New update..

[gunsmoke2]

New update...

The crown has finished their case and their two remaining witnesses will only be called if a Charter arguement is necessary..

This was an option that the judge presented to them and they decided to take it..

So the Starchoice lawyer will not be testifying tommorrow and most likely never..

So what does that mean...

We start our case tommorrow morning..

We have supeoned two witnesses..

One in the morning.. one in the afternoon..

I will tell only this for now and make a full report tommorrow nite.. or TTRK if he is there..

They are both Canadian broadcasters.. broadcasting on Canadian cable.. and Expresspuke.. Starjerks..

They run DSS on their premises currently both with programming to DTV..

One has RCA equipement..the other Sony equipement..

Both have dialers manufactered by my company.

Both have fake US adddresses :)

The one in the afternoon.. is the biggie..

It is a Crown Corporation..

Which means they are owned by the Government.

I think this will be somewhat embarrassing. :)

TTRK :) Please no names until they have testified ( Thanks )

I will not be testifying as my lawyers now feel it is not necessary..

We could start closing arguements tommorrow afternoon.. next will be the Crowns closing arguements..

So we might finish on Thursday ( next day reserved in court ).. if not then one day next week..

Leaving now.. off to the hotel as the courtroom is so far away..

GS2

[seed]

Oh, thats gotta hurt! Nice work!

Good luck,
Seed

[sparker]

well done

[Karen]

Ouch! Way to go, GS2!

We're rooting for you! :)

[To The Real King!!]

Hi Guys,

The court case is in Longeuil Quebec, about 1 1/2 hours from my home in Hudson area or 3/4 of an hour (at rush hour) south of Montreal. Its very hard to find and I arrived a half hour late the first day as its a long drive to get there. GS2 stays there at a hotel cause it aint such a good idea for HIM to be late :)

I am glad to hear that GS2Õs lawyers feel he doesnÕt need to testify as this means its virtually in the bag. I think they will revisit that question after the last witness has testified however as GS2 would make a good witness if needed. When the crown has really proved nothing however it becomes really unnecessary.

As MR. Gibson is a lawyer and a rep of StarChoice and as they cannot prove any loss, (they do have a civil right of action possibly) the judges decision not to have him (Gibson) testify unless the 2B charter argument is used CLEARLY shows where the judge is going.

You see the 2B argument would ONLY be called into issue if GS2 was to be found guilty. Then the Judge would have to decide if the RC Act infringed his rights under the charter section 2B (Freedom of Expression) BUT if he is found Ònot guiltyÓ OR if the Judge rules Òit is NOT an offenceÓ (the more likely ruling in MY opinion) then his 2B rights have NOT been infringed. In fact it means that Òthe Actions of GS2 (and everyone selling Grey Market) do NOT constitute an offence under the RC ACT.

In fact (as the act does not differentiate between Black and Grey) this MOST LIKELY means that ONLY someone who is STEALING a signal of an Authorized Distributor in Canada (such as ExpressVu and Star Choice for Satellite) is guilty of an RC Act offence, which is obviously correct and is what the law is there to protect against. Receiving programming from an International broadcaster such as an American company who are NOT authorized in Canada, whether you pay or NOT, is unlikely to be an offence under the Act.

I certainly do hope its over on Thursday as I am tired of travelling :)

I hope we get a ruling FROM THE BENCH followed by a written ruling which specifically says why. The Judge probably knows the Crown will Appeal this decision so the stronger the ruling is justified as to WHY, the less the grounds for appeal. The Crown can really only appeal on the LAW and NOT on the facts presented. They would have to allege that the Judge made an Òerror in lawÓ.

This is why I believe he may rule it Ònot an offence known to lawÓ as this has been ruled in two previous black market cases in Canada. As those were NOT appealed by the crown (one was but the appeal was later dropped because the ruling was SO STRONG) this CERTAINLY would not be overturned in a ÒGrey market caseÒ where the Òappearance of rightÓ or the Òmorality of it versus the legality of itÓ is clearly much more in our favor.

While some may take objection with the moral issue of receiving a signal without paying, this WILL NOT be an issue in THIS case and is really not a true issue in any case. Canadians MUST follow the law regardless of the Moral issues, one way or the other. There is a moral issue with their broadcasting in Canada which is disallowed by law (try to get a signal that is NOT broadcast here) but that does NOT change the law and legal issues.

