Click here. Disclosure: We have no problems with a Black Judge or Black Law Firm owner or Black Attorney helping people. He could be Indian anyway and was really stolen by the people who raised him, a decoration to obfuscate. It's not as if law or the legal profession has a colour in racialised identity in some unrealistic promotion of a racialised superiority, as seeking racialised hegemony. We would not agree with any racialised superiority or racialised hegemony that attacked the life of our Black Law graduated neighbour. What is the point when the School board tutor is white and very honoured if we didn't just quit when they cheated us on our professional exam results at Osgoode? We got 88% on the first bar exams. They asked us to write it again and we got 105%. That was subtle racialism. Was it just a fraud by the Law Society just as they ask you to complete an exam that addresses fraud itself? Other students, white, brown, black and red or yellow, may have had to write it on several occasions but were given their successful result. There is some culture at war with formalities. This is where it all begins; some culture that presumes it's above the law. But when the Law Society fails to provide a truthful account of your exam result, that is a fraud committed under $5000.00. An information has been issued. Someone is pretending that they did not fail to levy an honest exam process, contrary to the criminal code. They wake up and go to bed as if they did not do something wrong. But it's a fraud. We are Canadians. We help other Canadians when we can help and they can make a donation for any reasonable sum if assisted by us so that they will honor the Golden Rule taught to us by the good White people; the very good White people. They are some and then there are some wicked racist people. Some racists are black though who do not want to see a black person achieve any success. If a Judge encountered a file with Crown altered and edited evidence, redacted evidence it is not just a newsworthy information. It discloses a crime that is really the destruction of evidence and the impossibility of satisfying the Crown obligations to disclose. Here, there is nothing but reasonable doubt. There is no case here with evidence that enables the Crown to proceed or for the Judge to deliberate. With every destruction or redaction, there is new cause for evidentiary doubt. What did it say? Was the redacted evidence exculpatory? Who can be sure? If we can't be sure, there is doubt. If you need help with your appeal, call Warren A. Lyon. He is at Angel Ronan SDGCK. If your lawyer did not raise these issues to defeat the Crown case before trial, the Crown is in no obligation to withdraw. They can proceed to trial. Did your lawyer raise these issues during trial? If not, you could still be convicted. Maybe the whole file disappeared. Maybe all the officer's notes were blank. So, what do we do? Maybe it's a chance to get away Scot free; get away and be free in spite of what you did. But you have to show some genuine interest in your own case if you would just read it yourself. Your lawyer can also raise the alarm. But you should be okay now. It's on Angel Ronan SDGCK. If you like this article, send a donation because we help you. We cannot help you. The truth is we never helped you. You helped yourself as we only write articles. Did your lawyer bring a motion? It's soo obvious that they should not have to but it's procedure. You raised some good points and it took 2 years for the Crown to provide all disclosure and set a trial date so it could be all dismissed with a pre trial motion on the grounds of delay with a constitutional motion. A black guy can help you and it aids white hegemony when the black guy has at least one white school teacher and at least one white lecturer to remember during his experience. This is mentioned within the community in hopes of preventing a greater crime on us all; that is an unsafe Court and Judicial culture. All the files for the last 6 years handled by the Crown Tic Toc involved must be reviewed. He may be instructed to withdraw on other files and overturn convictions on others. Did you know Warren still has his licence to practice law; in Canada as a Barrister and Solicitor? He never lost his licence. He can practice law in England also as a Barrister with full rights of audience. The reason is he never did anything wrong and his experience has to led to several police informations being issued for those involved including G. Amentga for threatening him and the clients in open Court. These are offenses under the criminal code.
Click here.
Disclosure: We have no problems with a Black Judge or Black Law Firm owner or Black Attorney helping people.
He could be Indian anyway and was really stolen by the people who raised him, a decoration to obfuscate. It's not as if law or the legal profession has a colour in racialised identity in some unrealistic promotion of a racialised superiority, as seeking racialised hegemony. We would not agree with any racialised superiority or racialised hegemony that attacked the life of our Black Law graduated neighbour. What is the point when the School board tutor is white and very honoured if we didn't just quit when they cheated us on our professional exam results at Osgoode? We got 88% on the first bar exams. They asked us to write it again and we got 105%. That was subtle racialism. Was it just a fraud by the Law Society just as they ask you to complete an exam that addresses fraud itself? Other students, white, brown, black and red or yellow, may have had to write it on several occasions but were given their successful result. There is some culture at war with formalities. This is where it all begins; some culture that presumes it's above the law. But when the Law Society fails to provide a truthful account of your exam result, that is a fraud committed under $5000.00. An information has been issued. Someone is pretending that they did not fail to levy an honest exam process, contrary to the criminal code. They wake up and go to bed as if they did not do something wrong. But it's a fraud.
