Dean Clifford - A Tale of Two Gurus

[Jeffrey]

Gentlemen, I have good news. I believe I have managed to crack the final mystery of the Dean Clifford saga. We've been trying to figure out why Dean had his license suspended for a while now and I believe I figured it out.

This isn't 100% confirmed but here goes.

Around April of 2007 Dean lends his car to a friend of his named Zachariah Bradley Mastervick. Zach did not have a drivers license or insurance, gets into an accident and kills the guy he crashed into.

Why is Dean's license suspended? Section 225(4) of the Highway Traffic Act makes it an offense to let someone drive your car if you know that person doesn't have a valid drivers license, however, you can only have your license suspended for 1 year because of that.

So why was Dean's license still suspended nearly 5 years after the conviction in 2008? Section 239.2(2) allows them to increase the time of the suspension up to 5 years ONLY if the offense led to a persons death.

So yes, Darren Clifford's claim that they were sued by Manitoba Public Insurance for a house building accident is bullshit. MPI only deals with car insurance, which is why both Dean and Zach were hit with a $50k judgement in 2008.

As a result of the manslaughter conviction, Zach was sentenced to 12 months in jail in August 2007.

You may be wondering where Zach is currently and this is where things get really juicy. Zach was sentenced to ~5 years in jail in November 2012 and more interestingly given a 10 year prohibition from owning firearms under section 110 which means that what he was convicted of involved the use of firearms in the commission of the offense. Put that in context with Dean's current weapons charges.

So if you want to put Dean's war against the Highway Traffic Act and Insurance in context. The full story is that Dean let a friend of his use his car that was not supposed to be driving, that terrible decision led to the death of a human being and Dean spent the next 5 years trying to avoid paying for his actions and trying to continue driving despite having that privilege taken away because his actions led to a persons death.

Go back and listen to one of his rants against car licenses and car insurance now and try not to rage.

[Fmotlgroupie]

Quite the sleuthing! I must admit that dean had just struck me as the kind of guy who spends most of his life with a suspended licence and left it at that. But facts are the antidote to Dean and more facts, even tragic ones, are better.

[arayder]

Good job, Jeffery!

So Dean's story that he turned in his license in a freeman correct effort to shed himself of all "enjoinders" with the government was just a smoke screen developed to hide the fact that he had simply had his license taken away.

I would add that Dean's irresponsibility in loaning his car to an unlicensed driver amounts to contributing to the harm caused. Not just any sort of harm. . .somebody was killed.

Dean had to know the truth would make him look bad. And he must have been ashamed of what happen. So he made up a lie. Just like all his lies about having charges dropped and him having the upper hand in the courtroom.

Then when Dean realized his debunkers were looking into his court record he made up another lie to explain away the suit by the insurance company, saying the it was over a house building accident, and not a fatal auto accident.

[Hilfskreuzer Möwe]

Review of the Manitoba Courts website identifies four Court of Queen's Bench criminal proceedings that involve a Zachariah B. Mastervick:

• CR07-01-27706 – The information against Mastervick was filed on April 24, 2007. His charges are unclear. This appears to only be the Queen’s Bench component of the criminal proceeding, not steps that occurred in Provincial Court. Document #7 is a transcript of the preliminary inquiry that occurred on April 20, 2007. The same is true for the other criminal proceedings below. On August 3, 2007 Mastervick was found or pled guilty, sentenced to
  

  3 months concurrent on all counts (10.5 months time served w/credit to be given for double time).

  This perhaps implies Mastervick was in pre-trial remand detention for 5.25 months?
  
  CR07-01-27707 – The information against Mastervick was filed on April 27, 2007. A publication ban was in place for the provincial court documents, probably the preliminary hearing. The evidence includes two boxes and a sledge hammer. On August 7, 2007 Mastervick was found or pled guilty to one charge:
  

  12 months jail; concurrent cts. 1 & 4 (time served 10.5 months w/credit to be given for double time; cts. 2, 5, 6 & 7 stayed per Crown

I believe this means both CR07-01-27706 and CR07-01-27707 are probably related, and that the sentences on each were served concurrently – a one year total sentence. From these records I am uncertain whether post-trial Mastervick served a one year sentence or a 1.5 month sentence.

