civil asset forfeiture lawsrightedition.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/rights... ·...

Rights and Freedoms Bulletin (ISSN 1923-998X) is a public service of provided by RightsAndFreedoms.org and KM Publishing Inc., P.O. Box 21004, Chilliwack, BC V2P 8A9

This past January in New Mexico 21-year-old Sylvia Solano crashed her car into a brick wall. A Breathalyser test pegged her blood-alcohol level at 3 times the legal limit and police booked her for Driving While Intoxicated (DWI). They also seized her vehicle using civil forfeiture law after determining this was Sylvia Solano’s second DWI offense. Funny thing is... the 2003 BMW wasn’t Sylvia’s vehicle; it belonged to her father, former Santa Fe County Sheriff Greg Solano.It gets better. While in office back in 2006 Sheriff Greg Solano advocated exten-sively to use civil forfeiture law to seize vehicles from repeat drunk drivers. Yes,

including vehicles not belonging to the drunk driver, as in his daughter’s case.Karma is a bitch, and she bites hard some days, doesn’t she Greg Solano?While I certainly don’t condone drink driving, I do enjoy seeing one of law enforcement’s finest getting bit by the law he fought so hard to pass.Now that the shoe is on the other foot Greg Solano no longer sees the law as “fair” or “just”. Suddenly the very

law he fought so hard to pass, and used to his department’s financial benefit, is now a “violation of a car owner’s due process rights.”Hypocrite is obviously Greg Solano’s middle name.Back when Solano held the office of Sheriff of Santa Fe County he didn’t value the property rights of we mere citizens at all. Now that it’s his ox being gored it’s a whole different ballgame.Gotta love the hypocrisy of it all, not to mention the delicious irony!Yours in Liberty,

Civil Asset Forfeiture LawsFinally Hit The Right Mark

Christopher

Text like this is a link to online content. These links are provided to give you easy access to the original news story or other relevant information.

In This Issue

Minnesota’s Reform of Civil Asset Forfeiture Law 2Photographing Your Son Holding A Rifle is Child Abuse? 3Rob Sciuk Responds to Conservative Fundraising Letter 4Thomas Harding and the Heavy Hand of Police State Thugs 63rd Annual Parliamentary Outdoors Caucus Shooting Day at the Range 7B.C. Human Rights Tribunal Disconnected From Reality... 9Montreal Police Not Qualified To Shoot Their Weapons 13RCMP’s Arbitrary Firearm Reclassifications 14Police Can and Will Charge You Even When You Haven’t Broken Any Firearm Law 15

Rights and Freedom Bulletin Issue No. 176 May 24, 2014 http://Bulletin.RightsAndFreedoms.org

2 Rights and Freedom Bulletin Issue No. 176 May 24, 2014 http://Bulletin.RightsAndFreedoms.org

Civil Asset ForfeitureMinnesota’s Courageous Reform of Civil Asset Forfeiture Law

Five years ago scandal over the horrific abuse of Minnesota’s civil asset forfeiture law rocked the state. Their Metro Gang Strike Force (disbanded in the wake of the scandal) among others, grossly abused the power given them by the state’s civil forfeiture legislation, giving way to these reforms.The Metro Gang Strike Force didn’t care who they stole from. Anyone was fair game for this corrupt band of legalized criminals. If they saw something they wanted they simply took it, leaving the victim of their predation at the mercy of a system tilted against them.Evidence of crime? Why bother when the legislation allowed them to steal with impunity. To quote Jason Snead and Andrew Kloster’s article on the issue,

Minnesota residents became ATMs and their living rooms became convenience stores. After all, someone needed to finance strike force trips to Hawaiian conferences and supply agents with television sets.But the whole scheme came crashing down. Amid federal and state investigations, the strike force was shut down and some $840,000 in settlements was paid out to those whose property had been wrongfully seized. Other legal actions netted millions in settlements.

Instead of the half-baked attempts at civil forfeiture reform in other jurisdictions Minnesota didn’t shrink from its duty to its citizens. It tackled civil asset forfeiture reform with courage and conviction, and did it properly.Minnesota’s landmark civil forfeiture reform means police agencies can no longer victimize mere citizens at will and with impunity. As of now, law enforcement can no longer seize property from mere citizens unless there is either a criminal conviction or an admission of guilt.

While police may still profit from successful civil forfeitures, the new conviction requirement will add a layer of protection against the sort of evidence-less roadside shake-downs seen elsewhere. The state will also bear the burden of prov-ing wrongdoing in any civil forfei-ture case by clear and convincing evidence.

