Please allow me to introduce you to the very corrupt ex RCMP staff sergeant Gilles Blinn who worked hard to keep me barred from parliamentary properties for many years and even falsely arrested me in 2008
A memorial pays tribute to RCMP Const. Heidi Stevenson, a 23-year member
of the force and mother of two, along the highway in Shubenacadie,
N.S., on April 21, 2020. (Andrew Vaughan/The Canadian Press)
The union representing RCMP officers in Nova Scotia says its
members are finding it challenging that the force has stopped releasing
information about the April mass shooting, especially as they continue
to struggle with the personal toll of responding to the killing of 22
people, including their colleague Const. Heidi Stevenson.
On
April 18 and 19, a gunman travelled nearly 200 kilometres through rural
communities shooting strangers, neighbours and acquaintances while
masquerading as a Mountie.
Families of the victims are now suing the RCMP and
have questioned whether the force did enough to stop the killer and
warn of the danger. They've also been critical of the amount of
information they've received about their loved ones' deaths. CBC News
and other media organizations have gone to court to unseal search warrant documents in the case.
The
last press conference about the attacks was June 4 and in recent
months, the RCMP has repeatedly declined interviews about its
investigation. In response to media requests, it has sent the same
statement reiterating its commitment to accountability, transparency and
participating in the public inquiry, which it describes as "the most
appropriate and unbiased opportunity" to provide the facts about what
happened.
Brian Sauvé, president of the National Police
Federation, said he wouldn't second-guess the force's decision to stop
releasing information, but acknowledged front-line officers are finding
it hard.
"Our members want closure. Our members want ... to
essentially be vindicated in their actions," said Sauvé, whose
group represents approximately 1,060 RCMP officers stationed in Nova
Scotia.
"I'll say that because from what I've seen, heard, read,
those on the ground — and I'm not talking about command decisions, I'm
talking about those on the ground who've responded to this
incident — acted and worked in an extremely heroic manner with the
resources available to them.
"For membership not to hear the
RCMP support, that is challenging to them. And to wait for an inquiry to
have their day and their say is difficult."
RCMP Supt. Darren Campbell shows a map tracking the gunman's
movements during the rampage on April 18 and 19 during an April 24
press conference. Part of the RCMP’s justification for not providing
additional comments about the mass shooting has been their ongoing
investigation into where the shooter’s guns came from and whether he
acted alone. (CBC)
Meanwhile,
the police investigation — which includes looking at where the shooter
obtained his weapons and whether he had help — continues. Two weeks ago,
the RCMP announced three people, including the gunman's spouse, her
brother and brother-in-law, face a charge related to allegedly providing the gunman with ammunition. The Mounties have not answered questions or provided any information beyond a press release.
Individuals
members of the RCMP are not permitted to speak to the media and could
face disciplinary actions by doing so. Several officers declined to
speak to CBC about their experiences in recent months, with some
citing the possible repercussions.
Gilles
Blinn, who retired from the RCMP in New Brunswick in 2018, said he's
frequently in touch with former colleagues in Nova Scotia who are
struggling with criticism of their actions during the mass shooting and
who are frustrated that they can't defend themselves.
"They're
far removed from all the decisions that are made at headquarters in
Halifax and headquarters in Ottawa. They have no say in what's going on
... it's like they're gagged," Blinn said.
"They feel like
they're not supported at the top. And any manager knows this, that if
your people aren't happy under you, you have bad morale…. I think the
morale is very low in Nova Scotia currently due to the fact that no one
is speaking out on their behalf."
Two RCMP officers observe a moment of silence to honour
Const. Heidi Stevenson and the other 21 victims of the mass killings at a
checkpoint on Portapique Road in Portapique, N.S., on Friday, April 24,
2020. (Andrew Vaughan/The Canadian Press)
Blinn spent 31 years with the RCMP, including eight on the
staff organization that preceded the union. For many years, the former
staff sergeant originally from Digby County answered media calls. He'd
like to see the RCMP provide more information that could clear up
questions about how officers responded to one of the country's worst
mass killings in modern history.
"You
don't want to hamper your investigation. You don't want to hamper your
upcoming coroner's inquest or anything else that's going on. And you
have to be very diplomatic into what you're going to say. But there are
things that I believe that they could say to satisfy all parties
involved," he said.
Blinn's son was one of the officers who
responded in Portapique on April 18, though he stressed he couldn't
speak to his son's experience and didn't know exactly what happened that
night or the following morning.
During his time as an RCMP staff sergeant, Gilles Blinn
conducted media interviews on behalf of the force. He retired in 2018
after 31 years. (Submitted by Gilles Blinn)
But many of the people he knows are also grappling with the
horror of what unfolded, Blinn said. Overall, he said Mounties don't
feel supported by their leadership or the public.
"I know of some that turn to liquor. I know of some that were so traumatized that they've retired," he said.
"The
effects don't happen right away, for some members it'll take
years.... The trauma of seeing all this death and destruction and the
agony of the victims' families, which is what never goes away. You know,
seeing their loved ones pick up the pieces after someone's been killed.
And trust me, I've been there many times, so you never forget it."
Police block the highway in Debert, N.S., on Sunday, April 19, 2020. (Andrew Vaughan/The Canadian Press)
'I'm seeing burnout'
The RCMP offered employees the
option of taking leave in the wake of the shootings. The force said some
members took time off but would not disclose how many as it involves
private health information.
Some
employees are performing modified duties and others are on different
types of leave, Cpl. Lisa Croteau said in an email. The RCMP employs
about 1,450 people in the province, though not all are members of the
union.
CBC has confirmed some officers remain off work, in part, because they're dealing with the psychological impact of responding.
Sauvé
said across the board, members have been hurting alongside their
communities in a year that has been particularly challenging for
policing. He said COVID-19 has meant fewer officers are being trained to
fill vacancies, recruitment remains low, and the union is starting collective bargaining after nearly four years without a raise.
On
top of that, protests against policing and police brutality in the U.S.
and Canada have prompted widespread criticism of the profession.
The
fact that officers have taken time to deal with trauma is positive, the
union president said, as it signals an understanding that it's OK to
admit to needing help.
"We don't have to, you know, suck it up
and soldier on any longer.... the RCMP, as well as Canadians, are
starting to realize that trauma affects everybody differently and
recovery from traumatic events can take longer for some than it can for
others," said Sauvé.
"They
had to respond to the incident. They've had to deal with the aftermath
and the investigations of that incident, at the same time grieving the
loss of one of their colleagues as well as some of their friends."
Children sign a Canadian flag at an impromptu memorial in
front of the RCMP detachment on April 20, 2020, in Enfield, N.S. It was
the home detachment of slain RCMP constable Heidi Stevenson, who was one
of 22 people killed during Sunday's shooting rampage. (Tim Krochak/Getty Images)
The union said close to 100 officers travelled to Nova Scotia
to help investigate the shootings and backfill officers who took time
off in the months since the tragedy.
But even still, he said the
force is facing "big morale challenges" exacerbated by COVID-19 and
staffing stretched to the limit. Sauvé said many officers have been
denied vacation time due to operational requirements and have been
working "day in and day out."
"I'm seeing burnout. I am worried about it," said Sauvé.
The
Fifth Estate presents a comprehensive inquiry into this year's mass
shooting in Nova Scotia, chronicling 13 hours of mayhem that constitute
one of Canada's deadliest events. 45:10
Elizabeth
McMillan is a journalist with CBC's Atlantic investigative unit. Over
the past 11 years, she has reported from the edge of the Arctic Ocean to
the Atlantic Coast and loves sharing people's stories. Please send tips
and feedback to elizabeth.mcmillan@cbc.ca
Re Federal Court File No. T-1557-15 versus RCMP class action lawsuits
etc.Well May 24th came and went and not a peep from any of you or your
lawyers N'esy Pas?
---------- Original message ---------- From: "Public Safety MCU / Sécurité
publique UCM (PS/SP)" ps.publicsafetymcu-securitepubliqueucm.sp@canada.ca To:
david.raymond.amos@gmail.com Date:
Wed, 31 May 2017 23:15:54 +0000 Subject: Automatic reply: Clearly Chucky
Leblanc knows Justice Richard Bell and I very well N'esy Pas?
Merci
d’avoir écrit à l’honorable Ralph Goodale, ministre de la Sécurité publique
et de la Protection civile.
En raison d’une augmentation importante du
volume de la correspondance adressée au ministre, veuillez prendre note qu’il
pourrait y avoir un retard dans le traitement de votre courriel. Soyez assuré
que votre message sera examiné avec soin.
*********
Thank you
for writing to the Honourable Ralph Goodale, Minister of Public Safety and
Emergency Preparedness.
Due to the significant increase in the volume of
correspondence addressed to the Minister, please note that there may be a
delay processing your email. Rest assured that your message will
be carefully reviewed.
---------- Original message
---------- From: "Liliana (Legal Services) Longo" Liliana.Longo@rcmp-grc.gc.ca To:
David.Raymond.Amos@gmail.com Date:
Wed, 31 May 2017 19:14:38 -0400 Subject: Re: Clearly Chucky Leblanc knows
Justice Richard Bell and I very well N'esy Pas? (Away from the office/absente
du bureau) I will be away from the office until June 2, 2017. In my
absence, Barbara Massey will be acting and she can be reached at
(613) 843-6394.
Je serai absente du bureau jusqu'au 2 juin 2017. En
mon absence, Barbara Massey sera interimaire et peut être rejointe au
(613) 843-6394.
----------
Original message ---------- From: Gilles Blinn Gilles.Blinn@rcmp-grc.gc.ca To:
David.Raymond.Amos@gmail.com Date:
Wed, 31 May 2017 19:14:40 -0400 Subject: Re: Clearly Chucky Leblanc knows
Justice Richard Bell and I very well N'esy Pas? (Out of Office / Absent du
bureau) Please note that I will be away from the office for an indeterminate
period. Sgt. Jackie Basque will be acting on my behalf and can be reached
by email or by phone at 452-2448 or 470-4210 (cell).
Please also note
that I will not be replying to any messages.
Ssgt. Gilles
Blinn -------------------
Veuillez noter que je serai absent du bureau
pour une période indéterminée. En mon absence, Sgt Jackie Basque agira par
intérim. Elle peut être contactée par courriel, ou par téléphone au 452-2448
ou par cell. au 470-4210.
Veuillez aussi noter que je ne donnerai
suite à aucun message.
S.é-m. Gilles Blinn
---------- Original
message ---------- From: Ministerial Correspondence Unit - Justice Canada mcu@justice.gc.ca To:
david.raymond.amos@gmail.com Date:
Wed, 31 May 2017 23:14:13 +0000 Subject: Automatic reply: Clearly Chucky
Leblanc knows Justice Richard Bell and I very well N'esy Pas?
Thank
you for writing to the Honourable Jody Wilson-Raybould, Minister of Justice
and Attorney General of Canada.
Due to the significant increase in the
volume of correspondence addressed to the Minister, please note that there
may be a delay in processing your email. Rest assured that your message will
be carefully reviewed.
-------------------
Merci d'avoir écrit
à l'honorable Jody Wilson-Raybould, ministre de la justice et procureur
général du Canada.
En raison d'une augmentation importante du volume de
la correspondance adressée à la ministre, veuillez prendre note qu'il
pourrait y avoir un retard dans le traitement de votre courriel. Nous tenons
à vous assurer que votre message sera lu avec soin.
----------
Original message ---------- From: "Hansen, David" David.Hansen@justice.gc.ca To:
david.raymond.amos@gmail.com Date:
Wed, 31 May 2017 23:14:13 +0000 Subject: Automatic reply: Clearly Chucky
Leblanc knows Justice Richard Bell and I very well N'esy Pas?
I will
be away from the office March 1, 2017 until June 5, 2017. Please contact
Monique Lefebvre at (902) 426-5804 or by email, monique.lefebvre@justice.gc.ca
,
for assistance. Ginette Mazerolle will be acting in my absence.
Je
serais absent du bureau le 1 mars 2017 jusqu'au 5 juin 2017. Veuillez
contacter Monique Lefebvre au (902) 426-5804 ou par courriel, monique.lefebvre@justice.gc.ca,
pour assistance. Ginette Mazerolle agira de façon intérimaire pendant mon
absence.
