Public Commons

Part of Court cases

Tuesday September 9 or 20, 2008

Unless otherwise noted all reports were written by M. Monastyrskyj, CELOS researcher.

Officers from 14 Division enter the Kiss Cup Bar and Restaurant, conduct a search and issue 12 tickets. (Some of the tickets said September 9. Others said September 20. The Kiss Cup owners said one of those dates is incorrect, but I don't know which is the right date. The owners speak English, but not well and communication is hard. In court, they relied on an interpreter.)

Tuesday November 4, 2008

The case is on the 9am docket in courtroom C, Old City Hall. Courtroom C is provincial offences court. At 9:55, the Crown attorney calls out the name of the owners of the Kiss Cup. (The family owns a numbered company which in turn owns the Kiss Cup.) When the Justice of the Peace looks at the tickets issued by the police he is confused because six of the tickets have been issued to someone named Ying who is not in court today. The husband tries to explain but his English is hard to understand. His teenage daughter interprets for him, because the court's Cantonese interpreter isn't available. The JP asks the daughter for her name. Her last name is Luo while her father's is Law. It's the same name but the girl's spelling reflects Mandarin pronunciation while the father's is based on Cantonese. The JP wants to know who Ying is. The daughter explains that Ying is the name of the previous owner of the Kiss Cup.

The Crown attorney doesn't know why there are different names on the two sets of tickets. He asks that the matter be held down (delayed) while he goes outside to talk to the family.

At 10:20 the family appears again before the JP. The Crown says he isn't ready to set a trial date and asks the JP to have the matter return to courtroom C. He says he will try to rectify the discrepancy. He asks the JP to issue a "bench summons" for Ying under the section 51 of the Provincial Offences Act. The JP issues the summons. The summons is an order requiring Ying to appear in person at the next court date. The Crown says the return date has to be a Friday because that day is "liquor court." The family and the Crown agree on December 19.

The Crown will ask that a Cantonese interpreter be present for the father. The daughter asks if there can also be a Mandarin interpreter for her mother. The JP agrees. The Crown says that the family told him that Ying was the previous owner. He says he doesn't know which charges relate to which defendant.

The JP says it might be a question of when ownership was transferred. He tells the family it might turn out that the charges have nothing to do with them. He also orders that the officer-in-charge appear on December 19 to straighten out the matter.

Community listserve comment, Nov.29 2008

Does anyone know what is going on with the new Happy Cup bar on Bloor? The Kiss Cup sign is gone, and things seemed to have calmed down a little, but I see that there is a new bench installed on the street almost in front of the bar and tonight the usual fighting, shouting and loitering was going on all night. Any ideas why the bench was installed? Or what's going on with the bar?

Paul

Community listserve comment, Nov.30 2008

Hi everyone,

here's a bit of info re: The Kiss Cup

The previous owners of the Kiss cup (June 20-November) worked very hard to keep the criminal element out of their establishment. After being beat up a few times and having to replace every window in the front they were pretty successful at keeping those who were up to no good out of the bar. I would pop in multiple times a week and there would be one-two or three men sitting around quietly having a pleasant drink.

So after owning the Kiss Cup a few months and encountering numerous problems they sold the business to Bing. Bing will be offering a menu comprising of Chinese food and has worked with the previous owners to understand the community. Bing also changed the name...to you guessed it...the Happy Cup.

Why the bench?? I have no idea. I'll check into it.

With the policing, and the work being done by the community members and business owners there has been an improvement in the number of dealers and prostitutes hanging out in the streets over the last years. Policing alone will not solve this problem. Having viable businesses that people patronize regularly will increase the people traffic on the street which will increase the safety and civility.

What can you do??

1. Do you know anyone who is looking for a inexpensive place to start a business? We need to entice new businesses to locate on Bloor between Lansdowne and Dufferin. The 3 new art galleries have dramatically increased the positive traffic to our neighbourhood.

2. Shop, walk and hang out on Bloor. The more the merrier. Not only do the businesses need the community to support them but we need to fill our streets with regular activities.

See you on Bloor!

Donna

Friday December 19, 2008

The Kiss Cup is on the 9am docket in courtroom C, Old City Hall. Their case comes up shortly after 9, but neither the Laws (the people who just sold the Kiss Cup) nor the Yings (the people who sold the Kiss Cup to the Laws) are in court. The police officers who issued the tickets to the Yings and the Laws aren't in court either, although at the previous court appearance the Justice of the Peace issued a bench summons for them to appear. The Justice of the Peace and the Crown attorney decide that an ex-parte trial will be held on April 3, at 9am in courtroom C.

Friday April 3, 2009

Summary: The Crown attorney withdrew all charges against the former owner of Kiss Cup Bar and Restaurant because there were two different dates on the tickets issued by the police and one of those dates was wrong.

