Suzanne Holland Chief Justice of the Universal Supreme Court of the Tsilhqot’in Nation

[Burnaby49]

So, it appears to me, that by following the book exactly, allowing a pre-enquete, that Ms. Holland has been set up. There will be a definitive ruling that the Crown has a right to control its own court process and Ms. Holland cannot file any more of this foolishness.

I agree with you conclusion but not your wording. The phrase "the Crown" is not used in respect to Canadian courts. The Crown, in the context of litigation, refers to government prosecutors. The courts are independent of the Crown and the Crown has no authority over court process. So in your comment the correct phrasing is "there will be a definitive ruling that the courts have a right to control their own process". The Crown can, and very often does, petition the court to declare a litigant vexatious and abusive but the decision is out of the Crown's hands.

The issue in these hearings is the inherent right of the court to control whatever goes on in the court, including muzzling vexatious litigants. Historically it has been unusual for the court to unilaterally declare a specific litigant vexatious and/or abusive but over the last year or so Alberta's Queen's Bench had been very pro-active in doing so with many OPCA litigants, some even without a prior history of litigation, without any input or request from the Crown.

[eric]

I stand corrected Sir. I just got the impression that the BC Supreme Court, in its original ruling to allow Holland to try again, was purposely leaving an opening for another judge, such as in Felger, to make a ruling to be used as a precedent. In any case we will know on 20 Jan, although I expect she will try to appeal it.

[notorial dissent]

Sounds like she kind of set herself up, and they let her, in fact opened and held the door for her, and I think the comment that she is fiddling with something that is doomed to failure while ignoring the really serious elephant in the room is spot on. She can't do anything about that either so she distracts herself with more pointless nonsense, except that it will generate a Rookian precedent that will then be used to swat her and others like her. Way to go Zusanne.

[Burnaby49]

I stand corrected Sir. I just got the impression that the BC Supreme Court, in its original ruling to allow Holland to try again, was purposely leaving an opening for another judge, such as in Felger, to make a ruling to be used as a precedent. In any case we will know on 20 Jan, although I expect she will try to appeal it.

I’d said that I generally agreed with your conclusion, I just quibbled with terminology. But I'm rethinking that because, being lazy, I hadn’t bothered to review the appeal court decision. Now that I have I can’t agree that the B.C. Court of Appeal was deliberately scheming to get Holland to walk into a trap. All that they are really saying that she screwed up procedurally and has to start over. This is the summary of the decision;

Summary:

The appellant appeals an order dismissing an application for leave to bring a petition challenging the decision of Crown counsel to stay a private prosecution. This Court was referred the question of whether two vexatious litigant orders to which the appellant is subject apply in the context of a petition seeking to challenge a stay of proceedings entered pursuant to the Criminal Code. Held: Leave to appeal granted, appeal allowed, and order below set aside without prejudice to the appellant’s right to begin the proceedings anew by way of application for certiorari. The proceedings below ought to have been quashed at the outset. A challenge to a stay of proceedings entered pursuant to the Criminal Code is a criminal matter properly brought as an application for an extraordinary remedy, not as a petition for judicial review, to which vexatious litigant orders issued under provincial statutory authority do not apply.

Holland v. British Columbia (Attorney General)
2020 BCCA 304
http://canlii.ca/t/jbh5d

Her two vexatious litigant orders are in respect to civil matters but this is a criminal matter where different rules apply. In civil matters the Crown can stay a private prosecution by claiming the applicant has previously been deemed vexatious but the vexatious litigant order doesn’t carry across to criminal matters. However what the appeal court is really saying is that there should have been no private information to allow or refuse in the first place. It isn’t an appropriate way to respond when disagreeing with the Crown’s decision to stay charges and Holland shouldn’t have tried it.

[3] It is apparent that the challenge to a stay of a private prosecution ordered pursuant to s. 579 of the Code ought to have been brought by way of an application for certiorari according to the Criminal Rules and not by petition pursuant to the JRPA. Ms. Holland relied on the wrong procedure to challenge the stay. By doing so, she injected a complexity into the issues which ought not to have arisen. Accordingly, I propose to restate the question slightly to capture what I take to be the real issue, which is whether vexatious litigant orders pronounced pursuant to provincial legislation apply to properly brought challenges to a stay of proceedings entered by the Crown. If they do, then leave would be required before commencing a challenge to such a stay. If they do not, then leave is not required.

I’m not going to do a full analysis of the decision, it’s long and complex and the above quote is sufficient. The appeal court is saying that the lower court should have stomped on her private prosecution application as being invalid “The proceedings below ought to have been quashed at the outset”. The trial court then could have disallowed her complaint because the Crown has the discretion to stay charges if it wishes. Holland should then have appealed the decision to have charges stayed to B.C Court of Appeal in the normal way through an “application for certiorari” rather than pissing around with private prosecutions because “By doing so, she injected a complexity into the issues which ought not to have arisen”. So really all that the appeals court has done is just sent it back for Holland to try again;

Leave to appeal granted, appeal allowed, and order below set aside without prejudice to the appellant’s right to begin the proceedings anew by way of application for certiorari.

So it just means she’s back where she started. The lower court can quash her demand that the charges not be stayed and she’s free to appeal that decision if she wants but only by using the correct rules and procedures.

[Frater I*I]

Thx for the update and commentary about the Crazy Cat Lady

[Frater I*I]

Mrs. Pop-A-Squat calls LoneDummy, seems unlike her husband she follows the rules and will get 6 months halfway house time in late Nov. Then they devolved into anti vax and COVID lies, as a bonus you get to hear LoneDummy clipping his fingernails during the first few minutes...