Kudos to Minnesota Governor Mark Dayton for signing this into law the moment it hit his desk.This reform turns civil forfeiture on its head; something long overdue. Current legislation in every other juris-diction, including here in Canada, requires you to prove you did NOT do something, rather than requiring the State to prove you committed a crime.Guilty until proven innocent is not the way western justice works. It’s the other way around.Of course, forcing a person to prove they did not commit a crime makes it far easier for law enforcement... All that “innocent until proven guilty” crap takes far too much time and resources, right?What we require now is for every other jurisdiction in North America to follow Minnesota’s lead.If we are to stop the legalized theft of money and property from unwitting citizens for no reason whatsoever this simply must happen.

http://Bulletin.RightsAndFreedoms.org


http://blog.heritage.org/2014/05/16/minnesota-raises-bar-forfeiture-reform/

http://blog.heritage.org/2014/05/16/minnesota-raises-bar-forfeiture-reform/



Search and SeizurePhotographing Your Son Holding A Rifle is Child Abuse?

Imagine the scenario.You post an innocent photo of your son holding a rifle on Facebook. Your son is 11 years old. He is well trained in firearm safety by you. His finger is off the trigger in the photo, just as it should be.Some pathetic crybaby sees the photo online and calls the New Jersey Department of Children and Families who, in turn, contact the police.Both agencies raid your home and attempt to search it. They demand to see your gun safe and all your firearms for “inspection”. When you refuse to accede to their ridiculous demands because they don’t have a search warrant these so-called authorities label you “unreasonable” and “uncooperative” and say you act “suspiciously”.Imagine that.Stand up for your rights and you are “unreasonable”. Demand police respect your rights and you are “suspicious” and “uncooperative”.Rights are inviolate. Police thugs hate that. Good cops don’t, of course, because they respect your rights but those aren’t the type of police at your door late this night.The police finally do leave, however, but not before threatening to take your children away from you. Nice.This is no fable; no mere story.This is precisely the violation Shawn Moore, an NRA-certified firearms instructor and range safety officer, faced last year when some whining little ninny saw a photo on Facebook of Shawn’s son holding a rifle.In their rush to abuse a law-abiding firearm owner these police state thugs failed to obtain a search warrant. Actu-ally, the more likely scenario is no judge with functional brain cells would issue a search warrant based on such flimsy and absurd “evidence.”Clearly all common sense vacated the puny brains of the minions at the New Jersey Department of Children and Families and their counterparts in the police department.Nanny State Minion Kristen Brown, aka spokesperson for New Jersey Department of Children and Families, parroted the usual tripe about “duty” while not comprehending the meaning of the word.

“The department has a child abuse hotline for the state of New Jersey and anybody can make a call to that hotline. We are required to follow up on every single allegation that comes into the central registry. In general our role is to investigate allegations of child abuse and neglect.”

An anonymous phone call complaining of a Facebook photo of a child holding a rifle is considered an allegation of child abuse?How absurd.





Firearm PoliticsLaw-Abiding Firearm Owner Rob Sciuk Responds to Conservative Fundraising Letter

May 18, 2014Dear Mr. Walsh,Thank you for your letter dated April 24th asking why my donations to the Conservative party have stopped after years of being considered one of the Conservative Party’s strongest and most reliable Sustaining Donors.By way of background, Mr. Walsh, I have a university education, and work in the field of software engineering and firmware development in the Canadian high tech industry. I read two newspapers daily, one as the antidote to the other in order to avoid editorial bias, and I have an active life with two grown children, a wife and my two dogs. In other words, I want you to know that I am not now and never have been a single issue voter. But I am a fire-arm owner, and very active in hunting and the shooting sports, including the use of restricted firearms in compe-tition, both nationally, and internationally.Recently, the FRT group of the RCMP prohibited two semi-automatic rifles which had previously been non-restricted, and had presented no public safety issues whatsoever. Apparently these bureaucratic mandarins are not accountable, even to the Minister himself. My concerns also extend to Mr. Harper’s promise to repeal the entirety of the Liberal’s Canadian Firearms Act, and his decidedly ill-considered approach to ending only the long gun registry. We are left with a set of regula-tions and laws in place which will inevitably lead to the confiscation of each and every firearm in Canada within a generation or so, right under the noses of Parliament, and that was what the Canadian Firearms Act was designed to do from the outset. Newly introduced sections 91 and 92 of the Criminal Code of Canada make the simple possession of a firearm a criminal offense. The prior regime required did not require a federal license to continually own firearms, but rather a certificate only to obtain one. This afforded each and every reasonable public safety measure that is attributed to the license (background checks, training, spousal/parental permissions, letters of recommendation, and a mechanism for revocation).Now, with the expiration of a license, a mere temporal lapse means the difference between me being declared a criminal, subject to the very same mandatory minimum sentences the CONSERVATIVES adopted, without consideration as to whether the so-called criminal actually committed a crime, or simply was made one by the lapse of paperwork. The laws that the CONSERVATIVES passed make no distinction. While the Conservatives have performed admirably in many respects, not the least of which financially, and particularly in the light of the recent global economic downturn, I find myself not as trusting in the Conservative agenda, as I once was. I am extremely disappointed in the fact that the government has allowed bad laws to stand, and instead offering one temporary amnesty after another to keep erstwhile law-abiding citizens out of jail for the crime of simply owning the firearms that they had for generations. Literally hundreds of thousands of Canadians are now with lapsed licenses, and face criminal sentences in federal prisons. Enough with the damn amnesties. Arrest each and every one of them or change the stupid laws!Indeed Sir, the Conservatives have used responsible shooters badly. We have supported you for years, steadfast and unswerving in our support, and now you have the absolute gall to ask your strongest segment of support why that support might be wavering, having left us in the cold, and one step away from being declared criminals. Indeed a mere suspicion results in immediate loss of property and ruinous defense costs in the judicial process, which is for the most part, the punishment.





