JUMP TO HOME PAGE

FEBRUARY - 2016

FEBRUARY 01-2016 - CANADA'S CORRUPTOCRACY

A SYNOPSIS OF JANUARY - 2016

 

JUDICIAL LIES PILED ON TOP OF JUDICIAL LIES = CASE LAW for the Employee's Case(Canada).

BY: Roger Callow ‘The Outlawed Canadian’ in an 'Outlaw Justice System' www.employeescasecanada.com (30 year unresolved 'standing case' legal matter in 'illicit' teacher lay-off) now known judicially as ‘the cluster-fuck case’ which has been through 10 different court systems and over 40 judges. Sask. 2015-SKQB-308 (H.D. Sept. 24) & APPEAL CACV2783 has, as its focus, the ultra vires nature of BILL 35 as 'current demonstrated ability' is undefined in the Act or in law in general hence anything flowing from it is 'null and void'. The SK court did not order up the 'missing memo notes' (minutes of School Trustees meetings in June of 1985 where they heard from government officials on all aspects of BILL 35) from Justice Southin (1986) which hold the key to this government fraud. The SK decision to duck out for jurisdictional reasons is being appealed CACV2783 to be heard February 09. 3 legal precedent setting conditions now exist: 1) Any judge may 'go off the farm' with little fear of repercussions. 2) The 'sweetheart deal' between Employer and Union leaders has been legally sanctioned (places an end to Unions). 3) Courts no longer have to make a ruling (No legal answer  is a legal answer). = anarchy .What's better than one judge?...why two judges on the same case in QC 550-17-008208-157 which is called 'running a court within a court' , These two judicial tag-team wing-nuts are now referenced to the Supreme Court of Canada. Premier Couillard's government is in tatters as Quebecers no longer have anywhere to turn for justice. The Trudeau Gov't. appears to be caught by being 'pit lamped' and are the new target of these newsletters considering the abject failure of Gov. Gen. David Johnston to, in the void created by Parliament in this issue during the election, to act on the behalf of Canada and 35 million Canadians.

QUOTES:

A) First the punishment; then the crime. Alice in Wonderland  Lewis  Carroll

 

IN ANSWER  TO THE QUESTION POSED AT THE END OF 2015: WHOM IS RUNNING CANADA? SUPREME COURT OF CANADA'S CHIEF JUSTICE HON. B. MCLACHLIN (symbol of Justice System) OR PRIME MINISTER, JUSTIN TRUDEAU?

ANSWER: Well, it sure isn't 'Glory Boy'. If he is not going to dismiss her, he should resign himself.

WHAT REALLY HAPPENED IN THE LAY-OFF OF SENIOR WEST VANCOUVER  TEACHER, ROGER CALLOW, ON JUNE 28,1985; THE ONLY TEACHER AGAINST WHICH THE NEOPHYTE IMPOSED BILL 35 (EFFECTIVE JULY 01-1985) WAS USED AGAINST HIM BEFORE IT WAS WITHDRAWN WHILE THIS CASE WAS UNRESOLVED IN THE 1990'S. THIS CASE WAS DECLARED 'THE BATTLE OF ALL TEACHERS' IN 1985 BY THE UNION WHEN IN FACT IT WAS ONLY DIRECTED AGAINST THE ONE TEACHER NAMED ABOVE

 

JANUARY  3

4) I strongly recommend that you (School Board) put an end to this 30-year filibuster of refusing the necessary disclosure of the 'secret missing memo notes'. Those notes detail the meetings of the WVST in June of 1985 in which copious discussions were made regarding BILL 35 and the lay-off of senior teacher, Roger Callow, which were returned by B.C. Supreme Court's Justice Southin in 1986 after quashing the arbitration 'because she did not use them'.

5) Court cover-up of these documents for the past 30 years has led to a charge of systematic judicial abuse. The addition of the word 'systematic' implies that only the Supreme Court of Canada is competent to handle that aspect of this issue.

JAN. 5

5) ...Briefly put, according to the quashed arbitration, the Board of School Trustees in West Vancouver never authorized my lay-off as a senior teacher in June of 1985 under BILL 35 nor, for that matter any other teacher. More briefly, the conspirators acted fraudulently and the courts have continually covered up this vital fact for 30 years....

JAN.10

3) ...Even more regrettable is the fact that SK Appeal Court Justice Ottenbreit had to deny the rules on surety which he did by declaring this matter as a 'special case'....

4)... Hicks, Morley et al for the employer(Ontario) dropped representation of this case after complaints to the Ontario Legal Society which has failed to respond....

5) 1....There has never been any response from the Canadian Judicial Council under the aegis of its President, Hon. B. McLachlin (Supreme Court of Canada)....

5) 2. .; the general theme for the past 30 years has been this Plaintiff trying to get a judicial finding for his 'illicit' teacher lay-off from which compensation (includes pension rights) may flow. The assertion here is that the B.C. Government in 1985 was hi-jacked (imposed BILL 35) and the judiciary co-opted (gerrymandered government arbitrator later ruled patently unreasonable when the arbitration favouring the School Board was quashed) sanctioned a 'sweetheart deal' between the Employer and elements within the local Union....Southin then did those things which would permit the Board to gain through the back door what they could not gain through the front door of the arbitration. The ensuing 30 years in 10 separate court systems and 40 judges, it is submitted here, is proof positive of a judicial conspiracy in which a 'grey eminence' with backdoor access to the Office of the Chief Justice across the Country, is able - through the careful appointment of judges - maintain the biggest fraud ever perpetuated in Canadian jurisprudence... For the School Board, they would dearly like an end to this issue for no thinking B.C. teacher will ever again trust to arbitration and the courts nor will any ethical B.C. administrator write a negative Professional Report on a teacher.

10) The Employer could end this 30 year Disclosure quest by providing this Plaintiff immediately with those 'missing memo notes'. The Union also has a copy. All the RCMP is waiting for is the necessary Order to seize those documents.

