One Alberta man gets jail, another community time for 2022 Coutts border protest
The pair were convicted of mischief over $5,000 for their part in the blockade
One Alberta man has been sentenced to jail and another ordered to serve community time for their roles in the illegal Coutts border blockade in 2022.
Marco Van Huigenbos was sentenced to four months in jail Friday and Gerhard (George) Janzen received a three-month sentence, which is to be served in the community. Janzen was also ordered to complete 100 hours of community service by the end of his sentence.
Neither accused showed emotion and spectators packing the courtroom stayed silent as Justice Keith Yamauchi delivered the sentence in Lethbridge Court of King's Bench. He had ordered both men to leave the tables with their lawyers and sit inside the prisoner's box. Both men surrendered their phones and wallets.
Yamauchi told the pair the illegal blockade affected the lives of many Canadians and said, "The sentence must make it clear that the majority of Canadians denounce their actions."
"The protesters and offenders thought they had a legitimate cause. They undertook the vigilante approach of taking over Highway 4 until their demands were met. This is a significant case of mischief and a period of incarceration is warranted," Yamauchi said.
As the two men left the courtroom, Van Huigenbos's lawyer handed over his client's phone and a single coin to a family member.
One person in the crowd said "Bye Marco." Another added "I love you Marco. God bless."
The judge said Janzen had expressed real remorse for his actions but Van Huigenbos had not.
The pair were convicted of mischief over $5,000 for their part in the blockade, which tied up cross-border traffic with the United States for two weeks to protest COVID-19 pandemic rules and vaccine mandates.
A third man, Alex Van Herk, was to have been sentenced as well. However, Van Herk's lawyer told court Thursday he has been fired by the defendant. Van Herk was granted 30 days to find new legal representation.
During the original trial in April, Mounties testified that as the protest dragged on, officers increasingly turned to the three men to negotiate. The Crown argued the trio became the faces of the blockade and spoke on behalf of protesters.
On Thursday, Crown prosecutor Steven Johnston recommended Van Huigenbos be sentenced to nine months in jail and Janzen six months. Johnston said Van Huigenbos had a higher leadership profile and therefore should get more jail time.
Johnston told court it's about sending a broader message that actions have consequences.
"The most appropriate sentence for these gentlemen is to sentence them to a term of jail — real jail," Johnston said. "You can't break the law and not expect to be punished for it."
Brendan Miller, the lawyer for Van Huigenbos, asked Yamauchi to grant an absolute or conditional discharge. Failing that, Miller asked for a suspended sentence or no more than two months' of time served in the community.
Marco
Van Huigenbos, seen here at the protest in 2022, was sentenced to four
months in jail Friday for his role in the border blockade. (Mirna Djukic/Radio-Canada)
Miller told court Van Huigenbos's underlying motive was political advocacy and the desire to be heard by the government. He said Van Huigenbos did not steer or incite the blockade and acted no differently than the hundreds of other protesters, but was unfairly singled out because he spoke to and became a liaison to police.
Alan Honner, representing Janzen, said he would also like his client to be given an absolute discharge, a fine or a suspended sentence, saying his client played a minor role.
Janzen apologized to the court Thursday.
"Our actions, well intended to voice our concerns on important issues, adversely affected the daily lives of many in Milk River and Coutts," he said.
"For this I am sincerely sorry.
"Laws were broken. This was not in line with our intentions to promote change through peaceful and lawful means."
The Crown said it's an aggravating factor that the men were motivated by politics.
"Politically motivated crime always is a calculated decision.… We don't change our governments in this country through criminal acts," Johnston said.
"This was the hostage taking of a highway with the goal of creating political change."
The 2022 COVID protests sparked polarized debates across Canada on individual rights versus collective responsibility. That emotional debate has been reflected at the Coutts court hearings.
Outside of court, Honner said the outcome was positive.
"We're very pleased with the outcome in one way. We're pleased that Mr. Janzen avoided a sentence of actual imprisonment and we're happy he received a conditional sentence of a short duration," he said.
Miller said he was disappointed at the four-month sentence and so was his client.
"Of course he's disappointed. At the end of the day, it was always understood that jail was on the table," said Miller.
"The sentence is what the sentence is ... the remedy here is to go to the Court of Appeal if you don't like what happened and the court will consider whether to create a remedy."
On Friday, about 300 people lined up outside court to get one of the 90 seats available.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Lawyers react to Van Huigenbos & Janzen sentences | Friday, January 10, 2025 | Landon Hickok | BCN
Bridge City News Two Alberta men sentenced for roles in 2022 Coutts border protest
Jailed for Coutts blockade
UPDATE 3:05 p.m.
Two Alberta men have been sentenced for their roles in the illegal Coutts border blockade in 2022.
Marco Van Huigenbos was sentenced to four months in jail and Gerhard (George) Janzen received a three-month sentence to be served in the community.
Neither accused showed emotion as Justice Keith Yamauchi delivered the sentence in Court of Kings' Bench in Lethbridge.
The pair were convicted of mischief over $5,000 for their part in the blockade, which tied up cross-border traffic with the United States for two weeks to protest COVID rules and vaccine mandates.
The judge said the illegal blockade affected the lives of many Canadians and the sentence must reflect a denunciation of such actions.
Sentencing for a third defendant, Alex Van Herk, has been delayed because he fired his lawyer and is looking for new legal representation.
ORIGINAL 7:50 a.m.
Two men who became the faces of a COVID-19 protest blockade at a key border crossing between Alberta and the United States nearly three years ago will learn their fates Friday.
Gerhard (George) Janzen and Marco Van Huigenbos, along with a third man, Alex Van Herk, were found guilty last year of mischief over $5,000 for their actions at the protest over COVID-19 measures and vaccine mandates.
The sentencing hearing went ahead for Van Huigenbos and Janzen Thursday. Lawyer Michael Johnston told court that Van Herk had fired him. He requested a 30-day delay.
The Crown has recommended a nine-month sentence for Van Huigenbos and six months for Janzen because he played a lesser leadership role in the blockade.
Janzen addressed the court at the end of the day, offering an apology for the residents of Milk River and Coutts and for the stress the blockade caused. He said the intention was to cause change through peaceful means and not by breaking laws.
"The decision to participate in the blockade was driven by strong convictions. However, I regret that our methods obstructed the lives of our community members and brought unwelcome stress and chaos," Janzen said, reading from a prepared statement.
"I'm committed to learning from this experience and seeking more constructive and law-abiding ways to express my views in the future."
Van Huigenbos decided not to address the court but he did speak with The Canadian Press outside court at the end of the day.
"This is not something I have ever done so there's a lot of feelings, a lot of emotions," he said.
Van Huigenbos said it will be a relief to see the case come to a close.
"I won't miss coming back here," he said, and understands he may end up behind bars.
"It's a reality that I face but regardless of that reality we're here, we showed up, we fought the fight that we felt was there from the beginning ... ramifications aside and now it's in the hands of God, ultimately."
Johnston told Justice Keith Yamauchi that Van Huigenbos deserved a stiffer sentence.
“These two men are not at the same level,” Johnston said.
"It is the Crown's view that, realistically, the most appropriate sentence for these gentlemen is to sentence them to a term of jail — real jail."
Johnston said the fact it was a political protest doesn't lessen its severity.
"Politically motivated crime always is a calculated decision … we don't change our governments in this country through criminal acts," Johnston said.
"This was the hostage taking of a highway with the goal of creating political change."
Two Coutts protesters face jail for part in 2022 blockade
Gerhard Janzen offered an apology in court for his role in COVID protest
Two men who became the faces of a COVID-19 protest blockade at a key border crossing between Alberta and the United States nearly three years ago will learn their fates Friday.
Gerhard (George) Janzen and Marco Van Huigenbos, along with a third man, Alex Van Herk, were found guilty last year of mischief over $5,000 for their actions at the protest over COVID-19 measures and vaccine mandates.
The sentencing hearing went ahead for Van Huigenbos and Janzen Thursday. Lawyer Michael Johnston told court that Van Herk had fired him. He requested a 30-day delay.
The Crown has recommended a nine-month sentence for Van Huigenbos and six months for Janzen because he played a lesser leadership role in the blockade.
Janzen addressed the court at the end of the day, offering an apology for the residents of Milk River and Coutts and for the stress the blockade caused. He said the intention was to cause change through peaceful means and not by breaking laws.
"The decision to participate in the blockade was driven by strong convictions. However, I regret that our methods obstructed the lives of our community members and brought unwelcome stress and chaos," Janzen said, reading from a prepared statement.
"I'm committed to learning from this experience and seeking more constructive and law-abiding ways to express my views in the future."
Van Huigenbos decided not to address the court but he did speak with The Canadian Press outside court at the end of the day.
"This is not something I have ever done so there's a lot of feelings, a lot of emotions," he said.
Van Huigenbos said it will be a relief to see the case come to a close.
"I won't miss coming back here," he said, and understands he may end up behind bars.
"It's a reality that I face but regardless of that reality we're here, we showed up, we fought the fight that we felt was there from the beginning … ramifications aside and now it's in the hands of God, ultimately."
Johnston told Justice Keith Yamauchi that Van Huigenbos deserved a stiffer sentence.
"These two men are not at the same level," Johnston said.
"It is the Crown's view that, realistically, the most appropriate sentence for these gentlemen is to sentence them to a term of jail — real jail."
Johnston said the fact it was a political protest doesn't lessen its severity.
"Politically motivated crime always is a calculated decision, we don't change our governments in this country through criminal acts," Johnston said.
"This was the hostage taking of a highway with the goal of creating political change."
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Crown seeks jail time for pair convicted of mischief at Coutts border blockade
Marco Van Huigenbos and Gerhard Janzen led 2022 protest over COVID measures
One of two men who became the faces of a blockade at a key Alberta border crossing in 2022 offered a public apology Thursday at the end of sentencing arguments.
"As one of the protesters, I understand that our actions, well intended to voice our concerns on important issues, adversely affected the daily lives of many in Milk River and Coutts. For this I am sincerely sorry," said Gerhard [George] Janzen at the end of the day, reading from a prepared statement.
"I acknowledge that during our protests, laws were broken. This was not in line with our intentions to promote change through peaceful and lawful means."
Janzen, Marco Van Huigenbos and a third man — Alex Van Herk — were found guilty last year of mischief over $5,000 for their actions at the protest over COVID-19 measures and vaccine mandates.
The sentencing hearing went ahead for Van Huigenbos and Janzen. Lawyer Michael Johnston told court that Van Herk had fired him, and a 30-day delay was granted for Van Herk to obtain new counsel.
The Crown told court that the two men need to do jail time to send a message that actions have consequences.
Prosecutor Steven Johnston said Van Huigenbos and Janzen put themselves front and centre at the illegal blockade, which shut down the Canada-U. S. border at Coutts for two weeks.
Johnston recommended Van Huigenbos be sentenced to nine months and Janzen six months.
He told Justice Keith Yamauchi that Van Huigenbos was more to blame, as he was in a leadership position.
Anti-COVID
mandate demonstrators gather as a truck convoy blocks the highway at
the busy U.S. border crossing in Coutts, Alta., in January 2022. A
sentencing hearing is set to start on Thursday for three men convicted
of helping co-ordinate the blockade. (Jeff McIntosh/The Canadian Press)
"These two men are not at the same level," Johnston told court on the first day of the two-day sentencing hearing.
"It is the Crown's view that, realistically, the most appropriate sentence for these gentlemen is to sentence them to a term of jail — real jail.
"You can't break the law and not expect to be punished for it."
Brendan Miller, the lawyer representing Van Huigenbos, told court his client's underlying motive was political advocacy and the desire to be heard by the government.
He asked for an absolute or conditional discharge, a suspended sentence with probation or community service.
If the court decides jail time is warranted, Miller said, then the sentence should be short or a conditional sentence of 60 days to be served in the community.
"Mr. Van Huigenbos's right to equality before the law will be violated if he is not put in the same position of the hundreds of protesters that the RCMP did not charge and the Crown did not prosecute," Miller said.
"Why should this court send these gentlemen to jail and give them a criminal record when the police decided not to charge the 300 principal offenders. It's not fair. It's unequal."
He said his client didn't physically participate in the blockade or instruct protesters. Van Huigenbos simply showed up and negotiated with the RCMP on behalf of the main protesters, said Miller.
The Crown said it's an aggravating factor that the men were motivated by politics.
"Politically motivated crime always is a calculated decision, we don't change our governments in this country through criminal acts," Johnston said.
"This was the hostage taking of a highway with the goal of creating political change."
Alan Honner, who is representing Janzen, said he would also like his client to be given an absolute discharge, a fine or a suspended sentence, saying his client played just a minor role at the blockade.
"You should reject any submissions that Mr. Janzen should be incarcerated," Honner said.
The courtroom was packed Thursday, and about a dozen police officers on bicycles were outside.
Calgary pastor Artur Pawlowski, who was also convicted of mischief for a speech he gave to protesters at Coutts, said he was praying that Van Huigenbos and Janzen wouldn't suffer jail time.
Defence lawyers didn't call evidence during the trial, and Van Huigenbos, Janzen and Van Herk didn't testify.
Mounties told the jury that, as the protest dragged on, officers increasingly turned to the three men to negotiate. The Crown argued the trio became the faces of the blockade and spoke on behalf of protesters.
There were a number of arrests tied to the border protest.
In a separate case, protesters Anthony Olienick and Chris Carbert were charged with conspiracy to murder police officers at the blockade.
In September, a jury found them not guilty of that offence but convicted them of possessing a firearm dangerous to the public peace and mischief over $5,000. Olienick was also convicted of possessing a pipe bomb.
They were each sentenced to 6½ years behind bars. Their mischief convictions netted concurrent terms of six months.
Yamauchi said he would deliver his sentence Friday afternoon.
Sentencing hearing for 3 convicted in Coutts blockade down to 2 after lawyer fired
A sentencing hearing is to start Thursday for three men convicted of
helping co-ordinate the border blockade at Coutts, Alta., in 2022 in
protest of COVID-19 rules and restrictions. A truck adorned with
Canadian and American flags is shown at the blockade, Wednesday, Feb. 2,
2022. (Photo: Canadian Press)The sentencing hearing for three leaders of the Coutts, Alta., border blockade is now a sentencing hearing for two.
The lawyer for Alex Van Herk has told court he has been fired, and Van Herk has asked for a 30-day delay to obtain new counsel.
Van Herk, Marco Van Huigenbos and Gerhard (George) Janzen were in court in Lethbridge for sentencing arguments after earlier being found guilty of mischief over $5,000.
They were convicted for their roles in the blockade that tied up cross-border traffic for two weeks in early 2022 to protest COVID rules and vaccine mandates.
Sentencing submissions for Janzen and Van Huigenbos are to proceed as planned.
As the hearing was set to begin Tuesday, Van Herk’s lawyer, Michael Johnston, told Justice Keith Yamauchi that Van Herk “no longer wishes for me to be his counsel.”
“He has terminated by services.”
The trio were found guilty in April.
Defence lawyers didn’t call evidence during the trial, and the three accused didn’t testify.
Mounties told the jury that, as the protest dragged on, officers increasingly turned to the men to negotiate. The Crown argued the trio became the faces of the blockade and spoke on behalf of protesters.
“They are not some mere messengers. They use the words, `We, our and us,”’ prosecutor Steven Johnston told the trial.
In a separate case, protesters Anthony Olienick and Chris Carbert were charged with conspiracy to murder police officers at the blockade.
In September, a jury found them not guilty of that offence but convicted them of possessing a firearm dangerous to the public peace and mischief over $5,000. Olienick was also convicted of possessing a pipe bomb.
They were each sentenced to 6.5 years behind bars. Their mischief convictions netted concurrent terms of six months.
Van Huigenbos attended that sentencing hearing and said outside court that he expected the Crown would ask for him to serve more than six months.
“I feel they will look for more. The worst is 10 years,” said Van Huigenbos. “That won’t happen, but I expect to see something along the lines of a request for 1.5 years – something like that.”
The two-day hearing for the three men was initially scheduled for September but was delayed to give Van Huigenbos time to find a new lawyer.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Jan. 9, 2025.
(The Canadian Press)
Sentencing hearing begins for men convicted of leading Coutts blockade
A sentencing hearing is set to start today for three men convicted of helping co-ordinate a blockade at the Canada-U.S. border at Coutts, Alta., in protest of COVID-19 rules and restrictions.
Alex Van Herk, Marco Van Huigenbos and Gerhard (George) Janzen were each found guilty in April of mischief over $5,000.
They were charged for their roles in the blockade that tied up cross-border traffic for two weeks in early 2022.
Defence lawyers didn’t call evidence during the trial, and the three accused didn’t testify.
Mounties told the jury that, as the protest dragged on, officers increasingly turned to the men to negotiate.
The Crown argued the trio became the faces of the blockade and spoke on behalf of protesters.
“They are not some mere messengers. They use the words, ‘We, our and us,'” prosecutor Steven Johnston told the trial.
In a separate case, protesters Anthony Olienick and Chris Carbert were charged with conspiracy to murder police officers at the blockade.
In September, a jury found them not guilty but convicted them for possessing a firearm dangerous to the public peace and mischief over $5,000. Olienick was also convicted of possessing a pipe bomb.
They were each sentenced to 6 1/2 years behind bars. Their mischief convictions netted concurrent terms of six months.
Van Huigenbos attended that sentencing hearing and said outside court that he expected the Crown would ask for him to serve more than six months.
“I feel they will look for more. The worst is 10 years,” said Van Huigenbos. “That won’t happen, but I expect to see something along the lines of a request for 1 1/2 years … something like that.”
The two-day hearing for the three men was initially scheduled for September but was delayed to give Van Huigenbos time to find a new lawyer.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Jan. 9, 2025.
Coutts Trio w/ Marco Van Huigenbos & George Janzen
Sep 16, 10:00 am EDT
The much-anticipated sentencing for the #CouttsTrio—Marco Van Huigenbos and George Janzen—has been postponed due to Marco’s lawyer, Ryan E. Durran's serious illness. This unexpected delay adds another twist to an already highly charged legal process.
In this episode of The Lavigne Show, the #CouttsTrio opens up about the challenges they continue to face. They discuss the role of Crown Prosecutor Steven Johnston and the staggering mix of truths and deceptions that emerged throughout the Coutts Trials. They’ll also reflect on the sentencing of Chris Carbert and Tony Olienick, who were embroiled in the legal aftermath of the freedom protests.
Join us for an in-depth conversation that illuminates the ongoing fight for justice, the intricacies of the legal system, and what it means for the movement's future.
Debunking CBC w/ Betty Carbert & Marco Van Huigenbos
The CBC's Fifth Estate recently aired their episode, "Conspiracy in Coutts," which purported to delve into the trials and arrests connected to the Coutts blockade. However, the feedback from those closest to the case, including Betty Carbert, the mother of Chris Carbert, and her sister Sue, tells a very different story.
While the CBC employed 36 contributors to craft their narrative, what they delivered has been criticized as one-sided and misleading. Betty and Sue, who followed the trials closely, highlight glaring omissions:
- Ignoring the jury’s verdicts: Chris Carbert and Tony Olienick were found NOT GUILTY of conspiring to murder RCMP officers.
- Selective evidence: The CBC focused on prosecution narratives while neglecting evidence dismissed by the Court and the illegal nature of some RCMP actions.
- Misrepresentation of plea deals: The episode failed to accurately represent the outcomes for Chris Lysak and Jerry Morin, neither of whom admitted to planning violence against police.
Instead of presenting a balanced account, the CBC seemingly sought to vilify these men, ignoring the complex and nuanced reality of the trials and the perspectives of the defendants, their families, and the communities impacted.
What to Expect:
- Live Commentary & Reactions: Jason Lavigne will host a special live viewing of the CBC episode, pausing to provide expert analysis and commentary.
- Guest Insights: Betty Carbert and Marco Van Huigenbos will join to share their firsthand experiences and reactions to the CBC narrative.
The CBC had unparalleled access to courtroom evidence, witness statements, and exclusive interrogation videos, but did it use that access to seek truth or craft propaganda?
Why It Matters:
Canada deserves media that seeks the truth, not sensationalizing stories to fit a pre-ordained narrative. This special episode will highlight how critical it is to challenge mainstream media when they fail to present balanced and factual reporting.
Join us and be part of the movement to hold our institutions accountable.
Debunking CBC Part 2 w/ Betty Carbert & Marco Van Huigenbos
Part 2 - The CBC's Fifth Estate recently aired their episode, "Conspiracy in Coutts," which purported to delve into the trials and arrests connected to the Coutts blockade. However, the feedback from those closest to the case, including Betty Carbert, the mother of Chris Carbert, and her sister Sue, tells a very different story.
While the CBC employed 36 contributors to craft their narrative, what they delivered has been criticized as one-sided and misleading. Betty and Sue, who followed the trials closely, highlight glaring omissions:
- Ignoring the jury’s verdicts: Chris Carbert and Tony Olienick were found NOT GUILTY of conspiring to murder RCMP officers.
- Selective evidence: The CBC focused on prosecution narratives while neglecting evidence dismissed by the Court and the illegal nature of some RCMP actions.
- Misrepresentation of plea deals: The episode failed to accurately represent the outcomes for Chris Lysak and Jerry Morin, neither of whom admitted to planning violence against police.
Instead of presenting a balanced account, the CBC seemingly sought to vilify these men, ignoring the complex and nuanced reality of the trials and the perspectives of the defendants, their families, and the communities impacted.
What to Expect:
- Live Commentary & Reactions: Jason Lavigne will host a special live viewing of the CBC episode, pausing to provide expert analysis and commentary.
- Guest Insights: Betty Carbert and Marco Van Huigenbos will join to share their firsthand experiences and reactions to the CBC narrative.
The CBC had unparalleled access to courtroom evidence, witness statements, and exclusive interrogation videos, but did it use that access to seek truth or craft propaganda?
Why It Matters:
Canada deserves media that seeks the truth, not sensationalizing stories to fit a pre-ordained narrative. This special episode will highlight how critical it is to challenge mainstream media when they fail to present balanced and factual reporting.
Join us and be part of the movement to hold our institutions accountable.
----- Original Message -----
From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
To: bmiller <bmiller@fosterllp.ca>; Jason Lavigne <jason@yellowhead.vote>
Sent: Thursday, November 28, 2024 at 04:32:30 PM AST
Subject: Fwd: Convoy demands Merry Xmass??? Bah Humbug
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 2:24 PM
Subject: Re: Convoy demands Merry Xmass??? Bah Humbug
To: <bmiller@fosterllp.ca>, <bsvandenberg@fosterllp.ca>, <Eva@chipiuk-law.ca>, <keith@wilsonlawoffices.ca>, <Anthony.Rota@parl.gc.ca>, heather.bradley <heather.bradley@parl.gc.ca>, <Peggy.Regimbal@bellmedia.ca>, <patrickking@canada-unity.com>, <james@canada-unity.com>, <novaxpass@outlook.com>, <martin@canada-unity.com>, <tdundas10@gmail.com>, <jlaface@gmail.com>, <davesteenburg269@gmail.com>, <brown_tm3@yahoo.ca>, leannemb <leannemb@protonmail.com>, <harold@jonkertrucking.com>, <keepcanada@protonmail.com>, <andyjohanna01@hotmail.com>, <janiebpelchat@icloud.com>, <janetseto@protonmail.com>, <johndoppenberg@icloud.com>, <stiessen1979@gmail.com>, <77cordoba@outlook.com>, <pierrette.ringuette@sen.parl.gc.ca>, <Patrick.Brazeau@sen.parl.gc.ca>, <george.furey@sen.parl.gc.ca>, <larry.campbell@sen.parl.gc.ca>, <Bev.Busson@sen.parl.gc.ca>, <info@lionelmedia.com>, <liveneedtoknow@gmail.com>, <tips@steeltruth.com>, <media@steeltruth.com>, <press@deepcapture.com>, washington field <washington.field@ic.fbi.gov>, bbachrach <bbachrach@bachrachlaw.net>, Bill.Blair <Bill.Blair@parl.gc.ca>, barbara.massey <barbara.massey@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, Newsroom <Newsroom@globeandmail.com>, Norman Traversy <traversy.n@gmail.com>, news <news@dailygleaner.com>, nobyrne <nobyrne@unb.ca>, <tracy@uncoverdc.com>, <James@jamesfetzer.com>, <editor@americanthinker.com>, <nharris@maverick-media.ca>, nouvelle <nouvelle@acadienouvelle.com>, news-tips <news-tips@nytimes.com>, <danajmetcalfe@icloud.com>, <lauralynnlive@protonmail.com>, andrew.scheer <andrew.scheer@parl.gc.ca>, <info@eurasiagroup.net>, <james@eastpointswest.co.uk>, <onair@moats.tv>, <dnaylor@westernstandardonline.com>, Lindsay.Mathyssen <Lindsay.Mathyssen@parl.gc.ca>, <bonita.zarrillo@parl.gc.ca>, Jenny.Kwan <Jenny.Kwan@parl.gc.ca>, Alistair.MacGregor <Alistair.MacGregor@parl.gc.ca>, Matthew.Green <Matthew.Green@parl.gc.ca>, Gord.Johns <Gord.Johns@parl.gc.ca>, peter.julian <peter.julian@parl.gc.ca>, brian.masse <brian.masse@parl.gc.ca>, don.davies <don.davies@parl.gc.ca>, Alexandre.Boulerice <Alexandre.Boulerice@parl.gc.ca>, <lisamarie.barron@parl.gc.ca>, Richard.Cannings <Richard.Cannings@parl.gc.ca>, Taylor.Bachrach <Taylor.Bachrach@parl.gc.ca>, Laurel.Collins <Laurel.Collins@parl.gc.ca>, Rachel.Blaney <Rachel.Blaney@parl.gc.ca>, randall.garrison <randall.garrison@parl.gc.ca>, <cathay.wagantall@parl.gc.ca>, <Corey.Tochor@parl.gc.ca>, <kevin.waugh@parl.gc.ca>, <Brad.Redekopp@parl.gc.ca>, <fraser.tolmie@parl.gc.ca>, Gary.Vidal <Gary.Vidal@parl.gc.ca>, <Warren.Steinley@parl.gc.ca>, Michael.Kram <Michael.Kram@parl.gc.ca>, <kelly.block@parl.gc.ca>, <robert.kitchen@parl.gc.ca>, <Rosemarie.Falk@parl.gc.ca>, <randy.hoback@parl.gc.ca>, <Jeremy.Patzer@parl.gc.ca>
Cc: motomaniac333 <motomaniac333@gmail.com>, <Caryma.Sad@gmail.com>, <erinbcomber1@icloud.com>, <beth.macdonell@bellmedia.ca>, <stoosnews@nexicom.net>, <media@eurasiagroup.net>, Chris.Hall <Chris.Hall@cbc.ca>, <Wesley.Wark@uottawa.ca>, <president@uottawa.ca>, presidents.office <presidents.office@carleton.ca>, president <president@unb.ca>
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Brendan Miller <bmiller@fosterllp.ca>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2022 21:53:38 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: Methinks Trudeau The Younger and his buddy
Higgy wish that I did not save this video N'esy Pas Norm Traversy?
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
Please be advised that from October 10, 2022 at 12:00AM through to and
including November 25, 2022 at 11:59AM I will have limited access to
my email, being email address
bmiller@fosterllp.ca<mailto:bmiller@fosterllp.ca>, nor will I be in
the office.
Though I typically accept services of applications, court process, and
other documents via email, I will not be accepting service of same for
the period of October 10, 2022 at 12:00AM through to and including
November 25, 2022 at 11:59AM.
If there is correspondence you absolutely need to send during the
above time-period, you may send same by fax to Foster LLP
(403-266-4741) to the attention of all three following lawyers please:
(i) Leigh Sherry.
(ii) Peter Crozier; &
(iii) Rupert Joshi.
If there is an emergency application or matter during the above
time-period, you may serve the same by fax to Foster LLP
(403-266-4741) to the attention of all three following lawyers please:
(i) Leigh Sherry.
(ii) Peter Crozier; &
(iii) Rupert Joshi.
If there is an emergency requiring that you speak to me by phone
during the above time-period and you do not already have my cellphone
number, please email Bethany DeWolfe at
bdewolfe@fosterllp.ca<mailto:bdewolfe@fosterllp.ca> and she will
provide to you. Thereafter, please text or Imessage me regarding who
it is and what you need, and I will get back to you.
If prior to October 10, 2022 you need to contact me about something on
a file or what to deal with something before October 10, 2022, please
do so now.
If we have provided agreed to dates or have dates booked for steps in
litigation, questioning, court, or something of the like, those dates
stand and will be going ahead with counsel from my firm, or agent
counsel in lieu of my appearance, and should stay in your calendar.
This letter is not to be interpreted as agreement to adjourn or cancel
anything.
Automatic reply: Convoy demands Deja Vu Anyone???
Boulerice, Alexandre Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 1:11 PM
Block, Kelly - M.P. Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 1:11 PM
Tochor, Corey - M.P. Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 1:11 PM
MacGregor, Alistair - M.P. Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 1:11 PM
Barron, Lisa Marie - M.P. Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 1:11 PM
Blaney, Rachel - M.P. Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 1:11 PM
Cannings, Richard - M.P. Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 1:11 PM
Collins, Laurel - M.P. Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 1:11 PM
Mathyssen, Lindsay - M.P. Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 1:11 PM
Davies, Don - M.P. Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 1:11 PM
Zarrillo, Bonita - M.P. Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 1:11 PM
Kwan, Jenny - M.P. Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 1:11 PM
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
Julian, Peter - M.P.<peter.julian@parl.gc.ca> Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 1:11 PM
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
I called again Correct Tom Taggart and Brad Johns???
David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com> Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 3:48 PM
To: brianwongmla@gmail.com, mla@esmithmccrossinmla.com,
office@angelasimmonds.ca, info@loreleinicollmla.ca,
info@carmankerr.ca, jessomeben@gmail.com, keith@irvingmla.ca,
tonyince@tonyincemla.ca, info@braedonclark.ca,
kendracoombesmla@gmail.com, claudiachendermla@gmail.com,
info@patriciaarab.ca, brendan@brendanmaguire.ca,
mla@northsidewestmount.ca
Cc: larryharrisonmla@gmail.com, garyburrillmla@gmail.com,
ca@zachchurchill.com, info@iainrankin.ca,
toryrushtonmla@bellaliant.com
Bcc: myson333 <myson333@yahoo.com>
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2022 15:47:24 -0400
Subject: Re: I called again Correct Tom Taggart and Brad Johns???
To: Tom.Taggartmla@gmail.com, "jagmeet.singh"
<jagmeet.singh@parl.gc.ca>, Candice.Bergen@parl.gc.ca,
NightTimePodcast <NightTimePodcast@gmail.com>, tim
<tim@halifaxexaminer.ca>, jennifer@halifaxexaminer.ca, paulpalango
<paulpalango@protonmail.com>, andrewjdouglas@gmail.com,
info@alidualemla.ca, suzyhalifaxneedham@gmail.com,
conflict.commissioner@novascotia.ca, kelly@kellyregan.ca,
info@ronnieleblanc.ca, Rafah@rafahdicostanzo.com,
info@mombourquette.ca, mla@northsidewestmount.ca,
LisaLachanceMLA@gmail.com, susanleblancMLA@bellaliant.com,
mlabradjohns@gmail.com, mlabradjohns.assistant@gmail.com
Cc: justmin <justmin@gov.ns.ca>, "Brenda.Lucki"
<Brenda.Lucki@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, "Bill.Blair" <Bill.Blair@parl.gc.ca>,
mcu <mcu@justice.gc.ca>, smcneil@coxandpalmer.com
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Brad Johns, MLA Sackville - Uniacke" <mlabradjohns@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2022 11:27:16 -0800
Subject: Thank you for your email. Re: I called again Correct Tom
Taggart and Brad Johns???
To: david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com
Hello,
This is an automated response to confirm that your email has been received
by MLA Brad Johns.
In order to help answer your concern in a timely manner please forward
your concern, with address, to mlabradjohns.assistant@gmail.com.
Any correspondence for the Attorney General of Nova Scotia or the
Minister of Justice should be sent to justmin@novascotia.ca
In order to ensure constituent email is addressed in the most timely
manner, if you are a resident and you require follow up, make sure
that you
have included your residential address and contact phone number. This will
allow someone from our office to better sort, respond or directly
contact you about your concern much faster.
Please accept my apologizes in advance and thank you for your co-operation.
Brad
--
Brad Johns
Member of the Nova Scotia Legislative Assembly
Sackville - Uniacke
(902) 865-6467
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Tom Taggart <tom.taggartmla@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2022 11:27:16 -0800
Subject: Re: I called again Correct Tom Taggart and Brad Johns???
To: david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com
Thank you for contacting us at the office of MLA Tom Taggart. This
email is being monitored by my Constituency Assistant Andrea Johnson,
who will get back to you as soon as possible. If your inquiry is
urgent, please feel free to call the Constituency Office @
902-641-2335
Our Office is located @ 10653 Hwy 2 Masstown, Nova Scotia, right next
door to the Petro- Canada.
Our Office hours are Monday- Friday 8:30am - 3:30pm or by appointment.
We are closed on Holidays.
My office has the COVID RAPID TEST KITS if you need one please stop in
a pick one up.
--
Tom Taggart, MLA
Colchester North
(O) - 902-641-2335
tom.taggartmla@gmail.com
Deja Vu Anyone????
Yo Premier Iain Rankin Methinks somebody should tell your buddy Timmy
Boy Houston he picked a bad day not to come to the phone N'esy Pas?
David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com> Fri, Aug 6, 2021 at 2:48 PM
To: BOB! B-O-B <coachwhitford1@gmail.com>
Cc: motomaniac333 <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
JD is just another piece of chickenshit Feel Free to tell him I said so
On 8/6/21, BOB! B-O-B <coachwhitford1@gmail.com> wrote:
> I listened to the court recordings, quite the difference in the sound of
> Justice Bell's (I think his name is) when he came back from recess. Very
> low voice and at times choking on his own words. Also the other justice,
> Leblanc was it? He started off forcefully telling you "not to speak when I
> am speaking", then after you patiently waited your turn and unloaded a few
> of your facts his demeanor did a complete 180. Things that make you go
> hmmmmm. Interesting stuff you sent.
>
> So what's JD's story? Is he a stand up guy or what?
>
> On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 2:01 AM David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
>> Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2021 18:02:43 -0300
>> Subject: Fwd: Yo Premier Iain Rankin Methinks somebody should tell
>> your buddy Timmy Boy Houston he picked a bad day not to come to the
>> phone N'esy Pas?
>> To: brianwongpc2021@gmail.com, votemarni@gmail.com,
>> anthony.edmonds@greenpartyns.ca, christina.mccarron@nsndp.ca
>> Cc: motomaniac333 <motomaniac333@gmail.com>, mcu <mcu@justice.gc.ca>,
>> "Bill.Blair" <Bill.Blair@parl.gc.ca>, pathealey@gmail.com
>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> ---------- Original message ----------
>> >>>>>> From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>> >>>>>> Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2019 16:15:59 -0400
>> >>>>>> Subject: Hey Ralph Goodale perhaps you and the RCMP should call
>> >>>>>> the
>> >>>>>> Yankees Governor Charlie Baker, his lawyer Bob Ross, Rachael
>> >>>>>> Rollins
>> >>>>>> and this cop Robert Ridge (857 259 9083) ASAP EH Mr Primme
>> >>>>>> Minister
>> >>>>>> Trudeau the Younger and Donald Trump Jr?
>> >>>>>> To: pm@pm.gc.ca, Katie.Telford@pmo-cpm.gc.ca,
>> >>>>>> Ian.Shugart@pco-bcp.gc.ca, djtjr@trumporg.com,
>> >>>>>> Donald.J.Trump@donaldtrump.com, JUSTWEB@novascotia.ca,
>> >>>>>> Frank.McKenna@td.com, barbara.massey@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
>> >>>>>> Douglas.Johnson@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, sandra.lofaro@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
>> >>>>>> washington.field@ic.fbi.gov, Brenda.Lucki@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
>> >>>>>> gov.press@state.ma.us, bob.ross@state.ma.us, jfurey@nbpower.com,
>> >>>>>> jfetzer@d.umn.edu, Newsroom@globeandmail.com,
>> sfine@globeandmail.com,
>> >>>>>> .Poitras@cbc.ca, steve.murphy@ctv.ca, David.Akin@globalnews.ca,
>> >>>>>> Dale.Morgan@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, news@kingscorecord.com,
>> >>>>>> news@dailygleaner.com, oldmaison@yahoo.com, jbosnitch@gmail.com,
>> >>>>>> andre@jafaust.com>
>> >>>>>> Cc: david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com, DJT@trumporg.com
>> >>>>>> wharrison@nbpower.com, David.Lametti@parl.gc.ca,
>> >>>>>> mcu@justice.gc.ca
>> ,
>> >>>>>> Jody.Wilson-Raybould@parl.gc.ca, hon.ralph.goodale@canada.ca
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> >>>>>>> From: "Murray, Charles (Ombud)" <Charles.Murray@gnb.ca>
>> >>>>>>> Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2019 18:16:15 +0000
>> >>>>>>> Subject: You wished to speak with me
>> >>>>>>> To: "motomaniac333@gmail.com" <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> I have the advantage, sir, of having read many of your emails
>> >>>>>>> over
>> >>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>> years.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> As such, I do not think a phone conversation between us, and
>> >>>>>>> specifically one which you might mistakenly assume was in
>> >>>>>>> response
>> >>>>>>> to
>> >>>>>>> your threat of legal action against me, is likely to prove a
>> >>>>>>> productive use of either of our time.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> If there is some specific matter about which you wish to
>> communicate
>> >>>>>>> with me, feel free to email me with the full details and it will
>> >>>>>>> be
>> >>>>>>> given due consideration.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Sincerely,
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Charles Murray
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Ombud NB
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Acting Integrity Commissioner
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> From: Justice Website <JUSTWEB@novascotia.ca>
>> >>>>>>>> Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2017 14:21:11 +0000
>> >>>>>>>> Subject: Emails to Department of Justice and Province of Nova
>> >>>>>>>> Scotia
>> >>>>>>>> To: "motomaniac333@gmail.com" <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Mr. Amos,
>> >>>>>>>> We acknowledge receipt of your recent emails to the Deputy
>> Minister
>> >>>>>>>> of
>> >>>>>>>> Justice and lawyers within the Legal Services Division of the
>> >>>>>>>> Department of Justice respecting a possible claim against the
>> >>>>>>>> Province
>> >>>>>>>> of Nova Scotia. Service of any documents respecting a legal
>> >>>>>>>> claim
>> >>>>>>>> against the Province of Nova Scotia may be served on the
>> >>>>>>>> Attorney
>> >>>>>>>> General at 1690 Hollis Street, Halifax, NS. Please note that we
>> >>>>>>>> will
>> >>>>>>>> not be responding to further emails on this matter.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Department of Justice
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> On 8/3/17, David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> If want something very serious to download and laugh at as well
>> >>>>>>>>> Please
>> >>>>>>>>> Enjoy and share real wiretap tapes of the mob
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> http://thedavidamosrant.blogspot.ca/2013/10/re-glen-greenwald-and-braz
>> >>>>>>>>> ilian.html
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2013/06/09/nsa-leak-guardian.html
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> As the CBC etc yap about Yankee wiretaps and whistleblowers I
>> >>>>>>>>>> must
>> >>>>>>>>>> ask them the obvious question AIN'T THEY FORGETTING
>> SOMETHING????
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vugUalUO8YY
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> What the hell does the media think my Yankee lawyer served
>> >>>>>>>>>> upon
>> >>>>>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>>>> USDOJ right after I ran for and seat in the 39th Parliament
>> >>>>>>>>>> baseball
>> >>>>>>>>>> cards?