As for my support, Mr Walsh, it is withheld until such time as the real problem, the firearm law and its pursuant regulations are repaired. I would expect that the ability for nameless bureaucrats to confiscate my property without recourse or account-ability would be eliminated, and their ability to enact such creeping confiscation would end forthwith.In addition, in keeping with a liberal democracy, Parliamentary oversight would be required before any property would be banned from ownership, and that the right for responsible individuals to retain arms for any legitimate purpose, including self-defense to be recognized and respected. Until such time, you might consider me to be a former supporter, both financially, and at the polls. While I regret this turn of events, I have no choice but to take this position, and to widely encourage others to do the same. Given that I am technically inclined, this is a simple message to disseminate widely, and I’m sure that you will not be surprised to learn that it is an increasingly popular position among the Conservative formerly faithful firearms owners. We feel that we have been treated badly, and indeed, Sir, we have!

Respectfully,

Robert S. Sciuk Oshawa, Ont.



http://postcardsfromtheright.com/9108/police/abuse-of-police-authority/thomas-harding-heavy-hand-surete-du-quebecs-police-state-thugs/



Police MisconductThomas Harding and the Heavy Hand of Police State Thugs

Thomas Harding, as you may know, is the engineer of the train carrying oil that derailed in Lac Megantic, Quebec, leveling the town with the resulting explosion and fire. From the date of that terrible tragedy Thomas Harding avoided public comment at every turn. He cooperated with police and accident investigators fully and completely.Through his lawyer he even made it clear if he was charged with a crime he would turn himself in willingly.Such willingness to face the music, to be accountable for one’s actions in such a horrific case as this shows me Thomas Harding must be a man of great character. Whatever his role in the disaster, his steadfast and unwaver-ing determination to be held accountable for his actions that fateful day is to be respected and admired. Few have such courage.That is precisely the kind of principled man Surete du Quebec thugs humiliated with their high-profile SWAT takedown on May 12th, 2014, at his home in Farnham, Quebec.Over-compensating for their incredible lack of humanity and armed with both delusions of grandeur and fully-automatic weapons, Surete du Quebec thugs tossed Thomas Harding, his son and a visitor to the ground before they handcuffed him and hauled him off to jail.It’s no wonder police get stonewalled by actual criminals when they treat a citizen cooperating fully with investi-gators this atrociously. What incentive is there when no matter how properly you conduct yourself you are still subjected to a heavy-handed, make that obscene display of police power?Through the media, Surete du Quebec thugs gave a pathetic rationalization for their appalling behaviour, as though they were actually in the right. They were not.Claiming Mr. Harding unlawfully possessed firearms and spoke of suicide, they acted.What they conveniently failed to explain is why, if they truly believed Mr. Harding possessed firearms illegally, did they not obtain a search warrant and remove those firearms instead of leaving them in his possession for months?I am revolted, seeing police resources abused so callously in the name of “public safety” and “concern” for Mr. Harding. Concern for a person’s well being isn’t usually expressed by pointing a fully-automatic rifle into his face, handcuff-ing him and hauling him off to jail for a 10-hour interrogation. At least not by my dictionary, and I hope not yours either.The most troubling aspect of the very public and theatrical arrest of Thomas Harding is that it wasn’t about Thomas Harding at all. This very public shaming and humiliation, while Thomas Harding was the recipient of this abuse, it was not intended for him.It was intended for you and me, the mere citizens of Canada. Step out of line and thugs with badges and guns will do the same to us.Am I over-reacting? I doubt it.I’m sure some will not agree, however. If you’re one of those people I would ask you to ask yourself one simple question. ut yourself in Thomas Harding’s shoes.After you’ve made it clear to police you will turn yourself in whenever you are asked, is it reasonable for authori-ties to order a “high-risk takedown” by SWAT instead of simply calling you on the phone and saying, “Hey Mr. Harding, would you please come down to the station so we can process your arrest?”If you answer in the affirmative, then I must seriously question your humanity as I have already questioned that of the badge-wearing thugs of the Surete du Quebec.





Firearms Activism3rd Annual Parliamentary Outdoors Caucus Shooting Day at the Range

Question: What is the best way to advocate changes in government firearms legislation?1. Threaten to withhold volunteers, donations and votes if the government doesn’t do exactly what you demand immediately.2. Offer to take members of Parliament, Senators, and parliamentary staff to the shooting range so they can expe-rience for themselves why shooting is safe, enjoyable and a challenging skill to master.Answer: #2... By a landslide.

