Motion Brief - Phoenix Sinclair Inquiry

More documents

Recommendations

Info

IN THE MATTER OF: Commission of Inquiry into the Circumstances Surrounding the Death of Phoenix Sinclair MOTION BRIEF OF THE CANADIAN BROADCASTING CORPORATION, CTV WINNIPEG, GLOBAL WINNIPEG AND THE WINNIPEG FREE PRESS INDEX PAGE PART I LIST OF DOCUMENTS TO BE RELIED UPON. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 PART II ARGUMENT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 I. INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 II. THE “OPEN COURT PRINCIPLE”. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7 III. THE DAGENAIS/MENTUCK TEST. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 IV. EVIDENTIARY ISSUES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 V. RESPONSE TO PARTICULAR ALLEGATIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 VI. VII. HAVE THE APPLICANTS MET THE FIRST BRANCH OF THE DAGENAIS/MENTUCK TEST?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 HAVE THE APPLICANTS MET THE SECOND BRANCH OF THE DAGENSAIS/MENTUCK TEST?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 VIII. THE REQUESTED ORDER IS TOO BROAD. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43 IX. RECORDING AND BROADCASTING TESTIMONY GIVEN BY PROFESSIONAL WITNESSES WORKERS. . . . . . . . . . . . . .44 X. CONCLUSION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 PART III LIST OF AUTHORITIES TO BE RELIED UPON. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 APPENDIX “A” - DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE OF BRUCE RIVERS . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 APPENDIX “B” - DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE OF CHERYL REGEHR . . . . . . . . . . 54
- 2 - APPENDIX “C” - OPINION EVIDENCE OF JANET KEHLER. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 APPENDIX “D” - INADMISSIBLE OPINION EVIDENCE OF GWENDOLYN GOSEK, SHIRLEY COCHRANE AND ELIZABETH McLEOD. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 APPENDIX “E” - EXPERTISE OF EVELYN WOTHERSPOON IN RESPECT TO EXHIBIT “B” TO HER AFFIDAVIT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
Page 1: IN THE MATTER OF: Commission of Inq
Page 5 and 6: - 4 - 20. General Child and Family
Page 7 and 8: - 6 - 4. Canadian Broadcasting Corp
Page 9 and 10: - 8 - The open court principle is i
Page 11 and 12: - 10 - 12. In Phillips, Justice Cor
Page 13 and 14: - 12 - request to impair the rights
Page 15 and 16: - 14 - 27. An exception to this rul
Page 17 and 18: - 16 - Applicants’ reliance on se
Page 19 and 20: - 18 - 42. Many agencies, including
Page 21 and 22: - 20 - 51. While Ms. Kehler suggest
Page 23 and 24: - 22 - 57. There is thus no evidenc
Page 25 and 26: - 24 - 65. Judges should be cautiou
Page 27 and 28: - 26 - circumstances and there can
Page 29 and 30: - 28 - the stress upon them and tha
Page 31 and 32: - 30 - F. Client Confidentiality Al
Page 33 and 34: - 32 - Commissioner consists of gen
Page 35 and 36: - 34 - Edmonton Journal (The) v. A
Page 37 and 38: - 36 - 102. Mr. Rosner, Managing Ed
Page 39 and 40: - 38 - incorporating the informatio
Page 41 and 42: - 40 - names of Professional Witnes
Page 43 and 44: - 42 - 120. The Professional Witnes
Page 45 and 46: - 44 - 128. It is therefore respect
Page 47 and 48: - 46 - 135. There is, however, evid
Page 49 and 50: - 48 - 142. This is not an approach
Page 51 and 52: - 50 - 18. Episcopal Corporation of
Page 53 and 54:
- 52 - evidence does not connect th
Page 55 and 56:
- 54 - APPENDIX “B” Discussion
Page 57 and 58:
- 56 - 6. Although not dealt with i
Page 59 and 60:
- 58 - APPENDIX “C” Opinion Evi
Page 61 and 62:
- 60 - APPENDIX “D” Inadmissibl
Page 63 and 64:
- 62 - Scott Clark 10. Scott Clark
Page 65 and 66:
- 64 - personal expertise in the fi
show all

Motion Brief - Phoenix Sinclair Inquiry

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

Delete template?

Save as template?