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> http://archive.org/details/ITriedToExplainItToAllMaritimersInEarly200
>> >>>>>>>>>> 6
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> http://davidamos.blogspot.ca/2006/05/wiretap-tapes-impeach-bush.html
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> http://www.archive.org/details/PoliceSurveilanceWiretapTape139
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> http://archive.org/details/Part1WiretapTape143
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> FEDERAL EXPRES February 7, 2006
>> >>>>>>>>>> Senator Arlen Specter
>> >>>>>>>>>> United States Senate
>> >>>>>>>>>> Committee on the Judiciary
>> >>>>>>>>>> 224 Dirksen Senate Office Building
>> >>>>>>>>>> Washington, DC 20510
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> Dear Mr. Specter:
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> I have been asked to forward the enclosed tapes to you from a
>> man
>> >>>>>>>>>> named, David Amos, a Canadian citizen, in connection with the
>> >>>>>>>>>> matters
>> >>>>>>>>>> raised in the attached letter.
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> Mr. Amos has represented to me that these are illegal FBI wire
>> >>>>>>>>>> tap
>> >>>>>>>>>> tapes.
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> I believe Mr. Amos has been in contact with you about this
>> >>>>>>>>>> previously.
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> Very truly yours,
>> >>>>>>>>>> Barry A. Bachrach
>> >>>>>>>>>> Direct telephone: (508) 926-3403
>> >>>>>>>>>> Direct facsimile: (508) 929-3003
>> >>>>>>>>>> Email: bbachrach@bowditch.com
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> >>>>>>>>> From: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com
>> >>>>>>>>> Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2017 09:32:09 -0400
>> >>>>>>>>> Subject: Attn Integrity Commissioner Alexandre Deschênes, Q.C.,
>> >>>>>>>>> To: coi@gnb.ca
>> >>>>>>>>> Cc: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Good Day Sir
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> After I heard you speak on CBC I called your office again and
>> >>>>>>>>> managed
>> >>>>>>>>> to speak to one of your staff for the first time
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Please find attached the documents I promised to send to the
>> >>>>>>>>> lady
>> >>>>>>>>> who
>> >>>>>>>>> answered the phone this morning. Please notice that not after
>> >>>>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>>> Sgt
>> >>>>>>>>> at Arms took the documents destined to your office his pal
>> >>>>>>>>> Tanker
>> >>>>>>>>> Malley barred me in writing with an "English" only document.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> These are the hearings and the dockets in Federal Court that I
>> >>>>>>>>> suggested that you study closely.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> This is the docket in Federal Court
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> http://cas-cdc-www02.cas-satj.gc.ca/IndexingQueries/infp_RE_info_e.php?court_no=T-1557-15&select_court=T
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> These are digital recordings of the last three hearings
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Dec 14th https://archive.org/details/BahHumbug
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> January 11th, 2016 https://archive.org/details/Jan11th2015
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> April 3rd, 2017
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> https://archive.org/details/April32017JusticeLeblancHearing
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> This is the docket in the Federal Court of Appeal
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> http://cas-cdc-www02.cas-satj.gc.ca/IndexingQueries/infp_RE_info_e.php?court_no=A-48-16&select_court=All
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> The only hearing thus far
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> May 24th, 2017
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> https://archive.org/details/May24thHoedown
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> This Judge understnds the meaning of the word Integrity
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Date: 20151223
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Docket: T-1557-15
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Fredericton, New Brunswick, December 23, 2015
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> PRESENT: The Honourable Mr. Justice Bell
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> BETWEEN:
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> DAVID RAYMOND AMOS
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Plaintiff
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> and
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Defendant
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> ORDER
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> (Delivered orally from the Bench in Fredericton, New Brunswick,
>> on
>> >>>>>>>>> December 14, 2015)
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> The Plaintiff seeks an appeal de novo, by way of motion
>> >>>>>>>>> pursuant
>> >>>>>>>>> to
>> >>>>>>>>> the Federal Courts Rules (SOR/98-106), from an Order made on
>> >>>>>>>>> November
>> >>>>>>>>> 12, 2015, in which Prothonotary Morneau struck the Statement of
>> >>>>>>>>> Claim
>> >>>>>>>>> in its entirety.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> At the outset of the hearing, the Plaintiff brought to my
>> >>>>>>>>> attention
>> >>>>>>>>> a
>> >>>>>>>>> letter dated September 10, 2004, which he sent to me, in my
>> >>>>>>>>> then
>> >>>>>>>>> capacity as Past President of the New Brunswick Branch of the
>> >>>>>>>>> Canadian
>> >>>>>>>>> Bar Association, and the then President of the Branch, Kathleen
>> >>>>>>>>> Quigg,
>> >>>>>>>>> (now a Justice of the New Brunswick Court of Appeal). In that
>> >>>>>>>>> letter
>> >>>>>>>>> he stated:
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> As for your past President, Mr. Bell, may I suggest that you
>> check
>> >>>>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>>> work of Frank McKenna before I sue your entire law firm
>> >>>>>>>>> including
>> >>>>>>>>> you.
>> >>>>>>>>> You are your brother’s keeper.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Frank McKenna is the former Premier of New Brunswick and a
>> >>>>>>>>> former
>> >>>>>>>>> colleague of mine at the law firm of McInnes Cooper. In
>> >>>>>>>>> addition
>> >>>>>>>>> to
>> >>>>>>>>> expressing an intention to sue me, the Plaintiff refers to a
>> >>>>>>>>> number
>> >>>>>>>>> of
>> >>>>>>>>> people in his Motion Record who he appears to contend may be
>> >>>>>>>>> witnesses
>> >>>>>>>>> or potential parties to be added. Those individuals who are
>> >>>>>>>>> known
>> >>>>>>>>> to
>> >>>>>>>>> me personally, include, but are not limited to the former Prime
>> >>>>>>>>> Minister of Canada, The Right Honourable Stephen Harper; former
>> >>>>>>>>> Attorney General of Canada and now a Justice of the Manitoba
>> Court
>> >>>>>>>>> of
>> >>>>>>>>> Queen’s Bench, Vic Toews; former member of Parliament Rob
>> >>>>>>>>> Moore;
>> >>>>>>>>> former Director of Policing Services, the late Grant Garneau;
>> >>>>>>>>> former
>> >>>>>>>>> Chief of the Fredericton Police Force, Barry McKnight; former
>> >>>>>>>>> Staff
>> >>>>>>>>> Sergeant Danny Copp; my former colleagues on the New Brunswick
>> >>>>>>>>> Court
>> >>>>>>>>> of Appeal, Justices Bradley V. Green and Kathleen Quigg, and,
>> >>>>>>>>> retired
>> >>>>>>>>> Assistant Commissioner Wayne Lang of the Royal Canadian Mounted
>> >>>>>>>>> Police.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> In the circumstances, given the threat in 2004 to sue me in my
>> >>>>>>>>> personal capacity and my past and present relationship with
>> >>>>>>>>> many
>> >>>>>>>>> potential witnesses and/or potential parties to the litigation,
>> >>>>>>>>> I
>> >>>>>>>>> am
>> >>>>>>>>> of the view there would be a reasonable apprehension of bias
>> >>>>>>>>> should
>> >>>>>>>>> I
>> >>>>>>>>> hear this motion. See Justice de Grandpré’s dissenting judgment
>> in
>> >>>>>>>>> Committee for Justice and Liberty et al v National Energy Board
>> et
>> >>>>>>>>> al,
>> >>>>>>>>> [1978] 1 SCR 369 at p 394 for the applicable test regarding
>> >>>>>>>>> allegations of bias. In the circumstances, although neither
>> >>>>>>>>> party
>> >>>>>>>>> has
>> >>>>>>>>> requested I recuse myself, I consider it appropriate that I do
>> so.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> AS A RESULT OF MY RECUSAL, THIS COURT ORDERS that the
>> >>>>>>>>> Administrator
>> >>>>>>>>> of
>> >>>>>>>>> the Court schedule another date for the hearing of the motion.
>> >>>>>>>>> There
>> >>>>>>>>> is no order as to costs.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> “B. Richard Bell”
>> >>>>>>>>> Judge
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Below after the CBC article about your concerns (I made one
>> >>>>>>>>> comment
>> >>>>>>>>> already) you will find the text of just two of many emails I
>> >>>>>>>>> had
>> >>>>>>>>> sent
>> >>>>>>>>> to your office over the years since I first visited it in 2006.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> I noticed that on July 30, 2009, he was appointed to the the
>> >>>>>>>>> Court
>> >>>>>>>>> Martial Appeal Court of Canada Perhaps you should scroll to
>> >>>>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>>> bottom of this email ASAP and read the entire Paragraph 83 of
>> >>>>>>>>> my
>> >>>>>>>>> lawsuit now before the Federal Court of Canada?
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> "FYI This is the text of the lawsuit that should interest
>> >>>>>>>>> Trudeau
>> >>>>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>>> most
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> ---------- Original message ----------
>> >>>>>>>>> From: justin.trudeau.a1@parl.gc.ca
>> >>>>>>>>> Date: Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 8:18 PM
>> >>>>>>>>> Subject: Réponse automatique : RE My complaint against the
>> >>>>>>>>> CROWN
>> >>>>>>>>> in
>> >>>>>>>>> Federal Court Attn David Hansen and Peter MacKay If you
>> >>>>>>>>> planning
>> >>>>>>>>> to
>> >>>>>>>>> submit a motion for a publication ban on my complaint trust
>> >>>>>>>>> that
>> >>>>>>>>> you
>> >>>>>>>>> dudes are way past too late
>> >>>>>>>>> To: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Veuillez noter que j'ai changé de courriel. Vous pouvez me
>> >>>>>>>>> rejoindre
>> >>>>>>>>> à
>> >>>>>>>>> lalanthier@hotmail.com
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Pour rejoindre le bureau de M. Trudeau veuillez envoyer un
>> >>>>>>>>> courriel
>> >>>>>>>>> à
>> >>>>>>>>> tommy.desfosses@parl.gc.ca
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Please note that I changed email address, you can reach me at
>> >>>>>>>>> lalanthier@hotmail.com
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> To reach the office of Mr. Trudeau please send an email to
>> >>>>>>>>> tommy.desfosses@parl.gc.ca
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Thank you,
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Merci ,
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> http://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.ca/2015/09/v-behaviorurldefaultvmlo.html
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> 83. The Plaintiff states that now that Canada is involved in
>> more
>> >>>>>>>>> war
>> >>>>>>>>> in Iraq again it did not serve Canadian interests and
>> >>>>>>>>> reputation
>> >>>>>>>>> to
>> >>>>>>>>> allow Barry Winters to publish the following words three times
>> >>>>>>>>> over
>> >>>>>>>>> five years after he began his bragging:
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> January 13, 2015
>> >>>>>>>>> This Is Just AS Relevant Now As When I wrote It During The
>> >>>>>>>>> Debate
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> December 8, 2014
>> >>>>>>>>> Why Canada Stood Tall!
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Friday, October 3, 2014
>> >>>>>>>>> Little David Amos’ “True History Of War” Canadian Airstrikes
>> >>>>>>>>> And
>> >>>>>>>>> Stupid Justin Trudeau
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Canada’s and Canadians free ride is over. Canada can no longer
>> >>>>>>>>> hide
>> >>>>>>>>> behind Amerka’s and NATO’s skirts.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> When I was still in Canadian Forces then Prime Minister Jean
>> >>>>>>>>> Chretien
>> >>>>>>>>> actually committed the Canadian Army to deploy in the second
>> >>>>>>>>> campaign
>> >>>>>>>>> in Iraq, the Coalition of the Willing. This was against or
>> >>>>>>>>> contrary
>> >>>>>>>>> to
>> >>>>>>>>> the wisdom or advice of those of us Canadian officers that were
>> >>>>>>>>> involved in the initial planning phases of that operation.
>> >>>>>>>>> There
>> >>>>>>>>> were
>> >>>>>>>>> significant concern in our planning cell, and NDHQ about of the
>> >>>>>>>>> dearth
>> >>>>>>>>> of concern for operational guidance, direction, and forces for
>> >>>>>>>>> operations after the initial occupation of Iraq. At the “last
>> >>>>>>>>> minute”
>> >>>>>>>>> Prime Minister Chretien and the Liberal government changed its
>> >>>>>>>>> mind.
>> >>>>>>>>> The Canadian government told our amerkan cousins that we would
>> not
>> >>>>>>>>> deploy combat troops for the Iraq campaign, but would deploy a
>> >>>>>>>>> Canadian Battle Group to Afghanistan, enabling our amerkan
>> cousins
>> >>>>>>>>> to
>> >>>>>>>>> redeploy troops from there to Iraq. The PMO’s thinking that it
>> was
>> >>>>>>>>> less costly to deploy Canadian Forces to Afghanistan than Iraq.
>> >>>>>>>>> But
>> >>>>>>>>> alas no one seems to remind the Liberals of Prime Minister
>> >>>>>>>>> Chretien’s
>> >>>>>>>>> then grossly incorrect assumption. Notwithstanding Jean
>> Chretien’s
>> >>>>>>>>> incompetence and stupidity, the Canadian Army was heroic,
>> >>>>>>>>> professional, punched well above it’s weight, and the PPCLI
>> Battle
>> >>>>>>>>> Group, is credited with “saving Afghanistan” during the Panjway
>> >>>>>>>>> campaign of 2006.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> What Justin Trudeau and the Liberals don’t tell you now, is
>> >>>>>>>>> that
>> >>>>>>>>> then
>> >>>>>>>>> Liberal Prime Minister Jean Chretien committed, and deployed
>> >>>>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>>> Canadian army to Canada’s longest “war” without the advice,
>> >>>>>>>>> consent,
>> >>>>>>>>> support, or vote of the Canadian Parliament.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> What David Amos and the rest of the ignorant, uneducated, and
>> >>>>>>>>> babbling
>> >>>>>>>>> chattering classes are too addled to understand is the
>> >>>>>>>>> deployment
>> >>>>>>>>> of
>> >>>>>>>>> less than 75 special operations troops, and what is known by
>> >>>>>>>>> planners
>> >>>>>>>>> as a “six pac cell” of fighter aircraft is NOT the same as a
>> >>>>>>>>> deployment of a Battle Group, nor a “war” make.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> The Canadian Government or The Crown unlike our amerkan cousins
>> >>>>>>>>> have
>> >>>>>>>>> the “constitutional authority” to commit the Canadian nation to
>> >>>>>>>>> war.
>> >>>>>>>>> That has been recently clearly articulated to the Canadian
>> >>>>>>>>> public
>> >>>>>>>>> by
>> >>>>>>>>> constitutional scholar Phillippe Legasse. What Parliament can
>> >>>>>>>>> do
>> >>>>>>>>> is
>> >>>>>>>>> remove “confidence” in The Crown’s Government in a “vote of
>> >>>>>>>>> non-confidence.” That could not happen to the Chretien
>> >>>>>>>>> Government
>> >>>>>>>>> regarding deployment to Afghanistan, and it won’t happen in
>> >>>>>>>>> this
>> >>>>>>>>> instance with the conservative majority in The Commons
>> >>>>>>>>> regarding
>> a
>> >>>>>>>>> limited Canadian deployment to the Middle East.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> President George Bush was quite correct after 911 and the
>> >>>>>>>>> terror
>> >>>>>>>>> attacks in New York; that the Taliban “occupied” and “failed
>> >>>>>>>>> state”
>> >>>>>>>>> Afghanistan was the source of logistical support, command and
>> >>>>>>>>> control,
>> >>>>>>>>> and training for the Al Quaeda war of terror against the world.
>> >>>>>>>>> The
>> >>>>>>>>> initial defeat, and removal from control of Afghanistan was
>> >>>>>>>>> vital
>> >>>>>>>>> and
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> P.S. Whereas this CBC article is about your opinion of the
>> actions
>> >>>>>>>>> of
>> >>>>>>>>> the latest Minister Of Health trust that Mr Boudreau and the
>> >>>>>>>>> CBC
>> >>>>>>>>> have
>> >>>>>>>>> had my files for many years and the last thing they are is
>> >>>>>>>>> ethical.
>> >>>>>>>>> Ask his friends Mr Murphy and the RCMP if you don't believe me.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Subject:
>> >>>>>>>>> Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 12:02:35 -0400
>> >>>>>>>>> From: "Murphy, Michael B. \(DH/MS\)" MichaelB.Murphy@gnb.ca
>> >>>>>>>>> To: motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> January 30, 2007
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> WITHOUT PREJUDICE
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Mr. David Amos
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Dear Mr. Amos:
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> This will acknowledge receipt of a copy of your e-mail of
>> December
>> >>>>>>>>> 29,
>> >>>>>>>>> 2006 to Corporal Warren McBeath of the RCMP.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Because of the nature of the allegations made in your message,
>> >>>>>>>>> I
>> >>>>>>>>> have
>> >>>>>>>>> taken the measure of forwarding a copy to Assistant
>> >>>>>>>>> Commissioner
>> >>>>>>>>> Steve
>> >>>>>>>>> Graham of the RCMP “J” Division in Fredericton.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Sincerely,
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Honourable Michael B. Murphy
>> >>>>>>>>> Minister of Health
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> CM/cb
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Warren McBeath warren.mcbeath@rcmp-grc.gc.ca wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2006 17:34:53 -0500
>> >>>>>>>>> From: "Warren McBeath" warren.mcbeath@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
>> >>>>>>>>> To: kilgoursite@ca.inter.net, MichaelB.Murphy@gnb.ca,
>> >>>>>>>>> nada.sarkis@gnb.ca, wally.stiles@gnb.ca, dwatch@web.net,
>> >>>>>>>>> motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com
>> >>>>>>>>> CC: ottawa@chuckstrahl.com,
>> >>>>>>>>> riding@chuckstrahl.com,John.Foran@gnb.ca,
>> >>>>>>>>> Oda.B@parl.gc.ca,"Bev BUSSON" bev.busson@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
>> >>>>>>>>> "Paul Dube" PAUL.DUBE@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
>> >>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: Remember me Kilgour? Landslide Annie McLellan has
>> >>>>>>>>> forgotten me but the crooks within the RCMP have not
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Dear Mr. Amos,
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Thank you for your follow up e-mail to me today. I was on days
>> off
>> >>>>>>>>> over the holidays and returned to work this evening. Rest
>> >>>>>>>>> assured
>> >>>>>>>>> I
>> >>>>>>>>> was not ignoring or procrastinating to respond to your
>> >>>>>>>>> concerns.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> As your attachment sent today refers from Premier Graham, our
>> >>>>>>>>> position
>> >>>>>>>>> is clear on your dead calf issue: Our forensic labs do not
>> process
>> >>>>>>>>> testing on animals in cases such as yours, they are referred to
>> >>>>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>>> Atlantic Veterinary College in Charlottetown who can provide
>> these
>> >>>>>>>>> services. If you do not choose to utilize their expertise in
>> >>>>>>>>> this
>> >>>>>>>>> instance, then that is your decision and nothing more can be
>> done.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> As for your other concerns regarding the US Government, false
>> >>>>>>>>> imprisonment and Federal Court Dates in the US, etc... it is
>> clear
>> >>>>>>>>> that Federal authorities are aware of your concerns both in
>> Canada
>> >>>>>>>>> the US. These issues do not fall into the purvue of Detachment
>> >>>>>>>>> and policing in Petitcodiac, NB.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> It was indeed an interesting and informative conversation we
>> >>>>>>>>> had
>> >>>>>>>>> on
>> >>>>>>>>> December 23rd, and I wish you well in all of your future
>> >>>>>>>>> endeavors.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Sincerely,
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Warren McBeath, Cpl.
