Journal Entry Dec 10, 2011; Summary

Summary

The criminal allegations are combined with radar assaults linked to cancer.

The criminal allegations are linked to an unlawful assessment order before trial to find me not guilty of having committed a crime, when I haven't committed a crime, the delays and unlawful orders increase the exposure to the radar assaults while I'm trapped defending myself from the criminal allegations.

The unlawful assessment order resulted in delays, other delay examples are:

On October 21, 2011 the criminal court clerk confirmed several times that all 3 motions had been added to the role and sent to the judge, it's linked to an abuse of process through an appeal, on October 21, 2011 the judge only had 2 motions, the main or motion with the standing for appeal was missing,,,

On November 9, 2011 the crown states that he wants to renew his assessment order, which he can not do, the judge explains that pro-format is simply a latin word that means it proceeds or doesn't proceed, says he's going to solve the problem and sets a trial date, so I didn't ask for a trial date and neither did the crown, and I also tell the judge that according to the criminal code section 786 (2) he can not order proceeding after 6 months, he dismisses this and sets a trial date and states that he has ordered the trial, which is linked to more delays, several months, appeals that may not be successful given my lack of knowledge, etc ,,, delays linked to a longer period of vulnerability and exposure to radar assaults.

The radar assaults are linked to serious illness, different cancers such as lung cancer, bone cancer, leukemia, hidden homicides through cancer, the medical system, vulnerability, and trap me in Quebec also.

Fake Mob News Dec 5, 7, 2011

Fake Mob News Dec 5, 2011

Syria asks Canada for cancer causing radar assaulting technology.

We want to make people suffer, scream in pain, we want the radar assaulting technology Canada!

"we need to clean ourselves" the Syrian police stated, "and think using the combination of radar assaults and criminal allegations to frame victims and give them cancer too, like they do in Canada would help us with our human rights issues."

Fake Mob News Dec 7, 2011

The Syrian Police have a question for the Canadian Police.

So you use false allegations to trap them, and radar assaults linked to deadly cancers until they are framed or have cancer, you use your prison psychiatry to interpret this as a delusion, and hide these homicides through your medical system?

Is it vicious enough to induce fear?

A Conversation About Gun Control

Gun control makes sense, deranged people get guns and they kill people, so no more guns no
more deranged people and rage shootings.

What, organized crime, criminal harassment, they are causing these by using homelessness as a weapon, and also using technology for sleep deprivation and assaulting people with radar linked to cancer too!! That's not simply deranged people, and what, the more defenseless the population is the more this type of abuse is increased to induce fear through viciousness?

What does more information about the issue change?

"a deranged person" is not enough of an explanation.

Disarm the population, a defenseless population, leaving the only the Police and organized crime with guns? Do the authorities and Police start to abuse a defenseless population? If you are not "liked" by the police is being vulnerable to organized crime stressful?

Danny Hunt (mobbing)

[7] A routine example is that I would go to a grocery store when highly sleep deprived, criminal harassment participants would mix in with other shoppers and use different forms of threats and provocation to induce stress and adrenaline, try to stand directly behind me at the cash register, and interpret the adrenaline and voice fluctuations as fear, which is linked to fear and honor and attempts at repetitive humiliation;

Dear OHCHR

I would like to make you and human right defenders aware of my mobbing experience --.

[1] In 2003-2004 I reported the belief that I had caused the death of a team mate, -- , when a minor to the -- after being led to this conclusion by criminal harassment participants or mobbing participants;

[2] Their intention, mobbing participants, seemed to be a run away strategy linked to insinuations that I had committed murder and "who told you" linked to the psychological threat of being framed;

[3] I was charged with criminal mischief when she was found alive but her brother ceased to exist, resulting in my reporting of this error to the -- and the charge of criminal mischief in 2004;

[4] It seems to have been a mobbing and organized crime trap which would resulting in a criminal record, I found myself having to prove that I had caused the death of -- to be found innocent of criminal mischief;

[5] Starting in 2007 I began to experience high levels of sleep deprivation through what I believe to be sound technology, possibly the 2005 award winning HSS Hypersonic Sound technology that is linked to using ultra sound to create sound at a great distances and specific locations;

[6] Combined with criminal harassment and mobbing linked to provocation and threats to induce adrenaline and high levels of stress, acid-base disorders, and premature aging;

[7] A routine example is that I would go to a grocery store when highly sleep deprived, criminal harassment participants would mix in with other shoppers and use different forms of threats and provocation to induce stress and adrenaline, try to stand directly behind me at the cash register, and interpret the adrenaline and voice fluctuations as fear, which is linked to fear and honor and attempts at repetitive humiliation;

[8] In 2008 I filed complaints against several medical professionals including a cardiologist that told me high levels of stress and sleep deprivation had no effect on the body, muscles, and heart;

[9] In 2008-2009 I filed complaints with the -- against -- a former -- member who was present in the event when a minor;

[10] Following this complaint with the -- I filed a complaint with the Laval Police dept. against -- the former -- member with the -- police dept. and requested a search for -- who according to the -- ceased to exist in 2004;

[11] In August-September 2010 I started being attacked through powerful radar microwaves at my apartment, used to push me out of my apartment during winter, and linked to another run away strategy "run away or get cancer" and the criminal allegations of February 21 fabricated from to a Mobbing Research article by the Laval Police dept.;

[12] I continue to be attacked through powerful radar and microwave technology during the period of time I attempt to defend myself (see motions below) resulting in making me vulnerable to threats of intervention for the behavior linked to attempts to protect myself from this technology or weapon linked to cancer, which is linked to being detained and vulnerable to bad legal representation or participants in mobbing to frame a targeted citizen;

http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-659420

Mobbing Research: Run Away Strategy "run away or get cancer" - CNN iReport
(article link)

[1] The mob, organized crime, is using powerful radar and microwave technology linked to radiation sensitive cancer such as lung cancer combined with the criminal allegations, a run away strategy "run away or get cancer";

[2] Victims of this strategy who run away are framed through being detained and incarcerated resulting in being vulnerable to bad legal representation or participating lawyers at great expense.

http://www.psychologicalharassment.info/news/mobbing-in-modern-society/1141-mobbing-research-run-away-strategy-qrun-away-or-get-cancerq

Human Rights Violation, Homicides in Canada - CNN iReport (article link)
http://www.psychologicalharassment.us/news/mobbing-in-modern-society/1171-human-rights-violation-homicides-in-canada-cnn-ireport-article-link

Citizens are assaulted with powerful radar during the period of time a they try to defend themselves from criminal allegations; the mob in Canada is combining powerful radar assaults with criminal allegations;

Powerful Radar Targeting System Theory

2007

My experience in -- has been about 4 years of criminal harassment, provocation and threats linked to stress, cortisol, and adrenaline to deplete potassium linked to the bodies buffer system, combined with sleep deprivation through sound technology, sound technology such as the 2005 award winning HSS Hypersonic Sound technology, to induce acid-base imbalance linked to physical damage, premature aging, and calcium depletion;

2010-2011

This was followed by radar assaults starting in 2010, followed by 2011 criminal allegations of uttering threats on Facebook in a post for discussion called Mobbing Research .. , the Laval police entering my home without warrant and seizing my computers without warrant combined with an unlawful assessment order before trial for non-criminal responsibility, non-criminal responsibility would sanction the arrest and charges, search and seizure without a warrant;

Targeting System Theory

I first believed that the combination of calcium depletion and radar assaults was an attempt to manipulate the targeted citizen in absorbing neurotoxic metals like lead when attempting to shield themselves from the radar assaults, lead is used in the industry to shield from x-rays and radar.

And this may be true since calcium depletion is linked to bad health, heart disease, colon cancer, brain health, and lead would increase the attack on the brain;

The targeting system theory is linked to the fact that similar to absorbing more lead due to the calcium depletion, the targeted citizen can also absorb more radioactive isotopes used in a targeting system, which can be linked to the powerful radar assaults and powerful radar streams aimed at the shin bone, hips and butt, "how can they see me in my own home?".

http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-700426


Acid-Base Imbalance a Medical Weapon Linked to Diet, Stress, and Sleep Deprivation - CNN iReport (article link)
http://www.psychologicalharassment.us/news/mobbing-in-modern-society/1170-acid-base-imbalance-a-medical-weapon-linked-to-diet-stress-and-sleep-deprivation-cnn-ireport-article-link

In 2008 I was highly sleep deprived through sound technology and highly stressed through criminal harassment, provocation linked to adrenaline and the loss of potassium, depletion of calcium, which is linked to the buffer system and acid-base imbalance.

Several doctors including a cardiologist told me that high levels of stress and sleep deprivation had no effect on the body and heart.

High levels of sleep deprivation, stress, and acid-base imbalance was the medical and physical weapons the mob was using to cause physical damage, premature aging, calcium depletion, and links to serious illness.

The Standard American Diet, S.A.D., a diet high in sugar, refined, and processed foods makes people more vulnerable to this weapon.

http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-681985

Serious Human Rights Violations in Quebec Canada - CNN iReport (article link)

In Quebec Canada a combination of false criminal allegations are used to trap a person in their location combined with radar assaults until the person either gets framed or develops a radar related cancer such as leukemia, lung cancer, bone cancer etc.

The "game" like all other human rights violators in the world is denial and ridicule.

Victims of workplace psychological harassment used to be ridiculed, that was the "game".

Victims of criminal harassment and radar assaults are still ridiculed, still the "game", and I want this to change too.

http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-709502


Mobbing Research: Strategy and Violence - CNN iReport (article link)

Destroying a person's health and cancer resulting from radar assaults trap the accused in their country, their medical system, similar to a criminal record, and the medical system and participating members of the medical community can be used in coercion "change your story or die", and for hidden homicides.

Mobbing Research: Strategy and Violence

Insinuations that I was dangerous by the -- Police and other members of the criminal judicial system were combined with the criminal allegations and radar assaults;

Like a pre-paint.

1. Am I supposed to become violent given being "trapped" by criminal allegations and assaulted by radar linked to cancer during this period of time?

