FAQ – We Get Letters! Stacks and Stacks of Letters….

And each has a question about what my blog says.

Q. Exactly when did this start? What kicked it off.

A. 2012 – Bylaws Manager Techa Van Leeuwen and Mayor Dawe refused any and ALL Bylaws actions against my neighbour at One Mendy’s Lane.

Q. What happened recently to fire it all up again?

A. I tripped over several abuses of taxpayers by the Town of Aurora, and Mayor Dawe wanted me silenced.

Q. What do your dogs have to do with it?

A. I used Canine Commons dog park for exercise. It was in the most disgusting muddy conditions, covered in tree branches, with backwards cattle fence waiting to cut and pierce dog skins. I was asked by the Canine Commons Committee to join their private Facebook group and make rousing posts to get its users fired up to demand Aurora repair the park. Then the Canine Commons COmmittee turned on me as soon as I go tthem the $80,000 spent ($8,000 a short term “fix” and $72,000 for a complete redo)

Q. Surely a dog park is not the only mistake Aurora was making… did you get fixated on the dog park issues?

A. I admit I once concentrated on the park, but that all changed when I found lawbreaking and the financial abuses. I became vocal about Mayor Dawe breaking laws and defying the Accessibility Act (AODA) by NOT making the new park Accessible.

Q. How was Aurora able to arrest you if, as you claim, you did nothing wrong?

A. Aurora had an inside line to police. Mayor Dawe sat on a police committee and on York Region Council. He knew all the police from when they built YRP Headquarters Aurora. Aurora simply had influence with police.

Q. If Dawe’s first arrest of you was proven to be false before J. Johnston in November 2017, why did a second false arrest happen? Would the court not make sure that next time some evidence had been gathered BEFORE they arrested you?

A. Police got angry that I had defeated their first attempt for jail time, and so they upped the ante and arrested me May 30, 2018 for emailing Aurora Councillors and Mayor about unattended dog problems in Canine Commons.

Q. What possibly could you have emailed to Council to get yourself arrested again?

A. I revealed the scam contract of 2005 for Aurora Sports Dome. I revealed Aurora paid cash to buy Terry Redvers expensive things for his business. And Aurora paid Aurora Sports Dome’s education and business taxes for $40-50,000 annually and that the public was never told. I revealed that Allan Downey convinced Council to fake a letter to Ontario declaring the privately held Sports Dome was really being run JUST for taxpayers and thus it should be tax exempt. Clerk Mike De Rond misled the Finance Minister of Ontario that Redvers’ privately held for-profit Sports Dome was like a fire hall or town pool in Aurora and so the $50,000 education taxes need not be paid.

Q. You seem to make a lot of use of courts to do your bidding. Why?

A. Our courts are the only legal way to address such abuses of the public. There is no use taking up a petition… towns like Aurora only listen to the courts. So, it was up to me to bring the violations to the courts’ attention December 18, 2018 when I sued for $7 million. I happened to hit one million MORE than Aurora’s Mayor Morris sued bloggers Bill Hogg and Dick Johnson in 2010-12.

Q. Was it worth losing your dog, your perfect business reputation, your home, your savings, your wife, your brother, your son? Your friends?

A. This is not a case where I had any choices. The 7 arrests were done TO me in a continuing saga. Even my son wonders why I did not “stop doing stuff” to anger Aurora. I explained that there was nothing I could have done to avoid recriminations for my accusations of Misfeasance in Public Office. How COULD I know that Aurora would be so vindictive? Whichever way I turned, police, the Crown, Aurora, York Region put out traps and snares to put me in jail for seeking justice.

Q. Why did you blog and post news about certain names if the court had told you not to do so?

A. I misunderstood the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. I thought that if the Charter said I have a right to express my opinions, that I could blog my opinions about anything or anyone. It turned out that justices can override the Charter and they can order you to stop doing ANYTHING they do not like. So, Canadians think the Charter says it all, but they are never taught that the Charter is a facade and only “protects” people who have no opinions to discuss.

Q. Why did the law and the Crown not protect you from all this?

A. In my first arrest by HR Manager Sandra McKenzie, police were led to believe I had harassed the Mayor and Council. When police asked the Crown for approval to lay charges, they did not provide the Crown with ANY evidence of harassment. There were no documents in disclosure on the arrest. The Crown had approved my arrest without any documents backing them up, and so, embarrassed, they got angry at me for blogging about my success and made it very easy for arrests #2 through #7. They would accept whatever police claimed to have as “evidence” without seeing it for themselves. They knew that if police failed to find evidence in time for trial that they could just withdraw charges… as they did for arrest #7 by the 3 lawyers for Aurora, York Region, YRP, Police Services Board, Helen Clarke, Jaclyn Solomon. All 7 defendants had their lawyers arrest me March 4, 2020. I spent 4 days in jail for no reason. Defendants had run out of their own ideas to arrest me.

