On Sat, 6 Jul 2002 13:29:09 -0400, "Android Cat" <androidcat99@hotmail.com> wrote:
>"Gregg Hagglund" <elrond1@cogeco.ca> wrote in message
>news:3d2721e0.79848592@news2.lightlink.com...
snip
>
>Any sign of any Co$ "observers" yet?
Nope, Gregg was looking very carefully and it didn't look like any were there to give (*) a report.
Our lawyer went along with us, but was worried that filing that much stuff in the court might annoy the court because such detail is normally not provided until trial. But the point he agreed with us on was that laying out how much *we* knew to the other side was a good idea. It seems to have had the opposite effect. The *judge* read it in detail and the opposition lawyers didn't seem to have looked at it.
Weird.
Keith Henson
"Keith Henson" <hkhenson@cogeco.ca> wrote in message
news:3d298970.106363979@news2.lightlink.com...
> On Sat, 6 Jul 2002 13:29:09 -0400, "Android Cat"
> <androidcat99@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >"Gregg Hagglund" <elrond1@cogeco.ca> wrote in message
> >news:3d2721e0.79848592@news2.lightlink.com...
>
> snip
> >
> >Any sign of any Co$ "observers" yet?
>
> Nope, Gregg was looking very carefully and it didn't look like any
> were there to give (*) a report.
>
> Our lawyer went along with us, but was worried that filing that much
> stuff in the court might annoy the court because such detail is
> normally not provided until trial. But the point he agreed with us on
> was that laying out how much *we* knew to the other side was a good
> idea. It seems to have had the opposite effect. The *judge* read it
> in detail and the opposition lawyers didn't seem to have looked at it.
>
> Weird.
Don't knock it. A small claims court case, and the judge seems to have read it in detail? Oh my! (I'd bet that's a judge either looking for a promotion, and/or just to do an excellent job -- if I had the power, I'd give that promotion to him either way -- so far, and before review of his previous judicial record.)
Remember that Casey Hill v. Scientology is one of the touchstone cases of the Charter of Freedoms and Rights. You can't swing much of anything in a Canadian court without invoking it. (Ready, aim at foot, fire!)
Keep in mind that the TO PD does/did scan this newsgroup. (As I found out when I quoted what an officer said in public at a picket and he got reamed when I might have left an exact quote off the record -- not that I would have changed my picket report, but I might have left some room, sorry. An EFT maximum take-down doesn't leave much room [you were lied to, people].)
Suing the police is *generally* a bad idea. In this case, I think that they need to be reminded of all the things that Co$ got busted for in Canada. (And all the things that they almost got busted for, not that those count, right?) I can personally attest that Co$ is still up to their old tricks. The Velcro Kitty credit info posts and the Peter Ramsay letter to my exact team-leader of the moment where I was working? Inside info -- as verified by Equifax.
Ron of that ilk.