R v Baldtree 2012 ONCA 138

 

[154] Legal purists, and judges who must cope with and decide these issues, spend a great deal of intellectual energy worrying about whether evidence such as that confronting the trial judge is hearsay. While this approach provides a framework for analysis, I wonder if a different approach might be helpful.

 

 

It very much suspect that the judge who wrote this saw the almost homonyn in purists & jurists. And that the structure of the sentence implies that not all judges are "legal purists".

 

Cheers,

 

David Cheifetz