Disgrace: Canada Protects Porn Queen Judge

(left, Lori Douglas,  Manitoba’s chief family court judge.)

The resignation Thursday of a panel tasked
with firing Douglas calls into question the rule of law
in Canada.The judges accuse the Harper
government of undermining the judicial process.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lori_Douglas

from Nov 24, 2013
by Henry Makow, Ph.D

When a society fails to recognize and exorcise evil, and instead rewards it, it is in deep trouble.

(left, Douglas & husband Jack King)

When she was appointed judge in 2005, Lori Douglas was required to disclose any information that would detract from her fitness to be a judge. She failed to disclose that she had posed for scores of porn and bondage pictures on the Internet. She failed to mention that her husband Jack King had solicited a Black client Alex Chapman to participate in making more such obscene pictures.

When Chapman revealed this in 2010, Douglas was already Associate Chief Justice of Manitoba in charge of family law. She should have been forced to resign, plain and simple.

Instead, Winnipeg elites rallied around her, arguing that her private life had no bearing on her job capacity. Perhaps if she were still in private practice. But chief family court judge is a public position. Do they expect decent citizens to allow a degenerate to determine the fate of their families?

They claim she didn’t know what her husband did with the photos. Alex Chapman says she had two lunch dates with him and knew why.

Instead of resigning, for three years Lori Douglas has been receiving full salary of $315,000 for “administrative duties.” How long are taxpayers going to allow this?

CANADIAN JUDICIAL COUNCIL

In 2011-2012, a Canadian Judicial Council Inquiry began hearings to determine if Douglas should be cashiered.  It included the Chief Justices of Newfoundland and Prince Edward Island and was chaired by the Chief Justice of Alberta, Catherine Fraser, left.

In July 2012, the hearings were going badly for Douglas. After some particularly withering cross examination, Douglas’ lawyer Sheila Block accused the Committee of being “biased” and called for the proceedings to be stayed. Her motion was rejected by the Committee.  

Nevertheless, she was able to take her accusation of “bias” to the Federal Court. This is obviously an obstruction tactic. Instead of rejecting it, the Federal Court entertained the motion. Sixteen months have passed and nothing has happened.

In their 11-page statement Thursday, the Judicial Council Committee said, “This Committee does not agree that the Federal Court has the jurisdiction to judicially review the proceedings of an inquiry committee which is deemed to be a superior court under the Judges Act , RSC 1985, c. J-1.” 

(left, Peter MacKay, current attorney general of Canada)

In Section 9, the Committee cited many instances where the Attorney General of Canada failed to defend the Canadian Judicial Council in federal court proceedings.

These include: “The AGC did not oppose the stay of the Committee’s hearings requested by the Judge which was consequently granted, unopposed; The AGC did not appeal any of the decisions of the Federal Court denying intervener status to the Committee or restricting intervener status for the Council and the new Independent Counsel, despite having consented to these applications.”

CONCLUSION

The hearing was to continue with testimony from Justice Martin Freedman of the Manitoba Court of Appeal, who was involved in Douglas’s application to be a judge.

Lori Douglas Inquiry Unveils Masonic Underworld
Chief Family Court Judge on Bondage Web Site
Lori Douglas “Defence” is a Disgrace
Canada Anxious to Bury Porn Judge Inquiry

Alex Chapman (left) writes:

“Well stated.   You have summarized it well. Nothing much to add other than it has now been proven that the current laws don’t equally apply to everyone.  When ordinary folks are accused, Justice is sure swift.  When it’s one of the elites, Justice drags its feet.”

First Comment from Aloysius Fozdyke