2. Are the radar assaults themselves, like an animal tormented in a cage, supposed to make me hateful and violent?

3. If I develop a cancer am I supposed to become violent and "hit back"?

4. The -- Police never justified entering my home and seizing my computers without warrant, through the pretense that I was dangerous, a serious legal intrusion that amounts to trespassing and a crime when not justified and burden of proof refuted in court, and it has not been justified or refuted in court;

My guess is that the -- Police used these allegations and pretense that I was dangerous to justify communications interception too, under section 183 of the criminal code;

Plan 1

Use an "unlawful" assessment order before trial for non-criminal responsibility to escape police wrong doing;

Plan 2

The radar assaults, harassment, and provocation in attempts to push an accused to violence would help the police escape wrong doing;

5. Ranting about being assault by powerful radar and anger directed towards the police to justify intervention and incarceration through psychiatry;

Destroying a person's health and cancer resulting from radar assaults trap the accused in their country, their medical system, similar to a criminal record, and the medical system and participating members of the medical community can be used in coercion "change your story or die", and for hidden homicides.

http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-711021

Psychological Manipulation: Danny Hunt and Megan Meier's Assassination and Assassination Attempt - CNN iReport (article link)

This criminal harassment network influenced my perception and led me to believe everyone hated me and wanted me to die, mobbing[m];

--

[1] An adult mother of another teenager posing as a 16 year old boy, a new friend;

[3] The boy leads the start of insults on Megan with other teenagers, mobbing[m];

[4] The boy states "the world would be a better place without Megan", mobbing[m];

Mobbing Research: The First Assassination Attempt of Danny Hunt in 1998

The mob has been trying to push me to homelessness and assassinate me for a long time now, before 1998, which is around the time of the first assassination attempt.

I had left my job after being the victim of workplace psychological harassment, I felt purposeless, depressed, burned out, paranoid, and I was led to the conclusion that I had caused the death of someone when a minor, -- .

"The mob is stuck, the mob is stuck, kill yourself, hang yourself, you have no future, your future is in the garbage, the homeless are in the anus, you are in the anus".

This criminal harassment network influenced my perception and led me to believe everyone hated me and wanted me to die, mobbing[m];

Sound technology was used to repeat that I should hang myself, repetitive suggestion or thought influence, "hang yourself", and psychological manipulation linked to steps and actions towards a suicide attempt "make a plan", "call -- ", I did, failed, and a failed assassination attempt at around 1998;

-- is a former police officer and the idea linked to the plan and steps towards the action of committing suicide by hanging myself was that it would be better for him to find me first than my parents.

Megan Meier's

I believe this is Similar to the Megan Meier's case of a suicide through the psychological manipulation of an adult that intentionally passed her self off as a teenage boy to manipulate Megan who was already vulnerable and crush her psychologically leading to a suicide.

Megan Meier's psychological manipulation and suicide:

[1] An adult mother of another teenager posing as a 16 year old boy, a new friend;

[2] Not wanting to be friends anymore because "Megan is not nice to her friends", psychological crisis;

[3] The boy leads the start of insults on Megan with other teenagers, mobbing[m];

[4] The boy states "the world would be a better place without Megan", mobbing[m];

[5] Megan commits suicide.

[m] Mobbing is linked to suicides and pushing people to suicides intentionally and unintentionally.


HSS Hypersonic Sound - Wikipedia (article link)

Elwood "Woody" Norris, founder and Chairman of American Technology Corporation (ATC), announced he had successfully created a device which achieved ultrasound transmission of sound in 1996.[5] ATC named and trademarked their device as "HyperSonic Sound" (HSS). In February 1998, HSS was named the Best of What's New for 1997 by readers of Popular Science [6]. In December 2002, Popular Science named HyperSonic Sound the best invention of 2002.[citation needed] Norris received the 2005 Lemelson-MIT Prize for his invention of a "hypersonic sound".[7] ATC (now named LRAD Corporation) spun off the technology to Parametric Sound Corporation in September 2010 to focus on their Long Range Acoustic Device products (LRAD), according to their quarterly reports, press releases and executive statements.[8][9]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sound_from_ultrasound

The HSS technology uses ultrasound distribution, so the audio can be broadcast in narrow beam similar to laser. HSS allows highly focused sound beam, therefor significantly minimizing the noise level in closed or opened area.

http://www.directional-sound.com/en/products/hyper-sonic-sound

Possible organized crime applications: sleep deprivation, criminal harassment, threats and intimidation, ideation and psychological manipulation, suicides.


Canadian Criminal Code, No Person Commits Culpable Homicide by any Influence on the Mind Alone - (news Flash)

227. [Repealed, 1999, c. 5, s. 9]

Killing by influence on the mind

228. No person commits culpable homicide where he causes the death of a human being

(a) by any influence on the mind alone, or

(b) by any disorder or disease resulting from influence on the mind alone,

• Danny Hunt, Sleep Deprivation & Sharp Beeping

Serious Human Rights Violations in Quebec Canada

Victims of workplace psychological harassment used to be ridiculed, that was the "game".

Victims of criminal harassment and radar assaults are still ridiculed, still the "game", and I want this to change too.

Workplace psychological harassment was used to get rid of someone, criminal harassment and radar assaults are linked to getting rid of someone too, through homelessness and cancer.

....

Human Rights Violation, Homicides in Canada

Citizens are assaulted with powerful radar during the period of time a they try to defend themselves from criminal allegations; the mob in Canada is combining powerful radar assaults with criminal allegations;

Powerful Radar Targeting System Theory

2007

My experience in Laval Quebec Canada has been about 4 years of criminal harassment, provocation and threats linked to stress, cortisol, and adrenaline to deplete potassium linked to the bodies buffer system, combined with sleep deprivation through sound technology, sound technology such as the 2005 award winning HSS Hypersonic Sound technology, to induce acid-base imbalance linked to physical damage, premature aging, and calcium depletion;

2010-2011

This was followed by radar assaults starting in 2010, followed by 2011 criminal allegations of uttering threats on Facebook in a post for discussion called Mobbing Research .. , the Laval police entering my home without warrant and seizing my computers without warrant combined with an unlawful assessment order before trial for non-criminal responsibility, non-criminal responsibility would sanction the arrest and charges, search and seizure without a warrant;

Targeting System Theory

I first believed that the combination of calcium depletion and radar assaults was an attempt to manipulate the targeted citizen in absorbing neurotoxic metals like lead when attempting to shield themselves from the radar assaults, lead is used in the industry to shield from x-rays and radar.

And this may be true since calcium depletion is linked to bad health, heart disease, colon cancer, brain health, and lead would increase the attack on the brain;

The targeting system theory is linked to the fact that similar to absorbing more lead due to the calcium depletion, the targeted citizen can also absorb more radioactive isotopes used in a targeting system, which can be linked to the powerful radar assaults and powerful radar streams aimed at the shin bone, hips and butt, "how can they see me in my own home?".

....

Mobbing Research: Two Favorite Smear Campaign Strategies

1. The first favorite smear campaign strategy is to use a criminal harassment network to provide information or lead a person to a conclusion, leading them to report the issue to the police and being charged with criminal mischief;

- This criminal harassment network does not exist according to the police and authorities;

2. The second favorite smear campaign strategy is to use criminal allegations combined with powerful radar, assessment orders, and prison psychiatrists;

The result is that the smear campaign victim is found not guilty of having committed a crime due to mental illness;

When they have not committed a crime to start with.

- According to the police and authorities powerful radar linked to cancer is not used to target citizens in their own homes.

....

Human Rights Violations in Quebec Canada

State Police, Surete du Quebec

Police criminal allegations combined with powerful radar assaults, a criminal judicial system that is in on the "game", delays and corruption while the accused is trapped and assaulted with radar, in attempts to give him a radar related cancer, leukemia, lung cancer, bone cancer;

To use the state medical system for coercion "change your story or die" and third world type attempts to make a person suffer;

In Quebec Canada.

Besides being well hidden and denied, like other human rights violating countries; How is this different from the condemned human rights violating country Syria that was recently in the news?

Summary of Events1984-85, When a minor someone instructed Stephan Hardy to stand behind me and say you are going to suffer, a Surete du Quebec officer was in the back ground too;

Several years later a criminal harassment network leads me to conclude that I caused the death of a teammate when a minor;

I report the issue to the Surete du Quebec and I'm charged with criminal mischief in 2004, I found myself in the position of having to prove I caused someone's death to be found innocent of criminal mischief, I was found non-criminally responsible due to mental illness;

2007 start of high levels of sleep deprivation through sound technology combined with criminal harassment, the criminal harassment network;

2010 start of radar assaults;

2011 Laval Police criminal allegations of uttering threats on Facebook in a Mobbing Research article that I wrote, false allegations, combined with the powerful radar assaults.

View on Reality

The Police and Mob are linked too using homelessness as a weapon through workplace psychological harassment and a criminal harassment network;

The criminal harassment network is linked to the Surete du Quebec, the state police, and in 2003-2004 it was a form of trap, a setup or smear campaign attempt linked to a criminal record;

Unable to eliminate my means of subsistence to use homelessness as a weapon or for coercion, a plan was made to destroy my health to use serious illness and cancer as a weapon, for coercion or silence through death instead of homelessness;

1st Part of Plan

Starting 2007 the criminal harassment network participants was combined with high levels of sleep deprivation through sound technology, possibly the 2005 award winning HSS Hypersonic Sound technology;

2nd Part of Plan

Starting in 2010 I started being assaulted by powerful radar linked to cancer such as leukemia, lung cancer, bone cancer, testicular cancer, followed by and combined with 2011 criminal allegations of uttering threats on facebook towards women in a Mobbing Research .. article published on CNN and shared on facebook for discussion, false allegations, trapped in this location while assaulted by powerful radar, delays and corruption in the criminal judicial system by participants who seem to know the "game" of being assaulted by powerful radar combined with false allegations, also linked to draining my finances or an attempt to bankrupt me, the threat of intervention if I display efforts to protect and shield myself from these assaults linked to getting framed through an "unlawful" assessment order for non-criminal responsibility due to mental illness of having committed a crime when the allegations are completely false, another smear campaign attempt linked to being painted as a women hater and criminal record;

Longer delays linked to a longer period of radar assault exposure and increased risk of cancer.

The "game" is denial and ridicule but I think people and the International Community can see the truth when they read it, Quebec Canada a serious Human Rights Violator.

....

Serious Human Rights Violations in Quebec Canada

In Quebec Canada a combination of false criminal allegations are used to trap a person in their location combined with radar assaults until the person either gets framed or develops a radar related cancer such as leukemia, lung cancer, bone cancer etc.

The "game" like all other human rights violators in the world is denial and ridicule.

Journal Entry Nov 23, 2011; Two Cars and Guys in Front of Home

Two cars in front of my house when I came home, two guys talking when I came out to get into my van for protection.

