I just did a bit of digging around and there's surprisingly little information available about her background. (her nominee questionairre looks like the best resource: https://fja-cmf.gc.ca/scc-csc/2022/nominee-candidat-eng.html). The PM's announcement did claim that it happened through an "open, non-partisan selection process" - but that could mean anything you want it to mean.
It is very interesting that her PhD thesis from Ottawa U was "embargoed" - which means we can't see it. You've made me curious, so I may try to find the time to look into this some more.
It's also interesting that she wrote: "the Supreme Court of Canada must work to move society forward in a progressive way yet remain respectful of the law"
The thesis may be off-limits, but her Superior Court decisions aren't.
I just asked a friend who earned her own PhD from University of Ottawa just a month or so back. She said that it's *very* unusual to embargo a thesis for this long.
I've been thinking about ways to use some of the OSINT tools I used to teach to IT professionals in my current research. We'll see what might be possible.
An Ontario senior was a victim of O'Bonsawin's judging and wrote this in her Belleville Injustice substack about the civil trial O'Bonsawin presided over:
"Judge Michelle O’Bonsawin presided over the early phase of my case before her 2022 appointment to the Supreme Court of Canada. During her five years on the Ontario Superior Court (2017–2022), at least two of her decisions were overturned by the Ontario Court of Appeal, including one where the Court found she improperly relied on inadmissible evidence and another involving misapplication of evidentiary principles.
These characterizations of O’Bonsawin’s lower court decisions are consistent with how she presided over my Phase 1 Trial … improper reliance on inadmissible evidence, misapplication of evidentiary principles and interfering with my lawyer’s ability to show that the City/Intact’s experts had serious credibility issues..."
You will not believe the horror this law-abiding senior has been put through for 15 years and counting ... she writes about every Judge who has been completely unjust, all the city actors who have engaged in extreme abuse of authority and of course the lawfare of the city's favourite law firm. And she provides the evidence.
As is so often the case, the "usual suspects" are quite willing for "their" philosophy to be dominant but are horrified when a different philosophy is even considered.
Can you explain the elevation of Michelle O’Bonsawin to the court to us?
I just did a bit of digging around and there's surprisingly little information available about her background. (her nominee questionairre looks like the best resource: https://fja-cmf.gc.ca/scc-csc/2022/nominee-candidat-eng.html). The PM's announcement did claim that it happened through an "open, non-partisan selection process" - but that could mean anything you want it to mean.
It is very interesting that her PhD thesis from Ottawa U was "embargoed" - which means we can't see it. You've made me curious, so I may try to find the time to look into this some more.
It's also interesting that she wrote: "the Supreme Court of Canada must work to move society forward in a progressive way yet remain respectful of the law"
Tough to do data analysis when the data is "embargoed," isn't it.
The thesis may be off-limits, but her Superior Court decisions aren't.
I just asked a friend who earned her own PhD from University of Ottawa just a month or so back. She said that it's *very* unusual to embargo a thesis for this long.
I've been thinking about ways to use some of the OSINT tools I used to teach to IT professionals in my current research. We'll see what might be possible.
I believe at least one appeal court had some interesting things to say about her legal acumen.
An Ontario senior was a victim of O'Bonsawin's judging and wrote this in her Belleville Injustice substack about the civil trial O'Bonsawin presided over:
"Judge Michelle O’Bonsawin presided over the early phase of my case before her 2022 appointment to the Supreme Court of Canada. During her five years on the Ontario Superior Court (2017–2022), at least two of her decisions were overturned by the Ontario Court of Appeal, including one where the Court found she improperly relied on inadmissible evidence and another involving misapplication of evidentiary principles.
These characterizations of O’Bonsawin’s lower court decisions are consistent with how she presided over my Phase 1 Trial … improper reliance on inadmissible evidence, misapplication of evidentiary principles and interfering with my lawyer’s ability to show that the City/Intact’s experts had serious credibility issues..."
You will not believe the horror this law-abiding senior has been put through for 15 years and counting ... she writes about every Judge who has been completely unjust, all the city actors who have engaged in extreme abuse of authority and of course the lawfare of the city's favourite law firm. And she provides the evidence.
There are 18 parts to the substack story that we highly recommend you read that start here: https://gracejoubarne.substack.com/p/part-9-the-nightmare-in-belleville
Quelle surprise!
As is so often the case, the "usual suspects" are quite willing for "their" philosophy to be dominant but are horrified when a different philosophy is even considered.
Thank you, David.