AUGUST -2014

OPEN LETTER TO PMO (CANADA)– AUG.01-2014

(FORMERLY OPEN LETTERS TO THE OTTAWA CITIZEN and U.S. NEWS)

JUDICIAL LIES PILED ON TOP OF JUDICIAL LIES = CASE LAW for the Employee's Case(Canada)

BY: Roger Callow ‘The Outlawed Canadian’ www.employeescasecanada.com (29 year unresolved legal case) now known judicially as ‘the cluster-fuck case’ which has been through 8 different court systems and over 30 judges. It's Canada’s Watergate - Pulitzer Prize winning author being sought. The 'find me a court' plea has fallen on deaf ears due to Registry and Ministry obfuscation. I feel like Ralph Nader in 1961 trying to convince the public of dangerous cars (Unsafe at any speed). Who knows, maybe recalling judges and chief judges may become standard fare in the future - just like automobiles. To be sure, the current system is not working.

QUOTES: A) "It's a bit like bridge," he said. "As long as you play as if the cards most dangerous to you are in the hand of the opponent who is positioned to do you the most harm, you will generally be a step ahead." The Patient Michael Palmer

B) '...Still, what we've seen lately smacks of an activism found in no judge's description.'

'Here come da judge, with own rule book? Ottawa Sun Feb.21-2014 p.14

ANATOMY OF A JUDICIAL SCAM

1) The Employer, the West Vancouver, B.C. School Trustees set this scam into motion in June of 1985 with the illicit lay-off of senior high school teacher, Roger Callow.

2) How, may the reader ask, can the School Trustees expect to win an arbitration when they hired sixteen teachers while one and at the same time, not sanction the lay-off of any teacher?

3) By buying off the arbitrator. Unless a litigant contests a decision, that decision stands which explains how corrupt opinion becomes law.

4) By changing lawyers, the matter was referred to court which quashed the arbitration ruling that the arbitrator was 'patently unreasonable'. He had changed 16 new hires to read 16 lay-offs adding Callow as the seventeenth. I was now left in limbo.

IT GETS CURIOUSER AND CURIOSER

5) Without missing a beat, the pattern above was replicated by the Employer through 8 different courts and over 30 judges culminating in the courtroom of Ottawa Superior Court Judge, Justice Colin MacKinnon, in a 2 hour hearing on April 10-2014 in an action laid by the Employer (#13-59060) requesting that the court put an end to this issue and in that process make the astounding declaration that the Employer to be free of any compensation. (No compensation has been paid to date under the collective bargaining rules.)

6) In that endeavor, the Employer asked that all issues of this B.C. legal case be discussed (in 5 minutes in an Ontario courtroom).

7) In the past, whenever I had the opportunity, I asked this Employer if they were obligated to pay compensation? 'Under some circumstances' was the practiced answer without detailing those circumstances. Nor did the court ask them to do so. Now, for a first time, they asserted that they had no obligation to pay any compensation. In short, they were re-running the scam of the original arbitration.

8) It would seem that it is difficult to get good conspirators any longer. All other judges assigned to this case say little in court (sticking to the script that they have been handed?); merely perking up their ears in assigning costs which invariable goes against this target. Not MacKinnon. His bombastic comments were amply reported in the Ottawa Citizen (April 28-2014 p.1) accusing me of treating the justice system like a smorgasbord and stating that I would be better off with this B.C. case in Texas or New Mexico (where he parks his brain?) than in an Ontario court. He took no notice that it was the Employer, not this defendant who was the petitioner and whom was presenting this B.C. case for finalization. As the defendant, I requested $30,000 for this Employer tomfoolery ('maintenance' under the law).

9) McKinnon did not grant them their wish but refused me the right to appeal his decision as well as canceling an already scheduled hearing (cowboying) thus reducing my case to nought through this back door attempt to give the Employer what they wanted.

10) Nonetheless, the matter is being appealed as well as referenced to the Ontario Judicial Council for 'cowboying' (second guessing a future legal outcome before the case is heard).

11) Of even more dire consequences of his action/inaction; MacKinnon made no reference to the 'Cullen Creed' by which B.C. judge, Austin Cullen in July 23-2013, on his own recognizance, without taking legal argument, without quoting legal reasons, expelled this target from the judicial system for reasons best known to himself. That's anarchy. That explains my appeal in an Ontario court under the provisions of 'natural justice' and 'inherent jurisdiction'. Justice MacKinnon is an abject failure as a judge by failing to deal with the Cullen Creed. All Canadians are the poorer for his unconscionable omission.

