Report on my June 3rd appearance,
and submitted into my case file for judgment at my Pre-trial Conference
1] Upon arriving in Calgary on June 2nd I went directly to the court register & entered into file #1-19621, two 2-page documents. I also filed them with the Solicitor General of Alberta, where I luckily happened to meet and talk to him informally, and then I went to the Federal Crown and served these same documents on them.
[a] In court the next day, I asked the judge if he had read my documents entered into court record, and he said that he had seen them; and when I questioned him on the difference between read and seeing, he basically advised that I was bordering on contempt to continue down this path of questioning.
[b] I’m told that the form is different in BC than in the Queen’s Bench of Alberta. This court session is about elections. The Crown elected to proceed by indictment and the Crown elected to formally press 3 charges, which were read to me & I elected to a plea of not guilty. I was then asked, which way I would elect to proceed and I answered that I would defend myself, and elected by ‘judge and jury’
2] I tried a few times to bring up my jurisdiction issue and I was told that this was not the court appearance where this matter would be addressed; so we scheduled a pre-pretrial conference court session that happens at 2 PM June 23rd, and at this session, we will schedule a court date to address key issues, and trial dates.
At this session we will address many of the points brought up in this letter, because the Judge decides whether the Province of Alberta actually wants to take responsibility to hold this charge in its courts, or forward it to a court with the appropriate jurisdiction to be tried, or to dismiss the case now.
3] Now what’s really good news is that I finally got [what the Crown qualified as] the bulk of the particulars [about 10 minutes before the Judge enters court] so I had very little time to scan a 110 page set of documents
[a] This very point is proof that the Crown is vexatious; because they have been refusing to deliver these documents, which they admit were ready for a month, and refused every reasonable offer to comply with the law, even a direct offer to hand them to me the day before; therefore they willfully violated a legitimate threat of facing a Sec 337 /336 CCC charges for failure or nonfeasance [period]
[b] As I said to the Solicitor General, I may be jumping the gun by pressing FAILURE OF AN ENTITY TO COMPLY now, but it’s certain to happen at every turn, because of the institutionalized disrespect for the form and jurisdictional issues guaranteed under John Locke’s principles of fundamental Justice.
4] COUNT #1 – The Crown insists that 3 bags that [don’t weigh the same and] add up to less than a ounce, constitutes grounds to proceed by indictment for possession for the purposes of trafficking [PPT], when they admit to knowing I have lymphoma and a court recognized right [at least a color of right] to my medicine,
[a] This indictment is at best vexatious, because it defies basic human dignity, and when compounded by my jurisdictional issue, is a clear violation of what constitutes slavery; for which they really were/are being totally oblivious to, to the point where what they are doing is not just ‘legally wrong’ but ‘morally wrong’ [even unconscionable] and in so doing violate Sec 16 CCC, in order to use ignorance as an excuse Sec 19 CCC, in order to uphold a POLICE STATE under Sec 15 CCC, and in so doing violate FAILURE OF AN ENTITY TO COMPLY, which is in the Police Act to BAR this very activity
,
5] COUNT #2 – The Crown says that they can prove that possession of a half dozen cookies is a crime, because, at face value, one of these 4 ‘Certificates of Analyst’ ‘declares’ that a CDSA analyst swears that:
“I found it contained a controlled substance within the meaning of the Controlled Drugs and Substance Act [CDSA]” and signed a declaration saying that “this certificate is true, to the best of his knowledge and skills”.
[a] On this matter of the Certificates, I brought up the issue, in court that one of the samples was for possessing ‘cannabis resin’ which is in the form of cookies and I told them in court that there was most definitely hemp oil in those cookies, and hemp oil is ‘legal’ [but still a controlled substance of the CDSA]
[b] I pointed out that to my knowledge there was no recognized court test to chemically differentiate the difference from hemp oil and ‘cannabis resin’, [which under the CDSA is an ‘illegally’ controlled substance], and in open court I challenge this Certificate’s validity because it doesn’t prove a crime….
[c] This motion stands-under that “we are all innocent until proven guilty”; and upheld by our Sec 12 Charter right to be protected from no reasonable grounds to search ‘all’ my luggage, in the 1st place.
[d] To detail /expand on case law for cookies: There are no actual lab tests results attached to the certificates, & frankly the lab would be wasting its money by giving an expensive test for something that any expert can call simply by the look /smell /feel, and 3 of the 4 samples were plainly cannabis bud.
