This is a long and convoluted court case which is soon coming to an end….I hope!
(Links will be highlighted as I post the write-ups…which may be a bit random, as I am a slow thinker and some things take me longer to think about than others.)
Day 1 part 1 and part 2 , Day 2, Day 3 and Day 4 part 1 and part 2 of this trial were covered in March, 2014 (write-ups by me at links).
Day 5 is more or less covered by days 6 and 7.…
Day 7 part 1 is here – sorry about having had to chop this up into short little bits, it seems my original write up was too long for WordPress to format correctly… part 2 is here.
Dr. Baglow’s impression of my coverage of the court hearings, as per Twitter, is here.
September 15th, 2014 account is here. Roger Smith presented his side of the story (defense) and was cross examined.
September 16th, 2014, Connie Fournier presented her testimony and her cross examination commenced. Part 1 is here, Part 2 is here.
September 17th, 2014, Connie Fournier’s cross examination finished and Mark Fournier both testified and was cross examined.
Thursday, September 18th, 2014, was the day that the court appointed expert in the field of Canadian online political blogs, message boards and other emedia/new media communications, was qualified as expert by the court as an accepted expert, was accepted as such by all the parties involved, his report was entered into evidence as his testimony and every participant in this trial, the judge included, asked him many questions. Part 1 is here. Part 2 is here.
The report (once the trial is over) may become available. If so, it will be here.
Friday, September 19th was not a courtroom day.
In addition, some of the correspondence which, to the best of my abilities, appears to be identical to emails extensively relied on for both evidence and cross examination in many parts of this trial, is available in the comment section of one of my posts, here.
Monday, September 22nd and Tuesday, September 23rd, 2014, are days for the final arguments.
Mr. Burnet’s final argument – the part I heard, along with my courtroom observations, – is here.
Tuesday, the 23rd of September was a long day and I’d like to break it up by the different people whom I heard speak.
Court impression plus Barbara Kulaszka
Roger Smith, aka Peter O’Donnel
Steven G. Frankel, the CCLA intervenor in this matter
Mr. Burnel had a rebuttal opportunity, but, I was unable to be there for that bit.
Some additional thoughts by me are here.
The Sedona Canada Principles Addressing Electronic Discovery
The comments were defamatory, but they also were a fair comment and therefore this case was dismissed.
February 25, 2015 at 09:56
[…] For the background on this case, please see here. […]