Dennis Oland second-degree murder trial: Nov. 10
Diana Sedlacek, who was having an affair with Richard Oland, is testifying in the second-degree murder trial
Diana Sedlacek, who was having an affair with Richard Oland prior to his death, is testifying on Tuesday in the second-degree murder trial of Dennis Oland.
Earlier testimony indicated that Oland's affair with Sedlacek was not secret.
However, Dennis Oland's defence team has suggested his father's extramarital affair had started to sour in the months leading up to his death.
Recent testimony has focused on the troubled state of Dennis's Oland's finances leading up to the killing of Richard Oland.
The defence has countered that Oland's financial difficulties began long before the 2011 killing of Richard Oland in his Canterbury Street office.
Dennis Oland was the last known person to see his father alive.
Information Morning - Moncton
Oland defence won't present victim's mistress or her husband as suspects
Dennis Oland's team opts not to question Diana Sedlacek at murder retrial, objects to Jiri Sedlacek testifying
Dennis Oland's defence team won't put forward Richard Oland's mistress or her now-estranged husband as possible alternative suspects in his 2011 bludgeoning death, the murder retrial heard on Tuesday.
The defence won't argue the Saint John Police Force's investigation into Diana Sedlacek's husband, Jiri Sedlacek, was inadequate either, lawyer Michael Lacy told the Court of Queen's Bench.
He made the statements in objecting to the Crown calling Jiri Sedlacek as a witness.
Sedlacek testified at Oland's first trial in 2015 and faced a rigorous cross-examination by the defence.
But Lacy argued against recalling him for Oland's retrial on a charge of second-degree murder.
"It is our position that his evidence is not relevant … and has no probative value," Lacy told Justice Terrence Morrison.
The judge deliberated for about an hour before agreeing and ruling Sedlacek's evidence inadmissible.
Oland, 50, is being retried for his father's death after the Court of Appeal overturned his 2015 conviction, citing an error in the trial judge's instructions to the jury.
He is the last person known to have seen his multimillionaire father alive when he visited him at his office on July 6, 2011 around 5:35 p.m.
The body of the 69-year-old was found in the office the next morning with 45 sharp- and blunt-force injuries to his head, neck and hands.
The retrial is scheduled to resume Wednesday at 9:30 a.m. with testimony from an unidentified Crown witness, followed by the videotaped testimony of a forensic video analyst from the first trial.
Dennis Oland has maintained his innocence from the beginning and members of his extended family have stood by him. (CBC)
On Tuesday, lead Crown prosecutor P.J. Veniot had argued it was important for the court to hear from Jiri Sedlacek because in order to convict Dennis Oland, the judge must be satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt.
"Who more would have motive than a jilted husband?" said Veniot.
Allowing Sedlacek to testify would give the court the opportunity to hear him say, 'It wasn't me, I wasn't there, I didn't do it," the prosecutor said.
It would also disprove the defence's allegation that police had tunnel vision in zeroing in on Oland as a suspect within hours, Veniot argued.
Sedlacek told the first trial he had nothing to do with the death of Richard Oland and only found out about his wife's affair about 15 months later, when his lawyer shared a media report about it with him.
He admitted he would have been "very upset" if he had known his wife of 24 years was cheating on him, but insisted he suspected nothing.
Richard Oland, 69, was found dead in his Saint John office on July 7, 2011. (Canadian Yachting Association)
Sedlacek, who retired in 1988 as director of corporate planning for Bata Shoes and was about 84 years old at the time of the homicide, was questioned twice by Saint John police and ruled out as a suspect.
Defence lawyer Alan Gold pointed out during the first trial that police never asked to see Sedlacek's bank or phone records, or the GPS for his car.
On Tuesday, Morrison said that if Oland was being tried by a judge and jury, there "may be a temptation for lay jury to engage in the improper speculation that [Sedlacek] would have been involved in the homicide."
But he emphasized he is hearing the case alone, and had seen no evidence that implicated either of the Sedlaceks in Oland's murder.
Lacy assured the court the defence has no intention of raising either of the Sedlaceks as possible alternative suspects.
In issuing his ruling, Morrison said if the defence attempts later in the trial to lead any such evidence or invite the court to make any such inference, the Crown can make a motion to call rebuttal evidence.
Mistress never questioned by defence
Diana Sedlacek didn't take the stand at the retrial either.
The defence took no issue with the Crown playing a videotape Tuesday of her testimony from Oland's first trial in 2015 instead of calling her to testify again.
His lawyers did not cross-examine Sedlacek at the first trial — a decision that surprised many observers in the packed courtroom at the time because she is a key witness in the Crown's case.
Diana
Sedlacek previously testified that she had been in a 'romantic
relationship' with Richard Oland for several years before he was killed. (CBC)
Prosecutors are using a series of text messages and phone calls between the couple to establish a timeline of when Richard Oland was killed.
The Crown contends it was around 6:30 p.m., shortly before the accused left his father's office. The defence, however, suggests it was sometime after 7:30 p.m., when Anthony Shaw told police he heard thumping noises coming from the office. Dennis Oland was captured on security video around that time shopping with his wife in Rothesay, about a 15-minute drive away.
Impatience turned to panic
Richard Oland and Diana Sedlacek had exchanged several messages earlier that day, mostly in relation to a trip they were planning together to Portland, Maine, the courtroom heard.
They had been in a "romantic relationship" for about eight years, Sedlacek said.
At 6:44 p.m., her text, "U there??" went unanswered. She tried calling him, then texted again at 7:19 p.m. "You've turned your phone off!! Why!!!!!!??????"
She believed he had turned his phone off because it went straight to voicemail when she called, she testified.
Cellphone records would later show that text was the last communication received by Richard Oland's cellphone. It pinged off a cell tower in Rothesay, near the Renforth wharf where Dennis Oland told police he had stopped on his way home from visiting his father.
Diana
Sedlacek texted Richard Oland this selfie on June 26, 2011, saying
'Look at me everyday,' and asking him to send her a selfie too. (Court exhibit)
"I [have] a lot of men who would love 2 b with me !!!!!! Do stop this [expletive] around! And answer the damn phone! I [will] call at your house," Sedlacek wrote, referring to the Rothesay home Oland shared with his wife, Constance.
By the next morning, when Sedlacek still couldn't reach Oland, her impatience turned to panic, she said. She was "texting, calling, praying."
When she saw police outside his office and his car being towed away, she felt something horrible must have happened, but didn't know what. She thought he might have had a heart attack, she said.
When Dennis Oland was questioned by police later that day, he suggested that Sedlacek might have reason to harm his father.
"The only person that comes to mind is this supposed girlfriend, because she really seemed to be a whack job. Like, they call her the Dragon Lady. You know she's … somebody who you think could be that Fatal Attraction–type person."
Richard
Oland, once co-owner of Moosehead Breweries, was brutally murdered in
his office in downtown Saint John, New Brunswick in the early evening of
July 6th, 2011. His killer sprayed blood everywhere as he smashed
Richard Oland’s head with dozens of blows. It had all the
characteristics of an organized crime hit, designed to kill one and warn
others.
His murder remains unsolved and unexplained. The Saint
John city police have no suspects. Individuals who could explain the
murder have disappeared, pleaded bad memories or gone silent.
Saint John, and the rest of Canada, were witnesses to two murder trials
where Dennis Oland, Richard’s son, stood accused of the murder. In this
book, Janice Middleton sets out the obvious and clear evidence that
Dennis could not have been the murderer. Even so, Dennis was convicted
by a jury in his first trial, likely because everyone in the city knew
of a motive that was never mentioned in court: Richard had had an affair
with his son's wife.
The Oland family got Dennis acquitted,
but his acquittal left questions unanswered: who killed Richard Oland?
And why was he targeted?
Janice Middleton pieces
together the tangled story of Saint John’s most dysfunctional citizens.
She points to people who might have wanted Richard Oland dead, shadowy
investors who arrived in Saint John to finance the re-opening of the
local sugar refinery. The deal went sour, the investors lost millions,
and they disappeared from sight.
This is a compelling account of how someone got away with murdering a rich, powerful, sleazy leading
Truth and Honour: The Oland Family Murder Case that Shocked Canada
344 pages, Paperback
Published October 31, 2019
citizen of Saint John.
Is There a Future for the RCMP?
Policing expert Greg Marquis on the enduring issues of the national force and how to find a path forward. A Tyee Q&A.
Historian Greg Marquis has yet to hear from any Mounties or police officers he reached out to about the release of his new book on the RCMP.
“It’s not like this stuff didn’t happen,” he says.
“You might disagree as to why it happened or how serious it is, but I think in this period of reconciliation and critical self-evaluation... having an outsider write something that’s a little critical could make you think about a few things.”
A healthy counter to the enduring brand of the force, Canada’s State Police: 150 Years of the RCMP gives a clear-eyed look at various chapters in RCMP history, from its origins as the paramilitary arm of a colonial state to its suppression of labour movements to its approach to Indigenous groups, environmentalists and protests.
The history and issues that Marquis covers in his book will no doubt continue to shape the force.
From recent leadership gaffes to the loss of a municipal contract with the force in Surrey, criticism of its response to the 2020 mass shooting in Nova Scotia and an inquiry into its handling of abuse allegations, much of the recent media attention on the RCMP has been critical.
Marquis, who has been teaching at the University of New Brunswick in Saint John for 25 years and has written multiple books on policing, asks readers to consider the history of one of Canada’s most recognizable symbols, the issues the RCMP face today and if there is still a path forward for the national police force.
“[RCMP] do a lot of good work, but we also have to realize that they have to be kept accountable to the citizens. And I don’t know if our politicians are always able or willing to do that.”
The Tyee spoke to Marquis about the book. While he’s not entirely sure what the future of the RCMP will look like, he hopes the force — and politicians who support it — will embrace calls to become more transparent and accountable as they modernize. This interview has been edited for length and clarity.
The Tyee: When was the RCMP created and what was it created for?
Greg Marquis: Well, we say RCMP, but really you start with the North-West Mounted Police. John A. Macdonald, as part of the expansion of Canada into the West, created this paramilitary constabulary, officially founded in 1873, and it became an important agent for the colonization of the West.
They became not just police enforcing criminal law, but general agents of the state, doing a lot of bureaucratic activities. Other than the Department of Indian Affairs, they were the main point of contact with Indigenous people in the North-Western Territory.
It wasn’t set up to be permanent. With the colonization of the West, the need for a special constabulary controlled from Ottawa was expected to disappear, and that force could stand down. There was no idea that this North-West Mounted Police was going to be around 100 or 150 years later.
But through a series of accidents and unexpected things and short-term crises and being in the right place at the right time, the force continued to live on. After the 1885 resistance led by Louis Riel in Manitoba, it developed a bit of a negative reputation, but came out even stronger and larger.
After, there was a further repression of Indigenous Peoples and more surveillance. The mounted police were certainly part of that, and they increased in size.
The Yukon gold rush and the war in South Africa sort of gave the mounted police a new lease on life. You get the word “royal” added around 1904 by the British government, in recognition of the service of individual volunteers.
The next iteration is the RCMP, and that is the combination of the stresses after the end of the First World War — the rise of labour radicalism, strike activity, ripple effects of the Russian Revolution, the Red Scare in Canada and the United States, suspicion of people on the left, suspicion of different types of immigrants. That mounted police helped crush the famous 1919 strike in Winnipeg.
Founded in 1920 with a more national mandate, the RCMP took over intelligence and security.
But their future is not really assured until they start to get involved in the provincial policing contracts.
There’s this continuous transformation of the RCMP, of its role, of its mandate. Could you talk a little about this more modern, “national security” RCMP? How did they wiggle into that?
C-IRG, the RCMP’s Community-Industry Response Group, started to deploy at urban protests. Often they’re looking for a new mandate, a new opportunity. Almost like an entrepreneurial thing.
In recent years, there’s been this idea of “criminal intelligence.” What does that mean? There’s a few organizations and academics that have expressed concerns that under the guise of “criminal intelligence,” they’re starting to gather information on citizens and groups that maybe is not part of valid criminal investigation.
It’s not like a crime has been committed. You go gather information to solve the crime, but they’re gathering stuff just in case.
In theory, the Mounties’ role in national security is to arrest someone if they’ve broken a law. And CSIS, the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, is supposed to keep an eye on different threats.
But it seems that the Mounties got back into that in the late ’90s and they set up these teams working with CSIS and local police and Canadian border security and other federal agencies. They were active after 9/11 as well. And then recently, the C-IRG, that’s almost like an emergency response SWAT-type thing. But they have to have intelligence behind it.
Do you think the RCMP ever looks back critically at their own actions?
They do, but we don’t know how far this percolates down into the rank and file. The RCMP museum, which is not the only museum in the world to have problematic stuff in it, had the rope that hanged Louis Riel and part of Almighty Voice’s skull. But they have issued reconciliation-type statements recently, which is in the spirit of a lot of other museums. But they have a real challenge. How do you have an RCMP museum now in the spirit of reconciliation? It’s tricky.
The leadership is saying the right things. We just don’t know what it means in terms of moving down the ranks, and they’re facing a crisis with recruitment and turnover and burnout. They’re under-strength in many parts of the country. And there used to be such a big lineup to get into the RCMP.
I don’t know if municipal police forces are having the same recruitment issues. In terms of police community relations, accountability, shootings of civilians and things like that, most of that is happening with municipal police forces, because 80 per cent of Canadians are policed by those forces. There are probably a lot of similar issues facing all levels of policing in Canada.
What issues do the RCMP face today, both internally and in relation to society at large? What do you see as the path to resolving these issues?
One of the things I’m a little troubled by is the new union. Not every police union operates the same, but like any union, they’re going to protect their members. There are often unions that put up barriers to more accountability and transparency, and a police union is a different type of animal. They can be barriers to change.
I think the RCMP, in terms of its accountability to the public and its complaints procedure, does have to modernize, but there’s going to be resistance to that.
Some people over the last couple years have said it should be abolished. I don’t think we can do that. I think it’s too heavily embedded into Canadian society, and all the different provincial contracts and things like that. But it’s often hard to change these big institutions. And often it’s resistance from the rank and file.
