Relevant Information from the Milgaard Inquiry Judge’s Summary of Findings and Recommendations
Inquiry Report available at www.milgaardinquiry.ca
Chapter 7 Summary Findings and Recommendations
61. The combination of legal error respecting the application of s. 9(2) of the Canada Evidence Act and Chief Justice Bence’s impatience respecting the evidence given by Nichol John at trial probably contributed to the wrongful conviction of David Milgaard. (One example of judicial or legal error in our case was that the judge knew evidence from the justice department misrepresented evidence from a counselor, so the judge decided that the counselor was not sufficiently expert regarding domestic violence -despite thirty plus years as a counselor and co-authoring a book on abusive relationships - instead of dealing with the discrepancies between what the justice department employee quoted the counselor as saying and the counselors own testimony of what she said she told him and the information she had shared and her concerns the judge made a choice to ignore/disregard the counselors evidence in preference for the justice department employee’s evidence which contradicted what the judge heard directly from the counselor .)
70. Linda Fisher’s 1980 statement to the Saskatoon Police did not receive the attention it deserved. (The provincial and federal justice departments and governments did not investigate or respond appropriately to information received in writing directly from a doctor, social worker with a justice department funded domestic violence program, counselor, pre-school teacher or myself that information used at the trial and presented by the justice department’s family law division employee misrepresented information that had been shared regarding the violence my children and I had experienced and these professionals concerns for our safety and well-being.)
96. The criminal justice system failed David Milgaard because his wrongful conviction was not detected and remedied as early as it should have been. (Despite overwhelming evidence of problems and lack of adherence to protocol and standards of practice in our case that we presented to the justice system they refused to appropriately investigate, deal with or remedy this situation and the problems.)
97. The conviction review system in Canada is reactive and places too heavy an onus on the wrongfully convicted. The successful remedying of a wrongful conviction depends upon the wrongfully convicted person being able to identify credible grounds to challenge the safety of the conviction and convince the federal Minister of Justice that the conviction warrants a further review by the Court. In practice, only those grounds advanced by an applicant are investigated. (I did not have the necessary resources, knowledge, safety or support to identify all the grounds to challenge the process and problems.)
98. The conviction review system in Canada is premised on the belief that wrongful convictions are rare and that any remedy granted by the federal Minister is extraordinary. Change is needed to reflect the inevitability of wrongful convictions and the responsibility of the criminal justice system to detect and correct its own errors. (There is no provision by the justice department to deal with any problems with a custody and access report prepared by their staff – it is assumed it would be accurate, correct, follow their protocols and standards of practice and be credible, so there is no process for review, discussion or bringing evidence to the contrary.)
99. A wrongfully convicted person should not bear the responsibility of investigating his own conviction in order to identify all grounds needed to support a remedy. It is beyond the means and abilities of most wrongfully convicted persons to do so, because they are usually not in the best position to identify credible grounds in a timely manner. (Despite the fact that the justice departments own employee had caused the problem I had the sole responsibility of using my own resources and whatever support and assistance I could obtain to investigate this and try and bring the necessary information to the justice department in a way they deemed acceptable. I did not have the means or ability or safety to do this and the justice department did not facilitate this.)
100. In the case of David Milgaard, the onus of identifying credible grounds in a timely manner was a heavy one that was simply beyond the means and abilities of Milgaard and his supporters. They investigated his conviction for eight years before they filed an application for review with the federal Minister, relying on two grounds that were quickly determined to have no merit. (“Justice delayed is justice denied”.)
101. If an independent agency such as the United Kingdom’s Criminal Cases Review Commission had been in place to investigate David Milgaard’s case, it is likely, with its proactive methods and expertise, that credible grounds would have been identified much earlier than they were, even though Milgaard had not raised them. (As there was no independent organisation to hold the justice department accountable the department did as they wished – which was to not deal with or appropriately investigate the situation.)
