Dirty dicky Dean

Published on May 2016 | Categories: Documents | Downloads: 24 | Comments: 0 | Views: 386
of 56
Download PDF   Embed   Report



David Amos <[email protected]> wrote: Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 14:30:55 -0700 (PDT) From: David Amos <[email protected]> Subject: Since the Premier does not like my attachment have some text everyone else has read To: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

David Amos <[email protected]> wrote: Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 10:26:23 -0700 (PDT) From: David Amos <[email protected]> Subject: I just called ya O'Brien To: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] We all know the score on Harper and Martin. I am just trying to figure out who amongst my fellow Canadians is dumber, you or Parish or McLellan, or Cadman or Stronach or Kilgour or the Bloc Quebecois or the NDP or Billy Matthews or Johnny Crosbie or Andy Scott maybe just me? Methinks time will tell EH? Maybe you should ask the Cubans. They are pretending they are as clueless as that moron George W. Bush and don't want me to say stuff on the phone. Hell everybody know what I know. I am just the only one will to say it, thats all. Whereas James Carville thinks Karl Rove is oh so smart, I guess I will have ask him EH? Say hey to the Cubans in Ottawa that pissed me off yesterday and I will say hey to Allan Rock at the UN for you. Here is their number in case ya didn't know. Their associates in the UN are getting the same hard copy of material I gave Rob Moore, John Herron, Joe Day, Paul Zed, Brad Green, Danny Williams, Franky McKenna, the Arar Inquiry etc etc last year. H.E. Ernesto A. Sent� Darias 388 Main St., Ottawa, ON, K1S 1E3 Tel 613 563-0141 Fax 613 563-0068 Yesterday, Mr. Cotler would not comment on whether the bill would be delayed. Rather, he said he was not aware of any commitment to Mr. O'Brien. "I only know what I said to Pat O'Brien, which I suspect is the same thing the Prime Minister said . . . and that is this bill will have hearings as do all prospective legislation before committees, but it is the judgment of the committee as to what the nature and scope of those hearings will be.

"So the committee will make those determinations. It's not for us, a minister of the Crown, to make those determinations." Said justice critic Vic Toews: "It appears to me that Paul Martin is just fooling with O'Brien in a desperate attempt to keep him. . . . " Earlier this week, Mr. Martin lost one of his party's two Alberta MPs when David Kilgour left to sit as an independent. The Edmonton MP also opposes the same-sex marriage bill. In welcoming back Mr. O'Brien with open arms, however, Mr. Martin raised the ire of New Democratic Party Leader Jack Layton, who accused him of kicking anti-Bush MP Carolyn Parrish out of his caucus but not an MP who is anti-equality and anti-woman. Mr. O'Brien had referred to a female colleague, Liberal MP Sarmite Bulte, who disagreed with his position, as a "dumb blond bimbo." Mr. Martin and his Liberals have been making efforts all week to shore up support wherever they can after polls showed their fortunes plummeting. The testimony at the Gomery inquiry into the sponsorship scandal and allegations that millions of dollars of taxpayer money found its way into Liberal Party coffers have caused an election frenzy on the Hill. The government is doing everything it can to stay in office, including a proposal -- if it survives until the autumn -- to prorogue the Commons (officially end the session). The scenario, laid out at a recent meeting of senior ministerial staffers, involved, according to a source, proroguing the Commons in September so that it would not sit when the Gomery commission reports in the fall, then bringing the House back in January of 2006 with a Throne Speech followed by a budget and then an election.

After jumping ship from the federal Liberals, Edmonton-Beaumont MP David Kilgour announced yesterday the next election will mark the end of his political career. Kilgour also categorically ruled out running again for the Conservatives at a press conference yesterday at a Mill Woods pizza restaurant in his constituency. "Read my lips. I intend to remain an Independent on the Liberal side of the house until the next election," he said. "I am saying that I will not run in the next election, and therefore I will not be running for anybody. Twenty-seven years is probably long enough to be an MP." Kilgour also said he wouldn't consider rejoining the Liberals before Prime Minister Paul Martin steps down as party leader. "If Paul Martin were to see the writing on the wall, and decide to resign, and somebody who I agreed with most of the time ... I would probably go back to the Liberals," he said. Nor would he actually be very welcome in the Conservative circles in

the riding, according to Tim Uppal. He lost the seat to Kilgour by a whisker in last June's election. With explosive testimony from the Gomery inquiry expected to lead to another election in the spring, Uppal said the Conservatives are ramping up their nomination process. "At one point, he was the safest Liberal seat in Western Canada," Uppal said yesterday, adding Kilgour still enjoys a tremendous amount of respect in the riding. "Good for him. But coming over to the Conservatives, he would face a very tough nomination battle, and it's a battle he would not want to fight. "The Liberal party is hurting across Canada, and the Liberal party does not have a chance in this riding." Kilgour said yesterday the party's stand on same-sex marriage and the scandal surrounding revelations of the Gomery inquiry were a big part of his decision to leave. But he stressed the deal-breaker was Canada's failure to act to help civilians overrun by civil war in the Darfur region of Sudan. Kilgour blamed Martin for not acting. In the wake of Kilgour's departure from caucus Wednesday, Martin said he was glad to be rid of someone who wasn't willing to stick it out through tough times. Kilgour said he'll write a book and devote his time to helping underdeveloped nations after he retires from politics.

David Amos <[email protected]> wrote: Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 10:13:07 -0700 (PDT) From: David Amos <[email protected]> Subject: I just talked to ya Stevey Boy thanks for showng me your arse so fast To: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Christian R.C. Whalen, I just called you too and was put on hold while trying to explain my concerns. I hate that. May I suggest that you sit up and pay attention and act within the scope of your employment once you get back from lunch. The fact that I can use a phone and send emails must at least prove that I am human too and have

at least the same rights as you. Rest assured I will be giving you hard copy once I return home in order to prove what I say is true. Putting me in jail or on hold will no longer do. Just so you all know, there is no need to send your organization, the CBA hard copy. Your buddies George McAllister and Jeff Mockler amongst many others in Fredericton got it last year. I received their malevolent answers before I was was falsely imprisoned in the USA. I bet Georgey Boy and Elizabeth Weir are shitting bricks right now after what they have said in the newspaper about the insurance industry last year and the fact that old Hank Greenburg of AIG is in a world of trouble. When Elliot Spitzer went forward and sued Marsh McLellen whilst I was in jail it really pissed me off. I wonder if he and McAllister understand the term "personal injury" because they certainly failed to uphold the law and assisted John Ashcroft in my false imprisonment under the charges of "other" These emails just prove that you all knew the truth before I take up my matters with the UN and then come home to run for Parliament again. We all know Franky McKenna and Allan Rock ain't worth a damn when it comes to speaking for the best interests of our fellow Canadians. Who knows maybe there is some other country that will assist and honest pigheaded Maritimer to expose the awful truth for the benefit of all people excepting lawyers of course. By water Cuba is a close neighbor may we should become better friends. Rest assured if there is no one who will stand with me I will still sue your entire organization for failing the public trust placed in your profession. Methinks the Maritimes should separate from Canada and claim our natural resoures as our own. Lawyers know the maritimes is far from poor why else would buffons such as Franky McKenna and Bernard Lord get to rub elbows with all the rich and powerful? Danny Williams talks the talk should I walk the walk and inspire a true separation? If that were to come about I will wager many lawyers would move to Toronto or Montreal. Everybody knows most Maritimers hate lawyers because they are the ones that have caused us to suffer so while Upper Canadians such as Paul Martin's many cohorts have gotten wealthy off of our assests. Stephen Harper don't give a good god damn about the Maritimes in fact he has called us defeatists. Well he has met one that will challenge his thinking anyway of the week and six times on Sunday. What say you? Wanna call me a liar? David Amos <[email protected]> wrote: Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 08:49:50 -0700 (PDT) From: David Amos <[email protected]> Subject: Fwd: Here is some heavy reading for ya To: [email protected], [email protected]

David Amos <[email protected]> wrote: Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 09:16:35 -0800 (PST) From: David Amos <[email protected]> Subject: Here is some heavy reading for ya To: [email protected]

David Amos <[email protected]> wrote: Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 09:54:17 -0800 (PST) From: David Amos <[email protected]> Subject: Fwd: The most effective email for Thelma To: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] CC: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

David Amos <[email protected]> wrote: Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 06:08:14 -0800 (PST) From: David Amos <[email protected]> Subject: Fwd: The most effective email for Thelma To: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] CC: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Hey Yesterday morning I put one over the bow of a bunch of bad acting Yankees in Beantown. I got a very predictable response from them, nothing. It seems they struck themselves dumb. It comes to them naturally, I might add. They seem to think the whole world revolves around them and their Big Digs and by-elections. Yet while I was teasing those dumb bastards what was far more important to me and my fellow Canadians was the budget vote up home. If Martin's government fell and my name came up as part of the cause of it, shit would roll down hill and I could impeach Georgie Bush in a New York minute. Then the Yankees would sit up and pay attention. It was a small wonder to me that the Conservatives refrained from voting and Georgie Bush picked up the phone and made his peace with the snake, Paul Martin. Thus far everything has gone as I have predicted. However everybody does not know about me and the UN yet. Now there is a different kettle of fish. While everybody felt their own fat arses were so important and my dumb ass was not worth a damn, I was still playing the political game on many fronts. Watch out when I line them up. That said, I listened with interest this morning to the Virgin Fat Bastard on Fox News to hear what he had to say. The most offensive things he said were about Canada and how we don't matter. Perhaps he should have read what I gave to Murdoch's General Counsel, Mr.

