Thursday, February 2, 2023

REENA BASSER, PARA LEGAL, ACTED OUTSIDE OF HER LEGAL JURISDICTION AND ACTED AS A LAWYER, AGAINST THE LAW SOCIETY'S JURISDICTION, BY ISSUING NOTICE TO TENANT, UNDER THE COMMERCIAL TENANCIES ACT.

 REENA BASSER, A PARA LEGAL, IS IMMORAL AND UNETHICAL. NOT ONLY DID SHE ADVISED HER CLIENT IN BREAKING THE LAW, NUMEROUS TIMES, CONCERNING HER TENANT, BUT SHE HAS ALSO BROKEN THE LAW HERSELF, BY ACTING IN PLACE OF A LAWYER, IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE, GENERAL DIVISION, WHERE SHE HAS NO LEGAL AUTHORITY TO DO SO. BASSER ALSO MADE FALSE ACCUSATIONS AND HAVE ALSO ACTED IN A CONSPIRACY, WITH OTHERS, AGAINST THE TENANT, IN ORDER TO CARRY OUT AN ILLEGAL EVICTION, WHILE HER MATTER WAS STILL IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE. IN A NOTICE THAT SHE HAD POSTED ON THE TENANT'S DOOR, WHICH INDICATED IN THAT NOTICE, THAT THE POLICE, WOULD ASSIST THE LANDLORD, IN CARRYING OUT THIS ILLEGAL EVICTION, AGAINST THE TENANT. AFTER SENDING THE TENANT A TEXT, TO MOVE OUT BY THE END OF JANUARY OF 2023, THE CITY OF MARKHAM POLICE, DID ASSIST THE LANDLORD, IN CARRYING OUT T HIS ILLEGAL EVICTION, WITH THE ARREST OF THE TENANT ON JANUARY 30TH, WHICH FORBIDS HER TO LIVE AT THE PROPERTY, AND WITH CHARGES OF AN ALLEGED ALLEGED ASSAULT AND ALLEGED ASSAULT WITH A WEAPON,  AGAINST THE LANDLORD, THAT THE TENANT HAD POSTED THE VIDEO BELOW THIS ARTICLE, WHICH SHOWED HER INTERACTION WITH THE LANDLORD, ON THE SAME DAY OF THOSE ALLEGED ASSAULTS. THE TIMING OF THE THREAT OF THE PARALEGAL AGAINST THE TENANT, OF THE PENDIND ILLEGAL EVICTION ON JANUARY 31ST AND THE ARREST OF THE TENANT, ON JANUARY 3OTH, SHOULD ALSO NOT BE IGNORED. IT WAS A POLICE ASSISTED ILLEGAL EVICTION, AGAINST THE TENANT, SHE BELIEVES, IN ORDER TO HAVE THE LANDLORD GAIN BACK HER PROPERTY, WITHOUT AN EVICTION ORDER FROM THE COURT.






Monday, December 12, 2022

THE BLACK CANADIAN EXPERIENCE: UNITED WE STAND, DIVIDED WE (WILL) FALL. WHY SOME BLACK LEADERS, SUCH AS NICHOLAS MARCUS THOMPSON, DO NOT HELP OTHER BLACKS, FACING PERSECUTION, IN CANADA.

NICHOLAS MARCUS THOMPSON, THE CURRENT BLACK CANDADIAN, WHOSE METEORIC RISE IN THE MEDIA, HAS MORE TO DO WITH HIS OWN SELFISH AMBITION, THAN IN REPRESENTING THE BLACK COMMUNITY. WE SEE THIS TOO OFTEN. 

Black Union Leader, Nicholas Marcus Thompson (left) and Al Sharpton.
              on the right, who is a known FBI agent and who is known for selling out his own people, and Nicholas Marcus Thompson, whose own selfish ambition is also apparent, in his public attention grabbing, for every photo opportunity that he can get, to advance his own agenda. These two black men are SELL OUTS and will step on the backs of other blacks, to get ahead. They will also not help other deserving blacks, if it means that they will get in trouble, with the oppressors.