It therefore becomes the first case in Quebec & Ontario to be subject to the crowns appeal (they have 30 days) yet one of the most difficult ever to overturn.

I donÕt want to jump to any conclusions because its never over in law till the fat lady sings but I just wanted you to have some idea of what can happen, or should I say what I hope happens :)

To freedom of CHOICE in Canada and DOWN with the improper stance of our undemocratic Government!!!

Thanks,

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

http://www.dr7.com/temp/ttrk/pulsar.gif http://www.legal-rights.org/images/cdnalliance.gif http://www.dr7.com/temp/ttrk/pulsar.gif

http://www.dr7.com/temp/ttrk/lrbanner.gif
Now open with lots of useful resources at your disposal AT:
http://www.legal-rights.org

[To The Real King!!]

Hi Everyone,

Well today was one of the weirdest days that I have ever had in court. Perhaps I should wait and let GS2 report but I will say what I feel and we will see how he feels. I hope he feels better than me and that I am just having a moody day.

Firstly everything went smoothly today. Only 2 witnesses, one from ÒReseau Des SportsÒ and another from Radio Canada, the French version of the CBC.

The Witness from RDS was up first and was probably the wrong guy to have been subpoenaed. But thatÕs almost impossible to know in advance. But he admitted they bought programming from GS2Õs company and that they made short clips of the signals that they rebroadcast. I guess they bought grey market because that was the way to get it. But this guy didnÕt know that much.

Then in the afternoon the witness from CBC-Radio Canada. He was a good witness, admitted they had been buying from GS2Õs company since 1996 and that they too made film clips of the broadcasts to rebroadcast. He was MUCH more knowledgeable than the RDS guy. He said they HAD some type of permission to receive this but in effect they seemed to have rebroadcasting rights and NOT receiving rights.

Can the government get rights to receive DSS from the CRTC when we cant? Are they excluded from the law when we are not? Or is NOT the law that could prohibit that. This judge in my opinion should have seen the BIG contradiction there.

I have to say that this gentleman made pretty much all the admissions I expected but somehow, for some reason, it lacked the expected impact. It was good but NOT as big or dramatic as I had expected. Perhaps because the Judge did not seem impressed.

So all went well, yet there was a very large amount of disappointment in my eyes at the end of the day. Here is why as I see it.

Firstly this judge is fast and direct but he is French Canadian as would be expected in Longeuil. He showed ME today that he thinks that COLLECTIVE RIGHTS and the right of society (therefore the Government or the People) to administer broadcasting is FAR more important than individual rights. ThatÕs not uncommon here in Quebec. Quebecers are more ÒcollectiveÓ oriented (societal thinking) while the English component is more individual rights thinking believing that collective rights are no stronger that the sum of collective rights. Thats one of the BIGGEST basic differences between the two cultures.

The Judge made an unbelievable statement (to me anyway) when he said that the Canadian Government MUST administer the rights of foreign broadcasters in Canada and there is no way around that. In MY impression the Canadian Government DOES NOT HAVE the right to regulate any broadcast emanating from outside Canada AT ALL. It can ONLY regulate WITHIN Canada

He also seems to misunderstand part of the Act which says "subscription programming signal meansÒ Radiocommunication that is intended for reception either directly or indirectly by the public in Canada or elsewhere on payment of a subscription fee or other charge. He seems convinced that ELSEWHERE can mean THE USA.

In fact this is incorrect and elsewhere means as described herein in section 3.

(3) This Act applies within Canada and on board
(a) any ship, vessel or aircraft that is

(i) registered or licensed under an Act of Parliament, or
(ii) owned by, or under the direction or control of, Her Majesty in right of Canada or a province;
(b) any spacecraft that is under the direction or control of

(i) Her Majesty in right of Canada or a province,
(ii) a citizen or resident of Canada, or
(iii) a corporation incorporated or resident in Canada; and
(c) any platform, rig, structure or formation that is affixed or attached to land situated in those submarine areas adjacent to the coast of Canada and extending throughout the natural prolongation of the land territory of Canada to the outer edge of the continental margin or to a distance of two hundred nautical miles from the baselines from which the breadth of the territorial sea of Canada is measured, whichever is greater.

