I have put more then $10,000 dollars in to the injustice sent January 2007>. my life have ben delayed and destroy ?break down:,Ruin:kill a Animal < why .>
Friday, November 30, 2007
IMG_0024.JPG at lawyers office for a week
I have put more then $10,000 dollars in to the injustice sent January 2007>. my life have ben delayed and destroy ?break down:,Ruin:kill a Animal < why .>
Back up court.
the Government took away my plain Emploryment for sure by May 1997, Russell after 8 year to get to trial, paid me $2,726.Dollars ? i loss 9 building lotsThe Government Paid Fredericton Appraisal $5,000.Dollars to warnted this payment. ,you your self can see what going on with your tax dollars by going to canlii.org search word like "expropriation"
Thursday, November 29, 2007
Raped in a differn way ? Investagation of the system
Nfld Chief Judge Hickman Raped 11 Year Old Girl For Election win
From: GrandBankHidRapeKid
Subscribe Unsubscribe Joined: 2 weeks ago
Videos: 11
About This Video A 11 Year OLD girl raped repeatedly By A Judge ... (more)
Added: November 13, 2007
A 11 Year OLD girl raped repeatedly By A Judge Hickman who made the child have a baby we want the DNA and I am are not going away
Grand Bank Nfld Across From St Pierre et miquelon
Chief Justice Hickman of
Nfld supreme court Raped A 11 year
Old Girl For His Election gift at
,The Loyal orange Lodge
Hid Judges
Rape Of 11 year Old Girl
Grand Bank NewFoundLand A samll
town on the South west coast of
Newfoundland next to
St pierre et Miquelon
This Family was abused and prosecuted
By the whole town of Grand Bank Nfld
For Reporting The abuse and incest in
his family to the Authority doctors
rcmp every body , The Kids were sold for
anythings booze ,pills ,food ,clothing,
anything to neighbors ,friend ,business people
around town and the Minister of justice made the
11 year old kid pregnant we need the DNA And will
not give up until this is dealt with the kid has
no reason to lie .3 sisters one other brother
reported the rapes to the rcmp repeatedly nothing
was hear ever ,after each time The Chief Justice of Nfld supreme court Raped A
11 year old girl ,Repeatedly Raped A kid ,
impregnated her And Danny Williams still hiding it
from Non Government Newfoundland. Chief Justice Hickman of
Nfld supreme court Raped A 11 year
Old Girl For His Election gift at
,The Loyal orange Lodge ,
during the winning election
party Just after lunch time,
Les Douglas Was on the door
and keeped
her 13 year old Brother out
and wouldn,t allow him in but let
the little 11 year old sister in
10 mins later the newly elected Chief
Justices minster Hickman went opstairs
with the child ,the 13 year old brother
was stopped again by Les Douglas of grand
bank Nfld who told her 13 year old Brother to
get Out Of here you little Bastard and Mr Douglas
closed the door Stopping the kid from yelling to
his sister to come with him.
His Mother Got A blind person pension To
let chief justice hickman have his
election gift rape of a child ,His Mother Was Holding
the 11 year old childs arms while Chief Justice Hickman of
Nfld supreme court Raped A 11 year
Old Girl For His Election gift his mother
continued to drive every day with a blind
persons pension that was a gift for the rape
the 11 year old kid got pregnant that day.
Byron Prior's 40-year struggle to bring to justice high level political and legal figures in Newfoundland, Canada, who sexually abused his family.
Country: Canada Judge Hickman
Interests and Hobbies: as a country we have to put a end to Byron Prior's 40-year struggle with newfoundland government pedigree that has infested the province for ever this will end we are setting up a network to report the governments dirty secrets we will leave no family pedigree untouched the government of that place are Freemasons to the death thats the way it will be (less)
Added: November 13, 2007
Category: Education
Tags: Newfoundland Is Hiding The Rape Of Child By Chief Supreme Court Judge Hickman At Orange Masonic Hall In Grand Bank
URL
From: GrandBankHidRapeKid
Subscribe Unsubscribe Joined: 2 weeks ago
Videos: 11
About This Video A 11 Year OLD girl raped repeatedly By A Judge ... (more)
Added: November 13, 2007
A 11 Year OLD girl raped repeatedly By A Judge Hickman who made the child have a baby we want the DNA and I am are not going away
Grand Bank Nfld Across From St Pierre et miquelon
Chief Justice Hickman of
Nfld supreme court Raped A 11 year
Old Girl For His Election gift at
,The Loyal orange Lodge
Hid Judges
Rape Of 11 year Old Girl
Grand Bank NewFoundLand A samll
town on the South west coast of
Newfoundland next to
St pierre et Miquelon
This Family was abused and prosecuted
By the whole town of Grand Bank Nfld
For Reporting The abuse and incest in
his family to the Authority doctors
rcmp every body , The Kids were sold for
anythings booze ,pills ,food ,clothing,
anything to neighbors ,friend ,business people
around town and the Minister of justice made the
11 year old kid pregnant we need the DNA And will
not give up until this is dealt with the kid has
no reason to lie .3 sisters one other brother
reported the rapes to the rcmp repeatedly nothing
was hear ever ,after each time The Chief Justice of Nfld supreme court Raped A
11 year old girl ,Repeatedly Raped A kid ,
impregnated her And Danny Williams still hiding it
from Non Government Newfoundland. Chief Justice Hickman of
Nfld supreme court Raped A 11 year
Old Girl For His Election gift at
,The Loyal orange Lodge ,
during the winning election
party Just after lunch time,
Les Douglas Was on the door
and keeped
her 13 year old Brother out
and wouldn,t allow him in but let
the little 11 year old sister in
10 mins later the newly elected Chief
Justices minster Hickman went opstairs
with the child ,the 13 year old brother
was stopped again by Les Douglas of grand
bank Nfld who told her 13 year old Brother to
get Out Of here you little Bastard and Mr Douglas
closed the door Stopping the kid from yelling to
his sister to come with him.
His Mother Got A blind person pension To
let chief justice hickman have his
election gift rape of a child ,His Mother Was Holding
the 11 year old childs arms while Chief Justice Hickman of
Nfld supreme court Raped A 11 year
Old Girl For His Election gift his mother
continued to drive every day with a blind
persons pension that was a gift for the rape
the 11 year old kid got pregnant that day.
Byron Prior's 40-year struggle to bring to justice high level political and legal figures in Newfoundland, Canada, who sexually abused his family.
Country: Canada Judge Hickman
Interests and Hobbies: as a country we have to put a end to Byron Prior's 40-year struggle with newfoundland government pedigree that has infested the province for ever this will end we are setting up a network to report the governments dirty secrets we will leave no family pedigree untouched the government of that place are Freemasons to the death thats the way it will be (less)
Added: November 13, 2007
Category: Education
Tags: Newfoundland Is Hiding The Rape Of Child By Chief Supreme Court Judge Hickman At Orange Masonic Hall In Grand Bank
URL
Patterson Law - Douglas A. Caldwell, Q.C.
http://www.pattersonlaw.ca/lawyer.cfm?id=118 to day is my last day to get my appeal Government takes land for many reasons - from widening roads to constructing water and sewage plants to building new highways. Usually, government representatives will negotiate with a landowner before the power to forcibly take land is exercised. deep- Pocketing Lawyer in Expropriation it better to give your property away then to fight,
Judge David Russell.what is his Job.
David Russell Judge DO you think there a problem here.lol
[56] go to canlii.org
Mr. Carter correctly utilized the Direct Comparison Approach and correctly analyzed available market data. Approximately 86.5% of the parent lot remains for future development with substantial access to the Broad Road. I conclude the value placed on the expropriated portion of the parent lot by Mr. Carter is appropriate as is his finding there was no injurious affection. The value of the H.A.R. lands taken is, therefore, $2726.00.
