Please no more journeys

The Steven Truscott story is one that I remember from a very young age, well before I had any clue what it was really about - my father was from Goderich, became a lawyer, practiced with a Donnelly and was a big fan of Arthur Martin, so it was a big deal in my house when I was a kid. If the whole story teaches us anything it's how bad an idea capital punishment really is, but that's a whole other issue.

For this post I'm really only concerned about one thing: is our Attorney General a New Ager or just possessed of very, very bad diction?

From the Chatham Daily News:

Bentley said there will be discussions with the federal government about sharing the compensation costs as recommended in Robins' report.

"It was important once we had reached a conclusion in this matter that we provide Steven Truscott with our decision as quickly as possible," he said.

"We are doing what we can to bring to a conclusion this remarkable aspect of Mr. Truscott's life journey," Bentley said.

"It is my hope Mr. Truscott and his family will now be able to spend all of their time on the rest of life's journey."

Canadian lawyer and law professor James Morton on his blog reports the same comments as follows:

Truscott's legal saga was an "unprecedented" and "extraordinary" journey, Bentley said.
"We are doing what we can to conclude this journey," he said.
"It is my hope that Mr. Truscott and his family will now be able to spend all of their time on the rest of life's journey."

Does anyone else find reference to all this as a "journey" a bit jarring, let alone the rather odd repetition of the word? Maybe it's more of a forced march through various parts of our legal, political and journalistic systems over a half-century?