SCOTT RITTER: ( MILITARY INTELLIGENCE EXPERT ON UKRAINE CONFLICT )
Scott Ritter ( Former U.S. Marine Corps. Intelligence Officer, and U.N. Weapons Inspector) , provides perspective on WAR IN UKRAINE.
Scott Ritter will address propganda, Nato Strategy, Russian progress, "no fly zone", and other key issues surrounding the conflict in Ukraine.
Join Freedom Reporters, Rick Walker and Brendan Kennedy for this in depth analysis and commentary on the war in Ukraine.
Fw: Avis d’enquête en vertu de l’article 32 modifié (corrigé) / Amended notice of intention to investigate under section 32 (corrected notice) - 5822-03179
Dana-lee Melfi<dana_lee_ca@hotmail.com> | Fri, Feb 2, 2024 at 10:40 AM |
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com> | |
Another update on my recognised allegations on DOJ from OIC. Second amendment to the same complaint. Now we getting somewhere!
From: _Greffe-Registry <Greffe-Registry@oic-ci.gc.ca>
Sent: February 1, 2024 12:55 PM Subject: RE: Avis d’enquête en vertu de l’article 32 modifié (corrigé) / Amended notice of intention to investigate under section 32 (corrected notice) - 5822-03179 (english follows)
Avis d’enquête en vertu de l’article 32 modifié (corrigé)
Institution :
Ministère de la Justice Canada
Le Commissariat à l’information a corrigé les allégations figurant dans l’avis d’enquête en vertu de l’article 32 transmis le 15 septembre, 2022, qui sont maintenant les suivantes :
L’institution a pris une prorogation de délai invalide et l'a éventuellement retirée. L’allégation s’inscrit dans le cadre de l’alinéa 30(1)a).
L'institution a incorrectement placé la demande d'accès en attente. L’allégation s’inscrit dans le cadre de l’alinéa 30(1)f).
L'institution a communiqué par téléphone malgré la demande de communication par écrit. L’allégation s’inscrit dans le cadre de l’alinéa 30(1)f).
L’institution ne s’est pas acquittée de ses obligations en vertu du paragraphe 4(2.1), à savoir de faire tous les efforts raisonnables pour prêter toute l’assistance indiquée à la personne qui a fait la ou les demande(s) d’accès susmentionnée(s). L’allégation s’inscrit dans le cadre de l’alinéa 30(1)f).
L’institution n’a pas répondu à la demande ou aux demandes d’accès susmentionnée(s) dans le délai de 30 jours ou dans le délai prorogé, comme l’exige l’article 7. L’allégation s’inscrit dans le cadre de l’alinéa 30(1)a).
La Commissaire à l’information du Canada avise Ministère de la Justice Canada, en vertu de l’article 32 de la Loi, qu’elle a l’intention de faire enquête sur cette ou ces allégation(s). L’institution doit donc conserver tous les documents relatifs à celle(s)-ci jusqu’à ce que l’enquête et tout recours judiciaire subséquent soient terminés.
Amended notice of intention to investigate under section 32 (corrected notice)
Institution:
Department of Justice Canada
The Office of the Information Commissioner has corrected the allegations listed in the Notice of intention to investigate under section 32 issued on September 15, 2022. The allegation(s) are now as follows:
It took an invalid extension of time and eventually withdrew it. This allegation falls under paragraph 30(1)(a).
It improperly placed the access request on hold. This allegation falls under paragraph 30(1)(f).
It communicated by phone, despite requesting communication in writing. This allegation falls under paragraph 30(1)(f).
It did not meet its responsibilities under subsection 4(2.1) to make every reasonable effort to assist the requester with the above-noted access request(s). This allegation falls under paragraph 30(1)(f).
It did not respond to the above-noted access request(s) within the 30-day or extended period, as required by section 7. This allegation falls under paragraph 30(1)(a).
The Information Commissioner of Canada gives notice to Department of Justice Canada under section 32 that she intends to investigate this allegation(s). Consequently, the institution must keep all records relating to the allegation(s) until the investigation and any subsequent legal proceedings are complete.
From: _Greffe-Registry
(English follows)
Avis d’enquête en vertu de l’article 32 modifié (corrigé)
Institution : Ministère de la Justice Canada
Le Commissariat à l’information a corrigé les allégations figurant dans l’avis d’enquête en vertu de l’article 32 transmis le 15 septembre, 2022, qui sont maintenant les suivantes :
L’institution a pris une prorogation de délai invalide et l'a éventuellement retirée. L’allégation s’inscrit dans le cadre de l’alinéa 30(1)a).
L'institution a incorrectement placé la demande d'accès en attente. L’allégation s’inscrit dans le cadre de l’alinéa 30(1)f).
L'institution a communiqué par téléphone malgré la demande de communication par écrit. L’allégation s’inscrit dans le cadre de l’alinéa 30(1)f).
La Commissaire à l’information du Canada avise Ministère de la Justice Canada, en vertu de l’article 32 de la Loi, qu’elle a l’intention de faire enquête sur cette ou ces allégation(s). L’institution doit donc conserver tous les documents relatifs à celle(s)-ci jusqu’à ce que l’enquête et tout recours judiciaire subséquent soient terminés.
Amended notice of intention to investigate under section 32 (corrected notice)
Institution: Department of Justice Canada
The Office of the Information Commissioner has corrected the allegations listed in the Notice of intention to investigate under section 32 issued on September 15, 2022. The allegation(s) are now as follows:
It took an invalid extension of time and eventually withdrew it. This allegation falls under paragraph 30(1)(a).
It improperly placed the access request on hold. This allegation falls under paragraph 30(1)(f).
It communicated by phone, despite requesting communication in writing. This allegation falls under paragraph 30(1)(f).
The Information Commissioner of Canada gives notice to Department of Justice Canada under section 32 that she intends to investigate this allegation(s). Consequently, the institution must keep all records relating to the allegation(s) until the investigation and any subsequent legal proceedings are complete. ---------- Original message ---------- From: Leighton Grey <LGrey@gwsllp.ca> Date: Sun, 22 May 2022 17:53:32 +0000 Subject: Re: Methinks YOU and many FEDS FOR FREEDOM cannot deny that I crossed paths with their lawyer Leighton Grey QC just over a year ago N'esy Pas Higgy?? To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail. Mr. Amos: I have no connection whatsoever to Mark Jackson. Nor do I presently represent FFF. Regards, “Lex deficere non potest Justitia exhibenda” Leighton B. U. Grey, Q.C. Senior Counsel GWSLLP ______________________________ From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail. Sent: Sunday, May 22, 2022 11:48:54 AM To: Blaine.Higgs@gnb.ca <Blaine.Higgs@gnb.ca>; premier <premier@ontario.ca>; Brenda.Lucki <Brenda.Lucki@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>; Bill.Blair <Bill.Blair@parl.gc.ca>; premier <premier@gov.ab.ca>; derekstorie85@gmail.com <derekstorie85@gmail.com>; cps <cps@calgarypolice.ca>; ministryofjustice@gov.ab.ca <ministryofjustice@gov.ab.ca>; Kaycee.Madu <Kaycee.Madu@gov.ab.ca>; hugh.flemming <hugh.flemming@gnb.ca>; Bill.Hogan <Bill.Hogan@gnb.ca>; pm <pm@pm.gc.ca>; Katie.Telford <Katie.Telford@pmo-cpm.gc.ca>; Ian.Shugart <Ian.Shugart@pco-bcp.gc.ca>; jcarpay <jcarpay@jccf.ca>; jagmeet.singh <jagmeet.singh@parl.gc.ca>; robert.mckee <robert.mckee@gnb.ca>; andrea.anderson-mason <andrea.anderson-mason@gnb.ca> oldmaison <oldmaison@yahoo.com>; Office of the Premier <scott.moe@gov.sk.ca> Cc: motomaniac333 <motomaniac333@gmail.com>; Leighton Grey <LGrey@gwsllp.ca>; contact@fedsforfreedom.ca <contact@fedsforfreedom.ca>; ian <ian@mccuaiglaw.ca>; mjackson@fieldlaw.com <mjackson@fieldlaw.com>; freedomreport.ca <freedomreport.ca@gmail.com>; chris.scott@ <chris.scott@ <sheilagunnreid@gmail.com>; stefanos.karatopis <stefanos.karatopis@gmail.com> Subject: Methinks YOU and many FEDS FOR FREEDOM cannot deny that I crossed paths with their lawyer Leighton Grey QC just over a year ago N'esy Pas Higgy?? Hence anyone should undestand why I am laughing at them today EH? CEASE & DESIST SERVED TO CORE FEDERAL DEPARTMENTSWednesday, January 26, 2022 FEDS FOR FREEDOM FOR IMMEDIATE PRESS RELEASE This notice is to inform the press and the public at large, that today the President, Secretary and Chief Human Resources Officer of the Treasury Board (the official employer of federal public servants) have been served with a Cease and Desist letter regarding the federal vaccination mandate for public servants. Today, January 26th 2022, the lawyers for Feds For Freedom, a not-for-profit advocacy organization for public servants, served The Honorable Mona Fortier, Peter Wallace, Christine Donughue along with all Departmental Ministers of the Core Public Service Administration under the Treasury Board Secretariat. These documents put the individuals served on notice that the federal vaccine mandates are unjustifiable, unconstitutional and criminal in nature. Feds For Freedom maintains that bodily autonomy and informed consent, free of coercion, intimidation or bullying are fundamental rights that are inviolable. The consequences laid out by legal counsel include, but are not limited to:
As federal public servants, we have had our livelihoods stripped from us; we have endured unprecedented amounts stress and hardships. We have been harassed, ridiculed, mocked and had hatred and violence incited against us. This type of abusive behavior cannot and will not be tolerated; we expect and request an expeditious response.
Grey Wowk Spencer LLP Page 8 . "Per
the attached Appendices, and for the reasons stated, there is no
rational or legal basis for making Covid vaccination a condition of
employment with the Government of Canada . This
violates Provincial, Federal, and International Human Rights statutes,
agreements, and conventions. This is therefore notice to the Government
of Canada that if it proceeds to act upon its threat to suspend without
pay, or terminate any of the named employees whom we represent for the
above noted reasons, the following action shall be taken without any
further notice: 1. Legal action shall be commenced against the Government of Canada ; 2. Multiple Human Rights Claims shall be filed alleging violation of ss.7 and 15 of the Charter and applicable Provincial Human Rights Legislation and 3.
An application shall be brought seeking injunctive relief and punitive
damages against the Government of Canada arising from irreparable damage
caused through violation of the fundamental human rights of the named
employees. We
expect that the Government of Canada shall govern itself accordingly.