JAN.11

3) In 2004, the Supreme Court of Canada reinforced my position of being in limbo in an unresolved labour matter with its genesis in B.C. dating from 1985. No compensation (includes pension rights) has been paid due to the fact that there is no judicial finding relating to my 'illicit' teacher lay-off under the imposed BILL 35; the only teacher so laid off under this allegedly ultra vires piece of legislation. That's when Canada sank to Third World status as the very essence of any Justice System is its finality. That's why this matter is a 'standing case'.

4) ... In July of 2013,Deputy Justice A. Cullen of the B.C. Appeal Court (Cullen Creed), on his own recognizance, without taking argument nor applying applicable laws, expelled me from the B.C. Justice System (no 'may proceed only with the permission of a judge' was included) forcing me into other Justice Systems....

6) ... There must be disclosure before due diligence may be conducted; particularly when fraud is alleged as is the case here.

7) A careful reading of the legislation in each or the other forums illustrates the application of inherent jurisdiction, natural justice, transference which never happens under judges appointed to this case which does entail a responsibility of other courts to fill the void created in B.C. by the unusual and illicit actions of the Cullen Creed.

8) Failure of the courts above has lowered Canada, it is submitted here, to fourth world status.

10 c)... How can the QC court proceed without a definition as to the propriety of the duality of judges?....

12) For my part, it is time to send in the RCMP to obtain the 'disclosure' demanded above by this plaintiff. Either Couillard or Trudeau has that power.

JAN.15

5) Both QC courts and SK courts were unsuccessfully warned by me not to refer to any events in Ontario which are tied up in oversight bodies which do not respond.

6) The key reference in both cases to Ontario relates to highly specious 'frivolous and vexatious' Orders from Superior Court C. McKinnon j. where this writer was the Respondent : one dated April 23-2014 and a second one dated September 15-2014 which makes no reference to the first. The B.C. Legal Society, on the advice of the SK legal Society, is investigating this dichotomy.

7) In QC, 95% of the Lavery, de Billy case was based on this specious order according to a second Gatineau justice, Goulet j. whom wrote the lower court Order without reference to the sitting judge, Therrien j. in another kafkaesque duality. It is Goulet's Order which is being contested on January 18-2016 as I have not received an answer to my request for Therrien's Order. Lavery, de Billy's second factum to be heard January 18-2016 on an Order to dismiss makes no reference to this duality in what I label as the Lavery, de Billy 'tail' wagging the Montreal Appeal Court 'dog'.

8) While the focus in Montreal Appeal Court is the April 23-2014 McKinnon j. Order; the focus of B.C. Harris & Co. in SK was to quote the September 15-2014 Order....

THE MCKINNON j. ORDER(S)

11) ...This must be stopped. Now.' bawled the Ottawa Citizen page 1 story on April 28-2014 aped by the Montreal La Presse. What exactly it was that was to be stopped is not clear despite all the bombastic rhetoric of McKinnon j. in his April 23-2014 Order. My 'right to reply' was ignored by the anti-employee Citizen.

20) The unresolved Employee's Case where no compensation has flowed has been anything but fair under any conceivable circumstances, as handled by the various courts and tribunals.

21) The key here is whether a court system is credible (the 'fairness' aspect) Indeed, the entire Justice System depends on its credibility which is under attack in this case.

JAN.16

4)...There is no point continuing with any trial until such Disclosure is provided in either court....

7) I have no qualms about the QC court dismissing this case as I have no interest in the future of the Canadian Justice System although I would like to think QC Premier Couillard and P.M. Trudeau would think differently and why a copy of this letter is included to them.

9) For my part, my sole interest in QC was originally to acquire the Disclosure memos from Justice Therrien. Unfortunately, Justice Goulet re-opened the case - apparently in an illicit manner - so that now we have the proverbial 'dog's breakfast'....

14) In the early 1960's, the Big Three Automakers apologized to Ralph Nader (Unsafe at any Speed) for their persecution of him. Where is that apology to the 'Outlawed Canadian in an outlaw Justice System' which eclipses Nader's story?

JAN.29

1) Included in this account is a 10-page letter to QC Lavery de Billy dated June 03-15 revealing what a complete cock-up has been the Ministry of the Attorney General (2Ministers);the Superior Court of Justice (Ottawa) (2 judges) and the Canadian Judicial Council under President Hon. B. McLachlin as both these judges were originally Federal Court appointments; The ON Appeal Court (Chief Justice George Strathy) and any number of lower court functionaries.

2) The incompetence of the oversight bodies has led to drastic legal ramifications in this issue in courts outside of ON. For example, one case has been filed in the Supreme Court of Canada from QC with a second filing 'on deck' from SK.

3) The situation is so dire for the credibility of the Canadian Justice System, that a further letter of this date has been addressed to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.

4) How this body can resolve these difficulties is beyond me as the problem are your bosses.

JAN.29 (Trudeau)

1) The January 2016 Supreme Court of Canada Appeal to the Employee's Case (Quebec Division) as enunciated in a 10 page June 03-2015 letter to QC Lavery de Billy for the Respondent West Vancouver School Trustees, must be the strangest challenge to the credibility of Canada's Justice System ever entertained.

3) Under the circumstances noted in my Memorandum of Argument,(p.14-15)        I offer this unusual means of finalizing a legal matter which has undermined the course of justice in Canada: PLAINTIFF'S PROPOSAL  9) My proposal is that for a non-negotiable without prejudice offer, I will drop my action requesting the 'missing memo notes' in exchange for ten million dollars to be costed to the various parties concerned in this case according to the wishes of the court.

4) The point here is that as the plaintiff , I have no direct interest in the constitutional and otherwise legal questions voiced in this appeal as a revelation of the 'missing memo notes' would force a revision of my case in any event; probably on the basis of criminal fraud. That is not to say that the Prime Minister should be as sanguine.

6) In that latter regard of executive action, the P.M. could revitalize the Canadian Justice System by dismissing justices and chief justices associated with the Employee's Case for exceeding their authority (includes 'doing nothing'). A separate list has been included to the P.M. for this purpose.

