Friday, February 15, 2013

Application Dismissed

In the last post, I mentioned that I didn't know the date of the failed university application for a protection order against Marty. Well, a savvy commenter demonstrated that it's easy to learn: you just go to www.jus.gov.mb.ca, and search by name. Nice!

The date is January 18, that is, three weeks less one day before Marty's arrest.

But there's more! The search results show that on that day, not one, but two such applications were made, and both were dismissed:

118-Jan-2013Winnipeg-QBAPPLICATION - PROTECTION ORDER - DISMISSED GEORGE BUSH

118-Jan-2013Winnipeg-QBAPPLICATION - PROTECTION ORDER - DISMISSED DONALD JAMES METZ

We can only imagine the disappointment of professors Bush and Metz, as well as that of the university's legal team, that these requests for protection were deemed inadequate.
Posted by at

3 comments:

  1. AnonymousFebruary 15, 2013 at 7:55 PM

    Thinking that a failed protection order somehow lessens the charges being faced is strange. How does the fact that the university didn't get a protection order change the fact that he trespassed? As an analogy, that's like saying "I know I broke into your house, but you couldn't even get a lock on your door!"

    ReplyDelete
  2. AnonymousFebruary 15, 2013 at 10:10 PM

    Thanks for calling me savvy Neil.....my wife says I spend too much time on the computer....last week I was looking at the "handshake" problem and the "rowboat" problem and my wife says: "What the heck are you looking at, don't you have anything better to do!!!!

    Ok....I'm a nerd...so what

    ReplyDelete
  3. AnonymousFebruary 16, 2013 at 11:51 AM

    To the previous commenter but one: The fact that the university tried and failed *twice* to get a protection order suggests that the evidence upon which they based their application didn't meet legal standards. This in turn suggests that the criminal charges Marty is now facing didn't warrant his being detained without bail for more than one week. Still doesn't mean Marty's actions are justified, though. If his intention was *merely* to leaflet, and not to tweak the noses of the U of W administration, he could have stood on the public sidewalk on Portage or Ellice. If I were Marty's lawyer-- and I'm not-- I'd probably advise him to offer to plead guilty to a count of petty trespass in return for having the criminal charges stayed-- and to cease his shenanigans. But that's just me, and I have no reason to believe that Marty would listen to reason.

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)