Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site lsuc.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utcs!lsuc!dave
From: dave@lsuc.UUCP (David Sherman)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: Re: Zundel
Message-ID: <618@lsuc.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 31-Dec-69 18:59:59 EST
Article-I.D.: lsuc.618
Posted: Wed Dec 31 18:59:59 1969
Date-Received: Mon, 22-Apr-85 18:41:06 EST
References: <890@ubc-vision.CDN> <578@lsuc.UUCP> <1004@ubc-cs.UUCP> <2706@garfield.UUCP> <1008@ubc-cs.UUCP> <599@lsuc.UUCP> <1015@ubc-cs.UUCP>
Reply-To: dave@lsuc.UUCP (David Sherman)
Organization: Law Society of Upper Canada, Toronto
Lines: 25
Summary: shall we saw it off at 3/4 wrong?

In article <1015@ubc-cs.UUCP> robinson@ubc-cs.UUCP (Jim Robinson) writes:
||In article <599@lsuc.UUCP> dave@lsuc.UUCP (David Sherman) writes:
||>In article <1008@ubc-cs.UUCP> robinson@ubc-cs.UUCP (Jim Robinson) writes:
||>||I disagree. Section 281.2 of the criminal code ( wilfully 
||>||promoting hatred against an identifiable group ) is the law that
||>||is supposed to deal with hate literature. Section 177 was used 
||>||because it was thought to be easier to get a conviction with it.
||>
||>Wrong. S. 177 was used because s. 281.2 requires the consent of
||>the provincial Attorney-General before the charge can be laid,
||>and Mr. McMurtry refused to provide such consent.
||
||Only semi-wrong. Roy McMurty refused to provide consent because he did
||not think that the Crown could get a conviction using s. 281.2.

Yeah, but *nobody* thought a conviction under 177 would be easier.
It was because a prosecution under 281.2 was impossible (due to
the lack of A-G's consent) that Sabina Citron laid the charge under
s.177. If she'd been able to choose, she would have chosen 281.2
(and in fact tried for two years to get that charge laid by the
A-G's office).

Dave Sherman
-- 
{  ihnp4!utzoo  pesnta  utcs  hcr  decvax!utcsri  }  !lsuc!dave