Warman vs Free Dominion and John Does – the Jury Trial (day 4)

Day 1′s events can be read here.

Day 2′s events can be read here.

Day 3’s events can be read here.

Today, Mr. Warman was being cross-examined by Ms. Kulaszka.

It seems that, over the years, Mr Warman had instigated or filed well over 70 lawsuits – and is very comfortable on the witness stand.

He continues to paint Ms. Kulaszka as a nazi-lawyer, sort of like a ‘mob lawyer’, and thus casts her clients as nazis and bad people in the eyes of the jury.

For all her great intelligence, Ms. Kulaszka is not a good orator.  Even the judge had difficulty following her questions at times and was asking for clarification.  After Mr. Warman would answer a question, she’d make minutes long pauses before acknowledging the answer…

Mr. Warman appeared to be trying to help her, and won much sympathy from the jury.

Half an hour into the afternoon session, I could not take it any more and I left.

EDIT:  during day 7 of the trial, the number of lawsuits initiated by Mr. Warman was said to be 69, which M. Katz side disputed by pointing out that some were multiple lawsuits against the same people but some were lawsuits with multiple defendants.

Also, I would like to clarify that the means through which Mr. Warman painted Ms. Kulaszka as a ‘nazi-lawyer’ was by name dropping and smearing, not through direct accussations.

Advertisements

35 Responses to “Warman vs Free Dominion and John Does – the Jury Trial (day 4)”

  1. Phred Phudd (@Phred_Phudd) Says:

    I refuse to blame the lawyers or anyone else.

    Xanthippa says:

    I envy your innocence…

  2. politicallyincorrectandnotadumbredneck Says:

    Sounds like it is going great!

    To think, they just could have deleted some posts and apologized. Instead they spent a 1/2 decade for this cluster. Hilarious!

  3. DOW Says:

    Apologize for what???????

  4. Delbian Says:

    The Fourniers chose poorly when it came to lawyers.

    • John Workman Says:

      I have spent 2 days in the court and I feel as well that they may have poorly chosen their lawyer.She seems sort of lost and on Friday was censured by the Judge for going off topic as she referred many times to previous trials that Mr Warman had been involved in.The judge repeatedly told her to talk only about This trial !!!

      • politicallyincorrectandnotadumbredneck Says:

        If you followed any of the conversation on FD posted by the people involved in the last couple years. The main part of their defense was going to be all of Warman’s involvement in numerous lawsuits and stuff. Guess that is not going to fly with the Judge from what you have posted.

        The silence on FD is very telling. I have a feeling if they thought they were winning somebody would be boasting about it. Nothing but crickets over there.

      • xanthippa Says:

        I’m afraid that with my health problems keeping me out of the courtroom, they (including the FD people) have no feedback on what is happening. This is truly sad, because one person’s account cannot, ever, paint an objective picture – such is human nature. The closest we can come is to report the truth as perceived through our subjective lens of experiences.

        Since mine is, unfortunately, the only account, I have done my best – giving out more personal infomation about my background than I am comfortable with – to permit people to subtract my ‘subjective lens’ from my account of the events. I wish I could link to an alternate account, but, I know not of one. (If anyone ‘out there’ does, please, do send a linkie!!!)

        Still, I have not been able to report on the last few days of it…without information, there can be little discussion…one way or the other. And, even if every single person on the internet did have opinions…the only opinions that actually matter here are the opinions of the jurors.

        And, the jury is necessarily only being presented with a narrow slice of the whole picture. Such are the real-life limitations of our legal system – for better or worse, that is life. Yet…

        …it is premature to anticipate how any jury will react to what they have not yet been presented with.

