science forum Guru Wannabe
Joined: 01 Jan 2006
|Posted: Thu Jun 22, 2006 2:03 pm Post subject:
John Turmel drinks his own piss.
"By the way, he thinks he's shaming me while I think
he's helping spread a message many people will
eventually thank me for. I couldn't ask for a better
plug to bring this natural miraculous healer to
everyone's attention, even if from a demented
lunatic. I'm so not ashamed that I even pee a mug
full and chug it in the DVD put out last year at
http://www.turmelmovie.com so it's not as if I'm not
happy to get the message out."
John "Piss Boy" Turmel
science forum Guru
Joined: 07 May 2005
|Posted: Thu Jun 22, 2006 6:26 am Post subject:
TURMEL: Crown's pulls "fait accomplit" shuffle on Parker
JCT: Yesterday Terry Parker got an email from Crown Attorney
Geoffrey Roy informing Terry that they were looking to stall
his motion for the return of his controlled substance:
|Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 22:32:12 -0400
From: email@example.com ("Terry Parker Jr.")
Subject: Fw: Application under s.24 of CDSA
----- Original Message -----
From: "Roy, Geoffrey" <GEROY@JUSTICE.GC.CA
Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 12:19 PM
Subject: Application under s.24 of CDSA
Mr. Parker, I attempted to fax a letter to 416.632.2334, but
was informed the number had been disconnected. I have
attached the letter below in S word format and I have pasted
the text of that letter in this email.
June 20, 2006
Mr. Terrence Parker
2209-55 Triller Av.
Toronto, Ont. M6R 2H6
GR: Dear :Sir
Re: Application For Return Of Controlled Substances
This letter is to inform you that on the next day, (21 June
2006), the Crown will ask that this matter be set down for a
hearing sometime in the fall.
JCT: And they hope Terry dies for want of medicine before
GR: This is to allow the Crown to file responding materials
JCT: They've only had a couple of months since they
concluded their thorough investigation denying Terry his
anti-seizure herb but haven't been able to put it together
GR: and to allow for cross-examination on affidavits in
front of a special examiner.
JCT: We've seen this dodge before. They say that something
completely simple needs more examination and then they later
call it off. But who can call them on it now before they
prove it was a move by not doing it? But they're stalled
before on the basis of needed examinations which they then
called off. Just another handy option to sleaze delay.
GR: Yours truly,
Geoffrey Roy Crown Counsel firstname.lastname@example.org
Federal Prosecution Service. Ontario Regional Office
Department of Justice Canada Government of Canada
tel.(416) 952-2095 fax. (416) 973-8253
When we got to the Brampton court, Terry's name wasn't on the
docket. It was as huge court-house with many courts and
Terry had been told we were to be in Room #309.
The clerk said Parker's motion wasn't on the docket.
Fortunately, Geoffrey Roy was there so they knew something
was going on. But where was the file? She asked Terry where
he filed it, he said downstairs, but she never found it.
Terry had to give the court his copy.
Finally, Judge J.E. Allen entered the court and Terry's case
was called first.
Roy said the Crown wanted a date set for a pre-trial. Though
the application seemed simple, experience showed it was
going to get complicated. The Crown wanted time to prepare
materials and examine Parker on his affidavit because this
will be going to appeal.
Judge Allen asked if this was "the Terry Parker" and when
Roy said it was, he asked "so what's your problem, he's an
exemptee." Ray said he doesn't have an exemption.
Terry interrupted and pointed out he had an constitutional
exemption granted by the Ontario Court of Appeal extended by
Superior Court Ontario Justice Pitt.
Roy responded that the Pitt protection had been set aside by
his equal, Superior Justice Sandra Chapnik (upon the
recommendation of Crown Lara Speirs and Terry's Amicus
Curiae Alan Young). Roy handed up her decision.
Then he handed in the Feldman decision which had refused
Terry a stay of Chapnik's decision setting aside his Pitt
protection pending his appeal to the Ontario Court of
Then Roy handed in the Supreme Court of Canada decision
which refused Terry's application for leave to appeal
against Feldman's refusal to stay Chapnik's ruling that set
aside Parker's Pitt protection and for a stay pending his
application for leave to appeal. No.
