JANUARY - 2019


Jan. 01-2019  A) Readers of this blog over time may have noticed the transition from writers and quotations to annotated political and social cartoons as the written media is being supplanted in that regard. The Ottawa Sun 's Dolighan is one of my favourites. Even TV Public Affairs programs or 'grandpa news' as characterized by adult diaper ads is losing its cachet. The legal case recently filed in Saskatoon is interesting visa vis imposed legislation as it affects both this case (BILL 35) B.C. 1985 and the Carbon (tax?) battle looming in SK. Both illustrate the dangers of government by fiat as they circumnavigate such controls as court and government oversight powers. B) Unintended outcomes are also illustrated in this SK case. Shortly after the defeat of the constitutional question in Nova Scotia in 2017, the government announced the demise of School Boards, no doubt as a means of keeping 'wing-nut' School Boards from invoking $20 million lawsuits such as the Employees Case. Further, the Justice System has already 'shot its bolt' on this case and is unlikely to support a major Employer against an individual employee again.  C) One exemption to that scenario is the challenge that Vice-Admiral Mark Norman fired by the Tories and elevated to a criminal charge by the Liberals poses to two Prime Ministers. In so many words, the Irving Family 'tail' interests of Nova Scotia are intent on wagging the judicial dog in order to make it plain to all Canadians whom really rules the roost in Canada with Norman to be the scapegoat; the 'rule of law be damned'.  D) NYE's Canadian Air Farce was a farce...good actors/lousy scripts although my generation was discarded.



The Criminal Case against Vice Admiral Mark Norman

1) It is a classic case of statute law vs precedent law (from which statute law is created).

2) The crown quotes the rules of cabinet secrecy to support their contention of a 'leak' by Norman.

3) The Defense has the more difficult task of showing how cabinet decisions are a sieve with no recognizable boundaries. Merely stating that others first leaked the cabinet memo, as the crown correctly points out, does not nullify the fact that Norman, a cabinet minister, broke confidences.

4) The case resolves around the concept of the relationship between law and justice. Justice Estey in St. Anne Nackawic is pertinent here: What must be avoided at all costs, is a significant deprivation of justice under the law. One example suffices on this point. Many decades ago, CAA Magazine posted a map of 'speed traps' which abounded in the Southern U.S.  Typical was an out-of-state motorist slowing down from 50mph to 30mph at the sign headed into a small town. Once on the other side, he speeds up in the open country only to be pulled over and arrested for breaking the speed limit. The sign for resuming speed was deliberately posted way past the town for that purpose. The driver victim is taken to a local house in town. 'Hey, May, I have another one,' says the cop. 'Just a minute, I'll be right up' states May, the local J.P. 'I'm doing my washing'. 'So how do you plead?' she asks the victim. 'That's a speed trap your running,' he retorts.' 'Okay, contested case; trial next Wednesday, $50 bail.' 'But I will be 5 states away by then.' 'Then a warrant will be issued for your arrest and your insurance company notified.' 'That's preposterous!...(slowly figuring it out) how much is the fine?'  '$50.'  'I'll pay.' In so many words, while the law has been observed, there is precious little justice in this action.

5) Under the above code, Norman would have difficulty fighting his dismissal under the civil code. When the matter became critical with the much later decision to charge him criminally, a new perspective develops. For example, O.J. Simpson was found 'not guilty' of the murder of his wife in a criminal court but found guilty of the crime in a later civilian court where the requirements regarding evidence are much lower. Hence the focus of Norman's defense should be on the criminality of the charge plus the delay in laying it. Based on newspaper accounts up to December where preliminaries were held; I did not see any evidence from the Crown on that level for without it, by rights, Norman should 'walk'. Evidence secreted by the government is beginning to surface which does not bode well for the crown. That is the advantage of media coverage; something I do not have due to a media boycott in a story which has led to the demise of the credibility of both court and government.