Looks like they wanted me to see them, intimidation, given the police allegations are not going to work, 786 (2), I wondering what other form of attack I can expect from the mob or police.,

Paranoid? The police criminal allegations are combined with powerful radar assaults, they entered my home without warrant, searched my home without warrant, seized my computers without warrant, they have not justified this in court, their criminal allegations fabricated from a Mobbing Research .. article don't even work or match the criminal code definition they used for the allegations, and now the proceedings were instituted Out of Jurisdiction 786 (2), in other words they are in trouble which means I can expect another form of attack from the police or mob.

NOTICE OF APPLICATION November 22, 2011

No. DE DOSSIER: 540-01-048499-118
QUEBEC
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
DISTRICT OF LAVAL

BETWEEN:

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
respondent
- and -
DANNY HUNT
applicant

NOTICE OF APPLICATION

TAKE NOTICE that an application will be brought on Friday day, the 16 day of December, 2011, at 9:30 am, at Palais de Justice Laval, 2800, boulevard Saint-Martin Ouest, Laval (Québec) H7T 2S9, courtroom 1.07, for an Order allowing the application, granting the application, declaring that under section 786. (2) No proceedings shall be instituted more than six months after the time when the subject-matter of the proceedings arose, unless the prosecutor and the defendant so agree, that on November 9, 2011 when the Lower Court Judge ordered a trial on April 12, 2012 and instituted proceedings over six months from February 21, 2011 when the subject-matter of proceedings arose over the objection of the Applicant the Order was made Out of Jurisdiction, and granting the Applicant a stay of proceedings.

THE GROUNDS FOR THIS APPLICATION ARE:

1. THAT under section 786. (2) No proceedings shall be instituted more than six months after the time when the subject-matter of the proceedings arose, unless the prosecutor and the defendant so agree;
2. THAT the Crown on November 9, 2011 stated that he wished to renew his demand for an assessment order for non-criminal responsibility;
3. THAT the Lower Court Judge instituted proceedings and ordered a trial for April 12, 2012 on November 9, 2011;
4. THAT the order on November 9, 2011 to set a trial on April 12, 2011 was made over the objection of the applicant that also sited section 786 (2);
5. THAT the Applicant was charged on February 21, 2011 and when the subject-matter of the proceedings arose;
6. THAT the time from February 21, 2011 to November 9, 2011 is about eight months;
7. THAT the institution of proceedings on November 9, 2011 about eight months after February 21, 2011 was made Out of Jurisdiction according to section 786 (2) of the criminal code;
8. THAT the delay in instituting proceedings and setting a trial date is due to the Crown’s “unlawful”, see R v. Muschke, assessment order of February 23, 2011 for non-criminal responsibility made before trial, see R v. Swain, and his claim of wanting to renew this expired assessment order for non-criminal responsibility;
9. THAT a stay of proceedings is appropriate in the circumstances; and
10. Such further and other grounds as counsel may advise and this Honourable Court may permit.

IN SUPPORT OF THIS APPLICATION, THE APPLICANT RELIES UPON THE FOLLOWING:

1. The motion of November 9, 2011;
2. The transcript of November 9, 2011;
3. Other transcripts in the Applicant's case;
4. Judgments;
5. Affidavit and Factum; and
6. Such further and other material as counsel may advise and this Honourable Court may permit.

THE RELIEF SOUGHT IS:

1. An Order allowing the application, granting the application, declaring that under section 786. (2) No proceedings shall be instituted more than six months after the time when the subject-matter of the proceedings arose, unless the prosecutor and the defendant so agree, that on November 9, 2011 when the Lower Court Judge ordered a trial on April 12, 2012 and instituted proceedings after more than six months from February 21, 2011 the time when the subject-matter of proceedings arose over the objection of the Applicant the Order was made Out of Jurisdiction, and granting the Applicant a stay of proceedings.

THE APPLICANT MAY BE SERVED WITH DOCUMENTS PERTINENT TO THIS APPLICATION

1. By service in accordance with rule 5,

Dated at residence, 9:00 am, this 22 day of November, 2011.

_______________________________
Signature of applicant
Danny Hunt,

Time, The Speed of Light, Neutrinos Going Faster Than The Speed of Light

Time, The Speed of Light, Neutrinos Going Faster Than The Speed of Light

Neutrinos and Time

Light has a constant speed in the universe, an environmental factor.

Your perception of time changes according to your speed and the speed of light.

The closer you get to the speed of light to match this speed of light, the light in your environment is slower.

When your reach the speed of light and match the speed of light, "time stops" for matter but matter can not match the speed of light.

The neutrinos surpassing the speed of light, not matter or 'time reversing', going into the past, it's a subatomic particle.

Sub-atomics have different rules like Quantum Physics that are different from matter world.

Matter world of electrons, protons, neutrons.

Matter world functions with electrons and the speed of light.

----

Neutrinos are a sub-atomic particle that do not have electrons.

----

Still not sleeping, I was watching Einstein on Nova.

Here is my Einstein moment about Time, The Speed of Light, and Neutrinos going faster than the speed of light.

Human Rights Violation Advise to China from a Western Country Citizen, Laval Quebec Canada (satire)

News
Chinese officials are escalating their campaign to silence world-famous artist Ai Weiwei, who has a reputation for speaking his mind.

Advise

China, please blast his apartment with powerful radar and assault him with powerful radar linked to leukemia, lung cancer, testicular cancer, and other cancers, it is how it is done in the Western countries.

They'll stop reporting the issue and start ridiculing Ai Weiwei "try wearing a tin foil hat" "microwaves?" "take your medication" etc.

--

Recently, they slammed him with a multi-million dollar tax bill, claiming he'd been delinquent. After fans helped Weiwei cover most of the large sum the government claimed he owed, officials are now "investigating" accusations of pornography against the artist.

?

Ok, I confess, I watch porn Canada. : )

--

"The whole accusation has no base and it's really fabricated by police," Weiwei said.

Police Fabricating Accusations

The police fabricated accusations .. no way.

--

Lucky Ai Weiwei

Ai Weiwei is lucky he's not in Canada

In Canada they use a combination of fabricated criminal allegations and radar assaults, he might have cancer by now.

--

Taxes?

China using taxes, the way it's done by the pros in the West is that once he's seriously ill or has cancer you use your medical system, participating medical community members for coercion or homicide, problem solved.

--

Complaining About Radar Assaults

If Ai Weiwei complains about the radar assaults you use your caring and concerned Police dept. to intervene, and bring him to your Psychiatric Institution for the best of care possible for Ai.

--

Canada and Western Countries

Canada and Western Countries want to crack down on China for their human rights violations that offend the International Community.

Human Rights Violation, Homicides in Canada

Human Rights Violation, Homicides in Canada

Citizens are assaulted with powerful radar during the period of time a they try to defend themselves from criminal allegations; the mob in Canada is combining powerful radar assaults with criminal allegations;

Powerful Radar Targeting System Theory

2007

My experience in Laval Quebec Canada has been about 4 years of criminal harassment, provocation and threats linked to stress, cortisol, and adrenaline to deplete potassium linked to the bodies buffer system, combined with sleep deprivation through sound technology, sound technology such as the 2005 award winning HSS Hypersonic Sound technology, to induce acid-base imbalance linked to physical damage, premature aging, and calcium depletion;

2010-2011

This was followed by radar assaults starting in 2010, followed by 2011 criminal allegations of uttering threats on Facebook in a post for discussion called Mobbing Research .. , the Laval police entering my home without warrant and seizing my computers without warrant combined with an unlawful assessment order before trial for non-criminal responsibility, non-criminal responsibility would sanction the arrest and charges, search and seizure without a warrant;

Targeting System Theory

I first believed that the combination of calcium depletion and radar assaults was an attempt to manipulate the targeted citizen in absorbing neurotoxic metals like lead when attempting to shield themselves from the radar assaults, lead is used in the industry to shield from x-rays and radar.

And this may be true since calcium depletion is linked to bad health, heart disease, colon cancer, brain health, and lead would increase the attack on the brain;

The targeting system theory is linked to the fact that similar to absorbing more lead due to the calcium depletion, the targeted citizen can also absorb more radioactive isotopes used in a targeting system, which can be linked to the powerful radar assaults and powerful radar streams aimed at the shin bone, hips and butt, "how can they see me in my own home?".

Journal Entry October 29th, Powerful Radar Assaults After Court Transcription Demand

Journal Entry October 29th, Powerful Radar Assaults After Court Transcription Demand

I took refuge in a van from my home, an apartment and a house, to escape powerful radar assaults from neighboring homes.

The shins, lower leg bone, and lungs were mainly targeted when I was left with only one computer after the Laval Police seized the others including my laptop on February 21, 2011 to defend myself, write a motion for restitution of property that was granted with a month delay.
More recently on October 24th I woke to a powerful radar stream aimed at my colon and prostate, the day I was bring documents to the Quebec Court of Appeals.

Yesterday after I asked for the transcription at the court house, the powerful radar assault increased.

Important Note: More recently the unlawful assessment order for a psychological evaluation for non-criminal responsibility that put me on the defensive to this crime, powerful radar assaults, was acknowledged expired by the prosecutor, Oct 14 and Oct 21, so if I discuss the issue of powerful radar assaults, take protection measures, and wear protective shielding materials in public if the Laval Police and Social Workers try to detain me, there is no more assessment order for non-criminal responsibility that would permit the Laval Police and prosecutor to escape the Feb 21 false criminal allegations, entering a home without warrant, searching a home without warrant, and seizing computers that has not been justified in court.

Evaluations for non-criminal responsibility have to be made at the end of trial, not before it, R v Swain; the prosecutor must also provide evidence for his demand, R v Muschke; Non-criminal responsibility for me would mean not guilt of having committed a crime due to mental illness that I am innocent of, a form of smear campaign, and would also sanction Laval Police wrong doing, false allegations, seizure of computers, and entering a home without a warrant, which results in trespassing when not justified, Canadian Criminal Code s.72 Forced Entry and Detainer.

