If you do not know what these numbers indicate, do some reading.
This next one tell you most everyone uses small display screens. They have to use microscopes to see all the breaches claimed.
When such people learn no one will come after them if they lie, they lie.
And it works both ways. Police are notorious liars in court when under oath. To protect one of their own Thin Blue Line, they will say and do anything to defend the “honour” of a fellow police officer.
Politicians do the same. Once they prove to themselves they are protected by lawyers and insurance policies, they will say whatever they want to get their way.
And witnesses, once they are shown by. police that there will be no retribution, they lie to arrest me 7 times on 27 charges.
At least Trump has a feedback loop once every 4 years, and the voters will dispense with him.
But we don’t get to elect sheriffs in Canada. We are stuck with them.
There is no place to go to complain about the police. They are shielded by the OIPRD and that is just “them” investigating each other and finding perfection every time.
And so… thanks Donald!
You have opened eyes by merely being the epitomy of Presidential perfection.
My personal favourite debate question fo Trump?
Q: Will you denounce white supremacists?
Trump: Stand back and stand by!
People get greedy. They get taxes reduced a lot then they shoot for zero to prove they could do it. Better to pay $143,612.98 than ZERO or $750,00
Why attract every eyeball win the world?
So, Trump paid no taxes at all in 10 of 15 years and one year he paid $750
York Regional Police claim ZERO needs to admonish a cop, 2 years out of three. Just one in 3 consecutive years.
These are rookie mistakes. Greedy. Over reaching. Just plain dumb if you are NOT trying to attract attention to your lies.
Arrest Times: Mass Murderer – 2 days. Lepp – 2 hours
Are York Regional’s Police “biased”, or on a vendetta against me? Or are they treating me like normal, like. a normal mass murderer?
OK, you support your police. But, if you do not think they are perfect…
Menhaz Zaman, 24, on Thursday (September 24, 2020) pleaded guilty to killing his family seen here in Facebook photos, from left: Zaman’s grandmother, Firoza Begum; his sister, Malesa Zaman; his mother, Momotaz Zaman; and his father, Moniruz Zaman.
Read in The Star: https://apple.news/AIZPVqAoPQkmjdCiaB_tSBQ
In a soft but clear voice, Zaman admitted (Sept. 24, 2020) he first murdered his mother, Momotaz Begum, 50, in their home on Castlemore Avenue at about 3 p.m. on July 27, 2019.
Zaman messaged Devonte Nicholson, a friend from Minnesota at 11:54 p.m. (July 27, 2019) through the messaging app Discord and said: “I’ve just slaughtered my entire family and will most likely spend life in jail if I manage to survive. I hope I made you laugh at one point or another. I hope you remember the good times. I will miss you all.
NEXT DAY: On July 28, 2019, Toronto police informed York Regional Police that they’d received information that someone may have “slaughtered their entire family.”
When the police arrived at the home the day after the killing, Zaman peered out from an upstairs window.
Author of the article:Aidan Wallace Publishing date: Jul 31, 2019
It took police from 3 PM July 27, 2-19 until NEXT DAY to get a call from police.
“Police didn’t go there until over 15 hours,” said an online pal said, adding, “in 15 hours he could have killed so many more people. It’s very absurd.”
On July 14, 2017 at 11:39 am Mayor Geoffrey DAWE called police, Jeff Dawe, and he then convened a meeting at town hall. Jeff Brown briefed them all on his arrest plans and left. He drove past my house. Within an hour, the “complainant” was interviewed, and an hour later I was arrested,
2 hours, start to finish, is the service level for an email to a Thin Blue Line alumnus. Instant response.
On the evening of December 5, 2019 I blogged a photo of lawsuit showing a NAME of a woman in a letter from her lawyer threatening my wife.
By 11:00 am NEXT DAY I was arrested INSIDE a court room, incarcerated in the basement and suffered a heart attack.
Too bad none of the murdered family ever worked as a cop. The Thin Blue Line™©️ would have been on it in minutes.
I believe that is proof enough of police bias.
I got a letter today from CIBC. They no longer desire my business.
CIBC gives the existence of my bank account, and some data ILLEGALLY to lawyer Gwndolyn Adrian so her client, an ex-RBC pensioner, can garnish it. CIBC says to my complaint that they did nothing wrong.
I escalated to the Provincial OBSI banking complaints and they offered that CIBC would pay me $1,000 for doing everything perfectly, as long as I did not EVER blog or tell anyone they did everything perfectly.
I could not agree to keep CIBC’s perfection private to myself, so I cancelled my OBSI complaint, I forewent the $1,000 pay off, and I sued them for $35,000 in Small Claims and I called for the arrest of Gwendolyn Adrian.
And the CIBC Fraud Department calls that FREAID BY ME and fires me.
Update October 2, 2020: CIBC Counsel Nick Fitz says
The September 14, 2020 letter from CIBC that you reference speaks for itself. CIBC has never accused you of fraud. The other items you raise regarding CIBC engage the subject matter of your lawsuit against CIBC, and we will respond through our pleading in that action.
Kindly ensure you continue to only communicate with me regarding this matter, and not directly with CIBC.
Nick Fitz October 1, 2020
So, of course, since only the OTHER items are off limits, Fraud Firing is something I can ask CIBC about
My inbox is strangely quiet, ALL the lawyers stopped replying to all my questions and suggestions for a more efficient law suit.
The mistakes by J, Harpur cannot be reversed, and so those charges will fall. He should have let me use a defence counsel, and he should NOT have agreed with the Crown that a Small Claims appearance by my counsel against his witness should disqualify my counsel to defend me.
The J. Rose decision WILL fall. The Justice NEVER asked for, nor did he obtain evidence or proof of my mens rea… my mental state on April 2, 2019. J. Rose rubber stamped the decision and the probation order passed up to him by Crown Elder. …WITHOUT showing me first.
J. Rose imposed the SAME 185 word “Not to mention” term that ALL the other judges chose.
No Judge should see drafts unchallenged by the accused.
Elder can and did say WHATEVER lies he wanted about me in the drafts. He biased the judge against me, unchecked.
On appeal, Crown McCallion argued he had no obligation at all to prove my mens rea, that I KNEW I blogged a legible photo of my law suit, he argued as long as I DID THE ACT, the actus reus, that his burden was carried.
J. Dawe straightened him out, but it took 20 minutes and many repeated questions. Every criminal charge DEMANDS that the Crown PROVE the accused’s mens rea. McCallion did not know that.
Only Crowns in Newmarket think they can escape proving mens rea, For a senior Crown to CLAIM he did not KNOW he had to prove mens rea is very revealing of a lager, more institutional failure.
Police DO KNOW they should be able to prove it. BUT, even then, they did not EVER interview or video me BEFORE any arrest to nail it down. Twice, police called me to say I made an obvious mistake in a post and they let me delete it and not face new charges.
So, Cops: 1, Crown: 0
So, the Rose conviction and Probation Order must fall.
And that leaves ONLY the minor breach charge I pled guilty to March 9, 2020, For clarity, I only posted a photo of a letter Gwendolyn Adrian illegally and without provocation threatened my wife with. That she would take my wife’s money AFTER she emptied my accounts. Adrian snuck the name of her SECOND client into the letter, and that upset the client SO MUCH!
And instead of telling ME to not “transfer assets” she CHOSE to illegally contact my wife and to discuss my private legal issues with my wife.
J. Dawe made the point that it will be very tough for me to reverse a guilty plea. He says the probation order existed, with ALL its flaws, and MUST be obeyed.
I disagree. If the Probation Order asked for an illegal action, it cannot EVER have been in effect LEGALLY. In my opinion, The illegal “Not to mention” term… the 185 canned words rubber stamped by J. Rose, was ruled on June 5, 2020 by J. Dawe to have been illegally assigned, and he struck it in the March 9, 2020 Release Order.
The premise that a justice can put ANYTHING they dream up in a probation order is flawed.
Other conditions sometimes included as part of a probation order are:
J. Dawe now has the tricky job of deciding how to rule on my plea reversal. He has just 2 choices:
Murder convictions are reversible.
A most minor breach plea should be reversible.
The Crown and my lawyer forgot to warn me of the repercussions of a criminal record for a Canadian… I am blocked from the rest of the world through the USA. They will refuse me entry because I have a criminal record. I was not told my job nd friends would disappear.
I was not told my wife would leave me behind as a criminal so she cam move on to retaining a legal lifestyle.
I was not told I could not possess a forearm.
I was not told my SON cannot get a firearms licence because someone in hs family has a conviction.
I was not told of the high cost of appealing a guilty plea.
What person, faced with the statement from the Crown to my family that if I did not please guilty they would keep me in prison for showing TWO WORDS in a legal document from a complainant’s OWN lawyer meant to anger me, who would NOT plead guilty?
NONE! They left me no choice. Their STATEMENTS on December 9, 2019 that I would stay in prison unless I pled guilty.
FOR 2 words naming the person, an ex cop from Halton Region who lied twice to arrest me July 14, 2017 and August 23, 2018 And the same woman who CONCURRENTLY sued me for $1,000,000 for losing her two jobs she admits she agreed to leave after accepting cash buyouts to not sue them for firing her.
Gwendolyn Adrian filed the suit with NO EVIDENCE I was able to get her client fired twice. THEN, her client testifies IN MY TRIAL that she was not fired AT ALL. She was offered money to leave and she take it. Twice.
Adrian cannot sue me that I caused her termination, when HER CLIENT caused her OWN termination.
AND, to top it off, when I MENTIONED her by publishing her lawyer’s own letter about her…. I made no editorial comment about her or her actions.
Here is the breach letter, redacted of course so the person is not traumatized to see her name online:
I posted that letter in the evening of December 5, 2020. Adrian’s client went looking for her name and saw t and was petrified. Terrified, And ex street cop FEARED seeing her name in print.
Scopophobia, scoptophobia, or ophthalmophobia is an anxiety disorder characterized by a morbid fear of being seen or stared at by others.
Allodoxaphobia. An extremely rare phobia, allodoxaphobia is used to define the fear of opinions.
Panphobia, omniphobia, pantophobia, or panophobia is a vague and persistent dread of some unknown evil.
Gelotophobia is a fear of being laughed at, a type of social phobia.
Perfectionism, in psychology, is a broad personality style characterized by a person’s concern with striving for flawlessness and perfection and is accompanied by critical self-evaluations and concerns regarding others’ evaluations.
Androphobia is defined as a fear of men. The term originated inside feminist and lesbian-feminist movements to balance the opposite term “gynophobia,” which means a fear of women.
Misandry, another term that arose from the feminist and lesbian-feminist movements, is defined as a hatred of men.
Nomophobia (short for ‘no mobile phobia’) is a word for the fear of, or anxiety caused by, not having a working mobile phone.[1][2] It has been considered a symptom or syndrome of problematic digital media use in mental health, ( I just liked this one a lot)
Logophobia or Verbophobia (from the Greek lógos, “word”) is the fear of words. This fear typically originates from childhood, where the frequency of learning new words can cause distress and dread.
Som the complainant may have a number of the above ailments. She claims perfection in Business in her old women’s support group web site and blog, She and her daughter both fear men. And drunken, horny men in particular.
So, a drunken man blogging words about her lack of perfection may have triggered her lies in an attempt to rid her eyes of seeing her own name.
But WHY would she go searching the Internet for people blogging her own name? That seems pretty odd.
Additional Conditions
The Criminal Code enables the court to require a probationer to “comply with such other reasonable conditions as the court considers desirable for securing the good conduct of the accused and for preventing a repetition of the same offence or the commission of other offences.”
Conditions of probation must:
The same 185 words were ruled by J. Dawe June 5, 2020 as ambiguous, not clear, not understandable even by a justice. he struck them.
The full 185 words CANNPT be enforced since they decree acts in private between me and my family. No one can enforce that when I speak to my wife in bed.
Relevance is not maintained when media OTHER than my blog are banned. It is NOT RELEVANT that I not speak the name of a dog walking company to my son in private.
NO REHABILITATION was ordered or done.
So, the Probation order was illegal AT the outset.
I cannot be convicted of failing, WITHOUT LAWFUL REASON, to follow this probation order.
My “Lawful Reason” may well have been to prove to authorities who refuse to read my emails to read of the illegal threats to my wife.\
I have asked for the arrest of Gwendolyn Adrian. For fraud, for stealing my banking data from CIBC.
I await the last two trial day transcripts the crown and Michael Czuma refused to share.
This conviction was for the May 30, 2018 arrest when I emailed DS Bentham and PC Brown for help. J. Harpur convicted me after he refused to permit my counsel to defence me because she had opposed the paralegal witness in court one day. NOT a legal reason to exclude her.
