Ridiculous tales of Mrs. Myriam Bédard.

Ridiculous tales of Mrs. Myriam Bédard:

On Wednesday, March 24, 2004 Mrs. Myriam Bédard: testified in front of Standing Committee on Public Accounts during 3rd SESSION of 37th PARLIAMENT.

Quote:

Mr. Jason Kenney: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mrs. Bédard.

In your statement, you said, and I quote: “I had previously heard Mr. LeFrançois say that Groupaction was involved in drug trafficking. I was afraid and psychologically paralyzed.” Can you explain to us the context in which Mr. LeFrançois made that comment?

Mrs. Myriam Bédard: Yes, that happened in September 2001. Mr. LeFrançois was encouraging me to start up my own advertising company. I told him I liked my work at VIA Rail because I could do a number of projects there and that I didn’t see why I would set up my own advertising business. He then told me something else. I’ll try to repeat his words faithfully because I want to quote him right. He told me: “Groupaction is building a big castle and they don’t always do things right. They’re involved in drug trafficking.” He added that someone should eventually inherit Groupaction’s contracts. That’s why he encouraged me to open my own advertising company, which I did around September 26, 2001. However, one week later, he called me into his office and told me that he had said too much the previous week and that I should forget that. That’s what he told me. Is it true? Is it not true? That’s what Mr. LeFrançois told me.

That’s why, when they wanted to send me to Groupaction, I didn’t agree at all. There were some doubts about illegal things being done there. I especially didn’t want to be associated with those kinds of things.

Her testimony at the time exposed her to public ridicule. How much truth was there to it??

At the time of her testimony Irwin Cotler, MP representing Mount Royal riding in Montreal was acting as Canada’s Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada and soon after her testimony on July 20, 2004 Ujjal Dosanjh MP representing of Vancouver South riding joined Mr. Cotler in Paul Martin’s Cabinet as Canada’s Minister of Health replacing Pierre Pettigrew. They had a lot in common as Mr. Dosanjh used to serve as BC Attorney General from 1995 until February 23, 2000 when he become Premier of BC provincial government, position that he held until June 5, 2001. Mr. Dosanjh had a good friend who used to help him out handle “explosive situations”. This friend, whose name is Peter Leask, helped Mr. Dosanjh to “defuse” political backlash facing Sikh community of British Columbia following “Air India” bombing by Sikh millitants in 1985.

“Mr. Peter Leask working as defence lawyer and and his side kick Austin Cullen working as regional crown attorney were useful in covering up great many potentially explosive situations. Both men were very useful to BC Attorney General Ujjal Dosanjh and his boss Premier Glen Clark who at one time was accused of promoting pedophilia thru provincial government website. In 1997 Cullen arranged that Peter Leask acting as an indpendent prosecutor dropped charges against school principal and homosexual pedophile William Bennest. Cullen also dropped all pedophilia charges against Dr. John Gossage (child abuse expert) initially charged in 1992

http://www.lifesitenews.com/ld…..0122b.html

Austin Cullen got his reward on March 22, 2001 when The Hounurable Anne McLellan, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, appointed him as a Superior Court judge.
http://www.justice4you.org/cases_Bennest.php

All pedophile protecting activities however useful to their superiors never generated kind of money both gentlemen desired but in 2002 came their chance. RCMP was in a process of busting up heroin importing ring operating out of Hong Kong and they needed authorisations for wiretaps that were provided by Cullen.

Once heroine traffickers got arrested Peter Leask become defence lawyer for one of the accused See Chun Lee. What become of this prosecution was well summed up by now infamous Madam Justice Southin of BC Court of Appeals in her decision delivered in 2003. See:

here

Reasons for Judgment of the Honourable Madam Justice Southin:

[1] On the 11th January, 2001, the Crown preferred against the respondent and others a direct indictment, the portions of which relating to the respondent are:

See Chun LEE, Gou Din HO, Chuk Fong TAO, Wei Bo CHEN, Chak Nam CHAN, Siu Wah CHAU and Cheung HUNG stand charged that they/ils sont inculpes d’avoir:

COUNT 1: Between September 1, 1999 and September 3, 2000, at or near the Cities of Vancouver and Burnaby, British Columbia and elsewhere in British Columbia, and in the People’s Republic of China and in Hong Kong, did unlawfully conspire together, the one with the other or others of them and with a person or with persons unknown, to commit the indictable offence of importation of a controlled substance into Canada, to wit: Diacetylmorphine (heroin), contrary to section 6(1) of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act and trafficking in a controlled substance, to wit: Diacetylmorphine (heroin), contrary to section 5(1) of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act and did thereby commit an offence contrary to section 465(1)(c) of the Criminal Code of Canada.

