Methinks Robert Gauvin the SANB comedian we have for a Deputy Premier should have a long talk with his brother the lawyer and their pal Alban Duguay right away N'esy Pas?
Methinks Robert Gauvin the SANB comedian we have for a Deputy Premier
should have a long talk with his brother the lawyer and their pal Alban
Duguay right away N'esy Pas?
« Robert Gauvin ressemble beaucoup à son père », selon un ancien organisateur politique
---------- Original message ----------
From: "Gallant, Brian
(LEG)" <Brian.Gallant@gnb.ca>
Date:
Sun, 6 Jan 2019 16:04:22 +0000
Subject: RE: Methinks Robert Gauvin the SANB
comedian we have for a
Deputy Premier should have a long talk with his
brother the lawyer and
their pal Alban Duguay right away N'esy Pas?
To:
David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Thank
you for writing to the Leader of the Official Opposition of New
Brunswick.
Please be assured that your e-mail will be reviewed.
If this is a media
request, please forward your e-mail to ashley.beaudin@gnb.camedia-medias@gnb.ca
>.
Thank you!
---
Nous vous remercions d’avoir communiqué avec le
chef de l’opposition
officielle du Nouveau-Brunswick. Soyez assuré(e) que
votre courriel
sera examiné.
Si ceci est une demande médiatique,
prière de la transmettre à ashley.beaudin@gnb.camedia-medias@gnb.ca>.
Merci!
---------- Original message ----------
From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Date:
Sun, 6 Jan 2019 12:03:36 -0400
Subject: Methinks Robert Gauvin the SANB
comedian we have for a Deputy Premier should
Methinks Robert Gauvin the SANB comedian we have for a
Deputy Premier
should have a long talk with his brother the lawyer and their
pal
Alban Duguay right away N'esy Pas?
---------- Original message ----------
From: "Gauvin, Serge (SNB)" <Serge.Gauvin@snb.ca>
Date:
Sun, 6 Jan 2019 11:11:24 +0000
Subject: Réponse automatique : YO Kris Rondolo
say Hey to Premier Ford
and his Attorney General for me willy a?
To: David
Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
I
am out of the office. I will be back on Monday morning, January 7.
Please
contact Patrick Windle at patrick.windle@snb.caPatrick.windle@snb.ca
>
Je
suis absent du bureau. Je serai de retour lundi matin, le 7
janvier.
Veuillez contacter Patrick Windle à patrick.windle@snb.caPatrick.windle@snb.ca>
Case against stricter MLA conflict law doesn't wash, says
just-retired
commissioner
---------- Original message
----------
From: Premier of Ontario | Premier ministre de l’Ontario <Premier@ontario.ca>
Date:
Sat, 5 Jan 2019 15:20:13 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: Methinks there are
many lawyers and other
political animals reading this comment section today
but none of them
will ever admit it N'esy Pas?
To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Thank
you for your email. Your thoughts, comments and input are greatly
valued.
You can be assured that all emails and letters are carefully
read,
reviewed and taken into consideration.
There may be occasions
when, given the issues you have raised and the
need to address them
effectively, we will forward a copy of your
correspondence to the appropriate
government official. Accordingly, a
response may take several business
days.
Thanks again for your email.
______
Merci pour votre
courriel. Nous vous sommes très reconnaissants de
nous avoir fait part de vos
idées, commentaires et observations.
Nous tenons à vous assurer que nous
lisons attentivement et prenons en
considération tous les courriels et
lettres que nous recevons.
Dans certains cas, nous transmettrons votre
message au ministère
responsable afin que les questions soulevées puissent
être traitées de
la manière la plus efficace possible. En conséquence,
plusieurs jours
ouvrables pourraient s’écouler avant que nous puissions vous
répondre.
« Robert Gauvin ressemble beaucoup à son père », selon un ancien organisateur politique
Alban
Duguay, ancien organisateur politique progressiste-conservateur, reçoit
la visite de Robert Gauvin Photo: Gracieuseté Roger Lanteigne
Le
candidat progressiste-conservateur élu dans Shippagan-Lamèque-Miscou,
Robert Gauvin, seul élu francophone au sein de son parti, se trouve dans
une situation qui rappelle un peu celle de son père, Jean, au milieu
des années 1990.
Un texte de René Landry
À Shippagan, en remerciant ses partisans à la suite de sa victoire, Robert Gauvin a lancé un cri du cœur.Des
situations difficiles s'en viennent, a-t-il affirmé. On s'en va à
Fredericton. Il y a plusieurs partis qui sont là. Il y a le parti de
l'Alliance qui est là. Mais faites-vous-en pas. Avec ce que vous avez
fait ce soir, je vais me battre pour vous jusqu'à la mort, mesdames et
messieurs.
Il y a près de 25 ans, son père, Jean Gauvin, alors
député progressiste-conservateur de la circonscription qui portait le
nom de Shippagan-les-Îles, faisait un discours très émotif, la larme à
l'œil, à l'Assemblée législative. Il avait failli démissionner lorsque
son chef, Dennis Cochrane, avait entrouvert la porte du parti aux
anciens députés du parti anti-bilinguisme CoR.
Je pense que je préférerais mourir politiquement et mourir debout.
M. Cochrane connaît ma position à ce sujet-là, avait expliqué Jean Gauvin. Et
si M. Cochrane décide de donner une nouvelle orientation au parti, à ce
moment-là, c'est sûr que je vais réévaluer ma présence à l'intérieur du
parti.
Jean
Gauvin, ancien député et ministre progressiste-conservateur au
Nouveau-Brunswick, était le père de Robert Gauvin. Photo : Radio-Canada
Jean Gauvin était d'avis que d'accepter au sein du Parti
progressiste-conservateur des personnes qui s'opposent aux droits
collectifs des Acadiens représentait un affront envers les francophones.
Il avait lancé un ultimatum à son chef pour le forcer à se prononcer
sur l'admissibilité des députés du CoR au sein du Parti
progressiste-conservateur. Jean Gauvin avait soulevé une tempête alors
qu'il occupait le poste de whip chez les progressistes-conservateurs, celui-là même qui doit assurer la discipline dans les rangs du parti.
Le chef Dennis Cochrane a en quelque sorte puni son bouillant député acadien. C'est
nécessaire pour le Parti progressiste-conservateur, dans l'opposition,
de présenter un front très uni, avait-il déclaré. Les actions avec un
ultimatum ne sont pas dans les meilleures activités pour une équipe.
C'est la raison pourquoi j'ai terminé les actions de Jean comme whip.
La réponse de Gauvin a été cinglante. Si
c'est le prix qu'il faut que je paie pour défendre les droits des
francophones à l'intérieur d'un parti politique, eh bien écoutez, qu'il
donne le whip à quelqu'un d'autre, moi ça ne me fait pas de différence.
Le parti Confederation of Party a été fondé en 1989 au Nouveau-Brunswick et a été dissous en 2002. Photo : Radio-Canada
Bernard Valcourt a ensuite succédé à Dennis Cochrane à la
tête du Parti progressiste-conservateur et Jean Gauvin a décidé de ne
pas se porter candidat aux élections de 1995.
Robert Gauvin, député de Shippagan-Lamèque-Miscou, a dû,
lui aussi, lancer un avertissement à son chef progressiste-conservateur,
Blaine Higgs, qui n'a pas immédiatement fermé la porte à une
collaboration avec les députés de l'Alliance des gens du
Nouveau-Brunswick, un parti politique hostile au bilinguisme. La longévité de Blaine Higgs va dépendre de la façon dont il va traiter les Acadiens , a-t-il déclaré.
Un nationaliste
Alban Duguay, de Shippagan, a aujourd'hui 90 ans. Il a
été le président de l'Association progressiste-conservatrice de
Shippagan-les-Îles pendant une quinzaine d'années, soit durant la
période où Jean Gauvin était député. Il a bien connu ce dernier et a vu
ses enfants grandir. Il est l'une des personnes que Robert Gauvin est
allé rencontrer pour demander des conseils.
Alban Duguay, en discussion avec Robert Gauvin Photo : Gracieuseté Roger Lanteigne
Jean était
nationaliste et il ne s'en cachait pas non plus, rappelle-t-il. Il
défendait ses principes avec conviction. Je lui avais demandé, alors
qu'il était député, s'il ne voulait pas tenter de devenir chef du parti.
Je lui ai dit que Hatfield allait partir un jour. Il s'est mis à rire
et il a dit qu'il était bien trop nationaliste pour avoir l'appui des
anglophones. J'avais eu ma réponse, j'avais compris.
Tel père, tel fils?
Après avoir pris une pause du monde politique, Alban
Duguay a en quelque sorte repris du service en se présentant à des
activités partisanes de Robert Gauvin. Quand il a entendu dire que
Robert Gauvin avait lancé qu'il allait se battre pour les siens jusqu'à
la mort, cela lui a tout de suite fait penser à son ami Jean Gauvin,
aujourd'hui décédé.
Robert
ressemble beaucoup à son père, dit-il. Il a un talent d'orateur, comme
son père avait. J'ai entendu les premiers discours de Jean et des
avocats qui étaient présents disaient qu'il serait bon pour plaider des
causes. Jean était capable de soulever les foules, tout comme Robert
peut le faire. Les deux ont le même côté nationaliste, les mêmes
valeurs.
In front of more than 200 people at Club de l'âge d'or in
Shippagan Wednesday, actor and comedian Robert Gauvin said he would run for the
Tory nomination in the local riding.
Photo contribution
The Progressive Conservative opposition finally has what leader Blaine Higgs
calls a star candidate in the province’s north.
In front of more than 200 people at Club de l'âge d'or in Shippagan
Wednesday, actor and comedian Robert Gauvin said he would run for the Tory
nomination in the local riding.
The son of a former provincial cabinet minister, the late Jean Gauvin, and
best known for his roles in movies, TV series and plays like Elysium,
Smallville and Le pays de la Sagouine, he said in an
interview he had been approached by the Tory leadership a year ago and finally
decided he had to jump into the political fray.
“My dad was in Richard Hatfield’s cabinet as minister in fisheries, so I
guess you can say I have it in my blood,” said the 49-year-old father of two.
“And it’s the right time. We need better economic management in our
province.”
If he wins the Tory nomination contest for the riding of
Shippagan-Lamèque-Miscou, he’ll take on Liberal MLA Wilfred Roussel, a former
journalist, editor and businessman who won the riding by beating former deputy
premier Paul Robichaud in 2014 in a squeaker, by only 44 votes.
Neither the backbencher nor the Liberal party replied for comment
Wednesday.
In front of more than 200 people at Club de l'âge d'or in Shippagan
Wednesday, actor and comedian Robert Gauvin said he would run for the Tory
nomination in the local riding.
Photo contribution
The Progressive Conservative opposition finally has what leader Blaine Higgs
calls a star candidate in the province’s north.
In front of more than 200 people at Club de l'âge d'or in Shippagan
Wednesday, actor and comedian Robert Gauvin said he would run for the Tory
nomination in the local riding.
The son of a former provincial cabinet minister, the late Jean Gauvin, and
best known for his roles in movies, TV series and plays like Elysium,
Smallville and Le pays de la Sagouine, he said in an
interview he had been approached by the Tory leadership a year ago and finally
decided he had to jump into the political fray.
“My dad was in Richard Hatfield’s cabinet as minister in fisheries, so I
guess you can say I have it in my blood,” said the 49-year-old father of two.
“And it’s the right time. We need better economic management in our
province.”
If he wins the Tory nomination contest for the riding of
Shippagan-Lamèque-Miscou, he’ll take on Liberal MLA Wilfred Roussel, a former
journalist, editor and businessman who won the riding by beating former deputy
premier Paul Robichaud in 2014 in a squeaker, by only 44 votes.
Neither the backbencher nor the Liberal party replied for comment
Wednesday.
The news comes at the right time for Higgs, whose caucus only has one
francophone – Madeleine Dubé – a veteran politician who announced in February
she wouldn’t run in the next election in her Edmundston riding.
The Liberals, by contrast, have 15 francophone members in their caucus in a
province where one in three speaks French as the first language.
Political scientist Donald Wright has called Higgs’s unilingualism and his
former run at the leadership of the Confederation of Regions Party his Achilles
heel and said it was essential the politician from southern New Brunswick
attracted strong candidates in the north and eastern New Brunswick for the Sept.
24 provincial election.
When Jean Gauvin died in 2007, then-Liberal premier Shawn Graham paid homage
to the Tory politician by noting he had been a strong advocate for the rights
and advancement of francophone New Brunswickers, and of the fishing industry,
particularly crab fishermen in the northeast.
Higgs said Wednesday he had already met several times with the younger Gauvin
and is impressed.
“Robert and I have discussed a lot of issues related to the province and we
are fully aligned.”
A province divided: 'It opens up all kinds of wounds'
ADAM HURAS Legislature Bureau
Blaine Higgs
Photo: Adam Huras/Legislature Bureau
A lack of vision from all parties got us here, says the head of a francophone
rights group.
“We are on the eve of 50 years of official bilingualism in this province and
what I’m seeing is a return to the debates we had in the early 1990s on
language,” Société de l'Acadie du Nouveau-Brunswick executive director Ali
Chaisson said on Tuesday. “There are larger issues in New Brunswick we need to
deal with, like the economy.
“When everybody is happier, when they are richer, when there’s progress and
prosperity, these kind of questions are pushed to the margins. But that takes
long-term vision. Protest parties are about hitting on the easiest target and in
this case it’s bilingualism.”
New Brunswick woke up on Tuesday to a deep divide, the provincial election
riding map drawn along geographical and cultural fault lines to an even greater
degree than it was four years ago.
The Liberals took 55 per cent of the popular vote in the province’s northern
ridings, but only 27 per cent in the south.
Conversely, the Tories had 46 per cent support in the south and 22 in the
north.
It’s raising the question: Do any of the province’s political parties now
really represent all of New Brunswick?
A lack of vision from all parties got us here, says the head of a francophone
rights group.
“We are on the eve of 50 years of official bilingualism in this province and
what I’m seeing is a return to the debates we had in the early 1990s on
language,” Société de l'Acadie du Nouveau-Brunswick executive director Ali
Chaisson said on Tuesday. “There are larger issues in New Brunswick we need to
deal with, like the economy.
“When everybody is happier, when they are richer, when there’s progress and
prosperity, these kind of questions are pushed to the margins. But that takes
long-term vision. Protest parties are about hitting on the easiest target and in
this case it’s bilingualism.”
New Brunswick woke up on Tuesday to a deep divide, the provincial election
riding map drawn along geographical and cultural fault lines to an even greater
degree than it was four years ago.
The Liberals took 55 per cent of the popular vote in the province’s northern
ridings, but only 27 per cent in the south.
Conversely, the Tories had 46 per cent support in the south and 22 in the
north.
It’s raising the question: Do any of the province’s political parties now
really represent all of New Brunswick?
“Not at the moment,” J.P. Lewis, associate professor of politics at the
University of New Brunswick, said in an interview. “Watching the scene from the
PC headquarters on Monday night, it was as if they won.
“And maybe (Progressive Conservative Leader) Blaine Higgs will be premier,
but their share of the (total) popular vote is down to 32 per cent. If we’re
talking about a mandate, I don’t think there was a clear mandate to one
party.”
Lewis said a move by Brian Gallant to make himself regional minister for
Saint John didn’t resonate and Higgs’ attempt to field so-called “star
candidates” didn’t yield results.
The night instead resulted in third parties breaking through as New
Brunswickers searched for alternatives. That included the emergence of the
People's Alliance, a party in 2010 that formed amid anger over the
then-government's plan to sell NB Power to Hydro-Quebec, but its support of late
has comes from a populist appeal on bilingualism and duality.
For some, it echoes the rise of the New Brunswick Confederation of Regions
Party, a party that overtly pledged to repeal the Official Languages Act, while
proposing to provide government services in French only in areas with a large
francophone population.
It held official status in the New Brunswick legislative between 1991 and
1995, before losing all its seats in the following election.
The People’s Alliance won three ridings on Monday night - Fredericton-Grand
Lake, Miramichi, and Fredericton-York - in what was a major breakthrough that
painted a stripe of purple across the middle of the province.
Tory MLA Robert Gauvin: 'For
me, it’s clear: [Higgs’] longevity as premier will depend on the way he treats
the Acadians.'
Photo: Alexandre Boudreau/L'Étoile
New Brunswick's only francophone Tory MLA has a message for his leader: your
longevity as premier will depend on how you treat Acadians.
Newly-minted Shippagan-Lamèque-Miscou MLA Robert Gauvin made the comments on
Tuesday morning, hours after a wild provincial election that left neither the
Liberals or Progressive Conservatives with enough seats to secure a majority.
That fuelled talk of political dalliances with the Green Party and People's
Alliance, who won three seats each.
Gauvin said the Alliance's position on language rights - including the
creation of one health authority for the whole province - made them an untenable
political dance partner.
"As for the language question, I am in no way in agreement with the positions
of the People’s Alliance, and I can’t make concessions," Gauvin told Brunswick
News, adding that he has faith Higgs won't make a deal with the party led by
Kris Austin.
Tory MLA Robert Gauvin: 'For
me, it’s clear: [Higgs’] longevity as premier will depend on the way he treats
the Acadians.'
Photo: Alexandre Boudreau/L'Étoile
New Brunswick's only francophone Tory MLA has a message for his leader: your
longevity as premier will depend on how you treat Acadians.
Newly-minted Shippagan-Lamèque-Miscou MLA Robert Gauvin made the comments on
Tuesday morning, hours after a wild provincial election that left neither the
Liberals or Progressive Conservatives with enough seats to secure a majority.
That fuelled talk of political dalliances with the Green Party and People's
Alliance, who won three seats each.
Gauvin said the Alliance's position on language rights - including the
creation of one health authority for the whole province - made them an untenable
political dance partner.
"As for the language question, I am in no way in agreement with the positions
of the People’s Alliance, and I can’t make concessions," Gauvin told Brunswick
News, adding that he has faith Higgs won't make a deal with the party led by
Kris Austin.
"Blaine has said many times that he wouldn’t let the Acadian people down. We
haven’t seen it a lot in the media, but he wouldn’t let [them] down."
But he then delivered a warning.
"For me, it’s clear: [Higgs’] longevity as premier will depend on the way he
treats the Acadians," said Gauvin. "My job is to ensure that our rights are
respected. We can’t go back on what we’ve earned. I think it’s essential that
Acadians are represented in each party."
On Tuesday afternoon, Higgs said Gauvin was "fully on side" with the
Tories' principles.
"Robert was on the call when we met with all the winning candidates," Higgs
said. "Robert is fully on side. I've assured him that our aims and principles in
the party are strong and that's not going to be changing."
When asked about the uncertainty the election had created, and what would
likely come next, Gauvin declined to comment, dismissing any talk as "just
speculating."
Gauvin is the brother-in-law of Philippe Ricard, the director of francophone
publications at Brunswick News. Ricard was not involved in the assigning or
editing of this article.
---------- Original message ----------
From: "Gauvin, Serge (SNB)" <Serge.Gauvin@snb.ca>
Date:
Sun, 6 Jan 2019 11:11:24 +0000
Subject: Réponse automatique : YO Kris Rondolo
say Hey to Premier Ford
and his Attorney General for me willy a?
To: David
Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
I
am out of the office. I will be back on Monday morning, January 7.
Please
contact Patrick Windle at patrick.windle@snb.caPatrick.windle@snb.ca
>
Je
suis absent du bureau. Je serai de retour lundi matin, le 7
janvier.
Veuillez contacter Patrick Windle à patrick.windle@snb.caPatrick.windle@snb.ca>
----------
Original message ----------
From: "OfficeofthePremier, Office PREM:EX" <Premier@gov.bc.ca>
Date:
Fri, 4 Jan 2019 17:53:29 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: YO Kris Rondolo say
Hey to Premier Ford and
his Attorney General for me willy a?
To: David
Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Hello,
Thank
you for taking the time to write. I appreciate hearing feedback
and
suggestions from the people of British Columbia as we work
together to build
a better BC.
Due to the volume of incoming messages, this is an automated
response
to let you know that your email has been received and will be
reviewed
at the earliest opportunity.
In the event that your inquiry
more appropriately falls within the
mandate of a Ministry or other area of
government, staff will refer
your email for review and
consideration.
Again, thank you for
writing.
Sincerely,
John
Horgan
Premier
---------- Original message ----------
From:
Premier of Ontario | Premier ministre de l’Ontario <Premier@ontario.ca>
Date:
Fri, 4 Jan 2019 17:50:53 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: YO Kris Rondolo and
Renaud Brossard we just
talked about Taxation and you defer to the
questionable political
lawyer Aaron Wudrick???
To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Thank
you for your email. Your thoughts, comments and input are greatly
valued.
You can be assured that all emails and letters are carefully
read,
reviewed and taken into consideration.
There may be occasions
when, given the issues you have raised and the
need to address them
effectively, we will forward a copy of your
correspondence to the appropriate
government official. Accordingly, a
response may take several business
days.
Thanks again for your email.
______
Merci pour votre
courriel. Nous vous sommes très reconnaissants de
nous avoir fait part de vos
idées, commentaires et observations.
Nous tenons à vous assurer que nous
lisons attentivement et prenons en
considération tous les courriels et
lettres que nous recevons.
Dans certains cas, nous transmettrons votre
message au ministère
responsable afin que les questions soulevées puissent
être traitées de
la manière la plus efficace possible. En conséquence,
plusieurs jours
ouvrables pourraient s’écouler avant que nous puissions vous
répondre.
Derek
Fildebrandt is Leader of the Freedom Conservative Party of
Alberta and the
MLA for Strathmore-Brooks.
Derek is married to his wife Emma, is the
father of a beautiful baby
girl named Winifred, and has two German Shepherds.
He is a good
fisherman, an adequate hunter, and a poor guitar
player.
In his time as an MLA, Fildebrandt has consistently stood for
limited
government, free speech and personal
responsibility.
Fildebrandt served as both the Alberta Director and
National Research
Director of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation. Federally,
he fought to
end the Liberal long-gun registry, scrap gold-plated MP
pensions, and
require First Nation Chiefs to publicly disclose their salaries
to
band members. In Alberta, he led the fight against the
Redford
government’s deficit budgets and abuse of taxpayers’
money.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From:
"Lebouthillier, Diane" <Diane.Lebouthillier@cra-arc.gc.ca>
Date:
Wed, 30 Aug 2017 20:48:50 +0000
Subject: Réponse automatique : Your various
correspondence about
abusive tax schemes - 2017-02631
To: David Amos
<motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Merci
d'avoir écrit à l'honorable Diane Lebouthillier, ministre du
Revenu national.
Votre courriel sera lu avec soin et recevra toute
l'attention
voulue.
Si votre courriel porte sur une demande de rencontre ou une
invitation
à une activité particulière, nous tenons à vous assurer que
votre
demande a été notée et transmise à notre adjointe à
l'agenda.
***************************
Thank you for writing to the
Honourable Diane Lebouthillier, Minister
of National Revenue. Your email will
be read with care and will
receive every consideration.
If your email
relates to a meeting request or an invitation to a
specific event, please be
assured that your request has been noted and
sent to our scheduling
assistant.
Thank you for your various correspondence about abusive tax
schemes,
and for your understanding regarding the delay of this
response.
This is an opportunity for me to address your concerns about
the way
the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) deals with aggressive tax
planning,
tax avoidance, and tax evasion by targeting individuals and
groups
that promote schemes intended to avoid payment of tax. It is also
an
opportunity for me to present the Government of Canada’s
main
strategies for ensuring fairness for all taxpayers.
