Tuesday, September 16, 2008

The LEMIRE Defence Starts. Barbara Kulaszka Hammers the CHRC

OAKVILLE, September 16, 2008. The case for the defence in the Marc Lemire Internet case opened this morning.


            A website named JRBooksonline has been laid at Marc Lemire’s doorstep. The prosecution alleges he owns or controls it. Mr.Lemire helped a U.S. citizen register this revisionist book seller outlet in 2000. “There is no prima facie evidence that Mr. Lemire ever owned or controlled this site,” Miss Kulaszka argued.


            “Marc Lemire has a persona on his website. He uses his real name and photograph there and on STORMFRONT.. He uses his real name and a real e-mail address. However owns JRBooksonline does not do so. It is a different website in its look and feel and from a techie point of view it’s very primitive in comparison to the Freedomsite, as expert witness Bernard Klatt testified. It’s an old fashioned site selling historical books, like The International Jew, while the Freedomsite is a young person’s site in looks and content,” Miss Kulaszka argued.


            “Mr. Klatt testified that all a ‘Whois’ search proves is that a domain name is or is not available. There’s a disclaimer on a Whois search that they can’t guarantee the accuracy of the results. You can put any name in to register a domain.


            When informed of the registration of JRBooksonline, Mr. Lemire informed the Commission that he had complained to ICAN, the organization that deals with registration complaints in Canada.”When Hannya Risk, who was the investigator, should have gone to ICAN and seen that the registration had changed and been corrected.


            “The complainant had notice as of June, 2005 that the registration of JRBooksonline had changed and Marc Lemire was no longer registered as the owner,” Miss Kulaszka explained.


            “If this is remedial legislation, why would you drag a respondent through five years of proceedings, if he denies ownership but not contact ICAN to find out why and how the registration had changed?” Miss Kulaszka argued.


            “Investigator Hannya Risk was asked by Mr. Warman not to mention her search into JRBooksonline to Mr. Lemire as Mr. Warman was going to complain about JRBooksonline to the police. He did. Hannya Risk said she regretted this. Mr. Warman trained Hannya Risk. She testified that was not his job and Harvey Goldberg and Dean Steacy said they were very surprised at this. Mr. Warman trained Ms Risk in the investigative techniques she was to use. He has entirely corrupted the process,” Miss Kulaszka charged.


            Ms Kulaszka said in no other case was ownership attributed to a respondent solely on the basis of a WHOIS search. Referring to a dramatic moment in the hearings, Miss Kulazska referred to a WHOIS search showing Mr. Warman was the owner and technical contact for a website called “Ihatethehaters.com.’ The address was obviously phony and inaccurate as was a registration for ‘warmanbooksonline.’ Mr. Warman couldn’t explain how this could have happened. He does not understand how a WHOIS search works.”


            “It is very important for this Tribunal to find that a WHOIS search proves nothing more than that he domain name is taken and they provide no guarantees as to the accuracy of the registration information,” she argued.


            “Without further corroborative evidence tying Mr. Lemire to this website you should not find him responsible for communicating anything on it. No prima facie case has been made and, therefore, he has no case to answer,” Miss Kulazska submitted.


            The immigrant poem (an old water cooler joke that is at least 20 yeas old)  was downloaded by Mr. Warman  the same day it was posted, she explained. “Ms Risk testified Mr. Warman first told her of the immigrant poem in a letter in June, 2004. In January, 2004, before he even knows of Mr. Warman’s complaint, Mr. Lemire has removed the message board. Ms Risk in February, 2004 tries to access it and cannot. This was not disclosed to Mr. Lemire until Ms Risk testified in May, 2007. The Commission must now have been in a panic. Mr. Warman prints of the immigrant poem in February, 2004, buyt does not show it to Ms Risk until June, 2004, but Mr. Lemire is not informed of this further allegation, but is not told until June, 2005. He is never given a chance to respond. Ms Risk testifed she went on to STORMFRONT but could not find the poem. I asked her why she had included the poemn in the report and she said: ‘To show what Mr. Warman had given me.’”


            “This shows what seems to be the undue influence Mr. Warman had over Ms Risk,” Miss Kulazska charged. “Mr. Klatt did a diligent search of STORMFRONT’s datwa base and could not find the poem. There is no proof the poem was ever there. Mr. Warman’s credibility is sadly lacking.”


            “I asked Mr. Warman why he used the cloak and he said he couldn’t remember. Even the url doesn’t show it comes from STORMFRONT. My submission is that you should not find that this peom was ever posted by Mr, Lemire,” Ms Kulazska submitted.


            “Taylor requires not just one message but a series of messages. They were concerned not wiht how many people were accessing the messages but that there was a series of such messages. This showed intent,” Miss Kulaszka argued.


            “Mr. Klatt testifed that he’d done a web search of ‘The Immigrant Poem’ and found it on such maintsream websites as ‘Discover Vancouver’ and Country Living. Ordinary Canadians find it a humorous poem. Mr. Warman argues that the Freedomsite is not about puppy dogs and it is ‘neo-Nazi.’ Immigration policy is set by the government of Canada and is subject to criticism,’ she explained.


            Evidence shows that, at the time in question, Mr. Lemire had 409 postings on STORMFRONT, Yet, Mr. Warman could only find one that allegedly comes under Saec. 13 asnd it’s a poem that you can find on ‘Discover Vancouver.’ Now, Mr. Warman’s multiple messages on STORMFRONT ands VNN were found to constitute ‘hate messaging’ within the Act, but the comoplaint was dismissed as vexatiojus,” she argued.

“I’m asking that, inb regards to this poem, that his complaint be dismissed. It has not been proven on a balance of probabilities tha it was posted by Mr. Lemire. It doesn’t meet

PAYPAL: Donate now to help the Marc Lemire Constitutional Appeal

We desperately need your support to cover the legal bills and costs associated with this challenge of Internet Censorship