22.05.2014 Views

Motion Brief - Phoenix Sinclair Inquiry

Motion Brief - Phoenix Sinclair Inquiry

Motion Brief - Phoenix Sinclair Inquiry

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

- 17 -<br />

37. By tendering evidence of this nature, the Applicants attempt to introduce second<br />

hand information and opinions from unidentified sources whose expertise has not been<br />

established and who are not available for cross examination.<br />

Cross Examination of Shirley Cochrane, paras 15 to 21<br />

38. It is submitted that the hearsay evidence and opinion is not admissible and<br />

should carry no weight.<br />

V. Response to Particular Allegations in Applicant Affidavits<br />

A. Introduction<br />

39. This section of the brief addresses some of the factual claims underlying the<br />

Applicants’ arguments.<br />

B. The identities of social workers are generally known to the community<br />

and social workers do not generally conceal their identities or their<br />

occupations<br />

40. In paragraph 26 of her affidavit, Janet Kehler makes the statement that social<br />

workers make every attempt to keep the nature of their work private. The evidence has<br />

shown this statement to be incorrect.<br />

41. The Manitoba Institute of Registered Social Workers lists the name of every<br />

registered social worker in Manitoba on its public website.<br />

Affidavit of Allison Lamontagne, May 22, 2012, at Exhibit “B”

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!