Wake Up Canada : Case of Arthur Topham ( Part 1)
Radical Press Legal Update #8
Dear Supporters of Freedom of Speech,
January 3, 2013 was a good day in B.C. and across the nation for those who have taken up metaphorical arms in defence of Canada’s fundamental right to freedom of speech on the Internet.
Here in B.C. and out in Ontario those battling against the forces of media censorship and repression were, in both cases, successful in their efforts and thus, for once, I have only positive news to report.
I should preface this update with a short apology to some readers who were sent an alert yesterday indicating that I had unexpectedly been called to court. That was an error on my part due to some confusion arising from the previous bail hearing that took place on December 19, 2012 wherein I got the date for my next appearance mixed up. Call it a senior moment if you will.
During the last court appearance in December presiding Judge Church, after hearing arguments from both the Crown and Defence regarding the Crown’s rather strident and persistent effort to reimpose the original bail conditions that were placed on me by Cst. Terry Wilson of the BC HATE CRIME TEAM back on May 16, 2012, reserved her judgement on the issue until January 3, 2013.
My lawyer Doug Christie attended by telephone from Victoria, B.C. and I and my wife were in the Quesnel Court room at 1:30 p.m. to hear Judge Church’s decision.
The Judge first gave an overview of the Crown’s arguments and those of Defence lawyer Mr. Christie before presenting her own position on the issue. According to Judge Church the Crown’s basic argument was that while I had legally resumed publishing on RadicalPress.com on November 2, 2012 I was still publishing material that the Crown felt was of the same calibre as that originally complained of by Harry Abrams and Richard Warman. To back up Crown’s argument Crown Council Jennifer Johnston had submitted to Judge Church on December 19, 2012 a couple of screen shots taken from the radicalpress.com website that had supposed controversial headings which CC Johnston felt were significant enough that they warranted reinstating the original draconian restrictions that Cst Terry Wilson had unilaterally saddled me with on the day of my arrest in May.
Having considered these apparently pithy examples of willful promotion of hatred against “people of the Jewish religion or ethnic group” Judge Church went on to say that while the screen shots may have (as Crown was alleging), indicated an “undertone” of hatred toward those of the Jewish faith, Crown had not gone so far as to state that the captured text was in fact hateful. Furthermore, Crown had not disclosed to Judge Church any additional corroborating information pertaining to the screen shots in question which Crown was alleging were displaying such sentiments and so, according to the Judge, she had no way of determining whether or not the screen shots or the accompanying articles were, in fact, contravening sec. 319(2) of the CC of Canada.
Judge Church then went on to review Defence council Doug Christie’s arguments which basically stated Crown was attempting to pre-judge the published materials before a trial was held to determine whether or not they were in truth a contravention of sec. 319(2). It was also established that I am, in fact, a publisher and that under Canada’s constitution I have the right to publish articles deemed to be of interest to the general public and until such time that said articles are proven in a court of law to have contravened Canada’s hate crime legislation that my right to publish should not be pre-emptively prohibited simply because of allegations of wrong doing by those who feel particular materials are wilfully promoting hatred toward an ethnic minority. Throughout the course of her comments the Judge referred to the cases cited by both Crown and Defence during the previous hearing on December 19, 2012.
Another issue that had come up on December 19, 2012 was that of Disclosure. The Crown had then argued that they were withholding disclosure from my attorney because of a breach of protocol that had occurred back in the summer when a confidential document released to Doug Christie was later found to have been posted on a third party website (FreeDominion.ca). The Judge went on to describe the event which had to do with what is called a “Warned Statement” which was a digitally recorded conversation between myself and the arresting officer Cst Terry Wilson on the day of my arrest. The Crown alleged that the breach (committed by me due to ignorance of the nature of the document) posed a serious threat to the safety of the two complainants in the case Warman and Abrams and for that reason Crown had filed a further application demanding that my lawyer not provide me with any further disclosure because I might intentionally publish it or give it to someone else who might publish it and in the process endanger the complainants. CC Johnston had cited the case of the Basi-Virk Trial involving the BC Rail/BC Liberal government scandal as reasoning for her allegations.
The Judge then went on to state that the case law cited by Crown in fact dealt with examples where secondary parties who were testifying may have been at risk but that in my case it was information which I personally had given to Cst. Terry Wilson and was, as my lawyer had stated, not of the same nature and certainly did not pose any direct threat to either of the two individuals who had complained to the RCMP. As such the Judge did not feel that the Crown’s argument that Mr. Christie be restricted in sharing disclosure with me was valid.
Judge Church also considered Doug Christie’s counter argument that it would be an unreasonable and onerous position to be placed in were he not allowed to share the information in any disclosure with his client unless I was under his direct supervision given the fact that he was in Victoria and I was 700 km away in Quesnel. Mr. Christie had indicated on December 19, 2012 that he and his client would be more than willing to sign an undertaking prohibiting me from disclosing any further confidential information in order to insure that no such breach occurred a second time. The Judge was able to see the logic of Mr. Christie’s arguments while at the same time dismissing Crown’s position that the breach in question could have endangered the two complainants and went on to say that while she would not be imposing the two original conditions that prohibited me from publishing on radicalpress.com or writing articles for publication wherever I so chose she would be issuing an order that would make it illegal for me republish any further disclosure. At this point she also stating she would not impose upon Mr. Christie the condition that he be in attendance whenever disclosing confidential documents to me.
Having read out her decision regarding the matters at hand the Judge reinstated the new bail conditions and asked me if I understood them. I acknowledged that I did. As such here are the new bail conditions under which I am now to legally abide by:
CONDITION ONE: You shall keep the peace and be of good behaviour.