Siskland last year. There is good reason Canada does not want Fox on its airwaves. It is Fox that does not matter. Plus does VB think Canadians do not buy and sell on the stock market as well? Hell it is a Canadian firm called Thomson that sells all you Yankee lawyers your information that makes you appear so wise. They sell their shares on the Yankee Stock exchange and their General Counsel is right here in CT. I also heard what VB had to say about Reilly and his speach in front of the Taxpayer Dudes. Does Fox forget the fact that I sued Reilly, the IRS and everybody else years ago for not collecting Taxes? Then I heard from another Mike Sullivan who writes for the Herald and talks on Fox. What he had to say was truly comical if you know what I know about what he don't know about. How many Mike Sullivans are there in Massachusetts anyway? He had a lot to say about the stock market. Perhaps he should confer with two other Mikey Sullivans to get the real scoop. One produces Frontline and the other is the US Attorney. Then if he wants to make some serious dough as a whistleblower perhaps he should talk to me. I will forward an email about the Media that contians a Tiff file that should properly introduce the three Mikey Sullivans. I waited for the results of the budget vote to write my wife's last affidavit and then I am gone. You find what court she files it in. I ain't telling it would spoil my fun when I get back to Beantown in time for Tax Day up home. The Bloc Quebecois can call for a confidence vote anytime they want. Everybody knows how easy it is for me to piss off Frenchmen. I put it under the heading of sport. Read on or not I don't care this email just saves me a lot of toner and paper and Us Postage in order to support my final mailings to expose Public Corruption. I am at the top of the heap it is time to deliver the Coup de Grace in order to cause an Confidence Vote in Canada. The bad acting Yankees can do nothing to stop me now. Good bye Yankees. I do not wish you a Good Day. "OTTAWA (Reuters) - Canada's minority Liberal government won a crucial budget vote on Wednesday after the official opposition Conservative Party abstained to ensure the administration stayed in power. But Conservative leader Stephen Harper, who says Canadians have no desire for another election so soon after the vote last June, did not rule out voting against Ottawa's spending plans in the next few weeks. This, too, could trigger an election. Legislators approved the budget by 132-73. The government had declared each of the budget votes to be a matter of confidence that could spark an early election. The Liberals and the Conservatives are not enthusiastic about a new election since neither party has gained support since last June's vote, when the Liberals lost their majority in Parliament. The Liberals hold 133 of the 308 seats in the House of Commons, with the Conservatives holding 99, the Bloc Quebecois 54, and the New Democratic Party 19. There are two independents and one seat is vacant.

"It's not in the national interest to have an election now," Harper said before the vote. His party -- created 15 months ago through the union of the Alliance and Progressive Conservative parties -- holds its first policy convention next week." David Amos <[email protected]> wrote: Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2005 14:12:57 -0800 (PST) From: David Amos <[email protected]> Subject: The most effective email for Thelma To: [email protected] I truly believe that this email is the most important and timely email for Thelma and my little Clan as well. There is a lot more to this email than what first meets the eye. However if someone like Dick Gregory could have someone like Bill Cosby introduce Thelma to Martha Stewart and she could introduce what I know about lawyers and the SEC crooks to her. All of our troubles would be over when Martha Stewart gets mad as a wet hen. No kidding. It is hard for me to explain but very easy to do. The only problem I have is that nobody believes me. Maybe it is Thelma's credibility and friends are what I need to get the job done because I am too much of a radical. However if I were not such a fierce character I would not have been able to do what I did. Talk about a Catch 22 EH? David Amos <[email protected]> wrote: Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 16:45:28 -0800 (PST) From: David Amos <[email protected]> Subject: Fwd: Fw: Governor M. Jodi Rell I just callel your office To: [email protected]

David Amos <[email protected]> wrote: From: "David Amos" To: "moto maniac" , , Subject: Fw: Governor M. Jodi Rell I just callel your office Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 10:23:10 -0500

----- Original Message ----From: David Amos To: [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2005 10:10 AM Subject: Governor M. Jodi Rell I just callel your office Shame on you Ms. Rell. I read your spiel about Ethics and wanted to talk to you or your lawyers about Attorney General Blumenthal and his actions with Elliot Spitzer and many other people connected with

your State involving Securities Fraud before I sued your State. Whomever the woman was answered your phone demanded to know my business. Either she is very malicious or as dumb as a post. She only managed to be able to repeat what I said but seemed incapable of independent thought to answer a simple question and introduce me to your lawyers. Therefore I will sue you in federal court in order to meet them but not before calling Blumenthal to testify at my Trial. Long before that time you will have received Hard Copy of what Blumenthal had received under the reign of your former Governor and will stress test your ethics byway of Martha Stewart as soon as she gets out of jail. Meanwhile obviously I am telling the world what I think of Connecticut and all of its crooks. Tell me honestly. Whom do you do the common people will believe, me or a bunch of Yankee Carpetbaggers? I read about Howard Coble teasing Martha Stewart in prison. I truly hope she gets to return the favor. However Coble likely already knows that I will be suing him along with the Free Agent the loser/lawyer John Edwards. If I were you I would have your dim witted help read this real slow a couple of times because many other people are receiving this email as well. Martha Stewart alone will make the shit hit the fan once she see her copy. However perhaps you had better have your lawyers contact me real fast because my evidence of crimes are far more powerful than hers and Martha would need my support to sue those that have offended her. I am making my best effort to embarrass you into ethical conduct. If that doesn't rest assured I will sue.

November 14, 2003 Lawrence J Lasser, Juan M. Marcelino, 342 Warren St, 360 Forest Brookline, MA 02445 Bridgewater, MA 02324 Phone 617 566-5253 Phone 508 279-3341 Hey fellas, Seems to me you two played dumb too long, then resigned from your lucrative positions way past too late. I know that you and I know you underestimated me. I know your prompt but secretive resignations from your posts are simply part of a cover-up and fraudulent attempt to display ethical behavior at a state, federal and private level. Is this an honourable act? Would Mr. Marcelino swear to it with "Scout's Honor"? I know you, Mr. Lasser, know your Kickham neighbors. You do cruise the same haunts. Watch out for Uncle Franky, if you see him behind the wheel of that 4x4. He is as blind as a bat. Why Safety

Insurance gave him a good driver discount I will never understand. He has never even had a driver's license. Watch out for Uncle Bill as well, I know he drinks and drives. Good thing for him has many buddies in the Cop Shops. I also know you know about my appearance at the Brookline Savings Bank Shareholders meeting. You must have known about my contact with George Putnam before attending. What you may not know about is the Kickham's Court Ordered Second Accounts that were filed the same week. The documents are hereto enclosed. Have your best lawyer explain the ramifications to you. Then ask him if he will defend you after you receive a copy of my complaint. The instant he admits that he has read it and does not affirm the crimes of Charles J. Kickham Jr. I will sue him too. If no lawyer will talk to you, give Mr. Marcelino a call. He is a lawyer. He can't be too busy these days and his concerns are the same as yours. I am sending you both the same documents that I sent every U.S. Attorney but only he gets a copy of the tape. Lucky for you, Mr. Lasser, that you are not a lawyer. Seems to me that both of you and I may go toe to toe Pro Se. Even under the Patriot Act, the First Amendment and Freedom of Religion still stands. Watch me reel you in under the Rico laws for three times the total loss because of the conspiracy. If any lawyer disagrees, dare him to send me a letter. The transcripts of the Feb 8/02, May 16/02 and Oct 16/02 hearings in Norfolk Probate Court are enclosed for your review. Seems to me that the worm has turned. I hope the Kickhams live long enough to go to jail. None of us can predict the future but I got a feeling that my kid's future is looking brighter every day. Pretty soon they are gonna have to wear shades. As for me I has always been lucky. I have been living on borrowed time since I was three years old. All doctors were betting I would never come out of the coma. Would you like to make a little wager as to whether or not I complete my task before slipping back into the coma? One thing is for certain. Because you are now reading this letter you can never play dumb no more. Say hey to Chucky, Willy, Franky, Mr. Koski, Mr. Randazzo, Mr. Chapman and Mr. Tripp for me. Amos Cya'll in CourtJ 153 Alvin Ave. Milton, MA. 02186 David R.

