Caveat LectorVol. 11, The

A Journey of Dean-scovery: Interview with Interim Dean Bilson * Saddle Pals: or, How Two College of Law Students Are Changing the Western Novel Game * Tsilhqot’in Nation v. British Columbia: A Few Months On * Law Library Committee Update * Justice Fish on Campus: An Eye for an Eye * SLR Lecture: “Our Broken Democracy—and How to Fix it” * Dating Resume of a Supreme Court Justice * Financial Life After Law School: Expectation versus Reality * Nebulous Contentions for Honest Casuists * Top 10 Similarities Between Hogwarts and Law School * September Meme Contest Results * THIS IS NOT LEGAL AD-VICE * I, Object * Lloydminster Firm Crawl * Me, Brazil, and the Dream of the Giant Hat *

Ode to an ESB SNAIL * Law Team Wins Gold!

How Dean-Lightful! Bilson Returns to the Dean’s Office, the Lawbrary Still Stands, and Other

Updates from a Magical Semester.

THE CAVEAT LECTORVOLUME 11, ISSUE 2

MANAGING EDITORS Caeli MacPherson Kate Rattray COVER/PHOTOSHOP Brandi Rintoul EDITORS Keith Barron Alanna Carlson Nat Chelick Pierre Hawkins Thomas Hynes Julia Kindrachuk Matt McMahon Brandon Veenstra DISCLAIMER The editors of the Caveat Lector, in their infinite wisdom, do not necessari-ly endorse or condone the opinions discussed here-in. The submissions are the views of your peers. Take it up with them. MISSIONThe Caveat Lector exists to be redundant. It also exists to publish and make available informa-tion and creative works from law students, all the while maintaining a standard of journalistic integrity. Well, maybe not integrity, but something close. CONTACT US Caveat Lector C/O College of Law 15 Campus DriveSaskatoon, SK S7N 5A6 uofscaveat@gmail.com

A Journey of Dean-scovery: INTERVIEW WITH INTERIM DEAN BILSON Julia Kindrachuk

On behalf of the Caveat Lector, I recently had a dean-lightful sit down with In-terim Dean Bilson, where we discussed everything from university policy to the many talents of the faculty. While Sanj’s recent Hou-dean-I Act caught us all off guard, with a three-peat dean at the helm, we have nothing to be worried about.

Caveat: How did you land the illustrious position of interim Dean?Interim deans are appointed by the Provost, who consults with the outgoing Dean and Associate Deans within the College to identify possibilities. It is not a process involving any sort of application.

Caveat: You’ve been interim Dean twice now, why do you think you were chosen for the position?Because I have done it before. In this situation, where there is no possibility of a transition period, having somebody who at least knew what the job entailed or who to ask if questions arose, was seen as a positive characteristic.

Caveat: As a repeat Dean, what do you like most and least about the posi-tion?I actually do like the contact with alumni. I’ll never be as charming as Sanj, but I think it really is interesting to find out what has happened to our students. If you are a faculty member, one of the limitations is that you sort of wave good-bye when students leave the building, unless you make an effort to connect with the legal profession, you don’t find out how they turn out.

There are always things one would rather not have to do - I would rather not have students guilty of academic offences, or required to discontinue. Some-times one has to be the bearer of bad news to people. Human interactions are always unpredictable and sometimes difficult, the Dean is expected to over-see that as well, which can be kind of a pain, but I think that is true of any job. There are also lots of reports and paper that you have to keep on the move and that is less interesting.

Caveat: Has the University’s image suffered as a result of the events sur-rounding TransformUs?I would be sorry if that were the case. I know that there was a lot of hoo-ha in the spring, I think a lot of people did feel kind of let down when the university seemed to kind of implode. People did things and said things that seemed kind of odd. Universities are very resilient. In a situation like this, individual faculty members go on pursuing their objectives: teach students, supervise grad stu-dents, and pursue research. (continued on next page)

As long as those components are sound, I don’t think people need to worry about getting a good educa-tion here. Eventually we need someone to steer the ship, but I think the quality of what goes on in the classroom has not really altered.

In terms of the financial challenges, universities always have financial challenges. They are still dependent on government support and that support sort of rises and falls depending on the mood of politicians and the priority they attach to post-secondary education. Universities have to adjust to different financial cir-cumstances. I think this university is in a lot better shape than it was fifteen years ago, both physically and academically – there has been a lot of new hiring, new faculty positions created, and new buildings and facilities constructed.

Caveat: If you could be stranded on a desert island with any three of your colleagues, which ones would you select and what skills would they provide to ensure your survival?Well I think if you had more than one person, you would have to have Professor Keet as the mediator. I think …[much deliberation and reflection ensues]. I think Professor Larre because she is very practical, has a lot of kind of practical skills, which I think you would really need if you were on a desert island. And then I think Professor Poitras, because she would need to keep reminding us of what we would need to do to be happy.

Caveat: What kind of qualities do you think the Search Committee will be looking for in an incom-ing Dean?There are some big challenges facing legal education. In the case of a professional school like law, you are looking for someone who can oversee the academic mandate of the College but who also recognizes that it is necessary to maintain a strong relationship with the profession and a lot of sensitivity to the fact that most of our students want to pursue a legal career.The challenge for any law Dean is to figure out how to maintain some kind of balance between offering enough variety in courses for students who are preparing for all kinds of things while at the same time responding to what the legal professions seems to be increasingly defining as a kind of core curriculum for law schools.

Caveat: To the best of your knowledge, how has the position of Dean, and perhaps the values that go into selecting a Dean changed over time? I mean I have been around for a fair amount of time but not the whole life of the law school.I think there has always been an expectation that a Dean would carry-out a kind of liaison function with the profession and I think that is still important.

The fundraising aspect is fairly different. Universities and law schools are more reliant than they used to be on outside funding. Universities are having to do more in terms of systematic cultivation, in our case alumni are really our donor base. That kind of external role has expanded a lot and we have to be looking for someone who has a lot of public skills.

I think there is more of an expectation now that Deans will part of the University decision-making appa-ratus. I think law schools used to be pretty internally focussed. A Dean’s primary job was to look after his academic world. There wasn’t really a lot of central university planning or strategizing or policy-making and there is a lot more of that now ... The same ingredients are there, but the balance has changed a bit. Certainly external expectations are much higher than they were.

The Caveat Lector thanks Dean Bilson for the interview, and we are grateful for her willing interim leader-ship.

Saddle Pals: or, How Two College of Law Stu-dents Are Changing the Western Novel GameKate Rattray

Taming the wild, wild west can be a harrowing feat in itself, but somehow cowboys Filip Cupial and Ian Ross have managed to make it to their third year of law school while writing the Great American West-ern novel.

Curious to learn more, I moseyed on over to Ian’s bunk house to partake in a traditional cowboy sup-per with the writers and their advisor, Shayne Bar-rie. Greeted by a feast of steak, potato, and beans fit for only the toughest of pioneer men, I dragged up a chair and sat a spell.

