**** Contempt of Court Charges filed.!Crown tells RCMP not to returned goods to Tech

[gunsmoke2]

The three warrants are Quashed for improper conduct on the Crown..The RCMP and the Judge also found that Tech was not in any violation of any law.

Even though they must returned the equipement seized the Crown told the RCMP not to as they might appeal..

How insane can they be..

Back to court next week..

In Canada you are now guilty until proven innocent on satellite cases.. on top of that when you are proven innocent you are not intitled to receive the improper seizure of your goods that was meant to put you out of buisness only to begin with..

How sick and patheic can they get..

They want to set new standards for improper conduct that the United Nations will have to investigate it seems..

GS2

[North Sat]

I would haul their asses before J. Sheppard and ask that they be found in contempt of court...
however, technically speaking, despite the order to return the goods 'forthwith', the Criminal Code provides that nothing shall be returned for 30 days pending any appeal, and once an appeal is filed, it continues to be held...

The only possible way around this is to say 490 of the Code no longer applies as the RCMP themselves failed to follow the code (it not filing the report to a justice as required by 487....) therefore if they didn't play by the rules in seizing and holding the goods, the victim should not be expected to have to follow them.

The Crown loves to play such games, in my case, even though I had been acquitted of the charges relating to the 35 systems and they were no longer necessary for any trial, they fought all attempts to have them returned on the basis I could not prove that I was "lawfully" entitled as 490 of the code requires, in that their position was the systems are illegal.

[RiseStar]

Seeing stuff like this makes me :BA

And also makes me want to :PU

[To The Real King!!]

Hi Everyone,

Eddie I think you are right. As Mr. Alan Gold is Dawn Branton’s lawyer I believe he will be back in court and WILL ask to hold the RCMP in Contempt once a proper 490 is ruled on. At that point if the RCMP does not return the goods I believe Judge Sheppard WOULD hold them in contempt. If he hears that they did this on instructions from the Crown then I believe he will go off the deep end with large monetary sanctions. I could be wrong but I do not believe they get to hold the goods pending an appeal in Ontario or Quebec. I will check this out ASAP.

In your case Eddie, I understand the matter was referred back to the same judge so why does he not just make the same finding again. I am sure he will but why the delay? That seems patently unfair. Especially since you could allow them to keep ONE sample and sign an affidavit that you had the 34 others returned. They certainly do NOT need 35 units that are the same for evidentiary reasons. Its quite obvious that it is intended to be punative.

Judge Sheppard made this supplementary ruling in Tech’s case as HE smelled a RAT. Notice he mentions several other Ontario cases and the NEED for a Superior Court ruling which HE made.

I fear this WONT be nice for Mr. John D I C K, the crown attorney whom I am currently suing in Kitchener along with other defendants.

This is the same Crown who TWICE admitted the RCMP acted wrongly in another case in Toronto. TWICE? Is that normal. Mr. Justice also handled that case.

On a side note today the charges were dismissed and the goods ordered returned to a Mr. Gaetano Campennela in Hamilton. He operated under the name of Primestar and this also may be Mr. John D i c k as the crown too but I am not sure. I will find out though.

These people need a GOOD LESSON and I have a feeling Mr. Justice Sheppard may JUST be the one to give it to them. I hope so.

Thanks & Good Luck,

To The REAL King!!
-----------------------
Freedom has nothing to fear from the truth!

http://www.legal-rights.org/images/lrbanner.gif
Now open with lots of useful resources at your disposal AT:
http://www.legal-rights.org


[Edited by To The Real King!! on September 15th, 2000 at 11:50 PM]

[North Sat]

We offered (in Court so its on the record) to allow them to keep 1 sony and 1 rca and I would sign an ackowledgement that the other 33 were imported by me etc. etc.

They declined....

There is NO question than that this is punitive...

When I was acquitted my lawyer made some comments (also on the record) that she would be surprised if the Crown appealed the acquittals since we were still continuing with the trial on the other charge, they would get a determination of the law without the 35 systems...and she added 'unless of course, the Crown is trying punish my client'.

Well, of course we know what happened...they did appeal it and have the acquittal set aside, the search and seizure was still ruled ILLEGAL, although the QB judge thought that the illegal search and seizure didn't render the trial process unfair....so he sent it back to the Trial Judge with the 35 systems in evidence the Trial Judge excluded.