Canadian Shooting Sports Association Takes Canada’s Legislators To The Shooting Range

The 3rd Annual Parliamentary Outdoors Caucus Shooting Day at the Range is just around the corner. The buzz on Parliament Hill for this event has been escalating since it began in 2012. Co-host Garry Breitkreuz, M.P. has been fielding inquiries from his colleagues about the event since Christmas. As the June event approaches, the 45 available spaces overflowed to 69 parliamentarians of every political stripe as soon as Mr. Breitkreuz’s office issued the official invitations. In just three years, the Day at the Range has evolved into a major event for Conservative, Liberal, NDP and Green caucuses.Many firearms owners lament that the federal government has failed them because it has done nothing beyond scrapping the hated long-gun registry. The Canadian Shooting Sports Association (CSSA) advocates daily for more freedoms for gun owners, but let’s at least be accurate about the Harper government’s actions to date.

� Life became much better for hand-loaders and other ammunition users when former Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver updated regulations in the Explosives Act a few months ago.

� Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird helped gun owners when he refused to sign the feared United Nations Arms Trade Treaty.

� Business ledgers were eliminated as a back-door source for registration info and several CFO’s were spanked over nylon cable trigger locks.

� Several MPs have taken to hardcore internal lobbying for fairness to the firearms community. � Public Safety Minister Steven Blaney has been sabre-rattling with the RCMP and Chief Firearms Offices

to negate silly, napkin-scribbled regulations that make life miserable for gun owners. And, he’s just getting started.

So, is it a waste of time to give parliamentarians a chance to walk a mile in our boots? The evidence thus far suggests we’re onto something. They are getting the message. Most MPs and Senators (and cabinet ministers, too) receive their range safety and shooting instructions and can’t wait to toss some lead down range.





Buzzed and happy when the mag is empty, the questions begin. Most are flabbergasted to learn first-hand that sometimes there is virtually no difference between the non-restricted, restricted or prohibited classes of fire-arms. When our guest shooters set their hot handguns and smoking rifles back on the table, we explain why they can’t own certain classes of guns they just shot. That’s when they feel our pain. Many have suggested they will look into it.The Day at the Range is also very valuable because it follows the Outdoors Caucus notion that heritage activities must be non-partisan. Fair firearms laws should not be treated as the express domain of the left or right wings. The right to own firearms is a freedom issue – not a political volleyball. History shows there will be a new sheriff at 24 Sussex at some point, and gun owners need champions in every political camp. The Annual Parliamentary Outdoors Caucus Shooting Day at the Range is just one more way of cultivat-ing relationships with those who hold the keys to the legislative process.We continue to get results by doing what we do. And, there is a host of fire-arms organizations and businesses that concur. The Day at the Range is made possible by industry participants who help provide guns, ammo, safety equip-ment, trainers, staff, range guidance and even lunch. The firearms community is indebted to our partners in the Canadian Sport-ing Arms and Ammunition Association, the Outdoors Caucus Association of Canada and of course, the Stittsville Shooting Ranges and the numerous industry partners that give so generously to this event.

“Allan Rock said he came to Ottawa with the belief that only the police and military should have firearms. I believe that firearms ownership is a right, but a right that comes with responsibilities.”

– the Hon. Steven Blaney, Minister of Public Safety

Help Support The Great Work The Cssa Does To Protect Your Rights.





Human RightsB.C. Human Rights Tribunal Disconnected From Reality... Again.

In an astounding display of their disconnect from reality B.C. Human Rights Tribunal member Enid Marion awarded $475,000 in damages, including a whopping $75,000 specifically for “injury to dignity, feelings and self-respect”, to University of British Columbia (UBC) medical student Carl Kelly.This is ludicrous. It’s beyond ludicrous, actually. It’s utterly asinine.Carl Kelly, as specified in the ruling Kelly v. UBC (No. 3), 2012 BCHRT 32, has

Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder – Inattentive Type (“ADHD”). He also has a Non-Verbal Learn-ing Disability (“NVLD”) and has, at times, suffered from anxiety and depression.