Their currently-untitled story centres on Dodge City, Kansas in the late 1880s and follows the adventures of Marshall John Ross: a square-jawed lawman attempting to maintain order in an often violent and brutal town. Ross is a cool and calculat-ed character – an old Texas Ranger with a wife at home and a lifetime of experience laying down the law in pioneer towns.

Joining Ross in this wayward setting are characters like The Coyote Kid – a heavy-drinking cowhand with a heart of gold and a penchant for trouble. “It’s like the shirts,” says Fil. “The Coyote Kid would probably say ‘I don’t look for trouble – trouble finds me’.”

Bearcat – a rather mysterious character – is a 40-something trapper who marches to the beat of his own drum. His rugged, enormous physique hides the fact that he is surprisingly intelligent and well-read. Make no mistakes, though: he is a tough-as-nails mountain man.

So, how did these two cowpokes come together to write a western novel? Fil and Ian met in their first year of law school, but it took about one year before they became close enough to disclose their love for the western history genre to one another. After many conversations revolving around this intrigu-ing world, they set out for Louis’s, sat down, and plotted out a story over a beer (or two). Fil and Ian’s creative process is simple: one person writes while the other person waits. Though they

trade off writing duties and reconvene regularly to go over plot development and to see where the sto-ry is going, each person has free reign to write what they want given the strong bond of trust between the writers.

Recently, the writers went on a research trip to Ore-gon. During their visit, they scouted out some loca-tions and sought to better understand the cowboy life. They gained inspiration from a hike along some bluffs on the Columbia River, drank at an old-time saloon in Winthrop, Washington, and even took in a trail ride. Though they had expected to ride their horses across harrowing ridges and other rough terrain, it turned out that they were joined on their excursion by a group of six-year-olds. Nevertheless, Fil and Ian appear well-suited to the frontier life: “at one point [on the trail ride], some of the kids got scared so we sheltered them with our bodies and our horses by going in the front. When we re-turned, the ranchers wanted to offer us a job!”

The writers are also went on a research trip to the Dakotas, Montana, Wyoming, and Nebraska over Reading Break with a couple of hired hands, third-years Nat Chelick and Taylor Carson, for protection. When I spoke with them prior to the trip, the writ-ers hoped that their journey would bring further inspiration and allow them to get in touch with the people: “we want to talk to the ranchers, share a beer with them.”

Since that fateful day, Fil and Ian have nearly com-pleted their first draft of the novel and hope to find a publisher next year. Their project team has also grown – joining them in this creative pursuit are Shayne Barrie, their illustrator and advisor; Thom-as Hynes, their editor; and Brooklyn Thorpe, their assistant editor (currently on administrative leave).

If you have a similar enthusiasm for something not law-related, whether it be writing, music, or some other artistic pursuit, the writers encourage you to find time to pursue it: “just do it – what’s hold-ing you back? People can come up with a million reasons not to do something, but carpe diem … It would be a lot easier for us not to do this, but [we] have really enjoyed the process.”

Now, saddle up with a cup of campfire coffee and enjoy the first selected excerpt from Fil and Ian’s novel!Editor’s note: All characters appearing in this work are fictitious. Any resemblance to real persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental.

Seated at a table nearby were three Bar B cowhands, all Texans, who had been watching Lola with eager anticipation, waiting for her to near their table so they could get a closer look or maybe a quick embrace after spending weeks in the saddle on the trail. Lola, waiting for the Bearcat to look up from his plate and finding him unwilling to acknowledge her presence, threw out a chair at his table and stood her right leg on it. The Bearcat didn’t even blink at this, and several men sitting nearby laughed with amusement. Char-lie Peters, resting his fat forearms on the bar, could scarcely believe his eyes.

The Bearcat was said to have gotten his nickname after he had allegedly wrestled and killed a mountain lion back in Colorado with just his bare hands and a Bowie knife at his disposal. Only one other trapper had corroborated the story, but as the Bearcat was a giant of a man, it did not seem improbable. Standing 6’6 in his socks and weighing at least 270 pounds of mostly muscle, the man’s hulking frame looked even bigger in the bison robe he always seemed to be wearing. He had a massive beard that hid his face and gave him a wild, untamed appearance.

Used to attention from the men she met in the saloons, Lola had now made it a point to get the Bearcat to look at her. She pulled the pantyhose down her leg, revealing bare and smooth skin. There was no response forthcoming. She sat down across from the Bearcat, now singing somewhat off key, and leaned down trying to catch his eye, her blonde hair shining radiantly in the saloon’s artificial light. Still nothing. The whole drunken room erupted in laughter at this display of utter disinterest by the sober trapper.

Yet the three Texans, still waiting for Lola to pass by their table, did not laugh. The largest of the three, a man by the name of Ben Tucker, stood up. He swayed on his feet as he came up to the Bearcat’s table, having finished off the better part of a bottle of rye on his own. He ignored Lola and instead focused his attention on the Bearcat.

“What the hell is wrong with ya boy? Got a pretty lady sittin’ right alongside ya, and you don’t even give her the time of day!” The Bearcat, looking up for the first time in a long time, glanced at Tucker and held his gaze for a second before returning to his food.

One of the other Bar B men, a man nicknamed Jay, laughed.

“I think he’s as deaf as he is dumb, Tuck!” Jay yelled over the noise. Tucker looked back at his friend and smirked.

“Hey mountain man, I’m talken at you.” He persisted menacingly, slurring his words.

Again, the Bearcat sat motionless as he continued to chew his steak. Tucker, beginning to feel like a fool since the room now increasingly focused its attention on him rather than Lola, became enraged. His prod-ding had so far done nothing. Just as he heard another man laugh behind him, Tucker kicked out with his right boot at the table. It rattled the table and a glass smashed on the floor.

“Listen ‘ere mountain man. Your ass has been up in them hills so long, you must’ve fergotten what it feels like to have a woman, didn’t ya!” The third Bar B cowboy, an older, seasoned man by the name of Engel, didn’t like where the conversation was going. Apprehensive, he called out to Tucker.

“Tuck, the boss told us, no trouble tonight!”

But Tucker, feeling that he had couldn’t sit back down now without his reputation suffering, lashed out with his right hand, knocking the fork right out of the Bearcat’s hand and partially striking the man’s face. Tucker stood over the table with a look of victory spread all over his face. Watching the Bearcat do noth-ing but stare directly ahead, Tucker believed he had intimidated the man. He decided to push further.“Why you yella belly…” Just as he mouthed the words, the Bearcat dove out of his chair right into Tucker’s chest, knocking them both back heavily into another table. Jay and Engel stood by as the Bearcat got up to his feet and made his way back to his table, clearly intending to continue eating. The movement had been so quick that neither of the Bar B men had a chance to come to Tucker’s aid or break the fall.