And the issue is once again before the Trial Judge...

I think he is in a bit of a quandry because he knows they will run to the QB for an appeal once he acquits me, and he wants to make sure that his decision is firmly established under law and able to withstand such challenges...

[gunsmoke2]

We offered the same thing at my 90 hearing.. afidavids of all kinds..

We even offered to ship back the goods to the US..( Same as Pukeview except the Pukes lie and resale it in Canada )

They NADA to everything we offered..

What comes around goes around.. and with this crap I hope I and others can make it go around right back to them.

GS2

[gunsmoke2]

Contempt of Court Charges have been filed against the RCMP.

The hearing is scheduled for Sept 27 th in front of Justice Sheppard..

If this stays on this will be a must see for me..

I don't have the details about 490 but apparently it was taken care of..

There is no announcement of an appeal and even then under law they have to return the goods..

I hope they SCREW THEMSELVES real good on this one.. Alan Gold will be pleading the motion.. I spent 5 days with him in my case and he is top notch.. with Sheppard hearing it.. it makes for a very interesting result.

Royal Farcets.. your are GUILTY AS SIN.. just like us you will have to prove your innocense after.. EXCEPT you have no excuse other than being an UNLAWFUL ENFORCERS OF HARRASMENT.

I hope YOU get Sparky the chair.. and with Mr D i c k ----head being so DUMB.. I am very happy to hear he will be defended you..

Your good friend

GS2 http://www.legal-rights.org/images/smilesmok.gif




[Edited by gunsmoke2 on September 16th, 2000 at 12:46 PM]

[To The Real King!!]

Hi Everyone,

WOW, I hope Mr. Justice Sheppard gets as HOT as I think he will about this. That just may show other courts that the action is PUNITIVE and not lawful. Wait till he finds out that it was Mr. John D I C K that told the RCMP to hold on to it. The judge will FLIP:)

Now that we have the momentum going for us we are REDOUBLING our efforts to make it an ABSOLUTE LANDSLIDE in our favor. We have been fighting HARD and cooperating all along but now with the newfound encouragement we will be STRONGER than ever.

I am going to Drummondville Quebec on Monday where we believe the first Quebec ruling will come in on our side. This is a very good judge and an EXCELLENT CASE. We have also asked this Judge to make a ruling on the constitutionality of the law EVEN if she acquits the defendant. The CROWN argued AGAINST this but I think we may get our way. The judge was VERY PUZZLED as to WHY the Canadian Government did NOT want a ruling on that issue and KNOW what the law is. VERY Strange but that may WELL provide the encouragement that the judge needed. She is a long time Charter advocate and teaches the “Charter” at a well known Quebec university. I cant wait and we are BRINGING CHAMPAGNE

P.S. This case was fought with 3 lawyers at the Crowns table and NONE at ours. The defendant argued the case himself (with lots of help from Mr. Ian Angus for the WRITTEN pleas). Jacques did a WONDERFUL job and really excelled and soon even the Judge was calling him “Maitre D’Argy” which is the way to call him a lawyer in French. He shone and made the Crown lawyers look like “dead Meat” :D:D:D

It was TRULY neat to see the small guys and supposed banditos look so good while the opposition looked so BAD!!!

UNITED WE STAND!!

Thanks & Good Luck,

To The REAL King!!
-----------------------
Freedom has nothing to fear from the truth!

http://www.legal-rights.org/images/lrbanner.gif
Now open with lots of useful resources at your disposal AT:
http://www.legal-rights.org


Newbies PLEASE CLICK HERE and Read (http://www.dsschat.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?forumid=26)

[North Sat]

I may just have to fly out to check this one out...

In Whitby I assume?

[gunsmoke2]

Yes Whitby.. but..

Just to clarify a bit... originally my info came from Tech on this..

Having just spoke to their ( criminal ) lawyers which happen to be mine plus the other I have..

Here is more accurate information.. on Sept 27th there is a motion before Justice Sheppard to enfore the order that was ignored the first time.. it will be a second order.. also there is a motion on costs to be awarded..

They will be seeking all courts costs to be awarded for Tech as it was the Crown who is responsible for this whole mess to begin with.

Tech's cvil lawyers will be filing the contempt of court charges in connection with Tech's criminal lawyers.. this will not be heard on the 27th.. the date has not been set yet as the motion will probably be filed this week..

