Rory Daniel Hawes - who the heck is Regina?

[notorial dissent]

The UN thing, here at least, I think traces pretty directly back to the good ole bad ole days of the Birch Society paranoia that existed for so long, and I think it and the NWO fantasy got co-opted almost intact by some of the later sovrun groups that had to have descended from some of the patriot groups of the era who had to have descended at least in part from the Birchers. I have noticed that within the sovrun groups here there seems to be two ideologies, one holding to the NWO/UN is bad theory, and the other that doesn’t seem to even acknowledge they exist, which leads me to believe they have different parentage.

I really don’t see the UN bad one being particularly Canadian unless they learned their bad habits from some of ours.

I will admit I have to look at the Canadian FOTL types who think the UN is going to bail them out of whatever legal caca they have gotten themselves in to and really scratch my head, since one their core beliefs is that the Canadian gov’t has no power and/or doesn’t exist, and yet they are willing to claim the UN does to get them out of something, that one just really does leave me shaking my head. They’re sovrun, but the UN can override Canadian law for them?????? The cognitive disconnet/disfunction/not sure what the word here is just boggles the mind as an old friend of mine used to say.

[Hilfskreuzer Möwe]

Had one of those "ah-ah!" moments.

Compare the initials of persons in this thread to the players in this particular drama:

• S.H. v. G.J., 2013 BCPC 242: http://canlii.ca/t/g0pqs

See also: viewtopic.php?f=48&t=9577

That may provide a little more context to Gregor the Dapper. Or it could be a coincidence.

Burnaby49: as always a very fun report. I didn't think Rory had it in him for another spurt of resistance - but I am quietly glad to have been proven incorrect.

SMS Möwe

[Burnaby49]

Had one of those "ah-ah!" moments.

Compare the initials of persons in this thread to the players in this particular drama:

• S.H. v. G.J., 2013 BCPC 242: http://canlii.ca/t/g0pqs

See also: viewtopic.php?f=48&t=9577

That may provide a little more context to Gregor the Dapper. Or it could be a coincidence.

Burnaby49: as always a very fun report. I didn't think Rory had it in him for another spurt of resistance - but I am quietly glad to have been proven incorrect.

SMS Möwe

Coincidence? I think not. Mowe is just being coy. I'd say the evidence is overwhelming that this is part of Gregor Fpic Jahn's (G.J) Family Law proceedings regarding child sharing arrangements where he unwisely had R.H. (Rory Hawes) testify on his behalf. That certainly didn't work out well!

Anyhow, the evidence;

[17] On July 31, 2012, the father was supposed to return N. to her mother and did not do so. . . . . At this time, the mother had learned from N. and not from the father that he lived in a one-bedroom apartment with his girlfriend in Vancouver near the science centre. . . . . .

I reported Gregor's location in this video;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1BN8Gy9MnGo).

as being "Nice location though, a downtown Vancouver balcony, heading towards sunset on a clear spring afternoon, English Bay in the background". An apartment near science world would fit the bill nicely. I know that Gregor testified that he had moved from there to White Rock to stay with the girlfriend but the judge was very skeptical of this vague evidence and I am too. White Rock is just a few minutes drive from the American border and is a hell of a long and awkward commute for a non-driver like Gregor who professes to spend all his time in Vancouver and Coquitlam.

Next up to bat Alexander Ream and the Nanaimo Three's judge Rory Walters;

20] The parties appeared before Walters P.C.J. on a child support application on August 21, 2012. He imputed income to the father of $45,760 and ordered him to pay $424 a month child support to the mother for N. retroactive to January 1, 2010, and $126 a month commencing July 1, 2012, on the arrears, the amount of which is unstated in the order. I am told he has paid nothing under this child support order ever, nor did he pay anything resembling child support from the date of separation in 2005 to August 21, 2012.

