Friday, November 4, 2016

From the Green Room- Media Release from Ward 3 Councillor Mathew Green

“On Monday, October 31st , I was informed that the OIPRD process was completed, and a decision rendered. I was made aware that that a Police Services Act hearing will proceed December 15th regarding my OIPRD complaint involving my April 26th arbitrary street check.”


  1. Allan TaylorNovember 04, 2016

    Not arbitrary and not a street check by definition

  2. yet another contentious issue with pervasive implication for the entire community. I am certainly interested in seeing how this plays itself out.

  3. Mr. Green feels intimidated by the rank and file, betrayed by the Service Board, and believes a local Judge is rendering verdict rooted in personal bias. It sounds difficult for an elected official to get a fair break in this town.

    1. I don't presume to know what Councillor Green's lived experience is like, nor the lived experience of his constituents.

      His on-street interaction with the HPS was substantiated and deemed serious enough to advance to a disciplinary hearing. The councillor's interaction occurred almost a month after the province released clear and consistent rules prohibiting race from being any part of a police officer's reason for attempting an ID check. The HPS has played semantic games around the policy even as their stats have shown number of street checks dropping around 99% between 2011 and 2015 — from roughly 2,900 to roughly 30, in a city of 540,000. Given the purported rarity of these checks, it's unsurprising that an incident involving an elected official would garner the HPS unfavourable attention.

      It's not difficult for anyone paying attention to the PSB to find ample fodder for critical input of one kind or another. Councillor Whitehead, for example, famously called out the three Liberal appointees for rubber-stamping every HPS request put in front of them, after 13 members of council supported a motion to bring the police service under city control. Diversity is generally and explicit part of the provincial mandate, and in the case of the PSB it is presumably addressed by the fact that one member is female and two are Jewish. That all are baby boomers is unremarkable — that's par for the patronage course.

      Councillor Green's concerns regarding Judge Bernd Zabel's wildly inappropriate courtroom headgear are widely shared. Osgood Hall law professor Gus Van Harten submitted a formal complaint to the Ontario Judicial Council.


    2. do you really believe Mr. Green would have been equally offended had Justice Zabel arrived in chambers in a pantsuit? I believe when Green drew a direct link between Zabel's misstep and a KKK parade-on his city twitter feed and email account-he revealed his genuine agenda. It is unfortunate Green is critical of a code of conduct he appears unable to personally adopt.

      My question is what specific "City business" is this Councillor attempting to advance?

    3. Judge Zabel claims to have chosen to mark the "historic" election, which it would have been regardless of outcome. So, yes, maybe he had been fitted for a pantsuit in the days prior, while he was vacillating between a Clark costume and a Cubs cap.
      And had Judge Zabel chosen more of a conceptual DJT homage — orange spray tan and a gravity-defying comb-over — and it were Hallowe'en, the optics would have been different.

      I haven't seen the councillor's KKK tweet but the personality's association to that group and other white nationalists is well-documented and dates to the announcement of his candidacy. (His bias against racialized communities dates back decades — watch the Ken Burns documentary The Central Park Five for starters.)

      An Ontario Court Justice wearing any baseball cap in a courtroom brings their good sense into question. Wearing one associated with the ugliest presidential rhetorician in living memory is more obviously obviously problematic.

      Another Hamilton-based member of the province's judiciary, as it turns out, had been called on the carpet five months ago for a Trumpwear-related lapse in judgement: Supreme Court Justice Antonio Skarica.


      In both cases, their decision to wear a provocative demagogue's campaign souvenirs, with all of the poisonous baggage and subtext that accompanies them, is at the root of the matter. Here's the Ontario Judicial Council's thumbnail of professional conduct:

      "In Ontario, we expect high standards both in the delivery of justice and in the conduct of the provincial judges and justices of the peace who have the responsibility to make decisions… Examples of misconduct could include: gender or racial bias, having a conflict of interest with one of the parties or unprofessional conduct."

      This is a paraphrasing of section 1.1 of the Ontario Judicial Council’s principles of judicial office, developed by judges of the Ontario Court of Justice, which says “Judges should maintain their objectivity and shall not, by words or conduct, manifest favour, bias or prejudice towards any party or interest.”

      In light of Trump's grotesque track record on the matters of gender and race relations, which at best amount to stoking xenophobia and misogyny for political gain, and with due consideration given to his laissez-faire views on torture, police brutality, the Geneva Convention and the Bill of Rights, any provincial judge or justice of the peace who dons (no pun intended) these garments should have the intelligence to know that they are inviting formal complaints.

      But yes, judges make mistakes. That's where these sorts of remedies come in.


    4. given the widespread outrage you describe, I think it is worth noting Green is the only sitting Councilor to use City paid social media to demand immediate dismissal.
      So I will try once more, what specific City initiative is Mr. Green attempting to influence with this undertaking?

    5. Clr. Green may be wise to get his own personal twitter account to separate his personal views from what we pay him to do.


  4. Why doesn't The Hamiltonian ask Counselo Green about this?

    Circle X

    1. Hamiltonian AdminNovember 16, 2016

      We have emailed the Clr. and have not received a response. If we hear from him, we will post his reply.

      The Hamiltonian Admin

  5. "uncontaminated by personal conflicting interests"

  6. and yesterday Mr.Green met with a convicted murderer in his City Hall office to coach her on her Police complaint of discrimination and harassment.
    You and I paid for this advocacy.

  7. Hamiltonian AdminNovember 18, 2016

    Mr. Graham. Can you email us at admin@thehamiltonian.info. We would like to ask you something.


    Hamiltonian Admin

  8. http://www.thespec.com/news-story/6972950-carding-new-policy-must-stop-fishing-expeditions-police-board-hears/

    Mr. YW


Your comments are welcome. Please abide by the blog's policy on posting. This blog facilitates discussion from all sides of issues. Opposite viewpoints, spirited discussion and even pointed comments are welcome, provided they are respectful. Name calling is not allowed and any posts that violate the policy, will simply not be authorized to appear. This blog also reserves the right to exclude comments that are off topic or are otherwise unprofessional. This blog does not assume any liability whatsoever for comments posted. People posting comments or providing information on interviews, do so at their own risk.

Comments posted on this blog, may be used as excerpts in whole or in part, in other media sources .
This blog believes in freedom of speech and operates in the context of a democratic society, which many have fought and died for.

Views expressed by commentators or in articles that appear here, cannot be assumed to be espoused by The Hamiltonian staff or its publisher.