>> >>>>>>>>> GRC Caledonia RCMP
>> >>>>>>>>> Traffic Services NCO
>> >>>>>>>>> Ph: (506) 387-2222
>> >>>>>>>>> Fax: (506) 387-4622
>> >>>>>>>>> E-mail warren.mcbeath@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Alexandre Deschênes, Q.C.,
>> >>>>>>>>> Office of the Integrity Commissioner
>> >>>>>>>>> Edgecombe House, 736 King Street
>> >>>>>>>>> Fredericton, N.B. CANADA E3B 5H1
>> >>>>>>>>> tel.: 506-457-7890
>> >>>>>>>>> fax: 506-444-5224
>> >>>>>>>>> e-mail:coi@gnb.ca
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> http://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.ca/2017/11/federal-court-of-appeal-finally-makes.html
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Sunday, 19 November 2017
>> >>>>>>>> Federal Court of Appeal Finally Makes The BIG Decision And
>> >>>>>>>> Publishes
>> >>>>>>>> It Now The Crooks Cannot Take Back Ticket To Try Put My Matter
>> >>>>>>>> Before
>> >>>>>>>> The Supreme Court
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fca-caf/decisions/en/item/236679/index.do
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Federal Court of Appeal Decisions
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Amos v. Canada
>> >>>>>>>> Court (s) Database
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Federal Court of Appeal Decisions
>> >>>>>>>> Date
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> 2017-10-30
>> >>>>>>>> Neutral citation
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> 2017 FCA 213
>> >>>>>>>> File numbers
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> A-48-16
>> >>>>>>>> Date: 20171030
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Docket: A-48-16
>> >>>>>>>> Citation: 2017 FCA 213
>> >>>>>>>> CORAM:
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> WEBB J.A.
>> >>>>>>>> NEAR J.A.
>> >>>>>>>> GLEASON J.A.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> BETWEEN:
>> >>>>>>>> DAVID RAYMOND AMOS
>> >>>>>>>> Respondent on the cross-appeal
>> >>>>>>>> (and formally Appellant)
>> >>>>>>>> and
>> >>>>>>>> HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
>> >>>>>>>> Appellant on the cross-appeal
>> >>>>>>>> (and formerly Respondent)
>> >>>>>>>> Heard at Fredericton, New Brunswick, on May 24, 2017.
>> >>>>>>>> Judgment delivered at Ottawa, Ontario, on October 30, 2017.
>> >>>>>>>> REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY:
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> THE COURT
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Date: 20171030
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Docket: A-48-16
>> >>>>>>>> Citation: 2017 FCA 213
>> >>>>>>>> CORAM:
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> WEBB J.A.
>> >>>>>>>> NEAR J.A.
>> >>>>>>>> GLEASON J.A.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> BETWEEN:
>> >>>>>>>> DAVID RAYMOND AMOS
>> >>>>>>>> Respondent on the cross-appeal
>> >>>>>>>> (and formally Appellant)
>> >>>>>>>> and
>> >>>>>>>> HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
>> >>>>>>>> Appellant on the cross-appeal
>> >>>>>>>> (and formerly Respondent)
>> >>>>>>>> REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY THE COURT
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> I. Introduction
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> [1] On September 16, 2015, David Raymond Amos (Mr.
>> >>>>>>>> Amos)
>> >>>>>>>> filed a 53-page Statement of Claim (the Claim) in Federal Court
>> >>>>>>>> against Her Majesty the Queen (the Crown). Mr. Amos claims $11
>> >>>>>>>> million
>> >>>>>>>> in damages and a public apology from the Prime Minister and
>> >>>>>>>> Provincial
>> >>>>>>>> Premiers for being illegally barred from accessing parliamentary
>> >>>>>>>> properties and seeks a declaration from the Minister of Public
>> >>>>>>>> Safety
>> >>>>>>>> that the Canadian Government will no longer allow the Royal
>> >>>>>>>> Canadian
>> >>>>>>>> Mounted Police (RCMP) and Canadian Forces to harass him and his
>> >>>>>>>> clan
>> >>>>>>>> (Claim at para. 96).
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> [2] On November 12, 2015 (Docket T-1557-15), by
>> >>>>>>>> way
>> >>>>>>>> of
>> >>>>>>>> a
>> >>>>>>>> motion brought by the Crown, a prothonotary of the Federal Court
>> >>>>>>>> (the
>> >>>>>>>> Prothonotary) struck the Claim in its entirety, without leave to
>> >>>>>>>> amend, on the basis that it was plain and obvious that the Claim
>> >>>>>>>> disclosed no reasonable claim, the Claim was fundamentally
>> >>>>>>>> vexatious,
>> >>>>>>>> and the Claim could not be salvaged by way of further amendment
>> >>>>>>>> (the
>> >>>>>>>> Prothontary’s Order).
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> [3] On January 25, 2016 (2016 FC 93), by way of
>> >>>>>>>> Mr.
>> >>>>>>>> Amos’ appeal from the Prothonotary’s Order, a judge of the
>> >>>>>>>> Federal
>> >>>>>>>> Court (the Judge), reviewing the matter de novo, struck all of
>> >>>>>>>> Mr.
>> >>>>>>>> Amos’ claims for relief with the exception of the claim for
>> damages
>> >>>>>>>> for being barred by the RCMP from the New Brunswick legislature
>> >>>>>>>> in
>> >>>>>>>> 2004 (the Federal Court Judgment).
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> [4] Mr. Amos appealed and the Crown cross-appealed
>> >>>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>> Federal Court Judgment. Further to the issuance of a Notice of
>> >>>>>>>> Status
>> >>>>>>>> Review, Mr. Amos’ appeal was dismissed for delay on December 19,
>> >>>>>>>> 2016.
>> >>>>>>>> As such, the only matter before this Court is the Crown’s
>> >>>>>>>> cross-appeal.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> II. Preliminary Matter
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> [5] Mr. Amos, in his memorandum of fact and law in
>> >>>>>>>> relation to the cross-appeal that was filed with this Court on
>> >>>>>>>> March
>> >>>>>>>> 6, 2017, indicated that several judges of this Court, including
>> two
>> >>>>>>>> of
>> >>>>>>>> the judges of this panel, had a conflict of interest in this
>> >>>>>>>> appeal.
>> >>>>>>>> This was the first time that he identified the judges whom he
>> >>>>>>>> believed
>> >>>>>>>> had a conflict of interest in a document that was filed with
>> >>>>>>>> this
>> >>>>>>>> Court. In his notice of appeal he had alluded to a conflict with
>> >>>>>>>> several judges but did not name those judges.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> [6] Mr. Amos was of the view that he did not have
>> >>>>>>>> to
>> >>>>>>>> identify the judges in any document filed with this Court
>> >>>>>>>> because
>> >>>>>>>> he
>> >>>>>>>> had identified the judges in various documents that had been
>> >>>>>>>> filed
>> >>>>>>>> with the Federal Court. In his view the Federal Court and the
>> >>>>>>>> Federal
>> >>>>>>>> Court of Appeal are the same court and therefore any document
>> filed
>> >>>>>>>> in
>> >>>>>>>> the Federal Court would be filed in this Court. This view is
>> >>>>>>>> based
>> >>>>>>>> on
>> >>>>>>>> subsections 5(4) and 5.1(4) of the Federal Courts Act, R.S.C.,
>> >>>>>>>> 1985,
>> >>>>>>>> c. F-7:
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> 5(4) Every judge of the Federal Court is, by virtue of his or
>> >>>>>>>> her
>> >>>>>>>> office, a judge of the Federal Court of Appeal and has all the
>> >>>>>>>> jurisdiction, power and authority of a judge of the Federal
>> >>>>>>>> Court
>> >>>>>>>> of
>> >>>>>>>> Appeal.
>> >>>>>>>> […]
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> 5(4) Les juges de la Cour fédérale sont d’office juges de la
>> >>>>>>>> Cour
>> >>>>>>>> d’appel fédérale et ont la même compétence et les mêmes pouvoirs
>> >>>>>>>> que
>> >>>>>>>> les juges de la Cour d’appel fédérale.
>> >>>>>>>> […]
>> >>>>>>>> 5.1(4) Every judge of the Federal Court of Appeal is, by virtue
>> >>>>>>>> of
>> >>>>>>>> that office, a judge of the Federal Court and has all the
>> >>>>>>>> jurisdiction, power and authority of a judge of the Federal
>> >>>>>>>> Court.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> 5.1(4) Les juges de la Cour d’appel fédérale sont d’office juges
>> de
>> >>>>>>>> la
>> >>>>>>>> Cour fédérale et ont la même compétence et les mêmes pouvoirs
>> >>>>>>>> que
>> >>>>>>>> les
>> >>>>>>>> juges de la Cour fédérale.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> [7] However, these subsections only provide that
>> >>>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>> judges of the Federal Court are also judges of this Court (and
>> vice
>> >>>>>>>> versa). It does not mean that there is only one court. If the
>> >>>>>>>> Federal
>> >>>>>>>> Court and this Court were one Court, there would be no need for
>> >>>>>>>> this
>> >>>>>>>> section.
>> >>>>>>>> [8] Sections 3 and 4 of the Federal Courts Act
>> >>>>>>>> provide
>> >>>>>>>> that:
>> >>>>>>>> 3 The division of the Federal Court of Canada called the Federal
>> >>>>>>>> Court
>> >>>>>>>> — Appeal Division is continued under the name “Federal Court of
>> >>>>>>>> Appeal” in English and “Cour d’appel fédérale” in French. It is
>> >>>>>>>> continued as an additional court of law, equity and admiralty in
>> >>>>>>>> and
>> >>>>>>>> for Canada, for the better administration of the laws of Canada
>> and
>> >>>>>>>> as
>> >>>>>>>> a superior court of record having civil and criminal
>> >>>>>>>> jurisdiction.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> 3 La Section d’appel, aussi appelée la Cour d’appel ou la Cour
>> >>>>>>>> d’appel
>> >>>>>>>> fédérale, est maintenue et dénommée « Cour d’appel fédérale » en
>> >>>>>>>> français et « Federal Court of Appeal » en anglais. Elle est
>> >>>>>>>> maintenue
>> >>>>>>>> à titre de tribunal additionnel de droit, d’equity et d’amirauté
>> du
>> >>>>>>>> Canada, propre à améliorer l’application du droit canadien, et
>> >>>>>>>> continue d’être une cour supérieure d’archives ayant compétence
>> >>>>>>>> en
>> >>>>>>>> matière civile et pénale.
>> >>>>>>>> 4 The division of the Federal Court of Canada called the Federal
>> >>>>>>>> Court
>> >>>>>>>> — Trial Division is continued under the name “Federal Court” in
>> >>>>>>>> English and “Cour fédérale” in French. It is continued as an
>> >>>>>>>> additional court of law, equity and admiralty in and for Canada,
>> >>>>>>>> for
>> >>>>>>>> the better administration of the laws of Canada and as a
>> >>>>>>>> superior
>> >>>>>>>> court of record having civil and criminal jurisdiction.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> 4 La section de la Cour fédérale du Canada, appelée la Section
>> >>>>>>>> de
>> >>>>>>>> première instance de la Cour fédérale, est maintenue et dénommée
>> >>>>>>>> «
>> >>>>>>>> Cour fédérale » en français et « Federal Court » en anglais.
>> >>>>>>>> Elle
>> >>>>>>>> est
>> >>>>>>>> maintenue à titre de tribunal additionnel de droit, d’equity et
>> >>>>>>>> d’amirauté du Canada, propre à améliorer l’application du droit
>> >>>>>>>> canadien, et continue d’être une cour supérieure d’archives
>> >>>>>>>> ayant
>> >>>>>>>> compétence en matière civile et pénale.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> [9] Sections 3 and 4 of the Federal Courts Act
>> create
>> >>>>>>>> two separate courts – this Court (section 3) and the Federal
>> >>>>>>>> Court
>> >>>>>>>> (section 4). If, as Mr. Amos suggests, documents filed in the
>> >>>>>>>> Federal
>> >>>>>>>> Court were automatically also filed in this Court, then there
>> would
>> >>>>>>>> no
>> >>>>>>>> need for the parties to prepare and file appeal books as
>> >>>>>>>> required
>> >>>>>>>> by
>> >>>>>>>> Rules 343 to 345 of the Federal Courts Rules, SOR/98-106 in
>> >>>>>>>> relation
>> >>>>>>>> to any appeal from a decision of the Federal Court. The
>> requirement
>> >>>>>>>> to
>> >>>>>>>> file an appeal book with this Court in relation to an appeal
>> >>>>>>>> from
>> a
>> >>>>>>>> decision of the Federal Court makes it clear that the only
>> >>>>>>>> documents
>> >>>>>>>> that will be before this Court are the documents that are part
>> >>>>>>>> of
>> >>>>>>>> that
>> >>>>>>>> appeal book.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> [10] Therefore, the memorandum of fact and law filed
>> >>>>>>>> on
>> >>>>>>>> March 6, 2017 is the first document, filed with this Court, in
>> >>>>>>>> which
>> >>>>>>>> Mr. Amos identified the particular judges that he submits have a
>> >>>>>>>> conflict in any matter related to him.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> [11] On April 3, 2017, Mr. Amos attempted to bring a
>> >>>>>>>> motion
>> >>>>>>>> before the Federal Court seeking an order “affirming or denying
>> the
>> >>>>>>>> conflict of interest he has” with a number of judges of the
>> Federal
>> >>>>>>>> Court. A judge of the Federal Court issued a direction noting
>> >>>>>>>> that
>> >>>>>>>> if
>> >>>>>>>> Mr. Amos was seeking this order in relation to judges of the
>> >>>>>>>> Federal
>> >>>>>>>> Court of Appeal, it was beyond the jurisdiction of the Federal
>> >>>>>>>> Court.
>> >>>>>>>> Mr. Amos raised the Federal Court motion at the hearing of this
>> >>>>>>>> cross-appeal. The Federal Court motion is not a motion before
>> >>>>>>>> this
>> >>>>>>>> Court and, as such, the submissions filed before the Federal
>> >>>>>>>> Court
>> >>>>>>>> will not be entertained. As well, since this was a motion
>> >>>>>>>> brought
>> >>>>>>>> before the Federal Court (and not this Court), any documents
>> >>>>>>>> filed
>> >>>>>>>> in
>> >>>>>>>> relation to that motion are not part of the record of this
>> >>>>>>>> Court.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> [12] During the hearing of the appeal Mr. Amos alleged
>> >>>>>>>> that
>> >>>>>>>> the third member of this panel also had a conflict of interest
>> >>>>>>>> and
>> >>>>>>>> submitted some documents that, in his view, supported his claim
>> >>>>>>>> of
>> >>>>>>>> a
>> >>>>>>>> conflict. Mr. Amos, following the hearing of his appeal, was
>> >>>>>>>> also
>> >>>>>>>> afforded the opportunity to provide a brief summary of the
>> conflict
>> >>>>>>>> that he was alleging and to file additional documents that, in
>> >>>>>>>> his
>> >>>>>>>> view, supported his allegations. Mr. Amos submitted several
>> >>>>>>>> pages
>> >>>>>>>> of
>> >>>>>>>> documents in relation to the alleged conflicts. He organized the
>> >>>>>>>> documents by submitting a copy of the biography of the
>> >>>>>>>> particular
>> >>>>>>>> judge and then, immediately following that biography, by
>> >>>>>>>> including
>> >>>>>>>> copies of the documents that, in his view, supported his claim
>> that
>> >>>>>>>> such judge had a conflict.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> [13] The nature of the alleged conflict of Justice
>> >>>>>>>> Webb
>> >>>>>>>> is
>> >>>>>>>> that before he was appointed as a Judge of the Tax Court of
>> >>>>>>>> Canada
>> >>>>>>>> in
>> >>>>>>>> 2006, he was a partner with the law firm Patterson Law, and
>> >>>>>>>> before
>> >>>>>>>> that with Patterson Palmer in Nova Scotia. Mr. Amos submitted
>> >>>>>>>> that
>> >>>>>>>> he
>> >>>>>>>> had a number of disputes with Patterson Palmer and Patterson Law
>> >>>>>>>> and
>> >>>>>>>> therefore Justice Webb has a conflict simply because he was a
>> >>>>>>>> partner
>> >>>>>>>> of these firms. Mr. Amos is not alleging that Justice Webb was
>> >>>>>>>> personally involved in or had any knowledge of any matter in
>> >>>>>>>> which
>> >>>>>>>> Mr.
>> >>>>>>>> Amos was involved with Justice Webb’s former law firm – only
>> >>>>>>>> that
>> >>>>>>>> he
>> >>>>>>>> was a member of such firm.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> [14] During his oral submissions at the hearing of his
>> >>>>>>>> appeal Mr. Amos, in relation to the alleged conflict for Justice
>> >>>>>>>> Webb,
>> >>>>>>>> focused on dealings between himself and a particular lawyer at
>> >>>>>>>> Patterson Law. However, none of the documents submitted by Mr.
>> Amos
>> >>>>>>>> at
>> >>>>>>>> the hearing or subsequently related to any dealings with this
>> >>>>>>>> particular lawyer nor is it clear when Mr. Amos was dealing with
>> >>>>>>>> this
>> >>>>>>>> lawyer. In particular, it is far from clear whether such
>> >>>>>>>> dealings
>> >>>>>>>> were
>> >>>>>>>> after the time that Justice Webb was appointed as a Judge of the
>> >>>>>>>> Tax
>> >>>>>>>> Court of Canada over 10 years ago.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> [15] The documents that he submitted in relation to
>> >>>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>> alleged conflict for Justice Webb largely relate to dealings
>> >>>>>>>> between
>> >>>>>>>> Byron Prior and the St. John’s Newfoundland and Labrador office
>> >>>>>>>> of
>> >>>>>>>> Patterson Palmer, which is not in the same province where
>> >>>>>>>> Justice
>> >>>>>>>> Webb
>> >>>>>>>> practiced law. The only document that indicates any dealing
>> between
>> >>>>>>>> Mr. Amos and Patterson Palmer is a copy of an affidavit of
>> >>>>>>>> Stephen
>> >>>>>>>> May
>> >>>>>>>> who was a partner in the St. John’s NL office of Patterson
>> >>>>>>>> Palmer.
>> >>>>>>>> The
>> >>>>>>>> affidavit is dated January 24, 2005 and refers to a number of
>> >>>>>>>> e-mails
>> >>>>>>>> that were sent by Mr. Amos to Stephen May. Mr. Amos also
>> >>>>>>>> included
>> a
>> >>>>>>>> letter that is addressed to four individuals, one of whom is
>> >>>>>>>> John
>> >>>>>>>> Crosbie who was counsel to the St. John’s NL office of Patterson
>> >>>>>>>> Palmer. The letter is dated September 2, 2004 and is addressed
>> >>>>>>>> to
>> >>>>>>>> “John Crosbie, c/o Greg G. Byrne, Suite 502, 570 Queen Street,
>> >>>>>>>> Fredericton, NB E3B 5E3”. In this letter Mr. Amos alludes to a
>> >>>>>>>> possible lawsuit against Patterson Palmer.
>> >>>>>>>> [16] Mr. Amos’ position is that simply because Justice
>> >>>>>>>> Webb
>> >>>>>>>> was a lawyer with Patterson Palmer, he now has a conflict. In
>> >>>>>>>> Wewaykum
>> >>>>>>>> Indian Band v. Her Majesty the Queen, 2003 SCC 45, [2003] 2
>> >>>>>>>> S.C.R.
>> >>>>>>>> 259, the Supreme Court of Canada noted that disqualification of
>> >>>>>>>> a
>> >>>>>>>> judge is to be determined based on whether there is a reasonable
>> >>>>>>>> apprehension of bias:
>> >>>>>>>> 60 In Canadian law, one standard has now emerged as the
>> >>>>>>>> criterion for disqualification. The criterion, as expressed by
>> >>>>>>>> de
>> >>>>>>>> Grandpré J. in Committee for Justice and Liberty v. National
>> Energy
>> >>>>>>>> Board, …[[1978] 1 S.C.R. 369, 68 D.L.R. (3d) 716], at p. 394, is
>> >>>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>> reasonable apprehension of bias:
>> >>>>>>>> … the apprehension of bias must be a reasonable one, held by
>> >>>>>>>> reasonable and right minded persons, applying themselves to the
>> >>>>>>>> question and obtaining thereon the required information. In the
>> >>>>>>>> words
>> >>>>>>>> of the Court of Appeal, that test is "what would an informed
>> >>>>>>>> person,
>> >>>>>>>> viewing the matter realistically and practically -- and having
>> >>>>>>>> thought
>> >>>>>>>> the matter through -- conclude. Would he think that it is more
>> >>>>>>>> likely
>> >>>>>>>> than not that [the decision-maker], whether consciously or
>> >>>>>>>> unconsciously, would not decide fairly."
