====
Issues Pages:
Regions:
Ghomeshi lawyer says Tom Mulcair is shopping for votes by exploiting his case for political gain
Wed, 2016-03-30 20:04
#1
Ghomeshi lawyer says Tom Mulcair is shopping for votes by exploiting his case for political gain
Wed, 2016-03-30 20:09
#2
After the Ghomeshi verdict NDP leader Tom Mulcair tweeted Today, and every day, #Ibelievesurvivors
On last night's The National Ghomeshi lawyer, Marie Henein, was asked about Mulcair tweet.
"On a personal level if somebody wants to express their support that's their choice. When a politician weighs in, that's a little more concerning to me because you're a person who is engaged and should be more knowledgeable about what you're commenting on."
"When you are denigrating the legal system in which he worked and which you should actually be very proud of — we have one of the greatest legal systems in the world — and you do so not having read a word of transcript, and not having informed yourself of the case, that's disappointing and not something I would put much stock in. But it sure does get you a lot of votes doesn't it?" Henein said.
"Does it?" Mansbridge asked.
"It might. It gets you attention," Henein replied.
In response to Henein's comments, Mulcair stood by his earlier remarks.
"The problem isn't lawyers doing their jobs. That's a good thing," he said in a statement. "The issue is that the criminal justice system, as we have seen, has structural problems when it comes to handling cases involving sexual assault.
"During my time working on sexual abuse complaints, one of the biggest obstacles to justice that I saw was women not being believed when they came forward," Mulcair said. "I believe strongly in the presumption of innocence. I believe that you are entitled to a strong defence. But I also believe survivors."
Watch the video below for Marie Henein comments about Mulcair
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/jian-ghomeshi-lawyer-marie-henein-tom-mu...
Wed, 2016-03-30 20:11
#3
Is Mulcair a lawyer himself?
Wed, 2016-03-30 20:13
#4
Is Mulcair a lawyer himself?
Yes that is why Mansbridge asked Henein about Mulcair tweet, as it is coming from not only a lawyer but a politcian.
Wed, 2016-03-30 20:32
#5
"The issue is that the criminal justice system, as we have seen, has structural problems when it comes to handling cases involving sexual assault."
This position is not found in the NDP policy book (3.8 Justice and crime prevention), nor was it part of the NDP platform in the recent federal election.
Appears to be another opportunity for Mr. Mulcair to create an ad hoc position.
Wed, 2016-03-30 20:34
#6
Appears to be another opportunity for Mr. Mulcair to create an ad hoc position.
Which is why Marie said Mulcair is exploiting this strictly to garner votes.
Wed, 2016-03-30 20:35
#7
![http://i65.tinypic.com/24c9s2t.png[/IMG]](http://i65.tinypic.com/24c9s2t.png[/IMG]){kind=link}
Wed, 2016-03-30 20:48
#8
This is already being discussed [url=http://rabble.ca/babble/feminism/ghomeshi-trial-begins]here[/url], in the Feminism Forum. There is no reason to duplicate that conversation, except perhaps to make trouble.
Wed, 2016-03-30 20:53
#9
This is already being discussed [url=http://rabble.ca/babble/feminism/ghomeshi-trial-begins]here[/url], in the Feminism Forum. There is no reason to duplicate that conversation, except perhaps to make trouble.
yes but when it is covered on CBC Political Show Power & Politics as a POLITICAL story (shopping for votes, exploiting for political gain), but belongs in Canadian Politics.
Wed, 2016-03-30 21:34
#10
I think Henein would demolish Mulcair in a head-to-head confrontation. She is a formidable lawyer and unlike Mulcair who was largely on the legislative side of law rather than on the courtroom practice side, Henein has a lot of experience.
I think both Henein & Mulcair make good points in this debate. It's a complicated issue. Henein is obligated to provide the best defense possible to her client and she is right that Mulcair is probably weighing into something about which he isn't fully informed on the facts.
However, Mulcair is correct to point out that there have been inequities in the justice system facing victims of sexual assault and that there is a need to address those problems in future law reform.