  5. Thor Says:

    Warman’s strategy seems to be to call all those who oppose him and his methods “neo-Nazis.” He uses that term with great profligacy. On a side note, any movement that tries to promote and safeguard the interests of Whites gets smeared as “neo-Nazi” (and now apparently garden-variety conservatives, too!). Of course, this is intellectual terrorism aimed at demoralizing and pre-emptively disarming people. Warman wouldn’t dare to call groups of Jews, Mexicans, Chinese, etc. who form organizations to advocate on their peoples’ behalf as “neo-Nazis.” This is why the word anti-racist has effectively become a code word for anti-White.

    • politicallyincorrectandnotadumbredneck Says:

      There are actual neo-nazis out there, this is a fact. If your proudness includes nazi symbols and imagery, you are probably a neo-nazi.

      • WestViking Says:

        Your comments are irrelevant to the action at bar. Warman is suing for defamation. Either he was or was not defamed. Hid actions and motives are under scrutiny. He may be a thin-skinned egomaniac unable to tolerate valid criticism. Time and the trial will establish the facts.

  6. John Beattie Says:

    Been smeared most of my adult life with the crap. Like water off a duck’s back. Has not affected my life in the slightest. It comes from people who have very shallow lives. Everyone knows what fine people reside within Free Dominion. If you are not being screamed about by the losers, you aren’t doing your job.

    • Deadbolt Says:

      John, how can you say you’ve been “smeared” all your life when you *founded* something called the Canadian Nazi Party in the 1960s? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_John_Beattie

      • John Beattie Says:

        Rhonda Spisak of the Winnipeg jewish paper, passed on to The Jerusalem Post about 36 months ago, the truth. Click it in for search: John Beattie. Up comes whole story as to how I was unknowingly used by the defunct CJC to create hysteria about ONE YOUNG FOOL, to get the “Hate Law” passed. Surrounded by CJC agents….all exposed also by Ezra Levant, with his display of McCleans Magazine October 1966 issue. The press and the CJC were the nutzi gang………none other.
        Had I been guilty, would I be posting here at all ? ( Also exposed via “YouTube John Beattie ” The Whitewashing of John Beattie”. Am not and never was a “Nazi”.

      • Mok Time Says:

        John, your comment below doesn’t change the fact that you knowingly identified yourself as a Nazi and promoted the Nazi philosophy. Whether or not you were being manipulated at the same time doesn’t change that fact. Have you ever denounced the German Nazis or Hilter and disavowed your support of them?

  7. Thor Says:

    Warman’s close association with various Zionists (especially the now defunct CJC) is fascinating. Is it not curious that a self-aggrandizing anti-racist has nothing to say about the plight of Palestinian Arabs in Israel and the Occupied Territories and the numerous human rights abuses perpetrated by Israel and documented by the UN and a litany of human rights organizations? The people Warman used to work with are agents of what Desmond Tutu, among many other luminaries and institutions, has termed a viciously racist apartheid state. Warman’s association with Zionists such as Bernie Farber put into question his honesty as a somebody who supports human rights and fights racism everywhere they occur. Unless, of course, it’s not so much about racism and human rights but more about coming up with a lucrative ploy to get tax free money from the Commission and becoming famous as a fearless Nazi-hunter. At least, one is entitled to ask questions about Warman’s sincerity. What would a genuine Palestinian human rights activist say about Warman’s Zionist connections?

    • xanthippa Says:

      A ‘genuine Palestinian human rights activist’ would be more concerned with the human rights abuses committed by Hamas…

      But, I do get your point: most of the Palestinian human rights activists I have encountered here, in Canada, were strongly opposed to my Zionist views, to the point where one might suspect some of them of anti-Semitism.

    • WestViking Says:

      Not at all surprising. Single minded zealots often have a very narrow world-view. One cannot overlook that CHRA s. 13 was bad law, written even more badly and allowed persecution of someone for making comments that could at some future time offend some unknown person or persons.

  8. Thor Says:

    It is not Hamas who ethnically cleansed and dispossessed the indigenous population of Palestine and erected a racist, militaristic, apartheid society in Palestine. But my larger point is that Warman’s past association with militant Zionists makes a mockery of his alleged anti-racist bona fides and leads one to suspect a fundamentally dishonesty and opportunism.

