July 7, 2009
Let me start off by giving a little credit where it’s due for a change. Just for the giggles of it.
Here’s to Jane Sims and the Freeps for alerting us to the clear and present danger of “the man.” Apparently Sims and her paper felt compelled to give us a heads-up on this because “the man” is a real Class-A sack of maggot puke. You see, it’s kind of like this:
“The man” is a career pervert with a history going back 20 years or more, including “three sexual assaults, six convictions for invitation to sexual touching of a child under 14, two convictions of sexual interference and one for weapons possession,” according to the Freeps article. His latest conviction came when he pleaded guilty to a minor physical assault on his ex-girlfriend…
He was convicted of harassing her by threatening to harm any man she was with and telling her she had to go to him each week for sex.
He was also convicted of possession of child pornography for a photo on his computer showing a seven-year-old girl.
The common-law wife had to leave a job and move away because of the crimes. She fears for her safety.
Quite the charmer, huh? For that, “the man” got 30 months. Lop off 18 months for Pizza Parlour Justice™, and that leaves him with a year to go. Unless you count that little statutory release thing that the leftbots don’t like you bringing up. That’ll knock off a third of the whole thing, meaning he’s gonna be out walking the streets in two friggin’ months.
Aw, don’t go gettin’ all freaked out, now. After he gets spun out the revolving door, “the man” will be subject to a 10-year supervision order, where he’ll have to take his saltpeter, stay away from places with kids in them, and won’t be allowed to own guns or stick his pathetic excuse for a wiener in any more kids. Ever ever again. So there. And we know it’ll all work out fine; we know it from past experience and what his shrink had to say about him:
Psychiatrist Philip Klassen from the Centre of Addiction and Mental Health examined the man and determined he didn’t suffer from a major mental illness but did suffer from “a personality disorder, paraphilias, a probable attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder and borderline intellectual functioning.”
Klassen said the biggest concern was the man’s “bisexual pedophilia” and said he was a high risk to re-offend.
Assistant Crown attorney Peter Rollings told Jenkins the man was warned in 2006 he could face a dangerous offender application if he re-offended. The man had not taken prescribed sex drive reduction medication and failed to comply with court orders.
Ain’t justice peachy? And this sack of fertilizer is going to be back out on the streets in 2 months. The same streets as your kids and mine. There’s just one little question remaining:
WHO THE HELL IS THIS PRICK?!?!?
That’s right, his name doesn’t appear even ONCE.
January 13, 2009
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: â€œBC wants to switch to forced drugging and killing of homelessâ€ at http://www.bloggingtories.ca/forums/topic6769.html
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…)
December 20, 2008
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 thatâ€™s exactly what happened with a client of one of Winnipegâ€™s largest law firms after dealing with Thornhill, Ont.-based Bond Street Collections, Inc.
â€œThe debtor was unwilling to pay until Bond Street got involved,â€ the credit supervisor of the unnamed 55-lawyer firm told The Lawyers Weekly. â€œOnce 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.â€
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.
â€œI motivate people to pay,â€ explained Teplitsky, â€œby facilitating communication, breaking down barriers and opening the door to problem-solving.â€
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.
â€œItâ€™s very similar to sales,â€ she said of collecting. â€œYou try to persuade people that itâ€™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.â€
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.
â€œThe firm wasnâ€™t interested initially,â€ explained Renee Fullerton, collections supervisor for Goodmans LLP. â€œBut she never gave up, she was pleasantly persistent and because of that, the managing partner and the managing director gave her a shot.â€
The result? â€œShe turned out to be very good,â€ Fullerton added. â€œWe had trouble collecting from one of our U.S.-based clients, but she was able to locate them and get the payment in full.â€
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 couldnâ€™t on its own? Fullerton believes that once a third party gets involved, it makes people nervous and aware that the problem wonâ€™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 firmâ€™s reputation, making clients aware â€œthat we want and expect to get paid, but weâ€™ll do it in a nice manner,â€ added Fullerton. â€œSheâ€™s firm, but never rude or nasty and thatâ€™s whatâ€™s needed in this industry.â€
As a result, many clients with outstanding debt ended up coming back to the firm after paying off their bills.
