---------- Original message ----------
From: "Higgs, Premier Blaine (PO/CPM)" <Blaine.Higgs@gnb.ca>
Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2021 12:16:30 +0000
Subject: RE: CBC reported that the trial about cupcakes adjourned
abruptly after you told the court that a 'situation' arose Correct Ian
B. Kasper?
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
Hello,
Thank you for taking the time to write.
Due to the volume of incoming messages, this is an automated response
to let you know that your email has been received and will be reviewed
at the earliest opportunity.
If your inquiry more appropriately falls within the mandate of a
Ministry or other area of government, staff will refer your email for
review and consideration.
Merci d'avoir pris le temps de nous écrire.
En raison du volume des messages reçus, cette réponse automatique vous
informe que votre courriel a été reçu et sera examiné dans les
meilleurs délais.
Si votre demande relève plutôt du mandat d'un ministère ou d'un autre
secteur du gouvernement, le personnel vous renverra votre courriel
pour examen et considération.
If this is a Media Request, please contact the Premier’s office at
(506) 453-2144 or by email
media-medias@gnb.ca<mailto:med
S’il s’agit d’une demande des médias, veuillez communiquer avec le
Cabinet du premier ministre au 506-453-2144.
Office of the Premier/Cabinet du premier ministre
P.O Box/C. P. 6000 Fredericton New-Brunswick/Nouveau-
Tel./Tel. : (506) 453-2144
Email/Courriel:
premier@gnb.ca/premier.
---------- Original message ----------
From: Info <Info@gg.ca>
Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2021 12:15:07 +0000
Subject: OSGG General Inquiries / Demande de renseignements généraux au BSGG
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
Thank you for writing to the Office of the Secretary to the Governor
General. We appreciate hearing your views and suggestions. Responses
to specific inquiries can be expected within three weeks. Please note
that general comments and opinions may not receive a response.
*****
Nous vous remercions d'avoir écrit au Bureau du secrétaire du
gouverneur général. Nous aimons prendre connaissance de vos points de
vue et de vos suggestions. Il faut allouer trois semaines pour
recevoir une réponse à une demande précise. Veuillez noter que nous ne
donnons pas nécessairement suite aux opinions et aux commentaires
généraux.
IMPORTANT NOTICE: This message may contain confidential or privileged
information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are
not the intended recipient, you should not disseminate, distribute or
copy this email. Please notify the sender immediately if you have
received this email by mistake and delete it from your system.
AVIS IMPORTANT : Le présent courriel peut contenir des renseignements
confidentiels et est strictement réservé à l’usage de la personne à
qui il est destiné. Si vous n’êtes pas la personne visée, vous ne
devez pas diffuser, distribuer ou copier ce courriel. Merci de nous en
aviser immédiatement et de supprimer ce courriel s’il vous a été
envoyé par erreur.
---------- Original message ----------
From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2021 09:14:48 -0300
Subject: CBC reported that the trial about cupcakes adjourned abruptly
after you told the court that a 'situation' arose Correct Ian B. Kasper?
To: ibk@kapoorbarristers.com, "wayne.eyre" <wayne.eyre@forces.gc.ca>,
nia_ig.fct@navy.mil, pm <pm@pm.gc.ca>, "Ian.Shugart"
<Ian.Shugart@pco-bcp.gc.ca>, info <info@gg.ca>, mcu
<mcu@justice.gc.ca>, NIA_IG@navy.mil, Greta.Bossenmaier@hq.nato.int,
Matt.Gaetz@mail.house.gov, Tammy.Harris@forces.gc.ca,
Jill.Chisholm@justice.gc.ca, Cedric.Aspirault@forces.gc.ca,
Derek.Sloan@parl.gc.ca, Hon.ralph.goodale@canada.ca,
Brenda.Lucki@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, barbara.massey@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
clare.barry@justice.gc.ca, michael.mcnair@pmo-cpm.gc.ca,
David.Akin@globalnews.ca, dale.drummond@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, "blaine.higgs"
<blaine.higgs@gnb.ca>, fin.minfinance-financemin.fin@
hon.melanie.joly@canada.ca, Jody.Wilson-Raybould@parl.gc.
"andrea.anderson-mason" <andrea.anderson-mason@gnb.ca>
Ramesh.Sangha@parl.gc.ca, Marwan.Tabbara@parl.gc.ca
Cc: motomaniac333 <motomaniac333@gmail.com>, ashley.burke@cbc.ca,
Newsroom <Newsroom@globeandmail.com>, "steve.murphy"
<steve.murphy@ctv.ca>
https://www.cbc.ca/news/
Soldier tells court martial he 'didn't feel safe' using gun after eating cupcake
Trial adjourns abruptly after defence lawyer tells the court that a
'situation' arose
Mia Urquhart · CBC News · Posted: Aug 06, 2021 5:17 PM AT
"Testifying on the third day of the court martial of Bombardier
Chelsea Cogswell, Vallerand said he believed the cupcakes were the
culprit.
Cogswell, who grew up in Oromocto, is charged with eight counts of
administering a noxious substance to eight soldiers at 5th Canadian
Division Support Base Gagetown without their consent.
She is also charged with behaving in a disgraceful manner and
committing an act to the prejudice of good order and discipline.
The proceedings came to an abrupt halt on Friday afternoon, when
defence counsel Ian Kasper told the judge that a "situation" had
arisen.
He said he wanted a chance to talk to his client and senior counsel
before deciding how to proceed.
The trial was adjourned for the day and is scheduled to resume on
Saturday morning.
Disoriented, confused and paranoid
Over three days of testimony, eight soldiers have testified about
eating the cupcakes on July 21, 2018. They said they soon began
experiencing symptoms of fatigue, drunkenness, disorientation,
confusion and paranoia — all while on a live-fire training exercise.
They said they weren't able to focus on their tasks, and many of them
worried about the safety of handling guns and ammunition.
In her opening remarks, prosecutor Maj. Élisabeth Baby-Cormier said
Cogswell "recklessly introduced risk in an already inherently risky
activity."
On Day two of the court martial, Bombardier Lyann Lechman said she had
made a conscious decision to never try cannabis.
So when she started to feel strange on July 21, 2018, she never
considered that she was high.
An emotional Lechman testified that within a half-hour of eating the
cupcake, she started to feel sluggish and nauseous, lost sense of time
and wasn't able to perform tasks as usual. When she fell off an
ammunition box, she was told to lie in the shade.
Another soldier testified on Thursday about being sober for eight
years before eating a cupcake and knowing he was high.
Testifying remotely by video on Friday, Vallerand said Cogswell said a
couple of odd things to him when she offered him a cupcake. She said
she hoped they didn't taste "weird" because she used coconut or
avocado oil. She also said she hoped no one would have a reaction to
them.
Vallerand said he assumed at the time that she was worried about a
reaction to the oil she used.
Before long, he said he started to feel tired and sick to his stomach.
He said he immediately suspected the cupcake because it was the only
out-of-the-ordinary thing he had consumed. But he didn't initially
think he had been drugged; he thought he had a reaction to one of the
ingredients.
He and five other soldiers were tasked with moving a gun from one
location to another that day. On the way to their destination, he said
the driver also seemed tired and "he almost hit the gun in front of
us."
Before long, they all began talking about how poorly they felt.
When they arrived at the new gun location, they started to set up the
equipment, but Vallerand said they were all "struggling to do simple
tasks."
He said he "didn't feel safe using the gun."
Vallerand testified he told everyone to stop because something wasn't
right. He spoke to his superior officer and told him they weren't
feeling well. He also said the cupcakes were the suspected culprit.
By that time, Vallerand said, he was certain what was going on.
"I knew I was high … because I had cannabis before."
https://davidraymondamos3.
Monday, 12 July 2021
Evidence lost in case of soldier accused of feeding cannabis-laced cupcakes to gunners, lawyer says
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/jonathan-vance-obstruction-justice-1.6104409
Former chief of the defence staff Jonathan Vance charged with obstruction of justice
Vance is being investigated for sexual misconduct over his relationship with a subordinate
Former chief of defence staff Jonathan Vance has been charged with one count of obstruction of justice related to an ongoing military investigation into allegations of sexual misconduct.
The Canadian Forces National Investigation Service (CFNIS) announced the single charge against the country's retired former top military commander on Thursday.
The service would not provide details about what is alleged to have taken place, but said that it happened sometime after the CFNIS began investigating Vance on Feb. 4, 2021.
"It was during the course of this investigation that the obstruction of justice is alleged to have occurred," CFNIS said in a news release.
Provincial court documents, released late Thursday, allege that Vance "did willfully attempt to obstruction the course of justice in a judicial proceeding by repeatedly contacting Mrs. KB by phone and attempting to persuade her to make false statements about their past relationship to the Canadian Forces National Investigation Service."
Vance is due in provincial court on Sept. 17.
Vance retired as chief of the defence staff in mid-January. Almost two weeks later, Global News reported a story that accused him of having a long-standing relationship with a female subordinate and that he had sent a racy email to a junior non-commissioned officer eight years ago, prior to him assuming the top spot in in the military.
It was later revealed that the alleged inappropriate relationship involved Maj. Kellie Brennan, a reservist and staff officer at army headquarters in Ottawa.
Recordings of Vance
The allegations against Vance have sparked two sets of parliamentary committee hearings where Brennan testified and revealed the allegations which appear to be the basis of the charge against Vance. She also was interviewed by Global News and claimed that Vance, after the first story broke, counselled her to lie to military police.
She claimed to have tape recordings.
"It's recorded, and the CFNIS has all of the recordings of him directing me in what to say, what not to say, how to say it, what to exclude, to perjure myself," she told the Commons status of women committee on April 22.
WATCH | Former chief of defence staff Jonathan Vance charged with obstruction:
![](https://thumbnails.cbc.ca/maven_legacy/thumbnails/291/567/gen-vance-charged-brewster-150721.jpg?crop=1.777xh:h;*,*&downsize=510px:* 510w")
Jonathan Vance charged with obstruction of justice over sexual misconduct investigation
Vance, responding to the initial Global News story, denied the allegations. He has not spoken publicly since the stories were first made public in early February.
CBC News asked Vance for comment on Thursday, but he did not respond.
The allegations touched off a series of revelations and accusations involving other senior leaders in the military, including Vance's successor, Admiral Art McDonald, who voluntarily stepped aside in late February after sexual misconduct allegations against him were leaked to CBC News and the Ottawa Citizen.
The Crown's hurdles
One legal expert says that one of the hurdles the Crown will have to cross in proving the charge is whether Vance threatened Brennan.
"We don't have all of the evidence, but what I would be interested in knowing is what evidence they have that there was a threat, a bribe or other corrupt means to persuade Ms. Brennan to lie — because simply asking somebody to lie is not obstruction of justice," said retired colonel Rory Fowler, a military lawyer now in private practice.
There is a 10-year maximum sentence for a conviction on an obstruction of justice charge, Fowler said.
He added that it is unprecedented that such a senior retired officer is charged with a criminal offence.
"Previous to this, the most senior rank in living memory, the most senior rank who was facing a charge like this, was the then-vice-chief of the defence staff [Vice-Admiral] Mark Norman," said Fowler.
Norman was accused in 2017 of leaking cabinet secrets and charged by the RCMP with a single count of breach of trust. The charge was stayed two years later.
Gen.
Jonathan Vance, centre, and Admiral Art MacDonald, right, are pictured
here in 2019. Both are under investigation after allegations of sexual
misconduct surfaced. (CBC)
The investigations into Vance, McDonald and other senior leaders set off a wider crisis within the Canadian military, which has been grappling ineffectively with the scourge of sexual misconduct for decades.
Vance was supposed to be the one who fixed it; coming into the defence chief's job in 2015, he launched Operation Honour, an attempt to stamp out inappropriate behaviour.
Defence expert Charlotte Duval-Lantoine said the charge against Vance is serious and a demonstration by the federal government and the military that there will be no impunity.
Restoring confidence in the military justice system will depend on whether he is found guilty and punished, she suggested.
"We don't really know what is the outcome of this charge, but there is that idea now that even a chief of the defence staff needs to be subject to the same punishment, to the same sanctions as anyone else in the Canadian Armed Forces," said Duval-Lantoine, a fellow at the Canadian Global Affairs Institute.
The ongoing sexual misconduct crisis has prompted calls for the resignation of Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan, which were renewed Thursday once the obstruction charge was announced.
Renewed resignation calls
Conservative defence critic James Bezan said throughout the winter and spring, the Liberal government "went to great lengths to block investigations and hide the truth" about the sexual misconduct crisis and what it knew about Vance's personal life prior to the allegations becoming public.
"Accountability goes straight to the top," said Bezan. "Today's development is just one more reason why Minister Sajjan needs to resign."
NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh also weighed in, calling Liberal attempts to address military sexual misconduct a failure.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
LGen (Ret’d) Jean-Marc Lanthier Joins ADGA
ADGA has announced the addition of Lieutenant-General (ret’d) Jean-Marc Lanthier CMM, MSM, CD, to the ADGA Strategic Advisory Council. Lieutenant-General (ret’d) Lanthier recently retired after a distinguished career in the Canadian Forces, culminating in his appointment as Vice Chief of the Defence Staff.
“The Strategic Advisory Council is an invaluable advantage to ADGA and its sister companies” said Francoise Gagnon, CEO of ADGA Group. “We are a better company for the counsel and leadership they bring to our midst.”
Lieutenant-General (retired) Jean-Marc Lanthier joined the Canadian Armed Forces in 1989 and has led troops at all levels of command, including commanding the Canadian Army. His key command appointments include 12e Régiment blindé du Canada, 5e Groupe-brigade mécanisé du Canada, 2e Division du Canada/Joint Task Force (East) and the Canadian Army Doctrine and Training Centre.
“ADGA delivers important services and solutions to the Department of National Defence including expertise in ballistics and munitions, and training and simulation,” said Richard Fadden, OC, Chair, ADGA Strategic Advisory Council. “Lt Gen Lanthier’s expertise in Defence and Security make him a tremendous addition to the Council.”
Founded in 2017, ADGA’s Strategic Advisory Council is composed of industry and thought leaders who provide guidance and strategic direction to the Executive Management team at ADGA. They play a formidable role in guiding the company on its path forward. Lt. General (ret’d) Lanthier joins a distinguished group composed of Chair, Richard Fadden, OC, Lt Gen (ret’d) Guy Thibault, CMM, CD, MSC, John Ball, Karen Ellis, Carolyn Hurst, Gavin Liddy, and Lynn Roger.
http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/terms-conditions.page#social
Terms and Conditions
- Privacy
- Non-Government of Canada Servers
- Providing Content in Canada's Official Languages
- Hyperlinking
- Crown copyright protected works
- Supplementary reservists and the reporting of inventions
- Government of Canada Symbols
- Our Commitment to Accessibility
- Social Media
1. Privacy
The Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces (DND/CAF) are committed to providing websites that respect the privacy of visitors. This privacy notice summarizes the privacy practices for DND/CAF online activities.
All personal information collected by this institution is governed by the Privacy Act. This means that you will be informed of the purpose for which your personal information is being collected and how to exercise your right of access to that information
Your Privacy and the Internet
The nature of the Internet is such that Web servers automatically collect certain information about a visit to a website, including the visitor’s Internet Protocol (IP) address. IP addresses are unique numbers assigned by Internet Service Providers (ISP) to all devices used to access the Internet. Web servers automatically log the IP addresses of visitors to their sites. The IP address, on its own, does not identify an individual. However, in certain circumstances, such as with the co-operation of an ISP for example, it could be used to identify an individual using the site. For this reason, the Government of Canada considers the IP address to be personal information, particularly when combined with other data automatically collected when visitor requests a Web page such as the page or pages visited, date and time of the visit.
Unless otherwise noted, DND/CAF does not automatically gather any specific information from you, such as your name, telephone number or email address. DND/CAF would obtain this type of information only if you supply it to us, for example, by email or by filling in a contact form. In such cases, how your personal information is handled will be provided in a Personal Information Collection Statement.
In cases where services are provided by organizations outside of the Government of Canada, such as social media platforms or mobile applications, IP addresses may be recorded by the Web server of the third-party service provider.
The DND/CAF employs software programs to monitor network traffic, and to identify unauthorized attempts to upload or change information or otherwise cause damage. These programs are also used to gather anonymous information such as statistics to improve the functionality of our websites. These software programs receive and record the Internet Protocol (IP) address of the computer that has contacted our website, the date and time of the visit and the pages visited. We make no attempt to link these addresses with the identity of individuals visiting our website unless an attempt to damage the website has been detected.
The DND/CAF employs a fully automated Anti-Spam Filter to protect its employees and networks from spam. Incoming email messages that are flagged by the software as spam are deleted automatically by the technology without notification. The program is set to block email that is considered obvious spam because of its content (for example, pornographic, racist, get-rich-quick schemes, junk commercial solicitations) as determined by general industry best practice.
Questions or comments regarding this privacy policy, or the administration of the Privacy Act may be directed to the DND Access to Information and Privacy Coordinator by:
E-mail: ATIP-AIPRP@forces.gc.ca
Telephone: (613) 901-6720
Mail:
Director Access to Information and Privacy
National Defence Headquarters
Major-general George R. Pearkes Bldg.
101 Colonel By Drive
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0K2
If you are not satisfied with our response to your privacy concern, you may wish to contact the Office of the Privacy Commissioner by e-mail, by telephone at 1-800-282-1376 or visit their website.
Communicating with the Government of Canada
If you choose to send DND/CAF an email or complete a feedback form online, your personal information is used by DND/CAF in order to respond to your inquiry. The information you provide will only be shared with another government institution if your inquiry relates to that institution. DND/CAF does not use the information to create individual profiles nor does it disclose the information to anyone other than to those in the federal government who need to provide you with a response. Any disclosure of your personal information is in accordance with the Privacy Act.
Emails and other electronic methods used to communicate with the Government of Canada are not secure unless it is specifically stated on a Web page. Therefore, it is recommended that you do not send sensitive personal information, such as your Social Insurance Number or your date of birth, through non-secure electronic means.
Personal information from emails or completed feedback forms is collected pursuant to the Privacy Act. Such information may be used for statistical, evaluation and reporting purposes and is included in Personal Information Bank PSU 914 Public Communications.
Third-Party Social Media
DND/CAF use of social media serves as an extension of its presence on the Web. Social media accounts are public and are not hosted on Government of Canada servers. Users who choose to interact with us via social media should read the terms of service and privacy policies of these third-party service providers and those of any applications you use to access them.
Personal information that you provide to the Government of Canada via social media accounts is collected under the authority of the Privacy Act. This information is collected to capture conversations (e.g. questions and answers, comments, “likes”, retweets) between you and DND/CAF. It may be used to respond to inquiries, or for statistical, evaluation and reporting purposes. Comments posted that violate Canadian law will be deleted and disclosed to law enforcement authorities. Comments that violate our rules of engagement will also be deleted. The personal information is included in Personal Information Bank PSU 938 Outreach Activities.
Improving your Experience on Government of Canada Websites
Digital Markers (including cookies)
A digital marker is a resource created by the visitors’ browser in order to remember certain pieces of information for the Web server to reference during the same or subsequent visit to the website. Examples of digital markers are “cookies” or HTML5 web storage. Some examples of what digital markers do are as follows:
- they allow a website to recognize a previous visit each time the visitor accesses the site;
- they track what information is viewed on a site which helps website administrators ensure visitors find what they are looking for.
DND/CAF uses sessional digital markers on some portions of its website. During your on-line visit, your browser exchanges data with DND/CAF’s Web server. The digital markers used do not allow DND/CAF to identify individuals.
You may adjust your browser settings to reject digital markers, including cookies, if you so choose. However, it may affect your ability to interact with DND/CAF’s website.
Cookies are also used as an integral part of the identification process for some of our online applications. This is for security purposes to determine that you are who you say you are and to provide you with your confidential account information during an online session. No personal information is kept in session cookies and they are stored only in your browser’s temporary (cache) memory. When you log out of your session, the cookie is no longer valid and is discarded when you close your browser.
Web Analytics
Web analytics is the collection, analysis, measurement, and reporting of data about Web traffic and visits for purposes of understanding and optimizing Web usage. Information in digital markers may be used in conjunction with computer request data to identify and track your online interactions with the forces.gc.ca website.
Forces.gc.ca uses Google Analytics, Webtrends and log file analysis to improve the website. When your computer requests a forces.gc.ca Web page, the following types of information are collected and used for Web analytics:
- the originating IP address
- the date and time of the request
- the type of browser used
- the page(s) visited
- referral website
Opting out of Google Analytics
If you wish, you may opt out of being tracked by Google Analytics by disabling or refusing the cookies; by disabling JavaScript within your browser; or by using the Google Analytics Opt-Out Browser Add-On. Disabling Google Analytics or JavaScript will still permit you to access comparable information or services from our websites. However, if you disable your session cookie option, you will still be able to access our public website, but you might have difficulties accessing any secure services.
Log File Analysis
Forces.gc.ca uses log file analysis internally and retains information collected for Web analytics for a maximum period of 18 months. After this period, the information must be disposed of in accordance with the Standard on Privacy and Web Analytics or as authorized by the Librarian and Archivist of Canada. The information is not disclosed to an external third party service provider.
Google Analytics Data Collection
Data collected for Web analytics purposes goes outside of Canada to Google servers and may be processed in any country where Google operates servers. Data may be subject to the governing legislation of that country, [for example the USA Patriot Act]. For further information about Google Analytics, please refer to the Google Analytics terms of service.
Information used for the purpose of Web analytics is collected pursuant to section 5 of the Department of Human Resources and Skills Development Act and section 4 of the Privacy Act. Such data may be used for communications and information technology statistical purposes, audit, and evaluation, research, planning and reporting. For more information on how your privacy is safeguarded in relation to web analytics, see the Standard on Privacy and Web Analytics.
Protecting the Security of Government of Canada Websites
DND/CAF employs software programs to monitor network traffic to identify unauthorized attempts to upload or change information, or otherwise cause damage. This software receives and records the IP address of the computer that has contacted our website, the date and time of the visit and the pages visited. We make no attempt to link these addresses with the identity of individuals visiting our site unless an attempt to damage the site has been detected.
This information is collected pursuant to section 161 of the Financial Administration Act. The information may be shared with appropriate law enforcement authorities if suspected criminal activities are detected. Such information may be used for network security related statistical purposes, audit, evaluation, research, planning and reporting and is included in Personal Information Bank PSU 939 Security Incidents.
Inquiring about these Practices
Any questions, comments, concerns or complaints you may have regarding the administration of the Privacy Act and privacy policies regarding DND/CAF Web presence may be directed to our Access to Information and Privacy Coordinator by email at: ATIP-AIPRP@forces.gc.ca
If you are not satisfied with DND/CAF response to your privacy concern, you may wish to contact the Office of the Privacy Commissioner by telephone at 1-800-282-1376.
2. Non-Government of Canada Servers
To improve the functionality of Government of Canada websites, certain files (such as open source libraries, images and scripts) may be delivered automatically to your browser via a trusted third-party server or content delivery network. The delivery of these files is intended to provide a seamless user experience by speeding response times and avoiding the need for each visitor to download these files. Where applicable, specific privacy statements covering these files are included in our Privacy Notice.
3. Providing Content in Canada's Official Languages
The Official Languages Act, the Official Languages (Communications with and Services to the Public) Regulations and Treasury Board policy requirements establish when we use both English and French to provide services to or communicate with members of the public. When there is no obligation to provide information in both official languages, content may be available in one official language only. Information provided by organizations not subject to the Official Languages Act is in the language(s) provided. Information provided in a language other than English or French is only for the convenience of our visitors.
4. Hyperlinking
Links to websites not under the control of the Government of Canada, including those to our social media accounts, are provided solely for the convenience of our website visitors. We are not responsible for the accuracy, currency or reliability of the content of such websites. The Government of Canada does not offer any guarantee in that regard and is not responsible for the information found through these links, nor does it endorse the sites and their content.
Visitors should also be aware that information offered by non-Government of Canada sites to which this website links is not subject to the Privacy Act, the Official Languages Act and may not be accessible to persons with disabilities. The information offered may be available only in the language(s) used by the sites in question. With respect to privacy, visitors should research the privacy policies of these non-Government websites before providing personal information.
How to hyperlink to the DND/CAF website
Sites wishing to link to the DND/CAF website do not need to request permission to do so. We do, however, ask that you follow these linking practices:
- Use only text links for linking to the DND/CAF website.
