News   Jul 12, 2024
199 Church Showcases Heritage Facade and Artwork at Street Level
 826     0 
News   Jul 12, 2024
Six Points Plaza Redevelopment Advances With 36-Storey First Phase
 747     0 
News   Jul 12, 2024
Trading Spaces: Can Real Estate Conversion Help Boost Housing Supply?
 316     0 

Rob Ford's Toronto

Status
Not open for further replies.
Attention North Yorkers: first mayor of North York James Service has passed away. I read his obituary and am 100% sure that Rob Ford will not accomplish 1% of what this man did in his lifetime. I don't know whether he was considered a good mayor or not, but he certainly seemed to exceed the standard for municipal politicians. Definitely the kind of character one would expect in a mayor compared to the zero character the current MINO has.

http://www.legacy.com/obituaries/th...james-ditson-service&pid=171978814&fhid=17695
 
Rob Ford seems to me to be the least religious person around. He wouldn't go in a church unless it was to get votes.

Also, Twitter suggests that I follow that "Let Ford Be" account. Blah...
 
AlbertHWagstaff said:
Attention North Yorkers: first mayor of North York James Service has passed away. I read his obituary and am 100% sure that Rob Ford will not accomplish 1% of what this man did in his lifetime. I don't know whether he was considered a good mayor or not, but he certainly seemed to exceed the standard for municipal politicians. Definitely the kind of character one would expect in a mayor compared to the zero character the current MINO has.

http://www.legacy.com/obituaries/th...james-ditson-service&pid=171978814&fhid=17695
Click to expand...

A life well-lived and living up to his name, sounds like. I was a little young to be politically aware during his tenure, but my parents thought well of him. Agree 100% with your assessment of him as contrasted with RoFo! :\
 
Last edited:
Rob Ford has ZERO rhythm and the absolute WORST dance moves I've ever seen.

On another note, anyone else think Doug Ford gets his forehead botoxed?
 
casita said:
One fatal second
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7JawdbAL7lg
Click to expand...

In February 1967, my father was involved in a head-on collision on the 401. His car was totalled. It was two days before my birthday and I had two younger brothers; one was just 6 weeks old. The steering wheel broke when his face hit it, breaking his jaw and knocking out all of his lower front teeth. He also broke his ankle. His passenger broke his nose and possibly his ankle as well. I don't know the extent of the injuries of the couple in the other car, but all survived what pretty much everyone said was usually a fatal accident. (I think my dad was the most badly injured.) The reason they all survived is because they were ALL wearing seatbelts (lap belts). In 1967. Even though they were an "upgrade", my dad made sure his new car was equipped with the shoulder harness safety belts as well :)

Shortly after, the woman driving the other car found out she was pregnant and had a baby boy that September. I don't know what became of the couple - they actually moved to our town a few years later and my brother and their boy were friends for the several years they lived here (my brothers and I didn't find out who they were until much later lol). My dad however, and his passenger - his friend and co-worker - lived good long lives well into their 80s passing away within a few weeks of one another.
 
fishie said:
The reason they all survived is because they were ALL wearing seatbelts (lap belts). In 1967. Even though they were an "upgrade", my dad made sure his new car was equipped with the shoulder harness safety belts as well :)
Click to expand...

He was a man ahead of his time. Seat-belt usage did not become mandatory in Ontario until 1976 ( in cars that were equipped with them ).
 
Finally caught up on thread after a week away. I want to comment on two issues: Ford's subpoena and Socknacki.

First, re: subpoena:
Several UTers have posted fantastical predictions as to how Ford will be interrogated. Some seem to think he will be cross-examined by Giroux!

If subpoenaed, Ford is required, by law, to show up and answer, honestly, questions asked by the crown and the defense. His own lawyer is irrelevant to Lisi's case since he doesn't represent Lisi and Ford has not be charged, merely subpoenaed.

Ford will not be examined or cross-examined by Giroux. Giroux is a policeman, not a lawyer. He will probably not even be a witness in the case.

If Ford (and hotmail lawyer) agree to an interview with TPS -- not mandatory but up to Ford -- hotmail lawyer would be present to protect his client's rights. The questions asked would most likely be opened-ended, not accusatory. The police would be seeking information for their case against Lisi, not racking Ford over the coals. It would look and sound nothing like a cross examination.

