I have read, "Our courts set the example for the rest of society to follow." If this is true, what a shabby example it is that they set!

But it is as Justice Minister Rob Nicholson implied last winter, when he said that our Administration of Justice was never meant to be a private club of lawyers. The fact is, we have let successive reigning political parties contaminate the Administration of Justice with political patronage appointments, one after the other.

A prominent St John's criminal lawyer, Jerome Kennedy agrees. For his candor, he faced the wrath of the Chief Justice and the Law Society of Newfoundland. Now he's the Justice Minister and A.G. of same. From my perspective, it does seem a bizzare twist of events...

And speaking of bizzare, George W. Bush came to Calgary to lead a discussion on "the challenges we face in the 21st century". As I said to Prime Minister Harper this March 16th, 2009, specifically regarding Canada's laws on war criminals, we're "more than just a few Keebler elves", you know.

So now, I invite you to read "My Horror Story". And when you're done, have a look at the " Evidence".

"Another Horror Story" is about Howard Berge, former president of the Law Society of British Columbia. He recently resigned over a little fiasco involving a motor vehicle accident and a retaining wall, some diet pills and mouthwash and criminal charges (later plea-bargained with the crown down to undue careless attention), resulting in a thousand dollar fine...Can you say,"Obstruction of Justice"?

But that's not what this is about - it's about Mr. Berge and his friend and former law partner, Michael Bishop senior, and their fleecing of a disabled, single mother of three children. Could it be that Mr. Berge just needed her help to finance his drinking career?

As more and more families are falling apart, divorce has become an industry that serves lawyers, mortgage brokers and their friends in the real estate industry, generating 'distress sales' that leave the family members homeless. How glaring it is to see how 'the players' remain primarily focussed on the 'matrimonial home'. Coincidentally, it is Master Bishop we see, once more render decisions that defy logic.

And it was Master Bishop who ruled that I should pay lawyers for work they agreed to do, but didn't do, and never had any intention of doing, right from the very beginning.

Beyond criminal fraud, I've been subjected to repeated extortionist tactics, threats and coersion, all various attempts to try and shut me up.

Some even dared call it slander!
But clearly, it isn't slander if it's the truth - and you can prove it.

And then there's my friend, Karl Eisbrenner, and his Brouwer/Kuiper Case, wherein he set out to expose a wide-spread, clandestine collaboration between judicial and political interests, here in British Columbia. Those who opposed him went to enormous lengths to shut Karl up. Among them, you will again find Master Bishop meddling with and ignoring the law and the evidence Karl put before him. Persecuted and vilified, Karl is no longer with us, unexpectedly killed in a single-vehicle accident.

And my friend, John Bjornstrom, the notorious "Bushman of the Shuswaps", who spent two years of isolation in a remand cell before undergoing a five-day pre-sentence hearing, never gone to trial to establish any basis of guilt or not. Even so, that five-day hearing revealed a repetitive propensity of Crown Counsel, to dwell on his preferred state of the imagined, rather than the glaring facts that emmerged, establishing that John Bjornstron had previously conducted a private investigation into the case of two murdered teen-aged girls, discovered during the excavation of construction site in Calgary, leading him to a suspected pedophile/snuff/porn operation connected to suspects frequenting the Shuswaps.

Also established is that Mr. Bjornstrom had conducted a private investigation into the death of the geologist involved in the Bre-x scandal. John's lawyer explained to Global news camaras that he had a copy of a hit-list, acquired during a series of raids conducted by Indonesian police, subsequent to the arrest of Tommy Suharta. John's name is on that list, but the lawyer said that he was prohibited from including it in the record to establish Mr. Bjornstrom's credibility -- something to do with national security, he revealed...
Believe it or else, it is all connected and leads to the top.

Assuredly, the truth is not always easy, nor is it always a popular stance to take. Take, for instance, my letter to Victor S. Janicki, a local criminal lawyer who took to heckling me from the top of the courthouse stairs.

It was here, also, that Crown Counsel, Norman Yates responded to my question: yes, he had sworn an oath to uphold the Criminal Code of Canada, but not where it concerns me. He then turned and walked away, refusing to elaborate. To be sure, that raises some concerns for my "protection before and under the law".

The questionable application and validity of my right to freedom and protection "before and under the law", and by extention, the question of application and validity of the 1982 Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is blurred, perhaps even misleading ("notwithstanding" what?) at best. Of even greater relevance to the question of protection, might be the part that states that "the evidence shall be excluded if it is established that, having regard to all the circumstances, the admission of it in the proceedings would bring the administration of justice into disrepute".

I see that the link to Section 24 has changed... Though merely a "google" away, here's a couple of brief perspectives -- a scant 2 pages, beginning with a page from the Advocates Quarterly, (Vol. 28, p. 103, 2004), Justice Lance Finch's interpretation in Case #CA014518, Kuntz v The College of Physicians, winding up with a few words from Dr. John David Kuntz, himself, on how it has been applied in Canada.