In the meanwhile, we look forward to hearing from your corporate legal
counsel. Yours truly, GREY WOWK SPENCER LLP Per: Leighton B. U. Grey, Q.C. LBUG/mg"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Aqr9motb9I&ab_channel=BridgeCityNews
Federal Court rules Emergencies Act violated Charter Rights | Jeremiah Jost | GUEST17.4K subscribers1,654 views Jan 25, 2024
17 Comments
|
Re: Announcement from Vincent Gircys.
info@nationalcitizensinquiry.ca<info@nationalcitizensinquiry.ca> | Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 6:52 PM | ||||||||||||
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com> | |||||||||||||
Thank you for reaching out to the National Citizens Inquiry. We are grateful for all your messages. Due to the volume of correspondence we are receiving, it may take time to respond. Thank you for your patience. You may find the answer you’re looking for on our website. Please visit https:// message concerns: Media Inquiries: Thank you! Please redirect your message to press@nationalcitizensinquiry. Commissioners’ Report: Thank you! Please visit https:// Volunteering: Thank you! Please sign up online if you haven’t already: https:// Other Inquiries: Thank you! We will respond as soon as we can. Help share the Commissioners’ Report! Learn more at https:// To stay updated on all things NCI, please sign-up for our e-newsletter: https:// Yours sincerely, NCI Support Team PS The National Citizens Inquiry relies on the gracious support of volunteers to help with our correspondence. If your question was not fully answered, or you have additional questions or concerns, please reach out to us again for assistance.
|
Vincent Gircys is working with John Carpay and JCCF so of course they would play dumb while they settle with you
David Amos<david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com> | Thu, Feb 1, 2024 at 9:00 AM |
To: dana_lee_ca@hotmail.com | |
---------- Original message ---------- From: Dana-lee Melfi <dana_lee_ca@hotmail.com> Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2024 07:03:08 +0000 Subject: Fw: JCCF Portion of our current contract and This Retainer will not be changed unless both the Lawyer and I agree to the changes, and sign the new or altered Retainer. To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail. Hello David Wanted to share as I did like nor accept the hogwash that she tried to respond with. I held her to our contract and advised she should send the bill to JCCF. This is the 5th or 6th time documented she do so, and the first time "Sure, I can approach JCCF." she did? The answer came at 5:59 am this morning that JCCF was going to pay "the outstanding balance" and make a media release. I waited all day and none was made and still advertising my image with a donate button. The reason I was waiting is because she arbitrarily used my trust without me releasing it to her "if it was needed". Then I noticed your email was also sent to John Carpay. I have no worries because no matter what they will be paying the entire amount and not just the remainder. I do want to see how they handle this before this portion is shared. Will they admit the mental distress they have placed on me during this crucial trial I was headed to? Why did my lawyer not follow her contract in so many ways? I was constantly pressed to take deals. I could have used trust to travel and my stay for court and every donor would vouch they would be happy with that as I have the list she sent me and know everyone on it. No media release was made and no contact from JCCF. Monick says it is up to I to "take it up with her" meaning Eva Chipiuk. The problem for Monick is now that I do not give my number out at that time and could only be found in our secure contract that was shared with JCCF as Eva was still working for JCCF. If she would have called about my case I probably would or could not have an issue. That is not the case though and did document with an email and a call to Monick within 10 minutes. Please give it a day to see how they respond. Because it is cross border legal services with many contractual violations and ethics violations this is now a King's bench matter. I will be preparing a file for the complaints. I noticed that Vincent Gircys has decided to not read nor understand the importance of taking a few minutes to review. It is ok because my "Independent interim investigation and report" is almost ready. Dana-lee [cid:e0fabda6-500f-4943-8ff1- ______________________________ From: Monick Grenier <monick@grenierlaw.ca> Sent: January 31, 2024 5:59 AM To: Dana-lee Melfi <dana_lee_ca@hotmail.com> Subject: RE: JCCF Portion of our current contract and This Retainer will not be changed unless both the Lawyer and I agree to the changes, and sign the new or altered Retainer. You would need to take that up with her. All I know about that, I already told in in 2022 and that she's no longer with JCCF. I was only responding to your apparent allegations against me in response to my request to be paid the outstanding balance owing. As requested, i contacted JCCF with your bill and pointed out their fundraising. They agreed to pay the bill and will prepare a media release. Monick [pic]<https://www.grenierlaw. Monick L. Grenier Grenier Law 201-280 Metcalfe Street Ottawa, Ontario K2PIR7 T: 613-755-4037 / C: 613-552-5537 / F: 613-702-5557 www.grenierlaw.ca<https://www. <https://www.facebook.com/ <https://www.linkedin.com/in/ With offices conveniently located at Stave Law Chambers. www.stave.ca<https://www. [pic]<https://www.stave.ca/> Grenier Litigation Professional Corporation. This message is intended only for the named recipients and may contain information that is privileged or confidential. Dissemination or copying of this message and any attachments by anyone other than a named recipient is strictly prohibited. If you are not a named recipient, please notify us immediately, and permanently destroy this message and any copies you may have. From: Dana-lee Melfi <dana_lee_ca@hotmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2024 12:33 PM To: Monick Grenier <monick@grenierlaw.ca> Subject: Re: JCCF Portion of our current contract and This Retainer will not be changed unless both the Lawyer and I agree to the changes, and sign the new or altered Retainer. She had no right to use my information in our file to call and ask for her own personal agenda not related to my case. She called on behalf of Tamara and to ask to use my "proof" and release my documentation and videos explicitly only to "Help Tamara". You and they dismissed this with excuses that it "was harmless". It was not and I made sure to document it with you. She used private and protected information for personal gain. Period. JCCF was aware she did this and there were others in the room when she called me. ______________________________ From: Monick Grenier <monick@grenierlaw.ca<mailto:m Sent: January 30, 2024 11:27 AM To: 'Dana-lee Melfi' <dana_lee_ca@hotmail.com< Subject: RE: JCCF Portion of our current contract and This Retainer will not be changed unless both the Lawyer and I agree to the changes, and sign the new or altered Retainer. Hi Dana-lee, Sure, I can approach JCCF. To reply to what you call, “our first breach of contract,” if you are suggesting that I breached solicitor client privilege, that remains inaccurate. First, the retainer agreement you signed authorized me to speak with JCCF about your file. Secondly, in July 2022 you wanted to hear from JCCF about a media interview. In fact, you agreed to talk to them about a media release. I confirmed in writing to you on July 28, 2022 that I accordingly provided them with your number. You spoke to JCCF and the result of that was the media release (in or about August 18, 2022). Eva worked for JCCF. I already explained this to you in my email to you on October 8, 2022. That is clearly the context in which she received your phone number. Monick [pic]<https://www.grenierlaw. Monick L. Grenier Grenier Law 201-280 Metcalfe Street Ottawa, Ontario K2PIR7 T: 613-755-4037 / C: 613-552-5537 / F: 613-702-5557 www.grenierlaw.ca<https://www. <https://www.facebook.com/ <https://www.linkedin.com/in/ With offices conveniently located at Stave Law Chambers. www.stave.ca<https://www. [pic]<https://www.stave.ca/> Grenier Litigation Professional Corporation. This message is intended only for the named recipients and may contain information that is privileged or confidential. Dissemination or copying of this message and any attachments by anyone other than a named recipient is strictly prohibited. If you are not a named recipient, please notify us immediately, and permanently destroy this message and any copies you may have. From: Dana-lee Melfi <dana_lee_ca@hotmail.com< Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2024 11:31 AM To: Monick Grenier <monick@grenierlaw.ca<mailto:m Subject: Re: JCCF Portion of our current contract and This Retainer will not be changed unless both the Lawyer and I agree to the changes, and sign the new or altered Retainer. Hello Monick Thank you for your response. Please submit your bill to JCCF and wait for a response as directed. You say you do not understand much of what I say and discount specific communications. Eva took my private info from OUR file and contacted me in Oct 2022 on my personal cell phone # that was not available in any other way. I immediately contacted you. It was the FIRST breach of contract from you and JCCF. I have been straight forward and this implicates collusion into the illegal actions preformed by JCCF and the forementioned. We are in a global battle. You cannot hold accountability while standing in a lie. Internal faith is shown by external actions. Dana-lee Melfi Peace-Man ______________________________ From: Monick Grenier <monick@grenierlaw.ca<mailto:m Sent: January 30, 2024 10:06 AM To: 'Dana-lee Melfi' <dana_lee_ca@hotmail.com< Subject: RE: JCCF Portion of our current contract and This Retainer will not be changed unless both the Lawyer and I agree to the changes, and sign the new or altered Retainer. Hi Dana-lee, Your email is very lengthy. I have replied, but I will not continue these communications. I cannot address JCCF’s position. I can confirm to you that I have never breached solicitor-client privilege and I have never disclosed any confidential information to Chris Barber, and in fact I’ve never spoken to him about you or your file, or JCCF and your file. You complained to me about harassment by him that was interfering with your fundraising efforts. You also previously approved the release of information to the public, that JCCF was funding your defence. I, in turn, told his lawyer to speak to him about this (that his behavior was interfering with your fundraising). I did not speak to him directly. While I am “on the record” as one of the counsel on his file, there is no relation between his case and yours (other than they both arise from the protest). You will recall however, that given your complaints about him, I told you that I am on the record for him, and I asked you if that was a conflict to you because if so, I cannot represent you both. Your answer to me was “I trust you,” and you did not find there was a conflict. The same issue was raised with him by his lawyer, about me, and no conflict was recognized. In any event, I did not speak to him about your file, and I did not speak to you about his file. His awareness of anything about you or your did not come from me – other than a text message I received from him where he asked if the charges were withdrawn, to which I replied only “yes,” which is a fact on the public record and not protected by solicitor client privilege. Therefore, these alleged “intimate details like them offering a new lawyer in writing to me” are not intimate at all, but were either gleaned from public knowledge and/or presumed by him through logical induction. It did not come from me. Below are some answers to some comments in your email. * I informed you of your professional standards even while asking me to pay an amount of $10,000. I’m not sure what you are referring to. I have fulfilled by obligations to you. * I informed you of my faith in you and trust you will do your job "to the best of your abilities" and told you I do not wish for another lawyer and give the courts any excuse to delay. And I continued to represent you, the result of which was the withdrawal of the charges. * I refused all "deals" and again informed you I would not plead guilty to any wrongdoing. And you did not take a deal and your charges were withdrawn. * I asked you to put in a late disclosure application. The charges were withdrawn. I told you that a late disclosure application was available, however, the charges were withdrawn. Consequently, there is no purpose or forum for a late disclosure application. * I asked to review any material you were going to share with the courts after you did not let me review the Charter Application. I did not file any further applications or other substantive material after the Charter Application was filed. You did review the Charter Application after it was filed, and you wanted me to add other sections which were not appropriate. I advised you of this. You did not want anything removed. * After shadowing up and ready on Jan 22 and making myself available for two hours before the 10"00 am scheduled time there was no Judge and no written explanation from the courts to me as to why. I asked for this. I questioned why my lawyer would not question this before first adjournment on that day. You did not tell me you wanted a “written explanation from the Court.. as to why” your matter did not proceed immediately. You did not tell me that you wanted to meet two hours before Court. The reason why the Court was not prepared to start was made clear on the record in your presence: there were other matters before your matter. That leaves no question unanswered. I told you this the week before the trial, as soon as I found out. * Again I was ready and no Judge and not questioned on record. The reason was clear and you understood that because you were in the Court. * A colleague of mine contacted you in advocation asking you to review something before returning to court. David Amos. I did review what he sent me, a series of letters to various agencies in Canada and the US (and possibly even the UK) advising him that his inquiries are not within their purview. They were entirely