12) In short, the Employer's nefarious control over 8 different courts and over 30 judges (including two aborted trips to the Supreme Court of Canada) has been maintained for close to 30 years in this matter of systematic judicial abuse in which they have the complicity of the anti-employee media.

13) In the terms of the Employer, this line from Lady MacBeth is pertinent: 'What needst we fear it; when none can call us to account'. No politician nor political bureaucracy has seen fit to bring a floundering Justice System to task for such egregious behaviour.

14) While this case involves only one litigant directly, the principles of this case negatively affect 35 million Canadians to such an extent and degree that Canada can be said to no longer function under the rule of law.

OPEN LETTER TO PMO (CANADA)– AUG.08-2014

(FORMERLY OPEN LETTERS TO THE OTTAWA CITIZEN and U.S. NEWS)

JUDICIAL LIES PILED ON TOP OF JUDICIAL LIES = CASE LAW for the Employee's Case(Canada)

'ARCHIE'

CANADA'S JUDICIAL APARTHEID

QUOTES:

1) 'It has served us well, this myth of Christ' Pope Leo X (16th century) substitute the phrase 'Canadian Justice System' for 'Christ' RC

2) 'Once a convention is accepted it takes intellectual dynamite to shift it' The Hiram Key Knight/Lomas

3) '...Shame on you lawyers! for you have taken the key of knowledge away from the people. You yourselves do not enter the kingdom of God, and you prevent those who would enter from going in.' IBID

4) '...because it's far more egregious, and frightening when the state commits a wrong than when a citizen does, because it undermines the collective faith in the system....' COLLATERAL DAMAGE O.C. July 17-14 C2 columnist Christie Blatchford

5) '...(Parliament) meekly surrendering one ancient Parliamentary prerogative after another, not to the courts, but to a far more voracious usurper: the executive....'

CHARTER DISCONTENT SHOWS TORY DISCORD O.C. July 17-14 C7 columnist A.Coyne

6) "My friend BlackHawk,

'...We shall no longer sit together by the evening fire or eat again from the same pot. I have now seen sixty summers and it is time for me to join my ancestors...

'When I was a boy my father sent me to the missionaries to learn the white man's language and his ways...You must see if they have lessons for us, he instructed.

...perhaps someday, history will judge me for what I tried to do and failed....

I studied hard and learned to read and write and spent much time with the pakeha's Bible. I learned that it was a good book from a merciful God and I found it so myself. But I was soon to discover that it was the white man's Sunday book only and all the remaining days of the week the pakeha felt free to disobey the commandments of his own God.

It was then that I first realized that the pakeha's word could not be trusted, not even on Sunday, for it was not founded in his mana. That his God was good only for births and burials and his word was as worthless as a broken pot...

Though we fought with honour the pakeha had too many guns and too many soldiers....I go to my ancestors knowing that the Maori mana...will prevail. In our hearts we cannot be defeated until the earth sinks into the sea."

Wiremu Tamihana, Maori Chief April 1866

7) Substitute 'Justice System' for 'Church' and the reader gets the message. '...There must be a way for the Church to survive by re-thinking what it knows are mistaken ideas. There is an old Jewish story that makes the point well. At a gathering of rabbis the wise men were debating a section of Holy Law and one of them found himself at odds with the rest of the group on a point of interpretation...So he called on the Almighty to help him prove his case...God replied "(the group) is wrong and (the dissenter)is right"..."Oh, we pay no attention to heavenly voices," they said, "because the correct determination on this point was written down long ago." '

MESSAGE:

1) For close to 30 years in this unresolved labour case where no compensation has been paid in defiance of such legalities as due process, habeas corpus, there can be no process without judgment; indeed, the very essence of any legitimate legal system, the entire sanctity of a written contract in Canada has been lost largely due to judicial cupidity.

2) The thrust of this targeted employee's case has been that without a judicial finding, no compensation may flow; which is the essence of the collective bargaining procedure. In short, 8 courts and over 30 judges are wrong and to such an extent, that the Judicial System has been permitted to collapse. The problem for the Supreme Court of Canada (SCofC), should they accept their cupidity, lies in dealing with the word systematic, as it is used in the Employee’s Case for as systematic abuse it implies institutional corruption; something no democratic government has ever acknowledged. Nor have the professional teachers, legal fraternity, politicians and media in Canada shown the wherewithal to stand up to this Herculean challenge. (SEE Quote 8) above)

3) The thrust of the employer's case is that the employee is merely re-litigating matters which have already been decided without saying which matters have been litigated and what is the resultant decision? Over 30 judges and 8 courts buy into the employer's position in their failure to hold this employer to account in this argument.

4) The closest argument supporting the employer's position is labeled the 'universality of unions'. For example, does the Union represent all interests of an employee right into the question of collecting his rightful pension? Some judges will permit the client to present his/her case in court. Others do not. I was one denied that right. Hence I cannot collect my pension nor prove fraud as it relates to the original lay-off because I cannot get a court hearing on the original lay-off (although the request of the Employer on April 10-2014 in Ottawa Superior Court to discuss all issues revitalizes a third trip to our illustrious SCofC).

5) The above question was set to the Supreme Court of Canada (SCofC) which failed to address it (close to 85% of civil actions are never heard by the SCofC with no reason given leaving the litigants with a lower court decision. Due to unique circumstances, no lower court decision exists in the Employee's Case thus justifying the moniker of 'The Outlawed Canadian'.

6) Certainly two Ontario Superior Court judges perceived actions by the SCofC to be the final action of the justice system; Justice Robert Maranger and Justice Colin McKinnon.

7) In Maranger's case, he avoided the question above by failing to evaluate the exclusionary 'MacKenzie Creed' which forced me into a non-B.C. court. He just wasn't interested in being involved in a B.C. case.

8) The appeal of Maranger's Order in Divisional Court produced a definitive answer in that the judges of one province may not over-rule judges in another province. No case law for this preposterous outcome was cited. That case is currently being appealed solely on costs but is running into the kind of flak from the Registries that I run into with all appeals as, collectively, there appears to be a determined attempt being made to bar a third trip to the SCofC.

9) A subsequent hearing launched by the Employer under Justice Colin McKinnon, the judge whom talks too much, is more scandalous. In this hearing on April 10-2014, the Employer as the plaintiff unsuccessfully asked the judge to give a judicial finding on this B.C. case declaring that the Employer was free of any fiduciary responsibility.(The web site details the unusual machinations here which brought about my request to the Canadian Council of Judges to suspend this judge for usurping the law.)

10) It was clear to me in the above hearing that McKinnon was not familiar with either of the factums from the litigants and had been coached by someone on points not included in those factums. That is consistent with all other hearings in which I have asserted the point of view that someone appears to have access through the back door to the Offices of Chief Justices in 6 different courts across Canada in this case. The B.C. 'Cullen Creed' of July 2013 made it clear that I was barred from court access under any circumstances; I submit a first in judicial duplicity in Canada. Again, the court avoided addressing this key argument and is one reason for the appeal.

11) It was the introduction by the Employer to discuss all issues (in 5 minutes) that is the basis for the appeal of the McKinnon Decision as the only court competent to discuss this question is the SCofC but must first traverse the Appeal process. Appeal processes in Ontario here are also running into 'Registry' flak. (The SCofC insists on appeals to go through the lower courts; a rule ill-suited to the circumstances here.) That's where matters currently stand.

12) A third request has been sent to the Judicial Council of Judges for a response to alleged transgressions by Justice McKinnon as this body appears to be stalling.

13) Placed in the negative, which no litigant should have to do, no court nor judge has ever decreed that this case should not be resolved hence the failure here is primarily one of the judiciary. They don't do what they don't want to do, the laws be damned.

OPEN LETTER TO PMO (CANADA)– AUG.15-2014

(FORMERLY OPEN LETTERS TO THE OTTAWA CITIZEN and U.S. NEWS)

JUDICIAL LIES PILED ON TOP OF JUDICIAL LIES = CASE LAW for the Employee's Case(Canada)

evolution

JUDGES MESS UP...LITIGANTS PAY UP

QUOTES:

'...Still, what we've seen lately smacks of an activism found in no judge's description.'

