January 1 2009

Irrefutable evidence the government is Organized Crime personified with the RCMP providing the conclusive proof by persistently refusing to Investigate Government Organized Crime-corruption and conspiracy demonstrating their modus operandi designed by the conspirators that has permitted their success. BLACK BOOK II (1) The RCMP Connection Part 1 Compiled RCMP Correspondence January 3 2006 until November 8 2007 Commencing page 37 is the Correspondence with the RCMP that began January 3 2006 up and to November 8 2007 when I filed with the Commission for Public Complaints against the RCMP for refusing to investigate Government Organized Crime of corruption and conspiracy. On September 10 2008 I received the RCMP Final Letter of Disposition dated September 3 2008 signed by RCMP Superintendent Robert Davis, District Commander Greater Toronto Area. (Pages 17, 18) On September 23 2008 I requested a REVIEW of the RCMP Final Letter of Disposition (Pages 3-32) and received confirmation September 24 2008 signed be S.Smitt stating the pertinent evidence has been requested from the RCMP (Page 36) On page 7 I note the importance of acquiring a copy of Staff Sergeant R.B.MacAdam¶s report ASAP and on November 7 2008 I wrote requesting copies of said report but they have refused to respond as suspected being under the control of the conspirators. (Pages 33-36) Note: the Chain of Command of the RCMP Prime Minister Parliament of Canada DOJ-Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada Minister of Public Safety RCMP Commissioner These offices have responded irrefutably proving their involvement in the conspiracy Amongst the evidence provided to the RCMP is the original BLACK BOOK dated September 1 2006 clearly noted in Lawyer File # 14 addressed to Sgt. Michael Thomson that clearly shows the issues have persistently been of Government Organized Crime of corruption and conspiracy headed by the office of the Ontario Attorney General and the major role the RCMP play in it since Sgt. Thomson¶s response of January 18 2006 where he links the DOJ to the conspiracy as they ignore the evidence of the criminally fraudulent occurrences at the Ontario Rental Housing Tribunal June 30 2005, as had others before I came to the RCMP with the evidence. Since Sgt. Thomson¶s response of January 18 2006 I have proliferated cyber space with irrefutable evidence of the Government conspiracy and refusal to restructure the illegitimate system to a legal one consistent 1

with the Constitution conducive to the support of every individual¶s guaranteed Charter rights of equal protection and benefits The RCMP, the Prime Minister Stephen Harper, my MP Peter Van Loan, DOJ-Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, Robert Nicholson and former Vic Toews, Minister of Public Safety Stockwell Day, and RCMP Commissioner William Elliot and former commissioner ³ZACK´, Senators, the Governor General and Armed Forces have been e-mailed the irrefutable evidence along with a prodigious numbers of others of the Federal Government whose e-mail addresses appear in the AAAALIST document published on the Charter Democracy Force web site and others referenced on the URus Charter Democracy Force ROP web site www.URus.ca The AAAALIST also includes a prodigious number of prominent Ontario Government personnel, the Premier of Ontario Dalton McGuinty, my MPP Julia Munro, Ombudsman, Attorney General Chris Bentley and former Michael Bryant to name a few, the media, Church, charities, Bar Associations across Canada, the Federation of Law Societies and the Lieutenant Governor. The issues are addressed in other editions of the BLACK BOOK irrefutably proving the entire government, federal and provincial are staffed with personnel that do not give a damn about the Constitution, the people and their guaranteed Charter rights of equal protection and benefit cooperating with the conspiracy and the reason for its success as the struggle of humankind persists as it has since long before Confucius 551 BC479 BC gave us the Golden Rule ³Do not impose on others what you would not wish for yourself´ and ³There were no dates in this history scrawled this way and that scrawled across every page were the words BENEVOLENCE, RIGHTEOUSNESS and MORALITY«finally I began to make out what was written between the lines; the whole volume was filled with a single phrase: EAT PEOPLE´ As Confucius says there were no dates as the same ideology persists today in the illegitimate system structured by government members of the Law Societies to ransack the people and protect their members from their victims who become aware but stand alone against these charlatans of deception, prevarication, manipulation and orchestration of the people and the entire government for the unscrupulous purpose of the nefarious bent. The evidence is overwhelming supported by reality itself with no legitimate way out that will finally end the struggle of all humankind or just mine. The government conspirators illegitimate system is well documented as they cite this law and that devoid of mention of the Constitution and Charter rights simply because there is no semblance to the spirit of their modus operandi with ³The Spirit of the Law´ that provides the authority and demands, either stated or implied the Constitution: Establishment be the personification of the Constitution: Document yet to materialize. The Ideal is simply reality sanely dealt with

2

Continued in BLACK BOOK II (2) The RCMP Connection Part 2 Compiled RCMP Correspondence November 9 2007 up to September 3 2008

3

From: Frank Gallagher [mailto:franklyone@hotmail.com] Sent: September 25, 2008 3:15 PM To: 'REVIEWS' Subject: RE: Check: Correction September 25 2008 Please make note of corrected date on page 4 of the Request Review of Complaint September 25 2008 document published on the RCMP Final Letter of Disposition web site http://groups.google.com/group/charter-democracy-force Excerpt from page 4 follows False statements are underlined Paragraphs Complaint date November 7 2007 in error (False-November 8 2007) The investigator also reviewed numerous documents found on my web sites in order to understand the circumstances surrounding my complaint That is what he stated in his May 20 2008 interim report He has reviewed Staff Sergeant MacAdam¶s report and wishes to share with me the results. He emphasizes that despite the hundreds of pages of documentation involved in my complaint, the RCMP¶s sole mandate was to determine whether or not the members acted appropriately. He is suggesting there is a difference as to how the evidence is examined. The evidence provided to Sergeant Michael Thomson up to October 18 2007 when I met with Roy Steinebach is irrefutable to the Government Organized Crime of corruption and conspiracy even though he refused to take the evidence I brought to him that date he said he had access to the evidence that I had been sending to Sergeant Michael Thomson¶s e-mail address and I could continue to send evidence via the same method, which I did and is all relevant up to the date I filed the complaint with the commission November 8 2007. I presume he was instructed how to handle me before we met on October 7 2007, (Correction: October 18 2007 not October 7 2007) perhaps a note on the file. As far as Inspector Brian Verheul is concerned Superintendent Robert Davis states Inspector Verheul instructed Sergeant Thomson and to how to deal with the evidence and is therefore responsible for Sergeant Thomson¶s actions. Inspector Brian Verheul had plenty of time to confirm whether or not the evidence was relative to the Government Organized Crime of corruption and conspiracy. It is yet to be determined if Inspector Verheul acted on his own or« consulted with his superiors.) Please acknowledge Frank Gallagher

4

From: REVIEWS [mailto:reviews@cpc-cpp.gc.ca] Sent: September 23, 2008 3:33 PM To: franklyone@hotmail.com Subject: RE: Check This is to acknowledge receipt of your Request for a Review. You will be receiving a letter shortly confirming your request. Thank you. Commission for Public Complaints against the RCMP Reviews & Investigations Unit FAX #: 613-952-8045 TELEPHONE #: 1-800-267-6637 E-MAIL ADDRESS: reviews@cpc-cpp.gc.ca From: Frank Gallagher [mailto:frank.gallagher@sympatico.ca] Sent: September 23, 2008 3:24 PM To: REVIEWS Subject: Check September 23 2008 Commission for Public Complaints against the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Canada Post: Bag Service 1722 Ottawa, Ontario K1P 0B3 Fax-613-952-8045 www.cpc.cpp.gc.ca Re: File No. PC-2007-2316 Re: File No. PC-2007-2317 Re: Request Review of my Complaint RCMP refuse to investigate Government corruption and conspiracy Dear Commission Representative I have received the RCMP Final Letter of Disposition dated September 3 2008 signed by Superintendent Robert Davis, District Commander, Greater Toronto Area and he informs if I wish to exercise my right to a review of this investigation of my complaint I may do so by contacting the Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP at Canada Post: Bag Service 1722, Fax-613-952-8045, and www.cpc.cpp.gc.ca I do wish to exercise my right to a review of this investigation of my complaint. I have had some difficulties communicating with Andree Leduc, Enquiries and Complaints Analyst at the 7337 137 Street, Suite 102, Surrey, British Columbia V3W 1A4 office so I am submitting this Request for Review of my Complaint by both Fax-613-952-8045 and your on line form at www.cpc.cpp.gc.ca. Andree Leduc will get the whole document by e-mail along with the rest on the AAAAALIST 5
Frank Gallagher 34 Riverglen Drive Keswick, On. L4P 2P8 905-476-8959 frank@cdf.name Manager Charter Democracy Force www.cdf.name

All pertinent evidence regarding this Request for Review of my Complaint is published or referenced on the ³RCMP Final Letter of Disposition´ http://groups.google.com/group/rcmp-final-letter-of-disposition affiliate web site of the Charter Democracy Force All evidence published on this site is pertinent including correspondence with Andree Leduc of your Surrey, British Columbia Office. The RCMP Final Letter of Disposition dated September 3 2008 implicates Inspector Robert Davis to be in on the Government Organized Crime of corruption and conspiracy and the details are explained in document ³Request Review of Complaint September 23 2008´ published on the aforementioned web site of which this is the first page.

The links to the evidence originally published on the sites referenced in my original complaint to your office November 8 2007 were corrupted so I opened a new site CDF Documents and transferred pertinent evidence there informing Staff Sergeant R.B.MacAdam and everyone else published on the AAAAALIST of the original Charter Democracy Force web site http://groups.google.com/group/charter-democracy-force The CDF Documents web site can be accessed from this site. . It would be prudent to mention that I have been providing the irrefutable evidence of Government Organized Crime of corruption and conspiracy to Sergeant Michael Thomson of the Milton RCMP office since January 18 2006 when he responded to the evidence I originally left with Inspector Peter Goulet of the Newmarket detachment dated November 15 2005. On January 3 2006 Inspector P. Goulet wrote to inform the evidence was originally reviewed by members of the Federal Enforcement Section and it was learned I was concerned about possible offences under the Canada Business Act. The Act falls under the investigative mandate of the RCMP Commercial Crime Section also located in Newmarket and was being forwarded on to them for review. I had indeed originally requested the RCMP address the relative issues regarding my former tenant Don Wilson president and director of Bio Safe under the Canada Business Corporations Act, Part XIX Paragraph 229 (1) having already attempted to get the York Regional Police to deal with Don Wilson under the Criminal Code and Tenant Protection Act, 1997 but they declined to do so. By the time I went to the RCMP with the November 15 2005 cover letter and evidence I had already tried several government departments to address the issues that occurred June 30 2005 at the ORHT but to no avail, so that is the reason I presented the issues in different manner under the Canada Business Act to try my luck that way. This is all documented on the Golden Rule for Society «Gold for Law Society web site http://groups.google.com/group/golden-rule-for-society---gold-for-law-societyunder the heading Royal Canadian Mounted Police Compiled A ± C documents now available on the ³RCMP Final Letter of Disposition´ web site along with other pertinent evidence. You must remember I was just a victim experienced in another field of endeavour with no experience in how the police carried on business at the time and simply provided the evidence that crimes had been committed by my former tenant and president of a company that I had invested in and thought they would be dealt with by professional people in these matters not realizing I had to dot (t) s and cross (i) s and follow procedures I was not aware of or experienced in. I was under the opinion at the time that the people financed all government personnel involved in the administration and enforcement of the law to be proficient competent responsible and irreproachable with 6

fortitude and conviction to the safety and wellbeing of every individual as guaranteed by the Charter of equal protection and benefits consistent with the Constitution and the Police Services Act. My opinion has never wavered. Police Services Act R.S.O. 1990, CHAPTER P.15 PoliceServicesAct.doc Declaration of principles 1. Police services shall be provided throughout Ontario in accordance with the following principles: 1. The need to ensure the safety and security of all persons and property in Ontario. The importance of safeguarding the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Human Rights Code. The need for co-operation between the providers of police services and the communities they serve. 4. The importance of respect for victims of crime and understanding of their needs.

It is all about common sense and the law, not aware at the time the absence of it throughout the personnel of the system but with further thought and reason determined it was too consistent to be incompetence and eventually proved it was deliberate organized crime of corruption and conspiracy by members of the Law Societies beginning in the very first line of the Charter, all documented on the web sites. The Sergeant Michael Thomson e-mail dated January 18 2006 specifically states that I proposed an investigation be undertaken utilizing the auspices of the Canada Business Act and as such investigated the evidence This information is all published on my web sites that RCMP Staff Sergeant Bob MacAdam investigated and states in his interim report dated May 20 2008 that he felt he should be thorough and thoughtful when forming conclusions based on the relevant evidence. Since Superintendent Robert Davis, District Commander, Greater Toronto Area does not comprehend the need to be competent responsible and irreproachable with fortitude and conviction for the safety and wellbeing of every individual as guaranteed by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms nor is he competent to command a police force consistent with the Police Services Act I will just address the issues he stated in his September 3 2008 Final Letter of Disposition, which is self-evident In such serious matters of government organized crime of corruption and conspiracy well documented and filed with you on November 8 2007 and studied by Staff Sergeant Bob MacAdam in a manner he felt was thorough and thoughtful when forming conclusions based on the relevant evidence as he states in his interim report dated May 20 2008, and finally completed on July 11 2008 as stated in the letter from the Professional Standards Unit signed by Sergeant Karen Delorey, after 8 months of studying the prodigious amount of irrefutable evidence of government organized crime of corruption and conspiracy published on my web sites that had been provided to Inspector Brian Verheul, Milton detachment via e-mail addressed to Sergeant Michael Thomson since January 18 2006 it is incomprehensible that the final 2 page report dated September 3 2008 by Superintendent Robert Davis only contained a little more than one page of relative text, especially since he states Staff Sergeant R.B. MacAdam was a veteran investigator. It states in the Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP pamphlet Andree Leduc mailed me when confirming my complaint that if the CPC carries out a further investigation an investigator will gather 7

all the information relevant to the complaint and will conduct interviews with me, the RCMP members(s) involved, and any witnesses. The pertinent evidence is published on my Charter Democracy Force web sites aforementioned and the report by Staff Sergeant R.B. MacAdam is now pertinent evidence having spent 8 months studying the evidence thorough and thoughtful and of course he is a pertinent witness to attest that the report the RCMP present at the review is in fact the report that he prepared for the investigation of the complaint. Superintendent Robert Davis is also a pertinent witness to attest that the final report he sent me after 1 ¾ months reviewing Staff Sergeant R.B. MacAdam¶s report is indeed the report he prepared. I ask that you immediately request a copy of Staff Sergeant R.B. MacAdam¶s report to ensure no time is allowed for a fixed new replacement report. A copy of Superintendent Robert Davis¶s report is enclosed. It is within your competence to determine if they are consistent with each other.

Address of contents of Superintendent Robert Davis dated September 3 2008 False statements are underlined Paragraphs Complaint date November 7 2007 in error (False-November 8 2007) The investigator also reviewed numerous documents found on my web sites in order to understand the circumstances surrounding my complaint That is what he stated in his May 20 2008 interim report He has reviewed Staff Sergeant MacAdam¶s report and wishes to share with me the results. He emphasizes that despite the hundreds of pages of documentation involved in my complaint, the RCMP¶s sole mandate was to determine whether or not the members acted appropriately. He is suggesting there is a difference as to how the evidence is examined. The evidence provided to Sergeant Michael Thomson up to October 18 2007 when I met with Roy Steinebach is irrefutable to the Government Organized Crime of corruption and conspiracy even though he refused to take the evidence I brought to him that date he said he had access to the evidence that I had been sending to Sergeant Michael Thomson¶s e-mail address and I could continue to send evidence via the same method, which I did and is all relevant up to the date I filed the complaint with the commission November 8 2007. I presume he was instructed how to handle me before we met on October 7 2007, Correction: October 18 2007 not October 7 2007 perhaps a note on the file. As far as Inspector Brian Verheul is concerned Superintendent Robert Davis states Inspector Verheul instructed Sergeant Thomson and to how to deal with the evidence and is therefore responsible for Sergeant Thomson¶s actions. Inspector Brian Verheul had plenty of time to confirm whether or not the evidence was relative to the Government Organized Crime of corruption and conspiracy. It is yet to be determined if Inspector Verheul acted on his own or« consulted with his superiors.) It is superfluous to just stick with the complaint I filed November 8 2007 against Sergeant Roy Steinebach and Inspector Brian Verheul. They have some splainin to do as does Superintendent Robert Davis that will inevitably lead to their superiors. I complained of Government corruption and conspiracy and they refused to investigate, and when Staff Sergeant R.B.MacAdam investigated the evidence thorough and thoughtful when forming conclusions 8

based on the relevant evidence, in order to determine which was relevant he had to be thorough and thoughtful as he stated he was. That remains to be seen but Superintendent Robert Davis¶s report is self- evident he is not. I reiterate all police have a responsibility to be consistent with the Police Services Act and the Constitution conducive to every individual¶s guaranteed Charter rights of equal protection and benefits and it is each person¶s superior that is responsible to see that they are competent responsible and irreproachable with fortitude and conviction to every individual as guaranteed with particular attention to victims, attentive to any flaws in the system that should be addressed to prevent such reoccurrences to some other individual. Police Services Act R.S.O. 1990, CHAPTER P.15 PoliceServicesAct.doc Declaration of principles 1. Police services shall be provided throughout Ontario in accordance with the following principles: 1. The need to ensure the safety and security of all persons and property in Ontario. 2. The importance of safeguarding the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Human Rights Code. The need for co-operation between the providers of police services and the communities they serve. 4. The importance of respect for victims of crime and understanding of their needs. Obviously Inspector Robert Davis has insulted my intelligence and demonstrated his incompetence for success as either the bad or good guy. You will see in many of my writings I presumed the RCMP Commissioner William Elliot had been consulted and it was he who actually is behind the refusal to investigate along with Minister of Public Safety and so on right up to the DOJ and higher. Staff Sergeant MacAdam¶s investigation revealed when I attended the Toronto North Detachment on October 18 2007 and met with Sergeant Steinbach, it was not to make a new complaint but rather to provide more documents with respect to the same complaint I had previously made to the Commercial Crime Section (CCS). I was advised in 2006 that CCS would not be investigating this complaint and I was provided with the rationale for that decision being informed the Department of Justice had been consulted prior to responding to me. As previously stated only the first file I provided to Inspector Peter Goulet dated November 15 2005 made reference to the Canada Business Act issues that Sergeant Michael Thomson addressed in his report on January 18 2006. From then on it was all about Government Organized Crime of corruption and conspiracy and the refusal of the YRP, OPP, RCMP and many government departments and agencies to deal with the issues which led to the Ontario Attorney General who advises them all and he is the ³guardian of the public interest´ which he refuses to guard. 5a) Sergeant Steinbach declined to take more documents and explained the CCS Intake process to me. I printed out the evidence to take down to him because the RCMP web site stated they do not take evidence by e-mail. He refused to take the evidence stating he already had it because the evidence I had been 9

sending via Sergeant Michael Thomson¶s e-mail address was being kept on file and he already had a copy of the recording of the ORHT hearing that I provided with the November 15 2005 evidence I gave toInspector Peter Goulet. 5b) He did however tell me that he felt that my complaint was too vague and over reaching and that it did not meet the CCS Investigational mandate. He refused to look at the evidence I brought with me and the evidence on the web sites is not vague at all. He did not state the evidence was vague and over reaching and the evidence irrefutably proves his opinion as to the relevancy of Government Organized Crime of corruption and conspiracy is valueless and I suspect that he is not all that familiar with the file and was just acting on instructions. 5c). He also told me that there was already a file open regarding my allegations and went on to explain that it did not necessarily mean that the RCMP was going to investigate the complaint. (Sergeant Steinbach told me for certain the RCMP was not going to investigate the complaint) 6) Inspector Verheul did not deal with me directly, but he did provide direction to Sergeant Thomson, my principle contact person, that if material being submitted continues to relate to the issues already reviewed then nothing further should be done than to place a copy of the correspondence on the file. As previously mentioned Inspector Verheul is responsible for Sergeant Thomson¶s actions and when I brought the matter to his attention prior to filing the complaint he should have looked into it and he has had plenty of time since as he has been provided all the evidence the same as the rest of the people whose e-mail addresses are in the AAAAAALIST document published on the original Charter Democracy Force web site 7) In the course of his investigation Staff Sergeant MacAdam also determined that my initial complaint involving my investment in Mr. Wilson¶s company and the Ontario Rental Housing and Tenant¶s Act dispute was reviewed and that I was advised in writing that the matter was most appropriately handled through the civil provisions provided for in the noted statute and that no criminal investigation would be undertaken I presume reference is being made to Sergeant Michael Thomson¶s January 18 2006 e-mail again. He has to fill in the report somehow. Heaven knows I am not referring to reiterations being particularly reiterative myself. I am noting the struggle to put something to paper that looks legitimately convincing. 8) When I was not satisfied with that response I wrote back the same day and Sergeant Thomson wrote his second letter dated February 7th 2006, further explaining that if I suspect criminal activity, the police service with primary jurisdiction would be responsible for investigating the allegations and it seems the Ontario Provincial Police had also reviewed my complaint and had referred me to the York Regional Police as the police services of jurisdiction. It was established as well that I had met with the YRP previously and was told that the matter was civil and that they would not be conducting an investigation. I do not seem to have a copy of that letter in my computer files, perhaps in my 3¶ stack of hard copy but it is irrelative. The police sent me in circles as to who had the authority whereas the YRP was the original police force of jurisdiction but they have persistently refused to look into the Government Organized Crime of corruption and conspiracy, the same as the OPP and the RCMP whereas they all have been provided the same evidence. After careful consideration of the details surrounding my complaint, he finds no evidence that indicates that Sergeant Steinebach or Inspector Verheul acted improperly and furthermore he supports Inspector Verheul¶s directives, given the nature of the file and the documentation being 10

provided. There you have it, after careful consideration he finds no evidence that indicates that Sergeant Steinebach or Inspector Verheul acted improperly and further more he supports Inspector Verheul¶s directives. Was it he Superintendent Robert Davis, District Commander Greater Toronto Area that gave the order not to investigate? Was it an obvious decision for him? Did he need to bother consulting with his superiors? That is yet to be determined!!

If I wish to exercise my right to a review of this investigation of my complaint I may do so by contacting the CPU at the Ottawa office Of course I wish to exercise my right!!! That is what this all about. Right? I see Inspector Brian Verheul is retired now ( bottom of his 2nd page). Before Staff Sergeant R.B.MacAdam finished the investigation he was provided a new job( See his May 20 2008 interim report) with NCO i/c after his name as Occupational Health and Safety Services ³O´ Division/ Return to Work/Medical Discharge Facilitator of Occupational Health and Safety Services ³O´ Division As predictable as the likelihood of people becoming victims with government members of the Law Societies holding every position of authority in the legal system who are not required to give a damn about every individuals guaranteed Charter rights of equal protection and benefits nor is the Law Society of Upper Canada required to examine evidence provided in support of complaints against their members. See the 2 part Law Society of Upper Canada document published on the original Charter Democracy Force web site. CanLaw National Lawyer Referral Service confirmed this on their web site www.canlaw.com and I copied other evidence from their site, which they were not too happy about which you will see published on the Charter Democracy Force web site. All evidence referred herein is published on the Charter Democracy Force web sites and was e-mailed to everyone on the aforementioned AAAAAALIST and they were provided with the web site addresses they would be published on. ********************************************************************************** It is predictable you of the Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP will be orchestrated by the superiors of the Government Organized Crime of corruption and conspiracy as it is apparent they already caused Andree Leduc to not cooperate with me. You will find that information on the ³RCMP Final Letter of Disposition´ web site or referenced where you will find all the evidence stated herein, and quite probably more. The evidence is irrefutable of the Government Organized Crime of corruption and conspiracy and with the RCMP Final Letter of Disposition dated September 3 2008 they are securely implicated in the conspiracy. Now it is your turn to provide us the irrefutable evidence of the Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP for the public to see which you really have no choice but to cooperate with the conspiracy or cooperate consistent with the Constitution conducive to every individual¶s guaranteed Charter rights. Of course this document will be e-mailed to everyone on the AAAAALIST and many others. 11

I will expect acknowledgement of receipt of the first page of this document informing you where the rest of it is published and the other pertinent evidence. Should you have any problems with the links to the documents or web sites please do not hesitate to contact me at frank@cdf.name The same if you need any help understanding the evidence or should you require more evidence, anything at all please do not hesitate to contact me. Frank Gallagher Manager Charter Democracy Force PS You have more than enough to demand a Public Inquiry if you can find someone you can demand. Perhaps you can find a way to get the information to the media. You will read throughout the correspondence every government department and agency suggesting I get a lawyer and deal with my personal issues, as they like to say, in civil court. The July 26 2008 Saturday Star headlined the serious situation that the Middle Class cannot afford to access the civil courts costing $60,000 for 3 days and the media who are on the AAAALIST have also been provided the evidence of precisely what I informed them more than three years ago which they attempt to orchestrate themselves out of this one. Invariably everything they do is corrupt and they have no choice but to continue in their ways when they are confronted but the jig is up. There is always the option of finally doing things legal consistent with the Constitution conducive to every individual¶s guaranteed Charter rights. That would require restructuring and come right out and fess the truth something they are not familiar with so it could be somewhat clumsy.

12

From : Sent : To : CC : Subject :

Michael Thomson <Michael.Thomson@rcmp-grc.gc.ca> January 18, 2006 12:51:19 PM <franklyone@hotmail.com> "Mona Eichmann" <Mona.Eichmann@rcmp-grc.gc.ca> BioSafe Natural Products Inc./ Bio-Safe Natural TechnologiesInc.

Dear Mr. Gallagher: I have reviewed the documents, forwarded to our office here, that were submitted to our Newmarket Detachment. You have proposed an investigation be undertaken utilizing the auspices of the Canada Business Corporations Act, Chapter C-44 (CBCA) and as such, this matter has been taken by our office for review. A review of the matter has been completed and the Department of Justice (DOJ) has been consulted in terms of prosecution under the jurisdiction of this Act. Unfortunately, Part XIX, and Section 229(1) CBCA and thereafter of the Act is quite specific in the terms of the investigation and enforcement of same. This is entirely a civil procedure that requires the Court to issue an Investigation Order and thereafter appoint an Inspector. The Inspector has specific authorization allowing entry and examination of the corporation's books and records. These duties are outlined in Section 130(1) CBCA. Part XIX.1 outlines the apportioning of the award of damages, and Part XX outlines remedies, offences and punishment. Mr. Donald Wilson¶s assertions that a subpoena and/or a search warrant are required in order to allow the shareholders to review the companies' books and records are erroneous, as outlined in Section 21 (1-10) CBCA. It is the judgment of DOJ and this office that this matter lies solely within the confines of civil litigational procedures, and as such, DOJ will not consider prosecuting this matter and no investigation will be undertaken by this office. An attempt has been made to verbally convey this message via telephone, however the number provided appears to be the number of a fax machine. The information provided will be kept on file for intelligence/ information purposes only. If you have any further questions, these may be directed to the Writer at the numbers listed below. Yours truly,

M.J. Thomson, Sgt. NCO i/c Central Intake & Admin. Support. Greater Toronto Area - Commercial Crime Section, Milton, Ontario (905) 876-9656 (905) 876-9757 (Fax) michael.thomson@rcmp-grc.gc.ca

13

From: Frank Gallagher [mailto:frank.gallagher@sympatico.ca] Sent: September 18, 2008 8:21 AM To: 'complaints@cpc-cpp-gc.ca' Subject: FW: Request Review of Complaint September 18, 2008 Andree Leduc I have not yet received acknowledgement of receipt of the e-mail I sent September 11 2008. Please respond as to what actions you have taken regarding these most serious issues. Thank you Frank Gallagher Manager Charter Democracy Force

From: Frank Gallagher [mailto:frank.gallagher@sympatico.ca] Sent: September 11, 2008 3:19 PM To: 'complaints@cpc-cpp-gc.ca' Subject: Request Review of Complaint September 11 2008 Commission for Public Complaints Against The Royal Canadian Mounted Police 7337 137 Street, Suite 102 Surrey, British Columbia V3W 1A4 Fax 604-501-4095 complaints@cpc-cpp-gc.ca Attention Andree Leduc Enquiries and Complaints Analyst Re: File No. PC-2007-2316 Re: File No. PC-2007-2317 Re: Request Review of Complaint Dear Andree Leduc I hope you will be more cooperative than when you last wrote in December 2007 and refused to respond to my several attempts to have you confirm that you will and make some effort to be competent when this inevitable day arrived to request a review of my complaint against the RCMP as I am not satisfied with their deliberate incompetence consistent with the government organized crime of corruption and conspiracy. Given the evidence and particular circumstances it would ne naïve of me to believe anything other than you are under the thumb of the major players of the conspiracy but never the less I must go through the motions following the modus operandi of the government documenting every step of the way for both present and future use. 14
Frank Gallagher Manager Charter Democracy Force

.You will notice how FFF, Forthright Forthcoming and Forthwith I endeavour to be expecting the same in return and of course when not, it is painfully obvious and though I would prefer appropriate action from you I have learned to settle for more evidence as if I didn¶t have enough already. From the tone of my writing it is hoped you will comprehend that what concerns me does concern you one way or another and all I can do is hope that you understand that I am a victim requesting justice as detailed on the Charter Democracy Force web site www.cdf.name (Now www.URus.ca ) and 10 affiliate sites although in reference to the evidence originally attached to the complaints you will find it on the original Charter Democracy Force site http://groups.google.com/group/charter-democracy-force There is sufficient evidence there that demands the RCMP look into in the 15 Lawyer Files and the Mad, Glad mostly Sad«.Why document that asks many questions Why that need to be formally answered even though they answer themselves. I have made note of some very significant serious problems within the upper command of the RCMP in the following pages, which includes a copy of their Final Letter of Disposition dated September 3 2008. I believe considering your admittance of incompetence that this is a case of rare circumstance and at the discretion of the Chair of the CPC request the CPC become involved and conduct its own investigation in the public interest or conduct a public interest hearing or both. Please acknowledge receipt and your intent to cooperate Thank you Frank Gallagher

15

September 11 2008

Confucius 551 BC ± 479 BC

Golden Rule ³Do not impose on others what you would not wish for yourself´
³There were no dates in this history, but scrawled this way and that across every page were the words BENEVOLENCE, RIGHTEOUSNESS and MORALITY «finally I began to make out what was written between the lines; the whole volume was filled with a single phrase: EAT PEOPLE´

Jesus ³Do unto others as you would have them do unto you´

Jonathan Swainger University of British Columbia history professor
Edmund Morgan¶s compelling book ³Inventing the People: The Rise of Popular Sovereignty in England and America´ opens with an assertion that the success of any form of government requires the acceptance of a number of fictions. In democracies for example, it is necessary for the population to ³believe´ that the people have a voice or«that the representatives of the people are the people´

Frank 1942 AD ± 200_

Manager, Charter Democracy Force
When truth of a CONSISTENCY to a thing is the ultimate quest, the thing is self-evident even though supported by only one statement is self sufficient, impervious to any number of CONSISTENCIES of truths that do not maintain a CONSISTENCY with the thing . When all is said and done and such inconsistency remains adverse to the CONSISTENCY of the thing deception and prevarication is self-evident. When persons develop prevarication to perfection they invariably deceive themselves making them inane to any purpose vulnerable to sane purpose of humongous advantage to the Charter Democracy Force maintaining CONSISTENCY to a thing fair and relevant to all of the moral society of the Constitution of the democracy of Canada where eradication of amoral inclination is its purpose.

16

The painful obviousness of that which is predictable becomes pathetically more nauseating when proven true. One charged with a crime can not be judged by the amoral and most definitely not by oneself.
CONSISTENCY to evade the purpose of truth with irrelevant unfounded truths consistently reveals the truth whether they are truths or lies where Reality is the truth impervious to perception yet precisely due to perception. When ones mandate is to meet with a person to pay them back $5 owed and finds them lying in the street in pain a competent report on the incident, no matter how thorough to mandated purpose should include mention of the victim, how he or she got there, and what initiatives were taken to secure their safety and wellbeing and was there any obvious hazards that could be removed to ensure no reoccurrence. Due diligence to a purpose when the safety and wellbeing of every individual is severely jeopardized weighs heavy on the ability of an authority assigned responsibility and the report is self-evident

17

18

Priority Police Services Act R.S.O. 1990, CHAPTER P.15 PoliceServicesAct.doc Declaration of principles 1. Police services shall be provided throughout Ontario in accordance with the following principles: 1. The need to ensure the safety and security of all persons and property in Ontario. The importance of safeguarding the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Human Rights Code. The need for co-operation between the providers of police services and the communities they serve. 4. The importance of respect for victims of crime and understanding of their needs.

In which way does a preponderance of paper proliferated with words protect every individual as guaranteed by the Charter? Of what purpose are such words and those found in the Constitution if staff is without principles? 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. Incompetence is a relatively simple matter to deal with when competence is the quest by all concerned Deliberate incompetence is a simpler matter to deal with when incompetence is the quest by all concerned When there is an obvious CONSISTENCY of incompetence it could very well be the person who perceives the CONSISTENCY of incompetence to be obvious is personally consistently incompetent. 52. (1) The Constitution of Canada is the supreme law of Canada, and any law that is inconsistent with the provisions of the Constitution is, to the extent of the inconsistency, of no force or effect. Considering every individual¶s safety and well being is at stake consistent CONSISTENCY of those people assigned the responsibility to protect every individual equally as guaranteed is mandatory either stated or implied. Similarly and most assuredly government personnel financed to administer and enforce the provisions of the Constitution must be competent responsible and irreproachable in continuity with fortitude and conviction meaning they must be aware of their legitimate purpose and the serious ramifications upon society should the CONSISTENCY not be consistently monitored and maintained. The consequences of neglect are of the most serious nature to the public interest and most assuredly the Attorney General of Ontario is the ³guardian of the public interest´ as the ³Roles and Responsibilities of the Attorney General´ published on the Ontario web site attests. CONSISTENCY is also prerequisite in the safety and wellbeing of personnel involved in the government organized crime of corruption and conspiracy. The evidence published on the Charter Democracy Force was collected by me Frank Gallagher who became lucidly alert on June 30 2005 at an Ontario Rental Housing Tribunal hearing to the fact I had been victimized by my former tenant DON Wilson president of a company I had invested in. 19

Over a period of three years I presented the irrefutable evidence of the crimes to a preponderance of prominent government personnel, media and others whose e-mail addresses in the AAAAALIST document are published on the original Charter Democracy Force web site http://groups.google.com/group/charter-democracy-force The CONSISTENCY of their ³do not give a damn attitude about the Constitution and the individual¶s equal guaranteed Charter rights´ indicative of the spirit that emanates from the Law Society of Upper Canada demonstrated in the 2 part Law Society of Upper Canada document is overwhelming and pathetically incomprehensible in terms of incompetence and ignorance to legitimate purpose. So overwhelming that stretches far beyond the realm that such incompetence could be achieved naturally and already certain there was much more to this than meets the eye turned my efforts to divulge the root of the problem that led me right back to that which was immediately apparent at the beginning that the office of the Attorney General of Ontario was behind it all, being advisor to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing John Gerretsen who was responsible to monitor compliance with the Tenant Protection Act, 1997 but demonstrated an irresponsible indifference to his responsibility. This is all detailed in the 15 Lawyer Files, which we are all quite familiar with by now. Right? Well to save me time and everyone else concerned the evidence published on the Charter Democracy Force irrefutably proves the incompetence of the entire legal system to protect every individual equally as guaranteed by the Charter but at the same time demonstrates an uncanny CONSISTENCY to protect every individual involved in the conspiracy from the people adverse to the moral legitimate purpose that they have the people ³believe´ So CONSISTENT and so obvious that any sane person of moral thought and reason can discern the truth that what we have here in Canada is government organized crime personified. The RCMP who studied the evidence since I filed with the Commission for Public Complaints against the RCMP November 8 2007 not November 7 2007 as suggested in their ³Final Letter of Disposition had to wade through the evidence which was apparently either over their heads or was simply of no concern to them as they did their Law Society rendition of pathetic injustice oblivious to ³The Spirit of the Law´ and the vital role evidence plays. Well, the RCMP had an opportunity to show their stuff and blew it miserably incompetent to the conspiracy and most assuredly no semblance at all to what is expected of a competent responsible irreproachable entity of fortitude and conviction in continuity to support a moral society conducive to every individual¶s guaranteed equal Charter rights. Such lame excuses to avoid addressing the major issues and even in what amounts to a one full page of response maintains an inconsistency with actual fact, but then competence to any purpose is not expected of them from their superiors so what you see is what you get and the public has no choice but to forget it and move on to retain their sanity. Perhaps all the inconsistencies are deliberately entered to draw ones attention to them and would be of no avail to argue, petty in nature distracting from the obvious serious issues they obviously never intend to address. Perhaps they are intended to infuriate me so I will respond insanely providing them opportunity to divert the issues to a mental instability. 20

Well, that does not work absolutely inane to competent responsible irreproachable sane moral purpose. Reality is the truth impervious to perception yet precisely due to perception The truth cannot change but perceptions are vulnerable and fickle things. They will allow you to believe you are cunning intelligent above many, provide you confidence and arrogance«and stuff like that. Simple fact is it will betray you. Do not believe? Have a serious look at the Final Letter of Disposition from the point of view of an individual of the moral majority who once believed their Charter rights secure and were treated fairly as if in a democracy. The government organized crime has clearly been proven to be initiated at the top but its success is dependent on the ignorance and cooperation of the ROYAL CANADIAN MOUNTED POLICE. As the economy gets worse nature will take its course as history attests and be assured we of the Charter Democracy Force will humongously increase our efforts to the resolve necessary to prevention of the predictable unnecessary chaos. One has to wonder if ³terrorists´ is just a word attached to groups who are well aware that sane peaceful initiatives to fair sane moral purpose of sane moral thought and reason is impossible with greedy imbeciles devoid of conscience inept to sane moral thought and reason. It seems to me the manipulative abilities of international corporate conglomerates and the humongous advantage the affluent and influential have illegitimately over the people of the Lower Tiers the World Trade Center was a likely target when the people are driven insane by the insanity of it all left unchecked. Anyway, the people have a right to know what is published on the Charter Democracy Force web site and with phase one now complete with the irrefutable evidence the upper echelon of the RCMP are involved we can now direct our efforts full time to spreading the truth and we thank you for that for making it so vividly clear. This document ³ReceivedSeptember102008´ will be published in its appropriate place on the ³RCMP Final Letter of Disposition´ web site http://groups.google.com/group/rcmp-final-letter-of-disposition

I need not mention how severely disappointed we are but nothing we had not expected and certainly nothing we were not prepared for. We will give the Commission for Public Complaints against the RCMP one more opportunity to demonstrate their incompetence to serve the people consistent with the Constitution and of course make a formal request to the RCMP Commissioner to investigate the government organized crime as evidenced on the Charter Democracy Force web site www.cdf.name (Now www.URus.ca ), which Robert Davis, Superintendent, District Commander, Greater Toronto Area was kind enough to admit as did Staff Sergeant R.B. MacAdam that you have possession of the evidence or access of all the evidence on the web sites but have chosen to ignore it with blinders on and chose to emphasize your sole mandate was to determine whether or not the members acted appropriately 21

This is how my first conversation with Staff Sergeant R.B. MacAdam began when he phoned me to see if I would come down to the Newmarket office to discuss the complaint and now 10 months later the incompetence remains.. It was about 3 weeks after he began looking into it on a part time basis he informed and at first I agreed to go down, but when I asked if he had looked at the evidence on the web site he said no, he was just investing the complaint against the RCMP members. He had not yet talked to the 2 RCMP members and not looked at the evidence and he wants me to come down. I questioned how could he possibly determine if they acted appropriately with out looking at the evidence and of course the Law Society of Upper Canada is of the belief their member acted appropriately without looking at the evidence and we see a significant CONSISTENCY throughout that evidence appears to be irrelevant when members of the Law Societies are involved as the Attorney General who plays a major role advising all government departments and agencies. I told him he would first have to determine if the evidence was valid to the complaint or considered trivial, frivolous or vexatious which I cited from the Complaints Commission brochure. You state Staff Sergeant R.B. MacAdam is a veteran investigator which hardly supports your intended purpose when logically in the peoples minds evidence plays a major role in investigations and if your veteran investigators are not aware the public are in serious trouble. OOPS: They are in serious trouble aren¶t they? All that has been noted is the pathetic incompetence of the person assigned to the investigation and for that he gets a promotion and I can expand that to see how you made it to District Commander. There can be no doubt you are aware of the conspiracy because you would have to be an imbecile not to understand what is going on if you are familiar with the evidence. Of course that has crossed my mind in earlier writings that for the government organized crime to be successful persons in you positions have to be selected from the incompetent or cooperative to the conspiracy permitting its persistent existence. You have made reference to issues being discussed with the DOJ, which is absurd as the evidence clearly shows the DOJ and the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada are major players in the conspiracy. I know it appears that I am addressing these issues to you in an effort to make you people understand the error of your ways but we know you are well aware, however it is imperative the public clearly understands and it is to that endeavor I am most attentive. I presume your efforts are addressed similarly and I have to inform you the intended recipients of this information are hardly as dumb as they would have to be to comprehend any reason for you not to act on their behalf consistent with the Constitution. Meanwhile I am requesting every recipient to jump in and act appropriately on behalf of the people in legitimate support of the sanctity of the Canadian Constitution. 22

The inane dribble you offered as a competent responsible irreproachable response may well be what you believe but as always evidence begets the truth and you people simply must familiarize yourselves with the concept. You state Sergeant Steinbach told me that my complaint was too vague which is utter nonsense but I know after 10 months study of the evidence that is so overwhelming with nothing left to debate and out of hundreds of pages of evidence you had to at least fill one page with something and why not utter crap that comes so readily. Given the most serious nature of the issues it is incomprehensible to suggest every (i) should be dotted and (t) s crossed where if you were the competent responsible irreproachable people with fortitude and conviction to every individual¶s guaranteed Charter rights you would have laid out the red carpet and thanked me for all the investigative work I did to help you better serve the public interest and Attorney General Chris Bentley ³guardian of the public interest´ should have been pleased if not for the fact he is the major player along with the DOJ. You mentioned I was provided with the rationale back in 2006, January as I recall and that was an entirely different matter when after the York Regional Police demonstrated their incompetence to deal with the issues as well as many other government personnel I thought I would try in addition to address the matter under the Corporations Act«.whatever they call it further demonstrating Don Wilson¶s character but Sergeant Thomson pulled one of your tricks emphasizing that he was addressing the issues that I had presented back in November 2005 I believe it was, maybe early December under the auspices of the Corporations Act «whatever but since then I have provided the RCMP a preponderance of irrefutable evidence of government organized crime if you care to stay to pertinent point, and it was delivered by email via the Michael Thomson e-mail address and Sergeant Roy Steinebach acknowledged they had the evidence on file including a disk recording of the Tribunal hearing. That is why he refused to accept the evidence I brought down because he stated they already had it. Everything I am stating now is just reiterating the prodigious amount of reiterations published on the web sites and all you have demonstrated is your incoherence to the evidence and your irresponsible attitude towards the necessity of a responsible investigation on behalf of the people. I have no further interest in addressing the crapola contained within your Final Letter of Disposition when the evidence published on the web sites bares the truth and your report bares the truth of the incompetent and irresponsible ineptness of the RCMP to protect the people as guaranteed by the Charter when you make every effort to avoid the truth that lies within the evidence you stumbled over looking for something to put in your one page letter of content. Well the evidence stands for itself, not debatable and yet fools rush in to give it a try. Gee, that segues to the Commission for Public Complaints against the RCMP who were kind enough to explain their incompetence and were determined not to get any wiser, no matter how hard I tried. I informed them this day would come and if they had of started getting prepared back in December 2007 they would be competently prepared so now we get to see the results. Why would they want the public to know they are incompetent? Don¶t answer, we know don¶t we? They really are cooperative with the conspiracy but they were hired specifically for their incompetence. 23

Anyway I leave you all to ponder your decisions while we test the Complaints Commission. Frank Gallagher Manager Charter Democracy Force PS I did make mention I am not satisfied with your incompetent irresponsible trivial, frivolous vexatious Final Letter of Disposition didn¶t I? I suppose the obvious does not require the formality. If I seem a little frustrated and perhaps a bit irate perhaps if we looked at the evidence we could determine the cause and help me out. OOPS, silly me, I keep forgetting you are not required to give a damn but when the opportunity arises make a kind gesture. One more time I state unless the evidence that had been provided to the RCMP up until October 18 2007 has been thoroughly examined as to its validity of the charges of government organized crime of corruption and conspiracy the RCMP have demonstrated their incompetence to protect the public interest. Obviously the District Commander provides a good example of the incompetence that must run rampant throughout the force. We cannot have that, can we?

24

25

26

27

October 7 2008 Reviews Commission for Public Complaints Against RCMP reviews@cpc-cpp.gc.ca Re: File Nos. PC-2007-2316 & PC-2007-2317 Government Organized Crime Corruption and Conspiracy www.cdf.name

Dear Reviews Your letter by Canada Post dated September 24 2008 states you have requested the RCMP to forward you the pertinent evidence pursuant to my request where urgency is of the essence to ensure there is no time for the RCMP and other conspirators to manipulate the evidence. I am most concerned that you should now have secured a copy of RCMP Staff Sergeant R.B. MacAdam¶s report who was assigned by the office of the RCMP Commissioner to investigate my complaint. The Staff Sergeant spent 8 months studying the evidence and it is germane to the complaint as to his competence to review the evidence consistent with the Constitution in support of every individual¶s guaranteed Charter rights. As the evidence on the Charter Democracy Force web sites irrefutably proves the entire government modus operandi is consistent with that of the Law Society of Upper Canada, which has been documented and published as the 2 part Law Society of Upper Canada document. In this document they clearly state or imply that their members are not required to give a damn about the individual¶s guaranteed Charter rights nor is evidence relevant to their decisions when it is against their members. The ³Roles and Responsibilities of the Attorney General´ published on the Ontario web site clearly states he is responsible as the ³guardian of the public interest´ and the ³guardian of the rule of law´ to protect every individual and society as a whole and yet he has been provided the 2 part Law Society of Upper Canada document along with a preponderance of other evidence which he has refused to deal with consistent with the Constitution conducive to the support of every individual¶s guaranteed Charter rights. He is the advisor of all Cabinet Ministers, government departments and agencies who have all refused to deal with these most serious issues and I expect no different from your Reviews office consistent with the conspiracy. You have more than just the responsibility to study the evidence published on the webs sites to coherency to determine if the RCMP have acted appropriately conducive to the protection of every individual as guaranteed by the Charter as it imperative that you demonstrate due diligence to the support of every individual¶s guaranteed Charter rights particularly since the evidence highly suggests you will not be cooperative with me as it is impossible to do so and remain consistent with the conspiracy. Once again the evidence published on the Charter Democracy Force web site irrefutably proves the conspiracy and all government personnel who have responded to the evidence have had precisely the same 28

evidence to review and their responses or no responses is self ± evident they are not competent responsible and irreproachable with fortitude and conviction to the Constitution conducive to every individual¶s guaranteed Charter rights, however they have all been consistent with the conspiracy conducive to its success. The evidence clearly shows due diligence to the conspiracy clearly orchestrated from the office of the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada and the office of the Ontario Attorney General regarding the issues I have presented relative to incidents that occurred in Ontario. The RCMP Superintendent¶s Final Letter of Disposition dated September 3 2008, less than 2 pages of context is incomprehensible clearly demonstrating that he is not competent responsible and irreproachable with fortitude and conviction consistent with the Constitution conducive to every individual¶s guaranteed Charter rights however it irrefutably proves he is consistent with the conspiracy. On the other hand the evidence published on the Charter Democracy Force web site attests that I have been competent responsible irreproachable with fortitude and conviction consistent with the Constitution conducive to every individual¶s guaranteed Charter rights where we comprehend the significance of evidence and the necessity of its acquisition to support allegations and have applied every effort to obtaining pertinent evidence to ensure the truth, the whole truth is being provided for all to see and act appropriately. To maintain our consistency to the Constitution conducive to every individual¶s guaranteed Charter rights and our attentiveness to competent responsible and irreproachable approach with fortitude and conviction we request confirmation you are now in receipt of the pertinent evidence requested from the RCMP with relative information confirming the date that you received it. Consistent with democracy and equality guaranteed by the Charter I request a copy of the evidence acquired from the RCMP relative to my complaint where I am particularly interested in the contents of RCMP Staff Sergeant R.B. MacAdam¶s report after 8 months of studying the pertinent evidence. Reality is the truth impervious to perception yet precisely due to perception It is imperative that we know whether or not his perception of what he was to accomplish is consistent with the Constitution conducive to every individual¶s guaranteed Charter rights or not. If you do not comprehend this then your perception is not adept to these most serious issues. I remind you that laws, policies, procedures and normal routines set out by the conspirators are of no force or effect as to their inconsistencies with the Constitution 52. (1) The Constitution of Canada is the supreme law of Canada, and any law that is inconsistent with the provisions of the Constitution is, to the extent of the inconsistency, of no force or effect. I request you consider wisely before you make a decision not to cooperate with me consistent with the Constitution conducive to every individual¶s guaranteed Charter rights. I request immediate acknowledgement of receipt of this document ³RequestReviewsProvideEvidenceOctober72008´ published on the RCMP Final Letter of Disposition´ web site under heading ³Reviews Correspondence´ I also request immediate confirmation as to whether or not you are in now in possession of the evidence requested from the RCMP and whether or not you intend to immediately forward the requested evidence to me. 29

Thank you Frank Gallagher Manager Charter Democracy Force PS It is imperative you and everyone understands the present financial crisis cannot be dealt with appropriately by the conspirators that caused it who will invariably be attentive to the preservation of their own asses and their own financial well being, as always humongously detrimental to the safety and wellbeing of the individual and society as a whole. They must be exposed and appropriate action taken to ensure competent responsible people with fortitude and conviction to the Constitution and our Charter rights are provided the authority to lead us out of the financial crisis hugely detrimental to world peace and the well being of the world populace.

30

Public Inquiry warranted and demanded
Only the conspirators will object and thereby thrust themselves upon their own swords This was well worth the wait, but unfortunately society has paid far too much for the pleasure and cannot afford to wait any longer. Expediency is of the essence

PUBLIC INQUIRY

NOW!!!!

