Wednesday, January 30, 2013

Auditor General of BC app to CJ Bauman on Client/Solicitor Privilege: BC Rail? No! Bernardo/Murray? Yes



A harsh refresher course is needed for the Public (others too), to understand the ins and outs of Client/Solicitor Privilege, especially on the high profile cases where on the surface, Justice is being seen to be denied to the Auditor General electorate.   Maybe the Public just doesn't understand the nuances (fifty shades of grey) of the Courts.

What better example is there than to look at R. V. Murray   (Murray was found Innocent).

Something to think about:

Christopher D. Clemmer  Article:  Obstructing The Bernardo Investigation:  Kenneth Murray and the Defense Counsel's Conflicting Obligation to Clients and Court




~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"Conclusion" (snipped) starts on Page 57, but this image is from Page 58



...... It was demonstrated that privilege does not apply to inculpatory physical evidence, as per the judgement of Justice Gravely.  This finding posed a particular problem for Murray.   Since the tapes were not protected, he did not have any legal justification to suppress them for use in the trial.  Ultimately, although Murray was under the impression that he was acting lawfully, his suppression of the tapes was not protected by privilege and thus, was unlawful.  ......

Would laypersons and lawyers alike, see the BC Liberal Government destruction of tapes, documents and other evidence (testimony of a former BC Finance Minister) in the case of BC Rail AND the buyout of the Indemnity deal, as Obstruction of Justice?


Last Page of Document


2 comments:

Scotty on Denman said...

I take away that enough hasn't been done to address the admitted conflict between lawyer-client confidence and duty to society in general. I'm not clear as to why this particular case is not the time to address it.

kootcoot said...

"Would laypersons and lawyers alike, see the BC Liberal Government destruction of tapes, documents and other evidence (testimony of a former BC Finance Minister) in the case of BC Rail AND the buyout of the Indemnity deal, as Obstruction of Justice?"

Frankly I see virtually everything the BC liaRs do as Obstruction of Justice, destruction of justice and all around criminal activity protected by privilege and a mutually beneficial relationship with the RCMP (and feds).

Think of creeps like Kelly Reichart and Peter Montague. And who was Kelly's inlaw that headed up (and guided away from the actual crooks) the Everywhichway investigation and subsequent BC Rail Farce (or was that Montague?