Warman vs FD John Doe Appeal Report Thread

[styky]

Excellent report Connie.

[calgary clipper]

Thanks, Connie and Mark, for all that you have done and are doing on this file. With $10K in costs on the table, we can only hope that the three judges take a lot of time to assess just what the ramifications of their ruling will be. Also, that they will be up to speed in terms of the internet complexities involved and what could be involved down the road.

[Mark Fournier]

I will be very interested in whether any of the lawyers raises the issue of the earlier judge failing to consider each Doe on his or her merits.

That issue wasn't raised, Jay, but you bring up a good point. I'll be asking about it.

[Mark Fournier]

I have had to be silent too long Some know me, some do not. Just to let you all know, this case will be going into course materials in a law course for journalists. So here are my thoughts.

It's good to see you back, braveheart and excellent news that this case is going to be taught.

The following quote struck me as a big jab at him:

"In a case last year, the Supreme Court said that the balance is off between freedom of expression and reputation protection, and that reputation protection is currently given too much weight."

He has be suing people for defamation given he is a lawyer and should be allowed to protect his reputation more so. I remember this being said f him several years ago. By the statement above has his run come to an end?

It is a very good thing that the Supreme Court has been ruling repeatedly in favour of privacy. Individuals and society as a whole needs to be protected from serial litigants using lawfare to impose their political views on us all.

Also I love Wendy's line of argument - In Canada we have no fully formed common law right to privacy as the Australians do. We need a court to finally say it and express this right to privacy as a fully formed right. For if we do not do that here and now privacy is illusionary. The WIC case is going to be an important turning point in all of this.

Laws need to be written and we hope to play a part in making sure the new laws are good laws.

[Gerry T. Neal]

standing in for Richard Warman because he wasn't there

Of course he wasn't.

How exactly does he get away with not showing up at court for these lawsuits?

[Mark Fournier]

Thanks, Connie and Mark, for all that you have done and are doing on this file. With $10K in costs on the table, we can only hope that the three judges take a lot of time to assess just what the ramifications of their ruling will be. Also, that they will be up to speed in terms of the internet complexities involved and what could be involved down the road.

The three judges radiated frightening competence. I would hate to have to argue the wrong side of the law in front of them. They brooked no nonsense and they asked tough and penetrating questions of everyone who stood before them. They weren't quite up to speed on some of the tech stuff but I'm certain they will be by the time they issue their ruling. We have always maintained that judges who best understand the technology are most likely to rule in our favour so we are feeling good about this ruling.

Of course anything can happen so it's too early to start celebrating a victory for freedom but there is certainly room for optimism at this point.

[Fabulous Fred]

The sense I got from reading it was the you have one judge favouring your argument and one who is against you.

[Mark Fournier]

The sense I got from reading it was the you have one judge favouring your argument and one who is against you.

It seemed more like two for us and one possibly against. We are hoping that the more they look at the case the more they will realize the importance of protecting the public from this kind of of invasion of privacy by serial litigants. And no judge is likely to ignore or blithely dismiss the strong trend of the Supreme Court lately in protecting privacy.

[Fabulous Fred]

These situations are a little freaky. I have no experience at this level of litigation but from my limited experience I determined that the nicer a judge was towards me during the proceedings the likelier it was for me to be roasted alive when the decision was rendered.

[drummer]

Thanks for the report. Very interesting. Was there any representative from

[drummer]

Sorry, pressed the submit button too fast. Was Michael Geist himself there too?

[cinyc]

standing in for Richard Warman because he wasn't there

Of course he wasn't.

How exactly does he get away with not showing up at court for these lawsuits?

This was an appeal. It's usually left up to the lawyers to argue before the judges. Nobody testifies in the usual sense of the word. Mr. Warman couldn't have done much other than listen during these particular proceedings, anyway. He's not needed to argue the law.

[J.B. Stone]

standing in for Richard Warman because he wasn't there

Of course he wasn't.

How exactly does he get away with not showing up at court for these lawsuits?

This was an appeal. It's usually left up to the lawyers to argue before the judges. Nobody testifies in the usual sense of the word. Mr. Warman couldn't have done much other than listen during these particular proceedings, anyway. He's not needed to argue the law.

No, just to INFLICT and AGGRAVATE it.

[wildernessvoice]

The first question to be considered is if a lawyer even has a reputation to protect.
If the answer to the question Are you a lawyer? is in the affirmative then I think the issue of reputation has just been settled!

[westcoast woman]

Thank you for the report Connie. I was thinking of you and Mark as I was doing my work all day. This war against you two and Free Dominion has gone on so long. I look forward to the day this is all behind you.