Fix Our World
To Unite All People On a World Scale - Peace Environment Health Empowerment
Regarding Alleged Prejudices.
THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE.
Re: Letter from Dalton McGuinty
As someone who does not support Dalton McGuinty in any way, shape or form I find his response to your inquirey completely unbiased. Government officials should not under any circumstances respond to appeals already rejected under a court of law.
To do so undermines the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms under Enforcement, Section 24 subsection 2. Since elected officials are not lawyers and are not entitled to arbitrarily change court decisions, he would not be in a position to even try and even if he'd decided to and somehow the case was won, this violation alone is grounds for appeal which means, you lose again, with the added cost of additional court fees.
Re: Letter with respect to Events listed:
Having reviewed all of the court evidence provided and filed at CanLII, I fail to see the basis of your argument that your rights were somehow compromised.
If the Human Rights Tribunal had mailed you your Request for Reconsideration Form TR-8 regular mail without your express consent, then you might've been able to sue them for a a violation of civil proceedure. However, according to the letter you posted as "event150a", you in fact gave them consent without confirming your address to them via a phone call.
Where under oath they stated themselves this was the last known address, had you not given them consent via a phone call, you might've had grounds for a lawsuit.
Rules of Civil Proceedure 16.03 subsection 4 states: Re:
Mail via Last known address
" Service of a document may be made by sending a copy of the document together with an acknowledgment of receipt card (Form 16A) by mail to the last known address of the person to be served, but service by mail under this subrule is only effective as of the date the sender receives the card. O. Reg. 24/00, s. 3."
Pursuant to 16.03(4), 16.06(1) states:
"16.06 (1) Where a document is to be served by mail under these rules, a copy of the document shall be served by regular lettermail or by registered mail. O. Reg. 535/92, s. 6 (1)."
Pursuant to 16.06 (1) Where a document does not reach person served: 16.07(b) states:
16.07 Even though a person has been served with a document in accordance with these rules, the person may show on a motion to set aside the consequences of default, for an extension of time or in support of a request for an adjournment, that the document, (b) came to the person’s notice only at some time later than when it was served or is deemed to have been served. R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 194, r. 16.07.
I believe the reason that "the system" ultimately failed for you is due to a technicality. Your giving them consent to mail you legal forms regular mail without verifying an address you'd be able to receive it from before hand removed all liability from the human rights tribunal should you not get the letter.
Your appeal was rejected because you failed to respond to a letter mailed to you allegedly on your own terms. If you can prove that you never agreed to have it mailed to you via regular mail then you might have grounds for appeal, but I believe the onus is on you to provide them the correct address prior to mailing documents to you. If they have to mail by your last known address because you did not provide it then that's not their fault.
I came to this website thinking it had something to do with the statement "Premier Dalton McGuinty, Christ Bentley, Hugh Brown, Hamilton Courts, the Crown Attorney, Mayor Eisenberger, the City Councillors as well as the City Police all support spousal abuse 48% of the time."
Statistics are like tarot cards. They're fun to play with to get a vague idea of what's going on, but the day tarot cards establish public policy is the day you can kiss your rights and freedoms goodbye. After reviewing your case, I believe you need help and at least you're reaching out. I'll bookmark this page and respond as I can and I really hope you do get help.
Because your situation was not laid out very clearly, I understand why and I don't advocate abuse(any kind), I'm responding with what little I can offer. I hope that you do not take offense. You seem genuine in your passion, if not a bit misguided and that is something that should be applauded.
Looking forward to correspondence,
Demojen
Re: Letter from Dalton McGuinty
As someone who does not support Dalton McGuinty in any way, shape or form I find his response to your inquirey completely unbiased. Government officials should not under any circumstances respond to appeals already rejected under a court of law.
To do so undermines the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms under Enforcement, Section 24 subsection 2. Since elected officials are not lawyers and are not entitled to arbitrarily change court decisions, he would not be in a position to even try and even if he'd decided to and somehow the case was won, this violation alone is grounds for appeal which means, you lose again, with the added cost of additional court fees.