---------- Original message ---------- From: "Jensen,
Jan" jan.jensen@justice.gc.ca To:
david.raymond.amos@gmail.com Date:
Wed, 31 May 2017 23:14:13 +0000 Subject: Automatic reply: Clearly Chucky
Leblanc knows Justice Richard Bell and I very well N'esy Pas?
I will
be out of the office until Monday June 5, 2017 and I will have limited access
to email during that time. If you require immediate assistance, please
contact my assistant at (902) 426 1798.
Merci d’avoir écrit à l’honorable Mélanie Joly, ministre du
Patrimoine canadien.
La ministre est toujours heureuse de prendre
connaissance des commentaires de Canadiens sur des questions d’importance
pour eux. Votre courriel sera lu avec soin.
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 qu’elle recevra
toute l’attention voulue.
**********************
Thank you for
writing to the Honourable Mélanie Joly, Minister of Canadian
Heritage.
The Minister is always pleased to hear the comments of
Canadians on subjects of importance to them. Your email will be read with
care.
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 will be given every consideration.
---------- Original message
---------- From: Go public gopublic@cbc.ca To: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com Date:
Wed, 31 May 2017 16:14:21 -0700 Subject: Thank you Re: Clearly Chucky Leblanc
knows Justice Richard Bell and I very well N'esy Pas?
Hi - and thanks
so much for writing to Go Public.
This is an automatic
response.
We read all of our emails promptly - and we really appreciate
your submission.
If your story is one we think we can tackle, we will get
back to you soon, by phone or email. In the meantime, you can really help us
by sending the following, if you haven't already:
-A brief but very
specific description of what the story is -Phone number where we can reach
you (cell included please) -The most relevant, key
documentation/correspondence/pictures/video (re the situation you want
us to look into)
Please note:
Because we get a large number of
submissions, we will only get back to you if your story is something we can
consider taking on.
Thanks so much for your
understanding.
Cheers,
Erica Johnson, Reporter Rosa
Marchitelli, Reporter Rachel Ward, Producer James Roberts,
Producer
(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
Have a look at how many
times Chucky Leblanc is mentioned in my lawsuit
27. The Plaintiff states that the Sergeant-at-Arms, two
Commissionaires, a librarian, and two members of the FPF knew that the
Plaintiff was in legislative assembly on June 24, 2004 looking for the
“blogger” Charles Leblanc. While the Plaintiff was waiting for Charles
Leblanc to arrive that day he exercised his democratic right to witness the
proceedings of the Legislative Assembly from the gallery.
28. The
Plaintiff states that apparently a friend of the Crown put a new spin on this
matter the following day. The Crown’s corporate media has never said anything
about the Crown’s malicious actions barring him it has had lots to say about
the barring the blogger Charles Leblanc two years later and it has made the
arrests and prosecutions of him well known. On June 25, 2004 Charles Leblanc
a well-known friend of the MLAs, the Sergeant-at-Arms, the Commissionaires,
the RCMP and the Fredericton Police Force falsely reported in the social
media that the Plaintiff had been “shown the door” claiming that he had
attempted to interrupt the proceedings in the Legislature by speaking from
the gallery. The Crown knows if that were true it would have been recorded in
the legislative records. The words of Charles Leblanc an important witness to
be called to testify as to what he knows about this matter are as
follows
“IS ELVY ROBICHAID SEEING THE LIGHT???? by
Charles LeBlanc Friday, Jun. 25, 2004 at 10:56 AM Fredericton updates
from Charles
“There’s always undercovers cops around but only when
the House is in session. As God as my witness I hope nothing happens but
it’s just a matter of time till someone is push over the edge. I guess a guy
name David Amos was shown the door yesterday at the Legislature. This guy is
running as an Independent candidate in the riding of Fundy Royal. I met the
guy over the net and he has a beef with our political bureaucrats. I admire
people fighting for what they believe in but you can’t get carried away. I
guess in this case? He wanted to speak from the Gallery and that’s a big faux
pas!”
32. The Plaintiff states that many politicians knew that the
CBC had hard copy of two lawsuits of his since 2002 and their journalists had
been laughing at him for two years. It was a profound mistake for CBC to
ignore his candidacy now that he did as he promised in a statement of one
lawsuit and was running for public office in Canada. As CBC continued serving
the interests of the politicians who provided the funding sourced from
the Canadian taxpayer other citizens noticed that the CBC was ignoring
his candidacy. One journalist who had laughed at him called back and tried
to make a deal after the Plaintiff had called the Ombudsman for CBC
complaining of him and his associates only to be laughed at some more and
invited to sue CBC. CBC continued to ignore the Plaintiff even though the
popular former CBC reporter Mike Duffy was now employed by their largest
corporate competitor, CTV and they claimed Fundy was a riding to watch and at
least three newspapers and even the CBC’s blogger friend Charles Leblanc
had chosen to put his strange spin the actions and words of the Plaintiff
while calling him a Hells Angel. However, the aforementioned CBC journalist
did not keep his job very long after his boss and three directors of
CBC received the very same documents and CD that the Plaintiff’s
political opponents had in their possession. (The former CBC journalist did
get a job with the government of NB and has continued with his obvious malice
ever since)
33. The Plaintiff states that the CBC would not have
ignored its mandate and the standing of a candidate if he or she were a
member of the Liberal Party or the newly merged Conservative parties or the
Bloc Quebecois Party or the Green Party or the New Democratic Party without
expecting to deal with legions of lawyers. CBC had no legal right whatsoever
to ignore the Plaintiff merely because he was an Independent. In fact the
mandate of CBC as a publicly owned broadcaster dictates that he must not be
ignored whether he be a member of a powerful political party or not. With
regards to this complaint, on June 24, 2004 there were many journalists
inside the legislative properties of NB not just CBC. They published nothing
about the Plaintiff of his running for public office or his being barred or
even after their blogger friend, Charles Leblanc certainly
did.
34. The Plaintiff states that in June of 2006 Charles Leblanc
was also barred from the same legislative properties but not the Public
Documents Building on the UNB campus. More importantly the Sergeant-at-Arms
was clever enough not to sign or date the English only document this time.
Thus Charles Leblanc who usually demands things in French from the government
when he is in trouble was never barred at all. The CBC immediately reported
the barring of Charles Leblanc falsely claiming that the Sergeant-at-Arms had
signed the Barring Notice. CBC wrote the Sergeant-at-Arms admitted that he
had barred about six others but did not disclose as to who they were. CBC did
not ask who who the other citizens were because they knew they would have to
name the Plaintiff as well. Many people have protested the barring of
Charles Leblanc and a petition to have it revoked was placed in the public
record of the legislative assembly to no avail. In 2006 Charles Leblanc was
arrested in Saint John and in 2011 in Fredericton. In 2009 and 2012 the FPF
arrested their blogging friend Charles Leblanc on the legislative properties.
The CBC reported each time but failed to follow up and investigate and report
why the Crown refused to charge Charles Leblanc in both instances. The CBC
knows that as soon as the Plaintiff contacted the politicians and police to
remind them that he would appreciate being called to testify at Charles
Leblanc’s trial as a hostile but ethical witness about the barring actions of
the Crown it would never go forward with the charges. Leblanc was arrested
by the FPF two other times in recent years and he is on trial right now.
The CBC knows the Plaintiff has talked to members of the RCMP, the FPF,
the Saint John Police Force, the Miramichi Police Force and the
Edmundston Police Force who were investigating Leblanc for various reasons
since 2006. The police usually denied knowing who the Plaintiff was as they
refused to answer his emails. The Plaintiff knows the reason why Charles
Leblanc was barred from legislative property. He agrees with the Crown doing
so but it failed to allow the nasty blogger the right to due process of law
just like it did with and several others. He has never understood why the
Crown has not charged Leblanc under sections 300 and 319 of the Criminal Code
in lieu of arresting him for protesting too loudly or possible child porn
or trespass or punching an equally nasty poetic beggar.
35. The
Plaintiff states that by the end of November of 2004 a lawyer in the employ
of the Attorney General of NB had answered him in writing and the FPF, two
lawyers, the Mayor and a city councilor of Fredericton had some very serious
email exchanges with the Plaintiff. The only responses to the Plaintiff
about the breach of his right to peaceful assembly came from the (NBPC) on
September 14, 2004 acknowledging his complaint (File no 2110-04-11) and two
letters byway of email from the FPF. On September 30, 2004 a Staff Sergeant
of the FPF wrote that he was in possession of the complaint and requested
evidence to support the Plaintiff’s statement that he had been barred from
the legislative properties for “political reasons not legal reasons” The
Plaintiff responded and suggested that the FPF listen to the tape of the
interview he had with the NBPC and study all the evidence he gave to the NBPC
in the presence of a lawyer as a witness. The Staff Sergeant responded on
October 29, 2004 stating that he had detailed reports from fellow members of
the FPF and he had interviewed the Sergeant-at-Arms. He claimed that his
fellow police officers acted appropriately and he would inform the Chief of
the FPF that he did not have sufficient cause under the Police Act to
investigate the complaint the Plaintiff registered with the NBPC against the
FPF. The Plaintiff pointed out that the conflict of interest but grateful the
FPF acknowledged the incident. The Mayor of Fredericton found no humour in
that fact and sent the Plaintiff many emails within minutes no doubt in an
effort to overload his email account. In 2003 the Plaintiff had demanded the
Crown investigate the actions of RCMP now the RCMP should do the same with
the Crown because that para-military police force has jurisdiction everywhere
in Canada including all public and private property controlled by the Crown
even military bases. The words of the Sergeant-at-Arms, Commissionaires and
police were witnessed by only the Plaintiff. A legal action about their
offences against his rights under the Charter would boil down to their word
against his. Evidence was required because he was outnumbered and attacked by
people the Crown employed to understand the law. It was doubtful they would
act ethically and until June 16, 2006 the Crown refused to put anything in
writing to prove this claim about the fact that the Plaintiff is barred from
parliamentary properties.
36. The Plaintiff states that the Crown is
aware that far greater offences have been practiced within the Capital
District of NB by the FPF and the RCMP against the Plaintiff. Many servants
of the Crown have challenged him to seek relief in a Canadian provincial
court. The Plaintiff will not oblige Crown attorneys of thier desires he will
file in a court of a country at a time he chooses. Time is on the Plaintiff’s
side even though he getting old and was finally allowed to collect his Canada
Pension. His children and grandchildren are still very young. Whatever was
done against the Plaintiff was done against his Clan as well. All of the
Plaintiff’s heirs are Canadian citizens and two of them are American citizens
as well. The Crown, INTERPOL and the American law enforcement authorities
cannot deny that there is no statute of limitations on certain crimes. The
problem the Plaintiff is finding an ethical journalist to report about the
legal actions that he and the Crown have already been involved in since
1982.
37. The Plaintiff states that in October of 2004 if the Staff
Sergeant of the FPF had listened to the tape of his interview with the NBPC
and studied the documents they have in their possession he would not have
been so quick to dismiss the Plaintiff and his concerns in such a fashion.
Their many lawyers hardly ever allow corrupt police officers to admit that
the Plaintiff exists or put their malice towards him in writing. The
Plaintiff had explained to the NBPC what transpired on June 24th, 2004. To
explain briefly the police should have known instantly the Sergeant-at-Arms
actions were for political reasons as soon as he turned in the guest pass and
picked up his documents as he stepped outside the building. While the
Plaintiff was inside the legislative building he spoke to only three
employees two Commissionaires and the librarian. He did not interfere with
the proceedings in the House as he watched the MLAs and their assistants from
the gallery, some of whom he knew personally. He did notice political pundits
in the building. One Cabinet Minister’s assistant had been following him for
a couple of days. His political foes wanted him off the property
immediately but they knew that he was not shy of litigation if the Crown
attempted to place a malicious charge against him. Therefore they elected
the Sergeant-at-Arms to try bully the Plaintiff.
38. The
Plaintiff states that he satisfied himself as to the reasons behind the
blatant malice once he asked Sergeant-at-Arms and the police three questions
as follows:
(1) The Plaintiff first asked was why he was being
barred from the legislative property. The Sergeant-at-Arms falsely claimed in
front of the police that the Plaintiff had tried to serve documents on
somebody inside the parliamentary building. The Commissionaires and police
knew that was untrue because they all witnessed the fact that the Plaintiff
had left all the documents in his possession with the Commissionaire at the
entrance before he was allowed into the building and they all watched him
pick up the same documents as he turned in a visitor’s pass after he was
asked to step outside of the building.
