CRIMINAL CHARGE JULY 14, 2006:
On July 14, 2006 the Crown processed the paperwork to formally charge me with the Criminal
Code offense of 249.(1) Dangerous operation of a motor vehicle. The charge was completely false.
See the Crown's Dangerous Operation of a Motor Vehicle criminal charge against me HERE.
SUMMONS TO A PERSON CHARGED WITH AN OFFENCE JULY 14, 2006:
On July 19, 2006 three RCMP officers attended my home residence to serve me with a summons
dated July 14, 2006 pursuant to a criminal charge of dangerous operation of a motor vehicle. I was
ordered to attend the Powell River, BC RCMP detachment on the morning of August 9, 2006 for
processing, to be photographed and fingerprinted, and then I had to attend the Provincial Court of
British Columbia in Powell River, BC for an appearance.
See the Summons to a Person Charged with an Offence HERE.
RCMP REPORT TO CROWN COUNSEL
I retained counsel to defend myself against the false charge and through my lawyer I was able to see
the RCMP's Report to Crown Counsel which was the basis for the Crown's unusual decision to lay
a charge of criminal misconduct against me.
The Report to Crown Counsel was a damning piece of evidence, not against me, but against the
government. In an odd kind of way I should be grateful that the police undertook to attempt to send
me back to prison again because their Report to Crown Counsel, the government's own investigation
into Earl Graham's false claim of assault, was a lethal weapon I could use to thwart them. The
Report to Crown Counsel is an example of totally incompetent and hateful police work. All you
have to do is look at the Report to Crown Counsel and you can easily see that the RCMP don't give
a damn about law and order and they don't know what actual police work really is. The RCMP just
saw me as a landowner they could charge and process through the government's extortion system
and they undertook to do so as quickly as they possibly could. The Report to Crown Counsel is
loaded with lies and untruths and it's impossible to discern what's fact and what's been fabricated by
the police.
The first half of the report is an empty checklist of questions the RCMP must fill in to complete the
investigation. Other than my name and the Police Case No., none of the questions the RCMP is
required by law to answer have been answered, they're all left blank. It wasn't important to the
RCMP to complete the Report to Crown Counsel checklist before filing it with the Crown Counsel
Office to get a criminal charge on me. By refusing to complete the Report to Crown Counsel
questionnaire, the RCMP was negligent and did not fulfill its lawful duty to conduct a complete,
thorough and lawful investigation into this matter.
According to the RCMP's Report to Crown Counsel, on June 3, 2006 I operated a motor vehicle
dangerously at my personal residence when I struck Earl Graham and carried him on the hood of
my car for 500 meters and then stopped the car and let him walk away. This is what the Crown
said I did to Graham. It's completely false of course. Earl Graham has never attended my personal
home residence that I'm aware of and I've never struck him with a vehicle.
Further, the RCMP's Report to Crown Counsel basically proves that Earl Graham is guilty of
committing fraud against me. There is a criminal fraud charge against Graham in this report.
According to the RCMP, Graham was working in a shop in a barn I own that he was renting from
somebody other than the owner of the property. Somebody else was collecting a fee to rent out my
property. This is quite true, he was ripping me off. He did not rent the barn he was occupying
from the owners of the property. A fraud was being perpetrated against me by Earl Graham, he
was a hostile trespasser squatting on my privately-owned land without any legal authority to be
there. Earl Graham had confessed to the RCMP of a serious fraud against the property owners.
Yet this fraud didn't register with the cops. It went right over their heads. This is why we have a
massive fraud problem in Canada. The police don't recognize fraud as a criminal problem that
should be addressed and combated. Instead the police are in place to protect and assist the
fraudsters with their illegal schemes.
The RCMP then go on to recount a crazy story they attribute to Earl Graham about how Graham
was working in my shop at my barn on my property and I somehow struck Graham with my car by
driving in reverse and as such he ended up on the hood of my car and went for a little joyride until I
stopped the vehicle and Graham got off the hood of the car. According to the RCMP, Graham told
the police all this was witnessed by someone by the name of Carr.