Its speculated that the MORONS might return the goods on Sept 26th or something near that time.. the RCMP just say that they follows order from Mr D i c k the DUMB SH*THEAD.. who has intructed them not to return the goods and therefore ignoring the court order..

LOWLIFE PATHEIC DEGENERATES..

I am also very axiously awaiting what could be the first Quecbec Decision tommorrow.

McPuke who knew that the BC Decision was coming decided not to informed the Judge ( Clarke) in Edmonton or any of the defendents lawyers.. I wonder why Mr McPuke.. LOWLIFE.

GS2

[North Sat]

Well as I mentioned earlier, the difficulty will be section 490, particularly sub (12):

"Notwithstanding anything in this section, nothing shall be returned, forfeited or disposed of under this section pending any application made, or appeal taken, thereunder in respect of the thing or proceeding in which the right of seizure thereof is questioned or within 30 days after an order in respect of the thing seized is made under this section."

however that may be limited by the final words "...order...made under this section"

the order was NOT pursant to a request under 490, but a s. 8 breach of the Charter. Further, it could be argued that the goods don't even 'get' to 490 yet, due to the wording of the first paragraph:

"(1)Subject to this or any other Act of Parliament, where, pursuant to paragraph 489.1(1)(b) or subsection 489.1(2), anything that has been seized is brought before a justice or a report in respect of anything seized is made to a justice, the justice shall,..."

since the RCMP have failed to file the required report, the goods CANNOT yet be considered by 490, but instead are held completely illegally and in a manner which is completely unsupported by, and contrary to the Criminal Code.

This would seem to be the BEST argument for 'immediate' return. I do know of cases one of my local lawyers has worked on (it was a guy running a XXX video shop, and the RCMP went in and seized something like 9000 tapes, calling them all obscene...) where the client and lawyer actually went directly to the police station to get them back...of course the loser RCMP did the dirtiest -- they got a different warrant to seize and hold them....it almost resulted in fisticuffs....

It was kinda funny when this lawyer was telling my about some of the court appearances...they wanted to portray how stupid and excessive the whole thing was, (hmmm sound familiar) so at one date, the lawyer declined to waive reading of the informations, and asked the clerk to begin reading the informations...there was 1200+ charges or something crazy like that...so the clerk starts..."The accused blah blah blah charged with possession of obscene materials, blah blah blah, to wit: 1 videotape entitled: F*ck me harder..." and this went on till about count 5....when the lawyer interrupted and waived reading of the informations...

at the end of the day, this guy got all his stuff back, I think he plead out to a solitary charge simply to save face for the rcmp, and he went on to basically become the xxx king of western canada...the lawyer still can't believe he didn't want to sue the rcmp, but he was happy enough to simply move on....(and make a sh*tload of money)...

[RiseStar]

Funny how all citizens of canada are expected to live out our live in a legal fashion, yet out national police force are allowed to act in an unlawful manner and with relative impunity also I might add.

Its quite clear to me that their mandate is meant to offer punative action to satellite dealers even before their day in court, they seem to hold themselves in such high regard that they seem to feel that they are somehow above the law and don't need to fill out proper paperwork to hold goods.

Rather it seems that their mandate is to search and seize, hold onto goods and just forget about them, delay proceedings as long as possible and croos the bridges to any problems when they come to them.

It seems that in almost every crown case, they never seem to be properly prepared when it comes time for trial. They delay for 12-18 months or longer and then then come to court unprepared like they were surprised that the trial was going to commence.

Then they lose and have pie (did I say pie?) egg on their faces...

[gunsmoke2]

I think you are missing the point on section 490 in this situation..

The warrants were Quashed and therefore were illegal to begin with.. section 490 does not apply at all in this situation and it is not required to file it either..

The seizures being Quashed are therefore considered void or illegal as they should not have taken place..

They have to return the goods under the law..

I know you had you sernrio and am still a bit confused on why they were allowed to keep the goods but in any case your warrant was not Quashed as I understand it.?

GS2

[StarVu]

A few months ago here in Sault Ste Marie a man was charged under the Federal Liquore and Gaming act. He had 10 times the amount of alchol in his micro brewrey than he should have. RCMP got a warrant and took his booze...2 weeks later his lawyer argued that it served no purpose to hold the evidence and cause finacial harm to his client. Booze was returned........trial date set for fall.