(2) The second question was
to the police to see if they agreed to the false claim of the
Sergeant-at-Arms and if they would identify themselves. After the
Sergeant-at-Arms said something quickly in French and both police officers
stated that they agreed with him but only one would state his name and
rank.
(3) The Plaintiff then asked the Sergeant-at-Arms and the
police if they thought they had jurisdiction over him. They all said yes but
refused to take any documents from the Plaintiff just as the Deputy Prime
Minister suggested.
39. The Plaintiff states that three people
who were mentioned during the aforesaid meeting with the NBPC were Charles
Leblanc, Byron Prior and the most wanted American gangster Whitey Bulger. All
three were well aware of the Plaintiff and his actions. More importantly the
NBPC were made well aware of the RCMP’s knowledge of his possession of many
American police surveillance wiretap tapes. The NBPC were shown the very same
tapes that he had promised to give to the Suffolk County District Attorney in
the Dorchester District Court of Boston Massachusetts before a hearing
to discuss an illegal summons to answer a malicious unsigned criminal
complaint (Docket no. 0407CR004623). When the Plaintiff did so he was
falsely imprisoned under the charges of “other”.
42. The
Plaintiff states that in 2014 a confidential letter from the lawyer who is
now the chair of the NBPC was published by Charles Leblanc. Within the
aforesaid letter by a lawyer who was an officer in the Canadian Forces when
the Plaintiff was illegally barred in 2004 explained why he and some other
unnamed lawyers claimed that the Chief of the FPF and the NBPC did not have
jurisdiction over the legislative properties in order to investigate the
wrongs of the members of FPF under the Police Act. The lawyers claimed that
whereas the police were acting under the orders of the Sergeant-at-Arms the
immunity afforded them by parliamentary privilege would be undermined if the
Chief of the FPF and the NBPC upheld the law and the Charter.
67.
The Plaintiff states that in 2004 the 37th Parliament and many others in NB
and NL were informed that he knew of Byron Prior and Charles Leblanc and that
he supported their pursuit of justice byway of the social media. He called
his fellow Maritimers after reading their words about politicians
and listened to the reasons why they were collecting social assistance and
could not afford computers. They did not care about his concerns with
politicians but he believed them and offered his assistance by giving them
computers. The Plaintiff asked that they publish the truth about his actions
and to serve politicians copies of his documents. Leblanc publicly insulted
the Plaintiff after receiving his computer and stole documents he promised
to give to the Attorney General of NB and gave them to his activist
friends instead. Leblanc was asked why behaved in such a fashion and he wrote
back that he thought he was being funny and stated that he was not a sheriff
then sent an email asking if the Plaintiff was a fair comparison to his dog.
That email convinced the Plaintiff that Leblanc was a Conservative
insider because he had apparently read a letter sent to the Attorney General.
It did not take the Plaintiff long to figure out who his activist friends
were because Leblanc had forwarded their email address along with pictures of
his dog. Prior was difficult to deal with but he was true to his word. It was
he who delivered the documents to the parties named in paragraph 53. In
2005 Prior was sued for libel within his website. The Plaintiff wrote his
defence and counterclaim and it remained on the Internet until 2010. Prior’s
one website had more visitors than all the blogs of Leblanc until late 2006
when the New York Times reported that a judge found Leblanc not guilty in
a criminal trial and considered him to be a legitimate journalist. As
the readership of his blog soared, Leblanc and all politicians became
much better friends. In 2007 the Irving media empire complained of the
Plaintiff and Leblanc to Google and Yahoo. In response the Plaintiff’s blog,
two email accounts and all his legal documents stored within Yahoo’s domain
were deleted. Leblanc’s blog was deleted then restored. The FPF arrested
Leblanc again in 2012. The Plaintiff reminded the Crown of a judgment of
Byron Prior finding Section 301 of the Criminal Code unconstitutional and law
professors came to Leblanc’s aid. The Plaintiff caused Leblanc’s “other
personality” blog to be deleted not the FPF.
68. The Plaintiff
states that the Crown is well aware of three legal actions against Byron
Prior. One action is a civil lawsuit for libel filed in Supreme Court of NL
in January of 2005 against Byron Prior by a MP and that a publication ban was
placed on the matter immediately. Two are criminal prosecutions of Byron
Prior for libel. One prosecution under section 301 of the Criminal Code was
found to be unconstitutional in 2008. The Plaintiff was falsely imprisoned by
the RCMP in a mental ward of a hospital after he spread the word that the
Crown had lost. The Plaintiff does not know the judgment in the second trial
under section 300. He does know that in 2009 Byron Prior filed some of the
Plaintiff’s documents in the docket before he was imprisoned in a mental
hospital until early 2010.
69. The Plaintiff states that it was not
logical that Crown considered Byron Prior’s actions on the legislative
properties in NL criminal. The Crown was arresting and prosecuting him in NL
while the RCMP were issuing him permits to do exactly the same thing in front
of the House of Commons for months at a time from the spring of 2006 to at
least the spring 2011. The Crown prosecutes and defends all criminal actions
at a provincial and federal level. If the Crown was sincere in its
prosecution of Byron Prior it should have arrested him on the grounds of the
House of Commons in the spring of 2006. Instead the Crown had the RCMP and a
lawyer whom the Plaintiff ran against in the election of the 38th Parliament
investigate Byron Prior’s concerns at the request of his MP (Later appointed
a Senator) and the Minister of Justice (Who his left seat in the 41st
Parliament midterm as Minister of Public Safety and was appointed to be a
judge).
-----Original Message----- From: David Amos Sent:
Wednesday, May 31, 2017 10:43 AM To: jan.jensen ; bill.pentney ; david.hansen
; mcu ; Liliana.Longo ; hon.ralph.goodale ; bob.paulson ; oldmaison ; andre ;
gopublic ; Whistleblower ; Dale.Morgan ; Gilles.Blinn ; Gilles.Moreau ;
Jonathan.Vance ; jkee ; DDrummond ; ht.lacroix ; sylvie.gadoury ;
hon.melanie.joly ; jean-pierre.blais ; martine.turcotte Cc: David Amos ;
political.financing@elections.ca
; Yves.Cote ; mdcohen212@gmail.com
; washington field ; Boston.Mail Subject: Yo Mr Jensen see attached file I
see that you corrupt FEDS are on the attack bigtime as of May 24th N'esy
Pas?
For the record I only spoke with one Crown Counsel before I
appeared before the Federal Court of Appeal on May 24th. This was the number
I called and I talked to Liliana-Longo personally. She recalled our
last conversation in April of 2003 and i reminded her that the documents
I sent her in 2004 were now in the docket of the Federal Court. Need I say
that I did not consider it a coincidence when two members of the RCMP
attended the hearing in plain clothes on May 24th and refused to identify
themselves?
Liliana
Longo works as Senior General Counsel for Justice Canada. Liliana can be
reached at 613-843-4451
BTW I also managed to Speak to Trump's lawyer
Mikey Cohen on his Cell Phone (646-853-0114) because that is apparently how
his boss wants to do business these day. Seems that even the Yankee President
does not trust his own FEDS N'esy Pas Yves Cote and Mr Prime Minister
Trudeau "The Younger"???
There is a certain irony
in arguing her minions about suing the Queen after the long weekend we
are supposed to celebrate her position and be forced to pay homage to
the wealthy Brit N'esy Pas?
Interesting that the most evil FED who has been stalking my family
and I all over the Internet for over ten years makes a comment here of
all places N'es Pas Mr Prime Minister Trudeau "The Younger"???
Methinks this FED in particular and his buddy Barry Winters (aka Mr
Baconfat) forever proved long ago that Military Intelligence is truly an
oxymoron.
Do tell do ya think Trudeau "The Younger" or General Jonathan Vance and
his new assistant the evil Gilles Moreau formerly of the RCMP have even
bothered to read paragraph 83 of my lawsuit yet???
This guy's stuff never gets old. Hope the circus comes to Pretoria
before he hangs it all up this year as is the rumour. Give Gracie a
pinch on the chest for me will ya eh? lol Mean old Dog
‘Bittersweet’ day for former RCMP women as sex-harassment lawsuit nears end
The
suit was filed by all current and former female employees of the RCMP,
and the federal government has already set aside $100 million to pay
claims.
By Colin Perkel The Canadian Press Wed., May 24, 2017
TORONTO—Two
women who endured years of sexual harassment as RCMP employees
expressed mixed emotions as a landmark class-action suit against the
force edged Wednesday toward final court approval.
Speaking
after a settlement hearing, the women expressed hope their long battle
would pave the way for a more hospitable RCMP workplace.
“It’s
not a happy day based upon the fact that we’ve had to take this action
to get change,” said Linda Davidson, one of the representative
plaintiffs. “That’s sad. It’s 2017.”
Davidson
and fellow plaintiff Janet Merlo were among a few dozen women who sat
in the courtroom or spilled into an overflow room as lawyers urged
Federal Court Judge Ann Marie McDonald to sign off on the agreement in
the case.
The deal, which the government
did not oppose, would see current and former female employees who were
harassed each receive at least $10,000 and as much as $220,000. The
settlement also calls on the RCMP to fight harassment within its ranks.
Although
the government has not admitted any wrongdoing, RCMP Commissioner Bob
Paulson apologized publicly last October for what the women had endured.
However, both Merlo and Davidson said they have begun to doubt his
sincerity in light of recent damning reports about harassment in the
force.
Former
RCMP constable Janet Merlo, of Nanaimo, B.C., began her claim against
the force in 2012. A federal judge is now being urged to approve the
RCMP's settlement of the class action suit so that healing can begin. (Darryl Dyck / The Canadian Press)
“Not
only are they not changing, but they lack the will and ability to
change,” Merlo said. “Hopefully, this court order will be what makes
them change.”
As many as 20,000 RCMP
employees, dating back to Sept. 16, 1974, when the first female recruits
were sworn in, are potentially eligible for compensation. However, the
lawyers expected fewer women would actually apply.
McDonald said she would rule “very shortly.”
According
to the agreement, women eligible for the highest level of compensation
suffered ongoing intimidation and bullying, forced penetrative sex acts
and other egregious harassment that resulted in suicidal thoughts or
attempted suicide, sexual dysfunction or the inability to work among
other severe effects.
The government has
set aside $100 million for claims but the lawyers stressed there is no
cap. In severe cases, relatives of claimants are each eligible to
receive five per cent of the award to the claimant — to a maximum of 10
per cent that would be shared if there are more than two affected
relatives.
Merlo, who called the day
bittersweet, said money could never compensate for the lost careers and
broken relationships, but she took comfort that other RCMP women will
now benefit.
“It’s too bad we had to do this,” Merlo said. “But it’s good that it’s done.”
Key
among terms of the deal are provisions that shield claimants’
identities from the RCMP. Privacy is especially important for women who
still work for the force, the court heard.
“All
of the information provided during the claims process, both written and
oral, will be kept confidential,” co-counsel Megan McPhee told
McDonald. “The RCMP does not receive any of the claims and has no right
to respond.”
Government lawyer Mitchell
Taylor said a “surprisingly” large number of women — 1,590 — had opted
out of the settlement, most because they said they had not suffered any
harassment or discrimination.
“We are proceeding nonetheless,” Taylor said. “We think it is a fair and proper settlement.”
Merlo,
now of St. John’s, N.L., was an RCMP constable from 1991 to 2010 who
suffered depression, panic attacks and other health effects due to her
mistreatment. Davidson, 58, now of Bracebridge, Ont., started with the
RCMP in 1985. She became one of the few women to become a commissioned
officer, rising to the rank of inspector. Davidson took medical leave in
2009 and retired in 2012.
The claims
process is to be overseen by former Supreme Court justice Michel
Bastarache, who attended Wednesday’s approval hearing.
The
government has also agreed to pay $12 million to the two law firms
involved. In addition, the lawyers will earn 15 per cent of amounts
awarded to claimants.
“We believe this is a superb settlement,” said lawyer David Klein, who represents Merlo “It was complex, high-risk litigation.”