Wed, 2016-03-30 21:40
#11
I've asked for this duplicate and provocative thread to be shut down. Hope you understand why. If not, just ask.
Wed, 2016-03-30 22:41
#12
Is Mulcair a lawyer himself?
Yes that is why Mansbridge asked Henein about Mulcair tweet, as it is coming from not only a lawyer but a politcian.
Is Mulcair a lawyer? Given your track record I suspect you don't really have a clue whether he is or not. It has been many years since he practiced law and having a law degree is not sufficient to be called a lawyer you must also be a current member of a provincial law society.
His profession prior to politics was certainly law but that is not the same.
Wed, 2016-03-30 22:48
#13
Wed, 2016-03-30 22:50
#14
I think Henein would demolish Mulcair in a head-to-head confrontation.
Wed, 2016-03-30 22:53
#15
Is Mulcair a lawyer himself?
Yes that is why Mansbridge asked Henein about Mulcair tweet, as it is coming from not only a lawyer but a politcian.
Is Mulcair a lawyer? Given your track record I suspect you don't really have a clue whether he is or not. It has been many years since he practiced law and having a law degree is not sufficient to be called a lawyer you must also be a current member of a provincial law society.
His profession prior to politics was certainly law but that is not the same.
Unless he has actually sought permission to resign, or been disbarred, I would consider him to be a lawyer. I don't care if his fees happen to be in arrears.
Wed, 2016-03-30 23:09
#16
If he doesn't practice he isn't current on the law. You can call him anything you want but I suggest you don't call him to represent you in court.
Wed, 2016-03-30 23:31
#17
If he doesn't practice he isn't current on the law. You can call him anything you want but I suggest you don't call him to represent you in court.
No one cares if he is current on the law. That was not the point of Henien's criticism.
Wed, 2016-03-30 23:40
#18
If he doesn't practice he isn't current on the law. You can call him anything you want but I suggest you don't call him to represent you in court.
No one cares if he is current on the law. That was not the point of Henien's criticism.
I didn't say anything about Henien's criticism I was answering the question, "Is he a lawyer." You can answer it anyway you want and I'll answer it according to the rules, okay?
I think Henien is in the same category as a labour lawyer who works for large anti-union corporations. In other words she is scum. I think Mulcair is right in essence but he is no criminal lawyer and I don't think he ever practiced in that area of law so he is not speaking as a lawyer on the subject only as a politician.
Thu, 2016-03-31 00:39
#19
It could've been really stirring if Tom had raised his concerns during the leaders debate on women's issues he chose not to attend.
Thu, 2016-03-31 00:58
#20
If he doesn't practice he isn't current on the law. You can call him anything you want but I suggest you don't call him to represent you in court.
No one cares if he is current on the law. That was not the point of Henien's criticism.
I didn't say anything about Henien's criticism I was answering the question, "Is he a lawyer." You can answer it anyway you want and I'll answer it according to the rules, okay?
I think Henien is in the same category as a labour lawyer who works for large anti-union corporations. In other words she is scum. I think Mulcair is right in essence but he is no criminal lawyer and I don't think he ever practiced in that area of law so he is not speaking as a lawyer on the subject only as a politician.
From the perception of the impressionable public, much hay was made before and during the election of the fact that "Mulcair is a lawyer."
In this case, many in the public believe he is a lawyer and is knowledgable about issues of law, whether he technically is or not.
I was concerned about his apparent disregard for due process, but this isn't a venue where I've chosen to discuss it for various reasons. I saw this article much earlier today, but resisted the urge to post it here. That all said, I'm glad Heinen was given a forum via the Mansbridge interview to address some of the disgusting criticisms that have been thrown at her.
Thu, 2016-03-31 08:07
#21
If he doesn't practice he isn't current on the law. You can call him anything you want but I suggest you don't call him to represent you in court.
Interesting.
So when people complain about "bankers" or "businesspeople" being elected to the Liberal or Conservative benches we can tell them to lay off: they're none of those things; they're in politics now; and their previous professions are irrelevant?