JAN.29 (West Vancouver School Trustees)

9) Why should the current West Vancouver taxpayer, it needs be asked, foot the cost of legal chicanery when Prime Minister J. Trudeau can use the executive powers of the Prime Minister's position to handle that aspect of this alleged fraud? His father passed the Charter of Rights in 1982 (the easy part) leaving the son to enforce compliance from the Justice System in 2016 which is why this standing case labeled the Employee's Case Canada is his legacy no matter which course of action he chooses to follow.

10) As matters now stand, the escalating cost of settlement is increasing to seven million dollars as of February 09-2016 if you choose to settle 'out of court'. Most of that money is 30 years of 'deferred salary' which belongs to this plaintiff apart from judicial findings. In brief, I should never have been released from salary until this matter was resolved. No compensation (includes pension rights) has been paid to date.

 

 

CANADA'S CORRUPTOCRACY - FEBRUARY 07-2016

JUDICIAL LIES PILED ON TOP OF JUDICIAL LIES = CASE LAW for the Employee's Case(Canada)

BY: Roger Callow ‘The Outlawed Canadian’ in an 'Outlaw Justice System' www.employescasecanada.ca (30 year unresolved 'standing case' legal matter in 'illicit' teacher lay-off) now known judicially as ‘the cluster-fuck case’ which has been through 10 different court systems and over 40 judges. Sask. 2015-SKQB-308 (H.D. Sept. 24-15) & APPEAL CACV2783 has, as its focus, the ultra vires nature of BILL 35 as 'current demonstrated ability' is undefined in the Act or in law in general hence anything flowing from it is 'null and void'. The SK court did not order up the 'missing memo notes' (minutes of School Trustees meetings in June of 1985 where they heard from government officials on all aspects of BILL 35) from Justice Southin (1986) which hold the key to this government criminal fraud. The SK decision to duck out for jurisdictional reasons is being appealed in CACV2783 to be heard February 09.

 

February 05-2015

 

TO: Board of School Trustees (S.D. #45 West Vancouver, B.C.)

1075-21st Street, West Vancouver, B.C. V7V 4A9

tel: 604-981-1000   fax: 604-981-1001        SENT BY FAX (2 pages)

 

cc SK Appeal Court CACV2783 & SK Legal Society   SENT TO BOTH BY FAX

 

FROM: Roger Callow  Ottawa ON K1V 9A7

fax: 613-521-1739

 

TOPIC: legal status of Harris & Co. in SK CACV2783    H.D. Feb. 09-2016

QUOTE: A)Substitute 'ethical judges' for 'clean athletes' in this O.C. article Time for doping victims to have their say  '...This is different. It's no longer a case of the bad guys (the dopers=conspirator judges RC) to evade the good guys (those charged with protecting the sanctity of the sport).In athletics (as in law, RC),...there are cheaters, the power brokers at the top (chief justices RC) who are capitalizing on the cheating, and the clean athletes left with no one to protect them. It is these athletes who suffer most from such rampant corruption at the highest levels of the game....'

B) O.C. heading Feb. 4-16 A3 'Newspapers 'irresponsible' in failing to hold the powerful to account, Washington Post editor and guest speaker (Carleton U) says.' Response: Well, here's a personal challenge to Martin Baron, executive editor of the Washington Post, to win yet another Nobel Prize considering the 'irresponsible' Canadian boycott on the national Employee's Case.

 

PLACARD:   JUSTIN, EITHER FIRE CHIEF JUSTICES OR RESIGN

 

MESSAGE:

1) As you have chosen not to reply to my letter of January 29-2016 relating to the representation of your SK interests in the above matter by B.C.'s Harris & Co. of whom I am asking the SK courts to ban for legal transgressions; I must conclude that Harris & Co. is still your preferred choice.

2) As you know, those concerns are now in the hands of the SK Legal Society as the B.C. Society failed to deal with the central issue relating to the presentation of the duplicitous (Ontario Superior Court) McKinnon Order(s) by Harris & Co. in the lower SK court of Megaw j. Megaw j. was made well aware of this duplicity in court. These McKinnon Order(s) are the bedrock of the 'frivolous and vexatious' charge against this plaintiff.

3) A letter detailing those B.C. Legal Society shortcomings dated January 28-2016 has been delivered to you and the SK Appeal Court and SK Legal Society. SEE web QC-SK Dismissals

4) At this late date with the intervention of the weekend, there is no likelihood that an SK  Legal Society decision on the topic discussed above will be available in order that a written rebuttal is possible by this plaintiff. Under these conditions, I will ask the court to ignore the McKinnon Order(s) which is the only extant frivolous & vexatious account available but one which is badly flawed. They should reject the Megaw j. Decision on those grounds alone.

5) Should Harris & Co. turn up in SK court on February 9-2016; I will ask the court to ban his testimony. Should he fly to SK for the purpose, I will appeal any decision which duns me with those travel expenses. Telephone conferencing worked perfectly well at the lower court.

6) Should SK Appeal Court's Ottenbreit j. (reference: earlier 'surety' hearing) form part of the three person Appeal Court panel, I will call for the expulsion from the bench of all three judges. This type of judicial chicanery is not an exception from earlier hearings elsewhere where judges think nothing of sitting on the same case twice.

7) Any other perceived chicanery from the bench will result in the same charge which, in the recent case in QC, is part of the charge leveled at three Appeal Court Justices now in the hands of the Supreme Court of Canada. I called for their expulsion from the bench.

8) Of course, if Disclosure is not addressed or the ultra vires constitutional question as it relates to BILL 35 (1985); an appeal is inevitable. This disclosure is vital to a charge of criminal fraud.

9) Vital to this case is an admission by the court that the Cullen Creed of July 23-2013 expelled this plaintiff absolutely from B.C. courts hence calling for a proper application of the rules of inherent jurisdiction, natural justice, and transference . Megaw j. was made well aware of that point in the lower SK court. This admission is central to any appeal and has been in every court since 2013. As the Respondent did not address this argument, the plaintiff's case must stand.

