Misfeasance In Public Office

NOTE: This page is constantly being updated as case law proves Aurora et al were Misfeasant in Public Office.

Based on extracts from the excellent book of the same name, written by Erika Chamberlain, the Dean of Law, Western University.

Why This Tort?

This is a wonderful tort for taxpayers because it works even when a public officer does an otherwise lawful act, but does it for an improper purpose, that is misfeasance.

AND, it is wonderful because even if a public officer does NOTHING… they can still be guilty of Misfeasance IF they SHOULD have done something but were just too stubborn or vindictive to do so.

THEN! If the pubic officer did something to help a THIRD PARTY, he or she can ALSO be found guilty of misfeasance. The benefits of the act do NOT have to come back to the misfeasor to prove guilt. It is sufficient that the officer made a decision which HARMED me, whether he did that for his own benefit or for some 3rd party’s benefit.

”—> HERE is a list of all cases from Ontario in CANLII where the phrase exists…

So, DS Bentham was misfeasant when she assigned 36 different officers to “investigate me” so that SHE could call for my arrest. Even though that gave HER no direct benefit, it DID benefit Sandra McKenzie and Mayor Dawe and CAO Nadorozny, because once police set out my recognizance as “do not communicate to any staff of Aurora”, it became clear that the 3rd party she helped improperly was Aurora staff and Council. They did not have to read my emails anymore. She was misfeasant. It was her legal choice to make to arrest me 7 times, but especially on March 4, 2020, she was arresting me just to harm me be cause I recorded her admissions of complicity, and THEN I blogged about it.

The proof of “why” she did it, or who she may have intended to help… it is sufficient that she made the arrest decision to harm me, and after, she called around to the Crown, Helen Clarke and Jaclyn Solomon AFTERWARDS, when I was already under arrest, to hear their words of thanks personally. She wrote about those calls in her notebook in disclosure. At 6:40 pm on March 2 she assigned an officer to call the ladies, and 20 hours later she called me to come in and next day I was on my way to Lindsay prison. And DS Bentham called 2 women who were not even involved in the charges to let them know the deed was done.

Why does Detective Sergeant call people not even a PART of the charges? Because, she was doing it FOR THEM and she wanted them to know as soon as I was bundled off to prison.

When Mayor Dawe made the executive decision to have me arrested July 14, 2014, he acted improperly, but not for himself so much as he did it for a LOT of 3rd parties, being all the staff of Aurora who asked him for help. His purpose was to help THEM and injure me. Misfeasance.

In fact, according to the expert, Dean Erika Chamberlain, it is just as improper to misuse a legal decision in order to HARM ME, as it is to misuse one to BENEFIT OTHERS. When Mayor Dawe asked Sandra McKenzie to call police, he was setting up his plan to arrest me to help all the staff.

In the seminal Odhavji Estate v. Woodhouse, an issue went to the Supreme Court of Canada.The issue was whether the mere breach of a statutory obligation could be the foundation of a Misfeasance claim. If an officer simply breached an obligation to do something, that it could not be misfeasant. But at the Supreme Court of Canada, Iacobucci J. concluded that the tort was NOT limited to the abuse of statutory or prerogative powers, but was “more broadly based on unlawful conduct in the exercise of public functions generally.”

And, generally, Mayor Dawe and CAO Nadorozny held the reins of power and KNOWINGLY used them to harm me and benefit themselves AND all staff. A man, Dawe, who sits on a police commission can hardly claim he had no idea what the impact of 7 false arrests would be on my life. He knew exactly what would happen to me, as did Sandra McKenzie.

He wrote:

Per Feldman J.A. (dissenting): “It was not the case that the claims for misfeasance in public office could not succeed. They should not be struck out at the pleadings stage. The cause of action for misfeasance in public office is continuing to develop and can take new forms. There was no principled reason for drawing a distinction between a public official who improperly exercises a power and one who deliberately fails to carry out a duty, where the public official knows or is recklessly indifferent to the fact that injury is likely to result. The essence of the tort is the misfeasance in or misuse of the public office itself. The tort does not require the exercise of an executive or administrative power. Rather, failure to carry out a statutory duty can amount to misfeasance for the purposes of the tort.”

