Interim leader calls for end to 'self-inflicted wounds' as PC divisions remain
Call for consensus comes as members split on what party's future should look like
The interim leader of New Brunswick's Progressive Conservatives used the party's first meeting since the election to warn members against dividing into "ideological camps."
That comes after former leader Blaine Higgs, who lost his seat as the Liberals surged to a majority, faced criticism from elected members and party faithful over his direction — most notably on gender-identity policy and endorsement of a Christian conservative activist as a candidate.
While Higgs's message ultimately failed to gain enough traction to keep the party in power, interim PC Leader Glen Savoie urged members in a speech Saturday to move past blaming Higgs for the loss.
"You may remember the phrase, 'Those who fail to learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat them,'" Savoie said, noting the 1987 election where Frank McKenna's Liberals won every legislature seat.
Savoie urged members to come together around a common purpose. (Benjamin Ford/CBC)
"Twelve years of excruciating Liberal rule.... Why? Because we remained fractured as a party. We divided into ideological camps because we could not come to consensus, and in so doing gave a clear path for the Liberals of the day.
"The cycles of self-inflicted wounds, election loss, rebirth – it's all there, replayed over and over again."
Savoie urged members to instead come together around a common purpose.
"We can find better ways to disagree than we have most recently, I have to believe that," Savoie said.
Mike Dawson was the only PC MLA not in attendance at Saturday's AGM. (Jacques Poitras/CBC)
All elected PCs were in attendance, and joined Savoie on stage, except for Miramichi West MLA Mike Dawson.
The second-term MLA said he wouldn't be attending the AGM, which he called a "secret meeting" in a social media post the night before.
"There was an election on October 21, 2024, in New Brunswick. I want my constituents, and all New Brunswickers to know that I got the message," he said.
"New Brunswickers told us that they expect an open and transparent government that listens when they speak.... The way to demonstrate this openness, transparency and respect for voters begins with the culture of our political parties."
Dawson, who did not respond to an interview request, took issue with the meeting having an early registration deadline for members to attend and vote, the agenda lacking a question period for members, and a decision to exclude media from attending.
Brian Harquail said he was disappointed to see an early deadline to attend the AGM. (Savannah Awde/CBC)
When asked if Dawson will be allowed to remain in the PC caucus, Savoie said the group would make that decision privately.
Former Progressive Conservative Party of New Brunswick president Brian Harquail noted the early registration deadline as a departure from the practice he's seen at party AGMs over the past few decades.
"We have candidates, we have former, past presidents like myself, former ministers, that can't go to their own AGM," he said.
Re-elected MLA Ryan Cullins was in that boat, and appeared on stage with Savoie during the address, but was not allowed to be in the room or vote in the meeting.
Jason Cooling, a PC regional vice-president candidate, was also affected by the change. He was waiting outside the room on Saturday to hear the result of that vote.
Jason
Cooling, a regional vice-president nominee, worries there's appetite in
the party to maintain the status quo despite an election loss. (Savannah Awde/CBC)
He is concerned that the changes were an attempt to reduce access to the meeting, and in turn try to maintain a direction that voters rejected at the ballot box.
"Most parties in the past, if you lose you lose, that's just the way it is ... this time around it seems different. With this sort of, I'm not sure, an attempt to maintain the status quo," he said.
"I do know that there is a large groundswell of the grassroots people who do feel left out of the party. They're hurt."
PC president Erika Hachey declined to be interviewed, but newly elected vice-president Diane Carey said any concerns brought by members would be taken under consideration.
As Savoie called for unity around a common purpose, on Saturday members had varying thoughts on what that should mean.
Carey believes that direction will be different than the one Higgs took during the election, adding that she plans to make sure Francophone voices are heard by the party.
Diane
Carey, elected vice-president by party members Saturday, says the party
needs to improve its relationship with Francophone New Brunswickers. (Benjamin Ford/CBC)
"It's going to be, for us to be able to ... be just not in southern New Brunswick but be present in all parts of New Brunswick," she said.
Re-elected MLA Kris Austin didn't answer directly on whether the party needs a change in direction, but said he believes some of the more socially conservative stances Higgs took are gaining traction across North America.
"I do not believe for a second that we lost the election on [Policy] 713. I think we held seats because of our stance on that," Austin said in an interview.
Savoie believes better communication is at the heart of how the party moves forward, noting there are still a "wide array of opinions and viewpoints" under the blue tent.
"To understand where we went wrong, it's not going to be a one-day process," he said. "It's going to be a many-day process. But I think if we take our time, we're very measured and we're thoughtful in how we do that, we will get to where we need to be."
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
https://www.facebook.com/mike.dawson.14
Mike Dawson
Intro
Lives in Miramichi, New Brunswick
Married
1 mutual friend
Dear constituents,
Well…
the votes have been counted from yesterday, and I am humbled to have
been elected as the first Member of the Legislative Assembly for
Miramichi-West.
As
I indicated in a recent post, being elected (and now re-elected) as a
Member of the Legislative Assembly is an honour that I am not sure I am
worthy of.
Nothing is more important to me in this role, than your trust. I am frankly humbled by it.
I
want to take this opportunity to thank each person who offered their
name as a candidate in the most recent provincial election, regardless
of which riding, or political party, they represented. The diversity of
thoughts and ideas is what makes our democracy strong.
I solemnly promise to be your voice in Fredericton, and not to be the messenger of Fredericton here at home.
I
would like to take a moment to thank my wife Kathy and family for their
support, without them, this would definately not be possible.
Also
all the volunteers who spent countless hrs of there time to help "US"
win last night. Volunteers are what make these elections move and to ALL
of ours, I say THANK YOU.
It
is no secret that outgoing Premier Blaine Higgs and I did not always
agree, but want it stated for the record that I believe he is a good
man. I want to thank him for his service to New Brunswick.
I
want to congratulate Premier elect Susan Holt for her victory and
promise to encourage and support her, and her government, when they
manage the affairs of our province while balancing the budget and acting
the interests of my constituents. Likewise, I promise to do my part to
hold her, and her government, accountable when they do not.
Lastly,
I want to thank each and every person who voted in this election,
whether for, or against me. Your voice has been heard, and I am humbled
by the result.
Please feel free to contact me anytime on my cel at 506-210-0684.
Sincerely,
Mike Dawson
MLA-Elect Miramichi West
For
a couple of hours tomorrow, on November 9, 2024, a select group of
members of the Progressive Conservative Party of New Brunswick will meet
for the first time in two years for an ‘annual’ meeting.
I did not receive the invitation, and I will not be there.
There
was an election on October 21, 2024, in New Brunswick. I want my
constituents, and all New Brunswickers to know that I got the message.
What was the message?
Setting
aside for a moment questions of ‘substance’, on questions of ‘style’
New Brunswickers told us that they expect an open and transparent
government that listens when they speak. New Brunswickers expect
leadership, which is earned, not demanded.
The
way to demonstrate this openness, transparency and respect for voters
begins with the culture of our political parties, in my case the
Progressive Conservative Party of New Brunswick.
Despite
this clear message, a select group of Members of the Progressive
Conservative Party of New Brunswick were ‘invited’ to attend our first
‘annual’ meeting in two years. Registration for this secret meeting was
closed 6 days before the meeting itself, and only 8 days after the
careful notice was sent out. The media are not welcome at the event.
There is no opportunity on the agenda for those that are in attendance
to address the room or to seek answers to their very legitimate
questions.
To
all my constituents – whether you voted for me, for one of my
opponents, or decided not to vote at all – I want you to know that as a
Progressive Conservative Member of the Legislative Assembly, I am
committed to providing better leadership. I am committed to
demonstrating the leadership which you endorsed with your votes several
weeks ago.
We
may not always agree, but we can disagree without being disagreeable. I
will listen. I will be transparent. I will be tolerant of those with
different opinions. I encourage everyone to get involved and contribute
to our democracy.
Sadly,
as it relates to the Progressive Conservative Party of New Brunswick
for now… the beatings will continue until morale improves. (The very
thing you are doing is causing the pain you are trying to stop.)
Mike Dawson, MLA
Miramichi West
1 Comment
Laura Young-Perry
Confused to see comments stating the MLAs were in attendance. Is this a different meeting?
https://www.facebook.com/briang.harquail
Was
very disappointed yesterday after returning from vacation to learn
that registering for the upcoming progressive Conservative AGM had
closed at noon.Which means
that many,many members,past presidents,candidates and former Mla’s,
former ministers and many New Brunswick citizens are not going to be
allowed to participate in the democratic right to vote for the folks
that have decided to let their name stand for election on the provincial
council.
The
PC party have just suffered one of the largest defeats in NB
history,Our party is badly fractured and needs to heal,it’s time to put
our past differences behind us and look to the future,it’s a time to
rebuild and unite together and build a stronger,better party,To the best
of my knowledge there should have been a published statement from the
PC executive in the local news media 30 days prior to the date of said
AGM,also there was a time when you could register on the day of the
AGM.This did not happen..
Sometimes
it’s important when you want to rebuild you need change..Change starts
at the top.This responsibility lies on the shoulders of the President
and the executive director of the party.Mr.Higgs did the right thing by
resigning as leader,and I thank him for his service to the people of the
province.
Something to think about,!
Brian G Harquail,
Past President of the PC party of NB
Past Executive Director of the PC party of NB
Former Chief of staff of the government members,
Former campaign manager for Bernard Lord.(1999)
4 Comments
Faus Johnson
This is the kind of shit the PC’s pull here!! 
Mike Dawson
Couldn't agree more Brian, I'll stand up with the people in the back of the room not the people at the front!!
Max White
Your right on target Brian
Ron Sutton
I would like the see the party rebranded from PC to just Conservative. Progressivism has no place with conservatism.
NBCP = New Brunswick Conservative Party.
https://new-brunswick.411numbers-canada.com/directory/5064585842/fredericton/leslie-&-brian-harquail.html#google_vignette
Brian Harquail
506 458 5842---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Nov 4, 2024 at 11:43 AM
Subject: Premier Susan Holt and her new cabinet know some folks have a long memory and keep good records as well EH Ian Lee?
To: ltgov <ltgov@gnb.ca>, jake.stewart <jake.stewart@parl.gc.ca>, pm <pm@pm.gc.ca>, Katie.Telford <Katie.Telford@pmo-cpm.gc.ca>, rob.moore <rob.moore@parl.gc.ca>, John.Williamson <John.Williamson@parl.gc.ca>, Richard.Bragdon <Richard.Bragdon@parl.gc.ca>, <Rob.weir.riverview@gmail.com>, <DonMonahan@hotmail.com>, <ian.lee@gnb.ca>, kathy.bockus <kathy.bockus@gnb.ca>, Tammy.Scott-Wallace <Tammy.Scott-Wallace@gnb.ca>, sherry.wilson <sherry.wilson@gnb.ca>, mary.wilson <mary.wilson@gnb.ca>, Ryan.Cullins <Ryan.Cullins@gnb.ca>, Richard.Ames <Richard.Ames@gnb.ca>, Glen.Savoie <Glen.Savoie@gnb.ca>, kris.austin <kris.austin@gnb.ca>, michelle.conroy <michelle.conroy@gnb.ca>, Margaret.Johnson <Margaret.Johnson@gnb.ca>, Bill.Oliver <Bill.Oliver@gnb.ca>, Bill.Hogan <Bill.Hogan@gnb.ca>, Mike.Dawson <Mike.Dawson@gnb.ca>, robert.gauvin <robert.gauvin@gnb.ca>, robert.mckee <robert.mckee@gnb.ca>, Mike.Comeau <Mike.Comeau@gnb.ca>, Susan.Holt <Susan.Holt@gnb.ca>
Cc: darrow.macintyre <darrow.macintyre@cbc.ca>, pierre.poilievre <pierre.poilievre@parl.gc.ca>, premier <premier@gov.ab.ca>, Office of the Premier <scott.moe@gov.sk.ca>, premier <premier@gov.pe.ca>, premier <premier@ontario.ca>, PREMIER <PREMIER@gov.ns.ca>, local <local@chco.tv>
From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Nov 4, 2024 at 11:43 AM
Subject: Premier Susan Holt and her new cabinet know some folks have a long memory and keep good records as well EH Ian Lee?
To: ltgov <ltgov@gnb.ca>, jake.stewart <jake.stewart@parl.gc.ca>, pm <pm@pm.gc.ca>, Katie.Telford <Katie.Telford@pmo-cpm.gc.ca>, rob.moore <rob.moore@parl.gc.ca>, John.Williamson <John.Williamson@parl.gc.ca>, Richard.Bragdon <Richard.Bragdon@parl.gc.ca>, <Rob.weir.riverview@gmail.com>, <DonMonahan@hotmail.com>, <ian.lee@gnb.ca>, kathy.bockus <kathy.bockus@gnb.ca>, Tammy.Scott-Wallace <Tammy.Scott-Wallace@gnb.ca>, sherry.wilson <sherry.wilson@gnb.ca>, mary.wilson <mary.wilson@gnb.ca>, Ryan.Cullins <Ryan.Cullins@gnb.ca>, Richard.Ames <Richard.Ames@gnb.ca>, Glen.Savoie <Glen.Savoie@gnb.ca>, kris.austin <kris.austin@gnb.ca>, michelle.conroy <michelle.conroy@gnb.ca>, Margaret.Johnson <Margaret.Johnson@gnb.ca>, Bill.Oliver <Bill.Oliver@gnb.ca>, Bill.Hogan <Bill.Hogan@gnb.ca>, Mike.Dawson <Mike.Dawson@gnb.ca>, robert.gauvin <robert.gauvin@gnb.ca>, robert.mckee <robert.mckee@gnb.ca>, Mike.Comeau <Mike.Comeau@gnb.ca>, Susan.Holt <Susan.Holt@gnb.ca>
Cc: darrow.macintyre <darrow.macintyre@cbc.ca>, pierre.poilievre <pierre.poilievre@parl.gc.ca>, premier <premier@gov.ab.ca>, Office of the Premier <scott.moe@gov.sk.ca>, premier <premier@gov.pe.ca>, premier <premier@ontario.ca>, PREMIER <PREMIER@gov.ns.ca>, local <local@chco.tv>
Swearing-In Ceremony; Nov 2nd, 2024; Legislative Assembly of New Brunswick; Fredericton, NB.
Saturday 2 November 2024
Premier-designate Susan Holt, new cabinet to be sworn in at legislature
---------- Original message ---------
From: LeBlanc, Dominic - député <dominic.leblanc@parl.gc.ca>
Date: Mon, Jun 10, 2024 at 9:03 PM
Subject: Automatic reply: RE The Killing of David Amos and His Family
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
From: LeBlanc, Dominic - député <dominic.leblanc@parl.gc.ca>
Date: Mon, Jun 10, 2024 at 9:03 PM
Subject: Automatic reply: RE The Killing of David Amos and His Family
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
(English follows)
Bonjour,
Nous
accusons réception de votre courriel adressé à L’honorable Dominic
LeBlanc, cp, cr, député de Beauséjour et nous vous en remercions.
Veuillez noter que nous recevons actuellement un volume élevé de correspondances. Veuillez prévoir un délai dans nos réponses.
En ce qui concerne les courriels relativement à des enjeux particuliers de nos commettants de Beauséjour, nous allons nous assurer de bien réviser votre message et un employé de notre bureau de circonscription communiquera avec vous si nécessaire. Si vous avez des questions ou vous désirez des clarifications, vous pouvez toujours communiquer avec notre bureau au numéro de téléphone suivant : (506) 533-5700.
Si vous écrivez à propos de sujets relatifs aux fonctions de sécurité publique du
ministre LeBlanc, veuillez communiquer avec notre département de Sécurité publique à ps.ministerofpublicsafety-
Pour toutes demandes des médias, veuillez contacter Kelly Ouimet à Kelly.Ouimet@iga-aig.gc.ca
Merci et bonne journée.
Bureau de L’hon. Dominic LeBlanc, cp, cr, député
Député de Beauséjour
------------------------------
Hello,
We acknowledge receipt and thank you for your email addressed to the Honourable Dominic LeBlanc, P.C., K.C., M.P. for Beauséjour.
Please note that we are currently receiving a high volume of correspondence. This may mean a delay in our responding to you.
For emails related to specific issues from our constituents in Beauséjour, we will make sure to review your message and an employee from our constituency office will be in contact with you if necessary. If you have any questions or require clarification, you can always contact our office at the following phone number: (506) 533-5700.
If you are writing with respect to Minister LeBlanc's public safety duties, please
direct your correspondence to our Public Safety department at ps.ministerofpublicsafety-
For all media inquiries, please contact Kelly
Ouimet at Kelly.Ouimet@iga-aig.gc.ca
Thank you and have a good day.
Office of the Hon. Dominic LeBlanc, P.C., K.C., M.P.
Member of Parliament for Beauséjour
---------- Original message ---------
From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Jun 10, 2024 at 9:02 PM
Subject: RE The Killing of David Amos and His Family
To: <sirt@gov.ns.ca>, dominic.leblanc <dominic.leblanc@parl.gc.ca>, rob.moore <rob.moore@parl.gc.ca>, mcu <mcu@justice.gc.ca>, <ps.ministerofpublicsafety-ministredelasecuritepublique.sp@ps-sp.gc.ca>, <michael.chong@parl.gc.ca>, martin.gaudet <martin.gaudet@fredericton.ca>, Mark.Blakely <Mark.Blakely@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, kris.austin <kris.austin@gnb.ca>, Mike.Dawson <Mike.Dawson@gnb.ca>, Mike.Comeau <Mike.Comeau@gnb.ca>, John.Williamson <John.Williamson@parl.gc.ca>, andrea.anderson-mason <andrea.anderson-mason@gnb.ca>, Ross.Wetmore <Ross.Wetmore@gnb.ca>, blaine.higgs <blaine.higgs@pcnb.org>, robert.mckee <robert.mckee@gnb.ca>, Susan.Holt <Susan.Holt@gnb.ca>, hugh.flemming <hugh.flemming@gnb.ca>, <natasha.calvinho@gmail.com>, National Citizens Inquiry <info@nationalcitizensinquiry.ca>, Nathalie.G.Drouin <Nathalie.G.Drouin@pco-bcp.gc.ca>, Robert. Jones <Robert.Jones@cbc.ca>
From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Jun 10, 2024 at 9:02 PM
Subject: RE The Killing of David Amos and His Family
To: <sirt@gov.ns.ca>, dominic.leblanc <dominic.leblanc@parl.gc.ca>, rob.moore <rob.moore@parl.gc.ca>, mcu <mcu@justice.gc.ca>, <ps.ministerofpublicsafety-ministredelasecuritepublique.sp@ps-sp.gc.ca>, <michael.chong@parl.gc.ca>, martin.gaudet <martin.gaudet@fredericton.ca>, Mark.Blakely <Mark.Blakely@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, kris.austin <kris.austin@gnb.ca>, Mike.Dawson <Mike.Dawson@gnb.ca>, Mike.Comeau <Mike.Comeau@gnb.ca>, John.Williamson <John.Williamson@parl.gc.ca>, andrea.anderson-mason <andrea.anderson-mason@gnb.ca>, Ross.Wetmore <Ross.Wetmore@gnb.ca>, blaine.higgs <blaine.higgs@pcnb.org>, robert.mckee <robert.mckee@gnb.ca>, Susan.Holt <Susan.Holt@gnb.ca>, hugh.flemming <hugh.flemming@gnb.ca>, <natasha.calvinho@gmail.com>, National Citizens Inquiry <info@nationalcitizensinquiry.ca>, Nathalie.G.Drouin <Nathalie.G.Drouin@pco-bcp.gc.ca>, Robert. Jones <Robert.Jones@cbc.ca>
NEW BRUNSWICK OFFICE
Marysville Place
20 McGloin Street, 1st Flr.
Fredericton, NB E3A 5T8
506-444-4934
Toll Free: 1-855-450-2010
Email: sirt@gov.ns.ca
---------- Original message ---------
From: Moore, Rob - M.P. <Rob.Moore@parl.gc.ca>
Date: Tue, Jun 11, 2024 at 10:31 AM
Subject: Automatic reply: RE The Killing of David Amos and His Family
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
From: Moore, Rob - M.P. <Rob.Moore@parl.gc.ca>
Date: Tue, Jun 11, 2024 at 10:31 AM
Subject: Automatic reply: RE The Killing of David Amos and His Family
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
*This is an automated response*
Thank you for contacting the Honourable Rob Moore, P.C., M.P. office. We appreciate the time you took to get in touch with our office.