The unscrupulous Government members of the Law Societies and their unscrupulous counterpart¶s world wide are responsible for present reality as certain as always as history attests where:

Reality is the truth impervious to perception yet precisely due to perception
Their insatiable quest for wealth and power in cooperation with the affluent and influential and multinational corporate conglomerates have manipulated the markets indifferent to the safety and wellbeing of the people of the Lower Tiers and now when their manipulations are back firing on them, they who have been ransacking us to poverty reveal they have always had the money to deal with poverty and prove their indifference to poverty by now pulling out the money to save their asses. They are only coherent to poverty when it nears them and justice will be learned the hard way. Can we trust the people who have been irrefutably proven to be unscrupulous back stabbing cancers upon society to act responsibility all of a sudden for Society or will they use their BENEVOLENCE, RIGHTEOUSNESS and MORALITY ploy to keep their unscrupulous Law Societies luxuriously secure and us in poverty to the bitter end? Quite The Chief of PoliceChair of their Commission. Such a serious issue belongs to the democratic moral majority To: a responsibility for the

31

Royal Canadian Mounted Police From: Frank Gallagher (Share holder) BioSafe Natural Products Inc./Bio-Safe Natural Technologies Inc (Exhibit A1 & Exhibit A2)) 34 Riverglen Drive Keswick,On This document along with accompanying L4P 2P8 evidence denoted in ( ) was hand delivered to 905-476-8959 P. Goulet, Insp. RCMP January 3 2006 franklyone@hotmail.com November 15 2005 RE: BioSafe Natural Products Inc. Corporation # 6159206 BN #871599601RC0001 dated November 13 2003 Registered Office Address (A1) Still active Donald Wilson 12 Tower Court Bradford,ON. L3Z 2V2 Canada and Bio-Safe Natural Technologies Inc. corporation # 6186581 BN864226600RC0001 dated January 27 2004 Registered Office Address (A2) Still active Donald Wilson 16715-12 Yonge ST #260 Newmarket Ontario L3X 1X4 Canada Dear «« I, a major share holder of the above named corporations am applying for an investigation of Don Wilson president and director of the same under the Canada Business Corporations Act ,Part XIX Paragraph 229 (1) The charges include: 2(a) Don Wilson president, director ,etc has intended to defraud his share holders (b) Don Wilson, power of the director has been exercised in a manner that is oppressive or unfairly prejudicial to or that unfairly disregards the interests of a security holder. (d) Don Wilson, president, director ,etc. acted fraudulently or dishonestly. It is a long story that I have to tell and I have an abundance of evidence to support my allegations in 2(a)(b) and (d) above but in the interest of brevity I offer two agreements signed by Don Wilson and myself Frank Gallagher . 1) The May 6 2005 witnessed by my mother Edythe Gallagher (Exhibit Z1) (4 pages) 2) The April 13 2005 witnessed by Dave Kirby. (Exhibit Z) Note that pages 2 and 4 were revised and signed on April 27 2005 and witnessed by 32

my mother Edythe Gallagher. (6 pages) original pages 2 and 4 are included. These two agreements are similar in content with changes made to percentages of commission etc. and records updated. It is prudent to use the April 13 2005 agreement as case in point because I introduced it as evidence at an Ontario Housing Rental Tribunal hearing on June 30 2005. Don Wilson denied ever seeing the May 6 2005 agreement and the April 13 2005 agreement at the hearing. I introduced Dave Kirby to the judicator as the person who signed the April 13 2005 as witness. Dave Kirby stated that he did witness Don Wilson signing all 4 pages of the agreement. This is all a matter of record and I have a copy of the record on CD provided by the Tribunal. I had entered these documents to support my application to evict the said Don Wilson for failure to pay me rent for approximately a year and to support my claim that he had agreed to leave my premises by the end of May 2005. It is important to note that Don Wilson signed these documents with a different signature than he has used on previous documents His denial of ever seeing these documents is powerful supporting evidence of my allegations. I should also mention that at the hearing Don Wilson reiterated the words on his dispute (Z2) which he had filed with the Tribunal to argue my application for his eviction and he also stated that he had the documents to prove his statements. I was amazed at the ease he spewed out his fabrication which surely would have been enviously nose worthy to Pinochio. Of course Don Wilson had no documents to prove his lies and of course I had and did present the evidence to dispute his dispute. The Order under Section 69 Tenant Protection Act, 1997 (Z3) File # TNL-67103 found for me ordering Don Wilson to leave my premises and to pay me back rent. Although this hearing was to determine matters relative to rental accommodation it would be reasonable to say that the May 6 2005 and the April 13 2005 agreements which Don Wilson (Bio-Safe) had denied ever seeing played a decisive role in the findings of the Order when I was able to prove that he did indeed sign them and the contents within, relative to the rental hearing were verified by supporting documentation. The CD of the hearing is recorded evidence of Don Wilson¶s dishonesty which far surpasses rental matters and supports my allegations under the Ontario Business Corporations Act. The contents of these documents (May 6 2005 and April 13 2005) also reflect the issues of concern that became apparent over time since I first invested with BioSafe Natural Products Inc. on the 7th of January 2004. My final agreement with BioSafe Natural Products Inc. on February 11 2004 issues me a total of 30,000,000 shares which includes the original shares acquired by me on the 7th of January 2004 33

It is also important to note that Don Wilson had registered a new company above as BioSafe Natural Technologies Inc. on January 27 2004 just a couple of weeks before I went all in but my shares were still of the Products corporation. I also represent many friends who I have introduced to Don Wilson who have invested since then. Their documents have the BioSafe Natural Technologies Inc. name on their agreements and I am listed as a share holder on their documents. Others listed before me have an unstable number of shares as they show differently on each agreement. It is also important to note that none of the certificates provided to us are on the proper form, nor are they signed except for one which is signed but has no certificate number. You will also note that none of the agreements reflect the registered name of the corporation which is BioSafe Natural Technologies Inc. Note the dash in Bio-Safe I wonder if it is more than coincidence that this name is only used on his tax return account # 9317185 Donald Wilson 16715-12 Yonge St, 260 (Ab) and his TD Canada Trust account # 3102-5208016 Bio-Safe. I am not sure of the 8 (Ca) His TD access card # 1305-432-422-098 shows BIO-SAFE NATURAL TECHNOLOG DONALD WILSON

Don Wilson has also informed my mother and I on several occasions that we will be sorry for evicting him and that I will never see anything from this business. He has also told me that it will take me 10 years in court to unscramble the documentation which could very well go beyond my demise. That would be a hell of a way to spend my remaining years. I have plenty of evidence (documents) which lend credence to this but the documentation clearly shows his dishonesty and more. I have a document signed on 21st day of March 21 2005 by Donald Neil Wilson, President BioSafe Natural Technologies Inc. headed Proprietary Technology Declaration (Za) which states that all the intellectual property, know how, process technology etc. are the sole property of Donald Neil Wilson. I do not believe that he has the best interest of share holders at heart. It is also important to note that there is no way that I can get information from Don Wilson (Bio-Safe) I had provided him 6 months free rent in my basement from February 1 2004 to July 31 2004 to allow him more time for research.

34

He was to pay me $800 per month since but I finally had him evicted on August 18 2005 owing me more than $10,000 for rent. He also owes me another $10,000 + or ± for promissory notes, phone bills etc . He refuses to pay. He refuses to provide me and my friends with proper documents for our shares. He has never held a share holders meeting since I first invested on the 7th of January 2004. I have requested that he do so on several occasions and I have asked to see the company books. He told me to get a subpoena. I have asked for a copy of the certificate of incorporation and a list of the share holders, their addresses and the number of shares that they own but he refuses to deliver. Before he was evicted from my place I wrote him several times requesting that he complies and I requested that he hold a meeting to elect a director which is required by law before 18 months has passed since registration. Note: The registered address of the business is a post office box on Yonge Street as above. One of my friends attempted to contact him by registered mail at this address which was returned to sender. after approximately 15 days.(Z4) I know where he moved to when he was evicted from my place on August 18 2005 but I would not be welcome there and I resist the urge to write him lest he moves to hinder investigation. He would not leave a forwarding address and my attempt to follow him failed. I was fortunate that he moved to a house on a main road and by luck I spotted his vehicle there on a later search, not all that far from where I lost him. I make this point to make it known that if not for my detective work his and BioSafe¶s where abouts may go unknown hindering prosecution and recovery of money that he owes me. I wonder what address may appear on his drivers license. Perhaps post box # 260 unit 12 at 16715 Yonge St. His last known address is 4021 Stoufville Road and his 1994 white Cadilac has plate # ASKA 151. I could go on and on, but already I have surpassed brevity. I hope that the evidence provided herein will be sufficient to warrant a proper investigation of Don Wilson, president and director of Bio-Safe Technologies Inc.

Yours truly, Frank Gallagher To: Chief of Police, OPP

Chief of Police, RCMP 35

From: Frank Gallagher 34 Riverglen Drive Keswick,ON L4P 2P8 January 3 2006 Dear Chief

905-476-8959

I am a major investor in BIO-SAFE TECHNOLOGIES INC. I have proven in a lower court of the Province of Ontario that the president and director DON WILSON has filed false and misleading documents to argue his case with the Ontario Housing Rental Tribunal. During the hearing I introduced two documents which DON had signed with a false signature. He denied ever seeing or signing them. I introduced a witness to one of the documents who attested that Don did sign them. The contents of these documents represents a monetary value surpassing $150,000 and his actions at the hearing can only be defined as crooked by any rational person. I have written a few public offices with the hope of finding someone who may be concerned but at this point it seems that there is nothing illegal about this. The Tribunal found for me and Don was ordered to pay me $10,000 +/- but leave it up to me to try and collect. I have attempted to get various departments to investigate him further but to no avail. There is a con man loose in society which I have provided the evidence beyond any reasonable doubt in a provincial court that he has taken money from me and about 20 other investors with the obvious intention of denying our investments. I have enclosed copies of the correspondence between Armand P. LA BARGE, Chief of Police, York Region and myself and a CD of the hearing. I would appreciate that you have a look at it with the hope that you see cause to investigate this man¶s operation. An early response at your convenience would be nice. I personally do not have the resources to do the job. There is no doubt that there is a criminal at large. I have identified him and located him for you. Yours respectfully

36

Frank Gallagher To: Chief of Police, OPP From: Frank Gallagher 34 Riverglen Drive Keswick,ON L4P 2P8 January 3 2006 Dear Chief

Chief of Police, RCMP

905-476-8959

I am a major investor in BIO-SAFE TECHNOLOGIES INC. I have proven in a lower court of the Province of Ontario that the president and director DON WILSON has filed false and misleading documents to argue his case with the Ontario Housing Rental Tribunal. During the hearing I introduced two documents which DON had signed with a false signature. He denied ever seeing or signing them. I introduced a witness to one of the documents who attested that Don did sign them. The contents of these documents represents a monetary value surpassing $150,000 and his actions at the hearing can only be defined as crooked by any rational person. I have written a few public offices with the hope of finding someone who may be concerned but at this point it seems that there is nothing illegal about this. The Tribunal found for me and Don was ordered to pay me $10,000 +/- but leave it up to me to try and collect. I have attempted to get various departments to investigate him further but to no avail. There is a con man loose in society which I have provided the evidence beyond any reasonable doubt in a provincial court that he has taken money from me and about 20 other investors with the obvious intention of denying our investments. I have enclosed copies of the correspondence between Armand P. LA BARGE, Chief of Police, York Region and myself and a CD of the hearing. I would appreciate that you have a look at it with the hope that you see cause to investigate this man¶s operation. An early response at your convenience would be nice. I personally do not have the resources to do the job. There is no doubt that there is a criminal at large. I have identified him and located him for you. Yours respectfully

Frank Gallagher 37

From :

Michael Thomson <Michael.Thomson@rcmp-grc.gc.ca> 38

From : Sent : To : CC : Subject :

Michael Thomson <Michael.Thomson@rcmp-grc.gc.ca> January 18, 2006 12:51:19 PM <franklyone@hotmail.com> "Mona Eichmann" <Mona.Eichmann@rcmp-grc.gc.ca> BioSafe Natural Products Inc./ Bio-Safe Natural TechnologiesInc.

Dear Mr. Gallagher: I have reviewed the documents, forwarded to our office here, that were submitted to our Newmarket Detachment. You have proposed an investigation be undertaken utilizing the auspices of the Canada Business Corporations Act Chapter C-44 (CBCA) and as such, this matter has been taken by our office for review. A review of the matter has been completed and the Department of Justice (DOJ) has been consulted in terms of prosecution under the jurisdiction of this Act. Unfortunately, Part XIX, and Section 229(1) CBCA and thereafter of the Act is quite specific in the terms of the investigation and enforcement of same. This is entirely a civil procedure that requires the Court to issue an Investigation Order and thereafter appoint an Inspector. The Inspector has specific authorization allowing entry and examination of the corporation's books and records. These duties are outlined in Section 130(1) CBCA. Part XIX.1 outlines the apportioning of the award of damages, and Part XX outlines remedies, offences and punishment. Mr. Donald WILSON's assertions that a subpoena and/or a search warrant are required in order to allow the shareholders to review the companies' books and records are erroneous, as outlined in Section 21 (1-10) CBCA. It is the judgment of DOJ and this office that this matter lies solely within the confines of civil litigational procedures, and as such, DOJ will not consider prosecuting this matter and no investigation will be undertaken by this office. An attempt has been made to verbally convey this message via telephone, however the number provided appears to be the number of a fax machine. The information provided will be kept on file for intelligence/ information purposes only. If you have any further questions, these may be directed to the Writer at the numbers listed below. Yours truly, M.J. Thomson, Sgt. NCO i/c Central Intake & Admin. Support. Greater Toronto Area - Commercial Crime Section, Milton, Ontario (905) 876-9656 (905) 876-9757 (Fax) michael.thomson@rcmp-grc.gc.ca

39

To: Michael Thomson Royal Canadian Mounted Police From: Frank Gallagher Political Abstainer January 18, 2006 Dear Michael I am 63, old enough to have witnessed a lot of corruption, huge waste of tax payers money, and it just goes on and on. I am not politically inclined and in fact I really have no idea how the system is supposed to work. I have been reading a little lately on the Charter of Rights and the Constitution Act, 1982 and although the material clearly identifies itself as Canadian I have to wonder just which country it is that I live in, at Keswick ,Ontario. I commuted to a City of Toronto job which is about ¾ of an hour south of where I lived for 14 years. All the surrounding areas which I have come to know are all indicated on any map of Ontario I read, and Ontario surely is a province of Canada so I believe that I am a Canadian and in fact , my birth certificate reads that I was born in Toronto ,Ontario, Canada. I just went and checked that, yep, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. My experience with public offices, and enforcement offices are not exactly what I would expect from offices structured under

Part I, Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law:
Guarantee of Rights and Freedoms

1. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.

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.

Democratic Rights
3. Every citizen of Canada has the right to vote in an election of members of the House of Commons or of a legislative assembly and to be qualified for membership therein.

40

Legal Rights

7. Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice. 12. Everyone has the right not to be subjected to any cruel and unusual treatment or punishment.

Equality Rights
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. (2) Subsection (1) does not preclude any law, program or activity that has as its object the amelioration of conditions of disadvantaged individuals or groups including those that are disadvantaged because of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.

Enforcement
24. (1) Anyone whose rights or freedoms, as guaranteed by this Charter, have been infringed or denied may apply to a court of competent jurisdiction to obtain such remedy as the court considers appropriate and just in the circumstances. (2) Where, in proceedings under subsection (1), a court concludes that evidence was obtained in a manner that infringed or denied any rights or freedoms guaranteed by this Charter, the evidence shall be excluded if it is established that, having regard to all the circumstances, the admission of it in the proceedings would bring the administration of justice into disrepute.

Does anyone understand this? There are tons and tons of books on this stuff isn¶t there? Being an honest human being I can be honest with myself and trust that myself will be honest with me. It is a relationship that has developed since first we met nearly 63 years ago and we know each other very well and should by now. We have had our moments, arguing right from wrong, but we got it fairly well straightened out now. We have adopted this Proverb as our foundation to base a decision on which seems to keep us together. I am referring to I, me and myself. ³DO ONTO OTHERS AS YOU WOULD HAVE THEM DO ONTO YOU´ Everybody knows the intent of this statement and everybody knows that they are the only words that will serve to accomplish the intent as guaranteed in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

41

Everybody knows, that we can not have peace, fair justice and equal rights for all if we set our goals elsewhere. It is a shame how those empowered to administer justice fairly and to insure our rights are protected as guaranteed in the Canadian Charter of Rights and the Constitution do not comprehend the meaning and purpose of these words. Like perchance if I was a crook and was enjoying a very lucrative life style, then I imagine that I would vote for the status quo, wouldn¶t I,and perhaps look for a few other changes that would enhance this ecstasy I have come to know. Perhaps you are a person who just doesn¶t pay his proper share of taxes ,so you would accept the status quo and perhaps look for a few changes to enhance your lifestyle. Perhaps you are a person who enjoys a good lifestyle on social services for doing nothing when you are quite capable of working, who are you gonna vote for?

Any reasonable person must surely admit that those intelligent famous people who sat to write up the Charter of Rights surely did not do so with intent to guarantee injustice, and unequal rights for that was achieved and guaranteed before they sat. That we could have had for nothing. Any reasonable decent fair person would argue out what is right with them selves sparing the rest of us needless arguments. So, obviously, any interpretation of a law that deprives the innocent and rewards the bad guy is not a legal interpretation of the law and in fact is a misinterpretation.(See Part VII, General 52.(1) below.
7. Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice.

Part III, Equalization and Regional Disparities
36. (1) Without altering the legislative authority of Parliament or of the provincial legislatures, or the rights of any of them with respect to the exercise of their legislative authority, Parliament and the legislatures, together with the government of Canada and the provincial governments, are committed to (a) promoting equal opportunities for the well-being of Canadians; (b) furthering economic development to reduce disparity in opportunities; and (c) providing essential public services of reasonable quality to all Canadians. (2) Parliament and the government of Canada are committed to the principle of making equalization payments to ensure that provincial governments have sufficient revenues to provide reasonably comparable levels of public services at reasonably comparable levels of taxation.

Part VII, General
52. (1) The Constitution of Canada is the supreme law of Canada, and any law that is inconsistent with the provisions of the Constitution is, to the extent of

42

the inconsistency, of no force or effect. (2) The Constitution of Canada includes (a) the Canada Act 1982, including this Act; (b) the Acts and orders referred to in the schedule; and (c) any amendment to any Act or order referred to in paragraph (a) or (b). (3) Amendments to the Constitution of Canada shall be made only in accordance with the authority contained in the Constitution of Canada. 53. (1) The enactments referred to in Column I of the schedule are hereby repealed or amended to the extent indicated in Column II thereof and, unless repealed, shall continue as law in Canada under the names set out in Column III thereof. (2) Every enactment, except the Canada Act 1982, that refers to an enactment referred to in the schedule by the name in Column I thereof is hereby amended by substituting for that name the corresponding name in Column III thereof, and any British North America Act not referred to in the schedule may be cited as the Constitution Act followed by the year and number, if any, of its enactment. 1867 to 1975 (No 2) and this Act may be cited together as the Constitution Acts, 1867 to 1982.

Equality Rights
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. (2) Subsection (1) does not preclude any law, program or activity that has as its object the amelioration of conditions of disadvantaged individuals or groups including those that are disadvantaged because of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.

I find Equality Rights 15. (1) very interesting. Is that supposed to apply to me. It just cost me $150 after taxes to have Don Wilson evicted from my premises on August 18 2005, 2 ½ months after the date he had agreed to leave ,in two documents which he had signed along with me and both documents were witnessed. He also agreed in these 2 documents how much he owed me for rent ,how much he owed me for promissory notes and he agreed to issue me and fellow share holders proper documents and certificates. Not only did he file a dispute with the Ontario Housing Rental Tribunal that was nothing but lies, but he reiterated these lies at the Tribunal and said that he had the documents to prove these lies. Of course he didn¶t because his story was a fabrication from the beginning to end.

I provided the Tribunal with all the documents to prove everything in his dispute to be lies. He had signed the April 13 2005 and the May 6 2005 agreements with a phony signature both identical and then denied having ever seen them before in his life. 43

I had brought the witness to the April 13 2005 agreement who attested before the hearing that he had witnessed Don sign the agreement on every one of the four pages and then he signed every page to witness that fact. Don stalled the hearing for another month when he was offered the chance to dispute anything that I had stated in a 14 page chronicle and submitted to the court about our relationship since first we met. Of course he could not dispute it without evidence and court was dismissed on July 28th 2005 with us to receive the Judicator¶s decision in the mail. The Tribunal ordered Don to pay««. You know all that don¶t you?

Please respond by e-mail Frank Gallagher

44

To: Michael Thomson RCMP Michael Thomson [Michael.Thomson@rcmp-grc.gc.ca] Cc mona.eichmann@rcmp-grc.gc.ca From: Frank Gallagher 34 Riverglen Drive Keswick,ON L4P 2P8 905-476-8959 tel/fax 905-716-4927 cell franklyone@hotmail.com Re Don Wilson (BioSafe) 4021 Stouffville Road (just east of Kennedy Road, south side) 1994 white cadilac de ville plate # ASKA 151 February 6, 2006 Dear Michael I am delivering the attached document to Don Wilson this morning. In it you will find more information that should tip the scales in favor of Justice. It requires you to make a few phone calls, to confirm my statements and then you should be on your way to the court for the elusive warrant to investigate Don Wilson for Fraud under the criminal code. He has harassed my ex girlfriend and my ex wife. I request that you make all the appropriate charges that the evidence allows for, and I remind you that I have evidence up to my ears on him if you will take the time to meet with me. I do not have enough ink to inform you of everything and I am a two fingered clutz on the keyboard. I also request that you pass on this correspondence to the Department of Justice and ask their office to respond to my writings. Please inform me as to whom you addressed this matter to and provide me with their e-mail address Please keep me up to speed and I request that you do likewise. Thank you Frank Gallagher 45

PS He was at Larry Honsberger¶s place a couple of weeks ago gathering up personal belongings that he had stored in his garage. He could be on the move or even worse, moved already. Have you checked his drivers license data? Michael Thomson [Michael.Thomson@rcmp-grc.gc.ca] To: Michael Thomson RCMP To: Don Wilson BioSafe 4021 Stouffville Road Stouffville,On. L4A 7X5 From: Frank Gallagher 34 Riverglen Drive Keswick,On L4P 2P8 February 6, 2006 Re; Order under Section 69, Tenant Protection Act,1997 File Number TNL-67103 Don As you are quite aware, August 8 2005 you were ordered to pay me back rent, etc totaling more than $10,000 It is no surprise that I have not received any correspondence from you to make arrangements to pay as you informed me that I will never see one penny from you. Just for the record, I offer you this opportunity to do so before I commence legal actions against you. You have had 6 months since the order, so I will expect your response immediately and nothing less than a reasonable plan of repayment with your 1st payment received by me by February 10th 2006 will stop these proceedings. Re: Investigations under the Canada Business Corporations Act, Part XIX Paragraph 229(1) I have requested the Royal Canadian Mounted Police investigate you. I insert the following five pages which I delivered to the RCMP on January 3 2006

The following pages totaling 13 will remind you of certain matters that I have requested you to deal with pertaining to my rights as a shareholder, to go to the registered office of the corporation and receive information such as the names of shareholders etc, and my right as a shareholder to request a shareholders meeting to elect a new Director within 18 months of my becoming a shareholder. 46

It has now been 24 months, and you have not held one shareholders meeting. You have not provided me or any of the shareholders with any reports of the state of the company in that 24 month period. I hereby request that you respond appropriately to all my concerns within the contents of these 13 pages and as stated above I expect a confirmation by February 10 2006 of your intention to comply and a date that you will deliver. These 13 pages will be submitted to the courts when I deem it to be prudent.

By the way. Don How did the tests go out in Montreal with Bodycote Ref # AEB 20050601 Ms. Wendy Moroz Fax 514-697-2090 e-mail bourg.m@bodycote.ca June 6 2005

I have tried to e-mail you at dnwilson.biosafe@rogers.com but it failed. Skipped out on them too, eh?

47

48

49

50

51

I hope that the evidence provided herein will be sufficient to warrant a proper investigation of Don Wilson,president and director of Bio-Safe Technologies Inc. Yours truly, Frank Gallagher
5

Well, it seems that I can hope all I want, because the RCMP replied as follows.

52

53

Larry Honsberger, Bio Safe share holder, has been communicating with Rod Bradbury who has informed Larry that he is not associated with Bio-Safe in any way, and most certainly has never been the Vice President of Research and Development ,Bio-Safe, as so represented in the prospectus you provided me before I invested. I have scanned in a copy(see pg 13) Oh, by the way, you still owe him $4,000 for services. Rod Bradbury work 250-652-9150 fax 250-652-9190 Larry Honsberger 905-953-1577 cell 905-252-5566 I will be requesting a statement from him on his letter head to attest to this matter. Larry is also communicating with Mark Edward Mathews by telephone and it seems that he is not and has never held the position of Marketing Consultant with Bio-Safe as you have represented on the prospectus you provided me before I invested. We will be asking him for a written statement also.Mark 416-251-5269 (see pg 13) Do you remember that prospectus, the one with the picture of you in what looks like a lab coat? Larry says that he and his girlfriend took that picture of you against the wall of his garage. He says it was not a lab coat but just a reversible street jacket. Imagine that, I sure thought it was a lab jacket, but then I suppose, you thought it looked a lot like a lab jacket yourself, Eh?(see pg 13) I had being talking to and corresponding with Mac Shahasavar from Winnipeg who informed me that he gave you $52,000 back in September 2004. You are aware of this because he flew down to meet with you back in June 2005 when he informed you that he would see you in court. Mac cell 204-962-2570 office 204-885-5555 ext.222 OK Direct 202-885-7777 You remember the $52,000 dollars that you received, the money that you said was coming in a couple of weeks which you were going to pay me the back rent that you owed me, and the promissory notes. Yes, that same $50,000 that you told my son Scott that you brought into the company after I had said that I was the only one who has brought investment money in since I had invested and gave you 6 months free rent. The same $50,000, that you told me that you never received. You remember Scott, the fellow you were signing agreements with behind my back to void agreements you had with me, to asssure Scott that my agreement of December 17 2004 was not valid while on the same day you signed agreements with me to assure me that our agreement of December 17 2004 was valid. I have all the documents. Sure you remember, that is the time you went missing for 2 or 3 weeks. That is when Shawn Pecore, of First Summit Capital,kept calling here to see where you were because you had important duties to perform to get us on the Nasdaq. You remember how after months of waiting to get on the Nasdaq you pulled the plug on the very last day, by not sending the authorization to the Nasdaq. Shawn Bus. 416-873-4773 Fax-416-266-4014 By the way, Shawn says that you got him for $5,000

I could go on and on, and I certainly intend to, but first I would like to offer you the opportunity to make things right. You may be anyone, but for sure, I mean you, Don Wilson I suppose you are still laughing, after all, you did tell me that I was out of your league and that I will never see any money from you. I must agree that you sure know the system. I am a little more informed today and I thank you for that. In fact, I now respect your knowledge of the system so much that if you fail to acknowledge that you will comply with all th the matters contained herein by February 10 2006 I will assume that I am still barking up a wrong tree and that you have faith that the system was created for you. I will be dropping off a copy of this in your PO Box # address, (the registered company office address) and your present address, 4021 Stouffville road. I will take a witness.

54

I have provided equal opportunity to do the right thing. I can count on me. Who else? WE WILL SEE. Frank

To those people who I pay their wages, as do all tax payers, I say this. I have identified a criminal on the loose and I have identified some of his crimes. I have provided you witnesses and I have spent a lot of time. You have passed the buck to me to do your job. That is the biggest crime. Your crime is the root of crime. It is your indifference to it that causes it to flourish. If you people will do nothing but push paper around, we innocent will continue to be pushed around by those people who the Charter of Rights and Freedom was written to rid society of. The next time you are told to forget common sense, because you are a cop now, you tell them, they are under arrest, because common sense is required to interpret the laws. They are using their position of trust to turn the law against society. That is a premeditated conspiracy to remove the people¶s rights as guaranteed by the Charter, for monetary gains, either personal or personal cause. For God¶s sake think. Then don¶t just sit their. Do something for Christ sakes. Please forgive my ignorance as to the procedures and words you people use, language, inherent to the legal system. After all, I am just a common citizen, still working to better my communication skills in everyday English. I am not requesting that you prosecute this man under the Canada Business Corporations Act because, it is quite clear that it has no force or effect due to its inconsistencies with The Constitution Act,1982, Part 1, Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms The Corporations Act is irrelevant to this situation, anyway because I am not asking you to deal with him as set out under the Act. I am describing certain crimes that this man has committed, using the words from the Act to describe them, which infringe on my rights as guaranteed by the Charter. I remind you that I am a layman in law, attempting to communicate in street English. I am unilingual in matters of law. You administers of the law are bilingual. You must be able to interpret my language and apply it to yours to place my charges where they fit relative to the pertinent laws which are the foundation of your language. I am asking you to rid society of a man who lives and breathes and thinks for the sole purpose of stealing money from others under false pretenses. That is fraud in my understanding of the word. Use your language to quote the law that he has broken that allows you to act. In my language, he is a pedophile. He has used his experience of the law to molest me, a kid, in mind and sole . 55

I have more evidence than you have bothered to look at and you are negligent in your duty as Law Enforcement Officers who have been paid well and provided great benefits by us tax payers to do so to ensure the Rights and Freedoms of we the people under the provisions as set out by the Charter. Just read the part, pertaining to the innocent criminal¶s rights. Investigate the evidence, which includes interviewing those people that I have mentioned, and if that is not enough, I will provide you with more names and more evidence. A little effort on your part, and you will have a warrant to remove this blight on society. The administers of law have chosen, to make lemonade from the lemons served upon society instead of cutting the tree. Do the job that you are paid to do and we will have a tamer society. At the very least, we will have a saner one. I am very concerned that police officers driving around with guns on their belts in vehicles marked ´To Serve and To Protect´ have been taught to forget common sense when performing their duties. May I suggest that you find the kingpin who has the power to embed such ideology into our line of defense against the bad guys, and deal with him under the criminal code. But, do not forget his rights. , Do not forget that he should expect no leniency, as well as others who have been put in positions of trust to see that we all live in a decent society as intended by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom. That is the law that we pay for. That is the Law that we expect. That is the law that we will get. It is a great idea to educate the public about the dangers that may lay waiting in the dark, but do not tell me to not go down a dark alley because a dangerous person is there. Go get him, if you know he is there. Don¶t feel that you have done your job by warning me. Do not blame me if someone steals from me in a society that you can not control. Control it for God¶s sake and you won¶t have to warn me. Deal with them where ever you find them. If they have deprived me of my rights then they have stolen much more than my money. Read Don Wilson his rights and arrest the bastard. I will look after my rights under the Canada Business Corporations Act if and when I please after you have dealt with him under the criminal code or whatever you deem to be consistent with my fundamental rights as a law abiding citizen under the charter and above all, make sure that you do not infringe on that bastards rights who could care less about my rights, because we do not want to see him back in society infringing at will on everyone and anyone, who were not made aware that he was out there, because you failed to educate us. Meanwhile, I will continue to look both ways when I cross a street and, what was it that I should do if I see a car coming? Never mind, I¶ll ask my mother when I get home. I need a common sense answer for this one.

56

PART I CANADIAN CHARTER OF RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law: Guarantee of Rights and Freedoms
Rights and freedoms in Canada

1.

The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society. Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice.

Life, liberty and security of person

7.

Treatment or punishment

12.

Everyone has the right not to be subjected to any cruel and unusual treatment or punishment.

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. ENFORCEMENT

Enforcement of guaranteed rights and freedoms

24.

(1) Anyone whose rights or freedoms, as guaranteed by this Charter, have been infringed or denied may apply to a court of competent jurisdiction to obtain such remedy as the court considers appropriate and just in the circumstances. (2) Where, in proceedings under subsection (1), a court concludes that evidence was obtained in a manner that infringed or denied any rights or freedoms guaranteed by this Charter, the evidence shall be excluded if it is established that, having regard to all the circumstances, the admission of it in the proceedings would bring the administration of justice into disrepute.

Exclusion of evidence bringing administration of justice into disrepute

57

Enforcement
Enforcement of guaranteed rights and freedoms

24.

(1) Anyone whose rights or freedoms, as guaranteed by this Charter, have been infringed or denied may apply to a court of competent jurisdiction to obtain such remedy as the court considers appropriate and just in the circumstances. (2) Where, in proceedings under subsection (1), a court concludes that evidence was obtained in a manner that infringed or denied any rights or freedoms guaranteed by this Charter, the evidence shall be excluded if it is established that, having regard to all the circumstances, the admission of it in the proceedings would bring the administration of justice into disrepute.

Exclusion of evidence bringing administration of justice into disrepute

PART VII GENERAL Primacy of Constitution 52. (1) The Constitution of Canada is the supreme law of Canada,

Do not bother to explain to me what 24 (1) means.

It means that it is inconsistent with the rights of others who have been guaranteed the provisions under the Charter. You can not wait for me to raise the money or decide that it is my duty as a decent person to deal with the matter when you law enforcement people have already been paid and trained at the tax payers expense to do so. Once again I reiterate that I have done plenty and am prepared to do even more to help society clean up its act. You do your job and then I will step on the bug while he is down. It sure beats him stepping all over a decent society, only to have the law stepping all over me, the victim when I am down. He has taken my money and other¶s and is planning now, how to take another¶s while you try to teach me how to do your job with no pay while I learn.

58

Please pay particular attention to
Life, liberty and security of person

Part 1, Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice.

7.

The exception is there for the depraved who deprive anyone of their guaranteed Rights and Freedoms. Make sure that you do not deprive the depraved for they will surely cry foul. By so doing, they will confess to premeditated deprivation. Which should warrant a larger sentence. For they do understand Rights Let them know That we do TOO There is the law in black and white. I want my guarantee please.

With regards to my rights to see the company books and acquire the relative information as per the Canada Business Corporations Act. Michael J. Thomson of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police informs me that Don Wilson¶s statement that I need a subpoena / warrant to review the books are erroneous. Does anyone know where I can hire some goons to assist me while I assert my rights and it is difficult these days to find a gun to protect me when this big depraved fellow continues to thwart my efforts? If I were to ask you to come with me to protect me while I attempt to carry on my duties as a citizen shareholder of BioSafe, would you? Would you act as my witness to his denying me of my rights? Would you accompany me to prevent a crime? Would you rather wait until he assaults me? You have taken my rights to carry a gun to protect me. Are you not responsible then to protect me ? How often do you leave my rights and others to chance? Why does my guarantee kick in only after you have failed to provide my guarantee? How come I can not sue the administers of the law for damages ensued due to failure to back their guarantee? Equality Rights Equality before and 15. under law and equal protection and benefit of law (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. 59

To: Royal Canadian Mounted Police Michael Thom...@rcmp-grc.gc.ca FROM: franklyone@hotmail.com March 12 2006 As you are aware I have been corresponding with your office as well as many other Ontario Public Offices with the intent to have a former tenant of mine, Donald Wilson investigated for the purpose of charging him with fraud.It has been quite a frustrating experience causing my health to deteriorate making it even more difficult in my quest for justice. Make no mistake, I will continue until I can no longer do so. I hope that it is taken in the way that it is intended and I remind you that I have all my writings well distributed. At that time I or a representative will seek legal counsel to act on my behalf for the acquisition of my guarantee under Schedule A Part 1 Charter of Rights and Freedoms. 7. Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice. The request for you to investigate Don Wilson remains and I will reiterate my concerns later. However, during the course of attempting to find justice it became abundantly clear that the legal system is not programmed to provide for the peoples rights as guaranteed in the Charter. In fact it is set up to the contrary. As honest and fair as the Constitution Act, 1982 may appear in writing at first glance it is not so, upon application. I am assuming that the intent of the Constitution is to provide moral, conscientious law abiding Canadian people with a sense of security against the criminal element who have a tendency to wreak havoc on the people when left unchecked. Maybe I am wrong. If so, Please explain As I wrote above, I now have very good evidence to prove that the system is geared for the protection and benefit of the criminal element rather than the moral, conscientious people of Canada who finance the legal system. Charge (1) That is outrageous and in fact the tax payers are subjected to cruel or unusual treatment 12. Everyone has the right not to be subjected to any cruel or unusual treatment or punishment. This can not be allowed to continue and I therefore request that you investigate the whole system from top to bottom for the purpose of charging those authorities sanctioned to do for the people who do the people. They conspire to steal from the people together with the criminal element for benefit and loss to the majority of the people of the Democracy of Canada. Charge (2) They aid and abet the criminal element. The criminals aid and abet them. 15. (1) Every individual is equal before the 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. Charge (3) Fraud-They misrepresent the Constitution for personal financial gain or power or both. I expect you to make all the charges available to you under the Constitution Act, 1982 and I suggest that you apply common sense to your reasoning. I also suggest that you publish the intended charges for the purpose of gathering more evidence and proceed in a manner of a Class Action Suit. (Perhaps rent a barn for the evidence) Supporting Evidence begins now which will prove without a doubt that they are guilty and you must investigate to determine each person's extent of guilt as to premeditated, ignorance or innocent by reason of insanity. Incompetence is a given. CONSTITUTION ACT, 1982 PART I CANADIAN CHARTER OF RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS

60

15. (1) Every individual is equal before the 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. Tenant Protection Act,1997 A landlord must pay the tenant six per cent interest on the deposit every year. Order under Section 69 Tenant Protection Act, 1997 File Number:TNL-67103 August 8 2005 Tenant was ordered to pay me 4% on owed back rent after August 19 2006. The tenant was not ordered to pay me interest on the rent money he owes me from August 1 2004-August 19 2005 The order was made under the Tenant Protection Act, 1997. Why is it not the Landlord and Tenant Protection Act, 1997? That infers that they are on the side of the Tenant which the evidence indicates. June 6 2005 I filed an application for the eviction of my tenant and attached an agreement between the tenant and I, dated May 6 2005 which evidenced the fact that the tenant agreed to leave May 31 2005 and that he owed me $800 per month for back rent since August 1 2004 June 10 2005 The tenant filed a dispute with the Tribunal stating nothing but lies which I proved at the first day of the hearing June 30 2005. June 30 2005 Day 1 - Ontario Housing and Rental Tribunal hearing The tenant reiterated his lies at the hearing. I asked the judicator if there will be charges laid for lying, and she gave me a spin which left me understanding that she had the authority to forward for an investigation but she never gave me a definite YES Charge (1)(2) She never did charge him. Do you get it? He lied to beat me out of more than $10,000 and the Tribunal, Province of Ontario think that is okay. Well I don't and I suspect the taxpayers don't, Equal rights? I guess everyone should just lie to guarantee equality. Charge (3 During the course of the hearing I was told to let Don see a copy of the May 6 2005 agreement which he denied having ever seen. I introduced another agreement dated April 13 2005 which was similar in content to that of the May 6 2005 agreement which I showed Don. He denied ever seeing that. I introduced the witness of the document to the judicator and he identified Don Wilson (tenant) as the person who signed it The Tenant Protection Act favors the tenant to the detriment of the landlord which is as I witnessed on cases prior to my hearing. I brought to the attention of the judicator that Don Wilson had signed both the agreements which he had denied ever seeing, with a phony signature. The judicator finally acknowledged that she knew what was going on and throughout the 1st meeting I introduced further evidence which disputed every word Don Wilson said and that which he filed in his dispute. The last thing I gave her was a copy of a 14 page chronicle detailing events since the day I met Don Wilson up to June 30 2005 which she asked me to give Don a copy.. Don was asked to read it and respond to the Tribunal and provide me with a copy by July 21 2005. A continuance was scheduled for July 28 2005 . July 28 2005 Just a recap of the 1st hearing and it was made known that Don Wilson had not responded to the 14 page chronicle. How could he, everything in it is true and documented. The hearing was adjourned with the judicator saying that we would be receiving her decision in the mail. 61

August 10 2005 I received the Order under Section 69 Tenant Protection Act, 1997 File Number TNL-67103 Don was ordered to pay me $10,000 + and ordered to vacate my premises by August 18 2005. On the 18th Don Wilson phoned me to ask if he could stay another few days and I responded "No, if you are not out by midnight I will go to the Sheriff's office to have you removed" He just laughed and said I didn't have a clue about how things worked. August 19 2005 I went to the Sherriff's office as per the Order which clearly stated that the Sherriff was directed to remove him on the 19th if he had not left but staff demanded $330 before doing so. I was broke because of Don and now when he(tenant) refused to obey the Order I had to pay $330. August 24 Don vacated my house owing me $10359.20 for rent which included the $150 that I paid to file for his eviction. He managed to stay just about three months longer past the day that he had agreed to leave( May 31 2005) at my loss and his benefit. If I would like to take a shot at getting my money back I can go to another Provincial Office and start again by filing a civil suit and pay more money $75 I believe and they will see what they can do. I was informed though that I can only claim up to $10,000 in civil court which would be a loss to me of $434.20 + but a benefit to the tenant. As he also owed me approximately $10,000 in promissory notes and phone bills etc. I had to consider going to a higher court and deal with both matters. But, he still owes me proper certificates and purchase agreements for the $66,500 I invested in his company BioSafe and he also owes me proper certificates, etc for friends of mine who I talked into investing. (approximately $35,000) He also owes me 7,000,000 shares of the company in accordance with the May 6 2005 agreement He refuses to show me the company records and he refuses to hold a shareholders meeting nor provide me with a list of the shareholders. He is required to do these things under The Canadian Business Corporations Act but I have no money at the moment to retain a lawyer. I have been informed by the York Regional Police that even if I get Don Wilson to court it is quite likely that he will find his way around the courts or perhaps he will even claim bankruptcy and I will have just wasted more money and time. The YRP also informed me that that they are frustrated all the time because it happens over and over again. They suggested that I consider just forgetting all about it and move on as many have before me. I don't think so. If I did though it would be another huge benefit to Don Wilson (Bad GUY) I am the Good Guy. I say that for the benefit of those who just do not get it. Of course that is what I still believe the Constitution Act, 1982 is intended to recognize. Excluding my concerns under the Corporations Act which you and YRP like to refer me to as you refuse to deal with the evidence provided against Don Wilson (tenant) dealing with fraud and misrepresenting the facts in a Provincial Public Office, I will now continue to provide evidence for your attention as I mentioned in the beginning. We must stay focused on the 3 Charges I have asked you to investigate against the authorities under the Constitution Act, 1982 (1) As you are aware, I brought my concerns to the Judicator, Ontario Housing and Rental Tribunal with negative response (2) I brought my concerns to the Investigations and Enforcement Office with negative response (3) I brought my concerns to the York Regional Police fraud squad with negative response. (4) I brought my concerns to you Royal Canadian Mounted Police with negative response. 62

(5) I brought my concerns to the 3 major political parties with no response (6) I brought my concerns to my MP with no response (7) I brought my concerns to the Governor General's Office with no response. (8) I brought my concerns to the Attorney Generals Office with no response (9) I brought my concerns to the Defense Department with no response. (10) I brought my concerns to the Provincial Police with no response I have in fact brought it to many more but I think that I have given you 10 good reasons to investigate my concerns under the Constitution Act, 1982 7. Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice. 15. (1) Every individual is equal before the 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. I am presently being discriminated against as are all taxpayers who pay for such a system that uses their taxes to finance the whole damn system to use the money against them such as for the benefit of tenants which I have provided the evidence today. I have a stack of correspondence to prove that which I state. I also have an abundance of correspondence and evidence that proves that the taxpayers as well as I have been deprived of our rights as guaranteed under the Charter and will continue to be deprived until an investigation gets under way, but I do not want to lead you back to the Corporation Act response. Please do not suggest to me that I do not have enough evidence to prove beyond a doubt that they are guilty to acquire a warrant as did the York Regional Police. The way the system works according to them is that a judge acts as a middleman between them and the court and this judge requires to see such evidence before granting a warrant to investigate to accumulate such evidence. Kinda protecting the criminal element eh? I also would like to remind you that you can not put the onus on me to bring this man to trial via the Corporations Act because I am not in the position to proceed as many before me. I am not responsible to ensure the guarantee as provided in the Charter but you will find those offices sanctioned to do so in Schedule A of the Constitution. That by the way, is the way the system operates today causing criminal action to flourish which in turn causes the legal system to flourish which benefits the Public Service and even more so, those sanctioned to guarantee the provisions of the Charter to the honest people while the honest people are being robbed left and right by those whom they paid to protect them I would not be surprised if the mafia was running the country nor would I be if I get a visit from them. Failure to deal with this matter further guarantees that the people have no guarantee of rights under the Constitution and the criminally inclined will continue to reap the benefits provided by section 15(1) while the tax payers continue to pay to be shafted. I doubt there exists, as many masochists as the authorities may think. 15. (1) Every individual is equal before the 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. franklyone

63

64

April 14 2006
Prerequisites of Enforcement Police Commissioners IRREPROACHABLE Consistent in Sanity- Integrity - Morality- Responsibility - Due Diligence - Reason ± Proficiency -Purpose It is obvious to me that you people must be gifted with these traits or appear to be gifted with them You people have a very significant role to play in society as I see it from the people¶s point of view and I realize as you do that I am not authorized to speak for the people, however in matters of THE LAW the only authority is the Constitution Act, 1982, the (Document) itself which must be presumed consistent in SPIRIT: Consistent in SanityIntegrity - Morality- Responsibility - Due Diligence - Reason ± Proficiency- Purpose Spirit The Constitution is the SPIRIT of Canada where the Spirit of God is supreme Everyone in Canada must be coherent to the Spirit of God to be consistent with THE LAW REALITY In matters of enforcement, Reality must be dealt with Realistically Consistent in Sanity- Integrity - Morality- Responsibility - Due Diligence - Reason ± Proficiency- Purpose It is due to Reality and attentiveness to it that the Constitution Act 1982, was enacted PRIORITY In society no person is above the THE LAW therefore THE LAW has Priority over all matters CONFIDENCE Confidence plays an important factor in THE LAW as we must be confident in the SPIRIT Consistent in Sanity- Integrity - Morality- Responsibility - Due Diligence - Reason ± Proficiency- Purpose Having addressed that issue over and over again I give it a TEN in the Spirit of God who is supreme In Reality we have People prone to err, capable of evil unimaginable and good not yet realized within the SPIRIT of the CONSTITUTION yet the CONSTITUTION demands it for the benefit of society. Obviously given the PRIORITY of AUTHORITY the Document alone has no authority unless it is respected by everyone and given that the Spirit within the document was not respected before it was enacted which gave cause for its enactment it stands alone inane to purpose without enforcement consistent with its SPIRIT. The establishment that was in place before the enactment of the Constitution Act, 1982 had the authority to enact it, we must presume, or it is meaningless and if not enforced as to the Spirit of THE LAW it is meaningless. This leaves room for plenty of meanlingless argument which must be handed over to those of competent jurisdiction in such matters, the Law Society of Upper Canada which makes everything meaningless to their benefit. PRESUMPTION Is a state of mind known to be true which leads you to the evidence which supports or denies the presumption which consistency of evidence to the intended purpose proves.

65

FOCUS For there to be LAW and Order there must be Law and Order THE LAW is fixed and the infrastructure in place including the human resources retained for the purpose. The people have carried out their responsibility according to THE LAW and elected people to represent them, in the Spirit of THE LAW which gave them their authority. You Police Commissioners were granted your authority under the precept of THE LAW to enforce it in the Spirit of THE LAW which granted you said authority. It is the authority of THE LAW that has societies respect and to be consistent with society you must hold it in respect. Given the position you people hold in respect to THE LAW, it is incumbent on you to see that THE LAW is given the respect it had before the human factor was introduced to enforce it. It is the human factor which has given cause for THE LAW and unfortunately it is humans that must administer THE LAW cognizant to this Reality. All things big and small in matters of THE LAW must be presumed consistent in SPIRIT: Consistent in Sanity- Integrity - Morality- Responsibility - Due Diligence - Reason ± Proficiency- Purpose The Constitution insists the Spirit of God and the people be one and the same and given that representatives and the human resources of the establishment are people, they must be consistently of the spirit of the Constitution which authorized their positions of trust and authority to draw taxes to finance the system for the spirit intended. Given the extraordinary power granted in TRUST and the realities attributed to humankind this offers the opportunity for BULLYISM to run rampant throughout which is akin to Despotism contrary to the Spirit of THE LAW. Given the probability of such an occurrence it emphasizes the responsibility placed upon you to ensure such absurdities do not occur on your watch. It is sad that once it happens and given that the armed forces are reluctant to think as to where their authority lay thus proving they are irresponsible in matters of THE LAW which granted them their authority, and irresponsible to the people who financed them and provided their weapons which they would shoot their own people down with on the command by those who actually hand them the money. It is imperative when they stand proud when Oh Canada is sung, they are coherent to the words ³We stand on guard for Thee´ with emphasis as to who Thee is, which of course is the Spirit of the Constitution and the Spirit of God residing within the people. Given that reality, and the fact the armies are incoherent to matters of politics which they will assert and the probability of our demise if our proud honorable soldiers were in the hands of tyrannical forces, which they would not be cognizant of due their endeavor to ignorance, they would shoot their own parents and feel right proud in service of their country they purport to serve. Realities which are predictable and not attended to are premeditated realities and those with the responsibility to address such matters must expect punishment due in neglect of their responsibility. In the same consideration if those assigned the responsibility to ensure tyranny does not exist in a democracy do not tend to their responsibilities the people will rise in frustration and those who neglected their duties would definitely be held accountable and when arms are fired in anger without knowing who is the good guy many will die undeservingly and the others will find their place in hell.

66

Hell is a place which may or may not exist at the end of the line but in reality the whole scenario is hell and a probability

certain, due the neglect of responsibility by the Police Commissioner¶s, upon it becoming reality. It is sad that such an occurrence can happen in reality and it is even more sad that the people responsible to ensure such things don¶t happen are incognizant to the realities and incoherent when all around them reality exists for their analysis. When the Constitution is consistent in SPIRIT: Consistent in Sanity- Integrity - Morality- Responsibility - Due Diligence - Reason ± Proficiency- Purpose and your officers state they are taught THE LAW has nothing to do with COMMON SENSE and they are often frustrated when they attempt to present the evidence before the courts, considering the soundness of the Document and the PRIORITY of it in the whole scheme of things I would say everything else is the proof of the scheme, not conducive to the Spirit of the Constitution.
Not to act due to ignorance, incompetence or in on the conspiracy is a matter for the people to decide but regardless which you are negligent of your TRUSTED duty if you do not commence or cause proceedings to commence appropriate to the evidence which I have provided in the Spirit of the Constitution.

