GUILT BY ASSOCIATION

The Merchant Law Group in Regina, are now guaranteed 25 million dollars for representing the victims of criminal acts (child sex abuse), that were unlawfully covered up by the hierarchy within the church. (In the U.S., they rightly refer to this as organized crime…) But that is only the beginning. The Canadian taxpayers are going to be forced to cough up another 5 billion, because the Government of Canada doesn’t have the guts to expropriate the property of the churches involved. This was all made possible when the government’s advertising agencies put us on a collective guilt trip for the way we sexually abused the natives. But let’s get real. The only people who got diddled, were the victims and the taxpayers.
If we can expropriate (steal) property on a probability without a full & fair hearing, from/for the “Hell Angels”, why don’t we do the same with the Roman Catholic Church, (or any of the other denominations that were responsible…) when we are dealing with a certainty? Why should Canadian taxpayers shell out five billion dollars, when it was the bishops who covered for the pedophiles? Meanwhile the burghers of Saskatoon, let Brian George Dueck & Carol Bunko-Ruys, walk free. The fact that they allowed Kathleen Jessica Ross and Michelle Mimi Ross to be raped and sodomized for 43 months between May 29th, 1990 & January 1994, means little. The fact that they allowed their justice system to perpetrate a fraud in order to avoid detection, means even less. Unlawful expropriation, diddling priests & the Ross twin fiasco, do have something in common. A corrupt justice system.

Hrabinsky's Reputation

I would like to hear from those who believe Mr. Justice Paul Hrabinsky’s reputation, is something other than an artfully crafted legal fiction…

www.saskatchewanjustice.ca

Is it fair to blame Mr. Justice Hrabinsky, for Q.B.’s, institutionalized corruption?

www.justicehrabinsky.com

The Court Record v. Saskatchewan Justice Baffle-gab

In early September 2003, senior prosecutors at the management level within Saskatchewan Justice, made a tactical decision to have both my wife and I charged, in order to protect the position (transcripts from a “show cause”, make this clear…) they had taken in another case. Resident prosecutors in Saskatoon received their marching orders and quickly co-opted Sergeant Joseph Faber, from the Saskatoon Police Service. The fact that this Sergeant later admitted under oath that he didn’t understand the charges, is significant, because the police usually only act when they have a legitimate complainant, rather than a proxy. Bizarre or not, the Crown notified this writer at his first pre-trial-conference, that they were not going to call any of the three, so called complainants. At a much later point in time the defendant pushed the point and the Crown agreed to do so. (But within weeks. they ordered a “stay of proceedings”, on the remaining charge…) In retrospect it has become clear that Saskatchewan Justice tried to inflame the local judiciary & obtain quick convictions. An honest assessment, would show that they almost succeeded.
Note: The authorities charged both my wife and I, using the same INFORMATION & OCCURRENCE numbers. On September 15, 2003, my wife and I were arrested, detained and charged with the following four (8 overall) identical offences:

(a) Between the 8th day of September, A.D. 2003 and the 15th day of September, A.D. 2003, at or near Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, did commit a contempt of court by causing posters to be displayed which were contemptuous of Justice Paul Hrabinsky, a Judge of the Court of Queen's Bench, of Saskatchewan, contrary to law.

(b) Between the 8th day of September, A.D. 2003 and the 15th day of September, A.D. 2003, at or near Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, did publish matter without lawful justification or excuse that was likely to injure the reputation of Justice Paul Hrabinsky, by exposing him to hatred, contempt or ridicule, or that was designed to insult Justice Paul Hrabinsky, knowing that the matter was false and did thereby commit an offence, contrary to section 300 of the Criminal Code.

(c) Between the 8th day of September, A.D. 2003 and the 15th day of September, A.D. 2003, at or near Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, did publish matter without lawful justification or excuse that was likely to injure the reputation of Superintendent Brian Dueck, a peace officer, by exposing him to hatred, contempt or ridicule, or that was designed to insult Superintendent Brian Dueck, knowing that the matter was false and did thereby commit an offence, contrary to section 300 of the Criminal Code.