Watchdog slams RCMP’s efforts to fix serious harassment problems, calls for oversight shakeup
Daniel Katz/PostmediaFile photo of an RCMP officer
Bullying
and harassment remain serious problems within the RCMP, and only major
changes to the way the national police force is run will make a
difference, says a national watchdog.
In a report today, the Civilian Review and Complaints Commission for
the RCMP says the force lacks both the will and the capacity to address
the challenges that afflict its workplaces.
The commission urges the federal government to usher in civilian
governance or oversight for the paramilitary-style police force.
Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale ordered the commission report to
see if the RCMP had properly acted on commission recommendations made
in 2013. At the time, the watchdog said the Mounties must take swift and
effective action to reassure both members and the public.
The RCMP introduced new harassment policies and processes in 2014
aimed at promptly dealing with workplace conflict before it escalates.
The latest report, however, says the vast majority of complaints
under the new policies involve allegations that managers abused their
authority. These included accusations of abusive language, such as
“you’re dirt,” “people here don’t like you” and “nobody wants to work
with you.”
Others complained of being berated in public, punitive transfers or having leave arbitrarily denied.
“Organizational dysfunction in the RCMP has been well documented, and
the commission’s current investigation confirmed that the problems of
workplace bullying and harassment persist,” the report says.
The commission found that while senior leaders in the RCMP have made
efforts to prevent harassment –particularly at the divisional level —
these initiatives have been limited and ad hoc, and have not received
the necessary support from headquarters.
There has been no effort by national headquarters to monitor their
effectiveness, roll out best practices, or institutionalize reform
“There has been no effort by national headquarters to monitor their
effectiveness, roll out best practices, or institutionalize reform,” the
report says.
Incidents of harassment — sometimes extending over months or years —
can have serious professional consequences and can cause real emotional
and physical harm, the watchdog adds. In turn, this may affect the
operational effectiveness of the RCMP.
A key problem is that the RCMP’s definition of harassment is unduly
narrow, and likely results in valid complaints being dismissed, the
commission says. The policies are also overly complex and difficult to
comprehend.
In addition, they place “inappropriate emphasis” on the
responsibility of the complainant to confront his or her harasser, and
on the duty of supervisors and managers to report harassment, the report
says.
Unlike other policing organizations, the RCMP primarily appoints
uniformed members to senior administrative positions like human
resources and labour relations, rather than civilian experts, the report
notes.
The commission recommends hiring more civilian expertise within the
force. But it also calls for basic structural change, such as:
— a model that leaves administrative and financial matters to civilians, and operational issues to RCMP commanders;
— division of responsibility between a civilian commissioner and a uniformed chief of department, like the New York police; or
— a civilian board of management that would provide general direction to the RCMP and enhance public accountability.
“While RCMP senior leadership is not absolved of the responsibility
to make more sustained and meaningful efforts to address workplace
harassment going forward, lasting change will only come from fundamental
reforms to RCMP governance,” the report concludes.
RCMP Commissioner Bob Paulson, who plans to step down at the end of
next month, has grappled with the harassment issues plaguing the force
throughout his tenure.
Last October, Paulson delivered an abject apology to hundreds of
current and former female officers and employees who were subjected to
alleged incidents of bullying, discrimination and harassment dating back
as long as four decades.
He also announced the settlement of two class-action lawsuits
stemming from the harassment allegations that have cast a long shadow
over the police force.
---------- Original message ----------
From: Megan McPhee mbm@kimorr.ca
Date: Sun, 28 May 2017 23:26:01 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: Re Federal Court File No. T-1557-15 versus
RCMP class action lawsuits etc.Well May 24th came and went and not a
peep from any of youror your lawyers N'esy Pas?
To: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com
I am out of the office today, and will have limited access to email in
my absence. I will return your email upon my return to the office. Thank
you.
---------- Original message ----------
From: Stephen.Thatcher@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
Date: Sun, 28 May 2017 19:23:55 -0400
Subject: Re: Re Federal Court File No. T-1557-15 versus RCMP class
action lawsuits etc.Well May 24th came and went and not a peep from any
of youror your lawyers N'esy Pas? (Away from the Office)
To: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com
I will be away from the office May 22 to 28, 2017. For immediate
assistance during business hours, please contact Kelly Barbe at
613-843-6120.
Thank you,
Stephen
*******************
Je serai absent du bureau du 22 au 28 mai 2017. Pour de l'assistance
immédiate durant les heures de travail, veuillez svp communiquer avec
Kelly Barbe 613-843-6120.
Merci,
Stephen
---------- Original message ----------
From: "Dalton, Craig (SD/DS)" Craig.Dalton@gnb.ca
Date: Sun, 28 May 2017 23:23:47 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: Re Federal Court File No. T-1557-15 versus
RCMP class action lawsuits etc.Well May 24th came and went and not a
peep from any of youror your lawyers N'esy Pas?
To: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com
I have recently assumed new responsibilities and I am no longer serving as Deputy Minister of Social Development.
Please note that Eric Beaulieu assumes the role of Deputy Minister for
the department. He can be reached at eric.beaulieu@gnb.ca .
Thank you
************************************************
J'ai récemment assumé de nouvelles responsabilités et je ne suis plus en
fonction en tant que sous-ministre du Développement social.
Veuillez noter que Eric Beaulieu assumera les fonctions de sous-ministre
à compter du 23 mai 2017. Il peut être rejoint à eric.beaulieu@gnb.ca .
Merci
---------- Original message ----------
From: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com
Date: Sun, 28 May 2017 19:23:38 -0400
Subject: Re Federal Court File No. T-1557-15 versus RCMP class action
lawsuits etc.Well May 24th came and went and not a peep from any of
youror your lawyers N'esy Pas?
To: Liliana.Longo@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, Michael.Duheme@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
hon.ralph.goodale@canada.ca, scott.bardsley@canada.ca,
wsantos@callkleinlawyers.com, mbm@kimorr.ca, wjk@kimorr.ca,
dklein@callkleinlawyers.com, Gunther.Schonfeldt@cpc-cpp.gc.ca,
Hon.Dominic.LeBlanc@canada.ca, tomengel@engellaw.ca,
Charles.Rusnell@cbc.ca, Paul.Lynch@edmontonpolice.ca,
Charmaine.Bulger@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, pamela.roth@sunmedia.ca,
dstaples@edmontonjournal.com, steve.murphy@ctv.ca,
alison.crawford@cbc.ca, oldmaison@yahoo.com, andre@jafaust.com,
CRAIG.DALTON@gnb.ca, Stephen.Horsman@gnb.ca,
Stephane.vaillancourt@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, Lesley.McCoy@crcc-ccetp.gc.ca,
ian.mcphail@crcc-ccetp.gc.ca, stephen.thatcher@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
info@pps-spp.ca, jean-pierre.blais@crtc.gc.ca, ht.lacroix@cbc.ca,
MulcaT@parl.gc.ca, cmunroe@glgmlaw.com, premier@gnb.ca,
PREMIER@gov.ns.ca
Cc: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com, Gilles.Blinn@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, Gilles.Moreau@forces.gc.ca, Larry.Tremblay@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com
Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2017 14:30:06 -0400
Subject: Re Federal Court File No. T-1557-15 versus RCMP class action
lawsuits about the cops harassing each other Why does the CROWN deny
that the cops have abused me as well?
To: Michael.Duheme@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
hon.ralph.goodale@canada.ca, scott.bardsley@canada.ca,
wsantos@callkleinlawyers.com, mbm@kimorr.ca, wjk@kimorr.ca,
dklein@callkleinlawyers.com, Gunther.Schonfeldt@cpc-cpp.gc.ca,
Hon.Dominic.LeBlanc@canada.ca, tomengel@engellaw.ca,
Charles.Rusnell@cbc.ca, Paul.Lynch@edmontonpolice.ca,
Charmaine.Bulger@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, pamela.roth@sunmedia.ca,
dstaples@edmontonjournal.com, steve.murphy@ctv.ca
Cc: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com, alison.crawford@cbc.ca,
oldmaison@yahoo.com, andre@jafaust.com, CRAIG.DALTON@gnb.ca ,
Stephen.Horsman@gnb.ca, Stephane.vaillancourt@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
Lesley.McCoy@crcc-ccetp.gc.ca, ian.mcphail@crcc-ccetp.gc.ca,
Liliana.Longo@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, stephen.thatcher@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
info@pps-spp.ca
Perhaps some lawyer other than Liliana Longo,
Dominic Leblanc or you should talk to me before I file a few more
lawsuits EH Minister Goodale and Tom Engel?
Liliana Longo
Senior General Counsel
Called to the bar: 1980 (QC)
Royal Canadian Mounted Police
Legal Services
73 Leikin Dr.
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0R2
Phone: 613-843-4433
Fax: 613-825-7489
Is This the Most Hated Lawyer in Town?
Tom Engel has laid more complaints against police officers than any
other lawyer in the province. And police have made complaints against
him more than 20 times.
by Charles Rusnell
Remand centre guard sued by law firm over drug-smuggling allegation
Lawsuit alleges guard told criminology students that lawyers were drug smugglers
By Charles Rusnell, Jennie Russell, CBC News Posted: Feb 08, 2016 12:53 PM MT
Edmonton lawyer Tom Engel asks for pair of city cops to be fired
First posted: Monday, July 07, 2014 04:33 PM MDT
Engel Law Office
200 Wentworth Bldg.
10209-97th St. N.W.
Edmonton, Alberta T5J 0L6
Phone: 780-448-3639
http://www.kimorr.ca/index.html#FL-RCMP
RCMP Class Action
January 17, 2017
On January 13, Justice McDonald of the Federal Court released reasons
certifying the action for settlement purposes. A copy of those reasons
can be read here. The Federal Court has scheduled the hearing of the
settlement approval motion for May 24, 2017 at 9:30 in Toronto. The
Notice of Certification and Settlement approval hearing is here. The
Notice in French is here. The opt out form is here.
On October 6, 2016, an historic settlement was reached in the systemic
harassment class actions brought against the Royal Canadian Mounted
Police by female RCMP employees. Under the proposed national
settlement, every single living current and former female regular
member, civilian member, and public service employee of the RCMP who
worked within the RCMP since 1974, and who experienced gender and/or
sexual orientation-based harassment and discrimination, will be
eligible to claim compensation, without fear of disclosing her
identity to the RCMP or of reprisals. The settlement is not effective
until approved by the Federal Court. Here is our press release from
today regarding this historic Settlement. To view the Federal Court
claim, click here.
To read more about this proposed Settlement, please go to
rcmpclassactionsettlement.ca.
On December 22, 2015, Justice Perell released reasons dismissing the
Crown’s motion to strike the statement of claim and confirming that
the pleading meets the s. 5(1)(a) cause of action criterion for
certification. To read a copy of the decision, please click here. The
balance of the certification motion, which was scheduled to be heard
May 26-27, 2016, has been adjourned.
Kim Orr Barristers is prosecuting a class action against the Attorney
General of Canada involving allegations of gender- and
sexual-orientation-based discrimination, bullying and harassment of
female Royal Canadian Mounted Police (the "RCMP") employees. The
action has been commenced in Ontario on behalf of all current or
former female regular members, civilian members and public service
employees of the RCMP in Canada, excluding persons resident in Quebec.
The claim alleges that men and women were, and are, treated
differently within the RCMP, and that female RCMP employees have been
subject to systemic discrimination, bullying and harassment on the
basis of their gender and/or sexual orientation. It also alleges that
the RCMP has failed to investigate, adjudicate and resolve conduct and
complaints about these issues, despite repeated reports over the years
about the problems within the organization.
The plaintiff is a former senior-level RCMP member who alleges that
she suffered discrimination, bullying and harassment throughout her
26-year RCMP career. The plaintiff alleges that as a result of this
treatment, she, as well as the other class members, suffered serious
injuries physical and emotional injuries, including post-traumatic
stress disorder, diminished self-worth, depression, and anxiety. The
claim also alleges that as a result of these systemic issues, female
RCMP employees have been denied training and promotions, and have even
taken early retirement or have left the organization.
The action seeks general, punitive and special damages for the
defendant's alleged failure to fulfill its statutory, common law and
contractual duties to provide female RCMP employees with a work
environment free of gender- and sexual-orientation-based
discrimination, bullying and harassment. The action also seeks damages
on behalf of family members of female RCMP employees who are entitled
to assert a claim under provincial legislation.