Conn. AG Sues Marsh & McLennan, ACE Friday January 21, 4:26 pm ET By Laura Walsh, Associated Press Writer

Connecticut Attorney General Blumenthal Sues Broker Marsh & McLennan,

Insurer ACE HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) -- Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal on Friday sued insurance brokerage giant Marsh & McLennan Inc. and a unit of the Bermuda-based ACE Ltd. insurance company for illegal commissions in connection with an $80 million state contract. It was the latest in a series of actions that Blumenthal has taken since New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer filed suit last October against Marsh & McLennan, which is headquartered in New York, for bid rigging, price fixing and demanding incentive fees from insurance companies in exchange for sending more property and casualty business their way. AIG, Marsh Execs Plead Guilty to Fraud Tuesday February 15, 3:46 pm ET By Joseph A. Giannone NEW YORK (Reuters) - A former senior executive Inc. (NYSE:MMC - News) and two executives from Group Inc. (NYSE:AIG - News) pleaded guilty to from New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer's of fraud in the insurance industry. May 29th, 2004 Thomas P. Puccio Brendan V. Sullivan Jr. c/o The Law offices of Thomas P. Puccio c/o Williams & Connolly LLP 230 Park Avenue, Suite 301 725 Twelfth St., N.W. New York, New York 10169 Washington, DC 20005 RE: Corruption Sirs, I called and emailed both of your offices yesterday. Today someone called me from CT (203 964-0156) stating it was on Mr. Puccio's behalf. He asked me what I knew of Cendant. Now I support my statements to him with these enclosures that are exactly the same material sent to Mr. Ferguson of the Federal Reserve Bank quite a while ago. The copy of wiretap tape numbered 139 is served upon you in confidence as officers of the court in order that it may be properly investigated. I have also enclosed copies of two letters sent to the lawyers employed by Cendant Corp and a copy of a filing in Plymouth Probate Court in which the actions of Cendant Corp are mentioned. I do not know nor do I judge the actions of your clients, Walter Forbes and Kirk Shelton. I do state that the Office of the US Attorney prosecuting them has no right to complain of anyone for not upholding the law. There is also the irrefutable fact that the lawyers now employed by Cendant Corp and at least two of its Directors , Brian Mulroney and William Cohen, both of whom are well known lawyers/politicians, have proven to me that they have a total disregard for upholding the law. They are far from worthy of the Public Trust. I will be filing my own complaints against them soon. at Marsh & McLennan Cos. American International fraud charges stemming sweeping investigation

Feel free to argue me if you disagree but I think I have just served upon you a very big stick to use in the defense of your clients. Perhaps you should use it for the benefit of all. Although I am heading home to run for Parliament, rest assured I shall listen for the news of their present prosecution. I have also included a copy of a letter to Richard Blumenthal, the Attorney General of Connecticut, that has thus far gone unanswered. Perhaps you should ask him why he has chosen to ignore my allegations that should support the defense of your clients. At the very least I will call you as witnesses to my complaints. Perhaps you should consider my merits as a defense witness on your client's behalf. I must say I would make fairly formidable rebuttal witness against the actions of any government lawyer. If you doubt me ask Assistant Attorney General Robb Quinan if I am capable of filling a courtroom. Say hey to Martha Stewart's lawyers for me will ya? The fact that Feds are now prosecuting one of their own Secret Service Agents is just to funny in light of what I have sent to all parties involved in that matter. Please impress us all with a fine display of ethical conduct befitting your profession. Cya'll in CourtJ David R. Amos 153 Alvin Ave Milton MA. 02186

Connecticut Attorney General April 15th, 2004 Richard Blumenthal P.O. Box 120, Hartford, Connecticut 06141-0120 RE: Corruption Sir, Please find enclosed exactly the same documents etc. that were received by the Solicitor General Ted Olson a while ago. The copy of wiretap tape numbered 139 is served upon you in confidence as an officer of the court in order that it may be properly investigated. Please be the man I hope you are and not like the Attorney Generals in New York and Massachusetts. As you can see, I do not have much respect for Yankee lawyers but it does not follow that I hate them all. I have found one ethical lawyer who will speak for my wife as I hit the road and I am a

proud father of two Yankees and am married to one. I can't hate everyone. Please study this stuff and respond to me. A couple of days ago I sent you an email that should have prompted you to ask me for more information if you are truly concerned about the actions of Big Banks and their recent mergers. When I received no reply, I called your office, and tried to inform the lady that answered of my concerns and of my sincere effort to make you aware. She had no time or interest in talking to me and told me to send my stuff to you by US Mail. I am very curious if, when and what you may say about my concerns. As a father you must understand me. However the lawyer in you confuses me. I seek a friend not a foe. I have enough enemies. I have seen that you have been quite popular in your campaigns on behalf of the little guy and the people of your state obviously like you enough to keep you in office for so long. I must stress test your ethics in pursuit of a friend. I know about other things far more important than crooked lawyers, bankers or mobsters. The sad part is many others do to but are too afraid to speak up. Therefore I must become a politician in order to try to speak of it in Parliament so I can expose the truth in such a way that others don't suffer from it. If perchance I fail and you have proven to me that you are ethical, my ghost will make certain that you will know all that I once knew. I do not have a death wish. I am just laying low for a bit. If the bastards corner me, I will turn as mean as a snake. As one father to another I will ask you this. What is the point in raising happy children and sending them out to live in a miserable world? Shouldn't we protect the future of all of the children for the benefit of our own? Whether or not I receive response from you, I must call you to court to testify. I sincerely hope that you will stand with me and not against me. Cya'll in CourtJ David R. Amos 153 Alvin Ave. Milton, MA 02186 January 8, 2004 John R. Cuti and Robert G. Morvillo Hann M. Maazel Rebecca A. Monck and Emery, Cuti, Brinckerhoff & Abady, PC J. Tigue, Jr. c/o 545 Madison Avenue Morvillo, Abramowitz, Grand, John

New York, NY 10022 Iason & Silberberg, P.C. Phone: 212 763-5000 565 Fifth Avenue Fax: 212 763-5001 10017 Phone 212 856-9600 John Keker Fax 212 856-9494 Keker & Van Nest LLP 710 Sansome Street Richard M. Strassberg San Francisco, CA 94111 Goodwin Procter, LLA Phone: 415 391-5400 599 Lexington Avenue Fax: 415 397-7188 New York, NY 10022 Phone: 212 813-8859 Wayne M. Carlin , Fax: 212 355-3333 Alix Biel, Edwin H. Nordlinger Mark K. Schonfeld, Caren N. Pennington Mary Jo White, US Attorney and Doria G. Bachenheimer Michael S. Schachter her Assistant Securities and Exchange Commission Criminal Division 233 Broadway One St. Andrew's Plaza New York, New York 10279 New York, NY 10007 Phone: 646 428-1510 Phone: 212 637-2631 Fax: 646 428-1981 Corruption Hey,

