Category: Contributors

June 14, 2009

Nannies, Nincompoops & Ne’er-do-wells

Filed under: BS,Canada,HRCs,Mailbag,Nanny State,Rights — Dennis @ 10:28 am

The Nanny State(Gonna start off with a big ol’ tip o’ the tuque to Jeremy for dropping this in my inbox)

You know things are looking bad for Big Nanny when she’s getting hit from so many sides at once. Everyone knows that Big Nanny’s convinced that there’s nothing you can do that she can’t do better, including and especially deciding what’s best for your kids.

It seems like that sacred cow’s taking a bit of a beating lately:

Whether we wanted it or not, knew it or not, over time, the work of child-welfare organizations has become “parenting by the state and the imposition of their value system on other people,” says Marty McKay, a clinical psychologist who has worked on abuse cases in the U.S and Canada. Provincial agencies have the power to intervene when children are considered “at risk” of abuse or neglect – even if none has actually occurred. Or, where spousal abuse happens, but kids are untouched. And what they do with the children they take can sometimes be worse than what they suffered at home.

Utter BullshitThen we have another favourite social-engineering sledgehammer, the Human Lefts Commissions which have popped up across the land like warts on a toad’s arse. Curiously enough, they’ve been yelping a lot lately about how they want to “engage in the debate” that has swirled around their malfeasance lately. I call bullshit on that; and so does Ezra Levant.

Yup; this right here is totally how you engage in a debate. Not. This kind of buffoonery would actually be funny as hell under different circumstances…

This evening, Jennifer Lynch, the chief commissar of the Canadian Human Rights Commission, tried to have CTV Newsnet kick me off their interview program Power Play, hosted by Tom Clark.

To their great credit, CTV refused to be bullied — and it was Lynch who wound up off the show.

You can watch the episode here.

What an embarrassment Lynch and her CHRC have become to this government — and to all Canadians.

January 13, 2009

Too clever by half: How CAMH shrinks fooled Canadian Justice System

Too clever by half: How CAMH shrinks fooled Canadian Justice System and hid from Canadian public greatest case of mass murder in Canadian history (Morgentaler excluded).

Short history of a cover-up of Canadian Zyprexa Experiment in Canadian Courts

See also: “BC wants to switch to forced drugging and killing of homeless” at

In late 1980ties Eli Lilly and Co. was conducting research on chemical substance called Olanzapine or 2-methyl-4-(4-methyl-1-piperazinyl)-10H-thieno[2,3-b][1,5]benzodiazepine with intent of manufacturing and selling it as a psychotropic drug. Testing of chemicals with intent to use them as psychotropic drugs is extremely difficult due to the fact that testing on animals does not provide any clue as to their effectiveness in treating humans suffering from mental illness. As much as it is possible to recreate certain type of cancer in mouse or a rat and test on them various chemical substances in order to find a cure it is impossible to create schizophrenic mice, rat or even a monkey in order to test various chemical substances in order to determine if they could alleviate any symptoms or provide the cure. (more…)

January 5, 2009

New medical condition defined: Recovered Memory of Date Rape Syndrome

Filed under: Contributors — Karol @ 9:42 pm

It seems that this newly defined “Recovered Memory of Date Rape Syndrome” is much more serious mental condition than “Shaken Baby Syndrome” and “Munchausen’s by proxy Syndrome” (MBPS) combined

Read for yourself; [original post here] (more…)

January 1, 2009

Hocus Pocus

Filed under: Random Junk,Reader Questions,Society/Culture — Dennis @ 2:11 pm

I know that I said yesterday that I wouldn’t do this (New Year’s predictions are always like sticking your balls in a bear trap) but right now, I’m all hungover and my judgment is a little off, so here goes.

I’ve gotten nearly three dozen emails in the last 24 hours or so asking me just what the hell I think it is that we’re in for in the next 365 days. After all, they ask, everybody else does it, why don’t you? It’s not like I’ll end up looking any dumber than the next bozo who got it wrong.