irrelevant. * He was met with dismissal. You never asked or contacted me to ask if this was in fact a colleague or friend. He did not tell me he was a “colleague or friend” but that he knew of your case and that if I presented what he sent me to the Crown they would immediately drop the case. When I looked at what he sent me, I saw nothing of relevance. He in fact ended the call very abruptly, not me. I have no obligation to tell you about random calls I receive from strangers. * This is quite important as you say that the Charter Application Challenge was a key factor in the decision. I’m not drawing the connection between this sentence and the ones above. Your charges were withdrawn. There is not a better outcome short of an acquittal which would have taken longer and cost more and was not a certain outcome. * There were other key factors. David contacted many people over several months and waited for responses. He never contacted me and did his entire investigation from my online presence and seen what I was on too for the security of Canada. In those communications you can find all here at this link below. Your charges have been withdrawn. There is no other obligation on my part. Perhaps he sent me the wrong file. What I recall seeing were old letters (predating 2022) from various officials advising that they could not address his inquiries. * There was no Judge because there were none that would take the seat after these communications is an avenue we are exploring with the courts through the transcripts and communications. The EMA being deemed illegal had zero baring on my case. We both know the courts seen how serious I was and did not want this case to be heard. I’m not following what you are saying here. There was a Judge, but there were matters before yours. What is on the transcripts is exactly what you heard in Court yourself. I think you are referring to the Emergencies Act decision. Yes, it had zero baring on your case, I agree. I disagree that the Court had any particular concern about your case proceeding. They knew if the Trial did not start that week, that I would recommend to you that we proceed with a Late Disclosure Application and a Jordan Application. I already told you this, and I explained the remedy for a success Jordan Application. You already told me you did not particularly want a Jordan Application but the Crown would not have known that – and it would have been the most reasonable next step and could have resulted in your charges being dismissed. At that point it becomes a waste of resources for the Crown to prosecute (as it was, in my opinion, before that point as well). * They know of the investigation I have been on. Despite me eluding to it many times to you, you have yet to question or try and understand the magnitude. I was retained to represent you against four criminal charges, all of which have been withdrawn. That was my only role. That retainer is now complete. I do not represent you for any other reason. I do not know the investigation you are on. I do know you have a dispute with JCCF and complaints about various people and you believe there is a larger agenda on the world scale, all of which had nothing do to with your defence, which is now complete. * On Jan 23 2024 I brought a witness to court from NCI. She also witnessed our communications outside the court room. I have no idea who you are referring to, and why or how this is relevant. * The representative that showed has never seen a case where a planned trial and no judge available. It happens often that the Courts are double booked, in my experience, in Ottawa criminal matters, even predating the pandemic. The Judge in Court was your assigned judge. * You are on the legal defence for Tamara and Chris Barber. We had to have many discussions about your client sabotaging my fundraising in more than one spot. None of them actually done by me but good Canadians that wanted to support me. You still allowed for it to happen and it hurt me. I told you, I do not wish you any harm. But you allowed harm and now asking me for payment. Tamara Lich is represented by Lawrence Greenspon and others. I do not represent Tamara Lich. I am on the record in an assistance role to counsel for Chris Barber. We discussed this. * After my case was withdrawn I spent two days finally disclosing my investigation to NCI with hundreds of documents and, video, and testimony on how the protest of 2022 was infiltrated and the public defrauded and deceived. You are free to do so. My only comment to you about what you say publicly now that the charges have been withdrawn, is that the Crown could in theory revive the charges if you now make admissions of criminal mischief or obstruct for example. I’ve already explained this to you, however, in other words, your actions could have been damaging to your defence in that a Judge could have found that you committed criminal mischief (had the videos been admitted), by finding that you intentionally barricaded the truck you were on or by telling others to block the road. Those actions do not fall within the scope of lawful, peaceful protest. * Plainly. On Feb 7th 2022 a Corporation was formed that placed demands on a five eyes country. If the Government would have even responded then a precedent would be set. Therefore the citizen led movement and their voices were stollen and premeditated. There were and are, far more than me working on this and there will be many more to testify in accordance to this. The money donated was always to be subverted and never to reach the intended recipients. and much more. The conspiracy charges will be investigated in a new way now. The Police have all the evidence that Freedom Corp and 53 other influencers and members of MSM in Canada were aware that lawyers for JCCF facilitated a media and propaganda control room for clients with court conditions and against those conditions. The Police notified and given evidence (Blonde) withheld this evidence even while under oath in his testimony before the courts. Has still yet to inform or share this evidence to date. This has no relevance to my representation of you. * Want to share that I am well aware that JCCF has paid a "private lawyer", yourself, just as recent as the date you want to abruptly end our contract with a quick finalization. As per your screenshot, you have asked Mr. Narvey this directly, and he has replied to you. I can advise you that they could not transfer all files to inhouse counsel due to scheduling conflicts and lawyer availability. * Page 1 of the 2024-01-27 MELFI ACCOUNT 1414 PDF is missing. (incomplete work) I see what you mean. There is nothing missing. It is a bug that occurs sometimes in my software. The first page of the account which says page 2 is the first page. You can tell that because it has my name at the top, and is addressed to you. Only the first page includes that information, which you can see if you look at any prior account I’ve sent you. I’ve attached the corrected version. * I wish to have a detailed full account of the payments for your services from the start of our retainer to todays date. I told you we will be sending the bill to JCCF first and if they refuse to pay then the next step is to pay it with the trust in place when I hold them accountable. I advised you that if it came down to it I would pay from my life insurance if I was allowed to withdraw and not affect my lawsuit (DANA-LEE vs GOVERNMENT OF SASKATCHEWAN). There was no disclaimer provided to me with your promise to pay me. You’ve already been provided with copies of previous accounts rendered, from my assistant by emails dated November 18, 2022 and January 4, 2023. I had not rendered a further account for work performed prior to the new arrangement offered by JCCF but I intend to. You should receive a copy of that account also (if and when it is rendered). * I ask you if you are the lawyer for Wayne Narvey? That is a matter on the public record as Mr. Narvey has chosen to share this information with his followers on social media with appreciation, for which I am very grateful. He has also communicated directly with you. * You have a retainer with him as a personal lawyer with JCCF as the payee correct? You have asked Mr. Narvey directly and he has replied to you. * His court is now complete. And JCCF has confirmed they would pay. I also have an admission from Wayne that this is the case. (pictures attached) I am not the person to address these comments. The retainer agreement also says, “If the Justice Centre does not pay the legal fees, I understand that I will be responsible to pay the legal fees.” This clause contemplates a situation like yours, and the remedy. If you want me to approach JCCF to see if this can be resolved, I suppose I could, although at this point, I’m not sure even that would satisfy you. * They have also paid much to others private lawyers. This raises some ethical questions on their actions and explanations to me. As above, I am not the person to address these comments. I have no idea what they have paid or spent private counsel nor on inhouse counsel for that matter. * Before I continue Monick I ask you to complete our business and contract with answering some questions, providing some services that have now arisen due to the oddness of the courts actions. To remain loyal to your client that has obeyed all Rights and Freedoms under the law. That has paid and treated you with respect. I am no longer your lawyer. Please do not take that as being blunt, or abrupt. It is simply a fact. Nevertheless, I have spent over an hour and a half replying to this email. * There are much more intelligent people than I that have been watching every social communication and7or Government submissions that I have initiated since the days before my stance. The questions and investigation that I have been involved with and "I stood in peace on these filed documents within the law at all times". Good for you. * No Judge within their ethics would ever try my case for a reason. They are not only aware of my strong defence, but also aware of the investigations I am involved with. This is highly implausible. * They were all notified long before my trial date. There are even responses from many acknowledging receipt. All 338 of the house of commons were notified and possible cabinet meetings associated. The Chief of defence notified and etc. Right up to our Prime Minister. * https://davidraymondamos3. You have posted this email publicly? Ok, well, that is your choice. You certainly cannot claim privacy for anything you post publicly. * I am staying in Ottawa to do some follow up and am able to have a meeting with you. I have nothing to discuss with you. I’ve been replying to your complaints for almost two hours now. I have bills to pay and obligations to meet. * I am available at your earliest convenience and need to get to a finalisation to submit my bill to JCCF. The trust is to be returned to an account until such time as I agree to release it. No, it does not work that way. * I must in the end advise the donors that the money they have sent was accounted for as I promised. It has. See account attached. When will you pay the remainder? * I want you to understand the seriousness and not discount it as "an issue between JCCF and I". I want a lot of things too. * It is also your issue in your new corporation. When we entered our agreement, you were a sole proprietorship. Is that supposed to be a threat of some sort? You retained me, I have always been your lawyer. Funds were donated to cover your legal fees. I represented you, and rendered an account. * I am giving you a chance to rectify the mistakes made and continue to honour our current retainer. I’ve replied to your email. If you there was a mistake make, I fail to see what it is, or what damages you have suffered. You agreed to pay me and most clients would be grateful for the outcome I obtained. Now that the account has been rendered you’ve suddenly come up with a multitude of reasons not to pay, and have even suggested I should not be paid at all. I see exactly what is going on here. I hope that helps clarify. I apologize for any typos, I’ve already spent too much time on this, and will send it without any further review. I do not intend to devote any further unnecessary time to your complaints subject to any invitation to act on my part expressed in this letter. I will resend you the prior accounts which you have previously received, as per your request. Monick [pic]<https://www.grenierlaw. Monick L. Grenier Grenier Law 201-280 Metcalfe Street Ottawa, Ontario K2PIR7 T: 613-755-4037 / C: 613-552-5537 / F: 613-702-5557 www.grenierlaw.ca<https://www. <https://www.facebook.com/ <https://www.linkedin.com/in/ With offices conveniently located at Stave Law Chambers. www.stave.ca<https://www. [pic]<https://www.stave.ca/> Grenier Litigation Professional Corporation. This message is intended only for the named recipients and may contain information that is privileged or confidential. Dissemination or copying of this message and any attachments by anyone other than a named recipient is strictly prohibited. If you are not a named recipient, please notify us immediately, and permanently destroy this message and any copies you may have. From: Dana-lee Melfi <dana_lee_ca@hotmail.com< Sent: Monday, January 29, 2024 11:00 PM To: Monick Grenier <monick@grenierlaw.ca<mailto:m Subject: JCCF Portion of our current contract and This Retainer will not be changed unless both the Lawyer and I agree to the changes, and sign the new or altered Retainer. Hello Monick I have unanswered questions about our current retainer. I have "demanded" nothing. I have asked you complete your work before "finalization" and with several unanswered questions as your client. I do not have time to finish the draft of all these questions and requests I guess, and is of no interest now as you now have indicated quite abruptly and rudely. Let me make this very clear my friend. This is nothing personal. I have not released JCCF of their commitment and have disputed that JCCF has honoured their part of our current retainer. The excuses that were given is "they could not afford to pay private lawyers" and they offered an "inhouse lawyer". No other reasons given. This was not the case though as it was a brand-new law firm with zero experience as such under the licence, they operate. This made me question the communications the day you notified me that JCCF wants to change their agreement. I immediately tried to contact JCCF through several means and they would not respond. You know who did respond to me with conformation that JCCF will no longer help me? Chris Barber in writing to me. How did he even know? He described intimate details like them offering a new lawyer in writing to me. This is when I emailed you back to question these things and was met by a "is already done" attitude. So I had the retainer reviewed by a lawyer friend I have and I was advised to proceed cautiously. So I did. I reminded you of the contract in place , and specifically pointed out, 9. I understand that my matter is confidential, and that no information will be released to the Justice Centre except as provided in this Retainer. 