As you can see THIS ACT (the RC ACT) applies ONLY in Canada and in THESE specified places and NOT in the USA. That will be brought out CLEARLY on Thursday morning according to Mr. Gold. I had already mentioned and outlined it in a copy of the RC Act for Mr. La Leggia but I guess he did not want to lose his train of thought, so he forgot that.

The Judge also seems to have trouble with some other issues as was revealed in closing statements by the defence and HIS responses.

Firstly concerning the 6 modified Fcards. The law says at 10 (1) b that:

Offences
10. (1) Every person who
(a) contravenes section 4 or paragraph 9(1)(a) or (b),
(b) without lawful excuse, manufactures, imports, distributes, leases, offers for sale, sells, installs, modifies, operates or possesses any equipment or device, or any component thereof, under circumstances that give rise to a reasonable inference that the equipment, device or component has been used, or is or was intended to be used, for the purpose of contravening section 9,

Now its VERY clear here that the cards had to be used or intended to be used Òunder circumstances that give rise to a reasonable inferenceÒ that the equipment, device or component has been used, or is or was intended to be used, for the purpose of contravening section 9, Ò (And that doesnÕt mean by Charlie Brown but rather by the defendant or his people).

Now it is clear from ALL OF THE evidence here that these cards were received by them LONG AFTER they were obsolete and COULD NOT be used and that in the course of GS2Õs normal business of accepting Fcards as TRADE-INS on Hcards, they were sent to him. They were STILL in the senders envelope (which our great RCMP never investigated). You cannot tell if the card was once programmed when you look at it so HOW would you know this. Additionally these were THE ONLY modified cards found and they were not in any way intended to be used NOR COULD THEY be used in ANY way as they were 2 years obsolete.

Believe it or not the judge said that simply POSESSING these cards was enough to break the ACT because it talks of possession at 10 (1) b as well but ONLY under circumstances that are not met. This was a big shocker and was unanticipated and hopefully he was dissuaded from this line of thought. But he certainly had it as he said so. Very Disappointing in that he was NOT considering the circumstances which are important here!!

The Judge has TWO other issues that are quite troublesome because they ARE THE FACTS and that just the way it is. He DOES NOT like that grey market requires a false US address and he believes this is deceptive. It is DECEPTIVE BUT THE SUPPLIER is the one who requires the deception and the reseller (like GS2) just complies with his wishes. Its the ONLY way he will do it because of the Canadian law. He knows what is happening and LOVES the revenue from it but he keeps it deceptive to PRETEND he was deceived when in fact he is PART of the DECEPTION himself.

Its very troublesome that the judge doesnÕt like this FACT as it cannot be changed. Its SUCH a requirement that even the CBC does it. That is NOT GS2Õs fault so why should he take the brunt of the blame. Not only that but there is AMPLE mention of this in the Jurisprudence and of the Fact that DTV KNOWS this. Hopefully he will READ about this KNOWN issue of DTV.

The second thing the Judge does NOT like is that he sees a deceptive that GS2Õs people tried to move his goods out of his warehouse on Nov 4 1998 and that they were seized in a truck. Yes they were but it is NOT in evidence as to why that happened and the judge is just speculation I think. I myself donÕt know why.

The Judge thinks that Daniel called GS2 and GS2 decided to move the goods out and that may well be true but it also may NOT be. As GS2 did NOT testify, I dont think the reason why ever came out.

But why not if after 16 months he has STILL not got his merchandise back. This is OBVIOUSLY DONE to PENALIZE GS2 BEFORE his trial by depriving him of the goods of his trade. They could EASILY kept one of each type and had him sign to agree that he had X Number and they should be returned. This would be NORMAL procedure. But the Crown and the Police act PUNITIVELY to HARM the defendants and the judge does not seem to realize that EVEN AFTER the fact, LIKE NOW. That is also worrisome and to me it shows his leaning towards the Governments side whom he seems to THINK are acting in Good faith. Both I and GS2 KNOW this is not the case as does every Lawyer and defendant in these Satellite cases across the country. They are in the WORST of BAD FAITH.

