Ontario Senator and pastor fucked 16 yo girl...isn't it sexual assault?
- Thread starter Flatulent Fox
- Start date
- Status
HAHA is this a comedy skit. Meredith's lawyer (cough and barf) is a BIGGEST JOKE EVER. What gutter that this scum crawled out from? Same one as Meredith's. The BS coming out of his puke mouth is complete crap! BS excuses, excuses, excuses and more BS. Shouldn't be practicing law Jerk Pieters!!
Meredith's a complete big disgrace, liar and a predator. Resign dirt bag. Race card? Is this why he hires a black lawyer (again barf)? More endless BS Meredith! Resign from your cozy job. Along with resigning, Meredith should also be charged and sent to jail.
Preach!
It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
If the Senate keeps him, conservative Christian voters will freak out.
If the PAOC keeps him, the conservative Christians and most Pentecostal voters will freak out.
If black lawyers, politicians and activists endorse him, the black conservative Christian voters and other black activists will freak out.
If any person or organization endorses his sexual relationship with a teen, everybody with any common sense voters will freak out, and a black Pastor who is also a Senator will become a poster boy for pedophiles.
That's my 5 cents.
There are two issues to consider here:
First of all, was a crime committed? In terms of rape or statutory rape, the answer may not be available to us. Unless we are legal experts in the field and have all the details we may not know the legal answer to this question. However, there is another potential crime and that is in the sexual harassment family. Is a church pastor in a position of authority or influence? Are they granted a level of trust and respect which enables them to influence their congregants? Are the congregants (especially the younger and more impressionable ones) expected to obey and be influenced by the pastors? If any of this is true, there could potentially be a violation of the law when a pastor engages in a questionable relationship with a less empowered congregant. The courts would need to decide but there should be an investigation here.
Secondly, there is the moral and ethical issue. Because the accused is a Senator and part of this nation's government, it is important not only that he be innocent of any major crime but also that he demonstrate appropriate behaviour. As a Senator he can serve as a role model and an influence to the public so there's an obligation to behave well, not just to skate in under the legal line. Additionally, as a member of government he is in a position of power and influence. Canadian Senators are not massively mighty but they are still entrusted with responsibility and money. If, as a pastor, he clearly abused his position of responsibility, do we, as Canadians, deserve to have him in our government? We have a right to expect our leaders to be highly moral, not just barely legal.
First of all, was a crime committed? In terms of rape or statutory rape, the answer may not be available to us. Unless we are legal experts in the field and have all the details we may not know the legal answer to this question. However, there is another potential crime and that is in the sexual harassment family. Is a church pastor in a position of authority or influence? Are they granted a level of trust and respect which enables them to influence their congregants? Are the congregants (especially the younger and more impressionable ones) expected to obey and be influenced by the pastors? If any of this is true, there could potentially be a violation of the law when a pastor engages in a questionable relationship with a less empowered congregant. The courts would need to decide but there should be an investigation here.
Secondly, there is the moral and ethical issue. Because the accused is a Senator and part of this nation's government, it is important not only that he be innocent of any major crime but also that he demonstrate appropriate behaviour. As a Senator he can serve as a role model and an influence to the public so there's an obligation to behave well, not just to skate in under the legal line. Additionally, as a member of government he is in a position of power and influence. Canadian Senators are not massively mighty but they are still entrusted with responsibility and money. If, as a pastor, he clearly abused his position of responsibility, do we, as Canadians, deserve to have him in our government? We have a right to expect our leaders to be highly moral, not just barely legal.
Wow just wow. I'm sure not much time is spent on this in seminary either Jewish or mainstream Christian, but talk about 'how many angels can dance on the head of a pin,' or perhaps former President Clinton and his definition of sex.
Last edited:
Dawnlee, I was wondering the same thing but wasn't sure with the facts.
Might be simply bad optics due to the age difference and the position of authority he has, whether pastor or senator.
Who was the complainant? Or did a political foe out him?
Also, are Catholic schools still publicly funded? If so, end the madness already.
A very wise move on his part imo.
Lawyer for Don Meredith no longer representing embattled senator
Selwyn Pieters tweeted on Monday that he was no longer representing Meredith, who is now on sick leave from the Senate and facing calls to resign over his relationship with a teenage girl.
