They are trying to set an example with Charles but in reality they are creating a strong undercurrent of support for him.
The may find him to be a pain in their butt but they ain't seen nothing yet. They claim assault and he was the one assaulted. It is all on video so will come in handy. They are upset because Charles lodged a complaint the day before against one of the arresting Nazis and the Goose Stepper made it personal.
To the politicians and police of New Brunswick be warned. It is the citizens that control you, not the other way around.
TMA
Saturday, April 25, 2009
Thursday, April 23, 2009
WILLIAM MATTHEWS PLAINTIFF
Defamation law that ignores truth ruled unconstitutional
Peter Walsh - The Telegram (St. John's, NFLD)
Tuesday, May 6
The Supreme Court of Newfoundland has ruled a law that could send
someone to prison for defamation is unconstitutional.
Justice Lois Hoegg made the decision Friday. Her ruling also struck
down a criminal case by Crown prosecutors against Byron Prior of Grand
Bank.
Prior claims that in 1966, a justice official in the province raped
and impregnated one of his relatives. Crown attorneys say Prior wore
placards and distributed flyers which published the allegations.
The Royal Newfoundland Constabulary interviewed Prior's relative in
2004 and in 2007, but the alleged victim denied she had been sexually
assaulted or that she even knew the person Prior said had attacked
her.
Crown prosecutors tried to convict Prior of defamation under Section
301 of the Criminal Code, which says "everyone who publishes a
defamatory libel is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to
imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years."
The problem is, Hoegg said, the Crown couldn't prove that Prior was
knowingly spreading lies.
"I find that it is not justified, in our free and democratic society,
for the Crown to use the heavy hammer of the criminal law against a
subject for publishing defamatory libel when the Crown is not able to
show that the subject knows that his statements are false.
"The expression of truthful, unpopular or even false statements
deserve protection unless expressed in a violent manner," wrote Hoegg.
Hoegg said if the Crown could prove Prior knowingly published
defamatory libel, it would have charged him under a different section
of the criminal code that says "everyone who publishes a defamatory
libel that he knows is false is guilty of an indictable offence and
liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years."
That law has withheld court challenges. Section 301 - the law which
does not mention the matter of truth - has been struck down as
unconstitutional by three other superior courts in Canada.
"The sections catch different types of offender. To me, it naturally
follows that their purpose or objectives must be different," wrote
Hoegg. "I then determined that the objective (of Section 301) was not
so pressing and important as to override freedom of expression. The
section is offensive to modern day notions of justice."
The decision only applies to criminal applications of defamation law.
Hoegg said Prior could possibly be sued in civil court over his
allegations.
Three years ago, a federal politician filed a statement of claim in
the Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador to have a website that
contained allegations about him by Prior removed. In the statement,
the politician said a website posted by Prior accuses him and other
prominent Newfoundlanders of wrongdoing.
A website containing the allegations is still active ( see 1). Prior
claims to be a victim of physical and sexual abuse.
2005 01 T 0010
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEWFOUNDLAND AND LABRADOR
TRIAL DIVISION
BETWEEN:
WILLIAM MATTHEWS PLAINTIFF
AND:
BYRON PRIOR DEFENDANT
Peter Walsh - The Telegram (St. John's, NFLD)
Tuesday, May 6
The Supreme Court of Newfoundland has ruled a law that could send
someone to prison for defamation is unconstitutional.
Justice Lois Hoegg made the decision Friday. Her ruling also struck
down a criminal case by Crown prosecutors against Byron Prior of Grand
Bank.
Prior claims that in 1966, a justice official in the province raped
and impregnated one of his relatives. Crown attorneys say Prior wore
placards and distributed flyers which published the allegations.
The Royal Newfoundland Constabulary interviewed Prior's relative in
2004 and in 2007, but the alleged victim denied she had been sexually
assaulted or that she even knew the person Prior said had attacked
her.
Crown prosecutors tried to convict Prior of defamation under Section
301 of the Criminal Code, which says "everyone who publishes a
defamatory libel is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to
imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years."
The problem is, Hoegg said, the Crown couldn't prove that Prior was
knowingly spreading lies.
"I find that it is not justified, in our free and democratic society,
for the Crown to use the heavy hammer of the criminal law against a
subject for publishing defamatory libel when the Crown is not able to
show that the subject knows that his statements are false.
"The expression of truthful, unpopular or even false statements
deserve protection unless expressed in a violent manner," wrote Hoegg.
Hoegg said if the Crown could prove Prior knowingly published
defamatory libel, it would have charged him under a different section
of the criminal code that says "everyone who publishes a defamatory
libel that he knows is false is guilty of an indictable offence and
liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years."