If the TRUTH were told here I think we are REALLY up against 3 things that collectively make ONE thing and the Judge is preparing people for that possible line of reasoning. Having done his homework he KNOWS that the Federal Court case is squarely against us (Norsat). The REAL PROBLEM there is the NAMES of the Judges on the bench and where they are from.

The BAD news.
RULING BY
LƒTOURNEAU J.A.
CONCURRED IN BY:
DESJARDINS J.A.
CHEVALIER D.J.

All three of these are well respected Quebec Judges and it may be VERY HARD for this judge to rule in opposition to them. Mr. Gold told him today that THIS is what he is required to do, no bones about it but there may be a strong reluctance on his part to do so. And if he does then he will have to rule on the Charter 2B and I am wondering about his views on that. As I say, he seems to lean more towards collective rights (society or Government) rather than INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS and that is BAD for a charter ruling.

The lawyers were SO CLEAR on letting him know what he HAS to rule on, what charter issues are involved and how DIFFICULT it would be to rule against GS2 on this. He KNOWS and was told that to FIND GS2 guilty would be akin to putting him in the same class as a person STEALING THE ExpressVu SIGNAL IN CANADA. This is NOT a theft offence however and is about PAYING for subscriptions so how can this be.

Sorry but I am pretty upset tonight. The case resumes Thursday AM and I sure hope he considers all the angles of this and NOT just how to back his ex-confreres on the Federal Court of Appeals. That REALLY bothers me.

In Fact I am pretty PISSED and I hope I am wrong but I donÕt think so. This is my impression of where this judge is right now, totally unexpected and improper according to much of the evidence!!! Certainly a BIG disappointment to me.

Thanks,

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

http://www.dr7.com/temp/ttrk/pulsar.gif http://www.legal-rights.org/images/cdnalliance.gifhttp://www.dr7.com/temp/ttrk/pulsar.gif

http://www.dr7.com/temp/ttrk/lrbanner.gif
Now open with lots of useful resources at your disposal AT:
http://www.legal-rights.org

[gunsmoke2]

Hi Everyone,

It certainly was a strange day..

It started off by the crown requesting to have the VP of Starchoice take the stand as they had an answer for C-Band..

The trade in program..

However it was objected and the Judge ruled against allowing the witness to testify since the Crown had rested their case.

RDS was a shot as we did not handle their programming only knew they were using dialers manufactered by us.. RDS did confirmed they tape and rebroadcast.. it seem to be questionable who paid for the programming on the credit card.. an indivudual or the company..

CBC was a good witness and said his buisness would be effected tremendusly if he was not allowed to have access to Directv.. he also confirmed that the corporation paid for it on their credit card.. the Judge was taking notes.. the Judge does not show when he is impressed.. only when he is upset.

To say I wasn't disappointed at the Judges remarks would not be telling the truth.. I was very disappointed..

To suggest I was guilty because we tried to hide and salvage our loses is a disappointment.. the fact is when the other dealer was raided we did nothing and we knew from the day before.. In any case this has nothing to do with the interpretation of the law that he must decide on..

If he rules against those 6 useless cards than he rules that there is a total prohibition against encrpting US signals... there is no evidence I modified them..which I did not.. and if he would rule that possession of them contravene the RC Act then again he is ruling like the Norsat case.

The use of addresses for convience is something he already said he did not like.. however this should not be a factor in deciding on the interpretation of the law..

Especially when he READS all the case law on previous decisions..

The fact is he has NOT read the case law yet...

We are hopeful that when he does that the parts he had trouble with will go out the door as they do NOT relate to case law.. and the use of US addresses is not part of case law on interpretating the RC Act..

He has NOT read about DTV's involvement in Canada and he will see it in the previous cases.. and the other Judges remarks..

The fact that he comments on what bothers him is better than not disclosing them.. as it would be worse if he said nothing and just made his decision without saying what is on his mind..

This Judge is no nonense and certainly speaks his mind.. we knew that before the trial started..

He will give the answer on thursday morning when the crown argues their closing..

If he intervenes as he did today.. that will be a good sign.. if he questions or says what bothers him on the crown's arguements..

If he says nothing.. then frankly its probably case over.. Lost.

My lawyers did an excellant job.. we can always be a back seat driver.. but they really did their best..