Here come da judge, with own rule book? Ottawa Sun Feb.21-2014 p.14

(The best graffiti I ever saw was in Guelph, on a parking lot wall. It read

VOTE FOR NOBODY, NOBODY WILL KEEP ELECTION PROMISES. NOBODY CARES. NOBODY LISTENS TO YOUR CONCERNS. NOBODY TELLS THE TRUTH!) anon

'The trial was a spectacle, a farce, a ridiculous way to search for the truth. But as I learned, the truth was not important. Perhaps in another era, a trial was an exercise in the presentation of facts, the search for truth, and the finding of justice. Now a trial is a contest in which one side will win and the other side will lose. Each side expects the other to bend the rules or to cheat, so neither plays fair. The truth is lost in the melee. The Racketeer John Grisham

'...The technical term is "natural law" for the concept that certain things are inherently right, and others are wrong, no matter what law books or public opinion say, and we should try to bring man-made laws into keeping with this higher and unchanging one....' Ottawa Sun June 2 p.17 columnist John Robson

'...Maybe it boils down to a relationship with trust and risk and the answer to a simple question: Is the sense of security from big government worth the cost to individual spirit and the power of communities? Ottawa Sun columnist John Snobelen July 19-2014 p.13

'A lesson was learned there and then: Canadian laws are optional' Ottawa Sun c. Ezra Levant

'...infected with the twin viruses of tunnel vision and confirmation bias.' legal commentary

MESSAGE

1) For anyone involved with the judiciary to the extent that I have been over the past 30 years of the unresolved Employee's Case; one realizes the value of red tape which is the issue in political matters such as this one.

2) In that regard, having a working relationship with the various Registries is all important as some rules are promoted while others are ignored according to the particular Court with which one is dealing.

3) Courts do not like appeals as they are a reflection on a least one judge's ruling and hence a negative reflection on the judicial system in general. For this reason, such as the Ontario Justice System proudly proclaims that only 3% of their decisions go to the Supreme Court of Canada. Either they are successful in resolving matters (as they would have you believe) or else they are successful in screwing up anyone who may attempt an appeal. My experience with 4 Appeal Courts - B.C., the Federal Court, the Supreme Court of Canada, and now the Ontario courts would suggest that the latter is closer to the truth.

4) To be sure, some completely undeserving individual gets an undeserved win before the courts but that is the 'casino principle'; namely, if there are no winners, the suckers will not come back for more. In general, however, the 'big guys' win as they have the necessary muscle to contest judicial decisions with which they disagree.

5) As to Registries, they are an integral part of this process and must forever guard against capricious judges on the one hand and arrogant litigants on the other. They walk a fine line not antagonizing punctilious judges on the one side and advising litigants on the other without compromising legalities as they are not lawyers.

6) The politically correct registries merely reject submissions by saying, 'Sorry, this does not fit our format' without elaborating. The experienced registry clerk will direct the customer to the statutes concerned and the forms which can be accessed to that effect without being specific in order to retain their civil service status. Sometimes they have unofficial forms behind the counter which give important direction. Those clerks I depend on as does every lawyer for each court has their preferences for those rules followed and those side-stepped.

7) I have experienced 3 Appeal Court Registries directly in Ottawa where they are domiciled (The Federal Court, the Supreme Court of Canada, and the Ontario Courts (Ottawa). The fourth Court-and the most troublesome- has been the Appeal Court of B. C., which is not to brag about treatment received from the other three. In the case of Ontario, a bid is being made to the Ombudsman Office to expedite the Appeal process as the Wynne government is hopeless in providing any assistance.

8) Where Registrars, such as Supreme Court of Canada`s Roger Bilodeau, are concerned, nicely written letters complete with contact numbers are included...`don`t hesitate to call` which, while promising much, falls far short or your needs. For example, Bilodeau dutifully quotes SECTION 40 which I dutifully respond claiming that I have fulfilled those conditions. A black hole appears and the correspondence disappears. In one instance, the SCofC Registry telephoned the B.C. Court of Appeal who responded within ten minutes to the taped request. Anyone else is told on that selfsame tape for any Registry court that the court will get back to you inside of one day. They never do.

9) If a legal issue falls in the legal forest and is ignored by the presiding justice, does it make a noise? Absolutely not in the world of Ontario Superior Court Justice, Colin McKinnon. That's how the Canadian Justice system was smashed. In this case, he knew about the 'Cullen Creed' from B.C. Supreme Court (July 23-2013) which barred this plaintiff from B.C. courts `for reasons best known to the judge'; similar to an earlier order, the `MacKenzie Creed of October 01, 2010 from the same court level which also made this ban under the `frivolous and vexatious` label.