6) In actuality, the sub rosa story on this case is a matter of the Irving Family of Nova Scotia exerting undue influence over M.P. Scott Brison, head honcho at the Treasury Board whom is fronting for them. Their message? Canada and Canadians must learn whom runs this country; the rights of individuals be damned. Is it a case of a 'bridge too far'? It won't be unless Norman's lawyer refocuses her attention from 'what constitutes a leak' to whether or not Norman's actions are of a criminal nature. By his own admission, he did leak the cabinet documents. Is it 'a grievous fault?' in which he must be charged 'grievously' (criminally) for it? The Crown answers in the affirmative quoting statute law. Heinen must do better than limiting her case to precedent law regarding leaks in order to win this one. Government cover-up being exposed is instrumental for success.

7) The e-mails Heinen should be looking for are the ones linking the pronouncements of P.M. Trudeau on this topic to a conspiracy within his government in order to prove fraud. If fraud is shown, everything flowing from it is 'null and void'.

8) Disclosure or Habeas Corpus is the bedrock of any Justice System. For 34 years, I have been thwarted by over 50 judges in that regard from obtaining disclosure in the employeescasecanada.ca Currently I am suing for civil fraud (only the Crown and Police can lay criminal charges) including a number of names of judges - a most unusual action unrecognized by the media with its boycott on this national story - due to the fact that I have demonstrated that Canada has no oversight capabilities from either the Justice System or Government in matters of systemic judicial malfeasance in this case. It is a devastating indictment from which there is no recovery. The battle in Canada with the Employee's Case, beginning in 2019, is for the recognition of the 'individual' in Canadian Society. As an individual, is VAd Norman able to stand up to the 'Old Boy's Club' entrenched in government and large corporate interests such as I have been fighting? That is the broader question. His case is slated for a hearing in August before the national elections in October although more preliminaries are slated at the end of January. Trust the government to duck out, such as they did with the Senator Duffy case thus robbing Duffy of success in his $8 million challenge for his dismissal, to be the operant modus operandi in undermining Norman to obtain any possible redress. That way, the 'Old Boys Club' walks.




To: PREMIER FORD  by fax (2 pages)   From: Roger Callow plaintiff

OCTOBER 23-2018 - SECOND APPEAL: CV 18000 76950  0000 (Ottawa Supreme Court) copy to Ottawa Sun columnist, Mark Bonokoski

1) Considering that the B.C. action mentioned above filed after the Ontario Action has been adjudicated (with much prejudice - see employeescasecanada.ca), why is there a delay in providing a written Decision in Ontario particularly considering that the Employer did not file for an appearance in either case?

2) Also in contrast to B.C. is the fact that the Ontario action lists two Ontario judges whose actions still go uncontested as to malfeasance and were a factor in other venues across Canada.  The Ontario action, also in contrast to the B.C. action, is for civil fraud although production of the disclosure by the highly politicized RCMP would most likely lead to a criminal charge of fraud. Under those conditions, in the event of a successful suit, everything flowing from the imposed BILL 35 (1985) as used by the Employer in an illicit senior teacher lay-off in 1985 would be 'null and void'.

3) At heart of all court actions for 33 years has been the issue of disclosure (as is the case of the criminal trial against Vice Admiral Mark Norman but that trial continues with this difference; I have no media coverage. Is that what Canada has become?...a newspaper democracy?)  Bonokoski, are you listening?

4) The proper course for the Ford government (all correspondence now goes to Premier Ford considering the abject performance of his A.G. Carolyn Mulroney on this file) is to place the Ontario Judiciary under a trusteeship until answers are forthcoming explaining why the above legal case appears to have disappeared down the proverbial black hole.

Yours truly, Roger Callow aka 'outlaw'


DECEMBER 09-2018

1) Nothing has transpired on the above file no.; that is nothing from the court, and nothing from your office.

2) This letter is being written now to forewarn of a 'dirty little stunt' which the laws prohibit but from whom can one expect legitimate oversight? For example, a court letter is written on the last day of work on December 21 with delivery delayed in January so that a due date for response is passed. Looks good to other bureaucrats and possibly the media; but it's codswallop with which the justice system abounds as testified to by the Employee's Case.

3) And yes, as Premier, you are directly affected by any such stunt as the above.

Yours truly, (Roger Callow)


DECEMBER  17-2018  To Ottawa Supreme Court by fax: 613-239-1507  1 page

REFERENCE: CV 18000  76950  0000

1) Your attention is drawn to the letter above to Premier Ford as nothing has changed.