The crown is weak.. and we will still be able to cross.. again if the Judge says nothing then its all over..thats the bottom line.. if he questions the crown than it will immediately show he is not one sided.. and then its 50 50..

We will see on Thursday morning and should be able to see where we stand.. probably in the first hour..

I can only hope.. pray.. we did the right thing.. and my lawyers were spot on..

If I see that the judge is quiet on Thursday..

Then I got railroaded..

Wait and see.. that is the hardest part.

GS2

[bandit73]

GOOD LUCK on thursday GS2, WE ARE ALL PULLING FOR YOU !!!!!:):):)

[To The Real King!!]

To The REAL King
Member

Posts: 982
Registered: Aug 1999 posted May 10, 2000 04:58 PM ÊÊÊ Ê ÊÊ
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Everyone,

In my usual way I contacted some people who do know this judge and here is the info I got.

He is always questioning, wont wait till the lawyers get to issues he has, asks directly. The issues he has are just things he wants answered and not things that canÕt be overcome. So I would say that is positive and that he may have just been getting the issues above Òout of the wayÓ with answers.

I think it will boil down to 2 issues depending on the crowns arguments.

(1) Can he overcome the High Quebec Judges that were on the Federal Court of appeal in Norsat (in terms of deciding opposite to them).

(2) If he does NOT then he will have to rule on the charter and I have to agree with Jeet who says the charter protects both citizens and corporate citizens..

By the way Jeet, G4s lawyers made BOTH of the arguments you mention above and in almost exactly your words. The Judge does know this and I think he realizes he MUST give the 2B because the law does NO use expressly clear language that it could and should have used. Really he has to decide to over come the Federal judges or to give a 2B which may be the safer course in his mind.

I do not agree with GS2 on a companies rights under the Charter as the Supreme court of Canada has said that the Charter protects all Canadian citizens INCLUDING CORPORATE citizens.

Please understand that this CROWN is very mixed up, in my opinion, between what could save a 2B by section 1 of the charter and what can be argued against GIVING a charter right under 2B. I have her written response to 2 other 2B arguments and those are MORE appropriate to argue to save it by 1 (but not strong enough at all) and are NOT appropriate to not giving the ruling.

Its as simple as this. The LAW prohibits (if it does) the receiver from hearing the expression and a contract between him and the sender cannot be made BECAUSE of the law. But if the law were NOT there then both parties would be pleased to have a direct agreement with one another. So rather than that deception is required to defeat the law it is the LAW that makes a deception required. This means that the government has an objective (unstated but obviously to prohibit American TV) and the LAW does NOT accomplish the objective if absolute prohibition because it prevents ALL TV including Turkish, Russian, Hungarian and all other international services.

A prohibition that is justified must be a minimum impairment and do no more than is necessary to accomplish the governments objective and THEN it may be able to be saved by section one but this is NOT the case here. Additionally it is the LAW that prevents the expression from being received by Canadians and that means THERE IS A CONFLICT and a 2B must be given in that the LAW that infringes the charter MUST BE STRUCK in so much as it infringes the charter. That is very clear and the Supreme court has ruled many times on that. There is also a section under the charter that recognizes that Canada is a MULTICULTURAL COUNTRY (not bicultural) so what does prohibiting broadcasts in a Turkish Canadians language do to his rights under that section of the Charter.

Make no mistake, the Government DOES KNOW that this absolute prohibition absolutely infringes on section 2B rights and they will try VERY HARD and use all the resources available to them (almost unlimited lawyers) to attempt to overturn it but in the end they will FAIL. This TYPE of issue has come up many times before and has been ruled on all the way to the Supreme court and so is pretty much Òdecided lawÓ. It would be very difficult if not impossible to have it go the other way at this point. But it will be a long hard battle to get there.

Lets just hope that this Judge is willing to decide on his own as to guilt or innocence as HE heard the evidence in THIS CASE (different from Norsat totally) because if he does, this case will be over.

NOT GUILTY on all counts!!!!!

Thanks,

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

http://www.dr7.com/temp/ttrk/pulsar.gif http://www.legal-rights.org/images/cdnalliance.gifhttp://www.dr7.com/temp/ttrk/pulsar.gif

http://www.dr7.com/temp/ttrk/lrbanner.gif
Now open with lots of useful resources at your disposal AT:
http://www.legal-rights.org

[To The Real King!!]