Details: It was a somewhat confusing morning in court. First, some background information about the Kiss Cup: in the summer of 2007, members of a local community group, Dig In started noticing drug dealers hanging out at the Kiss Cup which is located at 1274 Bloor St. W on the north side between Emerson and St. Clarens. Police were already aware of the problem as was Councillor Adam Giambrone's office. In 2007 and 2008 the bar was raided more than once. One of the people who used to spend time in the Kiss Cup was Judy Bishop. Another was Jerry Leblanc.

In June 2008, the bar was temporarily closed for various liquor violations. The owners, people by the name of Ying, sold the business. The new owner put his daughter and his son-in-law, Kam Ho Law, in charge. On September 20, 2008 two police officers entered the bar and issued twelve provincial offences tickets for various violations. Six of the tickets were issued to the previous owners, the Yings, while the other six were issued to Kam Ho Law. (The Laws have since sold the business to another man. They told me their experience with the police was the reason they sold it.)

When I arrived in court before 9am, the Law family was already sitting in court, but the Yings weren't there, probably because they were no longer the owners when the tickets were issued. Although Kam Ho Law's name was on at least some of the tickets the charges were actually against a numbered company Ontario 175988 Ontario Inc, which is owned by Kam Ho Law's father-in-law.

Kam Ho Law approached the Crown attorney who suggested he talk to the police officer to see if they could come to an agreement about the charges. The Law family, Kam Ho, his wife, children and an interpreter who speaks both Mandarin and Cantonese went outside with the officer. When they came back, the officer told the Crown that the family wanted a trial.

The family sat down next to me and showed me photocopies of some of the tickets. One ticket read Liquor Licence Act, failure to ensure experienced person supervising the premises. This may be a reference to the teenage daughter who sometimes did her homework on the premises.

The interpreter approached the Crown and said Kam Ho Law wanted to talk to him. The Crown told Law he was ready to proceed on three charges, but would agree to withdraw two of them if Law would plead guilty to a violation of the Fire Marshals Act and pay a $150 fine. The Crown said Law had locked the front door when there were people inside the bar, "You can't do that."

Law said the charges weren't fair and that the police officer was engaging in an act of revenge because of a confrontation that had happened earlier. The Crown attorney replied that he wasn't there and that he didn't have anything against the Laws. He repeated, "You can't lock the door with people inside." The Crown said he was giving Law a chance but would proceed to trial if that's what Law wanted. "He has a right to a trial," the Crown said. During the discussion, Law pointed out that some of the tickets were issued on the wrong date.

Then the Crown asked the police officer if Law was the owner. When Law said his father-in-law was the owner, the Crown asked Law what his relation to the bar was. Law said he and his wife managed the bar. The Crown asked Law if he had authorization to proceed to trial on the owner's behalf. Law pointed out that the father-in-law wasn't there when the tickets were issued. The Crown said that didn't matter. Law said his father-in-law was outside in the corridor. The Crown told Law to get his father-in-law, adding "I just wasted my breath" because it's up to owner alone to decide whether to go to trial.

When Law came back with his father-in-law, there was a complication. While the Chinese interpreter spoke both Mandarin and Cantonese she didn't know the father-in-law's dialect which is Sichuan. His daughter had to translate. The Crown spoke English, the interpreter translated it into Cantonese and the daughter-in-law translated it into Sichuan. After talking to the Crown, the family went out into the hallway with the interpreter. In the meantime the court dealt with other matters.

The family came back with a piece of paper written in English and Chinese. Signed by the father-in-law, it authorized Kam Ho Law to act on his behalf. The Crown attorney stood up and told the Justice of the Peace he was withdrawing all the charges, because "upon review of the informations" he noticed there were two different dates on the tickets. He told the family they could go.

The courtroom was almost empty. Seeing me, the Crown asked if I had a matter before the court. I said I was with the family and that I was just observing. The father-in-law said I was a member of the community who was monitoring the case. Forgetting for a moment that court was still in session I asked the Crown if I could talk to him. He responded sharply, "No I can't talk to you." I went outside with the family and waited for a recess to talk to the Crown. A few minutes later the Crown left the courtroom. I apologized for speaking out of turn in court and talked to him briefly about what I had seen. He confirmed that all the charges had been withdrawn but added that he could have proceeded on three of them if he had wanted to.

After speaking to the Crown I went to eat with the Law family. The Laws told me their version of what happened when they were issued the tickets. They say they never locked the door, but that they did push against the door to keep drug dealers out. The previous owners had been criticized by the community for allowing drug dealers on the premises. The Laws say they have DVDs from their security cameras that show what happened that night and that they were prepared to show those DVDs if the matter had gone to trial.

The Laws also said that the Chinese interpreter told them not to fight the tickets. According to the Laws, the interpreter told them they wouldn't be able to win. Of course, I don't speak Chinese and wasn't there for that conversation.