Saturday, 4 January 2014

I wonder when Jenn Wambolt will wise up and quit talking legal advice from the sneaky Mikey Baby Archibald and the certified wingnut Sally Brooks

Friday, January 03, 2014

The Jenn Wambolt Saga continues in the Courts!!!!



On a quiet Sunday evening, a family is gathered together in celebration of their child's birthday.  

Loud, forceful bangs at the door silence the party mood, two FPF cops are at the door, and they have a summons for court in eight days' time at 9:00 am on the Miramichi two hours' drive away.

Having no knowledge of an investigation, they were understandably confused, there is after all procedures to be followed that should have made them aware they were at least being investigated for any alleged criminal charges and they know they have done nothing wrong. No police officer ever took a statement from them, no-one has informed them of these charges, no-one has asked for their side of the story. How can people be charged with criminal offences that have not even been investigated?

Why did nobody ever interview them to ask them about the circumstances of these allegations? Why did no-one ask if they had witnesses or evidence to prove they are innocent? How can charges be laid in a court without the actual accused parties ever being asked for evidence or statements that prove their innocence? Why did no-one inform them of their Charter rights to counsel?
When they attempted to obtain disclosure they received a partial copy and a letter from the Crown Prosecution Services refusing to provide them with the actual key evidence against them. How can they fight a case without the key evidence? Will it even go on the court record? Are they going to be found guilty without ever being given the evidence?

The couple appear in court and the Legal Aid duty counsel runs and hides from them. He doesn't want anything to do with them, even though it is his job. 

The couple does not know him, but he obviously knows them and has been told not to help them. He is eventually forced to speak for them, but the judge proves as bad as the Crown and duty counsel. He states on the court record that, "It is not the Crown's duty to prove its case – that is what the trial is for…"

The judge, Justice Friel, is 100% wrong and no prosecution should proceed without actual evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that a crime has been committed. The Crown Prosecutor, William Morrissy, violated the couple's lawful and Charter rights and freedoms by refusing to provide them with the evidence against them. The police and Crown violated the couple's Charter rights and freedoms by not informing them of their rights to counsel.

This is what happened to Jenn and Rusty Wambolt. The charges are for Rusty placing a knowingly false 911 call and for both of them interfering with the lawful running of a correctional institution by the placing of that call, where Jenn was wrongly incarcerated at the time and ill. 

The Crown does not want to release the 911 call because it proves there was nothing false about it. The man was in distress for the woman he knew was ill and suffering. 

The correctional facility claimed there was nothing wrong with Jenn at the time of the call, yet the EMTs examined her and took her to hospital on a Triage level requiring to be seen by a doctor within 1 hour. 

The criminal complaint about the false 911 call was placed by Chris Curran of the facility and accepted by the police before Jenn was even seen by a doctor and evaluated, so how could there be evidence that she was completely fine?

The police provided the Crown with medical records, a 911 call audio and DVD of the EMTs examining Jenn and removing her to the hospital. All of that evidence was removed from the disclosure documents by the Crown. The Crown now says it will release the 911 audio with a request that the court orders it not to be "disseminated". Does that mean a publicity ban? Does that mean it will not be on the court record? Why would they want to hide this 911 call?

It is obvious they are hiding evidence that proves there was no false 911 call. It is obvious this family is being persecuted and it is obvious that the courts, Crown and police work together destroying people's lives using tax dollars.

This has to stop.

Update: Jenn and Rusty Wambolt's second court appearance.
They drove to the Miramichi again on treacherous roads, for their hearing on Monday morning.

They arrived at the courthouse in plenty of time for their 10:30 am appearance only to be informed at the door that they had changed it to 9:30 am. As they waited outside the courtroom they saw a MPF cop returning a warrant of arrest to the crown he waved and smiled at them as he passed.

