Angela Marissa Greter - Freeman Ethologist

[Burnaby49]

Or should that be freewoman Ethologist? I don't think that'd been worked out yet. Forget it, I'm not going to start that debate. To save you looking it up here's what she does;

Ethology is the scientific and objective study of animal behaviour, usually with a focus on behaviour under natural conditions, and viewing behaviour as an evolutionarily adaptive trait.

Angela falls into the freeman spectrum because of her response to a requirement to pay her debts. She's a university student who at least partly financed her education through student loans. She was mortally offended when the government only forgave $6,000 of the $68,445 total she owed rather than the $20,000 she'd convinced herself they were going to write off. So she went full freeman on them and refused to pay any of it. This resulted in the government taking her to court to collect. And she, at least initially, put up a freeman defense both while refusing to pay and in court;

Alberta v Greter, 2016 ABQB 293
http://canlii.ca/t/grssn

[2] On June 19, 2015 Alberta sued Ms. Greter for the outstanding student loan and interest, a total of $68,445.65. On August 4, 2015, Ms. Greter filed a Statement of Defence that denied any debt liability to Alberta. The key passages of the Statement of Defence are:

Statement of facts relied on:
...
2. Full disclosure of the alleged debt was not and has never been provided under contract law.
...
Any matters that defeat the claim of the plaintiff(s):
...
5. As requested by the Defendant since July 2013, the Plaintiff has been unable and/or unwilling to produce the original debt instrument and a true certified copy of the actual accounting whereby the Government of Alberta has incurred a loss.

6. The Defendant has made numerous attempts to settle this matter and has never refused or neglected to make payment. That assertion is considered dishonourable defamation of character.

Remedy sought:

7. Upon inability to produce the original debt instrument and proven loss, the alleged debt will be discharged, all correspondence will cease and the matter will be considered resolved.

8. The Plaintiff will correct the Defendant’s credit record.

The two sides seem to have a very basic disagreement on the meaning of the word "payment". The defendant says;

6. The Defendant has made numerous attempts to settle this matter and has never refused or neglected to make payment. That assertion is considered dishonourable defamation of character.

Yet the government took the position that;

[1] Between 2004 and 2012 Angela Greter received student loans from the government of Alberta (“Alberta”) totalling $64,360.00. Ms. Greter completed her PhD in agriculture from the University of Guelph on December 13, 2012. She has made no payments to date. Alberta now sues to collect that debt.

In any case, when it came time to stand in front of a judge and put her case to the court she utilized an absolutely classic freeman defense, the Menard Scramble©, and didn't show up.

[4] Ms. Greter was not present at the first scheduled hearing of this matter on May 2, 2016, but her husband appeared and sought an adjournment, which was granted. Ms. Greter did not attend the May 16, 2016, hearing before myself, and has made no other representations. I was informed by counsel for Alberta that Ms. Greter had indicated she would not attend.

How did things get to this state?

[9] Ms. Dec’s affidavit establishes the nature and basis of Ms. Greter’s defence, and the history of this dispute. In 2013, after Ms. Greter graduated from her PhD program, she complained that a change in student loan relief programming meant that she was forgiven $6,000.00 in her loans. She had believed she would instead receive $20,000.00 in loan relief. She complained to Student Aid Alberta, but additional debt relief was refused. This is detailed in an exchange of emails and correspondence between Ms. Greter and officials in the Alberta government.

[10] Ms. Dec’s Affidavit also includes a number of documents that were then sent by Ms. Greter to Student Aid Alberta and Service Alberta. These disclose strategies that Associate Chief Justice Rooke in Meads v Meads, 2012 ABQB 571 (CanLII), 543 AR 215 categorized as “Organized Pseudolegal Commercial Arguments” [“OPCA”], and which appear with troubling frequency in Canadian courts. OPCA concepts are sold on a commercial basis by conmen, “OPCA gurus”, to lay persons with the promise that these legal-sounding schemes and their associated magical documents will provide extraordinary rights and remedies. They are instead a simply worthless scam that only causes harm and waste to all involved.

