Kevin Bradley GERMAN

10116 105 Ave

Edmonton, Alberta
T5H 0K2

August 7, 2007

Ms Barbara J. Stratton
Bennett Jones LLP
1000 ATCO Centre
10035 105th Avenue
Edmonton, Alberta
T5J 3T2

Dear Ms Stratton:

Re: The “Classroom Bubbles” Exhibit

In case you haven’t had the chance to review the DVD in any detail, there’s a page
dedicated to the “Classroom Bubbles” exhibit and numerous examples in the
FACSWeb media (such as “To Sir with Love” for Dr. Bland’s inclusion of the “Critique
of Pure Reason” in his Affidavit).

For the record, to support the fax barrage prepping the CAT:

This follows on the “Interface Design” e-

mail of mid ’02, and uses the contested
TC References as an exhibit to show
how the logic broke down over time,
plus the use of technology to correct the
contested perceptions.

Restated, the theory rests on the

concept that “truth” is a relative term…
investigators know that even
eyewitnesses for an accident will often
report wildly divergent versions of the
“facts” and this is where the weight of
evidence and a solid forensic record
(such as a cockpit voice recorder or
photo RADAR) comes into play.

The cylinders in the graphic are the flowchart representation for a data store and the
idea is to use the theory to correct the misperceptions so that there is only one teacher
(with valid information) and an arbitrary number of students. The logical interface
 -2-

would be formed by effective instructional techniques unique to each student and

data-on-demand (via the eSnips portal and FACSWeb DVD).

In the “Goss” transcripts, for instance, the Barrs

state that “he was working with FACS”, “his
meds were helping when he takes them” and “he
has made violent threats in the past” when the
record shows these assertions to be fabricated
and untried for FACS’ Cutis Woods.

Add to the record “he is stalking the cadets”, “he

sent letters to the Barrs’ children” and “the civil
action hasn’t gone anywhere” for Maj. Barr and
the POPIK investigation.

The terms of the “Goss” decision then glossed

over these errors and led to the MacKay decision
of 18 Dec ’06, on appeal as an “Abuse of
Process” and Charter Challenge (as the end effect is to bury the effect of the “Consent
Order” and unfairly subvert the medical appeal process on “hearsay” testimony).

Toward this end, the QB Action and CAT has, at the time of writing, a series of
“Written Interrogatories” and the purpose of these are to update the data store of the
“teacher” (the appellant & Case Presentation Officer) and the results, for the CAT, will
correct the fabricated facts with the credibility of the underlying opinions, rebutting the
diagnostic criteria and restoring employability as well.

You might know that the “Strike Hornet” applets are a visual metaphor to map the
displays to discrete URLs for each of the three CDIs and across the client/solicitor
relationship, so each of the “data stores” is a functional unit that could be anything
available on the Internet... and the combat term for this is “situational awareness”
(mapping to the words “insight into his condition” that runs as a recurring theme for
Drs. Singh, Elwell, Woods and Bland).

The end result is to understand in hindsight where the record broke down over time,
and use the “lessons learned” to address these interpersonal process boundaries in a
manner unique to the needs of each “student” as a discrete logical boundary and have
everybody reaching a consensus for the record.

From Steven Covey’s Seven Habits: “Begin with the End in Mind”, "Seek First to
Understand, Then to be Understood", “Think Win/Win” and “Synergize”.

The “Distorted Content” is the issue (plus the battle of duelling egos) but for the sake
of the show:

Examples that can be mapped out from FACS’ record and into the exhibit would be:
 -3-

The Record

Dr. Bach:

The record: In Canada 2002, there is “Big Mother" and "TerrySpeak."

The facts: The term is TerriLogic, the equivalent of Orwell’s “Big Brother” and
“Doublespeak”. (See the “Help Please” email of late ’01 for more on that term.)

Dr. Singh:

The record: “He can instruct counsel as well as follow the evidence.”

The facts: The instruction to counsel was that discussion of the medical issue “cannot
be allowed to happen at all, period”, the CHAP is the evidence and therefore, “we
need to deal with the CIC” (all of which was negated by the Elwell Report).

Dr. Elwell:

The record: “His family projects thoughts into his head”. (This sounds like mind-
control on their part and mental illness on mine.)

The facts: “They insert their opinions like a cassette tape.” (Overbearing passive
misrepresentation and manipulation of the medical record; see “Insight on What’s
Happening” of 18 Dec ’01 and the “Goss” transcripts [entered without representation].)

Dr. Woods:

The record: “He sought psychiatric treatment as a requirement of the Courts”.

The facts: There was only a need for matters before the Courts, addressing the
appeal and the “off meds” stunt (professional misconduct) for Cst Poirier. This
unwarranted “treatment” led to the “Details for Damages” suffered by the battery.

Dr. Bland:

The record: “He was terminated in 1999 for being unfit for further service”.

The facts: The release was as a result of not meeting the Course Training Standard
and could have been easily appealed. This was the second “grounding” due to the
‘ex, her Cadets and the shrinks… and the third grounding launches the Civil Action.

Sincerely,

Kevin B. German, Plaintiff