GUILTY Canada - Noelle Paquette, 27, Sarnia, Ont, 31 Dec 2012 - #4

[crowstoes]

IIRC I believe you are correct. It doesn't stop another Country from making this into a movie or a book prior to trial. Loosely based disclaimer. I do recall something of this nature in the Bernardo case. Anyone? I would have to spend some time hunting that up. I would think in today's world nobody would be as interested as back then. We have become so desensitized I think this story would not be viewed as having the same impact. As sad as that is. IMO

Bravo you are correct in that it is not enforceable outside of Canada. Well, outside of Ontario for that matter, though generally other provinces will respect a ban.

You are also correct regarding violations of the publication ban in the Bernardo case. Not the least of which was an author including at least two pieces of evidence which were subject to a publication ban.:twocents:

 

[SpriteGal]

I find it bizarre, I guess I am just so used to the first amendment that I cannot even fathom that you wouldn't even be allowed to speculate or post about a case. Weird. IMO.

 

[flipflop]

I don't know...we'll see. I still have a feeling that these two are going to cave...at least one of them!

See this... http://www.citynews.ca/2010/12/09/publication-ban-lifted-in-tori-stafford-case/

The publication ban was lifted in the Tori Stafford case, as well as the Robert Picton case too..just to name a couple. All it is should take is for one of them to plead guilty

Like I said, we'll see!

The Ban will still be in place if one caves and pleads guilty. This happened in the Stafford Case. The partial ban was lifted, after TLM's case was finished and as MR's case began. That was 1.5 to 2 yrs after the crime IIRC.

 

[redheadedgal]

while old, another interesting article about publication bans here... apparently one man got into trouble for posting election results on his own webpage!


http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/publicationbans/

 

[crowstoes]

I thought they already had a publication ban? Is this new? How has this changed anything for WS? Will they not report any new updates on the case, not even how they plea?

New updates on the case will have to follow the terms of the publication ban.

For example, if new/additional charges are laid, the charges will be able to be reported, but nothing except the charges themselves.

For court appearances,only the court appearance can be reported (and whether they have retained counsel, if so who, and when bail or preliminary hearings are scheduled.)

The victim's name is clearly not subject to the publication ban (as its still being reported) nor are the accuseds names subject.

Evidence in the case is protected by publication ban. This would include the brief written statement of facts usually read to the judge/JP on appearances relating to the case [what some people would be familiar with as the yellow disclosure sheet that outlines the general grounds for the charge]; expert reports; coroner's report, witnesses and witness statements, video tapes and any other item being used as evidence.

PS evidence does not equal rumors, speculation etc, though from here on in it would be prudent to avoid either.:twocents:

 

[crowstoes]

A plea is also reported but the terms of the statement of fact and evidence related to the plea is usually subject to publication bans until trial is underway for whomever is left as co-accused in the case as that evidence is still evidence.

 

[angel]

Hopefully one of the mods will jump in an clear up some things. We can NOT talk about the evidence in the case I think. I can't remember f it said speculation or not. I read about the TS link someone provided and their ban was lifted after like 7 mos bc TM plea guilty. At that time they real eased a ton of info. I just read a bunch. Wish I didn't. She was only 18 at the time too. Wth is this world coming to.ps. Ty for clearing it up... Was trying as that post came thru.

 

[SpriteGal]

I guess I am confused, as a site isn't this a united states based site, so what does that mean for here? I mean obviously they can't do anything to a website forum of americans? No offense to anyone, but like if an american news site wanted to publish an article about this case they could, as rights protect that. So I guess I am confused why can't people speculate any more? If it is the to respect the ban, i get that but legally us americans could speculate to the moon and back about a case without any reprecussions correct? As mentioned it just boggles my mind a bit, and am confused. I don't mean to disrespect or offend anybody I just want a clearer picture.