If you did not already, please ensure to include your full contact details on your email and the appropriate staff will be able to action your request. We strive to ensure all constituent correspondence is responded to in a timely manner.
If your question or concern is time sensitive, please call our office: 506-832-4200.
Again, we thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts and concerns.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
Office of the Honourable Rob Moore, P.C., M.P.
Member of Parliament for Fundy Royal
---------- Original message ---------
From: Chong, Michael - M.P. <michael.chong@parl.gc.ca>
Date: Tue, Jun 11, 2024 at 10:31 AM
Subject: Automatic reply: RE The Killing of David Amos and His Family
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
From: Chong, Michael - M.P. <michael.chong@parl.gc.ca>
Date: Tue, Jun 11, 2024 at 10:31 AM
Subject: Automatic reply: RE The Killing of David Amos and His Family
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
Thanks very much for getting in touch with me!
This email is to acknowledge receipt of your message and to let you know that every incoming email is read and reviewed. A member of my Wellington-Halton Hills team will be in touch with you shortly if follow-up is required.
Due to the high volume of email correspondence, priority is given to responding to residents of Wellington-Halton Hills and to emails of a non-chain (or “forwards”) variety.
In your email, if you:
· have verified that you are a constituent by including your complete residential postal address and a phone number, a response will be provided in a timely manner.
· have not included your residential postal mailing address, please resend your email with your complete residential postal address and phone number, and a response will be forthcoming.
If you are not a constituent of Wellington Halton-Hills, please contact your Member of Parliament. If you are unsure who your MP is, you can find them by searching your postal code at http://www.ourcommons.ca/en
Any constituents of Wellington-Halton Hills who require urgent attention are encouraged to call the constituency office at 1-866-878-5556 (toll-free in riding). Please rest assured that any voicemails will be returned promptly.
Once again, thank you for your email.
The Hon. Michael Chong, M.P.
Wellington-Halton Hills
toll free riding office:1-866-878-5556
Ottawa office: 613-992-4179
E-mail: michael.chong@parl.gc.ca
Website : www.michaelchong.ca
THIS MESSAGE IS ONLY INTENDED FOR THE USE OF THE INTENDED RECIPIENT(S) AND MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION THAT IS PRIVILEGED, PROPRIETARY AND/OR CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution, copying, conversion to hard copy or other use of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient and have received this message in error, please notify me by return e-mail and delete this message from your system.
---------- Original message ---------
From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Jun 11, 2024 at 10:30 AM
Subject: Re: RE The Killing of David Amos and His Family
To: <sirt@gov.ns.ca>, dominic.leblanc <dominic.leblanc@parl.gc.ca>, rob.moore <rob.moore@parl.gc.ca>, mcu <mcu@justice.gc.ca>, <ps.ministerofpublicsafety-ministredelasecuritepublique.sp@ps-sp.gc.ca>, <michael.chong@parl.gc.ca>, martin.gaudet <martin.gaudet@fredericton.ca>, Mark.Blakely <Mark.Blakely@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, kris.austin <kris.austin@gnb.ca>, Mike.Dawson <Mike.Dawson@gnb.ca>, Mike.Comeau <Mike.Comeau@gnb.ca>, John.Williamson <John.Williamson@parl.gc.ca>, andrea.anderson-mason <andrea.anderson-mason@gnb.ca>, Ross.Wetmore <Ross.Wetmore@gnb.ca>, blaine.higgs <blaine.higgs@pcnb.org>, robert.mckee <robert.mckee@gnb.ca>, Susan.Holt <Susan.Holt@gnb.ca>, hugh.flemming <hugh.flemming@gnb.ca>, <natasha.calvinho@gmail.com>, National Citizens Inquiry <info@nationalcitizensinquiry.ca>, Nathalie.G.Drouin <Nathalie.G.Drouin@pco-bcp.gc.ca>, Robert. Jones <Robert.Jones@cbc.ca>
From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Jun 11, 2024 at 10:30 AM
Subject: Re: RE The Killing of David Amos and His Family
To: <sirt@gov.ns.ca>, dominic.leblanc <dominic.leblanc@parl.gc.ca>, rob.moore <rob.moore@parl.gc.ca>, mcu <mcu@justice.gc.ca>, <ps.ministerofpublicsafety-ministredelasecuritepublique.sp@ps-sp.gc.ca>, <michael.chong@parl.gc.ca>, martin.gaudet <martin.gaudet@fredericton.ca>, Mark.Blakely <Mark.Blakely@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, kris.austin <kris.austin@gnb.ca>, Mike.Dawson <Mike.Dawson@gnb.ca>, Mike.Comeau <Mike.Comeau@gnb.ca>, John.Williamson <John.Williamson@parl.gc.ca>, andrea.anderson-mason <andrea.anderson-mason@gnb.ca>, Ross.Wetmore <Ross.Wetmore@gnb.ca>, blaine.higgs <blaine.higgs@pcnb.org>, robert.mckee <robert.mckee@gnb.ca>, Susan.Holt <Susan.Holt@gnb.ca>, hugh.flemming <hugh.flemming@gnb.ca>, <natasha.calvinho@gmail.com>, National Citizens Inquiry <info@nationalcitizensinquiry.ca>, Nathalie.G.Drouin <Nathalie.G.Drouin@pco-bcp.gc.ca>, Robert. Jones <Robert.Jones@cbc.ca>
>>
>> ---------- Original message ----------
>> From: Kevin Leahy <kevin.leahy@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>
>> Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2019 12:38:43 -0400
>> Subject: Re: RE The call from the Boston cop Robert Ridge (857 259
>> 9083) on behalf of the VERY corrupt Yankee DA Rachael Rollins
>> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>>
>> French will follow
>>
>> Thank you for your email.
>>
>> For inquiries regarding EMRO’s Office, please address your email to
>> acting EMRO Sebastien Brillon at sebastien.brillon@rcmp-grc.gc.
>>
>> For inquiries regarding CO NHQ Office, please address your email to
>> acting CO Farquharson, David at David.Farquharson@rcmp-grc.gc.
>>
>> All PPS related correspondence should be sent to my PPS account at
>> kevin.leahy@pps-spp@parl.gc.ca
>> ------------------------------
>> Merci pour votre courriel.
>>
>> Pour toute question concernant le Bureau de l'EMRO, veuillez adresser
>> vos courriels à l’Officier responsable des Relations
>> employeur-employés par intérim Sébastien Brillon à l'adresse suivante
>> sebastien.brillon@rcmp-grc.gc.
>>
>> Pour toute question concernant le bureau du Commandant de la
>> Direction générale, veuillez adresser vos courriels au Commandant de
>> la Direction générale par intérim Farquharson, David à l'adresse
>> suivante David.Farquharson@rcmp-grc.
>>
>> Toute correspondance relative au Service De Protection Parlementaire
>> doit être envoyée à mon compte de PPS à l'adresse suivante
>> kevin.leahy@pps-spp@parl.gc.ca
>>
>>
>> Kevin Leahy
>> Chief Superintendent/Surintendant principal
>> Director, Parliamentary Protective Service
>> Directeur , Service de protection parlementaire
>> T 613-996-5048
>> Kevin.leahy@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
>>
>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email and any attachments are
>> confidential and may contain protected information. It is intended
>> only for the individual or entity named in the message. If you are not
>> the intended recipient, or the agent responsible to deliver the
>> message that this email contains to the intended recipient, you should
>> not disseminate, distribute or copy this email, nor disclose or use in
>> any manner the information that it contains. Please notify the sender
>> immediately if you have received this email by mistake and delete it.
>> AVIS DE CONFIDENTIALITÉ: Le présent courriel et tout fichier qui y est
>> joint sont confidentiels et peuvent contenir des renseignements
>> protégés. Il est strictement réservé à l’usage du destinataire prévu.
>> Si vous n’êtes pas le destinataire prévu, ou le mandataire chargé de
>> lui transmettre le message que ce courriel contient, vous ne devez ni
>> le diffuser, le distribuer ou le copier, ni divulguer ou utiliser à
>> quelque fin que ce soit les renseignements qu’il contient. Veuillez
>> aviser immédiatement l’expéditeur si vous avez reçu ce courriel par
>> erreur et supprimez-le.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> ---------- Original message ----------
>>> From: "Chaplin, Lynn (NBPC/CPNB)" <Lynn.Chaplin@gnb.ca>
>>> Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2019 04:58:45 +0000
>>> Subject: Automatic reply: Methinks the lawyer Rob McKee as the
>>> LIEbrano Shadow Justice and Attorney General,was VERY STUPID to dlete
>>> my emails N'esy Pas/ Andrea Anderson-Mason.
>>> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com&
>>>
>>> Please be advised this account is not monitored.
>>>
>>> veuillez noter que ce compte n"est pas surveillé
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------- Original message ----------
>>> From: "Mitton, Megan (LEG)" <Megan.Mitton@gnb.ca>
>>> Date: Sat, 22 Aug 2020 06:04:32 +0000
>>> Subject: Automatic reply: Methinks the lawyer Rob McKee as the
>>> LIEbrano Shadow Justice and Attorney General,was VERY STUPID to delete
>>> my emails N'esy Pas Andrea Anderson-Mason???.
>>> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com&
>>>
>>> Thank you for contacting me.
>>>
>>> A provincial election was called on August 17th and will be held on
>>> September 14th. During that time, my constituency office is required
>>> to be closed. The phone and email will not be monitored during this
>>> period.
>>>
>>> Thank you!
>>> Megan Mitton
>>>
>>> ---
>>>
>>>
>>> Merci de m'avoir contacté. Des élections provinciales ont été
>>> déclenchées le 17 août et auront lieu le 14 septembre. Pendant cette
>>> période, mon bureau de circonscription doit être fermé. Le téléphone
>>> et le courriel ne seront pas surveillés pendant cette période.
>>>
>>> Merci !
>>> Megan Mitton
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 8/22/20, David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>> From: Brian Gallant <briangallant10@gmail.com>
>>>> Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 08:17:31 -0700
>>>> Subject: Merci / Thank you Re: Attn Robert McKee I am calling you for
>>>> the third time The pdf files hereto attached are for real
>>>> To: motomaniac333@gmail.com
>>>>
>>>> (Français à suivre)
>>>>
>>>> If your email is pertaining to the Government of New Brunswick,
>> please
>>>> email me at brian.gallant@gnb.ca
>>>>
>>>> If your matter is urgent, please email Greg Byrne at
>> greg.byrne@gnb.ca
>>>>
>>>> Thank you.
>>>>
>>>> Si votre courriel s'addresse au Gouvernement du Nouveau-Brunswick,
>>>> svp m'envoyez un courriel à brian.gallant@gnb.ca
>>>>
>>>> Pour les urgences, veuillez contacter Greg Byrne à greg.byrne@gnb.ca
>>>>
>>>> Merci.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>> From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>>>> Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 11:17:25 -0400
>>>> Subject: Attn Robert McKee I am calling you for the third time The
>> pdf
>>>> files hereto attached are for real
>>>> To: robert.mckee@fowlerlawpc.com, "brian.gallant"
>>>> <brian.gallant@gnb.ca>, "chris.collins" <chris.collins@gnb.ca>, tj
>>>> <tj@burkelaw.ca>, "blaine.higgs" <blaine.higgs@gnb.ca>, "David.Coo>>
>>>> <andre@jafaust.com>, jbosnitch <jbosnitch@gmail.com>
>>>> Cc: David Amos <david.raymond.amos@gmail.com>
>>>> <greg.byrne@gnb.ca>, "Jack.Keir" <Jack.Keir@gnb.ca>
>>>>
>>>> Robert K. Mckee
>>>> Called to the bar: 2012 (NB)
>>>> Fowler Law P.C. Inc.
>>>> 69 Waterloo St.
>>>> Moncton, New Brunswick E1C 0E1
>>>> Phone: 506-857-8811
>>>> Fax: 506-857-9297
>>>> Email: robert.mckee@fowlerlawpc.com
>>>>
>>>>
>> http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/
>>>>
>>>> Robert McKee to run for the Liberals in Moncton Centre
>>>> Lawyer won Saturday's nomination by acclamation, a spokesperson for
>>>> the party says
>>>> CBC News · Posted: Jun 03, 2018 4:50 PM AT
>>>>
>>>> Robert McKee, a 32-year-old lawyer and first-term Moncton city
>>>> councillor, declared his candidacy for the Moncton Centre Liberal
>>>> nomination on May 17. (Submitted)
>>>>
>>>> Robert McKee has won the Moncton Centre Liberal nomination and will
>>>> run for the party in the upcoming provincial election this fall.
>>>>
>>>> The 32-year-old lawyer was elected to Moncton city council in May,
>>>> 2016, representing Ward 3, and declared his candidacy for the Moncton
>>>> Centre Liberal nomination on May 17.
>>>>
>>>> He won Saturday's nomination by acclamation, according to Duncan
>>>> Gallant, a spokesperson for the party.
>>>>
>>>> The availability to run in Moncton Centre for the Liberals opened up
>>>> after Speaker Chris Collins said he wouldn't reoffer for the party.
>>>>
>>>> Speaker Chris Collins won't reoffer for Liberals, plans to sue
>>>> premier for libel
>>>> 8 Liberals quit over premier's 'humiliating' treatment of Chris
>>>> Collins
>>>>
>>>> Premier Brian Gallant suspended Collins from the Liberal caucus on
>> the
>>>> basis of allegations of harassment made by a former employee of the
>>>> legislature.
>>>>
>>>> Collins described Premier Gallant's handling of the allegations as
>>>> "atrocious" and will finish his term as an independent.
>>>>
>>>> The election is scheduled for Sept. 24.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>>> From: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com
>>>>> Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2017 09:32:09 -0400
>>>>> Subject: Attn Integrity Commissioner Alexandre Deschênes, Q.C.,
>>>>> To: coi@gnb.ca
>>>>> Cc: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com
>>>>>
>>>>> Good Day Sir
>>>>>
>>>>> After I heard you speak on CBC I called your office again and
>> managed
>>>>> to speak to one of your staff for the first time
>>>>>
>>>>> Please find attached the documents I promised to send to the lady
>> who
>>>>> answered the phone this morning. Please notice that not after the
>> Sgt
>>>>> at Arms took the documents destined to your office his pal Tanker
>>>>> Malley barred me in writing with an "English" only document.
>>>>>
>>>>> These are the hearings and the dockets in Federal Court that I
>>>>> suggested that you study closely.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is the docket in Federal Court
>>>>>
>>>>>
>> http://cas-cdc-www02.cas-satj.
>>>>>
>>>>> These are digital recordings of the last three hearings
>>>>>
>>>>> Dec 14th https://archive.org/details/
>>>>>
>>>>> January 11th, 2016 https://archive.org/details/
>>>>>
>>>>> April 3rd, 2017
>>>>>
>>>>> https://archive.org/details/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> This is the docket in the Federal Court of Appeal
>>>>>
>>>>>
>> http://cas-cdc-www02.cas-satj.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The only hearing thus far
>>>>>
>>>>> May 24th, 2017
>>>>>
>>>>> https://archive.org/details/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> This Judge understnds the meaning of the word Integrity
>>>>>
>>>>> Date: 20151223
>>>>>
>>>>> Docket: T-1557-15
>>>>>
>>>>> Fredericton, New Brunswick, December 23, 2015
>>>>>
>>>>> PRESENT: The Honourable Mr. Justice Bell
>>>>>
>>>>> BETWEEN:
>>>>>
>>>>> DAVID RAYMOND AMOS
>>>>>
>>>>> Plaintiff
>>>>>
>>>>> and
>>>>>
>>>>> HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
>>>>>
>>>>> Defendant
>>>>>
>>>>> ORDER
>>>>>
>>>>> (Delivered orally from the Bench in Fredericton, New Brunswick, on
>>>>> December 14, 2015)
>>>>>
>>>>> The Plaintiff seeks an appeal de novo, by>>> 12, 2015, in which
>>>>> Prothonotary Morneau struck the Statement of
>> Claim
>>>>> in its entirety.
>>>>>
>>>>> At the outset of the hearing, the Plaintiff brought to my attention
>> a
>>>>> letter dated September 10, 2004, which he sent to me, in my then
>>>>> capacity as Past President of the New Brunswick Branch of the
>> Canadian
>>>>> Bar Association, and the then President of the Branch, Kathleen
>> Quigg,
>>>>> (now a Justice of the New Brunswick Court of Appeal). In that
>> letter
>>>>> he stated:
>>>>>
>>>>> As for your past President, Mr. Bell, may I suggest that you check
>> the
>>>>> work of Frank McKenna before I sue your entire law firm including
>> you.
>>>>> You are your brother’s keeper.
>>>>>
>>>>> Frank McKenna is the former Premier of New Brunswick and a former
>>>>> colleague of mine at the law firm of McInnes Cooper. In addition to
>>>>> expressing an intention to sue me, the Plaintiff refers to a number
>> of
>>>>> people in his Motion Record who he appears to contend may be
>> witnesses
>>>>> or potential parties to be added. Those individuals who are known to
>>>>> me personally, include, but are not limited to the former Prime
>>>>> Minister of Canada, The Right Honourable Stephen Harper; former
>>>>> Attorney General of Canada and now a Justice of the Manitoba Court
>> of
>>>>> Queen’s Bench, Vic Toews; former member of Parliament Rob Moore;
>>>>> former Director of Policing Services, the late Grant Garneau; former
>>>>> Chief of the Fredericton Police Force, Barry McKnight; former Staff
>>>>> Sergeant Danny Copp; my former colleagues on the New Brunswick Court
>>>>> of Appeal, Justices Bradley V. Green and Kathleen Quigg, and,
>> retired
>>>>> Assistant Commissioner Wayne Lang of the Royal Canadian Mounted
>>>>> Police.
>>>>>
>>>>> In the circumstances, given the threat in 2004 to sue me in my
>>>>> personal capacity and my past and present relationship with many
>>>>> potential witnesses and/or potential parties to the litigation, I am
>>>>> of the view there would be a reasonable apprehension of bias should
>> I
>>>>> hear this motion. See Justice de Grandpré’s dissenting judgment in
>>>>> Committee for Justice and Liberty et al v National Energy Board et
>> al,
>>>>> [1978] 1 SCR 369 at p 394 for the applicable test regarding
>>>>> allegations of bias. In the circumstances, although neither party
>> has
>>>>> requested I recuse myself, I consider it appropriate that I do so.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> AS A RESULT OF MY RECUSAL, THIS COURT ORDERS that the Administrator
>> of
>>>>> the Court schedule another date for the hearing of the motion.