On August 29, 2007 UBC determined Carl Kelly was not suited to being a doctor and terminated his enrollment in its medical program.Carl Kelly immediately filed a human rights complaint, since being a doctor is a “human right’, right?Well, this is British Columbia and as B.C. Human Rights Tribunal member Enid Marion made crystal clear in her ruling,

“I have considered that I can accept some, all or none of the evidence of a witness.”In other words Enid Marion can decide anything she wants for any reason and discount any evidence before her, for any reason.Nice... but let me get back to the issue before us.Not every person is suited to the career of their choosing. That’s sad, but that’s life.If you unable to learn the material required and fail to perform adequately in your medical rotations even after accommodations are made specifically for you, it is reasonable to draw the conclusion that you are “unsuitable” to be a doctor.That sucks when your “life-long passion” is to be a doctor, but that’s life unless, of course, you file a human rights complaint in British Columbia. Then the harsh realities of life mean very little.The facts of this case include the following:

Dr. Carl Kelly entered the FM Program in November 2005 in the rural program. His start was delayed to accord with his graduation from the Undergraduate Medical Program at the University of Alberta (“U of A”).Dr. Kelly was dismissed from the FM Program on the basis of unsuitability in August 2007 having only partially completed PGY 1 (Post Graduate Year 1).Dr. Kelly’s first rotation was a paediatrics rotation in Kelowna. This rotation usually consists of two blocks (each block being 4 weeks). Dr. Kelly was only scheduled for six and one half weeks of training in this rotation due to his late start in the program. His performance was rated “fail.”

Carl Kelly, after almost 2 full years, failed to complete his first year of training, including his first paediatrics rota-tion. In the words of the ruling, he failed. The word unsuitable could easily be used in place of failed, won’t you agree?

Dr. Kelly was then scheduled for two blocks of family medicine at the UBC clinic in Vancouver. This rotation was extended to almost five blocks.

Extending Carl Kelly’s family medicine rotation over twice its normal duration seems like one heck of an accom-modation to me. Moving him from his assigned rural training location of Kelowna to Vancouver seems like another. These accommodations tell me UBC wanted Carl Kelly to succeed and made great strides to see that he did, even though his performance continued to be poor.



http://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bchrt/doc/2013/2013bchrt302/2013bchrt302.html




In January 2006 Dr. Kelly’s preceptors raised concerns about his performance which were discussed at a Site Directors meeting.Around this time, Dr. Kelly’s Director of his Residency Program, Dr. Carl Whiteside, advised Dr. Kelly that he had not passed his first rotation in paediatrics at Kelowna General Hospital. Dr. Whiteside discussed with Dr. Kelly undertaking his training in Vancouver so that he could access a more structured learning environment.Dr. Whiteside suggested Dr. Kelly see Dr. Mike Myers, a psychiatrist with a speciality treating physicians. Finally, Dr. Whiteside requested an assessment of any difficulties Dr. Kelly experienced during medical school so that accommodation of Dr. Kelly could be considered in the FM Program. Dr. Kelly gave his consent for Dr. Robert Drebit, from the U of A, to release this information to the FM Program.By March 2006 the Site Directors had determined that Dr. Kelly was not suitable for continued train-ing in the rural program. This decision was based on learning styles observed by the rural preceptors in Kelowna and by preceptors in the UBC Clinic. At a meeting of the urban Site Directors on March 15, 2006 the Site directors considered these observations. The Site Directors determined:a. that Dr. Kelly would remediate his paediatrics rotation;b. that Dr. Kelly’s new site Director, Dr. Betty Calam would ask Dr. Garey Mazowita to act as a mentor for Dr. Kelly;c. that Dr. Kelly would be attached to the incoming PGY 1 group for St. Paul’s Hospital as of July 1, 2006, if he successfully remediated his paediatric rotation;d. that Dr. Kelly could return to the UBC Health Clinic for his family medicine rotation in his PGY2 year; ande. that Dr. Kelly would follow a “vertical” structure for rotations, using both St. Paul’s and the Greater Vancouver programs, rather than the horizontal model at St. Paul’s.On April 5, 2006 Dr. Kernahan met with Dr. Kelly and Dr. Newton, Clinic Director at the UBC Health Clinic, to discuss certain issues that had arisen regarding his conduct during the rotation. These included a prescription he had signed and complaints from a member of the faculty, Dr. Donlevy, regarding Dr. Kelly’s on call conduct. During that meeting Dr. Kernahan formed a concern regarding Dr. Kelly’s behav-iour when Dr. Kelly left the room saying he was “going to be sick”.Dr. Kelly was advised that he had still not passed the UBC Health Clinic rotation and that his rotation at the UBC Health Clinic would be further extended before he would begin his remedial rotation. He was also advised that he could provide his response to the two incidents discussed.On April 27, 2006, Dr. Kernahan spoke with Dr. Simi Khangura regarding the structure of Dr. Kelly’s remediation. She advised that Dr. Kelly had not been functioning at the level of PGY 1 Family Medicine Resident in his previous rotation. Drs. Kernahan and Khangura discussed an evaluation model of provid-ing daily feedback forms to Dr. Kelly at the end of each shift so that Dr. Kelly would get immediate feed-back from each of his supervisors daily.

He failed his initial paediatrics rotation at UBC’s Medical School. After almost 5 blocks of family medicine rotation Carl Kelly still hadn’t passed that rotation. Even after UBC assigned him a mentor and created a special structure within the medical program designed specifically to fit his needs Carl Kelly continued to “under-perform”.UBC continued to make changes to the program specifically to accommodate Carl Kelly.