Mobbing Research: Link With Police and Organizes Crime Homicides

Mobbing Research: Link With Police and Organizes Crime Homicides

[1] I was led to conclude and believe that I had caused the death of a teammate by criminal harassment participants and reported it in 2003-2004 to the Surete du Quebec;

- I was charged with criminal mischief and found myself of having to prove what I reported, having caused the death of a teammate when a minor;

- A form of organized crime setup that I escaped thanks to my lawyer and doctor through non-criminal responsibility;

[2] In 2010 I began being assaulted by powerful radar followed by Laval Police criminal allegations of uttering threats on Facebook in a Mobbing Research article;

- Criminal allegations that do not fit the criminal code and dictionary meaning, a search and seizure of a home and computers without warrant, and probably spying technology and communication interception sanctioned through the false allegations;

- This time it was the crown and police who tried to escape false allegations and entering a home without warrant through non-criminal responsibility and an unlawful assessment order before trial for non-criminal responsibility;

IMPORTANT NOTE

The powerful radar assaults that started in 2010 linked to escaping criminal allegations and search and seizure without warrant through an unlawful assessment order for non-criminal responsibility before trial is linked to homicides through cancer, lung cancer and leukemia etc.

MOTION FOR ABUSE OF PROCESS

CANADA
PROVINCE DE QUEBEC
DISTRICT DE LAVAL
NUMÉRO DU GREFFE : 540

No. DE DOSSIER: 540-01-048499-118
No. D'EVENEMENT: LVL-110221-041

SUPERIOR COURT
(CRIMINAL DIVISION)

______________________________________
Danny HUNT;

APPELLANT – Accused

v.

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN, Palais de Justice Laval, 2800, boulevard Saint-Martin Ouest, Laval (Québec) H7T 2S9;

RESPONDENT – Prosecutrix
______________________________________

MOTION FOR ABUSE OF PROCESS;

ASSESSMENT ORDERS FOR NON-CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY ARE TO BE MADE AT THE END OF TRIAL, R. v. SWAIN;

THE CROWN AND COURT DID NOT PROVIDE EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THEIR ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR NON-CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY, R.v. DOBROTIC;

THE DEMAND, FORM 48, WAS MADE WITHOUT JURISDICTION, R. v. CREIGHTON;

CANADIAN CHARTER OF RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS INFRINGED, s.2(b) FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION, s.15(1) EQUALITY, s.7 LIBERTY AND SECURITY OF PERSON, s.8 UNREASONABLE SEARCH AND SEIZURE, S.11(d) PRESUMED INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY, S.12 CRUEL AND UNUSUAL TREATMENT, S.24;


TO ONE OF THE HONORABLE JUDGES OF THE SUPERIOR COURT, CRIMINAL DIVISION, IN THE DISTRICT OF LAVAL, THE APPLICANT PRESENTS THE FOLLOWING:

INTRODUCTION

[1] On February 21, 2011 Danny Hunt was arrested and charged with uttering threats on facebook, the Laval Police entered his home and seized computers and some hard drives without warrant; P-1

[2] The Laval Police dept. made a demand that Danny Hunt remain incarcerated for a psychological evaluation, Laval Police dept. first to raise the issue of a psychological evaluation; P-2

[3] On February 23, 2011 Judge Lauzon ordered an assessment for non-criminal responsibility for Danny Hunt and he was released on conditions; P-3

[4] Under the doctrine of abuse of process, the unfair or oppressive treatment of an appellant disentitles the Crown to carry on with the prosecution of the charge. The prosecution is set aside, not on the merits (see R. v. Jewitt,1985 CanLII 47 (SCC), [1985] 2 S.C.R. 128, at p. 148), but because it is tainted to such a degree that to allow it to proceed would tarnish the integrity of the court. The doctrine is one of the safeguards designed to ensure "that the repression of crime through the conviction of the guilty is done in a way which reflects our fundamental values as a society" (Rothman v. The Queen, 1981 CanLII 23 (SCC), [1981] 1 S.C.R. 640, at p. 689, per Lamer J.). It acknowledges that courts must have the respect and support of the community in order that the administration of criminal justice may properly fulfil its function. Consequently, where the affront to fair play and decency is disproportionate to the societal interest in the effective prosecution of criminal cases, then the administration of justice is best served by staying the proceedings.

There is a residual discretion in a trial court judge to stay proceedings where compelling an accused to stand trial would violate those fundamental principles of justice which underlie the community's sense of fair play and decency and to prevent the abuse of a court's process through oppressive or vexatious proceedings. This is a power, however, of special application which can only be exercised in the clearest of cases.

R. v. Swain

[5] Assessment orders for non-criminal responsibility are to be made at the end of trial as to not interfere with the defense of the accused, if the accused is found innocent there is no need of it; R. v. Langlois, R. v. Wells, R. v. Swain; P-5

The Court concluded that the common law rule that allowed the Crown to raise the accused’s mental state before a verdict had been rendered violated the accused’s rights to have control over his own defence. In so deciding, the Court confirmed (at p. 972): R. v. Langlois;

The Crown’s ability to raise the issue of an accused’s mental capacity is governed by the decision of the Supreme Court of Canada in Swain. Swain confirmed that when an accused does not want to rely on a s. 16 defence of NCRMD, the Crown may raise the issue independently. By doing so the Crown helps ensure that an accused is not wrongly convicted. However, in order to be minimally intrusive on the accused’s right to control the conduct of his defence, the Crown must wait to raise the issue until the trier of fact has decided the accused is guilty of the offence. If the accused is acquitted, the Crown cannot raise the issue. R. v. Wells;

I believe, moreover, that conferring on the prosecution a conditional right to raise the issue of insanity during the course of the trial infringes upon the equality rights of the mentally disabled under s. 15 of the Charter. It denies the mentally disabled, a group in our society which has been negatively stereotyped and historically disadvantaged, the control over their defences reposed in other accused persons and does so in a way which is discriminatory. In denying the mentally disabled personal autonomy in decision making it reinforces the stereotype that they are incapable of rational thought and the ability to look after their own interests. In a word, it denies them equality with other accused persons under the guise, putting it at its best, of a benign paternalism. The prosecution's conditional right will only pass constitutional muster, in my view, if it can be shown that there exists no alternative that achieves the same objective without limiting the accused's s. 7 or s. 15 rights or at least limiting them to a significantly lesser degree. R. v. Swain;

It seems to me that the principle advanced in support of the prosecution's right to introduce evidence of insanity can be effectively implemented by having the issue of the accused's insanity raised at the conclusion of the trial in cases where the defense put forward by the accused have been rejected and the essential elements of the offence have been established by the prosecution beyond a reasonable doubt. R. v. Swain;


R. v. Dobrotic
[6] The Crown and Court did not provide evidence to support their demand for an assessment order for non-criminal responsibility; R. v. Muschke, R. v. Dobrotic; P-6
In the case of R. v. Dobrotic, 1995 N.B.J. No. 222 (Q.L.), the New Brunswick Court of Appeal concluded that even with the consent of the accused to assessment, an order should not be made unless there was sufficient evidence before the judge to provide reasonable grounds to doubt the accused's criminal responsibility. R v Muschke;
Even if they could have been relied upon to establish reasonable grounds for belief, the recitation of facts by counsel disclosed unusual and quite possibly unacceptable conduct on the part of the applicant but did not provide reasonable and probable grounds for believing that the accused was incapable of appreciating the nature and quality of his acts in the form of the alleged threats or of knowing that his acts were wrong. R v Muschke;

R. v. Creighton

[7] The form 48 given to Danny Hunt on February 23, 2011 did not contain the correct specific information and did not comply with the mandatory provisions of Section 672.13, it was therefor made without Jurisdiction, R. v. Creighton;

<> R. v. Creighton P-7

[8] Following the motion to contest the assessment order for non-criminal responsibility by the accused, MOTION TO CONTEST PSYCHIATRIC EVALUATION FOR DANNY HUNT'S DEFENSE, on May 24, 2011 - June 13, 2011, the court and crown provided the correct information and it was hand written on the form 48 on June 13, 2011; P-4

[9] Furthermore, the attempt to correct the error on June 13, 2011 and the conduct exhibited during the June 13, 2011 court session is misconduct;

s.11(d) PRESUMED INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY

[10] Demands for an assessment order for non-criminal responsibility are to be made at the end of trial as to not interfer with the accused’s defense, if the accused is found innocent there is no need for it, R. v. Swain;

[11] The assessment order for granted before trial for non-criminal responsibility presumes guilty instead of innocent in a judicial proceeding;

s.15(1) EQUALITY, R. v. Swain

[12] The Laval Police made the following demand RAPPORT D’OBJECTION DE REMISE EN LIBERTE; P-2

RAPPORT D’OBJECTION DE REMISE EN LIBERTE

- L’accuse na aucun dossier criminel.
- L’accuse est prevenu dans un dossier de Novembre 2003 dans lequel il mentionnait qu’il avait tue une femme. Suite a l’enquete, la femme n’estait pas mort et il a été declare criminellement non-responsable.
- L’accuse est schizophrene et est en suivi medical.

Je m’objecte donc a la remise en liberte de l’accuse HUNT afin que ce dernier subisse une evaluation psychiatrique.