Caldwell ,Goodwin ,Carter, Association and gang
I Richard Harris file Complaint on Mr.Malcolm J. Carter,AACI,FRI,CMR.I also File a Complaint on Harrison W.Goodwin also AACI,BBA,CMR.on November 8,2000.Why, Because I was told and lead to believe if both of these Experts reports band by New Brunswick Association of real Estate Appaisers, ? I would not need a Expert to go forward with my claim of Expropriation of my property. Now after April 4,2000,after us having a meeting with D.O.T head People,such as AACI John S.Raymond, Jennifer Logan, Les Smith Wife. I knew by this time the Government realty had no reports with AACI Carter.I had Mr. Goodwin flaw draft Report, that I did not know what he was doing . Tacking 2,legal survey lots,and part of the back parcel and saying the market vale is $5,300.00 for both Lots and the back part.? Why would anyone take 2 survey lots and turn property in one Parcel and give it to the government for $5,300.00? Now I find this out after, he Goodwin already have taken $21,000.00 dollars from me. Now who was he Working for,? Why was the New Brunswick Association of Real Estate Appraisers was incorpoated on January 1,1995. ! I Think Because the Government knew the Highway was on the way,a way to Expropriation of people Property and control what they will paid. A way to give the Taxpayer Money away to the connected people to deprived Property owner. To delay property owner from moving on with life.a way to make then give up on there property right to fair value. Head person of N.B.Asscoiation is Les Smith. He and Doucet , was both part owner of Hardly Appaisers.ltd
This is some one else run in with the Association ???
She was not familiar with the Levesque case but assured me if I filed a complaint with the association, it would be handled properly.
On December 17,1999, I phoned Gerry McCoombs, then President of the NBAREA at his office in Fredericton. I explained my concerns to him regarding the Gerard Levesque complaint and he also assured me that should I file a complaint, it would be dealt with properly.
Based on assurances given, on January 6,2000, I forwarded a comprehensive and very serious complaint to the NBAREA against Mr.Daniel Doucet.
On May 3,2000, I telephoned the NBAREA seeking information on the status of my complaint. I was alarmed to be told that no action had been taken by the NBAREA to secure Mr.Doucet's files so that he could not alter or destroy them. I sent a letter to the NBAREA on May 4,2000, expressing my concerns (NBAREA-4).
On May 8,2000, in response of a request for information, the NBAREA advised that Herman Koops had been made chairperson of the Complaints Committee.
I sent a further letter to the NBAREA on May 11,2000, pointing out their obligations (NBAREA-5).
On August 11,2000, the NBAREA sent me a letter giving the decision reached by their Complaints Committee (NBAREA-6). In that letter they stated that since the matter had been to court and the Judge had said nothing in his decision to suggest any impropriety or lack of competence on the part of Mr.Doucet, therefore Mr.Doucet had done nothing wrong. This was nothing more than a lame excuse by the NBAREA to try and avoid dealing with my complaint. Many Judges are not experts in real estate valuation and appraisal practices and procedures and they must rely on expert witnesses for guidance in such matters. In this case, the Judge had a great deal of difficulty in understanding the testimony and his decision in no way indicated that Mr.Doucet had done nothing wrong. The NBAREA seems to think it is OK for an appraiser to do whatever he thinks he can get away with. The fact is Mr.Doucet had presented the Court with an appraisal which was not done in accordance to the required USPAP standards or the AIC Code of Ethics as he claimed it was. As was pointed out in my complaint, had Mr.Doucet applied proper adjustments to his data as is required by USPAP, then the value of my property he would have arrived at would have been slightly greater than that of my own appraiser.
In the final paragraph of their August 11,2000 letter, the NBAREA states: "It is not the function of the Association under its disciplinary powers to deal with disputes as to property value. This has to be dealt with by the Court as required by the Expropriation Act". This is a correct statement, the Courts set the property value based on evidence presented. The paragraph goes on to state that:"Under the New Brunswick Association of Real Estate Appraisers Act the Association only has jurisdiction to investigate and consider issues of professional misconduct and incompetence on the part of its members". Again, this statement is correct, it is the responsibility of the NBAREA to enforce professional standards and the AIC Code of Ethics. This is all I have requested them to do and they have refused to do that. My complaint was comprehensive and very detailed and showed numerous infractions of the USPAP standards and the AIC Code of Ethics on the part of Mr.Doucet. If the points raised in my complaint were not valid, then I'm sure the complaints committee would have gone over them, one by one, and pointed out the reasons for rejecting them. Since they chose instead to use a lame excuse for not dealing with them, it can be assumed that the complaints were valid and the objective of the Complaints Committee was to cover up for Mr.Doucet.
On August 18,2000, I sent a letter to the NBAREA requesting that the Board of Directors review the decision of their Complaints Committee (NBAREA-7).
On November 20,2000, I sent a further letter to the NBAREA, (NBAREA-8) which outlined my concerns of conflicts-of-interest which I considered many of the Board of Directors had in dealing with my complaint. At some point in time, Mr.D.Thibideau, then President of the NBAREA and an employee of the NB Department of Supply and Services, did resign his Office as President of the Association. It is not known if any other members of the Board declared their conflicts-of-interest and stepped aside from dealing with my complaint.
The Board of Directors of NBAREA were no doubt very aware of the fact that Mr.Doucet had done a large number of appraisals for the Provincial Government. Because of the seriousness of my complaint, had they ruled against him, they would have had to revoke his accreditation. This would have called into question the validity of all the appraisals he had done for the Government and could have potentially cost the Government millions of dollars. It is thus not difficult to understand why the Board of Directors, which was controlled by Government employees was reluctant to rule against Mr.Doucet.
The Board of Directors of the NBAREA sent me their decision of my appeal on December 19,2000 (NBAREA-9) which stated that they agreed with the decision of the Complaints Committee. The letter was signed by Andrew Leech as President of the Association.
Under the Act establishing the NBAREA, section 9(1) states that there shall be a Board of Directors of the Association consisting of (a) the president, past president, vice-president, secretary, and treasurer, and.....
Section 10(2) of the Act states that in the event of a vacancy occurring on the Board, except the office of President, the vacancy may be filled for the balance of the unexpired term as follows....
The Act specifically excludes filling the office of President for the balance of an unexpired term. It would therefore appear that it was not legal for Mr.Leech to complete the unexpired term of Mr.Thibideau who had resigned. Since the Board must have a President, then it was not legally constituted when it handed down its decision on my appeal.
As a self-regulating professional association, the NBAREA must deal with complaints it receives concerning members who do not do appraisals in accordance with USPAP standards and the AIC Code of Ethics as is required. When other self-regulating professional associations, such as the Barristers Society, receives a complaint against a member, they deal with it immediately. If the complaint is serious, they will go as far as to immediately suspend the member and have someone else take over their practice pending an investigation. They do not wait for a Court to find that the member was guilty of wrongdoing before taking action. It is the NBAREA's responsibility to investigate complaints and take action against appraisers who are guilty of malpractice.
Had the NBAREA been enforcing standards since its inception in 1994, then Mr.Doucet would have been required to prepare the appraisal he did on my property in accordance with the required standards. As it was, it appears that Mr.Doucet felt that he could take advantage of his influential position in the NBAREA and that he could get away with not doing appraisals to the required standards. As was shown in my complaint, had Mr.Doucet made proper adjustments to his data as is required by USPAP, then the value he arrived at for my property would have been slightly higher than that reached by my appraiser. Had that been the case, then it can be expected that it would have been possible to reach an agreement with the City on the value of my property back in 1995 and I would not have been forced to waste 6 ½ years of my life fighting for a proper settlement. During this time I have easily spent 50% of my time pursuing this matter which would otherwise been spent on more productive endeavors. I, therefore, feel I should be compensated for that time and for all the sleepless nights and mental distress caused by the NBAREA's failure to fulfill their obligations.
I Richard Harris had almost the same results.
I think it time for us people that gave up Property in Expropriation to start a class action on the Government,and the Association of the gang of this on going Crime in the Justice System. Do this for the young one for there Future.
This is some one else run in with the Association ???
She was not familiar with the Levesque case but assured me if I filed a complaint with the association, it would be handled properly.
On December 17,1999, I phoned Gerry McCoombs, then President of the NBAREA at his office in Fredericton. I explained my concerns to him regarding the Gerard Levesque complaint and he also assured me that should I file a complaint, it would be dealt with properly.
Based on assurances given, on January 6,2000, I forwarded a comprehensive and very serious complaint to the NBAREA against Mr.Daniel Doucet.