And hey, it’s not as if I haven’t gotten a prediction wrong before now, is it?

So here I am: beer in one hand, ice pack in the other, coffee standing by. This should be interesting…

  1. The Sedition Coalitionâ„¢: Fuggeddaboudit.
    It’s deader than Elvis.  Under any leader but Steffy, it wouldn’t have even been considered in the first place. Even hardcore Grits were dropping big brown bricks in their Stanfields over the thought of what the electorate would do (and, in a lot of cases, likely still will do in the next election) to them for this one.
  2. The Conservative budget will pass.
    HM PM Harper will make just enough compromises to make voting it down political suicide.
  3. Lean times.
    The economy isn’t going to ricochet back to where it was but we’re not heading for a rerun of the dirty thirties, either. Watch as the whole notion of Keynesian economics takes a beating.
  4. Kyoto, schmoto.
    The latest eco-doom fad, aka Y2Kyoto, aka The Church of Kyotology, aka We’re All Gonna Die IV, will all but drop off the public radar. The two main reasons are: 1) As the science further unravels, the Goracle’s acolytes will have a progressively harder time selling this pig in a poke to anybody capable of dressing themselves and 2) It’s the economy, stupid. Nobody gives a rat’s ass about saving the polar bears when they’re busy enough just paying the bills. Look for Ellie May and the Greens to slide even further off the national give-a-shit screen.
  5. Iggy will be the new UberGrit.
    But it’ll be one hell of a short honeymoon. He’s said too many nice things about the big, bad Yanks over the years and that kind of thing drives Grits absolutely apeshit. Steffy was the second, Iggy will be the third.
  6. Baracklash will hit the US.
    Speaking of the Yanks, look for a bad case of buyer’s remorse backlash to set in south of the border as they realize that they elected an empty suit. The funnest part will be watching the media turn on his ass like a pack of starving hyenas.
  7. Harper hogties HLCs.
    Look for Canada’s Human Rights Abuse Industry® to find itself either hogtied or shitcanned altogether (preferably the latter). Too much stink has seen the light of day in the last year and as the Conservatives consolidate their positions, look for them to give people with a real interest in real rights, like freedom of speech, what they want. CHRC Grand Inquisitor Jennifer Lynch will be sodomized and gnawed to death (perhaps in that order) by a pack of rabid beavers while on vacation in Algonquin Provincial Park.

And that, boys and girls, is all the hocus I can pocus right now. I’m off for some more of the hair o’ the dog that bit me…

December 22, 2008

Toronto feminist lawyers and the money crunch.

Filed under: Contributors,Justice,Ontario — Karol @ 8:20 pm

Ever since Conservative government cut funding to Court Challenges Program army of feminist lawyers that used to depend on this glorified welfare for legal professionals found themselves scrounging for new careers and new sources of income.

Some of these feminist lawyers were unable to make safe transition and join ranks of Ontario judiciary despite best efforts of Dalton McGuinty who in his relatively short stint as Premier of Ontario nominated close to one hundred judges so far.

One of these lawyers stranded by cancellation of Court Challenges program is Ms. Susan Vella.

Associate Partner – Civil Litigation

Direct Line: 416.363.7627
E-mail Address:

Team Members:

Jennifer Lord, Legal Assistant – Law Clerk
(416.363.1867, Ext. 248;

Meredith Francis, Law Clerk
(416.363.1867, Ext. 243;

Main Areas of Practice:

Civil Sexual and Institutional Abuse and Misconduct Claims, Aboriginal Rights Litigation and First Nations’ Dispute Resolution, Commercial Litigation,

Public Interest Litigation


Graduated from St. Michael’s College, University of Toronto, Hon. B.A. (Eng.), With Distinction

Susan might not be connected well enough in Toronto legal circles to become a judge but she knows enough many feminist judges well enough to be sure that if she can put a case together she is guaranteed to win it.

