----- Original Message -----
From: Michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2001 4:51 PM
Subject: Acquittal on 4 Counts of "failure to comply with a notice re.ITA" -
WIN
Hello all,
Well it's a glorious day as I look over the beautiful city of Vancouver and
review the last 3 years dealing with Rev Can, CCRA and the "Justice
system".Yesterday at approximately 2:20 pm in Burnaby, BC, Judge Watchuk of
the BC> Provincial Court used the words "deficient" in reading portions of
herdecision. At the end of her decisio she leaned across her desk....
looked,and spoke to me in a much gentler tone than the many times she had
leaned
across her desk, glaring at me and in her raised voice berating me AND
TODAY> she said calmly "Mr. Millar that means you've been acquitted of all
charges"..... that's what I thought she said in the body of her decision but
it sure was nice to hear the words plain and simple.
The acquittal result was a shocker to most people who attended the case
after seeing and hearing the Judge. Her behaviour towards me and the>
statements and rulings she made were hard to believe at times. Bias oozed
through, intimidation tactics and the shifting sands of "one moment she's
nice, the next she's jumping down my throat" Jekyl and Hyde stuff. I've not
been spoken to like that since I was about 10 and being a bad stupid boy (I
wasn't being bad and stupid, people just go on the attack when YOU
DAREQUESTION the LIE that THEY just told you). The judges use different
tactics to throw you off guard and take control of you, be prepared for
being
intimidated, manipulated or tested if you're in court. It will happen from
the moment you do anything other than being "cooperative" (my first
transcript is of me getting yelled at by Judge Stone and escorted into the
bar by the sheriff because I was asking questions from outside the bar on
name, jurisdiction etc. in Feb. 2000 - I believe this was referred to in the
Pacific Memorandum where it states "we believe Judges will deal with these>
situations summarily").
Bottom line is I had minimum 12 major issues with procedure, paperwork
and evidence brought to the court by CCRA and the main issue that the judge
choose to use as a reason for acquittal was related to the Tanner case that
was provided to the court by the Crown and that I hammered on over and over
in my argument. Tanner decision stated that the demand letter was deficient
because the signature stamp had below it the incorrect TITLE of office and
stated the regional office only, not Rev Can or CCRA (my demand documents
were served to me when it was still Rev Can. Nov. 1998).
ie. wrong way
John Smith
Director
Burnaby Fraser Tax Services Office
"Director" is not a delegated position for issuing demand notices. In
this demand letters it should have stated "Director-Taxation" as specified
in the unofficial yadda yadda version of the ITA. The office should also be
preceded by a line with the proper title of the agency or Dept. Nat. Rev.not
sure which. The main issue was the lack of proper office "Director-Taxation"
to issue the demand. There was also no evidence before the court to
establish in fact that the person named as the signatory stamp would have
been actually in the position of delegated authority. Other serious use of
stamping authority arguments were glossed over in the decision but I think
were a major point avoided.
ie. right way
John Smith
Director-Taxation
Canada Customs and Revenue Agency
Burnaby Fraser Tax Services Office
The Tanner case decision lays this "Director-Taxation" issue out and my
case decision now follows Tanner. Many of the demand letters out there
probably are in this incorrect format of "Director". There are many other
issues which I raised that I believe the court did not wish to rule on and
the court had a previously decided case to use as the reason for
acquittal....after all you only need one reason so I gave them a dozen to
pick from, some
of which would have been more embarrassing or precedent setting. Why set any
precedent when you can use an existing one?
There were also many appeal points ready to be raised that the judge may
have not wanted raised- application for recusal was the first thing she read
five minutes before sitting down on day one of trial - denied, pre-trial
applications not dealt with, rulings made that prevented cross exam on
legitimate issues and prevented "due-diligence" defence from being>
established (ie. "nothing prior to prosecution is relevant move on"), trial
confirmation occurred 9 days before trial instead of the 30 days in the
Rules which prevented service of supeoanas for CCRA witnesses and more, more
more. It was a mess. She had case law, she had a deficiency and she had many
other issues she did not want to rule on or deal with sooooo.....
It'sprobably not just the one factor but many combined. Although two cases
now have the same finding.....hmmm.
The judge did not have written reasons to give to Crown and myself. She
apologised and offered them to us since she will order the transcript "of
course reserving her right to edit the transcript for any obvious errors or
omissions". This comment relates to the fact that a number of issues were
before the court in Dec. 2000 and Jan 2001. The Judge gave her decision on
Jan 18, 2001 and withheld the release of her reasons until after the trial
and final arguments were finished (April) in spite of my repeated requests
in court and in a letter to the court to release them prior to final
argument. I was and still am APPALLED that a judge can speak words in court
and have you walk away making decisions based on what you heard in court and
they have the "right" (where in law?) to withhold those decisions and EDIT
them.... (oops I didn't mean THAT! we'll just change a word or two). When I
queried the transcription service they said this is standard practice in all
courts in BC.... REALLY.... practice maybe.... is it legal? (RANT)
For fun here is a list of the amount of time the Crown used up in
court:
2/2000 - JP appearance 1/2 hour
2/2000 - Judge appearance 1/2 hour
3/2000 - JP appearance 1/2 hour
4/2000 - JP appearance 1/2 hour
7/2000 - Judge appearance 1/2 hour
12/2000 - Judge pretrial 7 hours
12/2000 - Judge pretrial 2 hour
1/2001 - Judge pretrial decisions 1/2 hour
1/2001 - TRIAL 2 days - 12 hours court time> 3/2001 - Final Argument 2 1/2
hours
4/2001 - Final Argument cont. - 4 hours
5/2001 - Decision 1/2 hour
TOTAL TIME IN COURT in my proceedings alone - 31 hours
Trial + pretrial time - 26 1/2 hours - (there would have been more if
I'd
been able to call witnesses)
Famous last words - Crown: "your honor it's a very simple case and
should
take no more than 1/2 hour"
Each court room date from December on was full (or overfull) of people
(except for the decision...it's a long haul to the court and no
buses.....besides they'd been so many times before :-) ). Thanks to all of
you for your support and encouragement in what has been at times "a tough
road to hoe". I've been especially encouraged and supported by other people
in court and the sharing of their experiences via email Bruce Woodford,
Kevin
McElheran, Unami Joe, Donald Neuls there are more and sorry if I
missedyou... each email was helpful and uplifting.
I received much personal support from Sir Law, Dave Lindsay and
especially from the amazing Bruce Stellar who besides pulling all night work
sessions and helping with drafting paperwork attended at my side during the
trial and pretrial as a guide and support, I am eternally grateful. Special
thanks to Bruce, Byrun and Sir Law for having the balls to go public and
teach the truth. I attended many of their seminars (over and over) and
bought all their tapes. I also attended to watch many, many court cases to
learn from the people (un)fortunate enough to go to court before my turn. I
sat in on many trial and pre-trial cases to learn, learn, learn. I've
studied the acts
and read case law - point being... prepare to work hard if you plan on doing
it yourself - YOU have to have the knowledge and be willing to stand up and
speak up. In order to be Free you have to speak and live the Truth and that
takes being Bold in today's world. Be Bold and Live Truth to be Free. Be
Bold. Be True. Be Free
NOTE; thank you Dr. Gagne for showing me in the Supreme Court how to
persist, persist, persist (and more recently to Joe and Mike Felgner for
their amazing adventure in Supreme Court on persistence and focus.... you
guys are on to something keep it up! Understanding court procedures are HUGE
in any chance of success.)
There are many people educating about the truth of the fraud, and
deceptio we live in such as Eldon, Fred, Russ, Alex and others, thank you
and please keep up the speaking out and I hope the merits of every teachers
perspective on the "right way" to stand up and fight the lie are supported
because there> are many ways from inside and from outside the system to win.
I've always liked the natural person stuff and started there in my first
"appearance" so> I'm VERY excited to hear more court developments along
those lines (way t> go Russ). Thank you all (named and unnamed) for
everything you've done to help me and the many others before me that you may
not yet been properly acknowledged or rewarded for. I have invested over a
thousand hours, a lot of money and I have an idea of the time and effort you
have invested. I know you all have done far more and given so much to help
others than you have yet received credit or compensation for, thank you all
and that time is coming.
I have compiled transcripts of each of my times in court and did my
best to
ask lots of questions on transcript for highest eductional value. I'll be
doing an overview of each date and what happened. The final argument
transcripts have yet to be ordered where I present all the various arguments
in point form fully explained for the judge's easy understanding. Copies of
the decision will be available when I get them from the judge. Please let me
know if you want transcripts. I have copies of Tanner and a other goodies
let me know if you want anything..... donations gratefully accepted for
transcripts.
I am also planning a conference call for people who want to participate
and ask questions. Anyone interested please email me at
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and I'll send you a notice of date, time and number
to call. The Tuesday night meeting in New West I'll be at this coming week
to give the locals a debrief (be there and maybe hear Michael Felgners
update re. Supreme Court
(which Supreme Court are we in? awesome).
That's all for now. Please feel free to forward this email.
Sincerely,
:Michael: Millar
PS Anyone considering a court challenge to the ITA or CCRA's fraudulent
application of it? Supreme Court could be the place to start?
============================================================================
BoldTrueFree.com
Live Boldly, In Your Truth. Be Free.
voice & fax - 888-334-8916 cel. (604) 837--5522
local fax (604) 692-5599 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
He who gains victory over other men is strong.
But he who gains victory over himself is ALL POWERFUL. - Lao Tse
============================================================================
A Tribute To The Team From Sam Will Follow Later .
Donald
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is the Neither public email list, open for the public and general discussion.
To unsubscribe click here Mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Subject=unsubscribe
To subscribe click here Mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Subject=subscribe
For information on [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.neither.org/lists/public-list.htm
For archives
http://www.mail-archive.com/public-list@neither.org