- Do not link and/or use the official symbols of the GoC and Federal Identity Program (FIP) signatures as navigational aids.
- The official symbols of the GoC and the FIP signatures appear on non-government sites only when they are used to identify a government contribution or participation in a Collaborative Arrangement.
- The creation of a link does not confuse the user as to the source of the information through such practices as framing.
- The links provided respect the following Copyright Notice that governs materials published on the DND/CAF websites.
5. Crown copyright protected works
This section has been moved to: Crown copyright protected works
6. Supplementary Reservists Are Now Required to Report Inventions to DND
- This section has been moved to: Supplementary reservists and the reporting of inventions
7. Government of Canada Symbols
Certain official symbols of the Government of Canada, including the Canada Wordmark, the Arms of Canada, and the flag symbol may not be reproduced, whether for commercial or non-commercial purposes, without prior written authorization.
As these symbols are not managed by DND/CAF, a request for authorization must be forwarded to the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat at the following address:
information@fip-pcim.gc.ca
Federal Identity Program
Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat
300 Laurier Avenue West
Ottawa, Canada K1A 0R5
Telephone: 613-957-2533
Facsimile: 613-946-5187
8. Our Commitment to Accessibility
The Government of Canada is committed to achieving a high standard of accessibility as defined in the Standard on Web Accessibility and the Standard on Optimizing Websites and Applications for Mobile Devices. In the event of difficulty using our Web pages, applications or device-based mobile applications, please contact us for assistance or to obtain alternative formats such as regular print, Braille or another appropriate format.
9. Social Media Notice
This notice has been written to explain how DND/CAF interacts with the public on social media platforms.
Content and Frequency
We use our social media accounts as an alternative method of sharing the content posted on our website and interacting with our stakeholders. By following our social media accounts (by “following,” “liking” or “subscribing”), you can expect to see information about DND/CAF operations, programs and initiatives.
We understand that the Web is a 24/7 medium, and your comments are welcome at any time. You should expect to see new content posted Monday to Friday from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. EST/EDT. Comments submitted after hours or on weekends will be read and responded to as soon as possible.
Because the servers of social media platforms are managed by a third party, our social media accounts are subject to downtime that may be out of our control. As such, we accept no responsibility for platforms becoming unresponsive or unavailable.
Links to Other Websites and Ads
Our social media accounts may post or display links or ads for websites that are not under our control. These links are provided solely for the convenience of users. The Government of Canada is not responsible for the information found through these links or ads, nor does it endorse the sites or their content.
Following, “Favouriting” and Subscribing
Our decision to “follow,” “favourite” or “subscribe” to another social media account does not imply an endorsement of that account, channel, page or site, and neither does sharing (re-tweeting, reposting or linking to) content from another user.
Comments and Interaction
We will read comments and participate in discussions when appropriate. We ask that your comments be relevant and respectful. We reserve the right to delete comments that violate this notice, and the user may be blocked and reported to prevent further inappropriate comments.
By submitting a comment on this site, you, as the user, agree to indemnify and hold harmless Her Majesty the Queen in right of Canada including the DND/CAF against any liability and any and all third-party claims, demands, actions or costs (including legal costs on a solicitor-client basis) arising from its publication, including but not limited to breach of confidentiality or copyright, libel, or any obscene, defamatory, blasphemous or other actionable statement you may make.
We cannot engage in issues or answer questions that break the rules of this notice. The DND/CAF will not comment in the case of ongoing investigations, legal proceedings or matters before Parliament. Comments used for party political purposes will not be published. We will take seriously and report to the proper authorities any threats to the DND/CAF, their employees, agents, other users or the federal government.
We reserve the right to edit or remove comments that:
- Contain personal information;
- Are contrary to the principles of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms;
- Express racist, hateful, sexist, homophobic, slanderous, insulting or life-threatening messages;
- Put forward serious, unproven or inaccurate accusations against individuals or organizations;
- Are aggressive, coarse, violent, obscene or pornographic;
- Are offensive, rude or abusive to an individual or an organization;
- Are not sent by the author or are put forward for advertising purposes;
- Encourage illegal activity;
- Contain announcements from labour or political organizations;
- Are written in a language other than English or French;
- Are unintelligible or irrelevant;
- Are repetitive or spam; and
- Do not, in our opinion, add to the normal flow of the discussion.
In short, please be respectful and make sure that your comments are relevant to where they are posted. The views of users commenting on our social media accounts do not necessarily represent the views of DND/CAF or the Government of Canada.
Accessibility of Social Media Platforms
Social media platforms are third-party service providers and are not bound by Government of Canada standards for Web accessibility.
If you have difficulty accessing content on our social media accounts, please contact us and we will try to solve the problem or provide you with the information in a different format.
Copyright
Information that we post is subject to the Copyright Act.
Privacy
Our social media accounts are not Government of Canada websites and represent only our presence on third-party service providers.
For more information, please refer to our Privacy Notice regarding third-party social media.
Official Languages
Many social media platforms have multiple language options and provide instructions on how to set your preferences. The Government of Canada respects the Official Languages Act and is committed to ensuring that our information of is available in both French and English and that both versions are equal quality.
We reply to comments in the official language in which they are posted. If we think the response is a question of general public interest, we may respond in both official languages.
We may share links that direct users to sites of organizations or other entities that are not subject to the Official Languages Act and available only in the language(s) in which they are written. When content is available in only one language, we make an effort to provide similar content in the other official language.
Questions and Media Requests
Media are asked to send questions to the appropriate Media Contact or submit a media query electronically and refrain from submitting questions to the DND/CAF social media accounts as comments. Reporters’ questions will be removed.
Contact the Canadian Forces Military Police Group
Please call 911 to report a crime in progress or to request immediate assistance.
Report a non-emergency crime
To report a non-emergency crime or make a complaint, contact your nearest Military Police detachment or the police service of jurisdiction in your area:
British Columbia
- Comox: 250-339-8211 ext. 8218
- Chilliwack: 604-858-1020 or toll-free: 855-852-8325
- Esquimalt: 250-363-4032
Alberta
- Calgary: 403-410-2320 ext. 3943
- Cold Lake: 780-840-8000 ext. 8180
- Edmonton: 780-973-4011 ext. 4044
- Suffield: 403-544-4301
- Wainwright: 780-842-1700
Saskatchewan
- Dundurn: 306-492-2135 ext. 4282
- Moose Jaw: 306-694-2444
Manitoba
- Shilo: 204-765-3337
- Winnipeg: 204-833-2500 ext. 2633
Ontario
- Borden: 705-423-2241
- Kingston: 613-541-5010 ext. 5648
- London: 519-660-5275 ext. 5055
- Meaford: 519-538-1371 ext. 6575
- North Bay: 705-494-2011 ext. 2188
- Ottawa: 613-596-0124
- Petawawa: 613-687-5511 ext. 5444 (also responsible for Northern Ontario, except North Bay)
- Toronto: 416-633-6200 ext. 3810 or 416-678-7484 (24 hour support)
- Trenton: 613-392-2811 ext. 7153
Quebec
- Bagotville: 418-677-4000 ext. 7345
- Saint-Jean: 450-358-7011 ext. 7911
- Valcartier: 418-844-5000 ext. 7911
Atlantic Provinces
- Gagetown: 506-422-1404 or 506-422-1419
- Gander: 709-256-1703 ext. 1107
- Goose Bay: 709-896-6900 ext. 7111
- Greenwood: 902-756-1494 ext. 2633
- Halifax: 902-722-4445
Northwest Territories, Yukon and Nunavut
- Yellowknife: 867-873-0700 ext. 0
Canadian Forces National Investigation Service
For serious and sensitive matters, you can file a complaint or speak with a member of the Canadian Forces National Investigation Service (CFNIS) by calling the office closest to you. The CFNIS is a specialized unit within the Canadian Forces Military Police Group. Members of the CFNIS undergo specialized training in areas such as sexual assault investigations. CFNIS also runs its own Victims Assistance Program.
Atlantic Region
- Nova-Scotia, New-Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, Newfoundland and Labrador: 1-888-253-5335
Eastern Region
- Quebec and Nunavut: 1-877-763-3272
Central Region
- National Capital Region and Eastern Ontario: 1-888-812-3647
Borden Region
- Western Ontario: 1-866-698-1119
Western Region
- Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, North West Territories and Yukon: 1-877-290-1019
Pacific Region
- British Columbia: 1-844-489-0569
General inquiries
For Canadian Forces Provost Marshal or general inquiries about the Canadian Forces Military Police Group, contact us by:
Telephone: 613-949-1000From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2021 12:50:23 -0300
Subject: Attn Charlotte Duval-Lantoine and Rory Fowler we just talked
about what you said to CBC correct?
To: rory@roryfowlerlaw.com, cduval-lantoine@cgai.ca
Cc: motomaniac333 <motomaniac333@gmail.com>, ibk@kapoorbarristers.com
https://www.cbc.ca/news/
Former chief of the defence staff Jonathan Vance charged with
obstruction of justice
Vance is being investigated for sexual misconduct over his
relationship with a subordinate
Murray Brewster · CBC News · Posted: Jul 15, 2021 3:01 PM ET
The Crown's hurdles
"One legal expert says that one of the hurdles the Crown will have to
cross in proving the charge is whether Vance threatened Brennan.
"We don't have all of the evidence, but what I would be interested in
knowing is what evidence they have that there was a threat, a bribe or
other corrupt means to persuade Ms. Brennan to lie — because simply
asking somebody to lie is not obstruction of justice," said retired
colonel Rory Fowler, a military lawyer now in private practice.
There is a 10-year maximum sentence for a conviction on an obstruction
of justice charge, Fowler said.
PM's chief adviser knew of 'misconduct' allegation against top
military commander, committee told
He added that it is unprecedented that such a senior retired officer
is charged with a criminal offence.
"Previous to this, the most senior rank in living memory, the most
senior rank who was facing a charge like this, was the then-vice-chief
of the defence staff [Vice-Admiral] Mark Norman," said Fowler.
Norman was accused in 2017 of leaking cabinet secrets and charged by
the RCMP with a single count of breach of trust. The charge was stayed
two years later."
"Defence expert Charlotte Duval-Lantoine said the charge against Vance
is serious and a demonstration by the federal government and the
military that there will be no impunity.
Restoring confidence in the military justice system will depend on
whether he is found guilty and punished, she suggested.
"We don't really know what is the outcome of this charge, but there is
that idea now that even a chief of the defence staff needs to be
subject to the same punishment, to the same sanctions as anyone else
in the Canadian Armed Forces," said Duval-Lantoine, a fellow at the
Canadian Global Affairs Institute.
The ongoing sexual misconduct crisis has prompted calls for the
resignation of Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan, which were renewed
Thursday once the obstruction charge was announced."
http://roryfowlerlaw.com/
Rory Fowler
221 Queen St
Kingston, ON
K7K 1B4
rory@roryfowlerlaw.com
(613) 777 3820
Lieutenant-Colonel (retired) Rory G. Fowler, BComm, LL.B., LL.M., CD
Lieutenant-Colonel (retired) Rory Fowler retired from the Canadian
Forces after having served for nearly 28 years, first as an infantry
officer with the Princess Patricia’s Canadian Light Infantry, and
subsequently as a Legal Officer with the Office of the Judge Advocate
General. In the latter role, Rory served as a deployed legal advisor,
educator, and worked extensively in the area of public and
administrative law. He helped lead the development of the current
curriculum used to train new legal officers and served as a mentor to
many in the field of administrative law. Among his various positions,
Rory served as the Deputy Judge Advocate for Canadian Forces Base
Kingston, Director of Law – Compensation, Benefits, Pensions and
Estates and Director of Law – Administrative Law.
As Director of Law – Compensation, Benefits, Pensions and Estates,
Rory advised on a wide range of benefits for members of the Canadian
Forces under the National Defence Act, including pay, allowances,
reimbursement of expenses, as well as benefits under the Canadian
Forces Superannuation Act. As the Director of Law – Administrative
Law, Rory led the team responsible for advising on the Canadian Forces
grievance process, including providing direct support to the final
authority and assisting legal advisors to the various initial
authorities. He was also responsible for legal support to Boards of
Inquiry, summary investigations and other administrative
investigations.
https://www.cgai.ca/charlotte_
Charlotte Duval-Lantoine
Ottawa Operations Manager
Canadian Global Affairs Institute
8 York Street
2nd Floor
Ottawa, Ontario
Canada K1N 5S6
cduval-lantoine@cgai.ca
(613) 288-2529 ext 101
Charlotte Duval-Lantoine
Defence | Western Hemisphere
Charlotte is the Ottawa Operations Manager and a Fellow at the
Canadian Global Affairs Institute. She completed a Master in Military
History at Queen’s University, during which she started researching on
the toxic culture of leadership in the Canadian Armed Forces during
the 1990s and its impact on gender integration, which had started in
1989. She continues to study leadership and culture change issues in
the military in her free time. She obtained her BA in History and
Political Science at McGill University in 2017. During her graduate
studies, Charlotte served as the Assistant to the Executive Director
of Women In International Security-Canada for the fiscal year
2018-2019. She has also worked as a research assistant and translator
on projects about gender mainstreaming and integration in NATO Armed
Forces, and on the gendered dimension of veteran transition at Queen's
University Center for International and Defence Policy (CIDP).
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: CEDRIC.ASPIRAULT@forces.gc.ca
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2021 23:08:54 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: Attn Ian B. Kasper we just talked about
cupcakes and CBC correct?
To: david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
Please note that I am no longer CO 12 RBC and will be on leave and
moving to the US.
Please contact Maj Cameron, A/CO 12 RBC if there is any regimental
requierements.(david.cameron9@
I will monitor this adress until May 28th
My civilian email adress is : LCAspi50@me.com
418-806-9705
Lcol JLC Aspirault
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Minister Joly / Ministre Joly (IC)"
<ministerofeconomicdevelopment
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2021 23:09:41 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: Attn Ian B. Kasper we just talked about
cupcakes and CBC correct?
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
(le français suit l’anglais)
Your correspondence to the Honourable Mélanie Joly, Minister of
Economic Development and Official Languages, has been received. Thank
you for writing.
This is an automatically generated message. Please do not reply.
************************************************************
Votre correspondance adressée à l’honorable Mélanie Joly, ministre du
Développement économique et des Langues officielles, a été reçue.
Merci d’avoir écrit.
Ceci est un message automatique. Veuillez ne pas y répondre.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Higgs, Premier Blaine (PO/CPM)" <Blaine.Higgs@gnb.ca>
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2021 23:09:57 +0000
Subject: RE: Attn Ian B. Kasper we just talked about cupcakes and CBC correct?
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
Hello,
Thank you for taking the time to write.
Due to the volume of incoming messages, this is an automated response
to let you know that your email has been received and will be reviewed
at the earliest opportunity.
If your inquiry more appropriately falls within the mandate of a
Ministry or other area of government, staff will refer your email for
review and consideration.
Merci d'avoir pris le temps de nous écrire.
En raison du volume des messages reçus, cette réponse automatique vous
informe que votre courriel a été reçu et sera examiné dans les
meilleurs délais.
Si votre demande relève plutôt du mandat d'un ministère ou d'un autre
secteur du gouvernement, le personnel vous renverra votre courriel
pour examen et considération.
If this is a Media Request, please contact the Premier’s office at
(506) 453-2144 or by email
media-medias@gnb.ca<mailto:med
S’il s’agit d’une demande des médias, veuillez communiquer avec le
Cabinet du premier ministre au 506-453-2144.
Office of the Premier/Cabinet du premier ministre
P.O Box/C. P. 6000 Fredericton New-Brunswick/Nouveau-Brunswick E3B 5H1 Canada
Tel./Tel. : (506) 453-2144
Email/Courriel:
premier@gnb.ca/premier.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Info <Info@gg.ca>
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2021 23:08:58 +0000
Subject: OSGG General Inquiries / Demande de renseignements généraux au BSGG
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
Thank you for writing to the Office of the Secretary to the Governor
General. We appreciate hearing your views and suggestions. Responses
to specific inquiries can be expected within three weeks. Please note
that general comments and opinions may not receive a response.
*****
Nous vous remercions d'avoir écrit au Bureau du secrétaire du
gouverneur général. Nous aimons prendre connaissance de vos points de
vue et de vos suggestions. Il faut allouer trois semaines pour
recevoir une réponse à une demande précise. Veuillez noter que nous ne
donnons pas nécessairement suite aux opinions et aux commentaires
généraux.
IMPORTANT NOTICE: This message may contain confidential or privileged
information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are
not the intended recipient, you should not disseminate, distribute or
copy this email. Please notify the sender immediately if you have
received this email by mistake and delete it from your system.
AVIS IMPORTANT : Le présent courriel peut contenir des renseignements
confidentiels et est strictement réservé à l’usage de la personne à
qui il est destiné. Si vous n’êtes pas la personne visée, vous ne
devez pas diffuser, distribuer ou copier ce courriel. Merci de nous en
aviser immédiatement et de supprimer ce courriel s’il vous a été
envoyé par erreur.
---------- Original message ----------
From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2021 20:14:10 -0300
Subject: Re: Attn Ian B. Kasper we just talked about cupcakes and CBC correct?
To: ibk@kapoorbarristers.com, "wayne.eyre" <wayne.eyre@forces.gc.ca>,
nia_ig.fct@navy.mil, pm <pm@pm.gc.ca>, "Ian.Shugart"
<Ian.Shugart@pco-bcp.gc.ca>, info <info@gg.ca>, mcu
<mcu@justice.gc.ca>, NIA_IG@navy.mil, Greta.Bossenmaier@hq.nato.int,
Matt.Gaetz@mail.house.gov, Tammy.Harris@forces.gc.ca,
Jill.Chisholm@justice.gc.ca, Cedric.Aspirault@forces.gc.ca,
Derek.Sloan@parl.gc.ca, Hon.ralph.goodale@canada.ca,
Brenda.Lucki@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, barbara.massey@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
clare.barry@justice.gc.ca, michael.mcnair@pmo-cpm.gc.ca,
David.Akin@globalnews.ca, dale.drummond@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, "blaine.higgs"
<blaine.higgs@gnb.ca>, fin.minfinance-financemin.fin@
hon.melanie.joly@canada.ca, Jody.Wilson-Raybould@parl.gc.
"andrea.anderson-mason" <andrea.anderson-mason@gnb.ca>,
Ramesh.Sangha@parl.gc.ca, Marwan.Tabbara@parl.gc.ca
Cc: david.cameron9@forces.gc.ca, LCAspi50@me.com, motomaniac333
<motomaniac333@gmail.com>, ashley.burke@cbc.ca, Newsroom
<Newsroom@globeandmail.com>, "steve.murphy" <steve.murphy@ctv.ca>
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: CEDRIC.ASPIRAULT@forces.gc.ca
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2021 23:08:54 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: Attn Ian B. Kasper we just talked about
cupcakes and CBC correct?
To: david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
Please note that I am no longer CO 12 RBC and will be on leave and
moving to the US.
Please contact Maj Cameron, A/CO 12 RBC if there is any regimental
requierements.(david.cameron9@
I will monitor this adress until May 28th
My civilian email adress is : LCAspi50@me.com
418-806-9705
Lcol JLC Aspirault
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Minister Joly / Ministre Joly (IC)"
<ministerofeconomicdevelopment
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2021 23:09:41 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: Attn Ian B. Kasper we just talked about
cupcakes and CBC correct?
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
(le français suit l’anglais)
Your correspondence to the Honourable Mélanie Joly, Minister of
Economic Development and Official Languages, has been received. Thank
you for writing.
This is an automatically generated message. Please do not reply.
************************************************************
Votre correspondance adressée à l’honorable Mélanie Joly, ministre du
Développement économique et des Langues officielles, a été reçue.
Merci d’avoir écrit.
Ceci est un message automatique. Veuillez ne pas y répondre.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Higgs, Premier Blaine (PO/CPM)" <Blaine.Higgs@gnb.ca>
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2021 23:09:57 +0000
Subject: RE: Attn Ian B. Kasper we just talked about cupcakes and CBC correct?
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
Hello,
Thank you for taking the time to write.
Due to the volume of incoming messages, this is an automated response
to let you know that your email has been received and will be reviewed
at the earliest opportunity.
If your inquiry more appropriately falls within the mandate of a
Ministry or other area of government, staff will refer your email for
review and consideration.
Merci d'avoir pris le temps de nous écrire.
En raison du volume des messages reçus, cette réponse automatique vous
informe que votre courriel a été reçu et sera examiné dans les
meilleurs délais.
Si votre demande relève plutôt du mandat d'un ministère ou d'un autre
secteur du gouvernement, le personnel vous renverra votre courriel
pour examen et considération.
If this is a Media Request, please contact the Premier’s office at
(506) 453-2144 or by email
media-medias@gnb.ca<mailto:med
S’il s’agit d’une demande des médias, veuillez communiquer avec le
Cabinet du premier ministre au 506-453-2144.
Office of the Premier/Cabinet du premier ministre
P.O Box/C. P. 6000 Fredericton New-Brunswick/Nouveau-Brunswick E3B 5H1 Canada
Tel./Tel. : (506) 453-2144
Email/Courriel:
premier@gnb.ca/premier.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Info <Info@gg.ca>
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2021 23:08:58 +0000
Subject: OSGG General Inquiries / Demande de renseignements généraux au BSGG
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
Thank you for writing to the Office of the Secretary to the Governor
General. We appreciate hearing your views and suggestions. Responses
to specific inquiries can be expected within three weeks. Please note
that general comments and opinions may not receive a response.
*****
Nous vous remercions d'avoir écrit au Bureau du secrétaire du
gouverneur général. Nous aimons prendre connaissance de vos points de
vue et de vos suggestions. Il faut allouer trois semaines pour
recevoir une réponse à une demande précise. Veuillez noter que nous ne
donnons pas nécessairement suite aux opinions et aux commentaires
généraux.
IMPORTANT NOTICE: This message may contain confidential or privileged
information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are
not the intended recipient, you should not disseminate, distribute or
copy this email. Please notify the sender immediately if you have
received this email by mistake and delete it from your system.
AVIS IMPORTANT : Le présent courriel peut contenir des renseignements
confidentiels et est strictement réservé à l’usage de la personne à
qui il est destiné. Si vous n’êtes pas la personne visée, vous ne
devez pas diffuser, distribuer ou copier ce courriel. Merci de nous en
aviser immédiatement et de supprimer ce courriel s’il vous a été
envoyé par erreur.
On 7/12/21, David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
---------Original message ----------
From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2021 20:08:44 -0300
Subject: Attn Ian B. Kasper we just talked about cupcakes and CBC correct?
To: ibk@kapoorbarristers.com, "wayne.eyre" <wayne.eyre@forces.gc.ca>,
nia_ig.fct@navy.mil, pm <pm@pm.gc.ca>, "Ian.Shugart"
<Ian.Shugart@pco-bcp.gc.ca>, info <info@gg.ca>, mcu
<mcu@justice.gc.ca>, NIA_IG@navy.mil, Greta.Bossenmaier@hq.nato.int,
Matt.Gaetz@mail.house.gov, Tammy.Harris@forces.gc.ca,
Jill.Chisholm@justice.gc.ca, Cedric.Aspirault@forces.gc.ca,
Derek.Sloan@parl.gc.ca, Hon.ralph.goodale@canada.ca,
Brenda.Lucki@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, barbara.massey@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
clare.barry@justice.gc.ca, michael.mcnair@pmo-cpm.gc.ca,
David.Akin@globalnews.ca, dale.drummond@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, "blaine.higgs"
<blaine.higgs@gnb.ca>, fin.minfinance-financemin.fin@
hon.melanie.joly@canada.ca, Jody.Wilson-Raybould@parl.gc.
"andrea.anderson-mason" <andrea.anderson-mason@gnb.ca>,
Ramesh.Sangha@parl.gc.ca, Marwan.Tabbara@parl.gc.ca
Cc: motomaniac333 <motomaniac333@gmail.com>, ashley.burke@cbc.ca,
Newsroom <Newsroom@globeandmail.com>, "steve.murphy"
<steve.murphy@ctv.ca>
Ian B. Kasper
Called to the bar: 2015 (ON)
Kapoor Barristers
Suite 2900
161 Bay Street
Toronto, Ontario M5J 2S1
Phone: 416-363-2700
Fax: 416-363-2787
Email: ibk@kapoorbarristers.com
Ian Kasper
416.363.2700 ext 8103
ibk@kapoorbarristers.com
Ian Kasper
416.363.2700 ext 8103
ibk@kapoorbarristers.com
Mr. Kasper joined Kapoor Barristers in 2017. He appears in all courts
on trial and appellate matters.
He is a graduate of the University of Waterloo where he obtained a
Bachelor of Mathematics (Honours). Thereafter he attended Osgoode Hall
Law School, where his studies focused almost exclusively on criminal
law and related topics.
Mr. Kasper completed his articles at the law firm of Greenspan
Humphrey Lavine. Upon his call to the Bar in 2015, he opened a sole
practice in Toronto, where his practice included trial and appeal
matters in criminal law, mental health law, and correctional law.
In addition to his legal career, Mr. Kasper is a reservist in the
Canadian Armed Forces. He enlisted in 2011 and currently parades with
the Governor General's Horse Guards in Toronto.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/
Evidence lost in case of soldier accused of feeding cannabis-laced cupcakes to gunners, lawyer says
'The loss of such important evidence was the result of incompetence,' accused's lawyer says
Evidence in a bizarre case of a Canadian soldier accused of drugging comrades with marijuana-laced cupcakes was lost by military police, says the soldier's lawyer — who accuses the Department of National Defence of conducting a sloppy, incompetent investigation.
Bombardier Chelsea Cogswell's military trial is slated to start next month. It's believed to be the first of its kind.
She faces 18 charges, including administering a noxious substance to eight soldiers without their consent in July 2018 at CFB Gagetown. At the time, the soldiers were taking part in a live-fire exercise involving explosives and weapons drills.
CBC News has obtained a copy of a court application filed by Cogswell's lawyer Ian Kasper. In it, Kasper argues the military should throw out evidence of traces of THC — the main psychoactive compound in cannabis — gathered from one cupcake wrapper because the other cupcake wrappers were lost and never tested.
"The chain of command and the military police did not preserve all the wrappers for further investigation," Kasper wrote in the application. "The loss of such important evidence was the result of incompetence.
"The chain of command's loss of the cupcake wrappers was so shockingly negligent as to constitute an abuse of process."
The military is in the midst of an institutional crisis over its handling of misconduct in the ranks. Critics have said military police are ill-equipped to investigate offences.
'There's a lack of expertise. A lack of competence'
Military law expert Michel Drapeau has been arguing for years that the military police do not have the depth, supervision and training to conduct criminal investigations.
A sniper taking part in a competition between peers at CFB Gagetown in Oromocto, N.B. (Kevin Bissett/Canadian Press)
Drapeau reviewed the court documents obtained by CBC News. He pointed out that it took roughly 17 months for the military police to realize they hadn't secured all of the wrappers, and to investigate where they went.
"Seventeen months required to discover it is disturbing, to say the least," he said. "There is something lacking there. It could be a lack of expertise. It could also be incompetence, obviously."
Cogswell's unusual case made headlines around the world. The Department of National Defence has said it's believed to be the first case of a soldier charged with feeding marijuana to colleagues without their consent.
Cogswell's mother told CBC News strangers have bombarded her with hate messages online and she found her vehicle keyed in her driveway on one occasion.
"The military community was entitled to a proper and complete investigation, not a half-hearted and incomplete one that saw crucial evidence lost," reads Kasper's application. "The applicant's career and liberty are on the line."
Regional military prosecutors responded, saying the evidence was never lost since it was never in government authorities' possession in the first place.
"Any cupcake wrappers which were not collected had been disposed of by witnesses or complainants prior to commencement or contemplation of an investigation," reads the military's response to the court application. "There was no abuse of process."
'Loopy, anxious and paranoid'
At the time of the incident on July 21, 2018, Cogswell was working at a mobile canteen at the army's combat training centre in New Brunswick, according to court martial documents.
Cogswell offered some troops from the gun detachment free cupcakes she had baked that she said contained coconut oil and avocados, according to the document. At least nine soldiers ate the cupcakes; within an hour, some described feeling "high," the court martial documents said.
The charges are related to an incident at this firing range at CFB Gagetown in Oromocto, N.B. (David Smith/Canadian Press)
"They variously described feeling tired, exhausted, loopy, anxious and paranoid," said Kasper's court document. "Others, however, believed they were dehydrated or were suffering heat exhaustion."
Citing safety concerns, the military called off the live fire training exercise on that hot summer day and loaded those affected into an air-conditioned truck for assessment. A medical technician on scene ruled out heat injuries, according to the documents.
The commanding officer called in military police to investigate the possibility that "the members of the artillery school were suffering from mind-altering drugs while on a live fire exercise," Kasper's court document states.
Soldier gathered five wrappers
One of the soldiers who ate a cupcake and felt fine collected about five wrappers and gave them to the chain of command — one Warrant Officer Mangrove, according to the court document.
The base military police officer who attended the scene, Cpl. Benjamin Whitehall, obtained one of the wrappers from a soldier who got it from Mangrove and tested it for drugs. The test came back negative but later tested positive for traces of THC, according to both Kasper's court document and the response from military prosecutors.
The military police only discovered other wrappers existed almost a year and a half later, in January 2020, after a request from the accused's lawyer.
"No explanation has been proffered," wrote Kasper. "The only reasonable conclusion is that they were lost through incompetence. The wrappers are at the heart of the case ... and they could afford forensic evidence tending to disprove the offences charged."
The military wrote in its defence that it doesn't know where the other wrappers went "missing." At the time of the incident, the focus was on possible health and safety risks, not the "possibility of a future criminal investigation," said the military prosecutors.
"There is no evidence of any attempt to conceal or destroy evidence in this case, nor is there any evidence of bad faith on the part of the Crown," the prosecutors wrote. "In fact, it is more likely than not that obtaining the missing wrappers would have strengthened the Crown's case."
The Canadian Forces Provost Marshal would not tell CBC News if the military police involved in the case are with the base or with the Canadian Forces National Investigative Service unit.
The Military Police Complaints Commission will not confirm that it's received a complaint in connection to Cogswell's case. In a statement, the commission said it does not release information or the identity of complainants or subjects in "non-public interest cases."
Cogswell's court martial is set to begin Aug. 3 in Oromocto, New Brunswick.
Along with charges for administering a noxious substance, Cogswell also faces nine counts of conduct to the prejudice of good order and discipline and one count of behaving in a disgraceful manner.
Cogswell faces a maximum sentence of two years imprisonment, the defence department said.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
CBC's Journalistic Standards and Practices
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/court-martial-cannabis-cupcakes-1.6129731
Soldiers testify feeling paranoid, disoriented and 'spaced out' after eating cupcakes
Chelsea Cogswell accused of feeding cannabis-laced cupcakes to comrades
Bombardier Connor Chubry said he started to feel "spaced out" within about 45 minutes of eating a cupcake baked by Bombardier Chelsea Cogswell during a live-fire training exercise in July 2018 at 5th Canadian Division Support Base Gagetown in New Brunwsick.
At first, he thought he was dehydrated, but no amount of water helped.
He said he became incoherent, wandered around looking at the trees while on sentry duty, and was unable to focus on his duties.
Chubry said he felt high but was doubtful because he was on a military training exercise.
He said it wasn't until a few soldiers got together and began comparing symptoms that he believed that's what happened.
On the first day of the court martial of Cogswell, three soldiers testified she was in charge of the canteen and had given out free cupcakes just before lunch on July 21, 2018. All three described feeling "high" after eating a cupcake.
I started feeling a little weird, like spacey.
- Dylan Eoll
Cogswell faces eight charges of administering a noxious substance to eight soldiers without their consent. She is also charged with behaving in a disgraceful manner and committing an act to the prejudice of good order and discipline.
In her opening remarks, prosecutor Maj. Élisabeth Baby-Cormier said Cogswell baked the cannabis-laced cupcakes at her home the day before.
She said a number of those who ate the cupcakes began experiencing symptoms of fatigue, drunkenness, disorientation and confusion — all while on a live-fire training exercise.
Baby-Cormier said Cogswell "recklessly introduced risk in an already inherently risky activity."
She said one of the soldiers scheduled to testify "will tell you that she made a conscious decision in her life never to try drugs. She will tell you that on July 21, 2018, that decision was taken away from her."
She said another soldier will testify that he had been in recovery for several years following a drug addiction.
A
sniper taking part in a competition among peers at 5th Canadian
Division Support Base Gagetown, the same year as Bombardier Chelsea
Cogswell's alleged incident. (Kevin Bissett/Canadian Press)
Bombardier Dylan Eoll testified that Cogswell — who he initially referred to by her maiden name, Fraser — offered him a cupcake when he went to buy some items from the canteen.
He said she told him she made the cupcakes herself and said they were free. He described them as chocolate cupcakes, with chocolate frosting and a jelly bean on top.
Within an hour, he said he "started feeling a little weird, like spacey."
It was a hot day, so he thought he was dehydrated. But no amount of water helped.
"Small tasks were becoming harder and harder to do. I felt sluggish. I felt groggy … I just wasn't fully there."
He said he kept forgetting things, was paranoid and not completely coherent, as if he had just woken up. He said another soldier was "making mistakes I've never seen her make before."
Several soldiers started to notice similar symptoms and they "all came to the consensus" that they were high, said Eoll. They soon zeroed in on the cupcakes, since it was the only thing they had all consumed.
He said the training exercise was halted and they were all sent to a tent to recover. The military police started an investigation that day, said Eoll.
Baby-Cormier said 16 witnesses are expected to testify during the court martial. Two weeks have been set aside.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/court-martial-day-two-1.6131187
Soldiers testify at court martial about feeling high on live-fire training exercise
Bombardier Chelsea Cogswell accused of giving soldiers cannabis-laced cupcakes
Bombardier Lyann Lechman had never tried cannabis in her life.
So when she started to feel strange on July 21, 2018, she never considered that she was high.
"I felt side-effects, which I didn't know were side-effects of THC because I had never had THC before," Lechman testified on the second day of the court martial of Bombardier Chelsea Cogswell.
Cogswell, who grew up in Oromocto, faces eight charges of administering a noxious substance to eight soldiers at 5th Canadian Division Support Base Gagetown without their consent.
She is also charged with behaving in a disgraceful manner and committing an act to the prejudice of good order and discipline.
Offered as a 'treat'
Lechman testified Thursday that she bought some items from the canteen that Cogswell was in charge of on July 21, 2018, and said Cogswell told her to help herself to the cupcakes — "that it was a treat that she baked for the gunline."
Within a half-hour, she started to feel sluggish and nauseous, lost sense of time and wasn't able to perform tasks as usual.
"I had an overwhelming sense that something was not right."
She said she was slow to perform normal tasks, and loaded a round "awkwardly."
Lechman said she also fell off an ammunition box and was soon told to lay in the shade.
Testifying remotely by video, Bombardier Nathan Penner said he ate about one-quarter of a cupcake left by a fellow soldier.
He said he soon started to feel the effects and was having trouble focusing on his duties. He said he was concerned about the group's ability to perform its tasks.
"With the entire detachment feeling sick, there was not a lot of trust," Penner said about their ability to continue.
He said they attempted to prepare the gun for firing but were unable to finish before they were taken out of the field.
Gunners
testified about the difficulties they encountered during an artillery
exercise at CFB Gagetown after eating what they now believe were
cannabis-laced cupcakes. (Ed Hunter/CBC)
Bombardier Jordan Slade also ate a cupcake. He said he started to feel lethargic and sluggish but thought it might be related to the heat, since he had never had heat exhaustion before.
He said he believed the cupcakes were the culprit "once everyone talked and put together the only common denominator was the cupcakes."
The soldier in command told a superior that they were all feeling unwell and that it wasn't safe to continue.
Slade said the soldiers were not able to do "pretty simple tasks."
Master Bombardier William Long testified that when he asked Cogswell if there was anything in the cupcakes that he should be aware of, she just raised both her hands in an "I don't know" kind of gesture.
As a recovering alcoholic who also experimented with drugs, Long said he was trying to protect himself, but in the end he said he had to trust his fellow soldier. So he ate the cupcake, suspected there was marijuana in it and threw the wrapper on the ground.
Within about 15 minutes, he said, he started to experience a "body buzz" and things took on a "cartoony look."
He said he knew he was high because he had done drugs before getting sober more than eight years earlier. He said he pushed on and tried to get the gun ready to fire, but the process became "a comedy of errors."
Trusted a fellow soldier
Long said it was unfathomable to him at the time that someone would drug fellow soldiers during a live-fire training exercise.
"Ultimately, I made a choice to trust my fellow soldier," he said. "Obviously, that was the wrong choice."
Sixteen witnesses are expected to testify during the court martial. Two weeks have been set aside.
On the first day of the trial, three soldiers who ate the cupcakes said they began experiencing symptoms of fatigue, drunkenness, disorientation and confusion — all while on a live-fire training exercise.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/tainted-cupcake-court-martial-1.6132401
Soldier tells court martial he 'didn't feel safe' using gun after eating cupcake
Trial adjourns abruptly after defence lawyer tells the court that a 'situation' arose
It wasn't long after eating a cupcake that Sgt. William Vallerand knew he was high.
Looking around at his comrades who were having a tough time performing simple tasks, the soldier began to worry about the safety of using guns.
They were all involved in a live-fire training exercise and Vallerand went to his superior to voice his concerns and halt the exercise.
Testifying on the third day of the court martial of Bombardier Chelsea Cogswell, Vallerand said he believed the cupcakes were the culprit.
Cogswell, who grew up in Oromocto, is charged with eight counts of administering a noxious substance to eight soldiers at 5th Canadian Division Support Base Gagetown without their consent.
She is also charged with behaving in a disgraceful manner and committing an act to the prejudice of good order and discipline.
I didn't feel safe using the gun.
- Sgt. William Vallerand
The proceedings came to an abrupt halt on Friday afternoon, when defence counsel Ian Kasper told the judge that a "situation" had arisen.
He said he wanted a chance to talk to his client and senior counsel before deciding how to proceed.
The trial was adjourned for the day and is scheduled to resume on Saturday morning.
Disoriented, confused and paranoid
Over three days of testimony, eight soldiers have testified about eating the cupcakes on July 21, 2018. They said they soon began experiencing symptoms of fatigue, drunkenness, disorientation, confusion and paranoia — all while on a live-fire training exercise.
They said they weren't able to focus on their tasks, and many of them worried about the safety of handling guns and ammunition.
In her opening remarks, prosecutor Maj. Élisabeth Baby-Cormier said Cogswell "recklessly introduced risk in an already inherently risky activity."
On Day two of the court martial, Bombardier Lyann Lechman said she had made a conscious decision to never try cannabis.
So when she started to feel strange on July 21, 2018, she never considered that she was high.
An emotional Lechman testified that within a half-hour of eating the cupcake, she started to feel sluggish and nauseous, lost sense of time and wasn't able to perform tasks as usual. When she fell off an ammunition box, she was told to lie in the shade.
Another soldier testified on Thursday about being sober for eight years before eating a cupcake and knowing he was high.
Bombardier Chelsea Cogswell is accused of administering a noxious substance to eight soldiers at 5th Canadian Division Support Base Gagetown without their consent. (Submitted)
Testifying remotely by video on Friday, Vallerand said Cogswell said a couple of odd things to him when she offered him a cupcake. She said she hoped they didn't taste "weird" because she used coconut or avocado oil. She also said she hoped no one would have a reaction to them.
Vallerand said he assumed at the time that she was worried about a reaction to the oil she used.
Before long, he said he started to feel tired and sick to his stomach. He said he immediately suspected the cupcake because it was the only out-of-the-ordinary thing he had consumed. But he didn't initially think he had been drugged; he thought he had a reaction to one of the ingredients.
He and five other soldiers were tasked with moving a gun from one location to another that day. On the way to their destination, he said the driver also seemed tired and "he almost hit the gun in front of us."
Before long, they all began talking about how poorly they felt.
When they arrived at the new gun location, they started to set up the equipment, but Vallerand said they were all "struggling to do simple tasks."
He said he "didn't feel safe using the gun."
Vallerand testified he told everyone to stop because something wasn't right. He spoke to his superior officer and told him they weren't feeling well. He also said the cupcakes were the suspected culprit.
By that time, Vallerand said, he was certain what was going on.
"I knew I was high … because I had cannabis before."
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/day-four-chelsea-cogswell-1.6133578
Court martial resumes for soldier accused of feeding troops cannabis-laced cupcakes
Former soldier testifies comrades acting clumsy, paranoid after eating cupcakes
Day 4 of the court martial of a CFB Gagetown soldier accused of feeding fellow soldiers cupcakes laced with cannabis is underway at the base in Oromocto, N.B.
Bombardier Chelsea Cogswell is charged with eight counts of administering a noxious substance to soldiers without their consent.
She's also charged with behaving in a disgraceful manner and committing an act to the prejudice of good order and discipline.
Several soldiers have testified that Cogswell, who was in charge of the canteen, had given out free cupcakes around lunchtime on July 21, 2018 when troops were on a military exercise using live rounds.
The soldiers testified they started feeling high shortly after eating the cupcakes.
Soldiers acting clumsy, paranoid
In testimony Saturday morning, a soldier who ate one of the cupcakes said it wasn't out of the ordinary for Cogswell to staff the canteen and to bring home-baked goods or Timbits to give out to fellow soldiers.
Ashley Diggs, a retired sergeant, said he had a dry mouth after eating a cupcake, but he attributed that to the concern he had for fellow soldiers he saw were in distress.
He witnessed a soldier, who he had seen smoking only occasionally, start chain-smoking. He said another acted paranoid and couldn't sit still.
Diggs said one soldier had a history of being clumsy and was even more accident-prone than normal. Another, he said, was wandering around in front of his gun and was rolling around in the grass.
Diggs said he had consumed cannabis in his early 20s but did not recognize any taste of cannabis in the cupcakes.
'Thought it was a joke'
Maj. Nicholas Kaempffer was stationed at the forward operating base, about 30 minutes away from the gun line where the soldiers who consumed the cupcakes were located.
He said he was surprised when the battery commander contacted him to give a report about what was going on.
"It was so unbelievable at the time that we thought it was a joke," said Kaempffer. "It was very outlandish in nature."
Testimony is scheduled to continue Saturday afternoon.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/base-gagetown-cupcake-1.6135087
Military member told police she didn't add cannabis to cupcake mix, court martial hears
Final arguments underway at court martial of Bombardier Chelsea Cogswell of base Gagetown
A soldier at base Gagetown accused of feeding fellow soldiers cannabis-laced cupcakes told police she didn't add the drug to the cupcake mix she bought at a convenience store.
Chelsea Cogswell did not take the stand, but she denied the cannabis allegations throughout two interviews conducted by military police in September and October 2018.
Video recordings of the interviews were played Monday at Cogswell's court martial in Oromocto on eight counts of administering a noxious substance to soldiers without their consent.
Cogswell is also charged with behaving in a disgraceful manner and committing an act to the prejudice of good order and discipline.
Judge Sandra Sukstorf said she will deliver her decision Tuesday afternoon.
Accused describes additions to mix
Cogswell, who is from the Oromocto area, said she bought a Betty Crocker cake mix from the Ultramar in Burton, a rural community not far from 5th Canadian Division Support Base Gagetown.
She told investigator J.C. Leblanc that she added avocado oil and coconut flavouring to the mix. She ate five of the cupcakes the night before giving them to the soldiers and felt fine, she said.
"As soon as I heard people got sick I went back to the Ultramar and said this happened," said Cogswell.
Eight soldiers testified last week about eating the cupcakes on July 21, 2018, during a live-fire training exercise. Cogswell was in charge of the canteen where they got the cupcakes.
The soldiers said they soon began experiencing symptoms of fatigue, drunkenness, disorientation, confusion and paranoia. Some worried about handling guns and ammunition.
Medical marijuana helps her sleep
In the courtroom Monday, Cogswell, wearing a green dress and a white jacket, wiped her eyes with tissue when a video from her police interviews was played.
In one interview, Cogswell said she did use medical marijuana in capsule form to help her sleep because she was having trouble sleeping after a traumatic event the year before.
When asked about herself, Cogswell said that when she comes home from work, she locks the doors, cooks dinner and feeds her cat.
"I don't date, I don't go out," she said. "I'm still recovering from what happened."
Cogswell did not go into detail about what had happened the year before.
She did describe the culture working at the canteen to Leblanc and told him she was often called the "canteen bitch" by soldiers.
She said marijuana use was rife among soldiers on the gun line.
In his submission to the judge, Cogswell's defence lawyer Ian Kasper asked for an acquittal of all charges, saying the evidence offered was "evidence of opportunity."
Case called 'circumstantial'
There were others with access to the cupcakes who could have added cannabis to them, Kasper said
"It's extremely circumstantial."
Only one cupcake wrapper was seized and sent to Health Canada to be tested.
Cannabis was found on the wrapper, but it could have come from another source, said Kasper.
Further, none of the eight soldiers affected were drug tested to prove the cannabis is what made them sick.
Prosecution responds
The prosecution, led by Maj. Max Reede, asked the judge to consider all the evidence as a whole, not as unconnected. He said there were inconsistencies in Cogswell's statements to police.
In her first statement, he said, "The accused goes on to note, 'I warned every single person before they ate a cupcake. I said 'it's hot, you're drinking Monsters, it's chocolate, it could upset your belly. If you're scared of that don't eat them.' I warned every single person before.'"
In her second statement, Cogswell said she was concerned the avocado oil and coconut flavouring may have made everyone sick.
"According to her statement, she was present every time someone received a cupcake," said Reede, disputing Kasper's claim that someone else could have tampered with the cupcake.
"Each of these points in isolation may not amount to much, and that is the nature of circumstantial evidence, but these inconsistencies in the context of all the other evidence could lead a reasonably instructed jury to conclude that the accused did commit the offences."
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/gagetown-court-martial-cannabis-cupcake-1.6136496
Decision delayed in cannabis cupcake case at base Gagetown
Bombardier Chelsea Cogswell charged after 8 soldiers ate pot-laced cupcakes and felt symptoms
The judge presiding over the court martial of a base Gagetown soldier accused of feeding fellow soldiers cupcakes laced with cannabis has delayed her decision.
Military Judge Cmdr. Sandra Sukstorf was scheduled to deliver the decision Tuesday at 1 p.m., but it was delayed, with no reason given.
In court on Monday, Sukstorf said there was a great deal of evidence and testimony to go through.
During the trial at 5th Canadian Division Support Base Gagetown, 16 witnesses testified, but Bombardier Chelsea Cogswell, the military member accused in th case, wasn't one of them.
Cogswell is facing a total of 10 charges, including eight counts of administering a noxious substance to soldiers without their consent. She's also charged with behaving in a disgraceful manner and committing an act to the prejudice of good order and discipline.
Cogswell is alleged to have baked cupcakes, secretly adding cannabis, and giving them to soldiers on a live-fire training exercise in July 2018, when she was in charge of the canteen.
In a video recording of an interview with a military police investigator from 2018, which was played for the court Monday, Cogswell described the culture working at the canteen, saying she was often called the "canteen bitch" by soldiers.
She also said marijuana use was rife among soldiers.
Eight soldiers testified last week about eating the cupcakes, saying they experienced fatigue, drunkenness, disorientation, confusion and paranoia. Some worried about handling guns and ammunition.
On Monday, Cogswell's lawyer, Ian Kasper of the Toronto law firm Kapoor Barristers, asked for an acquittal on all charges, calling the evidence circumstantial. Kasper noted that none of the soldiers were tested for drugs, and only one cupcake wrapper was seized and tested by Health Canada.
The prosecution, led by Maj. Max Reede, said the evidence should be considered as a whole and in context, not as unconnected events.
Sukstorf is scheduled to deliver her decision Wednesday morning.
Verdict expected for soldier accused of feeding troops cannabis-laced cupcakes
Bombardier Chelsea Cogswell facing 10 charges in connection with 2018 live-fire training exercise
A New Brunswick soldier accused of giving cannabis-laced cupcakes to troops on a live-fire training exercise three years ago is expected to learn her fate today.
Military Judge Cmdr. Sandra Sukstorf is due to deliver her verdict in the court martial of Bombardier Chelsea Cogswell at 5th Canadian Division Support Base Gagetown in Oromocto, N.B.
