God save the little Queen!
Ex-Lt.-Gov. invokes royal prerogative to annul fraud trial (http://www.lfpress.com/news/canada/2012/06/12/19869086.html)
Quote
QUEBEC CITY – Former Lt.-Gov. Lise Thibault, accused of using taxpayer dollars as her personal spending account, wants to invoke royal prerogative to have her fraud trial annulled.
Royal prerogative is the collection of rights held by the Queen or her designates — the Governor General and lieutenant governors — that can technically override Canadian law.
Thibault is accused of bilking taxpayers of $700,000 but she said "the Queen can do no wrong" and that as the monarch's representative, she cannot be charged with the alleged crime.
The motion, filed in Superior Court, says Judge Michel Auger erred in law earlier this year when he ruled there's enough evidence to proceed to trial.
Thibault's motion will be heard Friday in Quebec City.
She faces six charges, including two counts of fraud, one count of breach of trust, fabrication of false documents and using false documents related to her 10-year reign.
The federal and provincial auditors general blasted Thibault for allegedly using expense accounts for an array of personal items.
The federal report showed she double-billed the federal and provincial governments to the tune of $129,000.
More than $1.7 million was paid out to the former Quebec viceroy between April 1997 and March 2007.
About $1 million was spent on official duties, while the rest went to expenses already covered by the Quebec government or for activities not related to official duties, the audit found.
On some of Thibault's travel claims, the only agenda item listed was golfing or skiing.
Among the receipts that raised eyebrows are those for a $59,000 garden party, a $30,000 Christmas party and bills for three different meals that were had simultaneously at three different restaurants.
Ah, the wonders of living in a monarchy :) Some people do get delusions of grandeur.
Quotebut she said "the Queen can do no wrong" and that as the monarch's representative, she cannot be charged with the alleged crime.
So what's the Queen think?
Sovereign immunity don't mean what she thinks it means. And shit.
Representatives of the Queen are not Heads of State, and they certainly re not the Sovereign, and thus don't have immunity.
She knows it, she's throwing the dice in case she falls on the one judge that is too dumb to seat on a tribunal.
You know what would be ballsy as all hell? Queen Elizabeth firing her. In public.
It'd be like Reagan shitcanning the ATCs, but with a better wave.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on June 12, 2012, 09:02:35 PM
You know what would be ballsy as all hell? Queen Elizabeth firing her. In public.
It'd be like Reagan shitcanning the ATCs, but with a better wave.
Projection, queen's response: "The queen can do no wrong, but the queen
can err, and clearly did so in placing trust in this individual. Your personal expenses are not made in my name, so no royal prerogative for you."
Quote from: CountDeMoney on June 12, 2012, 09:02:35 PM
You know what would be ballsy as all hell? Queen Elizabeth firing her. In public.
She's already fired, she's not lieutenant-governor anymore.
Quote from: Drakken on June 12, 2012, 09:09:21 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on June 12, 2012, 09:02:35 PM
You know what would be ballsy as all hell? Queen Elizabeth firing her. In public.
She's already fired, she's not lieutenant-governor anymore.
Gotcha.
I thought "former" was maybe some sort of French Quebecois thing. :unsure: Yeah. That's it.
Quote from: Drakken on June 12, 2012, 09:00:27 PM
Representatives of the Queen are not Heads of State, and they certainly re not the Sovereign, and thus don't have immunity.
She knows it, she's throwing the dice in case she falls on the one judge that is too dumb to seat on a tribunal.
of course they don't have immunity and of course she knows it. It's a dealying tactic, but one that will have to be carefully studied before the judge can answer that request. Hence, more time, more costs to us. All of this because we insist on keeping old useless traditions.
I was just having an argument about this kind of thing with my friend yesterday.
He was being stupid and republican and one of his arguments was the royals aren't held by the law. I of course said if a royal does commit a crime and could get away with it technically then the government would quickly change some rules and do some legal jiggery pokery so they could be prosecuted.
Will be interesting to see how this works out.
Well now, Charles I was executed for the crime of high treason. I also recall Princess Anne getting done for speeding on several occasions when she was younger.
Then there is Parliamentary Privilege, a partial immunity to certain laws so that legislators can speak freely about matters of public concern.
But I wouldn't think that the Royal Prerogative extends to expenses fiddling, the costs of throwing out this case should be added to her punishment imo.
This story illustrates well the Canadian French-English divide.
French: "The wonders of living in a monarchy!"
English: "Oh, just another corruption story from Quebec!"
:P
I think the thread title is debatable. After Freddy they didn't have that many hits anymore.
Quote from: viper37 on June 12, 2012, 09:38:51 PM
Quote from: Drakken on June 12, 2012, 09:00:27 PM
Representatives of the Queen are not Heads of State, and they certainly re not the Sovereign, and thus don't have immunity.
She knows it, she's throwing the dice in case she falls on the one judge that is too dumb to seat on a tribunal.
of course they don't have immunity and of course she knows it. It's a dealying tactic, but one that will have to be carefully studied before the judge can answer that request. Hence, more time, more costs to us. All of this because we insist on keeping old useless traditions.
This case is mostly because we keep hammering that nail. Let it rest already. All this crap for 700k?
Quote from: CountDeMoney on June 12, 2012, 08:52:51 PM
Quotebut she said "the Queen can do no wrong" and that as the monarch's representative, she cannot be charged with the alleged crime.
So what's the Queen think?
Whatever Stephen Harper tells her to think.
Quote from: Viking on June 13, 2012, 06:24:47 AM
Whatever Stephen Harper tells her to think.
'Tis ain't
House of Cards, FU.
Quote from: Pitiful Pathos on June 13, 2012, 04:28:16 AM
This story illustrates well the Canadian French-English divide.
French: "The wonders of living in a monarchy!"
English: "Oh, just another corruption story from Quebec!"
:P
I wonder why it's always the federalists who get caught in corruption scandals though. Either the seperatists are way more intelligent, or they are way more honest ;)
Or way more naiive.
Quote from: Pitiful Pathos on June 13, 2012, 04:28:16 AM
This story illustrates well the Canadian French-English divide.
French: "The wonders of living in a monarchy!"
English: "Oh, just another corruption story from Quebec!"
:P
:lol:
So true.
Anyway, Viper and the Queen should get a room. This love-hate thing is getting old for the rest of us. :P
The Queen should confirm her prerogative powers and tell the Canadian court to stand down.
Then she should attaint Thibault for corruption and treason, transport her to Tyburn, and hang her. Prerogative is a double edged sword . . .
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on June 13, 2012, 09:18:09 AM
The Queen should confirm her prerogative powers and tell the Canadian court to stand down.
Then she should attaint Thibault for corruption and treason, transport her to Tyburn, and hang her. Prerogative is a double edged sword . . .
It sounds so much better when you say it... :P
Quote from: Malthus on June 13, 2012, 08:37:30 AM
Anyway, Viper and the Queen should get a room. This love-hate thing is getting old for the rest of us. :P
I don't do older women.
Quote from: viper37 on June 13, 2012, 09:47:31 AM
Quote from: Malthus on June 13, 2012, 08:37:30 AM
Anyway, Viper and the Queen should get a room. This love-hate thing is getting old for the rest of us. :P
I don't do older women.
Given your obsession I think you'd make an exception for the queen :perv:
On a creepy sort of tangent, someone bought a used pair of the queens panties recently. ick.
Quote from: Drakken on June 13, 2012, 07:03:19 AM
Quote from: Viking on June 13, 2012, 06:24:47 AM
Whatever Stephen Harper tells her to think.
'Tis ain't House of Cards, FU.
You might think that, I couldn't possibly comment.