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.
