The building was rebricked about five years ago at a cost of about $4.3-million when it was discovered there was no vapour barrier, Ms. Erwin said.
The most useful suggestion that I can offer, given the situation you describe, is to continue to seek the advice of a lawyer in private practice to determine the course of action that will best serve your needs.If this is not financially possible, you may wish to consult with the legal aid office closest to you to determine whether you qualify for help.
For what purpose? If the owner confesses in an affidavit that the house ‘had problem’ and the Judges still gives them a pass on it just what purpose would it serve. Did the Inmates get any legal help in their case? I’m guessing not, another great miscarriage of justice and the victims end up with a lifelong injury. In our case we would have won if the defendants had to represent themselves but due to the length of the exposure small claims would have been giving them a gift rather than making them pay fair compensation.
I laughed when the Law society suggested I hire a Lawyer to handle my complaint about another Lawyer and I feel just the same about your advice, Basically it is less that useless.
I was actually in touch with the ones that did the ‘studies; and no surprise when they stood by their conclusion that overcrowding was the sole cause of all the excessive anger rather than mold being involved. When I asked what other studies showed that overcrowding resulted in the same conditions they did not reply at all which can only mean no studies support that conclusion or all prison would be affect by the same anger issues.
Since it was not the Province that arranged the studies it would then have to be connected with the Federal Government being the ones who commissioned the study while making sure the mold and sewer defects remained the same. In terms of studies of long term exposure to low levels of exposure to mold none have gone on for longer than 1 year as longer would have been classified as torture.
The text below shows the Provincial Government did not commission the studies and they went on a lot longer than 1 year. 20 years the study went on and you are ring to promote that the inmates weren’t being used (illegally) as lab rats to find out the effects of exposure to mold and then let back into the community where the same anger issues would have continued and nobody connected with that has ever been charged. Wow is all I can say to that miscarriage of justice. That and the community is being used in the very same way considering the bogus cleanup recommendation promoted by Health Canad which is a Federal Government entity rater than being a Provincial one so your claim it is ‘not your department is a misleading one if not an outright fabrication rather than lack of knowledge about the issues.
Try running that report past an expert like Jack Flasher and see if you get the same conclusion you have arrived at. I can assure you it will be just the opposite,
(in part)
Paul Okalik responds to scathing corrections report
'We're making progress as we speak,' says Justice Minister Okalik
CBC News Posted: Mar 11, 2015 9:36 AM CT Last Updated: Mar 12, 2015 11:36 AM CT
Nunavut's justice minister has responded to a scathing report released yesterday by the Auditor General
of Canada, who stated that the territory's largest jail — Iqaluit's Baffin Correctional Centre — puts the
safety of security of inmates and staff at risk.
Okalik who also served as the justice minister while premier of Nunavut from 1999 to 2008, says that he
agreed with "a lot" of the auditor general's recommendations.
"A lot of them, we're doing now," he says, specifically referencing a recommended requirement for fire
exercises and noting that the government has implemented quarterly exercises since the auditor
general's last visit. "I think it's in line with what we're trying to accomplish, which is to ensure a safe and
secure environment for all involved, and make sure our facilities serve our purpose."
The report noted that the Nunavut government has been aware of the problems with Baffin Correctional
Centre without fixing them for almost 20 years, and that the government has spent hundreds of
thousands of dollars to study the issues. In 2009, Okalik moved a successful motion to scrap a request
for $300,000 to study a potential replacement for Baffin Correctional Centre. At the time, he stated that a
community learning centre was a higher priority.
"We were in process of opening two new facilities at the time," he says. "And I wanted to see more
progress being made on other fronts, like better programming.
"I was never opposed to a facility that would bring us up-to-date. I was opposed to another study, on a
study, on top of a study. I think we're past that point, and we're actually making progress.
I note your complaint about the judge involved in your case. As you may be aware, there are several safeguards in place to ensure that the Canadian judiciary remains fully independent from the executive and legislative branches of government. These include the judicial complaints and discipline process managed by the Canadian Judicial Council (CJC).
Actually what I noticed is that Justice John Little got free legal help while I got zero assistance and told I would have to pay for my own investigation. If that isn’t the very declination of ‘crooked’ nothing is. Not totally unexpected but it was still an avenue that had to be explored, same with my e-mail to your department and I have to say it fits the same format as the CJC and the Law Society.
The CJC is an independent body established by Parliament to deal with complaints regarding superior court judges. Pursuant to sections 63 69 of the Judges Act, it alone is tasked with investigating complaints about the conduct of federally appointed judges. In the ordinary course, it is expected that the CJC will consider and dispose of such complaints pursuant to their publicly established procedure, which includes an assessment of whether a matter warrants the establishment of a formal inquiry. As Minister of Justice, my involvement in complaints against members of the judiciary only begins once the CJC has determined that a matter is serious enough to warrant an inquiry.
My case was about exposure for 14 years and the amount claimed was in excess of $8M for the both of us. What would be considered to be ‘serious’ if that isn’t. Like I have mentioned it is a protection racket as can easily be determined by the text I got back from them which basically said I would never get a judgment against him, no matter what. That’s pretty clear to me
I recognize that you are dissatisfied with the CJC’s disposition of your complaint. However, to ensure respect for the fundamental principle of judicial independence, it would not be appropriate for me to intervene with the CJC on your behalf, nor, as a matter of law, would it be possible for me to do so.
What I am dissatisfied with is the protection slumlords are given when they are clearly in the wrong. That the CJC turned down my complaint is fully in line with what the Lawyers (for the insurance company) and the Judge were discussing ‘options’ when that avenue was closed to me.
While I note your concerns, I have every confidence in the CJC’s capacity to deal effectively and appropriately with all matters that fall within its statutory mandate.
Really?? I wopuld bet an independent investigation would show that most (if not all) complaints lodged by a member of the Public is rejected under the same theme. Lawyers for the crooked Judges and zero assistance for the ‘victim’
I regret that this office cannot help you in the way you had perhaps hoped, but I wish you well in resolving your concerns.
Somehow I don’t believe that and you are quite happy that another Judge justice. (the long delay in the reply certainly shows that it was very unimportant to you and your office,BTW when Queen’s Bench Judges are appointed by the Government that does not make them independent or impartial, it makes the Judges ‘one of the ‘employed’.
I still have a few options open
Respectfully,
The Honourable . . . . .
Gerr you have been quite vocal in the past about this topic so I'll let you in. The link below has two topics, Legal and Medical. In the legal folder are all the documents associated with a court case that was filed for an amount in excess of $8M due to the length of the exposure and the long term effects of said exposure. The Judicial Council folder is about Judge Little and his inability to rule on a Residential Tenants Act dispute being a Queen's Bench Judge rather than just a Provincial Judge. The Law Society folder is a complaint against the two Lawyers who were working for Wawanesa Insurance and it is missing the final letter.
The Medical folder has a complaint made to the College of Physicians and Surgeons about the lack of treatment following the known exposure. Alberta Health folder is about my health issues at the same time Dr. Henshaw was insisting no health effects would be had despite the length of the exposure. The last folder is from a clinic that covers my past to about 2008.
Should you want to donate some money to Chance send it as as e-transfer to chancemitchell@gmail.com. He actually needs prayers more but this would show you are at least human.
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B9c4rHMTN__CVUdZX2dfUkEyNkU