One of such judges sympathetic to feminist cause is Madam Justice Sandra Chapnik who in one of her former incarnations served as the President of the Women’s Law Association of Ontario.

Madam Justice Sandra Chapnik, Superior Court Of Justice

Madam Justice Sandra Chapnik obtained a BA from the University of Toronto in 1962, and a Secondary School Teacher’s certificate in 1963. She was a high school teacher for several years, commencing in 1963.

In 1976 she obtained an LLB from Osgoode Hall Law School and was called to the Bar of Ontario in 1978. Prior to her appointment to the now Superior Court of Justice in September 1991, Madam Justice Chapnik was a vice-chair of the Worker’s Compensation Appeals Tribunal (WCAT) and a fact finder and mediator for the Ministry of Education. From 1982 to 1986, she practiced civil litigation, family, some criminal and entertainment law as a partner in Banks and Chapnik and acted as a part-time Rent Review Commissioner.

Professional positions that Madam Justice Chapnik has held include President of the Women’s Law Association of Ontario, member of the national and provincial executives of the Canadian Bar Association, Bar Admission Course Instructor and Bencher of the Law Society of Upper Canada. Awards received include the Canadian Bar Association Award of Distinction and Award for Distinguished Service, the Women’s Law Association President’s Award and a Reuben Wells Leonard Scholarship from the University of Toronto.


All that Ms. Vella needed a was a civil case preferably sexual assault case that ended in guilty plea or criminal conviction and an organisation with deep pockets that could be made vicariously responsible for paying compensation.

You might not believe it but Canadian law still keeps on their books almost never used concepts of fiduciary duty and vicarious liability. If you were a child victim of abuse or (homosexual) rape do not hold your breath for too long thinking that you could hold people that were paid to “raise” you or CAS to account for any of their actions, Ms. Vella can assure you of that as she tried it on previous occasion, see:

If there is a will there is a way, as they used to say.
First Ms. Vella tried to hit Toronto East General Hospital for some money over the alleged rape of 73 years old terminally ill woman, despite of the fact that the judge who presided over criminal trial Mr. Justice Laforme had some harsh words for feminists that tried to set up “rapist” intensive care nurse Mr. Peter Cocchio with three counts of sexual assault.

Justice Thomas R. Lederer of the Superior Court of Justice threw Ms. Susan Vella’s case out of court for abuse of process.

You can read some details of that fiasco at:
Undeterred by such treatment Ms. Susan Vella went to Ontario Court of Appeal to have that decision overturned and three justices were happy to accommodate her grievances.

You can also read how well is Ms. Susan Vella connected at Ontario Court of Appeals at:

In a meantime, Susan Vella poked around some more and found another case; nothing so drastic and life altering as rape, and quite dated as the case is almost 30 years old but other than that perfect case as the victim and the perpetrator are still alive and are living in Ontario, Toronto Police has deep pockets, and most importantly perpetrator was found guilty of sexual assault.

When Harper’s Government cut federal funding for Court Challenges Program they firmly believed that “welfare for legal professionals” was killing entrepreneurial spirit of Toronto feminst lawyers and distracting them from serving some “real” clients.

The proof is in the pudding, as they say, so here are some stunning financial results of Ontario feminists left to their own devices:

‘I went through this . . . to heal’


Marian Evans was awarded $215,000 plus legal costs for a 1979 attack in which she was detained and assaulted by a Toronto police officer.

Woman vows to fight for ‘what is right’ after police appeal ruling in officer’s sex attack

Dec 17, 2008 04:30 AM

Betsy Powell
Courts Bureau

Marian Evans says she had expected to lose and wind up “financially devastated” when she sued Toronto police for an assault committed by a former officer almost 30 years ago.

But she says it was never about money.

“I went through this process to get the truth … to heal basically,” she said yesterday, sitting in a midtown coffee shop.