* * *

Gou Din HO stands charged that he/il est inclupe d’avoir:

COUNT 5: Between June 1, 2000 and September 3, 2000 at or near the City of Vancouver in the Province of British Columbia, did unlawfully possess property or proceeds of property, to wit: funds of a value exceeding $1,000.00 United States of America currency knowing that all or part of the property or proceeds was obtained or derived directly or indirectly as a result of the commission in Canada of an offence under Section 5 of the Controlled Drugs and Substance Act, or a conspiracy to commit an offence under Section 5 of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, and did thereby commit an offence contrary to Section 8(1) of the said Act.

COUNT 6: Between June 1, 2000 and September 3, 2000 at or near the Cities of Vancouver and Richmond in the Province of British Columbia, did unlawfully possess property of a value exceeding $1,000.00 Canadian currency, to wit: a 2000 Honda Accord vehicle, bearing British Columbia License GRA899, knowing that all or part of the property was obtained or derived directly or indirectly as a result of the commission in Canada of an offence under Section 5 of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, or a conspiracy to commit an offence under Section 5 of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, and did thereby commit an offence contrary to Section 8(1) of the said Act.

[2] The Crown averred that the heroin in issue, some 93 kilograms, which arrived at the Port of Vancouver probably in 2000 in a container carried hence on a vessel from Asia, had a wholesale value of approximately $12 million and a possible street value of up to $33 million.

[3] On the 25th October, 2001, Cullen J. began a series of voir dire which lasted until late 2002 or early 2003. On the 7th April, 2003, the jury having been previously empanelled, the accused Lee and Tao (the last four named accused pleaded guilty) were put in charge of the jury and the trial proper began.

[4] The case for the Crown concluded the 24th April, 2003. The defence cases were closed by the 14th July, 2003.

[5] The learned judge began his charge to the jury on 26th July and continued it on 27th and 28th July. On that day the jury retired and after deliberating on the 29th and 30th July, delivered, on 31st July, its verdict of guilty on Count 1 and on two other counts against these two accused.

[6] I digress to note that on at least five occasions, the 21st May, 3rd June, 16th June, 11th July, and 25th July, this trial had to be adjourned because a juror was ill. Indeed, on the 25th July, two jurors were ill. The Criminal Code prescribes the minimum number of jurors who can give a verdict as ten. If the two jurors were too ill to continue and had been discharged and if a third juror had died suddenly on 29th July, this trial would have become a thing of naught. With the advent in recent years of very long trials, Parliament ought to enact a system in which more than twelve jurors shall be empanelled, but at the end of all the evidence only twelve, chosen in some manner, shall deliberate upon the evidence and return the verdict.

[7] The proceedings were adjourned to the 8th September for submissions on sentencing.

[8] On the 7th November, 2003, the learned judge, having given double credit for time served, sentenced Lee to 17 years 8 months on Count 1, and on Counts 2 and 3, to 12 years to be served concurrently with each other and Count 1. The accused Tao, having been given double credit for time served, was sentenced to 13 years 8 months on Count 1, and to ten years on Counts 2 and 3 to run concurrently with each other and Count 1.

[9] As the rights of appeal of those two accused have not been exhausted, nothing I say in these reasons constitutes any comment on whether, as against them, the Crown was entitled to these verdicts or whether these sentences were fit.

[10] The reader will therefore note that the trial from start to finish took two years. It required the learned judge to make over 60 rulings on evidentiary issues, the bulk of which would simply not have arisen before the promulgation of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. What it all cost in terms of the stipends, including fringe benefits, of the judge, the jurors (and one must not overlook the economic cost to the employers of those jurors who were gainfully employed and entitled under their contracts of employment to be paid their regular pay by their employer), interpreters (throughout the proceedings an interpretation into Cantonese was provided), Crown counsel and their support staff, court clerks and peace officers whose attendance at the trial was required, and legal aid for all the accused, I am unable to say. However, I am reminded of the trenchant comment of Romilly J. when he was a judge of the Provincial Court, quoted by me in my judgment in R. v. Moore; R. v. Bogdanich 1993 CanLII 17 (BC C.A.), (1993), 81 C.C.C. (3d) 161 at 173-74 (B.C.C.A.):

I would not wish to leave this appeal without iterating this trenchant observation made by Judge Romilly with which I agree:

Proceedings in this matter have been very lengthy. The trial has been continuing on and off over the last year and a half. The actual trial time involved was approximately four and one-half months. It is fair to say that if two words could be used to describe this lengthy trial, they would be the words, “Charter mania”. Every possible Charter argument that could be raised was raised in this trial. Some may be tempted to say that this trial has made a significant contribution towards the swelling of the national debt.