I remind you that all people are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law and that all people will proclaim their innocence, even the guilty and they will use everything they have to allude justice which includes using another¶s weapon which is not rightfully their own. In this regard you will be up against many who will attempt to use an authority which they do not have to obstruct justice and I request you do your duty as required and authorized by the Constitution Act, 1982 and arrest any person who would stand in your way in compliance with your responsibility to maintain Law and Order in pursuant of justice in the courts of our land. Given the reality of all the realities which exist and the fact that the York Regional Police officers F. Kerr and G. Rorke who are considered the foremost authority in York Region on that which is considered the threshold of proof beyond a reasonable doubt to present to get a warrant in such matters as I have addressed and considering one Judge may grant a warrant and another not which is proof of inconsistency in the application of THE LAW it would be negligent in matters of gathering all the evidence available in pursuit of that which I allege if you didn¶t simultaneously submit a warrant to all authorities who have jurisdiction in these matters to provide a warrant so their actions attest to that which is fact either in support of or contrary to that which I allege. I need not remind you of matters of conflict of interest and you by your actions will determine where your interests lay. Forgive me for my attitude but the evidence clearly explains why and in matters of respect for THE LAW people earn their respect relative to their respect for THE LAW and in matters of those financed under the authority of THE LAW to enforce THE LAW in a manner so as to have the people respect THE LAW, who have difficulty discerning the difference between THE LAW and the people administering THE LAW which by THE LAW must be coincidental in Spirit, you must act in a manner so as to gain their respect. It is with the due respect to the evidence which gives me disrespect for THE LAW (establishment) not the Document that I respectfully address you with disrespect unjustly having not waited for your response however justly that such tyranny has been permitted and continues on your watch. 67

In respect of the authority and trust granted to you by the people via the authority of the CONSTITUTION ACT, 1982 I trust and respect that you will use said authority with diligence due this abhorid invasion of tyrannical forces upon the foundation and Spirit of the Constitution and the Spirit of the PEOPLE of Canada.
The power of the Spirit of THE LAW and the Spirit of God is not in the Belief but the knowing the Spirit is true for although we do not have proof beyond any doubt of the existence of God we have proof beyond all doubt that there is THE LAW (Document) and the human resources (Establishment) who are purported to administer THE LAW in the Spirit of God, there is no proof that the Spirit of THE LAW in the Spirit of God exists within the establishment nor is there proof that the Spirit of THE LAW and THE SPIRIT of God exists in the people of Canada. People will be people for they were born that way, ignorant as hell but there is no excuse in remaining that way given the facts Reality relentlessly pours upon them every moment in time. The human brain is the most marvelous entity in the world without which there would be no Reality to observe and given there is proof everywhere of Reality not dealt with, there is no proof that any person uses their brain marvelously. As long as I try there is hope for me and hope for the world for some day if I perchance upon the marvel which will cause others to react sanely together in the Spirit of God rather than insanely in procrastination of their Beliefs which will remain eternaly Beliefs, with no effort in application to bring the Spirit of God to existence. Isn¶t it strange that those closest and actively participating in concepts of Belief know the least and are the least competent to be of use to the Reality of the Spirit of the Belief which leaves those of us in respect of the Spirit in disrespect of the Believers who will not look at TRUTH when it is handed them for the viewing. In that respect with so many of Belief, one must reconsider what is meant by the term Common Sense. In Reality we have the immoral who have sense in common with each other and we have the moral who believe and trust in the powers that be of State and Church and as they take their last breathe as the waters flood over them from global warming, the consequences of the Reality of their Beliefs, they will retain their faith to their Beliefs as they spew out in panic all they have learned to say upon a meeting with their Lord which will never happen. God sees all and is wise beyond their imaginations and yet God is a Spirit alone inane as the Spirit of THE LAW which stands alone without due respect to share the burden in the SPIRIT intended in the Spirit of THE LAW as stated in the very first line of the Charter which states Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law. I remind you that the Charter was enacted in 1982 to amend oversights not specifically mentioned in earlier versions of THE LAW of Canada and therefore has priority over such matters and considering laws and decisions made in contravention of the Spirit of the Constitution Act, 1982 have no value as precedence, however evidence of the truth that they acted inconsistent with the Constitution Act, 1982. Any argument to this would make the Charter meaningless which of course will be dealt with by the specialist¶s of meaningless. If there is a God I wish He would make a personal appearance to explain it to these poor ignorant fools before they take everyone with them. In lieu of that I am ready and pleased to move on to see for my self that which I know to be true from viewing the evidence consistent in SPIRIT Consistent in Sanity- Integrity - Morality- Responsibility - Due Diligence - Reason ± Proficiency ±Purpose. What if I am wrong? The worst thing that could happen to me is eternal life trying to explain to the ignorant the ignorance of their ways which I am already experienced in but with little success but with the advantage of eternal time perhaps, but although

68

if I am restricted to the limitations of God who will not present Himself in person I will be of no better use than if I were dead. Perhaps Martyrism is the way to go but it does seem rather superfluous to me for my preferred objective is to see the Spirit of God alive and well within the Spirits of the people as intended while I am alive and well but I thank God for my time limit here on earth, successful or not for I will finally get to sleep knowing it is for all eternity. Do I here an Amen to that? Amen

69

October 23 2006 RE: Charter Rights Obstruction of Justice WHATEVER (NOT A CIVIL MATTER) Thank you very much for your response, but I have been there done that. They refuse to respond to my concerns. On or about January 3 2006 I submitted a preliminary folder to my local RCMP detachment (Newmarket) laying out the details of the case and January the 19 2006 Michael Thomson, Sgt responded stating that I had proposed an investigation be undertaken using the auspices of the Canada Business Corporations Act and as such, this matter has been taken by their office to review. It is the opinion of the DOJ and the RCMP concur that this is a civil litigation matter. B«S« When I first wrote I described the whole story and did make reference to certain offences the Director of the Company, I had invested in, was guilty of under the Act, however, I, being an amateur at this type of thing, just an ordinary taxpayer did my best to present all that I knew about the case trusting those who we pay and have gained experience in such matters would use their experience to read the information I provided and translate it to legal definition which you all are familiar with. I did not know what section, subsection of which Laws or Acts my former tenant was guilty of when he fabricated his dispute and committed fraud at an Ontario Rental Housing Tribunal.(I do now and I have informed them but they are oblivious to my concerns.)

From: frank gallagher [mailto:franklyone@hotmail.com] Sent: July 15, 2006 3:16 PM To: info@ecosafenatural.com Subject: BioSafe July 14, 2006 To: Mr. Rod Bradbury Eco Safe Natural Products Inc. info@ecosafenatural.com From: Frank Gallagher 34 Riverglen Drive Keswick,On L4P 2P8 franklyone@hotmail.com Re: BioSafe Natural Products Inc. Dear Mr. Bradbury I am a major share holder of Bio Safe Natural Products Inc. second only to Don Wilson, Pres. CEO , whatever. 70

That means that I am the biggest loser in his scam. I am not the least bit happy with this man because I have evidence beyond any and all reasonable doubt that he has scammed me for approximately $85,000 and many of my friends for an additional $50,000. The man is going to face the music so to speak and that you can take to the bank. So, what has this got to do with you?

Larry Honsberger has informed me that he has been communicating with you on several occasions and he has requested a letter regarding your involvement with BIO SAFE and Don Wilson and you agreed to send it each time. He tells me that you have nothing to do with the company and in fact he has stiffed you for about $4,000. Please give me your full attention. The stage is set and Don is nearing his day in court. I have two documents signed by him and I, one witnessed by my mother and the other by a friend of mine which he denied having ever seen at the Ontario Housing Rental Tribunal which I presented when I had him evicted from my premises. The signature he used on these documents is not the signature that he has used on all the other documents I have been party to and his denial of having ever seen them puts him in a tough spot. This along with the fact that he has not issued the proper documents and certificates for our shares along with his refusal to carry on business as required under the Business Corporation Act leaves him adrift without a paddle. These documents consisting of 4 pages each, contained information concerning the rent he owed me and corporation matters. I presented the witness at the Tribunal hearing who attested to the fact that Don Wilson did indeed sign one of the documents and of course mother will be there to attest to the other one when I am ready to put him where he belongs. That is fraud and it is documented by the Tribunal and I have a digital recording of the hearing. In addition to that he completely fabricated the dispute he filed with the Tribunal and reiterated the crap at the hearing. I easily proved this with the relative documents and he was ordered to pay me $10,000 for back rent and of course he was ordered to leave my premises. That was last August and he has not paid me to date.

Now all that remains for me is to clarify if in fact you are the Vice- President of Research and Development as stated in his business prospectus which he presented to me at the time I invested. He also showed me your site at ecosafenatural.com which was quite impressive. 71

Please sign a statement before Notaries Public declaring you have never held the position of Vice- President of Research and Development or any other position with BioSafe Natural Products Inc. or any other company owned by Don Wilson if that is fact.

Any other information you care to add would be appreciated such as how much he owes you and why? As you have promised to send it on several occasions and failed to do so I now wonder if you are as innocent as you told Larry.

This is very important that you send this immediately or I will have no choice but to name you in the law suit along with Don. As Don is likely to have no money you may be held liable. Thank you Frank Gallagher

72

Mark Mathews refuses to respond.

Rod Bradbury was never the Vice ±President (See page 13) Fraud

73

-----Original Message----From: Ecosafe [mailto:info@ecosafenatural.com] Sent: July 18, 2006 7:39 PM To: 'frank gallagher' Subject: RE: BioSafe

Frank I do not appreciate the threatening tone at the end of your email. I am a very busy man running my own business and have long since written off any money owed to me by Don Wilson. However I will give you the series of events you asked for as I see them.

Firstly, I am founder and president of EcoSafe Natural Products Inc., a company incorporated in the province of British Columbia. I founded the company as EcoSafe Technologies, a sole proprietorship, in 1991 and incorporated it in 2000 when the name was also changed to EcoSafe Natural Products Inc.I am not an officer of any of Don Wilson¶s Companies and never have been. It was back in the summer of 2003 that Don Wilson first contacted me. I¶m not sure how he got my name, possibly from my company website. He had a lot of smooth talk and was talking about the fact that he had investors ready to put millions into his venture and needed my expertise to develop the products. The name he gave me for his company at the time was Agrotex International Inc. I soon realized this guy was unfocussed and flipped from one get rich quick idea to another. He talked about other companies he had or was founding --- EcoTurf Natural Products Inc., AquaSafe Environmental Products Ltd. I wrote him a proposal to do some work and started developing some herbicidal and insecticidal products. I sent him several samples to test and billed him for $4,661.35 for the work we had done in the lab and for the chemicals, time and courier charges. The bill was sent out at the end of November 2003. When I didn¶t receive payment and heard he had changed the name of his company to BioSafe Natural Products Inc. I realized I had been taken for a mug. I should also inform that his address was changing on a monthly basis which really got me suspicious. He led me to believe he had an office which I later found was totally untrue. I then got a call from an investor of his Mark Matthews. Mark proceeded to tell me the truth about Don. Apparently he was cab driving for a living and had just bought a new Cadillac and was driving it around living the rich life but not making the payments on it. Mark said he expected the car to reposessed at any time. I sent Don several bill reminders in an attempt to get the money but his email kept changing and the emails were undeliverable and the letters came back. I wrote the whole episode off as a business learning experience and moved on. Then to my surprise in the summer of 2004 I received a call from Don saying he finally had the investment he had been looking for and was ready to start developing and selling products. Of course by now I didn¶t trust him one inch and didn¶t want to do business with him. However he was insistent and flew out here to visit our lab. I informed him that we would do no further work until he paid his outstanding bill and that any future work that EcoSafe did would need to be paid for up front. He then back peddled and started to indicate that he hadn¶t actually got any money yet but it was imminent. However much to my surprise he wrote EcoSafe a cheque for $3,500 and even more to my surprise it didn¶t bounce when I cashed it. Over the next few weeks he began to push me more and more to do further work but I reiterated that when he settled up his account and gave me payment up front for any future work we 74

could do business. This finally caused him to get abusive and threatening and I haven¶t heard from him since. Regards....Rod Bradbury President EcoSafe Natural Products Inc. <http://www.ecosafenatural.com/> #7-6782 Veyaness Road Saanichton, BC Canada V8M 2C2 Tel. (250) 652-9150 Fax (250) 652-9190 <http://www.ecosafenatural.com/> ________________________________

July 19 2006 Rod I thank you very much for filling me in. I also apologize for what you took as a threat tone. It was meant as a nudge and to save us both any unnecessary inconveniences. You must understand that this is quite a serious matter to me. It was a normal undesirable recourse to get to the truth as I saw it and I am determined to get to the truth.

Your statement "This finally caused him to get abusive and threatening and I haven¶t heard from him since." leads me to believe that we are talking about the same man. That describes my last meeting with him. I have a copy of an e-mail from another person asking Don to refrain from the same. I and my mother have also been threatened on many occasions and he has resorted to smashing my furniture in my basement apartment and I have had the police here on at least three occasions but they say there is nothing that they can do. Evidence I hold proves beyond any doubt in my mind that Don Wilson is a crook and his performance at the Ontario Housing Rental Tribunal documented it. Since the Tribunal hearing last August I have corresponded with the Tribunal, Enforcement and Investigations, York Regional Police and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police who all claim that there is nothing that they can do about it. 75

I concluded that the system aids and abets the crooks and fails to protect the innocent. It is not about me, because my money is long gone. It is about the system and the likes of Don Wilson. I had a couple of meetings with the YRP fraud squad and they informed me that this type of thing goes on all the time and they are frustrated by the courts who refuse to grant them a warrant to investigate. They have no doubt that he is a con man but there is nothing they can do. They tell me I could get a lawyer but he would be negligent if he didn't inform me that it is highly unlikely that I will get my money back and I would just be wasting more money. People just usually write it off as you have. I have no doubt that my money is long gone but there is obviously something wrong with the system if people like Don who know the system are allowed to rob the people at will because those who create the system condone their actions.

I feel it is my moral duty to save others from the grief this man, and the like will bestow upon others if he is not reigned in.

The immoral know the system well as do those who are mandated in Schedule A of the Constitution Act,1982 who are obliged to put a legal system in place to provide for a moral society as per Schedule B, Part 1, Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The evidence that I now hold through correspondence with the various public departments proves beyond a doubt that the system in place provides for an immoral society and there is no guarantee to protect our rights as provided by the Charter. Those mandated to protect society not only refuse to protect us but they have set up a system which thrives by condoning the actions of the immoral which in turn allows the immoral to flourish which allows them to flourish. The system is so flawed that while it is their duty to rid society of the immoral and even though they take what they like through taxes to do so, they pass the buck back to each taxpayer to fight it out individually with the immoral and in most cases it is not financially feasible and the victim writes it off as you have. Hence these deprivations go unnoticed to the public. The system is self serving. They serve themselves and when the taxpayers go to them for help they say sorry, this is a self serve system. Please see the attachments to the Ombudsman and my MPP, Julia Munroe which explains better. So, once again I apologize but it is difficult to get help from either those we have paid to help us or those who have been victimized. 76

That is the system. It is a huge challenge I have taken on and it is often difficult to find words to get a persons attention but no matter the difficulties of the task I state no threats, just fact. It would be most detrimental to the cause if I were to revert to immoral ways to achieve morality. The immoral would be the first to cry foul. Thank you, Frank Gallagher

77

Copy of letter to Ombudsman dated May 31 2006

They also have copy of BLACK BOOK

78

October 23 2006

They refuse to respond

Common sense told me that justice is not achievable in an environment of lies. The ORHT and the Investigations and Enforcement Unit refused to file charges. I took the matter to the York Regional Police who reviewed my case and informed me this was a civil matter. Like the YRP, Michael Thomson, Sgt RCMP has chosen to focus on the part about the Corporations Act rather than deal with the root of my concerns which surfaced at the Ontario Rental Housing Tribunal when they declined to charge my former tenant with fraud and filing a fabricated dispute. These offices are financed by the people to administer justice to and for the people. Both of these investigation forces financed by the people for the people have indicated one of two things maybe both, by their actions. Their inability to investigate objectively or and negligence to their duty to protect the people of Canada as per the Constitution Act, 1982 and more particularly Part 1,Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This is their responsibility to the people, but they have chosen to shrug their duty. When they failed me I went to the YRP and RCMP to ask them to look into the matter and all they did was investigate to see how they could put the responsibility on to me ignoring all other evidence. Not once did they refer to the root of the problem evidencing they are also part of the problem. This is absolutely abhorrent and intolerable and proves that we people can not expect justice or protection from those who hold positions of trust within our legal system. Since their decline to deal with the matter I have written many departments at all levels of government which have either failed to respond or declined to deal with the problem. Those who have responded are consistent with the opinions of the YRP and the RCMP. This does not prove them to be right and me wrong but only evidences that which I have stated in my writings and all the correspondence up to September 15 2006 has been filed in the ³BLACK BOOK´ so that it may be presented for review. I first began my commentaries which contained my views as an ordinary citizen living in the democratic country of Canada who was of the opinion that the government was a group of people chosen by the people to look after and protect us. As the correspondence poured in it became apparent that my views were either wrong or the government people were oblivious to the peoples concerns. I am the type of person who considers all evidence as I learned early in life you can not get to the truth without doing so.

79

I picked up this good habit early in my legal surveying career and found it very useful and in fact a prerequisite for my duty to reestablish property lines in their original position as required by law. Of course law is the authority to do so and the mandate is to observe and obey the law. I often found my self surrounded by people who were ignorant to the law and it is a shame there exists such a majority of ignorance for it just made my job more difficult but I have forty years experience in such matters and I know for fact that law and me prevail over ignorance, most certainly when common sense is used to reason with and I must insist that common sense is a prerequisite in all matters of law if they are to be understood and obeyed. There must be reason for everything we do and in matters of law we must apply our arguments to the reason for the Constitution Act, 1982 and all laws must be reasoned for that reason. Any presentation of law which is inconsistent to the reason for the Constitution is not a viable presentation and it is stated or implied in Part 1, Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law: and supported by 52. (1) The Constitution of Canada is the supreme law of Canada, and any law that is inconsistent with the provisions of the Constitution is, to the extent of the inconsistency, of no force or effect. COMMON SENSE MUST REIGN

Laws must be read in support of the intent of the Constitution Act, 1982 The reason for the Act is obvious to anyone of sound mind. People reason in many different ways and when allowed to act on their reasoning to the detriment of others a peaceful society is unachievable. This is prominent in our history books and a good example of this is present today as we attempt to resolve the consequences of such reason which inflicted dire problems upon the aboriginal people which in turn inflicted dire problems upon us all. I commend the government for being coherent to the fact that the aboriginal people were wronged and I use this scenario as a very good example of reasoning after the fact rather than reasoning in a timely fashion so as to prevent the necessity. It¶s an ³If I only knew then what I know now´ kind of thing. Of course the people of the government today did not exist when this damage was done so they can not be blamed nor can the rest of the people of Canada. Simple fact is none of us are to blame for the initial deprivation but the problem exists and it must be dealt with as soon as possible. We are to blame for taking so long to understand and there is no excuse for that. It is just fact that we are slow to understand, some slower than others. 80

Victims catch on real quick and government leaders are the slowest who do not get it until they fall upon their own sword. They truly never get it but they understand the necessity to please the voters. Kind of a personal thing then and they bend over backwards for their cause. Sad but true and until they are made to consistently understand they will consistently be inconsistent with the Constitution Act, 1982. I have a prodigious amount of evidence which Karen Noakes of the YRP will attest to but she is no more capable of interpreting it than she is capable of interpreting the Constitution Act. I have provided the York Regional Police department with more than 400 pages (letter size) of evidence and commentary in an effort to demonstrate my concerns and she wrote two pages to explain what she understood. Karen demonstrated ignorance and incompetence in matters of law and investigative abilities, the latter dependant on the first. I reason that she has reasoned that she has done a good job and her superior¶s would agree for common sense tells me that she would not deal with such evidence in this manner on her own. Her response is not evidence of the law which was the purpose she was to address but it is evidence of her superior¶s incompetence to administer the law for the purpose it was intended. I have written that it is quite possible that the law was authored to benefit a certain group making the Constitution Act the catalyst of a conspiracy and that is most likely the fact but that intention no matter how true it may be, will never be argued as a defense and I will settle for a plea of incompetence. So the irony is they are trapped in their own snare which is proof enough of their incompetence. These people must be brought forward and punished in a manner so as to prevent such a reoccurrence. That is the obvious intent of the supreme law of Canada. Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law: The way of God is the rule and the enforcers must guarantee compliance PREVENTION is the KEY. The Key opens the minds to the door to HEAVEN as defined in the Charter The Lord works in mysterious ways until common sense is applied.

It¶s no mystery to me.

BELIEVE beyond BELIEFS The Constitution Act Reasoned well By good reason For good reason By minds of reason 81

For minds of reason Of all BELIEFS Law by reason Reason by law Punish by mind Punish for mind Mind for reason Reason for mind Peace of mind For all minds Of one mind Of Reason Please forward this whole letter including my original of October 22 2006 along with your response to Commissioner Giuliano Zacacardelli as it was addressed to and intended for him. I had phoned the London Office and was told this is the way to contact him. I have spent 10 months attempting to communicate my concerns to the mind set of those at the local office and I have no more time or patience to deal at this level. Too many trees have died needlessly while trying to open doors that are welded shut. Once again I thank you for your trouble. Frank ----Original Message----From: Webmaster Webmaster [mailto:Webmaster@rcmp-grc.gc.ca] Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 9:25 AM To: franklyone@hotmail.com Subject: Re: RCMP Web Comment Frank, I would recommend that you contact your local RCMP detachment and ask for their assistance and advice. Webmaster National Communication Services Services nationaux de communications RCMP-GRC 1200 Varnier Parkway Ottawa, ON K!A 0R2 >>> RCMP Website <webmaster@rcmp-grc.gc.ca> 10/22/06 11:13 PM >>> (comments) --------------------------------------------------------------------------October 22 2006 To:Commisioner Giuliano Zacardelli RCMP Fax:613-993-0309 82

From: Frank Gallagher franklyone@hotmail.com Re: Obstruction of Justice Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing Hon. John Gerretsen etal Tenant Protection Act,1997 Constitution Act,1982 COVER UP ORHT-Tampering with evidence Dear OPP I(landlord) received an Order under section 69 Tenant Protection Act,1997 File # TNL-67103 which found for me directing my (tenant) to pay me rent arrears and vacate my premises as per an agreement he had signed Dated May 6 2005 which I had attached to my application to evict. The disput he had signed and filed was a complete fabrication and contrary to the May 6/05 Agreement which he and I had both signed. The tenant denied having ever seen the 4 pages of the May 6 2005 agreement and denied having ever seen them. I submitted evidence which proved beyond any doubt that the tenant filed a false and misleading information which is an offence under the Tenant Protection Act. In so doing I also proved that he had committed fraud regarding the May 6 2005 agreement. When the judicator realized what was happening I said "There oughta be a law" and she responded "There is" and went on for a minute or two articulating the matter. When I tried to contact her after receiving the order to see if charges would be laid the ORHT declined to file charges but I got a copy of the hearing recording. The part where I said "There oughta be a law" and her response were removed. There was no recording of the second day of the hearing. I corresponded with the Investigations and Enforcement Unit of the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing and finally Dave Grech wrote me to say that he would not be filing charges and his reason was absolutely ridiculous and he ended with it would be my word againt his 83

which is absolute B..S.. My tenant had no evidence to back his dispute anf I had a prodigious amount to conclude beyond any doubt that he was a fraud and had filed a false and misleading information under the Act. Offences 206. (1) Any person who knowingly does any of the following is guilty of an offence: 6. Harass, hinder, obstruct or interfere with a landlord in the exercise of, i. securing a right or seeking relief under this Act or in the court, After corresponding with various levels of government I was not able to find anyone to deal with this matter but the Premier,Dalton McGuinty suggested I write the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing,Hon.John Gerretsen who declined to review the matter stating that Dave Grech coordinator of Investigations and Enforcement is the person whom he appointed to investate such matters and he trusts him so case closed. As for the ORHT he states they are at arms length from the government and implied that he couldn't investigate them. Duties of Minister 200. The Minister shall, (a) monitor compliance with this Act (b) investigate cases of alleged failure to comply with this Act and (c) where the circumstances warrant, commence or cause to be commenced proceedings with respect to alleged failures to comply with this Act. 1997, c. 24, s. 200. I have written the Attorney General, Michael Bryant on several occasions to investigate and file charges under: Offences Tenant Protection Act, 1997 but he has declined to respond. 206. (1) Any person who knowingly does any of the following is guilty of an offence: 6. Harass, hinder, obstruct or interfere with a landlord in the exercise of, i. securing a right or seeking relief under this Act or in the court,

I have this all well documented but everyone declines to file charges. I have been attempting to get this matter dealt with for over a year now and nobody has accepted responsibility to investigate. I reiterate that the evidence is overwhelming that the tenant filed a false and misleading dispute with the ORHT and the Fraud regarding the May 6 2005 agreement. Could you please inform me as to who has jurisdiction to investigate this matter. I am determined to get to the bottom of this. 84

I suspect it has something to do with the fact that the Tenant Protection Act,1997 is inconsistent with the Constitution Act, 1982

Thank you Frank Gallagher

To:Michael.Thomson@rcmp-grc.gc.ca; mona.eichman@rcmp-grc.gc.ca Cc: citytvhosts@citytv.com; city@thestar.ca; citydesk@tor.sunpub.com; comail@lsuc.on.ca; dmaclean@taxpayer.com; ed_hird@telus.net; editor@rd.ca; franklyone@hotmail.com; jwilliamson@taxpayer.com; letters@globeandmail.ca; ''; sylviagerl@ndp.ca; shennig@taxpayer.com; sueann.levy@tor.sunpub.com; tkeirddin@taxpayers.com; Vanloan.P@parl.gc.ca; Vanlop1@parl.gc.ca; webadmin@justice.gc.ca September 29, 2006 10:15 AM sent replacement email correcting dates To: Michael Thomson MPP, RCMP From: Frank Gallagher franklyone@hotmail.com Fax to: Premier Dalton McGuinty, Tim Arkell, Ombudsman, Julia Munro, Peter Van Loan, MP Bruce Herridge, York Regional Police brooksn@scc-csc.gc.ca media@scc-csc.gc.ca

Dear Michael Thomson As you are aware I am a Canadian citizen who became victim to a scam. This scam was identified at a Tribunal hearing of the ORHT on June 30 2005 where I had attached a copy of a May 6 2005 agreement to my application to evict my tenant Don Wilson for refusing to pay rent and for not vacating my premises on May 31 2005 as per the May 6 2005 agreement which both he and I had signed and my mother had witnessed. On June 10 2005 Don Wilson had signed and filed a Dispute with the ORHT which was a humungous fabrication which was an obvious contradiction of that which was contained in the May 6 2005 agreement which he had signed. During the course of the hearing Don Wilson denied having ever seen the May 6 2005 agreement and of course denied having signed it or initialed it. I then produced another agreement dated April 13 2005 which Don Wilson and I had signed and a friend of mine had witnessed. I showed it to Don and he denied ever seeing it and also denied ever signing it. I then introduced Dave Kirby to the Judicator as being the witness and he identified Don as the person who signed it. Both of these agreements confirmed that Don owed me the rent money and both confirmed that he had given me notice to vacate my premises on May 31 2005 quite contrary to the Dispute he had signed and filed with the Tribunal stating that he was paid up until February 2009 as per special arrangements made in stock negotiations.. 85

The agreements dealt with other matters regarding Don Wilson¶s Incorporated business BioSafe which I am a major share holder. The value of the document on paper to me and my friends is about $150,000 but it also protected the investors who had come before me increasing the value on paper to around $300,000. Probably about 20 investors in all. The reason I had him sign them in the first place is because he had given cause for me to distrust him. The Tribunal was adjourned to July 28 2005 for the Tribunal¶s decision and I should make note that Nancy Fahlgren (Judicator) announced at the beginning of the hearing that the hearing that it was not being recorded. I do have a copy of the June 30th as you know as I provided you a copy. On August 10 2005 I received the Tribunal Order under Section 69, Tenant Protection Act, 1997 File Number TNL-67103 dated August 8 2005 which found for me and Don Wilson was ordered to pay me the arrears and vacate my premises. I had asked Nancy Fahlgren on June 30th at the hearing if she would be charging Don Wilson with fraud and in fact I had said ³There should be a law´ when it was revealed that Don was a fraud, and Nancy said ³There is and that she could forward it onto the Investigations and Enforcement Unit´. I should note that this part of the hearing is not on the recording of the hearing so it was either erased or Nancy turned off the recorder. The Tribunal Order never indicated that Don Wilson had been charged for fraud which initiated my search for justice which I have not found to date.( over a year now) What I have found is that which I am sure the public have been aware of but just unable to prove. The administrators of the Constitution Act, 1982 have used their authority mandated by the Act for their own benefit disregarding the Charter rights of the people. I have documented this along with commentary in a file which I named the BLACK BOOK which consists of a cover page, 3 index pages, 266 pages and a back cover page as you know. I have sent you a copy as well as the York Regional Police, the Ombudsman, my MP and my MPP as well as the Premier of Ontario to whom I addressed on September 1 2006 on the cover page and forwarded to him, Dalton McGuinty. I have closed that file and opened a new folder the BLUE BOOK which contains correspondence with various authorities regarding my search for justice and I have attached an excerpt from it for your attention.(Beginning page 4) What you will read is the reason I am writing you now. The evidence within the BLACK BOOK proves that the people of Canada are not being protected by the administrators of the Constitution and this excerpt from the BLUE BOOK confirms my allegations. On page 9 of this excerpt I ask the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing a few questions, but I do not expect a prompt response and so I request that you provide me the answers. I have also Cc this to the media and others to make known my concerns should anything happen to me as I continue my quest for justice. . 86

It is my hope that at least one of the recipients of this e-mail will share my concerns and dare to do something for the people. I suggest that it is every person¶s duty to back the people¶s Charter rights and even more, those people who have been paid by the Taxpayer to do so. Given the strength of the evidence, I suggest that failure of any person receiving this evidence to take the necessary steps to correct this situation will implicate them in this conspiracy. Michael Thomson, I hereby formally charge you with the responsibility to put in motion the formal and legal procedures according to the Constitution Act, 1982 to deal with this conspiracy by the authorities who are empowered by the Constitution Act, 1982 to carry out and enforce the provisions of the said Act and have used that authority to suit their own purpose disregarding the rights and freedoms guaranteed to the people by the Charter and in so doing have effectively quashed the guarantee. I go onto say that they use their authority to collect taxes for the purposes of the Constitution and by so doing are guilty of Fraud, Conspiracy and just about anything you can name. I understand that most of you do not make the laws nor set department policy and I do know the difficulties of proceeding forward as I have experienced the same which has been identified in the BLACK BOOK regarding the gallagher papers and the Cover UP by the MAYOR¶S OFFICE. I hereby request you to take my concerns forward and inform me ASAP to whom you have addressed the matter to and their e-mail address and request that person to do likewise and so on until the appropriate action is taken to remedy the situation. I suggest that it is your duty and everyone else¶s who come across a superior who refuses to act appropriately or orders you to halt and remain silent, such as the gag order that was issued to the personnel of my former employer the City of Toronto, Property Surveys Management, to go around such person and charge them with obstruction of justice. So, let¶s get the ball rolling and see who is implicated in this conspiracy and I will not accept any response that states that you do not have the authority because we all have the Authority of the Constitution Act, 1982 and you have all the evidence you need to commence procedures. You have the knowledge, experience gained at the taxpayers expense to act in service of them and the rest of the population of Canada and I expect you to do so and I suggest that the majority of the people have the same expectations of you. I also request that you provide me with the e-mail address of the RCMP Commissioner. Thank you Frank Gallagher PS I am also forwarding this by fax to others who have not provided me with an e-mail address. I will also be forwarding to others I find on the net whom I feel should be concerned. I do not expect this to protect me but I hope it will help to expose this to the public.

87

September 27, 2006

To: John Gerretsen Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing mininfo@mah.gov.on.ca From: Frank Gallagher 34 Riverglen Drive Keswick On. franklyone@hotmail.com Dear John To be straight with you I have never had the opportunity to send a Dear John letter, not that there is anything wrong with that, so I take this opportunity to do so. I have just received today your response(pg 8) dated September 26, 2006 to my fax correspondence dated August 31 2006, a copy of which is filed in the BLACK BOOK pages 12-45. The BLACK BOOK is the name I have chosen for the compilation of files I have addressed to the Premier of Ontario, Dalton McGuinty of which the cover page is dated September 1 2006. Page 15 of the BLACK BOOK indicates that I have also sent you a copy of the correspondence to Dalton McGuinty which consists of the cover page and pages 1-11 The BLACK BOOK consists of a cover page, 3 index pages, 266 pages and a back cover page and this file has now been closed. I have opened a new folder which I refer to as the BLUE BOOK dated September 15 2006 in which I am filing all correspondence pertinent to the BLACK BOOK. On September 25 2006 I faxed you along with others but apparently it has not yet reached your desk. Having said that, back to Dear John I have also chosen to address you in the familiar form because I feel I know you and if you knew me you will know that I intend nothing personal in the contents of my writings to date and have been merely expressing my frustrations with the system. When you have finished reading the BLACK BOOK I believe that you will find that the modus operandi of the various authorities administering law are incapable of backing the guarantee of the peoples rights and freedoms as provided by the Charter and therefore we people are being robbed, not only of our protection but also the money we pay for it. Your response has confirmed which I have stated in my writings that the authorities are either incompetent or brilliantly incompetent in matters of the Constitution Act, 1982. I believe I have zeroed in on the problem from all approaches but I think at this time it would be prudent to say that the problem exists due to both of the reasons stated but for different reasons depending on ones station and some are quite understandable and forgivable before my writings and I also understand that the public servants are in a very precarious dammed if you do and damned if you don¶t position. 88

All the services provided by the public servants are the products of the whole, and it is the product I have been writing about, it is unfair to judge any individual on the basis of the product of the whole. It has been quite apparent to me and I do not stand alone when I say the product we are receiving is over priced and that is obviously due to no competition. This factor has huge ramifications in matters of costs and the development of products which the public want and need. Competition is the only way to know for sure what the people want and the only way to see that they get it at a reasonable price. This is concluded on the basis of sound reasoning but by further reasoning we can also determine that it is unreasonable to apply this reasoning for the very reason of reason. We taxpayers sure don¶t want to pay for three or four different company agencies to do the same thing, for the sake of competition and most likely some entity would control them all and we would be in worse shape than we are now. By the use of reasoning, having the same reason to reason we can reason that a group of people having the same knowledge would reason to the same conclusion and of course would be the ideal. By the very use of reasoning we could also reason that is not the case and can not possibly be nor is it a desirable situation to reason for because who would we learn from and wouldn¶t life be boring. I am getting bored right now and I suspect so are you but I hope you got warmed up so that we can apply some very good reasoning to the matter at hand. We will assume from now on that we are all reasonable people and I will assume that you all know that I consider there to be a problem that needs to be fixed and I am quite aware that there are many who see no problem at all and there are just as many who see me as a problem and I could go on and on that line of reasoning as could you all but here is the point. We all live in Canada and we are all equal in the eyes of the law and we all have equal rights and freedoms because that is the law. Not only is it the law, we are guaranteed it and the law is very fair and quite explicit. The law actually is the result of some very wise reasoning and given the circumstance in heavy print above we would have the ideal. Of course we don¶t have the ideal ingredients such as people of equal knowledge but for the very reason that we do not have the same reason to reason The Constitution Act, 1982 was enacted to provide us all with a very good reason to reason the same in matters of law. There is nothing to argue be cause it is the law. Unfortunately the Constitution Act is just a piece of paper with words on it until we put the personnel in place to enforce the law and we put a system in place to finance it. Both are done and yet we do not have the ideal of the Constitution. I wonder why? 89

. If you and you and you are not wondering why then you are part of the problem. If you do not care then you just aren¶t into the spirit of the law and quite possibly are selfish and don¶t give a damn about fair. That¶s okay, Constitution allows you to feel as you like. Believe what you like and whatever but when it comes to matters of law you had better believe the rights and freedoms of everyone are equal to yours and mess with them and you will be punished significantly until you believe it. Punishment must be distributed equally in the same manner as we are entitled to equal justice. Common sense and sound reasoning must be used to the extent of the very reasoning behind the Act and the purpose of the Act. Again there is nothing to argue for we know the law is as sound as can be, its only weakness is in those who are mandated to administer it. Like the reasoning applied to the tax system«.mmmm perhaps that is a bad example and when we learn to reason we can revisit that. Let¶s use charities then and the ability to pay, no even better how about child support. I think that¶s a good one. Separated parents who have left their family know full well of the consequence of a broken marriage and a lot of reasoning has been done on the subject and I suspect there is a lot more reasoning that needs to be done but the reasoning goes that its not the fault of the children and they must suffer the least financially. If we are to err we must err on the side of the innocent children. Seems fair to me. So, when a person decides to act in contravention of the Charter they have committed a crime against society and in matters of the Constitution we are all one big family and it is up to all to look after each other and when some of us stray we must show them the way. If two people do exactly the same crime and you punish them with the same fine of let¶s say $5,000 then that would be fair if they both had the same income and the same total worth considering assets and all. But when the fine is pocket change to one and a year¶s savings to another we are neither being fair nor would we accomplish the purpose of punishment which is to deter immoral inclinations for the support of the guarantee. This is a very serious matter that must be considered but even more is the matter of the victim. It is every one of our responsibilities to see that we do not become victims and we must remember that the victim could just as easily be you or I. The victim must be compensated so as if the crime never occurred. Generally there is no reason to leave the compensation up to this judge or that for it could all be computerized. 90

Everything we do we apply due diligence for our own safety. Like watching where we are walking, looking both ways when crossing the road and keeping stairways clear so that nobody trips and falls. Just a bunch of common sense, like walking a dog on a leash and we know the disastrous consequences if the dog were to bite someone. Many issues can be resolved with reason, good sound unbiased reasoning. So, if we are clear in mind and coherent in matters of law we must obey it and reason for the benefit of the whole and not for the benefit of one group or another nor the beliefs of another. We simply must stay focused. Strange enough that goes against the very way we vote now in this here democratic society doesn¶t it? Three or four parties striving to have it their way gives us something to think about. No problem with the voting system if the people could be held responsible as well as the parties. Need a lot of work there to and it will all come together if we shore up the foundation of the Constitution and patch the holes. So here is the problem as I have reiterated and reiterated. The administers of the Constitution have failed to put a modus operandi in place capable of backing the guarantee of the Charter and in so doing allows the immoral to flourish at the expense of the people. The people have paid to see the immoral decline and it is their hope that they will disappear over time. By doing so, so will the taxes.. As the evidence in the BLACK BOOK attests, so do you and the Ombudsman and you have put it on paper for us all to have a look at. For various reasons the administers have disregarded the supreme law of Canada and the authorities of Ontario have put it in writing. Right there in their Acts for all to see. There is nothing to argue, just correct them. Correct the minds of the people who write them and the minds of those who administer them and we are set to go. In your case you were asked to investigate into the reason why the Investigations and Enforcement Unit declined to charge Don Wilson with Fraud. And you state, let¶s see, what did you state? Oh yes, you have every confidence in the professionalism and expertise of the Investigations and Enforcement Unit and see no reason to revisit the conclusions reached by Mr. Grech. I have provided you the evidence but you trust Dave Grech. Like the wisdom of a mother¶s love for her children you have decided. This is not acceptable for a person who is in a position of trust and personally I do not see any logical reason for you to keep that position of trust. Have a look at the fax I sent you on September 25 2006 with special attention to the laws and get back to me ASAP please.

91

Are you saying they are above the law?

92

September 28 2006 To Honourable John Gerretsen Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing From: Frank Gallagher PRWP Peoples Representative Without Portfolio

Honourable John Gerretsen.

September 28 2006

September 28, 2006

Who would they be to teach? Brain washing would best describe. Who allows them to do this? Who empowers the minister? Who enacts the Act? So many questions, so many people paid by the taxpayer and yet no answers. If you can answer these questions, pleas to do so. Thank you. Frank Gallagher

Words I wish I had said but didn¶t but am now. The evidence shows perhaps the Tribunal applies impartial treatment. No matter who you are all victims will receive the same treatment and all the immoral will receive the same treatment although different than the treatment for the victims. The Tribunal like government services has a special place in their hearts for the immoral as they relate best with them. They are their bread and butter. Without them they would be out of business. When one of their bread winner¶s is caught up with the law it is in the best interests to the Tribunal to get the immoral back on the road. At the same time they have to do something to appear as if they are there for the people so they order him to pay me what he owes me but don¶t enforce it. Then to make it like there is some pressure for him to pay me they order that 4% interest will be paid on outstanding balance as of the court date. So, because of him not paying me I am paying 16-18% on credit cards I was forced to use in lieu. Not exactly a punishment to deter the immoral, and in no way will that back the guarantee of the Constitution. He was not ordered to pay me interest for the term from August 1 2004- August 8 2005 the date of the order. If the tenant had given me a deposit I would have been ordered to pay 6% for the term.

(6) A landlord of a rental unit shall pay interest to the tenant annually on the amount of the rent deposit at the rate of 6 per cent per year
The Tribunal has infringed upon my equality rights and supports the immoral and punishes the victim contary to the Constitution. On and on the people are being betrayed.

93

Administration and Enforcement Duties of Minister 200. The Minister shall, (a) monitor compliance with this Act; (b) investigate cases of alleged failure to comply with this Act; and (c) where the circumstances warrant, commence or cause to be commenced proceedings with respect to alleged failures to comply with this Act. 1997, c. 24, s. 200. Delegation 201. The Minister may in writing delegate to any person any power or duty vested in the Minister under this Act, subject to the conditions set out in the delegation. 1997, c. 24, s. 201. Investigators and inspectors 202. The Minister may appoint investigators for the purpose of investigating alleged offences and inspectors for the purposes of sections 154 and 155. 1997, c. 24, s. 202. Protection from personal liability 205. (1) No proceeding for damages shall be commenced against an investigator, an inspector, a member of the Tribunal, a lawyer for the Tribunal or an officer or employee of the Ministry or the Tribunal for any act done in good faith in the performance or intended performance of any duty or in the exercise or intended exercise of any power under this Act or for any neglect or default in the performance or exercise in good faith of such a duty or power. Crown liability good faith is the key (2) Despite subsections 5 (2) and (4) of the Proceedings Against the Crown Act, subsection (1) does not relieve the Crown of any liability to which it would otherwise be subject in respect of a tort committed by an investigator, an inspector, a member of the Tribunal, a lawyer for the Tribunal or an officer or employee of the Ministry or the Tribunal. 1997, c. 24, s. 205

Offence 206 (1) Any person who knowingly does any of the following 6. Harass, hinder, obstruct or interfere with a landlord in the exercise of, i. securing a right or seeking relief under this Act or in the court, or ii. participating in a proceeding under this Act. (2) Any person who does any of the following is guilty of an offence: 1. Furnish false or misleading information in any material filed in any proceeding under this Act or provided to the Tribunal, an employee or official of the Tribunal, an inspector, an investigator, the Minister or a designate of the Minister. 31. Nothing in this Charter extends the legislative powers of any body or authority. 32. (1) This Charter applies (a) to the Parliament and government of Canada in respect of all matters within the authority of Parliament including all matters relating to the Yukon Territory and Northwest Territories; and (b) to the legislature and government of each province in respect of all matters within the authority of the legislature of each province. 52. (1) The Constitution of Canada is the supreme law of Canada, and any law that is inconsistent with the provisions of the Constitution is, to the extent of the inconsistency, of no force or effect. Dear John.Gerretsen This is not about a dispute between a landlord and a tenant. 94

It is a request for you to review the decision of Dave Grech of Investigations and Enforcements who has refused to charge Don Wilson (Tenant) under 206(2) of the Tenant Protection Act, 1997 Don Wilson has obviously and deliberately filed a dispute which was false and misleading information. Don Wilson signed it. Don Wilson claimed he had paid rent up to February 2009 . Don has committed Fraud regarding two documents which I filed to support my application. Don Wilson signed both of these and it was proven at the hearing Don Wilson denied having ever seen either of these two documents and he denied having ever signed them He agreed to vacate my premises on May 31 2005 and he agreed that he owed me so much for rent at the time of signing the agreement. By order TNL-67103 under section 69 Tenants Protection Act, 1997 It was determined that: Don Wilson has not paid the rent Don Wilson gave notice to terminate the tenancy as of May 31 2005. If that isn¶t proof beyond a reasonable doubt Nancy Fahlgren ORHT is dispensing injustice. That was proof enough for Don to vacate the premises and he has had a year to file a complaint. Lets see August 2005- February 2009 42 months at $800 =$33,600 he tried to do me for. He would not have tried it if he thought he couldn¶t get away with it and he obviously was right so far. The failure of the ORHT and the Investigations and Enforcement Unit of the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing to file charges against this man for filing a false and misleading information under Section 206 (2) is a an offence under Section 206(1) This is an offence that you are now guilty of. You are also guilty of Ministering the Tenant and Protection Act, 1997 which is inconsistent with the Constitution Act, 1982 in matters of equal rights regarding interest rates and obstructing my right to justice regarding his filing a dispute of false and misleading information and his committing fraud regarding the two agreements. If the decision had of found for him the value of the fraud would have exceeded $200,000 on paper. The fact is he has already defrauded us of $150,000 and you will see in the September 25 2006 fax to you that on the prospectus he provided me at investment time he claims Rod Bradbury who owns a lab out in Vancouver is the Vice President of the company. He has an impressive web site and Don showed me that. You will also find a letter from Rod Bradbury stating that he is not and never was the Vice-President of BioSafe nor has he held any position with BioSafe. I have evidence that proves he was trying to frame me for stealing $7,000 and he tried to file charges against me with the police because I told him I wanted him out of my house on December 17 2004 when he and my Son attempted to oust me. On December 24 2004 he signed documents with my son declaring a document that Don and I had signed December 17 2004 was null and void and my son was the witness to that document so he was going to side with Don. On that very same day he signed a document declaring that the December 17 2004 agreement with me was valid. It just goes on and on and then when the ORHT has an opportunity to do the right thing you turn out to be no different than this man. Your letter confirms that which the evidence shows in the 266 page BLACK BOOK. This man harassed my ex wife and my ex girl friend and threatened me and my mother. He promised to pay me back 95

about $15,000 he owed me when he collected $50,000 from a potential investor and when he got it went missing for three weeks and I never saw my money. That is the short story. It is not likely he has any money now and I have resigned myself to that fact but you can damn well bet I won¶t quit until he has his day in court and any one who obstructs my right to justice will have their day in court also. That is the law under the Tenants Protection Act and the Constitution Act. That can¶t be too difficult to understand. You are all guilty under section 205(1) and you will have a difficult time proving you acted in good faith with the evidence being so obvious and so plentiful. What the hell is wrong with you people? Gee, there I go again. I wonder what the hell is wrong with me? Sincerely Frank Gallagher

96

September 5 2007

Integrity

Truth in the spirit as well as the letter of the law

franklyone@ hotmail.com

School¶s Out Bullies never go away«« they fade into the legal system
Dear RCMP September 4, 2007

I have a serious problem regarding the administration and enforcement of law in Ontario and quite probably it is inherent though out Canada. I have irrefutable evidence that my former tenant and President, CEO, Director, etal of a company called Bio Safe Natural Technologies Inc. alias Bio Safe Natural Products Inc. which I am a major investor, committed the criminal act of fraud over $100,000 and filed false and misleading information over $43,000 on the first day of the hearing June 30 2005 at the Ontario Rental Housing Tribunal at 375 D¶arcy Street, Newmarket, which the judicator Nancy Fahlgren is well aware of and in fact she made a comment ³ I see what is happening´ and I said ³There ought to be a law´ and she responded,³There is´ and went on for a couple of minutes to articulate how she has the authority to forward it on to the Investigations and Enforcement Unit of the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing and yada yada but didn¶t state that she would although I presumed she would. Later I asked her ³Is that a rec «´ when she abruptly said ³Yes, it is a recorder´ I asked if I would be able to get a copy and she said ³Yes, after the hearing I could get a copy from her office´ The second day July 28 2005 Nancy Fahlgren stated at the beginning of the hearing that there would not be a recording of the day¶s preceeding. On August 8 2005 Nancy signed an Order TNL-67103 which found for me and my former tenant was ordered to vacate my premises as he had given notice that he would and was ordered to pay me approximately $10, 000 in arrears of rent precisely as I claimed. On August 10 2005 when I received the Order there was no mention if proceedings were to be commenced or caused to be commenced against Don Wilson so I phoned the ORHT to enquire and also order a CD of 97

the hearing. Nobody could tell me if proceedings were commenced. When I faxed the ORHT on August 28 and 30 2005 to enquire as to whether or not charges would be laid against Don Wilson I was informed by the Regional Manager Rick Hennessey by mail dated August 30 2005 that the Order has been made, the file closed and the ORHT would not be keeping the two letters I sent on file and returned copies of them to me. Meanwhile I faxed the Investigations and Enforcement beginning August 10 2005 and quite a few days of faxing correspondence and evidence to them requesting all responses be in writing and immediate phone calls back from staff wondering what I want them to do with it and why do I want written responses. I finally got one by mail dated September 6 2005 from Dave Grech, Coordinator, Investigations who explained why they would not commence or cause to commence proceedings against Don Wilson. For the top man in the department his response was as ridiculous as the dispute which Don Wilson had filed. His response was absolutely incoherent to the facts. So I wrote him again on September 13 2005 but this time decided to drive downtown to his office from Keswick to walk him through it and provide copies of all the evidence again to make sure he had it and I provided a disk copy of the Tribunal hearing which I had to leave with Roel Pascual because Dave was not available. Having not received a response from Dave Grech I wrote him again on October 3 2005 but no response. By now I realized there had to be a whole lot more going on than meets the eye. Why was his office so reluctant to write to me explaining why they would not respond and why did it take near a month for him to respond with such ridiculous reasons for not commencing or causing to commence proceedings against Don Wilson. The big question is why wouldn¶t they commence proceedings? When I called the ORHT on August 24 2005 wondering where my CD copy was, a girl named Cathy #153 said she would look into it and on the 26th I received a call saying it was ready. When I picked it up and played it I noticed that all the previously mentioned conversations with Nancy Fahlgren were missing from the disk. Then I pondered as to why the 2nd day of the hearing July 28 2005 was not recorded. Something was obviously wrong. I mean here we have a person who had signed two agreements with a phony signature and denied having ever seen them before or signed them. I provided the witness to one of the agreements who attested to the fact that Don Wilson did sign the four pages of it. Both were signed with the same fraudulent signature for the purpose of denying them and they both were basically the same content dealing with matters of rent and money he owed me and other matters pertaining to shares of the company which were attachments to my purchase agreements and other investor¶s covering some shady actions taken by Don regarding the original agreements. My mother witnessed the other agreement but I had not brought her to the Tribunal. She is 85 now and quite well but who knows if she will be available if this drags out another couple of years. The dispute Don Wilson filed with the ORHT is a ridiculous fabrication which I proved decisively. 98

So here I have irrefutable evidence that Don Wilson committed the criminal act of fraud regarding the 2 agreements and filed false and misleading information regarding the dispute he filed with the ORHT in a building financed by the people to administer justice to and for the people before the judicator and the ORHT won¶t even discuss it, tampered with the evidence and didn¶t record the second day of the hearing. The Investigations and Enforcement Unit of the Ministry of Municipal Affairs were reluctant to respond in writing as to why they wouldn¶t commence or cause to commence proceedings, but due to my persistence 27 days later Dave Grech gave in and responded incoherent to the facts and after much effort to explain his errors including driving downtown with a complete fresh new copy of the evidence and a CD recording of the hearing which irrefutably proves that which I allege, he has refused to respond. I wrote my MPP Julia Munro, the Attorney General and the Premier Dalton McGuinty among others and Julia suggested I write the Ombudsman which I had done already and Dalton suggested I write the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing Hon John Gerretsen which I did and he informed me that the ORHT was an independent body at arms length of the government and he couldn¶t interfere and as for Dave Grech, he trusts him and sees no point in looking at the evidence so the case is closed.
I downloaded the Tenant Protection Act, 1997 to find that it is indeed an offense to furnish false and misleading information under s.206 (2) of the Act and it is an offense to harass, hinder, obstruct or interfere with a landlord under s.206 (1) 6. I Tenant Protection Act, 1997 Offence

206 (1) Any person who knowingly does any of the following 6. Harass, hinder, obstruct or interfere with a landlord in the exercise of, i. securing a right or seeking relief under this Act or in the court, or (2) Any person who does any of the following is guilty of an offence: 1. Furnish false or misleading information in any material filed in any proceeding under this Act or provided to the Tribunal, an employee or official of the Tribunal, an inspector, an investigator, the Minister or a designate of the Minister. So why would they do that? Obviously there is a whole lot more at stake here than is immediately apparent. It seems to me that Rick Hennessey wouldn¶t likely act so strange if things were on the up and up and what skin is it off his ass if he forwards the case onto the Investigations and Enforcement Unit, as is the proper and legal thing to do? Why the messing with the evidence and why didn¶t they record the second day? Why was Dave¶s office so reluctant to respond in writing and when Dave did why was his response so ridiculous? Why does Hon John Gerretsen trust Dave Grech when all he had to do was look at his response and the evidence which I provided him which he states he read both? That¶s his responsibility. 99

Tenant Protection Act, 1997 Duties of Minister
200. The Minister shall,

(a) monitor compliance with this Act; (b) investigate cases of alleged failure to comply with this Act; and (c) where the circumstances warrant, commence or cause to be commenced proceedings with respect to alleged failures to comply with this Act. 1997, c. 24, s. 200. Clearly it was Minister Honorable John¶s duty to monitor compliance with the Tenant Protection Act, 1997 at the time. Clearly the ORHT acted under the authority of the Tenant Protection Act, 1997 at the time. Why would Honorable John state that he can¶t get involved with the ORHT decision? Why didn¶t Honorable John do his duty and investigate the case of alleged failure to comply with the Act and commence or cause to commence proceedings as they certainly are warranted? Criminals can not be allowed to come into the courts of the legal system financed by the people to administer justice and flagrantly lie and commit the criminal act of fraud.right in front of the officer of the court and expect to get away with it as Don Wilson obviously has done to date.

