Chretien's lawyers back in court in challenge to Gomery

Canoe-Cnews ^ | April 26/05 | CNEWS

[fanfan]

Chretien's lawyers back in court in challenge to Gomery

Former prime minister Jean Chretien.

(CP PHOTO/Tom Hanson)

OTTAWA (CP) - Lawyers for Jean Chretien are objecting to an effort by Justice John Gomery to send his own lawyer to court to defend his impartiality as head of the federal sponsorship inquiry.

The former prime minister has asked Federal Court to remove Gomery from his post, alleging that the judge is biased and unable to deliver an objective evaluation of Chretien's role in the sponsorship affair.

Prime Minister Paul Martin has said his government will fight to defend Gomery and keep him in place.

But the inquiry has also hired its own lawyer, saying counsel for the Justice Department won't necessarily cover all the bases in arguing for Gomery's impartiality.

Peter Doody, one of Chretien's lawyers, says there's no need for Gomery to be represented by separate counsel.

"If you appeal a judge's decision to the court of appeal, the judge does not have a lawyer at the court of appeal," Doody said in an interview.

He said it's clear the government is already committed to "vigorously" defending Gomery and opposing his removal from the inquiry.

A hearing on whether Gomery should be represented by a separate lawyer was scheduled for Tuesday afternoon.

The broader issues involved in Chretien's case will be argued starting June 7.

By then Gomery will have completed hearing all the witnesses scheduled to appear at the inquiry. But he is not due to deliver a pair of reports - one on his factual findings, the other on recommended reforms - until November and December.

If Chretien is successful in his challenge to Gomery's impartiality, it could delay or block those reports. ,

[fanfan]

The Cretch is appealing to judges he himself appointed, in order to have Gomery removed as head of the inquirey.

Gomery is biased, but the judges Chretien is appealing to are not! Bwwwhhhhahahaha!

[fanfan]

PING

Please let me know if you want on or off the Adscam ping list.

[Tacis]

Do the judges and politicians in a socialist paradise have statuatory amounts they can give and demand as bribes or does "whatever the market will bear" rules govern?

[fanfan]

Good question. LOL.

I wouldn't know tho, I'm a conservative.

;-)

[headsonpikes]

Hey, da proof is da proof!

Tabernac!

[real saxophonist]

Cretin:

Gomer:

[fanfan]

lol.

[GMMAC]

Note full quote:
"A proof is a proof. What kind of a proof? It's a proof. A proof is a proof. And when you have a good proof, it's because it's proven."
- Former PM Jean Chrétien (on Iraqi weapons of mass destruction 2002)
Source:

Your paraphrase actually makes him seem somewhat more lucid and, as a lawyer, he was doubtless hoping to be paid by the word - LOL!

[Owl558]

"Do the judges and politicians in a socialist paradise have statuatory amounts they can give and demand as bribes or does "whatever the market will bear" rules govern?"

To each according to his ability...

[real saxophonist]

You know what's funny, I have a friend named Paul Martin, another former Marine, who does a radio show called the Revolution. He's been teased about being Canada's new PM...

[fanfan]

No way. Poor guy!

[littlelilac]

He said it's clear the government is already committed to "vigorously" defending Gomery and opposing his removal from the inquiry.

this is priceless too - the Liberal minority government that could be brought down by the Gomery inquiry is going to "vigourously" defend Gomery right, not when getting Gomery booted could buy Paul Martin more time in office Gomery is no fool

[GMMAC]

"Baghdad Dithers" Addresses the Nation:

"There is no corruption in the Liberal Party .
The Conservative forces are nowhere near Ottawa .
All reports from the Gomery Inquiry are bold fabrications .
The polls you are reading about are nothing but lies ."

[youngtory]

I can see him succeeding because he appointed most of these judges.

[GMMAC]

Possibly but, being whores, they may well not stay bought.

Plus, when you're making $200+K per year + perqs for light ego-gratifying pontification and virtually no accountability, why piss-off the current powers that be?
If most were anything other than lazy hacks with more than a little attachment to habitually taking the easy road and never having to defend or justify their actions and (or) outlandish personal opinions, they'd be on Bay St. pulling down seven figures per annum.