On July 26, 2006, Dr. Calam spoke with Dr. Myers regarding a consultant for neuro-psychological testing for Dr. Kelly.Also on July 26, 2006, Dr. Calam wrote to Dr. Myers and asked for an opinion outlining any restrictions for health reasons that Dr. Myers thought might be necessary for Dr. Kelly for his next rotation, sched-





uled at CTU at SPH for July 31, 2006, for four weeks. Dr. Myers provided same that day advising that, “Dr. Kelly is at risk for irritability, inner frustration and disorganization when he gets especially busy or tired.”On July 28, 2006, Dr. Kernahan concluded that Dr. Kason’s evaluation did not amount to a pass.From July 31 to August 27, 2006, Dr. Kelly undertook a rotation in CTU – Internal Medicine (General). Dr. Kelly’s performance was assessed as a “pass”.From August 28, 2006 to September 24, 2006 Dr. Kelly undertook a rotation in emergency medicine and was assessed as “pass”.On September 14, 2006 Dr. Calam received a complaint from some of the residents in Dr. Kelly’s peer group about an e-mail he had circulated the previous month. Dr. Calam suggested that Dr. Kelly be relieved from his current rotation pending investigation.

As a result of his poor progress in the medical program and the email message UBC’s doctoral supervisors placed Carl Kelly on “educational leave”.During this time of educational leave Carl Kelly went to his union to complain about his status and Ms. Zoe Towle, a representative of PAR-BC, intervened on his behalf.

In March 2007 Ms. Towle advised that on Dr. Kelly’s behalf PAR-BC would seek a second opinion from Dr. Margaret Weiss, a psychiatrist specializing in adult ADHD, to obtain information regarding potential accommodation of his learning disabilities and of his suitability for residency training.

Clearly Mr. Kelly felt UBC failed to accommodate his learning disabilities, even though they already made numerous, repeated and ongoing concessions for him. Due to his performance during his medical rotations, or more specifically his lack of performance during them, Carl Kelly was dismissed from UBC’s medical program.

In August 2007 the Resident Performance Subcommittee (“RPS”) of the PGEC met to consider Dr. Kelly’s suitability for continued training in the FM Program. On or about August 23, 2007 the PGEC recommended that the Complainant be terminated from the FM Program on the basis of unsuitability.

While it is sad and unfortunate, not everyone is cut out for the job of their dreams. That is one of the harsh reali-ties of life here on Planet Earth.Carl Kelly’s “life-long passion” is to be a doctor. Passion is great, but passion alone does not automatically qualify one for a job. You must also have skills, knowledge and aptitude, among other prerequisites.I, for example, have a lifelong passion to be an astronaut and walk on the surface of Mars. Does that mean I have the aptitude, skills and physical attributes required to be an astronaut? Does that mean I’m entitled to a massive payout when I fail to meet those qualifications?Absolutely not.Unless, perhaps, I file a human rights complaint in BC and am fortunate enough to land Enid Marion as my Tribunal member! Then the odds are surely in my favour!Justifying this absurd monetary award for which every BC Taxpayer will now pay, Enid Marion said this:

[101] My reasons for this are as follows:b) I do not accept UBC’s argument that it is not principled to conclude that a person with a life-long passion suffers more than someone without such a passion when they experience discrimination. In this case, it is relevant and principled to consider that Dr. Kelly was pursuing an almost life-long desire to become a physician and that the loss of that opportunity had a serious and detrimental impact on him, particularly within the context of his family dynamics.c) Dr. Kelly suffered deep humiliation and embarrassment as a result of the discrimination, which was ongoing for a significant period of time. He experienced symptoms of depression, including a lack of interest in life, trouble sleeping, and other health-related problems. I accept his evidence about the depth and continuing nature of those symptoms, including his thoughts of “ending it”, from the date of his





termination in 2007 until his reinstatement to the Program in 2013, including his loss of self-identity and self-esteem, his feelings of worthlessness, and his despair and uncertainty about his future.d) Dr. Kelly experienced further embarrassment when applying for jobs and explaining why, with his educational background, he was not pursuing his medical career.e) Dr. Kelly lost his source of income and felt compelled to move back in with his parents, losing his independence.[102] I find that the particular circumstances of this case are unique and serious. Unlike Gichuru, Dr. Kelly was unable to complete his training and enter practice as a physician as a result of the discrimina-tion.[103] In all the circumstances, I am persuaded that an award of $75,000 is reasonably proportionate to the injury to dignity, feelings and self-respect suffered by Dr. Kelly. I order UBC to pay to Dr. Kelly the sum of $75,000 damages for injury to dignity, feelings and self-respect.

