~n/t~
New Member
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2011
- Messages
- 17,670
- Reaction score
- 68
From CBC:
- he has a new lawyer, from Toronto......I missed the new guy's name.
Leclair
From CBC:
- he has a new lawyer, from Toronto......I missed the new guy's name.
@justin_ling
Magnotta had a psyc in Berlin. Leclair goes on to say that ‪#Magnotta‬ "trusts the Canadian judicial system."
this clears it up:
Justin Ling‏@justin_ling
Magnotta had a psyc in Berlin. Leclair goes on to say that #Magnotta "trusts the Canadian judicial system."
New lawyer is Luc Leclair, who appears to be in charge, but Pierre and another lawyer were present also, so appears to be a team.
Oh good lord. Are we going to have to pay for psych experts from Berlin to come testify at this trial? :banghead:
You know I have to ask you this, right? What if it is proven, beyond a doubt, that his actions were due to schizophrenia, or a drug interaction? Yes, this is going to cost us (the taxpayers) money, but isn't this the whole basis of a fair and just criminal system that a defendant be given all the tools at his disposal to prove he is not guilty, even if it is an insanity defense? I think we need to step back from our overwrought emotions and let this play out.
How much is this costing? Our Provincial tax already went up by 1%. :banghead:
I don't think these are legal aid lawyers. Panaccio isn't for sure, and Leclair appears to have his own practise on Carlton St in downtown Toronto. So LRM will be footing the bill. I remember a television report the other night saying there had been a number of lawyers interested in taking on the case. Perhaps for the notoriety, they give a reduced rate.
I don't think these are legal aid lawyers. Panaccio isn't for sure, and Leclair appears to have his own practise on Carlton St in downtown Toronto. So LRM will be footing the bill. I remember a television report the other night saying there had been a number of lawyers interested in taking on the case. Perhaps for the notoriety, they give a reduced rate.
I'm not asking anyone to agree with my opinions in this case and I would ask those who are opposed not to tell me what I should or should not do.
This ain't my first rodeo. Thanks
You know I have to ask you this, right? What if it is proven, beyond a doubt, that his actions were due to schizophrenia, or a drug interaction? Yes, this is going to cost us (the taxpayers) money, but isn't this the whole basis of a fair and just criminal system that a defendant be given all the tools at his disposal to prove he is not guilty, even if it is an insanity defense? I think we need to step back from our overwrought emotions and let this play out.