Winnipeg Free Press

Winnipeg Free Press (Newspaper) - July 19, 2013, Winnipeg, Manitoba C M Y K PAGE A11 Winnipeg Free Press Friday, July 19, 2013 A 11 POLL �� TODAY'S QUESTION What are your feelings on the band Kiss? �� Vote online at winnipegfreepress. com �� PREVIOUS QUESTION How many Fringe plays do you plan to attend? TOTAL RESPONSES 3,134 Winnipeg Free Press est 1872 / Winnipeg Tribune est 1890 VOL 141 NO 243 2013 Winnipeg Free Press, a division of FP Canadian Newspapers Limited Partnership. Published seven days a week at 1355 Mountain Avenue, Winnipeg, Manitoba R2X 3B6, PH: 697- 7000 BOB COX / Publisher PAUL SAMYN / Editor JULIE CARL / Deputy Editor F OR those anguished by the Saturday night acquittal of George Zimmerman, the remedy appears obvious: The U. S. Department of Justice should mount its own criminal case and prosecute Zimmerman for violating civil rights or hate crimes statutes in the shooting death of Trayvon Martin. The argument has appeal. Federal laws allow prosecutors to make broader arguments, citing broader federal priorities, than does the typical state murder or manslaughter law, more narrowly tailored to adjudicating who caused whose death and why. Justice at times has won convictions on these federal grounds after courts have acquitted defendants accused of violating local or state laws. That said, it's often difficult to use federal prosecution to right an alleged wrong done in a state court. More important, the federal statutes are a poor fit for the circumstances of the Zimmerman case and how it played out in Florida. Given those circumstances, it's all but inconceivable that prosecutors could prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Martin's race provoked Zimmerman's activity. Nor should they try. Federal civil rights and hate crimes statutes evolved, and achieved their prominence and respect, because localities and states egregiously had failed to follow their own protocols for delivering criminal justice. With intentionally shoddy investigations, weak prosecutions and other inadequate efforts, some local and state officials didn't properly pursue criminal cases because of a victim's race, colour, religion or nationality. In such cases, Justice today can insert itself as the designated and well- resourced provocateur. The national interest in equal justice under law permits this federal intervention into what may originate as local cases born of local crimes. The Zimmerman case doesn't meet that test. Each of us can agree or disagree with the jury's verdict. And critics can say local police were slow to probe the complexities of the case. But as the prosecution's evidence attested at trial, the investigation was extraordinarily elaborate. Like the rest of the nation, the defendant - and the victim's family - witnessed a fair and open trial. And the prosecutors' suggestion that Zimmerman had acted out of " ill will" or " hatred" or " spite" didn't convince jurors. Those jurors had limited options when they declared Zimmerman not guilty. But by rejecting murder and manslaughter convictions, they in essence declared Zimmerman innocent by reason of self- defence - a crucial point that goes to the heart of the decision on whether Justice now should attempt to prosecute him. Attorney General Eric Holder's Justice Department said Sunday that " experienced federal prosecutors" will make that decision. They should conclude the statutes at their disposal weren't written for this case. Jurors spent weeks hearing the best evidence prosecutors could produce against Zimmerman, yet didn't declare him in the wrong or ill- motivated. Ron Safer, a former federal prosecutor now in private practice in Chicago, notes that in a subsequent federal trial, " the prosecution would have the added burden to prove racial animus. It can't be assumed; it has to be proved." Yet federal investigators who interviewed dozens of Zimmerman's friends, neighbours and co- workers reportedly found no one who thought he was a racist. The lead detective in the Sanford police inquiry concluded he was not. Unless Justice has hitherto unseen evidence that racial bias motivated Zimmerman, accusing him of a civil rights or hate crimes violation risks the appearance, but also the reality, of prosecutorial overreach. Sometimes federal intervention does make sense. The feds successfully prosecuted two Los Angeles police officers for beating Rodney King in 1991 after they had been acquitted in a state trial. But there was extensive video footage of that episode, and the cops were convicted of violating King's rights " under colour of law" - a category that applies only to law enforcement, which Zimmerman was not. Even so, two of the four officers acquitted in the original trial were acquitted in federal court as well. The most comprehensive summation we've read of why Justice shouldn't interject itself here comes from Florida federal defence attorney Scott Srebnick. " If the state jury had been persuaded beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman caused bodily harm to Trayvon Martin because of Martin's race, it would have almost certainly convicted Zimmerman of second- degree murder, which requires proof of ' ill- will' or ' malice,' " Srebnick told the Miami Herald . " So, to bring a federal civil rights prosecution against Zimmerman, the attorney general would essentially be second- guessing the state jury's verdict as opposed to vindicating a different or broader federal interest." In this highly visible and racially charged case, the acquittal of George Zimmerman is bound to frustrate many people. But barring decisive new information, the Florida jury's decision ought to be the last word. Retrial of shooting C will fail ORNWALL, P. E. I. - The revelations in the Mike Duffy expense case just keep on coming. But there is one big question that still needs to be answered: why did it all happen in the first place? The whole scandal could have been so easily avoided. Could no one in the prime minister's political circle see this coming before The Duff's appointment? Question as to his suitability to serve as a senator from P. E. I. surfaced