To be clear: it is not the evidence that would "bring the administration of justice into disrepute", it is the actions of those to whom the evidence points. If those powers that be really do wish to revive the reputation of our courts, then they'd better start prosecuting those who have brought our courts into such disrepute in the first place.

As former Prime Minister Paul Martin did say that he supports whistle-blowers, I sent him a copy of my letter to Mr. Janecki. I also bought a whistle. I know that Mr. Martin recieved my email, and gave it due concern, because he sent a fellow by my house to have a little visit with me...

It's hard to imagine that a guy might even get busted!???

Just imagine the implications...

In my efforts to expose the truth, I've even resorted to running for political office. There are always consequences for speaking out, it appears.

Yes, when things get this bad, one may well have to resort to a variety of acts of civil disobedience, so as to invoke a challenge before the court..

In spite of my outlandish behaviour, I have faced a virtual media black-out, almost. In fact, their private responses can be quite nasty.

And then once in a while, out of the blue... a ray of light.

Still, the lawyers press on, again revealing their underlying agenda. Clearly, it represents another attack against freedom of speech!

As you peruse the related links on the right side of the page, it becomes clear to see that things are terribly broken. You might even be wondering; "How can we fix this mess?"

Sociologically speaking, an independent Administration of Justice forms the highest functional structure in any democratic society. To function properly, this administration must be beholden to nothing but the truth and the laws that are there to serve us all, equally in a fair and balanced society. There's just no room for private interests. But because of the sanction of just one lone judge, or 3, or even 5, all part of the same patronizing political process, politicians and their corporate lobbys keep winning, while the rest of us keep losing in greater and greater numbers.

In any democratic society, democracy would be seen to be done daily, exercised by juries of 12 citizens, selected, based on each participant's independence. As with all things public, utter transparency is essential to insure the utmost independence. Tape recorders should not be banned from courtrooms. And like every decision we make, complete disclosure is essential to make the most informed decisions.

At the very minimum, our present system of administering justice heaps far too much responsibility on too few shoulders to carry such a monstrous load. The opportunities for undue influence, unimaginable for so many of us, becomes far to great, making life-long targets out of judges, singularly.

And to be frank, with judges owing their judicial positions to political appointments, realistically, can we ever expect to see a conviction for say, public malfeasance, misfeasance, or nonfeasance, in spite of whatever evidence? We must take back the power from those already demonstrably compromised interests, and put it back into the hands of the communities who are allegedly sworn to be served by it. It would solve a lot of our social problems, microcosmically, and even globally.

For instance, I bet a jury of twelve would convict Karl Rove , George W. Bush, et al, faster than the American Senate will! Either way, it looks like it could be a very long wait and see…

Because really, it is like the President of Iran, Dr. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said in his letter to President George W. Bush .

It is my contention that public opinion carries weight. As proof, I submit that in spite of those Orders from the Court, now expired, Grant Hardwick never caused my home to be sold, I never paid him another nickel, and you're still reading this now. Roy knows better than anyone how many responded to my massive email appeal, but I couldn't have done it without you all! Thank you so much for your efforts, profoundly demonstrating how wrong at least one of my lawyers, Marvin Geekie has been -- people do care about fairness and justice. After all, it's for our common best interest.

Between phone calls to talk radio, letters, faxes and emails to editors, MPs, MLAs and bureacrats, turn up the volume to arrest all predatory human behaviour. More than ever before, North Americans must shout out in defence of their freedom to investigate, speak about and uphold the truth. That is that also the essence of justice. Now more than ever, it's time for North Americans to excercise our guaranteed right to speak freely.
Make a sign!
Freedom of speech - Use it or lose it

Does it feel like your elected representatives won't hear you?
Then send them a message that they'll most assuredly take note of - quit paying taxes!
Personally, I refuse to pay for broken goods.
And frankly, it is all about the money
Most assuredly and as is evidenced on these subsequent pages and links - much is broken...
Quit paying taxes!

Some quotes from the past:

"Permit me to issue and control the money of a nation and I care not who makes its laws.” - Mayer Amschel Rothschild

"The cost to the good people for their indifference to their public affairs is to be ruled by evil men." - Plato

"All that it takes for the triumph of evil is that good men and women do nothing." - Edmund Burke

It has been said that if someone has thought about doing something, there's someone else actually doing it, no matter how outrageous.
It matters not so much to me who wrote this master-plan; what matters is that it's a very well thought out plan for world domination...
The Protocals of Zion, the mere mention of which is strictly, taboo..

My Campaign Platform - Canadian Federal Election - 2005/2006.

http://www.canadianactionparty.ca/ - The party that no one is talking about..

Church and State - where do we draw the line?

Corporate Plunder

Our Global Village

Email Your Senator Email Your MP Email Your MLA
Email my MLA Email my MP Email Gordon Campbell
Email Stephen Harper

Share this site with all your friends.

Yours very truly,

David Thomson
mailto:idslayer@telus.net

P.s. Did you know that you don't need a postage stamp to snail-mail a Member of Parliament or a Member of the Provincial Legislature?