10) Any attempt by this Appeal Court to remit the matter back to the lower court will be rebuffed.

11) It is clear that the Employer in this case has abandoned the decades old B.C. Court Order to return to arbitration or, alternatively, refused to sign an outside agreement with the Union which was their only other alternative. This court, therefore, is quite within its rights under these circumstances, to return employment to this plaintiff with all terms of the contract (30 years of 'deferred salary' with interest) to apply.

11) Considering this letter, there is no need for myself as plaintiff to address this court which, if I am not mistaken, is the ploy of the Respondent to muzzle me in any case with a 'dismissal ' Order - as practiced in other courts - with the compliance of a willing bench.

Yours truly,

 

Roger Callow

 

cc Premier Wall / P.M. Trudeau / RCMP (Montreal Fraud Division)

 

CANADA'S CORRUPTOCRACY - FEBRUARY 10-2016

JUDICIAL LIES PILED ON TOP OF JUDICIAL LIES = CASE LAW for the Employee's Case(Canada)

BY: Roger Callow ‘The Outlawed Canadian’ in an 'Outlaw Justice System' www.employescasecanada.ca (30 year unresolved 'standing case' legal matter in 'illicit' teacher lay-off) now known judicially as ‘the cluster-fuck case’ which has been through 10 different court systems and over 40 judges. Sask. 2015-SKQB-308 (H.D. Sept. 24-15) & APPEAL CACV2783 has, as its focus, the ultra vires nature of BILL 35 as 'current demonstrated ability' is undefined in the Act or in law in general hence anything flowing from it is 'null and void'. The SK court did not order up the 'missing memo notes' (minutes of School Trustees meetings in June of 1985 where they heard from government officials on all aspects of BILL 35) from Justice Southin (1986) which hold the key to this government criminal fraud. The SK decision to duck out for jurisdictional reasons CACV2783 (Feb.09-16) which is being appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada making it the second such SCofC Appeal based, essentially, on Disclosure. That's ludicrous.

 

February 10-2016

TO:                                                                                        FROM:          

Rt. Hon.  J. Trudeau P.M.                                   Roger Callow               

VERY PERSONAL                                       Ottawa, Ontario K1V 9A7

'employescasecanada.ca'

MESSAGE:

1) The challenge to you at the end of last year was to either fire Canadian Judicial Council President and Supreme Court of Canada Chief Justice Beverly McLachlin, whom looms large in the Employee's Case, under your executive powers or resign yourself. You did neither leaving Canada and Canadians adrift in a legal morass without equal. Certainly, she should not have recently been given the keys to the city of Ottawa by the mayor.

2) Canada is great at telling other nations how to run their business, even bombing them to that end. Silence on the Employee's Case which has exposed the soft underbelly of a corrupt Justice System in a systematic manner makes us hypocrites in the eyes of the world.

3) The question of 'Disclosure' has plagued this case as it does the entire Canadian judiciary to such an extent and degree that there is to be no 'second coming' for the judiciary. In the words of John of the Gospel, 'It is finished'.

4) The question raised here is most significant as revealed by this protest PLACARD: BEHIND EVERY ECONOMIC COLLAPSE IS A MORAL COLLAPSE. The media, for example, prattle on about economic problems giving only a cursory examination to the underlying morality. While 'following the money trail' may be the watchword for the economy on which the economy would appear to rest; 'following the credibility trail' is the essence of any judicial system as it relies on credibility alone.

5) In that latter regard, Canada's oversight bodies including Parliament, as the Employee's Case has shown, are weaker than the bureaucracies that they would purport to oversee.

6) In brief, what your father would create with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in 1982 is being tested to its very core by yourself: PLACARD: WHAT THE FATHER WOULD CREATE / THE SON WOULD DESTROY

7) Currently, there is not one, but two Appeals to the SCofC which have Disclosure as their genesis. That's ludicrous on both counts. No doubt both courts in QC and SK are depending on Chief Justice McLachlin to bail them out of very difficult circumstances.

8) The Disclosure here, it is submitted, would force a re-construction of my case into one of criminal fraud against the original conspirators from 1985 plus the ensuing judicial reviews before 10 separate court systems and 40 judges...and that would never do....

9) In both Appeals to the SCofC; I offer to drop my request for Disclosure - which is in essence the case filed in both accounts although other factors apply - in exchange for $10 million in settlement for all matters in this case. Of course I have no say over charges already on file against legal counsel for the Employer and Union plus court functionaries.

10) One thing is clear, along with the anti-employee media, you may not continue to rule with your head stuck in the sand...to be polite

Yours, in dismay

The Outlawed Canadian in an outlaw Justice System (Roger Callow)

February 10-2016

TO: Saskatchewan Judicial Council
c/o Joanne Colledge-Miller, Executive Officer
2425 Victoria Avenue
Regina  SK  S4P 4W6
Email:
jcolledgemiller@sasklawcourts.ca    3 pages including this one

FROM:

Roger Callow Plaintiff in CACV2783

Ottawa, ON K1V 9A7

 

MESSAGE:

1) Included are two pages giving the most recent background in this case heard on Feb. 09-2016. Other information may be found on employescasecanada.ca

 

2) The long and the short of it is that this Appeal Court usurped the course of Justice bringing it into disrepute by organizing it in the truncated fashion (1/2 hour hearing) that they did thus depriving the litigants of a free and open trial on many significant legal points. Chief Justice Robert Richards could not but be well aware of this 'pre-determined' caper.

 

3) As matters now stand, I have to re-package my factums from SK marking them as an INDEX for the coming SCofC Appeal as it is almost as though I was not there.

 

4) As I no longer have faith in the SK legal system; the appropriate action would be for the court to cover my legal costs assigned to the Respondent at both court levels and to return my Surety payment demanded (speciously)  by Appeal Court's  Justice R. Ottenbreit.

