You're evasive. The example I gave was but one that I could bring forward of your bias. Tellingly, you don't even deny that you're biased against Camp. Which would be pretty tough to sustain given the example I gave, and the other examples I could. So, you attack my credibility instead. It's a common enough tactic, but it doesn't change the reality of your bias. And given that you can't see your own bias when it's pointed out to you, you're not going to see it in the tribunal's decisions either.

You might want to consider the frank and open way that Brenda Cossman admits her own bias. She freely acknowledges that her opinion is based on the bias that education is better than punishment. I share her view. On this case however, the bias of the tribunal was that punishment is better than education. 

Having a bias is normal. Unfortunately, so is refusing to admit it. Unless you're willing to acknowledge at least your own, I think we're done here.