Denunciatory Hysterics
Now that the absurd spectacle of a defence lawyer engaging in absurd hyperbole and outrageous presumptions has been well reported in on the news, the extradition hearing for Hassan Diab moves forward. And this time it is the Crown's turn to present their case before Ontario Superior Court Justice Robert Maranger.
Justice Maranger was placed on due notice by defence attorney Donald Bayne that he would rue to the end of his days a decision that would render Mr. Diab to France to stand trial. For, according to the learned Mr. Bayne, France had balefully manipulated evidence against his client.
French authorities are confident that have gathered sufficient evidence to try Mr. Diab for murder in the 1980 bomb that blasted the Copernic synagogue in Paris, killing four passersby in front of the synagogue, and injuring forty more, when the glass ceiling of the synagogue fell upon worshippers within.
"If we weren't dealing with such a tragic loss of life, I would be tempted to call Mr. Bayne's arguments laughable", observed Federal Justice department lawyer Claude LeFrancois, in evaluating the claims by defence lawyer Donald Bayne. Who, in his impassioned arguments cast slanderous aspersions on French justice, the lead French prosecutor Marc Trevidic, and the ominously baneful evidence purportedly sourced through 'torture'.
"That is a very serious accusation to level at any of our extradition partners. In my 13 years of practice in this area, I have never heard anything so sinister directed at a foreign state", said an aghast Mr. LeFrancois, preparing to state the argument for the Crown. Who pointed out also that the defence arguments had no basis in Canadian extradition law.
In a delirious leap of logic bordering on lunatic fantasy, Mr. Bayne condemned the French evidence and its source; intimating that anything emanating from Israel could not conceivably be relied upon to reflect the truth and any modicum of accuracy. Moreover, that should Justice Maranger find in favour of honouring France's request, that result would be seen to be in conflict with international conventions on torture.
To insist as Mr. Bayne has consistently done, that French evidence-gathering is corrupt and unreliable represents an egregious example of besmirching the justice system in another democracy with a long and proud tradition of upholding international and domestic law. However Justice Maranger finds at the conclusion of this hearing, Canada's part in the affair will surely reflect an even-handed determination.
Mr. Diab can expect no less from the French justice system if and when he is extradited to fulfill Canada's obligations to a sister-democracy. And in the final analysis, justice will be seen to have been done, one way or another.
Justice Maranger was placed on due notice by defence attorney Donald Bayne that he would rue to the end of his days a decision that would render Mr. Diab to France to stand trial. For, according to the learned Mr. Bayne, France had balefully manipulated evidence against his client.
French authorities are confident that have gathered sufficient evidence to try Mr. Diab for murder in the 1980 bomb that blasted the Copernic synagogue in Paris, killing four passersby in front of the synagogue, and injuring forty more, when the glass ceiling of the synagogue fell upon worshippers within.
"If we weren't dealing with such a tragic loss of life, I would be tempted to call Mr. Bayne's arguments laughable", observed Federal Justice department lawyer Claude LeFrancois, in evaluating the claims by defence lawyer Donald Bayne. Who, in his impassioned arguments cast slanderous aspersions on French justice, the lead French prosecutor Marc Trevidic, and the ominously baneful evidence purportedly sourced through 'torture'.
"That is a very serious accusation to level at any of our extradition partners. In my 13 years of practice in this area, I have never heard anything so sinister directed at a foreign state", said an aghast Mr. LeFrancois, preparing to state the argument for the Crown. Who pointed out also that the defence arguments had no basis in Canadian extradition law.
In a delirious leap of logic bordering on lunatic fantasy, Mr. Bayne condemned the French evidence and its source; intimating that anything emanating from Israel could not conceivably be relied upon to reflect the truth and any modicum of accuracy. Moreover, that should Justice Maranger find in favour of honouring France's request, that result would be seen to be in conflict with international conventions on torture.
To insist as Mr. Bayne has consistently done, that French evidence-gathering is corrupt and unreliable represents an egregious example of besmirching the justice system in another democracy with a long and proud tradition of upholding international and domestic law. However Justice Maranger finds at the conclusion of this hearing, Canada's part in the affair will surely reflect an even-handed determination.
Mr. Diab can expect no less from the French justice system if and when he is extradited to fulfill Canada's obligations to a sister-democracy. And in the final analysis, justice will be seen to have been done, one way or another.
Labels: Canada, Justice, Terrorism, Traditions
posted by Pieface | 5:38 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home