PROCLAMATION
Restorative
Justice Week
WHEREAS,
in the face of crime or conflict, restorative justice offers
a
philosophy
and approach that views these matters principally as harm done
to
people
and relationships; and
WHEREAS,
restorative justice approaches strive to provide support
and
opportunities
for the voluntary participation and communication between
those
affected
by crime and conflict (victims, offenders, community) to
encourage
accountability,
reparation and a movement towards understanding, feelings
of
satisfaction,
healing and a sense of closure; and
WHEREAS,
this year’s theme for Restorative Justice Week is “Reflexions
Past,
Present
and Future”, and it is an opportunity to learn about restorative
justice,
educate
and celebrate along with other communities across the country during
the
week.
THEREFORE
BE IT RESOLVED THAT, on
behalf of the Members of
Council
of the Corporation of the Town of Aurora, I, Mayor Phyllis Morris,
do
hereby
proclaim November
14th
–
November 21st,
2010 as
“Restorative
Justice
Week”
in
the Town of Aurora.
Dated
at the Town of Aurora
this
18th
day
of October, 2010.
Phyllis
M. Morris
Mayor
***************
The above was forwarded this morning. Note the date.
It was signed ten days after the SLAPP action commenced with public resources against political critics.
.
Posts
20 comments:
Oddly enough, I was thinking of that when someone put a comment on the Citizen claiming that Morris & Co. make a " mistake ". Lovely reminder of the past. This will be the 3rd year when kids can turn up at the door wearing necklaces made of coloured paper & claiming to be Morris. Restorative Justice. Hooey!
SO WHAT IS NEW?
THE HEIGHT OF BLATANT HYPOCRISY RAN RAMPANT.
THE SLAPP LITIGATION SIMPLY CONFIRMS HER STATE OF MIND, WHICH HAS ALWAYS BEEN HOLLOW.
WAS SHE MOTIVATED BY LEARNING THE IDENTITY OF THE ANONYMOUS BLOGGERS, OR RATHER, BY A HUGE PAYDAY?
AT ONE POINT SHE WAS SHOPPING FOR A YACHT AND A PLACE TO TIE IT TO.
SO YOU, DEAR READER, MAY CHOOSE.
AND HER STATE OF MIND IS STILL HOLLOW!
AND STILL A HYPOCRITE!
Ha! The irony of this is just too perfect!
Morris launched her publicly funded private lawsuit with no warning and she made no attempt to implement "restorative justice" as far as I know. I wonder why she was advising others to use this process if it wasn't good enough for her ?
Maybe she can explain all of this on her blog if she doesn't want to comment here.
See what happens when an individual takes one law course and believes it contains all the law needed. When Morris was still pontificating early in her suit, she angrily declared that she KNEW when a SLAPP lawsuit meant and that hers definitely was not one of them. It might even have been printed in the Auroran.
She doesn't have much to say for herself now.
There are still two more lawsuits where restorative justice could be used if the parties were willing and able !
Not that there will ever likely be any attempt to resolved these cases through mediation, but if that did ever happen I would love to be a fly on the wall.
Me. I have never understood why she was seeking 6 million dollars from Aurora residents in the first place. The language on the Citizen was certainly colourful. But what was said about her was also true.
3:54 PM
I think in some cases, mediation is a necessary step before a trial. Obviously that is not the case with the Conflict of Interest because it went straight to the Judge in Newmarket. Maybe because it was Municipal Law. Whatever. I'm damn sure that the Master's ruling will be included up there.
We are all glad and grateful that she is no longer our mayor. Now, it would be a whole lot better if some people would stop carrying on as if she still was.
4:35 PM She is free to go as soon as she ceases to drain resources from Aurora's bank account. The call is hers to make.
Pitiful , absolutely Pitiful
3:08 PM
The only response from Morris about motivation has been " No Comment " except on the one occasion when she told the Banner about " bearing the Town's burden " There has been nothing about ' restorative justice '.
Could we be quite clear here? There are still 3 lawsuits waiting to be settled.
Totally Off Topic
Someone wrote here in the past few days that he/she was afraid to comment because of our language police. That is not right. We have only one critic who nit-picks each remark. We simply ignore the nasty piece of work because we all goof. Including the dung beetle itself. Please continue to write your comments. There are no marks handed out on Evelyn's Blog for spelling or grammar. O.K ?
York Region [ Sean P } and the Star have articles up.
Thank you.
To 6:51
Question: "Could we be quite clear here? There are still 3 lawsuits waiting to be settled."
There are just two more lawsuits that I am aware of.
Morris’ lawyer is stating her case in the Newmarket Courthouse on November 2nd regarding the Municipal Conflict of Interest charges brought against her by George Hervey.
On August 17th Hervey’s lawyer laid out a compelling case that pointed out the Morris not only attended, but participated in a closed meeting in which the matter of launching a town funded lawsuit in her name or someone else’s name was discussed. The rules of procedure clearly state that if an elected official has a financial interest in a matter then they should not attend the closed meeting, let alone discuss the matter with those people deciding the issue. As far as I know, no conflict was ever declared by Morris however the minutes of the meeting were later revised to reflect that Morris left the closed meeting one minute before it ended. That later revision has always struck me as curious. Why was it done and who asked for it to be done ?
Morris’ lawyer has only stated so far that he feels the case against Morris should fail because the charges were not brought forward soon enough. The rest of Morris’ defence will be presented on November 2nd. At this stage it looks like Morris’ supporters on the former council all signed a virtually identical affidavit that seems to differ from what was said by the Town Clerk and the CAO. This is yet another interesting aspect of the case. As I recall, Councillors Gallo and Gaertner said in the media in 2010 that they had no idea that the vaguely worded motion that Council passed and Morris subsequently used to access town funds, would be used for litigation. It’s my understanding that the town staff said on the other hand that this issue of launching town funded litigation was discussed at length in the closed meeting which Morris attended, but further clarification may be required here. I can’t imagine that elected officials who claim to be the standard bearers of integrity would try and mislead the public. There must be an explanation to explain the apparent disconnect.
The second case was brought forward by Councillor Buck as a result of the former council using town resources to pursue her in a number of different ways. I am not sure if discoveries for the defence have occurred yet but I do know there appeared to be a long delay of over a year for some unknown reason. Again, I’m confused as to how people who claim to believe in open and transparent government can be so slow to respond to serious allegations. I have no idea where this case now stands.
Only time will tell how this will all turn out but these cases should both be over just in time for the next election.
10:15 AM
The SLAPP lawsuit has not been completed. There are outstanding issues which may/may not require further court activity. Certainly more expense.
I believe Morris' lawyer has been blind-sided by the SLAPP ruling by Master Hawkins. That was supposed to be a hearing about costs. He likely didn't see it coming.
The SLAPP verdict can be used in both other cases as it reflects the thinking of the individuals involved. The lawyers just have to work it into their presentation.
Post a Comment