Common sense demands getting to the bottom of this and over the passed two years I have accumulated an abundance of evidence that not only gets to the bottom of it but traces the problem to the top. The first step to the cure is to admit there is a problem. Recognize it, Resolve it The government is corrupt from top to bottom which they will deny as any crook would and evidence must be gathered as you would with any crook. I do not ask you to trust or believe me for it would be illogical under any circumstance just as it is illogical for me to trust you under the circumstances for the evidence I hold is believing and I trust my ability to analyze it. I am quite aware how inane my efforts are, if you are in on the conspiracy against the people which I have very good reason to believe but it is my hope that you have just not been alert to the fact. Having said that I presume you are attentive to integrity, sane reason, logic and moral purpose and due the significance of this matter with the safety and well being of all the Canadian people and society as a whole at stake will retain and remain focused on those values as you analyze the evidence with fortitude and conviction with open mind unbiased with a good grasp on reality. The problem is due to human nature and the inherent battle with conscience which has been the persistent struggle of humankind. The Constitution Act, 1982 is the supreme law of Canada which sets out the manner to deal with this. 100

The Act is the authority which sets out the manner in which authority is to be assigned to administer and enforce the provisions contained within and for the purpose of this exercise emphasis is to the Charter whereas Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law. We must all be coherent to the fact that everyone doesn¶t believe in God and quite understandable for many of us are persuaded by fact as you of the investigation and enforcement should be. However the aspirations attributed to God are of sound reason conducive to a fair, peaceful moral society and most everyone is coherent to this and should have no problem understanding the intent of the law. It¶s really not complicated until lawyers start messing with it but then who else has the authority and after all it¶s lawyers that write them. They are supposed to be written in the best interest of their clients though as the Law Society of Upper Canada will attest and the tax payers of Canada are the clients indirectly as the government personnel are their representatives trusted to look after the people¶s best interests. ³Do not impose on others what you would not wish for yourself´
This is not to be construed so as to provide for masochistic interpretations

Throughout my writings I draw on words of wisdoms attributed to Confucius some 2500 years ago. That statement when heeded by all is conducive to world peace and fair peaceful moral societies. It should be law and I suggest it is in Canada just stated differently to mean the same thing in the Charter
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.

³Do not impose on others what you would not wish for yourself´ This is the frame of mind required to use with integrity, fortitude and conviction to resolve the issues I have presented to various departments and levels of government over the passed couple of years.
As obvious as this is I feel it prudent to state emphatically that the criminally inclined are not a benefit to society and in fact they are forbidden to use their criminal skills in Canada. That is where you the RCMP and other law enforcement agencies come in. Right? It is very important to keep in mind that if it wasn¶t for the criminally inclined we would not need the whole damn legal system which includes the Policing services but to keep realistic as we must in dealing with people who have an on going struggle with their conscience a consistent effective efficient administration and enforcement system must be forever present and attentive to this endeavor. Given that people have certain necessities to sustain life it is incumbent upon the government to assure they all have equal opportunity to provide for themselves and it is a significant factor which must be efficiently and effectively addressed for poverty is cause and effect for criminal action. Poverty begets hopelessness and despair which begets immoral action detrimental to society but it is the poverty that is immoral in the first place to allow poverty to exist and immoral actions resulting from this is nothing other than retaliation and a cry for help.

101

³Do not impose on others what you would not wish for yourself´ No one has the right to deprive another except as provided by law. An example is fair taxation to provide for the necessities of society as effectively and efficiently as possible with attentiveness to eliminating the cause of the necessity such as eradicating immoral inclination from the face of the earth which is by far the most insatiable entity eating away at societies finances leaving wide spread poverty in its wake inciting immorality causing it to flourish and run rampant throughout the system in a vicious endless circle. There is so much to be stated about the ramifications of immorality on society and everyone except the immoral will agree that it must be dealt with as quickly as possible but obviously to date the professionals in these matters have been decidedly unsuccessful. All one need do to understand this is to look at the facts but even the most ignorant can attest to the fact that they can¶t be doing it right. How many time have we heard it said the law is an ?

It is you know. The Constitution (Establishment) that is. Not the Constitution (Document) even though it was written by the establishment. The Constitution (Document) was written in simple verbiage to deceive the people lulling them into peaceful slumber believing the Constitution (Establishment) are there responsibly carrying out their duties consistent with the provisions of the Charter. Case in point can be found in the very first line and first section of the Charter Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law: Guarantee of Rights and Freedoms 1. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society. We naïve people with other fields of endeavor are led to believe that our rights are guaranteed by the rule of law. But how can that be? I down loaded the ³Role of the Attorney General´ from his web site which defines the rule of law as that most elusive concept which is a well established legal principal but hard to easily define. It is the rule of law that protects individuals, and society as a whole. Only professionals in these matters would be aware that it is a well established legal principal

102

I have prepared 15 Lawyer Files and you will find a copy of the ³Role of the Attorney General´ in Lawyer File # 7. Clearly he is responsible for Constitutional matters and in particular the protection of the people¶s rights. But he wears too many other hats clearly in Conflict of Interest of the people¶s rights. Common Sense Laws are not likely to be obeyed unless they are enforced which is clearly the responsibility of the personnel employed in law enforcement which the Attorney General is the Executive Officer and responsible for the administration of law in Ontario. The Charter guarantees the rights and protection of the people and it is incumbent upon the Attorney General to put a modus of operandi in place capable of backing the guarantee but the evidence I have clearly demonstrates that the modus operandi is incapable to that endeavor and I have provided the Attorney General Michael Bryant a preponderance of evidence which irrefutably proves this which he has declined to address. In this respect the system is fixed and detrimental to the well being of the individuals of society. The police may consult with him or his Crown Attorneys but ultimately the police must file charges and then it is up to him to decide if he is going to commence proceedings. Under the circumstances it is not likely the police are going to consult with him about whether or not to file charges against him and if they do I would imagine he wouldn¶t have his heart in it and probably decide not to commence proceedings against himself. Having said all that and presuming you are now coherent to these facts inherent with the legal system and the fact Michael Bryant is human subject to err and given that he is the Chief Executive Officer with great influential power throughout the legal system and associates with the upper echelon you can see the potential for neglect of the individuals Charter rights. Now if we go back to the original problem of the criminal act of fraud and the filing of false and misleading information by Don Wilson which the ORHT, the Investigations and Enforcement Unit and the Minister of the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing refusal to commence or cause to commence proceedings you might see the link to the Attorney General. You will recall the peculiar behavior of these government personnel and the fact by so doing left themselves subject to charges of the offense s. 206 (1) 6.i of the Tenant Protection Act, 1997 among other charges including obstruction of justice under the criminal code and tampering with evidence etc. by the ORHT. These are quite serious charges and again the obvious question is why would they put themselves out in harms way unless they felt assured they would not be charged? Where would such confidence come from but the Chief Executive Officer himself? You will note that I made complaints relative to the inconsistencies of the Tenant Protection Act, 1997 with the Constitution Act, 1982 regarding my Charter rights and who is responsible? 103

The Attorney General is of course who is accountable to the people through the legislature. The purported to be independent departments are also influenced by the Attorney General¶s office and they misrepresent themselves to the people having them believe they have someone on their side.

The Ombudsman idea of an investigation is to phone the ORHT and ask if they are guilty or not rather than review the evidence I provided them. Their correspondence was absurd as Dave Grech¶s Coordinator of Investigations. There is more than sufficient evidence to commence an investigation and file charges against Rick Hennessey Regional Manager and Nancy Fahlgren Judicator of the ORHT, Dave Grech Coordinator of Investigations and Minister Hon. John Gerretsen of Municipal Affairs and Housing of obstruction of justice under the criminal code. A proper investigation should reveal who instructed them to act as they did and the evidence is overwhelming that the Tenant Protection Act, 1997 is inconsistent with the individuals equality rights of the Charter and Michael Bryant¶s refusal to deal with the issues I addressed to him implicates him in on the conspiracy and in fact Hon. John Gerretsen copied his response to me to Michael Bryant. So there you have it in Black and White and on page 9 I have listed the documents in support of my allegations and hereby request you investigate and commence proceedings against these people. 104

The following list of documents have been provided to all those people listed and I provide tthem in support of my allegations of government corruption, conspiracy, obstruction of justice and failure to put a modus operandi in place consistent with the Constitution Act, 1982 in support of the people¶s guaranteed Charter rights. Lawyer File 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 13A 14 Rick Hennessey, Nancy Fahlgren ORHT March 30 2007 Dave Grech Coordinator, Investigation MMAH Hon. John Gerretsen, Minister MMAH G.Carlino Ombudsman Julia Munro MP Queen¶s Park Dalton McGuinty, Premier Queen¶s Park Michael Bryant, Attorney General Queen¶s Park Randy Craig, Detective Sergeant Anti-Rackets OPP Bruce Herridge YRP Sheldon Prior OCCPS Judy Phillips, Manager Inquiries Attorney General Phil Moreau April 1 2007 Robert McCreary, Crown Attorney Newmarket April 5 2007 Paul Carver, Crown Attorney Toronto April 5 2007 Michael Thomson, Sgt. RCMP April 7 2007 October 8 2006 February 10 2007 12 pages 7 10 18 6 5 14 38 14 9 16 18 1 1 4 73 36

Letter to the Toronto Sun Law Society Upper Canada (compiled correspondence )

Note: Sgt. Michael Thomson originally accepted my papers for review on the auspices the issues dealt with the Canada Business Corporations Act which was the gist of the letter I wrote to the RCMP January 3 2006. Don Wilson is guilty of several issues under the Act but as he obviously had no money I felt it a frivolous approach for me to deal with it in that manner at that time and still do especially since he had committed crimes which should have been dealt with by the ORHT and the Investigations and Enforcement Unit It was absolutely absurd that they didn¶t deal with him and I have since come to know why. When the ORHT and the Investigations Unit didn¶t deal with him I took the information to the YRP but they felt it was a civil matter and didn¶t meet the ³Threshold´ for a prosecution in the criminal court. I thought that was ridiculous and eventually I got a another meeting with the YRP Insp. Michael Fleming but still I was not satisfied. I thought I would try a different approach with Michael Thomson and addressed the issues relative to the Corporation Act. I am of the opinion that the process there is unconstitutional as it puts the onus on me to take him to court and as Sgt. Fred Kerr and Constable George Rorke said a lawyer would be negligent if he didn¶t inform me that I was unlikely to get my money back which I was well aware but he should be punished. This is a constitutional matter because you can hardly be letting every criminal go because he has spent the money. How can you guarantee the individual¶s Charter rights of protection if you let the criminal¶s go free that the victims find it not a viable option to pursue. It is not the people who are responsible to take these criminal¶s off the streets and in fact it only states that I may take him to court under the Corporation Act but I may not as obviously I haven¶t. The guarantee is a false and misleading information if you do not have a modus operandi in place to back it. It gives people a false sense of security and invites the criminal element to gather to the feast. The criminal element is quick to find the weaknesses in the system. 105

The evidence I have proves without a doubt there is a two tiered system in place and how can there be anything else but for it is a natural given that lawyer¶s are members of the Law Society playing both sides of the fence. Only lawyers can make laws and act as judges as they feast off society. They are a special interest group who don¶t give a damn about the people¶s Charter rights and are prepared to tramp all over them if a client gives them money. I have a 36 page document of correspondence with the Law Society of Upper Canada regarding a Completely different issue than contained within these writings but it supports precisely what I say. Letter to the Toronto Sun October 8 2006 73 pages

Note: The letter to the Toronto Sun contains the irrefutable evidence that Don Wilson committed the crimes as alleged.

106

To: Michael Thomson Royal Canadian Mounted Police From: Frank Gallagher Political Abstainer January 18, 2006 Dear Michael I am 63, old enough to have witnessed a lot of corruption, huge waste of tax payers money, and it just goes on and on. I am not politically inclined and in fact I really have no idea how the system is supposed to work. I have been reading a little lately on the Charter of Rights and the Constitution Act, 1982 and although the material clearly identifies itself as Canadian I have to wonder just which country it is that I live in, at Keswick ,Ontario. I commuted to a City of Toronto job which is about ¾ of an hour south of where I lived for 14 years. All the surrounding areas which I have come to know are all indicated on any map of Ontario I read, and Ontario surely is a province of Canada so I believe that I am a Canadian and in fact , my birth certificate reads that I was born in Toronto ,Ontario, Canada. I just went and checked that, yep, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. My experience with public offices, and enforcement offices are not exactly what I would expect from offices structured under Part I, Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law: Guarantee of Rights and Freedoms 1. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society. 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. Democratic Rights 3. Every citizen of Canada has the right to vote in an election of members of the House of Commons or of a legislative assembly and to be qualified for membership therein.

107

7. Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice. 12. Everyone has the right not to be subjected to any cruel and unusual treatment or punishment. Equality Rights 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. (2) Subsection (1) does not preclude any law, program or activity that has as its object the amelioration of conditions of disadvantaged individuals or groups including those that are disadvantaged because of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability. Enforcement 24. (1) Anyone whose rights or freedoms, as guaranteed by this Charter, have been infringed or denied may apply to a court of competent jurisdiction to obtain such remedy as the court considers appropriate and just in the circumstances. (2) Where, in proceedings under subsection (1), a court concludes that evidence was obtained in a manner that infringed or denied any rights or freedoms guaranteed by this Charter, the evidence shall be excluded if it is established that, having regard to all the circumstances, the admission of it in the proceedings would bring the administration of justice into disrepute.

Does anyone understand this? There are tons and tons of books on this stuff isn¶t there? Being an honest human being I can be honest with myself and trust that myself will be honest with me. It is a relationship that has developed since first we met nearly 63 years ago and we know each other very well and should by now. We have had our moments, arguing right from wrong, but we got it fairly well straightened out now. We have adopted this Proverb as our foundation to base a decision on which seems to keep us together. I am referring to I, me and myself. ³DO ONTO OTHERS AS YOU WOULD HAVE THEM DO ONTO YOU´ Everybody knows the intent of this statement and everybody knows that they are the only words that will serve to accomplish the intent as guaranteed in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Everybody knows, that we can not have peace, fair justice and equal rights for all if we set our goals elsewhere. 108

It is a shame how those empowered to administer justice fairly and to insure our rights are protected as guaranteed in the Canadian Charter of Rights and the Constitution do not comprehend the meaning and purpose of these words. Like perchance if I was a crook and was enjoying a very lucrative life style, then I imagine that I would vote for the status quo, wouldn¶t I,and perhaps look for a few other changes that would enhance this ecstasy I have come to know. Perhaps you are a person who just doesn¶t pay his proper share of taxes ,so you would accept the status quo and perhaps look for a few changes to enhance your lifestyle. Perhaps you are a person who enjoys a good lifestyle on social services for doing nothing when you are quite capable of working, who are you gonna vote for?

Any reasonable person must surely admit that those intelligent famous people who sat to write up the Charter of Rights surely did not do so with intent to guarantee injustice, and unequal rights for that was achieved and guaranteed before they sat. That we could have had for nothing. Any reasonable decent fair person would argue out what is right with them selves sparing the rest of us needless arguments. So, obviously, any interpretation of a law that deprives the innocent and rewards the bad guy is not a legal interpretation of the law and in fact is a misinterpretation.(See Part VII, General 52.(1) below. 7. Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice. Part III, Equalization and Regional Disparities 36. (1) Without altering the legislative authority of Parliament or of the provincial legislatures, or the rights of any of them with respect to the exercise of their legislative authority, Parliament and the legislatures, together with the government of Canada and the provincial governments, are committed to (a) promoting equal opportunities for the well-being of Canadians; (b) furthering economic development to reduce disparity in opportunities; and (c) providing essential public services of reasonable quality to all Canadians. (2) Parliament and the government of Canada are committed to the principle of making equalization payments to ensure that provincial governments have sufficient revenues to provide reasonably comparable levels of public services at reasonably comparable levels of taxation.

Part VII, General 52. (1) The Constitution of Canada is the supreme law of Canada, and any law that is inconsistent with the provisions of the Constitution is, to the extent of the inconsistency, of no force or effect. (2) The Constitution of Canada includes (a) the Canada Act 1982, including this Act; (b) the Acts and orders referred to in the schedule; and (c) any amendment to any Act or order referred to in paragraph (a) or (b). (3) Amendments to the Constitution of Canada shall be made only in accordance with the 109

authority contained in the Constitution of Canada. 53. (1) The enactments referred to in Column I of the schedule are hereby repealed or amended to the extent indicated in Column II thereof and, unless repealed, shall continue as law in Canada under the names set out in Column III thereof. (2) Every enactment, except the Canada Act 1982, that refers to an enactment referred to in the schedule by the name in Column I thereof is hereby amended by substituting for that name the corresponding name in Column III thereof, and any British North America Act not referred to in the schedule may be cited as the Constitution Act followed by the year and number, if any, of its enactment. 1867 to 1975 (No 2) and this Act may be cited together as the Constitution Acts, 1867 to 1982. Equality Rights 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. (2) Subsection (1) does not preclude any law, program or activity that has as its object the amelioration of conditions of disadvantaged individuals or groups including those that are disadvantaged because of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability. I find Equality Rights 15. (1) very interesting. Is that supposed to apply to me? It just cost me $150 after taxes to have Don Wilson evicted from my premises on August 18 2005, 2 ½ months after the date he had agreed to leave, in two documents which he had signed along with me and both documents were witnessed. He also agreed in these 2 documents how much he owed me for rent, how much he owed me for promissory notes and he agreed to issue me and fellow share holders proper documents and certificates. Not only did he file a dispute with the Ontario Housing Rental Tribunal that was nothing but lies, but he reiterated these lies at the Tribunal and said that he had the documents to prove these lies. Of course he didn¶t because his story was a fabrication from the beginning to end.

I provided the Tribunal with all the documents to prove everything in his dispute to be lies. He had signed the April 13 2005 and the May 6 2005 agreements with a phony signature both identical and then denied having ever seen them before in his life. I had brought the witness to the April 13 2005 agreement who attested before the hearing that he had witnessed Don sign the agreement on every one of the four pages and then he signed every page to witness that fact. Don stalled the hearing for another month when he was offered the chance to dispute anything that I had stated in a 14 page chronicle and submitted to the court about our relationship since first we met. Of course he could not dispute it without evidence and court was dismissed on July 28th 2005 with us to receive the Judicator¶s decision in the mail. The Tribunal ordered Don to pay««. You know all that don¶t you? 110

Please respond by e-mail Frank Gallagher

111

112

April 7 2007 To: Michael Thomson RCMP
<Michael.Thomson@rcmpgrc.gc.ca>
From:

Frank Gallagher
34 Riverglen Drive Keswick, On L4P 2P8

Lawyer Files 1-10

franklyone@hotmail.com

CONSTITUTION ACT, 1982 Part 1, Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law:

MORAL COMMON SENSE ENFORCEMENT
Guarantee of Rights and Freedoms 1. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society. 7. Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice. 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. THE LAW SEEMS RELATIVELY SIMPLE ON PAPER

Dear Michael Thomson
As you are aware various departments of provincial government have declined to commence or cause to commence proceedings against Don Wilson for crimes he committed before a judicator in a building used to administer justice in the province of Ontario. I have provided you with a prodigious amount of evidence requesting you file the appropriate charges but you have declined to respond. I have provided you a copy of the 73 page letter to the Toronto Sun dated October 8 2006 that proves beyond any doubt that the crimes were committed as stated but you have been consistent in your refusal to respond. (See pages 2- 4) of this Lawyer File # 14 (see attachment) Please find attached Lawyer Files #s 1 ± 10 which prove beyond a doubt that the provincial government is corrupt and in fact their modus operandi and policies are inconsistent with the Constitution Act, 1982 and have proven it themselves by not filing the appropriate charges for the crimes Don Wilson committed. They have declined to act upon the charges within these files Please tend to the issues addressed in the attached files and commence or cause to commence proceedings in the appropriate manner as per the provisions of the Constitution to demonstrate that the peoples Rights and Freedoms of the Charter are indeed guaranteed. Please acknowledge receipt of this e-mail. Thank you Frank Gallagher

113

Cc: citytvhosts@citytv.com; city@thestar.ca; citydesk@tor.sunpub.com; comail@lsuc.on.ca; dmaclean@taxpayer.com; ed_hird@telus.net; editor@rd.ca; franklyone@hotmail.com; jwilliamson@taxpayer.com; letters@globeandmail.ca; ''; sylviagerl@ndp.ca; shennig@taxpayer.com; sueann.levy@tor.sunpub.com; tkeirddin@taxpayers.com; Vanloan.P@parl.gc.ca; Vanlop1@parl.gc.ca; webadmin@justice.gc.ca September 29, 2006 10:15 AM sent replacement email correcting dates To: Michael Thomson MPP, RCMP From: Frank Gallagher franklyone@hotmail.com Fax to: Premier Dalton McGuinty, Tim Arkell, Ombudsman, Julia Munro, Peter Van Loan, MP Bruce Herridge, York Regional Police brooksn@scc-csc.gc.ca media@scc-csc.gc.ca

Dear Michael Thomson As you are aware I am a Canadian citizen who became victim to a scam. This scam was identified at a Tribunal hearing of the ORHT on June 30 2005 where I had attached a copy of a May 6 2005 agreement to my application to evict my tenant Don Wilson for refusing to pay rent and for not vacating my premises on May 31 2005 as per the May 6 2005 agreement which both he and I had signed and my mother had witnessed. On June 10 2005 Don Wilson had signed and filed a Dispute with the ORHT which was a humungous fabrication which was an obvious contradiction of that which was contained in the May 6 2005 agreement which he had signed. During the course of the hearing Don Wilson denied having ever seen the May 6 2005 agreement and of course denied having signed it or initialed it. I then produced another agreement dated April 13 2005 which Don Wilson and I had signed and a friend of mine had witnessed. I showed it to Don and he denied ever seeing it and also denied ever signing it. I then introduced Dave Kirby to the Judicator as being the witness and he identified Don as the person who signed it. Both of these agreements confirmed that Don owed me the rent money and both confirmed that he had given me notice to vacate my premises on May 31 2005 quite contrary to the Dispute he had signed and filed with the Tribunal stating that he was paid up until February 2009 as per special arrangements made in stock negotiations.. The agreements dealt with other matters regarding Don Wilson¶s incorporated business BioSafe which I am a major share holder. The value of the document on paper to me and my friends is about $150,000 but it also protected the investors who had come before me increasing the value on paper to around $300,000. Probably about 20 investors in all. The reason I had him sign them in the first place is because he had given cause for me to distrust him. The Tribunal was adjourned to July 28 2005 for the Tribunal¶s decision and I should make note that Nancy Fahlgren (Judicator) announced at the beginning of the hearing that it was not being recorded. I do have a copy of the June 30th as you know as I provided you a copy. On August 10 2005 I received the Tribunal Order under Section 69, Tenant Protection Act, 1997 File Number TNL-67103 dated August 8 2005 which found for me and Don Wilson was ordered to pay me the arrears and vacate my premises. 114

I had asked Nancy Fahlgren on June 30th at the hearing if she would be charging Don Wilson with fraud and in fact I had said ³There should be a law´ when it was revealed that Don was a fraud, and Nancy said ³There is and that she could forward it onto the Investigations and Enforcement Unit´. I should note that this part of the hearing is not on the recording of the hearing so it was either erased or Nancy turned off the recorder. The Tribunal Order never indicated that Don Wilson had been charged for fraud which initiated my search for justice that I have not found to date.( over a year now) What I have found is that which I am sure the public have been aware of but just unable to prove. The administrators of the Constitution Act, 1982 have used their authority mandated by the Act for their own benefit disregarding the Charter rights of the people. I have documented this along with commentary in a file which I named the BLACK BOOK which consists of a cover page, 3 index pages, 266 pages and a back cover page as you know. I have sent you a copy as well as the York Regional Police, the Ombudsman, my MP and my MPP as well as the Premier of Ontario to whom I addressed on September 1 2006 on the cover page and forwarded to him, Dalton McGuinty. I have closed that file and opened a new folder the BLUE BOOK which contains correspondence with various authorities regarding my search for justice and I have attached an excerpt from it for your attention.(Beginning page 4) What you will read is the reason I am writing you now. The evidence within the BLACK BOOK proves that the people of Canada are not being protected by the administrators of the Constitution and this excerpt from the BLUE BOOK confirms my allegations. On page 9 of this excerpt I ask the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing a few questions, but I do not expect a prompt response and so I request that you provide me the answers. I have also Cc this to the media and others to make known my concerns should anything happen to me as I continue my quest for justice. . It is my hope that at least one of the recipients of this e-mail will share my concerns and dare to do something for the people. I suggest that it is every person¶s duty to back the people¶s Charter rights and even more, those people who have been paid by the Taxpayer to do so. Given the strength of the evidence, I suggest that failure of any person receiving this evidence to take the necessary steps to correct this situation will implicate them in this conspiracy. Michael Thomson, I hereby formally charge you with the responsibility to put in motion the formal and legal procedures according to the Constitution Act, 1982 to deal with this conspiracy by the authorities who are empowered by the Constitution Act, 1982 to carry out and enforce the provisions of the said Act and have used that authority to suit their own purpose disregarding the rights and freedoms guaranteed to the people by the Charter and in so doing have effectively quashed the guarantee. I go onto say that they use 115

their authority to collect taxes for the purposes of the Constitution and by so doing are guilty of Fraud, Conspiracy and just about anything you can name. I understand that most of you do not make the laws nor set department policy and I do know the difficulties of proceeding forward as I have experienced the same which has been identified in the BLACK BOOK regarding the gallagher papers and the Cover UP by the MAYOR¶S OFFICE. I hereby request you to take my concerns forward and inform me ASAP to whom you have addressed the matter to and their e-mail address and request that person to do likewise and so on until the appropriate action is taken to remedy the situation. I suggest that it is your duty and everyone else¶s who come across a superior who refuses to act appropriately or orders you to halt and remain silent, such as the gag order that was issued to the personnel of my former employer the City of Toronto, Property Surveys Management, to go around such person and charge them with obstruction of justice. So, let¶s get the ball rolling and see who is implicated in this conspiracy and I will not accept any response that states that you do not have the authority because we all have the Authority of the Constitution Act, 1982 and you have all the evidence you need to commence procedures. You have the knowledge, experience gained at the taxpayers expense to act in service of them and the rest of the population of Canada and I expect you to do so and I suggest that the majority of the people have the same expectations of you. I also request that you provide me with the e-mail address of the RCMP Commissioner. Thank you Frank Gallagher PS I am also forwarding this by fax to others who have not provided me with an e-mail address. I will also be forwarding to others I find on the net whom I feel should be concerned. I do not expect this to protect me but I hope it will help to expose this to the public.

116

(f) rules of professional conduct cannot address every situation, and a lawyer should observe the rules in the spirit as well as in the letter.

Reality is the truth impervious to perception yet precisely due to perception

The Ideal is simply reality sanely dealt with

117

April 19 2007

Constitution Act, 1982 PART 1, CANADIAN CHARTER OF RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law: The spirit of THE LAW is an invisible entity which is not easily defined by words, yet there are certain conditions that are clear and present which must be understood in matters of THE LAW The following was extracted from the Law Society of Upper Canada Lawyers Rules of Conduct. (103) Interpretation (f) rules of professional conduct cannot address every situation, and a lawyer should observe the rules in the spirit as well as in the letter. Immoral inclinitation exists in THE LAW applies to every person in Canada which every person must obey and where punishment is due for noncompliance it must be served consistently in a manner so as to diligently deter immorality with emphasis on deterence. Reality must be dealt with in realistic manner and we must consider: A $5000 fine is pocket change to one and 1 year savings to another which gives one unfair advantage over another. There is no provision in THE LAW to permit financial or influential advantage over another person in matters of law in fact forbids it. all human beings and as they are known to err THE LAW was enacted in 1982 to address these matters in a fair way to every individual and it must be consistently applied in respect of every individual for the Rights of every individual are dependent on the consistency. Simply abide by these words
DO ONTO OTHERS AS YOU

15. (1) Every individual is equal before and under the law and has WOULD HAVE THEM DO ONTO YOU 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. 31. Nothing in this Charter extends the legislative powers of any body or authority. 32. (1) This Charter applies (a) to the Parliament and government of Canada in respect of all matters within the authority of Parliament including all matters relating to the Yukon Territory and Northwest Territories; and (b) to the legislature and government of each province in respect of all matters within the authority of the legislature of each province. Integrity must be consistent in all matters of law where the purpose of the administrators of law is to diligently deal with immorality when and where ever it appears. Where policy or application of laws are not consistent with the spirit of THE LAW they must be amended immediately so as to not further burden the people of the moral society of Canada. 118

52. (1) The Constitution of Canada is the supreme law of Canada, and any law that is inconsistent with the provisions of the Constitution is, to the extent of the inconsistency, of no force or effect. Consistency is demanded in every matter of law to consistently address every matter of THE LAW. REALITY

Is precisely what is at present point of time which has a precise history and future up for grabs impervious to perception influenced by perception which is a constant which may be applied to any point of time passed. Unfortunately due to the fact reality is documented by humans known to err, the documents are their personal perceptions which are inflicted with misconceptions due the deceptions which distort the realities as God would see them and when consideration is given to the personal purpose the author writes, which could well be for financial gain which introduces a whole new realm of realities which may include writing what the people want to read or what the author wants the readers to believe. Only when we are confident that society is perceptive to all facets of reality and the disastrous affect deception has on perceptions which play a vital role in past and present future which were up for grabs will they comprehend that we live today far in the past relative to the future that may have been except for the unprogressive nature deceit and lies have on all present times which obstruct that which could have been in the future. To simplify in reality we have many factors which influence our lives and longevity such as depression and despair, wellbeing, attitudes which affect our health which require professional attention, hospitals, doctors and such which in turn reflects on our contributions to taxes and all these and many more in turn can be attributed to untimely demise of ones existence. Money is and always has been the most influential factor in reality which the lack there of leaves one¶s perception lacking of the realities of the times even though they are living one of the realities and those with the money live a completely different reality and considering there are less with money than those with and the fact those with the money and the wherewithal to get writings published and the fact they must write to an audience which can afford to buy, the truths are corrupted and those without money are not well represented. The truth of what actually goes on behind doors of the financial circles is not published or I should say not commonly known but what is commonly known is people will do anything for money, it¶s just a matter of finding the price and of course it is difficult to bring the wealthy to justice because they have an army of lawyers to keep them out of trouble and they have insider influence with the whole legal system. These are realities which exist and have always existed which have affected life styles of people since who knows when for without truths we can not determine and without truths our futures will never be the ultimate of that which could have been. Presently there was a drug mentioned on TV which I didn¶t quite catch the details of it but I heard it could save lives rather dramatically but the ingredients of the drug were so common and inexspensive and something to do with the people in the industry felt they couldn¶t make money to produce it, someone from the government had stated perhaps they could do something about getting it to the people and that is all I have heard about it since. 119

Just another reality of life or I should say another reality of our certain death and limited longevity. You would think that the media would grab hold of this story and run with it, considering the significance but when you ponder reality in money sense and the influencial circles inherent in matters of money and the peoples ignorance in such matters with money being the catalyst we can see how our lives are affected by not knowing the truths so that we the people can make appropriate decisions. Many would say give me true liberty or at least a better life. Not many are going to request death and they can take care of that themselves. We people only get to hear what they want us to hear and those who write are contolled by these realities. I reiterate if not for all the lies, deceit and immorality we would be now living as they would be somewhere in the far and distant future living quality longer lives. This gives much to think about but it requires little time to get the concept and it takes no effort of thought to be coherent to where the obstructions are. Reality offers the truth and we have eyes and ears to receive it and magnificent brains to store truths and to reason them for moral and truthful purpose but those with the power to do so obviously use the truth for their own purpose and give us lies to suit their purpose. So we the people suffer and live the consequences of their lies while they benefit from the truth. That is reality past and present and what the future holds for generations to come until the demise of reality. If there is a new beginning sometime after we are gone the people will seek the truth from the records that remain and they will develop perceptions from the lies and run the cycle over again. Loyalists to beliefs are the answer to the charlatan¶s prayers. It is blatantly obvious the affects lies and deceit have upon society and just as obvious is who has the power to use lies to the utmost benefit and just as obvious who has not learned to lie for benefit. There is no need to let our minds run off in all different directions in an unorganized manner in an effort to sort this all out to make things right which can not be achieved by we the people without the wherewithal to achieve such a mountainous task. It will suffice to know that reality is just what it is and we must be coherent to that fact if we are to deal with it. We know in reality there are people who err and we know this is common to everyone of us. We know people are ignorant and that is common to each and every one of with some being more and some less of our own personal ignorance and being personal we endeavor to keep that to ourselves. We obviously all have different perceptions of reality and that is an important matter which must be addressed. If we are to get along together we MUST be coherent to all facets of reality though we need not know the details of every reality. Truth is the ultimate factor in dealing with reality and with that ultimate factor, upon being cognizant to the detriment of lies upon society we can reason for the benefit of all we must eradicate lies from society. 120

The quality and longevity of our lives is dependent on our attentiveness to this endeavor. That has to be the ultimate purpose of every individual person in the world today for our lives depend on our ability to take care of our own personal bodies and those with children depend on you to take care of them, If you can¶t take care of your own person you are doing a grave injustice to your children which is fact whether you choose to believe it or not. We ourselves are living lives of much lesser quality than we should be if our ancestors had of dealt with reality. Reality itself attests to the fact as it does to all facts of reality. Lies come from people who all look and sound the same in general as all people do with no way of knowing if they tell lies or are intent on deceit by just looking at them. In reality we know if we were to ask a person if they were immoral they would take this as an insult of their character so we must look for liars in a more suitable manner. The obvious is to know the truth and identify the lie. The lie is a reality of many truths which only need to be retraced to the source and from there we will know why the person lied. Money is often the catalyst to the lies. In matters of THE LAW in Canada all individuals are guaranteed equally all the rights provided by the Charter which includes protection from the immoral and equal and fair justice when deprived by the immoral This is impossible when the realities of money factors are introduced leaving a gross disadvantage to those with no money or influence. Even those with money can not expect justice in this manner for there are too many factors involved such as to who has the best and most lawyers and most influential friends and on and on like that. That is reality but not justice and quite contrary to our Constitutional rights. 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. Who would argue against the law which guarantees fairness to every individual which fairly grants them the same rights? Of course the immoral people who obviously believe the laws are excellent for everyone except themselves and their friends, all who have great influence in such matters. They believe they have so much power and influence that they can use the law differently for themselves which has been the downfall and reason for the struggle of humankind. In a democracy such as Canada where the members of the government are elected by the people to represent them in all matters of THE LAW and the administers of THE LAW are financed by the people to administer 121

the law as defined in the document of THE LAW in the spirit of THE LAW with them having no advantage over any other individual in Canada they must make it appear so in performance of their duties. I say appear so because obvious they have the advantage that comes with the territory which is all part of reality. After all, this is their field of endeavor which they do for a living with the inherent wherewithal where the individual has wherewithal in other fields of endeavor. The fact is we individuals financed their wherewithal¶s to use them to protect each and every one of us individually which is supported by the whole, even the immoral who must state they are moral to cover their immorality. With all that reality provides and the reality of the spirit of THE LAW there is nothing to argue. Once they argue they will have provided evidence that they are deeply involved in the conspiracy and given the disastrous affect of the conspiracy upon the people and by their actions which have undermined the very foundation of the Constitution of Canada they must be charged with treason. As in all very serious criminal matters in society the number one purpose of THE LAW is to apply due punishment so as to deter such abhorrid atrocities to reoccur and in this endeavor it is imperative to get to the kingpin. In such matters plea bargaining seems to have positive results and I suggest that works best if one turns them self in before being apprehended and with a good presentation leading to the source of the conspiracy and the eradication thereof resulting in a moral administration coincidental to the spirit of the Constitution as demanded by THE LAW in service of the people I would have to think those people who cooperated in such a manner could change their status from national scum to hero by addressing all the issues openly to the public. The ultimate goal is to abandon the horse for a vehicle built to take us swiftly into the future attentive to consistency, integrity, fortitude and conviction so as to catch up to where we would have been in the future if not for their ignorant, arrogant avarice ways. Of course that is unachievable but you had best make every effort possible to appear as if you are trying. That begins with informing the public and they should be able to take it from there. So many things to ponder in reality and it is always best to ponder in a manner which will do you good and in your positions it is best you do everything to the best of your ability for the good of society which is surely for your own good in everyway in matters of reality.

Sincerely

Frank Gallagher

122

April 4, 2007 I apologize for changing my mind after stating I would not be sending you any more correspondence but as I am attentive to purpose and strive to deal with it the best way I can with due regard to fairness and given the enormity of the subject matter and the consequences to the people I have decided to send this attachment to those people who have at least read or opened the correspondence which I last sent. I presume you all have copies of my Lawyer Files #s 1-11 dated March 30 2007 and my Lawyer File #12 dated April 1 2007. If you were of mind to appear to the public that you are attentive to their well being and should require any more evidence of that which I charge I would be pleased to respond in haste lest there be more waste. Frank Gallagher PS Of course you are all aware of the issues I have addressed over the past 20 months and the purpose of this letter which is pertinent to the rest but for the record I request you to acknowledge receipt of this correspondence and attachments and inform me of your intentions regarding these matters. With Good Friday fast approaching and given the significance of the supremacy of God in matters of THE LAW which you people purport to administer I felt it prudent to test your conscience as you take a four day weekend to Honor His son. Perhaps if you set a moment aside to reflect on the reason Jesus died 2000 years ago and gave some thought as to why his death 2000 years ago was meaningless you may perchance upon a thought which could make His death and all the peoples births meaningful.

123

-----Original Message----From: Prime Minister/Premier ministre [mailto:pm@pm.gc.ca] Sent: Friday, July 20, 2007 9:29 AM To: Frank Gallagher Subject: Office of the Prime Minister / Cabinet du Premier ministre Dear Mr. Gallagher: On behalf of the Right Honourable Stephen Harper, I would like to acknowledge receipt of your correspondence regarding your personal affairs. While careful consideration has been given to your description of the difficulties you have experienced, I trust you will understand that this office is unable to intervene in any way or provide you with direct assistance in this matter. I regret that my response could not be more favourable.

M. Bredeson Executive Correspondence Officer for the Prime Minister's Office Agent de correspondance de la haute direction pour le Cabinet du Premier ministre >>> From : Frank Gallagher frank.gallagher@sympatico.ca >>> July 19, 2007 Received : 19 Jul 2007 05:59:27 PM

Dear Prime Minister

I have written you about certain issues which surely must be of your concern and I think it incomprehensible and unethical that you have not responded to me and at the very least I would expect acknowledgement as to receipt.

I have attached a file for your personal attention which should draw your personal attention to all that I have previously written you Including copies of my 15 Lawyer Files which you have declined to act upon let alone acknowledge, which leaves me in disrespect for you equally as you have held me in disrespect as you do equally the majority of individuals who have elected you in trust that you would represent them fairly in respect of the Constitution, which governs us all including you.

124

I request you acknowledge receipt of this and other documents I previously sent and state your intentions.

I have requested you forward the documentation on to the Commissioner of Conflict of Interest and Ethics Mary Elizabeth Dawson and I would like to know if you have done so.

I expect you to oversee the proceedings to ensure they are carried out in the spirit intended.

The conclusion of these proceedings will reveal the truth as to the intended spirit, deceit or in the spirit of the Constitution.

Respectfully to the Spirit of the Constitution Frank Gallagher

125

CANADA IS FOUNDED UPON PRINCIPLES THAT RECOGNIZE THE SUPREMACY OF GOD AND THE RULE OF LAW

October 18 2007

DO UNTO OTHERS AS WE WOULD HAVE THEM DO UNTO US

Integrity Inspector

Learning without thought is labor lost; thought without learning is perilous

There were no dates in this history but scrawled across every page, this way and that were the words, BENEVOLENCE, RIGHTEOUSNESS and MORALITY«.finally I
began to make out what was written between the lines; the whole volume was filled with a single phrase: EAT PEOPLE

126

Perhaps sincerity and a new badge for 2008 1954-2007

2008 -

The Department of Justice is pulling our strings ± Time to cut loose ± with the Supremy of God

The Rule of Law

The Law Society of Upper Canada The Law Society of Upper Canada is adamant their members are only obliged to advance the interests of their clients with no concern for the individual¶s guaranteed Charter rights, Their members fill every position in the legal system of Ontario and are required to abide by the supreme law of Canada, the Constitution Act, 1982 with particular attention to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms which specifically states Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and

The Rule of Law
31. Nothing in this Charter extends the legislative powers of any body or authority Nothing in this Charter extends the legislative powers could be interpreted two ways and it must to comply and be consistent with the Charter therefore their powers extend only to the limits provided to all people of Canada with the power and responsibility to administer and enforce the laws of Ontario consistent with and conducive to the individual¶s guaranteed Charter rights and given that they have extended their authority it is imperative there is a department consisting of non professionals either in legal or religious sectors of sane moral unbiased irreproachable character who comprehend the aspirations attributed to God to be the rule of law which credence must be given to that which is least likely misunderstood by human kind.

32. (1) This Charter applies (a) to the Parliament and government of Canada in respect of all matters within the authority of Parliament including all matters relating to the Yukon Territory and Northwest Territories; and (b) to the legislature and government of each province in respect of all matters within the authority of the legislature of each province. The Legal profession, throughout my investigation have proven to be in concurrence with the Society

127

As a citizen of Canada under the authority of the Constitution Act, 1982 with adherence to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms I request you investigate the personnel referenced in my Lawyer Files 1-14, 13A for the ultimate purpose of charging the Ontario Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, Minister Honourable John Gerretsen for Obstruction of Justice in matters referenced in Lawyer Files # 1-3. In pursuance of this investigation to commence proceedings against Honourable John, I request you gather evidence to commence proceedings against the Attorney General Michael Bryant for not only the charge of Obstruction of Justice in these matters but for the ultimate crime of conspiracy against the Canadian people by establishing a modus operandi, which includes enacting Ontario Laws purposely with out due regard to the individual¶s guaranteed Charter Rights for obvious benefit to the members of his personal interest group, the Law Society of Upper Canada and of course his affluent associates and the powers that be behind the scenes which is the ultimate quest of the investigation. I have explained in a 41 page document dated October 9 2007 addressed to Randy Craig, Detective Sergeant of the OPP Anti-Rackets, which I have circulated to a preponderance of government personnel by e-mail and fax for their immediate attention to these matters and I wait for response from the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, Honourable Robert Nicholson for evidence whether or not he is in on the conspiracy, which will support the DEMAND FOR AN EXTENSIVE RCMP PUBLIC INQUIRY You must remember that any Ontario laws prohibiting you to act in performance of your duty under the Constitution Act 1982, which is the supreme law of Canada as you are well aware, are of no force or effect to the extent of the inconsistency 52. (1) The Constitution of Canada is the supreme law of Canada, and any law that is inconsistent with the provisions of the Constitution is, to the extent of the inconsistency, of no force or effect. Lawyer File # 8 provides a fairly comprehensive presentation of the issues and on pages 24 - 26 I provide suggestion for a preliminary investigation which I consider the minimal requirements of a professional investigation. FFF Obviously these are very difficult and trying times and the evidence must be looked at in a manner consistent with and conducive to the Charter rights which are guaranteed to the people equally in all matters before and under the law which means there can not be a ³Threshold´ in matters of whether or not you can commence proceedings in a Provincial Court other than the reliability of the evidence itself as to whether or not criminal acts of fraud were committed by my former tenant Don Wilson which the evidence I have is irrefutable, to the fact that he did so at an Ontario Rental Housing Tribunal hearing before the judicator in a building financed by the people to administer and enforce the law consistent with the Constitution Act, 1982 attentive to the individual¶s guaranteed rights of protection whereas due punishment is the first line of defense where deterrence serves not only to give the criminal element something to think about but to ensure the word doesn¶t get spread to the criminal element, that they can do such things and get away with it due the incompetence of the establishment to administer and enforce the law consistent with and conducive to the individual¶s guaranteed rights. Let us not forget about the victim who demands justice, after all the victim was guaranteed protection, fully aware that nothing can be guaranteed not to happen, however like an automobile company the legal system must be able to demonstrate due diligence in backing the guarantee as car companies do. The evidence proves the government establishment hasn¶t one department with personnel alert to the concept. Not one person who picks up the phone to find out who of you should deal with the situation. 128

Such neglect is precisely contrary to the intent and the spirit of the Charter pathetically detrimental to a moral society and extremely beneficial to an immoral one which causes the criminal element to flourish being obviously beneficial to the members of the Law Society and their system flourishes providing them all inane and superfluous work with great rewards to the astronomical burden of the moral majority persistently burdening society. You must understand that the Attorney General has extraordinary power influentially and affluently but he is derelict of his authority and his duty in the matters addressed in the 15 Lawyer Files. His ³Roles and Responsibilities of the Attorney General´ posted on his web site which include being the Guardian of - the rule of law- that most elusive concept, hard to easily define which is a well established legal principle is not consistent with or conducive to the individuals guaranteed Charter rights of equality of protection and benefits and inconsistent with the aspirations attributed to God who is recognized as supreme by the supreme law of Canada the Constitution. Sections 1. 7. 12. 15. (1) of the Charter in particular, pertinent to the issues are consistent with the aspirations attributed to God who is supreme as a matter of law. You will note that ± the rule of law- which was a well established legal principle, elusive concept, hard to easily define was ³HOW IT WAS´ and was at the moment before the enactment of the Constitution Act, 1982 but once it was enacted and the supremacy of God was declared - the rule of law-as it stood, incompetent to the aspirations attributed to God and having been declared supreme, the aspirations attributed to Him became immediately the spirit of the law and every effort must be made to administer and enforce the law consistent with and conducive to the spirit which I reiterate ± the rule of law- ³HOW IT WAS´ then is passé and ³HOW IT IS´ now is of no force or effect as to its inconsistencies. Lawyers of course benefited well with ± the rule of law- as ³HOW IT WAS´ with organized confusion however the ambiguities have been removed and the lawyers must abide by the law as well as everyone and they have no right to trample all over everyone¶s rights as the Law Society of Upper Canada would have us believe. Obviously the lawyers were reluctant to change their ways and who¶s going to make them? Are the police going to ask the Attorney General his advice as to whether or not to file charges on him of conspiracy and if they decide to file them anyway as is their responsibility, what might be his decision as to whether or not to proceed which is within his realm of authority as stated in the ³Roles and Responsibilities of the Attorney General´ Say there was public pressure on the Attorney General to do so and being as adept to manipulate the public as his associate members in crime of the Law Society of Upper Tier Canada wouldn¶t they revert to their pet ploy to appear as if they were in compliance of the law and given the circumstance court proceedings are in order, and won¶t he announce to the public that he has full faith in the justice system and the proceedings will prove the accusations against him frivolous and that they have perhaps been initiated by terrorist factors. Of course all his associate members of his Society who hold the powerful positions in the legal system will put on quite a charade but eventually find him to be the man of integrity the position calls for. It¶s a ploy they use over and over again and they drag it out until the people simmer and many times they create diversions or make use of diversions when they rise to wrap up the case finding him innocent with the pressure against him dispersed. 129

The evidence is everywhere in their creating agencies like the Ombudsman and the Civilian Commission on Police Services without the authority they represent them to have to the public all headed by appointments of the government who are obviously alert to the ways of the powers that be and on side and they are provided the tools to extinguish complaints of persistent people complaining about the corruption and conspiracy of the government. They cite section so and so of so and so Act and this review is hereby closed with the decision final. It¶s all documented and reality itself is the best witness. The Prime Minister¶s enactment of the Federal Accountability Act, 2006 indicates he is well aware of the character of the personnel of the powers that be of the government by the enactment and yet he doesn¶t deal with the issues that were brought to his attention which pressured him to deal with the issues but instead he enact the Act. As if there wasn¶t enough Acts already and in particular the Constitution ACT with the inclusion of the Charter which demands integrity in the personnel employed to administer and enforce it responsibility and ³The ³Roles and the Responsibilities of the Attorney General´ of Ontario clearly states he is responsible and accountable. I wonder what is stated in the Roles and Responsibilities of the DOJ. You would presume if the Prime Minister was sincere about the enactment he would have dealt with the issues I presented him but his Office responded that I would understand why he would not get involved. Did they mean that since I was complaining about the government corruption and conspiracy that I would certainly understand why he won¶t deal with it? An obvious understanding: Right? Then I am lucky to have groups like Democracy Watch which gathers the actual statistics

There is a pile of stuff like this on the Democracy Watch web site which makes a few things abundantly obvious, yet they are not so obvious to an abundancy of people.
Sure the PM really didn¶t intend to make the government personnel responsible? That simply is not their modus operandi. Invariably they will stick with their forte¶

130

The most obvious is the fact that these groups are special interest groups feasting off the byproducts of the evil ways of the government and the empathy of the moral people of society which puts them in a bit of a befuddlement as they don¶t want to push to hard on the hands that feed them. Obviously their goal is number one, to provide well for themselves by obvious means of donations purportedly for the benefit of the people they advertise to support which fits in with the scheme of things that is so obvious that it goes unnoticed. Another thing that goes unnoticed is their wide spread ability to communicate and rally their supporters who respect their cause and their initiatives. One would have to ask though, having been provided the evidence I have provided you all which obviously attacks the problem at the root while they have been addressing the symptons, why they wouldn¶t jump on the wagon and utilize their contact lists to inform the public for that is the only way to eradicate this atrocious conspiracy by the government against the people who are made to finance their evil ways of deception for their personnel benefit ««.unless of course their ways are not so irreproachable? Perhaps I am getting a little paranoid and too untrusting and after all I just provided them the last writings of October 9 2007 a couple of days ago, so perhaps they just haven¶t had time to mobilize. So many people who have successful careers at the expense of the people who aver their loyalty to them have this once in a« at least 2500 years OPPORTUNITY to eradicate the corruption and conspiracies that exist in the governments of the world to demonstrate their integrity of purpose.. We of such a diverse society of people from all over the world have the opportunity now to not only eradicate government corruption and conspiracy from Canada but to demonstrate to the world the power of the people united under the spirit of God proving ancestry plays no part in the wars which have devastated and obstructed world peace. . The recipients of my writings have all been handed the opportunity to prove the truth as to their integrity and to the truth of my writings in matters of the individuals guaranteed Charter Rights and by their responses will determine if the individual¶s GUARANTEE is supported and if not they will know

WHY NOT

131

In my way of thinking you must follow my suggestions on pages 24-26 of Lawyer File # 8 quickly and effectively focusing your efforts on Lawyer Files #s 1-3 with emphasis on 1 & 2 for the purpose of implicating the Minister and the Attorney General or his agents in on the actions of the ORHT (LF # 1 and the ridiculous responses of Dave Grech (LF # 2) and HON. John¶s (LF # #) with the ultimate goal to get to the bottom of who is at the top of this conspiracy with ********* ³emphasis´ ******** on punishment which is the first line of defense of the individuals guaranteed rights of protection. Hon. John will thence be known as Little John of the ROBBING HOODS I Sherwood will revel that day and I will be known as the Sherriff of Naughty ham. Ultimately, considering the controversial matter of the issues it is not too far of a stretch to presume the ORHT and Dave Grech would have consulted a professional in these matters and the obvious link is ORHTDave Grech, Investigations-his boss in the same building Honourable John-his Ministerial advisor and associate Cabinet Minister Michael Bryant, Attorney General. The big question is why they went to all the effort to tamper with the evidence, not commence or cause to commence proceedings as is their duty and responsibility to do unless they are the irresponsible people of the conspiracy the evidence shows. The obvious reason is their laws are not constitutional and it would be revealed that they are still operating under the auspices of ±the rule of law- ³HOW IT WAS´ and precisely why the Charter was included in the Charter. The ramifications of this are astronomically horrid to their astronomical benefit to the astronomic detriment of the intended moral society and the outrageous detriment to the majority, creating or maintaining a two tier system. It is my contention that the Minister, Honourable John Gerretsen, Attorney General Michael Bryant and the Premier Dalton McGuinty are the people of authority who I have provided the evidence to, who have ultimately made the decisions for the others referred to in the 15 Lawyer Files and if they were to cooperate and answer as to who advised them to act as they did it would serve no moral or reasonable purpose to pursue proceedings against them. Obviously the goal is to get the public involved which will turn the members of the legal system into their doing the right thing for the moral majority in accordance with their God given and Constitutional rights, to the downfall of the upper tier and the rise of the lower tier with gravity being a major factor. It sure is a good opportunity to get on the good side of the public by making things right how it should be under law which recognizes God as supreme.