So here we have the RCMP lying like out-of-control maniacs to Crown counsel all over the place
about how I victimized Earl Graham. According to the summary of the grounds for the charge, I
struck Graham with my car at my personal residence. Yet in the testimony attributed to Graham,
he says he was struck in the shop at my barn which is about half a mile away from my home. And
none of the people who witnessed Graham's appalling conduct on June 3, 2006 are called Carr.
There is no Carr. The existence of a witness who can corroborate and back up the RCMP's false
story has been fabricated.
The lying from the RCMP continues. According to the RCMP, on the same day as Graham
attended the RCMP detachment to file a false police report against me, June 5, 2006, I sent a letter
to the detachment regarding Graham's criminal behavior. The RCMP claim that in this letter I made
no mention of the dangerous driving I was guilty of on June 3, 2006. This is false. I did not send a
June 5, 2006 letter to the Powell River Detachment of the RCMP.
Then the RCMP claim to have spoken to a couple of witnesses in their investigation. According to
the cops, one witness didn't want to give a formal statement to the police because he and his wife
are afraid of me and fear ramifications should they say something. According to the RCMP, if the
RCMP can assure this witness that I'm going to be convicted and sent to prison then a statement
will be provided, otherwise no statement. Incidentally, I caught this witness using my property as a
landing base for his helicopter operations so maybe he wants me incarcerated so he can land his
helicopters in my backyard again.
Nonetheless, even though the witness was supposedly scared to death of me, he did give a
statement. The witness said: “. . . the victim [Earl Graham] sat on the car belonging to the accused
[me]. The accused told the victim to get off his vehicle and the victim stated he would not.”
This witness told the truth. His statement is correct. Earl Graham was not struck by my vehicle as
he and the RCMP claimed. Earl Graham sat himself on my stationary car parked on my private
property and would not remove himself from the vehicle when asked to.
The RCMP spoke to another witness, who it's my understanding they managed to track down in
Maryland, USA. Maryland! According to the report, this witness was reluctant to be a party to an
RCMP investigation as well, but did say: “. . . the accused was not driving fast, but the victim
probably could have been hurt had he fallen off the hood of the car . . .”
This statement is also truthful and it confirms I was not driving fast, that I drove at a slow speed
while Graham refused to get off the hood of my car, and it confirms that Earl Graham did not fall
off my vehicle and he sustained no injuries in the incident. And we'll never know whether Graham
could have been hurt had he fallen off the car since he didn't fall off the car.
The RCMP finishes off the report with more incredibly massive lies. The RCMP claimed that
several officers had attempted to located me, including the officer who conducted the investigation,
but I couldn't be found anywhere. In actual fact I'd been in contact with the Powell River
Detachment of the RCMP by phone and by mail throughout the course of this matter. I initially
made contact with the Powell River, BC RCMP detachment by phone when I lodged a criminal
complaint against Graham on June 10, 2006. I spoke to the police three or four different times on
the phone that day. I was asked about the car hood incident and I explained to the officer exactly
what had happened. On July 16, 2006 I spoke to a corporal at the detachment by telephone about
Earl Graham, as well as on another, later occasion. And I'd mailed the RCMP at least seven letters
of complaint starting in May 2006 regarding the rampant criminal activity being perpetrated by Earl
Graham and others on my private property.
The RCMP concludes the report with a false claim that I have a criminal record for uttering a forged
document and that I received a jail sentence for uttering threats but this is not on my criminal
record. More sickening falsehoods. I have a record for several crimes, including uttering a forged
document. And I was sentenced to a jail term for more than just the crime of uttering threats.
Further, since I was convicted of the offense, the uttering threats conviction is included as part of
my criminal record. Why is the RCMP lying to Crown counsel about my criminal background?