I’m sure Carl Kelly is a very nice man. That does not bestow upon him the right to the career of his choosing. Like the rest of us, he must find the career he is best suited for, even if that ultimately is not one for which he has a “life-long passion”.Can a person with ADHD be a doctor? Absolutely. As evidence of experts quoted in this ruling makes clear, such people are successful doctors, lawyers and entrepreneurs, among other careers.Does that mean that every person with ADHD can be a doctor.Of course not.“Life-long passion” does not equal aptitude, ability or skill. Such is the harsh reality of life, unless you file a human rights complaint in British Columbia.UBC made numerous and ongoing attempts to accommodate Carl Kelly’s ADHD and learning disabilities before terminating him from its medical program. When those additional efforts did not result in Carl Kelly passing his extended medical rotations UBC is held at fault by the BC Human Rights Tribunal, not Carl Kelly.He was first reinstated to UBC’s medical program and then rewarded for failing to pass his medical rotations to the tune of $475,000.That is absurd.That is the BC Human Rights Commission.

You can read both the decision in Kelly v. University of British Columbia and the determination of penalty using the links below. The first decision is quite lengthy but gives you the full details of the decision. The second is where Enid Marion rationalizes her massive payout to Carl Kelly.

� Kelly v. UBC (No. 3), 2012 BCHRT 32

� Kelly v. University of British Columbia (No. 4), 2013 BCHRT 302







Police AccountabilityMontreal Police Not Qualified To Shoot Their Duty Weapons

If you live in Montreal you ought to be afraid. Very afraid. Why? Only 250 of 4,600 Montreal Police members bothered to qualify with their duty sidearms.Police qualification with firearms is required by law, yet only 5% of Montreal’s police force complied with that law.So what, you ask. There are a lot of cops in Quebec, right? Yes, but give this little tidbit a few moments in your melon. More Montreal cops shoot their weapons in the line of duty than the rest of the province’s police forces combined.It was Montreal’s Police members who shot and killed Patrick Limoges, a hospital worker, when they also shot and killed the knife-wielding and mentally ill Mario Hamel. The 2012 coroner’s inquest into the shooting death of Patrick Limoges made note of the pathetic shooting qualification compliance record of the Montreal Police.The coroner recommended the Montreal Police Force “take the necessary measures to ensure its police staff receive the best training conditions.”As the Sun News Network report noted, The qualification rate for firearms dropped in the year that followed [coroner] Brochu’s report.

Does that look like the yahoos in charge of the Montreal Police Force took the coroner’s recommendations seri-ously?I think not.What will it take for anyone at Montreal Police Headquarters to deal with the fact 95% of their membership failed to comply with legislation demanding police officers qualify with their firearms annually?Another innocent civilian inadvertently murdered by Montreal Police officers?



http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/sunnews/canada/archives/2014/05/20140516-122008.html



Action AlertRCMP’s Arbitrary Firearm Reclassifications

The RCMP under the questionable leadership of Robert Paulson is reclassify-ing a variety of firearms from non-restricted and restricted to prohibited status. These actions are without the sanction of Parliament or Steven Blaney, the Minister of Public Safety.Minister Blaney spoke out publicly against these actions, stating:

“I want to assure you all options are on the table to fix this situation. I will also be taking steps to make sure this never happens again.”

Despite that clear indicator from Canada’s Minister of Public Safety the unac-countable bureaucrats within the RCMP continue manufacturing criminals out of honest, law-abiding Canadians.Ensure your letter is clear, firm and polite.The Government of Canada, not unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats in the RCMP, determine firearm clas-sifications. The RCMP is in the business of enforcing laws, not manufacturing criminals out of Canada’s most law-abiding citizens.

Contact to Minister Blaney using the following information:The Honourable Steven Blaney

Minister of Public Safety House of Commons

Ottawa, ON K1A 0A6

You can also contact him by phone or fax at:Phone: (613) 992-7434 Fax: (613) 995-6856

His email addresses are:[email protected], [email protected] and

[email protected]

A sample letter is available online if you need a little inspiration, but please make sure you edit this into your own words before you send it off. Multiple copies of the same letter have far less effect than multiple individual letters. Personalization Matters.



http://www.conservative.ca/%3Fp%3D4369

mailto:blanes1b%40parl.gc.ca

mailto:blanes%40parl.gc.ca

mailto:ministerpublicsafety%40ps-sp.gc.ca

http://download.politicalactionsoftware.org/reclassification-sample-letter



Firearm Legal DefensePolice Can and Will Charge You Even When You Haven’t Broken Any Firearm Law