>> There
>>>>> is no order as to costs.
>>>>>
>>>>> “B. Richard Bell”
>>>>> Judge
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Below after the CBC article about your concerns (I made one comment
>>>>> already) you will find the text of just two of many emails I had
>> sent
>>>>> to your office over the years since I first visited it in 2006.
>>>>>
>>>>> I noticed that on July 30, 2009, he was appointed to the the Court
>>>>> Martial Appeal Court of Canada Perhaps you should scroll to the
>>>>> bottom of this email ASAP and read the entire Paragraph 83 of my
>>>>> lawsuit now before the Federal Court of Canada?
>>>>>
>>>>> "FYI This is the text of the lawsuit that should interest Trudeau
>> the
>>>>> most
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ---------- Original message ----------
>>>>> From: justin.trudeau.a1@parl.gc.ca
>>>>> Date: Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 8:18 PM
>>>>> Subject: Réponse automatique : RE My complaint against the CROWN in
>>>>> Federal Court Attn David Hansen and Peter MacKay If you planning to
>>>>> submit a motion for a publication ban on my complaint trust that you
>>>>> dudes are way past too late
>>>>> To: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com
>>>>>
>>>>> Veuillez noter que j'ai changé de courriel. Vous pouvez me rejoindre
>> à
>>>>> lalanthier@hotmail.com
>>>>>
>>>>> Pour rejoindre le bureau de M. Trudeau veuillez envoyer un courriel à
>>>>> tommy.desfosses@parl.gc.ca
>>>>>
>>>>> Please note that I changed email address, you can reach me at
>>>>> lalanthier@hotmail.com
>>>>>
>>>>> To reach the office of Mr. Trudeau please send an email to
>>>>> tommy.desfosses@parl.gc.ca
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you,
>>>>>
>> http://davidraymondamos3.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 83. The Plaintiff states that now that Canada is involved in more
>> war
>>>>> in Iraq again it did not serve Canadian interests and reputation to
>>>>> allow Barry Winters to publish the following words three times over
>>>>> five years after he began his bragging:
>>>>>
>>>>> January 13, 2015
>>>>> This Is Just AS Relevant Now As When I wrote It During The Debate
>>>>>
>>>>> December 8, 2014
>>>>> Why Canada Stood Tall!
>>>>>
>>>>> Friday, October 3, 2014
>>>>> Little David Amos’ “True History Of War” Canadian Airstrikes And
>>>>> Stupid Justin Trudeau
>>>>>
>>>>> Canada’s and Canadians free ride is over. Canada can no longer hide
>>>>> behind Amerka’s and NATO’s skirts.
>>>>>
>>>>> When I was still in Canadian Forces then Prime Minister Jean
>> Chretien
>>>>> actually committed the Canadian Army to deploy in the second
>> campaign
>>>>> in Iraq, the Coalition of the Willing. This was against or contrary
>> to
>>>>> the wisdom or advice of those of us Canadian officers that were
>>>>> involved in the initial planning phases of that operation. There
>> were
>>>>> significant concern in our planning cell, and NDHQ about of the
>> dearth
>>>>> of concern for operational guidance, direction, and forces for
>>>>> operations after the initial occupation of Iraq. At the “last minute”
>>>>> Prime Minister Chretien and the Liberal government changed its mind.
>>>>> The Canadian government told our amerkan cousins that we would not
>>>>> deploy combat troops for the Iraq campaign, but would deploy a
>>>>> Canadian Battle Group to Afghanistan, enabling our amerkan cousins
>> to
>>>>> redeploy troops from there to Iraq. The PMO’s thinking that it was
>>>>> less costly to deploy Canadian Forces to Afghanistan than Iraq. But
>>>>> alas no one seems to remind the Liberals of Prime Minister
>> Chretien’s
>>>>> then grossly incorrect assumption. Notwithstanding Jean Chretien’s
>>>>> incompetence and stupidity, the Canadian Army was heroic,
>>>>> professional, punched well above it’s weight, and the PPCLI Battle
>>>>> Group, is credited with “saving Afghanistan” during the Panjway
>>>>> campaign of 2006.
>>>>>
>>>>> What Justin Trudeau and the Liberals don’t tell you now, is that
>> then
>>>>> Liberal Prime Minister Jean Chretien committed, and deployed the
>>>>> Canadian army to Canada’s longest “war” without the advice, consent,
>>>>> support, or vote of the Canadian Parliament.
>>>>>
>>>>> What David Amos and the rest of the ignorant, uneducated, and
>> babbling
>>>>> chattering classes are too addled to understand is the deployment of
>>>>> less than 75 special operations troops, and what is known by
>> planners
>>>>> as a “six pac cell” of fighter aircraft is NOT the same as a
>>>>> deployment of a Battle Group, nor a “war” make.
>>>>>
>>>>> The Canadian Government or The Crown unlike our amerkan cousins have
>>>>> the “constitutional authority” to commit the Canadian nation to war.
>>>>> That has been recently clearly articulated to the Canadian public by
>>>>> constitutional scholar Phillippe Legasse. What Parliament can do is
>>>>> remove “confidence” in The Crown’s Government in a “vote of
>>>>> non-confidence.” That could not happen to the Chretien Government
>>>>> regarding deployment to Afghanistan, and it won’t happen in this
>>>>> instance with the conservative majority in The Commons regarding a
>>>>> limited Canadian deployment to the Middle East.
>>>>>
>>>>> President George Bush was quite correct after 911 and the terror
>>>>> attacks in New York; that the Taliban “occupied” and “failed state”
>>>>> Afghanistan was the source of logistical support, command and
>> control,
>>>>> and training for the Al Quaeda war of terror against the world. The
>>>>> initial defeat, and removal from control of Afghanistan was vital
>> and
>>>>>
>>>>> P.S. Whereas this CBC article is about your opinion of the actions
>> of
>>>>> the latest Minister Of Health trust that Mr Boudreau and the CBC
>> have
>>>>> had my files for many years and the last thing they are is ethical.
>>>>> Ask his friends Mr Murphy and the RCMP if you don't believe me.
>>>>>
>>>>> Subject:>>> From: "Murphy, Michael B. \(DH/MS\)"
>>>>> MichaelB.Murphy@gnb.ca
>>>>> To: motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com
>>>>>
>>>>> January 30, 2007
>>>>>
>>>>> WITHOUT PREJUDICE
>>>>>
>>>>> Mr. David Amos
>>>>>
>>>>> Dear Mr. Amos:
>>>>>
>>>>> This will acknowledge receipt of a copy of your e-mail of December
>> 29,
>>>>> 2006 to Corporal Warren McBeath of the RCMP.
>>>>>
>>>>> Because of the nature of the allegations made in your message, I
>> have
>>>>> taken the measure of forwarding a copy to Assistant Commissioner
>> Steve
>>>>> Graham of the RCMP “J” Division in Fredericton.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sincerely,
>>>>>
>>>>> Honourable Michael B. Murphy
>>>>> Minister of Health
>>>>>
>>>>> CM/cb
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Warren McBeath warren.mcbeath@rcmp-grc.gc.ca wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2006 17:34:53 -0500
>>>>> From: "Warren McBeath" warren.mcbeath@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
>>>>> To: kilgoursite@ca.inter.net, MichaelB.Murphy@gnb.ca,
>>>>> nada.sarkis@gnb.ca, wally.stiles@gnb.ca, dwatch@web.net,
>>>>> motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com
>>>>> CC: ottawa@chuckstrahl.com,
>> riding@chuckstrahl.com,John.
>>>>> Oda.B@parl.gc.ca,"Bev BUSSON" bev.busson@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
>>>>> "Paul Dube" PAUL.DUBE@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
>>>>> Subject: Re: Remember me Kilgour? Landslide Annie McLellan has
>>>>> forgotten me but the crooks within the RCMP have not
>>>>>
>>>>> Dear Mr. Amos,
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you for your follow up e-mail to me today. I was on days off
>>>>> over the holidays and returned to work this evening. Rest assured I
>>>>> was not ignoring or procrastinating to respond to your concerns.
>>>>>
>>>>> As your attachment sent today refers from Premier Graham, our
>> position
>>>>> is clear on your dead calf issue: Our forensic labs do not process
>>>>> testing on animals in cases such as yours, they are referred to the
>>>>> Atlantic Veterinary College in Charlottetown who can provide these
>>>>> services. If you do not choose to utilize their expertise in this
>>>>> instance, then that is your decision and nothing more can be done.
>>>>>
>>>>> As for your other concerns regarding the US Government, false
>>>>> imprisonment and Federal Court Dates in the US, etc... it is clear
>>>>> that Federal authorities are aware of your concerns both in Canada
>>>>> the US. These issues do not fall into the purvue of Detachment
>>>>> and policing in Petitcodiac, NB.
>>>>>
>>>>> It was indeed an interesting and informative conversation we had on
>>>>> December 23rd, and I wish you well in all of your future endeavors.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sincerely,
>>>>>
>>>>> Warren McBeath, Cpl.
>>>>> GRC Caledonia RCMP
>>>>> Traffic Services NCO
>>>>> Ph: (506) 387-2222
>>>>> Fax: (506) 387-4622
>>>>> E-mail warren.mcbeath@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Alexandre Deschênes, Q.C.,
>>>>> Office of the Integrity Commissioner
>>>>> Edgecombe House, 736 King Street
>>>>> Fredericton, N.B. CANADA E3B 5H1
>>>>> tel.: 506-457-7890
>>>>> fax: 506-444-5224
>>>>> e-mail:coi@gnb.ca
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>> From: Justice Website <JUSTWEB@novascotia.ca>
>>>> Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2017 14:21:11 +0000
>>>> Subject: Emails to Department of Justice and Province of Nova Scotia
>>>> To: "motomaniac333@gmail.com" <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>>>>
>>>> Mr. Amos,
>>>> We acknowledge receipt of your recent emails to the Deputy Minister
>> of
>>>> Justice and lawyers within the Legal Services Division of the
>>>> Department of Justice respecting a possible claim against the
>> Province
>>>> of Nova Scotia. Service of any documents respecting a legal claim
>>>> against the Province of Nova Scotia may be served on the Attorney
>>>> General at 1690 Hollis Street, Halifax, NS. Please note that we will
>>>> not be responding to further emails on this matter.
>>>>
>>>> Department of Justice
>>>>
>>>> On 8/3/17, David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> If want something very serious to download and laugh at as well
>> Please
>>>>> Enjoy and share real wiretap tapes of the mob
>>>>>
>>>>>
>> http://thedavidamosrant.
>>>>> ilian.html
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As the CBC etc yap>>>> ask them the obvious question AIN'T THEY
>>>>>> FORGETTING SOMETHING????
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What the hell does the media think my Yankee lawyer served upon the
>>>>>> USDOJ right after I ran for and seat in the 39th Parliament
>> baseball
>>>>>> cards?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> http://archive.org/details/
>>>>>> 6
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> http://davidamos.blogspot.ca/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.archive.org/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://archive.org/details/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> FEDERAL EXPRES February 7, 2006
>>>>>> Senator Arlen Specter
>>>>>> United States Senate
>>>>>> Committee on the Judiciary
>>>>>> 224 Dirksen Senate Office Building
>>>>>> Washington, DC 20510
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Dear Mr. Specter:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have been asked to forward the enclosed tapes to you from a man
>>>>>> named, David Amos, a Canadian citizen, in connection with the
>> matters
>>>>>> raised in the attached letter.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Mr. Amos has represented to me that these are illegal FBI wire tap
>>>>>> tapes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I believe Mr. Amos has been in contact with you about this
>> previously.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Very truly yours,
>>>>>> Barry A. Bachrach
>>>>>> Direct telephone: (508) 926-3403
>>>>>> Direct facsimile: (508) 929-3003
>>>>>> Email: bbachrach@bowditch.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>> http://davidraymondamos3.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Sunday, 19 November 2017
>>>> Federal Court of Appeal Finally Makes The BIG Decision And Publishes
>>>> It Now The Crooks Cannot Take Back Ticket To Try Put My Matter Before
>>>> The Supreme Court
>>>>
>>>>
>> https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Federal Court of Appeal Decisions
>>>>
>>>> Amos v. Canada
>>>> Court (s) Database
>>>>
>>>> Federal Court of Appeal Decisions
>>>> Date
>>>>
>>>> 2017-10-30
>>>> Neutral citation
>>>>
>>>> 2017 FCA 213
>>>> File numbers
>>>>
>>>> A-48-16
>>>> Date: 20171030
>>>>
>>>> Docket: A-48-16
>>>> Citation: 2017 FCA 213
>>>> CORAM:
>>>>
>>>> WEBB J.A.
>>>> NEAR J.A.
>>>> GLEASON J.A.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> BETWEEN:
>>>> DAVID RAYMOND AMOS
>>>> Respondent on the cross-appeal
>>>> (and formally Appellant)
>>>> and
>>>> HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
>>>> Appellant on the cross-appeal
>>>> (and formerly Respondent)
>>>> Heard at Fredericton, New Brunswick, on May 24, 2017.
>>>> Judgment delivered at Ottawa, Ontario, on October 30, 2017.
>>>> REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY:
>>>>
>>>> THE COURT
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Date: 20171030
>>>>
>>>> Docket: A-48-16
>>>> Citation: 2017 FCA 213
>>>> CORAM:
>>>>
>>>> WEBB J.A.
>>>> NEAR J.A.
>>>> GLEASON J.A.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> BETWEEN:
>>>> DAVID RAYMOND AMOS
>>>> Respondent on the cross-appeal
>>>> (and formally Appellant)
>>>> and
>>>> HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
>>>> Appellant on the cross-appeal
>>>> (and formerly Respondent)
>>>> REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY THE COURT
>>>>
>>>> I. Introduction
>>>>
>>>> [1] On September 16, 2015, David Raymond Amos (Mr.
>> Amos)
>>>> filed a 53-page Statement of Claim (the Claim) in Federal Court
>>>> against Her Majesty the Queen (the Crown). Mr. Amos claims $11
>> million
>>>> in damages and a public apology from the Prime Minister and
>> Provincial
>>>> Premiers for being illegally barred from accessing parliamentary
>>>> properties and seeks a declaration from the Minister of Public Safety
>>>> that the Canadian Government will no longer allow the Royal Canadian
>>>> Mounted Police (RCMP) and Canadian Forces to harass him and his clan
>>>> (Claim at para. 96).
>>>>
>>>> [2] On November 12, 2015 (Docket T-1557-15), by way of
>> a
>>>> motion brought by the Crown, a prothonotary of the Federal Court (the
>>>> Prothonotary) struck the Claim in its entirety, without leave to
>>>> amend, on the basis that it was plain and obvious that the Claim
>>>> disclosed no reasonable claim, the Claim was fundamentally vexatious,
>>>> and the Claim could not be salvaged by way of further amendment (the
>>>> Prothontary’s Order).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [3] On January 25, 2016 (2016 FC 93), by way of Mr.
>>>> Amos’ appeal from the Prothonotary’s Order, a judge of the Federal
>>>>>> for being barred by the RCMP from the New Brunswick legislature in
>>>> 2004 (the Federal Court Judgment).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [4] Mr. Amos appealed and the Crown cross-appealed the
>>>> Federal Court Judgment. Further to the issuance of a Notice of Status
>>>> Review, Mr. Amos’ appeal was dismissed for delay on December 19,
>> 2016.
>>>> As such, the only matter before this Court is the Crown’s
>>>> cross-appeal.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> II. Preliminary Matter
>>>>
>>>> [5] Mr. Amos, in his memorandum of fact and law in
>>>> relation to the cross-appeal that was filed with this Court on March
>>>> 6, 2017, indicated that several judges of this Court, including two
>> of
>>>> the judges of this panel, had a conflict of interest in this appeal.
>>>> This was the first time that he identified the judges whom he
>> believed
>>>> had a conflict of interest in a document that was filed with this
>>>> Court. In his notice of appeal he had alluded to a conflict with
>>>> several judges but did not name those judges.
>>>>
>>>> [6] Mr. Amos was of the view that he did not have to
>>>> identify the judges in any document filed with this Court because he
>>>> had identified the judges in various documents that had been filed
>>>> with the Federal Court. In his view the Federal Court and the Federal
>>>> Court of Appeal are the same court and therefore any document filed
>> in
>>>> the Federal Court would be filed in this Court. This view is based on
>>>> subsections 5(4) and 5.1(4) of the Federal Courts Act, R.S.C., 1985,
>>>> c. F-7:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 5(4) Every judge of the Federal Court is, by virtue of his or her
>>>> office, a judge of the Federal Court of Appeal and has all the
>>>> jurisdiction, power and authority of a judge of the Federal Court of
>>>> Appeal.
>>>> […]
>>>>
>>>> 5(4) Les juges de la Cour fédérale sont d’office juges de la Cour
>>>> d’appel fédérale et ont la même compétence et les mêmes pouvoirs que
>>>> les juges de la Cour d’appel fédérale.
>>>> […]
>>>> 5.1(4) Every judge of the Federal Court of Appeal is, by virtue of
>>>> that office, a judge of the Federal Court and has all the
>>>> jurisdiction, power and authority of a judge of the Federal Court.
>>>>
>>>> 5.1(4) Les juges de la Cour d’appel fédérale sont d’office juges de
>> la
>>>> Cour fédérale et ont la même compétence et les mêmes pouvoirs que les
>>>> juges de la Cour fédérale.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [7] However, these subsections only provide that the
>>>> judges of the Federal Court are also judges of this Court (and vice
>>>> versa). It does not mean that there is only one court. If the Federal
>>>> Court and this Court were one Court, there would be no need for this
>>>> section.
>>>> [8] Sections 3 and 4 of the Federal Courts Act provide
>>>> that:
>>>> 3 The division of the Federal Court of Canada called the Federal
>> Court
>>>> — Appeal Division is continued under the name “Federal Court of
>>>> Appeal” in English and “Cour d’appel fédérale” in French. It is
>>>> continued as an additional court of law, equity and admiralty in and
>>>> for Canada, for the better administration of the laws of Canada and
>> as
>>>> a superior court of record having civil and criminal jurisdiction.
>>>>
>>>> 3 La Section d’appel, aussi appelée la Cour d’appel ou la Cour
>> d’appel
>>>> fédérale, est maintenue et dénommée « Cour d’appel fédérale » en
>>>> français et « Federal Court of Appeal » en anglais. Elle est
>> maintenue
>>>> à titre de tribunal additionnel de droit, d’equity et d’amirauté du
>>>> Canada, propre à améliorer l’application du droit canadien, et
>>>> continue d’être une cour supérieure d’archives ayant compétence en
>>>> matière civile et pénale.
>>>> 4 The division of the Federal Court of Canada called the Federal
>> Court
>>>> — Trial Division is continued under the name “Federal Court” in
>>>> English and “Cour fédérale” in French. It is continued as an
>>>> additional court of law, equity and admiralty in and for Canada, for
>>>> the better administration of the laws of Canada and as a superior
>>>> court of record having civil and criminal jurisdiction.