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> [17] The issue to be determined is whether an informed
>> >>>>>>>> person, viewing the matter realistically and practically, and
>> >>>>>>>> having
>> >>>>>>>> thought the matter through, would conclude that Mr. Amos’
>> >>>>>>>> allegations
>> >>>>>>>> give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias. As this Court
>> >>>>>>>> has
>> >>>>>>>> previously remarked, “there is a strong presumption that judges
>> >>>>>>>> will
>> >>>>>>>> administer justice impartially” and this presumption will not be
>> >>>>>>>> rebutted in the absence of “convincing evidence” of bias
>> >>>>>>>> (Collins
>> >>>>>>>> v.
>> >>>>>>>> Canada, 2011 FCA 140 at para. 7, [2011] 4 C.T.C. 157 [Collins].
>> See
>> >>>>>>>> also R. v. S. (R.D.), [1997] 3 S.C.R. 484 at para. 32, 151
>> >>>>>>>> D.L.R.
>> >>>>>>>> (4th) 193).
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> [18] The Ontario Court of Appeal in Rando Drugs Ltd.
>> >>>>>>>> v.
>> >>>>>>>> Scott, 2007 ONCA 553, 86 O.R. (3d) 653 (leave to appeal to the
>> >>>>>>>> Supreme
>> >>>>>>>> Court of Canada refused, 32285 (August 1, 2007)), addressed the
>> >>>>>>>> particular issue of whether a judge is disqualified from hearing
>> >>>>>>>> a
>> >>>>>>>> case simply because he had been a member of a law firm that was
>> >>>>>>>> involved in the litigation that was now before that judge. The
>> >>>>>>>> Ontario
>> >>>>>>>> Court of Appeal determined that the judge was not disqualified
>> >>>>>>>> if
>> >>>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>> judge had no involvement with the person or the matter when he
>> >>>>>>>> was
>> >>>>>>>> a
>> >>>>>>>> lawyer. The Ontario Court of Appeal also explained that the
>> >>>>>>>> rules
>> >>>>>>>> for
>> >>>>>>>> determining whether a judge is disqualified are different from
>> >>>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>> rules to determine whether a lawyer has a conflict:
>> >>>>>>>> 27 Thus, disqualification is not the natural corollary to
>> >>>>>>>> a
>> >>>>>>>> finding that a trial judge has had some involvement in a case
>> >>>>>>>> over
>> >>>>>>>> which he or she is now presiding. Where the judge had no
>> >>>>>>>> involvement,
>> >>>>>>>> as here, it cannot be said that the judge is disqualified.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> 28 The point can rightly be made that had Mr. Patterson
>> been
>> >>>>>>>> asked to represent the appellant as counsel before his
>> >>>>>>>> appointment
>> >>>>>>>> to
>> >>>>>>>> the bench, the conflict rules would likely have prevented him
>> >>>>>>>> from
>> >>>>>>>> taking the case because his firm had formerly represented one of
>> >>>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>> defendants in the case. Thus, it is argued how is it that as a
>> >>>>>>>> trial
>> >>>>>>>> judge Patterson J. can hear the case? This issue was considered
>> >>>>>>>> by
>> >>>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>> Court of Appeal (Civil Division) in Locabail (U.K.) Ltd. v.
>> >>>>>>>> Bayfield
>> >>>>>>>> Properties Ltd., [2000] Q.B. 451. The court held, at para. 58,
>> that
>> >>>>>>>> there is no inflexible rule governing the disqualification of a
>> >>>>>>>> judge
>> >>>>>>>> and that, "[e]verything depends on the circumstances."
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> 29 It seems to me that what appears at first sight to be
>> >>>>>>>> an
>> >>>>>>>> inconsistency in application of rules can be explained by the
>> >>>>>>>> different contexts and in particular, the strong presumption of
>> >>>>>>>> judicial impartiality that applies in the context of
>> >>>>>>>> disqualification
>> >>>>>>>> of a judge. There is no such presumption in cases of allegations
>> of
>> >>>>>>>> conflict of interest against a lawyer because of a firm's
>> >>>>>>>> previous
>> >>>>>>>> involvement in the case. To the contrary, as explained by
>> >>>>>>>> Sopinka
>> >>>>>>>> J.
>> >>>>>>>> in MacDonald Estate v. Martin (1990), 77 D.L.R. (4th) 249
>> (S.C.C.),
>> >>>>>>>> for sound policy reasons there is a presumption of a
>> >>>>>>>> disqualifying
>> >>>>>>>> interest that can rarely be overcome. In particular, a
>> >>>>>>>> conclusory
>> >>>>>>>> statement from the lawyer that he or she had no confidential
>> >>>>>>>> information about the case will never be sufficient. The case is
>> >>>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>> opposite where the allegation of bias is made against a trial
>> >>>>>>>> judge.
>> >>>>>>>> His or her statement that he or she knew nothing about the case
>> and
>> >>>>>>>> had no involvement in it will ordinarily be accepted at face
>> >>>>>>>> value
>> >>>>>>>> unless there is good reason to doubt it: see Locabail, at para.
>> 19.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> 30 That brings me then to consider the particular
>> >>>>>>>> circumstances
>> >>>>>>>> of this case and whether there are serious grounds to find a
>> >>>>>>>> disqualifying conflict of interest in this case. In my view,
>> >>>>>>>> there
>> >>>>>>>> are
>> >>>>>>>> two significant factors that justify the trial judge's decision
>> not
>> >>>>>>>> to
>> >>>>>>>> recuse himself. The first is his statement, which all parties
>> >>>>>>>> accept,
>> >>>>>>>> that he knew nothing of the case when it was in his former firm
>> and
>> >>>>>>>> that he had nothing to do with it. The second is the long
>> >>>>>>>> passage
>> >>>>>>>> of
>> >>>>>>>> time. As was said in Wewaykum, at para. 85:
>> >>>>>>>> To us, one significant factor stands out, and must
>> >>>>>>>> inform
>> >>>>>>>> the perspective of the reasonable person assessing the impact of
>> >>>>>>>> this
>> >>>>>>>> involvement on Binnie J.'s impartiality in the appeals. That
>> factor
>> >>>>>>>> is
>> >>>>>>>> the passage of time. Most arguments for disqualification rest on
>> >>>>>>>> circumstances that are either contemporaneous to the
>> >>>>>>>> decision-making,
>> >>>>>>>> or that occurred within a short time prior to the
>> >>>>>>>> decision-making.
>> >>>>>>>> 31 There are other factors that inform the issue. The
>> Wilson
>> >>>>>>>> Walker firm no longer acted for any of the parties by the time
>> >>>>>>>> of
>> >>>>>>>> trial. More importantly, at the time of the motion, Patterson J.
>> >>>>>>>> had
>> >>>>>>>> been a judge for six years and thus had not had a relationship
>> with
>> >>>>>>>> his former firm for a considerable period of time.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> 32 In my view, a reasonable person, viewing the matter
>> >>>>>>>> realistically would conclude that the trial judge could deal
>> fairly
>> >>>>>>>> and impartially with this case. I take this view principally
>> >>>>>>>> because
>> >>>>>>>> of the long passage of time and the trial judge's lack of
>> >>>>>>>> involvement
>> >>>>>>>> in or knowledge of the case when the Wilson Walker firm had
>> >>>>>>>> carriage.
>> >>>>>>>> In these circumstances it cannot be reasonably contended that
>> >>>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>> trial judge could not remain impartial in the case. The mere
>> >>>>>>>> fact
>> >>>>>>>> that
>> >>>>>>>> his name appears on the letterhead of some correspondence from
>> over
>> >>>>>>>> a
>> >>>>>>>> decade ago would not lead a reasonable person to believe that he
>> >>>>>>>> would
>> >>>>>>>> either consciously or unconsciously favour his former firm's
>> former
>> >>>>>>>> client. It is simply not realistic to think that a judge would
>> >>>>>>>> throw
>> >>>>>>>> off his mantle of impartiality, ignore his oath of office and
>> >>>>>>>> favour
>> >>>>>>>> a
>> >>>>>>>> client - about whom he knew nothing - of a firm that he left six
>> >>>>>>>> years
>> >>>>>>>> earlier and that no longer acts for the client, in a case
>> involving
>> >>>>>>>> events from over a decade ago.
>> >>>>>>>> (emphasis added)
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> [19] Justice Webb had no involvement with any matter
>> >>>>>>>> involving Mr. Amos while he was a member of Patterson Palmer or
>> >>>>>>>> Patterson Law, nor does Mr. Amos suggest that he did. Mr. Amos
>> made
>> >>>>>>>> it
>> >>>>>>>> clear during the hearing of this matter that the only reason for
>> >>>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>> alleged conflict for Justice Webb was that he was a member of
>> >>>>>>>> Patterson Law and Patterson Palmer. This is simply not enough
>> >>>>>>>> for
>> >>>>>>>> Justice Webb to be disqualified. Any involvement of Mr. Amos
>> >>>>>>>> with
>> >>>>>>>> Patterson Law while Justice Webb was a member of that firm would
>> >>>>>>>> have
>> >>>>>>>> had to occur over 10 years ago and even longer for the time when
>> he
>> >>>>>>>> was a member of Patterson Palmer. In addition to the lack of any
>> >>>>>>>> involvement on his part with any matter or dispute that Mr. Amos
>> >>>>>>>> had
>> >>>>>>>> with Patterson Law or Patterson Palmer (which in and of itself
>> >>>>>>>> is
>> >>>>>>>> sufficient to dispose of this matter), the length of time since
>> >>>>>>>> Justice Webb was a member of Patterson Law or Patterson Palmer
>> >>>>>>>> would
>> >>>>>>>> also result in the same finding – that there is no conflict in
>> >>>>>>>> Justice
>> >>>>>>>> Webb hearing this appeal.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> [20] Similarly in R. v. Bagot, 2000 MBCA 30, 145 Man.
>> >>>>>>>> R.
>> >>>>>>>> (2d) 260, the Manitoba Court of Appeal found that there was no
>> >>>>>>>> reasonable apprehension of bias when a judge, who had been a
>> member
>> >>>>>>>> of
>> >>>>>>>> the law firm that had been retained by the accused, had no
>> >>>>>>>> involvement
>> >>>>>>>> with the accused while he was a lawyer with that firm.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> [21] In Del Zotto v. Minister of National Revenue,
>> [2000]
>> >>>>>>>> 4
>> >>>>>>>> F.C. 321, 257 N.R. 96, this court did find that there would be a
>> >>>>>>>> reasonable apprehension of bias where a judge, who while he was
>> >>>>>>>> a
>> >>>>>>>> lawyer, had recorded time on a matter involving the same person
>> who
>> >>>>>>>> was before that judge. However, this case can be distinguished
>> >>>>>>>> as
>> >>>>>>>> Justice Webb did not have any time recorded on any files
>> >>>>>>>> involving
>> >>>>>>>> Mr.
>> >>>>>>>> Amos while he was a lawyer with Patterson Palmer or Patterson
>> >>>>>>>> Law.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> [22] Mr. Amos also included with his submissions a CD.
>> He
>> >>>>>>>> stated in his affidavit dated June 26, 2017 that there is a
>> >>>>>>>> “true
>> >>>>>>>> copy
>> >>>>>>>> of an American police surveillance wiretap entitled 139” on this
>> >>>>>>>> CD.
>> >>>>>>>> He has also indicated that he has “provided a true copy of the
>> >>>>>>>> CD
>> >>>>>>>> entitled 139 to many American and Canadian law enforcement
>> >>>>>>>> authorities
>> >>>>>>>> and not one of the police forces or officers of the court are
>> >>>>>>>> willing
>> >>>>>>>> to investigate it”. Since he has indicated that this is an
>> >>>>>>>> “American
>> >>>>>>>> police surveillance wiretap”, this is a matter for the American
>> law
>> >>>>>>>> enforcement authorities and cannot create, as Mr. Amos suggests,
>> >>>>>>>> a
>> >>>>>>>> conflict of interest for any judge to whom he provides a copy.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> [23] As a result, there is no conflict or reasonable
>> >>>>>>>> apprehension of bias for Justice Webb and therefore, no reason
>> >>>>>>>> for
>> >>>>>>>> him
>> >>>>>>>> to recuse himself.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> [24] Mr. Amos alleged that Justice Near’s past
>> >>>>>>>> professional
>> >>>>>>>> experience with the government created a “quasi-conflict” in
>> >>>>>>>> deciding
>> >>>>>>>> the cross-appeal. Mr. Amos provided no details and Justice Near
>> >>>>>>>> confirmed that he had no prior knowledge of the matters alleged
>> >>>>>>>> in
>> >>>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>> Claim. Justice Near sees no reason to recuse himself.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> [25] Insofar as it is possible to glean the basis for
>> Mr.
>> >>>>>>>> Amos’ allegations against Justice Gleason, it appears that he
>> >>>>>>>> alleges
>> >>>>>>>> that she is incapable of hearing this appeal because he says he
>> >>>>>>>> wrote
>> >>>>>>>> a letter to Brian Mulroney and Jean Chrétien in 2004. At that
>> time,
>> >>>>>>>> both Justice Gleason and Mr. Mulroney were partners in the law
>> firm
>> >>>>>>>> Ogilvy Renault, LLP. The letter in question, which is rude and
>> >>>>>>>> angry,
>> >>>>>>>> begins with “Hey you two Evil Old Smiling Bastards” and “Re: me
>> >>>>>>>> suing
>> >>>>>>>> you and your little dogs too”. There is no indication that the
>> >>>>>>>> letter
>> >>>>>>>> was ever responded to or that a law suit was ever commenced by
>> >>>>>>>> Mr.
>> >>>>>>>> Amos against Mr. Mulroney. In the circumstances, there is no
>> reason
>> >>>>>>>> for Justice Gleason to recuse herself as the letter in question
>> >>>>>>>> does
>> >>>>>>>> not give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> III. Issue
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> [26] The issue on the cross-appeal is as follows: Did
>> the
>> >>>>>>>> Judge err in setting aside the Prothonotary’s Order striking the
>> >>>>>>>> Claim
>> >>>>>>>> in its entirety without leave to amend and in determining that
>> >>>>>>>> Mr.
>> >>>>>>>> Amos’ allegation that the RCMP barred him from the New Brunswick
>> >>>>>>>> legislature in 2004 was capable of supporting a cause of action?
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> IV. Analysis
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> A. Standard of Review
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> [27] Following the Judge’s decision to set aside the
>> >>>>>>>> Prothonotary’s Order, this Court revisited the standard of
>> >>>>>>>> review
>> >>>>>>>> to
>> >>>>>>>> be applied to discretionary decisions of prothonotaries and
>> >>>>>>>> decisions
>> >>>>>>>> made by judges on appeals of prothonotaries’ decisions in
>> >>>>>>>> Hospira
>> >>>>>>>> Healthcare Corp. v. Kennedy Institute of Rheumatology, 2016 FCA
>> >>>>>>>> 215,
>> >>>>>>>> 402 D.L.R. (4th) 497 [Hospira]. In Hospira, a five-member panel
>> >>>>>>>> of
>> >>>>>>>> this Court replaced the Aqua-Gem standard of review with that
>> >>>>>>>> articulated in Housen v. Nikolaisen, 2002 SCC 33, [2002] 2
>> >>>>>>>> S.C.R.
>> >>>>>>>> 235
>> >>>>>>>> [Housen]. As a result, it is no longer appropriate for the
>> >>>>>>>> Federal
>> >>>>>>>> Court to conduct a de novo review of a discretionary order made
>> >>>>>>>> by
>> >>>>>>>> a
>> >>>>>>>> prothonotary in regard to questions vital to the final issue of
>> the
>> >>>>>>>> case. Rather, a Federal Court judge can only intervene on appeal
>> if
>> >>>>>>>> the prothonotary made an error of law or a palpable and
>> >>>>>>>> overriding
>> >>>>>>>> error in determining a question of fact or question of mixed
>> >>>>>>>> fact
>> >>>>>>>> and
>> >>>>>>>> law (Hospira at para. 79). Further, this Court can only
>> >>>>>>>> interfere
>> >>>>>>>> with
>> >>>>>>>> a Federal Court judge’s review of a prothonotary’s discretionary
>> >>>>>>>> order
>> >>>>>>>> if the judge made an error of law or palpable and overriding
>> >>>>>>>> error
>> >>>>>>>> in
>> >>>>>>>> determining a question of fact or question of mixed fact and law
>> >>>>>>>> (Hospira at paras. 82-83).
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> [28] In the case at bar, the Judge substituted his own
>> >>>>>>>> assessment of Mr. Amos’ Claim for that of the Prothonotary. This
>> >>>>>>>> Court
>> >>>>>>>> must look to the Prothonotary’s Order to determine whether the
>> >>>>>>>> Judge
>> >>>>>>>> erred in law or made a palpable and overriding error in choosing
>> to
>> >>>>>>>> interfere.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> B. Did the Judge err in interfering with the
>> >>>>>>>> Prothonotary’s Order?
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> [29] The Prothontoary’s Order accepted the following
>> >>>>>>>> paragraphs from the Crown’s submissions as the basis for
>> >>>>>>>> striking
>> >>>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>> Claim in its entirety without leave to amend:
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> 17. Within the 96 paragraph Statement of Claim, the
>> Plaintiff
>> >>>>>>>> addresses his complaint in paragraphs 14-24, inclusive. All but
>> >>>>>>>> four
>> >>>>>>>> of those paragraphs are dedicated to an incident that occurred
>> >>>>>>>> in
>> >>>>>>>> 2006
>> >>>>>>>> in and around the legislature in New Brunswick. The jurisdiction
>> of
>> >>>>>>>> the Federal Court does not extend to Her Majesty the Queen in
>> right
>> >>>>>>>> of
>> >>>>>>>> the Provinces. In any event, the Plaintiff hasn’t named the
>> >>>>>>>> Province
>> >>>>>>>> or provincial actors as parties to this action. The incident
>> >>>>>>>> alleged
>> >>>>>>>> does not give rise to a justiciable cause of action in this
>> >>>>>>>> Court.
>> >>>>>>>> (…)
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> 21. The few paragraphs that directly address the Defendant
>> >>>>>>>> provide no details as to the individuals involved or the
>> >>>>>>>> location
>> >>>>>>>> of
>> >>>>>>>> the alleged incidents or other details sufficient to allow the
>> >>>>>>>> Defendant to respond. As a result, it is difficult or impossible
>> to
>> >>>>>>>> determine the causes of action the Plaintiff is attempting to
>> >>>>>>>> advance.
>> >>>>>>>> A generous reading of the Statement of Claim allows the
>> >>>>>>>> Defendant
>> >>>>>>>> to
>> >>>>>>>> only speculate as to the true and/or intended cause of action.
>> >>>>>>>> At
>> >>>>>>>> best, the Plaintiff’s action may possibly be summarized as: he
>> >>>>>>>> suspects he is barred from the House of Commons.
>> >>>>>>>> [footnotes omitted].
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> [30] The Judge determined that he could not strike the
>> >>>>>>>> Claim
>> >>>>>>>> on the same jurisdictional basis as the Prothonotary. The Judge
>> >>>>>>>> noted
>> >>>>>>>> that the Federal Court has jurisdiction over claims based on the
>> >>>>>>>> liability of Federal Crown servants like the RCMP and that the
>> >>>>>>>> actors
>> >>>>>>>> who barred Mr. Amos from the New Brunswick legislature in 2004
>> >>>>>>>> included the RCMP (Federal Court Judgment at para. 23). In
>> >>>>>>>> considering
>> >>>>>>>> the viability of these allegations de novo, the Judge identified
>> >>>>>>>> paragraph 14 of the Claim as containing “some precision” as it
>> >>>>>>>> identifies the date of the event and a RCMP officer acting as
>> >>>>>>>> Aide-de-Camp to the Lieutenant Governor (Federal Court Judgment
>> >>>>>>>> at
>> >>>>>>>> para. 27).