A. Three/Five Letters Scheme

[11] Ms. Greter’s correspondence attempts to implement a variation of the Three/Five Letters foisted unilateral agreement debt elimination scheme, which is detailed in Bank of Montreal v Rogozinsky, 2014 ABQB 771 (CanLII), 18 Alta LR (6th) 1. The first OPCA document included in Ms. Dec’s Affidavit is a “Notice of Default” dated Dec. 8, 2013, (see Appendix “A”) that indicates Ms. Greter is dissatisfied with and does not accept Student Aid Alberta’s response to three previous documents, and then announces Student Aid Alberta:

... is now in default of the obligation for full disclosure and lawful consideration under contract law. The following requirements were ignored or answered insufficiently:

1. Proof of the existence of an alleged account or contract in the flesh and blood name of Angela Marissa Greter duly signed and witnessed by both parties, not a unilateral agreement and upon which signed page there is reference to the entire agreement.

2. Proof of claim that the Student Aid Alberta Service Centre is the current holder of the above mentioned original debt instrument and that it has not been on-sold to another party.

3. A true certified copy of the actual accounting whereby the Student Aid Alberta Service Centre has incurred a loss of the alleged debt (proven loss). This may be provided via accounting through the bank proving that a true loss occurred.

4. A True Bill inked in blue with “Bill” and “Value” marked upon the face and not a statement of account for any amount of money allegedly owing or owed to the Student Aid Alberta Service Centre by Angela Marissa of the Greter family.

5. Please properly identify under full commercial liability and penalty of perjury who is the fiduciary creditor and who is the fiduciary debtor.

6. Please produce the original promissory note and contact me for inspection by my hand and not a copy and/or affidavit/certificate of lost note.
[Emphasis in original.]

[12] The “Notice of Default” then concludes:

The Student Aid Alberta Service Centre has until December 31, 2013 to cure this default. If the Student Aid Alberta Service Centre does not remedy the default within the allotted time, I will consider its silence to be assent and agreement that no debt exists. As such, I will consider the matter between us to have been legally and financially settled.

[13] Ms. Greter then signed the “Notice of Default” with a signature across an ink fingerprint.

That, I assume, is what she based her "never neglected a payment" comment on.

Anyhow I'll give the court's response to this but culled of its massive listings of precedence;

[14] There are many legal errors in this document.

[15] Ms. Greter’s “Notice of Default” is clearly one of a series of foisted unilateral agreements (Meads v Meads, at paras 447-528), a common pseudolegal strategy where a document claims to create and impose unilateral obligations on its recipient. First, contract law does not permit a person to ‘foist’ an obligation on another party: 1. In contract silence does not mean consent or agreement:

[16] Second, Canadian courts have concluded the information demanded by Ms. Greter is not necessary or relevant to prove the existence of a debt. A binding contract does not require an original document, ‘wet ink’ signature, and witnesses.

[17] Formal ledgers and other accounting documents are not required to prove a debt. Modern financial practices and their electronic equivalents are adequate.

[18] Sale of a debt, or “securitization” is irrelevant to whether the original creditor may enforce that debt:

[19] There is no obligation for a creditor to produce a “True Bill inked in blue”. I note that Justice Powers in Royal Bank of Canada v Skrapec concluded the “True Bill inked in blue” concept (whatever it may be) had no apparent connection to Canadian law, and instead probably was something of American origin. My attempts to find any Canadian meaning or function for a “True Bill inked in blue” was equally unsuccessful. Perhaps this is yet another OPCA flight of fantasy.

[20] A lending contract is not a consumer note or bill of exchange.

[21] Ms. Greter’s demand for the identity of the “fiduciary creditor” and “fiduciary debtor” is cryptic. What I can say with confidence is that the phrase “full commercial liability”, whatever its intent, is OPCA nonsense. The only times that language has appeared in any reported Canadian judgment is in an OPCA litigant’s arguments and documents: “Full commercial liability” means nothing in Canadian law.

[22] Suffice to say that Ms. Greter had no basis in law to make the demands identified in the “Notice of Default”, and that the mode by which she attempted to foist and then enforce those demands has no legal effect.