Finally, he handed up the Ontario Court of Appeal's ruling
which said they agreed with Justice Chapnik setting aside
the Pitt decision because Terry's motion had been improperly
Har har har har. What goes around comes around. I had
prepared Parker with only one rebuttal. The Court of Appeal
and Pitt Protection Orders are Criminal. The Unprotection
Order are Civil.
Har har har har.
The Chapnik decision is civil jurisdiction Order setting
aside the criminal jurisdiction Order of Justice Pitt as a
civil "default judgment." Pitt's criminal Order could not be
a default judgment because there are no default judgments in
criminal law. Har har har har. If you don't file a defence,
you are not convicted by default like in civil courts. THERE
ARE NO CRIMINAL DEFAULT JUDGMENTS. I just appealed all those
civil court Orders as a joke, toying with them to see if I
could get the Kangaroo Court Order set aside in the Kangaroo
Appeal Courts. I appealed the baseless Chapnik civil appeal
to toy with and misdirect them. Pay-back time.
The real problem for the government when Justice Pitt
extended Terry's Court of Appeal constitutional exemption
was his qualifier "until the government has complied with
the court's ruling." This is a correct conclusion that the
regulations had failed so far to safety Parker. And it was
now too late to comply within the 1 year deadline.
I reported on how Crown Lara Speirs and Alan Young tried to
talk Terry into trading his Pitt exemption in exchange for a
Ministerial Section 56 Exemption and how I nixed giving up
Pitt's "until the government has complied with the court's
ruling" for any piece of toilet paper from the Minister's
office without that conclusion. Pitt's conclusions helped us
all. Terry getting a section 56 worked only for Terry.
We know Krieger got the same deal, a personal exemption for
him so he didn't go for what was good for the whole and try
to claim his victory by setting aside the O'Leary stay on is
victory. To this day, Krieger has not moved to lift the
O'Leary stay so Max Cornelssen got busted due to Krieger
taking a personal win in exchange for his Canada-wide one.
Terry Parker had the choice that day to take the same
government deal as Krieger or to hold out for all of us. He
turned down the ministerial offer and kept Pitt's conclusion
alive for all of us.
So now Speirs and Young had to find some other way to get
rid of the Pitt conclusion that the government has not yet
complied with the court's ruling" while it's too late but
they didn't want to take the official route against the Pitt
conclusion to a 3-judge panel at the Court of Appeal and
overturn Pitt's Order but chose to try to set aside Pitt's
Criminal jurisdiction Order as a civil default judgment!!!
So at the Chapnik hearing upon the Crown's motion to set
aside the Pitt decision as a default judgment, the Crown
asked if Professor Alan Young could speak as a friend of the
Court in Terry's name. Justice Chapnik asked Terry if that
was okay, Terry had no reason to distrust his "friend" Alan
and said sure, Alan said he agreed with the Crown that the
Pitt decision was "not worth the paper it was printed on"
and should be set aside. The judge ruled, upon the agreement
of both sides, that the Pitt decision should be set aside as
a default judgment.
But then, Superior Court Judge Chapnik offered Terry a
constitutional exemption of her own, just like Pitt's,
except it wouldn't be "until the government has complied
with the court's ruling,' since the Crown were alleging the
MMAR had complied with the Parker Court's ruling.
I knew Pitt's criminal Order couldn't be set aside as a
default judgment since there are no default judgments in
criminal law and just because both sides asked that the Pitt
decision be treated as as a civil judgment, it didn't make
it so. So I told Terry to refuse to agree to his Pitt
conclusion (for all of us) being set aside. So Terry walked
out of there with a civil order stating his Criminal Order
had been set aside, me reassuring him that no one could set
Pitt's Order aside except at 3-judge criminal panel of the
Ontario Court of Appeal. Alan Young accuses me, after he
helped the Crown remove is Pitt protection, of costing Terry
is personal Chapnik protection. A sacrifice I'm proud to
think Terry chose to make. He didn't sell out for Alan
Young's bribe of Chapnik protection, as good as Pitt's, just
without the important conclusion.