[13] The demand that the accused remain incarcerated is not because he does not have a criminal record <>

It is because he has a disability <>, which is a sterotype and discrimination;

[14] A defense lawyer presented to the accused at the Palais de Justice advised the accused that he did not have a choice but to comply with this Laval Police demand and remain incarcerated for 30 days, the accused dismissed his services to represent himself;

The accused explained to the defense lawyer that the criminal charges were fabricated from a Mobbing Research .. article published on CNN iReport and shared on facebook, and that he was the creator and founder of the website called Psychological Harassment Information Association www.psychologicalharassment.org;

The defense lawyer persisted in claiming that the accused had no choice but to remain incarcerated for 30 days as the Laval Police demand requested, the accused dismissed his services;

The defense lawyer later returned stating he was under the service of the accused’s mother, Cecile Hunt, and that he would be released under conditions;

The accused does not remember any discussion concerning an assessment order for non-criminal responsibility since he had made it clear that this was a Mobbing Research article and that he was completely innocent of the criminal allegations;

[15] The Court and Crown presented conditions for release and ordered an assessment for non-criminal responsibility on February 23, 2011; P-3

[16] To raise the issue of insanity during the course of the trial infringes upon the equality rights of the mentally disabled under s. 15 of the Charter and does so in a way which is discriminatory. R. v. Swain;

I believe, moreover, that conferring on the prosecution a conditional right to raise the issue of insanity during the course of the trial infringes upon the equality rights of the mentally disabled under s. 15 of the Charter. It denies the mentally disabled, a group in our society which has been negatively stereotyped and historically disadvantaged, the control over their defences reposed in other accused persons and does so in a way which is discriminatory. In denying the mentally disabled personal autonomy in decision making it reinforces the stereotype that they are incapable of rational thought and the ability to look after their own interests. In a word, it denies them equality with other accused persons under the guise, putting it at its best, of a benign paternalism. R. v. Swain;

In conclusion, it is my view that while preventing insane persons from being convicted of criminal offences is an important objective, it is not of sufficient importance to justify overriding such a fundamental constitutional right of the accused as is in issue here, particularly where the objective can be achieved by the less intrusive means I have suggested. I would therefore allow the appeal and enter a stay of proceedings. R. v. Swain;

[17] Even with consent of the accused, without sufficient evidence before the judge to provide reasonable grounds to doubt the accused’s criminal responsibility the assessment order is unlawful, R. v. Dobrotic, R v Muschke;
In the case of R. v. Dobrotic, 1995 N.B.J. No. 222 (Q.L.), the New Brunswick Court of Appeal concluded that even with the consent of the accused to assessment, an order should not be made unless there was sufficient evidence before the judge to provide reasonable grounds to doubt the accused's criminal responsibility. R v Muschke
Even if they could have been relied upon to establish reasonable grounds for belief, the recitation of facts by counsel disclosed unusual and quite possibly unacceptable conduct on the part of the applicant but did not provide reasonable and probable grounds for believing that the accused was incapable of appreciating the nature and quality of his acts in the form of the alleged threats or of knowing that his acts were wrong. R v Muschke

It follows that because the initial order was unlawful, the extension was equally invalid. R v Muschke

S.2(b) FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION

[18] On February 21, 2011 the accused wrote a Mobbing Research article, shared the article on Facebook while recording his computer actions, and published the article and the video on CNN iReport; P-8

[19] The article followed and continued another Mobbing Research article published on February 13, 2011; P-9

[20] The accused Danny Hunt is the creator of the world leading website on psychological harassment called Psychological Harassment Information Association and Mobbing is part psychological harassment; P-10

www.psychologicalharassment.info
www.psychologicalharassment.org

[21] The accused is the creator of a Facebook page called Psychological Harassment Information Association; P-11

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Psychological-Harassment-Information-Association/140895545955030

[22] The accused is the creator of a Facebook page called Mobbing Research; P-12

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Mobbing-Research/178328388894986

[23] The criminal allegations of uttering threats on facebook towards women fabricated from a CNN iReport Mobbing Research article that was shared on facebook for discussion infringe on s.2 Freedom of Expression;

[24] Criminal Code 264.1 Uttering Threats;

Uttering threats

264.1 (1) Every one commits an offence who, in any manner, knowingly utters, conveys or causes any person to receive a threat

(a) to cause death or bodily harm to any person;

(b) to burn, destroy or damage real or personal property; or

(c) to kill, poison or injure an animal or bird that is the property of any person.

[25] R. v. Clemente;

Firstly, a serious threat to kill or cause serious bodily harm must have been uttered with the intent to intimidate or instill fear. Conversely, such a threat uttered with the intent to intimidate or cause fear must have been uttered with the intent that it be taken seriously.

The actus reus of the offence is the uttering of threats of death or serious bodily harm.

The mens rea is that the words were meant to intimidate or to be taken seriously.

Under the section the threat must be of death or serious bodily harm.

That is to say, a serious threat to kill or cause serious bodily harm must have been uttered with the intent to intimidate or instill fear. Conversely, a threat uttered with the intent to intimidate or cause fear must have been uttered with the intent that it be taken seriously. Both of these formulations of the mens rea constitute an intention to threaten and comply with the aim of the section.

The structure and wording of s. 264.1(1)(a) indicate that the nature of the threat must be looked at objectively; that is, as it would be by the ordinary reasonable person. The words which are said to constitute a threat must be looked at in light of various factors. They must be considered objectively and within the context of all the written words or conversation in which they occurred. As well, some thought must be given to the situation of the recipient of the threat.

[26] The definition of ‘Rampage’ does not mean or include the words ‘to cause death or serious bodily harm to any person’ as indicated in the criminal code section 264.1 (1) (a) to cause death or bodily harm to any person;

Definition of Rampage

Merriam Webster:
intransitive verb: to rush wildly about
Examples of RAMPAGE -- Rioters rampaged through the streets of the city.

Cambridge:
to go through an area making a lot of noise and causing damage
The demonstrators rampaged through the town, smashing windows and setting fire to cars.

Macmillan:
to behave in an uncontrolled way, especially when this involves damaging or destroying property over a wide area

P-15

[27] The Laval Police criminal allegation: [go on a rampage] L' accuse COMMET AINSI L'INFRACTION DE PROFERED DES MENACES DE CAUSELA MORT A L'ARTICLE 264.1 (1)a)(2)a);

Dear Police, I write this suicide note so that you won't have too, I just want everyone to know that if I commit suicide today or [go on a rampage] it's not because my means of subsistence have been eliminated ..

L' accuse COMMET AINSI L'INFRACTION DE PROFERED DES MENACES DE CAUSELA MORT A L'ARTICLE 264.1 (1)a)(2)a)

P-1

[28] ‘Dear Police, I write this suicide note so that you won't have too,’ is satire used in a Mobbing Research article and the intent is not to be taken seriously, the police do not write suicide notes for suicide victims or crimes;

[29] Uttering threats, mens rea, R. v. Dobrotic;

Several times, on the trip to jail, he threatened to kill the officers. One of them stopped counting after the fourth threat.

In R. v. Clemente, 1994 CanLII 49 (SCC), [1994] 2 S.C.R. 758, Cory J., speaking for the full court said at 763:

Under the present section the actus reus of the offence is the uttering of threats of death or serious bodily harm. The mans rea is that the words be spoken or written as a threat to cause death or serious bodily harm; that is, they were meant to intimidate or to be taken seriously.

To determine if a reasonable person would consider that the words were uttered as a threat the court must regard them objectively, and review them in light of the circumstances in which they were uttered, the manner in which they were spoken, and the person to whom they were addressed.

WORDING OF CHARGES

Finally, the charges relating to the uttering of threats do not follow the wording of 264.1(1) (a) of the Criminal Code. Both counts have omitted the word "serious" in relation

[Page 7]

to the offence of bodily harm. This may prove to be an essential ingredient, according to the circumstances of the case.

DISPOSITION

The defects highlighted in this judgment are sufficiently serious, such that they strike at fundamental justice. The convictions and sentences must be quashed. Under the circumstances, it would not serve the ends of justice to direct a new trial. The appeals are allowed, the convictions are quashed and judgments of acquittal are entered.

s.8 UNREASONABLE SEARCH AND SEIZURE

Hunter v Southam Inc., R. v. Grant

[30] The accused computers and some hard drives were seized without warrant s.489.1 on February 21, 2011; P-13

[31] In Hunter v Southam the Supreme Court of Canada decided that a search without prior authorization is presumed to be unreasonable and contrary to s. 8 of the Charter, unless the party seeking to justify it can refute this presumption;

If the issue to be resolved in assessing the constitutionality of searches under s. 10 were in fact the governmental interest in carrying out a given search outweighed that of the individual in resisting the governmental intrusion upon his privacy, then it would be appropriate to determine the balance of the competing interests after the search had been conducted. Such a post facto analysis would, however, be seriously at odds with the purpose of s. 8. That purpose is, as I have said, to protect individuals from unjustified state intrusions upon their privacy. That purpose requires a means of preventing unjustified searches before they happen, not simply of determining, after the fact, whether they ought to have occurred in the first place. This, in my view, can only be accomplished by a system of prior authorization, not one of subsequent validation.

A requirement of prior authorization, usually in the form of a valid warrant, has been a consistent prerequisite for a valid search and seizure both at common law and under most statutes. Such a requirement puts the onus on the state to demonstrate the superiority of its interest to that of the individual. As such it accords with the apparent intention of the Charter to prefer, where feasible, the right of the individual to be free from state interference to the interests of the state in advancing its purposes through such interference.

[Page 161]

I recognize that it may not be reasonable in every instance to insist on prior authorization in order to validate governmental intrusions upon individuals’ expectations of privacy. Nevertheless, where it is feasible to obtain prior authorization, I would hold that such authorization is a precondition for a valid search and seizure.

Here also, the decision in Katz, supra, is relevant. In United States v. Rabinowitz, 339 U.S. 56 (1950), the Supreme Court of the United States had held that a search without warrant was not ipso facto unreasonable. Seventeen years later, however, in Katz, Stewart J. concluded that a warrantless search was prima facie “unreasonable” under the Fourth Amendment. The terms of the Fourth Amendment are not identical to those of s. 8 and American decisions can be transplanted to the Canadian context only with the greatest caution. Nevertheless, I would in the present instance respectfully adopt Stewart J.’s formulation as equally applicable to the concept of “unreasonableness” under s. 8, and would require the party seeking to justify a warrantless search to rebut this presumption of unreasonableness.

[32] The seized computers were return on April 12, 2011 after a motion for restitution was granted, the Crown advised the accused that no analysis of the computers data would be needed, and therefore the Crown did not justify and refute this presumption;

[33] The criminal allegation of uttering threats was used to justify seizing computers without warrant, the criminal allegation of uttering threats [go on a rampage] do not match the criminal code definition s. 264.1(1)(a) actus reus of uttering of threats of death or serious bodily harm, the search and seizure was unreasonable;

[34] Furthermore, the assessment order for non-criminal responsibility would also provide the Crown with detailed private medical history and information as indicated by the Prison Psychiatric access demand form; P-14

[35] 8. Everyone has the right to be secure against unreasonable search or seizure. R. v. Grant, [1993] 3 SCR 223;

The common law has long demonstrated a respect for freedom from trespass on private property by state authorities, especially where the homes of individuals are involved. That respect for privacy in the home has been expanded by this Court to include other areas in which individuals expect a high degree of privacy, including the office (Hunter, supra) and to a lesser degree even a motor vehicle in some cases: see R. v. Wise, 1992 CanLII 125 (SCC), [1992] 1 S.C.R. 527, and R. v. Mellenthin, 1992 CanLII 50 (SCC), [1992] 3 S.C.R. 615. Protection against unreasonable search and seizure is maximized by the requirement that entries by state authorities be pre‑authorized by a judicial arbiter.

