Re: A-48-16 David Raymond Amos, Appellent, vs. Her Majesty the Queen, Respondent

May 25, 2016

WILLIAM F. PENTNEY Q.C.                                                                          

Deputy Attorney General of Canada

C/o JAN JENSEN

Department of Justice

Suite 1400-Duke Tower

5251 Duke Street

Halifax, NS B3J 1P3

Re: A-48-16 David Raymond Amos, Appellent, vs. Her Majesty the Queen, Respondent

Sirs,

        I write with respect to the Order of Justice Trudel that I received by way of an email on Friday the 13^th of May 2016. I am grateful to receive this Order. However I am disappointed by subsection (a) in that my request for an oral hearing pursuant to Section 35 (2) (a) was denied. I will do as the Judge suggests in subsection (b) at my convenience. I will follow the timelines and the prescriptions of the rules just as I have done in the past. This letter attests to that fact that I am obeying subsection (c) of the Order in a timely fashion.

       I consider subsections (d) and (e) of the Order of Justice Trudel to be the most important of all. On or before June 10^th, 2016 I will file proper Notice of Motion under Rule 369 in order to request that the Court determine the contents of the Appeal Book, how it is to be created either electronically or otherwise and by whom.

       On May 5^th, 2016 while I was waiting for directions from the court Mr Jensen forwarded to me a copy of a letter sent to an unnamed party within the Federal Court of Appeal in Halifax. It appears that he had issues with my April 27^th, 2016 letter to Suzelle Bazinet, Judicial Administrator of the Federal Court of Appeal. I was not obliged to serve upon Mr. Jensen a copy of my letter but I have no objection whatsoever with anyone reading any of my material and taking issue with it. I take particular interest when a lawyer acting on behalf of the CROWN considers my issues with the RCMP, the FBI, wiretap tapes, global bank and tax fraud etc irrelevant in light of the fact that these issues are addressed within my Statement of Claim and within two of my motions on file in the Federal Court of Canada. Perhaps the CROWN should have another lawyer review all the filings that it wishes to be published in the Appeal Book of this matter.  I was amazed that a lawyer would request that this matter be case managed by a Judge by merely sending a letter to nobody in particular in lieu of filing a Motion in accordance the Federal Court Rules. Subsection (f) of the Order of Justice Trudel did not surprise me.

        With regards to the Order I take issue Justice Trudel’s summation of events in this matter. Some statements raise a few questions of my own. I do not understand paragraph 1 at all but I do understand Paragraph 7 and disagree. In my opinion if a Justice of the Federal Court of Appeal states that the respondent’s cross-appeal may not be dismissed then it follows that the court also has the ability the award my request for a judgment by default rather than limiting its decision to upholding Section 17 (1) of the Federal Courts Act and allowing the Statement of Claim to be reinstated in its original form in order to be returned to the Federal Court for a continuation of the proceedings on the merits.

         Whereas the respondent’s cross-appeal still seeks to have my claim against the CROWN dismissed in its entirety then it follows that the Federal Court of Appeal should review all the documents that were filed by both parties in the docket of the Federal Court in the order in which they were filed in accordance to Section 344 (1) of the Federal Court Rules.

My proposal as to the contents of the Appeals Book are as follows:

1. Statement of Claim filed on 16-SEP-2015
2. Motion Record on behalf of Defendant and Draft Order\Judgment filed on 14-OCT-2015
3. Motion Record on behalf of Plaintiff filed on 26-OCT-2015
4. Order dated 12-NOV-2015 rendered by Richard Morneau, Esq., Prothonotary
5. Notice of Motion on behalf of Plaintiff for an appeal of the decision of Richard Morneau, Esq., Prothonotary dated 12-NOV-2015 filed on 20-NOV-2015
6. Motion Record on behalf of Plaintiff filed on 08-DEC-2015
7. Affidavit of David Raymond Amos sworn on 08-DEC-2015 contained within a Motion Record on behalf of Plaintiff in support of Motion including the Exhibits A & B (Exhibit A is a CD) filed on 08-DEC-2015
8. Unsigned Motion Record on behalf of Defendant filed on 10-DEC-2015
9. Affidavit of Jill Thomson sworn on 10-DEC-2015 contained within a Motion Record on behalf of Defendant in opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion filed on 10-DEC-2015
10. Order dated 14-DEC-2015 rendered by The Honourable Mr. Justice Bell Matter Delivered orally from the Bench on December 14, 2015. Filed on 23-DEC-2015.
11. A signed letter from the Speaker of the House of Commons Dated January 7^th, 2016 which was sent to the Plaintiff byway of an email of January 12^th, 2016.
12. An email sent by the Plaintiff to the Speaker of the House of Commons, the Minister of Justice/Attorney General of Canada and many others on January 18^th, 2016.
13. Reasons and Order dated 25-JAN-2016 rendered by The Honourable Mr. Justice Southcott Filed on 25-JAN-2016

       With regards to your proposal that transcripts are to be ordered for the Hearings held on in Federal Court December 14^th, 2015 and January 11^th, 2016, I see no need for them. However if the CROWN demands that the transcripts are required for its benefit then it should cover the cost of creating the aforesaid documents and filed with the court outside of the contents of the Appeal Book as per Section 344 (2) which reads as follows:

             344 (2) Transcripts may be reproduced in a separate document.

Veritas Vincit

David Raymond Amos

P.O. Box 234.

Apohaqui, NB E5P 3G2