HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Manitoba & Saskatchewan

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1321  
Old Posted Feb 10, 2018, 7:45 PM
esquire's Avatar
esquire esquire is offline
Think about Winnipeg.
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 19,708
It's a little known fact that the Manitoba Liberal leader is actually Stephen Colbert using an assumed name and some brown hair dye


Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1322  
Old Posted Feb 10, 2018, 9:02 PM
cllew cllew is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,717
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ando View Post
At least people know there names. How many people can name the leader of the Liberal Party.
Isn't it still Rana Bokhari who ran against Wab Kinew in Ft. Rouge? If not is shows how much of a low profile the new leader is keeping.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1323  
Old Posted Feb 10, 2018, 10:40 PM
esquire's Avatar
esquire esquire is offline
Think about Winnipeg.
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 19,708
^ psst... The Liberal leader is the guy in the first picture of my last post
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1324  
Old Posted Feb 10, 2018, 10:53 PM
OTA in Winnipeg's Avatar
OTA in Winnipeg OTA in Winnipeg is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: South Osborne
Posts: 529
__________________
Put up an antenna. TV is free as it always was and now comes with full program descriptions for the next 14 days on each channel, plus full HD that's far superior to cable and again, it's free!(after initial setup).
You're forced to watch the commercials anyways, right? Why would anyone pay for that?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1325  
Old Posted Feb 12, 2018, 6:17 PM
dmacc dmacc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 500
Does action need to be taken to address that Gerald Stanley was acquitted of 2nd degree murder in the shooting death of Colten Boushie?

I'm of the opinion that a group of men trespassed with the intent to steal property. The men from what I heard were armed with a shot gun. these men were confronted by the owner of the property, Gerald Stanley, and in the ensuing confrontation Gerald shot one of the men, Colten Boushie.

I don't understand why there were people upset about the ruling? I feel it would be good to ask this group of intelligent and rational people what you all think of this.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1326  
Old Posted Feb 12, 2018, 6:53 PM
rrskylar's Avatar
rrskylar rrskylar is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: WINNIPEG
Posts: 5,671
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmacc View Post
Does action need to be taken to address that Gerald Stanley was acquitted of 2nd degree murder in the shooting death of Colten Boushie?

I'm of the opinion that a group of men trespassed with the intent to steal property. The men from what I heard were armed with a shot gun. these men were confronted by the owner of the property, Gerald Stanley, and in the ensuing confrontation Gerald shot one of the men, Colten Boushie.

I don't understand why there were people upset about the ruling? I feel it would be good to ask this group of intelligent and rational people what you all think of this.
Colten Boushie was a twice convicted violent offender, he was with four other people in a stolen vehicle, prior to their encounter with Stanley they had robbed an adjacent farm, all had been drinking and were in possession of a firearm, they had in fact fired a shot at Stanley’s vehicle, the known motive of the group was to steal Stanley’s ATV, a confrontation between Stanley’s wife and a couple of the individuals had occurred before the shooting of Boushie.

Sometimes the consequences of your actions have deadly results! Did Stanley overreact who is to say if he felt the life of family members and his own life were at risk.

Really stupid of so called First Nations leadership, Wab Kinew, the PM, the Justice Minister and other elected official to even comment on the case in the way that they did, the jurors came to their conclusion based on the evidence and the case the defence and prosecution presented!
__________________
I'm sober enough to know what I'm doing, and drunk enough to really enjoy it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1327  
Old Posted Feb 12, 2018, 7:17 PM
Tacheguy Tacheguy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 740
Quote:
Originally Posted by rrskylar View Post
Colten Boushie was a twice convicted violent offender, he was with four other people in a stolen vehicle, prior to their encounter with Stanley they had robbed an adjacent farm, all had been drinking and were in possession of a firearm, they had in fact fired a shot at Stanley’s vehicle, the known motive of the group was to steal Stanley’s ATV, a confrontation between Stanley’s wife and a couple of the individuals had occurred before the shooting of Boushie.

Sometimes the consequences of your actions have deadly results! Did Stanley overreact who is to say if he felt the life of family members and his own life were at risk.