Re: Letter with respect to Events listed:
Having reviewed all of the court evidence provided and filed at CanLII, I fail to see the basis of your argument that your rights were somehow compromised.
If the Human Rights Tribunal had mailed you your Request for Reconsideration Form TR-8 regular mail without your express consent, then you might've been able to sue them for a a violation of civil proceedure. However, according to the letter you posted as "event150a", you in fact gave them consent without confirming your address to them via a phone call.
Where under oath they stated themselves this was the last known address, had you not given them consent via a phone call, you might've had grounds for a lawsuit.
Rules of Civil Proceedure 16.03 subsection 4 states: Re:
Mail via Last known address
" Service of a document may be made by sending a copy of the document together with an acknowledgment of receipt card (Form 16A) by mail to the last known address of the person to be served, but service by mail under this subrule is only effective as of the date the sender receives the card. O. Reg. 24/00, s. 3."
Pursuant to 16.03(4), 16.06(1) states:
"16.06 (1) Where a document is to be served by mail under these rules, a copy of the document shall be served by regular lettermail or by registered mail. O. Reg. 535/92, s. 6 (1)."
Pursuant to 16.06 (1) Where a document does not reach person served: 16.07(b) states:
16.07 Even though a person has been served with a document in accordance with these rules, the person may show on a motion to set aside the consequences of default, for an extension of time or in support of a request for an adjournment, that the document, (b) came to the person’s notice only at some time later than when it was served or is deemed to have been served. R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 194, r. 16.07.
I believe the reason that "the system" ultimately failed for you is due to a technicality. Your giving them consent to mail you legal forms regular mail without verifying an address you'd be able to receive it from before hand removed all liability from the human rights tribunal should you not get the letter.
Your appeal was rejected because you failed to respond to a letter mailed to you allegedly on your own terms. If you can prove that you never agreed to have it mailed to you via regular mail then you might have grounds for appeal, but I believe the onus is on you to provide them the correct address prior to mailing documents to you. If they have to mail by your last known address because you did not provide it then that's not their fault.
I came to this website thinking it had something to do with the statement "Premier Dalton McGuinty, Christ Bentley, Hugh Brown, Hamilton Courts, the Crown Attorney, Mayor Eisenberger, the City Councillors as well as the City Police all support spousal abuse 48% of the time."
Statistics are like tarot cards. They're fun to play with to get a vague idea of what's going on, but the day tarot cards establish public policy is the day you can kiss your rights and freedoms goodbye. After reviewing your case, I believe you need help and at least you're reaching out. I'll bookmark this page and respond as I can and I really hope you do get help.
Because your situation was not laid out very clearly, I understand why and I don't advocate abuse(any kind), I'm responding with what little I can offer. I hope that you do not take offense. You seem genuine in your passion, if not a bit misguided and that is something that should be applauded.
Looking forward to correspondence,
Demojen
Views: 114
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Edward Teach on
-
Demojen,
I respect your views however point 150a is way after the fact that my Ex comitted an offense specificaly section 345(mail search and theft) of the criminal code by the way Demojen an indictable offense murder etc are also indictable. These crimes were commited back in Nov and Dec of 2008. This is what my complaint is aboout, the Hamilton Police did not press the charge against her nor did the His Worship Hugh Brown. In fact Worship Brown acted the exact opposite of every rule of procedure that is currently consolidated, this is obstruction of justice as defined in Bill C-46. That is where the discrimination lies,, when the police have oral testimony (which by the way is all it takes for a woman to have a man charged) should not oral testimony have the same weight when it comes from a man? That is discrimination on the basis of sex is it not? As for Dalton I did not ask him to over turn a judgement but to ask for an inquiry as to why 48% of abuse victims are being neglected by the Dalton's own appointed officials? Kinda like the OLG scam and the E-Health fiasco both had inquires as to how the system failed. Well as for the statistics I can only use the same stats as the government. If you would re-read then perhaps your misunderstanding of where the discrimination lies would be realized. My appeal was reject because of the letters (that were the objects of the crime executed by my Ex) were not responded to because...THEY WERE STOLEN. After the time deadline had passed the decsion was rendered that I had intentionally disregarded said deadlines in 2008 by the Ontario Human Rights Commission. It is from that decsion that the respondents have relied upon and the tribunal has decided to honour.
What I am really curious about is how you got canlii to up the decsions in my case/ appeals as I would love to put that information up here and on other website.
Are the Police now Judge and Jury? Also on August !8 2009 Worship Brown was there as a trier of law and not of fact. The trier of fact would have been the Judge who would have had my Ex pleading her defense to and or accepting a plea bargain.
I look forward to your reply
-
-
Kos,
After replying to your post I thought I would just point out section 15(1) of our Charter of Rights and Freedoms:
15. (1) Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.
Given that I complained to the police on several occassions and the result was that nothing was done and infact on Feb 3, 2009 was told by the desk Sargent "That they did not intend to press the charge and I should just suck it up" Seems pretty much a straightforward violation of section 15 to me
or I'm just nuttier than squirrel poop and they are still in violation section 15
Any input on this would be appreciated there Demojen.
Delete Comment
-
-
A further thought there Demojen,
If you really did read the events then I ask the Question
Why are you calling Mr. Teach and not by given name? Also you must have missed quite a bit for if you did read it I mention that the offences took places in 2008 and I put forth my application for reconsideration on Oct. 30 2009. kinda seems like you only want to focus on one little area but of course you do not support Dalton do you?
I invite you to disprove me the forum is open for discussion or would you like to go to facebook or myspace to debate the facts?
-
Permalink Reply by Kos Demojen on
-
I see what you're getting at. Your evidence seemed to suggest by sheer abundance that your complaint started with this technicality. In court, the smallest thing can destroy a case. Something as minor as filing papers late.
I know that mail theft is an indictable offense but it's not municipal. Hamilton Police enforce municipal law. That is a federal offense. The Hamilton Police should not had shut the door in your face on this issue, but rather given it to the correct jurisdiction. The RCMP are the federal police in Canada and your case should've been, imo forwarded to their office for consideration.
Their behaviour speaks badly of Hamilton Police services. There is a chain of command that it seems was not adhered to or in a worst case scenario, ignored but these people are not robots. The constables who visit you are not the Empire trying to silence you.
People make mistakes and it is important when approaching a case of liability to take this into consideration and not take the position that their mistakes deserve they be hung. I agree that there is discrimination in the Hamilton Police forces. As much as this society claims to be an egalitarian utopia, public policy has for the last one hundred years always favored women in cases of abuse.
If you want to push this further I would cease equating theft with spousal abuse and rather tag the abuse charge on a civil case claiming pain and suffering. There is a distinction in the law between abuse and theft whereby theft involves an item of value. When someone steals your stuff, they are commiting an indictable offense(Theft). When someone steals your stuff and it causes damage to your person, personables or life style it is pain and suffering. You can't ask the police to charge someone for your pain and suffering, however as I've stated elsewhere they are paid to know better then to drop a case that's not within their jurisdiction.They should've forwarded your case to the RCMP. Their failure to do so only demonstrates further why police forces don't work well together.
Take your charge against the Hamilton Police Department to a federal prosecutor.
Mr. Morris Pistyner
Chief Federal Prosecutor
Public Prosecution Service of Canada
Ontario Regional Office (Toronto)
2 First Canadian Place, Suite 3400
Exchange Tower, Box 36
Toronto, Ontario M5X 1K6
416-973-0960
Canlii is free to use. You don't have to be a lawyer and it's contents are a matter of public record.
http://www.canlii.org/en/on/onhrt/doc/2009/2009hrto1925/2009hrto192...
http://www.canlii.org/en/on/onhrt/doc/2009/2009hrto1588/2009hrto158...
Those are the two court cases that come as a result of searching their database.
According to court records they didn't claim you intentionally did anything, rather that they didn't have any evidence that you filed for reconsideration due to as I mentioned previously, a technicality.(mailed to the wrong address).
Unless you're now stating that you gave them your ex's address in which case I have to wonder why.
