Here is the warrant!

The source doc is a very Valuable instrument if used correctly. Or NOTICE OF MISTAKE. PERFECT.

If they are going to RAPE me,i will turn the table and enjoy it,they like to hear the screams and crys but they dont know who they are fucking! I will RAPE them,i preform better in front of an audience when im fornicating!lol!

As with all of their laws, there are exceptions. Especially in sec. 136 of the Courts of Justice act. I have a feeling they want to argue sec.136, so as to draw you into jurisdiction.

in 1987 Chief Justice Howland ; explicitly dealt with sec.136, and issued a practice direction it. it can be found in the ontario anual practice. the goons are causing a smoke screen to gain jurisdiction.

UNLAWFULLY TAKE a recording? Are they claiming to have suffered a LOSS?

Who's the injured party?

ask them if they have somone spying on you?

Check for loopholes if you have a Privacy Act in Canada. Here in New Zealand, s54 of our Privacy Act 1993 says you can secretly record to protect home, family and employment as long as you are a party to the conversation.

If i breached a contract by recording proceedings than how is it that Justice Jefferies made a judicial determination at my previous bail hearing that" i did in fact have such a RIGHT?"

Do Canadian Courts use a stenographer or are they recording? Where is their permission to capture your evidence or argument on tape? There is a maxim at Law that states the Law applies equally to everyone. Seems to me that if a Court can breach your privacy with unauthorised recordings, then the Law is being unfairly applied.

"If" its a a public court...do i not have the right to record a public officer in the performance of his duties?

Don't use their recordings. They cut & paste all sorts of shit to suit themselves all the time. Use your own recording devices & witnesses.

Dean, sec. 183.1 of the cc says, you can record all you want ; as long as your party to the conversation. Their consent isn't required. However, again I feel they are using it as a redherring ( if that's the appropriate phrase to use ) to gain jurisdiction.

That is the meat and potatoes of it...now to play it out in court!

"What facts or evidence do you have that I took the recording?" Just because there's a murder weapon in my car, doesn't mean I killed the cop who was murdered with that weapon 10 minutes ago.

All these pricks do is speculate and presume. Just keep asking questions and don't make any statements.

ALWAYS ASK QUESTIONS

The name on the warrant reads "Dean Kory" but on the appendix"A" it is spelled "Dean KORY" ...(sneaky fuckers!)

Who is it that they want in court? Dean or DEAN. Who's stuff did you want? Your paperwork defines two different entities, man on the front page and a person on the appendix. I know who's stuff you took, and that MAN is pissed and that man is stand here

Dean- im reading (slowly, mind you) a book called THE PRACTICE AND JURISDICTION OF THE COURT OF ADMIRALTY, pg. VII, see if you get the gist of what its saying: "The jurisdiction of the...admiralty, as it is at present understood, appears to be of a strangely anomalous kind. Mariners' wages, except where the CONTRACT is under SEAL or is made in an unusual manner; bottomry, and in certain cases only and under many restrictions; and salvage, when the property shipwrecked is not cast ashore; appear to be the ONLY subjects within what is now considered to be its LEGITIMATE cognizance. . .for in the common law books there is no trace of it to be found, that the court of admiralty of England, entertains suits for the mere possession of vessels, though, it NEVER interferes where the TITLE is in CONTROVERSY." ..would you not say your TITLE is in CONTROVERSY?

Sure sounds like it to me! I love reading!

REMEMBER- Maxim-of-Law, the courts frown upon actions brought before it of a frivolous, trifling, or vexatious nature...MARINER Kory!? ;)

Dean writh THEM KUNTS a letter to deal with the matter PRIVATELY FIRST. Send it REGISTERED MAIL. 2 good witnesses to sign it infront of a JP. By doingt his ye have ACTED HONORABLY. "YOU"....ARE IN HONOUR THEM KUNTS are in DISHONOUR. You're 1 foot out the door already by doing this. PRIVATE VS PUBLIC. PRIVATE has NO JURISDICTION in their PUBLIC COURTS. COMPRENDE ??

I spoke with the JP days before the police showed up with the warrant to seize my property so im a few steps ahead...yes ill draft a letter looking to settle this dispute honorably first!

I think it was Matthew 18 or something like that, where it said go to your brother 3 times and try and resolve this peacefully, THEN go to the church/court to work it out if you must...this is where the NOTCE/private-administrative-remedy process supposedly evolved from

What does Matthew say about YOUR EMPLOYEE pissing you off? Lien their bond, Checkmate!!

Thats 100% correct Derek Moran. PRIVATE. NOT PUBLIC. Yeh their bekief in their bibke is so powerful when used against them kunts. They fuckin hate it when ye turn the tables on them.

Checkmate is correct Philip Laforet. I'm still trying to nut the lien pricess out. Is there an equivalent to PPSA in Australia? ?

I am not sure, but start with your local land registry office, it's not land, but that office used to do it here and there were able to tell me where to go to use ppsa, if using the correct term. Also if you lien say a law license, you need to know the proper name of the license and the person's name of course and the Ministry they work for, because the lien must go through the ministry they are licensed under.Bonds on the other hand I haven't found out exactly who underwrites their bonds, but it looks like a license is simple. I will find out soon. Lawyers here it is the Law Society of Upper Canada. Do cops carry a license or are the just bonded?

I don't know what ye mean by a license for the cops...oops I mean KUNTS? Yes they most likely should have a license to be KUNTS. But I think thet are BONDED BONDSMEN. Hence the BLUE uniform it represents BOND PAPER which is BLUE the same colour as your Birth Certificate.

philiop howd court go.

Oh yeh....Howd court go phillip ?? Slay those kunts or what ??

Photographing and filming police officers in Canada The Ottawa Citizen has a very good editorial on the practice of police intimidation of citizens who use their cellphone cameras and other devices to record the police. Here's a summary of what Canadians should know about this: There is no law in Canada that prevents a member of the public from taking photographs or video in a public place (other than some limitations related to sensitive defense installations); There is no law in Canada that prevents a member of the public from taking photographs or video of a police officer executing his or her duties in public or in a location lawfully controlled by the photographer (in fact, police officers have no privacy rights in public when executing their duties); Preventing a person from taking photos or video is a prima facie infrigement of a person's Charter rights; You cannot interfere with a police officer's lawful execution of his or her duties, but taking photos or videos does not, in and of itself, constitute interference; A police officer cannot take your phone or camera simply for recording him or her, as long as you were not obstructing; These privileges are not reserved to media -- everyone has these rights; A police officer cannot make you unlock your phone to show him or her your images; and A police officer cannot make you delete any photos.

So could i say i was audio recording the court officer in a public place in the preformence of his duties while that officer personally witnessed a breach of the peace and neglected his duty under his oath when the Crown and judge were trying to comitt the fraudulent transaction of a security interest through intimidation ,coersion and threats against a man?

just a little side note here on the warrant. Apparently when RCMP serve a warrant there has to be an affidavit. And you have a right to request that affidavit. However in our case when we got busted, with our search warrants, there were 2, they used Statutory Declarations. Statutory Declarations are similar to affidavits but they are not sworn to. Anybody have ideas why they used Statutory Declarations?

Interesting..

They are claiming you are the fiction named on the warrant and they are hiding behind legislation...

Hold them accountable and show through a notice of mistake that you are not the name and charge the bastards in there private capacities!

THEIR...

Grammer nazi!

" YOU" is not "ME" or " I"

Sieg fail

unfortunately we have already gone well past that point. He did 80 days in jail, and is on probation now. But I'm taking another look at this whole case to see what mistakes I can find. I have already found 5, but I'm not that knowledgeable about the paper work, warrants and the such.

Only 5 mistakes....really ?? Please do point them out for us ALL then Brenda.

RCMP put old man's driver's license # on certificate of conviction when he hasn't had one in the last 10 years. Said that they took plants, had them in lock up and destroyed them, when in actuality they left them behind on the shop floor in a bag. Falsified documents to show that they destroyed them. One officer stated what happened when they arrived with community services, but he wasn't even here then. Took a safe and stated there was only money in it, but I found one paper that stated by one officer that there were documents and money in the safe.RCMP told lies to Community Services, and they used it in affidavit to have valid reason to take the kids. They told CS that there 4 or 5 plants when there were only 3, that there was close to a pound of weed in the freezer when there was 6oz. told that the kids rooms were filthy with dirt couldn't see the floor. Which wasn't true. That we had no running water, which wasn't true. That there was dog feces on the kitchen floor, which wasn't true cause we have a hobby farm and the dogs are live stock guardian dogs and aren't allowed in the house.