Makes no sense.
So it's obvious the RCMP were desperate to lay a charge against me of one kind or another,
regardless of what they thought the facts might be. I was going to be charged with something no
matter what, whether innocent or guilty. The RCMP received a complaint. The RCMP conducted
an investigation into the complaint so as to either substantiate or negate the validity of the
complaint. Since their was no hard evidence like possibly a physical injury, the only way to prove
whether Graham was telling the truth was by talking to witnesses. Likewise, the witnesses would
also prove that he was lying if he'd fabricated his story. Graham was of course full of shit. The
RCMP begged the witnesses for the statements they were looking for, statements that would
support Graham's phony story. Yet the witnesses couldn't give them what they wanted. They
couldn't give the RCMP what they were begging for because none of the witnesses could
corroborate their bizarre, made-up story. The witnesses could only give the RCMP the truth. In
fact, Graham was so up to his eyeballs in lies he couldn't even get the name of his only witness
straight, he just made up a fake name for the cops. The RCMP investigation proved Graham was
lying. It was right there in the Report to Crown Counsel. However, this didn't matter to the police
or to the Crown prosecutors and a charge was laid anyways.
This is how the angry Canadian government gives you the finger and lets you know it hates you.
The government charges you with a fake crime, then like a belligerent cunt it gives you the evidence
to show you you've been deliberately set up on a bogus charge. The Report to Crown Counsel is
conclusive evidence of a premeditated criminal conspiracy to falsely prosecute me with a fake
criminal offense. That is a very serious crime in itself. The RCMP, Crown counsel and Earl
Graham are guilty of the Criminal Code offense of conspiracy to prosecute falsely knowing full well
that the offense as maintained by the Crown was not committed. In addition, Earl Graham is guilty
of the Criminal Code offense of making false statements to the police accusing me of a fake offense
and of reporting a false offense to the police.
See the RCMP Report to Crown Counsel HERE.
EARL GRAHAM'S STATEMENT TO THE RCMP:
I was also privy to Graham's own handwritten statement of accusation and it was a cinch tearing
Graham's credibility as a witness to shreds. His writing came across as that of a mentally disabled
child or someone blasted out of their skull on drugs and booze. The man hadn't learned to write or
spell and his written statement made little sense. The statement looked like it was written by a ten-
year-old child with a learning disability. However, Graham is at least forty years old, maybe fifty-
plus. His statement and his actions show that he suffers from a serious mental disability and isn't
able to properly balance moral issues. He doesn't comprehend consequences to his actions and he
doesn't realize that it's wrong -- and illegal -- to make false accusations against someone just because
it suits him.
The Canadian government is repulsive. It's absolutely reprehensible that the RCMP, the Ministry of
Solicitor General, the Ministry of Attorney General, ICBC and the Bar would have no qualms about
using this sick, disabled man to attack an innocent BC resident with false accusations. The immoral
Canadian government is infested with these lowlife scum predators who will not think twice about
using a mentally disabled person to churn people through their corrupt, broken down systems to
make a fast buck.
In Earl Graham's barely legible handwritten statement he claimed that on June 3, 2006 I was seated
in my stationary car parked on my own private property talking to him through my driver side
window. He claimed he was standing with his back to me, his body bent forward to listen to me
talk from my motionless car, when I suddenly struck him from behind without warning by moving
the car in reverse gear. He claimed this is how he ended up on the hood of my car. Graham's
statement wasn't credible. People don't listen to other people speak with their backside to them.
Graham had lied and in actual fact he simply sat himself on the hood my parked car.
Graham wrote that there was a spray of gravel when my wheels turned right and I knocked him
onto the hood of my car. This statement is simply impossible. The driveway at my barn that my
front-wheel drive car was parked on is made of cement and the road I backed out onto, McLean
Road, is a paved street. It sounds exciting for Graham to say my wheels spun and gravel shot up
into the air, but it's not in any way true.
