Baseball's slow,  justice slower

When it comes to getting a straight answer from the courts, be prepared for a long at bat

by Alan Shanoff @ sunmedia.ca  Sept. 07-2014 p. 17

     In baseball, it doesn't matter whether a runner is really safe or out. What matters is how the umpire calls the play.

     In a court of law it equally doesn't matter if an accused is really guilty or innocent, or whether a plaintiff's case has merit.

     What matters is how the judge sees the case, which evidence he accepts and how he interprets the evidence.

     The point of a baseball game is to determine the winner.

     The point of a trial is to resolve (my italics RWC) a dispute and determine a winner.

     Sometimes the wrong team wins the baseball game.

     Our history of the wrongly convicted is ample proof.

     And if we get it wrong in the criminal sphere, where the onus of proof is supposed to be based on the stringent proof beyond a reasonable proof, then just imagine how frequently we get it wrong in the civil sphere (arbitrator converted 16 new hires into 16 lay-offs adding this target as the 17th knowing full well that I was the only lay-off. The arbitration was quashed by the courts labeling the arbitrator as being 'patently unreasonable. I was left in a 29 year limbo where no compensation has been paid-includes pension rights- due to judicial chicanery over 8 court systems and over 30 judges. RWC)

where the onus of proof is based on the less stringent balance of probabilities test.

     ...Case Study from CBC's Marketplace....

     Clearly, the Marketplace episode cast doubt on the credibility findings of the trial judge and whether the trial result was correct. (As over 30 judges were 'in error' the term 'systematic' has been applied here under which no bureaucracy can survive. Further, in my case, we just don't know what the judicial finding would be due to the aforementioned systematic judicial chicanery. RWC)

     In baseball there are limited video-replay appeals, but in the judicial system we have appeals to higher courts. (If one is not thwarted by Registries over which there is no appeal.RWC)

The runaround (RWC)

...(the target) had already appealed his loss to a higher court and had it dismissed.

     Still, he had the right to apply to have the trial judgment set aside.

     But doing so was no easy task.

     He brought a motion seeking judgment based on the Marketplace episode.

     The judge turned him away, telling him to first bring a motion to set aside the trial judgment.

     After receiving legal advice, he contacted the original trial judge seeking dates for a motion to introduce new evidence but was told to schedule a motion date with another judge.

     The trial judge's office told him to bring hismotion before another judge, which he did.

     The Court of Appeal told him he should apply in the Superior Court before a motions judge.


...And lawyers and judges wonder why people are frustrated by our justice system.

(Amen, brother...when the Justice System does not want to do anything, they obfuscate at which they have become past masters. RWC)


Baseball games, at least, always have an ending. ( While the Marketplace target disagrees with his Decision, at least he has one. I have no finding. That's why the Justice System of Canada is in a state of collapse as government and media believe silence is the best course of 'inaction' thereby jeopardizing their own bureaucracies. RWC)