10) The key difference between the two Orders lies in the all-important addition that one so attached may continue in a court of law `with the permission of a judge` which is a little like pinning a yellow star on the target`s shirt and sending him into a Nazi courtroom which probably explains why very few litigants contest this action as it amounts to `death by a thousand legal cuts` should one pursue this line of attack as I have done.

11) The significance of the Cullen Creed is that the judgment is absolute: I am barred from B.C. courts for reasons best known to a judge. That is sheer anarchy. Ontario Justice McKinnon was made fully aware of that distinction in court of which he was not aware. His own binding Order added the all necessary `with permission of the judge` to proceed.

12) I have requested the Ontario Council of Judges to suspend Justice McKinnon in part for giving sanction to a most egregious judicial order (the Cullen Creed) in his ignorance of any comment on it. (Forgive us our sins, for what we have done, and what we have failed to do.) That is one reason why his Order was declared `wacky` by me as reported in the page 1 story by the Ottawa Citizen on April 28,2014 although the `Right of Rebuttal` on this point is conspicuous by its absence in the Citizen article which merely regurgitated his `colourful` judgment. That is also why the anti-employee media is suspect on these labour matters.

OPEN LETTER TO PMO (CANADA)– AUG.22-2014

(FORMERLY OPEN LETTERS TO THE OTTAWA CITIZEN and U.S. NEWS)

JUDICIAL LIES PILED ON TOP OF JUDICIAL LIES = CASE LAW for the Employee's Case(Canada)

BY: Roger Callow ‘The Outlawed Canadian’ in an 'Outlaw Justice System' www.employeescasecanada.com (29 year unresolved legal case) now known judicially as ‘the cluster-fuck case’ which has been through 8 different court systems and over 30 judges. It's Canada’s Watergate - Pulitzer Prize winning author being sought. The 'find me a court' plea has fallen on deaf ears due to Registry and Ministry obfuscation. I feel like Ralph Nader in 1961 trying to convince the public of dangerous cars (Unsafe at any speed). Who knows, maybe recalling judges and chief judges may become standard fare in the future - just like automobiles. To be sure, the current system is not working.

The law is blind only when it does not wish

to see. The Potato Factory Bryce Courtenay

QUOTE:

1)'...Modern Western minds love labels; we love to be able to put everything we come across into a pigeon-hole - it is an "A" or it is a "B". We have built up so many definitions and categories that we are slightly fazed if something is impossible to slot into a box....' The Hiram Key Knight/Lomas

2) '...they must be a dishonest society...look at how many laws they have!' Chinese proverb

3) '...under the wali's benevolent despotism, Swat was perhaps unique in being completely free of lawyers....' The Last Prince of Swat (Pakistan)

THE PROBLEM IS THE BUREAUCRACY, STUPID

REFERENCE: 'We need to monitor judges more closely' ...The only mechanism we have for responding to objections about judicial behaviour in Canada is through complaints to "judicial councils" at either the provincial or federal level. But this process is also flawed as a method for monitoring judicial behaviour and helping judges to improve their performance. Like the appellate process, it is sporadic and depends on someone bringing a complaint...The processes by which these councils have also been critiqued for being overly opaque.... Ottawa Citizen Aug. 13-2014 C7 Opinion

RESPONSE:

1) 'Our legal discrepancies, my dear Ottawa Citizen, lie not so much in our stars but in the Offices of our Chief Justices who have selected judges 'to do the necessary'; the laws be damned. Think of hockey enforcers; they have a job to do and they do it just as some appointed judges are to 'run a job' and they do it. That's why it is deja vÛ in that in political trials, such as the Employee's Case, the Order has been written even before the judge enters the courtroom. That's why September 23 promises to be a 'Court of Star Chambers'...but there is a price to be paid for such chicanery.

2) Similar to the opinion expressed above, judicial appendages charged with reviewing judicial conduct are 'more useless than tits on a bull'. Currently, I have 3 charges before Judicial Councils a) B.C. b) Canada (Federal Court) c)Ontario

3) As to Legislative oversight, forget it as the politicians care little about court transgressions as long as no 'doo doo' sticks to them which is happening 'in spades' with the Employee's Case which makes the Harper Government look like a bunch of bozos. The ineptness of his Justice Minister Peter MacKay with this issue is creating a legacy which will be the hallmark of Prime Minister Harper's political career. In short, there is no longer any rule of law in Canada as a consequence of the Employee's Case as the web site is illustrating.

