Warning! Nova Scotia and Canada is not safe for Families!

Canada’s Judicial system is unsafe for Families.

The legal system totally discriminates against one parent and rewards the other parent.

The judges are not happy until they have completely destroyed the non custodial family and the children.

Canada’s legal system has violated the following  against our family.

Criminal Code Violations

Allowed and endorsed:

Canadian Criminal Codes

1. 22.(1)  Person counseling offence
2. 126.(1) Disobeying a Statue.-
3. 127.(1) (a) Disobeying a court order. – Paulette Harris
4. 131.(1) Perjury-Paulette Harris
5. 137  Fabricating evidence. –Paulette Harris
6. 138 (b)  offences relating to affidavits. -Paulette Harris
7. 139.(1) (a) Obstructing justice. -Paulette Harris
8. 140.(1)c Public Mischief- Paulette Harris
9. 265.1(a)  Assault- Paulette Harris
10. 269.1 Torture -Every official or every person acting at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of an official, who inflicts torture on any other person is guilty of an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 14 years  Torture means any
11. act or omission by which severe pain or suffering whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person.
12. (iii) Intimidating or coercing the person or a third person and
13. For any reason based on discrimination of any kind.
14. 298.(1) Defamatory Libel- Paulette Harris
15. 302.(1) Extortion by Libel -Paulette Harris
    
16. 322. (1)(a) Theft-  Paulette Harris
    
17. 346.(1) Extortion-  Paulette Harris
18. 380.1(a) Fraud- Paulette Harris
19. 426. (1) Secret Commissions – Hidden agenda
20. 463 (b) Accessories to a crime
21. 465.(1)(c)Conspiracy- Paulette Harris
22. Divorce ACT- Right to vary 17.(1)
23. (4) Where either or both former spouses to whom a child support order relates do not agree with the amount of the order as recalculated pursuant to this section, either former spouse may, within thirty days after both former spouses are notified of the recalculation in the manner provided for in the agreement authorizing the recalculation, apply to a court of competent jurisdiction for an order under subsection 17(1).
25. Violation of  GUARANTEED  Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
    1. Sections, 7, 8, 12, 15.1, 24.1, 28, 31,32 & 52
26. Violation United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights
    1. Articles: 1,2,3,4,5,7,8,12, 16.1, 17.1,17.2,25,26.3,28,29,30
27. Violation of all Parental Rights- Paulette Harris
28. Parental Alienation and loss of affection- Paulette Harris

These crimes were committed by Paulette Harris against Victor Harris, the Dad, over a long period of time and still continuing today.

These crimes were fully endorsed and ordered by court order by the judges. Numerous judges have continued fraudulent child support and extortion, torture and discrimination for no legal reason.

These crimes are still continuing relentlessly.

Connie Brauer

Wife of Victor Harris,

assault victim and victim of judicial abuse.

How long since Canadian Parents Denied Their Parental Rights?

GUARANTEED Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms was signed into law on April 17, 1982.

Male and Female rights were guaranteed by Sect. 15.1 Equality Rights and Sect 28 of the Charter.

Equality before and under law and equal protection and benefit of law

15. (1) Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.

Section 28. Notwithstanding anything in this Charter, the rights and freedoms referred to in it are guaranteed equally to male and female persons.

However, since that time no family has been safe from torture by the Canadian Government and the Divine Right of Judges.

Judges have unlimited power to torture parents and families and ultimately destroy them.

This clock shows how many days of Slavery in Canada for all families.

http://i251.photobucket.com/albums/gg294/wafpaf/countup/swf/canadaday1big.swf?then_year=1982&then_month=3&then_day=17&eventt=Parents+With+No+Rights
Countup Clocks, Canada Day Countups at

WishAFriend.com

We want our children for Christmas. Where are they? Are they Dead or alive?

Media Release.

Immediate

Merry Christmas William Harris, Emily and Philip  Watch this video.

Is he Dead or Alive??

Connie Brauer and Victor Harris of Falmouth, NS want to find their children for Christmas. Victor Harris has been

deprived of all information of his own children’s (who are adults now) whereabouts for most of their lives

and especially since 2005. The court orders and the Divorce Act allow for maximum contact but it is systematically ignored.

Divorce Act.

Maximum contact

16.(10) In making an order under this section, the court shall give effect to the principle that a child of
the marriage should have as much contact with each spouse as is consistent with the best interests
of the child and, for that purpose, shall take into consideration the willingness of the person for whom
custody is sought to facilitate such contact.

On Dec. 10, 2005, his youngest son William Harris, reached the age of majority and the exorbitant

child support should have stopped.

The judges, however, jumped into high gear and ordered the Dad and Mother to pay for William’s own

private apartment while he had a part time job. This lasted for a short while and then he went missing.

We have not seen or heard anything from him since 2005.

The police won’t look for him. The judges won’t question the mother, Paulette Raymond and she will

not answer any questions about them. Multiple Interrogatories, a legal document, have been ignored.

Mr. Harris paid child support for a missing adult man for 6 years. All money went to Paulette Raymond.

Not the son.

In 2007, Mr. Harris applied for termination of child support, again! Chief Justice Joseph Kennedy ordered the Dad to

pay $10K surety within 30 days, before he or anyone else

would hear the case. That means pay child support for the rest of our lives, until we die. We are retired seniours living

on a fixed income. We don’t have $10K. This amount is three or four times more than a charged murderer needs to pay

to be released on bail. This is extortion!

Paulette Raymond finally stopped it on her own, after we filed an Appeal in Supreme Court of Canada in 2011.

No judge and no court terminated

child support for a missing adult man, despite numerous applications and Appeals.

MP’s get a grip! This wicked witch hunt for paying parents must stop! Do your job. Sound the alarms.

Get off your ass and do something.

This carnage must stop. It is highly illegal, abusive, discriminatory and totally unconstitutional.

This issue needs to rock the House of Commons! If you don’t, we will!

Divorce and tax rules still maintain an uneasy balance | The Chronicle Herald

Divorce and tax rules still maintain an uneasy balance | The Chronicle Herald.

Divorce and tax rules still maintain an uneasy balance

December 16, 2011 – 6:17pm By ROGER HAINEAULT | FISCAL ENDEAVOURS

Sometimes the tax rules lag behind the reality of the situation. Once again, a glaring example of this was imparted to one of our clients this past week.

You might have heard that sometimes marriage leads to divorce. And often there are children involved. Back in the day, the most common situation when there was family breakdown, involved dad leaving the household while mom stayed in the matrimonial home caring for the kiddies. And he usually made some payment that represented a combination of alimony and child support.

The most basic principle of tax policy is that of balance. If one party is taking a tax deduction for some payment, the other party must be including that same payment into their tax calculation. Seems logical, right?

