Home

BL20-🎄CLXV👁i👁 – Confession of Gwendolyn Adrian on Youtube

If you require access, email me for a link. BobLepp at gmail dot com

BL20-🎄CLXV👁i – Redemption! I ATTEMPT to redeem myself using “Aurora Cares”…Mayor Mrakas’ golf fund/slush money.

If I Had only ONE suggestion, I’d Be Worried… BUT, I have Two “Cannot Fail” Applications

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

#1 – Make Aurora 100% Googlefied

BLC20-172-1-Mayors-Golf-Fund-Applications

#2 – Sell 13,000 Rainbow Pet Tags

Remember, PetSmart and Ren’s Pets PAY owners $50 per pet to register for $10-$35 – EVERYONE wins!

BLC20-172-2-Mayors-Golf-Fund-Applications

Aurora’s Docupet Sponsors

Keep your fingers/paws crossed.

Use the SLIDER to view both

Wish me luck. I will need it.

Watch this space.

Did I mention… EVERY PET TAG PURCHASED GETS $50 in CASH COUPONS! $25 EACH from….

PAYS YOU $25 PER TAG
PAYS YOU $25 PER TAG

BL20-🎄CLXV👁 – We created the Thin Blue Line conspiracy

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.

BL20-🎄CLXV – Even duct tape can’t fix stupid

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

BL20-🎄CLXI – How Breachy Was I?

All My “Convictions” are breaches. Save one which was an email to police asking for help with a dog attack. Am I TOO breachy?

Breach´y

a.1.Apt to break fences or to break out of pasture; unruly; as, breachy cattle.
Too funny… breaking fences in spite of myself

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.

Protected: BL20-🎄CLX🎄 – Justice Cameron’s Unusual Findings

This content is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

BL20-🎄CLXIi – Crown! Heads UP! This is a case about technology, remember?

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

  • Findings and assessment of my guilt
  • Sentencing July 17, 2020

J, Cameron

  • Decision on my motion to suspend sentence awaiting appeal

J Rose

  • Decision and sentence
  • Probation Order

Here Mr. Elder , or “elder02” created the PDF in MS Word.

By Elder
By a court reporter

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.

BL20-🎄CLnever – Trump builds The Wall in Bradford Canada because that is the ONLY place he found a Mexican desperate enough to pay for it himself

AP – Breaking News – Saturday, September 5, 2020

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:

  1. Not an international border
  2. Not 30 feet high, just four feet High
  3. Not black, it’s orange
  4. Not in Mexico, it’s in Canada 50 km NORTH of the border
  5. For certain p, it was paid for ONLY by Mexicans

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:

Number of places named Wall per country:

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.

Walls Do Not Stop Boy Scouts

There is one place named Wall in Cameroon.

There is one place named Wall in Australia.


BL20-🎄CL8 – Alternative Facts: Maybe she did not steal it!

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.

Note: To lawyers reading this… DIBS! on the class actions… I demand a piece!

Read on. Maybe we can pin this on the CIBC acting alone.

Needed: Just get Camilla Latronico (CIBC) and Michael Hamilton (OBSI) to admit they were wrong… that CIBC made a mistake. Again.

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.

SNIFF- SNIFF!

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…

Spoiler alert! It was!

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.

Because all of my accounts at CIBC are frozen, I cannot transfer IN any money, I cannot pay my bills.

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!

CIBC Refuses To Upgrade Computer Systems

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,

I CANNOT be the first to be abused… CLASS ACTION GOLD MINE AHEAD!

Imagine how many people were robbed of their pensions which were then sent to the sheriff!

How long will it take CIBC to just figure out HOW MUCH they OWE these people?

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

BUT, if this were a “reglular for fee” account, they would be charging for a withdrawn service. They must pay it back.

THAT’S MORE TO PAY BACK!

I believe CIBC has an expensive problem.

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.

To get me to shut 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.

This is difficult for me…

BL20-🎄CL7️⃣ – “Tied Up With A Bow(Wow)”: Putting it all together with RBC’s help

See what I did there? Humour!

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…

  1. The bank gets garnished by fax…. because child support garnishments CAN be faxed to head office. Since they can’t tell the REASON for the garnish… or at least will claim they can’t .. they accept court orders too.
  2. Head office then FREEZES the accounts of the named person BECAUSE a deadbeat Dad or Mom will NOT be providing a bank account number.
  3. The “freeze” is due to systems so old it has no OTHER way to keep you from your money. The old mainframe COBOL programs are simply ALSO frozen since all of us COBOL programmers retired. Only the glitzy PC-based front ends get modifications now.
  4. So, the overall freeze takes away your pension payments. After all, deadbeat Dads are scum.
  5. If you happen to read this post you will now know that to get your CPP released … visit the branch and ask them to release your CPP.
  6. They give you the cash IF it has not been given to
  7. Your account is still frozen but you have cash.
  8. Mail cash to pay your cable bill.

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.

BL20-🎄CL🃕 – Do you know anyone whose Bank Account was garnished? They may have been scammed

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,

BL20-🎄CL🃕 – Do you know anyone whose Bank Account was garnished? They may have been scammed

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,

BL20-🎄CL❻ – Proof Ms. Adrian lied

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

I “reasonably” plead 137.1 in my Defence and on May 21, 2019… EXACTLY as I am supposed to. Ms Adrian filed for “Default Judgement” WHILE I filed 137.1 WITH HER on May 21, 2019

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.

The whole idea of the PPPA is to cut off SLAPP suits at the knees, AND at NO COST TO THE DEFENDANT.

Before the PPPA, MONEY was simply the weapon to shut up the dissenter.

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.

FACT: On May 21, 2019 we BOTH stood before J. Archibald and HE ordered us back August 26, 2019 for the 137.1 hearing… a date acceptable to BOTH of us.

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.

BL20-🎄CL🏌️‍♀️ – To: Michael Simaan – Things to ponder

As you consider the revenue streams from the lawsuits of TD and the other one, think about how…

Ms. Adrian submitted costs stating she worked seven 8.5 hour days, or 60 hours at $300 per hour, defending her client’s suit from SLAPP s.137.1 of the PPPA and the COJA and NEVER ONCE read the section to see what she was trying to defeat.

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.

FACT: There is NO TIME when SLAPP s. 137.1 cannot be moved.

  1. A woman who falsely arrested me on three criminal charges, the crown withdrew on all 3, she sues me for her losing her two town jobs… and yet she testified at MY trial it was her choice to leave each and she was paid “cash on lieu of notice” by both Aurora and Erin.
  2. A trained lawyer can claim to J. Schabas she worked 60 hours at $300 an hour on defending SLAP 137.1 BUT she never actually read the section in either the PPPA or the Courts of Justice act.

She denies knowing:

  1. 137.1 can be moved WITHOUT filing a defence, therefore, everyone who moves 137.1 IS IN DEFAULT.
  2. That defending 137.1 CANNOT BE AWARDED costs.. EVEN IF SUCCESSFUL.
  3. The meaning of SLAPP… as defined in the PPPA and 137.1
  4. She denies her client claimed she built 100% on her own land, right up until Ms Adrian got her to admit she knew it all along to beat Ms Buckles in Small Claims. That was brilliant of her. She won $2,000 by admitting her suit was FALSE all along… and forgot she now LOSES her $80,000 suit of two people.

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.

BL20-🎄CL🎄 – To: Michael Simaan – It’s easy as RBC…Why Ms. Adrian SHOULD be able to garnish RBC, too

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.

I told her “RBC Aurora”… why is it NOT garnished yet?

BL20-🎄CL-aye-aye – CIBC Prefers To Be Sued

If you have read what the function of various levels of Ombudsman inside and outside CIBC, you know:

  • They will never admit they made a mistake
  • They will never offer compensation for abuse and withdrawal of service
  • Their “Top Guns” at OBSI take over to silence you JUST to open a file.
  • The range OBSI states they pay for silence to continue to infinity is $1,000 to $5,000
  • You will never know how much or how often people are paid to shut up about Bank Misconduct because a non disclosure starts at minute one off your complaint
  • You can accept $1-5,000 and play that game, or you can sue
  • I can clone my Michael Simaan and TD Bank to Michael Simaan and CIBC Bank in an eyeblink
  • This time Ms Adrian cannot represent him as she is udder investigation for theft of my banking data at CIBC

I will post the Small Claims Suit Number HERE >>>>________________________

BL20-🎄CL – CIBC Ombudsman Camilla Latronico Tells Me How to Unfreeze My Account

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

BL20-🎄Cli – OBSI Michael Hamilton invokes SILENCE so I dump him

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

mhamilton@obsi.ca

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!

BL20-🎄C🍀🏌️‍♀️9 – To: Michael Simaan – I demand you garnish my RBC account where my CPP pension and OAS goes

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.

I told her “RBC Aurora”… way is it NOT garnished yet?

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?

  • Do I sue CIBC for $35,000?
  • Do I sue you again for $35,000
  • Do I sue her client for $35,000

Any free legal advice for me?

I thought not. I have GoogleLaw, don’t worry about me.

Te following article is from 2017

GoogleLaw and creative destruction of the legal profession

Google and artificial intelligence may not be the end of the legal profession, but, boy, can you see it from here. 

Gary Goodwin

By Gary Goodwin

OPINION 06 Nov 2017

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.

There is nothing like a bit of urgency to assist in the legal change management process. 

BL20-🎄C🍀🏌️‍♀️8 – To: Toronto Police Services – The Law of Garnishment

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:

  • Always read www.boblepp.com for the truth
  • The Bank Act section 462 is the law, and it says the garnishment must include the branch address and account number and be served to the BRANCH, NOT head office so the account number submitted can be compared to the one on the signature card in the branch
  • Did I mention www.boblepp.com?

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! 

BL20-🎄C🍀🏌️‍♀️7 – Bradford’s “Hay! Caramba!” as it joins my extensive Google Maps portfolio of 360 degree visual tours


BL20-🎄C🍀🏌️‍♀️6 – The “Bought ’em” Line

Gwendolyn CANNOT have BOTH served a legal garnishment notice AND served it legally

WHO/DecisionYESNO
MEX
CIBCX
OBSIX
Toronto PoliceX

The choices above do NOT result in a possible solution.

BECAUSE…EITHER

  • She served a legal garnishment using my stolen bank identity, and
  • The CIBC PERMITTED it to happen

OR

  • She served an illegal garnishment WITHOUT my account number AND
  • The CIBC PERMITTED it to happen

AND, THEREFORE

CIBC is wrong REGARDLESS

CIBC is responsible for BOTH choices police make

  1. leaking my personal data AND
  2. acting on an illegally served garnishment.

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”?

Catch-22 (logic)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaJump to navigationJump to searchA flowchart showing how Catch-22 works

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)

to justify and conceal their own abuse of power.

THAT sums up the Newmarket version of justice.

Newmarket Crowns make up arbitrary rules all the time.

  • NO Crown Pre-Trial (CPT) meetings, the time to exchange evidence and discuss options to a trial, despite the Attorney General mandating Self reps should get MOPRE CPT’s than a represented accused so teycna be given some training in court room procedures. Crown Moull WANTS want EVERY self rep to look like a RUDE RUBE to a justice. He wants mistakes made, rudeness, anger fro the self rep FLOUDERING in a strange land
  • (Note: Over 50% of cases now self represent due only to HIGH COSTS of lawyer.)
  • NO Consent for obvious motions…Like: Suspend sentence for a first time criminal who appealed the DECISION…. should be automatically consented to.
  • NO Consent for obvious motions… Consent to Strike “term 6” as J. Dawe ordered in every OTHER active order, release order, probation order, conditional release order… WITHOUT FORCING AN EXPENSIVE MOTION.
  • NO paper given to the accused facing a trial on 8 Summary charges and a Preliminary Inquiry 3 Indictable charges within a week of each other June 11 to 18, 2019 so he cannot know WHEN to hire a paralegal
  • MIX an Indicatable charge in with 7 summary charges in a SUMMARY trial to bias the justice to evidence unrelated to the Summary charges
  • PRESENT to J.P. Premji March 6, 2020 for a REVERSE ONUS bail release …a list of DISPOSED CHARGES ALREADY WITHDRAWN OR DISMISSED, JUST to BIAS JP Premji to think I had all of those as CONVICTIONS.
  • Accuse me of “filing too many motions on the wrong day” and THEN order that I NOT FILE ANYTHING AT ALL.

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.

The fact they will now screw me again is an:

Immutable truth

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In philosophy and logic, an immutable truth is:

an unchanging universal fact

or reality

that is NOT influenced by human opinion.

(According to positivismobservation and experience are the only ways for immutable truths to become fully realized or understood.)

BL20-🎄C🍀🏌️‍♀️5 – CIBC/Garnishment… an arrestingly simple decision chart

Do we arrest Gwendolyn Adrian for stealing my banking data from CIBC in less than one day?… or do we forgive her?

https://www.lucidchart.com/blog/how-to-make-a-decision-matrix

There are now THREE entities examining their options. Each has just two options, YES (Arrested, Adrian erred) or NO (No arrest, Adrian did everything correctly)

So, in the end, we will have 4 YES/NO’s

ALL WILL most likely say NO!

WHO/DecisionYESNO
MEX
CIBCX
OBSIX
Toronto PoliceX

Depending on the mix of answers, I will take the next actions. I will do what every organization I asked said to do: “Sue ’em!” is all you CAN do.

Then, Charles Painter will have FRESH evidence of my vexatious tendencies.

See how they all work together? “They” force me to sue, so Aurora can defeat my $7 million suit claiming I overuse and abuse the courts.

“…🎶 and the painted ponies go round and round..♬”

BL20-🎄C🍀🏌️‍♀️4 – Road Trip!

You may “proceed directly to any medical…approved in advance by the Conditional Sentence Supervisor”

Signed july 18, 2020 by D Whitman for J. Harpur

I have a lab test requisition, which I believe is “any medical” in nature.

I must get approval from my CSS to go a lab test. He will ask where, I will say “Lifelabs Aurora, or an alternate if it is closed.”

He will say yes.

I will go to Lifelabs Aurora.

If it is closed, I will got to another Lifelabs at: 1040 Oliver Rd #101

If you Google that, it is in Thunder Bay.

I’ll be back Sunday morning Sept. 6. I have surgery, a secondary repeat of last time next week and according to probation I will get advanced approval.

Lord Tunderin’ Jeezuz... he’s going to go to Tunder Bay, by Jeezuz... how clever is that b’y?

I’m jest about gutfounded.

I’ll put da ol’ slut on and have me a yarn.

When the lab returns results showing I had ingested 4 beers and a martini minutes before the Dracula’s me.. I wil be asked to go to any Lifelab for a repeat.

That’s where St. John’s comes in.

I love the idea of “Lacey’s Blood Work”… I found no Lifelabs there so I substituted…

Driving just 10 hours a day, I can be back by the end of my sentence.

I booked the Ferry in case there is a Labour Day rush.

For those a little bit short of any such sense, this is called humour.

I have a permit for a “concealed carry LOADED” at all times. Fully Automatic, the large clip, no silencer, water cooled (well iced Martini-cooled, belt loaded (one belt 🍸 per load), 10X scope, crosshairs, laser pointed, accepts bayonet, integrated brass knuckles for larynx-to-ear combat, body camera Bluetooth linked while firing.

Virtual Reality playback enabled. Real time publishing on YouTube.

BL20-🎄C🍀🏌️‍♀️3 – Here, My Crystal Ball Tells How The OBSI Will Whitewash CIBC

The OBSI exists to mediate to pay off people to NOT tell the public when banks break the law. Period.

They “Spoke and offered to think about ” paying me $1,000 to NOT talk more about how CIBC accepted and implemented an illegal garnishment in less than 24 hours of a brand new account.

CIBC pays OBSI to pay people off when its member has paid the current year dues, and broke a law

OBSI exists to negotiate to buy its members silence from those it abuses.
OBSI exists to subvert the law behind closed doors in silence so the Federal government does not cancel its charter

The dues CIBC paid for 2020 is “hush money” so no one knows they illegally removed my new bank account from my use, froze it March 4 without waiting 2 days, kept it frozen as I write September 2 four months later even though not one penny was deposited or garnished.

Are You A Logical Thinker?

Follow this closely and tell me why I am wrong.

The Bank Act is the law banks must follow.

s. 462 defines to the bank when and how to Legally garnish an account.

If a bank claims it acted legally, it can display the evidence of EACH and EVERY one ofthose actions.



Because, s. 462 says the entire process must be Properly documented documented.

CIBC, therefore, can show me NOW, TODAY these proofs

  • The carrier or postal registered mail receipt showing the exact branch address matching mine
  • A log or register from the branch
  • The paper letter from Gwendolyn Adrian being received AT MY BRANCH.
  • The name and account account number Ms Adrian specified to garnish
  • An image of the signature card used to verify that the correct account number matched what Ms Adrian wrote
  • The affidavit of service proving I was served the NEW garnishment order for the new account
  • The date of the request, the total to be garnished, and the date AFTER waiting 2 days to take money.
  • Proof that the account was left in a status which does NOT prevent me from using it to receive my CPP and OAS direct deposits
  • Proof I can still deposit online or accept transfers of money INTO my account
  • Proof that my CPP and OAS deposits will NOT BE GARNISHED
  • Proof that EVERY garnishment they acted on is now properly documented showing compliance with s. 462

It is designed only to satisfy the Bank Act.

CIBC will stick to its position they did nothing wrong despite the fact they have none of the documented evidence

BL20-🎄C🍀🏌️‍♀️2 – OBSI Provincial Ombudsman is run by the banks.

OBSI is a structure mandated by the law. It is just a necessary “last chance” when the bank says no.

OBSI is NOT on the side of the bank customer, nor is it biased to the bank. But, it IS funded by the banks and that answers the question. The Bank Act says they need to fund the OBSI, so they do, but it is NOT designed to help customers.

It is designed to be impartial enough tp satisfy the Bank Act.

BL20-241 – There IS a doG!

Attributed to The Rev. Bob Dod, aka: “The Deacon of Dyslexia”

My dog, Scheibe was killed as a direct effect of Det. Sgt. Bentham’s push to punish me for blogging about her. By banning me from the dog park, she forced me to the forest where she impaled herself, March 2019.

So, she’s in heaven. Yup, there is one. It is populated ONLY with our dead dogs. They are the only creatures deserving of heaven. No cats, except to lick up after serving the meals.

Anyway I ask her to do stuff for me. She does them, and I give my wife’s dog, Coco, extra treats.

Seems Coco has a lot of sway with heaven too. She asked Scheibe for our back yard to be filled with rabbits, tender ones, for her to chase.

Poof! Rabbits are nesting in a large flower pot.
So, Darwin had to know this strain of rabbit had to be removed from the gene pool and a Scheibe gave him a paw.


BL20-🎄C🍀🏌️‍♀️ – “Branching Out” for LEGAL Garnishment

It’s Time to Amend the Bank Act So Clients Can Collect on Judgments

Ontario utilizes a “loser pays” legal system in which the losing party is usually ordered by the court to pay a portion of the successful party’s legal fees. As a result, regardless of who wins, someone ends up with a piece of paper requiring the other party to pay money.

Assuming that the losing party does not voluntarily cut a cheque, a bank garnishment oughtto be the most straightforward and direct means to collect. I emphasize the word “ought”.

Put simply, once a bank is served with a Notice of Garnishment it is required to seize any funds the debtor holds at the bank and pay those funds (up to the amount owed to the creditor) to the sheriff. Ultimately the sheriff hands the money over to the creditor.

The catch is that in order to garnish the account, the creditor must serve the Notice of Garnishment at

the branch where the debt is payable.

If the creditor does not know the branch location then they are out of luck.

For example, the debtor may have $1 million dollars in a savings account at TD Canada Trust. However, if the creditor serves the Notice of Garnishment at the main branch, and the debtor’s “branch of account” is actually a different branch just around the corner from the main branch,

then the bank is not required to garnish and pay the funds over to the sheriff.

From a practical perspective, this means that if the creditor does not have any banking information for the debtor they have limited options.

The creditor can require the debtor to attend an examination and disclose his/her banking information. However, debtors often fail to show at these examinations and when they do they are often not very forthcoming. The result is more time and money wasted while the creditor returns to court to compel proper answers.

The creditor could also take a shot-gun approach and try to garnish different branches. While this may work in small rural areas, in larger urban centers there can be hundreds of bank branches which makes this approach cost prohibitive.

All of this got me to thinking, why on earth is it necessary to locate a specific bank branch.

The answer, it seems, was that this was initially required to make lives easier on the banks!

This case from 1981 discusses why the Bank Act created this requirement. At paragraph 32 the court states

“The subsection was necessary to protect the bank against garnishing orders issued, say, in Victoria when there was an account, say, in Halifax. The bank would be bound, upon receiving each garnishing order, to search the records of every branch in Canada and probably out of Canada, a quite impractical proposition. What need be done now is to search only the branch at which the garnishing order is served. If there is found to be neither property in the possession of the bank belonging to the person garnisheed nor moneys to the credit of that person, the bank need not search further.”

I agree that in 1981 having a bank search the records of every branch in Canada was likely “a quite impractical proposition”. However, over 30 years later one has to think that banks could, from a central location (or any location for that matter), easily search all of their records to see if the debtor has any accounts at any branch across the Province or Canada.

A simple amendment to s. 462 of the Bank Act could radically improve the way that litigants are able to recover sums of money that the courts have awarded to them. Instead of hunting for specific branches, litigants could easily take a shot-gun approach and serve all of the major banks.

Recovery prospects would increase dramatically. Enforcement costs would be reduced drastically given that litigants would only be paying fees associated with issuing 5 Notices of Garnishment as opposed to 500.

s. 462 of the Bank Act

Branch of account with respect to deposits

  • 461 (1) For the purposes of this Act, the branch of account with respect to a deposit account is
    • (a) the branch the address or name of which appears on the specimen signature card or other signing authority signed by a depositor with respect to the deposit account or that is designated by agreement between the bank and the depositor at the time of opening of the deposit account; or
    • (b) if no branch has been identified or agreed on as provided in paragraph (a), the branch that is designated as the branch of account with respect thereto by the bank by notice in writing to the depositor.
  • Where debt payable(2) The amount of any debt owing by a bank by reason of a deposit in a deposit account in the bank is payable to the person entitled thereto only at the branch of account and the person entitled thereto is not entitled to demand payment or to be paid at any other branch of the bank.
  • Idem(3) Notwithstanding subsection (2), a bank may permit either occasionally or as a regular practice, the person to whom the bank is indebted by reason of a deposit in a deposit account in the bank to withdraw moneys owing by reason of that deposit at a branch of the bank other than the branch of account or to draw cheques or other orders for the payment of such moneys at a branch other than the branch of account.
  • Situs of indebtedness

Situs of indebtedness

  • (4) The indebtedness of a bank by reason of a deposit in a deposit account in the bank shall be deemed for all purposes to be situated at the place where the branch of account is situated.

the place where the branch of account is situated.

Effect of writ, etc.

  • 462 (1) Subject to subsections (3) and (4), the following documents are binding on property belonging to a person and in the possession of a bank, or on money owing to a person by reason of a deposit account in a bank, only if the document or a notice of it is served at the branch of the bank that has possession of the property or that is the branch of account in respect of the deposit account, as the case may be:
    • (a) a writ or process originating a legal proceeding or issued in or pursuant to a legal proceeding;
    • (b) an order or injunction made by a court;
    • (c) an instrument purporting to assign, perfect or otherwise dispose of an interest in the property or the deposit account; or
    • (d) an enforcement notice in respect of a support order or support provision.
  • Notices(2) Any notification sent to a bank with respect to a customer of the bank, other than a document referred to in subsection (1) or (3), constitutes notice to the bank and fixes the bank with knowledge of its contents only if sent to and received at the branch of the bank that is the branch of account of an account held in the name of that customer.

BL20-🎄C💩enein – And the winner is “Toronto Police Services”

It saddens me to say I snitched. I have a report number # is 2020-1645xxx

I snitched on CIBC and Kramer Dhillon Simaan. It took at least one from each company to collude and breach the trust of clients.

I think they all have reasonably good connections to various police forces, they are “in the biz” and nothing much will happen.

CIBC will now have to be sued since I did not get a final payoff amount from them. We verbally discussed $1,000 – 10,000 as a range of payoff, but I heard nothing from either CIBC or the OBSI today.

No one got back to me.

If no charges are laid, it seems easiest to just add Ms. Adrian and both her clients to my suit if they are not there already.. They are ALL working in concert, And Ms Adrian bridges the Civil-Criminal gap nicely, interfacing with Charles Painter and the Crown.

How Could She Legally Know of My New Bank Account – a theory

There is ONE possible way she got the data WITHOUT breach of trust and theft. A “system” all banks set up quietly in back rooms.

Banks lose money to deadbeats, as do lawyers.

If the majors wanted to collect MORE money MORE often, they need to know what deadbeat MOVED around. All Banks would ALL contribute THEIR deadbeats to a common, shared database of “Known DeadBeats”.

So every bank puts in their new garnishments. And every bank can inquire when they need to see who has failed t okay… A credit check maybe…..

Then, all the banks ALSO would share “new accounts” with each other, and then, daily, someone would “run” the new accounts names against the database of “Known DeadBeats”, and spit out matches back to every bank.

When they match on name, address, or SIN, or Driver’s Licence… they know someone skipped out at one bank and JUST that day went to another. BANG! GARNISH!… they get that account frozen again instantly.

That would do what happened to me.

It also smacks of illegal use of personal data.

So, if the major banks are “sharing deadbeats” like that, she did not steal my data.. Maybe CIBC just GAVE it to her.

But, that illegal system would need to keep a whole LOT of people silent about its existence, like covering up failed moon landings or Trade Center collapses.

Maybe some clever nerd figured out how to get “deadbeats; from some OTHER legal source, and maybe banks only submit NEW accounts.. .under the guise of making sure …like a credit check… to a Credit Rating Company.

Maybe the banks got one of them to write a new system.

Maybe “Return of the DeadBeats”.. or “UndeadBeats”, or “DeadBeats Arose”.

That is all its takes. A third party willing to get each bank to feed it garnishments and new accounts and it just innocently says…”Hey, DeadBeat Lepp at TD Aurora just opened a new account at CIBC Aurora.” And maybe banks PAY an amount per “hit”.

Maybe Equifax is tracking them. After all, Equifax tracks EVERYONE and maybe banks feed Equifax new accounts and maybe Equifax does the matching so it looks to be at “arms length.”

The banks will never tell us.

But it may be proven anecdotally. If a LOT of garnished people report their second attempt at a new bank account ALSO froze next day… we are onto something.

A rainy day project.

BL20-🎄C💩e8 – 3 lawyers arrested me for speaking to them in court, I attempt to arrest 1 lawyer for speaking to me OUT of court

OK, this is a fun thought for ME to start the day, Monday, August 31, 2020

I bet, that while 3 of “them” with no evidence of any illegal act on my part, were able to put me in Lindsay for 2 nights IN THE MIDDLE OF COVID-19… I will NOT be able to arrest ONE lawyer for ADMITTING she stole my identity under the guise of an “examination for discovery”.

I contend that this time Tuesday, she will still not be arrested.

Within a few hours of being asked by Det. Sgt. Bentham March 2, 3, 4 …THEY successfully arrested me and put me in prison for 2 nights and had me under house arrest and a $15,000 bond

March 2 thru 4, 2020 … Within just hours of starting out, YRP Lawyer Barry Stork, and Aurora Lawyer Charles Painter, and a 3rd ringleader, SIGNED (or WOULDN’T SIGN) affidavit(s) and were ABLE to arrest me on JUST the CROWN’s trust of their friend’s words, telling police I merely spoke to the ringleader in a court room, precisely where J. Dawe ordered me to talk to her.

August 31, I WILL ATTEMPT to arrest just ONE of “them” for ADMITTING to stealing my personal banking data ON VIDEO with a court reporter as witness

August 31, 2020 I ask to arrest Lawyer Gwendolyn Adrian for SPEAKING to me in a COURT ordered Zoom meeting, and saying she got and garnished my brand new banking data from CIBC in less than 24 hours … and then she asked me for EVERY answer for EVERY question one must use to secure a bank account for online access. She had everything needed to directly take my money with even needing a garnishment order.

What are the bets police WILL REFUSE?

“FILM at 11:00” as they once said, today it is “Check your Twitter feed”

I will bet you they will claim (all of):

  • The Zoom meeting was implicitly “without prejudice”
  • There was only one eye and ear witness
  • The video quality is 540P and not 720P for courtroom use
  • I had caught her in a tired and confused state after being exposed to MY VOICE from 10:00 to 2:07 without earmuffs
  • I cheated her into admitting it by asking her outright if she had done it
  • I’ve been harassing Gwendolyn Adrian since December 1, 2016
  • Ms Adrian does NOT have an ethics contract as an LOS licensee, it is merely a “memorandum of understanding” to be trustworthy and honourable
  • It was a on a day with a “Y” in it and there is a Y in “lawyer” specifically for that matching purpose. Because, if a man who farms is a farmer, why is a man who practices law not a LAWER? Why did they get the “privilege” of an EXTRA letter?
  • I was involved in a “matter” against her in court
  • That would be a collateral attack. (I say it is a colawyeral attack)
  • It’s a P.D. day. Not a Professional Development day, Police Domination day.
  • And the ever popular… “NO, just no.”

BL20-🎄C💩e7 – Suing As A Private Citizen, Defended As An Employee of Aurora?

Why is she being given a free lawyer?

How is that even possible, let alone doable??

Should that be permitted? Should Gwendolyn Adrian and Charles Painter be permitted to act CONCURRENTLY THIS for an ex employee paid by my taxes for three years?

Should York Regional Police’s lawyer, Barry Stork, be able to join with those two to arrest me on three false criminal charges?

Should her lawyer be able to ask me for all of my bank account numbers and all my security answers to manage my online banking?

Should her lawyer be able to collude with CIBC to take all my account setup data?

no….. she should not.

Below are the summaries of potential charges. Some Provincial and some Federal. So, which police force do I report them to?

YRP – ummm, no.

Metro Toronto – If they would have me,

OPP – maybe. I have yet to get them to admit they do anything other than Hwy 400 traffic,

RCMP – maybe. I will ask. I know an ex-Mountie and he will know.

For the CIBC Employee

Criminal breach of trust

Theft

Identity theft

For the third party receiving the stolen personal banking information

Criminal breach of trust

Identity theft

The Law Society of Ontario requires:

Undertakings and Trust Conditions

SECTION 2.1 INTEGRITY

Competence

BL20-🎄C💩eꌛ – 3 Possible Police Forces to Call

10:10 am Sunday August 30, 2020 – I am on hold and reporting in to CIBC Security to report the admission of guilt and that a CIBC Aurora staffer had to be complicit.

Below are the summaries of potential charges. Some Provincial and some Federal. So, which police force do I report them to?

YRP – ummm, no.

Metro Toronto – If they would have me,

OPP – maybe. I have yet to get them to admit they do anything other than Hwy 400 traffic,

RCMP – maybe. I will ask. I know an ex-Mountie and he will know.

For the CIBC Employee

Criminal breach of trust

Theft

Identity theft

For the third party receiving the stolen personal banking information

Criminal breach of trust

Identity theft

The Law Society of Ontario requires:

Undertakings and Trust Conditions

SECTION 2.1 INTEGRITY

Competence

BL20-🎄C💩e5 – Top 10 Questions at Discovery

August 26, 2020 – Victory Verbatim Hosts Ms Gwendolyn Adrian

I was ordered to attend a “discovery” and I was TWICE sent an invitation for 10:00 a.m. and I was not told an end time. a 10:00 am meeting with no end time ends at lunch. Everyone knows that,

The invitation cited a bunch of stuff to bring, most of which just did not apply to me. I sent back a response for each item requested.

She already had all my banking, because she had ALL my money in CPP And OAS and she has GARNISHED every account I had except my RBC Aurora account. To do that, she has to have the branch and account and transit numbers for the garnishment order and serve it “as personal service”. She faxed to head office instead.

Coming in at #10…

In the actual examination, Ms. Adrian then took a giant left turn into inventorying the minutiae of my home. But, she wanted to make a coffee table book out of dozens of photos she demanded. For every appliance in my home, she wanted 4 photos.

My 20 year old lawn mower. Snowblower. All of which are community property. My “stereo”… a quaint anachronism. Dishwasher, $229 chest freezer.

  • 1) The item
  • 2) The manufacturer name
  • 3) The model number
  • 4) The serial number

So, it dawned on me these requests were new to me. I did not recall seeing them on the invitation.

So, at 1 hour 34 minutes and 58 seconds in …I asked “Were these items and photos requested on the meeting invitation?

Ms Adrian: “That is none of your business.!”

That sums it up, it was none of my business whether she asked in advance for this standard stuff. She did not want it 9 the invitation because it is out of line.

Holding down #1

Close to #1 Ms. Adrian asked for my mother’s name.

Now, how does that apply in a discovery?

But then she topped herself.

“Mr. Lepp, are you expecting to inherit any money?”

She wondered if my mother was dying.

This is the lowest thing I can imagine doing to a person. Asking him to rank the odds of his mother dying before Ms. Adrian gets her money.

Why?

She was looking to get her claws into the pennies left behind by a WWI veteran. Wife of a 19 year old WWII volunteer who flew 33 night bomber missions in defence of HER country.

The soul of a lawyer is so cold. They will say and do ANYTHING for money,

She is willing to act as counsel to two women who have lied about every aspect of their law suits. She litigates THEIR lies for them in full knowledge they are lies. It is in the public record, in the transcripts anyone can read.

Both women testified on the witness stand, both sworn in, to the exact OPPOSITE to what they sued me for. They lied in their Plaintiff’s Claims. Both women told MS Adrian the truth, and yet she still litigates the lies instead.

One said Aurora fired her on my request and she could no longer get work. In fact, they offered her cash to leave so her lover was not her superior Director. Just for appearances that looks bad.

Then she got work, at the identical job, in charge of the whole department again, within mere days in another town. Then her suit claims, at the 4 month mark of a 6 month contract, she swore THAT town fired her, ALSO on my request. In fact, as she and her boss BOTH testified at my trial, she was given two months pay FREE to leave early when they unexpectedly ran out of work when she cleaned up all the outstanding problems given to her ahead of schedule.

She signed happily, TWICE in two towns, to take cash money in lieu of notice for being terminated without cause and she admitted that to J. Harpur. Her director boyfriend testified they had been a couple months BEFORE she arrested me.

The second one sued me for how I said what she had done. She said I slandered her, that I told lies about her. Then, just a few months later, in Small Claims court, she testified on the witness stand to the EXACT same facts I had stated about her. Exact. Within 20 minutes of being hired to advocate, I had simply measured, then drawn up and sketched and photographed the exact proof of trespass she THEN admitted to and agreed with in her sworn testimony. It was the same trespass her TWO surveyors swore to. Both men cited the same trespass. Her contractor told her he was trespassing with his drills. We all agreed on the amount of trespass. The judge declared the trespass, Ms Adrian continues to litigate those lies.

BL20-🎄C💩e🏌️‍♀️ – 3 Possible Crimes in Transfer of Personal Banking Data from CIBC Bank to a 3rd party without authority

For the CIBC Employee

Criminal breach of trust

s. 336 Every one who, being a trustee of anything for the use or benefit, whether in whole or in part, of another person, or for a public or charitable purpose, converts, with intent to defraud and in contravention of his trust, that thing or any part of it to a use that is not authorized by the trust is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding fourteen years.

Theft

  • s. 322 (1) Every one commits theft who fraudulently and without colour of right takes, or fraudulently and without colour of right converts to his use or to the use of another person, anything, whether animate or inanimate, with intent
    • (a) to deprive, temporarily or absolutely, the owner of it, or a person who has a special property or interest in it, of the thing or of his property or interest in it;
    • (b) to pledge it or deposit it as security;
    • (c) to part with it under a condition with respect to its return that the person who parts with it may be unable to perform; or
    • (d) to deal with it in such a manner that it cannot be restored in the condition in which it was at the time it was taken or converted.

My bank accounts were frozen, made dead, useless, not for deposit or payment… of no use at all. She stole it by giving my personal banking data to Ms. Adrian. And, as defined, she now CANNOT put the genie back in the bottle.

Identity theft

  • 402.2 (1) Every person commits an offence who obtains or possesses another person’s identity information with intent to use it to commit an indictable offence that includes fraud, deceit or falsehood as an element of the offence.
  • Marginal note: Trafficking in identity information (2) Everyone commits an offence who transmits, makes available, distributes, sells or offers for sale another person’s identity information, or has it in their possession for any of those purposes, knowing that or being reckless as to whether the information will be used to commit an indictable offence that includes fraud, deceit or falsehood as an element of the offence.
  • Marginal note: Clarification(3) For the purposes of subsections (1) and (2), an indictable offence referred to in either of those subsections includes an offence under any of the following sections:
    • (a) section 57 (forgery of or uttering forged passport);
    • (b) section 58 (fraudulent use of certificate of citizenship);
    • (c) section 130 (personating peace officer);
    • (d) section 131 (perjury);
    • (e) section 342 (theft, forgery, etc., of credit card);
    • (f) section 362 (false pretence or false statement);
    • (g) section 366 (forgery);
    • (h) section 368 (use, trafficking or possession of forged document);
    • (i) section 380 (fraud); and
    • (j) section 403 (identity fraud).
  • Marginal note: Jurisdiction(4) An accused who is charged with an offence under subsection (1) or (2) may be tried and punished by any court having jurisdiction to try that offence in the place where the offence is alleged to have been committed or in the place where the accused is found, is arrested or is in custody. However, no proceeding in respect of the offence shall be commenced in a province without the consent of the Attorney General of that province if the offence is alleged to have been committed outside that province.
  • Marginal note: Punishment(5) Everyone who commits an offence under subsection (1) or (2)
    • (a) is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than five years; or
    • (b) is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.
  • 2009, c. 28, s. 10
  • 2018, c. 29, s. 45

For the third party receiving the stolen personal banking information

Criminal breach of trust

s. 336 Every one who, being a trustee of anything for the use or benefit, whether in whole or in part, of another person, or for a public or charitable purpose, converts, with intent to defraud and in contravention of his trust, that thing or any part of it to a use that is not authorized by the trust is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding fourteen years.

…assuming a LSO Licensee can be considered to be a TRUSTEE at any time

Identity theft

  • 402.2 (1) Every person commits an offence who obtains or possesses another person’s identity information with intent to use it to commit an indictable offence that includes fraud, deceit or falsehood as an element of the offence.
  • Marginal note:Trafficking in identity information(2) Everyone commits an offence who transmits, makes available, distributes, sells or offers for sale another person’s identity information, or has it in their possession for any of those purposes, knowing that or being reckless as to whether the information will be used to commit an indictable offence that includes fraud, deceit or falsehood as an element of the offence.
  • Marginal note:Clarification(3) For the purposes of subsections (1) and (2), an indictable offence referred to in either of those subsections includes an offence under any of the following sections:
    • (a) section 57 (forgery of or uttering forged passport);
    • (b) section 58 (fraudulent use of certificate of citizenship);
    • (c) section 130 (personating peace officer);
    • (d) section 131 (perjury);
    • (e) section 342 (theft, forgery, etc., of credit card);
    • (f) section 362 (false pretence or false statement);
    • (g) section 366 (forgery);
    • (h) section 368 (use, trafficking or possession of forged document);
    • (i) section 380 (fraud); and
    • (j) section 403 (identity fraud).
  • Marginal note:Jurisdiction(4) An accused who is charged with an offence under subsection (1) or (2) may be tried and punished by any court having jurisdiction to try that offence in the place where the offence is alleged to have been committed or in the place where the accused is found, is arrested or is in custody. However, no proceeding in respect of the offence shall be commenced in a province without the consent of the Attorney General of that province if the offence is alleged to have been committed outside that province.
  • Marginal note:Punishment(5) Everyone who commits an offence under subsection (1) or (2)
    • (a) is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than five years; or
    • (b) is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.
  • 2009, c. 28, s. 10
  • 2018, c. 29, s. 45

The Law Society of Ontario requires:

Undertakings and Trust Conditions

7.2-11 A lawyer shall not give an undertaking that cannot be fulfilled and shall fulfill every undertaking given and honour every trust condition once accepted.

[4] If a lawyer is unable or unwilling to honour a trust condition imposed by someone else, the subject of the trust condition should be immediately returned to the person imposing the trust condition, unless its terms can be forthwith amended in writing on a mutually agreeable basis

[Amended – October 2014]

Practice by Suspended Lawyers Prohibited

7.6-1.2 A lawyer whose licence to practise law is suspended shall comply with the requirements of the by-laws and shall not

(a) practise law;

(b) represent or hold himself or herself out as a person entitled to practise law; or

(c) represent or hold himself or herself out as a person entitled to provide legal services.

Disciplinary Authority

7.8.2-1 A lawyer is subject to the disciplinary authority of the Law Society regardless of where the lawyer’s conduct occurs.

SECTION 2.1 INTEGRITY

2.1-1 A lawyer has a duty to carry on the practice of law and discharge all responsibilities to clients, tribunals, the public and other members of the profession honourably and with integrity.

[1] Integrity is the fundamental quality of any person who seeks to practise as a member of the legal profession. If a client has any doubt about their lawyer’s trustworthiness, the essential element in the true lawyer-client relationship will be missing. If integrity is lacking, the lawyer’s usefulness to the client and reputation within the profession will be destroyed, regardless of how competent the lawyer may be.

[2] Public confidence in the administration of justice and in the legal profession may be eroded by a lawyer’s irresponsible conduct. Accordingly, a lawyer’s conduct should reflect favourably on the legal profession, inspire the confidence, respect and trust of clients and of the community, and avoid even the appearance of impropriety.

[3] Dishonourable or questionable conduct on the part of a lawyer in either private life or professional practice will reflect adversely upon the integrity of the profession and the administration of justice. Whether within or outside the professional sphere, if the conduct is such that knowledge of it would be likely to impair a client’s trust in the lawyer, the Law Society may be justified in taking disciplinary action.

2.1-2 A lawyer has a duty to uphold the standards and reputation of the legal profession and to assist in the advancement of its goals, organizations and institutions.

Competence

3.1-2 A lawyer shall perform any legal services undertaken on a client’s behalf to the standard of a competent lawyer.

[2] Competence is founded upon both ethical and legal principles. This rule addresses the ethical principles. Competence involves more than an understanding of legal principles; it involves an adequate knowledge of the practice and procedures by which such principles can be effectively applied. To accomplish this, the lawyer should keep abreast of developments in all areas of law in which the lawyer practises.

[10] In addition to opinions on legal questions, the lawyer may be asked for or may be expected to give advice on non-legal matters such as the business, economic, policy, or social complications involved in the question or the course the client should choose. In many instances the lawyer’s experience will be such that the lawyer’s views on non-legal matters will be of real benefit to the client. The lawyer who expresses views on such matters should, if necessary and to the extent necessary, point out any lack of experience or other qualification in the particular field and should clearly distinguish legal advice from other advice.

The fence was built KNOWINGLY in trespass. The builders lawyer should not litigate a suit claiming slander for stating the facts admitted by the builder in court o n the witness stands questioned by her OWN LAWYER.

Gwendolyn Adrian questioned her client WHERE she KNEW the fence to be located, the client said “I knew I built it ON the neighbours land and I dug up her foundation stones doing it.”

From that moment on, Ms Adrian KNEW her client lied in her suit of me and should have dismissed the suit. She continues to litigate this lie by her client.

Footings-Cutaway-Infringement-copy-2

BL20-🎄C💩e🎄 – Examination of Execution Rules

Fall 2007 – (Commercial Litigation Brief Winter 2007/2008)

In order to get the information necessary to seize a debtor’s assets or garnish his income, Rule 60.18 of the Rules of Court permit a creditor to require a debtor to attend an ex­amination under oath be­fore a court reporter and be questioned in relation to: 

(a)  the reason for non-payment or non-performance of the judgment; 

(b)  the debtor’s income and property; 

(c)  the debts owed to and by the debtor; 

(d)  the disposal the debtor has made of any property either before or after the making of the order; 

(e)  the debtor’s present, past and future means to satisfy the order; 

(f)  whether the debtor intends to obey the order or has any reason for not doing so; and 

(g)  any other matter pertinent to the enforcement of the order. 

In reading the rule, the most important provision is the ability to ask a question about “any other matter pertinent to the enforcement of the order.” That means that legal research into the panoply of post-judgment enforcement remedies must be done before the examination in aid of execution (formerly called a judgment debt­or examination) to determine what you have to establish to obtain those remedies and, therefore, what evidence you need from the debtor to assist you in obtaining those remedies.

She did the LEGAL RESEARCH and chose Garnishment of every bank account combined with a write filed against the sale of my home. There was no FURTHER questioning required. She had solved it.

Obviously, the debtor is hesi­tant to cooperate in this process, so one has to be prepared for the possibility that the debtor will ignore a personally served Notice of Examin­ation,1 and one will have to get a court order to re-attend.

I joined Zoom at 10:00. She ended the examination at 10:03 to get a certificate of non-attendance. The entire legal community waits 30 minutes for traffic. But not for a self rep. She waited only 3 minutes WHILE I SAT THERE WAITING TO BE INVITED IN TO THE MEETING.

The court may set out the method of service of for the second Notice of Examination. A copy of that Order, and the second Notice of Examination is then served. Ulti­mately, the court may make an Order for contempt, but only after service of the motion for contempt personally, and not by an alternative personal service, absent extraordinary circumstances, such as proof that the Debtor was evading service.

An officer or director of a corporate debtor or, in the case of a debtor that is a partnership or sole proprietorship, a partner or sole proprietor against whom the order may be enforced may be examined on behalf of the debtor. Only one examination may be held in a twelve-month period in respect of a debtor in the same proceeding unless the court orders otherwise. Therefore, proper preparation is key. Where it appears from an examination that a debtor has concealed or made away with property to defeat or defraud creditors, a judge may make a contempt order against the debtor, so pursuing a line of questioning about the history of the property belong to the debtor into the hands of third parties is an important part of the examination.3 When the debtor feigns a lack of knowledge, or cannot be located, one can rely on Rule 60.18 (6) which provides that where any difficulty arises concerning the enforcement of an order, the court may, 

(a)  make an order for the examination of any person who the court is satisfied may have knowledge of the matters set out in (a) through (g); and 

(b)  make such order for the examination of any other person as is just. 

Because the Rules of Court therefore provide that a creditor may examine a debtor not only as to his income and property, and debts owed to and by the debtor, but also with respect to the disposal that the debtor has made of any property either before or after the judgment, the creditor is entitled to examine not only as the debtor’s present means to satisfy the judgment, but also his means and assets previous to the judgment, for example, at the time that the debt to the plaintiffs was contracted. A debtor who contracted for the purchase of items at a time when they could not have paid for them may be guilty of fraud.

Questioning financial HISTORY is for fraud in a purchase. Not applicable.

Property transferred by the debtor prior to judgment for the purpose of avoiding creditors may also be challenged. Preferential transactions with non-arm’s length creditors to the detriment of other creditors at a time when the debtor was insolvent, may also be the subject of a challenge. All of these areas may be explored at an examination in aid of execution. A historical examination of the debtor’s assets and income is critical to determining historical patterns which demonstrate whether, and when, the debtor started to divert or hide income and assets from the impending threat of creditors’ claims. 

There has been NO diversion or hiding detected, ever.

Conclusion 

Clients retain high paid legal counsel to win trials for them, but often leave it to collection agencies to collect those judgments. Obtaining a judgment may only be half the battle, and it is important to treat post-judgment realization of that asset with the importance it deserves as part of an overall process of turning a claim into cash. Taking advantage of the expansive rights allowed under the Rules of Civil Procedure by a properly conducted Examination in Aid of Execution is a critical feature to that process, and must be understood as such. 

Ms. Adrian chose to NOT hire an expert in collections law. She did not have the requisite skills to do her own examination, since she revealed MORE about HER possibly alleged criminal act than anything negative about me.

1    Or by an alternative to personal service, but not by service on a solicitor, as set out in Rule 60.18 (7) 

2    Rule 60.11 (2) 

3    Rule 60.18 (5) 

This article appeared in Commercial Litigation Brief Winter 2007/2008. 

BL20-🎄C💩e2 – Silly cop tricks

https://www.tmz.com/2020/08/25/cops-interrogate-black-man-for-having-too-many-credit-cards/?fbclid=IwAR2wM89cgYf5PnENZgIH–u__GGzmVgakCig74DrpX8HQVgeHvXc4IxckZo

TEXAS COPS INTERROGATE BLACK MAN AT ATM …Prove Credit Cards Are Yours!!!

6:07 PM PT — Police say the officers were approached by a patron in the convenience store who was in line behind the man at the ATM and found it suspicious his transactions kept being denied.

In the video, the man explains he forgot his pin number because he had so many cards. Police say the entire interaction lasted 6 minutes and they are happy to discuss the incident with the man.

Pulling out money from an ATM in a Texas suburb was all it took for this black man to be cornered and interrogated by white police officers, who thought he had too many credit cards.

The incident went down recently at a gas station in Burleson, a suburb of Fort Worth, and video shows one of the officers asking the man to prove the numerous cards in his wallet are his.

The guy explains he’s in a rush to help his wife, whose car he says had broken down, but police make him slowly cycle through all the credit cards in his wallet so they can match the names on the cards to his ID.

The man wonders why cops are making a big fuss, and one officer tells him someone in the store thought he was acting suspiciously.

At one point, the officer outrageously asks the man how he ended up in the suburb and everything checks out in the end … but now the guy is saying the entire interaction was racist.

Hard to argue.

We reached out to the Burleson Police Department … so far, no word back.

Originally Published — 5:19 PM PT

BL20-🎄C💩e1 – Silly cop tricks

TEXAS COPSSLAM MAN’S HEAD INTO CURB …Put Knee On His Head

https://www.tmz.com/2020/08/25/police-slam-man-head-into-curb-arrest/

Police in Texas slammed a man’s forehead into a curb during a bloody arrest … and cops also had an elbow and knee pinned on his head.

The violent altercation with cops in Beaumont, Texas was caught on camera, with bystanders screaming in horror as multiple police officers flip the man off his stomach, causing his head to smash into the concrete curb in the middle of a parking lot.

BL20-🎄C💩e – Discovered For Examining!

aka: “If they ask for SIN… RUN!”

Now, lawyers looking in will tell you I got that backwards, that it’s “Examination for Discovery“.

Normally.

And, yes she DEMANDED my Social Insurance Number!

But, when Ms. Gwendolyn Adrian, senior lawyer of Michael Simaan’s firm Kramer Simaan Dhillon, does it… it comes out backwards. She wanted to find my lost old mine to get her $18,000

Trouble is, she had already been paid the $18,000.

She took $4,500 of our pensions from TD Bank within a week of J. Schabas order WITHOUT a single collection notice. No wasteful 30 day terms for lawyers. When I had not brought her cash THE NEXT DAY she illegally garnished our joint account of our CPP and OAS depots date day before.

That left about $13,500 to collect, so, she collected that amount too.

By attaching a $14,000 lien on our home, she was PAID IN FULL, she had accepted the lien as full and final payment.

So, why did she force me to a meeting? For greed.

But, in fact, out was met who was greedy. I knew I had paid her and wondered what I could get out of HER.

Jackpot! The brass ring.

Ms. Adrian ADMITTED out loud “It was someone else!”… who gave me your CIBC banking details…

Yesterday, on Zoom audio and in my v\deo recording. Mrs Adrian ADMITTED out loud “It was someone else!” who gave her my CIBC banking account info THE SAME DAY I OPENED IT.

This was after scheduling a marathon 14 HOURS of questioning, without telling me,

Yes, she said she had the legal authority to call me to a 10:00 am meeting, she gave me perhaps 5% of the documents she wanted to discuss, she stated NO END TIME for the meeting so we were going to midnight and THEN refused me an hour lunch break to do business.

I connected to the meeting precisely 10:00. But, by 10:03, as I waited quietly to be greeted, she declared I had not shown up and she left the meeting to get a piece of paper to that effect to file me for contempt. She stood up and left.

The Victory Transcription lady and I chatted aimlessly. She called Ms Adrian to find out where she was. Ms Adrian came back on.

Then, she ejected my representative from the Zoom audio meeting. Tossed him because “he is not a party to this”. And there went Jock.

She will claim this EXACT SET OF RULES would apply if I had hired a lawyer. Because she began to list EVERY item we own in our house and separately demanded

  • 1) A photo of “TV #1 of 5”
  • 2) A photo of TV#1 manufacturer name
  • 3) A photo of the model number
  • 4) A photo of the serial number…
  • and repeat that for each of 5 TVs.

THEN she ORDERED me to take a second camera and take a photo of my Google Maps camera. Well, probably 3 photos.

When she asked the serial number of my (dog’s food) chest freezer ($229 at Costco) I offered to put it at the curb last night for her client to pick up. She did not agree. But she snickered.

A hint: Drive lawyers nuttier… GIVE THEM WHAT THEY ASK FOR RIGHT AWAY!

Chest freezer, stereo, air conditioning, electronics, cameras… she began to list every item I owned TO KILL TIME. And to crank a big fat bill for “collection” when I had ALREADY paid her.

Get THIS! I had already paid the debt.

She lied to J. Schabas on her costs submissions for a 20 minute default motion. Spoiler alert: I lost.

Instead of submitting the August 26, 2019 costs of saying”NO” for 20 minutes, she INSTEAD submitted costs of $18,000 and she told the forgetful J. Schabas he had REALLY ruled on a complete SLAPP 137.1 motion planned since April. Fraud. Misrepresentation. Misdirection.

Luckily for me, J. Schabas in his decision wrote that he had no time for my SLAPP 137.1 motion. Then, because I was still in default, Ms. Adrian “played” him by convincing him the SLAPP 137.1 motion from April 2019 was never going to be heard, after all, “he is in default your honour! “

Which would all be fine…. EXCEPT everyone claiming SLAPP 137.1 IS ALREADY IN DEFAULT.

The PPPA, something Mr Simaan has never read so he can maintain plausible deniability, says I need NOT even file a defence. You just file SLAPP 137.1 in a motion before trial begins. I did so anyway.

If someone sues you JUST to silence your blog posts, that is SLAPP, and when they sue… you do NOT write a defence, you JUST go file a SLAPP 137.1 motion. From that instant, the court has 60 days to say YES or NO to SLAPP.

I filed 137.1 April 2019 and agreed with J. Archibald to hear to August 26, 2019… then J. Schabas replaced J. Archibald.

And to prevent SLAPPers from cheating, they CANNOT change anything in their claim, nor can they file ANYTHING until AFTER the SLAPP decision is published. Ms Adrian ignored all that and all my emails telling her she cheated J. Schabas

Neither J. Schabas nor Ma Adrian knows the law around SLAPP 137.1.

BL20-🎄C⛺️ex – Appealing Results… I win my first Court of Appeal of Ontario matter over Lloyd’s of London’s best lawyers. THEY get paid!

You can pick up a complete copy of the win on their web site.

Justice Edwards was right, I’m mouthy, not vexatious.

All court I find want top hear only the soft dulcet tones of this called to the bar.

No court likes the idea of a self rep, it’s embarrassing for the pros tp lose to a high school grad so they always fond a way to shove it in your face.

In my case, I was supposed to put up with 3 years of false arrests, 7 of them and 27 charges, 19 false so far, 3 outstanding and 5 appealed.

I was supposed to do that and then be all perfectly lawyerly standing up for myself against the entire Crown, the eminent judiciary AND Lloyd’s of London. All at once. All by myself.

I was supposed to take all that and smile and be silent.

Lawyers are dispassionate, the have no “skin” in the game, win or LOSE they get $500 an hour, and it its an insurance job, the payday is every day. And they have a union, the Law Society, in their six at al times fending off all miner of outrageous complaints.

Barry Stork and Charles Painter, Lloyd’s pros from Dover, got togther and led to arrest me for speaking to a counsel in a court room.

Imagine the nerve. They allege I spoke to a counsel in a court room when that counsel was a litigant. She slo wanted me arrested for writing her name on a piece of paper for the judge.

This is screwball stuff.

Neither Stork NOR Painter said they heard a single word DESPITE sitting BESIDE the 3rd counsel. He sat there, right. where she said he was, and he swore out an affidavit saying I SPOKE to the counsel,,,,, BUT, get this, he did not hear any words at all. His counsel-mate agreed I said “Hi Barry, nice to see you.” Barry dod not hear that. the counsel then alleged the next words were aimed at her,,,, despite ADMITTING she sat BESIDE Stork. So to believe that, you suspend reality and pretend I WHISPERED or something.

Mr. Painter declined Any and ALL statements of what he did or di not hear. So, lets take that as “He heard nothing too”

Anyway, back to my big mouth.

To a man, the courts feel they do not like my style.

My substance is fine, I won the appeal, m7 $7 million goes forward before j Edwards and now he knows Mr Painter called him a piece of poop, judicial-wise. He cited everything from brains to body odour as being failed. He cited every last element of being a justice was LACKING in J. Edwards.

Judges do not mind. They are used to “friends” trashing them to win a case, lawyers will do ANYTHING to win.

I thought they just had to be truthful. I was wrong.

And how dos the Appeal COurt let me win BUT keep me” in my place”?

They awarded Lloyd;s $15,000 of MY money to Lloyd’s because I won the motion, and then I won the appeal. BUT, Lloyds was able to snag “aggressive case management

Although Aurora had greater success given the orders obtained, we note that the application judge did not ultimately grant the s. 140(1) designation or the r. 2.1.01 motion in its entirety. 

So, let me translate.

I sue, Aurora claims I am vexatious for suing. They apply for that.

I win that. I am not vexatious.

J. Edwards suggests some edits for clarity, and imposes himself as case manager.

Aurora did not CLAIM a lack of clarity, they claimed “vexatiousness”

Appeals gave them $15,000 for being beaten by a self rep TWICE.

And this is Canadian Justice.

Lawyers may let you win, but their friends on the bench will make sure they get paid anyway.

I have worked DAYS to defeat the motion and appeal and I win BOTH and get $0.00\

And I am supposed to smile, grin and bear it.

BL20-🎄C⛺️eix – Bobotomy update: a checkup reveals improvement as incisions heal well

I had to go back to the surgeon yesterday. the nurses did some preliminary assessment of my new outlook on life.

The concern is pressure., Pressure inside that builds up as the body heals. They have a laser instrument which can measure the buildup non-invasively. It uses air pressure outside as a sudden blast against the body and the laser measures how the internals push back. My pressure was fine.

In the end, the surgeon said the nurse’s tests were conclusive and I could go home and rest.

So, this may be the best I’ll ever be seein’. And seen.

BL20-🎄C⛺️e8 – Silly Pastor Tricks – one-ups Catholic Church…Jerry Falwell Jr. retires to watch his wife have sex full time with mutual friend

Donald Trump blackmails him as an “Evangelical Backer”

Jerry Falwell Jr.

Embattled evangelical leader Jerry Falwell Jr. agreed to resign as Liberty University’s president yesterday but withdrew his resignation when news reports about the decision emerged, the Christian university founded by his late father said. The conversations about his fate followed a series of public controversies about Falwell Jr.’s behavior, including an affair a Miami man said he had with Falwell Jr.’s wife that went on for eight years. Falwell Jr. acknowledged the affair in a statement to CNN. The revelation adds new depth to Falwell Jr.’s swift and remarkable fall from grace. In June, he apologized after deleting a much-criticized tweet that showed one person in black face and another in a Ku Klux Klan hood and robe.

(CNN)Jerry Falwell Jr. is again under fire. This time, however, he is sorry.The outspoken Liberty University president deleted a tweet on Monday that showed one person in black face and another in a Ku Klux Klan hood and robe after black alumni and religious leaders spoke out against it and his “incendiary rhetoric” over the last several years.Falwell was roundly criticized last month for posting the photo with the racist figures, which was taken from Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam’s medical school yearbook.In the offending tweet, which criticized Northam’s policy to require masks in public, the image was made to appear as though it was the design on a face mask.That tweet, Falwell said, was intended to “remind all of the governor’s racist past.” Instead, it prompted an open letter from black Christian leaders and alumni. It also prompted a resignation: Liberty University Online instructor and pastor Christopher House stepped down after seeing the tweet. House, who is black, is also an associate professor at Ithaca College.A group of 35 black pastors, ministry leaders and former Liberty University student athletes sent a letter to Falwell this month asking him to “stop this infantile behavior,” citing the tweet as the latest example. Lawsuit accuses Liberty University of ‘profiting’ from the coronavirus pandemic “While your tweet may have been in jest about Virginia’s Governor, it made light of our nation’s painful history of slavery and racism,” the letter reads. “The KKK robe and hood and blackface face mask tweet may seem funny to you, but this tweet is the action of a political commentator or activist and is not fitting nor acceptable for the leader of one of the largest Evangelical Christian schools in the world.”In response, Falwell said Monday that he realized that he “refreshed the trauma that image had caused and offended some by using the image to make a political point.” “Based on our long relationships, they uniformly understood this was not my intent, but because it was the result, I have deleted the tweet and apologize for any hurt my effort caused, especially within the African American community,” he tweeted. Change.org petition encouraged Liberty University alumni, faculty, current students and parents to sign if they agreed with the letter’s message. Nearly 40,000 people have signed so far. About 85,586 students attend the evangelical Christian university in Lynchburg, Virginia, according to the State Council of Higher Education for Virginia. About 4,500 of those students are black — less than 10% of the student body.

Falwell’s recent coronavirus controversy

Falwell, a vocal supporter of President Donald Trump, has courted much controversy as of late, most of it coronavirus-related. In an interview on Fox News in March, he said people were “overreacting” to the pandemic.When Liberty University reopened to 1,000 students toward the end of March, against guidance from state officials and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Falwell said that concerns over students returning to campus were overblown.And in April, a lawsuit against the university claimed it was profiting from the coronavirus crisis by reducing campus services but not refunding student fees paid for those services.

BL20-🎄C⛺️e7 – Now Google-gigging on the streets of Ontario 7 days a week, reserve me now!!

I can come to your business Monday-Sunday for Street View photography,

Let me know when I can come, and I will be there, 9 am to 5 pm.

I did this tour Saturday…” Aurora Rainbow Welcome”

BL20-🎄C⛺️e❻ – Un-Surety – Crown moves on wife’s $15,000 by arresting me March 4 based on lies of 3 Law Society licensees

BL20-🎄C⛺️e5 – Kenosha cop caps kid capriciously

BL20-🎄C⛺️e🏌️‍♀️ – Bobotomy update: a checkup reveals improvement as incisions heal well

BL20-🎄C⛺️e3 – Silly cop tricks – cop car kills cop wife, his alibi? I was sleeping!

Florida cop’s wife dies while trapped in rear of hot police SUV

“It’s literally a cage,” one Miami cop said of the patrol vehicle’s rear seat

The wife of a Florida cop died after getting trapped inside his police SUV as the temperature outside soared into the 90s, according to a report Monday.

Clara Paulino’s fingerprints were found all over the interior of the Ford Explorer following the horrifying incident outside their Miami Shores home Friday, the Miami Herald reported.

“Clearly, she was panicked and trying to get out,” a law-enforcement source told the paper.

Paulino, 56, apparently climbed into the back seat while looking for something, then got trapped there by the door’s latching mechanism, which prevents it from being opened from the inside.

Paulino wasn’t carrying a cellphone and a safety partition prevented her from reaching over the front seat to honk the horn for help, according to the Herald.

“It’s literally a cage,” one Miami cop said of the patrol vehicle’s rear seat.

Paulino’s husband, Aristides Paulino, who’s been a Miami cop for 25 years, was asleep in their home following a midnight shift when the tragedy unfolded Friday afternoon, according to the Herald.

\

Aristides, 58, and the couple’s son found Clara’s body around 5:30 p.m. — as many as four-and-a-half hours after she got trapped, the paper said.

It’s unclear why she went into the SUV, which her husband left unlocked in their driveway when he returned home and went straight to bed late Friday morning, sources told the Herald.

Investigators were treating Clara’s death as an accident but it remained under investigation by the Miami-Dade Police Department’s Homicide Bureau.

“It’s very preliminary,” a police spokesman, Lt. Carlos Rosario, told the Herald.

BL20-🎄C⛺️2 – Cop Shoots Dog In It’s Gated Yard

http://www.tmz.com/videos/2020-08-22-082220-detroit-dog-4840242

this is beyond belief, a cop so arrogant he thinks he can kill anything that challenges his DOG.

I cannot wait for the union rep demanding no one will want to be a cop if they can’t kill stuff that upsets their dog.

Det Sgt Bentham may have been arrogant as well when she caused my dog to die because she wouldn’t let us use the dog park.

But even that level of arrogance is surpassed by asking three lawyers to lie March 4 to arrest me.

the dog merely stood its ground and took a loud bark to what he did not know was a gunfight.

The .38 pistol barked and the dog fell, injured, not killed even at that close range. If you’re gonna kill an unarmed dog, give it a clean head shot.

At least they have set a price of $100,000 for a doing tied to a house.

Being behind a fence is even more extreme.

BL20-🎄C⛺️1 – Sunshine, Lollipops and Rainbows

Well, that didn’t take long.

in typical fashion, Aurora Council jerked the collective knee and approved painting stripes across Yonge at Wellington. To represent the LGBTQ voters, er, community.

and of course they all ignored the obvious.

it’s a street. Busiest in Ontario. Traffic. Four tires per vehicle minimum. More on trucks

Didja consider tires, sand, mud, snow, salt, sand…. might get on the stripes.

and graffiti?

no, council closed its eyes and saw a rainbow with an elf and a pot of gold on a dry sunny day.

so, does the black paint on the yellow stripe ave meaning? Africa beats a China?

or is black just the best coverup?

https://photos.app.goo.gl/mXtywN7FgQ7f9tUi8

BL20-🎄C⛺️ – Faint Hope – Ontario Judicial Council

Click here to see their web pages

The Ontario Judicial Council may only investigate complaints about the conduct of provincially appointed judges. The Justices of the Peace Review Council may only investigate complaints about the conduct of justices of the peace. If you are unhappy with a decision of a judge or a justice of the peace in court, you can pursue an appeal on your own or by consulting with a lawyer or paralegal.

I’m happy with the decisions in that based on when the justice was told, they decided appropriately. Just wrong.

But, their CONDUCT, now that I CAN comment on because even Justice Dawe June 3, 2020 set out some fact sabot their conduct. What he ordered was that several justices had taken DRAFTS fro the Crown of decisions and orders.

Further, J,. Dawe found Crown Greg Elder had twice defied his order and that of J. Fuerst to rid term #6 “Not o mention” of the 3 ladies because all their charges were disposed of.

So, in turn, when Crown Elder lied to Justice Rose December 4, 2019 by DRAFTING the entire probation order… J. Rose’s conduct was faulty, he did not apply any of his own decisions on anything, he accepted the ENTIRE probation order as written for him. The result is J. Rose SIGNED a probation order SOMEONE ELSE WROTE… Greg Elder.

So, one complaint fo rJ. Rose.

Next, J.P. Premji on March 6, 2020 used the faulty probation order, the one Elder KNEW he had lied in, to order me on 3 breaches, ONLY because the 3 ladies had NOT been removed as J. Dawe AND J. Fuerst had ordered. He then ALSO took Crown Elder’s draft of a complete Release Order, complete with “Not to mention” and 4 names. J.P. Premji did NOT change one word or add even one comma.

So, one complaint, for J.P. Premji.

Next, J Dawe rued in that whole mess and STRUCK Term #6 “Not to mention” and he admonished Crown Elder and the Justices for rubber-stamping Elder’s drafts. He was perfect!

Next, J. Cameron was asked to apply what J. Dawe had ordered. She was asked to consider that since the Term 6 was struck, AND all my convictions are based on that term, that I should not have to serve my 60 days UNTIL my appeal wa perfected and decided. She declined. But in dong do he publish Crown G\Westgates DRAFT decision verbatim. She was [robably busy, new to Newmarket, and she took the draft as if it was truthful. But of course the crown has never been truthful with me, so she got suckered.

So, one complaint for J. Cameron.

Last, for now, J. Harpur conducted a trial, but his conduct of putting his name to the draft sentencing order from the Crown was improper. One could tell that listening to him read unfamiliar words and phrases which were not his own, But, he then came to 4 “fill in the blanks”: that Mr. Westgate had left for him to fill in . He had not. So when he read out that I could take my son t hospital… he stumbled because he had not filled oil the name. He had over a year two find out, 8 months SINCE his decision and he had not read my materials with my biography and my son’s name.

Next, he was supposed to tell me what 3 hours a week I could go shopping and the had not filled those in either. So in all he left 4 empty blanks on the “form sentencing” Crown Westgate had given him.

How can you prove that Bob?

Easy. J. Harpur did not tell his assistant to fill them in eatery,m but he did tell her to release his written decision… and there for all to behold are the four blank spaces Mr Westgate left for him to decide on his own.

Them J. Harpur used the draft probation order too. And Crown Westgate had been clever enough to drop 2 of 3 ladies names. He had heard about J. Dawe’s order.

So, one complaint for J. Harpur.

J. Kenkel is next, He was case manager and was supposed to make sure the trial started on time. He was also supposed to conduct himself without bias. And he did not. He was so biased against me that he ordered me to NOT file any motions, to NOT go to the court office. Then, he refused to take even one piece of paper from me as evidence. I wrote out how Crown Elder had mixed together Indictable and Summary charges in to one information number. And every time I saw him, I would ask for that be corrected. I asked he tell me what date each charge as being tried. He refused, telling me I already knew the dates. I did. And I knew he mixed charges and a jury should have heard the charge he threw in for J. Harpur. Then, he stated clearly my counsel could represent me art trial. I had asked for a ruling that the charges were for an 18 month period, not the legal 6 months. He ruled he could not do that and I must ask th trial justice. His flawed conduct then had him FORGET to attach that decision on my motion to the case file for J. Harpur to read. Instead, at trial, I again moved for withdrawal of the charges and Crown Elder lied that J. Kenkel had ordered 18 month legal. He had not. J. Hapur them believed Elder and NOT me. AND J. Kenkel’s decision to permit my counsel to defend me was ALSO not attached and J, Harpur banned her saying she had a conflict of interest with a complainant.And of course, J. harpur showed bias by believing Elder on EVERYTHING and NOT believing ANYTHING I said, Even though I brought pape evidence,

So, several complaints for J. Kenkel and more for J. Harpur.

I have a lot of writing to do.

Hold on, no! I just wrote it.

BL20-CCC🎱 – The Crown’s case crumbles aka “Fly Attorney General Airlines!”

You, society…the “public interest” should sleep better now I’ve been punished for emailing police for help. It takes a lot of money to fuel a court system such as ours and yet when the results are in we get such a Big Bang for the buck.

Judges affirm the public was well served to have me stay home during COVID-19 so I could get in more computer time. I suggested confining a criminal to 60 straight days to the scene of the crime may cause more trouble than it fixes, but, no, they feel that is an appropriate punishment.

THIS email was my crime, this VERY email to police

This email got me 60 days house arrest

Luckily I was not the balcony rapist, or I’d be serving my time on your balcony. If I’d known years ago I could be sentenced to 60 days at my last crime scene I’d have broken into Scaramouche years ago!

The Crown has a problem. They know my last arrest was based on Crown Greg Elders refusal to follow orders from two superior justices November and December. If he had done what he was told, there would be NO “not to mention” term to violate. And June 3 J Dawe AGAIN told the crown the term was illegal and STILL they do nothing.. they just ignored a third order by the Superior court.

Crowns succeed one case of four. And still get paid weekly, and a juicy pension. They have jobs for life. Their boss, the Atty General. guarantees that in writing. He writes in every manual, “Even if you do not follow these rules I will support whatever decision you make on your own, your guess is as god as ours, anyways!”

In related news, the Attorney General is now supplying pilots to the embattled airline industry. There its a glut of both planes AND pilots, so the AG figures to correct that by reducing supplies of both. 3 out of 4 flights will crash, taking out just ONE plane but TWO pilots, Oversupply problem solved! You can fly safely now! Well, either you OR one of your three buddies will.

If your family of four needs to fly, take 4 different flights. Statistically, at least one of you will arrive. If you fly together you are ALL 75% sure to die. Better to leave an executor alive.

BL20-CCCViii- Silly cop tricks

WITNESSES AND SUSPECT SOUGHT AFTER HATE-MOTIVATED INCIDENT IN THE TOWN OF AURORA 

|

Wait until the plowmophobes get to it!

Posted on Friday August 21, 2020

Investigators with the York Regional Police Hate Crime Unit and the #1 District Criminal Investigations Bureau are appealing for witnesses after a hate-motivated incident in the Town of Aurora.

On Friday, August 21, 2020, York Regional Police received a report from staff with the Town of Aurora regarding a suspected hate crime incident following the unveiling of the new rainbow crosswalk located at Yonge Street and Wellington Road. Officers learned that just before midnight on Thursday, August 20, 2020, a pick-up truck drove over the crosswalk and left black tire skid marks over the rainbow area then returned a short time later and left some more. Investigators believe that the marks were done intentionally and this is being investigated as a hate-motivated incident.

SUSPECT VEHICLE:

  • Light coloured pick-up truck

Investigators are asking any witnesses, anyone with information or anyone with dashcam or video surveillance footage in that area, to please come forward.

York Regional Police does not tolerate hate crime in any form. Those who victimize individuals based on race, national or ethnic origin, language, colour, religion, age, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or mental or physical disability will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

Anyone with information can contact the York Regional Police #1 District Criminal Investigation Bureau at 1-866-876-5423, ext. 7141, Crime Stoppers at 1-800-222-TIPS, leave an anonymous tip online at www.1800222tips.com.

BL20-CCCVii- Silly cop tricks

Click this:… hhttps://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/montreal-police-officer-lost-wallet-suspension_ca_5f29c716c5b6a34284c08886

MONTREAL — A Montreal police officer with a bizarre definition of a good deed was suspended without pay for three days after entering a family’s home “without any right” in the middle of the night to return a lost wallet. 

The series of events detailed in a recent decision from Quebec’s police ethics committee is downright bizarre. 

Officer Ghyslain Lavoie entered a house where lawyer Yves Gratton, his partner and their three children were sleeping, just before 2 a.m. on Aug 22, 2017. He was trying to return Mr Gratton’s daughter’s lost wallet, which had been found and turned in to police days earlier.

Gratton is a legal aid defence lawyer who has been practising in Quebec since 1993. A few days after the events, he filed a complaint with the police ethics commissioner, the provincial office which examines complaints filed against police officers, wildlife protection officers, special constables, highway controllers and UPAC investigators who may have violated its code of conduct.

Lavoie, who stated in his deposition he wasn’t aware of Gratton’s profession, went to great lengths to return the lost wallet. When it was given to him by a citizen who had found it, on Aug. 20, the police officer visited an address he found for the owner. When nobody answered the door, he decided to visit another address listed on the documents: Gratton’s home.

Lavoie knocked on the door of the Gratton family’s home around 3:22 a.m on the night of Aug. 21, according to an account of events endorsed by both parties. Nobody answered. He tried calling Gratton’s partner’s phone, but no one picked up. He couldn’t leave a message because her voicemail was full, the committee’s decision notes.

But Lavoie wasn’t ready to throw the towel. When he was back at work the following night, the officer returned to Gratton’s home with his partner, officer Milena Maturana. Around 1:46 a.m., Maturana rang the doorbell. Again, nobody answered.

Meanwhile, Lavoie inspected the car parked in the driveway and noticed it was left unlocked. The officer then took out another wallet left on the passenger seat of the vehicle “wanting to prevent a theft,” administrative documents state.

Determined to return the wallets to their owners, Lavoie went around the house to the back door, which was also unlocked. After knocking and ringing the doorbell multiple times, he entered the house.

“In his deposition, he mentioned entering to check if there had been a theft or if someone needed assistance,” the committee noted in its decision.

Awoken by Lavoie’s repeated calls of “Hello? Police,” Gratton got out of bed and came face to face with Lavoie, who was climbing the stairs to the first floor.

“He sees a police officer in uniform in his home, who is shining a flashlight towards him,” the committee wrote.  Maturana is still downstairs.

After a short conversation with Gratton, Lavoie handed him the wallets and cautioned him to always lock his door “for his safety.” The police officers then left the residence.

A few minutes later, Gratton called 911 to complain about the intervention. He filed an official ethics complaint against both officers on Sept. 1. 

Three days suspension

Lavoie, who has  never violated the police force’s code of conduct in his 26 years of service, admitted he had searched the lawyer’s car without having the right to do so. He also conceded that he shouldn’t have entered the home, “since he didn’t have any power or motive allowing him to enter in this space when the expectation of privacy is high.”

In light of this, the committee accepted the parties’ joint recommendation to give him a three-day suspension without pay. Maturana wasn’t sanctioned because the investigation determined Lavoie spearheaded the intervention.