I basically think a lot of the core things about the RCMP are very antiquated and should be abolished. They would argue that this is essential to esprit de corps and our identity, but maybe it’s time to get rid of some of these older things that are associated with the frontier era, and have a modern police force. Try to modernize training, have a more realistic complaints process.
The Mounties’ thing is that they’re so iconic — they’re like a brand. That maybe amplifies the scrutiny of them.
What would you say to people who would accuse you of being anti-police or anti-RCMP?
I would say, “Who do the police belong to? Do they belong to the police or do they belong to me and other people like me?” This is a public service.
I just think that we shouldn’t be taking these things for granted. Former RCMP commissioner Brenda Lucki got into trouble when she said she wasn’t understanding what systemic racism is, and then she backtracked and said there’s racism in the RCMP, like other organizations.
But other organizations don’t carry guns and can’t arrest you. We’re dealing with a police force here; we’re not dealing with the library. The police do have a lot of power. They’re an essential service.
Our family has used the police many times. I’ve been victimized. Our family’s been victimized. We had a health-related 911 call to our house in the last two weeks, and the police were the first to respond — I was glad to see them.
I’m not anti-police, but that doesn’t mean you can’t expect more of the police, more accountability and more fairness. ![[Tyee]](https://thetyee.ca/design-article.thetyee.ca/ui/img/yellowblob.png){kind=small}
Read more: Books, Rights + Justice
Book Information
Canada’s State Police
150 years of the RCMP
by Greg Marquis
The 150 year legacy of the RCMP, Canada’s national state police.
Stripping away the myth of the RCMP, historian Greg Marquis offers an account of 150 years of a state police force acting on behalf of the wealthy and powerful.
From its start policing Indigenous people in western Canada, the RCMP has gone on to surveil, harass and seek to jail labour organizers, leftist idealists, Quebec sovereigntists and now environmental activists. The RCMP has often made itself judge, jury, and executioner of who can live unmolested in Canada.
Drawing upon all the available literature on the organization's history, historian Greg Marquis lays bare 150 years of state police action. He highlights the force’s racism, sexism, misogyny, and internal dysfunctions. An invaluable resource, this book challenges the carefully constructed myths about the RCMP’s role in Canadian life.
About the Author
GREG MARQUIS is a historian at the University of New Brunswick. He specializes in Canadian history and criminal justice theory. He has developed a number of courses in the area of law and society, and is on the editorial board of Acadiensis. He is the author of multiple books including, The Vigilant Eye: Policing Canada from 1867-9/11, Truth & Honour: The Death of Richard Oland and the Trial of Dennis Oland, and John Lennon, Yoko Ono and the Year That Canada Was Cool. Greg Marquis lives in Quispamsis, New Brunswick.
Canada’s State Police: 150 years of the RCMP
Nicole O'Byrne talks to Greg Marquis about his book "Canada's State Police: 150 Years of the RCMP. Drawing upon all of the available literature related to the organization's history, Marquis lays bare what he regards as 150 years of state police action and seeks to challenge what he claims are the carefully constructed myths about the RCMP's role in Canadian life. Greg Marquis is a historian at the University of New Brunswick. He specializes in Canadian history and criminal justice theory. He has developed a number of courses in the area of law and society, and is on the editorial board of Acadiensis. He is the author of multiple books including, The Vigilant Eye: Policing Canada from 1867-9/11, Truth & Honour: The Death of Richard Oland and the Trial of Dennis Oland, and John Lennon, Yoko Ono and the Year That Canada Was Cool. Greg Marquis lives in Quispamsis, New Brunswick. If you like our work, please consider supporting it: bit.ly/support_WTY. Your support contributes to the Champlain Society’s mission of opening new windows to directly explore and experience Canada’s past. Image Credit: James Lorimer & Company Ltd., Publishers
History & Politics
Faculty of Arts, UNB Saint John
| Full Name | Position/Title | Phone | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Joanna Everitt | Professor | 1 506 648 5922 | jeveritt@unb.ca |
| Cheryl Fury | Professor | 1 506 648 5861 | cfury@unb.ca |
| Thomas E. Goud | Associate Professor | 1 506 648 5581 | goud@unb.ca |
| Leslie Jeffrey | Professor | 1 506 648 5609 | ljeffrey@unb.ca |
| J.P. Lewis | Professor, Politics Advisor, Chair | 1 506 648 5920 | jp.lewis@unb.ca |
| Debra Lindsay | Professor | 1 506 648 5759 | dlindsay@unb.ca |
| Heidi MacDonald | Professor | 1 506 648 5561 | heidi.macdonald@unb.ca |
| Greg Marquis | UNB Research Scholar (2018-20) | 1 506 648 5638 | gmarquis@unb.ca |
| Hepzibah Muñoz-Martínez | Professor | 1 506 648 5757 | hmartine@unb.ca |
| Erin Spinney | Assistant Professor | 1 506 638 2452 | erin.spinney@unb.ca |
From: LeBlanc, Dominic - député <dominic.leblanc@parl.gc.ca>
Date: Fri, Jun 7, 2024 at 3:30 PM
Subject: Automatic reply: YO Andrea Anderson-Mason You are welcome However methinks you and the former Attorney General Jody Wilson-Raybould are way past too late to act ethical N'esy Pas?
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
(English follows)
Bonjour,
Nous
accusons réception de votre courriel adressé à L’honorable Dominic
LeBlanc, cp, cr, député de Beauséjour et nous vous en remercions.
Veuillez noter que nous recevons actuellement un volume élevé de correspondances. Veuillez prévoir un délai dans nos réponses.
En ce qui concerne les courriels relativement à des enjeux particuliers de nos commettants de Beauséjour, nous allons nous assurer de bien réviser votre message et un employé de notre bureau de circonscription communiquera avec vous si nécessaire. Si vous avez des questions ou vous désirez des clarifications, vous pouvez toujours communiquer avec notre bureau au numéro de téléphone suivant : (506) 533-5700.
Si vous écrivez à propos de sujets relatifs aux fonctions de sécurité publique du
ministre LeBlanc, veuillez communiquer avec notre département de Sécurité publique à ps.ministerofpublicsafety-
Pour toutes demandes des médias, veuillez contacter Kelly Ouimet à Kelly.Ouimet@iga-aig.gc.ca
Merci et bonne journée.
Bureau de L’hon. Dominic LeBlanc, cp, cr, député
Député de Beauséjour
------------------------------
Hello,
We acknowledge receipt and thank you for your email addressed to the Honourable Dominic LeBlanc, P.C., K.C., M.P. for Beauséjour.
Please note that we are currently receiving a high volume of correspondence. This may mean a delay in our responding to you.
For emails related to specific issues from our constituents in Beauséjour, we will make sure to review your message and an employee from our constituency office will be in contact with you if necessary. If you have any questions or require clarification, you can always contact our office at the following phone number: (506) 533-5700.
If you are writing with respect to Minister LeBlanc's public safety duties, please
direct your correspondence to our Public Safety department at ps.ministerofpublicsafety-
Thank you and have a good day.
Office of the Hon. Dominic LeBlanc, P.C., K.C., M.P.
Member of Parliament for Beauséjour
From: Moore, Rob - M.P. <Rob.Moore@parl.gc.ca>
Date: Fri, Jun 7, 2024 at 3:30 PM
Subject: Automatic reply: YO Andrea Anderson-Mason You are welcome However methinks you and the former Attorney General Jody Wilson-Raybould are way past too late to act ethical N'esy Pas?
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
Thank you for contacting the Honourable Rob Moore, P.C., M.P. office. We appreciate the time you took to get in touch with our office.
If you did not already, please ensure to include your full contact details on your email and the appropriate staff will be able to action your request. We strive to ensure all constituent correspondence is responded to in a timely manner.
If your question or concern is time sensitive, please call our office: 506-832-4200.
Again, we thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts and concerns.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
Office of the Honourable Rob Moore, P.C., M.P.
Member of Parliament for Fundy Royal
From: <info@nationalcitizensinquiry.ca>
Date: Fri, Jun 7, 2024 at 3:30 PM
Subject: Auto: Fwd: YO Andrea Anderson-Mason You are welcome However methinks you and the former Attorney General Jody Wilson-Raybould are way past too late to act ethical N'esy Pas?
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
Thank you for reaching out to the National Citizens Inquiry. We are grateful for all your messages. Due to the volume of correspondence received and our small team of volunteers, it may take some time to respond.
You may find the answer you’re looking for on our website:
https://nationalcitizensinquir
Commissioners Report:
https://nationalcitizensinquir
Follow NCI on Social Media:
https://nationalcitizensinquir
Media Inquiries:
https://nationalcitizensinquir
Help share the Commissioners Report! Learn more at
https://nationalcitizensinquir
To stay updated on all things NCI, please sign-up for our e-newsletter:
https://nationalcitizensinquir
While you’re waiting for us, we would like to share part of a new strategy to reach "unaware" Canadians, who do not watch alternative sources and who - as we know - are still the majority in our country. The NCI has now created a network of regional YouTube channels, containing some of the most important NCI testimonials, which can bypass YouTube filters, if it’s done right.
To successfully by-pass and avoid potential YouTube strikes, we need your help to get these channels indexed (made searchable). Please click and “subscribe” on each of the six regional channel links below and then share with those you know who support NCI efforts.
NOTE: If you have multiple google accounts or channels on YouTube, you can subscribe from each of them:
https://www.youtube.com/@nci-c
https://www.youtube.com/@nci-c
https://www.youtube.com/@nci-c
https://www.youtube.com/@nci-c
https://www.youtube.com/@nci-c
https://www.youtube.com/@nci-c
Thank you for your patience and we will get back to you as soon as we can.
Yours sincerely,
NCI Support Team
PS The National Citizens Inquiry relies on the gracious support of volunteers to help with our correspondence. If your question was not fully answered, or you have additional questions or concerns, please reach out to us again for assistance.
From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Jun 7, 2024 at 3:29 PM
Subject: Fwd: YO Andrea Anderson-Mason You are welcome However methinks you and the former Attorney General Jody Wilson-Raybould are way past too late to act ethical N'esy Pas?
To: blaine.higgs <blaine.higgs@gnb.ca>, bruce.fitch <bruce.fitch@gnb.ca>, kris.austin <kris.austin@gnb.ca>, Susan.Holt <Susan.Holt@gnb.ca>, Mitton, Megan (LEG) <megan.mitton@gnb.ca>, Dominic.Cardy <Dominic.Cardy@gnb.ca>, dominic.leblanc <dominic.leblanc@parl.gc.ca>, rob.moore <rob.moore@parl.gc.ca>, fin.minfinance-financemin.fin <fin.minfinance-financemin.fin@canada.ca>, Mike.Comeau <Mike.Comeau@gnb.ca>, jan.jensen <jan.jensen@justice.gc.ca>, andrea.anderson-mason <andrea.anderson-mason@gnb.ca>, robert.mckee <robert.mckee@gnb.ca>, Dorothy.Shephard <Dorothy.Shephard@gnb.ca>, Ross.Wetmore <Ross.Wetmore@gnb.ca>, Daniel.J.Allain <Daniel.J.Allain@gnb.ca>, jeff.carr <jeff.carr@gnb.ca>, jill.green <jill.green@gnb.ca>, Holland, Mike (LEG) <mike.holland@gnb.ca>, Gary.Crossman <Gary.Crossman@gnb.ca>, michelle.conroy <michelle.conroy@gnb.ca>, Michael.Duheme <Michael.Duheme@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, Jason.Carrier <Jason.Carrier@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, ragingdissident <ragingdissident@protonmail.com>, Jason Lavigne <jason@yellowhead.vote>, Jacques.Poitras <Jacques.Poitras@cbc.ca>, Jack.Keir <Jack.Keir@gnb.ca>
Cc: <Steve.Outhouse@gnb.ca>, Dr.France.Desrosiers <Dr.France.Desrosiers@vitalitenb.ca>, Nathalie.G.Drouin <Nathalie.G.Drouin@pco-bcp.gc.ca>, National Citizens Inquiry <info@nationalcitizensinquiry.ca>, pm <pm@pm.gc.ca>, pierre.poilievre <pierre.poilievre@parl.gc.ca>
Kris Austin, People's Alliance - Voice of the Province - February 20, 2020
4 Comments
From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
Date: Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 11:14 AM
Subject: YO Andrea Anderson-Mason You are welcome However methinks you and the former Attorney General Jody Wilson-Raybould are way past too late to act ethical N'esy Pas?
To: <president@unb.ca>, <gmarquis@unb.ca>, <nobyrne@unb.ca>, oldmaison <oldmaison@yahoo.com>, steve.murphy <steve.murphy@ctv.ca>, Newsroom <Newsroom@globeandmail.com>, Jacques.Poitras <Jacques.Poitras@cbc.ca>, <Brenda.Lucki@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, <cblatchford@postmedia.com>, <Jody.Wilson-Raybould@parl.gc.
Cc: motomaniac333 <motomaniac333@gmail.com>, hugh.flemming <hugh.flemming@gnb.ca>, robert.mckee <robert.mckee@gnb.ca>, <Andrea.AndersonMason@gnb.ca>, premier <premier@gnb.ca>, premier <premier@ontario.ca>, premier <premier@gov.ab.ca>, Office of the Premier <scott.moe@gov.sk.ca>, pm <pm@pm.gc.ca>, Gerald.Butts <Gerald.Butts@pmo-cpm.gc.ca>
---------- Original message ----------
From: "Anderson-Mason, Andrea Hon. (JAG/JPG)" <Andrea.AndersonMason@gnb.ca>
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2020 14:50:49 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: YO Paul Mazerolle Never mind the crooks who
write the laws when are you people in UNB finally gonna uphold the
laws?
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
Thank you for your email. Your thoughts, comments and input are
greatly valued. You can be assured that all emails and letters are
carefully read, reviewed and taken into consideration.
If your issue is Constituency related, please contact Lisa Bourque at
my constituency office at
Lisa.Bourque@gnb.ca<mailto:Lis
Thank you.
Merci pour votre courriel. Nous vous sommes très reconnaissants de
nous avoir fait part de vos idées, commentaires et observations. Nous
tenons à vous assurer que nous lisons attentivement et prenons en
considération tous les courriels et lettres que nous recevons.
Si c’est au sujet du bureau de circonscription, veuillez contacter
Lisa Bourque à Lisa.Bourque@gnb.ca<mailto:Lis
(506)755-2810.
Merci.
Andrea Anderson-Mason, Q.C. / c.r.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/
UNB profs object to way new president is being hired
Secrecy leads to concerns about due diligence, but board of governors
cites need for confidentiality
CBC News · Posted: Jan 23, 2019 3:37 PM AT | Last Updated: January 23, 2019
Greg Marquis, a professor at the University of New Brunswick in Saint
John and a member of the senate, is concerned there wasn't as much
consultation with the university community as in the past for the
hiring of its next president. (UNB/Twitter)
Some professors at the University of New Brunswick don't like the way
the institution has gone about finding a replacement for retiring
president Eddy Campbell.
"It doesn't show due diligence and it doesn't really speak to real
consultation," said Greg Marquis, a history professor at the UNB Saint
John campus and a member of the senate on the Saint John campus.
Someone has just been chosen by members of the board of governors and
senates, but the name has to go to the premier as well and hasn't been
made public.
Marquis and some of his colleagues are not pleased there was no chance
for the broad university community to meet with proposed candidates in
a town hall type of setting, where they would have had a chance to
hear a presentation and ask questions.
"It seemed to be a very narrow consultation process and somewhat
secretive," he said. "It's like there's a hidden world operating
within the university to select these candidates and I don't think
that's right."
Marquis also doesn't like the decision to keep the names of candidates
under wraps.
"I can't even talk to the chair of my department about who the
candidate is, why they were selected, and what the selection process
was," said Marquis.
Larry Hachey, chair of the UNB board of governors, said the committee
tasked with hiring a new president consulted inside and outside the
UNB community in both Saint John and Fredericton about potential
candidates. (UNB)
"So that's very frustrating and strange for us to be working in that
type of environment."
UNB board of governors chair Larry Hachey acknowledged the school has
a tradition of having two or more candidates appear before the
university community to talk about what they'd like to do as president
but said it's not required under the UNB Act and no longer practical.
It seems like kind of a weird thing to have in a modern society.
- Greg Marquis, UNB Saint John professor
"That's something from at least 20 years ago and what's happened is
the landscape has changed."
"For example, let's say a potential candidate is a female and that
female may have a husband who's working," Hachey said. "Then it gets
known in the public she may be transferring, which may affect his
employment. Or vice versa.
"If we have two or three top candidates and two of the three decide
I'm not going to let my name stand if you're going to release it …
that's something we have to take into consideration."
Put UNB community first, profs say
That's not a good enough reason, according to the Association of
University of New Brunswick Teachers.
It issued a statement last week after members expressed concerns about
the search process.
"Privacy concerns of any candidate … should not outweigh the interests
of the UNB community," the association said on its website.
Eddy Campbell's five-year contract as president of UNB expires in July. (CBC)
"Any candidate recommended by the [joint nominating committee] should
make a public presentation prior to the joint meeting of senates and
the board.
"Sufficient time should be allowed after the presentation for senators
to consult with their colleagues."
Hachey said that town hall process could be brought back in the
future, depending on the privacy needs of the candidates.
But he is confident the person proposed by the joint nominating
committee was properly vetted, and he is comfortable with the amount
of consultation that took place.
"UNB has the most onerous hiring process in the country," he said
"With most universities the actual [hiring] committee is tasked with
hiring the president itself … at UNB we add on an extra layer of
bringing in our senates and boards to vote on the recommendation of
the committee."
Senate, board endorse name
That happened Tuesday night, said Hachey, and it resulted in a strong
endorsement.
He said a nominee has now been submitted to the premier and cabinet
and he hopes to get final approval from the lieutenant-governor soon,
possibly this week.
That last part of the process doesn't sit well with Marquis either.
"It seems like kind of a weird thing to have in a modern society," he said.
CBC's Journalistic Standards and Practices
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Premier of Ontario | Premier ministre de l’Ontario <Premier@ontario.ca>
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2020 14:52:06 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: YO Paul Mazerolle Never mind the crooks who
write the laws when are you people in UNB finally gonna uphold the
laws?
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
Thank you for your email. Your thoughts, comments and input are greatly valued.
You can be assured that all emails and letters are carefully read,
reviewed and taken into consideration.
There may be occasions when, given the issues you have raised and the
need to address them effectively, we will forward a copy of your
correspondence to the appropriate government official. Accordingly, a
response may take several business days.
Thanks again for your email.
______
Merci pour votre courriel. Nous vous sommes très reconnaissants de
nous avoir fait part de vos idées, commentaires et observations.
Nous tenons à vous assurer que nous lisons attentivement et prenons en
considération tous les courriels et lettres que nous recevons.
Dans certains cas, nous transmettrons votre message au ministère
responsable afin que les questions soulevées puissent être traitées de
la manière la plus efficace possible. En conséquence, plusieurs jours
ouvrables pourraient s’écouler avant que nous puissions vous répondre.
Merci encore pour votre courriel.
From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, May 28, 2024 at 1:31 PM
Subject: Re: YO Andrea Anderson-Mason You are welcome However methinks you and the former Attorney General Jody Wilson-Raybould are way past too late to act ethical N'esy Pas?
To: Gregory Marquis <gmarquis@unb.ca>
Hi
That is a bit outside of my area.
Greg Marquis
Professor
Department of History and Politics
University of New Brunswick Saint John
P.O. Box 5050
Saint John, NB, E2L 4L5
506 648-5638
Truth & Honour: The Oland Family Murder Case That Shocked Canada (Nimbus 2019)
https://www.audible.ca/search?searchAuthor=Greg+Marquis
Truth & Honour: The Death of Richard Oland and the Trial of Dennis Oland revised paperback ed. (Nimbus 2017).
Truth & Honour: The Death of Richard Oland and the Trial of Dennis Oland (Nimbus, 2016):
The Vigilant Eye: Policing Canada from 1867 to 9/11 (Fernwood, 2016):fernwoodpublishing.ca/book/the-vigilant-eye
Crime and Punishment in New Brunswick website:
www.unb.ca/saintjohn/arts/projects/crimepunishment/
From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
Sent: January 8, 2020 11:14:52 AM
To: President's Office <president@unb.ca>; Gregory Marquis <gmarquis@unb.ca>; Nicole O'Byrne <nobyrne@unb.ca>; oldmaison <oldmaison@yahoo.com>; steve.murphy <steve.murphy@ctv.ca>; Newsroom <Newsroom@globeandmail.com>; Jacques.Poitras <Jacques.Poitras@cbc.ca>; Brenda.Lucki@rcmp-grc.gc.ca <Brenda.Lucki@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>; cblatchford@postmedia.com <cblatchford@postmedia.com>; Jody.Wilson-Raybould@parl.gc.ca <Jody.Wilson-Raybould@parl.gc. ca>; Katie.Telford@pmo-cpm.gc.ca <Katie.Telford@pmo-cpm.gc.ca>; mcu <mcu@justice.gc.ca>; Beverley.Busson@sen.parl.gc.ca <Beverley.Busson@sen.parl.gc. ca>; Frank.McKenna@td.com <Frank.McKenna@td.com>; Nathalie.Drouin@justice.gc.ca <Nathalie.Drouin@justice.gc.ca >; David.Lametti@parl.gc.ca <David.Lametti@parl.gc.ca>; rfife@globeandmail.com <rfife@globeandmail.com>; investors@snclavalin.com <investors@snclavalin.com>; hannelie.stockenstrom@ snclavalin.com <hannelie.stockenstrom@ snclavalin.com>; charles.nieto@snclavalin.com <charles.nieto@snclavalin.com> ; Hartland.Paterson@snclavalin. com <Hartland.Paterson@snclavalin. com>; PETER.MACKAY@bakermckenzie.com <PETER.MACKAY@bakermckenzie. com>; pierre.poilievre.a3@parl.gc.ca <pierre.poilievre.a3@parl.gc. ca>; michael.chong.a1@parl.gc.ca <michael.chong.a1@parl.gc.ca>; David.Lametti.a1@parl.gc.ca <David.Lametti.a1@parl.gc.ca>
Cc: motomaniac333 <motomaniac333@gmail.com>; hugh.flemming <hugh.flemming@gnb.ca>; robert.mckee <robert.mckee@gnb.ca>; Andrea.AndersonMason@gnb.ca <Andrea.AndersonMason@gnb.ca>; premier <premier@gnb.ca>; premier <premier@ontario.ca>; premier <premier@gov.ab.ca>; Office of the Premier <scott.moe@gov.sk.ca>; pm <pm@pm.gc.ca>; Gerald.Butts <Gerald.Butts@pmo-cpm.gc.ca>
Subject: YO Andrea Anderson-Mason You are welcome However methinks you and the former Attorney General Jody Wilson-Raybould are way past too late to act ethical N'esy Pas?External message: Use caution.
---------- Original message ----------
From: "Anderson-Mason, Andrea Hon. (JAG/JPG)" <Andrea.AndersonMason@gnb.ca>
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2020 14:50:49 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: YO Paul Mazerolle Never mind the crooks who
write the laws when are you people in UNB finally gonna uphold the
laws?
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
Thank you for your email. Your thoughts, comments and input are
greatly valued. You can be assured that all emails and letters are
carefully read, reviewed and taken into consideration.
If your issue is Constituency related, please contact Lisa Bourque at
my constituency office at
Lisa.Bourque@gnb.ca<mailto:Lisa.Bourque@gnb.ca> or (506) 755-2810.
Thank you.
Merci pour votre courriel. Nous vous sommes très reconnaissants de
nous avoir fait part de vos idées, commentaires et observations. Nous
tenons à vous assurer que nous lisons attentivement et prenons en
considération tous les courriels et lettres que nous recevons.
Si c’est au sujet du bureau de circonscription, veuillez contacter
Lisa Bourque à Lisa.Bourque@gnb.ca<mailto:Lisa.Bourque@gnb.ca> ou
(506)755-2810.
Merci.
Andrea Anderson-Mason, Q.C. / c.r.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/unb- professors-president-hiring-1. 4989746
UNB profs object to way new president is being hired
Secrecy leads to concerns about due diligence, but board of governors
cites need for confidentiality
CBC News · Posted: Jan 23, 2019 3:37 PM AT | Last Updated: January 23, 2019
Greg Marquis, a professor at the University of New Brunswick in Saint
John and a member of the senate, is concerned there wasn't as much
consultation with the university community as in the past for the
hiring of its next president. (UNB/Twitter)
Some professors at the University of New Brunswick don't like the way
the institution has gone about finding a replacement for retiring
president Eddy Campbell.
"It doesn't show due diligence and it doesn't really speak to real
consultation," said Greg Marquis, a history professor at the UNB Saint
John campus and a member of the senate on the Saint John campus.
Someone has just been chosen by members of the board of governors and
senates, but the name has to go to the premier as well and hasn't been
made public.
Marquis and some of his colleagues are not pleased there was no chance
for the broad university community to meet with proposed candidates in
a town hall type of setting, where they would have had a chance to
hear a presentation and ask questions.
"It seemed to be a very narrow consultation process and somewhat
secretive," he said. "It's like there's a hidden world operating
within the university to select these candidates and I don't think
that's right."
Marquis also doesn't like the decision to keep the names of candidates
under wraps.
"I can't even talk to the chair of my department about who the
candidate is, why they were selected, and what the selection process
was," said Marquis.
Larry Hachey, chair of the UNB board of governors, said the committee
tasked with hiring a new president consulted inside and outside the
UNB community in both Saint John and Fredericton about potential
candidates. (UNB)
"So that's very frustrating and strange for us to be working in that
type of environment."
UNB board of governors chair Larry Hachey acknowledged the school has
a tradition of having two or more candidates appear before the
university community to talk about what they'd like to do as president
but said it's not required under the UNB Act and no longer practical.
It seems like kind of a weird thing to have in a modern society.
- Greg Marquis, UNB Saint John professor
"That's something from at least 20 years ago and what's happened is
the landscape has changed."
"For example, let's say a potential candidate is a female and that
female may have a husband who's working," Hachey said. "Then it gets
known in the public she may be transferring, which may affect his
employment. Or vice versa.
"If we have two or three top candidates and two of the three decide
I'm not going to let my name stand if you're going to release it …
that's something we have to take into consideration."
Put UNB community first, profs say
That's not a good enough reason, according to the Association of
University of New Brunswick Teachers.
It issued a statement last week after members expressed concerns about
the search process.
"Privacy concerns of any candidate … should not outweigh the interests
of the UNB community," the association said on its website.
Eddy Campbell's five-year contract as president of UNB expires in July. (CBC)
"Any candidate recommended by the [joint nominating committee] should
make a public presentation prior to the joint meeting of senates and
the board.
"Sufficient time should be allowed after the presentation for senators
to consult with their colleagues."
Hachey said that town hall process could be brought back in the
future, depending on the privacy needs of the candidates.
But he is confident the person proposed by the joint nominating
committee was properly vetted, and he is comfortable with the amount
of consultation that took place.
"UNB has the most onerous hiring process in the country," he said
"With most universities the actual [hiring] committee is tasked with
hiring the president itself … at UNB we add on an extra layer of
bringing in our senates and boards to vote on the recommendation of
the committee."
Senate, board endorse name
That happened Tuesday night, said Hachey, and it resulted in a strong
endorsement.
He said a nominee has now been submitted to the premier and cabinet
and he hopes to get final approval from the lieutenant-governor soon,
possibly this week.
That last part of the process doesn't sit well with Marquis either.
"It seems like kind of a weird thing to have in a modern society," he said.
CBC's Journalistic Standards and Practices
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Premier of Ontario | Premier ministre de l’Ontario <Premier@ontario.ca>
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2020 14:52:06 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: YO Paul Mazerolle Never mind the crooks who
write the laws when are you people in UNB finally gonna uphold the
laws?
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
Thank you for your email. Your thoughts, comments and input are greatly valued.
You can be assured that all emails and letters are carefully read,
reviewed and taken into consideration.
There may be occasions when, given the issues you have raised and the
need to address them effectively, we will forward a copy of your
correspondence to the appropriate government official. Accordingly, a
response may take several business days.
Thanks again for your email.