New York, NY


No one should ever say that I didn't diligently try to make you people act ethically and professionally while many of your friends tried very hard to impeach me. Each of you know that I tried to contact you to stop the very improper political persecution and prosecution of Martha Stewart, Peter Bacanovic and Frank Quattrone. Over the past six months I have made each of you very well aware of my standing against

the corruption within the government and you all know that I can easily prove it. Now I will drag you all to a place all lawyers fear to tread. It is the witness stand. Imagine having to swear to tell the truth and suffer through my questioning. The first law firm that I notified was Goodwin Procter, LLP at Exchange Place, Boston, MA I did so byway of a fellow member of Goodwin Proctor, F. Dennis Saylor IV. It was done the instant I became aware that he was nominated for a position as a judge in the US District Court. I have no doubt they know exactly who I am. It was not necessary to notify David J. Apfel and Richard M. Strassberg but I did call and fax them out of courtesy. Thus far I have heard nothing from them and do not expect to. No one else has contacted me. F. Dennis Saylor IV has known the truth since August of 2002 and he failed to act ethically in his bid to become a judge of the US District Court. In fact I have yet to receive even an acknowledgement from Mr. Saylor that I even exist. It seems I must complain of him and his law firm in order to receive a response. F. Dennis Saylor IV should have also acted in the best interest of the client of Goodwin Proctor, Peter Bacanovic and brought into the light the fact that the matter of The USA v. Martha Stewart et al is merely a case of the pot calling the kettle black. The US Attorney Office claims that it is all about lying. They should be very familiar with that act. The SEC are simply attacking celebrities with some very vague charges to put on a smoke and mirror show to take the public's eyes off of their own many sins. Every single one of you knows that I am the ultimate rebuttal witness against the government on behalf of the aforesaid defendants. Each of you also know that the instant that I speak in a widely witnessed public forum, the jig is up for many a corrupt government employee, politician and lawyer in private practice. I can only imagine your many discussions about what to do about me and my allegations. Why did it never dawn upon you to simply tell the truth and let the cards fall where they may for the benefit of all? The only possible answer is that you failed to uphold the law because of you hold your own personal self interests above your client's interests or the public trust. Over the past two weeks I was particularly vocal in many ways and in many forums that there is a hard rain about to fall upon the justice system and the political arena because I was doing my best rain dance and I had caught a few drips. The reason I could not come forward earlier in the aforesaid defendant's behalf was because I did not wish to prevent the Secret Service, the FBI and the IRS from finally acting within the scope of their employment and investigating the Bank Fraud and Tax Fraud within the Brookline Savings Bank that was reported with a Form 211 six months ago. I could not be certain as to whether or not the FEDs would become overcome by a sudden fit of honesty because of all the politicians I put over the pork barrel in the last six months. I know I tried hard to make them act responsibly but the bell just tolled today. Now I will sue them all as individuals. They are no longer sheltered by immunity as government employees. I have received no response from any of them. Although the Inspector General of the DHS promised to take a look but he is gonna keep it a secret from me. I don't care what he thinks is proper in my opinion he has already broken Rule 9 of the Code

of Ethics hereto attached within the enclosed documents. I will not be further delayed. I will file my first federal complaint very soon. Sooner or later the defendants, Martha Stewart, Peter Bacanovic and Frank Quattrone, are going to hear of my efforts in their defense. Methinks that all of you will have hell to pay when the shoe is on the other foot. At the very least byway of the US Mail to you I have reaffirmed the fact that I have made you witnesses to my pursuit of justice. You will be named as such in my pending complaint. I know it is a little redundant to send some of your offices the same documents again but there are a few others that you may not have seen and I wish to make certain that you all receive the same stuff so that you will be all on an even keel when I summons you to court. In my opinion John Keker has not offended me or anyone else as of yet. I just made him aware of me yesterday and without enough stuff to prove to him my sincerity. Now he should display his best ethical behavior very quickly before I file my complaint. After that point in time I will consider him way past too late. Please find enclosed an exact copy of a letter with all enclosures recently received by the CEO of Taxpayers against Fraud and a copy of a letter sent to The IRS six months ago with the form 211 and the evidence, Also included is a copy of letter sent to me by Francis Galvin and a copy of my response to him and Elliot Spitzer. They have ignored me too long and Spitzer in his malice even turned off his fax machine on me in order to ignore me. The copy of wiretap tape number 139 is served upon you in confidence as officers of the court in order that it maybe properly investigated. I have also sent an exact copy of this letter with all of its enclosures to the following: New York State Ethics Commission Cahill, Chief Counsel 39 Columbia Street Departmental Disciplinary Committee Albany, New York 12207-2717 2nd Floor Phone: 518 432-8207 York, New York 10006 Fax: 518 432-8255 212 401-0800 Fax: 212 401-0810 Don't you think its high time someone does the right thing? After all each of you swore before the Bar that you would in order to practice law for a fee. Say hey to Martha, Peter and Frank for me will ya. It's my turn to take a vacation and employ voicemail. I am tired of waiting for someone to call. I know you don't wish me well but you all better hope I don't die as well. Cya'll in CourtJ Thomas J.

61 Broadway, New Phone:

David R. Amos PO Box 2 South Acworth, NH 03607 Governor Rell Testifies in Favor of Ethics, Campaign and State Contract Reforms Appears Before Committee to Promote Reform Package

Governor M. Jodi Rell took her message of reform in state ethics, campaign finance and the awarding of state contracts before a legislative committee today, declaring that the state has "a historic opportunity" to "show the people of Connecticut that we are serious about change" with genuine, comprehensive reform.

"Enacting the reforms I have proposed will send a strong message to the people of Connecticut," Governor Rell told the General Assembly's Government Administration and Elections Committee. "That message will be that state government is open and accessible to them - not just to the favored few. That state government is here to work for them - not for the special interests. And that state government is using their hard-earned tax dollars wisely - and not squandering them in cozy deal-making."

Since taking office seven months ago Governor Rell has made ethics reform the focal point of her administration. She has proposed a sweeping package of reforms promoting "fairness over favoritism." Governor Rell's personal appearance before the committee underscored the depth of her commitment to reforming state ethics, political campaigns and contracting processes.

In her testimony, Governor Rell said, "Over the past few years, revelations of scandal and corruption here in Hartford - and in city halls across our state - shook people's confidence in our system. I have kept a steady focus on restoring public faith in our state government since taking office July 1. Now it is time to make even bigger and bolder gains through legislative action.

"We can take advantage of new leadership and a new spirit of civility and bipartisanship that exists in this building to satisfy the public's desire for reform. We have a historic opportunity to literally rewrite our laws. To set the highest standards. To make it clear that Connecticut expects the best.

"I look forward to seeing these bills arrive on my desk for signature," Governor Rell told the GAE members. The bills will "show the people of Connecticut that we are serious about change ... that we are serious about regaining and keeping their trust by upholding the highest standards of ethics and integrity in our state government."

Governor Rell testified in support of six bills in her reform package:

An Act Concerning the Citizen's Ethics and Government Integrity Commission This act creates a restructured and improved Ethics and Government Integrity Commission. It will focus the Commission's resources and work on a stronger training and education component without compromising its enforcement responsibilities. It also compartmentalizes functions to avoid conflicts of interest, creates clear lines of responsibility and establishes a structure that makes an important distinction between the enforcement and advisory functions of the Commission.

New restrictions will also govern the actions and activities of Commission members to limit potential conflicts of interest.

An Act Concerning a Code of Ethics This bill will allow a judge to reduce or revoke the pensions of public officials or state employees who are found guilty or plead guilty to a serious crime relating to their employment or the office they hold.

This bill would also:

� Prevent state employees and public officials from hiring a contractor to provide personal services, if that contractor does business with their agency � Close several so-called "revolving door" loopholes to restrict the actions of a state employee moving to a job in the private sector � � Take important steps to tighten gift restrictions Require local Connecticut governments to adopt a Code of


An Act Concerning Ethical Standards for State Contracting This bill imposes new requirements and new limits on companies seeking to do business with the state. It would:

Require these companies to report any state employee or public official who solicits a gift Hold private companies responsible if they violate "revolving door" restrictions when hiring former state employees Require that all large state contracts would have to include a summary of state ethics laws as part of the actual contract (and subcontract) language. An Act Concerning Campaign Finance This act seeks to limit the influence of special interests by prohibiting lobbyists and people doing business with the state from contributing to races for statewide office or the legislature. It also prohibits lobbyists from fundraising or soliciting contributions from their clients.

In addition, the bill: � Lowers limits on contributions for all statewide and legislative offices, and applies these lower limits to political parties, Political Action Committees (PACs) and individuals. � Limits the number of PACs for each legislative caucus

� Prohibits "ad books," in which sponsors buy advertising in another fund-raising technique that the Governor called "just a gimmick for getting around the law." � Provides an incentive to encourage citizen participation and hold down the cost of campaigns through a tax deduction for contributions to candidates who voluntarily accept spending limits � Includes an advance notification provision to stop the troubling trend of surprise negative attack ads

An Act Concerning a State Contracting Standards Board The Contracting Standards Board will be charged with establishing contracting standards and practices that apply across the board, without exception, to all state agencies. They will:

Give small, minority- and women-owned businesses an equal

opportunity to obtain state business, and � Encourage increased competition for state business

The Contracting Standards Board will assume the duties of the State Properties Review Board and have the authority to:

Conduct compliance audits of state agencies

� Review the substance of agency contracts, a great improvement of the Attorney General's present authority to review contracts as to form � Under certain conditions, the Board will have the authority to review and terminate an individual contract for cause and to suspend or disqualify a contractor from state business for a period of time.