AFTER the Crown mixed one indictable charge, all of its evidence and biased the judge with lies to argue it. The Crown often lays extra charges like this to “mistakenly mix them up” with Summary charges so they can lie about serious offences and then they have plausible deniability of they get caught. Crown Elder did get caught. But too late to keep the lies from being heard,
AFTER a long string of other errors in the law and in his decisions. He ruled my alleged charges to go back 18 months in time when 6 is maximum. NOTHIGN happened in the 12 extra months, NOTHING.
AFTER J Harpur read out a sentencing decision written FOR HIM BY THE CROWN.
Yes, and he even failed to fFILL IN THE BLANKS LEFT BY CROWN GIORDANO.
Neither man remembered to modify the published decision and they left the blanks untouched for my son’s name and the day and time for when I could go shopping weekly under house arrest.
And of course, I asked the Crown for copies of all drafts to the judges and they:
No, what this describes its bad faith by the Crown in not letting me see what they claimed in their draft.
Judges get lazy. Crowns know this. So, a cozy deal exists. The Crown agrees to write up what the judge is required to write in exchange for getting DONE what the Crown wants done.
They literally swap jobs, the Crown makes all the decisions in the law, the judge does nothing strenuous.
NOT all judges of course.
BUT, ALL Crowns draft orders for rubber-stamping,
Frequent readers recall me being hired by a woman whose neighbour confessed in Small Claims court October 2918 that she knew her contractor drilled up the neighbours foundations and trespassed with her new over height fence.
Well, that lady sued me for advocating on a matter of public interest… Ongoing Bylaws enforcement failures.
Her lawyer, Gwendolyn Adrian then went on to commit fraud by accepting $18,000 for work she did not do. She gave ne zero days to pay her and instead illegally garnished $4,500 of our pensions.
Then she stole my banking data at CIBC and admitted it and I have Toronto Det. Nicole Ozretic investigations fraud charges.
Then, she got an order to take me to. an examination for discovery and I told her I had a new RBC account at Aurora Branch and she should garnish that.
She and her boss, Michael Simaan refuse because her client works there for 40 years,
To DO all that Ms Adrian had to ignore that the first line of my defence said I was pleading SLAPP s. 137.1 because the suit sought ONLY to silence me,. She then lied to J. Schabas that he and she HAD argued it. he gave her $18,000 and NEVER DID hear my filed s. 137.1 which was to be heard August 26, 2019,
So, I filed an application to have the s. 137.1 heard finally after a year. When I win, everything is reversed.
Yes, Ms Adrian has chosen to let me detail in the public record how she violated Laws Society rules and the law accepting costs she did not earn.
In exchange for $4,500 of our pensions, she is willing to lose her licence…. for a day or two,
Det. Sgt, Bentham’s force needs a spot light, so now at the top and bottom of every page, you can use the new menu item:
Here you will find in one neat place how since June 4, 2017 York Regional Police:
Ms Bentham deserves a spot light, so now at the top and bottom of every page, you can use the new menu item:
Here you will find in one neat place how since June 4, 2017 Ms Bentham:
If the world had more RBG, it would NOT need so many courts.
I have never seen a person who quite simply EXUDED sympathy and fairness. Just to see her was to be re-assured that Canada can amend its legal systems to be fair to its citizens. She gave me hope that one day I could convince her to take on Canada just in her spare time.
How would RBG compare to female legal minds I know personally?
Let’s do a chart for RBG and a female lawyer and a paralegal, those I have litigated against
| Name/Attribute | Paralegal X | RBG | Lawyer -Gwendolyn Adrian |
|---|---|---|---|
| Respected (0-10) | 0 | 11 | 0 |
| Other Jobs | 5 | 0 | 0 |
| Websites Owned | 5+ | 0 | 1 |
| Undercover Informant? | Yes | Never | ?? |
| Public Mischief | 19 | 0 | yes |
| Awards | 0 | Innumerable | nope |
| Sued by Lepp | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| Memorable? (0-100) | -100 | 999 | 0 |
| Score of 100 | 0 | 150 | 0 |
What would I have to do today to get a do-over?
Yesterday, I made fun of the fantastic Ms. Rivet. I feel terrible now.
Not terrible enough to apologize, no one has EVER made me feel THAT bad.
I had asked her for the privilege of paying HER to go find out A’s legal name, I had come up dry, and BOTH her lawyers refused, and police refused…. I was stuck and I HAD to call for legal assistance.
She told me to get lost and do it my own self.
Well, not in so many words… actually not is so FEW words..
Divorce records, which was her speciality, would not prove a legal name, they only prove… well, a divorce.
So, she said ask the court.
So, I did.
I filed an application to J. Dawe, who I see in Zoomcourt today, to order the simply order the Crown to verify the past and current legal name of the main person who put me in prison.
Without THIS person being rock solid, the 7 arrests and 27 charges would be a sham. If she did not LEGALLY change her name from A as married to A’ as her maiden name again that means she lied and that means NOTHING she said could be trusted. And police should not have arrested me omg her complaint August 23, 2018.
Crown Westgate refused to accept that was a. real need at appeal today. He would ALLOW my application to be seen BUT he would NOT support it,
Let’s see what he refused to do:
No, that was simply too large a burden, especially during the extra work of COVID-18.
I replied who and why that it was important to me, but he was unmoved.
So, guess what kids?
He fell for Ms Rivet’s trap. She spun a web and he stuck like velcro.
J. Dawe will hear the story of the ensnarement.
They take the trust if the people and BREACH it, such a coincidence. They have been OVERWHELMING courts with bogus breach charges and now the BREACHED the public trust.
I cannot even go file an online OIPRD complaint anonymously, BUT, after verifying with my driver’s licence number I can complain an anonymous person arrested me 7 times.
‘Do yu haf papers, ja?” “Nein?” lights out
So, I sent BOTH her lawyers a simple request that THEY have a photo id copy from signup day.
So, if both counsel swear They have copy, I am happy.
I will worry whose name is on it at the law suit. They should match.
After J. Dawe hears that. I think I can do a mic drop. 🎤⤼
Imagine now a cartoon of Snoopy doing a mic drop.
Now, how can he NOT drop it? he has no opposable thumb.
If my “rule” works, asking for a reversal will only assure they will NOT let it happen.
So, I insist I be left alone with my criminal records and let me retire totally defeated so my DNA sample, prints and photos live on forever! My future ancestors may want to clone me and they would NEVER think to ask for my blood now. Well… blood yes! but “sample size” no!
So, in what sequence do I orally argue my case?
3 Years of false arrests started with an assault by A
A had police whitewash the assault with the OIPRD
B arrested me May 30, 2018
C arrested me August 23, August 3i, December 2018 ( 5 X Attempts failed), March 2, 2019, December 6, 2019, March 4, 2020
Not one charge of 17 by C was successful.
Only 1 charge by B succeeded, got a probation order with an illegal “Not to mention” term, and both are appealed today.
Both of the other convictions were breaches complained by A. Both are appealed today.
Keeping ABC on recognizance of bail terms illegally began Nov. 12, 2017 when Crown Moull stayed July 14, 2017 charges, but left “bail” in place illegally until July 14, 2019. 12 month is maximum, he went 24 months and then told Greg Elder the trick.
Crown Greg Elder kept ABC in “Term #6” ever as each charge was disposed of.
Elder’s Contempt #1 was refusing J, Fuerst in November 16, 2019 when she ordered him to drop ABC,
Elder’s contempt #2 was drafting a copy of “Term #6: for publishing by J. Rose December 4, 2019.
Elder’s contempt #3 was drafting a copy of “Term #” for publishing by J. Henschel December 6, 2019. J Fuerst had told him NO and he did it anyway.
Elder’s contempt #4 was December 4, 2019 when he forged court records and Lindsay prison records to show I had a telephone bail appearance from my Newmarket Emergency bed, and that I was sent there December 4, 5, 6, 7 2019 when I was still in Newmarket. How could I have been in HOSPITAL and at Lindsay on the sae days?
Elder’s contempt #5 was telling hospital guards from YRP to NOT let my family visit me in emergency December 4, 2019
Elder’s contempt #6 was telling hospital guards from YRP to NOT let my lawyer visit me in emergency until 26 hours had passed.
Elder’s contempt #7 was December 11, 2019 when J. Dawe ordered him to correct ABC in “Term #6: just as J. Fuerst told him in November.
Elder’s contempt #8 was March 4, 5, 6 2020 when he drafted the identical 185 words of Term #6 for J.P. Premji without telling him he had twice been ordered NOT to do so.
Elder’s contempt #9 was from May 30, 2018 to March 6, 2020 when he refused to follow the law and place a copy of orders. from J, Kenkel, J, Fuerst and J. Dawe INTO ny case paper file folder so future judiciary would NOT notice his contempt.
Elder’s contempt #10 was June 5, 2020 when J. Dawe ordered Term #6 STRUCK and he failed to go back “with consent” to change December 4, 9 and March 6 and remove and replace probation and release orders containing one or more of ABC.
Det. Sgt Bentham recorded an admission February 27, 2020 that she was upset back in 2017 that I blogged her name and that may have made her seek revenge setting 37 different officers in me,
She came out unsolicited claiming A was never known by ANY police as being an ex police officer. This lies was quickly. proven by simply reviewing the video and transcript of A on July 15, 2017 in which she related her career at Halton Region. Every video and interview has A declaring her police background. DS Bentham also KNEW the correct Dep, Chief as Andre Crawford and she knew YRP history has Chief Bruce Crawford STARTING the force in 1971. Many of Chief Crawford’s progeny work for Toronto Police and Fire. A married Strath Crawford. There may be. a family link which got her preferential treatment when I reported the assault.
Aurora’s HR Manager Sandra McKenzie was FIRST to meet with A and together they called in police. In the days that followed, multiple YRP officers called me to tell me to not email A anymore. I asserted the Charter but they persisted.
DC Brown and partner can to my wife and told her “Bob has troubles with the Town of Aurora”. she collapsed.
Both cops came to meet Mayor Dawe, CAO Nadorozny, Legal Dir. Techa Van Leeuwen and A in town Hall at 11:39 am, and DC Brown detailed his plans to arrest me that day.
ON my arrest July 14, 2017 DC Brown asserted A came as a private citizen to complain earlier that day, NOT as an employee. he said “This is NOT what Aurora wants me to do!”
112 days later, Crown David Moull was forced to agree he had no evidence of any crimes. No lawyer was required.
3 people, ABC, were allowed REPEATED kicks at my can as they returned 7 times and claimed 27 charges. Even though the previous charges were lies, police accepted more and more.
Culminating March 4, 2020 when DS Bentham assigned 5 more officers including herself to get C to make up 3 more charges. All were breaches and all were based on the contempt of Crown Greg Elder who kept naming ABC in bail terms and approving arrests when the term #6 wording could NOT be understood as eventually ruled by J. Dawe June 5, 2020.
C lied to police that 19 days EARLIER I had spoken to her in a court room witnessed by two other lawyers. Both lawyers consented to back her up, one wrote an affidavit saying heat beside her and heard nothing at all, and the other refused to wrote an affidavit. J. Dawe June 5, 2020 ruled the ONLY place I was permitted to speak to her was in that very court room.
Elder’s contempt #11 was on June 5 2020 when he failed to correct the March 6, 2020 charges, the 2 December convictions and he failed to admit his contempt to me. Frank Giordano replace him.
Elder’s contempt #12 March, 2020 was NOT coming clean to Frank Giordano about contempt’s #1 through #11.
Elder’s contempt #13 March, 2020 was NOT coming clean to Peter Westgate about contempt’s #1 through #12.
To this day NO CROWN has admitted contempts by Greg Elder. Bit even one, They all tell judges that Greg Elder acted honourably at all times.
At least 12 Crowns signed my case file. Not one has come forward to attempt to purge the contempt of Greg Elder in the smallest way.
Elder’s contempt #14 September 2020 was REFUSING to provide his PDF’s of my trial transcripts beginning June 2019 transcripts as ordered by J, Harpur to his amicus curiae Michael Czuma. This forces me to pay all over again for them. Then, I will recover those costs plus interest when I sue for wrongful arrest. This makes no sense, to pay TWICE using taxpayers money. But reduction of waste is not a job requirement in the court systems where 75% of arrests fail to convict anyone.
Contempt #1 of David Moull is his refusal to implements BILL C-75 Judicial Referral Hearings (JRH) to de-emphasize constantly expanding numbers of breaches and simplify prosecution. He simply adds a “local practice’ to NOT have JRH’s, to his list which includes “:NO Crown Pretrials for self reps.”