132

ocuments delivered to RCMP Harry Walker Blvd. south Davis Drive October 11 2007 Page 9 of 12 of Cover Introduction and Index Document (1) To: (2) From: (3) To: (4) To: (5) To: (6) To: (7) To: (8) To: (9) To: (10) To: (11) To: (12) To: (13) To: (14) To: (15) To (16) To: (17) To (18) To: (19) (20) To: (21) Date No of Pages

Randy Craig Detective Sergeant OPP Anti-Rackets Oct. 9, 2007 41 Dave Grech coordinator Investigations and Enforcement Sept.6, 2006 36 Toronto Sun: Re: Evidence of Fraud/ Obstruction Justice Oct.8, 2006 73 Rick Hennessey ORHT Lawyer File # 1 Mar.30 2007 11 Dave Grech Lawyer File # 2 7 Honourable John Gerretsen (MMAH) Lawyer File # 3 10 G. Carlino Ombudsman Lawyer File # 4 11 Julia Munro MPP Queen¶s Park Lawyer File # 5 6 Dalton McGuinty Premier Lawyer File # 6 5 Michael Bryant Attorney General Lawyer File # 7 14 Randy Craig Lawyer File # 8 38 Bruce Herridge Dep.Chief YRP Lawyer File # 9 22 Sheldon Prior On Civil Com Pol Serv Lawyer File # 10 9 Judy Phillips Off Attorney General Lawyer File # 11 16 Phil Moreau Standards YRP : Lawyer File # 12 Apr. 1 2007 18 Robert McCreary Crown Attorney Nmt Lawyer File # 13 5 1 Paul Culver Crown Attorney TO Lawyer File # 13A 5 1 Michael Thomson RCMP Lawyer File # 14 7 4 Dave Grech Compiled Correspondence Sept. 1 34 Peter Kormos MPP WITNESS May 10 2007 3 Recording ORHT Hearing Begins 3:21:00 +/June 30 2005 1

Note: Not one of these people has addressed the issues of Obstruction of Justice and corruption and conspiracy nor have they shown any concern. I understand their thinking having grown with the flow for 25 years and those who have been around longer have brought the old tradition forward with them and passed it along generation to generation with the orders and policies coming from the top. The vast majority of government personnel have been duped by the powers that be that have used their power and positions of trust against the very people who finance their wherewithal to do it. The truth will set us free. For Christ sake TELL IT Comments Re: Recording of the first day of the Tribunal Hearing June 30 2005 Between me Frank Gallagher Landlord Vs Don Wilson former Tenant 133

Commences at 3: 21:00 +/Please see Letter to Toronto Sun dated October 8 2006 and read it in conjunction with the disk copy of the Tribunal hearing.

On page 4 of the TS Dave Grech Investigations and Enforcement response June 5 2006 to my request for an investigation of Don Wilson for crimes he committed at the ORHT hearing, clearly shows Dave had confused the issues between the charge of Don Wilson filing a false and misleading information with the ORHT namely his dispute dated June 10 2005 to my application to evict him dated June 6 2005, an offense under s.206 (2) of the Tenant Protection Act, 1997 and the criminal act of fraud which he committed at the hearing regarding 2 agreements he had signed along with me dated April 13 2005 and May 6 2005 which I submitted to the ORHT at the hearing and I had also attached a copy of the May 6 2005 to my application to evict him in support of my claim that Don had agreed to vacate my premises on May 31 2005 and that he owed me approximately $8400 at the time in arrears of rent. On page 14 is a copy of the order to evict Don Wilson which clearly states there will not be a hearing if the tenant Don Wilson does not file a dispute within 5 days of receiving the eviction note which he did within 4 days. It clearly state if he filed on time the hearing will be held as scheduled on June 30 2005 Clearly if Don had not filed he would not have appeared on that date and there would not have been a hearing. What else can I say? I would hardly drive down to Scarborough and pay $150 to file for his eviction and then come home and send a dispute in for him and of course I wouldn¶t have forged his signature. When Don was asked to speak as to his dispute which he had filed, he reiterated that which he had written on his dispute which of course he would only know if he had filed it. If anything was not on the up and up about who filed the dispute and signed it, Don would have brought it up at the hearing. I should mention that Nancy Fahlgen, the judicator was not prepared and when I went to her with a copy of Don¶s 2 page dispute to compare it with the one she had at first she said she didn¶t have a copy of the dispute then she found one page of it and confirmed it was identical the part I had with Don¶s explanation for the dispute. I reiterate she was not together although quite at home in hearing environment which I wasn¶t. She was even confused when I mentioned a few times that a copy of the 4 page May 6 2005 agreement was attached to my application to evict Don. I had some difficulty orienting her with the purpose we were there at the hearing. I filed to evict and Don filed not to be evicted and a good place to start is why I have filed and why he has disputed. So the point is if you will verify what I have stated and look at Dave¶s dispute you will know he is confused and should not have declined my request. I made many attempts to make Dave aware of his misunderstanding and even drove downtown Toronto from Keswick with a complete set of documents which I had already faxed to his office. He was not available to see me so I left everything including a disk copy of the hearing, with Roel Pascual a person who stood in for him who agreed to give it all to Dave. 134

He never responded to me even though I wrote him many times and faxed him a copy of the TS and the 15 Lawyer Files. He had taken near a month to finally write to me as to why he wouldn¶t investigate. See document (19) which showed the efforts I made to have him investigate. His stubbornness to put it in writing why he wouldn¶t investigate, his incoherent response, and his refusal to address the facts after I drove down to clarify his incoherence stirred curiosity. There was information missing from the disk copy of the hearing which I received from the ORHT 3 weeks after my request for it regarding conversation I had with Nancy as to whether or not she would be filing charges. When you also consider that at the beginning of the second day of the hearing July 28 2005 Nancy announced there would not be a recorder it became obvious there was something not right in Newmarket. That¶s where the hearing was held. My efforts to see what was up brought us here today with irrefutable evidence of government corruption and conspiracy with the Office of the Attorney General at the forefront. On page 37 is a copy of the dispute which Don signed and filed with the ORHT and you will note in the block for reason of dispute he states, see attached document and agreements On the disk recording he is heard to make statements and declare he can provide documents to prove it. He never provided these documents. Note his signature is clearly legible as to his name Don Wilson On pages 27- 36 you will see the two agreements which he Don claimed he had never seen or signed. My mother witnessed the May 6 2005 and Dave Kirby witnessed the April 13 2005 which you will hear him state so on the Disk. Clearly Don Wilson had committed fraud before Nancy Fahlgren judicator of the ORHT hearing in a building financed by the taxpayer to administer justice

Please refer back to the TS for the rest of the facts of the Tribunal hearing with regard to the fact that Don Wilson did not provide one piece of documentary evidence in support of that which h claimed on his dispute which he signed and filed with the ORHT. When you have studied the copy of the recording and the letter to the Toronto Sun dated October 8 2006 you will know for fact that the crimes were committed by Don Wilson as I state. From there we get into the matters of government personnel tampering with evidence, obstruction of justice under both the Tenant Protection Act, 1997 and the Criminal code which further investigation leads to the government corruption and conspiracy against the people, their creation of a two tier system and treason in matters of the Constitution. I am wondering if the recording of the first day of the hearing was provided to the Attorney General by the ORHT. I recommend you read the accompanying documents in numerical order as follows 135

(1), (3) along with (21) recording and when coherent that the crimes were committed by Don Wilson read (4) - (6) Regarding the tampering with evidence, obstruction of justice. (10) regarding Michael Bryant Attorney General, obstruction of justice, conspiracy which implicates Hon. John Gerretsen. (11) Randy Craig OPP which details the corruption and on pages 24- 26 suggests how to proceed in an investigation for the purpose of getting to the bottom of who is at the top of the conspiracy behind the scenes of Michael Bryant which includes the Premier and the Prime Minister and soon to know if the DOJ is behind it equally with the office of the Ontario Attorney General along with Ontario Legislatue and Parliament. Skies the limit requiring you only to reach for it for the people of Canada of the lower Tier Should you require more documents or have any questions at all please e-mail me at franklyone@hotmail.com. Please give me the interpretation of ³Threshold´ used by the police to determine which cases meet the evidentiary requirements to be brought before the courts. Everyone who knows including Deputy Chief Bruce Herridge and Randy Craig please respond.

Thank you Frank Gallagher

136

October 18 2007 To: RCMP Insp. Brian Verheul O i/c CCS Sgt. Steve Semenchuk NCO i/c Intake CCS Cpl Mona Eichman Re: Government corruption and conspiracy Meeting with Sgt. Steinebech today. Dear Insp. Brian Verheul Today my mother Edythe Gallagher and I dropped into the RCMP headquarters Harry Walker Blvd, Newmarket and spent a couple of hours between 11 AM and 1 PM talking to RCMP staff to determine who has the responsibility to deal with matters of government corruption and conspiracy and eventually I was introduced to Sgt. Steinebech As I wrote the times down I realize that I must have connected at an inopportune time straddling staffs lunch times and if you could apologize to them for my inconsideration I would appreciate it. Not once did anyone mention it as they listened to hear me out and I should also apologize for being impatient with them when they point out their mandate limits their authority to deal with such matters. That is the inherent problem with the system as there is nobody mandated to do so as I have comprehensively and irrefutably proven in an e-mail I sent simultaneously to a prodigious number of Ontario and Federal government personnel listed in the document, Preamble Federal correspondence Recap October 9 2007 which I had attached. It was a letter addressed to Randy Craig, Detective. Sergeant OPP Anti-Rackets for his attention to the issues contained within but everyone who I e-mailed to were also requested to attend to the issues. The document was a response to, Federal Ombudsman of Victims of Crime Louis Theoret¶s e-mail of October 5 2007 and in fact the document included the correspondence between him and I since September 20 2007 which I had copied to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada Robert Nicholson so as to keep him up to speed as to the issues of the Ontario Government corruption and conspiracy so as to to provide him the opportunity to deal with the issues and hand him the rope to hang himself with. I had several times previous provided him the evidence but his office declined to respond. In Louis Theoret¶s e-mail of September 27 2007 he acknowledged that the issues were of a serious nature however he stated the issues were not within his jurisdiction which is utter nonsense since his duty is victimsfirst@ombudsman.gc.ca unless of course that means there ultimate purpose is to create victims which the whole government establishment are bent on. The fact is victims is his business to help and where clear and present danger is evident due diligence must be applied to that which is predictable in an initiative of prevention. His response wasn¶t unexpected as you will note in my first e-mail to him dated September 20 2007 but I had to go through the formalities to get it documented. 137

At the same time to keep everyone on my e-mail list on the same page including the Minister of Justice and Attorney General Robert Nicholson whom I presume is the authority to deal with the corruption and conspiracy of the Ontario Government since they had all declined to take action on the issues of a serious nature which was ultimately their failure to provide a legal system capable of demonstrating due diligence to the individual¶s guaranteed Charter rights. To prove this one last time and to also prove the said Minister of Justice was in on the conspiracy I provided them all simultaneously the irrefutable evidence along with my web site http://groups.google.com/group/peoples-law-society where the evidence and more is to be found should they have misplaced theirs. I had presumed the Minister Robert Nicholson was the person who should be responsible to back the individual¶s guaranteed Charter rights, however I asked them all to tell me who was responsible if not he and nobody at all has responded other than a couple of phone calls from Ms Petrie of the office of Robert McCreary Crown Attorney, Newmarket requesting me to fax some additional pages of the 41 page document which didn¶t come through With not one person responding to the issues which are of a serious nature proves irrefutably the incompetence of the legal system and the irresponsible personnel which run rampant throughout who are unequivocally indifferent to the individuals Charter rights. I reiterate this was known to me long ago being so obvious as the evidence shows but I was attentive to documenting it well, not for the purpose of presenting it before the courts which would be an exercise of futility since the whole system, Federal and Provincial is corrupt and in on the conspiracy together. I have stated in my writings that I understand life and know full well how it works where the people are brain washed from the day they are born where they fit into the system believing the law is a group of respectable people of irreproachable integrity but often the law is an ass due to the fact it is staffed by humans who are proned to err and that¶s just how it is thought to be according to common sense with a lot of corruption on the side. All the different cultures and religions attest to the influence of the environment they are reared and the inherent nature of hanging on to their cultures as they leave the country of their ancestry to begin a new and prosperous way of life here in Canada. Traditions which they are determined to hang on to like an anchor as they attempt to struggle ahead. It is a mind thing deeply embedded in their brains over time passed on and on.. Like the legal system which is operated by members of the Law Society of Upper Canada and like societies who like to hold on to tradition as stated in the Roles and Responsibilities of the Attorney General which is published on his web site. There you will find a prodigious amount of evidence that the Office of the Ontario Attorney General has determined to carry on tradition as they continue to administer and enforce the laws of Ontario consistent with the rule of law as it was before the enactment of the Constitution Act, 1982. That was the well established legal principle, that most elusive concept, hard to easily define. It was the rule of law, which the Attorney General of Ontario, was the Guardian of, which protected the people and society as a whole. 138

I would have to say it could not protect the people very well considering the description of it and obviously the ordinary moral majority would not commonly know the rule of law which protected them was so incompetent to do so. It clearly states that it was a well established legal principle and obviously those people of the legal profession would be well aware of the incompetence of it as they would know now, and obviously the people wouldn¶t know any better today than they would have then. This is obviously a testament to the legal professions deprivation of morality and integrity and the Attorney General¶s indifference to the well being of the individual and society as a whole attests to it. In any crime law enforcers are attentive to opportunity and motive and I suspect a look at his house, automobiles in his driveway, second and third properties, private schools his kids go to, yachts and travel expenses whatever, would address that issue. They are all partners in crime feasting off the people as they turn the simplest issues of right and wrong into major Federal cases which costs are prohibitive to the moral majority. I know I am just going through the formalities because you all know and in fact could offer a whole lot more but this isn¶t for you, it¶s for the people to know exactly what is going on and by your failure to act for them consistent and conducive to their guaranteed Charter rights they won¶t need to see anymore than what is written and documented herein and what you have not done to attend to the issues regarding their well being and their right to provide a prosperous life for themselves. They already know as you do the government is corrupt and the evidence within these writings explains precisely how it is done and who is involved. Everyone in the said e-mail list and of course whoever is yet to be linked when the people rise to force a Public Inquiry. We already know the office of the DOJ is linked to corruption and conspiracy through the Standing Committee on Public Accounts hearing of the RCMP pension fund scandal and we know who obstructed justice when the Standing Committee was told to Sit on it.. They won¶t be befuddled by the deceitful ways of lawyers who will not be sitting to judge nor will anything they have to say be heard by the majority and those who bother will just have more evidence against them which already runneth over. It is pathetic that I feel it necessary to Dick and Jane you people in hopes you will Spot your way to act responsibly in accordance with the supreme law of Canada, the Constitution which is the very foundation of what Canada and its people stand for. You people do know there is no Santa Clause even though Virginia was lied to, even though it is done in the good spirit of things. You do know that the conspirators are not doing it in the spirit of anything other than to satiate their own spirits. How can you people call yourselves law enforcers when you are indifferent to it following rules, regulations, policies which are neither coherent to, competent to or consistent with the law, the supreme law, the Constitution which makes them of no force or effect?

139

The Law Society of Upper Canada¶s admission, in the aforesaid correspondence that their members do not have to give a shit about the individual¶s Charter rights, as they continue in their unscrupulous traditional ways as defined in the Role of the Attorney General published on his web site where he is the Guardian of the rule of law which was a well established legal principle being that most elusive concept, hard to easily define which protected the people and society as a whole back in 1982 but was superseded by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms at the moment of the enactment where the rule of law was incompetent to back the individual¶s guarantees as provided by the Charter, inconsistent with the aspirations attributed to God who is recognized to be supreme by the supreme law of Canada, the Constitution. There have been no amendments to the Roles and Responsibilities of the Attorney General since the Charter inclusion to the Constitution Act, 1982 such as

The Attorney General (d) shall perform the duties and have the powers that belong to the Attorney General and Solicitor General of England by law and usage, so far as those powers and duties are applicable to Ontario, and also shall perform the duties and powers that, until the Constitution Act, 1867 came into effect, belonged to the offices of the Attorney General and Solicitor General in the provinces of Canada and Upper Canada and which, under the provisions of that Act, are within the scope of the powers of the Legislature; The document, Preamble Federal correspondence Recap October 9 2007, the 41 page document addressed to Randy Craig OPP which was provided to everyone on the said e-mail list proves 1 of 2 things that either nobody knows who is responsible to back the individual¶s guaranteed Charter rights or they know nobody is responsible to back the individual¶s Charter rights and they ain¶t telling. I know who is ultimately responsible to the people of Ontario through the legislature, and who is responsible for constitutional matters and who is responsible to ensure the laws of Ontario are legal and who is the guardian of the public interest and I know the Attorney General has unique responsibilities to the Crown, the courts, the Legislature and the executive branch of government. I know who has a constitutional and traditional responsibility beyond that of a political minister. I know who (b) shall see that the administration of public affairs is in accordance with the law; (c) shall superintend all matters connected with the administration of justice in Ontario e) shall advise the Government upon all matters of law connected with legislative enactments and upon all matters of law referred to him or her by the Government; (f) shall advise the Government upon all matters of a legislative nature and superintend all Government measures of a legislative nature; (g) shall advise the heads of ministries and agencies of Government upon all matters of law connected with such ministries and agency; (h) shall conduct and regulate all litigation for and against the Crown or any ministry or agency of government in respect of any subject within the authority or jurisdiction of the Legislature; (i) shall superintend all matters connected with judicial offices; (j) shall perform such other functions as are assigned to him or her by the Legislature or by the Lieutenant Governor in Council. I know the importance of the independence of the role is fundamental to the position and well established in common law, statutes and tradition. I know The Attorney General has a special role to play in advising Cabinet to ensure the rule of law is maintained and that Cabinet actions are legally and constitutionally valid. 140

I know as chief law officer, the Attorney General has a special responsibility to be the guardian of that most elusive concept - the rule of law. The rule of law is a well established legal principle, but hard to easily define. It is the rule of law that protects individuals, and society as a whole, from arbitrary measures and safeguards personal liberties. I know a whole lot more too thanks to the web site of the Attorney General I know who has guarded traditional disrespect for the people I know 31. Nothing in this Charter extends the legislative powers of any body or authority. I know 32. (1) This Charter applies (a) to the Parliament and government of Canada in respect of all matters within the authority of Parliament including all matters relating to the Yukon Territory and Northwest Territories; and (b) to the legislature and government of each province in respect of all matters within the authority of the legislature of each province. I don¶t know who is above these people and the people in the list which I have provided the evidence ain¶t telling; however they are all Honourable people who each play a vital role in the premeditated neglect of the individual¶s guaranteed Charter rights. 52. (1) The Constitution of Canada is the supreme law of Canada, and any law that is inconsistent with the provisions of the Constitution is, to the extent of the inconsistency, of no force or effect. I know for most definite fact the aspirations attributed to God who is supreme takes priority over the unscrupulous ways of the lawyers who continue in their pathetic traditional ways. Who amongst you will remain following the lawyers who are possessed by the Devil who have no place in a society where the supreme law of Canada, the Constitution recognizes the supremacy of God. The evidence consistently shows the members of the law society are of evil spirits who consistently act in defiance of the Constitution which they are sworn to uphold. It is not my opinion it is precisely what the evidence consistently demonstrates. Any person who cares to pull a rabbit out of the hat as precedence or what was traditional will only support my claim they are unscrupulous in their ways unrelentingly trying to persuade us they have more power than God who we know full well of the aspirations attributed to him.. I know many fools and I know there are many more yet to be flushed and I suggest once again you begin with Lawyer Files # 1, # 2 and # 3 with due regard to the ousting of number 7 the Attorney General of Ontario Michael Bryant who among all his Roles and Responsibilities: (g) shall advise the heads of ministries and agencies of Government upon all matters of law connected with such ministries and agency; So there you have it. It is beyond all comprehension the ORHT would take it upon themselves to tamper with the evidence, not record the 2nd day of the hearing and not commence or cause to commence proceedings against Don Wilson my former tenant and president of a company I invested in, with filing a false and misleading information with the ORHT, namely his dispute which he signed and faxed to the ORHT, an offense under s.206 (2) of the Tenant Protection Act, 1997 value $43,000 plus It is incomprehensible the ORHT, which is an independent agency of the Government would permit a person to commit criminal fraud over $100,000 right in front of the judicator in a building financed by the people as part of the legal system in Ontario mandated to administer justice in compliance with the Tenant 141

Protection Act, 1997 consistent with the supreme law of Canada, the Constitution Act, 1982 on their own without advice from the Attorney General and without him being aware of it. After all I have informed him as you are all aware that the Attorney General is cognizant of the facts as per Lawyer File # 7 and a prodigious number of other documents which includes Judy Phillips of his Office who was asked to respond to the evidence I provided and copies can be found on pages 19 and 32 of Government Correspondence compiled Sept, 1 2007. I remind you that all persons addressed on the 15 Lawyer Files have received copies of all 15 Lawyer Files. How obvious is it that Dave Grech Investigations and Enforcement of the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing is under the Minister of said Ministry Hon. John Gerretsen and how obvious is it that the Attorney General shall advise the heads of all Ministries on all matters of law. How obvious is it that Dave wouldn¶t go out on his own to write such a ridiculous incoherent response September 5 2006 to the evidence and why did he take a month to finally give in to write me a reason. If he had just erred as Randy Craig, OPP Anti-Rackets offered why when I took the trouble to drive all the way down town from Keswick why wouldn¶t he have just apologized and got on with it. Rick Hennessey and Nancy Fahlgren of the ORHT, Dave Grech and Hon. John Gerretsen of the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing are guilty of Obstruction of Justice in matters of the Criminal code and s.206 (1) of the Tenant Protection Act,1997 and I God damn well demand you commence proceedings against them in compliance with the law and the individual¶s Charter guarantee of protection and right to justice. I needn¶t mention the vital importance of due punishment in due diligence to deterrence without which we would have a lawless country which Sgt. Steinebech offered. I had that in mind myself. Refusal to do so will irrefutably implicate you to the conspiracy. I remind you that Sgt. Steinebeck refused to take the copies of the documents which I had brought to his office because it clearly stated on the RCMP web site that documents for criminal charges will not be accepted by e-mail and he informed me he already knew of me and my documents I have been e-mailing Sgt. Michael Thomson and he assured me they have all been kept on file and I can continue to communicate by e-mail as I have been doing. That was witnessed by my mother as I placed great emphasis on this even asking if he was refusing to take my evidence. He assured me it is not necessary and I reiterate because you have all my documents on file including the recording of the Tribunal Hearing which he stated you would have a copy of that from the first day I dropped off the evidence near 2 years ago. I accept him at his word; he has acknowledged you have the evidence. The Federal Ombudsman of Victims of Crime Louis Theoret has stated he has reviewed the evidence carefully and understands the issues are of a serious nature as do I and any person of moral conscience.

142

The severity of the issues and the crimes dwarf his understanding, but of course we know full well of his integrity for allowing such conditions to remain unattended to in his negligence of the most high as predictable is preventable and victims will continue to drop like flies. We all know his office is dependent on victims which plays havoc on his moral inclinations and failure to act with due diligence to this endeavor will not be tolerated. But that will be dealt with in due course as will all issues addressed within my writings which will be found on my web site Law Society of Upper Canada and 9 subsidiary sites.

I remind you people this is the computer age and it is to my understanding 73% of the populace have one. People have never been as dumb as you believe they are and it is plain ignorant of you to insult our intelligence. You gang up on the individual who you know full well is precisely that against all you bullies and only when groups get together like gays demanding their equal rights are you forced to listen. When all I hear from you is reasons why you can¶t help without looking for the obvious reasons you can and are responsible to do it takes no brain surgeon to determine where you are coming from because you can not be as bloody ignorant as you demonstrate. Before today I had no confirmation as to whether or not you had been receiving the evidence but that has now been confirmed which again begs the question as to why you have not commenced proceedings in any shape or form upon the issues addressed to you which are of the utmost importance to the people of the moral majority. You know those people, the ones you stand by and watch the government powers that be ravish us of our hard earned wages both in taxation and when the money is spent where consumer goods are all inflated and then gst and pst paid on those taxes and on and on and on. Do your law and ordering according to the law for the protection of the people of society not the criminal element and you will find things rather orderly. You are obvious as a hockey player scoring on his own net. Friendly fire you might say!! Frank Gallagher

143

I am still waiting for the true meaning of the word ³Threshold´ in police terminology. The line between which evidence is determined to be presented before the courts and I would ask you to review the evidence I have provided and tell me what more could possibly be provided And then I ask why none of you asked for more evidence to satisfy the limitations. I have a prodigious amount of evidence to prove what ever could be possibly be needed to prove beyond any reasonable doubt to any one competent in that persuasion

144

145

146

147

148

149

150

151

152

October 22 2006 To:Commisioner Giuliano Zacardelli RCMP Fax:613-993-0309 From: Frank Gallagher franklyone@hotmail.com Re: Obstruction of Justice Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing Hon. John Gerretsen etal Tenant Protection Act,1997 Constitution Act,1982 COVER UP ORHT-Tampering with evidence Dear OPP I(landlord) received an Order under section 69 Tenant Protection Act,1997 File # TNL-67103 which found for me directing my (tenant) to pay me rent arrears and vacate my premises as per an agreement he had signed Dated May 6 2005 which I had attached to my application to evict. The disput he had signed and filed was a complete fabrication and contrary to the May 6/05 Agreement which he and I had both signed. The tenant denied having ever seen the 4 page May 6 2005 agreement and denied having ever signed it. I submitted evidence which proved beyond any doubt that the tenant filed a false and misleading information which is an offence under the Tenant Protection Act. In so doing I also proved that he had committed fraud regarding the May 6 2005 agreement. When the judicator realized what was happening I said "There oughta be a law" and she responded "There is" and went on for a minute or two articulating the matter. When I tried to contact her after receiving the order to see if charges would be laid the ORHT declined to file charges but I got a copy of the hearing recording. The part where I said "There oughta be a law" and her response were removed. There was no recording of the second day of the hearing. I corresponded with the Investigations and Enforcement Unit of the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing and finally Dave Grech wrote me to say that he would not be filing charges and his reason was absolutely ridiculous and he ended with it would be my word againt his which is absolute B..S.. My tenant had no evidence to back his dispute anf I had a prodigious amount to conclude beyond any doubt that he was a fraud and had filed a false and misleading information under the Act. Offences 206. (1) Any person who knowingly does any of the following is guilty of an offence: 153

6. Harass, hinder, obstruct or interfere with a landlord in the exercise of, i. securing a right or seeking relief under this Act or in the court, After corresponding with various levels of government I was not able to find anyone to deal with this matter but the Premier, Dalton McGuinty suggested I write the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, Hon.John Gerretsen who declined to review the matter stating that Dave Grech coordinator of Investigations and Enforcement is the person whom he appointed to investigate such matters and he trusts him, so case closed. As for the ORHT he states they are at arms length from the government and implied that he couldn't investigate them. Duties of Minister 200. The Minister shall, (a) monitor compliance with this Act; (b) investigate cases of alleged failure to comply with this Act; and (c) where the circumstances warrant, commence or cause to be commenced proceedings with respect to alleged failures to comply with this Act. 1997, c. 24, s. 200. I have written the Attorney General, Michael Bryant on several occasions to investigate and file charges under: Offences Tenant Protection Act, 1997 but he has declined to respond. 206. (1) Any person who knowingly does any of the following is guilty of an offence: 6. Harass, hinder, obstruct or interfere with a landlord in the exercise of, i. securing a right or seeking relief under this Act or in the court, or

I have this all well documented but everyone declines to file charges. I have been attempting to get this matter dealt with for over a year now and nobody has accepted responsibility to investigate. I reiterate that the evidence is overwhelming that the tenant filed a false and misleading dispute with the ORHT and the Fraud regarding the May 6 2005 agreement. Could you please inform me as to who has jurisdiction to investigate this matter. I am determined to get to the bottom of this. I suspect it has something to do with the fact that the Tenant Protection Act, 1997 is inconsistent with the Constitution Act, 1982

Thank you Frank Gallagher

154

November 3, 2007 Minister of Public Safety Hon. Stockwell Day Day.S@parl.gc.ca Dear Stockwell Day I very much appreciate the letter signed by you however informative it does not address the issues. A Public Inquiry is most definitely required on the public side, point of view as these puppet Task Forces only address the issues of continuity in covering up the conspiracy against the people perpetrated by the Attorney General's Office and ultimately the government of Canada, all at the tax payers expense I have watched you on CPAC and have had good vibes about you, but unfortunately sanity tells me the smoother you are the further you will climb in the government ranks but I also allow for naïve ignorance too as the police believing they are quite intelligent as they are told at the beginning of their careers that the law has nothing to do with common sense which should be the first clue as they train to be ignorant detectives. They just fall in line and when controversial topics come up like mine they consult with the Attorney General or his agents, Crown Attorneys but ultimately they must lay the charges and in the issues I have addressed the Ontario Attorney General is the major player in the conspiracy against the people which the evidence I have accumulated over the passed 2 years irrefutably proves which I am sure you are well aware of. This would be a venture into incurable absurdity questioning Michael Bryant if it is okay to charge him with conspiracy and treason. It is quite possible he would say sure go ahead and then when the ball is in his court he can decide whether or not to prosecute himself, for he gets the final decision. Anyway what would be the point of consulting with the Attorney General who would obviously state I was confused and didn¶t have a clue about the law and if the cops had the slightest understanding other than what they are told and what they see happen in court over and over again as their officers crawl away with their heads between their toes frustrated as hell knowing full well the evidence met the criteria of common sense which they still haven¶t got the grasp of the law being nothing to do with common sense. How the hell can laws be obeyed if they have nothing to do with common sense and who benefits when that is the case other than lawyers who have infested the whole legal system with the people trusting that they will keep an eye on each other when in fact the people should have each others backs watching the every move of these crooks as they ravish the moral civilization as they sleep peacefully in trust. Sure at the moment it seems like I have ventured into a trek of superfluous futility greater than the challenge Christopher Columbus had getting ships to prove the world was round but it was an eventuality that had to happen simply because the world is round, spherical to be more correct. You know as well as I do the evidence I have is irrefutable and if it ever gets out to the public it will be supported by everything in reality and obviously due the most serious nature of the issues you people are quite confident it will never see the light of day and should there be signs of it nearing the light my lights will be turned off which is no particular concern to me being an old 65 with my eventuality approaching in any event.

155

That fact alone must surely tell you I am not addressing the issues for me or financial gain but for the purpose that is long over due being done and if not for so many fitting circumstances that perchanced upon me I would be golfing, fishing and whatever my perceptions would be of the heavenly thing to partake in. My Dick and Janeing you people is so obvious to Spot as is your responses which may appear intelligent alone but when related to the evidence and the issues you address are abundantly incompetent to the test and yet obviously would be judged by the system in place as sane in the insane world you people have created. The evidence which I have presented you all proves irrefutably it would go nowhere in the present illegal system but a jury of the people could cause a most serious ruckus which is definitely not my intention for I am a sane and moral person who has kept his head when all around have lost theirs. Do you have any idea what it feels like to be the only sane person in the world and when the term common sense is used it is in reference to my way of thinking. Sure it is a high improbability that I will get the information out and perchance I do I will probably be certified insane but history will know the document to mean I was sane as they peruse the insanity of the intelligence of man induced by the government to ransack us poor ignorant fools. I will tend to go on hoping to strike a chord perchance there is one amongst you who would pick up on the necessity of giving sanity a chance before it is too late which is quite possibly already a wee bit too late. Well enough of the rambling for now as I bring your attention to the 2 attachments which I have already circulated the Do your part.doc file. I now make it abundantly clear that I want you to address the issues within these documents, the aforesaid and the ³Boomerang Democracy Resolve´ FFF, Forthright, Forthcoming, Forthwith consistent with The Law, the supreme law of Canada, the Constitution Act 1982 whereas 25 years ago the individual¶s Charter Rights and Freedoms were guaranteed by the Federal government but they have not put a modus operandi in place conducive to the guarantee and in fact have put a system in place conducive to the members of the Law Society of Upper Canada who hold every position in the legal system who the Law Society adamantly state or imply their members do not give a damn about the individuals guaranteed Charter Rights which my evidence irrefutably attests to. Our Rights are guaranteed and are attached to the individual as an arm and a leg yet it¶s like pulling teeth to access them. The lawyers charge us every time we care to access what is already ours and the system is too costly making justice prohibitive for the moral majority. The people finance the system to protect us as per our Charter Rights and then charge us individually when we try to access the system which is a venture into futility trying to find justice from members of the Law Society who don¶t give a damn about our Charter Rights Now what the hell is that all about? Yes, I am requesting a response to that question most definitely The lawyers have built an empire from our tax money for their benefit and the evidence is everywhere in reality and irrefutable within the contents of my writings which the people whose e-mails are listed below have received. 156

I have also requested on many occasions, an answer to a very simple question from the prominent people in matters of law whose e-mail addresses you will also find on page 15 of the Do your part.doc which now includes your Day.S@parl.gc.ca address. I ask you all once again what the entity ³threshold´ means in matters of the law you people administer and enforce in Canada. In particular I would like to know what the term ³threshold´ means in reference to the evidence I presented to you all in the Toronto Sun document dated October 8 2006 which the York Regional Police and Randy Craig of the OPP Anti-Rackets refer to as the invisible delineator which the judge pulls from his or her hat to determine that my irrefutable evidence did not chin the line considered to be the ³threshold´ which determines whether or not they can commence or cause to commence proceedings in the provincial courts? The answer is obvious as is the no response to the question as is the refusal of all the aforesaid people to bring the issues I have addressed to the public¶s attention. I request each and every individual whose e-mail address is on page 15 of the attached document, ³Do your part.doc(582KB)´ to please respond to the ³threshold´ question The playing intelligently ignorant option has worn thin so I suggest demonstrating another one of your initiatives to appear FFF.

Oh, it would be prudent to mention that the (4) Click on Preamble Federal correspondence Recap October 9 2007 on page 11 of the Do your part.doc which is to be found on my web site Guardians of the Canadians Charter of Rights and Freedoms http://groups.google.com/group/guardians-of-the-canadians-charter-ofrights-and-freedoms quite convincing that you all were provided the opportunity to prove your indifference to the individual¶s guaranteed Charter Rights was fiction rather than truly the Attorney General¶s fiction which is in laymen terms conspiracy and treason when the people willingly refuse to generously suspend their disbelief as per page 2 of the document behind the black bar which is to be found on page 8 of the aforesaid Do your part.doc I state once again as I have many times before, Do not befuddle the befuddlement any further insulting the intelligence of our right to be ignorant of the fiction of the traditionally unscrupulous ways of the members of the Law Society of Upper Canada who are so bloody arrogant in their belief they are superior to God in their most devilish ways.

Hon Stockwell Day By all means inform me as to who else agrees with the no need for a Public Inquiry into the RCMP pension fund scandal which was linked to the upper command and the DOJ I noticed you copied your response to the DOJ confirming for me that he is aware of the issues and the media confirms for me that he has done nothing to address these issues which are of a most serious nature which Louis Theoret, Federal Ombudsman of Victims of Crime understands which you will read in the Preamble Federal correspondence Recap October 9 2007 document Clearly the DOJ, Department of Justice 157

He closed the file leaving predictable victims at the mercy of the conspiracy. With reference to your following statement with full respect for Canada¶s democratic traditions I dare say Canada¶s democratic traditions are passe¶ as of 1982 when the individual¶s Rights were guaranteed by the Charter necessitating a revamp of the legal system so as to be competent to back the guarantee consistent with and conducive to the provisions of the Charter You state you are accountable to both Parliament and the public for the RCMP and must ensure the Force functions with full respect for the fundamental rights and freedoms of Canadians and clearly the evidence shows that Sgt. Michael Thomson of the RCMP was provided copies of Lawyer Files 1-14, 13A of which lawyer File # 14 was addressed to him dated April 7 2007 which he has refused to respond to. On October 18 2007 I and my mother went to the RCMP office on Harry Walker Blvd. south of Davis drive with a prodigious amount of evidence which included copies of the 15 Lawyer Files, the 73 page letter to the Toronto Sun dated October 8 2006 and a copy of the Dave Grech compiled correspondence September 1 2007 and a copy of the recording of the Tribunal hearing which irrefutably proves that Don Wilson filed a false and misleading information with the ORHT valued at $43,000 + which is an offense under S.206 (2) of the Tenant protection Act, 1997 and committed the criminal act of fraud over $100,000 in a public building financed by the people of Ontario to administer justice to and for the people in compliance with the Tenant Protection Act, 1997 and the criminal code of the Constitution Act, 1982. Sgt Steinebeck met with us for about an hour and declined to take the evidence, which I had brought because the RCMP web site stated they would not accept evidence by e-mail which I had provided all the evidence to Sgt Michael Thomson by e-mail but he had declined to respond to it. Sgt.Steinebech admitted he knew of me when I questioned him about a half hour into our meeting and he went on to state that he already had copies of all the documents I had brought because they had received them by e-mail and opened a file for them. So the big question is why have they not commenced or caused to commence proceedings against Rick Hennessey, Regional Director of the ORHT as per Lawyer File # 1, of tampering with the evidence and refusing to file the afore mentioned charges against Don Wilson which makes Rick Hennessey guilty of Obstruction of a landlord in pursuit of his rights under s. 206 (1) of the Tenant Protection Act, 1997 and obstruction of justice in the matter of the criminal act of fraud under the Constitution Act 1982. Dave Grech of the Investigations and Enforcement Unit of the Ministry of Municipal Affairs also declined to file the charges as above and referred to in Lawyer File # 2 addressed to him. Hon. John Gerretsen Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing also refused to commence or cause to commence proceedings on these issues as addressed to him in Lawyer File # 3 making him guilty of the same charges as above and more as referred to in the said Lawyer File # 3 which also includes matters of non consistencies with the Constitution. The evidence also points to the same charges against the Attorney General Michael Bryant in Lawyer File # 7 and conspiracy against the people along with other matters regarding non compliance with the Constitution Act, 1982. Everyone else referenced in the 15 Lawyer Files are also guilty of conspiracy against the people and obstruction of justice under the Constitution Act 1982, 158

They have all received the evidence and have also been informed that should they have misplaced it they can find it on my web site Guardians of the Canadians Charter of Rights and Freedoms http://groups.google.com/group/guardians-of-the-canadians-charter-of-rights-and-freedoms So you see ³As Minister of Public Safety I am accountable to both Parliament and the public for the RCMP and must ensure that the Force functions with full respect for Canada¶s democratic traditions and the fundamental rights and freedoms of Canadians.´ I believe you are accountable to the public for the RCMP failure to function with full respect for my Charter Rights and Freedoms which are truly fundamental. I take you at your word that you will ensure that the RCMP functions consistent with the Constitution and conducive to my guaranteed Charter Rights and Freedoms and every other individual of Canada whose guaranteed protection is dependent on punishment due the crime attentive to deterrence which is the first line of defense in the guaranteed protection of the people. If you should require any more evidence than that which has been provided to Sgt. Michael Thomson of the RCMP please do not hesitate to request by e-mail at franklyone@hotmail.com I trust you understand the serious nature of the issues regarding the conspiracy by the Attorney General Michael Bryant and the evidence irrefutably proves the Ontario Government does not have a modus operandi in place capable of backing the individual¶s Charter Rights and Freedoms and in fact the modus operandi in place is conducive to the benefit of the lawyers and criminal element extremely detrimental to the moral majority. Once again I state the evidence is all available on my web site Guardians of the Canadians Charter of Rights and Freedoms http://groups.google.com/group/guardians-of-the-canadians-charter-of-rights-and-freedoms where you will find links to 9 other web sites which contain the irrefutable evidence of the Attorney General conspiracy. A Public Inquiry is in order and I request you do so FFF Frank Gallagher Cc Day.S@parl.gc.ca victimsfirst@ombudsman.gc.ca;Michael.Thomson@rcmprc.gc.ca;prevention@ps.gc.ca;randy.craig@jus.gov.on.ca; communications@ps.gc.ca;McGuinty.D@parl.gc.ca;ahorwath-qp@ndp.on.ca;bakerg@sen.parl.gc.ca; brooksn@scc-csc.gc.ca;bill.murdoch@pc.ola.org; bob.runciman@pc.ola.org;bironmi@sen.parl.gc.ca;baconl@sen.parl.gc.ca;comail@lsuc.ca;citytvhosts@city tv.com;citydesk@tor.sunpub.com;city@thestar.ca; christine.elliott@pc.ola.org;cowanj@sen.parl.gc.ca;cordyj@sen.parl.gc.ca;dhowlett@makepovertyhistory.c a;dinovocqp@ndp.on.ca;dyckli@sen.parl.gc.ca;dininc@sen.parl.gc.ca;debanp@sen.parl.gc.ca;dayja@sen.parl.gc.ca; dawsod@sen.parl.gc.ca;editor@rd.ca;editor@tor.sunpub.com;elizabeth.witmer@pc.ola.org;egglea@sen.par l.gc.ca;ernie.hardeman@pc.ola.org;fureyg@sen.parl.gc.ca;frasej@sen.parl.gc.ca;fortim@sen.parl.gc.ca; fitzpr@sen.parl.gc.ca;fairbj@sen.parl.gc.ca;gustal@sen.parl.gc.ca;grafsj@sen.parl.gc.ca;goldsy@sen.parl.g c.ca;gilla@sen.parl.gc.ca;gautht@sen.parl.gc.ca;gcarlino@ombudsman.on.ca;hublee@sen.parl.gc.ca; hervic@sen.parl.gc.ca;haysd@sen.parl.gc.ca;harbm@sen.parl.gc.ca;joyals@sen.parl.gc.ca;johnsj@sen.parl. 159

gc.ca;jaffem@sen.parl.gc.ca;jcrivest@sen.parl.gc.ca;julia.munroco@pc.ola.org;kfl@sen.parl.gc.ca; kinsen@sen.parl.gc.ca;kennyco@sen.parl.gc.ca; lachah@sen.parl.gc.ca;losier@sen.parl.gc.ca;lebrem@sen.parl.gc.ca;lavigr@sen.parl.gc.ca;communications @ps.gc.ca;mcgeed@sen.parl.gc.ca;munsoj@sen.parl.gc.ca;moorew@sen.parl.gc.ca;mitchg@sen.parl.gc.ca; milnel@sen.parl.gc.ca;merchp@sen.parl.gc.ca;mercet@sen.parl.gc.ca;meighen@sen.parl.gc.ca; mccoye@sen.parl.gc.ca;massip@sen.parl.gc.ca;mahovf@sen.parl.gc.ca;nejmcust@mms.org;nimhinfo@nih. gov; mbryant.mpp@liberal.ola.org; mininfo@mah.gov.on.ca;nolinp@sen.parl.gc.ca; onbox@ps.gc.ca;olived@sen.parl.gc.ca;pm@pm.gc.ca;pdowne@sen.parl.gc.ca;prudhm@sen.parl.gc.ca;poy v@sen.parl.gc.ca; poulim@sen.parl.gc.ca;phaleg@sen.parl.gc.ca;pepinl@sen.parl.gc.ca;pkormosqp@ndp.on.ca;stratt@sen.parl.gc.ca;stollp@sen.parl.gc.ca;stgerg@sen.parl.gc.ca;spivam@sen.parl.gc.ca;s mithd@sen.parl.gc.ca; sibnic@sen.parl.gc.ca;smithc@sen.parl.gc.ca;szwebmaster@yahoo.com;tkachd@sen.parl.gc.ca;tardic@sen. parl.gc.ca;vanlop0@parl.gc.ca;vanlop1@parl.gc.ca;web@ps.gc.ca;webadmin@justice.gc.ca;wattc@sen.parl .gc.ca; whistleblower@ctv.ca; zimmer@sen.parl.gc.ca; info@cjc-ccm.gc.ca rbartolucci.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org; cbentley.mpp@liberal.ola.org; mbountrogianni.mpp@liberal.ola.org; jbradley.mpp@liberal.ola.org; lbroten.mpp@liberal.ola.org; dcansfield.mpp@liberal.ola.org; dcaplan.mpp@liberal.ola.org; machambers.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org; cdicocco.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org; ldombrowsky.mpp@liberal.ola.org; dduncan.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org; mkwinter.mpp@liberal.ola.org; mmeilleur.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org; speters.mpp@liberal.ola.org; gphillips.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org; spupatello.mpp@liberal.ola.org; lbroten.mpp@liberal.ola.org; pfonseca.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org; htakhar.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org; dramsay.mpp.kirklandlake@liberal.ola.org;gsmitherman.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org; gsorbara.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org; vdhillon.mpp@liberal.ola.org; bduguid.mpp@liberal.ola.org; kflynn.mpp@liberal.ola.org; ljeffrey.mpp@liberal.ola.org; kkular.mpp@liberal.ola.org; mcolle.mpp@liberal.ola.org; jbrownell.mpp@liberal.ola.org;bbalkissoon.mpp@liberal.ola.org; warthurs.mpp@liberal.ola.org;Nicholson.R@parl.gc.ca; Emerson.D@parl.gc.ca; Blackburn.J@parl.gc.ca; Thompson.G@parl.gc.ca; Solberg.M@parl.gc.ca; Strahl.C@parl.gc.ca; Lunn.G@parl.gc.ca; MacKay.P@parl.gc.ca; Hearn.L@parl.gc.ca; Day.S@parl.gc.ca; Skelton.C@parl.gc.ca;Toews.V@parl.gc.ca;Ambrose.R@parl.gc.ca; Finley.D@parl.gc.ca; pm@pm.gc.ca; OConnor.G@parl.gc.ca; Oda.B@parl.gc.ca; Prentice.J@parl.gc.ca; Baird.J@parl.gc.ca; Bernier.M@parl.gc.ca; Cannon.L@parl.gc.ca; Clement.T@parl.gc.ca; Flaherty.J@parl.gc.ca; Verner.J@parl.gc.ca; Hill.J@parl.gc.ca; Kenney.J@parl.gc.ca; Ritz.G@parl.gc.ca; Guergis.H@parl.gc.ca; Paradis.C@parl.gc.ca;dwatch@web.net;info@ocsj.ca; ocap@tao.ca;info@olderwomensnetwork.org; terryoc2001@yahoo.ca; adavidov@torontohabitat.on.ca; justice@socialjustice.org;info@chfc.ca sandra.conlin@rcmp-grc.gc.ca; robin.roberts@cpc-cpp.gc.ca; gsmith@chrt-tcdp.gc.ca; AdamsoV@erccee.gc.ca; potterl@scc-csc.gc.ca;phil.jensen@servicecanada.gc.ca;AdamsoV@erc-cee.gc.ca; josee.dubois@psst-tdfp.gc.ca; elisabeth.nadeau@ps.gc.ca; mmacpherson@pco-bcp.gc.ca; dgrandmaitre@gg.ca; tpulcine@privcom.gc.ca; aleadbea@infocom.gc.ca; clgascon@fja.gc.ca; plourded@nafta-sec-alena.org; francois-giroux@cas-satj.gc.ca;bob.ward@chrc-ccdp.cadp.ca

160

Minister of Public Safety Ministre de a Sécurité publique Ottawa, Canada K1A 0P8 OCT 2 g 2007 Mr. Frank Gallagher frank.gaIIaghersympatico.ca Dear Mr. Gallagher: Thank you for your correspondence of July 19, 2007, regarding the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) pension fund as well as your concerns that rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms are not being protected. I apologize for the delay in responding. As Minister of Public Safety I am accountable to both Parliament and the public for the RCMP and must ensure that the Force functions with full respect for Canada¶s democratic traditions and the fundamental rights and freedoms of Canadians. The Government is committed to a high standard of transparency and accountability and is taking action to ensure government business is conducted in a responsible manner. In order to deliver on its commitment to make Government more accountable, on April 11, 2006, Canada¶s new Government introduced the Federal Accountability Act, which received Royal Assent on December 12, 2006. Through this Act, the Government of Canada has introduced specific measures to help strengthen accountability and increase transparency and oversight in Government operations. To clarify roles and responsibilities, the Federal Accountability Act designates Deputy Ministers and Deputy Heads such as the Commissioner of the RCMP as accounting officers who are accountable before the appropriate committee of Parliament to answer questions related to their responsibilities. Canada -2The RCMP is an important national institution that plays a significant role in the safety and security of Canadians; ensuring public trust and confidence is an important component of achieving that role. Canada¶s new Government has taken a number of recent steps in respect of this important national institution. On April 13, 2007, Mr. David Brown was appointed to lead an independent investigation into allegations relating to the RCMP pension and insurance plans. The mandate for this investigation gave Mr. Brown the flexibility to recommend whether a more formal inquiry was necessary to address any outstanding questions. In his report, submitted to the Government on June 15, 2007, Mr. Brown recommended that no formal inquiry was necessary. I have closely reviewed Mr. Brown¶s report and have accepted all of his recommendations. On July 16, 2007, the Government announced the creation of a five-member Task Force on Governance and Cultural Change in the RCMP, to be chaired by Mr. David Brown. In addition to the appointment of Mr. Brown as Chair, Linda Black, Richard Drouin, Norman Inkster, and Larry Murray ² each with varied expertise and experience ² have been appointed as members of the Task Force. The Task Force will make recommendations to improve management and accountability within the RCMP, and will report back to the Government by the end of 2007. Furthermore, the appointment of William J.S. Elliott as the new Commissioner of the RCMP, with a career that has been marked with distinction as well as expertise in the area of national security, will provide the RCMP with the renewed leadership that it critically needs at this time. With respect to the criminal allegations under the Tenant Protection Act, 1997 mentioned in your letter, please note that criminal matters in Ontario fall within the purview of the Honourable Michael Bryant, Attorney General of Ontario. You may therefore wish to raise your concerns with his office, using the contact information provided below: Ministry of the Attorney General 161

McMurtry-Scott Building 720 Bay Street, 11th Floor Toronto, Ontario M5G 2K1 Telephone: 416-326-2220 -3With respect to your concerns about the application of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, I have taken the liberty of forwarding a copy of your correspondence to my colleague the Honourable Rob Nicholson, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, for his information and consideration. In addition, a copy of your correspondence has been forwarded to Ms. Mary Elizabeth Dawson, Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner. I regret that I cannot help in the way you had perhaps hoped, but wish you well in resolving your concerns. Yours sincerely, c.c.: The Honourable Rob Nicholson, P.C., Q.C., M.P. Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada Ms. Mary Elizabeth Dawson, Q.C. Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner Stockwell Day, P.C., M.P. Minister of Public Safety

I am well aware of the Federal Accountability Act,2006 and in fact have written the Prime Minister Stephen Harper, providing him with evidence which his office responded hoping I understand why his office can not get involved. I do not understand why his office can not get involved unless of course his office is involved with the conspiracy which clearly the evidence shows must be by not getting involved. A copy of his Office¶s e-mail can be found in the Government Correspondence compiled September 1 2007 which is referenced in the afore said Preamble Federal correspondence Recap October 9 2007 document

The afore mentioned document clearly shows: the Honourable Rob Nicholson, P.C., Q.C., M.P. Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada has been informed along with everyone else who I have mentioned and clearly nothing has been done to address these most serious issues. You yourself Stockwell Day, P.C., M.P. Minister of Public Safety are aware that The Honourable Rob Nicholson, P.C., Q.C., M.P. Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada has been informed as you clearly state in your response to me dated November 2 2007 and a copy is hereto copied immediately above with the date incorrectly noted OCT 2 g 2007 Clearly the DOJ is implicated in this conspiracy as well as the RCMP Pension Fund scandal which the Standing Committee of Public Accounts was ordered to sit on. You have also Cc Ms. Mary Elizabeth Dawson, Q.C. Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner and the records show I have already been there, done that but her Office had no authority to deal with the issues. Your letter of November 2 2007 confirms everything I state that you people do nothing other than a dog chasing its tail which certainly appears busy and attentive to something but if it weren¶t for the coincidental consistent movement of head and tail its head would be found stuffed firmly up its ass.

162

The evidence is clear that the Task Force on Governance and Cultural Change in the RCMP, to be chaired by Mr. David Brown. In addition to the appointment of Mr. Brown as Chair, Linda Black, Richard Drouin, Norman Inkster, and Larry Murray will accomplish absolutely nothing other than to appear as if they are benefiting the public as is the Fiction of the Attorney General which does nothing but provide members of the Law Society with luxurious benefit to the colossal waste of tax payers money. The accountability and responsibility has already been defined in the ³Roles and Responsibilities of the Attorney General´ on the Ontario Attorney General web site and common law and common sense demands the guarantor of the guarantee to the individual¶s Charter Rights and Freedoms as provided in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is the responsible and accountable party to back the guarantee which is the Federal Government and clearly The Honourable Rob Nicholson, P.C., Q.C., M.P. Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada is mandated with that obligation. If not he, then who? That seems to be the gazzilion $ question. ³The Government is committed to a high standard of transparency and accountability and is taking action to ensure government business is conducted in a responsible manner.´ BULLSHIT To cite a man of wisdom from 2500 years ago «.Confucius says ³There were no dates in this history, but scrawled this way and that across every page were the words BENEVOLENCE, RIGHTEOUSNESS and MORALITY«.finally I began to make out what was written between the lines; the whole volume was filled with a single phrase: EAT PEOPLE´

Mr. Stockwell Day, P.C., M.P. Minister of Public Safety On this 3rd day of November 2007 under the authority of the Constitution Act, 1982 (Document) with due regard to Part 1, Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms charge you to uphold your responsibility to which you will be held accountable by the people. ³As Minister of Public Safety I am accountable to both Parliament and the public for the RCMP and must ensure that the Force functions with full respect for Canada¶s democratic traditions and the fundamental rights and freedoms of Canadians.´ The RCMP have been provided the evidence as have you and all the people whose e-mail addresses I have provided and I insist on behalf of the people that you commence or cause to commence proceedings for the restructuring of the antiquated legal system that has been superseded by the 1982 enactment of the Constitution which demands a modus operandi consistent with and conducive to the guarantee of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Common sense and all that¶s sane demands government personnel be irreproachable in this endeavor FFF, Forthright, Forthcoming, Forthwith and I will tentatively presume you are the man for this most significant job in this moment of time in history where it is absolutely vital to the well being and safety of the people of Canada As Minister of Public Safety Mr. Stockwell Day, P.C., M.P. it is incumbent upon you to lead the way in the interests of each and every person in Canada who is individually guaranteed Rights as provided by the 163

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom and you must do so with integrity, fortitude and conviction FFF attentive to, consistent with and conducive to the guarantee to each and every individual of Canada as per the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The present legal system is extraordinarily incompetent to that endeavor to the humongous waste of tax dollars to the horrific detriment to the people of Canada who finance the system for their benefit of a moral society under the supremacy of God. It matters not if you believe God exists or ever did for when you have exercised your responsibilities under the supremacy of God we will all be believers as the spirit of God and the spirit of The Law is one and the same.

I reiterate a continuity of the befuddlement will not be tolerated giving due cause to commence proceedings against every individual of the present government personnel who has been granted authority under the Constitution to administer and enforce it consistent with and conducive to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom consistent with the aspirations attributed to God clearly defined in Guarantee of Rights and Freedoms 1. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society. 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. 7. Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice. Frank Gallagher

164

November 5 2007

Stockwell Day Politician

oomerang

emocracy

esolve

Frank Gallagher Citizen

Men¶s natures are alike; it is their habits that carry them far apart Politician¶s perspective How difficult to find the words to once and for ever make the people understand our plight to keep the avarice sated while satiating the peon providers with carrots of dreams potentially possible but impossible due the likes of us. The ignorant people endeavoring to live a simple life have no idea how complicated it is for us to ensure they remain simple to appreciate the simple life whilst we publicly argue over the rights to their elusive dreams without waking them. Citizen¶s perspective Long ago the government took our guns promising to protect us while we endeavored to earn and stake out our perception of heaven. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is but words on paper written by people who traditionally pen their way to our heaven leaving us believing our Day will come Well Mr. Day is here and he takes us softly into the night

Nobody knows the troubles I have seen keeping Some day our Knight will come. themwho is sincere hitsbordering poverty whilst He peacefully happy what is right, and apprehends without the exercise of thought we must consistently seek out fair ways to divvy Belief is the elusive dream that would be if not for the Charlatan¶s of State and Church whose habits up the true without thought is labor lost, learning without thought is perilous Learning worth of their efforts. we feed Today centuries of knowledge is available at our finger tips, yet without consistent attentiveness to genuine purpose attentive to reality it will persistently be that which separates us from the Ideal. He who is known as an early riser can sleep to noon

He who sleeps to noon will be left with naught, but a can of worms Words are the weapons of politicians which they manipulate to manipulate the people How sad people with brains capable of unfathomable, most magnificent accomplishments far beyond that which could possibly be imagined of the capabilities and aspirations of God due their ignorance and persistence to it, which attentiveness to tradition born of ignorance of the times serves to lengthen the chain of time between Ideals being variables of the intelligence or ignorance as you prefer, of the minds of times. 165

It has been 2500 years since Confucius walked the earth with his words of wisdom and 2000 years since Jesus taught us the spirit and his conviction to it and approximately 515 years since Christopher Columbus proved the world was round. We know the words of Confucius and Jesus to be true and perhaps we would believe the world was flat today if it wasn¶t for Mr. Columbus doing more than just talking in circles lifting his ass off where upon it was sitting and put it where it needed to be to prove the reality that was considered fiction by the most wisest of the ignorant who lived in 1492. I wish I had been there to witness the force of gravity that day as the face of arrogant ignorant wisdom was realized, falling swiftly to assert their due place in history. History is the ignorance of times, not to be grasped firmly in retention but to retain in progressive assent to the Ideal of present wisdom which are all but variables in time where duration a variable of reluctance to let go the past. The wisest person who sits on his ass will starve to death when the ignorant become wise to them He who keeps danger in mind will rest safely in his seat; he who keeps ruin in mind will preserve his interest secure; he who sets the dangers of disorder before himself will maintain a state of order He offering words of wisdom in offset of irrefutable wisdom best be successful lest he be offset, as a reliable source of wisdom. Good day Mr. Day«.I hope you have attentively put your mind to the facts and absorbed well the issues I have presented you and quite frankly I hope stored in the capacity your name suggests Mr. Stockwell. Knowledge is that which we know to be true however when not used true to purpose defines one¶s true purpose Reality is the truth impervious to perception however reality is precisely due to perception left unattended. Ignorance is simply absence of knowledge inherent to us all which persistently reminds, keeping us simple in ignorant ways on refusal to acknowledge and attentively address it

Have you ever wished you had of said this rather than that and had perhaps a chance to do it all over again. I see no reason why it need be a wish and given the significance of the issues I have been attempting to communicate it would be negligent of me not to make every effort to convey that which I know to be true to the person I believe is responsible to deal with the issues and it is to that endeavor I take you at your word until you prove different.

To make my intent clearly transparent and unambiguous I am writing you to inform you that under normal circumstance I have chanced upon evidence that irrefutably proves the governments of Canada and Ontario have conspired against the people creating a two tiered system as a pathetically noticeable byproduct of their modus operandi which they themselves have documented and I present for all to see on my web sites.

166

I do not yet have irrefutable proof as to your involvement other than by association and your prominent position in the system which has been well documented by the personnel of the system, oh and of course your response to my e-mail of July 19 2007 you affirm you received and responded to 3 ½ months later on November 2 2007 incorrectly dated OCT 2 g 2007 a copy of which immediately follows. At this point you could very well be just one of their puppets intelligent in their ways but ignorant as to their true purpose which everything in reality attests to. One concentrating on the betterment of their career is apt to focus on that which will get them there rather than focusing on the true purpose of playing an important role in the government structure which is financed by the people who understand the necessity of all paying their fair share towards the developing and maintenance of a moral society as defined by the supreme law of Canada, the Constitution Act, 1982 which with the inclusion of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms clearly states whereas Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law I shall do my best not to reiterate upon reiterations I have reiterated so many times before but I will inform you once again where these reiterations are to be found along with all the evidence which supports all that I state to be irrefutably true. http://groups.google.com/group/guardians-of-the-canadians-charter-of-rights-and-freedoms On this site is listed 9 other sites which combined hold the truth that need be gleaned to respond to my most worthy concerns of Public Safety which you Hon. Stockwell Day are the Minister of and remain tentatively Honourable in my unique perception.. Your words in your response to my e-mail to you July 19 2007 which said response was e-mailed to me November 2 2007 but bares the date OCT 2 g 2007 which I immediately responded back to on November 3 2007 indicates a person to be possessed of the knowledge to deal with the issues, however when actually placed side by side with the letter you are responding to provides many truths not relative to that which I seeked which is of course the purpose of all my writings to get more than just words which are inane to the purpose as would the world still be flat if not for Chris getting off his ass to prove the words true which he spoke. So, attentive to the fact humans err and do everything imaginable and unimaginable I address the verbatim of your e-mail response to my July 19 2007 which you refer to. It¶s is in this way we can communicate and have a meeting of the minds, not only yours and mine but whomever reads and follows up in the spirit of The Law ( Constitution document) which all laws and those people granted authority under must be consistent with and conducive to the individual¶s guaranteed Charter Rights and Freedoms which are consistent with the aspirations attributed to God who the supreme law of Canada recognizes as supreme. Given the most magnificent importance of the Canadian Constitution which governs everyone and everything they do it is perquisite the government personnel who are financed to uphold The Law and have sworn to do before God who is supreme be irreproachable to that endeavor for it is the promise and guarantee of the Charter which ultimately protects and benefits each and every individual of Canada in this sanctuary of the spirit of God. Integrity, FFF to purpose is not an option to assure that which is humanly possible to protect the people consistently consistent with the guarantee which is ultimately the responsibility of each and every individual 167

granted authority under the Constitution to administer and enforce it consistent with the provisions found therein which must be interpreted in the spirit of The Law under the supremacy of God. The spirit of God is clear as direct from Jesus which is least likely to be mistaken by humankind. Do Unto Others As You Would Have Them Do Unto You It is in this spirit I write to you which will be the test as to the spirit you respond to me Perhaps there will be some ambiguity presented from both sides along the way and given the significance of the issues it is you Hon. Stockwell Day I address, to all your capacities of government authority along with your capacities as an individual being one and the same with every other individual guaranteed Charter Rights and Freedoms subject to and limited only to compliance with The Law consistent with and conducive to the Charter. It is you personally who I expect to respond to me given the most significant issues regarding Public Safety and I do not consider a response from your janitor or anyone else of your staff to be competent to your personal perception, however you are responsible for your assigns but it is impossible for the meeting of our minds if you abstain. As they say, first meetings have great influence on the perception of others and your first letter leaves me wanting. I remind you I have a prodigious amount of evidence that you must surely be aware of that provides me the opportunity to discern when deviations from the purpose are being initiated and it is your competence to assess the evidence I am addressing and testing for all to see. I will presume that you are in concurrence with me in any issue you fail to address, and you standby and hold to be true as within your knowledge to be true FFF. My endeavor is to assure you are fully cognizant to and coherent to all the evidence I have presented and where you may perceive to be some doubt as to that which I state to be true and backed by fact it is your responsibility to address the issues of your perceptive doubt so that I may direct you to the evidence which will remove any doubt as to your intention to befuddle perceptions. If you have any doubt at all as to that which I state to be irrefutably true, it is your responsibility to table the evidence in support of your doubt and of course I will remain consistent, true to purpose which must be yours in the prominent position of authority you hold, granted under the auspices of The Law. I have already responded to your response to me which is attached below on November 3 2007 and it is the intent of this letter to inform you that a response by you personally with great effort to integrity FFF will be expected as required of a person in your prominent position in the administering and enforcing of The Law of our country consistent with the authority granted you consistent with the spirit of The Law and God who is recognized supreme I ask you to explain to me, clearly how any of the verbiage in your response which you so proudly signed to address the issues which I presented to you. Every word you have had written and signed proves your consistency to the fiction of the Attorney General described in the Do you part. doc I sent you on November 3 2007 which contains a black bar like the one below which you may click on to refresh you memory. 168

http://books.google.com/books?id=eRHTr2TCBMwC&dq=roles+and+responsibilities+of+the+attorn I remind you due to circumstances beyond your control and obviously everyone¶s, any further response in support of the Fiction perpetrated by the Office of the Department of Justice and the Attorney General of Canada is superfluous for Fiction runs rampant and my files are abundantly saturated with it, all irrelevant to the issues front and center dealing with the criminal acts perpetrated firstly by my former tenant in a public building financed to administer and enforce justice in accordance with The Law , the Constitution Act, 1982 and the obstructions of justice perpetrated by the person¶s identified in the 15 Lawyer Files which can be found on my web site: Law Society of Lower Tier Canada http://groups.google.com/group/peopleslaw-society where you will see listed all the pertinent evidence which Sgt. Steinebech of the RCMP confirmed he had available to him which they, the RCMP had filed from my e-mails to Sgt. Michael Thomson. Sgt. Steinebech also confirmed they have a copy of the Tribunal Hearing recording dated June 30 2005 which they have had for near two years now which was witnessed by my mother, demonstrating no resemblance to that which you have written. However what you have written reflects stunning resemblance to the fiction of the Attorney General to be found by clicking on the aforesaid black bar, and the wisdom of Confucius 2500 years ago which bodes well with the acceptance of the Attorney General of Ontario to respect the Roles and Responsibilities of the Attorney General . to guard the unscrupulous ways of the tradition of his Office with no respect to the Constitution which is ultimately his responsibility. There were no words in this history but scrawled this way and that across every page were the words BENEVOLENCE, RIGHTEOUSNESS and MORALITY«.finally I began to make out what was written between the lines; the whole volume was filled with a single page: EAT PEOPLE Ultimately the Minister of Justice and the Attorney General of Canada, Rob Nicholson who you copied your response to me to is informed of the issues I have addressed to you and I appreciate your efforts to this endeavor. I make note that you refer to Rob as someone referred to the new Commissioner of the RCMP as Bill drawing some attention as that which is most obvious that he and all upper echelon of any government department, agency or whatever are receptive to the conspiracy and the RCMP pension fund scandal also was linked to the DOJ. Now he either acts responsibly with due regard to The Law which authorized his mandate or he is in neglect of his responsibility leaving the Public Safety of the people unprotected as demanded by the guarantees to the individual as provided in the Charter. ³As Minister of Public Safety I am accountable to both Parliament and the public for the RCMP and must ensure that the Force functions with full respect for Canada¶s democratic traditions and the fundamental rights and freedoms of Canadians.´ Clearly Canada¶s democratic traditions have been precluded by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms where The Law recognizes the supremacy of God and the Law Society of Upper Canada adamantly states their members do not give a damn about the individual¶s Charter Rights and went on to prove it in their correspondence dealing with a matter I brought before them to address.

169

So you Minister of Public Safety Stockwell Day, P.C., M.P. have clearly acknowledged your responsibility and accountability to the people in matters of the functions of the RCMP as above and below ³As Minister of Public Safety I am accountable to both Parliament and the public for the RCMP and must ensure that the Force functions with full respect for Canada¶s democratic traditions and the fundamental rights and freedoms of Canadians.´ This has been like pulling teeth as documented number (1) which heads the list of the documents I presentd to the RCMP on October 18 2007 which Sgt. Steinebech affirmed the RCMP already had on file. Once again I refer you to that which I previously stated which can be found on my web site: Law Society of Lower Tier Canada http://groups.google.com/group/peoples-law-society where you will see listed all the pertinent evidence which Sgt. Steinebech of the RCMP confirmed he had available to him which they, the RCMP had filed from my e-mails to Sgt. Michael Thomson. I have no doubt your belated apology in your delayed response of November 2 2007 3 ½ months after my email of July 19 2007 you refer to in your response, copy attached following my commentary was necessitated because you never intended to respond until the 41 page document (1) To: Randy Craig Det Sergeant OPP Anti-Rackets Preamble Federal correspondence Recap October 9 2007.doc Oct. 9, 2007 which is to be found on my web site aforesaid immediately above. Your admittance as to your responsibility and accountability is gratefully appreciated and all that remains is for you to do your job in bringing the people to justice who have deprived me of my guaranteed Charter Rights and Freedoms. I remind you my documents are spread much further than you are aware of and it would be wise to deal with the issues FFF in accordance with the Constitution with due regard to the individual¶s guaranteed Charter Rights. Surely things can be dealt with more reasonably than they are dealing with it in Pakistan. Quite a challenge for you people of the government but we the people have been satiated with the Reality you have bestowed upon us in your years of unscrupulous disrespect for the people who have paid your way. The Lord surely works in mysterious ways!!! to those who refuse to understand Him. Right? Far from respect Frank Gallagher Frank Gallagher PS Amen

170

November 6 2007 Ministerial Correspondence Unit MCU@JUSTICE.GC.CA T0: What¶s your name?

(1)In response to your following e-mail I would like to know the name of whom I am corresponding with please. (2)You should be aware that the issues involved here are only confidential in your own mind because the issues along with this and related correspondence are to be found on my web site http://groups.google.com/group/guardians-of-the-canadians-charter-of-rights-and-freedoms (3)The evidence which is referred to in all my correspondence is to be found on my web site http://groups.google.com/group/peoples-law-society and my postal address is to be found on all 15 Lawyer files and other files to be found on this site (3)As for the superfluity of this e-mail you sent me let me inform that it is indeed representative of the incompetence of government offices to deal with reality due the persistence to fiction and long ago in my writings I suspended all disbelief of it and have initiated a course of action to collapse the government conspiracy against the people. (4)I have proliferated the office of the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, Honourable Robert Nicholson as well as many other government offices with irrefutable evidence of the government corruption and conspiracy and every correspondence I get from you people simply adds to the evidence stack I already have and quite frankly I am satiated with it and any more will just prolong the PUBLIC INQUIRY wasting more tax payers money. (5) A good example of that is the Air India disaster inquiry as is the disaster of most anything you people do. (6) I am not looking for more paper from the government in an attempt to have me or others who will eventually read the crap believe you are addressing the issues in a manner consistent with the Constitution Act, 1982 conducive with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. (7) I am looking for appropriate action from you people consistent with the Constitution Act, 1982 conducive to the individual¶s guaranteed Charter of Rights and Freedoms regarding the Obstruction of Justice referenced in the aforesaid 15 Lawyer Files. (8) The Federal Government made the guarantee and I have provided the irrefutable evidence that the Ontario Government have not only refused to back it but they have not demonstrated they have put a modus operandi in place capable of backing the guarantee, and in fact their modus operandi is precisely opposite to that required being beneficial to those of an immoral society. (9)As with any job, government or private sector upon acceptance of financial benefit to do a job the person is responsible and accountable to do it. (10)Given the serious nature of the Charter guarantee to every individual regarding their safety and financial well being it is incumbent that the government personnel assigned with the responsibility to administer and 171

enforce The Law,(Constitution: document)be irreproachable to the endeavor with integrity FFF Forthright, Forthcoming, Forthwith. (11)It is pathetically incomprehensible that you people given the opportunity to demonstrate your competence to perform your duties compatible to the prerequisite consistently prove your incompetence to the endeavor. (12) The Federal Accountability Act, 2006 is such a demonstration of incompetence and further proof of the waste of tax payers money dedicated to the Fiction that the Attorney General is responsible to deceive the people having them believe you are actually doing something for them while you fritter their money away providing the legal profession luxurious inane jobs to the abhorred detriment to the taxpayer. The government personnel who took on mandates to uphold The Law of the country, swore to do so, and having received financial benefit are responsible and must be held accountable and the Federal Accountability Act, 2006 is just further demonstration of the deceitful ways of the government personnel under the guidance of the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada Honourable Robert Nicholson (13) Any further continuity of the befuddlement is inane as stated aforesaid because it is abundantly documented and reality attests to it, there by befuddling the befuddlement. (14)The Fiction has long collapsed and attentiveness to Reality is your mandate. Following your e-mail persistent to the Fiction is reference to where the documents of Reality are to be found which I demand you address realistically with integrity FFF consistent with the Constitution Act, 1982(document)which granted your authority, no more«.no less and upon your acceptance of financial benefit to the endeavor is binding to your responsibility to deal with the issues irreproachably FFF consistent with and conducive to, in due diligent manner to the backing and support of the individual¶s guaranteed rights as provided in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. (15)Any further diversion from reality in any of the government personnel correspondence addressing the serious issues I have presented to you all will prove the Constitution is as worthless as you people who administer and enforce it and provide good reason for the people to withhold further financing of an organization intent on ransacking them of not only their hard earned money but their hope for their perception of Heaven on Earth while they are above the surface.

************************************************************************************** ******************************************************************** -----Original Message----From: Ministerial Correspondence Unit [mailto:MCU@JUSTICE.GC.CA] Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2007 9:51 AM To: frank.gallagher@sympatico.ca Subject: Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - RCMP pension funds Dear Mr. Gallagher: The Ministerial Correspondence Unit for the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada has received your e-mail of July 19, 2007 from the office of the Honourable Stockwell Day.

172

Due to the high volume and sensitivity of the correspondence that this office receives we are unable to respond by e-mail at the present time. In order to receive a reply to your concerns please forward your postal mailing address. Thank you, Correspondence Analyst/Analyste de la correspondance Department of Justice/Ministère de la Justice Ministerial Correspondence Unit/Unité de la correspondance ministérielle

Upon receipt of my response to the above I request the name of the person who wrote the above e-mail to me and of course I want the name of the author of all future responses. There is no need to waste any further time by mailing responses when e-mail is quicker and more efficient when there is nothing confidential other than the evil you believe you are retaining unexposed in your own minds.

The issues I demand you address have been already provided you and documented on my 10 web sites and in the interest of breaking away from your initiatives to take me on a venture into futility of extraordinary obvious befuddlement not at all extraordinary to government personnel or me I direct your attention to: (2)You should be aware that the issues involved here are only confidential in your own mind because the issues along with this and related correspondence are to be found on my web site http://groups.google.com/group/guardians-of-the-canadians-charter-of-rights-and-freedoms (3)The evidence which is referred to in all my correspondence is to be found on my web site http://groups.google.com/group/peoples-law-society and my postal address is to be found on all 15 Lawyer files and other files to be found on this site Failure to study the contents found therein coherent to the issues in a diligent manner will attest to your incompetence and involvement with the government conspiracy. Any suggestions that it is not government policy or procedure to address the issues in this manner will be further proof of your incompetence and reluctance to administer and enforce the Constitution (document) consistent with and conducive to the guarantee of the Charter which all laws must be consistent with s.52 (1) of the Charter or they have no force or effect. 52. (1) The Constitution of Canada is the supreme law of Canada, and any law that is inconsistent with the provisions of the Constitution is, to the extent of the inconsistency, of no force or effect. With the Fiction dispelled it is a venture into futility for you to offer any policy or law that is inconsistent with The Law in the spirit of God who is supreme providing further evidence of your inadequacies to support it. Given the significance of the issues addressed to you no further conspicuous delay will be tolerable and I remind you the world keeps turning as I keep churning until this pathetic disgrace of unscrupulous behavior perpetrated against the people by the government personnel who are financed in trust to structure a system to the benefit of the moral majorities abruptly stops. I will expect an immediate response that you acknowledge receipt of this document and you will immediately set out to absorb the information provided on my web sites and upon being coherent to the facts will deal with them in a manner conducive to backing the guarantees as provided to each individual in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms with due regard to the preclusion of all laws, statutes, 173

policies, precedence, whatever which are inconsistent with the endeavor as of the enactment of the Constitution Act, 1982 with the inclusion of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms which consistency conducive to the guarantee precludes the aforesaid and other entities which were unscrupulously traditionally held in illegitimate conflict thereof. Given the evidence provided proves irrefutably the members of the Law Society of Upper Canada do not give a damn about the individual¶s guaranteed Charter Rights and Freedoms in direct defiance of The Law it precludes their interpretation of The Law and any laws introduced by them since the enactment of the Constitution and they are to be held in Conflict of Interest to the individual¶s guaranteed Charter Rights and the backing of the guarantee must be addressed under the auspices of common law and common sense where sanity must prevail over the fuddle duddle of the conniving spirits intent on the continuity of the traditional conspiracy. Given the befuddlement of circumstance, there is only one legitimate recourse that leaves me to see the issues addressed in accordance with The Law is to immediately commence or cause to commence proceedings publicly against the Hon. John Gerretsen, Minister of Municipal affairs and Housing for Obstruction of Justice as referenced in the Lawyer File # 3 document with due regard to Lawyer Files # 1 and 2. Diligently handled will endeavor to gather evidence in these proceedings as to the involvement of the Attorney General Michael Bryant which the evidence clearly shows a conspiracy against me and the guaranteed Charter Rights of all Canadian individuals. The ultimate quest is to restructure the legal system competent to effective and efficient consistency with and conducive to the individual¶s guaranteed Charter Rights which are attached to them as an arm or a leg and when they make a step or reach out for something is a matter of freedom of will to do so as long as they are incompliance with The Law that governs us all which is your responsibility to assure and uphold consistent to our freedom and in so doing attentiveness must be directed to deterrence of immoral inclination which compromises the reality intended by the Charter. I hope I have been specifically clear as to my demands under the authority of the Constitution and you know I trust you to act accordingly with no further crap about how you people are intent to purpose without the demonstration of proof in support. From this point on all communications from all sources of government will be published on my web site http://groups.google.com/group/guardians-of-the-canadians-charter-of-rights-and-freedoms immediatly following:

See letter to Minister of Public Safety, Hon. Stockwell Day dated November 3 2007 click on Stockwell Day.doc November 5 2007 Stockwell Day November 5 07.doc

As always I will also provide new evidence to the e-mail addresses of the irresponsible government personnel listed below with your address now included. They and you are requested to act responsibly in a manner consistent with the authority granted under the Constitution with due regard to ignore the precluded laws which are inconsistent with the Constitution as per s.52(1) at top of page 4 which illegally limit authority to act in accordance with, consistent with and conducive to the individual¶s guaranteed Charter Rights and Freedoms. I remind you any person who would interfere or falsely misrepresent their authority to obstruct you in pursuant of your obligation to perform your duty in compliance with The Law is guilty of Obstruction of Justice and in these circumstances evident their part in the government conspiracy and gives cause to immediately bring them before the courts and the public to deal with them in a manner befitting the crime. 174

I hope I have made my intentions and your responsibilities to the people of Canada perfectly clear

There have been a few government personnel of the e-mail addresses listed below who have been deleting my e-mails without reading proving their reluctance to convert from Fiction to Reality and perhaps an initiative to attest before the people that they weren¶t aware of the issues and therefore reason enough to absolve them of any wrong doings and to that endeavor I will list their e-mail addresses on the aforesaid web site and e-mail their addresses to everyone on my list of irresponsible government personnel so that they may know their intent is not to go down with you. I must inform you all which the evidence reveals in the letters to the Hon. Stockwell Day, Minister of Public Safety that he has admitted his responsibility to assure the RCMP act consistent with and conducive to the individual¶s guaranteed Charter Rights and he has been provided the evidence that they have not acted upon the evidence which has been provided them and you all, and his attempt to assure me «« just one moment and I¶ll provide you an excerpt from his letter As Minister of Public Safety I am accountable to both Parliament and the public for the RCMP and must ensure that the Force functions with full respect for Canada¶s democratic traditions and the fundamental rights and freedoms of Canadians. The Government is committed to a high standard of transparency and accountability and is taking action to ensure government business is conducted in a responsible manner. In order to deliver on its commitment to make Government more accountable, on April 11, 2006, Canada¶s new Government introduced the Federal Accountability Act, which received Royal Assent on December 12, 2006. Through this Act, the Government of Canada has introduced specific measures to help strengthen accountability and increase transparency and oversight in Government operations. To clarify roles and responsibilities, the Federal Accountability Act designates Deputy Ministers and Deputy Heads such as the Commissioner of the RCMP as accounting officers who are accountable before the appropriate committee of Parliament to answer questions related to their responsibilities. Canada -2The RCMP is an important national institution that plays a significant role in the safety and security of Canadians; ensuring public trust and confidence is an important component of achieving that role. Canada¶s new Government has taken a number of recent steps in respect of this important national institution. The letter goes on in continuance of traditional Bull Shit (is that one word or two) which baffles only those who are susceptible to it. When he puts the RCMP in motion to deal with the issues I have addressed commencing with the issues addressed in the Lawyer Files #s 1-3 transparency will be clear to see initiatives in action as apposed to the continuity of superfluous Bull Shit, I will tentatively believe.

For those who do not comprehend, and I do not direct this at any of you, I offer this. A promise of an ice cream cone is most believable when my tongue licks it to confirm to my mind that indeed it is what I was promised and am gratefully appreciative of. In the case of my Charter rights which have already been bought and paid for and you people have already been paid to deliver and in fact should be taken for granted if we had the government personnel, prerequisite 175

of the Constitution (document) and the evidence irrefutably proves we don¶t as does every piece of correspondence from the government personnel who persistently demonstrate their incompetence with signature to affirm it. This fantasy world you people live in is a nightmare to us, the people. Wakey, wakey people,.«tis the dawn of a new day Won¶t you join us

I think that¶s quite generous of me as I am known to be. So is God, but even He has purportedly demonstrated His wrath when occasion arises.

The time to shit or get off the pot has arrived. Please do so before it hits the fan.

Frank Gallagher Frank Gallagher PS I highly recommend you all document your every effort because obviously your word isn¶t worth a piece of shit.

Day.S@parl.gc.ca; MCU@JUSTICE.GC.CA victimsfirst@ombudsman.gc.ca;Michael.Thomson@rcmprc.gc.ca;prevention@ps.gc.ca;randy.craig@jus.gov.on.ca; communications@ps.gc.ca;McGuinty.D@parl.gc.ca;ahorwath-qp@ndp.on.ca;bakerg@sen.parl.gc.ca; brooksn@scc-csc.gc.ca;bill.murdoch@pc.ola.org; bob.runciman@pc.ola.org;bironmi@sen.parl.gc.ca;baconl@sen.parl.gc.ca;comail@lsuc.ca;citytvhosts@city tv.com;citydesk@tor.sunpub.com;city@thestar.ca; christine.elliott@pc.ola.org;cowanj@sen.parl.gc.ca;cordyj@sen.parl.gc.ca;dhowlett@makepovertyhistory.c a;dinovocqp@ndp.on.ca;dyckli@sen.parl.gc.ca;dininc@sen.parl.gc.ca;debanp@sen.parl.gc.ca;dayja@sen.parl.gc.ca; dawsod@sen.parl.gc.ca;editor@rd.ca;editor@tor.sunpub.com;elizabeth.witmer@pc.ola.org;egglea@sen.par l.gc.ca;ernie.hardeman@pc.ola.org;fureyg@sen.parl.gc.ca;frasej@sen.parl.gc.ca;fortim@sen.parl.gc.ca; fitzpr@sen.parl.gc.ca;fairbj@sen.parl.gc.ca;gustal@sen.parl.gc.ca;grafsj@sen.parl.gc.ca;goldsy@sen.parl.g c.ca;gilla@sen.parl.gc.ca;gautht@sen.parl.gc.ca;gcarlino@ombudsman.on.ca;hublee@sen.parl.gc.ca; hervic@sen.parl.gc.ca;haysd@sen.parl.gc.ca;harbm@sen.parl.gc.ca;joyals@sen.parl.gc.ca;johnsj@sen.parl. gc.ca;jaffem@sen.parl.gc.ca;jcrivest@sen.parl.gc.ca;julia.munroco@pc.ola.org;kfl@sen.parl.gc.ca; kinsen@sen.parl.gc.ca;kennyco@sen.parl.gc.ca; lachah@sen.parl.gc.ca;losier@sen.parl.gc.ca;lebrem@sen.parl.gc.ca;lavigr@sen.parl.gc.ca;communications @ps.gc.ca;mcgeed@sen.parl.gc.ca;munsoj@sen.parl.gc.ca;moorew@sen.parl.gc.ca;mitchg@sen.parl.gc.ca; milnel@sen.parl.gc.ca;merchp@sen.parl.gc.ca;mercet@sen.parl.gc.ca;meighen@sen.parl.gc.ca; 176

mccoye@sen.parl.gc.ca;massip@sen.parl.gc.ca;mahovf@sen.parl.gc.ca;nejmcust@mms.org;nimhinfo@nih. gov; mbryant.mpp@liberal.ola.org; mininfo@mah.gov.on.ca;nolinp@sen.parl.gc.ca; onbox@ps.gc.ca;olived@sen.parl.gc.ca;pm@pm.gc.ca;pdowne@sen.parl.gc.ca;prudhm@sen.parl.gc.ca;poy v@sen.parl.gc.ca; poulim@sen.parl.gc.ca;phaleg@sen.parl.gc.ca;pepinl@sen.parl.gc.ca;pkormosqp@ndp.on.ca;stratt@sen.parl.gc.ca;stollp@sen.parl.gc.ca;stgerg@sen.parl.gc.ca;spivam@sen.parl.gc.ca;s mithd@sen.parl.gc.ca; sibnic@sen.parl.gc.ca;smithc@sen.parl.gc.ca;szwebmaster@yahoo.com;tkachd@sen.parl.gc.ca;tardic@sen. parl.gc.ca;vanlop0@parl.gc.ca;vanlop1@parl.gc.ca;web@ps.gc.ca;webadmin@justice.gc.ca;wattc@sen.parl .gc.ca; whistleblower@ctv.ca; zimmer@sen.parl.gc.ca; info@cjc-ccm.gc.ca rbartolucci.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org; cbentley.mpp@liberal.ola.org; mbountrogianni.mpp@liberal.ola.org; jbradley.mpp@liberal.ola.org; lbroten.mpp@liberal.ola.org; dcansfield.mpp@liberal.ola.org; dcaplan.mpp@liberal.ola.org; machambers.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org; cdicocco.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org; ldombrowsky.mpp@liberal.ola.org; dduncan.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org; mkwinter.mpp@liberal.ola.org; mmeilleur.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org; speters.mpp@liberal.ola.org; gphillips.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org; spupatello.mpp@liberal.ola.org; lbroten.mpp@liberal.ola.org; pfonseca.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org; htakhar.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org; dramsay.mpp.kirklandlake@liberal.ola.org;gsmitherman.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org; gsorbara.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org; vdhillon.mpp@liberal.ola.org; bduguid.mpp@liberal.ola.org; kflynn.mpp@liberal.ola.org; ljeffrey.mpp@liberal.ola.org; kkular.mpp@liberal.ola.org; mcolle.mpp@liberal.ola.org; jbrownell.mpp@liberal.ola.org;bbalkissoon.mpp@liberal.ola.org; warthurs.mpp@liberal.ola.org;Nicholson.R@parl.gc.ca; Emerson.D@parl.gc.ca; Blackburn.J@parl.gc.ca; Thompson.G@parl.gc.ca; Solberg.M@parl.gc.ca; Strahl.C@parl.gc.ca; Lunn.G@parl.gc.ca; MacKay.P@parl.gc.ca; Hearn.L@parl.gc.ca; Day.S@parl.gc.ca; Skelton.C@parl.gc.ca;Toews.V@parl.gc.ca;Ambrose.R@parl.gc.ca; Finley.D@parl.gc.ca; pm@pm.gc.ca; OConnor.G@parl.gc.ca; Oda.B@parl.gc.ca; Prentice.J@parl.gc.ca; Baird.J@parl.gc.ca; Bernier.M@parl.gc.ca; Cannon.L@parl.gc.ca; Clement.T@parl.gc.ca; Flaherty.J@parl.gc.ca; Verner.J@parl.gc.ca; Hill.J@parl.gc.ca; Kenney.J@parl.gc.ca; Ritz.G@parl.gc.ca; Guergis.H@parl.gc.ca; Paradis.C@parl.gc.ca;dwatch@web.net;info@ocsj.ca; ocap@tao.ca;info@olderwomensnetwork.org; terryoc2001@yahoo.ca; adavidov@torontohabitat.on.ca; justice@socialjustice.org;info@chfc.ca sandra.conlin@rcmp-grc.gc.ca; robin.roberts@cpc-cpp.gc.ca; gsmith@chrt-tcdp.gc.ca; AdamsoV@erccee.gc.ca; potterl@scc-csc.gc.ca;phil.jensen@servicecanada.gc.ca;AdamsoV@erc-cee.gc.ca; josee.dubois@psst-tdfp.gc.ca; elisabeth.nadeau@ps.gc.ca; mmacpherson@pco-bcp.gc.ca; dgrandmaitre@gg.ca; tpulcine@privcom.gc.ca; aleadbea@infocom.gc.ca; clgascon@fja.gc.ca; plourded@nafta-sec-alena.org; francois-giroux@cas-satj.gc.ca;bob.ward@chrc-ccdp.cadp.ca

177

November 7 2007 To: RCMP Insp. Brian Verheul O i/c CCS Michael.Thomson@rcmp-grc.gc.ca Re: Government Corruption, Conspiracy

November 8, 2007

To: Robert McCreary
Crown Attorney's Office Courthouse 50 Eagle Street West Newmarket, ON L3Y 6B1 Fax: (905) 853-4849

See web sites

Dear Insp. Brian Verheul For the record

Response required

Frank Gallagher 34 Riverglen Drive Keswick.On L4P 2P8 franklyone@hotmail.com

As you are aware I met with Sgt Steinebech on October 18 2007 and e-mailed you using the Michael.Thomson@rcmp-grc.gc.ca e-mail address which I had been using for near two years to provide you the evidence of the government corruption and conspiracy against the people which your office has chosen to ignore. Pages 3-10 is a copy of the e-mail dated October 18 2007 which I sent to your office recapping the meeting with Sgt Steinebech and again requesting you address the issues of Government Conspiracy I have provided you my web sites where the issues and evidence is to be found. http://groups.google.com/group/guardians-of-the-canadians-charter-of-rights-and-freedoms http://groups.google.com/group/peoples-law-society You and the irresponsible government personnel whose e-mail addresses are listed below on page 11 have been provided a prodigious amount of evidence to this endeavor and have been informed where it is to be found on my web site for all to see. I request once again that you study the evidence to be found there until you are coherent to the facts and then commence or cause to commence proceedings as is your responsibility as clearly stated in Hon. Stockwell Day¶s e-mail to me November 2 2007 which can be found on my web site http://groups.google.com/group/guardians-of-the-canadians-charter-of-rights-and-freedoms http://groups.google.com/group/peoples-law-society along with other relative letters where you will also find a copy of this e-mail to you. 178

The following is an excerpt from that e-mail and I suggest you read it in its entirety along with the other correspondence listed on the said web site. As Minister of Public Safety I am accountable to both Parliament and the public for the RCMP and must ensure that the Force functions with full respect for Canada¶s democratic traditions and the fundamental rights and freedoms of Canadians. I request once you are coherent to the facts you will carry out your responsibility in full respect for the Rights and Freedoms of Canadians fundamental to the support of the guarantee to each individual provided by the Federal government in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Obviously the Constitution is just a worthless piece of paper without enforcement and without enforcement consistent to and conducive to the individual¶s guaranteed Charter rights the government personnel financed and responsible to enforce it are just as worthless and it is incomprehensible that any of you should be continued to be financed by the people for such absurdity.

Your immediate response with due regard for time to review the evidence is required and you are expected to act diligently consistent with and conducive to the individual¶s guaranteed Charter Rights as their safety and protection of their guaranteed equality of benefits is dependent on your conviction and fortitude to the task. I remind you are on Candid camera so to speak and your immediate attention to the issues is required as it is your responsibility. May I suggest once again that you meet with the other police forces, YRP and the OPP so as to efficiently and effectively deal with the issues as it is all your responsibilities and perhaps alleviate any gaps of authority and reduce any redundancy as you address the issues competent to the endeavor. I hope I have made my self clear and you will understand the importance to you and your department to address the issues as per your responsibility to do so. Thank you, Frank Gallagher Frank Gallagher

179

October 18 2007 To: RCMP Insp. Brian Verheul O i/c CCS Sgt. Steve Semenchuk NCO i/c Intake CCS Cpl Mona Eichman Re: Government corruption and conspiracy Meeting with Sgt. Steinebech today. Dear Insp. Brian Verheul Today my mother Edythe Gallagher and I dropped into the RCMP headquarters Harry Walker Blvd, Newmarket and spent a couple of hours between 11 AM and 1 PM talking to RCMP staff to determine who has the responsibility to deal with matters of government corruption and conspiracy and eventually I was introduced to Sgt. Steinebech As I wrote the times down I realize that I must have connected at an inopportune time straddling staffs lunch times and if you could apologize to them for my inconsideration I would appreciate it. Not once did anyone mention it as they listened to hear me out and I should also apologize for being impatient with them when they point out their mandate limits their authority to deal with such matters. That is the inherent problem with the system as there is nobody mandated to do so as I have comprehensively and irrefutably proven in an e-mail I sent simultaneously to a prodigious number of Ontario and Federal government personnel listed in the document, Preamble Federal correspondence Recap October 9 2007 which I had attached. It was a letter addressed to Randy Craig, Detective. Sergeant OPP Anti-Rackets for his attention to the issues contained within but everyone who I e-mailed to were also requested to attend to the issues. The document was a response to, Federal Ombudsman of Victims of Crime Louis Theoret¶s e-mail of October 5 2007 and in fact the document included the correspondence between him and I since September 20 2007 which I had copied to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada Robert Nicholson so as to keep him up to speed as to the issues of the Ontario Government corruption and conspiracy so as to to provide him the opportunity to deal with the issues and hand him the rope to hang himself with. I had several times previous provided him the evidence but his office declined to respond. In Louis Theoret¶s e-mail of September 27 2007 he acknowledged that the issues were of a serious nature however he stated the issues were not within his jurisdiction which is utter nonsense since his duty is victimsfirst@ombudsman.gc.ca unless of course that means there ultimate purpose is to create victims which the whole government establishment are bent on. The fact is victims is his business to help and where clear and present danger is evident due diligence must be applied to that which is predictable in an initiative of prevention. His response wasn¶t unexpected as you will note in my first e-mail to him dated September 20 2007 but I had to go through the formalities to get it documented. 180

At the same time to keep everyone on my e-mail list on the same page including the Minister of Justice and Attorney General Robert Nicholson whom I presume is the authority to deal with the corruption and conspiracy of the Ontario Government since they had all declined to take action on the issues of a serious nature which was ultimately their failure to provide a legal system capable of demonstrating due diligence to the individual¶s guaranteed Charter rights. To prove this one last time and to also prove the said Minister of Justice was in on the conspiracy I provided them all simultaneously the irrefutable evidence along with my web site http://groups.google.com/group/peoples-law-society where the evidence and more is to be found should they have misplaced theirs. I had presumed the Minister Robert Nicholson was the person who should be responsible to back the individual¶s guaranteed Charter rights, however I asked them all to tell me who was responsible if not he and nobody at all has responded other than a couple of phone calls from Ms Petrie of the office of Robert McCreary Crown Attorney, Newmarket requesting me to fax some additional pages of the 41 page document which didn¶t come through With not one person responding to the issues which are of a serious nature proves irrefutably the incompetence of the legal system and the irresponsible personnel which run rampant throughout who are unequivocally indifferent to the individuals Charter rights. I reiterate this was known to me long ago being so obvious as the evidence shows but I was attentive to documenting it well, not for the purpose of presenting it before the courts which would be an exercise of futility since the whole system, Federal and Provincial is corrupt and in on the conspiracy together. I have stated in my writings that I understand life and know full well how it works where the people are brain washed from the day they are born where they fit into the system believing the law is a group of respectable people of irreproachable integrity but often the law is an ass due to the fact it is staffed by humans who are proned to err and that¶s just how it is thought to be according to common sense with a lot of corruption on the side. All the different cultures and religions attest to the influence of the environment they are reared and the inherent nature of hanging on to their cultures as they leave the country of their ancestry to begin a new and prosperous way of life here in Canada. Traditions which they are determined to hang on to like an anchor as they attempt to struggle ahead. It is a mind thing deeply embedded in their brains over time passed on and on.. Like the legal system which is operated by members of the Law Society of Upper Canada and like societies who like to hold on to tradition as stated in the Roles and Responsibilities of the Attorney General which is published on his web site. There you will find a prodigious amount of evidence that the Office of the Ontario Attorney General has determined to carry on tradition as they continue to administer and enforce the laws of Ontario consistent with the rule of law as it was before the enactment of the Constitution Act, 1982. That was the well established legal principle, that most elusive concept, hard to easily define. It was the rule of law, which the Attorney General of Ontario, was the Guardian of, which protected the people and society as a whole. 181

I would have to say it could not protect the people very well considering the description of it and obviously the ordinary moral majority would not commonly know the rule of law which protected them was so incompetent to do so. It clearly states that it was a well established legal principle and obviously those people of the legal profession would be well aware of the incompetence of it as they would know now, and obviously the people wouldn¶t know any better today than they would have then. This is obviously a testament to the legal professions deprivation of morality and integrity and the Attorney General¶s indifference to the well being of the individual and society as a whole attests to it. In any crime law enforcers are attentive to opportunity and motive and I suspect a look at his house, automobiles in his driveway, second and third properties, private schools his kids go to, yachts and travel expenses whatever, would address that issue. They are all partners in crime feasting off the people as they turn the simplest issues of right and wrong into major Federal cases which costs are prohibitive to the moral majority. I know I am just going through the formalities because you all know and in fact could offer a whole lot more but this isn¶t for you, it¶s for the people to know exactly what is going on and by your failure to act for them consistent and conducive to their guaranteed Charter rights they won¶t need to see anymore than what is written and documented herein and what you have not done to attend to the issues regarding their well being and their right to provide a prosperous life for themselves. They already know as you do the government is corrupt and the evidence within these writings explains precisely how it is done and who is involved. Everyone in the said e-mail list and of course whoever is yet to be linked when the people rise to force a Public Inquiry. We already know the office of the DOJ is linked to corruption and conspiracy through the Standing Committee on Public Accounts hearing of the RCMP pension fund scandal and we know who obstructed justice when the Standing Committee was told to Sit on it.. They won¶t be befuddled by the deceitful ways of lawyers who will not be sitting to judge nor will anything they have to say be heard by the majority and those who bother will just have more evidence against them which already runneth over. It is pathetic that I feel it necessary to Dick and Jane you people in hopes you will Spot your way to act responsibly in accordance with the supreme law of Canada, the Constitution which is the very foundation of what Canada and its people stand for. You people do know there is no Santa Clause even though Virginia was lied to, even though it is done in the good spirit of things. You do know that the conspirators are not doing it in the spirit of anything other than to satiate their own spirits. How can you people call yourselves law enforcers when you are indifferent to it following rules, regulations, policies which are neither coherent to, competent to or consistent with the law, the supreme law, the Constitution which makes them of no force or effect?

