---------- Original message ----------
From: "Public Editor, The Toronto Star" <publiced@thestar.ca>
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2022 17:10:05 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: Methinks the RCMP, Palango and even Andy
Baby Douglas should understand why I am saving certain comments within
the live chat in this video by their pal Seamus N'esy Pas
David.Lametti?
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
THANK YOU for contacting the Toronto Star Public Editor's office.
This office handles queries about accuracy and the Star's
journalistic standards as set out in its Newsroom Policy and
Journalistic Standards Guide
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IG0CQmoTPkQ
MCC Day 52 – Panel on Personal and Community Responses to IPV, GBV, and Family Violence
386 views
Jul 21, 2022
674 subscribers
The MCC today featured a panel discussion on “IPV, GBV and Family Violence: Personal and Community Responses”, and featured Pamela Cross, Legal Director, Luke's Place Support and Resource Centre, Dr. Deborah Doherty, former Executive Director of the Public Legal Education and Information Service of New Brunswick, Emma Halpern, Executive Director, Elizabeth Fry Society of Mainland NS, Professor Janet Mosher from Osgoode Hall Law School, Lorraine Whitman, President of the Native Women Association of Canada, and Dr. Rachel Zellars, Associate Professor, Saint Mary's University.
This represented the eighth MCC discussion focused on domestic violence. Several of the panelists referenced the previous panel discussions, stating that they supported the submissions made so far. It is noteworthy that this panel, like every other IPV/GPV discussion held so far, was made up entirely of women.
Those who have been watching the MCC proceedings will have noted that the Commissioners start each day with a land acknowledgment. Today, there was an additional solemn and/or ceremonial prayer-like introduction, which was lead by Ms. Whitman. Everyone in the room stood for this.
Another thing that stood out in the ‘presentation’ element of what the MCC was hosting today was the highly visible sticker on the back of Ms. Cross’ laptop. The sticker was for “Thelma & Louise Live”, which is a play based on the 1991 movie.
Those two items foretold the tone and content of the discussion, which was emotional (for the speakers) at times as they described many stories of abuse suffered by women in a wide range of circumstances. Discussions covered women suffering abuse who were also struggling with racism, their precarious immigration status, drug additions, sex work, and rural living.
12 Comments
Methinks you and even Stevey Boy Murphy would have found it far more interesting watching Seamus and his buddies having fun as two interesting ladies embarrassed the hell out of the Commission and the DOJ lawyer Patricia MacPhee N'esy Pas ?
Thank You Adam for your insight into the proceeding today at the MCC. So much time and money spent on these round table discussions.
Glad to see that Steve Murphy spoke out last nite at news time on Lisa Banfield not being cross examined! He said more in 5 min than the MCC has! Maybe give Steve the millions to investigate this! The MCC can certainly addressed the domestic violence factor to the ith degree and even the effects of childhood abuse on GW, heck bring in his Dad, but its to the point where its " sooo obvious" that they are shoving this to the forefront, instead of focusing on how we can speak up earlier and prevent from happening and what caused this and steps to prevent it. 1st it was " Honor the RCMP for bravery" and when that blew up, now its " Lisa and DV " and heck maybe the next topic is " Our politicians, who failed to speak up, need more training"! Any of them out on PTSD stress leave yet? How about lazer focus on the crime, how it was allowed to happen, how did the border fail, who's responsible in Maine, who all knew about the police cars, has GW killed before, what all did Lisa know, what was the fight really about and where was she all night and why didn't the RCMP take photos or test her. Time to get real. The only time I've seen any true action is when devasted Nick spoke up and he was rudely told no more outbursts! So they yell at Nick, and Lisa is treated like a China doll thats delicate and breakable. Maybe time for NS people to protest on the street and create some news.
Gender based violence? Victims were 60% women and 40% men - Wortman’s spouse lived (one of the only people who did that encountered the mass shooter).
That I’m aware of, the shooting didn’t involve any First Nations or African Nova Scotians, or immigrants, and didn’t involve children.
Did the MCC get a blank check to bring in experts to talk about their specific areas of interest with no connection to the mass shooting?
Is it stated anywhere what the actual purpose of the commission is? It seems to have lost focus and can’t possibly cover every topic unrelated to the mass shooting.
@darrenm01 I asked almost the exact questions the other day? What is their mandate? And by the mounting costs of this commission, I think they do have a BLANK CHEQUE!!!
Nothing wrong with a little bit of Jesus being invited in on these fool! He ll make them tell the truth!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KFNEKqVYzcs
MCC - DAY 55 - ... AND PARTICIPANT SUBMISSIONS
797 views
Streamed live 15 hours ago
3.43K subscribers
4 Comments
Subject: Methinks the RCMP, Palango and even Andy Baby Douglas should
understand why I am saving certain comments within the live chat in
this video by their pal Seamus N'esy Pas David.Lametti?
This lady was far more interesting today than the mindless Jan Jensen ever was
Patricia C. MacPhee
Called to the bar: 1999 (NS)
Justice Canada
National Litigation Sector,
MCC - DAY 55 - ... AND PARTICIPANT SUBMISSIONS
113 watching now
Started streaming 2 hours ago
Little Grey Cells
3.43K subscribers
Top Chat
Welcome to live chat! Remember to guard your privacy and abide by our
community guidelines.
I missed so much today. Hopefully I’ll catch up on the weekend.
Thank you to all of you searching for the unvarnished truth. You know who you are and you totally rock! A special thank you to you Seamus, for putting in so much time and effort!
So lb needs to collect on policy, so the report says his shot didn't kill him, so not suicide
---------- Original message ----------
From: "Public Editor, The Toronto Star" <publiced@thestar.ca>
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2022 17:10:05 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: Methinks the RCMP, Palango and even Andy
Baby Douglas should understand why I am saving certain comments within
the live chat in this video by their pal Seamus N'esy Pas
David.Lametti?
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
THANK YOU for contacting the Toronto Star Public Editor's office.
This office handles queries about accuracy and the Star's
journalistic standards as set out in its Newsroom Policy and
Journalistic Standards Guide
https://www.thestar.com/
The public editor's office is staffed Monday to Friday, 9 a.m. to 5
p.m., by Public Editor Bruce Campion-Smith and Public Editor,
Associate, Maithily Panchalingam.
If you are requesting a correction or questioning journalistic
standards, please send a link or details of where you read the article
you are questioning, (e.g.- date, page number, digital device.) Please
include your full name and a telephone number where we can reach you
for further information if necessary. Unfortunately, due to the volume
of emails we receive, we cannot reply to every email, but we do read
them all, consider carefully the issues raised, and take appropriate
action to attempt to resolve complaints in cases of error or breach of
the Star's standards.
Some messages to the public editor may be published in Bruce
Campion-Smith's public editor column, which explores journalistic
issues raised by readers. Please inform us if you do not want your
message published.
Corrections: The public editor's office looks into claims of error on
any and all platforms on which the Star publishes. The Star corrects
significant errors of fact. When we determine a correction is called
for, it will be published as soon as possible; the article will also
be corrected online and a correction appended. Generally, news
corrections are published on page A2 and corrections for other
sections (including Sports, Entertainment and Life) are published in
those sections. Corrections are also published online:
https://www.thestar.com/
Because many readers often point out the same error, we cannot notify
each person that we are publishing a correction. As well, because of
the volume of queries we receive, we are not always able to respond to
explain why we determined no correction is necessary. Every query
about a possible error is considered thoroughly however. We thank all
readers who take the time to help the Star report accurately.
Unpublishing: Generally, the Star does not delete (unpublish) content
from our websites or archives, except in some rare circumstances
following consultation with the editor-in-chief, managing editor, and
in some cases, legal counsel. In the case of verified errors, we will
correct/update the article and/or append corrections as necessary but
will not remove it from the Star' s digital publishing record.
General feedback about coverage: If you are writing to express your
view of the Star's coverage, your message will be forwarded to the
appropriate department. Because of the volume of email we receive,
neither the public editor's office, nor the journalists in specific
departments, can respond to every reader comment about the Star's
coverage.
Letters to the Editor: If you want your comments expressing your view
considered for publication as a Letter to the Editor, please resend
your message to lettertoed@thestar.ca<mailto:l
Letters must include full name, address and all phone numbers of
sender (daytime, evening and cellphone). Street names and phone
numbers will not be published. The Star reserves the right to edit
letters, which typically run 50-150 words. Please note: The Star
receives many more letters than it has space to print. Due to the
volume, we unfortunately cannot acknowledge every submission.
Submissions to the Star: Commentaries, opinion pieces, story pitches
and press releases should be submitted to the section of the Star to
which they are best suited. A full list of departments is published on
the "Contact Us" page of the Star's website:
https://www.thestar.com/about/
How to reach a Star journalist: Most staff members, including
reporters, editors, columnists and photographers, can be reached by
email. In most cases the email address follows this formula (all lower
case, don't type spaces or the plus sign): first initial + last name
@thestar.ca. You can also reach staff in the Editorial department
(newsroom) via phone at 416-869-4300 or fax at 416-869-4328. Editorial
staff members can also be contacted within the department they work
for. To reach a freelance writer, please contact the section in which
his or her article appeared.
Subscriptions/Customer Service: The public editor's office handles
concerns about editorial content only. For home delivery
subscriptions, delivery problems, billing inquiries and other customer
service matters, please email
circmail@thestar.ca<mailto:cir
our Subscription page<http://www.thestar.com/
home delivery information.
Further information about how to contact other departments in the Star
can be found here: https://www.thestar.com/about/
Thank you for reading your Toronto Star.
---------- Original message ----------
From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2022 00:13:56 -0300
Subject: Re: Methinks folks should tune in and listen to Paul Palango
and his all knowing pumpkin before the show goes "Poof" N'esy Pas?
To: james.lockyer@umoncton.ca, jlockyer@lzzdefence.ca,
megan.mitton@gnb.ca, dominic.leblanc.c1@parl.gc.ca,
ernie.steeves@gnb.ca, Ginette.PetitpasTaylor@parl.
"Mark.Blakely" <Mark.Blakely@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, "Marco.Mendicino"
<Marco.Mendicino@parl.gc.ca>, "Mike.Comeau" <Mike.Comeau@gnb.ca>,
Tori.Weldon@cbc.ca, mcu <mcu@justice.gc.ca>, Seamus.ORegan@parl.gc.ca,
Newsroom@globeandmail.com, infoam@fredericton.cbc.ca,
briangallant10@gmail.com, MRichard@lawsociety-barreau.
David.Akin@globalnews.ca, charles.murray@gnb.ca, oldmaison@yahoo.com,
"greg.byrne" <greg.byrne@gnb.ca>, "McCulloch, Sandra"
<smcculloch@pattersonlaw.ca>, "Pineo, Robert"
<rpineo@pattersonlaw.ca>, "fin.minfinance-financemin.
<fin.minfinance-financemin.
<Sean.Fraser@parl.gc.ca>, PREMIER <PREMIER@gov.ns.ca>, "blaine.higgs"
<blaine.higgs@gnb.ca>, "Louis.Leger" <Louis.Leger@gnb.ca>,
"mary.wilson" <mary.wilson@gnb.ca>, washington field
<washington.field@ic.fbi.gov>, "Brenda.Lucki"
<Brenda.Lucki@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, "Bill.Hogan" <Bill.Hogan@gnb.ca>,
"Bill.Blair" <Bill.Blair@parl.gc.ca>, "barb.whitenect"
<barb.whitenect@gnb.ca>, "Moiz.Karimjee" <Moiz.Karimjee@ontario.ca>,
"Michelle.Boutin" <Michelle.Boutin@rcmp-grc.gc.
<andrew@frankmagazine.ca>, "Kevin.leahy" <Kevin.leahy@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>,
andrewjdouglas <andrewjdouglas@gmail.com>, "darren.campbell"
<darren.campbell@rcmp-grc.gc.
<Michael.Gorman@cbc.ca>, "michael.macdonald"
<michael.macdonald@
<Rhonda.Brown@globalnews.ca>, sheilagunnreid
<sheilagunnreid@gmail.com>, jesse <jesse@jessebrown.ca>, jesse
<jesse@viafoura.com>, publiced@thestar.ca, newsroom@therecord.com,
stevemckinley@thestar.ca
Cc: motomaniac333 <motomaniac333@gmail.com>, paulpalango
<paulpalango@protonmail.com>, NightTimePodcast
<NightTimePodcast@gmail.com>, nsinvestigators
<nsinvestigators@gmail.com>
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: paulpalango <paulpalango@protonmail.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2022 22:50:02 +0000
Subject: FRANK MAGAZINE TODAY
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
FRANK MAGAZINE JULY 20, 2022
THE LOCKYER FACTOR
by Paul Palango
If you haven’t already noticed, something truly strange happened on
the road to finding the truth about what actually happened before,
during and after the Nova Scotia massacres of April 18 and 19, 2020.
Lisa Banfield and her $1,200-an-hour lawyer, James Lockyer, appear to
have been controlling the show from the very beginning. The Lockyer
factor as a not-so-hidden influencer on the news is important to
address.
On April 19, 2020, just hours after Lisa Banfield arrived at the door
of Leon Joudrey, she contacted lawyer Kevin von Bargen in Toronto to
seek advice and help. The lawyer, a friend of Wortman and Banfield,
put her onto James Lockyer.
From that moment forward, her every word has been treated as gospel.
By the RCMP, by the Mass Casualty Commission, and by the compliant
media. Even those who believe her to have been a victim of domestic
violence at the hands of Gabriel Wortman (and she clearly was), but
also believe she might know more than she’s letting on — and that what
she knows might be important to the inquiry’s purported fact-finding
mission — have been dismissed as cranks and conspiracists.
According to financial documents released by the inquiry after Lisa
Banfield’s dramatic “testimony” on July 15, Banfield reported earnings
of $15,288 one recent year.
That would cover a day, plus HST, of Lockyer’s valuable time.
He has been on the clock for 27 months or so, his fees covered by
taxpayers through the Mass Casualty Commission.
Banfield’s finances, such as they are, would have been a juicy subject
for any curious lawyer, but she wasn’t allowed to be cross examined.
Too traumatic, remember.
Questions abound.
Why did Banfield hire an esteemed criminal lawyer? Did no one let her
in on her status as a victim?
Lockyer seems like an exotic choice. He made his name from the early
‘90s onward representing men wrongly convicted of murder, such as
Stephen Truscott, David Milgaard, Robert Baltovich and Guy Paul Morin.
Morin was falsely accused of killing 9-year-old Christine Jessop in
Queensville, Ontario, near Toronto.
I was the city editor at the Globe and Mail then. I was intimately
involved in the story which was being covered by one of our reporters,
Kirk Makin. I even at one point had a meeting with Makin and Morin’s
mother, who protested his innocence. At the time I was wrongly unmoved
and skeptical of her story, but Makin persisted in digging into it and
worked closely with Lockyer. Morin was eventually exonerated. Kudos to
all. I hope I got smarter after that.
Lockyer, who lived a block away from me in Toronto, went on to become
a champion of the wrongly convicted and started the Innocence Project
to work on their behalf. Among his many clients was Rubin (Hurricane)
Carter, the former boxer who was wrongly convicted of three murders in
Paterson, NJ and was the inspiration for the 1976 Bob Dylan epic
Hurricane.
In recent years, Lockyer and his Innocence Project became involved in
the case of Nova Scotia’s Glenn Assoun, who was wrongly convicted in
1999 of murdering Brenda Way in Dartmouth four years earlier.
Lockyer worked along with lawyers Sean MacDonald and Phil Campbell to
have Assoun’s conviction overturned after he had spent 17 years in
prison. In the final years of that campaign an activist reporter named
Tim Bousquet took on the Assoun case and wrote about it extensively
for years, channeling and publicizing what the lawyers and their
investigators had uncovered. To his credit Bousquet uncovered some
things on his own.
Perhaps the biggest revelation in the Assoun case was that the RCMP
had destroyed evidence and had mislead the courts about Assoun.
Bousquet joined with the CBC in 2020 and produced a radio series, Dead
Wrong, about the case. As Canadians should know well by now, both the
federal and Nova Scotia governments ignored what the Mounties were
caught doing.
Fast forward to the Nova Scotia massacres and the news coverage of it.
As I wrote in my recent book, 22 Murders: Investigating the Massacres,
Cover-up and Obstacles to Justice In Nova Scotia, I had a brief fling
with Bousquet and his on-line newspaper, The Halifax Examiner, in
2020.
After publishing an opening salvo in Maclean’s magazine in May 2020, I
couldn’t find anyone else interested in my reporting, which challenged
the official narrative. Maclean’s writer Stephen Maher introduced me
to Bousquet. I knew nothing about either him or the Halifax Examiner.
Over the next several weeks, Bousquet published five of my pieces and
I was pleasantly surprised to find that the Examiner punched well
above its weight. Its stories were being picked up and read across the
country. Although I had never met the gruff and the usually
difficult-to-reach Bousquet, I thought we had a mutual interest in
keeping the story alive as the mainstream media was losing interest in
it and were moving on. At first blush, Bousquet seemed like a true,
objective journalist determined to find the truth. Hell, I was even
prepared to work for nothing, just to get the story out.
“I have to pay you, man,” he insisted in one phone call.
I felt badly taking money from him. I had no idea what his company’s
financial situation might be, and I didn’t want to break the bank. He
said he could pay me $300 or so per story and asked me to submit an
invoice, which I did.
Soon afterward, a cheque for $1500 arrived. I cashed it and then my
wife Sharon and I sent him $500 each in after tax money as a donation.
Like I said, I didn’t want to be a drag on the Examiner.
Once we made the donations, Bousquet all but ghosted me. He was always
too busy to take my calls or field my pitches. I couldn’t tell if I
was being cancelled or had been conned.
I began to replay events in my head and the one thing that leapt out
to me was Bousquet’s defensive and even dismissive reaction to two
threads I thought were important and newsworthy which I wanted to
write about.
One was the politically sensitive issue of writing objectively about
all the women in the story. There were female victims who had slept
with Wortman, which I though was contextually important in
understanding the larger story. Bousquet had made it clear that he
wasn’t eager for me to write about that. (Be trauma informed!-ed.)
There was also the fact that female police officers were at the
intersection of almost every major event that terrible weekend. The
commanding officer was Leona (Lee) Bergerman. Chief Superintendent
Janis Gray was in charge of the RCMP in Halifax County. Inspector
Dustine Rodier ran the communications centre. It was a long list that
will continue to grow.
I believe in equal pay for work of equal value but that comes with
equal accountability for all. I am gender neutral when evaluating
performance.
But it didn’t take psychic powers to detect that gender politics was a
big issue with Bousquet – his target market, as it were.
I really wanted to write about Banfield. My preliminary research
strongly suggested to me her story was riddled with weakness and
inconsistency, but nobody in the mainstream media would tackle it.
Hell, for months her name wasn’t even published anywhere outside the
pages of Frank magazine.
Bousquet’s position was that Banfield was a victim of domestic
violence and that her story, via vague, second-hand and untested RCMP
statements, was to be believed. No questions asked.
“You’re going to need something really big to convince me otherwise,”
Bousquet said in one of our brief conversations.
Afterward, I did have one face-to-face meeting with him in Halifax. He
actually sat in the back seat of our car because Sharon was in the
front. We met up because I wanted to tell him about sensitive leads I
had which, if pursued, would show that the RCMP had the ability to
manipulate its records and destroy evidence in its PROs reporting
system.
Considering his involvement in the Assoun case, where that very issue
was at the heart of Assoun’s exoneration, I thought Bousquet would be
eager to pursue the story.
As I looked at him in the rearview mirror, I could sense his
discomfort and lack of interest. So could Sharon who was sitting
beside me.
“That was weird,” she said.
Bousquet got out of the car, walked away and disappeared me for good.
It was all so inexplicable. If this was the new journalism that I was
experiencing, there was something terribly wrong with it. I couldn’t
believe that a journalist like Bousquet who aspired to be a
truthteller felt compelled to distill every word or nuance through a
political filter first or even something more nefarious.
Later, while writing for Frank Magazine, I broke story after story
about the case. Incontrovertible documents showing that the RCMP was
destroying evidence in the Wortman case. The Pictou County Public
Safety channel recordings showing for the first time what the RCMP was
doing on the ground during the early morning hours of April 19. The
911 tapes. The Enfield Big Stop videos. That Lisa Banfield lied in
small claims court on two different occasions.
Bousquet either ignored or ridiculed most of those stories in the
Halifax Examiner or on his Twitter feed, as if I were making the
stories up.
For the most part throughout 2021, the Halifax Examiner didn’t even
bother covering the larger story. There was no discernible legwork or
energy being expended on it. And regarding the stories he did publish,
I began to see a pattern. Naïve readers might have thought that he was
digging for new stories when in fact the Examiner was merely mining
court documents and uncritically reporting what resided therein. It
was all stenography, straight from the mouths of the RCMP and the MCC.
Time and time again, “new” stories would be published which were
essentially no different from previous ones but all with the same
theme: as Ray Davies of the Kinks put it in his masterpiece Sunny
Afternoon: “Tales of drunkenness and cruelty.”
The Monster and the Maiden stories, as I called them, reinforced in
readers' minds that Banfield was a helpless victim controlled by a
demonic Wortman, a narrative that, upon reflection, seemed to
perfectly suit Lockyer’s strategy.
For 27 months the RCMP and the Mass Casualty Commission played along,
sheltering Banfield as part of their “trauma-informed” mandate, even
though there was plenty to be skeptical about her story.
Banfield was beside Wortman for 19 years during which he committed
crime after crime. She was reportedly the last person to be with
Wortman and her incredible, hoary tale of escape should have been
enough to raise suspicions about her.
From the moment she knocked on Leon Joudrey’s door she has been
treated as a victim, which to this day astounds law enforcement
experts and others who have monitored the case. Many observers,
including but not limited to lawyers representing the families of the
victims, have serious questions about how Banfield spent the overnight
hours of April 18/19. Not helping matters is that she doesn’t appear
to have been subjected to any level of normal criminal investigation
or evidence gathering. Her clothing wasn’t tested. There were no
gunshot residue tests. She wasn’t subjected to a polygraph or any
other credible investigative procedure.
Enter James Lockyer of the Innocence Project.
The puppetification of Tim Bousquet
As we moved closer to July 15, the day that Banfield would be
“testifying” at the MCC, it is also important to consider what
Bousquet and his minions were doing at the Halifax Examiner.
In the weeks and days leading up to Banfield’s appearance, the
Examiner’s reporting and Bousquet’s Twitter commentary began to take
on an illogical, more contemptuous and even hostile approach to anyone
who refused to buy into the RCMP and Banfield’s official version of
events.
In a series of hilariously one-sided diatribes, Bousquet lashed out at
Banfield’s critics whom he wouldn’t name. Some (likely us) were
“bad-faith actors.” He decried the “witchification” of Banfield.
He tweeted: “And just to repeat for the 1000th time: I’ve read
transcripts of interviews with dozens of people. I’ve read three
years’ of emails between Banfield and GW. I’ve read her Notes app.
There is ZERO evidence that she had any prior knowledge (of) GW’s
intent to kill people…. The notion that she is ‘complicit’ is pulled
out of people’s diarrhetic asses and plain old-fashioned misogyny.”
Oh, misogyny, that old woke slimeball to be hurled at any male who
dare be critical of any female.
One can’t help but sense the deft hand of a clever and experienced
defence lawyer running up the back of Bousquet’s shirt. That makes
sense.
Look at what has transpired on Lockyer’s watch.
Since April 2020, the RCMP and the federal and provincial governments
have wrapped themselves in a single, vague and inappropriate platitude
– trauma informed.
The original selling point was that this approach would prevent the
surviving family members from being further traumatized by the ongoing
“investigation” into the massacres.
What actually happened is much more sinister.
Lisa Banfield was coddled and protected the entire time not only by
the authorities but also by Lockyer’s friends in the mass media. The
wily old fox had the opportunity to mainline his thoughts into the
Globe and Mail, the Toronto Star, the CBC, CTV and Global News who
unquestioningly lapped it up.
At the MCC, Banfield wasn’t allowed to be cross examined because, as
Mr. Lockyer so eloquently explained, cross examination would just lead
to more conspiracy theories.
That’s rich.
The search for the truth will only confuse matters -- it’s better for
everyone that Banfield spin a much-rehearsed tale without challenge.
That’s clearly a $1,200-an-hour lawyer speaking.
The whole world has gone topsy-turvy. The Mass Casualty Commission,
the federal and provincial governments, the RCMP and Lisa Banfield are
now aligned on one side of the argument.
Meanwhile, the re-traumatized families find themselves agreeing with
this magazine and other skeptics and critics.
The final irony is that the Halifax Examiner bills itself as being
“independent” and “adversarial.” It seems to be neither these days.
In the end, Tim Bousquet’s approach to covering the Nova Scotia
Massacres is, to use his words: “Dead Wrong.”
paulpalango@protonmail.com
Paul Palango is author of the best selling book 22 Murders:
Investigating the massacres, cover-up and obstacles to justice in Nova
Scotia (Random House).
--
Andrew Douglas
Frank Magazine
phone: (902) 420-1668
fax: (902) 423-0281
cell: (902) 221-0386
andrew@frankmagazine.ca
www.frankmagazine.ca
Sent with Proton Mail secure email.
------- Original Message -------
On Sunday, July 17th, 2022 at 9:25 PM, David Amos
<david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?
>
>
> the Nova Scotia Mass Shooting - July 17, 2022
> 379 watching now
> Started streaming 67 minutes ago
> Nighttime Podcast
> 7.5K subscribers
> Advance questions and comments can be submitted by voice memo at
> nighttimepodcast.com/contact
>
> Live chat
>
> nikki lewisShe would have to prove zero negligence to the act
> Anne Marie EvansNighttime, hope you got my voice memo
> nikki lewisBut it’s possible she could claim all
> nikki lewisLol yeah nosy ☺
> BrendanAgreed. Banfield should have been questioned many times as
> should family members of theirs.
> Jmnl1199Did anyone notice Friday , Lisa’s sister the blonde one.
> Would nudge Lisa off and on with some questions
> nikki lewisEvery Damn witness should have given testimony in this sham
> Nosy ScotianWe'll have to compare horror stories sometime Nikki 😁
> Milkshaker69I don’t mean to judge.. but Lisa looks a lot more
> “weathered” than his sisters
> Julia RockJmnl1199 yes.
> Ash Lunnif LB signed any contract like a prenup like she says she did
> then wouldn't that still be ineffect?
> Ash Lunnthen again Wartman supposedly wrote a new will end of march
> 2020, unless that will is faked?
> Bushbaby _627Lisa’s video and some of her answers were word for word
> Christine WFor a person that hasn’t been able to sleep in over two
> years she looked well groomed ? Who’s her team?
> BrendanDid Wort have a will? Would his property be subject to seizure
> by the government?
> Jmnl1199Milkshaker69 yes I noticed she did, booze life she loved with
> him, then her stress after all this for 2 years I would say she is
> wearing it
> Ash Lunnwartman wills, one in oct 2007 and a new one done march 29th
> 2020 just before rampage
> Caper
> Evening folks
> Ryan
> there are 3 Wortman wills plus a prenup
> Chris LeeYa looking a bit like the goalie for the high school dart team lol
> BrendanInteresting, I can't remember if that info was in Paul's book.
> Ryan
> i''ll do a thread in the FB group and twitter if you guys want
> Jmnl1199He signed everything over to her didn’t he? Then she said she
> wanted nothing, changed her mind now wants
> Nosy Scotianshe didn't have her botox done that's all
> Ash Lunn@Ryan I saw in Comms only two listed?
> Caper
> Excellent Ryan thank you
> Nighttime Podcastk, I'm getting voicememo's for @Ryan now!
> Nighttime Podcasthaha
> Ash Lunn@Ryan yes plz, I want to see that, you rock
> wild foxi love you peeps
> Retire Cape Bretonanother performance art piece from palango?
> Ryan
> @Nighttime Podcast better late than never lol
> Anne Marie EvansNighttime-I sent one for Adam but it's best suited
> for Paul, should I send a new one
> Ash LunnI see kiplings statements on MCC the links are not working yet?
> Nighttime Podcastno it's fine @Anne Marie Evans , I will use it np
> nikki lewisyes please do a thread on that @ryan
> Ryan
> @Nighttime Podcast lol what? i thought you meant i called in last minute lol
> Nighttime Podcastno, straight up vm about you
> SMACwas 2 Five Islands Last year camping it was the darkest place
> ever when there was no moon.can't imagine going through the woods on
> hands &knees & not having my knee caps cut several &my hands ripped
> Ryan
> @Nighttime Podcast oh jeez
> SMACthe dead wood alone is very sharp
> Julia RockAnd barefoot @sMAC
> SMACI call Bullsh!t
> Christine WI wished in the reenactment she crawled a bit though the
> woods …. she had a hard time walking
> Ash Lunnur getting famous @Ryan lol
> SMAC@Jmnl1199 I caught the nudges that maureen was giving Lisa...I
> thought that the sister were more upset then she was...she never shed
> a tear
> 2bskorDid the whole route on the way back from Parrsboro today. Even
> stopped at the fire station.
> Lynn MShe was whispering to Maureen as well
> NS44Lisa "Houdini" Banfield.
> Julia RockCopperfield.
> Ash LunnTeflon LuLumon
> Lynn MDB Cooper
> Jmnl1199@smac that’s what I felt as well, then my mind went somewhere
> else. Wonder if she was with him as well on her sister
> 2bskorNo way that was done on a whim. It had to be planned
> Char DayzFrom where I was sitting I didn’t see the nudges. It’s
> probably best I didn’t notice 😡
> Ash Lunn@Char Dayz nudges and whispers answers to lisa from Maureen
> all the first half
> Jmnl1199@char days it was often
> Darrell Currie@2bskor you should have reached out. I would have given
> you the grand tour of where all the bullet holes are.
> Steve TracyWhen does the live stream start?
> Char DayzI guess I was too busy staring at Lisa, totally missed it.
> Lynn MWhatever happened to the caller that called a few times
> @nighttime ? He was an ex cop or something ?
> Patrick PenneyAdam Rodgers says he is one of top lawyers in Canada
> there was a game plan . and to boot no cross examination was free
> money for her lawyer
> Christine WDidn’t care for McDonald’s statements at the end … how
> great a support they are to her … 🤔🤔
> 2bskor@darrell Currie I will next time I go away for the weekend in
> august. Thanks!
> nikki lewisMacdonald needs to crawl back under his rock
> JayPlant pussy willows😜
> Rustyshelterin
> Mizz FoxxLisa used the charges to get out of really testifying and
> she used the presumption of testifying to get out of charges. She
> played the system. Professional victim
> Retire Cape Bretonpalangos performance art
> Robert BrackenI've seldom seen RCMP cruisers on highway 12.
> SMACI get that the silentparolwindow wasput inby GW but hewas very
> meticulous i the details I am sure that he made itfool proofI am sure
> that ther are some criminalsthat would like 2 know how she did that
> Julia RockMizz foxx absolutely.
> Sir Toast IIII drive highway everyday in morning and at night I see
> them all the time
>
> Subscribers-only mode. Messages that appear are from people who
> subscribe to this channel.
---------- Original message ----------
From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2022 14:07:44 -0300
Subject: Methinks the RCMP, Palango and even Andy Baby Douglas should
understand why I am saving certain comments within the live chat in
this video by their pal Seamus N'esy Pas David.Lametti?
To: james.lockyer@umoncton.ca, jlockyer@lzzdefence.ca,
megan.mitton@gnb.ca, dominic.leblanc.c1@parl.gc.ca,
ernie.steeves@gnb.ca, Ginette.PetitpasTaylor@parl.
"Mark.Blakely" <Mark.Blakely@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, "Marco.Mendicino"
<Marco.Mendicino@parl.gc.ca>, "Mike.Comeau" <Mike.Comeau@gnb.ca>,
Tori.Weldon@cbc.ca, mcu <mcu@justice.gc.ca>, Seamus.ORegan@parl.gc.ca,
Newsroom@globeandmail.com, infoam@fredericton.cbc.ca,
briangallant10@gmail.com, MRichard@lawsociety-barreau.
David.Akin@globalnews.ca, charles.murray@gnb.ca, oldmaison@yahoo.com,
"greg.byrne" <greg.byrne@gnb.ca>, "McCulloch, Sandra"
<smcculloch@pattersonlaw.ca>, "Pineo, Robert"
<rpineo@pattersonlaw.ca>, "fin.minfinance-financemin.fin"
<fin.minfinance-financemin.
<Sean.Fraser@parl.gc.ca>, PREMIER <PREMIER@gov.ns.ca>, "blaine.higgs"
<blaine.higgs@gnb.ca>, "Louis.Leger" <Louis.Leger@gnb.ca>,
"mary.wilson" <mary.wilson@gnb.ca>, washington field
<washington.field@ic.fbi.gov>, "Brenda.Lucki"
<Brenda.Lucki@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, "Bill.Hogan" <Bill.Hogan@gnb.ca>,
"Bill.Blair" <Bill.Blair@parl.gc.ca>, "barb.whitenect"
<barb.whitenect@gnb.ca>, "Moiz.Karimjee" <Moiz.Karimjee@ontario.ca>,
"Michelle.Boutin" <Michelle.Boutin@rcmp-grc.gc.
<Kevin.leahy@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, andrewjdouglas
<andrewjdouglas@gmail.com>, "darren.campbell"
<darren.campbell@rcmp-grc.gc.
<Michael.Gorman@cbc.ca>, "michael.macdonald"
<michael.macdonald@
<Rhonda.Brown@globalnews.ca>, sheilagunnreid
<sheilagunnreid@gmail.com>, jesse <jesse@jessebrown.ca>, jesse
<jesse@viafoura.com>, publiced@thestar.ca, newsroom@therecord.com,
stevemckinley@thestar.ca, Dwayne.King@
"ian.fahie" <ian.fahie@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, "Ian.Shugart"
<Ian.Shugart@pco-bcp.gc.ca>, "Anita.Anand" <Anita.Anand@parl.gc.ca>,
"robert.mckee" <robert.mckee@gnb.ca>, "rob.moore"
<rob.moore@parl.gc.ca>, "Ross.Wetmore" <Ross.Wetmore@gnb.ca>,
"Bill.Oliver" <Bill.Oliver@gnb.ca>, Norman Traversy
<traversy.n@gmail.com>, "nick.brown" <nick.brown@gnb.ca>, "Alex.Vass"
<Alex.Vass@gnb.ca>, "hugh.flemming" <hugh.flemming@gnb.ca>,
"andrea.anderson-mason" <andrea.anderson-mason@gnb.ca>,
"pierre.poilievre" <pierre.poilievre@parl.gc.ca>, "jagmeet.singh"
<jagmeet.singh@parl.gc.ca>, "jan.jensen" <jan.jensen@justice.gc.ca>,
Patricia.MacPhee@justice.gc.ca, "Candice.Bergen"
<Candice.Bergen@parl.gc.ca>, "John.Williamson"
<John.Williamson@parl.gc.ca>, David.Lametti@parl.gc.ca,
pmacphee@justice.gc.ca
Cc: motomaniac333 <motomaniac333@gmail.com>, andrew
<andrew@frankmagazine.ca>, paulpalango <paulpalango@protonmail.com>,
NightTimePodcast <NightTimePodcast@gmail.com>, nsinvestigators
<nsinvestigators@gmail.com>
This lady was far more interesting today than the mindless Jan Jensen ever was
Patricia C. MacPhee
Called to the bar: 1999 (NS)
Justice Canada
Legal ounsel
National Litigation Sector, Duke Twr.
1400-5251 Duke St.
Halifax, Nova Scotia B3J 1P3
Phone: 902-426-7914
Fax: 902-426-1351
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KFNEKqVYzcs&ab_channel=LittleGreyCells
MCC - DAY 55 - ... AND PARTICIPANT SUBMISSIONS
113 watching now
Started streaming 2 hours ago
Top Chat
Welcome to live chat! Remember to guard your privacy and abide by our community guidelines.
Robert KlinckAny
comments from these experts on the fact that governments employ
specialists in behavioural psychology for the purpose of manipulating
public opinion? Regarding wars, COVID, climate, etc.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Ministerial Correspondence Unit - Justice Canada <mcu@justice.gc.ca>
Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2022 00:25:36 +0000
Subject: Automatic Reply
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
Thank you for writing to the Honourable David Lametti, Minister of
Justice and Attorney General of Canada.
Due to the volume of correspondence addressed to the Minister, please
note that there may be a delay in processing your email. Rest assured
that your message will be carefully reviewed.
We do not respond to correspondence that contains offensive language.
-------------------
Merci d'avoir écrit à l'honorable David Lametti, ministre de la
Justice et procureur général du Canada.
En raison du volume de correspondance adressée au ministre, veuillez
prendre note qu'il pourrait y avoir un retard dans le traitement de
votre courriel. Nous tenons à vous assurer que votre message sera lu
avec soin.
Nous ne répondons pas à la correspondance contenant un langage offensant.
On 7/17/22, David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
> https://davidraymondamos3.
>
> Thursday, 14 July 2022
>
> Spouse of N.S. mass shooter shows how deadly rampage began in video
> re-enactment
>
> Methinks the very lazy corrupt media sheople love to republish Mikey
> MacDonald's spin on the Mass Casualty Commission Bullshit then polish
> the turd with their 2 bits worth. Others just use their photos and
> write their own spin.
>
> Hence they should not complain that I do the same within my Blog in
> light of the fact I duly notified them of what I have been up to for
> many years N'esy Pas?
> Deja Vu Anyone??
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: "Public Editor, The Toronto Star" <publiced@thestar.ca>
> Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2019 17:21:56 +0000
> Subject: RE: Attn Paul Manly I guess you have to rely on the lawyers
> such as Melanie Joly and Elizbeth May or the RCMP to explain why I
> just called
> To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
>
> THANK YOU for contacting the Toronto Star Public Editor's office.
> This office handles queries about accuracy and the Star's
> journalistic standards as set out in its Newsroom Policy and
> Journalistic Standards Guide
> https://www.thestar.com/
>
> The public editor's office is staffed Monday to Friday, 9 a.m. to 5
> p.m., by Public Editor Kathy English and Public Editor, Associate,
> Maithily Panchalingam.
>
> If you are requesting a correction or questioning journalistic
> standards, please send a link or details of where you read the article
> you are questioning, (e.g.- date, page number, digital device.) Please
> include your full name and a telephone number where we can reach you
> for further information if necessary. Unfortunately, due to the volume
> of emails we receive, we cannot reply to every email, but we do read
> them all, consider carefully the issues raised, and take appropriate
> action to attempt to resolve complaints in cases of error or breach of
> the Star's standards.
>
> Some messages to the public editor may be published in Kathy English's
> public editor column, which explores journalistic issues raised by
> readers. Please inform us if you do not want your message published.
>
> Corrections: The public editor's office looks into claims of error on
> any and all platforms on which the Star publishes. The Star corrects
> significant errors of fact. When we determine a correction is called
> for, it will be published as soon as possible; the article will also
> be corrected online and a correction appended. Generally, news
> corrections are published on page A2 and corrections for other
> sections (including Sports, Entertainment and Life) are published in
> those sections. Corrections are also published online:
> https://www.thestar.com/
> Because many readers often point out the same error, we cannot notify
> each person that we are publishing a correction. As well, because of
> the volume of queries we receive, we are not always able to respond to
> explain why we determined no correction is necessary. Every query
> about a possible error is considered thoroughly however. We thank all
> readers who take the time to help the Star report accurately.
> Unpublishing: Generally, the Star does not delete (unpublish) content
> from our websites or archives, except in some rare circumstances
> following consultation with the editor-in-chief, managing editor, and
> in some cases, legal counsel. In the case of verified errors, we will
> correct/update the article and/or append corrections as necessary but
> will not remove it from the Star' s digital publishing record.
> General feedback about coverage: If you are writing to express your
> view of the Star's coverage, your message will be forwarded to the
> appropriate department. Because of the volume of email we receive,
> neither the public editor's office, nor the journalists in specific
> departments, can respond to every reader comment about the Star's
> coverage.
> Letters to the Editor: If you want your comments expressing your view
> considered for publication as a Letter to the Editor, please resend
> your message to lettertoed@thestar.ca<mailto:l
> Letters must include full name, address and all phone numbers of
> sender (daytime, evening and cellphone). Street names and phone
> numbers will not be published. The Star reserves the right to edit
> letters, which typically run 50-150 words. Please note: The Star
> receives many more letters than it has space to print. Due to the
> volume, we unfortunately cannot acknowledge every submission.
> Submissions to the Star: Commentaries, opinion pieces, story pitches
> and press releases should be submitted to the section of the Star to
> which they are best suited. A full list of departments is published on
> the "Contact Us" page of the Star's website:
> https://www.thestar.com/about/
> How to reach a Star journalist: Most staff members, including
> reporters, editors, columnists and photographers, can be reached by
> email. In most cases the email address follows this formula (all lower
> case, don't type spaces or the plus sign): first initial + last name
> @thestar.ca. You can also reach staff in the Editorial department
> (newsroom) via phone at 416-869-4300 or fax at 416-869-4328. Editorial
> staff members can also be contacted within the department they work
> for. To reach a freelance writer, please contact the section in which
> his or her article appeared.
> Subscriptions/Customer Service: The public editor's office handles
> concerns about editorial content only. For home delivery
> subscriptions, delivery problems, billing inquiries and other customer
> service matters, please email
> circmail@thestar.ca<mailto:cir
> our Subscription page<http://www.thestar.com/
> home delivery information.
> Further information about how to contact other departments in the Star
> can be found here: https://www.thestar.com/about/
>
> Thank you for reading your Toronto Star.
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: "MEDIA-MÉDIAS (VAC/ACC)" <vac.media-medias.acc@canada.
> Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2019 16:28:32 +0000
> Subject: Automatic reply: How Ottawa gave up its entitlements to
> embrace ethics SWAT teams Yea Right I agree now tell me another one Mr
> Egan while allt unethical journalists
> To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
>
> Hello,
>
> We have received your request and are working on a response. We will
> send you an answer to your query as soon as possible.
>
> Thank you for your interest in Veterans Affairs Canada.
>
> ***
>
> Bonjour,
>
> Nous avons bien reçu votre demande. Nous allons préparer une réponse à
> vos questions et vous l’envoyer aussitôt que possible.
>
> Nous vous remercions de l’intérêt pour Anciens Combattants Canada.
>
> ***
>
> Media Relations | Relations avec les médias
> Veterans Affairs Canada | Anciens Combattants Canada
> Government of Canada | Gouvernement du Canada
> 613-992-7468
> vac.media-medias.acc@canada.ca
> Check out our Media
> Kits<http://www.veterans.gc.
> Trousse d’information<http://www.
>
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: "Dale, Daniel" <ddale@thestar.ca>
> Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2019 16:28:32 +0000
> Subject: Automatic reply: How Ottawa gave up its entitlements to
> embrace ethics SWAT teams Yea Right I agree now tell me another one Mr
> Egan while allt unethical journalists
> To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
>
> Daniel Dale is no longer at the Star. If you have a news tip or press
> release, please send them to: city@thestar.ca<mailto:city@
> Thank you for contacting the Star.
>
>
>
> https://www.thespec.com/ts/
>
>
> Canada’s top Mountie, Nova Scotia’s mass shooting probe and some
> missing pages: Here’s what we know so far
> RCMP faced more scrutiny for initially removing pages from subpoenaed
> documents recording Lucki’s anger at refusal to release details about
> the guns.
> SM
> By Steve McKinleyHalifax Bureau
> Sun., June 26, 2022
>
> RCMP Commissioner Brenda Lucki this week faced accusations that she
> sought to interfere with the Nova Scotia Mounties’ investigation into
> the province’s April 2020 massacre.
>
> HALIFAX—As controversy swirls around the RCMP, the Liberal government
> and allegations of interference in the investigation of the worst mass
> shooting in the country’s history, missing RCMP documentation is the
> latest development to take centre stage.
>
> RCMP Commissioner Brenda Lucki this week faced accusations that she
> sought to interfere with the Nova Scotia Mounties’ investigation into
> the province’s April 2020 massacre, potentially at the behest of
> then-public safety minister Bill Blair and the Prime Minister’s Office
> to grease the wheels for upcoming gun control legislation.
>
> Lucki, Blair and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau have denied that there
> was any interference with the Nova Scotia investigation.
>
> On Friday, the RCMP — and the Department of Justice by extension —
> faced scrutiny for initially removing pages from subpoenaed documents
> that recorded Lucki’s anger at the Nova Scotia RCMP’s refusal to
> release details about the guns involved in the shooting. The Nova
> Scotia Mounties had said doing so would compromise their
> investigation.
>
> The missing pages, which described Lucki telling a Nova Scotia
> contingent that she’d promised the public safety minister and the PMO
> the gun details would be released, were only handed over to the
> inquiry in May of this year, three months after the RCMP had provided
> the same documents without those pages.
>
> Here’s what’s happened so far, and what’s likely to happen next.
>
> What’s the controversy exactly?
>
> Days after the mass shooting that saw 22 people killed by a gunman in
> northern Nova Scotia, there was a meeting between national and Nova
> Scotia RCMP.
>
> Notes from that meeting, released this week by the public inquiry now
> reviewing the tragedy, show it included RCMP Commissioner Brenda Lucki
> and, from the Nova Scotia side, Assistant Commissioner Lee Bergerman,
> the province’s commanding officer; Supt. Darren Campbell; and
> strategic communications director Lia Scanlan.
> RCMP Supt. Darren Campbell discusses the timeline of events and
> locations of the Nova Scotia shootings at RCMP headquarters in
> Dartmouth, N.S., on April 24, 2020.
>
> In press briefings to that point, N.S. RCMP had withheld specifics on
> the weapons used by the gunman, saying that identifying the specific
> guns would compromise the investigation.
>
> At the meeting, Lucki “was obviously upset” that N.S. RCMP had not
> released the specifics, Campbell’s handwritten notes indicate.
>
> “The commissioner accused us (me) of disrespecting her by not
> following her instructions,” his notes said.
>
> At the time, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government was in the
> process of pushing through an order-in-council that would ban the sale
> of 1,500 models of assault-style firearms.
>
> Campbell’s notes indicate that when he attempted to explain the
> reasoning for not releasing this information, Lucki said that “we (the
> Nova Scotia RCMP) didn’t understand, that this was tied to pending gun
> control legislation that would make officers and public safer by or
> through this legislation.”
>
> “The commissioner said that she had promised the Minister of Public
> Safety and the Prime Minister’s Office that the RCMP (we) would
> release this information,” wrote Campbell.
>
> In an interview with the Mass Casualty Commission in February of this
> year, Scanlan also expressed frustration, saying Blair and Trudeau
> were “weighing in on what we could and could not say” in press
> briefings.
>
> “That is 100 per cent Minister Blair and the Prime Minister,” she
> said. “And we have a commissioner that does not push back.”
>
> Why was that bad, if it happened?
>
> The notes from that conference seem to indicate that Lucki was willing
> to interfere with RCMP operations — the investigation of the mass
> shooting — to advance a gun-control agenda championed by the Prime
> Minister’s Office and by the public safety minister at the time,
> Blair.
>
> Based on Lucki’s comments — as reported by Campbell — it appears that
> she was taking her marching orders from Blair and from the PMO.
>
> If true, that’s problematic because it compromises the principle of
> “operational independence,” a central tenet of policing that dictates
> that politicians should never dictate or direct police operations. In
> principle, it’s a noble concept; in practice, the definition is
> somewhat fuzzy.
>
> Lucki said late Tuesday that she would never take action that would
> jeopardize an investigation. Blair, now the emergency preparedness
> minister, denied that Lucki had ever promised him that the RCMP would
> release specific information about the guns. He’s also denied that he
> told anyone what the RCMP should communicate about their own
> investigation.
>
> Trudeau, speaking from a Commonwealth summit in Rwanda, said Thursday
> there was no “undue influence or pressure” put on the RCMP in the days
> following the mass shooting, and that only police determine what
> information to release and when.
>
> What position does this leave the RCMP commissioner in?
>
> Lucki’s tenure atop the RCMP has not been without controversy.
>
> In 2020, she drew criticism for saying she had struggled over the
> definition of systemic racism and its existence in her police force.
> Shortly thereafter, she changed tack and acknowledged that systemic
> racism was indeed present in the RCMP, drawing the ire of some
> members.
>
> That same year, the B.C. Civil Liberties Association filed a lawsuit
> against her for delaying the release of a civilian watchdog report
> into RCMP spying on Indigenous and climate advocates. And a series of
> on-camera incidents sparking allegations of excessive use of force by
> RCMP officers prompted then-Chief of the Assembly of First Nations
> Perry Bellegarde to call for her replacement.
>
> Trudeau said this week he still has confidence in Lucki to lead the
> RCMP. His support echoed that of current public safety minister, Marco
> Mendicino, and Blair.
>
> What’s the deal with the missing notes?
>
> On June 15, 2021, the Mass Casualty Commission issued a subpoena to
> the RCMP for its entire investigative file related to the mass
> shooting.
>
> Eight months later, on Feb. 14, 2022, as part of that file, the RCMP
> turned over the notes of senior RCMP officers, including Campbell’s
> handwritten notes covering the period from April 19, 2020 to June 16,
> 2020. Campbell’s notes covered 132 pages.
>
> Campbell was in the habit of writing the date in large numbers across
> the page in his notes like this: 2020-04-27.
>
> In those notes turned over by the RCMP in February, his dates jumped
> from 2020-04-27 to 2020-04-29 — April 27, 2020, to April 29, 2020 —
> with no April 28 in between.
>
> April 28, 2020 was the date of the conference with Lucki, during which
> Campbell’s notes reflected Lucki being upset about Campbell not
> releasing specific information on the guns used in the mass shooting,
> and noting her saying that she had promised the public safety minister
> and the PMO that she would do so.
>
> More than three months later, on May 31, 2022, the commission received
> another batch of documents from the Department of Justice, which again
> included Campbell’s handwritten notes.
>
> This time the notes numbered 136 pages and included the four pages of
> Campbell’s notes from the conference with Lucki, dated, as was his
> habit, with 2020-04-28 written across the page.
>
> “The Commission sought an explanation from the Department of Justice
> about why four pages were missing from the original disclosure of
> Supt. Campbell’s notes,” the Mass Casualty Commission’s investigations
> director, Barbara McLean, said in a statement Friday.
>
> “The Commission is also demanding an explanation for any further
> material that has been held back from disclosed material for privilege
> or other review where the fact that this has occurred is not clear on
> what has been produced to the Commission.
>
> “In short, the Commission is seeking assurance that nothing else has
> been held back as per direction from subpoenas.”
>
> The RCMP did not respond to a request from the Star seeking an
> explanation for the missing pages.
>
> What do the victims families’ think?
>
> “Our clients are understandably troubled by what they heard,” Michael
> Scott of Patterson Law, which represents most of the families of the
> victims of the shooting, said in a statement this week. “In the days
> following April 19, 2020, all efforts should have been focused on
> supporting victims, their families and the active investigation being
> carried out by local RCMP.
>
> “Interfering in those efforts, to exploit a perceived political
> opportunity or otherwise, would have been inexcusable. We trust that
> the Mass Casualty Commission recognizes the importance of determining
> the truth of these allegations and the need for fulsome
> cross-examination of the relevant witnesses.”
>
> When will we hear more from the players involved?
>
> Campbell and Lucki are scheduled to appear as witnesses at the Mass
> Casualty Commission inquiry in coming months, as are Assistant
> Commissioner Lee Bergerman, the province’s commanding officer at the
> time, and Chief Supt. Chris Leather, who was the critical incident
> commander the weekend of the shootings.
>
> But a parliamentary public safety committee has also called upon many
> of the same players to testify as it digs into the allegations of
> political interference into the RCMP investigation.
>
> Lucki and Blair are required to appear before the committee no later
> than July 25, and Campbell and Scanlan are being called as well. Also
> tapped for testimony before the committee are Bergerman and Leather.
>
> With files from The Canadian Press
> SM
> Steve McKinley is a Halifax-based reporter for the Star. Follow him on
> Twitter: @smckinley1
>
>
>
>
> https://raymond1212.rssing.
>
>
>
> —–Original Message—–
> Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2007 12:45 AM
> Subject: Remember me Mr Travers? Say Hey to Bev Busson for me will ya?
> All her cops are ducking me.
> Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2006 10:30:08 -0800 (PST)
> From: David Amos <motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: My cell # is 506 434 1379 Stress test my integrity why don't
> ya?
> To: “Travers, Jim” <jtravers@thestar.ca>
>
> What you say is true, that is why I must sue.. We all know why
> your fellow haughty snotty Upper Canadian reporters have ignored the
> Code of Ethics for journalists for years. The freedom of the press is
> a myth. They do what they are told. N'est Pas? However your publicly
> held company is in a world of trouble with me.
>
> If you doubt me ask Marie Beyette your company's
> Vice-President, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary to ask the
> following dudes about my issues about Tax Fraud Securities Fraud, Bank
> Fraud and Murder. Rest assured the RCMP ain't gonna tell you shit.
>
> Theses dudes are your directors and I have already proven many times
> that their companies are as crooked as Hell. The Torys oufit was the
> most fun of all just ask Lord Conrad Black and his sneaky lawyer Eddy
> Greenspan about the doings between me and the corrupt Yankee US
> Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald just acrost the 49th from you.
>
> SARABJIT S. MARWAH (He should talk to Deborah Alexander)
> Vice Chairman and Chief Administrative Officer, Bank of Nova Scotia
>
> RONALD W. OSBORNE (he should talk to Robert C. Pozen and Jeffery Carp)
> Chairman, Sun Life Financial Inc.
>
> THE HON. FRANK IACOBUCCI (He should talk to his partner John Laskin)
> Chairman of the Board, Torstar Corporation
> Counsel, Torys LLP
> Former Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada
>
> Veritas Vincit
> David Raymond Amos
>
> “Travers, Jim” <jtravers@thestar.ca> wrote:
>
> Your integrity is beyond my purview.
>
> ————————–
>
> Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld
>
> —–Original Message—–
> From: David Amos
> To: Travers, Jim
> Sent: Sat Nov 04 09:08:59 2006
> Subject: My cell # is 506 434 1379 Stress test my integrity why don't ya?
>
> David Amos <motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2006 22:51:33 -0800 (PST)
> From: David Amos <motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com>
> Subject: Fwd: Cya'll in Court Johnny Boy
> To: premier@gnb.ca, kelly.lamrock@gnb.ca,
> Stephane.vaillancourt@rcmp-
> mary.schryer@gnb.ca, rick.miles@gnb.ca, jack.keir@gnb.ca,
> Bernard.LeBlanc@gnb.ca, Cheryl.Lavoie@gnb.ca, greg.byrne@gnb.ca,
> john.foran@gnb.ca, giuliano.zaccardelli@rcmp-grc.
> CC: jonesr@cbc.ca, mleger@stu.ca, jwalker@stu.ca, plee@stu.ca,
> oldmaison@yahoo.com, belord@gnb.ca, DannyWilliams@gov.nl.ca,
> davies.carl@nbpub.com, bruce.northrup@gnb.ca, carl.urquhart@gnb.ca,
> claude.landry@gnb.ca, mike.olscamp@gnb.ca, info@pco-bcp.gc.ca
>
> David Amos <motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2006 10:57:25 -0800 (PST)
> From: David Amos <motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com>
> Subject: Cya'l in Court Johnny Boy
> To: john.logan@gnb.ca, christina.winsor@gnb.ca
>
> Your assistant Katherine Wilson really pissed me off after a long wait
> on hold to talk to you on the phone today. I read the news today and
> just shook my head at the nonsense of it all.
>
> Wilson claimed that she was well aware of my matters and that all of
> your associates employed as Crown Attorneys have advised me to the
> best of your abilities. How can that be? I have not been able to speak
> to any of you since I spoke to the crook, Jeff Mockler over two years
> ago and that was immediately after I came screaming out of jail in the
> USA. I saw red as I read his words to me then. They were obviously
> sent when he thought I would never get out of that Yankee jail.
>
> To date I have not received one response in writng let alone speak to
> anyone employed by the Crown as legal counsel, Despite the
> unbelievable volume of material I have faxed emailed and delivered in
> hand and byway of the Canada Post, you all failed to act within the
> scope of your employment and certainly do not deserve a raise. In fact
> you should all go to jail, not pass go and not allowed to accept even
> 200, dollars more from the taxpayers of New Brunswick.
>
> The text of the fowarded email I sent last night to you political bosses
> and many others says enough about my pending lawsuits.
>
> The Governor General of Canada is the highest authority in Canada
> who speaks in the name of the Crown N'est Pas? Well I received that
> letter mere days before I was falsely imprisoned in the USA.
>
> Well you can easily see that she affirms over two years ago that I had
> done the right thing with regards to provincial law enforcement
> authorities just as Deputy Prime Minister Landslide Annie McLellan
> had suggested I do before I came back home to New Brunswick to run
> for a federal seat in the malevolent 38th Parlaiment.
>
> Wheras you refused to talk to me today Johnny Boy Logan, may I
> suggest that you talk to the RCMP or some of your associates
> starting with Jeff Mockler. I have had enough of your obvious malice.
>
> I will leave you to wonder as to who else will read my opinion of you
> and your legal cohorts in short order. Cya'll in Court.
>> Veritas Vincit
> David Raymond Amos
>
> “Jan 3rd, 2004
>
> Mr. David R. Amos
> 143 Alvin Avenue
> Milton, MA 02186
> U.S.A.
>
> Dear Mr. Amos
>
> Thank you for your letter of November 19th, 2003, addressed to my
> predecessor, the Honourble Wayne Easter, regardingyour safety.
> I apologize for the delay in responding.
>
> If you have any concerns about your personal safety, I can only
> suggest that you contact the police of local jurisdiction. In addition,
> any evidence of criminal activity should be brought to their attention
> since the police are in the best position to evaluate the information
> and take action as deemed appropriate.
>
> I trust that this information is satisfactory.
>
> Yours sincerely
>
> A. Anne McLellan”
>
> David Amos <motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 15:43:33 -0800 (PST)
> From: David Amos <motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com>
> Subject: Fwd: BOOO ya Bastards
> To: premier@gnb.ca, kelly.lamrock@gnb.ca,
> Stephane.vaillancourt@rcmp-
> mary.schryer@gnb.ca, rick.miles@gnb.ca, jack.keir@gnb.ca,
> Bernard.LeBlanc@gnb.ca, Cheryl.Lavoie@gnb.ca,
> greg.byrne@gnb.ca, john.foran@gnb.ca,
> giuliano.zaccardelli@rcmp-grc.
> CC: jonesr@cbc.ca, mleger@stu.ca, jwalker@stu.ca,
> plee@stu.ca, oldmaison@yahoo.com, belord@gnb.ca,
> DannyWilliams@gov.nl.ca, davies.carl@nbpub.com,
> bruce.northrup@gnb.ca, carl.urquhart@gnb.ca,
> claude.landry@gnb.ca, mike.olscamp@gnb.ca,
> info@pco-bcp.gc.ca
>
> David Amos <motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 15:41:38 -0800 (PST)
> From: David Amos <motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com>
> Subject: BOOO ya Bastards
> To: jacques_poitras@cbc.ca, greg.byrne@gnb.ca,
> Deb_Nobes@cbc.ca, spinks08@hotmail.com,
> Duane.Rousselle@unb.ca, ndpnpd@nbnet.nb.ca,
> mackay01@canada.com,PoliticsNB
> oldmaison.wcie@gmail.com, handsofnothing@yahoo.ca,
> gcox@citizenspress.org, stevengerickson@yahoo.com
> CC: MacKay.P@parl.gc.ca, Day.S@parl.gc.ca,
> Moore.R@parl.gc.ca, info@pco-bcp.gc.ca,
> Guimond.M@parl.gc.ca, Cy.LEBLANC@gnb.ca,
> Jeannot.VOLPE@gnb.ca, Johnw.BETTS@gnb.ca,
> saintjohnfundy@hotmail.com, len.hoyt@mcinnescooper.com,
> william.gould@gnb.ca, cjcw@nbnet.nb.ca,
> news@kingscorecord.com
>
> September 11th, 2004
>
> Dear Mr. Amos,
>
> On behalf of Her Excellency the Right Honourable Adrienne Clarkson,
> I acknowledge receipt of two sets of documents and CD regarding
> corruption, one received from you directly, and the other forwarded
> to us by the Office of the Lieutenant Governor of New Brunswick.
>
> I regret to inform you that the Governor General cannot intervene in
> matters that are the responsibility of elected officials and courts of
> Justice of Canada.
>
> You already contacted the various provincial authorities regarding
> your concerns, and these were the appropriate steps to take.
>
> Yours sincerely.
> Renee Blanchet
> Office of the Secretary to the
> Governor General
>
> Criminal Code PART IV OFFENCES AGAINST THE ADMINISTRATION
> OF LAW AND JUSTICE
>
> Corruption and Disobedience 126. (1) Every one who, without
> lawful excuse, contravenes an Act of Parliament by wilfully doing
> anything that it forbids or by wilfully omitting to do anything that
> it requires to be done is, unless a punishment is expressly provided
> by law, guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for
> a term not exceeding two years.(2) Any proceedings in respect of a
> contravention of or conspiracy to contravene an Act mentioned in
> subsection (1), other than this Act, may be instituted at the instance
> of the Government of Canada and conducted by or on behalf of that
>
> Government.R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 126; R.S., 1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.),
> s. 185(F).
>
> ________________________________
> Crown lawyers receive help in fight for pay raise
> Last Updated: Wednesday, November 1, 2006 | 9:26 AM AT
> CBC News <http://www.cbc.ca/news/
>
> Lawyers who work for the New Brunswick government say a previously
> secret report may help their case for a bigger pay raise.
>
> The lawyers had to go to court to see the report, which proves they're
> underpaid, they say. Government lawyers aren't unionized and can't
> strike, so have no leverage in asking the government to raise their pay.
>
> Last year, the government commissioned a study of what Crown
> lawyers make across the country as part of a review of salaries.
>
> The government wouldn't give the Crown Counsel Association a copy
> of the report when it was done, so the association used the Right to
> Information Act to take the government to court, and a judge ordered
> the report released.
>
> Association president John Logan says the report appears to show
> government lawyers here are paid less than their counterparts in
> other provinces.
>
> “The association of Crown counsel are reviewing the report and intend
> to use it as background information.”
>
> The association is hoping to meet with the new attorney general to
> talk about the report, but government spokesperson Christina Winsor
> says a good pay plan is already in place.
>
> “The current pay plan for the lawyers is an average of three per cent
> a year over four years, and that is consistent and slightly above
> inflation rates, which is averaging about two per cent right now.”
>
> Winsor says a new study will be commissioned in 2009 when the
> current schedule of pay increases expires
> ——————————————————————————–
>
> http://www.fca-caf.gc.ca/fca-
>
> The Honourable John B. Laskin
> Justice John B. Laskin practised litigation for more than 30 years in
> the Toronto office of Torys LLP. In his broad trial and appellate
> practice, he represented individuals, corporations, governments and
> their agencies, public institutions, industry associations, public
> interest groups, and Indigenous organizations. He appeared in the
> Supreme Court of Canada, the Federal Courts, every level of court in
> Ontario, the courts of seven other provinces and territories, domestic
> and international arbitrations, and a variety of administrative
> tribunals.
> Justice Laskin is a Fellow of the American College of Trial Lawyers
> and of Litigation Counsel of America, and has been a member of the
> Ontario Regional Committee of the Supreme Court Advocacy Institute. He
> has spoken, written and taught frequently on matters of public law and
> advocacy, and was co-editor of Canadian Charter of Rights Annotated.
> Before entering private practice, he was a professor in the University
> of Toronto’s Faculty of Law.
> Born in Thunder Bay, Justice Laskin holds a B.A. (with distinction)
> from York University, an LL.B. (as Gold Medallist) from the University
> of Toronto, and an LL.M. from the University of California at
> Berkeley. He is a past President of the University of Toronto Law
> Alumni Association and was actively involved in the founding of the
> Faculty of Law at Lakehead University. In 2015, he was awarded the Law
> Society of Upper Canada’s Law Society Medal, given for outstanding
> service within the legal profession where the service is in accordance
> with the highest ideals of the profession.
> Justice Laskin was appointed a judge of the Federal Court of Appeal on
> June 21, 2017.
>
>
> Get the free Yahoo! toolbar and rest assured with the added security
>
> of spyware protection.
> Here just a couple of the latest examples
>
> https://globalnews.ca/news/
>
> Wife of N.S. mass killer explains why she didn’t report earlier
> violence to police
> By Michael Tutton and Michael MacDonald The Canadian Press
> Posted July 15, 2022 6:33 am
>
> WATCH: In an emotional, multi-hour testimony, Lisa Banfield confessed
> to hiding information from the police. Callum Smith has the latest.
>
> The common-law wife of the man responsible for the Nova Scotia mass
> shooting told an inquiry Friday that she lied to police about his
> illegal weapons and failed to report earlier violent behaviour because
> she was deeply afraid of him.
>
> Lisa Banfield struggled to maintain her composure as she described how
> her partner beat her in 2003 as witnesses looked on, and she offered
> new details about what happened when her spouse threatened to kill his
> parents in 2010.
>
> It was the first time she has spoken publicly about her life with the
> killer, and the inquiry’s decision to spare her from facing
> cross-examination proved contentious. Lawyers from a firm representing
> families of 14 of the victims, as well as about 20 of those family
> members, walked out of the hearing in protest before it ended.
> Lisa Banfield, the common-law wife of Gabriel Wortman, testifies at
> the Mass Casualty Commission on Friday.
> Lisa Banfield, the common-law wife of Gabriel Wortman, testifies at
> the Mass Casualty Commission inquiry into the mass murders in rural
> Nova Scotia on April 18/19, 2020, in Halifax on Friday, July 15, 2022.
> Wortman, dressed as an RCMP officer and driving a replica police
> cruiser, murdered 22 people. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Andrew Vaughan.
>
> The inquiry has heard Banfield was beaten and badly injured by Gabriel
> Wortman on the night of April 18, 2020, at the beginning of his
> shooting rampage that would claim 22 lives. She told investigators
> that she escaped into the woods and emerged the next morning to tell
> police that her partner was still at large and driving a vehicle that
> looked exactly like an RCMP cruiser.
>
> Banfield said she will remain forever haunted by her decision to flee,
> as she wonders if her spouse might have harmed her and then left
> others alone.
>
> “I often think would any of those people have died? So that is
> something that haunts me all the time, because I feel that they
> weren’t targeted. He was looking for me in the beginning,” she said.
>
> Banfield’s testimony was at times painful and dramatic as she
> described what happened in June 2010 when Wortman’s uncle alerted
> Halifax police that his nephew had threatened to kill his parents over
> a property dispute.
> Click to play video: 'Spouse of N.S. mass shooter reveals grim details
> about their life' 2:02 Spouse of N.S. mass shooter reveals grim
> details about their life
>
> Banfield recalled how the killer had been drinking heavily and fired a
> bullet into the wall of their home in Dartmouth, N.S., terrifying her.
> When a Halifax police officer arrived at their door, Banfield admitted
> she lied when asked about the death threats and whether her spouse
> owned any weapons.
>
> When commission lawyer Gillian Hnatiw asked why she lied, Banfield
> sobbed as she explained.
>
> “He had the handgun by the nightstand, and he said. ‘If any police
> come, I’m shooting,”’ she said. “So, when they asked me that, I didn’t
> want them to go in, because I didn’t want them
> (police) to get hurt.”
>
> When an RCMP officer showed up at the couple’s summer home in
> Portapique, N.S., after the death threat was reported, Wortman
> insisted he didn’t own any firearms, aside from an old musket and
> another antique weapon suspended near the fireplace and “filled with
> wax,” Banfield testified.
>
> She confirmed that the officer in question was Const. Greg Wiley, who
> had known Wortman for years and later told investigators that he had
> visited his Portapique home 16 times.
>
> Hnatiw also asked Banfield about a violent assault at a gathering in
> Sutherland Lake, north of Portapique. In earlier interviews with the
> inquiry, she indicated the attack took place in 2001 or 2002, but she
> confirmed Friday the actual date was 2003.
>
> She testified that when she tried to leave the bush party, Wortman
> became irate. As the pair drove away in his Jeep, he started punching
> her, she said.
>
> “And as I was driving back on the back road, he’s yelling at me,” she
> said as the hearing room fell silent. “He started smacking me in my
> face. I’m thinking, ‘I’ve never had anybody hit me before … and I’m
> trying to drive. He just kept whacking me in the head.”
>
> She said she jumped out of the vehicle and ran into the woods. He ran
> after her and caught her.
>
> “He grabbed by the hair and was punching me, and I’m trying to protect
> myself,” she said. “I’m screaming. He pulled me out by the road … and
> then I could see these two (all-terrain vehicles) and their lights
> were on me. He looked up and he dropped me.”
>
> Banfield said Wortman was later placed in the back of a police cruiser
> and taken back to their home in Portapique.
>
> Asked why she declined to report the assault to police, Banfield
> replied: “That’s the first time anybody hit me, and I didn’t want to
> get anybody in trouble. I just thought, ‘I’m walking away.”’
> Click to play video: 'Spouse of N.S. killer to testify in inquiry
> investigation' 2:16 Spouse of N.S. killer to testify in inquiry
> investigation
>
> Hnatiw also asked Banfield about the early stages of the couple’s
> relationship, which started in 2001 after they met at a bar in
> downtown Halifax. Banfield said that on their first date, he showed up
> with two dozen long-stemmed roses. “I thought that was over the top,”
> she said.
>
> But later that night, she was impressed by his reaction when his car
> was rear-ended by a vehicle driven by a young woman. “He approached
> the two young girls in the vehicle. He was smiling,” she said. “He
> said, ‘It’s OK.’ He was very calm. I thought, ‘He’s a good guy.”’
>
> Earlier this week, the commission released a document based on
> evidence provided by Banfield during interviews with the RCMP and the
> inquiry detailing the killer’s long history of violence toward her. It
> said she would not face cross-examination, mainly because she could be
> traumatized by having to relive the violence she endured.
>
> Still, lawyer Michael Scott, whose firm represents families of 14 of
> the victims, says the decision to limit questioning will leave
> lingering doubts about Banfield’s testimony.
>
> Nick Beaton, husband of Kristen Beaton, takes a break outside the room
> as Lisa Banfield, the common-law wife of Gabriel Wortman, testifies at
> the Mass Casualty Commission inquiry into the mass murders in rural
> Nova Scotia on April 18/19, 2020, in Halifax on Friday, July 15, 2022.
> Wortman, dressed as an RCMP officer and driving a replica police
> cruiser, murdered 22 people., including Kristen Beaton. THE CANADIAN
> PRESS/Andrew VaughanNick Beaton, husband of Kristen Beaton, takes a
> break outside the room as Lisa Banfield, the common-law wife of
> Gabriel Wortman, testifies at the Mass Casualty Commission inquiry
> into the mass murders in rural Nova Scotia on April 18/19, 2020, in
> Halifax on Friday, July 15, 2022. Wortman, dressed as an RCMP officer
> and driving a replica police cruiser, murdered 22 people., including
> Kristen Beaton. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Andrew Vaughan.
>
> Michael Scott from the Patterson Law team, representing the majority
> of families of victims, announces that they are leaving the inquiry as
> Lisa Banfield, the common-law wife of Gabriel Wortman, testifies at
> the Mass Casualty Commission inquiry into the mass murders in rural
> Nova Scotia on April 18/19, 2020, in Halifax on Friday, July 15, 2022.
> Wortman, dressed as an RCMP officer and driving a replica police
> cruiser, murdered 22 people. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Andrew VaughanMichael
> Scott from the Patterson Law team, representing the majority of
> families of victims, announces that they are leaving the inquiry as
> Lisa Banfield, the common-law wife of Gabriel Wortman, testifies at
> the Mass Casualty Commission inquiry into the mass murders in rural
> Nova Scotia on April 18/19, 2020, in Halifax on Friday, July 15, 2022.
> Wortman, dressed as an RCMP officer and driving a replica police
> cruiser, murdered 22 people. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Andrew Vaughan.
>
> Scott, several other lawyers in his firm and about 20 family members
> the firm represents walked out of the hearing in the afternoon. “We’ve
> decided with our clients we’ve heard enough and we’ll be leaving for
> the rest of the day,” he said.
>
> “I don’t know if Ms. Banfield is lying, I don’t know if she’s telling
> the truth, I don’t know if Ms. Banfield is mistaken, because we don’t
> have an opportunity to ask her any questions.”
>
> In the afternoon testimony, Hnatiw asked Banfield whether she ever
> suspected her spouse might harm others, given she knew he owned a mock
> RCMP cruiser, illegal guns and a stockpile of gas and money.
>
> She replied she regarded it as related to his paranoia about the
> pandemic. “He was talking crazy, and I would pass it off because I
> didn’t want to listen to what he was saying,” she said.
>
> During the 13 hours he was at large, the killer fatally shot 22
> people, including a pregnant woman and a Mountie. He was shot dead by
> two Mounties on the morning of April 19, 2020.
>
> This report by The Canadian Press was first published July 15, 2022.
> © 2022 The Canadian Press
>
>
>
>
>
> https://www.therecord.com/ts/
>
> ‘I was so scared’: Tears, anguish — and a walkout — as N.S. mass
> killer’s wife testifies
> The gunman’s abusive and violent behaviour toward Lisa Banfield has
> been documented in previous testimony given to the Mass Casualty
> Commission, but victims’ lawyers have questions, which they won’t be
> allowed to ask her at the inquiry.
> SM
> By Steve McKinley
> Halifax Bureau
> Fri., July 15, 2022
>
> Lisa Banfield, the common-law wife of Gabriel Wortman, testifies at
> the Mass Casualty Commission on Friday.
>
> HALIFAX —Flanked by her sisters, Lisa Banfield took to the podium
> Friday as the most anticipated witness in the five-month run, thus
> far, of the inquiry into Nova Scotia’s worst mass shooting.
>
> Her mouth set in a tight line, Banfield put her hand on the Bible and
> took an oath, beginning her first public appearance since her
> common-law husband, Gabriel Wortman, killed 22 people and torched
> several houses in a 13-hour rampage over April 18-19, 2020.
>
> Looking visibly distraught, she faced a full room — some 200 people
> crowded into the Nova Scotia Ballroom at the Marriott, who had come
> looking for some kind of insight into killings that shocked the
> country.
>
> In dramatic and emotional fashion, Banfield told the inquiry of her
> abuse at the hands of the gunman, of her fear for her safety and that
> of her family, of his penchant for collecting guns and police
> paraphernalia, and of the events of April 18, when what was supposed
> to be the celebration of their 19th anniversary went horribly wrong.
>
> Before that night was out, she had been assaulted and confined in the
> back of the gunman’s replica RCMP car, from which she managed to
> escape. The killer, meanwhile, roamed the neighbourhood in Portapique,
> killing 13 people there before fleeing into the night. The next
> morning he would begin killing again, before eventually being shot
> dead by police at a gas station.
>
> For families of victims wanting to know why their loved ones were
> killed, there was little solace; Banfield, in her only day of
> testimony, had much guilt, but few answers for them.
>
> “This is what haunts me,” she said, in tears, to the inquiry. “It’s
> because I feel like he was targeting me and my family. And if I didn’t
> get out of that car, I often think, ‘Would any of those people have
> died?’
>
> “That’s something that haunts me all the time, because I feel that
> they weren’t targeted. That he was looking for me in the beginning.”
> Lisa Banfield, the common-law wife of Gabriel Wortman, is flanked by
> her sisters Janice Banfield, left, and Maureen Banfield, as she
> testifies at the Mass Casualty Commission inquiry Friday.
>
> Banfield described her escape into the woods surrounding the gunman’s
> warehouse, eventually crossing to the other side of the road, where
> she heard two men.
>
> “I looked around because my back was sore, so I found a stick and I
> propped myself up and I started walking in the direction where I could
> hear the two guys talking … freaking out,” she said, her voice
> cracking.
>
> “And as I’m getting closer, the stick broke. So, I dropped to my
> knees, and there was another log and I thought, ‘I don’t have it in me
> to crawl over this and try to prop myself up again.
>
> “And then I heard, ‘Hey boys,’ or something. And — ‘bang!’ ‘bang!’ —
> and then there was nothing. And then I just crawled back to the log
> and just hid there.”
>
> She was sure, she said, it had been the sound of the gunman killing
> another of his victims. It’s not clear exactly who that might have
> been.
>
> “I’m thinking, ‘Should I go see if they’re OK?’ But I was so scared,
> and I didn’t want to move,” she said, in tears.
>
> At one point, she wondered if she was hallucinating, she said, because
> she could see the shadow of somebody with a gun that looked like a
> rifle. She wondered if her mind was playing tricks on her.
>
> She hid there by the log until morning, she said, then went to a
> neighbour’s house and called the police.
>
> As Friday’s testimony went on, and the questions kept coming, Banfield
> seemed to become more comfortable, her posture more confident, her
> voice stronger.
>
> But that confidence gave way when she began to relate some of the
> abuse she had faced at the hands of the gunman.
> Lisa Banfield, spouse of Gabriel Wortman, dons a mask at Nova Scotia
> provincial court in Dartmouth, N.S., March 9.
>
> When commission counsel Gillian Hnatiw questioned her about the guns
> that her spouse kept, Banfield said she didn’t think of reporting the
> weapons to police; that she wasn’t afraid that the gunman would use
> the guns on others, but that she was afraid that he would use them on
> her.
>
> “There was a couple of times, where if we had a fight, he’d put the
> gun to my head to scare me and say that he could blow off my head,”
> she said tearfully. “So, I was scared. I said, ‘I swear I’m not going
> to say anything.’”
>
> For all the powerful testimony, there was little new information
> revealed that had not already been gleaned from Banfield’s previous
> interviews with the RCMP, and an additional one with the Mass Casualty
> Commission.
>
> The families of Wortman’s victims left the inquiry en masse in the
> afternoon, frustrated over what they saw as the inquiry’s inability to
> unearth the answers they have been seeking.
>
> “We’ve decided with our clients that we’ve heard enough,” said Michael
> Scott of Patterson Law, which represents most of the victims’
> families, during an afternoon break in the proceedings. “We’ll be
> leaving for the rest of the day.
>
> “Nothing we’ve heard today has allayed any of our concerns about the
> way Ms. Banfield has been handled,” said Scott. “We haven’t heard any
> answers to any of the relevant questions about April 2020.”
>
> Most of that frustration stems from the commission’s decision to limit
> Banfield’s questioning to the commission’s own counsel, rejecting
> requests from the victims’ families to allow their lawyers to
> independently cross-examine her. That decision was made in order to
> avoid further traumatizing Banfield, in line with the inquiry’s
> trauma-informed approach, according to the commission. Police have
> said they don’t believe Banfield was involved in the mass killing.
>
> “Right now, what we have is evidence from Ms. Banfield that is
> entirely untested, some of it’s contradictory, and it leaves us in a
> position where we don’t know any more today than we did yesterday,”
> Scott said.
>
> “I don’t know if Ms. Banfield is lying. I don’t know if Ms. Banfield
> is telling the truth. I don’t know if Ms. Banfield is mistaken,
> because we don’t have an opportunity to ask her any questions.”
> Lawyer Michael Scott, representing the majority of families of
> victims, announces that they are leaving the inquiry as Lisa Banfield,
> the common-law wife of Gabriel Wortman, testifies at the Mass Casualty
> Commission inquiry Friday.
>
> Ryan Farrington, whose mother, Dawn Gulenchyn, and stepfather, Frank
> Gulenchyn, were killed and their house burned that night in April
> 2020, had been hoping for some answers about how and why his parents
> died. He didn’t get them, he said.
>
> “We’re not going to get any answers that we want to know about if our
> lawyers cannot ask (for) them,” he said. “So, yeah, the process, to
> me, is flawed. This entire public inquiry is flawed. I think it’s been
> a big waste of money right from the start.”
>
> A frustrated Scott McLeod, brother of victim Sean McLeod, said he
> found himself no closer to answers than he was two and a half years
> ago.
>
> “Why would he have targeted my brother, who was so far out of the way,
> and start this all over again the second day? What I want to know is,
> what was it that set him off that bad with my brother?” he asked
> earlier in the day.
>
> “She’s not going to give us anything extra,” McLeod said of Banfield.
> “She’s the one witness that should know more than anybody else.
>
> “With the upcoming Mounties (testifying), they’re setting aside two
> days for each of them. So why wouldn’t you set aside two days for Lisa
> Banfield?”
>
> Shortly before she left a significantly emptier room than she had
> entered, Banfield was asked by commission counsel Hnatiw about the
> psychological impact of the past two and a half years.
>
> “The fact that people would think that we would have anything to do
> with this … our family feels for all those people and we’re not angry
> that they’re angry, because, if it was my family, I would feel the
> same way,” said a tearful Banfield.
>
> “But it’s just angering, because he did this, and I didn’t. And I
> would never contribute anything like that.
>
> “It’s really hard because it’s scary to think that people are angry
> and that somebody could come after me or my family if they think that
> we had anything to do with it.”
>
> The Mass Casualty Commission continues its inquiry Monday.
>
>
> Steve McKinley
> Halifax Bureau
> stevemckinley@thestar.ca
> Connect :
> Steve McKinley is a reporter in the Star's Halifax bureau.
> Location :
> Halifax
> Reporting Focus:
> Generalist
>
>
>
> https://www.therecord.com/
>
>
> About The Waterloo Region Record
>
> Peter Moyer published the first issue of the Berlin Daily News on Feb.
> 9, 1878. Berlin was Kitchener's name until 1916.
>
> It is to the Daily News that today’s Record sets its daily historical
> clock. Moyer anticipated his newspaper would run into "rough handling
> from its very birth." Sometimes he paid his staff in goods shopkeepers
> left behind to cover advertising bills.
>
> German, English, daily, weekly - Berlin readers were swamped by
> newspapers in the late 1800s. For about six months in 1896, Berlin had
> three dailies - the Daily News, the Daily Record and the Daily
> Telegraph.
>
> Ben Uttley, a teacher-turned-newspaperman, created the Berlin
> News-Record by merging his Daily Record with Moyer's Daily News in
> 1897.
>
> There is another important branch to The Record's family tree. John
> Motz and Friedrich Rittinger published the first issue of a German
> weekly, The Berliner Journal, on Dec. 29, 1859. The Journal would
> continue for the next 65 years, outliving almost 20 local and area
> papers.
>
> By 1919, it was owned by W.J. Motz, John Motz's son, and politician
> W.D. Euler. That year, they did an extraordinary thing for proprietors
> of a weekly paper - they bought a daily, Uttley's News Record.
>
> They renamed it the Kitchener Daily Record and published out of 49
> King St. W. The Daily Record took over the Daily Telegraph in 1922.
>
> Some important dates in Record history:
>
> • Jan. 7, 1929 -- the Record moved from 49 King St. W. to a new plant
> at 30 Queen St. N. (the Queen-and-Duke intersection.)
>
> • By coincidence, The Record moved to its current home at 160 King St.
> E. on Friday - Jan. 7 in 2005.
>
> • 1929, 1948, 1962 and 1973 - the years The Record bought new presses.
> In 2000, the newspaper closed the presses at Fairway Road. Printing is
> done on presses in Hamilton, Guelph and Vaughan.
>
> • Dec. 31, 1947 - The Kitchener Daily Record became the
> Kitchener-Waterloo Record to reflect Waterloo becoming a city. In
> 1994, the newspaper recognized its region-wide coverage by dropping
> the cities from its name, becoming simply The Record.
>
> • Jan. 26, 1978 - A huge snowstorm hit southern Ontario and forced The
> Record to miss getting a paper out for the first time in its history.
> Delivery trucks couldn't budge. Some Record staffers bunked down at
> their desks.
>
> • The 1990s - A flurry of ownership changes. Four generations under
> the Motz family came to an end in 1989 when Southam Inc. bought the
> paper for $90 million. Southam sold The Record to Sun Media Corp. in
> 1998. By March 1999, The Record belonged to Torstar Corp.
>
> • Sept. 11, 2001 - The Record published its first extra in 56 years.
> The occasion was the terrorist attacks in New York City.
>
> • June 3, 2002 - Readers woke up to a morning Record - on a Monday.
> The Record was the last Canadian paper of its size to make the switch
> from afternoon to morning publication.
>
> • Aug. 14, 2003 - A blackout swept across southern Ontario. Record
> employees put together a newspaper using laptop computers and a
> smidgen of emergency power.
>
> • Jan. 7, 2005 - Record staff bade farewell to 225 Fairway Rd. S., the
> newspaper's home for 32 years. They moved to King and Scott streets in
> downtown Kitchener
>
> • March 21, 2008 - The Record becomes the Waterloo Region Record, to
> better reflect the entire coverage area of this regional newspaper.
>
> • Torstar was acquired in 2020 by Nordstar Capital, an entity owned by
> Toronto businessmen Jordan Bitove and Paul Rivett.
>
> The Waterloo Region Record welcomes the opportunity to develop
> strategic partnerships that will contribute to the betterment of our
> community and promote public engagement, charitable fundraising and
> social innovation. Our Community Partnerships Program strongly
> supports collaborative initiatives with engaged citizens and
> organizations that strive to enhance the vitality of the Waterloo
> region. We encourage you to browse through our program categories
> listed below and review our philanthropic practices and goals.
>
> The Waterloo Region Record and Lyle S. Hallman Foundation Kids to Camp
> Fund enables children in need of financial assistance to attend a
> variety of day, overnight, recreational and educational camps, by
> partially or fully subsidizing camp costs.
>
> We need your help!
>
> Any individual or organization may make a gift to the Waterloo Region
> Record Kids to Camp Fund. A donation of just $100 can send a child to
> day camp for an entire week!
>
> The Kids to Camp Fund is administered by our local Community
> Foundations. You can designate your gift to either the Kitchener and
> Waterloo Community Foundation’s Kids to Camp Fund or to the Cambridge
> and North Dumfries Community Foundation’s Kids to Camp Fund.
>
> You can make a donation by mail by sending a cheque to: Kids to Camp
> Fund c/o Kitchener Waterloo Community Foundation, 260 King Street West
> - Unit 206 Kitchener, ON N2G 1B6 or Cambridge & North Dumfries
> Community Foundation, 190 Turnbull Ct., Unit 1B, Cambridge, ON N1T
> 1J1. You can also donate online by visiting
> https://www.kwcf.ca/donate. Tax receipts will be issued for donations
> of $10 or more. Please ensure that cheques are made out to the
> Community Foundation of your choice, or note this in the "Special
> Instructions" box if you are donating online. If this is not noted,
> the funds will be directed to the Community Foundation that services
> your address.
>
> If you are a family wishing to access funds for your child this
> summer, you must contact your camp of choice, who will then apply to
> the fund on behalf of your child. Camps can apply to the fund through
> the foundations websites.
>
> For more information on the fund or learn how you can make a gift to
> the fund please contact Lesley Fitter, Advertising Solutions Manager,
> 519-895-5687.
>
>
> Back to top
>
> The Record Masthead
>
> Neil Oliver
>
> Chief Executive Officer and President, Metroland
>
> Donna Luelo
>
> Publisher, Waterloo Region Record
> V.P. Sales, Torstar Regional Daily Brands
>
> Jim Poling
>
> Editor-in-Chief
>
> David Elliott
>
> Director of Distribution
>
>
> Back to top
>
> Our Journalistic Standards
>
> The Torstar Journalistic Standards Guide provides a comprehensive code
> of journalistic principles and conduct to guide Waterloo Region Record
> journalists in their mission to responsibly engage and connect our
> readers on all platforms with trusted news, information and content.
>
> Here are the general editorial principles that provide the foundation
> for this guide:
>
> RESPONSIBILITY
>
> The Record has responsibilities to its customers, its clients, its
> shareholders and its employees. But the operation of a news
> organization is, above all, a public trust, no less binding because it
> is not formally conferred. Our overriding responsibility is to the
> democratic society.
>
> Freedom of expression and of the press must be defended against
> encroachment from any quarter, public or private. Journalists must
> ensure that the public’s business is conducted in public. They must be
> vigilant against all who would exploit the press for selfish purposes.
>
> Journalists who abuse the power of their professional roles for
> selfish motives or unworthy purposes are faithless to that public
> trust.
>
> ACCESS
>
> The Record is a forum for the interchange of information and opinion.
> It should provide for the expression of disparate and conflicting
> views. It should give expression to the interests of minorities as
> well as majorities, of the powerless as well as the powerful.
>
> ACCURACY AND TRUTH
>
> Good faith with the reader is the foundation of ethical and excellent
> journalism. That good faith rests primarily on the reader’s confidence
> that what we print is correct. Every effort must be made to ensure
> that everything published in the Record is accurate, is presented in
> context, and that all significant sides are presented fairly.
>
> Journalistic integrity demands that significant errors of fact, as
> well as errors of omission, should be corrected promptly and as
> prominently and transparently as warranted.
>
> FAIRNESS
>
> The Record should respect the rights of people involved in the news,
> be transparent and stand accountable to the public for the fairness
> and reliability of everything it publishes. Fair news reports provide
> relevant context, do not omit relevant facts and aim to be honest with
> readers about what we know and what we do not know. Our core fairness
> standard demands that any subject of potentially harmful allegations
> must be given opportunity to respond.
>
> INDEPENDENCE
>
> Independence from those we cover is a key principle of journalistic
> integrity. We avoid conflicts of interest and the appearance of
> conflicts. The Record believes in paying the costs incurred in
> gathering and publishing news. In circumstances where that may not be
> possible, we disclose information that could create the perception of
> a conflict of interest. Transparency with our readers and openness
> about the potential for conflicts should guide our considerations
> about real or perceived conflicts.
>
> IMPARTIALITY
>
> To be impartial does not require a news organization to be
> unquestioning or to refrain from editorial expression. Sound practice,
> however, demands a clear distinction for readers between news and
> opinion. All content that contains explicit opinion or personal
> interpretation should be clearly identified as opinion or analysis, as
> appropriate.
>
> PRIVACY
>
> Every person has a right to privacy. There are inevitable conflicts
> between the right to privacy, the public good and the public's right
> to be informed about the conduct of public affairs. Each case should
> be judged in the light of common sense and humanity.
>
>
> Back to top
>
> Accuracy and Corrections Policy
>
> Here are some of the core policies included in our Standards Guide:
>
> There can be no compromise with accuracy. Accuracy is our most basic
> contract with readers and is the responsibility of everyone in our
> newsrooms. Accuracy is grounded in verification, the essence of
> journalism. We must check and double-check all the information we
> publish, including information from all other publications.
>
> Mistakes will happen. When they do, we correct our errors. Corrections
> serve the reader and they serve the public record. They are essential
> to building and maintaining trust with our readers. Anyone who becomes
> aware of a possible error has responsibility for alerting those
> responsible for corrections in their newsrooms.
>
> Our corrections are guided by the core principles of accountability
> and transparency. We are accountable to our readers for the accuracy
> of the information we publish in stories, headlines, photos, cutlines,
> social media, graphics, data, videos and any other content on all of
> our platforms. We correct errors of fact in a clear, transparent
> manner on the platform(s) in which the error was published, as
> promptly as possible. We make clear to readers the correct information
> and the context and magnitude of the mistake.
>
> On all of our platforms, it should be clear to readers how to report a
> possible error. Readers can do so by emailing
> corrections@therecord.com or, on therecord.com, readers can report
> possible errors directly on an article page by selecting the "Report
> an Error" icon.
>
>
> Back to top
>
> Diversity Policy
>
> Inclusiveness is at the heart of thinking and acting as journalists.
> Torstar newsrooms aim to reflect the diversity of our communities and
> respect the human rights and equal dignity of all. We aim for a
> variety of voices as sources and contributors in our news and opinion.
>
> We seek to foster greater community understanding about ethnicity,
> race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, age, socio-economic status
> and physical/mental ability and do not perpetuate hurtful stereotypes.
>
> Generally no reference, direct or indirect, should be made to a
> person’s race, colour or religion unless it is pertinent to the story.
>
> In the case of a missing person or a criminal suspect at large, there
> may be justification for identifying race or colour as part of a full
> description that provides as many details as possible. Avoid vague
> descriptions that serve no purpose. At times, a group may make race a
> public issue. In such cases, the person’s race becomes relevant to the
> news.
>
> Religion is important to the lives of many of our readers. We should
> not hold up one religion or set of beliefs as superior to another. Do
> not single out a religion or religious practice for ridicule or
> stereotyping or use profanities considered offensive to any religions.
>
> We treat men and women equally and respect diverse gender identities,
> including people who identify as neither male nor female.
>
> Torstar is committed to this same inclusivness and diversity
> reflective of our communities in its hiring, promotion, development
> and retention of its staff.
>
>
> Back to top
>
> Anonymity and Confidential Sources
>
> The public interest is best served when news sources are identified by
> their full names. Torstar journalists are aggressive in pressing
> sources to put information on the record and seek independently to
> corroborate off-the-record information.
>
> We do not provide anonymity to those who attack individuals or
> organizations or engage in speculation — the unattributed cheap shot.
> People under attack in our publications have the right to know their
> accusers.
>
> There are times when reporters need confidential sources to serve
> readers and democracy. Responsible journalism in the public interest
> often depends on these confidential sources who give journalists
> information that powerful people seek to keep secret. There are times
> also when some sources, such as underage or other vulnerable people,
> may require anonymity in telling their stories.
>
> Torstar journalists must discuss using confidential sources with their
> department head, and in some cases the newsroom’s most senior editor.
> They must always reveal the source’s identity to editors, and provide
> a compelling argument for why the source will not be named in news
> reports. Senior editors have responsibility to work with reporters to
> assess the credibility of all sources including confidential sources.
>
> Once any promise is made to grant anonymity, we protect our source,
> only revealing their identity with that person’s permission.
>
> Published articles must explain why sources have been granted
> anonymity and why we consider them authoritative and credible.
> Confidential sources should have first-hand knowledge of the
> information and this must be conveyed to the reader. We should publish
> as much information as possible about the source — including why they
> sought confidentiality — without revealing identity.
>
> The definitions and ground rules for not naming a source must be
> discussed with sources. Any further promises made or deals brokered
> with any source must be discussed in advance with senior editors and
> are subject to the following:
>
> • Composites, where several sources are compiled into one person, are
> not used. Pseudonyms are used only rarely, with a senior editor’s
> permission, and must be declared as such in stories.
>
> • The source and the journalist must be clear on what has been agreed
> to and that agreement must be shared with the department manager.
> Torstar journalists keep their promises.
>
>
> Back to top
>
> Conflict of Interest
>
> Independence from those we cover is a key principle of journalistic
> integrity. We avoid conflicts of interest and the appearance of
> conflicts. In circumstances where that may not be possible, we
> disclose information that could create the perception of a conflict of
> interest. Transparency with our readers and openness about the
> potential for conflicts should guide our considerations about real or
> perceived conflicts.
>
> These policies apply to all outside interests that could cause our
> audiences to question the fairness and independence of our journalism.
>
> We seek primarily to ensure that our reporters’ reputations as
> fair-minded fact-finders are not compromised by public displays of
> political or partisan views on public issues, nor influenced by
> personal involvement or personal axe-grinding on issues we cover.
>
> Opinion journalists have greater leeway on these matters, in line with
> the latitude to express their own views in their work.
>
> All Torstar editorial staff should inform their immediate supervisors
> of any outside activity that could result in a conflict of interest,
> or reasonably perceived conflict of interest, that could cause our
> audiences to question the integrity of our work.
>
> These policies are not intended to restrict the personal lives,
> interests or expressions of beliefs of Torstar journalists outside
> their work lives. Rather, as has been established through various
> arbitration processes across the company, they seek to ensure that any
> such personal activities and interests do not come into conflict with
> the public role of our news organizations in any way that could be
> seen to compromise our editorial independence and integrity.
>
>
> Back to top
>
> News and Opinions
>
> The Record clearly labels content on all platforms to draw a clear
> line between news and opinion. This glossary provides definitions for
> various types of news and opinion we publish.
>
> NEWS
>
> News content is verified information based on the impartial reporting
> of facts, either observed by the reporter or reported and verified
> from knowledgeable sources. News reports do not include the opinion of
> the author.
>
> News Terms
>
> Analysis: A critical or contextual examination of an important and
> topical issue based on factual reporting. It provides an explanation
> of the impact or meaning of news events and draws on the authority and
> expertise of the writer. Analysis articles do not contain the author’s
> opinions.
>
> Investigation: In-depth reporting in the public interest that reveals
> wrongdoing and/or systemic problems, holds those in power accountable
> and promotes positive change.
>
> OPINION
>
> Opinion articles based are based on personal interpretation and
> judgment of facts. Opinion journalists have wide latitude to express
> their own views, subject to standards of taste and laws of libel
> including views directly contrary to the editorial views of the
> Record.
>
> Opinion Terms
>
> Editorial: An article that presents a point of view reflecting the
> news organization's position on an issue of public interest.
> Editorials are not meant to be a neutral presentation of the facts.
> They are written by journalists who are expressing the view of the
> news organization. As an editorial serves to present the company’s
> voice, there is no individual byline.
>
> Opinion: Articles based on the author’s interpretations and judgments
> of facts, data and events. Opinion articles include columns written by
> staff and commentary from non-staff contributors. Opinion journalists
> have wide latitude to express their own views including views directly
> contrary to the news organization's editorial views, as long as they
> fall within the boundaries of taste and laws of libel. Columnists
> should not engage in personal axe-grinding or internecine debates with
> other columnists who write for either their own or other publications.
>
> Advice: An advice article reflects the opinion of the author, who
> provides guidance or direction on a topic based on their expertise as
> well as their personal interpretations and judgments of facts.
>
> Blog: An online journal updated regularly by a journalist or editorial
> department that supplements news coverage. Blogs are usually informal
> or conversational in style and may reflect a writer’s opinions,
> subject to the rights and responsibilities of fair comment.
>
> First person: Narratives exploring an author’s insights, observations
> or thoughts based on that individual’s personal experience and
> opinions.
>
> Readers’ letters: A selection of letters by readers expressing a point
> of view, usually concerning a recently published article or current
> event.
>
> Review: A critical assessment of the merits of a subject, such as art,
> film, music, television, food or literature. Reviews are based on the
> writer’s informed/expert opinion.
>
>
> Back to top
>
> Contact Us
>
> The Waterloo Region Record’s mailing address is: PO Box 25069,
> Kitchener, ON N2A 4A5
>
> News, Events and Letters
>
> News tips
>
> Do you have a news tip? Or photos for us to consider for publication?
> Reach out to the news desk via email newsroom@therecord.com or phone
> 519-895-5602
>
> Letters to the Editor
>
> To submit a Letter to the Editor, please email: letters@therecord.com
>
> Frequently asked questions
>
> How do I subscribe to The Record?
>
> Please click HERE to see our Home Delivery and ePaper subscription
> page. Already a subscriber? Click HERE to manage your account.
>
> For TheRecord.com Digital Access, click HERE. Click HERE for
> Frequently Asked Questions about Digital Access. Click HERE to see our
> Subscription Terms and Conditions.
>
> Is my Waterloo Regional Record digital subscription eligible for the
> digital news subscription tax credit?
>
> Yes. Individuals who have a digital subscription to therecord.com or
> the Waterloo Region Record ePaper can claim the digital news
> subscription tax credit on their personal income tax return for the
> years 2020 to 2024. This is a non-refundable tax credit for amounts
> paid by individuals in the year to a qualified Canadian journalism
> organization (QCJO) for an eligible qualifying subscription. Click
> HERE to find out more about this tax credit and how to claim it.
>
> I am a home-delivery subscriber. Is my subscription eligible for the
> digital news subscription tax credit?
>
> Yes. Home delivery subscribers can claim the digital news subscription
> tax credit on their personal income tax return for the years 2020
> through 2024 inclusive. Our home delivery subscriptions include
> digital access to therecord.com and ePaper edition.
>
> The Canada Revenue Agency has indicated that if a subscription
> provides access to content of the qualified Canadian journalism
> organization (QCJO) that is not in digital form (i.e. in print), only
> the cost of a stand-alone subscription to the digital content of the
> QCJO can be claimed. The Waterloo Region Record maximum stand-alone
> digital subscription rate is $7.99 per month. If this maximum
> stand-alone rate exceeds the monthly price of your print subscription,
> see the CRA site for guidance on the amount of the eligible expense
> where there is no comparable stand-alone digital subscription.
>
> To find out more about this tax credit and how to claim it, please
> visit the Government of Canada website. Please visit the CRA website
> for a list of qualifying digital news subscriptions. The Waterloo
> Region Record’s Qualified Canadian Journalism Organization (QCJO)
> designation number is: Q2438091. To view your subscription payments,
> visit our Subscriber Login portal and follow the steps below:
>
> 1. Login with your email and password (Don’t have an account setup? Create
> one.)
>
> 2. Click on PAYMENTS
>
> 3. Click on ACCOUNT ADJUSTMENTS to view your payment history
>
> If you require assistance, please send us an email or call
> 1-800-210-5210 Note: Subscribers are responsible for ensuring that the
> amounts they are reporting are correct. Metroland Media Group Ltd. is
> not responsible for the amount you claim on your taxes
>
> How can I access the E-Paper
>
> Subscribers need to register for an online customer account. Then
> click HERE and log into the epaper with your ID/password and you'll
> have continued access while your subscription is active..
>
> What services are offered?
>
> All visitors to TheRecord.com have unrestricted access to classifieds
> through yourclassifieds.ca/
> obituaries through lifenews.ca, celebrations (anniversary, birthday
> and wedding announcements), auction listings, job ads through
> workopolis.com and localwork.ca, Homes Gallery, Wheels, community
> events and directories, and all news stories.
>
> If you are a non-subscriber, call 519-894-3000 or toll-free
> 1-800-210-5210 to subscribe to The Record E-Edition for as little as
> $2.31 per week plus HST (minimum six-month subscription). It may take
> up to 24 hours to set up your account. The E-Paper is available online
> daily by 6:30 a.m.
>
> Can I print articles from the newspaper?
>
> All news articles have a link to a printer-friendly version with fewer
> graphics (to save ink or toner). Click this link, and then print the
> story page using your browser's printer icon or commands. Printed
> articles are for personal use only, and not for distribution.
>
> Can I send articles by email?
>
> Yes. You can send a link of the story via email by copying the URL in
> the address bar and pasting it into the body of an email.
>
> Articles e-mailed between individuals are for personal use only.
> Distribution to a group or subscriber list would be considered a
> violation of copyright.
>
> Can I print advertisements?
>
> You can print advertisements you've found in our E-Edition.
>
> What is the Self-Service Account Manager?
>
> A service currently available to our subscribers. It allows you to
> make changes and inquiries about your subscription. You will be able
> to check your account balance, make payments, make vacation stops and
> contact our circulation department for any other questions or concerns
> you might have. You need to register yourself as a subscriber in order
> to access the "My Subscription" area of our site.
>
> Can I link to a Record.com news story from my website?
>
> You can link stories from TheRecord.com to your website.
>
> Can I republish Record articles on my website?
>
> Requests to republish material (in any format), which has been written
> by Record reporters, should be made in writing to Rod Frketich. Please
> include the article's headline and publication date, the writer's name
> along with an explanation of how the material will be used.
>
> Can I read the classified ads?
>
> Most Record classified ads are hosted on
> yourclassifieds.ca/
> making yourclassifieds.ca the perfect solution for buying or selling
> hard to ship items such as cars, furniture, electronics, computers,
> pets, sporting goods, antiques, and much more. For employment ads,
> click here or here.
>
> Can I read the obituaries?
>
> All visitors to TheRecord.com may read obituaries at lifenews.ca.
> Obituaries published since November 2002 may be purchased in the print
> archive. Obituaries published prior to November 2002 are not available
> in electronic form; contact your local public or university library
> regarding access to The Record on microfilm.
>
> Can I search for display advertisements?
>
> Keyword searching of display advertisements is not available.
>
> Can I search for display advertisements?
>
> Complete editions of The Record, including display advertisements, are
> available in our E-Edition. You can view the page, just as it was
> published in the print edition.
>
> Flyers and inserts that are not part of the regular newspaper are not
> available online, but most can be viewed on save.ca.
>
> Can I print items from the e-edition, like the crossword puzzle,
> Sudoku or advertisements?
>
> Yes. Once you are logged into the e-edition, click on the printer icon
> on the top of the page (icons are in red circles). Select the page(s)
> you want to print. Choose either portrait or landscape. Click on the
> box beside "High resolution Prints." Click on print. You can use your
> own printer settings to adjust the size, paper and other print
> functions.
>
> How do I get a PDF of a page?
>
> PDF stands for portable document format, a technology developed by
> Adobe. The biggest advantage to using PDF is that it preserves the
> original look of the document almost exactly -- photos, fonts,
> graphics and layout all appear as they do in the original. PDFs are
> not available on TheRecord.com, which uses an e-edition format. To get
> a PDF, contact 519-894-2250 ext. 772562.
>
> What if I have a problem with delivery of my newspaper?
>
> Missed or damaged newspaper? We want to make it right. Report delivery
> concerns using the self-service account manager, or call 519-894-3000
> to speak to a Record circulation representative.
>
> What if I have trouble logging in or setting up my web account?
>
> Contact us by e-mail at circulation-self-serve@
> 894-3000 to speak to a Record circulation representative.
>
> How can I find my password?
>
> Forgot your password? Simply send us your e-mail address using this
> form, and we'll send you your password.
>
> How do I submit a letter to the editor?
>
> We welcome letters that are topical and include full name, address and
> phone number for verification. All letters are edited for clarity,
> style, and length. Letters delivered by mail or fax require a
> signature.
>
> Letters can also be submitted online here.
>
> To accommodate the letter volume and range, writers generally are
> limited to 200 words and one submission in two months. Short letters
> have more impact.
>
> How do I place a classified ad?
>
> All users have access to our online order forms, which will guide you
> through the process of placing a classified ad.
>
> Before publication a classified ad representative will call you to
> confirm the final price including selected options and taxes.
>
> How do I stop and start home delivery?
>
> Going on vacation, or away for a few days? Use the self-service
> account manager to stop and start delivery, or call 519-894-3000 to
> speak to a Record circulation representative. If you are a subscriber
> that goes on vacation for 21 calendar days (includes Sundays) or less
> than you will continue to be charged your current subscription rate.
> You will have full access to therecord.com and our replica e-edition.
> If you are on vacation longer than 21 calendar days (includes Sundays)
> than you will be credited for the stop.
>
> How can I become a carrier?
>
> For information on how to become a carrier, click HERE.
>
> How do I report a problem with the site?
>
> We welcome your feedback -- comments, suggestions and bug reports.
> Contact Editor-in-Chief Jim Poling here.
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
> Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2022 14:31:54 -0300
> Subject: James Lockyer an old law school classmate of my sister and
> her hubby Reid Chedore called me back and denied receiving this email
> To: james.lockyer@umoncton.ca, jlockyer@lzzdefence.ca,
> megan.mitton@gnb.ca, dominic.leblanc.c1@parl.gc.ca,
> ernie.steeves@gnb.ca, Ginette.PetitpasTaylor@parl.
> "Mark.Blakely" <Mark.Blakely@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, "Marco.Mendicino"
> <Marco.Mendicino@parl.gc.ca>, "Mike.Comeau" <Mike.Comeau@gnb.ca>,
> Tori.Weldon@cbc.ca, mcu <mcu@justice.gc.ca>, Seamus.ORegan@parl.gc.ca,
> Newsroom@globeandmail.com, infoam@fredericton.cbc.ca,
> briangallant10@gmail.com, MRichard@lawsociety-barreau.
> David.Akin@globalnews.ca, charles.murray@gnb.ca, oldmaison@yahoo.com,
> "greg.byrne" <greg.byrne@gnb.ca>, "McCulloch, Sandra"
> <smcculloch@pattersonlaw.ca>, "Pineo, Robert"
> <rpineo@pattersonlaw.ca>, "fin.minfinance-financemin.fin"
> <fin.minfinance-financemin.
> <Sean.Fraser@parl.gc.ca>, PREMIER <PREMIER@gov.ns.ca>, "blaine.higgs"
> <blaine.higgs@gnb.ca>, "Louis.Leger" <Louis.Leger@gnb.ca>,
> "mary.wilson" <mary.wilson@gnb.ca>, washington field
> <washington.field@ic.fbi.gov>, "Brenda.Lucki"
> <Brenda.Lucki@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, "Bill.Hogan" <Bill.Hogan@gnb.ca>,
> "Bill.Blair" <Bill.Blair@parl.gc.ca>, "barb.whitenect"
> <barb.whitenect@gnb.ca>, "Moiz.Karimjee" <Moiz.Karimjee@ontario.ca>,
> "Michelle.Boutin" <Michelle.Boutin@rcmp-grc.gc.
> Cc: motomaniac333 <motomaniac333@gmail.com>, paulpalango
> <paulpalango@protonmail.com>, NightTimePodcast
> <NightTimePodcast@gmail.com>, nsinvestigators
> <nsinvestigators@gmail.com>
>
> However the former Attorney General refused to look on the internet to
> verify what I said was true. So I gave up on his bullshit and told him
> to answer me in writing because I could easily the lawyer got the
> damned email. Lockyer just refused to admit it tis all.
>
> Go Figure Why I brought this up today
>
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?
>
> MCC- DAY 50 - LISA BANFIELD... AND HANDLERS
> 179 watching now
> Started streaming 2 hours ago
> Little Grey Cells
> 3.42K subscribers
>
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: Premier <PREMIER@novascotia.ca>
> Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2022 17:33:54 +0000
> Subject: Thank you for your email
> To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
>
> Thank you for your email to Premier Houston. This is an automatic
> confirmation your message has been received.
>
> As we are currently experiencing higher than normal volumes of
> correspondence, there may be delays in the response time for
> correspondence identified as requiring a response.
>
> If you are looking for the most up-to-date information from the
> Government of Nova Scotia please visit:
> http://novascotia.ca<https://
>
> Thank you,
>
> Premier’s Correspondence Team
>
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: James Lockyer <jlockyer@lzzdefence.ca>
> Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2022 17:32:01 +0000
> Subject: Automatic reply: James Lockyer an old law school classmate of
> my sister and her hubby Reid Chedore called me back and denied
> receiving this email
> To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
>
> I will be out of the Province until July 16. I will respond to your
> email as soon as I return.
>
> If your matter is urgent, please contact Kathy Doyle at
> kdoyle@lzzdefence.ca or Katie Ray at katie@lzzdefence.ca.
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: Marc Richard <MRichard@lsbnb.ca>
> Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2022 17:34:35 +0000
> Subject: Automatic reply: James Lockyer an old law school classmate of
> my sister and her hubby Reid Chedore called me back and denied
> receiving this email
> To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
>
> I will be absent from the office until August 2, 2022
>
> Je serai absent du bureau jusqu'au 2 août 2022
>
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: "Fraser, Sean - M.P." <Sean.Fraser@parl.gc.ca>
> Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2022 17:33:46 +0000
> Subject: Automatic reply: James Lockyer an old law school classmate of
> my sister and her hubby Reid Chedore called me back and denied
> receiving this email
> To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
>
> Thank you for your message. This is an automated reply.
> Facebook:
> facebook.com/SeanFraserMP<http
> Twitter: @SeanFraserMP<https://twitter.
> Instagram: SeanFraserMP<https://www.
> www.seanfrasermp.ca<file:///C:
> /Users/Savannah%20DeWolfe/
> Toll free: 1-844-641-5886
> Please be advised that this account is for matters related to Central
> Nova. If you live outside of Central Nova and your issue pertains to
> immigration, please contact Minister@cic.gc.ca
> I am currently receiving an extremely high number of emails.
> If you are inquiring about Canada’s commitment to welcome vulnerable
> Afghan refugees, you can find more information on Canada’s response to
> the situation in Afghanistan
> here<https://www.canada.ca/en/
> The Government of Canada remains firm in its commitment to welcome
> Afghan refugees to Canada, and will be working to increase the number
> of eligible refugees to 40,000. This will be done through 2 programs:
> 1. A special immigration program for Afghan nationals, and their
> families, who assisted the Government of Canada.
> You don’t need to currently be in Afghanistan or return to Afghanistan
> to be eligible or to have your application processed once you’re able
> to apply.
> Find out more about this special immigration
> program<https://www.canada.ca/
> 2. A special humanitarian program focused on resettling Afghan
> nationals who
> · are outside of Afghanistan
> · don’t have a durable solution in a third country
> · are part of one of the following groups:
> · women leaders
> · human rights
> advocates<https://www.canada.
> · persecuted religious or ethnic minorities
> · LGBTI individuals
> · journalists and people who helped Canadian journalists
> How to reach us
> Contact us using our web
> form<https://specialmeasures-
> don’t send photos or other attachments until we ask you to.
> By phone at +1-613-321-4243
> · Available both inside Canada and abroad
> · Monday to Friday, 6:30 a.m. to 7 p.m. (ET)
> · Saturday and Sunday, 6:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. (ET)
> · We’ll accept charges for collect calls or calls with reverse
> charges
> If you or a loved one are a Canadian citizen or PR currently in
> Afghanistan, contact Global Affairs Canada’s 24/7 Emergency Watch and
> Response Centre ASAP by phone (+1-613-996-8885), email
> (sos@international.gc.ca<
> (+1-613-686-3658).
> If you would like to immigrate to Canada, please click
> here<https://www.canada.ca/en/
> to learn more.
> To inquire about the status of an immigration case,click
> here<https://www.canada.ca/en/
> You can also contact your local Member of Parliament for further
> assistance. If you don’t know who your Member of Parliament is, you
> can find out here, https://www.ourcommons.ca/
> If you have been the victim of fraud or want to report fraudulent
> activity, please call the Canada Border Services Agency’s fraud
> hotline at 1-888-502-9060.
> For other general questions about Canadian immigration, click
> here<https://www.canada.ca/en/
> Thank you.
> /////
> Veuillez noter que je reçois actuellement un nombre extrêmement élevé
> de courriels.
> Si vous vous renseignez sur l'engagement du Canada à accueillir les
> réfugiés afghans vulnérables, vous pouvez trouver plus d'information
> sur la réponse du Canada à la situation en Afghanistan
> ici<https://www.canada.ca/fr/
> Le gouvernement du Canada reste ferme dans son engagement à accueillir
> des réfugiés afghans au Canada, et s'efforcera d'augmenter le nombre
> de réfugiés admissibles à 40 000. Cela se fera par le biais de deux
> programmes :
> Un programme d'immigration spécial pour les ressortissants afghans, et
> leurs familles, qui ont aidé le gouvernement du Canada.
> Vous n'avez pas besoin d'être actuellement en Afghanistan ou d'y
> retourner pour être admissible ou pour que votre demande soit traitée,
> une fois que vous serez en mesure de présenter une demande.
> Pour en savoir plus sur ce programme d'immigration
> spécial<https://www.canada.ca/
> 2. Un programme humanitaire spécial axé sur la réinstallation des
> ressortissants afghans qui
> · se trouvent à l'extérieur de l'Afghanistan
> · n’ont pas de solution durable dans un pays tiers
> · font partie de l'un des groupes suivants :
> · femmes leaders,
> · défenseurs des droits de la
> personne<https://www.canada.
> · minorités religieuses ou ethniques persécutées,
> · personnes LGBTI,
> · journalistes et personnes ayant aidé des journalistes
> canadiens.
> Comment nous joindre
> Veuillez communiquer avec nous en utilisant notre formulaire
> Web<https://specialmeasures-
> Veuillez ne pas envoyer de photos ou d'autres pièces jointes jusqu'à
> ce que nous vous le demandions.
> Par téléphone au +1-613-321-4243.
> · Disponible au Canada et à l’étranger.
> · Du lundi au vendredi, de 6 h 30 à 19 h (HE).
> · Samedi et dimanche, de 6 h 30 à 15 h 30 (HE).
> · Nous acceptons les frais pour les appels à frais virés ou
> les appels avec inversion des frais.
> Si vous ou un de vos proches êtes un citoyen canadien ou un RP
> actuellement en Afghanistan, communiquez dès que possible avec le
> Centre de veille et d'intervention d'urgence 24/7 d'Affaires mondiales
> Canada par téléphone (+1-613-996-8885), par courriel
> (sos@international.gc.ca) ou par texto (+1-613-686-3658).
> Si vous souhaitez immigrer au Canada, veuillez cliquer
> ici<https://www.canada.ca/fr/
> pour en savoir plus.
> Pour vous renseigner sur l'état d'un dossier d'immigration, cliquez
> ici<https://www.canada.ca/fr/
> Vous pouvez également contacter votre député local pour obtenir une
> assistance supplémentaire. Si vous ne savez pas qui est votre député,
> vous pouvez le découvrir ici, https://www.noscommunes.ca/
> Si vous avez été victime d'une fraude ou si vous voulez signaler une
> activité frauduleuse, veuillez appeler la ligne d'assistance
> téléphonique de l'Agence des services frontaliers du Canada au
> 1-888-502-9060.
> Pour d'autres questions générales sur l'immigration canadienne,
> cliquez ici<canada.ca/immigration>.
> Merci.
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: Newsroom <newsroom@globeandmail.com>
> Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2022 17:34:58 +0000
> Subject: Automatic reply: James Lockyer an old law school classmate of
> my sister and her hubby Reid Chedore called me back and denied
> receiving this email
> To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
>
> Thank you for contacting The Globe and Mail.
>
> If your matter pertains to newspaper delivery or you require technical
> support, please contact our Customer Service department at
> 1-800-387-5400 or send an email to customerservice@globeandmail.
>
> If you are reporting a factual error please forward your email to
> publiceditor@globeandmail.com<
>
> Letters to the Editor can be sent to letters@globeandmail.com
>
> This is the correct email address for requests for news coverage and
> press releases.
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: Ministerial Correspondence Unit - Justice Canada <mcu@justice.gc.ca>
> Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2022 17:33:45 +0000
> Subject: Automatic Reply
> To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
>
> Thank you for writing to the Honourable David Lametti, Minister of
> Justice and Attorney General of Canada.
>
> Due to the volume of correspondence addressed to the Minister, please
> note that there may be a delay in processing your email. Rest assured
> that your message will be carefully reviewed.
>
> We do not respond to correspondence that contains offensive language.
>
> -------------------
>
> Merci d'avoir écrit à l'honorable David Lametti, ministre de la
> Justice et procureur général du Canada.
>
> En raison du volume de correspondance adressée au ministre, veuillez
> prendre note qu'il pourrait y avoir un retard dans le traitement de
> votre courriel. Nous tenons à vous assurer que votre message sera lu
> avec soin.
>
> Nous ne répondons pas à la correspondance contenant un langage offensant.
>
>
>
> https://www.facebook.com/
>
>
>
> May be an image of 1 person
>
>
> Frank
> January 12, 2021
> ·
> Save the kids or save the ex-con?
> by Paul Palango
> https://www.frankmagazine.ca/.
> (for subscribers only)
>
> On that terrible night in Portapique, the RCMP faced what on the
> surface, at least, seemed like a no-brainer of a situation: rescue
> four children hiding in a basement after their parents had been
> murdered by Gabriel Wortman, or save a convicted drug trafficker with
> ties to a Mexican drug cartel and his parents. Save the kids or save
> the con. An easy choice, you’d think.
>
> Yet, the RCMP chose to evacuate convicted drug trafficker Peter
> Griffon and his parents, Alan and Joanne Griffon, an hour or so before
> attending to the children. The cavalry showed up at the Griffon house
> at 4 Faris Lane sometime around midnight.
>
> Meanwhile, since 10:01 p.m. on April 18, four terrified children, two
> aged 12 and two aged 10, had been on the line with a 911 operator for
> about two hours, hunkered in the basement of slain school-teacher Lisa
> McCully’s house at 135 Orchard Beach Drive. Some half a kilometre away
> from the Griffon residence, as the crow flies...
>
> ...Tammy Oliver-McCreadie, the sister of Jolene Oliver, recently was
> able to gain access to her brother-in-law Aaron Tuck’s cell phone. To
> her astonishment she found a text from RCMP Constable Wayne (Skipper)
> Bent to Aaron. It was sent at 1:15 p.m. that Sunday. The Oliver family
> had been frantically calling the RCMP throughout that day because they
> couldn’t reach their family members. The RCMP repeatedly told them
> they were checking. But they hadn’t been. Not in person, anyway.
>
> The text to Aaron Tuck read: “This is Cst. Bent with the RCMP. Looking
> for Aaron Tuck to call me ASAP. Important. Thank you.”
>
> The three Tucks couldn’t answer Skipper Bent’s text for obvious reasons.
>
> Their bodies weren’t found until near 6 p.m. that Sunday, while the
> Olivers kept calling the RCMP and being stalled by Bent and the new
> officer in charge Corp. Gerard Rose-Berthiaume.
>
> “I have really no idea why in the %#@& would they text and not walk
> down the road and check them,” Oliver-McCurdie wrote in a message to
> Frank.
>
> “The phones were in the house. Aaron’s was plugged in charging.”
>
> That Saturday night and well into the day on Sunday, the RCMP seemed
> obsessed with keeping regular members away from nine crime scenes on
> the lower half of Portapique Beach Road, even after the threat had
> been neutralized.
>
> Nobody bothered to do a wellness check on the Tucks, for one small
> example, until seven hours after Gabriel Wortman’s rampage was finally
> brought to an end in Enfield..
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> https://www.facebook.com/
>
>
>
> No photo description available.
> Frank
> April 5, 2021 ·
>
> The RCMP, governments and the media have conflated all the killings
> into a single massacre. This is inaccurate. While Gabriel Wortman is
> the perpetrator in both massacres, the circumstances of each are
> decidedly distinct. By treating what happened as one prolonged
> incident provides both a disservice to the truth and a cover for the
> RCMP and its government and public enablers.
> The first massacre took place on Saturday night April 18, and was
> contained in the community of Portapique Beach. It appears that no
> witness to any of the murders was left alive. Portapique resident
> Andrew MacDonald and his wife, Katie, were shot at by Wortman and
> escaped. MacDonald told the first arriving officer, Constable Stuart
> Beselt, that Wortman was dressed as a police officer and was driving a
> fully marked RCMP vehicle. It is understood that Beselt radioed that
> information to his base. The Mounties say they had five units in place
> by 10:35 p.m. or so, but they held their positions. Officers who
> wanted to go down the road were ordered not to by a corporal who
> threatened them with the loss of their jobs if they did not obey her.
> Thirteen people were killed that night: John Zahl and Joanne Thomas,
> Frank and Dawn Gulenchyn, Greg and Jamie Blair, Lisa McCully, Corrie
> Ellison, Aaron Tuck, Jolene Oliver, Emily Tuck and Peter and Joy Bond.
> Could any of them been saved? Since the Columbine massacre in Colorado
> in 1999, police forces just about everywhere have recognized that the
> first officers on the scene of an active shooter must attack the
> shooter and not wait for specialized tactical officers to arrive on
> scene. The first responsibility of any law enforcement officer in a
> critical situation is preservation of life. Why did the RCMP not
> pursue Wortman when they were told where he was by MacDonald?
>
> The second massacre occurred on the morning of April 19, and was
> spread out over a wide swath of Northern and Central Nova Scotia. A
> key thing to note is that the RCMP sent its officers home from
> Portapique around 6:30 a.m. after it was assumed that Wortman had
> committed suicide. Who made that assumption?
> When daylight arrived, the bodies of Corrie Ellison and Lisa McCully
> were still lying by the road on Orchard Beach Drive. At least five
> bodies — the three Tucks and the two Bonds — wouldn’t be found until
> later that day. The police had no idea where Wortman was. Eventually,
> the police said that he likely spent the night behind a welding shop
> of Ventura Drive in Debert, but we still don’t really know that. It’s
> another assumption.
> That morning, Wortman travelled 50 kilometres to Hunter Road in
> Wentworth, where he killed corrections officers Sean McLeod and Alanna
> Jenkins before setting their house on fire. He killed Good Samaritan
> neighbour, Tom Bagley, who came to check out what was going on. He
> then drove back toward Portapique and killed Lillian Hyslop on Highway
> 4. He eluded the RCMP near Glenholme, tried to gain entry into another
> residence, and then killed VON nurses Kristin Beaton and Heather
> O’Brien on Plains Road in Debert.
> Wortman then headed south, where he shot and wounded Constable Chad
> Morrison and killed Constable Heidi Stevenson at Shubenacadie. At that
> scene he coldly executed Joey Webber, another Good Samaritan. He set
> his fake police car on fire with Webber in the back seat, and escaped
> in Webber’s Ford Escape. He stopped about a kilometre away at fellow
> denturist Gina Goulet’s house, killed her and stole her vehicle.
> In all Wortman drove an estimated 200 kilometres. The RCMP did not set
> up a roadblock in front of him. Why?
>
> One year after Portapique: On shifting timelines, evidence
> destruction, incompetence and unanswered questions, by Paul Palango
> https://www.frankmagazine.ca/.
> (for subscribers only)
> See less
>
>
>
> https://www.facebook.com/
>
>
>
> No photo description available.
>
>
> Frank
> April 20, 2021
> ·
> A hearty Frankland congratulations to Darryl MacDonald, Commander of
> the RCMP PEI Operational Communication Centre, named by the RCMP last
> week as the force's OCC Commander of the Year.
> The Mounties hand out the awards every year in mid-April.
> Fortuitous timing indeed for last year's winner, Glen Byrne!
>
>
>
> https://www.facebook.com/
>
>
>
> May be an image of one or more people and text
>
>
> Frank
> April 26, 2021
> ·
> Remember last April when the RCMP held four decidedly weird press
> conferences during which Assistant Commissioner Lee Bergerman, Chief
> Superintendent Chris Leather and Superintendent Darren Campbell all
> embarrassed themselves? Caught lurking behind the scenes at Campbell’s
> press conference on April 28 was an RCMP civilian employee named Alex
> Vass.
> He is a former journalist who had spent almost 30 years working as a
> radio and television reporter in New Brunswick, the last 16 of them
> with the CTV network. In April 2005, Vass went to work for the
> Mounties in their strategic communications department. By 2020, he was
> a senior crisis and communications strategist in the force, “using
> traditional and social media to meet business goals or in other words
> using communications to solve and prevent crime,” as he so awkwardly
> states in his own LinkedIn profile.
> Vass brought added value to the RCMP mainly because he had a pipeline
> back to his former comrades in the CTV newsroom, where he could deftly
> wield influence from behind the scenes and keep the CTV newsroom tame
> when it came to stories potentially harmful to the RCMP’s reputation.
> There was another part of Vass’s back story that shed light on why the
> RCMP had put so much of its faith in Twitter and Facebook and why it
> continued to defend that mystifying decision. Leather memorably called
> the platform “a superior way to communicate this ongoing threat” and
> said he was “satisfied with the messaging.”
> Vass was the key person inside the RCMP who was instrumental in
> convincing the force to use social media in a crisis and who was
> working behind the scenes to manage the force’s response to the
> growing criticism of the practise...
>
> HOW THE MOUNTIES GOT ADDICTED TO TWITTER, by Paul Palango
> https://www.frankmagazine.ca/.
> (for subscribers only)
> See less
>
>
>
>
>
> https://www.facebook.com/
>
>
>
> May be an image of 2 people
>
>
> Frank
> May 1, 2021
>
> ·
> In which journo Paul Palango breaks in his new Frank hat during a
> recent episode of Nighttime: Canadian Crime, Mysteries, and the Weird
> Sez host Jordan Bonaparte:
> "I've gotta get me one of those. I'll go get my face punched in
> downtown with that hat on".
> "I'd welcome it," declares the noted contrarian with an impish grin.
> Palango's been a regular guest on Nighttime for months, where he talks
> at length about his ongoing investigation into last year's mass
> shootings.
> He's back on the show tomorrow night, May 2, 10:15 N.S. time.
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?
>
>
>
>
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?
>
>
> 12) N.D.A.s - Derpmergency Alert
> 603 views
> Premiered Jan 23, 2022
> Big Fun Garage
> 175 subscribers
> Big Fun Garage Back-Up Channel on Rumble:
> https://rumble.com/c/c-1347083 12) N.D.A.s - Big Fun Garage (Rumble
> Link): https://rumble.com/vt2y06-
>
>
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?
>
>
>
> MCC Day 48 – Lisa Banfield Speaks
> 628 views
> Jul 15, 2022
> Adam Rodgers
> 651 subscribers
> Today, more than two years after the Nova Scotia mass shooting, the
> common law spouse of the killer has finally spoken in public, as she
> gave evidence in the Mass Casualty Commission proceedings. Lisa
> Banfield spent 19 years with Gabriel Wortman before he went on a
> rampage and killed 22 people over the course of 13 hours on April
> 18-19, 2020. It is difficult to know what to make of Ms. Banfield. She
> has had two years to prepare her answers, considerable preparation
> time and help from her high-profile lawyer, and the benefit of knowing
> everyone else’s versions of events before having to give evidence. On
> the other hand, multiple other witnesses have confirmed her accounts
> of having been the victim of domestic violence over an extended period
> of time. On yet another hand, she had no children to protect, and
> seemed to be enjoying a comfortable lifestyle built on criminal
> activity of which she must have been well aware, and now has a clear
> financial interest in denying knowledge of those criminal activities
> as she tries to retain entitlement to Gabriel Wortman’s estate.
>
>
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?
>
>
>
> MCC- DAY 50 - LISA BANFIELD... AND HANDLERS
> 2,695 views
> Streamed live
>
> Little Grey Cells
> 3.42K subscribers
>
> 15 Comments
>
> David Amos
> David Amos
> Methinks at 4 hours 1 minute you dudes jerked the wrong old dog's
> chain again N'esy Pas?
>
> "David AmosMethinks Agent Margaritaville loves to play the wicked
> game N'esy Pas?"
>
> "SadMafioso @David Amos Je Nas Comprend Pas".
>
> David Amos
> David Amos
> Need I say that I am editing my blog???
>
>
> David Amos
> David Amos
> Say Hey to your old pal Palango for me will ya?
> 1
>
> Paul Kimber
> Paul Kimber
> Greetings brother. This is my second look at this today and it is the
> most riveting thing I have ever seen, because these issues are taking
> place in my household, today, right now. Why do abused women risk so
> many lives before they finally spill the beans? My daughters abuser, a
> career criminal with no regard for others whatsoever knows full well
> he will never be held accountable for his crimes. She is right. These
> women also know that co-operating with the police will not protect
> them for long and if the woman has a child they live in terror. The
> similarities in LB's testimony to our current situation where our
> threat has been alleviated by a 14 day psyche test [3rd one in 2
> years]. I now protect my family with a slingshot. It seems the
> families have no standing in the courts, even with mountains of
> evidence of violent crime, even gun crimes, reckless endangerment,
> etc... over and over again. The man terrorizing our and his family
> openly and inflicting harm on the whole community, has all of us
> concerned they will just let him go AGAIN! GW should have gotten pen
> time the first time he beat her up whether Lisa liked it or not. I've
> watched these courts of revolving door zoom justice for two years now.
> In our case the police risked there lives to protect us, [Almaguin
> OPP] several times. The RCMP are globalist jack-boots and that's
> obvious. The OPP are never surprised to have to respond to assaults on
> our home though, because the courts and politicians are letting them
> all loose now. This proceeding, sadly is as corrupt as the zoom
> fiascoes in our criminal courts. There is no justice in the land, but
> for Divine justice which is shortly to come for those who love the
> truth according to His purposes. This wicked world is about to receive
> its just reward as we enter a thousand years of peace with the Prince
> of Peace, the Lord Jesus Christ and we who love HIM. Praying for the
> folks in that courtroom, who are ever in my thoughts and prayers these
> days. God have mercy and heal your people. Maranatha.
>
>
>
> Joanne Willoughby
> Joanne Willoughby
> I wish I could see the “live chat”, I was interested to see what
> everyone thought of this today!
>
> David Amos
> David Amos
> Go to my blog DELETED
>
> Little Grey Cells
> Little Grey Cells
> Live chat is there now, Joanne.
>
> Joanne Willoughby
> Joanne Willoughby
> @Little Grey Cells 😊 Also I truly Thank You for the shirts, that
> was very kind of You. When standing in line at Tim’s waiting for
> coffee yesterday on My way home, I was asked about My shirt. I had a
> nice chat with a young woman and gave her the name of your channel and
> told her to check it out IF she would like to have her eyes VERY WIDE
> OPEN! I hope she looks into it, the more people who get behind the
> truth the better. Take Care and Thank You for everything that You do
> ❤️ God Bless the 23 🙏🏻 and their families 💕
>
>
>
> Nosy Scotian
> Nosy Scotian
> Shawn Banfield learned to barber in the clink. Owned G spot. Cuts in
> the front. Powders in the back. Nephew or cousin not sure to Lisa
> 1
>
> Moshpit70
> Moshpit70
> Damn Dude, The YT blocked your replay chat comments. I learned so much
> from your followers. Glad you're still working towards truth. Thanks
> Seamus, Chat.
> 1
>
> Maureen Weeres
> Maureen Weeres
> LB scared of Gabes threats with guns but not concerned about where he
> stored them!
>
>
>
> Tony K
> Tony K
> I have been watching most days...they swear/affirm them at beginning
> and at times Commissioner MacDonald would sometimes say to a witness
> you are still under oath when they return from lunch or long
> breaks....but not done consistently. I have never seen them swear them
> in again after breaks...unless next day continuation. Is all the other
> 50 days of testimony now invalid? Need one of the 30-50 lawyers
> present to intervene or are they considered still under oath?
> 1
>
> Doreen Stokdijk
> Doreen Stokdijk
> Notice how she says Gabrial in a nice way and then says sorry, G. Hmm
> 2
>
> Scott Clark
> Scott Clark
> how do they all keep the RBF for so long
>
>
> tinycha0s
> tinycha0s
> Has anyone seen the article about that dentist who got that contract
> with the prison systems? wonder if that’s got anything to do with
> this….?
>
>
>
> Lynn M
> Lynn M
> Was she whispering something to her sister around the 59:00 min mark?
> Anyone hear it ?
>
>
>
>
> https://www.cbc.ca/news/
>
>
> Partner of N.S. mass shooter tells inquiry why she didn't report illegal
> guns
> Lawyers of victims’ families concerned about lack of ability to ask
> questions
>
> Haley Ryan · CBC News · Posted: Jul 15, 2022 5:00 AM AT
>
>
> Lisa Banfield, the partner of the gunman who carried out the Nova
> Scotia mass shooting of April 2020, speaks at the inquiry into the
> shooting on July 15, 2022. (CBC)
>
> The partner of the gunman who killed 22 people in the Nova Scotia mass
> shooting says she knew he didn't have a gun licence, but was scared he
> would kill her if she ever reported him to police.
>
> Lisa Banfield testified Friday before the Mass Casualty Commission
> leading a public inquiry into the rampage on April 18 and 19, 2020,
> when her common-law spouse, Gabriel Wortman, killed neighbours and
> strangers as he drove a mock RCMP cruiser.
>
> CBC's full coverage of the inquiry into the Nova Scotia mass casualty
>
> Banfield, who was only questioned by commission counsel, was composed
> for the first few hours of the day as she testified with two of her
> sisters by her side.
>
> She became emotional when talking about the various firearms the
> gunman owned. Banfield said she never considered reporting her
> common-law spouse to the police, even though she knew he didn't have a
> licence.
>
> "If we had a fight, he put the gun to my head to scare me and said he
> could blow off my head," Banfield said through tears.
>
> "So I was scared. I'm not going to say anything."
>
> Banfield said she was aware other men also knew Wortman had these guns
> and were afraid to say anything, "so what am I gonna do?"
> Wanted to protect police from gunman
>
> She was also asked about what happened when two Halifax Regional
> Police officers arrived at the Dartmouth home she shared with the
> gunman in June 2010, investigating reports that he had threatened to
> kill his parents.
>
> At the time, Banfield told officers there were no guns in the house.
> She testified Friday that wasn't true, but she said she lied to
> protect the officers.
>
> "[Wortman] had the handgun by the nightstand and said if any police
> come, 'I'm shooting,'" Banfield said.
>
> Soon after this, Banfield said RCMP Const. Greg Wiley came by the
> Portapique cottage to see whether Wortman had any firearms.
> Wiley in house for 10 minutes: Banfield
>
> The inquiry has heard that Wiley visited the gunman's cottage more
> than a dozen times in the years before the mass shooting, since the
> officer went to him for tips on local crime.
>
> During that 2010 visit, Banfield said Wiley asked Wortman if he had
> any guns. The gunman showed the Mountie an old musket and one
> decorative gun above a fireplace that was filled with wax.
>
> Wiley was only in the cottage for about 10 minutes and didn't seem to
> take an official statement from the gunman, nor did he search the
> home, said Banfield.
>
> She couldn't remember if Wiley visited the gunman's warehouse or if it
> had been built by then.
>
> The Portapique, N.S. log cottage belonging to the Nova Scotia mass
> shooter. The building, and nearby warehouse, were burned to the ground
> during the April 2020 rampage. (Mass Casualty Commission)
>
> The gunman began his rampage on April 18, 2020, after attacking
> Banfield during a celebration of their 19th anniversary. The gunman's
> long history of violence, emotional abuse and other controlling
> behaviour toward Banfield was outlined in a foundational document
> released earlier this week.
>
> Although Banfield's lawyer James Lockyer said she was apprehensive
> about testifying, due to revisiting of the trauma from her past, she
> chose to give her evidence in person rather than via video.
>
> "She's showing, you know, a lot of courage there in my view, and she's
> going to do her best," Lockyer said Thursday.
>
> As of Friday, Banfield has completed four interviews with police since
> the massacre, a video walk-through of her experience on April 18 and
> 19 in Portapique, N.S., and five recent interviews with the commission
> itself.
>
> Soon after the video walk-through in October 2020, the RCMP charged
> Banfield with supplying ammunition to the gunman and she stopped
> cooperating with police. Banfield also, under her lawyer's advice,
> initially refused to speak at the inquiry. That stance changed when
> her charge was referred to restorative justice in March.
>
> Spouse of Portapique gunman to have criminal charge resolved
>
> Common-law spouse among 3 charged with giving N.S. shooter ammunition
>
> According to a commission release, the decision to not allow questions
> from other participant lawyers is based on the volume of information
> Banfield has already provided, and her position as a "survivor of the
> perpetrator's violence."
>
> Gillian Hnatiw, commission counsel, said earlier this week that while
> there may be "follow-up questions" put to Banfield on Friday about the
> shootings, their team will not be asking her to retell that story.
>
> Michael Scott of Patterson Law, the firm representing the families of
> most victims, said they were "shocked" to hear that.
>
> Scott said their clients already had significant concerns with the
> commission blocking direct cross-examination. He is not planning to
> submit any written questions for the commission to consider.
>
> Scott said there is "absolutely no point" in having Banfield give
> sworn testimony in person under the conditions the commission has laid
> out.
>
> Michael Scott is a lawyer with Patterson Law, whose firm represents
> more than a dozen families of Portapique victims. (CBC)
>
> "We can be forgiven for concluding that Ms. Banfield has been called
> forward for no other reason than ... it can be said that she was
> called," Scott said Thursday.
>
> He added that the commission's trauma-informed mandate would have been
> better served by having Banfield testify once in person, and not sit
> through multiple lengthy interviews behind closed doors.
>
> If this process had been done the "proper way" and questions allowed
> from various lawyers, Scott said Banfield would have been allowed the
> opportunity to speak her piece. But as it stands, Scott said there
> will still be major questions around Banfield after she testifies
> Friday, and "speculation about what actually happened."
>
> When asked what else the commission is hoping to learn from Banfield,
> one of their lawyers Emily Hill told reporters Thursday that there are
> multiple issues, including the history of the gunman's abuse in their
> relationship. Hill also said they do have questions for her as a
> witness to how the events of April 18 unfolded.
>
> Banfield has told police how the gunman assaulted her before throwing
> her into the mock RCMP car in his Portapique garage. She said she
> escaped through an opening in the car's divider, and hid in the woods
> overnight.
>
> Lockyer said he's glad that the commission will not allow questions
> from participant lawyers which may be driven by a "conspiracy theory"
> that Banfield actually didn't spend the night outside in the woods.
>
> James Lockyer is a lawyer for Lisa Banfield, the partner of the mass
> shooter who killed 22 people in April 2020 across Nova Scotia. (CBC)
>
> This type of question "takes us to south of the border," Lockyer said
> Thursday.
>
> "You know, these shootings happen south of the border and the next
> thing we hear from the Alex Joneses of this world is that the shooting
> never actually happened, it's completely phony and was made up,"
> Lockyer said.
>
> "We don't need that kind of nonsense in Canada or in Nova Scotia."
>
> Lockyer said Banfield is aware victims' families will be in the room
> Friday, and that's one of the reasons she wants to come in person.
> Banfield never knew the massacre was coming, Lockyer said, and every
> day thinks about what would have happened if she hadn't fled on April
> 18.
>
> "She's going to think about that every day for the rest of her life.
> That's a difficult thing to carry, a very heavy burden to carry,"
> Lockyer said.
>
> "She just hopes that … she's going to be to tell them, as best she
> can, that she just wishes it never happened."
>
> Twenty-two people died on April 18 and 19, 2020. Top row from left:
> Gina Goulet, Dawn Gulenchyn, Jolene Oliver, Frank Gulenchyn, Sean
> McLeod, Alanna Jenkins. Second row: John Zahl, Lisa McCully, Joey
> Webber, Heidi Stevenson, Heather O'Brien and Jamie Blair. Third row
> from top: Kristen Beaton, Lillian Campbell, Joanne Thomas, Peter Bond,
> Tom Bagley and Greg Blair. Bottom row: Emily Tuck, Joy Bond, Corrie
> Ellison and Aaron Tuck. (CBC)
>
> Although Patterson Law filed a motion asking for detailed reasons on
> the commission's approach, the commission released a decision
> dismissing this motion Thursday.
>
> The commissioners said they have explained fully why Banfield is only
> being questioned by their own counsel, who are tasked to find answers
> in the public interest, and "not in the adversarial, trial-like model"
> on which the motion was based.
>
> The commission also dismissed Patterson's request to give an oral
> submission about Banfield's testimony Friday.
>
> This is not the first time the issue of lack of direct questioning has
> been raised by victims' families and their lawyers. In May, the
> commissioners decided that only their lawyers would question RCMP
> Staff Sgt. Brian Rehill and Sgt. Andy O'Brien in pre-taped interviews.
> Rehill was in charge of the police response during the first hours
> after 911 calls began to come in. O'Brien helped communicate with
> officers at the crime scene early in the crisis.
>
> This drew a temporary boycott of the inquiry by many victims'
> families, who did not show up during the Mounties' testimonies and
> instructed their lawyers to do the same.
> ABOUT THE AUTHOR
> Haley Ryan
>
> Reporter
>
> Haley Ryan is a reporter based in Halifax. Got a story idea? Send an
> email to haley.ryan@cbc.ca, or reach out on Twitter @hkryan17.
>
> With files from Catharine Tunney
> CBC's Journalistic Standards and Practices|
>
>
>
>
>
> https://www.cbc.ca/news/
>
>
> Spouse of N.S. mass shooter shows how deadly rampage began in video
> re-enactment
> Lisa Banfield told police what she could remember about Portapique
> events months later
>
> Haley Ryan · CBC News · Posted: Jul 13, 2022 3:57 PM AT
>
>
> The gunman's partner Lisa Banfield, left, stands with a Nova Scotia
> RCMP investigator near the remains of the gunman's warehouse in
> Portapique, N.S., in October 2020, during a re-enactment of the events
> that took place months earlier on April 18, 2020. (Mass Casualty
> Commission)
>
> Warning: This story contains details of violence and domestic abuse
> that are disturbing.
>
> New videos show the long-time partner of the Nova Scotia mass shooter
> re-enacting what she saw and experienced the night the rampage began
> two years ago.
>
> The Mass Casualty Commission released new documents and images
> Wednesday as part of its inquiry into what happened on April 18 and
> 19, 2020, when Gabriel Wortman killed 22 people while driving a mock
> RCMP car.
>
> Among these are video re-enactments from October 2020, when Lisa
> Banfield took an RCMP investigator through what she remembers happened
> in Portapique.
>
> Banfield said the night began with the couple celebrating their 19th
> anniversary and having drinks at the gunman's large garage next to his
> cottage. They were video chatting with friends in the United States
> and talking about how they planned to hold a commitment ceremony the
> next year. That's when their friend Angel Patterson said, "Don't do
> it." That upset Banfield and she left the garage.
>
> CBC's full coverage of the inquiry into the Nova Scotia mass casualty
>
> Halfway up the path to the cottage, Banfield said she decided to turn
> around and apologize to Wortman, but when she arrived he was already
> "irate." She told the commission she couldn't calm him down, and went
> back to the cottage and into bed.
>
> What seemed like minutes later, Banfield said the gunman pulled the
> covers off the bed and assaulted her, kicking her into the bedpost. He
> then pulled her through the cottage which she noticed was already
> doused in gasoline, and set the building on fire once they got
> outside.
>
> She then told police about the gunman leading her through the woods to
> the garage.
> N.S. gunman’s eyes were ‘just so cold,’ says former common-law spouse
> 21 hours ago
> Duration 0:54
> New videos show Lisa Banfield, the long-time partner of the Nova
> Scotia mass shooter re-enacting what she saw and experienced the night
> the rampage began two years ago.
>
> Once at the garage, the gunman started dousing the vehicles outside
> with gas. He dragged Banfield into the garage, and handcuffed her left
> hand.
>
> But when he demanded her right hand, Banfield said she held it back.
> N.S. gunman’s ex describes what she thought would be her last moments
> before being shot
> 21 hours ago
> Duration 1:16
> Lisa Banfield remembers the tense moments she pleaded for her life.
>
> When she was in the back seat of the mock RCMP cruiser behind the
> plexiglass partition, Banfield said the gunman loaded several firearms
> into the front of the vehicle.
>
> He then went up to the loft apartment in the garage, and she tried to
> kick out the back seat windows with no success.
>
> She managed to slip the handcuff off her left hand and was able to
> slide open a window in the divider and dive into the front seat. She
> ran from the garage, not taking any of the guns in the cruiser —
> something she told police she has replayed over in her head.
> N.S. gunman’s former common-law partner laments over being paralyzed by
> fear
> 21 hours ago
> Duration 0:24
> Lisa Banfield reenacts what she saw and experienced the night the
> rampage began two years ago.
>
> After running from the garage, Banfield tried to hide in one of his
> trucks but was worried he would set it on fire, and fled into the
> woods.
>
> Banfield told police how she spent the next few hours alone, hearing
> gunshots and terrified the gunman would find her.
> Lisa Banfield describes the sounds she could hear coming from beyond
> the woods she hid in
> 21 hours ago
> Duration 3:29
> The former common-law partner of the Nova Scotia mass shooter
> describes in her own words what she could hear while hiding in the
> dark woods in Portapique, N.S.
>
> While Banfield was in hiding, the gunman killed 13 people within the
> small community.
>
> She remained hidden inside a fallen tree overnight as temperatures
> dipped close to zero degrees, inquiry documents said.
>
> Banfield said she thought if she could survive until dawn, she could
> then venture out for help.
> ‘Lisa, just do it.’ How the N.S. gunman’s ex eventually found help
> 21 hours ago
> Duration 1:22
> Terrified and in pain, Lisa Banfield describes how and when she
> emerged from her hiding place in the Portapique, N.S., woods
>
> After first light, she walked to a neighbour who called police just
> before 6:30 a.m. on April 19. Members of the RCMP's emergency response
> team picked her up in an armoured vehicle a few minutes later.
>
> Medical records released through the inquiry show Banfield spent five
> nights in hospital after suffering a fractured rib and vertebrae, as
> well as extensive bruising and scrapes from the night of April 18.
>
> CBC's Journalistic Standards and Practices
>
>
>
> https://www.cbc.ca/news/
>
> Inquiry learns details of abuse, control suffered by spouse of N.S. mass
> shooter
> Lisa Banfield says she was convinced the gunman would kill her family
> if she left him
>
> Haley Ryan · CBC News · Posted: Jul 13, 2022 11:16 AM AT
>
>
>
> Inquiry hears from spouse of N.S. mass shooter about years of abuse,
> control
> 1 day ago
> Duration 2:17
> The public inquiry into the 2020 Nova Scotia mass shooting released
> dramatic, previously unseen video and testimony from the gunman's
> spouse Wednesday. She described suffering years of abuse at the
> gunman's hand, including on the night he killed 22 people.
>
> Warning: details are disturbing.
>
> The first time Lisa Banfield says she was physically abused by her
> partner was a terrifying assault where she ran into the woods in the
> early 2000s.
>
> "He was running after me and I was screaming my head off, and then he
> caught me and then he … you know, I had blood all over me and he was
> dragging me back," Banfield recalled to police.
>
> It's a scene she said played out again years later, the night her
> common-law spouse Gabriel Wortman began a shooting rampage in
> Portapique, N.S., that would leave 22 Nova Scotians dead.
>
> Mass shooting inquiry to examine gunman's family violence,
> domestic abuse this week
>
> How the N.S. mass shooter controlled, exploited women around him
>
> The gunman's violence, emotional abuse and other controlling behaviour
> toward Banfield throughout their 19-year relationship are outlined in
> a new foundational document released Wednesday by the Mass Casualty
> Commission. The document is based on interviews with Banfield, her
> family and other witnesses.
>
> The commission is leading the inquiry into the mass shootings on April
> 18 and 19, 2020, examining the tragedy and the factors that led up to
> it, including the violence in Wortman's family and his history of
> harassment and attacks on others.
>
> Banfield, who is set to testify before the inquiry for the first time
> Friday, gave four police interviews following the massacre and five
> interviews with the commission itself in recent months.
> Physical abuse began after party
>
> The documents show that Banfield met Wortman in May 2001 at the
> now-defunct Halifax pub, the Thirsty Duck.
>
> On their first date, he showed up with a dozen long-stemmed roses.
> Banfield felt that was "too showy," and said she wasn't impressed. But
> later in the evening, she was impressed by the gunman's calm demeanour
> when his car was rear-ended.
>
> Things moved quickly after that. Three months later, Banfield had
> moved in with the gunman.
>
> Initially, she described Wortman as "sweet and caring." That was
> before the first time she was physically abused, following a party at
> a cottage in Sutherland Lake, about a half-hour drive north of
> Portapique.
>
> Although witnesses differed on when the incident happened — Banfield
> said it was in 2001, others suggested it was as late as 2007 — the
> commission said it was likely after October 2002 when the gunman
> bought his Portapique cottage.
>
> The burned out remains of Gabriel Wortman's home on Portapique Beach
> Road, N.S., taken May 13, 2020. (Steve Lawrence/CBC)
>
> Banfield said Renée Karsten, a denturist who worked with Wortman at
> his Dartmouth clinic, invited the couple up for the night. But when
> Banfield wanted to leave and offered to take the gunman's Jeep home so
> he could stay, this "set him off."
>
> As she left, the gunman jumped in the car and began hitting her in the
> head as she continued trying to drive. Banfield said she was crying so
> hard she couldn't see, so she stopped and fled into the woods.
>
> The gunman soon caught Banfield and dragged her back to the car, but
> she ran away again when a group of people from the party arrived.
>
> Karsten told police she saw Wortman dragging Banfield by the hair in
> the driveway, so she "lost it" and tried to intervene.
>
> "His face and just the look in his eyes … it scared the hell out of
> me," Karsten told police.
> Police involved, no charges laid
>
> Karsten brought Banfield back to the cottage, and police came and
> drove the gunman back to his Portapique home. Banfield said that was
> the only time police were involved, and nothing came of the incident.
>
> The commission said in the document it's unclear exactly why police
> were called and what they knew about the situation. While police
> records from this time "may have been purged" by now, the commission
> continues to investigate.
>
> When Banfield eventually returned to the Portapique cottage that
> night, she saw the gunman pulling the tires off her car and throwing
> them over a bank. He told her to come inside, but she went to a
> neighbour's and waited for her niece to pick her up.
>
> The niece, Stephanie Goulding, said Banfield was bloody and scraped
> up, with torn clothing. Goulding wanted to stop into the Truro police
> station to report the assault, but Banfield "begged" her not to, so
> instead a sister took photos of her injuries.
>
> Banfield moved back into her sister Maureen Banfield's home after
> this, but Wortman soon began visiting and apologizing, saying he'd
> been drinking and he would never hurt her again — and they got back
> together.
>
> CBC's full coverage of the inquiry into the Nova Scotia mass casualty
>
> This pattern would continue through the years, both Banfield and two
> of her sisters told police. The few times her family knew of the abuse
> and urged her to report it or leave the relationship, Banfield didn't
> want to take that step.
>
> The gunman would often kick and punch the parts of her body that could
> be covered by clothing, Banfield said, like arms and legs. If he left
> marks on her neck while choking her, Banfield said she would use
> makeup to cover them.
>
> On at least two occasions, Banfield said he put a gun to her head.
>
> "He would say afterwards, 'If I didn't love you, I wouldn't do this
> because that's how much I care about you,'" she told the commission.
>
> One sister, Janice Banfield, called the gunman a "sociopath" and said
> she thought "we're gonna have to bury our sister one day."
>
> But Banfield said she felt she had nowhere to go, because the gunman
> frequently threatened to kill her or her family if she ever left him.
>
> "He would be like, 'I know where your family lives,' and look at me a
> certain way," she said.
> Violence more prevalent than first reported
>
> While Banfield originally told RCMP officers there had been around 10
> incidents of physical abuse over the years, she has since told the
> commission there were actually far more.
>
> "I just don't trust very well, and I was scared to say anything," she
> told the commission this May.
>
> She originally told police years would go by between attacks, and the
> last time had been three years before the mass shooting. Upon
> reflection, Banfield told the commission that was part of her coping
> mechanism.
>
> Banfield would write a journal entry about an incident but never
> revisit it, so she believed an assault hadn't happened in years even
> though it was happening "all along."
>
> "I would just have to block it out because … I needed to deal with
> whatever is going on in that moment, so I couldn't think about what's
> gone on," Banfield said.
> Only one neighbour reported abuse
>
> There were at least two instances of abuse witnessed by other people
> in Portapique.
>
> One day, the gunman's uncle Glynn Wortman and another neighbour saw
> him choking Banfield on the front lawn of their cottage. The uncle
> yelled, "You're just like your father, get off of her," Banfield
> recalled.
>
> Earlier this week, the inquiry heard accounts from several of the
> gunman's uncles describing incidents of his father, Paul Wortman,
> abusing his wife, Evelyn.
>
> One Portapique neighbour, Brenda Forbes, heard about the incident
> Glynn Wortman saw and reported it to the RCMP in 2013. Nothing came of
> her complaint, and Forbes said no one else in the community believed
> her or wanted to get involved.
>
> Banfield said she never told her family doctor about the abuse, and
> was careful to schedule visits only when she had no visible injuries.
> Psychologist urged her to leave
>
> But at one point, Banfield said things were "so bad" she saw a
> psychologist in Bedford who told her she was in an abusive
> relationship. This professional provided support and encouraged her to
> leave, but the gunman found out about it and made her stop.
>
> The gunman also threatened to confront the doctor, Banfield said, and
> she felt "trapped."
>
> Although Banfield said she was always "on eggshells" around the
> gunman, never knowing what would set him off, she consistently forgave
> his behaviour and tried to show him he was loved because "everybody
> always left him."
>
> In a statement to the commission, Banfield wrote she felt bad for the
> gunman when he told her about how his father abused him as a child,
> especially because she had such a large and loving family.
>
> "I thought I could help him if I just loved him unconditionally," Banfield
> said.
> Controlling, isolating behaviour
>
> The range of abuse the gunman inflicted on Banfield fits into the
> definitions of intimate-partner violence and coercive control, which
> are laid out in an inquiry report from Dr. Katreena Scott on
> interventions to address abuse.
>
> Scott writes that intimate-partner violence includes a range of
> behaviours besides physical violence, like unwanted sexual activity,
> threats, humiliation, and economic abuse which deprives a victim of
> the ability to provide for their own needs.
>
> Coercive control is a set of behaviours that disempower someone in a
> relationship, Scott said, like removing their liberties, threats to
> their family, and limiting access to loved ones or transportation.
>
> "Very early on there were so many signs of his controlling or bullying
> behaviour, but somehow, I was able to block it out and justify to
> myself how badly he treated me," Banfield wrote in a statement to the
> commission.
>
> "Gabriel was jealous, controlling, possessive, extremely degrading,
> and piggish; it was 'his way or the highway.'"
>
> Twenty-two people died on April 18 and 19, 2020. Top row from left:
> Gina Goulet, Dawn Gulenchyn, Jolene Oliver, Frank Gulenchyn, Sean
> McLeod, Alanna Jenkins. Second row: John Zahl, Lisa McCully, Joey
> Webber, Heidi Stevenson, Heather O'Brien and Jamie Blair. Third row
> from top: Kristen Beaton, Lillian Campbell, Joanne Thomas, Peter Bond,
> Tom Bagley and Greg Blair. Bottom row: Emily Tuck, Joy Bond, Corrie
> Ellison and Aaron Tuck. (CBC)
>
> Banfield said within the first couple of years, the gunman was able to
> convince her to quit her bank job at RBC so she could come work for
> his denturist business, which would make it easier for them to take
> time off and travel together.
>
> "I realize now that he just wanted to control my entire life,"
> Banfield wrote to the commission.
>
> He urged her to sell the car she'd had throughout her previous
> marriage, and he eventually bought her a Mercedes under his name.
>
> Banfield was in the gunman's will by 2011, but her sister Maureen
> Banfield was worried she'd be left with nothing if they broke up
> because she had no other income or investments of her own.
>
> By 2020, Banfield said she believed she was making around $25 an hour,
> but the clinic didn't have a regular payroll system. Instead, the
> gunman would write her cheques from a business account or give her
> cash, sometimes deducting a percentage from her cheques "for
> retirement," she said.
>
> "He dealt with all the money things, so I trusted whatever," Banfield
> told the commission.
> 'He wanted me to know that without him, I had nothing'
>
> Besides her work at his clinics, Banfield said she would wait on the
> gunman "hand and foot" by making all the meals and handling the
> cleaning and organizing of the household. She told one of her sisters
> it was the way she was raised and she wanted to take on these tasks.
>
> Banfield said in her written statement the gunman controlled
> everything in her life, so when she didn't obey, he could take things
> away to "punish her," including her car keys, phone and salary.
>
> "He wanted me to know that without him, I had nothing. I believed
> that," she wrote. "Made me feel so stupid and incapable of doing
> things on my own even though I did everything for him."
>
> The gunman also often groped Banfield in front of her family because
> he thought "it was funny," she said, and their sexual relationship was
> always defined by his wants and needs, not hers.
>
> Sex between them did not involve intimacy or tenderness, Banfield
> wrote to the commission, and said the gunman was "addicted to
> pornography."
>
> Despite his many affairs, including with Portapique neighbours or his
> own patients, Banfield said she forgave him every time — and "I am so
> ashamed of that."
> Unhappy with Banfield socializing
>
> While Banfield said the gunman would often become mad at her for
> wanting to see her siblings or other family, Banfield said he also
> didn't like her becoming too friendly with people in Portapique.
>
> If he saw her having fun at neighbourhood parties, Banfield said the
> gunman would put her down in front of others for "acting like an
> idiot" and drag her away by the arm. If she refused, he would become
> violent and slap her or pull her hair.
>
> At work, Banfield said he also belittled her and screamed at her in
> front of patients. When out for dinner one night, the gunman threw a
> glass of water in her face and left her alone in the restaurant.
>
> The gunman's controlling behaviour and jealousy appeared to weigh on
> Banfield's mind. One time, Banfield saw another denturist while out
> drinking with her sister, and was terrified they might tell the gunman
> because she wasn't supposed to be out.
>
> When her mother died, her high school boyfriend attended the funeral,
> but Banfield ushered him out, saying the gunman disliked him and would
> be upset he was there.
>
> The violence and control from the gunman lasted until April 18, 2020,
> when he attacked Banfield on the night of their 19th anniversary. He
> threw her in his mock RCMP cruiser, but she said she escaped through
> an opening in the car's partition and hid in the woods overnight.
> ABOUT THE AUTHOR
> Haley Ryan
>
> Reporter
>
> Haley Ryan is a reporter based in Halifax. Got a story idea? Send an
> email to haley.ryan@cbc.ca, or reach out on Twitter @hkryan17.
> CBC's Journalistic Standards and Practices
>
>
>
> https://www.cbc.ca/news/
>
> Lisa Banfield re-enactment videos raise questions about why she was charged
> Women’s Shelters Canada worries Banfield's experience with police will
> deter other women from reporting abuse
>
> Catharine Tunney · CBC News · Posted: Jul 14, 2022 5:04 PM AT
>
>
> The gunman's partner, Lisa Banfield, left, stands with a Nova Scotia
> RCMP investigator near the remains of the gunman's warehouse in
> Portapique, N.S., in October 2020, during a re-enactment of the events
> that took place months earlier on April 18, 2020. (Mass Casualty
> Commission)
>
> The release of new videos showing the longtime partner of the Nova
> Scotia mass shooter re-enacting what she saw and experienced the night
> of the rampage is raising questions about why police charged her in
> the weeks following the shootings.
>
> The Mass Casualty Commission released footage Wednesday of Lisa
> Banfield walking an RCMP investigator through what she remembered
> happening in Portapique, N.S., on April 18 and 19, 2020, including how
> her partner beat her and tried to handcuff her.
>
> CBC's full coverage of the inquiry into the Nova Scotia mass casualty
>
> The re-enactment was filmed in late October 2020, six months after
> Gabriel Wortman killed 22 people while driving a mock RCMP car.
>
> A few weeks after filming the re-enactment, Banfield was charged with
> supplying ammunition to the gunman.
>
> The Crown eventually determined there was no public interest in
> sending the case to trial and instead referred the matter to
> restorative justice. Upon completion, the criminal charge will be
> dropped.
>
> "I have concerns about the timeline and concerns about the fact she
> was charged in the first place," Banfield's defence lawyer, James
> Lockyer, said Thursday.
>
> Spouse of N.S. mass shooter shows how deadly rampage began in
> video re-enactment
>
> Inquiry learns details of abuse, control suffered by spouse of
> N.S. mass shooter
>
> Erin Breen, a lawyer representing three sexual assault and justice
> groups — Avalon Sexual Assault Centre, Wellness Within, and the
> Women's Legal Education and Action Fund — said she has concerns with
> the sequence of events.
>
> "It's always been a very troubling issue from our perspective. My
> clients were quite outraged when they learned that Ms. Banfield was
> being charged," she said.
>
> "Systemically it's a problem when a survivor comes forward and shares
> information about their survival behaviour and ends up getting charged
> in a criminal investigation."
> Banfield said she pleaded with gunman
>
> In the videos released Wednesday, Banfield explains how the couple had
> been marking their 19th anniversary when they began fighting.
>
> After she turned in for the night, Banfield said the gunman pulled the
> covers off the bed and assaulted her, kicking her into the bedpost. He
> then pulled her through the cottage, which she noticed was already
> doused in gasoline, and set the building on fire once they got
> outside, she told the investigator.
>
> Banfield said the gunman dragged her into the garage and tried to put
> her in handcuffs.
>
> "Looking at his eyes, there was nothing there," she said. "It was just so
> cold."
>
> Twenty-two people died on April 18 and 19, 2020. Top row from left:
> Gina Goulet, Dawn Gulenchyn, Jolene Oliver, Frank Gulenchyn, Sean
> McLeod, Alanna Jenkins. Second row: John Zahl, Lisa McCully, Joey
> Webber, Heidi Stevenson, Heather O'Brien and Jamie Blair. Third row
> from top: Kristen Beaton, Lillian Campbell, Joanne Thomas, Peter Bond,
> Tom Bagley and Greg Blair. Bottom row: Emily Tuck, Joy Bond, Corrie
> Ellison and Aaron Tuck. (CBC)
>
> Banfield was able to escape — shoeless — and hide for the next few
> hours, terrified he would find her as she heard gunshots.
>
> Medical records released through the inquiry show Banfield spent five
> nights in hospital after suffering a fractured rib and vertebrae, as
> well as extensive bruising and scrapes from the night of April 18.
>
> N.S. mass shooter had a history of intimidation, violent altercations
>
> N.S. gunman's spouse, set to undergo restorative justice, lived
> 'in survival mode,' says lawyer
>
> Other documents made public Thursday as part of the commission covered
> how the gunman used violence, emotional abuse and other controlling
> behaviour toward Banfield for nearly two decades.
> Push for more police training
>
> Megan Stephens, lawyer for Women's Shelters Canada, said she worries
> Banfield's experience will discourage other women from going to
> police.
>
> "I'm concerned about the message that people get because sometimes
> violence is such that people do need to call the police; there is no
> one else who could step in to protect them," she said.
>
> "But in this case, it feels like there were multiple failures of that,
> and the message that I think unfortunately women will get if they
> connect these dots, if they themselves are living in abusive
> relationships, is I don't know if that's the right option for me."
>
> WATCH | Inquiry hears from spouse of N.S. mass shooter about years of
> abuse, control
> Inquiry hears from spouse of N.S. mass shooter about years of abuse,
> control
> 1 day ago
> Duration 2:17
> The public inquiry into the 2020 Nova Scotia mass shooting released
> dramatic, previously unseen video and testimony from the gunman's
> spouse Wednesday. She described suffering years of abuse at the
> gunman's hand, including on the night he killed 22 people.
>
> Breen said she hopes the commission's work will at least spark a
> conversation about how police and the justice system should approach
> intimate partner abuse.
>
> "You see it quite commonly in situations where women are defending
> themselves in a violent conformation, end up getting charged with
> assault themselves," she said.
>
> "The current policy of a pro-arrest, pro-charge, pro-prosecution
> removes any choice or power from the person who has survived the
> violence."
>
> Stephens said she also hopes police get more training about how to
> recognize and better respond to abuse, including controlling
> behaviour.
>
> Lisa Banfield's running shoes, lost while fleeing Gabriel Wortman, are
> shown as commission counsel Gillian Hnatiw presents a foundational
> document about the violent behaviour that Wortman directed toward
> Banfield, his common-law spouse, at the Mass Casualty Commission
> inquiry into the mass murders in rural Nova Scotia on April 18 and 19,
> 2020, in Halifax on Wednesday, July 13, 2022. Wortman, dressed as an
> RCMP officer and driving a replica police cruiser, murdered 22 people.
> (Andrew Vaughan/The Canadian Press)
>
> "Intimate partner violence doesn't just involve discrete acts of
> physical violence, there are other ways in which controlling, coercive
> behaviour can really lead people to basically be stuck in situations
> and to have no control," she said.
>
> "Unfortunately, there is not enough training that goes into preparing
> officers who are on the front line. All the more so in some of these
> rural communities where you don't have specialists, you have
> generalists."
> Banfield felt 'betrayed' by re-enactment filming
>
> In an interview Banfield gave to a commission lawyer in April of this
> year, she said she felt ambushed by the re-enactment filming.
>
> She said she wanted to meet RCMP Sgt. Greg Vardy at the cottage in
> Portapique so he could see where her sneakers had been left and where
> she had hid overnight. It was the first time she had returned to the
> cottage since the night of the rampage.
>
> "I heard that people were thinking I'm lying about what happened, it's
> like, I thought if I go up there for the first time, I want somebody
> to see that, you know, to find my shoes, to find this tree, to find
> the things that I'm telling you that happened," she said.
>
> But Banfield said when she went to meet the Mountie, he had brought
> along a small audio and video crew.
>
> "It was just feeling like I was betrayed," she said.
>
> Her sister, Maureen, later jumps in on the interview. She said
> Banfield wasn't in the right mental shape to do the re-enactment.
>
> "Here's the thing that I feel is probably the deepest betrayal in
> terms of the manipulation of her actually being investigated without
> our knowledge," Maureen Banfield said.
>
> "It was horrific and I think it was very damning to her mentally, and
> that's for me, I think, the most egregious thing that took place in
> terms of her well-being and putting her first."
> Banfield not under investigation during filming
>
> A spokesperson for the RCMP said Banfield was not under investigation
> at the time of the re-enactment filming.
>
> "The victim/witness video re-enactment was related to a period of time
> where Ms. Banfield was a victim of multiple crimes. Given that she was
> not under investigation, it would not have been appropriate to provide
> her with rights that are given to a person who is being investigated
> for an offence or who is under arrest," said Cpl. Chris Marshall.
>
> "Lisa Banfield was provided her reason for arrest, rights to counsel
> and police warning, as required by the law, during the investigation
> in which she is charged with ammunition-related offences."
> ABOUT THE AUTHOR
> Catharine Tunney
>
> Reporter
>
> Catharine Tunney is a reporter with CBC's Parliament Hill bureau,
> where she covers national security and the RCMP. She worked previously
> for CBC in Nova Scotia. You can reach her at catharine.tunney@cbc.ca
>
> Follow Cat on Twitter
>
> With files from Haley Ryan
> CBC's Journalistic Standards and Practices
>
>
>
>
> https://www.cbc.ca/news/
>
> 3 accused of giving N.S. gunman ammunition named in lawsuit filed by
> families
> Lisa Banfield, James Banfield, Brian Brewster listed as defendants
> alongside shooter's estate
>
> Elizabeth McMillan · CBC News · Posted: Feb 08, 2021 3:27 PM AT
>
>
> The remains of a cottage and the burnt shell of a decommissioned RCMP
> cruiser are seen at a property in Portapique, N.S., that belonged to
> the gunman who killed 22 people on April 18 and 19. (Steve
> Lawrence/CBC)
>
> Three people accused of giving ammunition to the man responsible for
> killing 22 people in Nova Scotia have now been added as defendants to
> the proposed class-action lawsuit launched by families of the victims.
>
> On April 18 and 19, denturist Gabriel Wortman killed neighbours,
> acquaintances and strangers, and burned several homes, including his
> cottage, before being shot and killed by police in Enfield, N.S.
> During most of the attacks, he was driving a decommissioned cruiser
> that he'd adapted to look like a real RCMP vehicle.
>
> The gunman's common-law spouse, Lisa Banfield, 52, her brother James
> Blair Banfield, 54, of Beaver Bank, N.S., and her brother-in-law Brian
> Brewster, 60, of Lucasville, N.S., have been charged with unlawfully
> providing the shooter with .223-calibre Remington cartridges and
> .40-calibre Smith & Wesson cartridges in the month leading up to the
> massacre, which began in Portapique, N.S.
>
> Lisa Banfield is facing two counts and her relatives are each facing
> one count. They're all expected to enter pleas at their next court
> date in Dartmouth provincial court on March 9.
>
> Now, in addition to the criminal charges, the three are named in the
> lawsuit that argues they and the gunman's estate —which has been
> valued at $2.1 million — are liable to the families of the people who
> lost their lives, the estates and people who suffered damage to
> property and people who were injured due to Wortman's actions.
>
> There is a separate lawsuit families have filed against the RCMP and
> the province.
>
> Twenty-two people died on April 18 and 19. Top row from left: Gina
> Goulet, Dawn Gulenchyn, Jolene Oliver, Frank Gulenchyn, Sean McLeod,
> Alanna Jenkins. Second row: John Zahl, Lisa McCully, Joey Webber,
> Heidi Stevenson, Heather O'Brien and Jamie Blair. Third row from top:
> Kristen Beaton, Lillian Campbell, Joanne Thomas, Peter Bond, Tom
> Bagley and Greg Blair. Bottom row: Emily Tuck, Joy Bond, Corrie
> Ellison and Aaron Tuck. (CBC)
>
> The statement of claim filed against the estate alleges that in
> addition to killing 22 people, Wortman injured six people, killed five
> pets and burned or damaged three vehicles and four homes.
>
> Lisa Banfield, James Banfield and Brian Brewster's names were added to
> the lawsuit on Feb. 5. The other defendants include the public
> trustee, which is representing Wortman's estate, and three companies
> Wortman owned and controlled: Berkshire Broman Corp., Atlantic Denture
> Clinic Inc., and Northumberland Investments Inc.
>
> "Ultimately, our job is to protect the interests of the families of
> those lost in the April tragedies and of course the victims, the
> survivors of that tragedy as well," said lawyer Sandra McCulloch, who
> represents the plaintiffs. "That requires us pursuing this avenue of
> potential recourse and accountability and answers for our families."
>
> In order to proceed as a class action, the Nova Scotia Supreme Court
> must certify the lawsuit. That has not yet happened. None of the named
> defendants have filed statements in response to the allegations made
> by the plaintiffs.
>
> The burned remains of Gabriel Wortman’s cottage in Portapique, N.S.
> Wortman disguised himself as a Mountie and over the course of 13 hours
> the night of April 18, 2020, and the following morning travelled
> nearly 200 kilometres in and around Portapique, killing 22 people.
> (Steve Lawrence/CBC)
>
> When the RCMP announced the criminal charges in December, the force
> said the trio were not aware of Wortman's plans.
>
> The criminal case "coupled with the other information and evidence
> that we've been gathering on our end adds up to there being support
> for some degree of culpability on the part of each of those
> individuals," said McCulloch.
> Lawsuit alleges spouse acquired gasoline
>
> The updated statement of claim alleges that Lisa Banfield "was aware
> of and facilitated Wortman's preparations, including but not limited
> to, his accumulation of firearms, ammunition, other weapons, gasoline,
> police paraphernalia, and the outfitting of a replica RCMP vehicle."
>
> It alleges Banfield "directly acquired some of the accelerants and
> ammunition used by Wortman in the crime spree" and that James Banfield
> and Brian Brewster also "directly acquired" ammunition.
>
> The proposed lawsuit claims all three were "negligent in [the]
> acquisition of these items" and that they "knew or ought to have known
> that Wortman had tortious intentions."
>
> McCulloch declined to elaborate on the exact nature of the additional
> evidence gathered to support the allegations.
>
> The investigative firm Martin and Associates has been working with
> Patterson Law since the law firm was retained by the families. Last
> fall it set up a website to collect tips and information related to
> the mass shootings.
>
> Though police have said Lisa Banfield was the first victim of violence
> in Portapique on April 18, she was always excluded as a plaintiff from
> the families' lawsuit.
>
> "From our perspective, there has always been a possibility of a
> conflict of interest between [Banfield's] interest and those of our
> clients. And you're seeing that now manifest itself in our
> amendments," said McCulloch.
> Spouse suing estate separately
>
> In a separate civil case, however, Banfield is also suing her former
> partner's estate, which includes six properties, three corporations
> and $705,000 in cash seized from the wreckage of the couple's cottage
> in Portapique.
>
> In her statement of claim, which was filed with the Nova Scotia
> Supreme Court last summer, Banfield said she was the victim of assault
> and battery, and suffered physical, emotional and psychological
> injuries and trauma.
>
> Search warrant documents show several people told investigators
> Banfield, who lived with Wortman above the denture clinic in Dartmouth
> where they both worked, was abused during their 19-year relationship.
>
> Lawyers representing Banfield are also opposing the application by CBC
> and other media organizations to lift some redactions in the search
> warrants related to the mass shooting investigation.
> Banfield opposed to lifting redactions
>
> In documents filed with the court on Feb. 5, James Lockyer and Jessica
> Zita, the Toronto lawyers who are representing Banfield, argue that 13
> redacted paragraphs should remain blacked out because they explain the
> Crown's case against their client and "invades Lisa solicitor-client
> privilege."
>
> One paragraph is a summary of a statement Banfield's friend and lawyer
> Kevin van Bargen gave to police.
>
> "His information deals with business and financial affairs, unrelated
> and peripheral to the events. This invasion of Lisa's solicitor-client
> privilege is unwarranted, would not be permitted at her trial, and
> should not be provided to the media," the lawyers stated in the
> filings.
>
> Their filings said Lisa Banfield gave four statements to police, on
> April 19, April 20, April 28 and July 28. They said the other sections
> that should remain redacted pertain to her statements and those made
> by her co-accused and other family members who spoke to police between
> April and July.
>
> Meanwhile, work on a public inquiry into the mass killings is
> underway. Last month the commission announced the staff who will lead
> the teams involved in the joint federal-provincial inquiry.
> ABOUT THE AUTHOR
> Elizabeth McMillan
>
> Elizabeth McMillan is a journalist with CBC in Halifax. Over the past
> 13 years, she has reported from the edge of the Arctic Ocean to the
> Atlantic Coast and loves sharing people's stories. Please send tips
> and feedback to elizabeth.mcmillan@cbc.ca
> CBC's Journalistic Standards and Practices
>
>
> Cross-examination of N.S. killer's spouse could promote conspiracy
> theories: lawyer
>
> Michael MacDonald and Michael Tutton
> The Canadian Press
> Published July 14, 2022 3:29 p.m. ADT
>
> HALIFAX -
>
> There are good reasons why the spouse of the man responsible for the
> worst mass shooting in modern Canadian history should not face
> cross-examination when she testifies Friday before a public inquiry,
> her lawyer says.
>
> James Lockyer said Thursday his client, Lisa Banfield, should not be
> retraumatized by lawyers who seem determined to explore conspiracy
> theories about what happened April 18-19, 2020, when Gabriel Wortman
> killed 22 people during a 13-hour rampage across Nova Scotia.
>
> The Toronto lawyer said some lawyers who represent victims' families
> appear keen to ask Banfield how she managed to escape from her
> deranged partner and survive a bitterly cold night in the woods around
> Portapique, N.S., on the first night of the rampage.
>
> "Some of the lawyers, one or two of them, have been pretty hyperbolic
> in their statements," Lockyer said in an interview with The Canadian
> Press.
>
> "They talk of wanting to cross-examine her about certain aspects of
> her trauma that night without ever explaining their goals. And their
> goals, when you think about it, can only be conspiracy-theorist
> goals."
>
> Lockyer said the purpose of raising questions about Banfield's
> whereabouts would be to challenge her credibility and suggest that she
> may have spent the night elsewhere, which he says is absurd.
>
> "These mass casualty events, particularly (those) we've seen south of
> the border, do give rise to conspiracy theorists," Lockyer said. "We
> don't need that in Canada. We don't need that in Nova Scotia. I think
> the commission is to be congratulated that they're not willing to
> entertain it."
>
> Lawyer Michael Scott, whose firm represents 14 of the victims'
> families, challenged Lockyer's conspiracy comments, arguing that the
> inquiry's decision to limit questioning will leave lingering doubts
> about Banfield's testimony.
>
> "There are very good questions to be asked about how she survived
> overnight," Scott said Thursday. "And by arranging a process where
> nobody is allowed to ask reasonable questions, then this promotes
> conspiracy theories."
>
> The three commissioners overseeing the federal-provincial inquiry
> recently decided Banfield will not face cross-examination from lawyers
> who represent relatives of the victims, mainly because she could be
> traumatized by having to relive the violence she endured.
>
> The inquiry has heard evidence that Banfield, whose relationship with
> Wortman spanned 19 years, was the victim of a controlling, abusive man
> who repeatedly beat her. Banfield has also told the RCMP and the
> commission that she was beaten and threatened immediately before her
> husband started killing people in Portapique.
>
> On Thursday, the commission issued written reasons for its decision to
> limit questioning of Banfield, arguing that the role of a public
> inquiry is not the same as a trial.
>
> "We have been clear from the beginning that this is not an
> adversarial, trial-like proceeding," the ruling says. The decision
> says the commission's approach "represents the most effective way to
> gather Ms. Banfield's best evidence."
>
> Sandra McCulloch, a lawyer who works at the same firm as Scott, said
> inquiries and trials should share a commitment to finding facts.
>
> "As much as we're in a different kind of legal proceeding, we're still
> in a proceeding where we have to have reliable evidence, and part of
> having reliable evidence is allowing it to be tested," McCulloch said.
> "That's largely not going to happen."
>
> McCulloch is concerned that Banfield will not be asked about her
> partner's violent behaviour while they were together on that deadly
> weekend in April 2020.
>
> In an earlier statement, the commission said Banfield may be
> accompanied by two support people and will "address remaining
> questions relevant to the commission's mandate."
>
> Earlier this week, the commission released a 100-page document based
> on evidence provided by Banfield during four interviews with the RCMP
> and five interviews with the inquiry. That document provided extensive
> details about the killer's long history of gender-based violence.
>
> As well, the inquiry on Wednesday was shown a video recording of a
> 90-minute RCMP interview, which featured Banfield providing a detailed
> description of what happened to her on the night of April 18, 2020.
>
> The commission has confirmed participating lawyers have been invited
> to submit questions in advance of Banfield's testimony, and they can
> bring forward further questions on Friday.
>
> Scott has said his clients have instructed him not to submit written
> questions for Banfield because doing so would lend legitimacy to a
> flawed process.
>
> Lawyers for some families boycotted proceedings in May after the
> inquiry prevented cross-examination of two RCMP staff sergeants who
> oversaw the early response to the mass shooting.
>
> Lockyer said his client was feeling apprehensive about appearing
> before the inquiry, which will be the first time she has spoken in
> public about the tragedy.
>
> "I know ... she says to herself, `If I hadn't run and got away, would
> I have saved 22 lives?' And of course she says that to herself and
> always will. The probable answer is that it would have been 23 lives
> and not 22, but she's never going to believe that."
>
> It's important to remember that Banfield was the first victim of the
> "mass casualty" event, he said.
>
> "I don't think Lisa sees herself as a victim. She's too conscious of
> the people who were killed and their families. It's going to be a
> difficult day for her."
>
> This report by The Canadian Press was first published July 14, 2022.
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: "Bergen, Candice - M.P." <candice.bergen@parl.gc.ca>
> Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2022 13:20:44 +0000
> Subject: Automatic reply: The last thing Palango told Bonaparte was
> that he would not waste his time listening to Lisa Banfield on Friday
> No doubt a host of other snobby journalists will Correct Tristin Hopper?
> To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
>
> On behalf of the Hon. Candice Bergen, thank you for contacting the
> Office of the Leader of the Official Opposition.
>
> Ms. Bergen greatly values feedback and input from Canadians. We read
> and review every incoming e-mail. Please note that this account
> receives a high volume of e-mails. We reply to e-mails as quickly as
> possible.
>
> If you are a constituent of Ms. Bergen’s in Portage-Lisgar with an
> urgent matter please provide complete contact information. Not
> identifying yourself as a constituent could result in a delayed
> response.
>
> Once again, thank you for writing.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Office of the Leader of the Official Opposition
> ------------------------------
>
>
> Au nom de l’hon. Candice Bergen, nous vous remercions de communiquer
> avec le Bureau de la cheffe de l’Opposition officielle.
>
> Mme Bergen accorde une grande importance aux commentaires des
> Canadiens. Nous lisons et étudions tous les courriels entrants.
> Veuillez noter que ce compte reçoit beaucoup de courriels. Nous y
> répondons le plus rapidement possible.
>
> Si vous faites partie de l’électorat de Mme Bergen dans la
> circonscription de Portage-Lisgar et que votre affaire est urgente,
> veuillez fournir vos coordonnées complètes. Si vous ne le faites pas,
> cela pourrait retarder la réponse.
>
> Nous vous remercions une fois encore d’avoir pris le temps d’écrire.
>
> Veuillez agréer nos salutations distinguées,
>
> Bureau de la cheffe de l’Opposition officielle
>
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: "Rempel, Michelle - M.P." <Michelle.Rempel@parl.gc.ca>
> Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2022 13:20:46 +0000
> Subject: Automatic reply: The last thing Palango told Bonaparte was
> that he would not waste his time listening to Lisa Banfield on Friday
> No doubt a host of other snobby journalists will Correct Tristin Hopper?
> To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
>
> On behalf of the Honourable Michelle Rempel Garner, P.C., M.P. thank
> you for your email. Our office appreciates the time you took to get in
> touch with the MP. Due to the high volume of email correspondence our
> office receives, below is a guide on how your email will be responded
> to:
>
> If you are a constituent of Calgary Nose Hill:
>
> Queries regarding government programs, policies and operations take
> time to research, contact appropriate departments and collate
> information for dissemination to you. If you have provided your full
> contact details on your query, your email will be responded to as
> necessary.
>
> If your query is case related (i.e. immigration, CPP, EI, tax issues,
> etc.), consent forms will need to be filled out before your file can
> be activated. If you have not yet filled out our office’s consent
> form, a staff member will be in contact with you.
>
> If you are not a constituent of Calgary Nose Hill:
>
> If you are not a Calgary Nose Hill resident, given the high volume of
> emails we receive, your email will be reviewed and filed as
> INFORMATION. If the email is Critic portfolio in nature, it will be
> responded to as necessary.
> If you are contacting MP Rempel Garner to review your case work,
> please first contact your local MP for assistance.
> If your email is a form letter:
>
> Thank you for submitting this form letter. Due to the high volume of
> emails M.P. Rempel Garner’s office receives, we are unable to
> individually reply to form letters, particularly from non
> constituents. Form letters are template letters generated by
> organizations, webforms and other sources on a given issue. However,
> M.P. Rempel Garner does review and consider information received from
> all form letters.
>
> If you are a constituent and would like a response regarding the
> specific issue raised in your form letter, please email M.P. Rempel
> Garner’s office individually at this email address with “Constituent -
> (Insert subject)” in the subject of your email. This helps us to
> identify constituents who wish to receive a response among the
> hundreds of form letter responses our office receives on any given
> day.
>
> Again, thank you for reaching out to our office.
>
> Invites:
> If you have invited MP Rempel Garner to your event, please note that
> decisions on what events to attend are completed on a bi-monthly
> basis. As our office receives hundreds of invitations each week, our
> office will only contact you if MP Rempel Garner will be attending.
> Updates on MP Rempel Garner’s Work:
> If you wish to know what is happening in Calgary Nose Hill and the job
> MP Rempel Garner is doing for you in Ottawa, please sign up for her
> e-newsletter on her website: https://mprempel.ca/
> *M.P. Rempel Garner's office has a zero tolerance policy for
> threatening, abusive, or aggressive language or behaviour towards the
> Member and their staff. Phone calls, voicemails and emails containing
> threatening or abusive language will result in the termination of
> communications.
>
> Thank you again.
>
> Sincerely,
> Office of The Honourable Michelle Rempel Garner, P.C., M.P.
> Calgary Nose Hill
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: "Kennedy, Aaron" <akennedy@quispamsis.ca>
> Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2022 13:20:55 +0000
> Subject: Automatic reply: The last thing Palango told Bonaparte was
> that he would not waste his time listening to Lisa Banfield on Friday
> No doubt a host of other snobby journalists will Correct Tristin Hopper?
> To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
>
> Thank you for your email.
> I am out of the office until Monday, and will respond at that time. If
> you require immediate assistance, please call 849-5778.
> - Aaron
>
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: Premier <PREMIER@novascotia.ca>
> Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2022 13:20:42 +0000
> Subject: Thank you for your email
> To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
>
> Thank you for your email to Premier Houston. This is an automatic
> confirmation your message has been received.
>
> As we are currently experiencing higher than normal volumes of
> correspondence, there may be delays in the response time for
> correspondence identified as requiring a response.
>
> If you are looking for the most up-to-date information from the
> Government of Nova Scotia please visit:
> http://novascotia.ca<https://
>
> Thank you,
>
> Premier’s Correspondence Team
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: Justice Minister <JUSTMIN@novascotia.ca>
> Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2022 13:20:44 +0000
> Subject: Automatic reply: The last thing Palango told Bonaparte was
> that he would not waste his time listening to Lisa Banfield on Friday
> No doubt a host of other snobby journalists will Correct Tristin Hopper?
> To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
>
> Thank you for your email to the Minister of Justice. Please be assured
> that it has been received by the Department. Your email will be
> reviewed and addressed accordingly. Thank you.
>
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: Tom Taggart <tom.taggartmla@gmail.com>
> Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2022 06:18:42 -0700
> Subject: Re: The last thing Palango told Bonaparte was that he would
> not waste his time listening to Lisa Banfield on Friday No doubt a
> host of other snobby journalists will Correct Tristin Hopper?
> To: david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
>
> Thank you for contacting us at the office of MLA Tom.Taggart. This
> email is being monitored by my Constituency Assistant Andrea. Johnson,
> who will get back to you as soon as possible. If your inquiry is
> urgent, please feel free to call the Constituency Office @
> 902-641-2335
>
> Our Office is located @ 10653 Hwy 2 Masstown, Nova Scotia, right next
> door to the Petro- Canada.
> Our Office hours are Monday- Friday 8:30am - 3:30pm or by appointment.
> We are closed on Holidays.
>
> --
> Tom Taggart, MLA
> Colchester North
> (O) - 902-641-2335
> tom.taggartmla@gmail.com
>
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
> Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2022 10:18:37 -0300
> Subject: Re: The last thing Palango told Bonaparte was that he would
> not waste his time listening to Lisa Banfield on Friday No doubt a
> host of other snobby journalists will Correct Tristin Hopper?
> To: THopper@postmedia.com, "jagmeet.singh" <jagmeet.singh@parl.gc.ca>,
> Candice.Bergen@parl.gc.ca, "pierre.poilievre"
> <pierre.poilievre@parl.gc.ca>, jennifer@halifaxexaminer.ca,
> paulpalango <paulpalango@protonmail.com>, Tom.Taggartmla@gmail.com,
> darren.campbell@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
> Bill.Blair@parl.gc.ca, bmassey@justice.gc.ca, "Amato, Mike #509"
> <509@yrp.ca>, brenda.lucki@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
> ethics-ethique@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, "blaine.higgs" <blaine.higgs@gnb.ca>,
> "Mark.Blakely" <Mark.Blakely@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, mcu <mcu@justice.gc.ca>,
> "Marco.Mendicino" <Marco.Mendicino@parl.gc.ca>, pm <pm@pm.gc.ca>,
> "Katie.Telford" <Katie.Telford@pmo-cpm.gc.ca>, "Michelle.Boutin"
> <Michelle.Boutin@rcmp-grc.gc.
> <michelle.rempel@parl.gc.ca>, kevin.leahy@pps-spp.parl.gc.ca
> Charles.Murray@gnb.ca, JUSTWEB <JUSTWEB@novascotia.ca>, Newsroom
> <Newsroom@globeandmail.com>, "Mike.Comeau" <Mike.Comeau@gnb.ca>,
> "Louis.Leger" <Louis.Leger@gnb.ca>, akennedy@quispamsis.ca,
> "elizabeth.mcmillan" <elizabeth.mcmillan@cbc.ca>, Justice Minister
> <JUSTMIN@novascotia.ca>, PREMIER@novascotia.ca, andrewjdouglas
> <andrewjdouglas@gmail.com>, smcculloch@pattersonlaw.ca,
> NightTimePodcast <NightTimePodcast@gmail.com>, tim
> <tim@halifaxexaminer.ca>, rpineo@pattersonlaw.ca, "jan.jensen"
> <jan.jensen@justice.gc.ca>, washington field
> <washington.field@ic.fbi.gov>, "Boston.Mail" <Boston.Mail@ic.fbi.gov>,
> briangallant10 <briangallant10@gmail.com>, sheilagunnreid
> <sheilagunnreid@gmail.com>, "stefanos.karatopis"
> <stefanos.karatopis@gmail.com>
> <sylvie.gadoury@radio-canada.
> Cc: motomaniac333 <motomaniac333@gmail.com>, oldmaison
> <oldmaison@yahoo.com>, andre <andre@jafaust.com>,
> "andrea.anderson-mason" <andrea.anderson-mason@gnb.ca>
> <Bill.Hogan@gnb.ca>
>
> https://www.nighttimepodcast.
>
> the Nova Scotia Mass Shooting - July 10 - 11, 2022 - Weekly updates
> and revelations (with Paul Palango)
>
> In this double episode I share my two recent conversations with Paul
> Palango. The first, recorded on July 10th, is our discussion
> surrounding the interview with Rob the carpenter. The second, recorded
> the next day, is an emergency update in which Paul and I discuss the
> bizarre lie the that Rob the Carpenter told… and what that means to
> the broader story.
>
> Episode Links:
>
> the Nova Scotia Mass Shooting Series:
> https://www.nighttimepodcast.
>
> Join the Nova Scotia Mass Casualty Discussion Group:
> https://www.facebook.com/
>
> Send a tip related to this case: https://www.nighttimepodcast.
>
>
> https://www.facebook.com/
>
> ·
> Dear Frank:
> I’m not a fan of your magazine; however, recently you have stepped out
> of the fray and produced some very good journalism. Your interview
> with Gabriel Wortman’s father being the most noteworthy. Some of your
> Portapique coverage is noteworthy. Frank has a place in society.
> However, your recent inclusion of Paul Palango is pointing you and our
> neighbours in a very dark place as a society. I can’t reveal my real
> identity due to my employment as I would be shunned by my colleagues
> in media. I am aware, based on verifiable information that the
> Canadian mainstream media has turned its back on Paul Palango, who was
> a onetime trusted news source and held respect.
> The tide began to shift several years ago when some of his views were
> not based on credible information, but conjecture and speculation or
> as the mainstream media believes, he is falling into some mental
> health crisis.
> Maclean’s leaned into Paul because he seemed to have information
> nobody else had, and produced sources within the Mounties. It’s just
> they were not credible, and had an axe to grind. Maclean’s verified
> this fact and they cut Paul loose after that infamous story from last
> June.
> And they told other media sources that he is treacherous.
> A colleague is working on a story about Lisa Banfield that has her and
> her lawyer working on a libel suit against Frank and Paul. My sources
> tell me the Mounties have nothing to suggest she is misaligned and
> very much is a victim. After the inquiry and the evidence comes out
> they will be positioned to be successful in showing Palango was
> libellous.
> I support what you do, I don’t agree with the style, but we are a free
> society. My only reason for stepping in is that you are printing what
> will be shown to be his false narrative based on untrustworthy sources
> and possibly mental illness.
> Ivana Smear,
> Via email
>
> Dear Ms. Smear:
> This may come as a surprise to you, but I’ve heard this all before.
> My position is very clear.
> Since the first reports of gunshots at Portapique Beach on April 18,
> 2020, the response by the RCMP has been stranger than strange.
> The Mounties arrived on scene in time to potentially trap the killer
> in the community and perhaps prevent at least the last five murders.
> Instead, Wortman got past them, had a rest in Debert, and then was
> allowed to roam around Nova Scotia, killing nine more people.
> Lisa Banfield says she hid in the woods for about eight hours on a
> blistering cold night. She went to Leon Joudrey’s house at 6:34 a.m.
> He has told many reporters and the police that he did not believe her
> story.
> The earliest reports claimed Banfield suffered severe injuries from a
> beating administered by Gabriel Wortman.
> Actually, the RCMP and the Crown blacked out the first description of
> those injuries. The word they blacked out was “minor,” which was
> consistent with what Joudrey said.
> You suggest that I am treacherous and not trusted by the mainstream
> media because of a story you highlighted in Maclean’s magazine from
> last June.
> For that story we obtained a copy of the RCMP’s undercover manual.
> Among other things described in that document are the procedures the
> force should use in a blown undercover operation.
> The actions of the RCMP before, during and after the weekend of April
> 18-19 largely conform to the procedures described. I’ve spent the past
> eight months trying to disprove that there was an undercover operation
> in Portapique — to no avail.
> The more I investigate the more it appears that someone in Wortman’s
> circle appeared to have a special relationship with the authorities —
> be they the RCMP, Halifax Police or even CSIS. Nothing is conclusive,
> but that doesn’t mean you just give up because it’s too difficult.
> That isn’t in my DNA.
> My role as a journalist is to act as a disinterested investigator
> whose duty it is to uncover the truth and show no fear or favouritism
> to anyone. Like a pathologist, I am a friend of the dead. As Joseph
> Pulitizer once put it: “Newspapers should have no friends.”
> I am not here to be liked. I am not in it for the money, although some
> uninformed critics have wrongly accused me of being so. I am here to
> be the agent of the story and to do what it dictates that I must do.
> As for Ms. Banfield, I believe it is in the public interest that her
> story be fully examined because she was apparently the last person to
> see Wortman before he went on his rampage.
> You say Maclean’s dropped me because I was unreliable.
> I can assure you that is not what happened.
> I withdrew my story and chose to run it in Frank, as written.
> That same story generated a number of leads which lead to the
> discovery of the Pictou County analog recordings from the weekend in
> question.
> Stories about what was on those tapes brought even more stories and leads.
> That’s what good journalists do.
> As for my mental health, some people think I’m crazy for doing what
> I’m doing. I have a nice, comfortable life. I took this on to help
> other journalists, but when I found their work wanting, I got more and
> more involved. That being the case, maybe I do have a mental health
> issue. I admit that I can be a pain in the ass, but I always strive to
> do the right thing.
> The funny thing about my mental health is that the one agency slyly
> pushing that narrative has been the RCMP.
> “Look at the source,” referring to me, when another reporter tried
> following up one of my stories.
> “Another fairy tale,” Supt. Darren Campbell put it to the CBC’s
> Elizabeth McMillan when commenting on another story. I stand by my
> work in the past and now. Don’t you find it disturbing that the RCMP
> is willing to invest in character assassination rather than address
> the very real issues raised about his dysfunctional organization?
> That’s not a good thing in a supposed democracy.
> If you still insist on pushing the mental health angle, perhaps we can
> both submit to a Rorschach test to determine who sees the crazier
> stuff in the inkblots.
> You also state that Banfield and her lawyer, James Lockyer, are
> planning to sue me sometime down the road.
> I know Mr. Lockyer from my days in Toronto. He lived on the next block
> when he was defending Rubin (Hurricane) Carter, who strolled by my
> house on his regular walks. Lockyer is a good lawyer and always has
> been. He’s got to do what he thinks is best for his client.
> If Banfield is truly planning to head down that road, I would give her
> and Lockyer the following advice.
> This is not my first rodeo. As a corporate journalist and as an
> individual over the course of my career, I’ve been involved in about
> 18 major lawsuits (mostly on behalf of reporters who worked for me)
> and occasionally as a plaintiff. I’m 16 and 0 with a couple of draws.
> My last case should be seen as instructive.
> In the mid-1990s, a group of individuals hiding behind a $3-billion
> corporation listed on the New York Stock Exchange sued me for
> $11-million to stop me from asking questions about them. It didn’t
> stop me. They went up to $20 million. It still didn’t stop me. They
> tried to hire hit man Ken Murdock to kill me. Murdock turned down the
> job because he didn’t think it was right to kill a civilian.
> How do I know? I met him. I spent four days in the maximum-security
> Kingston Penitentiary interviewing him.
> I didn’t counter-sue the company. Instead, I launched an entirely
> different suit against it, its executives and lawyers. I called their
> lawsuit “public relations.” It ended up being an almost 10-year fight.
> The company went bankrupt, but the individuals didn’t. I ended up
> getting a nice house of it.
> The bottom line is this. I am prepared to take the slings and many
> arrows that are fired back at me as a result of what I write.
> But attacking the messenger is what the desperate and corrupt have
> always done. It’s as old as the Old Testament. Look up Malachi.
> The Greek philosopher Sophocles put it this way: “No one loves the
> messenger who brings bad news.”
> And here’s my take on it all: If you don’t like what I’m reporting and
> writing, get off your butt, suck up some courage, do some of your own
> investigating and either confirm what I’m reporting or prove me wrong.
> You’d be doing everyone a favour — including yourself.
> Paul Palango,
> Chester
>
> Attacking the messenger...
> https://www.frankmagazine.ca/
> Comments
> Nicholas Langille
> Give it to em Paul.
> If the rcmp had answers that could be strung together coherently maybe
> I could trust what they say. But that hasn't happened .… See more
>
> Reply
> 1y
>
> Jim Barkhouse
> Thank you Paul for your in depth coverage of this tragedy, your
> pursuit of the truth will set the facts straight and will be
> appreciated by all.
>
> Reply
> 1y
>
> Donna Marie Jessome
> Wtg Mr. Palango, Keep doing You!
> You and LGC are basically all we really have in this Massacre ,who are
> trying your darntest to bring the truth forward and for that I Thank
> You.
>
> Reply
> 1y
>
> Kelly Smales
> This is awesome Paul. We need more courageous journalists like you!
>
> Reply
> 1y
>
> Christine Elliott
> Excellent response Paul. as is your work. You’ve been tireless with
> the Portipique story and your past work about the RCMP is so valuable.
>
> Reply
> 1y
>
> Paula Jarrett
> Excellent work - keep going. People impacted by this horror deserve
> nothing less. We all deserve nothing less.
>
> Reply
> 1y
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Justice Minister <JUSTMIN@novascotia.ca>
> Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2022 07:24:06 +0000
> Subject: Automatic reply: The last thing Palango told Bonaparte was
> that he would not waste his time listening to Lisa Banfield on Friday
> No doubt a host of other snobby journalists will Correct Tristin Hopper?
> To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
>
> Thank you for your email to the Minister of Justice. Please be assured
> that it has been received by the Department. Your email will be
> reviewed and addressed accordingly. Thank you.
>
>
>
> On 7/15/22, David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
>> However the former Attorney General refused to look on the internet to
>> verify what I said was true. So I gave up on his bullshit and told him
>> to answer me in writing because I could easily the lawyer got the
>> damned email. Lockyer just refused to admit it tis all.
>>
>> Go Figure Why I brought this up today
>>
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?
>>
>> MCC- DAY 50 - LISA BANFIELD... AND HANDLERS
>> 229 watching now
>> Started streaming 2 hours ago
>> 82
>> Dislike
>> Share
>> Clip
>> Save
>> Little Grey Cells
>> 3.42K subscribers
>>
>> ---------- Original message ----------
>> From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
>> Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2019 10:53:43 -0400
>> Subject: Hey There Jeska Grue.and James Lockyer RE Federal Court File
>> No T-1557-15 I just called both of you about our common concerns about
>> war
>> To: heythere@jeskagrue.ca, megan.mitton@gnb.ca,
>> dominic.leblanc.c1@parl.gc.ca, james.lockyer@umoncton.ca,
>> ernie.steeves@gnb.ca, Ginette.PetitpasTaylor@parl.
>> Cc: motomaniac333@gmail.com, Tori.Weldon@cbc.ca,
>> Seamus.ORegan@parl.gc.ca, greg.thompson2@gnb.ca,
>> Newsroom@globeandmail.com, news@kingscorecord.com,
>> news@dailygleaner.com, Marc.Leger@gnb.ca, lou.lafleur@fredericton.ca,
>> infoam@fredericton.cbc.ca, briangallant10@gmail.com,
>> serge.rousselle@gnb.ca, MRichard@lawsociety-barreau.
>> steve.murphy@ctv.ca, David.Akin@globalnews.ca, charles.murray@gnb.ca,
>> oldmaison@yahoo.com, greg.byrne@gnb.ca
>>
>> I tried to explain now go figure things out for yourselves
>>
>> https://www.cbc.ca/news/
>>
>> Controversial armoured vehicle to be set up in Sackville Memorial
>> Park, upsets residents
>>
>> While residents agree veterans deserve to be commemorated, some worry
>> the armoured vehicle glorifies war
>> Tori Weldon · CBC News · Posted: Jun 18, 2019 7:08 AM AT
>>
>> "Jeska Grue, whose backyard backs onto the park, said what's already
>> there is plenty.
>>
>> "I don't feel that it's the best way for a memorial park [to]
>> commemorate veterans and those affected by war."
>>
>> Grue said an armoured vehicle could be an upsetting symbol for people
>> who have first-hand experience with war.
>>
>> Her grandfather served in the Second World War, where he worked as a
>> tank mechanic.
>>
>> "He did suffer from [post-traumatic stress disorder] and alcoholism
>> for the rest of his life," she said. "To me, that's the memory that it
>> draws."
>>
>> Grue said refugees starting a new life in Sackville may also be
>> troubled by the armoured vehicle sitting in the middle of town.
>>
>> But Jim Lockyer, honorary colonel of the 8th Canadian Hussars, said
>> the Cougar should act as a way to commemorate previous battles.
>>
>> "This is not glorifying war, if anything it's a memento to discourage
>> it."
>>
>> He's toured fields in Italy where soldiers belonging to the 8th
>> Canadian Hussars lost their lives fighting during the Second World
>> War.
>>
>> "There are young men, 18 to 25 years old, one of whom was Stedman
>> Henderson from Moncton, who again did not come home and they're still
>> there," he said.
>>
>> "So it's a testimonial to their contribution."
>>
>>
>> 90 Comments
>>
>>
>> David Amos
>> Methinks anyone can Google "Fundy Royal Debate" then go to the 28
>> minute mark and listen closely N'esy Pas?
>>
>> John Smith
>> Reply to @David Amos: david do you always ref your public speaking
>> engagements because your not permitted to think and speak of them out
>> loud in a public square maybe try a jesters hat traditionally they
>> were permitted to criticize the king and aristocrats
>>
>> David Amos
>> Reply to @john smith: Methinks you should finally read my lawsuit
>> (Federal Court File No T- 1557-15)Paragraph 83 would be a could place
>> t start with regards to this issue N'esy Pas?
>>
>> https://twitter.com/jeskagrue
>>
>> https://jeskagrue.ca/info
>>
>> CONTACT/LOCATION
>>
>> heythere@jeskagrue.ca
>>
>> 902-880-4783
>>
>> JG lives very close to the Waterfowl Park.
>>
>> James E. Lockyer, Q.C.
>> Université de Moncton
>> Professeur:
>> Faculté de droit
>> Edifice A.J. Cormier
>> Moncton, New Brunswick E1A 3E9
>> Phone: 506-863-2134
>> Fax: 506-858-4534
>> Email: james.lockyer@umoncton.ca
>>
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: "Murray, Charles (Ombud)" <Charles.Murray@gnb.ca>
>> Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2019 18:16:15 +0000
>> Subject: You wished to speak with me
>> To: "motomaniac333@gmail.com" <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>>
>> I have the advantage, sir, of having read many of your emails over the
>> years.
>>
>>
>> As such, I do not think a phone conversation between us, and
>> specifically one which you might mistakenly assume was in response to
>> your threat of legal action against me, is likely to prove a
>> productive use of either of our time.
>>
>>
>> If there is some specific matter about which you wish to communicate
>> with me, feel free to email me with the full details and it will be
>> given due consideration.
>>
>>
>> Sincerely,
>>
>>
>> Charles Murray
>>
>> Ombud NB
>>
>> Acting Integrity Commissioner
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2007 10:48:58 -0400 (EDT)
>>>>> From: "David Raymond Amos" davidramos333@yahoo.ca
>>>>> Subject: I already know that you are as crooked as Hell Mr Leger. I am
>>>>> fishing for an honest cop not another corrupt bureaucrat. i am just
>>>>> proving that you know the truth Get it?
>>>>> To: Marc.Leger@gnb.ca
>>>>> CC: Day.S@parl.gc.ca, John.Foran@gnb.ca, pat.bonner@saintjohn.ca,
>>>>> lou.lafleur@fredericton.ca, infoam@fredericton.cbc.ca,
>>>>> infomorning@moncton.cbc.ca, infomorning@halifax.cbc.ca,
>>>>> webo@xplornet.com, Stephane.vaillancourt@rcmp-
>>>>> alltrue@nl.rogers.com, samperrier@hotmail.com, oldmaison@yahoo.com,
>>>>> Scott.A@parl.gc.ca, amerrino@gmail.com, deanr0032@hotmail.com,
>>>>> wickedwanda3@adelphia.net, rfowlo@comcast.net, Harper.S@parl.gc.ca,
>>>>> bmulroney@ogilvyrenault.com, pcollin@cpa-acp.ca, Dion.S@parl.gc.ca,
>>>>> Dryden.K@parl.gc.ca, Layton.J@parl.gc.ca, Duceppe.G@parl.gc.ca,
>>>>> Casey.B@parl.gc.ca, leader@greenparty.ca
>>>>>
>>>>> Subject: Mr. Amos
>>>>> Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2007 11:41:22 -0300
>>>>> From: "Leger, Marc (DPS/MSP)" Marc.Leger@gnb.ca
>>>>> To: "David Raymond Amos" davidramos333@yahoo.ca
>>>>> David Amos,
>>>>>
>>>>> I am not able to address your concerns.
>>>>>
>>>>> Your calls and emails are not welcome and I would like you to stop
>>>>> communicating with me by phone and email
>>>>>
>>>>> Marc Léger
>>>>> Deputy Minister / Sous-ministre
>>>>> Public Safety / Sécurité publique
>>>>> (506) 453-7412 marc.leger@gnb.ca
>>>>> Working together to build a safer New Brunswick / Travaillons ensemble
>>>>> pour bâtir un Nouveau-Brunswick plus sûr
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>> From: Brian Gallant <briangallant10@gmail.com>
>>>> Date: Tue, 29 May 2018 06:01:57 -0700
>>>> Subject: Merci / Thank you Re: Fwd: I just called Alan Roy again about
>>>> my right to health care, my missing 1965 Harley, the Yankee Wiretaps
>>>> tapes in its saddlebag and Federal Court and his assistant played dumb
>>>> as usual
>>>> To: motomaniac333@gmail.com
>>>>
>>>> (Français à suivre)
>>>>
>>>> If your email is pertaining to the Government of New Brunswick, please
>>>> email me at brian.gallant@gnb.ca
>>>>
>>>> If your matter is urgent, please email Greg Byrne at greg.byrne@gnb.ca
>>>>
>>>> Thank you.
>>>>
>>>> Si votre courriel s'addresse au Gouvernement du Nouveau-Brunswick,
>>>> svp m'envoyez un courriel à brian.gallant@gnb.ca
>>>>
>>>> Pour les urgences, veuillez contacter Greg Byrne à greg.byrne@gnb.ca
>>>>
>>>> Merci.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>> From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>>>> Date: Tue, 29 May 2018 10:42:09 -0400
>>>> Subject: Attn Marc Richard and John McNair I just called AGAIN Say hey
>>>> to my Brother in Law W. S. Reid CHEDORE and his brother of the law
>>>> David Lutz QC for me will ya?
>>>> To: MRichard@lawsociety-barreau.
>>>> "serge.rousselle" <serge.rousselle@gnb.ca>, Erin.Hardy@snb.ca,
>>>> David.Eidt@gnb.ca
>>>> Cc: David Amos <david.raymond.amos@gmail.com>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>>> From: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com
>>>>> Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2017 09:32:09 -0400
>>>>> Subject: Attn Integrity Commissioner Alexandre Deschênes, Q.C.,
>>>>> To: coi@gnb.ca
>>>>> Cc: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com
>>>>>
>>>>> Good Day Sir
>>>>>
>>>>> After I heard you speak on CBC I called your office again and managed
>>>>> to speak to one of your staff for the first time
>>>>>
>>>>> Please find attached the documents I promised to send to the lady who
>>>>> answered the phone this morning. Please notice that not after the Sgt
>>>>> at Arms took the documents destined to your office his pal Tanker
>>>>> Malley barred me in writing with an "English" only document.
>>>>>
>>>>> These are the hearings and the dockets in Federal Court that I
>>>>> suggested that you study closely.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is the docket in Federal Court
>>>>>
>>>>> http://cas-cdc-www02.cas-satj.
>>>>>
>>>>> These are digital recordings of the last three hearings
>>>>>
>>>>> Dec 14th https://archive.org/details/
>>>>>
>>>>> January 11th, 2016 https://archive.org/details/
>>>>>
>>>>> April 3rd, 2017
>>>>>
>>>>> https://archive.org/details/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> This is the docket in the Federal Court of Appeal
>>>>>
>>>>> http://cas-cdc-www02.cas-satj.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The only hearing thus far
>>>>>
>>>>> May 24th, 2017
>>>>>
>>>>> https://archive.org/details/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> This Judge understnds the meaning of the word Integrity
>>>>>
>>>>> Date: 20151223
>>>>>
>>>>> Docket: T-1557-15
>>>>>
>>>>> Fredericton, New Brunswick, December 23, 2015
>>>>>
>>>>> PRESENT: The Honourable Mr. Justice Bell
>>>>>
>>>>> BETWEEN:
>>>>>
>>>>> DAVID RAYMOND AMOS
>>>>>
>>>>> Plaintiff
>>>>>
>>>>> and
>>>>>
>>>>> HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
>>>>>
>>>>> Defendant
>>>>>
>>>>> ORDER
>>>>>
>>>>> (Delivered orally from the Bench in Fredericton, New Brunswick, on
>>>>> December 14, 2015)
>>>>>
>>>>> The Plaintiff seeks an appeal de novo, by way of motion pursuant to
>>>>> the Federal Courts Rules (SOR/98-106), from an Order made on November
>>>>> 12, 2015, in which Prothonotary Morneau struck the Statement of Claim
>>>>> in its entirety.
>>>>>
>>>>> At the outset of the hearing, the Plaintiff brought to my attention a
>>>>> letter dated September 10, 2004, which he sent to me, in my then
>>>>> capacity as Past President of the New Brunswick Branch of the Canadian
>>>>> Bar Association, and the then President of the Branch, Kathleen Quigg,
>>>>> (now a Justice of the New Brunswick Court of Appeal). In that letter
>>>>> he stated:
>>>>>
>>>>> As for your past President, Mr. Bell, may I suggest that you check the
>>>>> work of Frank McKenna before I sue your entire law firm including you.
>>>>> You are your brother’s keeper.
>>>>>
>>>>> Frank McKenna is the former Premier of New Brunswick and a former
>>>>> colleague of mine at the law firm of McInnes Cooper. In addition to
>>>>> expressing an intention to sue me, the Plaintiff refers to a number of
>>>>> people in his Motion Record who he appears to contend may be witnesses
>>>>> or potential parties to be added. Those individuals who are known to
>>>>> me personally, include, but are not limited to the former Prime
>>>>> Minister of Canada, The Right Honourable Stephen Harper; former
>>>>> Attorney General of Canada and now a Justice of the Manitoba Court of
>>>>> Queen’s Bench, Vic Toews; former member of Parliament Rob Moore;
>>>>> former Director of Policing Services, the late Grant Garneau; former
>>>>> Chief of the Fredericton Police Force, Barry McKnight; former Staff
>>>>> Sergeant Danny Copp; my former colleagues on the New Brunswick Court
>>>>> of Appeal, Justices Bradley V. Green and Kathleen Quigg, and, retired
>>>>> Assistant Commissioner Wayne Lang of the Royal Canadian Mounted
>>>>> Police.
>>>>>
>>>>> In the circumstances, given the threat in 2004 to sue me in my
>>>>> personal capacity and my past and present relationship with many
>>>>> potential witnesses and/or potential parties to the litigation, I am
>>>>> of the view there would be a reasonable apprehension of bias should I
>>>>> hear this motion. See Justice de Grandpré’s dissenting judgment in
>>>>> Committee for Justice and Liberty et al v National Energy Board et al,
>>>>> [1978] 1 SCR 369 at p 394 for the applicable test regarding
>>>>> allegations of bias. In the circumstances, although neither party has
>>>>> requested I recuse myself, I consider it appropriate that I do so.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> AS A RESULT OF MY RECUSAL, THIS COURT ORDERS that the Administrator of
>>>>> the Court schedule another date for the hearing of the motion. There
>>>>> is no order as to costs.
>>>>>
>>>>> “B. Richard Bell”
>>>>> Judge
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Below after the CBC article about your concerns (I made one comment
>>>>> already) you will find the text of just two of many emails I had sent
>>>>> to your office over the years since I first visited it in 2006.
>>>>>
>>>>> I noticed that on July 30, 2009, he was appointed to the the Court
>>>>> Martial Appeal Court of Canada Perhaps you should scroll to the
>>>>> bottom of this email ASAP and read the entire Paragraph 83 of my
>>>>> lawsuit now before the Federal Court of Canada?
>>>>>
>>>>> "FYI This is the text of the lawsuit that should interest Trudeau the
>>>>> most
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ---------- Original message ----------
>>>>> From: justin.trudeau.a1@parl.gc.ca
>>>>> Date: Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 8:18 PM
>>>>> Subject: Réponse automatique : RE My complaint against the CROWN in
>>>>> Federal Court Attn David Hansen and Peter MacKay If you planning to
>>>>> submit a motion for a publication ban on my complaint trust that you
>>>>> dudes are way past too late
>>>>> To: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com
>>>>>
>>>>> Veuillez noter que j'ai changé de courriel. Vous pouvez me rejoindre à
>>>>> lalanthier@hotmail.com
>>>>>
>>>>> Pour rejoindre le bureau de M. Trudeau veuillez envoyer un courriel à
>>>>> tommy.desfosses@parl.gc.ca
>>>>>
>>>>> Please note that I changed email address, you can reach me at
>>>>> lalanthier@hotmail.com
>>>>>
>>>>> To reach the office of Mr. Trudeau please send an email to
>>>>> tommy.desfosses@parl.gc.ca
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you,
>>>>>
>>>>> Merci ,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> http://davidraymondamos3.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 83. The Plaintiff states that now that Canada is involved in more war
>>>>> in Iraq again it did not serve Canadian interests and reputation to
>>>>> allow Barry Winters to publish the following words three times over
>>>>> five years after he began his bragging:
>>>>>
>>>>> January 13, 2015
>>>>> This Is Just AS Relevant Now As When I wrote It During The Debate
>>>>>
>>>>> December 8, 2014
>>>>> Why Canada Stood Tall!
>>>>>
>>>>> Friday, October 3, 2014
>>>>> Little David Amos’ “True History Of War” Canadian Airstrikes And
>>>>> Stupid Justin Trudeau
>>>>>
>>>>> Canada’s and Canadians free ride is over. Canada can no longer hide
>>>>> behind Amerka’s and NATO’s skirts.
>>>>>
>>>>> When I was still in Canadian Forces then Prime Minister Jean Chretien
>>>>> actually committed the Canadian Army to deploy in the second campaign
>>>>> in Iraq, the Coalition of the Willing. This was against or contrary to
>>>>> the wisdom or advice of those of us Canadian officers that were
>>>>> involved in the initial planning phases of that operation. There were
>>>>> significant concern in our planning cell, and NDHQ about of the dearth
>>>>> of concern for operational guidance, direction, and forces for
>>>>> operations after the initial occupation of Iraq. At the “last minute”
>>>>> Prime Minister Chretien and the Liberal government changed its mind.
>>>>> The Canadian government told our amerkan cousins that we would not
>>>>> deploy combat troops for the Iraq campaign, but would deploy a
>>>>> Canadian Battle Group to Afghanistan, enabling our amerkan cousins to
>>>>> redeploy troops from there to Iraq. The PMO’s thinking that it was
>>>>> less costly to deploy Canadian Forces to Afghanistan than Iraq. But
>>>>> alas no one seems to remind the Liberals of Prime Minister Chretien’s
>>>>> then grossly incorrect assumption. Notwithstanding Jean Chretien’s
>>>>> incompetence and stupidity, the Canadian Army was heroic,
>>>>> professional, punched well above it’s weight, and the PPCLI Battle
>>>>> Group, is credited with “saving Afghanistan” during the Panjway
>>>>> campaign of 2006.
>>>>>
>>>>> What Justin Trudeau and the Liberals don’t tell you now, is that then
>>>>> Liberal Prime Minister Jean Chretien committed, and deployed the
>>>>> Canadian army to Canada’s longest “war” without the advice, consent,
>>>>> support, or vote of the Canadian Parliament.
>>>>>
>>>>> What David Amos and the rest of the ignorant, uneducated, and babbling
>>>>> chattering classes are too addled to understand is the deployment of
>>>>> less than 75 special operations troops, and what is known by planners
>>>>> as a “six pac cell” of fighter aircraft is NOT the same as a
>>>>> deployment of a Battle Group, nor a “war” make.
>>>>>
>>>>> The Canadian Government or The Crown unlike our amerkan cousins have
>>>>> the “constitutional authority” to commit the Canadian nation to war.
>>>>> That has been recently clearly articulated to the Canadian public by
>>>>> constitutional scholar Phillippe Legasse. What Parliament can do is
>>>>> remove “confidence” in The Crown’s Government in a “vote of
>>>>> non-confidence.” That could not happen to the Chretien Government
>>>>> regarding deployment to Afghanistan, and it won’t happen in this
>>>>> instance with the conservative majority in The Commons regarding a
>>>>> limited Canadian deployment to the Middle East.
>>>>>
>>>>> President George Bush was quite correct after 911 and the terror
>>>>> attacks in New York; that the Taliban “occupied” and “failed state”
>>>>> Afghanistan was the source of logistical support, command and control,
>>>>> and training for the Al Quaeda war of terror against the world. The
>>>>> initial defeat, and removal from control of Afghanistan was vital and
>>>>>
>>>>> P.S. Whereas this CBC article is about your opinion of the actions of
>>>>> the latest Minister Of Health trust that Mr Boudreau and the CBC have
>>>>> had my files for many years and the last thing they are is ethical.
>>>>> Ask his friends Mr Murphy and the RCMP if you don't believe me.
>>>>>
>>>>> Subject:
>>>>> Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 12:02:35 -0400
>>>>> From: "Murphy, Michael B. \(DH/MS\)" MichaelB.Murphy@gnb.ca
>>>>> To: motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com
>>>>>
>>>>> January 30, 2007
>>>>>
>>>>> WITHOUT PREJUDICE
>>>>>
>>>>> Mr. David Amos
>>>>>
>>>>> Dear Mr. Amos:
>>>>>
>>>>> This will acknowledge receipt of a copy of your e-mail of December 29,
>>>>> 2006 to Corporal Warren McBeath of the RCMP.
>>>>>
>>>>> Because of the nature of the allegations made in your message, I have
>>>>> taken the measure of forwarding a copy to Assistant Commissioner Steve
>>>>> Graham of the RCMP “J” Division in Fredericton.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sincerely,
>>>>>
>>>>> Honourable Michael B. Murphy
>>>>> Minister of Health
>>>>>
>>>>> CM/cb
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Warren McBeath warren.mcbeath@rcmp-grc.gc.ca wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2006 17:34:53 -0500
>>>>> From: "Warren McBeath" warren.mcbeath@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
>>>>> To: kilgoursite@ca.inter.net, MichaelB.Murphy@gnb.ca,
>>>>> nada.sarkis@gnb.ca, wally.stiles@gnb.ca, dwatch@web.net,
>>>>> motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com
>>>>> CC: ottawa@chuckstrahl.com, riding@chuckstrahl.com,John.
>>>>> Oda.B@parl.gc.ca,"Bev BUSSON" bev.busson@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
>>>>> "Paul Dube" PAUL.DUBE@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
>>>>> Subject: Re: Remember me Kilgour? Landslide Annie McLellan has
>>>>> forgotten me but the crooks within the RCMP have not
>>>>>
>>>>> Dear Mr. Amos,
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you for your follow up e-mail to me today. I was on days off
>>>>> over the holidays and returned to work this evening. Rest assured I
>>>>> was not ignoring or procrastinating to respond to your concerns.
>>>>>
>>>>> As your attachment sent today refers from Premier Graham, our position
>>>>> is clear on your dead calf issue: Our forensic labs do not process
>>>>> testing on animals in cases such as yours, they are referred to the
>>>>> Atlantic Veterinary College in Charlottetown who can provide these
>>>>> services. If you do not choose to utilize their expertise in this
>>>>> instance, then that is your decision and nothing more can be done.
>>>>>
>>>>> As for your other concerns regarding the US Government, false
>>>>> imprisonment and Federal Court Dates in the US, etc... it is clear
>>>>> that Federal authorities are aware of your concerns both in Canada
>>>>> the US. These issues do not fall into the purvue of Detachment
>>>>> and policing in Petitcodiac, NB.
>>>>>
>>>>> It was indeed an interesting and informative conversation we had on
>>>>> December 23rd, and I wish you well in all of your future endeavors.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sincerely,
>>>>>
>>>>> Warren McBeath, Cpl.
>>>>> GRC Caledonia RCMP
>>>>> Traffic Services NCO
>>>>> Ph: (506) 387-2222
>>>>> Fax: (506) 387-4622
>>>>> E-mail warren.mcbeath@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Alexandre Deschênes, Q.C.,
>>>>> Office of the Integrity Commissioner
>>>>> Edgecombe House, 736 King Street
>>>>> Fredericton, N.B. CANADA E3B 5H1
>>>>> tel.: 506-457-7890
>>>>> fax: 506-444-5224
>>>>> e-mail:coi@gnb.ca
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>> From: Justice Website <JUSTWEB@novascotia.ca>
>>>> Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2017 14:21:11 +0000
>>>> Subject: Emails to Department of Justice and Province of Nova Scotia
>>>> To: "motomaniac333@gmail.com" <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>>>>
>>>> Mr. Amos,
>>>> We acknowledge receipt of your recent emails to the Deputy Minister of
>>>> Justice and lawyers within the Legal Services Division of the
>>>> Department of Justice respecting a possible claim against the Province
>>>> of Nova Scotia. Service of any documents respecting a legal claim
>>>> against the Province of Nova Scotia may be served on the Attorney
>>>> General at 1690 Hollis Street, Halifax, NS. Please note that we will
>>>> not be responding to further emails on this matter.
>>>>
>>>> Department of Justice
>>>>
>>>> On 8/3/17, David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> If want something very serious to download and laugh at as well Please
>>>>> Enjoy and share real wiretap tapes of the mob
>>>>>
>>>>> http://thedavidamosrant.
>>>>> ilian.html
>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As the CBC etc yap about Yankee wiretaps and whistleblowers I must
>>>>>> ask them the obvious question AIN'T THEY FORGETTING SOMETHING????
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What the hell does the media think my Yankee lawyer served upon the
>>>>>> USDOJ right after I ran for and seat in the 39th Parliament baseball
>>>>>> cards?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://archive.org/details/
>>>>>> 6
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://davidamos.blogspot.ca/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.archive.org/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://archive.org/details/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> FEDERAL EXPRES February 7, 2006
>>>>>> Senator Arlen Specter
>>>>>> United States Senate
>>>>>> Committee on the Judiciary
>>>>>> 224 Dirksen Senate Office Building
>>>>>> Washington, DC 20510
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Dear Mr. Specter:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have been asked to forward the enclosed tapes to you from a man
>>>>>> named, David Amos, a Canadian citizen, in connection with the matters
>>>>>> raised in the attached letter.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Mr. Amos has represented to me that these are illegal FBI wire tap
>>>>>> tapes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I believe Mr. Amos has been in contact with you about this
>>>>>> previously.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Very truly yours,
>>>>>> Barry A. Bachrach
>>>>>> Direct telephone: (508) 926-3403
>>>>>> Direct facsimile: (508) 929-3003
>>>>>> Email: bbachrach@bowditch.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://davidraymondamos3.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Sunday, 19 November 2017
>>>> Federal Court of Appeal Finally Makes The BIG Decision And Publishes
>>>> It Now The Crooks Cannot Take Back Ticket To Try Put My Matter Before
>>>> The Supreme Court
>>>>
>>>> https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Federal Court of Appeal Decisions
>>>>
>>>> Amos v. Canada
>>>> Court (s) Database
>>>>
>>>> Federal Court of Appeal Decisions
>>>> Date
>>>>
>>>> 2017-10-30
>>>> Neutral citation
>>>>
>>>> 2017 FCA 213
>>>> File numbers
>>>>
>>>> A-48-16
>>>> Date: 20171030
>>>>
>>>> Docket: A-48-16
>>>> Citation: 2017 FCA 213
>>>> CORAM:
>>>>
>>>> WEBB J.A.
>>>> NEAR J.A.
>>>> GLEASON J.A.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> BETWEEN:
>>>> DAVID RAYMOND AMOS
>>>> Respondent on the cross-appeal
>>>> (and formally Appellant)
>>>> and
>>>> HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
>>>> Appellant on the cross-appeal
>>>> (and formerly Respondent)
>>>> Heard at Fredericton, New Brunswick, on May 24, 2017.
>>>> Judgment delivered at Ottawa, Ontario, on October 30, 2017.
>>>> REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY:
>>>>
>>>> THE COURT
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Date: 20171030
>>>>
>>>> Docket: A-48-16
>>>> Citation: 2017 FCA 213
>>>> CORAM:
>>>>
>>>> WEBB J.A.
>>>> NEAR J.A.
>>>> GLEASON J.A.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> BETWEEN:
>>>> DAVID RAYMOND AMOS
>>>> Respondent on the cross-appeal
>>>> (and formally Appellant)
>>>> and
>>>> HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
>>>> Appellant on the cross-appeal
>>>> (and formerly Respondent)
>>>> REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY THE COURT
>>>>
>>>> I. Introduction
>>>>
>>>> [1] On September 16, 2015, David Raymond Amos (Mr. Amos)
>>>> filed a 53-page Statement of Claim (the Claim) in Federal Court
>>>> against Her Majesty the Queen (the Crown). Mr. Amos claims $11 million
>>>> in damages and a public apology from the Prime Minister and Provincial
>>>> Premiers for being illegally barred from accessing parliamentary
>>>> properties and seeks a declaration from the Minister of Public Safety
>>>> that the Canadian Government will no longer allow the Royal Canadian
>>>> Mounted Police (RCMP) and Canadian Forces to harass him and his clan
>>>> (Claim at para. 96).
>>>>
>>>> [2] On November 12, 2015 (Docket T-1557-15), by way of a
>>>> motion brought by the Crown, a prothonotary of the Federal Court (the
>>>> Prothonotary) struck the Claim in its entirety, without leave to
>>>> amend, on the basis that it was plain and obvious that the Claim
>>>> disclosed no reasonable claim, the Claim was fundamentally vexatious,
>>>> and the Claim could not be salvaged by way of further amendment (the
>>>> Prothontary’s Order).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [3] On January 25, 2016 (2016 FC 93), by way of Mr.
>>>> Amos’ appeal from the Prothonotary’s Order, a judge of the Federal
>>>> Court (the Judge), reviewing the matter de novo, struck all of Mr.
>>>> Amos’ claims for relief with the exception of the claim for damages
>>>> for being barred by the RCMP from the New Brunswick legislature in
>>>> 2004 (the Federal Court Judgment).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [4] Mr. Amos appealed and the Crown cross-appealed the
>>>> Federal Court Judgment. Further to the issuance of a Notice of Status
>>>> Review, Mr. Amos’ appeal was dismissed for delay on December 19, 2016.
>>>> As such, the only matter before this Court is the Crown’s
>>>> cross-appeal.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> II. Preliminary Matter
>>>>
>>>> [5] Mr. Amos, in his memorandum of fact and law in
>>>> relation to the cross-appeal that was filed with this Court on March
>>>> 6, 2017, indicated that several judges of this Court, including two of
>>>> the judges of this panel, had a conflict of interest in this appeal.
>>>> This was the first time that he identified the judges whom he believed
>>>> had a conflict of interest in a document that was filed with this
>>>> Court. In his notice of appeal he had alluded to a conflict with
>>>> several judges but did not name those judges.
>>>>
>>>> [6] Mr. Amos was of the view that he did not have to
>>>> identify the judges in any document filed with this Court because he
>>>> had identified the judges in various documents that had been filed
>>>> with the Federal Court. In his view the Federal Court and the Federal
>>>> Court of Appeal are the same court and therefore any document filed in
>>>> the Federal Court would be filed in this Court. This view is based on
>>>> subsections 5(4) and 5.1(4) of the Federal Courts Act, R.S.C., 1985,
>>>> c. F-7:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 5(4) Every judge of the Federal Court is, by virtue of his or her
>>>> office, a judge of the Federal Court of Appeal and has all the
>>>> jurisdiction, power and authority of a judge of the Federal Court of
>>>> Appeal.
>>>> […]
>>>>
>>>> 5(4) Les juges de la Cour fédérale sont d’office juges de la Cour
>>>> d’appel fédérale et ont la même compétence et les mêmes pouvoirs que
>>>> les juges de la Cour d’appel fédérale.
>>>> […]
>>>> 5.1(4) Every judge of the Federal Court of Appeal is, by virtue of
>>>> that office, a judge of the Federal Court and has all the
>>>> jurisdiction, power and authority of a judge of the Federal Court.
>>>>
>>>> 5.1(4) Les juges de la Cour d’appel fédérale sont d’office juges de la
>>>> Cour fédérale et ont la même compétence et les mêmes pouvoirs que les
>>>> juges de la Cour fédérale.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [7] However, these subsections only provide that the
>>>> judges of the Federal Court are also judges of this Court (and vice
>>>> versa). It does not mean that there is only one court. If the Federal
>>>> Court and this Court were one Court, there would be no need for this
>>>> section.
>>>> [8] Sections 3 and 4 of the Federal Courts Act provide
>>>> that:
>>>> 3 The division of the Federal Court of Canada called the Federal Court
>>>> — Appeal Division is continued under the name “Federal Court of
>>>> Appeal” in English and “Cour d’appel fédérale” in French. It is
>>>> continued as an additional court of law, equity and admiralty in and
>>>> for Canada, for the better administration of the laws of Canada and as
>>>> a superior court of record having civil and criminal jurisdiction.
>>>>
>>>> 3 La Section d’appel, aussi appelée la Cour d’appel ou la Cour d’appel
>>>> fédérale, est maintenue et dénommée « Cour d’appel fédérale » en
>>>> français et « Federal Court of Appeal » en anglais. Elle est maintenue
>>>> à titre de tribunal additionnel de droit, d’equity et d’amirauté du
>>>> Canada, propre à améliorer l’application du droit canadien, et
>>>> continue d’être une cour supérieure d’archives ayant compétence en
>>>> matière civile et pénale.
>>>> 4 The division of the Federal Court of Canada called the Federal Court
>>>> — Trial Division is continued under the name “Federal Court” in
>>>> English and “Cour fédérale” in French. It is continued as an
>>>> additional court of law, equity and admiralty in and for Canada, for
>>>> the better administration of the laws of Canada and as a superior
>>>> court of record having civil and criminal jurisdiction.
>>>>
>>>> 4 La section de la Cour fédérale du Canada, appelée la Section de
>>>> première instance de la Cour fédérale, est maintenue et dénommée «
>>>> Cour fédérale » en français et « Federal Court » en anglais. Elle est
>>>> maintenue à titre de tribunal additionnel de droit, d’equity et
>>>> d’amirauté du Canada, propre à améliorer l’application du droit
>>>> canadien, et continue d’être une cour supérieure d’archives ayant
>>>> compétence en matière civile et pénale.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [9] Sections 3 and 4 of the Federal Courts Act create
>>>> two separate courts – this Court (section 3) and the Federal Court
>>>> (section 4). If, as Mr. Amos suggests, documents filed in the Federal
>>>> Court were automatically also filed in this Court, then there would no
>>>> need for the parties to prepare and file appeal books as required by
>>>> Rules 343 to 345 of the Federal Courts Rules, SOR/98-106 in relation
>>>> to any appeal from a decision of the Federal Court. The requirement to
>>>> file an appeal book with this Court in relation to an appeal from a
>>>> decision of the Federal Court makes it clear that the only documents
>>>> that will be before this Court are the documents that are part of that
>>>> appeal book.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [10] Therefore, the memorandum of fact and law filed on
>>>> March 6, 2017 is the first document, filed with this Court, in which
>>>> Mr. Amos identified the particular judges that he submits have a
>>>> conflict in any matter related to him.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [11] On April 3, 2017, Mr. Amos attempted to bring a motion
>>>> before the Federal Court seeking an order “affirming or denying the
>>>> conflict of interest he has” with a number of judges of the Federal
>>>> Court. A judge of the Federal Court issued a direction noting that if
>>>> Mr. Amos was seeking this order in relation to judges of the Federal
>>>> Court of Appeal, it was beyond the jurisdiction of the Federal Court.
>>>> Mr. Amos raised the Federal Court motion at the hearing of this
>>>> cross-appeal. The Federal Court motion is not a motion before this
>>>> Court and, as such, the submissions filed before the Federal Court
>>>> will not be entertained. As well, since this was a motion brought
>>>> before the Federal Court (and not this Court), any documents filed in
>>>> relation to that motion are not part of the record of this Court.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [12] During the hearing of the appeal Mr. Amos alleged that
>>>> the third member of this panel also had a conflict of interest and
>>>> submitted some documents that, in his view, supported his claim of a
>>>> conflict. Mr. Amos, following the hearing of his appeal, was also
>>>> afforded the opportunity to provide a brief summary of the conflict
>>>> that he was alleging and to file additional documents that, in his
>>>> view, supported his allegations. Mr. Amos submitted several pages of
>>>> documents in relation to the alleged conflicts. He organized the
>>>> documents by submitting a copy of the biography of the particular
>>>> judge and then, immediately following that biography, by including
>>>> copies of the documents that, in his view, supported his claim that
>>>> such judge had a conflict.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [13] The nature of the alleged conflict of Justice Webb is
>>>> that before he was appointed as a Judge of the Tax Court of Canada in
>>>> 2006, he was a partner with the law firm Patterson Law, and before
>>>> that with Patterson Palmer in Nova Scotia. Mr. Amos submitted that he
>>>> had a number of disputes with Patterson Palmer and Patterson Law and
>>>> therefore Justice Webb has a conflict simply because he was a partner
>>>> of these firms. Mr. Amos is not alleging that Justice Webb was
>>>> personally involved in or had any knowledge of any matter in which Mr.
>>>> Amos was involved with Justice Webb’s former law firm – only that he
>>>> was a member of such firm.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [14] During his oral submissions at the hearing of his
>>>> appeal Mr. Amos, in relation to the alleged conflict for Justice Webb,
>>>> focused on dealings between himself and a particular lawyer at
>>>> Patterson Law. However, none of the documents submitted by Mr. Amos at
>>>> the hearing or subsequently related to any dealings with this
>>>> particular lawyer nor is it clear when Mr. Amos was dealing with this
>>>> lawyer. In particular, it is far from clear whether such dealings were
>>>> after the time that Justice Webb was appointed as a Judge of the Tax
>>>> Court of Canada over 10 years ago.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [15] The documents that he submitted in relation to the
>>>> alleged conflict for Justice Webb largely relate to dealings between
>>>> Byron Prior and the St. John’s Newfoundland and Labrador office of
>>>> Patterson Palmer, which is not in the same province where Justice Webb
>>>> practiced law. The only document that indicates any dealing between
>>>> Mr. Amos and Patterson Palmer is a copy of an affidavit of Stephen May
>>>> who was a partner in the St. John’s NL office of Patterson Palmer. The
>>>> affidavit is dated January 24, 2005 and refers to a number of e-mails
>>>> that were sent by Mr. Amos to Stephen May. Mr. Amos also included a
>>>> letter that is addressed to four individuals, one of whom is John
>>>> Crosbie who was counsel to the St. John’s NL office of Patterson
>>>> Palmer. The letter is dated September 2, 2004 and is addressed to
>>>> “John Crosbie, c/o Greg G. Byrne, Suite 502, 570 Queen Street,
>>>> Fredericton, NB E3B 5E3”. In this letter Mr. Amos alludes to a
>>>> possible lawsuit against Patterson Palmer.
>>>> [16] Mr. Amos’ position is that simply because Justice Webb
>>>> was a lawyer with Patterson Palmer, he now has a conflict. In Wewaykum
>>>> Indian Band v. Her Majesty the Queen, 2003 SCC 45, [2003] 2 S.C.R.
>>>> 259, the Supreme Court of Canada noted that disqualification of a
>>>> judge is to be determined based on whether there is a reasonable
>>>> apprehension of bias:
>>>> 60 In Canadian law, one standard has now emerged as the
>>>> criterion for disqualification. The criterion, as expressed by de
>>>> Grandpré J. in Committee for Justice and Liberty v. National Energy
>>>> Board, …[[1978] 1 S.C.R. 369, 68 D.L.R. (3d) 716], at p. 394, is the
>>>> reasonable apprehension of bias:
>>>> … the apprehension of bias must be a reasonable one, held by
>>>> reasonable and right minded persons, applying themselves to the
>>>> question and obtaining thereon the required information. In the words
>>>> of the Court of Appeal, that test is "what would an informed person,
>>>> viewing the matter realistically and practically -- and having thought
>>>> the matter through -- conclude. Would he think that it is more likely
>>>> than not that [the decision-maker], whether consciously or
>>>> unconsciously, would not decide fairly."
>>>>
>>>> [17] The issue to be determined is whether an informed
>>>> person, viewing the matter realistically and practically, and having
>>>> thought the matter through, would conclude that Mr. Amos’ allegations
>>>> give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias. As this Court has
>>>> previously remarked, “there is a strong presumption that judges will
>>>> administer justice impartially” and this presumption will not be
>>>> rebutted in the absence of “convincing evidence” of bias (Collins v.
>>>> Canada, 2011 FCA 140 at para. 7, [2011] 4 C.T.C. 157 [Collins]. See
>>>> also R. v. S. (R.D.), [1997] 3 S.C.R. 484 at para. 32, 151 D.L.R.
>>>> (4th) 193).
>>>>
>>>> [18] The Ontario Court of Appeal in Rando Drugs Ltd. v.
>>>> Scott, 2007 ONCA 553, 86 O.R. (3d) 653 (leave to appeal to the Supreme
>>>> Court of Canada refused, 32285 (August 1, 2007)), addressed the
>>>> particular issue of whether a judge is disqualified from hearing a
>>>> case simply because he had been a member of a law firm that was
>>>> involved in the litigation that was now before that judge. The Ontario
>>>> Court of Appeal determined that the judge was not disqualified if the
>>>> judge had no involvement with the person or the matter when he was a
>>>> lawyer. The Ontario Court of Appeal also explained that the rules for
>>>> determining whether a judge is disqualified are different from the
>>>> rules to determine whether a lawyer has a conflict:
>>>> 27 Thus, disqualification is not the natural corollary to a
>>>> finding that a trial judge has had some involvement in a case over
>>>> which he or she is now presiding. Where the judge had no involvement,
>>>> as here, it cannot be said that the judge is disqualified.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 28 The point can rightly be made that had Mr. Patterson been
>>>> asked to represent the appellant as counsel before his appointment to
>>>> the bench, the conflict rules would likely have prevented him from
>>>> taking the case because his firm had formerly represented one of the
>>>> defendants in the case. Thus, it is argued how is it that as a trial
>>>> judge Patterson J. can hear the case? This issue was considered by the
>>>> Court of Appeal (Civil Division) in Locabail (U.K.) Ltd. v. Bayfield
>>>> Properties Ltd., [2000] Q.B. 451. The court held, at para. 58, that
>>>> there is no inflexible rule governing the disqualification of a judge
>>>> and that, "[e]verything depends on the circumstances."
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 29 It seems to me that what appears at first sight to be an
>>>> inconsistency in application of rules can be explained by the
>>>> different contexts and in particular, the strong presumption of
>>>> judicial impartiality that applies in the context of disqualification
>>>> of a judge. There is no such presumption in cases of allegations of
>>>> conflict of interest against a lawyer because of a firm's previous
>>>> involvement in the case. To the contrary, as explained by Sopinka J.
>>>> in MacDonald Estate v. Martin (1990), 77 D.L.R. (4th) 249 (S.C.C.),
>>>> for sound policy reasons there is a presumption of a disqualifying
>>>> interest that can rarely be overcome. In particular, a conclusory
>>>> statement from the lawyer that he or she had no confidential
>>>> information about the case will never be sufficient. The case is the
>>>> opposite where the allegation of bias is made against a trial judge.
>>>> His or her statement that he or she knew nothing about the case and
>>>> had no involvement in it will ordinarily be accepted at face value
>>>> unless there is good reason to doubt it: see Locabail, at para. 19.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 30 That brings me then to consider the particular circumstances
>>>> of this case and whether there are serious grounds to find a
>>>> disqualifying conflict of interest in this case. In my view, there are
>>>> two significant factors that justify the trial judge's decision not to
>>>> recuse himself. The first is his statement, which all parties accept,
>>>> that he knew nothing of the case when it was in his former firm and
>>>> that he had nothing to do with it. The second is the long passage of
>>>> time. As was said in Wewaykum, at para. 85:
>>>> To us, one significant factor stands out, and must inform
>>>> the perspective of the reasonable person assessing the impact of this
>>>> involvement on Binnie J.'s impartiality in the appeals. That factor is
>>>> the passage of time. Most arguments for disqualification rest on
>>>> circumstances that are either contemporaneous to the decision-making,
>>>> or that occurred within a short time prior to the decision-making.
>>>> 31 There are other factors that inform the issue. The Wilson
>>>> Walker firm no longer acted for any of the parties by the time of
>>>> trial. More importantly, at the time of the motion, Patterson J. had
>>>> been a judge for six years and thus had not had a relationship with
>>>> his former firm for a considerable period of time.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 32 In my view, a reasonable person, viewing the matter
>>>> realistically would conclude that the trial judge could deal fairly
>>>> and impartially with this case. I take this view principally because
>>>> of the long passage of time and the trial judge's lack of involvement
>>>> in or knowledge of the case when the Wilson Walker firm had carriage.
>>>> In these circumstances it cannot be reasonably contended that the
>>>> trial judge could not remain impartial in the case. The mere fact that
>>>> his name appears on the letterhead of some correspondence from over a
>>>> decade ago would not lead a reasonable person to believe that he would
>>>> either consciously or unconsciously favour his former firm's former
>>>> client. It is simply not realistic to think that a judge would throw
>>>> off his mantle of impartiality, ignore his oath of office and favour a
>>>> client - about whom he knew nothing - of a firm that he left six years
>>>> earlier and that no longer acts for the client, in a case involving
>>>> events from over a decade ago.
>>>> (emphasis added)
>>>>
>>>> [19] Justice Webb had no involvement with any matter
>>>> involving Mr. Amos while he was a member of Patterson Palmer or
>>>> Patterson Law, nor does Mr. Amos suggest that he did. Mr. Amos made it
>>>> clear during the hearing of this matter that the only reason for the
>>>> alleged conflict for Justice Webb was that he was a member of
>>>> Patterson Law and Patterson Palmer. This is simply not enough for
>>>> Justice Webb to be disqualified. Any involvement of Mr. Amos with
>>>> Patterson Law while Justice Webb was a member of that firm would have
>>>> had to occur over 10 years ago and even longer for the time when he
>>>> was a member of Patterson Palmer. In addition to the lack of any
>>>> involvement on his part with any matter or dispute that Mr. Amos had
>>>> with Patterson Law or Patterson Palmer (which in and of itself is
>>>> sufficient to dispose of this matter), the length of time since
>>>> Justice Webb was a member of Patterson Law or Patterson Palmer would
>>>> also result in the same finding – that there is no conflict in Justice
>>>> Webb hearing this appeal.
>>>>
>>>> [20] Similarly in R. v. Bagot, 2000 MBCA 30, 145 Man. R.
>>>> (2d) 260, the Manitoba Court of Appeal found that there was no
>>>> reasonable apprehension of bias when a judge, who had been a member of
>>>> the law firm that had been retained by the accused, had no involvement
>>>> with the accused while he was a lawyer with that firm.
>>>>
>>>> [21] In Del Zotto v. Minister of National Revenue, [2000] 4
>>>> F.C. 321, 257 N.R. 96, this court did find that there would be a
>>>> reasonable apprehension of bias where a judge, who while he was a
>>>> lawyer, had recorded time on a matter involving the same person who
>>>> was before that judge. However, this case can be distinguished as
>>>> Justice Webb did not have any time recorded on any files involving Mr.
>>>> Amos while he was a lawyer with Patterson Palmer or Patterson Law.
>>>>
>>>> [22] Mr. Amos also included with his submissions a CD. He
>>>> stated in his affidavit dated June 26, 2017 that there is a “true copy
>>>> of an American police surveillance wiretap entitled 139” on this CD.
>>>> He has also indicated that he has “provided a true copy of the CD
>>>> entitled 139 to many American and Canadian law enforcement authorities
>>>> and not one of the police forces or officers of the court are willing
>>>> to investigate it”. Since he has indicated that this is an “American
>>>> police surveillance wiretap”, this is a matter for the American law
>>>> enforcement authorities and cannot create, as Mr. Amos suggests, a
>>>> conflict of interest for any judge to whom he provides a copy.
>>>>
>>>> [23] As a result, there is no conflict or reasonable
>>>> apprehension of bias for Justice Webb and therefore, no reason for him
>>>> to recuse himself.
>>>>
>>>> [24] Mr. Amos alleged that Justice Near’s past professional
>>>> experience with the government created a “quasi-conflict” in deciding
>>>> the cross-appeal. Mr. Amos provided no details and Justice Near
>>>> confirmed that he had no prior knowledge of the matters alleged in the
>>>> Claim. Justice Near sees no reason to recuse himself.
>>>>
>>>> [25] Insofar as it is possible to glean the basis for Mr.
>>>> Amos’ allegations against Justice Gleason, it appears that he alleges
>>>> that she is incapable of hearing this appeal because he says he wrote
>>>> a letter to Brian Mulroney and Jean Chrétien in 2004. At that time,
>>>> both Justice Gleason and Mr. Mulroney were partners in the law firm
>>>> Ogilvy Renault, LLP. The letter in question, which is rude and angry,
>>>> begins with “Hey you two Evil Old Smiling Bastards” and “Re: me suing
>>>> you and your little dogs too”. There is no indication that the letter
>>>> was ever responded to or that a law suit was ever commenced by Mr.
>>>> Amos against Mr. Mulroney. In the circumstances, there is no reason
>>>> for Justice Gleason to recuse herself as the letter in question does
>>>> not give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> III. Issue
>>>>
>>>> [26] The issue on the cross-appeal is as follows: Did the
>>>> Judge err in setting aside the Prothonotary’s Order striking the Claim
>>>> in its entirety without leave to amend and in determining that Mr.
>>>> Amos’ allegation that the RCMP barred him from the New Brunswick
>>>> legislature in 2004 was capable of supporting a cause of action?
>>>>
>>>> IV. Analysis
>>>>
>>>> A. Standard of Review
>>>>
>>>> [27] Following the Judge’s decision to set aside the
>>>> Prothonotary’s Order, this Court revisited the standard of review to
>>>> be applied to discretionary decisions of prothonotaries and decisions
>>>> made by judges on appeals of prothonotaries’ decisions in Hospira
>>>> Healthcare Corp. v. Kennedy Institute of Rheumatology, 2016 FCA 215,
>>>> 402 D.L.R. (4th) 497 [Hospira]. In Hospira, a five-member panel of
>>>> this Court replaced the Aqua-Gem standard of review with that
>>>> articulated in Housen v. Nikolaisen, 2002 SCC 33, [2002] 2 S.C.R. 235
>>>> [Housen]. As a result, it is no longer appropriate for the Federal
>>>> Court to conduct a de novo review of a discretionary order made by a
>>>> prothonotary in regard to questions vital to the final issue of the
>>>> case. Rather, a Federal Court judge can only intervene on appeal if
>>>> the prothonotary made an error of law or a palpable and overriding
>>>> error in determining a question of fact or question of mixed fact and
>>>> law (Hospira at para. 79). Further, this Court can only interfere with
>>>> a Federal Court judge’s review of a prothonotary’s discretionary order
>>>> if the judge made an error of law or palpable and overriding error in
>>>> determining a question of fact or question of mixed fact and law
>>>> (Hospira at paras. 82-83).