An Act Concerning False Claims This measure encourages private citizens to get involved in cleaning up state government. It empowers individuals with knowledge of potential fraud to initiate lawsuits and win a percentage of any money recovered by the state.

It also creates new penalties for those who try to steal from taxpayers and the state.

----- Original Message ----From: David Amos To: [email protected] ; [email protected] Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2005 1:52 PM Subject: Fw: You can't fool me McGuinty I'm too stupid

----- Original Message ----From: David Amos To: [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2005 8:25 PM Subject: You can't fool me McGuinty I'm too stupid You lawyers are all the same but at least you can never say that you didn't know. I will call and leave a message with my cell phone I will have proof of that contact as well. ----- Original Message ----From: David Amos To: [email protected]

Cc: [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2005 5:30 PM Subject: Fw: FYI I just called

----- Original Message ----From: David Amos To: [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2005 5:02 PM Subject: Fw: FYI I just called

----- Original Message ----From: David Amos To: [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2005 4:50 PM Subject: FYI I just called You are way past too late act ethical now ----- Original Message ----From: David Amos To: [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] Cc: [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2005 2:55 PM Subject: My name is beginning to be Blogged Attn Mr. Jeffrey A. Dvorkin I just called you and left a message. I have crossed paths with NPR before and just shook my head and went on alone to do what I had to do. It has already proven to me that it is no better than any other Media controlled by the wealthy few. So as I went about proving what everybody knows in that public corruption is rampant and way out of control. I figured I would prove the Media is a big player against the public's best interests and the only possible way for ordinary folk to know simple truths is what they can weed out for themselves from the truth and fiction found in the internet. I truly believe it is every bit the important tool the printing press was centuries ago before rich folks bought them all. I contacted you Mr. Dvorkin because you are the most outspoken ombudsman on the web and you used to work for CBC in my native land. I am not surprised that you have not called me back yet. Everybody else does as well. As you can see I have sent this to many others just to rub that fact in. Why would you be any different than any of them? I will send only one more email to you and the others immediately after this one. I contains much text that should concern your former rivals at CTV in Canada and all Big Media in general. There is also attached just one small Tiff file that should properly serve to embarrass

Frontline at PBS. After the end of the day I will ignore you too. Turn about is fair play. I go to great lengths to check my own ethics constantly in order that none of my words may ever be impeached. In that regard I do agree with your following statements in particular. Most blogs are slanted and political just like the media. However not all are and since my battles are with both sides of the political fence in an sincere effort to expose the truth, I simply don't care who says what of me. It is far better than being ignored as NPR and its ilk have done. I will be comfortable with the fact that most ordinary people are more than capable to sort out who is a liar and who is not. I will let my work stand on its own and say no more to anyone. I am starting to bore myself as much as I have bored my friends long ago. Enough is enough. I do not deny the possibility that you may have no idea as to who I am, If in fact you don't, it only further serves to prove my point that blogging will be the only way to reveal the truth that media willingly ignores in pursuit of its own interests and that of its owners. However after my phone call and my emails you can never claim that anymore. In my opinion the freedom of the press is a myth and any individual is only free if he resists oppression upon his freedom. It is up to you to challenge me in disagreement or run and hide your head in the sand. My work cannot be undone. I am quite simply begging you to stress test my ethics to the max. The sooner the better for the benefit of all. Following your words and that of some others are several motions affidavits, answers and counterclaims that have been filed in two courts in two countries. I can further support all that I say is true with many emails that contain scans of legal documents letters and responses etc etc. If anyone responds to me by the end of the day. am asks for it. I will forward a rather large Tiff file that contains many legal documents, letters and response etc. It was exactly the same material that I sent to the Solicitor General Theodore Olson just before he quit his job while I was running for Parliament. IT is also exactly the same material that I served upon the Canadian Border Guards to send to their boss, the Solicitor General Anne McLellan to let her know I had made it home as was about to do my best to make all HELL break loose in an ethical and timely fashion. Six months after I sent one hell of a letter to Elections Canada I just received the funniest response yet. It seems everybody is nervous that I am going to come home and run again very soon. I am about to call their lawyer you answered me and ask her what the heel she did with her copy of wiretap tape numbered 139. "Skews Narrow? Many listeners tell me that the media -- NPR included -- doesn't skew left as much as it skews narrow. The range of issues needs to be broader, they say. NPR could do more to ensure that it allows other points of view -- from the right and the left -- on the air. But not just the usual well-worn suspects like Bill O'Reilly from Fox News. In recent days, O'Reilly has admonished NPR for not having him on public radio to sell his book. But NPR has no obligation to put O'Reilly or any other shameless self-promoter on the radio.

There are a number of younger, more interesting thinkers and journalists from both sides of the spectrum that deserve to be heard and considered. Perhaps fewer "think tankers" from the East Coast. More witty conservatives and liberals (yes, they exist). P.J. O'Rourke? Al Franken? Maybe even Bernard Goldberg.". "In Denial NPR interviewed a number of academics and journalists about this story. The academics seemed to be in denial, tending to pooh-pooh the importance of this story for American journalism overall. But others such as Bob Steele from The Poynter Institute and Tom Rosenstiel from the Project for Excellence in Journalism took the opposite view: that CBS' mistake will have consequences for all news organizations and for some time to come. After other recent scandals involving the BBC, The New York Times and USA Today, it is sometimes hard to believe that journalistic ethics are being given more than lip service these days. Yet, there are reasons to be optimistic. Rays of Hope? First, we must acknowledge that the blogs have truly arrived. It is hard for journalists who have led a sheltered life without public accountability to acknowledge that those days are over. Second, it will be tough for ombudsmen and women to admit that their unique role as overseers on behalf of the public is also changing. We need to make room on the bench and give the bloggers a place at the dinner table. The question remains: who's for dinner? NPR listeners have always been quick to point out our errors and lapses, and in a non-partisan way. The blogs are different because many are explicitly political. It will be interesting to see if the "blogosphere" still has as much impact on mainstream journalism once the election is over. Third, while the bloggers will make life uncomfortable for the media, ultimately, it is a sign of a healthy democratic give-and take. A question for the bloggers is, "what are your standards? How can the rest of us know that your sources are reliable?" Making the rich and powerful squirm is a short-lived measure of journalistic success -- both for the mainstream media and presumably, for the blogs. Bloggers must be as accountable to the public as they demand the rest of us must be. That means there should be some consequence for spreading false or partial information. Any thoughts on what those consequences might be would be a useful discussion.

More, Not Less Investigative Journalism CBS' failure will create a climate of timidity inside some organizations when it comes to investigative journalism. It may be understandable, but it would also be a mistake. There are still a number of unanswered questions about this story. Ethics for Investigative Journalists Finally, CBS' problems should remind us of the ethical obligations of investigative journalism. Aly Col�n from the Poynter Institute has reissued the guidelines for those organizations (like NPR) that want to enter into this area. (See link at bottom of page.) They are worth posting in every cubicle. I especially like Aly's idea that every investigative unit should appoint a "contrarian" whose role is to question everything. In my experience, the failure of investigative units occurs exactly because expressing doubts is seen as not being "on board." Skepticism inside the news organization is also a valuable journalistic tool. In that spirit, NPR needs to do some clearing up of one of its own sources." The following words of David Limbaugh's from out of the Heritage Foundation are truly hilarious to me. When one considers what I sent them last year that have thus far been ignored they will laugh too. As a double check I sent the same stuff to him as well to no avail but at least his brother's lawyer Roy Black responded to me. It aided in me forever proving some lawyers are too snotty for their own damned good. "Men in Black" is a primer on the United States Constitution as well as a clarion call to liberty lovers to wake up to the alarming damage the Court continues to inflict on our republic. Levin documents how the Court has morphed into a super-legislature, legislating from the bench rather than honoring its constitutional role of interpreting the laws. To be fair to the right here is proof that left wing lawyers are as crooked as the right wing dudes. ----- Original Message ----From: David Amos To: [email protected] Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2005 8:24 PM Subject: Fw: A True Tale of Two Corrupt Governments

----- Original Message ----From: David Amos To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2005 12:44 AM Subject: Fw: A True Tale of Two Corrupt Governments Hey Bill

