People that burn my butt…

This morning, I drove down town for our bi-weekly chiropractor appointments.

As usual, I tried to find a parking space but found that the only free spaces were taken by taxicabs idling in front of the Public Library instead of in the taxi rank outside the Indigo Hotel where there is ample space.

No, firstly, they aren’t paying for the parking spot, which is illegal. Secondly, they are idling which isn’t just bad for the environment, here in Ottawa, it is against the law unless it is above a certain temperature or below a certain temperature. Thirdly, when it is suggested that they need to move their vehicles they either ignore you or are downright rude and refuse to move.

index_en-1

Often, as I am up in the Chiro office, I watch the cars parked along that section of Metcalfe Street and can see the same taxis parked for well over 20 minutes. Often, when I come down tot he car after my appointment, the same drivers are in the same spot or have merely moved up one spot when someone who had parked has moved their car. Often, they are out of their cars, chatting while their cars are idling.

There is no Earthly reason why I, who am willing to pay for parking, should be shouldered out by taxi drivers who DON’T pay for parking. Especially, when parking downtown is at a premium.

So… while I drove around the block for yet another time looking for a space (using yet more fuel and causing more pollution) I find myself behind a line of cars waiting for a woman to cross the street who is slowly ambling across yakking on her cellphone.

So I yelled at he “Get off you fucking phone and cross the street”. As I made my way down the street, she barreled up to the car and whacked my window. As “luck” would have it, after finally getting a taxi driver to move and park my car, who should wander up the street but the woman I yelled at. She called me “vicious” and said she felt “sorry” for my mother because I was so “rude”. She said she had some sort of “injury” which was why she was so slow crossing the street. I opined that if she has an “injury” she seemed to have recovered from it and didn’t seem to be having a problem when she ran up the street to whack on my window.

Fact. She was walking and talking on the cellphone and was too preoccupied with that to know just how slowly she was walking and was oblivious to the fact that she was holding up traffic while she carried on a conversation. Not only is it silly and vain to walk on the street carrying on a conversation on your phone, it is dangerous. End of story.

daln247l

Regarding the taxis idling, I emailed the taxi company and Cc;d the city bylaw enforcement and the mayor, attaching the relevant City bylaws. So there… Pttthhhhttt….

UPDATE!

I received this response from Christine Vonk at Blue Line, the main culprit in this…

“I have forwarded your e mail to managers and they will ensure that messages are sent out to all drivers regarding this issue—I am sure this will be dealt with asap—thank you for your concerns!”

Advertisements

The Truscott Hearings

“Steven Truscott became Canada’s youngest death-row inmate in 1959 when he was sentenced to be hanged at age 14 for the murder of Lynn Harper. His case is one of the most famous and controversial in Canadian judicial history. Truscott’s long fight to clear his name resumed in an Ontario courtroom Jan. 31 2007, and cameras have been allowed to show the proceedings.”

The current hearing before the Ontario Court of Appeal are an historic event. Firstly, due to their being televised live (and “on demand”) and online. Secondly, because the Truscott case is one of the most controversial cases in Canadian legal history.

In 1959, Steven Truscott, then aged 14, was accused and convicted for the rape and murder of 12-year old Lynn Harper. He was sentenced to hang but the sentence was commuted to life imprisonment. In 1969, Steven Truscott was released on parole. In 1966, an appeal before the Supreme Court of Canada. The Supreme Court upheld the verdict of the jury.

It became clear over the eyars that a significant amount of evidence was not revealed to the Defense Council and that this evidence was also not seen or allowed to be entered in evidence to the Supreme Court during the appeal. Also, in the intervening years, new information, as well as credible information about other suspects had come to the attention of the OPP in the day was ignored, suppressed and not followed up.

In the day, the court case against Steven Truscott was conducted in 15 days, an incredibly short time considering the very confusing, detailed and contradictory evidence before the court.

The current case appeals the case on the basis of lack of disclosure of evidence to Defense Council, as well as the very credible information which might have provided substantial doubt as to the guilt of Steven Truscott, had it been followed up or, indeed been provided to the Defense Council.

The Truscott Hearings

“Steven Truscott became Canada’s youngest death-row inmate in 1959 when he was sentenced to be hanged at age 14 for the murder of Lynn Harper. His case is one of the most famous and controversial in Canadian judicial history. Truscott’s long fight to clear his name resumed in an Ontario courtroom Jan. 31 2007, and cameras have been allowed to show the proceedings.”

The current hearing before the Ontario Court of Appeal are an historic event. Firstly, due to their being televised live (and “on demand”) and online. Secondly, because the Truscott case is one of the most controversial cases in Canadian legal history.

In 1959, Steven Truscott, then aged 14, was accused and convicted for the rape and murder of 12-year old Lynn Harper. He was sentenced to hang but the sentence was commuted to life imprisonment. In 1969, Steven Truscott was released on parole. In 1966, an appeal before the Supreme Court of Canada. The Supreme Court upheld the verdict of the jury.

It became clear over the eyars that a significant amount of evidence was not revealed to the Defense Council and that this evidence was also not seen or allowed to be entered in evidence to the Supreme Court during the appeal. Also, in the intervening years, new information, as well as credible information about other suspects had come to the attention of the OPP in the day was ignored, suppressed and not followed up.

In the day, the court case against Steven Truscott was conducted in 15 days, an incredibly short time considering the very confusing, detailed and contradictory evidence before the court.

The current case appeals the case on the basis of lack of disclosure of evidence to Defense Council, as well as the very credible information which might have provided substantial doubt as to the guilt of Steven Truscott, had it been followed up or, indeed been provided to the Defense Council.

%d bloggers like this: