Rebel News' Sheila Gunn Reid & William Diaz-Berthiaume livetweeting the hearing: https://twitter.com/wdiazberthiaume/status/1545471726502510598
BREAKING: Judge rules Tamara Lich will be kept in detention. A trial will occur soon. Judge stated that “Tamara Lich has shown she will not follow court order and do as she wishes.”
To correct the record, the person deciding is NOT AN ACTUAL JUDGE NOR A LAWYER: https://twitter.com/SheilaGunnReid/status/1545463442215096320
I had previously referred to the decision-maker here as a judge. He is not. He is a justice of the peace, and not a lawyer, but a former federal bureaucrat from the environment ministry.
He even made basic factual errors: https://twitter.com/SheilaGunnReid/status/1545468347692621824
JP is making a factual mistake, thanks to relying on the bumbling Liberal crown and the lazy homicide detective for the underlying facts they didn't bother to investigate or confirm. He says Bernier was at JCCF event with his wife. JCCF comms tells me she was his dinner guest
https://twitter.com/SheilaGunnReid/status/1545468680233881600
JP calls the peaceful bouncy castle street party in Ottawa as the "siege" of the capital. Ridiculous.
https://twitter.com/SheilaGunnReid/status/1545469229930926080
JP said Lich was "flaunting her award" for her role in an "illegal occupation" and her role in "illegal activity" (At least the people who gave her the award are real lawyers, unlike this ridiculous justice of the peace.)
https://twitter.com/SheilaGunnReid/status/1545470388003434496
The JP seems annoyed that freedom protests are still ongoing. Perhaps he should think about the role the Ottawa courts are playing in giving people a reason to protest.
https://twitter.com/SheilaGunnReid/status/1545470909149958144
JP says people who are "victims" of the "occupation" will continue to fear as long as "organizers like Lich and Marazzo are allowed to socialize" Good grief. Someone else's Trudeau and CBC-induced mental fragility is not a reason to hold this peaceful woman another minute.
https://twitter.com/SheilaGunnReid/status/1545471228206391298
JP said the attendance of Lich at the JCCF awards dinner was "problematic" though an actual judge with a law degree - unlike this JP- gave her permission to be there.
https://twitter.com/SheilaGunnReid/status/1545471650816151552
This JP really does not like the JCCF and the fact they honoured Lich. he says once again she "flaunted her actions" of participating in the convoy by attending the event.
https://twitter.com/SheilaGunnReid/status/1545471983541817344
JP calls it absolutely ridiculous for Lich to think she could justify interacting with Marazzo by virtue of having her lawyers in the room. (which are literally her release conditions btw)
https://twitter.com/SheilaGunnReid/status/1545472893768724480
Lich, by then, will be held for 3 weeks for having a three-second interaction with a fellow convoy organizer, hardly time to hatch a seditious plot. Anyone arguing that this is normal or acceptable is evil. This is an absolute disgrace. She is only a danger to bad liberal ideas
Because it's easier to understand for non-Canadians than calling it "The notwithstanding clause".
The "BUT paragraph" is much easier to understand for everyone and requires much less explanation. "Freedom of speech BUT..." is exactly what Articles 1 and 33 are.
Because you didn't know it was called the Constitution Act and tried to be snarky ?
Look, you pounced on my post, don't be surprised I reply back. Don't go and play victim on me to score some Internet pity points.
That's literally what you're doing to me!!! "You're uneducated because you say the 'BUT paragraph'".
Dude, you're literally gaslighting me right now. WTF. Why does everyone here all of sudden act like a friggin' SJW leftist.
Even here Canadians find a way to act smug AF. God damn this Anglo Canadian Attitude is annoying.
WTF are you talking about ? Where did I talk about the US Bill of Rights at all ?
You're making shit up now.
And you still got it wrong. It is the Constitution Act of 1982. Part 1 of which is the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, article 2 being the article that talks about freedom of expression, articles 1 and 33 that add a big "BUT" to it.
Not really interesting for any non-Canadians. Not really relevant either. Who cares about article numbers and legalese terminology, no one here is filing court documents.
And instead of being polite, you go full on SJW leftist attack mode and victim on me. WTF dude.
I literally called it the Canadian Constitution. Because it is the Canadian Constitution. That's why it's called the Constitution Act of 1982. I used the correct term.
You're the one that I find unhinged. You're literally acting triggered because someone called it the "BUT paragraph" instead of the "Notwithstanding clause" and cited the actual name of the Act instead of using the name of Part 1.
Think about that for a minute.