The 3 requirements to request intervener status ‘Interveners must not challenge findings of fact, introduce new issues, or try to expand the case.’
They won’t respond mainly because you immediately disqualified yourself with the three requirements to request intervener status.
Your ‘letters’ are received but not accepted because there are rules and requirements you never follow. Rules are implemented because of procedural morons like yourself who think they are always ‘right’.
So theres that.
What is it that you don’t understand?
Your substack and X posts do not garner support from the educated.
Why post all this nonsense that makes readers perceive your ‘evidence’ as malarky?
These posts provide evidence that your self inflicted chaos has overwhelmed your perception of actuality……and you occasionally know what you are doing and the manipulation of facts is far from courageous or heroic.
I provided evidence important to the court in their determination of the legality of the conduct of the Executive. Of course I realized that the Judiciary would not welcome evidence that suggests that the Minister of Justice enforced the Emergencies Act because of the Judiciary's failure to administer the public service of the legal system in accordance with their constitutional requirement to provide fair and impartial trials and that his personal and the institutional integrity were being questioned in the legal system and a decision on the matter due on February 14, 2022 and since David Lametti, Minister of Justice had already made false and misleading statements in order to avoid doing his duty to protect the public and instead improperly protecting judges abusing Canadians. So I sent the evidence also to the Parliamentary Committee of the Declaration of the Emergency (DEDC) as they are somewhat more impartial in judging the Judiciary than the Judiciary and it is their duty. But they are also somewhat implicated as they did not remove Judge Shaw who is responsible for some of this mess, back in 1999 when he declared the law on child pornography to be unconstitutional and MP's were determined to remove him but fell into line when the Minister of Justice, Anne McLellan pleaded with them to allow the legal system to self-regulate.
But please continue your delusional rants as the integrity of your esteemed institution disintegrates in the gutter.
Why dont you publish your real name instead of hiding. You are correct that the BC Court of Appeal labelled me a conspiracy theorist and my claims as not reflecting reality although they did have in their hands evidence from the Canadian Judicial Council claiming that Judges have discretion to protect a lawyer committing fraud on a court order by rejecting my evidence, the official record of trial, the transcript.
And when I attempted to question the CRA Agent at trial regarding his opinion on the fairness of a trial conducted under these circumstances the Judge refused to allow him to answer.
And that the Public Prosecution Service of Canada dropped their prosecution of me on failing to file income tax statements, (my initial protest against an abusive and unconstitutional administration) "in the public interest" after an examination of prosecutorial discretion and another matter is currently held up at the BC Court of Appeal waiting for the Nelson Registry to comply with a court order to provide the court audio which discloses the corruption. It's been over a year now. I doubt they will ever comply.
And given that the Judge who sentenced me declared that there were no miscarriages of justice despite evidence of fraud and judicial corruption protecting the fraud but when the Judiciary can ignore all the evidence that any Canadian could provide then such miscarriages of justice will be guaranteed to occur.
But they are trying to shut me up because legally the courts are conducting themselves unconstitutionally and refusing to allow their discretion to be examined by the only court of competent jurisdiction to do so, which is Parliament. It is obvious to anyone that the Judiciary is in conflict with their constitutional requirement to provide a "fair and impartial trial" and so legally their decisions are of "no force or effect" until they rectify the situation. They are obviously biased towards lawyers as they will reject the best evidence any canadian could provide to protect fraud committed by a lawyer which is obviously unfair.
Who do you work for? Are you a lawyer, or an otherwise biased Party? Why would anyone defend such conduct and project their guilt onto another...
The 3 requirements to request intervener status ‘Interveners must not challenge findings of fact, introduce new issues, or try to expand the case.’
They won’t respond mainly because you immediately disqualified yourself with the three requirements to request intervener status.
Your ‘letters’ are received but not accepted because there are rules and requirements you never follow. Rules are implemented because of procedural morons like yourself who think they are always ‘right’.
So theres that.
What is it that you don’t understand?
Your substack and X posts do not garner support from the educated.
Why post all this nonsense that makes readers perceive your ‘evidence’ as malarky?
These posts provide evidence that your self inflicted chaos has overwhelmed your perception of actuality……and you occasionally know what you are doing and the manipulation of facts is far from courageous or heroic.
What a miserable life to live.
I provided evidence important to the court in their determination of the legality of the conduct of the Executive. Of course I realized that the Judiciary would not welcome evidence that suggests that the Minister of Justice enforced the Emergencies Act because of the Judiciary's failure to administer the public service of the legal system in accordance with their constitutional requirement to provide fair and impartial trials and that his personal and the institutional integrity were being questioned in the legal system and a decision on the matter due on February 14, 2022 and since David Lametti, Minister of Justice had already made false and misleading statements in order to avoid doing his duty to protect the public and instead improperly protecting judges abusing Canadians. So I sent the evidence also to the Parliamentary Committee of the Declaration of the Emergency (DEDC) as they are somewhat more impartial in judging the Judiciary than the Judiciary and it is their duty. But they are also somewhat implicated as they did not remove Judge Shaw who is responsible for some of this mess, back in 1999 when he declared the law on child pornography to be unconstitutional and MP's were determined to remove him but fell into line when the Minister of Justice, Anne McLellan pleaded with them to allow the legal system to self-regulate.
But please continue your delusional rants as the integrity of your esteemed institution disintegrates in the gutter.
Who is delusional?
Why dont you publish your real name instead of hiding. You are correct that the BC Court of Appeal labelled me a conspiracy theorist and my claims as not reflecting reality although they did have in their hands evidence from the Canadian Judicial Council claiming that Judges have discretion to protect a lawyer committing fraud on a court order by rejecting my evidence, the official record of trial, the transcript.
And when I attempted to question the CRA Agent at trial regarding his opinion on the fairness of a trial conducted under these circumstances the Judge refused to allow him to answer.
And that the Public Prosecution Service of Canada dropped their prosecution of me on failing to file income tax statements, (my initial protest against an abusive and unconstitutional administration) "in the public interest" after an examination of prosecutorial discretion and another matter is currently held up at the BC Court of Appeal waiting for the Nelson Registry to comply with a court order to provide the court audio which discloses the corruption. It's been over a year now. I doubt they will ever comply.
And given that the Judge who sentenced me declared that there were no miscarriages of justice despite evidence of fraud and judicial corruption protecting the fraud but when the Judiciary can ignore all the evidence that any Canadian could provide then such miscarriages of justice will be guaranteed to occur.
But they are trying to shut me up because legally the courts are conducting themselves unconstitutionally and refusing to allow their discretion to be examined by the only court of competent jurisdiction to do so, which is Parliament. It is obvious to anyone that the Judiciary is in conflict with their constitutional requirement to provide a "fair and impartial trial" and so legally their decisions are of "no force or effect" until they rectify the situation. They are obviously biased towards lawyers as they will reject the best evidence any canadian could provide to protect fraud committed by a lawyer which is obviously unfair.
Who do you work for? Are you a lawyer, or an otherwise biased Party? Why would anyone defend such conduct and project their guilt onto another...