PUBLIC SERVICE OR PIGS AT THE TROUGH?

Last Saturday's Waterloo Region Record carried this story titled "Sun shone brightly on local six-figure earners". Our chief medical officer of health is paid $304,111 per year. Do you think that if she can be removed by regional council that she would ever offer up an opinion different than what they tell her? Our chief of police with the Waterloo Regional Police earned $266,000 per year. Similar question to him as to the chief medical officer of health. Oh and there are 550 employees of the regional police in the Sunshine Club (ie. incomes > $100,000/year).

The City of Kitchener has about 300 employees on the sunshine list whereas Cambridge has only 190 and Waterloo a trifling 88 employees.

I have a question. How many of these have totally unique skill sets that can't be found elsewhere? How many of them are paid these monies from our taxes just to make sure they mind their p's and q's and don't ever rock the boat? Don't ever, ever offer up a public opinion contrary to the mayor's or council's? My opinion is that fewer right on the $100,000 mark and most if not all above the $200,000 salary level.

YET ANOTHER ASSAULT UPON DEMOCRACY

Today's Waterloo Region Record carrys this Opinion piece by staffer Luisa D'Amato titled "Woolwich council should be listening to its citizens, not censoring the.". I was present during this confrontation initiated, exacerbated and manufactured by five Wolwich Councillors. Dr. Dan Holt was more than a match for all five. Yes he did receive some assistance from Councillor Patrick Merlihan who was appalled by the behaviour of his colleagues on council. Council have a bee in their bonnet both in regards to myself and in regards to the other seven citizen volunteers and members of the Citizens Public Advisory Committee (CPAC).

This Council have been caught repeatedly breaking rules and laws (Municipal Act) and apparently they aren't done yet. They tried to shut me down last February 2 at Council and they tried to shut down Dr. Holt last Tuesday (March 22) evening. Their excuses and rationale are less than pathetic. The truth is they are hell bent on protecting Chemtuura Canada and the Ontario Ministry of Environment from appropriate and honest criticism by informed citizens. Meanwhile the Dioxins, DDT and more are still in the sediments and floodplain soils of Canagagigue Creek all the way down to the Grand River, five miles away.

THE STRANGE LEGAL SAGA OF BOB VERDUN

Last Saturday's Waterloo Region Record carrys a story titled "Verdun compares himself to journalist who was jailed". I'd gotten so used to the bad press Bob Verdun has received from the Record that at first blush I actually thought this one wasn't too bad. In hindsight it is. Way too much superfluous, derogatory comment is included about Mr. Verdun's being denied an appeal by the country's top court. Many readers don't know that the Record got their asses kicked by Verdun in Elmira and area when he started the Elmira Independent which soon blew the Signet (Record) off the map locally.

Secondly Canada's Libel laws are no prize. For a wealthy bigshot to sucessfully sue a former journalist for Libel isn't that much of a surprise. The onus is totally on the person being sued to prove his innocence of the civil charges not for the state or a private party who initiated the suit to prove their case. Hence Libel law is one of the few areas of law with a reverse onus included in the charges. Essentially it appears as if the Judge and court presume you're guilty until you prove otherwise and proving anything as subjective as Libel law is difficult especially with certain judges. It's also like proving a negative in that how do you prove you didn't do something?

"SYSTEMIC RACISM IN POLICE STOPS"

At one time in my lifetime I could joke that having police officers with a Grade 10 education kind of indicated their lack of academic skills. It's more difficult nowadays as newer officers have required much higher academic standards than ever before. That of course means a high school diploma and community college as well. Last Saturday's Waterloo Region Record carried a disturbing front page article written by Jeff Outhit titled "Critics see systemic racism in police stops". The figures are presented for all to see. Yes they do indicate some racial profiling. Truth be told not as much as I would have expected. In fact as a white person I am quite ticked as to how many of us white folks got stopped and intimidated into giving police our names. This entire "carding" procedure is nonsense and must be stopped entirely whether black or white, green or yellow.

INCOMPETENCE, COMPLACENCY, CORRUPTION OR ALL THREE?

I found the Prosecutor's 20-30 minute speech to be self-serving and bizarre in Provincial Offences Court last Wednesday morning. As much as possible he went out of his way to say nice things about mayor Shantz. Things like she demonstrated good faith. Things like she remedied and corrected her errors when she was made aware of them. In my opinion both of those statements by Mr. Fraser Kelly of London, Ontario are inaccurate. Why did the Crown Prosecutor feel it necessary to buttress the credibility or honesty of the accused?