[e] But we are not dealing here with an easily identifiable block of hashish resin as one of the samples, because this matter can be accurately defined as having the look, feel and smell of homemade cookies,
I - Even the court’s expert analyst cannot definitively tell between hemp oil and cannabis resin, especially in a cookie because the concentration is so low compared to the other ingredients.
ii - Now, the analyst didn’t lie by saying this cookie had a substance controlled by the CDSA
iii - But, possession of cookies is justifiably not a crime that can be pressed in law, due to the basic truth that hemp oil cookies cannot be proven to contain a ‘criminally’ controlled drug.
[f] The fact is that the reasons for the cookie charge is that the particulars show that the Crown has no case at all, if the cookies were challenged ‘as matter that cannot be easily identifiable as contraband’,
i - Especially when the arresting officers knew I had a genuine color of right to my medicine
[g] But what makes this ‘matter’ worse is that: due to ‘case precedent’, from so many cases involving cookies that I can [and am] holding the [Federal] CROWN accountable for committing a ‘frivolous and vexatious’ act, by charging me for these cookies, and in this case [in particular], it ‘constitutes’ a violation of the fiduciary trust to never use the law as an Instrument of punishment. [Sec 336 CCC] and enforceable by the Province under FAILURE OF AN ENTITY TO COMPLY with the law
7] COUNT #3 – [quote] “That I did have in my possession proceeds of property in wit Canadian currency of the value not exceeding $5,000. - knowing that all of the proceeds of the property was obtained by the commission in Canada of an offense punishable by indictment contrary to Sec 354 (b) CCC”. And when they found another $3750 in my pocket, they changed the charge to over $5000. and Sec 354 (a) CCC with the stroke of a pen
[a] What must be noted is the Crown elected 1-charge in order to convert it into an indictable offence,
[b] So the police & Crown agree: it’s totally irrelevant to co-join them, by not pressing separate charges
[c] Now my contention at the time of ticketing me is that the 1st luggage had only political party property,
Therefore at face value, it held the property and money of an EDA of the Marijuana Party of Ca
And the money in my pocket was that of a freeman on the land who is also a private individual
These CHARGES show that the Federal Crown holds frivolous & vexatious contempt for the law - S 16 CCC
in order to use ignorance as an excuse Sec 19 CCC, in order to uphold a POLICE STATE under
Sec 15 CCC, and in so doing violate FAILURE OF AN ENTITY TO COMPLY under the 1998 Police Act
1st MAJOR DEFENCE of legal insanity, to show a just cause for sending this file directly to a tribunal:
No Provincial judge can seize, let alone hold, any money from a federal political party, and frankly no police officer can lawfully take it, especially without giving a receipt, when asked [which I did repeatedly]
[a] By pressing this charge in Provincial court the Federal Crown is committing FRAUD – Sec 340 CCC
I - The Federal CROWN is pressing that The Province of Alberta can hold responsibility to hold matter in this file, in court without my consent, and this offer is perverted, because of this fact:
ii - The Federal Crown knows that they will not get consent, because I already know that trap.
Iii – They know because the CROWN submitted into this case file THE REASONS FOR JUDGEMENT, on CASE # 182787-D, and my PETITION to deliver this charge to a tribunal document, and the fact that the Criminal Record sheet shows it never happened; it’s proof in and of itself of the Federal CROWN being in contempt of FAILURE OF AN ENTITY TO COMPLY, by the fact that this file was not entered as ‘guilty as charged’. It outlines the fact that The VPD have created a case file # 259154, which says that I went to jail under some unknown regulation, under what’s called Sec 109 CC [note -not the CCC]
For - SUBSTANCE FOR THE PURPOSES AND MANDITORY PROHIBITION OF TRAFFICKING
Contrary to SEC 5(2) OF the CDSA – and in so doing “enforcing all laws not yet passed”
iii – I thank them for giving me this information that has been well hidden from me…albeit under duress
2nd MAJOR DEFENCE of legal insanity, to show a just cause for sending this file directly to a tribunal:
[a] Frankly every politician is doing ‘treacherous’ activity under the Elections Act, because it ‘permits’ them to do these unconstitutional acts while the Election Act operates ‘outside Canada’ [proof App #1]
and the only PERSON I hold that they can lawfully prosecute is in the Elections Act of Canada
[ON APPENDIX 1] It shows that the Chief Electoral Officer of Elections Canada quit rather than answer this simple question under Sec 336 CCC: ‘what rule of law is Supreme in his jurisdiction’ and what’s worse is they ignore to pay /deliver my $1000 that I paid for that person and answer
This documentation proves that Parliament itself is violating - Failure of an ENTITY to Comply
[b] In fact, ever since NAFTA was formed, all politicians are operating under an unconstitutional claim of right that created so many constitutional challenges that they had to create The1998 Police Act, because it was the only way to stop police from having to arrest politicians for committing not just criminal acts, but even treason.
