JUSTICE OF THE PEACE LYNN E. TIVEY, DID NOT ACT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND SHOULD NOT HAVE ISSUED PROCESS ON THE LESSER CHARGES, DESPITE A MEDICAL REPORT, PICTURES AND A VIDEO, OF THE ACCUSED ACTIONS. SHE DID NOT EVEN LOOK AT THE MEDICAL REPORT, SINCE SHE DID NOT INTEND TO ACT UPON IT.
WOULD YOU SAY, THAT THIS ONTARIO JUSTICE OF THE PEACE, LYNN TIVEY, HAS ACTED IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE?. BY IGNORING THE MEDICAL REPORT, PICTURES AND VIDEOS OF THE INJURIES, SUSTAINED BY THE VICTIM AND NOT ISSUING PROCESS AGAINST THE ACCUSED, FOR MORE SERIOUS CHARGES?.AND TO CONSPIRE WITH THE POLICE, I BELIEVE, TO ISSUE CHARGES OF A LESS SERIOUS NATURE, AGAINST THE SAME ACCUSED?.
AT THE PRE-ENQUETTE HEARING ON DECEMBER 16TH, WHERE THE INFORMANT (ME), HAD LAID TWO SETS OF CHARGES, FOR ASSAULT WITH A WEAPON, RELATING TO A NOVEMBER 17TH INCIDENT, OF AN ATTACK AGAINST HER, BY THE ACCUSED PAUL WRIGHT. THE JUSTICE OF THE PEACE, ACTED IN THE USUAL CAPACITY, TO PERVERT JUSTICE, IN THIS CASE. A REGULAR PRACTICE OF THAT COURT, AGAINST THE INFORMANT, IN THIS CASE.
HOW THIS JUSTICE OF THE PEACE, LYNN E. TIVEY, HAS ACTED CORRUPTLY.
DESPITE THE EVIDENCE AGAINST THE ACCUSED, PAUL WRIGHT, INCLUDING, A MEDICAL REPORT, PICTURES OF THE INJURY AND A VIDEO OF HIS ATTACKS AGAINST ME. THE JUSTICE OF THE PEACE, LYNN TIVEY, DID NOT ISSUE PROCESS, ON THE MORE SERIOUS CHARGES, OF ASSAULT WITH A WEAPON, THE ONE RESULTING FROM THE KNIFE ATTACK, AGAINST ME, WHERE I WAS CHOKED AND THE ASSAILANT ALSO ATTEMPTED TO STAB ME WITH THE KNIFE. THE JUSTICE OF THE PEACE, LYNN TIVEY, ONLY ISSUED THE SUMMONS, FOR THE LESS SERIOUS OFFENCE, RELATING TO HIM ATTACKING ME WITH A FRYING PAN. SHE ALSO IGNORED A WARRANT FOR HIS ARREST, SAYING THAT THE ACCUSED AND I SHOULD, LEARN TO LIVE TOGETHER. IGNORING THE FACT, THAT THE SAME ACCUSED, HAS MADE AN ATTEMPT TO KILL ME.
I BELIEVE THAT THE POLICE AND THE COURT, CONSPIRED TOGETHER, FOR THE LESSER CHARGE, RELATING TO SAME INCIDENT, TO PROCEED AGAINST THE ACCUSED. RATHER THAN THE SAME CHARGES, BUT FOR THE MORE SERIOUS OFFENCE, SINCE IT INVOLVED A KNIFE. THIS JP SHOULD EXPLAIN HOW THE VICTIM ENDED UP WITH INJURIES TO HER NECK, ARMS AND FACE AND WHY SHE WOULD ALSO IGNORED THIS FACT, IN HER DECISION TO NOT PROCEED AGAINST THE ACCUSED, IN REGARD TO THE KNIFE ATTACK AND FOR CHOKING THE VICTIM, DURING THAT ATTACK. THIS WOULD MAKE IT EASIER FOR THE COURT TO DISMISS THOSE CHARGES LATER, AS IS ALSO THE NORMAL PRACTICE OF THE COURT, WHERE I AM CONCERNED.