Mr. Kelly seemed to have little compunction against criticizing my actions. Some of the criticism was subtle. Things like Mr. Marshall again did not appeal the Compliance Audit Committee's (MECAC) decision to the Ontario Court of Justice (OCJ). Mr. Kelly knew exactly why I did not appeal those decisions to the OCJ because he asked me why in my two hour and five minute interview with him 45 hours before Wednesday's Court appearance. He failed in presenting a balanced, truthful scenario.

Fraser Kelly emphasized that several of the charges were "improper". How were they improper? Did Mr. Kelly give the impression to the court that these "improper" charges were due to a failure on my part? I came away from court feeling that way. Was there something obvious in the Municipal Elections Act that somewhere said that only evenly numbered Sections of the Act are chargeable offences and odd numbered Sections are merely filler? Is there a magic phrase in certain Sections such as "May" or "May not" that determine if a candidate can be charged for failing to comply with that Section but it's O.K. to not comply with other Sections? Finally why was I not given the courtesy of a copy of the Crown Prosecutor's decision?

These alleged "improper" charges are not remotely due to any failure on my part. I went to the courts in actual and real "good faith". I relied upon Superior Court in Kitchener to advise me as to what I had to do to properly lay an "Information" which didn't become charges until after a Justice of the Peace went over the "Information" slowly and carefully and in detail. Yes it took two different J.P.s to finally succeed at this. Was that my fault? Was it my fault that I had to attend Superior court six Fridays in a row to finally get these charges laid? Was it my fault that the process is stilted, awkward and agonizingly slow? I don't think so.

Two Justice's of the Peace over six weeks. Two Prosecutors (Andres & Kelly) over six months and approx. six court appearances. Two private meetings one on December 23/15 with Mr. Andres and one on March 21 with Mr. Kelly. And then on March 23/16 Fraser Kelly springs on me in open court that four or five of my ten charges are "improper"? When did either of these prosecutors actually figure that out? I mean each and every charge was a one sentence simple and brief statement. For example charge one "Sandra Shantz failed to record as Contributions all goods and services given to her municipal election campaign contrary to Section 66.(1) of the Municipal Elections Act (1996)ie. MEA on March 27, 2015." Similarily charge two was just as straightforward namely "Sandra Shantz failed to record as Expenses all goods and services used in her municipal election campaign contrary to Section 67.(1) of the Municipal Elections Act (1996) ie MEA".

If and I say IF there are flaws in these charges what are they? I've doublechecked the Section numbers. Did I make a spelling error? Maybe a grammatical error? The date (March 27/15) preceeded all the charges but I added it anyways for some of them. Was this a failure?

And now the final kicker. Could my alleged "improper" charges have been amended or corrected at any point in time? Could they have been corrected three months ago? Two days before court? How about now? The silence from the court is both deafening and sickening. Is this just one more example of the courts doing in an unrepresented litigant (URL)? I am left with the impression that the courts have just played a big joke on me. They exploited some minor flaw that was their responsibility in the first place, not mine, in order to withdraw all the charges.

What exactly is the definition of "withdraw" charges? Is this the same as "stayed" the charges? Again for incredibly more time and money I could hire a lawyer to answer some of these questions. Silly me I thought I was already paying through the nose via taxes to have the courts work for me. Clearly not and clearly the courts have just behaved in a manner to have brought themselves into disrepute. A lot of disrepute.


►

PROSECUTORIAL & JUDICIAL BIAS

This is reproduced from another Blog and is in regards to the mayor of Woolwich Township having all Municipal Election Act(MEA) charges withdrawn yesterday.




These above biases are built into the Municipal Elections Act whether intentionally or not. Any law that puts the sole responsibility upon citizens and laypersons while assiduously avoiding giving them any practical assistance or means to fulfill their responsibilities is a sham. At every step of the way the system have done their absolute utmost to throw up roadblocks of time, money and frustration. From the wrong Forms handed out to me last September, followed by sending the case to the wrong court (Superior) and now finally telling me six months later that some of the ten charges I laid are "improper"; this process has been a bust and it's all on our judicial system. Customer service? Non-existent. Client respect? Zero. Oh and let's not forget the idiocy of having Justices of the Peace only available at Superior Court for this process ONE DAY OF THE WEEK namely Fridays. What a pathetic joke. Yet the Municipal Elections Act claims that citizens can go directly to the Courts to have the Act enforced . Pure, lying bullshit. I wanted to see if I had finally found a law holding politicians accountable for their inattention, stupidity, mistakes or downright dishonesty and disrespect for the law. If such a law exists it isn't the Municipal Elections Act.