Illegible, illogical, vague bail terms are the “weapons of choice” for poles AND Crowns. Breach convictions make them look “efficient”. In fact, they can manufacture convictions simply be drafting nebulous terms no one can obey.
As real crime drop, police and Crowns inspire to bulk up their statistics with breaches no ne can follow to the letter because no one understands the language.
My current Probation Order Term #6 has 185 words. J. Dawe could NOT decide what it said. He struck it entirely in a subsequent Release Order, and on September 18, 2020 I hope to finally get corrections made which David Moull, Greg Elder, Frank Giordano and Peter Westgate should have consented to months back.
If any of these men had respect for the law, they would have proactively fixed the mistakes of Greg Elder. Instead, they venerate him by simply refusing to correct anything, he messed up, even when ordered by multiple Superior Court justices since November 16, 2019… TEN months ago.
They refuse to give me any evidence of collusion with police I can use in my law suit. And, making corrections unasked would be admitting defeat,.
The Crown forces the judiciary to waste THEIR time with lengthy and expensive motions, when they KNOW Elder messed up badly.
I am fortunate the Crown took this “head in the sand” approach. It proves my collusion theory. Think about it.
The only reason the Crown will not remedy Elder’s contempt on its own is to “protect” police. If, instead, the Crown were to simply fix their own mistakes to save ME the trouble of more motions, it would signify police NEVER had ANY basis for the 7 arrests.
She knew how to “legally: garnish TD Bank.
She knew how to get a CIBC employee to tell her I opened a new account, next day she garnished it “legally” without having an account number.
So, her client worked at RBC for decades…. why does she now REFUSE to garnish RBC so we can all watch it happen?
I sued her client WAY BACK for lying about her fence. I was correct since she admitted it to the judge.
Anyway, my suit got “rolled up” into the BIG ONE for $7,000,000. I did not name fence lady in it then, but now I know she was a pro f the collusion bu Bylaws and Police… she will be added as an eighth million. As soon as Justice Edwards starts to hear motions again.
Gwendolyn saw a chance for $150 from me, I told her she would not qualify, and in the MIDDLE OF COVID told a judge she was in desperate financial stress and she wanted that money NOW!
I told her that the suit had been purged July 18, 2020 as abandoned after 24 months, actually it is 26 months now. She would not hear of it, because, of course, I am an unwashed self rep.
So, the judge told her off!
The Crown successfully delayed ALL of my motions to suspend sentence awaiting appeal.
So, now I have served all 60 days, and, when the appeal is successful,, they owe me.
I made more Google Maps money in 60 days than I have in 3 years.
I had more work scheduled while incarcerated than when I was free.
Since I am too old to risk going out and getting COVID-19 anyway, the sentence had the expected impact.
I will make a lot of money for staying home as ordered.
Open Letter to Boss of Lawyer Gwendolyn Adrian
You and Ms Adrian took an entire day away from me in an Examination in Execution or whatever. You belittled me from 10 am to after 2 pm asking repeatedly where I move my money.
I moved it to RBC Aurora branch. And I told the CRA to send my CPP And OAS monthly beginning with THIS month.
So, soon there winkle beaver $1,000 here for you.
I demand you now garnish RBC just as you did TD Bank and CIBC,
You declared BOTH TD and CIBC filings as legally obtained and executed,
You are now REQUIRED by the Law Scciety to continue collecting your clients winnings, You cannot stop just because I sued you.
I know you client worked for RBC for 40 years and she may not want to be embarrassed by garnishing her old employer. That does not matter.
I have it set up to track and document everything you do at RBC and therefore I can compare that to what you dud at TD and CUBC and if you changed your approach, maybe my law suits will succeed,.
So, let’s get to it. Garnish me at RBC!
Because, the transcript will be made public and the CANLII case as an appeal will be online forever.
And every time they Google themselves, this appeal will pop up at the top of Google results, And second in those results will be the complete transcript on my blog.
And it will be factual, just the transcript and the unavoidable ruling. No editorial comments. No comments at all. No personal opinions, just pure court documents ANYONE can get and post.
The 3 Victim Impact Statements (The Company Name was not allowed one) allowed on an inappropriate guilty finding will look real funny when the underlying conviction is reversed. The death bed questioning will look a little fraudulent, but maybe that is how she wants to remember her mother… being mad at ME.
The Crown is PROVEN in contempt ALREADY by J. Dawe’s June 5, 2020 decision. Twice. He clearly explains how Greg Elder was ordered TWICE to stop including the same 185 words “not to mention A, B, C, D” in EVERY DRAFT order he passed to EVERY justice illegally.
Well, passing it was not illegal, but as soon as each justice rubber stamped the Crown’s draft terms, each breached the public’s trust in the judiciary.
Thanks to Crowns Westgate and Giordano I will immortalize in Google those who abused me in the Ontario legal systems… JUST because they could.
And every email I ever send to A, B, C AND D,,,, will be published here for eternity showing how a judge can be fooled by the Crown into believing they saw something that did not exist.
| Hi Bob, I will always tell the truth. Not to worry about that. Merry Christmas |
| and Happy New Year. |
| Thank you for the gift card. |
| Hi Bob, thank you for everything. I am confused as to the design of the new gate. I just want to make sure we still have an airlock Love it!!! Thank you!!! Thank you. My husband and I said the same thing. Good cop/bad cop. Let’s see what happens now. Monday morning should be interesting. Hi Bob, go ahead. It looks like we finally have the town’s attention. At this point I don’t know what to say. I am not yet in a position, health wise, where I am comfortable meeting in a professional setting. I think the best way to approach this now is to start seeing some work done by the town. I think we can devise a plan, timeline and budget over email for now. If we start with the worst areas and some of the lower cost items, I think we can calm things down. The Facebook page …It is not my temperament. I do not like conflict but I also believe in freedom of speech. If we could please start with getting more wood chips right away. We need them inside and outside the gate area from the parking lot to the big tree on the west side. Then we need to worry about the removal of the dead tree in the north east corner and repair the gate right away. We can plan for a new fencing either late in the year 2017 or as part of the 2018 budget. We also, need to have a plan in place for next year for the paving of the parking lot. Other items not as urgent include better lighting, drainage, a small dog area. Users have also requested running water. Signage for Canine Commons(so you can see that is a dog park from the street). We are currently in need of additional blue bins(way down on the list), help with weeds and grass cutting. If timelines and budget numbers are communicated to the user community then people will see the town’s commitment to the park. What do you think of my plan? When can we get started? I can mobilize the user community if you need bodies to assist in any project you feel we can contribute. I look forward to working with to create a dog park our town can be proud of. Thank you, I think you are saying things we all feel. I think all the town staff needs time to absorb our demands and emails. They will have areas with budget money left over they can allocate to us. Honestly, the really important things to us do not cost the town that much. I will send a note to Tom directly. I think he will be our most helpful person in the town. See if we can’t move this forward. It should be a no brainer. The one councillor who hate us (dog owners) is Evelyn Buck. She constantly puts up barriers to us getting anything at all. I am sure that now that you have lit a fire under their arse we will see at least the bare minimum of the work done before the new year. And now they know what we want more than ever. I think it is a good idea. I may even do the post myself. Most of the dog park group is very quiet. She called me. I told her no way they can close it now. To much focus on it. They would look worse than they do now. It’s all good. Have a great night. That’s great. We can do a lot with that. |
| Hi Bob, |
| Thank you for everything that you have done. We have renewed the communication with the town and things are progressing. |
| I actually asked that recognition be kept limited as I am not comfortable with publicity. |
| I appreciate you not putting my name in further posts. |
| Thank you. |
| Hi Bob, I will always tell the truth. Not to worry about that. Merry Christmas |
| and Happy New Year. |
| Thank you for the gift card. |
| The park isn’t moving. That has not been decided. |
| That’s enough. You don’t know what’s going on. You are merely speculating and it’s not helping now. |
| Dear Bob, there are plenty of signs. People are aware of the rules. They choose not read them or to follow them. Not my problem. |
| I will work with the town to see if some kind of first aid kit is in order. And what they do in other Parks around town. |
| If you have an issue with a town please follow the proper procedures in filling your complaints/comments. May 10, 2018: I have reported you to the police. I have blocked you from contacting me. The fact that you have changed you email to get through to me is a cyber crime. This email is slander and defamation of character. I do not have a contract with the town. I am not the lead volunteer for the park. Therefore, you have no reason to contact me. Never contact me again for any reason and stop following me. |
J. Rose: I read your blog last night. What did you mean by saying “If there is something I don’t want to happen, I just ask for it and Poof! It’s not done!“
J. Dawe:
There was NEVER a legal need for a “not to mention” term ANY TIME, especially NOT one exactly 185 words long.
Rose J. suspended the passing of sentence and placed Mr. Lepp on probation for three years. This probation order includes a term stating that Mr. Lepp is:
“Not to mention, that is speak, write, email, post or mention in any other manner or by any method onsocial media, online media, video, printed blog, online blog, or otherwise mention in any other manner or by any method A, B, C, D in any online media, Except in a court room or on court documents in a courtroom or through a member of the Law Society for purposes of matters before the court.”
While the record before me is not entirely clear, Rose J. appears to have copied the wording of this term from the bail recognizance that was in force against Mr. Lepp in December 2019. Mr. Lepp advised me that this term was first added to his bail in or around May 2019 in place of the earlier version that prohibited him from mentioning the listed names “in any on-line media”. I was not given any information about the circumstances that led up to Mr. Lepp’s release terms being varied in this way.
On December 11, 2019 I varied Mr. Lepp’s bail to delete references to charges and complainants that were no longer before the courts. This resulted in B and C names being removed from the terms of Mr. Lepp’s bail recognizance. However, their names remained in Rose J.’s probation order.
The second count of breaching the terms of probation is based on an allegation that on February 14, 2020, when Mr. Lepp and B were both at the Newmarket courthouse “in regards to a civil matter”, he approached her and spoke to her while the court was not in session, thereby allegedly contravening a term in his probation order that prohibits him from communicating with A, B or C.
Justice of the Peace Premji’s release order named Mr. Lepp’s wife as his surety in an amount of $15,000. The terms of release included a house arrest condition (Term 3) that required Mr. Lepp to remain in his residence at all times except when in the company of his wife or in the event he experienced a medical emergency. It also included non-contact and non- attendance terms in relation to A, B and C (Terms 4 and 5), as well as a term stating that Mr. Lepp is:
“Not to mention, that is speak, write, email, post or mention in any other manner or by any method onsocial media, online media, video, printed blog, online blog, or otherwise mention in any other manner or by any method A, B , C, D, in any online media, EXCEPT in a court room or on court documents in a courtroom or through a member of the Law Society for purposes of matters before the court.”
This latter term, Term 6, is identical to Term 10 of Rose J.’s probation order. Finally, Term 7 of Justice of the Peace Premji’s bail order directed that Mr. Lepp:
“… not possess or use any computers or any other device that has access to the Internet or other digital network.”
First, the Crown has already consented to substantial changes to the bail terms that were set by the Justice of the Peace, deleting the house arrest condition entirely and substantially loosening the restrictions on Mr. Lepp’s ability to use computers and the internet. As a result, Mr. Lepp’s current release order can no longer be accurately characterized as reflecting a judicial officer’s “delicate balancing of all the relevant circumstances”.12 Rather, the current terms of Mr. Lepp’s bail have effectively been set by the Crown. Accordingly, in my view, no judicial deference to these terms is warranted.
Indeed, by agreeing to eliminate or relax some of the very stringent restrictions the Justice of the Peace placed on Mr. Lepp’s liberty, the Crown is effectively acknowledging that these restrictions are no longer necessary or appropriate, if they ever were. As I see it, this opens the door to the other terms that were imposed by the Justice ofthe Peace also being judicially reassessed.
There has also been a potentially material change of circumstance, insofar as Justice of the Peace Premji releasedhis decision a week before the courts were shut down in response to
(12 St-Cloud, supra at para. 22.) the COVID-19 public health crisis. As I will explain, the COVID-19 shutdown would have made it necessary for me to reassess the severe restrictions Justice of the Peace Premji placed on Mr. Lepp’s ability to use computers and the internet (Term 7), even if the Crown had not already opened the door to judicial review of this term by agreeing to substantially vary this condition.