I guess this means that she's not going to see her credit rating restored anytime soon. It's surprising that she didn't show for her hearing because she was very aggressive until court action was immanent.

B. Fee Schedule

[23] Next Ms. Greter sent a “Non-Negotiable” “User Agreement Fee Schedule Notice” (Appendix “B”), dated Feb. 22, 2014. This is another foisted unilateral agreement that sets penalties and costs for various potential interactions between government actors and Ms. Greter, including penalties for filing court documents ($300.00 per document), “Educational Services” ($650.00 per session), receipt of telephone calls ($250.00 per call), and various graduated and escalating penalties, in silver coin, directed to government actors and police, which climax with:

ONE BILLION ($1 000 000 000.00) .999% PURE COMMERCIAL GRADE SILVER DOLLARS PER INCIDENT if injected or any private organic matter such as blood/tissue or DNA samples are forcibly removed from me under duress.

[24] Like other foisted unilateral agreements, fee schedules impose no obligations on their recipients: Rooke ACJ recently in Gauthier v Starr, 2016 ABQB 213 (CanLII) at para 39 summarized the illegitimate and illegal function of these documents:

... Fee schedules are foisted unilateral agreements that define certain penalties for government, institutional, and court actors engaged in their legal duties ... OPCA fee schedules have one purpose: intimidation. These documents are intended to deter state and court actors from the proper exercise of their obligations ... Asserting a foisted unilateral agreement against a public official is harassment ... I recently concluded ... that an attempt to enforce a spurious OPCA-based debt on a peace officer was prima facie intimidation of a justice system participant: Criminal Code, RSC 1985, c C-46, s 423.1. [Citations omitted.]

[25] Other correspondence indicates that Ms. Greter also published her fee schedule on a website: http://publicnoticeangela.blogspot.ca/. Fortunately for her, Ms. Greter does not appear to have attempted to collect any penalties under her “User Agreement Fee Schedule Notice”. If she had, that would have been a basis for punitive steps in this lawsuit, such as elevated costs, and potentially other sanctions, such as being declared a vexatious litigant: Re Boisjoli, 2015 ABQB 629 (CanLII), 29 Alta LR (6th) 334.

C. Subsequent Correspondence

[26] The Affidavit of Ms. Dec also includes a Feb. 28, 2014 letter from “Commonly called Angela Marissa of the Greter Family, Principal Creditor” to a collection agency denying a contract with the collection agency, and threatening to bill for “damages”. This correspondence indicates Ms. Greter has also adopted the OPCA double/split person “Strawman” motif: Meads v Meads, at paras 417-446. This is a bizarre pseudolegal misconception that individuals have two components: a physical ‘flesh and blood’ half (Angela Marissa of the Greter family), and a non-corporeal ‘legal’ half or “Strawman” (ANGELA GRETER):

You are a third party interloper with no lawful signed contract between the ANGELA GRETER or the living woman commonly known as Angela Marissa of the Greter family.

I am the living woman commonly known as Angela Marissa of the Greter family that supplies the sweat equity and labor as agent for the ens legis person ANGELA GRETER.

Since certain truths, transparencies, and maxims in commerce are now coming to the forefront of the awareness in the collective human consciousness, moralities of higher spirit compel me to seek full transparency and full disclosure on the types of commercial contracts offered by governments and corporate institutions, which brings me today to ask a few questions so that I remain in honour of the involuntary bankruptcy of the nation and settle all alleged debts for the ANGELA GRETER.

[27] This is, of course, wrong. The “Strawman” is a myth. The legal and physical aspects of an individual are one and the same. Canadian law does not recognize anything called an “ens legis” person, and that term has never appeared in any reported Canadian judgment, unless it was said or written by an OPCA litigant: The idea of an interrelationship between two aspects of oneself is equally absurd. As my colleague Master Schlosser observed in Servus Credit Union Ltd v Parlee at para 76, “[t]alking to yourself binds no-one.”