As for MetroMan's tweet about the possibility of Ford committing perjury in his own trial: Ford is not required to testify in his defence and not even Hotmail Lawyer would allow his client to take the stand.

Re: Socnacki: I had dealing with him, as councillor, in the late 90s regarding a mid-rise apartment building without a working elevator and containing several disabled tenants. He seemed a bit dull and inexperienced, imho. He accomplished nothing for the tenants which is why I was called in to help. Nice enough chap to chat with; just not with it.

I can't think of one important initiative he has brought forward in the past 1 and a half decades, nor can I recall one issue where he took a strong and principled stand. Sure, he's looking for votes now but what in his record inspires anyone? Simply that he's a decent conservative chap who doesn't spend his life in drunken stupers? Toronto deserves better.
 
Pickles said:
Finally caught up on thread after a week away. I want to comment on two issues: Ford's subpoena and Socknacki.

First, re: subpoena:
Several UTers have posted fantastical predictions as to how Ford will be interrogated. Some seem to think he will be cross-examined by Giroux!

If subpoenaed, Ford is required, by law, to show up and answer, honestly, questions asked by the crown and the defense. His own lawyer is irrelevant to Lisi's case since he doesn't represent Lisi and Ford has not be charged, merely subpoenaed.

Ford will not be examined or cross-examined by Giroux. Giroux is a policeman, not a lawyer. He will probably not even be a witness in the case.

If Ford (and hotmail lawyer) agree to an interview with TPS -- not mandatory but up to Ford -- hotmail lawyer would be present to protect his client's rights. The questions asked would most likely be opened-ended, not accusatory. The police would be seeking information for their case against Lisi, not racking Ford over the coals. It would look and sound nothing like a cross examination.

As for MetroMan's tweet about the possibility of Ford committing perjury in his own trial: Ford is not required to testify in his defence and not even Hotmail Lawyer would allow his client to take the stand.

Re: Socnacki: I had dealing with him, as councillor, in the late 90s regarding a mid-rise apartment building without a working elevator and containing several disabled tenants. He seemed a bit dull and inexperienced, imho. He accomplished nothing for the tenants which is why I was called in to help. Nice enough chap to chat with; just not with it.

I can't think of one important initiative he has brought forward in the past 1 and a half decades, nor can I recall one issue where he took a strong and principled stand. Sure, he's looking for votes now but what in his record inspires anyone? Simply that he's a decent conservative chap who doesn't spend his life in drunken stupers? Toronto deserves better.
Click to expand...

If Ford agrees to an interview, his lawyer would not be present. You don't have that right in Canada. And I highly doubt it would be an open-ended, non-accusatory interview.
 
Last edited:
Pickles said:
Re: Socnacki: I had dealing with him, as councillor, in the late 90s regarding a mid-rise apartment building without a working elevator and containing several disabled tenants. He seemed a bit dull and inexperienced, imho. He accomplished nothing for the tenants which is why I was called in to help. Nice enough chap to chat with; just not with it.

I can't think of one important initiative he has brought forward in the past 1 and a half decades, nor can I recall one issue where he took a strong and principled stand. Sure, he's looking for votes now but what in his record inspires anyone? Simply that he's a decent conservative chap who doesn't spend his life in drunken stupers? Toronto deserves better.
Click to expand...

I don't recall ever having heard of Soknacki before this election, but what warms my (not particularly conservative) heart now is the fact that he is clearly basing his platform on facts and evidence. That is the strong and principled stand I am looking for, even if in some (not all) cases today's answer is "let's find out more about it".
 
Generally speaking, if the police want an interview with you and cannot command it (ie. by arresting you), they are open to one's lawyer being present. That's part of the negotiations behind scenes. If what you, whatthe, say is what the police insist on, Ford will not likely be giving an interview to Police. In that case they would have to decide whether or not to call him as a witness, pursuant to the subpoena, without knowing what his testimony would be. On the other hand, he wouldn't know what evidence the police had that might refute any lies he might offer as testimony.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top