Q. You were found guilty of contempt multiple times. Why?

A. Justices do not make up all the words for their decisions. They tell the Crown to just type up or “draft” whatever order they want signed. The justice then considers and signs that draft and makes it a new law. The Crown assigns “recognizances”, things I cannot do, in orders they draft up for a justice to approve. Justices are so backed up with work, they accept WHATEVER the Crown drafts up as orders to be made against me. So, police wanted three women to NOT be part of my blogging. The courts can seemingly make me agree to ANYTHING when they found me guilty. But, the Crown drafted up a “rubber stamp” recognizance to NOT blog about the SAME 3 women by name, image or reference. The SAME, EXACT 72 word paragraph was copied, every last comma and period, into every draft by Crown Greg Elder despite being told no to do that by both RSJ Fuerst and Justice Dawe.The law says they can only generally restrict me when it comes to people who have outstanding criminal complaints about me When I am found innocent, the name of the complainant MUST be removed from any Recognizance. Crown Greg Elder did NOT remove names as I defeated his 26 charges and so I blogged about the people who had no outstanding criminal accusations. I thought the courts would accept the obvious abuse as something I did not need to follow. Crown Elder then had police arrest me again and again when I blogged about women who ONCE had me arrested.

Q. Why not sue Crowns David Moull and Greg Elder?

A. Ontario laws were changed to make that very difficult, but it will happen one day. I am trying to right things caused by individuals and governments first. Then I will take on the King. Charles, not Elvis.

Here is a good description of the issues. I CAN sue for “wrongful” or “malicious” prosecution. I will do that after this trial is over.


Q. What is you could have stopped doing which would make all this unnecessary,

A. I could have STOPPED blogging about my local government like most people do. Canadians are trained to accept free health care and not complain about anything else, just in case it gets eliminated. But, I am just a blogger like Bill Hogg, not a physical activist who camps out at Town Hall, approaches politicians in person or uses a telephone to bug people. I compose my thoughts. I write them as pages in my blog. I look for public support. Only high volumes of public support can defeat bad government. I will not have that because Canadians are more likely to say “Sorry, eh?” rather than “Hey you, pull over!” when they see laws broken. It’s just the Canadian way to put up with government abuse and corruption. We feel so privileged to have this wonderful country that we put up with government shortcomings at every turn, and we just persevere. But take away free health care and I would get a ton of support.

Q. When do you think you will be able to stop all this?

A. When I have exhausted the courts, the Appeals Court and the Supreme Court of Canada.

Q. What court decisions encourage you to continue?

A. Ones like the following:

As McLachlin J. (as she then was) noted in dissent in Keegstra, at p. 850 S.C.R., “in weighing the intrusiveness of a limitation on freedom of expression our consideration cannot be confined to those who may ultimately be convicted under the limit, but must extend to those who may be deterred from legitimate expression by uncertainty as to whether they might be convicted”. [page189]

IOW, the court may find it supports people who protest AND those too afraid to protest

The accused, an Alberta high school teacher, was charged under s. 319(2) of the Criminal Code with wilfully promoting hatred against an identifiable group by communicating anti‑semitic statements to his students.  Prior to his trial, the accused applied to the Court of Queen’s Bench for an order quashing the charge.  The court dismissed the application on the ground that s. 319(2) of the Code did not violate freedom of expression as guaranteed by s. 2(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.  The court, for want of proper notice to the Crown, did not entertain the accused’s argument that s. 319(3)(a) of the Code violated the presumption of innocence protected by s. 11(d) of the Charter.  Section 319(3)(a) affords a defence of “truth” to the wilful promotion of hatred but only where the accused proves the truth of the communicated statements on a balance of probabilities.  The accused was thereafter tried and convicted.  On appeal the accused’s Charter arguments were accepted, the Court of Appeal holding that ss. 319(2) and 319(3)(a) infringed ss. 2(b) and 11(d) of the Charter respectively, and that the infringements were NOT justifiable under s. 1 of the Charter.


So, if Keegstra could spout anti-semitism to his students and be protected by the Charter, why does it not protect me when I spout about Aurora staff and politicians in my blog to adults?