 

5) The Judicial oversight Decision requested above along with the SK Legal Society analysis of the actions of the Respondent lawyer will be included to the SCofC if delivered in a timely manner.

 

Yours truly,

 

(signed) Roger Callow   self-represented plaintiff

cc P.M. Rt. Hon. P.M.  J. Trudeau

 

CANADA'S CORRUPTOCRACY - FEBRUARY 14-2016 cc P.M. Trudeau

JUDICIAL LIES PILED ON TOP OF JUDICIAL LIES = CASE LAW for the Employee's Case(Canada)

 

BY: Roger Callow ‘The Outlawed Canadian’ in an 'Outlaw Justice System' www.employescasecanada.ca (30 year unresolved 'standing case' legal matter in 'illicit' teacher lay-off) now known judicially as ‘the cluster-fuck case’ which has been through 10 different court systems and over 40 judges.The SK decision to duck out for jurisdictional reasons CACV2783 (Feb.09-16) is being appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada making it the second such inane SCofC Appeal based, essentially, on Disclosure.

 

UOTES:

A) '...we have gone from being a proud province of nation builders to a bunch of pompous blowhards....' Ottawa Sun columnist Christina Blizzard

B) '...Ask the subject "What should happen to the person whom is found guilty? An honest person is going to say, Fire him because they want strict punishment...A deceitful person is going to say, I don't know. It's not my job to say. (crux of the SK court debacle RC) To Catch a Liar  O.S. Feb. 10-16 p.16

C) '...men lie to boost themselves up and women lie to protect others and avoid conflicts.' (N.B. the lead judge in the SK Appeal Court was female RC) Ibid

D) From the QC Appeal to the SCofC: PLAINTIFF PROPOSAL   9) My proposal is that for a non-negotiable without prejudice offer, I will drop my action requesting the missing memo notes in exchange for ten million dollars to be costed to the various parties concerned in this case according to the wishes of the court.

 

THREE BLIND MICE

 G. Jackson j - lead judge / N. Caldwell j. / J. Ryan-Froslie j / SK Appeal Court CACV2783

1) In a variation to the limerick, it was the lead judge whom with a carving knife cut off the tails of  justices Caldwell & Ryan-Froslie by forbidding them to speak even when challenged to do so on a legal point by me.

2) No doubt Jackson j. and her minions are the 'apple of his eye' of SK Appeal Chief Justice Robert Richards although more serious observers would coin another term. I don't believe that I have ever encountered a Chief Justice whom I have liked.

3) In a half hour in which only this Plaintiff was called on to speak to the question of jurisdiction (disregarding the matter of fraud relating to material presented in the lower court by the Respondent which has yet to be properly examined by the SK legal society); Justice Jackson would reduce this case to its lowest common denominator...a judicial debacle.

4) In the past, the Employer has sought to derail this case by superimposing 'Motions to Dismiss' on top of the original case thereby speaking first in the hope that the court would act without hearing the other side. Sometimes it worked; other times it didn't such as in Quebec where the matter has been referred to the Supreme Court of Canada with a call by this writer for the expulsion of the three QC Appeal Court judges.

5) Similar machinations in SK stop short of calling for the expulsion of the three Appeal Court judges although it should be noted that individual claimants in a province hard hit with unemployment are likely to face kangaroo court conditions. Popular Brad Wall does not fear the NDP under Cam Broten nor the anti-employee Regina Leader-Post in revealing what is going on under his watch.

The Legal Situation in CACV2783 as construed by the court

6) The court takes a parochial view that events with their genesis in B.C. have no place in a SK Court. In short, 'no tickee, no laundee'

7) That feature comes under the topic of inherent jurisdiction of which list is not exclusive as the court would have it as dealing with external issues not attached to SK does fall under their jurisdiction. For example, an extra-territorial issue outside Canada or B.C. for that matter as in this case, may indeed be tested in a Provincial Court. My argument was that the law givers forsaw such a predicament and wrote exceptions into the law so that the Supreme Court of Canada - as in this case - would not have to deal with matters which should have been handled at the lower court level such as Disclosure. Appealing to the SCofC, essentially on this basis is ludicrous as the SCofC has jurisdiction over all courts in Canada making a non-entity of the jurisdiction question in any event. SK is merely buck passing.

8) Complicating this key difference between myself and Justice Jackson was the format used by her. She blocked the Respondent from presenting a case other than speaking to costs which she awarded him. In brief, the court had decided beforehand how the outcome was to be determined (usually the case but not in such a blatant manner). P.M.Trudeau should place a 'dot' beside the name of Robert Richards as one more Chief Justice whom will not be missed for approving  this pre-determined caper.

9) By not being recorded, the Respondent avoided being asked to account for the fraud alleged at the lower court level for which the B.C. Law Society investigated with the right question which they then proceeded not to answer. The SK legal Society is still on the hook for picking up the slack in this regard for the SCofC Appeal.

Of course the whole exercise is designed to keep the specious 'judicial record' clean. Such as the following questions, therefore, were stillborn: a) When is the Respondent going to tell the court whether or not the Employer owes this plaintiff any compensation? That is the crux of this case for 30 years now and a question the courts have studiously avoided asking. b) Was I or was I not expelled from the B.C. Justice System (Cullen Creed) in July, 2013 forcing me into other Canadian court systems? That point was conspicuous by its absence from both SK court levels making a 'castle built on sand' of any of their arguments. c) Was B.C.'s imposed BILL 35 unconstitutional? Without a rebuttal, my argument that it is indeed the case, must stand.

10) Unfortunately for the conspirators, in filling one hole created by the Respondent legal representative regarding the 'duality' of the ON McKinnon j. order which formed the basis of their frivolous & vexatious accusations, the court dug a much deeper hole as now the onus is entirely on the court to answer this discrepancy as they chose to absorb the Respondent's case as their own. Hence this matter has been forwarded to the SK Judicial Council of Judges. No matter which answer the two SK bodies provide for the SCofC Appeal, the SK Justice System is compromised to the extent that SK citizens will view their court system and the government of Premier Brad Wall with a jaundiced eye.