Court did not begin at 10:30 nor by 11:00 at ten after they were approached by a different duty counsel then the last time, and he comes with an offer from the crown, he says "this is a onetime offer, only available today, and today only, it will not be available tomorrow", the crown is offering a Pre-charge Redirection Program, where all court proceedings stop and the Wambolts do community service.  After they out right refused the offer the duty counsel had two more options for them.  Enter a plea without full disclosure or ask for an adjournment to get full disclosure.  

They chose the third option.

Once court finally began and they were called to the front, duty counsel asked for an adjournment the judge granted it but only for three weeks, the crown announced they had been given new evidence that morning from the MPF and they needed time to review it before giving it to the Wambolts, and the crown cannot guarantee they would receive them in time as they have no control over the mail, the Judge argued that 3 weeks should be plenty of time.
They were still not given the key disclosure materials - the 911 call CD and DVD of EMTs tending to Jenn.

The judge ordered another hearing for 20th January, 2014, at 10.30 am and said the parties should have full disclosure by then... 

After a two hour drive to the Miramichi, the hearing lasted around two minutes and then came the two hour drive back to Fredericton. This is torture and insanity.


mikel said...
First, its true we only have one side of the story. However, charging somebody with 'knowingly making a false 911 call' seems close to insane. In order to prove a case the crown has to prove that this man KNOWINGLY placed a false 911 charge. Proving that is pretty tough, and you can go to canlii or search online and see just how rarely such a charge is made. Meanwhile, in a report from Moncton in December, that city pays MILLIONS each year in false 911 calls.

But from a legal point of view, it is ALSO crazy to expect police to inform people 'there is an investigation on them'. Did they tell Charles? Do they call up drug trafficers and say "by the way, you are being monitored to see if you are dealing drugs"? Of course not.

Third, from a judicial point of view, most of that seems above board. The three options are pretty much standard. And its 'too bad' they have to drive two hours, but it is a case for the miramichi.

So it certainly sounds like overkill, but in this case the judge does not come off badly. That police got 'new information' on such a charge seems just silly and the family is right to be suspicious. But the judge is right that 'that is what a trial is for'.

So absolutely, like the Ron Francis case it seems the police and crown are corroborating to harass somebody. As many others have said, the law is being used for political purposes, and that's something we expect from third world countries, but not canada.

But again, unfortunately we only have one side of this story. But again, PROVING that this man KNEW that he was making a false call to 911 is pretty tough. In the few cases I could find online, they were clearly childish pranks. Even if you disagree with the guy calling 911, thats another issue. The same with calling an ambulance-if you have chest pains, are you justified in calling an ambulance, even if it turns out to be indigestion? But people who do so are not CHARGED with a crime, they are simply billed.

PS, did you say the guys name was 'rusty'? How weird is it that the word to prove your not a robot for my comment is 'rusty'!
Anonymous said...
This saga is what passes for Justice in this Province.
The second Duty Counsel sounds like they were having a Fire Sale - "this is a onetime offer, only available today, and today only, it will not be available tomorrow", What an absolute con. When they would not accept the fire sale offer, two more options were presented. The Crown not wanting to provide the disclosure and using the Post Office to say she could not guarantee it would arrive on time is more bs. They have mailed things before that guaranteed arrival on time. When the people who are supposed to provide justice, do not, it is time for an investigation.

Anonymous said...
I thought the charge was interferring with the institutional procedures. WHy is she charged in this? She didn't make the call.
Anonymous said...

I have also been involuntarily detained in the ER and was never told of my rights to counsel - and I did not need to be "taken". Mikel I take issue with your comments about not being informed about a police investigation. The issue here is not anything that would compromise a serious and valid investigation. The issue here is, once the police supposedly completed an investigation and laid charges against Jenn and Rusty, they did not go and take statements from them or any witnesses they might have to defend their case. We are talking about a 911 call and, as you say, the issue is proving it was knowingly false. Don't you think the police investigation should actually include interviewing the so-called perpetrators of a crime? Even drug barons are interrogated and interviewed by the cops. NO charges should be laid until everyone involved has been interviewed. That is part of diligent police work and that is not what the Miramichi police did. Disgraceful and scary.