When I say that Black Union leader, Nicholas Marcus Thompson, is a selfish and ambitious man, I speak from personal experience. Having contacted him to assist me, through the lawyer who have acted on his class action case with the UN, the Black Class Action lawsuit, against the Federal Government of Canada. Citing discrimination and racism, as the cause of that action, against Canadian black federal employees. And my own case with the UN, citing the same thing, as well as human rights abuse. I had to exposed Nicholas Marcus Thompson, as the hypocrite that he is, since who he is privately, is not the same as who he has professed to be publicly. That is, as a champion for the black cause. No, Thompson is not unlike other blacks in Canada, who are in some position of authority and who would like to keep their positions at all costs. This means stepping on other blacks, or overlooking them, if they will be an impediment, to their personal advancement. He has failed to realized, that if we have the same issues, as blacks living in Canada, such as facing racism and discrimination, then we owe it to ourselves and to our community, to support each other. He has failed to realized that despite his position, as a union leader, to the racist and discriminatory system, that we are all facing in Canada, that the same system, views him no differently, than it views me. 

Nicholas Marcus Thompson, has ambition that goes far beyond, the current case before the UN and the Canadian courts, regarding his discrimination case. He wants to be in the limelight and he wants to be looked favorably upon. In other words, he wants to make a name for himself. And to be remembered. But remembered for what?. When he turns his back on helping a single black person, or a group of them, because it would interfere with his own private agenda, then he is a SELL OUT. He would betray another black person, for advancing his own agenda, that is a SELL OUT. He should be remembered for that. If he is going to be in the media, then the public should get to see, both sides of this man. I have seen his kind way too often and it disgust me. I cannot tell you how many of these so called black leaders, like Nicholas Marcus Thompson, have sold me out, to the very same system that oppresses us both, as black people in Canada. Unlike him, I am not favoured in the media, (nor do I care). I am blacklisted and he is not. No Canadian media, will ever touch my story, of human rights abuse against Canada and its police, (because this is in fact a police state), but that is okay, as I am more than capable of telling my own story, or writing about it, in my own version of an alternative media, via my blog, or internet radio. I am more interested in exposing the truth, of what blacks are facing in Canada, than in becoming a media darling, at the cost of misrepresenting myself and the community, that I am talking about. 

I have a simple question, for Nicholas Marcus Thompson and other black leaders in Canada like him. How are we to get ahead, when we keep holding each other back?. How do you do that, you might asked?. (As if you don't already know).  By holding back other blacks, in the same position as yourself, in order to advance your own selfish agenda. Don't blame the system, when it attacks and destroys us as a community. By your own actions, you have given it permission to do so. Yes, the saying is true, that united we stand and divided we fall. Why haven't you got that yet?.

THE HYPOCRISY OF THESE SO CALLED BLACK LEADERS IN CANADA, WHO FOR THE MOST PART, ARE IN THE MEDIA AND PROFESSING TO ADVOCATE, ON BEHALF OF OTHER BLACK CANADIANS, BUT WHO ARE REALLY TOKENS, OR PUPPETS, OR WORST. WHEN THEIR MOTIVE IS THEIR OWN SELFISH AMBITION. 

Nicholas Thompson, ran for office in 2019, as an NDP candidate for Don Valley East, in the east end of the City of Toronto. He also lost that election. He is supposed to be a social justice advocate, but I can tell you, that he does not really represent that either.  Human rights abuse, such as the kind that I am facing, does not interest him. What interest him, is being recognized in the media and doing photo op. Which he never misses an opportunity to do. 

He is also a member of the, Racially Visible Action Committee, and for what purpose?. An organization that is a part of the Public Service Alliance of Canada. 