We are Canadians. We help other Canadians when we can help and they can make a donation for any reasonable sum if assisted by us so that they will honor the Golden Rule taught to us by the good White people; the very good White people. They are some and then there are some wicked racist people. Some racists are black though who do not want to see a black person achieve any success.
If a Judge encountered a file with Crown altered and edited evidence, redacted evidence it is not just a newsworthy information. It discloses a crime that is really the destruction of evidence and the impossibility of satisfying the Crown obligations to disclose. Here, there is nothing but reasonable doubt. There is no case here with evidence that enables the Crown to proceed or for the Judge to deliberate.
With every destruction or redaction, there is new cause for evidentiary doubt. What did it say? Was the redacted evidence exculpatory? Who can be sure? If we can't be sure, there is doubt.
If you need help with your appeal, call Warren A. Lyon. He is at Angel Ronan SDGCK. If your lawyer did not raise these issues to defeat the Crown case before trial, the Crown is in no obligation to withdraw. They can proceed to trial. Did your lawyer raise these issues during trial? If not, you could still be convicted. Maybe the whole file disappeared. Maybe all the officer's notes were blank. So, what do we do? Maybe it's a chance to get away Scot free; get away and be free in spite of what you did. But you have to show some genuine interest in your own case if you would just read it yourself. Your lawyer can also raise the alarm. But you should be okay now. It's on Angel Ronan SDGCK. If you like this article, send a donation because we help you. We cannot help you. The truth is we never helped you. You helped yourself as we only write articles. Did your lawyer bring a motion? It's soo obvious that they should not have to but it's procedure. You raised some good points and it took 2 years for the Crown to provide all disclosure and set a trial date so it could be all dismissed with a pre trial motion on the grounds of delay with a constitutional motion. A black guy can help you and it aids white hegemony when the black guy has at least one white school teacher and at least one white lecturer to remember during his experience.
This is mentioned within the community in hopes of preventing a greater crime on us all; that is an unsafe Court and Judicial culture. All the files for the last 6 years handled by the Crown Tic Toc involved must be reviewed. He may be instructed to withdraw on other files and overturn convictions on others.
Did you know Warren still has his licence to practice law; in Canada as a Barrister and Solicitor? He never lost his licence. He can practice law in England also as a Barrister with full rights of audience. The reason is he never did anything wrong and his experience has to led to several police informations being issued for those involved including G. Amentga for threatening him and the clients in open Court. These are offenses under the criminal code.
But we can let all of this go today and enjoy our community as follows:
1. We agree to see every Canadian receive equi-parity income support at no less than $90,000.00 per year ($ CAD 7500.00) tomorrow morning with the first payment. This is a national normality in all other countries and we agree to this as Canadians; all on one team and one support. Our war time virtues must be seen in equal measure in peace time as we maintain peace.
2. We agree to ensure everyone can gain work experience with a new one shift per week programme that pays $1500.00 per week, inviting people to work, to gain experience, to be seen, ensure representativeness, ensure involvement, ensure participation in one of several different roles.
3. We provide emergency white debit cards to any persons in need of assistance. They will be available at all points of contact including the Courts, the EMERGENCY rooms, police stations and libraries. You are in need of assistance if you have not received your benefits like most others. They will be provided to all. That means every Canadian who wants one in a new Safety Canada Benefits App. If you use the card and you also have a bank account that is accessible, you can join the app so part of your benefits are paid to the card and part is paid into your account. You are safe. The card, if not activated on the app, will pay only $75.00 in shopping and for hotel stays at hotels. It will cover all travel also. Yoda, Buddah, Wenceslas must have his integrity and cannot kill these this way. We help them for the time being at abandoned car plants or military bases. We find out what happened to them.
See above.
This is what we ask for our mutual freedom and compensation for some incessant, ongoing crimes in the confines of the hallowed Courts and we ask the Crown to help; the M. Strokeback charges withdrawn as submitted for the reasons stated above with no fair trial or fair, complete disclosure of evidence possible. Also, it is that the Court cannot aide and abet the crime, that being the destruction of evidence; the redaction of evidence. See S. 340 of the CCC.
- Definition: Spoliation is the intentional destruction of relevant evidence in anticipation of or during litigation.
- Civil Consequences: When intentional destruction is proven, Canadian courts may draw an adverse inference (a presumption that the evidence would have been unfavourable to the party that destroyed it).
- Negligent Destruction: While intentional destruction brings the strongest penalties, parties can still face sanctions (such as costs) for negligent or inadvertent destruction if they knew or should have known the evidence was relevant.
- It was thoughtless and intentional.