102. The federal Minister of Justice should not be the gatekeeper to determine whether an alleged wrongful conviction should be returned to the Court for further review. The involvement of a federal politician in the review of individual cases of alleged wrongful conviction invites public advocacy and accusations of political influence. The office of the federal Minister, identified as it is by the public with prosecutions, and being occupied by a political figure, does not lend itself well to the adjudication of issues which arise in the judicial system and are to be returned there. (People who were a part of the justice department and government and had a vested interest in not dealing with these issues were the gate-keepers and refused to deal with these issues. Public advocacy is not safe for women and children who have experienced domestic violence.)
103. As long as responsibility for conviction review remains with the federal Minister of Justice, there will be the potential for political pressure and public advocacy to play a role in the decision making process, or, at the very least, for the perception to exist that the decision can be so influenced. The conviction review process must not only be truly independent, it must be seen to be independent. (Dealing with the justice department to try and get a credible review was not an independent or accountable process nor could it have ever appeared to be independent, when we asked for out of province and Australian experts to be involved the provincial justice department refused to have them involved.)
***
The five women mentioned in the Family Service Bureau letter (quoted in “Situation Synopsis” on the online resource/blog I created www.womenwhowant2gohome.blogspot.com ), “Jane” and I all had supposedly good lawyers who we paid many thousands of dollars to for legal assistance and advice (I spent over $100,000 on lawyers, experts for court etc). None of us could find a lawyer who would speak up about the injustice of having an assessor – in our case a Justice Department employee- misrepresent information in court about the abuse we experienced -unlike David Milgaard whose lawyer at times worked pro bono for him and spoke up publicly about the problems in the justice system. We will never experience justice if the Australian government, legal experts and others won’t immediately assist and advocate for us, as the provincial and Canadian governments and justice departments have shown their commitment to supporting and keeping secret these human rights and justice violations against Australian women and their children.
It is impossible for us to hold the Canadian and provincial government and justice systems accountable (as can be seen from the findings from the Milgaard Inquiry) and everyone is aware of this. For the Australian government to continue to tell us, and I don’t know how many other Australian children and women in similar traumatic, unjust and unsafe circumstances, that it has no ability to “intervene” is to condone violence and human rights abuses against Australian children and women and is deliberately discriminatory when the media, politicians and advocates have made us all aware of the many Australians overseas experiencing difficulties and legal or justice problems that the government has intervened for and provided legal assistance, consular assistance and other resources to ensure their safe and prompt return to Australia. Why should we deserve the same or be expected to accept any less?
The theme for International Women’s Day, March 8th 2009 was “Women and men united to end violence against women and girls”. “The only thing necessary for evil to prevail is for (supposedly) good men to do nothing” Edmund Burke
***
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Sunday, March 08, 2009
International Women's Day
***
What does International Women’s Day mean in Australia and for Australian women? What are we celebrating?
Sue Conde, United Nations Development Fund for Women (Australia) informs us that this years International Women’s Day theme is “women and men uniting to end violence against women and girls”…
Why do we celebrate International Women’s Day but refuse to ask why Australian women and their children in foreign jurisdictions who experience domestic violence and systemic and judicial discrimination, failures, inequities and inadequacies that deprive them of the safety and justice they need and deserve do not receive any of the compassion, support, advocacy or assistance that the Australian government, organisations and advocates provide other Australians in difficult circumstances in foreign jurisdictions receive?
Why is it acceptable to politicians, academics and advocates that the Australian government condones violence, discrimination and injustice against Australian women and children in foreign jurisdictions by providing financing to these jurisdictions - despite extensive information and documentation regarding these jurisdictions use of resources to deny Australian children and women the safety and justice they need and deserve?
How can we celebrate International Women’s Day and talk about our collective responsibility to eradicate violence and discrimination against women while so many public servants, leaders, politicians, academics and others choose the narrowest possible definitions of their positions and appointments so as to claim they do not have the opportunity, ability or responsibility to assist or even speak publicly about these experiences of violence, injustice, human rights abuses and discrimination that have traumatised Australian women and their children?
