Opening comments: More at the end.
Most of my comments about this case are in the other web-page.
However, as I was sitting in on his so-called trial it was very interesting to see the Crown fight to keep this matter from being explored. Why would that be? Maybe because it would mean that evidence could be submitted and once that happens it is public. Well, that happened just before the court broke for lunch and right after wards the senior prosecutor ended Mr. Midanik's efforts to get Mr. Morton's testimony on the official record.
Another reason why the Crown does not wish to allow evidence from the defence, I would say, is that it could lead to the ending of the Toronto polices unlawful pre-emptive searches. I would also say that serves the Tory government agenda. It was "expected to tell the hearing how the Toronto police repeatedly violated his constitutional rights".
Back up to;
Toronto Star Mar. 20, 2003 - BY NICK PRON AND HAROLD LEVY - STAFF REPORTERS
Order halts protester's testimony
Judge told he can't conduct activist's hearing
Higher court to hear of alleged police brutality
A poverty activist had been poised to testify about alleged police brutality when a hearing at a downtown Toronto courtroom was abruptly halted yesterday.
Christopher Morton had been expected to describe how a Toronto police officer had beaten him following his arrest at an Ontario Coalition Against Poverty rally on Oct. 16, 2001, the court had been told earlier by Morton's lawyer, David Midanik.
But the Ontario Court of Justice hearing at old city hall was adjourned when a senior prosecutor, acting for Attorney-General Norm Sterling, served the judge a notice saying he didn't have the authority to hear the case.
Mr. Justice Paul Reinhardt seemed visibly disappointed at the prohibition order delivered by assistant crown attorney Jim Atkinson but agreed that a higher court would have to make a ruling. The case will be heard Monday at the Superior Court of Justice.
Morton, 23, had been expected to tell the hearing how the Toronto police repeatedly violated his constitutional rights during the Bay St. rally against the economic policies of the provincial government, the court had heard.
The student had been cut for three stitches above his left eye during what a court brief alleged was his "violent" arrest by three officers on a charge of assaulting a police officer. But the crown dropped the assault charge against Morton.
Morton, bleeding from the head wound, had been held for 5 1/2 hours in the back of a police van before being strip-searched, Midanik had told Reinhardt in his opening remarks to the judge.
Midanik said that detaining an injured man in the back of the van that long, not giving him medical aid nor letting him speak to a lawyer, were violations of his constitutional rights.
The hearing was being held, over the protests of a crown attorney, to determine if the authorities should pay court costs for the nearly two years Morton's case moved through the justice system.
Meanwhile, at the trial ... [1]
Do you want to do something about this?
Before the election and get this issue talked about?
Then go to the Media page, let the media and Ontario's political party's know how you feel.
[COMMENTS BY DON B. -
[1] - The rest is left out as it deals with the trial of OCAP leaders and I feel it is was put in the same article to create a bias in the mind of the reader. This trial ended when the jury could not reach a decision, etc., more and more injustice and using the legal system itself as the punishment. ]