Anonymous said...
This belongs on the cover of the CBC and CTV pages! I have never seen such a GD farce and scam being pulled on a family to settle a grudge for cops who had their feelings hurt because they stepped out of line. We only have to look where Ashley Smiths Journey to her Death began was at this US Owned (Wackenhut)for profit Prison. NB Law Society should put a end to this nonsense grudge?
Anonymous said...
There is ABDOLUTELY no reason that police need to inform or interview anyone being charged for anything.

That's EXACTLY how it should be.

Police investigate
Pass information to crown
Crown decides to proceed or not
If proceed, charges are laid and a court date set
Charges are stated in court,
Case is settled in court.

EXACTLY as it should be, and EXACTLY as this case was done b the writeup.

Of course with our current nanny state and social liberalism running amuck, there's far too many people out there that think we need to micromanage and hold everyone's hand on every detail. PATHEtIC.

Suck it up like the REST of us, go to court, here the charges, and then If you disagree fight the charges in court. That's ALL that's needed. That EVERYTHING the wambats were given.
Anonymous said...
Even Paul Bernardo was questioned and so was the Colonial. All people have the right to give statements. Who are you anyway Coward Curran.
mikel said...
I won't go as far as the above commenter, but police don't often go to 'criminals' to hear their side of the story during an investigation. The police only need to see a crime committed, then go to the prosecutor to see if there is enough evidence for an arrest. This wasn't a 'whodunnit' where people had to be interviewed to find out whether they committed the crime.

However, the comment about the 'nanny state', is just insane. What we are seeing from this blog is that its clear that not only does nobody 'hold your hand', but the people who BY LAW are supposed to at least 'walk you to the door' won't even do that, or do that very poorly.

The entire blog posting is about them 'fighting the charges in court'. But again, part of the issue is what the charges ARE, just like the whole issue with Charles was all about the police charging him with a crime which virtually everybody agreed was unconstitutional and wouldn't hold up in court, so I suspect you may be the same poster who posted earlier that 'no matter what the law is, it should be obeyed'.

There are literally thousands of laws which have not been repealed over the years, virtually every person in the province could be found guilty of some existing crime at some point during every week. But there is that word always used in canadian courtrooms- 'reasonable'.

Again, we don't know the facts of exactly what this guy did, and unfortunately the story hasn't been verified. But if its even HALF true then it looks pretty bad on New Brunswick, and given what has been verified from other cases, there is certainly good reason to take it seriously.

I 'sort of' agree about the 'nanny state' comment, although people generally get angry about the wrong things. The 'nanny state' is clearly designed to make sure that those who have money keep it, and that average people bear the brunt.

In case people haven't heard, the media in New Brunswick has been pretty low key about the new movie "Still Mine" which opened at the toronto film festival. In case people don't know, its based on a true story, and it paints the government of new brunswick in a pretty unfavourable light. Hopefully more will be heard about it as it gains wider release. So once again, we see New Brunswick painted out for the world in the worst possible colours-and ones that are true (so far as we are told).

That 'nanny state' gone amuck is a good story, but it certainly doesn't apply here. Nannies are supposed to HELP people who need it, not harass them. There is virtually NO micromanaging going on in the province, certainly in the mental health field-as we see from TWO blogs posted one after another in one day.

Jeff Wright said...
Charles you need to stop posting anything written by Mikel, he doesn't have a clue what he's talking about he just writes any shit he things is going to upset people, I always feel like I've wasted my time reading his crap. First he says there are two sides to every story when it comes to any one who's being bullied and then when the cops and crown lay charges in court he expects it to be one sided I wonder who he would feel if they were knocking on his door with a summons on false charges would he want to have his side heard then?

No comments:

Post a Comment

Please Leave Comments here