• CR12-01-32095 – The information was filed on July 26, 2012. Justice Chartier heard this trial and on Nov. 7, 2012 reserved his decision. I have not located a written reserved decision. The sentence was made on Nov. 21, 2012:
  

  3 years and 9 months jail, less TIC – 2 years and 11 mths and 3 wks going forward, 10 yr sec 110 wpns, secondary DNA, stand alone restit., waive costs and surch.

  There are also documents then for a discretionary 10 year weapons ban, a $495 stand alone restitution order, and a DNA order.
  
  I interpret this to mean Mastervick was in remand for a lengthy period; I don’t think we can tell whether “TIC” was subject to a multiplier or really guess whether this sentence was under the ‘Truth in Sentencing Act’ regime. Somewhat simplified, a Criminal Code, s. 110 prohibition order applies where a weapon is used or threatened in a violent or drug offence, or the offence is a weapon offence. A “secondary DNA” order is in response to an offence identified in Criminal Code, s. 487.04, what could be called ‘milder’ criminal offences.
  
  CR12-01-32194 – This information was filed on August 23, 2012. This trial appears to have been conducted at the same time as CR12-01-32095 since there is a reserve judgment notice and disposition on the same dates. The sentence was:
  

  ct. 1 – six months jail conc to CR12-01-32095, ct.2 – four months jail conc to CR12-01-32095 , waive costs and surcharge

  
  
  Since all of these three sentences are concurrent that implies these three convictions arose from the same offense scenario.

I cannot see any way to evaluate what the exact charges were against Mastervick from these records.

There are two separate proceedings in Manitoba Queen’s Bench against Mastervick by the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation:

• CI08-01-55828 – this is the 2008 proceeding where Mastervick and Clifford each ended up with a default judgment of $50,696.07
  
  SC12-01-21012 – a $1,560.31 default judgment against Mastervick where he failed to appear. This is identified as a “small claim – motor vehicle accident.”

I have looked for media reporting on these trials and have struck out. For what it’s worth...

SMS Möwe

[Jeffrey]

While we wait for an update, I'd like to post something that may have escaped our attention. Back in Updates 6 through 9 we were introduced to Paul Stein of We Are Change Victoria.

http://wearechangevictoria.com/

Stein interviewed Dean around 2013 and Paul seemed quite fond of him.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZI5bGQ3lhs

Stein has done a bit of Guru shopping and has interviewed other big names in the OPCA community like Rob Menard and Kevin Lindsay.

Well anyways, Paul mentions in Update 7 that he had taken a seatbelt ticket to the Supreme Court twice and won but I don't think we had bothered to look them up.

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

This was round one; the result:

[36] How then does that interpretation apply to the facts of this case. If Mr. Stein had been stopped before he got to Subway, he might have met the terms of the exemption, on a generous interpretation of the paragraph above. But once he left Subway, he did not meet the distance test nor the time interval test (even if he had not been stopped by Sgt. LeBlanc). This conclusion seems particularly so because he was travelling on at least two roads (and three if you include Doncaster Drive) of relatively heavy traffic, which raises the risk factor.

[37] For these reasons, I find Mr. Stein guilty of failing to wear his seatbelt under section 220(4) of the Act. Given the uncertainty of the wording of section 220(5)(c), I reduce the fine from $167 to $50.

Postscript

[38] As the commentary above illustrates, I cannot leave these Reasons without urging the lawmakers to provide the driving public and the enforcement officials greater guidance on the Legislature’s intention by amending section 220(5)(c) to clarify the limits of the exemption.

Ehhhhhh, something of a win, but no OPCA arguments were used

What about Round two?

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

[48] In summary, I do not accept that making 4 work required stops, in short succession and in the course of a very long work day, followed by a break and then a traffic stop constitutes the type of activity by a person that was meant to attract an exemption under s. 220(5) of the Motor Vehicle Act.