>>>>
>>>> [28] In the case at bar, the Judge substituted his own
>>>> assessment of Mr. Amos’ Claim for that of the Prothonotary. This Court
>>>> must look to the Prothonotary’s Order to determine whether the Judge
>>>> erred in law or made a palpable and overriding error in choosing to
>>>> interfere.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> B. Did the Judge err in interfering with the
>>>> Prothonotary’s Order?
>>>>
>>>> [29] The Prothontoary’s Order accepted the following
>>>> paragraphs from the Crown’s submissions as the basis for striking the
>>>> Claim in its entirety without leave to amend:
>>>>
>>>> 17. Within the 96 paragraph Statement of Claim, the Plaintiff
>>>> addresses his complaint in paragraphs 14-24, inclusive. All but four
>>>> of those paragraphs are dedicated to an incident that occurred in 2006
>>>> in and around the legislature in New Brunswick. The jurisdiction of
>>>> the Federal Court does not extend to Her Majesty the Queen in right of
>>>> the Provinces. In any event, the Plaintiff hasn’t named the Province
>>>> or provincial actors as parties to this action. The incident alleged
>>>> does not give rise to a justiciable cause of action in this Court.
>>>> (…)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 21. The few paragraphs that directly address the Defendant
>>>> provide no details as to the individuals involved or the location of
>>>> the alleged incidents or other details sufficient to allow the
>>>> Defendant to respond. As a result, it is difficult or impossible to
>>>> determine the causes of action the Plaintiff is attempting to advance.
>>>> A generous reading of the Statement of Claim allows the Defendant to
>>>> only speculate as to the true and/or intended cause of action. At
>>>> best, the Plaintiff’s action may possibly be summarized as: he
>>>> suspects he is barred from the House of Commons.
>>>> [footnotes omitted].
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [30] The Judge determined that he could not strike the Claim
>>>> on the same jurisdictional basis as the Prothonotary. The Judge noted
>>>> that the Federal Court has jurisdiction over claims based on the
>>>> liability of Federal Crown servants like the RCMP and that the actors
>>>> who barred Mr. Amos from the New Brunswick legislature in 2004
>>>> included the RCMP (Federal Court Judgment at para. 23). In considering
>>>> the viability of these allegations de novo, the Judge identified
>>>> paragraph 14 of the Claim as containing “some precision” as it
>>>> identifies the date of the event and a RCMP officer acting as
>>>> Aide-de-Camp to the Lieutenant Governor (Federal Court Judgment at
>>>> para. 27).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [31] The Judge noted that the 2004 event could support a
>>>> cause of action in the tort of misfeasance in public office and
>>>> identified the elements of the tort as excerpted from Meigs v. Canada,
>>>> 2013 FC 389, 431 F.T.R. 111:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [13] As in both the cases of Odhavji Estate v Woodhouse, 2003 SCC
>>>> 69 [Odhavji] and Lewis v Canada, 2012 FC 1514 [Lewis], I must
>>>> determine whether the plaintiffs’ statement of claim pleads each
>>>> element of the alleged tort of misfeasance in public office:
>>>>
>>>> a) The public officer must have engaged in deliberate and unlawful
>>>> conduct in his or her capacity as public officer;
>>>>
>>>> b) The public officer must have been aware both that his or her
>>>> conduct was unlawful and that it was likely to harm the plaintiff; and
>>>>
>>>> c) There must be an element of bad faith or dishonesty by the public
>>>> officer and knowledge of harm alone is insufficient to conclude that a
>>>> public officer acted in bad faith or dishonestly.
>>>> Odhavji, above, at paras 23, 24 and 28
>>>> (Federal Court Judgment at para. 28).
>>>>
>>>> [32] The Judge determined that Mr. Amos disclosed sufficient
>>>> material facts to meet the elements of the tort of misfeasance in
>>>> public office because the actors, who barred him from the New
>>>> Brunswick legislature in 2004, including the RCMP, did so for
>>>> “political reasons” (Federal Court Judgment at para. 29).
>>>>
>>>> [33] This Court’s discussion of the sufficiency of pleadings
>>>> in Merchant Law Group v. Canada (Revenue Agency), 2010 FCA 184, 321
>>>> D.L.R (4th) 301 is particularly apt:
>>>>
>>>> …When pleading bad faith or abuse of power, it is not enough to
>>>> assert, baldly, conclusory phrases such as “deliberately or
>>>> negligently,” “callous disregard,” or “by fraud and theft did steal”.
>>>> “The bare assertion of a conclusion upon which the court is called
>>>> upon to pronounce is not an allegation of material fact”. Making bald,
>>>> conclusory allegations without any evidentiary foundation is an abuse
>>>> of process…
>>>>
>>>> To this, I would add that the tort of misfeasance in public office
>>>> requires a particular state of mind of a public officer in carrying
>>>> out the impunged action, i.e., deliberate conduct which the public
>>>> officer knows to be inconsistent with the obligations of his or her
>>>> office. For this tort, particularization of the allegations is
>>>> mandatory. Rule 181 specifically requires particularization of
>>>> allegations of “breach of trust,” “wilful default,” “state of mind of
>>>> a person,” “malice” or “fraudulent intention.”
>>>> (at paras. 34-35, citations omitted).
>>>>
>>>> [34] Applying the Housen standard of review to the
>>>> Prothonotary’s Order, we are of the view that the Judge interfered
>>>> absent a legal or palpable and overriding error.
>>>>
>>>> [35] The Prothonotary determined that Mr. Amos’ Claim
>>>> disclosed no reasonable claim and was fundamentally vexatious on the
>>>> basis of jurisdictional concerns and the absence of material facts to
>>>> ground a cause of action. Paragraph 14 of the Claim, which addresses
>>>> the 2004 event, pleads no material facts as to how the RCMP officer
>>>> engaged in deliberate and unlawful conduct, knew that his or her
>>>> conduct was unlawful and likely to harm Mr. Amos, and acted in bad
>>>> faith. While the Claim alleges elsewhere that Mr. Amos was barred from
>>>> the New Brunswick legislature for political and/or malicious reasons,
>>>> these allegations are not particularized and are directed against
>>>> non-federal actors, such as the Sergeant-at-Arms of the Legislative
>>>> Assembly of New Brunswick and the Fredericton Police Force. As such,
>>>> the Judge erred in determining that Mr. Amos’ allegation that the RCMP
>>>> barred him from the New Brunswick legislature in 2004 was capable of
>>>> supporting a cause of action.
>>>>
>>>> [36] In our view, the Claim is made up entirely of bare
>>>> allegations, devoid of any detail, such that it discloses no
>>>> reasonable cause of action within the jurisdiction of the Federal
>>>> Courts. Therefore, the Judge erred in interfering to set aside the
>>>> Prothonotary’s Order striking the claim in its entirety. Further, we
>>>> find that the Prothonotary made no error in denying leave to amend.
>>>> The deficiencies in Mr. Amos’ pleadings are so extensive such that
>>>> amendment could not cure them (see Collins at para. 26).
>>>>
>>>> V. Conclusion
>>>> [37] For the foregoing reasons, we would allow the Crown’s
>>>> cross-appeal, with costs, setting aside the Federal Court Judgment,
>>>> dated January 25, 2016 and restoring the Prothonotary’s Order, dated
>>>> November 12, 2015, which struck Mr. Amos’ Claim in its entirety
>>>> without leave to amend.
>>>> "Wyman W. Webb"
>>>> J.A.
>>>> "David G. Near"
>>>> J.A.
>>>> "Mary J.L. Gleason"
>>>> J.A.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
>>>> NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
>>>>
>>>> A CROSS-APPEAL FROM AN ORDER OF THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE SOUTHCOTT DATED
>>>> JANUARY 25, 2016; DOCKET NUMBER T-1557-15.
>>>> DOCKET:
>>>>
>>>> A-48-16
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> STYLE OF CAUSE:
>>>>
>>>> DAVID RAYMOND AMOS v. HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> PLACE OF HEARING:
>>>>
>>>> Fredericton,
>>>> New Brunswick
>>>>
>>>> DATE OF HEARING:
>>>>
>>>> May 24, 2017
>>>>
>>>> REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY:
>>>>
>>>> WEBB J.A.
>>>> NEAR J.A.
>>>> GLEASON J.A.
>>>>
>>>> DATED:
>>>>
>>>> October 30, 2017
>>>>
>>>> APPEARANCES:
>>>> David Raymond Amos
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> For The Appellant / respondent on cross-appeal
>>>> (on his own behalf)
>>>>
>>>> Jan Jensen
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> For The Respondent / appELLANT ON CROSS-APPEAL
>>>>
>>>> SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
>>>> Nathalie G. Drouin
>>>> Deputy Attorney General of Canada
>>>>
>>>> For The Respondent / APPELLANT ON CROSS-APPEAL
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://www.facebook.com/
>>>>
>>>> John Williamson - Conservative Nomination Candidate New Brunswick
>>>> Southwest
>>>> May 17 at 12:48pm ·
>>>>
>>>> Great news! John Williamson is running for the federal Conservative
>>>> nomination in New Brunswick Southwest. He needs your help to secure
>>>> the riding and defeat the Trudeau Liberals in 2019.
>>>>
>>>> Having served as Member of Parliament from 2011-2015, he knows the
>>>> issues, has proven ability, and can win: John had the highest
>>>> Conservative vote — 38.6% — of all 32 ridings in Atlantic Canada in
>>>> 2015. It wasn’t enough to get over the top, but it was a clear signal
>>>> that his local campaign was strong.
>>>>
>>>> How can you help? Only current Conservative Party members can vote for
>>>> John in the nomination, so please signup or renew your membership
>>>> here: https://donate.conservative.
>>>>
>>>> There are also envelopes that need stuffing, phone calls that need to
>>>> be made, and events already planned.
>>>>
>>>> Contact John today by e-mail at VoteJohnW@gmail.com or call
>>>> 506-466-8347 to let him know how you can help!
>>>>
>>>> Unsure if your membership is current? Feel free to contact John and
>>>> ask. His team can make sure you’re all set to vote.
>>>>
>>>> And be sure to share and follow this page for updates on his campaign
>>>> and to learn about upcoming events.
>>>>
>>>> Go John! And Vote John W!
>>>>
>>>> Progressive Conservative MLA calls it quits at provincial level
>>>> Brian Macdonald won't run again for legislature seat, but might try
>>>> federal politics
>>>> CBC News · Posted: May 28, 2018 6:07 PM AT | Last Updated: May 28
>>>> Brian Macdonald, a Progressive Conservative MLA, has announced he
>>>> won't run in the Sept. 24 provincial election. (CBC)
>>>>
>>>> New Brunswick's Progressive Conservative party is losing one of its
>>>> highest-profile MLAs just months before the next provincial election.
>>>>
>>>> Brian Macdonald says he won't be a candidate this fall and may instead
>>>> jump into federal politics.
>>>>
>>>> Calling the last year "my best year in politics," the two-term MLA
>>>> said his decision has nothing to do with PC Leader Blaine Higgs, who
>>>> beat Macdonald for the party leadership in 2016.
>>>>
>>>> "It's been a really good year," Macdonald said. "I've had a strong
>>>> voice in the legislature on issues that are really important to my
>>>> heart.
>>>>
>>>> "I also think it can be a challenge being in provincial politics. It's
>>>> very small, it's very close, it's very tight, and on a personal basis,
>>>> I want to move on."
>>>>
>>>> Macdonald says he’s considering running for the federal Conservative
>>>> nomination in New Brunswick Southwest, which includes part of the
>>>> riding of Fredericton West-Hanwell, where he has been the MLA. (CBC)
>>>>
>>>> Macdonald said he's considering running for the federal Conservative
>>>> nomination in New Brunswick Southwest, a constituency that includes
>>>> part of Macdonald's provincial riding of Fredericton West-Hanwell.
>>>>
>>>> Health critic slams 'gutting' of top doctor's office
>>>>
>>>> Blaine Higgs faces internal PC dissent over appointment
>>>>
>>>> That decision would pit him against former Conservative MP John
>>>> Williamson, who announced May 21 he'll also seek the nomination in the
>>>> riding he represented from 2011 to 2015. Party members in the riding
>>>> will nominate their candidate June 28.
>>>>
>>>> Macdonald said he'll also consider running federally in Fredericton.
>>>> The former soldier said he's also looking at job opportunities with
>>>> national organizations that advocate for veterans.
>>>>
>>>> "I'm looking for opportunities and considering a lot of options," he
>>>> said.
>>>>
>>>> Blaine Higgs wins N.B. PC leadership race on 3rd ballot
>>>>
>>>> Tory leadership hopefuls scramble to be 'second choice' of rivals'
>>>> supporters
>>>>
>>>> Macdonald is the fifth candidate from the 2016 provincial PC
>>>> leadership race to opt against running in this year's election under
>>>> Higgs.
>>>>
>>>> Macdonald said he is confident he would have won his riding again and
>>>> the Tories will win the election Sept. 24, meaning he'd have a shot of
>>>> becoming a minister.
>>>>
>>>> But he said being a provincial politician "does wear on you and it
>>>> does make you think about what the other options are. … If I go
>>>> another four years in provincial politics, it concerns me that my
>>>> options would be limited after that."
>>>>
>>>> The 47-year-old also said the recent death of some friends made him
>>>> realize he should pursue other opportunities when he can.
>>>>
>>>> Macdonald's interest in federal politics has been well-known for
>>>> years. He was a political assistant to former federal Defence Minister
>>>> Peter MacKay and sought the federal Conservative nomination for
>>>> Fredericton for the 2008 election.
>>>>
>>>> After failing to win that nomination, he ran provincially in
>>>> Fredericton-Silverwood in 2010 and was elected. He was re-elected in
>>>> the newly created riding of Fredericton West-Hanwell in 2014, when he
>>>> defeated then-NDP leader Dominic Cardy.
>>>>
>>>> Macdonald ran for the leadership of the New Brunswick Progressive
>>>> Conservative Party but lost to Blaine Higgs. (Jacques Poitras/CBC)
>>>>
>>>> In 2016, Macdonald ran for the PC leadership, placing sixth on the
>>>> first ballot out of seven candidates.
>>>>
>>>> Macdonald said he doesn't think his departure will hurt the provincial
>>>> party's chances of holding on to Fredericton West-Hanwell.
>>>>
>>>> "It's going to be very attractive to a number of high-calibre
>>>> candidates who are now beginning to come forward," he said.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>>> From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>>>>> Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2018 14:37:04 -0400
>>>>> Subject: Birth Certificates of David and Max Amos
>>>>> To: swilliams@mosherchedore.ca
>>>>> Cc: David Amos <david.raymond.amos@gmail.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> Assistant (Property): Samantha Williams
>>>>>
>>>>> Direct Line: (506) 648-0373
>>>>> Email: swilliams@mosherchedore.ca
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>>> From: mike gauvin <mikegauvin@live.ca>
>>>>> Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2018 01:29:25 +0000
>>>>> Subject: Re: 83 Valley Road FYI this is a document I may employ BTW I
>>>>> am in Saint John tommorrow attending a hearing at the EUB
>>>>> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> Tomorrow Iam going to talk to a guy that should do it.
>>>>> ______________________________
>>>>> From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>>>>> Sent: October 11, 2018 11:38:58 AM
>>>>> To: mike gauvin; swilliams; serge.gauvin; mrichard; serge.rousselle;
>>>>> david.eidt
>>>>> Cc: David Amos; greg.byrne; brian.gallant; David.Coon;
>>>>> kris.austin@gnb.ca; blaine.higgs; robert.gauvin@gnb.ca
>>>>> Subject: Re: 83 Valley Road FYI this is a document I may employ BTW I
>>>>> am in Saint John tommorrow attending a hearing at the EUB
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.legaldeeds.com/
>>>>>
>>>>> New Brunswick Contract of Purchase and Sale of Real Property will
>>>>> provide you with a custom completed contract of purchase and sale of
>>>>> real property used in the sale of residential or recreational real
>>>>> estate in New Brunswick. This document is a must for anyone buying or
>>>>> selling a home or lot privately in New Brunswick.
>>>>>
>>>>> By simply answering a few questions our service will produce for you
>>>>> an online custom completed contract, ready to be signed by the buyer
>>>>> and the seller.
>>>>>
>>>>> This document includes simple and straight forward instructions to
>>>>> enable you to execute quickly and effortlessly. A subject removal form
>>>>> is also included for your convenience. The cost of the personalized
>>>>> Contract of Purchase and Sale is $15.00, payable in Canadian dollars.
>>>>> Within a few minutes, you will receive your completed PDF documents by
>>>>> email.
>>>>>
>>>>> To proceed, complete the entries.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 10/10/18, David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Obviously I have the same problem with every lawyer in New Brunswick.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you still wish to follow though on the deal. I will do as I
>>>>>> promised and pay you in full and get you to swear out and purchase
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> sale agreement properly witnessed by SNB and handle this matter
>>>>>> myself.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 10/10/18, mike gauvin <mikegauvin@live.ca> wrote:
>>>>>>> Mosher Chedore replied to me that it's a conflict and cannot
>>>>>>> represent
>>>>>>> me.
>>>>>>> ______________________________
>>>>>>> From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> Sent: October 9, 2018 9:57:18 AM
>>>>>>> To: swilliams@mosherchedore.ca; mikegauvin@live.ca
>>>>>>> Cc: David Amos
>>>>>>> Subject: I have yet to receive a response Why?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ---------- Original message ----------
>>>>>>> From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2018 14:37:04 -0400
>>>>>>> Subject: Birth Certificates of David and Max Amos
>>>>>>> To: swilliams@mosherchedore.ca
>>>>>>> Cc: David Amos <david.raymond.amos@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Assistant (Property): Samantha Williams
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Direct Line: (506) 648-0373
>>>>>>> Email: swilliams@mosherchedore.ca
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>>>>> From: mike gauvin <mikegauvin@live.ca>
>>>>>>> Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2018 15:56:14 +0000
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: Hey Kyle read real slow
>>>>>>> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hey David, I tried to call Reid, no avail. I will call that Serge
>>>>>>> Gauvin guy Monday morning, this is getting ridiculous. I would just
>>>>>>> prefer to go through the proper legal channels.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yours Truly, Michael Gauvin
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
From: Ministerial Correspondence Unit - Justice Canada <mcu@justice.gc.ca>
Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2022 00:25:36 +0000
Subject: Automatic Reply
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
Thank you for writing to the Honourable David Lametti, Minister of
Justice and Attorney General of Canada.
Due to the volume of correspondence addressed to the Minister, please
note that there may be a delay in processing your email. Rest assured
that your message will be carefully reviewed.
We do not respond to correspondence that contains offensive language.
-------------------
Merci d'avoir écrit à l'honorable David Lametti, ministre de la
Justice et procureur général du Canada.
En raison du volume de correspondance adressée au ministre, veuillez
prendre note qu'il pourrait y avoir un retard dans le traitement de
votre courriel. Nous tenons à vous assurer que votre message sera lu
avec soin.
Nous ne répondons pas à la correspondance contenant un langage offensant.
On 7/17/22, David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
> https://davidraymondamos3.
>
> Thursday, 14 July 2022
>
> Spouse of N.S. mass shooter shows how deadly rampage began in video
> re-enactment
>
> Methinks the very lazy corrupt media sheople love to republish Mikey
> MacDonald's spin on the Mass Casualty Commission Bullshit then polish
> the turd with their 2 bits worth. Others just use their photos and
> write their own spin.
>
> Hence they should not complain that I do the same within my Blog in
> light of the fact I duly notified them of what I have been up to for
> many years N'esy Pas?
> Deja Vu Anyone??
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: "Public Editor, The Toronto Star" <publiced@thestar.ca>
> Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2019 17:21:56 +0000
> Subject: RE: Attn Paul Manly I guess you have to rely on the lawyers
> such as Melanie Joly and Elizbeth May or the RCMP to explain why I
> just called
> To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
>
> THANK YOU for contacting the Toronto Star Public Editor's office.
> This office handles queries about accuracy and the Star's
> journalistic standards as set out in its Newsroom Policy and
> Journalistic Standards Guide
> https://www.thestar.com/
>
> The public editor's office is staffed Monday to Friday, 9 a.m. to 5
> p.m., by Public Editor Kathy English and Public Editor, Associate,
> Maithily Panchalingam.
>
> If you are requesting a correction or questioning journalistic
> standards, please send a link or details of where you read the article
> you are questioning, (e.g.- date, page number, digital device.) Please
> include your full name and a telephone number where we can reach you
> for further information if necessary. Unfortunately, due to the volume
> of emails we receive, we cannot reply to every email, but we do read
> them all, consider carefully the issues raised, and take appropriate
> action to attempt to resolve complaints in cases of error or breach of
> the Star's standards.
>
> Some messages to the public editor may be published in Kathy English's
> public editor column, which explores journalistic issues raised by
> readers. Please inform us if you do not want your message published.
>
> Corrections: The public editor's office looks into claims of error on
> any and all platforms on which the Star publishes. The Star corrects
> significant errors of fact. When we determine a correction is called
> for, it will be published as soon as possible; the article will also
> be corrected online and a correction appended. Generally, news
> corrections are published on page A2 and corrections for other
> sections (including Sports, Entertainment and Life) are published in
> those sections. Corrections are also published online:
> https://www.thestar.com/
> Because many readers often point out the same error, we cannot notify
> each person that we are publishing a correction. As well, because of
> the volume of queries we receive, we are not always able to respond to
> explain why we determined no correction is necessary. Every query
> about a possible error is considered thoroughly however. We thank all
> readers who take the time to help the Star report accurately.
> Unpublishing: Generally, the Star does not delete (unpublish) content
> from our websites or archives, except in some rare circumstances
> following consultation with the editor-in-chief, managing editor, and
> in some cases, legal counsel. In the case of verified errors, we will
> correct/update the article and/or append corrections as necessary but
> will not remove it from the Star' s digital publishing record.
> General feedback about coverage: If you are writing to express your
> view of the Star's coverage, your message will be forwarded to the
> appropriate department. Because of the volume of email we receive,
> neither the public editor's office, nor the journalists in specific
> departments, can respond to every reader comment about the Star's
> coverage.
> Letters to the Editor: If you want your comments expressing your view
> considered for publication as a Letter to the Editor, please resend
> your message to lettertoed@thestar.ca<mailto:l
> Letters must include full name, address and all phone numbers of
> sender (daytime, evening and cellphone). Street names and phone
> numbers will not be published. The Star reserves the right to edit
> letters, which typically run 50-150 words. Please note: The Star
> receives many more letters than it has space to print. Due to the
> volume, we unfortunately cannot acknowledge every submission.
> Submissions to the Star: Commentaries, opinion pieces, story pitches
> and press releases should be submitted to the section of the Star to
> which they are best suited. A full list of departments is published on
> the "Contact Us" page of the Star's website:
> https://www.thestar.com/about/
> How to reach a Star journalist: Most staff members, including
> reporters, editors, columnists and photographers, can be reached by
> email. In most cases the email address follows this formula (all lower
> case, don't type spaces or the plus sign): first initial + last name
> @thestar.ca. You can also reach staff in the Editorial department
> (newsroom) via phone at 416-869-4300 or fax at 416-869-4328. Editorial
> staff members can also be contacted within the department they work
> for. To reach a freelance writer, please contact the section in which
> his or her article appeared.
> Subscriptions/Customer Service: The public editor's office handles
> concerns about editorial content only. For home delivery
> subscriptions, delivery problems, billing inquiries and other customer
> service matters, please email
> circmail@thestar.ca<mailto:cir
> our Subscription page<http://www.thestar.com/
> home delivery information.
> Further information about how to contact other departments in the Star
> can be found here: https://www.thestar.com/about/
>
> Thank you for reading your Toronto Star.
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: "MEDIA-MÉDIAS (VAC/ACC)" <vac.media-medias.acc@canada.
> Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2019 16:28:32 +0000
> Subject: Automatic reply: How Ottawa gave up its entitlements to
> embrace ethics SWAT teams Yea Right I agree now tell me another one Mr
> Egan while allt unethical journalists
> To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
>
> Hello,
>
> We have received your request and are working on a response. We will
> send you an answer to your query as soon as possible.
>
> Thank you for your interest in Veterans Affairs Canada.
>
> ***
>
> Bonjour,
>
> Nous avons bien reçu votre demande. Nous allons préparer une réponse à
> vos questions et vous l’envoyer aussitôt que possible.
>
> Nous vous remercions de l’intérêt pour Anciens Combattants Canada.
>
> ***
>
> Media Relations | Relations avec les médias
> Veterans Affairs Canada | Anciens Combattants Canada
> Government of Canada | Gouvernement du Canada
> 613-992-7468
> vac.media-medias.acc@canada.ca
> Check out our Media
> Kits<http://www.veterans.gc.
> Trousse d’information<http://www.
>
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: "Dale, Daniel" <ddale@thestar.ca>
> Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2019 16:28:32 +0000
> Subject: Automatic reply: How Ottawa gave up its entitlements to
> embrace ethics SWAT teams Yea Right I agree now tell me another one Mr
> Egan while allt unethical journalists
> To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
>
> Daniel Dale is no longer at the Star. If you have a news tip or press
> release, please send them to: city@thestar.ca<mailto:city@
> Thank you for contacting the Star.
>
>
>
> https://www.thespec.com/ts/
>
>
> Canada’s top Mountie, Nova Scotia’s mass shooting probe and some
> missing pages: Here’s what we know so far
> RCMP faced more scrutiny for initially removing pages from subpoenaed
> documents recording Lucki’s anger at refusal to release details about
> the guns.
> SM
> By Steve McKinleyHalifax Bureau
> Sun., June 26, 2022
>
> RCMP Commissioner Brenda Lucki this week faced accusations that she
> sought to interfere with the Nova Scotia Mounties’ investigation into
> the province’s April 2020 massacre.
>
> HALIFAX—As controversy swirls around the RCMP, the Liberal government
> and allegations of interference in the investigation of the worst mass
> shooting in the country’s history, missing RCMP documentation is the
> latest development to take centre stage.
>
> RCMP Commissioner Brenda Lucki this week faced accusations that she
> sought to interfere with the Nova Scotia Mounties’ investigation into
> the province’s April 2020 massacre, potentially at the behest of
> then-public safety minister Bill Blair and the Prime Minister’s Office
> to grease the wheels for upcoming gun control legislation.
>
> Lucki, Blair and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau have denied that there
> was any interference with the Nova Scotia investigation.
>
> On Friday, the RCMP — and the Department of Justice by extension —
> faced scrutiny for initially removing pages from subpoenaed documents
> that recorded Lucki’s anger at the Nova Scotia RCMP’s refusal to
> release details about the guns involved in the shooting. The Nova
> Scotia Mounties had said doing so would compromise their
> investigation.
>
> The missing pages, which described Lucki telling a Nova Scotia
> contingent that she’d promised the public safety minister and the PMO
> the gun details would be released, were only handed over to the
> inquiry in May of this year, three months after the RCMP had provided
> the same documents without those pages.
>
> Here’s what’s happened so far, and what’s likely to happen next.
>
> What’s the controversy exactly?
>
> Days after the mass shooting that saw 22 people killed by a gunman in
> northern Nova Scotia, there was a meeting between national and Nova
> Scotia RCMP.
>
> Notes from that meeting, released this week by the public inquiry now
> reviewing the tragedy, show it included RCMP Commissioner Brenda Lucki
> and, from the Nova Scotia side, Assistant Commissioner Lee Bergerman,
> the province’s commanding officer; Supt. Darren Campbell; and
> strategic communications director Lia Scanlan.
> RCMP Supt. Darren Campbell discusses the timeline of events and
> locations of the Nova Scotia shootings at RCMP headquarters in
> Dartmouth, N.S., on April 24, 2020.
>
> In press briefings to that point, N.S. RCMP had withheld specifics on
> the weapons used by the gunman, saying that identifying the specific
> guns would compromise the investigation.
>
> At the meeting, Lucki “was obviously upset” that N.S. RCMP had not
> released the specifics, Campbell’s handwritten notes indicate.
>
> “The commissioner accused us (me) of disrespecting her by not
> following her instructions,” his notes said.
>
> At the time, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government was in the
> process of pushing through an order-in-council that would ban the sale
> of 1,500 models of assault-style firearms.
>
> Campbell’s notes indicate that when he attempted to explain the
> reasoning for not releasing this information, Lucki said that “we (the
> Nova Scotia RCMP) didn’t understand, that this was tied to pending gun
> control legislation that would make officers and public safer by or
> through this legislation.”
>
> “The commissioner said that she had promised the Minister of Public
> Safety and the Prime Minister’s Office that the RCMP (we) would
> release this information,” wrote Campbell.
>
> In an interview with the Mass Casualty Commission in February of this
> year, Scanlan also expressed frustration, saying Blair and Trudeau
> were “weighing in on what we could and could not say” in press
> briefings.
>
> “That is 100 per cent Minister Blair and the Prime Minister,” she
> said. “And we have a commissioner that does not push back.”
>
> Why was that bad, if it happened?
>
> The notes from that conference seem to indicate that Lucki was willing
> to interfere with RCMP operations — the investigation of the mass
> shooting — to advance a gun-control agenda championed by the Prime
> Minister’s Office and by the public safety minister at the time,
> Blair.
>
> Based on Lucki’s comments — as reported by Campbell — it appears that
> she was taking her marching orders from Blair and from the PMO.
>
> If true, that’s problematic because it compromises the principle of
> “operational independence,” a central tenet of policing that dictates
> that politicians should never dictate or direct police operations. In
> principle, it’s a noble concept; in practice, the definition is
> somewhat fuzzy.
>
> Lucki said late Tuesday that she would never take action that would
> jeopardize an investigation. Blair, now the emergency preparedness
> minister, denied that Lucki had ever promised him that the RCMP would
> release specific information about the guns. He’s also denied that he
> told anyone what the RCMP should communicate about their own
> investigation.
>
> Trudeau, speaking from a Commonwealth summit in Rwanda, said Thursday
> there was no “undue influence or pressure” put on the RCMP in the days
> following the mass shooting, and that only police determine what
> information to release and when.
>
> What position does this leave the RCMP commissioner in?
>
> Lucki’s tenure atop the RCMP has not been without controversy.
>
> In 2020, she drew criticism for saying she had struggled over the
> definition of systemic racism and its existence in her police force.
> Shortly thereafter, she changed tack and acknowledged that systemic
> racism was indeed present in the RCMP, drawing the ire of some
> members.
>
> That same year, the B.C. Civil Liberties Association filed a lawsuit
> against her for delaying the release of a civilian watchdog report
> into RCMP spying on Indigenous and climate advocates. And a series of
> on-camera incidents sparking allegations of excessive use of force by
> RCMP officers prompted then-Chief of the Assembly of First Nations
> Perry Bellegarde to call for her replacement.
>
> Trudeau said this week he still has confidence in Lucki to lead the
> RCMP. His support echoed that of current public safety minister, Marco
> Mendicino, and Blair.
>
> What’s the deal with the missing notes?
>
> On June 15, 2021, the Mass Casualty Commission issued a subpoena to
> the RCMP for its entire investigative file related to the mass
> shooting.
>
> Eight months later, on Feb. 14, 2022, as part of that file, the RCMP
> turned over the notes of senior RCMP officers, including Campbell’s
> handwritten notes covering the period from April 19, 2020 to June 16,
> 2020. Campbell’s notes covered 132 pages.
>
> Campbell was in the habit of writing the date in large numbers across
> the page in his notes like this: 2020-04-27.
>
> In those notes turned over by the RCMP in February, his dates jumped
> from 2020-04-27 to 2020-04-29 — April 27, 2020, to April 29, 2020 —
> with no April 28 in between.
>
> April 28, 2020 was the date of the conference with Lucki, during which
> Campbell’s notes reflected Lucki being upset about Campbell not
> releasing specific information on the guns used in the mass shooting,
> and noting her saying that she had promised the public safety minister
> and the PMO that she would do so.
>
> More than three months later, on May 31, 2022, the commission received
> another batch of documents from the Department of Justice, which again
> included Campbell’s handwritten notes.
>
> This time the notes numbered 136 pages and included the four pages of
> Campbell’s notes from the conference with Lucki, dated, as was his
> habit, with 2020-04-28 written across the page.
>
> “The Commission sought an explanation from the Department of Justice
> about why four pages were missing from the original disclosure of
> Supt. Campbell’s notes,” the Mass Casualty Commission’s investigations
> director, Barbara McLean, said in a statement Friday.
>
> “The Commission is also demanding an explanation for any further
> material that has been held back from disclosed material for privilege
> or other review where the fact that this has occurred is not clear on
> what has been produced to the Commission.
>
> “In short, the Commission is seeking assurance that nothing else has
> been held back as per direction from subpoenas.”
>
> The RCMP did not respond to a request from the Star seeking an
> explanation for the missing pages.
>
> What do the victims families’ think?
>
> “Our clients are understandably troubled by what they heard,” Michael
> Scott of Patterson Law, which represents most of the families of the
> victims of the shooting, said in a statement this week. “In the days
> following April 19, 2020, all efforts should have been focused on
> supporting victims, their families and the active investigation being
> carried out by local RCMP.
>
> “Interfering in those efforts, to exploit a perceived political
> opportunity or otherwise, would have been inexcusable. We trust that
> the Mass Casualty Commission recognizes the importance of determining
> the truth of these allegations and the need for fulsome
> cross-examination of the relevant witnesses.”
>
> When will we hear more from the players involved?
>
> Campbell and Lucki are scheduled to appear as witnesses at the Mass
> Casualty Commission inquiry in coming months, as are Assistant
> Commissioner Lee Bergerman, the province’s commanding officer at the
> time, and Chief Supt. Chris Leather, who was the critical incident
> commander the weekend of the shootings.
>
> But a parliamentary public safety committee has also called upon many
> of the same players to testify as it digs into the allegations of
> political interference into the RCMP investigation.
>
> Lucki and Blair are required to appear before the committee no later
> than July 25, and Campbell and Scanlan are being called as well. Also
> tapped for testimony before the committee are Bergerman and Leather.
>
> With files from The Canadian Press
> SM
> Steve McKinley is a Halifax-based reporter for the Star. Follow him on
> Twitter: @smckinley1
>
>
>
>
> https://raymond1212.rssing.
>
>
>
> —–Original Message—–
> Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2007 12:45 AM
> Subject: Remember me Mr Travers? Say Hey to Bev Busson for me will ya?
> All her cops are ducking me.
> Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2006 10:30:08 -0800 (PST)
> From: David Amos <motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: My cell # is 506 434 1379 Stress test my integrity why don't
> ya?
> To: “Travers, Jim” <jtravers@thestar.ca>
>
> What you say is true, that is why I must sue.. We all know why
> your fellow haughty snotty Upper Canadian reporters have ignored the
> Code of Ethics for journalists for years. The freedom of the press is
> a myth. They do what they are told. N'est Pas? However your publicly
> held company is in a world of trouble with me.
>
> If you doubt me ask Marie Beyette your company's
> Vice-President, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary to ask the
> following dudes about my issues about Tax Fraud Securities Fraud, Bank
> Fraud and Murder. Rest assured the RCMP ain't gonna tell you shit.
>
> Theses dudes are your directors and I have already proven many times
> that their companies are as crooked as Hell. The Torys oufit was the
> most fun of all just ask Lord Conrad Black and his sneaky lawyer Eddy
> Greenspan about the doings between me and the corrupt Yankee US
> Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald just acrost the 49th from you.
>
> SARABJIT S. MARWAH (He should talk to Deborah Alexander)
> Vice Chairman and Chief Administrative Officer, Bank of Nova Scotia
>
> RONALD W. OSBORNE (he should talk to Robert C. Pozen and Jeffery Carp)
> Chairman, Sun Life Financial Inc.
>
> THE HON. FRANK IACOBUCCI (He should talk to his partner John Laskin)
> Chairman of the Board, Torstar Corporation
> Counsel, Torys LLP
> Former Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada
>
> Veritas Vincit
> David Raymond Amos
>
> “Travers, Jim” <jtravers@thestar.ca> wrote:
>
> Your integrity is beyond my purview.
>
> ————————–
>
> Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld
>
> —–Original Message—–
> From: David Amos
> To: Travers, Jim
> Sent: Sat Nov 04 09:08:59 2006
> Subject: My cell # is 506 434 1379 Stress test my integrity why don't ya?
>
> David Amos <motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2006 22:51:33 -0800 (PST)
> From: David Amos <motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com>
> Subject: Fwd: Cya'll in Court Johnny Boy
> To: premier@gnb.ca, kelly.lamrock@gnb.ca,
> Stephane.vaillancourt@rcmp-
> mary.schryer@gnb.ca, rick.miles@gnb.ca, jack.keir@gnb.ca,
> Bernard.LeBlanc@gnb.ca, Cheryl.Lavoie@gnb.ca, greg.byrne@gnb.ca,
> john.foran@gnb.ca, giuliano.zaccardelli@rcmp-grc.
> CC: jonesr@cbc.ca, mleger@stu.ca, jwalker@stu.ca, plee@stu.ca,
> oldmaison@yahoo.com, belord@gnb.ca, DannyWilliams@gov.nl.ca,
> davies.carl@nbpub.com, bruce.northrup@gnb.ca, carl.urquhart@gnb.ca,
> claude.landry@gnb.ca, mike.olscamp@gnb.ca, info@pco-bcp.gc.ca
>
> David Amos <motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2006 10:57:25 -0800 (PST)
> From: David Amos <motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com>
> Subject: Cya'l in Court Johnny Boy
> To: john.logan@gnb.ca, christina.winsor@gnb.ca
>
> Your assistant Katherine Wilson really pissed me off after a long wait
> on hold to talk to you on the phone today. I read the news today and
> just shook my head at the nonsense of it all.
>
> Wilson claimed that she was well aware of my matters and that all of
> your associates employed as Crown Attorneys have advised me to the
> best of your abilities. How can that be? I have not been able to speak
> to any of you since I spoke to the crook, Jeff Mockler over two years
> ago and that was immediately after I came screaming out of jail in the
> USA. I saw red as I read his words to me then. They were obviously
> sent when he thought I would never get out of that Yankee jail.
>
> To date I have not received one response in writng let alone speak to
> anyone employed by the Crown as legal counsel, Despite the
> unbelievable volume of material I have faxed emailed and delivered in
> hand and byway of the Canada Post, you all failed to act within the
> scope of your employment and certainly do not deserve a raise. In fact
> you should all go to jail, not pass go and not allowed to accept even
> 200, dollars more from the taxpayers of New Brunswick.
>
> The text of the fowarded email I sent last night to you political bosses
> and many others says enough about my pending lawsuits.
>
> The Governor General of Canada is the highest authority in Canada
> who speaks in the name of the Crown N'est Pas? Well I received that
> letter mere days before I was falsely imprisoned in the USA.
>
> Well you can easily see that she affirms over two years ago that I had
> done the right thing with regards to provincial law enforcement
> authorities just as Deputy Prime Minister Landslide Annie McLellan
> had suggested I do before I came back home to New Brunswick to run
> for a federal seat in the malevolent 38th Parlaiment.
>
> Wheras you refused to talk to me today Johnny Boy Logan, may I
> suggest that you talk to the RCMP or some of your associates
> starting with Jeff Mockler. I have had enough of your obvious malice.
>
> I will leave you to wonder as to who else will read my opinion of you
> and your legal cohorts in short order. Cya'll in Court.
>> Veritas Vincit
> David Raymond Amos
>
> “Jan 3rd, 2004
>
> Mr. David R. Amos
> 143 Alvin Avenue
> Milton, MA 02186
> U.S.A.
>
> Dear Mr. Amos
>
> Thank you for your letter of November 19th, 2003, addressed to my
> predecessor, the Honourble Wayne Easter, regardingyour safety.
> I apologize for the delay in responding.
>
> If you have any concerns about your personal safety, I can only
> suggest that you contact the police of local jurisdiction. In addition,
> any evidence of criminal activity should be brought to their attention
> since the police are in the best position to evaluate the information
> and take action as deemed appropriate.
>
> I trust that this information is satisfactory.
>
> Yours sincerely
>
> A. Anne McLellan”
>
> David Amos <motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 15:43:33 -0800 (PST)
> From: David Amos <motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com>
> Subject: Fwd: BOOO ya Bastards
> To: premier@gnb.ca, kelly.lamrock@gnb.ca,
> Stephane.vaillancourt@rcmp-
> mary.schryer@gnb.ca, rick.miles@gnb.ca, jack.keir@gnb.ca,
> Bernard.LeBlanc@gnb.ca, Cheryl.Lavoie@gnb.ca,
> greg.byrne@gnb.ca, john.foran@gnb.ca,
> giuliano.zaccardelli@rcmp-grc.
> CC: jonesr@cbc.ca, mleger@stu.ca, jwalker@stu.ca,
> plee@stu.ca, oldmaison@yahoo.com, belord@gnb.ca,
> DannyWilliams@gov.nl.ca, davies.carl@nbpub.com,
> bruce.northrup@gnb.ca, carl.urquhart@gnb.ca,
> claude.landry@gnb.ca, mike.olscamp@gnb.ca,
> info@pco-bcp.gc.ca
>
> David Amos <motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 15:41:38 -0800 (PST)
> From: David Amos <motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com>
> Subject: BOOO ya Bastards
> To: jacques_poitras@cbc.ca, greg.byrne@gnb.ca,
> Deb_Nobes@cbc.ca, spinks08@hotmail.com,
> Duane.Rousselle@unb.ca, ndpnpd@nbnet.nb.ca,
> mackay01@canada.com,PoliticsNB
> oldmaison.wcie@gmail.com, handsofnothing@yahoo.ca,
> gcox@citizenspress.org, stevengerickson@yahoo.com
> CC: MacKay.P@parl.gc.ca, Day.S@parl.gc.ca,
> Moore.R@parl.gc.ca, info@pco-bcp.gc.ca,
> Guimond.M@parl.gc.ca, Cy.LEBLANC@gnb.ca,
> Jeannot.VOLPE@gnb.ca, Johnw.BETTS@gnb.ca,
> saintjohnfundy@hotmail.com, len.hoyt@mcinnescooper.com,
> william.gould@gnb.ca, cjcw@nbnet.nb.ca,
> news@kingscorecord.com
>
> September 11th, 2004
>
> Dear Mr. Amos,
>
> On behalf of Her Excellency the Right Honourable Adrienne Clarkson,
> I acknowledge receipt of two sets of documents and CD regarding
> corruption, one received from you directly, and the other forwarded
> to us by the Office of the Lieutenant Governor of New Brunswick.
>
> I regret to inform you that the Governor General cannot intervene in
> matters that are the responsibility of elected officials and courts of
> Justice of Canada.
>
> You already contacted the various provincial authorities regarding
> your concerns, and these were the appropriate steps to take.
>
> Yours sincerely.
> Renee Blanchet
> Office of the Secretary to the
> Governor General
>
> Criminal Code PART IV OFFENCES AGAINST THE ADMINISTRATION
> OF LAW AND JUSTICE
>
> Corruption and Disobedience 126. (1) Every one who, without
> lawful excuse, contravenes an Act of Parliament by wilfully doing
> anything that it forbids or by wilfully omitting to do anything that
> it requires to be done is, unless a punishment is expressly provided
> by law, guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for
> a term not exceeding two years.(2) Any proceedings in respect of a
> contravention of or conspiracy to contravene an Act mentioned in
> subsection (1), other than this Act, may be instituted at the instance
> of the Government of Canada and conducted by or on behalf of that
>
> Government.R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 126; R.S., 1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.),
> s. 185(F).
>
> ________________________________
> Crown lawyers receive help in fight for pay raise
> Last Updated: Wednesday, November 1, 2006 | 9:26 AM AT
> CBC News <http://www.cbc.ca/news/
>
> Lawyers who work for the New Brunswick government say a previously
> secret report may help their case for a bigger pay raise.
>
> The lawyers had to go to court to see the report, which proves they're
> underpaid, they say. Government lawyers aren't unionized and can't
> strike, so have no leverage in asking the government to raise their pay.
>
> Last year, the government commissioned a study of what Crown
> lawyers make across the country as part of a review of salaries.
>
> The government wouldn't give the Crown Counsel Association a copy
> of the report when it was done, so the association used the Right to
> Information Act to take the government to court, and a judge ordered
> the report released.
>
> Association president John Logan says the report appears to show
> government lawyers here are paid less than their counterparts in
> other provinces.
>
> “The association of Crown counsel are reviewing the report and intend
> to use it as background information.”
>
> The association is hoping to meet with the new attorney general to
> talk about the report, but government spokesperson Christina Winsor
> says a good pay plan is already in place.
>
> “The current pay plan for the lawyers is an average of three per cent
> a year over four years, and that is consistent and slightly above
> inflation rates, which is averaging about two per cent right now.”
>
> Winsor says a new study will be commissioned in 2009 when the
> current schedule of pay increases expires
> ——————————————————————————–
>
> http://www.fca-caf.gc.ca/fca-
>
> The Honourable John B. Laskin
> Justice John B. Laskin practised litigation for more than 30 years in
> the Toronto office of Torys LLP. In his broad trial and appellate
> practice, he represented individuals, corporations, governments and
> their agencies, public institutions, industry associations, public
> interest groups, and Indigenous organizations. He appeared in the
> Supreme Court of Canada, the Federal Courts, every level of court in
> Ontario, the courts of seven other provinces and territories, domestic
> and international arbitrations, and a variety of administrative
> tribunals.
> Justice Laskin is a Fellow of the American College of Trial Lawyers
> and of Litigation Counsel of America, and has been a member of the
> Ontario Regional Committee of the Supreme Court Advocacy Institute. He
> has spoken, written and taught frequently on matters of public law and
> advocacy, and was co-editor of Canadian Charter of Rights Annotated.
> Before entering private practice, he was a professor in the University
> of Toronto’s Faculty of Law.
> Born in Thunder Bay, Justice Laskin holds a B.A. (with distinction)
> from York University, an LL.B. (as Gold Medallist) from the University
> of Toronto, and an LL.M. from the University of California at
> Berkeley. He is a past President of the University of Toronto Law
> Alumni Association and was actively involved in the founding of the
> Faculty of Law at Lakehead University. In 2015, he was awarded the Law
> Society of Upper Canada’s Law Society Medal, given for outstanding
> service within the legal profession where the service is in accordance
> with the highest ideals of the profession.
> Justice Laskin was appointed a judge of the Federal Court of Appeal on
> June 21, 2017.
>
>
> Get the free Yahoo! toolbar and rest assured with the added security
>
> of spyware protection.
> Here just a couple of the latest examples
>
> https://globalnews.ca/news/
>
> Wife of N.S. mass killer explains why she didn’t report earlier
> violence to police
> By Michael Tutton and Michael MacDonald The Canadian Press
> Posted July 15, 2022 6:33 am
>
> WATCH: In an emotional, multi-hour testimony, Lisa Banfield confessed
> to hiding information from the police. Callum Smith has the latest.
>
> The common-law wife of the man responsible for the Nova Scotia mass
> shooting told an inquiry Friday that she lied to police about his
> illegal weapons and failed to report earlier violent behaviour because
> she was deeply afraid of him.
>
> Lisa Banfield struggled to maintain her composure as she described how
> her partner beat her in 2003 as witnesses looked on, and she offered
> new details about what happened when her spouse threatened to kill his
> parents in 2010.
>
> It was the first time she has spoken publicly about her life with the
> killer, and the inquiry’s decision to spare her from facing
> cross-examination proved contentious. Lawyers from a firm representing
> families of 14 of the victims, as well as about 20 of those family
> members, walked out of the hearing in protest before it ended.
> Lisa Banfield, the common-law wife of Gabriel Wortman, testifies at
> the Mass Casualty Commission on Friday.
> Lisa Banfield, the common-law wife of Gabriel Wortman, testifies at
> the Mass Casualty Commission inquiry into the mass murders in rural
> Nova Scotia on April 18/19, 2020, in Halifax on Friday, July 15, 2022.
> Wortman, dressed as an RCMP officer and driving a replica police
> cruiser, murdered 22 people. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Andrew Vaughan.
>
> The inquiry has heard Banfield was beaten and badly injured by Gabriel
> Wortman on the night of April 18, 2020, at the beginning of his
> shooting rampage that would claim 22 lives. She told investigators
> that she escaped into the woods and emerged the next morning to tell
> police that her partner was still at large and driving a vehicle that
> looked exactly like an RCMP cruiser.
>
> Banfield said she will remain forever haunted by her decision to flee,
> as she wonders if her spouse might have harmed her and then left
> others alone.
>
> “I often think would any of those people have died? So that is
> something that haunts me all the time, because I feel that they
> weren’t targeted. He was looking for me in the beginning,” she said.
>
> Banfield’s testimony was at times painful and dramatic as she
> described what happened in June 2010 when Wortman’s uncle alerted
> Halifax police that his nephew had threatened to kill his parents over
> a property dispute.
> Click to play video: 'Spouse of N.S. mass shooter reveals grim details
> about their life' 2:02 Spouse of N.S. mass shooter reveals grim
> details about their life
>
> Banfield recalled how the killer had been drinking heavily and fired a
> bullet into the wall of their home in Dartmouth, N.S., terrifying her.
> When a Halifax police officer arrived at their door, Banfield admitted
> she lied when asked about the death threats and whether her spouse
> owned any weapons.
>
> When commission lawyer Gillian Hnatiw asked why she lied, Banfield
> sobbed as she explained.
>
> “He had the handgun by the nightstand, and he said. ‘If any police
> come, I’m shooting,”’ she said. “So, when they asked me that, I didn’t
> want them to go in, because I didn’t want them
> (police) to get hurt.”
>
> When an RCMP officer showed up at the couple’s summer home in
> Portapique, N.S., after the death threat was reported, Wortman
> insisted he didn’t own any firearms, aside from an old musket and
> another antique weapon suspended near the fireplace and “filled with
> wax,” Banfield testified.
>
> She confirmed that the officer in question was Const. Greg Wiley, who
> had known Wortman for years and later told investigators that he had
> visited his Portapique home 16 times.
>
> Hnatiw also asked Banfield about a violent assault at a gathering in
> Sutherland Lake, north of Portapique. In earlier interviews with the
> inquiry, she indicated the attack took place in 2001 or 2002, but she
> confirmed Friday the actual date was 2003.
>
> She testified that when she tried to leave the bush party, Wortman
> became irate. As the pair drove away in his Jeep, he started punching
> her, she said.
>
> “And as I was driving back on the back road, he’s yelling at me,” she
> said as the hearing room fell silent. “He started smacking me in my
> face. I’m thinking, ‘I’ve never had anybody hit me before … and I’m
> trying to drive. He just kept whacking me in the head.”
>
> She said she jumped out of the vehicle and ran into the woods. He ran
> after her and caught her.
>
> “He grabbed by the hair and was punching me, and I’m trying to protect
> myself,” she said. “I’m screaming. He pulled me out by the road … and
> then I could see these two (all-terrain vehicles) and their lights
> were on me. He looked up and he dropped me.”
>
> Banfield said Wortman was later placed in the back of a police cruiser
> and taken back to their home in Portapique.
>
> Asked why she declined to report the assault to police, Banfield
> replied: “That’s the first time anybody hit me, and I didn’t want to
> get anybody in trouble. I just thought, ‘I’m walking away.”’
> Click to play video: 'Spouse of N.S. killer to testify in inquiry
> investigation' 2:16 Spouse of N.S. killer to testify in inquiry
> investigation
>
> Hnatiw also asked Banfield about the early stages of the couple’s
> relationship, which started in 2001 after they met at a bar in
> downtown Halifax. Banfield said that on their first date, he showed up
> with two dozen long-stemmed roses. “I thought that was over the top,”
> she said.
>
> But later that night, she was impressed by his reaction when his car
> was rear-ended by a vehicle driven by a young woman. “He approached
> the two young girls in the vehicle. He was smiling,” she said. “He
> said, ‘It’s OK.’ He was very calm. I thought, ‘He’s a good guy.”’
>
> Earlier this week, the commission released a document based on
> evidence provided by Banfield during interviews with the RCMP and the
> inquiry detailing the killer’s long history of violence toward her. It
> said she would not face cross-examination, mainly because she could be
> traumatized by having to relive the violence she endured.
>
> Still, lawyer Michael Scott, whose firm represents families of 14 of
> the victims, says the decision to limit questioning will leave
> lingering doubts about Banfield’s testimony.
>
> Nick Beaton, husband of Kristen Beaton, takes a break outside the room
> as Lisa Banfield, the common-law wife of Gabriel Wortman, testifies at
> the Mass Casualty Commission inquiry into the mass murders in rural
> Nova Scotia on April 18/19, 2020, in Halifax on Friday, July 15, 2022.
> Wortman, dressed as an RCMP officer and driving a replica police
> cruiser, murdered 22 people., including Kristen Beaton. THE CANADIAN
> PRESS/Andrew VaughanNick Beaton, husband of Kristen Beaton, takes a
> break outside the room as Lisa Banfield, the common-law wife of
> Gabriel Wortman, testifies at the Mass Casualty Commission inquiry
> into the mass murders in rural Nova Scotia on April 18/19, 2020, in
> Halifax on Friday, July 15, 2022. Wortman, dressed as an RCMP officer
> and driving a replica police cruiser, murdered 22 people., including
> Kristen Beaton. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Andrew Vaughan.
>
> Michael Scott from the Patterson Law team, representing the majority
> of families of victims, announces that they are leaving the inquiry as
> Lisa Banfield, the common-law wife of Gabriel Wortman, testifies at
> the Mass Casualty Commission inquiry into the mass murders in rural
> Nova Scotia on April 18/19, 2020, in Halifax on Friday, July 15, 2022.
> Wortman, dressed as an RCMP officer and driving a replica police
> cruiser, murdered 22 people. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Andrew VaughanMichael
> Scott from the Patterson Law team, representing the majority of
> families of victims, announces that they are leaving the inquiry as
> Lisa Banfield, the common-law wife of Gabriel Wortman, testifies at
> the Mass Casualty Commission inquiry into the mass murders in rural
> Nova Scotia on April 18/19, 2020, in Halifax on Friday, July 15, 2022.
> Wortman, dressed as an RCMP officer and driving a replica police
> cruiser, murdered 22 people. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Andrew Vaughan.
>
> Scott, several other lawyers in his firm and about 20 family members
> the firm represents walked out of the hearing in the afternoon. “We’ve
> decided with our clients we’ve heard enough and we’ll be leaving for
> the rest of the day,” he said.
>
> “I don’t know if Ms. Banfield is lying, I don’t know if she’s telling
> the truth, I don’t know if Ms. Banfield is mistaken, because we don’t
> have an opportunity to ask her any questions.”
>
> In the afternoon testimony, Hnatiw asked Banfield whether she ever
> suspected her spouse might harm others, given she knew he owned a mock
> RCMP cruiser, illegal guns and a stockpile of gas and money.
>
> She replied she regarded it as related to his paranoia about the
> pandemic. “He was talking crazy, and I would pass it off because I
> didn’t want to listen to what he was saying,” she said.
>
> During the 13 hours he was at large, the killer fatally shot 22
> people, including a pregnant woman and a Mountie. He was shot dead by
> two Mounties on the morning of April 19, 2020.
>
> This report by The Canadian Press was first published July 15, 2022.
> © 2022 The Canadian Press
>
>
>
>
>
> https://www.therecord.com/ts/
>
> ‘I was so scared’: Tears, anguish — and a walkout — as N.S. mass
> killer’s wife testifies
> The gunman’s abusive and violent behaviour toward Lisa Banfield has
> been documented in previous testimony given to the Mass Casualty
> Commission, but victims’ lawyers have questions, which they won’t be
> allowed to ask her at the inquiry.
> SM
> By Steve McKinley
> Halifax Bureau
> Fri., July 15, 2022
>
> Lisa Banfield, the common-law wife of Gabriel Wortman, testifies at
> the Mass Casualty Commission on Friday.
>
> HALIFAX —Flanked by her sisters, Lisa Banfield took to the podium
> Friday as the most anticipated witness in the five-month run, thus
> far, of the inquiry into Nova Scotia’s worst mass shooting.
>
> Her mouth set in a tight line, Banfield put her hand on the Bible and
> took an oath, beginning her first public appearance since her
> common-law husband, Gabriel Wortman, killed 22 people and torched
> several houses in a 13-hour rampage over April 18-19, 2020.
>
> Looking visibly distraught, she faced a full room — some 200 people
> crowded into the Nova Scotia Ballroom at the Marriott, who had come
> looking for some kind of insight into killings that shocked the
> country.
>
> In dramatic and emotional fashion, Banfield told the inquiry of her
> abuse at the hands of the gunman, of her fear for her safety and that
> of her family, of his penchant for collecting guns and police
> paraphernalia, and of the events of April 18, when what was supposed
> to be the celebration of their 19th anniversary went horribly wrong.
>
> Before that night was out, she had been assaulted and confined in the
> back of the gunman’s replica RCMP car, from which she managed to
> escape. The killer, meanwhile, roamed the neighbourhood in Portapique,
> killing 13 people there before fleeing into the night. The next
> morning he would begin killing again, before eventually being shot
> dead by police at a gas station.
>
> For families of victims wanting to know why their loved ones were
> killed, there was little solace; Banfield, in her only day of
> testimony, had much guilt, but few answers for them.
>
> “This is what haunts me,” she said, in tears, to the inquiry. “It’s
> because I feel like he was targeting me and my family. And if I didn’t
> get out of that car, I often think, ‘Would any of those people have
> died?’
>
> “That’s something that haunts me all the time, because I feel that
> they weren’t targeted. That he was looking for me in the beginning.”
> Lisa Banfield, the common-law wife of Gabriel Wortman, is flanked by
> her sisters Janice Banfield, left, and Maureen Banfield, as she
> testifies at the Mass Casualty Commission inquiry Friday.
>
> Banfield described her escape into the woods surrounding the gunman’s
> warehouse, eventually crossing to the other side of the road, where
> she heard two men.
>
> “I looked around because my back was sore, so I found a stick and I
> propped myself up and I started walking in the direction where I could
> hear the two guys talking … freaking out,” she said, her voice
> cracking.
>
> “And as I’m getting closer, the stick broke. So, I dropped to my
> knees, and there was another log and I thought, ‘I don’t have it in me
> to crawl over this and try to prop myself up again.
>
> “And then I heard, ‘Hey boys,’ or something. And — ‘bang!’ ‘bang!’ —
> and then there was nothing. And then I just crawled back to the log
> and just hid there.”
>
> She was sure, she said, it had been the sound of the gunman killing
> another of his victims. It’s not clear exactly who that might have
> been.
>
> “I’m thinking, ‘Should I go see if they’re OK?’ But I was so scared,
> and I didn’t want to move,” she said, in tears.
>
> At one point, she wondered if she was hallucinating, she said, because
> she could see the shadow of somebody with a gun that looked like a
> rifle. She wondered if her mind was playing tricks on her.
>
> She hid there by the log until morning, she said, then went to a
> neighbour’s house and called the police.
>
> As Friday’s testimony went on, and the questions kept coming, Banfield
> seemed to become more comfortable, her posture more confident, her
> voice stronger.
>
> But that confidence gave way when she began to relate some of the
> abuse she had faced at the hands of the gunman.
> Lisa Banfield, spouse of Gabriel Wortman, dons a mask at Nova Scotia
> provincial court in Dartmouth, N.S., March 9.
>
> When commission counsel Gillian Hnatiw questioned her about the guns
> that her spouse kept, Banfield said she didn’t think of reporting the
> weapons to police; that she wasn’t afraid that the gunman would use
> the guns on others, but that she was afraid that he would use them on
> her.
>
> “There was a couple of times, where if we had a fight, he’d put the
> gun to my head to scare me and say that he could blow off my head,”
> she said tearfully. “So, I was scared. I said, ‘I swear I’m not going
> to say anything.’”
>
> For all the powerful testimony, there was little new information
> revealed that had not already been gleaned from Banfield’s previous
> interviews with the RCMP, and an additional one with the Mass Casualty
> Commission.
>
> The families of Wortman’s victims left the inquiry en masse in the
> afternoon, frustrated over what they saw as the inquiry’s inability to
> unearth the answers they have been seeking.
>
> “We’ve decided with our clients that we’ve heard enough,” said Michael
> Scott of Patterson Law, which represents most of the victims’
> families, during an afternoon break in the proceedings. “We’ll be
> leaving for the rest of the day.
>
> “Nothing we’ve heard today has allayed any of our concerns about the
> way Ms. Banfield has been handled,” said Scott. “We haven’t heard any
> answers to any of the relevant questions about April 2020.”
>
> Most of that frustration stems from the commission’s decision to limit
> Banfield’s questioning to the commission’s own counsel, rejecting
> requests from the victims’ families to allow their lawyers to
> independently cross-examine her. That decision was made in order to
> avoid further traumatizing Banfield, in line with the inquiry’s
> trauma-informed approach, according to the commission. Police have
> said they don’t believe Banfield was involved in the mass killing.
>
> “Right now, what we have is evidence from Ms. Banfield that is
> entirely untested, some of it’s contradictory, and it leaves us in a
> position where we don’t know any more today than we did yesterday,”
> Scott said.
>
> “I don’t know if Ms. Banfield is lying. I don’t know if Ms. Banfield
> is telling the truth. I don’t know if Ms. Banfield is mistaken,
> because we don’t have an opportunity to ask her any questions.”
> Lawyer Michael Scott, representing the majority of families of
> victims, announces that they are leaving the inquiry as Lisa Banfield,
> the common-law wife of Gabriel Wortman, testifies at the Mass Casualty
> Commission inquiry Friday.
>
> Ryan Farrington, whose mother, Dawn Gulenchyn, and stepfather, Frank
> Gulenchyn, were killed and their house burned that night in April
> 2020, had been hoping for some answers about how and why his parents
> died. He didn’t get them, he said.
>
> “We’re not going to get any answers that we want to know about if our
> lawyers cannot ask (for) them,” he said. “So, yeah, the process, to
> me, is flawed. This entire public inquiry is flawed. I think it’s been
> a big waste of money right from the start.”
>
> A frustrated Scott McLeod, brother of victim Sean McLeod, said he
> found himself no closer to answers than he was two and a half years
> ago.
>
> “Why would he have targeted my brother, who was so far out of the way,
> and start this all over again the second day? What I want to know is,
> what was it that set him off that bad with my brother?” he asked
> earlier in the day.
>
> “She’s not going to give us anything extra,” McLeod said of Banfield.
> “She’s the one witness that should know more than anybody else.
>
> “With the upcoming Mounties (testifying), they’re setting aside two
> days for each of them. So why wouldn’t you set aside two days for Lisa
> Banfield?”
>
> Shortly before she left a significantly emptier room than she had
> entered, Banfield was asked by commission counsel Hnatiw about the
> psychological impact of the past two and a half years.
>
> “The fact that people would think that we would have anything to do
> with this … our family feels for all those people and we’re not angry
> that they’re angry, because, if it was my family, I would feel the
> same way,” said a tearful Banfield.