______
Merci pour votre courriel. Nous vous sommes très reconnaissants de
nous avoir fait part de vos idées, commentaires et observations.
Nous tenons à vous assurer que nous lisons attentivement et prenons en
considération tous les courriels et lettres que nous recevons.
Dans certains cas, nous transmettrons votre message au ministère
responsable afin que les questions soulevées puissent être traitées de
la manière la plus efficace possible. En conséquence, plusieurs jours
ouvrables pourraient s’écouler avant que nous puissions vous répondre.
Merci encore pour votre courriel.
---------- Original message ----------
From: Jody.Wilson-Raybould@parl.gc.ca
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2019 01:24:19 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: RE SNC-Lavalin Trudeau and the OECD Attn Don
Houle, Denis Jasmin, William McNamara and Stephen LeDrew pursuant to
my calls you will find this email at the bottom of my blog about you
dudes
To: motomaniac333@gmail.com
Thank you for writing to the Honourable Jody Wilson-Raybould, Member
of Parliament for Vancouver Granville.
This message is to acknowledge that we are in receipt of your email.
Due to the significant increase in the volume of correspondence, there
may be a delay in processing your email. Rest assured that your
message will be carefully reviewed.
To help us address your concerns more quickly, please include within
the body of your email your full name, address, and postal code.
Thank you
-------------------
Merci d'?crire ? l'honorable Jody Wilson-Raybould, d?put?e de
Vancouver Granville.
Le pr?sent message vise ? vous informer que nous avons re?u votre
courriel. En raison d'une augmentation importante du volume de
correspondance, il pourrait y avoir un retard dans le traitement de
votre courriel. Sachez que votre message sera examin? attentivement.
Pour nous aider ? r?pondre ? vos pr?occupations plus rapidement,
veuillez inclure dans le corps de votre courriel votre nom complet,
votre adresse et votre code postal.
Merci
---------- Original message ----------
From: Newsroom <newsroom@globeandmail.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2019 01:24:20 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: RE SNC-Lavalin Trudeau and the OECD Attn Don
Houle, Denis Jasmin, William McNamara and Stephen LeDrew pursuant to
my calls you will find this email at the bottom of my blog about you
dudes
To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Thank you for contacting The Globe and Mail.
If your matter pertains to newspaper delivery or you require technical
support, please contact our Customer Service department at
1-800-387-5400 or send an email to customerservice@globeandmail.com
If you are reporting a factual error please forward your email to
publiceditor@globeandmail.com<mailto:publiceditor@ globeandmail.com>
Letters to the Editor can be sent to letters@globeandmail.com
This is the correct email address for requests for news coverage and
press releases.
---------- Original message ----------
From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2019 21:24:10 -0400
Subject: RE SNC-Lavalin Trudeau and the OECD Attn Don Houle, Denis
Jasmin, William McNamara and Stephen LeDrew pursuant to my calls you
will find this email at the bottom of my blog about you dudes
To: investors@snclavalin.com, wmcnamara@torys.com,
ledrew@stephenledrew.ca, pm@pm.gc.ca, GOVintegrity@oecd.org,
Michael.Wernick@pco-bcp.gc.ca, Paul.Shuttle@pco-bcp.gc.ca
Cc: david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com, Brenda.Lucki@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
cblatchford <cblatchford@postmedia.com,
Jody.Wilson-Raybould@parl.gc.ca, Katie.Telford@pmo-cpm.gc.ca,
Beverley.Busson@sen.parl.gc.ca, Frank.McKenna@td.com,
mcu@justice.gc.ca, Nathalie.Drouin@justice.gc.ca,
David.Lametti@parl.gc.ca, rfife@globeandmail.com>,
hon.ralph.goodale@canada.ca, Newsroom@globeandmail.com
https://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.com/2019/03/t-1843- 18-snc-lavalin-group-inc-et- al-v.html
Denis Jasmin, CPA, CA
Vice-President, Investor Relations
455 René-Lévesque Blvd. West
Montreal, Quebec
Canada, H2Z 1Z3
+1 514-393-8000 ext. 57553
Don Houle 513 393 8000 ext 56370
investors@snclavalin.com
---------- Original message ----------
From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2019 12:05:00 -0400
Subject: YO Pierre Poilievre RE SNC-Lavalin I just called again and
managed to speak to Craig Patrick Hilimoniuk but he didn't have much
time for me just like David Lametti's people
To: pierre.poilievre.a3@parl.gc.ca, michael.chong.a1@parl.gc.ca,
David.Lametti.a1@parl.gc.ca, Jody.Wilson-Raybould.a1@parl.gc.ca,
maxime.bernier@parl.gc.ca, andrew.scheer@parl.gc.ca,
charlie.angus@parl.gc.ca, Amarjeet.Sohi.a1@parl.gc.ca,
hannelie.stockenstrom@snclavalin.com, charles.nieto@snclavalin.com,
Hartland.Paterson@snclavalin.com, PETER.MACKAY@bakermckenzie.com ,
tony.clement.a1@parl.gc.ca, scott.bardsley@canada.ca,
mcu@justice.gc.ca, JUSTWEB@novascotia.ca
Cc: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>,
fiacobucci@torys.com, justin.trudeau.a1@parl.gc.ca, coi@gnb.ca,
MRichard@lawsociety-barreau.nb.ca, David.Eidt@gnb.ca,
Newsroom@globeandmail.com, Jacques.Poitras@cbc.ca,
sfine@globeandmail.com
https://www.nationalobserver.com/2019/03/05/news/snc- lavalin-lawyer-iacobucci- urged-resign-trudeaus-trans- mountain-envoy
SNC-Lavalin lawyer Iacobucci urged to resign as Trudeau's Trans Mountain envoy
By Alastair Sharp in News, Energy, Politics | March 5th 2019
'Not a shrinking violet'
The UBCIC's Wilson said Iacobucci would ideally step down from his
role leading the Trans Mountain expansion consultations, but should at
least choose to remove himself from one of the files.
“I think he’s embroiled in SNC and that he should stay over there but
step down from the Trans Mountain pipeline one,” she said. “I would
prefer him to step down from that one (the Trans Mountain pipeline)
but maybe the majority of Canadians would prefer him out of SNC, I
don’t know.”
“He made a mess over there, we don’t want him to make a mess over here.”
Wilson said the government's handling of both files showed a startling
lack of transparency.
“With SNC, we don’t know what was said to Minister Jody
Wilson-Raybould or in the thousands of lobby meetings between SNC and
the government," she said. "We also don’t know how Trans Mountain was
handled in the inner core of the prime minister’s office and the
various ministries involved, especially now that they are owners of
the pipeline.”
She pointed out the SNC-Lavalin could clearly benefit from
construction and engineering contracts if Trans Mountain gets built.
SNC-Lavalin employs about 9,000 people across Canada who work on
projects in a variety of sectors, including oil, gas and pipelines.
A spokesman for SNC-Lavalin declined to comment when asked about
Iacobucci's dual roles. Iacobucci didn't respond to a request for
comment.
In May 2018, Canada’s elections watchdog laid charges against a former
SNC executive, accusing him of orchestrating illegal federal political
donations the company made, mostly to Liberal groups, as well as to
Conservatives, more than a decade ago.
During an emergency debate about the SNC-Lavalin scandal on Feb. 28,
Green Party Leader Elizabeth May stood in the House of Commons to muse
about Iacobucci's role in two key files it is juggling.
"Frank Iacobucci is not a shrinking violet. He is playing an
interesting role here. I wonder if my friend finds it's curious in any
way that SNC-Lavalin's lawyer was the choice of the prime minister to
run the Indigenous consulations in the repairing of the flawed
consultations on the Kinder Morgan pipeline," she said, during an
exchange in the Commons with Conservative MP Michael Barrett, who
represents the Ontario riding of Leeds-Grenville-Thousand Islands.
"And he is still playing that role, while he is also SNC-Lavalin's
lawyer."
Barrett responded by saying that nothing surprises him at this point.
Hartland Paterson
Executive Vice President & General Counsel:
Called to the bar: 1987 (QC)
Charles Nieto
Senior Legal Counsel:
Called to the bar: 1995 (QC)
SNC-Lavalin Inc.
455 boul. René-Lévesque o.
Montréal, Québec H2Z 1Z3
Phone: 514-393-8000 Ext: 522668
Fax: 514-866-5057
Email: charles.nieto@snclavalin.com
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2019 22:48:08 -0400
Subject: ATTN Anthony Housefather Your boss Trudeau cannot stop your
friend Jody Wilson-Raybould talking about Re Federal Court File No
T-1557-15 Correct?
To: anthony.housefather@parl.gc.ca, Kathleen.Harris@cbc.ca, Newsroom
<Newsroom@globeandmail.com>, "wayne.easter" <wayne.easter@parl.gc.ca>,
"Hon.Chrystia.Freeland" <Hon.Chrystia.Freeland@canada.ca>,
"Hon.Dominic.LeBlanc" <Hon.Dominic.LeBlanc@canada.ca>, "steve.murphy"
<steve.murphy@ctv.ca>, "David.Akin" <David.Akin@globalnews.ca>,
TCromwell@blg.com, darrow.macintyre@cbc.ca, jp.lewis@unb.ca,
Hunter.Tootoo@parl.gc.ca, tony.clement.a1@parl.gc.ca,
andrew.scheer@parl.gc.ca, JagmeetForBurnaby@ndp.ca,
maxime.bernier@parl.gc.ca
Cc: "David.Raymond.Amos" <David.Raymond.Amos@gmail.com>,
"Michael.Wernick" <Michael.Wernick@pco-bcp.gc.ca>, "Katie.Telford"
<Katie.Telford@pmo-cpm.gc.ca>
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-wilson- raybould-snc-lavalin-1.5033639
Wilson-Raybould says PMO restricting her ability to 'speak freely' at
Justice committee Wednesday
Former attorney general has been granted broad waiver on cabinet
confidence, solicitor-client privilege
Kathleen Harris · CBC News · Posted: Feb 26, 2019 10:59 AM ET
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2019 14:02:14 -0400
Subject: Re: ATTN Murray Rankin and David Lametti Re Federal Court
File No T-1557-15 I just called again Correct?
To: "Murray.Rankin" <Murray.Rankin@parl.gc.ca>, "Jody.Wilson-Raybould"
<Jody.Wilson-Raybould@parl.gc.ca>, "maxime.bernier"
<maxime.bernier@parl.gc.ca>, "andrew.scheer"
<andrew.scheer@parl.gc.ca>, "bruce.northrup" <bruce.northrup@gnb.ca>,
"Brenda.Lucki" <Brenda.Lucki@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, "Alaina.Lockhart"
<Alaina.Lockhart@parl.gc.ca>, "David.Lametti"
<David.Lametti@parl.gc.ca>, washington field
<washington.field@ic.fbi.gov>, "Dale.Morgan"
<Dale.Morgan@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>
Cc: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>, media@ndp.ca,
"Nathalie.Drouin" <Nathalie.Drouin@justice.gc.ca>, "nathan.cullen"
<nathan.cullen@parl.gc.ca>, "charlie.angus" <charlie.angus@parl.gc.ca>
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Murray.Rankin@parl.gc.ca
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2019 18:00:50 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: ATTN Murray Rankin and David Lametti Re
Federal Court File No T-1557-15 I just called again Correct?
To: motomaniac333@gmail.com
For British Columbia media inquiries please email Krystal at
Murray.Rankin.C1@parl.gc.ca
For National media inquiries please email Charlotte at
Murray.Rankin.A2@parl.gc.ca
---
Thank you for taking the time to contact me and to express your views.
I acknowledge receipt of your email.
While my team and I read all correspondence, the volume of emails 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. In most cases, anonymous, cc'd or forwarded mail will not
receive a response.
If you are a constituent of Victoria seeking assistance with a federal
service or program, then please ensure your email included your full
name, address, postal code, telephone number, and the details of your
situation so that my office is able help you efficiently. If the
matter is time-sensitive, then please call my office directly at
250-363-3600. If we are unable to answer your call immediately, please
leave a voicemail and we will return your call at our earliest
opportunity. Please be assured that all email sent to this office is
treated as confidential.
My team and I look forward to continuing our hard work for the
residents of Victoria.
Sincerely,
Murray Rankin, Member of Parliament
Victoria
NDP Justice Critic and Deputy House Leader
New Democratic Party
________________________________________________________
Victoria: 250-363-3600 | Ottawa: 613-996-2358 | www.murrayrankin.ca
UFCW 232
On 2/26/19, David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com> wrote:
> http://murrayrankin.ndp.ca/ndp-calls-for-investigation- into-former-attorney-general- s-firing
>
>
> NDP calls for investigation into former Attorney General’s firing
>
> February 8th, 2019 - 4:06pm
>
> NDP Critic for Justice Murray Rankin made the following statement:
>
> “Canadians have a right to question whether this Prime Minister fired
> Canada’s first Indigenous Justice Minister for ‘speaking truth to
> power’.
>
> The government has denied the Prime Minister or his backroom advisors
> fired Minister Jody Wilson-Raybould because she refused to yield to
> pressure in the SNC-Lavalin matter.
>
> Canadians have to be assured the independence of the justice system
> has not been compromised. In these circumstances, Canadians cannot be
> expected to take the Prime Minister’s word for it.
>
> As Vice Chair of the Justice Committee, I have joined with MP Michael
> Cooper in calling for the former Attorney General, the current Justice
> Minister, and high-ranking officials in the Prime Minister’s Office to
> appear before the Justice Committee as soon as possible.
>
> My NDP colleagues, Nathan Cullen and Charlie Angus, have also written
> to the Ethics Commissioner to ensure an investigation by that office
> is undertaken.
>
> The integrity of our justice system may well be at issue. The Liberal
> government must allow the Justice Committee to do its work on behalf
> of Canadians and clear the air at this critical time.”
>
>
>
> – 30 –
>
>
>
> For more information, please contact:
>
> NDP Media Centre: 613-222-2351 or media@ndp.ca
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Ministerial Correspondence Unit - Justice Canada <mcu@justice.gc.ca>
> Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2019 17:35:05 +0000
> Subject: Automatic reply: RE FATCA, the CRA and the IRS YO Donald J.