The CRA’s
mission is to preserve the integrity of Canada’s tax system,
and it is taking
concrete and effective action to deal with abusive
tax schemes. Through
federal budget funding in 2016 and 2017, the
government has committed close
to $1 billion in cracking down on tax
evasion and combatting tax avoidance at
home and through the use of
offshore transactions. This additional funding is
expected to generate
federal revenues of $2.6 billion over five years for
Budget 2016, and
$2.5 billion over five years for Budget 2017.
More
precisely, the CRA is cracking down on tax cheats by hiring more
auditors,
maintaining its underground economy specialist teams,
increasing coverage of
aggressive goods and service tax/harmonized
sales tax planning, increasing
coverage of multinational corporations
and wealthy individuals, and taking
targeted actions aimed at
promoters of abusive tax schemes.
On the
offshore front, the CRA continues to develop tools to improve
its focus on
high‑risk taxpayers. It is also considering changes to
its Voluntary
Disclosures Program following the first set of program
recommendations
received from an independent Offshore Compliance
Advisory Committee. In
addition, the CRA is leading international
projects to address the base
erosion and profit shifting initiative of
the G20 and the Organisation for
Economic Co-operation and
Development, and is collaborating with treaty
partners to address the
Panama Papers leaks.
These actions are
evidence of the government’s commitment to
protecting tax fairness. The CRA
has strengthened its intelligence and
technical capacities for the early
detection of abusive tax
arrangements and deterrence of those who participate
in them. To
ensure compliance, it has increased the number of actions aimed
at
promoters who use illegal schemes. These measures include
increased
audits of such promoters, improved information gathering,
criminal
investigations where warranted, and better communication
with
taxpayers.
To deter potential taxpayer involvement in these
schemes, the CRA is
increasing notifications and warnings through its
communications
products. It also seeks partnerships with tax preparers,
accountants,
and community groups so that they can become informed observers
who
can educate their clients.
The CRA will assess penalties against
promoters and other
representatives who make false statements involving
illegal tax
schemes. The promotion of tax schemes to defraud the government
can
lead to criminal investigations, fingerprinting, criminal
prosecution,
court fines, and jail time.
Between April 1, 2011, and
March 31, 2016, the CRA’s criminal
investigations resulted in the conviction
of 42 Canadian taxpayers for
tax evasion with links to money and assets held
offshore. In total,
the $34 million in evaded taxes resulted in court fines
of $12 million
and 734 months of jail time.
When deciding to pursue
compliance actions through the courts, the CRA
consults the Department of
Justice Canada to choose an appropriate
solution. Complex tax-related
litigation is costly and time consuming,
and the outcome may be unsuccessful.
All options to recover amounts
owed are considered.
More specifically,
in relation to the KPMG Isle of Man tax avoidance
scheme, publicly available
court records show that it is through the
CRA’s efforts that the scheme was
discovered. The CRA identified many
of the participants and continues to
actively pursue the matter. The
CRA has also identified at least 10
additional tax structures on the
Isle of Man, and is auditing taxpayers in
relation to these
structures.
To ensure tax fairness, the CRA
commissioned an independent review in
March 2016 to determine if it had acted
appropriately concerning KPMG
and its clients. In her review, Ms. Kimberley
Brooks, Associate
Professor and former Dean of the Schulich School of Law at
Dalhousie
University, examined the CRA’s operational processes and decisions
in
relation to the KPMG offshore tax structure and its efforts to
obtain
the names of all taxpayers participating in the scheme. Following
this
review, the report, released on May 5, 2016, concluded that the
CRA
had acted appropriately in its management of the KPMG Isle of
Man
file. The report found that the series of compliance measures the
CRA
took were in accordance with its policies and procedures. It
was
concluded that the procedural actions taken on the KPMG file
were
appropriate given the facts of this particular case and
were
consistent with the treatment of taxpayers in similar situations.
The
report concluded that actions by CRA employees were in accordance
with
the CRA’s Code of Integrity and Professional Conduct. There was
no
evidence of inappropriate interaction between KPMG and the
CRA
employees involved in the case.
Under the CRA’s Code of Integrity
and Professional Conduct, all CRA
employees are responsible for real,
apparent, or potential conflicts
of interests between their current duties
and any subsequent
employment outside of the CRA or the Public Service of
Canada.
Consequences and corrective measures play an important role
in
protecting the CRA’s integrity.
The CRA takes misconduct very
seriously. The consequences of
misconduct depend on the gravity of the
incident and its repercussions
on trust both within and outside of the CRA.
Misconduct can result in
disciplinary measures up to dismissal.
All
forms of tax evasion are illegal. The CRA manages the Informant
Leads
Program, which handles leads received from the public regarding
cases of tax
evasion across the country. This program, which
coordinates all the leads the
CRA receives from informants, determines
whether there has been any
non-compliance with tax law and ensures
that the information is examined and
conveyed, if applicable, so that
compliance measures are taken. This program
does not offer any reward
for tips received.
The new Offshore Tax
Informant Program (OTIP) has also been put in
place. The OTIP offers
financial compensation to individuals who
provide information related to
major cases of offshore tax evasion
that lead to the collection of tax owing.
As of December 31, 2016, the
OTIP had received 963 calls and 407 written
submissions from possible
informants. Over 218 taxpayers are currently under
audit based on
information the CRA received through the OTIP.
With a
focus on the highest-risk sectors nationally and
internationally and an
increased ability to gather information, the
CRA has the means to target
taxpayers who try to hide their income.
For example, since January 2015, the
CRA has been collecting
information on all international electronic funds
transfers (EFTs) of
$10,000 or more ending or originating in Canada. It is
also adopting a
proactive approach by focusing each year on four
jurisdictions that
raise suspicion. For the Isle of Man, the CRA audited
3,000 EFTs
totalling $860 million over 12 months and involving approximately
800
taxpayers. Based on these audits, the CRA communicated
with
approximately 350 individuals and 400 corporations and performed
60
audits.
In January 2017, I reaffirmed Canada’s important role as a
leader for
tax authorities around the world in detecting the structures used
for
aggressive tax planning and tax evasion. This is why Canada
works
daily with the Joint International Tax Shelter Information
Centre
(JITSIC), a network of tax administrations in over 35 countries.
The
CRA participates in two expert groups within the JITSIC and leads
the
working group on intermediaries and proponents. This
ongoing
collaboration is a key component of the CRA’s work to develop
strong
relationships with the international community, which will help
it
refine the world-class tax system that benefits all Canadians.
The
CRA is increasing its efforts and is seeing early signs of
success. Last
year, the CRA recovered just under $13 billion as a
result of its audit
activities on the domestic and offshore fronts.
Two-thirds of these
recoveries are the result of its audit efforts
relating to large businesses
and multinational companies.
But there is still much to do, and
additional improvements and
investments are underway.
Tax cheats are
having a harder and harder time hiding. Taxpayers who
choose to promote or
participate in malicious and illegal tax
strategies must face the
consequences of their actions. Canadians
expect nothing less. I invite you to
read my most recent statement on
this matter at canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/news/2017/03/
statement_from_thehonourabledianelebouthillierministerofnational.
Thank
you for taking the time to write. I hope the information I have
provided is
helpful.
Sincerely,
The Honourable Diane Lebouthillier
Minister
of National Revenue
Kris
Rondolo
Generation Screwed Executive Director
Office Location: 712-170
Laurier Ave W. Ottawa, ON K1P 5V5
Phone: Cell: 613.981.8411
E-mail: krondolo@generationscrewed.ca
Twitter
@ @GenScrewedCDN
Hi-Res Photo: Download
Kris’ family immigrated from
the Philippines to the Greater Toronto
Area (GTA) in 2007. A few years later,
her fight against big
government and taxes all began when she opened her
first paycheck.
She studied political science and health sciences at the
University of
Ottawa. While studying, Kris also served as an organizer for
Equal
Voice UOttawa.Before taking the reins as Generation
Screwed’s
Executive Director, Kris worked on Parliament Hill for several
Members
of Parliament.
In her spare time, Kris volunteers for
community boards like the
Philippine Centre Canada, and the Filipino Youth
Association, where
she brings her passion and dedication as a community
organizer and as
an advocate for young Canadians.
Kris is also a watch
enthusiast and enjoys collecting vintage
mechanical
watches.
A business graduate from
École des sciences de la gestion (ESG) at
Université du Québec à Montréal
(UQAM), Renaud has always been drawn
to politics. First getting involved in
politics at the age of
eighteen, he quickly left partisan politics,
preferring to focus on
getting his ideals implemented instead of simply
getting some guy
elected.
That is how he became involved in Generation
Screwed, first as UQAM
coordinator, and then later as the movement’s
Executive Director.
There, he worked on mobilizing young Canadians against
government debt
and massive deficits, two of the greatest issues facing his
generation
and Canada as a whole due to our aging population and our
politicians’
lack of vision for anything past their
four-year-terms.
Renaud is passionate about issues regarding economic
development,
efficient government and free trade. This is why he got involved
with
the CTF in the first place and remains involved to this
day.
Paige MacPherson
Atlantic Director
Office
Location: MAILING ADDRESS ONLY: 5201 Duke St PO Box 34077
Scotia Square
Halifax, NS B3J 1N0
Phone: 902.717.7078 / TOLL FREE:
1.877.909.5757
E-mail: pmacpherson@taxpayer.com
Twitter
@ @paigemacp
Hi-Res Photo: Download
Paige became Atlantic Director of
the CTF in 2018, previously working
as CTF Alberta Director starting in 2015.
Throughout her career she’s
had a passion for giving a voice to taxpayers and
pushing for
government accountability.
Paige was raised in Pickering,
Ontario and her family is from Cape
Breton, Nova Scotia. Her work has taken
her from
coast-to-coast-to-coast, in Halifax, Cape Breton, Fredericton,
Ottawa,
Toronto, Vancouver, Calgary and Whitehorse.
As a former
reporter and weekend host for Sun News Network, Paige
traveled across the
country to cover four provincial elections. She is
a contributing writer to
the New Brunswick-based Canadians for
Affordable Energy. Paige has published
research on education policy in
Canada, and for several years she has
contributed opinions and news
coverage to newspapers, magazines and radio
programs across Canada.
Prior to media, Paige worked in communications
and media relations at
the Atlantic Institute for Market Studies (AIMS), a
Halifax-based
think tank. While there she started AIMS on Campus, a
free-market
university outreach program.
Paige has a Bachelor of Arts
in Political Science from Dalhousie
University and a Master of Public Policy
from the University of
Calgary.
Paige enjoys exploring Canada and
spending time with her friends,
family and her dog Coco. She and her family
call Halifax home.
Kris Sims
British Columbia
Director
Office Location: PO Box 20539 Howe Street RPO Vancouver BC V6Z
2N8
Phone: 800.699.2282
E-mail: ksims@taxpayer.com
Hi-Res
Photo: Download
Born in the town of Hope and raised on both sides of the
Strait of
Georgia, Kris has been employed (and taxed) since she was 12
years
old, working in horse stables, fast food joints and gas
stations
before attending journalism school at BCIT in Burnaby.
Kris
worked in radio in the Comox Valley before moving to Ottawa to
work as a
legislative assistant on Parliament Hill. She then joined
Ottawa News Talk
Radio 580 CFRA as a reporter and anchor, eventually
becoming a journalist for
the CTV parliamentary bureau.
Kris was a founding reporter for Sun News
Network and proudly covered
issues of big government, personal liberty and
the rights of
small-town and rural Canadians until SNN was shut down. She
then
worked as the director of communications for Veterans Affairs
Minister
Erin O’Toole, and as the senior producer for Evan Solomon at
CFRA
Radio. She is proud to return to her home of British Columbia to
fight
for the rights of all taxpayers.
When she isn’t digging through
expense reports and doing media
interviews, Kris can be found reading Ayn
Rand on the banks of the
Fraser River with her husband and their two
children
Todd MacKay
Prairie Director
Office Location: 265-438
Victoria Ave East, Regina, SK S4N 0N7
Phone: 800.667.7933
Cell:
306.582.7717
E-mail: prairie@taxpayer.com
Twitter
@ @toddamackay
Hi-Res Photo: Download
Todd joined the Canadian
Taxpayers Federation as Prairie Director in
2015 with a background spanning
newspaper reporting, government
communications and pouring
concrete.
Todd grew up in small town Saskatchewan and went on to earn
a
journalism degree at the University of King’s College in Halifax.
After
a few years as a reporter at community newspapers, he served in
several
communications roles for the federal government and
participated on Canadian
trade missions around the world. He moved
back to Saskatchewan to do
communications and policy work for the
provincial government when his first
son was born.
After writing one too many speeches about the importance
of
entrepreneurship, Todd tossed his suit and tie, moved back to
his
hometown and became co-owner of a concrete construction
company.
Todd and his wife Tanya live in Moose Jaw with their four kids.
Mostly
he tries to keep up with his kids, but sometimes he gets to
read
history and literature or even go hunting with his Labrador
retriever
Stanley.
Franco Terrazzano
Alberta Director
Office
Location: Mailing Address: PO Box 14043 Richmond Road PO,
Calgary, AB T3E
7Y7
Phone:
Cell: 403.918.3532
E-mail: fterrazzano@taxpayer.com
Twitter
@ @franco_nomics
Hi-Res Photo: Download
Franco joins the CTF after
working as an economic policy analyst with
the Calgary Chamber of Commerce
and as a fellow with the Canadian
Constitution Foundation. Franco has
produced multiple reports and
op-eds on the costs associated with tax
increases, inefficient
government and the unintended consequences of public
policies.
Franco completed his Master of Public Policy and Bachelor of
Arts
(Economics) degrees at the University of Calgary. Franco also
played
on the University of Calgary’s baseball team, and did a quick stint
in
Europe playing for the Amsterdam Bombers baseball club.
When not
advocating for lower taxes, less waste and accountable
government, Franco
enjoys working out, reading economics and
attempting to re-live his athletic
days.
Jeff Bowes
Research Director
Office Location: Canadian
Taxpayers Federation: Suite 712 - 170
Laurier Ave W., Ottawa ON K1P
5V5
Phone: 613.234.6554
E-mail: jbowes@taxpayer.com
Twitter
@ jbowes2
Hi-Res Photo: Download
Jeff grew up in Perth, Ontario and
moved to Ottawa to attend Carleton
University.
There he received a
Bachelor of Arts in Political Science, and worked
with the CTF during the
2007 Ontario provincial election. He reminded
Dalton McGuinty of his broken
promises by following him across the
province dressed as Fibber, the Honesty
in Politics mascot.
Before returning to the CTF Jeff worked providing
video and audio
production services for Members of Parliament.
In
addition to exposing government waste, Jeff enjoys running, soccer
and
traveling.
Aaron Wudrick
Federal Director
Office Location: Canadian
Taxpayers Federation: Suite 712 - 170
Laurier Ave W., Ottawa ON K1P
5V5
Phone: 800.265.0442
E-mail: federal.director@taxpayer.com
Twitter
@ @awudrick
Hi-Res Photo: Download
Aaron joined the CTF as Federal
Director in 2014. A lawyer by
training, Aaron practised litigation in his
native Kitchener, Ontario,
and then corporate law with a major international
law firm in London,
Hong Kong and Abu Dhabi, before returning to Canada to
work with a
prominent political consulting firm.
In addition to being
a recovering lawyer, Aaron is also a recovering
partisan, having previously
served as a political organizer and
campaign manager for several political
candidates in federal and
provincial elections and leadership campaigns (some
successful, some
not so much). He was author of a rabble-rousing weekly
opinion column
in the campus newspaper during his undergraduate days, and a
prolific
political blogger back in a time when people actually read
blogs.
Aaron holds a BA in economics and political science from
the
University of Waterloo, and a J.D. from the Faculty of Law at
the
University of Western Ontario, where he served as student
body
president during his final year of studies. He lives in Ottawa
with
his wife and children.
Christine Van Geyn
Ontario
Director
Office Location: PO Box 74507, 270 The Kingsway, Etobicoke, Ontario
M9A 5E2
Phone: 647.343.4150
E-mail: on.director@taxpayer.com
Twitter
@ @cvangeyn
Hi-Res Photo: Download
Christine
Van Geyn
Ontario Director
Phone: 647.607.6633
E-mail: on.director@taxpayer.com
Twitter
@ @cvangeyn
Hi-Res Photo: Download
Christine joined the CTF as Ontario
Director in 2015. Prior to joining
CTF, Christine practiced commercial
litigation and corporate law in
Toronto with some of Canada’s leading law
firms. Christine has also
worked for various non-profits, including the Iran
Human Rights
Documentation Centre, and she was an intern with the CTF too
many
years ago for her to admit.
Christine served as a political
organizer and campaign manager for
several political candidates, and was a
communications aide in the
federal government. Her research has been
published in a number of
economic policy and legal magazines. Christine is
the winner of a
number of International legal skills competitions, including
the
Skadden Foreign Direct Investment Moot, the International Criminal
Law
Moot in The Hague, and she placed third in Canada in the
Davies
Securities Law Moot.
Christine graduated from the University of
Toronto, Trinity College,
with an Honours BA in political science and ethics.
She graduated from
Osgoode Hall Law School with a J.D., and also attended New
York
University School of Law.
Christine lives in Toronto, and she
enjoys sailing, yoga, skiing,
coffee, and her pet
Keeshond.
---------- Original message ----------
From:
Kevin Lacey <klacey@taxpayer.com>
Date:
Mon, 9 Dec 2013 03:51:40 -0800
Subject: Away until Dec 15th Re: I just
emailed the Frank Magazine
once AGAIN with some wicked gossip about Petey
Baby MacKay,his latest
bestest strange bedfellow Premier Stevy Boy McNeil and
their newest
employee Senator Brazeau
To: motomaniac333@gmail.com
I'll
be out of the country and not back until Dec 15th. If you need
any assistance
please feel free to call the CTF National Vice
President Scott Hennig at
1-780-589-1006 or email: shennig@taxpayer.com
----------
Forwarded message ----------
From: shennig@taxpayer.com
Date:
Sat, 08 Nov 2014 17:22:46 -0700
Subject: Re: Yo Derek Fildebrand Whereas your
mindless buddy Scott
Hennig wants me to sue him personally along with you I
will assume
that these are your correct current addresses
To: David Amos
<motomaniac333@gmail.com>,
derek@fildebrandt.ca,
Aaron
Wudrick <awudrick@taxpayer.com>,
Kevin Lacey <klacey@taxpayer.com>
You
might get a message that it has bounced, but ignore that, it's
an
autoresponder that we set up.
Our lawyers will review all
information you send to that address as
they prepare our court
defense.
You can remove all other CTF email addresses from your
correspondence,
as it will be vital to ensure there's only one copy on
file.
Thank you,
Scott Hennig
Vice President,
Communications
Canadian Taxpayers Federation
Original
Message
From: David Amos
Sent: Saturday, November 8, 2014 4:54 PM
To:
derek@fildebrandt.ca;
dmh@bht.com; shennig;
greg.horton;
Biage.Carrese; kas@karenselick.com;
radical; jennifer.johnston;
t.wilson; paul; deborah.alexander; david.allgood;
jennifer.warren;
Frank.McKenna; joe.anglin@assembly.ab.ca; rimbey.rockymountainhouse.sundre@assembly.ab.ca; david.cournoyer@gmail.com;
Raj.Sherman; Rachel.Notley@assembly.ab.ca;
Danielle.Smith;
bbachrach; Gilles.Moreau; Paul.Fiander; GillesLee;
Gilles.Blinn; Eric.Rosendahl@gmail.com;
pej.prentice@gmail.com;
DavidYurdiga;
awudrick@taxpayer.com;
dfildebrandt; John.Williamson.c1;
jason.kenney.c1; Mackap; atlantic.director;
Kevin.leahy; scott.macrae;
Glen Canning; justmin; JAG.Minister; Rob.Merrifield@gov.ab.ca; dhowell@edmontonjournal.com;
lgunter; serge.rousselle; Jonathan.Denis;
Peter.Edge; Peter.Edge
Cc: David
Amos; justin.trudeau.a1; MulcaT; leader; Davidc.Coon;
jamiebaillie;
Jacques.Poitras; nick.moore; oldmaison; andre;
COCMoncton; peter.dauphinee;
premier; PREMIER; premier
Subject: Yo Derek Fildebrand Whereas your mindless
buddy Scott Hennig
wants me to sue him personally along with you I will
assume that these
are your correct current addresses
This was your
address before you got married recently Its public
knowledge
Correct?
For
the Public Record anyone with two clues between their ears can see
that
despite what your tax free organization names imply The Canadian
Taxpayers
Federation and The National Citizens Coalition you are just
overpaid far
right wing spindoctors who either work for politicians or
have worked for
them as you try to become politicians yourselves
I bet by now you not so
clever neo con punks have at least finally
figured out that threats from
politcal wannabes and their corrupt
lawyers and cops pals don't scare Mean
Old Me not even a little bit.
Imagine if the neo con punks had figured
out what has been going on
been the Feds and I since 1982. The Libranos and
the RCMP would not
have their way with Canada for so long EH Assistant
Commisioner Gilles
Moreau?
Also
for the Public Record John Williamson and Kevin Lacey should not
deny that I
have spoken with both of them personally several times
since 2005 and sent
them many emails since then. Kevin Lacey can't
deny that his beloved Premier
Hamm quit as Premier as soon as I
informed Murray Scott the I would publish
the letter below in Chucky
Leblanc's blog while all the corrupt left wing CBC
dudes were locked
out of ther jobs and could not report it even if they
wanted to.
Lt. Gov. Norman L. Kwong
Premier Ralph Klein
c/o Att.
Gen. Ron Stevens
Lt. Gov. Iona V. Campagnolo
Premier Gordon
Campbell
c/o Att. Gen. Wally Oppal
Lt. Gov. Myra A. Freeman
Premier
John F. Hamm
c/o Att. Gen. Michael Baker
Halifax, Nova Scotia
Lt.
Gov. J. Léonce Bernard
Premier Pat G. Binns
c/o Att. Gen. Mildred A.
Dover
Charlottetown, PEI
RE: Public
Corruption
Hey,
Apparently everybody wanted to play dumb about my
concerns and
allegations so that Humpty Dumpty Martin's minority government
would
not fall and they could party hardy while the Queen was in Canada.
As
you all know months ago, I began faxing, emailing and calling the
eight
other Lt. Governors I had yet to cross paths with. I fully
informed them of
my indignation towards the Governor General Clarkson
and two of her other
Maritime Lieutenants Roberts and Chaisson before
the latest wave of bad
acting Yankees invaded my home in the USA
without warrants or due process if
law.
I made certain all of the provincial Attorney Generals and
Premiers
can never deny the fact that I tried to make them well aware of
my
concerns and allegations in order to make everybody should sit up
and
pay attention. Not one person from any of your offices ever
responded
in any fashion at all. You can be certain that I expected
the
deliberate ignorance. It is one of the oldest tricks in the book
that
lawyers employ in order to play their wicked game of see no evil,
hear
no evil speak no evil. I knew it would happen particularly after
Nova
Scotia's Conflict of Interest Commissioner Merlin Nunn had blocked
my
emails before I had contacted you. I have no doubt it helped to
relieve
him of his ethical dilemma before the NS NDP decided what to
do about their
chance to unseat the Conservatives. I have no doubt
whatsoever many lawyers
in Canada were praying that the Suffolk County
District Attorney would have
me back in the loony bin by April 28th
and that all your troubles would go
away. I opted to let you all have
your way and did not bother you anymore
until the Queen had left our
shores and Parliament quit for the summer. Now
it is my turn to have
some fun and raise a little Political
Hell.