Hi Everyone,

Day 5 of GS2Õs trial had a LOT of surprises for us all BUT they were great super surprises All I know is that I donÕt want to play poker with this Judge. Yes he did it. He spoofed us all yesterday and worried us quite a bit. How? By playing Òdevils advocateÓ with a straight FACE.

Today that became very apparent in what he did and what he said.

Firstly the Crown substitute, Ms. Manon Lavoie starts her final arguments and wastes most of it trying to show that mere possession of the 6 modified Fcards (obsolete as of July 1997) proved guilt and she went on and on about this when all through the trial is was apparent that those were sent to GS2Õs company as part of a trade in program. By trying to make this bull---- stick she totally ruined her credibility and the Judge would have none of it at all. He isnÕt even considering that and he says so.

She further annoyed the judge by TRYING to say that the previous co-accused with GS2, Daniel Forand pleaded guilty. The Judge shut her up immediately and said that had NO BEARING on GS2 at all. As if the crown didnÕt know that.

In law, when someone pleads guilty, it means NOTHING. In fact he may NOT be guilty but is STILL allowed to plead guilty. But it sets no precedent, jurisprudence or anything else useful. It is a NON-ISSUE and fully of NO VALUE or assistance. But she tried to say it as an insinuation of GS2Õs guilt and the Judge resented it. She moved right along.

Then she TRIED to make a type of conspiracy of GS2 with Daniel Forand even though he is not charged with that. Again the Judge disagreed. He saw no conspiracy at all between a Wholesaler and his customer in the normal conduct of business. There was NEVER any intent or even possibility of using them in any improper way. They were DEAD and Obsolete when he got them.

Now she goes from the sublime to the ridiculous and says several times that Òsection 327 of the Criminal code is much less significant than 9 (1)b and 10 (1) c and that the RC ACT goes MUCH farther than the Òsimple theftÓ of 327.Ó ThatÕs as inane as it gets. 327 is Criminal and the RC Act is regulatory with penal ramifications and 327 is considered much more onerous and serious even though the standard of guilt is virtually the same. Not happy with her lameness, she SAYS IT AGAIN. This time the judge catches on to what she is saying and treats her like a little girl, a new law student, and explains how 327 is much more serious and its the opposite of what she is saying. At this point it becomes rather obvious to the judge that she either is dumb or she has no understanding of the law at all or no ethics and is taking HIM (the judge) for a fool. Either way he is naturally NOT too keen. She tries to continue right along without acknowledging her blunders and errors. I donÕt think the way she did that was very endearing to the judge.

The Judge goes FURTHER to explain that the 9 (1) c offence requires no Òmens rheaÓ but thatÕs a regulatory offence but that 327 DOES require Òmens rheaÒ as it is a criminal offence. The burden on the crown is MUCH more difficult with the required proof of Òmens rheaÓ and Òactus rheusÓ under section 327 of the criminal code.

Then she tries to say that CBC and RDS have the right to get DTV given by the CRTC but the Judge says they had no such approval in evidence here. He then states that he will have a problem if he finds GS2 guilty in KNOWING that the CBC are in fact a GS2 customer and therefore break the law too. He cannot believe that the Government could think that they can break a law that they expect citizens to follow. They have NO RIGHTS more than citizens and if GS2 was guilty, THEY would have to take all their DSS dishes down too. And yet they are part of the broadcasting scheme in this country?? Like whats GOING ON???

While yesterday I thought this was very IMPORTANT but that it seemed to lack IMPACT, today I saw that it DID impact the Judge severely and he is having a real problem with that on the CBCÕs part. HOWEVER he has interpreted the papers submitted by the CBC (some CRTC docs) as saying that DTV are NOT operating a distribution undertaking in Canada and so it is not against the law to receive that.

THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT WE THE INDUSTRY HAVE BEEN SAYING FOR YEARS but now its the CRTC giving this opinion. I think these documents are destined to serve us VERY WELL!!!