Earl Graham wrote that he gripped the hood of my car holding on for dear life while I took him for
a ride up the road. He then wrote that I tried to knock him off by doing a U-turn on the highway.
This wasn't true. I drove at a slow speed and I did not attempt to injure or cause bodily harm to
Graham. Then he said I stopped the car and he got off and walked away.
Graham claimed the incident was witnessed by a McLean Road resident by the name of Mr. Carr.
This was false. While there were witnesses to the incident, the residents of two homes directly
across the street from my property, none of those people are called Carr. Like most of his false
story, Graham also falsified the existence of this witness for his report to the police. There is no
Mr. Carr.
See Earl Graham's police statement HERE.
CROWN COUNSEL'S INITIAL SENTENCING POSITION JULY 12, 2006:
Next the Crown lawyers got involved and the conspiracy got deeper and whackier. According to a
government document entitled Crown Counsel's Initial Sentencing Position, the Crown prosecutor
was looking for a condition in a probation order against me that prohibited my contact with Earl
Graham. Earl Graham was a squatter on my private property who showed up every day first thing
in the morning and sometimes didn't leave till well into the night. He'd set himself up in my barn
and he'd declared he was not ever going to leave my land. As such, the Crown was saying it
wanted to evict me from my home so Earl Graham could be left alone in peace to tinker with his
auto wrecks on my privately-owned property that I pay thousands of dollars in property tax for each
and every year, INCLUDING A SPECIFIC TAX FOR THE POLICE ALONE!!! The Crown
wanted to protect this trespasser so he could continue to defraud me. And the Crown was
demanding a no-contact order, yet I was charged with a driving offense. How does a no-contact
order correlate to my dangerous operation of a motor vehicle? The Crown lawyer's position was a
nauseating kick in the stomach and it clearly showed how the government wants to hurt innocent
people who are not guilty of anything. The Crown had declared war on me.
See the July 12, 2006 Crown Counsel's Initial Sentencing Position document HERE.
CROWN COUNSEL DISCLOSURE NOTICE JULY 24, 2006:
This Crown counsel document names Earl Graham as the ONLY witness in this matter. This is an
example of another huge Crown counsel lie. In truth, there were several witnesses to what
happened between me and Earl Graham on my private property on June 3, 2006 and the
government knew there were. They interviewed at least two of them. As we know, the RCMP
Report to Crown Counsel contains important statements from two other witnesses to Graham's
hysterical behavior on June 3, 2006. Additionally, I too am a witness in this matter and I gave a
number of statements to the RCMP on the telephone and in writing regarding Graham's criminal
conduct on my private property, including a June 10, 2006 statement via the telephone answering
Graham's allegation of assault. All but one of my many written and verbal statements were covered
up and ignored up by the government.
Further, the Crown notes that it intends to make an appointment with me. This is weird. It makes
no sense that the Crown prosecutors would wish to contact me directly when I've already been
circumvented in their investigation, when I've been set up and criminally charged, and when I've
retained legal counsel to defend myself against the Crown's false accusations. The procedure is to
take the matter to trial, not to schedule an appointment with me.
See the July 24, 2006 Crown Counsel Disclosure Notice HERE.
Maybe the Crown prosecutors in Powell River, British Columbia are used to pushing innocent
people around with false charges and aren't accustomed to people opposing them. Perhaps they
thought I'd plead guilty or something. That wasn't going to happen. I fought the bogus charge
through my lawyer with the facts of the matter and after some foot-dragging on the Crown's part the
charge that should never have been leveled in the first place was eventually dropped. By laying the
charge against me, that meant the Crown believed I was guilty of the crime. The facts of the matter
didn't change. So why not proceed with the prosecution? Why was the charge dropped? Because
there was no crime in the first place and it was all an atrocious fraud from the very beginning, that's
why.
Then ICBC started kicking again.