10. I understand that the Lawyer’s obligations are to me, if a dispute arises between me and the Justice Centre. 11. I understand and consent that this legal payment arrangement has been provided to the Justice Centre. 12. I understand and consent that the Lawyer will provide me and the Justice Centre with a copy of each account due on this matter and that the Justice Centre will pay the said account on my behalf as well as a copy of this Retainer 13. As a condition of the Justice Centre paying my legal fees for this matter: (a) I agree to assert my constitutional and other legal rights; (d) I consent to the Lawyer utilizing, in regard to this matter, the services of other lawyers, paralegals, IT personnel and the communication team who work with the Justice Centre, and I consent to the disclosure of information related to this matter to these persons to the extent deemed appropriate by the Lawyer; (f) I agree to fully cooperate with the media and communications strategies approved by the Lawyer and implemented by the Justice Centre to publicize my matter; 14. If the Justice Centre does not pay the legal fee4s, I understand that I will be responsible to pay the legal fees. 17. I hereby authorize the Lawyer to discuss all aspects of this matter with the Justice Centre’s officers, directors, employees and network of volunteer legal service providers for the purpose of advancing the matter. Such communications shall not constitute a waiver of solicitor-client or litigation privilege. 25. I understand that this Retainer represents the whole Retainer between me and the Lawyer in regards to the matter. This Retainer will not be changed unless both the Lawyer and I agree to the changes, and sign the new or altered Retainer. This Retainer may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall be an original, but all of which together shall constitute one instrument. This Retainer may be executed by facsimile or PDF signature(s). 26. The laws of the Province of Ontario shall govern this Retainer. 27. I understand, the Lawyer is happy to answer any questions I may have. I may wish to have this retainer agreement reviewed by another lawyer. (Of which was done before I entered) I have already instructed you many times that our retainer is current and incomplete. When JCCF and John Carpay did not respond to my communications I secured a flight to Calgary and was going to walk in the front door of their head office. When they found out I was on the ground in Calgary I finally get a communication from their representative and he takes me for a lunch to explain. I did not let them out of the contract as they were still using my face several places online with a donate button even to this day 1/29/2024. POSTED ON: AUGUST 11, 2022 COVID-19-NEWS-RELEASESNEWS RELEASES Count Days 536 days of advertising August 11, 2022 - January 29, 2024 (Page 1 missing in finalization of billing that shows the total paid by JCCF) https://www.jccf.ca/peace-man- 536 * aprox $3033.22 = $5.68 per day. I know from admissions and testimony that many specifically donated for my cause at JCCF within the first 100 days. And even recently. I did however agree for a consultation from this new proposed lawyer and firm to show my cooperation with their offer. After the consultation they sent me a new retainer to review. I did and also had it reviewed. It was NOT in my best interest to enter or even entertain that retainer. I informed YOU of this. I was never going to respond to that lawyer or firm again. A week later he contacted me and said he was NOT a representative of JCCF, when just two emails before he said he was. He was unethical in a very pointed and out right lie. You are cc'ed in that email. I could not take this lawyer they "offered". WE did not agree and did not enter into a new retainer and ours explicitly states the one we have is still in effect to this day 01/29/2024 I informed you several times that the https://LSO.ca<https://lso.ca/ and https://lawsociety.mb.ca/ Had been contacted. Kings bench also contacted due to the seriousness beyond provincial borders on several lawyers under the banner of JCCF. I informed you of your professional standards even while asking me to pay an amount of $10,000. I informed you of my faith in you and trust you will do your job "to the best of your abilities" and told you I do not wish for another lawyer and give the courts any excuse to delay. I refused all "deals" and again informed you I would not plead guilty to any wrongdoing. I asked you to put in a late disclosure application. I asked to review any material you were going to share with the courts after you did not let me review the Charter Application. After shadowing up and ready on Jan 22 and making myself available for two hours before the 10"00 am scheduled time there was no Judge and no written explanation from the courts to me as to why. I asked for this. I questioned why my lawyer would not question this before first adjournment on that day. I waited until 2 pm and again no Judge and adjourned to Jan 23 10"00 am. Again I was ready and no Judge and not questioned on record. A colleague of mine contacted you in advocation asking you to review something before returning to court. David Amos. He was met with dismissal. You never asked or contacted me to ask if this was in fact a colleague or friend. This is quite important as you say that the Charter Application Challenge was a key factor in the decision. There were other key factors. David contacted many people over several months and waited for responses. He never contacted me and did his entire investigation from my online presence and seen what I was on too for the security of Canada. In those communications you can find all here at this link below. There was no Judge because there were none that would take the seat after these communications is an avenue we are exploring with the courts through the transcripts and communications. The EMA being deemed illegal had zero baring on my case. We both know the courts seen how serious I was and did not want this case to be heard. They know of the investigation I have been on. Despite me eluding to it many times to you, you have yet to question or try and understand the magnitude. On Jan 23 2024 I brought a witness to court from NCI. She also witnessed our communications outside the court room. What had NCI interested is they have representatives that have attended almost all cases regarding the protests and invocation of the Mandates and EMA in their own investigation. The representative that showed has never seen a case where a planned trial and no judge available. You are on the legal defence for Tamara and Chris Barber. We had to have many discussions about your client sabotaging my fundraising in more than one spot. None of them actually done by me but good Canadians that wanted to support me. You still allowed for it to happen and it hurt me. I told you, I do not wish you any harm. But you allowed harm and now asking me for payment. After my case was withdrawn I spent two days finally disclosing my investigation to NCI with hundreds of documents and, video, and testimony on how the protest of 2022 was infiltrated and the public defrauded and deceived. Plainly. On Feb 7th 2022 a Corporation was formed that placed demands on a five eyes country. If the Government would have even responded then a precedent would be set. Therefore the citizen led movement and their voices were stollen and premeditated. There were and are, far more than me working on this and there will be many more to testify in accordance to this. The money donated was always to be subverted and never to reach the intended recipients. and much more. The conspiracy charges will be investigated in a new way now. The Police have all the evidence that Freedom Corp and 53 other influencers and members of MSM in Canada were aware that lawyers for JCCF facilitated a media and propaganda control room for clients with court conditions and against those conditions. The Police notified and given evidence (Blonde) withheld this evidence even while under oath in his testimony before the courts. Has still yet to inform or share this evidence to date. Want to share that I am well aware that JCCF has paid a "private lawyer", yourself, just as recent as the date you want to abruptly end our contract with a quick finalization. Page 1 of the 2024-01-27 MELFI ACCOUNT 1414 PDF is missing. (incomplete work) I wish to have a detailed full account of the payments for your services from the start of our retainer to todays date. I told you we will be sending the bill to JCCF first and if they refuse to pay then the next step is to pay it with the trust in place when I hold them accountable. I advised you that if it came down to it I would pay from my life insurance if I was allowed to withdraw and not affect my lawsuit (DANA-LEE vs GOVERNMENT OF SASKATCHEWAN). I ask you if you are the lawyer for Wayne Narvey? You have a retainer with him as a personal lawyer with JCCF as the payee correct? His court is now complete. And JCCF has confirmed they would pay. I also have an admission from Wayne that this is the case. (pictures attached) They have also paid much to others private lawyers. This raises some ethical questions on their actions and explanations to me. Before I continue Monick I ask you to complete our business and contract with answering some questions, providing some services that have now arisen due to the oddness of the courts actions. To remain loyal to your client that has obeyed all Rights and Freedoms under the law. That has paid and treated you with respect. There are much more intelligent people than I that have been watching every social communication and7or Government submissions that I have initiated since the days before my stance. The questions and investigation that I have been involved with and "I stood in peace on these filed documents within the law at all times". No Judge within their ethics would ever try my case for a reason. They are not only aware of my strong defence, but also aware of the investigations I am involved with. They were all notified long before my trial date. There are even responses from many acknowledging receipt. All 338 of the house of commons were notified and possible cabinet meetings associated. The Chief of defence notified and etc. Right up to our Prime Minister. https://davidraymondamos3. I am staying in Ottawa to do some follow up and am able to have a meeting with you. A call would be insufficient and communications in email seem to be misunderstood. I am available at your earliest convenience and need to get to a finalisation to submit my bill to JCCF. The trust is to be returned to an account until such time as I agree to release it. I must in the end advise the donors that the money they have sent was accounted for as I promised. I want you to understand the seriousness and not discount it as "an issue between JCCF and I". It is also your issue in your new corporation. When we entered our agreement, you were a sole proprietorship. I am giving you a chance to rectify the mistakes made and continue to honour our current retainer. Thank you, Dana-lee Melfi |
Fw: JCCF Portion of our current contract and This Retainer will not be changed unless both the Lawyer and I agree to the changes, and sign the new or altered Retainer.
Dana-lee Melfi<dana_lee_ca@hotmail.com> | Thu, Feb 1, 2024 at 3:03 AM | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com> | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Hello David
Wanted to share as I did like nor accept the hogwash that she tried to respond with. I held her to our contract and advised she should send the bill to JCCF. This is the 5th or 6th time documented she do so, and the first time "Sure,
I can approach JCCF." she did?
The answer came at 5:59 am this morning that JCCF was going to pay "the outstanding balance" and make a media release.
I waited all day and none was made and still advertising my image with a donate button. The reason I was waiting is because she arbitrarily used my trust without me releasing it to her "if it was needed". Then I noticed your email was also sent to John Carpay. I have no worries because no matter what they will be paying the entire amount and not just the remainder. I do want to see how they handle this before this portion is shared. Will they admit the mental distress they have placed on me during this crucial trial I was headed to? Why did my lawyer not follow her contract in so many ways? I was constantly pressed to take deals. I could have used trust to travel and my stay for court and every donor would vouch they would be happy with that as I have the list she sent me and know everyone on it. No media release was made and no contact from JCCF. Monick says it is up to I to "take it up with her" meaning Eva Chipiuk. The problem for Monick is now that I do not give my number out at that time and could only be found in our secure contract that was shared with JCCF as Eva was still working for JCCF. If she would have called about my case I probably would or could not have an issue. That is not the case though and did document with an email and a call to Monick within 10 minutes. Please give it a day to see how they respond. Because it is cross border legal services with many contractual violations and ethics violations this is now a King's bench matter. I will be preparing a file for the complaints. I noticed that
Vincent
Gircys has
decided to not read nor understand the importance of taking a few
minutes to review. It is ok because my "Independent interim
investigation and report" is almost ready.