On May 3,2000, I telephoned the NBAREA seeking information on the status of my complaint. I was alarmed to be told that no action had been taken by the NBAREA to secure Mr.Doucet's files so that he could not alter or destroy them. I sent a letter to the NBAREA on May 4,2000, expressing my concerns (NBAREA-4).
On May 8,2000, in response of a request for information, the NBAREA advised that Herman Koops had been made chairperson of the Complaints Committee.
I sent a further letter to the NBAREA on May 11,2000, pointing out their obligations (NBAREA-5).
On August 11,2000, the NBAREA sent me a letter giving the decision reached by their Complaints Committee (NBAREA-6). In that letter they stated that since the matter had been to court and the Judge had said nothing in his decision to suggest any impropriety or lack of competence on the part of Mr.Doucet, therefore Mr.Doucet had done nothing wrong. This was nothing more than a lame excuse by the NBAREA to try and avoid dealing with my complaint. Many Judges are not experts in real estate valuation and appraisal practices and procedures and they must rely on expert witnesses for guidance in such matters. In this case, the Judge had a great deal of difficulty in understanding the testimony and his decision in no way indicated that Mr.Doucet had done nothing wrong. The NBAREA seems to think it is OK for an appraiser to do whatever he thinks he can get away with. The fact is Mr.Doucet had presented the Court with an appraisal which was not done in accordance to the required USPAP standards or the AIC Code of Ethics as he claimed it was. As was pointed out in my complaint, had Mr.Doucet applied proper adjustments to his data as is required by USPAP, then the value of my property he would have arrived at would have been slightly greater than that of my own appraiser.
In the final paragraph of their August 11,2000 letter, the NBAREA states: "It is not the function of the Association under its disciplinary powers to deal with disputes as to property value. This has to be dealt with by the Court as required by the Expropriation Act". This is a correct statement, the Courts set the property value based on evidence presented. The paragraph goes on to state that:"Under the New Brunswick Association of Real Estate Appraisers Act the Association only has jurisdiction to investigate and consider issues of professional misconduct and incompetence on the part of its members". Again, this statement is correct, it is the responsibility of the NBAREA to enforce professional standards and the AIC Code of Ethics. This is all I have requested them to do and they have refused to do that. My complaint was comprehensive and very detailed and showed numerous infractions of the USPAP standards and the AIC Code of Ethics on the part of Mr.Doucet. If the points raised in my complaint were not valid, then I'm sure the complaints committee would have gone over them, one by one, and pointed out the reasons for rejecting them. Since they chose instead to use a lame excuse for not dealing with them, it can be assumed that the complaints were valid and the objective of the Complaints Committee was to cover up for Mr.Doucet.
On August 18,2000, I sent a letter to the NBAREA requesting that the Board of Directors review the decision of their Complaints Committee (NBAREA-7).
On November 20,2000, I sent a further letter to the NBAREA, (NBAREA-8) which outlined my concerns of conflicts-of-interest which I considered many of the Board of Directors had in dealing with my complaint. At some point in time, Mr.D.Thibideau, then President of the NBAREA and an employee of the NB Department of Supply and Services, did resign his Office as President of the Association. It is not known if any other members of the Board declared their conflicts-of-interest and stepped aside from dealing with my complaint.
The Board of Directors of NBAREA were no doubt very aware of the fact that Mr.Doucet had done a large number of appraisals for the Provincial Government. Because of the seriousness of my complaint, had they ruled against him, they would have had to revoke his accreditation. This would have called into question the validity of all the appraisals he had done for the Government and could have potentially cost the Government millions of dollars. It is thus not difficult to understand why the Board of Directors, which was controlled by Government employees was reluctant to rule against Mr.Doucet.
The Board of Directors of the NBAREA sent me their decision of my appeal on December 19,2000 (NBAREA-9) which stated that they agreed with the decision of the Complaints Committee. The letter was signed by Andrew Leech as President of the Association.
Under the Act establishing the NBAREA, section 9(1) states that there shall be a Board of Directors of the Association consisting of (a) the president, past president, vice-president, secretary, and treasurer, and.....
Section 10(2) of the Act states that in the event of a vacancy occurring on the Board, except the office of President, the vacancy may be filled for the balance of the unexpired term as follows....
The Act specifically excludes filling the office of President for the balance of an unexpired term. It would therefore appear that it was not legal for Mr.Leech to complete the unexpired term of Mr.Thibideau who had resigned. Since the Board must have a President, then it was not legally constituted when it handed down its decision on my appeal.
As a self-regulating professional association, the NBAREA must deal with complaints it receives concerning members who do not do appraisals in accordance with USPAP standards and the AIC Code of Ethics as is required. When other self-regulating professional associations, such as the Barristers Society, receives a complaint against a member, they deal with it immediately. If the complaint is serious, they will go as far as to immediately suspend the member and have someone else take over their practice pending an investigation. They do not wait for a Court to find that the member was guilty of wrongdoing before taking action. It is the NBAREA's responsibility to investigate complaints and take action against appraisers who are guilty of malpractice.
Had the NBAREA been enforcing standards since its inception in 1994, then Mr.Doucet would have been required to prepare the appraisal he did on my property in accordance with the required standards. As it was, it appears that Mr.Doucet felt that he could take advantage of his influential position in the NBAREA and that he could get away with not doing appraisals to the required standards. As was shown in my complaint, had Mr.Doucet made proper adjustments to his data as is required by USPAP, then the value he arrived at for my property would have been slightly higher than that reached by my appraiser. Had that been the case, then it can be expected that it would have been possible to reach an agreement with the City on the value of my property back in 1995 and I would not have been forced to waste 6 ½ years of my life fighting for a proper settlement. During this time I have easily spent 50% of my time pursuing this matter which would otherwise been spent on more productive endeavors. I, therefore, feel I should be compensated for that time and for all the sleepless nights and mental distress caused by the NBAREA's failure to fulfill their obligations.
I Richard Harris had almost the same results.
I think it time for us people that gave up Property in Expropriation to start a class action on the Government,and the Association of the gang of this on going Crime in the Justice System. Do this for the young one for there Future.
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
Expropriation the ACT ? WoW
________________________________________
Date: Sun, 7 Oct 2007 14:25:41 -0700
From: oldmaison@yahoo.com
Subject: Your letter
To: injusticecoalition@hotmail.com
To Whom It May concern: Visit Length 31 minutes 53 secondsPage Views 16 Domain Name GNB.CA ? (Canada)IP Address 142.139.0.# (Province of New Brunswick)ISP Province of New BrunswickLocation
Continent : North America
Country : Canada (Facts)
State/Region : New Brunswick
City : Fredericton
On November 27/2007 views buy the Government ?
The main key of evidence in the matter on the files of Goodwin and the Appeal of Russell¢s Decision of June 3rd, 2005 that I believe will turn the matter into deliberate, illegal abuse.
The main issue is the matter of Judge Russell¢s decision on page 19.paragrafh 49,50,51,52,
Now to get the consent of what was going on with my Lawyers, Goodwin, DOT employee¢s and so on?
We have to start when the Public would know for the first time the routing of the highway was to change location.
1. There was a Discovery on September 11th and 12th of 2001, Now John Raymond will take undertaking to provide additional information in relation to the Public Meetings (the public meeting was December 11/1996.)
2. Now at this public meeting there was a rough drawing with a date on it 12/96.
3. I saw this Drawing for the first time on or about after February 13/1997.
4. I did not meet Heather Pugh until after this date that for sure. ( if D.O.T. did not have any survey work done until late February, 1997. then how could there be a drawing with survey line like drawing 82 on December 17,1996?
5. So does this not mean that Heather Pugh lied on the stand? ( perjury) Why would she do this? (She testified that she was promoted in D.O.T.)??? (maybe this is why)
6. See December 6th, 2001 and December 5th, 2001 (?John Raymond undertakeing )that I will not know about till December 20th, 2002. ? Why did Lawyer Eddy and Caldwell hold this information from myself until December 20/2002. ?
But I got Mr. Carter files on May, 30/2002?? (part of Raymond undertaking ),(But I know now there were files left out!