Please explain this lawsuit to me real slow. It is by your buddy Billy Matthews against Byron Prior in Newfoundland after you drew my friend's plight to Irwin Cotler's attention? He did finally respond to Byron with a not my job attitude on the very same day Paul Martin's coal boat was caught with the load of cocaine in Sidney. Furthermore I know what I sent you in my emails last year before I can home to run for Parliament against your party. In return you bastards allow me to be summoned back to the USA to be sent straight to jail without due process of law. Now don't that just piss me off. Methinks I will send you the same Hard Copy I gave John Crosbie last year not too long before I sue some of you nasty lawyers for your malice. What say you sir? Do you feel a sudden fit of ethical behavior coming over you. ----- Original Message ----From: David Amos To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected] ; [email protected] Sent: Sunday, January 30, 2005 4:01 PM Subject: Fw: A True Tale of Two Corrupt Governments

----- Original Message ----From: David Amos To: [email protected] ; [email protected] Cc: [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; 'Stephen Harper' ; Jack Layton ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2005 9:57 AM Subject: Fw: A True Tale of Two Corrupt Governments

----- Original Message ----From: David Amos To: [email protected] ; [email protected] ; Herbert Snider ; [email protected] ; [email protected] Cc: [email protected] ; [email protected] Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2005 9:18 AM Subject: A True Tale of Two Corrupt Governments Hey Fellas Yesterday in the Supreme Court of Newfoundland my friend, Bryon Prior gave his word to a court he knows to be very corrupt not to publish or cause to have published some of the following documents in order for Judge J. Dereck Green not to throw him in jail. I have no doubt he will keep his word. Byron should not be punished for my actions in the necessary defence of my freedom in another country. Byron also also informed the court that there is no way for him to put a muzzle on me. I am sending this email out to men that I trust Durable Power of Attorney. Whether the bastards like me in word and deed as long as I keep breathing. All court know I must make these matters widely known in that have my it or not you are of you and the order not to be

put back in jail. As you all know I gave my fair warning to all of publishing the words within this email before Byron was compelled to make his promise. The Rules of Newfoundland Supreme Court do not hold nor do they mean a Tinker's damn to me until I am named and properly invited to the circus. I would gladly stand as a defendant beside Byron after the Court publishes that fact so it becomes widely known the reasons for my coming home. However it is painfully obvious that the Newfoundland Supreme Court and Byron Prior must wait until my present pending criminal trial in the USA is over before I can become joined in a civil matter up home. Never forget my native land denied me any assistance in trying to stop my being persecuted down here and sent straight to jail without due process of law. At least in compensation Canada is sending down Franky MaKenna to speak for me as I sue his law firm. Won't that be interesting? The sexual abuse of Byron 's family long ago and wrongful actions within the Offshore Oil Industry in Newfoundland are far more important to everyone in Newfoundland and the rest of the Maritimes than my arguments about Securities Fraud, Tax Fraud and dead ex Fbi agents etc. with Yankees. That said, my must protect my freedom and my own family's interests first before I can help anyone else. I am certain my friends agree and I thank you for your help. Whereas no lawyer would come to Byron's assistance, I did as best I could do from afar to study the rules and write what I could for Byron to use in his defence and counterclaim to expose the truth and to use in my own defence in the USA. The serious mischief that is afoot is within the ex parte doings of the desperate law firm Patterson and Palmer and a very corrupt justice system to have Byron's document stricken after they had demanded them of him. John Crosbie's partner Stephen J. May speaking on behalf of his own law firm and Billy Matthews a Member of Parliament was forced to agree with Byron's inablitity to put a muzzle on me. As anyone can see Stevey Boy May in his Affidavit has admitted to the knowledge of the reasons why I am very angry with his law firm's malice towards Byron and I. The fact that May refused to file his Affidavit and the court refused to accept Byron's document requesting a postponement today should prove to all what Byron and I say is true. If anyone wishes to view exactly the same documents as were served upon Patterson Palmer and their cohorts up home or upon the Suffolk County District Attorney down here, all they have to do is ask. I will fill their email inbox with scans in a Tiff format. All the documents have been filed in the Public Record during the course of my criminal trial and there are many more to follow. Many Canadian Politicians have received exactly the same material from me and many have answered me. the most recent Respond came from Senator Joe Day yesterday after a five month delay. Any ethical lawyer could easily employ them in Byron's defence and to support his counterclaim. Judge Green has ordered him to find a lawyer to defend him "pro bono" by February 9th. Byron and I hold no illusions about the impossible task. He has already emailed every lawyer within the Newfoundland Law Society asking for assistance and not one has responded before he stood in court yesterday. What is truly necessary is an ethical Royal Commission to investigate T. Alex Hickman and his friends in order for the truth to be revealed. Since we all know that the Liberal Caucus is now in Fredeicton. I ask that my friends take many of their friends and go see the MP Andy Scott today and ask him why he did not respond to the material I

delivered in hand to his office with Dave Mollins before I returned to the USA. The fact that I was falsely imprisoned makes me very angry with people such as Andy Scott and his cohorts who are employed to uphold the Public Trust. As a Member of Parliament he could have stopped this nonsense out of the gate. As the Minister of Indian Affairs he certianly should have contacted my friend the lawyer Barry Bachrach by now. I called his office today and told them to expect some sincere men to turn up with some simple but serious questions for him. I also forwarded him this email to share with the Liberal Caucus now in Fredericton. Please find within this email three Motions and an Affidavit of mine in a Yankee Court and A court order in Newfoundland with the related Defence, Counterclaim and Request of byron Prior all of which I wrote. Most importantly is an Affidavit by the crooked lawyer Stevey Boy May. Spotlight on N.B. culture for national Liberal caucus retreat Maritime Kitchen Party welcomes Prime Minister, cabinet to Province Fredericton (N.B.) - New Brunswickers are putting on a really big show for Prime Minister Paul Martin and his Liberal caucus when they come to Fredericton later this month. The National Liberal Caucus Winter Retreat will bring the 135 Liberal Members of Parliament, including Mr. Martin's entire cabinet, as well as the 61 Liberal Senators to the Capital City for three days of meetings. The retreat is co-hosted by Tobique-Mactaquac MP and Chairman of the National Liberal Caucus Andy Savoy and Hon. Andy Scott, Fredericton MP and Minister of Indian and Northern Affairs. A Maritime Kitchen Party, Wednesday, January 26, will feature a full evening of New Brunswick-flavoured food, song and dance, from toe-tapping Acadian reels to high-stepping Scottish jigs. The party headlines Fredericton's own Downtown Blues Band, Bairdsville singer and songwriter Matt Andersen, the multi-talented La Famille Arsenault and fiddling sensation Dominque Dupuis of Dieppe with Moncton comedian Marshall Button, better known as Lucien, as emcee. "This is a one-of-a-kind occasion to share our rich cultural heritage with the leaders of our nation," Mr. Savoy said. "We are proud to be an example of cultural diversity and harmony to the rest of Canada." "We want to give our friends in Ottawa the kind of warm welcome that New Brunswickers are noted for," Mr. Scott said. "This will be a showcase of our heritage and hospitality." The Maritime Kitchen Party is open to the public and will begin at 8 p.m. at the Delta Fredericton ballroom. Tickets are now on sale at all MP constituency offices in New Brunswick, as well as the New Brunswick Liberal Association office in Fredericton. For further information, contact the NBLA 1-800-442-4902; Office of Andy Savoy at 1-866-542-4400 or the Office of Andy Scott, (506) 452-4110.