Then we have the Crown. I have in writing from the out of town Crown the statement that he will not do any investigation whatsoever. Not even a phone call or request to the police for assistance. Everything and I mean everything constituting evidence must be spoonfed to the Crown. I and every other citizen have zero authority to collect evidence, interview witnesses or in any fashion whatsoever compel cooperation in this investigation. Oh and yes meanwhile the Crown yesterday stated in court that under the Elections Act I am not able to charge the accused with the offence of Obstruction (Section 93 MEA) for either her lawyer's dispicable attempt to keep me out of Superior Court last July or for her ten minute "ambush" of me with 30 pages of documents just prior to the July 2/15 hearing. According to the Crown yesterday this Obstruction charge doesn't apply to me. While I am the complainant I am a legal nonperson apparently.

All the Crown had to do was request an interview with the mayor's accountant. Nope he wouldn't even ask.

The Crown advised the court that eventually the mayor had included all her Contributions (donations) after multiple Financial Statements. He is of course guessing about that. They kept rising throughout the process. He was a little less clear about her expenses. Despite a minimum of four Financial Statements she did not include expenses such as her live band as pointed out here in my February 4/16 posting. Further evidence could have been obtained by a phone call or interview with the Elmira Curling Club but of course that was out of the question. Crown's are very busy people.

I mentioned four Financial Statements. Actually there is testimony to another one that was removed from the Township's website prior to the February 2/15 one going up. Of course neither the mayor nor the Township ever got around to mentioning this allegation to MECAC, Superior Court or anyone else. I advised the Crown as to the name of the person who gave me this tantalising information. Think of the implications which I also pointed out to the Crown. Would the Crown pick up the phone and make a call to confirm this statement to me. Nope! Would he get the Regional Police to make such a call? Nope! Is this a failure by the Crown or is the justice system totally and completely biased against sucessfully prosecuting violaters of the Municipal Elections Act? Or is it both? I'm not sure.

Yes Woolwich CAO Brenneman I do have an audio copy of the October 26/15 MECAC (Compliance Audit Committee) meeting. Yes I knew exactly what I was speaking of when I accused you and possibly assorted staff of failing to accurately record the facts of that meeting in your Minutes. I gave a copy of that recording to the Crown. Was the Crown keen on the clearly biased and leading comments or questions of the MECAC panel? No he wanted to know how, who and where I obtained the audio recording. At first blush I thought he just wanted to satisfy himself that it was legal and acceptable in court. Now I'm thinking it's as likely that he was looking for evidence against me. That is disturbing.

I sat down with the out of town Crown less than 48 hours before Wednesday's 9 am. Court appearance. Oddly while the Police weren't interested in helping me last summer with concerns and allegations I took to them including the Township's failure and delay in removing the mayor who had automatically forfeited her position (Section 80 MEA); nevertheless they were there for the two hour meeting last Monday. Also I believe it was a Regional Police Officer (Detective J. Murray) who arranged the appointment for last Monday. Oh and this same officer has had further recent dealings with the out of town Crown. What exactly is going on versus what I'm being told? Instead of investigating MEA contraventions am I being set up for something? Was Monday's meeting really to assist the Crown in further understanding of the MEA case or was I invited there under false pretenses? Would our Regional Police do such a thing? Is the Pope Catholic?

Then of course there is the Crown's nitpicking. Add to this the Crown advising the Court yesterday that it was not in the public interest to prosecute mayor Shantz on the Municipal Election Act (MEA) charges. I would agree it's not in her interests to prosecute her. Why is it not in the public interest? What is the Crown's criteria for claiming it's not in the public interest? Who made those criteria if they even exist? Yesterday was a very sad day for the public, citizens and taxpayers . Unsurprisingly politicians everywhere are probably very happy with how it went. It was not justice. Nice try though.

BURLINGTON SKYWAY CASE

The accused blew multiple times above the standard on a breathalizer test several hours after his truck hit and damaged the Burlington Skyway. That evidence was ruled inadmissable as the test was given after the three hour deadline. Also it turned out that the OPP had not advised the defendant of his reason for being detained as well as of his right to counsel. Last Friday's Waterloo Region Record carried this story titled "Second OPP bungle in Skyway case excused". Also today's paper states that the accused has been convicted of dangerous driving and acquitted of mischief endangering life.

All in all this gentleman is extremely fortunate considering his drinking, driving and then incredibly damaging accident to have only received the one conviction. Yours truly drove dump trucks for many years (decades) and was always cognizant of the state of the box on the truck. There are two levers involved and there was not any warning light or buzzer on any trucks I drove to tell me if the Power takeoff was engaged or if the handle was in the up position. That was on me to always know the status of the controls for the box.