Cogswell is facing a total of 10 charges, including eight counts of administering a noxious substance to soldiers without their consent during the July 2018 training exercise, which involved explosives and weapons drills, when she was in charge of the mobile canteen.
She's also charged with behaving in a disgraceful manner and committing an act to the prejudice of good order and discipline.
If convicted, Cogswell faces a maximum sentence of two years imprisonment, according to the Department of National Defence.
Sukstorf was originally scheduled to deliver her decision on Tuesday afternoon, but set it over. She did not give a reason.
Sixteen witnesses testified throughout the trial, which began Aug. 4 and continued into the weekend.
The soldiers who ate the cupcakes told the court they soon experienced fatigue, drunkenness, disorientation, confusion and paranoia. Some said they believed they were high and worried about handling guns and ammunition.
The training exercise was halted, the soldiers were sent to a tent to recover and the military police started an investigation that day, the court heard.
Cogswell did not take the stand in her own defence, but denied the allegations during two videotaped interviews conducted by military police in September and October 2018, which were played for the court on Monday.
Her Toronto-based lawyer, Ian Kasper, argued for an acquittal, calling the evidence circumstantial. The soldiers weren't tested for drugs and the cannabis found on the single wrapper sent to Health Canada for testing could have come from another source, he said.
The prosecution, led by Maj. Max Reede, asked the judge to consider the evidence as a whole and in context, not as unconnected events.
With files from Lauren Bird
Judge rejects acquittal of soldier accused of feeding troops cannabis-laced cupcakes
Bombardier Chelsea Cogswell facing 10 charges in connection with 2018 live-fire training exercise
The judge presiding over the court martial of a New Brunswick soldier accused of giving cannabis-laced cupcakes to troops on a live-fire training exercise has dismissed the defence's request for an acquittal on all charges.
Bombardier Chelsea Cogswell's trial is scheduled to resume Thursday at 9:30 a.m. AT at 5th Canadian Division Support Base Gagetown in Oromocto.
Cogswell is facing a total of 10 charges, including eight counts of administering a noxious substance to soldiers without their consent. She's also charged with behaving in a disgraceful manner and committing an act to the prejudice of good order and discipline.
Cogswell is alleged to have given soldiers cupcakes she baked that secretly contained cannabis during a July 2018 training exercise, which involved explosives and weapons drills. She was in charge of the canteen at the time.
If convicted, Cogswell faces a maximum sentence of two years imprisonment, according to the Department of National Defence.
On Monday, after the prosecution concluded its case, her lawyer, Ian Kasper of Toronto, sought the acquittal, arguing the evidence presented was "extremely circumstantial."
Cogswell did not have exclusive opportunity to lace the cupcakes — a roommate or another person with access to them could have done it, he said. In addition, not all the soldiers were drug tested and only one cupcake wrapper was seized and tested by Health Canada.
But in her hour-long decision Wednesday on Kasper's request, military Judge Cmdr. Sandra Sukstorf ruled that based on case law, the prosecution does not need to prove Cogswell had exclusive opportunity to put the cannabis in the cupcakes.
Further, Cogswell had access to cannabis and the knowledge of how to use it and what it would do, Sukstorf said. In an interview with military police, Cogswell said she used medical marijuana in capsule form at the time to help her sleep because of a traumatic event the year before. No details about the event were provided.
Inconsistencies in police statements
Sukstorf also noted several inconsistencies in Cogswell's statements to police about what happened.
Over two interviews in September and October 2018, Cogswell changed her story about why she baked the cupcakes for the soldiers that day, she said.
In the first interview, Cogswell said she brought them in as an afterthought, having baked them and eaten five that night and not wanting to eat anymore.
In the second statement, she said she brought them for the troops, who had been in the field for several days and wanted something different to eat from what was offered at the canteen.
"In reviewing both statements of yourself given to Sgt. [J.C.] Leblanc there are a string of not just exaggerations — and most of those are harmless — but there are also significant inconsistencies.
"Their mere existence is noted and it likely suggests that there are some evidentiary concerns and possibly delivered falsehoods contained therein," Sukstorf told the court.
The process of baking, transporting and distributing the cupcakes was actually on the very high end of the exclusivity scale.
- Sandra Sukstorf, military judge
Sukstorf noted that Cogswell told Leblanc that she lived with her two cats and did not often go out to socialize. She also referenced Cogswell's statements that she ensured everyone who took a cupcake was aware that they might get sick if they ate it, suggesting she was near the cupcakes.
"Based on the totality of the facts before the court, mostly taken from your own statements, the process of baking, transporting and distributing the cupcakes was actually on the very high end of the exclusivity scale," Sukstorf said.
Kasper also argued that there was no evidence of which cupcake the wrapper came from, how the THC got on it, or where on the wrapper it was. Sukstorf did not accept this argument.
"At this stage it is not the role of the court to engage in the assessment of the reliability of the test conducted on the cupcake wrapper, nor in the weighing of it as evidence," said Sukstorf.
Sukstorf also dismissed Kasper's argument that the prosecution had not proven well enough that another person could have tampered with the cupcakes, in his suggestion of a roommate or another soldier.
Sukstorf said she was satisfied with the evidence provided to the court in dismissing the defence's request.
"The direct proven facts are: you baked the cupcakes, you said you lived in a somewhat isolated scenario, you personally transported the cupcakes to the canteen, you purportedly warned every person, suggesting that you exercised close control over the distribution of the cupcakes, further one of the cupcake wrappers from a cupcake you baked tested positive for THC."
Testimony from 16 witnesses
Sixteen witnesses testified throughout the prosecution's case, which began Aug. 4 and continued into the weekend.
The soldiers who ate the cupcakes told the court they soon experienced fatigue, drunkenness, disorientation, confusion and paranoia. Some said they believed they were high and worried about handling guns and ammunition.
The training exercise was halted, the soldiers were sent to a tent to recover and the military police started an investigation that day, the court heard.
Cogswell has not testified, but denied the allegations during her two videotaped statements to police, which were played for the court on Monday.
The prosecution, led by Maj. Max Reede, asked the judge to consider the evidence as a whole and in context, not as unconnected events.
Defence expected to present case for soldier facing court martial over cannabis cupcakes
Bombardier Chelsea Cogswell facing 10 charges in connection with 2018 live-fire training exercise
The court martial of a New Brunswick soldier accused of giving cannabis-laced cupcakes to troops on a live-fire training exercise continues Thursday, when the defence is expected to begin presenting its case.
Bombardier Chelsea Cogswell, of the 5th Canadian Division Support Base Gagetown in Oromocto, N.B., is charged with eight counts of administering a noxious substance to soldiers without their consent. She's also charged with behaving in a disgraceful manner and committing an act to the prejudice of good order and discipline.
Several soldiers have testified that Cogswell, who was in charge of the canteen, gave out free cupcakes around lunchtime on July 21, 2018, when troops were on a training exercise that involved explosives and weapons drills. Cogswell had baked the chocolate cupcakes at home the night before, the court heard.
On Wednesday, the presiding military judge rejected a motion by the defence to acquit Cogswell on all charges.
Ian Kasper of Toronto argued the prosecution's case was circumstantial. But Judge Cmdr. Sandra Sukstorf ruled she was satisfied with the evidence provided. She also noted several inconsistencies in the two statements Cogswell gave to the military police about what happened.
The soldiers who ate the cupcakes testified they soon experienced fatigue, drunkenness, disorientation, confusion and paranoia. Some said they believed they were high and worried about handling guns and ammunition. The cupcakes were the only common factor, they concluded.
The training exercise was halted, the soldiers were sent to a tent to recover and the military police started an investigation that day.
Cogswell has not testified, but denied the allegations during her two videotaped statements to police, which were played for the court on Monday.
If convicted, she faces a maximum sentence of five years imprisonment, according to the prosecution.
The hearing is set to resume at 9:30 a.m. AT at 5th Canadian Division Support Base Gagetown.
With files from Lauren Bird
CBC's Journalistic Standards and Practices
Defence seeks to exclude drug-tinged cupcake wrapper at soldier's court martial
Bombardier Chelsea Cogswell facing 10 charges in connection with 2018 live-fire training exercise
The defence lawyer of a New Brunswick soldier accused of giving cannabis-laced cupcakes to troops on a live-fire training exercise argued Thursday to have a cupcake wrapper thrown out of evidence at her court martial, alleging her charter rights were violated.
Bombardier Chelsea Cogswell, of the 5th Canadian Division Support Base Gagetown in Oromocto, N.B., is charged with eight counts of administering a noxious substance to soldiers without their consent. She's also charged with behaving in a disgraceful manner and committing an act to the prejudice of good order and discipline.
Several soldiers have testified that Cogswell, who was in charge of the canteen, gave out free cupcakes around lunchtime on July 21, 2018, when troops were on a training exercise that involved explosives and weapons drills. Cogswell had baked the chocolate cupcakes at home the night before, the court heard.
According to testimony, about 12 cupcakes were brought in and eight were eaten by soldiers. But only one wrapper was seized and tested by Health Canada.
On Thursday, as defence lawyer Ian Kasper of Toronto began presenting his case, he focused on that wrapper, which tested positive for THC, the main psychoactive compound in cannabis.
He did not call any witnesses or present any evidence but requested the wrapper be excluded because, he said, the loss of the remaining wrappers prevented Cogswell from getting a fair trial, which violates Section 7 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
"There is no question that many cupcake wrappers were lost in this investigation," Kasper told the courtroom at base Gagetown.
Earlier in the trial, Ashley Diggs, a retired sergeant who had eaten one of the cupcakes but did not suffer many symptoms, testified that he had collected five or six wrappers and given them to his commanding officer.
Given the importance of the wrappers to the investigation, the loss of the wrappers can only be explained by unacceptable negligence.
- Ian Kasper, defence lawyer
Kasper questioned where those wrappers were and how they had gone missing. He noted it's the prosecution's obligation to explain the loss.
"The police, at the very least, were under the obligation to seek out the wrappers when they commenced the disciplinary investigation," he said. "Given the importance of the wrappers to the investigation, the loss of the wrappers can only be explained by unacceptable negligence."
Military police officer Cpl. Ben Whitehall, who attended the scene, had testified that he only received the one wrapper in a plastic bag.
"We have the evidence that there is one wrapper and no evidence as to what occurred to the remainder," said Kasper.
The loss of the wrappers constitutes an abuse of process, he said, calling the investigation sloppy.
Neither the urine tests of the soldiers who ate the cupcakes nor their symptoms identify the source of the exposure, stressed Kasper.
"Ultimately, there is no other evidence that contains essentially the same information as to what forensic testing [of the other wrappers] might reveal," he said.
Cogswell has been prejudiced, Kasper argued, and to continue with the wrapper still in evidence, would be unfair.
Does not preclude fair trial
Lead prosecutor Maj. Max Reede told the court the Crown can only produce what it has in its possession, and the Crown never received more wrappers.
He also said that given the unprecedented size and complexity of the situation that day in July 2018, the primary concern of many on site was the health and safety of the soldiers.
"An investigation was commenced as soon as practical," Reede said.
That was as soon as the Military Police were called, he said. And by that time, the soldiers who had eaten the cupcakes had already been to three different locations as much as a 30-minute drive apart.
"Any loss of cupcake wrappers in this case does not preclude a fair trial," said Reede.
Military Judge Cmdr. Sandra Sukstorf has reserved her decision on the wrapper until Friday at 10 a.m. after which the prosecution and defence are expected to deliver closing arguments.
Motion to acquit rejected
On Wednesday, Sukstorf rejected a motion by the defence to acquit Cogswell on all charges.
Kasper had argued the prosecution's case was circumstantial. But Sukstorf ruled she was satisfied with the evidence provided. She also noted several inconsistencies in the two statements Cogswell gave to the military police about what happened.
The soldiers who ate the cupcakes testified they soon experienced fatigue, drunkenness, disorientation, confusion and paranoia. Some said they believed they were high and worried about handling guns and ammunition. The cupcakes were the only common factor, they concluded.
The training exercise was halted, the soldiers were sent to a tent to recover and the military police started an investigation that day.
Cogswell has not testified, but denied the allegations during her two videotaped statements to police, which were played for the court on Monday.
If convicted, she faces a maximum sentence of five years imprisonment, according to the prosecution.
Judge rejects defence motion to exclude drug-tinged cupcake wrapper at soldier's court martial
Closing arguments in case of Bombardier Chelsea Cogswell set for this afternoon at CFB Gagetown in Oromocto
A military judge has dismissed a defence request to exclude a cupcake wrapper from evidence against a soldier accused of serving cannabis-laced cupcakes to troops in the field during a live-fire exercise at base Gagetown.
The wrapper was the only one collected from the field and sent to Health Canada for testing. It tested positive for THC, the main psychoactive compound in cannabis.
Bombardier Chelsea Cogswell of the 5th Canadian Division Support Base Gagetown in Oromocto, N.B., is now being tried by court martial, charged with eight counts of administering a noxious substance to soldiers without their consent.
She's also charged with behaving in a disgraceful manner and committing an act to the prejudice of good order and discipline.
Several soldiers have testified Cogswell, who was in charge of the canteen, gave out free cupcakes around lunchtime on July 21, 2018, when troops were on a training exercise that involved explosives and weapons drills. Cogswell had baked the chocolate cupcakes at home the night before, the court heard.
According to testimony, about 12 cupcakes were brought in and eight were eaten by soldiers. Only one wrapper was submitted into evidence.
On Thursday, defence lawyer Ian Kasper argued that the loss of the remaining wrappers was the result of a negligent investigation and impeded Cogswell's ability to defend herself, alleging her charter rights were violated.
But after going through the trial testimony of how events unfolded that day, Judge Cmdr. Sandra Sukstorf dismissed that application Friday.
"Based on the evidence at trial there is very strong evidence to suggest that there is no real evidence lost," said Sukstorf.
I find that the evaluation of the prejudice that may have resulted from the lost cupcake wrappers is largely speculative.
- Sandra Sukstorf, military judge
"It seems nonsensical to suggest that wrappers that were discarded as garbage at the time they were consumed in multiple locations, away from where the military police investigation started, automatically fall within the control of the Crown."
Sukstorf said she agreed with the prosecution's argument that the troops that day were focused on the health and safety of soldiers and not an investigation or impending investigation into a criminal matter.
"I find that the evaluation of the prejudice that may have resulted from the lost cupcake wrappers is largely speculative," Sukstorf said.
Outside the courtroom during a lunch break, Cogswell attempted to make a statement to reporters but was cut off by her lawyer.
Court is scheduled to continue Friday afternoon with closing arguments.
The court martial, which began Aug. 4, has heard from 16 witnesses, including the eight soldiers who ate the cupcakes.
They testified they soon experienced fatigue, drunkenness, disorientation, confusion and paranoia. Some said they believed they were high and worried about handling guns and ammunition. The cupcakes were the only common factor, they concluded.
The training exercise was halted, the soldiers were sent to a tent to recover and the military police started an investigation that day.
Cogswell did not take the stand in her own defence, but denied the allegations during two videotaped statements to police in September and October 2018, which were played for the court on Monday.
If convicted, she faces a maximum sentence of five years imprisonment, according to the prosecution.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/base-gagetown-soldier-cogswell-cupcake-1.6141289
Defence makes closing arguments in soldier's court martial
Chelsea Cogswell accused of feeding cannabis-laced cupcakes to troops without their knowledge
Court martial proceedings against Bombardier Chelsea Cogswell came to a close Saturday after two weeks of testimony and arguments.
Cogswell, of the 5th Canadian Division Support Base Gagetown in Oromocto, N.B., is facing 10 charges.
She is accused of feeding troops cupcakes laced with cannabis without their knowledge, including eight counts of administering a noxious substance to soldiers without their consent.
She's also charged with behaving in a disgraceful manner and committing an act to the prejudice of good order and discipline.
Cogswell is alleged to have baked cupcakes laced with cannabis and given them to troops who were on a training exercise that involved explosives and weapons drills in July 2018.
Defence concludes
Defence lawyer Ian Kasper made his closing arguments to the judge in a small courtroom at the base.
He told the court that this was a case about the absence of evidence.
"When you apply the rules of evidence and when you apply the criminal standard of proof, I submit you must conclude that prosecution has not proven its allegations beyond a reasonable doubt, and Bombardier Cogswell should be acquitted of the charges before this court," Kasper said.
He argued that there was no clear evidence to prove it was cannabis that made the soldiers sick. He also said that the prosecution didn't prove beyond reasonable doubt that the cupcakes contained marijuana, or that someone else couldn't have tampered with the cupcakes, if they were tainted.
Kasper suggested that the symptoms endured by the soldiers that day aren't exclusively symptoms of cannabis use. Soldiers who testified during the trial said they suffered from paranoia, feeling anxious, fatigue and dry mouth.
He said those symptoms could have been the result of heat exhaustion, although Judge Cmdr. Sandra Sukstorf questioned him, saying members of the military at that time were trained to recognize the symptoms of heat exhaustion.
Earlier in the trial, Ashley Diggs, a retired sergeant, testified to eating a cupcake but not feeling any effects other than a dry mouth.
Five of the soldiers tested positive for cannabis, but Kasper said they could have ingested it at any other time in the previous 28 days.
Kasper reiterated his argument from earlier in the week that Cogswell was not the only person with access to the cupcakes.
A decision in the court martial of Bombardier Chelsea Cogswell is expected Wednesday. (Submitted)
The cupcakes were described as chocolate, with icing and a jelly bean on top. According to testimony, about 12 cupcakes were brought in and eight were eaten by soldiers on a hot July day.
In closing arguments on Friday, the prosecution argued that Cogswell was the only person who could have contaminated the baked goods, and that she had a prescription for cannabis at the time and knew enough about it to use it in this way.
Prosecutor points to inconsistencies
Lead prosecutor Maj. Max Reede summarized the testimony of the eight affected soldiers and went through Cogswell's statements in two separate interviews with military police from September and October 2018. He pointed out inconsistencies in Cogswell's two statements.
Reede noted that in the two interviews she gave different reasons for baking the cupcakes.
In one interview, she said she brought the cupcakes as a treat for the soldiers who had been in the field for a week and wanted something to eat other than what was offered in the canteen.
In the other interview, she said had eaten five of the cupcakes she had baked and brought them in for the soldiers so she wouldn't eat any more.
Reede pointed to other inconsistencies and exaggerations and called Cogswell's credibility into question.
He noted that she told the investigator that she often brought treats for soldiers and spent "hundreds of thousands of dollars" on them. Kasper called that a harmless exaggeration, and even Sukstorf agreed.
Earlier in the week, at the end of the prosecution's case, Kasper asked for an acquittal of all charges, calling the evidence circumstantial.
Applications denied
He also asked that the only cupcake wrapper tested for cannabis contamination be thrown out. Both of those applications were denied.
Sukstorf is scheduled to give her decision Wednesday morning.
The court martial, which began Aug. 4, heard from 16 witnesses, including the eight soldiers who ate the cupcakes.
They testified they soon experienced fatigue, drunkenness, disorientation, confusion and paranoia. Some said they believed they were high and worried about handling guns and ammunition.
The cupcakes were the only common factor, they concluded.
The training exercise was halted, the soldiers were sent to a tent to recover and the military police started an investigation that day.
Cogswell did not take the stand in her own defence, but denied the allegations during two videotaped statements to police in September and October 2018, which were played for the court on Monday.
If convicted, she faces a maximum sentence of five years imprisonment, according to the prosecution.
N.B. soldier found guilty of secretly feeding troops cannabis-laced cupcakes
Bombardier Chelsea Cogswell of Base Gagetown faces maximum of 5 years in prison
Bombardier Chelsea Cogswell was convicted Wednesday of eight counts of administering a noxious substance to soldiers without their consent and one count of behaving in a disgraceful manner, a charge under the National Defence Act, which carries a maximum sentence of five years in prison, according to the prosecution.
A 10th charge of committing an act to the prejudice of good order and discipline, which is a lesser offence than behaving in a disgraceful manner, was stayed.
Military Judge Cmdr. Sandra Sukstorf delivered her decision over two hours to a full courtroom Wednesday morning at 5th Canadian Division Support Base Gagetown in Oromocto, N.B.
Cogswell, who was in charge of the canteen, was found to have put cannabis into cupcakes she had baked at home and distributed to soldiers in July 2018 when they were on a live-fire exercise. She didn't tell them about the cannabis.
Soldiers who ate cupcakes felt paranoid, anxious
Throughout the trial, several soldiers testified that Cogswell gave out free cupcakes at the canteen around lunchtime on July 21, 2018, during Common Gunner, one of the largest combined training exercises with the Royal Canadian Artillery School.
They described the cupcakes as chocolate, with chocolate icing and a jelly bean on top.
The eight soldiers who ate the cupcakes said they felt paranoia, anxiety, fatigue, drunkenness and dry mouth starting about 30 minutes after eating the cupcakes.
They said they weren't able to focus on their tasks, and many worried about the safety of handling guns and ammunition.
Sukstorf went through the closing arguments made Saturday by defence lawyer Ian Kasper.
Throughout the trial, which started Aug. 4, Kasper maintained that the circumstantial evidence left reasonable doubt that the soldiers may have been made ill by something else, such as heat exhaustion; that even if it was cannabis, it may not have come from the cupcakes (only one wrapper was tested) and that there was no definitive evidence showing that Cogswell tainted the cupcakes.
Court satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt
But
having reviewed the testimony of the 16 witnesses led by the
prosecution, Cogswell's two interviews with military police and the
evidence, such as the wrapper, which tested positive for traces of THC,
the main psychoactive compound in cannabis, and five urine samples from
soldiers that all tested positive for marijuana metabolites, Sukstorf
said the court could be satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that the
soldiers had ingested cannabis, that it came from the cupcakes and that
Cogswell put it there and knowingly distributed the baked goods.
"Having verified the primary facts, established by the evidence, which I
accept, the court can make the inference that the cupcakes were the
source of the cannabis ingested by the soldiers," the judge said.
She concluded that Cogswell, having a medical prescription for marijuana at the time, had the access and the knowledge to add the cannabis, an illegal substance at the time.
She also said Cogswell's statements to police in September and October in 2018 showed she had reason to be upset with the unit.
"You [Cogswell] told the investigator that you were still recovering from an incident in Shilo and since that time you kept to yourself. You told Sgt. Leblanc that you were waiting for a transfer to the JPSU [joint personnel support unit] as you couldn't take the unit any longer," Sukstorf said.
The judge went on to quote Cogswell about her troubles with the unit, and that Cogswell remembered being referred to as "the canteen bitch."
Sentencing begins Nov. 16
About an hour-and-a-half into Sukstorf's decision, Cogswell, who was dressed in a black-and-white patterned suit, asked for a break. Her father was seated in the row behind her. After the break, he walked her back into the courtroom.
The court heard that Cogswell comes from a military family, that both her father and mother served, as well as her sister.
I've been on this bench long enough to see that there are a lot of good people that sometimes exercise very poor judgment.- Military Judge Cmdr. Sandra Sukstorf
Sentencing will begin Nov. 16 and is expected to take several days.
At the end of the proceedings Sukstorf addressed Cogswell directly, telling her that she would get through this.
"I've been on this bench long enough to see that there are a lot of good people that sometimes exercise very poor judgment."
Sukstorf also said sentencing would be an opportunity for Cogswell, who didn't take the stand in her own defence, to tell her story.
"It's very important for us to see the good that lies behind an individual," she said.
Sukstorf has the power to sentence Cogswell to the Canadian Forces Service Prison and Detention Barracks in Edmonton, if she sees fit.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 2021 15:52:53 -0300
Subject: This important Thats why I just called and tweeted both of
your congressional offices
To: Dawn.McArdle@mail.house.gov, Matt.Gaetz@mail.house.gov,
patrick.parsons@mail.house.gov
Cc: motomaniac333 <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 2021 14:48:36 -0300
Subject: Fwd: [Non-DoD Source] Fwd: Methinks the evil lawyer Howie
Cooper made a deal with the VERY NASTY FBI dudes in Beantown N'esy Pas
Howie Anglin?
