This is something I have been covering for a while – and I am sad to say that I seem to be the lone person giving it attention over time (though others do drop in every now and then).
This is bad because I know I am a poor observer of the human condition, being an Aspie and all! And this case will determine the life or death of the Canadian political blogosphere!!!
I know I ought to be writing up yesterday and today’s proceedings, but, I am so very, very tired. It may not seem like a lot, but, the strain of sitting up all day, several days in a row, is more than my broken body can comfortably handle – and with this weariness, I don’t think I could give do the write-up justice.
Plus I need to be very careful what I write.
Though Mr. Burnet and Dr. Baglow have assured me of their good will and that the complaint about some words (which I admit, I took seriously – given this is a defamation lawsuit and all, so I took them down right away to show good will) was just a joke and I was more nervous than I had need to be. That is good to know, but, like I said, as an Aspie, I really have a hard time understanding where ‘the line’ lies that ought not be crossed….I would not have thought that the impugned words would have warranted this, either – but obviously, other people think they do, or we would not be here today…
When Mr. Burnet was reassuring me I was OK with what I wrote, I could not help but notice the elegant ring on the ring finger of his left hand. Masculine, and elegant. A gold band which encircled some sort of a black stone or center. Very nice. On the ring finger of his right hand, he wore a simple golden band.
I am sorry – I know I am rambling.
Which is precisely why I am not writing things up today…
But, I do promise you that I have copious notes to aid my memory and when I am in a more serene state of mind, I will write it all up!
Xanthippa's Chamberpot 
September 17, 2014 at 19:15
Rest up. ❤
September 17, 2014 at 23:38
Whatever you have to report we anxiously await, but not at the expense of your health.
September 17, 2014 at 23:47
Thank you!
But, rather than my health, I worry my reporting will suffer….
September 18, 2014 at 01:39
I check here daily for reports. But don’t write if you are exhausted. You a providing a key record of one of the many, sadly successful, attempts by the Left to use any means available to harass and silence political conversation in Canada.
The problem the Left has is that it keeps losing arguments. It lost on s. 13,its losing on “climate change”, its politics of group rather than individual identity are being quietly rejected, it’s cry of “racist” to end discussion is routinely ignored.
So now poor John Baglow is stuck trying to claim that something his sock puppet Miss Mew published is defamatory. He just looks silly at great expense to the Defendants. (I only wish Connie and Mark had third parties Miss Mew so that John would have been in the ludicrous position of suing himself.)
John should be ashamed of himself… And I suspect that, rather quietly, he is.
September 18, 2014 at 15:25
The last few days in court, he had indeed looked solemn, serious, his head often hung low, gaze turned towards the floor…
In person, he is indeed extremely charming and fun – but I truly wonder if he honestly thinks his cause is just.
September 18, 2014 at 20:41
Sooner or later the proper application of defamation law to internet blogs and forums had to come before the courts for a judicial review.
Application of law intended for the print media to internet exchanges is the equivalent of enforcing laws that required a man with a lantern to walk in front of a horseless carriage to warn people of its approach to vehicles on an interstate highway.
The notion that a publisher would forever employ sufficient editorial staff to prevent the publication of any commentary libellous or defamatory died with independent newspapers. Certainly internet forums and blogs that allow comment allow members or participants to publish their own comments instantaneously. What no one recognized was that libel laws are nothing more than a vehicle for censorship of anyone with the courage to challenge the powerful and rich.
The right to the freedom of expression is of little value if your opinion is edited and censored by the publisher or site owner. Public discourse, no matter what the medium, carries with it a reasonable responsibility for the words uttered, posted, printed or otherwise communicated. That said, the notion that anyone is responsible for ensuring that nothing is published that a person of means can consider defamatory is nonsense.
Defamation law that presume the sterling reputation of a plaintiff are ludicrous in a day and age where internet search engines allow anyone with a modicum of computer knowledge to investigate the reputation of any person with relative ease. Those with advanced knowledge or who hire someone with advanced knowledge can do a significant search of any person’s character and reputation. Alleged A-list people are regularly outed and their reputation turned to cinders thanks to internet searches.
This case and the appeal outstanding absolutely need to be fought. We have to give substance and meaning to the concept of the freedom of expression. If individuals with deep pockets or our governments are granted the power to silence us, we no longer live in a free democracy. We will be slaves to self-appointed betters.