from the day it was first announced, especially in P. E. I. Sure, he was a ( then) favoured native son, but he was living and working in Ottawa, only coming home to a summer cottage. But he could easily have stemmed any controversy by first semi- retiring from CTV ( perhaps filing a daily commentary) and moving back to P. E. I. After living here a year, there would have been no question he was a resident. By that time, he would even have had the residential tax credit supplied by the tax department to prove it. Prince Edward Island, you see, unlike other provinces, has a different property tax rate for full- time residents and summer visitors whose primary residence is outside the province. Technically, it works like this: everybody is assessed at the same rate but then residents get a credit for half that amount while non- residents don't. Being eligible for the credit would have gone a long way to bolstering his argument. The Duff would then have become a bit player, instead of the poster boy, in the Senate expense scandal. Instead, RCMP documents released recently in an Ottawa court show Duffy's only proof of residency on P. E. I. was a driver's licence and vehicle registration. The police investigation shows he obtained those documents just before he was named to the Senate. Prior to that, he held an Ontario licence and registration. The RCMP documents also show Duffy attempted to obtain a P. E. I. health card, which the Senate Committee on Internal Economy had asked for as proof of Island residency. Duffy himself called the Island Department of Health and Social Services on one occasion and one of his staff members followed up with two calls requesting that the document be expedited. The health department, however, refused to co- operate. The documents also note the Duff's Ottawa address is listed as his permanent residence on his passport and the legal address for Mike Duffy Media Services Inc., which collected his fees for speaking engagements. So what happens now? If the RCMP decides to press charges, the Duff could presumably be forced to give up his seat, which he has adamantly refused to do to this point. However, here's the rub: such a conviction would be proof the former broadcaster had never been eligible to hold the seat in the first place. If that turns out to be the case, could he then be forced to pay back every cent he has made since he assumed his seat in December of 2008? That comes to four years and seven months ( and counting) at an annual salary of $ 135,200, plus expenses. But the trouble might not stop there. There could also be further charges, because if any Canadian knowingly makes a declaration on an income tax form or an employment insurance form they know to be false, and from which they receive a financial benefit, they can be charged with fraud. Were Duffy's actions and different? He signed a declaration stating P. E. I. was his primary residence; he obtained a Prince Edward Island driver's licence just before his appointment, suggesting he was at least worried the claim could be challenged; and there is no question he benefited financially. Duffy has proclaimed the truth will eventually come out. But when he was given an opportunity to appear at a rate public meeting before the Senate committee on internal economy to give his side of the story, he didn't even show up. A life- long resident of Prince Edward Island, Troy Media Syndicated Columnist Andy Walker has been a writer and commentator for more than 30 years. V ANCOUVER - The explosion, shocking loss of life and the incineration of idyllic downtown Lac M�gantic, Que., is a catastrophe for the ages. The tragedy, however, does give us the ability to learn new lessons. The independent Transportation Safety Board will examine the railway procedures of that evening and provide answers on the cause of the incident. It will investigate whether human error was at play, and examine the structural integrity of the tank cars and the air braking system of the runaway train in particular. But beyond looking at causes, wider policy questions - about the safety of the transportation of oil by rail and the security of the many towns built along the rail lines across the country - are being asked. As rail will always be part of oil's journey from production field to gas pump due to pipeline over- capacity and the location of oil production, Canadians are right to examine its transportation. Some are claiming that the Lac M�gantic rail disaster means oil transportation should be confined to pipelines, but pipelines have their own set of risks and more pipeline capacity will not eradicate rail demand for oil transport. The facts show that, despite the increase in the amount of crude oil shipped by rail over the past five years, there has been no concurrent increase in the number of derailments. Rail accidents involving dangerous goods have decreased nearly by half in recent years. Freight railways in the U. S. transport about 1.7 million carloads of dangerous goods each year, representing about seven per cent of carloads in North America. Canada's railways transported 140,000 carloads of oil last year. With dangerous goods criss- crossing the country daily, it may be a hollow argument to now turn against transportation of oil by rail. As a strong and safe performer, rail has become an attractive alternative to shippers, with the result that it has consistently gained market share. Strong performance, however, can be a two- edged sword. Despite impressive market gains, the downside for rail is that it is obliged to transport all goods offered to it for delivery. It cannot refuse shipment on the basis of inconvenience, cost, potential liability or the lack of profitability. The obligation, known as the common carrier doctrine, has special relevance in the transportation of dangerous goods and petroleum products where rail, being self- insured, may prefer to refuse the goods. There are only unsatisfactory alternatives for Canadians who seek safe communities and alternatives to rail lines in urban areas. One would be to allow limits to the common carrier obligation. It