Dana-lee From: Monick Grenier <monick@grenierlaw.ca>
Sent: January 31, 2024 5:59 AM To: Dana-lee Melfi <dana_lee_ca@hotmail.com> Subject: RE: JCCF Portion of our current contract and This Retainer will not be changed unless both the Lawyer and I agree to the changes, and sign the new or altered Retainer. You would need to take that up with her. All I know about that, I already told in in 2022 and that she's no longer with JCCF.
I was only responding to your apparent allegations against me in response to my request to be paid the outstanding balance owing. As requested, i contacted JCCF with your bill and pointed out their fundraising. They agreed to pay the bill and will prepare a media release. Monick
Grenier Litigation Professional Corporation. This message is intended only for the named recipients and may contain information that is privileged or confidential. Dissemination or copying of this message and any attachments by anyone other than a named recipient is strictly prohibited. If you are not a named recipient, please notify us immediately, and permanently destroy this message and any copies you may have.
From: Dana-lee Melfi <dana_lee_ca@hotmail.com>
She had no
right to use my information in our file to call and ask for her own
personal agenda not related to my case. She called on behalf of Tamara
and to ask to use my "proof" and release my documentation
and videos explicitly only to "Help Tamara". You and they dismissed this
with excuses that it "was harmless". It was not and I made sure to
document it with you. From: Monick Grenier <monick@grenierlaw.ca>
Hi Dana-lee,
Sure, I can approach JCCF.
To reply to what you call, “our first breach of contract,” if you are suggesting that I breached solicitor client privilege, that remains inaccurate.
First, the retainer agreement you signed authorized me to speak with JCCF about your file. Secondly, in July 2022 you wanted to hear from JCCF about a media interview. In fact, you agreed to talk to them about a media release. I confirmed in writing to you on July 28, 2022 that I accordingly provided them with your number. You spoke to JCCF and the result of that was the media release (in or about August 18, 2022). Eva worked for JCCF. I already explained this to you in my email to you on October 8, 2022. That is clearly the context in which she received your phone number.
Monick
Grenier Litigation Professional Corporation. This message is intended only for the named recipients and may contain information that is privileged or confidential. Dissemination or copying of this message and any attachments by anyone other than a named recipient is strictly prohibited. If you are not a named recipient, please notify us immediately, and permanently destroy this message and any copies you may have.
From: Dana-lee Melfi <dana_lee_ca@hotmail.com>
Hello Monick From: Monick Grenier <monick@grenierlaw.ca>
Hi Dana-lee,
Your email is very lengthy. I have replied, but I will not continue these communications.
I cannot address JCCF’s position.
I can confirm to you that I have never breached solicitor-client privilege and I have never disclosed any confidential information to Chris Barber, and in fact I’ve never spoken to him about you or your file, or JCCF and your file.
You complained to me about harassment by him that was interfering with your fundraising efforts. You also previously approved the release of information to the public, that JCCF was funding your defence. I, in turn, told his lawyer to speak to him about this (that his behavior was interfering with your fundraising). I did not speak to him directly. While I am “on the record” as one of the counsel on his file, there is no relation between his case and yours (other than they both arise from the protest). You will recall however, that given your complaints about him, I told you that I am on the record for him, and I asked you if that was a conflict to you because if so, I cannot represent you both. Your answer to me was “I trust you,” and you did not find there was a conflict. The same issue was raised with him by his lawyer, about me, and no conflict was recognized. In any event, I did not speak to him about your file, and I did not speak to you about his file.
His awareness of anything about you or your did not come from me – other than a text message I received from him where he asked if the charges were withdrawn, to which I replied only “yes,” which is a fact on the public record and not protected by solicitor client privilege.
Therefore, these alleged “intimate details like them offering a new lawyer in writing to me” are not intimate at all, but were either gleaned from public knowledge and/or presumed by him through logical induction. It did not come from me.
Below are some answers to some comments in your email.
I’m not sure what you are referring to. I have fulfilled by obligations to you.
And I continued to represent you, the result of which was the withdrawal of the charges.
And you did not take a deal and your charges were withdrawn.
The charges were withdrawn. I told you that a late disclosure application was available, however, the charges were withdrawn. Consequently, there is no purpose or forum for a late disclosure application.
I did not file any further applications or other substantive material after the Charter Application was filed. You did review the Charter Application after it was filed, and you wanted me to add other sections which were not appropriate. I advised you of this. You did not want anything removed.
You did not tell me you wanted a “written explanation from the Court.. as to why” your matter did not proceed immediately. You did not tell me that you wanted to meet two hours before Court. The reason why the Court was not prepared to start was made clear on the record in your presence: there were other matters before your matter. That leaves no question unanswered. I told you this the week before the trial, as soon as I found out.
The reason was clear and you understood that because you were in the Court.
I did review what he sent me, a series of letters to various agencies in Canada and the US (and possibly even the UK) advising him that his inquiries are not within their purview. They were entirely irrelevant.
He did not tell me he was a “colleague or friend” but that he knew of your case and that if I presented what he sent me to the Crown they would immediately drop the case. When I looked at what he sent me, I saw nothing of relevance. He in fact ended the call very abruptly, not me. I have no obligation to tell you about random calls I receive from strangers.
I’m not drawing the connection between this sentence and the ones above. Your charges were withdrawn. There is not a better outcome short of an acquittal which would have taken longer and cost more and was not a certain outcome.
Your charges have been withdrawn. There is no other obligation on my part. Perhaps he sent me the wrong file. What I recall seeing were old letters (predating 2022) from various officials advising that they could not address his inquiries.
I’m not following what you are saying here. There was a Judge, but there were matters before yours. What is on the transcripts is exactly what you heard in Court yourself. I think you are referring to the Emergencies Act decision. Yes, it had zero baring on your case, I agree. I disagree that the Court had any particular concern about your case proceeding. They knew if the Trial did not start that week, that I would recommend to you that we proceed with a Late Disclosure Application and a Jordan Application. I already told you this, and I explained the remedy for a success Jordan Application. You already told me you did not particularly want a Jordan Application but the Crown would not have known that – and it would have been the most reasonable next step and could have resulted in your charges being dismissed. At that point it becomes a waste of resources for the Crown to prosecute (as it was, in my opinion, before that point as well).
I was retained to represent you against four criminal charges, all of which have been withdrawn. That was my only role. That retainer is now complete. I do not represent you for any other reason. I do not know the investigation you are on. I do know you have a dispute with JCCF and complaints about various people and you believe there is a larger agenda on the world scale, all of which had nothing do to with your defence, which is now complete.
I have no idea who you are referring to, and why or how this is relevant.
It happens often that the Courts are double booked, in my experience, in Ottawa criminal matters, even predating the pandemic. The Judge in Court was your assigned judge.
Tamara Lich is represented by Lawrence Greenspon and others. I do not represent Tamara Lich. I am on the record in an assistance role to counsel for Chris Barber. We discussed this.
You are free to do so. My only comment to you about what you say publicly now that the charges have been withdrawn, is that the Crown could in theory revive the charges if you now make admissions of criminal mischief or obstruct for example. I’ve already explained this to you, however, in other words, your actions could have been damaging to your defence in that a Judge could have found that you committed criminal mischief (had the videos been admitted), by finding that you intentionally barricaded the truck you were on or by telling others to block the road. Those actions do not fall within the scope of lawful, peaceful protest.
The money donated was always to be subverted and never to reach the intended recipients. and much more. The conspiracy charges will be investigated in a new way now. The Police have all the evidence that Freedom Corp and 53 other influencers and members of MSM in Canada were aware that lawyers for JCCF facilitated a media and propaganda control room for clients with court conditions and against those conditions. The Police notified and given evidence (Blonde) withheld this evidence even while under oath in his testimony before the courts. Has still yet to inform or share this evidence to date. This has no relevance to my representation of you.
As per your screenshot, you have asked Mr. Narvey this directly, and he has replied to you. I can advise you that they could not transfer all files to inhouse counsel due to scheduling conflicts and lawyer availability.
I see what you mean. There is nothing missing. It is a bug that occurs sometimes in my software. The first page of the account which says page 2 is the first page. You can tell that because it has my name at the top, and is addressed to you. Only the first page includes that information, which you can see if you look at any prior account I’ve sent you. I’ve attached the corrected version.
There was no disclaimer provided to me with your promise to pay me. You’ve already been provided with copies of previous accounts rendered, from my assistant by emails dated November 18, 2022 and January 4, 2023. I had not rendered a further account for work performed prior to the new arrangement offered by JCCF but I intend to. You should receive a copy of that account also (if and when it is rendered).
That is a matter on the public record as Mr. Narvey has chosen to share this information with his followers on social media with appreciation, for which I am very grateful. He has also communicated directly with you.
You have asked Mr. Narvey directly and he has replied to you.
I am not the person to address these comments. The retainer agreement also says, “If the Justice Centre does not pay the legal fees, I understand that I will be responsible to pay the legal fees.” This clause contemplates a situation like yours, and the remedy. If you want me to approach JCCF to see if this can be resolved, I suppose I could, although at this point, I’m not sure even that would satisfy you.
As above, I am not the person to address these comments. I have no idea what they have paid or spent private counsel nor on inhouse counsel for that matter.
I am no longer your lawyer. Please do not take that as being blunt, or abrupt. It is simply a fact. Nevertheless, I have spent over an hour and a half replying to this email.
Good for you.
This is highly implausible.
You have posted this email publicly? Ok, well, that is your choice. You certainly cannot claim privacy for anything you post publicly.
I have nothing to discuss with you. I’ve been replying to your complaints for almost two hours now. I have bills to pay and obligations to meet.
No, it does not work that way.
It has. See account attached. When will you pay the remainder?
I want a lot of things too.
Is that supposed to be a threat of some sort? You retained me, I have always been your lawyer. Funds were donated to cover your legal fees. I represented you, and rendered an account.
I’ve replied to your email. If you there was a mistake make, I fail to see what it is, or what damages you have suffered. You agreed to pay me and most clients would be grateful for the outcome I obtained. Now that the account has been rendered you’ve suddenly come up with a multitude of reasons not to pay, and have even suggested I should not be paid at all. I see exactly what is going on here.
I hope that helps clarify. I apologize for any typos, I’ve already spent too much time on this, and will send it without any further review. I do not intend to devote any further unnecessary time to your complaints subject to any invitation to act on my part expressed in this letter. I will resend you the prior accounts which you have previously received, as per your request.
Monick
Grenier Litigation Professional Corporation. This message is intended only for the named recipients and may contain information that is privileged or confidential. Dissemination or copying of this message and any attachments by anyone other than a named recipient is strictly prohibited. If you are not a named recipient, please notify us immediately, and permanently destroy this message and any copies you may have. |
Vincent G<vincent.gircys@gmail.com> | Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 6:25 PM |
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com> | |
Cc: prontoman1@protonmail.com, waynenarvey@hotmail.com | |
Hello David, I
have no idea why you're sending me extensive emails relating to people
and situations I'm not involved with with no explanation or reference. I
currently have my hands full by working on matters that can make an
appreciable beneficial difference to Canadians in bringing about
accountability. I
suggest you try the appropriate social introduction to whomever your
trying to correspond with. Introduce yourself including the purpose of
contact and explain in short summary the concern you have and why your
contact might be interested including a request to delve in further
details. As someone who
gets extensive Web mail, I just can't process it all in short order. If I
tried I would be so far behind in workload I wouldn't be able to get
anything accomplished. I
hope you understand as this also applies to whoever else you may be
contacting of which some choose to proceed to use the block option. Respectfully Vincent Gircys On Tue, Jan 30, 2024, 11:01 AM David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- |
Dana-lee Melfi<dana_lee_ca@hotmail.com> | Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 12:00 AM | ||||||||||||||||||
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com> | |||||||||||||||||||
From: Dana-lee Melfi <dana_lee_ca@hotmail.com>
Sent: January 29, 2024 9:59 PM To: Monick Grenier <monick@grenierlaw.ca> Subject: JCCF Portion of our current contract and This Retainer will not be changed unless both the Lawyer and I agree to the changes, and sign the new or altered Retainer. Hello Monick
I have unanswered questions about our current retainer. I have "demanded" nothing. I have asked you complete your work before "finalization" and with several unanswered questions as your client. I do not have time to finish the draft of all these questions and requests I guess, and is of no interest now as you now have indicated quite abruptly and rudely. Let me make this very clear my friend. This is nothing personal. I have not released JCCF of their commitment and have disputed that JCCF has honoured their part of our current retainer. The excuses that were given is "they could not afford to pay private lawyers" and they offered an "inhouse lawyer". No other reasons given. This was not the case though as it was a brand-new law firm with zero experience as such under the licence, they operate. This made me question the communications the day you notified me that JCCF wants to change their agreement. I immediately tried to contact JCCF through several means and they would not respond. You know who did respond to me with conformation that JCCF will no longer help me? Chris Barber in writing to me. How did he even know? He described intimate details like them offering a new lawyer in writing to me. This is when I emailed you back to question these things and was met by a "is already done" attitude.
So I had the retainer reviewed by a lawyer friend I have and I was advised to proceed cautiously. So I did.
I reminded you of the contract in place , and specifically pointed out,
9. I understand that my matter is confidential, and that no information will be released to the Justice Centre except as provided in this Retainer. 10. I understand that the Lawyer’s obligations are to me, if a dispute arises between me and the Justice Centre. 11. I understand and consent that this legal payment arrangement has been provided to the Justice Centre. 12. I understand and consent that the Lawyer will provide me and the Justice Centre with a copy of each account due on this matter and that the Justice Centre will pay the said account on my behalf as well as a copy of this Retainer 13. As a condition of the Justice Centre paying my legal fees for this matter: (a) I agree to assert my constitutional and other legal rights; (d) I consent to the Lawyer utilizing, in regard to this matter, the services of other lawyers, paralegals, IT personnel and the communication team who work with the Justice Centre, and I consent to the disclosure of information related to this matter to these persons to the extent deemed appropriate by the Lawyer; (f) I agree to fully cooperate with the media and communications strategies approved by the Lawyer and implemented by the Justice Centre to publicize my matter; 14. If the Justice Centre does not pay the legal fee4s, I understand that I will be responsible to pay the legal fees. 17. I hereby authorize the Lawyer to discuss all aspects of this matter with the Justice Centre’s officers, directors, employees and network of volunteer legal service providers for the purpose of advancing the matter. Such communications shall not constitute a waiver of solicitor-client or litigation privilege. 25. I understand that this Retainer represents the whole Retainer between me and the Lawyer in regards to the matter.
This Retainer will not be changed unless both the Lawyer and I agree to the changes, and sign the new or altered Retainer. This
Retainer may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which
shall be an original, but all of which together shall constitute one
instrument. This Retainer may be executed by facsimile or PDF
signature(s).
26.
The laws of the Province of Ontario shall govern this Retainer.
27.
I understand, the Lawyer is happy to answer any questions I may have.
I may wish to have this retainer agreement reviewed by another lawyer. (Of which was done before I entered)
I have already instructed you many times that our retainer is current and incomplete. When JCCF and John Carpay did not respond to my communications I secured a flight to Calgary and was going to walk in the front door of their head office. When they found out I was on the ground in Calgary I finally get a communication from their representative and he takes me for a lunch to explain. I did not let them out of the contract as they were still using my face several places online with a donate button even to this day 1/29/2024. COVID-19-NEWS-RELEASESNEWS RELEASES
Count Days
536
days of advertising
August 11, 2022 - January 29, 2024 (Page 1 missing in finalization of billing that shows the total
paid by JCCF)
https://www.jccf.ca/peace-man-
536 * aprox $3033.22 = $5.68 per day. I know from admissions and testimony that many specifically donated for my cause at JCCF within the first 100 days. And even recently. I did however agree for a consultation from this new proposed lawyer and firm to show my cooperation with their offer. After the consultation they sent me a new retainer to review. I did and also had it reviewed. It was NOT in my best interest to enter or even entertain that retainer. I informed YOU of this. I was never going to respond to that lawyer or firm again. A week later he contacted me and said he was NOT a representative of JCCF, when just two emails before he said he was. He was unethical in a very pointed and out right lie. You are cc'ed in that email. I could not take this lawyer they "offered".
WE
did not agree and did not enter into a new retainer and ours explicitly
states the one we have is still in effect to this day 01/29/2024
I informed you several times that the
https://LSO.ca and
https://lawsociety.mb.ca/ Had been contacted. Kings bench also
contacted due to the seriousness beyond provincial borders on several
lawyers under the banner of JCCF.
I informed you of your professional standards even while asking me to pay an amount of $10,000. I informed you of my faith in you and trust you will do your job "to the best of your abilities" and told you I do not wish for another lawyer and give the courts any excuse to delay. I refused all "deals" and again informed you I would not plead guilty to any wrongdoing. I asked you to put in a late disclosure application. I asked to review any material you were going to share with the courts after you did not let me review the Charter Application. After shadowing up and ready on Jan 22 and making myself available for two hours before the 10"00 am scheduled time there was no Judge and no written explanation from the courts to me as to why. I asked for this. I questioned why my lawyer would not question this before first adjournment on that day. I waited until 2 pm and again no Judge and adjourned to Jan 23 10"00 am. Again I was ready and no Judge and not questioned on record. A colleague of mine contacted you in advocation asking you to review something before returning to court. David Amos. He was met with dismissal. You never asked or contacted me to ask if this was in fact a colleague or friend. This is quite important as you say that the Charter Application Challenge was a key factor in the decision. There were other key factors. David contacted many people over several months and waited for responses. He never contacted me and did his entire investigation from my online presence and seen what I was on too for the security of Canada. In those communications you can find all here at this link below. There was no Judge because there were none that would take the seat after these communications is an avenue we are exploring with the courts through the transcripts and communications. The EMA being deemed illegal had zero baring on my case. We both know the courts seen how serious I was and did not want this case to be heard. They know of the investigation I have been on. Despite me eluding to it many times to you, you have yet to question or try and understand the magnitude. On Jan 23 2024 I brought a witness to court from NCI. She also witnessed our communications outside the court room. What had NCI interested is they have representatives that have attended almost all cases regarding the protests and invocation of the Mandates and EMA in their own investigation. The representative that showed has never seen a case where a planned trial and no judge available. You are on the legal defence for Tamara and Chris Barber. We had to have many discussions about your client sabotaging my fundraising in more than one spot. None of them actually done by me but good Canadians that wanted to support me. You still allowed for it to happen and it hurt me. I told you, I do not wish you any harm. But you allowed harm and now asking me for payment. After my case was withdrawn I spent two days finally disclosing my investigation to NCI with hundreds of documents and, video, and testimony on how the protest of 2022 was infiltrated and the public defrauded and deceived. Plainly. On Feb 7th 2022
a Corporation was formed that placed demands on a five eyes country. If
the Government would have
even responded then a precedent would be set. Therefore the citizen led
movement and their voices were stollen and premeditated. There were and
are, far more than me working on this and there will be many more to
testify in accordance to this.
The money donated was always to be subverted and never to reach the intended recipients. and much more. The conspiracy charges will be investigated in a new way now. The Police have all the evidence that Freedom Corp and 53 other influencers and members of MSM in Canada were aware that lawyers for JCCF facilitated a media and propaganda control room for clients with court conditions and against those conditions. The Police notified and given evidence (Blonde) withheld this evidence even while under oath in his testimony before the courts. Has still yet to inform or share this evidence to date. Want to share that I am well aware that JCCF has paid a "private lawyer", yourself, just as recent as the date you want to abruptly end our contract with a quick finalization. Page 1 of the 2024-01-27 MELFI ACCOUNT 1414 PDF is missing. (incomplete work) I wish to have a detailed full account of the payments for your services from the start of our retainer to todays date. I told you we will be sending the bill to JCCF first and if they refuse to pay then the next step is to pay it with the trust in place when I hold them accountable. I advised you that if it came down to it I would pay from my life insurance if I was allowed to withdraw and not affect my lawsuit (DANA-LEE vs GOVERNMENT OF SASKATCHEWAN). I ask you if you are the lawyer for Wayne Narvey? You have a retainer with him as a personal lawyer with JCCF as the payee correct? His court is now complete. And JCCF has confirmed they would pay. I also have an admission from Wayne that this is the case. (pictures attached) They have also paid much to others private lawyers. This raises some ethical questions on their actions and explanations to me. Before I continue Monick I ask you to complete our business and contract with answering some questions, providing some services that have now arisen due to the oddness of the courts actions. To remain loyal to your client that has obeyed all Rights and Freedoms under the law. That has paid and treated you with respect. There are much more intelligent people than I that have been watching every social communication and7or Government submissions that I have initiated since the days before my stance. The questions and investigation that I have been involved with and "I stood in peace on these filed documents within the law at all times". No Judge within their ethics would ever try my case for a reason. They are not only aware of my strong defence, but also aware of the investigations I am involved with. They were all notified long before my trial date. There are even responses from many acknowledging receipt. All 338 of the house of commons were notified and possible cabinet meetings associated. The Chief of defence notified and etc. Right up to our Prime Minister. https://davidraymondamos3.
I am staying in Ottawa to do some follow up and am able to have a meeting with you. A call would be insufficient and communications in email seem to be misunderstood.
I am available at your earliest convenience and need to get to a
finalisation to submit my bill to JCCF. The trust is to be returned to
an account until such time as I agree to release it.