To: nia_ig.fct@navy.mil, washington field
<washington.field@ic.fbi.gov>, pm <pm@pm.gc.ca>, "Ian.Shugart"
<Ian.Shugart@pco-bcp.gc.ca>
Cc: "Brenda.Lucki" <Brenda.Lucki@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, "Jonathan.Vance"
<Jonathan.Vance@forces.gc.ca>, "Greta.Bossenmaier"
<Greta.Bossenmaier@hq.nato.int
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: NIA_IG <nia_ig.fct@navy.mil>
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 2021 11:03:08 +0000
Subject: RE: [Non-DoD Source] Fwd: Methinks the evil lawyer Howie
Cooper made a deal with the VERY NASTY FBI dudes in Beantown N'esy Pas
Howie Anglin?
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
Dear David Amos,
The Naval Intelligence Activity (NIA) Office of the Inspector General
(IG) reviewed your email and attached .WAV file provided to the NIA
Hotline on 2 April 2021. I found no connection to the United States
Navy or United States Naval Intelligence.
Naval Inspectors General exist to improve the efficiency and
effectiveness of US Navy Programs, and strive to eliminate and prevent
waste, fraud, and abuse with their respective departments. Naval IGs
are restricted to assessing matters falling within the purview of
their respective commanders.
Citing the lack of an apparent connection to the US Navy or Naval
Intelligence, I am unable to provide further assistance, or provide
direct referral to any other agency or activity.
Sincerely,
Mark Koneda
Investigator
Naval Intelligence Activity
Office of the Inspector General
NIA_IG@navy.mil
(301)669-3030 (unclass)
TSVOIP 560-3030
INSPECTOR GENERAL SENSITIVE INFORMATION - FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY The
information contained in this email and any accompanying attachments
may contain Inspector General sensitive or pre-decisional information,
which is protected from mandatory disclosure under the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA, 5 USC Section 552). It should not be released
to unauthorized persons. If you are not the intended recipient of this
information, any disclosure, copying, distribution, or the taking of
any action in reliance on this information is prohibited. If you
received this email in error, please notify this office by email or by
calling (301) 669-3030.
-----Original Message-----
From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
Sent: Friday, April 2, 2021 12:50 PM
To: NIA_IG <nia_ig.fct@navy.mil>
Cc: motomaniac333 <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Subject: [Non-DoD Source] Fwd: Methinks the evil lawyer Howie Cooper
made a deal with the VERY NASTY FBI dudes in Beantown N'esy Pas Howie
Anglin?
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Art.McDonald@forces.gc.ca
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2021 13:49:10 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: Methinks the evil lawyer Howie Cooper made a
deal with the VERY NASTY FBI dudes in Beantown N'esy Pas Howie Anglin?
To: motomaniac333@gmail.com
The Acting Chief of the Defence Staff is LGen Wayne Eyre, he may be
reached at wayne.eyre@forces.gc.ca.
Le Chef d'état-major de la Défense par intérim est le LGen Wayne Eyre.
Il peut être rejoint au wayne.eyre@forces.gc.ca.
Art McD
He/Him // Il/Lui
Admiral/amiral Art McDonald
Chief of the Defence Staff (CDS)
Canadian Armed Forces
art.mcdonald@forces.gc.ca<
Chef d’état-major de la Defense (CÉMD)
Forces armées canadiennes
art.mcdonald@forces.gc.ca<
----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "McKnight, Gisele" McKnight.Gisele@kingscorecord.
> > > > To: lcampenella@ledger.com
> > > > Cc:motomaniac_02186@hotmail.
> > > Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2005 2:53 PM
> > > > Subject: David Amos
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Hello Lisa,
> > > > > David Amos asked me to contact you. I met him last June after he
> > became
> > > an
> > > > > independent (not representing any political party) candidate in our
> > > > federal
> > > > > election that was held June 28.
> > > > >
> > > > > He was a candidate in our constituency of Fundy (now called
> > > Fundy-Royal).
> > > > I
> > > > > wrote a profile story about him, as I did all other candidates. That
> > > story
> > > > > appeared in the Kings County Record June 22. A second story, written
> > by
> > > > one
> > > > > of my reporters, appeared on the same date, which was a report on
> the
> > > > > candidates' debate held June 18.
> > > > >
> > > > > As I recall David Amos came last of four candidates in the election.
> > The
> > > > > winner got 14,997 votes, while Amos got 358.
> > > > >
> > > > > I have attached the two stories that appeared, as well as a photo
> > taken
> > > by
> > > > > reporter Erin Hatfield during the debate. I couldn't find the photo
> > that
> > > > > ran, but this one is very similar.
> > > > >
> > > > > Gisele McKnight
> > > > > editor A1-debate A1-amos,David for MP 24.doc debate
2.JPG
> > > > > Kings County Record
> > > > > Sussex, New Brunswick
> > > > > Canada
> > > > > 506-433-1070
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
Raising a Little Hell- Lively Debate Provokes Crowd
By Erin Hatfield
"If you don't like what you got, why don't you change it? If your
world is all screwed up, rearrange it."
The 1979 Trooper song Raise a Little Hell blared on the speakers at
the 8th Hussars Sports Center Friday evening as people filed in to
watch the Fundy candidates debate the issues. It was an accurate, if
unofficial, theme song for the debate.
The crowd of over 200 spectators was dwarfed by the huge arena, but as
they chose their seats, it was clear the battle lines were drawn.
Supporters of Conservative candidate Rob Moore naturally took the blue
chairs on the right of the rink floor while John Herron's Liberalswent
left. There were splashes of orange, supporters of NDP Pat Hanratty,
mixed throughout. Perhaps the loudest applause came from a row towards
the back, where supporters of independent candidate David Amos sat.
The debate was moderated by Leo Melanson of CJCW Radio and was
organized by the Sussex Valley Jaycees. Candidates wereasked a barrage
of questions bypanelists Gisele McKnight of the Kings County Record
and Lisa Spencer of CJCW.
Staying true to party platforms for the most part, candidates
responded to questions about the gun registry, same sex marriage, the
exodus of young people from the Maritimes and regulated gas prices.
Herron and Moore were clear competitors,constantly challenging each
other on their answers and criticizing eachothers’ party leaders.
Hanratty flew under the radar, giving short, concise responses to the
questions while Amos provided some food for thought and a bit of comic
relief with quirky answers. "I was raised with a gun," Amos said in
response to the question of thenational gun registry. "Nobody's
getting mine and I'm not paying 10 cents for it."
Herron, a Progressive Conservative MP turned Liberal, veered from his
party'splatform with regard to gun control. "It was ill advised but
well intentioned," Herron said. "No matter what side of the house I am
on, I'm voting against it." Pat Hanratty agreed there were better
places for the gun registry dollars to be spent.Recreational hunters
shouldn't have been penalized by this gun registry," he said.
The gun registry issues provoked the tempers of Herron and Moore. At
one point Herron got out of his seat and threw a piece of paper in
front of Moore. "Read that," Herron said to Moore, referring to the
voting record of Conservative Party leader Steven Harper. According to
Herron, Harper voted in favour of the registry on the first and second
readings of the bill in 1995. "He voted against it when it counted, at
final count," Moore said. "We needa government with courage to
register sex offenders rather than register the property of law
abiding citizens."
The crowd was vocal throughout the evening, with white haired men and
women heckling from the Conservative side. "Shut up John," one woman
yelled. "How can you talk about selling out?" a man yelled whenHerron
spoke about his fear that the Conservatives are selling farmers out.
Although the Liberal side was less vocal, Kings East MLA Leroy
Armstrong weighed in at one point. "You’re out of touch," Armstrong
yelled to Moore from the crowd when the debate turned to the cost of
post-secondary education. Later in the evening Amos challenged
Armstrong to a public debate of their own. "Talk is cheap. Any time,
anyplace," Armstrong responded.
As the crowd made its way out of the building following the debate,
candidates worked the room. They shook hands with well-wishers and
fielded questions from spectators-all part of the decision-making
process for the June 28 vote.
Cutline – David Amos, independent candidate in Fundy, with some of his
favourite possessions—motorcycles.
McKnight/KCR
The Unconventional Candidate
David Amos Isn’t Campaigning For Your Vote, But….
By Gisele McKnight
FUNDY—He has a pack of cigarettes in his shirt pocket, a chain on his
wallet, a beard at least a foot long, 60 motorcycles and a cell phone
that rings to the tune of "Yankee Doodle."
Meet the latest addition to the Fundy ballot—David Amos.
The independent candidate lives in Milton, Massachusetts with his wife
and two children, but his place of residence does not stop him from
running for office in Canada.
One has only to be at least 18, a Canadian citizen and not be in jail
to meet Elections Canada requirements.
When it came time to launch his political crusade, Amos chose his
favourite place to do so—Fundy.
Amos, 52, is running for political office because of his
dissatisfaction with politicians.
"I’ve become aware of much corruption involving our two countries," he
said. "The only way to fix corruption is in the political forum."
The journey that eventually led Amos to politics began in Sussex in
1987. He woke up one morning disillusioned with life and decided he
needed to change his life.
"I lost my faith in mankind," he said. "People go through that
sometimes in midlife."
So Amos, who’d lived in Sussex since 1973, closed his Four Corners
motorcycle shop, paid his bills and hit the road with Annie, his 1952
Panhead motorcycle.
"Annie and I rode around for awhile (three years, to be exact)
experiencing the milk of human kindness," he said. "This is how you
renew your faith in mankind – you help anyone you can, you never ask
for anything, but you take what they offer."
For those three years, they offered food, a place to sleep, odd jobs
and conversation all over North America.
Since he and Annie stopped wandering, he has married, fathered a son
and a daughter and become a house-husband – Mr. Mom, as he calls
himself.
He also describes himself in far more colourful terms—a motorcyclist
rather than a biker, a "fun-loving, free-thinking, pig-headed
individual," a "pissed-off Maritimer" rather than an activist, a proud
Canadian and a "wild colonial boy."
Ironically, the man who is running for office has never voted in his life.
"But I have no right to criticize unless I offer my name," he said.
"It’s alright to bitch in the kitchen, but can you walk the walk?"
Amos has no intention of actively campaigning.
"I didn’t appreciate it when they (politicians) pounded on my door
interrupting my dinner," he said. "If people are interested, they can
call me. I’m not going to drive my opinions down their throats."
And he has no campaign budget, nor does he want one.
"I won’t take any donations," he said. "Just try to give me some. It’s
not about money. It goes against what I’m fighting about."
What he’s fighting for is the discussion of issues – tainted blood,
the exploitation of the Maritimes’ gas and oil reserves and NAFTA, to
name a few.
"The political issues in the Maritimes involve the three Fs – fishing,
farming and forestry, but they forget foreign issues," he said. "I’m
death on NAFTA, the back room deals and free trade. I say chuck it
(NAFTA) out the window.
NAFTA is the North American Free Trade Agreement which allows an
easier flow of goods between Canada, the United States and Mexico.
Amos disagrees with the idea that a vote for him is a wasted vote.
"There are no wasted votes," he said. "I want people like me,
especially young people, to pay attention and exercise their right.
Don’t necessarily vote for me, but vote."
Although…if you’re going to vote anyway, Amos would be happy to have
your X by his name.
"I want people to go into that voting booth, see my name, laugh and
say, ‘what the hell.’"
---------- Orignal message ----------
From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2021 10:49:00 -0300
Subject: Methinks the evil lawyer Howie Cooper made a deal with the
VERY NASTY FBI dudes in Beantown N'esy Pas Howie Anglin?
To: hcooper@toddweld.com, washington field
<washington.field@ic.fbi.gov>, stateofcorruptionnh1
<stateofcorruptionnh1@gmail.
<Boston.Mail@ic.fbi.gov>, mdcohen212 <mdcohen212@gmail.com>,
art.mcdonald@forces.gc.ca, richard.jolette@forces.gc.ca,
JONATHAN.VANCE@forces.gc.ca, Tammy.Harris@forces.gc.ca,
Jill.Chisholm@justice.gc.ca, Cedric.Aspirault@forces.gc.ca,
Derek.Sloan@parl.gc.ca, Hon.ralph.goodale@canada.ca,
Brenda.Lucki@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, barbara.massey@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
clare.barry@justice.gc.ca, michael.mcnair@pmo-cpm.gc.ca,
David.Akin@globalnews.ca, dale.drummond@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, "blaine.higgs"
<blaine.higgs@gnb.ca>, fin.minfinance-financemin.fin@
hon.melanie.joly@canada.ca, Jody.Wilson-Raybould@parl.gc.
"andrea.anderson-mason" <andrea.anderson-mason@gnb.ca>
Ramesh.Sangha@parl.gc.ca, Marwan.Tabbara@parl.gc.ca,
Yasmin.Ratansi@parl.gc.ca, Ian.Shugart@pco-bcp.gc.ca, "Bill.Blair"
<Bill.Blair@parl.gc.ca>, chad@williamson.law,
steve.phillips@gov.ab.ca, Karen.Thorsrud@gov.ab.ca,
ministryofjustice@gov.ab.ca, Kaycee.Madu@gov.ab.ca,
edmontonprosecutions@gov.ab.ca
howard.anglin@gmail.com, centralpeace.notley@assembly.
cypress.medicinehat@assembly.
lacombe.ponoka@assembly.ab.ca, brooks.medicinehat@assembly.
bonnyville.coldlake.stpaul@
theangryalbertan@protonmail.
lboothby@postmedia.com, acps.calgaryprosecutions@gov.
<premier@gov.ab.ca>, sheilagunnreid <sheilagunnreid@gmail.com>,
keean.bexte@rebelnews.com, Newsroom <Newsroom@globeandmail.com>, sfine
<sfine@globeandmail.com>, pm <pm@pm.gc.ca>, news-tips
<news-tips@nytimes.com>, mcu@justice.gc.ca,
ombudsman-communications@
<Katie.Telford@pmo-cpm.gc.ca>
Cc: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
etiernan@wickedlocal.com, nesimpson@patriotledger.com,
jdifazio@patriotledger.com, Nathalie Sturgeon
<sturgeon.nathalie@
<steve.murphy@ctv.ca>
https://no-click.mil/?https://
Prosecutors say Joyce’s lawyer lied, should be pulled from trial
By Neal Simpson
The Patriot Ledger
Posted Jan 18, 2018 at 12:59 PM
BOSTON - Federal prosecutors have accused an attorney for former state
Sen. Brian Joyce of lying to state ethics officials and are asking a
judge to have him pulled from Joyce’s defense team if the former
legislator’s corruption case goes to trial.
In a motion filed earlier this month, prosecutors said lawyer Howard
Cooper had made “several material and false representations” to the
state Ethics Commission on behalf of Joyce, a Milton Democrat who is
accused of using the influence of his office to collect a series of
bribes, kickbacks and gifts, including hundreds of pounds of free
coffee and a Jeep.
Prosecutors say Cooper helped Joyce cover up at least two of his
schemes and could provide important testimony at trial.
Cooper, a founding partner at Todd & Weld in Boston, was not
identified by name in the 113-count indictment against Joyce, but
prosecutors said in their motion filed earlier this month that he was
the unnamed attorney described in the indictment as sending misleading
emails and letters to the Ethics Commission on Joyce’s behalf. Cooper
did not respond to request for comment Wednesday.
In one of those letters, sent in October 2016, prosecutors say Cooper
falsely told the Ethics Commission that Joyce had directed his
retirement account to purchase common stock in an energy-insurance
holding company doing business in Massachusetts.
In fact, prosecutors say, the retirement account was a sham created to
evade IRS penalties and hide Joyce’s direct investment in the company,
which stood to benefit from alternative-energy legislation that Joyce
was championing on Beacon Hill.
Prosecutors say Cooper also sent two misleading emails to the Ethics
Commission about Joyce’s relationship with a Dunkin’ Donuts franchisee
who made payments to Joyce and sent him free coffee at the same time
that the senator was pushing legislation that would help the
franchisee’s business.
Prosecutors said Joyce received hundreds of pounds of free coffee from
the franchisee – giving much of it away to constituents or fellow
state senators – but later tried to claim he paid for the coffee
deliveries or had received them in exchange for legal services
provided by his law firm.
In 2015, prosecutors say Cooper emailed the Ethics Commission and told
them Joyce had purchased the coffee he gave out to fellow senators the
previous Christmas. In reality, prosecutors say Joyce only paid for
the coffee only after The Boston Globe reported on the Christmas gifts
a month later.
Then in 2016, prosecutors say Cooper told the commission in an email
that an earlier delivery of coffee in 2013 had been made in exchange
for Joyce’s legal work on related to a Dunkin’ Donuts franchise. But
prosecutors say Joyce only invented that arrangement in 2015, two
years after the coffee had already been delivered.
Joyce was released last month on $250,000 bond secured by property he
owns in Canton. He is due back in court Feb. 23.
Neal Simpson may be reached at nesimpson@ledger.com or follow him on
Twitter @NSimpson_Ledger.
https://no-click.mil/?https://
Accountant charged with helping ex-Sen. Brian Joyce defraud IRS
Image: Former Massachusetts State Sen. Brian Joyce is surrounded by
reporters as he leaves the U.S. Federal Courthouse in Worcester, Mass
By Erin Tiernan
The Patriot Ledger
Posted Jan 29, 2018 at 2:50 PM
Federal prosecutors say John H. Nardozzi helped the former Milton
Democrat avoid paying almost $800,000 in taxes over a four-year
period.
WORCESTER — A longtime accountant for former state Sen. Brian Joyce
has been charged with helping the embattled Milton Democrat prepare
and file false income tax returns, federal officials said.
John. H. Nardozzi of Waltham is accused of aiding Joyce and his family
in defrauding the government out of almost $800,000 in taxes over a
four-year period, according to an indictment unsealed on Monday.
Joyce was charged in a separate federal indictment in December that
alleges he laundered more than $1 million in kickbacks and bribes
through his law practice and another private business.
Nardozzi will appear in federal court in Worcester on Monday
afternoon, charged with one count of conspiring to defraud the IRS and
eight counts of aiding and assisting in the filing of false tax
returns, the U.S. Attorney’s Office said.
Prosecutors allege Nardozzi conspired with Joyce to defraud the IRS by
deducting millions of dollars in personal expenses as legitimate
business expenses, inflating self-employment income for Joyce and his
wife by more than $2 million in order to maximize retirement plan
contributions, falsifying withdrawals from a retirement account and
falsifying dividends on Joyce’s personal tax returns.
In total, Nardozzi is accused of misclassifying $2,268,520 to reduce
Joyce’s tax burden, according to prosecutors. Joyce’s law firm should
have paid out $850,748 in taxes during that period, of which Joyce
paid just $56,766.
“For tax years 2011 through and including 2014, defendant Nardozzi and
Joyce knowingly and willfully caused [Brian Joyce’s law firm] to avoid
paying approximately $793,982 in federal corporate income taxes,” the
indictment states.
Joyce, who moved to Westport with his family last year following an
FBI-raid on his law office, faces more than 100 charges ranging from
racketeering and extortion to money laundering and could place Joyce
behind bars for up to 20 years.
Then-Acting U.S. Attorney William Weinreb hinted in December at a
press conference announcing Joyce’s indictment that more arrests were
likely as the investigation into Joyce’s alleged corruption continued.
“He used his office as a criminal enterprise to make deals with his
business cronies and in exchange he took bribes, kickbacks ... and
took steps to conceal his corrupt acts,” Weinreb said at the time
Nardozzi’s indictment indicates that prosecutors believe the certified
public accountant played a part in that cover up.
Joyce and his wife bought $471,250 in common stock from a Delaware
energy insurance broker in 2014, $395,125 of which they paid for
though a series of early withdrawals from their retirement accounts.
In the Joyce indictment, prosecutors said the retirement account was a
sham created to evade IRS penalties and hide Joyce’s direct investment
in the company, which stood to benefit from alternative-energy
legislation that Joyce pushing on Beacon Hill.
Prosecutors allege Nardozzi, an accountant of 37 years, falsely
reported it as a tax-exempt retirement account rollover with the
intent to help the Joyce’s avoid paying taxes to the IRS.
“By reporting the early withdrawal of funds from the Joyce’s
retirement accounts as a tax-exempt rollover on Joyce’s 2014 personal
tax return... defendant Nardozzi and Joyce caused Joyce and Joyce’s
spouse to avoid paying approximately $208,100 in additional income
taxes and early withdrawal penalties,” the indictment states.
Nardozzi was not named in the original 113-count indictment against
Joyce. Joyce pleaded not guilty to the charges on Dec. 8 and is
currently free on a $250,000 bond.
Prosecutors have also fingered Joyce’s laweyr, Howard Cooper as taking
a role in Joyce’s corruption coverup. A motion filed earlier this
month asked a federal judge to remove Cooper from Joyce’s defense
team, accusing him of making “several material and false
representations” to the state Ethics Commission on behalf of Joyce.
Cooper has not been indicted, but prosecutors said Cooper helped Joyce
cover up at least two of his schemes, including the stock purchase,
and could provide important testimony at trial.
Erin Tiernan may be reached at etiernan@wickedlocal.com. Neal Simpson
contributed to this report.
https://no-click.mil/?https://
Prosecutors in Joyce case earn rebuke from legal community
By Neal Simpson
The Patriot Ledger
Posted Apr 4, 2018 at 4:47 PM
BOSTON — Federal prosecutors seeking to disqualify an attorney for
former state Sen. Brian Joyce from his upcoming corruption trial have
earned a rebuke from dozens of lawyers and several legal organizations
who accuse them of trying to to broaden their ability to have
defendants’ lawyers removed.
Prosecutors had argued that attorney Howard M. Cooper, founding
partner at Todd & Weld in Boston, should be stripped from Joyce’s
defense team at trial because Cooper has unwittingly helped Joyce
cover up some of his corrupt activities by submitting false statements
to the state Ethics Commission, making Cooper a potential witness to
Joyce’s crimes. But in an amicus brief submitted earlier this week, a
collection of lawyers and legal organizations argue that such thinking
would erode defendants’ Sixth Amendment right to their chosen counsel
and interfere with attorneys’ ability to represent their clients while
criminal charges are pending.
“Granting the present motion would threaten ethical and effective
advocacy by counsel in numerous other cases,” the brief reads. “It
would encourage the government to seek to disqualify counsel more
frequently in any of the array of circumstances in which defense
counsel may advocate on a client’s behalf and might present what the
government may later claim to be inaccurate information.”
The battle over the future of Joyce’s legal representation comes as
the former Milton Democrat faces a 113-count indictment accusing him
of turning his Beacon Hill office into a money-making venture where he
traded legislation and political influence for more than $1 million in
kickbacks, hundreds of pounds of free coffee and a 2014 Jeep. He was
arrested on the charges this past December and released on $250,000
bond.
A little more than a month after Joyce’s arrest, federal prosecutors
indicated that they would seek to disqualify Cooper from representing
Joyce at trial and could call him to testify about several statements
he made to the ethics commission on Joyce’s behalf. Some of those
statements had addressed the commission’s questions about whether the
senator had received free Dunkin’ Donuts coffee in exchange for
pushing favorable legislation, whether he’d filed legislation without
disclosing that it would benefit a client, and whether he’d appeared
before a state commission while concealing his financial investment in
the company.
Prosecutors have not suggested that Cooper was aware that the
statements were false, but said that Joyce had nonetheless “entangled
Attorney Cooper in the cover-up.” In a motion filed in late February,
prosecutors argued that Joyce had used Cooper’s statements to further
his crimes, making communications between the two exempt from
attorney-client privilege.
In response, Joyce accused prosecutors of trying to disqualify his
attorney by making him into a witness even through they hadn’t shown
any need for Cooper’s testimony. Joyce said he would even stipulate
that he himself had prepared and reviewed the statements that
prosecutors say were false.
Joyce, who is a lawyer, also argued Cooper had only submitted the
statements to defend Joyce against allegations of wrongdoing and had
not been involved in setting up the corrupt deals Joyce is accused of
making. Joyce hired Cooper and his firm, Todd & Weld, in March 2015
after Boston Globe reporters began asking Joyce’s office questions.
Joyce said disqualifying Cooper would violated his Sixth Amendment
right to choose his legal counsel and force him to find a new attorney
following the loss of his job, the end of his practice and “the
exhaustion of his resources.”
“Now the government takes aim at the one attorney who has represented
him throughout, in whom he reposes the greatest trust and confidence,
and ask the Court to require him to start over with new counsel he
does not want and cannot afford,” attorneys for Joyce and Cooper said
in a motion filed on their behalf. “This would be a cruel, unfair and
clearly unconstitutional blow.”