As noted above, Term 6 of the current release order provides that Mr. Lepp is:
“Not to mention, that is speak, write, email, post or mention in any other manner or by any method onsocial media, online media, video, printed blog, online blog, or otherwise mention in any other manner or by any method A, B , C, D in any online media, EXCEPT in a court room or on court documents in a courtroom or through a member of the Law Society for purposes of matters before the court.”
[38] In my view, this term is problematic in at least three different respects. First, the wording is opaque and extremely difficult to interpret. In particular, it is far from clear whether the term is meant to only restrict Mr. Lepp’s ability to“mention” the named persons and the business online, or whether the restriction is meant to apply more broadly toall uses of these names by him out of court or outside of court documents. Different aspects of the wording of Term 6 point in different directions. On the one hand, the phrase:
“… speak, write, email, post or mention in any other manner or by any method on social media, online media, video, printed blog, online blog, or otherwise mention in any other manner or by any method …” can be read as modified by the subsequent limiting expression “in any online media”, with the result that the term as a whole only applies to Mr. Lepp’s “mentioning” these names online. However, on this comparatively narrow reading of the term the complexity and breadth of the earlier phrase make little sense, as does the exception permitting Mr. Lepp to “mention” these names “in a courtroom or on court documents”. This latter exception would seem to be completely unnecessary if the term as a whole is understood as only applying to Mr. Lepp’s online communications.
[39] The reference to a “printed blog” as something apparently distinct from an “online blog” is also puzzling, since in ordinary usage a “blog” is by definition something that appears online.14
Mr. Lepp advised me that he understands Term 6 to mean that he “cannot say or write the [four] names unless he is in a court room”, and I am unable to say that his broad reading of the term is plainly wrong.
[41] Trotter J.A., one of the leading Canadian authorities on the law of bail, notes extrajudicially in his text The Law of Bail in Canada that “[t]he most important feature of conditions of release is that they must be certain. That is, they must be understandable to the accused.”15 In my view, Term 6 of Mr. Lepp’s bail utterly fails to meet this very basic threshold requirement for any proper bail condition.
A second problem with Term 6 as worded is that it includes A and B’s names, which I specifically ordered on December 11, 2019 should be removed from Mr. Lepp’s bail order because he was no longer facing any charges in which they were the complainants. Crown counsel (Greg Elder) who appeared before me on December 11, 2019 (again, not Mr. Westgate), and who opposed my order removing A and B’s names, also appeared at Mr. Lepp’s March 6, 2020 bail hearing. He presented Justice of the Peace Premji with a draft release order that re-inserted these names, without informing the Justice of the Peace that I had previously deleted them from Mr. Lepp’s previous bail. While it would have been open to Crown counsel to argue to the Justice of the Peace that there had been material changes of circumstance that allowed the Justice of the Peace to depart from my ruling and re-insert these names, he was not entitled to simply ignore my previousorder as he did.
The third and most fundamental problem with the Term 6 condition is that regardless of whether it is interpretedbroadly or narrowly, it is not carefully tailored to advance legitimate bail objectives. In Antic, supra, Wagner J. explained (at para. 67(j)):
Terms of release imposed under s. 515(4) may “only be imposed to the extent that they are necessary” to address concerns related to the statutory criteria for detention and to ensure that the accused can be released. They must not be imposed to change an accused person’s behaviour or to punish an accused person.
In Mr. Lepp’s case, the Crown has relied exclusively on the secondary ground in s. 515(10)(b) of the Criminal Code as a reason to put restrictions on his liberty. This section provides:
10. For the purposes of this section, the detention of an accused in custody is justified only on one or more of the following grounds
(b) where the detention is necessary for the protection or safety of the public, including any victim of or witness to the offence, or any person under the age of ( (15 G. Trotter, The Law of Bail in Canada, at §6.5(b)(ii).) 18 years, having regard to all the circumstances including any substantial likelihood that the accused will, if released from custody, commit a criminal offence or interfere with the administration of justice; …
Accordingly, any bail condition that is imposed on Mr. Lepp must be directed at “the protection or safety of the public” and must be demonstrably necessary to achieve these objectives. Term 6 places sweeping restrictions on Mr. Lepp’s ability to “mention” the complainants’ names, without regard to the content of his communications or to their surrounding context. As discussed above, the extent of these restrictions is unclear, since the Term 6 condition can be understood broadly as applying to all communications that take place outside a courtroom or in court documents, but can also be read more narrowly as applying only to Mr. Lepp’s communications on the internet. On either reading, however, the term captures a vast range of expressive activity that is not likely to cause any identifiable harm to anyone, including the persons named in the order. While protecting these named persons from being harassed by Mr. Lepp would be a legitimate secondary ground objective, a term that bars Mr. Lepp from simply “mentioning” their names in any and all circumstances seems on its face to be somewhat like trying to swat a fly by shooting at it with a blunderbuss. The potential overbreadth remains striking even if Term 6 is interpreted as being limited to Mr. Lepp’s online communications.
In my view, Term 6 could only be found to be “necessary for the protection or safety of the public” if there were some cogent reason for believing that no more carefully crafted restrictions could be devised that would be effective at stopping Mr. Lepp from harassing the complainants.
The evidence before me falls well short of the mark. While Mr. Lepp has been found guilty of one count ofsending “harassing telecommunications” to B, this charge was laid in May 2018, at a time when Mr. Lepp does not appear to have been facing any criminal charges or to have been subject to any bail orders. There is no evidence before me that he has ever engaged in any similar conduct after he was charged.16
The record before me also contains no evidence that Mr. Lepp has ever blogged about the complainants in a way that might raise legitimate concerns about their psychological health or personal safety. I recognize that when Rose J. sentenced Mr. Lepp for breaching the earlier version of this bail term, he described Mr. Lepp as having “engaged in a pattern of online postings, which constitute bullying” and declared that the bail term at issue had been imposed “to prevent him from online blogging in a manner which is hurtful and demeaning to A, B, C”. These conclusions may very well have been justified on the evidence that was before Rose J. However, the problem I face is that they are not supported by the record that has been put before me. To the contrary, the only specific
(16 Mr. Lepp was charged with sending harassing emails to B in July 2018, but was acquitted of this charge by Harpur J.)
information I have been given about Mr. Lepp’s blogging and other online activity is that he has “mentioned” the complainants’ names by posting documents from his civil case and other documents relating to the operations of the dog park, and once when responding to a negative “Google review” that attacked him personally. Nothing about the content of these posts as they have been described in the materials before me would appear to raise any secondary ground concerns.
Mr. Westgate argues that since any “mention” by Mr. Lepp of the complainants’ names captured by Term 6 would now also be a breach of the identically-worded term of the probation order imposed by Rose J.,
Term 6 can now be seen as directed towards preventing the commission of further criminal offences under s. 733.1 of the Code (fail to comply with a probation order). I do not accept this argument, for two main reasons. First, probationary terms, unlike terms of a bail order, can properly be crafted “to change an accused person’s behaviour or to punish an accused person”. I do not think the restrictions Antic places on including such terms in a bail order can be circumvented simply by pointing to the presence of a similar term in a probation order. Second, the existence of a “substantial likelihood that the accused will … commit a criminal offence” is only one of the factors bearing on the key question of whether a bail condition is “necessary for the protection or safety ofthe public”. In my view, conduct by Mr. Lepp that does not in and of itself pose any substantial risk of harm to the complainants or to the public will not give rise to a genuine secondary ground concern merely because it has already been prohibited by the terms of his probation. If Mr. Lepp violates these latter terms he can be charged and prosecuted for the breach whether or not the terms are duplicated in a bail order.
Mr. Westgate submitted further that if I am not satisfied that the Term 6 order as it is currently worded isproperly supportable as a bail condition, I should vary it to make it more closely resemble the term that was included in several of Mr. Lepp’s previous bail orders, which provided that he was:
Not to mention A, B, C, D, in any on-line media.
Mr. Westgate suggests that the wording of the term should be modified to specify that it includes “social media, online media, video, printed blog or online blog”.
While varying Term 6 along these lines would address some of the vagueness concerns that I discussed earlier,17 it would not deal with the more fundamental problem of overbreadth. While I appreciate that the judicial officers who previously barred Mr. Lepp from even “mentioning” the complainants’ names online likely had some reason for taking this approach, I simply do not know what this reason was. I do not know when this term was first added to Mr. Lepp’s bail conditions, who first imposed it, or why he or she did so. Moreover,
17 I remain puzzled by the proposed reference to a “printed blog” as something distinct from an “online blog”.
it is of some potential significance that this term may have been first added to Mr. Lepp’s bail at a time when he was facing much more serious charges than he now faces.18
J. Rose was SUPPOSED to be shown ONLY the blog page alleged to have breached my bail.
This one:
Imagine it on a small iPhone screen.. could YOU read anything? No, of course not.
On a tiny iPhone where it was created not ONE WORD can be read. Only the microscope Greg Elder constructed revealed it, And NONE of the 3 women desired using a microscope to read it
Sad note: The 4 inch stack of paper is Aurora’s argument that I’, vexatious and I talk too much in my blog..
Instead J. Rose was shown my ENTIRE blog the night before he read his draft decision from the Crown. And he asked me questions about posts not introduced into evidence. This is illegal. Judges CANNOT look outside the evidence presented for their decision.
So, it was not surprising he asked for all 3 victim impact statements. As if all 3 of them could read their names in the photo above.
One complained her mother could read her name in that post on her deathbed and she asked her daughter when I was going to stop terrorizing her daughter by writing her name on counter suits.
Did the main complainant of the May 30, 208 arrest truthfully describe how reading her own name affected her?
No, she related that she got ill to the stomach every time I showed up in her inbox, I have published EVERY email I sent her. Not one response from her indicated her stomach condition. EVERY one thanked me for getting her $70,000 for HER business to use free daily.
Did that retching happen in person? Like the day she invited me ALONE to her home when she was considering quitting her volunteering after Jim Tree bribed her to disparage me in writing?
No, I witnessed no retching as I sat at her dining room table. And she happily played along as Mayor Tom Mrakas repeated the EXACT same bribe offer for free wood chips next day on her cell as I watched.
Did the ex-cop try to cover up her past career as Det Sgt Bentham claimed she had done onFebruary 27, 2020? No, she OPENED with her “first responder” career. This trained street cop then swore to the trauma of seeing her name on my $1 million counter suit of HER $1 million suit. She told J. Rose that seeing her name on a counter suit brought back horrible memories. I guess her lawyer had not told her one day she may read her name on a countersuit.
Because he was reading the script prepared by Crown Greg Elder. And that “draft” order led him to say everything at sentencing.
Luckily for me, it is illegal for a justice to rubber stamp the words of the Crown given to him on paper. He could NOT have written 185 IDENtICAL words and commas to those of Greg Elder,
Proof? Simple… J. Rose read into the record his recognizance of bail… exactly 185 words, punctuated IDENTICALLY to the one J. Dawe ordered eliminated December 11, 2019. And it was IDENTICAL to the one J. Fuerst ordered hm to delete November 16, 2019.
By keeping that set of 185 words and getting J. Rose to read it into the record AGAIN in ANOTHER charge is all the evidence required to prove SEVERAL breaches of trust by J. Rose.
And the double contempt of Greg Elder would go on into TWO MORE courts, J. Henschel Dec. 6, 2019 and JP Premji March 6, 2020 where the same 185 words were AGAIN imposed.
So, Crown Elder had confidence. His contempt before J. Fuerst November 16, 2019 did not slow him down. Contempt before J Dawe December 11, 2019 did not slow him down, and on March 6, 2020 Greg Elder AGAIN [\passed the 185 words to JP Premji for his rubber stamped release order.
What else could possibly be needed to prove J. Rose erred in his December 4, 2019 decision in my charges?
What was fun was listening as J. Rose read Greg Elder’s “draft” admonishment to the three that they should not stray beyond the charge at hand in their statements.
Then, read the transcript as he ordered me to NOT even glance or look on my accusers as they recited their life stories. I was to turn away, shut up and listen he said.
When the appeal Friday is successful, the 3 victim impacts will be published here in their entirety, and you can judge fairness for yourself.
A date? or an emergency phone number?
Both, and that is called irony. because calling 911 did not stop 911.
Nor is calling 911 even a guarantee of being left alive. Just ask any of the U.S. blacks murdered by police in theist year,
At least for me, they planned only humiliation and impoverishment.
June 4, 2017 and May 30, 2017 I made the normal, safe, recommended SIMPLE of writing to the police and asking for help.
2017-06-03 0 I was assaulted by an Aurora employee June 3, 2017 at her own promotional event to woo dog owownhers ;ole me into not calling the mayor so often about her/
2017-06-04 – I wrote up the assault and handed it to PC Gaudet. He got me arrested by July 14, just 40 days to create a crime for me.
