The other day I sent an email to the Attorney General in regards to who is responsible for the security at the Sopinka Court House here in Hamilton.
I was pretty sure that it was Hamilton Police Services who were responsible and again I sent in a complaint already to them and their response was less than satisfying nor would it be what would be considered in the best interest of the public at large to just refuse to investigate my allegations but that is par for the course when it comes to Hamilton Police Services investigating their own.

Now if you have read my blog post titled Hamilton Willing participant in Obstruction of Justice you will have noticed that it is a right of parties acting in person to be able to record the proceedings to supplement their notes and to help them prepare for their next court appearance. You will also be aware that on October 8, 2010 this section of the Courts of Justice Act and the Howland Directive on this section are still in force and effect. There is also the Cunningam decision which found that cell phones blackberries etc are to be permitted in the court rooms as well. So a very good question is why would Hamilton Police Services break the rule of law and as well ignore the Howland directive and as well permit every single person entering that court house the ability to carry their cell phones and blackberries into the courts all of which have the ability to record both sound and video and yet deny me access to the courts because I was going to invoke my rights under section 136(2) of the Courts of Justice Act?

Here is the Response from the Attorney General and remember that pursuant to section 5(c) the Attorney General is to superintend all matters of justice.

M10-08413: Dan Perrins
...
From:
"DSouza, Suman (JUS)"
...
Add to Contacts
To: XXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Dear Mr. Perrins:



Thank you for your e-mail dated November 18, 2010, addressed to the Honourable Chris Bentley, Attorney General, regarding the special constables at the courthouse in Hamilton . As Hamilton courts fall under the jurisdiction of Central West Region, your e-mail has been forwarded to me for response.



In Ontario , the delivery and administration of court security services, and the determination of the appropriate level of security required in a courthouse, is the responsibility of local municipal police services as per the legislated requirements of the Police Services Act. In Hamilton , the Hamilton Police Service is the party responsible for court security for all courthouses within their jurisdiction.

Questions about court security should be directed to the Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services or the local municipal police service for the jurisdiction in which the courthouse resides. In Hamilton , you can write to Chief Glenn De Caire, Hamilton Police Services, at 155 King William Street, Box 1060, LCD1 Hamilton, ON L8N 4C1.



I hope the information provided is helpful to you. Once again, thank you for writing.



Yours truly,

Suman D'Souza

A/Issues Management Officer

Court Services Division - Central West Region

Ministry of the Attorney General

See now here is the real problem everyone else going to court on those days all kept their cell phones blackberries and such with them and again I point out ALL THESE DEVICES ARE CAPABLE OF RECORDING VIDEO AND AUDIO RECORDINGS. Why was I stopped held hostage and as well had legal books and documents held hostage when I was before the Courts and expected to make legal submissions and or arguments?
Why are Hamilton Police Services so hell bent on keeping the cards stacked against me in my matters?
Also of importance to the community at large this section 136(2) also gives reporters the right to record proceedings so as to supplement their notes as well. I guess what goes on in the courts needs to be hushed up and kept secret?
More to follow
Dan