📚 Megathread British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal (BCHRT) - All initial BCHRT related material goes here, including updates on current hearings.

Wyróżnienie
Gustav Schuchardt powiedział(a):
I wonder how deep her pockets are. He's not earning money and he lost his 'early Christmas' BCHRT case. At some point she's going to start telling him to stop wasting money by going to court.
Kliknij, aby rozwinąć...
This is the mother who burst into a hearing and screeched “It’s 500 dollars or your LIFE!!”, apparently in reference to him not wanting her to call him an ambulance at that moment for one of his mysterious brain lumps or summat. If she’s delusional enough to throw down that amount to play pretend-emergency for the hundredth time, she’ll pay out for more scam lawsuits. They were probably both betting on an early Christmas cash-out. She’s as bad as he is and just as stupid.

All he has to do is convince her that this next suit is the gamble that will pay off...or scream at her and threaten to cut the umbilical cord. A total bluff, but it would work.
 
Apteryx Owenii powiedział(a):
Regardless of legal bills $2000 (or dollarydoos or whatever) is nowhere near a fair amount for the trouble that he put these women through. Even lost profits dealing with this utter sperg are probably higher than that for some of them.
Kliknij, aby rozwinąć...

The sanctions should have been on top of compensation for his racist hate crimes against these women.
 
HeraldofNurgle powiedział(a):
I don't know if you can do this in Canada, but I think those ladies may have a case to sue for Pain and Suffering due to being dragged into a sham court and being harassed by a creepy fat manchild for over a year.

And I believe you can set up GoFundMe for legal defense/ paying for lawyers, so I wouldn't put it past yaniv to lie and set one up to 'hire a lawyer' and then use the money to pay the judgement without using his own tampon money.
Kliknij, aby rozwinąć...
In general, you can sue for abuse of process and malicious prosecution. However, these are extremely rare in BC because special costs at trial are the usual way to handle this.
The tribunal costs award raises a unique question because it is designed to compensate the women for Yaniv’s high-handed conduct (which in a normal court is aggravated damages). However, the $2k is clearly insufficient and Cousineau seemed to have awarded it with at least a smidgeon of sympathy to Yaniv. I think, but am not sure, that if the women were to sue Yaniv for malicious prosecution then the courts would see it as having been previously decided by the tribunal costs award.
 
Fat boy was quick enough to mention his supposed loss of earnings (3 figures a day wasn't it?) plus distress etc and that, I presume, would have been factored into any sort of 'settlement' if he had won yet nothing really for the women who have obviously gone through so much more - he was obviously enjoying every minute of it.

So $2000, although better than nothing, is insulting in the great scheme of things.
 
C4605 powiedział(a):
I think, but am not sure, that if the women were to sue Yaniv for malicious prosecution then the courts would see it as having been previously decided by the tribunal costs award.
Kliknij, aby rozwinąć...

I'd say not because they were entirely punitive, not correlated to the damage caused. There should also be room for the unaddressed compensatory damages, especially if, as some seem to think, the HRT itself lacked the power to award those at all.
 
I'm glad they were able to suss out a guy like him from real cases of actual intolerance, so there's that. I also love the judge saying, "If you want to cosplay as a woman, fine. That's your right... but there are limits."
 
What about the tribunals costs?
That 60 pages I see as an easy $30K US
Govt. funds (taxpayers) wasted on a grifter
BUT...they can't go after him for costs as it might discourage REAL troons from filing REAL complaints
A sad world we live in.
 
Short Stack powiedział(a):
What about the tribunals costs?
That 60 pages I see as an easy $30K US
Govt. funds (taxpayers) wasted on a grifter
BUT...they can't go after him for costs as it might discourage REAL troons from filing REAL complaints
A sad world we live in.
Kliknij, aby rozwinąć...

It was their choice to put on a shameful display of a kangaroo court proceeding with full evidentiary hearings on all of it rather than throwing it out at patently frivolous at the start, which it was obvious to any idiot it was. They kind of dug their own grave there by catering to this child molester.
 
AnOminous powiedział(a):
It was their choice to put on a shameful display of a kangaroo court proceeding with full evidentiary hearings on all of it rather than throwing it out at patently frivolous at the start, which it was obvious to any idiot it was. They kind of dug their own grave there by catering to this child molester.
Kliknij, aby rozwinąć...

They were so surprised by the tweet feeds from the audience and the covert films. That, more than anything, was the value of this debacle. The HRT has gotten a little too comfortable without public scrutiny, and the model relies on public accountability.

Elsie and the mystery videographer (who basically served to authenticate Elsie's painstaking notes and remind Canadians that people are honest) are the heroes on this story. If Canadians value freedom, we have to participate in the process.
 
HeraldofNurgle powiedział(a):
I don't know if you can do this in Canada, but I think those ladies may have a case to sue for Pain and Suffering due to being dragged into a sham court and being harassed by a creepy fat manchild for over a year.
Kliknij, aby rozwinąć...
It's already been said. You can't sue someone for suing you. Or filing complaints against you etc.
 
sperginity powiedział(a):
I'm fairly certain that it is just to discourage yaniv from filing more bullshit at the HRT, it isn't meant to compensate the women at all.
Kliknij, aby rozwinąć...

Yep. From the BCHRT website:

BCHRT powiedział(a):
The primary purpose of a costs award is punitive, not compensatory. It is meant to deter future participants from committing similar acts, and to signal the Tribunal’s condemnation of the conduct.
Kliknij, aby rozwinąć...

pr3nt177 powiedział(a):
Fat boy was quick enough to mention his supposed loss of earnings (3 figures a day wasn't it?) plus distress etc and that, I presume, would have been factored into any sort of 'settlement' if he had won yet nothing really for the women who have obviously gone through so much more - he was obviously enjoying every minute of it.
Kliknij, aby rozwinąć...

