"Investigators at the Canadian Human Rights Commission share control of an online identity called Jadewarr, which they have used to anonymously monitor and contribute to controversial far-right and white supremacist Web sites, in a strategy that a prominent defendant calls entrapment.
The admission came in testimony Tuesday at the final day of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal's hearing in the case of Marc Lemire, who is charged with violating the Human Rights Act's controversial hate speech section because of comments posted on his FreedomSite.
Legally, the admission by CHRC investigator Dean Steacy, and the subsequent cross-examination by Mr. Lemire's lawyers, was the most significant part of the day, in that it bolstered Mr. Lemire's case that he should not be held accountable for what others post on his site, especially if those others are government employees."
"There were moments of drama, such as when Mr. Steacy bluntly and repeatedly refused to answer a question (he was asked for the identity of an anonymous complainant, who never filed a formal complaint), to the evident shock of Athanasios Hadjis, the one-man tribunal hearing the case.
'You refuse to answer?' he said twice."
and (time to investigate themselves!):
"Mr. Steacy himself raised the strange hypothetical scenario of an investigator being charged for online writing that, in the words of section 13.1, is 'likely to expose a person or persons to hatred or contempt.'
'My understanding of the legislation is there's not an exemption for anybody, so that would have to apply to investigators. If an investigator posted hate, then a complaint could be brought against them,' he said."
and (wow!; note how the worst newspaper in the world tries to use this outrage by the Commission to slur the victims of the Commission):
But, for skeptics of human rights commissions, the coup de grace came when the Tribunal wrongly outed an innocent person as a Commission operative, thus exposing her to the unwanted attention of the vast army of bloggers who support Mr. Lemire, or at least do not support the Canadian Human Rights Commission.
For a government agency that has fought for months to protect the personal security of their own staff, even going so far as to (unsuccessfully) invoke national security to keep them off the witness stand, their handling of the 'Nellie Hechme' question was shocking.
. . .
Once Mr. Hadjis explicitly ordered him to do so, Mr. Monfette reported that Bell's technical staff learned that whoever logged on as Jadewarr that day in 2006 had accessed the Internet through a Bell account controlled by Nellie Hechme. He gave the phone number and the street address of the apartment where the account was registered.
By the morning coffee break, associates of Mr. Lemire had already tracked down the value of Ms. Hechme's apartment, but not her identity. By the end of the day, the Commission's lawyer Margot Blight said that Ms. Hechme is a mystery to everyone involved, including Mr. Lemire's team.
Reached by phone last night, Ms. Hechme, 26, told the National Post she has no connection to the tribunal, has never known any of the investigators, and has never accessed a Web site as Jadewarr. She said that in the relevant period in 2006 she did have a Bell Sympatico account with a wireless connection that was not password controlled, meaning anyone within range of her apartment could have accessed the internet with it."
It appears that the Commission may have effectively stolen somebody's identity in order to hide what they were up to!
Mr. Lemire's live blogging of the hearing is here and here and here and here and here.
It's a given that Mr Lemire must be acquitted, as he can hardly be held responsible for the wrongful acts of the investigators. We can also go further, and note that every single prosecution by the Commission that involves alleged hate on the internet also has to be voided, as it is impossible to know whether the 'hate' was the work of the accused or some government employee (we can hardly now rely on the employees themselves to tell us they had nothing to do with it). Finally, all the staff of the Commission have to be subject to their own hate crime investigations, which cannot be held by the Commission itself (for obvious reasons). Perhaps the government could appoint a special judge to investigate and prosecute.
You can see know why the Commission wanted this hearing to be private, and why the lawyers for free speech had to force the testimony out of the witness.
We can't forget that the only reason this has turned into a big media circus is because Canadian Muslim groups had the audacity to turn hate crime legislation, traditionally used to promote the idea of Jews as victims, against the Jewish-led international campaign of hatred against Muslims. Canadian human rights law has to be dismantled so Bibi Natanyahu's 'war on terror' can continue to provide the propaganda basis for Israeli colonialism.