$15,000 Awarded To Insulted Lesbian by Human Rights Tribunal

dumpthemonarchy

House Member
Jan 18, 2005
4,235
14
38
Vancouver
www.cynicsunlimited.com
No joke folks. Time to legislate Human Rights Tribunals out of existence. Will the Harperites do this? We'll see.
The comedian didn't even work for the restaurant. This small business owner is getting shafted. Plus, plus, nothing was recorded so we don't really know what was said. Justice is being perverted by these so-called Human Rights Tribunals. Real courts or nothing.

I suppose the multicult crowd is getting us ready for sharia law.

http://www.ctvbc.ctv.ca/servlet/an/...fined_110421/20110421?hub=BritishColumbiaHome
Comedian ordered to pay $15K for insulting lesbian

By: Andrew Weichel , ctvbc.ca

Date: Thursday Apr. 21, 2011 4:02 PM PT

The BC Human Rights Tribunal has ordered a Toronto comedian to pay $15,000 to a lesbian woman whom he insulted at a performance in 2007.

In a decision posted Wednesday, the tribunal ruled that Guy Earle and Zesty Food Services, Inc. had discriminated against Lorna Pardy on the basis of her sex and sexual orientation, contrary to the Human Rights Code.

"Mr. Earle repeatedly and publicly subjected her to extreme homophobic and sexist comments, and physical aggression, when he was acting as the host of an open microphone comedy show," it reads.

The decision came after a four-day hearing involving testimony from 11 witnesses, including Pardy, employees of Zesty's Restuarant on Commercial Drive and some of Earle's fellow comedians.

Earle's lawyer Jim Millar said two applications for his client to testify via phone from Ontario were denied.

The ruling is alarming, Millar said, because it lumps comedic performers with service industry workers. The case was heard under Section 8 of the Human Rights Code, which covers discrimination in accommodation, service and facility.

"It would mean that a comedian is restricted to the same polite conversation that a service provider is – someone dishing out burgers or working in a public office," he said.

"There's no thought to protected speech or that [a comedian] might be pushing the envelope, or of the tradition of strong put-downs of hecklers."

The tribunal ruled that Pardy and her partner had not heckled or otherwise disrupted Earle's performance.
It found Pardy suffered humiliation that led to post-traumatic stress disorder, and that Earle had also taken Pardy's sunglasses and broken them.

Zesty's owner Salam Ismail was also ordered to pay Pardy $7,500 in compensation for the incident.

Millar boycotted the hearing, arguing that the tribunal did not have the jurisdiction to hear the case. He and Earle will be reviewing the decision with the B.C. Supreme Court.
 

In Between Man

The Biblical Position
Sep 11, 2008
4,597
46
48
44
49° 19' N, 123° 4' W
Time to legislate Human Rights Tribunals out of existence..

Agreed. They've taken us down the wrong road by trying to discern what's free speech and what's not. We should be using the constitution/charter for that obviously, not unelected panels of yahoos.

I suppose the multicult crowd is getting us ready for sharia law.

The first step will be when you can be charged for criticizing Islam. It's coming. Google UN anti blasphemy resolution.

The tribunal ruled that Pardy and her partner had not heckled or otherwise disrupted Earle's performance.

That's bull. When this story first broke it was reported by witnesses that she was indeed heckling the comedian. Which is fine, but then she couldn't take her own medicine? What a bleeding heart!
 

SLM

The Velvet Hammer
Mar 5, 2011
29,151
3
36
London, Ontario
I always thought the entire point of the human rights tribunals was to provide a venue where David can take on Goliath. Where someone could resolve a grievance where they were denied employment, accomodation, service etc if the basis of that denial was their gender, age, religion, sexual orientation etc.

This seems more David against David to me.
 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83
I haven't been following, but did the offended actually incur a $15,000.00 loss as a result of the insult?
 

DurkaDurka

Internet Lawyer
Mar 15, 2006
10,385
129
63
Toronto
I haven't been following, but did the offended actually incur a $15,000.00 loss as a result of the insult?

I'm pretty she didn't, but that's the thing with these tribunals, you don't need to prove damages, just that you were insulted or maligned in some manner and then the tribunal can find for punitive damages.

What's really messed up about this is the case was heard under the Section 8 of the Human Rights Code, which covers discrimination in accommodation, service and facility, lumping the comedian in with busboys and waiters.
 

Andem

dev
Mar 24, 2002
5,643
128
63
Larnaka
Time to legislate Human Rights Tribunals out of existence..

Yeah right, like that's ever going to happen. Canada is under minority rule, and not just a minority government. Harper's campaign made it clear they would fight for visable minorities and the human rights tribunals are exactly what was created to serve and protect their interests.

Some of my favourite comedians make fun of different races, in all fun, on programmes like SNL and MadTV. Are US networks now going to be fined and banned in Canada?

Think about it. The tribunals have the power of courts but lack the fairness. It's virtually impossible to appeal.
 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83
I'm pretty she didn't, but that's the thing with these tribunals, you don't need to prove damages, just that you were insulted or maligned in some manner and then the tribunal can find for punitive damages.

That's kind of screwed up.

At least make an attempt at psychological trauma for chrissake. Then you can show you've incurred an actual expense by missing work or whatnot.