Thu, 2016-03-31 09:21
#22
I've asked for this duplicate and provocative thread to be shut down. Hope you understand why. If not, just ask.
I too have sent the mods a message asking them NOT to delete this thread for the reasonings below.
CBC.ca has placed it under its POLITICS section
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/jian-ghomeshi-lawyer-marie-henein-tom-mu...
Both Power & Politics and Power Play TWO of the daily political shows have discussed this from a political standpoint.
Every newspaper has printed this story under its "Politics" section.
This is a POLITICAL story and should be discussed in the Canadian politics section.
This thread is about Thomas Mulcair, the POLITICIAN. So what is the confusion?
Thu, 2016-03-31 10:01
#23
If he doesn't practice he isn't current on the law. You can call him anything you want but I suggest you don't call him to represent you in court.
No one cares if he is current on the law. That was not the point of Henien's criticism.
I didn't say anything about Henien's criticism I was answering the question, "Is he a lawyer." You can answer it anyway you want and I'll answer it according to the rules, okay?
I think Henien is in the same category as a labour lawyer who works for large anti-union corporations. In other words she is scum. I think Mulcair is right in essence but he is no criminal lawyer and I don't think he ever practiced in that area of law so he is not speaking as a lawyer on the subject only as a politician.
What rules?
Again, most lawyers, especially those who are affluent like Mulcair, don't resign from the Law Society until they are ready to retire.
It is far more reasonable to presume that Mulcair is still a member of the barreau than to allege that he isn't.
The fact that he is non-practising is irrelevant. The fact that he wasn't a criminal lawyer is irrelevant. Especially, it seems, to him:
""During my time working on sexual abuse complaints, one of the biggest obstacles to justice that I saw was women not being believed when they came forward," Mulcair said. "I believe strongly in the presumption of innocence. I believe that you are entitled to a strong defence. But I also believe survivors."
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/jian-ghomeshi-lawyer-marie-henein-tom-mu...
He is saying that he has particular expertise in the sexual abuse context, which informs his beliefs in the criminal law context.
Thu, 2016-03-31 10:22
#24
"It is far more reasonable to presume that Mulcair is still a member of the barreau than to allege that he isn't."
In fact the barreau website lists Mulcair as a member in good standing.Took me less time to look it up than to read all the posts arguing as to whether he is.
Me Thomas Mulcair
[email protected]
Député fédéral d'Outremont
154 avenue Laurier Ouest
Bureau 302
Montréal QC H2T 2N7
Téléphone :(514) 697-7746 Télécopieur :(514) 736-2726
Thu, 2016-03-31 11:53
#25
swallow
And he's directing mail to his assistant 1a! What a scandal! He must resign at once!
[img]http://blogs.democratandchronicle.com/chili/files/2009/05/85_witch_stirr...
Thu, 2016-03-31 12:07
#26
There is no criticism too disgusting for Me Henein. Though we must take pains to make sure our criticisms aren't misogynist, tempting though it is in terms of such a patriarchal (and vehicular homicide) enabler.
Thu, 2016-03-31 12:32
#27
White Cat
When you are denigrating the legal system in which he worked and which you should actually be very proud of — we have one of the greatest legal systems in the world
Hard to tell who's the politician here. But a legal system that allows most rapists to walk free must have a few kinks in it. I doubt most women have the same degree of faith in the system that this paid gum-flapper has.
But she really demonstrates what's wrong with politics. It's the freaking lawyers! These professional liars. But the time they work their way up to the food chain and run for office, their brains are completely shredded — as well as any personal integrity that they might have had at one point in their lives.
Civilization definitely has a big lawyer problem. I don't say 'kill all the lawyers.' But they definitely need to be put on a leash.
Thu, 2016-03-31 13:14
#28
You can't imagine my discomfort as an Anarchist with having to speak in favour of due process and the power serving legal system we have. Alas, such are the misconceptions, ideological thought processes, and rhetoric being swung around with abandon.