[49] At the critical time, i.e. at the time of the traffic stop, I find that it would not have inconvenienced Mr. Stein, nor been impracticable for him to wear a seatbelt after leaving his lunch stop and while travelling to the Oakland Avenue address so as to bring him within the class of those persons that the Legislature intended to exempt from the requirement to wear a seat belt as provided under s. 220(4) of the Act.

[50] There being no issue that Mr. Stein was not wearing a seat belt at the time of the traffic stop and having found that Mr. Stein is not entitled to be exempt from the legislative requirement by operation of s. 220(5) of the Motor Vehicle Act, I find him guilty of the offence of failing to wear a complete seat belt assembly while driving or operating a motor vehicle contrary to section 220(4) of the Motor Vehicle Act.

Seems like a solid loss right there.

[notorial dissent]

But...but...but he said he won, you mean we can't take him at his word after all????

[Hilfskreuzer Möwe]

I've been a little hesitant to make this suggestion but I think we may be seeing our very first Dean Clifford written court judgment in the next while.

Dean has sued some judges, Crown prosecutors, and peace officers in a civil action. A hearing occurred last Friday, Aug. 1, 2014, in response to a motion by the defendants in the action to have Dean's lawsuit tossed. We haven't obtained the documents in support of that application to this date.

As of the time of this message that hearing is still tagged on the Manitoba Courts website as "pending". There is no outcome document logged in that database.

Now, I've watched how the database reported quite a few of Dean's hearing, and what I observed is that in every case a result was logged within 48 hours. To date all those judgments have been made on the spot by the judge, in an oral decision.

It's now been a week. My suspicion is that indicates that rather than give an immediate decision the Master who heard the motion to toss instead reserved with reasons to follow.

If I am correct then this could be fun and informative. There's a lot about Dean's litigation that we don't know, and it would be logical for the decision to provide a recap of what's going on, the charges Dean faces, and Dean's various in-court antics.

(And I think Dean's lawsuit will probably be struck out ... it's just my suspicion.) (Well, we have the Statement of Claim and it's totally crappola, so I'm gosh darned confident it will be struck out.)

So now we wait!

Otherwise it seems quiet on the Dean front. Those paragons of independent media We Are Change Victoria and the Winnipeg Alternative Media haven't said a peep about Dean. They've been distracted by chemtrails and stuff like that. It turns out there are actually two "Free Dean Clifford" Facebook groups. The one we have been monitoring (https://www.facebook.com/freedeanclifford) has nothing new. The same is true for the other one (https://www.facebook.com/groups/338561402926566/), though its content is a little more ... quirky.

SMS Möwe

[Burnaby49]

Quirky? I'd go with batshit crazy. It's that damn flouride;

Maryanne SpencerJuly 26 at 12:21pm.

Why would that old c***-faced bollock chops whore Theresa May block the Baylis boys leaving???

hmmm...... Special Prosecutor’s Office for the Crimes
Of Violence against Women and Human trafficking Attorney General’s Office
ISSUE: WARRANTS FOR ARREST...
OFFICIAL COMMUNICATION: FEVIMTRA/CGT/699/2013
A.C.PGR/FEVIMTRA/DES/020/2011
A.P. PGR/FEVIMTRA/185/2012 (CHILD TRAFFICKING)
WARRANT FOR IMMIDIATE ARREST: A.P.PGR/FEVIMTRA/185/2012/0033
Mrs. Theresa May
Address: Home secretary of Britain
DATE OF BIRTH not known
Nationality: British
VICTIMS: KEVIN CHRISTAIN BAYLIS DATE OF BIRTH 11TH OCTOBER 1996 AND JENVEY TREVOR BAYLIS
DATE OF BIRTH 1ST FEBRUARY 2000. The suspect has allowed changes to the minors’ names to Nissen
and also allowed British passports to be issued to two foreign minor Nationals, without the written
consent of their parents.
CRIMES WANTED FOR:
1. Enforced disappearance of two minors October 2011
Fiscalía especial para los Delitos de Violencia contra las Mujeres y Trata de Personas, FEVIMTRA
Rio Elba #17, Col. Cuauhtémoc, Del, Cuauhtémoc, México, DF 06500
http://www.pgr.gob.mx/CombatealaDelincu ... VIMTRA.asp
2. Changed of identity of two minors October 2011
3. Issuing British travel documents to two minors without parental consent October 2011
4. Violating the families humanitarian protection that they were granted by the United States of
Mexico against the United Kingdom and Mr. Nissen October 2011
5. Abduction and kidnapping of Kevin Baylis and Jenvey Baylis October 2011
9. False imprisonment of Kevin and Jenvey Baylis in the United Kingdom Current
10. Following violations of the Human rights of children, Article 2, Article 3, Article 4, Article 7,
Article 8, Article 9, Article 10, Article 11, Article 12, and Article 19. Article 34 and Article 35
Recommendations:
THE SUSPECT NEEDS TO BE IMMIDAITELY APPREHENDED AND PLACE IN CUSTODY AND AWAIT
EXTRIDITION TO THE UNITED STATES OF MEXICO. SHE IS A RISK TO THE SAFETY OF KEVIN AND JENVEY
BAYLIS, AFTER ISSUEING THEM BRITISH PASSPORTS AND CHANGING THEIR NATIONALITY AND NAMES.
THUS ALLOWING BRITAIN TO TRAFFIC TWO MINORS.

