Fw: Provincial Court of Alberta Ruling Creates Dilemma for Tax Department

[Donald Neuls]

----- Original Message ----- From: The McElheran's Sent: Friday, May 04, 2001 4:55 PM Subject: Fw: Provincial Court of Alberta Ruling Creates Dilemma for Tax Department   I have received many replies to the last e-mail requesting it be sent again as the subject matter was missing the "attachment".  Those that did receive it had trouble opening it, so I will send it again as the main message. I have made some changes in it except for the ruling of the court and definitions provided. The Honourable Judge Davie had this to say when ruling against a charge of "Breach of Trust" which I attempted to lay on a particular tax agent after many attempts to have him "prove" the "debt" created by the tax department. All attempts failed. The only course of action the tax agent chose in justifying the "debt" was to seize 100% of my cheque from work with no explanation. IN THE CRIMINAL DIVISION OF THE PROVINCIAL COURT OF ALBERTA JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF CALGARY September 29, 1999 IN THE MATTER OF: the Criminal Code Of Canada, Section 507 (Kevin Lyle McElheran) vs. ROBERT BRANT McMEEKIN (Revenue Canada Collection Officer) Judge Davie presiding, ruled the following: "It’s my judgement that there is no trust relationship existing between you and this public official…" And further: "There is no trust relationship, in my judgment existing between Mr. McMeekin and you…" The Judge then dismissed the charge against the tax official to the pleasure of the official's superiors however, in doing so, he may not have realized what precedent he had just created for everyone else.  Defining "no trust relationship" clearly describes what the Court has set as precedent, the duties and obligations between the public and the public official. What exactly is the publics duty now with the tax department with respect to this ruling? Below is some definitions to help understand what Judge Davie ruled and may also help those who choose to write their closest tax office concerning this ruling. Trust as defined in the AMERICAN COLLEGE DICTIONARY 1966 is in part as follows: reliance on the integrity, justice etc., of a person,… confident in the ability or intention of a person… the obligation or to whom something is entrusted. the condition of being confided to another’s care… something committed or entrusted to one, as an office, duty, etc. to depend on. Syn. 1. Trust, assurance, confidence- imply a feeling of security. Obligation as defined in the AMERICAN COLLEGE DICTIONARY 1966 is in part as follows: a binding requirement as to action; duty. the binding power or force of a promise, law, duty, agreement, etc. a binding promise or the like made act of binding oneself by a promise, contract, etc. an agreement enforceable by law… Syn. 1. See duty. Duty as defined in the AMERICAN COLLEGE DICTIONARY 1966 is in part as follows: that which one is bound to do by…legal obligation. Action required by one’s position or…function. A payment,…etc. imposed and enforceable by law... T.O.M. 9110 PUBIC AFFAIRS POLICY paragraph (5) states in part: "Our relations with taxpayers should be such that we gain the public’s acceptance of our procedures, as well as their understanding of the role of the tax assessor and collector." Relation as defined in the AMERICAN COLLEGE DICTIONARY 1966 is in part as follows: an existing connection. the various connections between peoples, etc. the mode or kind of connection between one person and another…etc. regard, respect Syn. 1. relationship, connection. Connection as defined in the AMERICAN COLLEGE DICTIONARY 1966 is in part as follows: act of connecting. state of being connected. anything that connects; a connecting part. association; relationship. For those who deeply desire to comply with the requirements from the tax office, how can this be done when there is "no" -  trust, integrity, legal obligation, duty, relationship and/or connection?  Just doing my part in, 'Standing on Guard for Thee.' Kevin McElheran   [EMAIL PROTECTED]