edmlawyersteve.bsky.social
Criminal defence lawyer in Edmonton, AB (not a fan of electronic dance music). He/him.
Posts mostly about topics other than Canadian criminal law; should be treated as lacking any credibility whatsoever on such topics.
Reskeet probably = endorsement.
2,109 posts
280 followers
191 following
Regular Contributor
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
If their "latest fantasy" is from 2013, I guess Gunter's arguing that the Iveson-Sohi councils kept their feet firmly planted in reality...I wouldn't have expected such a concession from him, but good on him.
comment in response to
post
(This was hilarious despite it not actually being true that, pre-Galileo and Copernicus, the scientific community believed that the world was flat.)
comment in response to
post
Experts used to say that the world was flat until Galileo." I responded "And, if Galileo's opinion evidence was accepted by a trier of fact, then appellate courts could do something with it."
Brown piped up "Actually, I believe that Galileo's evidence was rejected."
comment in response to
post
obligation to defer to trial courts on findings of fact, including findings derived from the testimony of experts (the SCC itself has made this point, in Bedford). Justice Rowe was giving me a particularly hard time, and said something to the effect of "Experts have said all kinds of things (cont)
comment in response to
post
I see David Percy praised Brown's humour, so story time about that: I have precisely one appearance before the SCC. I lost. There was a dissent, but Brown was with the majority (so I don't praise him out of self-interest). But during argument, I was making a point about appellate courts' (cont)
comment in response to
post
Though in a metropolitan area, ten miles is a long ways (I might actually be within that 6 in 10–I haven’t measured).
comment in response to
post
Ah! I guess I’m anomalous, then, because I grew up in suburbia, got a taste of commute times when living with my parents during my first couple years of university, and decided “nope”.
Thanks for that additional information, anyway.
comment in response to
post
Mind you, my main reason for living here is commute times, so I guess I might still live here if I was a bigot who hated long commutes.
comment in response to
post
Anyway, not my area of expertise, so if any division-of-powers hotshots want to tell me that there’s some case out of Québec (it would definitely be out of Québec) that’s on-point, I could definitely be wrong. But that’s my sense.
comment in response to
post
the fact that this legislation would be i. from a borderline separatist government, and ii. self-evidently disgusting would probably reduce the deference.
comment in response to
post
Courts are pretty deferential to governments when legislating in areas of de facto shared jurisdiction (it *is* within my area of expertise to say that they’ll uphold all manner of provincial legislation that’s effectively criminal law on the basis of one provincial head or another), but (cont)
comment in response to
post
(Obviously I couldn’t *actually* become an American citizen, or possibly even cross the border, because of my activities on Bluesky, a social network on which I have seven followers. But bear with me.)
comment in response to
post
Sorry, my own response isn’t sitting well with me, because I think I got the tone wrong. What I meant is that, in all seriousness, your question is a good one, and I probably shouldn’t have made the dickish response, and the fact that I did does not speak super well of me.
comment in response to
post
Evidence would suggest that I'm a dick, I guess?
comment in response to
post
Rudy Giuliani and (the old Republican version of) Mike Bloomberg say hi.
But yeah, dickish response aside, it's a pretty blue town.
comment in response to
post
Also, I assume that, at this point, whenever she describes herself as “concerned” she’s intentionally trolling, and I have to admit that on some level I respect that.
comment in response to
post
a prosecutor for the federal Department of Justice telling a court that it has to hold a person in custody specifically in order to frustrate the activities of another federal department.
comment in response to
post
Also, I accept that there’s been cognitive decline, but I think focusing on that understates the extent to which the issue is that he is, by his nature, an incurious and dim-witted narcissist.
comment in response to
post
Are there attempts to cover it up? Looks pretty out in the open to me.
comment in response to
post
In summary, I have no idea what will happen.
Follow me for more penetrating insights into Edmonton politics.
comment in response to
post
I have to think that name recognition, so important in municipal elections, will make him an immediate contender (and I assume that he’s sufficiently connected that he’ll be well-funded). But I also think he’ll be competing for the same (large) pool of votes as Cartmell and Caterina.
comment in response to
post
Serious People were saying that they could win it (that's basically the same riding that elected the Western Canada Concept in a 1982 by-election), so I'll take 17%.