As was the case in Kokesch, supra, the warrantless perimeter search in the case at bar involved trespass by state agents onto private residential property. Given the protection of private property interests which the common law has ordinarily offered, the nature of the trespass is "far from trivial or minimal": Kokesch, supra, at p. 29

1. Is s. 10 of the Narcotic Control Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. N-1, to the extent that it authorizes a search without a warrant of any place other than a dwelling house, inconsistent with the right to be secure against unreasonable search or seizure as guaranteed by s. 8 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and, to that extent, inoperative and of no force and effect?

Answer:Yes, to the extent that it authorizes such searches in circumstances other than in exigent circumstances where it would be impracticable to obtain a warrant.

2. Is s. 10 of the Narcotic Control Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. N-1, to the extent that it may authorize the perimeter search of a dwelling‑house without a warrant inconsistent with the right to be secure against unreasonable search or seizure as guaranteed by s. 8 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and, to that extent, inoperative and of no force and effect?

Answer:Yes, to the extent that it authorizes such searches in circumstances other than in exigent circumstances where it would be impracticable to obtain a warrant.

[36] In Entick v. Carrington, supra, it was flatly stated that if state authorities enter a house without the express permission of Parliament or the common law, they commit a trespass; the serious intrusion of the legitimate high expectations of privacy in one's home cannot be ignored in assessing the situation. R. v. Silveira, [1995] 2 SCR 297;

Application of Section 8 to the Securing of a Dwelling-House

41 I note at the outset that the Crown has conceded that the appellant's constitutional right to be secure against an unreasonable search and seizure has been breached; it recognizes that the appellant had a reasonable expectation of privacy in his home. In my view, the Crown was perfectly right in making this concession, although the matter was apparently the source of some confusion in the courts below. It is surprising that nearly four hundred years after Semayne's Case (1604), 5 Co. Rep. 91, 77 E.R. 194, there should be any debate about the matter. That case firmly enunciated the principle that "a man's home is his castle", and that even the King himself had no right to invade the sanctity of the home without the authority of a judicially issued warrant. That principle has remained ever since as a bulwark for the protection of the individual against the state. It affords the individual a measure of privacy and tranquillity against the overwhelming power of the state; see also Entick v. Carrington (1765), 19 St. Tr. 1029. It is a fundamental precept of a free society. The apparent confusion in the courts below is all the more disturbing since in the very statute the police were attempting to enforce, the Narcotic Control Act (ss. 10 and 12), it is made abundantly clear that a police officer may only enter a dwelling "under authority of a warrant" issued by a justice.

What the appellant lost ‑‑ and what we all lose when such intrusions take place ‑‑ is the security guaranteed by the Charter that the police will not invade our homes without conforming to the established rule that constitutes the cornerstone of our liberties.

47 Nor do I agree with the majority's view that the violation of the Charter rights of the appellant's family is irrelevant. -- The serious intrusion of the legitimate high expectations of privacy in one's home cannot be ignored in assessing the situation.

50 The principle that a search of a dwelling-house without a warrant is unjustifiable is firmly entrenched in the common law. It goes back at least 230 years, when in Entick v. Carrington, supra, it was flatly stated that if state authorities enter a house without the express permission of Parliament or the common law, they commit a trespass. No exception to this principle has since been made to permit a search in exigent circumstances or otherwise. The principle has in recent years been restated in Colet v. The Queen, 1981 CanLII 11 (SCC), [1981] 1 S.C.R. 2, where this Court unanimously held that police who enter and search a dwelling-house without a warrant are trespassers, and that specific statutory authority is required to alter this rule. Moreover, Ritchie J. made it clear that any such provision would be narrowly interpreted, concluding, at p. 10, that "any provision authorizing police officers to search and enter private property must be phrased in express terms" (emphasis added). The terms of ss. 10 and 12 of the Narcotic Control Act are clear. They authorize entry into a dwelling-house only under the authority of a warrant. No exception is made for exigent circumstances; there is thus no "specific statutory authority" to use the words of Ritchie J. There is no mention of exigent circumstances as a ground for an unwarranted police entry to search a dwelling-house. The common law since Entick v. Carrington has created no such justification, and it would require a marked departure from the law as set forth in Colet v. The Queen to do so, one that would involve a consideration of whether this conformed to s. 8 of the Charter.

[37] This motion for appeal is well founded in facts and law.

DISCUSSION

R. v. Langlois, 2005 BCCA 162 (CanLII)

23 In R. v. Swain, 1991 CanLII 104 (SCC), 1991 1 S.C.R. 933, the Supreme Court of Canada considered the accused’s rights in the context of the operation of the insanity defence under the Code prior to the amendments in 1992 which brought in the NCRMD provisions. One of the issues in that case was whether the Crown could raise the issue of insanity over the wishes of the accused. The Court concluded that the common law rule that allowed the Crown to raise the accused’s mental state before a verdict had been rendered violated the accused’s rights to have control over his own defence. In so deciding, the Court confirmed (at p. 972):

Given that the principles of fundamental justice contemplate an accusatorial and adversarial system of criminal justice which is founded on respect for the autonomy and dignity of human beings, it seems clear to me that the principles of fundamental justice must also require than an accused person have the right to control his or her own defence.

24 The Supreme Court’s response to its finding was to vary the common law rule to allow the Crown to raise the issue of the mental capacity of the accused only after the court had concluded that the accused is otherwise guilty of the offence — the procedure adopted in the NCRMD Code provisions in 1992.

R v Wells
8 The following Criminal Code sections are relevant to the defence of NCRMD:

16. (1) No person is criminally responsible for an act committed or an omission made while suffering from a mental disorder that rendered the person incapable of appreciating the nature and quality of the act or omission or of knowing that it was wrong.

(2) Every person is presumed not to suffer from a mental disorder so as to be exempt from criminal responsibility by virtue of subsection (1), until the contrary is proved on the balance of probabilities.

(3) The burden of proof that an accused was suffering from a mental disorder so as to be exempt from criminal responsibility is on the party that raises the issue.

672.12 (1) The court may make an assessment order at any stage of proceedings against the accused of its own motion, on application of the accused or, subject to subsections (2) and (3), on application of the prosecutor.

(2) Where the prosecutor applies for an assessment in order to determine whether the accused is unfit to stand trial for an offence that is prosecuted by way of summary conviction, the court may only order the assessment if

(a) the accused raised the issue of fitness; or

(b) the prosecutor satisfies the court that there are reasonable grounds to doubt that the accused is fit to stand trial.

(3) Where the prosecutor applies for an assessment in order to determine whether the accused was suffering from a mental disorder at the time of the offence so as to be exempt from criminal responsibility, the court may only order the assessment if

(a) the accused puts his or her mental capacity for criminal intent into issue; or

(b) the prosecutor satisfies the court that there are reasonable grounds to doubt that the accused is criminally responsible for the alleged offence, on account of mental disorder.

672.34 Where the jury, or the judge or provincial court judge where there is no jury, finds that an accused committed the act or made the omission that formed the basis of the offence charged, but was at the time suffering from mental disorder so as to be exempt from criminal responsibility by virtue of subsection 16(1), the jury or the judge shall render a verdict that the accused committed the act or made the omission but is not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder.

9 The defence of NCRMD in s. 16 reflects a principle of fundamental justice that a person who was insane at the time of the offence (and was therefore incapable of forming criminal intent) should not be convicted: R. v. Swain, 1991 CanLII 104 (SCC), 1991 1 S.C.R. 933, 63 C.C.C. (3d) 481.

10 The Crown’s ability to raise the issue of an accused’s mental capacity is governed by the decision of the Supreme Court of Canada in Swain. Swain confirmed that when an accused does not want to rely on a s. 16 defence of NCRMD, the Crown may raise the issue independently. By doing so the Crown helps ensure that an accused is not wrongly convicted. However, in order to be minimally intrusive on the accused’s right to control the conduct of his defence, the Crown must wait to raise the issue until the trier of fact has decided the accused is guilty of the offence. If the accused is acquitted, the Crown cannot raise the issue.
R v Swain

I believe, moreover, that conferring on the prosecution a conditional right to raise the issue of insanity during the course of the trial infringes upon the equality rights of the mentally disabled under s. 15 of the Charter. It denies the mentally disabled, a group in our society which has been negatively stereotyped and historically disadvantaged, the control over their defences reposed in other accused persons and does so in a way which is discriminatory. In denying the mentally disabled personal autonomy in decision making it reinforces the stereotype that they are incapable of rational thought and the ability to look after their own interests. In a word, it denies them equality with other accused persons under the guise, putting it at its best, of a benign paternalism. The prosecution's conditional right will only pass constitutional muster, in my view, if it can be shown that there exists no alternative that achieves the same objective without limiting the accused's s. 7 or s. 15 rights or at least limiting them to a significantly lesser degree.

It seems to me that the principle advanced in support of the prosecution's right to introduce evidence of insanity can be effectively implemented by having the issue of the accused's insanity raised at the conclusion of the trial in cases where the defences put forward by the accused have been rejected and the essential elements of the offence have been established by the prosecution beyond a reasonable doubt. At that point I think either party should be free to raise the issue of the accused's insanity. I realize, of course, that there is an element of circularity involved in this approach in that insanity has a direct bearing on proof of mens rea. However, I prefer this approach since it both respects the accused's right to waive the defence of insanity and ensures that any resultant prejudice he suffers in the finding of guilt flows from his own decision not to avail himself of the defence and not as a consequence of the prosecution's having raised the issue in the middle of the trial process.

In my view, if the prosecution's right to raise the issue of the accused's insanity is confined as I have suggested, the requirements of s. 16(1) are satisfied and no infringement of the accused's trial rights under either s. 7 or s. 15 are involved. I express no opinion as to whether any other constitutional rights of the accused, other than his trial rights, are infringed by such a rule or by s. 16(1) of the Code and, if so, whether any such infringement would be saved by s. 1 since this is not, for obvious reasons, before us.

I should add that I recognize that restricting the Crown's right to introduce the issue of insanity only after an accused has been found guilty may well result in some accuseds who are in fact insane being acquitted of criminal charges and thereby escaping incarceration under the Criminal Code entirely. To some, no doubt, this would amount to a failure of our criminal justice system. In my view, however, the incarceration of those persons in institutes for the criminally insane is neither mandated by the principles of fundamental justice nor by the Criminal Code. Section 16(1) of the Code only makes it illegal to convict an insane person of a criminal offence. The potential risk of the criminally insane eluding the reach of the criminal law remains, in other words, a matter for Parliament if it views the civil commitment procedures instituted by the provincial legislatures as inadequate for the proper protection of the public.

