“The Coutts 2” (began as ‘The Coutts 4’).
The Prosecutor (Steven Johnston) is appealing the jury decision – – not guilty of Conspiracy to murder RCMP Officers.
The 2 men remain locked up (for 2.5 years now). The only improvement is that they are FINALLY being processed.
In Lethbridge Court of King’s Bench, Crown prosecutor Steven Johnston and defence lawyer Katherin Beyak agreed the sentencing hearing would begin Aug. 26. Four days are set aside. The first two days will involve a finding of facts heard in the case. After a one day break, it resumes Aug. 29.
Two of the co-accused (originally, the Coutts 4) were released on a plea deal, early February this year, 6 months ago. A plea deal places information beyond public reach. It’s a gag order.
Things happen for a reason. There’s a pattern that emerges as more information sees the light of day.
(If you assume I am saying this in reference to the men in the Coutts trials, you are wrong.)
Sometimes weird behavior is as simple as someone’s act of desperation.
Or, one desperate person “has the goods on” someone else.
The way the Mafia works. In the darkness, it’s hard to discern the alleyways.
Where is the top of the heap? Where did it start?
The Coutts 3, a different set of men: Alex Van Herk, Marco Van Huigenbos, and George Janzen await sentencing.
“. . . The sentencing has been complicated by the refusal of Van Huigenbos to be interviewed by a probation officer for the preparation of a pre-sentence report (PSR), which is used to inform judges’ decisions regarding sentencing. Van Huigenbos told Robert (Kraychik, Rebel Journalist) that the questions that Van Herk was asked in his PSR interview seemed too invasive, asking about political beliefs and religious practices. “He further told me that he has expectations that he will face more severe consequences — that’s his word — from the judge, given that his lack of compliance may be interpreted as intransigence.”
Opinion is divided on Marco’s position regarding the pre-sentence report (not submitting one). I (Sandra speaking) respect his position. He explains his views very well; he knows the inside stories. His actions have been informed, well thought out, even-handed, every step of the way, in spite of all. He is an intelligent and honourable man.
Every step of the way he has been motivated by the well-being of others – – getting money to the families of the Coutts 4, for example. Those working men were locked up, unable to provide for their families. He had the advantage of not being locked up. He spoke up, relentlessly.
I know Marco from listening to him on videos, and from one encounter in person. Early on in the Coutts debacle, with his own trial off in the distance, I tried to support him with a financial contribution. His contribution to the public good is invaluable. He would not accept my contribution; the Coutts 4 needed the money more than he and his family did. He requested, please contribute to help them.
So, think about it: Marco Van Huigenbos would view the prosecution of the Coutts 4 as foul play. . . . Right?
I searched the net and found “Unwarranted criminal prosecution”.
People argue Marco should do this. He should do that.
Yes, but. Lawyers are expensive – – justice is far from free OR fast. And you have to be able to counteract at least some of the propaganda, the “smearing”. Marco is a young man, with a young family; he resigned the position of Town Councillor (Feb ’24); he has a business to look after.
- I argue;
- The postings on my blog argue (category Health, sub-category Vaccinations (including corruption of science & govt)
Canada is on trial, from top to bottom. Covid brought it to a head. Our will to break-the-back of Corruption is on trial. Marco’s next step is up to him. I support him. No second-guessing and no pressure.