>>>>
>>>> 4 La section de la Cour fédérale du Canada, appelée la Section de
>>>> première instance de la Cour fédérale, est maintenue et dénommée «
>>>> Cour fédérale » en français et « Federal Court » en anglais. Elle est
>>>> maintenue à titre de tribunal additionnel de droit, d’equity et
>>>> d’amirauté du Canada, propre à améliorer l’application du droit
>>>> canadien, et continue d’être une cour supérieure d’archives ayant
>>>> compétence en matière civile et pénale.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [9] Sections 3 and 4 of the Federal Courts Act create
>>>> two separate courts – this Court (section 3) and the Federal Court
>>>> (section 4). If, as Mr. Amos suggests, documents filed in the Federal
>>>> Court were automatically also filed in this Court, then there would
>> no
>>>> need for the parties to prepare and file appeal books as required by
>>>> Rules 343 to 345 of the Federal Courts Rules, SOR/98-106 in relation
>>>> to any appeal from a decision of the Federal Court. The requirement
>> to
>>>> file an appeal book with this Court in relation to an appeal from a
>>>> decision of the Federal Court makes it clear that the only documents
>>>> that will be before this Court are the documents that are part of
>> that
>>>> appeal book.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [10] Therefore, the memorandum of fact and law filed on
>>>> March 6, 2017 is the first document, filed with this Court, in which
>>>> Mr. Amos identified the particular judges that he submits have a
>>>> conflict in any matter related to him.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [11] On April 3, 2017, Mr. Amos attempted to bring a motion
>>>> before the Federal Court seeking an order “affirming or denying the
>>>> conflict of interest he has” with a number of judges of the Federal
>>>> Court. A judge of the Federal Court issued a direction noting that if
>>>> Mr. Amos was seeking this order in relation to judges of the Federal
>>>> Court of Appeal, it was beyond the jurisdiction of the Federal Court.
>>>> Mr. Amos raised the Federal Court motion at the hearing of this
>>>> cross-appeal. The Federal Court motion is not a motion before this
>>>> Court and, as such, the submissions filed before the Federal Court
>>>> will not be entertained. As well, since this was a motion brought
>>>> before the Federal Court (and not this Court), any documents filed in
>>>> relation to that motion are not part of the record of this Court.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [12] During the hearing of the appeal Mr. Amos alleged that
>>>> the third member of this panel also had a conflict of interest and
>>>> submitted some documents that, in his view, supported his claim of a
>>>> conflict. Mr. Amos, following the hearing of his appeal, was also
>>>> afforded the opportunity to provide a brief summary of the conflict
>>>> that he was alleging and to file additional documents that, in his
>>>> view, supported his allegations. Mr. Amos submitted several pages of
>>>> documents in relation to the alleged conflicts. He organized the
>>>> documents by submitting a copy of the biography of the particular
>>>> judge and then, immediately following that biography, by including
>>>> copies of the documents that, in his view, supported his claim that
>>>> such judge had a conflict.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [13] The nature of the alleged conflict of Justice Webb is
>>>> that before he was appointed as a Judge of the Tax Court of Canada in
>>>> 2006, he was a partner with the law firm Patterson Law, and before
>>>> that with Patterson Palmer in Nova Scotia. Mr. Amos submitted that he
>>>> had a number of disputes with Patterson Palmer and Patterson Law and
>>>> therefore Justice Webb has a conflict simply because he was a partner
>>>> of these firms. Mr. Amos is not alleging that Justice Webb was
>>>> personally involved in or had any knowledge of any matter in which
>> Mr.
>>>> Amos was involved with Justice Webb’s former law firm – only that he
>>>> was a member of such firm.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [14] During his oral submissions at the hearing of his
>>>> appeal Mr. Amos, in relation to the alleged conflict for Justice
>> Webb,
>>>> focused on dealings between himself and a particular lawyer at
>>>> Patterson Law. However, none of the documents submitted by Mr. Amos
>> at
>>>> the hearing or subsequently related to any dealings with this
>>>> particular lawyer nor is it clear when Mr. Amos was dealing with this
>>>> lawyer. In particular, it is far from clear whether such dealings
>> were
>>>> after the time that Justice Webb was appointed as a Judge of the Tax
>>>> Court of Canada over 10 years ago.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [15] The documents that he submitted in relation to the
>>>> alleged conflict for Justice Webb largely relate to dealings between
>>>> Byron Prior and the St. John’s Newfoundland and Labrador office of
>>>> Patterson Palmer, which is not in the same province where Justice
>> Webb
>>>> practiced law. The only document that indicates any dealing between
>>>> Mr. Amos and Patterson Palmer is a copy of an affidavit of Stephen
>> May
>>>> who was a partner in the St. John’s NL office of Patterson Palmer.
>> The
>>>> affidavit is dated January 24, 2005 and refers to a number of e-mails
>>>> that were sent by Mr. Amos to Stephen May. Mr. Amos also included a
>>>> letter that is addressed to four individuals, one of whom is John
>>>> Crosbie who was counsel to the St. John’s NL office of Patterson
>>>> Palmer. The letter is dated September 2, 2004 and is addressed to
>>>> “John Crosbie, c/o Greg G. Byrne, Suite 502, 570 Queen Street,
>>>> Fredericton, NB E3B 5E3”. In this letter Mr. Amos alludes to a
>>>> possible lawsuit against Patterson Palmer.
>>>> [16] Mr. Amos’ position is that simply because Justice Webb
>>>> was a lawyer with Patterson Palmer, he now has a conflict. In
>> Wewaykum
>>>> Indian Band v. Her Majesty the Queen, 2003 SCC 45, [2003] 2 S.C.R.
>>>> 259, the Supreme Court of Canada noted that disqualification of a
>>>> judge is to be determined based on whether there is a reasonable
>>>> apprehension of bias:
>>>> 60 In Canadian law, one standard has now emerged as the
>>>> criterion for disqualification. The criterion, as expressed by de
>>>> Grandpré J. in Committee for Justice and Liberty v. National Energy
>>>> Board, …[[1978] 1 S.C.R. 369, 68 D.L.R. (3d) 716], at p. 394, is the
>>>> reasonable apprehension of bias:
>>>> … the apprehension of bias must be a reasonable one, held by
>>>> reasonable and right minded persons, applying themselves to the
>>>> question and obtaining thereon the required information. In the words
>>>> of the Court of Appeal, that test is "what would an informed person,
>>>> viewing the matter realistically and practically -- and having
>> thought
>>>> the matter through -- conclude. Would he think that it is more likely
>>>> than not that [the decision-maker], whether consciously or
>>>> unconsciously, would not decide fairly."
>>>>
>>>> [17] The issue to be determined is whether an informed
>>>> person, viewing the matter realistically and practically, and having
>>>> thought the matter through, would conclude that Mr. Amos’ allegations
>>>> give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias. As this Court has
>>>> previously remarked, “there is a strong presumption that judges will
>>>> administer justice impartially” and this presumption will not be
>>>> rebutted in the absence of “convincing evidence” of bias (Collins v.
>>>> Canada, 2011 FCA 140 at para. 7, [2011] 4 C.T.C. 157 [Collins]. See
>>>> also R. v. S. (R.D.), [1997] 3 S.C.R. 484 at para. 32, 151 D.L.R.
>>>> (4th) 193).
>>>>
>>>> [18] The Ontario Court of Appeal in Rando Drugs Ltd. v.
>>>> Scott, 2007 ONCA 553, 86 O.R. (3d) 653 (leave to appeal to the
>> Supreme
>>>> Court of Canada refused, 32285 (August 1, 2007)), addressed the
>>>> particular issue of whether a judge is disqualified from hearing a
>>>> case simply because he had been a member of a law firm that was
>>>> involved in the litigation that was now before that judge. The
>> Ontario
>>>> Court of Appeal determined that the judge was not disqualified if the
>>>> judge had no involvement with the person or th>> lawyer. The Ontario
>>>> Court of Appeal also explained that the rules for
>>>> determining whether a judge is disqualified are different from the
>>>> rules to determine whether a lawyer has a conflict:
>>>> 27 Thus, disqualification is not the natural corollary to a
>>>> finding that a trial judge has had some involvement in a case over
>>>> which he or she is now presiding. Where the judge had no involvement,
>>>> as here, it cannot be said that the judge is disqualified.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 28 The point can rightly be made that had Mr. Patterson been
>>>> asked to represent the appellant as counsel before his appointment to
>>>> the bench, the conflict rules would likely have prevented him from
>>>> taking the case because his firm had formerly represented one of the
>>>> defendants in the case. Thus, it is argued how is it that as a trial
>>>> judge Patterson J. can hear the case? This issue was considered by
>> the
>>>> Court of Appeal (Civil Division) in Locabail (U.K.) Ltd. v. Bayfield
>>>> Properties Ltd., [2000] Q.B. 451. The court held, at para. 58, that
>>>> there is no inflexible rule governing the disqualification of a judge
>>>> and that, "[e]verything depends on the circumstances."
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 29 It seems to me that what appears at first sight to be an
>>>> inconsistency in application of rules can be explained by the
>>>> different contexts and in particular, the strong presumption of
>>>> judicial impartiality that applies in the context of disqualification
>>>> of a judge. There is no such presumption in cases of allegations of
>>>> conflict of interest against a lawyer because of a firm's previous
>>>> involvement in the case. To the contrary, as explained by Sopinka J.
>>>> in MacDonald Estate v. Martin (1990), 77 D.L.R. (4th) 249 (S.C.C.),
>>>> for sound policy reasons there is a presumption of a disqualifying
>>>> interest that can rarely be overcome. In particular, a conclusory
>>>> statement from the lawyer that he or she had no confidential
>>>> information about the case will never be sufficient. The case is the
>>>> opposite where the allegation of bias is made against a trial judge.
>>>> His or her statement that he or she knew nothing about the case and
>>>> had no involvement in it will ordinarily be accepted at face value
>>>> unless there is good reason to doubt it: see Locabail, at para. 19.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 30 That brings me then to consider the particular
>> circumstances
>>>> of this case and whether there are serious grounds to find a
>>>> disqualifying conflict of interest in this case. In my view, there
>> are
>>>> two significant factors that justify the trial judge's decision not
>> to
>>>> recuse himself. The first is his statement, which all parties accept,
>>>> that he knew nothing of the case when it was in his former firm and
>>>> that he had nothing to do with it. The second is the long passage of
>>>> time. As was said in Wewaykum, at para. 85:
>>>> To us, one significant factor stands out, and must inform
>>>> the perspective of the reasonable person assessing the impact of this
>>>> involvement on Binnie J.'s impartiality in the appeals. That factor
>> is
>>>> the passage of time. Most arguments for disqualification rest on
>>>> circumstances that are either contemporaneous to the decision-making,
>>>> or that occurred within a short time prior to the decision-making.
>>>> 31 There are other factors that inform the issue. The Wilson
>>>> Walker firm no longer acted for any of the parties by the time of
>>>> trial. More importantly, at the time of the motion, Patterson J. had
>>>> been a judge for six years and thus had not had a relationship with
>>>> his former firm for a considerable period of time.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 32 In my view, a reasonable person, viewing the matter
>>>> realistically would conclude that the trial judge could deal fairly
>>>> and impartially with this case. I take this view principally because
>>>> of the long passage of time and the trial judge's lack of involvement
>>>> in or knowledge of the case when the Wilson Walker firm had carriage.
>>>> In these circumstances it ca>> trial judge could not remain impartial
>>>> in
>>>> the case. The mere fact
>> that
>>>> his name appears on the letterhead of some correspondence from over a
>>>> decade ago would not lead a reasonable person to believe that he
>> would
>>>> either consciously or unconsciously favour his former firm's former
>>>> client. It is simply not realistic to think that a judge would throw
>>>> off his mantle of impartiality, ignore his oath of office and favour
>> a
>>>> client - about whom he knew nothing - of a firm that he left six
>> years
>>>> earlier and that no longer acts for the client, in a case involving
>>>> events from over a decade ago.
>>>> (emphasis added)
>>>>
>>>> [19] Justice Webb had no involvement with any matter
>>>> involving Mr. Amos while he was a member of Patterson Palmer or
>>>> Patterson Law, nor does Mr. Amos suggest that he did. Mr. Amos made
>> it
>>>> clear during the hearing of this matter that the only reason for the
>>>> alleged conflict for Justice Webb was that he was a member of
>>>> Patterson Law and Patterson Palmer. This is simply not enough for
>>>> Justice Webb to be disqualified. Any involvement of Mr. Amos with
>>>> Patterson Law while Justice Webb was a member of that firm would have
>>>> had to occur over 10 years ago and even longer for the time when he
>>>> was a member of Patterson Palmer. In addition to the lack of any
>>>> involvement on his part with any matter or dispute that Mr. Amos had
>>>> with Patterson Law or Patterson Palmer (which in and of itself is
>>>> sufficient to dispose of this matter), the length of time since
>>>> Justice Webb was a member of Patterson Law or Patterson Palmer would
>>>> also result in the same finding – that there is no conflict in
>> Justice
>>>> Webb hearing this appeal.
>>>>
>>>> [20] Similarly in R. v. Bagot, 2000 MBCA 30, 145 Man. R.
>>>> (2d) 260, the Manitoba Court of Appeal found that there was no
>>>> reasonable apprehension of bias when a judge, who had been a member
>> of
>>>> the law firm that had been retained by the accused, had no
>> involvement
>>>> with the accused while he was a lawyer with that firm.
>>>>
>>>> [21] In Del Zotto v. Minister of National Revenue, [2000] 4
>>>> F.C. 321, 257 N.R. 96, this court did find that there would be a
>>>> reasonable apprehension of bias where a judge, who while he was a
>>>> lawyer, had recorded time on a matter involving the same person who
>>>> was before that judge. However, this case can be distinguished as
>>>> Justice Webb did not have any time recorded on any files involving
>> Mr.
>>>> Amos while he was a lawyer with Patterson Palmer or Patterson Law.
>>>>
>>>> [22] Mr. Amos also included with his submissions a CD. He
>>>> stated in his affidavit dated June 26, 2017 that there is a “true
>> copy
>>>> of an American police surveillance wiretap entitled 139” on this CD.
>>>> He has also indicated that he has “provided a true copy of the CD
>>>> entitled 139 to many American and Canadian law enforcement
>> authorities
>>>> and not one of the police forces or officers of the court are willing
>>>> to investigate it”. Since he has indicated that this is an “American
>>>> police surveillance wiretap”, this is a matter for the American law
>>>> enforcement authorities and cannot create, as Mr. Amos suggests, a
>>>> conflict of interest for any judge to whom he provides a copy.
>>>>
>>>> [23] As a result, there is no conflict or reasonable
>>>> apprehension of bias for Justice Webb and therefore, no reason for
>> him
>>>> to recuse himself.
>>>>
>>>> [24] Mr. Amos alleged that Justice Near’s past professional
>>>> experience with the government created a “quasi-conflict” in deciding
>>>> the cross-appeal. Mr. Amos provided no details and Justice Near
>>>> confirmed that he had no prior knowledge of the matters alleged in
>> the
>>>> Claim. Justice Near sees no reason to recuse himself.
>>>>
>>>> [25] Insofar as it is possible to glean the basis for Mr.
>>>> Amos’ allegations against Justice Gleason, it appears that he alleges
>>>> that she is incapable of hearing this appeal because he says he wrote
>>>> a letter to Brian Mulroney and Jean Chrétien in 2004. At th>> both
>>>> Justice Gleason and Mr. Mulroney were partners in the law firm
>>>> Ogilvy Renault, LLP. The letter in question, which is rude and angry,
>>>> begins with “Hey you two Evil Old Smiling Bastards” and “Re: me suing
>>>> you and your little dogs too”. There is no indication that the letter
>>>> was ever responded to or that a law suit was ever commenced by Mr.
>>>> Amos against Mr. Mulroney. In the circumstances, there is no reason
>>>> for Justice Gleason to recuse herself as the letter in question does
>>>> not give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> III. Issue
>>>>
>>>> [26] The issue on the cross-appeal is as follows: Did the
>>>> Judge err in setting aside the Prothonotary’s Order striking the
>> Claim
>>>> in its entirety without leave to amend and in determining that Mr.
>>>> Amos’ allegation that the RCMP barred him from the New Brunswick
>>>> legislature in 2004 was capable of supporting a cause of action?
>>>>
>>>> IV. Analysis
>>>>
>>>> A. Standard of Review
>>>>
>>>> [27] Following the Judge’s decision to set aside the
>>>> Prothonotary’s Order, this Court revisited the standard of review to
>>>> be applied to discretionary decisions of prothonotaries and decisions
>>>> made by judges on appeals of prothonotaries’ decisions in Hospira
>>>> Healthcare Corp. v. Kennedy Institute of Rheumatology, 2016 FCA 215,
>>>> 402 D.L.R. (4th) 497 [Hospira]. In Hospira, a five-member panel of
>>>> this Court replaced the Aqua-Gem standard of review with that
>>>> articulated in Housen v. Nikolaisen, 2002 SCC 33, [2002] 2 S.C.R. 235
>>>> [Housen]. As a result, it is no longer appropriate for the Federal
>>>> Court to conduct a de novo review of a discretionary order made by a
>>>> prothonotary in regard to questions vital to the final issue of the
>>>> case. Rather, a Federal Court judge can only intervene on appeal if
>>>> the prothonotary made an error of law or a palpable and overriding
>>>> error in determining a question of fact or question of mixed fact and
>>>> law (Hospira at para. 79). Further, this Court can only interfere
>> with
>>>> a Federal Court judge’s review of a prothonotary’s discretionary
>> order
>>>> if the judge made an error of law or palpable and overriding error in
>>>> determining a question of fact or question of mixed fact and law
>>>> (Hospira at paras. 82-83).
>>>>
>>>> [28] In the case at bar, the Judge substituted his own
>>>> assessment of Mr. Amos’ Claim for that of the Prothonotary. This
>> Court
>>>> must look to the Prothonotary’s Order to determine whether the Judge
>>>> erred in law or made a palpable and overriding error in choosing to
>>>> interfere.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> B. Did the Judge err in interfering with the
>>>> Prothonotary’s Order?
>>>>
>>>> [29] The Prothontoary’s Order accepted the following
>>>> paragraphs from the Crown’s submissions as the basis for striking the
>>>> Claim in its entirety without leave to amend:
>>>>
>>>> 17. Within the 96 paragraph Statement of Claim, the Plaintiff
>>>> addresses his complaint in paragraphs 14-24, inclusive. All but four
>>>> of those paragraphs are dedicated to an incident that occurred in
>> 2006
>>>> in and around the legislature in New Brunswick. The jurisdiction of
>>>> the Federal Court does not extend to Her Majesty the Queen in right
>> of
>>>> the Provinces. In any event, the Plaintiff hasn’t named the Province
>>>> or provincial actors as parties to this action. The incident alleged
>>>> does not give rise to a justiciable cause of action in this Court.
>>>> (…)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 21. The few paragraphs that directly address the Defendant
>>>> provide no details as to the individuals involved or the location of
>>>> the alleged incidents or other details sufficient to allow the
>>>> Defendant to respond. As a result, it is difficult or impossible to
>>>> determine the causes of action the Plaintiff is attempting to
>> advance.
>>>> A generous reading of the Statement of Claim allows the Defendant to
>>>> only speculate as to the true and/or int>> best, the Plaintiff’s action
>>>> may possibly be summarized as: he
>>>> suspects he is barred from the House of Commons.
>>>> [footnotes omitted].
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [30] The Judge determined that he could not strike the
>> Claim
>>>> on the same jurisdictional basis as the Prothonotary. The Judge noted
>>>> that the Federal Court has jurisdiction over claims based on the
>>>> liability of Federal Crown servants like the RCMP and that the actors
>>>> who barred Mr. Amos from the New Brunswick legislature in 2004
>>>> included the RCMP (Federal Court Judgment at para. 23). In
>> considering
>>>> the viability of these allegations de novo, the Judge identified
>>>> paragraph 14 of the Claim as containing “some precision” as it
>>>> identifies the date of the event and a RCMP officer acting as
>>>> Aide-de-Camp to the Lieutenant Governor (Federal Court Judgment at
>>>> para. 27).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [31] The Judge noted that the 2004 event could support a
>>>> cause of action in the tort of misfeasance in public office and
>>>> identified the elements of the tort as excerpted from Meigs v.