On July 14, 2006 the Crown processed the paperwork to formally charge me with the Criminal
Code offense of 249.(1) Dangerous operation of a motor vehicle. The charge was completely false.
See the Crown's Dangerous Operation of a Motor Vehicle criminal charge against me HERE.
SUMMONS TO A PERSON CHARGED WITH AN OFFENCE JULY 14, 2006:
On July 19, 2006 three RCMP officers attended my home residence to serve me with a summons
dated July 14, 2006 pursuant to a criminal charge of dangerous operation of a motor vehicle. I was
ordered to attend the Powell River, BC RCMP detachment on the morning of August 9, 2006 for
processing, to be photographed and fingerprinted, and then I had to attend the Provincial Court of
British Columbia in Powell River, BC for an appearance.
See the Summons to a Person Charged with an Offence HERE.
RCMP REPORT TO CROWN COUNSEL
I retained counsel to defend myself against the false charge and through my lawyer I was able to see
the RCMP's Report to Crown Counsel which was the basis for the Crown's unusual decision to lay
a charge of criminal misconduct against me.
The Report to Crown Counsel was a damning piece of evidence, not against me, but against the
government. In an odd kind of way I should be grateful that the police undertook to attempt to send
me back to prison again because their Report to Crown Counsel, the government's own investigation
into Earl Graham's false claim of assault, was a lethal weapon I could use to thwart them. The
Report to Crown Counsel is an example of totally incompetent and hateful police work. All you
have to do is look at the Report to Crown Counsel and you can easily see that the RCMP don't give
a damn about law and order and they don't know what actual police work really is. The RCMP just
saw me as a landowner they could charge and process through the government's extortion system
and they undertook to do so as quickly as they possibly could. The Report to Crown Counsel is
loaded with lies and untruths and it's impossible to discern what's fact and what's been fabricated by
the police.
The first half of the report is an empty checklist of questions the RCMP must fill in to complete the
investigation. Other than my name and the Police Case No., none of the questions the RCMP is
required by law to answer have been answered, they're all left blank. It wasn't important to the
RCMP to complete the Report to Crown Counsel checklist before filing it with the Crown Counsel
Office to get a criminal charge on me. By refusing to complete the Report to Crown Counsel
questionnaire, the RCMP was negligent and did not fulfill its lawful duty to conduct a complete,
thorough and lawful investigation into this matter.
According to the RCMP's Report to Crown Counsel, on June 3, 2006 I operated a motor vehicle
dangerously at my personal residence when I struck Earl Graham and carried him on the hood of
my car for 500 meters and then stopped the car and let him walk away. This is what the Crown
said I did to Graham. It's completely false of course. Earl Graham has never attended my personal
home residence that I'm aware of and I've never struck him with a vehicle.
Further, the RCMP's Report to Crown Counsel basically proves that Earl Graham is guilty of
committing fraud against me. There is a criminal fraud charge against Graham in this report.
According to the RCMP, Graham was working in a shop in a barn I own that he was renting from
somebody other than the owner of the property. Somebody else was collecting a fee to rent out my
property. This is quite true, he was ripping me off. He did not rent the barn he was occupying
from the owners of the property. A fraud was being perpetrated against me by Earl Graham, he
was a hostile trespasser squatting on my privately-owned land without any legal authority to be
there. Earl Graham had confessed to the RCMP of a serious fraud against the property owners.
Yet this fraud didn't register with the cops. It went right over their heads. This is why we have a
massive fraud problem in Canada. The police don't recognize fraud as a criminal problem that
should be addressed and combated. Instead the police are in place to protect and assist the
fraudsters with their illegal schemes.
The RCMP then go on to recount a crazy story they attribute to Earl Graham about how Graham
was working in my shop at my barn on my property and I somehow struck Graham with my car by
driving in reverse and as such he ended up on the hood of my car and went for a little joyride until I
stopped the vehicle and Graham got off the hood of the car. According to the RCMP, Graham told
the police all this was witnessed by someone by the name of Carr.