Thursday, November 24, 2022

TENANT IS SUING THE CITY OF MARKHAM POLICE AND BY LAW OFFICER, PETER NICKOLAIDIS AND HER LANDLORD, FOR THE POLICE ACTIONS, TO AID THE LANDLORD, SHE BELIEVED, IN ATTEMPTING TO EVICT THE TENANT, ILLEGALLY. THE VIDEO POSTED, HAS PROVEN THE FALSE ALLEGATION, OF AN ASSAULT, MADE UP AGAINST THE TENANT, BY THE LANDLORD AND THOSE OTHERS, SHE ALSO BELIEVED, ACTED IN THE CONSPIRACY. THE TENANT ACTUALLY HELPED THE LANDLORD, AS SHOWN IN THE VIDEO PROVIDED.

IT IS ILLEGAL FOR THE POLICE, TO ASSIST A LANDLORD, IN EVICTING A TENANT, WITHOUT AN EVICTION ORDER, OR AN ORDER FOR A WRIT OF POSSESSION. WHICH ONLY THE SHERIFF, CAN ENFORCED. 

TENANT:  THE ATTEMPT TO DESTROY MY LIFE, BY INSINUATING A LIE, AGAINST THE TENANT, AS A MEANS OF HELPING A LANDLORD, TO ILLEGALLY EVICT THE TENANT, WILL NOT BE IGNORED. THE TENANT HAD WISELY RECORDED, THE ALLEGED INCIDENT, WHEN SHE WAS ASKED FOR HELP, BY THE LANDLORD. THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE VIDEO, WAS NOT KNOWN BY THE POLICE, WHO LATER ACCUSED THE TENANT, OF ALLEGEDLY, ASSAULTING THE LANDLORD, DURING THAT INCIDENT, UNTIL THE TENANT PRODUCED THE VIDEO TO THE POLICE, WHO THEN DID NOT BOTHER WITH ARRESTING HER, FOR THE ALLEGED INCIDENT. SHE WAS TOLD BY THE POLICE, THAT THE ALLEGED ASSAULT, TOOK PLACE ON SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 19TH, THE DATE OF THE VIDEO AND OF THE TENANT RECORDING THAT INCIDENT, OF ASSISTING HER LANDLORD, WHO HAD FALLEN FROM HER WHEEL CHAIR, WHICH SHOWS THAT NO ASSAULT TOOK PLACE. 

NOTE:  (For reference to this article, see the video in the previous article, posted below this one).

BUT THE TENANT WANT TO SEND THE MESSAGE TO THE POLICE AND TO ANY LANDLORD, WHO WOULD RESORT TO SUCH A TACTIC, TO EVICT A TENANT, THAT THE ACTIONS OF THE LANDLORD, THE POLICE AND THOSE OTHERS INVOLVED IN THIS CONSPIRACY, WHICH CAUSED THE TENANT HARM, WILL BE RESPONDED TO, WITH A CIVIL ACTION, FOR DAMAGES, BY THE TENANT.  THE INCIDENT, WAS TRAUMATIC AND DISTRESSING, FOR THE TENANT, TO BE ACCUSED OF HARMING SOMEONE, THAT SHE WAS IN FACT HELPING, AT THE TIME AND WHO HAD THANKED HER, FOR HER HELP, AT THE END OF THE VIDEO.  

THERE IS ALSO RACISM INVOLVED, IN THEIR ACTIONS. THAT IS DIRECTED AT TARGETING AND ALSO USING OTHER MEANS, TO ATTEMPT TO DESTROY THE INDIVIDUAL. AN ABUSE OF THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL AND ALSO HUMAN RIGHTS. 

IT IS ALSO ALARMING, THAT THOSE PERSONS IN POSITIONS OF AUTHORITY, WOULD ABUSE THEIR POWER AND OFFICE AND TO TRY TO USE IT, TO TRY TO DESTROY ANYONE, THAT THEY VIEW, AS AN IMPEDIMENT, TO THEIR CORRUPT WAYS,  OF DOING THINGS.  AS I HAVE BEEN DOING, IN EXPOSING THE CITY OF MARKHAM, BY-LAW OFFICIALS, REGARDING THE INVESTIGATION, OF THE PROPERTY OF THE LANDLORD. HOW THEY TOOK UP, A PERSONAL INTEREST, IN THE MATTER AND HAVE USED THEIR POSITIONS, TO TRY AND TO ADVANCE THE CAUSE OF THE OWNER, OR TO STOP THE TENANT, FROM EXPOSING THEIR ACTIONS. BY-LAW OFFICERS, PETER NICKOLAIDIS AND FIRE INSPECTOR, ALEX FREEMAN, ARE AT THE CENTER, OF THIS INVESTIGATION AND BOTH ARE IN FACT, DEFENDANTS ALREADY, IN A CIVIL ACTION, THAT WAS TAKEN BY THE TENANT, AGAINST THEM AND THE CITY OF MARKHAM, ONTARIO. 

THE TENANT BELIEVED, THAT THOSE BY-LAW OFFICERS, ESPECIALLY PETER NICKOLAIDIS, MAY HAVE CONSPIRED, WITH THE LANDLORD AND OTHERS, WITH THE FALSE ALLEGATIONS, OF AN ASSAULT, JUST SO THAT THEY COULD GET THE TENANT TO MOVE OUT SOONER, WHICH WOULD ALSO BENEFIT THE LANDLORD.  

FOR INSTANCE, ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 21ST, (THE SAME DAY, THAT SHE WAS ACCUSED BY THE POLICE, OF AN ALLEGED ASSAULT, AGAINST THE LANDLORD, DATED AT THE TIME OF THE VIDEO, ON SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 19TH AND FOR WHICH THE POLICE LATER DID NOT PROCEED WITH, BASED ON THE EVIDENCE OF THE VIDEO), THE TENANT HAD SPENT SOME TIME, ON THE TELEPHONE, WITH BY-LAW OFFICER, PETER NICKOLAIDIS, OVER HIS ACTIONS, REGARDING THE LANDLORD. FOR INSTANCE, WHAT HE DID, OR OMMITED TO DO, REGARDING THE INVESTIGATION, OF THE LANDLORD'S PROPERTY. HE ALLEGES, THAT HE HAD PROVIDED THE COURT WITH DOCUMENTS, IN THE PROSECUTION OF THE LANDLORD, REGARDING THE VIOLATIONS, OF THE OWNER, PUI YI WONG, AKA FANNY WONG, WITH THE CROWN ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, YET NO RECORD OF THIS COULD BE FOUND WITH THE COURT.  UNLIKE THE COURT'S RECORD, OF THE CITY OF MARKHAM FIRE SERVICES, PROSECUTION OF THE LANDLORD, FOR VIOLATIONS UNDER THE ONTARIO FIRE CODE. WHICH IS COMING UP FOR A HEARING, ON DECEMBER 19TH, AT 9.A.M. AT THE COURTHOUSE.

THE TENANT BELIEVED, THAT PETER NICKOLAIDIS, WAS INVOLVED IN THE FALSE ALLEGATIONS, MADE AGAINST HER, BY THE LANDLORD, AS PART OF THE CONSPIRACY, AGAINST THE TENANT.  PETER NIKOLAIDIS, WAS ALSO NOT AWARE OF THE VIDEO'S EXISTENCE, EITHER. 

AND AS THE TENANT HAD MADE MENTIONED TO THE POLICE, THAT THERE WAS A PROCESS INVOLVED, WITH REGARDS TO THE LANDLORD, WHEN IT COMES TO EVICTING A TENANT.  AND THAT SHE MUST ALSO FOLLOW THAT LEGAL PROCESS.



VIDEO PROVING THE FALSE ACCUSATION OF AN ALLEGED ASSAULT, BY LANDLORD, WHICH THE POLICE TRIED TO USE, TO EVICT THE TENANT. THE VIDEO POSTED, SHOWS OTHERWISE.