4) The September 23-2014 one hour hearing (10:00 A.M.) in Ottawa Superior Court (#14-61592) has the added element of fraud; both on the part of the Respondents and that of the court (cover-up).

5) It's a key hearing for 21st century justice in Canada. Will the press attend?...or are they too busy publishing myopic studies with puerile solutions such as the above?

6) Parallel media coverage of the political scene isn't much better. For example, John and Jane Public don't give a rat's ass about a politician exceeding his financial allowances. Indeed, these stories about politicians - who are merely there to raise money and vote according to how they are told - belie the true story of a media failure to cover the real story of the 300 members of the PMO's Office who actually run this country in secrecy. The real change with a change of government is the elimination of the current crop of PMO staff.

7) If it had not been for media exposure, there would have been no Robocall trial. There has been no press exposure in a much larger Employee's Case. Robocall affects the fortunes of one political party; the Employee's Case affects the fortunes of 35 million Canadians.

8) By hiding the campaign manager for Guelph in Kuwait (no affidavit evidence) and cutting a deal with Sona's co-conspirator not to prosecute him - for he was in a position to name higher Tory factotums -, the Old Boy's Club subverted the course of justice lending credence to my claim that disruption of the course of justice in Canada is routine.

9) While the media prattles on about 'law and order', Jane and John Public, while remaining skeptical such as illustrated by the above cartoon, are quite prepared to accept the trade off for government claims of security with law and order a distant second.

OPEN LETTER TO PMO (CANADA)– AUG.29-2014

(FORMERLY OPEN LETTERS TO THE OTTAWA CITIZEN and U.S. NEWS)

JUDICIAL LIES PILED ON TOP OF JUDICIAL LIES = CASE LAW for the Employee's Case(Canada)

BY: Roger Callow ‘The Outlawed Canadian’ in an 'Outlaw Justice System' www.employeescasecanada.com (29 year unresolved labour legal case) now known judicially as ‘the cluster-fuck case’ which has been through 8 different court systems and over 30 judges due to systematic judicial abuse. It's Canada’s Watergate - Pulitzer Prize winning author being sought. The 'find me a court' plea has fallen on deaf ears due to Registry and Ministry obfuscation. I feel like Ralph Nader in 1961 trying to convince the public of dangerous cars (Unsafe at any speed). Who knows, maybe recalling judges and chief judges may become standard fare in the future - just like automobiles. To be sure, the current system is not working.

Three Trainwrecks;the literal one killing 47 people at Lac Mégantic,Que; symbolic train wrecks, George Bush's Iraq War and The Employee's Case (Canada); all have something in common...systematic abuse.

A) Lac Mégantic: '...but nobody was looking at it from a big picture point of view to say 'Have we got a systematic problem?...This is the question for the judicial system...our mission is to try to prevent another accident from happening, and in order to do that we have to drill down deeply and look at all the systematic issues.'

B) Bush's Iraq War: It's Getting Ugly Out There Washington broadcast journalist Jack Cafferty. '...the nonsense that flies out of your mouth during your broadcasts.' BILL 'Well, Bill, let me put it to you this way: the bottom line is that the country and the Constitution either stand for something or they don't. The ends don't justify the means - ever. You are either a nation of laws and you conduct yourself accordingly, or you are not, in which case you can wipe your ass with the Constitution when it's convenient. But you can't pay lip service to these bedrock values and then not live up to them. That makes us no better than any other two-bit government on the face of the earth.'

other quotes: a)'We're in the fight of our lives, and many of us don't even know it.'

b) '...that said, I think the process of corruption or contamination of the media is sinister and subtle (N.B. At one point, over half of U.S. Citizens believed Bush's pronouncement: 'WMD-Saddam Hussein-Al Qaeda') c) 'Why don't we vote much? We're never told the truth. Certainly not by the politicians, and less and less by the sad wreck of the media. d) 'What would slow the decline and maybe help reverse it? The American people have to get pissed off enough to start changing it.' e) 'The bottom line is that our government no longer works for us.'