2) Considering your chicanery, the names of two ON Judges, Colin McKinnon and Robert Scott, whom I have charged with fraud in the above action, are being shifted to another venue.

Yours truly, (Roger Callow)



Still no response.

cc Premier Ford / Ottawa Court / O.S. 'international' columnists Farzan Hassan/Tarek Fatah


Yours truly, (Roger Callow)






     The poet, Robert Frost, knew not what he had provoked with these lines as far as I am concerned...Two roads diverged in a wood, and I - I took the one less traveled by, And that has made all the difference.

     As a much younger man, when asked which road I took, I gave a sensible answer: Why the one most travelled by, of course, so I would not get my shoes or trousers muddy.

    Then you must be a sheep trodding the path with all the other conformists.

    I hope so as that was the way I was brought up...pick up after yourself, be good to your friends, work hard, tell the truth, etc. All those things learned in kindergarten. I was a good boy.

    And you had no desire to be an individual by taking the 'goat' trail?

    I was an individual without taking the goat trail. I was not ambitious. I left that to others whom far too often learned that goat herding school for sheep attracted those long on ego and short on almost every other quality in the deck. Some considered it a school for buggering sheep, both mentally and physically. Many of the world's leaders attest to that fact.

     So you willingly followed these goatherds?

     Absolutely not. I was the one sheep who rejected belligerent goats which was why I became the first teacher in Canada to be laid off from my senior teaching job in West Vancouver in 1985 under imposed legislation (BILL 35) passed for the purpose. I still fight on alone in courts after 34 years for a judicial conclusion.

     So, in effect, you are a misguided and frustrated old billygoat.

     As to that, let me leave you with this thought. When I first arrived in Ottawa in 1988, one of my shorter jobs was selling cellular phones which, at that time, were fastened to automobiles. (Hand-held cellular phones came later.) The astute sociopathic sales manager told me one day: I don't know where to place you. You are intelligent but I do not know where you belong.

     The 1982 Charter of Rights and Freedoms was written for people like me. The preamble reads, in effect, No individual may be deprived... which my 34 years experience with Canada's Justice System revealed that the preamble should have read, No power group may be deprived....

     And yeah, Robert, that has made all the difference as I was forced to define myself; an opportunity not readily understood by goats and sheep combined, although they profess to be action people. Just read the slogans on their tee shirts although 'the suits' suffice for the institutional type, if you can believe me. Carpe diem for whichever path one takes.


JAN. 04-2019


January 04-2018

BY: Roger Callow employeescasecanada.ca  SEE JANUARY-2018


A) As Aristotle once said, there's a stupid corner in the brain of every wise person.

B) '...if they can't determine to stand for their own rights, how will they stand for anyone else's?'  Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms

C) 'All that will remain is what is written down.' Dictator Robert Harris



1) Imposed Legislation (IL) is nothing more than dictatorship. Democracies would seek to control such actions by making the 'rule of law' paramount; except that is, in Canada's case, where Nova Scotia Supreme Court judge, P. Rosinski, (469918 Nov. 29-2017) shafted the single most important constitutional question raised by this writer by refusing to grant a hearing.

2) As a consequence the de facto situation for powerful interests including government is best expressed by the West Vancouver School Trustee's final solution aka Nazi Germany; If you do not acquiesce to our terms of settlement, you will get nothing at all.  That is how Canada lost its Justice System.

3) The source of IL is the 'Order in Council' originally designed to deal with housekeeping chores such as the appointment of a secretary to an M.P. and for which the entire Parliament need not be diverted from bigger tasks for such picayune matters. It was never intended to be put to the use that governments in Canada are doing now.

4) In recent years, IL has been promoted as a means of getting around the laws; that is, imposing such as B.C.'s BILL 35 (1985) for a limited purpose i.e. lay off teachers for economic reasons and then withdrawing the legislation in the 1990's in order to escape any repercussions which happened here. In emerging countries, this type of law is known as 'banana republic justice' which is really no justice at all.