Really stupid of so called First Nations leadership, Wab Kinew, the PM, the Justice Minister and other elected official to even comment on the case in the way that they did, the jurors came to their conclusion based on the evidence and the case the defence and prosecution presented!
you missed the point. the verdict isn't the issue. The issue is the composition of the jury and the appearance of possible bias. the system needs to be changed so that people cant be ruled off juries due to the colour of their skin. A true conservative would agree with that. A racist wouldn't.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1328  
Old Posted Feb 12, 2018, 7:20 PM
dmacc dmacc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tacheguy View Post
you missed the point. the verdict isn't the issue. The issue is the composition of the jury and the appearance of possible bias. the system needs to be changed so that people cant be ruled off juries due to the colour of their skin.
I don't understand, if the verdict was correct, then how could there have been bias? Were people ruled off the jury because of the colour of their skin?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1329  
Old Posted Feb 12, 2018, 7:30 PM
Tacheguy Tacheguy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 740
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmacc View Post
I don't understand, if the verdict was correct, then how could there have been bias? Were people ruled off the jury because of the colour of their skin?
there was a pretty good editorial in the globe about this the other day. under our system apparently lawyers for either side can reject potential jurors for whatever reason. in this case the defence rejected anyone who looked like they might be aboriginal. so although there probably was no bias in the verdict it is that appearance that becomes important. wouldn't aboriginal jurors have assessed the evidence the same way? so that is what politicians are questioning and appropriately so imo.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1330  
Old Posted Feb 12, 2018, 7:40 PM
dmacc dmacc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tacheguy View Post
there was a pretty good editorial in the globe about this the other day. under our system apparently lawyers for either side can reject potential jurors for whatever reason. in this case the defence rejected anyone who looked like they might be aboriginal. so although there probably was no bias in the verdict it is that appearance that becomes important. wouldn't aboriginal jurors have assessed the evidence the same way? so that is what politicians are questioning and appropriately so imo.
Can both sides refuse jurors? Couldn't the prosecutors have refused anyone who was white and therefore choosing a jury that would be biased against the defendant?

What if every jury has to be reflective of society as a whole? if 50% are white, 10% aboriginal and 30% asian than that's what a jury has to consist of?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1331  
Old Posted Feb 12, 2018, 7:42 PM
drew's Avatar
drew drew is offline
the first stamp is free
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Hippyville, Winnipeg
Posts: 5,715
^ I thought that there was a maximum number (6?) of prospective jurors that either side can outright reject without reasoning.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1332  
Old Posted Feb 12, 2018, 7:47 PM
Tacheguy Tacheguy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 740
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmacc View Post
Can both sides refuse jurors? Couldn't the prosecutors have refused anyone who was white and therefore choosing a jury that would be biased against the defendant?

What if every jury has to be reflective of society as a whole? if 50% are white, 10% aboriginal and 30% asian than that's what a jury has to consist of?
it is about optics in a racially sensitive situation. perhaps no one should be disqualified on the basis of skin colour?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1333  
Old Posted Feb 12, 2018, 7:48 PM
dmacc dmacc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 500
Drew that's interesting, I didn't know that.

Is it possible that it isn't the system that has a problem but that peoples perception of the issue and lack of understanding and knowledge of why it was set up the way it was be the problem? I hope that question makes sense.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1334  
Old Posted Feb 12, 2018, 7:52 PM
Tacheguy Tacheguy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 740
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmacc View Post
Drew that's interesting, I didn't know that.

Is it possible that it isn't the system that has a problem but that peoples perception of the issue and lack of understanding and knowledge of why it was set up the way it was be the problem? I hope that question makes sense.
it is the system that can be the problem. why should lawyers get to reject potential jurors so easily? this should be tightened up by the judges.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1335  
Old Posted Feb 12, 2018, 7:57 PM
StNorberter StNorberter is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 126
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmacc View Post
Does action need to be taken to address that Gerald Stanley was acquitted of 2nd degree murder in the shooting death of Colten Boushie?