“It was so important for me to figure out for my own good. I couldn’t move forward.”

Following a civil trial, Ontario Superior Court Justice Sandra Chapnik last month awarded Evans $215,000 plus legal costs, and said the Toronto Police Services Board should pay because it was “vicariously responsible.” John David Sproule, a former constable, was also ordered to pay $25,000 in punitive damages.

The court-ordered award is believed to be one of the largest against Toronto police. Evans’ lawyer, Susan Vella, hailed the ruling as “very important for women.”

Last Friday, the board filed a notice of appeal. Despite the setback, and the prospect of having to borrow even more money to pay her legal bills, Evans, 54, says she will continue to “fight for what is right.” That means refusing to accept any offers to settle, just as she has done since launching her lawsuit in 2002.

“I’m actually a stronger person than they think,” she said.

Chapnik, whom Evans praised as “a picture of class,” wrote in her Nov. 12 judgment that Evans “was subject to an admittedly outrageous and despicable sexual assault.”

In the morning hours of Jan. 7, 1979, Sproule, who was in uniform, stopped Evans, then 24, as she was driving alone on Danforth Ave. He detained her, drove her to a secluded area and tried to grab her breast and kiss her. She complained and he was charged with indecent assault. After pleading guilty, he was fined $1,000 and quit the force.

The incident was a closed book, something never discussed in the Scarborough home where she lived with her parents.

“I was left to deal with it on my own terms so the only way I could deal with it was to let it go as much as I could and it festered over the years.”

She went from someone who had grown up in a happy and “normal but strict environment” to living a chaotic life that saw her, for a period, living in rooming houses.

After years of blaming herself for what she describes as often erratic and irrational behaviour, she started to see a psychiatrist in 2001. With the benefit of counselling, she began to realize the impact the assault had on her life and, in 2002, she began legal proceedings. She was well aware she was long outside the four-year limitation period under the Limitations Act.

“It was understood, but the fight was more important to me than being concerned about that.”

The board, in its notice of appeal, is asking the Ontario Court of Appeal to set aside the trial decision and dismiss the claim because it was initiated 23 years after the assault took place. The notice also states the judge “erred in the application of the law regarding vicarious liability as it related to the Toronto Police Services Board.”

A mediation session in 2003 was the first time she had seen Sproule since 1979. He lives in Northern Ontario and did not appear at the trial.

“I could not look at that man’s face,” she said, covering her own face with her hand. Nor was she able to speak when asked to state her name. “I didn’t want anything to do with this man. I didn’t want him to hear my voice … So I was quite pleased when he didn’t show up at trial.”

Evans is trying to “rebuild her life.” She works freelance in the book publishing industry and is writing her memoirs.

“It’s been a very, very long time for me and slowly coming together but it’s really hard,” she says tearily. She says she still gets frightened when she sees police cars.

Her 23-year-old son Adam has been the “angel” on her shoulder. She started to cry yesterday recalling how, after the judge’s ruling, he hugged her and told her he was proud of what she had done.

“I’m willing to go through this, I’m very willing to go through this,” she said.

“I can’t run – I have to face it. The only thing that matters to me is my son. As long as he’s all right I can get by, I’m happy.”

December 20, 2008

It is Christmas at Osgoode Hall.

Filed under: Contributors,Courts — Karol @ 12:46 pm

Marty Teplitsky’s daughter Sheryl Teplitsky runs very successful collection agency in Toronto.

She succeeds where everybody else fails, she succeeds at an impossible task of collecting money for Toronto blood sucking lawyers.

One just wonders how she does it??
How would she be able persuade or intimidate business people to pay Toronto lawyers for their inflated and mostly fraudulent legal bills???

Lets see: How about an arrangement where her father would once a year at Christmas time use the facilities of the Law Society of Upper Canada to throw a Christmas Dinner for all homeless people living on the streets of downtown Toronto???

How about an arrangement where Chief Justice of Ontario Court of Appeals Warren Winkler would act as a head waiter at that party and would give an interview to the press that Marty Teplitsky is his good friend???

How about an arrangement where Marty Teplitsky would stand at the door of Osgoode Hall and give ten bucks to every beggar, every homeless person, and every drug junkie that came to Osgoode Hall on that day for a free food??

Would such a graphic spectacle involving 600 destitute guests, many Ontario judges and lawyers as well as Toronto Police keeping order be enough of message to all members of Toronto business community that they better cough up the money to Sheryl Teplitsky when she knocks on their door than run a risk that her father Marty would drive them destitute and force them to join the crowd that once a year comes to Osgoode Hall to benefit from Marty’s “charity”???

In my wildest dreams I would never be able to come up with more graphic way to advertise legal extortion racket.

If you think for a split of a second that I am making it all up please read on.

Law firm collection specialist succeeds with mediation-based approach

By Pablo Fuchs
February 04 2005

Sheryl Teplitsky has helped many firms collect outstanding bills by adopting a mediation-based approach. Photo by Pablo Fuchs
Click here to see full sized version.

When was the last time you heard a bad debtor speak highly of a collection agency? Probably never, right?

Well that’s exactly what happened with a client of one of Winnipeg’s largest law firms after dealing with Thornhill, Ont.-based Bond Street Collections, Inc.

“The debtor was unwilling to pay until Bond Street got involved,” the credit supervisor of the unnamed 55-lawyer firm told The Lawyers Weekly. “Once they did, a solution was reached and he even complimented them, telling us that he was treated with respect and in a courteous, business-like manner.”

The brainchild of Sheryl Teplitsky, Bond Street has been collecting unpaid legal fees on behalf of law firms since 1994 with an unlikely approach for a collection agency.

“I motivate people to pay,” explained Teplitsky, “by facilitating communication, breaking down barriers and opening the door to problem-solving.”

In more accurate terms, Teplitsky does not use the intimidation and harassment-based approach employed by virtually all collection agencies under the sun. Instead, she applies a calm, sales-based method that encourages clients of legal services to pay their unpaid bills.

“It’s very similar to sales,” she said of collecting. “You try to persuade people that it’s in their best interest to pay. At the same time, most people have good intentions and would rather resolve the matter amicably and pay their bills, if given the opportunity.”

Teplitsky learned about all that 15 years ago while working as a summer student collecting bad debts for a Toronto-based, 21-lawyer firm. Initially, she was dealing with unpaid bills that were two to three years old. She stayed at the firm for two years and eventually got that down to bills that were 90-days-old, then 45-days-old, then finally 30-days-old.

Given that unique experience, Teplitsky found her calling and decided not to follow the law school education that she was set to pursue. Instead, she took advantage of her collecting gift and went into business, opening the nationally licenced and fully bonded Bond Street.

At first, she took some time to build a clientele. But eventually, she got it done with the same motivational skills and persistence that have made her a whiz at what she does.

“The firm wasn’t interested initially,” explained Renee Fullerton, collections supervisor for Goodmans LLP. “But she never gave up, she was pleasantly persistent and because of that, the managing partner and the managing director gave her a shot.”

The result? “She turned out to be very good,” Fullerton added. “We had trouble collecting from one of our U.S.-based clients, but she was able to locate them and get the payment in full.”

In the more than four years she has been dealing with Goodmans, Teplitsky has done wonders for the firms, collecting 75 to 80 per cent of outstanding bills that it had already considered lost as well as helping to clear the backlog of more recent unpaid bills.

So why was Teplitsky able to collect the bills the firm couldn’t on its own? Fullerton believes that once a third party gets involved, it makes people nervous and aware that the problem won’t simply go away.

Most importantly, however, she says that Teplitsky is very careful in the way that she deals with clients, taking into account the firm’s reputation, making clients aware “that we want and expect to get paid, but we’ll do it in a nice manner,” added Fullerton. “She’s firm, but never rude or nasty and that’s what’s needed in this industry.”

As a result, many clients with outstanding debt ended up coming back to the firm after paying off their bills.

“Lawyers want their money but they don’t want to upset the client,” Teplitsky noted. “If it’s settled amicably, it opens the door for future business for that account and for referrals.”

How does she accomplish that without resorting to the intimidation methods espoused by other collectors? Teplitsky explains that she calls the clients, explains the situation, specifically what lawyers do, noting all the work they put into a file behind the scenes.

Then, she explains the different options, which include: not paying, which would result in the firm pursuing legal remedies; setting up a payment plan; or collecting a lump sum up front.

Usually, that works. But Teplitsky admits she is no magician. “There are clients who aren’t going to pay under any circumstances,” she said. “Some jump from firm to firm creating bad debts with many lawyers.”

Overall, she says that she ends up collecting between 20 and 35 of all the files that come her way, explaining that there are variables that affect the process, mostly the age of the account – the older the account, the more the value of the work decreases with clients – as well as the area of law. Family lawyers have a higher rate of unpaid bills because “people don’t budget for a divorce.”

However, Teplitsky is trying to change that as well. Last April she received a certificate in dispute resolution from York University and has been applying many of the principles she has learned from that course into her business.

She tries to encourage dialogue and participation from the debtors, asking for their suggestions on payment as well as listening to their grievances about the lawyer. She admits that she’s not a neutral party, since she’s hired by the firms, but she tries to play the part of a mediator by sorting out any unresolved issues to ensure that the lawyer or firm receive their unpaid fees.

“People want a sense of closure and [this approach] makes everyone feel better, which opens doors for the future,” she said.

Currently, Teplitsky is trying to further her use of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) methods. She’s in the process of obtaining her LLM in ADR at Osgoode Hall Law School and expects to obtain the designation within the next year and a half.

Once she’s done that, she wants to expand her services to include more ADR services, primarily to help firms solve internal, personal disputes.

But her main focus will still be collecting for law firms along with her two associates in the manner that she has developed over the last decade.

“Our infrastructure is modelled after a law firm, so there’s a professional synergy there,” she said. “We’ve worked very hard for our reputation and intend to keep it.”


Christmas Dinner at Osgoode Hall where merchants of misery offer their “charity” as a veiled warning to all Ontarians still resisting legal extorsion scams.

Martin Teplitski (Sheryl’s father), known in shadowy world of Toronto legal mafia as “the judge maker”, once a year comes of the woodwork to show all Canadians how generous and charitable he can be to those, whom he and his legal mafia friends, reduced to position of street prostitutes, druggies and homeless beggars.

It is a very sick spectacle indeed.…

Justices offer up steaks and jazz for the homeless
From Thursday’s Globe and Mail

December 18, 2008 at 4:14 AM EST

Turning up the earflaps of his winter hat and unzipping his coat, Cliff Wind settled into his chair at a cafeteria table in the basement of Osgoode Hall. A wisp of a man composed of equal parts flesh, bone and beard, he’d been standing in the cold with hundreds of Toronto’s hungry and homeless for nearly four hours waiting for a hot meal.

When the filet mignon coated with gravy and snuggled between green beans and French fries was placed on the table in front of him, he grinned.

“I haven’t had filet mignon in 20 years. It is the best meat in the world,” he said, his 53-year-old eyes widening behind a thick pair of glasses.

Delicately, he cut a generous bite, stabbed it with his plastic fork and slipped it into his mouth. His eyes narrowed and his beard bobbed as he chewed in silence for several seconds.

Chief Justice Warren Winkler serves the homeless yesterday. (Kevin Van Paassen/The Globe and Mail)

“It’s very good,” he decreed at last. “It would be even nicer if I had teeth.”

