Freeman infection of anti COVID groups

[wserra]

Not to be confused with Tupac or Tuvok?

Or TWOROCKS, as in "dumber than ...".

[LordEd]

And as expected, a real criminal defense lawyer steps into the fray and volunteers to represent pro bono anyone who is targeted by TUPOC's private prosecutors. BTW, James Bowie did an excellent job live blogging bail hearings for assorted convoy types.

Been on my list for watching the "find out" stage of this process.

Unfortunately, he might have difficulty in that I expect the only court this will see will be a food court with a pretend judge.

[DNetolitzky]

Unfortunately, the Criminal Code ss 504, 507.1 private information process being described is going to result in actual court processes. In Canada, pretty much any person can submit a criminal "information" to the provincial level trial court to initiate a criminal process. These are received and accepted by courts without substantive scrutiny - the very first review is little more than whether the blanks have been filled in correctly.

So the claim that there are private information processes underway in the ONPC is very probably true.

What follows next is an odd hearing called a "pre-enquette", which is the first substantive look at the alleged criminal acts. A provincial court judge examines the evidence provided to see if there is a basis for charges to be filed. That is a low threshold. If so, then a formal criminal information is filed, and the criminal proceeding ball starts rolling, and a summons or arrest issues for the accused. Pre-enquette hearings are private.

Now most private informations die at the pre-enquette stage, because a substantial number of private informations have no legitimate basis. However, if there is substance to the allegations, then the provincial Crown Prosecutors take over the prosecution. They don't have to, in theory, but the policy in Canada is that step should always occur, because private persons should not be permitted to conduct Criminal Code proceedings.

It's not unusual that the Crown stays the prosecutions it takes over, which addresses potentially real criminal offences where there is no public policy basis to proceed.

So long story short, the alleged private Criminal Code prosecutions very well could exist, but the odds those would be pursued are negligible. Well, unless there is concrete evidence a serious offence did occur.

Donald Netolitzky

[AnOwlCalledSage]

Unfortunately, the Criminal Code ss 504, 507.1 private information process being described is going to result in actual court processes. In Canada, pretty much any person can submit a criminal "information" to the provincial level trial court to initiate a criminal process. These are received and accepted by courts without substantive scrutiny - the very first review is little more than whether the blanks have been filled in correctly.

So the claim that there are private information processes underway in the ONPC is very probably true.

Pretty much the same in the UK. Michael O'Bonkers has been filing numerous private prosecutions for "mortgage fraud" and "Covid death squads". They are recorded so he gets his opportunity to broadcast to his followers that it's been "accepted" with his copious bindles of "evidence"... that is until it's thrown out at Westminster Magistrates Court level (which handles these things on a national basis) by the first reviewing judge .

Of course, this then proves corruption in the judicial process, rather than he's a trust baby idiot with nothing better to do with his time, but the gullible fall for it... and end up losing their houses.

[Burnaby49]

Given Donald's posting, and similar I've done regarding MIA Dean Kory, this statement is essentially meaningless;

The United People of Canada
@TUPOC_CA
Private Prosecution Process for 4 Criminal Charges against 2 individuals are approved by a Justice of the Peace to proceed to the pre-enquete hearing stage. Our Private Prosecution Team continues to maintain a 100% success rate in approval of our Informations laid.

Since, as discussed, all private prosecution filings are automatically accepted by a JOP. Dean had no problem with that part. The hard part is having them go anywhere. Boasting rights only attach to having the private prosecution accepted by the Crown for prosecution.

[DNetolitzky]

Owl, a question. You stated that private prosecutions in the UK are all triaged by the Westminster Magistrates Court.

I'm particularly interested in how and why courts organize their activities, and I don't think I've ever heard of a process that could be, theoretically, conducted by many courts in a jurisdiction, instead being funnelled through one particular court.

Is there a backstory to this? Is that legislated, or a formal court rule or practice note of some kind?

Much appreciate any explanation you can provide.

Donald Netolitzky

[AnOwlCalledSage]

Looking through the guidelines, it does seem to allow any magistrates courts to issue a summons.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... osecutions

However, wherever Michael Waugh (O'Bonkers) has submitted it always seem to end up with a District Judge at Westminster chucking it out. That could be coincidence, or just a function of how smaller magistrates courts are administered and a group of them pass private prosecutions to one with a DJ sitting.

For example, he submitted one at Suffolk in 2020 and it was passed to Westminster.

“I can confirm that the application was sent to the Senior District Judge last Friday and she nominated a District Judge based at Westminster Magistrates Court to deal with your application.

As we are an administrative office only, we cannot process your application and it must be dealt with by a court. This is now with the legal team at Westminster Magistrates Court and once the Judge has made his ruling you will be hearing from them direct.”

Added:

I've done a bit of digging and lo and behold Princess Nutbag (yes, it was obviously going to be Neelu!) submitted an FoI request about Westminster hearing all private prosecutions.

https://icj13.webs.com/responses

Reading between the lines, it looks like the local magistrates pass most requests to the Chief Magistrate who is based as Westminster, hence resulting in a DJ sitting at Westminster deciding them. However, in principle the local magistrates could deal with them.

[DNetolitzky]

Thanks Owl, that makes a great deal of sense.

The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench takes a similar approach to certain specialized kinds of proceedings. For example, we have a single designated justice who conducts triage gatekeeping of habeas corpus applications, which are almost entirely from incarcerated prisoners.

Similarly, the Calgary and Edmonton administrative Associate Chief Justices handle the large majority of certain procedures that involve abusive litigants and litigation. Centralization can provide a lot of efficiencies that way, as well as process consistency.

[MRN]

Well, heck. I just got back to Ottawa after a trip to the US and was going to update you all, but you seem to be up to speed.

Although you may not be aware of the paper crowns.



Or the Super Soakers.



Oh, sorry. The "unconventional rounds".



Current problem facing the vocally unimpressed of Ottawa: at this level of ridiculous they are getting really quite hard to mock effectively. But we persist, with all due caution. The very least (and also probably the most) we can do for that poor bailiff is undercut their morale as much as possible.

Meanwhile, a question: they seem very into variations on the phrases "from our perspective" and "it is our understanding that/we understand".





The "understanding" thing we've seen variations on before. The "from our perspective" thing seems to be a new set of Magic Words.

Has that one been seen in the wild before?

My theory is that they're not quite deluded enough not to have figured out that they're breaking the law and are going to end up arrested, but they are deluded enough to think that maintaining the fiction that they always sincerely believed their actions were justified will keep them from being charged or convicted.

Edit: Our Man Mackenzie got his hands on the court documents from the eviction. Enjoy.

[Burnaby49]

The United People of Canada are spraying journalists with water guns and threatening trespassing charges on land they are accused of trespassing on

What does that remind me of, something from years ago? Just a vague memory . . . .

Got it! Dean Kory, a worthless parasite I've extensively written about, set up his tent in a forested area of government owned Crown land then fenced his little plot off and put up No Trespassing signs to keep the riff-raff off of what was now his land. I'd say the UPC's claim is about as solid as Dean's and if they progress past squirting people with water they're going to find the police aren't as allied with them as claimed.

[eric]

Although you may not be aware of the paper crowns.
...snip
Or the Super Soakers.
...snip
sorry. The "unconventional rounds".

How can you mock someone when they are doing such a fine job themselves of being idiots with no outside help?

Meanwhile, a question: they seem very into variations on the phrases "from our perspective" and "it is our understanding that/we understand". The "understanding" thing we've seen variations on before. The "from our perspective" thing seems to be a new set of Magic Words.

The "from our perspective" bit seems to be because they have the naive belief that by simply stating that someone is harassing them or discriminating against them meets the requirements for an offence to have occurred. (see how to be an idiot above)

[MRN]

The "from our perspective" bit seems to be because they have the naive belief that by simply stating that someone is harassing them or discriminating against them meets the requirements for an offence to have occurred. (see how to be an idiot above)

Which they seem to think they can use to claim self-defense. Among other things.



I do have some live-from-the-courtroom SovCittery to offer, though.

[eric]

I did rather enjoy these two snippets:

“You seem to be rushing in your agenda” Derksen
“Do you have a lawyer or are you representing yourself? » the workship(sic)
« God is my lawyer » Bryan Walter Derksen

and

Bryan Derksen interrupts multiple times
“For the record I am the crown” Brian Walter Derksen

I was hoping that their vastly experienced PSF Special Prosecutor would be Sue Holland. For the record she has filed 53 private prosecutions just to do with Parsons, some of them even during breaks during court appearances, and has appealed them (and lost) up to BC supreme Court. Still have to type that one up.

[wserra]

"Active criminal investigation" is a term of art for these idiots. Translation: "We went to the station house, told them about it, and the detective on intake duty assured us that it would go directly into the circular file for immediate appropriate action."

[Dr. Caligari]

“Do you have a lawyer or are you representing yourself? » the workship(sic)
« God is my lawyer » Bryan Walter Derksen

A story that was long told in the federal court in New York (I'm sure wserra heard it):

Judge: Do you have counsel?
Defendant: Allah is my counsel.
Judge: Do you have local counsel?

[MRN]

Today's shenanigans:



Summary: held over until the 19th, so I guess we have more time to plan the eviction party.

Some legal geekery for you all:



A convoy to the Nope Store seems in order here:



Still trying to think of something funny to say myself. Still got nothin'. Basically:

[eric]

And from the other side of the country.....
Note that Mak Parhar (deceased) (mentioned elsewhere on quatloos) is one of the plaintiffs.
https://www.castanet.net/news/BC/383035 ... -argument-
Here's the statement of claim produced by Rocco Galati for which he charged six figures. It's 391 pages long......
https://www.constitutionalrightscentre. ... Canada.pdf
And the judge had this to say about it:

[45] On the first issue, whether the NOCC is prolix, I agree with the defendants’ submission: the NOCC, in its current form, is not a pleading that can properly be answered by a responsive pleading. It describes wide-ranging global conspiracies that may, or may not, have influenced either the federal or the provincial governments. It seeks rulings of the court on issues of science. In addition, it includes improper allegations, including criminal conduct and “crimes against humanity”. In my opinion, it is “bad beyond argument”.

https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2 ... c1507.html

[Burnaby49]

Over seven years ago I did an extensive writeup on Galati's legal acumen and this was how I started it;

Rocco Galati is "widely considered" to be Canada's top constitutional lawyer? I'd bet that's news to the members of Canada's legal community who don't see Galati's face peering back out of the bathroom mirror at them every morning. Keep in mind that Galati is the lawyer handling this case and yet the Statement of Claim, the critical document that tell the court what the lawsuit is all about and why the plaintiff is deserving of relief, was so badly drafted, so botched up, that both a prothonotary and a judge of the Federal court of Canada threw it out because it was just incomprehensible gibberish. Does this sound like the work of even a marginally competent lawyer? I'm curious about how bad a train wreck that Statement of Claim actually was so I think I'll head down to the Federal Court registry next week and see if I can pick up a copy.

viewtopic.php?f=48&t=10450

In the ensuing time period I've not seen any evidence that he's yet reached the level of being "even a marginally competent lawyer". As I said above the absolute minimum requirement to even begin a lawsuit in Canada is to file a Statement of Claim acceptable to the court. If a lawyer can't even do that he's useless to his client. After numerous attempts Galati failed to cough up an acceptable Statement of Claim in the 2015 lawsuit and it was tossed out. This monstrosity is no better and allowing him the opportunity to try and find something, anything, in it that's salvageable is just delaying the inevitable.

A bit ironic that Parhar was one of the plaintiffs in a lawsuit ranting against Canada's covid rules and restrictions given that the reason he's no longer with us to see the result of his lawsuit is that covid killed him.

[Burnaby49]

History, at least in Rocco's case, is certainly repeating itself. I've been reviewing the Quatloos writeup of his 2015 lawsuit and came across this comment I'd made;

This means that the Federal Court felt that the whole steaming pile was hopeless but, to be fair, the court was allowing COMER a "faint hope" pass to at least attempt to re-write some of its Statement of Claim to try and put it into some kind of shape that the court could actually review. Even so there were parts that even an unbelievably generous Federal Court couldn't gag down because they were so overwhelmingly stupid that they couldn't be salvaged no matter how they were amended. These portions, listed above, were struck without leave to amend. The claim for monetary remedies was one of these. So I don't get the dollar even if COMER wins.

Exactly the same situation his current 'lawsuit' is facing.

[Frater I*I]

I was hoping that their vastly experienced PSF Special Prosecutor would be Sue Holland. For the record she has filed 53 private prosecutions just to do with Parsons, some of them even during breaks during court appearances, and has appealed them (and lost) up to BC supreme Court. Still have to type that one up.

I'm going to look forward to it..