CONDITION TWO: You shall have no contact or communication, directly or indirectly, with Richard Warman or Harry Abrams except as follows: (a) while in attendance at court; (b) through legal counsel.
CONDITION THREE: You shall not possess any weapon as defined in Section 2 of the criminal Code except for purposes directly related to your employment.
CONDITION FOUR: You shall not distribute, circulate or share all or any part of the Crown disclosure material with any person or organization.
CONDITION FIVE: You shall not publish or post all or any part of the Crown disclosure material on any internet site that can be read by the general public.
Having listened to the conditions of the new undertaking and given my consent to obey them the Judge then concluded the hearing. My wife and I then went for coffee and returned later to the Court Registry office where the undertaking was waiting for my signature. After signing it and obtaining a copy we left the building.
Included in the new undertaking was a notice stating that I would appear in court on April 2, 2013 at 1:30 pm PT in Quesnel for the preliminary hearing.
For some unknown reason Crown Council Jennifer Johnston was absent from the court room and another assistant Crown Council was sitting in for her.
So by all indications it looks like I will finally have some temporary respite from all the legal machinations that have been occurring over the past three months and I can focus on raising funds and adding further information to radicalpress.com that will assist others in understanding both the importance of this case and why it is that Canadians must sit up and pay much more attention to what these foreign lobbyists are doing to wreck our inherent right to freedom of expression and censor any and debate that focuses on the criminal and racist actions of the state of Israel and its dangerous and supremacist ideology known as Zionism.
Publisher & Editor
The Radical Press
“Digging to the root of the issues since 1998″
Arthur Topham is a B.C. resident that has had a blog for several years and he discusses a variety of controversial issues.
I have read many of his posts, and he is often linked to by bloggers outside the country. As is noted , he was arrested and charged with ” Hate Crimes ” last year.
IMHO, he is a canary in the mine.
……..the original bail conditions that were placed on me by Cst. Terry Wilson of the BC HATE CRIME TEAM back on May 16, 2012, reserved her judgement on the issue until January 3, 2013.
QUESTION: So, what is a “hate crime” ?
ANSWER: …..you may as well try to nail jello to the wall….it is very subjective ,….very gray….. thus subject to interpretation.
….and that’s EXACTLY the way they like it.
There is a major difference between a goal of inciting hate and possible violence against a person or group based on no grounds….as opposed to commenting / criticizing on objective grounds. Read the news, or blogs etc…NO ONE is immune from criticism, in the sense that even people we consider literal saints and humanitarians and religious figures etc. haven’t had someone take a shot of critique at them.
In response, in a ” free speech ” society, we can rebut and criticize the critics. At the end we can perhaps enlighten each other , or agree to disagree. In my experience most people can debate in a civil sense and should do it with a thick skin. This can ignite some passion and high blood pressure. That also implies to do your homework going in so as not to get your ass – kicked.
However , one will read about some of these cases and they seem to involve people with thin skins whose feelings were hurt and wish to exploit this subjective law for publicity and monetary gain.
I will delve into this deeper…but ” the usual suspects ” are the primary lobbyists for this subjective ” hate speech / hate crime / human rights ” legislation. Why ? Think about it.
Read history. Back to the Bolshevik Revolution. What defineable group is behind that ? That is documented fact. What was one of the first laws passed once the definable group took control after the revolution ? You could NOT criticize them, aka special priveleges given them….while tens of millions of Christians etc. were brutally slaughtered .WTF is with that..or is that more and more obvious?
This defineable group is very adept at twisting reality throughout history even to the point of co-opting various Gov’ts to draft and pass legislation that has the appearance of protecting “all ” human rights, but is actually a weapon ” custom designed ” for them specifically to create censorship and assist in covering up any/all exposure. They don’t really give a damn about other minorities, they are simply pawns being played as camouflage for the censorship agenda. The test of this is they seem to be either the disproportional plaintiffs, or disproportionally representing plaintiffs in these cases.
The two parties cited above “R .W.” and “H.A.” should be “GOOGLED”. They seem to act as a tag team to hunt down parties and thus use OUR GOV”T RESOURCES to make examples out of our fellow citizens. One of this duo was a civil servant apparently making a nice living off of charging people with Hate Speech,and collecting judgements , while he was employed on the very Human Rights boards doing the judging.
So what is going on ? It’s not that hard to figure out…its the old magicians trick of misdirection and controlling the chokepoints ( those in positions of control and power ).
NOTE: They already have our own Prime Minister under their thumb, his full support , y’know that regime on stolen Palestinian land that shoots innocent children like they are rats (No …let me correct that…you are NOT MY PRIME MINISTER, only legally) . Then you have officers from one of the most corrupt police organizations in the free world dedicated to being “R .W.” and “H.A.” bitches and dragging citizens through our corrupt court system ?
Mr. Topham is simply an example they wish to use…cases like his have been through the courts before and even the Federal Gov’t is tiring of this nonsense. Mr. Topham may ultimately win, but that’s not the point. The goal is to tie up Mr Topham for months, possibly bankrupt him…have lots of media coverage trying to paint him as an evil person, and he may possibly go to jail or have heavy restrictions placed on him..even though I would submit the vast majority of people have never even heard of him. Then at the end , others are intimidated, and the wolves go seek out even more ridiculous cases to increase censorship.
Well perhaps this may backfire… as people wake up and see what is really going on.
The communists said….. and I paraphrase…. that the free world will sell the rope by which they will be hung by the communists.
A lot of that is based on ignorance apathy , till they come knocking on YOUR door.
( To Be Continued )