Momentarily winded, Tucker finally caught his breath and got to his knees. The whole room seemed to shake with laughter, and no one even seemed to pay particular attention to him anymore. Most consid-ered the confrontation to be as good as ended. For a troublemaker with an ego as large as his, it had been a devastating blow.

Tsilhqot’in Nation v. British Columbia:A Few Months OnLaura Forseille

The historic Supreme Court of Canada ruling this past summer regarding the Tsilhqot’in Nation (Tsilhqot’in Nation v. British Columbia) garnered attention across the country, and for good reason. It was, for one, the first time the Court granted a declaration of Aboriginal title. It also introduced new (higher) consultation requirements for lands where treaties do not apply, and where there are outstanding Aboriginal land claims. Going forward, if there is an Aboriginal title claim to an area, the government will need to obtain consent for any de-velopment activities to occur or to prove a “press-ing and substantial” reason for the development to continue while fulfilling its fiduciary duty to First Nations as required by our constitution. The ruling also clarified the supremacy of provincial laws to areas where Aboriginal title applies, except where the constitution provides otherwise.

Many have argued or suggested that the ruling will bring clarity to defining the duty to consult Aborig-inal peoples. However, many industry players have argued that the decision does the opposite, slowing down development and sometimes halting it, while stakeholders figure out what is required of them by the new legal standards. One could argue that that is what the ruling was meant to encourage – a pause for breath and respectful discussion with those whom the development activities affect most. The ruling has the potential to encourage treaty ne-gotiations between the government and Aboriginal

peoples, and to encourage good faith interplay be-tween Aboriginal peoples and corporations pursu-ing development projects on Aboriginal lands. The ruling encourages stakeholders to find their own certainty – to realize that the tripartite relationship between First Nations, governments, and industry is ongoing and subject to differing goals and values, and will never be completely straightened out by a single ruling by the Supreme Court.

Furthermore, the ruling has led to a furtherance of “reconciliation” as a fundamental objective of the law of Aboriginal treaty rights as per the Supreme Court of Canada in Mikisew. Since the ruling, BC Premier Christy Clark has apologized officially for the wrongful hanging in 1864 of six Tsilhqot’in war chiefs, who were falsely told they were to attend peace talks and were instead hanged for “murder” which they perpetrated in the course of a legit-imate territorial war. The Tsilhqot’in have also created the Dasiqox Tribal Park in their title lands, a place for traditional worship.

Interestingly, the park is in the same area as the Prosperity Mine which has been proposed by Tase-ko Mines Ltd., and which has been rejected twice by the federal government. The overlap of proposed uses seems a microcosm of ongoing tension be-tween stakeholders involved in economic develop-ment on Aboriginal lands. While the effects of the Tsilhqot’in ruling continue to unfold, such stake-holders will have to learn how to operate within a new framework, one recognizing that Aboriginal title to certain lands continues to exist, whether it is officially recognized or not.

Law Library Committee Update Alanna Carlson

As your Law Library Committee student represen-tative, I would like to assuage any fears you might have about our library: it is not going to be compro-mised! Former Dean Sanjeev Anand did an excel-lent job negotiating with main campus administra-tion and the new president and vice-provost are on our side. If anything, the controversy this summer over administrative budget cuts has inspired our College to make improvements to our library. Since the Law Library has not been updated for decades, there is much room improvement. Students are well aware of this, as indicated by the comments about the basement submitted by students to the Future of the Law Library Student Input Survey:

“Downstairs is a dungeon and could be drastically improved. Maybe that’s why I like studying down there.”

“I don’t know why anyone would want to study in the basement. Make it all shelving.”

“The basement is sorta creepy.”

As such, the College decided to ask the legal com-munity for sponsorship and capital funds to reno-vate the library. They are currently considering a partnership with the Law Society of Saskatchewan to make a consolidated provincial law library that would provide services to students, professors, community members, and lawyers. If this plan goes through, they would then aim to integrate the court libraries in some fashion. If you are worried about rural lawyers, please be aware that most court libraries in smaller centres do not have many hard copies, and they are rarely used. A consolidated li-brary would provide a service where lawyers could order books to be sent to them. If you are skeptical that the courts would agree to this, I would agree that it is hard to see the Court of Appeal agreeing to it as they are located in Regina. However, this is all just in the preliminary talks phase so we will have to be patient.

Although Former Dean Sanjeev Anand was the leader for this initiative, Interim Dean Beth Bilson was also on the committee so the work will be

continued. Please keep in mind that things move very slowly in institutional environments like our university, so it is unlikely that anything will be happening soon.

I do have some exciting news in regards to the renovations. The Committee is heeding student suggestions; Sanj made it clear that they are fully on board with getting new chairs and tables with electrical outlets. In September, we met with the university Facilities Management Division archi-tects to discuss possible renovations. During the tour, it became very apparent that one architect was in love with our library (he even made a jazz music metaphor) and knew its history, significance, and design intimately. He explained that because the library has a layered grid or tartan design, any changes must maintain that structure.

To alleviate basement creepiness, he suggested punching a hole in the floor at the South doors to create an open staircase, and installing windows where possible. We also need a full elevator that can access all three floors. The committee also dis-cussed removing the long wall to expand the base-ment into the other half (where there are currently abandoned offices and classrooms, including one with a pretty mural). It is more than likely that the American law reporters on the second floor will be removed to remote storage, and replaced by more study space. The clever architect also suggested in-stalling sound absorbing board around the library to reduce echoes.

Overall, the committee had many excellent ideas; it looks as though there will be positive change in the years to come.

Please let me know if you have any ideas, concerns, or questions. alanna.carlson@usask.ca

Justice Fish on Campus: An Eye for an EyeNicholas Koltun

On October 28, I had the pleasure of attending a thought-provoking lecture entitled “An Eye for an Eye: Biblical Origins and Contemporary Relevance”. The Gertler Family Lectureship in Law was pre-sented by former Supreme Court Justice, the Hon-ourable Morris Fish, Q.C. Justice Fish spoke about Old Testament law and how principles from it are applied and relevant to our current criminal law. Justice Fish started by discussing the lex talionis in the Old Testament of the Bible – the law of talion, or retaliation. The Old Testament talks about an eye for an eye, a life for a life, an ox for an ox – all exam-ples of the lex talionis. Though seemingly harsh, Justice Fish pointed out that this was, in fact, a rev-olutionary concept for the time. The significance of this type of law is that instead of being a vengeful punishment, it prescribed a certain punishment for a certain crime. This punishment was proportional to the crime. In this sense, both the lex talionis of the Christian Old Testament or Jewish Torah was a proportionate compensatory response and there-fore an example of retributive justice.

Justice Fish went on to talk about the apparent con-tradiction of the Christian Old and New Testaments. The Old Testament is often said to show an angry, hateful God whereas the New Testament portrays a loving God. This may be seen on a surface reading of the Bible. However, looking deeper, specifically here at what the lex talionis would have meant to Ancient Israel, one can see that both the Old and New Testament portray a merciful God. This por-trayal is seen in the restraint evident in the lex tali-onis in the Old Testament, as well as in the words of Jesus in the New Testament.