While the Queen, Clarkson and Martin where all having a grand old
time
on the Canadian dime my little Clan went through living hell
down
here. Trust me, lawyers need to learn some new tricks. Ignorance is
no
excuse to the law or me. Making some Canadian Attorney Generals
and
their political buddies show me their arses is child's play to
me
after all that I have experienced in the last few years. If you
doubt
me ask Michael J. Bryant and Yvon Marcoux why I am so pissed at
their
bosses and the DHS. Then check my work for yourself. If the tag
team
of John Ashcroft and Tom Ridge could not intimidate me, believe me
you
people don't have a prayer. Both of those dudes have quit their
jobs
but I am still standing and squaring off against their
replacements
now. If it were not for all the decent folks I know, the snotty
ones
like you would make me feel ashamed to be a Canadian. There is
no
shortage of lawyers. It is just that ethical ones that are rare
birds,
that's all. You must know how easily the Canadian people can
replace
you with other lawyers if it becomes widely known how willing you
are
to ignore crime if it means some fancy dude may be compelled to
suffer
for his own wrongs.
The justice system is supposed to be
self-policing. It should clean up
its own act rather than trying to maintain
a false mask of integrity
for lawyers that are obviously criminals. It is way
beyond my
understanding why you people would choose to support the likes of
Paul
Martin, Adrienne Clarkson, T. Alex Hickman and Billy Matthews if
you
are not all as crooked as hell as well. The deliberate ignorance
and
double-talk employed by the wealthy few to dodge simple truths
is
absolutely offensive to ordinary people blessed with the rare
attribute
called common sense. Not all folks are like sheep. Paul
Martin's latest
tricks make for a very fine example of truly how bad
things are. Even amidst
wholesale scandals breaking out hell, west and
crooked everywhere lawyers and
politicians just close ranks and stand
together as thick as the thieves they
are. I stress tested the ethics
of the ladies of the Bloc Quebecois and the
Gomery Inquiry immediately
after Martin's carefully orchestrated little
circus in Parliament on
May 19th was a matter of history. Lets just say I was
not surprised to
not hear one peep in response from anyone other than to get
a call
from an unidentified and very nervous but cocky Yankee lawyer
claiming
that Tony Blair was mad at me.
Pursuant to my phone calls,
emails and faxes please find enclosed as
promised exactly the same hard copy
of what I sent to the Canadian
Ambassadors Allan Rock and Franky Boy McKenna
and a couple of nasty
FBI agents on May 12th just before an interesting event
in front of
our home in Milton. I have also included a copy of four letters I
have
received in response since then that you may find interesting to
say
the least. I also sent you a copy of a letter sent to a lady
Ms.
Condolezza Rice whom our former Prime Minister Brian
Mulroney
considers to be the most powerful woman in the world. The CD of
the
copy of police surveillance tape # 139 is served upon all the
above
named Attorney Generals as officers of the court in order that it
may
be properly investigated. I will not bother you with the details
of
what I am sending to you byway of the certified US Mail because I
will
be serving identical material to many other Canadian Authorities
in
hand and tell them I gave this stuff to you first and enclose a copy
of
this letter. All that is important to me right now is that I secure
proof
that this mail was sent before I make my way back home to
the
Maritimes.
However I will say I am also enclosing a great deal
more material than
what Allan Rock had received in the UN. Some of it is in
fact the same
material the two maritime lawyers, Rob Moore and Franky Boy
McKenna in
particular received, while I was up home running for Parliament
last
year. Things have changed greatly in the past year so I have
also
included a few recent items to spice things up for you. I am tired
of
trying to convince people employed in law enforcement to uphold
the
law. So all I will say for now is deal will your own conscience and
be
careful how you respond to this letter. If you do not respond.
Rest
assured I will do my best to sue you some day. Ignorance is no
excuse
to the law or me.
Veritas Vincit
David R. Amos
The
enclosed letter from The Public Service Integrity Office, whose
boss recently
testified before the Gomery Inquiry and following quotes
prove why I must
speak out.
"Well what do you expect?" said Le Hir in reaction. "Anybody
who had
been involved in that kind of thing isn't going to admit readily,
or
willfully, to having participated." Asked why he's waited 10 years
to
come out with his allegations, Le Hir said he was "sworn to
secrecy."
"I'm breaking that oath, and the only way I could have been
relieved
by that oath was by a judge in a court saying, 'Mr. Lehir,
I
understand that you have made an oath of secrecy; and you're
hereby
relieved of that oath." "Mr. Wallace added that police and the
courts,
not internal rules, are best-equipped to deal with bureaucrats who
cross
the line and break the law. But Judge Gomery did not appear
satisfied.
"It takes a major scandal to get the police involved," he said.
"It is not
in the nature of the public service to call in the
police."
Everybody knows that in order to protect the rights and
interests of
my Clan and to sooth my own soul, I have proven many times over
that
all lawyers, law enforcement authorities, and politicians in
Canada
and the USA are not worthy of the public trust. I maintain that
their
first order of business is to protect the evil longstanding
system
they have created for their own benefit rather than the people
they
claim to serve. Call me a liar and put it in writing. I Double
Dog
Dare ya.
Baker got my material. So did everyone else. Only the
Attorney General
in Quecbec refused it. I bet our newest Governor General
knows why. It
is likely for the same reason she will not accept my emails. It
should
be obvious to anyone why I must sue the Crown.
That said I
must add some more "info" about Jimmy Prentice and his
minions for you "
Taxpayer" dudes to try to ignore and also say Hey to
couple of lawyers on
your board of Directors one of whom I have
crossed paths with
before
Karen
Selick @kselick ·29 Jul 2013
BLOG: You don't fight Nazis by becoming a Nazi
yourself says @kselick http://huff.to/1e6eanr via
@HuffPostCanada
Michael Taube @michaeltaube ·30 Jul 2013
I completely
agree with Karen's position. MT @kselick You don't fight
Nazis by becoming a
Nazi yourself http://huff.to/1e6eanr
Dr. Dawg @DrDawg
·30 Jul 2013
@michaeltaube @kselick So you agree with Karen's laughable
assertion
that the Nazis opposed private property?
Michael Taube
@michaeltaube ·30 Jul 2013
@DrDawg @kselick Sorry, I don't follow. She wrote
that the Nazis
opposed Jews owning private property. That's
correct.
Dr. Dawg @DrDawg ·30 Jul 2013
@michaeltaube I misunderstood,
then. I thought she was saying it was
"Nazi" to oppose private property
rights.
Michael Taube @michaeltaube ·30 Jul 2013
@DrDawg No worries!
She was just trying to show how the Nazis
arbitrarily opposed Jewish
ownership of private property.
David Raymond Amos @DavidRayAmos ·18 Aug
2013
@kselick @huffpostcanada @DavidRayAmos I just left you a
voicemail
because it appears that we have a common foe http://www.radicalpress.com/?p=3081
Anyway i must
say you VERY UNETHICAL "Taxpayer" people who are no
doubt still generously
supported by Bankster donations must at least
recall why I sued three US
Treasury Agent in 2002 or the documents I
sent to your Wannabe King Harper
and his Bankster buddies in 2006
while your political pal Derek Baby was
still in school N'esy Pas ?
Mr. David R. Amos
153 Alvin Avenue
Milton, MA U.S.A.
02186
Dear Mr. Amos
Thank you for your letter of November 19th,
2003, addressed to my
predecessor, the Honourble Wayne Easter, regarding your
safety.
I apologize for the delay in responding.
If you have any
concerns about your personal safety, I can only suggest
that you contact the
police of local jurisdiction. In addition, any evidence of
criminal activity
should be brought to their attention since the police are in
the best
position to evaluate the information and take action as
deemed
appropriate.
I trust that this information is
satisfactory.
Yours sincerely
A. Anne McLellan
September 11th,
2004
Dear Mr. Amos,
On behalf of Her Excellency the Right
Honourable Adrienne
Clarkson, I acknowledge receipt of two sets of documents
and
CD regarding corruption, one received from you directly, and the
other
forwarded to us by the Office of the Lieutenant Governor of
New
Brunswick.
I regret to inform you that the Governor General
cannot
intervene in matters that are the responsibility of elected
officials
and courts of Justice of Canada. You already contacted the
various
provincial authorities regarding your concerns, and these were
the
appropriate steps to take.
Yours sincerely.
Renee
Blanchet
Office of the Secretary to the Governor
General
Thank
you for contacting CIBC.
We received your message and will reply to you
within 48 hours or 2
business days.
CIBC Office of the
Ombudsman
******************************************************************************
Merci
d'avoir communiqué avec la Banque CIBC.
Nous avons bien reçu votre message.
Nous vous répondrons d'ici les 48
prochaines heures ou deux jours
ouvrable.
CIBC Bureau de l'ombudsman
----------
Original message ----------
From: Jonathan Denis QC <Jonathan.Denis@gov.ab.ca>
Date:
Thu, 2 Oct 2014 21:48:28 +0000
Subject: RE: Here is some VERY serious gossip
for the Left Wingers in
Calgary (Tory ineptitude??? Methinks the Herald is no
better EH Mr
Minister Denis?)
To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
I've
learned to ignore the noise and keep focused on the task at
hand...
---------- Original message ----------
From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Date:
Tue, 29 May 2018 11:03:47 -0400
Subject: Hey Serge we just talked I didn't
get an email from you so I
forwarded to you the one I was composing when you
called
To: serge.gauvin@snb.ca
Cc:
David Amos <david.raymond.amos@gmail.com>
SERGE
GAUVIN
Registrar General of Land Titles
SNB Bldg., 985 College Hill
Rd.
PO Box 1998
Fredericton, New Brunswick
E3B 5G4
Phone:
506-457-6933
Phone : (506) 457-6933
Fax : (506) 444-3033
Email : serge.gauvin@snb.ca
Du Pays de la Sagouine à la politique : Robert Gauvin veut faire le saut
Robert
Gauvin assure que son expérience au Pays de la Sagouine lui a ouvert
les yeux sur les besoins des régions du Nouveau-Brunswick. Photo:
Radio-Canada / Héloïse Bargain
Après
19 ans au Pays de la Sagouine, Robert Gauvin confirme qu'il se lance en
politique. Il devient candidat à l'investiture pour le Parti
progressiste-conservateur dans la circonscription de
Shippagan-Lamèque-Miscou, qui a déjà été représentée par son père,
l'ancien ministre progressiste-conservateur Jean Gauvin.
« Ça
fait neuf mois que j’y pense, que j’essaie de me convaincre que non,
mais un moment donné, quand il y a quelque chose qui te tire le coeur,
t’as pas le choix, faut que tu y ailles », lance Robert Gauvin, sur sa
décision de se lancer en politique.
Il assure que son expérience au Pays de la Sagouine,
comme acteur, auteur et au développement économique, lui a ouvert les
yeux sur les besoins des régions : « Ça m’a permis de faire le tour de
l’Acadie au moins 25 fois ».
Robert Gauvin ne peut dévoiler ses plans avant de devenir
candidat pour le Parti progressiste-conservateur, dit-il. Par contre,
il affirme vouloir mettre l’accent sur le pont de Shippagan, le tourisme
et le bilinguisme.
Il se présente à l’investiture dans la circonscription de
Shippagan-Lamèque-Miscou, une région qu’il a quittée pendant 17 ans
pour travailler au Pays de la Sagouine.
> ---------- Forwarded message
----------
> From: Brian Gallant <briangallant10@gmail.com>
>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2018 06:01:57 -0700
> Subject: Merci / Thank you Re:
Fwd: I just called Alan Roy again about
> my right to health care, my
missing 1965 Harley, the Yankee Wiretaps
> tapes in its saddlebag and
Federal Court and his assistant played dumb
> as usual
> To: motomaniac333@gmail.com
>
>
(Français à suivre)
>
> If your email is pertaining to the
Government of New Brunswick, please
> email me at brian.gallant@gnb.ca
>
>
If your matter is urgent, please email Greg Byrne at greg.byrne@gnb.ca
>
>
Thank you.
>
> Si votre courriel s'addresse au Gouvernement du
Nouveau-Brunswick,
> svp m'envoyez un courriel à brian.gallant@gnb.ca
>
>
Pour les urgences, veuillez contacter Greg Byrne à greg.byrne@gnb.ca
>
>
Merci.
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message
----------
> From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2018 10:42:09 -0400
> Subject: Attn Marc Richard and
John McNair I just called AGAIN Say hey
> to my Brother in Law W. S. Reid
CHEDORE and his brother of the law
> David Lutz QC for me will ya?
>
To: MRichard@lawsociety-barreau.nb.ca,
John.McNair@snb.ca,
>
"serge.rousselle" <serge.rousselle@gnb.ca>,
Erin.Hardy@snb.ca,
>
David.Eidt@gnb.ca
>
Cc: David Amos <david.raymond.amos@gmail.com>
>
>
---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Marc Richard <MRichard@lawsociety-barreau.nb.ca>
>
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2017 22:51:09 +0000
> Subject: Automatic reply: RE
Irving's ridiculous constitutional
> challenge and Federal Court File no
T-1557-15 I wonder if George
> Cooper and Hélène Beaulieure even know how
many times the Irvings and
> partners of their VERY snobby law firm have
offended me over t...
> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>
>
I will be out of the office until October 30, 2017. Je serai absent
> du
bureau jusqu'au 30 octobre 2017.
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded
message ----------
> From: "Eidt, David (OAG/CPG)" <David.Eidt@gnb.ca>
>
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2017 00:33:21 +0000
> Subject: Automatic reply: Yo Mr
Lutz howcome your buddy the clerk
> would not file this motion and
properly witnessed affidavit and why
> did she take all four
copies?
> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>
>
I will be out of the office until Monday, March 13, 2017. I will have
>
little to no access to email. Please dial 453-2222 for
assistance.
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message
----------
> From: Marc Richard <MRichard@lawsociety-barreau.nb.ca>
>
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2016 13:16:46 +0000
> Subject: Automatic reply: RE: The
New Brunswick Real Estate
> Association and their deliberate ignorance for
the bankster's benefit
> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>
>
I will be out of the office until August 15, 2016. Je serai absent du
>
bureau jusqu'au 15 août 2016.
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded
message ----------
> From: "McNair, John (SNB)" <John.McNair@snb.ca>
>
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2016 16:04:29 +0000
> Subject: Automatic reply: RE: The
New Brunswick Real Estate
> Association and their deliberate ignorance for
the bankster's benefit
> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>
>
I will be out of the office August 1 - August 12. I will reply to your
>
email when I return. If you require immediate assistance, please
> contact
Chantal Leger at 663-2510. Thank you.
>
> Je serai absent du bureau
les 1 aout - 12 aout. Je répondrai à votre
> courriel à mon retour. Si
vous nécessitez de l'assistance
> immédiatement, veuillez contacter
Chantal Leger au 663-2510. Merci.
>
>
>
> ----------
Forwarded message ----------
> From: "Hardy, Erin (SNB)" <Erin.Hardy@snb.ca>
>
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2016 16:04:28 +0000
> Subject: Automatic reply: RE: The
New Brunswick Real Estate
> Association and their deliberate ignorance for
the bankster's benefit
> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>
>
Le francais suit:
>
> Hello,
>
> I am currently out of
the office. I will gladly reply to your message
> upon my return on August
15, 2016. Should you require immediate
> assitance please contact Celeste
Savoie at (506) 471-5290 or by email:
> Celeste.Savoie@snb.ca.
>
>
Have a nice day!
>
> Bonjour,
>
> Je suis presentement
hors du bureau. Il me fera plaisir de repondre a
> votre message a mon
retour August 15, 2016. Si vous avez besoin d'une
> assitance immediate,
veuillez communiquer avec Celeste Savoie au (506)
> 471-5290 ou par
courriel a: Celeste.Savoie@snb.ca.
>
>
Bonne journee!
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message
----------
> From: Marc Richard <MRichard@lawsociety-barreau.nb.ca>
>
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2014 17:43:27 +0000
> Subject: Automatic reply: Oh My My
we just talked briefly Correct Ms
> Beaulieu? It appears to me that the
latest President of the NB Law
> Society thinks non lawyers are not worth
talking to
> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>
>
I will be out of the office until July 21, 2014. Je serai absent du
>
bureau jusqu'au 21 juillet 2014.
>
>
>
>> ----------
Forwarded message ----------
>> From: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com
>>
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2017 09:32:09 -0400
>> Subject: Attn Integrity
Commissioner Alexandre Deschênes, Q.C.,
>> To: coi@gnb.ca
>> Cc: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com
>>
>>
Good Day Sir
>>
>> After I heard you speak on CBC I called
your office again and managed
>> to speak to one of your staff for the
first time
>>
>> Please find attached the documents I promised
to send to the lady who
>> answered the phone this morning. Please
notice that not after the Sgt
>> at Arms took the documents destined to
your office his pal Tanker
>> Malley barred me in writing with an
"English" only document.
>>
>> These are the hearings and the
dockets in Federal Court that I
>> suggested that you study
closely.
>>
>> This is the docket in Federal
Court
>>
>> http://cas-cdc-www02.cas-satj.gc.ca/IndexingQueries/infp_RE_info_e.php?court_no=T-1557-15&select_court=T
>>
>>
These are digital recordings of the last three hearings
>>
>>
Dec 14th https://archive.org/details/BahHumbug
>>
>>
January 11th, 2016 https://archive.org/details/Jan11th2015
>>
>>
April 3rd, 2017
>>
>> https://archive.org/details/April32017JusticeLeblancHearing
>>
>>
>>
This is the docket in the Federal Court of Appeal
>>
>> http://cas-cdc-www02.cas-satj.gc.ca/IndexingQueries/infp_RE_info_e.php?court_no=A-48-16&select_court=All
>>
>>
>>
The only hearing thus far
>>
>> May 24th,
2017
>>
>> https://archive.org/details/May24thHoedown
>>
>>
>>
This Judge understnds the meaning of the word Integrity
>>
>>
Date: 20151223
>>
>> Docket: T-1557-15
>>
>>
Fredericton, New Brunswick, December 23, 2015
>>
>> PRESENT:
The Honourable Mr. Justice Bell
>>
>>
BETWEEN:
>>
>> DAVID RAYMOND AMOS
>>
>>
Plaintiff
>>
>> and
>>
>> HER MAJESTY THE
QUEEN
>>
>> Defendant
>>
>>
ORDER
>>
>> (Delivered orally from the Bench in Fredericton,
New Brunswick, on
>> December 14, 2015)
>>
>> The
Plaintiff seeks an appeal de novo, by way of motion pursuant to
>> the
Federal Courts Rules (SOR/98-106), from an Order made on November
>>
12, 2015, in which Prothonotary Morneau struck the Statement of
Claim
>> in its entirety.
>>
>> At the outset of the
hearing, the Plaintiff brought to my attention a
>> letter dated
September 10, 2004, which he sent to me, in my then
>> capacity as Past
President of the New Brunswick Branch of the Canadian
>> Bar
Association, and the then President of the Branch, Kathleen Quigg,
>>
(now a Justice of the New Brunswick Court of Appeal). In that
letter
>> he stated:
>>
>> As for your past
President, Mr. Bell, may I suggest that you check the
>> work of Frank
McKenna before I sue your entire law firm including you.
>> You are
your brother’s keeper.
>>
>> Frank McKenna is the former
Premier of New Brunswick and a former
>> colleague of mine at the law
firm of McInnes Cooper. In addition to
>> expressing an intention to
sue me, the Plaintiff refers to a number of
>> people in his Motion
Record who he appears to contend may be witnesses
>> or potential
parties to be added. Those individuals who are known to
>> me
personally, include, but are not limited to the former Prime
>>
Minister of Canada, The Right Honourable Stephen Harper; former
>>
Attorney General of Canada and now a Justice of the Manitoba Court
of
>> Queen’s Bench, Vic Toews; former member of Parliament Rob
Moore;
>> former Director of Policing Services, the late Grant Garneau;
former
>> Chief of the Fredericton Police Force, Barry McKnight; former
Staff
>> Sergeant Danny Copp; my former colleagues on the New Brunswick
Court
>> of Appeal, Justices Bradley V. Green and Kathleen Quigg, and,
retired
>> Assistant Commissioner Wayne Lang of the Royal Canadian
Mounted
>> Police.
>>
>> In the circumstances, given
the threat in 2004 to sue me in my
>> personal capacity and my past and
present relationship with many
>> potential witnesses and/or potential
parties to the litigation, I am
>> of the view there would be a
reasonable apprehension of bias should I
>> hear this motion. See
Justice de Grandpré’s dissenting judgment in
>> Committee for Justice
and Liberty et al v National Energy Board et al,
>> [1978] 1 SCR 369 at
p 394 for the applicable test regarding
>> allegations of bias. In the
circumstances, although neither party has
>> requested I recuse myself,
I consider it appropriate that I do so.
>>
>>
>> AS A
RESULT OF MY RECUSAL, THIS COURT ORDERS that the Administrator of
>>
the Court schedule another date for the hearing of the motion.
There
>> is no order as to costs.
>>
>> “B. Richard
Bell”
>> Judge
>>
>>
>> Below after the CBC
article about your concerns (I made one comment
>> already) you will
find the text of just two of many emails I had sent
>> to your office
over the years since I first visited it in 2006.
>>
>> I
noticed that on July 30, 2009, he was appointed to the the Court
>>
Martial Appeal Court of Canada Perhaps you should scroll to the
>>
bottom of this email ASAP and read the entire Paragraph 83 of my
>>
lawsuit now before the Federal Court of Canada?
>>
>> "FYI
This is the text of the lawsuit that should interest Trudeau the
>>
most
>>
>>
>> ---------- Original message
----------
>> From: justin.trudeau.a1@parl.gc.ca
>>
Date: Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 8:18 PM
>> Subject: Réponse automatique : RE
My complaint against the CROWN in
>> Federal Court Attn David Hansen
and Peter MacKay If you planning to
>> submit a motion for a
publication ban on my complaint trust that you
>> dudes are way past
too late
>> To: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com
>>
>>
Veuillez noter que j'ai changé de courriel. Vous pouvez me rejoindre
à
>> lalanthier@hotmail.com
>>
>>
Pour rejoindre le bureau de M. Trudeau veuillez envoyer un courriel
à
>> tommy.desfosses@parl.gc.ca
>>
>>
Please note that I changed email address, you can reach me at
>> lalanthier@hotmail.com
>>
>>
To reach the office of Mr. Trudeau please send an email to
>> tommy.desfosses@parl.gc.ca
>>
>>
Thank you,
>>
>> Merci ,
>>
>>
>>
http://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.ca/2015/09/v-behaviorurldefaultvmlo.html
>>
>>
>>
83. The Plaintiff states that now that Canada is involved in more
war
>> in Iraq again it did not serve Canadian interests and reputation
to
>> allow Barry Winters to publish the following words three times
over
>> five years after he began his bragging:
>>
>>
January 13, 2015
>> This Is Just AS Relevant Now As When I wrote It
During The Debate
>>
>> December 8, 2014
>> Why
Canada Stood Tall!
>>
>> Friday, October 3, 2014
>>
Little David Amos’ “True History Of War” Canadian Airstrikes And
>>
Stupid Justin Trudeau
>>
>> Canada’s and Canadians free ride
is over. Canada can no longer hide
>> behind Amerka’s and NATO’s
skirts.
>>
>> When I was still in Canadian Forces then Prime
Minister Jean Chretien
>> actually committed the Canadian Army to
deploy in the second campaign
>> in Iraq, the Coalition of the Willing.