I must in the end advise the donors that the money they have sent was accounted for as I promised. I want you to understand the seriousness and not discount it as "an issue between JCCF and I". It is also your issue in your new corporation. When we entered our agreement, you were a sole proprietorship. I am giving you a chance to rectify the mistakes made and continue to honour our current retainer. Thank you,
Dana-lee Melfi
|
RE The "Peace-Man" returns to court in Ottawa on Monday Correct?
Dana-lee Melfi<dana_lee_ca@hotmail.com> | Mon, Jan 22, 2024 at 7:02 PM |
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com> | |
Peace-Man returns to Ottawa for a trial
213 subscribers2 Comments
David Amos<david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com> | Mon, Jan 22, 2024 at 1:07 PM | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
To: Dana_lee_ca@hotmail.com, monick@grenierlaw.ca, pm <pm@pm.gc.ca>, ps.ministerofpublicsafety-ministredelasecuritepublique.sp@ps-sp.gc.ca, mcu <mcu@justice.gc.ca>, "fin.minfinance-financemin.fin" <fin.minfinance-financemin.fin@canada.ca>, "Marco.Mendicino" <Marco.Mendicino@parl.gc.ca>, "Nathalie.G.Drouin" <Nathalie.G.Drouin@pco-bcp.gc.ca>, "Michael.Duheme" <Michael.Duheme@rcmp-grc.gc.ca> | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Now that "Peace-Man" is before the court he may enjoy checking some of my work about war etc YO Minister Marco Mendicino Methinks its High Time that you and I create a MOU N'esy Pas Ian Nunn???
https://twitter.com/ David Raymond Amos’s Tweets · Apr 6 David Raymond Amos @DavidRaymondAm1 Replying to @DavidRaymondAm1 @DanDonovan4 and 42 others YO @realGonzaloLira Go Figure why the link I offered you within @YouTube was blocked https://davidraymondamos3. #UkraineRussianWar #cdnpoli 366 Comments David Amos Say Hoka Hey to NATO or me https://youtube.com/watch?v= youtube.com Vanished: Is There a NATO General In Mariupol? A good introduction to the entire Skripal affair, and the unanswered questions: http://johnhelmer.net/four- David Raymond Amos @DavidRaymondAm1 Replying to @DavidRaymondAm1 @DanDonovan4 and 44 others I heard through the grapevine that you ain't dead yet but have been muzzled bigtime #UkraineRussianWar #cdnpoli Too bad so sad that these dudes were not honest with mean old me just you dudes never were EH? @ikwilson @wikileaks @guardian @ggreenwald https://www.youtube.com/watch? youtube.com FOOD PLANT FIRES: LIVE NEWS COVERAGE...THE CONSPIRACY...THE SHORTAGES Freedom Reporter and researcher Ian Nunn joins the conversation with the newest data surrounding a bizarre chain of Food Processing Plant fires across the U.... Mar 26 Gonzalo Lira @realGonzaloLira You want to learn the truth about the Zelensky regime? Google these names: Vlodymyr Struk Denis Kireev Mikhail & Aleksander Kononovich Nestor Shufrych Yan Taksyur Dmitri Djangirov Elena Berezhnaya If you haven’t heard from me in 12 hours or more, put my name on this list. GL David Raymond Amos @DavidRaymondAm1 Replying to @realGonzaloLira This was the last I heard from you https://www.youtube.com/watch? youtube.com Scott Ritter and The Battle of the Donbas My Telegram channel: https://t.me/realCRPMy Twitter: https://twitter.com/ content: https://www.patreon.com/Co.. https://davidraymondamos3. Monday, 26 April 2021 YO JONATHAN.VANCE I trust that MASON STALKER, all the NATO dudes and YOU know that I don't send Spam https://www.youtube.com/watch? Ready for nuclear holocaust with Russia over Ukraine? 100,941 views •Apr 16, 2021 5.2K160Share Save Tulsi Gabbard Are we prepared to see our loved ones burn alive in a nuclear holocaust in a war with Russia over Ukraine? If not, cut out the macho saber rattling and deescalate before it's too late. 2,080 Comments David Amos David Amos Why did you ignore me when you were running for Presidential Office??? https://davidraymondamos3. https://twitter.com/ David Raymond Amos @DavidRaymondAm1 Replying to @JonathanVize We just talked about this video that you dudes published Please say Hey to @HarjitSajjan and the Boyz for me will ya? https://www.youtube.com/watch? Canada on alert as Russia military moves into Arctic 846,650 views Apr 7, 2021 Inside The Story The Russian military has built a network of bases and stations along its northern coast in recent years, while developing new weapons that could hit North America. 3,852 Comments David Amos David Amos Hmmmm |
The "Peace-Man" returns to court in Ottawa on Monday Correct?
Chrystia Freeland<Chrystia.Freeland@fin.gc.ca> | Sat, Jan 20, 2024 at 6:20 PM | |
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com> | ||
The
Department of Finance acknowledges receipt of your electronic
correspondence. Please be assured that we appreciate receiving your
comments. |
Ministerial Correspondence Unit - Justice Canada<mcu@justice.gc.ca> | Sat, Jan 20, 2024 at 6:20 PM |
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com> | |
Thank you for writing to the Honourable Arif Virani, 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 Arif Virani, ministre de la Justice et procureur général du Canada.
Nous ne répondons pas à la correspondance contenant un langage offensant. |
David Amos<david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com> | Sat, Jan 20, 2024 at 6:18 PM |
To: Dana_lee_ca@hotmail.com, monick@grenierlaw.ca, pm <pm@pm.gc.ca>, ps.ministerofpublicsafety-ministredelasecuritepublique.sp@ps-sp.gc.ca | |
Cc: mcu <mcu@justice.gc.ca>, "fin.minfinance-financemin.fin" <fin.minfinance-financemin.fin@canada.ca>, "Marco.Mendicino" <Marco.Mendicino@parl.gc.ca>, "Nathalie.G.Drouin" <Nathalie.G.Drouin@pco-bcp.gc.ca>, "Michael.Duheme" <Michael.Duheme@rcmp-grc.gc.ca> |
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Minister of Public Safety / Ministre de la Sécurité publique
(PS/SP)" <ps.ministerofpublicsafety-
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2024 16:17:02 +0000
Subject: Response from Public Safety Canada - LEB-001083 / Réponse de
Sécurité Publique Canada - LEB-001083
To: "david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
Unclassified | Non classifié
Dear David Amos,
This is in response to your correspondence dated July 24, 2019,
addressed to the Right Honourable Justin Trudeau, Prime Minister of
Canada, concerning the New Brunswick Police Commission.
We regret to inform you that after examining your correspondence, it
has been determined that the subject matter which you raise does not
fall under the purview of our department and portfolio agencies. This
can be brought to the attention of the Saint John, New Brunswick
Police Commission.
Consequently, no response will be provided.
Thank you for taking the time to write.
Ministerial Correspondence Unit
Public Safety Canada
Unclassified | Non classifié
Saturday 20 January 2024
Peace-Man returns to Ottawa
Take A Stand
Welcome
There's much to see here. It has just begun!
If you have video, Pictures or links of Peace-Man for a near future project
please send via Dana_lee_ca@hotmail.com
Or click the chat button at bottom of page!
Black and white pictures done by
It is our duty
Do not let the Main media & Government fool you!
This action was not mere seconds for a photo op, please remember this.
This was not meant for one person, but humanity as a whole.
With clear intention if you could follow the story. I know they made it so difficult for people to focus on the end goal.
Major strides are happening to expose and restore humanity starting in our country.
There is much information out there and it is "the bits" of truth that are hard to follow. As we move forward on this story about Peace-Man you can also see the entire path on social media, MSM and and many other platforms.
Everything Peace-Man has done has been with careful consideration.
Named not by himself, by "the people".
Almost all went to Ottawa in personal protest because of what we were enduring as a country.
We know that not just "Ze Cabinets are penetrated".
We know courts will not solve it or at least be years delayed as is the plan.
What would be the first thing they would protect as to not ruin the massive changes in so many countries? Citizen led movements. Period.
Every trick in the book is being played on many.
After years of personal experience with many of you as a mere citizen, your hearts are in the right place.
Do your research is being hailed, and so many have failed.
As citizens looking for concrete actionable, peaceful solutions. WE have just passed the first stage. (2023)
If you want to have civil intelligent conversation before some of these comments I see, Stop, Take a look back
at the many involved. You will find the inconsistencies, connections,
symbolism, contradictions and much more if you think unbiased.
It comes down to root causes to expose all of the truth.
There are investigators for the good I believe now, They have had no choice but to open this conversation.
So, my personal belief is that as
citizens united no matter if avocate or whatever you call yourselves
that do not fight for Rights and freedoms, one thing in common is,
"We
as citizens need to call for a direct investigation to the very public
announcement that our Government and businesses are "Penetrated"".
We
can keep breaking branches of this tree all day exposing individuals,
corporations, gov entities, courts and so on. Wasting money and
resources fighting nothing... or.... all work together and really get to
some truth.
This way nobody is fighting in the streets, it can be accepted as a petition in gov.
Bingo bango bongo!
Why is there zero investigations in countries about this?
At this time. NOBODY should fear investigation.
Just my view, Thank you V4F
Peace-Man
Standing by the written and spoken word is exactly not what is happening in this world, in this moment. When things are not dealt with as they are happening according to our many laws, Rights, freedoms, and moral accountability the perpetrators delay and get away with it, creating a public perception in the moment.
After that moment is done, usually the damage is done.
But sometimes, they become teaching moments on a broad scale.
25 days standing only in Peace.
Thousands supporting Peace-Man face to face and millions online from around the world.
Zero government officials asking to hear Canadians grievances and ignoring many requests to be heard.
ONLY TO BE ARRESTED AND DISRESPECTED BY GOVERNMENT. Please Share!
"You know, I have always shown respect to everyone in my family and beyond, Love despite differences. What makes you think I am doing anything different now?"
"Why do you think I am deeply affected mentally and physically now when logic and compassion are gone in communication?
😞 Billions of People around the world feel the lines have been crossed on many levels of governments throughout.
We have been peaceful the entire time in Canada."
"Selective Law" has now been proven in Ottawa by Peace-Man....
Everything done in this case is to mislead. Seriously, they are spending tens of thousands persecuting a man that stood in peace, with taxpayer money.
"Maybe if I was naked the police would look the other way? If Selective Law Enforcement have let this happen in our streets, how about within government?"
Ever hear of the Cullen Commission and its findings?
https://www.cullencommission.ca/
Question:
If all democracy is controlled by currency, are there any true democracies?
What you watch on CBC and CTV, Global is NOT reflective of the Truth.
They play the victim after bringing it upon themselves.
"Why would all sides want to hide information and not look at the true path over the last 4 years of our government?"
"Canadians will continue to demonstrate how to Hold the Line with Peace, and Dignity."
" Mr. Melfi maintains his innocence and states that the right of peaceful protest is fundamental to a healthy democracy. "
Most important documents I grew up living by is the Canadian Bill of Rights
Donations can be made directly to Dana-lee at dana_lee_ca@hotmail.com PW:Freedom
If you wish to help Peace-Man/Dana-lee Melfi fight for your Rights and Freedoms.
