Let’s call them the Keystone Lawyers…
Okay, so it has already been proven that Kevin Annett & Jason Bowman are lying about having filed a court case. So, what was their response? Well, they decided to ignore this evidence and try to laugh-off the fact that they had been busted. Nice try guys, but no cigar- the onus of evidence is on you now to prove what you are saying.
In the worst retort on-record, these clowns decided that they could prove they had filed a court case by publishing the documents I’ve attached at the bottom of this article. The documents were published on Alfred Webre’s web page a couple of days ago.
Not only is this not proof, but it kind of makes a mockery out of Jason Bowman’s statements that he has “good legal advice”. It also makes me wonder about Webre’s legal skills- because not only are the documents complete gobbledegook, but they are missing some important things you’d expect to see in a legal filing. These documents are so wacky that they could have been put together by the Keystone Lawyers (close relatives of the Keystone Cops).
I was hesitating, at first, to point out all of the inaccuracies and mistakes in these documents- as it might help them with a future attempt. That said, they have stated that they’ve filed these documents in court. So, if there are any major changes, it will be further evidence that they were not telling the truth.
And so, to the analysis!
1.) Nothing was filed.
In the video when I went to the clerk of the court she looked-up both Kevin Annett & Jason Bowman’s names in the computer and there was no record of any case bring filed. As she very clearly stated, if a case is filed in a court, it is always in the computer. This point alone makes the rest of the article moot.
2.) The Court filing numbers & stamps are missing.
These documents have no court filing numbers, and have not been stamped by the clerk of the court. This is always done at the moment that the case has been filed- without exception. So, that Annett has released these documents to the public, without a stamp and a filing number, is absolutely meaningless towards proving they were filed. (which they weren’t)
3.) These aren’t the documents that need to be filed.
You can’t have a motion without either a statement of claim or an application first being filed because without them there’s nothing to have a motion on. So, basically, had they actually tried to file these documents (which they didn’t) they would have been immediately rejected.
4.) There’s no action/resolution called for.
If you are going to bake a cake you need to have some flour. If you are going to file a court case, you need to state what you are asking for as a resolution. For example, they could ask for $10 million in damages. Read these documents and you will realize that they have totally omitted this essential part of any court case. Just like the last case Annett claims to have been a part of, this would have been rejected for this reason.
5.) The filing failed to provide material facts to support it.
If you are going to accuse someone of a crime, you must state what that crime is. These documents are exactly like the last case Annett claims to have been a part of that were rejected for exactly this reason.
6.) Kevin Annett & Jason Bowman are listed as representative plantiffs.
Neither Annett of Bowman have ever attended a residential school, nor do they have any family members that did. In fact, Bowman is claiming to be the ‘prosecutor’, not a plaintiff. So, they should not be listed as plaintiffs.
Here are the documents- enjoy!
Related articles
19 comments
Skip to comment form
Here is my question, aside from the obvious fakeness, how can they proceed criminally? They say they are going to proceed concurrently civil and criminal – but how can they do that when I thought only the government could institute criminal charges?
Author
It’s my understanding that this is possible – I was told that there’s a process where an individual can lead a criminal filing. That said, I believe that criminal charges would still have to be approved by the Crown first…
Everyone has a Crown—it is part of your skull. Anyone may swear an information—the posted documents look like an affidavit and a strange notice of motion which speaks of an application and how it ought to be served. Where is this application?
As for the Crown approving charges, etc. I think it is the Federal/Provincial attorneys general that have veto over prosecutions started by Natural Crowns, as opposed to their artificial Public Prosecution Service. One certainly doesn’t require prior approval—indeed, by the letter of the law, one should not even need to write anything to swear an information. One should be able to go to a Judge in Chambers or a Justice of the Peace sitting in a traffic court and ask to swear an information into the record. The Officer should do the paperwork for you.
That being said, this is more obvious flim-flam.
Author
Indeed, these guys redefine flimflam to a whole new level!
I had an argument with a group of Annettites (not to be confused with sodomites of course) and asked them to provide the court file number. One of them was emailing back and forth with Annett and of course, no court file number was provided. Only charges that you are a shill of the government, etc. I can post Annett’s response if you would like. I was able to turn one of the ladies away from the dark side, which is good. Common sense and reason started to take over, and then it went into hyperdrive.
Author
This seems to be standard Annerttery, once someone calls you on your bullshit immediately retort by calling them a schil. Sorry people, that doesn’t work on me- and most people know better other than the Annettites…
.at least if these are going to fake documents, which do not include filing numbers or court stamps, they would use the ACTUAL fonts that the canadian government uses in such documents. Someone needs to call the cops about these con artist passing THOSE documents off as “court documents”. They need arrested immediately for fraud.
Author
Don’t worry, that’s in-process…
You better cut out that “shill” business! Direct from the mouth of the CON MAN himself!
(1) Renouf: Kevin Annett is getting together a file being put together by people across Canada with the evidence that Renouf is an agent of chaos of the government of Canada, in this case charged with derailing the class action against the Vatican, UK Queen, Big Pharma in the Federal Court of Canada, and will be sending that to me for posting “in several days”; (2) Federal Court Filing – CoPlaintiff Jason Bowman in the Federal Court case is this weekend at Brandford ON in connection with the ongoing investigation into the genocide of First Nations children there. Kevin Annett indicated he would be requesting Jason Bowman again to forward a scan of the case filing, which has already been requested. In the meantime, we ask that people have a bit of faith AND NOT SUPPORT THE CANADIAN GOVT. SHILLS
Author
Can you please share the link for that with me? I need to get a screen shot of it for legal purposes…
I just emailed everything to you!
Author
Got it – thanks!
Umm, you cannot file a claim against “John Doe “. The court rules very clearly state that ALL parties must have an address to which materials must be served to. A John Doe claim can be used only unil such time as a real name and CAUSE OF ACTION is established. Fisrt flaw in thier “claim”, no cause of action.
Author
One more for the list! These guys are clowns!
There is such a thing as private prosecution for a criminal matter however you need the approval of a justice of the peace but a crown attorney can just quash it if he or she doesn’t think it’s in the public interest to pursue it. In the case of a private prosecution only the charges are laid privately, the crown attorney has to actually do the prosecuting and has the discretion not to proceed.
Author
Thank you for updating us with the real story…
That is not quite correct, in my view. Not just any Crown attorney can intervene to quash a private prosecution. Further, an individual may certainly have carriage of the prosecution. There is no requirement that a Canadian Government Crown (Canadian Crown, remember, you have your own Crown!) prosecute the charge. And everything where a statute provides for an XYZ (attorney general, Crown, etc.) a statutory right of intervention, for them to exercise that right requires a hearing at which an impartial and independent judge will apply the statute. Mostly, tho, I agree with you, except that calling it the “approval of a justice of the peace” is not quite how I would phrase it. JPs don’t approve charges; they witness their attestation.
I don’t understand Annett’s logic – if he believes the Queen is evil and actively and personally involved in legal and political maneuverings in Canada – rather than the absentee figurehead she actually is – why would he think for a moment that the Queen’s courts would allow a legal action against her to succeed? Odd that he boycotts the RCMP because they belong to the Queen but not the courts.
Author
That’s a really good point there. One more bit of Annett’s BS exposed I guess…