In conclusion, it is my view that while preventing insane persons from being convicted of criminal offences is an important objective, it is not of sufficient importance to justify overriding such a fundamental constitutional right of the accused as is in issue here, particularly where the objective can be achieved by the less intrusive means I have suggested. I would therefore allow the appeal and enter a stay of proceedings. I would answer the constitutional questions in the manner indicated by the Chief Justice.

I agree with Lamer C.J's conclusion for the reason given by him that a transitional period in the terms he has outlined is required in order to deal with the consequences of a finding by this Court that s. 542(2) of the Criminal Code is of no force or effect.

R v Muschke
47 The other factor which might be construed as evidence upon which the order to assess could have been based is the statement by the applicant's counsel that the applicant did not much care if an assessment order were made provided it was made on an outpatient basis. The statement might have been construed as an admission of the necessity of assessment. In the case of R. v. Dobrotic, 1995 N.B.J. No. 222 (Q.L.), the New Brunswick Court of Appeal concluded that even with the consent of the accused to assessment, an order should not be made unless there was sufficient evidence before the judge to provide reasonable grounds to doubt the accused's criminal responsibility.

48 Even if they could have been relied upon to establish reasonable grounds for belief, the recitation of facts by counsel disclosed unusual and quite possibly unacceptable conduct on the part of the applicant but did not provide reasonable and probable grounds for believing that the accused was incapable of appreciating the nature and quality of his acts in the form of the alleged threats or of knowing that his acts were wrong.

51 While the judge spoke of fitness to stand trial, the matter was not in issue as the application was made by the prosecutor pursuant to s. 672.12(3)(b) of the Code. Had fitness been an issue, there was nothing before the judge, whether by statements from counsel or otherwise, which would have justified the formulation of a belief based on reasonable grounds that the applicant, on account of mental disorder, was unable to understand the nature or object of the proceedings in which he was involved, understand the possible consequences of the proceedings, or communicate with counsel. One or more of these factors are necessary in order to formulate an opinion that one is unfit to stand trial as the phrase is defined in s. 2 of the Code.

52 It follows that because the initial order was unlawful, the extension was equally invalid.
R. v. Creighton, 2002 BCSC 1190 (CanLII)
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA

INTRODUCTION

1 This is a similar application by the Crown to that of R. v. Gray, Number 20507, Vancouver Registry, for an Order of certiorari to set aside an Order made also by her Honour Judge Trueman on May 13, 2002.

3 On May 13, 2002, Judge Trueman made the following Order:
Pursuant to Section 672.12(1) and pursuant to Section 672.13(1) of the Criminal Code, Cecil Creighton is to be examined and assessed for developmental disorders, including ARND, by a medical doctor, preferably a developmental pediatrician experienced in the examination and assessments needed to make an accurate diagnosis. This medical examination is to be undertaken as part of the multi-disciplinary approach usual in such cases, so that the individual effects of such a disorder on Cecil Creighton can be determined, particularly in regard to impulsivity. The examination is to be conducted within the ambit of the existing medical system of public healthcare in the Province of British Columbia or by funds designated by the Attorney General of the Province of British Columbia for the administration of justice. The doctor is to be agreed upon by the Crown and Defence. The place of examination is to be arranged by the Crown and the Defence and by further Court Order, if necessary.
This examination is for the purposes of discerning whether Cecil Creighton was suffering from a mental disorder so as to be exempt from criminal responsibility by virtue of Section 16(1). Pursuant to Section 672.14(3) of the Criminal Code, this assessment order will remain in force until July 10, 2002. The results of this assessment are to be presented to the Court, in writing at 2 p.m., July 10, 2002, in Courtroom 513 at the Provincial Court of British Columbia, 222 Main Street, Vancouver British Columbia.
The medical doctor charged with the responsibility of the examination is to be advised that the Court has a photograph of Cecil Creighton as a toddler.
4 The Crown’s complaint here is similar to that made in Regina v. Gray. In addition the Crown says the Assessment Order does not comply with the mandatory provisions of Section 672.13 of theCriminal Code.

5 In light of what I decided earlier in R. v. Gray, the Order to set aside Judge Trueman’s Order must be granted.

7 I agree also with the Crown’s contention that the mandatory provisions of Section 672.l3 were not complied with.

FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH MANDATORY PROVISIONS

26 Unlike a judge of the Supreme Court, a Provincial Court Judge possesses no inherent powers to control its own process. The powers of a Provincial Court Judge are entirely statutory.

27 The powers and functions of a Provincial Court Judge acting under the Criminal Code are therefore circumscribed by the provisions contained therein. Jurisdiction must be conferred directly by Criminal Code provisions or by necessary implication: R. v. Doyle, (1976) 29 C.C.C. 2d No. 177 (S.C.C.).

28 As the Criminal Code constitutes the only source of jurisdiction in Provincial CourtCriminal Code proceedings, failure of a Provincial Court Judge to observe mandatory provisions in the Criminal Code amounts to jurisdictional error. Jurisdiction is lost by a Provincial Court Judge who fails to observe a mandatory section of the Criminal Code: R. v. Forsythe, (1980) 53 C.C.C. (2d) No. 225 (S.C.C.); Doyle.

29 Subsection 672.13 is a mandatory section. It provides that an assessment order must specify first of all the service, person, or hospital where the assessment is to be made, and secondly whether the accused is to be detained in custody while the order is in force.

30 According to Black’s Law Dictionary, specify means “To mention specifically; to state in full and explicit terms; to point out; to tell or state precisely or in detail; to particularize, or to distinguish by words one thing from another”.

31 The Crown submitted that Judge Trueman’s May 13, 2002 assessment order does not even suggest, let alone specify, by whom or where the assessment is to be carried out. Nor does the assessment order make any mention of Mr. Creighton’s custodial status.

32 As the assessment order does not specify service, person, hospital, or custodial status, it does not comply with s. 672.13. An assessment order which does not comply with s. 672.13 cannot depend upon that section for its jurisdictional basis. Since s. 672.13 is a mandatory section in Part XX.1, the Part governing assessment orders, an assessment order which does not comply with s. 672.13 cannot depend upon Part XX.1 for its jurisdictional basis. There being no other source of jurisdiction for the assessment order, the assessment order was made without jurisdiction.

CONCLUSION

33 For the reasons stated, an order to set aside Judge Trueman’s Order dated May 13, 2002, is granted.

ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR NON-CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY AND ELEMENTS OF SMEAR CAMPAIGN

[37] The November 2003 Surete du Quebec criminal mischief charge mentioned in the Laval Police RAPPORT D’OBECTION DE REMISE EN LIBERTE;

The 2003 criminal allegations of criminal mischief << L’accuse est prevenu dans un dossier de Novembre 2003 dans lequel il mentionnait qu’il avait tue une femme. Suite a l’enquete, la femme n’estait pas mort et il a été declare criminellement non-responsable.>> resulted from criminal harassment participants leading the accused to believe and conclude that he had caused the death of a teammate, a girl of around 14 year old, when he was a minor of around 17, in an attempt to induce fear through threats of being framed and incarceration, to make him run away, a form fugitive, which he reported to the Surete du Quebec;

The resulting Surete du Quebec criminal allegations of criminal mischief were a form of organized crime and criminal harassment trap in which the accused now needed to prove that he had caused a teammates death to be found innocent of criminal mischief, a form of smear campaign that resulted in non-criminal responsibility in 2003;

RAPPORT D’OBJECTION DE REMISE EN LIBERTE

- L’accuse na aucun dossier criminel.
- L’accuse est prevenu dans un dossier de Novembre 2003 dans lequel il mentionnait qu’il avait tue une femme. Suite a l’enquete, la femme n’estait pas mort et il a été declare criminellement non-responsable.
- L’accuse est schizophrene et est en suivi medical.

Je m’objecte donc a la remise en liberte de l’accuse HUNT afin que ce dernier subisse une evaluation psychiatrique.

[38] The elements of a smear campaign is linked to criminal allegations that the accused is innocent of but found non-criminally responsible for a crime committed due to mental illness;

Example:

RAPPORT D’OBJECTION DE REMISE EN LIBERTE

- L’accuse na aucun dossier criminel.
- L’accuse est schizophrene et est en suivi medical.

- L’accuse est prevenu dans un dossier de Novembre 2003 dans lequel il mentionnait qu’il avait tue une femme. Suite a l’enquete, la femme n’estait pas mort et il a été declare criminellement non-responsable.
- L’accuse a fait des menaces de mort en verse les femme en 2011 et il a ete declare criminellement non-responsible.

Je m’objecte donc a la remise en liberte de l’accuse HUNT afin que ce dernier subisse une evaluation psychiatrique.

S.12 CRUEL AND UNUSUAL TREATMENT

[30] The accused claims that powerful radar is used to make him vulnerable to an assessment order for non-criminal responsibility and intervention by Laval Police;

Another run away strategy « run away or get cancer » that results in run aways being detained and vulnerable to bad or participating defense lawyers at great expense;



Intervention detains the accused during Laval Police criminal allegation and proceedings, making the accused vulnerable to bad or participating defense lawyers at great expense;

Non-criminal responsibility sanctions the criminal allegations of uttering threats towards women in a Mobbing Research article by the Laval Police, incarceration, and all the events that surround these criminal allegations such as tres passing and the seizure of computers without warrant, and possible communications interception s. 183;

The Laval Police threatened to detain the accused on three seperate occassions;

Criminal allegations that overwhelme the accused while the accused is attacked through organized crime and powerful radar linked to different cancers such as lung cancer and leukemia, the unlawful assessment order makes the accused vulnerable to the smear campaign elements and a form or homicide through resulting cancers;

The accused filed a complaint with the international OHCHR and also wrote an organized crime strategy plan that reflects his claim;

The accused is a human rights defender and believes that if human rights violations and crime remain hidden, unrepported, and un written they remain invisible, therefor it is written and reported in order to prevent this type of human rights violation and discourage them through awareness;


FOR THESE MOTIVES, MAY IT PLEASE THE COURT:
RECEIVE the present motion;
GRANT the stay of proceedings;
RENDER judgement in accordance to the demands of justice;
THE WHOLE with costs.
AND I SIGNED IN LAVAL
The 17 October 2011
---------------------------------------------------------
Danny Hunt
Defendant
Copie Conforme

Malicious Criminal Allegations, Prosecution, and Organized Crime Smear Campaigns Mob Strategy Plan

Malicious Criminal Allegations, Prosecution, and Organized Crime Smear Campaigns Mob Strategy Plan

Steps:

[1] Powerful radar attacks linked to deadly cancers, lung cancer and leukemia;

[2] Malicious criminal allegations of uttering threats s.264.1 on the internet, seizure of computers and private information without warrant;

[3] The charge of uttering threats s.264.1 can be used to justify communications interception s.183;

[4] Police demand that the accused remain incarcerated for psychological assessment;

If Police Demand is Successful

[5] The accused is vulnerable to Participating Defense Lawyers at great expense while detained for assessment;

[6] The claim of powerful radar attacks, step [1] of the plan, to a prison psychiatrist during the assessment results in justifying detaining the accused until and throughout the trial proceedings at great expense and framed through Participating Defense Lawyers;

[7] The Prison Psychiatrist obtains the private medical history and provides this information in a report to the crown (police) and court;

[8] The powerful radar, step [1], and assessment order, step [4], is linked to escaping the malicious criminal allegations and prosecution through non-criminal responsibility;

Non-criminal responsibility of a crime committed, justifying and sanctioning the arrest, criminal allegations, unreasonable search and seizure, incarceration, obtaining private computer and medical information, private information that can be used in more prosecutions or were part of the setup plan and smear campaign, etc.