2017-07-14 – Employee makes 2 complaints
2018-05-10 – I was attacked by a dog in Aurora’s dog park. I wrote it up and emailed Council and Bylaw and all the volunteers at the park. It only took one of the volunteers who me back I was harassing her, top have me arrested by…
2018-05-30 – I am arrested on 2 counts of for harassing all the volunteers
2018-08-23 – The volunteers got a paralegal and she wrote up 4 new charges, the Aurora employee kicked in one more and Det. James Ward rubber stamped them all..
2018-08-31 – The same paralegal wrote up 5 breaches and Det Ward stamped this as well.
2017-12-04 – Paralegal steals, in the my pre enquet against her, an email O sent ONLY to the Crown about her lies, and she has Det. John Loughry write up 5 more breaches based on the information I gave ONLY TO CROWN ELIZABETH BARNIER only,
Paralegal Total 14,,, Crown Moull regains his sanity and refuses to prosecute these 5
April 2, 2019 – paralegal added 2 more for 16….
2019-12-04 – paralegal added 2 more for 18….
2019-12-06 – paralegal added 2 more for 20….
2020-03–04 paralegal added 3 more for 23…. minus 5 of Dec/18 = 18
And throughout, Det Sgt Bentham assigned 37 different officers to rubber stamp what the paralegal wrote up.
She just “wound up” the paralegal and pointed her at me to make stuff up.
But it hit me like 911 did to the USA… changed it for the better
I told the lawyers they gad a conflict of interest one they had me arrested. It is hardly fair that they can BOTH represent Lloyds of London against my suit AND arrest me. It took Charles Painter two police reports to get me arrested. I forgave him that one false attempt when he claimed I had “gotten close: to his client… in fact, my son did that.
So, I have waited for new names and none are forthcoming, despite J. Edwards ordering Mr Painter to use only email with me.
So, I will email Jody Johns and ask.
I will ask Michael Simaan who will litigate for her two ladies acting to sue me, I called for the arrest of Ms Adrian when she admitted stealing my CIBC bank account number,
Some fresh faces may be more willing to settle.
You have both acted to enable Gwendolyn Adrian to seize my pension. Then, you ordered I answer her questions to collect that $18,000 despite her not giving me one day to pay it.
She asked for my answers to all the online banking security checks, SIN, birther date, wife’s full maiden name, mothers full name and age. All of the extra password protection we set up.
I refused.
Then, she admitted how she had stolen my CIBC banking data to garnish it legally. She admitted she did not use her client’s 40 years’ of banking career in Aurora, but stopped short of naming the person. She then admitted “None of your business” stole it.
So I reported her to Nicole Ozretic, Toronto police detective, but her FIRST question to me was “Why not report in Aurora to YRP” and then “What is your bank account number?”. When I refused because it had no value to her investigation, she refused to investigate at all. So I emailed Mayor Tory and he advised some senior police official. Dead end.
Today, I told the Canada Pension folks to direct deposit at RBC Aurora. I opened it so I could get cash nmonethly so Ms Adrian could not take it again.
I sued CIBC and Ms Afrian’s biss Michael Simaan for failing to train her.
I will ask YRP to investigate instead. They will decline, and wil claim it is a Toronto crime.
Then I wil try the OPP and RCMP. Then I will fond someone else.
Justices, you created and enabled this mess and I ask you to fix it,
Thanks if you can.
Bob
Anyway, the laser excised the last piece of anatomy causing the loss of the usual normal “clarity” in our day to day interactions.
Am I healed? Time will tell…. when the pain and inflammation retreat.
All I can do is promise that I will try to see both sides of everything before I make a reaction. Or even just ONE side they tell me will help guide me to. better resolution. I intend to go for “high resolution” in all the rest of y life.
Wish me luck. I am doing my best here,
CANADA
Behzad Ghotb/August 2020Share
Companies should stay empathetic right now, and plan experiences that help comfort today’s nervous consumers. Behzad Ghotb, consumer research and insights lead at Google Canada, sheds light on ways brands can respond to how consumers are feeling now.
With economies now open across Canada, many marketers are eager for data that sheds light on what the “new normal” may look like for consumers. The future remains to be seen, but recent research shows that this summer, consumer behaviour shifted. The way people shop — and feel about shopping — has changed.
Marketers need to recognize the sentiment and adapt campaigns to address current needs, or risk an experience that falls flat — or worse — offends.
Consumers are feeling nervous. They’re still feeling concerned about their health, safety, and their finances. They’re still turning to contactless experiences like delivery and curbside pickup.
Marketers need to recognize the sentiment and adapt campaigns to address current needs, or risk an experience that falls flat — or worse — offends.
Many consumers are returning to old habits. In Canada, in-store shopping has increased throughout the summer, with 75% of Canadians surveyed saying they are shopping for the majority of their needs in-store.1 This is exciting news and many businesses are eager to welcome customers back to the pre-pandemic experiences of dining in restaurants, heading to attractions, wandering aisles, or filling fitting rooms with clothes to try on.
However, that old carefree consumer isn’t back just yet.
Recognizing the shopper mindset has changed — and may continue to change — is critical.
As the consumer mindset changes, marketers must:
A marketer’s first order of business should be to address today’s challenges, brought on by COVID-19. People’s feelings have changed and so should the experience you deliver.
Trying to upsell isn’t as important as offering them an experience that meets their needs. Customers don’t want to hear “look what you need”— they want to hear “we recognize your needs and we’re here to help you.” Research shows 65% of consumers say that how brands behave now will have a “huge impact” on what they will buy in the future after the COVID-19 crisis subsides.7
At the start of the summer season, Dairy Queen (DQ) and their agency partner denstu xquickly shifted DQ’s traditional messaging from trying to drive in-store to reminding customers that they have options. Instead of “visit a DQ now,” they shifted messaging and video end cards with voiceovers highlighting access options like takeout, delivery and drive-through. They also adapted their online to offline strategy to include local campaigns, so customers could easily understand how their local DQ was adapting to the current situation.
Think about experience and all of the barriers along the way. Are there ways to address them? Tell them how you made them safer. They need to hear another voice, grounded in values of caring and empathy. Let them know their health is more important to you than their wallet.
Early on during the pandemic, adidas adapted its digital marketing efforts to highlight how their products are supporting “staycations” and activities like home workouts, nature hikes, and days spent with the kids. The brand also built an at-home workout community #hometeam, featuring video workouts, inspiring stories from professional athletes, and curated collections of adidas workout gear. This summer, as restrictions eased in many places and sports teams began to play again, their “Ready for Sports” video series has continued to reassure and encourage people to return to sports at their own pace and focus on personal training and goals.
Consumer behaviour is part of a larger picture, and must be assessed in relation to how customers are feeling — even if those emotions aren’t positive. It’s essential that marketers realize that consumer comfort levels have changed.
Marketers need to ask what consumers are feeling and respond accordingly. Keep an eye on the pulse of both consumer behaviour and feelings, and land on messaging that feels right for their brand right now, and for their customers
Consumer Research and Insights ManagerGoogle Canada
What happens when 295,000 people want a nice pub in Cookstown?
They find my photos in Street View….
and there are more in that range…
Google Maps is what EVERYONE uses to find new places to visit.
and now suddenly they have enough money to protect children from COVID-19?
what did I miss??
All lawyers now refuse to respond to me. I am untouchable.
Charles Painter had me ordered to contact him only by email, so he is in contempt of his own order.
Anway, if you’re a lawyer acting to defend my suit, here is what I know about lawyers assigned as at a September 8, 2020
Aurora – Charles Painter twice called police to arrest me, one failed and one worked. I’ve declared this a conflict of interest and I ask him to be replaced. He had me ordered not to contact Lloyd’s of London, so I can’t say if someone new has been assigned yet.
Region of York, police and their board – Barry Stork also had me arrested so I have asked he be noted in a conflict of interest as well.
Lady A – used Charles Painter so the status is the same as Aurora
Lady B – using homeowners insurance lawyer
If you require access, email me for a link. BobLepp at gmail dot com
The $750,000 (Cumulatove Historically) Fund Disbursements are explained here:
https://www.aurora.ca/en/aurora-cares-community-action-team.aspx
See it here: https://www.aurora.ca/en/aurora-cares-community-action-team.aspx
Keep your fingers/paws crossed.
Wish me luck. I will need it.
Watch this space.
When everyone came back from World War II did they start the thin brown line? When they came back from Korea, did they start the brown line? Iraq? Afghanistan? No and that’s because they had no desire at all to keep doing what they WERE doing.
They just wanted to get back to their lives and forget everything they saw and everything they had done.
But police are not like that. We started thanking them for looking after us, just for doing their jobs THEY chose to do. And so it went to their heads. we honored them as first responders on 9/11 and every other opportunity. We cranked them up, puffed them up…we made their jobs seem more important than our own, when in fact they are just jobs like all the rest and no one forces them to do it.
We gave them a uniform, we gave them a taser, rifles, we gave them a gun and troop carriers, gas masks, we gave them a fast car and we said go get ‘em!
But they did not want to do it alone. They did not want to pick on somebody and have that person fight back. They may get hurt.
So, they started long ago a special fraternity called the “Thin Blue Line” and it was meant to scare the bad guys. You knew that if you ever picked on one cop, you were picking on all of them, and so they all (and their lawyers and their union reps and publicists) piled on and that also went to their heads.
Back in the 80s crime started to decline and police saw that they were not gonna have so many opportunities to show off, and so they started to generate crimes using breaches of recognizance. If there were fewer real bank robberies and not as many murders, at least they could arrest people for breaking the terms of their bail.
But even that might not work if they made those terms too easy to comply with. So, they made them impossible to comply with. They literally wrote up the bail terms so that the accused person must fail, and so they could be arrested again and the cops would look great again.
Somewhere along the way they realize that they could inflict more REAL, IMMEDIATE, COSTLY punishment using bail terms then they could with a judge and the jury.
And rarely could judges and juries drain your bank account as easily as having to hire a criminal lawyer. That is the REAL punishment they seek. To impoverish their perceived enemies.
Crown prosecutors jumped in to help because they would look busier if they had more matters on the docket. And more matters meant judges were overworked, and crowns knew that if you wanted to create your own justice system, all you had to do was hand a very busy judge a piece of paper with what they wanted the judge to do.
Some judges then figured out they didn’t have to work very much if they just had their assistant type up what the crown gave them to say, and so judges began to rubber stamp the draft orders from the crown.
This would be funnier if it weren’t so true. Ontario has had declining crime rates, yet the courts are bigger, there are more judges, and they still can’t keep up. They even rehire pensioned off judges, paying by the hour. The government of Canada saw this happening, they acted, and so, in December 2019, they introduced new law in Bill C-75.
The new bill deemphasized the role of the Crown and the court in a simple breach of bail. They made it a “slap on the wrist, get out of here you silly boy” kind of thing, A ticket is written, literally, a judge hears it like a parking ticket and decides on the spot.
But that that did not work as planned. A weakness in the Attorney General‘s guidelines Issued to all to local Crown attorneys allows them to develop what are called “local practices”. Like, a court can be created in a sweat lodge up north, or plaid jackets are permitted.
They are allowed to modify how the law is imposed for any reason they make up, and Newmarket made up the reason that they simply had no time to learn Bill C 75, and so they just ignored it. How do I know this? Because all my charges are breaches of bail. Oh sure there were a few lame criminal code charges and even one of those was successful before appeal but the rest are all just silly wastes of time.
They involve blogging about the very people who arrested me. My charter rights, remember them?. Because what the crown was able to do was to ignore the orders of the Superior Court on several occasions, and they would lie time after time to judges that I was forbidden to even say four names to my son in private. In their desire to arrest me, again and again, the Crown convinced several judges that I should be forbidden to say the names of these people and of one of their businesses even in private even to my family. It took 2 1/2 years for me to prove that to the Superior Court but when I did they ordered Crown Greg Elder just stop doing it.
His solution was simple beyond belief.
He simply ignored superior Court of Justice Dawe. WORDS went in one ear and out the other. He knew he could get away with this because he had already done the same thing to the top judge in the GTA. Senior regional justice Fuerst on November 16, 2019 ordered him to remove all the names from the bail terms and Greg Elder found that if he just ignored the order, he could still use those terms in a draft order to any judge he wanted. And so, on December 4 2019 he specified the same four forbidden names all over again to Justice Rose in a draft decision and a draft probation order. Justice Rose was very busy that day, so all he had to do was to sign the draft order and his assistant would type it up over his name. The manipulation of the justice system was complete.