>> Canada,
>>>> 2013 FC 389, 431 F.T.R. 111:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [13] As in both the cases of Odhavji Estate v Woodhouse, 2003
>> SCC
>>>> 69 [Odhavji] and Lewis v Canada, 2012 FC 1514 [Lewis], I must
>>>> determine whether the plaintiffs’ statement of claim pleads each
>>>> element of the alleged tort of misfeasance in public office:
>>>>
>>>> a) The public officer must have engaged in deliberate and unlawful
>>>> conduct in his or her capacity as public officer;
>>>>
>>>> b) The public officer must have been aware both that his or her
>>>> conduct was unlawful and that it was likely to harm the plaintiff;
>> and
>>>>
>>>> c) There must be an element of bad faith or dishonesty by the public
>>>> officer and knowledge of harm alone is insufficient to conclude that
>> a
>>>> public officer acted in bad faith or dishonestly.
>>>> Odhavji, above, at paras 23, 24 and 28
>>>> (Federal Court Judgment at para. 28).
>>>>
>>>> [32] The Judge determined that Mr. Amos disclosed
>> sufficient
>>>> material facts to meet the elements of the tort of misfeasance in
>>>> public office because the actors, who barred him from the New
>>>> Brunswick legislature in 2004, including the RCMP, did so for
>>>> “political reasons” (Federal Court Judgment at para. 29).
>>>>
>>>> [33] This Court’s discussion of the sufficiency of
>> pleadings
>>>> in Merchant Law Group v. Canada (Revenue Agency), 2010 FCA 184, 321
>>>> D.L.R (4th) 301 is particularly apt:
>>>>
>>>> …When pleading bad faith or abuse of power, it is not enough to
>>>> assert, baldly, conclusory phrases such as “deliberately or
>>>> negligently,” “callous disregard,” or “by fraud and theft did steal”.
>>>> “The bare assertion of a conclusion upon which the court is called
>>>> upon to pronounce is not an allegation of material fact”. Making
>> bald,
>>>> conclusory allegations without any evidentiary foundation is an abuse
>>>> of process…
>>>>
>>>> To this, I would add that the tort of misfeasance in public office
>>>> requires a particular state of mind of a public officer in carrying
>>>> out the impunged action, i.e., deliberate conduct which the public
>>>> officer knows to be inconsistent with the obligations of his or her
>>>> office. For this tort, particularization of the allegations is
>>>> mandatory. Rule 181 specifically requires particularization of
>>>> allegations of “breach of trust,” “wilful default,” “state of mind of
>>>> a person,” “malice” or “fraudulent intention.”
>>>> (at paras. 34-35, citations omitted).
>>>>
>>>> [34] Applying the Housen standard of review to the
>>>> Prothonotary’s Order, we are of the view that the Judge interfered
>>>> absent a legal or palpable and overriding error.
>>>>
>>>> [35] The Prothonotary determined that Mr. Amos’ Claim
>>>> disclosed no reasonable claim and was fundamentally vexatious on the
>>>> basis of jurisdictional concerns and the absence of material facts to
>>>> ground a cause of action. Paragraph 14 of the Claim, which addresses
>>>> the 2004 event, pleads no material facts as to how the R>> engaged in
>>>> deliberate and unlawful conduct, knew that his or her
>>>> conduct was unlawful and likely to harm Mr. Amos, and acted in bad
>>>> faith. While the Claim alleges elsewhere that Mr. Amos was barred
>> from
>>>> the New Brunswick legislature for political and/or malicious reasons,
>>>> these allegations are not particularized and are directed against
>>>> non-federal actors, such as the Sergeant-at-Arms of the Legislative
>>>> Assembly of New Brunswick and the Fredericton Police Force. As such,
>>>> the Judge erred in determining that Mr. Amos’ allegation that the
>> RCMP
>>>> barred him from the New Brunswick legislature in 2004 was capable of
>>>> supporting a cause of action.
>>>>
>>>> [36] In our view, the Claim is made up entirely of bare
>>>> allegations, devoid of any detail, such that it discloses no
>>>> reasonable cause of action within the jurisdiction of the Federal
>>>> Courts. Therefore, the Judge erred in interfering to set aside the
>>>> Prothonotary’s Order striking the claim in its entirety. Further, we
>>>> find that the Prothonotary made no error in denying leave to amend.
>>>> The deficiencies in Mr. Amos’ pleadings are so extensive such that
>>>> amendment could not cure them (see Collins at para. 26).
>>>>
>>>> V. Conclusion
>>>> [37] For the foregoing reasons, we would allow the Crown’s
>>>> cross-appeal, with costs, setting aside the Federal Court Judgment,
>>>> dated January 25, 2016 and restoring the Prothonotary’s Order, dated
>>>> November 12, 2015, which struck Mr. Amos’ Claim in its entirety
>>>> without leave to amend.
>>>> "Wyman W. Webb"
>>>> J.A.
>>>> "David G. Near"
>>>> J.A.
>>>> "Mary J.L. Gleason"
>>>> J.A.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
>>>> NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
>>>>
>>>> A CROSS-APPEAL FROM AN ORDER OF THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE SOUTHCOTT
>> DATED
>>>> JANUARY 25, 2016; DOCKET NUMBER T-1557-15.
>>>> DOCKET:
>>>>
>>>> A-48-16
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> STYLE OF CAUSE:
>>>>
>>>> DAVID RAYMOND AMOS v. HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> PLACE OF HEARING:
>>>>
>>>> Fredericton,
>>>> New Brunswick
>>>>
>>>> DATE OF HEARING:
>>>>
>>>> May 24, 2017
>>>>
>>>> REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY:
>>>>
>>>> WEBB J.A.
>>>> NEAR J.A.
>>>> GLEASON J.A.
>>>>
>>>> DATED:
>>>>
>>>> October 30, 2017
>>>>
>>>> APPEARANCES:
>>>> David Raymond Amos
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> For The Appellant / respondent on cross-appeal
>>>> (on his own behalf)
>>>>
>>>> Jan Jensen
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> For The Respondent / appELLANT ON CROSS-APPEAL
>>>>
>>>> SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
>>>> Nathalie G. Drouin
>>>> Deputy Attorney General of Canada
>>>>
>>>> For The Respondent / APPELLANT ON CROSS-APPEAL
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------- Original message ----------
>>>> From: "Higgs, Premier Blaine (PO/CPM)" <Blaine.Higgs@gnb.ca>
>>>> Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2020 23:04:24 +0000
>>>> Subject: Automatic reply: Methinks Higgs's rationale for a
>>>> snap-election was flawed bigtime N'esy Pas?
>>>> To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
>>>>
>>>> Thank you for taking the time to write to us.
>>>>
>>>> Due to the high volume of emails that we receive daily, please note
>>>> that there may be a delay in our response. Thank you for your
>>>> understanding.
>>>>
>>>> If you are looking for current information on Coronavirus, please
>>>> visit www.gnb.ca/coronavirus<http://
>>>>
>>>> If this is a Media Request, please contact the Premier’s office at
>>>> (506) 453-2144.
>>>>
>>>> Thank you.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Bonjour,
>>>>
>>>> Nous vous remercions d’avoir pris le temps de nous écrire.
>>>>
>>>> Tenant compte du volume élevé de courriels que nous recevons
>>>> quotidiennement, il se peut qu’il y ait un délai dans notre réponse.
>>>> Nous vous remercions de votre compréhension.
>>>>
>>>> Si vous recherchez des informations à jour sur le coronavirus,
>>>> veuillez visiter
>>>> www.gnb.ca/coronavirus<http://
>>>>
>>>> S’il s’agit d’une demande des médias, veuillez communiquer avec le
>>>> Cabinet du premier ministre au 506-453-2144.
>>>>
>>>> Merci.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Office of the Premier/Cabinet du premier ministre
>>>> P.O Box/C. P. 6000
>>>> Fredericton, New-Brunswick/Nou>> Email/Courriel:
>>>> premier@gnb.ca/premier.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------- Original message ----------
>>>> From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
>>>> Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2020 20:04:18 -0300
>>>> Subject: Methinks Higgs's rationale for a snap-election was flawed
>>>> bigtime N'esy Pas?
>>>> To: oldmaison@yahoo.com, Dominic.Cardy@gnb.ca, chris@duffie.ca,
>>>> ron.tremblay2@gmail.com, aadnc.minister.aandc@canada.ca
>>>> jake.stewart@gnb.ca, andre@jafaust.com, rick.desaulniers@gnb.ca,
>>>> kris.austin@gnb.ca, michelle.conroy@gnb.ca, "David.Coon"
>>>> <David.Coon@gnb.ca>, elizabeth.may@parl.gc.ca, "Mitton, Megan (LEG)"
>>>> <megan.mitton@gnb.ca>, "Arseneau, Kevin (LEG)"
>>>> <kevin.a.arseneau@gnb.ca>, "Kevin.Vickers" <Kevin.Vickers@gnb.ca>,
>>>> Kevin.leahy@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, Dale.Morgan@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, "dan.
>>>> bussieres" <dan.bussieres@gnb.ca>, "serge.rousselle"
>>>> <serge.rousselle@gnb.ca>, "greg.byrne" <greg.byrne@gnb.ca>,
>>>> "Jack.Keir" <Jack.Keir@gnb.ca>, "tyler.campbell"
>>>> <tyler.campbell@gnb.ca>, "jeff.carr" <jeff.carr@gnb.ca>,
>>>> bob.atwin@nb.aibn.com, jjatwin@gmail.com, markandcaroline
>>>> <markandcaroline@gmail.com>, sheppardmargo@gmail.com,
>>>> jordan.gill@cbc.ca, "steve.murphy" <steve.murphy@ctv.ca>,
>> "David.Akin"
>>>> <David.Akin@globalnews.ca>, Newsroom <Newsroom@globeandmail.com>,
>>>> carolyn.bennett@parl.gc.ca, "Jody.Wilson-Raybould"
>>>> <Jody.Wilson-Raybould@parl.gc.
>> <jfurey@nbpower.com>,
>>>> "David.Lametti" <David.Lametti@parl.gc.ca>, mcu <mcu@justice.gc.ca>,
>>>> "Nathalie.Drouin" <Nathalie.Drouin@justice.gc.ca
>>>> <jan.jensen@justice.gc.ca>, premier <premier@ontario.ca>, premier
>>>> <premier@gnb.ca>
>>>> Cc: motomaniac333 <motomaniac333@gmail.com>, "blaine.higgs"
>>>> <blaine.higgs@gnb.ca>, "robert.gauvin" <robert.gauvin@gnb.ca>,
>>>> "Ross.Wetmore" <Ross.Wetmore@gnb.ca>, "Shane.Fowler"
>>>> <Shane.Fowler@cbc.ca>, pm <pm@pm.gc.ca>, "PETER.MACKAY"
>>>> <PETER.MACKAY@bakermckenzie.
>>>> <Katie.Telford@pmo-cpm.gc.ca>, postur <postur@for.is>, postur
>>>> <postur@fjr.stjr.is>
>>>>
>>>> https://twitter.com/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> David Raymond Amos @DavidRayAmos
>>>> Replying to @DavidRayAmos @alllibertynews and 49 others
>>>> Methinks I should not have been surprised to see the VERY CORRUPT CBC
>>>> block me in Facebook just like they do in Twitter and in the very
>>>> domain we all pay for with our tax dollars N'esy Pas?
>>>>
>>>>
>> https://davidraymondamos3.
>>>>
>>>> #nbpoli #cdnpoli
>>>>
>>>>
>> https://www.cbc.ca/news/
>>>>
>>>> CBC's Facebook Live answers questions about provincial election
>>>> Do you have questions about the election on Sept. 14? We have answers
>>>>
>>>> CBC News · Posted: Aug 19, 2020 10:44 AM AT
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 46 Comments
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> David Amos
>>>> Content disabled
>>>> Methinks they will block me in Facebook just like they do in Twitter
>>>> N'esy
>>>> Pas?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> BINGO
>>>> Your account has been banned until September 3, 2020. Reason: We have
>>>> banned this account for 15 days because we believe it is in violation
>>>> of our Terms of Use. For more information, please visit:
>>>> http://cbc.ca/submissions.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>> https://www.cbc.ca/news/
>>>>
>>>> Higgs's rationale for no-snap-election deal is flawed, says political
>>>> expert
>>>> Three byelections must be held this fall
>>>>
>>>> Jacques Poitras · CBC News · Posted: Aug 13, 2020 2:50 PM AT
>>>>
>>>>
>> ---------- Original message ----------
>> From: Kevin Leahy <kevin.leahy@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>
>> Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2019 12:38:43 -0400
>> Subject: Re: RE The call from the Boston cop Robert Ridge (857 259
>> 9083) on behalf of the VERY corrupt Yankee DA Rachael Rollins
>> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>>
>> French will follow
>>
>> Thank you for your email.
>>
>> For inquiries regarding EMRO’s Office, please address your email to
>> acting EMRO Sebastien Brillon at sebastien.brillon@rcmp-grc.gc.
>>
>> For inquiries regarding CO NHQ Office, please address your email to
>> acting CO Farquharson, David at David.Farquharson@rcmp-grc.gc.
>>
>> All PPS related correspondence should be sent to my PPS account at
>> kevin.leahy@pps-spp@parl.gc.ca
>> ------------------------------
>> Merci pour votre courriel.
>>
>> Pour toute question concernant le Bureau de l'EMRO, veuillez adresser
>> vos courriels à l’Officier responsable des Relations
>> employeur-employés par intérim Sébastien Brillon à l'adresse suivante
>> sebastien.brillon@rcmp-grc.gc.
>>
>> Pour toute question concernant le bureau du Commandant de la
>> Direction générale, veuillez adresser vos courriels au Commandant de
>> la Direction générale par intérim Farquharson, David à l'adresse
>> suivante David.Farquharson@rcmp-grc.
>>
>> Toute correspondance relative au Service De Protection Parlementaire
>> doit être envoyée à mon compte de PPS à l'adresse suivante
>> kevin.leahy@pps-spp@parl.gc.ca
>>
>>
>> Kevin Leahy
>> Chief Superintendent/Surintendant principal
>> Director, Parliamentary Protective Service
>> Directeur , Service de protection parlementaire
>> T 613-996-5048
>> Kevin.leahy@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
>>
>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email and any attachments are
>> confidential and may contain protected information. It is intended
>> only for the individual or entity named in the message. If you are not
>> the intended recipient, or the agent responsible to deliver the
>> message that this email contains to the intended recipient, you should
>> not disseminate, distribute or copy this email, nor disclose or use in
>> any manner the information that it contains. Please notify the sender
>> immediately if you have received this email by mistake and delete it.
>> AVIS DE CONFIDENTIALITÉ: Le présent courriel et tout fichier qui y est
>> joint sont confidentiels et peuvent contenir des renseignements
>> protégés. Il est strictement réservé à l’usage du destinataire prévu.
>> Si vous n’êtes pas le destinataire prévu, ou le mandataire chargé de
>> lui transmettre le message que ce courriel contient, vous ne devez ni
>> le diffuser, le distribuer ou le copier, ni divulguer ou utiliser à
>> quelque fin que ce soit les renseignements qu’il contient. Veuillez
>> aviser immédiatement l’expéditeur si vous avez reçu ce courriel par
>> erreur et supprimez-le.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> ---------- Original message ----------
>>> From: "Chaplin, Lynn (NBPC/CPNB)" <Lynn.Chaplin@gnb.ca>
>>> Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2019 04:58:45 +0000
>>> Subject: Automatic reply: Methinks the lawyer Rob McKee as the
>>> LIEbrano Shadow Justice and Attorney General,was VERY STUPID to dlete
>>> my emails N'esy Pas/ Andrea Anderson-Mason.
>>> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com&
>>>
>>> Please be advised this account is not monitored.
>>>
>>> veuillez noter que ce compte n"est pas surveillé
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------- Original message ----------
>>> From: "Mitton, Megan (LEG)" <Megan.Mitton@gnb.ca>
>>> Date: Sat, 22 Aug 2020 06:04:32 +0000
>>> Subject: Automatic reply: Methinks the lawyer Rob McKee as the
>>> LIEbrano Shadow Justice and Attorney General,was VERY STUPID to delete
>>> my emails N'esy Pas Andrea Anderson-Mason???.
>>> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com&
>>>
>>> Thank you for contacting me.
>>>
>>> A provincial election was called on August 17th and will be held on
>>> September 14th. During that time, my constituency office is required
>>> to be closed. The phone and email will not be monitored during this
>>> period.
>>>
>>> Thank you!
>>> Megan Mitton
>>>
>>> ---
>>>
>>>
>>> Merci de m'avoir contacté. Des élections provinciales ont été
>>> déclenchées le 17 août et auront lieu le 14 septembre. Pendant cette
>>> période, mon bureau de circonscription doit être fermé. Le téléphone
>>> et le courriel ne seront pas surveillés pendant cette période.
>>>
>>> Merci !
>>> Megan Mitton
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 8/22/20, David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>> From: Brian Gallant <briangallant10@gmail.com>
>>>> Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 08:17:31 -0700
>>>> Subject: Merci / Thank you Re: Attn Robert McKee I am calling you for
>>>> the third time The pdf files hereto attached are for real
>>>> To: motomaniac333@gmail.com
>>>>
>>>> (Français à suivre)
>>>>
>>>> If your email is pertaining to the Government of New Brunswick,
>> please
>>>> email me at brian.gallant@gnb.ca
>>>>
>>>> If your matter is urgent, please email Greg Byrne at
>> greg.byrne@gnb.ca
>>>>
>>>> Thank you.
>>>>
>>>> Si votre courriel s'addresse au Gouvernement du Nouveau-Brunswick,
>>>> svp m'envoyez un courriel à brian.gallant@gnb.ca
>>>>
>>>> Pour les urgences, veuillez contacter Greg Byrne à greg.byrne@gnb.ca
>>>>
>>>> Merci.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>> From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>>>> Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 11:17:25 -0400
>>>> Subject: Attn Robert McKee I am calling you for the third time The
>>>> files hereto attached are for real
>>>> To: robert.mckee@fowlerlawpc.com, "brian.gallant"
>>>> <brian.gallant@gnb.ca>, "chris.collins" <chris.collins@gnb.ca>, tj
>>>> <tj@burkelaw.ca>, "blaine.higgs" <blaine.higgs@gnb.ca>, "David.Coo>>
>>>> <andre@jafaust.com>, jbosnitch <jbosnitch@gmail.com>
>>>> Cc: David Amos <david.raymond.amos@gmail.com>
>>>> <greg.byrne@gnb.ca>, "Jack.Keir" <Jack.Keir@gnb.ca>
>>>>
>>>> Robert K. Mckee
>>>> Called to the bar: 2012 (NB)
>>>> Fowler Law P.C. Inc.
>>>> 69 Waterloo St.