That law has withheld court challenges. Section 301 - the law which
does not mention the matter of truth - has been struck down as
unconstitutional by three other superior courts in Canada.
"The sections catch different types of offender. To me, it naturally
follows that their purpose or objectives must be different," wrote
Hoegg. "I then determined that the objective (of Section 301) was not
so pressing and important as to override freedom of expression. The
section is offensive to modern day notions of justice."
The decision only applies to criminal applications of defamation law.
Hoegg said Prior could possibly be sued in civil court over his
allegations.
Three years ago, a federal politician filed a statement of claim in
the Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador to have a website that
contained allegations about him by Prior removed. In the statement,
the politician said a website posted by Prior accuses him and other
prominent Newfoundlanders of wrongdoing.
A website containing the allegations is still active ( see 1). Prior
claims to be a victim of physical and sexual abuse.
2005 01 T 0010
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEWFOUNDLAND AND LABRADOR
TRIAL DIVISION
BETWEEN:
WILLIAM MATTHEWS PLAINTIFF
AND:
BYRON PRIOR DEFENDANT
Friday, April 17, 2009
Just Dave E-mail
E-mail from -
Why Me getting all this Mail
David,
I know that you want in on this action very bad but you are not going to get far if you just call somebody up and than after you learn that you are talking to a man instead of a woman as you expected you. immediately hung up the phone Did that information shock you so much that you hung up?? BTW to this very moment I do not know who you are as you never introduced yourself.If you want me to help you as well please call me again as I do not have your phone number.Cheers,Karol.
Why did you stutter when I called you sir? You clearly admitted thatyou knew who I was. CORRECT? Hell I must ask do you people evenunderstand the meaning of the word Integity as you seek justice foronly certain people? Does not my Clan deserve the same justice thatyou bastards seek? Obviously I complied with your request in a fashionthat suit the best interests of my Clan first and foremost. Bu tell mewhy should I help you sneaky bastards now? In my humble opinion my betinterest would be served if Byron Prior did a little time behind barslike I did a couple of times to see how it feels and then perhaps youpeople would admit that I exist and what I did to ethically defendhim. Maybe then a little shit would hit the fan and a little justicewould be served on many corrupt judges. Perhaps some of YOU dudes should pick up the phone (506 756 8687) andexplain your actions against me real slow. Don't lie or I will hang upjust like I always do with liars. Life is too short to argue with suchpeople. Otherwise I will merely dismiss you bastards as the sneakybuggers that you no doubt are and go on my merry way as on seriouslypissed off mean old Maritmer fighting tooth and nail to protect hisCaln's righta and interests against legions of greedy smiling bastardswho have lost a lot of money lately because they laughed at me for waypast too long. Now tha Bernie Madoff is locked up all his pals arereal nervous and I am laughing like a smiling bastard too. I havenothing left to lose now and everhting to regain. Byron Prior is inthat boat too and he fucked up bigtime time by trusting the wrongpeople and stabbing his true friends in the back.. Veritas VincitDavid Raymond Amos
A F F I D A V I T I, Stephen J. May, of the City of St. John’s, in the Province ofNewfoundland and Labrador, Barrister and Solicitor, make oath and sayas follows: THAT I am a Partner in the St. John’s office of PATTERSON PALMERsolicitors for William Matthews, the Member of Parliament forRandom-Burin-St. George’s in the Parliament of Canada. THAT Mr. Matthews originally retained Mr. Edward Roberts, Q.C. on orabout 30 April 2002 after Mr. Byron Prior, the Defendant/Plaintiff byCounterclaim, had made allegations against Mr. Matthews in apublication called “My Inheritance - The truth - Not Fiction: A Townwith a Secret”. In that publication, the allegation was made that Mr.Matthews had had sex with a girl who had