182

The Law Society of Upper Canada¶s admission, in the aforesaid correspondence that their members do not have to give a shit about the individual¶s Charter rights, as they continue in their unscrupulous traditional ways as defined in the Role of the Attorney General published on his web site where he is the Guardian of the rule of law which was a well established legal principle being that most elusive concept, hard to easily define which protected the people and society as a whole back in 1982 but was superseded by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms at the moment of the enactment where the rule of law was incompetent to back the individual¶s guarantees as provided by the Charter, inconsistent with the aspirations attributed to God who is recognized to be supreme by the supreme law of Canada, the Constitution. There have been no amendments to the Roles and Responsibilities of the Attorney General since the Charter inclusion to the Constitution Act, 1982 such as

The Attorney General (d) shall perform the duties and have the powers that belong to the Attorney General and Solicitor General of England by law and usage, so far as those powers and duties are applicable to Ontario, and also shall perform the duties and powers that, until the Constitution Act, 1867 came into effect, belonged to the offices of the Attorney General and Solicitor General in the provinces of Canada and Upper Canada and which, under the provisions of that Act, are within the scope of the powers of the Legislature; The document, Preamble Federal correspondence Recap October 9 2007, the 41 page document addressed to Randy Craig OPP which was provided to everyone on the said e-mail list proves 1 of 2 things that either nobody knows who is responsible to back the individual¶s guaranteed Charter rights or they know nobody is responsible to back the individual¶s Charter rights and they ain¶t telling. I know who is ultimately responsible to the people of Ontario through the legislature, and who is responsible for constitutional matters and who is responsible to ensure the laws of Ontario are legal and who is the guardian of the public interest and I know the Attorney General has unique responsibilities to the Crown, the courts, the Legislature and the executive branch of government. I know who has a constitutional and traditional responsibility beyond that of a political minister. I know who (b) shall see that the administration of public affairs is in accordance with the law; (c) shall superintend all matters connected with the administration of justice in Ontario e) shall advise the Government upon all matters of law connected with legislative enactments and upon all matters of law referred to him or her by the Government; (f) shall advise the Government upon all matters of a legislative nature and superintend all Government measures of a legislative nature; (g) shall advise the heads of ministries and agencies of Government upon all matters of law connected with such ministries and agency; (h) shall conduct and regulate all litigation for and against the Crown or any ministry or agency of government in respect of any subject within the authority or jurisdiction of the Legislature; (i) shall superintend all matters connected with judicial offices; (j) shall perform such other functions as are assigned to him or her by the Legislature or by the Lieutenant Governor in Council. I know the importance of the independence of the role is fundamental to the position and well established in common law, statutes and tradition. I know The Attorney General has a special role to play in advising Cabinet to ensure the rule of law is maintained and that Cabinet actions are legally and constitutionally valid. 183

I know as chief law officer, the Attorney General has a special responsibility to be the guardian of that most elusive concept - the rule of law. The rule of law is a well established legal principle, but hard to easily define. It is the rule of law that protects individuals, and society as a whole, from arbitrary measures and safeguards personal liberties. I know a whole lot more too thanks to the web site of the Attorney General I know who has guarded traditional disrespect for the people I know 31. Nothing in this Charter extends the legislative powers of any body or authority.

I know 32. (1) This Charter applies (a) to the Parliament and government of Canada in respect of all matters within the authority of Parliament including all matters relating to the Yukon Territory and Northwest Territories; and (b) to the legislature and government of each province in respect of all matters within the authority of the legislature of each province. I don¶t know who is above these people and the people in the list which I have provided the evidence ain¶t telling; however they are all Honourable people who each play a vital role in the premeditated neglect of the individual¶s guaranteed Charter rights. 52. (1) The Constitution of Canada is the supreme law of Canada, and any law that is inconsistent with the provisions of the Constitution is, to the extent of the inconsistency, of no force or effect. I know for most definite fact the aspirations attributed to God who is supreme takes priority over the unscrupulous ways of the lawyers who continue in their pathetic traditional ways. Who amongst you will remain following the lawyers who are possessed by the Devil who have no place in a society where the supreme law of Canada, the Constitution recognizes the supremacy of God. The evidence consistently shows the members of the law society are of evil spirits who consistently act in defiance of the Constitution which they are sworn to uphold. It is not my opinion it is precisely what the evidence consistently demonstrates. Any person who cares to pull a rabbit out of the hat as precedence or what was traditional will only support my claim they are unscrupulous in their ways unrelentingly trying to persuade us they have more power than God who we know full well of the aspirations attributed to him.. I know many fools and I know there are many more yet to be flushed and I suggest once again you begin with Lawyer Files # 1, # 2 and # 3 with due regard to the ousting of number 7 the Attorney General of Ontario Michael Bryant who among all his Roles and Responsibilities: (g) shall advise the heads of ministries and agencies of Government upon all matters of law connected with such ministries and agency; So there you have it. It is beyond all comprehension the ORHT would take it upon themselves to tamper with the evidence, not record the 2nd day of the hearing and not commence or cause to commence proceedings against Don Wilson my former tenant and president of a company I invested in, with filing a false and misleading information with the ORHT, namely his dispute which he signed and faxed to the ORHT, an offense under s.206 (2) of the Tenant Protection Act, 1997 value $43,000 plus It is incomprehensible the ORHT, which is an independent agency of the Government would permit a person to commit criminal fraud over $100,000 right in front of the judicator in a building financed by the 184

people as part of the legal system in Ontario mandated to administer justice in compliance with the Tenant Protection Act, 1997 consistent with the supreme law of Canada, the Constitution Act, 1982 on their own without advice from the Attorney General and without him being aware of it. After all I have informed him as you are all aware that the Attorney General is cognizant of the facts as per Lawyer File # 7 and a prodigious number of other documents which includes Judy Phillips of his Office who was asked to respond to the evidence I provided and copies can be found on pages 19 and 32 of Government Correspondence compiled Sept, 1 2007. I remind you that all persons addressed on the 15 Lawyer Files have received copies of all 15 Lawyer Files. How obvious is it that Dave Grech Investigations and Enforcement of the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing is under the Minister of said Ministry Hon. John Gerretsen and how obvious is it that the Attorney General shall advise the heads of all Ministries on all matters of law. How obvious is it that Dave wouldn¶t go out on his own to write such a ridiculous incoherent response September 5 2006 to the evidence and why did he take a month to finally give in to write me a reason. If he had just erred as Randy Craig, OPP Anti-Rackets offered why when I took the trouble to drive all the way down town from Keswick why wouldn¶t he have just apologized and got on with it. Rick Hennessey and Nancy Fahlgren of the ORHT, Dave Grech and Hon. John Gerretsen of the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing are guilty of Obstruction of Justice in matters of the Criminal code and s.206 (1) of the Tenant Protection Act,1997 and I God damn well demand you commence proceedings against them in compliance with the law and the individual¶s Charter guarantee of protection and right to justice. I needn¶t mention the vital importance of due punishment in due diligence to deterrence without which we would have a lawless country which Sgt. Steinebeck offered. I had that in mind myself. Refusal to do so will irrefutably implicate you to the conspiracy. I remind you that Sgt. Steinebeck refused to take the copies of the documents which I had brought to his office because it clearly stated on the RCMP web site that documents for criminal charges will not be accepted by e-mail and he informed me he already knew of me and my documents I have been e-mailing Sgt.Michael Thomson and he assured me they have all been kept on file and I can continue to communicate by e-mail as I have been doing. That was witnessed by my mother as I placed great emphasis on this even asking if he was refusing to take my evidence. He assured me it is not necessary and I reiterate because you have all my documents on file including the recording of the Tribunal Hearing which he stated you would have a copy of that from the first day I dropped off the evidence near 2 years ago. I accept him at his word; he has acknowledged you have the evidence. The Federal Ombudsman of Victims of Crime Louis Theoret has stated he has reviewed the evidence carefully and understands the issues are of a serious nature as do I and any person of moral conscience.

185

The severity of the issues and the crimes dwarf his understanding, but of course we know full well of his integrity for allowing such conditions to remain unattended to in his negligence of the most high as predictable is preventable and victims will continue to drop like flies. We all know his office is dependent on victims which plays havoc on his moral inclinations and failure to act with due diligence to this endeavor will not be tolerated. But that will be dealt with in due course as will all issues addressed within my writings which will be found on my web site Law Society of Upper Canada and 9 subsidiary sites.

I remind you people this is the computer age and it is to my understanding 73% of the populace have one. People have never been as dumb as you believe they are and it is plain ignorant of you to insult our intelligence. You gang up on the individual who you know full well is precisely that against all you bullies and only when groups get together like gays demanding their equal rights are you forced to listen. When all I hear from you is reasons why you can¶t help without looking for the obvious reasons you can and are responsible to do it takes no brain surgeon to determine where you are coming from because you can not be as bloody ignorant as you demonstrate. Before today I had no confirmation as to whether or not you had been receiving the evidence but that has now been confirmed which again begs the question as to why you have not commenced proceedings in any shape or form upon the issues addressed to you which are of the utmost importance to the people of the moral majority. You know those people, the ones you stand by and watch the government powers that be ravish us of our hard earned wages both in taxation and when the money is spent where consumer goods are all inflated and then gst and pst paid on those taxes and on and on and on. Do your law and ordering according to the law for the protection of the people of society not the criminal element and you will find things rather orderly. You are obvious as a hockey player scoring on his own net. Friendly fire you might say!! Frank Gallagher

I am still waiting for the true meaning of the word ³Threshold´ in police terminology. The line between which evidence is determined to be presented before the courts and I would ask you to review the evidence I have provided and tell me what more could possibly be provided

186

And then I ask why none of you asked for more evidence to satisfy the limitations. I have a prodigious amount of evidence to prove what ever could be possibly be needed to prove beyond any reasonable doubt to any one competent in that persuasion Day.S@parl.gc.ca; MCU@JUSTICE.GC.CA victimsfirst@ombudsman.gc.ca;Michael.Thomson@rcmprc.gc.ca;prevention@ps.gc.ca;randy.craig@jus.gov.on.ca; communications@ps.gc.ca;McGuinty.D@parl.gc.ca;ahorwath-qp@ndp.on.ca;bakerg@sen.parl.gc.ca; brooksn@scc-csc.gc.ca;bill.murdoch@pc.ola.org; bob.runciman@pc.ola.org;bironmi@sen.parl.gc.ca;baconl@sen.parl.gc.ca;comail@lsuc.ca;citytvhosts@city tv.com;citydesk@tor.sunpub.com;city@thestar.ca; christine.elliott@pc.ola.org;cowanj@sen.parl.gc.ca;cordyj@sen.parl.gc.ca;dhowlett@makepovertyhistory.c a;dinovocqp@ndp.on.ca;dyckli@sen.parl.gc.ca;dininc@sen.parl.gc.ca;debanp@sen.parl.gc.ca;dayja@sen.parl.gc.ca; dawsod@sen.parl.gc.ca;editor@rd.ca;editor@tor.sunpub.com;elizabeth.witmer@pc.ola.org;egglea@sen.par l.gc.ca;ernie.hardeman@pc.ola.org;fureyg@sen.parl.gc.ca;frasej@sen.parl.gc.ca;fortim@sen.parl.gc.ca; fitzpr@sen.parl.gc.ca;fairbj@sen.parl.gc.ca;gustal@sen.parl.gc.ca;grafsj@sen.parl.gc.ca;goldsy@sen.parl.g c.ca;gilla@sen.parl.gc.ca;gautht@sen.parl.gc.ca;gcarlino@ombudsman.on.ca;hublee@sen.parl.gc.ca; hervic@sen.parl.gc.ca;haysd@sen.parl.gc.ca;harbm@sen.parl.gc.ca;joyals@sen.parl.gc.ca;johnsj@sen.parl. gc.ca;jaffem@sen.parl.gc.ca;jcrivest@sen.parl.gc.ca;julia.munroco@pc.ola.org;kfl@sen.parl.gc.ca; kinsen@sen.parl.gc.ca;kennyco@sen.parl.gc.ca; lachah@sen.parl.gc.ca;losier@sen.parl.gc.ca;lebrem@sen.parl.gc.ca;lavigr@sen.parl.gc.ca;communications @ps.gc.ca;mcgeed@sen.parl.gc.ca;munsoj@sen.parl.gc.ca;moorew@sen.parl.gc.ca;mitchg@sen.parl.gc.ca; milnel@sen.parl.gc.ca;merchp@sen.parl.gc.ca;mercet@sen.parl.gc.ca;meighen@sen.parl.gc.ca; mccoye@sen.parl.gc.ca;massip@sen.parl.gc.ca;mahovf@sen.parl.gc.ca;nejmcust@mms.org;nimhinfo@nih. gov; mbryant.mpp@liberal.ola.org; mininfo@mah.gov.on.ca;nolinp@sen.parl.gc.ca; onbox@ps.gc.ca;olived@sen.parl.gc.ca;pm@pm.gc.ca;pdowne@sen.parl.gc.ca;prudhm@sen.parl.gc.ca;poy v@sen.parl.gc.ca; poulim@sen.parl.gc.ca;phaleg@sen.parl.gc.ca;pepinl@sen.parl.gc.ca;pkormosqp@ndp.on.ca;stratt@sen.parl.gc.ca;stollp@sen.parl.gc.ca;stgerg@sen.parl.gc.ca;spivam@sen.parl.gc.ca;s mithd@sen.parl.gc.ca; sibnic@sen.parl.gc.ca;smithc@sen.parl.gc.ca;szwebmaster@yahoo.com;tkachd@sen.parl.gc.ca;tardic@sen. parl.gc.ca;vanlop0@parl.gc.ca;vanlop1@parl.gc.ca;web@ps.gc.ca;webadmin@justice.gc.ca;wattc@sen.parl .gc.ca; whistleblower@ctv.ca; zimmer@sen.parl.gc.ca; info@cjc-ccm.gc.ca rbartolucci.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org; cbentley.mpp@liberal.ola.org; mbountrogianni.mpp@liberal.ola.org; jbradley.mpp@liberal.ola.org; lbroten.mpp@liberal.ola.org; dcansfield.mpp@liberal.ola.org; dcaplan.mpp@liberal.ola.org; machambers.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org; cdicocco.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org; ldombrowsky.mpp@liberal.ola.org; dduncan.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org; mkwinter.mpp@liberal.ola.org; mmeilleur.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org; speters.mpp@liberal.ola.org; gphillips.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org; spupatello.mpp@liberal.ola.org; lbroten.mpp@liberal.ola.org; pfonseca.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org; 187

htakhar.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org; dramsay.mpp.kirklandlake@liberal.ola.org;gsmitherman.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org; gsorbara.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org; vdhillon.mpp@liberal.ola.org; bduguid.mpp@liberal.ola.org; kflynn.mpp@liberal.ola.org; ljeffrey.mpp@liberal.ola.org; kkular.mpp@liberal.ola.org; mcolle.mpp@liberal.ola.org; jbrownell.mpp@liberal.ola.org;bbalkissoon.mpp@liberal.ola.org; warthurs.mpp@liberal.ola.org;Nicholson.R@parl.gc.ca; Emerson.D@parl.gc.ca; Blackburn.J@parl.gc.ca; Thompson.G@parl.gc.ca; Solberg.M@parl.gc.ca; Strahl.C@parl.gc.ca; Lunn.G@parl.gc.ca; MacKay.P@parl.gc.ca; Hearn.L@parl.gc.ca; Day.S@parl.gc.ca; Skelton.C@parl.gc.ca;Toews.V@parl.gc.ca;Ambrose.R@parl.gc.ca; Finley.D@parl.gc.ca; pm@pm.gc.ca; OConnor.G@parl.gc.ca; Oda.B@parl.gc.ca; Prentice.J@parl.gc.ca; Baird.J@parl.gc.ca; Bernier.M@parl.gc.ca; Cannon.L@parl.gc.ca; Clement.T@parl.gc.ca; Flaherty.J@parl.gc.ca; Verner.J@parl.gc.ca; Hill.J@parl.gc.ca; Kenney.J@parl.gc.ca; Ritz.G@parl.gc.ca; Guergis.H@parl.gc.ca; Paradis.C@parl.gc.ca;dwatch@web.net;info@ocsj.ca; ocap@tao.ca;info@olderwomensnetwork.org; terryoc2001@yahoo.ca; adavidov@torontohabitat.on.ca; justice@socialjustice.org;info@chfc.ca sandra.conlin@rcmp-grc.gc.ca; robin.roberts@cpc-cpp.gc.ca; gsmith@chrt-tcdp.gc.ca; AdamsoV@erccee.gc.ca; potterl@scc-csc.gc.ca;phil.jensen@servicecanada.gc.ca;AdamsoV@erc-cee.gc.ca; josee.dubois@psst-tdfp.gc.ca; elisabeth.nadeau@ps.gc.ca; mmacpherson@pco-bcp.gc.ca; dgrandmaitre@gg.ca; tpulcine@privcom.gc.ca; aleadbea@infocom.gc.ca; clgascon@fja.gc.ca; plourded@nafta-sec-alena.org; francois-giroux@cas-satj.gc.ca;bob.ward@chrc-ccdp.cadp.ca November 7 2007 November 8, 2007 To: RCMP Insp. Brian Verheul O i/c CCS Michael.Thomson@rcmp-grc.gc.ca Re: Government Corruption, Conspiracy
See web sites

To: Robert McCreary
Crown Attorney's Office Courthouse 50 Eagle Street West Newmarket, ON L3Y 6B1 Fax: (905) 853-4849

Dear Insp. Brian Verheul For the record

Response required

Frank Gallagher 34 Riverglen Drive Keswick.On L4P 2P8 franklyone@hotmail.com

As you are aware I met with Sgt Steinebech on October 18 2007 and e-mailed you using the Michael.Thomson@rcmp-grc.gc.ca e-mail address which I had been using for near two years to provide you the evidence of the government corruption and conspiracy against the people which your office has chosen to ignore. Pages 3-10 is a copy of the e-mail dated October 18 2007 which I sent to your office recapping the meeting with Sgt Steinebech and again requesting you address the issues of Government Conspiracy I have provided you my web sites where the issues and evidence is to be found. http://groups.google.com/group/guardians-of-the-canadians-charter-of-rights-and-freedoms http://groups.google.com/group/peoples-law-society You and the irresponsible government personnel whose e-mail addresses are listed below on page 11 have been provided a prodigious amount of evidence to this endeavor and have been informed where it is to be found on my web site for all to see. 188

I request once again that you study the evidence to be found there until you are coherent to the facts and then commence or cause to commence proceedings as is your responsibility as clearly stated in Hon. Stockwell Day¶s e-mail to me November 2 2007 which can be found on my web site http://groups.google.com/group/guardians-of-the-canadians-charter-of-rights-and-freedoms http://groups.google.com/group/peoples-law-society along with other relative letters where you will also find a copy of this e-mail to you. The following is an excerpt from that e-mail and I suggest you read it in its entirety along with the other correspondence listed on the said web site. As Minister of Public Safety I am accountable to both Parliament and the public for the RCMP and must ensure that the Force functions with full respect for Canada¶s democratic traditions and the fundamental rights and freedoms of Canadians. I request once you are coherent to the facts you will carry out your responsibility in full respect for the Rights and Freedoms of Canadians fundamental to the support of the guarantee to each individual provided by the Federal government in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Obviously the Constitution is just a worthless piece of paper without enforcement and without enforcement consistent to and conducive to the individual¶s guaranteed Charter rights the government personnel financed and responsible to enforce it are just as worthless and it is incomprehensible that any of you should be continued to be financed by the people for such absurdity.

Your immediate response with due regard for time to review the evidence is required and you are expected to act diligently consistent with and conducive to the individual¶s guaranteed Charter Rights as their safety and protection of their guaranteed equality of benefits is dependent on your conviction and fortitude to the task. I remind you are on Candid camera so to speak and your immediate attention to the issues is required as it is your responsibility. May I suggest once again that you meet with the other police forces, YRP and the OPP so as to efficiently and effectively deal with the issues as it is all your responsibilities and perhaps alleviate any gaps of authority and reduce any redundancy as you address the issues competent to the endeavor. I hope I have made my self clear and you will understand the importance to you and your department to address the issues as per your responsibility to do so. Thank you, Frank Gallagher Frank Gallagher

189

October 18 2007 To: RCMP Insp. Brian Verheul O i/c CCS Sgt. Steve Semenchuk NCO i/c Intake CCS Cpl Mona Eichman Re: Government corruption and conspiracy Meeting with Sgt. Steinebech today. Dear Insp. Brian Verheul Today my mother Edythe Gallagher and I dropped into the RCMP headquarters Harry Walker Blvd, Newmarket and spent a couple of hours between 11 AM and 1 PM talking to RCMP staff to determine who has the responsibility to deal with matters of government corruption and conspiracy and eventually I was introduced to Sgt. Steinebech As I wrote the times down I realize that I must have connected at an inopportune time straddling staffs lunch times and if you could apologize to them for my inconsideration I would appreciate it. Not once did anyone mention it as they listened to hear me out and I should also apologize for being impatient with them when they point out their mandate limits their authority to deal with such matters. That is the inherent problem with the system as there is nobody mandated to do so as I have comprehensively and irrefutably proven in an e-mail I sent simultaneously to a prodigious number of Ontario and Federal government personnel listed in the document, Preamble Federal correspondence Recap October 9 2007 which I had attached. It was a letter addressed to Randy Craig, Detective. Sergeant OPP Anti-Rackets for his attention to the issues contained within but everyone who I e-mailed to were also requested to attend to the issues. The document was a response to, Federal Ombudsman of Victims of Crime Louis Theoret¶s e-mail of October 5 2007 and in fact the document included the correspondence between him and I since September 20 2007 which I had copied to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada Robert Nicholson so as to keep him up to speed as to the issues of the Ontario Government corruption and conspiracy so as to to provide him the opportunity to deal with the issues and hand him the rope to hang himself with. I had several times previous provided him the evidence but his office declined to respond. In Louis Theoret¶s e-mail of September 27 2007 he acknowledged that the issues were of a serious nature however he stated the issues were not within his jurisdiction which is utter nonsense since his duty is victimsfirst@ombudsman.gc.ca unless of course that means there ultimate purpose is to create victims which the whole government establishment are bent on. The fact is victims is his business to help and where clear and present danger is evident due diligence must be applied to that which is predictable in an initiative of prevention. His response wasn¶t unexpected as you will note in my first e-mail to him dated September 20 2007 but I had to go through the formalities to get it documented. 190

At the same time to keep everyone on my e-mail list on the same page including the Minister of Justice and Attorney General Robert Nicholson whom I presume is the authority to deal with the corruption and conspiracy of the Ontario Government since they had all declined to take action on the issues of a serious nature which was ultimately their failure to provide a legal system capable of demonstrating due diligence to the individual¶s guaranteed Charter rights. To prove this one last time and to also prove the said Minister of Justice was in on the conspiracy I provided them all simultaneously the irrefutable evidence along with my web site http://groups.google.com/group/peoples-law-society where the evidence and more is to be found should they have misplaced theirs. I had presumed the Minister Robert Nicholson was the person who should be responsible to back the individual¶s guaranteed Charter rights, however I asked them all to tell me who was responsible if not he and nobody at all has responded other than a couple of phone calls from Ms Petrie of the office of Robert McCreary Crown Attorney, Newmarket requesting me to fax some additional pages of the 41 page document which didn¶t come through With not one person responding to the issues which are of a serious nature proves irrefutably the incompetence of the legal system and the irresponsible personnel which run rampant throughout who are unequivocally indifferent to the individuals Charter rights. I reiterate this was known to me long ago being so obvious as the evidence shows but I was attentive to documenting it well, not for the purpose of presenting it before the courts which would be an exercise of futility since the whole system, Federal and Provincial is corrupt and in on the conspiracy together. I have stated in my writings that I understand life and know full well how it works where the people are brain washed from the day they are born where they fit into the system believing the law is a group of respectable people of irreproachable integrity but often the law is an ass due to the fact it is staffed by humans who are proned to err and that¶s just how it is thought to be according to common sense with a lot of corruption on the side. All the different cultures and religions attest to the influence of the environment they are reared and the inherent nature of hanging on to their cultures as they leave the country of their ancestry to begin a new and prosperous way of life here in Canada. Traditions which they are determined to hang on to like an anchor as they attempt to struggle ahead. It is a mind thing deeply embedded in their brains over time passed on and on.. Like the legal system which is operated by members of the Law Society of Upper Canada and like societies who like to hold on to tradition as stated in the Roles and Responsibilities of the Attorney General which is published on his web site. There you will find a prodigious amount of evidence that the Office of the Ontario Attorney General has determined to carry on tradition as they continue to administer and enforce the laws of Ontario consistent with the rule of law as it was before the enactment of the Constitution Act, 1982. That was the well established legal principle, that most elusive concept, hard to easily define. It was the rule of law, which the Attorney General of Ontario, was the Guardian of, which protected the people and society as a whole. 191

I would have to say it could not protect the people very well considering the description of it and obviously the ordinary moral majority would not commonly know the rule of law which protected them was so incompetent to do so. It clearly states that it was a well established legal principle and obviously those people of the legal profession would be well aware of the incompetence of it as they would know now, and obviously the people wouldn¶t know any better today than they would have then. This is obviously a testament to the legal professions deprivation of morality and integrity and the Attorney General¶s indifference to the well being of the individual and society as a whole attests to it. In any crime law enforcers are attentive to opportunity and motive and I suspect a look at his house, automobiles in his driveway, second and third properties, private schools his kids go to, yachts and travel expenses whatever, would address that issue. They are all partners in crime feasting off the people as they turn the simplest issues of right and wrong into major Federal cases which costs are prohibitive to the moral majority. I know I am just going through the formalities because you all know and in fact could offer a whole lot more but this isn¶t for you, it¶s for the people to know exactly what is going on and by your failure to act for them consistent and conducive to their guaranteed Charter rights they won¶t need to see anymore than what is written and documented herein and what you have not done to attend to the issues regarding their well being and their right to provide a prosperous life for themselves. They already know as you do the government is corrupt and the evidence within these writings explains precisely how it is done and who is involved. Everyone in the said e-mail list and of course whoever is yet to be linked when the people rise to force a Public Inquiry. We already know the office of the DOJ is linked to corruption and conspiracy through the Standing Committee on Public Accounts hearing of the RCMP pension fund scandal and we know who obstructed justice when the Standing Committee was told to Sit on it.. They won¶t be befuddled by the deceitful ways of lawyers who will not be sitting to judge nor will anything they have to say be heard by the majority and those who bother will just have more evidence against them which already runneth over. It is pathetic that I feel it necessary to Dick and Jane you people in hopes you will Spot your way to act responsibly in accordance with the supreme law of Canada, the Constitution which is the very foundation of what Canada and its people stand for. You people do know there is no Santa Clause even though Virginia was lied to, even though it is done in the good spirit of things. You do know that the conspirators are not doing it in the spirit of anything other than to satiate their own spirits. How can you people call yourselves law enforcers when you are indifferent to it following rules, regulations, policies which are neither coherent to, competent to or consistent with the law, the supreme law, the Constitution which makes them of no force or effect?

192

The Law Society of Upper Canada¶s admission, in the aforesaid correspondence that their members do not have to give a shit about the individual¶s Charter rights, as they continue in their unscrupulous traditional ways as defined in the Role of the Attorney General published on his web site where he is the Guardian of the rule of law which was a well established legal principle being that most elusive concept, hard to easily define which protected the people and society as a whole back in 1982 but was superseded by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms at the moment of the enactment where the rule of law was incompetent to back the individual¶s guarantees as provided by the Charter, inconsistent with the aspirations attributed to God who is recognized to be supreme by the supreme law of Canada, the Constitution. There have been no amendments to the Roles and Responsibilities of the Attorney General since the Charter inclusion to the Constitution Act, 1982 such as

The Attorney General (d) shall perform the duties and have the powers that belong to the Attorney General and Solicitor General of England by law and usage, so far as those powers and duties are applicable to Ontario, and also shall perform the duties and powers that, until the Constitution Act, 1867 came into effect, belonged to the offices of the Attorney General and Solicitor General in the provinces of Canada and Upper Canada and which, under the provisions of that Act, are within the scope of the powers of the Legislature; The document, Preamble Federal correspondence Recap October 9 2007, the 41 page document addressed to Randy Craig OPP which was provided to everyone on the said e-mail list proves 1 of 2 things that either nobody knows who is responsible to back the individual¶s guaranteed Charter rights or they know nobody is responsible to back the individual¶s Charter rights and they ain¶t telling. I know who is ultimately responsible to the people of Ontario through the legislature, and who is responsible for constitutional matters and who is responsible to ensure the laws of Ontario are legal and who is the guardian of the public interest and I know the Attorney General has unique responsibilities to the Crown, the courts, the Legislature and the executive branch of government. I know who has a constitutional and traditional responsibility beyond that of a political minister. I know who (b) shall see that the administration of public affairs is in accordance with the law; (c) shall superintend all matters connected with the administration of justice in Ontario e) shall advise the Government upon all matters of law connected with legislative enactments and upon all matters of law referred to him or her by the Government; (f) shall advise the Government upon all matters of a legislative nature and superintend all Government measures of a legislative nature; (g) shall advise the heads of ministries and agencies of Government upon all matters of law connected with such ministries and agency; (h) shall conduct and regulate all litigation for and against the Crown or any ministry or agency of government in respect of any subject within the authority or jurisdiction of the Legislature; (i) shall superintend all matters connected with judicial offices; (j) shall perform such other functions as are assigned to him or her by the Legislature or by the Lieutenant Governor in Council. I know the importance of the independence of the role is fundamental to the position and well established in common law, statutes and tradition. I know The Attorney General has a special role to play in advising Cabinet to ensure the rule of law is maintained and that Cabinet actions are legally and constitutionally valid. 193

I know as chief law officer, the Attorney General has a special responsibility to be the guardian of that most elusive concept - the rule of law. The rule of law is a well established legal principle, but hard to easily define. It is the rule of law that protects individuals, and society as a whole, from arbitrary measures and safeguards personal liberties. I know a whole lot more too thanks to the web site of the Attorney General I know who has guarded traditional disrespect for the people I know 31. Nothing in this Charter extends the legislative powers of any body or authority.

I know 32. (1) This Charter applies (a) to the Parliament and government of Canada in respect of all matters within the authority of Parliament including all matters relating to the Yukon Territory and Northwest Territories; and (b) to the legislature and government of each province in respect of all matters within the authority of the legislature of each province. I don¶t know who is above these people and the people in the list which I have provided the evidence ain¶t telling; however they are all Honourable people who each play a vital role in the premeditated neglect of the individual¶s guaranteed Charter rights. 52. (1) The Constitution of Canada is the supreme law of Canada, and any law that is inconsistent with the provisions of the Constitution is, to the extent of the inconsistency, of no force or effect. I know for most definite fact the aspirations attributed to God who is supreme takes priority over the unscrupulous ways of the lawyers who continue in their pathetic traditional ways. Who amongst you will remain following the lawyers who are possessed by the Devil who have no place in a society where the supreme law of Canada, the Constitution recognizes the supremacy of God. The evidence consistently shows the members of the law society are of evil spirits who consistently act in defiance of the Constitution which they are sworn to uphold. It is not my opinion it is precisely what the evidence consistently demonstrates. Any person who cares to pull a rabbit out of the hat as precedence or what was traditional will only support my claim they are unscrupulous in their ways unrelentingly trying to persuade us they have more power than God who we know full well of the aspirations attributed to him.. I know many fools and I know there are many more yet to be flushed and I suggest once again you begin with Lawyer Files # 1, # 2 and # 3 with due regard to the ousting of number 7 the Attorney General of Ontario Michael Bryant who among all his Roles and Responsibilities: (g) shall advise the heads of ministries and agencies of Government upon all matters of law connected with such ministries and agency; So there you have it. It is beyond all comprehension the ORHT would take it upon themselves to tamper with the evidence, not record the 2nd day of the hearing and not commence or cause to commence proceedings against Don Wilson my former tenant and president of a company I invested in, with filing a false and misleading information with the ORHT, namely his dispute which he signed and faxed to the ORHT, an offense under s.206 (2) of the Tenant Protection Act, 1997 value $43,000 plus It is incomprehensible the ORHT, which is an independent agency of the Government would permit a person to commit criminal fraud over $100,000 right in front of the judicator in a building financed by the 194

people as part of the legal system in Ontario mandated to administer justice in compliance with the Tenant Protection Act, 1997 consistent with the supreme law of Canada, the Constitution Act, 1982 on their own without advice from the Attorney General and without him being aware of it. After all I have informed him as you are all aware that the Attorney General is cognizant of the facts as per Lawyer File # 7 and a prodigious number of other documents which includes Judy Phillips of his Office who was asked to respond to the evidence I provided and copies can be found on pages 19 and 32 of Government Correspondence compiled Sept, 1 2007. I remind you that all persons addressed on the 15 Lawyer Files have received copies of all 15 Lawyer Files. How obvious is it that Dave Grech Investigations and Enforcement of the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing is under the Minister of said Ministry Hon. John Gerretsen and how obvious is it that the Attorney General shall advise the heads of all Ministries on all matters of law. How obvious is it that Dave wouldn¶t go out on his own to write such a ridiculous incoherent response September 5 2006 to the evidence and why did he take a month to finally give in to write me a reason. If he had just erred as Randy Craig, OPP Anti-Rackets offered why when I took the trouble to drive all the way down town from Keswick why wouldn¶t he have just apologized and got on with it. Rick Hennessey and Nancy Fahlgren of the ORHT, Dave Grech and Hon. John Gerretsen of the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing are guilty of Obstruction of Justice in matters of the Criminal code and s.206 (1) of the Tenant Protection Act,1997 and I God damn well demand you commence proceedings against them in compliance with the law and the individual¶s Charter guarantee of protection and right to justice. I needn¶t mention the vital importance of due punishment in due diligence to deterrence without which we would have a lawless country which Sgt. Steinebeck offered. I had that in mind myself. Refusal to do so will irrefutably implicate you to the conspiracy. I remind you that Sgt. Steinebeck refused to take the copies of the documents which I had brought to his office because it clearly stated on the RCMP web site that documents for criminal charges will not be accepted by e-mail and he informed me he already knew of me and my documents I have been e-mailing Sgt.Michael Thomson and he assured me they have all been kept on file and I can continue to communicate by e-mail as I have been doing. That was witnessed by my mother as I placed great emphasis on this even asking if he was refusing to take my evidence. He assured me it is not necessary and I reiterate because you have all my documents on file including the recording of the Tribunal Hearing which he stated you would have a copy of that from the first day I dropped off the evidence near 2 years ago. I accept him at his word; he has acknowledged you have the evidence. The Federal Ombudsman of Victims of Crime Louis Theoret has stated he has reviewed the evidence carefully and understands the issues are of a serious nature as do I and any person of moral conscience.

195

The severity of the issues and the crimes dwarf his understanding, but of course we know full well of his integrity for allowing such conditions to remain unattended to in his negligence of the most high as predictable is preventable and victims will continue to drop like flies. We all know his office is dependent on victims which plays havoc on his moral inclinations and failure to act with due diligence to this endeavor will not be tolerated. But that will be dealt with in due course as will all issues addressed within my writings which will be found on my web site Law Society of Upper Canada and 9 subsidiary sites.

I remind you people this is the computer age and it is to my understanding 73% of the populace have one. People have never been as dumb as you believe they are and it is plain ignorant of you to insult our intelligence. You gang up on the individual who you know full well is precisely that against all you bullies and only when groups get together like gays demanding their equal rights are you forced to listen. When all I hear from you is reasons why you can¶t help without looking for the obvious reasons you can and are responsible to do it takes no brain surgeon to determine where you are coming from because you can not be as bloody ignorant as you demonstrate. Before today I had no confirmation as to whether or not you had been receiving the evidence but that has now been confirmed which again begs the question as to why you have not commenced proceedings in any shape or form upon the issues addressed to you which are of the utmost importance to the people of the moral majority. You know those people, the ones you stand by and watch the government powers that be ravish us of our hard earned wages both in taxation and when the money is spent where consumer goods are all inflated and then gst and pst paid on those taxes and on and on and on. Do your law and ordering according to the law for the protection of the people of society not the criminal element and you will find things rather orderly. You are obvious as a hockey player scoring on his own net. Friendly fire you might say!! Frank Gallagher

I am still waiting for the true meaning of the word ³Threshold´ in police terminology. The line between which evidence is determined to be presented before the courts and I would ask you to review the evidence I have provided and tell me what more could possibly be provided

196

And then I ask why none of you asked for more evidence to satisfy the limitations. I have a prodigious amount of evidence to prove what ever could be possibly be needed to prove beyond any reasonable doubt to any one competent in that persuasion Day.S@parl.gc.ca; MCU@JUSTICE.GC.CA victimsfirst@ombudsman.gc.ca;Michael.Thomson@rcmprc.gc.ca;prevention@ps.gc.ca;randy.craig@jus.gov.on.ca; communications@ps.gc.ca;McGuinty.D@parl.gc.ca;ahorwath-qp@ndp.on.ca;bakerg@sen.parl.gc.ca; brooksn@scc-csc.gc.ca;bill.murdoch@pc.ola.org; bob.runciman@pc.ola.org;bironmi@sen.parl.gc.ca;baconl@sen.parl.gc.ca;comail@lsuc.ca;citytvhosts@city tv.com;citydesk@tor.sunpub.com;city@thestar.ca; christine.elliott@pc.ola.org;cowanj@sen.parl.gc.ca;cordyj@sen.parl.gc.ca;dhowlett@makepovertyhistory.c a;dinovocqp@ndp.on.ca;dyckli@sen.parl.gc.ca;dininc@sen.parl.gc.ca;debanp@sen.parl.gc.ca;dayja@sen.parl.gc.ca; dawsod@sen.parl.gc.ca;editor@rd.ca;editor@tor.sunpub.com;elizabeth.witmer@pc.ola.org;egglea@sen.par l.gc.ca;ernie.hardeman@pc.ola.org;fureyg@sen.parl.gc.ca;frasej@sen.parl.gc.ca;fortim@sen.parl.gc.ca; fitzpr@sen.parl.gc.ca;fairbj@sen.parl.gc.ca;gustal@sen.parl.gc.ca;grafsj@sen.parl.gc.ca;goldsy@sen.parl.g c.ca;gilla@sen.parl.gc.ca;gautht@sen.parl.gc.ca;gcarlino@ombudsman.on.ca;hublee@sen.parl.gc.ca; hervic@sen.parl.gc.ca;haysd@sen.parl.gc.ca;harbm@sen.parl.gc.ca;joyals@sen.parl.gc.ca;johnsj@sen.parl. gc.ca;jaffem@sen.parl.gc.ca;jcrivest@sen.parl.gc.ca;julia.munroco@pc.ola.org;kfl@sen.parl.gc.ca; kinsen@sen.parl.gc.ca;kennyco@sen.parl.gc.ca; lachah@sen.parl.gc.ca;losier@sen.parl.gc.ca;lebrem@sen.parl.gc.ca;lavigr@sen.parl.gc.ca;communications @ps.gc.ca;mcgeed@sen.parl.gc.ca;munsoj@sen.parl.gc.ca;moorew@sen.parl.gc.ca;mitchg@sen.parl.gc.ca; milnel@sen.parl.gc.ca;merchp@sen.parl.gc.ca;mercet@sen.parl.gc.ca;meighen@sen.parl.gc.ca; mccoye@sen.parl.gc.ca;massip@sen.parl.gc.ca;mahovf@sen.parl.gc.ca;nejmcust@mms.org;nimhinfo@nih. gov; mbryant.mpp@liberal.ola.org; mininfo@mah.gov.on.ca;nolinp@sen.parl.gc.ca; onbox@ps.gc.ca;olived@sen.parl.gc.ca;pm@pm.gc.ca;pdowne@sen.parl.gc.ca;prudhm@sen.parl.gc.ca;poy v@sen.parl.gc.ca; poulim@sen.parl.gc.ca;phaleg@sen.parl.gc.ca;pepinl@sen.parl.gc.ca;pkormosqp@ndp.on.ca;stratt@sen.parl.gc.ca;stollp@sen.parl.gc.ca;stgerg@sen.parl.gc.ca;spivam@sen.parl.gc.ca;s mithd@sen.parl.gc.ca; sibnic@sen.parl.gc.ca;smithc@sen.parl.gc.ca;szwebmaster@yahoo.com;tkachd@sen.parl.gc.ca;tardic@sen. parl.gc.ca;vanlop0@parl.gc.ca;vanlop1@parl.gc.ca;web@ps.gc.ca;webadmin@justice.gc.ca;wattc@sen.parl .gc.ca; whistleblower@ctv.ca; zimmer@sen.parl.gc.ca; info@cjc-ccm.gc.ca rbartolucci.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org; cbentley.mpp@liberal.ola.org; mbountrogianni.mpp@liberal.ola.org; jbradley.mpp@liberal.ola.org; lbroten.mpp@liberal.ola.org; dcansfield.mpp@liberal.ola.org; dcaplan.mpp@liberal.ola.org; machambers.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org; cdicocco.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org; ldombrowsky.mpp@liberal.ola.org; dduncan.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org; mkwinter.mpp@liberal.ola.org; mmeilleur.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org; speters.mpp@liberal.ola.org; gphillips.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org; spupatello.mpp@liberal.ola.org; lbroten.mpp@liberal.ola.org; pfonseca.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org; 197

htakhar.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org; dramsay.mpp.kirklandlake@liberal.ola.org;gsmitherman.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org; gsorbara.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org; vdhillon.mpp@liberal.ola.org; bduguid.mpp@liberal.ola.org; kflynn.mpp@liberal.ola.org; ljeffrey.mpp@liberal.ola.org; kkular.mpp@liberal.ola.org; mcolle.mpp@liberal.ola.org; jbrownell.mpp@liberal.ola.org;bbalkissoon.mpp@liberal.ola.org; warthurs.mpp@liberal.ola.org;Nicholson.R@parl.gc.ca; Emerson.D@parl.gc.ca; Blackburn.J@parl.gc.ca; Thompson.G@parl.gc.ca; Solberg.M@parl.gc.ca; Strahl.C@parl.gc.ca; Lunn.G@parl.gc.ca; MacKay.P@parl.gc.ca; Hearn.L@parl.gc.ca; Day.S@parl.gc.ca; Skelton.C@parl.gc.ca;Toews.V@parl.gc.ca;Ambrose.R@parl.gc.ca; Finley.D@parl.gc.ca; pm@pm.gc.ca; OConnor.G@parl.gc.ca; Oda.B@parl.gc.ca; Prentice.J@parl.gc.ca; Baird.J@parl.gc.ca; Bernier.M@parl.gc.ca; Cannon.L@parl.gc.ca; Clement.T@parl.gc.ca; Flaherty.J@parl.gc.ca; Verner.J@parl.gc.ca; Hill.J@parl.gc.ca; Kenney.J@parl.gc.ca; Ritz.G@parl.gc.ca; Guergis.H@parl.gc.ca; Paradis.C@parl.gc.ca;dwatch@web.net;info@ocsj.ca; ocap@tao.ca;info@olderwomensnetwork.org; terryoc2001@yahoo.ca; adavidov@torontohabitat.on.ca; justice@socialjustice.org;info@chfc.ca sandra.conlin@rcmp-grc.gc.ca; robin.roberts@cpc-cpp.gc.ca; gsmith@chrt-tcdp.gc.ca; AdamsoV@erccee.gc.ca; potterl@scc-csc.gc.ca;phil.jensen@servicecanada.gc.ca;AdamsoV@erc-cee.gc.ca; josee.dubois@psst-tdfp.gc.ca; elisabeth.nadeau@ps.gc.ca; mmacpherson@pco-bcp.gc.ca; dgrandmaitre@gg.ca; tpulcine@privcom.gc.ca; aleadbea@infocom.gc.ca; clgascon@fja.gc.ca; plourded@nafta-sec-alena.org; francois-giroux@cas-satj.gc.ca;bob.ward@chrc-ccdp.cadp.ca

198

199

200

201

202

203

204

205

206

207

208

209

210

211

212

From: Frank Gallagher [mailto:franklyone@hotmail.com] Sent: September 25, 2008 3:15 PM To: 'REVIEWS' Subject: RE: Check: Correction September 25 2008 Please make note of corrected date on page 4 of the Request Review of Complaint September 25 2008 document published on the RCMP Final Letter of Disposition web site http://groups.google.com/group/charter-democracy-force Excerpt from page 4 follows False statements are underlined Paragraphs Complaint date November 7 2007 in error (False-November 8 2007) The investigator also reviewed numerous documents found on my web sites in order to understand the circumstances surrounding my complaint That is what he stated in his May 20 2008 interim report He has reviewed Staff Sergeant MacAdam¶s report and wishes to share with me the results. He emphasizes that despite the hundreds of pages of documentation involved in my complaint, the RCMP¶s sole mandate was to determine whether or not the members acted appropriately. He is suggesting there is a difference as to how the evidence is examined. The evidence provided to Sergeant Michael Thomson up to October 18 2007 when I met with Roy Steinebach is irrefutable to the Government Organized Crime of corruption and conspiracy even though he refused to take the evidence I brought to him that date he said he had access to the evidence that I had been sending to Sergeant Michael Thomson¶s e-mail address and I could continue to send evidence via the same method, which I did and is all relevant up to the date I filed the complaint with the commission November 8 2007. I presume he was instructed how to handle me before we met on October 7 2007, (Correction: October 18 2007 not October 7 2007) perhaps a note on the file. As far as Inspector Brian Verheul is concerned Superintendent Robert Davis states Inspector Verheul instructed Sergeant Thomson and to how to deal with the evidence and is therefore responsible for Sergeant Thomson¶s actions. Inspector Brian Verheul had plenty of time to confirm whether or not the evidence was relative to the Government Organized Crime of corruption and conspiracy. It is yet to be determined if Inspector Verheul acted on his own or« consulted with his superiors.) Please acknowledge Frank Gallagher

213

From: REVIEWS [mailto:reviews@cpc-cpp.gc.ca] Sent: September 23, 2008 3:33 PM To: franklyone@hotmail.com Subject: RE: Check This is to acknowledge receipt of your Request for a Review. You will be receiving a letter shortly confirming your request. Thank you.

Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP Reviews & Investigations Unit FAX #: 613-952-8045 TELEPHONE #: 1-800-267-6637 E-MAIL ADDRESS: reviews@cpc-cpp.gc.ca From: Frank Gallagher [mailto:frank.gallagher@sympatico.ca] Sent: September 23, 2008 3:24 PM To: REVIEWS Subject: Check September 23 2008 Commission for Public Complaints Against the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Canada Post: Bag Service 1722 Ottawa, Ontario K1P 0B3 Fax-613-952-8045 www.cpc.cpp.gc.ca Re: File No. PC-2007-2316 Re: File No. PC-2007-2317 Re: Request Review of my Complaint RCMP refuse to investigate Government corruption and conspiracy Dear Commission Representative I have received the RCMP Final Letter of Disposition dated September 3 2008 signed by Superintendent Robert Davis, District Commander, Greater Toronto Area and he informs if I wish to exercise my right to a review of this investigation of my complaint I may do so by contacting the Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP at Canada Post: Bag Service 1722, Fax-613-952-8045, and www.cpc.cpp.gc.ca I do wish to exercise my right to a review of this investigation of my complaint. I have had some difficulties communicating with Andree Leduc, Enquiries and Complaints Analyst at the 7337 137 Street, Suite 102, 214
Frank Gallagher 34 Riverglen Drive Keswick, On. L4P 2P8 905-476-8959 frank@cdf.name Manager Charter Democracy Force www.cdf.name

Surrey, British Columbia V3W 1A4 office so I am submitting this Request for Review of my Complaint by both Fax-613-952-8045 and your on line form at www.cpc.cpp.gc.ca. Andree Leduc will get the whole document by e-mail along with the rest on the AAAAALIST

All pertinent evidence regarding this Request for Review of my Complaint is published or referenced on the ³RCMP Final Letter of Disposition´ http://groups.google.com/group/rcmp-final-letter-of-disposition affiliate web site of the Charter Democracy Force All evidence published on this site is pertinent including correspondence with Andree Leduc of your Surrey, British Columbia Office. The RCMP Final Letter of Disposition dated September 3 2008 implicates Inspector Robert Davis to be in on the Government Organized Crime of corruption and conspiracy and the details are explained in document ³Request Review of Complaint September 23 2008´ published on the aforementioned web site of which this is the first page.

The links to the evidence originally published on the sites referenced in my original complaint to your office November 8 2007 were corrupted so I opened a new site CDF Documents and transferred pertinent evidence there informing Staff Sergeant R.B.MacAdam and everyone else published on the AAAAALIST of the original Charter Democracy Force web site http://groups.google.com/group/charter-democracy-force The CDF Documents web site can be accessed from this site. . It would be prudent to mention that I have been providing the irrefutable evidence of Government Organized Crime of corruption and conspiracy to Sergeant Michael Thomson of the Milton RCMP office since January 18 2006 when he responded to the evidence I originally left with Inspector Peter Goulet of the Newmarket detachment dated November 15 2005. On January 3 2006 Inspector P. Goulet wrote to inform the evidence was originally reviewed by members of the Federal Enforcement Section and it was learned I was concerned about possible offences under the Canada Business Act. The Act falls under the investigative mandate of the RCMP Commercial Crime Section also located in Newmarket and was being forwarded on to them for review. I had indeed originally requested the RCMP address the relative issues regarding my former tenant Don Wilson president and director of Bio Safe under the Canada Business Corporations Act, Part XIX Paragraph 229 (1) having already attempted to get the York Regional Police to deal with Don Wilson under the Criminal Code and Tenant Protection Act, 1997 but they declined to do so. By the time I went to the RCMP with the November 15 2005 cover letter and evidence I had already tried several government departments to address the issues that occurred June 30 2005 at the ORHT but to no avail, so that is the reason I presented the issues in different manner under the Canada Business Act to try my luck that way. This is all documented on the Golden Rule for Society «Gold for Law Society web site http://groups.google.com/group/golden-rule-for-society---gold-for-law-societyunder the heading Royal Canadian Mounted Police Compiled A ± C documents now available on the ³RCMP Final Letter of Disposition´ web site along with other pertinent evidence. You must remember I was just a victim experienced in another field of endeavour with no experience in how the police carried on business at the time and simply provided the evidence that crimes had been committed by my former tenant and president of a company that I had invested in and thought they would 215

be dealt with by professional people in these matters not realizing I had to dot (t) s and cross (i) s and follow procedures I was not aware of or experienced in. I was under the opinion at the time that the people financed all government personnel involved in the administration and enforcement of the law to be proficient competent responsible and irreproachable with fortitude and conviction to the safety and wellbeing of every individual as guaranteed by the Charter of equal protection and benefits consistent with the Constitution and the Police Services Act. My opinion has never wavered. Police Services Act R.S.O. 1990, CHAPTER P.15 PoliceServicesAct.doc Declaration of principles 1. Police services shall be provided throughout Ontario in accordance with the following principles: 1. The need to ensure the safety and security of all persons and property in Ontario. The importance of safeguarding the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Human Rights Code. The need for co-operation between the providers of police services and the communities they serve. 4. The importance of respect for victims of crime and understanding of their needs.