Mr. Wind held the 29th of 600 tickets handed out yesterday for the Lawyers Feed the Hungry Program Christmas dinner. Each ticket granted the bearer entrance to Osgoode Hall, where a filet mignon dinner, bread pudding, a live jazz band, new socks and a crisp $10 bill awaited.

Dinner began at 5 p.m., but, nearly an hour before, the line outside Osgoode Hall stretched around the building to University Avenue, and people had to be turned away as all 600 tickets had been dispensed.

After shivering in line for two hours, John Chesson, 60, was one of those lucky enough to secure a ticket. He smiled when, while waiting outside, he learned that Ontario Chief Justice Warren Winkler would be one of his servers.

“I’m a former client,” he said.

Nearly 20 years ago, Mr. Chesson said he was sentenced by a judge, now known as Chief Justice Winkler, to four years in prison for bank robbery. (Mr. Chesson says he was innocent.)

“Can I get a pardon with my steak?” he asked.

A short time later, Chief Justice Winkler, who padded about on brown loafers while balancing trays stacked with filet mignon, chuckled at the suggestion of steaks served with a side of pardon.

“I think that’s a dandy idea,” he joked, and then, after a quiet pause of judicial contemplation, he added, “Well, maybe half-pardons.”

Chief Justice Winkler is a close friend of Martin Teplitsky, the founder of the program, who arrived with $6,000 cash in a flimsy grocery bag.

As is tradition with the 11-year-old program, Mr. Teplitsky paid for the steaks and handed out $10 of his own money to 600 diners.

The funds, for many, are the main attraction, and several eager patrons tried to bypass the meal, steamrolling directly toward the exit where Mr. Teplitsky handed out crisp purple bank notes.

Each was rerouted by a friendly, strategically placed volunteer.

Mr. Teplitsky has been criticized over the years for the extravagance of his annual Christmas feast. A hugely successful lawyer who dislikes the label “foodie” because he feels it denotes a certain culinary elitism he lacks, Mr. Teplitsky bristles at the notion that charity meals can’t include gourmet ingredients.

Mr. Wind, after dabbing drops of gravy from the corners of his beard, agreed.

Martin Teplitsky '64Just replace; Martin Teplitsky’s name with that of “All Capone”, Law Society of Upper Canada name with “La Cosa Nostra”, Ontario Court of Appeal name with that of “the Commission” and consider Errors & Omissions insurance at over $12000.00 dollars a year that each lawyer has to pay to LSUC as protection racket money and you will get a picture why everybody in Toronto legal community goes along with Marty’s initiative.

While making public mockery of Christian charity and Christian generosity Ontario judiciary quietly reintroduced debtors’ prisons in Canada and just recently started to set ground rules for imprisonment for those who cannot afford to pay ransom imposed on them.

No lawyer and no evidence of any sort is ever required. FRO records are deemed to be accurate and court orders that they use to enforce their reign of terror are deemed to be authentic. If it happens that FRO uses fraudulent court orders and falsified statements of accounts judges presiding over incarceration hearings deny jurisdiction to hear that evidence and they throw blasphemous debtors in jail for daring to challange credibility of FRO and crooked lawyers that act for them.

Michael Barry Miller, crooked lawyer who presented fabricated evidence in court, committed perjury and falsified court order with intent to use FRO to defraud poor father who is trying to protect his son from sexual abuse is protected by LSUC and Madam Justice Nancy L. Backhouse, wife of Mr. Martin Teplitsky “the judge maker”, and Justice Backhouse in turn is protected by her husband’s good friend Chief Justice Warren Winkler, who in turn acts as the head waiter during party for the poor and downtrodden, thrown by Mr. Teplitsky.

Below is a link to previous post regarding recent ruling made by the Ontario Court of Appeals that is housed in a building owned and operated by the Law Society of Upper Canada. The very same building that the poor are allowed to visit only one a year and only as official recepients of “charity” dipensed to them by habitual blood suckers who want to feel better about themselves and at the same time intimidate others to pay up..

Next Page »