The Boston legal community apparently agrees. In a motion filed
Monday, a group including the Massachusetts Bar Association, the
Massachusetts Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, the American
Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts and 71 individual attorneys
argued that the prosecutors’ request had “far-reaching and troubling
Sixth Amendment implications,” potentially opening the door for
prosecutors to have defense attorneys removed from a case by claiming
that they had previously presented inaccurate information on their
client’s behalf. The Boston Bar Association is seeking to file a
separate amicus brief.
“We believe the government’s motion threatens the constitutionally
protected right of a lawyer to present a client’s defense to courts
and to government agencies,” Jon Albano, president-elect of the Boston
Bar Association, said in a statement. “A lawyer should not be
disqualified for presenting a client’s side of a case when there is no
evidence that the lawyer knew the client was not telling the truth.”
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2018 12:19:51 -0400
Subject: Methinks one of Trump's many lawyers should call the FBI
dudes in DC and Beantown ASAP They are far too chicken to talk to me
or you N'esy Pas Mikey Gill?
To: sheri.dillon@morganlewis.com, washington field
<washington.field@ic.fbi.gov>, hcooper <hcooper@toddweld.com>,
stateofcorruptionnh1 <stateofcorruptionnh1@gmail.
<Boston.Mail@ic.fbi.gov>, mdcohen212 <mdcohen212@gmail.com>,
"hon.ralph.goodale" <hon.ralph.goodale@canada.ca>,
Pierre.Parent@parl.gc.ca, "Gib.vanErt" <Gib.vanErt@scc-csc.ca>
Cc: David Amos <david.raymond.amos@gmail.com>
jonathan.albano@morganlewis.
<Dale.Morgan@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>
Sheri A. Dillon
1111 Pennsylvania Ave. NW
Washington, DC 20004-2541
United States
Phone +1.202.739.5749
sheri.dillon@morganlewis.com
---------- Original message ----------
From: Premier of Ontario | Première ministre de l’Ontario <Premier@ontario.ca>
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 13:21:16 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: The LIEbranos latest Constitutional and
Legal Adviser Michael Fenrick denied receiving this email but several
computers did not
To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Thank you for your email. Your thoughts, comments and input are greatly valued.
You can be assured that all emails and letters are carefully read,
reviewed and taken into consideration.
There may be occasions when, given the issues you have raised and the
need to address them effectively, we will forward a copy of your
correspondence to the appropriate government official. Accordingly, a
response may take several business days.
Thanks again for your email.
______
Merci pour votre courriel. Nous vous sommes très reconnaissants de
nous avoir fait part de vos idées, commentaires et observations.
Nous tenons à vous assurer que nous lisons attentivement et prenons en
considération tous les courriels et lettres que nous recevons.
Dans certains cas, nous transmettrons votre message au ministère
responsable afin que les questions soulevées puissent être traitées de
la manière la plus efficace possible. En conséquence, plusieurs jours
ouvrables pourraient s’écouler avant que nous puissions vous répondre.
Merci encore pour votre courriel.
---------- Original message ----------
From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 09:21:12 -0400
Subject: Fwd: The LIEbranos latest Constitutional and Legal Adviser
Michael Fenrick denied receiving this email but several computers did
not
To: jagmeet.singh@ndp.ca, sfeinman <sfeinman@fahrllc.com>, premier
<premier@ontario.ca>, PREMIER <PREMIER@gov.ns.ca>, premier
<premier@gov.ab.ca>, premier <premier@gov.pe.ca>, premier
<premier@gov.sk.ca>, premier <premier@gov.yk.ca>, premier
<premier@gov.nt.ca>, premier <premier@gov.bc.ca>, "premier.ministre"
<premier.ministre@cex.gouv.qc.
Cc: David Amos <david.raymond.amos@gmail.com>
<doug@fordnation.ca>, "francis.scarpaleggia"
<francis.scarpaleggia@parl.gc.
---------- Original message ----------
From: "Gallant, Premier Brian (PO/CPM)" <Brian.Gallant@gnb.ca>
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 12:51:40 +0000
Subject: RE: The LIEbranos latest Constitutional and Legal Adviser
Michael Fenrick denied receiving this email but several computers did
not
To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Thank you for writing to the Premier of New Brunswick. Please be
assured that your email will be reviewed.
If this is a media request, please forward your email to
media-medias@gnb.ca<mailto:med
******************************
Nous vous remercions d’avoir communiqué avec le premier ministre du
Nouveau-Brunswick. Soyez assuré(e) que votre courriel sera examiné.
Si ceci est une demande médiatique, prière de la transmettre à
media-medias@gnb.ca<mailto:med
---------- 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:
> 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
>
> https://no-click.mil/?http://
>
> These are digital recordings of the last three hearings
>
> Dec 14th https://no-click.mil/?https://
>
> January 11th, 2016 https://no-click.mil/?https://
>
> April 3rd, 2017
>
> https://no-click.mil/?https://
>
>
> This is the docket in the Federal Court of Appeal
>
> https://no-click.mil/?http://
>
>
> The only hearing thus far
>
> May 24th, 2017
>
> https://no-click.mil/?https://
>
>
> This Judge understnds the meaning of the word Integrity
>
> Date: 20151223
>
> Docket: T-1557-15
>
> Fredericton, New Brunswick, December 23, 2015
>
> PRESENT: The Honourable Mr. Justice Bell
>
> BETWEEN:
>
> DAVID RAYMOND AMOS
>
> Plaintiff
>
> and
>
> HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
>
> Defendant
>
> ORDER
>
> (Delivered orally from the Bench in Fredericton, New Brunswick, on
> December 14, 2015)
>
> The Plaintiff seeks an appeal de novo, by way of motion pursuant to
> the Federal Courts Rules (SOR/98-106), from an Order made on November
> 12, 2015, in which Prothonotary Morneau struck the Statement of Claim
> in its entirety.
>
> At the outset of the hearing, the Plaintiff brought to my attention a
> letter dated September 10, 2004, which he sent to me, in my then
> capacity as Past President of the New Brunswick Branch of the Canadian
> Bar Association, and the then President of the Branch, Kathleen Quigg,
> (now a Justice of the New Brunswick Court of Appeal). In that letter
> he stated:
>
> As for your past President, Mr. Bell, may I suggest that you check the
> work of Frank McKenna before I sue your entire law firm including you.
> You are your brother’s keeper.
>
> Frank McKenna is the former Premier of New Brunswick and a former
> colleague of mine at the law firm of McInnes Cooper. In addition to
> expressing an intention to sue me, the Plaintiff refers to a number of
> people in his Motion Record who he appears to contend may be witnesses
> or potential parties to be added. Those individuals who are known to
> me personally, include, but are not limited to the former Prime
> Minister of Canada, The Right Honourable Stephen Harper; former
> Attorney General of Canada and now a Justice of the Manitoba Court of
> Queen’s Bench, Vic Toews; former member of Parliament Rob Moore;
> former Director of Policing Services, the late Grant Garneau; former
> Chief of the Fredericton Police Force, Barry McKnight; former Staff
> Sergeant Danny Copp; my former colleagues on the New Brunswick Court
> of Appeal, Justices Bradley V. Green and Kathleen Quigg, and, retired
> Assistant Commissioner Wayne Lang of the Royal Canadian Mounted
> Police.
>
> In the circumstances, given the threat in 2004 to sue me in my
> personal capacity and my past and present relationship with many
> potential witnesses and/or potential parties to the litigation, I am
> of the view there would be a reasonable apprehension of bias should I
> hear this motion. See Justice de Grandpré’s dissenting judgment in
> Committee for Justice and Liberty et al v National Energy Board et al,
> [1978] 1 SCR 369 at p 394 for the applicable test regarding
> allegations of bias. In the circumstances, although neither party has
> requested I recuse myself, I consider it appropriate that I do so.
>
>
> AS A RESULT OF MY RECUSAL, THIS COURT ORDERS that the Administrator of
> the Court schedule another date for the hearing of the motion. There
> is no order as to costs.
>
> “B. Richard Bell”
> Judge
>
>
> Below after the CBC article about your concerns (I made one comment
> already) you will find the text of just two of many emails I had sent
> to your office over the years since I first visited it in 2006.
>
> I noticed that on July 30, 2009, he was appointed to the the Court
> Martial Appeal Court of Canada Perhaps you should scroll to the
> bottom of this email ASAP and read the entire Paragraph 83 of my
> lawsuit now before the Federal Court of Canada?
>
> "FYI This is the text of the lawsuit that should interest Trudeau the most
>
> https://no-click.mil/?http://
>
> 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?
>
>
> Vertias Vincit
> David Raymond Amos
> 902 800 0369
>
> P.S. Whereas this CBC article is about your opinion of the actions of
> the latest Minister Of Health trust that Mr Boudreau and the CBC have
> had my files for many years and the last thing they are is ethical.
> Ask his friends Mr Murphy and the RCMP if you don't believe me.
>
> Subject:
> Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 12:02:35 -0400
> From: "Murphy, Michael B. \(DH/MS\)" MichaelB.Murphy@gnb.ca
> To: motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com
>
> January 30, 2007
>
> WITHOUT PREJUDICE
>
> Mr. David Amos
>
> Dear Mr. Amos:
>
> This will acknowledge receipt of a copy of your e-mail of December 29,
> 2006 to Corporal Warren McBeath of the RCMP.
>
> Because of the nature of the allegations made in your message, I have
> taken the measure of forwarding a copy to Assistant Commissioner Steve
> Graham of the RCMP “J” Division in Fredericton.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Honourable Michael B. Murphy
> Minister of Health
>
> CM/cb
>
>
> Warren McBeath warren.mcbeath@rcmp-grc.gc.ca wrote:
>
> Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2006 17:34:53 -0500
> From: "Warren McBeath" warren.mcbeath@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
> To: kilgoursite@ca.inter.net, MichaelB.Murphy@gnb.ca,
> nada.sarkis@gnb.ca, wally.stiles@gnb.ca, dwatch@web.net,
> motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com
> CC: ottawa@chuckstrahl.com, riding@chuckstrahl.com,John.
> 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
>
>
> https://no-click.mil/?http://
>
> https://no-click.mil/?http://
>
>
> 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
>
>
>
>
>
> https://no-click.mil/?http://
>
> Integrity commissioner calls for tougher conflict-of-interest law
> N.B. legislation should apply to apparent conflicts, not just actual
> ones, Alexandre Deschênes says
> By Jacques Poitras, CBC News Posted: Jun 12, 2017 6:30 AM AT
>
> Alexandre Deschênes's first act as commissioner was to deal with
> Victor Boudreau's 20 per cent investment in Shediac Campground Ltd., a
> proposed 700-site facility that has generated local opposition.
> (Jacques Poitras/CBC)
>
> New Brunswick's integrity commissioner says the conflict-of-interest
> law for politicians should be toughened to clarify cases such as
> cabinet minister Victor Boudreau's former investment in a proposed
> campground near Parlee Beach.
>
> Alexandre Deschênes said earlier this year that Boudreau's stake in
> the project did not put him in a conflict of interest but that the
> appearance of a conflict was "inevitable."
>
> Unlike other conflict-of-interest laws, "our act does not apply to an
> apparent conflict of interest," he said in an interview with CBC News.
> "It's not in there."
>
> Previous commissioners suggested law
>
> Boudreau recused himself from Parlee Beach issues anyway, even though
> he didn't technically have to. The law said ministers aren't in a
> conflict if decisions that affect their private interests also apply
> to the general public.
>
> Boudreau recuses himself from Parlee Beach controversy
> Victor Boudreau case shows 'huge loophole' in conflict law, ethics
> group says
>
> "Mr. Boudreau could have gone on and said, 'I'm the minister of health
> and I'm going to make decisions that apply to the general public and
> the act allows it,'" Deschênes said.
>
> "If you'd had the words 'apparent conflict of interest' [in the law]
> it would have been clear."
>
> Deschênes pointed out two of his predecessors as conflict-of-interest
> commissioner, Pat Ryan and Stuart Stratton, recommended expanding the
> act to include the appearance of conflicts.
>
> "It started out way back," he said. "We're looking at almost a decade
> here where the suggestion has been made that apparent conflict of
> interest ought to be included in the act. It's not been done.
>
> "But as a commissioner, I will be following what they've been doing
> and I will be recommending it when I file a report."
>
> Updated conflict act
>
> The Gallant Liberals passed amendments to update the Members Conflict
> of Interest Act during the spring session of the legislature, but they
> did not include a ban on perceived conflicts.
>
> Progressive Conservative MLA Brian MacDonald has also called for the
> Liberals to fix what he calls "a gap in the law."
>
> 'Gap in the law': PC critic suggests review of conflict law
> Premier backs Victor Boudreau's involvement in Parlee Beach issue
>
> Deschênes was appointed the province's integrity commissioner last
> year. The new role incorporates the role of conflict-of-interest
> watchdog and registrar of lobbyists, and in September it will also
> include the Right to Information and Protection of Privacy Act.
>
> Victor
>
> Cabinet minister Victor Boudreau recused himself from the Parlee Beach
> issues anyway, even though the law said ministers aren't in a conflict
> if decisions that affect their private interests also apply to the
> general public. (CBC)
>
> Deschênes's first act as commissioner was to deal with Boudreau's 20
> per cent investment in Shediac Campground Ltd., a proposed 700-site
> facility that has generated local opposition.
>
> As health minister, Boudreau oversees the public health offices, and
> his department was part of a working group looking at how to deal with
> fecal contamination at Parlee Beach. One option the group looked at
> was a moratorium on new development near the beach.
>
> That would have affected the proposed campground.
>
> 'I told him, and he made it public, that the appearance of
> conflict in this case was absolutely inevitable. He couldn't get
> around it. It was there.'
>
> - Alexandre Deschênes
>
> The law bans ministers from making decisions that affect their
> "private interest," but it makes an exception if the decision applies
> to the broader public, even if the minister would still benefit.
>
> Deschênes said in his letter to Boudreau in March that "one could
> argue" a decision on a moratorium would affect the broader public.
>
> "Under the act, he might have been entitled to continue to have
> discussions that applied to the general population, even though he was
> part of [the project] at that point," Deschênes said in an interview
> last week.
>
> "I told him, and he made it public, that the appearance of conflict in
> this case was absolutely inevitable. He couldn't get around it. It was
> there."
> An MP's perceived conflict matters
>
> The federal conflict of interest code for MPs also includes an
> exception for decisions that affect the general public, but it
> includes an explicit reference to perceived conflicts.
>
> Boudreau put his investment in a blind trust in 2014, which meant he
> had no role in the running of the business. But the value of his stake
> would have been affected by a moratorium on future development.
>
> Parlee beach
>
> In May, Victor Boudreau announced he was giving up his investment in
> the campground on Parlee Beach altogether.
>
> He said in March he learned of the potential moratorium Feb. 28 and
> met with Deschênes March 2, the first date they could arrange it.
>
> "That perception is the issue," Boudreau said at the time. "And if the
> perception is the issue, and the perception is what's going to be
> prevent us from getting to the bottom of it, then I'm prepared to
> recuse myself from all activities relating to this committee."
>
> Last month he announced that he was giving up his investment in the
> campground altogether.
>
> Deschênes said he believes most ministers and MLAs would do the same
> thing if he told them there was an apparent, but not actual, conflict.
>
> "In most cases I think they will listen and they will do what has to
> be done to put an end to an apparent conflict of interest, although
> technically they could continue to do what they want to do."
>
>
>
> 6 Comments
>
> David Raymond Amos
>
> I sure hope the new integrity commissioner finally does his job and
> answers me in writing
>
>
>
> 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
>
> Hon. Alexandre Deschênes, Q.C.
> Integrity Commissioner
>
> Hon. Alexandre Deschênes, Q.C., who resides in Bathurst, N.B., is a
> native of Kedgwick, N.B., and is married to Huguette (Savoie)
> Deschênes. They have two sons.
>
> He studied at Saint-Joseph University (now Université de Moncton) from
> 1960 to 1962, University of Ottawa from 1962-1965 (B.A.), and
> University of New Brunswick (LL.B., 1968). He was admitted to the Law
> Society of New Brunswick in 1968. He was legal counsel to the
> Department of Justice in Fredericton from 1968 to 1971. He was in
> private practice from 1972 to 1982 and specialized in civil litigation
> as a partner in the law firm of Michaud, Leblanc, Robichaud, and
> Deschênes. While residing in Shediac, N.B., he served on town council
> and became the first president of the South East Economic Commission.
> He is a past president of the Richelieu Club in Shediac.
>
> In 1982, he was appointed a judge of the Court of Queen’s Bench of New
> Brunswick and of the Court of Appeal of New Brunswick in 2000.
>
> On July 30, 2009, he was appointed to the Court Martial Appeal Court of
> Canada.
>
> While on the Court of Appeal of New Brunswick, he was appointed
> President of the provincial Judicial Council and in 2012 Chairperson
> of the Federal Electoral Boundaries Commission for the Province of New
> Brunswick for the 2015 federal election.
>
> He was appointed Conflict of Interest Commissioner in December 2016
> and became New Brunswick’s first Integrity Commissioner on December
> 16, 2016 with responsibilities for conflict of interest issues related
> to Members of the Legislative Assembly. As of April 1, 2017 he
> supervises lobbyists of public office holders under the Lobbyists’
> Registration Act.
>
> As of September 1, 2017, he will be assuming the functions presently
> held by the Access to Information and Privacy Commissioner.
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
> Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2012 16:22:25 -0400
> Subject: Thank you for your signature Frenchy
> To: Andre Murray <andremurraynow@gmail.com>, "marie-claude.blais"
> <marie-claude.blais@gnb.ca>, sallybrooks25 <sallybrooks25@yahoo.ca>,
> evelyngreene <evelyngreene@live.ca>, law <law@stevenfoulds.ca>,
> "danny.copp" <danny.copp@fredericton.ca>, nbpc <nbpc@gnb.ca>, nbombud
> <nbombud@gnb.ca>, coi <coi@gnb.ca>, "Wayne.Lang"
> <Wayne.Lang@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>
> Cc: "dan. bussieres" <dan.bussieres@gnb.ca>, oldmaison
> <oldmaison@yahoo.com>, andre <andre@jafaust.com>
>
> From: "Bussières, Dan (LEG)" <Dan.Bussieres@gnb.ca>
> Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2012 15:47:49 -0400
> Subject: RE: I just called all three of your offices
> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>
> Oui je vois
>
>
>
> On 12/6/12, David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I don't take orders well ask the corrupt ex cop Bussieres why that is
>>
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
> Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2016 13:46:11 -0400
> Subject: Attn premier Brian Gallant and Kirk MacDonald I just called
> your friends in the Law Society of New Brunswick for the last time
> From now on we argue before the courts
> To: george.filliter@gmail.com, lcmarcou@mccain.ca,
> cmichaud@coxandpalmer.com, tross@judicom.ca, coi@gnb.ca,
> m.pelletier@nb.aibn.com, "Kim.Poffenroth" <Kim.Poffenroth@gnb.ca>,
> nbpc <nbpc@gnb.ca>, "Gilles.Blinn" <Gilles.Blinn@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>,
> "bruce.northrup" <bruce.northrup@gnb.ca>, "brian.keirstead"
> <brian.keirstead@gnb.ca>, "blaine.higgs" <blaine.higgs@gnb.ca>,
> "Davidc.Coon" <Davidc.Coon@gmail.com>, "David.Coon"
> <David.Coon@gnb.ca>, "david.eidt" <david.eidt@gnb.ca>, "jan.jensen"
> <jan.jensen@justice.gc.ca>, "bill.pentney"
> <bill.pentney@justice.gc.ca>, mcu <mcu@justice.gc.ca>, postur
> <postur@for.is>, postur <postur@irr.is>, birgittaj
> <birgittaj@althingi.is>
> Cc: David Amos <david.raymond.amos@gmail.com>
> <kirk.macdonald@gnb.ca>, briangallant10 <briangallant10@gmail.com>,
> "Jacques.Poitras" <Jacques.Poitras@cbc.ca>, premier <premier@gnb.ca>
>
> Methinks if Kik MacDonald were truly wise he would make another speech
> before Xmass but this time he should tell the awful truth instead of
> just making fun of our trubles with LIEBRANOS N'esy Pas Davey Baby
> Coon?
>
> Trust that watching this politite nonsense is truly offensive to any
> Maritmer with two clues between their ears.
>
> https://no-click.mil/?http://
>
> Conflict of Interest 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
>
> Michèle Pelletier
> Arseneault & Pelletier
> 568A Ave. des Pionniers
> Balmoral, New Brunswick E8E 1E3
> Phone: 506-826-1819
> Fax: 506-826-1817
> Email: m.pelletier@nb.aibn.com
>
> KIM POFFENROTH
> Assistant Deputy Attorney General
> Legislative Services (Branch)
> Office of the Attorney General
> Phone : (506) 453-2855
> Fax : (506) 457-7342
> Email : Kim.POFFENROTH@gnb.ca
>
>
>
> https://no-click.mil/?http://
>
> The Gallant government has introduced legislation to merge several
> legislative watchdog positions into a single job and has chosen a
> retired judge to take on the newly expanded role.
>
> Alexandre Deschênes
>
> Alexandre Deschênes, a retired New Brunswick Court of Appeal justice,
> is to be the first integrity commissioner in New Brunswick.
>
> Retired New Brunswick Court of Appeal justice Alexandre Deschênes will
> become the province's first integrity commissioner, an appointment
> supported by the opposition Progressive Conservatives and Green Party
> Leader David Coon.
>
> Premier Brian Gallant introduced a bill Wednesday to create the position.
>
> For now, Deschênes fills the vacant position of conflict-of-interest
> commissioner and will also oversee legislation governing the privacy
> of personal health records.
>
> Next July, Deschênes will add responsibility for the lobbyist registry
> to his duties.
>
> The Liberals say they will proclaim legislation to set up the registry
> by next July. The law was passed by the previous PC government in 2014
> but not enacted.
>
> Conflict of interest commissioner, MLAs have conflicting views on
> transparency
> Commissioner wants mandatory privacy breach reporting
> N.B. legislature will study cutting independent watchdogs
>
> And next September, after Anne Bertrand, the information and privacy
> commissioner, finishes her seven-year term, that job will become part
> of Deschênes's job as integrity commissioner.
>
> An independent study, done as part of the government's program
> review, recommended the merging of the legislative officer positions.
>
> All parties in the legislature agreed on two other appointments
> Wednesday: lawyer Michèle Pelletier as consumer advocate for insurance
> and assistant deputy attorney general Kim Poffenroth as chief
> electoral officer.J
>
>
> https://no-click.mil/?http://
>
> At its Annual General Meeting on Saturday, June 25th, 2016, the Law
> Society of New Brunswick elected its new Executive for the 2016-2017
> term:
>
> New Executive
>
> George P. Filliter, Q.C.
> President
> 68 Avonlea Court
> Fredericton, NB E3C 1N8
> Tel: (506) 454-7678
> Fax: (506) 454-6983
> george.filliter@gmail.com
>
> Luc Marcoux, Q.C.
> Vice-President
> McCain Foods Limited
> 8800 Main Street
> Florenceville-Bristol, NB E7L 1B2
> Tel: (506) 375-5353
> Fax: (506) 375-5058
> lcmarcou@mccain.ca
>
> Christian E. Michaud, Q.C.
> Treasurer
> Cox & Palmer
> Blue Cross Center
> 644 Main Street, Suite 500
> Moncton, NB E1C 1E2
> Tel: (506) 863-1131
> Fax: (506) 856-8150
> cmichaud@coxandpalmer.com
>
>
> Law Society of New Brunswick
> 68 Avonlea Court
> Fredericton, New Brunswick
> E3C 1N8
> (506) 458-8540
> (506) 451-1421
>
> general@lawsociety-barreau.nb.
>
> https://no-click.mil/?http://
>
> October 24, 2016
>
> Eleven New Brunswick lawyers were appointed Queen’s Counsel by the
> Lieutenant-Governor of New Brunswick, the Honourable Jocelyne Roy
> Vienneau, on Monday, October 24, 2016, at the Legislative Assembly in
> Fredericton.