Judge Walters fits right into the narrative. Gregor goes on and on about him in his videos supporting Hawes. For example this one titled "140122 - Court Update - How "Judge" Rory Walters breaks the law".

http://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcpc/doc/20 ... pc242.html

He gets into his Judge Rory Walters adventures starting at 6:30

And of course there is Gregor's daughter's exposure to Rory Hawes as explained by the mother;

[29] At trial, the mother testified that the father was spending a lot of time with one R.H., whom she understood from certain Internet information she had accessed believed himself to be a freeman-on-the-land and was involved in the creation of videos on how people could, for example, circumvent judges and the law. She believed that, in essence, adherents to Mr. H's philosophy, as she understood it, had a set of beliefs that they were not bound by the laws of Canada. She had concerns that the father might be an adherent to these unusual beliefs and would impart them to her daughter N., which tuition or exposure would be harmful to her. I will return to this issue shortly when I deal with the father's evidence.

[43] The mother testified, by way of explanation, that she is very concerned about Mr. H. for a number of reasons, including her understanding of his apparent negative attitude to the police and law due to his political philosophy and her perception that somehow he does not feel he needs to comply with or follow our laws as others do. He, for example, need not be respectful of judges as she understands he sees himself as a sovereign man and advises people, including the father, how to avoid following what judges say or order. Her concern is based on her understanding of Mr. H.'s principles; N.'s father being a friend of his and, to some extent, a follower or adherent of his point of view; and most importantly, a belief that to some extent, N., if in Mr. H.’s presence with her father, would become exposed to what she believes are his negative attitudes and be harmed in the process in that she might adopt points of view that were quite wrong and antisocial. I think this accurately summarizes the mother's position with respect to N.'s exposure to Mr. H.

Sure sounds like our "Who the heck is Regina" Rory Hawes to me.

And this fits right in with Gregor's claimed employment as a freelance journalist;

[54] His current employment is rather vague. Mr. N. understood that he worked making movie props at a company he had visited several times after work called W.M. D. but agreed this was some time ago. The father gave little evidence as to what he did here or why he left this employment. He says he is now a video editor and journalist. He produces and directs TV shows. He has done some work for R.H., who asked him to document his case apparently involving some interaction he had with a local police force.

Remember I noted in my Hawes court report how Rory denied that British Columbia even existed. Well, Gregor brought up the same point in his family law proceedings;

[99] In an affidavit filed in this case on August 1, 2012, sworn by the father, he deposed as follows in paragraphs 1 to 4:
I, G.J., Journalist, swear or affirm that:

1. I file this affidavit under thread [sic] and duress. I understand that the Provincial Court of B.C. doesn't have to follow the law as according to Canadian law, B.C. is to the most parts not even part of Canada but in fact occupied Coast Salish territory.

2. Adjudicators W. and S. willingly broke already their oath to uphold the law. Previously filed evidence was willingly ignored. Both made it very clear that being biased is of no concern in their courts.

I assume W. in the above quote is Judge Rory Walters.

I find it interesting how the judge in this decision put in, as part of the decision, that Hawes was prohibited from driving Gregor's daughter anywhere.

Very interesting connection Mowe! I find it very informative to get stories like this about who these people are outside of their court decisions and You tube videos.

Now a totally unrelated story about family court decisions in British Columbia that gives a background to this puzzle about having to figure out the players from initials. I got this from an acquaintance who spent much of his working life acting as an expert witness in divorce proceedings. He was involved in allocating values for the distribution of assets. Divorce and other family related decisions used to be given under the full name of the participants until suddenly it was initials only. Causes a hell of a problem for lawyers and others trying to trace cases and do research. According to my friend this was exactly why it was changed. He said that the court got complaints from parents that their children were being mocked by their friends and classmates over their parent's peccadilloes, flaws, and other dirty laundry (adultery, drugs, screaming arguments, arrests, whatever). The friends and classmates got this information just by checking the court's decision database under the parents names and pulling up their divorce and family court decisions. Precocious little buggers! The monied upper end of the parents complained that too much of their financial life was being aired to the public at large. So the court made it somewhat harder to identify parties while making it still possible, as in this case, for a diligent researcher like Mowe to make the connection.

[notorial dissent]

I have to agree with Burnaby and Möwe, when I read this it all sounded much to familiar and of course, it was the original Hawes saga that it all leads back to, and makes a great deal more sense now with all the pieces in play.

So, two more FOTL oddments explained.