Day Three Notes

I have published Daphne Bramham’s excellent article below.  The most interesting time during an argument presentation is when the attorney steps back from the text and add more comment to the debate.  I’ve captured some notes in that regard because Mr. Craig Jones is a brilliant artist of this craft:

  • The reasoning for asking FLDS witnesses about their own birthdays and if they knew the birth dates of their siblings was to establish the age of the children; not, as the Amicus would have us believe to explore whether or not they believe in birthday celebrations.
  • We’ve see the extent to which religion is used as the control mechanism. . .
  • There is something significantly harmful about the assertion of religious belief by the Fundamental Mormons. . .because of the mathematics of it, one cannot exercise a religious freedom right to practice polygamy without denying another member of the religion his “religious right” to practice polygamy.
  • Residence affects the individual’s entire life and development (from paragragh 291)
  • The people of the community (FLDS) instill fears of prosecution upon themselves.  (paragraph 296)
  • Crimes are hidden in the FLDS community because they are crimes. (paragraph 297)
  • Regarding fundamental justice, Jones talked about drunk driving laws, marijuana use, and consentual fist fighting case.  “The court seems to be saying, ‘You may be consenting to the personal harm, but we see a more serious social harm. . .’  Mr. Jones also discussed the tobacco use laws and firearms laws.
  • CPAA says s. 293 is overbroad because it targets victims. . .This argument repeatedly blurs the fact that we have laws protecting social harms.
  • There is no reason with s. 293 to sentence someone for whom a sentence is not fit, e.g. its victims.
  • The Amicus says the essense of distinction is religious.  We say the essense of distinction is on the action.
  • Amicus says polygamists are a historically disadvantaged group.  Expert witness Dr. Larry Beall explained the caste system that is an inherent part of any polygamous group.
  • The Amicus immigration assertion proposes a law that disallows polygamists to immigrate to Canada but he does not propose how that law would be worded.  Mr. Jones asserts that in the end, it would probably be similar to the ban we how have on polygamy.
  • We know Canada is a favourite destination for immigration.  Dr. Joseph Henrich says decriminalization would not be a harmless social experiment.
  • The most disturbing aspect of this is the acquiescence of those involved.  In speaking of interviewing one of the anonymous witnesses (paraphrasing): Q.  Where would you go if you saw harm being done? W. To my husband. Q. But if he agrees with what is happening? W. Then to the church leaders. (end paraphrasing) No one outside the community is to be contacted.

Housekeeping note:  I have written to the CBC and asked them to put the link to the live videoing of the polygamy hearings on their front page.  It keeps getting shoved further and further down on their “More News” list.

Today the Attorney for the AGC will be presenting their closing arguments.  He said he will be citing Butler, Sharp and Malmo.

Nancy Mereska, President
Stop Polygamy in Canada

No comments

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.