11) Once before in B.C. a number of years ago, I experienced a similar experience where the presiding Justice only heard one side, a dangerous practice as noted above. It is meant as a high-level judicial put down of a client. It would appear that the SK court, in that regard, has been 'too clever by half'.

Conclusion

12) This lead unresolved labour case of 30 years and still tracking is now the story of the SS Titanic Legal Ship which sits on the bottom of the ocean although the judicial factotums would still write about it as a 'sailing adventure'. This Herculean story - studiously avoided by the anti-employee media running afraid of their owners - should warrant a Winston Churchill (now dead) or Donald Trump (the establishment would wish him dead) leaving this writer to promote a national Canadian story without equal at my own personal expense.

13) Why should I spend limited resources to defend 35 million Canadians? What have they done for me?

14) Hence while the questions from QC and SK are valid SCofC challenges, I do not intend to pursue them for once I get the Disclosure of the 'missing memo notes' which I have been pursuing for 30 years in this illicit teacher lay-off in 1985, I will pursue a criminal fraud charge;the rest of the legal issues and Canada be damned.

 

February 11-2015

 

TO: Board of School Trustees (S.D. #45 West Vancouver, B.C.)

1075-21st Street, West Vancouver, B.C. V7V 4A9

tel: 604-981-1000   fax: 604-981-1001                                    SENT BY FAX (2 pages)

 

cc SK Legal Society / SK Judicial Council / Premier B. Wall / P.M. Justin Trudeau

                                                                                                                               SENT BY FAX

 

FROM: Roger Callow  Ottawa ON K1V 9A7

employescasecanada.ca  'The Outlawed Canadian in an outlaw Justice System'

 

On February 5-2016, I wrote to you:

TOPIC: legal status of Harris & Co. in SK CACV2783    H.D. Feb. 09-2016

MESSAGE:

1) As you have chosen not to reply to my letter of January 29-2016 relating to the representation of your SK interests in the above matter by B.C.'s Harris & Co. of whom I am asking the SK courts to ban for legal transgressions; I must conclude that Harris & Co. is still your preferred choice.

2) As you know, those concerns are now in the hands of the SK Legal Society as the B.C. Society failed to deal with the central issue relating to the presentation of the duplicitous (Ontario Superior Court) McKinnon Order(s) by Harris & Co. in the lower SK court of Megaw j. Megaw j. was made well aware of this duplicity in court. These McKinnon Order(s) are the bedrock of the 'frivolous and vexatious' charge against this plaintiff.

3) A letter detailing those B.C. Legal Society shortcomings dated January 28-2016 has been delivered to you and the SK Appeal Court and SK Legal Society.

4) At this late date with the intervention of the weekend, there is no likelihood that an SK  Legal Society decision on the topic discussed above will be available in order that a written rebuttal is possible by this plaintiff. Under these conditions, I will ask the court to ignore the McKinnon Order(s) which is the only extant frivolous & vexatious account available but one which is badly flawed. They should reject the Megaw j. Decision on these grounds alone.

 

CURRENT MESSAGE OF FEB. 11-2016

1) After your 'wild' success in Quebec Courts (which is now filed for an Appeal in the Supreme Court of Canada (SCofC) by me; you must be 'jumping for joy' at an apparent clean sweep of the SK courts by your B.C. representative, Harris & Co.

2) The SK Appeal Court called on Harris & Co. to speak only to 'costs' which even here, was problematic as I blazoned forth in court. Never, I submitted, is the Respondent Employer ever called on to substantiate their 'outstanding legal bills' merely trusting to a broad blandishment bought into without question by the SK courts of Ottenbreit j (surety) and the Appeal hearing on February 09-2016. I stated that I do not have any accounts outstanding for which I do not include debt owing until all Appeals on file are exhausted. I will challenge Harris & Co. in court should they seek these funds before the SCofC responds.

3) The specific reference here related to a claim that I owed $22,000 in Ontario raising my ire as I had no such bill of accounts from Hicks, Morley et al whom dropped representation of the Employer in 2014, no doubt on my accusations of fraud to the Ontario Legal Society. That Society has yet to respond.

4) My question here, for the sake of the SCofC Appeal is whether or not you paid such a sum to Hicks, Morley out of your own pocket. If so, Harris & Co. has mislead the court (once again in addition to the charge of irregularities at the lower SK court) in a most significant manner. A complete reply is therefore required from you to this point to be filed with the SCofC Appeal.

5) The usual pattern of the Respondent filing an 'Order to Dismiss' after the initial Plaintiff filing so that only the dismissal Order and Respondent is heard without reference to the original factum was not used here, possibly because the frivolous & vexatious terminology for the Respondent was thoroughly compromised by the Ontario courts (McKinnon Order(s)) of 2014. By blocking Harris & Co. from giving argument in Appeal court, the court no doubt hoped to bury this piece of subterfuge enacted at the lower court level but, it is asserted here, at the expense of a much bigger subterfuge.

6) As the court was specifically warned by me not to use the McKinnon Order(s) until investigated by the SK Legal Society, they decided on a corollary of that term by listening only to this Plaintiff. The implication here is that the Plaintiff's case is so trivial that it does not warrant court time by hearing the opposition.

7) Years ago in B.C., the court pulled this stunt on me. As explained to me by legal counsel, It is a 'high-level slap in the face of a litigant' and they can get away with it as long as the matter is not contested which, of course, is what I am doing  here.

8) The risk that the court takes in hearing only one side for which a pre-written Report is invariably the case, is that the court absorbs full responsibility for the arguments of the unheard side. That is why a second adjudication is being called for in addition to the SK Legal Society as to lawyer indiscretions. That second adjudication before the Saskatchewan Judicial Council questions the impartiality of this Appeal Court in a most significant way. In short, while the accusation falls short of fraud calling for the removal of these three judges such as I have made in Quebec; the SK Judicial Council has to adjudicate as to the efficacy of the SK Courts of the government of Premier Brad Wall intervening in this manner.