This boiled down to meaning that elusive Òlawful broadcasterÒ as follows by these definitions in the RC Act and the Broadcasting Act.
programming undertaking"
"entreprise de programmation"
means an undertaking for the transmission of programs, either directly by radio waves or other means of telecommunication or indirectly through a distribution undertaking, for reception by the public by means of broadcasting receiving apparatus;


"lawful distributor"<<distributeur lŽgitime>>
"lawful distributor", in relation to an encrypted subscription programming signal or encrypted network feed, means a person who has the lawful right in Canada to transmit it and authorize its decoding;

Of course DirecTV are neither of these so the CRTCÕs docs are probably correct and if so there is NO BREECH of the act and no laws are being broken by US or by the CBC/RDS.

So the crowns Closing argument were EXACTLY THAT, arguments with the Judge and she lost every one of them :)

So she is batting 1000 :)

Then Mr. Alan Gold revealed that when this is decided he intends to file a motion for ÒABUSE OF PROCESS.Ó Mr. Gold reiterates that the RC act says ÒNo person shall decode Ò (this includes actual person or moral person, a company) and he points out that this INCLUDES the CBC branch of the Government for the record. The Judge agrees that they too are prohibited if anyone is. This whole issue is based on a clear law and is therefore an Òabuse of processÒ by the Government in pressing these charges. The Judge goes further and agrees that he can make such a motion whether GS2 is convicted or even if he is NOT, as simply pressing the charges have done the damage. Where that will go the Judge cant say but he certainly believes such a motion is not out of place in THIS case. :) :) :) :)

So the Judge announces that he will wait for the ruling in the CanAm appeal to be heard the end of this month, will allow the defence to make written arguments on

(1) The interpretation of sections 9 and 10 of the RC Act.

(2) a complete written argument on the Òabuse of power issue under section 7 of the charter and

(3) a complete argument on the charter section 2B under section 52 of the constitution act and remedy under section 24 of the charter. The Section 52 of our constitution and the charter read as follows.


Section 52 The Constitution is the supreme law of Canada, and any law that is inconsistent with the provisions of the constitution is, to the extent of the inconsistency, of no force or effect.

Section 2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:

(a)Freedom of conscience and religion;

(b)Freedom of thought, belief opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other means of communication;

(c)Freedom of peaceful assembly; and

(d)Freedom of association.

24.(1) Anyone whose rights or freedoms, as guaranteed by this Charter, have been infringed or denied may apply to a court of competent jurisdiction to obtain such remedy as the court considers appropriate and just in the circumstances.

The above is much more serious that it seems as firstly the law (the RC ACT) must be struck and become null and void and all the evidence must be thrown out so no conviction can be made.

The Bad news.

The next court date for GS2 is September 6, 2000 with written arguments to be in by August 15th. As the Crown will be allowed ample time to respond to this I believe its safe to think that this case wont see a ruling until November. Bear in mind that by then GS2 will have had his entire inventory seized for over 2 years and will have survived in his business by a miracle, prudently having saved some funds and by working TWICE as hard as before to make half as much income. But he SURVIVED!! And will Justice come. Yes, but as you can see its in NO HURRY!!

And this is what the RCMP counted on all along. Justice DELAYED is really Justice DENIED in this and many other cases and the only hope is for civil suits and class action suits once this is over. And that will take years and cost much money too. In the meantime people are broken, nerves are frayed and a million other small damages are done to peopleÕs lives while the justice system lumbers its way along, seemingly uncaringly.

It reminds me of a favorite from Ayn Rand which says

"We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission; which is the stage of the darkest periods of human history, the stage of rule by brute force."

--Ayn Rand, in "The Nature of Government"

AinÕt that the truth!!!

Thanks,

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

http://www.dr7.com/temp/ttrk/pulsar.gif http://www.legal-rights.org/images/cdnalliance.gif http://www.dr7.com/temp/ttrk/pulsar.gif

http://www.dr7.com/temp/ttrk/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 May 11th, 2000 at 12:50 PM]

[gunsmoke2]

Today was not a win but a moral victory..

My trial is wrapped up for now.. but it was a super way to wrap up..

My lawyers told me to not to worry.. but I worry about everything..

Wait for Thursday.. then we will see..

Its only 15 minutes or so and one of my lawyers is already tapping on my foot.. hehe.. :)

The Crown already started to shoot themselves.. what a day..