â€œLawyers want their money but they donâ€™t want to upset the client,â€ Teplitsky noted. â€œIf itâ€™s settled amicably, it opens the door for future business for that account and for referrals.â€
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. â€œThere are clients who arenâ€™t going to pay under any circumstances,â€ she said. â€œSome jump from firm to firm creating bad debts with many lawyers.â€
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 â€“ the older the account, the more the value of the work decreases with clients â€“ as well as the area of law. Family lawyers have a higher rate of unpaid bills because â€œpeople donâ€™t budget for a divorce.â€
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 sheâ€™s not a neutral party, since sheâ€™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.
â€œPeople want a sense of closure and [this approach] makes everyone feel better, which opens doors for the future,â€ she said.
Currently, Teplitsky is trying to further her use of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) methods. Sheâ€™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 sheâ€™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.
â€œOur infrastructure is modelled after a law firm, so thereâ€™s a professional synergy there,â€ she said. â€œWeâ€™ve worked very hard for our reputation and intend to keep it.â€
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 â€œthe judge makerâ€, 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.
Just replace; Martin Teplitsky’s name with that of â€œAll Caponeâ€, Law Society of Upper Canada name with â€œLa Cosa Nostraâ€, Ontario Court of Appeal name with that of â€œthe Commissionâ€ 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 debtorsâ€™ 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 â€œthe judge makerâ€, 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..
November 4, 2008
Well, I guess my break’s over. It was kind of nice while it lasted but seriously folks, this isn’t what I wanted to come back to.
In yet another perfect example of the judiciary asshattery goodness that we’ve had kicking around ever since the Supreme Court’s Singh decision back in ’85, some child-molesting yankee bag of maggot shit has gotten himself bagged in Winnipeg and promptly gone and uttered the magic word: “REFUGEE!”
To make a long story short, Troy Greenbank tried to have a threesome with a woman and her ten year old daughter and got caught. So, naturally, he ran like hell for the Canadian border:
Greenback has no connection to Canada and told police he came north because it was the easiest direct route from Missouri in his attempt to seek asylum on charges he knew were coming. He also wanted a chance to “start over.”
Go to hell, asshole. You want to start over? Do it someplace else. And just what excuse is it that he’s using to try and stay here, you wonder?
Troy Greenbank, 29, faces up to 50 years behind bars if convicted in his home state of Missouri, but is now seeking to fight deportation and to obtain refugee status and protection from the Canadian government. He claims he will probably be killed in prison if returned to the United States to face justice.
Boo hoo. Can’t have that now, can we? Because everybody knows that what this world really needs is more diddlers walking around hogging up air that the rest of us could be breathing.
The girl’s father then learned of the arrangement and called police after discovering the sex toy Mr. Greenbank allegedly bought her.
Greenback is scheduled to return to court in Winnipeg on Friday for another detention review. He is being held in protective custody at the Winnipeg Remand Centre and is on 24-hour suicide watch, based on his statement that he has made previous attempts on his life.
Two final things to think about today: (more…)
September 12, 2008
As if we somehow needed more proof (no, we don’t) that our laughably so-called “justice system” in this country has gone completely and utterly off the rails, a woman in Guelph, Ontario has gotten of light, thanks to Justice Cas Herold, with the cold-blooded murder of not one, but two children.Â Not just kids, but babies!Â Both of them were under three months old! It’s days like this that I sometimes question my opposition to capital punishment.
Both of the victims were her own children.
Some of you without strong stomachs of anger management issues might not want to read much further, just so you know.Â Pieces of walking garbage like this so-called woman could gag a maggot:
GUELPHâ€“A Guelph woman who admitted killing her two sons was acquitted of two counts of murder yesterday, prompting an angry outburst from one victim’s father and tears of relief from the other.
“You’re a f—ing murderer,” the woman’s former partner yelled at her before storming from the courtroom at Guelph’s Superior Court. “No matter what, you’re a f—ing murderer.”
The man, followed from the courtroom by his mother and grandmother, could then be heard screaming and banging in the corridor.
Yeah, he’s pissed, and who the hell can blame him?Â The bitch murdered his son!
Let’s take a look at the facts of this case, shall we?Â For once, they really are quite simple and straightforward…
- In Kitchener in 1998, she smothered her 7-week old son.
