• You will need to login or register before you can post a message. If you already have an Agriville account login by clicking the login icon on the top right corner of the page. If you are a new user you will need to Register.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Confused?!

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Confused?!

    On CBC Tamara Lich, convoy organizer charged with counselling to commit mischief. Chris Barber charged with the same. If we go back to Dml’s post about the EMA, he kept talking about terrorism related reasons for the implementation being necessary. Therefore I must be missing something. Is there a new charge for terrorism called mischief?! Or does Justin Trudeau now consider acts of terrorism mischief?! Can all you great defenders of the EMA and Justin Trudeau please clear this up for me!!!

    #2
    Yes confused is the right word for many of the convoy supporters and organizers.

    In due time the courts will make clear the case against all the organizers and define what mischief in this case is. There will likely also be other charges laid against protestors and organizers.

    When Tamara had her bail hearing her husband Dwayne Lich seem to not know which laws applied in Canada or the US.

    "He also questioned whether the Emergencies Act — which was debated Saturday in the House of Commons — was implemented legally, at times confusing the numbered amendments found in the U.S. Constitution with Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

    "Honestly? I thought it was a peaceful protest and based on my first amendment, I thought that was part of our rights," he told the court.

    "What do you mean, first amendment? What's that?" Judge Julie Bourgeois asked him.


    "I don't know. I don't know politics. I don't know," he said. "I wasn't supportive of the blockade or the whatever, but I didn't realize that it was criminal to do what they were doing. I thought it was part of our freedoms to be able to do stuff like that."

    No bail decision yet for Tamara Lich, convoy protest organizer
    https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/tamara-lich-bail-hearing-february-19-1.6358307

    Comment


      #3
      Mischief sounds like egging a house at Halloween.
      JT and the liberals are all idiots...
      Proof is right here on this site..lol...

      Comment


        #4
        Why won't they let her out on bail?

        She might get interviews that keep the heat on.
        Bury her for a while and hope it blows over?

        What harm can she do Chuck?

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by chuckChuck View Post
          Yes confused is the right word for many of the convoy supporters and organizers.

          In due time the courts will make clear the case against all the organizers and define what mischief in this case is. There will likely also be other charges laid against protestors and organizers.

          When Tamara had her bail hearing her husband Dwayne Lich seem to not know which laws applied in Canada or the US.

          "He also questioned whether the Emergencies Act — which was debated Saturday in the House of Commons — was implemented legally, at times confusing the numbered amendments found in the U.S. Constitution with Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

          "Honestly? I thought it was a peaceful protest and based on my first amendment, I thought that was part of our rights," he told the court.

          "What do you mean, first amendment? What's that?" Judge Julie Bourgeois asked him.


          "I don't know. I don't know politics. I don't know," he said. "I wasn't supportive of the blockade or the whatever, but I didn't realize that it was criminal to do what they were doing. I thought it was part of our freedoms to be able to do stuff like that."

          No bail decision yet for Tamara Lich, convoy protest organizer
          https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/tamara-lich-bail-hearing-february-19-1.6358307
          Just curious Chuck2 how exactly does that address my question? The justification for the implementation was suspected terrorist activity or was it insurrection or was it sedition or was it illegally obtained donor information or was it all fabrication?!

          Comment


            #6
            hmmm...

            Definition of mischief

            1: a specific injury or damage attributed to a particular agent
            the polished floor … often causes mischiefs—bruises, sprains, dislocations
            — Herbert Spencer

            2: a cause or source of harm, evil, or irritation
            especially : a person who causes mischief
            He's a real mischief to his family.


            3a: action that annoys or irritates
            Halloween mischiefs

            b: the quality or state of being mischievous : MISCHIEVOUSNESS
            had mischief in his eyes

            warning! NEVER annoy or irritate a Lieberal!

            Comment


              #7
              Or then there is the legal definition of mischief as writtern in section 430 of the criminal code of Canada

              Mischief

              430 (1) Every one commits mischief who wilfully

              (a) destroys or damages property;

              (b) renders property dangerous, useless, inoperative or ineffective;

              (c) obstructs, interrupts or interferes with the lawful use, enjoyment or operation of property; or

              (d) obstructs, interrupts or interferes with any person in the lawful use, enjoyment or operation of property.

              Comment


                #8
                Mischief is a catch all charge in these circumstances. Yes what these folks were doing could be deemed mischief but apart from that there isn’t a lot more than that. The gravity is the judges decision as to how harsh the punishment is. Right now Ottawa police are cracking down on businesses who served the convoy people and not letting people film them. Tempers and moods are stretched and owly. Authorities are like the taliban going door to door shooting people who cooperated with the allies. Tying up loose ends so to speak. Argue about mischief and other bs but we are in a police state now. Any of you for the liberals or ndp and for the crackdowns it is only a matter of time before they come for you too. Get your heads out of the sand.

                Comment


                  #9
                  DML cleared it up.

                  Now the question is what happened to all the law and order conservatives? Have they gone soft on crime?.

                  In the end not one Conservative premier or leader was willing to say the occupation and border blockades were legal or justified. They all said go home. Since many didn't want to go home what options are left? None except the police forcing them out and arresting the organizers and those who wouldn't cooperate.

                  Spin it any way you want because the vast majority of Canadians were not in favour of the illegal blockades or occupation.
                  Last edited by chuckChuck; Feb 20, 2022, 16:08.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    https://rumble.com/embed/vs48fc/?pub=4&fbclid=IwAR2WqzggzldBlIZU2Yoep3vPBGHr8A84qL JcNMsFKoPvVds54Ju1GzHPIRI

                    It may take a few years, but proper justice will be served. “I was just doing my job” won’t cut it!

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Originally posted by dmlfarmer View Post
                      Or then there is the legal definition of mischief as writtern in section 430 of the criminal code of Canada

                      Mischief

                      430 (1) Every one commits mischief who wilfully

                      (a) destroys or damages property;

                      (b) renders property dangerous, useless, inoperative or ineffective;

                      (c) obstructs, interrupts or interferes with the lawful use, enjoyment or operation of property; or

                      (d) obstructs, interrupts or interferes with any person in the lawful use, enjoyment or operation of property.
                      So do these definitions of the charge of mischief coincide with your 6 condensed aspects of the EMA that you posted earlier in your opinion?!

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Originally posted by chuckChuck View Post
                        DML cleared it up.

                        Now the question is what happened to all the law and order conservatives? Have they gone soft on crime?.

                        In the end not one Conservative premier or leader was willing to say the occupation and border blockades were legal or justified. They all said go home. Since many didn't want to go home what options are left? None except the police forcing them out and arresting the organizers and those who wouldn't cooperate.

                        Spin it any way you want because the vast majority of Canadians were not in favour of the illegal blockades or occupation.
                        Yes there was illegality in the actions of protesters to a degree and it will be dealt with to the letter of the law. Law is the law but will the same implementation of the law be followed with political corruption, police brutality, excessive use of power, or other criminal acts carried out by law enforcement or politicians? That double standard is what is gross. It’s kinda like Andy McMehon being paraded in shackles for making a border run with wheat. I am sure you applauded that action but a sick bitch like Karla Homolka gets out of jail and is allowed to live a free life after murdering her own sister in cold blood. I know there is probably no getting through to you as you have to hold your position here but darnit you must think about these things?

                        Comment


                          #13
                          And that about sums it up WR
                          Same as no charges in B.C. terrorism act
                          It’s all on camera
                          Everyone knows who they are
                          Not the first time either by a long shot
                          Remember , this is a LEGAL pipeline

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Watching parliament on cpac.
                            Where is the TURD??
                            No where to bee seen on such important debate..
                            Anyone who supports liberals is totally NUTS....

                            Comment


                              #15
                              https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/tamara-lich-bail-hearing-february-19-1.6358307

                              Chuckle… it can’t be more obvious than her defence lawyers were either drones for the Federal Government or there was no legitimate defence counsel what so ever.

                              Was this guy acting as legal defence counsel… obviously not an articled lawyer from Ontario?? Obviously he had no legal clue whatsoever… and he said that so eloquently…which any reasonable person would recognize in one second.

                              How did the judge allow this hearing to go forward … She as judge is dangerously close to bringing Justice into disrepute.

                              In CWB court hearings …there is no way that this would have been acceptable protocol for a bail hearing.

                              Comment

                              • Reply to this Thread
                              • Return to Topic List
                              Working...