Tony At 10: LIFE IN THE BIG CITY; BLOG # 133; MAY 30, 2014

THE MESSAGE:

LIFE IN THE BIG CITY

THE CITY OF TORONTO

Toronto has edged ahead of Chicago to become North America's fourth most populous city. Already the largest city in Canada, Toronto's new population estimate is 2.79 million — beating Chicago's 2.7 million people. The numbers are based on the cities proper and do not include the surrounding metropolitan areas.

THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL

The city has 47 councillors who consistently vote against anything that Rob Ford proposed or favoured. They seem to be against anything that would add to the progressive side of the city. The mayor is an admitted 'crack' cocaine user. The Toronto Star has singled him out as their favourite target.

CITY STREETS AND THOROUGHFARES

It is impossible today to find a major east / west street that is not undergoing construction. The traffic lights in the city are totally out of sync with the flow of traffic. Major expressways are an invitation to the hardy commuter to hope that, "Today will be different". I will be home in less than one hour.

PEDESTRIANS

They challenge the dreaded flashing hand on stoplights at busy intersections. Either they don't know the "rules of right-of-way" or they choose to ignore them.

THE TORONTO MAPLE LOSERS

What should be the most competitive hockey franchise in the NHL has become a frustrating, complacent group of consistent underachievers. They are the butt of jokes, the stuff of futility and the epitome of a metaphor depicting the excrement of the overfed equine.

CITY RESIDENTS

There is not enough space or time to include a synopsis on this topic. Allow me to sum it up by saying that Toronto is a unique conglomeration of communities, each with its own corresponding set of differences and challenges.

I thought I had heard and considered it all. What follows is a spite filled, if unbelievable, example of human pettiness and conflict. I must admit; however, that I did emit a few chuckles.

SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE - ONTARIO

RE: Paris Morland-Jones and John Morland-Jones, Plaintiffs

– AND –

Audrey Taerk and Gary Taerk, Defendants

BEFORE: Justice E.M. Morgan

COUNSEL: Paul V. McCallen and Pamela Miehls, for the Plaintiffs

Brian Shiller and Angela Chaisson, for the Defendants

HEARD: April 25, 2014

THE BACKGROUND

This hearing is about two neighbours who live a rather luxurious lifestyle in stately homes in Toronto's Forest Hill District. They live across the street from one another. The Plaintiff is an oil company executive; the Defendant, is a psychiatrist. They do not seem to like each other, and neither do their respective spouses. The crux of the case is that the Taerks' behaviours are constantly interfering and interrupting the peaceful life of the Jones family.

THE BATTLE:

Jones has installed several video cameras, two of which are aimed directly at the Taerk residence.
The camera records Audrey Taerk scooping her doggie doo into a plastic bag and walking across the street towards the Jones house. She is seen returning empty handed. It is assumed that Taerk deposits the bag into the Jones' garbage can.
A cease and desist letter was sent, from Jones' lawyer, to the Defendants after Mr Taerk was captured on video walking his dog and allowing it to urinate on the Jones' bushes.
The Taerks chose not to respond and it was argued by the Plaintiffs' attorney that this was an admission of guilt.
The story escalates into deliberate mischief by parking one of their cars on the street directly in front of the other person's home.
Ms. Taerk is accused of standing in her driveway taking pictures of the Jones house and photographing Jones' housekeeper walking their dog to a strategic spot close to Taerk's property to perform its duty.
Ms. Taerk has testified that, in fact, she has not taken any pictures but rather has been pretending to do so by simply pointing her phone and clicking it randomly.
Ms Jones accuses Mr Taerk of walking by the Jones' house with a voice recorder in order to capture Ms Jones directing profanity or insults at him. In some cases he holds up the recorder for her view just to annoy her.
On one of the tapes, Ms. Taerk can actually be heard prompting Mr. Taerk to go out and goad Ms. Jones in this fashion.
The antics have only gotten worse. Ms. Ms Jones has shouted at the Taerks from her front yard, and Ms. Taerk has given Ms.Jones “the finger” from her front driveway.
The Defendants have apparently called the police on the Plaintiffs numerous times in recent years; the Plaintiffs have responded by retaining a criminal lawyer to attempt to have a peace bond issued that would restrict the Defendants’ movements. All of that has been to no avail.

JUDGE'S COMMENTS

It is a repeated form of hijinks that could, if a sponsor were found, be broadcast and screened weekly, although probably limited to the cable channels high up in the 300 range.

In my view, the parties do not need a judge; what they need is a rather stern kindergarten teacher. I say this with the greatest of respect, as both the Plaintiffs and the Defendants are educated professionals who are successful in their work lives and are otherwise productive members of the community. Despite their many advantages in life, however, they are acting like children. And now that the matter has taken up an entire day in what is already a crowded motions court, they are doing so at the taxpayer’s expense.

THE RESOLUTION

There is no serious issue to be tried in this action. The Plaintiff’s motion is therefore dismissed. There will be no costs order. Each side deserves to bear its own costs.

THE QUESTION: