Political and Judicial Prisoner
Incarceration at Fraser Regional Correctional Centre
In 2020 I filed a complaint with the UN Human Rights Tribunal asserting that I had lots all rights within the Canadian legal system due to Judges claiming a discretion to ignore the transcript to protect a lawyer committing fraud. The complaint was received but no response.
In March 2021 the enforcement procedure of the Charter s 24(1) was properly served upon the Federal AG/MOJ requesting Parliament check the constitutionality of the Judiciary’s claim of absolute power over all evidence, including their own official record, the transcript. No response.
Thanks for reading Fundamental Justice! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.
On July 1st, 2022 this article was published in the Valley Voice, a local independent paper in the West Kootenays of British Columbia.
On July 16th, 2022 I attended the Provincial Court before Justice Sicotte and made allegations of a failure by the MOJ David Lametti to “protect the public” and ensure that the “administration of government is in compliance with the law”.
Two constitutional questions were served on the BC and Federal AG but “no comment” was the only response. One constitutional question was regarding the constitutionality of the Income Tax Act reporting requirements s 238(1) and the second was the constitutionality of the failure of the Federal AG to respond to the enforcement procedure of the Charter, improperly protecting lawyers and judges.
At that time Justice Sicotte claimed he was not a high enough court to rule on the matter and refused to allow a CRA agent, a public servant to answer a question as to his perception of the fairness of a trial where Judges assert they have discretion over their acceptance of the best evidence any Canadian could provide, the transcript. Sicotte was fairly compassionate and claimed his ruling was the best he could do, it was below the minimum statutory penalty and delayed payment of the fine for 5 years.
I appealed the decision to the BC Supreme Court and presented an account of a failure of the rule of law throughout the Canadian legal system involving lawyers, law societies, judges, judicial councils, AG/MOJ and PM Trudeau. Liberal appointed Justice Lyster declared a mistrial which re-opened the possibility of incarceration as a punishment but dismissed my arguments as being “irrelevant”.
At BC Court of Appeal Justice Newbury continued the denial and effectively removed my ability to make any allegations of misconduct within the BC Court system with an assertion of raw Judicial opinion supported by zero evidence. Res Judicata, and the rules of precedent binds lower courts to this decision, essentially compelling imprisonment.
"his leap from the fact that his evidence [the transcript - the best evidence possible to prove fraud by a lawyer on a court order - my comment] was not accepted in 2006 to the existence of a vast failure of the justice system and of judges and lawyers to comply with their oaths of office and codes of ethics seems to indicate a disturbing world view rife with conspiracies and corruption. This does not reflect reality."
Unfortunately the evidence suggests that it does. A constitutional question on the constitutionality of not responding to a constitutional question also remains unanswered.
In 2023 prior to the hearing I served a constitutional question on the constitutionality of the Judges Act where the public have zero rights in the judicial conduct process and indeed with the assertion by judges of absolute power, to ignore the transcript - appeals are irrelevant and arbitrary. Both Provincial and Federal AG’s “declined to participate”.
I presented evidence of a Court Registry failing to permit my access to the court, to dispute the false allegations presented by the mother of my children which was resulting in FMEP ( the child support collection body ) requesting my incarceration. “irrelevant” and a “conspiracy theory” being the precedent binding the Court.
Unfortunately the Nelson Court Registry is also not complying with a court order to provide the court audio of a hearing where I allege that the transcript had been altered to delete evidence of a judge losing control of a court hearing subsequent to a judicial conduct complaint. I was able to get that court order from the BC Supreme Court as Justice Newbury at the BCCA had indicated that the evidence was “relevant” in the transcript before her ruling dismissing my application.
I provided argument regarding my indebtedness ( a result of a judicial decision by Justice Shaw - whose fitness as a judge had been debated in Parliament for declaring the law on child pornography to be unconstitutional ) and inability to comply with the court orders as well as restating my constitutional arguments which had previously been declared “irrelevant” and a “conspiracy theory” so those were duly ignored because lower court judges must follow orders. Res Judicata.
I had previously pointed out that the excuse of just following orders had been the cause of human rights abuses throughout history. The hearing lasted under an hour, all my evidence was, after all “irrelevant” and Justice Sicotte declared that there would be “no miscarriage of justice” and ordered my incarceration for 80 days.
In a prior hearing on the Income Tax Act my eldest son, who was 14, had attended and perceived enough to understand that the Prosecution and Judge knew that they were wrong, but in denial.
Unfortunately at that hearing his mother also attempted to physically assert authority over him and the RCMP intervened and returned my son, thoroughly shaken. The same officer, who I have thanked, and does help to restore my trust in the legal system, intervened with the Sheriff and allowed me to text my son and inform him that I would not be coming home and would be denied my care of him. Not in the best interests of the child. Devastating. He had no choice but to go to his mother’s.
I wrote my boys from prison and a friend delivered the letters to the school principal. The principal claimed that he had sat down with my boys and asked them if they wanted to receive letters from me and that they had refused. The principal was very well informed of my experience in the legal system as 5 years previously when the mother denied access for 3 months I had contacted him. At that time the principal had changed the children’s official record at the school to read that the mother had sole custody, which was false. He corrected the record. When I was released I asked my son if the principal had talked to him and he said no and when he asked for the letters the principal told him that his mother had told him not to give them to him. Clearly not in the best interests of the child. I came to the office and told him what he did was wrong, his response was “I’m only here for another 2 weeks…” as he was leaving for another position at another school…
My son and many in my small community assumed that I was jailed for something to do with my protest against abuse of powers in the legal system. It was pretty hard for my son to hear that it was the result of his mother abusive legal action. I’ll write a full post one day on this issue but the summary is she went to the lawyer from my previous divorce, the one that failed to comply with a court order, for independent legal advice. Then, initiated bad faith mediation, did not take the item mediated upon to court, did not mediate on anything that was taken to court, despite offers to do so by me to her and her lawyer and much much more, knowing the abuse of power that I had suffered before and figuring that the previous abuse would serve to their advantage.
The words from a book on Negotiation, “Stand firm on principles, gentle on people.” are powerful reminders to treat others as we would like to be treated ourselves.
I informed the intake officer at the Fraser Regional Correctional Centre and showed him my website fundamentaljustice.com and told the brief story of abuse of power by lawyers and judges. Of course he said that didn’t sound right…but he had to follow orders.
I informed the prison administration of the threat to my person as the RCMP had written that they would “destroy evidence” and I am the evidence. I asked that they use their discretion in my appropriate placement within the prison. I was placed in medium security. Midway through my sentence I requested a transfer to open custody which was denied, but when I requested reasons I received no reply.
Sentencing contributes to respect for the law and to a just, peaceful and safe society. A sentence’s objectives can be to:
Deter the offender or others from committing future crimes
Remove an offender from society to prevent future crimes
Tailor the punishment to further the offender’s rehabilitation
Provide reparations for harm done to victims or the community
Promote a sense of responsibility in offenders and acknowledgment of the harm they have done to victims and community
A sentence should be similar to that imposed on similar offenders for similar offences committed in similar circumstances
An offender should not be deprived of liberty, if a less restrictive way of dealing with the case is appropriate in the circumstances
All available punishments other than imprisonment that are reasonable in the circumstances should be considered for all offenders.
The purpose of incarceration: Four different goals of corrections are commonly espoused: retribution, deterrence, incapacitation, and rehabilitation. Prison reality is the forceful imposition of “command and obedience”, removal of almost all democratic rights including voting, and denial of most forms of social contact to isolate.
I can confirm that the goal of retribution, deterrence and incapacitation were achieved. However it is not in the public interest that I be “rehabilitated” from protesting unconstitutional conduct by the Judiciary and illegal conduct by lawyers.
The Judiciary and Federal and Provincial Prosecutors are notified of my intention to serve Parliament with the Enforcement Procedure of the Charter s 24(1), and being incarcerated certainly prevented that, as did the BC Supreme Court denying the writ of mandamus on the MOJ.
I remain at peace knowing that I can only control my own behavior and try to set a good example for my children.