I'm of the opinion that a group of men trespassed with the intent to steal property. The men from what I heard were armed with a shot gun. these men were confronted by the owner of the property, Gerald Stanley, and in the ensuing confrontation Gerald shot one of the men, Colten Boushie.

I don't understand why there were people upset about the ruling? I feel it would be good to ask this group of intelligent and rational people what you all think of this.
The general consensus seems to be that he should have been found guilty of manslaughter.

Regardless of what others may say about having a firearm in the vehicle, past criminal record, what their blood alcohol level was, none of that is relevant. The firearm wasn't found until after RCMP arrived, and it wasn't even able to be fired ( as it was used to try and open another vehicle). So I'm not sure where rrskyler is getting his information from, but nothing i have seen indicated that there wire shots fired at that location by anyone than than Stanley.

What's on trial are Stanley's action. According to him he went to his shed, retrieved and loaded his pistol, fired three shots in the air ( of which only two fired - one was supposedly a hang fire). Some of the youths fled at this point, others tried to move the vehicle. Stanley then removed the magazine, did an unload, approached the vehicle, pointed the pistol at Boushie's head and then the hang fire completed.

That's his story. Even if the Jury believed his story, that's still manslaughter. What the non guilty verdict means is that the they heard Stanley's story, and said "The accidental hang fire doesn't matter. Someone tried to steal your property and now they are attempting to flee. You are justified in walking up to him and shooting him in the head at point blank range."

The jury's verdict says it doesn't matter if it was an accident or if Stanley did it with intent.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1336  
Old Posted Feb 12, 2018, 8:01 PM
cheswick's Avatar
cheswick cheswick is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: South Kildonan
Posts: 1,599
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmacc View Post
Can both sides refuse jurors? Couldn't the prosecutors have refused anyone who was white and therefore choosing a jury that would be biased against the defendant?

What if every jury has to be reflective of society as a whole? if 50% are white, 10% aboriginal and 30% asian than that's what a jury has to consist of?
Quote:
Originally Posted by drew View Post
^ I thought that there was a maximum number (6?) of prospective jurors that either side can outright reject without reasoning.
I believe they would be allowed 12 peremptory challenges per side. Outside of that, juror dismissal would have to be for just cause and agreed to by the judge.


http://criminalnotebook.ca/index.php...tory_Challenge
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1337  
Old Posted Feb 12, 2018, 8:03 PM
dmacc dmacc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tacheguy View Post
it is the system that can be the problem. why should lawyers get to reject potential jurors so easily? this should be tightened up by the judges.
Perhaps there is a perfectly good reason that rule was put in place. Maybe we shouldn't assume the system is broken and instead ask why something is the way it is. Perhaps you'll get a very reasonable answer.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1338  
Old Posted Feb 12, 2018, 8:04 PM
dmacc dmacc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cheswick View Post
I believe they would be allowed 12 peremptory challenges per side. Outside of that, juror dismissal would have to be for just cause and agreed to by the judge.


http://criminalnotebook.ca/index.php...tory_Challenge
That sounds perfectly reasonable.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1339  
Old Posted Feb 12, 2018, 8:09 PM
esquire's Avatar
esquire esquire is offline
Think about Winnipeg.
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 19,708
A criminal trial is a very complicated affair... all that I can say is that it's easy to be a Monday morning quarterback and complain that the trial didn't produce the desired result. I think the jury deserves the benefit of the doubt on reaching what is most certainly a defensible finding after a painstaking process.

Besides, if there was some sort of overarching error, then the Crown will be raising it on appeal.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1340  
Old Posted Feb 12, 2018, 8:10 PM
Tacheguy Tacheguy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 740
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmacc View Post
Perhaps there is a perfectly good reason that rule was put in place. Maybe we shouldn't assume the system is broken and instead ask why something is the way it is. Perhaps you'll get a very reasonable answer.
sometimes it is reasonable to assess the impact or current rules and make appropriate changes. I think that is the discussion that is taking place now and I think that is healthy. maybe the status quo will be maintained, maybe not.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Manitoba & Saskatchewan
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:34 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.