Monday, November 14, 2022

YORK REGIONAL POLICE HARASSMENT. ILLEGAL SURVEILLANCE, WITHOUT A WARRANT. THE POLICE CARS THAT ARE INVOLVED, LICENSE PLATES # CHRM 414 AND CJMN 266.

 THE YORK REGIONAL POLICE, HAS DECIDED TO CARRY OUT ITS HARASSMENT, BY ITS ILLEGAL SURVEILLANCE OF ME, WITHOUT A WARRANT. 



 TWO POLICE VANS AND A PLAIN CAR, WAS PARKED AT THE ROUTE THAT I USUSALLY TAKE, CARRYING OUT THE ILLEGAL SURVEILLANCE OF ME. 

ONE OF THE YORK POLICE VEHICLE, LICENSE PLATE NUMBER IS CHRM 414 AND THE OTHER IS CJMN 266.  BOTH VEHICLES DROVE OFF, IMMEDIATELY, WHICH SUGGESTED THAT THE ACTIVITY, THAT THEY WERE CARRYING OUT, WAS ILLEGAL.

THE POLICE REQUIRES A WARRANT, FROM THE COURT, TO CARRY OUT THE SURVEILLANCE, OF AN INDIVIDUAL. AND MUST HAVE A JUSTIFIABLE REASON TO DO SO. IN THE ABSENCE OF THIS WARRANT, THEY ARE VIOLATING SECTION 8 OF THE CHARTER OF RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS, AND ARE LIABLE.

AS SOON AS I BEGAN TO RECORD THEIR ACTIVITY, THEY DROVE OFF.  NOW, I HAVE A LANDLORD, WHO THEY SEEM TO BE WORKING WITH THE POLICE, AND WHO WHO WANTS TO EVICT ME, ILLEGALLY.  AND AS WE CAN SEE FROM THE CASE OF CARR VS THE OTTAWA POLICE, AS WELL AS THE LAW ITSELF, THE POLICE IS NOT SUPPOSE TO BE ASSISTING A LANDLORD, TO EVICT ANY RENT PAYING TENANT. THE JUDGE, SYLVIA CORTHORN, RULED THAT THE VICTIM, "HAD EVERY RIGHT TO BE AT THE HOME, AS A RENT PAYOR".  

MY MATTER IS IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE, WHICH DEALS WITH ALL OTHER  TENANCIES, THAT ARE NOT COVERED UNDER THE RTA, AND INSTEAD OF GOING TO THE COURT, TO OBTAIN A WRIT OF POSSESSION, THIS WOMAN IS TRYING TO FIND OTHER WAYS TO EVICT ME. SHE HAS ONLY TURNED THE HEAT ON, SINCE NOVEMBER 1ST AND SHE HAS TURNED THE WATER OFF, FOR MONTHS NOW, IN THE KITCHEN AND AND HAS ALSO TURNED THE WATER OFF IN THE BATHRROM. WHICH MEANS THAT YOU CANNOT USE THE TOILET. 

TWO WEEKS AGO, SHE CONTACTED THE POLICE AND TOLD THEM THAT I HAD STUFFED A PLASTIC BAG DOWN THE TOILET AND HAD BLOCKED UP HER TOILET. BUT HERE IS WHAT SHE ALSO SAID TO THE POLICE, "THAT SHE WAS NOT AT HOME AT THE TIME, BUT IT MUST BE ME, BECAUSE I WAS HOME ALL DAY".  NOW SHE IS SAYING THAT SOMEONE SAW ME FLUSHED THE PLASTIC BAG, DOWN THE TOILET, WHICH IS HEARSAY. AND WHO THE HELL, AS A STRANGER, WOULD BE INVITED INSIDE A BATHROOM, WHEN YOU ARE USING IT?. BOTH LIES ON HER PART. SHE ALSO CHANGED THE LOCK ON THE DOOR AND DID NOT GIVE ME THE REPLACEMENT KEYS, WHERE I HAD TO BE CALLING THE POLICE TO ASSIST ME, IN GETTING BACK INSIDE MY HOME.  

THE LANDLORDS, PUI YI WONG AKA FANNY WONG AND SUET WAN WONG, AKA KEN WONG, HAS BEEN OPERATING THEIR PROPERTY ILLEGALLY FOR 13 YEARS. AND THEY DID WHATEVER THEY WANTED TO THE TENANTS. LAST WEEK, WHEN THE GARBAGE TRUCK DID NOT TAKE UP THE GARBAGE, SHE THREATENED TO DUMP IT IN MY RENTAL UNIT. SHE IS ALSO FACING A CIVIL ACTION BY ME, FOR DAMAGES. ALONG WITH SOME CORRUPT CITY OF MARKHAM, OFFICIALS. ONCE OF WHOM, A FIRE INSPECTOR, BY THE NAME OF ALEX FREEMAN,  RECENTLY MAKE AN INSPECTION OF THE PROPERTY (AGAIN) AND ORDERE HER TO REMOVED THE BEDS FROM ALL OF THE ROOMS, THAT SHE HAD TOLD THE BY-LAW OFFICERS, WERE EMPTY AND THAT THE TENANTS HAD MOVED OUT.  THE INSPECTORS WANTED PROOF OF THIS AND ORDERED HER TO REMOVED THE LOCKS ON THE DOORS FROM THOSE ROOMS, (TWO ON THE SECOND FLOOR AND ONE ON THE MAIN FLOOR), AS WELL AS THE BEDS, IN THOSE ROOMS. BUT SHE HAS CONTINUED TO IGNORE THE ORDER AND HAS FAILED TO COMPLY WITH IT. ONE OF THE TENANTS, A MALE, WHOSE ROOM WAS ORDERED TO BE CLOSED DOWN PERMANENTLY, HAS CONTINUED TO LIVE THERE, DESPITE THE ORDER MADE AGAINST HIM.  THE SAD THING IS THAT THOSE SAME OFFICIALS ARE AWARE THAT SHE HAS VIOLATED THE ORDER AND HAS DONE NOTHING ABOUT IT. THIS IS THE CORRUPTION THAT IS INVOLVED.  ONLY TWO TENANTS WERE ALLOWED TO STAY AT THE BUILDING AS RENTERS, DURING THE INSPECTION. MYSELF AND ANOTHER TENANT NAME MICHELLE, AS BOTH OF OUR RENTAL UNITS WERE OCCUPIED AND LIVED IN, WERE ALLOWED TO STAY, WHILE ALL OF THE OTHERS TENANTS HAD TO GO. THE ORDER WAS ALSO POSTED ON THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING, BY KATHY ROACH, A BUILDING INSPECTOR.  I WAS HOME AT THE TIME OF THE INSPECTION, SO I KNOW WHAT WAS SAID AND  DONE, BY THE BYLAW OFFICERS. IT ALL FELL OF DEAF EARS, AS FAR AS THE LANDLORDS, WERE CONCERNED. THEY HAVE NEVER COMPLIED WITH THAT ORDER.

 NOW THE LANDLORDS ARE FACING SEVERAL CRIMINAL CHARGES, INCLUDING DISOBEYING AN ORDER OF THE COURT,  BRIBERY AND CORRUPTION, MONG OTHERS. 


HERE IS ANOTHER EXAMPLE, REGARDING A LANDLORD'S SELF HELP METHOD, OF EVICTING A TENANT AND HOW THE COURT ACTUALLY VIEWS IT.