Someone drives for a living and deducts the cost of the gasoline he or she puts in their tank while the oil company includes that payment for that same gasoline in its sales revenues as taxable income.

Anyway, back to our stereotyped example. Dad would pay mom some agreed-upon amount every month and at the end of the year he took a tax deduction for it while she had to include it on her tax return.

The caveat was that the dad could not make any dependant claim for a child in which he was providing support for — in effect negating the opportunity to take a double deduction.

Then in 1995 the Supreme Court held in Thibaudeau v. Canada that including support as taxable income was not a violation of equality rights. The notion of the case was that Suzanne Thibaudeau found it unfair that her higher-income ex-spouse was entitled to deduct his payment to her (and incidentally enjoy a larger tax savings because of a greater marginal tax rate) while she had to support herself and the children at a lower income point and not even enjoy the full payment benefits since it was taxable and resulted in less net dollars to spend caring for the household.

In 1996, the federal government brought in a budget with a number of changes in this area that ultimately resulted in the system we enjoy today. Now support payments are neither deductible nor taxable.

But there is an unfair element.

Today, shared custody is the gold standard. Often we see the separated parents running households in the same neighbourhood with the children shuttling back and forth on a weekly basis, to minimize disruption to their lives. The Child Support Guidelines provide the parties with a mechanism to determine the support payment.

Take, for instance, Bill and Mary. Bill earns more than Mary and the guideline states that Bill should pay Mary $900 and Mary should pay Bill $700 a month. Their two children are in a shared custody arrangement where they live 50 per cent of the time in each household.

If one takes a moment to think about it, the cost of upbringing these children over the course of the year is for the most part split — half the food is consumed in each home and so on. The guideline dictates that Bill pay to Mary $200 a month — the differential.

Mary claims one of the children for the Amount for Eligible Dependant — a significant tax credit. The other child should be eligible to be claimed using the same rule by Bill, since effectively this is the most equitable position, and it’s not the same child being claimed twice.

But the rules do not allow for any personal dependant credits to be claimed for a child in which you make a support payment. Made sense when you were taking a tax deduction for that payment, but not today.

So Bill incurs an additional tax bill of almost $2,400, which realistically means a couple of hundred bucks a month less for the kiddies.

Roger Haineault is with Tax Filers here in HRM. His column appears Saturday.

(rhaineault@herald.ca)

About the Author

By ROGER HAINEAULT | FISCAL ENDEAVOURS

Comments from Connie Brauer…

1. Family Tax Benefits go to the custodial parent even though both parents are paying support.
2. Child support is taxable to the payor and deductible to the non payor.
3. Special Education allowances can be claimed by the custodial parent and not the non custodial parent even though he pays for the private school.
4. Child support is calculated as if the payor wasn’t paying anything and had nothing to due with the children.
5. Even though both parents are paying child support  the receiving parent does not claim  it as income.
6. This is a double whammy for the payor. He pays the tax.
7. Majority of custodial parents in Canada are women.
8. Sole custody is the norm in Canada. Judges award it automatically.
9. Lawyers fail to support their clients.

This is unfair, unequal and unconstitutional.

See Charter of Rights.

Sect. 15.1 and Sect. 28

Equality Rights

Equality before and under law and equal protection and benefit of law

15. (1) Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.

 

28. Notwithstanding anything in this Charter, the rights and  freedoms referred to in it are guaranteed equally to male and female persons.

Domestic violence double standard : Prime time : SunNews Video Gallery

Domestic violence double standard : Prime time : SunNews Video Gallery.

 

http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/video/domestic-violence-double-standard/1311198135001

KarmaTube: Amazing Grace, by Wintley Phipps

KarmaTube: Amazing Grace, by Wintley Phipps.

Video from KarmaTube

Dr. Phil.com – Shows – Anger Intervention -Violenceagainst men

Dr. Phil.com – Shows – Anger Intervention.

 

 

http://r.unicornmedia.com/content.aspx?uid=AC26FE85-334B-4A21-B72C-154F743F5739&at=b5e7a882-5843-4a1c-826f-6cfe313896fa

Another Judge Obstructing Justice? on www.fulldisclosure.net – YouTube

Another Judge Obstructing Justice? on www.fulldisclosure.net – YouTube.

 

Name(required)

Email(required)

Website

Comment(required)

No Justice in Canada!

24/11/2011

Dear Editor,

I have to take great exception to Derrick Kimball’s comments on Nov.24/11,

“We enjoy a legal system that is second to none. It is called the common law.”

http://thechronicleherald.ca/opinion/36148-insurance-changes-benefit-accident-victims-not-lawyers

He is of course a lawyer and specifically a personal injury lawyer. He is perpetuating the lie that Canada’s legal system is excellent when nothing could be further from the truth.

My husband and I have been systematically abused, tortured, discriminated against and kept in slavery by prejudiced judges who have conspired to deprive us of all civil, constitutional, parental and human rights. We are parents. He was ordered to pay child support for a missing adult man who has been missing for six years. Not one judge would terminate child support. Not one judge would ask her the question, “Where is he?” Not one judge would ensure access to our son, which is our legal right. This, after years and years of paying exorbitant child support for the children.

We had to go to the Supreme Court of Canada, after endless applications in Nova Scotia Supreme Court, to terminate child support for a missing adult. The Supreme Court of Canada did not terminate child support either. She did. After she enjoyed increased fraudulent income for herself for six years and only after we requested she be charged with fraud, extortion, theft and conspiracy. These are criminal code crimes. When is a crime not a crime? When a judge commits fraud, theft, extortion and conspiracy etc.

She too was ordered to pay child support to subsidize the son’s personal apartment however she was able to terminate ours and her own child support without a court appearance and without any explanation at all.

We on the other hand were denied over and over again. One prominent judge went to the extreme malfeasance of committing extortion, which is a crime. He ordered my husband to pay $10,000 before he could come to court and apply for termination of child support for a missing adult man, during the first few minutes of a scheduled hearing to terminate child support for a missing adult man.
We are not rich. We are seniours living on a fixed income. We don’t have $10,000 to donate to the Dept of Justice nor should we. We have committed no crime.

None of this makes any sense.  This is totally illegal and unconstitutional and our rights are being systematically violated. The family has been fractured, irreparably thanks to the judges and the other parent.

How to resolve this? There is no way. There are no Constitutional lawyers in Canada who are willing to uphold the GUARANTEED Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms for individuals. I have called all the major law firms. They do not do Charter Rights.

There are no courts in Canada who are willing to hear a constitutional complaint. We have applied to them all.

So how does this make Canada’s legal system second to none? Be warned folks! Canada’s legal system doesn’t care a damn about our rights or yours. We don’t have any! Show me the lawyer in all of Canada and the court that upholds the GUARANTEED Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. I would like to see it.