[c] So, the police were converted over to also being in NAFTA, under ‘Part 9’ under an erroneous claim of right or what they called: this ‘experi‘mental’ CIVILIAN OVERSIGHT, in order to permit Authority to act illegally under the immunity created by the same quasi-legal loophole, of operating ‘outside Canada’
[d] The end result is that as long as politician and police are doing the bidding of NAFTA, they will never be prosecuted, and as all scams go, the participants are immune from any kind of prosecution as long as they are compliant to NAFTA, which institutionalizes corporate/fascist corruption, under de facto law.
[e] Frankly, the only thing that can save us all is Manifest Destiny, & that’s exactly what’s being offered
All the lonely days will be gone, or you won’t know what you’ve got till it’s gone, to see Paradise at the foot of a Parking lot , you might as well put trees in museums and charge a buck and a half just to see them.- Joni Mitchell
3rd MAJOR DEFENCE of legal insanity, to show a just cause for sending this file directly to a tribunal:
A] Now, in regard to the $3750 found on me, when I arrived at the station; this is my money for services rendered as a free man, and earned while being a private individual, upholding my court recognized right to benefit form the Marijuana Party of Canada RUBRIC, under the Elections Canada, while <<outside Canada>>
[a] To say that a police officer has the right to take property /money [especially] away from a freeman is to say that RAPE by police is ‘permitted’ again; it’s so un-defendable that it’s transparent with corruption
- Which is exactly what’s happening here [all over the place]. RAPE is what it was called before this practice was outlawed in England. It’s all about the money, and the usurping of POWER
[b] By seizing this money they are in affect re-establishing the ancient practice of rogue police getting away with [literally] HIGHWAY ROBBERY, which was [quasi] legal, yet banned in the 16th century, and
[c] Yet, no longer protected under CIVILIAN OVERSIGHT under maritime jurisdiction, at a bus station
After all, no one will really revolt, over how revolting it can [and will] get by following this path
B] All of this is created by the Canadian court’s upholding that old English case law [Sec 8 (2) CCC] can be used as a reference, but can no longer be used automatically as case precedent [on like: gay Charter rights] and this is necessary to protect our multi cultural society from any of the wrongs that occurred in England,
[a] What the police are now doing [their best at imposing] is that: any and all of those police activities that were once legal and became crimes in England, are now not crimes when done ‘outside Canada’,
After all, in Canada, we don’t need ‘any’ of those old English laws, in our multicultural society.
[b] Any Sec 8 (2) rights previously won in England are somehow not necessarily guaranteed anymore, [c] In practice: this means the law now upholds [as far as Martin’s law confirms] ‘that recent changes to Sec 7 of the Charter make [all rights known to man in common law] of Sec 8 (3) CCC to be no longer ‘really’ in affect any more,’ because of a conversion made in to totally unconstitutional, yet hardly mentioned amendments made in 1989 to Sec 7 of the Charter of Right [like these notable entries p 371]
- Section 7 of the Charter is designed to impose certain procedural structure upon decisions that may constitute an infringement of the 3 rights enshrined therein [namely: life liberty and security]
- Without doubt, the Charter has reinforced judicial unfairness in the broadest sense of the term
[in spite of] – “Considering that the ‘deprivation’ of ‘those rights’ holds the most severe consequences”
[e] Just because it’s there in law does not make it so, especially when The CROWN is being challenged under Sec 16 CCC for being legally insane, by the deliverer of the new Covenant and Jubilee…
C] The real Constitutional problem with this case file sits again squarely on my ‘abnormal’ IDENTITY ISSUE.
- Due to the fact that from the onset, I declared to be a ‘free man ’with political private individual guarantees’ really gives me the right to ‘demand remedy’ under Sec 337 CCC, [which I clearly did from the onset]
[a] This means that until the Province accepts this case, I can only hold the Federal Crown liable for violating Sec 337 CCC- Failure to deliver property; Sec 336 CCC- Failure to uphold the fiduciary trust of upholding the rule of law; in order to uphold a de facto body under Sec 15 CCC; by standing under an erroneous claim that Sec 19 CCC: ignorance is an excuse by pleading legal insanity under Sec 16 CCC
Rather than just calling it for what it is: ongoing RAPE with total abuse of power to impose a police state
[b] and by continuing after this conference, they’ll both be liable to violating Sec 340 FRAUD at pre-trial, because the Federal and Provincial Crown will both be in FAILURE OF AN ENTITY TO COMPLY with violating the jurisdiction of the Sovereignty and Supremacy of God, and directly assaulting Democracy.