Justice Fish went on to talk about different Chris-tian interpretations of the lex talionis following Je-sus’s time. He noted that many early church fathers were confused about how to view and interpret the lex talionis. Some time later, Immanuel Kant devel-oped a retributive model of judicial punishment, based in part on the idea of the lex talionis of the Bible. His theory designated that the principle aim of punishment was to make the offender feel guilty. In applying a punishment, Kant relied on the princi-ple of lex talionis as the only principle that can

define both a penalty and a punishment. Kant’s penal theory was at odds with that of Jeremy Ben-tham’s utilitarian view of punishment. Bentham proposed a prospective view of punish-ment which was focused instead on the prevention of offense. The risk of punishment gave to both the offender and to society as a whole an incentive to reform. Those that were found guilty would, in theory, reform their ways to eliminate future punishment from subsequent wrongdoing and would therefore try to act in accordance with the law. Those who had not been found guilty would see the punishment that those who were guilty had received and from that would refrain from criminal acts. Bentham stood in opposition to a retributive model of justice.

Kant and Bentham had opposing views on punish-ment. Kant’s view was one that looked backward at the crime that had been committed and provided retribution for those wrongs. Bentham looked at punishment in a forward-looking manner in pro-posing punishment so that potential wrongdoers would refrain from criminal acts in the future. H.L.A. Hart proposed a hybrid of the two.

Hart answered three questions in developing his theory. The first was along the lines of what jus-tifies punishment and why? This question was answered from a utilitarian perspective. That is, the justification for punishment is the creation of a better society. People are not punished because, as Kant would say, guilty crimes ought to be punished. The second question that Hart answered was the question of whom should be punished. Finally, Hart answered the question of how severely a per-son should be punished. These last two questions were answered from a retributive perspective.

Hart’s theory regarding punishment has been ad-opted in Canadian criminal law for the past number of years. In 1984, the Canadian Sentencing Com-mission was tasked with evaluating sentencing in Canada. From this report came a codification of Hart’s theory in s. 718 of the Criminal Code outlin-ing the purposes of sentencing. This codification showed both retributive aspects from the lex tali-onis, such as in Kant’s theory, and utilitarian ideas seen in Bentham’s theory. (continued on next page)

Justice Fish went on to discuss some issues with the current view of punishment. Justice Fish indicat-ed that the government is moving more and more towards minimum sentences – a practice which he says is unjust. Requiring minimum sentences goes against the idea of lex talionis. Lex talionis is a retributive principle, essentially meaning that you get what you deserve. A minimum sentence does not necessarily mean that the offender gets what they deserve. A minimum sentence may be dispro-portionate to the severity of the offence.

Justice Fish gave the example of a person importing and exporting drugs under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act. Previously, if a person was car-rying a joint while leaving the country for the Unit-ed States, they would be exporting an illegal drug. If they ended up not smoking it while they were in the United States and ended up bringing it back to Canada, they would be guilty of two counts of trafficking drugs and therefore guilty for two mini-mum sentences of seven years each for a total of 14 years, just for carrying a single joint on your person while travelling to and from the United States. This is the example given in R v Smith, where the Su-preme Court of Canada struck down the seven-year minimum sentence for trafficking drugs. From this case came a test for striking down a minimum sen-tence, asking if the minimum sentence was grossly disproportional. This is an example of the contem-porary relevance of the lex talionis principle. Justice Fish concluded that the lex talionis was a revolutionary principle when it was first seen in the Old Testament. It is a moral principle of retribution and proportionality.

I thought the lecture Justice Fish presented was very informative. The lecture, at least from my per-spective, gave a greater understanding of both Old Testament law and current Canadian criminal law and of the relationship between the two.

SLR Lecture: “Our Broken Democracy—and How to Fix it” Katelyn Sheehan

Who are we?#Nerds. The Saskatchewan Law Review (SLR) is a peer-reviewed academic journal run by student editors. The Editorial Board is made up of 15 up-per-year students and 3 third-year students who are managing editors. We also have a supervisory faculty advisor. This year’s faculty advisor is Profes-sor Newman; our last advisor is now a judge (nbd).

What do we do?Edit stuff. Long story short, the SLR Editorial Board selects and edits articles for publication. Published twice annually, the SLR is made available to every-one with a Canadian Bar Association – Saskatche-wan Branch membership. We publish articles on a variety of issues. Most submissions are of interest to people within the province, but we are open to any legal subject matter (we’re looking at you, mar-itime law!)

Why are we writing you? The 17th Annual SLR Lecture was held on October 20, 2014. Andrew Coyne, national affair columnist for Postmedia News, delivered this year’s lecture. You may recognize his name from his ever-so-witty pieces in a number of national media outlets. Mr. Coyne gave a thought provoking and entertain-ing lecture on Canadian politics. Spoiler alert: our democracy is broken. But no worries, Mr. Coyne knows how to fix it. Problems with our system, in-cluding the perils of first-past-the-post, attack ads, media coverage of campaigns, broken politician promises and dismal voter turnout, all contribute to the disturbing state our democracy.

How do we fix this situation? Mr. Coyne has a number of solutions from the most often cited to the innovative. Curbing Prime Min-isterial power seems to be the underlying theme. Proportional representation and mandatory voting offer a starting point. Further, making politicians voluntary sign up to tell the truth and voice their own attack ads will curb the campaign fatigue a lot Canadians face during election periods. Cutting party funding and the size of the cabinet while simultaneously inflating the power of the Speaker of the House will help to clean up our parliamenta-ry democracy. As Mr. Coyne so candidly ended his lecture, “[i]t [democracy] is broke. Let’s fix it.”

If any of this sounded mildly interesting to you, check us out! You can also get at us to submit arti-cles by emailing sask.lawreview@usask.ca.

Dating Resume of a Supreme Court JusticeMichael MacDonald

73 year-old Puisne Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada. I am an exceptional listener, enjoy ice-skat-ing, and friends describe me as being an “all-around good guy.” Other crucial skills have been acquired through a variety of professional and volunteer experiences. I have been active as a professional spouse for roughly 50 years, and I pride myself on performance that is as excellent as it is consistent. Google for photo.

Achievements/Recognitions Double N Earthmovers Ltd. v. Edmonton (City) 2007 (co-authored by Abella J.)