Sincerely,

Connie Brauer

http://www.stopthetorture.info

Civil rights advocate for equal shared parenting restitution and reform.

Live Free,

Connie Brauer
1061 Mines Rd.
RR 2
Falmouth, NS
B0P 1L0 Canada
Home: 902.798.5267
New Email: cbrauer@eastlink.ca

>>>>Sign Canadian Petition (Canadians only, please)
to save our families.

http://www.gopetition.com/petition/43582.html

Have you paid child support for an adult? How long? How many?

 

Richard I Fine Torture Complaint Filed With United Nations – YouTube

Richard I Fine Torture Complaint Filed With United Nations – YouTube.

Why are the Fathers not honoured on Remembrance Day?

Thank you for your submission..

Thank you for your submission.

Below is what you submitted to info@legion.ca on Thursday, November 10, 2011 at 13:02:29

---

Topic: Where is the respect for the Fathers?

Name: Connie Brauer

Address: 1061 Mines Rd. RR2

City: Falmouth

Province: NS

Postal: B0P 1L0

Phone: 902.798.5267

Question or Comment:

Dear Legion,

Tomorrow is Remembrance Day. I may not go. I was dismayed at the response to a fellow activist for father’s rights, that was given to him regarding the wreath laid from the Mother’s of Canada. Where is the wreath From the Fathers of Canada?

Did they not lose their sons too? When will discrimination against men stop? You are discriminating against the very men who fought in the wars!

He wrote: For the last 14 years, I have been laying a wreath from “Fathers of Canada” on Remembrance Day at the National War Memorial, and asking the government and Legion to change the ceremony to recognize that soldiers have two parents. In the national ceremony, the Governor General lays a wreath from the people of Canada, then the “Mothers of Canada” wreath, then a wreath recognizing veterans. Our fathers’ wreath is kept back in the 8th wave, at the very end. Readers are right that the Memorial Cross and the “Silver Cross Mother” recognition are separate questions. In response to my letters, the Legion wrote that they would only consider including a father in the official party if there were no more mothers. In another letter, the Legion said that including mothers and excluding fathers was “sacrosanct”. It is unfortunate that this important day has become so politicized. The proper order should be people of Canada, veterans wreath and then “parents of Canada” or a wreath from a mother and a father. It does no honour to veterans, Canada, mothers or the Legion to exclude fathers.

Connie…

I looked up sacrosanct. Here’s what it said: Sacrosanctity was a right of tribunes in Ancient Rome not to be harmed physically. Plebeians took an oath to regard anyone who laid hands on a tribune as an outlaw liable to be killed without penalty. The term comes from the phrase sacer esto (“let him be accursed”) and reflects that violation of a tribune’s sacrosanctity was not only a secular offense, but a religious offense as well.[1]

Pretty barbaric, wouldn’t you say? Please look into this matter immediately and honour our fathers too, immediately!

Connie Brauer

Victim of judicial abuse against fathers and families by the courts.

---

• Back to Legion.ca

---

 

Texas judge and his wife beats his daughter into submission for using Internet

WARNING! EXTREME VIOLENCE!

Judge William Adams beats his daughter into submission for using the Internet. Mom comes in and tortures her too.
Still not enough! They kick her out of her room to sleep on the couch!
This is the most horrible example of child abuse, I have ever seen.
Dr. Phil, please get this poor girl on the show, she needs a new home. This is the kind of scrum bags sitting on the benches!
Connie Brauer
Victim of judicial abuse
http://www.stopthetorture.info

“I’m going to beat you into submission.”

by Glen Canning on November 2, 2011

I don’t even know what to say about this because the words I’d need to express myself are hard to find. I just watched a video recorded in 2004 in Aransas County, Texas by a teenage girl. It is disgusting. It allegedly shows Court-At-Law Judge named William Adams beating his teenage daughter with a belt for accessing the Internet. He repeatedly screams profanity as he hits away despite her pleas for him to stop. At one point he asks, “Are you going to put more computer games on?” Seriously? He beats and terrorises his daughter for that? This is a crime. The man in this video is not doing this out of love or a sense of duty as a parent. He’s a thug.

And of this morning that thug is being investigated by the Rockport, Texas Police Department. The investigation started last night, right after the video was brought to the department’s attention, Police Chief Tim Jayroe told the International Business Times.

The video on YouTube was posted by user shoehedgie on October 27, 2011. It has almost 500,000 views as of today, November 2nd, and that number will undoubtably increase in the next few days.

The text posted along with the video reads:

2004: Aransas County Court-At-Law Judge William Adams took a belt to his own teenage daughter as punishment for using the internet to acquire music and games that were unavailable for legal purchase at the time. She has had ataxic cerebral palsy from birth that led her to a passion for technology, which was strictly forbidden by her father’s backwards views. The judge’s wife was emotionally abused herself and was severely manipulated into assisting the beating and should not be blamed for any content in this video. The judge’s wife has since left the marriage due to the abuse, which continues to this day, and has sincerely apologized and repented for her part and for allowing such a thing, long before this video was even revealed to exist. Judge William Adams is not fit to be anywhere near the law system if he can’t even exercise fit judgement as a parent himself. Do not allow this man to ever be re-elected again. His “judgement” is a giant farce. Signed, Hillary Adams, his daughter.

The Aranas County web site shows the following News Release:

This is the video. PLEASE BE WARNED IT IS NOT FOR THE SQUEAMISH:

I think both the mother and the father should be charged, jailed, fired and the children put in a loving home. Sorry Hillary, your mom doesn’t get a free ride! She was equally as violent to you and she sure didn’t sound abused!

Connie Brauer

New Crime Bill does nothing for victims if police won’t arrest perpetrators

Dear Editor,

The new crime bill seeks to punish criminals, however, if the police don’t charge perpetrators with a crime how does this help the victims?

I was assaulted in ’07 by Paulette Raymond in Halifax. I called police and they wouldn’t arrest her citing it was a civil matter. Since when is assault a civil matter?

The HRP suggested I prosecute her myself in court. I did.

Despite eyewitness testimony, pictures of the injury and the her lawyer admitting the assault, she was acquitted. Why? She should have received a 5 year prison sentence.

What’s going on behind the scenes?

She was obviously guilty of a vicious assault. Did they not have room at the jail?

Is the over crowding allowing guilty people of vicious crimes to be acquitted? What’s going on? Where is the justice for victims?

Connie Brauer

Victim of vicious assault

Fathers’ Rights Activist on Canadian Televison

Kris Titus on the Michael Coren Show.