Police could arrest me time and time again knowing that the Crown had away to get the judge to rule against me. And no one caught on that it was because the Crown was ignoring the orders of 2 Superior Court justices. Now, you need to know that an interesting thing happens when people find out but the Crown will prosecute any old charge at all against a person like me. Those people then make up whatever charges they want, they lie whatever they want on police interview videos and they know the police and the Crown will take it from there.
So starting on June 3, 2017, the same three women have used the implicit support of police and the Crown to arrest me seven times on 27 charges with the most outrageous lies in the most illegal actions imaginable. Then one of them retained a lawyer and let her in on the fun. So Gwendolyn Adrian jumped into the fray and began to do whatever she wanted knowing that the courts and the police would back her up. A paralegal, one who should known better, even decided she could break her oath and breach the trust of the public and go undercover to help POLICE try to entrap me. I was a convenient pin cushion for anything That bothered them in life.
Her dog died of cancer and old age and to her it was just another opportunity to call police and ask them to arrest me. It’s not like I didn’t fight back, but I just don’t have enough money to defeat them totally. The paralegal created 19 false charges, and not one of them was successful, yet if she went to POLICE today they would dutifully take another report, and record another video interview and call me to come in to be arrested.
The genesis of the affair, The Bylaws department of the Town Of Aurora had some family connections to York Regional police meant that nothing I did could stop police from arresting me.
There have now been 37 different officers assigned to keep me in prison. And the excuse their boss uses is that I had the nerve to write her name in my blog after my first arrest July 14, 2017. And here’s where the privilege afforded by the thin blue line comes in. She is backing up an ex police officer and her husband, and she knows that regardless of what she does, the rest of the police force will back her up because of course she is one of the glorious Thin Blue Line and she deserves it.
She proves that by telling me she has been an officer for 31 years. She does not tell me whether she did good police work or bad police work for 31 years, only that she has paid her dues. And so, she infers that because she paid her dues she can do whatever she wants to me. Luckily I was recording that conversation, and in the course of an hour she verified everything that was just a theory to me before I sat down to talk to her. I was thrilled and worried at the same time as I listened to her. I was thrilled she was admitting to it all, but, I was worried my battery would run out. That turned out not to be a problem and so I blogged her name again February 28, 2020 on a Friday.
Bright and early on a Monday morning Detective Sergeant Heather Bentham assigned four more officers to make up a case against me. Of course the first person they called was the paralegal who initiated the other 19 breaches, and within a few hours she had convinced two lawyers to back her up. Maybe there is a Thin Gray Line as well, or would it be green for the color of money.
In any event, a mere paralegal was able to convince two full stripe lawyers to agree that I had spoken to her inside a court room. She chose that crime because she thought it was a bail term, and if it was a bail term she could certainly get the crown to prosecute me for it. But there was one wrinkle she had not considered.
She never thought that a Superior Court justice had already closed down that door. Because of the delays during the pandemic it took until June 5 for justice Dawe to once again tell the Crown that they had all been abusing my rights. He ordered for the third time the Crown Greg Elder must delete the four names from my bail terms after providing great detail as to why they violated my rights. To be completely truthful, he could not even figure out what term number six meant. But he did understand enough that the only place in the universe that I COULD speak to the paralegal was in a court room.
I can hear several of you saying well that should take care of the problem, Bob, that should be that the arrest of March 4 will have to be withdrawn as false because a judge just ordered you to speak to that paralegal only inside a court room. I can hear you say that but I cannot tell you it worked.
And again the Crown is using the pandemic as the excuse to delay Superior Court of Justice Dawe’s order from coming into effect. For 3 1/2 months, the Crown has been told that they have been prosecuting me on a completely illegal bail term.
So all of that allowed Justice Harper to sentence me to 60 days of house arrest based on the same old, obsolete, abusive wording. The Crown knew that I had an extremely strong appeal and so the next problem was how to stop me from getting the sentence suspended until my appeal could wipe it out completely .
Of course the Crown went to the playbook and simply found a busy justice to hear my motion, and then they passed her not only a draft decision but a draft argument for the decision. They gave her the complete decision to publish under her own name.
But they made a few mistakes and added in a few facts that were never discussed in our, so the justice could not possibly have known about them. The most obvious was to state that five paragraphs number 45 through 49 were written by Justice Harper to explain the legal reasons why a legal contract requiring volunteers to manage a dog park did not give me any reason to email them when I was attacked by a dog in the dog park.
My only conviction on a criminal code charge was ordered by Justice Harpur. He ordered that I was guilty of harassment by emailing the people in charge of the dog park that I had been attacked. I was simply following the contract the town had required the volunteers to sign. The contract said that all users of the dog park must communicate all problems to the volunteers, because there was no one at the town who would help them.
So, POLICE simply made the contract disappear. And the town removed the contract from the website, taking it out of the public view. Then, the Crown in one of many drafts of orders and motions given to the judge pointed out to him that I was going to use the existence of the contract as the reason for communicating about my dog attack.
And so, Justice Harpur did what he was asked. In the middle of my testimony, he kept telling me repeatedly he had already made up his mind and I should just stop talking about that contract. He told me that no contract could possibly explain why I emailed the volunteers about being attacked by a dog in the dog park.
To me this was a problem, because the only reason I emailed the volunteers is that the contract required me to do that. That contract actually required the volunteers to communicate all of the terms of the contract to every user of the dog park,and further the volunteers were required to publish all of the rules for using the park and they were to assure that every person bringing a dog to the park had a copy of the Contract and of the rules and understood them.
This was a great plan, but the volunteers defeated that plan by simply doing nothing. They knew that if they EVER DID show the contract to every user, and EVER DID make up rules, that everyone would know the volunteers themselves were using the dog park to make money in a commercial dog walking business.
The volunteers all knew that the other users of the park would be upset to know that the only people breaking the rules where the volunteers themselves, and so the volunteers simply NEVER published any rules.
My fault, if I have one and I’m sure I do, is that I FIRST researched all of that as a user of the park. The contract was on the town website. There is a huge sign at the gates that explained the rules and it excluded commercial dog walkers, and so I understood how things were supposed to work.
What I failed to understand is that I was the only person to know the rules.
Even the volunteers had signed the contract so long ago that they had actually forgotten that it even existed. I had to repeatedly ask the volunteers for their signed copy, and once I got it I confirmed it was very clear to anyone who happened to be given a copy.
So you may ask why would Aurora want me arrested for being the only person that knew the rules and followed them? Because in my research I also found that the bylaws department was selling only 10% of pet tags to 14,000 pets in Aurora. I was the only one to notice that each year the financial statements reported a shortfall of $300,000. I thought the town would be happy to hear the news, and, of course, I blamed it all on the bylaws department.
What I did not know was that the bylaws department was having an affair with the parks director and every time I criticized the lack of fiscal responsibility by the bylaws department, the parks director took increasingly serious measures tO shut me up.
He started slow by having his manager Jim Tree try to bribe the volunteers with free wood chips if they would disparage me in writing. When that failed, he asked a counselor Tom Mrakas to you offer the same bribe, I witnessed it. When that failed, he simply threatened all the volunteers that they would be ejected from the park, and they could not run their business if they did not disparage me.
So the volunteers turned against me and they ignored the fact I had won them $80,000 for a brand new park. They all went to police and claimed that my many emails back and forth with them getting the money wee actually harassing them instead.
They were not immediately successful because, of course, police saw nothing in the emails of any concern, and twice that was the official written result
But then, Detective Sergeant Bentham, assigned the most senior detective in York region to take over. He was the one who implemented the plan to erase, remove and bleach the contract that the town themselves had written. While the town had demanded the volunteers tell everyone about the contract, Detective James Ward decided no one should know about the contract, and on May 28, 2018 he taught all of the volunteers how to deny the existence of that contract when asked in court. He told them that if they were ever asked about a contract, that they should deny there ever was a legal contract and say that it was only a “memorandum of understanding”. They got no cash at all, so, it had no legal force and nothing in it required them to accept my emails of help or my email asking for help with the dog attack. Once he had implanted his plan into all their minds, he arrested me May 30, 2018 and he worked with the Crown to have them communicate to the judge that the contract simply had no place in anything, including my alibi. So now, you say, why don’t we just look at that video where he trains the volunteers to deny a contract and show it to a judge. Well that would be a good plan if it was not a pandemic. But the pandemic is being defeated. And the courts are about to reopen and that video will be played front and center after the one hour recording of Detective Bentham, admitting that she was behind it all along.
Keep your fingers crossed.
Watch this space.
Wish me luck. I will need it.
We all remember a while back when a baby sex reveal party start a forest fire.
An over privileged MILLENIAL decided to use a rifle to ignite a pyrotechnic Which exploded in a puff of pink powder.
We saw that up here in CANADA. On the news. In the United States the president tells people not to watch the fake news so not very many people saw it down there
Well this week another arrogant over privileged millennial decided he and his buddies could do better and so they too fired an assault rifle at a pyrotechnic in a forest.
Now 7,000 acres of California are on fire and this is in the best country in the world led by the greatest president ever.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/07/us/california-fire-el-dorado-gender-reveal-trnd/index.html
All My “Convictions” are breaches. Save one which was an email to police asking for help with a dog attack. Am I TOO breachy?
| a. | 1. | Apt to break fences or to break out of pasture; unruly; as, breachy cattle. |
Webster’s Revised Unabridged Dictionary, published 1913 by G. & C. Merriam Co.
“APT TO BREAK FENCES” is just TOO funny.
In the past five months less than 12 people Average per day read my blog.
Three are alleged victims
Three more are me and my family, one more friend
at least three must be lawyers
my probation offocer, that’s 11.
some of 37 cops assigned
And your Attorney General has spent $250,000 conservatively since 2017. Ten trial days. Four inquiry days. A Hundred appearances. Waste.
For one ex cop. And only because of the “Thin Blue Line”.
I spent over $44,000 on lawyers and courts.
For 12 people a day. Ontario paid $228 per viewer per day
I paid another $40 a day per viewer
$268 a day we paid.
Is that “in the public interest?”
$268 a day.. over $10 an hour per person?
Discuss among yourselves.
I’m thinking ex cops are expensive to protect from public opinion. If they don’t want people blogging about them…. stop assaulting me and lying again and again. Two arrests, three charges all withdrawn as false.
When I went to Toronto police the first thing thing they asked ME for was photo ID. “Standard procedure” he said.
Why is it not STANDARD with York Regional Police?
Why can I not be shown PROOF of the name of the person who arrested me twice falsely? 3 charges. All withdrawn. Why can I not be told the legal name of such a person?
Since there was no name change between June 3, 2017 and January 30, 2018 when a married name was renewed as a POA officer in council minutes, she lied about her name in every charge and every lawsuit. Neither of her two lawyers have responded to a legal request to know my accuser’s legal name.
When after 5 days Toronto police called … they IMMEDIATELY opened with..” Why did you try to arrest in Toronto, you’re in Aurora?”
Second thing? She wanted my bank account number.
She’s not even planning to get the “legally executed garnishment from CIBC” to get the account number. She wants it from me?
Nope. I do not Gove my SON or bank account to anyone. Common sense.
If CIBC was legally freezing my account, she can now garnish RBC the same way. If she stole no account number for CIBC she should be able to repeat the process at RBC WITHOUT an account number. I’ve put my cash in the account. Go garnish it without an account number to prove your innocence.
If they give you my money they broke the law in s. 462. I’ve sued two banks already for breaking the Bank Act s.462 and eliminating my account, so to sue a third is easy.
Not garnishing RBC is an admission of guilt.
Your call.
Dear Crown,
I ask that you take archive copies of every soft copy you have sent me. I ask that the metadata for all Word documents be safeguarded. Or, if you do NOT use MS Office, save every file and tell me what software you used to create them.
Crown Westagte was quite offended II suggested Mr. Elder, Giordano and himself had supplied “DRAFT orders” to Justice Harpur and Justice Cameron for their decisions.
Word metadata
Most Word documents contain hidden metadata that shows the history of the document. Metadata is data about the document or file that is embedded within the file’s details. That data shows when the document was first created, who authored the document, total editing time, and the last time the document was modified.
Microsoft Word’s metadata, or document properties, stores details about files. Common metadata entries include the document’s author, company, title and subject. Each time someone edits and saves a file, Word updates the document’s metadata. Comments and revisions logged in the metadata are helpful when several people are collaborating on a document. Reviewing the document’s properties or using the Document Inspector to see if metadata is present and will help you verify what information Word has recorded; remember, though, that the Document Inspector locates the types of metadata recorded in the document but does not reveal what that data contains.