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> [31] The Judge noted that the 2004 event could support
>> >>>>>>>> a
>> >>>>>>>> cause of action in the tort of misfeasance in public office and
>> >>>>>>>> identified the elements of the tort as excerpted from Meigs v.
>> >>>>>>>> Canada,
>> >>>>>>>> 2013 FC 389, 431 F.T.R. 111:
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> [13] As in both the cases of Odhavji Estate v Woodhouse,
>> >>>>>>>> 2003
>> >>>>>>>> SCC
>> >>>>>>>> 69 [Odhavji] and Lewis v Canada, 2012 FC 1514 [Lewis], I must
>> >>>>>>>> determine whether the plaintiffs’ statement of claim pleads each
>> >>>>>>>> element of the alleged tort of misfeasance in public office:
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> a) The public officer must have engaged in deliberate and
>> >>>>>>>> unlawful
>> >>>>>>>> conduct in his or her capacity as public officer;
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> b) The public officer must have been aware both that his or her
>> >>>>>>>> conduct was unlawful and that it was likely to harm the
>> >>>>>>>> plaintiff;
>> >>>>>>>> and
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> c) There must be an element of bad faith or dishonesty by the
>> >>>>>>>> public
>> >>>>>>>> officer and knowledge of harm alone is insufficient to conclude
>> >>>>>>>> that
>> >>>>>>>> a
>> >>>>>>>> public officer acted in bad faith or dishonestly.
>> >>>>>>>> Odhavji, above, at paras 23, 24 and 28
>> >>>>>>>> (Federal Court Judgment at para. 28).
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> [32] The Judge determined that Mr. Amos disclosed
>> >>>>>>>> sufficient
>> >>>>>>>> material facts to meet the elements of the tort of misfeasance
>> >>>>>>>> in
>> >>>>>>>> public office because the actors, who barred him from the New
>> >>>>>>>> Brunswick legislature in 2004, including the RCMP, did so for
>> >>>>>>>> “political reasons” (Federal Court Judgment at para. 29).
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> [33] This Court’s discussion of the sufficiency of
>> >>>>>>>> pleadings
>> >>>>>>>> in Merchant Law Group v. Canada (Revenue Agency), 2010 FCA 184,
>> 321
>> >>>>>>>> D.L.R (4th) 301 is particularly apt:
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> …When pleading bad faith or abuse of power, it is not enough to
>> >>>>>>>> assert, baldly, conclusory phrases such as “deliberately or
>> >>>>>>>> negligently,” “callous disregard,” or “by fraud and theft did
>> >>>>>>>> steal”.
>> >>>>>>>> “The bare assertion of a conclusion upon which the court is
>> >>>>>>>> called
>> >>>>>>>> upon to pronounce is not an allegation of material fact”. Making
>> >>>>>>>> bald,
>> >>>>>>>> conclusory allegations without any evidentiary foundation is an
>> >>>>>>>> abuse
>> >>>>>>>> of process…
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> To this, I would add that the tort of misfeasance in public
>> >>>>>>>> office
>> >>>>>>>> requires a particular state of mind of a public officer in
>> carrying
>> >>>>>>>> out the impunged action, i.e., deliberate conduct which the
>> >>>>>>>> public
>> >>>>>>>> officer knows to be inconsistent with the obligations of his or
>> her
>> >>>>>>>> office. For this tort, particularization of the allegations is
>> >>>>>>>> mandatory. Rule 181 specifically requires particularization of
>> >>>>>>>> allegations of “breach of trust,” “wilful default,” “state of
>> >>>>>>>> mind
>> >>>>>>>> of
>> >>>>>>>> a person,” “malice” or “fraudulent intention.”
>> >>>>>>>> (at paras. 34-35, citations omitted).
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> [34] Applying the Housen standard of review to the
>> >>>>>>>> Prothonotary’s Order, we are of the view that the Judge
>> >>>>>>>> interfered
>> >>>>>>>> absent a legal or palpable and overriding error.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> [35] The Prothonotary determined that Mr. Amos’ Claim
>> >>>>>>>> disclosed no reasonable claim and was fundamentally vexatious on
>> >>>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>> basis of jurisdictional concerns and the absence of material
>> >>>>>>>> facts
>> >>>>>>>> to
>> >>>>>>>> ground a cause of action. Paragraph 14 of the Claim, which
>> >>>>>>>> addresses
>> >>>>>>>> the 2004 event, pleads no material facts as to how the RCMP
>> officer
>> >>>>>>>> engaged in deliberate and unlawful conduct, knew that his or her
>> >>>>>>>> conduct was unlawful and likely to harm Mr. Amos, and acted in
>> >>>>>>>> bad
>> >>>>>>>> faith. While the Claim alleges elsewhere that Mr. Amos was
>> >>>>>>>> barred
>> >>>>>>>> from
>> >>>>>>>> the New Brunswick legislature for political and/or malicious
>> >>>>>>>> reasons,
>> >>>>>>>> these allegations are not particularized and are directed
>> >>>>>>>> against
>> >>>>>>>> non-federal actors, such as the Sergeant-at-Arms of the
>> Legislative
>> >>>>>>>> Assembly of New Brunswick and the Fredericton Police Force. As
>> >>>>>>>> such,
>> >>>>>>>> the Judge erred in determining that Mr. Amos’ allegation that
>> >>>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>> RCMP
>> >>>>>>>> barred him from the New Brunswick legislature in 2004 was
>> >>>>>>>> capable
>> >>>>>>>> of
>> >>>>>>>> supporting a cause of action.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> [36] In our view, the Claim is made up entirely of
>> >>>>>>>> bare
>> >>>>>>>> allegations, devoid of any detail, such that it discloses no
>> >>>>>>>> reasonable cause of action within the jurisdiction of the
>> >>>>>>>> Federal
>> >>>>>>>> Courts. Therefore, the Judge erred in interfering to set aside
>> >>>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>> Prothonotary’s Order striking the claim in its entirety.
>> >>>>>>>> Further,
>> >>>>>>>> we
>> >>>>>>>> find that the Prothonotary made no error in denying leave to
>> amend.
>> >>>>>>>> The deficiencies in Mr. Amos’ pleadings are so extensive such
>> >>>>>>>> that
>> >>>>>>>> amendment could not cure them (see Collins at para. 26).
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> V. Conclusion
>> >>>>>>>> [37] For the foregoing reasons, we would allow the
>> >>>>>>>> Crown’s
>> >>>>>>>> cross-appeal, with costs, setting aside the Federal Court
>> Judgment,
>> >>>>>>>> dated January 25, 2016 and restoring the Prothonotary’s Order,
>> >>>>>>>> dated
>> >>>>>>>> November 12, 2015, which struck Mr. Amos’ Claim in its entirety
>> >>>>>>>> without leave to amend.
>> >>>>>>>> "Wyman W. Webb"
>> >>>>>>>> J.A.
>> >>>>>>>> "David G. Near"
>> >>>>>>>> J.A.
>> >>>>>>>> "Mary J.L. Gleason"
>> >>>>>>>> J.A.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
>> >>>>>>>> NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> A CROSS-APPEAL FROM AN ORDER OF THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE SOUTHCOTT
>> >>>>>>>> DATED
>> >>>>>>>> JANUARY 25, 2016; DOCKET NUMBER T-1557-15.
>> >>>>>>>> DOCKET:
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> A-48-16
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> STYLE OF CAUSE:
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> DAVID RAYMOND AMOS v. HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> PLACE OF HEARING:
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Fredericton,
>> >>>>>>>> New Brunswick
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> DATE OF HEARING:
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> May 24, 2017
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY:
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> WEBB J.A.
>> >>>>>>>> NEAR J.A.
>> >>>>>>>> GLEASON J.A.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> DATED:
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> October 30, 2017
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> APPEARANCES:
>> >>>>>>>> David Raymond Amos
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> For The Appellant / respondent on cross-appeal
>> >>>>>>>> (on his own behalf)
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Jan Jensen
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> For The Respondent / appELLANT ON CROSS-APPEAL
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
>> >>>>>>>> Nathalie G. Drouin
>> >>>>>>>> Deputy Attorney General of Canada
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> For The Respondent / APPELLANT ON CROSS-APPEAL
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> ---------- Original message ----------
>> >>>>> Date: Thu, 24 May 2007 19:01:11 -0700 (PDT)
>> >>>>> From: "David Amos" motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com
>> >>>>> Subject: Now everybody and his dog knows TJ Burke and his cop
>> >>>>> buddies
>> >>>>> allegations against me are false and you had the proof all along EH
>> >>>>> Chucky?
>> >>>>> To: oldmaison@yahoo.com, nbombud@gnb.ca, dan.bussieres@gnb.ca,
>> >>>>> jacques_poitras@cbc.ca, news@dailygleaner.com,
>> >>>>> kcarmichael@bloomberg.net, advocacycollective@yahoo.com,
>> >>>>> Easter.W@parl.gc.ca, Comartin.J@parl.gc.ca,
>> >>>>> cityadmin@fredericton.ca
>> ,
>> >>>>> info@gg.ca, bmosher@mosherchedore.ca, rchedore@mosherchedore.ca,
>> >>>>> police@fredericton.ca, chebert@thestar.ca, Stoffer.P@parl.gc.ca,
>> >>>>> Stronach.B@parl.gc.ca, Matthews.B@parl.gc.ca,
>> >>>>> alltrue@nl.rogers.com,
>> >>>>> Harper.S@parl.gc.ca, Layton.J@parl.gc.ca, Dryden.K@parl.gc.ca,
>> >>>>> Duceppe.G@parl.gc.ca
>> >>>>> CC: dgleg@nb.aibn.com, brad.woodside@fredericton.ca,
>> >>>>> whalen@fredericton.ca, david.kelly@fredericton.ca,
>> >>>>> cathy.maclaggan@fredericton.ca, stephen.kelly@fredericton.ca,
>> >>>>> tom.jellinek@fredericton.ca, scott.mcconaghy@fredericton.ca,
>> >>>>> marilyn.kerton@fredericton.ca, walter.brown@fredericton.ca,
>> >>>>> norah.davidson@fredericton.ca, mike.obrien@fredericton.ca,
>> >>>>> bruce.grandy@fredericton.ca, dan.keenan@fredericton.ca,
>> >>>>> jeff.mockler@gnb.ca, mrichard@lawsociety-barreau.nb.ca,
>> >>>>> cynthia.merlini@dfait-maeci.gc.ca, jlmockler@mpor.ca,
>> >>>>> scotta@parl.gc.ca, michael.bray@gnb.ca, jack.e.mackay@gnb.ca
>> >>>>>
>> http://www.cbc.ca/canada/new-brunswick/story/2007/05/24/nb-burkethreat.html
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> http://www.canadaeast.com/ce2/docroot/article.php?articleID=149018
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> http://oldmaison.blogspot.com/2007/05/tj-burke-walking-around-with-rcmp.html
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> http://oldmaison.blogspot.com/2006/06/fapo-has-meeting-about-panhanding.html
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> http://oldmaison.blogspot.com/2007/05/hats-off-to-cbc-reporter-jacques.html
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> http://maritimes.indymedia.org/mail.php?id=9856
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Methinks your liberal pals just made a major faux pas N'est Pas?
>> >>>>> Scroll down Frenchie and go down?.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Threat against Burke taken seriously
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> By STEPHEN LLEWELLYN
>> >>>>> dgleg@nb.aibn.com
>> >>>>> Published Thursday May 24th, 2007
>> >>>>> Appeared on page A1
>> >>>>> An RCMP security detail has been guarding Justice Minister and
>> >>>>> Attorney General T.J. Burke because of threats made against him
>> >>>>> recently.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Burke, the Liberal MLA for Fredericton-Fort Nashwaaksis, wouldn't
>> >>>>> explain the nature of the threats.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> "I have had a particular individual or individuals who have made
>> >>>>> specific overtures about causing harm towards me," he told
>> >>>>> reporters
>> >>>>> Wednesday.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> "The RCMP has provided security to me recently by accompanying me
>> >>>>> to
>> a
>> >>>>> couple of public functions where the individual is known to reside
>> >>>>> or
>> >>>>> have family members in the area," said Burke. "It is nice to have
>> some
>> >>>>> added protection and that added comfort."
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> The RCMP provides protection to the premier and MLAs with its VIP
>> >>>>> security
>> >>>>> unit.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Burke didn't say when the threat was made but it's believed to have
>> >>>>> been in recent weeks.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> "When a threat is posed to you and it is a credible threat, you
>> >>>>> have
>> >>>>> to be cautious about where you go and who you are around," he said.
>> >>>>> "But again, I am more concerned about my family as opposed to my
>> >>>>> own
>> >>>>> personal safety."
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Burke said he doesn't feel any differently and he has not changed
>> >>>>> his
>> >>>>> pattern of activity.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> "It doesn't bother me one bit," he said. "It makes my wife feel
>> >>>>> awful
>> >>>>> nervous."
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Burke served in an elite American military unit before becoming a
>> >>>>> lawyer and going into politics in New Brunswick.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> "(I) have taken my own precautions and what I have to do to ensure
>> >>>>> my
>> >>>>> family's safety," he said. "I am a very cautious person in general
>> due
>> >>>>> to my background and training.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> "I am comfortable with defending myself or my family if it ever had
>> to
>> >>>>> happen."
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Burke said it is not uncommon for politicians to have security
>> >>>>> concerns.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> "We do live unfortunately in an age and in a society now where
>> threats
>> >>>>> have to be taken pretty seriously," he said.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Since the terrorism attacks in the United States on Sept. 11, 2001,
>> >>>>> security in New Brunswick has been
>> >>>>> beefed up.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Metal detectors were recently installed in the legislature and all
>> >>>>> visitors are screened.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> The position of attorney general is often referred to as the
>> >>>>> province's "top cop."
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Burke said sometimes people do not differentiate between his role
>> >>>>> as
>> >>>>> the manager of the justice system and the individual who actually
>> >>>>> prosecutes them.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> "With the job sometimes comes threats," he said. "I have had
>> >>>>> numerous
>> >>>>> threats since Day 1 in office."
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Burke said he hopes his First Nations heritage has nothing to do
>> >>>>> with
>> >>>>> it.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> "I think it is more of an issue where people get fixated on a
>> >>>>> matter
>> >>>>> and they believe you are personally responsible for assigning them
>> >>>>> their punishment or their sanction," he said.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Is the threat from someone who was recently incarcerated?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> "I probably shouldn't answer that," he replied.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Reporters asked when the threat would be over.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> "I don't think a threat ever passes once it has been made," said
>> >>>>> Burke. "You have to consider the credibility of the source."
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Bruce Fitch, former justice minister in the Conservative
>> >>>>> government,
>> >>>>> said "every now and again there would be e-mails that were not
>> >>>>> complimentary."
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> "I did have a meeting with the RCMP who are in charge of the
>> >>>>> security
>> >>>>> of the MLAs and ministers," said Fitch.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> "They look at each and every situation."
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Fitch said he never had bodyguards assigned to him although former
>> >>>>> premier Bernard Lord and former health minister Elvy Robichaud did
>> >>>>> have extra security staff assigned on occasion.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> He said if any MLA felt threatened, he or she would discuss it with
>> >>>>> the
>> >>>>> RCMP.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> http://www.archive.org/details/SecTreasuryDeptEtc
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Small World EH Chucky Leblanc?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> "Lafleur, Lou" lou.lafleur@fredericton.ca wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> From: "Lafleur, Lou" lou.lafleur@fredericton.ca
>> >>>>> To: "'motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com'" motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com,
>> >>>>> "Lafleur, Lou" lou.lafleur@fredericton.ca
>> >>>>> Subject: Fredericton Police Force
>> >>>>> Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2007 15:21:13 -0300
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Dear Mr. Amos
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> My Name is Lou LaFleur and I am a Detective with the Fredericton
>> >>>>> Police Major Crime Unit. I would like to talk to you regarding
>> >>>>> files
>> >>>>> that I am investigating and that you are alleged to have
>> >>>>> involvement
>> >>>>> in.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Please call me at your earliest convenience and leave a message and
>> >>>>> a
>> >>>>> phone number on my secure and confidential line if I am not in my
>> >>>>> office.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> yours truly,
>> >>>>> Cpl. Lou LaFleur
>> >>>>> Fredericton Police Force
>> >>>>> 311 Queen St.
>> >>>>> Fredericton, NB
>> >>>>> 506-460-2332
>> >>>>> ________________________________
>> >>>>> This electronic mail, including any attachments, is confidential
>> >>>>> and
>> >>>>> is for the sole use of the intended recipient and may be
>> >>>>> privileged.
>> >>>>> Any unauthorized distribution, copying, disclosure or review is
>> >>>>> prohibited. Neither communication over the Internet nor disclosure
>> >>>>> to
>> >>>>> anyone other than the intended recipient constitutes waiver of
>> >>>>> privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, please
>> >>>>> immediately
>> >>>>> notify the sender and then delete this communication and any
>> >>>>> attachments from your computer system and records without saving or
>> >>>>> forwarding it. Thank you.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >
>>
On 12/21/22, David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com> wrote:
> PUBLIC ORDER EMERGENCY COMMISSION
>
> B E T W E E N :
>
> FREEDOM CORP. ET AL
> Applicants/Moving Parties
>
> - and -
>
> HIS MAJESTY THE KING IN RIGHT OF CANADA
> and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
> Respondents/Responding Parties
>
> FINAL WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS OF FREEDOM CORP. ET AL – RELEASED
> IMMEDIATELY AFTER FILING TO FEDERAL PARLIAMENTARIANS, THE CANADIAN
> PUBLIC, AND THE CANADIAN AND FOREIGN MEDIA
>
> December 9, 2022 Foster LLP
>
> 2100, 520 – 5th Avenue SW
> Calgary, Alberta T2P 3R7
> Tel: (403) 261-5333
> Fax: (403) 266-4741
> Brendan M. Miller & Bath-Sheba
> van den Berg
> Barristers and Solicitors
> bmiller@fosterllp.ca
> bsvandenberg@fosterllp.ca
> File No. 450261
>
> Wilson Law Office
> Suite 195, 3-1 Bellerose Drive
> St. Alberta, Alberta T8N 5C9
> Keith Wilson, K.C.
> keith@wilsonlawoffices.ca
> & Eva Chipiuk
> Eva@chipiuk-law.ca
> Acting in Capacity as Solicitors Only
> Counsel for Freedom Corp. et al
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Sean Tiessen <stiessen1979@gmail.com>
> Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2022 06:26:30 -0800
> Subject: Re: "The VERY corrupt cop ClaudeTremblay just wished me a
> Merry Xmass??? BAH HUMBUG"
> To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
>
> David,
>
> Long time no talk.
>
> As I know how much you live reading this type of thing... dig in!!
>
> Let me know what you think. Feel free to share.... widely.
>
> Thx
> Merry Christmas
>
> Sean
>
> On Tue., Dec. 20, 2022, 1:27 p.m. David Amos, <
> david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: Blogger <no-reply@google.com>
>> Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2022 20:43:59 +0000
>> Subject: Your post titled "The VERY corrupt cop ClaudeTremblay just
>> wished me a Merry Xmass??? BAH HUMBUG" has been put behind a warning
>> for readers
>> To: david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com
>>
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> As you may know, our Community Guidelines
>> (https://blogger.com/go/contentpolicy) describe the boundaries for what
>> we
>> allow-- and don't allow-- on Blogger. Your post titled "The VERY corrupt
>> cop ClaudeTremblay just wished me a Merry Xmass??? BAH HUMBUG" was
>> flagged
>> to us for review. This post was put behind a warning for readers because
>> it
>> contains sensitive content; the post is visible at
>>
>> http://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.com/2022/12/the-very-corrupt-cop-claudetremblay.html
>> .
