From: johnturmel@yahoo.com   
      
   TURMEL: Bad day for Mike Spottiswood's Crown Attorneys   
      
   JCT: Yesterday was the last pre-trial case management   
   conference before Ontario Superior Court Justice Goodman   
   with Crowns Kim Johnson and Myfanwy Smith, the court-   
   appointed Amicus Curia lawyer Robert Sheppard and Mike   
   Spottiswood.   
      
   1) Mr. Sheppard advised the court Mike wanted to tape record   
   the hearing and the judge said fine. I'll bet it's a   
   precedent in the London Courthouse with their "no tape   
   recorders allowed" sign posted outside the courtroom.   
      
   2) The Crown was really rocked when Justice Goodman decided   
   to send all the issues to trial. In earlier case management   
   discussions, he had indicated that half of the issues the   
   Crown had objected to might not be relevant and could be   
   stricken. But in the end, Judge Goodman decided to let the   
   trial judge do the striking, if any, and send all of the   
   issues to trial. Har har har. The Crown thought they'd   
   already cut their workload in half and were hoping to cut it   
   further and now find they're all alive again! Har har har.   
   Bad news for them that upon revisitation, the judge found   
   none of the issues was bad enough to strike beforehand.   
      
   3) As for the 55 witnesses, the judge had asked that more   
   details should be be provided of what medical evidence the   
   witnesses "will say" than the simple grid of issues they had   
   all ticked off for topics they wanted to complain about.   
   That really would have been too much work and the grid   
   really did lay out what they "will say" so we just left it   
   at that and the judge decided to let Mike have all the   
   witnesses he could fit into 3 days of hearings. Then the   
   Crown gets 2 days for rebuttal.   
      
   So we won't use that many witnesses but will use many   
   doctors.   
   I think there's a good chance that every issue can be   
   covered by most witnesses in 3 days and we really don't need   
   everyone since there is overlap. We always knew the judge   
   could say: I've heard enough on "no doctors," and we then   
   stick to witnesses with testimony on other issues. When the   
   judge has heard enough on each issue, it gets pared down   
   until exactly the right few witnesses are left for exactly   
   the remaining rare issues.   
      
   4) So the Crown asked for a publication ban on Mike's pre-   
   trial motions! What are they afraid of? DENIED!!!   
      
   While the judge had to handle another case, they broke for a   
   conference between Mike, Amicus, 2 Crowns. They offered Mike   
   1 year probation for a guilty plea to S.7(1) production with   
   the S.5(2) trafficking charge and the charges against his   
   daughter Sarah gone. That Sarah's conviction would ruin her   
   for life fell on Mike's deaf ears because we know her former   
   lawyer Michael Barry had explained that they'd have to let   
   her go if Mike won and would let her go if Mike lost! So she   
   was never in any danger and was only being used as a pawn to   
   coerce a plea. And Mike wasn't falling for it. Sarah's safe.   
      
   Mike countered that if Mike MacDonald could get a discharge   
   and no criminal record and all his stuff back, Mike wanted   
   at least the same deal! What a great card added to our hand   
   from out East. What could they say? Why should Mike S. end   
   up with a criminal record and Mike M. not? What perfect   
   timing.   
      
   So the Crown knows that a discharge is the only deal. No   
   record. No win. People on my team get criminal records only   
   after they've been sustained by the Supreme Court of Canada!   
   The MacDonald discharge is the best they're going to get.   
   Stand-off is the best they can get.   
      
   And to finally add a little rain to the Crown's day, Mike   
   filed my Expert Witness Report which, on each issue, says:   
   Witnesses will testify that this or that policy hurt or   
   threatened them and my opinion is that the harm reduces   
   their chances of good health and survival. On every issue,   
   my expert opinion is that the tort caused by the flaw in the   
   MMAR reduces the chances of life. I just need the witnesses   
   to provide the facts upon which my expert opinion on the   
   odds of survival are based and it's cinched.   
      
   So I'd expect the Crown to take the plea for the discharge   
   and avoid the nightmare trial of the decade. Why they're   
   waiting, I don't know. Things change. Once Mike walks in to   
   order subpoenas sent to some of our recalcitrant doctors,   
   then the shit hits the fan and they'll be too late to avoid   
   the inconvenience of explaining to all these doctors why   
   they've been called to explain their refusals. (As the Court   
   of Appeal told Mernagh he should have!) Har har har.   
      
   Anyway, I hope Mike's tape-recorder precedent makes the   
   London courthouse grapevine. You have to admit, for the past   
   25 years, lawyers could have been taping every hearing to   
   upload every night so they would never have to wait for   
   transcripts with instantaneous access to perfect recall at   
   home like I did. I wonder how long it takes for the first   
   young lawyer to wise up and start advising the courts that   
   he's taping his hearings for better notes. But now Mike's   
   going to have his whole show taped which he'll be able to   
   listen to for the rest of his life!   
      
   Mike has until May 10 to file anything, the Crown has until   
   June 7 to respond, June 12 to file a motion challenging the   
   relativity of our medical witnesses' material to the motion   
   challenging the MMAR! Har har har har har har. I'll wipe   
   that out with a 1-liner and it had better be on their time.   
      
   The trial starts with the pre-plea Quash motion and pre-   
   trial constitutional motion from June 17-19 for Mike; the   
   Crown has 20-21 for its witnesses and evidence with respect   
   to the MMAR. Keep in mind, there are no witnesses on the   
   Quash Application, that's pure POLCOA-BENO law and the   
   decision will probably be reserved.   
   The motion on whether the law is dead should be decided before we   
   waste time on the motion whether it should be dead! But it's   
   not necessary.   
   After that's over, if no win, jury trial.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)