Unless Jessie was going to claim that they couldn't go to work because their balls were too hairy, any remedy wouldn't have included loss of earnings - loss of earnings for attending the tribunal isn't covered, only loss of earnings directly related to the alleged discrimination.

Compensation for hurty feewings looks like it could have been expensive, though - the smallest award in the list of examples for refusal of service was $1500.
 
Ostatnio edytowane:
Choose carefully powiedział(a):
Yep. From the BCHRT website:
Kliknij, aby rozwinąć...
So any scrote can make accusations resulting in untold stress and worry (possibly impacting on health & livelihood) for the other party and walk out with a slap on the wrists like Yaniv has.

Considering how determined she seemed in her conclusions re Yaniv's true motives and behaviour she still felt that $15000 was too harsh (can't remember her exact wording) even though she pointed out that his motives were partly financial gain. A deterrent, to me, would be a hefty financial levy, now that would be a better deterrent surely? Seems Yaniv's circumstances mattered more though.

"In all the circumstances I am satisfied that $6,000 strikes the right balance in expressing the Tribunal’s condemnation of Ms. Yaniv’s conduct while not exacting too harsh a punishment on her. In the circumstances, although Ms. Yaniv’s conduct has likely impacted all of the Respondents to her complaints..."
 
Ostatnio edytowane:
pr3nt177 powiedział(a):
So any scrote can make accusations resulting in untold stress and worry (possibly impacting on health & livelihood) for the other party and walk out with a slap on the wrists like Yaniv has.
Kliknij, aby rozwinąć...

If there is sufficient evidence to make a case for discrimination, then it looks like it, yes. The decision said at least one of the arm/leg waxing cases would likely have gone in Yaniv's favour if not for the overall pattern of bringing cases for financial gain

pr3nt177 powiedział(a):
Considering how determined she seemed in her conclusions re Yaniv's true motives and behaviour she still felt that $15000 was too harsh (can't remember her exact wording). A deterrent, to me, would be a hefty financial levy, now that would be a better deterrent surely? Seems Yaniv's circumstances mattered more though.

"In all the circumstances I am satisfied that $6,000 strikes the right balance in expressing the Tribunal’s condemnation of Ms. Yaniv’s conduct while not exacting too harsh a punishment on her. In the circumstances, although Ms. Yaniv’s conduct has likely impacted all of the Respondents to her complaints..."
Kliknij, aby rozwinąć...

Yeah, I can't say I follow her reasoning here - saying she has no info on JY's ability to pay (ignoring JY claiming a mid-three figure daily income in court), reducing the sum because she ruled against JY in the unrepresented cases, and my favourite, that JY was "polite and deferential throughout the Tribunal's hearings!"
 
pr3nt177 powiedział(a):
So any scrote can make accusations resulting in untold stress and worry (possibly impacting on health & livelihood) for the other party and walk out with a slap on the wrists like Yaniv has.
Kliknij, aby rozwinąć...

Yes. You can bet the victims of this fake court had to pay a huge multiple of what Jon has gotten away with and will probably never even pay. Even with pro bono legal counsel, their lives and businesses have been disrupted and maybe even permanently closed down out of trauma of Jon's racist harassment and the fear of being dragged before a kangaroo court by future perverts.
 
Choose carefully powiedział(a):
Yeah, I can't say I follow her reasoning here - saying she has no info on JY's ability to pay (ignoring JY claiming a mid-three figure daily income in court), reducing the sum because she ruled against JY in the unrepresented cases, and my favourite, that JY was "polite and deferential throughout the Tribunal's hearings!"
Kliknij, aby rozwinąć...
On one hand, she itemises his racism, financial motives, lying, his threatening behaviour (settle or court) etc then is careful not to 'punish' him too severely when in actual fact knowing what she knew should have meant coming down hard - to deter him from attempting similar and to deter other chancers out there trying it on.

Yaniv's thoughts must be with that $6,000 + $37,500 'damages' he was seeking, + whatever he could have got from Laser Cut Beauty Salon. That must gnaw. :lol:

AnOminous powiedział(a):
Yes. You can bet the victims of this fake court had to pay a huge multiple of what Jon has gotten away with and will probably never even pay. Even with pro bono legal counsel, their lives and businesses have been disrupted and maybe even permanently closed down out of trauma of Jon's racist harassment and the fear of being dragged before a kangaroo court by future perverts.
Kliknij, aby rozwinąć...
This is what goads me tbh. Yeah he's been lambasted but let's face it I doubt he'll care - potential financial loss yeah but public humiliation nah.

One poor woman hasn't been able to work since and his shitty attitude was 'so what' (wtte).
 
Ostatnio edytowane:
HungoverHermaphrodite powiedział(a):
Just read through the whole ruling or whatever it's called. Am also suprised and dissapointed by Yaniv's racism being referred to more than the predatory behavior and history of sending little girls dick pics, but simultaneously find the judge's response badass just because she sounded so done with her shit.
Kliknij, aby rozwinąć...
If there is currently a ongoing open case to his pedophile past like is being hinted at by the police the tribunal would have to be careful.

Yeah he is obviously guilty and the evidence is damming. But he hadn't YET been convicted in a court of law. And a argument could be made that if the tribunal started throwing accusations that he is a pedophile, it could bias any future trial and infringe on his right to a fair trial.

Same with the illegal weapon charges. It's fine for us the talk and mock him over it but the authorities can fuck up a investigation or trial if they say the wrong thing.
 
Wyróżnienie
Musisz się zalogować lub zarejestrować, aby odpowiedzieć.
Wstecz
Top Na dole