[arksi]

It's more likely that it'll be shown that Price and Lissi went after the video-- an event that could have happened with or without Ford's consent. What I'm hoping though is that he will be arrested for something eventually as part of a broader investigation that goes far beyond crack video antics.

 

[pattycakes]

What I'm saying: If Ford were to be charged with a crime, why would the evidence that would form the basis of that charge be released to the media in advance of the charge? Less related to the matter at hand: I'm also much less sure than some that Ford will be charged with anything. But there's also a big difference between information that could lead directly to a specific criminal charge, and information that is damaging to a politician.

The court of public opinion has spoken loud and clear. Rob needs to go, the sooner, the better.

 

[Schmilsson]

Why would anyone think Ford would be arrested on the release of this document? This is information the police *already have*. If they were going to arrest based on this information it would have happened by now.

I believe people were conjecturing an arrest not on the release of the document, but rather in advance of it.

I think the reasoning was that, if the police were investigating Ford for criminal activity, and the release of this document contained an indication of the specifics of their investigation, the TPS might opt to make an arrest in advance of the document's release to prevent Ford from taking action to hide yet-unsecured evidence, or influencing potential testifying witnesses, based on the investigation information revealed.

Of course, if the court ruled the document unreleasable, there would be no need to act.
Likewise, if there's no worry about the information in the document with regards to an ongoing Ford investigation, there's still no need to act.

 

[animatronic]

So what you're saying is Rob Ford is a member of Al Qaeda?

Given the evidence I'd say that Al Shabaab is more likely.

 

[Dubster]

Well is Brazen II ongoing? If so then it could be that Ford won't be charged "yet." Otherwise if the TPS have packed it up and gone to bed on Ford (which kind of seems like the case based on Blair's statement), this thing is over. Basically we'll find out that the crack video exists at best. The end.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

At 39% support, Ford is very likely the least popular mayor in the country. And he's certainly the least popular mayor in recent Toronto history. Why this guy thinks he has a chance at reelection is beyond me.

 

[blackballed]

What I'm saying: If Ford were to be charged with a crime, why would the evidence that would form the basis of that charge be released to the media in advance of the charge? Less related to the matter at hand: I'm also much less sure than some that Ford will be charged with anything. But there's also a big difference between information that could lead directly to a specific criminal charge, and information that is damaging to a politician.

So... you're saying that I should turn off my car engine and come out of my garage?

 

[blackballed]

I suspect that their lawyer - who was part of this legal action - is making a good educated guess that this information - even in redacted form - would not be released if one of the subjects was still part of an active police investigation. The judge would not have agreed to release all this information if one of the named subjects was still under threat of arrest.

I get that you don't like CBC, but what you've just implied would get that lawyer (who, by the way, was also working for The Sun) disbarred.

 

[Peepers]

I get that you don't like CBC, but what you've just implied would get that lawyer (who, by the way, was also working for The Sun) disbarred.

If the lawyer revealed actual details of what is in the sealed documents he could be disbarred. Not sure if he could get in trouble by simply offering an opinion that no arrests are forthcoming.

 

[eyewonder]

I saw Dougy laughing his head off on his way home from the office. Didnt look like a guy who's empire was about to crumble at all. He was in the best spirits.

 

[MetroMan]

My source is saying that a very public person is 3rd party #1 in the warrant. They don't know if the name will be redacted but they're expecting it not to.
We all know that that's Rob Ford. The warrant may just show that he was under surveillance for his connection to Project Traveller (the video). People will infer obstruction of justice charges if enough unredacted information is released. My source is expecting a public outcry for this person's arrest. Tomorrow is going to be very messy for the mayor I think.

 

[eyewonder]

Is this real life?

 

[MetroMan]

Doug Ford, Mark Towhey, David Price, George Christopolous and Isaac Ransom are 5 out of 70 third parties mentioned in the warrant. All were questioned by the police. I hope their names are unredacted in tomorrow's release. At least 2 of them will probably be willing to talk once the cat is out of the bag.

 

[MetroMan]

Also looking for a guy named Jeff or Geoff, a Mike and a Rosa that are important links. I have no idea who they are and what role they play but I'm told that these names are in the warrant.

EDIT: and a Marco.

 

[pud99]

I get that you don't like CBC, but what you've just implied would get that lawyer (who, by the way, was also working for The Sun) disbarred.

Why?

The lawyers involved have been free to speak with their clients about what they have seen in the unredacted portion (which the lawyers have had for some time, and one assumes have read from beginning to end) since the judge made his order late this morning that the unredacted portion of the ITO is to be released generally forthwith. So, they could not criticized, by the judge or by the Law Society, for disclosing to their clients what is in the unredacted portion, so long as they did not make that disclosure until after the judge's order was made.

And, the lawyers involved could not be criticized for talking with their clients about the possible reason(s) why the Crown decided not oppose the unredacted portion of the ITO being released generally. (The lawyers for the news organizations and the Crown do not agree that the ITO should be divided up into an unredacted portion and a redacted portion, as the Crown wants -- the lawyers for the news organizations are contending that everything should be released -- but the reports of the proceeding say that the Crown agreed that the unredacted portion could be released, and it is entirely legitimate for anyone to discuss what the possible reason(s) might be for the Crown having taken that position.)