On the evidence, there was not the slightest shred of doubt from the outset of the trial that the appellants were guilty. I should be much surprised if the burden upon the taxpayer of this trial, quite apart from the cost of this appeal, namely, the salaries and benefits of the judge, Crown counsel, the police witnesses and the court staff, and the costs of the provision and maintenance of the courtroom in which it was held, was less than $200,000.00. I assume that in this particular case the public did not bear the fees of defence counsel, although in many of these long conspiracy trials the public does bear that expense.

[11] If the reader is now curious about what happened to the respondent, it is this: Sometime after the 26th June, 2002, he was deported to the People’s Republic of China, of which he is a citizen.

[12] If the next question is how could that be when he was standing trial on this indictment, the answer is that he no longer was standing trial on this indictment, Cullen J. having entered a stay.

[13] The Crown, by this appeal, seeks to have that stay reversed.

[14] It is not probable, even if the Crown succeeds, that the respondent will voluntarily return to Canada, although if he does I suppose he might claim refugee status.

[15] As Canada has no extradition treaty with the People’s Republic of China, his return could not be demanded. In an unusual twist, the respondent, after the stay was entered, gave on commission evidence later put before the jury describing himself as the kingpin of the conspiracy and exculpating some one or more of the other accused. His having testified, however, would not prevent him returning to Canada as, by virtue of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, his evidence, if he did return and if he were tried again, could not be used against him.

[16] But because, on balance, it seems highly improbable that the respondent will return to Canada, counsel appearing for him put forward the argument that this Court should consider this appeal to be academic. The Court, however, concluded that even if, as between the respondent and the Crown, the issue is academic, it is right that the Court should consider it because the foundation for the stay was the learned judge’s view of the breadth of an asserted right to counsel at the public expense……..

As a result of strong recommendation put forward by Ujjal Dosanjh on November 23, 2005 Irwin Cotler, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, announced the following appointment: Peter D. Leask Q.C., of Vancouver is appointed a judge of the Supreme Court of British Columbia.

Soon after that, fellow life time bencher of the Law society of BC, and good friend of Ujjal Dosanjh the Honourable Mr. Justice Peter D. Leask presided over the drug trafficking trial of Glen Jonathan Hehn full patch member of Hells Angels. Despite of very damaging evidence Justice Leask decided to acquit Hehn of all charges. Anticipating inevitable complaint to the Canadian Judicial Council and knowing that content of a complaint from RCMP and BC Attorney General’s Office will remain secret Justice Leask pre-emptively swore couple of times at the Crown prosecutor. He knew that all complaints from the outraged public, RCMP and BC AGO office would all treated by CJC as one complaint and only swearing aspect would get addressed publicly.

See: here

Justice Leask apologised publicly for his outbursts in court and took the money, and Glen Jonathan Hehn, full patch member of Hell’s Angels, walked out of the court as a free man.

Canadian Judicial Council did “their thing” and issued Justice Peter D. Leask stern warning.

See: here

Couple of moths later Justice Peter D. Leask released yet another drug dealer Larry Crocker sentencing him to the time served.

See: here

If that was not good enough just recently Justice Peter D. Leask sentenced another member of Hells Angels Chad James Barroby caught selling one pound of cocaine to and undercover RCMP officer to 18 months of house arrest.

See: here.

On top of all this it seems that during last federal elections 662 votes went missing in Vancouver South riding. Disappearance of these crucial votes resulted in judicial recount conducted by Associate Chief Justice of the Supreme Court the Honourable Patrick D. Dohm whose arrogant behaviour served as a perfect diversion drawing people’s attention from the issue of missing votes. As result of all these legal manoeuvres missing votes were never found and Ujjal Dosanjh was declared a winner. See: http://www.bloggingtories.ca/forums/topic6077-60.html.

How much truth there are to Mrs. Myriam Bédards allegations that people associated with the Liberal Party of Canada (Groupaction) were involved in drug trafficking in Quebec?? We still do not know but if Montreal Chapter of Hells Angels is as cozy with Quebec judiciary and Quebec members of LPC as BC Chapter of Hells Angels are with BC judges and members of LPC, Ms. Bédards’ allegations might be very accurate reports of what she heard from her boss.