53.  If the solicitor counselled or countenanced these clearly illegal acts of his clients his own conduct was outrageous, and well below the standard which the court is entitled to expect from any solicitor licenced to practice as such in Ontario. The policy against self-help - against the recovery of possession of residential premises except under the authority of a writ of possession - is too well established to allow for an exculpatory plea of ignorance of the law from a solicitor purporting to act in this area of the law. The provision prohibiting the changing of locks is very clear - and may be seen as part of the larger policy against self-help. I am convinced that instances of self-help with respect to residential tenancies have a significant potential for begetting violence. A majority of the persons in Metropolitan Toronto live in rented accommodation. The public interest in avoiding self-help remedies is obvious and the public policy is clearly reflected in the legislation. It is not tolerable that solicitors, or other representatives of landlords or tenants, whether through ignorance or defiance, countenance, counsel or assist with illegal activities such as those carried out in this case by Diane and Steve Divitcos.

Friday, September 30, 2022

WAITING ALMOST SIX MONTHS, TO HAVE MY URGENT MOTIONS HEARD, AT THE COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO, IS A BIT TOO MUCH TO HANDLE. A DELAY THAT HAVE CAUSED ME IRREVOCABLE HARM. I AM FILING A COMPLAINT WITHT HE UNITED NATIONS AND POSSIBLY FILING CHARGES, IN THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT, FOR CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY, THAT CANADIAN PERSONS IN THE COURT AND GOVERNMENT, HAS CARRIED OUT AGAINST ME.

MY MOTION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL TO THE COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO AND ANOTHER URGENT MOTION THAT WAS FILED, ALONG WITH THAT MOTION, IS STILL BEING DELAYED AND HAS NOT BEEN HEARD BY THE COA, SINCE IT WAS FILED IN APRIL, OF 2022. THIS IS ALMOST A SIX MONTH DELAY.

 

A SIX MONTH DELAY, TO HAVE AN URGENT MOTION HEARD, IS ALSO A VIOLATION UNDER THE CANADIAN CHARTER OF RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS, TO BE TREATED EQUALLY AND FAIRLY, BY THE COURT. THE BLAME IN THIS CASE IS TO BE PUT ON THE REGISTRAR, OF T HE COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO AND THE COURT STAFF NARZANA BHUJWALLA.  

Actions will be taken, to protect my rights under international law, against such a discrimination, that was carried out against me, by the Canadian court.

Wednesday, April 13, 2022

CORRUPT ONTARIO SENIOR JUDGE, HARRIET SACHS AND THE CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE OF SYSTEMATIC RACISM, AGAINST BLACKS IN THE CANADIAN COURT.

HOW AND WHY JUDGES IN THE DIVISION COURT, WILL FACE AN INVESTIGATION, WITH THE UN AND OTHERS, FOR CARRYING OUT CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY, AGAINST ME. AND IT IS EASY TO SEE HOW?. SINCE THERE IS ALSO A LONG PAPER TRAIL, TO BE USED AS EVIDENCE, AGAINST THEM. 

THE FIRST ACTION OF THE JUDGE, HARRIET SACHS, AT THE APPEAL HEARING, ON APRIL 13, 2022, WAS TO BAN ALL RECORDINGS OF THE HEARING. IT WAS ALSO INTENDED FOR ME, AS SHE HAD ADVISED THE CLERK TO READ OUT LOUD, THE SECTIONS OF THE LAW, FORBIDDING THE RECORDING OF THE HEARING, AND THE CONSEQUENCES OF BREACHING THAT ORDER. I GOT IT. BUT SHE FORGOT THAT I COULD ALSO WRITE. I DO NOT NEED TO RECORD THE HEARING, ELECTRONICALLY, TO BE ABLE TO STATE TO THE PUBLIC, WHAT HAD TRANSPIRED AT THE APPEAL HEARING. AND THERE IT IS. ONE OF YOUR MOST COMPELLING EVIDENCE, FOR HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSE. A CLOSED DOOR HEARING. CLOSED DOOR HEARINGS, REGARDING SOME INDIVIDUALS, THAT SUITS THEIR PURPOSE. ALTHOUGH IT IS ALSO A GENERAL LAW IN CANADA, FORBIDDING THE RECORDINGS OF ITS COURT PROCEDURES. BUT IN MY CASE, ESPECIALLY. WHY?. BECAUSE THE JUDGES INVOLVED, DO NOT WANT THEIR ACTIONS EXPOSED. NO ONE MUST SEE OR HEAR, WHAT WAS SAID, OR WHAT THEY HAVE DONE. OR SO THEY BELIEVED.