This was against or contrary to
>> the wisdom or advice of those of us
Canadian officers that were
>> involved in the initial planning phases
of that operation. There were
>> significant concern in our planning
cell, and NDHQ about of the dearth
>> of concern for operational
guidance, direction, and forces for
>> operations after the initial
occupation of Iraq. At the “last minute”
>> Prime Minister Chretien and
the Liberal government changed its mind.
>> The Canadian government
told our amerkan cousins that we would not
>> deploy combat troops for
the Iraq campaign, but would deploy a
>> Canadian Battle Group to
Afghanistan, enabling our amerkan cousins to
>> redeploy troops from
there to Iraq. The PMO’s thinking that it was
>> less costly to deploy
Canadian Forces to Afghanistan than Iraq. But
>> alas no one seems to
remind the Liberals of Prime Minister Chretien’s
>> then grossly
incorrect assumption. Notwithstanding Jean Chretien’s
>> incompetence
and stupidity, the Canadian Army was heroic,
>> professional, punched
well above it’s weight, and the PPCLI Battle
>> Group, is credited with
“saving Afghanistan” during the Panjway
>> campaign of
2006.
>>
>> What Justin Trudeau and the Liberals don’t tell
you now, is that then
>> Liberal Prime Minister Jean Chretien
committed, and deployed the
>> Canadian army to Canada’s longest “war”
without the advice, consent,
>> support, or vote of the Canadian
Parliament.
>>
>> What David Amos and the rest of the
ignorant, uneducated, and babbling
>> chattering classes are too addled
to understand is the deployment of
>> less than 75 special operations
troops, and what is known by planners
>> as a “six pac cell” of fighter
aircraft is NOT the same as a
>> deployment of a Battle Group, nor a
“war” make.
>>
>> The Canadian Government or The Crown unlike
our amerkan cousins have
>> the “constitutional authority” to commit
the Canadian nation to war.
>> That has been recently clearly
articulated to the Canadian public by
>> constitutional scholar
Phillippe Legasse. What Parliament can do is
>> remove “confidence” in
The Crown’s Government in a “vote of
>> non-confidence.” That could not
happen to the Chretien Government
>> regarding deployment to
Afghanistan, and it won’t happen in this
>> instance with the
conservative majority in The Commons regarding a
>> limited Canadian
deployment to the Middle East.
>>
>> President George Bush was
quite correct after 911 and the terror
>> attacks in New York; that the
Taliban “occupied” and “failed state”
>> Afghanistan was the source of
logistical support, command and control,
>> and training for the Al
Quaeda war of terror against the world. The
>> initial defeat, and
removal from control of Afghanistan was vital and
>>
>> P.S.
Whereas this CBC article is about your opinion of the actions of
>> the
latest Minister Of Health trust that Mr Boudreau and the CBC have
>>
had my files for many years and the last thing they are is ethical.
>>
Ask his friends Mr Murphy and the RCMP if you don't believe
me.
>>
>> Subject:
>> Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 12:02:35
-0400
>> From: "Murphy, Michael B. \(DH/MS\)" MichaelB.Murphy@gnb.ca
>>
To: motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com
>>
>>
January 30, 2007
>>
>> WITHOUT
PREJUDICE
>>
>> Mr. David Amos
>>
>> Dear
Mr. Amos:
>>
>> This will acknowledge receipt of a copy of
your e-mail of December 29,
>> 2006 to Corporal Warren McBeath of the
RCMP.
>>
>> Because of the nature of the allegations made in
your message, I have
>> taken the measure of forwarding a copy to
Assistant Commissioner Steve
>> Graham of the RCMP “J” Division in
Fredericton.
>>
>> Sincerely,
>>
>>
Honourable Michael B. Murphy
>> Minister of
Health
>>
>> CM/cb
>>
>>
>> Warren
McBeath warren.mcbeath@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
wrote:
>>
>> Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2006 17:34:53 -0500
>>
From: "Warren McBeath" warren.mcbeath@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
>>
To: kilgoursite@ca.inter.net,
MichaelB.Murphy@gnb.ca,
>>
nada.sarkis@gnb.ca,
wally.stiles@gnb.ca,
dwatch@web.net,
>>
motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com
>>
CC: ottawa@chuckstrahl.com,
riding@chuckstrahl.com,John.Foran@gnb.ca,
>>
Oda.B@parl.gc.ca,"Bev
BUSSON" bev.busson@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
>>
"Paul Dube" PAUL.DUBE@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
>>
Subject: Re: Remember me Kilgour? Landslide Annie McLellan has
>>
forgotten me but the crooks within the RCMP have not
>>
>>
Dear Mr. Amos,
>>
>> Thank you for your follow up e-mail to me
today. I was on days off
>> over the holidays and returned to work this
evening. Rest assured I
>> was not ignoring or procrastinating to
respond to your concerns.
>>
>> As your attachment sent today
refers from Premier Graham, our position
>> is clear on your dead calf
issue: Our forensic labs do not process
>> testing on animals in cases
such as yours, they are referred to the
>> Atlantic Veterinary College
in Charlottetown who can provide these
>> services. If you do not
choose to utilize their expertise in this
>> instance, then that is
your decision and nothing more can be done.
>>
>> As for your
other concerns regarding the US Government, false
>> imprisonment and
Federal Court Dates in the US, etc... it is clear
>> that Federal
authorities are aware of your concerns both in Canada
>> the US. These
issues do not fall into the purvue of Detachment
>> and policing in
Petitcodiac, NB.
>>
>> It was indeed an interesting and
informative conversation we had on
>> December 23rd, and I wish you
well in all of your future endeavors.
>>
>>
Sincerely,
>>
>> Warren McBeath, Cpl.
>> GRC
Caledonia RCMP
>> Traffic Services NCO
>> Ph: (506)
387-2222
>> Fax: (506) 387-4622
>> E-mail warren.mcbeath@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
>>
>>
>>
>>
Alexandre Deschênes, Q.C.,
>> Office of the Integrity
Commissioner
>> Edgecombe House, 736 King Street
>>
Fredericton, N.B. CANADA E3B 5H1
>> tel.: 506-457-7890
>> fax:
506-444-5224
>> e-mail:coi@gnb.ca
>>
>
>
---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Justice Website <JUSTWEB@novascotia.ca>
>
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2017 14:21:11 +0000
> Subject: Emails to Department of
Justice and Province of Nova Scotia
> To: "motomaniac333@gmail.com"
<motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>
>
Mr. Amos,
> We acknowledge receipt of your recent emails to the Deputy
Minister of
> Justice and lawyers within the Legal Services Division of
the
> Department of Justice respecting a possible claim against the
Province
> of Nova Scotia. Service of any documents respecting a legal
claim
> against the Province of Nova Scotia may be served on the
Attorney
> General at 1690 Hollis Street, Halifax, NS. Please note that
we will
> not be responding to further emails on this
matter.
>
> Department of Justice
>
> On 8/3/17, David
Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
wrote:
>
>> If want something very serious to download and laugh
at as well Please
>> Enjoy and share real wiretap tapes of the
mob
>>
>> http://thedavidamosrant.blogspot.ca/2013/10/re-glen-greenwald-and-braz
>>
ilian.html
>>
>>> http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2013/06/09/nsa-leak-guardian.html
>>>
>>>
As the CBC etc yap about Yankee wiretaps and whistleblowers I
must
>>> ask them the obvious question AIN'T THEY FORGETTING
SOMETHING????
>>>
>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vugUalUO8YY
>>>
>>>
What the hell does the media think my Yankee lawyer served upon
the
>>> USDOJ right after I ran for and seat in the 39th Parliament
baseball
>>> cards?
>>>
>>> http://archive.org/details/ITriedToExplainItToAllMaritimersInEarly200
>>>
6
>>>
>>> http://davidamos.blogspot.ca/2006/05/wiretap-tapes-impeach-bush.html
>>>
>>>
http://www.archive.org/details/PoliceSurveilanceWiretapTape139
>>>
>>>
http://archive.org/details/Part1WiretapTape143
>>>
>>>
FEDERAL EXPRES February 7, 2006
>>> Senator Arlen
Specter
>>> United States Senate
>>> Committee on the
Judiciary
>>> 224 Dirksen Senate Office Building
>>>
Washington, DC 20510
>>>
>>> Dear Mr.
Specter:
>>>
>>> I have been asked to forward the
enclosed tapes to you from a man
>>> named, David Amos, a Canadian
citizen, in connection with the matters
>>> raised in the attached
letter.
>>>
>>> Mr. Amos has represented to me that
these are illegal FBI wire tap
>>>
tapes.
>>>
>>> I believe Mr. Amos has been in contact
with you about this previously.
>>>
>>> Very truly
yours,
>>> Barry A. Bachrach
>>> Direct telephone: (508)
926-3403
>>> Direct facsimile: (508) 929-3003
>>> Email:
bbachrach@bowditch.com
>>>
>>
>
>
http://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.ca/2017/11/federal-court-of-appeal-finally-makes.html
>
>
>
Sunday, 19 November 2017
> Federal Court of Appeal Finally Makes The BIG
Decision And Publishes
> It Now The Crooks Cannot Take Back Ticket To Try
Put My Matter Before
> The Supreme Court
>
> https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fca-caf/decisions/en/item/236679/index.do
>
>
>
Federal Court of Appeal Decisions
>
> Amos v. Canada
> Court
(s) Database
>
> Federal Court of Appeal Decisions
>
Date
>
> 2017-10-30
> Neutral citation
>
> 2017
FCA 213
> File numbers
>
> A-48-16
> Date:
20171030
>
> Docket: A-48-16
> Citation: 2017 FCA 213
>
CORAM:
>
> WEBB J.A.
> NEAR J.A.
> GLEASON
J.A.
>
>
> BETWEEN:
> DAVID RAYMOND AMOS
>
Respondent on the cross-appeal
> (and formally Appellant)
>
and
> HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
> Appellant on the cross-appeal
>
(and formerly Respondent)
> Heard at Fredericton, New Brunswick, on May
24, 2017.
> Judgment delivered at Ottawa, Ontario, on October 30,
2017.
> REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY:
>
> THE
COURT
>
>
>
> Date: 20171030
>
> Docket:
A-48-16
> Citation: 2017 FCA 213
> CORAM:
>
> WEBB
J.A.
> NEAR J.A.
> GLEASON J.A.
>
>
>
BETWEEN:
> DAVID RAYMOND AMOS
> Respondent on the
cross-appeal
> (and formally Appellant)
> and
> HER MAJESTY
THE QUEEN
> Appellant on the cross-appeal
> (and formerly
Respondent)
> REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY THE COURT
>
> I.
Introduction
>
> [1] On September 16,
2015, David Raymond Amos (Mr. Amos)
> filed a 53-page Statement of Claim
(the Claim) in Federal Court
> against Her Majesty the Queen (the Crown).
Mr. Amos claims $11 million
> in damages and a public apology from the
Prime Minister and Provincial
> Premiers for being illegally barred from
accessing parliamentary
> properties and seeks a declaration from the
Minister of Public Safety
> that the Canadian Government will no longer
allow the Royal Canadian
> Mounted Police (RCMP) and Canadian Forces to
harass him and his clan
> (Claim at para. 96).
>
> [2]
On November 12, 2015 (Docket T-1557-15), by way of a
> motion
brought by the Crown, a prothonotary of the Federal Court (the
>
Prothonotary) struck the Claim in its entirety, without leave to
> amend,
on the basis that it was plain and obvious that the Claim
> disclosed no
reasonable claim, the Claim was fundamentally vexatious,
> and the Claim
could not be salvaged by way of further amendment (the
> Prothontary’s
Order).
>
>
> [3] On January 25, 2016 (2016 FC
93), by way of Mr.
> Amos’ appeal from the Prothonotary’s Order, a judge
of the Federal
> Court (the Judge), reviewing the matter de novo, struck
all of Mr.
> Amos’ claims for relief with the exception of the claim for
damages
> for being barred by the RCMP from the New Brunswick legislature
in
> 2004 (the Federal Court Judgment).
>
>
> [4]
Mr. Amos appealed and the Crown cross-appealed the
> Federal Court
Judgment. Further to the issuance of a Notice of Status
> Review, Mr.
Amos’ appeal was dismissed for delay on December 19, 2016.
> As such, the
only matter before this Court is the Crown’s
>
cross-appeal.
>
>
> II. Preliminary
Matter
>
> [5] Mr. Amos, in his memorandum of fact and
law in
> relation to the cross-appeal that was filed with this Court on
March
> 6, 2017, indicated that several judges of this Court, including
two of
> the judges of this panel, had a conflict of interest in this
appeal.
> This was the first time that he identified the judges whom he
believed
> had a conflict of interest in a document that was filed with
this
> Court. In his notice of appeal he had alluded to a conflict
with
> several judges but did not name those judges.
>
> [6]
Mr. Amos was of the view that he did not have to
> identify
the judges in any document filed with this Court because he
> had
identified the judges in various documents that had been filed
> with the
Federal Court. In his view the Federal Court and the Federal
> Court of
Appeal are the same court and therefore any document filed in
> the
Federal Court would be filed in this Court. This view is based on
>
subsections 5(4) and 5.1(4) of the Federal Courts Act, R.S.C., 1985,
> c.
F-7:
>
>
> 5(4) Every judge of the Federal Court is, by virtue
of his or her
> office, a judge of the Federal Court of Appeal and has all
the
> jurisdiction, power and authority of a judge of the Federal Court
of
> Appeal.
> […]
>
> 5(4) Les juges de la Cour
fédérale sont d’office juges de la Cour
> d’appel fédérale et ont la même
compétence et les mêmes pouvoirs que
> les juges de la Cour d’appel
fédérale.
> […]
> 5.1(4) Every judge of the Federal Court of Appeal
is, by virtue of
> that office, a judge of the Federal Court and has all
the
> jurisdiction, power and authority of a judge of the Federal
Court.
>
> 5.1(4) Les juges de la Cour d’appel fédérale sont
d’office juges de la
> Cour fédérale et ont la même compétence et les
mêmes pouvoirs que les
> juges de la Cour
fédérale.
>
>
> [7] However, these subsections
only provide that the
> judges of the Federal Court are also judges of
this Court (and vice
> versa). It does not mean that there is only one
court. If the Federal
> Court and this Court were one Court, there would
be no need for this
> section.
> [8] Sections 3 and 4
of the Federal Courts Act provide that:
> 3 The division of the Federal
Court of Canada called the Federal Court
> — Appeal Division is continued
under the name “Federal Court of
> Appeal” in English and “Cour d’appel
fédérale” in French. It is
> continued as an additional court of law,
equity and admiralty in and
> for Canada, for the better administration of
the laws of Canada and as
> a superior court of record having civil and
criminal jurisdiction.
>
> 3 La Section d’appel, aussi appelée la
Cour d’appel ou la Cour d’appel
> fédérale, est maintenue et dénommée «
Cour d’appel fédérale » en
> français et « Federal Court of Appeal » en
anglais. Elle est maintenue
> à titre de tribunal additionnel de droit,
d’equity et d’amirauté du
> Canada, propre à améliorer l’application du
droit canadien, et
> continue d’être une cour supérieure d’archives ayant
compétence en
> matière civile et pénale.
> 4 The division of the
Federal Court of Canada called the Federal Court
> — Trial Division is
continued under the name “Federal Court” in
> English and “Cour fédérale”
in French. It is continued as an
> additional court of law, equity and
admiralty in and for Canada, for
> the better administration of the laws
of Canada and as a superior
> court of record having civil and criminal
jurisdiction.
>
> 4 La section de la Cour fédérale du Canada,
appelée la Section de
> première instance de la Cour fédérale, est
maintenue et dénommée «
> Cour fédérale » en français et « Federal Court »
en anglais. Elle est
> maintenue à titre de tribunal additionnel de droit,
d’equity et
> d’amirauté du Canada, propre à améliorer l’application du
droit
> canadien, et continue d’être une cour supérieure d’archives
ayant
> compétence en matière civile et pénale.
>
>
>
[9] Sections 3 and 4 of the Federal Courts Act create
> two
separate courts – this Court (section 3) and the Federal Court
> (section
4). If, as Mr. Amos suggests, documents filed in the Federal
> Court were
automatically also filed in this Court, then there would no
> need for the
parties to prepare and file appeal books as required by
> Rules 343 to 345
of the Federal Courts Rules, SOR/98-106 in relation
> to any appeal from a
decision of the Federal Court. The requirement to
> file an appeal book
with this Court in relation to an appeal from a
> decision of the Federal
Court makes it clear that the only documents
> that will be before this
Court are the documents that are part of that
> appeal
book.
>
>
> [10] Therefore, the memorandum of fact
and law filed on
> March 6, 2017 is the first document, filed with this
Court, in which
> Mr. Amos identified the particular judges that he
submits have a
> conflict in any matter related to
him.
>
>
> [11] On April 3, 2017, Mr. Amos attempted
to bring a motion
> before the Federal Court seeking an order “affirming
or denying the
> conflict of interest he has” with a number of judges of
the Federal
> Court. A judge of the Federal Court issued a direction
noting that if
> Mr. Amos was seeking this order in relation to judges of
the Federal
> Court of Appeal, it was beyond the jurisdiction of the
Federal Court.
> Mr. Amos raised the Federal Court motion at the hearing
of this
> cross-appeal. The Federal Court motion is not a motion before
this
> Court and, as such, the submissions filed before the Federal
Court
> will not be entertained. As well, since this was a motion
brought
> before the Federal Court (and not this Court), any documents
filed in
> relation to that motion are not part of the record of this
Court.
>
>
> [12] During the hearing of the appeal
Mr. Amos alleged that
> the third member of this panel also had a conflict
of interest and
> submitted some documents that, in his view, supported
his claim of a
> conflict. Mr. Amos, following the hearing of his appeal,
was also
> afforded the opportunity to provide a brief summary of the
conflict
> that he was alleging and to file additional documents that, in
his
> view, supported his allegations. Mr. Amos submitted several pages
of
> documents in relation to the alleged conflicts. He organized
the
> documents by submitting a copy of the biography of the
particular
> judge and then, immediately following that biography, by
including
> copies of the documents that, in his view, supported his claim
that
> such judge had a conflict.
>
>
> [13]
The nature of the alleged conflict of Justice Webb is
> that before he
was appointed as a Judge of the Tax Court of Canada in
> 2006, he was a
partner with the law firm Patterson Law, and before
> that with Patterson
Palmer in Nova Scotia. Mr. Amos submitted that he
> had a number of
disputes with Patterson Palmer and Patterson Law and
> therefore Justice
Webb has a conflict simply because he was a partner
> of these firms. Mr.
Amos is not alleging that Justice Webb was
> personally involved in or had
any knowledge of any matter in which Mr.
> Amos was involved with Justice
Webb’s former law firm – only that he
> was a member of such
firm.
>
>
> [14] During his oral submissions at the
hearing of his
> appeal Mr. Amos, in relation to the alleged conflict for
Justice Webb,
> focused on dealings between himself and a particular
lawyer at
> Patterson Law. However, none of the documents submitted by Mr.
Amos at
> the hearing or subsequently related to any dealings with
this
> particular lawyer nor is it clear when Mr. Amos was dealing with
this
> lawyer. In particular, it is far from clear whether such dealings
were
> after the time that Justice Webb was appointed as a Judge of the
Tax
> Court of Canada over 10 years ago.
>
>
> [15]
The documents that he submitted in relation to the
> alleged conflict
for Justice Webb largely relate to dealings between
> Byron Prior and the
St. John’s Newfoundland and Labrador office of
> Patterson Palmer, which
is not in the same province where Justice Webb
> practiced law. The only
document that indicates any dealing between
> Mr. Amos and Patterson
Palmer is a copy of an affidavit of Stephen May
> who was a partner in the
St. John’s NL office of Patterson Palmer. The
> affidavit is dated January
24, 2005 and refers to a number of e-mails
> that were sent by Mr. Amos to
Stephen May. Mr. Amos also included a
> letter that is addressed to four
individuals, one of whom is John
> Crosbie who was counsel to the St.
John’s NL office of Patterson
> Palmer. The letter is dated September 2,
2004 and is addressed to
> “John Crosbie, c/o Greg G. Byrne, Suite 502,
570 Queen Street,
> Fredericton, NB E3B 5E3”. In this letter Mr. Amos
alludes to a
> possible lawsuit against Patterson Palmer.
> [16]
Mr. Amos’ position is that simply because Justice Webb
> was a
lawyer with Patterson Palmer, he now has a conflict. In Wewaykum
> Indian
Band v. Her Majesty the Queen, 2003 SCC 45, [2003] 2 S.C.R.
> 259, the
Supreme Court of Canada noted that disqualification of a
> judge is to be
determined based on whether there is a reasonable
> apprehension of
bias:
> 60 In Canadian law, one standard has now emerged as
the
> criterion for disqualification. The criterion, as expressed by
de
> Grandpré J. in Committee for Justice and Liberty v. National
Energy
> Board, …[[1978] 1 S.C.R. 369, 68 D.L.R. (3d) 716], at p. 394, is
the
> reasonable apprehension of bias:
> … the apprehension of bias
must be a reasonable one, held by
> reasonable and right minded persons,
applying themselves to the
> question and obtaining thereon the required
information. In the words
> of the Court of Appeal, that test is "what
would an informed person,
> viewing the matter realistically and
practically -- and having thought
> the matter through -- conclude. Would
he think that it is more likely
> than not that [the decision-maker],
whether consciously or
> unconsciously, would not decide
fairly."
>
> [17] The issue to be determined is whether an
informed
> person, viewing the matter realistically and practically, and
having
> thought the matter through, would conclude that Mr. Amos’
allegations
> give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias. As this
Court has
> previously remarked, “there is a strong presumption that
judges will
> administer justice impartially” and this presumption will
not be
> rebutted in the absence of “convincing evidence” of bias (Collins
v.
> Canada, 2011 FCA 140 at para. 7, [2011] 4 C.T.C. 157 [Collins].
See
> also R. v. S. (R.D.), [1997] 3 S.C.R. 484 at para. 32, 151
D.L.R.
> (4th) 193).
>
> [18] The Ontario Court of
Appeal in Rando Drugs Ltd. v.
> Scott, 2007 ONCA 553, 86 O.R. (3d) 653
(leave to appeal to the Supreme
> Court of Canada refused, 32285 (August
1, 2007)), addressed the
> particular issue of whether a judge is
disqualified from hearing a
> case simply because he had been a member of
a law firm that was
> involved in the litigation that was now before that
judge. The Ontario
> Court of Appeal determined that the judge was not
disqualified if the
> judge had no involvement with the person or the
matter when he was a
> lawyer. The Ontario Court of Appeal also explained
that the rules for
> determining whether a judge is disqualified are
different from the
> rules to determine whether a lawyer has a
conflict:
> 27 Thus, disqualification is not the natural corollary
to a
> finding that a trial judge has had some involvement in a case
over
> which he or she is now presiding. Where the judge had no
involvement,
> as here, it cannot be said that the judge is
disqualified.
>
>
> 28 The point can rightly be made
that had Mr. Patterson been
> asked to represent the appellant as counsel
before his appointment to
> the bench, the conflict rules would likely
have prevented him from
> taking the case because his firm had formerly
represented one of the
> defendants in the case. Thus, it is argued how is
it that as a trial
> judge Patterson J. can hear the case? This issue was
considered by the
> Court of Appeal (Civil Division) in Locabail (U.K.)