5) Unions and Associations are forever on guard against IL and for good reason. For example, ON sought to impose BILL 115 on its teachers in 2015 and NS imposed BILL 75 on teachers in 2016 leading to their first demonstration in NS history. These bills are 'shoving matches' between the Union leaders on one side justifying their existence and the powerful influences on the other seeking material gain at the expense of teachers at large. No matter how much yelling and shouting goes on, the Union leaders are not going to spend precious resources on a single teacher unless they feel cornered as happened in 1985 with the lay-off of senior teacher, Roger Callow, for reasons of declining enrolment. (In fact, the figures produced in arbitration showed an increase. School Board officials perjured themselves to a willing arbitrator later ruled patently unreasonable when the arbitration was quashed by the courts but here's the hitch...the WVST do not recognize court oversight over imposed legislation.)

6) Recently, ON CUPE won a $56 million settlement for their educational workers in a 5 year legal challenge for an entire group to an imposed piece of legislation but that is rare. What individual, it needs be asked, has 5 years amid onerous legal costs should he or she be dismissed? The only protection is to hire your own lawyer at your own expense to parallel a Union lawyer to protect oneself against the sweetheart deal which pervades almost all dismissals to some degree. Union leaders don't like that one as they are jealous of their powers as evidenced in battling against the establishment of an ON Teachers College in the early 1990's (ON teachers pay two fees). That College was instrumental in driving pedophiles out of the profession; something the Unions were loath to do. Those trials can be expensive as seen by the CBC dismissal of Jian Ghomeshi whom won his case. The Union in that case merely got a big bill.

7) The above CUPE story was limited to the 'collective bargaining rules' while my constitutional challenge affected all imposed legislation whether it be for employees or provincial governments e.g. carbon tax in SK. Earlier, I outlined a scenario regarding Tory Jason Kenny of AB if he wins the next election to curtail teacher salaries by recreating public schools as charter schools where seniority provisions won't exist. Such an approach skates around the Unions and leaves senior teachers (at twice the salary) highly vulnerable. In brief, the professional teachers of Canada have dug their own graves by failing to support my constitutional bid in NS. There will never be another opportunity for Union or Association employees quite like this one where I was bearing all the costs with my Model T 'uber' approach.

8) While still spinning my wheels after 32 years, that is not the case for the Canadian Justice System (this case encompasses 8 out of 10 provinces). It has irrevocably collapsed and in that process has taken down the politicians, the anti-employee media, and the unions; it can't be any worse for a democracy than that. What is worse; the calumny experienced here is being paralleled in almost all aspects of Canada's institutions. In the past, war is the logical next step when a country's institutions go bad...ask city 'guru', Jane Jacobs.

9) I contacted such as the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms for their presence in NS on November 29-2017 as intervener status is all the judges really look at. They chose to ignore me. The alternative was for NS teachers to MAKE NOISE which they failed to do.



JAN.04-2019 This account with a few variations is as timely today as it was on January 01-2017


'Would the real Ottawa, Ontario, Justice Colin McKinnon please stand up'

BY: Roger Callow ('The Outlawed Canadian') employeescasecanada.ca

1) Recently, my Google Account was hacked. All that was produced was 'error messages' for anyone seeking my web site which flew below my radar as I do not access my web site through Google. Corrections have been made and, in that process, I stumbled on the mother lode of all judicial corruption. Here's how it happened.

2) In April of 2014, The Employer represented in ON by Hicks, Morley, et al, rather than mount a defense to an action which I had laid, chose instead to mount their own case where I would be the defendant (13-59060 McKinnon j. April 23-2014 Decision).

3) The Hackers mounted two allied sites to my website; the Halifax Examiner (Nov. 03-2017) and McKinnon's April 23 Decision. First the 'Red Neck Media' where the newspaper account is annotated with my detailed comments widely dispersed to NS Teachers and Legal firms. SEE  2018 website.

4) The second McKinnon j. 30 page account of April 23-2014 is one which I had never seen before. The Decision I received was rather brief and limited to my continued dealings with the court. I cited all my reservations on that level for the second court case, this time one before Justice Scott at the end of September of 2014 (14-61592). The reader can immediately see the problem; which account was filed? ...the abbreviated one that I received or the 30 page account (clearly prepared by JUSTICE CANADA as there was information in there which neither McKinnon nor the Hicks, Morley representative were privy to). In brief, it was a matter of overkill by the authorities. So what to do now?