During Incarceration I did take the opportunity to further my communications with my Member of Parliament Richard Cannings NDP who once again did not return my communications. I also communicated with Senator Batters who as opposition in the Senate had presented some arguments against the Judges Act, particularly the lack of public consultation. When I was watching parliamentary debates in my prison cell TV I heard MP Tako Van Popta talking about Judges having constitutional constraints I wrote him a letter too. As far as my duty to inform the prison of my legal position in regards to habeas corpus I did that too.
I will write at a later date more about the experience of incarceration. Upon release I was involved in an accident in the vehicle arranged by the prison.
It did not appear there was any effort to brake or turn…although Hanlon’s Razor states, “Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence.”
However I remain vigilant, given that I’m alleging constitutional failures at the highest levels and the complete denial of everything I say including, the RCMP threatening to “destroy evidence”. I’ve requested assurances from the MOJ and PM for my safety on multiple occasions, which has never been provided, starting with my Charter complaint requesting Parliament check the claim of absolute power by the Judiciary and numerous refusals to submit. The RCMP were informed, again.
I hitch hiked the rest of the way home with a neighbor from New Denver who happened to drive by 10 minutes later. I had started peeing blood and was displaying signs of shock and very shaky by the time I got back. I called an ambulance 2 hours later and spent two days in the hospital with a suspected perforated bladder but fortunately that serious medical condition was eliminated after filling my bladder with a CT scan dye.
I made a Freedom of Information request on the Prison.
Some information has been withheld pursuant to section(s)
15 (Disclosure harmful to law enforcement),
17 (Disclosure harmful to the financial or economic interests of a public body)
they also remove anything disclosing elements of prosecutorial discretion…
I remind Canadians of who is responsible when a judge screws up, it is the Prime Minister and the Minister of Justice. They are both well informed. When I wrote to the PMO and informed them of the MOJ failing to respond to the enforcement procedure of the Charter and Judges claiming they could ignore the transcript to protect a lawyer and much more; they forwarded the issue to the Minister of Public Safety, an acknowledgement of the public safety concern.
“Frequent use of unbridled judicial power contains the seeds of its own destruction because it will erode the perceived legitimacy of the Judiciary.”
The irony is that the “crime” I was imprisoned for is a “reverse-onus offence” where I was supposed to prove I couldn’t pay what the BC Supreme Court had ordered through the mother’s allegations where I was not served and did not attend, increasing the agreed upon child support of $200 to $2600 down from the $4000+ that the mother had wanted, all in complete denial of the agreed upon debts and obligation to mediate in the separation agreement and before the expiry of the 7 year payment plan to complete equalization payments and in full knowledge of serious indebtedness after a recent business failure…and knowing I didn’t even have a bank account because they already seized it, along with drivers license and passport.
….And under orders from BC Superior Courts that my evidence of the Judicial Council approving a judge ignoring the transcript and preferring the plaintiff’s voice was “irrelevant” and represented “a conspiracy theory…does not reflect reality.”
A request for a writ of Habeas Corpus upon the Supreme Court of Canada to check the legality of the detention remained unanswered until my father in Australia wrote to the Canadian High Commission which resulted in a response from the Court who termed my request, “a letter.”
I submitted a brief to the Parliamentary Committee on Justice and Human Rights as they were debating Bill C-40, the David Milgaard Act, on wrongful imprisonment, 17th of January 2024. They did acknowledge receipt, perhaps they will post it, or maybe they wont. I’ve seen both. Can citizens access Parliament is the question?
Given my correspondence with the RCMP threatening to destroy evidence and the failure of the Emergencies Act Inquiry to include my submitted evidence of the MOJ refusing to comply with the Enforcement Procedure of the Charter improperly protecting lawyers and judges
Except of course if it judges doing it, then who judges the judges. Here is my recommendation for reform of the judicial conduct process to include a citizen jury at the top, as we are the legitimate judges of judicial conduct in a democracy.
They dont like me reporting on my experience. But “it’s the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. So help me God.”
Thanks for reading Fundamental Justice! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.