fwd: courtroom #7
To whom it may concern,
I was in provincial court today at 2:00 p.m. in courtroom #7 where a criminal trial was convened on traffic charges.
Justice Singer on announcing his entry stated that these were criminal proceedings.
Thats right.
Voluntary payment traffic offences under the highway traffic act, are criminal offences.
Not only that, the courts do not require a victim to be identified in these criminal proceedings.
And they do not have to make full disclosure to the charges. i.e. R v. Stinchcomb
Evidence was tendered showing the provincial court had refused to accept payment for the tickets on three separate previous occasions.
The judge did not seem to care.....that he is now complicit in the crime of subjecting someone to cruel and unusual punishment.
I mean....it only stands to reason that if a party (provincial court) refuses to accept payment on three separate previous occasions and your that party then, you have no option after waiving payment.
Let alone attempting to convict someone of it after the fact.
The crowns witnesses were shown to be incompetent i.e. did not have an iota of an idea above a planted Bull-Frogs ass as to who they were representing in court today.
They did not have to know what any of the words or terms written on the tickets meant either.
Just fill in the blanks.
Gary Parker senior prosecutor, refused to take the stand and testify.
The judge wanted to know what 2 questions I had for him.
1) Who do you represent here today?
2) Why did you fail to provide disclosure to the nature and cause of the charges?
.The Judge now representing senior crown counsel stated:
He does not have to answer that.
I actually got sick of the legal advise the judge was attempting to slide on me like some kind of green slime.
It got down right sickening, watching these clowns operate.
A constitutional trial where no one dare bring up the constitution.
A criminal trial with no identifiable victim.
No competent witnesses.....for either side of the crown.
They seem to be getting pissed with me after I carved their three federal counsellors in court of Queens Bench a brand new asshole by simply using the rules of procedure.
(The only way they got out the door unscathed was by threatening or bribing the judge.)
Thats never happened before.
The court transcript & file says it all.
That is if.... it is not found to be lost.
And that has happened to me before.
In my books the provincial court is notorious for losing the transcript.
I don't know about you but, if it was me jerking somebody's chain for sport, I would expect retribution.
I would expect to lose my position along with a cut in pay.
And reside in the penalty box for a game misconduct.
Or worse....be kicked right out of the league altogether.
Regards,
Jack
p.s. It sure didn't take these people long to get the ball rolling.
Mary Gill to me
show details Apr 6 (2 days ago)
Our File: 11-0009
6 April 2011
Mr Jackie Grant Harper
jack.harper4@gmail.com
Dear Mr Harper:
I wish to acknowledge receipt of your letter of 31 March 2011 in which you make a complaint involving Mr Justice Foley of the Court of Queen’s Bench for Saskatchewan.
The Executive Director and Senior General Counsel, Mr Norman Sabourin, has asked me to inform you that your complaint will be brought to the attention of the Vice-Chairperson of the Council’s Judicial Conduct Committee and that we will be writing to you once your complaint is reviewed.
For your information, you will find on our website at www.cjc-ccm.gc.ca a brochure entitled “The Conduct of Judges” which explains the complaint process and the role of the Council.
Yours sincerely,
Mary Gill
Administration Officer
Judicial Conduct Registry