What does International Women’s Day mean when Australians who have chosen to commit known crimes or participate in known dangerous activities receive government intervention and consular assistance in foreign jurisdictions but Australian women and their children who been the victims of the crime of domestic violence and systemic and judicial failures and discrimination are told the government cannot intervene and they have to deal with the situation on their own?
Why does the Australian government then reward foreign jurisdictions that use their resources to deny Australian women and their children justice and safety human and condone these human rights and justice violations by financing these foreign jurisdictions? And how is this related to our acknowledgement and celebration of International Women’s Day?
Why will none of the politicians, academics, advocates, legal experts and organisations who so publicly insisted the government ensure David Hicks human rights and right to “judicial fairness” and was brought home to Australia, ignore these Australian women and their children when they beg them to ensure their human rights and similar right to “judicial fairness”? Why does no one publicly question this – and what does this mean when these same politicians, academics, advocates, legal experts and organisations “celebrate” International Women’s’ Day while keeping these secrets?
If so much effort is so successfully expended to keep these issues regarding Australian women’s lived reality out of the public discourse and unaddressed, then what other issues and experiences of discrimination, inequity, human rights and justice violations against Australian women are ignored and kept secret?
So, what are we celebrating on International Women’s Day?
What does International Women’s Day mean in Australia when it is privately stated that “female politicians will not speak up about these issues for fear of backlash” but this is never publicly discussed or questioned?
What does it mean to acknowledge International Women’s Day in Australia when Australian government and non-government delegates to international meetings such as this month’s United Nations 53rd Convention on the Status of Women ignore Australian women in these traumatic, dangerous, unjust and discriminatory situations and refuse to provide them any support, assistance or advocacy or even bring these issues into the public discourse?
What are we celebrating on International Women’s Day when women’s groups say they can’t speak up about these issues of the government refusing to assist Australian women and children who have experienced domestic violence and systemic and judicial failures because if they did so they would lose their government funding?
What does it mean in Australia to celebrate International Women’s Day when state and federal government appointed council’s who will influence policy on violence against women accept terms of reference that specifically preclude addressing or sharing any information about these issues, despite being personally approached by women begging for assistance and support? What does it mean that these government appointed bodies not only keep these traumatic realities and injustices against Australian women secret but are also choosing to withhold this information from all other Australian women to protect them from a possible similar traumatic experience?
What are we celebrating on International Women’s Day when domestic violence academics refuse to provide any assistance, advocacy or support, but appropriate for their personal teaching purposes information sent in confidence by women begging for assistance? What are we celebrating for women when domestic violence academics and advocates are aware of but do not question or censure their colleague’s behaviour?
What does it mean on International Women’s Day that the same media, who keeps the secret of this violence and injustice against Australian women and their children, celebrates and quotes the politicians, academics and advocates they know are also keeping the secret? What does it mean that the media refuses to make public any of these issues – even to warn Australian women about these dangerous, traumatic, unjust and discriminatory possibilities!
What does it mean when federal ministers make a joint statement regarding Australia signing the Optional Protocol on the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) that will come into effect by International Women’s Day this year but neither of them will assist or advocate for Australian children and women who have experienced violence and injustice in foreign jurisdictions or believe these innocent and vulnerable Australian women and their children deserve any of the government compassion and assistance provided to other Australians overseas, including those that have chosen to participate in known dangerous and illegal activities?
What does it mean for Australian women as they “celebrate” International Women’s Day when popular women’s magazines who interviewed the prime ministerial candidates during federal electioneering and reported both these men’s supposed “zero tolerance” of violence against women and children withhold information from all their female readers that neither of these men will provide any assistance to Australian women and children who are begging for safety, support and justice and the opportunity to return to their families in Australia after experiencing domestic violence and judicial discrimination and inequities in foreign jurisdictions?
