Christian Conservative Christian "Independent"

I'm an evangelical Christian, member of the CPC, but presently & unjustly exiled to wander the political wilderness.
All opinions expressed here are solely my own.

Tuesday, May 25, 2010

Charges against Michael Bryant DROPPED

I didn't post on the story when it broke, and I recall urging my fellow BTers to "wait and see". Sounded to me like it was pretty cut and dry when it happened... it sounded like the cyclist just lost it on Bryant, and his actions were defencive in nature.

The charges against former Liberal Attorney General Michal Bryant have now been dropped, on the advice of the special prosecutor appointed in this case, Vancouver lawyer Richard Peck. (in and effort to avoid any kind of conflict of interest)

Labels: , ,

11 Comments:

  • At Tue May 25, 11:46:00 AM EDT, Blogger Alan Kan said…

    What a coincidence. That's the same title I used for this story :-)

     
  • At Tue May 25, 12:19:00 PM EDT, Blogger kursk said…

    ...and the Globe closes the comments for 'legal reasons'

     
  • At Tue May 25, 12:21:00 PM EDT, Blogger Ted Betts said…

    I've seen the video of the incident. I'm not surprised that charges related to Sheppard's death were dropped, especially knowing now how drunk he was. I have to say though that I'm surprised all charges have been dropped since the original traffic accident charge, which led to Sheppard's attack on Bryant, seemed pretty clear in the video.

    (Good for you for not posting in a rush at first or for making comparisons to Jaffer.)

     
  • At Tue May 25, 12:56:00 PM EDT, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    There is no justice in Ontario.

     
  • At Tue May 25, 01:47:00 PM EDT, Blogger Christian Conservative said…

    I beg to differ Anonymous... I think that justice has been well served in this case. A drunk guy harassed a member of the public and threatened violence, while Mr. Bryant was able to successfully defend himself both physically and legally.

    Perhaps the lesson of this story is "Don't drink and drive"... had Mr. Sheppard not been drinking and riding his bike, which is in and of itself against the law I believe, he would very likely still be with us today.

     
  • At Tue May 25, 03:58:00 PM EDT, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    I disagree the law does not allow you to use excessive force resulting in death
    the man who died was on foot having abandoned his
    bicycle
    the man who claims he was afraid was inside a convertible car top down with his wife and in possession of a mobile phone Bryant choose not to call the police
    I strongly disagree that justice was seen to be done
    he called police after he had run over the man

    fh

     
  • At Tue May 25, 04:11:00 PM EDT, Blogger John said…

    Utter bull. This just goes to show that there's two sets of law at play in Canada - one for entitled, Harvard-educated, politically-connected rich folk and another for the plebs.

    Well Michael might have been able to grease his way past a jury thanks to the silent support of his old-boys' network, but that doesn't change the fact that his actions resulted in another man's death. That's something he'll have to live with the rest of his natural life, with his sentence to be served standing in front of every mirror he'll ever look upon.

     
  • At Tue May 25, 04:28:00 PM EDT, Blogger Ted Betts said…

    Question for Anonymous 3:58.

    How does one call for the police on your mobile phone when a drunk reaches into your car and grabs you and your steering wheel?

    Do you ask him: "Please, sir, let go of me so that I can call the police to come and sort this out. And while I am doing that, I would be much obliged if you didn't punch me in the head."

    Watch the video and tell me you think that Bryant could have called the police with Sheppard attacking him like that. And then tell me that that is what you would have done.

     
  • At Tue May 25, 04:54:00 PM EDT, Blogger Ted Betts said…

    If you watch the video - and there are plenty of copies out there to see - it is clear to any objective observer that this is what happened:

    1. Sheppard, cycling on the inside left turn lane, cuts in front of Bryant just before the intersection, blocking him from proceeding. That is a dangerous move and minor traffic offence.

    2. Bryant, likely pissed with Sheppard for doing so, edges up close to him and maybe even bumps him.

    3. Bryant then does hit him and knocks him over.

    4. Bryant then backs up and turns his car to go around him. He actually drives over the bike. A clear hit and run, regardless of Sheppard's prior conduct. I have no idea what the charges were dropped for this and from my perspective they ought not to have been.

