Over the weekend, Graham James’ mug shot emerged from Stony Mountain Institution, a federal penitentiary in Manitoba. James was sentenced to two years in prison last week for sexually abusing two former hockey players he had coached. James looks dramatically different from his days behind the bench. On his way in and out of the courthouse in Winnipeg for both the sentencing submissions and decisions, James had kept his face hidden from media cameras. His lawyer claims James as been the subject of numerous threats and has ongoing concern for his safety.
The Winnipeg Free Press reports that prison photos are not normally released to the public unless police are searching for a wanted fugitive or issuing a community warning about a convicted offender who is about to be released. James is expected to be transferred to a minimum-security institution in the coming months and will be eligible for day parole in September and full parole in November, when he has served one-third of his sentence.
Today, CBC News reported that Stony Mountain is investigating the photo’s emergence. A spokesperson said the release of the photo was in violation of the penitentiary’s policy and legislation and whoever leaked it could face disciplinary action.
Yesterday evening I posted about one U.S. Senator’s response to the issue of employers asking job applicants for their Facebook usernames and passwords. Today, Facebook has responded, with Chief Privacy Officer Erin Egan warning that employers who solicit Facebook passwords could open themselves up to legal action. Coverage can be found on the Globe and Mail online here, and the ACLU has a new posting here.
The ACLU’s update also contains more examples of employers that have asked for this information. They also applaud Facebook for taking this matter seriously, and hope that Congress takes notice. The Globe and Mail’s coverage contains an interesting remark from internet-privacy specialist Lori Andrews, who is a law professor at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. She raises the point that even asking for applicants to volunteer the information is coercive, as there is a large amount of pressure on people who are seeking employment to land the job.
Read the rest of this entry »
Over the past week the ACLU has been following a growing news story in the U.S. surrounding employers purportedly asking job applicants for their Facebook usernames and passwords. The story has been discussed at length here in Canada too, with many social-media users upset by the idea. In their most recent update, the ALCU reports that in response to widespread objections, Senator Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut has announced that he plans to table a federal bill to ban the practice altogether.
Read the rest of this entry »
In the wake of the St. Patrick’s Day riots which occurred on Fleming Drive in London, Ontario last Saturday, the London City Council has passed a strengthened by-law, based on an existent nuisance by-law, that would enable to the police to break up a party “before it gets out of control.” The hope is that such a by-law will allow the police to prevent circumstances from occurring that might escalate into a dangerous situation such as another riot.
The law, however, would extend not only to public property, but to parties on private property as well. If certainly types of behaviour are present at the party, such as fighting or loud music, the police would have the right to force those not living on the property to leave. This presents a potential threat to the civil liberties of those enjoying a social party, on their private premises, in that their right to such a private social gathering will be disallowed if the police deem it to be too boisterous.
A Windsor woman claims female U.S. border agents at the customs checkpoint groped her. The 33-year-old, by the name of Leslie Ingratta, filed a claim in a U.S. District Court in Michigan. She said the sexual grouping was humiliating. She and two other Canadian women are suing the female U.S. border guards at the Detroit border crossing.
The allegations stated in the statement of claim have not been proven in court. According to the statement of claim, Ingratta stated she was subjected to “an invasive personal search by two female border guards who fondled her breasts and buttocks and stroked her groin”. After the incident, Ingratta stated one of the officers asked her if she was on a “booty call”.
Ingratta said she was let go after being searched and questioned by agents for two hours. All three women allege that they were unreasonably and improperly searched at the border in violation of the fourth amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Ingratta’s claim states that the search was contrary to standard Customs and Border Protection procedure.
Ingratta is seeking compensatory and punitive damage. Her Michigan based lawyer, Tom Wienner, has requested tapes from the waiting room. Ingratta states that she wants “people to know there was no reason for it”.
Read the full article here.
Legislation has been introduced for full body scanners to be used in Australian airports. Unlike in the US and Europe, there will be no opt outs available. The scan is basically like a “digital strip search”. Civil Liberties Austrailia states that passengers should be able to request a pat-down instead. This option is available in the US. These scans are a major violation of civil rights and privacy and are not proven to guarantee the protection that is argued to be necessary by the governments implementing them. There was evidence that a handgun was smuggled through a full body scanner without detection. Are the machine worth the money and invasion of privacy? This is not a question that can be easily answered.
Article
On behalf of the Financial Post, Toronto-based Social Media Group Inc. has conducted an analysis of all mentions on Twitter of Bill C-30, also known as the Protecting Children from Internet Predators Act. The bill would enable a vast expansion of police powers over internet surveillance, and has been heavily criticized since it was tabled on Valentine’s Day just under a month ago. The study analyzed the 2,226 mentions of the Act that were tweeted out during the month of February, with 79% of all mentions demonstrating a “clear negative sentiment.” The article about the study in the Financial Post can be viewed online here.
Read the rest of this entry »
As reported by the Winnipeg Free Press, Justice Saull of the Manitoba Court of Queen’s Bench granted a request from the Conservative MP for Provencher that will allow Toews access to the requisitions filled out by those who asked to see his divorce file. Details from the affidavits filed in Toews’ divorce were shared on twitter through the account @Vikileaks30 last month.
The court registrar had denied Toews’ lawyers access to the names, concerned the file requisitions fell under privacy legislation. However, Justice Saull found them not to be private documents and is reported as saying, “As such they should be produced to the applicant who clearly in this case has a vital interest in knowing who accessed his personal affairs”.
The @Vikileaks twitter account was created in the wake of controversy caused after the introduction of Bill C-30, the internet surveillance bill, and a comment made by Toews in the House of Commons that an opponent could either “stand with us or with the child pornographers”. Toews subsequently made it known that he felt threatened and had contacted police after attacks which he felt posed a threat to the safety of his family.
Find the full story here.
L’affaire R c. D.C. a été entendue devant la Cour suprême le 8 février dernier.
Essentiellement dans l’affaire R. c. D.C., la Cour d’appel a acquitté une dame reconnue coupable en première instance d’agression sexuelle et de voies de faits graves pour avoir eu une relation sexuelle non protégée alors qu’elle n’avait pas divulgué son statut sérologique à son partenaire. Elle avait au moment des faits une charge virale indétectable et le partenaire n’a pas contracté le virus.
La Cour d’appel a indiqué que les faits ne permettaient pas de conclure à la responsabilité criminelle de Mme D.C. puisqu’elle n’avait eu qu’une seule relation sexuelle sans condom et qu’elle avait justement à ce moment accès à un traitement rendant sa charge virale indétectable. Selon la preuve, la chance de contracter la maladie lorsque la charge virale est indétectable chez une femme est de 1 sur 50 000, alors que pour pouvoir conclure à la responsabilité criminelle d’une personne atteinte du VIH/sida la non-divulgation de la maladie doit mener à un «risque important de préjudice grave», critère qui n’était pas atteint selon la Cour d’appel.
En plus de limiter la criminalisation des personnes atteintes du VIH/sida, le fait de pouvoir taire sa séropositivité lorsque le risque de transmission est presque impossible constituerait-il un pas de plus vers une meilleure protection du droit à la vie privée des personnes atteintes du VIH/sida?
Pour lire l’article de la COCQ-SIDA sur le sujet cliquez ici.
Pour lire le jugement de la Cour d’appel cliquez ici.