[28] The “Strawman” concept is so notoriously false that simply advancing the “Strawman” double/split person is a basis to presume a court participant litigates in bad faith and for abusive, ulterior purposes: Fiander v Mills, 2015 NLCA 31 (CanLII) at paras 20, 39-40. I conclude that applies to Ms. Greter’s defence against collection of her student loans.

[29] The last OPCA document from Ms. Greter is an April 2, 2015, “Rebuttal to Service Alberta, Crown Debt Collections”, addressed to Carla Dec (Appendix “C”). It repeats the demands in the “Notice of Default”, and states there is no outstanding loan because the Government of Alberta is not “in honour”. Since Student Aid Alberta has not responded to the Three/Five Letters documents “... I must conclude the true evidence of this loan does not exist ...” and unless the Government of Alberta responds to Ms. Greter’s satisfaction by April 21, 2015 “... I will consider the matter between us to have been legally and financially settled.”

I have to say, even with my extensive knowledge of freeman defenses, I've not heard an argument framed quite this way before;

Since certain truths, transparencies, and maxims in commerce are now coming to the forefront of the awareness in the collective human consciousness, moralities of higher spirit compel me to seek full transparency and full disclosure on the types of commercial contracts offered by governments and corporate institutions, which brings me today to ask a few questions so that I remain in honour of the involuntary bankruptcy of the nation and settle all alleged debts for the ANGELA GRETER.

Whatever the hell that's supposed to mean. No doubt the court was as puzzled as I am. Admit it, we all know where this is going;

D. Ms. Greter’s OPCA Scheme is Legally Incorrect

[30] Ms. Greter’s Three/Five Letters debt elimination scheme cannot impose an obligation on Alberta to fulfill Ms. Greter’s demands on how it proves her debt. Further, the information she sought by those means is unnecessary, irrelevant, or imaginary. I therefore conclude that Ms. Greter has no viable defence to Alberta’s action to enforce her outstanding student debts. She has simply attempted to deny and evade her obligations to repay the government loans that financed her education and present career. Her Statement of Defence is struck out and I award summary judgment in favour of the Plaintiff.

[33] As a final note to Ms. Greter, I caution her against further attempts to use OPCA concepts. Alberta originally sought double costs in its Statement of Claim, but did not pursue elevated and punitive court costs in its oral submissions at the summary judgment application. If Alberta had maintained that claim I would have granted the double costs award sought, or ordered solicitor and own client indemnity costs against Ms. Greter. This reflects this Court’s categorical rejection of pseudolaw as a means to advance false claims or to frustrate the administration of justice, the operation of the courts, and the enforcement of legal obligations.

All done by the dreaded Master Schulz, the author of Crossroads-DMD Mortgage Investment Corporation v Gauthier, 2015 ABQB 703 (http://canlii.ca/t/glzx5)

viewtopic.php?f=48&t=10875

But don't think for a moment that her refusal to repay money she borrowed from the government to finance her education is in any way an ethical impediment to her willingness to support herself and her consulting business through government funding. Moral consistency is just old-school thinking. She's more than willing to accept a quarter of a million dollar government grant to look at cows.

http://www.highriveronline.com/local/31 ... al-funding

For more details on her business try these;

http://www.angelagreterconsulting.com/

Or this one, where she's a doctor and CEO!

http://www.agnosis.biz/#!about/c20r9

Can't say she didn't pick a high-class name;

Why AgNosis?

As 'gnosis' is Greek for knowledge and 'agriculture' is typically shortened to 'ag', we combined these to form a new word - AgNosis. Our team brings a unique mix of agricultural knowledge and disaster recovery / business continuity planning knowledge to your farming operation.

http://www.agnosis.biz/#!about/c20r9

So how did she find herself on the path of freeman debt-free happiness? Dean Clifford of course! A warning here. In order to confirm this you are going to have to participate in her somewhat obsessive focus on her wedding. Only 280 days ago! How do I know such a personal detail? She seems determined to tell us;

https://www.theknot.com/us/angela-grete ... d-aug-2015

I've been married 14,000 days, give or take. I don't have one of those helpful counters to give the exact total. They all blend together anyhow.