 

[redheadedgal]

i remember back when the PB trial was occurring... people would drive over the border @ Niagara Falls to obtain newspapers to read what the canadian media couldn't publish here.

this timeline outlines how the ban worked and how some got around it: start @ july 1993

http://www.francesfarmersrevenge.com/stuff/badgirls/homolkatimeline.htm

 

[crowstoes]

while old, another interesting article about publication bans here... apparently one man got into trouble for posting election results on his own webpage!


http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/publicationbans/

Yes, and he fought it all the way to the SCC:


He was convicted by a B.C. court but the province’s superior court overturned his ruling two years later. In 2005, the B.C. Court of Appeal upheld the original decision and the Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, agreed, ruling the section of the law did not breach of the Charter of Rights’ guarantee of freedom of speech because it imposed a “reasonable limit” and maintained “informational equality” among citizens. http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/01/13/canada-election-gag_n_1204157.html

On a side note, he was involved with the National Citizens' Coalition: an (in my view) group that advocates increased individual rights, less government interference lol

 

[Bravo]

I would love to see D. Derstine take on one of the accused. Or somebody of his caliber. He is bright and articulate. Lessen the chance of any future Appellate issues. Not to mention i could listen to that man all day. Which is huge considering many a Defense Lawyer leaves a bad taste in my mouth LOL If i can find a link I'll bring it back here. I like listening to people who can say a paragraph in a sentence. And rather quickly LOL

 

[crowstoes]

I guess I am confused, as a site isn't this a united states based site, so what does that mean for here? I mean obviously they can't do anything to a website forum of americans? No offense to anyone, but like if an american news site wanted to publish an article about this case they could, as rights protect that. So I guess I am confused why can't people speculate any more? If it is the to respect the ban, i get that but legally us americans could speculate to the moon and back about a case without any reprecussions correct? As mentioned it just boggles my mind a bit, and am confused. I don't mean to disrespect or offend anybody I just want a clearer picture.

If this is indeed a US site, I think the administration of this board has made a choice to respect the publication ban as it exists, regardless of whether Canada or not, since I believe in their instructional thread nothing that isn't reported in MSM should be posted here. IIRC However, I'm sure they will answer your question when they are on. I can see why you might be confused though. Good points.

 

[Ninae]

I am going to guess yes. With Paul Bernardo, the US was still talking about it, and made a movie. A movie was *banned* (right word?) from being made in Canada, from what I remember.

Is the publication ban only in Canada???

 

[Bravo]

I'm not so sure we as a Crime Board would be subject to legal repercussions. I'm not saying ignore the ban. Is it morally wrong? Yes. And who in there right mind would want to test it legally lol. In my mind there would be a reasonable expectation of what would be discussed here prior to the ban. I don't think the laws as prior stated have quite caught up with today. Interesting to banter and discuss. IMO. Trust me i wouldn't challenge it lol

 

[Bravo]

I am going to guess yes. With Paul Bernardo, the US was still talking about it, and made a movie. A movie was *banned* (right word?) from being made in Canada, from what I remember.

IIRC it could not be shown in Canada.

 

[shygirl]

IIRC it could not be shown in Canada.

if they did show it in canada i for one would not see it

 

[Ninae]

If I remember, it was on a US channel, and the DVD's were for sale there. I did go and buy one to see if there was anything new. (I also bought all the books, as I did with Scott Peterson...I LOVE psychology, and trying to figure out a sociopath's mind...i.e. nature vs. nurture...basically, WHY????)...The movie confused me, since I didn't understand at first why I didn't recognize names...but when they made the movie, they changed the names of the victims.

IIRC it could not be shown in Canada.

 

[Bravo]

if they did show it in canada i for one would not see it

They may have after the ban. I just cant recall.

 

[Bravo]

Haaaa!! even when exhausted the man can talk a mile a minute :floorlaugh:

http://www.lfpress.com/news/london/raffertytrial/2012/05/12/19749931.html

 

[redheadedgal]

the timeline i posted above referred to this banned article by anne swardson -that somehow i managed to find a copy of- which discusses the 1993 ban too:


http://khiss1.tripod.com/Banned_Washington_Post.html