Prove this government has systemic corruption. Prove what they have done
is wrong and call for a public inquiry into the infiltration of our
government! Please Help.
This is the only place We ask or advertise for help.
Peace-Man has not sold or sells any official products to date. (others have)
Peace-Man has paid for the site to stay up until March of 2024.
"I could no longer afford to pay for my Peace-Man email and it has been disconnected and they tell me non recoverable. :( "
For Peace-Man to be able to show and share his perspective he needs help.
Please think about it?
If you wish to help fund my defence of these false charges
About Grenier Law
MONICK GRENIER
Monick practices law in Ottawa, Ontario at Grenier Law, and often works in association with other counsel. She focuses on Civil Litigation (personal injury, breach of contract, other), including matters before the Ontario and Superior Courts of Justice, Small Claims Court and Administrative Tribunals. She also has a Criminal Defence and provincial offences practice. She offers full representation and Limited Scope Retainers, where appropriate.
Monick articled in Toronto, prior to being called to the Ontario Bar in 2012. During law school, Monick completed Osgoode’s renowned Aboriginal Intensive program. She was active in the student community and was an Executive Member of two student groups (Osgoode Christian Legal Fellowship and the Indigenous Students’ Association).
For 20 years prior to being called to the bar, Monick held various support capacities in the legal field.Before completing her JD at Osgoode Hall Law School, Monick obtained a Master of Divinity at Tyndale Seminary in Toronto in 2006, and a Bachelor of Arts (Honours) from Carleton University in Ottawa in 1998. Monick taught English in Seoul, South Korea for one year following her undergrad. In her spare time, she is a part time student at the University of Ottawa studying Quebec civil law (LL.L).
Monick promotes access to justice and considers the law a ministry of service to her clients and the justice system. Monick brings a passion for the law and advocating for her clients. Monick values the application of wisdom in managing every case and in exploring satisfactory resolutions, if available, that are suitable to her clients’ needs and desires.
Monick is a member of the Canadian Bar Association, County of Carleton Law Association, Christian Legal Fellowship, Defence Counsel Association of Ottawa, Ontario Trial Lawyers Association, and Métis Nation of Ontario.
Grenier Law
https://peace-man.ca/about/f/peace-man-returns-to-ottawa
Peace-Man returns to Ottawa
Hello all! Please read!
So here is the scoop! I am not much for all the tic toxics and live videos sorry.
Because of all the confusion going on with Canadians being Rights and Freedoms advocates, once again I will stand in Ottawa to bring awareness that the most basic forms of protest are very effective in holding our governments accountable.
As per the conditions set out in my ilegal arrest I am not allowed to enter a "restricted area". Below is my request and response from the PLT team in Ottawa.
I show this as I find it very interesting on their unwillingness to cooperate with the citizens.
Dana-lee Melfi
"
After reading my conditions to the Ottawa police arrest on me. It says
if I wish to enter the restricted area that I contact Ottawa police and
ask for permission. I am doing that now for the dates Jan 26th 2023 to
Feb 20th 2023. I am no threat and only offer messages of peace and
dialogue. It says That Ottawa Police can grant me this without any court
approvals.
I have never been convicted of a crime and Ottawa is my birthplace.
I can give details on where I will stay and any other information you would like.
You want to talk about trust? Show some to a good citizen please.
An Olive branch if you will.
It can only help the relationship between citizens and the differences
they have by the actions of the Ottawa police and our controlling
government.
Because you are the one that started off by stating to me, my
responsibilities. I am trying to do that right now in a formal request
Thank you.
My email is Peaceman@Peace-Man.ca I would request a response from the Ottawa Police. You are my contact for this exact type of correspondence correct?
You can obtain a copy of my conditions as I am sure you are well aware. "
PLT Team Response:
Good
afternoon Mr. Melfi......... I've reviewed your conditions from the
Ottawa Police file 22-43251 ........ I do not see anything about being
able to enter the restricted area with police permission. I see
condition f) states that you are not to attend the area bound by Highway
417, Booth St, Ottawa River and the Rideau River in the City of Ottawa
and not to be within one kilometer of Parliament Hill EXCEPT for the
purposes of attending court or attending your legal counsel's office to
prepare a defense. I am referring to the Undertaking issued to you on
2022-02-19. If there is another release document you're referring to
please let me know and I'll look into it but I don't see any other
release document.
12:33 PM
Dana-lee Melfi
Page 3 section 8
"The mandatory condition and the conditions indicated by a check mark on
this "undertaking" (*by Ottawa Police) remain in effect until they are
"Cancelled" or "changed" (**Ottawa Police have done this undertaking and
can change the conditions) or until you have been discharged, sentenced
or discharged by the courts." (*4 options)
Section 9
"You are warned that, unless you have a lawful excuse" (***an option is
by asking those that laid the restrictions to "change" and allow my
request.)
I would not call it an excuse but more like my rights.
The language is excuse so I will give mine as a right of a citizen never
convicted of a crime and of no danger to commemorate my own actions at
my birthplace.
Section 10
"I understand that I do not have to accept the conditions and that, if I
do not accept the conditions,s, I will be brought to a justice for a
bail hearing"
Well I guess that depends on the Ottawa Police officer that is willing
to arrest me for against my rights and Freedoms The Ottawa Police must
abide by.
So Now I put it to you. I knew your answer before you sent it.
So, I am letting you know I did lead you to the correct document and is
determined by your understanding. Your willingness to study the
situation before answering. Your willingness to serve and protect.
Depends
on the Ottawa Police if they are willing to cooperate with a harmless
citizen. I will give copies of prepared statements as well. I will not
break a law as I have not done to date.
So now that you have the info and choices you need, please respond to my request in an email. Thank you for the consideration.
PLT Team
Police
cannot change the conditions once they have been filed with the court. I
encourage you to reach out to legal counsel, if you've retained
someone, and ask them to speak with the court to have your conditions
changed. Not withstanding that if you don't have the conditions change
you could be arrested and charged with breaching your release
conditions.
Dana-lee Melfi
Again sir, You are giving me false information.
Just like you said that you could not reach out to another protection
agency. I never asked you to dictate anything and asked for help with a
citizens safety. I do not even know why you would use that language. "a
police officer in the City of Ottawa cannot call another police service
and dictate to them what or how to investigate. This is what I believe
you are asking me to do." How you got this thought is exactly why you
cannot see that Ottawa Police can Change the conditions.
I have a lawyer, I cannot afford to add extra paperwork to your false
arrests. You think it is that easy for a person being wrongfully
persecuted to just call up a lawyer and do it thru them. I did btw.
The answer is still the same as described to you. There are four
choices. And Ottawa Police are able to "change" the conditions. I have 5
days to be able to carry out my Rights and Freedoms starting on Jan
26th.
I guess what you want is me standing one foot away then?
I am still requesting an official response to my request by email please.
I wish to talk to your supervisor or the chief please.
PLT Team
False information? I'm
sorry but I don't know what information you believe to be false? Police
and more specifically me as a police officer cannot arbitrarily change
release conditions. I have reviewed you release document and do not see
any mention of police being able to change release conditions and
frankly have never seen that on a release document before. You are more
than welcome to petition the court yourself to have to conditions
changed if you chose.
Dana-lee Melfi
No, I would like to speak to your supervisor or Chief please. And please have someone prepare an email to me.
Please have either one of them call me at their earliest convenience.
I never asked YOU to change my conditions. wow. I explained how you gave
out false information twice. Maybe you do not understand yet and need a
supervisor to help you.
PLT Team
I've passed your
request along. And again police cannot change conditions regardless of
who the officer is. Feel free to contact the officer who issues the
release document to you to confirm.
Dana-lee Melfi
You initiated
contact with me sir. Hmmm can you show me where Ottawa Police cannot
change conditions they have set? Nope. and as a matter of fact there is
precedent that it has happened in the past. You seem quite certain of
your decisions speaking on behalf of Ottawa Police and need to lean some
of your own policies.
I wonder if Sgt. Jim knows his policies?
PLT Team
Please feel free to contact Sgt. Killeen and speak with him regarding your conditions.
Dana-lee Melfi
No
I will speak to your supervisor first or Chief please. I have had the
non-pleasure of being victimized by Mr Jim already. He will have to be
accountable for his actions of false arrests with zero notes.
I asked nicely for you to cooperate and instead you took 3.5 mins to
respond with a personal view. Instead of trying to "work with the
people" as you advertise this is what you do. You have shown zero
concern for safety of a citizen. You have shown zero interest in sharing
proper information. You have shown zero credence of what the PLT team
gives it selves.
Your organization is is not looking out for public interests anymore and
has become obvious. What is it like standing where this Canadian cannot
because of disgusting illegal acts? You feel free sir?
When can I expect communication from a superior?
PLT Team
I have informed my Supervisor of your concerns but he has pressing matters to deal with at this time and will not be able to communicate with you until next week.
I never did receive an email.
Not wanting to ask very much online because of the amount of opportunists and griffters not representing real Rights and Freedoms advocates, it has been hard to garner support for peace-Man's cause.
I ask you to visit the www.Peace-Man.ca site to find out just what my missions and goals are!
So I thought of this! " I need some help and did not want to ask right out for it. So this way I give back make it fun and maybe we get thousands to start standing in silence and peace. Much could come from this if I have friends help and support. " Do you think you can do it?!!!!? I am a little rusty lol
Will you help me share this message? Are you a believer?
Peace-Man
Time to publicly address this
Peace Man from Ottawa protest represented by Justice Centre against mischief charges
OTTAWA: The Justice Centre has taken the case of Dana-Lee Melfi, popularly known as “Peace Man” during the Ottawa freedom convoy. Mr. Melfi was arrested on Saturday, February 19, 2022, in Ottawa during a peaceful protest, on various mischief related charges, including mischief, mischief to property, disobeying a lawful order, and obstructing justice.
Mr. Melfi maintains his innocence and states that the right of peaceful protest is fundamental to a healthy democracy.
Mr. Melfi has worked for government in various positions and stations, including within the Department of National Defence, in various Government buildings in Ottawa, on Parliament Hill, and in the Canadian War Museum. He attended the Ottawa protests wearing two cameras on his head and carrying a large Canadian flag. Mr. Melfi, who is ill with chronic conditions, personally protested many hours each day, enduring pain, standing still near Parliament Hill holding his flag in a peaceful stance.
Mr. Melfi did not have a vehicle at the protest and did not block any roads. He simply stood with his flag. Mr. Melfi states he was exercising his right to peaceful protest. Mr. Melfi however, may have come to the attention of the authorities, particularly after giving interviews to the Canadian Press, New York Times, Washington Post, Epoch Times and many independent media, which went viral around the world.
Ottawa lawyer Monick Grenier, on behalf of the Justice Centre, represents Mr. Melfi and will argue that there were no reasonable grounds to arrest Mr. Melfi, that he was arbitrarily detained, and subject to unreasonable search by police officers.
Mr. Melfi’s next court date is August 18, 2022.
https://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.com/2022/02/trudeau-invoking-emergency-act-and.html