9) The significance of the challenge to SK should not be underestimated. For example, there have been many, many Senate of Canada excesses such as the Senator who bank-rolled the railroad under the J.A. MacDonald Government in 1873. While MacDonald lost the election over this 'Pacific Scandal', no challenge was made to the Senator concerned and not until the  criminal charge against Senator Duffy in recent years; was the Senate ever vulnerable to be placed on trial (Duffy forewent that challenge by taking the stand instead). In short, the law does not punish wrong doers, per se, rather it punishes wrong-doers whom are apprehended; a small but a most significant point in law.

10) The SK court, in the above regard, took a chance, and it now remains -from their perspective- for Chief Justice of the SCofC, Rt. Hon. B. McLachlin (whom looms large in this case) to bail them out as they were fully cognizant of my intentions in this case. (McLachlin has a more serious challenge with an Appeal of the Quebec courts currently on file by me.)

11) As you know, my unprejudiced buy-out offer has escalated to $8 million as of Feb. 09-2016. When I get the necessary Disclosure of the 'missing memo notes' from the School Board of June, 1985 regarding my illicit lay-off, you should expect continued incremental increases of significant amounts.

 

Yours truly,

 

Roger Callow Plaintiff  CACV2783

REPLY requested to 3) & 4)

 

 

CANADA'S CORRUPTOCRACY - FEBRUARY 21-2016

JUDICIAL LIES PILED ON TOP OF JUDICIAL LIES = CASE LAW for the Employee's Case(Canada)

BY: Roger Callow ‘The Outlawed Canadian’ in an 'Outlaw Justice System' www.employescasecanada.ca (30 year unresolved 'standing case' legal matter in 'illicit' teacher lay-off) now known judicially as ‘the cluster-fuck case’ which has been through 10 different court systems and over 40 judges . This edition is focused on the 'judicial record'; those decisions which form the basis of 'precedent law' on which the practice of law is based. It is a fake as the legal fraternity all know but until the Employee's Case, the Justice System was not exposed on this level. The below scenario seems like someone having to  deal with the billing department of his cable provider.

THE WILLFUL BLINDNESS OF THE 'JUDICIAL RECORD' (J.R.)

1) A key tenet for any legal system is its finality. So how do the conspirators explain how the 'Outlawed Canadian' is in a state of limbo for 30 years? Answer (A.) By making a vague claim that I am merely re-litigating matters which have already been decided. Which matters and which answers remains unknown but the J.R. is satisfied by merely making the claim.

2) Another key tenet is that the judge may not merely pick up the judicial ball and go home leaving a litigant in limbo. B.C. Deputy Chief Justice A. Cullen in 2013 did just that adding, for reasons best known to himself, that I was prohibited from filing any future litigation in B.C. How can a litigant be expelled under these circumstances forcing him into courts outside B.C? A. By other courts claiming that B.C. matters have no place in another jurisdiction. That is the law of inherent jurisdiction in which I argue those points that the non-B.C. courts do have a role while the courts merely look at those points which they claim support an exclusionary role against outside matters. They are wrong but the J.R. is not going into detail on that one.

3) Vital to persistent claims from a litigant by the court is the application of the rule of frivolous & vexatious behaviour. Why so? A. This overworked label is like pinning a yellow star on a litigant and sending him into a Nazi courtroom in order to trivialize a litigant's argument. The difficulty here is that Ontario Superior Court Justice, Colin McKinnon, who wrote the only complete form of f & v, compounded his problem by issuing two orders on two different dates; one used in QC and the other used in SK. On recommendation from the SK legal Society to the B.C. legal Society (Harris & Co. for the Employer  domiciled in B.C.), the B.C. Legal Society (BCLS) asked the right question about the duplicity of McKinnon j. but failed to answer it preferring to direct a diatribe against this  plaintiff. The matter was rebutted and forwarded to the SK Legal Society for a proper examination. I don't expect to hear back so that the J.R. would merely record the BCLS answer. The point here is that the BCLS has 'whitewashed' the concept that a judge may give two different orders without referencing each other. That flies below the radar of the official J.R. but is a major coffin nail in the Justice System.

4) A second matter of Judicial cupidity relates to the fact that two judges were assigned to the QC lower court to write a decision which only came from the second judge without referencing the first. It was as though the first judge did not exist in the J.R. On Appeal in Montreal, the court ignored that glaring deficiency; again, a success for the J.R. with its willful blindness. As far as I am concerned, I am awaiting the Decision from the first duly assigned judge...a long wait indeed as I wait for Hell to freeze over although the Supreme Court of Canada (SCofC) is charged with explaining a shortcoming which promises to revolutionize how justice is conducted in Canada.

5) So how does Harris & Co. avoid facing my wrath over the duality of the McKinnon Order (f & v) in SK Appeal Court on Feb. 09-16? A. Easy, with a pre-arrangement with the court, they would not present an argument other than for costs. The J.R. would imply that they were heard. The difficulty here for the court and why the matter is being appealed to the SCofC is that the Court abandoned its judicial role and became a direct advocate of the Employer and is therefore responsible for all arguments including shortcomings. That turns the entire Justice System on its head. Again, the SCofC will be asked to adjudicate that piece of subterfuge.

6) So what were the courts in SK and QC thinking knowing that these matters would be forwarded to the SCofC? A. That Chief Justice B. McLachlin will arrange to have these matters left unheard (most civil cases go unheard for no given reason). She was personally involved in 1997 along with Chief Justice A. Lamers (d) and as Chief Justice in 2004 in denying  hearings in this unresolved case. With 3 judges to reject the first hearing followed by a second set of 3 judges to do likewise, 6 judges would be implicated. How would Prime Minister Trudeau deal with that conundrum? The point here is that unless he does, the Canadian Justice System is defunct. Our ability as a nation to deal with such as foreign affairs would be seen to come from a failed state...and that would never do....The authorities here are praying that the media owners hold a tight leash on the media whom are forbidden to report on a legal case which has flushed the Justice System down the toilet leaving this writer as 'The Outlawed Canadian in an outlaw Justice System'. It can't get any worse than that.