Best Duran Duran Halloween Costume 1986 Recipient

Best in Class – Pumpkin Carving Seminar 1960-62 Academic Year

Professional Experience

2011-Present: Netflix Navigation Aptitude

I have developed morally through making extremely important value-based decisions when choosing what to watch for the evening. ‘Impossible choice’ scenarios occur frequently, and I have gained important analytical skills in finding logical resolutions. 1976-1993: Pet-Related Activities In this demanding position, I learned advanced techniques of canine management. My spouse would spontaneously request that I walk up to four poodles at a time. Through these intense periods my abilities to walk a pet in couple formation (holding hands or not) were upgraded significantly. I also had a turtle for eleven years. His name was “Turtle.” 1960-1961: “Sportsing” Prowess In May 1960 I started to undertake various sessions of “sport”. “Sportsing”, as I fondly called it, included activities such as walking at faster rates, biking slowly, and golfing. During these thirteen months, others perceived a slight improvement in fashion sense and muscular volume. It is possible that these spin-off qualities have since atrophied.

Volunteer Experience

1994-Present (Seasonal)

During these oddly recurring periods of unemployment I would hone my muscular-skeletal reflexes by playing videogames that were/are hooked into a television. Few people truly realize the importance of such dexterity in times of isolation.

Other Skills

I have good decision-making abilities in familial contexts. I am particularly effective at meeting grand-mothers.

Financial Life After Law School: Expectation versus Reality Alanna Carlson & Eduard Matei

First-Year Associate Lawyer Salary ComparisonEduard Matei

Some students enter law school with a reasonably accurate expectation of what the future will hold for them following convocation. Other students have only a vague notion of what the legal market actually looks like, a notion typically fuelled by a combination of the media’s portrayal of the profes-sion and optimism. Being self-assured that getting into law school was the “hard part” of becoming a lawyer, I fell squarely into the second category.

Watching Suits all but assured me that BMW had taken note of my admission to law school and already proceeded to reserve for me a decked out M6. It turns out, however, that although associate lawyers will usually earn respectable salaries by most metrics, there is some considerable variance based on a few factors. In trying to figure out how I could make that BMW mine, I recognized that I needed to answer a few questions.

What city will I work in?What size firms will I be applying to?What about in-house counsel?Is failing Administrative Law really that big of a deal?*

If these questions keep you up at night too, then I hope this article can help you.

The most obvious conclusion we can draw is one that we are all already aware of: if making money is top concern, you want to end up in one of the big economic centers at a big firm. Montreal, Toronto, Vancouver, Edmonton and Calgary all break the $90,000 barrier for first year associates’ average salaries. If you are working in Winnipeg or Quebec City, on the other hand, you will struggle to breach the $80,000 barrier even in a large firm. When looking at smaller firms, though, the averages be-tween cities seem to cluster a little bit closer. Most of the cities above are in the mid-to-high $50,000 range with a few tip-toeing past the $60,000 mark. Finally, bear in mind that all of these numbers show base salaries that do not include bonuses, which can vary.

Although not nearly as heavily advertised to law students, in-house counsel provides another viable employment option after a few years of experience. This graph shows that in-house counsel salaries are fairly similar to those of private firms. It must be noted, however, that unlike the firm salary chart, the in-house counsel data shows expected salaries for lawyers with up to three years’ experience – meaning the averages are a little bit higher than can be expected for brand-new lawyers. Also, keep in mind that although it is not unheard of for lawyers to begin their careers as in-house counsel, it is not the norm.

As can be surmised as well from the above, perhaps the BMW will have to wait until I make partner.

*Note: Failing Administrative Law will likely be a pretty big deal.

Law Firm Billing and SalaryAlanna Carlson

Another factor that can affect your salary is the in-dividual firm procedures for billing and salary. This refers to how you are compensated for your work (i.e., bill hours or standard fees), billable rate, min-imum and maximum billable hours, and also how the partner compensation scheme is structured. When you are considering where you would like to work, it may be a good idea to look into these “behind the scenes” factors. You will want to have a good idea of how the practice areas fit your inter-ests, what will be demanded of you, and how you will be compensated and recognized by the firm. While much of this is mysterious and seemingly ta-boo, you have a right to know what you are getting into, so consider asking recently-retired partners or current associates (but do it quickly, because after about two years of work they tend to clam up!).

As an associate lawyer, you will likely charge your clients by the billable hour. Not everything you do for your client’s file is billable. Your hourly rate will start low and usually increase by a standard increment for five years or until you reach a certain salary (also called ‘lock step’), and then it would increase based on your skills and profitability. You will want to ask about the targeted annual billable hour rate. Firms that are more demanding (read: Calgary and Toronto) will expect around 1600 hours (that’s around seven billable hours per day), while more relaxed firms may ask for 1350 hours (which is like an eight-hour work day, Monday through Friday). The national average is around 1400 hours. Also, in some places, once you reach a certain amount anything above your billable hours is considered a “bonus” where half goes to you and half goes to the firm. It is not common for firms to penalize associates for not hitting their target, but some do. Given that these expectations can vary greatly, you need to know what you are getting into. If your target is 1600 hours (and that sometimes means minimum), then you’ll be working evenings and weekends.

As a solicitor, many tasks will have a standard fee. For example, land transfers will typically have a standard rate so the more you can complete, the more easy income you earn. By contrast, litigators who do lots of research on Quicklaw or Westlaw must be cognizant of how much they are charging their client. Some firms bill each Quicklaw trans-action (up to ~$100/case) directly to the client, while some partners will take that cost as a shared expense and bill the client less. For this reason, many litigators will use CanLii as much as they can to minimize impact to their client.

Your rate of income significantly rests on your ability to ask your clients for money. Many asso-ciates learn the hard way when they do not ask for money up-front and instead rack up a huge bill expecting the client to pay it. If you client is Suncor, they are unlikely to question the bill (though they may ask for a discount of say 5-10%, which would be applied to the entire bill). However, if your client is a local entrepreneur or personal injury claimant, they may have a bone to pick with your research fees and phone calls or may have gone bankrupt or have other reasons why they are unable to pay right away.

As Eddy outlined above, salaries can vary signifi-cantly in each city and with the size of firm. On top of the salary, many associates receive a bonus. This depends on your productivity and what the firm partnership decides. In 2012, half of all law firms paid a bonus to associates (on average, $10,000). Most firms provide some perks or benefits, such as gym memberships, parking, restaurant tabs, snacks and drinks, and professional development. It is widely acknowledged that Calgary firms aim to have their lawyers stay at work as long as possible, and as such provide in-house chefs, food delivery, sleeping rooms, and showers. Whether that is a perk depends on your perspective!

What you should be taking away from this is that your starting salary in a firm of any size may not be more than $60,000, and it could take years to be making above six digits. In fact, first-year associate salaries have been dropping year after year since 2008. Big-Law firms have not been cutting wages like their smaller peers as they are always looking for their next partner when they hire. Although going solo is definitely an option, be aware that usually firms make you sign a non-competition agreement that prevents you from taking all your business with you if you decide to leave the firm. If you’d like to look into associate salaries more, check out the Salary Calculator on the Robert Half Legal website. Your salary will also depend on firm compensation structures, which are outlined in the next section.

