February 22, 2006

Positions of parties:

Marc Lemire:  Wants the tribunal in Oakville, Burlington or Milton.  This is close to where the Witnesses are and my safety is at risk in Toronto due to groups that are associated with the complainant.  At a previous hearing in Toronto, we were followed and harassed by this group.

 

CHRC/Warman: Warman wanted the hearing in Toronto because he has access to cheap accommodation and public transit. It would be too financially hard to have the hearings outside of Toronto.  Warman suggests possibly Kingston, Ontario as a mid way point between Toronto and Ottawa

Note: Warman is being called as a witness by the CHRC and his expenses will be paid by the taxpayers. Keep that in mind when reading his arguments about his costs.

[HTML Format]

February 23, 2006

Positions of parties:

Marc Lemire: We are opposed to the intervention of the Canadian Jewish Congress, B'Nai Brith, Simon Wiesenthal Centre.  It would unfairly lengthen the hearing.  Run up the amount of money it would cost me. Support the intervention of CAFE and CFSL.

 

CHRC/Warman: They Agree to the Jewish groups intervention

[HTML Format]

March 14, 2006

Positions of parties:

CHRC/Warman: Request to add the grounds of "discrimination" of Sexual orientation to the complaint against me

 

Marc Lemire:  If the CHRC is granted this motion, we request make further submissions on the Constitutional Motion

[HTML Format]

August 16, 2006

Positions of parties:

Marc Lemire:  “further particulars and disclosure” from the Complainant, Richard Warman, and the Canadian Human Rights Commission. on Constitutional issues.

 

CHRC/Warman: no

partly Warman / CHRC

October 26, 2006

Positions of parties:

Marc Lemire: With the present motion, Mr. Lemire is in effect attempting to introduce his own human rights complaint against Mr. Warman. He is claiming that Mr. Warman wrote and posted hate messages of his own on the very same website, freedomsite.org. Mr. Lemire argues that Mr. Warman should therefore be added as an additional respondent in the present case.

 

CHRC/Warman: no

November 29, 2006

Positions of parties:

CHRC/Warman: “All information within the possession of Marc Lemire without exception of entire contents of his website which he administers, as well as all the literature (books) referred to on this website and the entire website including all additions (such as information regarding the Commission’s announced expert) to it since September 24, 1999 and up to date on the date of the hearing” (sic throughout).

 

Marc Lemire: no

 

 

and in a very small way, Marc Lemire for not having to disclosure this:

elsewhere that the Respondent has in his possession”.

December 6, 2006

Positions of parties:

Marc Lemire: Mr. Lemire has made a motion seeking the dismissal of the complaint. He alleges that the Statements of Particulars of the Canadian Human Rights Commission and Mr. Warman do not set out material facts sufficient to allow him to give full answer and defence.

 

CHRC/Warman: no

January 3, 2003

Positions of parties:

Marc Lemire: Mr. Lernire is therefore authorized to file the expert's report of Dr. Persinger, which was already communicated to the other parties, 1 gather, on or about December 13, 2006. This will enable Mr. Lemire to call Dr. Persinger to testify as an expert witness,

 

CHRC/Warman: opposed