Human Rights Complaint Against Casino Dismissed

Thursday, April 02, 2009 10:21 AM

Prince George, B.C. – A Prince George man has had his human rights complaint against the Treasure Cove Casino, its owner, some employees and the BC Lottery Corporation, dismissed. Glenn Miller has also been ordered to pay $1,000 each to; Mr. John Major, Steve Leach and Treasure Cove Supply Limited.

Glenn Miller alleged the Casino had barred him for two years because of behaviour which was the result of a mental disability. His his mother spends time at the Casino as part of her social activities and he would like to be able to join her when she is there. However, after a series of incidents, Miller was barred from the Casino. He says the Casino’s refusal to allow him entry was based, in part, on his mental disability and was, therefore, discriminatory. He wanted a ruling that would have the Casino lift the bar and allow him access to it.

The respondents supplied all the correspondence and the voice mails from Glenn Miller, and requested the action be dismissed.

In her decision, B.C. Human Rights Tribunal member Enid Marion said while Mr. Miller claimed to have a mental disability, he had not produced any information that would support that claim.

She also noted Mr. Miller’s correspondence tone “It is an understatement to say that Mr. Miller’s communications are replete with invective, foul language and express or implied threats.” She went on to say “he exhibits a callous and insensitive disregard for the respondents, their counsel and for the Tribunal’s processes. In some cases, he engages in communications for which the recipient might seek the protection of the Code.”

She ordered Miller to pay the total of $3,000 in costs to three respondents which she said are punitive and are meant to deter this kind of activity “Mr. Miller repeatedly failed to comply with the Tribunal’s Rules and directions. This is a serious impropriety. Further, his correspondence to the parties and their counsel is full of invective, smears, and disrespectful, demeaning and derogatory language. As stated earlier, no party to a complaint, or their counsel, should have to tolerate this kind of behaviour. As well, Mr. Miller’s communications to the Tribunal have demonstrated a lack of respect and disdain for the Tribunal processes and its personnel. His communications to the Tribunal’s Registrar and his statements about the Tribunal’s treatment of the respondents are inappropriate, unfounded and improper. Mr. Miller has also made comments which could reasonably be construed as threats.”

Miller has 30 days from March 31^st to make the payments.

The full decision can be read here.

Previous Story - Next Story

Email |

Print |

Facebook |

Twitter |

Digg |

Del.icio.us

Posted on Thursday, April 02, 2009 10:21 AM in News by 250 News

Return to Home

Comments

Posted by: YamaDooPolCat on April 2 2009 1:09 PM

The complaint came from a man? And if this behavior came from a woman it would have to be a disability. Man swear and curse and get noisy, so being a man he is probably normal. Was the judge a woman, and did he annoy her? The Human Rights Kangaroo Court is not a place to find justice, especially if you act like someone the HRC was set up to get revenge on.

You hurt the feelings of the HRC staff, so pay up you silly. No one hurts someones feelings at the HRC and gets away with it. You are a guilty fella.

Posted by: He speaks on April 2 2009 1:33 PM

#638

It is a difficult one, can someone actually use their mental disability as there ticket to misbehave in a public facility. I think not. Sure a person may have temporary behaviour, but should it preclude them from paying the consequences of that action. Again this problem exist in the judicial system.

The better question is, what is the recepient going to do with the money. The right thing to do, is to give it to the social programs which may assist mr Glenn Millar with his problems.

Posted by: travism on April 2 2009 1:35 PM

No evidence of a mental disablity therefore no case. If he disrespected my staff I would have thrown him out too. I don't care what hangs between your legs, talk to people with respect or don't come back. As for the fine, finally, the courts making people responsible for their actions.

Posted by: Thunder on April 2 2009 1:50 PM

Provide the proof and maybe he might have a case. Sounds like a no brainer to me.

Posted by: Harbinger on April 2 2009 5:50 PM

The signs everywhere that say, "We reserve the right to refuse service". Have these signs become a non-politically correct bluff?

Posted by: thereasonableman on April 3 2009 10:03 PM

Sounds like he may have autism ?
I worked with an elderly lady patient once that used foul language all the time, that was an interesting experience. She would yell/swear at anything. She couldn't help it.

Posted by: thereasonableman on April 4 2009 1:03 PM

OK, I went and read the disposition for kicks, to see what has got them all in a flap.

They are so busy being offended by everything that comes out of his mouth, that they aren't paying attention to anything else.

Autism ? I don't know, maybe OCD ?

Definitely shows the grandiose and delusional behavior of APD.

In any event, they were so busy being offended by coarse language that they dropped the ball completely. The human rights complaint is the least of concerns now.

There are reasonable and probable grounds for an arrest under s. 264.1 CCC for uttering threats or criminal harrassment, take your pick.

That allows you to get the guy in for a court-ordered psych assessment and get his mental health not only determined but treated properly. I doubt anti-depressants are what he needs.

After you have dealt with his mental health issues, you can determine if you need to continue to pursue charges, or resolve the matter with a s. 810 CCC Peace Bond application, or stay the matter altogether if he is now no longer a problem.

In any event, when you focus on the small stuff, you miss the bigger picture.
Banning the guy and making him pay costs was the least effective means of dealing with this situation.

And, this guy needs to see a Psychiatrist, not a GP.