    5. But then it is clear that, as Bryant drives away, Sheppard gets up and jumps him, grabs onto the steering wheel, and the car veers suddenly to the left, going across two lanes of traffic and into a mailbox, knocking Sheppard off the car.

    6. (Not on the video) Bryant goes around the corner, drops off his wife and then calls the police (and his PR contact).

    To me, the death seems directly the cause of Sheppard's own actions. I have looked at a number of the videos and I believe, looking at the videos, that Sheppard caused the car to vere left. At the very least I can see the prosecutor concluding that there would not be any way to prove, beyond any reasonable doubt, that Bryant deliberately/intentionally drove his car across two lanes of traffic into the mailbox.

    What we don't have is any sound in any of the videos. Did Bryant honk several times? Was there shouting before any of the incidents? Did Sheppard shout something as he attacked? What did witnesses say they saw or heard? That might add something to our understanding.

    So: I don't see how the more serious charges could go ahead and I certainly don't see how they could succeed, but I am puzzled and concerned about no charge for the bump and leaving the scene.

     
  • At Tue May 25, 06:40:00 PM EDT, Blogger Anon1152 said…

    Thank you.


    Most of the commentary I've seen on this story has note been about the actual incident at all, but a case of cyclists vs. drivers (or conservatives vs. liberals).

     
  • At Tue May 25, 10:28:00 PM EDT, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    This is a pretty tough call for me to lean towards a sweet-deal by the Social Status.
    But the Crown under Dalton McFibber brought in their Attorney from B.C. to avoid any perception of a bias to favour Mr.Bryant.
    Except one thing....B.C. was the same Province that gave Svend Robinson a sweet Backroom deal for the theft of a $60'000.00 item when no Black youth could ever get the Probation Svend gotfor the same crime.
    In fact,Svend called the RCMP to report himself as the thief as if it made hin a hero solving a crime.Svend even pulled out the Homophobia-Card that MADE him become a fellon while even Jack Layton and Libby Davies fell for it and welcomed back Light-fingers Robinson into the NDP to run again in B.C. during the Federal election.
    Hmmmmmm..... B.C. allows gays to excuse away their crimes based on everyone else outside of B.C. being presupposed to a guilt of being Homophobes with NO evidence of trials to prove the theory by the fellon.

    Now Bryant whose family is from B.C. and powerful Socially by their Status,was afforded a B.C. based unbias Crown Lawyer to examine the B.C. linked and ex Ontario Attorney General tied to the death of a cyclist as the surviving witness giving evidence on his actions.

    BTW
    Do a news search for the CSL cargo ship owned by the Martin family linked to our P.M. Paul Martin jr. whose dad Paul sr. was in Politics when Trudeau mocked our dead soldiers in Europe when he wore a Nazi helmet in Quebec to claim that Hitler was not a French problem as nazis murdered gays,gypsys,Christians,jews and the mentally ill.
    Your search will call up the story of the RCMP finding about 150lbs of Cocain on a CSL ship and yet Martin's family and CSL walked free since the Police agreed the Cocain was planted their by bad people off-shore wanting to sneak it into canada.
    Yeah,right....try that at Niagara Falls if Border dogs sniff out the slightest trace of dope of coke because an American touched your car while having drug powder residue on the fingers or tossed a finished joint butt in the truck or hood crack where it sat for the dogs to sniff.
    The RCMP does not have a Charter Right to pick which Laws they will enforce,it's the Courts and a Jury that needed to rule on a 150 lbs wad of drugs smuggled into Canada. And if someone murders a store clerk with a gun and toses it into my cars back floor to be found while re-entering canada,good luck for me telling the Guard it was Planted there or that it's not mine so you can keep it and I'll just drive back to Toronto,thank you Sir.
    We have a Afghan based soldier
    on murder charges when NOBODY actually saw him shoot the alleged Taliban prisoner that Muslims in canada say was Murdered,but the NDP and a Islamic Org. with ties to Hamas want Omar Khadr back in Canada because NOBODY actually saw him toss the grenade that murdered a medic which is a violation of the Geneva Convension for attack Medical workers in a combat zone.

    In the USA, you're innocent until proven broke. But in canada,you're innocent until proven non-Liberal/Non-Muslim.

     

Post a Comment

<< Home