been prostituted by hermother. That girl was alleged to have been Mr. Prior’s sister. THAT upon being retained, Mr. Edward Roberts wrote a letter to Mr.Prior. That letter to Mr. Prior is attached as Exhibit “1" to myAffidavit. THAT subsequent to Mr. Roberts’ letter to Mr. Prior, Mr. Robertsreceived a 1 May 2002 e-mail from Mr. Prior. That e-mail is attachedas Exhibit “2". THAT subsequent to Mr. Roberts receipt of the e-mail, Mr. Prior sworean Affidavit acknowledging that what had been said in that publicationwas false. That Affidavit is attached as Exhibit “3" to my Affidavit.Following Mr. Roberts’ receipt of that Affidavit, Mr. Matthews advisedthat he was satisfied not to pursue the matter any further and ourfirm closed our file. THAT on or about 25 October 2004, I was retained by Mr. Matthewsfollowing his gaining knowledge that a web site, made a series ofallegations against him relating to my having sex with a girl ofapproximately 12 years old through to an approximate age of 15 yearsold. It also accused him of being a father of one of her children andaccused him of having raped that girl. Upon checking the web site Isaw that Byron Prior, the Defendant, had been identified as the authorof the material on the site. THAT Mr. Matthews instructed me to write Mr. Prior, to remind him ofthe fact that the allegations had been admitted to being false througha 16 May 2002 Affidavit to advise him of Mr. Matthews’ intentions tocommence legal proceedings if the comments were not removed from theweb site. A copy of my letter to Mr. Prior is attached as Exhibit “4"to this Affidavit. THAT I attach as Exhibit “5" a transcript from a 5 November 2004voicemail left by David Amos, identified in the voicemail as a friendof Mr. Prior. THAT I attach as Exhibit “6" a portion of a 6 November 2004 e-mailfrom Mr. Amos. THAT until I received his voicemail and e-mail, I had never heard of Mr. Amos. THAT Mr. Amos has continued to send me e-mail since his 5 Novembere-mail. Including his 6 November 2004 e-mail, I have received a totalof 15 e-mails as of 23 January 2005. All do not address Mr. Matthews’claim or my involvement as Mr. Matthews’ solicitor. I attach asExhibit “7" a portion of a 12 January 2005 e-mail that Mr. Amos sentto me but originally came to my attention through Ms. Lois Skaneswhose firm had received a copy. This e-mail followed the service ofthe Statement of Claim on 11 January 2005 on Mr. Prior. I also attachas Exhibit “8" a copy of a 19 January 2005 e-mail from Mr. Amos. THAT I attach as Exhibit “9" a copy of a 22 November 2004 letteraddressed to me from Edward Roberts, the Lieutenant Governor ofNewfoundland and Labrador covering a 2 September 2004 letter from Mr.Amos addressed to John Crosbie, Edward Roberts, in his capacity asLieutenant Governor, Danny Williams, in his capacity as Premier ofNewfoundland and Labrador, and Brian F. Furey, President of the LawSociety of Newfoundland and Labrador. I requested a copy of thisletter from Government House after asking Mr. Roberts if he hadreceived any correspondence from Mr. Amos during his previousrepresentation of Mr. Matthews. He advised me that he received aletter since becoming Lieutenant Governor, portions of which involvedhis representation of Mr. Matthews. Mr. Roberts’ letter also coveredhis reply to Mr. Amos. THAT I attach as Exhibit “10" an e-mail from Mr. Amos received onSunday, 23 January 2005. THAT I swear this Affidavit in support of the Application to strikeMr. Prior’s counterclaim. SWORN to before me atSt. John’s, Province of Newfoundlandand Labrador this 24th day ofJanuary, 2005. Signed by Della Hart STEPHEN J. MAY SignatureSTAMPDELLA HARTA Commissioner for Oaths in and for
| From: | KAROL KAROLAK (karol_karolak@rogers.com) |
Why Me getting all this Mail
David,
I know that you want in on this action very bad but you are not going to get far if you just call somebody up and than after you learn that you are talking to a man instead of a woman as you expected you. immediately hung up the phone Did that information shock you so much that you hung up?? BTW to this very moment I do not know who you are as you never introduced yourself.If you want me to help you as well please call me again as I do not have your phone number.Cheers,Karol.