- Criminal Code Provisions:
- Section 340: Destroying titles, documents, or documents of title is an indictable offence, punishable by up to 10 years in prison.
- Section 430 & 434: Covers mischief in relation to property, including destruction by fire/explosion.
Courts have several ways to address destroyed evidence:
- Adverse Inference: Arguing that the missing evidence was damaging to the party who destroyed it.
- Cost Consequences: The court may order special cost awards to the other party.
- Dismissal/Default Judgment: In extreme cases, the court may dismiss a plaintiff’s claim or strike a defendant's defence.
- Anton Piller Order: A rare, pre-trial order permitting the search and seizure of evidence to prevent imminent destruction.
If the Crown or police fail to preserve evidence, it can lead to a stay of proceedings under sections 7 and 11(d) of the Charter (right to a fair trial), especially if it prevents the accused from making full answer and defence.
Click here for more.
Disclosure or Particulars: You are pinpointing the exact moment a prosecution collapses under the weight of its own disclosure failures. When the Crown cannot produce the original, unredacted evidence—especially when that evidence is central to the **actus reus** (the criminal act) or **mens rea** (the criminal intent)—the foundation of the trial is gone.
Yet the facts become unknowable if you redact the facts. This is not about winning or losing but ensuring the Court has all the evidence before it to reach a fair and just determination at the end of the proceedings. But you have redacted information that the Court needs and made it an artifice. No fair proceeding is possible now. How can we rely on your artifice? The truth is now unknowable. Who the f---k......?? What de Ras......??
Under **R. v. Stinchcombe**, if the Crown loses the ability to provide a complete record, they lose the ability to guarantee a fair trial.
### 1. The Breakdown of the "Prima Facie" Case
A motion for **non-suit** (or a directed verdict) is based on the Crown failing to establish a *prima facie* case. If the evidence required to prove a specific element of the offense is "tainted" or "incomplete," the legal logic follows your path:
* **Actus Reus:** If the missing 10 minutes of audio shows the complainant admitted the "knocking/begging" didn't happen, the Crown cannot prove the physical act of the offense occurred.
* **Mens Rea:** If the recording shows the accused had no criminal intent (or that the complainant was orchestrating a scene), the "guilty mind" cannot be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
* **The Crown's Uncertainty:** If the Crown prosecutors themselves realize the police provided "edited" files, they are ethically bound by their role as "ministers of justice." They cannot proceed if they no longer have a "reasonable prospect of conviction."
### 2. The "Best Evidence" Rule and Integrity
While modern courts often allow digital copies, the **Best Evidence Rule** still suggests that the most original, complete version of a record should be produced. If the Crown admits the original state is gone and only a "redacted/edited" version exists:
1. **The Inference of Bad Faith:** The court may wonder *why* it was edited. If the redaction wasn't for a legal privilege (like protecting an informant), the court may infer the evidence was manipulated to favor the prosecution.
2. **Inability to Cross-Examine:** You cannot cross-examine a "ghost." If the defense cannot see what was removed, they cannot test the reliability of what remains.
### 3. Procedural Path: Directed Verdict vs. Stay of Proceedings
In a 10-day trial where witnesses have already been cross-examined, here is how this logic usually plays out in a Canadian courtroom:
| Legal Argument | The Logic | Result |
|---|---|---|
| **No Case to Answer** | The Crown's evidence is so "tenuous" or "incomplete" that even if believed, it couldn't support a conviction. | **Acquittal** (Non-suit/Directed Verdict) |
| **Abuse of Process** | The state (Police/Crown) withheld or destroyed exculpatory evidence, making a fair trial impossible. | **Stay of Proceedings** |
| **Lost Evidence Doctrine** | The defense shows that the missing 10 minutes were "material" and their loss causes actual prejudice. | **Stay of Proceedings** or **Evidence Exclusion** |
### 4. The "Reasonable Prospect of Conviction"
In Ontario, the **Crown Prosecution Manual** dictates that a prosecution must be discontinued if there is no longer a reasonable prospect of conviction. If the evidence is shown to be "tainted" on Day 4:
* The Crown has a professional duty to **withdraw the charges** voluntarily.
* If they don't, the Defense moves for a **Directed Verdict** after the Crown closes its case, arguing that the "incomplete" evidence is no evidence at all.
### Summary of the Legal Defect
If the missing portion of that 911 tape proves the complainant was acting out of a "need to know if he was with someone else" rather than actual fear or a crime being committed, the **genuineness** of the entire Crown case is destroyed.
The court cannot be "sure" of a puzzle if the Crown has hidden the pieces that change the picture. This is exactly the type of scenario where a judge may determine that letting the trial continue would be an affront to justice. The Crown itself can say that at this hour there is no palpable or reasonable prospect of conviction.
Comments
Post a Comment