>> Your blog readers must acknowledge the warning before being able to read
>> the post/blog.
>>
>> Why was your blog post put behind a warning for readers?
>> Your content has been evaluated according to our Adult Content
>> policy.
>> Please visit our Community Guidelines page linked in this email to learn
>> more.
>>
>> We apply warning messages to posts that contain sensitive content.
>> If
>> you are interested in having the status reviewed, please update the
>> content
>> to adhere to Blogger's Community Guidelines. Once the content is updated,
>> you may republish it at
>>
>> https://www.blogger.com/go/appeal-post?blogId=2464308071878322421&postId=4810761789543695034
>> .
>> This will trigger a review of the post.
>>
>> For more information, please review the following resources:
>>
>> Terms of Service: https://www.blogger.com/go/terms
>> Blogger Community Guidelines: https://blogger.com/go/contentpolicy
>>
>> Sincerely,
>>
>> The Blogger Team
>>
>>
>> ---------- Original message ----------
>> From: Blogger <no-reply@google.com>
>> Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2022 07:02:05 +0000
>> Subject: Your post titled "MARCO MENDICINO PUBLIC ORDER EMERGENCY
>> COMMISSION INQUIRY Day 28 - November 22, 2022" has been reinstated
>> To: david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> We have re-evaluated the post titled "MARCO MENDICINO PUBLIC ORDER
>> EMERGENCY COMMISSION INQUIRY Day 28 - November 22, 2022" against
>> Community
>> Guidelines https://blogger.com/go/contentpolicy. Upon review, the post
>> has
>> been reinstated. You may access the post at
>>
>> http://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.com/2022/11/marco-mendicino-public-order-emergency.html
>> .
>>
>> Sincerely,
>>
>> The Blogger Team
>>
>
> On 2/20/22, David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com> wrote:
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: LeanneMB <LeanneMB@protonmail.com>
>> Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2022 15:39:48 +0000
>> Subject: Convoy demands
>> To: "david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com" <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
>>
>> Sent from ProtonMail for iOS
>>
>>
>> ---------- Original message ----------
>> From: "Barron, Lisa Marie - M.P." <lisamarie.barron@parl.gc.ca>
>> Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2022 02:29:26 +0000
>> Subject: Automatic reply: RE Trudeau Invoking the Emergency Act and
>> Freeland defending her liberal democracy byway of her bankster buddies
>> To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
>>
>> This automated response is to assure you that your message has been
>> received by my office and will be reviewed as soon as possible. Please
>> note that constituents of Nanaimo-Ladysmith have priority. Be sure to
>> include your home address or postal code if you are a resident of
>> Nanaimo-Ladysmith.
>>
>> If you are not a local resident, please contact your MP’s office for
>> assistance. You can enter your postal code here
>> https://www.ourcommons.ca/members/en if you are unsure who represents
>> your neighbourhood.
>>
>> Due to the overwhelming volume of correspondence received and our
>> limited capacity, we may not be able to respond personally to your
>> inquiry. In most cases, anonymous, cc'd, forwarded items and links to
>> articles will not receive a response. If you have any questions
>> regarding the status of your correspondence, please do not hesitate to
>> follow up with my office.
>>
>> If you live in Nanaimo-Ladysmith and the information you have sent is
>> about a concern or problem with a federal government ministry or
>> agency, please make sure that you have included your full name,
>> address, telephone number and the particulars regarding your case so
>> we can respond and assist you more efficiently.
>>
>> Thank you again for taking the time to share your views.
>>
>> Services & Assistance
>>
>> When you contact my community office, my team and I will do everything
>> we can to assist you. Your confidentiality is respected at all times.
>> To give you a better idea of how we can help, please review the
>> information below.
>>
>> What my Community Office can help you with:
>>
>> * Provide information on locating government services and contact
>> information
>> * Assist in understanding government policies and services
>> * Assist in navigating through government bureaucracy
>> * Ensure due process is being followed
>> * Attend community events
>> * Advocate on behalf of the community to government
>> * Provide congratulatory and greeting messages
>> * Provide government documents, legislation discussion papers and
>> other web-based forms if you don't have internet access
>> * Resolve issues you may be having with federal ministries or
>> agencies
>>
>> We can help you if:
>>
>> * You are a resident of the Nanaimo-Ladysmith constituency
>> * Your matter is with the Federal government
>>
>> We are unable to:
>>
>> * Offer legal advice or assist with legal action
>> * Influence processes set up in law to be independent of Parliament
>> * Change the time limits for filing appeals
>> * Make inquiries about police investigations. If you have a
>> complaint about police conduct, please direct them to the Office of
>> the Police Complaints Commissioner.
>>
>> In addition, while we are not able to take on casework that is
>> provincial or municipal in nature, we can help direct you to the
>> people who can assist you.
>>
>> If you would like more information regarding federal government
>> services and assistance available, please go to
>> https://www.canada.ca/en/employment-social-development/corporate/portfolio/service-canada.html
>> or call toll free 1-800-622-6232 for more information.
>>
>> Thanks again for writing.
>>
>> Warmly,
>>
>> Lisa Marie Barron
>>
>> Member of Parliament Elect for Nanaimo Ladysmith
>>
>> 250 734 6400
>>
>>
>> With respect and gratitude, the Nanaimo-Ladysmith riding is located on
>> the traditional territories of the Snuneymuxw, Snaw Naw As,
>> Stz`minus, and Lyackson First Nations.
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------- Original message ----------
>> From: "Cannings, Richard - M.P." <Richard.Cannings@parl.gc.ca>
>> Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2022 02:29:26 +0000
>> Subject: Automatic reply: RE Trudeau Invoking the Emergency Act and
>> Freeland defending her liberal democracy byway of her bankster buddies
>> To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
>>
>> *Do not reply to this email*
>>
>> Thank you very much for your e-mail and please be assured that I have
>> taken note of your concerns and expressed views. Please be assured
>> that this e-mail is monitored and while my staff and I read all
>> correspondence, the volume of emails we receive means that some form
>> letter campaigns and non-critic/non-riding correspondence may not
>> receive a direct response.
>>
>> in the event that you require immediate assistance while our office is
>> closed, I have provided the following list of contact numbers for your
>> use.
>>
>> Service Canada: 1-800-622-6232 /
>> www.canadabenefits.gc.ca<http://www.canadabenefits.gc.ca>
>> Global Affairs (International Consular Assistance): 1-800-267-8376,
>> sos@international.gc.ca<mailto:sos@international.gc.ca>
>>
>> Old Age Security (OAS): 1-800-277-9914
>> Canada Pension Plan (CPP): 1-800-227-9914
>> Employment Insurance (EI): 1-800-206-7218
>> Canada Revenue Agency (CRA): 1-800-959-8281
>> Citizenship and Immigration: 1-888-242-2100
>> Passport Canada: 1-800-567-6868
>> Veterans Affairs Canada: 1-866-522-2122
>>
>> Provincial
>> Service BC: 1-800-663-7867
>> Tenant Information Line: 1-800-665-1185
>> BC 211: Dial 211 or visit www.bc211.ca<http://www.bc211.ca> to be
>> connected to community, social and government resources.
>> Legal Aid BC: 1-888-601-6076
>>
>> Again, thank you very much for reaching out and I appreciate hearing from
>> you.
>>
>> Please be assured that all e-mails sent to this office are treated as
>> confidential.
>>
>> Sincerely,
>>
>> Richard Cannings, MP
>> South Okanagan-West Kootenay
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------- Original message ----------
>> From: "Wagantall, Cathay - M.P." <Cathay.Wagantall@parl.gc.ca>
>> Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2022 02:29:26 +0000
>> Subject: Automatic reply: RE Trudeau Invoking the Emergency Act and
>> Freeland defending her liberal democracy byway of her bankster buddies
>> To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
>>
>> Thank you for contacting the office of Cathay Wagantall, Member of
>> Parliament for Yorkton-Melville, Saskatchewan. This is an automated
>> response to acknowledge receipt of your email.
>> MP Wagantall welcomes hearing from constituents on issues that are
>> important to them. Priority will be given to Yorkton-Melville
>> residents, so please include your mailing address and phone number in
>> your email. If you are unsure, you can determine who your MP is by
>> entering your postal code at https://www.ourcommons.ca/Members
>> For constituents with an urgent matter, please call the constituency
>> office in Yorkton at 306-782-3309<tel:306-782-3309> or 1.800.667.6606
>> for assistance, Monday-Friday 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m.
>> Stay up to date with your MP’s work in Ottawa and in the Constituency
>> by signing up for her e-newsletter
>> here<https://www.cathaywagantall.ca/enewsletter>.
>> Please note: my office will not respond to messages directed to
>> another person or organization, or to correspondence containing
>> offensive or abusive language.
>> Due to the large volume of letters my office receives, form letters
>> from mass email senders are welcome, but will not receive a reply.
>> However, topics tracked and brought to the Member’s attention each
>> week.
>> Again, thank you for taking the time to contact MP Wagantall.
>>
>>
>> Sincerely,
>> Cathay Wagantall
>> Member of Parliament
>> Yorkton-Melville
>> FACEBOOK<https://www.facebook.com/CathayWagantallYM> |
>> YOUTUBE<https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC5pEIZBn9gj6cN72BktCRWQ/videos>
>> | TWITTER<https://twitter.com/cathayw> |
>> INSTAGRAM<http://www.instagram.com/cathaywagantall>
>>
>> CLICK HERE TO SUBSCRIBE TO CATHAY’S MONTHLY
>> E-NEWSLETTER!<https://www.cathaywagantall.ca/enewsletter>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------- Original message ----------
>> From: "Bachrach, Taylor - M.P." <Taylor.Bachrach@parl.gc.ca>
>> Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2022 02:29:26 +0000
>> Subject: Automatic reply: RE Trudeau Invoking the Emergency Act and
>> Freeland defending her liberal democracy byway of her bankster buddies
>> To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
>>
>> Sent from the office of Taylor Bachrach, MP
>>
>> Thank you for your email and for taking the time to contact me and
>> express your views.
>>
>> This automatic response is to let you know that I have received your
>> message. I regularly review all communications sent to me, however,
>> due to the high volume of emails received I may not be able to respond
>> personally to each one. In most cases, anonymous, cc'd, and forwarded
>> items will not receive a response. Every effort will be made to reply
>> to you as soon as possible.
>>
>> Please note: due to much higher than normal levels of correspondence,
>> our response time for non-urgent requests has temporarily increased.
>> It may take several weeks for you to receive a response to your
>> inquiry. Urgent requests will be given first priority. We apologize
>> for the inconvenience and appreciate your understanding.
>>
>> If you are a resident of the Skeena-Bulkley Valley constituency and
>> your concerns are with a federal government ministry or agency, we
>> would be happy to look into the matter for you and assist to the best
>> of our ability. Please ensure that you have included your full name,
>> address, postal code, telephone number, and the details of your
>> situation so my office is able to assist you efficiently. If the
>> matter is time-sensitive, please call my office directly at
>> 1-888-622-0212. If we are unable to answer your call immediately,
>> please leave a voicemail and we will return your call at our earliest
>> opportunity.
>>
>> If you are not sure if you live within the Skeena-Bulkley Valley
>> constituency, you can check by entering your postal code here:
>> http://www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members
>>
>> Thank you again for your email, and for taking the time to share your
>> thoughts and concerns with me.
>>
>> Sincerely,
>>
>> Taylor Bachrach, Member of Parliament
>> Skeena-Bulkley Valley
>> 1-888-622-0212
>> taylorbachrach.ndp.ca<http://taylorbachrach.ndp.ca>
>> taylor.bachrach@parl.gc.ca<mailto:taylor.bachrach@parl.gc.ca>
>> UFCW 232
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------- Original message ----------
>> From: "Collins, Laurel - M.P." <Laurel.Collins@parl.gc.ca>
>> Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2022 02:29:26 +0000
>> Subject: Automatic reply: RE Trudeau Invoking the Emergency Act and
>> Freeland defending her liberal democracy byway of her bankster buddies
>> To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
>>
>> This automated response is to assure you that your message has been
>> received by my office and will be reviewed as soon as possible. Please
>> note that constituents of Victoria and correspondence related to my
>> role as Critic of the Environment and Climate Change have priority. Be
>> sure to include your home address or postal code if you are a resident
>> of Victoria.
>>
>> If you are not a local resident, please contact your MP’s office for
>> assistance.You can enter your postal code here
>> https://www.ourcommons.ca/members/en if you are unsure who represents
>> your neighbourhood.
>>
>> If you are writing to Laurel with a media request regarding her role
>> as the Member of Parliament for Victoria, please direct your request
>> to nadia.hamdon.841@parl.gc.ca
>>
>> If you are writing to Laurel with a media request regarding her role
>> as Critic of the Environment and Climate Change, please direct your
>> request to
>> alicia.tiffin.841@parl.gc.ca<mailto:alicia.tiffin.841@parl.gc.ca>.
>>
>> Our office will respond to direct inquiries from constituents.
>> However, due to the overwhelming volume of correspondence received and
>> our limited capacity, there may be a delay in response time and we may
>> not be able to respond personally to all emails. In most cases,
>> anonymous, cc'd, forwarded items and links to articles will not
>> receive a response. If you have any questions regarding the status of
>> your correspondence, please do not hesitate to follow up with my
>> office.
>>
>> If you live in Victoria and the information you have sent is about a
>> concern or problem with a federal government ministry or agency,
>> please make sure that you have included your full name, address,
>> telephone number and the particulars regarding your case so we can
>> respond and assist you more efficiently.
>>
>> Thank you again for taking the time to share your views.
>>
>> Services & Assistance
>> When you contact my community office, my staff and I will do
>> everything we can to assist you. Your confidentiality is respected at
>> all times. To give you a better idea of how we can help, please review
>> the information below.
>>
>> What my Community Office can help you with:
>> • Provide information on locating government services and
>> contact information
>> • Assist in understanding government policies and services
>> • Assist in navigating through government bureaucracy
>> • Ensure due process is being followed
>> • Attend community events
>> • Advocate on behalf of the community to government
>> • Provide congratulatory and greeting messages
>> • Provide government documents, legislation discussion
>> papers and other web-based forms if you don't have internet access
>> • Resolve issues you may be having with federal ministries or
>> agencies
>>
>> We can help you if:
>> • You are a resident of the Victoria constituency
>> • Your matter is with the Federal government
>>
>> We are unable to:
>> • Offer legal advice or assist with legal action
>> • Influence processes set up in law to be independent of
>> Parliament
>> • Change the time limits for filing appeals
>> • Make inquiries about police investigations. If you have a
>> complaint about police conduct, please direct them to the Office of
>> the Police Complaints Commissioner.
>>
>> In addition, while we are not able to take on casework that is
>> provincial or municipal in nature, we can help direct you to the
>> people who can assist you.
>>
>> If you would like more information regarding federal government
>> services and assistance available, please go to
>> https://www.canada.ca/en/employment-social-development/corporate/portfolio/service-canada.html
>> or call toll free 1-800-622-6232 for more information.
>>
>> Thanks again for writing.
>>
>> Warmly,
>>
>> Laurel
>> Member of Parliament for Victoria
>>
>> Community Office of Laurel Collins
>> 1057 Fort Street
>> Victoria BC V8V 3K5
>> 1-250-363-3600
>>
>> Parliamentary Office of Laurel Collins
>> Confederation Building, Suite 518
>> Parliament Hill
>> Ottawa ON K1A 0A6
>> 1-613-996-2358
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------- Original message ----------
>> From: "MacGregor, Alistair - M.P." <Alistair.MacGregor@parl.gc.ca>
>> Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2022 02:29:26 +0000
>> Subject: Automatic reply: RE Trudeau Invoking the Emergency Act and
>> Freeland defending her liberal democracy byway of her bankster buddies
>> To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
>>
>> Sent from the office of Alistair MacGregor, MP
>> Thank you for your email and for taking the time to contact me and
>> express your views.
>> This automatic response is to let you know that I have received your
>> message. I regularly review all communications sent to me, however,
>> due to the high volume of emails received I may not be able to respond
>> personally to each one. In most cases, anonymous, cc'd, and forwarded
>> items will not receive a response. Every effort will be made to reply
>> to you as soon as possible.
>> If you are a resident of the Cowichan-Malahat-Langford constituency
>> and your concerns are with a federal government ministry or agency, we
>> would be happy to look into the matter for you and assist to the best
>> of our ability. Please ensure that you have included your full name,
>> address, postal code, telephone number, and the details of your
>> situation so my office is able to assist you efficiently. If the
>> matter is time-sensitive, please call my office directly at
>> 1-866-609-9998. If we are unable to answer your call immediately,
>> please leave a voicemail and we will return your call at our earliest
>> opportunity.
>> If you are not sure if you live within the Cowichan-Malahat-Langford
>> constituency, you can check by entering your postal code here:
>> http://www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members
>>
>> Thank you again for your email, and for taking the time to share your
>> thoughts and concerns with me.
>>
>> Sincerely,
>>
>> Alistair MacGregor, Member of Parliament
>> Cowichan-Malahat-Langford
>> 1-866-609-9998
>> alistairmacgregor.ca
>> alistair.macgregor@parl.gc.ca<mailto:alistair.macgregor@parl.gc.ca>
>>
>> UFCW 232
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------- Original message ----------
>> From: "Johns, Gord - M.P." <Gord.Johns@parl.gc.ca>
>> Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2022 02:29:26 +0000
>> Subject: Automatic reply: RE Trudeau Invoking the Emergency Act and
>> Freeland defending her liberal democracy byway of her bankster buddies
>> To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
>>
>> Hello!
>> Thank you for taking the time to write. It's always great to hear from
>> my constituents. This automated reply is being sent so that you know
>> that your message has been received. Messages sent to this office are
>> reviewed daily but the volume of emails means that not every message
>> will receive an immediate or individual reply.
>> Constituent issues requiring time-sensitive attention will be given
>> priority and every effort will be made to reply to you in a timely
>> fashion. If you are a constituent and need assistance with a
>> federally-delivered service or federal government agency, please make
>> sure you have included your full name, phone number, street address
>> and postal code. Be assured that all correspondence sent to my office
>> is treated as confidential.
>> You can also contact my community offices directly: 1-844-620-9924
>> To contact the office of a Department, please call the House of
>> Commons General Inquiries line: 1-866-599-4999
>> If you live outside Courtenay—Alberni, please contact your local MP
>> office for assistance. If you aren't sure what riding you live in, go
>> to: https://www.ourcommons.ca/Members/en/search
>> Best Regards,
>> Gord Johns, MP Courtenay—Alberni http://gordjohns.ndp.ca/
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------- Original message ----------
>> From: "Mathyssen, Lindsay - M.P." <Lindsay.Mathyssen@parl.gc.ca>
>> Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2022 02:29:26 +0000
>> Subject: Automatic reply: RE Trudeau Invoking the Emergency Act and
>> Freeland defending her liberal democracy byway of her bankster buddies
>> To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
>>
>> Thank you for your email and for taking the time to contact the office
>> of MP Lindsay Mathyssen to express your views.
>> This automatic response is to let you know that we have received your
>> message.
>> For the most up to date information on Canada’s response to COVID-19
>> as well as information on financial assistance and travel restrictions
>> please visit: https://www.canada.ca/en.html
>> Please note: Our office is now re-open to the public but due to
>> provincial COVID-19 guidelines, we cannot host large numbers of
>> visitors so please call before visiting, if possible. Staff continue
>> to work on your behalf, but no in-person meetings will be scheduled at
>> this time and please be assured that all emails will be responded to
>> as soon as we are able. If you are a constituent living in
>> London-Fanshawe, you can always contact our office by phone at
>> 519-685-4745. We will return your call and respond to your inquiries
>> as soon as we can.
>> Due to much higher than normal levels of correspondence, our response
>> time for non-urgent requests has temporarily increased. Form letter
>> campaigns, anonymous or cc’ed emails may not receive an immediate
>> response, but we will try to respond as quickly as possible.