Office of the Hon. Andy Scott Towne Centre Building 412 Queen Street Suite 100 Fredericton, N.B. E3B 1B6 Phone: (506) 452-4110 Fax: (506) 452-4076 This is the fella I just called. Andrew Holland Excutive Assistant Phone: (506) 452-3516 Read this fellas and then go cause the Liberals that are having to much fun at our expense to weep and worry about their own malevolent interests. Ask them if they still wish to support the Diddlers T. Alex Hickman and their buddy Billy Matthews. At the very least tell everybody to call Andy Savoy and Andy Scott and ask them the same question Lois Skanes asked of Stevey Boy May. Who the Hell is David Amos and what the Hell is he talking about? THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS THE TRIAL COURT DORCHESTER, SS. DISTRICT COURT DEPARTMENT THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS CRIMINAL ACTION ) ) DAVID R. AMOS ) MOTION TO DISQUALIFY THE OFFICE OF THE SUFFOLK COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY ON THE BASIS THAT A CONFLICT OF INTEREST THE DEFENDANT, EXISTS THAT WOULD RENDER IT IMPOSSIBLE FOR v. ) ) DOCKET NO. 0407CR004623 ) )

DAVID R. AMOS TO RECEIVE A FAIR TRIALNow comes the defendant, David R. Amos a Citizen of Canada and a Legal Permanent Resident of the USA

within the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and demands that the Office of the Suffolk County District Attorney be disqualified from prosecuting this matter. This motion is based on the affidavit previously filed with the clerk of this court and recorded in the public record, the court herein and such matters as may be presented at the hearing on this motion and points to his civil rights under the following authority: the Declaration of the Rights of the Inhabitants of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts PART THE FIRST Article XII which states as follows: "No subject shall be held to answer for any crimes or offence, until the same is fully and plainly, substantially and formally, described to him; or be compelled to accuse, or furnish evidence against himself. And every subject shall have a right to produce all proofs, that may be favorable to him; to meet the witnesses against him face to face, and to be fully heard in his defense by himself, or his counsel, at his election. And no subject shall be arrested, imprisoned, despoiled, or deprived of his property, immunities, or privileges, put out of the protection of the law, exiled, or deprived of his life, liberty, or estate, but by the judgment of his peers, or the law of the land." The defendant legally acting ithin his rights was imprisoned. In support of this motion, the defendant states that on October 1st, 2004 he returned from safe haven in Canada to stand once more before Judge Coffey of this court as ordered. The judge witnessed the signing the aforesaid affidavit. This was done prior to any hearing of this matter in a court not recognized by the defendant as having the proper jurisdiction and venue for a trial of a Canadian citizen involving serious criminal charges with an unsigned complaint. The defendant was well aware that if he were to be convicted of the false charges he would be subject to a prison term and the revocation of his status as a permanent resident of the USA and that his family would suffer greatly. The plaintiff went to great lengths to inform the correct Canadian authorities of his persecution in the USA. Judge Coffey witnessed the defendant serve the District Attorney and also provide the clerk of this court an exact copy of the aforesaid affidavit before he properly disqualified himself from hearing this matter as soon as he was informed that he lives the defendant's neighborhood. This was done before the defendant was ever served a complaint that he would be compelled to answer. Attached to the aforesaid affidavit are two large exhibits containing one or more affidavits and many other legal documents etc. that prove the malicious actions of the District Attorney supporting a criminal conspiracy against the freedom, civil rights, interests and property of the defendant. In further support of this motion the defendant states that beginning in July of 2004, the defendant had fully disclosed to the District Attorney the circumstances of this matter before the Clerk Magistrate Owens went forward and filed his malicious complaint. The defendant had every right to expect the District Attorney to uphold the law and properly warn the Clerk Magistrate not to attempt to make an illegal compliant. Instead the District Attorney attempted to explain the illegal action while claiming not to be involved. In response the defendant received a letter from the District Attorney dated July 29th, 2004. In it the DA claimed that he as not yet involved but attempted to explain the impending illegal action of the Clerk Magistrate on August 13th, 2004. A true copy of the aforesaid letters to and from the District Attorney in July of 2004 are hereto attached

for the court to review. On September 3rd the District Attorney proved his malice and even demanded imprisonment or bail to make certain that the defendant answer an unsigned complaint that had yet to be served. Judge Coffey properly denied the DA's request, ordered the DA to serve the defendant copies of all that was in the docket of the matter and ordered a hearing of the matter on October 1st in order establish the legality of the complaint and the proper jurisdiction and venue. The judge suggested that the defendant file the documents he had shown to the court byway of a proper means on October 1st and then he would hear if the District Attorney wanted to continue to prosecute the matter. To date the defendant has not heard from or received on slip of paper from the District Attorney other than the documents comprising of this complaint ordered by Judge Coffey on Sept 1st. If there was in fact a signed complaint against the defendant dated August 13th, 2004, it should have been served upon him at that time not by Judge Hanlon after he was compelled to waive his right to counsel in order to receive swift justice. The defendant does have three separate copies of an unsigned complaint. One is of the court's record, one is of the prosecutor's copy and the last is the defendant's copy. The defendant strongly believes that the signed copy of the complaint was created October 1st, 2004 after the District Attorney had asked for a recess and studied the defendant's affidavit. That fact should have been blatantly obvious to the court and Judge Coffey because the District Attorney's Office had asked to confer with the defendant before he filed the affidavit but afterwards they did not wish to continue with their own request. It became blatantly obvious to the defendant and his witnesses that the court and the DA were cohorts in the conspiracy against him as they watched the clerk of this court give the District Attorney their copy of the affidavit that that had been filed in the Public Record before Judge Hanlon had the matter called before her on October 1st. On that day Judge Hanlon did inquire about the last statement in the defendant's affidavit and of his concerns with the well being of his friend Byron Prior in Newfoundland and of the defendant's own concerns with Canada. The defendant told the judge as much as she was willing to hear before she sent the defendant to jail based on the false allegations of an ADA claiming that Judge Coffey was threatened. The allegations were absurd. If Judge Coffey had in fact felt threatened then he would have dealt with the defendant immediately. After the defendant was put in jail many Canadian authorities act quickly to cover up their own conspiracy against the defendant and Bryon Prior. At the time of the writing of this document a law firm of a well-known Canadian politician, John Crosbie has made a statement of claim against Byron Prior on behalf of the Member of Parliament Bill Matthews while ignoring the very same material that was served upon the Suffolk County District Attorney and this court on October 1st. That matter will be addressed in Canada. However on October 19th as the defendant stood before Judge Hanlon, she clearly affirmed the fact that Judge Coffey had not been threatened but did nothing to chastise the ADA for her false allegations and denied that the original wiretap tapes served upon the District Attorney on Sept 3rd were any sort of evidence in this matter even though the Clerk Magistrate had made note of their existence on August 13th. Thus there is a need to sue the District Attorney and the court.

Dated January 11th, 2005 David R. Amos, Pro Se 153 Alvin Ave. Milton, MA. 02186 617 698-6549 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, David R. Amos of Milton, MA hereby certify that on January 12th, 2005, I with two friends accompanying me as witnesses served upon the Suffolk County District Attorney, Daniel F. Conley a true original copy of the attached Motion to his office within Dorchester District Court at the following address 510 Washington St. Dorchester, MA David R. Amos 153 Alvin Ave. Milton, MA. 02186 THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS THE TRIAL COURT DORCHESTER, SS. THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS CRIMINAL ACTION ) v. ) ) DAVID R. AMOS ) MOTION TO DISQUALIFY JUDGE SIDNEY HANLON ON THE BASIS THAT A CONFLICT ) DOCKET NO. 0407CR004623 DISTRICT COURT DEPARTMENT ) )

OF INTEREST EXISTS THAT WOULD RENDER IT IMPOSSIBLE FOR THE DEFENDANT, DAVID R. AMOS TO RECEIVE A FAIR TRIAL Now comes the David R. Amos, a Citizen of Canada and a Legal Permanent Resident of the USA within the Commonwealth of Massachusetts herein named as the defendant and demands that Judge Sidney Hanlon be disqualified from hearing all further proceedings in the above stated criminal prosecution because of her personal interest in the outcome. In support of this motion, the defendant has attached a true copy of a letter received by Cynthia A. Robinson, the legal counsel of Boston Municipal Court on January 4th,.2005 and a true copy of the docket sheet of this matter. Also attached to the aforesaid letter is a copy of an email that was served upon the Suffolk County District Attorney and a Judge of Dorchester District Count on November 19th, 2004. Within the email are the irrefutable facts that support the defendant's statements within an Affidavit and its attached exhibits filed in the Public Record of this court on October 1st, 2004 and ordered removed by Judge Hanlon on Oct 19th after she admitted that the defendant did not threaten Judge Coffey. The defendant freely admits that this is a very important trial about Criminal Harassment. However he has always maintained the Criminal Harassment has been practiced by the court against him. The defendant maintains his declaration of innocence and only demands his right to a swift trial in front of a jury of his peers in the proper jurisdiction and venue. . As of this date the defendant has not received a response from Ms. Robinson either in the spoken or written word to refute his allegations of criminal activity supported by many people employed to up hold the law and the public trust in their elected or politically appointed positions within the justice systems of Canada and the USA. Whereas this motion was the last day to file this motion according to law and ordered by this court in order for it to be heard on January 21st, 2005, the defendant must make it well known to the court that he is about to sue the court to regain lost assets and seek relief for personal injury. Whereas it was Judge Hanlon who willing supported with documents signed in her own hand the malicious actions of the Clerk Magistrate Mr. Owens and the false allegations of the District Attorney, the defendant demands that she be disqualified. The fact that Judge Hanlon went even further and maliciously declared that she believed the defendant had a prior history of mental illness and did not believe his actions within the Canadian justice system and the Parliamentary process was very offensive to the defendant. Please view attachments bearing her signature. Dated January 11th, 2005 David R. Amos, Pro Se 153 Alvin Ave. Milton, MA. 02186 617 698-6549 CERTIFICATE