Partner StructuresWhile becoming a firm partner is a nebulous and secret affair generally, you would think that earn-ings would dramatically increase once you make partner. In reality, partner earnings on average range between $150,000 - $200,000 (including salary, annual draws, and splits, but not bonuses!). All partnerships require some kind of buy-in, which is usually a year’s worth of salary. Partners have the benefits of enjoying annual profits and distri-butions, as well as a capital return when they retire or leave. Also note that the majority of partners do not have billable hour targets. Looking at it this

way, investing in a partnership is like an alternative pension. Broadly speaking, there are equity and non-equity partnerships, and different firm compensation models.

Equity partnerships are a mutual investment and commitment that is considered full partnership with voting rights, profits, as well as liability. It can take over a decade to make equity partner. Equity partners are more likely to be compensated on an “Eat-What-You-Kill” basis, which sounds like something Harvey Specter would be familiar with. It means that you get paid for what work you do. Smaller firms usually use this model, as it is the most simple. It is also associated with office-sharing models, where all lawyers are essentially solo practitioners but share the space, technology, and assistants.

Non-equity partnerships have no voting rights or shared profit, but they also do not have the big contri-bution fee or liability. Essentially, it is a way for firms to keep you around before they make you a part-ner. Older lawyers who have taken their equity out of a firm may opt to transition to non-equity partner status before they officially retire from practice.

While there are many compensation models for lawyers, Formula-Based Partnership takes into account productivity and rewards partners who are involved in the hands-on management of the firm, while law-yers earn a percentage from the firm. The Subjective Merit Compensation model takes into account the subjective accomplishments and performance of the partners, so partners who train associates, super-vise, and bring in clients earn more. Although it takes more time and effort, the latter model has high prof-its and is more common in mid-large size firms.

This article was written to help students be prepared for the job market in Canadian mid-large law firms, with a focus on Saskatchewan and Alberta. If you notice an error or if you have a different experience or opinion, feel welcome to let us know.

Sources: Salary Calculator, Robert Half Legal 4Students - Canadian Lawyer MagazineCanadian Lawyer Magazine Conversations with lawyers in Saskatoon, Calgary, and Edmonton

Nebulous Contentions for Honest CasuistsOmer KhayyamFor the vexed seekers of laws, both written and unwritten, this humble one has composed contentions to the path of enlightenment. In the fullness of time this ink will be tasted. Is reason discovered or invented? Breath. This is natural law. Hiccup. This is common law. Law must change in order to remain the same. Law must stay the same in order to change.Justice is measured not by the shame and guilt of criminals, but by the shame and guilt of judges. The spirit of the law is utopian; the letter of the law is dystopian. The Socratic method is legato in the beginning and sostenuto in the end. The courtroom is where we let go by clinging on. The dead letter of the law stands still. The living letter of the law runs away. Everything the law is not – is what made it the law. Justice is a playlist of golden oldies remembered for their tune not their lyrics. The spirit of the letter is the future. The letter of the spirit is the past. What satisfies the mind can never satisfy the hearts. The limits of the law are prescribed by the cleverness of lawyers. Is reasonableness another name for mediocrity? Omer Khayyam is the George Contanza Chair in Nebulousness at the U of S. He spends his time studying Legal Bibliomancy and mastering Dark Hado. He will be Clerking for Judge Dredd in the fall.

SEPTEMBER MEME CONTEST“First-Year Law”

Winner: Kristen Bates

Runner-Up: Jon Ponath

Honourable Mention: Ali Bruce

Top 10 Similarities between Hogwarts and Law SchoolKeith B.

1. Confusing obsession with robes.2. Libraries filled with people who go to great lengths to avoid reading physical books.3. School filled with students who have grown up in a magical reality where all their needs are met and the world is at their fingertips.4. Talking with snakes is frequent.5. Walls covered with pictures of dead people. 6. Latin is constantly brutalized.7. Washrooms perpetually filled with the sounds of moaning and crying.8. Students are sorted into cohorts at the beginning of first year, and students in other cohorts are instantly dead to you.9. Old white guys are so popular they could be on trad-ing cards.10. Ridiculous sweaters.

A NOTE FROM JUST RIGHTS

Just Rights will be hosting the annual Painting Justice Art Auction, a popular silent auction fundraiser event during Justice Week (tentatively planned for the last week in Feb-ruary or first week in March). The event will include mu-sical entertainment, appetizers and drinks. The proceeds from the silent auction will go to a Saskatoon charity.

If you are creative, please consider donating a drawing, painting, photograph, poem, or craft! Contact us by email: just.rights@usask.ca

THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE**May or May Not Be Katina

Dear TINLA:Will I be taken more seriously in a pantsuit or a skirt suit?Which is preferable?Signed,How Professional?

Dear How Professional?:

First off: what a boring question. It was merely a few syllables and I had a hard time getting through it.Second, I’ve been accused of lots of things in my super-short time on earth but being taken seriously has never been one of them, so please take the following advice with a grain of salt.Good-fitting dress pants are hard to find for the female form. They’re either too tight or too baggy or show un-derwear lines or aren’t tapered enough or whatever. There’s so much more that can go wrong than on fellas. So, personally, I like to stick with skirts because I think people tend to take you most seriously when you’re confident. Also, anyone who doesn’t take you seriously because you chose skirt over pants is probably a misogynistic a-hole and you’d probably be better off not caring about that person’s reading of you. So choose a skirt for a fun Rorschach test!

Dear TINLA:How do I put together the perfect black outfit?Signed,Bright Colours Depress Me

Dear Bright Colours Depress Me:

Black is undeniably the best colour to wear. Black is slimming, and if you spill something (or lots of things) on your-self most people will be none the wiser. This is most true when wearing leather or pleather. Most spills will literally glide right off your pant leg. So, my advice is pleather pants, black t-shirt, black cardigan, and black boots. You can wear it every single day and most people will assume it’s all different stuff because there are no defining features, and it won’t show its wear.

Dear TINLA:Inspired by Taylor Swift’s most recent music video I want to kill this guy who’s been a real jerk. Do you have any hot tips on how get away with murder?Signed,Blank Space

Dear Blank Space:

We’ve all wondered why that pesky jerk won’t just do us a favour and disappear off the face of the earth, and we’ve all wanted to help that process along. I reached out to criminal law expert Professor Glen Luther for some advice on the subject, to which he replied: “Please don’t bother me with this nonsense.” In the absence of any helpful advice from Professor Luther, I’d like to quote the great Mindy Kaling: “they say the best revenge is living well. I say it’s acid in the face—who will love them now?” A quick google search has informed that me that most acids can burn skin, they just have to be the right concentra-tion. Basically, you’re looking for sulphuric, hydrochloric and phosphoric. A concentrated bottle of any of these will set you back about $75 on eBay. However, I can’t recommend this path because the odds of the person seeing you, or the odds of this getting traced back to you, are too high to be sound.Because I can’t supply any tips on getting away with murder or acid-throwing, I’m going to have to default on the traditional “the best life is living well.” I’d say just float around being that perfect, hands-free-of-blood angel you are and just let him embarrass himself with petty behaviour. Also, make out with as many of his friends as you can.