You can always tell what important to your opponent but what
he aims at and resisting, even in kangaroo court, lets you
know what he wants. The whole purpose of the civil kangaroo
court was to get Parker to believe his real criminal court
Pitt decision had been removed. And the best way to let them
keep thinking we were resisting that way was to play along
and keep fighting the phantom civil order . So I did.
I appealed the Order from the civil kangaroo court to a
civil kangaroo court of appeal. And to a civil kangaroo
Supreme Court of Canada for his stay. I didn't get justice
in removing the phantom set-aside Order, all the while
knowing it didn't matter because the real Pitt Order could
not be a default judgment since it was criminal even if they
say it was set aside by one equivalent judge.
And finally, in the actual appeal of the Civil Chapnik Order
setting aside the Criminal Pitt Order, the court of appeal
dropped the "default" argument and ruled Chapnik was right
to set aside the Pitt decision because Terry's motion had
been improperly served.
Superior Court Justice Pitt had power to exempt service and
have an short notice and even ex parte hearing. He cannot
have been wrong in issuing his Superior Court Order because
there had been insufficient service. There couldn't have
been insufficient service because there no need for service
at all to a Superior Court judge with the power to dispense
with service as all Superior Courts have the power to do.
Har har har har. What a ludicrous error to hang their
decision on and it's all coming into play now.
Court of Appeal Justices Doherty, Goudge and Simmons not
only erred in their Hitzig resurrection, erred in not
needing to amend the Criminal Code with the Parker and
Krieger invalidations since judges will remember which
written laws actually are invalid, after having previously
failed to remember before having to stay 4000 bogus
indictments, the same three also erred in saying Pitt acted
wrongly by issuing an order upon improper service when Pitt
J. had the power to issue an Order upon no service at all!
Har har har har. And now the Crown has introduced all the
evidence of orders from the civil kangaroo courts while
Parker gets to laugh at how they all didn't remember that
that criminal Superior Court Orders can't be improperly
served nor set aside in civil courts.
Har har har har. Remember, I never even appealed this Court
of Appeal decision endorsing the phantom civil Chapnik
ruling. I only went to the top with the 1) Parker / Turmel &
3rd Guy / Hitzig resurrection decision because they were
important to the cause and 2) R.v. Turmel (no re-print
necessary, we'll remember what written laws don't count)
decision and . I didn't deem it worth applying for leave to
appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada a civil kangaroo court
of appeal ruling endorsing a civil kangaroo court order
setting aside a criminal court Order for the mere amusement
value and dropped it at that point.
Now, whether the bogus civil proceedings really did strip
Parker of his criminal court protection is the crux. That's
what's so neat about this case. The Crown must try to trump
Parker's real criminal Court Pitt Order with bogus civil
court proceedings that the Pitt decision was wrongly
You don't call a Superior Court Judge's criminal decision
wrongly settled and set it aside like a civil default
judgment, you may only appeal a Superior Court judge's
decision to 3-higher judges. It's insulting for them to
argue Pitt erred without having gone into it.
And now that their dirty deed gets it's airing, let's see
how the Crown tries to explain the relation of their bogus
civil proceedings to Parker's actual criminal Order. Now
they're on the hook to put it all down on paper, how these
civil judgments setting aside a criminal Order as a civil
default judgment may be done for the first time in Canadian
history. Why? Back to Crown Greg Smith's argument to Judge
Edward: "They wouldn't have done it it if they couldn't have
done it so they can." Judge Edward proceeded with the
prosecution upon that to substantiate that the Court had
taken the law into its own hands when Parliament had left
the law invalid for two years to bring it back to life.
