Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

TURMEL: Orillia Eric Forde Quash Motion stalled for Constitutional Question!

8 views
Skip to first unread message

KingofthePaupers

unread,
Jul 30, 2016, 6:33:04 PM7/30/16
to


JCT: When Eric Forde was in court in Orillia last time, it had
been put on the docket of a Justice of the Peace with no
authority to do a Quash. When the Crown said he hadn't even
read the motion (guess he hadn't responded on time) it was put
it off to July 11.

On the 11th, Judge Michael Harpur immediately refused to even
read the motion stating the constitutional issue had not been
properly served on the Provincial Attorneys-General. How could
he know it's constitutional if he hadn't read it?

Too bad he hadn't read the motion before refusing to read it.
In it was the explanation why a S.601 Quash wasn't
constitutional in J.P. and not here either. It also includes a
sample Notice of No Constitutional Question Eric will now
file. I include it just so judges too inept to know the law
should be apprised up front of what I'm going to do. What
about a judge too inept to know the law nor even do his duty
to find out by reading it?

The judge put it off to July 26 to pick a date for a pre-trial
hearing. So Eric's going to announce he needs at least 30 days
for the required Notice of Constitutional Question for his
newly-filed Quash Motion.

So now we get to embarrass Judge Harpur as we've embarrassed
Judge Anouk Desaulniers and Judge Laflamme in niece Marie's
Gatineau case. So she filed her "Notice of No Constitutional
Question" informing all AGs that though no constitutional
issues would be raised, Judge Desaulniers thought there was
and insisted they be given notice anyway! There it was.

Now same thing for Judge LaFlamme and now Judge Michael Harpur
for Eric Forde will enter the pantheon of judges in AG
provincial archives who didn't know a S.601 motion was not
constitutional.

Imagine the day we catch a judge who accepts Rogin is right
that a S.601 Quash is not constitutional. Just have to keep
looking.

Ray with Rene Ouellet in Quebec City July 29 trying to set a
date for trial so the Quash can be heard by the Trial judge!
Har har har. Rene will argue the Quash is for a judge of first
instance.

Then Max has a newbie Quash on Aug 4 in Montreal.

And Ray has another newbie Quash on Aug 8 in Gatineau.

Then on Aug 11, Ray has two more in St-Jerome.
0 new messages