7) For 30 years, I have requested Disclosure regarding the meeting notes of the Employer in June of 1985 regarding my illicit lay-off. For 30 years, the Courts have refused to order that Disclosure which they never even mention unless it is incidentally. It is time for Prime Minister Trudeau to send in the RCMP (Montreal Fraud Division has a record of these Newsletters). From there a criminal charge of fraud could be launched against the original conspirators as well as the court processes (there is no statute of limitations on fraud).

 

CANADA'S CORRUPTOCRACY - FEBRUARY 23-2016

JUDICIAL LIES PILED ON TOP OF JUDICIAL LIES = CASE LAW for the Employee's Case(Canada)

BY: Roger Callow ‘The Outlawed Canadian’ in an 'Outlaw Justice System' www.employescasecanada.ca (30 year unresolved 'standing case' legal matter in 'illicit' teacher lay-off) now known judicially as ‘the cluster-fuck case’ which has been through 10 different court systems and over 40 judges. This edition is focused on

being ubered (external threat from an unexpected source) through the interlocked legal proceedings from different courts across Canada. For example, recently the Employer filed a 'Motion to Dismiss' in both QC and SK Courts. In QC, the Motion to Dismiss was heard first without any recognition to my factum which had not received a docket number leaving me to defend a negative which is an impossibility. That matter is now in front of the Supreme Court of Canada (SCofC). In brief, the court never entertained the amazing fact that two, not one judge officiated at the lower Gatineau Court; the second judge writing the Decision without any recognition of the existence of the first judge. 'Cover-up by any other name.' Thus it was with some surprise that a similar stunt was not pulled in SK where both my original action and the Motion to Dismiss were to be held at the same time. I was further surprised to be told that I would speak first as the Motion to Dismiss usually takes precedence. That surprise turned to shock when in disagreement with the lead judge on 'jurisdiction'; I requested the opinion of the other two. She forbad them to speak. It further turned out that the Employer's lawyer by prior agreement would not speak either. For example, I asked him whether the Employer owes me compensation; the key question in this trial. She would not permit him to speak other than to costs which she assigned to him. In effect, she made the court fully responsible for the Employer's argument. That is the basis for my request for the removal of these three judges along with the Chief Justice of the SK Appeal Court. The point to be made here is that the 'grey eminence' is only experienced with arranging proceedings in a linear fashion. The Employee's Case has led to bungling on an unimaginable scale with inter-court finagling and is the source of the following letter.

 

February 23-2016

 

TO: Prime Minister Trudeau (with a copy to Premiers Wall & Couillard)

FROM: Roger  Callow

 

MESSAGE: From much correspondence to the above:

1) The Prime Minister must dismiss Hon. B. McLachlin (SCofC and President of the Canadian Judicial Council) if he is to have any credibility and before further damage is done to the Canadian Justice System

2) In conjunction with Premier Wall and the SK legislature, the Prime Minister and Parliament must suspend Appeal Court judges G. Jackson (lead judge) / N. Caldwell / J. Ryan-Froslie and Chief Justice Robert Richards with an eye to dismissal for a gross abuse of the justice system now under Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada.

3) Further, the Prime Minister is called on to appoint his most experienced PMO officer and give him or her full powers to investigate the 30 year unresolved legal debacle known as the Employee's Case(Canada). That personage would have the power to investigate all aspects of this case including the interview of chief judges, judges, court personnel and lawyers attached to this case.

4) The Prime Minister is also called into directing the RCMP (Montreal Fraud Section has the records) to seize the Disclosure memos outlined elsewhere in this 30 year ongoing request.

5) Failure to take any action is tantamount to 'stepping down' and leaving it to a 'Donald Trump' to inform the public as to what a cesspool Canadian bureaucracies have become.

6) How can we justify bombing other nations into submission with this nonsense in our own backyards?       

 

Yours truly,

 

 

NEWS  item: Ottawa Sun Feb. 22-2016 Group wants RCMP to unionize p.3

'...We can't continue to count on people at the top of the organization to change the organization,' (retired RCMP officer) said. "They have a vested interest in the status quo and keeping the amount of power that they have. The type of transformational change that we're talking about is going to be driven from the ground up."  '

My Response: The downside of this argument is that the Unions form yet another bureaucracy and a client, such as myself, can be the target of a 'sweetheart deal' which is the essence of the 30 years unresolved Employee's Case which has broken the back of the Canadian Justice System and yet still awaits a judicial finding. The proper answer is for the Prime Minister to take executive action to remove those at the top (of any public body) whom have clearly exceeded their responsibilities such as I maintain is the case of Supreme Court of Canada's Chief Justice, Beverly McLachlin. Hordes of legitimate legal interests would, under these circumstances, breath a well needed sigh of relief. Even if it takes an Act of Parliament, whom does the P.M. fear...opposition parties committed to incompetence? It is a win-win position for P.M. Trudeau. To be sure, with the appointment of a new Chief Justice, it would slow down the type of nonsense which I encountered recently under Appeal Courts in SK and QC where these problems abound. While both provinces have been referred to the SCofC by me; the real onus is on the P.M. to act immediately.

April Fools?

Dion 'shocked' at overturned acquittal (O.C. Feb.26-2016)

'...Dion said in a statement: "This decision is unjust, given the many grave irregularities throughout the various proceedings and the fact that all evidence presented by the defence has systematically been rejected...and despite... repeated calls for due process,... this case was not handled in a fair and transparent manner...reputation as a safe place for Canadians to work, travel and invest...."  '

    

     Was this Cabinet Minister Dion on the Employee's Case (Canada)? Nope; he remains silent on that one like all his brethren in Parliament and the anti-employee media. But his speech could have been. This story in fact was on the Bantleman Case regarding the Calgary teacher jailed in Indonesia for pedophilia. PLACARD:  HYPOCRISY / CANADA DOES IT BEST