- Just 4 years later, in 2002, she killed her 9-week-old son in Guelph.
- She admitted to killing her children.
- She also admitted to thinking about killing her other two surviving kids. 😯
There you have it.Â She’s 27 years old, has murdered exactly half of all the children she’s ever given birth to, and is thinking about finishing the job on the others (a boy and a girl).
Maximum sentence: seven years.Â Toss in statutory release and the lovely 2-for-1 pizza justice that scumbags get for pre-trial custody, and she’ll likely be out by next summer.Â Oh, did I mention the best part?Â You aren’t allowed to know who she is.
That’s because, while she was 21 when she killed her second victim, she was only 17 the first time she killed a baby (and got caught), so she gets to hide behind the anonymity that the lovely little YCJA provides for all murdering little bitches/bastards under the age of 18.Â Nice friggin’ job, Chretien & Co., the gift that just keeps on giving.
And you can’t return the God damned thing…
July 13, 2008
Next Page »
Those of you who read here, know that I have some mixed feelings about La Belle Province. Sometimes, I really, really want to just bitch-slap Quebec, en masse. Other times, I just love the hell outta the little buggers.
This is one of the latter.
On the one hand, they can be like the surly teenager who lives in the basement, demanding to be let do his own thing but refusing to live by the rules of the parents who actually pay the damned bills. On the other hand, they are capable of some astounding antibullshit from time to time. Today’s editorial in the Montreal Gazette is one such example (my emphasis, of course):
The way Canadians and their government deal with refugee claimants is still, as it has long been, an incoherent muddle of exceptions, special pleading, unverifiable claims, activism, confusion and foolishness.
Politically unpalatable though it might be, somebody needs to drain this swamp, and that somebody will have to be the federal government.
Several recent cases illustrate the problem:
U.S. Army Private Joshua Key deserted, came to Canada, and claimed refugee status, saying that in Iraq he had witnessed looting and violations of human rights. His refugee claim was rejected, but a judge allowed him to stay in Canada anyway.
An un-named Colombian denied refugee status in the U.S. said the “r” word here. Despite the fact that Canada and the U.S. have a “safe haven” agreement governing such cases, a Canadian court said he could stay. Last week a higher court overruled this validation of “asylum shopping,” but activist groups are complaining; the case may not be over.
Even when a bogus claimant loses his appeals, he can find a way to stay.
In British Columbia, Laibar Singh, an Indian who entered Canada with false papers, remains holed up in a Sikh temple. After the laborious hearing and appeals process, he was ordered deported from Canada, but ignored the order. In Canada he became ill and is now paralyzed. Immigration officials have been unable to summon the courage to arrest and deport him, even though he moves frequently from one refuge to another.
In Montreal, another failed refugee claimant, Algerian Abdelkader Belaouni, remains holed up in St. Gabriel’s Catholic Church despite an expulsion order, having slipped into Canada after his U.S. visa expired. Here again, immigration officials defer to the medieval superstition that a place of worship should provide immunity from the law.
At least those two say where they are. An alarming 41,000 people ordered deported from this country – many of them criminals – have just vanished.
There are far too many cases such as those mentioned above, and each time a judge, a pastor, or anyone else puts knee-jerk “compassion” above the rule of law, Canada loses something.
Canadians like to think of ourselves as generous and compassionate people, but where can we draw the line between being welcoming and being suckers? If our refugee-determinations come to be based on simply accepting everyone who gets here and wants to stay, what will the consequences be? Do we want to accept deserters into Canada? From the U.S. alone, or from everywhere? If we do that, how can we think of imposing any penalty on deserters from the Canadian Forces?
Do we really want to allow the unpopularity of the Iraq war in Canada to lead us to treat the U.S. armed forces as somehow illegitimate? Even if we did, shouldn’t this be articulated and regulated by Parliament, rather than by anyone with room in his church basement?
Immigration, including refugee policy, must be based on rules, not on individuals. If it’s not based on rules, then it’s not law.
It’s past time for Canadian refugee law to be clarified, improved, and then enforced with determination and vigour.
Yup; sometimes ya just gotta love the li’l French bastards… 😉