Will our current Prime Minister being making a public statement on International Women’s Day regarding his and his governments commitment to women’s equality, human rights and right to freedom from violence and discrimination? Will he then explain why despite having the time, resources and inclination to attend many cricket games he has not had the time, resource or inclination to respond to communication and extensive documentation regrading Australian women in desperate need of government assistance to deal with the violence and injustices they have experienced in foreign jurisdictions?
What are we celebrating about International Women’s Day when the domestic violence sector not only refuses to provide any support, assistance or advocacy for Australian women and their children who have experience violence and injustice overseas, but also refuses to use the information provided to protect other Australian women from a similar trauma or even publicly question the governments intervention for other Australians overseas while ignoring these innocent and vulnerable Australian women and children?
What does it mean to use public resources to promote and celebrate International Women’s Day when academics and organisations that also receive public funding refuse to use their resources and opportunity to speak out about these issues and withhold this information from the public who funds them?
What are we celebrating on International Women’s Day when women, who with their children have been traumatised by domestic violence and judicial and systemic discrimination and failures, beg for safety and justice and are told they need counselling or a psychiatrist instead? Why are women made feel there is something wrong with them instead of anyone speaking up and doing something about what is wrong with the abuse, injustice and discrimination these women and their children have experienced?
What does it mean when we celebrate International Women’s Day and refuse to discuss these issues and human rights violations against Australian women and their children?
What does International Women’s Day mean to you?
Happy International Women’s Day!
What does International Women’s Day mean in Australia and for Australian women? What are we celebrating?
Sue Conde, United Nations Development Fund for Women (Australia) informs us that this years International Women’s Day theme is “women and men uniting to end violence against women and girls”…
Why do we celebrate International Women’s Day but refuse to ask why Australian women and their children in foreign jurisdictions who experience domestic violence and systemic and judicial discrimination, failures, inequities and inadequacies that deprive them of the safety and justice they need and deserve do not receive any of the compassion, support, advocacy or assistance that the Australian government, organisations and advocates provide other Australians in difficult circumstances in foreign jurisdictions receive?
Why is it acceptable to politicians, academics and advocates that the Australian government condones violence, discrimination and injustice against Australian women and children in foreign jurisdictions by providing financing to these jurisdictions - despite extensive information and documentation regarding these jurisdictions use of resources to deny Australian children and women the safety and justice they need and deserve?
How can we celebrate International Women’s Day and talk about our collective responsibility to eradicate violence and discrimination against women while so many public servants, leaders, politicians, academics and others choose the narrowest possible definitions of their positions and appointments so as to claim they do not have the opportunity, ability or responsibility to assist or even speak publicly about these experiences of violence, injustice, human rights abuses and discrimination that have traumatised Australian women and their children?
What does International Women’s Day mean when Australians who have chosen to commit known crimes or participate in known dangerous activities receive government intervention and consular assistance in foreign jurisdictions but Australian women and their children who been the victims of the crime of domestic violence and systemic and judicial failures and discrimination are told the government cannot intervene and they have to deal with the situation on their own?
Why does the Australian government then reward foreign jurisdictions that use their resources to deny Australian women and their children justice and safety human and condone these human rights and justice violations by financing these foreign jurisdictions? And how is this related to our acknowledgement and celebration of International Women’s Day?
Why will none of the politicians, academics, advocates, legal experts and organisations who so publicly insisted the government ensure David Hicks human rights and right to “judicial fairness” and was brought home to Australia, ignore these Australian women and their children when they beg them to ensure their human rights and similar right to “judicial fairness”? Why does no one publicly question this – and what does this mean when these same politicians, academics, advocates, legal experts and organisations “celebrate” International Women’s’ Day while keeping these secrets?
If so much effort is so successfully expended to keep these issues regarding Australian women’s lived reality out of the public discourse and unaddressed, then what other issues and experiences of discrimination, inequity, human rights and justice violations against Australian women are ignored and kept secret?
So, what are we celebrating on International Women’s Day?