For more information on this case, please contact Megan B. McPhee at
mbm@kimorr.ca.
RCMP to face new class-action harassment lawsuit, this time on behalf
of male employees
Current and former members allege they were physically intimidated,
denied promotions, belittled and bullied
By Alison Crawford, CBC News Posted: Oct 25, 2016 8:35 PM ET
The RCMP will soon face another class-action harassment lawsuit — this
time on behalf of male Mounties and civilian employees of the force.
Earlier this month, the federal government and the RCMP set aside $100
million to settle an estimated 1,000 cases of female employees being
harassed and bullied at work.
CBC News has learned that one of the law firms that represented those
women is preparing to bring another suit for men — which could
potentially be much bigger given that men make up roughly 80 per cent
of the RCMP's workforce.
Mounties offer apology and $100M compensation for harassment,
abuse against female members
'This is a way for everybody to heal': ex-Mountie on RCMP compensation
External body needed to probe workplace complaints, senior Mountie says
"We've spoken with hundreds of members, and we're contacted by new
members every day," said lawyer Megan McPhee of Kim Orr Barristers in
Toronto, who has been working on the case for years. "The stories are
very consistent. We're told that there is a culture of bullying and
harassment within the force, and one of the regular issues that we
hear is a fear of speaking out, a fear of reprisals."
Cpl. Michael Mansoor, who's due to be medically discharged in January,
says he was diagnosed with PTSD after what he alleges was years of
harassment at the hands of his colleagues and superiors.
He says it started in 2001, when he was posted to his hometown of
Richmond, B.C., where his brother was in conflict with the law. It
wasn't long before Mansoor said he found his duties restricted.
"I was banned from any work section in the detachment except for
general duty and traffic because they acknowledged that there might be
a conflict," said Mansoor.
Wrongly accused of sexual assault
Despite pleas for a transfer, he says his superiors stuck to the local
convention that a member must serve five years in the detachment
before being moved.
Documents obtained under the Access to Information Act suggest
officers were suspicious of his family ties. Eventually, Mansoor found
himself suspended with pay and under investigation for what he alleges
are two trumped-up internal disciplinary charges.
Furthermore, due to a clerical error, Mansoor was also initially
accused of sexual assault.
"There was a minor glitch with [Mansoor's] security suspension
document service this morning," reads an internal email about
Mansoor's disciplinary charges. "There is a reference to a 'sexual
assault'.... It was our conclusion that HQ Ottawa had screwed up the
paperwork. Seems likely that they took a previous form letter,
re-tooled it for [Mansoor's] case and did not remove a phrase that did
not apply in this case."
As for the two other allegations, they later proved unfounded.
Whisper campaign
Over time, Mansoor says the ongoing whisper campaign and harassment
made him ill.
"There comes actually a point where you start to look at yourself and
go, 'Am I bringing this on myself? Because surely it's not this
widespread in an organization,'" Mansoor said.
Retired sergeant Hugo Desrochers says he knows exactly how that feels.
Retired Sgt. Hugo Desrochers
Retired sergeant Hugo Desrochers alleges that during his employment
with the RCMP he was stripped of responsibility, belittled in front of
colleagues and denied opportunities to develop his career. (Provided
by Desrochers)
He left the force last year after 26 years in a job he says, for the
most part, he loved. He was making his way up the ranks and working
towards another promotion, he says, but that came to a halt near the
end of his career when management changed at the RCMP detachment in
Cornwall, Ont.
"[I] started covering my back. Started taking notes to make sure I was
not going to be hung out to dry," Desrochers said.
Years of meticulous notes document allegations of being micromanaged,
stripped of his responsibilities, belittled in front of colleagues for
taking initiative and denied opportunities to further develop his
career.
The worst incident, according to Desrochers, was when the inspector
refused to sign off on his application to serve in Kosovo due to
shortcomings with his performance. Yet Desrochers says all his boss
managed to come up with, after repeated requests for specifics, was a
late overtime claim.
Retired Sgt. Hugo Desrochers
Desrochers, right, seen here on a marijuana bust in British Columbia
early in his career. (Provided by Desrochers)
"It takes a toll on you because you start questioning yourself...and
then you're not good," an emotional Desrochers told CBC News.
Desrochers welcomes the lawsuit.
"If nobody comes forward to say there's a problem, how are they going
to know there's a problem. Is it just me sitting here? No."
Belittled, physically intimidated
It's not just men in uniform who allege they've been harassed.
Garth Caron worked as a public servant from 2005 to 2015, doing
administrative work in detachments in Saskatchewan and Alberta. Caron
says his first experience with harassment was when a few Mounties took
issue with him being gay and subjected him to a number of pranks.
"I came in one morning to my workstation and I noticed a number of
female items on my desk — boxes of tampons and things like that — and
it kind of struck me as odd as to why they would have been left
there," he said.
At another detachment, Caron said a sergeant questioned his Métis
status, belittled him in front of colleagues and tried to physically
intimidate him. The union got involved and Caron says he agreed, while
under a great deal of duress, to retire before he was ready to leave
the workforce.
It's no secret the RCMP has a bullying problem. Commissioner Bob
Paulson has said so himself. In a 2012 interview with CBC News,
Paulson conceded that he too had been harassed at work.
"I think in the day, if you weren't sort of in line with your
officer's expectations or consistent with his or her vision of where
the organization was going, then you were pushed aside," he said. "And
it's a very uncomfortable feeling and a very destructive feeling, and
it doesn't speak to a transparent, ethical, organization."
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com
Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2016 12:46:00 -0400
Subject: A little Deja Vu for old pals of Kevin Vickers on the Hill to
review before their party hardy as Canada turns the corner on 150
tonight
To: heather.bradley@parl.gc.ca, Jean-Bruno.Tremblay@sen.parl.gc.ca,
Mike.McDonald@sen.parl.gc.ca, patrick.mcdonell@parl.gc.ca,
ppscommsspp@pps-spp.parl.gc.ca, Christopher.Nelligan@justice.ca,
Michael.Duheme@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, christian.bourgeois@parl.gc.ca,
denis.morin@parl.gc.ca, claude.st-germain@parl.gc.ca,
gilles.gervais@parl.gc.ca, geoff@geoffregan.ca,
Carol.Hughes@parl.gc.ca, bruce.stanton@parl.gc.ca, SpkrOff@parl.gc.ca,
geoff.regan@parl.gc.ca, geoff.regan.a1@parl.gc.ca,
john.wallace@sen.parl.gc.ca, rona.ambrose.A1@parl.gc.ca,
david.mcguinty@parl.gc.ca, MulcaT@parl.gc.ca, leader@greenparty.ca
Cc: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com, Dale.Morgan@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
garry.keller@parl.gc.ca, steven.blaney@parl.gc.ca,
Peter.Edge@ice.dhs.gov,
postur@for.is, Hon.Dominic.LeBlanc@canada.ca, smari@immi.is,
cmunroe@glgmlaw.com, Matt.DeCourcey.c1@parl.gc.ca, DJT@trumporg.com,
Alaina.Lockhart@parl.gc.ca, andrew.scheer@parl.gc.ca,
pmilliken@cswan.com, mcohen@trumporg.com, dmcgahn@jonesday.com,
oig@sec.gov, oig@ftc.gov, OIG@cap-police.senate.gov,
James.Comey@ic.fbi.gov, hon.ralph.goodale@canada.ca,
bob.paulson@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
They only time Vickers ever responded to me since 2004 was when his
computer acted ethically just Harper was preparing to ship him over to
Ireland a get him out of the way as he handed security over to the
RCMP.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: kevin.vickers@parl.gc.ca
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2014 17:43:20 -0500
Subject: Out of Office: Here is a little more Deja Vu for the CIBC,
the RCMP, the CBC etc and the lawyers/MLAs Jim Prentice QC PC Jonathan
Denis QC, Don.Scott QC and their newfound EX Wildrose pals
To: motomaniac333@gmail.com
Please be advised that the Sergeant-at-Arms is currently away from the
office and will be returning on Monday, November 17, 2014.
Veuillez noter que le sergent d’armes est absent du bureau et sera de retour le lundi 17 novembre 2014.
S’il s’agit d’une demande liée aux opérations, veuillez communiquer avec : Benoit Giroux, sergent d'armes par intérim Téléphone : 613-995-1990| Courriel : Benoit.Giroux@parl.gc.ca mailto:Benoit.Giroux@parl.gc.ca
S’il s’agit d’une demande de renseignements des médias, veuillez communiquer avec :
Heather Bradley Directrice des communications, Bureau du Président de la Chambre des communes Téléphone : 613-995-7882 | Courriel : heather.bradley@parl.gc.ca
En ce qui a trait aux réponses à la correspondance personnelle, vous devez vous attendre à un retard en raison du volume actuel.
Sunday, 19 February 2017 YO CST DALE DRUMMOND Do you or any the CROWN's lawyers recall the document hereto attached (Paragraph19 in particular) ? This is the text of the document
---------- Original message ---------- From: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2017 07:32:10 -0400 Subject: YO CST DALE DRUMMOND Do you or any the CROWN's lawyers recall the document hereto attached (Paragraph19 in particular) ? To: dale.drummond@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, pm@pm.gc.ca, Gerald.Butts@pmo-cpm.gc.ca, CRAIG.DALTON@gnb.ca, cmunroe@glgmlaw.com, bob.paulson@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
Dale.Morgan@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, brian.hodgson@assembly.ab.ca,
hon.ralph.goodale@canada.ca, scott.bardsley@canada.ca,
tim.turner@gov.ab.ca, Ezra@therebel.media, andre@jafaust.com,
oldmaison@yahoo.com, Gilles.Moreau@forces.gc.ca, Mark.Blakely@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, postur@for.is, briangallant10@gmail.com, premier@gnb.ca Cc:
david.raymond.amos@gmail.com, radical@radicalpress.com,
akemp@andrewkemp.ca, Gilles.Blinn@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
jan.jensen@justice.gc.ca, jill.chisholm@justice.gc.ca,
david.hansen@justice.gc.ca, bill.pentney@justice.gc.ca,
mcu@justice.gc.ca
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2017 08:00:47 -0400 Subject: Re Federal Court File No. T-1557-15 and the QMPMA application for a class action lawsuit against the RCMP byway of the CROWN To: assoc.mpmq@gmail.com, fsimedia@videotron.ca, charles.mancer@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, james@dugganavocats.ca, Serge.Bilodeau@rcmp-grc.gc.ca Cc:
david.raymond.amos@gmail.com, Mark.Blakely@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
Gilles.Blinn@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, dale.drummond@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
bernadine.chapman@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, Paulette.Delaney-Smith@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
Dale.Morgan@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
The Application for certification of a class action on behalf of all members of the RCMP (past and present) arose from the many members coming forward with their long-standing stories of harassment, abuse and discrimination experienced while working in the RCMP. These are stories that span many decades and point to a culture of bullying, harassment and discrimination in the RCMP.
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Lisa Porteous lporteous@kleinlyons.com Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2013 14:46:22 +0000 Subject: RCMP To: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com
David,
Thank you for your email inquiring about our class action against the RCMP. As you may know, the Notice of Claim was filed in the British Columbia Supreme Court on March 27, 2012. The lawsuit has been brought by former RCMP constable Janet Merlo on behalf of female RCMP members. Unfortunately, we cannot assist you with your claim.
We recommend that you contact Mr. Barry Carter of Mair Jensen Blair LLP to discuss any claim you may have against the RCMP for harassment. His contact information is as follows:
Mr. Barry Carter Mair Jensen Blair LLP 1380-885 W. Georgia Street Vancouver, BC V6C 3E8 Phone: 604-682-6299 Fax 1-604-374-6992
This is not intended to be an opinion concerning the merits of your case. In declining to represent you, we are not expressing an opinion as to whether you should take further action in this matter.
You should be aware that there may be strict time limitations within which you must act in order to protect your rights. Failure to begin your lawsuit by filing an action within the required time may mean that you could be barred forever from pursuing a claim. Therefore, you should immediately contact another lawyer ( as indicated above) to obtain legal advice/representation.
Thank you again for considering our firm.