Adrien Nicholson
What does this have to do with Dean? Your post makes no sense.
July 29 at 1:41am · Like

Kim Lawley
That bitch has been trying to bring down the age of consent to 10. Wish someone had have smashed her in at 10 The whore should be jailed for saying such a thing. I reckon%90 are peadiphiles that's how they are controlled it's blowing up in England now and about time too
July 29 at 1:42am

Kim Lawley Maryanne Spencer good work is this from itccs.org ?July 29 at 1:53am · Like
..Joe BucksJuly 28 at 12:29pm · Edited.Last I heard Dean was in solitary confinement.
A suggestion: Dean should have a Medical doctor come in and certify that Dean is Alive.
Lol enter that into the Record. Lol

Kim Lawley
Joe Bucks but he says if you are a man of the cloth you are not an outlaw? As soon as I saw this I thought of dean sounds like Canadians are as dull as English too much fluoride and brainwashing it's very hard to wake people up I've tried with about 70 that I know they all think I'm nuts
July 29 at 1:03am

[notorial dissent]

Well I'm shocked I tell you, I actually agreed with something on a FOTL site, that first posting makes zip all sense and has nothing to do with Dean.

We now return you to our regularly scheduled nonsense.

[Jeffrey]

Courtesy of Rob Smith and the Free Dean Clifford facebook page. Copying it here because it's already been modified once:

Dean had his Queen's Bench hearing last Thursday and again the justice sitting on the bench refused to pass a ruling. For those who are not yet aware and are listening to all the hype and BS out there on this issue, Dean is approaching 8 months in prison and is being held in solitary confinement WITHOUT any convictions or rulings on the current charges against him. All of which would normally come with little or no jail time.

I know people who are or have served time for "Possession with intent to Traffic" and got less time than Dean has already served for a simple failure to appear and minor charges or refusing to ask permission from a foreign corporation which a licensed individual would have been permitted to do.

This is not an issue of "Is Dean doing things wrong" but rather a factual matter that the "Crown" has no jurisdiction and has seriously screwed up. Now they are stuck between a rock and a hard place because they can NOT convict or they would have already and they CAN'T release him because it would be an admission of wrong doing.

Before you go believing the people who claim to know something about what Dean is doing and thinking, ask yourself if they are Dean themselves because only Dean knows why he's doing or what he's done and why. If you aren't Dean then the fact is you know nothing about why he is doing what he's doing because you can't see the world from his perspective.

More people are awake today because of Dean's voice than from anyone else I've witnessed. If you believe in freedom then even if you disagree with Dean's beliefs and way of life then you must support his being released without conviction. To hold to any other ideology is to demand that people live as you feel they should and is just another enslavement and removal of their personal unalienable rights to live as they choose so long as they harm no other.

Rob

http://www.robsmithcounsel.com/

I have to wonder what "hype and BS" Rob is talking about. As far as I know the only place that has discussed the lack of an update concerning Dean's latest hearing was here and Mowe's prediction (which have generally been on the ball) is that it's simply due to delays while the judge writes up a decision. But Rob of course wants to spin it as some conspiracy theory.