He turned a subdivision approach to vale on January 23/1998 to D.O.T. that was not in the files ,
I received from my so call lawyers, Caldwell and Eddy.
(I think Carter had a lot value on lots at $14,000.00 in this report that was turn in on January 23, 1998. ?
why did not Judge Russell ask in court on March 2005 to see this report of Mac Carter.??
(But this figure is way better then what Goodwin put on Property as, Market vale of $5,300.00 for the tacking of my Property.
(Now Goodwin took two survey lots and the H.A.R. property, and put it as one parcel
he quote a market value of $5,300. on the property.
now would any person in there right mind take two survey lots and change lots to raw property, to sale on the Market.
Now at this time, Rex Tucker set up a meeting with D.O.T.
For March-15, 2000. NOW at this time Goodwin was getting a black mail contract for me to sign before he would do any more work. ?
Goodwin wanted $70,000.00 gearted in this Contract, Government delay,and deep-pocketing taitic set up in 1995.
Mr Tucker sent 377,pages of E-mail to my now x ,lawyers Caldwell & John Logan,
(john Logan get a job in the Government March of 2001 .
Eddy come on the file , first Meeting with him he call up Goodwin , now he did this after i just told him i would get a new Appraiser to do a report. ( look at April 3-2001 Fax from Babineau.)
, now after he talk to Goodwin , he said that his draif report look like a good start , for a report. ?
why did he Call Goodwin. after i told him i was done with Goodwin.
7. Now here¢s a lie on paper, because on Thursday March 1st, 2007 .
I went to the Oromocto Town Hall and retained a Drawing with a date on it. ( of February 1997) First drawing that had survey line where the highway is on my Property .
• This drawing of February 1997 was use at the Second public meetings on the alignment Issue to relocate the highway from Smith subdivision.
To where it is today. (( comcrection on this issuse of the second meeting)
There was only one meeting to the public on December 11/1996.
(the Public would only learn that the alinement was to change on this date December 11/1996, (there was no Survey drawing untill February 1997,
Before this date the alinement was in a differn location.? or was it.
( because of what went on in 1995, ? (when i had a store for sale, ?
T.R.A. food.made a verble offer to buy all my Property for $250,000.00 in 1995. ?
Did they know about the Change in highway alinement back then, if so the Government has fraud Richard Harris out of his hold life.
( who will do a investation on the injustice tactic of rule of Court deep pocketing. ?
It not like the New Brunswick Judges don't
know what is going on with these property Expropriation cases. (see canlii.org)
(look what it is costing the Public for all these bureaucracy to justicefied there Job, and look what it cost the public when these people are the ones that could make a differn in the world we live in,???
( but insted of then geting penlize, ( we will give then there retirerment,
wow what a system. ? a reward for there Snding and lieing.
( I would like a investaition on these matter. ? how to hold these Bureaucracy accountable for there Decision, on a person life work,
That 11 year latter have no fucture left or dream to live any longer.
4. Undertaking of December 6th, 2001 said more or less the Second public meeting was on December 11th, 1996.
This was in Fact the First Meeting to the Public. The one and only Meeting.
Now on December 5th, 2001 undertaking as to pargraft two.
(Quote Attached is a copy of the plan (the Drawing with a date of 12/96) plan used at the December (11) 1996
Public Meeting showing the new or perpose Highway alignment.
(Now this drawing is not to scale to where the highway is now)
like to the drawing of February. Dated February 1997. with survey line.
The one I got a copy of Fred Hackett on March 1st, 2007.
Fact. now Heather Pugh did not have this drawing on December 17,1996. ( that for sure) Drawing date February 1997.?
when i travel to Oromocto on March 1/2007,at my own expences
I ask Fred Hackett for the Big drawing used at the plublic Meeting of december 11/1996, he told me he Could not find that one,
so i ask him ,when did the town know what the land requirement was by D.O.T. knowen to the town,
I gest this is why he gave me this drawing of February 1997.
5. Why is this so important? Because of a lie that was told in court by Heather Pugh that set the main Logistics for a decision by Judge Russell to paid me so little after 8 years of fighting?
If this memo was so important you would think it would have been brought up at one of the two Discoverys ? ?? or was Judge Russell June 3/2005 Decision made on December 17,1996,by Shelden Lee,and John Raymond. ? There is a paper trial that sure look like this in my Files,.The files that was only return to me this year in June of 2007,. this was to late to ward of 2 court sessions, one on february 12/07,the other on the Goodwin matter on February 26/07. now this month of November /07 there two more court sessions. more abuice to a person that ben deeppocketing from 1997.
why is the memo of Heather Pugh not brought up at
Discovery of 2001 or 2004 but I think why it was not is because of the Goodwin Matter (see page 90, on the Goodwin draft report. )
there 2. reports now, the first one that went to the complaint concomey of N.B.Association of Real Estate Appraisers ? Which has the power to levy fines and cost penalties. ( i received Goodwin defence on this one on Janruary of 2005, a few week before the Trial.?
now the Goodwin number 2, report that i only seen for the first time on March 3/2005. THIS report was used in his motion in court on February 26/2007, ? he was fired as far as i was comcerm on or about february 18,2000. I also received Goodwin defence on the Action i started in june 2004, is all of this just a queneses.??
so why did he do the number 2 report up. ? this report is also full of misleading fact, and ares in the figger, Not even addressing 10% of my losses on this Expropation of a person life work.
Now if this memo of Heather Pugh was to play such an important part in the Russell Decision ,.Nine years later. Then why was this document not on John S. Raymond affidavit of Documents list,
(form 31,B)Copy of this memo( SEE : Exhibit A-8 ) of Judge Russell paragraph 49 . See the Decision at Canlii.org
6. Exhibit A-8 memo. It said ? Copy of this memo went to John Raymond Assistant director, Copies to Mike Phillips,Copies to Brian McEwing and Colleen Brown.
Now with all these people having Copies,? you would think this memo that my Lawyers enter as Exhibit A-8 at trial.
you would have to think this memo would at least been on Raymond Documents list. ? why is Judge Russell letting this staking the Exhibit Documents. /? Why would he alowe this in court.(i think it got a lot to do with the Goodwin Matter, allso to do with the confick of Interence that the Frank Mckeen government set up to build this highway-for there buddy to take large amonts of Taxpayer money.
7. Questions, but look at page 90 of Goodwin report and you will see he knew of a memorandum that was faxed by Ross little, to Lonnie Forbes?
How would he know this? It looks like he talks to Lonnie forbs or Ross Little.
Now this work should be on his Detail billing.
( I will have to look for it now on March 6th, 2007)
When would I see any of the Governments Documents, two week before for Discovery of September 11th, of 2001?
On Goodwin detail invoice billing to Mr. Richard Harris. Date Entered: July 6th, 1999. On page 2. On or about March 2nd, 1999
Goodwin Quote (telephone Commission with Lonnie Forbes, N.B. Municipalities Culture and Housing Rural Planning Commission.
Now on March 2nd, 1999.and looking at Goodwin page 90 of the draft report, he quoted (a memorandum contained a note for the potential of the proposed highway to affect the RAH/HARCL land and also noted that RAH had been to the NBDOT Planning Office to see the plans for the new highway. ?? (why have he not got the time of this Meeting to see Plans.)
/
!!!!! fact there was no survey drawing of alinement untill late february 1997. Now this is a fact. after i talk to the Town of Oromocto develment offier Mr.Fred Hackett.
If Mr. Goodwin was looking out for my best interest in his report? ( you would think he would be putting a date on this so call meeting at NBDOT planning Office of me seeing the Plans of the new Highway,)?
So on or about March 19th, 1999. Goodwin was at my place getting eight Thousand more dollars from me, leading me on that his report was just about finished. It was worth around 4-to-6 hundred thousand, But Obviously he knew what was to take place in March of 2005 in Court. (The key to this whole matter is this none dated Drawing that Goodwin refureds to on his page 90 in his report.