This is just a wedding warm-up to her FaceBook page where Global F. A. C. T. Radio and Dean await;

https://www.facebook.com/angela.greter

A warning. Don't click on "see all" photos. I did. She likes cats. A lot.

Anyhow if you go to Dean's self love page where he's in his wolverine stage;

http://gramlove.co/user.php?id=21832484 ... c.clifford

And scroll down the list of friends guess who you find;


Angela Grete

Angela, a word of advice. If you plan to rely on the Deanster for any further advice make sure you know visiting hours. Canadian penitentiaries are sticklers for things like that.

[notorial dissent]

I'm not sure what of this is stranger. She took out a $68k student loan and then didn't think she was going to have to repay it?

That is an incredible mish most of sovrunidjit theory and thinking, some I've seen a lot before, and some I'm, not sure where she got it from. A lot of it does seem to originate down here, but some of it who knows. Doesn't look like she got the resolution she wanted though.

Disturbing is the least of what I can say about the pictures.

[The Observer]

I looked at Greter's photos and found them to be nothing more than the usual photos people take of their lives. Nothing that I saw was particularly disturbing; sure, some might be seen as embarrassing in years to come. But I think we would all have to admit to being caught up in a moment that ended in our lack of poise being memorialized. Thus, there is is nothing in the photos that would cause me to say "OMG! SOVRUN ON THE LOOSE!" Is she happy about being married? Obviously. Is that indicative of her being a moron and swallowing FOTL ideology? No. Angela may get as jaded as Burnaby about married life, once she reaches the 14,000 day plateau, in which case she will probably delete her website posthaste.

I think it is more relevant that Angela pursued an education that one would presume required critical thinking and an ability to look at all sides of the issue before reaching a conclusion. The fact that despite achieving a doctorate degree she promptly stuck her head down the Clifford Molson Koolade barrel as a way to deal with her $68,000 education loan says a great deal about her. And that really is the disturbing part.

[Burnaby49]

Jaded? JADED? Every day has been a delight. Apart from August 22nd, 1981 but I'm not allowed to talk about that.

I'm just opposed to expensive weddings. The money is much better spent on a down payment on a home, saving for the future, or even paying off debts. Instead people are incurring even more debt for an event that I think is largely irrelevant to the relationship. Well, apart from a big wedding causing stress and financial distress right at the start. When you wake up the next morning you're married regardless of how you got through the day before. We had less than thirty guests at our wedding and I recall it costing about $300 but somehow we've struggled through even with that shabby start.

[notorial dissent]

FWIW, I was talking about Deano and his coterie, for some reason that collection was disturbing, I never could get on to Angela's pages for some reason, FB doesn't like me I guess. What I find disturbing on her end is that she went down that particular rabbit hole after all that work, and is proceeding to make a hash of her life before she has even really gotten started.

[eric]

I think it is more relevant that Angela pursued an education that one would presume required critical thinking and an ability to look at all sides of the issue before reaching a conclusion. The fact that despite achieving a doctorate degree she promptly stuck her head down the Clifford Molson Koolade barrel as a way to deal with her $68,000 education loan says a great deal about her. And that really is the disturbing part.

That was my opinion as well. I noted in one of the posts above that she had received a major grant to study animal transport, a subject with which I'm intimately involved through my employment. The protocols involved are endlessly minuted, detail every step of the procedure in laborious detail, and require input from government, veterinarians, producers,and receivers. Not something that I picture the typical FMOTl with limited grasp of reality getting involved in. After all, how can someone who doesn't accept "statute law" wrap their head around the fact that some of the animal transport protocols define the trucker's footwear and the exact procedure for putting on his boots? (yes, I can turn back a load because the trucker didn't put his boots on properly )

[Burnaby49]

I think it is more relevant that Angela pursued an education that one would presume required critical thinking and an ability to look at all sides of the issue before reaching a conclusion. The fact that despite achieving a doctorate degree she promptly stuck her head down the Clifford Molson Koolade barrel as a way to deal with her $68,000 education loan says a great deal about her. And that really is the disturbing part.