Why did you stutter when I called you sir? You clearly admitted thatyou knew who I was. CORRECT? Hell I must ask do you people evenunderstand the meaning of the word Integity as you seek justice foronly certain people? Does not my Clan deserve the same justice thatyou bastards seek? Obviously I complied with your request in a fashionthat suit the best interests of my Clan first and foremost. Bu tell mewhy should I help you sneaky bastards now? In my humble opinion my betinterest would be served if Byron Prior did a little time behind barslike I did a couple of times to see how it feels and then perhaps youpeople would admit that I exist and what I did to ethically defendhim. Maybe then a little shit would hit the fan and a little justicewould be served on many corrupt judges. Perhaps some of YOU dudes should pick up the phone (506 756 8687) andexplain your actions against me real slow. Don't lie or I will hang upjust like I always do with liars. Life is too short to argue with suchpeople. Otherwise I will merely dismiss you bastards as the sneakybuggers that you no doubt are and go on my merry way as on seriouslypissed off mean old Maritmer fighting tooth and nail to protect hisCaln's righta and interests against legions of greedy smiling bastardswho have lost a lot of money lately because they laughed at me for waypast too long. Now tha Bernie Madoff is locked up all his pals arereal nervous and I am laughing like a smiling bastard too. I havenothing left to lose now and everhting to regain. Byron Prior is inthat boat too and he fucked up bigtime time by trusting the wrongpeople and stabbing his true friends in the back.. Veritas VincitDavid Raymond Amos
A F F I D A V I T I, Stephen J. May, of the City of St. John’s, in the Province ofNewfoundland and Labrador, Barrister and Solicitor, make oath and sayas follows: THAT I am a Partner in the St. John’s office of PATTERSON PALMERsolicitors for William Matthews, the Member of Parliament forRandom-Burin-St. George’s in the Parliament of Canada. THAT Mr. Matthews originally retained Mr. Edward Roberts, Q.C. on orabout 30 April 2002 after Mr. Byron Prior, the Defendant/Plaintiff byCounterclaim, had made allegations against Mr. Matthews in apublication called “My Inheritance - The truth - Not Fiction: A Townwith a Secret”. In that publication, the allegation was made that Mr.Matthews had had sex with a girl who had been prostituted by hermother. That girl was alleged to have been Mr. Prior’s sister. THAT upon being retained, Mr. Edward Roberts wrote a letter to Mr.Prior. That letter to Mr. Prior is attached as Exhibit “1" to myAffidavit. THAT subsequent to Mr. Roberts’ letter to Mr. Prior, Mr. Robertsreceived a 1 May 2002 e-mail from Mr. Prior. That e-mail is attachedas Exhibit “2". THAT subsequent to Mr. Roberts receipt of the e-mail, Mr. Prior sworean Affidavit acknowledging that what had been said in that publicationwas false. That Affidavit is attached as Exhibit “3" to my Affidavit.Following Mr. Roberts’ receipt of that Affidavit, Mr. Matthews advisedthat he was satisfied not to pursue the matter any further and ourfirm closed our file. THAT on or about 25 October 2004, I was retained by Mr. Matthewsfollowing his gaining knowledge that a web site, made a series ofallegations against him relating to my having sex with a girl ofapproximately 12 years old through to an approximate age of 15 yearsold. It also accused him of being a father of one of her children andaccused him of having raped that girl. Upon checking the web site Isaw that Byron Prior, the Defendant, had been identified as the authorof the material on the site. THAT Mr. Matthews instructed me to write Mr. Prior, to remind him ofthe fact that the allegations had been admitted to being false througha 16 May 2002 Affidavit to advise him of Mr. Matthews’ intentions tocommence legal proceedings if the comments were not removed from theweb site. A copy of my letter to Mr. Prior is attached as Exhibit “4"to this Affidavit. THAT I attach as Exhibit “5" a transcript from a 5 November 2004voicemail left by David Amos, identified in the voicemail as a friendof Mr. Prior. THAT I attach as Exhibit “6" a portion of a 6 November 2004 e-mailfrom Mr. Amos. THAT until I received his voicemail and e-mail, I had never heard of Mr. Amos. THAT Mr. Amos has continued to send me e-mail since his 5 Novembere-mail. Including his 6 November 2004 e-mail, I have received a totalof 15 e-mails as of 23 January 2005. All do not address Mr. Matthews’claim or my involvement as Mr. Matthews’ solicitor. I attach asExhibit “7" a portion of a 12 January 2005 e-mail that Mr. Amos sentto me but originally came to my attention through Ms. Lois Skaneswhose firm had received a copy. This e-mail followed the service ofthe Statement of Claim on 11 January 2005 on Mr. Prior. I also attachas Exhibit “8" a copy of a 19 January 2005 e-mail from Mr. Amos. THAT I attach as Exhibit “9" a copy of a 22 November 2004 letteraddressed to me from Edward Roberts, the Lieutenant Governor ofNewfoundland and Labrador covering a 2 September 2004 letter from Mr.Amos addressed to John Crosbie, Edward Roberts, in his capacity asLieutenant Governor, Danny Williams, in his capacity as Premier ofNewfoundland and Labrador, and Brian F. Furey, President of the LawSociety of Newfoundland and Labrador. I requested a copy of thisletter from Government House after asking Mr. Roberts if he hadreceived any correspondence from Mr. Amos during his previousrepresentation of Mr. Matthews. He advised me that he received aletter since becoming Lieutenant Governor, portions of which involvedhis representation of Mr. Matthews. Mr. Roberts’ letter also coveredhis reply to Mr. Amos. THAT I attach as Exhibit “10" an e-mail from Mr. Amos received onSunday, 23 January 2005. THAT I swear this Affidavit in support of the Application to strikeMr. Prior’s counterclaim. SWORN to before me atSt. John’s, Province of Newfoundlandand Labrador this 24th day ofJanuary, 2005. Signed by Della Hart STEPHEN J. MAY SignatureSTAMPDELLA HARTA Commissioner for Oaths in and for
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
TEXTAREA_ID