(Goodwin quotes) February 3rd, 1997, a memorandum was faxed by Ross Little, of NBDOT land Management & planning to Mr. Lonnie Forbes, Development Officer for the Rural Planning District Commission concerning the Richard Harris property and enclosing plan #82? Now how would I know what plan #82 was, if I did not see this untill March of 2005 in Court
what even more inporten is Exhibit R-16 Internal Governmemt property Listing . If Judge Russell look at this List closely ? he would of notice the Nane of Gary Straition and Carolyn Straition ? now you can find this same sale in Fredericton Appraisal Associates ltd. Malcolm J. Carter, AACI, FRI, CMR> a report Prepared for Mr. Donald J. Mc Crea ; Deputy Minister of Transportation (file No 71-H-6007 ) See page 31-INDEX #NO. 4 Date of sale August 10,1995. now letts look at page 16 pargrafh 44, and 45,of Judge David H Russell Decision of June 3 2005 , Now what i see here is the Straition are the the Same people that had a Real Estate Agemet came and made me a offer on one of my lots in fall of 1994, now this is after i told this Real Estate compety not to bother me with any offer less then $15,000.00 all of my Property was on a listing at this time , store and lot at $230,000.00 Two Legal size building lots for $15,900.00 each and the back property for $33,000.00 remenber the Street work was just started at this time.
Lot 92-2 needed about 12 feet of fill . but the Straition did make a Arms lengh offer of $11,500.00 on this lot. IN 1995 i fill this lot with over $15,000.00 worth of fill, The Straition made the offer on lot 92-1-a corner lot that would only requires about $3,000.in fill. Now why would they the Straition go down the Broad rd. and buy a lot that would requires at less $30,000.00 in fill. what even more funny with this lot that they bought from Bill Jones for $10,000.00 .It is steel setting there the same way. ? did they get wind of the Change in highway alinements in 1994.
Bill Jones had a lot right beside this one for sale allready fill for $16,000.00 so why did they not buy this lot insted of the large hole they bought,??
or why did they not paid Richard Harris the $15,500.00 that i would of tacken for this lot 92-1 in 1994, ??
I think they bought this lot because they though the highway would be There.
Fact: Carolyn Straition run a chiropractic business in Haney Town.
Carolyn Straition bought a property for her Business in 1997 beside the town of Oromocto town line. ?
So why was the Straition trying to buy a lot from Richard Harris in 1994. ??? Why did Carter have this Comparables lot in his Report. Mac Carter knew i Richard Harris would not take $11,500. hunder in 1994.
So he turn around after the Government, i gest told hin i was Changing Lawyer from Allen Miles to Mr. Douglas Caldwell , so this is why he use this lot.
Now if i would take $11,500 dollars in 1994 . He knew this so why would he only put a ten thousand on lot 92-1 ,. Carter knew that Stephen Leblanc offer $15,000. for this same lot on february 12 /1997. The Government paid this Appraiser over twenty five hundred dollars to justified a ten thousand dollars cheque on this one lot 92-1 . the question i have here is why so much money to apprais on a empenty lot .
Most of the plublic know you can get a appraisal on a house and lot for about five Hunder dollars , the value for a Bank lone of $150,thousand Dollars.
Now back to the Exhibit A-8 the memo that appeared in Court and entered by my lawyers, the Drawing that went with it has no dates and no official writings or notes to make it a legal document other than stating it was plan #82 ( but this Drawing has survey line of the highway alinement)
My point here is what date and Year was this SURVEY carry out. The Taxpayer paid for this survey work on the highway, so why after wasting month trying to get the Survey date. I can't get it unless i take court action.
Is if because it will prove Heather Pugh lie on the Stand in Court.
Is Perjury not against the law, is Shawn Graham ,T.J.Burke and Denis Landry not up holding Perjury by there Bureaucrats, these Bureaucrats will be rewarded at the End, buy the Taxpayers, to compleaty destroy a human being. I am 55 now in pore health, no way to start over.
8. Now look at paragraph #6 and you will see that there were copies of Heather Pughs Memo sent to Ross Little.
• Facts there were no Drawings showing my 18 building lots sent to DOT, planning Office untill January 1997 .
• We know that the Town of Oromocto did not get a Survey drawing untill February of 1997 to have the Second public Meeting. Because the first was on December 11th, 1996. And six days later on the same day that I know now my wife Marilyn Harris signed for a Notice of intent to survey letter.
• Heather Pugh Memo said I seen her on December 17th, 1996. This is false!
• I will admit I did go to see Heather Pugh with a drawing that I received from Lonnie Forbes only after the meeting on February 12, 1997 with Stephen Leblanc. I was also at a meeting with John Raymond and Loraine Obraen earlyer that day . (the Quesion i have here is if there was a sket drawing at the plublic meeting on December 11 /1996 why did not one of the three people above give me a copy . Why did'nt Stephen Leblanc have a Drawing with him on February 12/1997.
There is something very roung here. ( i bleave this is desect, bad faith)
• The drawing with a date on it of 12/96. On this drawing I drew a red line to show DOT people buy taking all my property they would not need to move the salt and sand storage building. I think I knew for sure on February 15th, 1997 that they D.O.T.did not have any survey work started yet. on the Change of the alinement, (i belived the Government was going to give one of the Done Storage building to MRDC. untill i show then how they could take all my property and would not have to move the Storage Building.
I think this made then mad at me. ( a half a million of Taxpayer copper)
• On or about March 2th,2007 At 9:30.am I traveled to the Burton Court House, looking for this plan #82,filed (not in the Court) but what I did learn was the date of Survey ,1997/ 03 /07 ,I think this would be March ,7,1997. But what I know from the Town Hall in Oromocto that there was drawing with a date February 1997 that the town had.
• This brings us to a question when for the first time could these Center Lines be put on this none dated Drawing? Because these Lines are the location where the Highway is today.
• So with the matter of a so call meeting on December 17th, 1996 with Heather Pugh. This meeting would have been impossible.
9. Now on Paragraph [51] of Judge David Russells decision, who would these accusations benefit the most?
I think it would be Goodwin as he obviously knew what was to take place in Court 2005 as it looked on page 90 of the Draft report that I would see for the first time in July of 1999.
10. Why did Goodwin not have the fact that Lonnie Forbes sent D.O.T. a drawing showing my 18 building lots??
Why did he leave this information out on page 90 of his background part of the first draft report?
(Is this not evidence that D.O.T .knew my intention for my property. Janruary of 1997)
Look what I was doing March 13th, 2005 on this matter of a meeting on December 17th, 1996?
Going to the Oromocto postal outlet to find out what day this Intent to Survey letter was sign for?
Why did Mr. Caldwell not enter the whole 4 pages of Documents I gave him?
I think this has a lot to do with Goodwin also. In March of 2005? I gave Douglas Caldwell a 2 page of my opinion on the so-call meeting with Heather Pugh.
Today is august 1/2007 and I know for sure that I did not meet with Heather Pugh untill I got the drawing from Lonnie Forbes, (now I never seen any drawing untill after February 12/1997?
________________________________________
Shape Yahoo! in your own image. Join our Network Research Panel today!
.
Date: Sun, 7 Oct 2007 14:25:41 -0700
From: oldmaison@yahoo.com
Subject: Your letter
To: injusticecoalition@hotmail.com
To Whom It May concern: Visit Length 31 minutes 53 secondsPage Views 16 Domain Name GNB.CA ? (Canada)IP Address 142.139.0.# (Province of New Brunswick)ISP Province of New BrunswickLocation
Continent : North America
Country : Canada (Facts)
State/Region : New Brunswick
City : Fredericton
On November 27/2007 views buy the Government ?
The main key of evidence in the matter on the files of Goodwin and the Appeal of Russell¢s Decision of June 3rd, 2005 that I believe will turn the matter into deliberate, illegal abuse.
The main issue is the matter of Judge Russell¢s decision on page 19.paragrafh 49,50,51,52,
Now to get the consent of what was going on with my Lawyers, Goodwin, DOT employee¢s and so on?
We have to start when the Public would know for the first time the routing of the highway was to change location.
1. There was a Discovery on September 11th and 12th of 2001, Now John Raymond will take undertaking to provide additional information in relation to the Public Meetings (the public meeting was December 11/1996.)
2. Now at this public meeting there was a rough drawing with a date on it 12/96.
3. I saw this Drawing for the first time on or about after February 13/1997.
4. I did not meet Heather Pugh until after this date that for sure. ( if D.O.T. did not have any survey work done until late February, 1997. then how could there be a drawing with survey line like drawing 82 on December 17,1996?