Ltd. v. Bayfield
> Properties Ltd., [2000] Q.B. 451. The court held, at
para. 58, that
> there is no inflexible rule governing the
disqualification of a judge
> and that, "[e]verything depends on the
circumstances."
>
>
> 29 It seems to me that what
appears at first sight to be an
> inconsistency in application of rules
can be explained by the
> different contexts and in particular, the strong
presumption of
> judicial impartiality that applies in the context of
disqualification
> of a judge. There is no such presumption in cases of
allegations of
> conflict of interest against a lawyer because of a firm's
previous
> involvement in the case. To the contrary, as explained by
Sopinka J.
> in MacDonald Estate v. Martin (1990), 77 D.L.R. (4th) 249
(S.C.C.),
> for sound policy reasons there is a presumption of a
disqualifying
> interest that can rarely be overcome. In particular, a
conclusory
> statement from the lawyer that he or she had no
confidential
> information about the case will never be sufficient. The
case is the
> opposite where the allegation of bias is made against a
trial judge.
> His or her statement that he or she knew nothing about the
case and
> had no involvement in it will ordinarily be accepted at face
value
> unless there is good reason to doubt it: see Locabail, at para.
19.
>
>
> 30 That brings me then to consider the
particular circumstances
> of this case and whether there are serious
grounds to find a
> disqualifying conflict of interest in this case. In my
view, there are
> two significant factors that justify the trial judge's
decision not to
> recuse himself. The first is his statement, which all
parties accept,
> that he knew nothing of the case when it was in his
former firm and
> that he had nothing to do with it. The second is the
long passage of
> time. As was said in Wewaykum, at para. 85:
>
To us, one significant factor stands out, and must inform
> the
perspective of the reasonable person assessing the impact of this
>
involvement on Binnie J.'s impartiality in the appeals. That factor is
>
the passage of time. Most arguments for disqualification rest on
>
circumstances that are either contemporaneous to the decision-making,
> or
that occurred within a short time prior to the decision-making.
> 31
There are other factors that inform the issue. The Wilson
> Walker firm
no longer acted for any of the parties by the time of
> trial. More
importantly, at the time of the motion, Patterson J. had
> been a judge
for six years and thus had not had a relationship with
> his former firm
for a considerable period of time.
>
>
> 32 In my view,
a reasonable person, viewing the matter
> realistically would conclude
that the trial judge could deal fairly
> and impartially with this case. I
take this view principally because
> of the long passage of time and the
trial judge's lack of involvement
> in or knowledge of the case when the
Wilson Walker firm had carriage.
> In these circumstances it cannot be
reasonably contended that the
> trial judge could not remain impartial in
the case. The mere fact that
> his name appears on the letterhead of some
correspondence from over a
> decade ago would not lead a reasonable person
to believe that he would
> either consciously or unconsciously favour his
former firm's former
> client. It is simply not realistic to think that a
judge would throw
> off his mantle of impartiality, ignore his oath of
office and favour a
> client - about whom he knew nothing - of a firm that
he left six years
> earlier and that no longer acts for the client, in a
case involving
> events from over a decade ago.
> (emphasis
added)
>
> [19] Justice Webb had no involvement with any
matter
> involving Mr. Amos while he was a member of Patterson Palmer
or
> Patterson Law, nor does Mr. Amos suggest that he did. Mr. Amos made
it
> clear during the hearing of this matter that the only reason for
the
> alleged conflict for Justice Webb was that he was a member
of
> Patterson Law and Patterson Palmer. This is simply not enough
for
> Justice Webb to be disqualified. Any involvement of Mr. Amos
with
> Patterson Law while Justice Webb was a member of that firm would
have
> had to occur over 10 years ago and even longer for the time when
he
> was a member of Patterson Palmer. In addition to the lack of
any
> involvement on his part with any matter or dispute that Mr. Amos
had
> with Patterson Law or Patterson Palmer (which in and of itself
is
> sufficient to dispose of this matter), the length of time
since
> Justice Webb was a member of Patterson Law or Patterson Palmer
would
> also result in the same finding – that there is no conflict in
Justice
> Webb hearing this appeal.
>
> [20]
Similarly in R. v. Bagot, 2000 MBCA 30, 145 Man. R.
> (2d) 260, the
Manitoba Court of Appeal found that there was no
> reasonable apprehension
of bias when a judge, who had been a member of
> the law firm that had
been retained by the accused, had no involvement
> with the accused while
he was a lawyer with that firm.
>
> [21] In Del Zotto v.
Minister of National Revenue, [2000] 4
> F.C. 321, 257 N.R. 96, this court
did find that there would be a
> reasonable apprehension of bias where a
judge, who while he was a
> lawyer, had recorded time on a matter
involving the same person who
> was before that judge. However, this case
can be distinguished as
> Justice Webb did not have any time recorded on
any files involving Mr.
> Amos while he was a lawyer with Patterson Palmer
or Patterson Law.
>
> [22] Mr. Amos also included with his
submissions a CD. He
> stated in his affidavit dated June 26, 2017 that
there is a “true copy
> of an American police surveillance wiretap
entitled 139” on this CD.
> He has also indicated that he has “provided a
true copy of the CD
> entitled 139 to many American and Canadian law
enforcement authorities
> and not one of the police forces or officers of
the court are willing
> to investigate it”. Since he has indicated that
this is an “American
> police surveillance wiretap”, this is a matter for
the American law
> enforcement authorities and cannot create, as Mr. Amos
suggests, a
> conflict of interest for any judge to whom he provides a
copy.
>
> [23] As a result, there is no conflict or
reasonable
> apprehension of bias for Justice Webb and therefore, no
reason for him
> to recuse himself.
>
> [24] Mr.
Amos alleged that Justice Near’s past professional
> experience with the
government created a “quasi-conflict” in deciding
> the cross-appeal. Mr.
Amos provided no details and Justice Near
> confirmed that he had no prior
knowledge of the matters alleged in the
> Claim. Justice Near sees no
reason to recuse himself.
>
> [25] Insofar as it is
possible to glean the basis for Mr.
> Amos’ allegations against Justice
Gleason, it appears that he alleges
> that she is incapable of hearing
this appeal because he says he wrote
> a letter to Brian Mulroney and Jean
Chrétien in 2004. At that time,
> both Justice Gleason and Mr. Mulroney
were partners in the law firm
> Ogilvy Renault, LLP. The letter in
question, which is rude and angry,
> begins with “Hey you two Evil Old
Smiling Bastards” and “Re: me suing
> you and your little dogs too”. There
is no indication that the letter
> was ever responded to or that a law
suit was ever commenced by Mr.
> Amos against Mr. Mulroney. In the
circumstances, there is no reason
> for Justice Gleason to recuse herself
as the letter in question does
> not give rise to a reasonable
apprehension of bias.
>
>
> III.
Issue
>
> [26] The issue on the cross-appeal is as
follows: Did the
> Judge err in setting aside the Prothonotary’s Order
striking the Claim
> in its entirety without leave to amend and in
determining that Mr.
> Amos’ allegation that the RCMP barred him from the
New Brunswick
> legislature in 2004 was capable of supporting a cause of
action?
>
> IV. Analysis
>
> A.
Standard of Review
>
> [27] Following the Judge’s
decision to set aside the
> Prothonotary’s Order, this Court revisited the
standard of review to
> be applied to discretionary decisions of
prothonotaries and decisions
> made by judges on appeals of
prothonotaries’ decisions in Hospira
> Healthcare Corp. v. Kennedy
Institute of Rheumatology, 2016 FCA 215,
> 402 D.L.R. (4th) 497 [Hospira].
In Hospira, a five-member panel of
> this Court replaced the Aqua-Gem
standard of review with that
> articulated in Housen v. Nikolaisen, 2002
SCC 33, [2002] 2 S.C.R. 235
> [Housen]. As a result, it is no longer
appropriate for the Federal
> Court to conduct a de novo review of a
discretionary order made by a
> prothonotary in regard to questions vital
to the final issue of the
> case. Rather, a Federal Court judge can only
intervene on appeal if
> the prothonotary made an error of law or a
palpable and overriding
> error in determining a question of fact or
question of mixed fact and
> law (Hospira at para. 79). Further, this
Court can only interfere with
> a Federal Court judge’s review of a
prothonotary’s discretionary order
> if the judge made an error of law or
palpable and overriding error in
> determining a question of fact or
question of mixed fact and law
> (Hospira at paras.
82-83).
>
> [28] In the case at bar, the Judge substituted
his own
> assessment of Mr. Amos’ Claim for that of the Prothonotary. This
Court
> must look to the Prothonotary’s Order to determine whether the
Judge
> erred in law or made a palpable and overriding error in choosing
to
> interfere.
>
>
> B. Did the Judge
err in interfering with the
> Prothonotary’s Order?
>
> [29]
The Prothontoary’s Order accepted the following
> paragraphs from
the Crown’s submissions as the basis for striking the
> Claim in its
entirety without leave to amend:
>
> 17. Within the 96
paragraph Statement of Claim, the Plaintiff
> addresses his complaint in
paragraphs 14-24, inclusive. All but four
> of those paragraphs are
dedicated to an incident that occurred in 2006
> in and around the
legislature in New Brunswick. The jurisdiction of
> the Federal Court does
not extend to Her Majesty the Queen in right of
> the Provinces. In any
event, the Plaintiff hasn’t named the Province
> or provincial actors as
parties to this action. The incident alleged
> does not give rise to a
justiciable cause of action in this Court.
> (…)
>
>
>
21. The few paragraphs that directly address the Defendant
> provide
no details as to the individuals involved or the location of
> the alleged
incidents or other details sufficient to allow the
> Defendant to respond.
As a result, it is difficult or impossible to
> determine the causes of
action the Plaintiff is attempting to advance.
> A generous reading of the
Statement of Claim allows the Defendant to
> only speculate as to the true
and/or intended cause of action. At
> best, the Plaintiff’s action may
possibly be summarized as: he
> suspects he is barred from the House of
Commons.
> [footnotes omitted].
>
>
> [30] The
Judge determined that he could not strike the Claim
> on the same
jurisdictional basis as the Prothonotary. The Judge noted
> that the
Federal Court has jurisdiction over claims based on the
> liability of
Federal Crown servants like the RCMP and that the actors
> who barred Mr.
Amos from the New Brunswick legislature in 2004
> included the RCMP
(Federal Court Judgment at para. 23). In considering
> the viability of
these allegations de novo, the Judge identified
> paragraph 14 of the
Claim as containing “some precision” as it
> identifies the date of the
event and a RCMP officer acting as
> Aide-de-Camp to the Lieutenant
Governor (Federal Court Judgment at
> para. 27).
>
>
>
[31] The Judge noted that the 2004 event could support a
> cause
of action in the tort of misfeasance in public office and
> identified the
elements of the tort as excerpted from Meigs v. Canada,
> 2013 FC 389, 431
F.T.R. 111:
>
>
> [13] As in both the cases of Odhavji
Estate v Woodhouse, 2003 SCC
> 69 [Odhavji] and Lewis v Canada, 2012 FC
1514 [Lewis], I must
> determine whether the plaintiffs’ statement of
claim pleads each
> element of the alleged tort of misfeasance in public
office:
>
> a) The public officer must have engaged in deliberate
and unlawful
> conduct in his or her capacity as public
officer;
>
> b) The public officer must have been aware both that
his or her
> conduct was unlawful and that it was likely to harm the
plaintiff; and
>
> c) There must be an element of bad faith or
dishonesty by the public
> officer and knowledge of harm alone is
insufficient to conclude that a
> public officer acted in bad faith or
dishonestly.
> Odhavji, above, at paras 23, 24 and 28
> (Federal
Court Judgment at para. 28).
>
> [32] The Judge determined
that Mr. Amos disclosed sufficient
> material facts to meet the elements
of the tort of misfeasance in
> public office because the actors, who
barred him from the New
> Brunswick legislature in 2004, including the
RCMP, did so for
> “political reasons” (Federal Court Judgment at para.
29).
>
> [33] This Court’s discussion of the sufficiency
of pleadings
> in Merchant Law Group v. Canada (Revenue Agency), 2010 FCA
184, 321
> D.L.R (4th) 301 is particularly apt:
>
> …When
pleading bad faith or abuse of power, it is not enough to
> assert,
baldly, conclusory phrases such as “deliberately or
> negligently,”
“callous disregard,” or “by fraud and theft did steal”.
> “The bare
assertion of a conclusion upon which the court is called
> upon to
pronounce is not an allegation of material fact”. Making bald,
>
conclusory allegations without any evidentiary foundation is an abuse
> of
process…
>
> To this, I would add that the tort of misfeasance in
public office
> requires a particular state of mind of a public officer in
carrying
> out the impunged action, i.e., deliberate conduct which the
public
> officer knows to be inconsistent with the obligations of his or
her
> office. For this tort, particularization of the allegations
is
> mandatory. Rule 181 specifically requires particularization
of
> allegations of “breach of trust,” “wilful default,” “state of mind
of
> a person,” “malice” or “fraudulent intention.”
> (at paras.
34-35, citations omitted).
>
> [34] Applying the Housen
standard of review to the
> Prothonotary’s Order, we are of the view that
the Judge interfered
> absent a legal or palpable and overriding
error.
>
> [35] The Prothonotary determined that Mr. Amos’
Claim
> disclosed no reasonable claim and was fundamentally vexatious on
the
> basis of jurisdictional concerns and the absence of material facts
to
> ground a cause of action. Paragraph 14 of the Claim, which
addresses
> the 2004 event, pleads no material facts as to how the RCMP
officer
> engaged in deliberate and unlawful conduct, knew that his or
her
> conduct was unlawful and likely to harm Mr. Amos, and acted in
bad
> faith. While the Claim alleges elsewhere that Mr. Amos was barred
from
> the New Brunswick legislature for political and/or malicious
reasons,
> these allegations are not particularized and are directed
against
> non-federal actors, such as the Sergeant-at-Arms of the
Legislative
> Assembly of New Brunswick and the Fredericton Police Force.
As such,
> the Judge erred in determining that Mr. Amos’ allegation that
the RCMP
> barred him from the New Brunswick legislature in 2004 was
capable of
> supporting a cause of action.
>
> [36]
In our view, the Claim is made up entirely of bare
> allegations, devoid
of any detail, such that it discloses no
> reasonable cause of action
within the jurisdiction of the Federal
> Courts. Therefore, the Judge
erred in interfering to set aside the
> Prothonotary’s Order striking the
claim in its entirety. Further, we
> find that the Prothonotary made no
error in denying leave to amend.
> The deficiencies in Mr. Amos’ pleadings
are so extensive such that
> amendment could not cure them (see Collins at
para. 26).
>
> V. Conclusion
> [37]
For the foregoing reasons, we would allow the Crown’s
> cross-appeal,
with costs, setting aside the Federal Court Judgment,
> dated January 25,
2016 and restoring the Prothonotary’s Order, dated
> November 12, 2015,
which struck Mr. Amos’ Claim in its entirety
> without leave to
amend.
> "Wyman W. Webb"
> J.A.
> "David G. Near"
>
J.A.
> "Mary J.L. Gleason"
> J.A.
>
>
>
>
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
> NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF
RECORD
>
> A CROSS-APPEAL FROM AN ORDER OF THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE
SOUTHCOTT DATED
> JANUARY 25, 2016; DOCKET NUMBER T-1557-15.
>
DOCKET:
>
> A-48-16
>
>
>
> STYLE OF
CAUSE:
>
> DAVID RAYMOND AMOS v. HER MAJESTY THE
QUEEN
>
>
>
> PLACE OF HEARING:
>
>
Fredericton,
> New Brunswick
>
> DATE OF
HEARING:
>
> May 24, 2017
>
> REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF
THE COURT BY:
>
> WEBB J.A.
> NEAR J.A.
> GLEASON
J.A.
>
> DATED:
>
> October 30, 2017
>
>
APPEARANCES:
> David Raymond Amos
>
>
> For The
Appellant / respondent on cross-appeal
> (on his own
behalf)
>
> Jan Jensen
>
>
> For The Respondent /
appELLANT ON CROSS-APPEAL
>
> SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
> Nathalie
G. Drouin
> Deputy Attorney General of Canada
>
> For The
Respondent / APPELLANT ON CROSS-APPEAL
>
>
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Gauvin, Serge (SNB)" <serge.gauvin@snb.ca>,
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2019 13:47:28 +0000
Subject: Réponse automatique : Yo Ernie Steeves One of your minions just called RE Application and Declaration for Low-Income Seniors Benefit I have questions about why your computer is rejecting my application
To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
I am out of the office. I will be back on Monday morning, January 7. Please contact Patrick Windle at patrick.windle@snb.ca
Je suis absent du bureau. Je serai de retour lundi matin, le 7 janvier. Veuillez contacter Patrick Windle à patrick.windle@snb.ca
For the record I can find no law in New Brunswick that
requires us to use the services of a lawyer to complete our transaction and
nobody has dared to argue that simple fact.
On 12/27/18, mike gauvin <mikegauvin@live.ca>
wrote:
> Hi David. Did you find an attorney yet? Let me know when you do
and I can
> put my attorney in contact with yours to complete the real
estate deal.
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Michael
Gauvin >
From: mike gauvin <mikegauvin@live.ca> Date:
Fri, 12 Oct 2018 01:29:25 +0000 Subject: Re: 83 Valley Road FYI this is a
document I may employ BTW I am in Saint John tommorrow attending a hearing at
the EUB To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Tomorrow
Iam going to talk to a guy that should do
it. ________________________________ From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com> Sent:
October 11, 2018 11:38:58 AM To: mike gauvin; swilliams; serge.gauvin;
mrichard; serge.rousselle; david.eidt Cc: David Amos; greg.byrne;
brian.gallant; David.Coon; kris.austin@gnb.ca;
blaine.higgs; robert.gauvin@gnb.ca Subject:
Re: 83 Valley Road FYI this is a document I may employ BTW I am in Saint John
tommorrow attending a hearing at the EUB
New
Brunswick Contract of Purchase and Sale of Real Property will provide you
with a custom completed contract of purchase and sale of real property used
in the sale of residential or recreational real estate in New Brunswick. This
document is a must for anyone buying or selling a home or lot privately in
New Brunswick.
By simply answering a few questions our service will
produce for you an online custom completed contract, ready to be signed by
the buyer and the seller.
This document includes simple and straight
forward instructions to enable you to execute quickly and effortlessly. A
subject removal form is also included for your convenience. The cost of the
personalized Contract of Purchase and Sale is $15.00, payable in Canadian
dollars. Within a few minutes, you will receive your completed PDF documents
by email.
> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From:
Samantha Williams <swilliams@mosherchedore.ca> >
Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2018 16:03:43 +0000 > Subject: Automatic reply: A copy
of the Birth Certificates of David > and Max Amos should all that your
lawyer requires I doubt that the Law > Society disagrees with me >
To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com> > >
I will be out of the office returning Monday, December 31, 2018. I > will
respond to your e-mail on my return. If you require immediate >
assistance please contact the Receptionist at 634-1600 and you will be >
directed to someone who can assist you. > > > On 12/27/18,
David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
wrote: >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From:
Marc Richard <MRichard@lsbnb.ca> >>
Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2018 15:54:18 +0000 >> Subject: Automatic reply: 83
valley road >> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com> >> >>
I will be absent from the office until January 7, 2019. >> >>
Je serai absent du bureau jusqu'au 7 janvier
2019. >> >> >> >> ---------- Forwarded
message ---------- >> From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com> >>
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2018 14:37:04 -0400 >> Subject: Birth Certificates of
David and Max Amos >> To: swilliams@mosherchedore.ca >>
Cc: David Amos <david.raymond.amos@gmail.com> >> >>
Assistant (Property): Samantha Williams >> >> Direct Line:
(506) 648-0373 >> Email: swilliams@mosherchedore.ca >> >> >>
---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: mike gauvin <mikegauvin@live.ca> >>
Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2018 01:29:25 +0000 >> Subject: Re: 83 Valley Road
FYI this is a document I may employ BTW I >> am in Saint John tommorrow
attending a hearing at the EUB >> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com> >> >>
Tomorrow Iam going to talk to a guy that should do it. >>
________________________________ >> From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com> >>
Sent: October 11, 2018 11:38:58 AM >> To: mike gauvin; swilliams;
serge.gauvin; mrichard; serge.rousselle; >> david.eidt >> Cc:
David Amos; greg.byrne; brian.gallant; David.Coon; >> kris.austin@gnb.ca;
blaine.higgs; robert.gauvin@gnb.ca >>
Subject: Re: 83 Valley Road FYI this is a document I may employ BTW
I >> am in Saint John tommorrow attending a hearing at the
EUB >> >> http://www.legaldeeds.com/Interface/Services/Conveyances/Canada/NB/contract_of_purchase_and_sale_of_real_property/questionnaire.php >> >>
New Brunswick Contract of Purchase and Sale of Real Property will >>
provide you with a custom completed contract of purchase and sale of >>
real property used in the sale of residential or recreational real >>
estate in New Brunswick. This document is a must for anyone buying
or >> selling a home or lot privately in New
Brunswick. >> >> By simply answering a few questions our
service will produce for you >> an online custom completed contract,
ready to be signed by the buyer >> and the
seller. >> >> This document includes simple and straight
forward instructions to >> enable you to execute quickly and
effortlessly. A subject removal form >> is also included for your
convenience. The cost of the personalized >> Contract of Purchase and
Sale is $15.00, payable in Canadian dollars. >> Within a few minutes,
you will receive your completed PDF documents by >>
email. >> >> To proceed, complete the
entries. >> >> >> On 10/10/18, David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
wrote: >>> Obviously I have the same problem with every lawyer in
New Brunswick. >>> >>> If you still wish to follow
though on the deal. I will do as I >>> promised and pay you in full
and get you to swear out and purchase and >>> sale agreement
properly witnessed by SNB and handle this matter >>>
myself. >>> >>> On 10/10/18, mike gauvin <mikegauvin@live.ca>
wrote: >>>> Mosher Chedore replied to me that it's a conflict and
cannot represent >>>> me. >>>>
________________________________ >>>> From: David Amos
<motomaniac333@gmail.com> >>>>
Sent: October 9, 2018 9:57:18 AM >>>> To: swilliams@mosherchedore.ca;
mikegauvin@live.ca >>>>
Cc: David Amos >>>> Subject: I have yet to receive a response
Why? >>>> >>>> ---------- Original message
---------- >>>> From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com> >>>>
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2018 14:37:04 -0400 >>>> Subject: Birth
Certificates of David and Max Amos >>>> To: swilliams@mosherchedore.ca >>>>
Cc: David Amos <david.raymond.amos@gmail.com> >>>> >>>>
Assistant (Property): Samantha Williams >>>> >>>>
Direct Line: (506) 648-0373 >>>> Email: swilliams@mosherchedore.ca >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>
---------- Forwarded message ---------- >>>> From: mike gauvin
<mikegauvin@live.ca> >>>>
Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2018 15:56:14 +0000 >>>> Subject: Re: Hey Kyle
read real slow >>>> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com> >>>> >>>>
Hey David, I tried to call Reid, no avail. I will call that
Serge >>>> Gauvin guy Monday morning, this is getting ridiculous.
I would just >>>> prefer to go through the proper legal
channels. >>>> >>>> >>>> Yours
Truly, Michael
Gauvin >>>> >>> >> >
---------- Original message ----------
From: "Gauvin,
Serge (SNB)" <Serge.Gauvin@snb.ca>
Date:
Mon, 24 Sep 2018 15:11:27 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: Methinks anyone who
thinks he can predict
the outcome tonight is as wacko as your buddy Chucky
Leblanc and the
mindless Mr Faust N'esy Pas Premier Gallant?
