 |
Canadian Democratic Fraud |
 |
|---|
 |
|---|
It is not agreed with the Democracy of Canada, the Prime Minister's office and the Canadian Judicial Council's Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin's allegations that the Plaintiff's family had been treated properly by Justice Blair. Yet there are few, if any, places to go with this easily proved judicial fraud, the Democracy of Canada has quickly claimed independence from the Courts including areas of fraud,obstruction of justiceand Judges involvement with the evidence. This sets a Canadian precedent that the Canadian Government will not be involved within future cases when there is judges misconduct, fraud and judges involvement. Remember the removal of a Judge Blair for fraud is not an issue for the Appeal Courts to decide. |
| A doctor getting paid for the same attendance alleged by Judge Richard Blair to never happen is fraud. Only Justice Blair making these fraudulent claims. | Contradictory is Justice Blair's claim. The "Standard of Disclosure" had been placed before Justice Blair within a book of authorities. |
| Maybe Justice Blair should seek professional psychiatric assistance for the problems he has in making allegations that do not appear in the evidence. | Justice Blair pointed and yelled "My friendships will have no effect on judgement." as he was being asked to step aside. |
| It would be Justice Blair's very inability to provide thoughtful answers and his inability to defend his allegations that will uncover a constructive application of evidence and exclusions of evidence that provided benefit. Allegations would not be defendable by Justice Blair and not supported by evidence. |
Judge Blair's judgement has been approved by the Prime Minister and Chief Justice of Canada and sets this case as the Democracy of Canadaaccepted standard of conduct for Canadian Judges. All rights are claimed.. as if claiming equal rights even matters to these people. |
Warning: Kamloops B.C. Supreme CourtJustice Richard Blair made several serious allegations of evidence that failed to appear anywhere. Claims that were not presented by anyone. Fraud is claimed. |
Warning: The Prime Ministers office within a letter states "While careful consideration has been given to your description of the difficulties you have experienced, this office is unable to intervene in any way in this situation." | Warning: The Canadian Judicial Council within a letter states "Please be advised that any further correspondence in this matter will remain without reply and will simply be filed." | Finding nothing wrong with judgement, the Prime Minister's office, The Canadian Justice Ministryand the Chief Justice of Canada have set the accepted standard for judges. This is a precedent. |
| ✅ The doctors failed to provide evidence relating to Judge Blair's alleged disclosure of risk or consent. ✅ A constructive judgement with both law and evidence withheld in order to provide benefit. ✅ Justice Blair made allegations failed to appear in evidence. ✅ Justice Blair was not asked to explain. Judge Blair fails to dispute fraud. ✅ Government accepted fraud on alleged evidence that failed to appear. ✅ An alleged need for experts within a closed courtroom went to destroy legitimate evidence. ✅ Dr. White is paid for the same attendance alleged never happened. This is fraud. ✅ The rejection of a requested trial and cross-examination was beyond the Plaintiff's control. ✅ Justice Blair's alleged experts, employed by the Doctors, did not see the Plaintiff's evidence. ✅ Judge Blair introduced questions knowing they could not be answered with affidavits. ✅ Judge Blair fails to dispute this claim of fraud. Nothing disputes this Internet website. ✅ Judge Blair's misconduct is claimed to be an issue for the courts by the Canadian Judicial Council. ✅ Court Costs awarded based upon fraudulent claims made by Kamloops Judge Richard Blair. |
| Justice Blair made serious unsupported allegations that alleged experts employed by the doctors claimed an informed consent. Absolutely no inference can be taken from alleged doctor experts who provided him with some form of evidence that an informed consent was provided or any discussions had taken place, when discussions had not. No consent relating to risk was provided. Experts hired by the doctors, who failed to see any evidence from the Plaintiff, when fraud is claimed have absolutely no credibility. Fraud is claimed on an alleged consent. Fraud is claimed on judges allegations that failed to appear anywhere in the evidence. |
Shame on B.C. Supreme Court Justice Richard Blair |
 |