>>>> Moncton, New Brunswick E1C 0E1
>>>> Phone: 506-857-8811
>>>> Fax: 506-857-9297
>>>> Email: robert.mckee@fowlerlawpc.com
>>>>
>>>>
>> http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/
>>>>
>>>> Robert McKee to run for the Liberals in Moncton Centre
>>>> Lawyer won Saturday's nomination by acclamation, a spokesperson for
>>>> the party says
>>>> CBC News · Posted: Jun 03, 2018 4:50 PM AT
>>>>
>>>> Robert McKee, a 32-year-old lawyer and first-term Moncton city
>>>> councillor, declared his candidacy for the Moncton Centre Liberal
>>>> nomination on May 17. (Submitted)
>>>>
>>>> Robert McKee has won the Moncton Centre Liberal nomination and will
>>>> run for the party in the upcoming provincial election this fall.
>>>>
>>>> The 32-year-old lawyer was elected to Moncton city council in May,
>>>> 2016, representing Ward 3, and declared his candidacy for the Moncton
>>>> Centre Liberal nomination on May 17.
>>>>
>>>> He won Saturday's nomination by acclamation, according to Duncan
>>>> Gallant, a spokesperson for the party.
>>>>
>>>> The availability to run in Moncton Centre for the Liberals opened up
>>>> after Speaker Chris Collins said he wouldn't reoffer for the party.
>>>>
>>>> Speaker Chris Collins won't reoffer for Liberals, plans to sue
>>>> premier for libel
>>>> 8 Liberals quit over premier's 'humiliating' treatment of Chris
>>>> Collins
>>>>
>>>> Premier Brian Gallant suspended Collins from the Liberal caucus on
>> the
>>>> basis of allegations of harassment made by a former employee of the
>>>> legislature.
>>>>
>>>> Collins described Premier Gallant's handling of the allegations as
>>>> "atrocious" and will finish his term as an independent.
>>>>
>>>> The election is scheduled for Sept. 24.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>>> From: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com
>>>>> Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2017 09:32:09 -0400
>>>>> Subject: Attn Integrity Commissioner Alexandre Deschênes, Q.C.,
>>>>> To: coi@gnb.ca
>>>>> Cc: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com
>>>>>
>>>>> Good Day Sir
>>>>>
>>>>> After I heard you speak on CBC I called your office again and
>> managed
>>>>> to speak to one of your staff for the first time
>>>>>
>>>>> Please find attached the documents I promised to send to the lady
>> who
>>>>> answered the phone this morning. Please notice that not after the
>> Sgt
>>>>> at Arms took the documents destined to your office his pal Tanker
>>>>> Malley barred me in writing with an "English" only document.
>>>>>
>>>>> These are the hearings and the dockets in Federal Court that I
>>>>> suggested that you study closely.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is the docket in Federal Court
>>>>>
>>>>>
>> http://cas-cdc-www02.cas-satj.
>>>>>
>>>>> These are digital recordings of the last three hearings
>>>>>
>>>>> Dec 14th https://archive.org/details/
>>>>>
>>>>> January 11th, 2016 https://archive.org/details/
>>>>>
>>>>> April 3rd, 2017
>>>>>
>>>>> https://archive.org/details/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> This is the docket in the Federal Court of Appeal
>>>>>
>>>>>
>> http://cas-cdc-www02.cas-satj.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The only hearing thus far
>>>>>
>>>>> May 24th, 2017
>>>>>
>>>>> https://archive.org/details/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> This Judge understnds the meaning of the word Integrity
>>>>>
>>>>> Date: 20151223
>>>>>
>>>>> Docket: T-1557-15
>>>>>
>>>>> Fredericton, New Brunswick, December 23, 2015
>>>>>
>>>>> PRESENT: The Honourable Mr. Justice Bell
>>>>>
>>>>> BETWEEN:
>>>>>
>>>>> DAVID RAYMOND AMOS
>>>>>
>>>>> Plaintiff
>>>>>
>>>>> and
>>>>>
>>>>> HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
>>>>>
>>>>> Defendant
>>>>>
>>>>> ORDER
>>>>>
>>>>> (Delivered orally from the Bench in Fredericton, New Brunswick, on
>>>>> December 14, 2015)
>>>>>
>>>>> The Plaintiff seeks an appeal de novo, by>>> 12, 2015, in which
>>>>> Prothonotary Morneau struck the Statement of
>> Claim
>>>>> in its entirety.
>>>>>
>>>>> At the outset of the hearing, the Plaintiff brought to my attention
>> a
>>>>> letter dated September 10, 2004, which he sent to me, in my then
>>>>> capacity as Past President of the New Brunswick Branch of the
>> Canadian
>>>>> Bar Association, and the then President of the Branch, Kathleen
>> Quigg,
>>>>> (now a Justice of the New Brunswick Court of Appeal). In that
>> letter
>>>>> he stated:
>>>>>
>>>>> As for your past President, Mr. Bell, may I suggest that you check
>> the
>>>>> work of Frank McKenna before I sue your entire law firm including
>> you.
>>>>> You are your brother’s keeper.
>>>>>
>>>>> Frank McKenna is the former Premier of New Brunswick and a former
>>>>> colleague of mine at the law firm of McInnes Cooper. In addition to
>>>>> expressing an intention to sue me, the Plaintiff refers to a number
>> of
>>>>> people in his Motion Record who he appears to contend may be
>> witnesses
>>>>> or potential parties to be added. Those individuals who are known to
>>>>> me personally, include, but are not limited to the former Prime
>>>>> Minister of Canada, The Right Honourable Stephen Harper; former
>>>>> Attorney General of Canada and now a Justice of the Manitoba Court
>> of
>>>>> Queen’s Bench, Vic Toews; former member of Parliament Rob Moore;
>>>>> former Director of Policing Services, the late Grant Garneau; former
>>>>> Chief of the Fredericton Police Force, Barry McKnight; former Staff
>>>>> Sergeant Danny Copp; my former colleagues on the New Brunswick Court
>>>>> of Appeal, Justices Bradley V. Green and Kathleen Quigg, and,
>> retired
>>>>> Assistant Commissioner Wayne Lang of the Royal Canadian Mounted
>>>>> Police.
>>>>>
>>>>> In the circumstances, given the threat in 2004 to sue me in my
>>>>> personal capacity and my past and present relationship with many
>>>>> potential witnesses and/or potential parties to the litigation, I am
>>>>> of the view there would be a reasonable apprehension of bias should
>> I
>>>>> hear this motion. See Justice de Grandpré’s dissenting judgment in
>>>>> Committee for Justice and Liberty et al v National Energy Board et
>> al,
>>>>> [1978] 1 SCR 369 at p 394 for the applicable test regarding
>>>>> allegations of bias. In the circumstances, although neither party
>> has
>>>>> requested I recuse myself, I consider it appropriate that I do so.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> AS A RESULT OF MY RECUSAL, THIS COURT ORDERS that the Administrator
>> of
>>>>> the Court schedule another date for the hearing of the motion.
>> There
>>>>> is no order as to costs.
>>>>>
>>>>> “B. Richard Bell”
>>>>> Judge
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Below after the CBC article about your concerns (I made one comment
>>>>> already) you will find the text of just two of many emails I had
>> sent
>>>>> to your office over the years since I first visited it in 2006.
>>>>>
>>>>> I noticed that on July 30, 2009, he was appointed to the the Court
>>>>> Martial Appeal Court of Canada Perhaps you should scroll to the
>>>>> bottom of this email ASAP and read the entire Paragraph 83 of my
>>>>> lawsuit now before the Federal Court of Canada?
>>>>>
>>>>> "FYI This is the text of the lawsuit that should interest Trudeau
>> the
>>>>> most
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ---------- Original message ----------
>>>>> From: justin.trudeau.a1@parl.gc.ca
>>>>> Date: Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 8:18 PM
>>>>> Subject: Réponse automatique : RE My complaint against the CROWN in
>>>>> Federal Court Attn David Hansen and Peter MacKay If you planning to
>>>>> submit a motion for a publication ban on my complaint trust that you
>>>>> dudes are way past too late
>>>>> To: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com
>>>>>
>>>>> Veuillez noter que j'ai changé de courriel. Vous pouvez me rejoindre
>> à
>>>>> lalanthier@hotmail.com
>>>>>
>>>>> Pour rejoindre le bureau de M. Trudeau veuillez envoyer un courriel à
>>>>> tommy.desfosses@parl.gc.ca
>>>>>
>>>>> Please note that I changed email address, you can reach me at
>>>>> lalanthier@hotmail.com
>>>>>
>>>>> To reach the office of Mr. Trudeau please send an email to
>>>>> tommy.desfosses@parl.gc.ca
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you,
>>>>>
>> http://davidraymondamos3.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 83. The Plaintiff states that now that Canada is involved in more
>> war
>>>>> in Iraq again it did not serve Canadian interests and reputation to
>>>>> allow Barry Winters to publish the following words three times over
>>>>> five years after he began his bragging:
>>>>>
>>>>> January 13, 2015
>>>>> This Is Just AS Relevant Now As When I wrote It During The Debate
>>>>>
>>>>> December 8, 2014
>>>>> Why Canada Stood Tall!
>>>>>
>>>>> Friday, October 3, 2014
>>>>> Little David Amos’ “True History Of War” Canadian Airstrikes And
>>>>> Stupid Justin Trudeau
>>>>>
>>>>> Canada’s and Canadians free ride is over. Canada can no longer hide
>>>>> behind Amerka’s and NATO’s skirts.
>>>>>
>>>>> When I was still in Canadian Forces then Prime Minister Jean
>> Chretien
>>>>> actually committed the Canadian Army to deploy in the second
>> campaign
>>>>> in Iraq, the Coalition of the Willing. This was against or contrary
>> to
>>>>> the wisdom or advice of those of us Canadian officers that were
>>>>> involved in the initial planning phases of that operation. There
>> were
>>>>> significant concern in our planning cell, and NDHQ about of the
>> dearth
>>>>> of concern for operational guidance, direction, and forces for
>>>>> operations after the initial occupation of Iraq. At the “last minute”
>>>>> Prime Minister Chretien and the Liberal government changed its mind.
>>>>> The Canadian government told our amerkan cousins that we would not
>>>>> deploy combat troops for the Iraq campaign, but would deploy a
>>>>> Canadian Battle Group to Afghanistan, enabling our amerkan cousins
>> to
>>>>> redeploy troops from there to Iraq. The PMO’s thinking that it was
>>>>> less costly to deploy Canadian Forces to Afghanistan than Iraq. But
>>>>> alas no one seems to remind the Liberals of Prime Minister
>> Chretien’s
>>>>> then grossly incorrect assumption. Notwithstanding Jean Chretien’s
>>>>> incompetence and stupidity, the Canadian Army was heroic,
>>>>> professional, punched well above it’s weight, and the PPCLI Battle
>>>>> Group, is credited with “saving Afghanistan” during the Panjway
>>>>> campaign of 2006.
>>>>>
>>>>> What Justin Trudeau and the Liberals don’t tell you now, is that
>> then
>>>>> Liberal Prime Minister Jean Chretien committed, and deployed the
>>>>> Canadian army to Canada’s longest “war” without the advice, consent,
>>>>> support, or vote of the Canadian Parliament.
>>>>>
>>>>> What David Amos and the rest of the ignorant, uneducated, and
>> babbling
>>>>> chattering classes are too addled to understand is the deployment of
>>>>> less than 75 special operations troops, and what is known by
>> planners
>>>>> as a “six pac cell” of fighter aircraft is NOT the same as a
>>>>> deployment of a Battle Group, nor a “war” make.
>>>>>
>>>>> The Canadian Government or The Crown unlike our amerkan cousins have
>>>>> the “constitutional authority” to commit the Canadian nation to war.
>>>>> That has been recently clearly articulated to the Canadian public by
>>>>> constitutional scholar Phillippe Legasse. What Parliament can do is
>>>>> remove “confidence” in The Crown’s Government in a “vote of
>>>>> non-confidence.” That could not happen to the Chretien Government
>>>>> regarding deployment to Afghanistan, and it won’t happen in this
>>>>> instance with the conservative majority in The Commons regarding a
>>>>> limited Canadian deployment to the Middle East.
>>>>>
>>>>> President George Bush was quite correct after 911 and the terror
>>>>> attacks in New York; that the Taliban “occupied” and “failed state”
>>>>> Afghanistan was the source of logistical support, command and
>> control,
>>>>> and training for the Al Quaeda war of terror against the world. The
>>>>> initial defeat, and removal from control of Afghanistan was vital
>> and
>>>>>
>>>>> P.S. Whereas this CBC article is about your opinion of the actions
>> of
>>>>> the latest Minister Of Health trust that Mr Boudreau and the CBC
>> have
>>>>> had my files for many years and the last thing they are is ethical.
>>>>> Ask his friends Mr Murphy and the RCMP if you don't believe me.
>>>>>
>>>>> Subject:>>> From: "Murphy, Michael B. \(DH/MS\)"
>>>>> MichaelB.Murphy@gnb.ca
>>>>> To: motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com
>>>>>
>>>>> January 30, 2007
>>>>>
>>>>> WITHOUT PREJUDICE
>>>>>
>>>>> Mr. David Amos
>>>>>
>>>>> Dear Mr. Amos:
>>>>>
>>>>> This will acknowledge receipt of a copy of your e-mail of December
>> 29,
>>>>> 2006 to Corporal Warren McBeath of the RCMP.
>>>>>
>>>>> Because of the nature of the allegations made in your message, I
>> have
>>>>> taken the measure of forwarding a copy to Assistant Commissioner
>> Steve
>>>>> Graham of the RCMP “J” Division in Fredericton.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sincerely,
>>>>>
>>>>> Honourable Michael B. Murphy
>>>>> Minister of Health
>>>>>
>>>>> CM/cb
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Warren McBeath warren.mcbeath@rcmp-grc.gc.ca wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2006 17:34:53 -0500
>>>>> From: "Warren McBeath" warren.mcbeath@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
>>>>> To: kilgoursite@ca.inter.net, MichaelB.Murphy@gnb.ca,
>>>>> nada.sarkis@gnb.ca, wally.stiles@gnb.ca, dwatch@web.net,
>>>>> motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com
>>>>> CC: ottawa@chuckstrahl.com,
>> riding@chuckstrahl.com,John.
>>>>> Oda.B@parl.gc.ca,"Bev BUSSON" bev.busson@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
>>>>> "Paul Dube" PAUL.DUBE@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
>>>>> Subject: Re: Remember me Kilgour? Landslide Annie McLellan has
>>>>> forgotten me but the crooks within the RCMP have not
>>>>>
>>>>> Dear Mr. Amos,
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you for your follow up e-mail to me today. I was on days off
>>>>> over the holidays and returned to work this evening. Rest assured I
>>>>> was not ignoring or procrastinating to respond to your concerns.
>>>>>
>>>>> As your attachment sent today refers from Premier Graham, our
>> position
>>>>> is clear on your dead calf issue: Our forensic labs do not process
>>>>> testing on animals in cases such as yours, they are referred to the
>>>>> Atlantic Veterinary College in Charlottetown who can provide these
>>>>> services. If you do not choose to utilize their expertise in this
>>>>> instance, then that is your decision and nothing more can be done.
>>>>>
>>>>> As for your other concerns regarding the US Government, false
>>>>> imprisonment and Federal Court Dates in the US, etc... it is clear
>>>>> that Federal authorities are aware of your concerns both in Canada
>>>>> the US. These issues do not fall into the purvue of Detachment
>>>>> and policing in Petitcodiac, NB.
>>>>>
>>>>> It was indeed an interesting and informative conversation we had on
>>>>> December 23rd, and I wish you well in all of your future endeavors.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sincerely,
>>>>>
>>>>> Warren McBeath, Cpl.
>>>>> GRC Caledonia RCMP
>>>>> Traffic Services NCO
>>>>> Ph: (506) 387-2222
>>>>> Fax: (506) 387-4622
>>>>> E-mail warren.mcbeath@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Alexandre Deschênes, Q.C.,
>>>>> Office of the Integrity Commissioner
>>>>> Edgecombe House, 736 King Street
>>>>> Fredericton, N.B. CANADA E3B 5H1
>>>>> tel.: 506-457-7890
>>>>> fax: 506-444-5224
>>>>> e-mail:coi@gnb.ca
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>> From: Justice Website <JUSTWEB@novascotia.ca>
>>>> Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2017 14:21:11 +0000
>>>> Subject: Emails to Department of Justice and Province of Nova Scotia
>>>> To: "motomaniac333@gmail.com" <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>>>>
>>>> Mr. Amos,
>>>> We acknowledge receipt of your recent emails to the Deputy Minister
>> of
>>>> Justice and lawyers within the Legal Services Division of the
>>>> Department of Justice respecting a possible claim against the
>> Province
>>>> of Nova Scotia. Service of any documents respecting a legal claim
>>>> against the Province of Nova Scotia may be served on the Attorney
>>>> General at 1690 Hollis Street, Halifax, NS. Please note that we will
>>>> not be responding to further emails on this matter.
>>>>
>>>> Department of Justice
>>>>
>>>> On 8/3/17, David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> If want something very serious to download and laugh at as well
>> Please
>>>>> Enjoy and share real wiretap tapes of the mob
>>>>>
>>>>>
>> http://thedavidamosrant.
>>>>> ilian.html
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As the CBC etc yap>>>> ask them the obvious question AIN'T THEY
>>>>>> FORGETTING SOMETHING????
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What the hell does the media think my Yankee lawyer served upon the
>>>>>> USDOJ right after I ran for and seat in the 39th Parliament
>> baseball
>>>>>> cards?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> http://archive.org/details/
>>>>>> 6
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> http://davidamos.blogspot.ca/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.archive.org/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://archive.org/details/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> FEDERAL EXPRES February 7, 2006
>>>>>> Senator Arlen Specter
>>>>>> United States Senate
>>>>>> Committee on the Judiciary
>>>>>> 224 Dirksen Senate Office Building
>>>>>> Washington, DC 20510
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Dear Mr. Specter:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have been asked to forward the enclosed tapes to you from a man
>>>>>> named, David Amos, a Canadian citizen, in connection with the
>> matters
>>>>>> raised in the attached letter.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Mr. Amos has represented to me that these are illegal FBI wire tap
>>>>>> tapes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I believe Mr. Amos has been in contact with you about this
>> previously.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Very truly yours,
>>>>>> Barry A. Bachrach
>>>>>> Direct telephone: (508) 926-3403
>>>>>> Direct facsimile: (508) 929-3003
>>>>>> Email: bbachrach@bowditch.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>> http://davidraymondamos3.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Sunday, 19 November 2017
>>>> Federal Court of Appeal Finally Makes The BIG Decision And Publishes
>>>> It Now The Crooks Cannot Take Back Ticket To Try Put My Matter Before
>>>> The Supreme Court
>>>>
>>>>
>> https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Federal Court of Appeal Decisions
>>>>
>>>> Amos v. Canada
>>>> Court (s) Database
>>>>
>>>> Federal Court of Appeal Decisions
>>>> Date
>>>>
>>>> 2017-10-30
>>>> Neutral citation
>>>>
>>>> 2017 FCA 213
>>>> File numbers
>>>>
>>>> A-48-16
>>>> Date: 20171030
>>>>
>>>> Docket: A-48-16
>>>> Citation: 2017 FCA 213
>>>> CORAM:
>>>>
>>>> WEBB J.A.
>>>> NEAR J.A.
>>>> GLEASON J.A.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> BETWEEN:
>>>> DAVID RAYMOND AMOS
>>>> Respondent on the cross-appeal
>>>> (and formally Appellant)
>>>> and
>>>> HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
>>>> Appellant on the cross-appeal
>>>> (and formerly Respondent)
>>>> Heard at Fredericton, New Brunswick, on May 24, 2017.
>>>> Judgment delivered at Ottawa, Ontario, on October 30, 2017.