  9. Deadbolt Says:

    I’m afraid that the Fourniers have been milked by their lawyer and used by white supremacist extremists. And what were the thining relying on Paul From and Marc Lemire as “experts” and using as their lawyer somone who is best known for defending Ernst Zundel and Nazi war criminals? Any lawyer with their salt would have urged them to settle long ago since this is not a human rights case, it’s a defamation case and Warman is suing over comments that the court has already found to be defamatory in the Fromm defamation case. This isn’t going to end well.

  10. Lux Tenebris Says:

    Unfortunately for the people of Palestine who live in the world’s largest outdoor prison , Hamas is controlled opposition , installed by the Zionist to further the agenda

  11. Maikeru Says:

    politicallyincorrectandnotadumbredneck said
    “The silence on FD is very telling. I have a feeling if they thought they were winning somebody would be boasting about it. Nothing but crickets over there.”

    The comments on FreeDominion which led to Mr. Warman’s ‘defamation’ suit occurred in the latter half of 2007.
    In mid-2007, Mr. Warman was honoured with the ‘Saul Hayes Award’.
    In mid-2009, Stephen Harper was honoured with the same award.
    http://tinyurl.com/o3k6cqt
    Any reasonable Canadian would agree that Mr. Harper has been ‘defamed’ by a multitude of sources.

    Unfortunately, Mr. Warman suffers from ‘thinskinitus’, which is related to tinnitus in that the former condition is related to fearing whereas the latter to hearing – which is why Mr. Warman’s treatment regime involves lawsuits whereas tinnitus treatment involves labsuits.

    As far as crickets on FreeDominion goes, there is a whole field of recorded chirps available on FreeDominion at no cost other beyond an email addy and pseudonym (pogue mahone’ and ‘lucy’ are already taken).

    For the hard of hearing, here’s a link to a symphony of chirps on FreeDominion, composed by Mr. Warman’s brandleader ‘Nosferatu200’, which has played continuously therein since mid-2009, when Peter O’Donnell was publicly forced ‘out of the closet’ and ‘into the courtroom’ by the award-winning Mr. Warman, aka ‘AxetoGrind’
    http://www.freedominion.ca/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=1754177#p1754177

    Mr. Warman’s successful run in CHRAct Sec 13.1 hearing rooms came to an abrupt halt on March 25, 2008, when Canadians learned that CHRC investigators considered ‘freedom of speech’ to be a foreign concept, forcing Parliament to extinguish the clause to protect Canadians from bounty hunters.

    Since then, royalties from Mr. Warman’s songsheet ‘Maximum©Disruption’ have dried up, and the suit currently underway is a bald, so to speak, attempt to extract one more ‘reunion’ payday, similar to aging rockstars.

  12. Warman vs Free Dominion and John Does – the Jury Trial (day 7) | Xanthippa's Chamberpot Says:

    […] Warman vs Free Dominion and John Does – the Jury Trial (day 4) […]

  13. GoodFaun Says:

    Is Kulaszka as bad as you say she is? Maybe she hasn’t had that many trials in her small Ontario town. Practice makes…better and I don’t know if she’s used to jury trials or any type of trials. What does she know about defamation law anyways? Plus, she may be getting old and is mostly known for having represented Zundel. I hope for Fourniers sake that I’m wrong on all counts. The Fourniers probably should’ve used Chris Ashby of Toronto. He’s not a money-grubbing thief I hear and actually knows defamation law.

    • xanthippa Says:

      Ms. Kulaszka is incredibly smart and very knowledgable of the law – if you wish her to write about it. She is jus not, in my never-humble-opinion, a great orator, that is all.

      • GoodFaun Says:

        It’s pretty damning to say of a lawyer (especially) during a trial that she’s not a good orator, considering that she’s a hired mouth-piece (I mean no disrespect). She wasn’t hired for her looks or knitting skills but to effectively present a case.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: