Thursday, May 31, 2012

The Six Million Dollar Railgate Deal....Who Kept The Ball In The Air?



We've fussed and fussed and fussed about all of this before.

And now, as Ian Reid surmises, in the wake of John Van Dongen's latest attempt to bring clarity to the matter on the floor of Ledge yesterday, it really does look like there was a prior inducement for Mess'rs Basi, Basi and Virk to play 'Let's Make A Deal'

Here's Ian's kicker:

...Van Dongen, referenced a ministry email that says the indemnity was changed prior to the guilty pleas and that meant the defendants’ $6 million liability was waved before their guilty pleas:  “Contrary to the October 2010 public statement by Deputy Attorney General Loukidelis, the Justice Ministry e-mail claimed there was no legal liability priorto the guilty pleas.”
Attorney General Bond agrees that’s what happened.  The change to the indemnity was completed prior to the  guilty pleas utilizing the government’s perceived power to amend indemnities....


Here's the thing.....

If you're gonna play let's make a deal, you need somebody to play the part of Monty Hall.


Because, in this case, it's looking more and more like somebody must have kept the ball in the air while simultaneously holding everyone's hands, tight, between the time that the government let the accused off the hook and the time they subsequently took the bribe....errrr...'inducement'  to help them plead guilty.

Having trouble with that?


Think of it this way.....Once they were released for their legal costs, if somebody didn't step in and play the part of the good Mr. Hall, what was there to keep the accused from going instead for Door Number 3 that would have opened up to reveal, not Carol Merrill, but instead Gary Collins taking the stand for real?


Who, exactly, might that Deal Maker/Third Man have been?

And, given all the obfuscation that has gone on regarding this matter already, I, for one, am starting to wonder about the third leg of this triangulated deal also....



Norm Farrell said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Norm Farrell said...

I feel like the case is proven and continued discussion - necessary, I admit - is of little value. No one, besides BC Liberal partisans, argues that BCR deals, from beginning to end, were not corrupt.

The perpetrators don't even bother to defend themselves. They've simply decided to ignore the upset, assuming it will go away and they won't go to jail.

A few individuals in Britain assumed the same thing about perjury and corruption but they've recently experienced the clamping of handcuffs and they hear the echoes of heavy metal doors closing behind.

Anonymous said...

Curious that they don't deny their guilt, they just say 'prove it'.

lenin's ghost said...

unlike in Britain, the corrupt pigs will walk away untouched