Despite what the court said with respect to these two cases, I see no reason that you can not speak to a federal prosecutor on the topic of the liability of municipal police officers to handle cases without prejudices and forward those outside of their departmental jurisdiction to the correct jurisdictions.
-
-
On the topic of your title, I see no reason why I should call you by your name but decided not to out of what I alleged was respect for your desire to seperate identities(Whether intentional or circumstancial).
I do not understand what you refer to on the topic of disproving you.
-
-
You're not crazy, but telling them(The police) it's spousal abuse is incorrect and if you word your complaint to the police that your ex committed an indictable offense(theft) and follow it up with the charge of spousal abuse, they are probably going to laugh at the idea of theft being spousal abuse(Particularly since they are both handled by different courts of justice), however and with respect to this case, I believe the Hamilton Police were in no position to turn you away for reporting theft.
-
-
ok Demojen need to answer your replies and thank you for posting takes guts,
The definition of abuse is this
Stuff from Health Canada website at http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/ncfv-cnivf/publications/rcmp-grc/fem-par...
What is spousal and partner abuse?
Spousal abuse covers a wide range of acts, from explosive violence to chronic behaviours like belittling. It can involve physical, sexual and/or emotional abuse. There are many types of abuse and degrees of severity. Spousal and partner abuse can be committed by a spouse or exspouse, a current or former common-law partner, a current or former girlfriend or boyfriend or a person in a dating relationship.
Physical violence can involve a threat with a fist or object; being pushed or shoved in a way that could result in injury; being slapped, hit or beaten; being hit or attacked with an object. There may be no obvious physical injuries, or there may be bruises, cuts, broken bones, internal injuries, disfigurement, disablement and even death.
Sexual assault may be part of a physical attack. Sexual acts within a marriage or intimate partnership must take place with consent. There is no “right” to sexual relations.
Emotional abuse can include threats and intimidation, demeaning and degrading verbal and body language, control and isolation, subordination and humiliation. Victims may suffer serious loss of self-esteem and experience feelings of shame, anxiety, hopelessness, depression and terror.
while my ex's actions were not physical it clearly is abuse.
first I applied under section 53.5 of the transitional board it was denied. Reason no reply to papers mailed to me in 2008. filed my appeal and same result same reasoning failure to reply. My third appeal is called a reconsideration it was filed as well and done on October 30 2009. I have been letting them know what happened and nothing. Now I cannot put a monetary value to that case that should be before the human rights tribunal right now but I can say that failure by the agencies that be to investigate upon my allegations is brutal. I was there at the police station and complained any investigation only when I threatened to go to the news did they even consider acting and if I complain consistantly and they do nothing but when I say news they all of a sudden wanna act ??? makes me just a tad suspicious. now about His Worship Brown you are obviously versed in the rules of civil procedure look at the Laying of an information by a private citizen. Are there grounds for Insufficiency? If the Crown is supposed to advise A justice of the peace on the law did they? Relevant bits of Legislation. First lets go to their oaths Oath of office
8. Every Crown Attorney and every assistant Crown Attorney, before entering upon his or her duties, shall take and subscribe before a judge of the Superior Court of Justice the following oath:
I swear (or affirm) that I will truly and faithfully, according to the best of my skill and ability, execute the duties, powers and trusts of Crown Attorney (or assistant Crown Attorney) without favour or affection to any party: So help me God. (Delete if affirmed)
R.S.O. 1990, c. C.49, s. 8; 2006, c. 19, Sched. C, s. 1 (1).
The Justice of the peaces is similar ok
Now lets look at some of the rule which there would be no need for the Rcmp to be invovled the laying of an information by a private citizen
23. (1) Any person who, on reasonable and probable grounds, believes that one or more persons have committed an offence, may lay an information in the prescribed form and under oath before a justice alleging the offence and the justice shall receive the information.
Idem
(2) An information may be laid anywhere in Ontario. R.S.O. 1990, c. P.33, s. 23.
25. (1) Each offence charged in an information shall be set out in a separate count.