So here we have the RCMP lying like out-of-control maniacs to Crown counsel all over the place
about how I victimized Earl Graham. According to the summary of the grounds for the charge, I
struck Graham with my car at my personal residence. Yet in the testimony attributed to Graham,
he says he was struck in the shop at my barn which is about half a mile away from my home. And
none of the people who witnessed Graham's appalling conduct on June 3, 2006 are called Carr.
There is no Carr. The existence of a witness who can corroborate and back up the RCMP's false
story has been fabricated.
The lying from the RCMP continues. According to the RCMP, on the same day as Graham
attended the RCMP detachment to file a false police report against me, June 5, 2006, I sent a letter
to the detachment regarding Graham's criminal behavior. The RCMP claim that in this letter I made
no mention of the dangerous driving I was guilty of on June 3, 2006. This is false. I did not send a
June 5, 2006 letter to the Powell River Detachment of the RCMP.
Then the RCMP claim to have spoken to a couple of witnesses in their investigation. According to
the cops, one witness didn't want to give a formal statement to the police because he and his wife
are afraid of me and fear ramifications should they say something. According to the RCMP, if the
RCMP can assure this witness that I'm going to be convicted and sent to prison then a statement
will be provided, otherwise no statement. Incidentally, I caught this witness using my property as a
landing base for his helicopter operations so maybe he wants me incarcerated so he can land his
helicopters in my backyard again.
Nonetheless, even though the witness was supposedly scared to death of me, he did give a
statement. The witness said: “. . . the victim [Earl Graham] sat on the car belonging to the accused
[me]. The accused told the victim to get off his vehicle and the victim stated he would not.”
This witness told the truth. His statement is correct. Earl Graham was not struck by my vehicle as
he and the RCMP claimed. Earl Graham sat himself on my stationary car parked on my private
property and would not remove himself from the vehicle when asked to.
The RCMP spoke to another witness, who it's my understanding they managed to track down in
Maryland, USA. Maryland! According to the report, this witness was reluctant to be a party to an
RCMP investigation as well, but did say: “. . . the accused was not driving fast, but the victim
probably could have been hurt had he fallen off the hood of the car . . .”
This statement is also truthful and it confirms I was not driving fast, that I drove at a slow speed
while Graham refused to get off the hood of my car, and it confirms that Earl Graham did not fall
off my vehicle and he sustained no injuries in the incident. And we'll never know whether Graham
could have been hurt had he fallen off the car since he didn't fall off the car.
The RCMP finishes off the report with more incredibly massive lies. The RCMP claimed that
several officers had attempted to located me, including the officer who conducted the investigation,
but I couldn't be found anywhere. In actual fact I'd been in contact with the Powell River
Detachment of the RCMP by phone and by mail throughout the course of this matter. I initially
made contact with the Powell River, BC RCMP detachment by phone when I lodged a criminal
complaint against Graham on June 10, 2006. I spoke to the police three or four different times on
the phone that day. I was asked about the car hood incident and I explained to the officer exactly
what had happened. On July 16, 2006 I spoke to a corporal at the detachment by telephone about
Earl Graham, as well as on another, later occasion. And I'd mailed the RCMP at least seven letters
of complaint starting in May 2006 regarding the rampant criminal activity being perpetrated by Earl
Graham and others on my private property.
The RCMP concludes the report with a false claim that I have a criminal record for uttering a forged
document and that I received a jail sentence for uttering threats but this is not on my criminal
record. More sickening falsehoods. I have a record for several crimes, including uttering a forged
document. And I was sentenced to a jail term for more than just the crime of uttering threats.
Further, since I was convicted of the offense, the uttering threats conviction is included as part of
my criminal record. Why is the RCMP lying to Crown counsel about my criminal background?
Makes no sense.