How much does Rob actually know?

[notorial dissent]

I'd say Mister Rob sounds just a wee tad desperate and strident, and is busy trying to make something he knows more about than he wants to let on go away when he knows it won't. It sounds to me like someone either spilled the beans or else wonder guru's lies are beginning to catch up with him and his followers and they don't know what to do since they don't have anyone telling them what to think, and the thinking part is getting more and more painful.

[Hilfskreuzer Möwe]

Hmm. I do not think Rob Smith knows what he is talking about. That could be misinformation from Dean & Co. Or it could be simple ignorance.

I’ll go with ignorance.

Let’s run through a check list.

I’m going to presume for a moment that Rob/Dean got the court right. The first issue is a minor one – the hearing was on Friday rather than a Thursday.

Second, we know that Dean has at least some convictions because Dean himself has (unsuccessfully) moved to have those convictions quashed on July 21, 2014 in proceeding CR13-01-32571. Oops.

Third, Dean is not facing charges “which would normally come with little or no jail time.” We know Dean is facing serious criminal charges which have mandatory minimum sentences of one year (grow op) and three years (prohibited firearm), so what he faces would normally come with much significant jail time – time he cannot avoid if convicted.

Fourth, why in the world is this about jurisdiction? The hearing on Aug. 1 related to Dean’s civil action where he is claiming damages against various Crown actors. Even if Dean were successful in his civil action (he won’t be) that still would not lead to his release, as that is a separate proceeding. What he could ask for is damages.

But no, Dean he went further and asked for these silly things in his Statement of Claim:

… iii.) Immunity from legislation and policies of Her Majesty the Queen et al, effective as of the moment of the false arrest of claimant and forced subjugation, forcible confinement, involuntary servitude and fraud carried out by agents for Her Majesty the Queen that has led to the complete loss of everything in claimant’s life and irreparable harm to claimant’s life.

130. Claimant requires a permanent No Contact Order against Her Majesty the Queen and any party acting as Her Majesty the Queen from any future contact of any kind and for any reason. Claimant wants a complete injunction against the debtor from all contact of any kind and for any reason with exception to the transfer of entitlements and monies owed the claimant by the debtor for his share of the resources of this land that he is the rightful owner of and heir to, being held in trust by the debtor.

131. Claimant requires a court appointed trustee to oversee the No Contact Order and ensure that claimant is receiving what he is due from the debtor with no more interference, hindrance, harassment or contact by debtor in his life in any way shape or form, for any reason, permanently. All contact is to be through the court appointed trustee, paid for by the debtor. The claimant has suffered enough from contact with the debtor and its agents.

Pardon my sniggering. I’ll just point to Fearn v. Canada Customs, 2014 ABQB 114 and Meads v. Meads, 2012 ABQB 571. You can’t opt out. You don’t own a chunk of Canada. You can’t block the inherent jurisdiction of a superior court.

If Dean wants release due to an absence of jurisdiction then he ought to file a habeas corpus application, and then claim he was held without jurisdiction because of stuff. Whoops! He’s done that (in various forms) on April 17, 2014 and May 1, 2014 in CR13-01-32571. Both applications were denied. So I guess the Crown and Courts do have jurisdiction. If Dean didn’t like that result he could appeal. Oh – he didn’t. Too bad. Now he cannot even attack those results because of the rule against collateral attack.

If Dean were a peace-loving kewl dude then he could ask for pre-trial judicial interim release (bail). Oh dear, he did, and it was denied. And his appeal of that result on June 24, 2014 was also denied. Did Dean appeal that result to the Manitoba Court of Appeal? No. Oops.

Fifth, Dean has been detained for more like 8.5 months now rather than “approaching 8 months” – but I’m being picky to mention that.

Last, there wasn’t a justice who heard the application; it was heard by Manitoba Court of Queen’s Bench Master Sharp. That actually is quite significant because it tells us a lot about the kind of hearing this was. We know this was a motion to strike out Dean’s civil action. The fact it was heard by a Master tells us that there are no disputed facts involved. In other words, all of Dean’s factual allegations are presumed to be true … but if Dean’s action is struck out then that still means his action is hopeless.