>
> Christa Bourque, Q.C., of Moncton
> Krista Lynn Colford, Q.C., of Fredericton
> The Honourable Alexandre Deschênes, Q.C., of Bathurst
> Edward L. Derrah, Q.C., of Fredericton
> Shannon Doran, Q.C., of Fredericton
> Nathalie L. Godbout, Q.C., of Saint John
> Stephen J. Hutchison, Q.C., of Saint John
> The Honourable Dominic A. J. LeBlanc, Q.C., of Shediac
> Luc Marcoux, Q.C., of Florenceville-Bristol
> D. Andrew Rouse, Q.C., of Fredericton
> John R. Williamson, Q.C., of Fredericton
>
> The distinction of Queen’s Counsel is conferred upon experienced
> lawyers in recognition of their commitment to the principles of the
> legal profession and contributions to their communities. Eligible
> lawyers include those who have been members of the Law Society of New
> Brunswick and have been engaged in the active practice of law in the
> province for at least 15 years with extensive experience before the
> courts or have demonstrated exceptional service to the profession.
>
> In the fall of this year, a committee consisting of the Chief Justice
> of New Brunswick, J. Ernest Drapeau, the Attorney General of New
> Brunswick and the President of the Law Society of New Brunswick, will
> consider candidates for the next Queen’s Counsel appointments.
>
> The distinction of Queen’s Counsel is conferred upon experienced
> lawyers in recognition of their commitment to the principles of the
> legal profession and contributions to their communities. The criteria
> for these appointments are:
>
> A regular member of the Law Society of New Brunswick who:
>
> a) has been engaged in the active practice of law in the Province of
> New Brunswick for at least fifteen years, with extensive experience
> before the courts;
>
> b) in the opinion of the Committee, merits the appointment by reason
> of exceptional service to the legal profession.
>
> It should be noted that past practice indicates that Queen’s Counsel
> appointments typically have more than seventeen years at the Bar.
>
> The Law Society encourages members to forward a letter and a resume in
> order to be considered as a candidate for a Queen’s Counsel
> appointment. Persons may either apply personally or may nominate a
> member of the Law Society. All applicants will be treated equally by
> the Committee whether they are nominated, or whether they apply
> personally.
>
> In your letter, you may wish to identify two individuals, either
> within or outside the Law Society who might provide additional
> information to assist the Committee in considering this matter. If
> letters of reference are provided, they may be identified for this
> purpose.
>
> Your application or nomination should be received by Chief Justice J.
> Ernest Drapeau no later than Friday, June 24, 2016, at 4:00 p.m.
>
> It may be sent via email to tross@judicom.ca or sent/delivered to:
>
> Committee on Queen’s Counsel Appointments
> c/o The Hon. Chief Justice J. Ernest Drapeau
> Court of Appeal of New Brunswick
> Justice Building
> 427 Queen Street, Room 311
> Fredericton, NB E3B 1B7
>
>
> https://no-click.mil/?http://
>
>
> Judge-moving bill aims to help Dominic LeBlanc, Tory MLA charges
> Kirk MacDonald says Liberals drafted bill to help put Jolène Richard
> and André Richard on court
>
> By Jacques Poitras, CBC News Posted: Nov 24, 2016 6:03 PM AT
>
> A Progressive Conservative MLA has taken the unusual step of naming
> names — including that of a sitting provincial court judge — in his
> attack on a proposed law on how Court of Queen's Bench judges are
> transferred.
>
> Kirk MacDonald told the legislature last week that he believes the
> government bill was drafted to help the spouse and the brother-in-law
> of federal Liberal MP Dominic LeBlanc, a close ally of Premier Brian
> Gallant.
> nb-andre-richard-jolene-
>
> A Progressive Conservative MLA believes the Liberal government's
> judge-moving bill was drafted to help have André Richard and Jolène
> Richard appointed to the Court of Queen's Bench. (CBC)
>
> "I will give you two names. I will give you Jolène Richard and André
> Richard, two people I believe are looking for judicial appointments
> here in New Brunswick," MacDonald said during second-reading debate on
> the bill.
>
> In fact, Jolène Richard is already a provincial court judge. André
> Richard is her brother and a senior lawyer at Stewart McKelvey.
>
> Province names new judge, wife of MP Dominic LeBlanc
>
> "Dominic LeBlanc has some judges that he wants to appoint in New
> Brunswick, and the framework as it currently exists does not allow for
> that to happen," MacDonald said.
>
> André Richard stated Thursday he "had no involvement in the
> government's decision to propose changes to the Judicature Act."
>
> "As you know, my sister is already a judge who sits in Moncton. I fail
> to understand why our names are being brought into this debate."
> Bill gives veto to minister
>
> The Liberal bill would amend the Judicature Act, which governs how
> courts operate, to give the justice minister a veto over Chief Justice
> David Smith of the Court of Queen's Bench transferring judges from one
> court to another.
> nb-chief-justice-david-smith
>
> Court of Queen's Bench Chief Justice David Smith has transferred 13
> judges since becoming chief justice in 1998. (Acadia University)
>
> PC MLAs have hinted in the past about who they believe the bill was
> designed to help. But until now, no one was willing to name them.
>
> It's rare for politicians to draw sitting judges into partisan
> debates, and the veteran Tory MLA did not offer any evidence to back
> up his allegations. He turned down a request to explain his views in
> an interview.
> Parliamentary privilege
>
> Parliamentary privilege protects members of the legislature from being
> sued for defamation or held in contempt of court for comments they
> make during proceedings. No such protection exists for things they say
> outside the legislature.
>
> Provincial court judges such as Richard are appointed by the province,
> but Court of Queen's Bench justices are named by Ottawa. Both courts
> are administered by the province, but the current law gives Smith the
> power to move judges on his court on his own.
>
> Smith has argued the bill would threaten the independence of the
> courts, which could make it unconstitutional.
> Bill brought back
>
> The Liberals introduced the bill during the last session, but it
> didn't pass before the session ended. They brought it back last week.
>
> Justice Minister Denis Landry said last week the bill was designed to
> bring "best practices" to court administration and end the pattern of
> justices being named to smaller courthouses and then being transferred
> soon after.
>
> Judge-moving legislation introduced again
> 2 chief justices appear at odds over judge-moving bill
> 7 things list reveals about controversial judge-moving bill
>
> "This is what we want to correct," he said. "If we name a judge, they
> should reside there, for a long period of time, not just two or three
> months then move them where they want to go."
>
> Asked whether he'd veto such a transfer, Landry said, "This is what we'll
> see."
>
> Landry's department said Thursday it would not comment on MacDonald's
> accusation.
> Larger locations favoured
>
> MacDonald said during last week's debate that it's true Court of
> Queen's Bench justices are often appointed to smaller locations and
> are then moved to one of the three largest cities.
> Dominic LeBlanc
>
> Federal Fisheries Minister Dominic LeBlanc is a close ally of New
> Brunswick Premier Brian Gallant. (CBC)
>
> He said that court postings in Moncton, Fredericton, and Saint John
> are "The positions that everyone seems to want."
>
> And he said the current system for moving judges, "which is controlled
> by the chief justice, does not work for Dominic LeBlanc and the
> Liberal Party of New Brunswick," MacDonald said.
>
> Upside to judge-moving bill touted by ex-constitutional lawyer
> Gallant government's judge-moving bill questioned by legal expert
>
> "They want to change it. They want to have a situation where they have
> a mechanism to control that decision and to effect change on that
> decision."
>
> In June, Smith transferred Justice Tracey DeWare from Woodstock to
> Moncton and Justice Richard Petrie from Saint John to Woodstock.
>
> DeWare was moved to fill a vacancy after Justice Brigitte Robichaud
> switched to supernumerary, or part-time, status.
>
> Jolène Richard did not respond to interview requests.
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: Póstur FOR <postur@for.is>
> Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2016 22:05:47 +0000
> Subject: Re: Hey Premier Gallant please inform the questionable
> parliamentarian Birigtta Jonsdottir that although NB is a small "Have
> Not" province at least we have twice the population of Iceland and
> that not all of us are as dumb as she and her Prime Minister pretends
> to be..
> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>
>
> Erindi þitt hefur verið móttekið / Your request has been received
>
> Kveðja / Best regards
> Forsætisráðuneytið / Prime Minister's Office
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: Póstur IRR <postur@irr.is>
> Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2016 22:05:47 +0000
> Subject: Re: Hey Premier Gallant please inform the questionable
> parliamentarian Birigtta Jonsdottir that although NB is a small "Have
> Not" province at least we have twice the population of Iceland and
> that not all of us are as dumb as she and her Prime Minister pretends
> to be..
> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>
>
> Erindi þitt hefur verið móttekið. / Your request has been received.
>
> Kveðja / Best regards
> Innanríkisráðuneytið / Ministry of the Interior
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Póstur FOR <postur@for.is>
> Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2016 21:43:50 +0000
> Subject: Re: After crossing paths with them bigtime in 2004 Davey Baby
> Coon and his many Green Meanie and Fake Left cohorts know why I won't
> hold my breath waiting for them to act with any semblance of integrity
> now N'esy Pas Chucky Leblanc??
> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>
>
> Erindi þitt hefur verið móttekið / Your request has been received
>
> Kveðja / Best regards
> Forsætisráðuneytið / Prime Minister's Office
>
>
> This is the docket
>
> https://no-click.mil/?http://
>
> These are digital recordings of the last two hearings
>
> Dec 14th https://no-click.mil/?https://
>
> Jan 11th https://no-click.mil/?https://
>
> This me running for a seat in Parliament again while CBC denies it again
>
> Fundy Royal, New Brunswick Debate – Federal Elections 2015 - The Local
> Campaign, Rogers TV
>
> https://
>
>http://
>
> Veritas Vincit
> David Raymond Amos
> 902 800 0369
>
> FYI This is the text of the lawsuit that should interest Trudeau the most
>
>
> http://
>
> 83 The Plaintiff states that now that Canada is involved in more war
> in Iraq again it did not serve Canadian interests and reputation to
> allow Barry Winters to publish the following words three times over
> five years after he began his bragging:
>
> January 13, 2015
> This Is Just AS Relevant Now As When I wrote It During The Debate
>
> December 8, 2014
> Why Canada Stood Tall!
>
> Friday, October 3, 2014
> Little David Amos’ “True History Of War” Canadian Airstrikes And
> Stupid Justin Trudeau
>
> Canada’s and Canadians free ride is over. Canada can no longer hide
> behind Amerka’s and NATO’s skirts.
>
> When I was still in Canadian Forces then Prime Minister Jean Chretien
> actually committed the Canadian Army to deploy in the second campaign
> in Iraq, the Coalition of the Willing. This was against or contrary to
> the wisdom or advice of those of us Canadian officers that were
> involved in the initial planning phases of that operation. There were
> significant concern in our planning cell, and NDHQ about of the dearth
> of concern for operational guidance, direction, and forces for
> operations after the initial occupation of Iraq. At the “last minute”
> Prime Minister Chretien and the Liberal government changed its mind.
> The Canadian government told our amerkan cousins that we would not
> deploy combat troops for the Iraq campaign, but would deploy a
> Canadian Battle Group to Afghanistan, enabling our amerkan cousins to
> redeploy troops from there to Iraq. The PMO’s thinking that it was
> less costly to deploy Canadian Forces to Afghanistan than Iraq. But
> alas no one seems to remind the Liberals of Prime Minister Chretien’s
> then grossly incorrect assumption. Notwithstanding Jean Chretien’s
> incompetence and stupidity, the Canadian Army was heroic,
> professional, punched well above it’s weight, and the PPCLI Battle
> Group, is credited with “saving Afghanistan” during the Panjway
> campaign of 2006.
>
> What Justin Trudeau and the Liberals don’t tell you now, is that then
> Liberal Prime Minister Jean Chretien committed, and deployed the
> Canadian army to Canada’s longest “war” without the advice, consent,
> support, or vote of the Canadian Parliament.
>
> What David Amos and the rest of the ignorant, uneducated, and babbling
> chattering classes are too addled to understand is the deployment of
> less than 75 special operations troops, and what is known by planners
> as a “six pac cell” of fighter aircraft is NOT the same as a
> deployment of a Battle Group, nor a “war” make.
>
> The Canadian Government or The Crown unlike our amerkan cousins have
> the “constitutional authority” to commit the Canadian nation to war.
> That has been recently clearly articulated to the Canadian public by
> constitutional scholar Phillippe Legasse. What Parliament can do is
> remove “confidence” in The Crown’s Government in a “vote of
> non-confidence.” That could not happen to the Chretien Government
> regarding deployment to Afghanistan, and it won’t happen in this
> instance with the conservative majority in The Commons regarding a
> limited Canadian deployment to the Middle East.
>
> President George Bush was quite correct after 911 and the terror
> attacks in New York; that the Taliban “occupied” and “failed state”
> Afghanistan was the source of logistical support, command and control,
> and training for the Al Quaeda war of terror against the world. The
> initial defeat, and removal from control of Afghanistan was vital and
> essential for the security and tranquility of the developed world. An
> ISIS “caliphate,” in the Middle East, no matter how small, is a clear
> and present danger to the entire world. This “occupied state,”
> or“failed state” will prosecute an unending Islamic inspired war of
> terror against not only the “western world,” but Arab states
> “moderate” or not, as well. The security, safety, and tranquility of
> Canada and Canadians are just at risk now with the emergence of an
> ISIS“caliphate” no matter how large or small, as it was with the
> Taliban and Al Quaeda “marriage” in Afghanistan.
>
> One of the everlasting “legacies” of the “Trudeau the Elder’s dynasty
> was Canada and successive Liberal governments cowering behind the
> amerkan’s nuclear and conventional military shield, at the same time
> denigrating, insulting them, opposing them, and at the same time
> self-aggrandizing ourselves as “peace keepers,” and progenitors of
> “world peace.” Canada failed. The United States of Amerka, NATO, the
> G7 and or G20 will no longer permit that sort of sanctimonious
> behavior from Canada or its government any longer. And Prime Minister
> Stephen Harper, Foreign Minister John Baird , and Cabinet are fully
> cognizant of that reality. Even if some editorial boards, and pundits
> are not.
>
> Justin, Trudeau “the younger” is reprising the time “honoured” liberal
> mantra, and tradition of expecting the amerkans or the rest of the
> world to do “the heavy lifting.” Justin Trudeau and his “butt buddy”
> David Amos are telling Canadians that we can guarantee our security
> and safety by expecting other nations to fight for us. That Canada can
> and should attempt to guarantee Canadians safety by providing
> “humanitarian aid” somewhere, and call a sitting US president a “war
> criminal.” This morning Australia announced they too, were sending
> tactical aircraft to eliminate the menace of an ISIS “caliphate.”
>
> In one sense Prime Minister Harper is every bit the scoundrel Trudeau
> “the elder” and Jean ‘the crook” Chretien was. Just As Trudeau, and
> successive Liberal governments delighted in diminishing,
> marginalizing, under funding Canadian Forces, and sending Canadian
> military men and women to die with inadequate kit and modern
> equipment; so too is Prime Minister Stephen Harper. Canada’s F-18s are
> antiquated, poorly equipped, and ought to have been replaced five
> years ago. But alas, there won’t be single RCAF fighter jock that
> won’t go, or won’t want to go, to make Canada safe or safer.
>
> My Grandfather served this country. My father served this country. My
> Uncle served this country. And I have served this country. Justin
> Trudeau has not served Canada in any way. Thomas Mulcair has not
> served this country in any way. Liberals and so called social
> democrats haven’t served this country in any way. David Amos, and
> other drooling fools have not served this great nation in any way. Yet
> these fools are more than prepared to ensure their, our safety to
> other nations, and then criticize them for doing so.
>
> Canada must again, now, “do our bit” to guarantee our own security,
> and tranquility, but also that of the world. Canada has never before
> shirked its responsibility to its citizens and that of the world.
>
> Prime Minister Harper will not permit this country to do so now
>
> From: dnd_mdn@forces.gc.ca
> Date: Fri, 27 May 2011 14:17:17 -0400
> Subject: RE: Re Greg Weston, The CBC , Wikileaks, USSOCOM, Canada and
> the War in Iraq (I just called SOCOM and let them know I was still
> alive
> To: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com
>
> This is to confirm that the Minister of National Defence has received
> your email and it will be reviewed in due course. Please do not reply
> to this message: it is an automatic acknowledgement.
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos@gmail.com>
> Date: Fri, 27 May 2011 13:55:30 -0300
> Subject: Re Greg Weston, The CBC , Wikileaks, USSOCOM, Canada and the
> War in Iraq (I just called SOCOM and let them know I was still alive
> To: DECPR@forces.gc.ca, Public.Affairs@socom.mil,
> Raymonde.Cleroux@mpcc-cppm.gc.
> william.elliott@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
> dnd_mdn@forces.gc.ca, media@drdc-rddc.gc.ca, information@forces.gc.ca,
> milner@unb.ca, charters@unb.ca, lwindsor@unb.ca,
> sarah.weir@mpcc-cppm.gc.ca, birgir <birgir@althingi.is>, smari
> <smari@immi.is>, greg.weston@cbc.ca, pm <pm@pm.gc.ca>,
> susan@blueskystrategygroup.com
> eugene@blueskystrategygroup.
> Cc: "Edith. Cody-Rice" <Edith.Cody-Rice@cbc.ca>, "terry.seguin"
> <terry.seguin@cbc.ca>, acampbell <acampbell@ctv.ca>, whistleblower
> <whistleblower@ctv.ca>
>
> I talked to Don Newman earlier this week before the beancounters David
> Dodge and Don Drummond now of Queen's gave their spin about Canada's
> Health Care system yesterday and Sheila Fraser yapped on and on on
> CAPAC during her last days in office as if she were oh so ethical.. To
> be fair to him I just called Greg Weston (613-288-6938) I suggested
> that he should at least Google SOUCOM and David Amos It would be wise
> if he check ALL of CBC's sources before he publishes something else
> about the DND EH Don Newman? Lets just say that the fact that your
> old CBC buddy, Tony Burman is now in charge of Al Jazeera English
> never impressed me. The fact that he set up a Canadian office is
> interesting though
>
> http://
>
> http://
>
> Anyone can call me back and stress test my integrity after they read
> this simple pdf file. BTW what you Blue Sky dudes pubished about
> Potash Corp and BHP is truly funny. Perhaps Stevey Boy Harper or Brad
> Wall will fill ya in if you are to shy to call mean old me.
>
> http://
>
> The Governor General, the PMO and the PCO offices know that I am not a
> shy political animal
>
> Veritas Vincit
> David Raymond Amos
> 902 800 0369
>
> Enjoy Mr Weston
> http://
>
> "But Lang, defence minister McCallum's chief of staff, says military
> brass were not entirely forthcoming on the issue. For instance, he
> says, even McCallum initially didn't know those soldiers were helping
> to plan the invasion of Iraq up to the highest levels of command,
> including a Canadian general.
>
> That general is Walt Natynczyk, now Canada's chief of defence staff,
> who eight months after the invasion became deputy commander of 35,000
> U.S. soldiers and other allied forces in Iraq. Lang says Natynczyk was
> also part of the team of mainly senior U.S. military brass that helped
> prepare for the invasion from a mobile command in Kuwait."
>
> https://no-click.mil/?http://
>
> "I remember years ago when the debate was on in Canada, about there
> being weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Our American 'friends"
> demanded that Canada join into "the Coalition of the Willing. American
> "veterans" and sportscasters loudly denounced Canada for NOT buying
> into the US policy.
>
> At the time I was serving as a planner at NDHQ and with 24 other of my
> colleagues we went to Tampa SOUCOM HQ to be involved in the planning
> in the planning stages of the op....and to report to NDHQ, that would
> report to the PMO upon the merits of the proposed operation. There was
> never at anytime an existing target list of verified sites where there
> were deployed WMD.
>
> Coalition assets were more than sufficient for the initial strike and
> invasion phase but even at that point in the planning, we were
> concerned about the number of "boots on the ground" for the occupation
> (and end game) stage of an operation in Iraq. We were also concerned
> about the American plans for occupation plans of Iraq because they at
> that stage included no contingency for a handing over of civil
> authority to a vetted Iraqi government and bureaucracy.
>
> There was no detailed plan for Iraq being "liberated" and returned to
> its people...nor a thought to an eventual exit plan. This was contrary
> to the lessons of Vietnam but also to current military thought, that
> folks like Colin Powell and "Stuffy" Leighton and others elucidated
> upon. "What's the mission" how long is the mission, what conditions
> are to met before US troop can redeploy? Prime Minister Jean Chretien
> and the PMO were even at the very preliminary planning stages wary of
> Canadian involvement in an Iraq operation....History would prove them
> correct. The political pressure being applied on the PMO from the
> George W Bush administration was onerous
>
> American military assets were extremely overstretched, and Canadian
> military assets even more so It was proposed by the PMO that Canadian
> naval platforms would deploy to assist in naval quarantine operations
> in the Gulf and that Canadian army assets would deploy in Afghanistan
> thus permitting US army assets to redeploy for an Iraqi
> operation....The PMO thought that "compromise would save Canadian
> lives and liberal political capital.. and the priority of which
> ....not necessarily in that order. "
>
> You can bet that I called these sneaky Yankees again today EH John
> Adams? of the CSE within the DND?
>
> https://no-click.mil/?http://
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
> Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2015 09:20:29 -0400
> Subject: Hey before you Red Coats swear an Oath to the Queen and the
> 42nd Parliament begins perhaps the turncoat Big Bad Billy Casey the
> Yankee carpetbagger David Lutz or some Boyz from NB should explain
> this lawsuit to you real slow.
> To: alaina@alainalockhart.ca, david <david@lutz.nb.ca>,
> "daniel.mchardie" <daniel.mchardie@cbc.ca>, info@waynelong.ca,
> info@ginettepetitpastaylor.ca, rarseno@nbnet.nb.ca,
> matt@mattdecourcey.ca, info@sergecormier.ca, pat@patfinnigan.ca,
> tj@tjharvey.ca, karen.ludwig.nb@gmail.com
> Cc: David Amos <david.raymond.amos@gmail.com>
> <Frank.McKenna@td.com>, info@votezsteve.ca, info@billcasey.ca,
> "justin.trudeau.a1" <justin.trudeau.a1@parl.gc.ca>
> "dominic.leblanc.a1" <dominic.leblanc.a1@parl.gc.ca
> <oldmaison@yahoo.com>, jacques_poitras <jacques_poitras@cbc.ca>,
> "Jacques.Poitras" <Jacques.Poitras@cbc.ca>, "peter.mackay"
> <peter.mackay@justice.gc.ca>
>
>
>
http://
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://no-click.mil/?https://
Federal Court of Appeal Decisions
Amos v. Canada
Court (s) Database
Federal Court of Appeal Decisions
Date
2017-10-30
Neutral citation
2017 FCA 213
File numbers
A-48-16
Date: 20171030
Docket: A-48-16
Citation: 2017 FCA 213
CORAM:
WEBB J.A.
NEAR J.A.
GLEASON J.A.
BETWEEN:
DAVID RAYMOND AMOS
Respondent on the cross-appeal
(and formally Appellant)
and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Appellant on the cross-appeal
(and formerly Respondent)
Heard at Fredericton, New Brunswick, on May 24, 2017.
Judgment delivered at Ottawa, Ontario, on October 30, 2017.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY:
THE COURT
Date: 20171030
Docket: A-48-16
Citation: 2017 FCA 213
CORAM:
WEBB J.A.
NEAR J.A.
GLEASON J.A.
BETWEEN:
DAVID RAYMOND AMOS
Respondent on the cross-appeal
(and formally Appellant)
and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Appellant on the cross-appeal
(and formerly Respondent)
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY THE COURT
I. Introduction
[1] On September 16, 2015, David Raymond Amos (Mr. Amos)
filed a 53-page Statement of Claim (the Claim) in Federal Court
against Her Majesty the Queen (the Crown). Mr. Amos claims $11 million
in damages and a public apology from the Prime Minister and Provincial
Premiers for being illegally barred from accessing parliamentary
properties and seeks a declaration from the Minister of Public Safety
that the Canadian Government will no longer allow the Royal Canadian
Mounted Police (RCMP) and Canadian Forces to harass him and his clan
(Claim at para. 96).
[2] On November 12, 2015 (Docket T-1557-15), by way of a
motion brought by the Crown, a prothonotary of the Federal Court (the
Prothonotary) struck the Claim in its entirety, without leave to
amend, on the basis that it was plain and obvious that the Claim
disclosed no reasonable claim, the Claim was fundamentally vexatious,
and the Claim could not be salvaged by way of further amendment (the
Prothontary’s Order).
[3] On January 25, 2016 (2016 FC 93), by way of Mr.