>> Thank you again for writing, and please be assured that all emails
>> sent to my office is treated as confidential.
>> ________________________________________________________________________________________________________
>> Bonjour. Nous accusons réception de votre message et vous remercions
>> d’avoir écrit au bureau de la députée Lindsay Mathyssen. Ceci est une
>> réponse automatique.
>> Pour des renseignements à jour sur la réponse du Canada à la COVID-19,
>> l’aide financière et les restrictions de voyage, consultez
>> https://www.canada.ca/fr.html.
>> Veuillez noter que notre bureau est fermé en raison de la pandémie de
>> COVID-19. Notre personnel continue de travailler pour vous, mais nous
>> ne pouvons organiser de rencontre en personne pour l’instant. Sachez
>> cependant que tous les courriels sont acheminés à qui de droit et que
>> vous pouvez toujours nous contacter par téléphone au 519-685-4745.
>> Comme nous recevons beaucoup plus de correspondance qu’en temps
>> normal, les délais de réponse aux demandes non urgentes sont plus
>> longs. Notre priorité va aux courriels urgents venant des habitants de
>> la circonscription de London-Fanshawe ou portant sur les
>> responsabilités essentielles de Mme Mathyssen.
>> Il se pourrait que nous ne répondions pas directement aux campagnes de
>> lettres, aux courriels anonymes, aux courriels envoyés en copie
>> conforme (c.c.) et à la correspondance ne portant pas sur des
>> questions essentielles ou relatives à la circonscription. Il pourrait
>> s’écouler plusieurs semaines avant que nous puissions y répondre.
>> Nous vous remercions de nous avoir écrit et sachez que tous les
>> courriels envoyés à mon bureau sont traités confidentiellement.
>>
>> Lindsay Mathyssen
>>
>> Member of Parliament
>> London-Fanshawe
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------- Original message ----------
>> From: "Zarrillo, Bonita - M.P." <bonita.zarrillo@parl.gc.ca>
>> Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2022 02:29:26 +0000
>> Subject: Automatic reply: RE Trudeau Invoking the Emergency Act and
>> Freeland defending her liberal democracy byway of her bankster buddies
>> To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
>>
>> This automated response is to assure you that your message has been
>> received by my office and will be reviewed as soon as possible. Please
>> note that constituents of Port Moody – Coquitlam, Anmore or Belcarra
>> have priority. Be sure to include your home address or postal code if
>> you are a resident of Port Moody – Coquitlam, Anmore or Belcarra. If
>> you are not a local resident, please contact your MP’s office for
>> assistance. You can enter your postal code here
>> https://www.ourcommons.ca/members/en if you are unsure who represents
>> your neighbourhood.
>> Due to the overwhelming volume of correspondence received and our
>> limited capacity, we may not be able to respond personally to your
>> inquiry. In most cases, anonymous, cc'd, forwarded items and links to
>> articles will not receive a response. If you have any questions
>> regarding the status of your correspondence, please do not hesitate to
>> follow up with my office.
>> If you live in Port Moody – Coquitlam, Anmore or Belcarra and the
>> information you have sent is about a concern or problem with a federal
>> government ministry or agency, please make sure that you have included
>> your full name, address, telephone number and the particulars
>> regarding your case so we can respond and assist you more efficiently.
>> Thank you again for taking the time to share your views.
>> Services & Assistance
>> When you contact my community office, my staff and I will do
>> everything we can to assist you. Your confidentiality is respected at
>> all times. To give you a better idea of how we can help, please review
>> the information below.
>> What my Community Office can help you with:
>> • Provide information on locating government services and
>> contact information
>> • Assist in understanding government policies and services
>> • Assist in navigating through government bureaucracy
>> • Ensure due process is being followed
>> • Attend community events
>> • Advocate on behalf of the community to government
>> • Provide congratulatory and greeting messages
>> • Provide government documents, legislation discussion
>> papers and other web-based forms if you don't have internet access
>> • Resolve issues you may be having with federal ministries or
>> agencies
>> We can help you if:
>> • You are a resident of the Port Moody – Coquitlam constituency
>> • Your matter is with the Federal government
>> We are unable to:
>> • Offer legal advice or assist with legal action
>> • Influence processes set up in law to be independent of
>> Parliament
>> • Change the time limits for filing appeals
>> • Make inquiries about police investigations. If you have a
>> complaint about police conduct, please direct them to the Office of
>> the Police Complaints Commissioner.
>> In addition, while we are not able to take on casework that is
>> provincial or municipal in nature, we can help direct you to the
>> people who can assist you.
>> If you would like more information regarding federal government
>> services and assistance available, please go to
>> https://www.canada.ca/en/employment-social-development/corporate/portfolio/service-canada.html
>> or call toll free 1-800-622-6232 for more information.
>> Thanks again for writing.
>> Respectfully,
>> Bonita Zarrillo
>> Member of Parliament Port Moody – Coquitlam
>> Telephone: 604-664-9229
>> Fax: 604-664-9231
>> I respectfully acknowledge the Port Moody – Coquitlam riding is
>> located on the unceded and traditional territory of the Halq'eméylem
>> speaking Coast Salish peoples. This includes the nations of
>> kʷikʷəƛw̓əm (Kwikwetlem), Katzie, and Tsleil-Waututh.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------- Original message ----------
>> From: "Blaney, Rachel - M.P." <Rachel.Blaney@parl.gc.ca>
>> Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2022 02:29:26 +0000
>> Subject: Automatic reply: RE Trudeau Invoking the Emergency Act and
>> Freeland defending her liberal democracy byway of her bankster buddies
>> To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
>>
>> *Please do not reply to this email*
>>
>> Hello, thank you for contacting the office of Rachel Blaney, Member of
>> Parliament for North Island - Powell River. This automated reply is to
>> assure you that your message has been received by our office and will
>> be reviewed as soon as possible.
>>
>> I want to thank you for taking the time to reach out and express your
>> views. While all correspondence is read, the volume of emails we
>> receive means that we are not able to respond immediately to every
>> message. Every effort will be made to reply to you as soon as
>> possible. Please note that in most cases, anonymous, cc’d or forwarded
>> items will be read but will not receive a response. Constituents of
>> North Island - Powell River and correspondence related to my roles as
>> Critic of Seniors, Veterans, and Rural Economic Development have
>> priority. If the information you have sent is about a concern that you
>> have as a constituent, please make sure that you have given your full
>> name, postal code and telephone number so that my office is able to
>> assist you efficiently.
>>
>> You can ensure you are contacting the correct MP by entering your
>> postal code at this website: https://www.ourcommons.ca/members/en
>>
>> Should you need further assistance, you can contact my constituency
>> offices at 1-250-287-9388 (Campbell River) and 1-604-489-2286 (Powell
>> River).
>>
>> Please be assured that all email sent to this office is treated as
>> confidential.
>>
>> Thanks again for reaching out.
>>
>> Sincerely,
>>
>> Rachel Blaney, MP
>> (North Island - Powell River)
>>
>>
>> ---------- Original message ----------
>> From: "Davies, Don - M.P." <don.davies@parl.gc.ca>
>> Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2022 02:29:26 +0000
>> Subject: Automatic reply: RE Trudeau Invoking the Emergency Act and
>> Freeland defending her liberal democracy byway of her bankster buddies
>> To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
>>
>> *Do not reply to this email*
>>
>> Greetings!
>>
>> I acknowledge receipt of your email. Thank you for taking the time to
>> contact me and express your views.
>>
>> Due to the current COVID-19 situation, please be advised that my
>> Vancouver Kingsway constituency office will be conducting all business
>> by phone and online communication until further notice.
>>
>> Our goal is to keep constituents and staff safe, while continuing to
>> provide the important services that community members depend on.
>>
>> While I read all correspondence, the volume of email we receive means
>> that I am not able to respond immediately to every message. Every
>> effort will be made to reply to you as soon as possible. Please note
>> that in most cases, anonymous, cc’d or forwarded items will be read
>> but will not receive a response.
>>
>> If the information you have sent is about a concern that you have as a
>> constituent, please make sure that you have given your full name,
>> address and telephone number so my office is able to assist you
>> efficiently. If you live outside Vancouver Kingsway please contact
>> your own Member of Parliament for assistance.
>>
>> You can ensure you are contacting the correct MP by entering your
>> postal code at this website: https://www.ourcommons.ca/members/en
>>
>> Please be assured that all email sent to this office is treated as
>> confidential.
>>
>> Should you need further assistance, please contact my office at
>> 604-775-6263.
>>
>> Sincerely,
>>
>> Don Davies, MP
>> Vancouver Kingsway
>>
>>
>> *Ne répondre pas à ce courriel*
>>
>> Bonjour,
>>
>> J’accuse réception de votre courriel. Je vous remercie d’avoir pris le
>> temps de communiquer avec moi et d’exprimer vos opinions.
>>
>> Alors que la situation du COVID-19 continue d'évoluer, mon bureau de
>> circonscription de Vancouver Kingsway aidera avec toutes les affaires
>> par téléphone et par communication en ligne jusqu'à nouvel avis.
>>
>> Notre objectif est d'assurer la sécurité des électeurs et du
>> personnel, tout en continuant à fournir les services importants dont
>> dépendent les membres de la communauté.
>>
>> Je tiens à vous assurer que je lis tous les messages qui me sont
>> envoyés. Toutefois, le grand nombre de courriels que mon bureau reçoit
>> fait en sorte que je ne suis pas en mesure de répondre immédiatement à
>> chaque message. Tous les efforts seront déployés pour vous répondre
>> dès que possible. Veuillez prendre note que, dans la plupart des cas,
>> les messages anonymes, transmis en copie conforme ou transférés seront
>> lus, mais qu’aucune réponse ne sera envoyée.
>>
>> Si les informations que vous m’avez transmises concernent un problème
>> en particulier et que vous êtes un citoyen de la circonscription,
>> assurez-vous d’avoir indiqué votre nom au complet, votre adresse et
>> votre numéro de téléphone pour que mon bureau puisse vous aider
>> efficacement. Si vous n’êtes pas un résident de Vancouver Kingsway,
>> veuillez communiquer avec le député de votre circonscription pour
>> obtenir de l’aide.
>>
>> Vous pouvez vous assurer de communiquer avec le bon député en entrant
>> votre code postal sur cette page Web :
>> https://www.ourcommons.ca/members/fr
>>
>> Soyez assuré que tous les courriels envoyés à mon bureau sont traités
>> en toute confidentialité.
>>
>> Si vous avez besoin d’aide, veuillez téléphoner à mon bureau :
>> 604-775-6263.
>>
>> Je vous prie d’accepter l’expression de mes sentiments distingués.
>>
>> Don Davies, député à la Chambre des communes
>> Vancouver Kingsway
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------- Original message --------------
>> From: "Julian, Peter - M.P." <peter.julian@parl.gc.ca>
>> Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2022 02:29:26 +0000
>> Subject: Thank you for contacting our Parliament Hill office / Merci
>> d’avoir contacté notre bureau parlementaire
>> To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
>>
>> On behalf of Peter Julian, Member of Parliament (New
>> Westminster-Burnaby), we would like to thank you for contacting our
>> office. Peter always welcomes and appreciates receiving your comments
>> and suggestions, which are helpful to his work in both Canada’s
>> Parliament and in the Riding.
>> We want to assure you that your email has been received, will be
>> reviewed as soon as possible and acted upon should it be required. Due
>> to the high volume of electronic mail received, messages from
>> constituents of New Westminster-Burnaby will be given the highest
>> priority. Please be certain that you have included your first, last
>> name and mailing address (including your postal code) as well as the
>> particulars of the federal issue (s) you are concerned about. Thank
>> you.
>>
>> As always, we serve the constituents of New Westminster-Burnaby with
>> resources, questions and concerns regarding federal departments and
>> agencies. Please don’t hesitate to be in touch with our office with
>> your concerns. Due to the rising COVID cases, we encourage you to
>> reach our Constituency Office team by email
>> peter.julian.c1@parl.gc.ca<mailto:peter.julian.c1@parl.gc.ca> and
>> telephone: 604-775-5707. In-person appointments can be arranged when
>> necessary, but are subject to change according to the most recent
>> health regulations.
>>
>> For the most up to date information on Canada’s response to COVID-19
>> as well as information on financial assistance and travel restrictions
>> please visit: https://www.canada.ca/en.html
>> Stay healthy and safe in these challenging times.
>> ***
>> Nous vous remercions de prendre contact avec le bureau parlementaire
>> de Peter Julian, député dans la circonscription de New
>> Westminster-Burnaby. Peter est toujours heureux de recevoir vos
>> commentaires et vos suggestions qui sont utiles à son travail, tant au
>> Comté qu’au Parlement.
>>
>> Soyez assuré que, malgré le grand nombre de courriels que nous
>> recevons chaque jour, nous accordons toujours la plus haute priorité
>> aux messages des commettants de New Westminster-Burnaby et que nous
>> examinerons votre courriel le plus tôt possible. NB : veuillez-vous
>> assurer SVP de bien nous indiquer les questions qui vous préoccupent
>> qui relève du domaine fédéral, ainsi que votre nom, votre prénom, et
>> adresse postale, y compris le code postal. Merci.
>>
>> Comme toujours, notre bureau de circonscription est disponible pour
>> vous aider concernant toute question ou préoccupation relevant de la
>> compétence fédérale. En raison de l'augmentation des cas de COVID,
>> nous vous encourageons à contacter notre équipe par téléphone
>> 604-775-5707 et par courriel
>> peter.julian.c1@parl.gc.ca<mailto:peter.julian.c1@parl.gc.ca> pour
>> obtenir de l’aide. Des rendez-vous en personne peuvent être fixés en
>> cas de besoin mais sont susceptibles d'être modifiés en fonction des
>> règlements sanitaires les plus récents.
>>
>> Pour des renseignements à jour sur la réponse du Canada à la COVID-19,
>> l’aide financière et les restrictions de voyage, veuillez SVP
>> consultez ce lien : https://www.canada.ca/fr.html.
>> Restez en santé et en sécurité en cette période difficile.
>> Office of Peter Julian, MP (New Westminster-Burnaby) | Bureau du
>> député Peter Julian (New Westminster-Burnaby)
>> New Democratic Party | Nouveau Parti démocratique
>>
>> We acknowledge that we work on the unceded traditional territory of
>> the Algonquin, Haudenosaunee and Anishinabek peoples.
>> Nous reconnaissons que nous travaillons sur le territoire non-cédé des
>> nations Algonquine, Haudenosaunee et Anishinabek.
>>
>> New Westminster is located on the unceded and traditional territory of
>> the Halq'eméylem speaking Coast Salish peoples. This includes the
>> nations of the Qayqayt, qʼʷa:n̓ƛʼən̓ (Kwantlen), Katzie, kʷikʷəƛw̓əm
>> (Kwikwetlem), xʷməθkʷəy̓əm (Musqueam), Stó:lō, sc̓əwaθn məsteyəxʷ
>> (Tsawwassen), and Tsleil-Waututh.
>>
>> Burnaby is located on the ancestral and unceded
>> homelands<https://www.burnabyvillagemuseum.ca/assets/Resources/Indigenous%20History%20in%20Burnaby%20Resource%20Guide.pdf>
>> of the
>> hən̓q̓əmin̓əm̓<http://www.burnaby.ca/assets/burnaby+interagency/audio+clip.mp3>
>> and
>> Sḵwx̱wú7mesh<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yknmoz9PZRU&feature=youtu.be>
>> speaking peoples as well as all Coast Salish peoples.
>> ______________________________________________________
>>
>> (TEL) 613.992.4214 | (CELL) 613.222.4074 | FAX) 613.947.9500
>>
>> UFCW | TUAC
>>
>> P Help save paper - do you need to print this email?
>>
>> P Économisons le papier – est-il vraiment nécessaire d’imprimer ce
>> courriel?
>>
>> "My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear.
>> Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and
>> optimistic. And we’ll change the world."
>> -Jack Layton, 1950-2011
>>
>> « Mes amis, l’amour est cent fois meilleur que la haine. L’espoir est
>> meilleur que la peur. L’optimisme est meilleur que le désespoir. Alors
>> aimons, gardons espoir et restons optimistes. Et nous changerons le
>> monde. »
>> -Jack Layton, 1950-2011
>>
>> This email message and any attachment may contain privileged or
>> confidential information and is intended only for the named
>> recipient(s) or group indicated. If you have received this message in
>> error, or are not the named recipient(s), please notify the sender and
>> delete this email message. Thank you for your cooperation.
>>
>> Ce courriel, ainsi que tout fichier annexé peut contenir des
>> renseignements protégés ou confidentiels et concerne uniquement les
>> destinataires indiqués. Si vous avez reçu ce courriel par erreur, ou
>> si vous n'êtes pas les destinataires, veuillez en aviser l'expéditeur
>> et l'effacer. Merci de votre coopération.
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------- Original message ----------
>> From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
>> Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2022 22:29:09 -0400
>> Subject: RE Trudeau Invoking the Emergency Act and Freeland defending
>> her liberal democracy byway of her bankster buddies
>> To: "andrew.scheer" <andrew.scheer@parl.gc.ca>, info@eurasiagroup.net,
>> james@eastpointswest.co.uk, onair@moats.tv,
>> dnaylor@westernstandardonline.com, "Lindsay.Mathyssen"
>> <Lindsay.Mathyssen@parl.gc.ca>, bonita.zarrillo@parl.gc.ca,
>> "Jenny.Kwan" <Jenny.Kwan@parl.gc.ca>, "Alistair.MacGregor"
>> <Alistair.MacGregor@parl.gc.ca>, "Matthew.Green"
>> <Matthew.Green@parl.gc.ca>, "Gord.Johns" <Gord.Johns@parl.gc.ca>,
>> "peter.julian" <peter.julian@parl.gc.ca>, "brian.masse"
>> <brian.masse@parl.gc.ca>, "don.davies" <don.davies@parl.gc.ca>,
>> "Alexandre.Boulerice" <Alexandre.Boulerice@parl.gc.ca>,
>> lisamarie.barron@parl.gc.ca, "Richard.Cannings"
>> <Richard.Cannings@parl.gc.ca>, "Taylor.Bachrach"
>> <Taylor.Bachrach@parl.gc.ca>, "Laurel.Collins"
>> <Laurel.Collins@parl.gc.ca>, "Rachel.Blaney"
>> <Rachel.Blaney@parl.gc.ca>, "randall.garrison"
>> <randall.garrison@parl.gc.ca>, cathay.wagantall@parl.gc.ca,
>> Corey.Tochor@parl.gc.ca, kevin.waugh@parl.gc.ca,
>> Brad.Redekopp@parl.gc.ca, fraser.tolmie@parl.gc.ca, "Gary.Vidal"
>> <Gary.Vidal@parl.gc.ca>, Warren.Steinley@parl.gc.ca, "Michael.Kram"
>> <Michael.Kram@parl.gc.ca>, kelly.block@parl.gc.ca,
>> robert.kitchen@parl.gc.ca, Rosemarie.Falk@parl.gc.ca,
>> randy.hoback@parl.gc.ca, Jeremy.Patzer@parl.gc.ca
>> Cc: motomaniac333 <motomaniac333@gmail.com>, Caryma.Sad@gmail.com,
>> erinbcomber1@icloud.com, beth.macdonell@bellmedia.ca,
>> stoosnews@nexicom.net, media@eurasiagroup.net, "Chris.Hall"
>> <Chris.Hall@cbc.ca>, "Wesley.Wark@uottawa.ca \"president\""
>> <president@uottawa.ca>, "presidents.office"
>> <presidents.office@carleton.ca>, president <president@unb.ca>
>>
>> https://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.com/2022/02/trudeau-invoking-emergency-act-and.html
>>
>> Saturday, 19 February 2022
>>
>> Trudeau Invoking the Emergency Act and Freeland defending her liberal
>> democracy byway of her bankster buddies
>>
>> Deja Vu Anyone???
>>
>
No comments:
Post a Comment