It dosen't seem fair!

We must have the worst legal system in the world....

But it's better than everyone else's

[North Sat]

I do not believe the quashing of a search warrant is automatic return, in fact I KNOW its not....

for example, they certainly would not return drugs.....nor would they return stolen TVs, even if the search and seizure was illegal..get my drift?

And yes, it is still dealt with under 490 since at the time of the seizure it was done with a warrant...

that is why 490 contains the words 'lawfully entitled', so that people could not get back 'illegal' goods no matter what....and furthermore, even 'illegally seized' goods can be used in a trial, so long as they are not excluded under 24(2)....exclusion is NOT automatic.

[MIKED]

I believe North Sat is correct since similar statutes are applicable in the States. The issue here is that the merchandise in question was/is not illegal and that the assumption here is that they were legally owned. Perhaps there is an interpretation problem here that allows the retention of the confiscated goods? Perhaps there have been no documents that show rightful ownership and thus a waiting period must pass so as to enable any rightful owners to make claims?

[gunsmoke2]

We are NOT talking DRUGS or STOLEN TVS.. its Satellite equipement..

The warrant(3)were Quashed.. and therefore the goods were ILLEGALLY SEIZED and there is no authority to retained them..

I know where you are coming from.. Ian.. and although you and he share the same opinion.. Allan Gold and I do not share your opinion on this.. no section 490 required as this WAS an ILLEGAL SEIZURE with the warrants thrown out..

We can go on and on about this.. and I know about your experience in Manitoba and I know we are now talking Ontario Superior court..

But in any case somebody is right and somebody is wrong on this.. I having heard from both attorneys it will be interesting to see which one is correct..

Should have the answer on Sept 27th.. or on the 26th.. 25th.. if they decide all of a sudden to return them.

GS2





[Edited by gunsmoke2 on September 19th, 2000 at 08:34 PM]

[North Sat]

hey believe me, I would love to believe things your way, however I have been there!

It is UNQUESTIONABLY still dealt with by 490 (As I said earlier, the WAY AROUND that would be the failure to file the report...as it appears 490 only applies when evidence is being held pursuant to a report and detention order...)there is also ANOTHER reason the goods could be held, and that is for the trial...You will notice the judge did NOT rule on the admissibility of the evidence...he left that to the trial judge...well that right there is grounds to continue holding it, as 490 specifies that nothing shall be returned if it is necessary for trial. Items can ONLY be returned when a prosecutor is satisfied they are no longer necessary. In fact, I would suggest that the Crown has an excellent chance of appealing the order to return the goods, on the basis it is still necessary for trial...it is a common everyday thing for trials to continue with warrantless searches, it is only in the USA where illegally seaized goods are automatically excluded at trial...

I would sure like to see them get around 490 (even if its due to the failure to file the report, as the RCM(tv)P who seized my 35 systems without a warrant never filed one either) and get the stuff returned, it would be very helpful for me...

Certainly this is the correct Judge to be before..

[gunsmoke2]

I known you have been there except it was not on a successful Quash warrant?

They could try to argue they need it for evidence at trial but good luck when you read that Judge Sheppard said they needed ONLY to buy ONE unit for evidence if necessary..it seems that because they keep it ALL was one of his reasons given to Quash ALL the warrants in the first place..

They are NOT filling section 490 as they say it does NOT apply in this case.. the goods were SEIZE ILLEGALLY from her.. if they are successful without the 490 then you will have their way on how to get around it..


They ( crown ) have filed an appeal but gave hardly any reasons for the basis of their appeal..thats because they don't have any...just more Financial Harrashment


I personally feel the judge will order the return of the goods and only get more upset at this situation.. its the same judge who seemed upset already..

The crown in Ontario is a MORON.. and I hope this will turn out to make him look like a BIGGER MORON.. Madame crown in Quebec is in the same catergory.. think their is someone( Government ) in the background telling them to look like fools

BTW, It seems that for now they will appeal EVERYTHING no matter what..I guess it makes them feel good to tell the judges that all the cases are being appealed.. maybe they are also hoping to drain one or so out of funds..

Lets up the ones that won are the ones that will fight the appeals.. lets hope that the judges don't grant leave to appeal.


GS2


[Edited by gunsmoke2 on September 20th, 2000 at 10:14 AM]