5) Why... create a third signed judgment by McKinnon j. in September immediately before the Scott j. hearing so that the new document would displace my reasoned argument. The problem lay in getting it into court as Hicks, Morley et al had not filed an appearance nor informed me of this new McKinnon Decision. In any event, Hicks, Morley leaped into court running up to the bench to eagerly outstretched judicial hands amid my vociferous objections. To the best of my knowledge, Scott never filed a ruling although considering the above scam, something could have been filed later without my knowledge. Hicks, Morley dropped the Employer after I reported their perfidy to the ON Legal Society. There was no acknowledgement of my charges.

6) If the Canadian Council of Judges (CCJ) (both McKinnon & Scott were originally Federal Court appointees) and the ON Legal Society had investigated at that time as I requested, the debacle in QC and SK plus the Supreme Court of Canada plus the Office of the P.M. (Trudeau) would have been spared. Added to that list is the NS courts as the same material was being 'laundered' by the Employer in his 'Book of Authorities' which the courts point blank refused to investigate(Justice Suzanne Hood April 2017) which explains why a 'Book of Authorities' has lost all credibility across Canada.)

7) With the December 2017 retirement of Chief Justice B. McLachlin of the SCofC and President of the Canadian Judicial Council, I have revived the complaint to the CCJ and ON Legal Society. Interestingly, one judge of whom I asked to be investigated- SCofC, Richard Wagner who sat on both the QC and SK Appeals of this matter in 2016 much to my vehement objection - has now been appointed the new SCofC Chief Justice.

8) Provincially, as the measure of Premier Wynne has already been taken, the challenge shifts to the Tory and NDP Parties in ON along with the anti-employee media. Don't hold your breath on that one plus don't vote in June of 2018 as a consequence.



9) As judicial events outside of British Columbia since 2013 require a conclusion considering that I have once again been accepted by the courts under new B.C. Premier John Horgan (still some glitches here), and considering that certainly the above doesn't look like there will be any resolution sometime soon if at all,  I raised a 'false flag' in Nova Scotia by seeking to restrict a hearing to the constitutional question with the support of the Employer (essentially the same question that they had raised before McKinnon j. which he had ignored.) as to whether the courts have oversight powers to imposed legislation. Of course if the court had heard that challenge, over 50 judges would have been severely embarrassed no matter which way the decision went...and that would never do....

10) The NS courts were caught badly off-guard when I filed a constitutional challenge for the second time in an ex parte (no defendant) action heard before Halifax Supreme Court Justice P. Rosinski on November 28,2017. The outcome? As expected, considering that the Deputy Ministers of all provinces concerned must be notified on constitutional challenges(NS, BC, Federal Government). When they all filed back that they would not be present for intervener status, the message was clear; a few carefully placed phone calls had elicited the answer that this challenge would not see the light of day. So the only question was how Justice Rosinski would pervert the course of justice. The following explanation does not include whether Rosinski j. pulled a 'McKinnon' by having the judicial record laundered in this case with a private second judgment.

11) Rosinski's judgment makes no mention of the 'constitutional question' nor does it make any copious reference to background facts which he did in court and are a part of transcript evidence. I have called for President Trump to invoke the Magnitsky Act (legal and moral turpitude) against Justice Rosinski  and barring that, for Venezuela to strike back at Canada for using that self-same act to condemn their Chief Justice.

12) Hence the de facto situation is that the West Vancouver School Trustee's Final Solution which denies court oversight over imposed legislation stands. Up the revolution!

13) Currently the I am suing the Employer in B.C. for civil fraud. SEE 2018 HINCKSON CJ FRAUD Sub-heading for a preposterous action referred to the B.C. NDP gov't. = no response

14) Until this mess known as the 'cluster-fuck case' is sorted out, Governor General Julie Payette should not hand out any 'Orders of Canada' nor should anyone accept them.


 JANUARY  11-2019


Reference: Trump's wall is not the answer  O.S. Jan. 11-2019 Farzana Hassan




Response: (Pound of flesh argument) Let's examine the question first.

1) Historically, castle walls protected the inhabitants until they were starved out.

2) The cannon put an end to the castle wall although ensuing street fighting is abhorred by both sides due to high military casualties.