 THE ONLY TIME, THAT I WILL REMAIN SILENT, IS WHEN I AM DEAD. I WILL CONTINUE TO EXPOSE HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSE AND SYSTEMATIC RACISM, IN THE CANADIAN COURTS, UNTIL I AM PHYSICALLY NOT ABLE TO DO SO. 

Ontario Regional Senior Judge Harriet Sachs
 and Divisional Court Judge, in Toronto, acted corruptly
at the hearing of the Appeal.
She made a decision, siding 
with the L&T Board member, Nancy Morris, that her decision
not to allow a crucial evidence (audio recording statements of a witness, 
stating unequivocally, that she had not given the landlord, Barney Rivers 
Investments Inc, any letter (which was also used as evidence, at the hearing, by
the landlord and its agent and also counsel, at the Board). The said evidence
(audio recordings) was already filed with the L&T Board, but the tenant (whom the 
Board member also did not consider as a tenant, for the purpose of the hearing)
was not allowed to play her evidence. When she had asked the L&T Board member
Nancy Morris, at the hearing of her T2 application, to have her evidence heard, at the hearing,
the member Nancy Morris, said emphatically, "NO!".She then later filed an appeal at the
Div. Ct. citing a lack of procedural fairness. The Divisional court judge, Harriet Sachs, took
 the position at the appeal hearing, (which she seemed to have presided over solely, even though it was to be a hearing before a panel of three judges, (None of whom made themselves present at the appeal hearing, except for the judge Harriet Sachs.). How unusual, for a panel of three judges, not to have 
commented at all, or interjected, at the hearing of the appeal?. Aside from their names given to
the Appellant, who had asked judge Sachs for the names of the judges, who would be hearing the
appeal, that was all that was heard of them. Complete silence on their part, and if you are like me and 
did not believed, that they could have actually been present at an appeal hearing and made any comments at all. My personal opinion, is that judge Harriet Sachs, was the only judge at the hearing of the appeal, because the appeal hearing itself, was a farce. It was not to be conducted like a regular appeal under the law, including a lack of procedural fairness on her part and also respecting the rights of the Appellant (Me) in this case.  


WHY BLOCKING MY EFFORTS WITH THE UN, TO INVESTIGATE HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSE AGAINST ME IN CANADA, WILL NOT WORK THIS TIME.


AND IT ALSO DID NOT HELP MY CASE, TODAY, THAT I HAD PREVIOUSLY, WRITTEN AN UN UNFAVORABLY, AGAINST THE SAME JUDGE, HARRIET SACHS, SOME YEARS AGO, CONCERNING ANOTHER LANDLORD AND TENANT MATTER, THAT SHE HAD ALSO HEARD AT THE DIV. COURT, AND ALSO ACTED IN THE SAME PREJUDICED MANNER AGAINST ME.


I WILL BE APPEALING THE JUDGE HARRIET SACHS AND THE DIVISIONAL COURT'S DECISION, AT THE COURT OF APPEAL. 







REENA BASSER, PARA LEGAL, ACTED OUTSIDE OF HER LEGAL JURISDICTION AND ACTED AS A LAWYER, AGAINST THE LAW SOCIETY'S JURISDICTION, BY ISSUING NOTICE TO TENANT, UNDER THE COMMERCIAL TENANCIES ACT.

 REENA BASSER, A PARA LEGAL, IS IMMORAL AND UNETHICAL. NOT ONLY DID SHE ADVISED HER CLIENT IN BREAKING THE LAW, NUMEROUS TIMES, CONCERNING H...