I sent it to the Toronto Sun,CBC,CBS,The Lindsay Post,and The Oshawa Times media,as well as many people on my friends list! Vid#2 keeps being pulled and being the cynical fuck i am,I think that i might have something recorded here that "They" dont like!
at 23 seconds, the Justice goes from admitting to maybe you're not Dean Kory so you dont have nothing to worry about; THEN, out of the other side of his mouth, he issues an arrest warrant? For WHO exactly, the PERSON, or the MAN? MAXIM-of-LAW: (paraphrasing) "Those who contradict themselves should not be heard".....i think THAT is why this clip keeps on being deleted
Signed,
the Rules-of-Recusal
PARTIES AND JOINDER
RULE 5JOINDER OF CLAIMS AND PARTIES
JOINDER OF CLAIMS
5.01 (1) A plaintiff or applicant may in the same proceeding join any claims the plaintiff or applicant has against an opposite party. R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 194, r. 5.01 (1).
(2) A plaintiff or applicant may sue in different capacities and a defendant or respondent may be sued in different capacities in the same proceeding. R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 194, r. 5.01 (2).
(3) Where there is more than one defendant or respondent, it is not necessary for each to have an interest in all the relief claimed or in each claim included in the proceeding. R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 194, r. 5.01 (3).
(3) In an action to which the Proceedings Against the Crown Act applies, if the notice required by section 7 of that Act has not been served, the Crown in right of Ontario is entitled to participate in mediation under this Rule but is not required to do so. O. Reg. 453/98, s. 1.
THIS is the book Scott has recommended i read instead of the CLUBHOUSE RULES: http://www.carswell.com/product-detail/ontario-annual-practice-2012-2013-edition-cd/
..dunno if it would differ from Ontario Civil Procedure in your case, though
on pg.68 of ONTARIO SMALL CLAIMS COURT PRACTICE 2013 by Justice Zuker from Carswell, it states: 22) "Dont be scared of a courtroom. Judges are there to INTERPRET and APPLY the law, not make it."
pg. 11 - REASONABLE APPREHENSION OF BIAS:
"Public confidence in our legal system "is rooted in the fundamental belief that those who adjudicate must always do so WITHOUT BIAS or PREJUDICE and must be perceived to do so" (Roberts v. R. 2003)
pg. 11 - UNREPRESENTED LITIGANTS: A PERSPECTIVE - GROUNDS FOR APPEAL - COMPLAINTS
ORDER doesnt reflect settlement terms
I didnt know i needed to testify
The judge made up his or her mind before we began
The judge didnt UNDERSTAND what i was saying
The judge was a FRIEND (amicus curiae) of the lawyer
The judge didnt take the proceeding seriously
Judge was BIASED
Judge was in a hurry
Judge pressured me to settle
Decision leaves out key evidence
MISTAKES in the decision
I may have to file a private information through a JP...no police station will touch this with a 10 foot pool...Judge Chester used to be mayor and knows everyone!
So they OBLIGE you to go into a PRIVATE place to clarify something regarding YOUR person, you've brought some audio material with you, because you have NO CONFIDENCE at all about this PRIVATE place, you brought all this equipment for your OWN protection, and now, THEY've steal all this equipment from you. :(
If We are NOT a person and if we REALLY HAVE a person, and they are after THE PERSON, and we KNOW that we are NOT this person's SURETY, they are coocked....
The most wonderful thing I did in here is I JUMPED in the pool, regardless of any mistakes I could have done or not....and you pretty much did the same, we may had looked stupid once in a while, but it gets extremly VALUABLE for our thinking process ate the end....