3) Famous walls I have seen:

a) Jerusalem Pretty difficult to miss this skyscraper of a wall permitting only of climbers armed with suction cups whom would be easy to pick off with rifle fire. Besides, passing through the gate from Israel to Bethlehem is much easier. Other means of curtailment are used = reprisals

b) Berlin The double 8' wall now in remnants is street wide and was re-enforced by shooting anyone caught in the middle.

c) Czech border with Austria The river in some sections can be easily walked across. I asked the older River Cruise Director whether many escaped this way? No. A section of land on the Czech border was mined and patrolled by dog patrols. Shooting at will was the modus operandi.

Hadrian's Wall (Scotland-England) symbolic value only. Romans did not go North of that wall unless in pursuit of a Scottish raiding party

4) The Great Wall in China (not seen) More like a Roman road in which troops could be rushed to trouble spots.

Mexico - U.S. border

5) Any country which cannot protect it borders is a sub-standard nation. For example, both Switzerland in WWII mined their tunnels against invasion and South Korea has mines hanging beneath their bridges.

6) So the first point to make here is that the U.S. does not require military protection from 'shithole' Mexico. Their situation is more akin to the Berlin Wall designed to block refugee access. Machine gunning interlopers is not a cultural option.

7) The physical wall on the Mexico border is little more than a bad joke as almost anyone so inclined can hop over it. In short, the U.S. does not have an effective back-up plan for those whom breach their defenses however they may be designed. The cheapest protection are drone patrols backed up by land enforcement. But what then? Place the interlopers into internment camps such as does Australia (although recently rejected by their courts)?

8) Hence a physical wall without a necessary infrastructure is a myopic plan. While infrastructure plans may exist (beyond internment camps) I have not seen much. It's a road, or a wall in this case, to nowhere...'2 x 4's and plywood walls  do not a prison make'  to bastardize a classic expression....

9) Methinks the 5-1/2 billion price tag includes one billion to replenish the coffers of one, Donald Trump.


JANUARY 12 - 2018

OTTAWA BUS DISASTER - 3 dead; over 20 injured

1) As one whom possessed an A-Z license (drive almost anything on the road) and drove a handicapped bus as a retirement project  a decade ago, here are a few of my observations on the accident.

2) First of all; type of vehicle. For example the E-series vans favoured by so many private teams are death traps as evidenced by one NB sports crash a few years back with a loss of life in a snowstorm. The drivers are rarely professionally trained as was the case there. Never mind the load limits; these units are not safe to carry a full team plus their equipment. While having no experience with a doubledecker bus (the type in the accident) vs a regular bus; a driver familiar with both could reveal much. (ADDENDUM: There is specific training for doubledecker busses.)

3) Even for a doubledecker, people standing in the packed aisle in this bus would require an adjustment in driving patterns such as slowing down.

4) Weather is another inhibiting factor. An icy slick appears to have started the bus weaving out of control.

5) Road mania is something I have not seen defined but it works something along these lines. If I witness one accident, there is a good chance inside of half a day that I will see another or 'a close call'. On the day of the accident, I witnessed a number of small cars tailgating and changing lanes unnecessarily over a short distance.

6) Distractions are always a problem such as speaking to a passenger (which drivers are not to do) rather than concentrating on traffic.

7) There is a shortage of trained people in all fields raising the question as to the selection process. The selection process I went through a couple of decades ago amounted to a surprise map location questionnaire in which only 3 of us passed out of 13. I am sure there were many good drivers whom were discounted. (In short, hiring panels leave much to be desired in all fields, I have found.)

8) Trees blocking vision such as the recent disaster in SK and a few years back with another doubledecker bus collision in Ottawa costing several lives are a major problem although not a problem in the above case.

9) Drivers of big transports and long distance buses have concerns of sleep deprivation. Government regulations in that regard are all important.

10) Opioid use by drivers behind the wheel frightens me silly.

11) The female driver of one year with an immigrant name must have been a Human Resources triumph. She had already driven one bus into the back of another in December amid Supervisory concerns over-all. The police did not act properly at the accident scene regarding her apprehension. She was not honour bound to accompany the police to the station. That is why a bus supervisor is at the scene to determine such matters as an arrest sequence.

12) Another explanation as to why a relatively inexperienced driver found herself on a doubledecker is that due to seniority provisions, senior drivers may avoid the assignment.