would allow railways, which face ruinous damages in the event of an accident, greater freedom in choosing whether to accept the cargo deemed dangerous. In 2009 in the U. S., Union Pacific Railroad asked to be relieved from its common carrier obligation to transport chlorine. The request was turned down. The U. S. Surface Transportation Board reasoned that allowing rail to supersede its obligation to carry all goods, including chlorine, could result in rail controlling markets served by the chemical producers. Other solutions are equally difficult, including relocating railway lines away from urban centres, which is allowed under Canadian law but comes at great cost. The only real answer lies in ensuring the safe transportation of all products moving by rail. Legislation should ensure that emergency preparedness, technological improvements and operational safety protocols are in the forefront. U. S. railways lead Canadian railways on these issues. Canada should give a fresh look at positive train control technology, mandated by the U. S. Congress in the Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008. PTC technology monitors train speed and position, warns of speed or authority limits and brakes automatically if train crews fail to respond. PTC would prevent derailments, in cases of excessive speed, conflicting train movements or engineer failure to obey wayside signals, by automatically stopping trains where a collision or derailment is imminent. Depending on the facts found by the TSB on the Lac M�gantic disaster, PTC may be of limited relevance. Yet, given that most rail accidents originate with human error and track defect in equal measure, an examination of how technology can best ensure safe rail operations is needed. It can provide Canadians with the extra security they require in the transportation of goods. It is not the transportation of oil by rail that requires an alternative. Rather, it is the way we address safe rail operations in this country. Mary- Jane Bennett is a transportation consultant and a research fellow with the Frontier Centre. - Troy Media B RISBANE - Streaking made a ( hopefully) brief reappearance in Australia on Wednesday night when a nude man invaded the grounds in the last crucial moments of one of the nation's most popular football clashes. In the age of social media, the public reaction was not as uniform as you might expect. Wati Holmwood, 33, " nuded up'' and sprinted 100 metres across Sydney's ANZ Stadium in front of a global audience of potentially hundreds of millions. He ended face down on the turf after his exhausting effort while the final moments of the " State of Origin'' clash between New South Wales and Queensland played itself out around him. NSW players, who narrowly lost the game, were furious. Back- rower Ryan Hoffman told Wati via News Limited newspapers: " You're an idiot. That's about all there is to say." Chief superintendent Peter Gillam, who was in charge of police operations at the grounds, was also in no mood to tolerate adolescent hijinks. " No one wants to see a grown man running around naked at a footy match, and this man can expect to not only feel the wrath of the crowd but also a magistrate,'' he thundered. And that might have been that were we still in the age of mainstream media, where views and opinions are predictable and everyone knows their lines. In the alternative world of social media, there was some celebration about an event which many social media users may not realize is a little pass�. Streaking has always been with us but goes through sudden, sharp increases in popularity - much like the yo- yo and the Rolling Stones. Like cholera outbreaks, it also appears to quickly retreat into obscurity after traumatizing a generation. For Australians, it was the 1970s that hosted our most serious streaker outbreak along with a possibly related decline in fashion standards, allowing burnt orange to emerge as the colour of choice for the sophisticated male. Curiously enough, many streakers insisted on making England the venue for their crimes, possibly channelling the spirit of our convicts who felt comfortable challenging authority back in the Old Dart. The most famous Aussie streakers took to the field at the Wallabies- England rugby match at Twickenham. Erica Roe appeared to more delight than infuriate the English when she removed her top at the game and was subsequently offered a modelling contract. Wati's plump, almost asexual body wobbling across the field Wednesday night somehow didn't appear as confronting as the regular streaker, and many on social media appeared to not only welcome the diversion, but encourage it as harmless fun. Far from being an " idiot," he is to many " a legend" who " deserves a medal." At last count Wednesday night there were eight Facebook pages dedicated to his performance, including one page with more than 18,000 followers encouraged to donate cash to pay for Wati's expected $ 5,000 fine. As for the man himself, he has what horse race followers in this nation call " good form.'' He apparently did the same thing at a game back in 2011. In an act that may go some way towards inspiring forgiveness, he had a few contrite words for media early yesterday morning as he attempted to leave the hospital he had been taken to for observation. A journalist from the Sydney tabloid The Telegraph who had attempted to interview him ended up giving him $ 10 for a train ride home. " I'm sorry, I apologize about what happened, am I in trouble now?" he asked. Michael Madigan is the Free Press correspondent in Australia. He writes mostly about politics for the Brisbane- based Courier Mail. MICHAEL MADIGAN MARY- JANE BENNETT OTHER OPINION The Chicago Tribune Streaker finds new audience on social media By Andy Walker Duffy affair could have been avoided easily What can we learn from Lac M�gantic? RYAN REMIORZ / THE CANADIAN PRESS Workers continue the cleanup and search at the site of the train derailment and fire in Lac- M�gantic, Que. One or two 9% At least half- a- dozen 3% As many as I can 5% None 83% A_ 13_ Jul- 19- 13_ FP_ 01. indd A11 7/ 18/ 13 7: 30: 19 PM ;