Feldman J.A. – Odhavji Estate v. Woodhouse, 2000 CanLII 17007 (ON CA) –

There was no principled reason for drawing a distinction between a public official who improperly exercises a power and one who deliberately fails to carry out a duty,

Feldman J.A. – Odhavji Estate v. Woodhouse, 2000 CanLII 17007 (ON CA)

What is “Misfeasance”?

The basic premise is that, by definition, ALL public officers exist ONLY to help the people who pay them. It is that basic.

So, if a public officer takes an action, a legal action, and they had to know in advance that it would certainly HARM even one person… that is misfeasance. It is truly a two edged sword. Aurora arrested me 7 times KNOWING well the amount of harm they would inflict. Especially by the 7th arrest, I had inundated them with emails advising exactly how I was being harmed and they CONTINUED the arrests.

ANY Public Officer harms a person knowingly by taking an improper action which may normally be completely legal

After Arrest #1 July 14, 2017 I emailed Aurora with all the evidence of not only my innocence but also how Sandra McKenzie was wrong to call in police. When arrests 2, 3, and 4 happened in quick succession, Aurora knew precisely how Ms McKenzie and Mayor Dawe and CAO Nadorozny had harmed me, and yet they approved another 3 arrests. Even AFTER I sued December 18, 2018, York Regional Police arrested me #5, #6 and #7 on March 4, 2020. They used the testimony of THREE LAWYERS, Charles Pointer, Barry Stork and Jaclyn Solomon… representing all 7 defendants…. to arrest me for speaking to Jaclyn in an active court room. 3 lawyers told 4 different stories, STARKLY at odds with each other on what happened.

Can Police Be Misfeasant? YES! DS Bentham Arrested Me Despite Knowing She Had No Case

Police Det, Sgt. Heather Bentham (retired) was secretly recorded by me February 27, 2020 STATING I was NOT under any investigation. She said “If we had ANY reason to arrest you, we would.” I left the police station with a rare confidence that maybe I was safe for a while.

That nice sense lasted 2 business days, March 3, 2020, when DS Bentham told me she had completed an INTENSIVE investigation of a February 14, 2020 incident in a court room. Under her OWN name, in Det Loughry’s case, she inserted her notebooks saying from 10:00 am March 3, 2020, she had worked the phones. She called ALL the witnesses and got a PERSONAL explanation of what each witnessed. NONE of the stories matched, not even the TWO from Solomon.

BUT, DS Bentham still assigned Det. John Loughry anyway. She spoke to me on March 3, 2020 at 2:05 pm, telling me I was to be arrested. She called Crown Greg Elder who provided a number of ideas for breach charges….

NOTE: Greg Elder KNEW March 2, 2020 that he had been using a falsified recognizance naming all 3 ladies. So, he was HELPING DS Bentham to get APPROVAL for another arrest when she called him March 3. This is misfeasance… KNOWINGLY approving my arrest when he KNEW the names were ILLEGALLY in the recognizance which BOTH RSJ Fuerst and J. Dawe ORDERED him to correct. He KNEW he was acting improperly by suggesting charges to DS Bentham. He KNEW he had been drafting illegal terms of recognizance for months.

Next day, March 4, at 11:00 am, I was under arrest by Det. Loughry, in a room, handcuffed, and DS Bentham stopped by to say “Hi!” She noted in her own hand that “He did not answer”, as if she was proud of that. She ordered my arrest, did a telephone interview of me, without recording ANY of my MANY answers, not even one question, and THEN she gloats that I was speechless in her presence.

In what universe is a cop openly HAPPY that I am silent when arrested? Would it not make sense to eventually enlighten her officers that arresting a person BEFORE asking questions never works? Why did she manage her officers so consistently to NEVER ASK ME A THING before being arrested?

Then, yes it gets worse, she made calls around town to tell everyone I was being arrested again.

Luckily at 2:05 pm on March 4, 2020 in her own notes, DS Bentham wrote:

From 2:05 through 3:04 she “Let him go on about the history of all this” until my phone cut out.

March 4 2020 2:05 pm DS Bentham

DS Bentham’s Notes…


My web site knows when her officers browsed my blog. I had emailed March 2 that her cops were wasting time screen capturing it when I could easily have printed it out neatly for her.

So, at trial, she cannot claim she had no idea about the false evidence used in the previous 6 arrests. She put in her own writing an expression that meant her time was being wasted. She ignored what I said, she KNEW it was admissible because I had yet to be arrested. I spoke of my own free will and NONE of it was recorded.

Det. Sgt. Heather Bentham interviewed me for an HOUR and did not make ONE SINGLE NOTE of a question OR of an answer.

That is Misfeasance. Misusing her powers of arrest and knowingly harming me with an arrest without evidence which proves a crime. She had NOTHING from Painter in writing. She had TWO stories from Jaclyn, and “I heard nothing!” from York’s lawyer Stork. She interviewed me for an hour, “letting” me go on and yet she did NOT record a single question or answer. That is Misfeasance. Knowingly harming me by a false arrest.

She THEN called Maria Bedford, my Probation Officer to let her know I was being arrested. Listen to the February 27 recording where DS Bentham goes on about Maria Bedford calling her to tell her what the ladies had claimed.. and DS Bentham said there was no investigation.

March 4, 2020… Early, DS Bentham calls the women to tell them she arrested me.

John Loughry is the “Lead Investigator” and yet DS BENTHAM herself calls the ladies? Why is that even possible?

Well, as a woman, she was proud to help the other ladies keeping me shut up.

This means either:

  1. She lied to me February 27 and she really DID had an investigation underway, or
  2. She told the truth, then went looking for a reason be cause I blogged about recording her

Either way, She did NOT have adequate time on Thursday February 27, Friday 28th, Saturday 29th, Sunday March 1and Monday March 2 to properly investigate the claims of the 3 complainants. The police report cites that it was not until POLICE CALLED PAST FAILED WITNESSES to begin a new investigation. There may be an inference that

She had NOT begin the investigation Feb. 27 or 28 or 29 or March 1… INSTEAD, she began at 6:40 pm on March 2 by getting Det. John Loughry to LEAD the investigation which would start and end within 24 hours.

On Monday March 2nd, 2020 at approximately 1840hrs PC Goobie #2355 responded to a Breach of Probation call at 1 District located at 240 Prospect Street in the Town of Newmarket. The call included two complainants who were both alleging breaches on the same male suspect.

PC Goobie to complainants who identified themselves as Jaclyn SOLOMAN and Helen CLARKE. The male suspect was identified by both complainants as Robert LEPP.

Jaclyn and Helen BEGAN Arrest #7 at 6:40 pm March 2

By March 3, DS Bentham decided to arrest me. She said come in early next day, but she knew I was to be jailed in Lindsay until March 6.

When she called me, she KNEW she had no case against me.

When she called me, she KNEW what Painter would testify, that it was CONTRARY to BOTH of Jaclyn’s stories, and she had NOT received any written statement from Charles Painter who then waited several months to write one.

When she called, she KNEW Jaclyn had supplied TWO differing stories of my alleged crime, neither of which made sense, but because she was duplicitous, she had perjured herself.

When she called me, she KNEW Barry Stork’s testimony was that he HEARD NOTHING I said.

When she arrested me March 4, 2020 she had 3 written stories from just TWO witnesses and NOTHING from the 3rd, lawyer Charles Painter.

I submit to you that it is misfeasant on several levels. She took an improper action to arrest me WITHOUT any investigation. A breach of trust. Then, she failed to get an affidavit from only the 2nd person who claimed to hear me say anything. Painter did not provide an affidavit until 2021. When he did, his story was 180 degrees OPPOSITE that of Jaclyn. Charles said I spoke FROM THE DEFENSE LECTERN, while BOTH of Jaclyn’s stories had me AFTER I walked past her to the door to leave.

That dichotomy was why Painter did NOT write up his testimony, He knew it cleared me. So he waited and DS Bentham was misfeasant when she FAILED to do something to obtain the affidavit that would exonerate me. She KNEW it exonerated me and arrested me anyway.

So, a police officer who did something improper, went BEYOND her powers, KNOWING it would harm me, is misfeasant.

THEN, if that same officer were to FAIL to do something which should have been done to help those who pay him or her… that is misfeasant as well.

So, by NOT continuing an extremely short investigation begun March 2 at 6:40 pm and ending March 3 afternoon, not even 24 hours about an incident 3 weeks OLD… DS Bentham was again misfeasant. As were all officers named in GO# 19-416533.

So, Aurora, via its officers Sandra McKenzie and Mayor Dawe and CAO Nadorozny, took the necessary steps to have me arrested for emailing them. That is legal. Did they did it solely because it was harassing? Or, did they instead do it to shut me up with a “do not communicate to any Aurora staff” recognizance? Let’s talk a look at the evidence Mayor Dawe and CAO Nadorozny had in their possession.

They had every email I ever sent anyone at Aurora. They knew I was critical of their actions on many fronts. Specifically, they knew I identified lost money for pet tags, improper election expense accounting by Mayor Dawe, illegal tax exemption for Aurora Sports Dome. They knew I had been assaulted, they read HOW I claimed I was assaulted and they all knew that I had filed a written complaint. They had the right to ask staff who had been accused by me for assault. After making that complaint, I contacted staff who declined to answer my questions. The Mayor and CAO already knew and held the true answer to the exact question I asked. They KNEW whether or not any staff had the right to decline my question. They had to know that an arrest has a huge impact on any life. They could have asked staff for the date, but they had it already in their HR records. They knew from Mayor Dawe’s experience on police commissions that a taxpayer can ALSO be stopped from sending emails by a Peace Bond. While arresting me seems to be a legal act, they knew the emails were not threatening in any way, and that I had simply asked for a date that every taxpayer had a right to know. Instead of telling me that date, Dawe and Nadorozny made the “group” decision to arrest me anyway. That arrest was used by them to silence me writing about staff illegalities to the people who run Aurora. It was an improper purpose to arrest me. It was to silence me, and it was NOT to protect any staff from any harm.

That is Misfeasance in Public Office. Silencing my opinions is an improper purpose. Misusing the normally legal act of arresting me, but done for an improper purpose.

The underlying purposes of the misfeasance tort were expressed by Lord Steyn, in Three Rivers: “The rationale of the tort is that in a legal system, based on the rule of law, executive or administrative power, may be exercised only for the public good, and not for ulterior and improper purposes

I was arrested for discussing personal staff history and events which Dawe wanted kept secret from taxpayers because it would embarrass the Human Relations Department. That is an ulterior motive. Sandra McKenzie called police first to have me arrested rather than determine why Dawe or ANY staff wanted my investigations kept secret. Had she asked around if I had first filed an assault complaint, or if she had simply asked the 2 officers if I had filed any charges first, then none of this would have happened. Misfeasance. Legal choices to make. But wrong choices made.

It is also an IMPROPER purpose. No one was at risk. I write emails. Period. Oh, and I blog pretty much everything in my emails. It was not Mayor Dawe’s duty to have me arrested just because I investigated claims of his staff and found them to be false. Instead of first making sure I was wrong, he took actions to eliminate my voice from Aurora. Staff simply said “Hey, he wrote about me. Arrest him.” and he did. He knew police would write in a recognizance on my release papers to NOT name ANY staff person in my blog or to communicate to ANY staff person for ANY reason. He cannot possibly argue that with two senior officers in his offices outlining their plans to arrest me in the next 2 hours that he did not know the impact a criminal arrest would have on my life and on my family. At that moment, he could have asked what effect the previous attempts of police had on my family and myself. He sat on a police commission, he “built” their HQ, attended Regional Council… he knew every aspect of an arrest, of the court processes and delays, and the effect on the remainder of my life with a criminal record and a DNA sample on file keeping me from getting a job. He never questioned what was asked of police. He did not ask for alternatives. He was given one option only. He knew from his police commission experience that a Peace Bond is typically used on a perp for staff persons who feel harassed. He knew that taxpayers often find obstinate staff and it is his job to sort it out. He knew well he was being asked to make a decision on behalf on all OTHER taxpayers. He chose the most extreme solution possible. He did not ask for an alternative. There are always multiple solutions to any problem, He should not have made a decision without seeing alternatives which would do no harm. A Peace Bond is not “harmful”, there is no record, no criminal record, no criminal lawyer fees, no time in jail, no wasted time waiting for court backlogs.

It remains that he must have WANTED to harm me. Because he certainly was TOLD by his legal staff of the impacts on my life. Even if he never watched “CSI Aurora” on television, he was in charge of a town with its own lawyers. And he could have asked them for an opinion. He didn’t, and so, it was solely his decision to ruin my life.

Primary Elements Of The Tort

  1. public office
  2. the exercise of power as a public officer
  3. the state of mind of the defendant
  4. duty to the plaintiff
  5. causation
  6. damage and remoteness

“Defendants cannot be liable in misfeasance unless they owe some “duty” to the Plaintiff”.

In my case, Mayors Dawe and Mrakas, along with the Councillors, owe me the duty of directing the town to support my life here.

Directors Techa Van Leeuwen and Allan Downey owe me the duty of providing support and authority to Town Bylaws enacted by Council.

All police officers in York Regional Police owe me a duty to protect me physically as a taxpayer in York Region.

Jaclyn Solomon is a licensee of the Law Society of Ontario, which is…

The Oldest and Largest of Canadian Law Societies

The Law Society of Ontario, the largest of all Canadian law societies, was founded in 1797, almost 20 years before the earliest such association in any other province or territory. It became the model for law societies across Canada.

…to provide the province with a “learned and honourable body, to assist their fellow subjects as occasion may require, and to support and maintain the constitution of the said Province.”

In concrete terms, the main function of the Law Society of Ontario was to ensure that all persons who practise law in Ontario were competent, followed proper procedures and behaved ethically. Its mandate has been broadened since May 1, 2007 to regulate all providers of legal services, including independent paralegals.

The Court of Appeal and the House of Lords have already ruled that no antecedent right is required “beyond the right not to be damaged or injured by a deliberate abuse of power by a public officer.”

So, I am not required to prove that ANY person owed me a duty to NOT HURT me, I just need to show that I suffered injuries from a deliberate abuse of power. I have the right to NOT be injured, so anyone who DOES injure me is misfeasant.

What is “A Public Officer”

In R. v. Whittaker (England 1914), Lawrence J. provided that:

Held: Lawrence J said: ‘A public officer is an officer who discharges any duty in the discharge of which the public are interested, more clearly so if he is paid out of a fund provided by the public. If taxes go to supply his payment and the public have an interest in the duties he discharges, he is a public officer’.
As to the offence: ‘When an officer has to discharge a public duty in which the public is interested, to bribe that officer to act contrary to his duty is a criminal act. To induce him to show favour or abstain from showing disfavour where an impartial discharge of his duty demands that he should show no favour . . is to induce him to act contrary to his duty; where this is done corruptly it is an indictable misdemeanour at common law.’


Jim Tree and then-Councillor Toom Mrakas offered a bribe to another public officer, Helen Clarke, to induce her to disparage me to the public and to remove me as a volunteer in Canine Commons who got $80,000 spent when Helen had tried for 9 years and failed.

Clearly, my taxes funded the Mayors and Council, Directors Van Leeuwen and Downey, and CAO Nadorozny. They are public officers along with York Region, York Regional Police and the Police Services Board siren all are paid by a fund filled by taxes.

Aurora has a signed contract, an agreement with Time4Paws/Helen Clarke and the Canine Commons Committee to manage and maintain Canine Commons, so the volunteers are all public officers.

The Criminal Code defines “public officer” at” https://www.criminal-code.ca/criminal-code-of-canada-section-117-07-2-definition-of-public-officer/index.html

In my case, we need only these words:

(g) person, or member of a class of persons, employed in the federal public administration or by the government of a province or municipality who is prescribed to be a public officer;

Nigeria (under a hybrid form of Common Law) says:

Public Officers. : means any officer or employee of a departmentagency or division of the State, and any person who participates accidentally or permanently in the exercise of public functions, in a remunerated or honorary manner, either by popular choice or by appointment of a competent authority; any officer or employee of permitauthorization and license officescustoms officerscandidates for public office and officers of international public organizationsThe term also includes officers or employees of companies controlled by the State or owned by the State, such as universitiesairlinesoil companieshealth care facilities and other providers controlled by the State or owned by the State. Relatives or direct associates of such persons are also included in this definition.

…any person who participates in the exercise of public functions in an honorary manner, direct associates of such persons are also included in this definition.… i.e. Canine Commons Committee.


So, Jaclyn Solomon, is a direct associate of Helen Clarke, a public officer, and is therefore also a public officer. She is also an “officer of the court”, and acts in support of the court which is funded by my taxes.

All of these public officers owed me a duty to not harm me. And each one took specific, documented steps to arrest me based on their lies and misinformation. They can and are being sued for those reckless acts.

By the way, “reckless” in the content of this tort has the context of “a person doing something which they do not really believe is legal” by doing it anyway.

Municipal Corporations

A claim for misfeasance in a public office may be brought against a municipal council or corporation. Indeed, many of the leading misfeasance cases involve claims against municipalities, particularly for the planning decisions. Municipalities were historically, and are currently some of the most common defendants in misfeasance claims.

E. Chamberlain

Chamberlain went on to say: “However, it may be difficult to establish that a municipality acted with the requisite and malicious state of mind. The malice element of misfeasance in a public office requires that the defendant, either acted with a deliberate intention to harm the plaintive, or with knowledge that the relevant actions were unlawful, and were likely to harm the plaintive. ‘Knowledge’ for these purposes include subjective recklessness, but not constructive knowledge. In other words, there must be a subjectively blameworthy state of mind, in some particular person. This means that a plaintiff who fails to identify a natural person who acted with malice will most likely be unsuccessful.”

I have named many natural persons. I did not just name “Aurora”.

Crown Agencies

Looking ahead, we need to know: At common law, the Crown itself cannot be sued. Thus it is impossible to bring a claim against the state per se. As discussed below, this principle holds particular force with respect to misfeasance in a public office, which has an explicit mental element. The state has no mind of its own, and cannot act in bad faith. However, it is possible to bring a claim against ministers of the crown, and against certain crown, agencies or corporations. The crown may also be vicariously liable for actions of its agents and employees.

E. Chamberlain

So, Newmarket Crown prosecutors were found by 2 Superior Court Justices to have imposed the identical 72 word recognizance naming person(s) who had no active criminal complaints. Greg Elder refused to stop using this boiler plate term IN WRITING by RSJ Fuerst and J. Dawe. When he failed to follow judicial orders, her was misfeasant in public office because HE knew most of his charges were for breaching that 73 word recognizance. He can be sued as an “agent” or employee of the Crown.

There are two main issues:

  1. Is the agency capable of being sued in its own name?
  2. How does the plaintiff establish that the agency had the requisite “malicious state of mind”?

Greg Elder knew that he was setting me up for a breach by naming I could not blog about 3 named women. I knew his boilerplate text was illegal and so I assumed that any justice would see that illegality if I was arrested. It turns out that whatever a justice signs comes law. And if the words he or she signs are lies or are illegal, it does not matter. I did not know that.

If the defendant is someone whose exercise of powers is subject to judicial review, this may indicate that he, or she holds a public office.

E. Chamberlain

Greg Elder and David Moull’s powers ARE subject to judicial review. They are public officers. And they can be sued for misfeasance in public office. They knew that illegal and overreaching terms of recognizance would harm me, particularly when they ordered I could not possess any computer devices when he knew I am an I.T. Consultant. I would NOT be able to attend court by Zoom. I could not serve or file any court documents. Maliciously, he knew the harm that house arrest PLUS selling all computers or other devices capable of accessing the Internet would cause me. I could NOT earn a living and my wife was leaving me. They both KNEW they were harming me, just as Justice Dawe did when he ordered Moull and Elder to stop.


There has been a difference of opinion in the Commonwealth, as to whether lawyers are public officers capable of being sued for Miss Theisen’s. The issue primarily arises in claims against prosecutors in Cannon and Rochford, v. Tahche & Ors, the plaintive sued the lawyers who had been contracted to conduct his prosecution alleging that they failed to disclose certain evidence that might have assisted him in defending rape charges the court of appeal in Victoria concluded that the defendants were not public officers as they were not exercising any powers in the public interest in the courts view, a breach of the duties to act, fairly and disclose. Potentially exculpatory evidence could not form the basis of a misfeasance claim.

E. Chamberlain

In Canada and England, it seems to be excepted. The prosecutors can be public officers for the purposes of the misfeasance tort for example, in Milgaard, versus Kujawa, the Saskatchewan Court Of Appeal refuse to strike out a misfeasance claim against crown prosecutors who had failed to disclose or, who had actively suppressed potentially exculpatory information to the accused. Milgaard spent 22 years in prison for murder before a new trial was ordered and ultimately stayed by the Attorney General in one of Canada’s, most notorious miscarriages of justice. The court opined that claim for abuse of power was potentially available and would not be governed by immunity.

The court explained: Mr. Milgard has alleged that the prosecutors conspired to, and did intentionally, and with malice breached their duty to disclose information which tended to exculpate him, for the purpose of harming him. Were he to succeed in proving these allegations, they would constitute exactly the kind of fraud on the law, the kind of abuse of the law, the kind of improper purpose or motive, and the kind of excess of authority, that the Supreme Court said should not be protected by immunity.


The legislation provides for judicial immunity except where the judge acted maliciously and without reasonable and probable grounds. There are no reasonable or probable grounds that I MAILED a letter to 8 judges. It was an email to the Court Schedulers and yes, it named 8 judges, but only so that the scheduler knew which judges to approach for a date for my motion to dismiss my suit. Aurora’s lawyer told the judge that I had MAIELD several letters, yet he had no proof of that, not even a signed affidavit. I know the judge was conned by a lawyer, but as a self represented litigant I have nothing to compete with a lawyer’s LSO Licence to practice law. I cannot even swear my own affidavits are true.

I am not planning suing any judge. It is difficult enough suing a town, a region and a police force. Oh, and 3 women.

Deliberately Unlawful Conduct

The conduct that forms the basis of a misfeasance claim must be deliberately unlawful. The Commonwealth courts have taken a relatively broad view of what amounts to “unlawful” conduct for the purposes of this tort. The misfeasance tort encompasses, not only deliberate abuse of power, but also breach of statutory duty, violations of administrative, fairness, and acting ultra vires, or for improper purposes. However, since misfeasance in a public office is an intentional tort, the plaintive must show that the defendant’s actions were deliberately unlawful. Thus, a defendant will not be held liable if the actions were committed through negligence, honest, (though mistaken) belief in their lawfulness, cavalier behaviour, poor judgment, or simply bad practice. The element of deliberate unlawfulness was discussed at some length in the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in Odhavji Estate versus Woodhouse. Iacobucci J. for the court stressed that the tort excluded not only negligent or inadvertent excess of power, but also failure to perform obligations on account of factors beyond the public officers control.

Mayor Dawe had access to every email exchanged with all of his staff.

He knew from MY emails that I had filed an assault charge. He did not seem to use that information. He ignored the concept of revenge, or vindication. He ignored the vexatious nature of Aurora, at the same time, arresting me and suing me in 2 different courts at the same time with the SAME evidence, 2 stolen emails.

He had read every email I sent and he knew that none of them were of a harassing nature, they asked a single simple question, and everyone refused to answer it. They directed me to get the answer from another source, the Province, when the town source was the ONLY one who could answer and the Province does not maintain such records about each town.

Aurora then published a bylaw in January 2018 stating exactly what I knew to be the truth. That there had been no changes at all. So, when I came to the same conclusion, and I asked the question… I was arrested for asking it.

Recall that it is not ONLY the 7 arrests I claimed were misfeasant. I also claim Mayor Dawe failed to collect $350,000 annually selling pet tags from 2015 onwards up to this day. That he illegally declared Aurora Sports Dome to be a Municipal Capital Facility. That he failed to complete election expense reports so that duplicated donations could be detected… like the Ford dealer and his family. And of course, his refusal to stop the absurdity parents parking at the curb in School Safety Zones.

The 7 arrests DID come from staff who are Public Officers. Helen, Jaclyn Solomon and Aurora itself, Charles Painter, Barry Stork. Each of these people signed and swore out complaints to have me arrested for everything from harassment, to extortion, to witness tampering, to criminal libel (declared non constitutional in 1995), but mostly breaches due to the illegal wording by Moull and Elder.

Techa Van Leeuwen is DIRECTOR of legal staff. She and Pat De Sario certainly have had enough training in the law to know what constitutes harassment. That emails negotiating settlement of a $5,000 small claim are not harassment.

And, EVERYONE at Aurora knew of Mayor Morris’ SLAPP conviction for the indentical purpose… silence dissent in personal blogs.

Geoffrey Dawe CANNOT argue that he did not know of the legal dangers in suing taxpayers for $6,000,000 for being critical of the decisions of council. He had to personally apologize and educate EVERY Aurora staff member to the dangers of silencing dissent just because it was critical of their decisions and actions. He knew at the point he called in police July 14 to Town Hall that he was embarking on a much more seriously malicious act of arresting the vocal critic. He KNEW and knows today that at no time did his staff EVER support my particular problems with neighbours. we have the email from Nadorozny telling all staff to simple not answer any question from me.