Police are now laying charges in situations that most hunters believe is safe storage.Mr. Hunter took several guns with him hunting. He kept them in his pickup bed. The guns were cased, covered, but not trigger-locked and not in locked hard cases. Ammunition was carried in the bed and in an unlocked box. The pickup bed was covered with a locked cap, bolted down and an additional wire and lock held the cap door closed in addition to a lock. Mr. Hunter slept in a hotel. During the night thieves broke the cap door off at the hinges. The lock held fast and two guns were stolen.The police arrested the thieves, impounded Mr. Hunter’s truck without a warrant and seized his remaining guns and ammunition. Mr. Hunter faces criminal charges of unsafe storage of guns and ammunition and unsafe trans-portation for leaving his guns unattended. The police say he should have had trigger locks or locked hard cases and the ammunition should have been in a locked box. This may sound ridiculous to you. Mr. Hunter has a good defense and should be found not guilty. The police say “let the judge decide”. Mr. Hunter’s guns are seized until trial. He must hire a lawyer and travel from home to the court where the theft took place. The trial will be nine months after his truck was broken into. This is not fair but it is true. This happened in September 1998. Names are changed, the essential facts are true.Protect yourself from this type of police harassment. If you leave your gun in your vehicle, trigger lock it, action lock it or take the bolt out and lock the bolt up. Keep your ammunition in a locked box. This is beyond what the law requires but do this to avoid becoming a test case for the police to see how far they can push the law.Every year over 3,500 Ontario residents are convicted of unsafe storage. Many are innocent but they do not fight a wrongfully laid charge. Most charges can be fought. Do not plead guilty. Do not surrender your rights without a fight. Do not make statements to the police after arrest. Call a lawyer, get advice. Better yet, put an extra trigger lock on your gun and a lock on your ammo box. That is a lot cheaper than a lawyer.



http://readthis.rightsandfreedoms.org/firearm-legal-defense/tid-01a

http://readthis.rightsandfreedoms.org/firearm-legal-defense/tid-01b



Political ActionThe Political Action Wizard Free Senate Edition - Download and Use it Today

On June 23, 2013 I announced that the political action software program I had created for contacting every Senator in Canada was ready for you to download and use. While the reason I created the software is no longer relevant (The Senate repeal Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act on June 28) the Canadian Senate still has a lot of power over the lives of ordinary Canadians. While they did a great thing by finally passing Bill C-304 to repeal Section 13, the very same day they absolutely gutted Bill C-377, a bill that would have forced Canadian labour unions to become more transparent. They did this and got away with it because nobody was watching them and they knew it. The Political Action Wizard Free Senate Edition is a tool for every Canadian to use to write to our Senators and express our views on the legislation before them. As their actions on Bill C-377 proved, we must let our Senators know we’re watching otherwise all kinds of silliness takes place.

http://download.politicalactionsoftware.org/senate-free-edition/



http://download.politicalactionsoftware.org/senate-free-edition/tid-RFB140_1







From The Inbox

I love hearing from you, the reader of Canadian Rights and Freedoms Bulletin. If you would like to submit a comment about a story that’s appeared in Canadian Rights and Freedoms Bulletin or if you would like to submit an article for publication, you can do that by sending an email to [email protected]. Alternatively, you can submit your thoughts through the web form located at http://support.rightsandfreedoms.org/contact-us/.Yours in Liberty,

Christopher di Armani

I believe Snead and Kloster’s Report (Minnesota’s Courageous Reform of Civil Asset Forfeiture Law) may be better served on the desk of our Minister of Justice.Then “Maybe” (just maybe) the Montague’s [civil forfeiture] case would be ended. Bruce would (and should be) exonerated and he and his Family not only be reimbursed for their Legal costs, but also awarded damages for unlawful imprisonment, and the strife they have endured over the past decade.I am a Canadian and proud to be one, but over the years, any Rights or Liberties we did have, have been gradual-ly removed from the playing table. Our Legal System has slipped to a point where, it doesn’t matter how “Right” you are, but they are never wrong. Case dismissed.We, as Canadians, need some avenue of recourse so that once again, David can fight Goliath. At present of course, there is none, and although every Politician wants our Vote, there are none bold enough to step up to the Plate for fear of their Silken Pillows be taken away from them or turned to burlap.Thanks for ruining my Monday morning Chris.Regards,Norm Sharp

Hey Norm,

Nice to hear from you again.

I thought you knew I don’t feel like I’ve done my job as a writer if I haven’t ruined someone’s morning! I couldn’t agree more, though. Maybe I’ll send a copy of their article and mine to the Minister of Justice myself.

Yours in Liberty,

Christopher di Armani



mailto:bulletin%40rightsandfreedoms.org?subject=Article%20Submission%20or%20Story%20Idea

mailto:bulletin%40rightsandfreedoms.org?subject=Article%20Submission%20or%20Story%20Idea

http://support.rightsandfreedoms.org/contact-us/

http://support.rightsandfreedoms.org/contact-us/

http://christopherdiarmani.com/11308/police-state/civil-forfeiture-laws/minnesotas-courageous-reform-civil-asset-foreiture-law/

http://readthis.rightsandfreedoms.org/bullet-proof-mind-dvd-series/tid-inbox3

http://readthis.rightsandfreedoms.org/tims-evergreen-presentation/tid-inbox2

http://readthis.rightsandfreedoms.org/free-concealed-carry-report/tid-inbox1

http://readthis.rightsandfreedoms.org/threat-detection-master-course/tid-inbox4

civil asset forfeiture lawsrightedition.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/rights... ·...

Documents