TURMEL: Gravel's Feb 24 Double Date in Quebec Courts
From: John Turmel (bc726_at_FreeNet.Carleton.CA)
Date: 02/19/05
- Next message: John Turmel: "TURMEL: Pierre Bourque cowed with the rest of the presstitutes?"
- Previous message: Bunn E. Rabbit: "Re: Official Says al-Qaeda May Enter U.S. at Southern Border"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 19 Feb 2005 01:12:44 GMT
JCT: I didn't think the Le Droit article promising a pre-
trial in weeks would keep Dominic turned off too long when
the alternative was to NOT try to get out again; for free.
Besides, he's found out the Le Droit article was completely
untrue and his pre-trial is in May.
So he's ready to go back and give it another shot. So I
prepared another set of documents for him with the the
affidavit of particulars which Justice Plouffe had told him
was missing the last time. What's sad is that instead of
pointing out each of the 7 questions to be answered, Judge
Plouffe could have elicited the simple answers and saved him
the extra 3 weeks in jail on a dead law.
His girl-friend brought them to the jail on Wednesday before
noon but instead of him getting them signed and back to her
in 2 hours like the last time, the jailers decided not to
give him the documentation until Friday. Think about that.
The "jailer" decided to delay his release by 2 days.
Imagine. The jailer did it.
Remember when the jailer didn't transmit the South Notice of
Inmate Appeal for 2 days which gave me the time to open the
file first! I think a system stinks which gives the jailer
the power to keep a prisoner's release documentation away
from him for extra days. That's real dirty.
But because he still has Jacques Belley registered as his
lawyer, the Crown won't file the motion to have him
transported to court and we had to pick up the Motion for an
Inmate's appearance for Dominic to sign with his Motion for
release. It's a court form that simply has to he signed by
the applicant and then the court clerks take care of the
rest.
So his documents were sworn in the afternoon and his
girlfriend then had to follow these instructions. Keep in
mind that but for the missing affidavit, the documentation
worked to get him before the judge the last time and the
judge invited him back on 2 days notice with the completed
forms. So it should have been a cinch.
Apportez une copie de la requete a la couronne (1ier etage)
et demandez qu'ils signent pour la signification sur le
derriere d'une autre copie.
Apportez la copie avec signification au greffe (rez de
chausser) avec la requete pour comparution.
Bring one copy of the motion to the Crown (1st floor) and
ask them to sign service on the back of another copy.
Bring the copy with the service to the clerk (ground floor)
with the motion for appearance.
Not hard, right? Wrong. The Crown wouldn't sign for service
saying that the papers weren't done right. She didn't know
what to do. We know we'd have just left a copy and written a
short affidavit of service on the back and gotten it sworn.
Then at the registrar's office, they pointed out that the
old file number was no longer good since it had been
dismissed. They didn't tell her she could have a new number.
And they told her she'd have to file in Montreal! I didn't
know Justice Plouffe and the Superior Court had moved.
So they really jerked her around. Imagine, the documentation
that worked fine to get him in Gatineau the last time and
now she's being told she has to go to Montreal.
So I'll be going to Ottawa-Gatineau on Monday to bulldoze
the motion onto the court docket like Judge Plouffe said he
could with the same, more complete" documentation too. Let
them try to tell me why what worked before doesn't work
anymore.
There are now over a dozen inmates in that one little jail
who realize that if Krieger applies to Gravel, Krieger
applies to them too! And he got no answer on whether the
Krieger Supreme Court card wins last time, he only got the
answer that the paperwork wasn't done right. And now it is
and he's going to find out if Krieger has enough of a chance
to warrant his getting out with no conditions.
One quick point about Belley's comment in Le Droit that the
Krieger card had "no chance" of winning. I witnessed his
interview and he said he thought it had "little chance," not
"no chance." Quite the difference and quite the distortion
of his words by the press. Dominic says he had only good to
say about me regardless.
And the headline "Gravel chooses to use Belley over Turmel"
was pretty stupid considering Gravel could choose to use
both. And he now has. Belley is still on file to help him
when it's defence. And he's going to do a few offensive
moves himself first.
----------------
NOTICE OF MOTION
----------------
To: Attorney General for Canada
TAKE NOTICE that on Thursday Feb 24 2005, the Applicant will
make a motion before a judge of the Superior Court of Quebec
at the courthouse at 17 Laurier in Gatineau at 9:30am for an
Order varying the bail conditions to permit release upon
Applicant's own recognizance on the grounds that "Parliament
has not re-enacted the necessary S.4 possession and S.7
cultivation prohibitions sustaining any imputed improper
purpose since they were struck down in Parker and Krieger"
Dated at Gatineau on Feb 18 2005.
Defendant-Applicant Dominic Gravel
JCT: And right after, he goes to the lower court to try to
quash his charges:
----------------
NOTICE OF MOTION
----------------
To: Attorney General for Canada
TAKE NOTICE that on February 24 2005 the Defendant will make
a motion before a judge of the Quebec Court at the
courthouse at 17 Laurier in Gatineau at 9:30am for an Order
1) an Order pursuant to S.601(1) of the Criminal Code
quashing all charges relating to marijuana under the CDSA as
unknown to law on the grounds Parliament has not re-enacted
the S.7 cultivation and S.4 possession prohibitions which
underpin all other marijuana prohibitions in the CDSA since
they were struck down by the Ontario and Albert Courts of
Appeal.
2) an Order staying any charges for marijuana as abuse of
the process on the grounds that statute is of no force and
effect.
3) an Order, in the absence of proof that all inmates
convicted since the marijuana prohibitions were repealed
have been released, citing the Ministry of Justice for
contempt of the Ontario and Alberta Courts of Appeal and
Supreme Court of Canada in R. v. Parker and R. v. Krieger on
the grounds Crown Attorney S. David Frankel acknowledged
that the S.7 Cultivation and S.4 Possession prohibitions had
been struck down by the highest court in Alberta but did not
dutifully inform Canada's Law Enforcement to cease and
desist arrests under the repealed statutes.
4) or in the alternative, an Order staying the charges
pending the final determination of the repeal of the
prohibitions by the Supreme Court of Canada in Turmel v.
HMTQ #30570 (Hitzig) and R. v. Turmel #30571 (3.3Kg
Parliament Hill bust under S.5(2)).
Dated at Gatineau on Jan 24 2005
Defendant-Applicant Dominic Gravel
JCT: Finally, the Crown's going to get theirs on Krieger in
a province where the judges can't plead the Nuremberg
defence that they were just doing wrong by following higher
evil orders. Can't see the Ontario Hitzig decision going far
in resurrecting Section 7 in Quebec even if Ontario judges
say it did in Ontario even if Hitzig never mentioned S.7 at
all. Like Judge Serre ruled in Elliot Lake for Richard
Johnson who was charged with S.7 cultivation.
We're all waiting to hear her reasons which should be
available for our entertainment and revilement soon.
But a Quebec Krieger challenge has to be the Crown's worst
nightmare. And it's going to happen Thursday.
Any bets on whether the clerks are going to jerk me around
successfully or whether Dominic Gravel gets his hearing on
Thursday?
-- Abolitionist Slave Leader John C."The Banking Systems Engineer" Turmel for UNILETS interest-free time-based currency in U.N. resolution C6 to Governments in the http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration.htm http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel 519-753-0645 USENET: can.politics
- Next message: John Turmel: "TURMEL: Pierre Bourque cowed with the rest of the presstitutes?"
- Previous message: Bunn E. Rabbit: "Re: Official Says al-Qaeda May Enter U.S. at Southern Border"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
