Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site mnetor.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utcs!mnetor!clewis
From: clewis@mnetor.UUCP (Chris Lewis)
Newsgroups: can.general,can.politics
Subject: Zundel etc.
Message-ID: <407@mnetor.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 10-Apr-85 17:39:12 EST
Article-I.D.: mnetor.407
Posted: Wed Apr 10 17:39:12 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 10-Apr-85 19:25:14 EST
Organization: Computer X (CANADA) Ltd., Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Lines: 24
Xref: utcs can.general:242 can.politics:362

Maybe a better way to deal with Zundels is to extend the libel
definition to include "groups" instead of just individuals.
Then, the onus would be on the Zundel to *prove* his assertions.
This is probably a lot easier on the courts (and us) than having 
to have the Crown prove that the Zundel knew it was false and
was doing it to incite hatred.  Then you can sue them into oblivion.
Also, presumably, you could also institute "court orders" on further
publication, and then criminal charges apply if he persists.
These probably would be nastier sentences too - contempt of court 
has a higher maximum penalty doesn't it?

The only problem is that this could cause millions of "harassment"
suits and bog the courts down completely.  That is, if they aren't
already.

I don't like 177, because it makes a complete zoo out of our courts and
I cannot possibly see how they can manage to successfully prosecute
under this law.  I am surprised (*and* pleased) that they actually 
managed to make the charge stick.  I do hope that they deport him.
God knows what will happen with the other one starting up now.
-- 
Chris Lewis, Computer X (CANADA) Ltd.
UUCP: {allegra, linus, ihnp4}!utzoo!mnetor!clewis
BELL: (416)-475-1300 ext. 321