Couple Files Canadian Judicial Corruption and Cover-up Complaint Filed at the United Nations

Media Release, for immediate release

Connie Brauer and Victor Harris

1061 Mines Rd.

RR2

Falmouth, NS B0P 1L0

Canada

Phone and Fax:  902.798.5267

Email: cbrauer@eastlink.ca

http://www.stopthetorture.info

 

Thursday, October 06, 2011

Couple Files Canadian Judicial Corruption

and Cover-up Complaint Filed at the United Nations

 

Connie Brauer and Victor Harris, Falmouth, NS Canada, have filed a complaint of multiple, unending crimes, torture and abuse, judicial corruption and cover-up in Canada’s courts with the United Nations.

On Oct. 3, 2011 nearly a year after filing a Leave to Appeal in the Supreme Court of Canada, Victor Harris received the decision of the court as dismissed.

Mr. Harris had been paying child support to Paulette (Harris) Raymond, by order of the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia, for six years for a missing adult son. Since 2005, when William Harris, the son, reached the age of majority, he has had no contact and no information regarding his son.

Mr. Harris does not know if William Harris is dead or alive. All three of his adult children’s whereabouts are unknown.

Despite repeated efforts, court applications and appeals, the courts refused to terminate child support for a missing adult man. All judges knew that the man was missing. After six years of collecting fraudulent child support, Paulette Raymond terminated her child support payable and Mr. Harris’s child support without any proof of change of circumstances, disclosure or application to the court.

During that time, Paulette Raymond, a Halifax school teacher, committed assault against Connie Brauer. She continued to commit fraud, theft, extortion, parental alienation and withheld all evidence and access to the missing man, from Victor Harris, the father.

The judges relied on fraudulent documents, fraudulent procedures, secret documents and false allegations to unlawfully continue child support for the personal enrichment of Paulette Raymond.

No child support was ever paid to William Harris, by Paulette Raymond as stipulated in the court orders. There is no child. He is a man.

In 2007, Chief Justice Joseph Kennedy ordered Mr. Harris to pay $10,000 in surety costs to the courts before he or anyone else would hear the case to terminated child support for a missing adult man.

This is extortion and it ensured that Mr. Harris would be forced to pay child support for the rest of his life to Ms. Raymond for a missing adult man.

Mr. Harris is a retired teacher, living on a fixed pension income. He has taught thousands of high school children for thirty three years. He was an extraordinary teacher.

He has been denied all parental rights and freedoms, contrary to the court orders and the law allowing for maximum contact.  Mr. Harris and Ms. Brauer have had to file 23 court applications with the court to terminate child support for a missing adult man. That doesn’t take into consideration all the previous applications to vary child support for the other two adults.

Not one judge terminated the fraudulent child support.

The Nova Scotia Supreme Court  judges committed fraud, extortion, theft, abuse, torture, parental alienation, slavery, discrimination, cover up of corruption, hate crime, elder abuse and an unconstitutional violation of Mr. Harris’s GUARANTEED Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Brauer and Harris are determined activists for their parental rights and the rights of all parents in Canada who have been abused and tortured by the discriminatory family law system.

We will not stop until we get compensation, restitution, reform and all perpetrators are prosecuted.

More info at http://www.stopthetorture.info

 

 

 

Connie Brauer and Victor Harris

Disrobe the judge! Justice Joanne Veit! Allowed Baby Killer to go free!

Katrina Effert, Alberta child killer

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dear Canadian Judicial Counsel, Prime Minister and Federal Justice Minister of Canada,

Please accept this as my strong complaint against an Alberta judge, Justice Joanne Veit,who condoned child murder and set a murderer free with a suspended sentence.

In this case the defense counsel is even asking for no jail time for tossing the  dead baby over the fence.

This judge also overturned a jury’s conviction of murder against Katrina Effert. Is this legal?

Is this because she is female? Is there prejudice here?

This is an outrageous  act of criminal negligence by the incompetent and ridiculous judiciary in Canada.

Have you ever heard of Casey Anthony? She was charged with murder in the first degree, which

carries the death penalty in Florida for killing her child. The jury came back with a not guilty verdict.

She is now the most hated person in America. The people want justice. The court had no alternative

but to let her go free. The jury’s verdict stands.

We want justice too! This woman Katrina Effert, killed her baby and she deserves a guilty conviction

with all the penalties that goes with it.

Giving birth is not a reason to kill a baby. It’s no excuse.

Shame on this country! We want a retrial and we want justice now.

Speeding tickets and weed will get one more jail time than child murder!

Convict this judge!

Connie Brauer

Infanticide conviction nets Alberta woman suspended sentence – Edmonton – CBC News

Infanticide conviction nets Alberta woman suspended sentence – Edmonton – CBC News.

CBC News

Posted: Sep 9, 2011 2:23 PM MT

Last Updated: Sep 9, 2011 8:48 PM MT

Read 140 comments140 Accessibility Links

Katrina Effert is led out of the Edmonton Law Courts Friday by her father. (CBC)

Related Story Content

Related Links

Alberta woman weeps at infanticide sentencing

Murder conviction overturned in baby killing

Accessibility Links

Beginning of Story Content

The Wetaskiwin, Alta., woman convicted of infanticide for killing her newborn son, was given a three-year suspended sentence Friday by an Edmonton Court of Queen’s Bench judge.

Katrina Effert was 19 on April 13, 2005, when she secretly gave birth in her parents’ home, strangled the baby boy with her underwear and threw the body over a fence into a neighbour’s yard.

She silently wept as Justice Joanne Veit outlined the reasons for the suspended sentence. Effert will have to abide by conditions for the next three years but she won’t spend time behind bars for strangling her newborn son.

In her judgment, the judge rejected arguments from the Crown that the single father and the grandparent also face “the same stresses of the mind” as a mother who kills her own baby.

The fact that Canada has no abortion laws reflects that “while many Canadians undoubtedly view abortion as a less than ideal solution to unprotected sex and unwanted pregnancy, they generally understand, accept and sympathize with the onerous demands pregnancy and childrbirth exact from mothers, especially mothers without support,” she writes.

The judge noted that infanticide laws and sentencing guidelines were not altered when the government made many changes to the Criminal Code in 2005, which she says shows that Canadians view the law as a “fair compromise of all the interests involved.”

“Naturally, Canadians are grieved by an infant’s death, especially at the hands of the infant’s mother, but Canadians also grieve for the mother.”

Appeal court overturned jury’s decision

Next week, the court will hear arguments on a remaining issue from Effert’s long legal battle: the 16 days of jail time she still must serve for throwing her baby’s body over the fence.

Her lawyer, Peter Royal, asked the court to do away with the penalty or allow her to serve the time on weekends. It was “unjust” and “almost mean to incarcerate her” at this point, he argued.