But Terry just repeated to the Judge Allen that Pitt was
criminal while Chapnik was civil and had no power to set
aside the Pitt decision. Judge Allen said he thought it was
possible but I'd bet he misunderstood the situation. Sure,
Superior Court judges can wear either hat, civil or
criminal, but they can't use their civil powers in criminal
matters or vice versa. Sure, one civil judge can set aside a
civil "default Order" that no judge had spent any time
thinking about but it takes three judges to set aside a
"criminal Order" that a judge has spend some time thinking
about. There are no judgments issued by default in criminal
law so Criminal Orders can't be set aside as civil default
Their trying their scam to trick Parker into switching to a
Chapnik exemption without the Pitt exemption's conclusion in
the wrong court is one reason I laugh at Alan "Wrong-Way"
Young. He lost his Wakeford case against Health Canada in
provincial court when I've known for years only Federal
Court has jurisdiction over federal Health Canada. Helping
the Crown strip Parker of his Pitt criminal court protection
in civil court seems just another in a long line of backward
planning by the Crown Court Clutz or Professeur Saboteur
Alan "stab-Parker-in-the-back" Young.
Then Geoffrey Roy pulled the Crown's "fait accomplit"
shuffle on Parker. He said he wasn't even the Crown who had
been given carriage of the case, Chris Leafloor wouldn't be
available until July. No materials had been filed in
response. So, without the proper Crown, without any Crown
materials, the judge may as well grant the request for
adjournment the Crown had, by fait accomplit, demanded the
Chris Leafloor is one of the Crown's who argued police could
keep busting Canadians during 2001, 2002, and 2003 because
the MMAR had worked to save the prohibition from the Parker
invalidation. Eventually, the Court of Appeal proved him
wrong and admitted that the law had been dead for the
previous two years so Chris, nice guy, is responsible for
tens of thousands of those bogus convictions that happened
while Turmel was screaming the law had been invalidated and
he was telling the cops doing the busting to keep on busting
because Turmel was wrong. Either I was wrong and he helped
justice prevail or I was right and he wronged tens of
thousands of Canadians. Once the Court of Appeal ruled that
Chris was wrong, he became responsible for all those bogus
convictions while he was wrong to resist the truth. A sad
fate, much like a Hiroshima bomber would feel except Chris
victims were the epileptics who wouldn't have died if he
hadn't misled them into believing their anti-seizure
medicine was still illegal and the thousands of families
devastated by criminal prosecutions initiated at his
instigation. Poor Leafloor with blood on his hands. Even a
nice executioner is an executioner. And posterity will
forever know of is prostitution to the prohibitionist cause.
Of course, that's what lawyers are trained to do, with no
regard to the corpses that result from their efforts.
Though Terry insisted that if they could not charge him with
possession, they could not seize his medicine. I'd laughed
that they had completed their investigation enough to deny
him his medicine but now they needed more time to do more
investigation? They cut off his supply without full
deliberation? Why should he go without while they try to
prove the "the Terry Parker" is not exempted. "Charge me or
give me my marijuana." Besides, they know where the pot's
going to be whenever they do decide Pitt no longer protects
The final joke is if they're right, it also proves their
exemption system doesn't work for Terry Parker and has not
complied with the Parker court's ruling! And the law is
still as unconstitutional now as it was when Parker won in
But Judge Allen had no choice but to obey the Crown's motion
for an adjournment and sent Terry and Roy off to the Trial
Coordinator to pick a future date. Back against Leafloor for
a two-hour pre-trial on July 17 2006 at 10am.
It should be quite the show. And they will have had their
chance to examine Terry on his affidavit. Any bets they
What high adventure. And you won't hear about it on the Big
Media. I sent out faxes to 90 local media. You'll only hear
it on the TURMEL news network. I enjoyed the show and
reporting on the show knowing it's pay-back time as we get
to fight it out with the civil kangaroo proceedings. I've
waited a long time to argue what I think of the Court of
Appeal's civil Order endorsing Chapnik's civil Order setting
aside Pitt's criminal Order.
Har har har har. I'll always love saying that one. First
time since it was handed down in 2003, over 2 years ago.
The time now is Mon Dec 18, 2017 10:15 pm | All times are GMT
Copyright © 2004-2005 DeniX Solutions SRL
Other DeniX Solutions sites:
Electronics forum |
Medicine forum |
Unix/Linux blog |
Unix/Linux documentation |
Unix/Linux forums |
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group