Yours truly,
Lisa Porteous Case Manager/Paralegal
lporteous@kleinlyons.com www.kleinlyons.com
KLEIN ∙ LYONS Suite 400-1385 West 8th Avenue Vancouver BC V6H 3V9 Canada Office 604.874.7171 Fax 604.874.7180 Direct 604.714.6533
This email is confidential and may be protected by solicitor-client privilege. It is intended only for the use of the person to whom it is addressed. Any distribution, copying or other use by anyone else is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please telephone us immediately and destroy this e-mail.
Please consider the environment before printing this email.
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 15:08:00 -0400 Subject: I repeat You never got back to me Mr Spratt WHY? To: michael@agpllp.ca, bob.paulson@rcmp-grc.gc.ca Cc: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com, alison.crawford@cbc.ca, mcu@justice.gc.ca, Jody.Wilson-Raybould.a1@parl.gc.ca
Michael Spratt Criminal Defence Counsel 116 Lisgar St Ottawa, On K2P 0C2 613) 296-2561 michael@agpllp.ca
Liberals looking to eliminate many mandatory minimum sentences, justice minister says Wilson-Raybould says mandatory minimums contribute to backlogs in Canada's courts By Alison Crawford, CBC News Posted: Feb 11, 2017 5:00 AM ET
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2017 10:37:51 -0400 Subject: Fwd Even though the Premiers and Attorney Generals of ONT, QC, MA, SK, PEI, NS, BC and AB refuse to answer the documents I sent in 2005 and many wackos on the Internet deny that my lawsuit exists it does not follow that I am a liar To: postur@for.is, premier@gnb.ca Cc: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2017 10:36:19 -0400 Subject: Even though the Premiers and Attorney Generals of ONT, QC, MA, SK, PEI, NS, BC and AB refuse to answer the documents I sent in 2005 and many wackos on the Internet deny that my lawsuit exists it does not follow that I am a liar To: ministryofjustice@gov.ab.ca, premier@gov.ab.ca, suzanne.anton.mla@leg.bc.ca, premier@gov.bc.ca, vicki.huntington.MLA@leg.bc.ca, mike.dejong.mla@leg.bc.ca, bill.bennett.MLA@leg.bc.ca,
themayor@calgary.ca, cps@calgarypolice.ca, don.iveson@edmonton.ca,
eps@edmontonpolice.ca, radical@radicalpress.com, brian@brianruhe.ca,
sunrayzulu@shaw.ca, patrick_doran1@hotmail.com, andrew.weaver.mla@leg.bc.ca, adrian.dix.MLA@leg.bc.ca, eliasishak@yandex.com,
oldmaison@yahoo.com, smcintyre@sylvanlake.ca, deanrogerray@hotmail.com,
Gilles.Blinn@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, Dale.Morgan@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
corporate.security@calgary.ca, don.marshall@edmonton.ca,
Paul.Lynch@edmontonpolice.ca, paul@paulfromm.com, andre@jafaust.com,
jbosnitch@gmail.com, David.Coon@gnb.ca, david@lutz.nb.ca,
david.eidt@gnb.ca, info@greenparty.bc.ca, premier@gnb.ca,
PREMIER@gov.ns.ca, premier@gov.pe.ca Cc: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com
---------- Original message ---------- From: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2017 16:26:22 -0400 Subject: Perhaps you purportedly ethical Overseers of the Financial Industry should ask yourselves a very simple question To: ombuds@finra.org, Andrew.Bailey@fca.org.uk, dean.buzza@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, oig@sec.gov Cc: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com
How about some of the many computer responses to emails over the years?
On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 11:41 AM, PREM Premier Premier@gov.ab.ca wrote:
Please be advised that the Premier's e-mail address is intended to provide Albertans with a venue to share their comments on various government issues. Therefore, it is requested that the Premier's e-mail address be removed from your mailing list at the earliest opportunity.
Thank you in advance for your cooperation.
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: "Graff, Elisabeth JAG:EX" Elisabeth.Graff@gov.bc.ca Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2015 12:18:24 +0000 Subject: Automatic reply: A little year old Deja Vu for Chucky Leblancand all his old buddies in the Fake Left, the Greeen Meanies, RCMP. the Fredericton and Miramichi Police Forces to review one year later To: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com
I am away from the office until Tuesday, November 17, 2015. Please contact Sarah Gibbs at 250 356-8835, Sacha Williamson at 250 356-8826, or Carrol Parfitt at 250 356-8831 if you require any immediate assistance.
Thank you,
Elisabeth
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: David.Eby.MLA@leg.bc.ca Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2016 20:09:08 +0000 Subject: Automatic reply: RE Justice Camp the Canadian Judicial Council and Kathleen Ganley I just called Ganley's Ministry office and her assistant hung up me Go Figure EH Ezzy Baby Levant and Premier Notely? To: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com
Thank you for contacting my Community Office.
This automated response is to assure you that your message has been received by my office and will be reviewed as soon as possible, noting that constituents of Vancouver-Point Grey have priority. Please be sure to respond back and include your home address or postal code if you haven't already, to confirm you are a resident of Vancouver-Point Grey.
Due to the high volume of correspondence received, I am not be able to respond personally to every inquiry. In most cases, anonymous, cc'd, and forwarded items will not receive a response. Please do not hesitate to contact my office should you have any questions regarding the status of your query.
Should you have a situation that requires immediate attention, please call Service BC, toll-free at 1-800-663-7867 and they will connect you to the appropriate government ministry.
To find out which MLA represents your neighbourhood, you can enter your postal code here to get their contact information: https://www.leg.bc.ca/learn-about-us/members
Thanks again for writing, Community office of David Eby MLA, Vancouver-Point Grey 2909 West Broadway, Vancouver BC V6K 2G6 604-660-1297 | www.davidebymla.ca
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Jonathan Denis QC Jonathan.Denis@gov.ab.ca Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2015 18:35:30 +0000 Subject: Re: Well Mr Baconfat lets see if Patty Baby allows this comment on your LIVE talk show stand the test of time EH PERVERTS? To: Shawn Cullen shawncullen@telus.net Cc:
don.iveson@edmonton.ca, David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com,
sunrayzulu@shaw.ca, patrick_doran1@hotmail.com,
dale.johnson@edmontonpolice.ca, rod.knecht@edmontonpolice.ca,
geoff.crowe@edmontonpolice.ca, greg.preston@edmontonpolice.ca,
scott.mckeen@edmonton.ca, dave.loken@edmonton.ca, danny.copp@fredericton.ca,
lgunter@shaw.ca, Leanne.Fitch@fredericton.ca, oldmaison@yahoo.com,
andre@jafaust.com, martin.gaudet@fredericton.ca, Stephen.Horsman@gnb.ca,
eachtem@hotmail.com, deanr0032@hotmail.com, dean.buzza@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
Rhansen@calgarypolice.ca, grcanning@gmail.com,
scott.macrae@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,nbourdap@halifax.ca,
pol7163@calgarypolice.ca, bill.clark@edmontonpolice.ca, eps@edmontonpolice.ca, police@fredericton.ca, DDrummond@google.com, david.raymond.amos@gmail.com
Please also remove jonathan.denis@gov.ab.ca
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: "Johnston, Jennifer JAG:EX" Jennifer.Johnston@gov.bc.ca Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2013 18:03:35 -0700 Subject: Out of Office: Christy Clark and Stockwell Day dig up old blog comments about Indians to embarass Dix and Topp? Trust that that statemnt was a minor the tip of a very malevolent Iceberg for BOTH parities To: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com
I am away until April 23, 2013. I will not be checking my e-mails. If this is urgent, please call Kathy Backer at 250 992-4262.
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Premier PREMIER@gov.ns.ca Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2013 02:12:15 +0000 Subject: Automatic reply: [PROBABLE-SPAM] RE The corrupt RCMP their pal Senator Kenny, the evil Public Safety dudes and Old Email Exchanges that even the CBC CLEARLY FORGOT To: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com
On behalf of Premier Stephen McNeil, thank you for your email.
Given the volume of emails and letters received a response, if required, may take several business days.
If your email relates to a meeting request or an invitation to an event, you will hear from the Premier's scheduling committee regarding your request.
Premier McNeil appreciates you taking the time to write and values your input.
Warmest Regards,
Premier's Correspondence Unit
> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > >> From: Póstur FOR postur@for.is > >> Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2016 22:05:47 +0000 > >> Subject: Re: Hey Premier Gallant please inform the questionable > >> parliamentarian Birigtta Jonsdottir that although NB is a small "Have > >> Not" province at least we have twice the population of Iceland and > >> that not all of us are as dumb as she and her Prime Minister pretends > >> to be.. > >> To: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com > >> > >> Erindi þitt hefur verið móttekið / Your request has been received > >> > >> Kveðja / Best regards > >> Forsætisráðuneytið / Prime Minister's Office > >> > >> > >> This is the docket > >> > >> > 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 two hearings > >> > >> Dec 14th https://archive.org/details/BahHumbug > >> > >> Jan 11th https://archive.org/details/Jan11th2015 > >> > >> This me running for a seat in Parliament again while CBC denies it again > >> > >> Fundy Royal, New Brunswick Debate – Federal Elections 2015 - The Local > >> Campaign, Rogers TV > >> > >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-cFOKT6TlSE > >> > >> > http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/fundy-royal-riding-profile-1.3274276 > >> > >> Veritas Vincit > >> David Raymond Amos > >> 902 800 0369 > >> > >> > > > ---------- 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 > essential for the security and tranquility of the developed world. An > ISIS “caliphate,” in the Middle East, no matter how small, is a clear > and present danger to the entire world. This “occupied state,” > or“failed state” will prosecute an unending Islamic inspired war of > terror against not only the “western world,” but Arab states > “moderate” or not, as well. The security, safety, and tranquility of > Canada and Canadians are just at risk now with the emergence of an > ISIS“caliphate” no matter how large or small, as it was with the > Taliban and Al Quaeda “marriage” in Afghanistan. > > One of the everlasting “legacies” of the “Trudeau the Elder’s dynasty > was Canada and successive Liberal governments cowering behind the > amerkan’s nuclear and conventional military shield, at the same time > denigrating, insulting them, opposing them, and at the same time > self-aggrandizing ourselves as “peace keepers,” and progenitors of > “world peace.” Canada failed. The United States of Amerka, NATO, the > G7 and or G20 will no longer permit that sort of sanctimonious > behavior from Canada or its government any longer. And Prime Minister > Stephen Harper, Foreign Minister John Baird , and Cabinet are fully > cognizant of that reality. Even if some editorial boards, and pundits > are not. > > Justin, Trudeau “the younger” is reprising the time “honoured” liberal > mantra, and tradition of expecting the amerkans or the rest of the > world to do “the heavy lifting.” Justin Trudeau and his “butt buddy” > David Amos are telling Canadians that we can guarantee our security > and safety by expecting other nations to fight for us. That Canada can > and should attempt to guarantee Canadians safety by providing > “humanitarian aid” somewhere, and call a sitting US president a “war > criminal.” This morning Australia announced they too, were sending > tactical aircraft to eliminate the menace of an ISIS “caliphate.” > > In one sense Prime Minister Harper is every bit the scoundrel Trudeau > “the elder” and Jean ‘the crook” Chretien was. Just As Trudeau, and > successive Liberal governments delighted in diminishing, > marginalizing, under funding Canadian Forces, and sending Canadian > military men and women to die with inadequate kit and modern > equipment; so too is Prime Minister Stephen Harper. Canada’s F-18s are > antiquated, poorly equipped, and ought to have been replaced five > years ago. But alas, there won’t be single RCAF fighter jock that > won’t go, or won’t want to go, to make Canada safe or safer. > > My Grandfather served this country. My father served this country. My > Uncle served this country. And I have served this country. Justin > Trudeau has not served Canada in any way. Thomas Mulcair has not > served this country in any way. Liberals and so called social > democrats haven’t served this country in any way. David Amos, and > other drooling fools have not served this great nation in any way. Yet > these fools are more than prepared to ensure their, our safety to > other nations, and then criticize them for doing so. > > Canada must again, now, “do our bit” to guarantee our own security, > and tranquility, but also that of the world. Canada has never before > shirked its responsibility to its citizens and that of the world. > > Prime Minister Harper will not permit this country to do so now > > From: dnd_mdn@forces.gc.ca > Date: Fri, 27 May 2011 14:17:17 -0400 > Subject: RE: Re Greg Weston, The CBC , Wikileaks, USSOCOM, Canada and > the War in Iraq (I just called SOCOM and let them know I was still > alive > To: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com > > This is to confirm that the Minister of National Defence has received > your email and it will be reviewed in due course. Please do not reply > to this message: it is an automatic acknowledgement. > > >>>> > ---------- Original message ---------- > From: David Amos david.raymond.amos@gmail.com > Date: Fri, 27 May 2011 13:55:30 -0300 > Subject: Re Greg Weston, The CBC , Wikileaks, USSOCOM, Canada and the > War in Iraq (I just called SOCOM and let them know I was still alive > To: DECPR@forces.gc.ca, Public.Affairs@socom.mil, > Raymonde.Cleroux@mpcc-cppm.gc.ca, john.adams@cse-cst.gc.ca, > william.elliott@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, stoffp1 , > dnd_mdn@forces.gc.ca, media@drdc-rddc.gc.ca, information@forces.gc.ca, > milner@unb.ca, charters@unb.ca, lwindsor@unb.ca, > sarah.weir@mpcc-cppm.gc.ca, birgir@althingi.is, > smari@immi.is, greg.weston@cbc.ca, pm@pm.gc.ca > susan@blueskystrategygroup.com, Don@blueskystrategygroup.com, > eugene@blueskystrategygroup.com, americas@aljazeera.net > Cc: Edith.Cody-Rice@cbc.ca, "terry.seguin" > terry.seguin@cbc.ca, acampbell@ctv.ca, whistleblower > whistleblower@ctv.ca > > I talked to Don Newman earlier this week before the beancounters David > Dodge and Don Drummond now of Queen's gave their spin about Canada's > Health Care system yesterday and Sheila Fraser yapped on and on on > CAPAC during her last days in office as if she were oh so ethical.. To > be fair to him I just called Greg Weston (613-288-6938) I suggested > that he should at least Google SOUCOM and David Amos It would be wise > if he check ALL of CBC's sources before he publishes something else > about the DND EH Don Newman? Lets just say that the fact that your > old CBC buddy, Tony Burman is now in charge of Al Jazeera English > never impressed me. The fact that he set up a Canadian office is > interesting though > > http://www.blueskystrategygroup.com/index.php/team/don-newman/ > > > http://www.cbc.ca/news/arts/media/story/2010/05/04/al-jazeera-english-launch.html > > Anyone can call me back and stress test my integrity after they read > this simple pdf file. BTW what you Blue Sky dudes pubished about > Potash Corp and BHP is truly funny. Perhaps Stevey Boy Harper or Brad > Wall will fill ya in if you are to shy to call mean old me. > > http://www.scribd.com/doc/2718120/Integrity-Yea-Right > > The Governor General, the PMO and the PCO offices know that I am not a > shy political animal > > Veritas Vincit > David Raymond Amos > 902 800 0369 > > Enjoy Mr Weston > > http://www.cbc.ca/m/touch/news/story/2011/05/15/weston-iraq-invasion-wikileaks.html > > "But Lang, defence minister McCallum's chief of staff, says military > brass were not entirely forthcoming on the issue. For instance, he > says, even McCallum initially didn't know those soldiers were helping > to plan the invasion of Iraq up to the highest levels of command, > including a Canadian general. > > That general is Walt Natynczyk, now Canada's chief of defence staff, > who eight months after the invasion became deputy commander of 35,000 > U.S. soldiers and other allied forces in Iraq. Lang says Natynczyk was > also part of the team of mainly senior U.S. military brass that helped > prepare for the invasion from a mobile command in Kuwait." > > http://baconfat53.blogspot.com/2010/06/canada-and-united-states.html > > "I remember years ago when the debate was on in Canada, about there > being weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Our American 'friends" > demanded that Canada join into "the Coalition of the Willing. American > "veterans" and sportscasters loudly denounced Canada for NOT buying > into the US policy. > > At the time I was serving as a planner at NDHQ and with 24 other of my > colleagues we went to Tampa SOUCOM HQ to be involved in the planning > in the planning stages of the op....and to report to NDHQ, that would > report to the PMO upon the merits of the proposed operation. There was > never at anytime an existing target list of verified sites where there > were deployed WMD. > > Coalition assets were more than sufficient for the initial strike and > invasion phase but even at that point in the planning, we were > concerned about the number of "boots on the ground" for the occupation > (and end game) stage of an operation in Iraq. We were also concerned > about the American plans for occupation plans of Iraq because they at > that stage included no contingency for a handing over of civil > authority to a vetted Iraqi government and bureaucracy. > > There was no detailed plan for Iraq being "liberated" and returned to > its people...nor a thought to an eventual exit plan. This was contrary > to the lessons of Vietnam but also to current military thought, that > folks like Colin Powell and "Stuffy" Leighton and others elucidated > upon. "What's the mission" how long is the mission, what conditions > are to met before US troop can redeploy? Prime Minister Jean Chretien > and the PMO were even at the very preliminary planning stages wary of > Canadian involvement in an Iraq operation....History would prove them > correct. The political pressure being applied on the PMO from the > George W Bush administration was onerous > > American military assets were extremely overstretched, and Canadian > military assets even more so It was proposed by the PMO that Canadian > naval platforms would deploy to assist in naval quarantine operations > in the Gulf and that Canadian army assets would deploy in Afghanistan > thus permitting US army assets to redeploy for an Iraqi > operation....The PMO thought that "compromise would save Canadian > lives and liberal political capital.. and the priority of which > ....not necessarily in that order. " > > You can bet that I called these sneaky Yankees again today EH John > Adams? of the CSE within the DND? > > http://www.socom.mil/SOCOMHome/Pages/ContactUSSOCOM.aspx > >
Liliana Longo works as Senior General Counsel for
Justice Canada.
Liliana can be reached at 613-843-4451
Recorded entries for T-1685-16
Court number information
Court Number :
T-1685-16
Style of Cause :
JANET MERLO ET AL v. HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Proceeding Category :
Actions
Nature :
Others - Crown (v. Queen) [Actions]
Type of Action :
Ordinary
54 records found for T-1685-16
Doc
Date Filed
Office
Recorded Entry Summary
-
2017-05-24
Toronto
Toronto 24-MAY-2017 BEFORE The Honourable Madam Justice
McDonald Language: E Before the Court: Motion Doc. No. 15 on behalf of
PLAINTIFFS Result of Hearing: Matter reserved held in Court Senior Usher:
FRED LLOYD Duration per day: 24-MAY-2017 from 09:30 to 13:36 Courtroom :
Courtroom No. 5-C - Toronto Court Registrar: Michelle Gauvin Total Duration:
4h 6min Appearances: DAVID A.KLEIN / ANGELA BESPFLUG 604-874-7171
representing PLAINTIFFS WON J.KIM / MEGAN B.MCPHEE / ARIS GYAMFI 416-596-1414
representing PLAINTIFFS MITCHELL R.TAYLOR / CHARMAINE DE LOS REYES / SARAH
HAGEN 604-666-2324 representing Defendant Comments: DARS Z006132 USED TO
RECORD Minutes of Hearing entered in Vol. 975 page(s) 304 - 309 Abstract of
Hearing placed on file
23
2017-05-17
Vancouver
Affidavit of service of Amy Roy sworn on 17-MAY-2017 on
behalf of Plaintiff confirming service of Doc. 21, Proposed Approval Order
(ID50), Book of Authorities (ID 51) upon Defendant by email on consent on
17-MAY-2017 with Exhibits "A" filed on 17-MAY-2017
22
2017-05-17
Vancouver
Notice of Consent to Electronic Service on behalf of the
Defendant filed on 17-MAY-2017
-
2017-05-17
Vancouver
Book of Authorities consisting of 2 volume(s) on behalf of
Plaintiff received on 17-MAY-2017 Sent directly to Presiding Judge
-
2017-05-17
Vancouver
Proposed Settlement Approval Order re motion doc. 15 on
behalf of the Plaintiff (forms part of Doc. 21) received on 17-MAY-2017
21
2017-05-17
Vancouver
Motion Record containing the following original
document(s): 15 16 17 18 19 20 Number of copies received: 3 on behalf of
Plaintiff filed on 17-MAY-2017
20
2017-05-17
Vancouver
Memorandum of fact and law contained within a Motion
Record on behalf of Plaintiff filed on 17-MAY-2017
19
2017-05-17
Vancouver
Affidavit of Linda Gillis Davidson sworn on 11-MAY-2017
contained within a Motion Record on behalf of Plaintiff in support of Motion
Doc. No. 15 filed on 17-MAY-2017
18
2017-05-17
Vancouver
Affidavit of Janet Catherine Merlo sworn on 10-MAY-2017
contained within a Motion Record on behalf of Plaintiff in support of Motion
Doc. No. 15 with Exhibits "A - B" filed on 17-MAY-2017
17
2017-05-17
Vancouver
Affidavit of Mandy Ng sworn on 11-MAY-2017 contained
within a Motion Record on behalf of Plaintiff in support of Motion Doc. No.
15 with Exhibits "A - C" filed on 17-MAY-2017
16
2017-05-17
Vancouver
Affidavit of Whitney Santos sworn on 11-MAY-2017 contained
within a Motion Record on behalf of Plaintiff in support of Motion Doc. No.
15 with Exhibits "A - II" filed on 17-MAY-2017
15
2017-05-17
Vancouver
Notice of Motion contained within a Motion Record on
behalf of Plaintiff returnable at Special Sitting in Toronto on 24-MAY-2017
to begin at 09:30 for an Order for approval of settlement filed on
17-MAY-2017 Draft Order\\Judgment received.
-
2017-05-12
Ottawa
Lettre de l'Honoralbe juge Pierre-C. Gagnon, de la Cour
supérieur du Québec, en date du 12-MAI-2017 à l'Honorable juge Ann Marie
McDonald, transmettant à la Cour une copie de son jugement du 5 mai 2017 et
avisant la Cour qu'il a décrété que le dossier No 500-06-000819 de la Cour
supérieure du Québec, soit suspendu, pour donner préséance au dossier
T-370-17 de la Cour fédérale. reçue le 12-MAI-2017
-
2017-01-17
Ottawa
Acknowledgment of Receipt received from 4 counsel for the
parties by fax on 17-JAN-2017 with respect to Corrections to p.17 of the
Order and Reasons of McDonald, J., dated 13-JAN-2017 and corrected on
17-JAN-2017. placed on file on 17-JAN-2017
-
2017-01-17
Ottawa
Corrections to page(s) 17 of the Reasons of The Honourable
Madam Justice McDonald that were dated 13-JAN-2017 received on 17-JAN-2017
Corrected pages sent to 4 counsel for the parties by fax on 17-JAN-2017
-
2017-01-17
Ottawa
Acknowledgment of Receipt received from 4 counsel for the
parties by fax on 17-JAN-2017 with respect to Order doc. 14 of McDonald, J.
dated 17-JAN-2017. placed on file on 17-JAN-2017
14
2017-01-17
Ottawa
Order dated 17-JAN-2017 rendered by The Honourable Madam
Justice McDonald Matter considered without personal appearance The Court's
decision is with regard to Letter from Won J. Kim, co-counsel for Plaintiffs
on behalf of parties dated 16-JAN-2017 dated 17-JAN-2017 Result: "THIS
COURT ORDERS that: The hearing of the settlement motion is hereby fixed for
Wednesday, May 24, 2017, to commence at 9:30 a.m., at the Federal Court, 180
Queen Street West, in the city of Toronto, in the Province of Ontario, for a
duration not exceeding one (1) day; The parties shall file all materials in
support of the settlement motion no later than Wednesday, May 17, 2017; The
hearing shall be conducted in the English language." Filed on
17-JAN-2017 certified copies sent to 4 counsel for the parties by fax on
17-JAN-2017 Transmittal Letters placed on file. entered in J. & O. Book,
volume 1324 page(s) 134 - 135 Interlocutory Decision
-
2017-01-16
Ottawa
Letter from Won J. Kim of Kim Orr dated 16-JAN-2017 relating
to the scheduling of the motion to approve the settlement in this matter.