OTTAWA—Don Meredith’s lawyer says he no longer represents the embattled senator, one day after arguing on TV that the Pentecostal pastor is the victim of a “lynch mob mentality” and wouldn’t be treated so harshly if he were part of an “old white boys club.”
Selwyn Pieters wrote on Twitter on Monday evening that Meredith’s move to hire a new lawyer was made with his “blessing,” though it is unclear whether he was fired or quit.
He didn’t respond to multiple requests for comment from the Star on Monday.
https://www.thestar.com/news/canada...eredith-sex-scandal-could-loom-for-weeks.html
Anyone but me find it unsettling that so much official business is conducted by tweet on Twitter?
Kudos to Mr. Peters. Guys like Meredith should man up and stop playing the race card. What he did is morally indefensible and unacceptable in a civilized society.
BTW: Funding Catholic schools is a condition of bringing Quebec into confederation. It is virtually, if not actually, constitutional. Can anyone imagine a Canada without Quebec?
Senate ethics committee to review Don Meredith's case today as suspension looms
Toronto-area senator could be suspended for his sexual relationship with a teenage girl
By John Paul Tasker, CBC News Posted: Mar 22, 2017 5:00 AM ET Last Updated: Mar 22, 2017 5:08 AM ET
Members of the Senate's ethics committee will review the case of embattled Senator Don Meredith today and begin the process of formally sanctioning the Toronto-area senator for his relationship with a teenage girl.
Committee members will meet behind closed doors at 3 p.m. to study the Senate ethics officer's report, which was compiled after a two-year investigation into Meredith's sexual relationship with a young woman he first met at an Ottawa church when she was just 16.
Meredith, a 52-year-old Pentecostal pastor, was appointed as a Conservative senator by former prime minister Stephen Harper in 2010 before becoming a member of the Independent Senators Group (ISG). He denies many of the allegations levelled against him by the woman in question — who is identified by Lyse Ricard, the ethics officer, as "Ms. M" in the report — but has said he had sexual intercourse with her on at least one occasion when she was over 18.
Ricard found that Meredith violated two sections of the code of ethics, namely that the he did not uphold the highest standards of dignity inherent to his position, and that his actions reflect adversely on the institution of the Senate. Ottawa police investigated the matter but dropped the case without pressing criminal charges.
Meredith will not appear
Meredith will not appear at the committee today because the senators will meet in camera with no invited guests. Under the Senate's own rules, Meredith must be given the opportunity to appear before the body at some point to mount a defence of his behaviour.
He had retained Toronto lawyer Selwyn Pieters to represent him during his appearances before the committee, but Pieters said Monday he is longer representing Meredith. Pieters had said that Ricard unfairly targeted his client as a "predator" because he is a black man.
Because Ricard found Meredith breached his obligations under the ethics code, it is not a matter of if, but how he will be punished, according the rules. There are a number of remedial measures the committee can recommend the Senate impose on Meredith for his transgressions, including:
The ethics committee will then deliver its recommendations to the Senate chamber, and all senators will have a chance to vote on sanctions against Meredith.
Senators considering expulsion
There have been near universal calls for Meredith's resignation since Ricard released her report two weeks ago.
Peter Harder, the Trudeau government's representative in the Senate, has said Meredith should resign, and if he does not leave voluntarily the chamber's leadership will consider its options.
The Senate has never expelled one of its own, but came close after Liberal Senator Andrew Thompson posted continually dismal attendance records — he was present in the chamber only 28 times in a 14-year period — but they ultimately decided on a suspension because of concerns about constitutional complications.
Similarly, the chamber suspended Senators Patrick Brazeau, Mike Duffy and Pamela Wallin for irregularities in their expenses, but those suspensions expired when the last election was called. All three have since returned to their seats.
A suspension is temporary, whereas an expulsion would remove Meredith from the chamber entirely, stripping him of his title and his right to sit in the chamber for good.
As CBC News first reported, some members of the Red Chamber are so determined to expel Meredith that they have tasked the Senate's law clerk with combing through the Constitution in search of a line they can use to expel him.