Effert was allowed to walk out of court, but she covered her head with a jacket to avoid cameras and quickly ducked into a waiting vehicle.

Two years ago, for the second time, a jury found Effert guilty of second-degree murder, but last May the province’s highest court decided the jury made a mistake.

In a rare move, the Alberta Court of Appeal overturned the conviction, replacing it with the lesser one of infanticide.

The appeal court said Effert should have been given the benefit of the doubt based on psychiatric evidence.

Make judges accountable for their corruption in Canada

Lawless America

http://www.lawlessamerica.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=212:ideas-for-state-legislation-to-deal-with-judicial-and-government-dishonesty-and-corruption&catid=104:initiatives&Itemid=105

 

We’ve Gotta Fix This!

• Home

Ideas for State Legislation to deal with Judicial and Government Dishonesty and Corruption

Thursday, 07 April 2011 00:00

William M. Windsor

• 
• 
• 

America, we have a lot of problems.

Our best hope of fixing some of our problems now is at the state level.  So, GRIP (Government Reform & Integrity Platform) and other organizations are drafting proposed state legislation to deal with dishonesty and corruption with judges and other government officials.

Please review the points that have been submitted thus far, and add your comments to the article below….

 

The Problem: Dishonesty and Corruption in Government.

A Solution: State Legislation

GRIP and other organizations are combining forces to draft proposed state legislation that will enable We the People to fix many of the problems with the judicial system and dishinest and/or corrupt government officials.

1. Corruption must be minimized in government. [The government has not been able to effectively deal with corruption in government.  We must put the power to deal with corruption into the hands of the people.  The provisions of this law are designed to do just that.]
2. Each elected official and every government employee in the state, including all federal elected officials and federal employees operating in the state, shall be required to sign a Contract with the Citizens of the State and the United States.  This Contract requires those signing to be honest at all times while performing their duties and to protect our fundamental rights afforded by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.  Violation of the Contract will be presented to a Special Grand Jury.  [This makes our government officials ACCOUNTABLE to the people; they are essentially accountable to no one at this time.]
3. Each county shall have grand juries, and citizens will be able to directly present charges of government misconduct and corruption to a Special Grand Jury.  [Article of Amendment V of the Bill of Rights gives grand juries the power to deal with judicial and government wrongdoing through the power of Presentment.  Not all states have county grand juries, but they are needed in every state in every county.  Where grand juries do exist, government officials may block a citizen's access to the grand jury, and this will be fixed through this clause.]  A complaint for criminal conduct of a judge may be brought directly to the Special Grand Jury upon all the following prerequisites: (1) an affidavit of criminal conduct has been lodged with the appropriate prosecutorial entity within ninety (90) days of the commission of the alleged conduct; (2) the prosecutor declines to prosecute, or one hundred twenty (120) days has passed following the lodging of such affidavit and prosecution has not commenced; (3) an indictment, if sought, has not been specifically declined on the merits by a county Grand Jury; and (4) the criminal statute of limitations has not run.  Investigative grand juries may compel evidence and subpoena witnesses; may compel production of documents filed under seal; may inspect records, documents, correspondence, and books of any department, agency, board, bureau, commission, institution, or authority of the state or any of its political subdivisions; and may require the production of records, documents, correspondence, and books of any person, firm, or corporation which relate directly or indirectly to the subject of the investigation being conducted by the investigative grand jury. Each Special Grand Jury shall have exclusive power to retain non-governmental advisors, special prosecutors, and investigators, as needed, who shall serve no longer than one year, after which term said officers shall be ineligible. Notwithstanding the one year, a special prosecutor may be retained to prosecute current cases in which they are involved through all appeals and any complaints for judicial misconduct.  [This provides terms for the impmentation of this clause.]
4. Special Grand Juries shall be responsible to ensure that government officials are honest above all else.   The Special Grand Jury shall require active investigation of politicians for corrupt behavior. [This is essential if we are to minimize corruption.  The power must be in the hands of the citizens.]
5.  All judicial misconduct complaints will be handled by a Special Grand Jury.   The judicial system will cease “policing” itself.  All judicial complaints will be made public.  [Expecting judges to discipline their friends (fellow judges) is not at all right.  Complaints are also kept confidential.  A Grand Jury composed of citizens from the county will ensure fair consideration of the issues.  Making the complaints public will allow others to see the complaints that have been made, and it should serve as a deterrent to those who might commit misconduct.]
6. All attorney misconduct complaints will be handled by a Special Grand Jury. The association of attorneys (Bar Association) will cease being the sole means of “policing” attorneys. All attorney complaints will be made public.  [Just as with judges as discussed immediately above, expecting the association of attorneys to discipline their members isn't the independent way that complaints should be handled.  Citizens probably are not aware that the Bar Association is nothing but an association; it isn't a government entity.  Attorneys do massive damage to people, and the way to minimize this is to make attorneys accountable to a jury of citizens from the county.]
7. Judges may be removed from office for cause.  Cause shall include deliberate violation of law, fraud, conspiracy, intentional violation of due process of law, deliberate disregard of material facts, using erroneous law, ignoring valid precedents, judicial acts without jurisdiction, blocking of a lawful conclusion of a case, or any deliberate violation of the Constitutions of the State or the United States and the Bill of Rights as well as dishonesty. [The reports of proven judicial corruption nationwide are staggeing; the scary part is all the corruption that the judges are able to hide.  The only way to keep judges honest is to have a Grand Jury and the power to remove judges for cause.]
8. Judges must address all points raised by all parties in every court decision with a clear explanation with citation to determining facts, statutes, and case law. [One of the dishonest/corrupt techniques used by judges is to ignore the issues, facts, and law.  By forcing judges to address the issues, facts, statutes, and case law on each issue in their orders, judges will either treat the parties fairly or expose their corruption for all to see.  When judges violate this provision, an aggrieved party will now have the ability to take the matter to a Special Grand Jury.]
9. Appellate judges must address all points of error in every appellate decision with a clear explanation with citation to determining facts, statutes, and case law. [Appellate judges are even more dishonest that lower court judges when it comes to ignoring the issues, facts, statutes, and case law.  By forcing judges to address the issues, facts, statutes, and case law, judges will either treat the parties fairly or expose their corruption for all to see.  When judges violate this provision, an aggrieved party will now have the ability to take the matter to a Special Grand Jury.]
10. Parties may present claims of attorney misconduct, judicial misconduct, clerk’s office misconduct, and law enforcement misconduct to a Special Grand Jury. [Attorneys, judges, judicial staff, clerks of court, and law enforcement all commit misconduct, and a Special Grand Jury provides the independent tribunal that the citizens need.]
11. Perjury is a cause of action that will be allowed in a civil suit. [Currently, people can lie repeatedly in court, and those damaged by the perjury have no recourse, and judges do nothing.  Citizens need the ability to seek damages against witnesses in court who commit perjury.]
12. Judges must insist that people tell the truth in court with extreme consequences for those who don’t. [There are rules that will make the legal process infinitely more fair and less expensive.  Judges must honor and enforce the rules.  It is one of the only ways to get witnesses and attorneys to be honest.]
13. Attorneys must go by the letter of every law and every professional rule.  Judges must subject attorneys to onerous consequences for violations. [There are rules that will make the legal process infinitely more fair and less expensive.  Judges must honor and enforce the rules.  It is one of the only ways to get attorneys and judges to be honest.]
14. Attorneys who violate their Code of Professional Conduct shall be referred to a Special Grand Jury. [Attorneys are a big part of the problem with the legal system.  If they followed their Code of Professional Conduct, the legal system would be much fairer, and the expense of litigation would be dramatically reduced.  Accountability by an independent Special Grand Jury should have amazing impact.]
15. “Motion practice” must be minimized.  Judges must hold conferences and allow attorneys and pro se parties to communicate important issues directly to judges.  [In federal courts especially, judges avoid all contact with the attorneys and parties.  They force the parties to file motions, responses, and replies to motion after motion.  This runs up massive legal fees and provides infinite opportunities for misconduct and mistreatment of the parties.]
16. Judges may not enter summary judgments when a jury trial has been requested. [Judges corrupt the judicial process by depriving parties of a jury trial.  Juries must make the decisions in legal matters -- not judges.]
17. Judges may not ignore or change the rules of civil procedure.  [Judges may favor one attorney or party over another by selectively ignoring the rules or independently making their own after-the-fact rules.  There are rules, and everyone must adhere to them.  Judges must not be given the power to deprive a party or attorney of the published rules.]
18. All court decisions shall be published.  [Courts do not publish many of their orders.  This keeps others from seeing their wrongdoing and mistakes.  By publishing every decision, judges will have to do a better job, and they will be exposed to criticism by other judges and attorneys who identify their mistakes.]
19. All orders must be signed by the judges involved. [In many cases, the judges do not sign the orders.  There is no way to know if the judges actually participated in the decision.  Every order must be signed by the judges involved to prove that they participated in the decision and to make the orders valid.]
20. The votes of each judge involved in a decision shall be made part of the public record. [When multiple judges are involved, the parties and the public deserve to know how each voted.]
21. All pro se parties shall be given the ability to make electronic filings, if they choose.  [In most courts, only attorneys are allowed to file electronically.  This also enables them to file just before midnight on a due date.  Pro se parties are forced to print everything, and they have to file by the time the clerk's office closes (usually 5 pm or earlier).  This inflates the cost for pro se parties, increases the costs of judicial personnel, and gives an unfair advantage to the attorneys.  Pro se parties should take online training on how to use the electronic filing system, and they should have the option to save money and time by filing electronically.]
22. There shall be no requirement of a legal degree and legal experience for judicial positions in cities, counties, and states. [Lawyers are a big part of the problem with the legal system.  Lawyers as judges come to the position with a built-in prejudice for their friend attorneys and may have a bias against attorneys they faced.  If the participants in a case go by the rules and the law, any intelligent person can serve as judge.  It is unfair to limit judge positions to attorneys.]
23. Judges must adhere to sentencing guidelines. [There must be rules, and the place for a judge in the process is to go by the rules.  We must minimize interpretation and freedom for judges to do whatever they want, because that is what has made our judicial system so unfair and corrupt.]
24. All family court trials shall be by jury. [Family court abuse and corruption is one of the most widely-criticized.  Judges and their friends involved in the family court process create a situation ripe for injustice and corruption.  We must remove the judges from this life-altering process for so many people.  Let a jury of local citizens with their own families make these serious decisions.]
25.  It shall be a child’s right to be raised by his parent(s), free from government intrusion; have an attorney of his choice; be heard in court personally; be allowed to report abuse and know that the system will protect them; be protected from mental and physical abuse by guardians as well as the judicial system; and receive justice. [Currently, the way children and their families are treated by the judicial system is a crime in and of itself.  We the people must protect families and the children.  These rights must be mandated because the existing system is hopelessly broken.]
26. No child may be taken from family without evidence and a hearing. [Children are being removed from their homes at the whim of people.  This life-altering decision must first be made in court and decided by a jury.  We cannot allow families to be torn apart by people who should have no authority to take such serious action.]
27. All children deserve to live a childhood free from abuse, exploitation, and government interference during custody litigation. [Custody litigation is devastating to many.  The children must be protected not damaged by the system.]
28. Campaign contributions are not allowed for funding judicial campaigns. [Campaign contributions create the perfect opportunity for corrupting the judicial system.  Elections for judges should be done with no contributions of any type allowed.]
29. Complaints about CPS and other state agencies may be presented to a Special Grand Jury. [Government corruption may take place in any agency.  Child Protective Services (CPS) is an area where abuse is often alleged.]
30. Complaints about foreclosure fraud may be presented to a Special Grand Jury. [Foreclosure fraud is a form of government-assisted corruption.  Those in danger of losing their biggest asset need help and fast.  We the people need to protect them.]
31. The statute of limitations shall be eliminated in cases of sexual assault against children.  The statute of limitations shall be eliminated in cases of perjury and fraud upon the courts. [Laws must not be used to deprive citizens of recourse for wrongdoing.]
32. Parties may represent themselves in all legal proceedings in the State.  Corporations, Limited Liability Companies, Partnerships, and other legal entities may also be represented by an officer of the corporation in legal proceedings, and representation by an attorney shall not be required. [Statutes say that parties may represent themselves, but all of the attorneys involved in the law-making and judicial processes have twisted the intent of the law to force legal entities to spend zillions of dollars on attorneys.  Pro se parties (those individuals who represent themselves) are generally discriminated against by judges, and this must not be allowed.  Allowing legal entities to represent themselves will save billions of dollars in legal fees and will dramatically reduce the costs of operating the judicial system.]
33. A spouse may represent his or her spouse in legal proceedings if there is a properly executed power of attorney granting such right. [Once again, judges ignore the law and refuse to allow an individual to be represented in court by someone pursuant to a power of attorney.  This must be stopped.  When a power of attorney grants a person to handle legal matters, it must apply to anyone in any legal matter, especially litigation.]
34. Pro se parties now represent approximately one-third of all parties in lawsuits. Each county in the State will establish an office with at least one staff attorney to assist pro se parties at no charge. [Pro se parties usually cannot afford attorneys.  Some courts provide assistance, but most don't.  One-third of the citizens involved in the legal process must be helped.]
35. Judges must recuse themselves in specific circumstances, including if they are party to a lawsuit with a litigant.  Bias can be demonstrated by actions in a lawsuit. All complaints of judicial bias will be resolved by a Special Grand Jury if a party chooses to pursue the matter after a judge refuses to recuse himself/herself. [One of the areas of great abuse by judges is their refusal to recuse themselves.  Once again, if judges went by the rules, the system would be fair...but they don't.  Judges rarely recuse themselves when outsiders would feel the judge has bias that should require them to recuse themselves.  Judges must be encouraged to abide by the rules and the intent of the recusal process, and if they fail to recuse themself three times when a Special Grand Jury says they should have, they should be removed from office.]
36. No immunities shall be extended to any judge in this State except as is specifically set forth in this Law.  The theory of judicial immunity is to protect judges from frivolous and harassing actions.  However, deliberate violation of law, fraud, conspiracy, intentional violation of due process of law, deliberate disregard of material facts, judicial acts without jurisdiction, blocking of a lawful conclusion of a case, or any deliberate violation of the Constitutions of Florida or the United States and the Bill of Rights and dishonesty are violations by judges that are not frivolous or harassing. A Special Grand Jury’s responsibility shall include determining, on an objective standard, whether a civil suit against a judge would be frivolous and harassing, or fall within the exclusions of immunity as set forth herein, and whether there is probable cause of criminal conduct by the judge complained of.  Special Grand Juries shall also have the power to independently pursue charges against any government officials through the power of Presentment. [Judges have manufactured claims of immunity for themselves using a case from the 1800's that is archaic and not really even applicable.  Judges must not be allowed to corruptly, maliciously break laws, ignore laws and the facts, andf abuse parties.  They must be held accountable for their wrongs just as each of us is held accountable.  If judges don't like this risk, then they should get real jobs like we all do.]
37. Any judge or government official removed from office shall not thereafter serve in any government or judicial position.  Retirement for such removed officials shall not exceed one-half of the benefits to which such person would have otherwise been entitled.  [We must cease giving outrageous benefits to those who commit wrongdoing.]
38. Should the Special Grand Jury find probable cause of criminal conduct on the part of any judge against whom a complaint is docketed, it shall have the power to indict such judge except where double jeopardy attaches. The Special Grand Jury shall, without voir dire beyond personal relationship, cause to be impaneled twelve special trial jurors, plus alternates, which trial jurors shall be instructed that they have power to judge both law and fact. The Special Grand Jury shall also select a non-governmental special prosecutor and a judge with no more than four years on the bench from a county other than that of the defendant judge. The trial jury shall be selected from the same pool of jury candidates as any regular jury.  The special prosecutor shall thereafter prosecute the cause to a conclusion, having all the powers of any other prosecutor within this State. Upon conviction, the special trial jury shall have exclusive power of sentencing (limited to incarceration, fines and/or community service), which shall be derived by an average of the sentences of the trial jurors. [This procedure is essential for the effective implementation of this Law.]
39. No judge complained of or sued civilly shall be defended at public expense or by any elected or appointed public counsel, nor shall any judge be reimbursed from public funds for any losses sustained under this Law. [Currently, the government office responsible for taking action against a judge is also the office that provides counsel to represent judges at the taxpayer's expense.  Judges should have to pay for their own legal counsel, or represent themselves, just as we the people have to do.]
40. All court cases involving the government or a government employee must be trials by jury, and summary judgments will not be allowed in such cases to avoid the prejudice of a government employee judge having bias for another government employee. [Bias must be protected against at all costs.  It is only human nature for us to "protect our own."  This must no longer be allowed.]
41. This Law applies to federal courts as well as state, county, and local courts, because federal courts and federal judges are allowed to operate in the state as a guest of the state. [Federal courts must not be allowed to operate in a dishonest or corrupt manner.  Federal employees functioning in our state must abide by our state's laws.]
42. Attorneys and government employees will not be eligible to serve on a Special Grand Jury. [Attorneys and government officials have an automatic conflict of interest and a natural bias for one of their own.  Attorneys may also be risking their careers due to reprisals from a judge or government official that they take action against.]
43. All elected officials in the state and all government employees in the state must sign a Contract with the Citizens of the State that requires them to be honest at all times and defend the fundamental rights protected by the Constitution and Bill of Rights. [This Contract makes all elected officials accountable to the people.]
44. All Bar documents must be public record. [Nothing in the legal world should be secret, especially complaints about participants in the legal process.]
45. All attorneys and judges must pass a competency exam on constitutional principles, particularly rights. [States must ensure that qualified people are in place.]
46. Impose requirements for bonds on all attorneys and judges, which they pay for out of their own pockets, and make it easy for their victims to file complaints reviewed only by a grand jury. [This will clean up a lot of corruption and dishonesty.]
47. Open video and audio recording by public shall be allowed at all court proceedings. [Judges and attorneys get away with murder; this will be another excellent tool to make them more accountable.]

 

Your thoughts, ideas, additions, deletions, etc. are welcomed.  Please just add a comment below.

Thanks

 William M. Windsor

 

		We, Canadians could use this too! Connie Brauer

Forceful governor general tells lawyers, ‘Heal thyself’

Forceful governor general tells lawyers, ‘Heal thyself’.

In stinging rebuke, Johnston says it’s time legal profession regains sight of justice, public good

By RICHARD FOOT, Postmedia News August 15, 2011 9:43 AM

• Story
• Photos ( 1 )

Gov. Gen. David Johnston has singled out Ontario as having the worst court processing times in Canada.

Photograph by: Ashley Fraser, The Ottawa Citizen

HALIFAX – Canada’s lawyers and judges are losing sight of their commitments to justice and the public good, and the profession must reform itself and rebuild the trust of ordinary citizens, says Gov. Gen. David Johnston.

In a rare, forceful speech at the opening of the Canadian Bar Association’s annual meeting in Halifax on Sunday, Johnston issued a stinging assessment of the legal profession and pleaded with it to change.

“We need a new model for professionalism in law,” he said. “To borrow a saying from a sister profession: physician, heal thyself.”

A former dean of law at the University of Western Ontario, Johnston said lawyers such as himself enjoy a “social contract” with society: In return for self-regulation and a monopoly over the practice of law, he said, “We are duty bound” to improve justice and serve the public good.

Instead, he said the profession is failing to uphold its end of the deal.

He said Canadians in all provinces wait too long to have their cases heard in court, and face unacceptable delays once there. He singled out Ontario for the worst court processing times in the country, and said despite efforts to reverse the trend, “the pace (of change) is woefully slow.”

Johnston said judges and lawyers must act with “urgency” to break through what criminologists have called a “court culture” of complacency, if they hope to streamline the process.

Johnston also chastised lawyers — not specifically in Canada but across the democratic world — for contributing to the collapse of trust between citizens and public institutions, and the resulting social instability in many western nations today.

He cited the 2008 financial collapse on Wall Street as one example.

“How many lawyers ‘papered’ the deals that involved fraudulent statements of assets, liabilities, income and valuations?” he said.

“How many lawyers ‘sounded the alarm’ about conflict of interest in the web of financial transactions and creative financial instruments?

“How many lawyers were silent in the face of a pattern of deregulation which has left the economy naked to excessive leverage, and which any thoughtful observer knew was bound to have its inevitable pendulum swing?”

Johnston also rebuked Canada’s law schools for losing touch with practicing lawyers in the real world, and for relying too heavily on narrow criteria, such as the standardized Law School Admissions Test, for selecting new students.

He lamented the lack of work-life balance in law firms that “penalize those with a family,” particularly young mothers — a comment that drew applause from the audience.

And, like Supreme Court Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin on Saturday, Johnston said the profession must make legal services more affordable, and simple, for millions of middle-class Canadians.

“For many today the law is not accessible, save for large corporations and desperate people at the low end of the income scale charged with serious criminal offences. We must engage our most innovative thinking to redefine professionalism and regain our focus on serving the public.

“If we wish to avoid having change forced upon us, we must embrace new ideas.”

It is rare for a Canadian Governor General to make such frank public speeches, but Rod Snow, president of the Canadian Bar Association, said he welcomed Johnston’s honest words.

“He talked about things that he knows,” Snow said. “He probably gauged that this audience wanted to hear something of substance and I think he probably got it right.”

Ontario Bar Association president Lee Akasaki said he was surprised by Johnston’s strong stand, but also agreed with it.

“We have to get the bar back on track, be more relevant to the people we serve and hopefully in doing that we’ll improve the image of lawyers,” he said.

Arianna Huffington, the American social media pioneer and founder of The Huffington Post online website, spoke to the conference after Johnston.

She praised his remarks as a “speech of tremendous depth” and said what Johnston highlighted was essentially a breakdown in trust and a crisis of leadership among political and professional elites in many democracies.

“I completely agree with the Governor General,” she said. “Our leaders refuse to innovate because they are afraid of rocking the boat,” she said. “But if they don’t innovate, change will be forced upon them.”

Postmedia News

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen

• E-mail this Article
• Print this Article
• Share this Article 

Paulette Raymond commits fraud, extortion and theft.

By Connie Brauer, wife

NS, Canada

Paulette RAYMOND commits crimes and doesn’t want anyone to know!

Sign in front yard. Lots of traffic.

NS Canada

Paulette Raymond filed a response to our Leave to Appeal in Supreme Court of Canada on July 22/11.

Here’s the story.

Victor Harris has filed an Appeal from the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia Appeals Court in Jan./11.

The NS court:

1. Denied termination of child support for a missing adult man. Parents ordered to pay for his private apartment in 2005.
2. Missing since 2006.
3. William Harris has been a legal adult since 2005.
4. His Dad has been paying child support to Paulette Harris-Raymond since 2005 until July 2010 when she, not the judges, terminated child support without a written court order.
5. Denied termination of irrevocable life insurance beneficiary as the child. It goes to the child who is no longer a child for child support which is no longer being paid. Get it?
6. Denied the criminal charges against Paulette Harris – Raymond and the Government of Canada for fraud, theft, extortion and numerous other crimes they  committed against Victor Harris.
7. Denied restitution.
8. Denied reform in the Divorce Industry.
9. Denied all accountability.

This necessitated the need to file an Appeal with the Supreme Court of Canada, in Ottawa.

Not one judge among many,  would terminate child support for a missing adult man for the last six years.

They are:

1. Justice Gregory Warner-fraud, theft
2. Justice Gregory Warner-fraud, theft
3. Justice MacDonald, Bateman, and Hamilton- fraud, theft
4. Justice Glen McDougall- fraud, theft
5. Justice John D. Murphy- fraud, theft
6. Justice Gordon Tidman- fraud, theft
7. Chief Justice Joseph Kennedy- fraud, theft and a new one. Extortion of $10,000.
8. Justice Michael MacDonald- fraud, theft, extortion
9. Justice Gregory Warner- fraud, theft, extortion
10. Justice Haliburton- fraud, theft, extortion
11. Justice Jamie Saunders- refused substitution of service and advised the fraud to continue.
12. Justice McDonald- fraud, theft, extortion
13. Justice Farrar, Hamilton and Oland- fraud, theft, extortion
14. Justice Warner- fraud, theft, extortion

Why extortion? Because Kennedy ordered Victor Harris to pay $10,000 to the courts before he or anyone else would terminate child support for a missing adult man, Missing for many years at this time. Each judge after that was implicit in committing extortion.   No accountability for Paulette Harris Raymond or the judges. She’s the one who asked via secret documents to the judge for a surety of $10K  so she can continue to collect fraudulent child support for a missing adult man.

Now in March, 2011 (Five months after the hearing )  Justice Warner called back both parties and provided a written court order terminating child support and releasing the irrevocable beneficiary to be one of Victor Harris’s choice. Be clear however, he did not terminate child support. No one did. Not one judge! What does that tell you?

How do you spell  C O R R U P T I O N ?

So now, after seven months during which time Paulette Harris:

1. Changed her name. She wants to be known as Raymond.
2. Refused service.
3. Lied to Canada Post and told them she had moved. Sounds like a crime to me.
4. Asked Supreme Court of Canada to resend the documents that she refused.
5. Asked Supreme Court of Canada for an extension of time.
6. Filed an incomplete and duplicate Factum used in the NS Appeal Court.
7. Filed a suit against Connie Brauer in NS Supreme Court.
8. Asked the Supreme Court of Canada to hold off, until the verdict of the NS Supreme Court against Connie Brauer, in order to influence the outcome of the Supreme Court of Canada.
9. NS Supreme Court dismissed case against Connie Brauer. One point for Warner.
10. Asked the Supreme Court of Canada for another extension of time.
11. Was given an extra 10 days to file.
12. Finally filed her response without addressing any of the issues in the application to the Supreme Court of Canada.
13. Instead she made false allegations, threats and raged on about the media submissions by Connie Brauer.

Well folks, I’m Connie Brauer and I will write submissions to the media about injustice, fraud, extortion, theft, disrespect, assault, withholding access to the adult children, withholding Interrogatories, (written discovery) parental alienation, lies, torture, slavery, violations of the Charter of Rights and more for as long as I want. I have the absolute right to do so.

FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS.

2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:

(a) freedom of conscience and religion;

(b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;

(c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and

(d) freedom of association.

So now we wait on the Supreme Court of Canada for Justice.

Connie Brauer, wife of Victor Harris