> Trump Jr. why does your ex lawyer Mr Cohen and the Canadain FEDS
> continue lie after all this time???
> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>
> Thank you for writing to the Honourable David Lametti, Minister of
> Justice and Attorney General of Canada.
>
> Due to the significant increase in the volume of correspondence
> addressed to the Minister, please note that there may be a delay in
> processing your email. Rest assured that your message will be
> carefully reviewed.
>
> We do not respond to correspondence that contains offensive language.
>
> -------------------
>
> Merci d'avoir écrit à l'honorable David Lametti, ministre de la
> Justice et procureur général du Canada.
>
> En raison d'une augmentation importante du volume de la correspondance
> adressée au ministre, veuillez prendre note qu'il pourrait y avoir un
> retard dans le traitement de votre courriel. Nous tenons à vous
> assurer que votre message sera lu avec soin.
>
> Nous ne répondons pas à la correspondance contenant un langage offensant.
>
---------- Original message ----------
From: "LSD / DSJ (JUS/JUS)" <BPIB-DGPAA@justice.gc.ca>
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2019 19:25:31 +0000
Subject: RE: YO Pierre Poilievre I just called and tried to reason
with David Lametti's minions and got nowhere fast Surprise Surprise
Surprise N'esy Pas Petev Baby Mackay?
To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
This confirms receipt of the message that you recently sent to the
Legal Systems Division or to the Justipedia Team of the Legal
Practices Branch. We will review your message and reply within
forty-eight (48) hours. Please do not reply to this email.
***
La présente confirme réception du message que vous avez fait parvenir
à la Division des systèmes juridiques ou à l’équipe de Justipédia de
la Direction générale des pratiques juridiques. Nous réviserons votre
message et vous répondrons dans les quarante-huit (48) heures. Prière
de ne pas répondre au présent courriel.
---------- Original message ----------
From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2019 15:25:26 -0400
Subject: Fwd: YO Pierre Poilievre I just called and tried to reason
with David Lametti's minions and got nowhere fast Surprise Surprise
Surprise N'esy Pas Petev Baby Mackay?
To: Support@viafoura.com, darrow.macintyre@cbc.ca,
carrie@viafoura.com, allison@viafoura.com
Cc: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com, LPMD-DGPD@justice.gc.ca,
Mark.Blakely@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, Gilles.Blinn@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2019 15:00:58 -0400
Subject: YO Pierre Poilievre I just called and tried to reason with
David Lametti's minions and got nowhere fast Surprise Surprise
Surprise N'esy Pas Petev Baby Mackay?
To: pierre.poilievre@parl.gc.ca, olad-dlo@justice.gc.ca,
David.Lametti.a1@parl.gc.ca, maxime.bernier@parl.gc.ca,
andrew.scheer@parl.gc.ca, charlie.angus@parl.gc.ca,
PETER.MACKAY@bakermckenzie.com, tony.clement.a1@parl.gc.ca
Cc: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com, scott.bardsley@canada.ca,
scott.brison@parl.gc.ca, scott.macrae@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
warren.mcbeath@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, Beverley.Busson@sen.parl.gc.ca
Official Languages Directorate
Telephone: 613-957-4967
Fax: 613-948-6924
Email: olad-dlo@justice.gc.ca
Address: Official Languages Directorate
Department of Justice Canada
350 Albert Street, 3rd floor
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0H8
---------- Original message ----------
From: Ministerial Correspondence Unit - Justice Canada <mcu@justice.gc.ca>
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2019 17:58:23 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: C'yall in Court
To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Thank you for writing to the Honourable David Lametti, Minister of
Justice and Attorney General of Canada.
Due to the significant increase in the volume of correspondence
addressed to the Minister, please note that there may be a delay in
processing your email. Rest assured that your message will be
carefully reviewed.
-------------------
Merci d'avoir écrit à l'honorable David Lametti, ministre de la
Justice et procureur général du Canada.
En raison d'une augmentation importante du volume de la correspondance
adressée à la ministre, veuillez prendre note qu'il pourrait y avoir
un retard dans le traitement de votre courriel. Nous tenons à vous
assurer que votre message sera lu avec soin.
---------- Original message ----------
From: Ministerial Correspondence Unit - Justice Canada <mcu@justice.gc.ca>
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2019 22:18:45 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: Methinks David Lametti should go back to law
school too N'esy Pas Pierre Poilievre?
To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Thank you for writing to the Honourable David Lametti, Minister of
Justice and Attorney General of Canada.
Due to the significant increase in the volume of correspondence
addressed to the Minister, please note that there may be a delay in
processing your email. Rest assured that your message will be
carefully reviewed.
-------------------
Merci d'avoir écrit à l'honorable David Lametti, ministre de la
Justice et procureur général du Canada.
En raison d'une augmentation importante du volume de la correspondance
adressée à la ministre, veuillez prendre note qu'il pourrait y avoir
un retard dans le traitement de votre courriel. Nous tenons à vous
assurer que votre message sera lu avec soin.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Jody.Wilson-Raybould@parl.gc.ca
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2019 22:18:49 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: Methinks David Lametti should go back to law
school too N'esy Pas Pierre Poilievre?
To: motomaniac333@gmail.com
Thank you for writing to the Honourable Jody Wilson-Raybould, Member
of Parliament for Vancouver Granville.
This message is to acknowledge that we are in receipt of your email.
Due to the significant increase in the volume of correspondence, there
may be a delay in processing your email. Rest assured that your
message will be carefully reviewed.
To help us address your concerns more quickly, please include within
the body of your email your full name, address, and postal code.
Thank you
-------------------
Merci d'?crire ? l'honorable Jody Wilson-Raybould, d?put?e de
Vancouver Granville.
Le pr?sent message vise ? vous informer que nous avons re?u votre
courriel. En raison d'une augmentation importante du volume de
correspondance, il pourrait y avoir un retard dans le traitement de
votre courriel. Sachez que votre message sera examin? attentivement.
Pour nous aider ? r?pondre ? vos pr?occupations plus rapidement,
veuillez inclure dans le corps de votre courriel votre nom complet,
votre adresse et votre code postal.
Merci
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: michael.chong@parl.gc.ca
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2019 22:18:49 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: Methinks David Lametti should go back to law
school too N'esy Pas Pierre Poilievre?
To: motomaniac333@gmail.com
Thanks very much for getting in touch with me!
This email is to acknowledge receipt of your message and to let you
know that every incoming email is read and reviewed. A member of my
Wellington-Halton Hills team will be in touch with you shortly if
follow-up is required.
Due to the high volume of email correspondence, priority is given to
responding to residents of Wellington-Halton Hills and to emails of a
non-chain (or "forwards") variety.
In your email, if you:
* have verified that you are a constituent by including your
complete residential postal address and a phone number, a response
will be provided in a timely manner.
* have not included your residential postal mailing address,
please resend your email with your complete residential postal address
and phone number, and a response will be forthcoming.
If you are not a constituent of Wellington Halton-Hills, please
contact your Member of Parliament. If you are unsure who your MP is,
you can find them by searching your postal code at
http://www.ourcommons.ca/en
Any constituents of Wellington-Halton Hills who require urgent
attention are encouraged to call the constituency office at
1-866-878-5556 (toll-free in riding). Please rest assured that any
voicemails will be returned promptly.
Once again, thank you for your email.
The Hon. Michael Chong, M.P.
Wellington-Halton Hills
toll free riding office:1-866-878-5556
Ottawa office: 613-992-4179
E-mail: michael.chong@parl.gc.ca<mailto:michael.chong@parl.gc. ca>
Website : www.michaelchong.ca<http://www.michaelchong.ca>
THIS MESSAGE IS ONLY INTENDED FOR THE USE OF THE INTENDED RECIPIENT(S)
AND MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION THAT IS PRIVILEGED, PROPRIETARY AND/OR
CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby
notified that any review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution,
copying, conversion to hard copy or other use of this communication is
strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient and have
received this message in error, please notify me by return e-mail and
delete this message from your system.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2019 18:18:40 -0400
Subject: Methinks David Lametti should go back to law school too N'esy
Pas Pierre Poilievre?
To: David.Lametti@parl.gc.ca, Jody.Wilson-Raybould@parl.gc.ca,
pierre.poilievre@parl.gc.ca,mcu@justice.gc.ca,
michael.chong@parl.gc.ca, Michael.Wernick@pco-bcp.gc.ca
Cc: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com, Newsroom@globeandmail.com,
Jacques.Poitras@cbc.ca, serge.rousselle@gnb.ca
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2019 15:44:16 -0400
Subject: Jagmeet Singh says that maybe Jay Shin should go back to law
school??? Too Too Funny Indeed EH Karen Wang and Laura-Lynn Tyler
Thompson?
To: info@jayshin.ca, jay@lonsdalelaw.ca, karenwang@liberal.ca,
lauralynnlive@gmail.com
Cc: David Amos <david.raymond.amos@gmail.com>,
jmaclellan@burnabynow.com, kgawley@burnabynow.com
Jagmeet Singh on Tory opponent: 'Maybe he should go back to law school'
Conservative candidate Jay Shin said Singh was 'keeping criminals out
of jail' during his days as a criminal defence lawyer
Kelvin Gawley Burnaby Now January 13, 2019 10:27 AM
Julie MacLellan
Assistant editor, and newsroom tip line
jmaclellan@burnabynow.com
Phone: 604 444 3020
Kelvin Gawley
kgawley@burnabynow.com
Phone: 604 444 3024
Jay Shin
Direct: 604-980-5089
Email: jay@lonsdalelaw.ca
By phone: 604-628-0508
By e-mail: info@jayshin.ca
Karen Wang
604.531.1178
karenwang@liberal.ca
Now if Mr Shin scrolls down he will know some of what the fancy NDP
lawyer has known for quite sometime
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Singh - QP, Jagmeet" <JSingh-QP@ndp.on.ca>
Date: Fri, 19 May 2017 16:39:35 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: Re Federal Court File # T-1557-15 and the
upcoming hearing on May 24th I called a lot of your people before High
Noon today Correct Ralph Goodale and Deputy Minister Malcolm Brown?
To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
For immediate assistance please contact our Brampton office at
905-799-3939 or jsingh-co@ndp.on.ca
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Kennedy.Stewart@parl.gc.ca
Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2018 18:18:35 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: Attn Minister Ralph Goodale and Pierre
Paul-Hus Trust that I look forward to arguing the fact that fhe Crown
filed my Sept 4th email to you and your buddies
To: motomaniac333@gmail.com
Many thanks for your message. Your concerns are important to me. If
your matter is urgent, an invitation or an immigration matter please
forward it to burnabysouth.A1@parl.gc.ca or
burnabysouth.C1@parl.gc.ca. This email is no longer being monitored.
The House of Commons of Canada provides for the continuation of
services to the constituents of a Member of Parliament whose seat has
become vacant. The party Whip supervises the staff retained under
these circumstances.
Following the resignation of the Member for the constituency of
Burnaby South, Mr. Kennedy Stewart, the constituency office will
continue to provide services to constituents.
You can reach the Burnaby South constituency office by telephone at
(604) 291-8863 or by mail at the following address: 4940 Kingsway,
Burnaby BC.
Office Hours:
Tuesday - Thursday: 10am - 12pm & 1pm - 4pm
Friday 10am - 12pm
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Michael Cohen <mcohen@trumporg.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2018 05:54:40 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: ATTN Blair Armitage You acted as the Usher
of the Black Rod twice while Kevin Vickers was the Sergeant-at-Arms
Hence you and the RCMP must know why I sued the Queen Correct?
To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Effective January 20, 2017, I have accepted the role as personal
counsel to President Donald J. Trump. All future emails should be
directed to mdcohen212@gmail.com and all future calls should be
directed to 646-853-0114.
________________________________
This communication is from The Trump Organization or an affiliate
thereof and is not sent on behalf of any other individual or entity.
This email may contain information that is confidential and/or
proprietary. Such information may not be read, disclosed, used,
copied, distributed or disseminated except (1) for use by the intended
recipient or (2) as expressly authorized by the sender. If you have
received this communication in error, please immediately delete it and
promptly notify the sender. E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed
to be received, secure or error-free as emails could be intercepted,
corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late, incomplete, contain viruses
or otherwise. The Trump Organization and its affiliates do not
guarantee that all emails will be read and do not accept liability for
any errors or omissions in emails. Any views or opinions presented in
any email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily
represent those of The Trump Organization or any of its affiliates.
Nothing in this communication is intended to operate as an electronic
signature under applicable law.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Justice Website <JUSTWEB@novascotia.ca>
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2017 14:21:11 +0000
Subject: Emails to Department of Justice and Province of Nova Scotia
To: "motomaniac333@gmail.com" <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Mr. Amos,
We acknowledge receipt of your recent emails to the Deputy Minister of
Justice and lawyers within the Legal Services Division of the
Department of Justice respecting a possible claim against the Province
of Nova Scotia. Service of any documents respecting a legal claim
against the Province of Nova Scotia may be served on the Attorney
General at 1690 Hollis Street, Halifax, NS. Please note that we will
not be responding to further emails on this matter.
Department of Justice
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Eidt, David (OAG/CPG)" <David.Eidt@gnb.ca>
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2017 00:33:21 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: Yo Mr Lutz howcome your buddy the clerk
would not file this motion and properly witnessed affidavit and why
did she take all four copies?
To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
I will be out of the office until Monday, March 13, 2017. I will have
little to no access to email. Please dial 453-2222 for assistance.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Marc Richard <MRichard@lawsociety-barreau.nb.ca>
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2016 13:16:46 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: RE: The New Brunswick Real Estate
Association and their deliberate ignorance for the bankster's benefit
To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
I will be out of the office until August 15, 2016. Je serai absent du
bureau jusqu'au 15 août 2016.
> ---------- 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/April32017JusticeLeblancHearin g
>
>
> 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
>
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/ITriedToExplainItToAllMaritime rsInEarly200
>> 6
>>
>> http://davidamos.blogspot.ca/2006/05/wiretap-tapes-impeach- bush.html
>>
>> http://www.archive.org/details/ PoliceSurveilanceWiretapTape13 9
>>
>> 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
>>
>
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
From: Fraser, Sean - M.P. <Sean.Fraser@parl.gc.ca>
Date: Thu, Aug 7, 2025 at 8:52 PM
Subject: Automatic reply: Who Killed Richard Oland?