I, ObjectThomas Hynes

This October, Women in Law (WIL) were official-ly ratified as a student group with the USSU. This puts them amongst the ranks of the other College of Law student groups like Green Legal, Canadian Lawyers Abroad (CLA), or Just Rights. Women in Law is described as a forum for female bonding in the College, and a means through which to promote gender-based equality within the College and the profession of law. The creation of the group really begs the important question - what about the men? Men face countless challenges in law school and surely find it difficult to endure without some sort of “Bro Table” support group.

Cast with shame over appearing too emotional or unmanly, most law students chose not to respond to the Caveat’s request for stories about the trials of law school. One male student, who chose only to go by “Paul”, gave the Caveat an exclusive inter-view. Paul finds himself burdened by the amount of time he has to go to the gym to maintain his masculine physique, despite his high metabolism and above-average lung capacity. Most days he fights to make it to class, as his arms/chest/arms-in-one-day workout leaves him too exhausted for the remainder of the day to do any studying. Given that he’s a white, middle-class, heterosexual male of above-average good looks, he has a lot to live up to: “I mean, there is just this presumption that I’m going to succeed, and all this systemic bias that supports my dream of being a good looking dude in a suit with prestige, but what happens if I fail? I mean, if I fail then I really fail, ‘cause everything is going my way. That’s a lot of pressure, dude.”

While Paul admits that he has the freedom to ex-press his sexuality without repudiation, he worries that the burdens of having so many outlets through which to express himself can be exhausting. The time commitment of the men’s kick line, coupled with the artful nude modeling of the man calendar and the glory and drama of LSA hockey, make it difficult for Paul to find any “me” time. Who will advocate for really, really ridiculously good-looking, athletic hetero men like Paul?

Another student in third year, who can only be

identified as “Mr. Hunter”, also responded to the Caveat. He told the Caveat about his time mooting and how it scared him how much he was respected in the mock courtroom. Mr. Hunter worries that his deep voice and steely gaze gave authority to his argument that wasn’t supported by its substantive merit. A softer, caring man, Mr. Hunter worries also that he will have to spend too much time golfing with the partners to enjoy the children he dreams of siring. “While it’s nice to be welcomed into the culture,” says Mr. Hunter, “the old boy’s club con-sumes a lot of emotional energy. Really, there are only so many games that I can bond over before I have nothing left to give.”

But Mr. Hunter may not have to worry much longer. Rumors are circulating that the old boys club of the legal profession is on the decline. If this exclusive aspect of the profession dissolves, where will the men turn? Sure, they might be able to bond over things like foosball or a richly endowed LSA hock-ey tournament, but there simply isn’t a formalized group for them to come together as men and share just how difficult it is to be a man in the legal pro-fession.

Lloydminster Firm CrawlCaeli MacPherson

Way too early in the morning (like 9 A.M.) on Octo-ber 17, a group of students from the College board-ed a small bus travelling to Lloydminster for the annual Small Urban and Rural Firm Crawl. The Trip was organized by a committee consisting of Terri Karpish, Kristen Bates, Theresia Cooper, Breanne Lothian, and Caeli MacPherson Some students were visiting their home community while others were experiencing the practice of law in a smaller centre for the first time. Several students were ac-tively pursuing employment opportunities. Though the bus ride was long and bumpy, all attendees agreed that the free food, wine, and cupcakes made the trip worthwhile.

The official objective of the Small Urban and Rural Firm Crawls is to expose students to career oppor-tunities available in small urban and rural centres. The first trip went to Weyburn in 2009. Mr. Bill Holliday attended the CBA Showcase in February and provided a presentation on working in small

urban and rural communities. He then invited the students to Weyburn to experience first-hand what he was talking about. A year later, a student com-mittee was formed in conjunction with the College of Law Career Office to plan various trips and to develop initiatives. In previous years, the Commit-tee has visited many communities including, most recently Moose Jaw, Melfort, and the Battlefords. Students have enjoyed experiencing these smaller centres and have found it interesting how different these communities can be.

In my opinion, the best part of the trip was the free cupcakes ... Just kidding (though they were pretty amazing). The best part of the trip was being able to network with lawyers one-on-one in an informal manner. Other highlights included a presentation from community members at a networking lun-cheon, tours of local firms, a meet-and-greet with Justice Young, and the opportunity to network with local lawyers. I was surprised by the substantial need for lawyers in the community. A few firms expressed that while there may be few articling positions readily available, there is definitely a huge need for lawyers in the area. Justice Young gave students a behind-the-scenes tour of Lloydminis-ter’s Saskatchewan Provincial Court where he pro-vided students with advice, anecdotes, and encour-aging words. The day finished with a relaxed wine and cheese where we were able to visit with law-yers on a one-on-one basis. As many smaller cen-tres do not actively recruit, building these networks are important for students looking for employment outside the major city centres. We found Lloydmin-ster to be a friendly, welcoming community full of opportunities.

This year, we were fortunate to have a professor with a personal connection attend the trip. Hav-ing grown up and practised law in Lloydminster, Professor Glen Luther was able to offer a unique perspective on the community. His attendance on the trip, as well as participation in an information session promoting the trip, was greatly appreciated by the students.

The local law firms and community of Lloydminster did a great job of welcoming us into their communi-ty and showing us what the city has to offer.

In addition to the Small Urban and Rural Firm Crawl, the Career Fair and CBA Showcase of Sas-katchewan firms, both hosted at the College, are great opportunities for students to gain exposure to a variety of firms.

THANK YOU to those who contributed arti-cles for this issue:

TINLA (AKA Katina)Keith B.Alanna CarlsonThomas Hynes Omer KhayyamNicholas KoltunJulia KindrachukLaura ForseilleCaeli MacPhersonEduard MateiMichael McDonaldKate RattrayKatelyn Sheehan The U of S College of Law Mens’ Soccer Team If you are interested in writing an article for Caveat Lector, please feel free to reach us at uofscaveat@gmail.com. We are happy to pro-vide suggestions for topics and accept sub-missions covering nearly any topic or genre. We will publish two issues during second semester.

Good luck on your finals, and have a wonder-ful Christmas Break!