[c] This means Alberta can drop the case now, but under Sec 337 CCC the Judge must ‘deliver’ to me all my property, not just order the Federal CROWN to tell the police to comply with the law, or send this case file to a tribunal of appropriate jurisdiction that can hold this matter, and rule ‘once and for all’
E] FRANKLY: Due to my abnormal birth, this kind of liability awaits anyone [or in this case any ‘body’] who refuses to deliver any and all of my property, and criminal charges can be pressed against any Judge who refuses to be accountable for returning my property, under Sec 337 CCC, because no Provincial court can deny delivering the property of a ‘free man on the land’, let alone a free man who holds a PERSON under the Canada Elections Act, as a private individual, when I’ll refuse to let the judge hold my property in the 1st place
[a] The only way any Authority can defend its position with me is to say that ‘it’ is hell bent on destroying Democracy and desires to have my file be the case law that finally restores slavery onto all the people
On the solid ground THAT: If police can say “there can be no such thing as a ‘free man’”,
Then what does that say about the status of everyone who does not hold freeman rights?
[b] As I keep insisting, in law, it’s impossible to prosecute me without the Crown holding an ability to COPYRIGHT and because of this, the courts cannot address any charge without 1st addressing my IDENTITY ISSUE, and it’s self evident, that matter MUST go to a tribunal in order to manifest Destiny
F] By proceeding by indictment the Crown is legally wrong, and due to the overall weakness of the case, the FEDERAL CROWN as an ENTITY is morally wrong, which are the Essential Elements to support a charge of violating Sec 16 CCC Defense of Legal Insanity as opposed to mental insanity, by violating Sec 15 CCC, and this is enforceable by The Province of Alberta, under the 1998 Police Act, under Failure of an Entity to Comply.
G] What is undeniable is that The Federal CROWN wants to fight, and I want to fight, the only real issue at this pre-trial conference is for a Judge to decide “where this case is going to be heard?”, and my contention is firm
The Province of Alberta, holds an opportunity to BAR a crime against humanity from going any further, by sending this case to a tribunal, and if it wasn’t for the fact that any learned Judge knows that my challenge of The Supremacy Act of 1559 truly does ‘perfect’ the form as in Hebrews 10:1 prophecy of
“The law is only a shadow of the good things to come, not the realities themselves”` and [18] where
The deliverer is pressing the message to repent: Upholding Creation is the new Covenant that God promised, and it’s being offered 100 generations into God’s promise to Abraham, and as to the 1st- 4 Commandments,
- in the end you will fail, tithe is paid, and the offer is Paradise on earth to fulfill a promise of 1000 generations
By undertaking this Act of Supremacy Challenge, God will make Jacob caretaker of the universe, and God will write this new Covenant in your hearts and in your minds, and all our sins will be forgotten
H] As I asked at the Solicitor General’s Office, If not now, then when? [until the other everything is in place]
Canadian society, let alone the world are simply not prepared for the consequences of this perversion of law. The luciferian doctrine is completely implemented when the 1998 Police Act, permitted an experimental Part 9, which is kept alive through fraud, with tactics perfected by the Gestapo, under maritime law, - [in Alberta?]
Their motives are demonic at best; and fulfill [1Tim 3] prophecy of being hypocrites with consciences as if seared with hot irons, who are barred from upholding their Oaths, and forbid those who know the truth to partake in a food given by God in thanksgiving – where those seeking a godly life will be persecuted
J] My very intent is to fulfill Jesus’ challenge in Luke 11 by dividing the house of Satan, and to destroy it, once and for all. I am more than ready to go to court and show beyond any reasonable doubt that I am a man who comes to defend the Good name of the Lord in the form and society, and blessed to be a man called Jonah,
I am the sign of the end of our childhood, and whatever interpretation of the Messiah that you hold will be here really soon, to deliver you from evil, which is your worst enemy – to save you from yourself
- with a METANOIA – a total about face on how you think, with just one word, in the blink of an eye
It’s easy… All you need is love, love is all you need, and it’s all about the love that lies between the lines of illusion
I would love to say I will do this or that, but it’s not my choice; [Heb 10] God will send one who will live on faith alone, by delivering the new Covenant, and God hopes I don’t shrink, because the stakes are really really high
I am delivering a message that they [and we all] must repent at the teachings of John Solomon who in 1895 created a legal fiction called CORPORATION that is now a beast that is greater than K. Solomon
[a] Laws are created by men for mankind’s needs, this prophecy says that a tribunal [men of the Nineveh] and the people of the south will rise in indignation at my teachings; in so doing manifest Destiny itself.
|