To: David
Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
I
am out of the office. I will be back on Tuesday morning, September
25
Please contact Patrick Windle at patrick.windle@snb.caPatrick.windle@snb.ca
>
Je
suis absent du bureau. Je serai de retour au bureau mardi matin,
le 25
septembre. Veuillez contacter Patrick Windle à patrick.windle@snb.caPatrick.windle@snb.ca>
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Mary Wilson
<votemarywilson@gmail.com>
Date:
Sat, 8 Sep 2018 15:08:42 -0300
Subject: Re: Clearly Chris Collins and CBC
know that other Independent
candidates are in quite a battle as well N'esy
Pas Premier Gallant?
To: motomaniac333@gmail.com
Thank
you for sharing this information, It has been passed on to Mary.
The Mary
Wilson Campaign Team
>
> http://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.com/2018/09/cbc-fails-again-to-talk-of-battles-of.html
>
>
Friday, 7 September 2018
>
> CBC fails again to talk of the battles
of other Independent
> politicians in New
Brunswick
>
>
>
> https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/moncton-centre-chris-collins-election-1.4812940
>
>
A battle is brewing in Moncton Centre, with Chris Collins an
independent
>
> Former Liberal MLA is confident he can regain seat
after being bounced
> from caucus
> Kate Letterick · CBC News ·
Posted: Sep 07, 2018 6:00 AM AT
>
>
> "This is all going to
come out in public when the lawsuit is proceeded
> with and all of the
documents have to become public, so until then, I
> shouldn't be held back
from doing the job that I love, and that's
> serving the people of my
riding."
>
> Collins said voters are concerned about a number of
issues, including
> government spending and
language."
>
>
>
> https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/shediac-beaubassin-cap-pele-nb-2018-election-1.4810051
>
>
'Incestuous politics': a look at New Brunswick's die-hard red
riding
>
> Shediac-Beaubassin-Cap-Pelé is considered one of the
safest Liberal
> ridings in New Brunswick, if not Canada
> Gabrielle
Fahmy · CBC News · Posted: Sep 06, 2018 7:00 AM AT
>
> "We've been
voting Liberal since day one. I think we should be
> rewarded," said
Gallant.
>
> Marcel Doiron, the Conservative candidate and a
Cap-Pelé native, is
> campaigning hard in the village. He doesn't miss an
opportunity to
> take a jab at the Liberals.
>
> "They take
everybody for granted," said Doiron. "We can't live like
> this
anymore."
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
>
From: "Gallant, Premier Brian (PO/CPM)" <Brian.Gallant@gnb.ca>
>
Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2018 11:03:40 +0000
> Subject: RE: Why would the Bankster
Frank McKenna ask Gerry Lowe a
> former union rep to run in the Harbour
that is the heart of the Irving
> Empire?
> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>
>
Thank you for writing to the Premier of New Brunswick. Please be
>
assured that your email will be reviewed.
>
> If this is a media
request, please forward your email to
> media-medias@gnb.camedia-medias@gnb.ca>.
Thank you!
>
>
*************************************
>
> Nous vous remercions
d’avoir communiqué avec le premier ministre du
> Nouveau-Brunswick. Soyez
assuré(e) que votre courriel sera examiné.
>
> Si ceci est une
demande médiatique, prière de la transmettre à
> media-medias@gnb.camedia-medias@gnb.ca>.
Merci!
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
>
From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>
Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2018 07:03:36 -0400
> Subject: Why would the Bankster
Frank McKenna ask Gerry Lowe a former
> union rep to run in the Harbour
that is the heart of the Irving
> Empire?
> To: "Frank.McKenna"
<Frank.McKenna@td.com>,
"darrow.macintyre"
> <darrow.macintyre@cbc.ca>,
"brian.gallant" <brian.gallant@gnb.ca>,
>
ddale <ddale@thestar.ca>,
Newsroom <Newsroom@globeandmail.com>,
>
sugarhil@nb.sympatico.ca,
"Bill.Oliver" <Bill.Oliver@gnb.ca>,
>
"blaine.higgs" <blaine.higgs@gnb.ca>,
"terry.seguin"
> <terry.seguin@cbc.ca>,
rjspeer555@gmail.com,
"Ross.Wetmore"
> <Ross.Wetmore@gnb.ca>,
shoreviewholsteins@gmail.com,
"hance.colburne"
> <hance.colburne@cbc.ca>,
BrianThomasMacdonald
> <BrianThomasMacdonald@gmail.com>,
oldmaison <oldmaison@yahoo.com>,
>
andre <andre@jafaust.com>,
jbosnitch <jbosnitch@gmail.com>,
washington
> field <washington.field@ic.fbi.gov>,
"Robert.E.Lighthizer"
> <Robert.E.Lighthizer@ustr.eop.gov>,
"Chrystia.Freeland"
> <Chrystia.Freeland@parl.gc.ca>
>
Cc: "Gerald.Butts" <Gerald.Butts@pmo-cpm.gc.ca>,
"Catherine.Tait"
> <Catherine.Tait@cbc.ca>,
"sylvie.gadoury"
> <sylvie.gadoury@radio-canada.ca>,
"Chuck.Thompson"
> <Chuck.Thompson@cbc.ca>,
"dean.buzza" <dean.buzza@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>,
>
"maxime.bernier" <maxime.bernier@parl.gc.ca>,
"elizabeth.may"
> <elizabeth.may@parl.gc.ca>,
David Amos <david.raymond.amos@gmail.com>,
>
"andrew.scheer" <andrew.scheer@parl.gc.ca>,
"David.Akin"
> <David.Akin@globalnews.ca>,
correspondence@ustr.eop.gov,
>
bjanovitz@ustr.eop.gov,
jgreer@ustr.eop.gov,
svaughn@ustr.eop.gov,
>
rlighthizer@ustr.eop.gov,
jrvanoord@gmail.com,
gdaley@nbnet.nb.ca,
>
bwwoodslane@gmail.com,
dykfarm@nbnet.nb.ca,
dejongfons@gmail.com,
>
kayepeter10@gmail.com,
deniscyr10@rogers.com
>
>
>
http://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.com/2018/09/lets-how-many-comments-cbc-edits-after.html
>
>
>
If the election in New Brunswick ain't important why would CBC just
>
block my comment about Trump, Wllbur Ross and I? Why would the
> Bankster
Frank McKenna ask Gerry Lowe a former union rep to run in the
> Harbour
that is the heart of the Irving Empire?
>
>
> https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/saint-john-harbour-nb-election-2018-1.4808144
>
>
"A city councillor for five years, he played a key role in
> successfully
persuading council to ask the province to repeal the
> city's longstanding
tax deal with Irving Oil on the Canaport LNG
> terminal.
> He
decided to run provincially for the Liberals at the request of
> Brian
Gallant and former premier Frank McKenna.
>
> "There are so many
things that have to be changed and they all exist
> in Fredericton," Lowe
said.
> His major concerns include affordable housing and fair taxation
—
> especially greater control for the municipality over taxes and
>
assessments and phasing out double taxation."
>
>
> ----------
Forwarded message ----------
> From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>
Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2018 12:02:58 -0400
> Subject: Re: Hey Kyle read real
slow
> To: llo@nb.aibn.com, serge.gauvin@snb.ca,
patrick.windle@snb.ca,
>
Erin.Hardy@snb.ca, john.mcnair@snb.ca, claude.poirier@snb.ca,
>
Michel.Carrier@gnb.ca,
Hugues.Beaulieu@gnb.ca,
>
Katie.Robertson.KentN@gmail.com,
MarcelDoiron
> <MarcelDoiron@rocketmail.com>,
claudetteturner405@gmail.com,
>
"Gilles.Cote" <Gilles.Cote@gnb.ca>,
"dan. bussieres"
> <dan.bussieres@gnb.ca>,
"chris.collins" <chris.collins@gnb.ca>
>
Cc: David Amos <david.raymond.amos@gmail.com>,
"brian.gallant"
> <brian.gallant@gnb.ca>,
"serge.rousselle" <serge.rousselle@gnb.ca>,
>
MRichard@lawsociety-barreau.nb.ca,
kevhache@nb.sympatico.ca,
>
krisaustin@peoplesalliance.ca
>
>
---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: "Gauvin, Serge (SNB)"
<Serge.Gauvin@snb.ca>
>
Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2018 15:31:17 +0000
> Subject: Automatic reply: Hey Kyle
read real slow
> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>
>
> I am out of the office. I will be back on Monday morning,
September
> 10 Please contact Patrick Windle at
> patrick.windle@snb.caPatrick.windle@snb.ca>
>
>
Je suis absent du bureau. Je serai de retour au bureau lundi matin,
>
le10 septembre. Veuillez contacter Patrick Windle à
> patrick.windle@snb.caPatrick.windle@snb.ca>
>
>
>
>
---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: "Windle, Patrick (SNB)"
<Patrick.Windle@snb.ca>
>
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2018 13:11:54 +0000
> Subject: Automatic reply: Hey
Serge Trust that the First Canadian
> Title people, the Fidelity minions
and many lawyers will tell you that
> I will figure out what a form 13a
is.
> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>
>
>
I am out of the office until Thursday, August 23.
>
> For inquiries
regarding the land registry, please contact Serge Gauvin
> at serge.gauvin@snb.ca.
>
>
For inquiries regarding the corporate registry, please contact the
>
registry at (506) 453-2703 or SNBCorporateAffairs@snb.ca
>
>
>
________________
>
> Soyez avisés que je suis absent du bureau
jusqu'à jeudi le 23 août.
>
> Pour les demandes relatives au
registre de biens-fonds, veuillez
> contacter Serge Gauvin au serge.gauvin@snb.ca.
>
>
Pour les demandes relatives au registre des affaires corporatives,
>
veuillez contacter (506) 453-2703 ou SNBCorporateAffairs@snb.ca
>
>
>
Patrick Windle
> Director – Corporate Registry | Directeur - Registre
corporatif
> Deputy Registrar General of Land Titles | registrateur
général adjoint
> des titres de biens-fonds
> Registrar of the
Personal Property Registry | Registraire du Réseau
> d’enregistrement des
biens personnels
> Registries / Registres
> Service New Brunswick /
Service Nouveau-Brunswick
>
> Phone / Téléphone :
506-453-3758
> Fax / Télécopieur : 506-444-3033
> E-mail / Courriel
: patrick.windle@snb.ca
>
>
http://www.snb.ca/
>
>
>
> ----------
Forwarded message ----------
> From: "Hardy, Erin (SNB)" <Erin.Hardy@snb.ca>
>
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2018 13:11:58 +0000
> Subject: Automatic reply: Hey
Serge Trust that the First Canadian
> Title people, the Fidelity minions
and many lawyers will tell you that
> I will figure out what a form 13a
is.
> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>
>
Hello,
>
> I will be out of the office from August 9-24 inclusive. I
will reply
> to your email upon my return, however, I will be checking
emails
> periodically. Thank you.
>
> Bonjour,
>
>
Je serai absent du bureau du 9 au 24 août inclusivement. Je répondrai
> à
votre courriel à mon retour, mais, je vérifierai régulièrement les
>
courriels. Merci.
>
>
> On 9/7/18, David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
wrote:
>
> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> >
From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>
> Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2018 09:11:48 -0400
> > Subject: Hey Serge Trust
that the First Canadian Title people, the
> > Fidelity minions and many
lawyers will tell you that I will figure out
> > what a form 13a
is.
> > To: serge.gauvin@snb.ca,
patrick.windle@snb.ca,
"claude.poirier"
> > <claude.poirier@snb.ca>,
"john.mcnair" <john.mcnair@snb.ca>,
>
> Erin.Hardy@snb.ca,
"alan.roy" <alan.roy@snb.ca>
>
> Cc: David Amos <david.raymond.amos@gmail.com>,
"brian.gallant"
> > <brian.gallant@gnb.ca>,
"hugh.flemming" <hugh.flemming@gnb.ca>,
>
> MRichard@lawsociety-barreau.nb.ca,
"serge.rousselle"
> > <serge.rousselle@gnb.ca>,
kevhache@nb.sympatico.ca,
"greg.byrne"
> > <greg.byrne@gnb.ca>,
krisaustin <krisaustin@peoplesalliance.ca>,
>
> "David.Coon" <David.Coon@gnb.ca>,
"blaine.higgs"
> > <blaine.higgs@gnb.ca>,
David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
>
>
> > Serge Gauvin
> > Registrar General of Land
Titles
> > Called to the bar: 1995 (NB)
> > Phone:
506-457-6933
> > Fax: 506-444-3033
> > Email: serge.gauvin@snb.ca
>
> Patrick V. Windle
> > Deputy Registrar General of Land
Titles
> > Called to the bar: 1997 (NB)
> > Email: patrick.windle@snb.ca
>
> Service New Brunswick
> > Land Registry, 985 College Hill
Rd.
> > PO Box 1998, Stn. A
> > Fredericton, New Brunswick E3B
5G4
> >
> > ---------- Original message ----------
>
> From: "Auto-reply from kevhache@nb.aibn.com"
<kevhache@nb.aibn.com>
>
> Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2018 18:20:04 -0400
> > Subject: Re: Too Funny I
just talked to Claude Landry Elvy Robichaud’s
> > old Chief of Staff He
forgot what went down in 2004 and the emails I
> > sent him
since
> > To: david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com
>
>
> > Bonjour
> >
> > Je serais absent du bureau
du 6 aout au 22 aout inclusivement. Le
> > bureau sera fermé du 6 au
19 aout inclusivement pour les vacances d
> > ete et sera ouvert a
partir du 20 aout. Bonne Vacance a tous
> >
> > Je
retournerais votre courriel a mon retour.
> >
> > Kevin J.
Hache
> >
> > CABINET KEVIN J. HACHE
> > 8 Boul
St-Pierre Ouest
> > C.P. 5662
> > Caraquet NB E1W 1B7
>
> 506 727 5150 (telephone)
> > 506 727 6686 (telecopieur)
>
> kevhache@nb.sympatico.ca
>
>
> >
> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>
> From: Brian Gallant <briangallant10@gmail.com>
>
> Date: Tue, 29 May 2018 06:01:57 -0700
> > Subject: Merci / Thank
you Re: Fwd: I just called Alan Roy again about
> > my right to health
care, my missing 1965 Harley, the Yankee Wiretaps
> > tapes in its
saddlebag and Federal Court and his assistant played dumb
> > as
usual
> > To: motomaniac333@gmail.com
>
>
> > (Français à suivre)
> >
> > If your email is
pertaining to the Government of New Brunswick, please
> > email me at
brian.gallant@gnb.ca
>
>
> > If your matter is urgent, please email Greg Byrne at greg.byrne@gnb.ca
>
>
> > Thank you.
> >
> > Si votre courriel
s'addresse au Gouvernement du Nouveau-Brunswick,
> > svp m'envoyez un
courriel à brian.gallant@gnb.ca
>
>
> > Pour les urgences, veuillez contacter Greg Byrne à greg.byrne@gnb.ca
>
>
> > Merci.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> > From:
David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>
> Date: Tue, 29 May 2018 10:42:09 -0400
> > Subject: Attn Marc
Richard and John McNair I just called AGAIN Say hey
> > to my Brother
in Law W. S. Reid CHEDORE and his brother of the law
> > David Lutz QC
for me will ya?
> > To: MRichard@lawsociety-barreau.nb.ca,
John.McNair@snb.ca,
>
> "serge.rousselle" <serge.rousselle@gnb.ca>,
Erin.Hardy@snb.ca,
>
> David.Eidt@gnb.ca
>
> Cc: David Amos <david.raymond.amos@gmail.com>
>
>
> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> > From:
Marc Richard <MRichard@lawsociety-barreau.nb.ca>
>
> Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2017 22:51:09 +0000
> > Subject: Automatic
reply: RE Irving's ridiculous constitutional
> > challenge and Federal
Court File no T-1557-15 I wonder if George
> > Cooper and Hélène
Beaulieure even know how many times the Irvings and
> > partners of
their VERY snobby law firm have offended me over t...
> > To: David
Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>
>
> > I will be out of the office until October 30, 2017. Je serai
absent
> > du bureau jusqu'au 30 octobre 2017.
> >
>
>
> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> > From:
"Eidt, David (OAG/CPG)" <David.Eidt@gnb.ca>
>
> Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2017 00:33:21 +0000
> > Subject: Automatic reply:
Yo Mr Lutz howcome your buddy the clerk
> > would not file this motion
and properly witnessed affidavit and why
> > did she take all four
copies?
> > To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>
>
> > I will be out of the office until Monday, March 13, 2017. I
will have
> > little to no access to email. Please dial 453-2222 for
assistance.
> >
> >
> > ---------- Forwarded message
----------
> > From: Marc Richard <MRichard@lawsociety-barreau.nb.ca>
>
> Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2016 13:16:46 +0000
> > Subject: Automatic
reply: RE: The New Brunswick Real Estate
> > Association and their
deliberate ignorance for the bankster's benefit
> > To: David Amos
<motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>
>
> > I will be out of the office until August 15, 2016. Je serai
absent du
> > bureau jusqu'au 15 août 2016.
> >
>
>
> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> > From:
"McNair, John (SNB)" <John.McNair@snb.ca>
>
> Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2016 16:04:29 +0000
> > Subject: Automatic
reply: RE: The New Brunswick Real Estate
> > Association and their
deliberate ignorance for the bankster's benefit
> > To: David Amos
<motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>
>
> > I will be out of the office August 1 - August 12. I will reply
to your
> > email when I return. If you require immediate assistance,
please
> > contact Chantal Leger at 663-2510. Thank you.
>
>
> > Je serai absent du bureau les 1 aout - 12 aout. Je répondrai à
votre
> > courriel à mon retour. Si vous nécessitez de
l'assistance
> > immédiatement, veuillez contacter Chantal Leger au
663-2510. Merci.
> >
> >
> >
> > ----------
Forwarded message ----------
> > From: "Hardy, Erin (SNB)" <Erin.Hardy@snb.ca>
>
> Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2016 16:04:28 +0000
> > Subject: Automatic
reply: RE: The New Brunswick Real Estate
> > Association and their
deliberate ignorance for the bankster's benefit
> > To: David Amos
<motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>
>
> > Le francais suit:
> >
> > Hello,
>
>
> > I am currently out of the office. I will gladly reply to your
message
> > upon my return on August 15, 2016. Should you require
immediate
> > assitance please contact Celeste Savoie at (506) 471-5290
or by email:
> > Celeste.Savoie@snb.ca.
>
>
> > Have a nice day!
> >
> > Bonjour,
>
>
> > Je suis presentement hors du bureau. Il me fera plaisir de
repondre a
> > votre message a mon retour August 15, 2016. Si vous avez
besoin d'une
> > assitance immediate, veuillez communiquer avec Celeste
Savoie au (506)
> > 471-5290 ou par courriel a: Celeste.Savoie@snb.ca.
>
>
> > Bonne journee!
> >
> >
> >
---------- Forwarded message ----------
> > From: Marc Richard <MRichard@lawsociety-barreau.nb.ca>
>
> Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2014 17:43:27 +0000
> > Subject: Automatic
reply: Oh My My we just talked briefly Correct Ms
> > Beaulieu? It
appears to me that the latest President of the NB Law
> > Society
thinks non lawyers are not worth talking to
> > To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>
>
> > I will be out of the office until July 21, 2014. Je serai
absent du
> > bureau jusqu'au 21 juillet 2014.
> >
>
>
---------- Original message ----------
From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Date:
Tue, 29 May 2018 11:03:47 -0400
Subject: Hey Serge we just talked I didn't
get an email from you so I
forwarded to you the one I was composing when you
called
To: serge.gauvin@snb.ca
Cc:
David Amos <david.raymond.amos@gmail.com>
SERGE
GAUVIN
Registrar General of Land Titles
SNB Bldg., 985 College Hill
Rd.
PO Box 1998
Fredericton, New Brunswick
E3B 5G4
Phone:
506-457-6933
Phone : (506) 457-6933
Fax : (506) 444-3033
Email : serge.gauvin@snb.ca
----------
Forwarded message ----------
From: Brian Gallant <briangallant10@gmail.com>
Date:
Tue, 29 May 2018 06:01:57 -0700
Subject: Merci / Thank you Re: Fwd: I just
called Alan Roy again about
my right to health care, my missing 1965 Harley,
the Yankee Wiretaps
tapes in its saddlebag and Federal Court and his
assistant played dumb
as usual
To: motomaniac333@gmail.com
(Français
à suivre)
If your email is pertaining to the Government of New Brunswick,
please
email me at brian.gallant@gnb.ca
If
your matter is urgent, please email Greg Byrne at greg.byrne@gnb.ca
Thank
you.
Si votre courriel s'addresse au Gouvernement du
Nouveau-Brunswick,
svp m'envoyez un courriel à brian.gallant@gnb.ca
Pour
les urgences, veuillez contacter Greg Byrne à greg.byrne@gnb.ca
----------
Forwarded message ----------
From: Marc Richard <MRichard@lawsociety-barreau.nb.ca>
Date:
Sat, 14 Oct 2017 22:51:09 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: RE Irving's
ridiculous constitutional
challenge and Federal Court File no T-1557-15 I
wonder if George
Cooper and Hélène Beaulieure even know how many times the
Irvings and
partners of their VERY snobby law firm have offended me over
t...
To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
I
will be out of the office until October 30, 2017. Je serai absent
du bureau
jusqu'au 30 octobre 2017.
---------- Forwarded message
----------
From: Marc Richard <MRichard@lawsociety-barreau.nb.ca>
Date:
Wed, 1 Mar 2017 00:33:11 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: Yo Mr Lutz howcome
your buddy the clerk
would not file this motion and properly witnessed
affidavit and why
did she take all four copies?
To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
I
will be out of the office until March 2, 2017. Je serai absent du
bureau
jusqu'au 2 mars 2017.
---------- Forwarded message
----------
From: "Eidt, David (OAG/CPG)" <David.Eidt@gnb.ca>
Date:
Wed, 1 Mar 2017 00:33:21 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: Yo Mr Lutz howcome
your buddy the clerk
would not file this motion and properly witnessed
affidavit and why
did she take all four copies?
To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
I
will be out of the office until Monday, March 13, 2017. I will have
little to
no access to email. Please dial 453-2222 for assistance.
----------
Forwarded message ----------
From: Marc Richard <MRichard@lawsociety-barreau.nb.ca>
Date:
Fri, 12 Aug 2016 13:16:46 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: RE: The New
Brunswick Real Estate
Association and their deliberate ignorance for the
bankster's benefit
To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
I
will be out of the office until August 15, 2016. Je serai absent du
bureau
jusqu'au 15 août 2016.
---------- Forwarded message
----------
From: "McNair, John (SNB)" <John.McNair@snb.ca>
Date:
Fri, 12 Aug 2016 16:04:29 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: RE: The New
Brunswick Real Estate
Association and their deliberate ignorance for the
bankster's benefit
To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
I
will be out of the office August 1 - August 12. I will reply to your
email
when I return. If you require immediate assistance, please
contact Chantal
Leger at 663-2510. Thank you.
Je serai absent du bureau les 1 aout - 12
aout. Je répondrai à votre
courriel à mon retour. Si vous nécessitez de
l'assistance
immédiatement, veuillez contacter Chantal Leger au 663-2510.