So it's obvious the RCMP were desperate to lay a charge against me of one kind or another,
regardless of what they thought the facts might be. I was going to be charged with something no
matter what, whether innocent or guilty. The RCMP received a complaint. The RCMP conducted
an investigation into the complaint so as to either substantiate or negate the validity of the
complaint. Since their was no hard evidence like possibly a physical injury, the only way to prove
whether Graham was telling the truth was by talking to witnesses. Likewise, the witnesses would
also prove that he was lying if he'd fabricated his story. Graham was of course full of shit. The
RCMP begged the witnesses for the statements they were looking for, statements that would
support Graham's phony story. Yet the witnesses couldn't give them what they wanted. They
couldn't give the RCMP what they were begging for because none of the witnesses could
corroborate their bizarre, made-up story. The witnesses could only give the RCMP the truth. In
fact, Graham was so up to his eyeballs in lies he couldn't even get the name of his only witness
straight, he just made up a fake name for the cops. The RCMP investigation proved Graham was
lying. It was right there in the Report to Crown Counsel. However, this didn't matter to the police
or to the Crown prosecutors and a charge was laid anyways.
This is how the angry Canadian government gives you the finger and lets you know it hates you.
The government charges you with a fake crime, then like a belligerent cunt it gives you the evidence
to show you you've been deliberately set up on a bogus charge. The Report to Crown Counsel is
conclusive evidence of a premeditated criminal conspiracy to falsely prosecute me with a fake
criminal offense. That is a very serious crime in itself. The RCMP, Crown counsel and Earl
Graham are guilty of the Criminal Code offense of conspiracy to prosecute falsely knowing full well
that the offense as maintained by the Crown was not committed. In addition, Earl Graham is guilty
of the Criminal Code offense of making false statements to the police accusing me of a fake offense
and of reporting a false offense to the police.
See the RCMP Report to Crown Counsel HERE.
EARL GRAHAM'S STATEMENT TO THE RCMP:
I was also privy to Graham's own handwritten statement of accusation and it was a cinch tearing
Graham's credibility as a witness to shreds. His writing came across as that of a mentally disabled
child or someone blasted out of their skull on drugs and booze. The man hadn't learned to write or
spell and his written statement made little sense. The statement looked like it was written by a ten-
year-old child with a learning disability. However, Graham is at least forty years old, maybe fifty-
plus. His statement and his actions show that he suffers from a serious mental disability and isn't
able to properly balance moral issues. He doesn't comprehend consequences to his actions and he
doesn't realize that it's wrong -- and illegal -- to make false accusations against someone just because
it suits him.
The Canadian government is repulsive. It's absolutely reprehensible that the RCMP, the Ministry of
Solicitor General, the Ministry of Attorney General, ICBC and the Bar would have no qualms about
using this sick, disabled man to attack an innocent BC resident with false accusations. The immoral
Canadian government is infested with these lowlife scum predators who will not think twice about
using a mentally disabled person to churn people through their corrupt, broken down systems to
make a fast buck.
In Earl Graham's barely legible handwritten statement he claimed that on June 3, 2006 I was seated
in my stationary car parked on my own private property talking to him through my driver side
window. He claimed he was standing with his back to me, his body bent forward to listen to me
talk from my motionless car, when I suddenly struck him from behind without warning by moving
the car in reverse gear. He claimed this is how he ended up on the hood of my car. Graham's
statement wasn't credible. People don't listen to other people speak with their backside to them.
Graham had lied and in actual fact he simply sat himself on the hood my parked car.
Graham wrote that there was a spray of gravel when my wheels turned right and I knocked him
onto the hood of my car. This statement is simply impossible. The driveway at my barn that my
front-wheel drive car was parked on is made of cement and the road I backed out onto, McLean
Road, is a paved street. It sounds exciting for Graham to say my wheels spun and gravel shot up
into the air, but it's not in any way true.