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
Thank you for your contacting the constituency office of Sean Fraser, Member of Parliament for Central Nova.
This is an automated reply.
Please note that all correspondence is read, however due to the high volume of emails we receive on a daily basis there may be a delay in getting back to you. Priority will be given to residents of Central Nova.
To ensure we get back to you in a timely manner, please include your full name, home address including postal code and phone number when reaching out.
Thank you.
-------------
Merci d'avoir contacté le bureau de circonscription de Sean Fraser, député de Central Nova. Il s'agit d'une réponse automatisée.
Veuillez noter que toute la correspondance est lue, mais qu'en raison du volume élevé de courriels que nous recevons quotidiennement, il se peut que nous ne puissions pas vous répondre dans les meilleurs délais.
Pour que nous puissions vous répondre dans les meilleurs délais, veuillez indiquer votre nom complet, votre adresse personnelle, y compris le code postal, et votre numéro de téléphone lorsque vous nous contactez.
Nous vous remercions.
Facebook : facebook.com/SeanFraserMP
Twitter : @SeanFraserMP
Instagram : SeanFraserMP
Sans frais : 1-844-641-5886
From: Ministerial Correspondence Unit - Justice Canada <mcu@justice.gc.ca>
Date: Thu, Aug 7, 2025 at 8:54 PM
Subject: Automatic Reply
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
Thank you for writing to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada.
Due to the volume of correspondence addressed to the Minister, please note that there may be a delay in processing your email. Rest assured that your message will be carefully reviewed.
We do not respond to correspondence that contains offensive language.
-------------------
Merci d'avoir écrit au ministre de la Justice et procureur général du Canada.
En raison du volume de correspondance adressée au ministre, veuillez
prendre note qu'il pourrait y avoir un retard dans le traitement de
votre courriel. Nous tenons à vous assurer que votre message sera lu
avec soin.
Nous ne répondons pas à la correspondance contenant un langage offensant.
From: Moore, Rob - M.P. <Rob.Moore@parl.gc.ca>
Date: Thu, Aug 7, 2025 at 8:52 PM
Subject: Automatic reply: Who Killed Richard Oland?
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
Thank you for contacting the Honourable Rob Moore, P.C., M.P. office. We appreciate the time you took to get in touch with our office.
If you did not already, please ensure to include your full contact details on your email and the appropriate staff will be able to action your request. We strive to ensure all constituent correspondence is responded to in a timely manner.
If your question or concern is time sensitive, please call our office: 506-832-4200.
Again, we thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts and concerns.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
Office of the Honourable Rob Moore, P.C., M.P.
Member of Parliament for Fundy Royal
From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, Aug 7, 2025 at 8:50 PM
Subject: Who Killed Richard Oland?
To: <vanhorne.ryan@gmail.com>, <ps.ministerofpublicsafety-ministredelasecuritepublique.sp@ps-sp.gc.ca>, dominic.leblanc <dominic.leblanc@parl.gc.ca>, Sean.Fraser <Sean.Fraser@parl.gc.ca>, mcu <mcu@justice.gc.ca>, robert.mckee <robert.mckee@gnb.ca>, robert.gauvin <robert.gauvin@gnb.ca>, Mark.Blakely <Mark.Blakely@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, Marco.Mendicino <Marco.Mendicino@parl.gc.ca>, rob.moore <rob.moore@parl.gc.ca>, John.Williamson <John.Williamson@parl.gc.ca>, Wayne.Long <Wayne.Long@parl.gc.ca>, President's Office <president@unb.ca>, Gregory Marquis <gmarquis@unb.ca>, Nicole O'Byrne <nobyrne@unb.ca>, oldmaison <oldmaison@yahoo.com>
Who Killed Richard Oland? New book digs into unsolved murder of Saint John businessman
Author Janice Middleton offers up new suspects for 2011 killing in New Brunswick
In her book Who Killed Richard Oland? A real-life murder mystery, author Janice Middleton starts with a vivid “reconstruction” of the murder.
Spoiler alert: Dennis Oland, Richard’s son who was acquitted in July 2019 of second-degree murder in a second trial, is not the perpetrator in this scenario. Far from it.
Middleton characterizes the murder as a “contract killing” and speculates that it could have been ordered by sour Russian and Ukrainian investors who lost $17.5 million in a failed bid to rekindle the sugar industry in Saint John, N.B.. Richard Oland acted as a broker, bringing public and private investors into a group that bought the old Lantic Sugar plant and started a new venture called Can Sugar that quickly went bankrupt.
Middleton’s book raises a boatload of reasonable doubts; so many that the reader is left wondering how a jury of 12 people could have found Dennis Oland guilty beyond a reasonable doubt at his first trial in 2015.
With so many red flags, she wonders how the case even got past the preliminary inquiry stage, what with all the shoddy police work and skimpy evidence. (More on that later, and even more in the book).
In his ruling after the preliminary inquiry for the first trial, provincial court Judge Ronald LeBlanc pointed out that the Crown failed to prove that Dennis Oland had a motive to kill his father.
“So weak was the case the Crown presented that it is not immediately apparent why it was not dismissed at this level,” Middleton writes.
Doing so would have saved the taxpayers of New Brunswick millions of dollars, but Middleton theorizes there was a reluctance to repudiate the work of the police and Crown in “the most high-profile murder in New Brunswick judicial history.”
At the trial, the Crown’s case hinged on a few tiny dots of blood found on Dennis Oland’s jacket – blood that matched the DNA of his father.
Middleton recounts the lax handling of the jacket, which was sent for testing by Saint John police after their warrant to keep it had expired. Middleton also reveals the jacket was improperly stored in the desk of police Insp. Glen McCloskey for several months before it was sent for testing. That’s a big no-no in the forensics world, where the chain of evidence is paramount. Judges usually throw out any evidence obtained from contaminated items like this.
In the Oland murder trials, however, it became the only piece of physical evidence the police and Crown used to connect Dennis Oland to the crime.
At that preliminary inquiry for the first trial, Judge LeBlanc questioned “why Dennis Oland would keep a blood-stained jacket while disposing of the murder weapon and his father’s iPhone,” which was what the Crown contended.
A few days after the murder, investigators called the phone and technicians received a “roaming error” message, which suggests it was out of the Rogers coverage area.
Middleton interviewed a telecommunications expert for her book who said that with the technology that existed in 2011 “the Saint John police should have been able to locate the phone anywhere in the world. The police never found Richard Oland’s iPhone.”
Soon after Richard Oland’s battered and bloody body was found at the downtown Saint John office of Far End Corporation on the morning of July 7, 2011, Saint John police investigators were very quickly and thoroughly convinced that Dennis Oland was the killer.
They neglected other investigative avenues, Middleton writes, and looked at all evidence through the lens of “Dennis Oland murdered his dad.” They also ignored all evidence that did not support that theory.
In painstaking detail, Middleton analyzes how the faulty police investigation was further hampered by “tunnel vision.”
They did not pursue the angle Middleton describes in her reconstruction, but more tellingly, they did not explore the angle involving one of Richard Oland’s two mistresses.
Here are the lowlights of how the Saint John Police Force’s ham-fisted investigation was derailed by a misguided notion:
- The crime scene was not fully or properly investigated.
- A key witnesses was not interviewed and not called to testify at the first trial.
- Video evidence that gave Dennis Oland an alibi was not uncovered by police.
- Autopsy evidence suggested the killer was right-handed while Dennis Oland is left-handed.
Middleton also pokes holes in the Crown’s rationale that Dennis Oland committed an “act of spontaneous rage” in murdering his dad, hence the charge of second-degree murder.
First-degree murder would have required proof of planning, like thinking about such major details as concealing all the blood that would have been on the killer and bringing the murder weapon – a drywall hammer – to a meeting with Richard Oland. It was not something that was kept in the office at Far End and it’s not something people usually carry around with them.
With all these errors in practice and reasoning, Middleton suggests that in Dennis Oland’s case, the fundamental tenet of our justice system, that a person is presumed innocent until proven guilty, was turned on its head.
“Dennis has had to prove his innocence, and in the eyes of too many, he has yet to do that,” Middleton writes.
Who Killed Richard Oland? A real-life murder mystery by Janice Middleton is published by Formac Publishing Company.
Written By:
Ryan Van Horne is a Halifax journalist and playwright. He used to cover the crime beat for The Daily News in Halifax.
10 years later: Who killed Richard Oland?
The 69-year-old businessman was brutally murdered — bludgeoned over 40 times at some point the prior day.
His murder was possibly the most notorious in the city’s history.
Author, academic and history professor with the University of New Brunswick Greg Marquis has followed the case closely since the beginning, having released three editions of a book on Oland’s murder and the ensuing investigation.
He’s one of many Saint John residents who have no problem recalling where they were when they heard the news.
“I was in the Saint John Public Library just a few blocks away from the crime scene,” says Marquis.
“I think one of the staff there or someone I knew in the library said there was a rumour going around that an Oland had been attacked and possibly murdered.”
That rumour, of course, turned out to be true.
Oland’s personal assistant discovered him face down in a pool of blood the morning of July 7, 2011.
The fast-escalating police investigation, and perceived mistakes made in the crucial first hours, became synonymous with the murder itself.
“There seem to be, from a common-sense point of view, some mistakes at the crime scene,” Marquis says.
“Not wearing gloves, not taking notes, too many officers on the crime scene, an officer using a washroom outside the crime scene…”
Richard Oland’s body was discovered on July 7 inside his Saint John office.
Travis Fortnum / Global News
The Saint John Police Force quickly zeroed in on Oland’s son, Dennis, naming no other suspects through its investigation.
That tunnel vision, Marquis says, has also garnered criticism in the years since.
“Early on, the police developed a theory that Dennis was having financial difficulty and owed his father money,” he says.
“(Evidence) was mainly circumstantial. No one saw the actual murder or attack. It was timeline evidence that was put together by cellphone and surveillance camera. Also things that were said by family and Dennis Oland himself about his relationship with his father.”
Police charged Dennis Oland with second-degree murder in 2013.
He was convicted by a jury in December 2015 but, after eight months in prison, successfully appealed his conviction.
A second trial in 2018 ended in a mistrial.
A third saw Dennis Oland acquitted in 2019.
Global News reached out to the Saint John Police Force for comment on where the investigation stands 10 years later but received no response.
Former chief of the Saint John Police Force Bruce Connell told media in 2019 that the investigation was no longer active, but that the force would consider any additional information brought forward.
“Who’s going to come up with that information?” asks Marquis.
“Mr. Oland, who was acquitted, cannot be tried again on the same evidence.”
So, a decade later, will we ever know what really happened to Richard Oland?
“I don’t know,” Marquis says.
“You hear about cases that are never solved or cases where the police think they have the killer but they don’t have enough evidence.
“Not all murders can be solved.”
For now, Marquis says he has no plans for a fourth edition of his book.
Oland Murder Analysis
New details on the killing of brewery millionaire Richard Oland and the trial of his son, Dennis
I have a confession to make about the Oland murder trial: I didn’t pay attention to it.
I heard about it, of course. You’d need to have been in a media blackout – and not use social media – to not know about it. But unlike most, I did not follow the story, even though it garnered national attention.
Richard Oland’s wealth never made the crime more interesting for me, as it did for some. This is why the media, particularly national outlets like the Globe and Mail and National Post, gave it so much ink.
Dennis Oland was accused of murdering his father and it was portrayed as being motivated by money. I filed it away as “Rich kid kills his dad to get the money” and didn’t give it any more thought.
But
when I was asked to write about two new books on the case, my interest
in criminal law and journalism made me eager to take the case, as it
were. The 
two books are Truth and Honour: The Death of Richard Oland and the Trial of Dennis Oland by Greg Marquis, a historian, and Shadow of Doubt: The Trial of Dennis Oland by
Bobbi-Jean MacKinnon, a CBC reporter who covered the case. Despite the
difference in the titles, both look at the case in its entirety from the
moment Richard Oland’s secretary, Maureen Adamson, arrived at the
uptown Saint John office and discovered the body of her boss on the
morning of July 7, 2011.
Richard Oland, 69, was bludgeoned to death. A coroner testified that Oland suffered 45 blows to his head, neck and hands. As Marquis points out in his book, a criminal profiler would call it “overkill” or “an excessively violent assault motivated by rage or revenge.”
During the trial, the public followed the case with an almost morbid fascination, which ramped up as salacious details of an affair bubbled from the reservoir of secrets held by one of Atlantic Canada’s wealthiest families. When facts about a cool father-son relationship, further strained by the son’s debt, were laid out for public scrutiny, many thought Dennis had a strong motive. He was also the last person known to have seen his father the day he died.
For almost two years, Dennis Oland was the elephant in the room. Everybody knew he was a suspect, mostly because the police did a thorough search of his home just a week after the murder, during which they seized several items.
The Saint John Police finally charged Dennis Oland in November 2013, 28 months after the crime. After a preliminary inquiry in 2014, Dennis Oland stood trial for second-degree murder in the fall of 2015.
After 65 days of testimony, the longest trial in New Brunswick history, a jury found Dennis Oland guilty of killing his dad. The verdict was handed down last December and, in February, a judge gave him the mandatory sentence of life in prison, but set parole eligibility as low as it could go at 10 years.
Both books paint a vivid picture of Richard Oland. Dick, as he was often called, had a high-profile split from his family’s business when his brother Derek was given control of Moosehead Breweries. Dick ventured out on his own and became a wealthy man. He was regarded by some as ruthless in business and by his family as aloof and uncaring at best, a “pig” at worst. The latter was a moniker uttered by his daughter, Lisa, when she found his Viagra, which had fuelled an eight-year-long affair with Diana Sedlacek, a real estate agent who was also married.
Despite being worth about $37 million when he died, and a noted philanthropist, Dick Oland was a penny pincher on the home front. That he was being unfaithful to his wife was galling enough, but he put her on a budget and required her to submit receipts to his secretary, who would prepare a monthly report of the household expenses before Oland would reimburse his wife.
This was in stark contrast to his extravagant sailing habit. He had an ocean-racing yacht named Vela Veloce that was worth an estimated $850,000 and was having a larger sailboat custom-built in Spain when he died.