Further to their letter submitted on Friday, January 19, 2017 the parties are
requesting an earlier date for the motion. Also indicating an error in the
naming of counsel on the January 13, 2017 decision. Scanned to CMJ's
attention. received on 16-JAN-2017
-
2017-01-16
Ottawa
Acknowledgment of Receipt received from all parties with
respect to the Order and Reasons rendered on January 13, 2017 (via email)
placed on file on 16-JAN-2017
13
2017-01-13
Ottawa
Order and Reasons dated 13-JAN-2017 rendered by The
Honourable Madam Justice McDonald Matter considered with personal appearance
The Court's decision is with regard to Motion Doc. No. 5 Result: granted
Filed on 13-JAN-2017 entered in J. & O. Book, volume 1324 page(s) 1 - 35
Interlocutory Decision
-
2017-01-09
Toronto
Toronto 09-JAN-2017 BEFORE The Honourable Madam Justice
McDonald Language: E Before the Court: Motion Doc. No. 5 on behalf of
PLAINTIFFS Result of Hearing: Matter reserved held in Court Senior Usher:
FRED LLOYD Duration per day: 09-JAN-2017 from 09:33 to 10:44 Courtroom :
Courtroom No. 4-A - Toronto Court Registrar: Michelle Gauvin Total Duration:
1h 11min Appearances: DAVID KLEIN/ANGELA BESPFLUG 604-874-7171 representing
PLAINTIFFS WON KIM/MEGAN MCPHEE 416-596-1414 representing PLAINTIFFS GINA
SCARCELLA/SUSANNE PEREIRA/VICTORIA YANKOU 416-954-8111 representing Defendant
Comments: DARS Z006719 USED TO RECORD. DRAFT ORDER SUBMITTED TO COURT. Minutes
of Hearing entered in Vol. 966 page(s) 59 - 62 Abstract of Hearing placed on
file
12
2017-01-09
Toronto
Supplementary Affidavit of WHITNEY SANTOS sworn on
06-JAN-2017 on behalf of PLAINTIFFS in support of Motion Doc. No. 5 with
Exhibits A filed at hearing on 09-JAN-2017
-
2017-01-05
Ottawa
Letter from Plaintiff dated 03-JAN-2017 "...The
purpose of this letter is simply to advise the Court of the existence of a
dispute respecting the allocation of class counsel fees in the above-noted
matter..." received on 05-JAN-2017
11
2016-12-30
Toronto
Affidavit of service of Won J. Kim sworn on 30-DEC-2016 on
behalf of Plaintiff confirming service of doc. #10 and Id#30 (Book of
Authorities) upon all parties by e-mail on 30-DEC-2016 filed on 30-DEC-2016
-
2016-12-30
Toronto
Book of Authorities consisting of 1 volume(s) on behalf of
Plaintiff re motion on Consent received on 30-DEC-2016
10
2016-12-30
Toronto
Motion Record containing the following original
document(s): 5 6 7 8 9 Number of copies received: 3 on behalf of Plaintiff
vol. 1-3 filed on 30-DEC-2016
9
2016-12-30
Toronto
Memorandum of fact and law contained within a Motion
Record on behalf of Plaintiff filed on 30-DEC-2016
8
2016-12-30
Toronto
Affidavit of Linda Gillis Davidson sworn on 29-DEC-2016
contained within a Motion Record on behalf of Plaintiff in support of Motion
Doc. No. 5 with Exhibits "A"-"G" filed on 30-DEC-2016
7
2016-12-30
Toronto
Affidavit of Janet Catherine Merlo sworn on 28-DEC-2016
contained within a Motion Record on behalf of Plaintiff in support of Motion
Doc. No. 5 with Exhibits "A" filed on 30-DEC-2016
6
2016-12-30
Toronto
Affidavit of Whitney Snatos sworn on 23-DEC-2016 contained
within a Motion Record on behalf of Plaintiff in support of Motion Doc. No. 5
with Exhibits "A"-"H" filed on 30-DEC-2016
-
2016-12-30
Toronto
Draft Order concerning Motion Doc. No. 5 received on
30-DEC-2016
5
2016-12-30
Toronto
Notice of Motion contained within a Motion Record on
behalf of Plaintiff returnable at Special Sitting in Toronto on 09-JAN-2017
to begin at 09:30 for certification as a class action filed on 30-DEC-2016
Draft Order\\Judgment received.
-
2016-11-30
Ottawa
Acknowledgment of Receipt received from 4 counsel for the
parties by fax on 30-NOV-2016 with respect to Direction (ID 21) of the Chief
Justice, in a memorandum signed by the Hearings Coordinator (Time and Place),
dated 30-NOV-2016. placed on file on 30-NOV-2016
-
2016-11-30
Ottawa
Written directions received from the Court: Chief Justice
Crampton dated 30-NOV-2016 directing that in a memorandum signed by the
Hearings Coordinator, directing that: "The Chief Justice has indicated
the following: The Applicant's motion for certification as a class proceeding
will be heard before this Court at 180 Queen Street West, in the City of
Toronto, Ontario, on Monday, the 9th day of January, 2017 at 9:30 in the
forenoon for a duration of four (4) hours. As agreed by the parties, a joint
record for the consent certification hearing will be served and filed 10 days
prior to the hearing but no later than December 30, 2016." placed on
file on 30-NOV-2016 Confirmed in writing to the party(ies)
-
2016-11-14
Ottawa
Letter from Plaintiff dated 14-NOV-2016 "Further to
the Case Managment Conference of November 9, 2015, I have attached a schedule
setting out counsel in this action. We also confirm that all counsel are
available for a hearing of the consent certification motion on December 12,
13, the week of December 19, 2016 and the weeks of January 2 and 16th 2017.
Counsel anticipate that no more than one day will be required, although we
are optimistic that it can be completed in half day. We will file
comprehensive motion materials and a factunm addressing all of the issues on
the motion at least 7 days in advance of the hearing date..." received
on 14-NOV-2016
-
2016-11-09
Ottawa
Letter from Respondent, Canada dated 09-NOV-2016 advsing
of the names of Counsel for Canada that will appear at the Case Management
conference call on November 9, 2016. received on 09-NOV-2016
-
2016-11-09
Toronto
Toronto 09-NOV-2016 BEFORE The Honourable Madam Justice
McDonald Language: E Before the Court: Case Management Conference Result of
Hearing: Court to confirm potential dates for certification motion in
December 2016 or January 2017. held by way of Conference Call in chambers
Duration per day: 09-NOV-2016 from 15:00 to 15:22 Courtroom : Judge's
Chambers - Toronto Court Registrar: Beatriz Winter Total Duration: 22min
Appearances: David Klein and Angela Bespflug 604-874-7171 representing
Plaintiff Won Kim, Megan McPhee, Mandy Ng, and Eris Gyamfi 416-596-1414
representing Plaintiff Mitchell Taylor, Susanna Pereira, and Charmaine
De-Los-Reyes 604-666-2324 representing Defendant Gina Scarcella, Victoria
Yankou, and Andrew Law 416-954-8111 representing Defendant Liliana Longo,
Matthew Zadro, and Sarah Hegan 613-843-4451 representing RCMP Legal Services
Comments: Hearing recorded by hand-recorder Minutes of Hearing entered in
Vol. 961 page(s) 333 - 336 Abstract of Hearing placed on file
-
2016-11-09
Ottawa
Letter from Plaintiff dated 08-NOV-2016 writing to provide
the Court a procedural history of the case in advance of the case management
conference scheduled for 3:00 pm. on Wednesday, November 9, 2016. received on
09-NOV-2016
-
2016-11-08
Ottawa
Acknowledgment of Receipt received from Megan McPhee (KIMM
ORR Barristers, P.C.), with copy of Registry letter with respect to dated
1-NOV-2016, signed by Ms. McPhee on 8-NOV-2016, confirming receipt of 5
certified copies each of Orders documents no. 3 and 4. placed on file on
08-NOV-2016
-
2016-11-07
Ottawa
Memorandum to file from Cynthia Leaver, Ottawa Registry
dated 07-NOV-2016 Attached is a LIST OF COUNSEL, providing contact
information for co-counsel for the Plaintiffs and co-counsel for the
Defendant. Defendant's contact info was provided by the Plaintiffs' counsel
on Sun. 6-NOV-2016 (M. McPhee). placed on file.
-
2016-11-04
Ottawa
Successfull transmittal report received from facsimile
with respect to the Direction of the Court issued on November 4, 2016. placed
on file on 04-NOV-2016
-
2016-11-04
Ottawa
Oral directions received from the Court: The Honourable
Madam Justice McDonald dated 04-NOV-2016 directing that "A case
management by telephone conference will take place on Wednesday November 9,
2016 at 3:00 p.m." placed on file on 04-NOV-2016 Confirmed in writing to
the party(ies)
-
2016-11-03
Ottawa
Letter from Plaintiff dated 02-NOV-2016 writing in
accordance with the Order of Madam Prothonotary Tabib dated October 17, 2016,
and requesting that a telephone case management conference be scheduled and
providing the parties' mutual dates of availability. received on 03-NOV-2016
-
2016-11-01
Ottawa
Letter sent by Registry on 01-NOV-2016 to Plaintiff
enclosing 5 certified copies each of 2 Orders, docs. 3 and 4. Sent by
overnight courrier to Toronto Registry - Counter on 2-NOV-2016. Copy placed
on file.
-
2016-11-01
Ottawa
Letter from Plaintiff dated 01-NOV-2016 requesting 5
certified copies each of Orders doc. 3 and 4. received on 01-NOV-2016
-
2016-11-01
Ottawa
Acknowledgment of Receipt received from 2 co-counsel for
the Plaintiffs, only by fax on 1-NOV-2016 with respect to Order doc. 4 of the
Chief Justice, dated 1-NOV-2016. placed on file on 01-NOV-2016
4
2016-11-01
Ottawa
Order dated 01-NOV-2016 rendered by Chief Justice Crampton
Matter considered without personal appearance The Court's decision is with
regard to Order dated 18-OCT-2016 Result: "IT IS ORDERED pursuant to
Rule 383 that Justice Ann Marie McDonald is assigned as Case Management Judge
in this matter." Filed on 01-NOV-2016 certified copies sent to 2
co-counsel for the Plaintiffs, only by fax on 1-NOV-2016 Transmittal Letters
placed on file. entered in J. & O. Book, volume 1317 page(s) 203 - 203
Interlocutory Decision
-
2016-10-18
Ottawa
Communication to the Court from the Registry dated
18-OCT-2016 re: Sent to Judicial Administrator (per Order doc. 3) - CMJ to be
assigned
-
2016-10-18
Ottawa
Acknowledgment of Receipt received from 2 co-counsel for
the Plaintiffs, only, by fax on 18-OCT-2016 with respect to Order doc. 3 of
Tabib, P. dated 17-OCT-2016, received and filed in the Registry on
18-OCT-2016. placed on file on 18-OCT-2016
3
2016-10-18
Ottawa
Order dated 17-OCT-2016 rendered by Mireille Tabib,
Prothonotary Matter considered without personal appearance The Court's
decision is with regard to Letter from Plaintiff dated 12-OCT-2016 Result:
THIS COURT ORDERS that: 1. This proceeding shall continue as a specially
managed proceeding. 2. Counsel for the Plaintiffs shall transmit to counsel
for the Defendant this order, as well as the order designating a Case Management
Judge forthwith upon their issuance. 3. The Plaintiffs shall within 10 days
of an order designating a Case Management Judge, provide the Court with all
counsel's dates of mutual availability to participate in a case management
telephone conference." Filed on 18-OCT-2016 certified copies sent to 2
co-counsel for the Plaintiffs, only, by fax on 18-OCT-2016 Transmittal
Letters placed on file. entered in J. & O. Book, volume 1315 page(s) 341
- 342 Interlocutory Decision
-
2016-10-13
Ottawa
Communication to the Court from the Registry dated
13-OCT-2016 re: Plaintiffs' letter dated October 12, 2016
-
2016-10-12
Ottawa
Letter from Plaintiff dated 12-OCT-2016 re: Requesting the
appointment of a case management judge received on 12-OCT-2016
2
2016-10-07
Ottawa
Service copy of Statement of Claim with proof of service
upon Defendant on 07-OCT-2016 filed on 07-OCT-2016
1
2016-10-06
Ottawa
Statement of Claim and 2 copies filed on 06-OCT-2016
Certified copy(ies)/copy(ies) transmitted to Deputy Attorney General of
Canada Tariff other action - $150.00
No comments:
Post a Comment