Allegation of offence
(2) Each count in an information shall in general apply to a single transaction and shall contain and is sufficient if it contains in substance a statement that the defendant committed an offence therein specified.
Reference to statutory provision
(3) Where in a count an offence is identified but the count fails to set out one or more of the essential elements of the offence, a reference to the provision creating or defining the offence shall be deemed to incorporate all the essential elements of the offence.
Idem
(4) The statement referred to in subsection (2) may be,
(a) in popular language without technical averments or allegations of matters that are not essential to be proved;
(b) in the words of the enactment that describes the offence; or
(c) in words that are sufficient to give to the defendant notice of the offence with which the defendant is charged.
More than one count
(5) Any number of counts for any number of offences may be joined in the same information.
Particulars of count
(6) A count shall contain sufficient detail of the circumstances of the alleged offence to give to the defendant reasonable information with respect to the act or omission to be proved against the defendant and to identify the transaction referred to.
Sufficiency
(7) No count in an information is insufficient by reason of the absence of details where, in the opinion of the court, the count otherwise fulfils the requirements of this section and, without restricting the generality of the foregoing, no count in an information is insufficient by reason only that,
(a) it does not name the person affected by the offence or intended or attempted to be affected;
(b) it does not name the person who owns or has a special property or interest in property mentioned in the count;
(c) it charges an intent in relation to another person without naming or describing the other person;
(d) it does not set out any writing that is the subject of the charge;
Now if these are the rules That Justice Brown were suppossed to adhere to on Aug !8 then why was no warrant and or summons issued? Why didn't the Crown speak up and mention this to His Worship?
-
-
now for abuse lets see controling the outcome of a Human rights issue with my former employer which may or may not have resulted in monetary gain did ask for but it never got heard. How about intentional denial of my freedoms by her as well? I'm not saying that people don't make mistakes I've made my share heck if the police weren't so pig headed about the whole situation if the first place would I be there infront of the court house? It just seems awful damn suspicious that after going to the police in Jan and Feb of this year and then to lay an information in August 2 events seperated by 6 months nothing was done ,,,, look at the laws that they say we all are to work with and yet,,,,
My flyer is explosive and gets peoples attention it needs to if I am right but I believe I'm right enough to be out infront of that court house.
-
-
I still feel that this should go to the RCMP, for clearly the municipal police have an interest in covering their own ass. If you're alleging a miscarriage of justice at this point their even hearing your case could be considered a conflict of interest, since they are now in a position that they should be defending themselves from you and that means they can no longer be seen to be unbiased.
-
-
Demojen,
I could have but I have been an angry man for over 10 months now it has landed my fiance in the hospitol,,, no more my line in the sand is drawn ,,,, do what you want to me but mess with whom I hope will be the mother of my children and thats it I am willing to do this much to ensure our safety and equal benefit of the law.
-
-
also Dem look how well the RCMP did on there investigation to the polish man in B.C. police investigating police sheesh can we all say conflict of interest
-
-
As well how about murder Dem it is a federal offence and the Hamilton Police have pressed charges many many many times over. In their oath they will uphold the constitution act ,, but the results speak for themselves nada woman says this man says that no investigation, the man is guilty ,,, hmmm guilty verdict before a trial yet both is viva voce evidence take mine a step further only after I said lets CHCH tv know and then and only then was that desk Sargent interested hmmmmmm lets see they knew she committed the crime way before Feb 3 2009 and yet nothing,,, hmmm I wonder what my Ex said to them but can't speculate on that but what is documented and very provable is that she was a music drama major from Queens university and while I cannot say she played it up for the police I can say she would definatly know how.
To the Femminist/ Anti-violence movement out there if this woman did play it up for the police and they just believed her story blindly they both have done serious harm to your cause.
A further thought there is a take back the night march why is it end violence against women and children and not just end relationship violence period???? why a distinction between the sexxes? violence is inflicted on all parties and both sexxes have the ability to do it. I abohr violence if you result to it violence out of anger your own fault but if lack of action and equality increases anger then at what point does a man loose hope and control over his anger?
Blog Posts
Badge
© 2024 Created by FixOurWorld.
Powered by