Earl Graham wrote that he gripped the hood of my car holding on for dear life while I took him for
a ride up the road. He then wrote that I tried to knock him off by doing a U-turn on the highway.
This wasn't true. I drove at a slow speed and I did not attempt to injure or cause bodily harm to
Graham. Then he said I stopped the car and he got off and walked away.
Graham claimed the incident was witnessed by a McLean Road resident by the name of Mr. Carr.
This was false. While there were witnesses to the incident, the residents of two homes directly
across the street from my property, none of those people are called Carr. Like most of his false
story, Graham also falsified the existence of this witness for his report to the police. There is no
Mr. Carr.
See Earl Graham's police statement HERE.
CROWN COUNSEL'S INITIAL SENTENCING POSITION JULY 12, 2006:
Next the Crown lawyers got involved and the conspiracy got deeper and whackier. According to a
government document entitled Crown Counsel's Initial Sentencing Position, the Crown prosecutor
was looking for a condition in a probation order against me that prohibited my contact with Earl
Graham. Earl Graham was a squatter on my private property who showed up every day first thing
in the morning and sometimes didn't leave till well into the night. He'd set himself up in my barn
and he'd declared he was not ever going to leave my land. As such, the Crown was saying it
wanted to evict me from my home so Earl Graham could be left alone in peace to tinker with his
auto wrecks on my privately-owned property that I pay thousands of dollars in property tax for each
and every year, INCLUDING A SPECIFIC TAX FOR THE POLICE ALONE!!! The Crown
wanted to protect this trespasser so he could continue to defraud me. And the Crown was
demanding a no-contact order, yet I was charged with a driving offense. How does a no-contact
order correlate to my dangerous operation of a motor vehicle? The Crown lawyer's position was a
nauseating kick in the stomach and it clearly showed how the government wants to hurt innocent
people who are not guilty of anything. The Crown had declared war on me.
See the July 12, 2006 Crown Counsel's Initial Sentencing Position document HERE.
CROWN COUNSEL DISCLOSURE NOTICE JULY 24, 2006:
This Crown counsel document names Earl Graham as the ONLY witness in this matter. This is an
example of another huge Crown counsel lie. In truth, there were several witnesses to what
happened between me and Earl Graham on my private property on June 3, 2006 and the
government knew there were. They interviewed at least two of them. As we know, the RCMP
Report to Crown Counsel contains important statements from two other witnesses to Graham's
hysterical behavior on June 3, 2006. Additionally, I too am a witness in this matter and I gave a
number of statements to the RCMP on the telephone and in writing regarding Graham's criminal
conduct on my private property, including a June 10, 2006 statement via the telephone answering
Graham's allegation of assault. All but one of my many written and verbal statements were covered
up and ignored up by the government.
Further, the Crown notes that it intends to make an appointment with me. This is weird. It makes
no sense that the Crown prosecutors would wish to contact me directly when I've already been
circumvented in their investigation, when I've been set up and criminally charged, and when I've
retained legal counsel to defend myself against the Crown's false accusations. The procedure is to
take the matter to trial, not to schedule an appointment with me.
See the July 24, 2006 Crown Counsel Disclosure Notice HERE.
Maybe the Crown prosecutors in Powell River, British Columbia are used to pushing innocent
people around with false charges and aren't accustomed to people opposing them. Perhaps they
thought I'd plead guilty or something. That wasn't going to happen. I fought the bogus charge
through my lawyer with the facts of the matter and after some foot-dragging on the Crown's part the
charge that should never have been leveled in the first place was eventually dropped. By laying the
charge against me, that meant the Crown believed I was guilty of the crime. The facts of the matter
didn't change. So why not proceed with the prosecution? Why was the charge dropped? Because
there was no crime in the first place and it was all an atrocious fraud from the very beginning, that's
why.
Then ICBC started kicking again.
| "ICBC-RCMP-ATTORNEY GENERAL CONSPIRACY EXPOSED" CONTINUED |
2 / 6