MESSAGE:

1) So how does a litigant obtain a focus on the systematic abuse in a legal case? By addressing the bodies with a mandate to discuss this abuse; namely, the Supreme Court of Canada and the Government (Minister of Justice). Both of these organizations have ducked out leaving Prime Minister Stephen Harper with this legacy: a country without a viable legal system.

2) In the case of the Supreme Court of Canada, close to 85% of appeals are not heard without any reason given. In the Employee's Case, however, the two failed attempts left this litigant in the unique position of being frozen in a permanent state of limbo as all other rejected cases are left with a lower court decision; something which does not exist in the unusual circumstances of the Employee's Case (see web for details.)

3) There is never any response from government. Indeed, this story began as an errant piece of legislation (BILL 35) passed by the B.C. Government in 1985 and used only against this personage; and then revoked before this matter was resolved (Banana Republic Justice). Two Attorney Generals from B.C. and Ontario have ducked their responsibilities leaving Federal Justice Minister MacKay to resolve this legal matter. He has done nothing. (In 2004, former Que. premier, Jean Charest, was a Tory Opposition member who forwarded the information to then Opposition Justice Minister, Peter Mackay, who did nothing...at least he is consistent.)

4) Hence getting this matter back before the Supreme Court of Canada - possibly on the topic of 'fraud' - is currently being frustrated by the lower courts and their respective Registries over which there is no appeal. That resistance reflects how weak is the esteem of the legal fraternity for the SCofC. SCofC Registrar, Roger Bilodeau, has sidetracked 5 approaches so far for jurisdictional reasons.

5) In the 1990's, one B.C. Supreme Court judge told me: 'Mr. Callow. You have a right to a judicial finding.' "Right, then where is it?" 'Not my jurisdiction.' "If not your department, then whose department is it?" 'Jurisdiction. I don't know, but not mine.' The point here is that without a judicial finding, no compensation (includes pension rights) may flow to this litigant. In brief, the Employer has manipulated the Justice System to avoid all fiduciary responsibility under the contract setting, as they do, a very dangerous precedent: "We are not dismissing you; rather we are laying you off and if you do not sign a $1 quick deed for all outstanding matters, you will not collect your pension."

6) The above precedent was enshrined by the second refusal of the SCofC to hear this case in 2004 under the terms of 'ultimate remedy' (there must be a remedy under the collective bargaining rules) thus reducing Canada to Third World status.

7) Fast forward to recent events in which the B.C. Supreme Court in October 2010 and July 2013 ('MacKenzie Creed' and 'Cullen Creed') banned this litigant from B.C. courts on any basis for reasons 'best known to the judge'. Both judges, on their own recognizance, without a hearing, without taking legal argument, without quoting specific laws, turned the Canadian Justice System into a wasteland.

8) Five courts (Federal and Ontario) courts were appealed to under the provisions of inherent jurisdiction and natural justice considering the ban against me. None of those courts dealt with the content of those Creeds although the Divisional Court of Ontario (Ottawa DT-12-1872 under appeal) was tasked solely with evaluating the MacKenzie Creed. Their brief finding? Without quoting laws or case studies or depending on hearing presentations, concluded that 'the judge of one province may not over-rule the findings of a judge in another province'; a highly specious conclusion.

9) On April 10-2014 in Ottawa Superior Court #13-59060 before Justice Colin McKinnon; the Employer launched an action requesting that all issues be discussed with a conclusion that the Employer did not owe any compensation to this laid-off senior teacher from June of 1985; a preposterous request to be made in an Ontario court considering that the Employer was not barred from B.C. courts.

10) The outcome has been, among other things, assigned to the Judicial Council of Judges, for not only did McKinnon j. fail to address this central issue, he decided to award $10,000 costs against me for what was, in essence, an Employer failure! His decision is being appealed as well.

11) There is no doubt in my mind that this legal caper is being organized behind the scenes in a bid to protect the Supreme Court of Canada from a Third Appeal. Apparently, the SCofC handles rinky dink issues such as the Union employee who refused to divulge her mailing address to the Union but is bereft of dealing with a matter of fraud - on the part of the Employer and the courts (noted in the Preamble to the Supreme Court of Canada (2004) SEE web HOME PAGE)

cc PMO/SCofC Hon. A. Karakatsanis/Ont. Appeal Court Registrar H. Thomson/ media