It is all about common sense and the law, not aware at the time the absence of it throughout the personnel of the system but with further thought and reason determined it was too consistent to be incompetence and eventually proved it was deliberate organized crime of corruption and conspiracy by members of the Law Societies beginning in the very first line of the Charter, all documented on the web sites. The Sergeant Michael Thomson e-mail dated January 18 2006 specifically states that I proposed an investigation be undertaken utilizing the auspices of the Canada Business Act and as such investigated the evidence This information is all published on my web sites that RCMP Staff Sergeant Bob MacAdam investigated and states in his interim report dated May 20 2008 that he felt he should be thorough and thoughtful when forming conclusions based on the relevant evidence. Since Superintendent Robert Davis, District Commander, Greater Toronto Area does not comprehend the need to be competent responsible and irreproachable with fortitude and conviction for the safety and wellbeing of every individual as guaranteed by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms nor is he competent to command a police force consistent with the Police Services Act I will just address the issues he stated in his September 3 2008 Final Letter of Disposition, which is self-evident In such serious matters of government organized crime of corruption and conspiracy well documented and filed with you on November 8 2007 and studied by Staff Sergeant Bob MacAdam in a manner he felt was thorough and thoughtful when forming conclusions based on the relevant evidence as he states in his interim report dated May 20 2008, and finally completed on July 11 2008 as stated in the letter from the Professional Standards Unit signed by Sergeant Karen Delorey, after 8 months of studying the prodigious amount of irrefutable evidence of government organized crime of corruption and conspiracy published on my web sites that had been provided to Inspector Brian Verheul, Milton detachment via e-mail addressed to Sergeant Michael Thomson since January 18 2006 it is incomprehensible that the final 2 page report dated 216

September 3 2008 by Superintendent Robert Davis only contained a little more than one page of relative text, especially since he states Staff Sergeant R.B. MacAdam was a veteran investigator. It states in the Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP pamphlet Andree Leduc mailed me when confirming my complaint that if the CPC carries out a further investigation an investigator will gather all the information relevant to the complaint and will conduct interviews with me, the RCMP members(s) involved, and any witnesses. The pertinent evidence is published on my Charter Democracy Force web sites aforementioned and the report by Staff Sergeant R.B. MacAdam is now pertinent evidence having spent 8 months studying the evidence thorough and thoughtful and of course he is a pertinent witness to attest that the report the RCMP present at the review is in fact the report that he prepared for the investigation of the complaint. Superintendent Robert Davis is also a pertinent witness to attest that the final report he sent me after 1 ¾ months reviewing Staff Sergeant R.B. MacAdam¶s report is indeed the report he prepared. I ask that you immediately request a copy of Staff Sergeant R.B. MacAdam¶s report to ensure no time is allowed for a fixed new replacement report. A copy of Superintendent Robert Davis¶s report is enclosed. It is within your competence to determine if they are consistent with each other.

Address of contents of Superintendent Robert Davis dated September 3 2008 False statements are underlined Paragraphs Complaint date November 7 2007 in error (False-November 8 2007) The investigator also reviewed numerous documents found on my web sites in order to understand the circumstances surrounding my complaint That is what he stated in his May 20 2008 interim report He has reviewed Staff Sergeant MacAdam¶s report and wishes to share with me the results. He emphasizes that despite the hundreds of pages of documentation involved in my complaint, the RCMP¶s sole mandate was to determine whether or not the members acted appropriately. He is suggesting there is a difference as to how the evidence is examined. The evidence provided to Sergeant Michael Thomson up to October 18 2007 when I met with Roy Steinebach is irrefutable to the Government Organized Crime of corruption and conspiracy even though he refused to take the evidence I brought to him that date he said he had access to the evidence that I had been sending to Sergeant Michael Thomson¶s e-mail address and I could continue to send evidence via the same method, which I did and is all relevant up to the date I filed the complaint with the commission November 8 2007. I presume he was instructed how to handle me before we met on October 7 2007, Correction: October 18 2007 not October 7 2007 perhaps a note on the file. As far as Inspector Brian Verheul is concerned Superintendent Robert Davis states Inspector Verheul instructed Sergeant Thomson and to how to deal with the evidence and is therefore responsible for Sergeant Thomson¶s actions. Inspector Brian Verheul had plenty of time to confirm whether or not the evidence was relative to the Government Organized Crime of corruption and conspiracy. It is yet to be determined if Inspector Verheul acted on his own or« consulted with his superiors.)

217

It is superfluous to just stick with the complaint I filed November 8 2007 against Sergeant Roy Steinebach and Inspector Brian Verheul. They have some splainin to do as does Superintendent Robert Davis that will inevitably lead to their superiors. I complained of Government corruption and conspiracy and they refused to investigate, and when Staff Sergeant R.B.MacAdam investigated the evidence thorough and thoughtful when forming conclusions based on the relevant evidence, in order to determine which was relevant he had to be thorough and thoughtful as he stated he was. That remains to be seen but Superintendent Robert Davis¶s report is self- evident he is not. I reiterate all police have a responsibility to be consistent with the Police Services Act and the Constitution conducive to every individual¶s guaranteed Charter rights of equal protection and benefits and it is each person¶s superior that is responsible to see that they are competent responsible and irreproachable with fortitude and conviction to every individual as guaranteed with particular attention to victims, attentive to any flaws in the system that should be addressed to prevent such reoccurrences to some other individual. Police Services Act R.S.O. 1990, CHAPTER P.15 PoliceServicesAct.doc Declaration of principles 1. Police services shall be provided throughout Ontario in accordance with the following principles: 1. The need to ensure the safety and security of all persons and property in Ontario. 2. The importance of safeguarding the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Human Rights Code. The need for co-operation between the providers of police services and the communities they serve. 4. The importance of respect for victims of crime and understanding of their needs. Obviously Inspector Robert Davis has insulted my intelligence and demonstrated his incompetence for success as either the bad or good guy. You will see in many of my writings I presumed the RCMP Commissioner William Elliot had been consulted and it was he who actually is behind the refusal to investigate along with Minister of Public Safety and so on right up to the DOJ and higher. Staff Sergeant MacAdam¶s investigation revealed when I attended the Toronto North Detachment on October 18 2007 and met with Sergeant Steinbach, it was not to make a new complaint but rather to provide more documents with respect to the same complaint I had previously made to the Commercial Crime Section (CCS). I was advised in 2006 that CCS would not be investigating this complaint and I was provided with the rationale for that decision being informed the Department of Justice had been consulted prior to responding to me. As previously stated only the first file I provided to Inspector Peter Goulet dated November 15 2005 made reference to the Canada Business Act issues that Sergeant Michael Thomson addressed in his report on January 18 2006. From then on it was all about Government Organized Crime of corruption and conspiracy and the refusal of the YRP, OPP, RCMP and many government departments and agencies to deal with the issues, which led to the Ontario Attorney General who advises them all and he is the ³guardian of the public interest´ which he refuses to guard. 218

5a) Sergeant Steinbach declined to take more documents and explained the CCS Intake process to me. I printed out the evidence to take down to him because the RCMP web site stated they do not take evidence by e-mail. He refused to take the evidence stating he already had it because the evidence I had been sending via Sergeant Michael Thomson¶s e-mail address was being kept on file and he already had a copy of the recording of the ORHT hearing that I provided with the November 15 2005 evidence I gave toInspector Peter Goulet. 5b) He did however tell me that he felt that my complaint was too vague and over reaching and that it did not meet the CCS Investigational mandate. He refused to look at the evidence I brought with me and the evidence on the web sites is not vague at all. He did not state the evidence was vague and over reaching and the evidence irrefutably proves his opinion as to the relevancy of Government Organized Crime of corruption and conspiracy is valueless and I suspect that he is not all that familiar with the file and was just acting on instructions. 5c). He also told me that there was already a file open regarding my allegations and went on to explain that it did not necessarily mean that the RCMP was going to investigate the complaint. (Sergeant Steinbach told me for certain the RCMP was not going to investigate the complaint) 6) Inspector Verheul did not deal with me directly, but he did provide direction to Sergeant Thomson, my principle contact person, that if material being submitted continues to relate to the issues already reviewed then nothing further should be done than to place a copy of the correspondence on the file. As previously mentioned Inspector Verheul is responsible for Sergeant Thomson¶s actions and when I brought the matter to his attention prior to filing the complaint he should have looked into it and he has had plenty of time since as he has been provided all the evidence the same as the rest of the people whose e-mail addresses are in the AAAAAALIST document published on the original Charter Democracy Force web site 7) In the course of his investigation Staff Sergeant MacAdam also determined that my initial complaint involving my investment in Mr. Wilson¶s company and the Ontario Rental Housing and Tenant¶s Act dispute was reviewed and that I was advised in writing that the matter was most appropriately handled through the civil provisions provided for in the noted statute and that no criminal investigation would be undertaken I presume reference is being made to Sergeant Michael Thomson¶s January 18 2006 e-mail again. He has to fill in the report somehow. Heaven knows I am not referring to reiterations being particularly reiterative myself. I am noting the struggle to put something to paper that looks legitimately convincing. 8) When I was not satisfied with that response I wrote back the same day and Sergeant Thomson wrote his second letter dated February 7th 2006, further explaining that if I suspect criminal activity, the police service with primary jurisdiction would be responsible for investigating the allegations and it seems the Ontario Provincial Police had also reviewed my complaint and had referred me to the York Regional Police as the police services of jurisdiction. It was established as well that I had met with the YRP previously and was told that the matter was civil and that they would not be conducting an investigation. I do not seem to have a copy of that letter in my computer files, perhaps in my 3¶ stack of hard copy but it is irrelative. The police sent me in circles as to who had the authority whereas the YRP was the original police force of jurisdiction but they have persistently refused to look into the Government Organized Crime of corruption 219

and conspiracy, the same as the OPP and the RCMP whereas they all have been provided the same evidence. After careful consideration of the details surrounding my complaint, he finds no evidence that indicates that Sergeant Steinebach or Inspector Verheul acted improperly and furthermore he supports Inspector Verheul¶s directives, given the nature of the file and the documentation being provided. There you have it, after careful consideration he finds no evidence that indicates that Sergeant Steinebach or Inspector Verheul acted improperly and further more he supports Inspector Verheul¶s directives. Was it he Superintendent Robert Davis, District Commander Greater Toronto Area that gave the order not to investigate? Was it an obvious decision for him? Did he need to bother consulting with his superiors? That is yet to be determined!!

If I wish to exercise my right to a review of this investigation of my complaint I may do so by contacting the CPU at the Ottawa office Of course I wish to exercise my right!!! That is what this all about. Right? I see Inspector Brian Verheul is retired now ( bottom of his 2nd page). Before Staff Sergeant R.B.MacAdam finished the investigation he was provided a new job( See his May 20 2008 interim report) with NCO i/c after his name as Occupational Health and Safety Services ³O´ Division/ Return to Work/Medical Discharge Facilitator of Occupational Health and Safety Services ³O´ Division As predictable as the likelihood of people becoming victims with government members of the Law Societies holding every position of authority in the legal system who are not required to give a damn about every individuals guaranteed Charter rights of equal protection and benefits nor is the Law Society of Upper Canada required to examine evidence provided in support of complaints against their members. See the 2 part Law Society of Upper Canada document published on the original Charter Democracy Force web site. CanLaw National Lawyer Referral Service confirmed this on their web site www.canlaw.com and I copied other evidence from their site, which they were not too happy about which you will see published on the Charter Democracy Force web site. All evidence referred herein is published on the Charter Democracy Force web sites and was e-mailed to everyone on the aforementioned AAAAAALIST and they were provided with the web site addresses they would be published on. ********************************************************************************** It is predictable you of the Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP will be orchestrated by the superiors of the Government Organized Crime of corruption and conspiracy as it is apparent they already caused Andree Leduc to not cooperate with me. You will find that information on the ³RCMP Final Letter of Disposition´ web site or referenced where you will find all the evidence stated herein, and quite probably more. The evidence is irrefutable of the Government Organized Crime of corruption and conspiracy and with the RCMP Final Letter of Disposition dated September 3 2008 they are securely implicated in the conspiracy.

220

Now it is your turn to provide us the irrefutable evidence of the Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP for the public to see which you really have no choice but to cooperate with the conspiracy or cooperate consistent with the Constitution conducive to every individual¶s guaranteed Charter rights. Of course this document will be e-mailed to everyone on the AAAAALIST and many others. I will expect acknowledgement of receipt of the first page of this document informing you where the rest of it is published and the other pertinent evidence. Should you have any problems with the links to the documents or web sites please do not hesitate to contact me at frank@cdf.name The same if you need any help understanding the evidence or should you require more evidence, anything at all please do not hesitate to contact me. Frank Gallagher Manager Charter Democracy Force PS You have more than enough to demand a Public Inquiry if you can find someone you can demand. Perhaps you can find a way to get the information to the media. You will read throughout the correspondence every government department and agency suggesting I get a lawyer and deal with my personal issues, as they like to say, in civil court. The July 26 2008 Saturday Star headlined the serious situation that the Middle Class cannot afford to access the civil courts costing $60,000 for 3 days and the media who are on the AAAALIST have also been provided the evidence of precisely what I informed them more than three years ago which they attempt to orchestrate themselves out of this one. Invariably everything they do is corrupt and they have no choice but to continue in their ways when they are confronted, but the jig is up. There is always the option of finally doing things legal consistent with the Constitution conducive to every individual¶s guaranteed Charter rights. That would require restructuring and come right out and fess the truth something they are not familiar with so it could be somewhat clumsy. From : Michael Thomson <Michael.Thomson@rcmp-grc.gc.ca> Sent : To : CC : Subject : January 18, 2006 12:51:19 PM <franklyone@hotmail.com> "Mona Eichmann" <Mona.Eichmann@rcmp-grc.gc.ca> BioSafe Natural Products Inc./ Bio-Safe Natural TechnologiesInc.

Dear Mr. Gallagher: I have reviewed the documents, forwarded to our office here, that were submitted to our Newmarket Detachment. You have proposed an investigation be undertaken utilizing the auspices of the Canada Business Corporations Act,Chapter C-44 (CBCA) and as such, this matter has been taken by our office for 221

review. A review of the matter has been completed and the Department of Justice (DOJ) has been consulted in terms of prosecution under the jurisdiction of this Act. Unfortunately, Part XIX, and Section 229(1) CBCA and thereafter of the Act is quite specific in the terms of the investigation and enforcement of same. This is entirely a civil procedure that requires the Court to issue an Investigation Order and thereafter appoint an Inspector. The Inspector has specific authorization allowing entry and examination of the corporation's books and records. These duties are outlined in Section 130(1) CBCA. Part XIX.1 outlines the apportioning of the award of damages, and Part XX outlines remedies, offences and punishment. Mr. Donald WILSON's assertions that a subpoena and/or a search warrant are required in order to allow the shareholders to review the companies' books and records are erroneous, as outlined in Section 21 (1-10) CBCA. It is the judgment of DOJ and this office that this matter lies solely within the confines of civil litigational procedures, and as such, DOJ will not consider prosecuting this matter and no investigation will be undertaken by this office. An attempt has been made to verbally convey this message via telephone, however the number provided appears to be the number of a fax machine. The information provided will be kept on file for intelligence/ information purposes only. If you have any further questions, these may be directed to the Writer at the numbers listed below. Yours truly,

M.J. Thomson, Sgt. NCO i/c Central Intake & Admin. Support. Greater Toronto Area - Commercial Crime Section, Milton, Ontario (905) 876-9656 (905) 876-9757 (Fax) michael.thomson@rcmp-grc.gc.ca

222

From: Frank Gallagher [mailto:frank.gallagher@sympatico.ca] Sent: September 18, 2008 8:21 AM To: 'complaints@cpc-cpp-gc.ca' Subject: FW: Request Review of Complaint September 18, 2008 Andree Leduc I have not yet received acknowledgement of receipt of the e-mail I sent September 11 2008. Please respond as to what actions you have taken regarding these most serious issues. Thank you Frank Gallagher Manager Charter Democracy Force

From: Frank Gallagher [mailto:frank.gallagher@sympatico.ca] Sent: September 11, 2008 3:19 PM To: 'complaints@cpc-cpp-gc.ca' Subject: Request Review of Complaint September 11 2008 Commission for Public Complaints Against The Royal Canadian Mounted Police 7337 137 Street, Suite 102 Surrey, British Columbia V3W 1A4 Fax 604-501-4095 complaints@cpc-cpp-gc.ca Attention Andree Leduc Enquiries and Complaints Analyst Re: File No. PC-2007-2316 Re: File No. PC-2007-2317 Re: Request Review of Complaint Dear Andree Leduc I hope you will be more cooperative than when you last wrote in December 2007 and refused to respond to my several attempts to have you confirm that you will and make some effort to be competent when this inevitable day arrived to request a review of my complaint against the RCMP as I am not satisfied with their deliberate incompetence consistent with the government organized crime of corruption and conspiracy. Given the evidence and particular circumstances it would ne naïve of me to believe anything other than you are under the thumb of the major players of the conspiracy but never the less I must go through the motions following the modus operandi of the government documenting every step of the way for both present and future use. 223
Frank Gallagher Manager Charter Democracy Force

.You will notice how FFF, Forthright Forthcoming and Forthwith I endeavour to be expecting the same in return and of course when not, it is painfully obvious and though I would prefer appropriate action from you I have learned to settle for more evidence as if I didn¶t have enough already. From the tone of my writing it is hoped you will comprehend that what concerns me does concern you one way or another and all I can do is hope that you understand that I am a victim requesting justice as detailed on the Charter Democracy Force web site www.cdf.name and 10 affiliate sites although in reference to the evidence originally attached to the complaints you will find it on the original Charter Democracy Force site http://groups.google.com/group/charter-democracy-force There is sufficient evidence there that demands the RCMP look into in the 15 Lawyer Files and the Mad, Glad mostly Sad«.Why document that asks many questions Why that need to be formally answered even though they answer themselves. I have made note of some very significant serious problems within the upper command of the RCMP in the following pages, which includes a copy of their Final Letter of Disposition dated September 3 2008. I believe considering your admittance of incompetence that this is a case of rare circumstance and at the discretion of the Chair of the CPC request the CPC become involved and conduct its own investigation in the public interest or conduct a public interest hearing or both. Please acknowledge receipt and your intent to cooperate Thank you Frank Gallagher September 11 2008

224

Confucius 551 BC ± 479 BC

Golden Rule ³Do not impose on others what you would not wish for yourself´ ³There were no dates in this history, but scrawled this way and that across every page were the words BENEVOLENCE, RIGHTEOUSNESS and MORALITY «finally I began to make out what was written between the lines; the whole volume was filled with a single phrase: EAT PEOPLE´

Jesus ³Do unto others as you would have them do unto you´

Jonathan Swainger University of British Columbia history professor Edmund Morgan¶s compelling book ³Inventing the People: The Rise of Popular Sovereignty in England and America´ opens with an assertion that the success of any form of government requires the acceptance of a number of fictions. In democracies for example, it is necessary for the population to ³believe´ that the people have a voice or«that the representatives of the people are the people´

Frank 1942 AD ± 200_

225

Manager, Charter Democracy Force When truth of a CONSISTENCY to a thing is the ultimate quest, the thing is self-evident even though supported by only one statement is self sufficient, impervious to any number of CONSISTENCIES of truths that do not maintain a CONSISTENCY with the thing . When all is said and done and such inconsistency remains adverse to the CONSISTENCY of the thing deception and prevarication is self-evident. When persons develop prevarication to perfection they invariably deceive themselves making them inane to any purpose vulnerable to sane purpose of humongous advantage to the Charter Democracy Force maintaining CONSISTENCY to a thing fair and relevant to all of the moral society of the Constitution of the democracy of Canada where eradication of amoral inclination is its purpose. The painful obviousness of that which is predictable becomes pathetically more nauseating when proven true. One charged with a crime can not be judged by the amoral and most definitely not by oneself.

226

CONSISTENCY to evade the purpose of truth with irrelevant unfounded truths consistently reveals the truth whether they are truths or lies where Reality is the truth impervious to perception yet precisely due to perception. When ones mandate is to meet with a person to pay them back $5 owed and finds them lying in the street in pain a competent report on the incident, no matter how thorough to mandated purpose should include mention of the victim, how he or she got there, and what initiatives were taken to secure their safety and wellbeing and was there any obvious hazards that could be removed to ensure no reoccurrence. Due diligence to a purpose when the safety and wellbeing of every individual is severely jeopardized weighs heavy on the ability of an authority assigned responsibility and the report is self-evident

227

228

Priority Police Services Act R.S.O. 1990, CHAPTER P.15 PoliceServicesAct.doc Declaration of principles 1. Police services shall be provided throughout Ontario in accordance with the following principles: 1. The need to ensure the safety and security of all persons and property in Ontario. The importance of safeguarding the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Human Rights Code. The need for co-operation between the providers of police services and the communities they serve. 4. The importance of respect for victims of crime and understanding of their needs.

In which way does a preponderance of paper proliferated with words protect every individual as guaranteed by the Charter? Of what purpose are such words and those found in the Constitution if staff is without principles? 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. Incompetence is a relatively simple matter to deal with when competence is the quest by all concerned Deliberate incompetence is a simpler matter to deal with when incompetence is the quest by all concerned When there is an obvious CONSISTENCY of incompetence it could very well be the person who perceives the CONSISTENCY of incompetence to be obvious is personally consistently incompetent. 52. (1) The Constitution of Canada is the supreme law of Canada, and any law that is inconsistent with the provisions of the Constitution is, to the extent of the inconsistency, of no force or effect. Considering every individual¶s safety and well being is at stake consistent CONSISTENCY of those people assigned the responsibility to protect every individual equally as guaranteed is mandatory either stated or implied. Similarly and most assuredly government personnel financed to administer and enforce the provisions of the Constitution must be competent responsible and irreproachable in continuity with fortitude and conviction meaning they must be aware of their legitimate purpose and the serious ramifications upon society should the CONSISTENCY not be consistently monitored and maintained. The consequences of neglect are of the most serious nature to the public interest and most assuredly the Attorney General of Ontario is the ³guardian of the public interest´ as the ³Roles and Responsibilities of the Attorney General´ published on the Ontario web site attests. CONSISTENCY is also prerequisite in the safety and wellbeing of personnel involved in the government organized crime of corruption and conspiracy. The evidence published on the Charter Democracy Force was collected by me Frank Gallagher who became lucidly alert on June 30 2005 at an Ontario Rental Housing Tribunal hearing to the fact I had been victimized by my former tenant DON Wilson president of a company I had invested in. 229

Over a period of three years I presented the irrefutable evidence of the crimes to a preponderance of prominent government personnel, media and others whose e-mail addresses in the AAAAALIST document are published on the original Charter Democracy Force web site http://groups.google.com/group/charter-democracy-force The CONSISTENCY of their ³do not give a damn attitude about the Constitution and every individual¶s equal guaranteed Charter rights´ indicative of the spirit that emanates from the Law Society of Upper Canada demonstrated in the 2 part Law Society of Upper Canada document is overwhelming and pathetically incomprehensible in terms of incompetence and ignorance to legitimate purpose. So overwhelming that stretches far beyond the realm that such incompetence could be achieved naturally and already certain there was much more to this than meets the eye turned my efforts to divulge the root of the problem that led me right back to that which was immediately apparent at the beginning that the office of the Attorney General of Ontario was behind it all, being advisor to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing John Gerretsen who was responsible to monitor compliance with the Tenant Protection Act, 1997 but demonstrated an irresponsible indifference to his responsibility. This is all detailed in the 15 Lawyer Files, which we are all quite familiar with by now. Right? Well to save me time and everyone else concerned the evidence published on the Charter Democracy Force irrefutably proves the incompetence of the entire legal system to protect every individual equally as guaranteed by the Charter but at the same time demonstrates an uncanny CONSISTENCY to protect every individual involved in the conspiracy from the people adverse to the moral legitimate purpose that they have the people ³believe´ So CONSISTENT and so obvious that any sane person of moral thought and reason can discern the truth that what we have here in Canada is government organized crime personified. The RCMP who studied the evidence since I filed with the Commission for Public Complaints against the RCMP November 8 2007 not November 7 2007 as suggested in their ³Final Letter of Disposition had to wade through the evidence which was apparently either over their heads or was simply of no concern to them as they did their Law Society rendition of pathetic injustice oblivious to ³The Spirit of the Law´ and the vital role evidence plays. Well, the RCMP had an opportunity to show their stuff and blew it miserably incompetent to the conspiracy and most assuredly no semblance at all to what is expected of a competent responsible irreproachable entity of fortitude and conviction in continuity to support a moral society conducive to every individual¶s guaranteed equal Charter rights. Such lame excuses to avoid addressing the major issues and even in what amounts to a one full page of response maintains an inconsistency with actual fact, but then competence to any purpose is not expected of them from their superiors so what you see is what you get and the public has no choice but to forget it and move on to retain their sanity. Perhaps all the inconsistencies are deliberately entered to draw ones attention to them and would be of no avail to argue, petty in nature distracting from the obvious serious issues they obviously never intend to address. Perhaps they are intended to infuriate me so I will respond insanely providing them opportunity to divert the issues to a mental instability. Well, that does not work absolutely inane to competent responsible irreproachable sane moral purpose. 230

Reality is the truth impervious to perception yet precisely due to perception The truth cannot change but perceptions are vulnerable and fickle things. They will allow you to believe you are cunning intelligent above many, provide you confidence and arrogance«and stuff like that. Simple fact is it will betray you. Do not believe? Have a serious look at the Final Letter of Disposition from the point of view of an individual of the moral majority who once believed their Charter rights secure and were treated fairly as if in a democracy. The government organized crime has clearly been proven to be initiated at the top but its success is dependent on the ignorance and cooperation of the ROYAL CANADIAN MOUNTED POLICE. As the economy gets worse nature will take its course as history attests and be assured we of the Charter Democracy Force will humongously increase our efforts to the resolve necessary to the prevention of the predictable unnecessary chaos. One has to wonder if ³terrorists´ is just a word attached to groups who are well aware that sane peaceful initiatives to fair sane moral purpose of sane moral thought and reason is impossible with greedy imbeciles devoid of conscience inept to sane moral thought and reason. It seems to me the manipulative abilities of international corporate conglomerates and the humongous advantage the affluent and influential have illegitimately over the people of the Lower Tiers the World Trade Center was a likely target when the people are driven insane by the insanity of it all left unchecked. Anyway, the people have a right to know what is published on the Charter Democracy Force web site and with phase one now complete with the irrefutable evidence the upper echelon of the RCMP are involved we can now direct our efforts full time to spreading the truth and we thank you for that for making it so vividly clear. This document ³ReceivedSeptember102008´ will be published in its appropriate place on the ³RCMP Final Letter of Disposition´ web site http://groups.google.com/group/rcmp-final-letter-of-disposition

I need not mention how severely disappointed we are at but nothing we had not expected and certainly nothing we were not prepared for. We will give the Commission for Public Complaints against the RCMP one more opportunity to demonstrate their incompetence to serve the people consistent with the Constitution and of course make a formal request to the RCMP Commissioner to investigate the government organized crime as evidenced on the Charter Democracy Force web site www.cdf.name which Robert Davis, Superintendent, District Commander, Greater Toronto Area was kind enough to admit as did Staff Sergeant R.B. MacAdam that you have possession of the evidence or access of all the evidence on the web sites but have chosen to ignore it with blinders on and chose to emphasize your sole mandate was to determine whether or not the members acted appropriately 231

This is how my first conversation with Staff Sergeant R.B. MacAdam began when he phoned me to see if I would come down to the Newmarket office to discuss the complaint and now 10 months later the incompetence remains.. It was about 3 weeks after he began looking into it on a part time basis he informed and at first I agreed to go down, but when I asked if he had looked at the evidence on the web site he said no, he was just investing the complaint against the RCMP members. He had not yet talked to the 2 RCMP members and not looked at the evidence and he wants me to come down. I questioned how could he possibly determine if they acted appropriately with out looking at the evidence and of course the Law Society of Upper Canada is of the belief their member acted appropriately without looking at the evidence and we see a significant CONSISTENCY throughout that evidence appears to be irrelevant when members of the Law Societies are involved as the Attorney General who plays a major role advising all government departments and agencies. I told him he would first have to determine if the evidence was valid to the complaint or considered trivial, frivolous or vexatious which I cited from the Complaints Commission brochure. You state Staff Sergeant R.B. MacAdam is a veteran investigator which hardly supports your intended purpose when logically in the peoples minds evidence plays a major role in investigations and if your veteran investigators are not aware the public are in serious trouble. OOPS: They are in serious trouble aren¶t they? All that has been noted is the pathetic incompetence of the person assigned to the investigation and for that he gets a promotion and I can expand that to see how you made it to District Commander. There can be no doubt you are aware of the conspiracy because you would have to be an imbecile not to understand what is going on if you are familiar with the evidence. Of course that has crossed my mind in earlier writings that for the government organized crime to be successful persons in you positions have to be selected from the incompetent or cooperative to the conspiracy permitting its persistent existence. You have made reference to issues being discussed with the DOJ, which is absurd as the evidence clearly shows the DOJ and the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada are major players in the conspiracy. I know it appears that I am addressing these issues to you in an effort to make you people understand the error of your ways but we know you are well aware, however it is imperative the public clearly understands and it is to that endeavor I am most attentive. I presume your efforts are addressed similarly and I have to inform you the intended recipients of this information are hardly as dumb as they would have to be to comprehend any reason for you not to act on their behalf consistent with the Constitution. Meanwhile I am requesting every recipient to jump in and act appropriately on behalf of the people in legitimate support of the sanctity of the Canadian Constitution.

232

The inane dribble you offered as a competent responsible irreproachable response may well be what you believe but as always evidence begets the truth and you people simply must familiarize yourselves with the concept. You state Sergeant Steinebach told me that my complaint was too vague which is utter nonsense but I know after 10 months study of the evidence that is so overwhelming with nothing left to debate and out of hundreds of pages of evidence you had to at least fill one page with something and why not utter crap that comes so readily. Given the most serious nature of the issues it is incomprehensible to suggest every (i) should be dotted and (t) s crossed where if you were the competent responsible irreproachable people with fortitude and conviction to every individual¶s guaranteed Charter rights you would have laid out the red carpet and thanked me for all the investigative work I did to help you better serve the public interest and Attorney General Chris Bentley ³guardian of the public interest´ should have been pleased if not for the fact he is the major player along with the DOJ. You mentioned I was provided with the rationale back in 2006, January as I recall and that was an entirely different matter when after the York Regional Police demonstrated their incompetence to deal with the issues as well as many other government personnel I thought I would try in addition to address the matter under the Corporations Act«.whatever they call it further demonstrating Don Wilson¶s character but Sergeant Thomson pulled one of your tricks emphasizing that he was addressing the issues that I had presented back in November 2005 I believe it was, maybe early December under the auspices of the Corporations Act «whatever but since then I have provided the RCMP a preponderance of irrefutable evidence of government organized crime if you care to stay to pertinent point, and it was delivered by email via the Michael Thomson e-mail address and Sergeant Roy Steinbach acknowledged they had the evidence on file including a disk recording of the Tribunal hearing. That is why he refused to accept the evidence I brought down because he stated they already had it. Everything I am stating now is just reiterating the prodigious amount of reiterations published on the web sites and all you have demonstrated is your incoherence to the evidence and your irresponsible attitude towards the necessity of a responsible investigation on behalf of the people. I have no further interest in addressing the crapola contained with your Final Letter of Disposition when the evidence published on the web sites bares the truth and your report bares the truth of the incompetent and irresponsible ineptness of the RCMP to protect the people as guaranteed by the Charter when you make every effort to avoid the truth that lies within the evidence you stumbled over looking for something to put in your one page letter of content. Well the evidence stands for itself, not debatable and yet fools rush in to give it a try. Gee, that segues to the Commission for Public Complaints against the RCMP who were kind enough to explain their incompetence and were determined not to get any wiser, no matter how hard I tried. I informed them this day would come and if they had of started getting prepared back in December 2007 they would be competently prepared so now we get to see the results. Why would they want the public to know they are incompetent? Don¶t answer, we know don¶t we? 233

They really are cooperative with the conspiracy but they were hired specifically for their incompetence. Anyway I leave you all to ponder your decisions while we test the Complaints Commission. Frank Gallagher Manager Charter Democracy Force PS I did make mention I am not satisfied with your incompetent irresponsible trivial, frivolous vexatious Final Letter of Disposition didn¶t I? I suppose the obvious does not require the formality. If I seem a little frustrated and perhaps a bit irate perhaps if we looked at the evidence we could determine the cause and help me out. OOPS, silly me, I keep forgetting you are not required to give a damn but when the opportunity arises make a kind gesture. One more time I state unless the evidence that had been provided to the RCMP up until October 18 2007 has been thoroughly examined as to its validity of the charges of government organized crime of corruption and conspiracy the RCMP have demonstrated their incompetence to protect the public interest. Obviously the District Commander provides a good example of the incompetence that must ran rampant throughout the force. We cannot have that can we?

234

235

236

237

238

239

240

241

242

September 26 2008 Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP Reviews & Investigations Unit FAX #: 613-952-8045 TELEPHONE #: 1-800-267-6637 E-MAIL ADDRESS: reviews@cpc-cpp.gc.ca Re: File No. PC-2007-2316 Re: File No. PC-2007-2317
Frank Gallagher 34 Riverglen Drive Keswick, On. L4P 2P8 905-476-8959 frank@cdf.name Manager

Re: RequestReviewofComplaintSeptember232008(datecorrectionSeptember252008.doc) Democracy Force Charter www.cdf.name RCMP refuse to investigate Government corruption and conspiracy Re: Further Waste of Tax Money Request for immediate Public Inquiry Dear Reviews & Investigations Unit As you are aware my Request Review of Complaint September 23 2008 (date correction September 25 2008) included a copy of the RCMP Final Letter of Disposition signed by RCMP Superintendent Robert Davis, District Commander, Greater Toronto Area. I listed his false statements under the heading False statements are underlined. I draw your attention to paragraph 4 with my commentary, which I have copied below

He emphasizes that despite the hundreds of pages of documentation involved in my complaint, the RCMP¶s sole mandate was to determine whether or not the members acted appropriately. He is suggesting there is a difference as to how the evidence is examined. The evidence provided to Sergeant Michael Thomson up to October 18 2007 when I met with Roy Steinebach is irrefutable to the Government Organized Crime of corruption and conspiracy even though he refused to take the evidence I brought to him that date he said he had access to the evidence that I had been sending to Sergeant Michael Thomson¶s e-mail address and I could continue to send evidence via the same method, which I did and is all relevant up to the date I filed the complaint with the commission November 8 2007. I presume he was instructed how to handle me before we met on October 7 2007, (Correction: October 18 2007 not October 7 2007) perhaps a note on the file. As far as Inspector Brian Verheul is concerned Superintendent Robert Davis states Inspector Verheul instructed Sergeant Thomson and to how to deal with the evidence and is therefore responsible for Sergeant Thomson¶s actions. Inspector Brian Verheul had plenty of time to confirm whether or not the evidence was relative to the Government Organized Crime of corruption and conspiracy. It is yet to be determined if Inspector Verheul acted on his own or« consulted with his superiors.) It is superfluous to just stick with the complaint I filed November 8 2007 against Sergeant Roy Steinebach and Inspector Brian Verheul. They have some splainin to do as does Superintendent Robert Davis that will inevitably lead to their superiors. I complained of Government corruption and conspiracy and they refused to investigate, and when Staff Sergeant R.B.MacAdam investigated the evidence thorough and thoughtful when forming conclusions 243

based on the relevant evidence, in order to determine which was relevant he had to be thorough and thoughtful as he stated he was. That remains to be seen but Superintendent Robert Davis¶s report is self- evident he is not. I reiterate all police have a responsibility to be consistent with the Police Services Act and the Constitution conducive to every individual¶s guaranteed Charter rights of equal protection and benefits and it is each person¶s superior that is responsible to see that they are competent responsible and irreproachable with fortitude and conviction to every individual as guaranteed with particular attention to victims, attentive to any flaws in the system that should be addressed to prevent such reoccurrences to some other individual. Police Services Act R.S.O. 1990, CHAPTER P.15 PoliceServicesAct.doc Declaration of principles 1. Police services shall be provided throughout Ontario in accordance with the following principles: 1. The need to ensure the safety and security of all persons and property in Ontario. 2. The importance of safeguarding the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Human Rights Code. The need for co-operation between the providers of police services and the communities they serve. 4. The importance of respect for victims of crime and understanding of their needs. Obviously Inspector Robert Davis has insulted my intelligence and demonstrated his incompetence for success as either the bad or good guy. You will see in many of my writings I presumed the RCMP Commissioner William Elliot had been consulted and it was he who actually is behind the refusal to investigate along with Minister of Public Safety and so on right up to the DOJ and higher. *********************************************************************************** Inspector Robert Davis emphasizes that despite the hundreds of pages of documentation involved in my complaint, the RCMP¶s sole mandate was to determine whether or not the members acted appropriately, and I have made it quite clear the RCMP have refused to investigate Government Organized Crime of corruption and conspiracy with irrefutable evidence published on my web sites which they were required to study to determine if the evidence was valid. In Staff Sergeant R.B.MacAdam¶s interim report of May 20 2008 he states he studied the evidence in a manner he felt was thorough and thoughtful when forming conclusions based on the relevant evidence After careful consideration of the details surrounding my complaint, Inspector Robert Davis finds no evidence that indicates that Sergeant Steinebach or Inspector Verheul acted improperly and furthermore he supports Inspector Verheul¶s directives, given the nature of the file and the documentation being provided. I never believed at any time they were doing anything other than following orders of their superiors and with that thought in mind they did not act improperly obeying their superiors. However, with Staff Sergeant R.B. MacAdam spending 8 months on studying the evidence thoroughly and thoughtfully before forming his conclusions in his report and Inspector Robert Davis with careful consideration of the details surrounding my complaint«.of government organized crime of corruption and conspiracy which the evidence irrefutably proves his Final Letter of Disposition deliberately ignores the 244

valid irrefutable evidence and consistent with the modus of operandi of the conspirators as irrefutably documented the Inspector once again attempts to divert the issues irrefutably proving he refuses to investigate the Government Organized Crime of corruption and conspiracy that the evidence they studied irrefutably attests to. So as to remove any doubt as to the fact that it was not the 2 RCMP members I named as refusing to investigate the Government Organized Crime of corruption and conspiracy and they were only acting on orders from their superiors who were really behind the refusal to investigate the Government Organized Crime of corruption and conspiracy and in fact are major players in the conspiracy I draw your attention to the CDF ±Bugs web site http://groups.google.com/group/cdf-bugs-charter-democracy-force-bares-ultimategovernment-scam

On September 15 2008 I have clearly requested Inspector Robert Davis along with the RCMP Commissioner William Elliot and RCMP Inspector Pierre Leduc to study the evidence they are already familiar with for the purpose of charging the major player in the Ontario Government Organized Crime of corruption and conspiracy, Ontario Attorney General Chris Bentley as the evidence irrefutably proves. They can not attempt to try their BENEVOLENCE, RIGHTEOUSNESS and MORALITY ploy again suggesting the RCMP¶s sole mandate was to determine anything other than the validity of the evidence on my web sites that irrefutably proves Government Organized Crime of corruption and conspiracy. They have not responded to me as of this 26th day of September 2008 for obvious reason they are well aware of the conspiracy being major players. This is pertinent evident to my RequestReviewofComplaintSeptember232008(datecorrectionSeptember252008.doc) published on the RCMP Final Letter of Disposition web site http://groups.google.com/group/rcmp-final-letter-of-disposition where all evidence published and referenced on that site is pertinent. It would be futile and a further waste of taxpayer¶s money for me to file a new complaint with the Commission for Public Complaints against the RCMP providing all the pertinent evidence you are required to study now under the original complaints File No. PC-2007-2316 and File No. PC-2007-2317, which would only conclude with more evidence of their refusal to investigate Government Organized Crime of corruption and conspiracy because they are irrefutably major players and the success of the Government conspiracy could simply not have happened without their cooperation. It would be incomprehensible for you to study the evidence and not grant my Request Review of Complaint following my directions stated therein to go through the formalities to prove what the evidence has already irrefutably proven. The fact is even a Review is a waste of your time, mine, and the taxpayer¶s money when ultimately a PUBLIC INQUIRY is warranted. I remind you that there is no government department or agency hat has been provided a mandate that specifically authorizes them to eradicate Government Organized Crime of corruption and conspiracy simply because the conspirators issue the mandates.

245

I also remind you that there is no government department or agency hat has been provided a mandate that specifically does not authorize them to eradicate Government Organized Crime of corruption and conspiracy

The following was extracted from the Law Society of Upper Canada Lawyers Rules of Conduct. (103) Interpretation (f) rules of professional conduct cannot address every situation, and a lawyer should observe the rules in the spirit as well as in the letter. 52. (1) The Constitution of Canada is the supreme law of Canada, and any law that is inconsistent with the provisions of the Constitution is, to the extent of the inconsistency, of no force or effect. 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. How could anyone interpret his or her mandate to be anything less than consistent with the Constitution conducive to every individual¶s guaranteed Charter rights of equal protection and benefits? The conspirators are obviously adverse to ³The Spirit of the Law´ When one is adept to moral thought and reason consistent with ³The Spirit of the Law´ they are alert to the fact that personnel financed by the people to protect them as guaranteed must be competent responsible irreproachable with fortitude and conviction to structure a legal system that is competent responsible irreproachable with fortitude and conviction to ensure all personnel are competent responsible irreproachable with fortitude and conviction. The RCMP Final Letter of Disposition is self ± evident that the RCMP upper echelon is not the prerequisite competent responsible irreproachable people with fortitude and conviction to protect every individual as guaranteed. Clearly the 2 part Law Society of Upper Canada document they studied irrefutably proves the Law Society is not staffed with the prerequisite competent responsible irreproachable people with fortitude and conviction to protect every individual as guaranteed. Clearly their members holding every position of authority in the entire legal system are not the prerequisite competent responsible irreproachable people with fortitude and conviction to protect every individual as guaranteed, having been provided all the evidence published on my web sites which includes the 2 part Law Society of Upper Canada document which they have obviously not seen anything wrong with their absurd adverse inconsistency with ³The Spirit of the Law´. Just as obvious as the fact they are all members of the Law Society is the fact they are in the business for luxurious lifestyle taking advantage of their humongous opportunity to ransack society masquerading as the prerequisite competent responsible irreproachable people with fortitude and conviction to protect every individual as guaranteed, when decidedly they are not as the evidence irrefutably proves and everything they do is purposely to obstruct justice from eradicating them. It is obvious that the individual does not have the wherewithal to deal with them, nor does any one department or agency that look for advice from the Ontario Attorney General whose responsibility is to advise them consistent with the constitution as ³guardian of the public interest´ 246

Those of you who have been advised by the Attorney General inconsistent with the Constitution not conducive to every individual¶s guaranteed Charter rights must reflect on their adeptness to moral thought and reason consistent with ³The Spirit of the Law´ and their competence to serve the Constitution and its people. Reality is the truth impervious to perception yet precisely due to perception Given the irrefutable evidence it is imperative for every one of you financed in the legal system to protect every individual as guaranteed by the Charter to reflect on the part you have played to obstruct an individuals plea for justice consistent with the Constitution. You hold major evidence as to who advised you and of course we all know the ³Roles and Responsibilities of the Attorney General´ is self-evident. Reality attests to everything pertinent to these issues as is the necessity to be mentally strong as an individual to stand up for the people seemingly alone with the world on your shoulders a reality no person would expect of another. But that is not the case because once that person exposes the truth of the Government Organized Crime of corruption and conspiracy to the pubic the majority of Canadian individuals will be immediately standing there side by side with that person of strength of integrity and conviction along with the Constitution, the supremacy of God and the irrefutable evidence of the Charter Democracy Force. Who of you has half the guts of our Armed Forces personnel to come forward and stand up for the democracy of Canada and the guaranteed Charter rights of every individual? On receipt of this document your actions will be self-evident. Frank Gallagher Manager Charter Democracy Force Cc AAAAAALIST October 7 2008 Reviews Commission for Public Complaints Against RCMP reviews@cpc-cpp.gc.ca Re: File Nos. PC-2007-2316 & PC-2007-2317 Government Organized Crime Corruption and Conspiracy www.cdf.name

Dear Reviews Your letter by Canada Post dated September 24 2008 states you have requested the RCMP to forward you the pertinent evidence pursuant to my request where urgency is of the essence to ensure there is no time for the RCMP and other conspirators to manipulate the evidence.

247

I am most concerned that you should now have secured a copy of RCMP Staff Sergeant R.B. MacAdam¶s report who was assigned by the office of the RCMP Commissioner to investigate my complaint. The Staff Sergeant spent 8 months studying the evidence and it is germane to the complaint as to his competence to review the evidence consistent with the Constitution in support of every individual¶s guaranteed Charter rights. As the evidence on the Charter Democracy Force web sites irrefutably proves the entire government modus operandi is consistent with that of the Law Society of Upper Canada, which has been documented and published as the 2 part Law Society of Upper Canada document. In this document they clearly state or imply their members are not required to give a damn about the individual¶s guaranteed Charter rights nor is evidence relevant to their decisions when it is against their members. The ³Roles and Responsibilities of the Attorney General´ published on the Ontario web site clearly states he is responsible as the ³guardian of the public interest´ and the ³guardian of the rule of law´ to protect every individual and society as a whole and yet he has been provided the 2 part Law Society of Upper Canada document along with a preponderance of other evidence which he has refused to deal with consistent with the Constitution conducive to the support of every individual¶s guaranteed Charter rights. He is the advisor of all Cabinet Ministers, government departments and agencies who have all refused to deal with these most serious issues and I expect no different from your Reviews office consistent with the conspiracy. You have more than just the responsibility to study the evidence published on the webs sites to coherency to determine if the RCMP have acted appropriately conducive to the protection of every individual as guaranteed by the Charter as it imperative that you demonstrate due diligence to the support of every individual¶s guaranteed Charter rights particularly since the evidence highly suggests you will not be cooperative with me as it is impossible to do so and remain consistent with the conspiracy. Once again the evidence published on the Charter Democracy Force web site irrefutably proves the conspiracy and all government personnel who have responded to the evidence have had precisely the same evidence to review and their responses or no responses is self ± evident they are not competent responsible and irreproachable with fortitude and conviction to the Constitution conducive to every individual¶s guaranteed Charter rights, however they have all been consistent with the conspiracy conducive to its success. The evidence clearly shows due diligence to the conspiracy clearly orchestrated from the office of the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada and the office of the Ontario Attorney General regarding the issues I have presented relative to incidents that occurred in Ontario. The RCMP Superintendent¶s Final Letter of Disposition dated September 3 2008, less than 2 pages of context is incomprehensible clearly demonstrating that he is not competent responsible and irreproachable with fortitude and conviction consistent with the Constitution conducive to every individual¶s guaranteed Charter rights however it irrefutably proves he is consistent with the conspiracy. On the other hand the evidence published on the Charter Democracy Force web site attests that I have been competent responsible irreproachable with fortitude and conviction consistent with the Constitution conducive to every individual¶s guaranteed Charter rights where we comprehend the significance of 248

evidence and the necessity of its acquisition to support allegations and have applied every effort to obtaining pertinent evidence to ensure the truth, the whole truth is being provided for all to see and act appropriately. To maintain our consistency to the Constitution conducive to every individual¶s guaranteed Charter rights and our attentiveness to competent responsible and irreproachable approach with fortitude and conviction we request confirmation you are now in receipt of the pertinent evidence requested from the RCMP with relative information confirming the date that you received it. Consistent with democracy and equality guaranteed by the Charter I request a copy of the evidence acquired from the RCMP relative to my complaint where I am particularly interested in the contents of RCMP Staff Sergeant R.B. MacAdam¶s report after 8 months of studying the pertinent evidence. Reality is the truth impervious to perception yet precisely due to perception It is imperative that we know whether or not his perception of what he was to accomplish is consistent with the Constitution conducive to every individual¶s guaranteed Charter rights or not. If you do not comprehend this then your perception is not adept to these most serious issues. I remind you that laws, policies, procedures and normal routines set out by the conspirators are of no force or effect as to their inconsistencies with the Constitution 52. (1) The Constitution of Canada is the supreme law of Canada, and any law that is inconsistent with the provisions of the Constitution is, to the extent of the inconsistency, of no force or effect. I request you consider wisely before you make a decision not to cooperate with me consistent with the Constitution conducive to every individual¶s guaranteed Charter rights. I request immediate acknowledgement of receipt of this document ³RequestReviewsProvideEvidenceOctober72008´ published on the RCMP Final Letter of Disposition´ web site under heading ³Reviews Correspondence´ I also request immediate confirmation as to whether or not you are in now in possession of the evidence requested from the RCMP and whether or not you intend to immediately forward the requested evidence to me. Thank you Frank Gallagher Manager Charter Democracy Force PS It is imperative you and everyone understands the present financial crisis cannot be dealt with appropriately by the conspirators that caused it who will invariably be attentive to the preservation of their own asses and their own financial well being, as always humongously detrimental to the safety and wellbeing of the individual and society as a whole. They must be exposed and appropriate action taken to ensure competent responsible people with fortitude and conviction to the Constitution and our Charter rights are provided the authority to lead us out of the financial crisis hugely detrimental to world peace and the well being of the world populace. 249

Public Inquiry warranted and demanded
Only the conspirators will object and thereby thrust themselves upon their own swords This was well worth the wait, but unfortunately society has paid far too much for the pleasure and cannot afford to wait any longer. September 26 2008 Expediency is of the essence

www.cdf.name

PUBLIC INQUIRY

NOW!!!!

The unscrupulous Government members of the Law Societies and their unscrupulous counterpart¶s world wide are responsible for present reality as certain as always as history attests where:

Reality is the truth impervious to perception yet precisely due to perception
Their insatiable quest for wealth and power in cooperation with the affluent and influential and multinational corporate conglomerates have manipulated the markets indifferent to the safety and wellbeing of the people of the Lower Tiers and now when their manipulations are back firing on them, they who have been ransacking us to poverty reveal they have always had the money to deal with poverty and prove their indifference to poverty by now pulling out the money to save their asses. They are only coherent to poverty when it nears them and justice will be learned the hard way. Can we trust the people who have been irrefutably proven to be unscrupulous back stabbing cancers upon society to act responsibility all of a sudden for Society or will they use their BENEVOLENCE, RIGHTEOUSNESS and MORALITY ploy to keep their unscrupulous Law Societies luxuriously secure and us in poverty to the bitter end? Quite a responsibility for the Chair of their Commission. Such a serious issue belongs to the democratic moral majority

250

January 1 2009 Continued in BLACK BOOK II (2) The RCMP Connection Part 2 Compiled RCMP Correspondence November 9 2007 up to September 3 2008

Continued in BLACK BOOK III The Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP Connection Note: Andree Leduc has not responded since his letter of December 20 2007 attempting to distance himself from the Government conspiracy or«as I suspect the powers that be have gotten to him REVIEWS Complaints against the RCMP Note: S.Smitt has not responded since September 24 2008 and I suspect the powers that be are in control.

Due the humongously serious nature of the issues I highly suggest you make copies of the BLACK BOOK series before the Government Organized Crime syndicate removes it from the web. This is history in the making and you can play a major role

This is copyright © material « See www.URus.ca for restrictions « For Personal Use Only in ³The Spirit of the Law´ and the spirit of URus Charter Democracy Force ROP«one and the same

251

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful