I will be forwarding this Appeal to the following departments:
Premier Christy Clark; Canadian Judicial Council; Federal Minister of Justice, Madam Wilson-Raybould; Office of Prime Minister Trudeau.
Today is April 21, 2016.
My Summary Trial was on February 12, 2016; I was dismissed on some vague reasonings, based on alleged mis-filing of my papers.
I continue to await receiving the legitimate, rule applicable and wel-defined, 'Written Reasons for Judgment' from the combined efforts of the AG Counsel, Johnny Van Camp, and Judge Geoffrey Gaul. Apparently, it concerned, what looked to be a yet-to-be applied Rule, absolving a Judge from any kind of ordering she/he might have introduced in his/her dismissal, be the decision legally valid, arguable, applicable, correct or NOT!
From my recollection (please read the transcript in a former Blog to verify), the 'Yet to be Used Rule' indicates that a Judge, in her/his daily duties, can order as she/he damn well pleases! So, as such, GOD-like, is forever UN-accountable.
Unless, as in the case of an Alberta judge, another Mr. Van Camp, it concerns a male Judge's IN-Court language, to be found abusive and inexcusable, about a female Litigant's spread knees in her sexual harassment case. Here, at long-last, a precedent of accountability was determined and set.
I am, this day, appealing to the above most honourable addressees, all who presently fill functions at the highest level of our purported 'Democracy.' My various appeals, in the nutshell entitled: 'CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT', concern my Citizen's Constitutional Rights. Rights I am entitled to under Section 12 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom (see below)
Although I am, in my 7th year legal nightmare sojourn, not discussing any apparent circumstances of visual 'physical' abuse, the ever-present daily mental tensions and continued need to attend to whatever formats and stages I was struggling to comply with, these, like a steady type of water torture were constantly gnawing at me. I had legal nightmares; would wake up having to write down phrases that struck me as pertinent; My blood pressure was up, I needed to get up early to deal with the 3 hour Ontario time differential + the constant subtleties of interpreting the legalese of the myriad documents gathering around me; all became unbearable over the many thousands of hours driven to find a modicum of 'Justice.' Barbaric indeed! Who might be 'criminally' responsible here?
Over time, I have been in contact with a number of Self-Representing Litigants across the Country. Based on the exorbitant costs charged by lawyers, their numbers are ever increasing.
I say: We have had enough suffering; Enough Cruel and Unjust Punishment! Enough 'IN-justice!' I urge the addresses above to take us VERY SERIOUSLY and bring about the desperate CHANGE we all voted for. Turn this ship around, introduce real Justice, and make it applicable Federally across the Country! First construct Rules that make sense; then, cutting out rhetoric argument, apply them as written. Are we not living in the 21st Century?
And NO-ONE is above the law; EVERYone must be held ACCOUNTABLE! The honourable, me Lordship judge, without a Robe, is a common citizen, like any of us.
I SHALL CONTINUE REQUESTING A PUBLIC INQUIRY IN TO THE DAILY DEALINGS OF OUR NATIONAL JUSTICE SYSTEM!
===================================
Section Twelve of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
Section 12 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, as part of theConstitution of Canada, is a legal rights section that protects an individual's freedom from cruel and unusual punishments in Canada
Legal Rights Sections 7-14
Right Not to Face Cruel and Unusual Punishment
Introduction
Section 12 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms protects against “any cruel and unusual treatment or punishment.” Like other Charter rights, section 12 can only be triggered by government action. ....
Cruel and Unusual
Once a court has established that there has been treatment or punishment, it must then determine whether the treatment or punishment is both cruel and unusual.[6] It is not enough to be one or the other. The treatment or punishment must be both. The terms “cruel” and “unusual” have not been concretely defined, nor has it been fully determined what makes an action both cruel and unusual. However, Canadian courts have narrowed the definitions of these terms to include the following categories:
1) treatment or punishment that is barbaric in itself
This includes any treatment or punishment that would be considered cruel and unusual as the penalty for any offence, no matter the severity of the crime.[7] Examples include lobotomizing dangerous offenders or castrating sexual offenders.[8]
2) treatment or punishment that is grossly disproportionate to the offence
According to the Supreme Court’s decision in R v Smith, treatment or punishment is grossly disproportionate if the punishment imposed on the offender is too severe or excessive for that specific crime or where there are specific circumstances surrounding the offender or the case that create a gross disproportionality.[9] Some factors that a court would consider include the gravity of the offence, the personal characteristics of the offender and the particular circumstances of the case.[10] Like Smith,much of the law on gross disproportionality thus far has focused on mandatory minimum sentences, which are a form of punishment.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Post a Comment