5. So does this not mean that Heather Pugh lied on the stand? ( perjury) Why would she do this? (She testified that she was promoted in D.O.T.)??? (maybe this is why)
6. See December 6th, 2001 and December 5th, 2001 (?John Raymond undertakeing )that I will not know about till December 20th, 2002. ? Why did Lawyer Eddy and Caldwell hold this information from myself until December 20/2002. ?
But I got Mr. Carter files on May, 30/2002?? (part of Raymond undertaking ),(But I know now there were files left out!
He turned a subdivision approach to vale on January 23/1998 to D.O.T. that was not in the files ,
I received from my so call lawyers, Caldwell and Eddy.
(I think Carter had a lot value on lots at $14,000.00 in this report that was turn in on January 23, 1998. ?
why did not Judge Russell ask in court on March 2005 to see this report of Mac Carter.??
(But this figure is way better then what Goodwin put on Property as, Market vale of $5,300.00 for the tacking of my Property.
(Now Goodwin took two survey lots and the H.A.R. property, and put it as one parcel
he quote a market value of $5,300. on the property.
now would any person in there right mind take two survey lots and change lots to raw property, to sale on the Market.
Now at this time, Rex Tucker set up a meeting with D.O.T.
For March-15, 2000. NOW at this time Goodwin was getting a black mail contract for me to sign before he would do any more work. ?
Goodwin wanted $70,000.00 gearted in this Contract, Government delay,and deep-pocketing taitic set up in 1995.
Mr Tucker sent 377,pages of E-mail to my now x ,lawyers Caldwell & John Logan,
(john Logan get a job in the Government March of 2001 .
Eddy come on the file , first Meeting with him he call up Goodwin , now he did this after i just told him i would get a new Appraiser to do a report. ( look at April 3-2001 Fax from Babineau.)
, now after he talk to Goodwin , he said that his draif report look like a good start , for a report. ?
why did he Call Goodwin. after i told him i was done with Goodwin.
7. Now here¢s a lie on paper, because on Thursday March 1st, 2007 .
I went to the Oromocto Town Hall and retained a Drawing with a date on it. ( of February 1997) First drawing that had survey line where the highway is on my Property .
• This drawing of February 1997 was use at the Second public meetings on the alignment Issue to relocate the highway from Smith subdivision.
To where it is today. (( comcrection on this issuse of the second meeting)
There was only one meeting to the public on December 11/1996.
(the Public would only learn that the alinement was to change on this date December 11/1996, (there was no Survey drawing untill February 1997,
Before this date the alinement was in a differn location.? or was it.
( because of what went on in 1995, ? (when i had a store for sale, ?
T.R.A. food.made a verble offer to buy all my Property for $250,000.00 in 1995. ?
Did they know about the Change in highway alinement back then, if so the Government has fraud Richard Harris out of his hold life.
( who will do a investation on the injustice tactic of rule of Court deep pocketing. ?
It not like the New Brunswick Judges don't
know what is going on with these property Expropriation cases. (see canlii.org)
(look what it is costing the Public for all these bureaucracy to justicefied there Job, and look what it cost the public when these people are the ones that could make a differn in the world we live in,???
( but insted of then geting penlize, ( we will give then there retirerment,
wow what a system. ? a reward for there Snding and lieing.
( I would like a investaition on these matter. ? how to hold these Bureaucracy accountable for there Decision, on a person life work,
That 11 year latter have no fucture left or dream to live any longer.
4. Undertaking of December 6th, 2001 said more or less the Second public meeting was on December 11th, 1996.
This was in Fact the First Meeting to the Public. The one and only Meeting.
Now on December 5th, 2001 undertaking as to pargraft two.
(Quote Attached is a copy of the plan (the Drawing with a date of 12/96) plan used at the December (11) 1996
Public Meeting showing the new or perpose Highway alignment.
(Now this drawing is not to scale to where the highway is now)
like to the drawing of February. Dated February 1997. with survey line.
The one I got a copy of Fred Hackett on March 1st, 2007.
Fact. now Heather Pugh did not have this drawing on December 17,1996. ( that for sure) Drawing date February 1997.?
when i travel to Oromocto on March 1/2007,at my own expences
I ask Fred Hackett for the Big drawing used at the plublic Meeting of december 11/1996, he told me he Could not find that one,
so i ask him ,when did the town know what the land requirement was by D.O.T. knowen to the town,
I gest this is why he gave me this drawing of February 1997.
5. Why is this so important? Because of a lie that was told in court by Heather Pugh that set the main Logistics for a decision by Judge Russell to paid me so little after 8 years of fighting?
If this memo was so important you would think it would have been brought up at one of the two Discoverys ? ?? or was Judge Russell June 3/2005 Decision made on December 17,1996,by Shelden Lee,and John Raymond. ? There is a paper trial that sure look like this in my Files,.The files that was only return to me this year in June of 2007,. this was to late to ward of 2 court sessions, one on february 12/07,the other on the Goodwin matter on February 26/07. now this month of November /07 there two more court sessions. more abuice to a person that ben deeppocketing from 1997.
why is the memo of Heather Pugh not brought up at
Discovery of 2001 or 2004 but I think why it was not is because of the Goodwin Matter (see page 90, on the Goodwin draft report. )
there 2. reports now, the first one that went to the complaint concomey of N.B.Association of Real Estate Appraisers ? Which has the power to levy fines and cost penalties. ( i received Goodwin defence on this one on Janruary of 2005, a few week before the Trial.?
now the Goodwin number 2, report that i only seen for the first time on March 3/2005. THIS report was used in his motion in court on February 26/2007, ? he was fired as far as i was comcerm on or about february 18,2000. I also received Goodwin defence on the Action i started in june 2004, is all of this just a queneses.??
so why did he do the number 2 report up. ? this report is also full of misleading fact, and ares in the figger, Not even addressing 10% of my losses on this Expropation of a person life work.
Now if this memo of Heather Pugh was to play such an important part in the Russell Decision ,.Nine years later. Then why was this document not on John S. Raymond affidavit of Documents list,
(form 31,B)Copy of this memo( SEE : Exhibit A-8 ) of Judge Russell paragraph 49 . See the Decision at Canlii.org
6. Exhibit A-8 memo. It said ? Copy of this memo went to John Raymond Assistant director, Copies to Mike Phillips,Copies to Brian McEwing and Colleen Brown.
Now with all these people having Copies,? you would think this memo that my Lawyers enter as Exhibit A-8 at trial.
you would have to think this memo would at least been on Raymond Documents list. ? why is Judge Russell letting this staking the Exhibit Documents. /? Why would he alowe this in court.(i think it got a lot to do with the Goodwin Matter, allso to do with the confick of Interence that the Frank Mckeen government set up to build this highway-for there buddy to take large amonts of Taxpayer money.
7. Questions, but look at page 90 of Goodwin report and you will see he knew of a memorandum that was faxed by Ross little, to Lonnie Forbes?
How would he know this? It looks like he talks to Lonnie forbs or Ross Little.
Now this work should be on his Detail billing.
( I will have to look for it now on March 6th, 2007)
When would I see any of the Governments Documents, two week before for Discovery of September 11th, of 2001?
On Goodwin detail invoice billing to Mr. Richard Harris. Date Entered: July 6th, 1999. On page 2. On or about March 2nd, 1999
Goodwin Quote (telephone Commission with Lonnie Forbes, N.B. Municipalities Culture and Housing Rural Planning Commission.
Now on March 2nd, 1999.and looking at Goodwin page 90 of the draft report, he quoted (a memorandum contained a note for the potential of the proposed highway to affect the RAH/HARCL land and also noted that RAH had been to the NBDOT Planning Office to see the plans for the new highway. ?? (why have he not got the time of this Meeting to see Plans.)
/
!!!!! fact there was no survey drawing of alinement untill late february 1997. Now this is a fact. after i talk to the Town of Oromocto develment offier Mr.Fred Hackett.
If Mr. Goodwin was looking out for my best interest in his report? ( you would think he would be putting a date on this so call meeting at NBDOT planning Office of me seeing the Plans of the new Highway,)?