Thu, 2016-03-31 13:15
#29
When you are denigrating the legal system in which he worked and which you should actually be very proud of — we have one of the greatest legal systems in the worldCivilization definitely has a big lawyer problem. I don't say 'kill all the lawyers.' But they definitely need to be put on a leash.
Lawyers don't step out of line in North Korea.
Thu, 2016-03-31 17:24
#30
White Cat
When you are denigrating the legal system in which he worked and which you should actually be very proud of — we have one of the greatest legal systems in the worldCivilization definitely has a big lawyer problem. I don't say 'kill all the lawyers.' But they definitely need to be put on a leash.
Lawyers don't step out of line in North Korea.
North Korea has no need for bribe-taking lawyer-politicians to let down the defenses so bankers can loot the economy. The people in the upper-echelons of that society get their taste.
Of course, none of them do as well as the Clintons. They made $230-million so far deregulating the banks and negotiating the TPP. I guess that's chicken scratch compared to the billions some players made. But they are humble public servants. So they must make sacrifices. As do we all. (It's called freedumb and dumbocracy.)
And we must remember that centrism means getting fooled over and over and over again until plutocrats and their pet politicians cause civilization to implode in the Anthropocene. It means playing Russian roulette with the heads of your children and grandchildren.
Standing up to corruption is extremist. It's evil!
How dare anyone demand that people act responsibly and follow the rule of law? It's communist!
Thu, 2016-03-31 17:27
#31
White Cat
You can't imagine my discomfort as an Anarchist with having to speak in favour of due process and the power serving legal system we have. Alas, such are the misconceptions, ideological thought processes, and rhetoric being swung around with abandon.
That's because you're an ideologue who can only process thought in terms of black and white. So it's either all the way one way or the other.
What really gets on my nerves is people accusing those who question how a system can allow so many rapists to go free of being against "due process." THEY ARE NOT FUCKING AGAINST DUE PROCESS. NOT FUCKING ONE OF THEM SAYS THEY ARE AGAINST DUE PROCESS.
Thu, 2016-03-31 18:10
#32
I don't say 'kill all the lawyers.' But they definitely need to be put on a leash.
Can you elaborate on this? And can you be SPECIFIC?
I'm not asking for "lawyers should serve the people!!" or "I don't really know, all I know is the system is fucked!!".
What, specifically, should be done to put lawyers "on a leash"?
Thu, 2016-03-31 18:11
#33
You can't imagine my discomfort as an Anarchist with having to speak in favour of due process and the power serving legal system we have. Alas, such are the misconceptions, ideological thought processes, and rhetoric being swung around with abandon.
That's because you're an ideologue who can only process thought in terms of black and white. So it's either all the way one way or the other.
What really gets on my nerves is people accusing those who question how a system can allow so many rapists to go free of being against "due process." THEY ARE NOT FUCKING AGAINST DUE PROCESS. NOT FUCKING ONE OF THEM SAYS THEY ARE AGAINST DUE PROCESS.
Well yes, the system should be able to put far more rapists in prison, no question about it. Communities should demand it. That last bit rolls of the tongue eh? Except that it seems unrealistic that you know what every last person would be prepared to do. So maybe it's fair to say that contradiction rolls off the tongue as well?
Thu, 2016-03-31 18:34
#34
I fully expected Ghomeshi's lawyer to be vilified if they won the case and I wasn't let down. It's still weird to watch and see some of the accusations and suggestions.
Thu, 2016-03-31 18:59
#35
"It is far more reasonable to presume that Mulcair is still a member of the barreau than to allege that he isn't."
In fact the barreau website lists Mulcair as a member in good standing.Took me less time to look it up than to read all the posts arguing as to whether he is.
Me Thomas Mulcair
[email protected]
Député fédéral d'Outremont
154 avenue Laurier Ouest
Bureau 302
Montréal QC H2T 2N7Téléphone :(514) 697-7746 Télécopieur :(514) 736-2726
Yes, some lawyers keep their licenses active when they bcome MPs, and some don't.
Thu, 2016-03-31 19:01
#36
*