>
> “But it’s just angering, because he did this, and I didn’t. And I
> would never contribute anything like that.
>
> “It’s really hard because it’s scary to think that people are angry
> and that somebody could come after me or my family if they think that
> we had anything to do with it.”
>
> The Mass Casualty Commission continues its inquiry Monday.
>
>
> Steve McKinley
> Halifax Bureau
> stevemckinley@thestar.ca
> Connect :
> Steve McKinley is a reporter in the Star's Halifax bureau.
> Location :
> Halifax
> Reporting Focus:
> Generalist
>
>
>
> https://www.therecord.com/
>
>
> About The Waterloo Region Record
>
> Peter Moyer published the first issue of the Berlin Daily News on Feb.
> 9, 1878. Berlin was Kitchener's name until 1916.
>
> It is to the Daily News that today’s Record sets its daily historical
> clock. Moyer anticipated his newspaper would run into "rough handling
> from its very birth." Sometimes he paid his staff in goods shopkeepers
> left behind to cover advertising bills.
>
> German, English, daily, weekly - Berlin readers were swamped by
> newspapers in the late 1800s. For about six months in 1896, Berlin had
> three dailies - the Daily News, the Daily Record and the Daily
> Telegraph.
>
> Ben Uttley, a teacher-turned-newspaperman, created the Berlin
> News-Record by merging his Daily Record with Moyer's Daily News in
> 1897.
>
> There is another important branch to The Record's family tree. John
> Motz and Friedrich Rittinger published the first issue of a German
> weekly, The Berliner Journal, on Dec. 29, 1859. The Journal would
> continue for the next 65 years, outliving almost 20 local and area
> papers.
>
> By 1919, it was owned by W.J. Motz, John Motz's son, and politician
> W.D. Euler. That year, they did an extraordinary thing for proprietors
> of a weekly paper - they bought a daily, Uttley's News Record.
>
> They renamed it the Kitchener Daily Record and published out of 49
> King St. W. The Daily Record took over the Daily Telegraph in 1922.
>
> Some important dates in Record history:
>
> • Jan. 7, 1929 -- the Record moved from 49 King St. W. to a new plant
> at 30 Queen St. N. (the Queen-and-Duke intersection.)
>
> • By coincidence, The Record moved to its current home at 160 King St.
> E. on Friday - Jan. 7 in 2005.
>
> • 1929, 1948, 1962 and 1973 - the years The Record bought new presses.
> In 2000, the newspaper closed the presses at Fairway Road. Printing is
> done on presses in Hamilton, Guelph and Vaughan.
>
> • Dec. 31, 1947 - The Kitchener Daily Record became the
> Kitchener-Waterloo Record to reflect Waterloo becoming a city. In
> 1994, the newspaper recognized its region-wide coverage by dropping
> the cities from its name, becoming simply The Record.
>
> • Jan. 26, 1978 - A huge snowstorm hit southern Ontario and forced The
> Record to miss getting a paper out for the first time in its history.
> Delivery trucks couldn't budge. Some Record staffers bunked down at
> their desks.
>
> • The 1990s - A flurry of ownership changes. Four generations under
> the Motz family came to an end in 1989 when Southam Inc. bought the
> paper for $90 million. Southam sold The Record to Sun Media Corp. in
> 1998. By March 1999, The Record belonged to Torstar Corp.
>
> • Sept. 11, 2001 - The Record published its first extra in 56 years.
> The occasion was the terrorist attacks in New York City.
>
> • June 3, 2002 - Readers woke up to a morning Record - on a Monday.
> The Record was the last Canadian paper of its size to make the switch
> from afternoon to morning publication.
>
> • Aug. 14, 2003 - A blackout swept across southern Ontario. Record
> employees put together a newspaper using laptop computers and a
> smidgen of emergency power.
>
> • Jan. 7, 2005 - Record staff bade farewell to 225 Fairway Rd. S., the
> newspaper's home for 32 years. They moved to King and Scott streets in
> downtown Kitchener
>
> • March 21, 2008 - The Record becomes the Waterloo Region Record, to
> better reflect the entire coverage area of this regional newspaper.
>
> • Torstar was acquired in 2020 by Nordstar Capital, an entity owned by
> Toronto businessmen Jordan Bitove and Paul Rivett.
>
> The Waterloo Region Record welcomes the opportunity to develop
> strategic partnerships that will contribute to the betterment of our
> community and promote public engagement, charitable fundraising and
> social innovation. Our Community Partnerships Program strongly
> supports collaborative initiatives with engaged citizens and
> organizations that strive to enhance the vitality of the Waterloo
> region. We encourage you to browse through our program categories
> listed below and review our philanthropic practices and goals.
>
> The Waterloo Region Record and Lyle S. Hallman Foundation Kids to Camp
> Fund enables children in need of financial assistance to attend a
> variety of day, overnight, recreational and educational camps, by
> partially or fully subsidizing camp costs.
>
> We need your help!
>
> Any individual or organization may make a gift to the Waterloo Region
> Record Kids to Camp Fund. A donation of just $100 can send a child to
> day camp for an entire week!
>
> The Kids to Camp Fund is administered by our local Community
> Foundations. You can designate your gift to either the Kitchener and
> Waterloo Community Foundation’s Kids to Camp Fund or to the Cambridge
> and North Dumfries Community Foundation’s Kids to Camp Fund.
>
> You can make a donation by mail by sending a cheque to: Kids to Camp
> Fund c/o Kitchener Waterloo Community Foundation, 260 King Street West
> - Unit 206 Kitchener, ON N2G 1B6 or Cambridge & North Dumfries
> Community Foundation, 190 Turnbull Ct., Unit 1B, Cambridge, ON N1T
> 1J1. You can also donate online by visiting
> https://www.kwcf.ca/donate. Tax receipts will be issued for donations
> of $10 or more. Please ensure that cheques are made out to the
> Community Foundation of your choice, or note this in the "Special
> Instructions" box if you are donating online. If this is not noted,
> the funds will be directed to the Community Foundation that services
> your address.
>
> If you are a family wishing to access funds for your child this
> summer, you must contact your camp of choice, who will then apply to
> the fund on behalf of your child. Camps can apply to the fund through
> the foundations websites.
>
> For more information on the fund or learn how you can make a gift to
> the fund please contact Lesley Fitter, Advertising Solutions Manager,
> 519-895-5687.
>
>
> Back to top
>
> The Record Masthead
>
> Neil Oliver
>
> Chief Executive Officer and President, Metroland
>
> Donna Luelo
>
> Publisher, Waterloo Region Record
> V.P. Sales, Torstar Regional Daily Brands
>
> Jim Poling
>
> Editor-in-Chief
>
> David Elliott
>
> Director of Distribution
>
>
> Back to top
>
> Our Journalistic Standards
>
> The Torstar Journalistic Standards Guide provides a comprehensive code
> of journalistic principles and conduct to guide Waterloo Region Record
> journalists in their mission to responsibly engage and connect our
> readers on all platforms with trusted news, information and content.
>
> Here are the general editorial principles that provide the foundation
> for this guide:
>
> RESPONSIBILITY
>
> The Record has responsibilities to its customers, its clients, its
> shareholders and its employees. But the operation of a news
> organization is, above all, a public trust, no less binding because it
> is not formally conferred. Our overriding responsibility is to the
> democratic society.
>
> Freedom of expression and of the press must be defended against
> encroachment from any quarter, public or private. Journalists must
> ensure that the public’s business is conducted in public. They must be
> vigilant against all who would exploit the press for selfish purposes.
>
> Journalists who abuse the power of their professional roles for
> selfish motives or unworthy purposes are faithless to that public
> trust.
>
> ACCESS
>
> The Record is a forum for the interchange of information and opinion.
> It should provide for the expression of disparate and conflicting
> views. It should give expression to the interests of minorities as
> well as majorities, of the powerless as well as the powerful.
>
> ACCURACY AND TRUTH
>
> Good faith with the reader is the foundation of ethical and excellent
> journalism. That good faith rests primarily on the reader’s confidence
> that what we print is correct. Every effort must be made to ensure
> that everything published in the Record is accurate, is presented in
> context, and that all significant sides are presented fairly.
>
> Journalistic integrity demands that significant errors of fact, as
> well as errors of omission, should be corrected promptly and as
> prominently and transparently as warranted.
>
> FAIRNESS
>
> The Record should respect the rights of people involved in the news,
> be transparent and stand accountable to the public for the fairness
> and reliability of everything it publishes. Fair news reports provide
> relevant context, do not omit relevant facts and aim to be honest with
> readers about what we know and what we do not know. Our core fairness
> standard demands that any subject of potentially harmful allegations
> must be given opportunity to respond.
>
> INDEPENDENCE
>
> Independence from those we cover is a key principle of journalistic
> integrity. We avoid conflicts of interest and the appearance of
> conflicts. The Record believes in paying the costs incurred in
> gathering and publishing news. In circumstances where that may not be
> possible, we disclose information that could create the perception of
> a conflict of interest. Transparency with our readers and openness
> about the potential for conflicts should guide our considerations
> about real or perceived conflicts.
>
> IMPARTIALITY
>
> To be impartial does not require a news organization to be
> unquestioning or to refrain from editorial expression. Sound practice,
> however, demands a clear distinction for readers between news and
> opinion. All content that contains explicit opinion or personal
> interpretation should be clearly identified as opinion or analysis, as
> appropriate.
>
> PRIVACY
>
> Every person has a right to privacy. There are inevitable conflicts
> between the right to privacy, the public good and the public's right
> to be informed about the conduct of public affairs. Each case should
> be judged in the light of common sense and humanity.
>
>
> Back to top
>
> Accuracy and Corrections Policy
>
> Here are some of the core policies included in our Standards Guide:
>
> There can be no compromise with accuracy. Accuracy is our most basic
> contract with readers and is the responsibility of everyone in our
> newsrooms. Accuracy is grounded in verification, the essence of
> journalism. We must check and double-check all the information we
> publish, including information from all other publications.
>
> Mistakes will happen. When they do, we correct our errors. Corrections
> serve the reader and they serve the public record. They are essential
> to building and maintaining trust with our readers. Anyone who becomes
> aware of a possible error has responsibility for alerting those
> responsible for corrections in their newsrooms.
>
> Our corrections are guided by the core principles of accountability
> and transparency. We are accountable to our readers for the accuracy
> of the information we publish in stories, headlines, photos, cutlines,
> social media, graphics, data, videos and any other content on all of
> our platforms. We correct errors of fact in a clear, transparent
> manner on the platform(s) in which the error was published, as
> promptly as possible. We make clear to readers the correct information
> and the context and magnitude of the mistake.
>
> On all of our platforms, it should be clear to readers how to report a
> possible error. Readers can do so by emailing
> corrections@therecord.com or, on therecord.com, readers can report
> possible errors directly on an article page by selecting the "Report
> an Error" icon.
>
>
> Back to top
>
> Diversity Policy
>
> Inclusiveness is at the heart of thinking and acting as journalists.
> Torstar newsrooms aim to reflect the diversity of our communities and
> respect the human rights and equal dignity of all. We aim for a
> variety of voices as sources and contributors in our news and opinion.
>
> We seek to foster greater community understanding about ethnicity,
> race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, age, socio-economic status
> and physical/mental ability and do not perpetuate hurtful stereotypes.
>
> Generally no reference, direct or indirect, should be made to a
> person’s race, colour or religion unless it is pertinent to the story.
>
> In the case of a missing person or a criminal suspect at large, there
> may be justification for identifying race or colour as part of a full
> description that provides as many details as possible. Avoid vague
> descriptions that serve no purpose. At times, a group may make race a
> public issue. In such cases, the person’s race becomes relevant to the
> news.
>
> Religion is important to the lives of many of our readers. We should
> not hold up one religion or set of beliefs as superior to another. Do
> not single out a religion or religious practice for ridicule or
> stereotyping or use profanities considered offensive to any religions.
>
> We treat men and women equally and respect diverse gender identities,
> including people who identify as neither male nor female.
>
> Torstar is committed to this same inclusivness and diversity
> reflective of our communities in its hiring, promotion, development
> and retention of its staff.
>
>
> Back to top
>
> Anonymity and Confidential Sources
>
> The public interest is best served when news sources are identified by
> their full names. Torstar journalists are aggressive in pressing
> sources to put information on the record and seek independently to
> corroborate off-the-record information.
>
> We do not provide anonymity to those who attack individuals or
> organizations or engage in speculation — the unattributed cheap shot.
> People under attack in our publications have the right to know their
> accusers.
>
> There are times when reporters need confidential sources to serve
> readers and democracy. Responsible journalism in the public interest
> often depends on these confidential sources who give journalists
> information that powerful people seek to keep secret. There are times
> also when some sources, such as underage or other vulnerable people,
> may require anonymity in telling their stories.
>
> Torstar journalists must discuss using confidential sources with their
> department head, and in some cases the newsroom’s most senior editor.
> They must always reveal the source’s identity to editors, and provide
> a compelling argument for why the source will not be named in news
> reports. Senior editors have responsibility to work with reporters to
> assess the credibility of all sources including confidential sources.
>
> Once any promise is made to grant anonymity, we protect our source,
> only revealing their identity with that person’s permission.
>
> Published articles must explain why sources have been granted
> anonymity and why we consider them authoritative and credible.
> Confidential sources should have first-hand knowledge of the
> information and this must be conveyed to the reader. We should publish
> as much information as possible about the source — including why they
> sought confidentiality — without revealing identity.
>
> The definitions and ground rules for not naming a source must be
> discussed with sources. Any further promises made or deals brokered
> with any source must be discussed in advance with senior editors and
> are subject to the following:
>
> • Composites, where several sources are compiled into one person, are
> not used. Pseudonyms are used only rarely, with a senior editor’s
> permission, and must be declared as such in stories.
>
> • The source and the journalist must be clear on what has been agreed
> to and that agreement must be shared with the department manager.
> Torstar journalists keep their promises.
>
>
> Back to top
>
> Conflict of Interest
>
> Independence from those we cover is a key principle of journalistic
> integrity. We avoid conflicts of interest and the appearance of
> conflicts. In circumstances where that may not be possible, we
> disclose information that could create the perception of a conflict of
> interest. Transparency with our readers and openness about the
> potential for conflicts should guide our considerations about real or
> perceived conflicts.
>
> These policies apply to all outside interests that could cause our
> audiences to question the fairness and independence of our journalism.
>
> We seek primarily to ensure that our reporters’ reputations as
> fair-minded fact-finders are not compromised by public displays of
> political or partisan views on public issues, nor influenced by
> personal involvement or personal axe-grinding on issues we cover.
>
> Opinion journalists have greater leeway on these matters, in line with
> the latitude to express their own views in their work.
>
> All Torstar editorial staff should inform their immediate supervisors
> of any outside activity that could result in a conflict of interest,
> or reasonably perceived conflict of interest, that could cause our
> audiences to question the integrity of our work.
>
> These policies are not intended to restrict the personal lives,
> interests or expressions of beliefs of Torstar journalists outside
> their work lives. Rather, as has been established through various
> arbitration processes across the company, they seek to ensure that any
> such personal activities and interests do not come into conflict with
> the public role of our news organizations in any way that could be
> seen to compromise our editorial independence and integrity.
>
>
> Back to top
>
> News and Opinions
>
> The Record clearly labels content on all platforms to draw a clear
> line between news and opinion. This glossary provides definitions for
> various types of news and opinion we publish.
>
> NEWS
>
> News content is verified information based on the impartial reporting
> of facts, either observed by the reporter or reported and verified
> from knowledgeable sources. News reports do not include the opinion of
> the author.
>
> News Terms
>
> Analysis: A critical or contextual examination of an important and
> topical issue based on factual reporting. It provides an explanation
> of the impact or meaning of news events and draws on the authority and
> expertise of the writer. Analysis articles do not contain the author’s
> opinions.
>
> Investigation: In-depth reporting in the public interest that reveals
> wrongdoing and/or systemic problems, holds those in power accountable
> and promotes positive change.
>
> OPINION
>
> Opinion articles based are based on personal interpretation and
> judgment of facts. Opinion journalists have wide latitude to express
> their own views, subject to standards of taste and laws of libel
> including views directly contrary to the editorial views of the
> Record.
>
> Opinion Terms
>
> Editorial: An article that presents a point of view reflecting the
> news organization's position on an issue of public interest.
> Editorials are not meant to be a neutral presentation of the facts.
> They are written by journalists who are expressing the view of the
> news organization. As an editorial serves to present the company’s
> voice, there is no individual byline.
>
> Opinion: Articles based on the author’s interpretations and judgments
> of facts, data and events. Opinion articles include columns written by
> staff and commentary from non-staff contributors. Opinion journalists
> have wide latitude to express their own views including views directly
> contrary to the news organization's editorial views, as long as they
> fall within the boundaries of taste and laws of libel. Columnists
> should not engage in personal axe-grinding or internecine debates with
> other columnists who write for either their own or other publications.
>
> Advice: An advice article reflects the opinion of the author, who
> provides guidance or direction on a topic based on their expertise as
> well as their personal interpretations and judgments of facts.
>
> Blog: An online journal updated regularly by a journalist or editorial
> department that supplements news coverage. Blogs are usually informal
> or conversational in style and may reflect a writer’s opinions,
> subject to the rights and responsibilities of fair comment.
>
> First person: Narratives exploring an author’s insights, observations
> or thoughts based on that individual’s personal experience and
> opinions.
>
> Readers’ letters: A selection of letters by readers expressing a point
> of view, usually concerning a recently published article or current
> event.
>
> Review: A critical assessment of the merits of a subject, such as art,
> film, music, television, food or literature. Reviews are based on the
> writer’s informed/expert opinion.
>
>
> Back to top
>
> Contact Us
>
> The Waterloo Region Record’s mailing address is: PO Box 25069,
> Kitchener, ON N2A 4A5
>
> News, Events and Letters
>
> News tips
>
> Do you have a news tip? Or photos for us to consider for publication?
> Reach out to the news desk via email newsroom@therecord.com or phone
> 519-895-5602
>
> Letters to the Editor
>
> To submit a Letter to the Editor, please email: letters@therecord.com
>
> Frequently asked questions
>
> How do I subscribe to The Record?
>
> Please click HERE to see our Home Delivery and ePaper subscription
> page. Already a subscriber? Click HERE to manage your account.
>
> For TheRecord.com Digital Access, click HERE. Click HERE for
> Frequently Asked Questions about Digital Access. Click HERE to see our
> Subscription Terms and Conditions.
>
> Is my Waterloo Regional Record digital subscription eligible for the
> digital news subscription tax credit?
>
> Yes. Individuals who have a digital subscription to therecord.com or
> the Waterloo Region Record ePaper can claim the digital news
> subscription tax credit on their personal income tax return for the
> years 2020 to 2024. This is a non-refundable tax credit for amounts
> paid by individuals in the year to a qualified Canadian journalism
> organization (QCJO) for an eligible qualifying subscription. Click
> HERE to find out more about this tax credit and how to claim it.
>
> I am a home-delivery subscriber. Is my subscription eligible for the
> digital news subscription tax credit?
>
> Yes. Home delivery subscribers can claim the digital news subscription
> tax credit on their personal income tax return for the years 2020
> through 2024 inclusive. Our home delivery subscriptions include
> digital access to therecord.com and ePaper edition.
>
> The Canada Revenue Agency has indicated that if a subscription
> provides access to content of the qualified Canadian journalism
> organization (QCJO) that is not in digital form (i.e. in print), only
> the cost of a stand-alone subscription to the digital content of the
> QCJO can be claimed. The Waterloo Region Record maximum stand-alone
> digital subscription rate is $7.99 per month. If this maximum
> stand-alone rate exceeds the monthly price of your print subscription,
> see the CRA site for guidance on the amount of the eligible expense
> where there is no comparable stand-alone digital subscription.
>
> To find out more about this tax credit and how to claim it, please
> visit the Government of Canada website. Please visit the CRA website
> for a list of qualifying digital news subscriptions. The Waterloo
> Region Record’s Qualified Canadian Journalism Organization (QCJO)
> designation number is: Q2438091. To view your subscription payments,
> visit our Subscriber Login portal and follow the steps below:
>
> 1. Login with your email and password (Don’t have an account setup? Create
> one.)
>
> 2. Click on PAYMENTS
>
> 3. Click on ACCOUNT ADJUSTMENTS to view your payment history
>
> If you require assistance, please send us an email or call
> 1-800-210-5210 Note: Subscribers are responsible for ensuring that the
> amounts they are reporting are correct. Metroland Media Group Ltd. is
> not responsible for the amount you claim on your taxes
>
> How can I access the E-Paper
>
> Subscribers need to register for an online customer account. Then
> click HERE and log into the epaper with your ID/password and you'll
> have continued access while your subscription is active..
>
> What services are offered?
>
> All visitors to TheRecord.com have unrestricted access to classifieds
> through yourclassifieds.ca/
> obituaries through lifenews.ca, celebrations (anniversary, birthday
> and wedding announcements), auction listings, job ads through
> workopolis.com and localwork.ca, Homes Gallery, Wheels, community
> events and directories, and all news stories.
>
> If you are a non-subscriber, call 519-894-3000 or toll-free
> 1-800-210-5210 to subscribe to The Record E-Edition for as little as
> $2.31 per week plus HST (minimum six-month subscription). It may take
> up to 24 hours to set up your account. The E-Paper is available online
> daily by 6:30 a.m.
>
> Can I print articles from the newspaper?
>
> All news articles have a link to a printer-friendly version with fewer
> graphics (to save ink or toner). Click this link, and then print the
> story page using your browser's printer icon or commands. Printed
> articles are for personal use only, and not for distribution.
>
> Can I send articles by email?
>
> Yes. You can send a link of the story via email by copying the URL in
> the address bar and pasting it into the body of an email.
>
> Articles e-mailed between individuals are for personal use only.
> Distribution to a group or subscriber list would be considered a
> violation of copyright.
>
> Can I print advertisements?
>
> You can print advertisements you've found in our E-Edition.
>
> What is the Self-Service Account Manager?
>
> A service currently available to our subscribers. It allows you to
> make changes and inquiries about your subscription. You will be able
> to check your account balance, make payments, make vacation stops and
> contact our circulation department for any other questions or concerns
> you might have. You need to register yourself as a subscriber in order
> to access the "My Subscription" area of our site.
>
> Can I link to a Record.com news story from my website?
>
> You can link stories from TheRecord.com to your website.
>
> Can I republish Record articles on my website?
>
> Requests to republish material (in any format), which has been written
> by Record reporters, should be made in writing to Rod Frketich. Please
> include the article's headline and publication date, the writer's name
> along with an explanation of how the material will be used.
>
> Can I read the classified ads?
>
> Most Record classified ads are hosted on
> yourclassifieds.ca/
> making yourclassifieds.ca the perfect solution for buying or selling
> hard to ship items such as cars, furniture, electronics, computers,
> pets, sporting goods, antiques, and much more. For employment ads,
> click here or here.
>
> Can I read the obituaries?
>
> All visitors to TheRecord.com may read obituaries at lifenews.ca.
> Obituaries published since November 2002 may be purchased in the print
> archive. Obituaries published prior to November 2002 are not available
> in electronic form; contact your local public or university library
> regarding access to The Record on microfilm.
>
> Can I search for display advertisements?
>
> Keyword searching of display advertisements is not available.
>
> Can I search for display advertisements?
>
> Complete editions of The Record, including display advertisements, are
> available in our E-Edition. You can view the page, just as it was
> published in the print edition.
>
> Flyers and inserts that are not part of the regular newspaper are not
> available online, but most can be viewed on save.ca.
>
> Can I print items from the e-edition, like the crossword puzzle,
> Sudoku or advertisements?
>
> Yes. Once you are logged into the e-edition, click on the printer icon
> on the top of the page (icons are in red circles). Select the page(s)
> you want to print. Choose either portrait or landscape. Click on the
> box beside "High resolution Prints." Click on print. You can use your
> own printer settings to adjust the size, paper and other print
> functions.
>
> How do I get a PDF of a page?
>
> PDF stands for portable document format, a technology developed by
> Adobe. The biggest advantage to using PDF is that it preserves the
> original look of the document almost exactly -- photos, fonts,
> graphics and layout all appear as they do in the original. PDFs are
> not available on TheRecord.com, which uses an e-edition format. To get
> a PDF, contact 519-894-2250 ext. 772562.
>
> What if I have a problem with delivery of my newspaper?
>
> Missed or damaged newspaper? We want to make it right. Report delivery
> concerns using the self-service account manager, or call 519-894-3000
> to speak to a Record circulation representative.
>
> What if I have trouble logging in or setting up my web account?
>
> Contact us by e-mail at circulation-self-serve@
> 894-3000 to speak to a Record circulation representative.
>
> How can I find my password?
>
> Forgot your password? Simply send us your e-mail address using this
> form, and we'll send you your password.
>
> How do I submit a letter to the editor?
>
> We welcome letters that are topical and include full name, address and
> phone number for verification. All letters are edited for clarity,
> style, and length. Letters delivered by mail or fax require a
> signature.
>
> Letters can also be submitted online here.
>
> To accommodate the letter volume and range, writers generally are
> limited to 200 words and one submission in two months. Short letters
> have more impact.
>
> How do I place a classified ad?
>
> All users have access to our online order forms, which will guide you
> through the process of placing a classified ad.
>
> Before publication a classified ad representative will call you to
> confirm the final price including selected options and taxes.
>
> How do I stop and start home delivery?
>
> Going on vacation, or away for a few days? Use the self-service
> account manager to stop and start delivery, or call 519-894-3000 to
> speak to a Record circulation representative. If you are a subscriber
> that goes on vacation for 21 calendar days (includes Sundays) or less
> than you will continue to be charged your current subscription rate.
> You will have full access to therecord.com and our replica e-edition.
> If you are on vacation longer than 21 calendar days (includes Sundays)
> than you will be credited for the stop.
>
> How can I become a carrier?
>
> For information on how to become a carrier, click HERE.
>
> How do I report a problem with the site?
>
> We welcome your feedback -- comments, suggestions and bug reports.
> Contact Editor-in-Chief Jim Poling here.
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
> Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2022 14:31:54 -0300
> Subject: James Lockyer an old law school classmate of my sister and
> her hubby Reid Chedore called me back and denied receiving this email
> To: james.lockyer@umoncton.ca, jlockyer@lzzdefence.ca,
> megan.mitton@gnb.ca, dominic.leblanc.c1@parl.gc.ca,
> ernie.steeves@gnb.ca, Ginette.PetitpasTaylor@parl.
> "Mark.Blakely" <Mark.Blakely@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, "Marco.Mendicino"
> <Marco.Mendicino@parl.gc.ca>, "Mike.Comeau" <Mike.Comeau@gnb.ca>,
> Tori.Weldon@cbc.ca, mcu <mcu@justice.gc.ca>, Seamus.ORegan@parl.gc.ca,
> Newsroom@globeandmail.com, infoam@fredericton.cbc.ca,
> briangallant10@gmail.com, MRichard@lawsociety-barreau.
> David.Akin@globalnews.ca, charles.murray@gnb.ca, oldmaison@yahoo.com,
> "greg.byrne" <greg.byrne@gnb.ca>, "McCulloch, Sandra"
> <smcculloch@pattersonlaw.ca>, "Pineo, Robert"
> <rpineo@pattersonlaw.ca>, "fin.minfinance-financemin.fin"
> <fin.minfinance-financemin.
> <Sean.Fraser@parl.gc.ca>, PREMIER <PREMIER@gov.ns.ca>, "blaine.higgs"
> <blaine.higgs@gnb.ca>, "Louis.Leger" <Louis.Leger@gnb.ca>,
> "mary.wilson" <mary.wilson@gnb.ca>, washington field
> <washington.field@ic.fbi.gov>, "Brenda.Lucki"
> <Brenda.Lucki@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, "Bill.Hogan" <Bill.Hogan@gnb.ca>,
> "Bill.Blair" <Bill.Blair@parl.gc.ca>, "barb.whitenect"
> <barb.whitenect@gnb.ca>, "Moiz.Karimjee" <Moiz.Karimjee@ontario.ca>,
> "Michelle.Boutin" <Michelle.Boutin@rcmp-grc.gc.
> Cc: motomaniac333 <motomaniac333@gmail.com>, paulpalango
> <paulpalango@protonmail.com>, NightTimePodcast
> <NightTimePodcast@gmail.com>, nsinvestigators
> <nsinvestigators@gmail.com>
>
> However the former Attorney General refused to look on the internet to
> verify what I said was true. So I gave up on his bullshit and told him
> to answer me in writing because I could easily the lawyer got the
> damned email. Lockyer just refused to admit it tis all.
>
> Go Figure Why I brought this up today
>
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?
>
> MCC- DAY 50 - LISA BANFIELD... AND HANDLERS
> 179 watching now
> Started streaming 2 hours ago
> Little Grey Cells
> 3.42K subscribers
>
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: Premier <PREMIER@novascotia.ca>
> Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2022 17:33:54 +0000
> Subject: Thank you for your email
> To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
>
> Thank you for your email to Premier Houston. This is an automatic
> confirmation your message has been received.
>
> As we are currently experiencing higher than normal volumes of
> correspondence, there may be delays in the response time for
> correspondence identified as requiring a response.
>
> If you are looking for the most up-to-date information from the
> Government of Nova Scotia please visit:
> http://novascotia.ca<https://
>
> Thank you,
>
> Premier’s Correspondence Team
>
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: James Lockyer <jlockyer@lzzdefence.ca>
> Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2022 17:32:01 +0000
> Subject: Automatic reply: James Lockyer an old law school classmate of
> my sister and her hubby Reid Chedore called me back and denied
> receiving this email
> To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
>
> I will be out of the Province until July 16. I will respond to your
> email as soon as I return.
>
> If your matter is urgent, please contact Kathy Doyle at
> kdoyle@lzzdefence.ca or Katie Ray at katie@lzzdefence.ca.
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: Marc Richard <MRichard@lsbnb.ca>
> Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2022 17:34:35 +0000
> Subject: Automatic reply: James Lockyer an old law school classmate of
> my sister and her hubby Reid Chedore called me back and denied
> receiving this email
> To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
>
> I will be absent from the office until August 2, 2022
>
> Je serai absent du bureau jusqu'au 2 août 2022
>
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: "Fraser, Sean - M.P." <Sean.Fraser@parl.gc.ca>
> Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2022 17:33:46 +0000
> Subject: Automatic reply: James Lockyer an old law school classmate of
> my sister and her hubby Reid Chedore called me back and denied
> receiving this email
> To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
>
> Thank you for your message. This is an automated reply.
> Facebook:
> facebook.com/SeanFraserMP<http
> Twitter: @SeanFraserMP<https://twitter.
> Instagram: SeanFraserMP<https://www.
> www.seanfrasermp.ca<file:///C:
> /Users/Savannah%20DeWolfe/
> Toll free: 1-844-641-5886
> Please be advised that this account is for matters related to Central
> Nova. If you live outside of Central Nova and your issue pertains to
> immigration, please contact Minister@cic.gc.ca
> I am currently receiving an extremely high number of emails.
> If you are inquiring about Canada’s commitment to welcome vulnerable
> Afghan refugees, you can find more information on Canada’s response to
> the situation in Afghanistan
> here<https://www.canada.ca/en/
> The Government of Canada remains firm in its commitment to welcome
> Afghan refugees to Canada, and will be working to increase the number
> of eligible refugees to 40,000. This will be done through 2 programs:
> 1. A special immigration program for Afghan nationals, and their
> families, who assisted the Government of Canada.
> You don’t need to currently be in Afghanistan or return to Afghanistan
> to be eligible or to have your application processed once you’re able
> to apply.
> Find out more about this special immigration
> program<https://www.canada.ca/
> 2. A special humanitarian program focused on resettling Afghan
> nationals who
> · are outside of Afghanistan
> · don’t have a durable solution in a third country
> · are part of one of the following groups:
> · women leaders
> · human rights
> advocates<https://www.canada.
> · persecuted religious or ethnic minorities
> · LGBTI individuals
> · journalists and people who helped Canadian journalists
> How to reach us
> Contact us using our web
> form<https://specialmeasures-
> don’t send photos or other attachments until we ask you to.
> By phone at +1-613-321-4243
> · Available both inside Canada and abroad
> · Monday to Friday, 6:30 a.m. to 7 p.m. (ET)
> · Saturday and Sunday, 6:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. (ET)
> · We’ll accept charges for collect calls or calls with reverse
> charges
> If you or a loved one are a Canadian citizen or PR currently in
> Afghanistan, contact Global Affairs Canada’s 24/7 Emergency Watch and
> Response Centre ASAP by phone (+1-613-996-8885), email
> (sos@international.gc.ca<
> (+1-613-686-3658).
> If you would like to immigrate to Canada, please click
> here<https://www.canada.ca/en/
> to learn more.
> To inquire about the status of an immigration case,click
> here<https://www.canada.ca/en/
> You can also contact your local Member of Parliament for further
> assistance. If you don’t know who your Member of Parliament is, you
> can find out here, https://www.ourcommons.ca/
> If you have been the victim of fraud or want to report fraudulent
> activity, please call the Canada Border Services Agency’s fraud
> hotline at 1-888-502-9060.
> For other general questions about Canadian immigration, click
> here<https://www.canada.ca/en/
> Thank you.
> /////
> Veuillez noter que je reçois actuellement un nombre extrêmement élevé
> de courriels.
> Si vous vous renseignez sur l'engagement du Canada à accueillir les
> réfugiés afghans vulnérables, vous pouvez trouver plus d'information
> sur la réponse du Canada à la situation en Afghanistan
> ici<https://www.canada.ca/fr/
> Le gouvernement du Canada reste ferme dans son engagement à accueillir
> des réfugiés afghans au Canada, et s'efforcera d'augmenter le nombre
> de réfugiés admissibles à 40 000. Cela se fera par le biais de deux
> programmes :
> Un programme d'immigration spécial pour les ressortissants afghans, et
> leurs familles, qui ont aidé le gouvernement du Canada.
> Vous n'avez pas besoin d'être actuellement en Afghanistan ou d'y
> retourner pour être admissible ou pour que votre demande soit traitée,
> une fois que vous serez en mesure de présenter une demande.
> Pour en savoir plus sur ce programme d'immigration
> spécial<https://www.canada.ca/
> 2. Un programme humanitaire spécial axé sur la réinstallation des
> ressortissants afghans qui
> · se trouvent à l'extérieur de l'Afghanistan
> · n’ont pas de solution durable dans un pays tiers
> · font partie de l'un des groupes suivants :
> · femmes leaders,
> · défenseurs des droits de la
> personne<https://www.canada.
> · minorités religieuses ou ethniques persécutées,
> · personnes LGBTI,
> · journalistes et personnes ayant aidé des journalistes
> canadiens.
> Comment nous joindre
> Veuillez communiquer avec nous en utilisant notre formulaire
> Web<https://specialmeasures-
> Veuillez ne pas envoyer de photos ou d'autres pièces jointes jusqu'à
> ce que nous vous le demandions.
> Par téléphone au +1-613-321-4243.
> · Disponible au Canada et à l’étranger.
> · Du lundi au vendredi, de 6 h 30 à 19 h (HE).
> · Samedi et dimanche, de 6 h 30 à 15 h 30 (HE).
> · Nous acceptons les frais pour les appels à frais virés ou
> les appels avec inversion des frais.
> Si vous ou un de vos proches êtes un citoyen canadien ou un RP
> actuellement en Afghanistan, communiquez dès que possible avec le
> Centre de veille et d'intervention d'urgence 24/7 d'Affaires mondiales
> Canada par téléphone (+1-613-996-8885), par courriel
> (sos@international.gc.ca) ou par texto (+1-613-686-3658).
> Si vous souhaitez immigrer au Canada, veuillez cliquer
> ici<https://www.canada.ca/fr/
> pour en savoir plus.
> Pour vous renseigner sur l'état d'un dossier d'immigration, cliquez
> ici<https://www.canada.ca/fr/
> Vous pouvez également contacter votre député local pour obtenir une
> assistance supplémentaire. Si vous ne savez pas qui est votre député,
> vous pouvez le découvrir ici, https://www.noscommunes.ca/
> Si vous avez été victime d'une fraude ou si vous voulez signaler une
> activité frauduleuse, veuillez appeler la ligne d'assistance
> téléphonique de l'Agence des services frontaliers du Canada au
> 1-888-502-9060.
> Pour d'autres questions générales sur l'immigration canadienne,
> cliquez ici<canada.ca/immigration>.
> Merci.
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: Newsroom <newsroom@globeandmail.com>
> Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2022 17:34:58 +0000
> Subject: Automatic reply: James Lockyer an old law school classmate of
> my sister and her hubby Reid Chedore called me back and denied
> receiving this email
> To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
>
> Thank you for contacting The Globe and Mail.
>
> If your matter pertains to newspaper delivery or you require technical
> support, please contact our Customer Service department at
> 1-800-387-5400 or send an email to customerservice@globeandmail.
>
> If you are reporting a factual error please forward your email to
> publiceditor@globeandmail.com<
>
> Letters to the Editor can be sent to letters@globeandmail.com
>
> This is the correct email address for requests for news coverage and
> press releases.
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: Ministerial Correspondence Unit - Justice Canada <mcu@justice.gc.ca>
> Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2022 17:33:45 +0000
> Subject: Automatic Reply
> To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
>
> Thank you for writing to the Honourable David Lametti, Minister of
> Justice and Attorney General of Canada.
>
> Due to the volume of correspondence addressed to the Minister, please
> note that there may be a delay in processing your email. Rest assured
> that your message will be carefully reviewed.
>
> We do not respond to correspondence that contains offensive language.
>
> -------------------
>
> Merci d'avoir écrit à l'honorable David Lametti, ministre de la
> Justice et procureur général du Canada.
>
> En raison du volume de correspondance adressée au ministre, veuillez
> prendre note qu'il pourrait y avoir un retard dans le traitement de
> votre courriel. Nous tenons à vous assurer que votre message sera lu
> avec soin.
>
> Nous ne répondons pas à la correspondance contenant un langage offensant.
>
>
>
> https://www.facebook.com/
>
>
>
> May be an image of 1 person
>
>
> Frank
> January 12, 2021
> ·
> Save the kids or save the ex-con?
> by Paul Palango
> https://www.frankmagazine.ca/.
> (for subscribers only)
>
> On that terrible night in Portapique, the RCMP faced what on the
> surface, at least, seemed like a no-brainer of a situation: rescue
> four children hiding in a basement after their parents had been
> murdered by Gabriel Wortman, or save a convicted drug trafficker with
> ties to a Mexican drug cartel and his parents. Save the kids or save
> the con. An easy choice, you’d think.
>
> Yet, the RCMP chose to evacuate convicted drug trafficker Peter
> Griffon and his parents, Alan and Joanne Griffon, an hour or so before
> attending to the children. The cavalry showed up at the Griffon house
> at 4 Faris Lane sometime around midnight.
>
> Meanwhile, since 10:01 p.m. on April 18, four terrified children, two
> aged 12 and two aged 10, had been on the line with a 911 operator for
> about two hours, hunkered in the basement of slain school-teacher Lisa
> McCully’s house at 135 Orchard Beach Drive. Some half a kilometre away
> from the Griffon residence, as the crow flies...
>
> ...Tammy Oliver-McCreadie, the sister of Jolene Oliver, recently was
> able to gain access to her brother-in-law Aaron Tuck’s cell phone. To
> her astonishment she found a text from RCMP Constable Wayne (Skipper)
> Bent to Aaron. It was sent at 1:15 p.m. that Sunday. The Oliver family
> had been frantically calling the RCMP throughout that day because they
> couldn’t reach their family members. The RCMP repeatedly told them
> they were checking. But they hadn’t been. Not in person, anyway.
>
> The text to Aaron Tuck read: “This is Cst. Bent with the RCMP. Looking
> for Aaron Tuck to call me ASAP. Important. Thank you.”
>
> The three Tucks couldn’t answer Skipper Bent’s text for obvious reasons.
>
> Their bodies weren’t found until near 6 p.m. that Sunday, while the
> Olivers kept calling the RCMP and being stalled by Bent and the new
> officer in charge Corp. Gerard Rose-Berthiaume.
>
> “I have really no idea why in the %#@& would they text and not walk
> down the road and check them,” Oliver-McCurdie wrote in a message to
> Frank.
>
> “The phones were in the house. Aaron’s was plugged in charging.”
>
> That Saturday night and well into the day on Sunday, the RCMP seemed
> obsessed with keeping regular members away from nine crime scenes on
> the lower half of Portapique Beach Road, even after the threat had
> been neutralized.
>
> Nobody bothered to do a wellness check on the Tucks, for one small
> example, until seven hours after Gabriel Wortman’s rampage was finally
> brought to an end in Enfield..
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> https://www.facebook.com/
>
>
>
> No photo description available.
> Frank
> April 5, 2021 ·
>
> The RCMP, governments and the media have conflated all the killings
> into a single massacre. This is inaccurate. While Gabriel Wortman is
> the perpetrator in both massacres, the circumstances of each are
> decidedly distinct. By treating what happened as one prolonged
> incident provides both a disservice to the truth and a cover for the
> RCMP and its government and public enablers.
> The first massacre took place on Saturday night April 18, and was
> contained in the community of Portapique Beach. It appears that no
> witness to any of the murders was left alive. Portapique resident
> Andrew MacDonald and his wife, Katie, were shot at by Wortman and
> escaped. MacDonald told the first arriving officer, Constable Stuart
> Beselt, that Wortman was dressed as a police officer and was driving a
> fully marked RCMP vehicle. It is understood that Beselt radioed that
> information to his base. The Mounties say they had five units in place
> by 10:35 p.m. or so, but they held their positions. Officers who
> wanted to go down the road were ordered not to by a corporal who
> threatened them with the loss of their jobs if they did not obey her.
> Thirteen people were killed that night: John Zahl and Joanne Thomas,
> Frank and Dawn Gulenchyn, Greg and Jamie Blair, Lisa McCully, Corrie
> Ellison, Aaron Tuck, Jolene Oliver, Emily Tuck and Peter and Joy Bond.
> Could any of them been saved? Since the Columbine massacre in Colorado
> in 1999, police forces just about everywhere have recognized that the
> first officers on the scene of an active shooter must attack the
> shooter and not wait for specialized tactical officers to arrive on
> scene. The first responsibility of any law enforcement officer in a
> critical situation is preservation of life. Why did the RCMP not
> pursue Wortman when they were told where he was by MacDonald?
>
> The second massacre occurred on the morning of April 19, and was
> spread out over a wide swath of Northern and Central Nova Scotia. A
> key thing to note is that the RCMP sent its officers home from
> Portapique around 6:30 a.m. after it was assumed that Wortman had
> committed suicide. Who made that assumption?
> When daylight arrived, the bodies of Corrie Ellison and Lisa McCully
> were still lying by the road on Orchard Beach Drive. At least five
> bodies — the three Tucks and the two Bonds — wouldn’t be found until
> later that day. The police had no idea where Wortman was. Eventually,
> the police said that he likely spent the night behind a welding shop
> of Ventura Drive in Debert, but we still don’t really know that. It’s
> another assumption.
> That morning, Wortman travelled 50 kilometres to Hunter Road in
> Wentworth, where he killed corrections officers Sean McLeod and Alanna
> Jenkins before setting their house on fire. He killed Good Samaritan
> neighbour, Tom Bagley, who came to check out what was going on. He
> then drove back toward Portapique and killed Lillian Hyslop on Highway
> 4. He eluded the RCMP near Glenholme, tried to gain entry into another
> residence, and then killed VON nurses Kristin Beaton and Heather
> O’Brien on Plains Road in Debert.
> Wortman then headed south, where he shot and wounded Constable Chad
> Morrison and killed Constable Heidi Stevenson at Shubenacadie. At that
> scene he coldly executed Joey Webber, another Good Samaritan. He set
> his fake police car on fire with Webber in the back seat, and escaped
> in Webber’s Ford Escape. He stopped about a kilometre away at fellow
> denturist Gina Goulet’s house, killed her and stole her vehicle.
> In all Wortman drove an estimated 200 kilometres. The RCMP did not set
> up a roadblock in front of him. Why?
>
> One year after Portapique: On shifting timelines, evidence
> destruction, incompetence and unanswered questions, by Paul Palango
> https://www.frankmagazine.ca/.
> (for subscribers only)
> See less
>
>
>
> https://www.facebook.com/
>
>
>
> No photo description available.
>
>
> Frank
> April 20, 2021
> ·
> A hearty Frankland congratulations to Darryl MacDonald, Commander of
> the RCMP PEI Operational Communication Centre, named by the RCMP last
> week as the force's OCC Commander of the Year.
> The Mounties hand out the awards every year in mid-April.
> Fortuitous timing indeed for last year's winner, Glen Byrne!
>
>
>
> https://www.facebook.com/
>
>
>
> May be an image of one or more people and text
>
>
> Frank
> April 26, 2021
> ·
> Remember last April when the RCMP held four decidedly weird press
> conferences during which Assistant Commissioner Lee Bergerman, Chief
> Superintendent Chris Leather and Superintendent Darren Campbell all
> embarrassed themselves? Caught lurking behind the scenes at Campbell’s
> press conference on April 28 was an RCMP civilian employee named Alex
> Vass.
> He is a former journalist who had spent almost 30 years working as a
> radio and television reporter in New Brunswick, the last 16 of them
> with the CTV network. In April 2005, Vass went to work for the
> Mounties in their strategic communications department. By 2020, he was
> a senior crisis and communications strategist in the force, “using
> traditional and social media to meet business goals or in other words
> using communications to solve and prevent crime,” as he so awkwardly
> states in his own LinkedIn profile.
> Vass brought added value to the RCMP mainly because he had a pipeline
> back to his former comrades in the CTV newsroom, where he could deftly
> wield influence from behind the scenes and keep the CTV newsroom tame
> when it came to stories potentially harmful to the RCMP’s reputation.
> There was another part of Vass’s back story that shed light on why the
> RCMP had put so much of its faith in Twitter and Facebook and why it
> continued to defend that mystifying decision. Leather memorably called
> the platform “a superior way to communicate this ongoing threat” and
> said he was “satisfied with the messaging.”
> Vass was the key person inside the RCMP who was instrumental in
> convincing the force to use social media in a crisis and who was
> working behind the scenes to manage the force’s response to the
> growing criticism of the practise...
>
> HOW THE MOUNTIES GOT ADDICTED TO TWITTER, by Paul Palango
> https://www.frankmagazine.ca/.
> (for subscribers only)
> See less
>
>
>
>
>
> https://www.facebook.com/
>
>
>
> May be an image of 2 people
>
>
> Frank
> May 1, 2021
>
> ·
> In which journo Paul Palango breaks in his new Frank hat during a
> recent episode of Nighttime: Canadian Crime, Mysteries, and the Weird
> Sez host Jordan Bonaparte:
> "I've gotta get me one of those. I'll go get my face punched in
> downtown with that hat on".
> "I'd welcome it," declares the noted contrarian with an impish grin.
> Palango's been a regular guest on Nighttime for months, where he talks
> at length about his ongoing investigation into last year's mass
> shootings.
> He's back on the show tomorrow night, May 2, 10:15 N.S. time.
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?
>
>
>
>
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?
>
>
> 12) N.D.A.s - Derpmergency Alert
> 603 views
> Premiered Jan 23, 2022
> Big Fun Garage
> 175 subscribers
> Big Fun Garage Back-Up Channel on Rumble:
> https://rumble.com/c/c-1347083 12) N.D.A.s - Big Fun Garage (Rumble
> Link): https://rumble.com/vt2y06-
>
>
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?
>
>
>
> MCC Day 48 – Lisa Banfield Speaks
> 628 views
> Jul 15, 2022
> Adam Rodgers
> 651 subscribers
> Today, more than two years after the Nova Scotia mass shooting, the
> common law spouse of the killer has finally spoken in public, as she
> gave evidence in the Mass Casualty Commission proceedings. Lisa
> Banfield spent 19 years with Gabriel Wortman before he went on a
> rampage and killed 22 people over the course of 13 hours on April
> 18-19, 2020. It is difficult to know what to make of Ms. Banfield. She
> has had two years to prepare her answers, considerable preparation
> time and help from her high-profile lawyer, and the benefit of knowing
> everyone else’s versions of events before having to give evidence. On
> the other hand, multiple other witnesses have confirmed her accounts
> of having been the victim of domestic violence over an extended period
> of time. On yet another hand, she had no children to protect, and
> seemed to be enjoying a comfortable lifestyle built on criminal
> activity of which she must have been well aware, and now has a clear
> financial interest in denying knowledge of those criminal activities
> as she tries to retain entitlement to Gabriel Wortman’s estate.
>
>
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?
>
>
>
> MCC- DAY 50 - LISA BANFIELD... AND HANDLERS
> 2,695 views
> Streamed live
>
> Little Grey Cells
> 3.42K subscribers
>
> 15 Comments
>
> David Amos
> David Amos
> Methinks at 4 hours 1 minute you dudes jerked the wrong old dog's
> chain again N'esy Pas?
>
> "David AmosMethinks Agent Margaritaville loves to play the wicked
> game N'esy Pas?"
>
> "SadMafioso @David Amos Je Nas Comprend Pas".
>
> David Amos
> David Amos
> Need I say that I am editing my blog???
>
>
> David Amos
> David Amos
> Say Hey to your old pal Palango for me will ya?
> 1
>
> Paul Kimber
> Paul Kimber
> Greetings brother. This is my second look at this today and it is the
> most riveting thing I have ever seen, because these issues are taking
> place in my household, today, right now. Why do abused women risk so
> many lives before they finally spill the beans? My daughters abuser, a
> career criminal with no regard for others whatsoever knows full well
> he will never be held accountable for his crimes. She is right. These
> women also know that co-operating with the police will not protect
> them for long and if the woman has a child they live in terror. The
> similarities in LB's testimony to our current situation where our
> threat has been alleviated by a 14 day psyche test [3rd one in 2
> years]. I now protect my family with a slingshot. It seems the
> families have no standing in the courts, even with mountains of
> evidence of violent crime, even gun crimes, reckless endangerment,
> etc... over and over again. The man terrorizing our and his family
> openly and inflicting harm on the whole community, has all of us
> concerned they will just let him go AGAIN! GW should have gotten pen
> time the first time he beat her up whether Lisa liked it or not. I've
> watched these courts of revolving door zoom justice for two years now.
> In our case the police risked there lives to protect us, [Almaguin
> OPP] several times. The RCMP are globalist jack-boots and that's
> obvious. The OPP are never surprised to have to respond to assaults on
> our home though, because the courts and politicians are letting them
> all loose now. This proceeding, sadly is as corrupt as the zoom
> fiascoes in our criminal courts. There is no justice in the land, but
> for Divine justice which is shortly to come for those who love the
> truth according to His purposes. This wicked world is about to receive
> its just reward as we enter a thousand years of peace with the Prince
> of Peace, the Lord Jesus Christ and we who love HIM. Praying for the
> folks in that courtroom, who are ever in my thoughts and prayers these
> days. God have mercy and heal your people. Maranatha.
>
>
>
> Joanne Willoughby
> Joanne Willoughby
> I wish I could see the “live chat”, I was interested to see what
> everyone thought of this today!
>
> David Amos
> David Amos
> Go to my blog DELETED
>
> Little Grey Cells
> Little Grey Cells
> Live chat is there now, Joanne.
>
> Joanne Willoughby
> Joanne Willoughby
> @Little Grey Cells 😊 Also I truly Thank You for the shirts, that
> was very kind of You. When standing in line at Tim’s waiting for
> coffee yesterday on My way home, I was asked about My shirt. I had a
> nice chat with a young woman and gave her the name of your channel and
> told her to check it out IF she would like to have her eyes VERY WIDE
> OPEN! I hope she looks into it, the more people who get behind the
> truth the better. Take Care and Thank You for everything that You do
> ❤️ God Bless the 23 🙏🏻 and their families 💕
>
>
>
> Nosy Scotian
> Nosy Scotian
> Shawn Banfield learned to barber in the clink. Owned G spot. Cuts in
> the front. Powders in the back. Nephew or cousin not sure to Lisa
> 1
>
> Moshpit70
> Moshpit70
> Damn Dude, The YT blocked your replay chat comments. I learned so much
> from your followers. Glad you're still working towards truth. Thanks
> Seamus, Chat.
> 1
>
> Maureen Weeres
> Maureen Weeres
> LB scared of Gabes threats with guns but not concerned about where he
> stored them!
>
>
>
> Tony K
> Tony K
> I have been watching most days...they swear/affirm them at beginning
> and at times Commissioner MacDonald would sometimes say to a witness
> you are still under oath when they return from lunch or long
> breaks....but not done consistently. I have never seen them swear them
> in again after breaks...unless next day continuation. Is all the other
> 50 days of testimony now invalid? Need one of the 30-50 lawyers
> present to intervene or are they considered still under oath?
> 1
>
> Doreen Stokdijk
> Doreen Stokdijk
> Notice how she says Gabrial in a nice way and then says sorry, G. Hmm
> 2
>
> Scott Clark
> Scott Clark
> how do they all keep the RBF for so long
>
>
> tinycha0s
> tinycha0s
> Has anyone seen the article about that dentist who got that contract
> with the prison systems? wonder if that’s got anything to do with
> this….?
>
>
>
> Lynn M
> Lynn M
> Was she whispering something to her sister around the 59:00 min mark?
> Anyone hear it ?
>
>
>
>
> https://www.cbc.ca/news/
>
>
> Partner of N.S. mass shooter tells inquiry why she didn't report illegal
> guns
> Lawyers of victims’ families concerned about lack of ability to ask
> questions
>
> Haley Ryan · CBC News · Posted: Jul 15, 2022 5:00 AM AT
>
>
> Lisa Banfield, the partner of the gunman who carried out the Nova
> Scotia mass shooting of April 2020, speaks at the inquiry into the
> shooting on July 15, 2022. (CBC)
>
> The partner of the gunman who killed 22 people in the Nova Scotia mass
> shooting says she knew he didn't have a gun licence, but was scared he
> would kill her if she ever reported him to police.
>
> Lisa Banfield testified Friday before the Mass Casualty Commission
> leading a public inquiry into the rampage on April 18 and 19, 2020,
> when her common-law spouse, Gabriel Wortman, killed neighbours and
> strangers as he drove a mock RCMP cruiser.
>
> CBC's full coverage of the inquiry into the Nova Scotia mass casualty
>
> Banfield, who was only questioned by commission counsel, was composed
> for the first few hours of the day as she testified with two of her
> sisters by her side.
>
> She became emotional when talking about the various firearms the
> gunman owned. Banfield said she never considered reporting her
> common-law spouse to the police, even though she knew he didn't have a
> licence.
>
> "If we had a fight, he put the gun to my head to scare me and said he
> could blow off my head," Banfield said through tears.
>
> "So I was scared. I'm not going to say anything."
>
> Banfield said she was aware other men also knew Wortman had these guns
> and were afraid to say anything, "so what am I gonna do?"
> Wanted to protect police from gunman
>
> She was also asked about what happened when two Halifax Regional
> Police officers arrived at the Dartmouth home she shared with the
> gunman in June 2010, investigating reports that he had threatened to
> kill his parents.
>
> At the time, Banfield told officers there were no guns in the house.
> She testified Friday that wasn't true, but she said she lied to
> protect the officers.
>
> "[Wortman] had the handgun by the nightstand and said if any police
> come, 'I'm shooting,'" Banfield said.
>
> Soon after this, Banfield said RCMP Const. Greg Wiley came by the
> Portapique cottage to see whether Wortman had any firearms.
> Wiley in house for 10 minutes: Banfield
>
> The inquiry has heard that Wiley visited the gunman's cottage more
> than a dozen times in the years before the mass shooting, since the
> officer went to him for tips on local crime.
>
> During that 2010 visit, Banfield said Wiley asked Wortman if he had
> any guns. The gunman showed the Mountie an old musket and one
> decorative gun above a fireplace that was filled with wax.
>
> Wiley was only in the cottage for about 10 minutes and didn't seem to
> take an official statement from the gunman, nor did he search the
> home, said Banfield.
>
> She couldn't remember if Wiley visited the gunman's warehouse or if it
> had been built by then.
>
> The Portapique, N.S. log cottage belonging to the Nova Scotia mass
> shooter. The building, and nearby warehouse, were burned to the ground
> during the April 2020 rampage. (Mass Casualty Commission)
>
> The gunman began his rampage on April 18, 2020, after attacking
> Banfield during a celebration of their 19th anniversary. The gunman's
> long history of violence, emotional abuse and other controlling
> behaviour toward Banfield was outlined in a foundational document
> released earlier this week.
>
> Although Banfield's lawyer James Lockyer said she was apprehensive
> about testifying, due to revisiting of the trauma from her past, she
> chose to give her evidence in person rather than via video.
>
> "She's showing, you know, a lot of courage there in my view, and she's
> going to do her best," Lockyer said Thursday.
>
> As of Friday, Banfield has completed four interviews with police since
> the massacre, a video walk-through of her experience on April 18 and
> 19 in Portapique, N.S., and five recent interviews with the commission
> itself.
>
> Soon after the video walk-through in October 2020, the RCMP charged
> Banfield with supplying ammunition to the gunman and she stopped
> cooperating with police. Banfield also, under her lawyer's advice,
> initially refused to speak at the inquiry. That stance changed when
> her charge was referred to restorative justice in March.
>
> Spouse of Portapique gunman to have criminal charge resolved
>
> Common-law spouse among 3 charged with giving N.S. shooter ammunition
>
> According to a commission release, the decision to not allow questions
> from other participant lawyers is based on the volume of information
> Banfield has already provided, and her position as a "survivor of the
> perpetrator's violence."
>
> Gillian Hnatiw, commission counsel, said earlier this week that while
> there may be "follow-up questions" put to Banfield on Friday about the
> shootings, their team will not be asking her to retell that story.
>
> Michael Scott of Patterson Law, the firm representing the families of
> most victims, said they were "shocked" to hear that.
>
> Scott said their clients already had significant concerns with the
> commission blocking direct cross-examination. He is not planning to
> submit any written questions for the commission to consider.
>
> Scott said there is "absolutely no point" in having Banfield give
> sworn testimony in person under the conditions the commission has laid
> out.
>
> Michael Scott is a lawyer with Patterson Law, whose firm represents
> more than a dozen families of Portapique victims. (CBC)
>
> "We can be forgiven for concluding that Ms. Banfield has been called
> forward for no other reason than ... it can be said that she was
> called," Scott said Thursday.
>
> He added that the commission's trauma-informed mandate would have been
> better served by having Banfield testify once in person, and not sit
> through multiple lengthy interviews behind closed doors.
>
> If this process had been done the "proper way" and questions allowed
> from various lawyers, Scott said Banfield would have been allowed the
> opportunity to speak her piece. But as it stands, Scott said there
> will still be major questions around Banfield after she testifies
> Friday, and "speculation about what actually happened."
>
> When asked what else the commission is hoping to learn from Banfield,
> one of their lawyers Emily Hill told reporters Thursday that there are
> multiple issues, including the history of the gunman's abuse in their
> relationship. Hill also said they do have questions for her as a
> witness to how the events of April 18 unfolded.
>
> Banfield has told police how the gunman assaulted her before throwing
> her into the mock RCMP car in his Portapique garage. She said she
> escaped through an opening in the car's divider, and hid in the woods
> overnight.
>
> Lockyer said he's glad that the commission will not allow questions
> from participant lawyers which may be driven by a "conspiracy theory"
> that Banfield actually didn't spend the night outside in the woods.
>
> James Lockyer is a lawyer for Lisa Banfield, the partner of the mass
> shooter who killed 22 people in April 2020 across Nova Scotia. (CBC)
>
> This type of question "takes us to south of the border," Lockyer said
> Thursday.
>
> "You know, these shootings happen south of the border and the next
> thing we hear from the Alex Joneses of this world is that the shooting
> never actually happened, it's completely phony and was made up,"
> Lockyer said.
>
> "We don't need that kind of nonsense in Canada or in Nova Scotia."
>
> Lockyer said Banfield is aware victims' families will be in the room
> Friday, and that's one of the reasons she wants to come in person.
> Banfield never knew the massacre was coming, Lockyer said, and every
> day thinks about what would have happened if she hadn't fled on April
> 18.
>
> "She's going to think about that every day for the rest of her life.
> That's a difficult thing to carry, a very heavy burden to carry,"
> Lockyer said.
>
> "She just hopes that … she's going to be to tell them, as best she
> can, that she just wishes it never happened."
>
> Twenty-two people died on April 18 and 19, 2020. Top row from left:
> Gina Goulet, Dawn Gulenchyn, Jolene Oliver, Frank Gulenchyn, Sean
> McLeod, Alanna Jenkins. Second row: John Zahl, Lisa McCully, Joey
> Webber, Heidi Stevenson, Heather O'Brien and Jamie Blair. Third row
> from top: Kristen Beaton, Lillian Campbell, Joanne Thomas, Peter Bond,
> Tom Bagley and Greg Blair. Bottom row: Emily Tuck, Joy Bond, Corrie
> Ellison and Aaron Tuck. (CBC)
>
> Although Patterson Law filed a motion asking for detailed reasons on
> the commission's approach, the commission released a decision
> dismissing this motion Thursday.
>
> The commissioners said they have explained fully why Banfield is only
> being questioned by their own counsel, who are tasked to find answers
> in the public interest, and "not in the adversarial, trial-like model"
> on which the motion was based.
>
> The commission also dismissed Patterson's request to give an oral
> submission about Banfield's testimony Friday.
>
> This is not the first time the issue of lack of direct questioning has
> been raised by victims' families and their lawyers. In May, the
> commissioners decided that only their lawyers would question RCMP
> Staff Sgt. Brian Rehill and Sgt. Andy O'Brien in pre-taped interviews.
> Rehill was in charge of the police response during the first hours
> after 911 calls began to come in. O'Brien helped communicate with
> officers at the crime scene early in the crisis.
>
> This drew a temporary boycott of the inquiry by many victims'
> families, who did not show up during the Mounties' testimonies and
> instructed their lawyers to do the same.
> ABOUT THE AUTHOR
> Haley Ryan
>
> Reporter
>
> Haley Ryan is a reporter based in Halifax. Got a story idea? Send an
> email to haley.ryan@cbc.ca, or reach out on Twitter @hkryan17.
>
> With files from Catharine Tunney
> CBC's Journalistic Standards and Practices|
>
>
>
>
>
> https://www.cbc.ca/news/
>
>
> Spouse of N.S. mass shooter shows how deadly rampage began in video
> re-enactment
> Lisa Banfield told police what she could remember about Portapique
> events months later
>
> Haley Ryan · CBC News · Posted: Jul 13, 2022 3:57 PM AT
>
>
> The gunman's partner Lisa Banfield, left, stands with a Nova Scotia
> RCMP investigator near the remains of the gunman's warehouse in
> Portapique, N.S., in October 2020, during a re-enactment of the events
> that took place months earlier on April 18, 2020. (Mass Casualty
> Commission)
>
> Warning: This story contains details of violence and domestic abuse
> that are disturbing.
>
> New videos show the long-time partner of the Nova Scotia mass shooter
> re-enacting what she saw and experienced the night the rampage began
> two years ago.
>
> The Mass Casualty Commission released new documents and images
> Wednesday as part of its inquiry into what happened on April 18 and
> 19, 2020, when Gabriel Wortman killed 22 people while driving a mock
> RCMP car.
>
> Among these are video re-enactments from October 2020, when Lisa
> Banfield took an RCMP investigator through what she remembers happened
> in Portapique.
>
> Banfield said the night began with the couple celebrating their 19th
> anniversary and having drinks at the gunman's large garage next to his
> cottage. They were video chatting with friends in the United States
> and talking about how they planned to hold a commitment ceremony the
> next year. That's when their friend Angel Patterson said, "Don't do
> it." That upset Banfield and she left the garage.
>
> CBC's full coverage of the inquiry into the Nova Scotia mass casualty
>
> Halfway up the path to the cottage, Banfield said she decided to turn
> around and apologize to Wortman, but when she arrived he was already
> "irate." She told the commission she couldn't calm him down, and went
> back to the cottage and into bed.
>
> What seemed like minutes later, Banfield said the gunman pulled the
> covers off the bed and assaulted her, kicking her into the bedpost. He
> then pulled her through the cottage which she noticed was already
> doused in gasoline, and set the building on fire once they got
> outside.
>
> She then told police about the gunman leading her through the woods to
> the garage.
> N.S. gunman’s eyes were ‘just so cold,’ says former common-law spouse
> 21 hours ago
> Duration 0:54
> New videos show Lisa Banfield, the long-time partner of the Nova
> Scotia mass shooter re-enacting what she saw and experienced the night
> the rampage began two years ago.
>
> Once at the garage, the gunman started dousing the vehicles outside
> with gas. He dragged Banfield into the garage, and handcuffed her left
> hand.
>
> But when he demanded her right hand, Banfield said she held it back.
> N.S. gunman’s ex describes what she thought would be her last moments
> before being shot
> 21 hours ago
> Duration 1:16
> Lisa Banfield remembers the tense moments she pleaded for her life.
>
> When she was in the back seat of the mock RCMP cruiser behind the
> plexiglass partition, Banfield said the gunman loaded several firearms
> into the front of the vehicle.
>
> He then went up to the loft apartment in the garage, and she tried to
> kick out the back seat windows with no success.
>
> She managed to slip the handcuff off her left hand and was able to
> slide open a window in the divider and dive into the front seat. She
> ran from the garage, not taking any of the guns in the cruiser —
> something she told police she has replayed over in her head.
> N.S. gunman’s former common-law partner laments over being paralyzed by
> fear
> 21 hours ago
> Duration 0:24
> Lisa Banfield reenacts what she saw and experienced the night the
> rampage began two years ago.
>
> After running from the garage, Banfield tried to hide in one of his
> trucks but was worried he would set it on fire, and fled into the
> woods.
>
> Banfield told police how she spent the next few hours alone, hearing
> gunshots and terrified the gunman would find her.
> Lisa Banfield describes the sounds she could hear coming from beyond
> the woods she hid in
> 21 hours ago
> Duration 3:29
> The former common-law partner of the Nova Scotia mass shooter
> describes in her own words what she could hear while hiding in the
> dark woods in Portapique, N.S.
>
> While Banfield was in hiding, the gunman killed 13 people within the
> small community.
>
> She remained hidden inside a fallen tree overnight as temperatures
> dipped close to zero degrees, inquiry documents said.
>
> Banfield said she thought if she could survive until dawn, she could
> then venture out for help.
> ‘Lisa, just do it.’ How the N.S. gunman’s ex eventually found help
> 21 hours ago
> Duration 1:22
> Terrified and in pain, Lisa Banfield describes how and when she
> emerged from her hiding place in the Portapique, N.S., woods
>
> After first light, she walked to a neighbour who called police just
> before 6:30 a.m. on April 19. Members of the RCMP's emergency response
> team picked her up in an armoured vehicle a few minutes later.
>
> Medical records released through the inquiry show Banfield spent five
> nights in hospital after suffering a fractured rib and vertebrae, as
> well as extensive bruising and scrapes from the night of April 18.
>
> CBC's Journalistic Standards and Practices
>
>
>
> https://www.cbc.ca/news/
>
> Inquiry learns details of abuse, control suffered by spouse of N.S. mass
> shooter
> Lisa Banfield says she was convinced the gunman would kill her family
> if she left him
>
> Haley Ryan · CBC News · Posted: Jul 13, 2022 11:16 AM AT
>
>
>
> Inquiry hears from spouse of N.S. mass shooter about years of abuse,
> control
> 1 day ago
> Duration 2:17
> The public inquiry into the 2020 Nova Scotia mass shooting released
> dramatic, previously unseen video and testimony from the gunman's
> spouse Wednesday. She described suffering years of abuse at the
> gunman's hand, including on the night he killed 22 people.
>
> Warning: details are disturbing.
>
> The first time Lisa Banfield says she was physically abused by her
> partner was a terrifying assault where she ran into the woods in the
> early 2000s.
>
> "He was running after me and I was screaming my head off, and then he
> caught me and then he … you know, I had blood all over me and he was
> dragging me back," Banfield recalled to police.
>
> It's a scene she said played out again years later, the night her
> common-law spouse Gabriel Wortman began a shooting rampage in
> Portapique, N.S., that would leave 22 Nova Scotians dead.
>
> Mass shooting inquiry to examine gunman's family violence,
> domestic abuse this week
>
> How the N.S. mass shooter controlled, exploited women around him
>
> The gunman's violence, emotional abuse and other controlling behaviour
> toward Banfield throughout their 19-year relationship are outlined in
> a new foundational document released Wednesday by the Mass Casualty
> Commission. The document is based on interviews with Banfield, her
> family and other witnesses.
>
> The commission is leading the inquiry into the mass shootings on April
> 18 and 19, 2020, examining the tragedy and the factors that led up to
> it, including the violence in Wortman's family and his history of
> harassment and attacks on others.
>
> Banfield, who is set to testify before the inquiry for the first time
> Friday, gave four police interviews following the massacre and five
> interviews with the commission itself in recent months.
> Physical abuse began after party
>
> The documents show that Banfield met Wortman in May 2001 at the
> now-defunct Halifax pub, the Thirsty Duck.
>
> On their first date, he showed up with a dozen long-stemmed roses.
> Banfield felt that was "too showy," and said she wasn't impressed. But
> later in the evening, she was impressed by the gunman's calm demeanour
> when his car was rear-ended.
>
> Things moved quickly after that. Three months later, Banfield had
> moved in with the gunman.
>
> Initially, she described Wortman as "sweet and caring." That was
> before the first time she was physically abused, following a party at
> a cottage in Sutherland Lake, about a half-hour drive north of
> Portapique.
>
> Although witnesses differed on when the incident happened — Banfield
> said it was in 2001, others suggested it was as late as 2007 — the
> commission said it was likely after October 2002 when the gunman
> bought his Portapique cottage.
>
> The burned out remains of Gabriel Wortman's home on Portapique Beach
> Road, N.S., taken May 13, 2020. (Steve Lawrence/CBC)
>
> Banfield said Renée Karsten, a denturist who worked with Wortman at
> his Dartmouth clinic, invited the couple up for the night. But when
> Banfield wanted to leave and offered to take the gunman's Jeep home so
> he could stay, this "set him off."
>
> As she left, the gunman jumped in the car and began hitting her in the
> head as she continued trying to drive. Banfield said she was crying so
> hard she couldn't see, so she stopped and fled into the woods.
>
> The gunman soon caught Banfield and dragged her back to the car, but
> she ran away again when a group of people from the party arrived.
>
> Karsten told police she saw Wortman dragging Banfield by the hair in
> the driveway, so she "lost it" and tried to intervene.
>
> "His face and just the look in his eyes … it scared the hell out of
> me," Karsten told police.
> Police involved, no charges laid
>
> Karsten brought Banfield back to the cottage, and police came and
> drove the gunman back to his Portapique home. Banfield said that was
> the only time police were involved, and nothing came of the incident.
>
> The commission said in the document it's unclear exactly why police
> were called and what they knew about the situation. While police
> records from this time "may have been purged" by now, the commission
> continues to investigate.
>
> When Banfield eventually returned to the Portapique cottage that
> night, she saw the gunman pulling the tires off her car and throwing
> them over a bank. He told her to come inside, but she went to a
> neighbour's and waited for her niece to pick her up.
>
> The niece, Stephanie Goulding, said Banfield was bloody and scraped
> up, with torn clothing. Goulding wanted to stop into the Truro police
> station to report the assault, but Banfield "begged" her not to, so
> instead a sister took photos of her injuries.
>
> Banfield moved back into her sister Maureen Banfield's home after
> this, but Wortman soon began visiting and apologizing, saying he'd
> been drinking and he would never hurt her again — and they got back
> together.
>
> CBC's full coverage of the inquiry into the Nova Scotia mass casualty
>
> This pattern would continue through the years, both Banfield and two
> of her sisters told police. The few times her family knew of the abuse
> and urged her to report it or leave the relationship, Banfield didn't
> want to take that step.
>
> The gunman would often kick and punch the parts of her body that could
> be covered by clothing, Banfield said, like arms and legs. If he left
> marks on her neck while choking her, Banfield said she would use
> makeup to cover them.
>
> On at least two occasions, Banfield said he put a gun to her head.
>
> "He would say afterwards, 'If I didn't love you, I wouldn't do this
> because that's how much I care about you,'" she told the commission.
>
> One sister, Janice Banfield, called the gunman a "sociopath" and said
> she thought "we're gonna have to bury our sister one day."
>
> But Banfield said she felt she had nowhere to go, because the gunman
> frequently threatened to kill her or her family if she ever left him.
>
> "He would be like, 'I know where your family lives,' and look at me a
> certain way," she said.
> Violence more prevalent than first reported
>
> While Banfield originally told RCMP officers there had been around 10
> incidents of physical abuse over the years, she has since told the
> commission there were actually far more.
>
> "I just don't trust very well, and I was scared to say anything," she
> told the commission this May.
>
> She originally told police years would go by between attacks, and the
> last time had been three years before the mass shooting. Upon
> reflection, Banfield told the commission that was part of her coping
> mechanism.
>
> Banfield would write a journal entry about an incident but never
> revisit it, so she believed an assault hadn't happened in years even
> though it was happening "all along."
>
> "I would just have to block it out because … I needed to deal with
> whatever is going on in that moment, so I couldn't think about what's
> gone on," Banfield said.
> Only one neighbour reported abuse
>
> There were at least two instances of abuse witnessed by other people
> in Portapique.
>
> One day, the gunman's uncle Glynn Wortman and another neighbour saw
> him choking Banfield on the front lawn of their cottage. The uncle
> yelled, "You're just like your father, get off of her," Banfield
> recalled.
>
> Earlier this week, the inquiry heard accounts from several of the
> gunman's uncles describing incidents of his father, Paul Wortman,
> abusing his wife, Evelyn.
>
> One Portapique neighbour, Brenda Forbes, heard about the incident
> Glynn Wortman saw and reported it to the RCMP in 2013. Nothing came of
> her complaint, and Forbes said no one else in the community believed
> her or wanted to get involved.
>
> Banfield said she never told her family doctor about the abuse, and
> was careful to schedule visits only when she had no visible injuries.
> Psychologist urged her to leave
>
> But at one point, Banfield said things were "so bad" she saw a
> psychologist in Bedford who told her she was in an abusive
> relationship. This professional provided support and encouraged her to
> leave, but the gunman found out about it and made her stop.
>
> The gunman also threatened to confront the doctor, Banfield said, and
> she felt "trapped."
>
> Although Banfield said she was always "on eggshells" around the
> gunman, never knowing what would set him off, she consistently forgave
> his behaviour and tried to show him he was loved because "everybody
> always left him."
>
> In a statement to the commission, Banfield wrote she felt bad for the
> gunman when he told her about how his father abused him as a child,
> especially because she had such a large and loving family.
>
> "I thought I could help him if I just loved him unconditionally," Banfield
> said.
> Controlling, isolating behaviour
>
> The range of abuse the gunman inflicted on Banfield fits into the
> definitions of intimate-partner violence and coercive control, which
> are laid out in an inquiry report from Dr. Katreena Scott on
> interventions to address abuse.
>
> Scott writes that intimate-partner violence includes a range of
> behaviours besides physical violence, like unwanted sexual activity,
> threats, humiliation, and economic abuse which deprives a victim of
> the ability to provide for their own needs.
>
> Coercive control is a set of behaviours that disempower someone in a
> relationship, Scott said, like removing their liberties, threats to
> their family, and limiting access to loved ones or transportation.
>
> "Very early on there were so many signs of his controlling or bullying
> behaviour, but somehow, I was able to block it out and justify to
> myself how badly he treated me," Banfield wrote in a statement to the
> commission.
>
> "Gabriel was jealous, controlling, possessive, extremely degrading,
> and piggish; it was 'his way or the highway.'"
>
> Twenty-two people died on April 18 and 19, 2020. Top row from left:
> Gina Goulet, Dawn Gulenchyn, Jolene Oliver, Frank Gulenchyn, Sean
> McLeod, Alanna Jenkins. Second row: John Zahl, Lisa McCully, Joey
> Webber, Heidi Stevenson, Heather O'Brien and Jamie Blair. Third row
> from top: Kristen Beaton, Lillian Campbell, Joanne Thomas, Peter Bond,
> Tom Bagley and Greg Blair. Bottom row: Emily Tuck, Joy Bond, Corrie
> Ellison and Aaron Tuck. (CBC)
>
> Banfield said within the first couple of years, the gunman was able to
> convince her to quit her bank job at RBC so she could come work for
> his denturist business, which would make it easier for them to take
> time off and travel together.
>
> "I realize now that he just wanted to control my entire life,"
> Banfield wrote to the commission.
>
> He urged her to sell the car she'd had throughout her previous
> marriage, and he eventually bought her a Mercedes under his name.
>
> Banfield was in the gunman's will by 2011, but her sister Maureen
> Banfield was worried she'd be left with nothing if they broke up
> because she had no other income or investments of her own.
>
> By 2020, Banfield said she believed she was making around $25 an hour,
> but the clinic didn't have a regular payroll system. Instead, the
> gunman would write her cheques from a business account or give her
> cash, sometimes deducting a percentage from her cheques "for
> retirement," she said.
>
> "He dealt with all the money things, so I trusted whatever," Banfield
> told the commission.
> 'He wanted me to know that without him, I had nothing'
>
> Besides her work at his clinics, Banfield said she would wait on the
> gunman "hand and foot" by making all the meals and handling the
> cleaning and organizing of the household. She told one of her sisters
> it was the way she was raised and she wanted to take on these tasks.
>
> Banfield said in her written statement the gunman controlled
> everything in her life, so when she didn't obey, he could take things
> away to "punish her," including her car keys, phone and salary.
>
> "He wanted me to know that without him, I had nothing. I believed
> that," she wrote. "Made me feel so stupid and incapable of doing
> things on my own even though I did everything for him."
>
> The gunman also often groped Banfield in front of her family because
> he thought "it was funny," she said, and their sexual relationship was
> always defined by his wants and needs, not hers.
>
> Sex between them did not involve intimacy or tenderness, Banfield
> wrote to the commission, and said the gunman was "addicted to
> pornography."
>
> Despite his many affairs, including with Portapique neighbours or his
> own patients, Banfield said she forgave him every time — and "I am so
> ashamed of that."
> Unhappy with Banfield socializing
>
> While Banfield said the gunman would often become mad at her for
> wanting to see her siblings or other family, Banfield said he also
> didn't like her becoming too friendly with people in Portapique.
>
> If he saw her having fun at neighbourhood parties, Banfield said the
> gunman would put her down in front of others for "acting like an
> idiot" and drag her away by the arm. If she refused, he would become
> violent and slap her or pull her hair.
>
> At work, Banfield said he also belittled her and screamed at her in
> front of patients. When out for dinner one night, the gunman threw a
> glass of water in her face and left her alone in the restaurant.
>
> The gunman's controlling behaviour and jealousy appeared to weigh on
> Banfield's mind. One time, Banfield saw another denturist while out
> drinking with her sister, and was terrified they might tell the gunman
> because she wasn't supposed to be out.
>
> When her mother died, her high school boyfriend attended the funeral,
> but Banfield ushered him out, saying the gunman disliked him and would
> be upset he was there.
>
> The violence and control from the gunman lasted until April 18, 2020,
> when he attacked Banfield on the night of their 19th anniversary. He
> threw her in his mock RCMP cruiser, but she said she escaped through
> an opening in the car's partition and hid in the woods overnight.
> ABOUT THE AUTHOR
> Haley Ryan
>
> Reporter
>
> Haley Ryan is a reporter based in Halifax. Got a story idea? Send an
> email to haley.ryan@cbc.ca, or reach out on Twitter @hkryan17.
> CBC's Journalistic Standards and Practices
>
>
>
> https://www.cbc.ca/news/
>
> Lisa Banfield re-enactment videos raise questions about why she was charged
> Women’s Shelters Canada worries Banfield's experience with police will
> deter other women from reporting abuse
>
> Catharine Tunney · CBC News · Posted: Jul 14, 2022 5:04 PM AT
>
>
> The gunman's partner, Lisa Banfield, left, stands with a Nova Scotia
> RCMP investigator near the remains of the gunman's warehouse in
> Portapique, N.S., in October 2020, during a re-enactment of the events
> that took place months earlier on April 18, 2020. (Mass Casualty
> Commission)
>
> The release of new videos showing the longtime partner of the Nova
> Scotia mass shooter re-enacting what she saw and experienced the night
> of the rampage is raising questions about why police charged her in
> the weeks following the shootings.
>
> The Mass Casualty Commission released footage Wednesday of Lisa
> Banfield walking an RCMP investigator through what she remembered
> happening in Portapique, N.S., on April 18 and 19, 2020, including how
> her partner beat her and tried to handcuff her.
>
> CBC's full coverage of the inquiry into the Nova Scotia mass casualty
>
> The re-enactment was filmed in late October 2020, six months after
> Gabriel Wortman killed 22 people while driving a mock RCMP car.
>
> A few weeks after filming the re-enactment, Banfield was charged with
> supplying ammunition to the gunman.
>
> The Crown eventually determined there was no public interest in
> sending the case to trial and instead referred the matter to
> restorative justice. Upon completion, the criminal charge will be
> dropped.
>
> "I have concerns about the timeline and concerns about the fact she
> was charged in the first place," Banfield's defence lawyer, James
> Lockyer, said Thursday.
>
> Spouse of N.S. mass shooter shows how deadly rampage began in
> video re-enactment
>
> Inquiry learns details of abuse, control suffered by spouse of
> N.S. mass shooter
>
> Erin Breen, a lawyer representing three sexual assault and justice
> groups — Avalon Sexual Assault Centre, Wellness Within, and the
> Women's Legal Education and Action Fund — said she has concerns with
> the sequence of events.
>
> "It's always been a very troubling issue from our perspective. My
> clients were quite outraged when they learned that Ms. Banfield was
> being charged," she said.
>
> "Systemically it's a problem when a survivor comes forward and shares
> information about their survival behaviour and ends up getting charged
> in a criminal investigation."
> Banfield said she pleaded with gunman
>
> In the videos released Wednesday, Banfield explains how the couple had
> been marking their 19th anniversary when they began fighting.
>
> After she turned in for the night, Banfield said the gunman pulled the
> covers off the bed and assaulted her, kicking her into the bedpost. He
> then pulled her through the cottage, which she noticed was already
> doused in gasoline, and set the building on fire once they got
> outside, she told the investigator.
>
> Banfield said the gunman dragged her into the garage and tried to put
> her in handcuffs.
>
> "Looking at his eyes, there was nothing there," she said. "It was just so
> cold."
>
> Twenty-two people died on April 18 and 19, 2020. Top row from left:
> Gina Goulet, Dawn Gulenchyn, Jolene Oliver, Frank Gulenchyn, Sean
> McLeod, Alanna Jenkins. Second row: John Zahl, Lisa McCully, Joey
> Webber, Heidi Stevenson, Heather O'Brien and Jamie Blair. Third row
> from top: Kristen Beaton, Lillian Campbell, Joanne Thomas, Peter Bond,
> Tom Bagley and Greg Blair. Bottom row: Emily Tuck, Joy Bond, Corrie
> Ellison and Aaron Tuck. (CBC)
>
> Banfield was able to escape — shoeless — and hide for the next few
> hours, terrified he would find her as she heard gunshots.
>
> Medical records released through the inquiry show Banfield spent five
> nights in hospital after suffering a fractured rib and vertebrae, as
> well as extensive bruising and scrapes from the night of April 18.
>
> N.S. mass shooter had a history of intimidation, violent altercations
>
> N.S. gunman's spouse, set to undergo restorative justice, lived
> 'in survival mode,' says lawyer
>
> Other documents made public Thursday as part of the commission covered
> how the gunman used violence, emotional abuse and other controlling
> behaviour toward Banfield for nearly two decades.
> Push for more police training
>
> Megan Stephens, lawyer for Women's Shelters Canada, said she worries
> Banfield's experience will discourage other women from going to
> police.
>
> "I'm concerned about the message that people get because sometimes
> violence is such that people do need to call the police; there is no
> one else who could step in to protect them," she said.
>
> "But in this case, it feels like there were multiple failures of that,
> and the message that I think unfortunately women will get if they
> connect these dots, if they themselves are living in abusive
> relationships, is I don't know if that's the right option for me."
>
> WATCH | Inquiry hears from spouse of N.S. mass shooter about years of
> abuse, control
> Inquiry hears from spouse of N.S. mass shooter about years of abuse,
> control
> 1 day ago
> Duration 2:17
> The public inquiry into the 2020 Nova Scotia mass shooting released
> dramatic, previously unseen video and testimony from the gunman's
> spouse Wednesday. She described suffering years of abuse at the
> gunman's hand, including on the night he killed 22 people.
>
> Breen said she hopes the commission's work will at least spark a
> conversation about how police and the justice system should approach
> intimate partner abuse.
>
> "You see it quite commonly in situations where women are defending
> themselves in a violent conformation, end up getting charged with
> assault themselves," she said.
>
> "The current policy of a pro-arrest, pro-charge, pro-prosecution
> removes any choice or power from the person who has survived the
> violence."
>
> Stephens said she also hopes police get more training about how to
> recognize and better respond to abuse, including controlling
> behaviour.
>
> Lisa Banfield's running shoes, lost while fleeing Gabriel Wortman, are
> shown as commission counsel Gillian Hnatiw presents a foundational
> document about the violent behaviour that Wortman directed toward
> Banfield, his common-law spouse, at the Mass Casualty Commission
> inquiry into the mass murders in rural Nova Scotia on April 18 and 19,
> 2020, in Halifax on Wednesday, July 13, 2022. Wortman, dressed as an
> RCMP officer and driving a replica police cruiser, murdered 22 people.
> (Andrew Vaughan/The Canadian Press)
>
> "Intimate partner violence doesn't just involve discrete acts of
> physical violence, there are other ways in which controlling, coercive
> behaviour can really lead people to basically be stuck in situations
> and to have no control," she said.
>
> "Unfortunately, there is not enough training that goes into preparing
> officers who are on the front line. All the more so in some of these
> rural communities where you don't have specialists, you have
> generalists."
> Banfield felt 'betrayed' by re-enactment filming
>
> In an interview Banfield gave to a commission lawyer in April of this
> year, she said she felt ambushed by the re-enactment filming.
>
> She said she wanted to meet RCMP Sgt. Greg Vardy at the cottage in
> Portapique so he could see where her sneakers had been left and where
> she had hid overnight. It was the first time she had returned to the
> cottage since the night of the rampage.
>
> "I heard that people were thinking I'm lying about what happened, it's
> like, I thought if I go up there for the first time, I want somebody
> to see that, you know, to find my shoes, to find this tree, to find
> the things that I'm telling you that happened," she said.
>
> But Banfield said when she went to meet the Mountie, he had brought
> along a small audio and video crew.
>
> "It was just feeling like I was betrayed," she said.
>
> Her sister, Maureen, later jumps in on the interview. She said
> Banfield wasn't in the right mental shape to do the re-enactment.
>
> "Here's the thing that I feel is probably the deepest betrayal in
> terms of the manipulation of her actually being investigated without
> our knowledge," Maureen Banfield said.
>
> "It was horrific and I think it was very damning to her mentally, and
> that's for me, I think, the most egregious thing that took place in
> terms of her well-being and putting her first."
> Banfield not under investigation during filming
>
> A spokesperson for the RCMP said Banfield was not under investigation
> at the time of the re-enactment filming.
>
> "The victim/witness video re-enactment was related to a period of time
> where Ms. Banfield was a victim of multiple crimes. Given that she was
> not under investigation, it would not have been appropriate to provide
> her with rights that are given to a person who is being investigated
> for an offence or who is under arrest," said Cpl. Chris Marshall.
>
> "Lisa Banfield was provided her reason for arrest, rights to counsel
> and police warning, as required by the law, during the investigation
> in which she is charged with ammunition-related offences."
> ABOUT THE AUTHOR
> Catharine Tunney
>
> Reporter
>
> Catharine Tunney is a reporter with CBC's Parliament Hill bureau,
> where she covers national security and the RCMP. She worked previously
> for CBC in Nova Scotia. You can reach her at catharine.tunney@cbc.ca
>
> Follow Cat on Twitter
>
> With files from Haley Ryan
> CBC's Journalistic Standards and Practices
>
>
>
>
> https://www.cbc.ca/news/
>
> 3 accused of giving N.S. gunman ammunition named in lawsuit filed by
> families
> Lisa Banfield, James Banfield, Brian Brewster listed as defendants
> alongside shooter's estate
>
> Elizabeth McMillan · CBC News · Posted: Feb 08, 2021 3:27 PM AT
>
>
> The remains of a cottage and the burnt shell of a decommissioned RCMP
> cruiser are seen at a property in Portapique, N.S., that belonged to
> the gunman who killed 22 people on April 18 and 19. (Steve
> Lawrence/CBC)
>
> Three people accused of giving ammunition to the man responsible for
> killing 22 people in Nova Scotia have now been added as defendants to
> the proposed class-action lawsuit launched by families of the victims.
>
> On April 18 and 19, denturist Gabriel Wortman killed neighbours,
> acquaintances and strangers, and burned several homes, including his
> cottage, before being shot and killed by police in Enfield, N.S.
> During most of the attacks, he was driving a decommissioned cruiser
> that he'd adapted to look like a real RCMP vehicle.
>
> The gunman's common-law spouse, Lisa Banfield, 52, her brother James
> Blair Banfield, 54, of Beaver Bank, N.S., and her brother-in-law Brian
> Brewster, 60, of Lucasville, N.S., have been charged with unlawfully
> providing the shooter with .223-calibre Remington cartridges and
> .40-calibre Smith & Wesson cartridges in the month leading up to the
> massacre, which began in Portapique, N.S.
>
> Lisa Banfield is facing two counts and her relatives are each facing
> one count. They're all expected to enter pleas at their next court
> date in Dartmouth provincial court on March 9.
>
> Now, in addition to the criminal charges, the three are named in the
> lawsuit that argues they and the gunman's estate —which has been
> valued at $2.1 million — are liable to the families of the people who
> lost their lives, the estates and people who suffered damage to
> property and people who were injured due to Wortman's actions.
>
> There is a separate lawsuit families have filed against the RCMP and
> the province.
>
> Twenty-two people died on April 18 and 19. Top row from left: Gina
> Goulet, Dawn Gulenchyn, Jolene Oliver, Frank Gulenchyn, Sean McLeod,
> Alanna Jenkins. Second row: John Zahl, Lisa McCully, Joey Webber,
> Heidi Stevenson, Heather O'Brien and Jamie Blair. Third row from top:
> Kristen Beaton, Lillian Campbell, Joanne Thomas, Peter Bond, Tom
> Bagley and Greg Blair. Bottom row: Emily Tuck, Joy Bond, Corrie
> Ellison and Aaron Tuck. (CBC)
>
> The statement of claim filed against the estate alleges that in
> addition to killing 22 people, Wortman injured six people, killed five
> pets and burned or damaged three vehicles and four homes.
>
> Lisa Banfield, James Banfield and Brian Brewster's names were added to
> the lawsuit on Feb. 5. The other defendants include the public
> trustee, which is representing Wortman's estate, and three companies
> Wortman owned and controlled: Berkshire Broman Corp., Atlantic Denture
> Clinic Inc., and Northumberland Investments Inc.
>
> "Ultimately, our job is to protect the interests of the families of
> those lost in the April tragedies and of course the victims, the
> survivors of that tragedy as well," said lawyer Sandra McCulloch, who
> represents the plaintiffs. "That requires us pursuing this avenue of
> potential recourse and accountability and answers for our families."
>
> In order to proceed as a class action, the Nova Scotia Supreme Court
> must certify the lawsuit. That has not yet happened. None of the named
> defendants have filed statements in response to the allegations made
> by the plaintiffs.
>
> The burned remains of Gabriel Wortman’s cottage in Portapique, N.S.
> Wortman disguised himself as a Mountie and over the course of 13 hours
> the night of April 18, 2020, and the following morning travelled
> nearly 200 kilometres in and around Portapique, killing 22 people.
> (Steve Lawrence/CBC)
>
> When the RCMP announced the criminal charges in December, the force
> said the trio were not aware of Wortman's plans.
>
> The criminal case "coupled with the other information and evidence
> that we've been gathering on our end adds up to there being support
> for some degree of culpability on the part of each of those
> individuals," said McCulloch.
> Lawsuit alleges spouse acquired gasoline
>
> The updated statement of claim alleges that Lisa Banfield "was aware
> of and facilitated Wortman's preparations, including but not limited
> to, his accumulation of firearms, ammunition, other weapons, gasoline,
> police paraphernalia, and the outfitting of a replica RCMP vehicle."
>
> It alleges Banfield "directly acquired some of the accelerants and
> ammunition used by Wortman in the crime spree" and that James Banfield
> and Brian Brewster also "directly acquired" ammunition.
>
> The proposed lawsuit claims all three were "negligent in [the]
> acquisition of these items" and that they "knew or ought to have known
> that Wortman had tortious intentions."
>
> McCulloch declined to elaborate on the exact nature of the additional
> evidence gathered to support the allegations.
>
> The investigative firm Martin and Associates has been working with
> Patterson Law since the law firm was retained by the families. Last
> fall it set up a website to collect tips and information related to
> the mass shootings.
>
> Though police have said Lisa Banfield was the first victim of violence
> in Portapique on April 18, she was always excluded as a plaintiff from
> the families' lawsuit.
>
> "From our perspective, there has always been a possibility of a
> conflict of interest between [Banfield's] interest and those of our
> clients. And you're seeing that now manifest itself in our
> amendments," said McCulloch.
> Spouse suing estate separately
>
> In a separate civil case, however, Banfield is also suing her former
> partner's estate, which includes six properties, three corporations
> and $705,000 in cash seized from the wreckage of the couple's cottage
> in Portapique.
>
> In her statement of claim, which was filed with the Nova Scotia
> Supreme Court last summer, Banfield said she was the victim of assault
> and battery, and suffered physical, emotional and psychological
> injuries and trauma.
>
> Search warrant documents show several people told investigators
> Banfield, who lived with Wortman above the denture clinic in Dartmouth
> where they both worked, was abused during their 19-year relationship.
>
> Lawyers representing Banfield are also opposing the application by CBC
> and other media organizations to lift some redactions in the search
> warrants related to the mass shooting investigation.
> Banfield opposed to lifting redactions
>
> In documents filed with the court on Feb. 5, James Lockyer and Jessica
> Zita, the Toronto lawyers who are representing Banfield, argue that 13
> redacted paragraphs should remain blacked out because they explain the
> Crown's case against their client and "invades Lisa solicitor-client
> privilege."
>
> One paragraph is a summary of a statement Banfield's friend and lawyer
> Kevin van Bargen gave to police.
>
> "His information deals with business and financial affairs, unrelated
> and peripheral to the events. This invasion of Lisa's solicitor-client
> privilege is unwarranted, would not be permitted at her trial, and
> should not be provided to the media," the lawyers stated in the
> filings.
>
> Their filings said Lisa Banfield gave four statements to police, on
> April 19, April 20, April 28 and July 28. They said the other sections
> that should remain redacted pertain to her statements and those made
> by her co-accused and other family members who spoke to police between
> April and July.
>
> Meanwhile, work on a public inquiry into the mass killings is
> underway. Last month the commission announced the staff who will lead
> the teams involved in the joint federal-provincial inquiry.
> ABOUT THE AUTHOR
> Elizabeth McMillan
>
> Elizabeth McMillan is a journalist with CBC in Halifax. Over the past
> 13 years, she has reported from the edge of the Arctic Ocean to the
> Atlantic Coast and loves sharing people's stories. Please send tips
> and feedback to elizabeth.mcmillan@cbc.ca
> CBC's Journalistic Standards and Practices
>
>
> Cross-examination of N.S. killer's spouse could promote conspiracy
> theories: lawyer
>
> Michael MacDonald and Michael Tutton
> The Canadian Press
> Published July 14, 2022 3:29 p.m. ADT
>
> HALIFAX -
>
> There are good reasons why the spouse of the man responsible for the
> worst mass shooting in modern Canadian history should not face
> cross-examination when she testifies Friday before a public inquiry,
> her lawyer says.
>
> James Lockyer said Thursday his client, Lisa Banfield, should not be
> retraumatized by lawyers who seem determined to explore conspiracy
> theories about what happened April 18-19, 2020, when Gabriel Wortman
> killed 22 people during a 13-hour rampage across Nova Scotia.
>
> The Toronto lawyer said some lawyers who represent victims' families
> appear keen to ask Banfield how she managed to escape from her
> deranged partner and survive a bitterly cold night in the woods around
> Portapique, N.S., on the first night of the rampage.
>
> "Some of the lawyers, one or two of them, have been pretty hyperbolic
> in their statements," Lockyer said in an interview with The Canadian
> Press.
>
> "They talk of wanting to cross-examine her about certain aspects of
> her trauma that night without ever explaining their goals. And their
> goals, when you think about it, can only be conspiracy-theorist
> goals."
>
> Lockyer said the purpose of raising questions about Banfield's
> whereabouts would be to challenge her credibility and suggest that she
> may have spent the night elsewhere, which he says is absurd.
>
> "These mass casualty events, particularly (those) we've seen south of
> the border, do give rise to conspiracy theorists," Lockyer said. "We
> don't need that in Canada. We don't need that in Nova Scotia. I think
> the commission is to be congratulated that they're not willing to
> entertain it."
>
> Lawyer Michael Scott, whose firm represents 14 of the victims'
> families, challenged Lockyer's conspiracy comments, arguing that the
> inquiry's decision to limit questioning will leave lingering doubts
> about Banfield's testimony.
>
> "There are very good questions to be asked about how she survived
> overnight," Scott said Thursday. "And by arranging a process where
> nobody is allowed to ask reasonable questions, then this promotes
> conspiracy theories."
>
> The three commissioners overseeing the federal-provincial inquiry
> recently decided Banfield will not face cross-examination from lawyers
> who represent relatives of the victims, mainly because she could be
> traumatized by having to relive the violence she endured.
>
> The inquiry has heard evidence that Banfield, whose relationship with
> Wortman spanned 19 years, was the victim of a controlling, abusive man
> who repeatedly beat her. Banfield has also told the RCMP and the
> commission that she was beaten and threatened immediately before her
> husband started killing people in Portapique.
>
> On Thursday, the commission issued written reasons for its decision to
> limit questioning of Banfield, arguing that the role of a public
> inquiry is not the same as a trial.
>
> "We have been clear from the beginning that this is not an
> adversarial, trial-like proceeding," the ruling says. The decision
> says the commission's approach "represents the most effective way to
> gather Ms. Banfield's best evidence."
>
> Sandra McCulloch, a lawyer who works at the same firm as Scott, said
> inquiries and trials should share a commitment to finding facts.
>
> "As much as we're in a different kind of legal proceeding, we're still
> in a proceeding where we have to have reliable evidence, and part of
> having reliable evidence is allowing it to be tested," McCulloch said.
> "That's largely not going to happen."
>
> McCulloch is concerned that Banfield will not be asked about her
> partner's violent behaviour while they were together on that deadly
> weekend in April 2020.
>
> In an earlier statement, the commission said Banfield may be
> accompanied by two support people and will "address remaining
> questions relevant to the commission's mandate."
>
> Earlier this week, the commission released a 100-page document based
> on evidence provided by Banfield during four interviews with the RCMP
> and five interviews with the inquiry. That document provided extensive
> details about the killer's long history of gender-based violence.
>
> As well, the inquiry on Wednesday was shown a video recording of a
> 90-minute RCMP interview, which featured Banfield providing a detailed
> description of what happened to her on the night of April 18, 2020.
>
> The commission has confirmed participating lawyers have been invited
> to submit questions in advance of Banfield's testimony, and they can
> bring forward further questions on Friday.
>
> Scott has said his clients have instructed him not to submit written
> questions for Banfield because doing so would lend legitimacy to a
> flawed process.
>
> Lawyers for some families boycotted proceedings in May after the
> inquiry prevented cross-examination of two RCMP staff sergeants who
> oversaw the early response to the mass shooting.
>
> Lockyer said his client was feeling apprehensive about appearing
> before the inquiry, which will be the first time she has spoken in
> public about the tragedy.
>
> "I know ... she says to herself, `If I hadn't run and got away, would
> I have saved 22 lives?' And of course she says that to herself and
> always will. The probable answer is that it would have been 23 lives
> and not 22, but she's never going to believe that."
>
> It's important to remember that Banfield was the first victim of the
> "mass casualty" event, he said.
>
> "I don't think Lisa sees herself as a victim. She's too conscious of
> the people who were killed and their families. It's going to be a
> difficult day for her."
>
> This report by The Canadian Press was first published July 14, 2022.
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: "Bergen, Candice - M.P." <candice.bergen@parl.gc.ca>
> Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2022 13:20:44 +0000
> Subject: Automatic reply: The last thing Palango told Bonaparte was
> that he would not waste his time listening to Lisa Banfield on Friday
> No doubt a host of other snobby journalists will Correct Tristin Hopper?
> To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
>
> On behalf of the Hon. Candice Bergen, thank you for contacting the
> Office of the Leader of the Official Opposition.
>
> Ms. Bergen greatly values feedback and input from Canadians. We read
> and review every incoming e-mail. Please note that this account
> receives a high volume of e-mails. We reply to e-mails as quickly as
> possible.
>
> If you are a constituent of Ms. Bergen’s in Portage-Lisgar with an
> urgent matter please provide complete contact information. Not
> identifying yourself as a constituent could result in a delayed
> response.
>
> Once again, thank you for writing.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Office of the Leader of the Official Opposition
> ------------------------------
>
>
> Au nom de l’hon. Candice Bergen, nous vous remercions de communiquer
> avec le Bureau de la cheffe de l’Opposition officielle.
>
> Mme Bergen accorde une grande importance aux commentaires des
> Canadiens. Nous lisons et étudions tous les courriels entrants.
> Veuillez noter que ce compte reçoit beaucoup de courriels. Nous y
> répondons le plus rapidement possible.
>
> Si vous faites partie de l’électorat de Mme Bergen dans la
> circonscription de Portage-Lisgar et que votre affaire est urgente,
> veuillez fournir vos coordonnées complètes. Si vous ne le faites pas,
> cela pourrait retarder la réponse.
>
> Nous vous remercions une fois encore d’avoir pris le temps d’écrire.
>
> Veuillez agréer nos salutations distinguées,
>
> Bureau de la cheffe de l’Opposition officielle
>
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: "Rempel, Michelle - M.P." <Michelle.Rempel@parl.gc.ca>
> Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2022 13:20:46 +0000
> Subject: Automatic reply: The last thing Palango told Bonaparte was
> that he would not waste his time listening to Lisa Banfield on Friday
> No doubt a host of other snobby journalists will Correct Tristin Hopper?
> To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
>
> On behalf of the Honourable Michelle Rempel Garner, P.C., M.P. thank
> you for your email. Our office appreciates the time you took to get in
> touch with the MP. Due to the high volume of email correspondence our
> office receives, below is a guide on how your email will be responded
> to:
>
> If you are a constituent of Calgary Nose Hill:
>
> Queries regarding government programs, policies and operations take
> time to research, contact appropriate departments and collate
> information for dissemination to you. If you have provided your full
> contact details on your query, your email will be responded to as
> necessary.
>
> If your query is case related (i.e. immigration, CPP, EI, tax issues,
> etc.), consent forms will need to be filled out before your file can
> be activated. If you have not yet filled out our office’s consent
> form, a staff member will be in contact with you.
>
> If you are not a constituent of Calgary Nose Hill:
>
> If you are not a Calgary Nose Hill resident, given the high volume of
> emails we receive, your email will be reviewed and filed as
> INFORMATION. If the email is Critic portfolio in nature, it will be
> responded to as necessary.
> If you are contacting MP Rempel Garner to review your case work,
> please first contact your local MP for assistance.
> If your email is a form letter:
>
> Thank you for submitting this form letter. Due to the high volume of
> emails M.P. Rempel Garner’s office receives, we are unable to
> individually reply to form letters, particularly from non
> constituents. Form letters are template letters generated by
> organizations, webforms and other sources on a given issue. However,
> M.P. Rempel Garner does review and consider information received from
> all form letters.
>
> If you are a constituent and would like a response regarding the
> specific issue raised in your form letter, please email M.P. Rempel
> Garner’s office individually at this email address with “Constituent -
> (Insert subject)” in the subject of your email. This helps us to
> identify constituents who wish to receive a response among the
> hundreds of form letter responses our office receives on any given
> day.
>
> Again, thank you for reaching out to our office.
>
> Invites:
> If you have invited MP Rempel Garner to your event, please note that
> decisions on what events to attend are completed on a bi-monthly
> basis. As our office receives hundreds of invitations each week, our
> office will only contact you if MP Rempel Garner will be attending.
> Updates on MP Rempel Garner’s Work:
> If you wish to know what is happening in Calgary Nose Hill and the job
> MP Rempel Garner is doing for you in Ottawa, please sign up for her
> e-newsletter on her website: https://mprempel.ca/
> *M.P. Rempel Garner's office has a zero tolerance policy for
> threatening, abusive, or aggressive language or behaviour towards the
> Member and their staff. Phone calls, voicemails and emails containing
> threatening or abusive language will result in the termination of
> communications.
>
> Thank you again.
>
> Sincerely,
> Office of The Honourable Michelle Rempel Garner, P.C., M.P.
> Calgary Nose Hill
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: "Kennedy, Aaron" <akennedy@quispamsis.ca>
> Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2022 13:20:55 +0000
> Subject: Automatic reply: The last thing Palango told Bonaparte was
> that he would not waste his time listening to Lisa Banfield on Friday
> No doubt a host of other snobby journalists will Correct Tristin Hopper?
> To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
>
> Thank you for your email.
> I am out of the office until Monday, and will respond at that time. If
> you require immediate assistance, please call 849-5778.
> - Aaron
>
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: Premier <PREMIER@novascotia.ca>
> Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2022 13:20:42 +0000
> Subject: Thank you for your email
> To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
>
> Thank you for your email to Premier Houston. This is an automatic
> confirmation your message has been received.
>
> As we are currently experiencing higher than normal volumes of
> correspondence, there may be delays in the response time for
> correspondence identified as requiring a response.
>
> If you are looking for the most up-to-date information from the
> Government of Nova Scotia please visit:
> http://novascotia.ca<https://
>
> Thank you,
>
> Premier’s Correspondence Team
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: Justice Minister <JUSTMIN@novascotia.ca>
> Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2022 13:20:44 +0000
> Subject: Automatic reply: The last thing Palango told Bonaparte was
> that he would not waste his time listening to Lisa Banfield on Friday
> No doubt a host of other snobby journalists will Correct Tristin Hopper?
> To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
>
> Thank you for your email to the Minister of Justice. Please be assured
> that it has been received by the Department. Your email will be
> reviewed and addressed accordingly. Thank you.
>
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: Tom Taggart <tom.taggartmla@gmail.com>
> Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2022 06:18:42 -0700
> Subject: Re: The last thing Palango told Bonaparte was that he would
> not waste his time listening to Lisa Banfield on Friday No doubt a
> host of other snobby journalists will Correct Tristin Hopper?
> To: david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
>
> Thank you for contacting us at the office of MLA Tom.Taggart. This
> email is being monitored by my Constituency Assistant Andrea. Johnson,
> who will get back to you as soon as possible. If your inquiry is
> urgent, please feel free to call the Constituency Office @
> 902-641-2335
>
> Our Office is located @ 10653 Hwy 2 Masstown, Nova Scotia, right next
> door to the Petro- Canada.
> Our Office hours are Monday- Friday 8:30am - 3:30pm or by appointment.
> We are closed on Holidays.
>
> --
> Tom Taggart, MLA
> Colchester North
> (O) - 902-641-2335
> tom.taggartmla@gmail.com
>
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
> Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2022 10:18:37 -0300
> Subject: Re: The last thing Palango told Bonaparte was that he would
> not waste his time listening to Lisa Banfield on Friday No doubt a
> host of other snobby journalists will Correct Tristin Hopper?
> To: THopper@postmedia.com, "jagmeet.singh" <jagmeet.singh@parl.gc.ca>,
> Candice.Bergen@parl.gc.ca, "pierre.poilievre"
> <pierre.poilievre@parl.gc.ca>, jennifer@halifaxexaminer.ca,
> paulpalango <paulpalango@protonmail.com>, Tom.Taggartmla@gmail.com,
> darren.campbell@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
> Bill.Blair@parl.gc.ca, bmassey@justice.gc.ca, "Amato, Mike #509"
> <509@yrp.ca>, brenda.lucki@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
> ethics-ethique@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, "blaine.higgs" <blaine.higgs@gnb.ca>,
> "Mark.Blakely" <Mark.Blakely@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, mcu <mcu@justice.gc.ca>,
> "Marco.Mendicino" <Marco.Mendicino@parl.gc.ca>, pm <pm@pm.gc.ca>,
> "Katie.Telford" <Katie.Telford@pmo-cpm.gc.ca>, "Michelle.Boutin"
> <Michelle.Boutin@rcmp-grc.gc.
> <michelle.rempel@parl.gc.ca>, kevin.leahy@pps-spp.parl.gc.ca
> Charles.Murray@gnb.ca, JUSTWEB <JUSTWEB@novascotia.ca>, Newsroom
> <Newsroom@globeandmail.com>, "Mike.Comeau" <Mike.Comeau@gnb.ca>,
> "Louis.Leger" <Louis.Leger@gnb.ca>, akennedy@quispamsis.ca,
> "elizabeth.mcmillan" <elizabeth.mcmillan@cbc.ca>, Justice Minister
> <JUSTMIN@novascotia.ca>, PREMIER@novascotia.ca, andrewjdouglas
> <andrewjdouglas@gmail.com>, smcculloch@pattersonlaw.ca,
> NightTimePodcast <NightTimePodcast@gmail.com>, tim
> <tim@halifaxexaminer.ca>, rpineo@pattersonlaw.ca, "jan.jensen"
> <jan.jensen@justice.gc.ca>, washington field
> <washington.field@ic.fbi.gov>, "Boston.Mail" <Boston.Mail@ic.fbi.gov>,
> briangallant10 <briangallant10@gmail.com>, sheilagunnreid
> <sheilagunnreid@gmail.com>, "stefanos.karatopis"
> <stefanos.karatopis@gmail.com>
> <sylvie.gadoury@radio-canada.
> Cc: motomaniac333 <motomaniac333@gmail.com>, oldmaison
> <oldmaison@yahoo.com>, andre <andre@jafaust.com>,
> "andrea.anderson-mason" <andrea.anderson-mason@gnb.ca>
> <Bill.Hogan@gnb.ca>
>
> https://www.nighttimepodcast.
>
> the Nova Scotia Mass Shooting - July 10 - 11, 2022 - Weekly updates
> and revelations (with Paul Palango)
>
> In this double episode I share my two recent conversations with Paul
> Palango. The first, recorded on July 10th, is our discussion
> surrounding the interview with Rob the carpenter. The second, recorded
> the next day, is an emergency update in which Paul and I discuss the
> bizarre lie the that Rob the Carpenter told… and what that means to
> the broader story.
>
> Episode Links:
>
> the Nova Scotia Mass Shooting Series:
> https://www.nighttimepodcast.
>
> Join the Nova Scotia Mass Casualty Discussion Group:
> https://www.facebook.com/
>
> Send a tip related to this case: https://www.nighttimepodcast.
>
>
> https://www.facebook.com/
>
> ·
> Dear Frank:
> I’m not a fan of your magazine; however, recently you have stepped out
> of the fray and produced some very good journalism. Your interview
> with Gabriel Wortman’s father being the most noteworthy. Some of your
> Portapique coverage is noteworthy. Frank has a place in society.
> However, your recent inclusion of Paul Palango is pointing you and our
> neighbours in a very dark place as a society. I can’t reveal my real
> identity due to my employment as I would be shunned by my colleagues
> in media. I am aware, based on verifiable information that the
> Canadian mainstream media has turned its back on Paul Palango, who was
> a onetime trusted news source and held respect.
> The tide began to shift several years ago when some of his views were
> not based on credible information, but conjecture and speculation or
> as the mainstream media believes, he is falling into some mental
> health crisis.
> Maclean’s leaned into Paul because he seemed to have information
> nobody else had, and produced sources within the Mounties. It’s just
> they were not credible, and had an axe to grind. Maclean’s verified
> this fact and they cut Paul loose after that infamous story from last
> June.
> And they told other media sources that he is treacherous.
> A colleague is working on a story about Lisa Banfield that has her and
> her lawyer working on a libel suit against Frank and Paul. My sources
> tell me the Mounties have nothing to suggest she is misaligned and
> very much is a victim. After the inquiry and the evidence comes out
> they will be positioned to be successful in showing Palango was
> libellous.
> I support what you do, I don’t agree with the style, but we are a free
> society. My only reason for stepping in is that you are printing what
> will be shown to be his false narrative based on untrustworthy sources
> and possibly mental illness.
> Ivana Smear,
> Via email
>
> Dear Ms. Smear:
> This may come as a surprise to you, but I’ve heard this all before.
> My position is very clear.
> Since the first reports of gunshots at Portapique Beach on April 18,
> 2020, the response by the RCMP has been stranger than strange.
> The Mounties arrived on scene in time to potentially trap the killer
> in the community and perhaps prevent at least the last five murders.
> Instead, Wortman got past them, had a rest in Debert, and then was
> allowed to roam around Nova Scotia, killing nine more people.
> Lisa Banfield says she hid in the woods for about eight hours on a
> blistering cold night. She went to Leon Joudrey’s house at 6:34 a.m.
> He has told many reporters and the police that he did not believe her
> story.
> The earliest reports claimed Banfield suffered severe injuries from a
> beating administered by Gabriel Wortman.
> Actually, the RCMP and the Crown blacked out the first description of
> those injuries. The word they blacked out was “minor,” which was
> consistent with what Joudrey said.
> You suggest that I am treacherous and not trusted by the mainstream
> media because of a story you highlighted in Maclean’s magazine from
> last June.
> For that story we obtained a copy of the RCMP’s undercover manual.
> Among other things described in that document are the procedures the
> force should use in a blown undercover operation.
> The actions of the RCMP before, during and after the weekend of April
> 18-19 largely conform to the procedures described. I’ve spent the past
> eight months trying to disprove that there was an undercover operation
> in Portapique — to no avail.
> The more I investigate the more it appears that someone in Wortman’s
> circle appeared to have a special relationship with the authorities —
> be they the RCMP, Halifax Police or even CSIS. Nothing is conclusive,
> but that doesn’t mean you just give up because it’s too difficult.
> That isn’t in my DNA.
> My role as a journalist is to act as a disinterested investigator
> whose duty it is to uncover the truth and show no fear or favouritism
> to anyone. Like a pathologist, I am a friend of the dead. As Joseph
> Pulitizer once put it: “Newspapers should have no friends.”
> I am not here to be liked. I am not in it for the money, although some
> uninformed critics have wrongly accused me of being so. I am here to
> be the agent of the story and to do what it dictates that I must do.
> As for Ms. Banfield, I believe it is in the public interest that her
> story be fully examined because she was apparently the last person to
> see Wortman before he went on his rampage.
> You say Maclean’s dropped me because I was unreliable.
> I can assure you that is not what happened.
> I withdrew my story and chose to run it in Frank, as written.
> That same story generated a number of leads which lead to the
> discovery of the Pictou County analog recordings from the weekend in
> question.
> Stories about what was on those tapes brought even more stories and leads.
> That’s what good journalists do.
> As for my mental health, some people think I’m crazy for doing what
> I’m doing. I have a nice, comfortable life. I took this on to help
> other journalists, but when I found their work wanting, I got more and
> more involved. That being the case, maybe I do have a mental health
> issue. I admit that I can be a pain in the ass, but I always strive to
> do the right thing.
> The funny thing about my mental health is that the one agency slyly
> pushing that narrative has been the RCMP.
> “Look at the source,” referring to me, when another reporter tried
> following up one of my stories.
> “Another fairy tale,” Supt. Darren Campbell put it to the CBC’s
> Elizabeth McMillan when commenting on another story. I stand by my
> work in the past and now. Don’t you find it disturbing that the RCMP
> is willing to invest in character assassination rather than address
> the very real issues raised about his dysfunctional organization?
> That’s not a good thing in a supposed democracy.
> If you still insist on pushing the mental health angle, perhaps we can
> both submit to a Rorschach test to determine who sees the crazier
> stuff in the inkblots.
> You also state that Banfield and her lawyer, James Lockyer, are
> planning to sue me sometime down the road.
> I know Mr. Lockyer from my days in Toronto. He lived on the next block
> when he was defending Rubin (Hurricane) Carter, who strolled by my
> house on his regular walks. Lockyer is a good lawyer and always has
> been. He’s got to do what he thinks is best for his client.
> If Banfield is truly planning to head down that road, I would give her
> and Lockyer the following advice.
> This is not my first rodeo. As a corporate journalist and as an
> individual over the course of my career, I’ve been involved in about
> 18 major lawsuits (mostly on behalf of reporters who worked for me)
> and occasionally as a plaintiff. I’m 16 and 0 with a couple of draws.
> My last case should be seen as instructive.
> In the mid-1990s, a group of individuals hiding behind a $3-billion
> corporation listed on the New York Stock Exchange sued me for
> $11-million to stop me from asking questions about them. It didn’t
> stop me. They went up to $20 million. It still didn’t stop me. They
> tried to hire hit man Ken Murdock to kill me. Murdock turned down the
> job because he didn’t think it was right to kill a civilian.
> How do I know? I met him. I spent four days in the maximum-security
> Kingston Penitentiary interviewing him.
> I didn’t counter-sue the company. Instead, I launched an entirely
> different suit against it, its executives and lawyers. I called their
> lawsuit “public relations.” It ended up being an almost 10-year fight.
> The company went bankrupt, but the individuals didn’t. I ended up
> getting a nice house of it.
> The bottom line is this. I am prepared to take the slings and many
> arrows that are fired back at me as a result of what I write.
> But attacking the messenger is what the desperate and corrupt have
> always done. It’s as old as the Old Testament. Look up Malachi.
> The Greek philosopher Sophocles put it this way: “No one loves the
> messenger who brings bad news.”
> And here’s my take on it all: If you don’t like what I’m reporting and
> writing, get off your butt, suck up some courage, do some of your own
> investigating and either confirm what I’m reporting or prove me wrong.
> You’d be doing everyone a favour — including yourself.
> Paul Palango,
> Chester
>
> Attacking the messenger...
> https://www.frankmagazine.ca/
> Comments
> Nicholas Langille
> Give it to em Paul.
> If the rcmp had answers that could be strung together coherently maybe
> I could trust what they say. But that hasn't happened .… See more
>
> Reply
> 1y
>
> Jim Barkhouse
> Thank you Paul for your in depth coverage of this tragedy, your
> pursuit of the truth will set the facts straight and will be
> appreciated by all.
>
> Reply
> 1y
>
> Donna Marie Jessome
> Wtg Mr. Palango, Keep doing You!
> You and LGC are basically all we really have in this Massacre ,who are
> trying your darntest to bring the truth forward and for that I Thank
> You.
>
> Reply
> 1y
>
> Kelly Smales
> This is awesome Paul. We need more courageous journalists like you!
>
> Reply
> 1y
>
> Christine Elliott
> Excellent response Paul. as is your work. You’ve been tireless with
> the Portipique story and your past work about the RCMP is so valuable.
>
> Reply
> 1y
>
> Paula Jarrett
> Excellent work - keep going. People impacted by this horror deserve
> nothing less. We all deserve nothing less.
>
> Reply
> 1y
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Justice Minister <JUSTMIN@novascotia.ca>
> Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2022 07:24:06 +0000
> Subject: Automatic reply: The last thing Palango told Bonaparte was
> that he would not waste his time listening to Lisa Banfield on Friday
> No doubt a host of other snobby journalists will Correct Tristin Hopper?
> To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
>
> Thank you for your email to the Minister of Justice. Please be assured
> that it has been received by the Department. Your email will be
> reviewed and addressed accordingly. Thank you.
>
>
>
> On 7/15/22, David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
>> However the former Attorney General refused to look on the internet to
>> verify what I said was true. So I gave up on his bullshit and told him
>> to answer me in writing because I could easily the lawyer got the
>> damned email. Lockyer just refused to admit it tis all.
>>
>> Go Figure Why I brought this up today
>>
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?
>>
>> MCC- DAY 50 - LISA BANFIELD... AND HANDLERS
>> 229 watching now
>> Started streaming 2 hours ago
>> 82
>> Dislike
>> Share
>> Clip
>> Save
>> Little Grey Cells
>> 3.42K subscribers
>>
>> ---------- Original message ----------
>> From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
>> Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2019 10:53:43 -0400
>> Subject: Hey There Jeska Grue.and James Lockyer RE Federal Court File
>> No T-1557-15 I just called both of you about our common concerns about
>> war
>> To: heythere@jeskagrue.ca, megan.mitton@gnb.ca,
>> dominic.leblanc.c1@parl.gc.ca, james.lockyer@umoncton.ca,
>> ernie.steeves@gnb.ca, Ginette.PetitpasTaylor@parl.
>> Cc: motomaniac333@gmail.com, Tori.Weldon@cbc.ca,
>> Seamus.ORegan@parl.gc.ca, greg.thompson2@gnb.ca,
>> Newsroom@globeandmail.com, news@kingscorecord.com,
>> news@dailygleaner.com, Marc.Leger@gnb.ca, lou.lafleur@fredericton.ca,
>> infoam@fredericton.cbc.ca, briangallant10@gmail.com,
>> serge.rousselle@gnb.ca, MRichard@lawsociety-barreau.
>> steve.murphy@ctv.ca, David.Akin@globalnews.ca, charles.murray@gnb.ca,
>> oldmaison@yahoo.com, greg.byrne@gnb.ca
>>
>> I tried to explain now go figure things out for yourselves
>>
>> https://www.cbc.ca/news/
>>
>> Controversial armoured vehicle to be set up in Sackville Memorial
>> Park, upsets residents
>>
>> While residents agree veterans deserve to be commemorated, some worry
>> the armoured vehicle glorifies war
>> Tori Weldon · CBC News · Posted: Jun 18, 2019 7:08 AM AT
>>
>> "Jeska Grue, whose backyard backs onto the park, said what's already
>> there is plenty.
>>
>> "I don't feel that it's the best way for a memorial park [to]
>> commemorate veterans and those affected by war."
>>
>> Grue said an armoured vehicle could be an upsetting symbol for people
>> who have first-hand experience with war.
>>
>> Her grandfather served in the Second World War, where he worked as a
>> tank mechanic.
>>
>> "He did suffer from [post-traumatic stress disorder] and alcoholism
>> for the rest of his life," she said. "To me, that's the memory that it
>> draws."
>>
>> Grue said refugees starting a new life in Sackville may also be
>> troubled by the armoured vehicle sitting in the middle of town.
>>
>> But Jim Lockyer, honorary colonel of the 8th Canadian Hussars, said
>> the Cougar should act as a way to commemorate previous battles.
>>
>> "This is not glorifying war, if anything it's a memento to discourage
>> it."
>>
>> He's toured fields in Italy where soldiers belonging to the 8th
>> Canadian Hussars lost their lives fighting during the Second World
>> War.
>>
>> "There are young men, 18 to 25 years old, one of whom was Stedman
>> Henderson from Moncton, who again did not come home and they're still
>> there," he said.
>>
>> "So it's a testimonial to their contribution."
>>
>>
>> 90 Comments
>>
>>
>> David Amos
>> Methinks anyone can Google "Fundy Royal Debate" then go to the 28
>> minute mark and listen closely N'esy Pas?
>>
>> John Smith
>> Reply to @David Amos: david do you always ref your public speaking
>> engagements because your not permitted to think and speak of them out
>> loud in a public square maybe try a jesters hat traditionally they
>> were permitted to criticize the king and aristocrats
>>
>> David Amos
>> Reply to @john smith: Methinks you should finally read my lawsuit
>> (Federal Court File No T- 1557-15)Paragraph 83 would be a could place
>> t start with regards to this issue N'esy Pas?
>>
>> https://twitter.com/jeskagrue
>>
>> https://jeskagrue.ca/info
>>
>> CONTACT/LOCATION
>>
>> heythere@jeskagrue.ca
>>
>> 902-880-4783
>>
>> JG lives very close to the Waterfowl Park.
>>
>> James E. Lockyer, Q.C.
>> Université de Moncton
>> Professeur:
>> Faculté de droit
>> Edifice A.J. Cormier
>> Moncton, New Brunswick E1A 3E9
>> Phone: 506-863-2134
>> Fax: 506-858-4534
>> Email: james.lockyer@umoncton.ca
>>
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: "Murray, Charles (Ombud)" <Charles.Murray@gnb.ca>
>> Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2019 18:16:15 +0000
>> Subject: You wished to speak with me
>> To: "motomaniac333@gmail.com" <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>>
>> I have the advantage, sir, of having read many of your emails over the
>> years.
>>
>>
>> As such, I do not think a phone conversation between us, and
>> specifically one which you might mistakenly assume was in response to
>> your threat of legal action against me, is likely to prove a
>> productive use of either of our time.
>>
>>
>> If there is some specific matter about which you wish to communicate
>> with me, feel free to email me with the full details and it will be
>> given due consideration.