Sincerely, Caeli McPherson and Kate RattrayCo-Managing EditorsCaveat Lector

Me, Brazil, and the Dream of the Giant Hat Michael McDonald

I left Saskatoon on May 20th and arrived in Salva-dor, Brazil 20 hours later. My visa had been ap-proved just two weeks earlier, which was a relief, as I was expected in Brazil for an internship. The stars had aligned, dear readers, and I had surprisingly become acquainted with a Brazilian public prose-cutor. Years ago, my family had hosted a Brazilian exchange student, Jose Roberto Polli. Jose’s mother prosecutes criminals for the state of Bahia, and when she learned that I had nothing to do between my first year and second year of law school, she offered me a crash course tutorial of the coun-try’s criminal justice system. So, once my visa was approved, I booked my flight, made a list of neces-sities (sandals, swimwear, a shirt), crammed those necessities into a satchel, and brushed up on my Portuguese. I knew basically none, after all. I stumbled off the airplane in Brazil with my slip-shod satchel dangling in tow. Public Prosecutor Gracas Polli was waiting for me. She is a tall and beautiful Brazilian lady of Italian descent. She wel-comed me with a hug and two kisses, planting one on each cheek. This was the first time I had seen her in person or spoken to her. We sped off in her Sport Utility Vehicle.

Dr. Polli swerved the SUV through a mess of traffic. Little cars and Volkswagon transport buses veered in surprising directions. It seemed like no rules were being obeyed, or, at least, no rules that I could decipher. I will never know. Dr. Polli and I had been chatting and getting to know each other. Her En-glish was strong. She spoke rapidly, needing to slow down and stammer only occasionally. She turned towards me and asked what I wanted to learn during the summer. Dear readers, I need to explain: I am a weak and sensitive individual. The humidi-ty in Salvador is arresting. The cars and buses are brightly-coloured. Tropical plants are very strange. This was the wild scene whizzing by us as Dr. Polli piloted the swerving death machine. In short, the environment had overwhelmed me and I had no

answer for Dr. Polli’s question. She must have took my silence for boredom, as she then explained to me in slow and careful English that we would be attending court the next day.

Dr. Polli was unfamiliar with this particular court. It was a type of substitute assignment. Her colleague was on holidays, and Dr. Polli had been scheduled to appear on the colleague’s behalf. We pulled up to a building which was constructed to resemble a tall sombrero. We walked inside that enormous hat and descended via a spiral staircase. The hearing rooms were down there, allowing participants to escape the excruciating equatorial heat. This particular hearing was in relation to illegal election advertis-ing. There were three people in the room besides Dr. Polli and I, and I did not understand what they were saying. I grasped that Dr. Polli had explained my presence, because everyone was looking at me, pointing at my freckly arms. I gathered from the circumstances and certain words that Dr. Polli then told them what I had told her about Canadian win-ters. They all gasped.

I did not understand the proceedings until after-wards when Dr. Polli debriefed me, but, what had happened was riveting. The witness had described how he saw the advertisements of the impugned candidate on display the day of the election. The defense attorney was twenty minutes late. He was wearing a loose-fitting suit and had arrived after the testimony. He looked over the transcript, indi-cated it was acceptable by yawing his head about, and left. While walking out, Dr. Polli was stopped by two very friendly judges. They were both very excited to meet a Canadian.

Dr. Polli normally works at Terceira Vera Tribunal. This is the third district court of Salvador, where crimes against the person are prosecuted. These include many different crimes of violence and theft. It was surprisingly informal. We could be late, the judge could be late, folders would be strewn about the room, and other officials would pop their heads in, just to say “ola”.

If you pay attention in the few moments of silence, you can hear the quiet clucking of chickens. A chicken coup is located three floors below the Tribunal. On a related note, the cafeteria offered great sandwiches.

Beyond the sandwiches, many exciting things hap-pened at Tribunal. I didn’t understand completely, but I could tell that very serious things were happening around me. When a defendant was present, he or she would be supervised by two guards, armed with serious guns and pillowy neck muscles. The judge would sit and listen to some testimony, then recite her understanding, which would be transcribed by a law student. A screen displayed what was typed, and if the parties agree to the content, it is printed and signed by everyone, and added to the court file. The file then travels to Ministerio Publico where it is received, and a randomizer determines which court it is distributed to next. That court will either hear more testimony or, if all the affidavit evidence had been submitted, the judge would perform a final deliberation to conclude the proceedings.

The other half of Dr. Polli’s job was to write indict-ments (“denuncias”). We would receive gargantuan police investigations. I was fortunate enough to be able to shuffle my dry and pale Canadian fingers through them. These documents used a strict standardized for-mat, which meant I was able to deduce some meaning from them in spite of my awful Portuguese. I looked at the results of wire-tap surveillance, and read inves-tigations of organized crime rings. I was even able to attempt some “denuncias”. The products were dilapi-dated, however, and Dr. Polli could only pat me on the head in response.

By the time I left Brazil, I had met many friends and witnessed many things. When Dr. Polli drove me to the airport at the end of August, I reminded her of our first day in the court which was in the building which was constructed to resemble a sombrero. Her head snapped in my direction, electric Italian eyes squinting at me in incredulity. She informed me that the court was not constructed to look like a sombrero, and I had been mistaken.

An Ode to An ESB SNAIL Alanna Carlson

You appear so studious, with glasses and collar.But when it’s snack time, you’re such a bother.

Out comes the carrots, the hot slurpy tea,the triple-wrapped candy,and you dare to look at me.

Your girlfriend has arrivedto chat audibly for an hour.While you’re conversing, I hope your laptop loses power.

Then when her cell rings, she answers it here, “I’m in the library!”, she saysyet carries on for all to hear.

Then you leave and return, then repeat two more times.What are you doing?!?Just let me read these crimes!

You have a stack of books,a binder, a text.But YouTube is calling, and there’s a Facebook message to check.

Already the lights flicker, and our school work is not complete.Sigh. I’ll see you tomorrow, but damn it, I’m getting back my seat.

LAW TEAM WINS GOLD

The University of Saskatchewan, College of Law Men’s Competitive Soccer team reigned supreme this past season. “We worked hard for it,” said Cam Klein, the team’s top scorer, about the first-place finish. The team has a stunning twenty-five goals, which more than doubles the goals of the next two closest teams. Esteemed Captain Herman Jhangri commented: “we’ve had some great new additions to the team.” New players include gifted playmaker Alyx Nanji, former Captain of an Australian university soccer team; Reilly Quinlan, a “brick wall” goalkeeper; Andrew Dusevic, an experienced winger; and Andrew Bitz, a rock on defence.

“I think the mix of new and veteran players has made us unstoppable” says Arran Ferguson, the team’s pow-erhouse sweeper. Cameron Brightman, widely regarded as the team’s best player, mentioned the game’s pace by noting that: “players like Rich Gorrin, Amjad Murabit, Myles Ross, Brandon Veenstra, and Jade Ped-erson have extremely fast legs - get any of them the ball and it’s a goal.” Some of the veteran players have also added their wise, more refined game to the team. “Scott Hitchings, Mike Crampton and Sean Galloway all produce extremely smart passes. They usually end up setting up a ton of goals,” said Dom Sikora, consid-ered to be the heart of the team as well as its best-dressed player. Duncan McIntyre, a free-kick magician, concurred: “the combination is absolutely lethal.”

Overall, the boys have an illustrious roster and look forward to continuing their success at the 2015 Law Games taking place this January at Dalhousie University.