The clerk, and other constitutional experts, has pointed to Section 18 of the Constitution, which stipulates that Canadian parliamentarians should have the same privileges as a British MP. Members of the British House of Commons have the power to expel one of their own, and have used it sparingly to eject wayward MPs.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/senate-ethics-committee-meredith-meeting-1.4034679
Toronto-area senator could be suspended for his sexual relationship with a teenage girl
By John Paul Tasker, CBC News Posted: Mar 22, 2017 5:00 AM ET Last Updated: Mar 22, 2017 5:08 AM ET
Members of the Senate's ethics committee will review the case of embattled Senator Don Meredith today and begin the process of formally sanctioning the Toronto-area senator for his relationship with a teenage girl.
Committee members will meet behind closed doors at 3 p.m. to study the Senate ethics officer's report, which was compiled after a two-year investigation into Meredith's sexual relationship with a young woman he first met at an Ottawa church when she was just 16.
Meredith, a 52-year-old Pentecostal pastor, was appointed as a Conservative senator by former prime minister Stephen Harper in 2010 before becoming a member of the Independent Senators Group (ISG). He denies many of the allegations levelled against him by the woman in question — who is identified by Lyse Ricard, the ethics officer, as "Ms. M" in the report — but has said he had sexual intercourse with her on at least one occasion when she was over 18.
Ricard found that Meredith violated two sections of the code of ethics, namely that the he did not uphold the highest standards of dignity inherent to his position, and that his actions reflect adversely on the institution of the Senate. Ottawa police investigated the matter but dropped the case without pressing criminal charges.
Meredith will not appear
Meredith will not appear at the committee today because the senators will meet in camera with no invited guests. Under the Senate's own rules, Meredith must be given the opportunity to appear before the body at some point to mount a defence of his behaviour.
He had retained Toronto lawyer Selwyn Pieters to represent him during his appearances before the committee, but Pieters said Monday he is longer representing Meredith. Pieters had said that Ricard unfairly targeted his client as a "predator" because he is a black man.
Because Ricard found Meredith breached his obligations under the ethics code, it is not a matter of if, but how he will be punished, according the rules. There are a number of remedial measures the committee can recommend the Senate impose on Meredith for his transgressions, including:
- Reduction or removal of access to Senate resources, like budgets and staff.
- Removal of Senate assignments, duties or powers.
- Elimination of the right to speak or vote.
- An invitation or order to apologize.
- A censure, admonition or reprimand.
- Suspension.
The ethics committee will then deliver its recommendations to the Senate chamber, and all senators will have a chance to vote on sanctions against Meredith.
Senators considering expulsion
There have been near universal calls for Meredith's resignation since Ricard released her report two weeks ago.
Peter Harder, the Trudeau government's representative in the Senate, has said Meredith should resign, and if he does not leave voluntarily the chamber's leadership will consider its options.
The Senate has never expelled one of its own, but came close after Liberal Senator Andrew Thompson posted continually dismal attendance records — he was present in the chamber only 28 times in a 14-year period — but they ultimately decided on a suspension because of concerns about constitutional complications.
Similarly, the chamber suspended Senators Patrick Brazeau, Mike Duffy and Pamela Wallin for irregularities in their expenses, but those suspensions expired when the last election was called. All three have since returned to their seats.
A suspension is temporary, whereas an expulsion would remove Meredith from the chamber entirely, stripping him of his title and his right to sit in the chamber for good.
As CBC News first reported, some members of the Red Chamber are so determined to expel Meredith that they have tasked the Senate's law clerk with combing through the Constitution in search of a line they can use to expel him.
The clerk, and other constitutional experts, has pointed to Section 18 of the Constitution, which stipulates that Canadian parliamentarians should have the same privileges as a British MP. Members of the British House of Commons have the power to expel one of their own, and have used it sparingly to eject wayward MPs.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/senate-ethics-committee-meredith-meeting-1.4034679
An interesting development. Not sure what it means. Obviously even guilty people are entitled to a lawyer and there's no shame for a lawyer who defends a criminal so it's not just a case of the lawyer bailing because he believes his client is guilty. I wonder what is really behind this.
- Status