Merci.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Hardy,
Erin (SNB)" <Erin.Hardy@snb.ca>
Date:
Fri, 12 Aug 2016 16:04:28 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: RE: The New
Brunswick Real Estate
Association and their deliberate ignorance for the
bankster's benefit
To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Le
francais suit:
Hello,
I am currently out of the office. I will
gladly reply to your message
upon my return on August 15, 2016. Should you
require immediate
assitance please contact Celeste Savoie at (506) 471-5290
or by email: Celeste.Savoie@snb.ca.
Have
a nice day!
Bonjour,
Je suis presentement hors du bureau. Il me
fera plaisir de repondre a
votre message a mon retour August 15, 2016. Si
vous avez besoin d'une
assitance immediate, veuillez communiquer avec Celeste
Savoie au (506)
471-5290 ou par courriel a: Celeste.Savoie@snb.ca.
Bonne
journee!
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Marc
Richard <MRichard@lawsociety-barreau.nb.ca>
Date:
Fri, 18 Jul 2014 17:43:27 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: Oh My My we just
talked briefly Correct Ms
Beaulieu? It appears to me that the latest
President of the NB Law
Society thinks non lawyers are not worth talking
to
To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
I
will be out of the office until July 21, 2014. Je serai absent du
bureau
jusqu'au 21 juillet 2014.
> ---------- Forwarded message
----------
> From: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com
>
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2017 09:32:09 -0400
> Subject: Attn Integrity
Commissioner Alexandre Deschênes, Q.C.,
> To: coi@gnb.ca
> Cc: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com
>
>
Good Day Sir
>
> After I heard you speak on CBC I called your office
again and managed
> to speak to one of your staff for the first
time
>
> Please find attached the documents I promised to send to
the lady who
> answered the phone this morning. Please notice that not
after the Sgt
> at Arms took the documents destined to your office his pal
Tanker
> Malley barred me in writing with an "English" only
document.
>
> These are the hearings and the dockets in Federal
Court that I
> suggested that you study closely.
>
> This is
the docket in Federal Court
>
> http://cas-cdc-www02.cas-satj.gc.ca/IndexingQueries/infp_RE_info_e.php?court_no=T-1557-15&select_court=T
>
>
These are digital recordings of the last three hearings
>
> Dec
14th https://archive.org/details/BahHumbug
>
>
January 11th, 2016 https://archive.org/details/Jan11th2015
>
>
April 3rd, 2017
>
> https://archive.org/details/April32017JusticeLeblancHearing
>
>
>
This is the docket in the Federal Court of Appeal
>
> http://cas-cdc-www02.cas-satj.gc.ca/IndexingQueries/infp_RE_info_e.php?court_no=A-48-16&select_court=All
>
>
>
The only hearing thus far
>
> May 24th, 2017
>
> https://archive.org/details/May24thHoedown
>
>
>
This Judge understnds the meaning of the word Integrity
>
> Date:
20151223
>
> Docket: T-1557-15
>
> Fredericton, New
Brunswick, December 23, 2015
>
> PRESENT: The Honourable Mr.
Justice Bell
>
> BETWEEN:
>
> DAVID RAYMOND
AMOS
>
> Plaintiff
>
> and
>
> HER MAJESTY
THE QUEEN
>
> Defendant
>
> ORDER
>
>
(Delivered orally from the Bench in Fredericton, New Brunswick, on
>
December 14, 2015)
>
> The Plaintiff seeks an appeal de novo, by way
of motion pursuant to
> the Federal Courts Rules (SOR/98-106), from an
Order made on November
> 12, 2015, in which Prothonotary Morneau struck
the Statement of Claim
> in its entirety.
>
> At the outset of
the hearing, the Plaintiff brought to my attention a
> letter dated
September 10, 2004, which he sent to me, in my then
> capacity as Past
President of the New Brunswick Branch of the Canadian
> Bar Association,
and the then President of the Branch, Kathleen Quigg,
> (now a Justice of
the New Brunswick Court of Appeal). In that letter
> he
stated:
>
> As for your past President, Mr. Bell, may I suggest that
you check the
> work of Frank McKenna before I sue your entire law firm
including you.
> You are your brother’s keeper.
>
> Frank
McKenna is the former Premier of New Brunswick and a former
> colleague of
mine at the law firm of McInnes Cooper. In addition to
> expressing an
intention to sue me, the Plaintiff refers to a number of
> people in his
Motion Record who he appears to contend may be witnesses
> or potential
parties to be added. Those individuals who are known to
> me personally,
include, but are not limited to the former Prime
> Minister of Canada, The
Right Honourable Stephen Harper; former
> Attorney General of Canada and
now a Justice of the Manitoba Court of
> Queen’s Bench, Vic Toews; former
member of Parliament Rob Moore;
> former Director of Policing Services,
the late Grant Garneau; former
> Chief of the Fredericton Police Force,
Barry McKnight; former Staff
> Sergeant Danny Copp; my former colleagues
on the New Brunswick Court
> of Appeal, Justices Bradley V. Green and
Kathleen Quigg, and, retired
> Assistant Commissioner Wayne Lang of the
Royal Canadian Mounted
> Police.
>
> In the circumstances,
given the threat in 2004 to sue me in my
> personal capacity and my past
and present relationship with many
> potential witnesses and/or potential
parties to the litigation, I am
> of the view there would be a reasonable
apprehension of bias should I
> hear this motion. See Justice de
Grandpré’s dissenting judgment in
> Committee for Justice and Liberty et
al v National Energy Board et al,
> [1978] 1 SCR 369 at p 394 for the
applicable test regarding
> allegations of bias. In the circumstances,
although neither party has
> requested I recuse myself, I consider it
appropriate that I do so.
>
>
> AS A RESULT OF MY RECUSAL,
THIS COURT ORDERS that the Administrator of
> the Court schedule another
date for the hearing of the motion. There
> is no order as to
costs.
>
> “B. Richard Bell”
> Judge
>
>
>
Below after the CBC article about your concerns (I made one comment
>
already) you will find the text of just two of many emails I had sent
> to
your office over the years since I first visited it in 2006.
>
> I
noticed that on July 30, 2009, he was appointed to the the Court
>
Martial Appeal Court of Canada Perhaps you should scroll to the
> bottom
of this email ASAP and read the entire Paragraph 83 of my
> lawsuit now
before the Federal Court of Canada?
>
> "FYI This is the text of the
lawsuit that should interest Trudeau the most
>
>
> ----------
Original message ----------
> From: justin.trudeau.a1@parl.gc.ca
>
Date: Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 8:18 PM
> Subject: Réponse automatique : RE My
complaint against the CROWN in
> Federal Court Attn David Hansen and Peter
MacKay If you planning to
> submit a motion for a publication ban on my
complaint trust that you
> dudes are way past too late
> To: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com
>
>
Veuillez noter que j'ai changé de courriel. Vous pouvez me rejoindre à
>
lalanthier@hotmail.com
>
>
Pour rejoindre le bureau de M. Trudeau veuillez envoyer un courriel à
> tommy.desfosses@parl.gc.ca
>
>
Please note that I changed email address, you can reach me at
> lalanthier@hotmail.com
>
>
To reach the office of Mr. Trudeau please send an email to
> tommy.desfosses@parl.gc.ca
>
>
Thank you,
>
> Merci ,
>
>
> http://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.ca/2015/09/v-behaviorurldefaultvmlo.html
>
>
>
83. The Plaintiff states that now that Canada is involved in more war
>
in Iraq again it did not serve Canadian interests and reputation to
>
allow Barry Winters to publish the following words three times over
> five
years after he began his bragging:
>
> January 13, 2015
> This
Is Just AS Relevant Now As When I wrote It During The Debate
>
>
December 8, 2014
> Why Canada Stood Tall!
>
> Friday, October
3, 2014
> Little David Amos’ “True History Of War” Canadian Airstrikes
And
> Stupid Justin Trudeau
>
> Canada’s and Canadians free
ride is over. Canada can no longer hide
> behind Amerka’s and NATO’s
skirts.
>
> When I was still in Canadian Forces then Prime Minister
Jean Chretien
> actually committed the Canadian Army to deploy in the
second campaign
> in Iraq, the Coalition of the Willing. This was against
or contrary to
> the wisdom or advice of those of us Canadian officers
that were
> involved in the initial planning phases of that operation.
There were
> significant concern in our planning cell, and NDHQ about of
the dearth
> of concern for operational guidance, direction, and forces
for
> operations after the initial occupation of Iraq. At the “last
minute”
> Prime Minister Chretien and the Liberal government changed its
mind.
> The Canadian government told our amerkan cousins that we would
not
> deploy combat troops for the Iraq campaign, but would deploy
a
> Canadian Battle Group to Afghanistan, enabling our amerkan cousins
to
> redeploy troops from there to Iraq. The PMO’s thinking that it
was
> less costly to deploy Canadian Forces to Afghanistan than Iraq.
But
> alas no one seems to remind the Liberals of Prime Minister
Chretien’s
> then grossly incorrect assumption. Notwithstanding Jean
Chretien’s
> incompetence and stupidity, the Canadian Army was
heroic,
> professional, punched well above it’s weight, and the PPCLI
Battle
> Group, is credited with “saving Afghanistan” during the
Panjway
> campaign of 2006.
>
> What Justin Trudeau and the
Liberals don’t tell you now, is that then
> Liberal Prime Minister Jean
Chretien committed, and deployed the
> Canadian army to Canada’s longest
“war” without the advice, consent,
> support, or vote of the Canadian
Parliament.
>
> What David Amos and the rest of the ignorant,
uneducated, and babbling
> chattering classes are too addled to understand
is the deployment of
> less than 75 special operations troops, and what is
known by planners
> as a “six pac cell” of fighter aircraft is NOT the
same as a
> deployment of a Battle Group, nor a “war”
make.
>
> The Canadian Government or The Crown unlike our amerkan
cousins have
> the “constitutional authority” to commit the Canadian
nation to war.
> That has been recently clearly articulated to the
Canadian public by
> constitutional scholar Phillippe Legasse. What
Parliament can do is
> remove “confidence” in The Crown’s Government in a
“vote of
> non-confidence.” That could not happen to the Chretien
Government
> regarding deployment to Afghanistan, and it won’t happen in
this
> instance with the conservative majority in The Commons regarding
a
> limited Canadian deployment to the Middle East.
>
>
President George Bush was quite correct after 911 and the terror
> attacks
in New York; that the Taliban “occupied” and “failed state”
> Afghanistan
was the source of logistical support, command and control,
> and training
for the Al Quaeda war of terror against the world. The
> initial defeat,
and removal from control of Afghanistan was vital and
>
> P.S.
Whereas this CBC article is about your opinion of the actions of
> the
latest Minister Of Health trust that Mr Boudreau and the CBC have
> had my
files for many years and the last thing they are is ethical.
> Ask his
friends Mr Murphy and the RCMP if you don't believe me.
>
>
Subject:
> Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 12:02:35 -0400
> From: "Murphy,
Michael B. \(DH/MS\)" MichaelB.Murphy@gnb.ca
>
To: motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com
>
>
January 30, 2007
>
> WITHOUT PREJUDICE
>
> Mr. David
Amos
>
> Dear Mr. Amos:
>
> This will acknowledge
receipt of a copy of your e-mail of December 29,
> 2006 to Corporal Warren
McBeath of the RCMP.
>
> Because of the nature of the allegations
made in your message, I have
> taken the measure of forwarding a copy to
Assistant Commissioner Steve
> Graham of the RCMP “J” Division in
Fredericton.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Honourable Michael B.
Murphy
> Minister of Health
>
> CM/cb
>
>
>
Warren McBeath warren.mcbeath@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
wrote:
>
> Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2006 17:34:53 -0500
> From:
"Warren McBeath" warren.mcbeath@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
>
To: kilgoursite@ca.inter.net,
MichaelB.Murphy@gnb.ca,
>
nada.sarkis@gnb.ca,
wally.stiles@gnb.ca,
dwatch@web.net,
>
motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com
>
CC: ottawa@chuckstrahl.com,
riding@chuckstrahl.com,John.Foran@gnb.ca,
>
Oda.B@parl.gc.ca,"Bev
BUSSON" bev.busson@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
>
"Paul Dube" PAUL.DUBE@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
>
Subject: Re: Remember me Kilgour? Landslide Annie McLellan has
> forgotten
me but the crooks within the RCMP have not
>
> Dear Mr.
Amos,
>
> Thank you for your follow up e-mail to me today. I was on
days off
> over the holidays and returned to work this evening. Rest
assured I
> was not ignoring or procrastinating to respond to your
concerns.
>
> As your attachment sent today refers from Premier
Graham, our position
> is clear on your dead calf issue: Our forensic labs
do not process
> testing on animals in cases such as yours, they are
referred to the
> Atlantic Veterinary College in Charlottetown who can
provide these
> services. If you do not choose to utilize their expertise
in this
> instance, then that is your decision and nothing more can be
done.
>
> As for your other concerns regarding the US Government,
false
> imprisonment and Federal Court Dates in the US, etc... it is
clear
> that Federal authorities are aware of your concerns both in
Canada
> the US. These issues do not fall into the purvue of
Detachment
> and policing in Petitcodiac, NB.
>
> It was
indeed an interesting and informative conversation we had on
> December
23rd, and I wish you well in all of your future endeavors.
>
>
Sincerely,
>
> Warren McBeath, Cpl.
> GRC Caledonia
RCMP
> Traffic Services NCO
> Ph: (506) 387-2222
> Fax: (506)
387-4622
> E-mail warren.mcbeath@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
>
>
>
>
Alexandre Deschênes, Q.C.,
> Office of the Integrity Commissioner
>
Edgecombe House, 736 King Street
> Fredericton, N.B. CANADA E3B
5H1
> tel.: 506-457-7890
> fax: 506-444-5224
> e-mail:coi@gnb.ca
>
Mr.
Amos,
We acknowledge receipt of your recent emails to the Deputy Minister
of
Justice and lawyers within the Legal Services Division of
the
Department of Justice respecting a possible claim against the
Province
of Nova Scotia. Service of any documents respecting a legal
claim
against the Province of Nova Scotia may be served on the
Attorney
General at 1690 Hollis Street, Halifax, NS. Please note that we
will
not be responding to further emails on this matter.
Sunday,
19 November 2017
Federal Court of Appeal Finally Makes The BIG Decision And
Publishes
It Now The Crooks Cannot Take Back Ticket To Try Put My Matter
Before
The Supreme Court
BETWEEN:
DAVID RAYMOND AMOS
Respondent on
the cross-appeal
(and formally Appellant)
and
HER MAJESTY THE
QUEEN
Appellant on the cross-appeal
(and formerly Respondent)
Heard at
Fredericton, New Brunswick, on May 24, 2017.
Judgment delivered at Ottawa,
Ontario, on October 30, 2017.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY:
THE
COURT
Date: 20171030
Docket: A-48-16
Citation: 2017 FCA
213
CORAM:
WEBB J.A.
NEAR J.A.
GLEASON
J.A.
BETWEEN:
DAVID RAYMOND AMOS
Respondent on the
cross-appeal
(and formally Appellant)
and
HER MAJESTY THE
QUEEN
Appellant on the cross-appeal
(and formerly Respondent)
REASONS
FOR JUDGMENT BY THE COURT
I. Introduction
[1]
On September 16, 2015, David Raymond Amos (Mr. Amos)
filed a
53-page Statement of Claim (the Claim) in Federal Court
against Her Majesty
the Queen (the Crown). Mr. Amos claims $11 million
in damages and a public
apology from the Prime Minister and Provincial
Premiers for being illegally
barred from accessing parliamentary
properties and seeks a declaration from
the Minister of Public Safety
that the Canadian Government will no longer
allow the Royal Canadian
Mounted Police (RCMP) and Canadian Forces to harass
him and his clan
(Claim at para. 96).
[2] On November
12, 2015 (Docket T-1557-15), by way of a
motion brought by the Crown, a
prothonotary of the Federal Court (the
Prothonotary) struck the Claim in its
entirety, without leave to
amend, on the basis that it was plain and obvious
that the Claim
disclosed no reasonable claim, the Claim was fundamentally
vexatious,
and the Claim could not be salvaged by way of further amendment
(the
Prothontary’s Order).
[3] On January 25, 2016
(2016 FC 93), by way of Mr.
Amos’ appeal from the Prothonotary’s Order, a
judge of the Federal
Court (the Judge), reviewing the matter de novo, struck
all of Mr.
Amos’ claims for relief with the exception of the claim for
damages
for being barred by the RCMP from the New Brunswick legislature
in
2004 (the Federal Court Judgment).
[4] Mr. Amos
appealed and the Crown cross-appealed the
Federal Court Judgment. Further to
the issuance of a Notice of Status
Review, Mr. Amos’ appeal was dismissed for
delay on December 19, 2016.
As such, the only matter before this Court is the
Crown’s
cross-appeal.
II. Preliminary
Matter
[5] Mr. Amos, in his memorandum of fact and law
in
relation to the cross-appeal that was filed with this Court on March
6,
2017, indicated that several judges of this Court, including two of
the
judges of this panel, had a conflict of interest in this appeal.
This was the
first time that he identified the judges whom he believed
had a conflict of
interest in a document that was filed with this
Court. In his notice of
appeal he had alluded to a conflict with
several judges but did not name
those judges.
[6] Mr. Amos was of the view that he did not
have to
identify the judges in any document filed with this Court because
he
had identified the judges in various documents that had been filed
with
the Federal Court. In his view the Federal Court and the Federal
Court of
Appeal are the same court and therefore any document filed in
the Federal
Court would be filed in this Court. This view is based on
subsections 5(4)
and 5.1(4) of the Federal Courts Act, R.S.C., 1985,
c. F-7:
5(4)
Every judge of the Federal Court is, by virtue of his or her
office, a judge
of the Federal Court of Appeal and has all the
jurisdiction, power and
authority of a judge of the Federal Court of
Appeal.
[…]
5(4) Les
juges de la Cour fédérale sont d’office juges de la Cour
d’appel fédérale et
ont la même compétence et les mêmes pouvoirs que
les juges de la Cour d’appel
fédérale.
[…]
5.1(4) Every judge of the Federal Court of Appeal is, by
virtue of
that office, a judge of the Federal Court and has all
the
jurisdiction, power and authority of a judge of the Federal
Court.
5.1(4) Les juges de la Cour d’appel fédérale sont d’office juges
de la
Cour fédérale et ont la même compétence et les mêmes pouvoirs que
les
juges de la Cour fédérale.
[7] However, these
subsections only provide that the
judges of the Federal Court are also judges
of this Court (and vice
versa). It does not mean that there is only one
court. If the Federal
Court and this Court were one Court, there would be no
need for this
section.
[8] Sections 3 and 4 of the Federal
Courts Act provide that:
3 The division of the Federal Court of Canada called
the Federal Court
— Appeal Division is continued under the name “Federal
Court of
Appeal” in English and “Cour d’appel fédérale” in French. It
is
continued as an additional court of law, equity and admiralty in
and
for Canada, for the better administration of the laws of Canada and
as
a superior court of record having civil and criminal
jurisdiction.
3 La Section d’appel, aussi appelée la Cour d’appel ou la
Cour d’appel
fédérale, est maintenue et dénommée « Cour d’appel fédérale »
en
français et « Federal Court of Appeal » en anglais. Elle est
maintenue
à titre de tribunal additionnel de droit, d’equity et d’amirauté
du
Canada, propre à améliorer l’application du droit canadien, et
continue
d’être une cour supérieure d’archives ayant compétence en
matière civile et
pénale.
4 The division of the Federal Court of Canada called the Federal
Court
— Trial Division is continued under the name “Federal Court”
in
English and “Cour fédérale” in French. It is continued as an
additional
court of law, equity and admiralty in and for Canada, for
the better
administration of the laws of Canada and as a superior
court of record having
civil and criminal jurisdiction.
4 La section de la Cour fédérale du
Canada, appelée la Section de
première instance de la Cour fédérale, est
maintenue et dénommée «
Cour fédérale » en français et « Federal Court » en
anglais. Elle est
maintenue à titre de tribunal additionnel de droit,
d’equity et
d’amirauté du Canada, propre à améliorer l’application du
droit
canadien, et continue d’être une cour supérieure d’archives
ayant
compétence en matière civile et pénale.
[9]
Sections 3 and 4 of the Federal Courts Act create
two separate courts – this
Court (section 3) and the Federal Court
(section 4). If, as Mr. Amos
suggests, documents filed in the Federal
Court were automatically also filed
in this Court, then there would no
need for the parties to prepare and file
appeal books as required by
Rules 343 to 345 of the Federal Courts Rules,
SOR/98-106 in relation
to any appeal from a decision of the Federal Court.
The requirement to
file an appeal book with this Court in relation to an
appeal from a
decision of the Federal Court makes it clear that the only
documents
that will be before this Court are the documents that are part of
that
appeal book.
[10] Therefore, the memorandum of fact
and law filed on
March 6, 2017 is the first document, filed with this Court,
in which
Mr. Amos identified the particular judges that he submits have
a
conflict in any matter related to him.
[11] On April
3, 2017, Mr. Amos attempted to bring a motion
before the Federal Court
seeking an order “affirming or denying the
conflict of interest he has” with
a number of judges of the Federal
Court. A judge of the Federal Court issued
a direction noting that if
Mr. Amos was seeking this order in relation to
judges of the Federal
Court of Appeal, it was beyond the jurisdiction of the
Federal Court.
Mr. Amos raised the Federal Court motion at the hearing of
this
cross-appeal. The Federal Court motion is not a motion before
this
Court and, as such, the submissions filed before the Federal
Court
will not be entertained. As well, since this was a motion
brought
before the Federal Court (and not this Court), any documents filed
in
relation to that motion are not part of the record of this
Court.
[12] During the hearing of the appeal Mr. Amos
alleged that
the third member of this panel also had a conflict of interest
and
submitted some documents that, in his view, supported his claim of
a
conflict. Mr. Amos, following the hearing of his appeal, was
also
afforded the opportunity to provide a brief summary of the
conflict
that he was alleging and to file additional documents that, in
his
view, supported his allegations. Mr. Amos submitted several pages
of
documents in relation to the alleged conflicts. He organized
the
documents by submitting a copy of the biography of the
particular
judge and then, immediately following that biography, by
including
copies of the documents that, in his view, supported his claim
that
such judge had a conflict.
[13] The nature of the
alleged conflict of Justice Webb is
that before he was appointed as a Judge
of the Tax Court of Canada in
2006, he was a partner with the law firm
Patterson Law, and before
that with Patterson Palmer in Nova Scotia. Mr. Amos
submitted that he
had a number of disputes with Patterson Palmer and
Patterson Law and
therefore Justice Webb has a conflict simply because he was
a partner
of these firms. Mr. Amos is not alleging that Justice Webb
was
personally involved in or had any knowledge of any matter in which
Mr.
Amos was involved with Justice Webb’s former law firm – only that
he
was a member of such firm.
[14] During his oral
submissions at the hearing of his
appeal Mr. Amos, in relation to the alleged
conflict for Justice Webb,
focused on dealings between himself and a
particular lawyer at
Patterson Law. However, none of the documents submitted
by Mr. Amos at
the hearing or subsequently related to any dealings with
this
particular lawyer nor is it clear when Mr. Amos was dealing with
this
lawyer. In particular, it is far from clear whether such dealings
were
after the time that Justice Webb was appointed as a Judge of the
Tax
Court of Canada over 10 years ago.