>>>> REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY:
>>>>
>>>> THE COURT
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Date: 20171030
>>>>
>>>> Docket: A-48-16
>>>> Citation: 2017 FCA 213
>>>> CORAM:
>>>>
>>>> WEBB J.A.
>>>> NEAR J.A.
>>>> GLEASON J.A.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> BETWEEN:
>>>> DAVID RAYMOND AMOS
>>>> Respondent on the cross-appeal
>>>> (and formally Appellant)
>>>> and
>>>> HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
>>>> Appellant on the cross-appeal
>>>> (and formerly Respondent)
>>>> REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY THE COURT
>>>>
>>>> I. Introduction
>>>>
>>>> [1] On September 16, 2015, David Raymond Amos (Mr.
>> Amos)
>>>> filed a 53-page Statement of Claim (the Claim) in Federal Court
>>>> against Her Majesty the Queen (the Crown). Mr. Amos claims $11
>> million
>>>> in damages and a public apology from the Prime Minister and
>> Provincial
>>>> Premiers for being illegally barred from accessing parliamentary
>>>> properties and seeks a declaration from the Minister of Public Safety
>>>> that the Canadian Government will no longer allow the Royal Canadian
>>>> Mounted Police (RCMP) and Canadian Forces to harass him and his clan
>>>> (Claim at para. 96).
>>>>
>>>> [2] On November 12, 2015 (Docket T-1557-15), by way of
>> a
>>>> motion brought by the Crown, a prothonotary of the Federal Court (the
>>>> Prothonotary) struck the Claim in its entirety, without leave to
>>>> amend, on the basis that it was plain and obvious that the Claim
>>>> disclosed no reasonable claim, the Claim was fundamentally vexatious,
>>>> and the Claim could not be salvaged by way of further amendment (the
>>>> Prothontary’s Order).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [3] On January 25, 2016 (2016 FC 93), by way of Mr.
>>>> Amos’ appeal from the Prothonotary’s Order, a judge of the Federal
>>>>>> for being barred by the RCMP from the New Brunswick legislature in
>>>> 2004 (the Federal Court Judgment).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [4] Mr. Amos appealed and the Crown cross-appealed the
>>>> Federal Court Judgment. Further to the issuance of a Notice of Status
>>>> Review, Mr. Amos’ appeal was dismissed for delay on December 19,
>> 2016.
>>>> As such, the only matter before this Court is the Crown’s
>>>> cross-appeal.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> II. Preliminary Matter
>>>>
>>>> [5] Mr. Amos, in his memorandum of fact and law in
>>>> relation to the cross-appeal that was filed with this Court on March
>>>> 6, 2017, indicated that several judges of this Court, including two
>> of
>>>> the judges of this panel, had a conflict of interest in this appeal.
>>>> This was the first time that he identified the judges whom he
>> believed
>>>> had a conflict of interest in a document that was filed with this
>>>> Court. In his notice of appeal he had alluded to a conflict with
>>>> several judges but did not name those judges.
>>>>
>>>> [6] Mr. Amos was of the view that he did not have to
>>>> identify the judges in any document filed with this Court because he
>>>> had identified the judges in various documents that had been filed
>>>> with the Federal Court. In his view the Federal Court and the Federal
>>>> Court of Appeal are the same court and therefore any document filed
>> in
>>>> the Federal Court would be filed in this Court. This view is based on
>>>> subsections 5(4) and 5.1(4) of the Federal Courts Act, R.S.C., 1985,
>>>> c. F-7:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 5(4) Every judge of the Federal Court is, by virtue of his or her
>>>> office, a judge of the Federal Court of Appeal and has all the
>>>> jurisdiction, power and authority of a judge of the Federal Court of
>>>> Appeal.
>>>> […]
>>>>
>>>> 5(4) Les juges de la Cour fédérale sont d’office juges de la Cour
>>>> d’appel fédérale et ont la même compétence et les mêmes pouvoirs que
>>>> les juges de la Cour d’appel fédérale.
>>>> […]
>>>> 5.1(4) Every judge of the Federal Court of Appeal is, by virtue of
>>>> that office, a judge of the Federal Court and has all the
>>>> jurisdiction, power and authority of a judge of the Federal Court.
>>>>
>>>> 5.1(4) Les juges de la Cour d’appel fédérale sont d’office juges de
>> la
>>>> Cour fédérale et ont la même compétence et les mêmes pouvoirs que les
>>>> juges de la Cour fédérale.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [7] However, these subsections only provide that the
>>>> judges of the Federal Court are also judges of this Court (and vice
>>>> versa). It does not mean that there is only one court. If the Federal
>>>> Court and this Court were one Court, there would be no need for this
>>>> section.
>>>> [8] Sections 3 and 4 of the Federal Courts Act provide
>>>> that:
>>>> 3 The division of the Federal Court of Canada called the Federal
>> Court
>>>> — Appeal Division is continued under the name “Federal Court of
>>>> Appeal” in English and “Cour d’appel fédérale” in French. It is
>>>> continued as an additional court of law, equity and admiralty in and
>>>> for Canada, for the better administration of the laws of Canada and
>> as
>>>> a superior court of record having civil and criminal jurisdiction.
>>>>
>>>> 3 La Section d’appel, aussi appelée la Cour d’appel ou la Cour
>> d’appel
>>>> fédérale, est maintenue et dénommée « Cour d’appel fédérale » en
>>>> français et « Federal Court of Appeal » en anglais. Elle est
>> maintenue
>>>> à titre de tribunal additionnel de droit, d’equity et d’amirauté du
>>>> Canada, propre à améliorer l’application du droit canadien, et
>>>> continue d’être une cour supérieure d’archives ayant compétence en
>>>> matière civile et pénale.
>>>> 4 The division of the Federal Court of Canada called the Federal
>> Court
>>>> — Trial Division is continued under the name “Federal Court” in
>>>> English and “Cour fédérale” in French. It is continued as an
>>>> additional court of law, equity and admiralty in and for Canada, for
>>>> the better administration of the laws of Canada and as a superior
>>>> court of record having civil and criminal jurisdiction.
>>>>
>>>> 4 La section de la Cour fédérale du Canada, appelée la Section de
>>>> première instance de la Cour fédérale, est maintenue et dénommée «
>>>> Cour fédérale » en français et « Federal Court » en anglais. Elle est
>>>> maintenue à titre de tribunal additionnel de droit, d’equity et
>>>> d’amirauté du Canada, propre à améliorer l’application du droit
>>>> canadien, et continue d’être une cour supérieure d’archives ayant
>>>> compétence en matière civile et pénale.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [9] Sections 3 and 4 of the Federal Courts Act create
>>>> two separate courts – this Court (section 3) and the Federal Court
>>>> (section 4). If, as Mr. Amos suggests, documents filed in the Federal
>>>> Court were automatically also filed in this Court, then there would
>> no
>>>> need for the parties to prepare and file appeal books as required by
>>>> Rules 343 to 345 of the Federal Courts Rules, SOR/98-106 in relation
>>>> to any appeal from a decision of the Federal Court. The requirement
>> to
>>>> file an appeal book with this Court in relation to an appeal from a
>>>> decision of the Federal Court makes it clear that the only documents
>>>> that will be before this Court are the documents that are part of
>> that
>>>> appeal book.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [10] Therefore, the memorandum of fact and law filed on
>>>> March 6, 2017 is the first document, filed with this Court, in which
>>>> Mr. Amos identified the particular judges that he submits have a
>>>> conflict in any matter related to him.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [11] On April 3, 2017, Mr. Amos attempted to bring a motion
>>>> before the Federal Court seeking an order “affirming or denying the
>>>> conflict of interest he has” with a number of judges of the Federal
>>>> Court. A judge of the Federal Court issued a direction noting that if
>>>> Mr. Amos was seeking this order in relation to judges of the Federal
>>>> Court of Appeal, it was beyond the jurisdiction of the Federal Court.
>>>> Mr. Amos raised the Federal Court motion at the hearing of this
>>>> cross-appeal. The Federal Court motion is not a motion before this
>>>> Court and, as such, the submissions filed before the Federal Court
>>>> will not be entertained. As well, since this was a motion brought
>>>> before the Federal Court (and not this Court), any documents filed in
>>>> relation to that motion are not part of the record of this Court.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [12] During the hearing of the appeal Mr. Amos alleged that
>>>> the third member of this panel also had a conflict of interest and
>>>> submitted some documents that, in his view, supported his claim of a
>>>> conflict. Mr. Amos, following the hearing of his appeal, was also
>>>> afforded the opportunity to provide a brief summary of the conflict
>>>> that he was alleging and to file additional documents that, in his
>>>> view, supported his allegations. Mr. Amos submitted several pages of
>>>> documents in relation to the alleged conflicts. He organized the
>>>> documents by submitting a copy of the biography of the particular
>>>> judge and then, immediately following that biography, by including
>>>> copies of the documents that, in his view, supported his claim that
>>>> such judge had a conflict.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [13] The nature of the alleged conflict of Justice Webb is
>>>> that before he was appointed as a Judge of the Tax Court of Canada in
>>>> 2006, he was a partner with the law firm Patterson Law, and before
>>>> that with Patterson Palmer in Nova Scotia. Mr. Amos submitted that he
>>>> had a number of disputes with Patterson Palmer and Patterson Law and
>>>> therefore Justice Webb has a conflict simply because he was a partner
>>>> of these firms. Mr. Amos is not alleging that Justice Webb was
>>>> personally involved in or had any knowledge of any matter in which
>> Mr.
>>>> Amos was involved with Justice Webb’s former law firm – only that he
>>>> was a member of such firm.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [14] During his oral submissions at the hearing of his
>>>> appeal Mr. Amos, in relation to the alleged conflict for Justice
>> Webb,
>>>> focused on dealings between himself and a particular lawyer at
>>>> Patterson Law. However, none of the documents submitted by Mr. Amos
>> at
>>>> the hearing or subsequently related to any dealings with this
>>>> particular lawyer nor is it clear when Mr. Amos was dealing with this
>>>> lawyer. In particular, it is far from clear whether such dealings
>> were
>>>> after the time that Justice Webb was appointed as a Judge of the Tax
>>>> Court of Canada over 10 years ago.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [15] The documents that he submitted in relation to the
>>>> alleged conflict for Justice Webb largely relate to dealings between
>>>> Byron Prior and the St. John’s Newfoundland and Labrador office of
>>>> Patterson Palmer, which is not in the same province where Justice
>> Webb
>>>> practiced law. The only document that indicates any dealing between
>>>> Mr. Amos and Patterson Palmer is a copy of an affidavit of Stephen
>> May
>>>> who was a partner in the St. John’s NL office of Patterson Palmer.
>> The
>>>> affidavit is dated January 24, 2005 and refers to a number of e-mails
>>>> that were sent by Mr. Amos to Stephen May. Mr. Amos also included a
>>>> letter that is addressed to four individuals, one of whom is John
>>>> Crosbie who was counsel to the St. John’s NL office of Patterson
>>>> Palmer. The letter is dated September 2, 2004 and is addressed to
>>>> “John Crosbie, c/o Greg G. Byrne, Suite 502, 570 Queen Street,
>>>> Fredericton, NB E3B 5E3”. In this letter Mr. Amos alludes to a
>>>> possible lawsuit against Patterson Palmer.
>>>> [16] Mr. Amos’ position is that simply because Justice Webb
>>>> was a lawyer with Patterson Palmer, he now has a conflict. In
>> Wewaykum
>>>> Indian Band v. Her Majesty the Queen, 2003 SCC 45, [2003] 2 S.C.R.
>>>> 259, the Supreme Court of Canada noted that disqualification of a
>>>> judge is to be determined based on whether there is a reasonable
>>>> apprehension of bias:
>>>> 60 In Canadian law, one standard has now emerged as the
>>>> criterion for disqualification. The criterion, as expressed by de
>>>> Grandpré J. in Committee for Justice and Liberty v. National Energy
>>>> Board, …[[1978] 1 S.C.R. 369, 68 D.L.R. (3d) 716], at p. 394, is the
>>>> reasonable apprehension of bias:
>>>> … the apprehension of bias must be a reasonable one, held by
>>>> reasonable and right minded persons, applying themselves to the
>>>> question and obtaining thereon the required information. In the words
>>>> of the Court of Appeal, that test is "what would an informed person,
>>>> viewing the matter realistically and practically -- and having
>> thought
>>>> the matter through -- conclude. Would he think that it is more likely
>>>> than not that [the decision-maker], whether consciously or
>>>> unconsciously, would not decide fairly."
>>>>
>>>> [17] The issue to be determined is whether an informed
>>>> person, viewing the matter realistically and practically, and having
>>>> thought the matter through, would conclude that Mr. Amos’ allegations
>>>> give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias. As this Court has
>>>> previously remarked, “there is a strong presumption that judges will
>>>> administer justice impartially” and this presumption will not be
>>>> rebutted in the absence of “convincing evidence” of bias (Collins v.
>>>> Canada, 2011 FCA 140 at para. 7, [2011] 4 C.T.C. 157 [Collins]. See
>>>> also R. v. S. (R.D.), [1997] 3 S.C.R. 484 at para. 32, 151 D.L.R.
>>>> (4th) 193).
>>>>
>>>> [18] The Ontario Court of Appeal in Rando Drugs Ltd. v.
>>>> Scott, 2007 ONCA 553, 86 O.R. (3d) 653 (leave to appeal to the
>> Supreme
>>>> Court of Canada refused, 32285 (August 1, 2007)), addressed the
>>>> particular issue of whether a judge is disqualified from hearing a
>>>> case simply because he had been a member of a law firm that was
>>>> involved in the litigation that was now before that judge. The
>> Ontario
>>>> Court of Appeal determined that the judge was not disqualified if the
>>>> judge had no involvement with the person or th>> lawyer. The Ontario
>>>> Court of Appeal also explained that the rules for
>>>> determining whether a judge is disqualified are different from the
>>>> rules to determine whether a lawyer has a conflict:
>>>> 27 Thus, disqualification is not the natural corollary to a
>>>> finding that a trial judge has had some involvement in a case over
>>>> which he or she is now presiding. Where the judge had no involvement,
>>>> as here, it cannot be said that the judge is disqualified.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 28 The point can rightly be made that had Mr. Patterson been
>>>> asked to represent the appellant as counsel before his appointment to
>>>> the bench, the conflict rules would likely have prevented him from
>>>> taking the case because his firm had formerly represented one of the
>>>> defendants in the case. Thus, it is argued how is it that as a trial
>>>> judge Patterson J. can hear the case? This issue was considered by
>> the
>>>> Court of Appeal (Civil Division) in Locabail (U.K.) Ltd. v. Bayfield
>>>> Properties Ltd., [2000] Q.B. 451. The court held, at para. 58, that
>>>> there is no inflexible rule governing the disqualification of a judge
>>>> and that, "[e]verything depends on the circumstances."
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 29 It seems to me that what appears at first sight to be an
>>>> inconsistency in application of rules can be explained by the
>>>> different contexts and in particular, the strong presumption of
>>>> judicial impartiality that applies in the context of disqualification
>>>> of a judge. There is no such presumption in cases of allegations of
>>>> conflict of interest against a lawyer because of a firm's previous
>>>> involvement in the case. To the contrary, as explained by Sopinka J.
>>>> in MacDonald Estate v. Martin (1990), 77 D.L.R. (4th) 249 (S.C.C.),
>>>> for sound policy reasons there is a presumption of a disqualifying
>>>> interest that can rarely be overcome. In particular, a conclusory
>>>> statement from the lawyer that he or she had no confidential
>>>> information about the case will never be sufficient. The case is the
>>>> opposite where the allegation of bias is made against a trial judge.
>>>> His or her statement that he or she knew nothing about the case and
>>>> had no involvement in it will ordinarily be accepted at face value
>>>> unless there is good reason to doubt it: see Locabail, at para. 19.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 30 That brings me then to consider the particular
>> circumstances
>>>> of this case and whether there are serious grounds to find a
>>>> disqualifying conflict of interest in this case. In my view, there
>> are
>>>> two significant factors that justify the trial judge's decision not
>> to
>>>> recuse himself. The first is his statement, which all parties accept,
>>>> that he knew nothing of the case when it was in his former firm and
>>>> that he had nothing to do with it. The second is the long passage of
>>>> time. As was said in Wewaykum, at para. 85:
>>>> To us, one significant factor stands out, and must inform
>>>> the perspective of the reasonable person assessing the impact of this
>>>> involvement on Binnie J.'s impartiality in the appeals. That factor
>> is
>>>> the passage of time. Most arguments for disqualification rest on
>>>> circumstances that are either contemporaneous to the decision-making,
>>>> or that occurred within a short time prior to the decision-making.
>>>> 31 There are other factors that inform the issue. The Wilson
>>>> Walker firm no longer acted for any of the parties by the time of
>>>> trial. More importantly, at the time of the motion, Patterson J. had
>>>> been a judge for six years and thus had not had a relationship with
>>>> his former firm for a considerable period of time.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 32 In my view, a reasonable person, viewing the matter
>>>> realistically would conclude that the trial judge could deal fairly
>>>> and impartially with this case. I take this view principally because
>>>> of the long passage of time and the trial judge's lack of involvement
>>>> in or knowledge of the case when the Wilson Walker firm had carriage.
>>>> In these circumstances it ca>> trial judge could not remain impartial
>>>> in
>>>> the case. The mere fact
>> that
>>>> his name appears on the letterhead of some correspondence from over a
>>>> decade ago would not lead a reasonable person to believe that he
>> would
>>>> either consciously or unconsciously favour his former firm's former
>>>> client. It is simply not realistic to think that a judge would throw
>>>> off his mantle of impartiality, ignore his oath of office and favour
>> a
>>>> client - about whom he knew nothing - of a firm that he left six
>> years
>>>> earlier and that no longer acts for the client, in a case involving
>>>> events from over a decade ago.
>>>> (emphasis added)
>>>>
>>>> [19] Justice Webb had no involvement with any matter
>>>> involving Mr. Amos while he was a member of Patterson Palmer or
>>>> Patterson Law, nor does Mr. Amos suggest that he did. Mr. Amos made
>> it
>>>> clear during the hearing of this matter that the only reason for the
>>>> alleged conflict for Justice Webb was that he was a member of
>>>> Patterson Law and Patterson Palmer. This is simply not enough for
>>>> Justice Webb to be disqualified. Any involvement of Mr. Amos with
>>>> Patterson Law while Justice Webb was a member of that firm would have
>>>> had to occur over 10 years ago and even longer for the time when he
>>>> was a member of Patterson Palmer. In addition to the lack of any
>>>> involvement on his part with any matter or dispute that Mr. Amos had
>>>> with Patterson Law or Patterson Palmer (which in and of itself is
>>>> sufficient to dispose of this matter), the length of time since
>>>> Justice Webb was a member of Patterson Law or Patterson Palmer would
>>>> also result in the same finding – that there is no conflict in
>> Justice
>>>> Webb hearing this appeal.
>>>>
>>>> [20] Similarly in R. v. Bagot, 2000 MBCA 30, 145 Man. R.
>>>> (2d) 260, the Manitoba Court of Appeal found that there was no
>>>> reasonable apprehension of bias when a judge, who had been a member
>> of
>>>> the law firm that had been retained by the accused, had no
>> involvement
>>>> with the accused while he was a lawyer with that firm.