Amos’ appeal from the Prothonotary’s Order, a judge of the Federal
Court (the Judge), reviewing the matter de novo, struck all of Mr.
Amos’ claims for relief with the exception of the claim for damages
for being barred by the RCMP from the New Brunswick legislature in
2004 (the Federal Court Judgment).
[4] Mr. Amos appealed and the Crown cross-appealed the
Federal Court Judgment. Further to the issuance of a Notice of Status
Review, Mr. Amos’ appeal was dismissed for delay on December 19, 2016.
As such, the only matter before this Court is the Crown’s
cross-appeal.
II. Preliminary Matter
[5] Mr. Amos, in his memorandum of fact and law in
relation to the cross-appeal that was filed with this Court on March
6, 2017, indicated that several judges of this Court, including two of
the judges of this panel, had a conflict of interest in this appeal.
This was the first time that he identified the judges whom he believed
had a conflict of interest in a document that was filed with this
Court. In his notice of appeal he had alluded to a conflict with
several judges but did not name those judges.
[6] Mr. Amos was of the view that he did not have to
identify the judges in any document filed with this Court because he
had identified the judges in various documents that had been filed
with the Federal Court. In his view the Federal Court and the Federal
Court of Appeal are the same court and therefore any document filed in
the Federal Court would be filed in this Court. This view is based on
subsections 5(4) and 5.1(4) of the Federal Courts Act, R.S.C., 1985,
c. F-7:
5(4) Every judge of the Federal Court is, by virtue of his or her
office, a judge of the Federal Court of Appeal and has all the
jurisdiction, power and authority of a judge of the Federal Court of
Appeal.
[…]
5(4) Les juges de la Cour fédérale sont d’office juges de la Cour
d’appel fédérale et ont la même compétence et les mêmes pouvoirs que
les juges de la Cour d’appel fédérale.
[…]
5.1(4) Every judge of the Federal Court of Appeal is, by virtue of
that office, a judge of the Federal Court and has all the
jurisdiction, power and authority of a judge of the Federal Court.
5.1(4) Les juges de la Cour d’appel fédérale sont d’office juges de la
Cour fédérale et ont la même compétence et les mêmes pouvoirs que les
juges de la Cour fédérale.
[7] However, these subsections only provide that the
judges of the Federal Court are also judges of this Court (and vice
versa). It does not mean that there is only one court. If the Federal
Court and this Court were one Court, there would be no need for this
section.
[8] Sections 3 and 4 of the Federal Courts Act provide that:
3 The division of the Federal Court of Canada called the Federal Court
— Appeal Division is continued under the name “Federal Court of
Appeal” in English and “Cour d’appel fédérale” in French. It is
continued as an additional court of law, equity and admiralty in and
for Canada, for the better administration of the laws of Canada and as
a superior court of record having civil and criminal jurisdiction.
3 La Section d’appel, aussi appelée la Cour d’appel ou la Cour d’appel
fédérale, est maintenue et dénommée « Cour d’appel fédérale » en
français et « Federal Court of Appeal » en anglais. Elle est maintenue
à titre de tribunal additionnel de droit, d’equity et d’amirauté du
Canada, propre à améliorer l’application du droit canadien, et
continue d’être une cour supérieure d’archives ayant compétence en
matière civile et pénale.
4 The division of the Federal Court of Canada called the Federal Court
— Trial Division is continued under the name “Federal Court” in
English and “Cour fédérale” in French. It is continued as an
additional court of law, equity and admiralty in and for Canada, for
the better administration of the laws of Canada and as a superior
court of record having civil and criminal jurisdiction.
4 La section de la Cour fédérale du Canada, appelée la Section de
première instance de la Cour fédérale, est maintenue et dénommée «
Cour fédérale » en français et « Federal Court » en anglais. Elle est
maintenue à titre de tribunal additionnel de droit, d’equity et
d’amirauté du Canada, propre à améliorer l’application du droit
canadien, et continue d’être une cour supérieure d’archives ayant
compétence en matière civile et pénale.
[9] Sections 3 and 4 of the Federal Courts Act create
two separate courts – this Court (section 3) and the Federal Court
(section 4). If, as Mr. Amos suggests, documents filed in the Federal
Court were automatically also filed in this Court, then there would no
need for the parties to prepare and file appeal books as required by
Rules 343 to 345 of the Federal Courts Rules, SOR/98-106 in relation
to any appeal from a decision of the Federal Court. The requirement to
file an appeal book with this Court in relation to an appeal from a
decision of the Federal Court makes it clear that the only documents
that will be before this Court are the documents that are part of that
appeal book.
[10] Therefore, the memorandum of fact and law filed on
March 6, 2017 is the first document, filed with this Court, in which
Mr. Amos identified the particular judges that he submits have a
conflict in any matter related to him.
[11] On April 3, 2017, Mr. Amos attempted to bring a motion
before the Federal Court seeking an order “affirming or denying the
conflict of interest he has” with a number of judges of the Federal
Court. A judge of the Federal Court issued a direction noting that if
Mr. Amos was seeking this order in relation to judges of the Federal
Court of Appeal, it was beyond the jurisdiction of the Federal Court.
Mr. Amos raised the Federal Court motion at the hearing of this
cross-appeal. The Federal Court motion is not a motion before this
Court and, as such, the submissions filed before the Federal Court
will not be entertained. As well, since this was a motion brought
before the Federal Court (and not this Court), any documents filed in
relation to that motion are not part of the record of this Court.
[12] During the hearing of the appeal Mr. Amos alleged that
the third member of this panel also had a conflict of interest and
submitted some documents that, in his view, supported his claim of a
conflict. Mr. Amos, following the hearing of his appeal, was also
afforded the opportunity to provide a brief summary of the conflict
that he was alleging and to file additional documents that, in his
view, supported his allegations. Mr. Amos submitted several pages of
documents in relation to the alleged conflicts. He organized the
documents by submitting a copy of the biography of the particular
judge and then, immediately following that biography, by including
copies of the documents that, in his view, supported his claim that
such judge had a conflict.
[13] The nature of the alleged conflict of Justice Webb is
that before he was appointed as a Judge of the Tax Court of Canada in
2006, he was a partner with the law firm Patterson Law, and before
that with Patterson Palmer in Nova Scotia. Mr. Amos submitted that he
had a number of disputes with Patterson Palmer and Patterson Law and
therefore Justice Webb has a conflict simply because he was a partner
of these firms. Mr. Amos is not alleging that Justice Webb was
personally involved in or had any knowledge of any matter in which Mr.
Amos was involved with Justice Webb’s former law firm – only that he
was a member of such firm.
[14] During his oral submissions at the hearing of his
appeal Mr. Amos, in relation to the alleged conflict for Justice Webb,
focused on dealings between himself and a particular lawyer at
Patterson Law. However, none of the documents submitted by Mr. Amos at
the hearing or subsequently related to any dealings with this
particular lawyer nor is it clear when Mr. Amos was dealing with this
lawyer. In particular, it is far from clear whether such dealings were
after the time that Justice Webb was appointed as a Judge of the Tax
Court of Canada over 10 years ago.
[15] The documents that he submitted in relation to the
alleged conflict for Justice Webb largely relate to dealings between
Byron Prior and the St. John’s Newfoundland and Labrador office of
Patterson Palmer, which is not in the same province where Justice Webb
practiced law. The only document that indicates any dealing between
Mr. Amos and Patterson Palmer is a copy of an affidavit of Stephen May
who was a partner in the St. John’s NL office of Patterson Palmer. The
affidavit is dated January 24, 2005 and refers to a number of e-mails
that were sent by Mr. Amos to Stephen May. Mr. Amos also included a
letter that is addressed to four individuals, one of whom is John
Crosbie who was counsel to the St. John’s NL office of Patterson
Palmer. The letter is dated September 2, 2004 and is addressed to
“John Crosbie, c/o Greg G. Byrne, Suite 502, 570 Queen Street,
Fredericton, NB E3B 5E3”. In this letter Mr. Amos alludes to a
possible lawsuit against Patterson Palmer.
[16] Mr. Amos’ position is that simply because Justice Webb
was a lawyer with Patterson Palmer, he now has a conflict. In Wewaykum
Indian Band v. Her Majesty the Queen, 2003 SCC 45, [2003] 2 S.C.R.
259, the Supreme Court of Canada noted that disqualification of a
judge is to be determined based on whether there is a reasonable
apprehension of bias:
60 In Canadian law, one standard has now emerged as the
criterion for disqualification. The criterion, as expressed by de
Grandpré J. in Committee for Justice and Liberty v. National Energy
Board, …[[1978] 1 S.C.R. 369, 68 D.L.R. (3d) 716], at p. 394, is the
reasonable apprehension of bias:
… the apprehension of bias must be a reasonable one, held by
reasonable and right minded persons, applying themselves to the
question and obtaining thereon the required information. In the words
of the Court of Appeal, that test is "what would an informed person,
viewing the matter realistically and practically -- and having thought
the matter through -- conclude. Would he think that it is more likely
than not that [the decision-maker], whether consciously or
unconsciously, would not decide fairly."
[17] The issue to be determined is whether an informed
person, viewing the matter realistically and practically, and having
thought the matter through, would conclude that Mr. Amos’ allegations
give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias. As this Court has
previously remarked, “there is a strong presumption that judges will
administer justice impartially” and this presumption will not be
rebutted in the absence of “convincing evidence” of bias (Collins v.
Canada, 2011 FCA 140 at para. 7, [2011] 4 C.T.C. 157 [Collins]. See
also R. v. S. (R.D.), [1997] 3 S.C.R. 484 at para. 32, 151 D.L.R.
(4th) 193).
[18] The Ontario Court of Appeal in Rando Drugs Ltd. v.
Scott, 2007 ONCA 553, 86 O.R. (3d) 653 (leave to appeal to the Supreme
Court of Canada refused, 32285 (August 1, 2007)), addressed the
particular issue of whether a judge is disqualified from hearing a
case simply because he had been a member of a law firm that was
involved in the litigation that was now before that judge. The Ontario
Court of Appeal determined that the judge was not disqualified if the
judge had no involvement with the person or the matter when he was a
lawyer. The Ontario Court of Appeal also explained that the rules for
determining whether a judge is disqualified are different from the
rules to determine whether a lawyer has a conflict:
27 Thus, disqualification is not the natural corollary to a
finding that a trial judge has had some involvement in a case over
which he or she is now presiding. Where the judge had no involvement,
as here, it cannot be said that the judge is disqualified.
28 The point can rightly be made that had Mr. Patterson been
asked to represent the appellant as counsel before his appointment to
the bench, the conflict rules would likely have prevented him from
taking the case because his firm had formerly represented one of the
defendants in the case. Thus, it is argued how is it that as a trial
judge Patterson J. can hear the case? This issue was considered by the
Court of Appeal (Civil Division) in Locabail (U.K.) Ltd. v. Bayfield
Properties Ltd., [2000] Q.B. 451. The court held, at para. 58, that
there is no inflexible rule governing the disqualification of a judge
and that, "[e]verything depends on the circumstances."
29 It seems to me that what appears at first sight to be an
inconsistency in application of rules can be explained by the
different contexts and in particular, the strong presumption of
judicial impartiality that applies in the context of disqualification
of a judge. There is no such presumption in cases of allegations of
conflict of interest against a lawyer because of a firm's previous
involvement in the case. To the contrary, as explained by Sopinka J.
in MacDonald Estate v. Martin (1990), 77 D.L.R. (4th) 249 (S.C.C.),
for sound policy reasons there is a presumption of a disqualifying
interest that can rarely be overcome. In particular, a conclusory
statement from the lawyer that he or she had no confidential
information about the case will never be sufficient. The case is the
opposite where the allegation of bias is made against a trial judge.
His or her statement that he or she knew nothing about the case and
had no involvement in it will ordinarily be accepted at face value
unless there is good reason to doubt it: see Locabail, at para. 19.
30 That brings me then to consider the particular circumstances
of this case and whether there are serious grounds to find a
disqualifying conflict of interest in this case. In my view, there are
two significant factors that justify the trial judge's decision not to
recuse himself. The first is his statement, which all parties accept,
that he knew nothing of the case when it was in his former firm and
that he had nothing to do with it. The second is the long passage of
time. As was said in Wewaykum, at para. 85:
To us, one significant factor stands out, and must inform
the perspective of the reasonable person assessing the impact of this
involvement on Binnie J.'s impartiality in the appeals. That factor is
the passage of time. Most arguments for disqualification rest on
circumstances that are either contemporaneous to the decision-making,
or that occurred within a short time prior to the decision-making.
31 There are other factors that inform the issue. The Wilson
Walker firm no longer acted for any of the parties by the time of
trial. More importantly, at the time of the motion, Patterson J. had
been a judge for six years and thus had not had a relationship with
his former firm for a considerable period of time.
32 In my view, a reasonable person, viewing the matter
realistically would conclude that the trial judge could deal fairly
and impartially with this case. I take this view principally because
of the long passage of time and the trial judge's lack of involvement
in or knowledge of the case when the Wilson Walker firm had carriage.
In these circumstances it cannot be reasonably contended that the
trial judge could not remain impartial in the case. The mere fact that
his name appears on the letterhead of some correspondence from over a
decade ago would not lead a reasonable person to believe that he would
either consciously or unconsciously favour his former firm's former
client. It is simply not realistic to think that a judge would throw
off his mantle of impartiality, ignore his oath of office and favour a
client - about whom he knew nothing - of a firm that he left six years
earlier and that no longer acts for the client, in a case involving
events from over a decade ago.
(emphasis added)
[19] Justice Webb had no involvement with any matter
involving Mr. Amos while he was a member of Patterson Palmer or
Patterson Law, nor does Mr. Amos suggest that he did. Mr. Amos made it
clear during the hearing of this matter that the only reason for the
alleged conflict for Justice Webb was that he was a member of
Patterson Law and Patterson Palmer. This is simply not enough for
Justice Webb to be disqualified. Any involvement of Mr. Amos with
Patterson Law while Justice Webb was a member of that firm would have
had to occur over 10 years ago and even longer for the time when he
was a member of Patterson Palmer. In addition to the lack of any
involvement on his part with any matter or dispute that Mr. Amos had
with Patterson Law or Patterson Palmer (which in and of itself is
sufficient to dispose of this matter), the length of time since
Justice Webb was a member of Patterson Law or Patterson Palmer would
also result in the same finding – that there is no conflict in Justice
Webb hearing this appeal.
[20] Similarly in R. v. Bagot, 2000 MBCA 30, 145 Man. R.
(2d) 260, the Manitoba Court of Appeal found that there was no
reasonable apprehension of bias when a judge, who had been a member of
the law firm that had been retained by the accused, had no involvement
with the accused while he was a lawyer with that firm.
[21] In Del Zotto v. Minister of National Revenue, [2000] 4
F.C. 321, 257 N.R. 96, this court did find that there would be a
reasonable apprehension of bias where a judge, who while he was a
lawyer, had recorded time on a matter involving the same person who
was before that judge. However, this case can be distinguished as
Justice Webb did not have any time recorded on any files involving Mr.
Amos while he was a lawyer with Patterson Palmer or Patterson Law.
[22] Mr. Amos also included with his submissions a CD. He
stated in his affidavit dated June 26, 2017 that there is a “true copy
of an American police surveillance wiretap entitled 139” on this CD.
He has also indicated that he has “provided a true copy of the CD
entitled 139 to many American and Canadian law enforcement authorities
and not one of the police forces or officers of the court are willing
to investigate it”. Since he has indicated that this is an “American
police surveillance wiretap”, this is a matter for the American law
enforcement authorities and cannot create, as Mr. Amos suggests, a
conflict of interest for any judge to whom he provides a copy.
[23] As a result, there is no conflict or reasonable
apprehension of bias for Justice Webb and therefore, no reason for him
to recuse himself.
[24] Mr. Amos alleged that Justice Near’s past professional
experience with the government created a “quasi-conflict” in deciding
the cross-appeal. Mr. Amos provided no details and Justice Near
confirmed that he had no prior knowledge of the matters alleged in the
Claim. Justice Near sees no reason to recuse himself.
[25] Insofar as it is possible to glean the basis for Mr.
Amos’ allegations against Justice Gleason, it appears that he alleges
that she is incapable of hearing this appeal because he says he wrote
a letter to Brian Mulroney and Jean Chrétien in 2004. At that time,
both Justice Gleason and Mr. Mulroney were partners in the law firm
Ogilvy Renault, LLP. The letter in question, which is rude and angry,
begins with “Hey you two Evil Old Smiling Bastards” and “Re: me suing
you and your little dogs too”. There is no indication that the letter
was ever responded to or that a law suit was ever commenced by Mr.
Amos against Mr. Mulroney. In the circumstances, there is no reason
for Justice Gleason to recuse herself as the letter in question does
not give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias.
III. Issue
[26] The issue on the cross-appeal is as follows: Did the
Judge err in setting aside the Prothonotary’s Order striking the Claim
in its entirety without leave to amend and in determining that Mr.
Amos’ allegation that the RCMP barred him from the New Brunswick
legislature in 2004 was capable of supporting a cause of action?
IV. Analysis
A. Standard of Review
[27] Following the Judge’s decision to set aside the
Prothonotary’s Order, this Court revisited the standard of review to
be applied to discretionary decisions of prothonotaries and decisions
made by judges on appeals of prothonotaries’ decisions in Hospira
Healthcare Corp. v. Kennedy Institute of Rheumatology, 2016 FCA 215,
402 D.L.R. (4th) 497 [Hospira]. In Hospira, a five-member panel of
this Court replaced the Aqua-Gem standard of review with that
articulated in Housen v. Nikolaisen, 2002 SCC 33, [2002] 2 S.C.R. 235
[Housen]. As a result, it is no longer appropriate for the Federal
Court to conduct a de novo review of a discretionary order made by a
prothonotary in regard to questions vital to the final issue of the
case. Rather, a Federal Court judge can only intervene on appeal if
the prothonotary made an error of law or a palpable and overriding
error in determining a question of fact or question of mixed fact and
law (Hospira at para. 79). Further, this Court can only interfere with
a Federal Court judge’s review of a prothonotary’s discretionary order
if the judge made an error of law or palpable and overriding error in
determining a question of fact or question of mixed fact and law
(Hospira at paras. 82-83).
[28] In the case at bar, the Judge substituted his own
assessment of Mr. Amos’ Claim for that of the Prothonotary. This Court
must look to the Prothonotary’s Order to determine whether the Judge
erred in law or made a palpable and overriding error in choosing to
interfere.
B. Did the Judge err in interfering with the
Prothonotary’s Order?
[29] The Prothontoary’s Order accepted the following
paragraphs from the Crown’s submissions as the basis for striking the
Claim in its entirety without leave to amend:
17. Within the 96 paragraph Statement of Claim, the Plaintiff
addresses his complaint in paragraphs 14-24, inclusive. All but four
of those paragraphs are dedicated to an incident that occurred in 2006
in and around the legislature in New Brunswick. The jurisdiction of
the Federal Court does not extend to Her Majesty the Queen in right of
the Provinces. In any event, the Plaintiff hasn’t named the Province
or provincial actors as parties to this action. The incident alleged
does not give rise to a justiciable cause of action in this Court.
(…)
21. The few paragraphs that directly address the Defendant
provide no details as to the individuals involved or the location of
the alleged incidents or other details sufficient to allow the
Defendant to respond. As a result, it is difficult or impossible to
determine the causes of action the Plaintiff is attempting to advance.
A generous reading of the Statement of Claim allows the Defendant to
only speculate as to the true and/or intended cause of action. At
best, the Plaintiff’s action may possibly be summarized as: he
suspects he is barred from the House of Commons.
[footnotes omitted].
[30] The Judge determined that he could not strike the Claim
on the same jurisdictional basis as the Prothonotary. The Judge noted
that the Federal Court has jurisdiction over claims based on the
liability of Federal Crown servants like the RCMP and that the actors
who barred Mr. Amos from the New Brunswick legislature in 2004
included the RCMP (Federal Court Judgment at para. 23). In considering
the viability of these allegations de novo, the Judge identified
paragraph 14 of the Claim as containing “some precision” as it
identifies the date of the event and a RCMP officer acting as
Aide-de-Camp to the Lieutenant Governor (Federal Court Judgment at
para. 27).
[31] The Judge noted that the 2004 event could support a
cause of action in the tort of misfeasance in public office and
identified the elements of the tort as excerpted from Meigs v. Canada,
2013 FC 389, 431 F.T.R. 111:
[13] As in both the cases of Odhavji Estate v Woodhouse, 2003 SCC
69 [Odhavji] and Lewis v Canada, 2012 FC 1514 [Lewis], I must
determine whether the plaintiffs’ statement of claim pleads each
element of the alleged tort of misfeasance in public office:
a) The public officer must have engaged in deliberate and unlawful
conduct in his or her capacity as public officer;
b) The public officer must have been aware both that his or her
conduct was unlawful and that it was likely to harm the plaintiff; and
c) There must be an element of bad faith or dishonesty by the public
officer and knowledge of harm alone is insufficient to conclude that a
public officer acted in bad faith or dishonestly.
Odhavji, above, at paras 23, 24 and 28
(Federal Court Judgment at para. 28).
[32] The Judge determined that Mr. Amos disclosed sufficient
material facts to meet the elements of the tort of misfeasance in
public office because the actors, who barred him from the New
Brunswick legislature in 2004, including the RCMP, did so for
“political reasons” (Federal Court Judgment at para. 29).
[33] This Court’s discussion of the sufficiency of pleadings
in Merchant Law Group v. Canada (Revenue Agency), 2010 FCA 184, 321
D.L.R (4th) 301 is particularly apt:
…When pleading bad faith or abuse of power, it is not enough to
assert, baldly, conclusory phrases such as “deliberately or
negligently,” “callous disregard,” or “by fraud and theft did steal”.
“The bare assertion of a conclusion upon which the court is called
upon to pronounce is not an allegation of material fact”. Making bald,
conclusory allegations without any evidentiary foundation is an abuse
of process…
To this, I would add that the tort of misfeasance in public office
requires a particular state of mind of a public officer in carrying
out the impunged action, i.e., deliberate conduct which the public
officer knows to be inconsistent with the obligations of his or her
office. For this tort, particularization of the allegations is
mandatory. Rule 181 specifically requires particularization of
allegations of “breach of trust,” “wilful default,” “state of mind of
a person,” “malice” or “fraudulent intention.”
(at paras. 34-35, citations omitted).
[34] Applying the Housen standard of review to the
Prothonotary’s Order, we are of the view that the Judge interfered
absent a legal or palpable and overriding error.
[35] The Prothonotary determined that Mr. Amos’ Claim
disclosed no reasonable claim and was fundamentally vexatious on the
basis of jurisdictional concerns and the absence of material facts to
ground a cause of action. Paragraph 14 of the Claim, which addresses
the 2004 event, pleads no material facts as to how the RCMP officer
engaged in deliberate and unlawful conduct, knew that his or her
conduct was unlawful and likely to harm Mr. Amos, and acted in bad
faith. While the Claim alleges elsewhere that Mr. Amos was barred from
the New Brunswick legislature for political and/or malicious reasons,
these allegations are not particularized and are directed against
non-federal actors, such as the Sergeant-at-Arms of the Legislative
Assembly of New Brunswick and the Fredericton Police Force. As such,
the Judge erred in determining that Mr. Amos’ allegation that the RCMP
barred him from the New Brunswick legislature in 2004 was capable of
supporting a cause of action.
[36] In our view, the Claim is made up entirely of bare
allegations, devoid of any detail, such that it discloses no
reasonable cause of action within the jurisdiction of the Federal
Courts. Therefore, the Judge erred in interfering to set aside the
Prothonotary’s Order striking the claim in its entirety. Further, we
find that the Prothonotary made no error in denying leave to amend.
The deficiencies in Mr. Amos’ pleadings are so extensive such that
amendment could not cure them (see Collins at para. 26).
V. Conclusion
[37] For the foregoing reasons, we would allow the Crown’s
cross-appeal, with costs, setting aside the Federal Court Judgment,
dated January 25, 2016 and restoring the Prothonotary’s Order, dated
November 12, 2015, which struck Mr. Amos’ Claim in its entirety
without leave to amend.
"Wyman W. Webb"
J.A.
"David G. Near"
J.A.
"Mary J.L. Gleason"
J.A.
No comments:
Post a Comment