That is a sketch of the wealthy murder victim and his familial relations, but it is the trial of his son Dennis, and the police work around his murder, which have drawn national attention, largely because of Dennis’ appeal of his conviction to the Supreme Court of Canada. No one convicted of murder in New Brunswick has ever been allowed out on bail while they were appealing their conviction. This is what Dennis Oland sought to do and it attracted the interest of three other provinces and the Canadian Criminal Defence Lawyers Association.
Under scrutiny is the seizure of one piece of Crown evidence, a blood-stained brown jacket taken from Dennis Oland’s house, which was initially deemed lawful. But a question was raised as to whether city police had the proper authority to have the blood tested by the RCMP in Halifax.
Ultimately, the directions the judge gave to the jury were deemed prejudicial on appeal, and Dennis Oland’s conviction was overturned in October. He was also granted bail, making him a free man pending a second trial, if one occurs.
Regardless of the final outcome, each author approaches the case itself from a different background. Marquis is a criminal historian who teaches at the University of New Brunswick; MacKinnon is a reporter for CBC Saint John. She live-blogged the trial and provided updates on Twitter. All that material, and more that she has gathered through additional interviews, are in her book. As a reporter writing on deadline and with space restrictions, there is much of what MacKinnon gathered in court that she was not able to use in her stories for CBC.
“Some of it, I didn’t even have a chance to touch,” she says. “It was a chance to look back. When you’re in the thick of it, it’s sometimes hard to see the forest for the trees. It gave me a chance to take a closer look at it all, and how it all unfolded and to tell it in different way, a more comprehensive way.”
MacKinnon devotes an entire chapter to evidence the jury didn’t hear and the media couldn’t report. She brings an exquisite level of detail, painting a vivid picture of the state of the Saint John Police Force and the detectives and forensic team. MacKinnon explains the manpower and logistical challenges the police faced and how it affected their investigation.
As a historian, Marquis is used to studying and writing about events in the distant past. The Oland case has given him the chance to observe history unfolding with far-reaching implications in Canadian criminal law.
Neither author provides a personal verdict. MacKinnon says her continued coverage of the appeal process of the case this fall precludes that. Marquis prefers to provide material for devil’s advocates on both sides.
“Many people have very set views,” he says. “I’m hoping people will challenge themselves and maybe it’s a book that people will revisit as the various appeals happen.”
Written By:
Ryan Van Horne is a Halifax journalist and playwright. He used to cover the crime beat for The Daily News in Halifax.
---------- Forwarded message ----------From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2021 07:46:05 -0400
Subject: RE CTV Twitter etc For the record I never met a Van Horne who
wasn't Conservative spin doctor
To: vanhorne.ryan@gmail.com, "martine.turcotte"
<martine.turcotte@bell.ca>, Nathalie Sturgeon
<sturgeon.nathalie@brunswickne
<steve.murphy@ctv.ca>, smithh@halifax.ca, Glen Canning
<grcanning@gmail.com>, dexterdyne <dexterdyne@gmail.com>, merricra
<merricra@gov.ns.ca>, justmin <justmin@gov.ns.ca>, msegal
<msegal@murraysegal.com>, "scott.macrae"
<scott.macrae@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, bourdap <bourdap@halifax.ca>,
patrick_doran1 <patrick_doran1@hotmail.com>, Paul Elam
<paul@avoiceformen.com>, girlwriteswhat <girlwriteswhat@gmail.com>,
"rod.knecht" <rod.knecht@edmontonpolice.ca>
<kris.wells@ualberta.ca>, "Jonathan.Denis" <Jonathan.Denis@gov.ab.ca>,
"Staples, David (Edm Journal)" <dstaples@edmontonjournal.com>
<lgunter@shaw.ca>, Glen Canning <grcanning@me.com>, deanr0032
<deanr0032@hotmail.com>, FathersCan <fatherscan@storm.ca>,
maryann4peace <maryann4peace@gmail.com>, premier <premier@gov.ab.ca>,
Rachel Notley <Rachel.Notley@assembly.ab.ca>
<john.green@gnb.ca>, oldmaison <oldmaison@yahoo.com>, andre
<andre@jafaust.com>, COCMoncton <COCMoncton@gmail.com>,
"joshua.skurnik" <joshua.skurnik@hotmail.com>, "Kevin.leahy"
<Kevin.leahy@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, "martin.gaudet"
<martin.gaudet@fredericton.ca>
<ppalmater@politics.ryerson.ca
<almabrooks26@hotmail.com>, "Mark.Blakely"
<Mark.Blakely@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>
Cc: david.raymond.amos333@gmail.co
<blaine.higgs@gnb.ca>, ryan.vanhorne@bellmedia.ca, "robert.gauvin"
<robert.gauvin@gnb.ca>, "rob.moore" <rob.moore@parl.gc.ca>,
"Ross.Wetmore" <Ross.Wetmore@gnb.ca>, ryan_riordon
<ryan_riordon@hotmail.com>
---------- Original message ----------
From: Ryan Van Horne <vanhorne.ryan@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2014 23:10:12 -0300
Subject: Twitter
To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Among your series of tweets you hint for a second time that I am a Harper
spin doctor.
I have never worked for the federal government or Stephen Harper. If you
read my blog carefully, you will see that I worked for the NS Departments
of Health and Energy -- not the federal departments.
And there was no PDF attachment to your e-mail. If you'd like to try
sending it to me again, I'll have a look at it.
https://atlantic.ctvnews.ca/ry
Ryan Van Horne
CTVNewsAtlantic.ca Digital Co-ordinator
Halifax
Ryan Van Horne is a digital co-ordinator at CTV Atlantic in Halifax.
Ryan was born in Ontario, grew up in Quebec, but has been a Maritimer
for 33 years.
After graduating from Saint Mary's University with a degree in
political science, Ryan worked at The Daily News in Halifax for 18
years as a reporter, photographer, columnist, and editor. He was part
of the team that won an Atlantic Journalism Award for spot news
coverage of the Westray mine explosion.
Ryan worked in news, business and sports while at the paper and
continued to cover a wide range of topics as a freelance journalist
for six years.
During that time he also wrote four plays, which have been performed
in theatre festivals across Nova Scotia, and directed two documentary
films.
Ryan is a generalist with CTV Atlantic and has been part of team
coverage of events such as the Saint John refinery fire and COVID-19
in New Brunswick.
An avid hiker, Ryan also enjoys whale-watching and the many beautiful
beaches of the Maritimes. Like many Canadians, he's also been known to
watch the odd hockey game.
He speaks English and French.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Ryan Van Horne <vanhorne.ryan@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2014 08:24:05 -0300
Subject: Re: The Three Stooges Glen Canning, Ryan Van Horne and Rick
Howe are quite likely more unethical than the cops and lawyers and
other journalists are
To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
David,
Did you hang up the phone on me the other day when you called? If so, why?
I needed to go somewhere and when I tried to call you back later, there was
no answer either time and I wasn't able to leave a message.
I don't understand why you're suggesting that what I've done is unethical.
Are you in some way connected to the case of Rehtaeh Parsons? Do you have
any first-hand knowledge of what happened in this case?
Ryan
On 27 September 2014 01:24, David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com> wrote:
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: "Bourdages, Pierre" <bourdap@halifax.ca>
> Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2013 12:17:48 +0000
> Subject: RE: Here is something that the RCMP and Harper will never
> mention EH Franky Boy?
> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>
> Good morning Mr. Amos;
>
> I am not sure I am understanding your request...is there something we
> can do to help you ?
>
> Cst. Pierre Bourdages
> Public Information Officer
> Halifax Regional Police
> (902) 490-5154 Office
> (902) 456-1688 cell
> bourdap@halifax.ca
> www.facebook.com/HalifaxRegion
> www.twitter.com/HfxRegPolice
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Amos [mailto:motomaniac333@gmail.co
> Sent: June-06-13 9:13 AM
> To: Rath, Theresa; justmin; MacRae, Scott; jamiebaillie; Bourdages,
> Pierre; Frank.McKenna; Kevin.leahy; kevin.violot; Jessica Hume;
> kris.sims
> Cc: David Amos; ddexter
> Subject: Here is something that the RCMP and Harper will never mention
> EH Franky Boy?
>
>
> http://thechronicleherald.ca/m
>
> Publication ban breach probedDAN ARSENAULT CRIME REPORTER
> Published September 24, 2014 - 3:12pm
> Last Updated September 25, 2014 - 3:42pm Share on facebookShare on
> twitterShare on linkedinMore Sharing Services
> Share on facebookShare on twitterShare on linkedinMore Sharing Services
> Select ratingCancel ratingPoorOkayGoodGreatAwesome
> Cancel ratingPoorOkayGoodGreatAwesome
> Average: 3.7 (3 votes)
> .Share on emailShare on print.Halifax Regional Police said they
> are investigating another alleged publication ban violation that’s
> tied to another recent court case.
>
> Spokesman Const. Pierre Bourdages would not confirm if it involved the
> case of a 20-year-old Eastern Passage man who pleaded guilty to making
> child pornography earlier this week. In that case, the judge had
> ordered a ban prohibiting the publication of the name of the victim.
> The accused pleaded guilty to one count stemming from the November
> 2011 incident. The girl died at age 17, a few days after attempting
> suicide in April 2013.
>
> The case drew international attention and a large number of people
> wrote the victim’s name on social media in opposition to that ruling.
>
> “It’s been brought by a number of complaints,” Bourdages said in
> reference to the second investigation.
>
> “We have to go with the evidence that we have. That investigation just
> started yesterday (Tuesday).”
>
> He said if a complainant only mentioned one alleged violator of that
> ban, police are still bound to investigate every situation they
> uncover that appears to violate it.
>
> “We have to go where the evidence leads us,” he said.
>
> “Tell people, ‘Be very careful what you’re posting publicly because,
> ultimately, you’re responsible for what you’re posting.’”
>
> Ryan Van Horne, a Halifax freelance journalist, acknowledged he
> printed the victim’s name in a blog earlier this week. He said he was
> unaware if he was under investigation as a result.
>
> In an interview Wednesday afternoon, he said there are differences in
> the sexual assault case compared to the child pornography case, and by
> extension, in the appropriateness of the publication bans.
>
> “In that (sexual assault) case, my understanding is that a person
> (allegedly) named the victim to shame her and did so without her
> permission. I considered the public interest and named the (child
> pornography) victim to keep her name alive in important discussions
> that we need to have about sexual consent, cyberbullying and suicide.
>
> “I named her with her parents’ permission and took a cue from the
> Ontario Crown attorney working on the case. He opposed the ban in the
> spring, so I would be surprised if there was an about-face on this.”
>
> CORRECTION: This story has been updated with the following correction:
> An earlier version stated, in the second paragraph, that the accused
> pleaded guilty to two counts from the November 2011 incident. In fact,
> the accused pleaded guilty to one count.
>
> About the Author »
> DAN ARSENAULT CRIME REPORTER
> E-Mail: darsenault@herald.ca
> Twitter: @CH_danatherald
> .
>
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2014 02:18:50 -0600
Subject: Re: Hey Glen Canning and Kris Wells Mr Baconfat wanted you
dudes to know his phone # (780 425 5075) and wished for you to view
his new blog as well
To: smithh@halifax.ca, sunrayzulu <sunrayzulu@shaw.ca>, Glen Canning
<grcanning@gmail.com>, dexterdyne <dexterdyne@gmail.com>, merricra
<merricra@gov.ns.ca>, "vanhorne.ryan" <vanhorne.ryan@gmail.com>,
justmin <justmin@gov.ns.ca>, msegal <msegal@murraysegal.com>,
"scott.macrae" <scott.macrae@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, bourdap
<bourdap@halifax.ca>, patrick_doran1 <patrick_doran1@hotmail.com>,
Paul Elam <paul@avoiceformen.com>, girlwriteswhat
<girlwriteswhat@gmail.com>, "roger.l.brown"
<roger.l.brown@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>
<john.warr@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, "rod.knecht"
<rod.knecht@edmontonpolice.ca>
"Jonathan.Denis" <Jonathan.Denis@gov.ab.ca>, "Staples, David (Edm
Journal)" <dstaples@edmontonjournal.com>
Glen Canning <grcanning@me.com>, deanr0032 <deanr0032@hotmail.com>,
FathersCan <fatherscan@storm.ca>, maryann4peace
<maryann4peace@gmail.com>, premier <premier@gov.ab.ca>,
"Danielle.Smith" <Danielle.Smith@assembly.ab.ca
<Rachel.Notley@assembly.ab.ca>
<Raj.Sherman@assembly.ab.ca>
Cc: David Amos <david.raymond.amos@gmail.com>
<john.green@gnb.ca>, oldmaison <oldmaison@yahoo.com>, andre
<andre@jafaust.com>, COCMoncton <COCMoncton@gmail.com>,
"joshua.skurnik" <joshua.skurnik@hotmail.com>, "Kevin.leahy"
<Kevin.leahy@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, "danny.copp"
<danny.copp@fredericton.ca>, ppalmater
<ppalmater@politics.ryerson.ca
<almabrooks26@hotmail.com>
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Bourdages, Pierre" <bourdap@halifax.ca>
Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2014 08:16:12 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: Hey Glen Canning and Kris Wells Mr Baconfat
wanted you dudes to know his phone # (780 425 5075) and wished for you
to view his new blog as well
To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
I will be out of the office on vacation Until November 10. If you
require media or public relations assistance, please contact Cst Holly
Tooke at 490-3088 or smithh@halifax.ca
On 10/26/14, David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 10/25/14, BARRY WINTERS <sunrayzulu@shaw.ca> wrote:
>
> Little David, my wife heartily enjoyed the vulgar and really stupid tweets
> from you and the so called Amos klan. YOU better give that phone number you
> say is mine to "professor" Wells, and check in with your friend Glen
> Canning. baconfat55 word press. Send my love and cum to your "mother"
> Jeannah, little David.
>
> BTW My family and I have NEVER called or tweeted the nasty racist
> bitch Lori Ink but well all know who did so while pretending to be us
> N'esy Pas Chucky Leblanc and John Green aka G $ of QSLS in Fat Fred
> City???
>
> http://thedavidamosrant.blogsp
>
> http://baconfat53.blogspot.ca/
>
> Blog has been removed
> Sorry, the blog at baconfat53.blogspot.com has been removed. This
> address is not available for new blogs.
>
> Did you expect to see your blog here? See: 'I can't find my blog on
> the web, where is it?'
>
> http://sunrayzulu.blogspot.ca/
>
> Blog has been removed
> Sorry, the blog at sunrayzulu.blogspot.com has been removed. This
> address is not available for new blogs.
>
>
> http://baconfatreport.wordpres
>
> The Sordid Crimes of Glenford Canning and Leah Parsons
> October 25, 2014
>
> Rehtaeh Parsons killed herself. It took all of her eighteen years for
> Rehtaeh to progress herself to self-destruction. Rehtaeh at fourteen
> was the product of a dysfunctional “family,’ a disinterested “Mother,”
> and apparently a “Father” that abused her for years. Rehtaeh at
> fourteen habitually attended parties where she abused drugs, and
> alcohol. At fourteen Rehtaeh Parsons was known to be abnormally
> promiscuous, by her friends, peers and later Halifax police. Rehtaeh
> Parsons attended several of these parties with the tacit approval of
> her parents. It has been observed by many writers that if Halifax, and
> Nova Scotia Child Welfare Services had known of Rehtaeh’s domestic
> situation, she would have been removed from the custody of her
> parents.
>
> When Rehateh was fourteen years of age, her parents Glenford Canning
> and Leah Parsons maintain Rehtaeh lied to them about staying the night
> with a friend, and attended a party. Rehtaeh was a habitual attendee
> of these drunken celebrations, and her “parents” knew it. Rehtaeh
> reportedly consumed both alcohol and drugs at this party. Rehtaeh had
> reportedly made sexual overtures to her “best friend,” and the girl
> she arrived at the party with, boyfriend. Rehaeh’s friend wanted to
> go home. The young lady’s Mother asked Rehtaeh who was by then
> standing in the centre of the room in a state of undress, if she
> wanted to go home. Rehtaeh answered negatively, and remained at the
> party.
>
> Subsequent witness, and statements to the police confirm Rehtaeh
> assisted three teen-age boys into a state of undress, removed their
> penises from their trousers, and proceeded to enthusiastically, and
> with alacrity fellate each one of them, and later engage in coitus
> with all of them together. Witness statements to police confirm that,
> a “good time was had by all participants. Apparently Rehtaeh Parsons
> suffered no “morning after” remorse for about a week after what Leah
> Parson’s called “that fateful party.” Then a picture or pictures of
> Rehtaeh’s celebratory activities emerged in cyber-space, and social
> media. It was after a meeting of Rehtaeh, Glenford Canning, and Leah
> Parsons, that it was decided, Rehteah was indeed, the victim “of a
> vicious gang rape,” and culture of rape in Canada.
>
> After two exhaustive investigations not a scintilla of evidence was
> found, because none existed that Rehtaeh was the “victim of a vicious
> gang rape.” There was no evidence to support the laying of charges
> against anyone, much less the likelihood of securing a conviction.
> Some people posit and opine that in those two years betwixt that
> “fateful party,” and Rehtaeh’s suicide, bullying, ridicule, and being
> shunned execrably pushed Rehtaeh to self-destruction. In those two
> years Rehtaeh’s “parents” were never cognizant that Rehtaeh had
> stopped attending school. The Parsons / Cannning family had
> disintegrated, and Rehtaeh was shunted from home to home, and to Grand
> Parents. But, myself and many others think Rehtaeh was well on the way
> to self-destruction well before “that fateful party.” Normal fourteen
> year old teen-agers aren’t promiscuous nor addicted to drugs and
> alcohol. Rehtaeh was “acting out,” at fourteen, because their was
> familiar abuse in that already dysfunctional family. Tragically
> Rehtaeh was already at this time well on the way to her eventual
> demise..
>
> Rehtaeh killed herself. Rehteah Parsons is dead. Glen Canning and Leah
> Parsons, blamed and indicted, the Halifax police, the RCMP, the Crown
> Prosecutor’s office, the Halifax School District, Canada’s “culture of
> rape,” high school kids, and the “parents of that guy.” Everyone was
> to blame in their eyes but themselves.
>
> The reality is.Rehtaeh Parsons is dead, because she wanted to rid
> herself of her abusive and disinterested parents Glen Canning and Leah
> Parsons.
>
> http://baconfatreport.wordpres
>
> Max Amos, “Professor” Kris Wells, Little Tony And Oppression
> October 26, 2014
>
> Little Tony Luong, and Max Amos are what some people refer to as “less
> than manly,” effete, or sodomites. So called “professor” Kris Wells
> calls them “sexual minorities,” and bleats loudly to whomsoever that
> may lend an ear they are “oppressed,” and “unsafe.” A small and
> unknown Face Book group called the Living Archive on Eugenics in
> Western Canada has allied itself with the LGBTQ “community” to hold
> the annual Alberta Eugenics Awareness Week. Sadly this year’s
> commemoration is to be the last, due to abject disinterest. It appears
> Little Tony Luong, “professor” Kris Wells, the LGBTQ “community,” and
> the CRISPIE (s) have allied themselves with the soon to be defunct
> Alberta Eugenics Awareness Week to…fight oppression! The LGBTQ
> “community,” it’s so called “intelligentsia,” and the rest of these
> “oppressed people” are assiduously attempting to revise and rewrite
> history in order to promote their own perverse political agenda.
>
> From the early twenties through the late sixties every Canadian
> province and the vast majority of political jurisdictions world-wide
> had “eugenics programmes,” or “sterilization laws” on the books to
> prevent who was then called the retarded from reproducing . Obviously
> human-kind, and society has evolved past that. These LGBTQ ignorant
> and chattering classes pontificate to all and sundry that, “State”
> eugenics programmes “discouraged the breeding of Queer people,
> radicalized people, (whatever those are) poor and working class people
> and even women.” Thus self-described “gender creative” Tony Luong,
> spokes-“person” for deviates everywhere, declares that they share a
> “history of oppression” with the retards in history who had their
> tubes snipped or tied.
>
> Stalwart resistance fighters against the forces of oppression the
> CRISPIE (s) or Collaborative Radically Integrated Society in Edmonton,
> a so-called “artists collective” of oppressed people, “dancing for
> social change.” Were the “star attraction.” This “dance troupe” of
> three faggots, two lesbians, three “gender creatives,” two behemoth
> cross dressers and some girl in a wheel-chair, “shared deeply
> political and personal stories of being in a body that is stigmatized
> because of its differences from a perceived normal body.” Or say says
> Tony Luong. Tony and the LGBTQ “community” feel “art” can be used as a
> “form of resistance against dominant stories of oppression.” Whatever
> that is, but alas no one would describe the CRISPIE(s) as artists.
>
> These “people” prevaricate, pontificate, and propagandize that of the
> thousands of “mental defectives” that were legally and involuntarily
> sterilized in Canada under our “sterilization laws” many were Queers,
> radicalized people, poor and working class people, and women. The
> so-called LGBTQ “community” are claiming being historically victimized
> like the injuns and the residential schools tragedy. Of course any
> intelligent human knows that only happened in the Third Reich. Not
> unlike conspiracy theorists this alliance of “disabled,” stigmatized,
> and “oppressed people” claim the “state” is engaging in eugenics even
> today. Tony Luong says! “Eugenics is insidious, and pervasive, and
> continues to be a threat to disabled and oppressed people. A real
> example of this occurring would really be helpful.
>
> Little Tony Luong says. “living with a stigmatized body or identity
> creates different ways of being in the world. There are many different
> ways that we can feel pride in who we are as unique human beings.”
> That’s why the University of Alberta’s so-called Gender Studies
> Programme feels compelled to have “Pride Week” twice a year. The
> great unwashed, and not too bright of the LGBTQ “community” maintain
> and propagandize that. ” The “disabled,” oppressed, stigmatized and
> sexual deviate are extremely vulnerable to “oppressive systems, such
> as modern-day eugenics,” because they “constrain our behaviours and
> actions.” There are laws, society has laws to “constrain behaviours
> and actions.” But there are no “State” sponsored or other eugenic
> programmes to provide a ” final solution,” like little Tony, and the
> CPISPIE(s) are wont to claim. As always with the LGBTQ “community”
> it’s all a “big shining lie.”
>
> http://baconfatreport.wordpres
>
> Indians, Commerce, And Public Art In Edmonton
> October 26, 2014
>
> On a bitterly cold 5:30 AM last Winter here in Edmonton, I was walking
> to work. I walk down the alley from my back door one block to the
> Mac’s Store on 114 St. and Jasper Avenue to get to my bus stop. This
> particular morning a beat up and rusted Ford half-ton pickup drove in
> front of me turned and stopped. Two very hard looking, scruffy, very
> wary, “proud natives” jumped out of the truck. One of them pointed to
> a crated new big screen TV in the truck bed, and said. We just found
> this, just wondering what you would pay us for it,” whilst his
> accomplice “kept six.” All I got is fifty bucks in my wallet, so
> you’re shit outta luck.” I replied. They looked at each other and
> nodded, “you gotta deal!” He said. “You can carry it home by yourself,
> we gotta run.” I told him, “I ‘m quite sure you do have to run, but we
> don’t have a deal, because I couldn’t have carried that thing by
> myself twenty years ago, much less now.” In a nano-second our
> “aboriginal entrepreneurs” jumped in the truck, and were down the
> alley.
>
> Last night around eleven-thirty my wife, and myself were walking home,
> and two doors from home a “native entrepreneur” jumped out of a parked
> car, rushed to us, and in an out of breath wheezy voice said. “Wanna
> buy a brand new winter jacket?” The jacket still had its sales tickets
> on it. I told him, “normally would try it on, but this coat looks like
> it might be too hot to wear,” and walked away.
>
> Chelsea Boos an “artist” who wants to “play in public spaces,” and
> make Edmontonians “think,” has been recently immortalized by ersatz
> Edmonton Journal “columnist David Staples. A couple of days ago a
> woman “artist” was ‘making art” in chalk on the sidewalk no fifty feet
> from the Gas Pump Bar and Grill on 114 Street. Now this “artist,” this
> public “artist” was making sort of “hop scotch” type symbols on the
> concrete, flowers, and the shape of a car, all with something at the
> “artistic” skill level of a four-year old. Our “public artist” would
> write some words, or non-sequitors on the pavement, that’s
> significance, I haven’t a clue. At the head of one of the “hop scotch”
> like figures were the words “Treaty Six,” and a couple of “stick
> flowers.” The phrase, treat indigenous people with respect,” which our
> “artist” spelled incorrectly was chalked on the pavement. In all, it
> was a pretty pathetic attempt at “artistic expression,” or anything
> else it seems.
>
> Some fifty feet north of our pathetic example of “public art” is the
> Gas Pump Bar and Grill. A bar where “cougars” usually of the not so
> attractive variety, but every now and then there is “pearl in a sow’s
> ear,” are looking for a well endowed young schmuck to make them “feel
> like a woman.” Almost all the “ladies” that patronize the Gas Pump
> are as hot to trot, as Rehtaeh Parsons at a teen-age drinking party
> and orgy in Halifax. A few short hours after my encounter with of
> Edmonton’s “public artists” I had to go to Shopper’s Drug Mart for
> sinus medication for my wife. As I walk up to our “little work of
> art,” a large, big haired beyond chunky woman approached myself and
> the “art.” She was wearing a black chiffon-like mini-dress, that
> barely covered her ham hock proportioned thighs, and aircraft carrier
> like ass. She was so drunk she tottered in or on her high-heeled
> shoes, but alas she may well have done that sober. It was obviously a
> socially unsuccessful evening for our Methuselah, not because she was
> drunk, but because she didn’t have an equally intoxicated young man
> leading her home for drunken, and sloppy sex.
>
> Methuselah stopped at the “art” looked down, frowned, and with a
> particularly un lady like grunt and whoosh, vomited on the “public
> art.” I as ever, the gentleman gave her my, by some strange quirk of
> fate clean handkerchief. She said, both, “I’m sorry, and thank-you.”
> I told her I had the very same opinion of this “public art.” Whereupon
> our Methuselah tottered off unsteadily home. As I walked back to my
> “beloved” and “hearth and home,” I thought it an entirely apropos
> expression of disdain for “public art,” the act of a drunken Rehtaeh
> Parsons type slut, it was to vomit on it.
>
> Oh dear, only in Edmonton it seems!
>
Back in the newspaper game
I am back in the newspaper game.
Almost 14 years ago, I was one of many people Transcontinental threw out of work when the flyer-printing conglomerate abruptly shut down The Daily News where I had worked for almost 18 years.
It was a powerful gut punch. I was happy to see so many former colleagues find work at other newspapers across Canada, but moving away from Halifax was not an option for me. It was a tough time, but I found other work and eventually got back into journalism after an ill-advised venture into the government communications field.
After leaving public service, I freelanced for six years. I loved the freedom of being my own boss, but the market deteriorated and it became tougher to support a family on a freelancer’s income. So, three-and-a-half years ago, I joined CTV Atlantic to work on their website and things were looking up. It was great to be back in a newsroom, but then even that was taken away as the pandemic forced me to work from home for the last 18 months. The camaraderie of a newsroom is amazing. I’m sure some other workplaces have something similar, but I’ve never experienced anything quite like it and I missed it.
Now, the pandemic that took something away from me has created a new opportunity, one that I didn’t think would ever be available.
I want to live in Nova Scotia because this is where my family is and I love the ocean, but I have never stopped wanting to work for a newspaper.
In two weeks, I’ll be joining the Postmedia team as a copy editor and working remotely. I am thrilled about this opportunity and I look forward to this next chapter in my career, even though it might be the last.
In some ways, I feel like a blacksmith at the end of the 19th century. I know the newspaper industry has been in a steady decline because of dwindling revenues, but there will always be a need for good journalism whether it be print, digital, or broadcast.
Nowadays, I admire the fine workmanship of blacksmiths who keep the craft alive. They take pride in their work because it takes skill and years of training to become good at it.
There will always be a need for people like that.
-30-
No comments:
Post a Comment