That was my opinion as well. I noted in one of the posts above that she had received a major grant to study animal transport, a subject with which I'm intimately involved through my employment. The protocols involved are endlessly minuted, detail every step of the procedure in laborious detail, and require input from government, veterinarians, producers,and receivers. Not something that I picture the typical FMOTl with limited grasp of reality getting involved in. After all, how can someone who doesn't accept "statute law" wrap their head around the fact that some of the animal transport protocols define the trucker's footwear and the exact procedure for putting on his boots? (yes, I can turn back a load because the trucker didn't put his boots on properly )

I doubt that she believed, or even understood any of her bullshit paperwork. Somebody sold her a bill of goods that she could get out of the debt by sending the creditor a bunch of legal looking documents. Reality probably only hit her when she was required to stand in front of a judge and try and explain it.

Not showing up was a dumb move. When she'd decided to abandon any defense (not that she had one) she should have tried to come to some kind of repayment agreement with the government, whatever it took to avoid having Queen's Bench decide the case. But, amongst all of the other things she didn't understand, she probably didn't know how Alberta Queen's Bench handles any case with any freeman gibberish in it. Now she has this judgment hanging around her neck making her look ridiculous and her credit rating is probably crap. And she still owes the money.

[grixit]

I'm surprised she got the grant. i don't think she'll ever get another one. and i hope the husband that she is so deleriously happy about has no plans to get any loans or grants himself.

[Burnaby49]

I'm surprised she got the grant. i don't think she'll ever get another one. and i hope the husband that she is so deleriously happy about has no plans to get any loans or grants himself.

He doesn't need to get grants in his own name, he's the president of their business, AgNosis Continuity. A real family business by the look of it;

Trevor Rouillard
President & Senior Consultant

Dr. Angela Greter
Vice President & CEO

I assume that this is Trevor's father;

John Rouillard
Senior Advisor

A Certified Disaster Recovery Planner, and long-standing member of the Disaster Recovery Institute since 1989, John has played a lead role in the development of a continuity of business program for several Federal Government agencies including Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC), and Atomic Energy Canada Limited (AECL). Because of his extensive knowledge in the field of Emergency Response and Disaster Recovery Planning, he served for several years on the Advisory Board of the largest Disaster Recovery service provider in the US. As founder of a Business Continuity consulting firm, he has provided services for other private and public companies and agencies such as the Department of National Defense, Innovapost, House of Commons and Alterna Bank and provided Pro bono services by assuming charge of and organizing volunteers involved in the Eastern Ontario Ice Storm recovery effort.

And perhaps Angela's sister too;

Jamie-Lynn Greter
Director of Environmental Assessment

[The Observer]

Jaded? JADED? Every day has been a delight. Apart from August 22nd, 1981 but I'm not allowed to talk about that.

As opposed to?:

I've been married 14,000 days, give or take. I don't have one of those helpful counters to give the exact total. They all blend together anyhow.

Ok, I will put you down for 14,000 days of wedded bliss - oblivious bliss, but bliss nevertheless.

FWIW, I was talking about Deano and his coterie,...

Thanks for the clarification. I was just concerned we were opening up another can of worms regarding the lives of people who had no intent to put themselves up for mocking. We have had problems in the past here with people linking to or posting pictures that either exposed them to potential abuse or invasion of their privacy. I was hoping that was not going to be the case here.

[Burnaby49]

I delved into her FB page because that was where Dean and F. A. C. T. Radio were lurking. I couldn't find any freeman connections for her elsewhere. It's possible Dean didn't play much of a role in this. There are all kinds of freeman types flogging these miracle get-out-of-debt document packages on the internet.

I'm quite content to have spent my youth and much of my adult life in an age when online personal content didn't exist. Way too much oversharing out there. My only online presence is right here and that works fine for me.

[guilty]

My attempts to find any Canadian meaning or function for a “True Bill inked in blue”...

I wonder if this is some 'holdover' from the early days of photocopying? Blue was a particular problem for the early copiers and could often disappear on the print. Also, it is not so long ago that 'non- photo' blue was used by photo editors to make comments on photos that would not appear on the final print. Technology has moved on since then, although many official forms still ask that you complete the information in black ink.
Presumably, Angela thinks that anything written in blue must be an original because a photocopy can't be made?