>>>>
>>>> [21] In Del Zotto v. Minister of National Revenue, [2000] 4
>>>> F.C. 321, 257 N.R. 96, this court did find that there would be a
>>>> reasonable apprehension of bias where a judge, who while he was a
>>>> lawyer, had recorded time on a matter involving the same person who
>>>> was before that judge. However, this case can be distinguished as
>>>> Justice Webb did not have any time recorded on any files involving
>> Mr.
>>>> Amos while he was a lawyer with Patterson Palmer or Patterson Law.
>>>>
>>>> [22] Mr. Amos also included with his submissions a CD. He
>>>> stated in his affidavit dated June 26, 2017 that there is a “true
>> copy
>>>> of an American police surveillance wiretap entitled 139” on this CD.
>>>> He has also indicated that he has “provided a true copy of the CD
>>>> entitled 139 to many American and Canadian law enforcement
>> authorities
>>>> and not one of the police forces or officers of the court are willing
>>>> to investigate it”. Since he has indicated that this is an “American
>>>> police surveillance wiretap”, this is a matter for the American law
>>>> enforcement authorities and cannot create, as Mr. Amos suggests, a
>>>> conflict of interest for any judge to whom he provides a copy.
>>>>
>>>> [23] As a result, there is no conflict or reasonable
>>>> apprehension of bias for Justice Webb and therefore, no reason for
>> him
>>>> to recuse himself.
>>>>
>>>> [24] Mr. Amos alleged that Justice Near’s past professional
>>>> experience with the government created a “quasi-conflict” in deciding
>>>> the cross-appeal. Mr. Amos provided no details and Justice Near
>>>> confirmed that he had no prior knowledge of the matters alleged in
>> the
>>>> Claim. Justice Near sees no reason to recuse himself.
>>>>
>>>> [25] Insofar as it is possible to glean the basis for Mr.
>>>> Amos’ allegations against Justice Gleason, it appears that he alleges
>>>> that she is incapable of hearing this appeal because he says he wrote
>>>> a letter to Brian Mulroney and Jean Chrétien in 2004. At th>> both
>>>> Justice Gleason and Mr. Mulroney were partners in the law firm
>>>> Ogilvy Renault, LLP. The letter in question, which is rude and angry,
>>>> begins with “Hey you two Evil Old Smiling Bastards” and “Re: me suing
>>>> you and your little dogs too”. There is no indication that the letter
>>>> was ever responded to or that a law suit was ever commenced by Mr.
>>>> Amos against Mr. Mulroney. In the circumstances, there is no reason
>>>> for Justice Gleason to recuse herself as the letter in question does
>>>> not give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> III. Issue
>>>>
>>>> [26] The issue on the cross-appeal is as follows: Did the
>>>> Judge err in setting aside the Prothonotary’s Order striking the
>> Claim
>>>> in its entirety without leave to amend and in determining that Mr.
>>>> Amos’ allegation that the RCMP barred him from the New Brunswick
>>>> legislature in 2004 was capable of supporting a cause of action?
>>>>
>>>> IV. Analysis
>>>>
>>>> A. Standard of Review
>>>>
>>>> [27] Following the Judge’s decision to set aside the
>>>> Prothonotary’s Order, this Court revisited the standard of review to
>>>> be applied to discretionary decisions of prothonotaries and decisions
>>>> made by judges on appeals of prothonotaries’ decisions in Hospira
>>>> Healthcare Corp. v. Kennedy Institute of Rheumatology, 2016 FCA 215,
>>>> 402 D.L.R. (4th) 497 [Hospira]. In Hospira, a five-member panel of
>>>> this Court replaced the Aqua-Gem standard of review with that
>>>> articulated in Housen v. Nikolaisen, 2002 SCC 33, [2002] 2 S.C.R. 235
>>>> [Housen]. As a result, it is no longer appropriate for the Federal
>>>> Court to conduct a de novo review of a discretionary order made by a
>>>> prothonotary in regard to questions vital to the final issue of the
>>>> case. Rather, a Federal Court judge can only intervene on appeal if
>>>> the prothonotary made an error of law or a palpable and overriding
>>>> error in determining a question of fact or question of mixed fact and
>>>> law (Hospira at para. 79). Further, this Court can only interfere
>> with
>>>> a Federal Court judge’s review of a prothonotary’s discretionary
>> order
>>>> if the judge made an error of law or palpable and overriding error in
>>>> determining a question of fact or question of mixed fact and law
>>>> (Hospira at paras. 82-83).
>>>>
>>>> [28] In the case at bar, the Judge substituted his own
>>>> assessment of Mr. Amos’ Claim for that of the Prothonotary. This
>> Court
>>>> must look to the Prothonotary’s Order to determine whether the Judge
>>>> erred in law or made a palpable and overriding error in choosing to
>>>> interfere.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> B. Did the Judge err in interfering with the
>>>> Prothonotary’s Order?
>>>>
>>>> [29] The Prothontoary’s Order accepted the following
>>>> paragraphs from the Crown’s submissions as the basis for striking the
>>>> Claim in its entirety without leave to amend:
>>>>
>>>> 17. Within the 96 paragraph Statement of Claim, the Plaintiff
>>>> addresses his complaint in paragraphs 14-24, inclusive. All but four
>>>> of those paragraphs are dedicated to an incident that occurred in
>> 2006
>>>> in and around the legislature in New Brunswick. The jurisdiction of
>>>> the Federal Court does not extend to Her Majesty the Queen in right
>> of
>>>> the Provinces. In any event, the Plaintiff hasn’t named the Province
>>>> or provincial actors as parties to this action. The incident alleged
>>>> does not give rise to a justiciable cause of action in this Court.
>>>> (…)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 21. The few paragraphs that directly address the Defendant
>>>> provide no details as to the individuals involved or the location of
>>>> the alleged incidents or other details sufficient to allow the
>>>> Defendant to respond. As a result, it is difficult or impossible to
>>>> determine the causes of action the Plaintiff is attempting to
>> advance.
>>>> A generous reading of the Statement of Claim allows the Defendant to
>>>> only speculate as to the true and/or int>> best, the Plaintiff’s action
>>>> may possibly be summarized as: he
>>>> suspects he is barred from the House of Commons.
>>>> [footnotes omitted].
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [30] The Judge determined that he could not strike the
>> Claim
>>>> on the same jurisdictional basis as the Prothonotary. The Judge noted
>>>> that the Federal Court has jurisdiction over claims based on the
>>>> liability of Federal Crown servants like the RCMP and that the actors
>>>> who barred Mr. Amos from the New Brunswick legislature in 2004
>>>> included the RCMP (Federal Court Judgment at para. 23). In
>> considering
>>>> the viability of these allegations de novo, the Judge identified
>>>> paragraph 14 of the Claim as containing “some precision” as it
>>>> identifies the date of the event and a RCMP officer acting as
>>>> Aide-de-Camp to the Lieutenant Governor (Federal Court Judgment at
>>>> para. 27).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [31] The Judge noted that the 2004 event could support a
>>>> cause of action in the tort of misfeasance in public office and
>>>> identified the elements of the tort as excerpted from Meigs v.
>> Canada,
>>>> 2013 FC 389, 431 F.T.R. 111:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [13] As in both the cases of Odhavji Estate v Woodhouse, 2003
>> SCC
>>>> 69 [Odhavji] and Lewis v Canada, 2012 FC 1514 [Lewis], I must
>>>> determine whether the plaintiffs’ statement of claim pleads each
>>>> element of the alleged tort of misfeasance in public office:
>>>>
>>>> a) The public officer must have engaged in deliberate and unlawful
>>>> conduct in his or her capacity as public officer;
>>>>
>>>> b) The public officer must have been aware both that his or her
>>>> conduct was unlawful and that it was likely to harm the plaintiff;
>> and
>>>>
>>>> c) There must be an element of bad faith or dishonesty by the public
>>>> officer and knowledge of harm alone is insufficient to conclude that
>> a
>>>> public officer acted in bad faith or dishonestly.
>>>> Odhavji, above, at paras 23, 24 and 28
>>>> (Federal Court Judgment at para. 28).
>>>>
>>>> [32] The Judge determined that Mr. Amos disclosed
>> sufficient
>>>> material facts to meet the elements of the tort of misfeasance in
>>>> public office because the actors, who barred him from the New
>>>> Brunswick legislature in 2004, including the RCMP, did so for
>>>> “political reasons” (Federal Court Judgment at para. 29).
>>>>
>>>> [33] This Court’s discussion of the sufficiency of
>> pleadings
>>>> in Merchant Law Group v. Canada (Revenue Agency), 2010 FCA 184, 321
>>>> D.L.R (4th) 301 is particularly apt:
>>>>
>>>> …When pleading bad faith or abuse of power, it is not enough to
>>>> assert, baldly, conclusory phrases such as “deliberately or
>>>> negligently,” “callous disregard,” or “by fraud and theft did steal”.
>>>> “The bare assertion of a conclusion upon which the court is called
>>>> upon to pronounce is not an allegation of material fact”. Making
>> bald,
>>>> conclusory allegations without any evidentiary foundation is an abuse
>>>> of process…
>>>>
>>>> To this, I would add that the tort of misfeasance in public office
>>>> requires a particular state of mind of a public officer in carrying
>>>> out the impunged action, i.e., deliberate conduct which the public
>>>> officer knows to be inconsistent with the obligations of his or her
>>>> office. For this tort, particularization of the allegations is
>>>> mandatory. Rule 181 specifically requires particularization of
>>>> allegations of “breach of trust,” “wilful default,” “state of mind of
>>>> a person,” “malice” or “fraudulent intention.”
>>>> (at paras. 34-35, citations omitted).
>>>>
>>>> [34] Applying the Housen standard of review to the
>>>> Prothonotary’s Order, we are of the view that the Judge interfered
>>>> absent a legal or palpable and overriding error.
>>>>
>>>> [35] The Prothonotary determined that Mr. Amos’ Claim
>>>> disclosed no reasonable claim and was fundamentally vexatious on the
>>>> basis of jurisdictional concerns and the absence of material facts to
>>>> ground a cause of action. Paragraph 14 of the Claim, which addresses
>>>> the 2004 event, pleads no material facts as to how the R>> engaged in
>>>> deliberate and unlawful conduct, knew that his or her
>>>> conduct was unlawful and likely to harm Mr. Amos, and acted in bad
>>>> faith. While the Claim alleges elsewhere that Mr. Amos was barred
>> from
>>>> the New Brunswick legislature for political and/or malicious reasons,
>>>> these allegations are not particularized and are directed against
>>>> non-federal actors, such as the Sergeant-at-Arms of the Legislative
>>>> Assembly of New Brunswick and the Fredericton Police Force. As such,
>>>> the Judge erred in determining that Mr. Amos’ allegation that the
>> RCMP
>>>> barred him from the New Brunswick legislature in 2004 was capable of
>>>> supporting a cause of action.
>>>>
>>>> [36] In our view, the Claim is made up entirely of bare
>>>> allegations, devoid of any detail, such that it discloses no
>>>> reasonable cause of action within the jurisdiction of the Federal
>>>> Courts. Therefore, the Judge erred in interfering to set aside the
>>>> Prothonotary’s Order striking the claim in its entirety. Further, we
>>>> find that the Prothonotary made no error in denying leave to amend.
>>>> The deficiencies in Mr. Amos’ pleadings are so extensive such that
>>>> amendment could not cure them (see Collins at para. 26).
>>>>
>>>> V. Conclusion
>>>> [37] For the foregoing reasons, we would allow the Crown’s
>>>> cross-appeal, with costs, setting aside the Federal Court Judgment,
>>>> dated January 25, 2016 and restoring the Prothonotary’s Order, dated
>>>> November 12, 2015, which struck Mr. Amos’ Claim in its entirety
>>>> without leave to amend.
>>>> "Wyman W. Webb"
>>>> J.A.
>>>> "David G. Near"
>>>> J.A.
>>>> "Mary J.L. Gleason"
>>>> J.A.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
>>>> NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
>>>>
>>>> A CROSS-APPEAL FROM AN ORDER OF THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE SOUTHCOTT
>> DATED
>>>> JANUARY 25, 2016; DOCKET NUMBER T-1557-15.
>>>> DOCKET:
>>>>
>>>> A-48-16
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> STYLE OF CAUSE:
>>>>
>>>> DAVID RAYMOND AMOS v. HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> PLACE OF HEARING:
>>>>
>>>> Fredericton,
>>>> New Brunswick
>>>>
>>>> DATE OF HEARING:
>>>>
>>>> May 24, 2017
>>>>
>>>> REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY:
>>>>
>>>> WEBB J.A.
>>>> NEAR J.A.
>>>> GLEASON J.A.
>>>>
>>>> DATED:
>>>>
>>>> October 30, 2017
>>>>
>>>> APPEARANCES:
>>>> David Raymond Amos
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> For The Appellant / respondent on cross-appeal
>>>> (on his own behalf)
>>>>
>>>> Jan Jensen
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> For The Respondent / appELLANT ON CROSS-APPEAL
>>>>
>>>> SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
>>>> Nathalie G. Drouin
>>>> Deputy Attorney General of Canada
>>>>
>>>> For The Respondent / APPELLANT ON CROSS-APPEAL
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------- Original message ----------
>>>> From: "Higgs, Premier Blaine (PO/CPM)" <Blaine.Higgs@gnb.ca>
>>>> Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2020 23:04:24 +0000
>>>> Subject: Automatic reply: Methinks Higgs's rationale for a
>>>> snap-election was flawed bigtime N'esy Pas?
>>>> To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
>>>>
>>>> Thank you for taking the time to write to us.
>>>>
>>>> Due to the high volume of emails that we receive daily, please note
>>>> that there may be a delay in our response. Thank you for your
>>>> understanding.
>>>>
>>>> If you are looking for current information on Coronavirus, please
>>>> visit www.gnb.ca/coronavirus<http://
>>>>
>>>> If this is a Media Request, please contact the Premier’s office at
>>>> (506) 453-2144.
>>>>
>>>> Thank you.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Bonjour,
>>>>
>>>> Nous vous remercions d’avoir pris le temps de nous écrire.
>>>>
>>>> Tenant compte du volume élevé de courriels que nous recevons
>>>> quotidiennement, il se peut qu’il y ait un délai dans notre réponse.
>>>> Nous vous remercions de votre compréhension.
>>>>
>>>> Si vous recherchez des informations à jour sur le coronavirus,
>>>> veuillez visiter
>>>> www.gnb.ca/coronavirus<http://
>>>>
>>>> S’il s’agit d’une demande des médias, veuillez communiquer avec le
>>>> Cabinet du premier ministre au 506-453-2144.
>>>>
>>>> Merci.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Office of the Premier/Cabinet du premier ministre
>>>> P.O Box/C. P. 6000
>>>> Fredericton, New-Brunswick/Nou>> Email/Courriel:
>>>> premier@gnb.ca/premier.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------- Original message ----------
>>>> From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
>>>> Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2020 20:04:18 -0300
>>>> Subject: Methinks Higgs's rationale for a snap-election was flawed
>>>> bigtime N'esy Pas?
>>>> To: oldmaison@yahoo.com, Dominic.Cardy@gnb.ca, chris@duffie.ca,
>>>> ron.tremblay2@gmail.com, aadnc.minister.aandc@canada.ca
>>>> jake.stewart@gnb.ca, andre@jafaust.com, rick.desaulniers@gnb.ca,
>>>> kris.austin@gnb.ca, michelle.conroy@gnb.ca, "David.Coon"
>>>> <David.Coon@gnb.ca>, elizabeth.may@parl.gc.ca, "Mitton, Megan (LEG)"
>>>> <megan.mitton@gnb.ca>, "Arseneau, Kevin (LEG)"
>>>> <kevin.a.arseneau@gnb.ca>, "Kevin.Vickers" <Kevin.Vickers@gnb.ca>,
>>>> Kevin.leahy@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, Dale.Morgan@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, "dan.
>>>> bussieres" <dan.bussieres@gnb.ca>, "serge.rousselle"
>>>> <serge.rousselle@gnb.ca>, "greg.byrne" <greg.byrne@gnb.ca>,
>>>> "Jack.Keir" <Jack.Keir@gnb.ca>, "tyler.campbell"
>>>> <tyler.campbell@gnb.ca>, "jeff.carr" <jeff.carr@gnb.ca>,
>>>> bob.atwin@nb.aibn.com, jjatwin@gmail.com, markandcaroline
>>>> <markandcaroline@gmail.com>, sheppardmargo@gmail.com,
>>>> jordan.gill@cbc.ca, "steve.murphy" <steve.murphy@ctv.ca>,
>> "David.Akin"
>>>> <David.Akin@globalnews.ca>, Newsroom <Newsroom@globeandmail.com>,
>>>> carolyn.bennett@parl.gc.ca, "Jody.Wilson-Raybould"
>>>> <Jody.Wilson-Raybould@parl.gc.
>> <jfurey@nbpower.com>,
>>>> "David.Lametti" <David.Lametti@parl.gc.ca>, mcu <mcu@justice.gc.ca>,
>>>> "Nathalie.Drouin" <Nathalie.Drouin@justice.gc.ca
>>>> <jan.jensen@justice.gc.ca>, premier <premier@ontario.ca>, premier
>>>> <premier@gnb.ca>
>>>> Cc: motomaniac333 <motomaniac333@gmail.com>, "blaine.higgs"
>>>> <blaine.higgs@gnb.ca>, "robert.gauvin" <robert.gauvin@gnb.ca>,
>>>> "Ross.Wetmore" <Ross.Wetmore@gnb.ca>, "Shane.Fowler"
>>>> <Shane.Fowler@cbc.ca>, pm <pm@pm.gc.ca>, "PETER.MACKAY"
>>>> <PETER.MACKAY@bakermckenzie.
>>>> <Katie.Telford@pmo-cpm.gc.ca>, postur <postur@for.is>, postur
>>>> <postur@fjr.stjr.is>
>>>>
>>>> https://twitter.com/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> David Raymond Amos @DavidRayAmos
>>>> Replying to @DavidRayAmos @alllibertynews and 49 others
>>>> Methinks I should not have been surprised to see the VERY CORRUPT CBC
>>>> block me in Facebook just like they do in Twitter and in the very
>>>> domain we all pay for with our tax dollars N'esy Pas?
>>>>
>>>>
>> https://davidraymondamos3.
>>>>
>>>> #nbpoli #cdnpoli
>>>>
>>>>
>> https://www.cbc.ca/news/
>>>>
>>>> CBC's Facebook Live answers questions about provincial election
>>>> Do you have questions about the election on Sept. 14? We have answers
>>>>
>>>> CBC News · Posted: Aug 19, 2020 10:44 AM AT
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 46 Comments
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> David Amos
>>>> Content disabled
>>>> Methinks they will block me in Facebook just like they do in Twitter
>>>> N'esy
>>>> Pas?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> BINGO
>>>> Your account has been banned until September 3, 2020. Reason: We have
>>>> banned this account for 15 days because we believe it is in violation
>>>> of our Terms of Use. For more information, please visit:
>>>> http://cbc.ca/submissions.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>> https://www.cbc.ca/news/
>>>>
>>>> Higgs's rationale for no-snap-election deal is flawed, says political
>>>> expert
>>>> Three byelections must be held this fall
>>>>
>>>> Jacques Poitras · CBC News · Posted: Aug 13, 2020 2:50 PM AT
>>>>
>>>>
On Mon, Jun 10, 2024 at 9:02 PM David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
NEW BRUNSWICK OFFICEMarysville Place20 McGloin Street, 1st Flr.Fredericton, NB E3A 5T8506-444-4934Toll Free: 1-855-450-2010Email: sirt@gov.ns.ca
No comments:
Post a Comment