So on or about March 19th, 1999. Goodwin was at my place getting eight Thousand more dollars from me, leading me on that his report was just about finished. It was worth around 4-to-6 hundred thousand, But Obviously he knew what was to take place in March of 2005 in Court. (The key to this whole matter is this none dated Drawing that Goodwin refureds to on his page 90 in his report.
(Goodwin quotes) February 3rd, 1997, a memorandum was faxed by Ross Little, of NBDOT land Management & planning to Mr. Lonnie Forbes, Development Officer for the Rural Planning District Commission concerning the Richard Harris property and enclosing plan #82? Now how would I know what plan #82 was, if I did not see this untill March of 2005 in Court
what even more inporten is Exhibit R-16 Internal Governmemt property Listing . If Judge Russell look at this List closely ? he would of notice the Nane of Gary Straition and Carolyn Straition ? now you can find this same sale in Fredericton Appraisal Associates ltd. Malcolm J. Carter, AACI, FRI, CMR> a report Prepared for Mr. Donald J. Mc Crea ; Deputy Minister of Transportation (file No 71-H-6007 ) See page 31-INDEX #NO. 4 Date of sale August 10,1995. now letts look at page 16 pargrafh 44, and 45,of Judge David H Russell Decision of June 3 2005 , Now what i see here is the Straition are the the Same people that had a Real Estate Agemet came and made me a offer on one of my lots in fall of 1994, now this is after i told this Real Estate compety not to bother me with any offer less then $15,000.00 all of my Property was on a listing at this time , store and lot at $230,000.00 Two Legal size building lots for $15,900.00 each and the back property for $33,000.00 remenber the Street work was just started at this time.
Lot 92-2 needed about 12 feet of fill . but the Straition did make a Arms lengh offer of $11,500.00 on this lot. IN 1995 i fill this lot with over $15,000.00 worth of fill, The Straition made the offer on lot 92-1-a corner lot that would only requires about $3,000.in fill. Now why would they the Straition go down the Broad rd. and buy a lot that would requires at less $30,000.00 in fill. what even more funny with this lot that they bought from Bill Jones for $10,000.00 .It is steel setting there the same way. ? did they get wind of the Change in highway alinements in 1994.
Bill Jones had a lot right beside this one for sale allready fill for $16,000.00 so why did they not buy this lot insted of the large hole they bought,??
or why did they not paid Richard Harris the $15,500.00 that i would of tacken for this lot 92-1 in 1994, ??
I think they bought this lot because they though the highway would be There.
Fact: Carolyn Straition run a chiropractic business in Haney Town.
Carolyn Straition bought a property for her Business in 1997 beside the town of Oromocto town line. ?
So why was the Straition trying to buy a lot from Richard Harris in 1994. ??? Why did Carter have this Comparables lot in his Report. Mac Carter knew i Richard Harris would not take $11,500. hunder in 1994.
So he turn around after the Government, i gest told hin i was Changing Lawyer from Allen Miles to Mr. Douglas Caldwell , so this is why he use this lot.
Now if i would take $11,500 dollars in 1994 . He knew this so why would he only put a ten thousand on lot 92-1 ,. Carter knew that Stephen Leblanc offer $15,000. for this same lot on february 12 /1997. The Government paid this Appraiser over twenty five hundred dollars to justified a ten thousand dollars cheque on this one lot 92-1 . the question i have here is why so much money to apprais on a empenty lot .
Most of the plublic know you can get a appraisal on a house and lot for about five Hunder dollars , the value for a Bank lone of $150,thousand Dollars.
Now back to the Exhibit A-8 the memo that appeared in Court and entered by my lawyers, the Drawing that went with it has no dates and no official writings or notes to make it a legal document other than stating it was plan #82 ( but this Drawing has survey line of the highway alinement)
My point here is what date and Year was this SURVEY carry out. The Taxpayer paid for this survey work on the highway, so why after wasting month trying to get the Survey date. I can't get it unless i take court action.
Is if because it will prove Heather Pugh lie on the Stand in Court.
Is Perjury not against the law, is Shawn Graham ,T.J.Burke and Denis Landry not up holding Perjury by there Bureaucrats, these Bureaucrats will be rewarded at the End, buy the Taxpayers, to compleaty destroy a human being. I am 55 now in pore health, no way to start over.
8. Now look at paragraph #6 and you will see that there were copies of Heather Pughs Memo sent to Ross Little.
• Facts there were no Drawings showing my 18 building lots sent to DOT, planning Office untill January 1997 .
• We know that the Town of Oromocto did not get a Survey drawing untill February of 1997 to have the Second public Meeting. Because the first was on December 11th, 1996. And six days later on the same day that I know now my wife Marilyn Harris signed for a Notice of intent to survey letter.
• Heather Pugh Memo said I seen her on December 17th, 1996. This is false!
• I will admit I did go to see Heather Pugh with a drawing that I received from Lonnie Forbes only after the meeting on February 12, 1997 with Stephen Leblanc. I was also at a meeting with John Raymond and Loraine Obraen earlyer that day . (the Quesion i have here is if there was a sket drawing at the plublic meeting on December 11 /1996 why did not one of the three people above give me a copy . Why did'nt Stephen Leblanc have a Drawing with him on February 12/1997.
There is something very roung here. ( i bleave this is desect, bad faith)
• The drawing with a date on it of 12/96. On this drawing I drew a red line to show DOT people buy taking all my property they would not need to move the salt and sand storage building. I think I knew for sure on February 15th, 1997 that they D.O.T.did not have any survey work started yet. on the Change of the alinement, (i belived the Government was going to give one of the Done Storage building to MRDC. untill i show then how they could take all my property and would not have to move the Storage Building.
I think this made then mad at me. ( a half a million of Taxpayer copper)
• On or about March 2th,2007 At 9:30.am I traveled to the Burton Court House, looking for this plan #82,filed (not in the Court) but what I did learn was the date of Survey ,1997/ 03 /07 ,I think this would be March ,7,1997. But what I know from the Town Hall in Oromocto that there was drawing with a date February 1997 that the town had.
• This brings us to a question when for the first time could these Center Lines be put on this none dated Drawing? Because these Lines are the location where the Highway is today.
• So with the matter of a so call meeting on December 17th, 1996 with Heather Pugh. This meeting would have been impossible.
9. Now on Paragraph [51] of Judge David Russells decision, who would these accusations benefit the most?
I think it would be Goodwin as he obviously knew what was to take place in Court 2005 as it looked on page 90 of the Draft report that I would see for the first time in July of 1999.
10. Why did Goodwin not have the fact that Lonnie Forbes sent D.O.T. a drawing showing my 18 building lots??
Why did he leave this information out on page 90 of his background part of the first draft report?
(Is this not evidence that D.O.T .knew my intention for my property. Janruary of 1997)
Look what I was doing March 13th, 2005 on this matter of a meeting on December 17th, 1996?
Going to the Oromocto postal outlet to find out what day this Intent to Survey letter was sign for?
Why did Mr. Caldwell not enter the whole 4 pages of Documents I gave him?
I think this has a lot to do with Goodwin also. In March of 2005? I gave Douglas Caldwell a 2 page of my opinion on the so-call meeting with Heather Pugh.
Today is august 1/2007 and I know for sure that I did not meet with Heather Pugh untill I got the drawing from Lonnie Forbes, (now I never seen any drawing untill after February 12/1997?
________________________________________
Shape Yahoo! in your own image. Join our Network Research Panel today!
.
p-4 letter to Raymond cc to lord office
do i give up or will other join me to start a class actioni need other property owner to get invold /?
p-3 letter to raymond cc sent to lord office
there is Corruption and fraud that started with the Frank Mckenna Government and is carry on today 10 years later>??p-2 letter to Raymond feb20-03
these Documents went to Bernard Lord office in february 20/2003 we have a conflict of interest here that the Government know about.
Sunday, November 25, 2007
five day to D day See canlii.org
only 5 day to left. do and loss. Don't do and loss? how do you get back a hole life
of being here. what happen to free man 55,10 year latter looking to live on street.