For PDF files..
For PDF files..
View document properties
When you view a PDF, you can get information about it, such as the title, the fonts used, and security settings. Some of this information is set by the person who created the document, and some is generated automatically.
In Acrobat, you can change any information that can be set by the document creator, unless the file has been saved with security settings that prevent changes.
Choose File > Properties.
Click a tab in the Document Properties dialog box.
Document Properties
Description
Shows basic information about the document. The title, author, subject, and keywords may have been set by the person who created the document in he source application, such as Word or InDesign, or by the person who created the PDF. You can search for these description items to find particular documents. The Keywords section can be particularly useful for narrowing searches.
Note that many search engines use the title to describe the document in their search results list. If a PDF does not have a title, the filename appears in the results list instead. A file’s title is not necessarily the same as its filename.
The Advanced area shows the PDF version, the page size, number of pages, whether the document is tagged, and if it’s enabled for Fast Web View. (The size of the first page is reported in PDFs or PDF Portfolios that contain multiple page sizes.) This information is generated automatically and cannot be modified.
I would like all of that for every decision published by the various justices.
In particular:
J. Harpur
J, Cameron
J Rose
Here Mr. Elder , or “elder02” created the PDF in MS Word.
So, the evidence of who wrote these documents is recorded in the soft copy file itself.
I ask for a copy of each Word document so I can see who wrote it.
The Whitehouse today issued a press release bragging that “Trump builds a “‘New” protective wall, on the very land owned by its neighbour even, that no U.S. cash was spent, and only Mexicans had to pay for it!”
One has to dig deep into the narrative to discover that The New Wall is:
Announcing: “The Wall” at Hay Caramba, Bradford, Ontario… a brand new patio safely surrounded by towering (to children) walls in safety orange.
The “Mexicans” are owners Noe Martinez and Melissa Marques. They paid 100% of the costs.
Trump is now looking into the miles of canal walls built by the large numbers of annual farm workers brought to the Holland Marsh area from Mexico because Canadians do not want to grow food. I’d have thought a pandemic might convince a few people to learn the skills… Just in case. Apparently everyone trusts McDonalds burgers WILL have adequate hormones in the beef to kill COVID-19.
So, each mile of canal is two miles of wall because Mexicans built the canals.
In Toronto, Secret Service suits were seen Laser measuring the Mexican embassy so a space contractor computer simulation could prove the length of all interior walls as well. Dubbed “Trump Mex US Some More Wall”, the app is being deployed to all countries with Mexican embassies and to all border states with Mexican immigrant owned bodegas… each store’s walls will be counted.
Following will be inclusion of all Wahlburgers, Walmart’s, ANYTHING Sam Walton OWN’s, all WonderWalls. All walls in Cornwall, all previously owned furniture of Humpty Dumpty and his progeny, all buildings built by any company trading on Wall Street,
Then, usually dim witted Eric came up with more opportunities when he asked, “What is a wall?” And Dad said.. “ Look it up you you dumb f&*k!” And he found…
All U.S. embassies in the following countries will be asked to donate one city each:
There are 5 places named Wall in Germany.
There are 4 places named Wall in United Kingdom.
There are 3 places named Wall in America.
There is one place named Wall in Vanuatu.
There is one place named Wall in Czech Republic.
There is one place named Wall in Cameroon.
There is one place named Wall in Australia.
Better L8 than never! MAYBE I was wrong!
If I had it wrong with Adrian, will CIBC take the blame?
Because, it COULD also have been CIBC lying that they did nothing wrong.
IN FACT, that MAY be a high possibility.
Will I now be arrested for Public Mischief?
A;; I did was report Gwendolyn ADMITTED it was “none of my business” who stole my account number for her.
Have faith Gwendolyn, you have a female officer investigating, and. I am sure you can talk yourself out of it.
Maybe, Gwendolyn is gonna take one for the team, maybe she’ll allow her OWN arrest rather than cost the banking industry a fortune.
If it was Gwendolyn… she gets a knuckle rap.
BUT, if it was CIBC… the resultant CLASS ACTIONS will cost a bundle.
Read on. Maybe we can pin this on the CIBC acting alone.
And here’s what I base that on. More evidence that CIBC simply cannot properly handle garnish orders. They evolved (see my Darwin posts) into treating them ALL as “child support orders“. By letting ALL LAWYERS fax garnish orders for family support, CIBC let lawyers sneak in the odd shady court order and if needed deny it as a one-off mistake.
Plausible deniability…. always useful, always valuable.
Remember… the POSITIVELY shady $18,000 court order the banks are waiting for was fraudulently awarded. Ms Adrian asked for and got it claiming a motion NEVER heard. $1,800 ALONE was claimed by Gwendolyn for PHOTOCOPIES NEVER SEEN.
That is (in my opinion, see: Rights, Charter Of) fraud.
Anyway, it SHOULD be.
Let’s Make Like A Canary and Take a Sniff! If we die, we die.
OK, let’s see if my CIBC account is still frozen by an order sent by Gwendolyn Adrian March 4, just about 20 hours after I opened it…
I tried a large Interac from my pension fund account at RBC Aurora
I then switched Apps and tried to deposit it at CIBC Aurora….. NOPE.
So, the banks DEFEATED the whole intent of a garnish…. they really just get ONE grab, and if the balance is less than demanded… then the account is useless forever. Forever frozen. It cannot get more money put in.
BUT CPP And OAS will arrive… AND BE SEIZED.
See, there is no capability in this cold banking computer systems IBM sold them in the 70’s to exempt social benefits from being seized. I proved that too, by asking them!
With the BILLIONS taken from the Canadian taxpayer… they will now claim it to have been and TO BE NOW too expensive to change their mainframes to permit meeting REQUIREMENTS clearly define in the Bank ct at s. 462,
Imagine how many people were robbed of their pensions which were then sent to the sheriff!
After all if CIBC accepted a $5,000 COURT ORDER (NOT family support related) and then took $1,000 of the last CPP or OAS payments… THEY STOLE them to give the sheriff.
CIBC will have to pay them back once my class action gets rolling.
Oh, BTW, even when frozen.. the $4.95 charge is applied.
YES, I also get a credit of the $4.95 Old Fart Rebate
THAT’S MORE TO PAY BACK!
And, once they admit THAT to keep Gwendolyn Adrian from being arrested, they “freeze and seize and never releaze”… I go to TD, RBC, BMO, Tangerine, …. ALL of them will have to take a look whether they seized pension funds in every garnish order EVER! OR charged fees while the account was made useless.
The lawyers will be lining up.
Now, what are the bets I can go in and change my account to a high end, all bells and half whistles version with the highest fee and then watch that accumulate? Think I can do it by Monday morning? I have 1-4 pm out today, I will try.
Alert! Bob Lepp is coming to CIBC to catfish them into charging fees for a frozen account. I’ll send my OAS there Direct Deposit, and keep CPP as a paper check I can tender at RBC. THEn, I have it all. End to end.
Since I just published the BUGS in CIBC systems, and emailed the Ombudsman, and if they STILL ignore me, and STILL LET me upgrade the account to a high fee… is THAT fraud as well?
Knowingly charging a monthly fee for a completely disabled account…
I’ll check with a lawyer.
Gwendolyn? Any time on your hands? Or are you NOT doing time yet?
See, more humour. I win again.
I love the idea that in the end RBC is my safe place to bank.
and they are the key to how I avoid Ms Adrian until my appeal can be perfected.
Ms Buckles’ neighbour, and she has two, worked at RBC for forty years and now they will keep her talons off my money.
A wonderful young man there tied it all up with a bow.
He asked head office how they garnish an account. Simple. Direct.
I had no idea to ASK TD before they took our $4,500. Poof! It was gone.
And CIBC shut me down in half a day.
So, I assume those two would say the same as RBC…
So, if I MUST go to my bank to argue for my CPP…
I may as well get a paper check and cash it and save the argument.
BUT will they SEIZE it instead, put it in my account anyway…THEN, I get to argue for it.
WOW, so many options to mess me up.
Thus, a false garnish ALWAYS stops me getting my pension.
JUST like Adrian asked the judge to do.
Banks are permitting lawyers to circumvent the Bank Act.
To collect debts, they can “garnish” the debtor’s bank account. The Bank Act S. 462 tells them how.
They need your name, account number, branch number and branch address. Then they courier the order to the branch. And the bank branch is supposed to do the rest. They compare the account and name to the name and account on your signature card, then take your cash. If you still owe money, they take any cash you are silly enough to deposit.
Until recently….
Today, Lawyers now ignore all that and just fax the debtor name to every bank head office and they do the rest, Each head office finds and freezes the account and sends the cash to the sheriff,
Until all the debt is paid, you CANNOT use your account.
So, you lose your money AND the ability to day your bills.
And nome of that is legal.
Call YOUR bank and ask their routines. You will be amazed,
Banks are permitting lawyers to circumvent the Bank Act.
To collect debts, they can “garnish” the debtor’s bank account. The Bank Act S. 462 tells them how.
They need your name, account number, branch number and branch address. Then they courier the order to the branch. And the bank branch is supposed to do the rest. They compare the account and name to the name and account on your signature card, then take your cash. If you still owe money, they take any cash you are silly enough to deposit.
Until recently….
Today, Lawyers now ignore all that and just fax the debtor name to every bank head office and they do the rest, Each head office finds and freezes the account and sends the cash to the sheriff,
Until all the debt is paid, you CANNOT use your account.
So, you lose your money AND the ability to day your bills.
And nome of that is legal.
Call YOUR bank and ask their routines. You will be amazed,
Ms Adrian and Mr Painter OFTEN forget I am not a lawyer. They then expect I know all the secret handshakes.
The both enjoy whining to justices that I do not play by unwritten lawyer rules developed over the centuries to make their lives even easier. This makes tech judge biased against me.
To be honest, if a self rep actually finds himself standing before a justice then he has moved heaven and earth. It is not trivial to schedule a motion. To be able to produce the paperwork takes a lot of learning, effort and mistakes.
Below is Ms Adrian’s signature under paragraph 10) in which she claims:
“…Lepp increased costs by unilaterally scheduling the SLAPP relief motion…Increased costs were incurred. Had Lepp acted REASONABLY, a motion to deal with the preliminary issue of default could have been scheduled before a master…..”
G. Adrian Costs submission to J Schabas
She refused ALL communication while I was in default. I emailed her several times citing PPPA, COJA and SLAPP 137.1 rules.
Framers of the PPPA despised SLAPP suits. They are predatory and allow wealth to defeat dissent through false suits JUST to cost MONEY and l its of it.
SLAPP suits are oppressive and illegal now and Ms Adrian has STILL not “got” it.
“DEFAULT” means NOTHING when 137.1 is moved.
Adrian refused to understand that 137.1 SUPERCEDES EVERYTHING ELSE ABOUT A CASE. The PPPA’s purpose is to DISCOURAGE exactly the kind of suit Duncan brought. To do that, the Defendant can challenge it ANYTIME under 137.1. He can be assured of NOT PAYING ANY COSTS. He can win UNCAPPED damages if he proves SLAPP.
There was NO unilateral “scheduling” of anything. I had ALREADY pled 137.1 IN SENTENCE ONE OF MY DEFENCE TO Brad Cran.
There is NO REQUIREMENT for a self represented person to beg a lawyer for a date. Lawyer “friends” do that as a nicety to fellow union members. I have it from Llyshelle Barrett, Superior Court Scheduler Newmarket that no “consultation” is required.
As you consider the revenue streams from the lawsuits of TD and the other one, think about how…
If she HAD read the s. 137.1 it states clearly it can be moved at ANY TIME, when in default, or NOT in default, BEFORE filing a defence, AFTER filing a defence.. there is NO TIME when it cannot be moved.
She denies knowing:
Now, if she had NOT STOLEN MY CIBC DATA,.. she might convince a judge she was just sloppy, but once she committed a crime the judge SHOULD lose all respect for her.
But, she did steal my account number. And I can prove it.
CIBC said their staff ALL did a perfect job, just like they worked for Trump.
That MEANS, there was a match between the account Ms. Adrian submitted on the garnishment order and the account number on my still wet signature card.
CIBC would not lie to police, correct? They would say they did not Gove the number away. And then the police ask for the garnishment order, point to the account number and say “Well how did Ms Adrian get it legally?”
So, Ms Adrian somehow got knowledge of my account number to be able to write it on the order to the court and to CIBC. And I can state I did not give it to her.
ONLY CIBC knew my account number when I opened the account March 3, 2020 and BEFORE she garnished it March 4. So, in those 24 hours, Ms. Adrian stole it from someone.
AND, someone told her I was in that CIBC branch March 3. She could NOT know to go steal the account UNLESS a co-conspirator saw me there and phoned her up. THEN, she could go steal the account number.
So, she had TWO helpers, one playing lookout and one on the INSIDE of CIBC to print out my banking data for her. Its a long number, plus the TRANSIT code… she could not just be told it, someone printed it out or wrote it down for her.. and that piece of paper is evidence she now cannot destroy.
CIBC logs EVERY access to my profile data. They can be subpoena’d, ALL of the staff… to ask each one to confess.
And then August 26, Ms Adrian tried to elicit all my password hints. Wife’s name. birthday, mother’s name, son’s name, birthday…. she got EVERYTHING she needed to log in as me and take my money directly. Was she planning to do that? Or were the improper Discovery questions part of her thievery?
And imagine how much time CIBC wil spend backing away from claiming they did everything legally when they decide its easier to just charge Adrian for theft and let police figure it out. Not great press, but all press is good press.
The cost of all these suits to taxpayers is unfortunate.
On August 26, 2020 I was ordered by Ms Adrian to attend Discovery in aid io execution. She repeatedly asked me for ALL the accounts I had beyond the two she had ALREADY garnished so she could garnish it.
If you have read what the function of various levels of Ombudsman inside and outside CIBC, you know:
I will post the Small Claims Suit Number HERE >>>>________________________
Dear Mr. Lepp,
I am writing in response to your email of today’s date regarding your bank accounts
In order to access funds in your accounts, you need to contact CIBC at (905) 727-4248 X 222 (660 Wellington Street East Aurora Ontario L4G 0K3). Thank you, Regards,
Camilla Latronico, CFP STI | Senior Manager | Office of the Ombudsman
P.O. Box 342, Commerce Court, Toronto, ON M5L 1G2 | Tel: 416-980-3755 | Fax: 416-980-3754 |
September 2, 2020 at 4:29 pm
Hear the results here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1QNWhqlc05eCj7Pct_pVEhc2nfPncnDYY/view?usp=sharing
Recall that OBIS exists to pay off people who get screwed over by a bank.
As soon as you start not the process, the “Cone of Silence” drops over you. Then, whatever they tell your whatever the solution is you must shut up. You cannot use the admissions of OBSI that a bank screwed you over to sue that bank.
So, in essence, OBSI is just a muffler for complaints. Only the serious errors and omissions would be brought to them and they INSTANTLY have you wrapped in sound absorbing legal instruments.
If you get screwed over, just go straight to a law suit, because OBSI tops out at $1,000 anyway. Chump change.
CIBC broke the Bank Act was, specifically s. 462, but accepting a garnishment order at head office as a fax. They did not require Ms Adrian to courier it to my branch for comparison of the account number she had to the one on my signature card.
Because CIBC then froze my account to all uses for the last 5 months, they still assert they did nothing wrong.
So, if on September 2, 2020 (today) CIBC asserts they have done nothing illegal, why os my account not of any use to me?
Mr. Lepp,
Thank you for the update. At this time, I am required to remind you and bring your attention to the consent you signed with OBSI on July 7, 2020. Specifically:
Information you receive from us is confidential
You cannot share the information you get from us with anyone except the firm’s regulators and anyone who has also signed this agreement. You cannot use information you get from us in any legal action.
You agreed to the terms set out in the consent. In particular, you agreed that:
OBSI’s correspondence, files, and any discussions we have during the review of your complaint are confidential;
Sincerely,
Michael Hamilton
Senior Investigator
———————————————————————
OBSI / OSBI
T: 1.888.451.4519 x 2262
F: 1.888.422.2865
September 2, 2020 at 4:29 pm
SO, I guess the OBSI will sue me now.
So far, what I got from the OBSI is “We need another 60 days to take us out to our maximum of 120 days to come back with a result.
Well, CIBC already telegraphed the result… a frozen account.
Did anyone see or notice that lawyers and government and bankers EVERYWHERE want to shut me up?
Aurora wants me shut up about the illegal business and education tax exemption for Terry Redvers and his soccer dome and maybe his tennis club by now.
York Region wants me shut up about Bus Safety.
the Catholic School Board wants me SiLENTLY to stay off public land at the bus stop.
York Region police want me shut up about Det. Sgt Bentham in my blog
The Police services Board want me to shut up and not demand they control the Thin Blue Line mentality of the Crawford family.
All of this silencing will come with a cost. Which is pretty cool, I will get paid for shutting up!
UPDATE: September 3, 2020 – I met the RBC Aurora staff and set it all up for garnishment, They will let me know September 4 whether they can guarantee they will not take CPP and OAS if I direct it there
On August 26, 2020 I was ordered by Ms Adrian to attend Discovery in aid io execution.
She repeatedly asked me for ALL the accounts I had beyond the two she had ALREADY garnished so she could garnish it.
This is all she had, if police believe her, to garnish me at CIBC. She said she did not get my actual real account number or anything else REAL about me.
I challenge her NOW to prove it. And it is dead easy to prove.
I DEMAND she garnish it today September 2, 2020 a week LATER.
But you KNOW NOW she will not, don’t you?
Because, without an account number and a branch address and then registered mail or courier personal service TO the branch address, my signature card account number cannot be compared to the account number in the garnishment order.
Aurora RBC is at: 15408 Yonge St, Aurora, ON L4G 1N9 (905) 841-2020 Closes 5:00 pm today.
And because you would FAIL to prove that, she must have broken the law getting “Ms. Nunhov U.R. Business!” to give her my account details.
She is in a corner now. Backed in real tight.
If she DOES garnish my RBC Aurora pension money, she will break the law.
If she does NOT garnish RBC Aurora, she is admitting she can find no legal way to do that.
So, what shall it be?
I have already offered settlement in my suit of you and TD Bank. You declined. So at trial the justice can go nuts with a cash award. Especially when I tell him the same lawyer you hired AGAIN illegally garnished Canada Pension and OAS at CIBC.
My conundrum is what do I DO?
Any free legal advice for me?
I thought not. I have GoogleLaw, don’t worry about me.
Google and artificial intelligence may not be the end of the legal profession, but, boy, can you see it from here.
By Gary Goodwin
Google and artificial intelligence may not be the end of the legal profession, but, boy, can you see it from here.
I anticipate encountering what Joseph Schumpeter euphemistically called creative destruction. Innovation destructs archaic business models and creatively releases capital to be deployed elsewhere — a benign description of being out on the street with your law degree.
Perhaps it’s too hyperbolic, but, for example, Google has made a database of federal and state case law and legal journal articles available via its Google Scholar search. In their defence, lawyers can now purchase on Amazon the “Please Do Not Confuse Your Google Search With My Law Degree” coffee mug.
For a simpler DIY approach, YouTube displays more than 146 videos on family law. This also includes shuffle playlist for greater variety.
For comparison, AI factors into more than 38 per cent of regular enterprise planning for mainly customer interfaces. As for law firms, it’s likely not so much. Most of law firm and in-house planning centres on how to augment regular legal work with new AI tools to make this more effective and efficient.
JPMorgan Chase & Co., apparently, eliminated 360,000 hours of legal work creating legal security documents by the use of COIN, for Contract Intelligence, to review commercial loan agreements. The bank plans to use AI to analyze credit default swaps . . . since things worked out so well last time.
Other forms of AI can review entire contracts, interpret sections and even recommend sections that are not there. These recommendations can depend on which side of a particular transaction you happen to be. Similar to customizing streaming music systems, one can imagine the type of customization that can occur as you adjust the lever from buyer focused over to seller focused. We await the ultimate customization that includes sliding the scale either to the far left or far right into the “jerk” setting.
I tried a contract review application one time with a simple release. No comments came back. I imagine legal associates would be ecstatic to receive something back from a senior lawyer without any comments. I was hoping for at least one “atta boy” type of meme.
Instead of augmenting legal practice, another perspective suggests a client-based focus where the system asks questions and directs the client to certain resources. For example, The DoNotPay website helped users successfully appeal hundreds of thousands of parking tickets by having the client answer a number of questions. The system then interprets the situation and prints out a draft letter to send to the authorities.
I tested DoNotPay over the weekend and can confidently assert that the experience replicated that of retaining some legal firms. The site took in my request, said it was sorry to hear that and told me if I could email more information it would get back to me in 24 hours. Nice immediate reply, but a solution may come a bit later. Notwithstanding the delay, the value proposition — benefits divided by total costs — cannot be beat. The system is free.
So, where do the law societies stand among all of this creative destruction? Their mandate includes the protection of the public. However, the other two mandates generally include advancing the cause of justice and the rule of law, which requires the public disclosure of legal codes and processes. Societies also facilitate access to justice. This suggests making it as easy as possible for the general public unable to afford a lawyer access to some form of legal information.
This type of access does not mean providing paper or online brochures but a more customized response. In other businesses, chatbots can ask an advancing series of questions and provide a more “intelligent” and applicable answer. This forms the entire basis behind a customer-focused type of interface.
A new client-driven model suggests perhaps an Uber approach. Uber does not own cabs and tries not to employ drivers. The courts have imposed some obligations here. Generally, Uber is a simple platform that connects customers and drivers. A similar approach could connect a client and a lawyer providing the most cost-effective service. Cost is not everything, but as the law becomes more commoditized, then perhaps being “the better lawyer” may not carry the day if everyone uses the same type of AI platform to research and provide a result. And, yes, everyone shall likely have their respective settings maximized over to jerk, so there will still be plenty to argue about.
From a policy analysis perspective, one appreciates the different approaches each law society brings to the table and the complicated socio-economic analysis that would be required to balance justice access and public protection. The 2014 CBA Legal Futures Initiativeoutlined a number of areas that the legal profession could take to remain relevant. Implementation of the recommendations may be slow in coming.
The various law societies currently have authority over who can practise law. One can easily imagine a public lobbying effort to storm the ramparts to allow some form of AI system that can ask questions and guide the individual to a possible area where help could be found.
Dear PC Mohammed
When and if your detectives speak to Ms Adrian, she will impress u[on them her superior knowledge of the law.
She will say: “Detective, I know the law and I did what it said to do.”
Well, faced with that assault on the competence of a highly trained Detective in Canada’s most sophisticated city… he or she may crumble and give up.
I ask that you do a couple of things for me:
I have done few related posts already. I created a new “category” ‘Whither Goest Gwendolyn Adrian?” for all such commentary on the Bank Act.
Just click HERE and see ALL posts about the legalities of Garnishment
and of course, get them to ask THE experts.. their credit union, because I am guessing NO ONE illegally garnishes them!
| WHO/Decision | YES | NO |
|---|---|---|
| ME | X | |
| CIBC | X | |
| OBSI | X | |
| Toronto Police | X |
The choices above do NOT result in a possible solution.
BECAUSE…EITHER
OR
AND, THEREFORE
CIBC is responsible for BOTH choices police make
Ms. Adrian REQUIRED my account number on the order which HAD or be served “personally” at my branch, not faxed to EITHER the branch OR head office
SO THAT
My CIBC ***BRANCH*** could MATCH it to their signature card.
So, now the OBSI will do its thing and recommend CIBC pay me money to stay silent about their illegal mistakes,
Oopsie… TOO LATE!
They missed their chance to avoid “Death by BLOGGER BOB”.
Can you say “Catch 22”?
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaJump to navigationJump to searchA flowchart showing how Catch-22 works
A catch-22 is a paradoxical situation from which an individual cannot escape because of contradictory rules or limitations.[1] The term was coined by Joseph Heller, who used it in his 1961 novel Catch-22.
An example is:In needing experience to get a job…”How can I get any experience until I get a job that gives me experience?” – Brantley Foster in The Secret of My Success.
Catch-22s often result from rules, regulations, or procedures that an individual is subject to, but has no control over, because to fight the rule is to accept it. Another example is a situation in which someone is in need of something that can only be had by not being in need of it (e.g.: the only way to qualify for a loan is to prove to the bank that you don’t need a loan). One connotation of the term is that the creators of the “catch-22” situation have created arbitrary rules in order to justify and conceal their own abuse of power.
Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catch-22_(logic)
THAT sums up the Newmarket version of justice.
Newmarket Crowns make up arbitrary rules all the time.
Until last week, I could NOT have won for trying.
Today, I CANNOT POSSIBLY LOSE even if I tried.
Watch THEM lose ME now! They have it ALL figured out, I only have half.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(According to positivism, observation and experience are the only ways for immutable truths to become fully realized or understood.)