What does International Women’s Day mean in Australia when it is privately stated that “female politicians will not speak up about these issues for fear of backlash” but this is never publicly discussed or questioned?
What does it mean to acknowledge International Women’s Day in Australia when Australian government and non-government delegates to international meetings such as this month’s United Nations 53rd Convention on the Status of Women ignore Australian women in these traumatic, dangerous, unjust and discriminatory situations and refuse to provide them any support, assistance or advocacy or even bring these issues into the public discourse?
What are we celebrating on International Women’s Day when women’s groups say they can’t speak up about these issues of the government refusing to assist Australian women and children who have experienced domestic violence and systemic and judicial failures because if they did so they would lose their government funding?
What does it mean in Australia to celebrate International Women’s Day when state and federal government appointed council’s who will influence policy on violence against women accept terms of reference that specifically preclude addressing or sharing any information about these issues, despite being personally approached by women begging for assistance and support? What does it mean that these government appointed bodies not only keep these traumatic realities and injustices against Australian women secret but are also choosing to withhold this information from all other Australian women to protect them from a possible similar traumatic experience?
What are we celebrating on International Women’s Day when domestic violence academics refuse to provide any assistance, advocacy or support, but appropriate for their personal teaching purposes information sent in confidence by women begging for assistance? What are we celebrating for women when domestic violence academics and advocates are aware of but do not question or censure their colleague’s behaviour?
What does it mean on International Women’s Day that the same media, who keeps the secret of this violence and injustice against Australian women and their children, celebrates and quotes the politicians, academics and advocates they know are also keeping the secret? What does it mean that the media refuses to make public any of these issues – even to warn Australian women about these dangerous, traumatic, unjust and discriminatory possibilities!
What does it mean when federal ministers make a joint statement regarding Australia signing the Optional Protocol on the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) that will come into effect by International Women’s Day this year but neither of them will assist or advocate for Australian children and women who have experienced violence and injustice in foreign jurisdictions or believe these innocent and vulnerable Australian women and their children deserve any of the government compassion and assistance provided to other Australians overseas, including those that have chosen to participate in known dangerous and illegal activities?
What does it mean for Australian women as they “celebrate” International Women’s Day when popular women’s magazines who interviewed the prime ministerial candidates during federal electioneering and reported both these men’s supposed “zero tolerance” of violence against women and children withhold information from all their female readers that neither of these men will provide any assistance to Australian women and children who are begging for safety, support and justice and the opportunity to return to their families in Australia after experiencing domestic violence and judicial discrimination and inequities in foreign jurisdictions?
Will our current Prime Minister being making a public statement on International Women’s Day regarding his and his governments commitment to women’s equality, human rights and right to freedom from violence and discrimination? Will he then explain why despite having the time, resources and inclination to attend many cricket games he has not had the time, resource or inclination to respond to communication and extensive documentation regrading Australian women in desperate need of government assistance to deal with the violence and injustices they have experienced in foreign jurisdictions?
What are we celebrating about International Women’s Day when the domestic violence sector not only refuses to provide any support, assistance or advocacy for Australian women and their children who have experience violence and injustice overseas, but also refuses to use the information provided to protect other Australian women from a similar trauma or even publicly question the governments intervention for other Australians overseas while ignoring these innocent and vulnerable Australian women and children?
What does it mean to use public resources to promote and celebrate International Women’s Day when academics and organisations that also receive public funding refuse to use their resources and opportunity to speak out about these issues and withhold this information from the public who funds them?
What are we celebrating on International Women’s Day when women, who with their children have been traumatised by domestic violence and judicial and systemic discrimination and failures, beg for safety and justice and are told they need counselling or a psychiatrist instead? Why are women made feel there is something wrong with them instead of anyone speaking up and doing something about what is wrong with the abuse, injustice and discrimination these women and their children have experienced?
What does it mean when we celebrate International Women’s Day and refuse to discuss these issues and human rights violations against Australian women and their children?
What does International Women’s Day mean to you?
Happy International Women’s Day!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