[eric]

And Ms. Holland gets her second chance today in her attempt to privately prosecute the judge. She also gets her first kick at the can to prosecute the BC attorney general and the Canadian prime minister. All three of the files have their process hearing today. The court lists will be updated tomorrow but if there is a stay of proceedings marked down for file numbers 36956 to 36958 we will know that she has been unsuccessful.

[notorial dissent]

I always felt a teensy bit sorry for Pat, except for her absolutely execrable taste in men, I still don't know if she is nutz as well, or has jus made really terrible life choices to date.

[DarthManius]

How much you wanna bet that as we speak, Mikey is absolutely fuming because he expected to be on that pardon list Trump put out. He’s told Rudi several times that he believes Trump would pardon or exonerate him and Pat and tried to get one of his letters to him.

[notorial dissent]

Poor Mikey, doomed to a life of well deserved frustration and being ignored, all by his own doing.

[Baidn]

I always felt a teensy bit sorry for Pat, except for her absolutely execrable taste in men, I still don't know if she is nutz as well, or has jus made really terrible life choices to date.

I haven't listened to the call yet but I'm guessing there's no chance that Pat has realizes Mike ruined both their lives with his self important idiocy and foul temper. It's too bad, I legitimately thought there was a chance that prison could be the best thing to ever happen to Mrs. Parsons and might lead to her being able to rebuild her life without the giant arrogant leech attached to her.

[eric]

I listened to the call and Pat sounded relatively sane and normal. She even made valid points about one of her parole requirements is finding a job relevant to her education and experience. I agree with her that it probably won't happen. The job market for engineers with twenty plus years of experience is essentially zero.

[notorial dissent]

Unless I am terribly wrong, I think Pat's two main problems are that she has to have incredibly low/poor self esteem issues, out of which comes the aforementioned "execrable taste in men" and I suspect Mikey has pretty well done her out of any chance at a real life now. With a felony conviction I suspect any kind of engineering job is going to be right out of reach. She does need to get as far away from Mikey and his fantasy world as she can and try and start a new life.

[obadiah]

I don't know about Pat but I have more experience and I get recruited regularly.

I listened to the call and Pat sounded relatively sane and normal. She even made valid points about one of her parole requirements is finding a job relevant to her education and experience. I agree with her that it probably won't happen. The job market for engineers with twenty plus years of experience is essentially zero.

[eric]

I don't know about Pat but I have more experience and I get recruited regularly.

I listened to the call and Pat sounded relatively sane and normal. She even made valid points about one of her parole requirements is finding a job relevant to her education and experience. I agree with her that it probably won't happen. The job market for engineers with twenty plus years of experience is essentially zero.

Ok, I understand your point, I probably made too much of a sweeping generalization. I should have put it as "job market for engineers with twenty plus years of experience at a single employer in a limited specialty is essentially zero." Spoken as a retired engineer with members of my family still practicing engineers who made sure that we kept out career path options flexible enough so that we were always in demand.

[Frater I*I]

I don't know about Pat but I have more experience and I get recruited regularly.

I listened to the call and Pat sounded relatively sane and normal. She even made valid points about one of her parole requirements is finding a job relevant to her education and experience. I agree with her that it probably won't happen. The job market for engineers with twenty plus years of experience is essentially zero.

Ok, I understand your point, I probably made too much of a sweeping generalization. I should have put it as "job market for engineers with twenty plus years of experience at a single employer in a limited specialty is essentially zero." Spoken as a retired engineer with members of my family still practicing engineers who made sure that we kept out career path options flexible enough so that we were always in demand.

Not to mention an engineer with a felony record for aiding and abetting the solicitation of kidnapping

[Frater I*I]

The Crazy Cat Lady is back, and as deliciously insane as ever, I haven't listened to the whole thing...

[eric]

I'm really not quite sure what she's trying to do, except she really really wants Bryfogle helping her on her defense for her main charges of kidnapping. Right now he can't so yesterday she had quite a busy day at Kamloops Supreme Court. She is trying to appeal his conviction for a parole violation of playing lawyer, also had a pre-trial conference on her kidnapping. Next week is her private prosecution hearing on "the judge and Crown don't like me because they don't like Bryfogle".

I didn't bother listening to it either. She seems intent on throwing every obstacle she can in the way of making any progress on the kidnapping charges. I expect she will lose the parole violation appeal, but will then appeal her inevitable loss on the private prosecution.

[Frater I*I]

Thank for the update

[eric]

Just found another proceeding that Ms. Holland is involved in. I missed it because she filed it in Prince George rather than Kamloops or Williams lake. Back in 2019, she was angry that her kidnapping trial was proceeding by direct indictment and filed an appeal, which was quashed. (previously discussed above long ago)
https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcca/doc/2 ... ca417.html
She re-wrote her appeal and thought she could sneak it in again in Prince George, and things did not go well:
https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcca/doc/2 ... ultIndex=4

We are agreed that for the reasons of Justice DeWitt‑Van Oosten in R. v. Holland, 2019 BCCA 417, this putative appeal cannot proceed for want of jurisdiction. Accordingly, the appeal is quashed.

and for those of you wondering what a Section 685 dismissal is:

Summary determination of frivolous appeals

685 (1) Where it appears to the registrar that a notice of appeal, which purports to be on a ground of appeal that involves a question of law alone, does not show a substantial ground of appeal, the registrar may refer the appeal to the court of appeal for summary determination, and, where an appeal is referred under this section, the court of appeal may, if it considers that the appeal is frivolous or vexatious and can be determined without being adjourned for a full hearing, dismiss the appeal summarily, without calling on any person to attend the hearing or to appear for the respondent on the hearing.

I had a chance to skim though her latest call to Lonedummy. She sounds so optimistic but if you actually go through the court records she hasn't accomplished anything in the past year substantial, except for wasting a lot of the Courts' time. It amazes me that BC is allowing all this to go forward.