Legal aid boycott gathering strength

Action now affects much of Ontario


From Friday's Globe and Mail


Defence lawyers in two more Ontario centres and an organization that picks up the pieces after a miscarriage of justice - the Association in Defence of the Wrongly Convicted - have joined a spreading legal-aid boycott.

The addition of several dozen lawyers in Hamilton, Sudbury and Barrie means that the boycott now covers a substantial portion of the province.

Virtually every defence lawyer with five years of experience in Toronto, Kingston and Thunder Bay had earlier agreed to boycott legal-aid cases that involve homicide or guns and gang laws.

Robert Gee, past president of the Hamilton Criminal Lawyers' Association, said yesterday that the city's 40 defence lawyers joined in reluctantly, given that the region has been so hard hit by the recession.

"Ontario has a two-tier legal system and we want the public to know that," Mr. Gee said. "You need to fund social programs in tough times or they fail their promise. The newly unemployed and the middle class depend on a program that can't meet the demands on it."

In launching the boycott last month, the Criminal Lawyers' Association said that the province would make a net saving were it to fund legal-aid properly, since experienced lawyers shorten trials by negotiating pragmatic plea bargains, conceding hopeless evidentiary points and streamlining the trial process.

AIDWYC director James Lockyer said yesterday that there is a direct link between poor trial counsel, underpaid expert witnesses and wrongful convictions. He criticized appellate judges for making it almost impossible to overturn convictions where an inexperienced trial lawyer hurt his client's interests.

"You read trial transcripts and sometimes you just go, 'Oh, my God,' " Mr. Lockyer said. "But the Ontario Court of Appeal has such a high threshold for demonstrating ineffective assistance of counsel, that you do everything you can to avoid alleging it."

If appellate judges made it easier to win new trials based on ineffective counsel, Mr. Lockyer predicted, the province would respond swiftly with higher legal-aid fees in order to attract experienced lawyers back into the courtroom.

"It costs money - but it avoids years of legal wreckage and misery for the wrongly convicted," he said. "If the government doesn't listen to what judges and lawyers are telling them, we are going to be cleaning up the mess for the next two decades."

The CLA's Sudbury director, Craig Fleming, said yesterday that: "I am unable to go into legal fights as well-equipped as my opponents because of two decades of cutbacks and freezes. The people who are paying for that are the poor, the middle class and the recently unemployed."

Thomas Bryson, president of Simcoe County Criminal Lawyers' Association, said that all 17 senior lawyers in his region will no longer keep an "unbalanced" program afloat.

"It is time to go public," he said. "I have never refused to defend someone with legal problems because they couldn't afford legal services. But I can't make a social program work if the government doesn't do more than it's doing. Our resolve is against two-tier justice, not the government."

Mr. Bryson said that lawyers are routinely refusing legal-aid cases now: "I don't expect that to change until the program is fixed."




Commentary in the Globe and mail, by the Ottawa Mens Centre


7/3/2009 6:45:12 PM
The Province of Ontario would be well served if they took careful note of the submissions of James Lockyer and Craig Flemming.

Mr. Lockyer's comments regarding "appellate judges" are an understatement, the entire Judiciary of Ontario spends a lot of its time sweeping cases under the mat, using the principle of res ajudicata, claiming society needs "finality of litigation" with a pathological disregard and contempt for the fundamental principles of justice that encourage those with money to commit fraud and then the judiciary says that it won't look at any claim that any decision was wrongfully obtained despite the most obvious and clear evidence.

The delinquent Judiciary of Ontario engage in widespread "justification" that creates politically correct decisions based on "judge made law" that often contradicts the statues that make such rulings illegal.

Our jails are increasingly filled with politically convicted inmates who did nothing but go to court and ask for justice.

What is particularly disturbing is that the Premier of Ontario, a lawyer, the Attorney General all know very very well WHO the underbelly of the judiciary are you engage in the worst examples of "flagrant abuses of Judicial discretion"

For those who don't know, you can find several of these at 161 Elgin Street Ottawa, their names are very well known, just ask ANY lawyer in Ottawa who deals with family and or criminal matters.

Take the dishonourable Justice Richard Lajoie, well known for his corruption when he sat in Timmins, there is hardly a criminal lawyer around who does not despise him.

Then there is Justice Allan Sheffield who holds the distinction of being known as "the worst judge ever", the worst of the worst, the judge who never smiles, and who holds some kind of record in the severity and corruptness of his draconian decisions that deprive litigants of the right of an answer and defence.



Ontario Judges have a judicial discretion available to them to order "their boss" the Ontario Government, to pay lawyers a reasonable rate for their work, however, the Ontario Judiciary are politically appointed and "repay" their "obligation" to "the government" by making, or more to the point "not making" decisions that directly put innocent people in jail, and habitually deprive children of a father.

Ontario Judges are the lowest forms of life in society, they are engaged in a war against men. Take family court, their decisions are often "stacked", they might in about 1% of cases, actually order "joint custody" without the consent of the parties, but penalize a father in a multitude o ways to apply a "feminist" "sharia style law" against men.

It's done with "child care expenses" allowing rich mothers to employ expensive "nannies" to care for the child "full time" while depriving the father of that right, and making him pay for "the nanny".

It's also done by "imputing income" that is, income that in many cases never existed, its just "an excuse" to "penalize" a man for going to court".

Then there is the Ontario Government's policy of draconian orders terminating all access in "Criminal Court" upon the most outragious of allegations of "domestic assault" "threats" all applied to give the generally female, the alleger, the complainant, "status quo" WITHOUT any penalty or repercussions.

It's Ontario Judges Blatant crazy feminist doctrine that deprives children of a father and fills Ontario's courts and jails with endless litigation.

For all that injustice, you can thank the greatest deadbeats of society, the Judiciary of Ontario.



Mr. James Lockyer should be next in line for the Order of Canada. He is a true hero of society, who actually defends the Rule of Law.

The problem is, as Mr. Lockyer so eloquently said.
"But the Ontario Court of Appeal has such a high threshold for demonstrating ineffective assistance of counsel, that you do everything you can to avoid alleging it."

Lets look at those words.
Its a damming indictment against the ONTARIO GOVERNMENT who make no secret that judges have an obligation , a CORRUPT obligation, to make "politically correct decisions" that "don't make waves" or "don't cause grief for the Government"

Judges habitually reject anything, thats right ANYTHING that is politically incorrect.

You gain success by committing fraud, fabricating evidence and simply allege that the other person is "politically incorrect", its a guaranteed way of success, its an easy way of gaining convictions, of putting innocent people in jail.

According to the Judiciary, they never make mistakes, and, the worst, the most vile, examples of injustice, are promoted and encouraged by the Court of Appeal of Ontario.

Now, take note,
The VERY WORST examples of flagrant abuses of Judicial discretion in the Court of Appeal of Ontario, get to be judges of the Supreme Court of Canada.

So, who is the worst , the most flagrant abuser on the Court of Appeal, who has earned her "brownie Points" for the Supreme Court ?

Just ask Any male litigant who has been in the Ontario Court of Appeal, Ask any objective lawyer who can "speak in confidence" and they will tell you the most Anti-Male, Politically correct judge on the Ontario Court of Appeal is none other than "Madam" of Injustice Katherine FELDMAN.

Feldman recently said that being charged but not convicted of a criminal offense was not of any concern to the courts.

That is just One example a decision that was actually published. The rest are censored and burried.