Monday, September 21, 2015

J.P. vs. MCFD Trial Watch Day 24, November 1, 2013 - Gwen Rowley day 5 testimoney

MCFD Misfeasance lawsuit day 24
Courtroom 75, top floor, Justice Walker presiding
Detective Madam Rowley is FINALLY on cross examination by Mr. Hittrich

Starting at 12:00 noon today. This bacon frying event is likely to go on for the most of next week.

Rowley has previously been on the stand for 5 days giving direct testimony.

Rowley appears to be the lone individual that MCFD is relying on to save bacon in this lawsuit.

It may be my imagination, but it would appear that Ms. Rowley's demeanor is less "officious" and the volume of her voice is significantly lower. She is waffling on answers, repeatedly responding that she is "unclear" on exactly what Mr. Hittrich is asking. So, he offers her the chance to give her opinion, then he gets her to read relevant evidence.

For we the observers in the gallery that do not have the exhibits in front of us (we are now up to #144 as of today -- that last one being yet another 600 page 4" binder), it is most helpful that the lawyers are instructing witnesses to read relevant portions. Having this material inline within transcripts greatly assist future days of trial where those days are reviewed. Highly expensive though. Keep in mind each day of transcripts runs about $1,000 and they have to be rush ordered.

For the uninitiated, the MCFD defensive claim is that the police, VPD "independently" arrived at the exact same conclusion as our intrepid public servants such as Mr. Strickland (et al), that mom had mental health issues and was making up sexual abuse allegations against her ex. To boost the child removal impetus for MCFD, VPD Rowley states that in addition to serious mental health mom would flee the country and kill her kids. Gotta remove those kids; no choice, right?

So, right off the bat, even before Rowley gets the case file mid December 2009, we hear that MCFD Strickland meddles in this case with his two bit opinion.

(See Judge Walker's ruling regarding VPD at

To repeat, BEFORE MCFD's saviour, detective madam Rowley gets this file, social worker Team Leader Mr. Strickland, who is the high mucky-muck dude in the MCFD Vancouver office, tells another senior VPD officer (an senior commanding officer, I think) who took notes of his conversation, he is putting on the police record he believes mom has serious mental health concerns and is making up allegations of sexual abuse of her ex towards her four kids. MCFD decides this.

MCFD's level of expertise regarding child abuse investigations should be deferred to by VPD, right? Assigned significant weight? More than average credibility? Now is the passing the baton to see what criminal charges should be explored (just as long as it is not sexual abuse against children by pedo-dad).

So, the judge observes in 92 days of testimony, MCFD sabotages mom and influences the VPD investigation. VPD Rowley, in an effort to save MCFD (which, I conclude, must be a pre-emptive and necessary step of self-preservation which is necessary to avoid the inevitable lawsuit against VPD and the city of Vancouver), her position would be that "no, our 'collective' investigative efforts were completely independent of MCFD's. How preposterous MCFD would be accused of misfeasance."

Nice try VPD Rowley. Nice try MCFD Strickland et al.

So, how DO you prove that billions of public servants are lying and are all in cahoots to discredit mom? Apparently, with 130-plus days of trial and a Pitt-bull lawyer and a bottomless pit of money.

In what I am sure will be the most delightful smell of bacon emanating from courtroom 75 on the days that come, Mr. Hittrich will continue to cross examine Ms. sex crime chief investigator madam Rowley. We will, of course hearing about her response to the (probably unwarranted and overly harsh) criticism of her substandard "investigation" as found by Judge Walker and her senior investigative officer, Mr. Woods.

One has to wonder why MCFD goes out of their way to have their contract lawyers pay for and produce legal assistance for pedo-dad in their effort to help him win custody against his troublesome wife. In their collective zeal to fry this mom, it would appear their evil plans of uncounted dozens of public servants "may" have backfired.

MCFD is in effect, through the Crown, is conducting a appeal of Judge Walker's finding of facts, which I find a judicial break of due process. All these witnesses, including social workers and police were not called at the beginning to explain how they were right and everyone else is wrong (MCFD says: especially that lying mom and her easily coerced and probably-lying children).

Somehow, I don't think this case will be concluded by next Friday November 8th, 2013 as both counsel have previously estimated.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Comments are manually approved to eliminate spam and off topic discussions.