[eric]

Might I suggest a corollary of "not blue"? In Canada, financial instruments that may be microfilmed or electronically imaged in some fashion, shall not be accepted by the receiving institution if certain areas have a red background or are written in red. The basic problem, is that after proof, many cheques are electronically imaged, and all cheques for over twenty dollars that may be going through the US are microfilmed. Both of these technologies are more sensitive in the near IR than the human eye so there was a "red check" fad to hide sensitive information from those who might take interest in your financial affairs. If you had the right background on a document and wrote things in red ink all you had was a massive blur, similar to an over-exposed photo. Even though I was intimately involved in engineering fixes for this issue back in the 1980's, the "not red" is still a requirement in Canada.

[Burnaby49]

I wrote a couple of days ago;

I delved into her FB page because that was where Dean and F. A. C. T. Radio were lurking. I couldn't find any freeman connections for her elsewhere. It's possible Dean didn't play much of a role in this. There are all kinds of freeman types flogging these miracle get-out-of-debt document packages on the internet.

That turned out to be exactly the case. She made my newspaper!

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canad ... udent-loan

“I found a bunch of websites talking about administrative process and providing templates. I don’t have a law degree, I thought they looked like they were more or less asking what I was trying to ask, so I used them. … Everyone makes mistakes.”

Unfortunately she's still peddling bullshit;

But in phone and email exchanges this week, Greter, who lives in High River, Alta., with her husband, said the court had “grossly misrepresented” what she was seeking.

Her intent, she said, was never to avoid or stall paying back the money. All she was trying to do was get assurance from the province it was still the debt holder and that it hadn’t securitized the debt and sold it to another party.

“If they had sold the securities, which means they already got paid, and they are continuing to ask me for payment, then they are being paid twice and that is unjust enrichment,” she said.

And if the debt had been sold (it wasn't) how does that get her off the hook? The new creditor would have bought it for the stream of interest and principle repayments she was legally required to make. She says she isn't a lawyer but she seems pretty confidant in claiming she's the victim of unjust enrichment, a legal issue. I get the feeling she doesn't have a clue what she's talking about.

However she's conceded that maybe, just maybe, she owes some money;

Greter, who now works as an organic farm inspector and agriculture consultant, said it was never her intent to thwart the administration of justice. She said after talking to a government lawyer a few weeks ago, she became satisfied the province was still the debt holder and immediately set up a repayment plan.

But she's still suffering from the injustice of that unfair misleading judgment;

However, Greter hasn’t ruled out an appeal.

“I feel that this ruling really misrepresents my side. … I’m concerned by how this could be misinterpreted in the public arena.”

Angela, if you're reading this, a bit of advice. Your position has not been misinterpreted or misrepresented. Master Schulz got it exactly right. She treated you with kid gloves compared to the mauling you are going to get from Queen's Bench if you appeal the decision. They have no patience for this garbage, something you should have noted from the tenor of your judgment. Keep these lines in mind if you are thinking about appealing.

[33] As a final note to Ms. Greter, I caution her against further attempts to use OPCA concepts. Alberta originally sought double costs in its Statement of Claim, but did not pursue elevated and punitive court costs in its oral submissions at the summary judgment application. If Alberta had maintained that claim I would have granted the double costs award sought, or ordered solicitor and own client indemnity costs against Ms. Greter. This reflects this Court’s categorical rejection of pseudolaw as a means to advance false claims or to frustrate the administration of justice, the operation of the courts, and the enforcement of legal obligations.

This could get very expensive for you very quickly. Next time Alberta will seek punitive costs and they will get them. With the $3,000 cost award you are heading towards $75,000 you owe the government. When you lose the appeal you can expect to add, at a rough guess, another $8,000 or so on top of that.

[Burnaby49]

Angela's getting famous! This morning the same article was in the Vancouver Sun, my local paper. My wife pointed it out to me (she grabs the paper first) and asked if Angela was one of those people I write about.