Friday, November 23, 2007
I Richard Harris was in Court of Appeal to day Nov_2007
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW BRUNSWICK
Turnbull, Drapeau and Robertson, JJ.A.
B E T W E E N:
RONALD R. YOUNG ) Douglas Caldwell, Q.C.
) and Bruno Roy, Esq.
(Applicant) APPELANT ) for the Appellant
)
- and - )
)
THE CITY OF MONCTON ) Stephen M. Trueman, Esq.
) and Anne F. Beaulieu, Esqe.
(Respondent) RESPONDENT ) for the Respondent
The appeal is dismissed and the appellant is ordered to pay the respondent costs in the amount of $1,500.
6] At trial, the appellant claimed the sum of $255,000 as compensation under the Act. W.H. Goodwin Jr., who was qualified as an expert in the field of real estate appraisal, testified in support of the appellant’s claim. In Mr. Goodwin’s opinion, the highest and best use of the subject property at the time of expropriation involved the conversion of the four-room school building, which he found to be structurally sound and to have significant commercial value, into a 12-unit “motel plan” apartment building. Mr. Goodwin explained that there are no central hallways in a motel style apartment, each tenant having direct access from his unit to the outside, and that, by sparing the owner the cost of heating and lighting the hallways as well as the cost of their maintenance, a motel style apartment is significantly less expensive to operate than other, more conventional, types of apartment buildings.
Just prior to the commencement of the trial, the Appellant’s solicitor at the time, Mr. Edwin G. Ehrhardt and the solicitor for the City of Moncton, Mr. Stephen M. Trueman, attended an “in chambers” meeting with the trial judge. During this meeting, the trial judge, Mr. Justice Paul Godin, indicated to the solicitors that he was faced with two conflicting appraisal reports. The trial judge reminded the solicitors of one of his recent decisions wherein he had concluded that the Court should rely on one of the appraisal reports to the exclusion of the other in its entirety. Mr. Justice Godin gave the solicitors a strong indication that he may well be in the same position in this case. ...
nalysis and Decision
I. Preliminary Issues
Did the trial judge misapprehend, as the appellant contends, the scope of his adjudicative duties on the issue of the subject property’s market value?
Did the trial judge improperly refuse to order production of relevant documents?
[20] In my view, Mr. Doucet’s direct comparison approach to the valuation of the bare land complied with the governing standards for professional appraisals. I now turn to the appellant’s substantive challenge to the market value determination made in the court below.
I can see a pattern in all most all Appeal With Goodwin & caldwell
Turnbull, Drapeau and Robertson, JJ.A.
B E T W E E N:
RONALD R. YOUNG ) Douglas Caldwell, Q.C.
) and Bruno Roy, Esq.
(Applicant) APPELANT ) for the Appellant
)
- and - )
)
THE CITY OF MONCTON ) Stephen M. Trueman, Esq.
) and Anne F. Beaulieu, Esqe.
(Respondent) RESPONDENT ) for the Respondent
The appeal is dismissed and the appellant is ordered to pay the respondent costs in the amount of $1,500.
6] At trial, the appellant claimed the sum of $255,000 as compensation under the Act. W.H. Goodwin Jr., who was qualified as an expert in the field of real estate appraisal, testified in support of the appellant’s claim. In Mr. Goodwin’s opinion, the highest and best use of the subject property at the time of expropriation involved the conversion of the four-room school building, which he found to be structurally sound and to have significant commercial value, into a 12-unit “motel plan” apartment building. Mr. Goodwin explained that there are no central hallways in a motel style apartment, each tenant having direct access from his unit to the outside, and that, by sparing the owner the cost of heating and lighting the hallways as well as the cost of their maintenance, a motel style apartment is significantly less expensive to operate than other, more conventional, types of apartment buildings.
Just prior to the commencement of the trial, the Appellant’s solicitor at the time, Mr. Edwin G. Ehrhardt and the solicitor for the City of Moncton, Mr. Stephen M. Trueman, attended an “in chambers” meeting with the trial judge. During this meeting, the trial judge, Mr. Justice Paul Godin, indicated to the solicitors that he was faced with two conflicting appraisal reports. The trial judge reminded the solicitors of one of his recent decisions wherein he had concluded that the Court should rely on one of the appraisal reports to the exclusion of the other in its entirety. Mr. Justice Godin gave the solicitors a strong indication that he may well be in the same position in this case. ...
nalysis and Decision
I. Preliminary Issues
Did the trial judge misapprehend, as the appellant contends, the scope of his adjudicative duties on the issue of the subject property’s market value?
Did the trial judge improperly refuse to order production of relevant documents?
[20] In my view, Mr. Doucet’s direct comparison approach to the valuation of the bare land complied with the governing standards for professional appraisals. I now turn to the appellant’s substantive challenge to the market value determination made in the court below.
I can see a pattern in all most all Appeal With Goodwin & caldwell
Tuesday, November 20, 2007
Monday, November 19, 2007
N.S.Lawyer, N.B.lawyer -Eddy -212 Thousand dollars
I ben told that these lawyers Knew at Discovery of 2004 that i would lose. this was before trial in 2005
need help
Expropriation? Has it ever happened to you or someone you know???
We all have heard of the famous Jackie Vautour and his over 30 years long battle with the Government.
I have been told the Government or bureaucrats have the system set up for only the well connected people such as Appraisers and Lawyers to make money from property owner losses.
Form what I’m told the Appraiser will get roughly 25%. The property owner will also receive 25% and the lawyers will get a grand total of 50%!!!!
…and the taxpayers pays the bill!!!
Is this a way to take and justify the taxpayer’s funds?
For more info on this issue. Click below –
http://canlii.org
The landowners will be told by the bureaucrats such as John Stanley Raymond of the famous television show- Deal or No deal!!!!
This is my final offer. Deal or not deal???
If you don’t take the deal therefore you’ll be fried because the Government will take it anyway.
Take a close look at the propose LNG Pipe route through Saint John…
Will these landowners be offered a fair deal for their land? Who knows?
Check this blog site out-
http://govinjustice.blogspot.com
Richard Harris has been fighting this issue for over 10 years and it did take a toll on his life.
He took his first heart attack in 1999, and since then three more!!
From what I’m told he was dealing with a crooked Atlantic law firm PPHM ,a expert Expropriation Lawyer from Nova Scotia.
Have you ever heard or been caught in an Expropriation case?
Feel free to leave a comment in this blog or send an email to
injusticecoalition@hotmail.com
He’s looking for other people with this issue { Class Action suit} A group of angry former landowners will be more successful!!!
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
John S. Raymond Bureaucratsb
To the N.B. Law Society, July 17, 1998 Dear Mr. Carrier. From planning and Land Management Sincerely John S. Raymond [Assistant Director].
I enclose a copy of a letter, dated May 28, 1998, from Mr. Douglas A. Caldwell (Solicitor with Patterson Palmer Hunt Murphy) to the Hon. Sheldon Lee, Minister of Transportation.
Mr. Caldwell advised that he is legal council to H.A.R. Construction, and to Richard and Marilyn Harris, Oromocto, N.B.
I enclose a copy of a letter, dated May 28, 1998, from Mr. Douglas A. Caldwell (Solicitor with Patterson Palmer Hunt Murphy) to the Hon. Sheldon Lee, Minister of Transportation.
Mr. Caldwell advised that he is legal council to H.A.R. Construction, and to Richard and Marilyn Harris, Oromocto, N.B.
LAW Society -Job ! to help Lawyers
From: Shirley MacLean (SMacLean@lawsociety-barreau.nb.ca)
Sent: May 10, 2007 4:17:02 PM
To: 'Richard Harris' (injusticecoalition@hotmail.com)
Please note that as previously indicated we do not process e-mail correspondence. Kindly respond by regular mail or fax (506) 451-1421.
This e-mail will be deleted.
S. MacLean
Registrar
Sent: May 10, 2007 4:17:02 PM
To: 'Richard Harris' (injusticecoalition@hotmail.com)
Please note that as previously indicated we do not process e-mail correspondence. Kindly respond by regular mail or fax (506) 451-1421.
This e-mail will be deleted.
S. MacLean
Registrar
Saturday, November 10, 2007
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
TEXTAREA_ID