That’s actually one of the most interesting aspects of a possible written judgment in Dean’s civil action. If Dean’s action is struck out that will probably mean Master Sharp looks at the theoretical nature of Dean’s claims to being legally outside the jurisdiction of Canada – and rejects that.

This may not necessarily be a very long analysis, given existing Canadian jurisprudence, but it would at least be interesting.

No doubt Dean and his supporters will merely scream the result is yet more evidence that the courts are corrupt. It’s kind of odd, though, how Canadian courts are always “corrupt” in a consistent manner.

Doesn’t that ever make folks like Rob perhaps question his ‘legal knowledge’, as a person who provides “…personal counsel on issues with the law”? (http://www.robsmithcounsel.com/services-offered/). Well, probably not.

SMS Möwe

[notorial dissent]

Hmm. I do not think Rob Smith knows what he is talking about. That could be misinformation from Dean & Co. Or it could be simple ignorance.

I’ll go with ignorance.


Doesn’t that ever make folks like Rob perhaps question his ‘legal knowledge’, as a person who provides “…personal counsel on issues with the law”? (http://www.robsmithcounsel.com/services-offered/). Well, probably not.

SMS Möwe

That would most likely be true with anyone with at least half a neuron firing, but as the saying goes, "asked and answered".

[davids]

My favorite humorous post, from just 14 hours ago, on the free Dean fb page:

"is anyone in this group a credited psychologist?"

[notorial dissent]

I wouldn't be at all surprised if the whole bunch of them weren't under observation by psychologists and anthropologists wanting to see a disfunctional pretend society as it grows and disintegrates. Actually, I can just see an anthropologist monitoring them and giving them cute names as they watch them go through their antics and pretend dealings with each other and reality, could provide some true gold for someone's thesis on comparative cultures.

[quatloos3]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8wkM0leD3O4

"
9. We are still digging and will confirm when we know more but apparently Scott's Aquilae Trust owns the name DEAN CLIFFORD in other words Dean can't even administer his legal fiction name anymore as silly as this sounds. APPARENTLY Scott has full charge over it. BUT YES Dean Clifford had to take part in the trust willfully. APPARENTLY Scott tried to do the same with Robert Menard and when Robert rejected, Scott went on the attack against Rob."

Scott Winnipeg boat party Dean Clifford
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3TgV1fz4_s

https://www.facebook.com/notes/942359415830531/

http://activistshub.com/scott-duncan-da ... onal-mind/

https://www.facebook.com/IamaSovereign/ ... 56/?type=1


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nfD63pCY718

[The Observer]

Actually, I can just see an anthropologist monitoring them and giving them cute names as they watch them go through their antics and pretend dealings with each other and reality...

Sounds more like watching and observing primates. But honestly, who would want to be tagged as the Jane Goodall of sovrun observation?

[notorial dissent]

Well, yes, i was trying to be nice, I know, doesn't sound like me, but it was way too early in the morning and I hadn't had anywhere near enough coffee yet, on the other hand I must have been in a really good mood as they weren't dripping blood, see lack of coffee.

Cultural anthropologists are a very very strange lot and I try very hard NOT to understand their motivations or fixations, or really much at all about what makes them tick, saves lots of wear and tear on the grey matter. I've known a few who, who, if their previous subjects haven't eaten them by now, would think this would be a fun simple little study.

[Jeffrey]

New entry added to Dean's records:

-NOTICE OF MASTER'S RESERVED DECISION - MASTER SHARP 01AUG2014 MOTION TO STRIKE

Which appears to be in keeping with Mowe's predictions. Otherwise, all is quiet.

[notorial dissent]

But...but...but you mean all his magic sure fire motions and papers and all his legal erudition and knowledge didn't make an inconsequential Master flee in terror? Why it must be treason of misfeasance against the Charter or the Magna Carter or so something, OR Dean is just full of it and his house of BS is starting to evaporate in the light of day. Which sounds more reasonable, at least to a sane mind?