As TTRK said they started to blab about 6 useless cards.. they went on and on.. about nothing.. and forgot what my case is about..
They have to prove that the 6 useless F cards that they found had given rise to believe I was going to use them to contravene the RC Act.. but there was no evidence of this whatsoever...

So they continue.. and they continue to piss off the Judge.. you do not want to do that with this Judge.. but they insisted.. hehe :)

The Judge had read all the cases by today.. and was he ever ready..

But the crown kept on insisting to piss off the Judge :) with the kaka arguements that TTRK mention.. by this time myself and both my lawyers were buzy tapping each others toes.. it was hard not to crack up.. :)

As I have said this Judge is no nonsense.. doesn't like Kaka useless details.. and thats what the crown specializes in.. :)

For me the high point out of them all was the buisness of RDS and CBC..

The Judge said he spent much of his time thinking about it and even said he lost some sleep over it.. he wanted to know how the Crown expected to find me guilty if they are allowed to operate DSS..

He went one step further.. he wanted to know how he was suppose to explain this to Canadians.. he wanted the Crown to give him an answer.. the more they tried the worse it got..

He called CBC a state owned company owned by you ( you - pointing to the Crown.. the Government ).. at one point he told the Crown that if they continue with their arguements he would then have to find me innocent.. unfortunately the crown decided to give up.. they are suppose to come up with an answer..

So my only two surprise witnesses turned out after all to be excellant.. of great value.. already one lawyer said he is going to call them in to testify at another trial..

You see.. I been waiting for this.. and it worked out just great....

These will be in my transcripts and hopefully can help other cases..

One of my lawyers then decides to announce he has a motion for abuse of process.. says that since 1991 the Government did nothing.. only prosecute small dish people.. leave C-band alone ( something we had already established in the trial ) says the dishes are everywhere in plain sight.. and they do nothing.. just attack small dish operators like me..

There are objections by the Judge and the Crown over this.. but my lawyers are top notch.. too much for the Crown.. but the Judge is no easy push over.. hard one to tackle, he has experienced.. 25 years as a crown prosecuter.. however my lawyers are up to the task with experience also..

I believe there was mutual respect between the Judge and my lawyers.. and I point this out for any others who need representation.. go for the best.. don't hold back..

The Judge grants the hearing on the motion for abuse of process and I think the crown is still stunned or don't even know what he means.. it means its against you.. you Morons.. :)

My lawyer said if we interpretate their position of total prohibition then the Government will have 300,000 Canadians to prosecute.. later on the crown called it a general prohibition.. hehe..

The motion for abuse of process is Sept 6.. but it doesn't mean we won't have a ruling before that.. in fact we will..

If Cam Am wins.. I can almost 100& guarantee I win.. if Can-Am loses then it will be an uphill struggle.. but not impossible...

Thats why we have the motion for abuse of process.. really something to fall back on.. but I hope I don't need it.. and will use it instead for a civil action I might decide to file against the Morons..

Atleast I can relax a bit now as my case relies on the BC case coming up.. I believe even though I have no decision as of yet.. I feel so far I have helped the Satellite community something I have been waiting for.. for 18 months..

There was no damage at all.. only positive.. we have accomplished as best we can.. the case looks very good..

I am gratefull to my lawyers.. and frankly gratefull to the Patheic Morons :)

GS2

[seed]

Congratulations GS2, sounds like it went very well. At least it ended on a positive note, you must have lost a little sleep last night. :)

Waiting has got to be hard, I hope you get a positive ruling sooner rather than later.

How the heck did you found those witnesses? Nice bit of detective work...


Take care,
Seed

[gunsmoke2]

Actually finding them was pretty easy...

CBC bought DSS equipement from one of my customers..

Then they ( CBC) sent me a purchase order for activation of Directv services of Total Choice Gold.. all professional sports and HBO in 1996.. They also have re-dialers manufactered by my company..

RDS also has re-dialers from my company.. their programming services from Directv are handled by a friend of mine since 1997.. I didn't know if they were still current so I had to trick them last week.

Called and finally got someone to acknowledge they still had the equipement.. since I knew they had my re-dialers I told them they needed a technical update :) or they might lose their service..

Someone called me back and even left their cell phone number..

No technical update.. just a summons to appear in court is what they got.. :)

GS2

[Edited by gunsmoke2 on May 11th, 2000 at 07:25 PM]