>>
>>
>> Sincerely,
>>
>>
>> Charles Murray
>>
>> Ombud NB
>>
>> Acting Integrity Commissioner
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2007 10:48:58 -0400 (EDT)
>>>>> From: "David Raymond Amos" davidramos333@yahoo.ca
>>>>> Subject: I already know that you are as crooked as Hell Mr Leger. I am
>>>>> fishing for an honest cop not another corrupt bureaucrat. i am just
>>>>> proving that you know the truth Get it?
>>>>> To: Marc.Leger@gnb.ca
>>>>> CC: Day.S@parl.gc.ca, John.Foran@gnb.ca, pat.bonner@saintjohn.ca,
>>>>> lou.lafleur@fredericton.ca, infoam@fredericton.cbc.ca,
>>>>> infomorning@moncton.cbc.ca, infomorning@halifax.cbc.ca,
>>>>> webo@xplornet.com, Stephane.vaillancourt@rcmp-
>>>>> alltrue@nl.rogers.com, samperrier@hotmail.com, oldmaison@yahoo.com,
>>>>> Scott.A@parl.gc.ca, amerrino@gmail.com, deanr0032@hotmail.com,
>>>>> wickedwanda3@adelphia.net, rfowlo@comcast.net, Harper.S@parl.gc.ca,
>>>>> bmulroney@ogilvyrenault.com, pcollin@cpa-acp.ca, Dion.S@parl.gc.ca,
>>>>> Dryden.K@parl.gc.ca, Layton.J@parl.gc.ca, Duceppe.G@parl.gc.ca,
>>>>> Casey.B@parl.gc.ca, leader@greenparty.ca
>>>>>
>>>>> Subject: Mr. Amos
>>>>> Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2007 11:41:22 -0300
>>>>> From: "Leger, Marc (DPS/MSP)" Marc.Leger@gnb.ca
>>>>> To: "David Raymond Amos" davidramos333@yahoo.ca
>>>>> David Amos,
>>>>>
>>>>> I am not able to address your concerns.
>>>>>
>>>>> Your calls and emails are not welcome and I would like you to stop
>>>>> communicating with me by phone and email
>>>>>
>>>>> Marc Léger
>>>>> Deputy Minister / Sous-ministre
>>>>> Public Safety / Sécurité publique
>>>>> (506) 453-7412 marc.leger@gnb.ca
>>>>> Working together to build a safer New Brunswick / Travaillons ensemble
>>>>> pour bâtir un Nouveau-Brunswick plus sûr
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>> From: Brian Gallant <briangallant10@gmail.com>
>>>> Date: Tue, 29 May 2018 06:01:57 -0700
>>>> Subject: Merci / Thank you Re: Fwd: I just called Alan Roy again about
>>>> my right to health care, my missing 1965 Harley, the Yankee Wiretaps
>>>> tapes in its saddlebag and Federal Court and his assistant played dumb
>>>> as usual
>>>> To: motomaniac333@gmail.com
>>>>
>>>> (Français à suivre)
>>>>
>>>> If your email is pertaining to the Government of New Brunswick, please
>>>> email me at brian.gallant@gnb.ca
>>>>
>>>> If your matter is urgent, please email Greg Byrne at greg.byrne@gnb.ca
>>>>
>>>> Thank you.
>>>>
>>>> Si votre courriel s'addresse au Gouvernement du Nouveau-Brunswick,
>>>> svp m'envoyez un courriel à brian.gallant@gnb.ca
>>>>
>>>> Pour les urgences, veuillez contacter Greg Byrne à greg.byrne@gnb.ca
>>>>
>>>> Merci.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>> From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>>>> Date: Tue, 29 May 2018 10:42:09 -0400
>>>> Subject: Attn Marc Richard and John McNair I just called AGAIN Say hey
>>>> to my Brother in Law W. S. Reid CHEDORE and his brother of the law
>>>> David Lutz QC for me will ya?
>>>> To: MRichard@lawsociety-barreau.
>>>> "serge.rousselle" <serge.rousselle@gnb.ca>, Erin.Hardy@snb.ca,
>>>> David.Eidt@gnb.ca
>>>> Cc: David Amos <david.raymond.amos@gmail.com>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>>> From: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com
>>>>> Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2017 09:32:09 -0400
>>>>> Subject: Attn Integrity Commissioner Alexandre Deschênes, Q.C.,
>>>>> To: coi@gnb.ca
>>>>> Cc: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com
>>>>>
>>>>> Good Day Sir
>>>>>
>>>>> After I heard you speak on CBC I called your office again and managed
>>>>> to speak to one of your staff for the first time
>>>>>
>>>>> Please find attached the documents I promised to send to the lady who
>>>>> answered the phone this morning. Please notice that not after the Sgt
>>>>> at Arms took the documents destined to your office his pal Tanker
>>>>> Malley barred me in writing with an "English" only document.
>>>>>
>>>>> These are the hearings and the dockets in Federal Court that I
>>>>> suggested that you study closely.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is the docket in Federal Court
>>>>>
>>>>> http://cas-cdc-www02.cas-satj.
>>>>>
>>>>> These are digital recordings of the last three hearings
>>>>>
>>>>> Dec 14th https://archive.org/details/
>>>>>
>>>>> January 11th, 2016 https://archive.org/details/
>>>>>
>>>>> April 3rd, 2017
>>>>>
>>>>> https://archive.org/details/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> This is the docket in the Federal Court of Appeal
>>>>>
>>>>> http://cas-cdc-www02.cas-satj.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The only hearing thus far
>>>>>
>>>>> May 24th, 2017
>>>>>
>>>>> https://archive.org/details/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> This Judge understnds the meaning of the word Integrity
>>>>>
>>>>> Date: 20151223
>>>>>
>>>>> Docket: T-1557-15
>>>>>
>>>>> Fredericton, New Brunswick, December 23, 2015
>>>>>
>>>>> PRESENT: The Honourable Mr. Justice Bell
>>>>>
>>>>> BETWEEN:
>>>>>
>>>>> DAVID RAYMOND AMOS
>>>>>
>>>>> Plaintiff
>>>>>
>>>>> and
>>>>>
>>>>> HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
>>>>>
>>>>> Defendant
>>>>>
>>>>> ORDER
>>>>>
>>>>> (Delivered orally from the Bench in Fredericton, New Brunswick, on
>>>>> December 14, 2015)
>>>>>
>>>>> The Plaintiff seeks an appeal de novo, by way of motion pursuant to
>>>>> the Federal Courts Rules (SOR/98-106), from an Order made on November
>>>>> 12, 2015, in which Prothonotary Morneau struck the Statement of Claim
>>>>> in its entirety.
>>>>>
>>>>> At the outset of the hearing, the Plaintiff brought to my attention a
>>>>> letter dated September 10, 2004, which he sent to me, in my then
>>>>> capacity as Past President of the New Brunswick Branch of the Canadian
>>>>> Bar Association, and the then President of the Branch, Kathleen Quigg,
>>>>> (now a Justice of the New Brunswick Court of Appeal). In that letter
>>>>> he stated:
>>>>>
>>>>> As for your past President, Mr. Bell, may I suggest that you check the
>>>>> work of Frank McKenna before I sue your entire law firm including you.
>>>>> You are your brother’s keeper.
>>>>>
>>>>> Frank McKenna is the former Premier of New Brunswick and a former
>>>>> colleague of mine at the law firm of McInnes Cooper. In addition to
>>>>> expressing an intention to sue me, the Plaintiff refers to a number of
>>>>> people in his Motion Record who he appears to contend may be witnesses
>>>>> or potential parties to be added. Those individuals who are known to
>>>>> me personally, include, but are not limited to the former Prime
>>>>> Minister of Canada, The Right Honourable Stephen Harper; former
>>>>> Attorney General of Canada and now a Justice of the Manitoba Court of
>>>>> Queen’s Bench, Vic Toews; former member of Parliament Rob Moore;
>>>>> former Director of Policing Services, the late Grant Garneau; former
>>>>> Chief of the Fredericton Police Force, Barry McKnight; former Staff
>>>>> Sergeant Danny Copp; my former colleagues on the New Brunswick Court
>>>>> of Appeal, Justices Bradley V. Green and Kathleen Quigg, and, retired
>>>>> Assistant Commissioner Wayne Lang of the Royal Canadian Mounted
>>>>> Police.
>>>>>
>>>>> In the circumstances, given the threat in 2004 to sue me in my
>>>>> personal capacity and my past and present relationship with many
>>>>> potential witnesses and/or potential parties to the litigation, I am
>>>>> of the view there would be a reasonable apprehension of bias should I
>>>>> hear this motion. See Justice de Grandpré’s dissenting judgment in
>>>>> Committee for Justice and Liberty et al v National Energy Board et al,
>>>>> [1978] 1 SCR 369 at p 394 for the applicable test regarding
>>>>> allegations of bias. In the circumstances, although neither party has
>>>>> requested I recuse myself, I consider it appropriate that I do so.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> AS A RESULT OF MY RECUSAL, THIS COURT ORDERS that the Administrator of
>>>>> the Court schedule another date for the hearing of the motion. There
>>>>> is no order as to costs.
>>>>>
>>>>> “B. Richard Bell”
>>>>> Judge
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Below after the CBC article about your concerns (I made one comment
>>>>> already) you will find the text of just two of many emails I had sent
>>>>> to your office over the years since I first visited it in 2006.
>>>>>
>>>>> I noticed that on July 30, 2009, he was appointed to the the Court
>>>>> Martial Appeal Court of Canada Perhaps you should scroll to the
>>>>> bottom of this email ASAP and read the entire Paragraph 83 of my
>>>>> lawsuit now before the Federal Court of Canada?
>>>>>
>>>>> "FYI This is the text of the lawsuit that should interest Trudeau the
>>>>> most
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ---------- Original message ----------
>>>>> From: justin.trudeau.a1@parl.gc.ca
>>>>> Date: Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 8:18 PM
>>>>> Subject: Réponse automatique : RE My complaint against the CROWN in
>>>>> Federal Court Attn David Hansen and Peter MacKay If you planning to
>>>>> submit a motion for a publication ban on my complaint trust that you
>>>>> dudes are way past too late
>>>>> To: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com
>>>>>
>>>>> Veuillez noter que j'ai changé de courriel. Vous pouvez me rejoindre à
>>>>> lalanthier@hotmail.com
>>>>>
>>>>> Pour rejoindre le bureau de M. Trudeau veuillez envoyer un courriel à
>>>>> tommy.desfosses@parl.gc.ca
>>>>>
>>>>> Please note that I changed email address, you can reach me at
>>>>> lalanthier@hotmail.com
>>>>>
>>>>> To reach the office of Mr. Trudeau please send an email to
>>>>> tommy.desfosses@parl.gc.ca
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you,
>>>>>
>>>>> Merci ,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> http://davidraymondamos3.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 83. The Plaintiff states that now that Canada is involved in more war
>>>>> in Iraq again it did not serve Canadian interests and reputation to
>>>>> allow Barry Winters to publish the following words three times over
>>>>> five years after he began his bragging:
>>>>>
>>>>> January 13, 2015
>>>>> This Is Just AS Relevant Now As When I wrote It During The Debate
>>>>>
>>>>> December 8, 2014
>>>>> Why Canada Stood Tall!
>>>>>
>>>>> Friday, October 3, 2014
>>>>> Little David Amos’ “True History Of War” Canadian Airstrikes And
>>>>> Stupid Justin Trudeau
>>>>>
>>>>> Canada’s and Canadians free ride is over. Canada can no longer hide
>>>>> behind Amerka’s and NATO’s skirts.
>>>>>
>>>>> When I was still in Canadian Forces then Prime Minister Jean Chretien
>>>>> actually committed the Canadian Army to deploy in the second campaign
>>>>> in Iraq, the Coalition of the Willing. This was against or contrary to
>>>>> the wisdom or advice of those of us Canadian officers that were
>>>>> involved in the initial planning phases of that operation. There were
>>>>> significant concern in our planning cell, and NDHQ about of the dearth
>>>>> of concern for operational guidance, direction, and forces for
>>>>> operations after the initial occupation of Iraq. At the “last minute”
>>>>> Prime Minister Chretien and the Liberal government changed its mind.
>>>>> The Canadian government told our amerkan cousins that we would not
>>>>> deploy combat troops for the Iraq campaign, but would deploy a
>>>>> Canadian Battle Group to Afghanistan, enabling our amerkan cousins to
>>>>> redeploy troops from there to Iraq. The PMO’s thinking that it was
>>>>> less costly to deploy Canadian Forces to Afghanistan than Iraq. But
>>>>> alas no one seems to remind the Liberals of Prime Minister Chretien’s
>>>>> then grossly incorrect assumption. Notwithstanding Jean Chretien’s
>>>>> incompetence and stupidity, the Canadian Army was heroic,
>>>>> professional, punched well above it’s weight, and the PPCLI Battle
>>>>> Group, is credited with “saving Afghanistan” during the Panjway
>>>>> campaign of 2006.
>>>>>
>>>>> What Justin Trudeau and the Liberals don’t tell you now, is that then
>>>>> Liberal Prime Minister Jean Chretien committed, and deployed the
>>>>> Canadian army to Canada’s longest “war” without the advice, consent,
>>>>> support, or vote of the Canadian Parliament.
>>>>>
>>>>> What David Amos and the rest of the ignorant, uneducated, and babbling
>>>>> chattering classes are too addled to understand is the deployment of
>>>>> less than 75 special operations troops, and what is known by planners
>>>>> as a “six pac cell” of fighter aircraft is NOT the same as a
>>>>> deployment of a Battle Group, nor a “war” make.
>>>>>
>>>>> The Canadian Government or The Crown unlike our amerkan cousins have
>>>>> the “constitutional authority” to commit the Canadian nation to war.
>>>>> That has been recently clearly articulated to the Canadian public by
>>>>> constitutional scholar Phillippe Legasse. What Parliament can do is
>>>>> remove “confidence” in The Crown’s Government in a “vote of
>>>>> non-confidence.” That could not happen to the Chretien Government
>>>>> regarding deployment to Afghanistan, and it won’t happen in this
>>>>> instance with the conservative majority in The Commons regarding a
>>>>> limited Canadian deployment to the Middle East.
>>>>>
>>>>> President George Bush was quite correct after 911 and the terror
>>>>> attacks in New York; that the Taliban “occupied” and “failed state”
>>>>> Afghanistan was the source of logistical support, command and control,
>>>>> and training for the Al Quaeda war of terror against the world. The
>>>>> initial defeat, and removal from control of Afghanistan was vital and
>>>>>
>>>>> P.S. Whereas this CBC article is about your opinion of the actions of
>>>>> the latest Minister Of Health trust that Mr Boudreau and the CBC have
>>>>> had my files for many years and the last thing they are is ethical.
>>>>> Ask his friends Mr Murphy and the RCMP if you don't believe me.
>>>>>
>>>>> Subject:
>>>>> Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 12:02:35 -0400
>>>>> From: "Murphy, Michael B. \(DH/MS\)" MichaelB.Murphy@gnb.ca
>>>>> To: motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com
>>>>>
>>>>> January 30, 2007
>>>>>
>>>>> WITHOUT PREJUDICE
>>>>>
>>>>> Mr. David Amos
>>>>>
>>>>> Dear Mr. Amos:
>>>>>
>>>>> This will acknowledge receipt of a copy of your e-mail of December 29,
>>>>> 2006 to Corporal Warren McBeath of the RCMP.
>>>>>
>>>>> Because of the nature of the allegations made in your message, I have
>>>>> taken the measure of forwarding a copy to Assistant Commissioner Steve
>>>>> Graham of the RCMP “J” Division in Fredericton.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sincerely,
>>>>>
>>>>> Honourable Michael B. Murphy
>>>>> Minister of Health
>>>>>
>>>>> CM/cb
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Warren McBeath warren.mcbeath@rcmp-grc.gc.ca wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2006 17:34:53 -0500
>>>>> From: "Warren McBeath" warren.mcbeath@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
>>>>> To: kilgoursite@ca.inter.net, MichaelB.Murphy@gnb.ca,
>>>>> nada.sarkis@gnb.ca, wally.stiles@gnb.ca, dwatch@web.net,
>>>>> motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com
>>>>> CC: ottawa@chuckstrahl.com, riding@chuckstrahl.com,John.
>>>>> Oda.B@parl.gc.ca,"Bev BUSSON" bev.busson@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
>>>>> "Paul Dube" PAUL.DUBE@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
>>>>> Subject: Re: Remember me Kilgour? Landslide Annie McLellan has
>>>>> forgotten me but the crooks within the RCMP have not
>>>>>
>>>>> Dear Mr. Amos,
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you for your follow up e-mail to me today. I was on days off
>>>>> over the holidays and returned to work this evening. Rest assured I
>>>>> was not ignoring or procrastinating to respond to your concerns.
>>>>>
>>>>> As your attachment sent today refers from Premier Graham, our position
>>>>> is clear on your dead calf issue: Our forensic labs do not process
>>>>> testing on animals in cases such as yours, they are referred to the
>>>>> Atlantic Veterinary College in Charlottetown who can provide these
>>>>> services. If you do not choose to utilize their expertise in this
>>>>> instance, then that is your decision and nothing more can be done.
>>>>>
>>>>> As for your other concerns regarding the US Government, false
>>>>> imprisonment and Federal Court Dates in the US, etc... it is clear
>>>>> that Federal authorities are aware of your concerns both in Canada
>>>>> the US. These issues do not fall into the purvue of Detachment
>>>>> and policing in Petitcodiac, NB.
>>>>>
>>>>> It was indeed an interesting and informative conversation we had on
>>>>> December 23rd, and I wish you well in all of your future endeavors.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sincerely,
>>>>>
>>>>> Warren McBeath, Cpl.
>>>>> GRC Caledonia RCMP
>>>>> Traffic Services NCO
>>>>> Ph: (506) 387-2222
>>>>> Fax: (506) 387-4622
>>>>> E-mail warren.mcbeath@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Alexandre Deschênes, Q.C.,
>>>>> Office of the Integrity Commissioner
>>>>> Edgecombe House, 736 King Street
>>>>> Fredericton, N.B. CANADA E3B 5H1
>>>>> tel.: 506-457-7890
>>>>> fax: 506-444-5224
>>>>> e-mail:coi@gnb.ca
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>> From: Justice Website <JUSTWEB@novascotia.ca>
>>>> Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2017 14:21:11 +0000
>>>> Subject: Emails to Department of Justice and Province of Nova Scotia
>>>> To: "motomaniac333@gmail.com" <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>>>>
>>>> Mr. Amos,
>>>> We acknowledge receipt of your recent emails to the Deputy Minister of
>>>> Justice and lawyers within the Legal Services Division of the
>>>> Department of Justice respecting a possible claim against the Province
>>>> of Nova Scotia. Service of any documents respecting a legal claim
>>>> against the Province of Nova Scotia may be served on the Attorney
>>>> General at 1690 Hollis Street, Halifax, NS. Please note that we will
>>>> not be responding to further emails on this matter.
>>>>
>>>> Department of Justice
>>>>
>>>> On 8/3/17, David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> If want something very serious to download and laugh at as well Please
>>>>> Enjoy and share real wiretap tapes of the mob
>>>>>
>>>>> http://thedavidamosrant.
>>>>> ilian.html
>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As the CBC etc yap about Yankee wiretaps and whistleblowers I must
>>>>>> ask them the obvious question AIN'T THEY FORGETTING SOMETHING????
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What the hell does the media think my Yankee lawyer served upon the
>>>>>> USDOJ right after I ran for and seat in the 39th Parliament baseball
>>>>>> cards?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://archive.org/details/
>>>>>> 6
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://davidamos.blogspot.ca/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.archive.org/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://archive.org/details/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> FEDERAL EXPRES February 7, 2006
>>>>>> Senator Arlen Specter
>>>>>> United States Senate
>>>>>> Committee on the Judiciary
>>>>>> 224 Dirksen Senate Office Building
>>>>>> Washington, DC 20510
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Dear Mr. Specter:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have been asked to forward the enclosed tapes to you from a man
>>>>>> named, David Amos, a Canadian citizen, in connection with the matters
>>>>>> raised in the attached letter.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Mr. Amos has represented to me that these are illegal FBI wire tap
>>>>>> tapes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I believe Mr. Amos has been in contact with you about this
>>>>>> previously.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Very truly yours,
>>>>>> Barry A. Bachrach
>>>>>> Direct telephone: (508) 926-3403
>>>>>> Direct facsimile: (508) 929-3003
>>>>>> Email: bbachrach@bowditch.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://davidraymondamos3.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Sunday, 19 November 2017
>>>> Federal Court of Appeal Finally Makes The BIG Decision And Publishes
>>>> It Now The Crooks Cannot Take Back Ticket To Try Put My Matter Before
>>>> The Supreme Court
>>>>
>>>> https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Federal Court of Appeal Decisions
>>>>
>>>> Amos v. Canada
>>>> Court (s) Database
>>>>
>>>> Federal Court of Appeal Decisions
>>>> Date
>>>>
>>>> 2017-10-30
>>>> Neutral citation
>>>>
>>>> 2017 FCA 213
>>>> File numbers
>>>>
>>>> A-48-16
>>>> Date: 20171030
>>>>
>>>> Docket: A-48-16
>>>> Citation: 2017 FCA 213
>>>> CORAM:
>>>>
>>>> WEBB J.A.
>>>> NEAR J.A.
>>>> GLEASON J.A.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> BETWEEN:
>>>> DAVID RAYMOND AMOS
>>>> Respondent on the cross-appeal
>>>> (and formally Appellant)
>>>> and
>>>> HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
>>>> Appellant on the cross-appeal
>>>> (and formerly Respondent)
>>>> Heard at Fredericton, New Brunswick, on May 24, 2017.
>>>> Judgment delivered at Ottawa, Ontario, on October 30, 2017.
>>>> REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY:
>>>>
>>>> THE COURT
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Date: 20171030
>>>>
>>>> Docket: A-48-16
>>>> Citation: 2017 FCA 213
>>>> CORAM:
>>>>
>>>> WEBB J.A.
>>>> NEAR J.A.
>>>> GLEASON J.A.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> BETWEEN:
>>>> DAVID RAYMOND AMOS
>>>> Respondent on the cross-appeal
>>>> (and formally Appellant)
>>>> and
>>>> HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
>>>> Appellant on the cross-appeal
>>>> (and formerly Respondent)
>>>> REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY THE COURT
>>>>
>>>> I. Introduction
>>>>
>>>> [1] On September 16, 2015, David Raymond Amos (Mr. Amos)
>>>> filed a 53-page Statement of Claim (the Claim) in Federal Court
>>>> against Her Majesty the Queen (the Crown). Mr. Amos claims $11 million
>>>> in damages and a public apology from the Prime Minister and Provincial
>>>> Premiers for being illegally barred from accessing parliamentary
>>>> properties and seeks a declaration from the Minister of Public Safety
>>>> that the Canadian Government will no longer allow the Royal Canadian
>>>> Mounted Police (RCMP) and Canadian Forces to harass him and his clan
>>>> (Claim at para. 96).
>>>>
>>>> [2] On November 12, 2015 (Docket T-1557-15), by way of a
>>>> motion brought by the Crown, a prothonotary of the Federal Court (the
>>>> Prothonotary) struck the Claim in its entirety, without leave to
>>>> amend, on the basis that it was plain and obvious that the Claim
>>>> disclosed no reasonable claim, the Claim was fundamentally vexatious,
>>>> and the Claim could not be salvaged by way of further amendment (the
>>>> Prothontary’s Order).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [3] On January 25, 2016 (2016 FC 93), by way of Mr.
>>>> Amos’ appeal from the Prothonotary’s Order, a judge of the Federal
>>>> Court (the Judge), reviewing the matter de novo, struck all of Mr.
>>>> Amos’ claims for relief with the exception of the claim for damages
>>>> for being barred by the RCMP from the New Brunswick legislature in
>>>> 2004 (the Federal Court Judgment).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [4] Mr. Amos appealed and the Crown cross-appealed the
>>>> Federal Court Judgment. Further to the issuance of a Notice of Status
>>>> Review, Mr. Amos’ appeal was dismissed for delay on December 19, 2016.
>>>> As such, the only matter before this Court is the Crown’s
>>>> cross-appeal.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> II. Preliminary Matter
>>>>
>>>> [5] Mr. Amos, in his memorandum of fact and law in
>>>> relation to the cross-appeal that was filed with this Court on March
>>>> 6, 2017, indicated that several judges of this Court, including two of
>>>> the judges of this panel, had a conflict of interest in this appeal.
>>>> This was the first time that he identified the judges whom he believed
>>>> had a conflict of interest in a document that was filed with this
>>>> Court. In his notice of appeal he had alluded to a conflict with
>>>> several judges but did not name those judges.
>>>>
>>>> [6] Mr. Amos was of the view that he did not have to
>>>> identify the judges in any document filed with this Court because he
>>>> had identified the judges in various documents that had been filed
>>>> with the Federal Court. In his view the Federal Court and the Federal
>>>> Court of Appeal are the same court and therefore any document filed in
>>>> the Federal Court would be filed in this Court. This view is based on
>>>> subsections 5(4) and 5.1(4) of the Federal Courts Act, R.S.C., 1985,
>>>> c. F-7:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 5(4) Every judge of the Federal Court is, by virtue of his or her
>>>> office, a judge of the Federal Court of Appeal and has all the
>>>> jurisdiction, power and authority of a judge of the Federal Court of
>>>> Appeal.
>>>> […]
>>>>
>>>> 5(4) Les juges de la Cour fédérale sont d’office juges de la Cour
>>>> d’appel fédérale et ont la même compétence et les mêmes pouvoirs que
>>>> les juges de la Cour d’appel fédérale.
>>>> […]
>>>> 5.1(4) Every judge of the Federal Court of Appeal is, by virtue of
>>>> that office, a judge of the Federal Court and has all the
>>>> jurisdiction, power and authority of a judge of the Federal Court.
>>>>
>>>> 5.1(4) Les juges de la Cour d’appel fédérale sont d’office juges de la
>>>> Cour fédérale et ont la même compétence et les mêmes pouvoirs que les
>>>> juges de la Cour fédérale.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [7] However, these subsections only provide that the
>>>> judges of the Federal Court are also judges of this Court (and vice
>>>> versa). It does not mean that there is only one court. If the Federal
>>>> Court and this Court were one Court, there would be no need for this
>>>> section.
>>>> [8] Sections 3 and 4 of the Federal Courts Act provide
>>>> that:
>>>> 3 The division of the Federal Court of Canada called the Federal Court
>>>> — Appeal Division is continued under the name “Federal Court of
>>>> Appeal” in English and “Cour d’appel fédérale” in French. It is
>>>> continued as an additional court of law, equity and admiralty in and
>>>> for Canada, for the better administration of the laws of Canada and as
>>>> a superior court of record having civil and criminal jurisdiction.
>>>>
>>>> 3 La Section d’appel, aussi appelée la Cour d’appel ou la Cour d’appel
>>>> fédérale, est maintenue et dénommée « Cour d’appel fédérale » en
>>>> français et « Federal Court of Appeal » en anglais. Elle est maintenue
>>>> à titre de tribunal additionnel de droit, d’equity et d’amirauté du
>>>> Canada, propre à améliorer l’application du droit canadien, et
>>>> continue d’être une cour supérieure d’archives ayant compétence en
>>>> matière civile et pénale.
>>>> 4 The division of the Federal Court of Canada called the Federal Court
>>>> — Trial Division is continued under the name “Federal Court” in
>>>> English and “Cour fédérale” in French. It is continued as an
>>>> additional court of law, equity and admiralty in and for Canada, for
>>>> the better administration of the laws of Canada and as a superior
>>>> court of record having civil and criminal jurisdiction.
>>>>
>>>> 4 La section de la Cour fédérale du Canada, appelée la Section de
>>>> première instance de la Cour fédérale, est maintenue et dénommée «
>>>> Cour fédérale » en français et « Federal Court » en anglais. Elle est
>>>> maintenue à titre de tribunal additionnel de droit, d’equity et
>>>> d’amirauté du Canada, propre à améliorer l’application du droit
>>>> canadien, et continue d’être une cour supérieure d’archives ayant
>>>> compétence en matière civile et pénale.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [9] Sections 3 and 4 of the Federal Courts Act create
>>>> two separate courts – this Court (section 3) and the Federal Court
>>>> (section 4). If, as Mr. Amos suggests, documents filed in the Federal
>>>> Court were automatically also filed in this Court, then there would no
>>>> need for the parties to prepare and file appeal books as required by
>>>> Rules 343 to 345 of the Federal Courts Rules, SOR/98-106 in relation
>>>> to any appeal from a decision of the Federal Court. The requirement to
>>>> file an appeal book with this Court in relation to an appeal from a
>>>> decision of the Federal Court makes it clear that the only documents
>>>> that will be before this Court are the documents that are part of that
>>>> appeal book.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [10] Therefore, the memorandum of fact and law filed on
>>>> March 6, 2017 is the first document, filed with this Court, in which
>>>> Mr. Amos identified the particular judges that he submits have a
>>>> conflict in any matter related to him.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [11] On April 3, 2017, Mr. Amos attempted to bring a motion
>>>> before the Federal Court seeking an order “affirming or denying the
>>>> conflict of interest he has” with a number of judges of the Federal
>>>> Court. A judge of the Federal Court issued a direction noting that if
>>>> Mr. Amos was seeking this order in relation to judges of the Federal
>>>> Court of Appeal, it was beyond the jurisdiction of the Federal Court.
>>>> Mr. Amos raised the Federal Court motion at the hearing of this
>>>> cross-appeal. The Federal Court motion is not a motion before this
>>>> Court and, as such, the submissions filed before the Federal Court
>>>> will not be entertained. As well, since this was a motion brought
>>>> before the Federal Court (and not this Court), any documents filed in
>>>> relation to that motion are not part of the record of this Court.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [12] During the hearing of the appeal Mr. Amos alleged that
>>>> the third member of this panel also had a conflict of interest and
>>>> submitted some documents that, in his view, supported his claim of a
>>>> conflict. Mr. Amos, following the hearing of his appeal, was also
>>>> afforded the opportunity to provide a brief summary of the conflict
>>>> that he was alleging and to file additional documents that, in his
>>>> view, supported his allegations. Mr. Amos submitted several pages of
>>>> documents in relation to the alleged conflicts. He organized the
>>>> documents by submitting a copy of the biography of the particular
>>>> judge and then, immediately following that biography, by including
>>>> copies of the documents that, in his view, supported his claim that
>>>> such judge had a conflict.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [13] The nature of the alleged conflict of Justice Webb is
>>>> that before he was appointed as a Judge of the Tax Court of Canada in
>>>> 2006, he was a partner with the law firm Patterson Law, and before
>>>> that with Patterson Palmer in Nova Scotia. Mr. Amos submitted that he
>>>> had a number of disputes with Patterson Palmer and Patterson Law and
>>>> therefore Justice Webb has a conflict simply because he was a partner
>>>> of these firms. Mr. Amos is not alleging that Justice Webb was
>>>> personally involved in or had any knowledge of any matter in which Mr.
>>>> Amos was involved with Justice Webb’s former law firm – only that he
>>>> was a member of such firm.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [14] During his oral submissions at the hearing of his
>>>> appeal Mr. Amos, in relation to the alleged conflict for Justice Webb,
>>>> focused on dealings between himself and a particular lawyer at
>>>> Patterson Law. However, none of the documents submitted by Mr. Amos at
>>>> the hearing or subsequently related to any dealings with this
>>>> particular lawyer nor is it clear when Mr. Amos was dealing with this
>>>> lawyer. In particular, it is far from clear whether such dealings were
>>>> after the time that Justice Webb was appointed as a Judge of the Tax
>>>> Court of Canada over 10 years ago.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [15] The documents that he submitted in relation to the
>>>> alleged conflict for Justice Webb largely relate to dealings between
>>>> Byron Prior and the St. John’s Newfoundland and Labrador office of
>>>> Patterson Palmer, which is not in the same province where Justice Webb
>>>> practiced law. The only document that indicates any dealing between
>>>> Mr. Amos and Patterson Palmer is a copy of an affidavit of Stephen May
>>>> who was a partner in the St. John’s NL office of Patterson Palmer. The
>>>> affidavit is dated January 24, 2005 and refers to a number of e-mails
>>>> that were sent by Mr. Amos to Stephen May. Mr. Amos also included a
>>>> letter that is addressed to four individuals, one of whom is John
>>>> Crosbie who was counsel to the St. John’s NL office of Patterson
>>>> Palmer. The letter is dated September 2, 2004 and is addressed to
>>>> “John Crosbie, c/o Greg G. Byrne, Suite 502, 570 Queen Street,
>>>> Fredericton, NB E3B 5E3”. In this letter Mr. Amos alludes to a
>>>> possible lawsuit against Patterson Palmer.
>>>> [16] Mr. Amos’ position is that simply because Justice Webb
>>>> was a lawyer with Patterson Palmer, he now has a conflict. In Wewaykum
>>>> Indian Band v. Her Majesty the Queen, 2003 SCC 45, [2003] 2 S.C.R.
>>>> 259, the Supreme Court of Canada noted that disqualification of a
>>>> judge is to be determined based on whether there is a reasonable
>>>> apprehension of bias:
>>>> 60 In Canadian law, one standard has now emerged as the
>>>> criterion for disqualification. The criterion, as expressed by de
>>>> Grandpré J. in Committee for Justice and Liberty v. National Energy
>>>> Board, …[[1978] 1 S.C.R. 369, 68 D.L.R. (3d) 716], at p. 394, is the
>>>> reasonable apprehension of bias:
>>>> … the apprehension of bias must be a reasonable one, held by
>>>> reasonable and right minded persons, applying themselves to the
>>>> question and obtaining thereon the required information. In the words
>>>> of the Court of Appeal, that test is "what would an informed person,
>>>> viewing the matter realistically and practically -- and having thought
>>>> the matter through -- conclude. Would he think that it is more likely
>>>> than not that [the decision-maker], whether consciously or
>>>> unconsciously, would not decide fairly."
>>>>
>>>> [17] The issue to be determined is whether an informed
>>>> person, viewing the matter realistically and practically, and having
>>>> thought the matter through, would conclude that Mr. Amos’ allegations
>>>> give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias. As this Court has
>>>> previously remarked, “there is a strong presumption that judges will
>>>> administer justice impartially” and this presumption will not be
>>>> rebutted in the absence of “convincing evidence” of bias (Collins v.
>>>> Canada, 2011 FCA 140 at para. 7, [2011] 4 C.T.C. 157 [Collins]. See
>>>> also R. v. S. (R.D.), [1997] 3 S.C.R. 484 at para. 32, 151 D.L.R.
>>>> (4th) 193).
>>>>
>>>> [18] The Ontario Court of Appeal in Rando Drugs Ltd. v.
>>>> Scott, 2007 ONCA 553, 86 O.R. (3d) 653 (leave to appeal to the Supreme
>>>> Court of Canada refused, 32285 (August 1, 2007)), addressed the
>>>> particular issue of whether a judge is disqualified from hearing a
>>>> case simply because he had been a member of a law firm that was
>>>> involved in the litigation that was now before that judge. The Ontario
>>>> Court of Appeal determined that the judge was not disqualified if the
>>>> judge had no involvement with the person or the matter when he was a
>>>> lawyer. The Ontario Court of Appeal also explained that the rules for
>>>> determining whether a judge is disqualified are different from the
>>>> rules to determine whether a lawyer has a conflict:
>>>> 27 Thus, disqualification is not the natural corollary to a
>>>> finding that a trial judge has had some involvement in a case over
>>>> which he or she is now presiding. Where the judge had no involvement,
>>>> as here, it cannot be said that the judge is disqualified.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 28 The point can rightly be made that had Mr. Patterson been
>>>> asked to represent the appellant as counsel before his appointment to
>>>> the bench, the conflict rules would likely have prevented him from
>>>> taking the case because his firm had formerly represented one of the
>>>> defendants in the case. Thus, it is argued how is it that as a trial
>>>> judge Patterson J. can hear the case? This issue was considered by the
>>>> Court of Appeal (Civil Division) in Locabail (U.K.) Ltd. v. Bayfield
>>>> Properties Ltd., [2000] Q.B. 451. The court held, at para. 58, that
>>>> there is no inflexible rule governing the disqualification of a judge
>>>> and that, "[e]verything depends on the circumstances."
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 29 It seems to me that what appears at first sight to be an
>>>> inconsistency in application of rules can be explained by the
>>>> different contexts and in particular, the strong presumption of
>>>> judicial impartiality that applies in the context of disqualification
>>>> of a judge. There is no such presumption in cases of allegations of
>>>> conflict of interest against a lawyer because of a firm's previous
>>>> involvement in the case. To the contrary, as explained by Sopinka J.
>>>> in MacDonald Estate v. Martin (1990), 77 D.L.R. (4th) 249 (S.C.C.),
>>>> for sound policy reasons there is a presumption of a disqualifying
>>>> interest that can rarely be overcome. In particular, a conclusory
>>>> statement from the lawyer that he or she had no confidential
>>>> information about the case will never be sufficient. The case is the
>>>> opposite where the allegation of bias is made against a trial judge.
>>>> His or her statement that he or she knew nothing about the case and
>>>> had no involvement in it will ordinarily be accepted at face value
>>>> unless there is good reason to doubt it: see Locabail, at para. 19.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 30 That brings me then to consider the particular circumstances
>>>> of this case and whether there are serious grounds to find a
>>>> disqualifying conflict of interest in this case. In my view, there are
>>>> two significant factors that justify the trial judge's decision not to
>>>> recuse himself. The first is his statement, which all parties accept,
>>>> that he knew nothing of the case when it was in his former firm and
>>>> that he had nothing to do with it. The second is the long passage of
>>>> time. As was said in Wewaykum, at para. 85:
>>>> To us, one significant factor stands out, and must inform
>>>> the perspective of the reasonable person assessing the impact of this
>>>> involvement on Binnie J.'s impartiality in the appeals. That factor is
>>>> the passage of time. Most arguments for disqualification rest on
>>>> circumstances that are either contemporaneous to the decision-making,
>>>> or that occurred within a short time prior to the decision-making.
>>>> 31 There are other factors that inform the issue. The Wilson
>>>> Walker firm no longer acted for any of the parties by the time of
>>>> trial. More importantly, at the time of the motion, Patterson J. had
>>>> been a judge for six years and thus had not had a relationship with
>>>> his former firm for a considerable period of time.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 32 In my view, a reasonable person, viewing the matter
>>>> realistically would conclude that the trial judge could deal fairly
>>>> and impartially with this case. I take this view principally because
>>>> of the long passage of time and the trial judge's lack of involvement
>>>> in or knowledge of the case when the Wilson Walker firm had carriage.
>>>> In these circumstances it cannot be reasonably contended that the
>>>> trial judge could not remain impartial in the case. The mere fact that
>>>> his name appears on the letterhead of some correspondence from over a
>>>> decade ago would not lead a reasonable person to believe that he would
>>>> either consciously or unconsciously favour his former firm's former
>>>> client. It is simply not realistic to think that a judge would throw
>>>> off his mantle of impartiality, ignore his oath of office and favour a
>>>> client - about whom he knew nothing - of a firm that he left six years
>>>> earlier and that no longer acts for the client, in a case involving
>>>> events from over a decade ago.
>>>> (emphasis added)
>>>>
>>>> [19] Justice Webb had no involvement with any matter
>>>> involving Mr. Amos while he was a member of Patterson Palmer or
>>>> Patterson Law, nor does Mr. Amos suggest that he did. Mr. Amos made it
>>>> clear during the hearing of this matter that the only reason for the
>>>> alleged conflict for Justice Webb was that he was a member of
>>>> Patterson Law and Patterson Palmer. This is simply not enough for
>>>> Justice Webb to be disqualified. Any involvement of Mr. Amos with
>>>> Patterson Law while Justice Webb was a member of that firm would have
>>>> had to occur over 10 years ago and even longer for the time when he
>>>> was a member of Patterson Palmer. In addition to the lack of any
>>>> involvement on his part with any matter or dispute that Mr. Amos had
>>>> with Patterson Law or Patterson Palmer (which in and of itself is
>>>> sufficient to dispose of this matter), the length of time since
>>>> Justice Webb was a member of Patterson Law or Patterson Palmer would
>>>> also result in the same finding – that there is no conflict in Justice
>>>> Webb hearing this appeal.
>>>>
>>>> [20] Similarly in R. v. Bagot, 2000 MBCA 30, 145 Man. R.
>>>> (2d) 260, the Manitoba Court of Appeal found that there was no
>>>> reasonable apprehension of bias when a judge, who had been a member of
>>>> the law firm that had been retained by the accused, had no involvement
>>>> with the accused while he was a lawyer with that firm.
>>>>
>>>> [21] In Del Zotto v. Minister of National Revenue, [2000] 4
>>>> F.C. 321, 257 N.R. 96, this court did find that there would be a
>>>> reasonable apprehension of bias where a judge, who while he was a
>>>> lawyer, had recorded time on a matter involving the same person who
>>>> was before that judge. However, this case can be distinguished as
>>>> Justice Webb did not have any time recorded on any files involving Mr.
>>>> Amos while he was a lawyer with Patterson Palmer or Patterson Law.
>>>>
>>>> [22] Mr. Amos also included with his submissions a CD. He
>>>> stated in his affidavit dated June 26, 2017 that there is a “true copy
>>>> of an American police surveillance wiretap entitled 139” on this CD.
>>>> He has also indicated that he has “provided a true copy of the CD
>>>> entitled 139 to many American and Canadian law enforcement authorities
>>>> and not one of the police forces or officers of the court are willing
>>>> to investigate it”. Since he has indicated that this is an “American
>>>> police surveillance wiretap”, this is a matter for the American law
>>>> enforcement authorities and cannot create, as Mr. Amos suggests, a
>>>> conflict of interest for any judge to whom he provides a copy.
>>>>
>>>> [23] As a result, there is no conflict or reasonable
>>>> apprehension of bias for Justice Webb and therefore, no reason for him
>>>> to recuse himself.
>>>>
>>>> [24] Mr. Amos alleged that Justice Near’s past professional
>>>> experience with the government created a “quasi-conflict” in deciding
>>>> the cross-appeal. Mr. Amos provided no details and Justice Near
>>>> confirmed that he had no prior knowledge of the matters alleged in the
>>>> Claim. Justice Near sees no reason to recuse himself.
>>>>
>>>> [25] Insofar as it is possible to glean the basis for Mr.
>>>> Amos’ allegations against Justice Gleason, it appears that he alleges
>>>> that she is incapable of hearing this appeal because he says he wrote
>>>> a letter to Brian Mulroney and Jean Chrétien in 2004. At that time,
>>>> both Justice Gleason and Mr. Mulroney were partners in the law firm
>>>> Ogilvy Renault, LLP. The letter in question, which is rude and angry,
>>>> begins with “Hey you two Evil Old Smiling Bastards” and “Re: me suing
>>>> you and your little dogs too”. There is no indication that the letter
>>>> was ever responded to or that a law suit was ever commenced by Mr.
>>>> Amos against Mr. Mulroney. In the circumstances, there is no reason
>>>> for Justice Gleason to recuse herself as the letter in question does
>>>> not give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> III. Issue
>>>>
>>>> [26] The issue on the cross-appeal is as follows: Did the
>>>> Judge err in setting aside the Prothonotary’s Order striking the Claim
>>>> in its entirety without leave to amend and in determining that Mr.
>>>> Amos’ allegation that the RCMP barred him from the New Brunswick
>>>> legislature in 2004 was capable of supporting a cause of action?
>>>>
>>>> IV. Analysis
>>>>
>>>> A. Standard of Review
>>>>
>>>> [27] Following the Judge’s decision to set aside the
>>>> Prothonotary’s Order, this Court revisited the standard of review to
>>>> be applied to discretionary decisions of prothonotaries and decisions
>>>> made by judges on appeals of prothonotaries’ decisions in Hospira
>>>> Healthcare Corp. v. Kennedy Institute of Rheumatology, 2016 FCA 215,
>>>> 402 D.L.R. (4th) 497 [Hospira]. In Hospira, a five-member panel of
>>>> this Court replaced the Aqua-Gem standard of review with that
>>>> articulated in Housen v. Nikolaisen, 2002 SCC 33, [2002] 2 S.C.R. 235
>>>> [Housen]. As a result, it is no longer appropriate for the Federal
>>>> Court to conduct a de novo review of a discretionary order made by a
>>>> prothonotary in regard to questions vital to the final issue of the
>>>> case. Rather, a Federal Court judge can only intervene on appeal if
>>>> the prothonotary made an error of law or a palpable and overriding
>>>> error in determining a question of fact or question of mixed fact and
>>>> law (Hospira at para. 79). Further, this Court can only interfere with
>>>> a Federal Court judge’s review of a prothonotary’s discretionary order
>>>> if the judge made an error of law or palpable and overriding error in
>>>> determining a question of fact or question of mixed fact and law
>>>> (Hospira at paras. 82-83).
>>>>
>>>> [28] In the case at bar, the Judge substituted his own
>>>> assessment of Mr. Amos’ Claim for that of the Prothonotary. This Court
>>>> must look to the Prothonotary’s Order to determine whether the Judge
>>>> erred in law or made a palpable and overriding error in choosing to
>>>> interfere.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> B. Did the Judge err in interfering with the
>>>> Prothonotary’s Order?
>>>>
>>>> [29] The Prothontoary’s Order accepted the following
>>>> paragraphs from the Crown’s submissions as the basis for striking the
>>>> Claim in its entirety without leave to amend:
>>>>
>>>> 17. Within the 96 paragraph Statement of Claim, the Plaintiff
>>>> addresses his complaint in paragraphs 14-24, inclusive. All but four
>>>> of those paragraphs are dedicated to an incident that occurred in 2006
>>>> in and around the legislature in New Brunswick. The jurisdiction of
>>>> the Federal Court does not extend to Her Majesty the Queen in right of
>>>> the Provinces. In any event, the Plaintiff hasn’t named the Province
>>>> or provincial actors as parties to this action. The incident alleged
>>>> does not give rise to a justiciable cause of action in this Court.
>>>> (…)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 21. The few paragraphs that directly address the Defendant
>>>> provide no details as to the individuals involved or the location of
>>>> the alleged incidents or other details sufficient to allow the
>>>> Defendant to respond. As a result, it is difficult or impossible to
>>>> determine the causes of action the Plaintiff is attempting to advance.
>>>> A generous reading of the Statement of Claim allows the Defendant to
>>>> only speculate as to the true and/or intended cause of action. At
>>>> best, the Plaintiff’s action may possibly be summarized as: he
>>>> suspects he is barred from the House of Commons.
>>>> [footnotes omitted].
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [30] The Judge determined that he could not strike the Claim
>>>> on the same jurisdictional basis as the Prothonotary. The Judge noted
>>>> that the Federal Court has jurisdiction over claims based on the
>>>> liability of Federal Crown servants like the RCMP and that the actors
>>>> who barred Mr. Amos from the New Brunswick legislature in 2004
>>>> included the RCMP (Federal Court Judgment at para. 23). In considering
>>>> the viability of these allegations de novo, the Judge identified
>>>> paragraph 14 of the Claim as containing “some precision” as it
>>>> identifies the date of the event and a RCMP officer acting as
>>>> Aide-de-Camp to the Lieutenant Governor (Federal Court Judgment at
>>>> para. 27).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [31] The Judge noted that the 2004 event could support a
>>>> cause of action in the tort of misfeasance in public office and
>>>> identified the elements of the tort as excerpted from Meigs v. Canada,
>>>> 2013 FC 389, 431 F.T.R. 111:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [13] As in both the cases of Odhavji Estate v Woodhouse, 2003 SCC
>>>> 69 [Odhavji] and Lewis v Canada, 2012 FC 1514 [Lewis], I must
>>>> determine whether the plaintiffs’ statement of claim pleads each
>>>> element of the alleged tort of misfeasance in public office:
>>>>
>>>> a) The public officer must have engaged in deliberate and unlawful
>>>> conduct in his or her capacity as public officer;
>>>>
>>>> b) The public officer must have been aware both that his or her
>>>> conduct was unlawful and that it was likely to harm the plaintiff; and
>>>>
>>>> c) There must be an element of bad faith or dishonesty by the public
>>>> officer and knowledge of harm alone is insufficient to conclude that a
>>>> public officer acted in bad faith or dishonestly.
>>>> Odhavji, above, at paras 23, 24 and 28
>>>> (Federal Court Judgment at para. 28).
>>>>
>>>> [32] The Judge determined that Mr. Amos disclosed sufficient
>>>> material facts to meet the elements of the tort of misfeasance in
>>>> public office because the actors, who barred him from the New
>>>> Brunswick legislature in 2004, including the RCMP, did so for
>>>> “political reasons” (Federal Court Judgment at para. 29).
>>>>
>>>> [33] This Court’s discussion of the sufficiency of pleadings
>>>> in Merchant Law Group v. Canada (Revenue Agency), 2010 FCA 184, 321
>>>> D.L.R (4th) 301 is particularly apt:
>>>>
>>>> …When pleading bad faith or abuse of power, it is not enough to
>>>> assert, baldly, conclusory phrases such as “deliberately or
>>>> negligently,” “callous disregard,” or “by fraud and theft did steal”.
>>>> “The bare assertion of a conclusion upon which the court is called
>>>> upon to pronounce is not an allegation of material fact”. Making bald,
>>>> conclusory allegations without any evidentiary foundation is an abuse
>>>> of process…
>>>>
>>>> To this, I would add that the tort of misfeasance in public office
>>>> requires a particular state of mind of a public officer in carrying
>>>> out the impunged action, i.e., deliberate conduct which the public
>>>> officer knows to be inconsistent with the obligations of his or her
>>>> office. For this tort, particularization of the allegations is
>>>> mandatory. Rule 181 specifically requires particularization of
>>>> allegations of “breach of trust,” “wilful default,” “state of mind of
>>>> a person,” “malice” or “fraudulent intention.”
>>>> (at paras. 34-35, citations omitted).
>>>>
>>>> [34] Applying the Housen standard of review to the
>>>> Prothonotary’s Order, we are of the view that the Judge interfered
>>>> absent a legal or palpable and overriding error.
>>>>
>>>> [35] The Prothonotary determined that Mr. Amos’ Claim
>>>> disclosed no reasonable claim and was fundamentally vexatious on the
>>>> basis of jurisdictional concerns and the absence of material facts to
>>>> ground a cause of action. Paragraph 14 of the Claim, which addresses
>>>> the 2004 event, pleads no material facts as to how the RCMP officer
>>>> engaged in deliberate and unlawful conduct, knew that his or her
>>>> conduct was unlawful and likely to harm Mr. Amos, and acted in bad
>>>> faith. While the Claim alleges elsewhere that Mr. Amos was barred from
>>>> the New Brunswick legislature for political and/or malicious reasons,
>>>> these allegations are not particularized and are directed against
>>>> non-federal actors, such as the Sergeant-at-Arms of the Legislative
>>>> Assembly of New Brunswick and the Fredericton Police Force. As such,
>>>> the Judge erred in determining that Mr. Amos’ allegation that the RCMP
>>>> barred him from the New Brunswick legislature in 2004 was capable of
>>>> supporting a cause of action.
>>>>
>>>> [36] In our view, the Claim is made up entirely of bare
>>>> allegations, devoid of any detail, such that it discloses no
>>>> reasonable cause of action within the jurisdiction of the Federal
>>>> Courts. Therefore, the Judge erred in interfering to set aside the
>>>> Prothonotary’s Order striking the claim in its entirety. Further, we
>>>> find that the Prothonotary made no error in denying leave to amend.
>>>> The deficiencies in Mr. Amos’ pleadings are so extensive such that
>>>> amendment could not cure them (see Collins at para. 26).
>>>>
>>>> V. Conclusion
>>>> [37] For the foregoing reasons, we would allow the Crown’s
>>>> cross-appeal, with costs, setting aside the Federal Court Judgment,
>>>> dated January 25, 2016 and restoring the Prothonotary’s Order, dated
>>>> November 12, 2015, which struck Mr. Amos’ Claim in its entirety
>>>> without leave to amend.
>>>> "Wyman W. Webb"
>>>> J.A.
>>>> "David G. Near"
>>>> J.A.
>>>> "Mary J.L. Gleason"
>>>> J.A.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
>>>> NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
>>>>
>>>> A CROSS-APPEAL FROM AN ORDER OF THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE SOUTHCOTT DATED
>>>> JANUARY 25, 2016; DOCKET NUMBER T-1557-15.
>>>> DOCKET:
>>>>
>>>> A-48-16
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> STYLE OF CAUSE:
>>>>
>>>> DAVID RAYMOND AMOS v. HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> PLACE OF HEARING:
>>>>
>>>> Fredericton,
>>>> New Brunswick
>>>>
>>>> DATE OF HEARING:
>>>>
>>>> May 24, 2017
>>>>
>>>> REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY:
>>>>
>>>> WEBB J.A.
>>>> NEAR J.A.
>>>> GLEASON J.A.
>>>>
>>>> DATED:
>>>>
>>>> October 30, 2017
>>>>
>>>> APPEARANCES:
>>>> David Raymond Amos
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> For The Appellant / respondent on cross-appeal
>>>> (on his own behalf)
>>>>
>>>> Jan Jensen
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> For The Respondent / appELLANT ON CROSS-APPEAL
>>>>
>>>> SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
>>>> Nathalie G. Drouin
>>>> Deputy Attorney General of Canada
>>>>
>>>> For The Respondent / APPELLANT ON CROSS-APPEAL
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://www.facebook.com/
>>>>
>>>> John Williamson - Conservative Nomination Candidate New Brunswick
>>>> Southwest
>>>> May 17 at 12:48pm ·
>>>>
>>>> Great news! John Williamson is running for the federal Conservative
>>>> nomination in New Brunswick Southwest. He needs your help to secure
>>>> the riding and defeat the Trudeau Liberals in 2019.
>>>>
>>>> Having served as Member of Parliament from 2011-2015, he knows the
>>>> issues, has proven ability, and can win: John had the highest
>>>> Conservative vote — 38.6% — of all 32 ridings in Atlantic Canada in
>>>> 2015. It wasn’t enough to get over the top, but it was a clear signal
>>>> that his local campaign was strong.
>>>>
>>>> How can you help? Only current Conservative Party members can vote for
>>>> John in the nomination, so please signup or renew your membership
>>>> here: https://donate.conservative.
>>>>
>>>> There are also envelopes that need stuffing, phone calls that need to
>>>> be made, and events already planned.
>>>>
>>>> Contact John today by e-mail at VoteJohnW@gmail.com or call
>>>> 506-466-8347 to let him know how you can help!
>>>>
>>>> Unsure if your membership is current? Feel free to contact John and
>>>> ask. His team can make sure you’re all set to vote.
>>>>
>>>> And be sure to share and follow this page for updates on his campaign
>>>> and to learn about upcoming events.
>>>>
>>>> Go John! And Vote John W!
>>>>
>>>> Progressive Conservative MLA calls it quits at provincial level
>>>> Brian Macdonald won't run again for legislature seat, but might try
>>>> federal politics
>>>> CBC News · Posted: May 28, 2018 6:07 PM AT | Last Updated: May 28
>>>> Brian Macdonald, a Progressive Conservative MLA, has announced he
>>>> won't run in the Sept. 24 provincial election. (CBC)
>>>>
>>>> New Brunswick's Progressive Conservative party is losing one of its
>>>> highest-profile MLAs just months before the next provincial election.
>>>>
>>>> Brian Macdonald says he won't be a candidate this fall and may instead
>>>> jump into federal politics.
>>>>
>>>> Calling the last year "my best year in politics," the two-term MLA
>>>> said his decision has nothing to do with PC Leader Blaine Higgs, who
>>>> beat Macdonald for the party leadership in 2016.
>>>>
>>>> "It's been a really good year," Macdonald said. "I've had a strong
>>>> voice in the legislature on issues that are really important to my
>>>> heart.
>>>>
>>>> "I also think it can be a challenge being in provincial politics. It's
>>>> very small, it's very close, it's very tight, and on a personal basis,
>>>> I want to move on."
>>>>
>>>> Macdonald says he’s considering running for the federal Conservative
>>>> nomination in New Brunswick Southwest, which includes part of the
>>>> riding of Fredericton West-Hanwell, where he has been the MLA. (CBC)
>>>>
>>>> Macdonald said he's considering running for the federal Conservative
>>>> nomination in New Brunswick Southwest, a constituency that includes
>>>> part of Macdonald's provincial riding of Fredericton West-Hanwell.
>>>>
>>>> Health critic slams 'gutting' of top doctor's office
>>>>
>>>> Blaine Higgs faces internal PC dissent over appointment
>>>>
>>>> That decision would pit him against former Conservative MP John
>>>> Williamson, who announced May 21 he'll also seek the nomination in the
>>>> riding he represented from 2011 to 2015. Party members in the riding
>>>> will nominate their candidate June 28.
>>>>
>>>> Macdonald said he'll also consider running federally in Fredericton.
>>>> The former soldier said he's also looking at job opportunities with
>>>> national organizations that advocate for veterans.
>>>>
>>>> "I'm looking for opportunities and considering a lot of options," he
>>>> said.
>>>>
>>>> Blaine Higgs wins N.B. PC leadership race on 3rd ballot
>>>>
>>>> Tory leadership hopefuls scramble to be 'second choice' of rivals'
>>>> supporters
>>>>
>>>> Macdonald is the fifth candidate from the 2016 provincial PC
>>>> leadership race to opt against running in this year's election under
>>>> Higgs.
>>>>
>>>> Macdonald said he is confident he would have won his riding again and
>>>> the Tories will win the election Sept. 24, meaning he'd have a shot of
>>>> becoming a minister.
>>>>
>>>> But he said being a provincial politician "does wear on you and it
>>>> does make you think about what the other options are. … If I go
>>>> another four years in provincial politics, it concerns me that my
>>>> options would be limited after that."
>>>>
>>>> The 47-year-old also said the recent death of some friends made him
>>>> realize he should pursue other opportunities when he can.
>>>>
>>>> Macdonald's interest in federal politics has been well-known for
>>>> years. He was a political assistant to former federal Defence Minister
>>>> Peter MacKay and sought the federal Conservative nomination for
>>>> Fredericton for the 2008 election.
>>>>
>>>> After failing to win that nomination, he ran provincially in
>>>> Fredericton-Silverwood in 2010 and was elected. He was re-elected in
>>>> the newly created riding of Fredericton West-Hanwell in 2014, when he
>>>> defeated then-NDP leader Dominic Cardy.
>>>>
>>>> Macdonald ran for the leadership of the New Brunswick Progressive
>>>> Conservative Party but lost to Blaine Higgs. (Jacques Poitras/CBC)
>>>>
>>>> In 2016, Macdonald ran for the PC leadership, placing sixth on the
>>>> first ballot out of seven candidates.
>>>>
>>>> Macdonald said he doesn't think his departure will hurt the provincial
>>>> party's chances of holding on to Fredericton West-Hanwell.
>>>>
>>>> "It's going to be very attractive to a number of high-calibre
>>>> candidates who are now beginning to come forward," he said.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>>> From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>>>>> Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2018 14:37:04 -0400
>>>>> Subject: Birth Certificates of David and Max Amos
>>>>> To: swilliams@mosherchedore.ca
>>>>> Cc: David Amos <david.raymond.amos@gmail.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> Assistant (Property): Samantha Williams
>>>>>
>>>>> Direct Line: (506) 648-0373
>>>>> Email: swilliams@mosherchedore.ca
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>>> From: mike gauvin <mikegauvin@live.ca>
>>>>> Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2018 01:29:25 +0000
>>>>> Subject: Re: 83 Valley Road FYI this is a document I may employ BTW I
>>>>> am in Saint John tommorrow attending a hearing at the EUB
>>>>> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> Tomorrow Iam going to talk to a guy that should do it.
>>>>> ______________________________
>>>>> From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>>>>> Sent: October 11, 2018 11:38:58 AM
>>>>> To: mike gauvin; swilliams; serge.gauvin; mrichard; serge.rousselle;
>>>>> david.eidt
>>>>> Cc: David Amos; greg.byrne; brian.gallant; David.Coon;
>>>>> kris.austin@gnb.ca; blaine.higgs; robert.gauvin@gnb.ca
>>>>> Subject: Re: 83 Valley Road FYI this is a document I may employ BTW I
>>>>> am in Saint John tommorrow attending a hearing at the EUB
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.legaldeeds.com/
>>>>>
>>>>> New Brunswick Contract of Purchase and Sale of Real Property will
>>>>> provide you with a custom completed contract of purchase and sale of
>>>>> real property used in the sale of residential or recreational real
>>>>> estate in New Brunswick. This document is a must for anyone buying or
>>>>> selling a home or lot privately in New Brunswick.
>>>>>
>>>>> By simply answering a few questions our service will produce for you
>>>>> an online custom completed contract, ready to be signed by the buyer
>>>>> and the seller.
>>>>>
>>>>> This document includes simple and straight forward instructions to
>>>>> enable you to execute quickly and effortlessly. A subject removal form
>>>>> is also included for your convenience. The cost of the personalized
>>>>> Contract of Purchase and Sale is $15.00, payable in Canadian dollars.
>>>>> Within a few minutes, you will receive your completed PDF documents by
>>>>> email.
>>>>>
>>>>> To proceed, complete the entries.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 10/10/18, David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Obviously I have the same problem with every lawyer in New Brunswick.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you still wish to follow though on the deal. I will do as I
>>>>>> promised and pay you in full and get you to swear out and purchase
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> sale agreement properly witnessed by SNB and handle this matter
>>>>>> myself.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 10/10/18, mike gauvin <mikegauvin@live.ca> wrote:
>>>>>>> Mosher Chedore replied to me that it's a conflict and cannot
>>>>>>> represent
>>>>>>> me.
>>>>>>> ______________________________
>>>>>>> From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> Sent: October 9, 2018 9:57:18 AM
>>>>>>> To: swilliams@mosherchedore.ca; mikegauvin@live.ca
>>>>>>> Cc: David Amos
>>>>>>> Subject: I have yet to receive a response Why?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ---------- Original message ----------
>>>>>>> From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2018 14:37:04 -0400
>>>>>>> Subject: Birth Certificates of David and Max Amos
>>>>>>> To: swilliams@mosherchedore.ca
>>>>>>> Cc: David Amos <david.raymond.amos@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Assistant (Property): Samantha Williams
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Direct Line: (506) 648-0373
>>>>>>> Email: swilliams@mosherchedore.ca
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>>>>> From: mike gauvin <mikegauvin@live.ca>
>>>>>>> Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2018 15:56:14 +0000
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: Hey Kyle read real slow
>>>>>>> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hey David, I tried to call Reid, no avail. I will call that Serge
>>>>>>> Gauvin guy Monday morning, this is getting ridiculous. I would just
>>>>>>> prefer to go through the proper legal channels.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yours Truly, Michael Gauvin
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
No comments:
Post a Comment