Psychiatric assessment, what was the state of mind of the accused at the time the alleged crime was committed?

"so, when you posted the alleged threats on the internet you claim you were also being attacked by microwaves?"

[9] Elements of a smear campaign, non-criminal responsible of uttering threats is being found not guilty of having committed a crime, uttering threats, due to mental illness;

This is entered in the police criminal system, and can be used at a later time by the police and prosecutor with other criminal allegations to justify demands of incarceration or longer incarceration;

If Police Demand is Not Successful (released under conditions)

[10] The Crown or Court demands an assessment order for non-criminal responsibility;

- The demand for fitness to stand trial is unlawful if it is granted without providing any evidence to the court by the crown, the accused has a right to challenge this evidence;

- The demand for non-criminal responsibility is supposed to be at the end of trial if the accused is found guilty, if the accused is innocent there is no need for it, if it is granted before it interferes with the accuse's defense and control of their defense; (R v Swain)

[11] Participating Defense Lawyer, the criminal code demands more requirements for the crown and court to raise the issue, and this is were a Participating Defense Lawyer can attempt to help the crown by making the demand for assessment "first to raise the issue" or sanctioning it;

[12] Granting the unlawful assessment order puts the accused on the defensive to organized crime, their use of powerful radar step [1];

The accused is vulnerable to police harassment and threats of intervention, false pretenses and justification to "intervene" to detain the accused linked to Participating Defense Lawyers, great personal expense, controlling the proceedings, preventing exposure, convicting the accused, and escape the malicious criminals allegations and prosecutions;

- "Microwaves" and the assessment order for non-criminal responsibility;

- Example, unanimous suspicious vehicle calls and threats of intervention;

[13] The threat of intervention and being detained is linked to the threat of being framed through participating lawyers at great personal expense;

[14] Police threats of intervention discourages the accused's attempts to protect themselves from powerful radar, step [1], protection and safety measures during this period of time the accused tries to defend himself from the criminal allegations;

[15]

A) The powerful radar is used in a run away strategy, "run away or get cancer", to detain run away's;

B) Conspiracy to do serious bodily harm and give a person cancer through the use of powerful radar, "die in pain" - participants, conspiracy to commit murder or attempted murder;

[16] The behavior changes by the accused to protect themselves from powerful radar is used to justify intervention and linked to threats of intervention by the police;

Behavior change examples:

Building and using shielding panels, wearing shielding materials, changes in hygiene and house keeping linked to attempts to avoid radar;

[17] More private information is obtained through communications interception during the period of malicious prosecutions and delays s. 183;

[18] The claim that a defense lawyer is actually a participant in a setup or a mob strategy plan can be interpreted as defamation;

If an accused makes this claim the prosecutor can try to setup a discussion in front of witnessing constables, and inform this defense lawyer that he has been defamed in front of a colleague and constables, which results in the accused now faced with criminal allegations and a lawsuit from a former defense lawyer.

Acid-Base Imbalance a Medical Weapon Linked to Diet, Stress, and Sleep Deprivation

Acid-Base Imbalance a Medical Weapon Linked to Diet, Stress, and Sleep Deprivation

In 2008 I was highly sleep deprived through sound technology and highly stressed through criminal harassment, provocation linked to adrenaline and the loss of potassium, depletion of calcium, which is linked to the buffer system and acid-base imbalance.

Several doctors including a cardiologist told me that high levels of stress and sleep deprivation had no effect on the body and heart.

High levels of sleep deprivation, stress, and acid-base imbalance was the medical and physical weapons the mob was using to cause physical damage, premature aging, calcium depletion, and links to serious illness.

The Standard American Diet, S.A.D., a diet high in sugar, refined, and processed foods makes people more vulnerable to this weapon.

Mobbing Research Notes Linked to Laval Police Criminal Allegations

Mobbing Research Notes Linked to Laval Police Criminal Allegations

[1] Laval Police criminal allegations of uttering threats on Facebook fabricated from a Mobbing Research article;

[2] Laval Police demand that I remain incarcerated for a psychological evaluation

a) no criminal record;

b) has a psychiatric care history, a disability;

The demand that I remain incarcerated is not because I have no criminal record, it's because I have a disability, which is discrimination.

[3] The Quebec Police Ethics rules there is no discrimination;

[4] The Quebec human rights commission dismisses the complaint and claims there is no discrimination;

[5] The crown prosecutor followed the Laval Police demand that was not successful with a demand for a psychological evaluation for non-criminal responsibility;

The crown did not provide evidence to support this demand as required by the criminal code 672.12 (3)(b) and a Supreme BC Court judge has ruled in a similar case, R v Muschke, that this is an "unlawful" demand granted by a lower court judge;

Further more, it is also stated that the abuse of this demand can be linked to crown prosecutors attempting to escape malicious prosecutions, R v Muschke, R v Dobrotic, R v Stratton;

[6] The Laval Police arrested me after I shared an article on Facebook that was published on CNN called Mobbing Research .. someone from Laval saw this in the C-SPAN discussion and felt threatened, the police claimed in criminal allegations that I uttered threats on facebook in this article;

[7] My computers are seized without warrant etc, (unreasonable search and seizure);

[8] During the period of time I try to defend myself I'm blasted and attacked through powerful radar technology linked to cancer, leukemia and lung cancer, a run away strategy “run away or get cancer” linked to detaining run away citizens to make them vulnerable to participating lawyers at great expense;

Link to Laval Police demand that I remain incarcerated and a lawyer who told me I had no choice but to stay in prison for this Laval Police demand and evaluation, I dismissed his services to represent myself;

[9] The Laval Police who repetitively showed up claiming an anonymous call for a suspicious vehicle using the word "intervention" and the need to determine if they need to “intervene”, interogation and questions, etc. linked to the behavior and attempts to protect myself from powerful radar;

Intervention and looking for justifications to intervene is linked to detaining citizens and make them vulnerable to participating lawyers at great personal expense;

I advised the Laval Police several times that I was currently defending myself from criminal allegations, that I felt threatened with questioning linked to intervention, which would interfere with my attempts to defend myself with these Laval Police criminal allegations and not to respond to these suspicious vehicle calls, and to contact a social worker that was acting as a liaison;

[10] The crown's "unlawful" demand for the evaluation with the abuse of this demand said to be linked to attempts to escape malicious prosecutions also made me vulnerable and put me on the defensive to this powerful radar organized crime attacks;

The claim that powerful radar is being used in a run away strategy to police officers looking for justification to intervene could be used to detain me at great expense but not be used to escape malicious persecution and criminal allegations without this demand;

[11] The crowns demand is also linked to a form of unreasonable search and seizure, the crown prosecutor and Laval Police obtaining all the private Information of my medical history etc, similar to all the private information on my computers;

[12] The threat of intervention and being detained at great expense and framed through participating lawyers is also linked to discouraging or interfering with attempts to defend myself from powerful radar attacks, the powerful radar attacks being linked to deadly forms of cancer and a form of assassination, murder;

[13] The prosecutors demand linked to abuse and "unlawful", the abuse said to be linked to escape malicious prosecution, is linked to non-criminally responsible due to mental illness, which means not being criminally responsible for a committed crime due to mental illness, and this is entered in the police criminal system, and used in other criminal allegations to support different police or crown demands etc. (smear campaign)

Instead of being found completely innocent of criminal allegations or malicious criminal allegations and prosecution.

[14] This follows an assassination attempts over ten years ago at around 1998 through psychological manipulation, losing my job through workplace psychological harassment, burnout, purposelessness, despair and negative thoughts about the future, depression, a criminal harassment network that led me to believe I caused the death of a teammate, the "voice" of her brother used to bring me "down", this criminal harassment network influencing my perception to believe everyone hated me and wanted me to die, sound technology used to repeat that I should hang myself, and manipulation to push me towards the action of hanging myself, a failed attempt and a failed assassination attempt;

A Run Away Strategy through the threat of being framed for murder "who told you", which is linked to mens rea a necessary element or compont of crime; If I didn't know I caused someone's death there is no mens rea "who told you", criminal harassment participants[m] led me to this conclusion and belief;

[15] I reported this believe to the Surete du Quebec in 2003, her brother ceased to exist and she is found alive, I'm charged with criminal mischief in 2004 when I inform them of the error concern her brother "ceasing to exist";

[16] These recent events with the Laval Police seem to be linked to another form of assassination, assassination through different possible deadly resulting cancers from powerful radar used in a run away strategy such as lung cancer and leukemia;

[17] What seems to be a 4 year plan that started again with sound technology used for high levels of sleep deprivation combined with (again)criminal harassment[m] linked to acid-base imbalance and calcuim depletion through stress, cortisol, and adrenaline, premature aging and being bitter and angry, leading to these criminal allegations of "uttering threats towards women" in a Mobbing Research article and a run away strategy linked to detaining run aways to make them vulnerable to participating lawyers at great expense, framed, smear campaign, and being bitter and angry at the mob and police;

Run Away Strategy using powerful radar "run away or get cancer";

in progress,,

.