(d) Between the 8th day of September, A.D. 2003 and the 15th day of September, A.D. 2003, at or near Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, did publish matter without lawful justification or excuse that was likely to injure the reputation of Rod Donlevy, by exposing him to hatred, contempt or ridicule, or that was designed to insult Rod Donlevy, knowing that the matter was false and did thereby commit an offence, contrary to section 300 of the Criminal Code.

Case Disposition

Over the next 35 months, ALL 8 charges (my wife had her four withdrawn within weeks…) were withdrawn, tossed, or in the case of the last, a “stay of proceedings”, was entered regarding the Hrabinsky section 300 (defamatory libel) offence, on August 24, 2006.

Why?

1. The Supreme Court has made it clear that you can’t use a “mere insult”, as the basis for a section 300 charge.

2. While the Crown no longer must prove that the defendant knew his/her words, were untrue, they can’t proceed when the entire legal community within a province, knows them to be true.

3. Mr. Justice Krueger, with the full support of Mr. Justice Allbright, requested that his Chief Justice have this matter removed from the Court’s jurisdiction. Mr. Justice Krueger later explained that the Chief Justice had approached the Chief Justice of the Appeal Court and that it was decided that it would be procedurally cumbersome. Before Mr. Justice Krueger made his request, he had the defendant forgo his automatic right to an Appeal. This was all done because of the perception of bias within the Court of Queen’s Bench. As noted above, Saskatchewan Justice, succeeded in their plan to inflame the judiciary.

4. At the time Saskatchewan Justice entered the “stay of proceedings”, involving their last remaining charge, their senior prosecutor Mr. Jeff Kalmakoff, handling the matter, had already informed the defendant that he believed that, “former police superintendent, Brian George Dueck, was responsible for allowing Kathleen Jessica Ross & Michell(e) Mimi Ross, to be sodomized and raped, for a period of 43 months.” Mr. Kalmakoff made this admission in front of a witness and had the integrity to not deny his “spontaneous utterance”, when more than one justice was informed.

5. It is my belief that Mr. Justice Ball, would have entered a “judicial stay”, at the next hearing, if Saskatchewan Justice had not acted first.

6. Despite the hoopla, the Crown never had a case & neither of the accused had committed a crime.

THE EXONERATED VICTIMS OF THIS MALICIOUS PROSECUTION, STILL BELIEVE THAT;

1. The evidence is clear that the Crown perpetrated a fraud in Mr. Justice Hrabinsky’s Court.

2. For whatever reason, Mr. Justice Hrabinsky, has refused to report the undeniable fraud that occurred, within his Court.

3. Mr. Justice Paul Hrabinsky corrupted the Court of Queen’s Bench, when he failed to do his duty. How can anyone trust the integrity of Queen’s Bench, when they allow a Justice, to get away with not reporting an obvious fraud that occurred within his Court?

4. Mr. Justice Paul Hrabinsky, is corrupt.

www.justicehrabinsky.com would never have come about if the authorities had responded to the last of the “Symak Papers”, which were received on January 12, 2007, with some sort of investigation. Because we were only able to confirm the credibility of some of the allegations, I had a 45 minute conversation with a lawyer who was conversant with the rest. This lawyer thought the matter was serious and I decided to inform Mr. Justice Paul Hrabinsky, via Mr. Berezowsky, the Judicial Centre of Saskatoon’s Registrar, plus three senior Saskatchewan Justice prosecutors. The fact that the authorities did not even have the decency to reply, is the only reason I purchased the above domain name. The facts behind the Hrabinsky story are interesting & deserve their own site. Please contact the webmaster if you wish to correct an error, or have relevant information that you wish to include, so that this site will remain, “fair & balanced”. While Justice Hrabinsky will never be as infamous as British Columbia’s, Judge Begbie, they both share one trait.