[15] The
documents that he submitted in relation to the
alleged conflict for Justice
Webb largely relate to dealings between
Byron Prior and the St. John’s
Newfoundland and Labrador office of
Patterson Palmer, which is not in the
same province where Justice Webb
practiced law. The only document that
indicates any dealing between
Mr. Amos and Patterson Palmer is a copy of an
affidavit of Stephen May
who was a partner in the St. John’s NL office of
Patterson Palmer. The
affidavit is dated January 24, 2005 and refers to a
number of e-mails
that were sent by Mr. Amos to Stephen May. Mr. Amos also
included a
letter that is addressed to four individuals, one of whom is
John
Crosbie who was counsel to the St. John’s NL office of
Patterson
Palmer. The letter is dated September 2, 2004 and is addressed
to
“John Crosbie, c/o Greg G. Byrne, Suite 502, 570 Queen
Street,
Fredericton, NB E3B 5E3”. In this letter Mr. Amos alludes to
a
possible lawsuit against Patterson Palmer.
[16] Mr. Amos’
position is that simply because Justice Webb
was a lawyer with Patterson
Palmer, he now has a conflict. In Wewaykum
Indian Band v. Her Majesty the
Queen, 2003 SCC 45, [2003] 2 S.C.R.
259, the Supreme Court of Canada noted
that disqualification of a
judge is to be determined based on whether there
is a reasonable
apprehension of bias:
60 In Canadian law, one
standard has now emerged as the
criterion for disqualification. The
criterion, as expressed by de
Grandpré J. in Committee for Justice and
Liberty v. National Energy
Board, …[[1978] 1 S.C.R. 369, 68 D.L.R. (3d) 716],
at p. 394, is the
reasonable apprehension of bias:
… the apprehension of
bias must be a reasonable one, held by
reasonable and right minded persons,
applying themselves to the
question and obtaining thereon the required
information. In the words
of the Court of Appeal, that test is "what would an
informed person,
viewing the matter realistically and practically -- and
having thought
the matter through -- conclude. Would he think that it is more
likely
than not that [the decision-maker], whether consciously
or
unconsciously, would not decide fairly."
[17] The issue
to be determined is whether an informed
person, viewing the matter
realistically and practically, and having
thought the matter through, would
conclude that Mr. Amos’ allegations
give rise to a reasonable apprehension of
bias. As this Court has
previously remarked, “there is a strong presumption
that judges will
administer justice impartially” and this presumption will
not be
rebutted in the absence of “convincing evidence” of bias (Collins
v.
Canada, 2011 FCA 140 at para. 7, [2011] 4 C.T.C. 157 [Collins].
See
also R. v. S. (R.D.), [1997] 3 S.C.R. 484 at para. 32, 151
D.L.R.
(4th) 193).
[18] The Ontario Court of Appeal in Rando
Drugs Ltd. v.
Scott, 2007 ONCA 553, 86 O.R. (3d) 653 (leave to appeal to the
Supreme
Court of Canada refused, 32285 (August 1, 2007)), addressed
the
particular issue of whether a judge is disqualified from hearing
a
case simply because he had been a member of a law firm that was
involved
in the litigation that was now before that judge. The Ontario
Court of Appeal
determined that the judge was not disqualified if the
judge had no
involvement with the person or the matter when he was a
lawyer. The Ontario
Court of Appeal also explained that the rules for
determining whether a judge
is disqualified are different from the
rules to determine whether a lawyer
has a conflict:
27 Thus, disqualification is not the natural corollary
to a
finding that a trial judge has had some involvement in a case
over
which he or she is now presiding. Where the judge had no
involvement,
as here, it cannot be said that the judge is
disqualified.
28 The point can rightly be made that had Mr.
Patterson been
asked to represent the appellant as counsel before his
appointment to
the bench, the conflict rules would likely have prevented him
from
taking the case because his firm had formerly represented one of
the
defendants in the case. Thus, it is argued how is it that as a
trial
judge Patterson J. can hear the case? This issue was considered by
the
Court of Appeal (Civil Division) in Locabail (U.K.) Ltd. v.
Bayfield
Properties Ltd., [2000] Q.B. 451. The court held, at para. 58,
that
there is no inflexible rule governing the disqualification of a
judge
and that, "[e]verything depends on the circumstances."
29
It seems to me that what appears at first sight to be an
inconsistency in
application of rules can be explained by the
different contexts and in
particular, the strong presumption of
judicial impartiality that applies in
the context of disqualification
of a judge. There is no such presumption in
cases of allegations of
conflict of interest against a lawyer because of a
firm's previous
involvement in the case. To the contrary, as explained by
Sopinka J.
in MacDonald Estate v. Martin (1990), 77 D.L.R. (4th) 249
(S.C.C.),
for sound policy reasons there is a presumption of a
disqualifying
interest that can rarely be overcome. In particular, a
conclusory
statement from the lawyer that he or she had no
confidential
information about the case will never be sufficient. The case is
the
opposite where the allegation of bias is made against a trial
judge.
His or her statement that he or she knew nothing about the case
and
had no involvement in it will ordinarily be accepted at face
value
unless there is good reason to doubt it: see Locabail, at para.
19.
30 That brings me then to consider the particular
circumstances
of this case and whether there are serious grounds to find
a
disqualifying conflict of interest in this case. In my view, there
are
two significant factors that justify the trial judge's decision not
to
recuse himself. The first is his statement, which all parties
accept,
that he knew nothing of the case when it was in his former firm
and
that he had nothing to do with it. The second is the long passage
of
time. As was said in Wewaykum, at para. 85:
To us, one
significant factor stands out, and must inform
the perspective of the
reasonable person assessing the impact of this
involvement on Binnie J.'s
impartiality in the appeals. That factor is
the passage of time. Most
arguments for disqualification rest on
circumstances that are either
contemporaneous to the decision-making,
or that occurred within a short time
prior to the decision-making.
31 There are other factors that inform
the issue. The Wilson
Walker firm no longer acted for any of the parties by
the time of
trial. More importantly, at the time of the motion, Patterson J.
had
been a judge for six years and thus had not had a relationship
with
his former firm for a considerable period of time.
32
In my view, a reasonable person, viewing the matter
realistically would
conclude that the trial judge could deal fairly
and impartially with this
case. I take this view principally because
of the long passage of time and
the trial judge's lack of involvement
in or knowledge of the case when the
Wilson Walker firm had carriage.
In these circumstances it cannot be
reasonably contended that the
trial judge could not remain impartial in the
case. The mere fact that
his name appears on the letterhead of some
correspondence from over a
decade ago would not lead a reasonable person to
believe that he would
either consciously or unconsciously favour his former
firm's former
client. It is simply not realistic to think that a judge would
throw
off his mantle of impartiality, ignore his oath of office and favour
a
client - about whom he knew nothing - of a firm that he left six
years
earlier and that no longer acts for the client, in a case
involving
events from over a decade ago.
(emphasis added)
[19]
Justice Webb had no involvement with any matter
involving Mr. Amos while
he was a member of Patterson Palmer or
Patterson Law, nor does Mr. Amos
suggest that he did. Mr. Amos made it
clear during the hearing of this matter
that the only reason for the
alleged conflict for Justice Webb was that he
was a member of
Patterson Law and Patterson Palmer. This is simply not enough
for
Justice Webb to be disqualified. Any involvement of Mr. Amos
with
Patterson Law while Justice Webb was a member of that firm would
have
had to occur over 10 years ago and even longer for the time when
he
was a member of Patterson Palmer. In addition to the lack of
any
involvement on his part with any matter or dispute that Mr. Amos
had
with Patterson Law or Patterson Palmer (which in and of itself
is
sufficient to dispose of this matter), the length of time since
Justice
Webb was a member of Patterson Law or Patterson Palmer would
also result in
the same finding – that there is no conflict in Justice
Webb hearing this
appeal.
[20] Similarly in R. v. Bagot, 2000 MBCA 30, 145 Man.
R.
(2d) 260, the Manitoba Court of Appeal found that there was
no
reasonable apprehension of bias when a judge, who had been a member
of
the law firm that had been retained by the accused, had no
involvement
with the accused while he was a lawyer with that
firm.
[21] In Del Zotto v. Minister of National Revenue, [2000]
4
F.C. 321, 257 N.R. 96, this court did find that there would be
a
reasonable apprehension of bias where a judge, who while he was
a
lawyer, had recorded time on a matter involving the same person who
was
before that judge. However, this case can be distinguished as
Justice Webb
did not have any time recorded on any files involving Mr.
Amos while he was a
lawyer with Patterson Palmer or Patterson Law.
[22] Mr. Amos
also included with his submissions a CD. He
stated in his affidavit dated
June 26, 2017 that there is a “true copy
of an American police surveillance
wiretap entitled 139” on this CD.
He has also indicated that he has “provided
a true copy of the CD
entitled 139 to many American and Canadian law
enforcement authorities
and not one of the police forces or officers of the
court are willing
to investigate it”. Since he has indicated that this is an
“American
police surveillance wiretap”, this is a matter for the American
law
enforcement authorities and cannot create, as Mr. Amos suggests,
a
conflict of interest for any judge to whom he provides a copy.
[23]
As a result, there is no conflict or reasonable
apprehension of bias
for Justice Webb and therefore, no reason for him
to recuse
himself.
[24] Mr. Amos alleged that Justice Near’s past
professional
experience with the government created a “quasi-conflict” in
deciding
the cross-appeal. Mr. Amos provided no details and Justice
Near
confirmed that he had no prior knowledge of the matters alleged in
the
Claim. Justice Near sees no reason to recuse himself.
[25]
Insofar as it is possible to glean the basis for Mr.
Amos’ allegations
against Justice Gleason, it appears that he alleges
that she is incapable of
hearing this appeal because he says he wrote
a letter to Brian Mulroney and
Jean Chrétien in 2004. At that time,
both Justice Gleason and Mr. Mulroney
were partners in the law firm
Ogilvy Renault, LLP. The letter in question,
which is rude and angry,
begins with “Hey you two Evil Old Smiling Bastards”
and “Re: me suing
you and your little dogs too”. There is no indication that
the letter
was ever responded to or that a law suit was ever commenced by
Mr.
Amos against Mr. Mulroney. In the circumstances, there is no
reason
for Justice Gleason to recuse herself as the letter in question
does
not give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias.
III.
Issue
[26] The issue on the cross-appeal is as
follows: Did the
Judge err in setting aside the Prothonotary’s Order striking
the Claim
in its entirety without leave to amend and in determining that
Mr.
Amos’ allegation that the RCMP barred him from the New
Brunswick
legislature in 2004 was capable of supporting a cause of
action?
IV. Analysis
A. Standard of
Review
[27] Following the Judge’s decision to set aside
the
Prothonotary’s Order, this Court revisited the standard of review
to
be applied to discretionary decisions of prothonotaries and
decisions
made by judges on appeals of prothonotaries’ decisions in
Hospira
Healthcare Corp. v. Kennedy Institute of Rheumatology, 2016 FCA
215,
402 D.L.R. (4th) 497 [Hospira]. In Hospira, a five-member panel
of
this Court replaced the Aqua-Gem standard of review with
that
articulated in Housen v. Nikolaisen, 2002 SCC 33, [2002] 2 S.C.R.
235
[Housen]. As a result, it is no longer appropriate for the
Federal
Court to conduct a de novo review of a discretionary order made by
a
prothonotary in regard to questions vital to the final issue of
the
case. Rather, a Federal Court judge can only intervene on appeal
if
the prothonotary made an error of law or a palpable and
overriding
error in determining a question of fact or question of mixed fact
and
law (Hospira at para. 79). Further, this Court can only interfere
with
a Federal Court judge’s review of a prothonotary’s discretionary
order
if the judge made an error of law or palpable and overriding error
in
determining a question of fact or question of mixed fact and
law
(Hospira at paras. 82-83).
[28] In the case at bar, the
Judge substituted his own
assessment of Mr. Amos’ Claim for that of the
Prothonotary. This Court
must look to the Prothonotary’s Order to determine
whether the Judge
erred in law or made a palpable and overriding error in
choosing to
interfere.
B. Did the Judge err in
interfering with the
Prothonotary’s Order?
[29] The
Prothontoary’s Order accepted the following
paragraphs from the Crown’s
submissions as the basis for striking the
Claim in its entirety without leave
to amend:
17. Within the 96 paragraph Statement of Claim, the
Plaintiff
addresses his complaint in paragraphs 14-24, inclusive. All but
four
of those paragraphs are dedicated to an incident that occurred in
2006
in and around the legislature in New Brunswick. The jurisdiction
of
the Federal Court does not extend to Her Majesty the Queen in right
of
the Provinces. In any event, the Plaintiff hasn’t named the Province
or
provincial actors as parties to this action. The incident alleged
does not
give rise to a justiciable cause of action in this Court.
(…)
21.
The few paragraphs that directly address the Defendant
provide no
details as to the individuals involved or the location of
the alleged
incidents or other details sufficient to allow the
Defendant to respond. As a
result, it is difficult or impossible to
determine the causes of action the
Plaintiff is attempting to advance.
A generous reading of the Statement of
Claim allows the Defendant to
only speculate as to the true and/or intended
cause of action. At
best, the Plaintiff’s action may possibly be summarized
as: he
suspects he is barred from the House of Commons.
[footnotes
omitted].
[30] The Judge determined that he could not
strike the Claim
on the same jurisdictional basis as the Prothonotary. The
Judge noted
that the Federal Court has jurisdiction over claims based on
the
liability of Federal Crown servants like the RCMP and that the
actors
who barred Mr. Amos from the New Brunswick legislature in
2004
included the RCMP (Federal Court Judgment at para. 23). In
considering
the viability of these allegations de novo, the Judge
identified
paragraph 14 of the Claim as containing “some precision” as
it
identifies the date of the event and a RCMP officer acting
as
Aide-de-Camp to the Lieutenant Governor (Federal Court Judgment
at
para. 27).
[31] The Judge noted that the 2004 event
could support a
cause of action in the tort of misfeasance in public office
and
identified the elements of the tort as excerpted from Meigs v.
Canada,
2013 FC 389, 431 F.T.R. 111:
[13] As in both the
cases of Odhavji Estate v Woodhouse, 2003 SCC
69 [Odhavji] and Lewis v
Canada, 2012 FC 1514 [Lewis], I must
determine whether the plaintiffs’
statement of claim pleads each
element of the alleged tort of misfeasance in
public office:
a) The public officer must have engaged in deliberate and
unlawful
conduct in his or her capacity as public officer;
b) The
public officer must have been aware both that his or her
conduct was unlawful
and that it was likely to harm the plaintiff; and
c) There must be an
element of bad faith or dishonesty by the public
officer and knowledge of
harm alone is insufficient to conclude that a
public officer acted in bad
faith or dishonestly.
Odhavji, above, at paras 23, 24 and 28
(Federal
Court Judgment at para. 28).
[32] The Judge determined that Mr.
Amos disclosed sufficient
material facts to meet the elements of the tort of
misfeasance in
public office because the actors, who barred him from the
New
Brunswick legislature in 2004, including the RCMP, did so
for
“political reasons” (Federal Court Judgment at para. 29).
[33]
This Court’s discussion of the sufficiency of pleadings
in Merchant
Law Group v. Canada (Revenue Agency), 2010 FCA 184, 321
D.L.R (4th) 301 is
particularly apt:
…When pleading bad faith or abuse of power, it is not
enough to
assert, baldly, conclusory phrases such as “deliberately
or
negligently,” “callous disregard,” or “by fraud and theft did
steal”.
“The bare assertion of a conclusion upon which the court is
called
upon to pronounce is not an allegation of material fact”. Making
bald,
conclusory allegations without any evidentiary foundation is an
abuse
of process…
To this, I would add that the tort of misfeasance in
public office
requires a particular state of mind of a public officer in
carrying
out the impunged action, i.e., deliberate conduct which the
public
officer knows to be inconsistent with the obligations of his or
her
office. For this tort, particularization of the allegations
is
mandatory. Rule 181 specifically requires particularization
of
allegations of “breach of trust,” “wilful default,” “state of mind of
a
person,” “malice” or “fraudulent intention.”
(at paras. 34-35, citations
omitted).
[34] Applying the Housen standard of review to
the
Prothonotary’s Order, we are of the view that the Judge
interfered
absent a legal or palpable and overriding error.
[35]
The Prothonotary determined that Mr. Amos’ Claim
disclosed no reasonable
claim and was fundamentally vexatious on the
basis of jurisdictional concerns
and the absence of material facts to
ground a cause of action. Paragraph 14
of the Claim, which addresses
the 2004 event, pleads no material facts as to
how the RCMP officer
engaged in deliberate and unlawful conduct, knew that
his or her
conduct was unlawful and likely to harm Mr. Amos, and acted in
bad
faith. While the Claim alleges elsewhere that Mr. Amos was barred
from
the New Brunswick legislature for political and/or malicious
reasons,
these allegations are not particularized and are directed
against
non-federal actors, such as the Sergeant-at-Arms of the
Legislative
Assembly of New Brunswick and the Fredericton Police Force. As
such,
the Judge erred in determining that Mr. Amos’ allegation that the
RCMP
barred him from the New Brunswick legislature in 2004 was capable
of
supporting a cause of action.
[36] In our view, the Claim
is made up entirely of bare
allegations, devoid of any detail, such that it
discloses no
reasonable cause of action within the jurisdiction of the
Federal
Courts. Therefore, the Judge erred in interfering to set aside
the
Prothonotary’s Order striking the claim in its entirety. Further,
we
find that the Prothonotary made no error in denying leave to amend.
The
deficiencies in Mr. Amos’ pleadings are so extensive such that
amendment
could not cure them (see Collins at para. 26).
V.
Conclusion
[37] For the foregoing reasons, we would allow the
Crown’s
cross-appeal, with costs, setting aside the Federal Court
Judgment,
dated January 25, 2016 and restoring the Prothonotary’s Order,
dated
November 12, 2015, which struck Mr. Amos’ Claim in its
entirety
without leave to amend.
"Wyman W. Webb"
J.A.
"David G.
Near"
J.A.
"Mary J.L. Gleason"
J.A.
FEDERAL COURT OF
APPEAL
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
A CROSS-APPEAL FROM
AN ORDER OF THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE SOUTHCOTT DATED
JANUARY 25, 2016; DOCKET
NUMBER T-1557-15.
DOCKET:
A-48-16
STYLE OF
CAUSE:
DAVID RAYMOND AMOS v. HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
PLACE
OF HEARING:
Fredericton,
New Brunswick
DATE OF
HEARING:
May 24, 2017
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
BY:
WEBB J.A.
NEAR J.A.
GLEASON J.A.
DATED:
October
30, 2017
APPEARANCES:
David Raymond Amos
For The Appellant
/ respondent on cross-appeal
(on his own behalf)
Jan
Jensen
For The Respondent / appELLANT ON
CROSS-APPEAL
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Nathalie G. Drouin
Deputy
Attorney General of Canada
John
Williamson - Conservative Nomination Candidate New Brunswick Southwest
May 17
at 12:48pm ·
Great news! John Williamson is running for the federal
Conservative
nomination in New Brunswick Southwest. He needs your help to
secure
the riding and defeat the Trudeau Liberals in 2019.
Having
served as Member of Parliament from 2011-2015, he knows the
issues, has
proven ability, and can win: John had the highest
Conservative vote — 38.6% —
of all 32 ridings in Atlantic Canada in
2015. It wasn’t enough to get over
the top, but it was a clear signal
that his local campaign was
strong.
How can you help? Only current Conservative Party members can
vote for
John in the nomination, so please signup or renew your
membership
here: https://donate.conservative.ca/membership/
There
are also envelopes that need stuffing, phone calls that need to
be made, and
events already planned.
Contact John today by e-mail at VoteJohnW@gmail.com or
call
506-466-8347 to let him know how you can help!
Unsure if your
membership is current? Feel free to contact John and
ask. His team can make
sure you’re all set to vote.
And be sure to share and follow this page
for updates on his campaign
and to learn about upcoming events.
Go
John! And Vote John W!
Progressive Conservative MLA calls it quits at
provincial level
Brian Macdonald won't run again for legislature seat, but
might try
federal politics
CBC News · Posted: May 28, 2018 6:07 PM AT |
Last Updated: May 28
Brian Macdonald, a Progressive Conservative MLA, has
announced he
won't run in the Sept. 24 provincial election. (CBC)
New
Brunswick's Progressive Conservative party is losing one of
its
highest-profile MLAs just months before the next provincial
election.
Brian Macdonald says he won't be a candidate this fall and may
instead
jump into federal politics.
Calling the last year "my best
year in politics," the two-term MLA
said his decision has nothing to do with
PC Leader Blaine Higgs, who
beat Macdonald for the party leadership in
2016.
"It's been a really good year," Macdonald said. "I've had a
strong
voice in the legislature on issues that are really important to
my
heart.
"I also think it can be a challenge being in provincial
politics. It's
very small, it's very close, it's very tight, and on a
personal basis,
I want to move on."
Macdonald says he’s considering
running for the federal Conservative
nomination in New Brunswick Southwest,
which includes part of the
riding of Fredericton West-Hanwell, where he has
been the MLA. (CBC)
Macdonald said he's considering running for the
federal Conservative
nomination in New Brunswick Southwest, a constituency
that includes
part of Macdonald's provincial riding of Fredericton
West-Hanwell.
Health critic slams 'gutting' of top doctor's
office
Blaine Higgs faces internal PC dissent over
appointment
That decision would pit him against former Conservative MP
John
Williamson, who announced May 21 he'll also seek the nomination in
the
riding he represented from 2011 to 2015. Party members in the
riding
will nominate their candidate June 28.
Macdonald said he'll
also consider running federally in Fredericton.
The former soldier said he's
also looking at job opportunities with
national organizations that advocate
for veterans.
"I'm looking for opportunities and considering a lot of
options," he said.
Blaine Higgs wins N.B. PC leadership race on 3rd
ballot
Tory leadership hopefuls scramble to be 'second choice' of
rivals'
supporters
Macdonald is the fifth candidate from the 2016
provincial PC
leadership race to opt against running in this year's election
under
Higgs.
Macdonald said he is confident he would have won his
riding again and
the Tories will win the election Sept. 24, meaning he'd have
a shot of
becoming a minister.
But he said being a provincial
politician "does wear on you and it
does make you think about what the other
options are. … If I go
another four years in provincial politics, it concerns
me that my
options would be limited after that."
The 47-year-old also
said the recent death of some friends made him
realize he should pursue other
opportunities when he can.
Macdonald's interest in federal politics has
been well-known for
years. He was a political assistant to former federal
Defence Minister
Peter MacKay and sought the federal Conservative nomination
for
Fredericton for the 2008 election.
After failing to win that
nomination, he ran provincially in
Fredericton-Silverwood in 2010 and was
elected. He was re-elected in
the newly created riding of Fredericton
West-Hanwell in 2014, when he
defeated then-NDP leader Dominic
Cardy.
Macdonald ran for the leadership of the New Brunswick
Progressive
Conservative Party but lost to Blaine Higgs. (Jacques
Poitras/CBC)
In 2016, Macdonald ran for the PC leadership, placing sixth
on the
first ballot out of seven candidates.
Macdonald said he doesn't
think his departure will hurt the provincial
party's chances of holding on to
Fredericton West-Hanwell.
"It's going to be very attractive to a number
of high-calibre
candidates who are now beginning to come forward," he
said.
Jean
Gauvin, ancien député et ministre progressiste-conservateur au
Nouveau-Brunswick, était le père de Robert Gauvin. Photo : Radio-Canada
Le parti Confederation of Party a été fondé en 1989 au Nouveau-Brunswick et a été dissous en 2002. Photo : Radio-Canada
Alban Duguay, en discussion avec Robert Gauvin Photo : Gracieuseté Roger Lanteigne
No comments:
Post a Comment