OF SERVICE I, David R. Amos of Milton, MA hereby certify that on January 12th, 2005, I with two friends accompanying me as witnesses served upon the Suffolk County District Attorney, Daniel F. Conley a true original copy of the attached Motion to his office within Dorchester District Court at the following address 510 Washington St. Dorchester, MA David R. Amos

153 Alvin Ave. Milton, MA. 02186 THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS THE TRIAL COURT DORCHESTER, SS. DISTRICT COURT DEPARTMENT THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS CRIMINAL ACTION ) v. ) ) DAVID R. AMOS ) MOTION OF THE DEFENDANT, DAVID R. AMOS TO DEMAND THAT THE MATTER BE SENT TO US DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS IN ORDER THAT HE MAY RECEIVE A FAIR TRIAL BY A JURY OF HIS PEERS IN THE PROPER JURISDICTION AND VENUE. Now comes the defendant, David R. Amos a Citizen of Canada and a Legal Permanent Resident of the USA within the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and demands his right to a swift trial before a jury of his peers in order to defend his freedom in the proper jurisdiction and venue of the US District Court for the District of Massachusetts. The defendant has already spent time in a malicious Sheriff's jail in a clear and ) DOCKET NO. 0407CR004623 ) )

irrefutable violation to his Eighth Amendment rights. He asserts his rights as follows and prays that the Dorchester District Court to make note that there are two other directly related motions filed along with this motion and that they should be heard first. The aforesaid motions demand that the entire office of the Suffolk County District Attorney and Judge Hanlon be disqualified because of their interest in the outcome of this matter. This motion is based the affidavit previously filed with the clerk of this court and recorded in the public record, the court herein and such matters as may be presented at the hearing on this motion. In support of this motion the defendant states that he is being prosecuted for criminal harassment byway of emails on behalf of the lawyer, Angela Troccoli whom he has been litigating against in the USA for years. One of the emails that she claims as harassment contain pictures of police surveillance tapes that contain recordings of the private conversations of several people that reside outside of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. The Boston Municipal Court does not have jurisdiction to even begin prosecution particularly in light of the fact that the Minister of Justice who is also the Attorney General of Canada received the email that the court finds so offensive before the lawyer Troccoli received her forwarded copy and made her false allegations. If the emails were in fact criminally offensive then David Lutz QC, a lawyer who litigates on behalf of the Attorney General of Canada in the Province of New Brunswick should have filed a complaint against the defendant while he was on Canadian soil. The defendant was running against the candidate Mr. Lutz was supporting for the same seat in Canada's Parliament. On July 29th, 2004, the very same day that the Suffolk County District Attorney was composing his malicious letter, the defendant was confronting David Lutz in front of many witnesses including the RCMP in Sussex Provincial Court in the Province of New Brunswick. David R, Amos who was yet to be charged with anything was demanding an answer for the many documents served upon David Lutz in his capacity as a prosecutor for the Queen in June of 2004. Mr. Lutz's only answer was that he had given the material to law enforcement. It appeared to the defendant that a solicitor appointed to speak on behalf of the Queen was content in allowing a Clerk Magistrate of a Boston Municipal Court to attempt to prosecute the defendant in order to assist in the cover up his own wrongs. The defendant's suspicions have since been affirmed many times over in many ways. In further support of this motion the defendant states that he must call many witnesses to testify in his defense in federal court. Many of these people act under the federal code of law enforcement. If they had acted within the scope of their employment years ago then it would not have been necessary for the defendant to run for Parliament in Canada let alone stand trail as an innocent man being criminally prosecuted in order to protect the political interests of so many others. Indeed the defendant will joyfully argue a criminal matter in defense of his freedom in order to expose the rampant public corruption the people of the two countries that he is a person of know to exist. In further support of this motion, the defendant states that on October 1st, 2004, Judge Coffey of this court witnessed the signing the aforesaid affidavit which has since been removed from the public record under Judge Hanlon's orders. This was done prior to any hearing of this matter in a court not recognized by the defendant as having the proper jurisdiction and venue for a trail of a Canadian citizen

involving serious criminal charges in an unsigned complaint. The defendant was well aware that if he were to be convicted of the false charges he would be subject to a prison term of up two and one half years and the revocation of his status as a permanent resident of the USA and that his family would suffer greatly. Attached to the aforesaid affidavit are two large exhibits containing one or more affidavits and many other legal documents etc. that prove the malicious actions of the District Attorney and this court supporting a criminal conspiracy against the freedom, civil rights, interests and property of the defendant. The defendant will have the aforesaid affidavit and many other documents and wiretap tapes to support this motion with him in court on January 21st, 2005. The defendant would refuse to give this material to the Federal Bureau of Investigation or any other law enforcement authority because he now needs it as evidence to be used against them in a civil lawsuit. The material proves that he has been pleading for years fo law enforcement authorities to act within the scope of their employment. Perhaps the District Attorney Daniel Conley upon reading this motion should reconsider and ignore Judge Hanlon's opinions of the wiretap tapes that he has in his possession then give tapes to the FBI as soon as possible. He has ten days to review all that the defendant has provided him appear as an ethical officer of the court. A true copy of the aforementioned affidavit is hereto attached for the court to review. Dated January 11th, 2005 David R. Amos, Pro Se 153 Alvin Ave. Milton, MA. 02186 617 698-6549 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, David R. Amos of Milton, MA hereby certify that on January 12th, 2005, I with two friends accompanying me as witnesses served upon the Suffolk County District Attorney, Daniel F. Conley a true original copy of the attached Motion to his office within Dorchester District Court at the following address 510 Washington St. Dorchester, MA David R. Amos 153 Alvin Ave. Milton, MA. 02186

THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS THE TRIAL COURT DORCHESTER, SS. DISTRICT COURT DEPARTMENT THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS CRIMINAL ACTION ) v. ) DAVID R. AMOS ) AFFIDAVIT OF DAVID R. AMOS Now comes, David R. Amos, a Citizen of Canada and a Legal Permanent Resident of the USA and asserts his Constitutional Rights pursuant to Title 42 Sections 1981, 1982, 1985 and 1986 of the Federal Code and freely swears under the penalties of perjury that the following statements are true and to the best of his knowledge. On September 3rd, 2004 I returned to the USA and stood before the Dorchester District Court in response to a summons served upon my home in Milton MA dated August 13th, 2004. On September 3rd, 2004 I reported to the probation officer as ordered after he joked and made fun of me he directed me to serve upon the District Attorney the many original wiretap tapes that I had promised I would bring to court and ask if they wished to continue. The District Attorney Office wished to prosecute me so I returned to the probation office and the required documentation was filled out. I did not discuss the matter with anyone working for the Commonwealth on September 3rd or since that time other than register my indignation about the lack of diligence, professional behavior and malicious acts practiced against me in an effort to impeach my character. On September 3rd, 2004, before any hearing of the matter began I protested the fact that the Clerk Buckley had claimed that I was pleading not guilty. I had made no plea whatsoever. I refused to waive any of my Rights and I demanded that the court prove its jurisdiction to hear the matter. For over a period of almost three months I had tried to resolve the issues of this matter with the Clerk's Office of this court, the Boston Police Dept., the Police Commissioner, the City's Legal Dept. the Mayor's office, the Suffolk County District Attorney's Office, The Governor's Office, the US Ambassador to Canada, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. CSIS and the Canadian Consulate in Boston. I was refused the right to know what the allegations against me were and ) DOCKET NO. 0407CR004623 ) )

no one would discuss my concerns about the possibility of foul play. I knew I had done nothing wrong and I had fully disclosed the circumstances to the Suffolk County District Attorney as Chief Justice Robert A. Mulligan had suggested. I had received an answer from the DA weeks before he was willing to prosecute me on false charges. I had no understanding of the matter. I had not been given information to work with and no one would speak to me. If the District Attorney Daniel F. Conley had acted ethically and diligently the lawyer, Angel Troccoli and her cohorts within the law firm of Dane M. Shulman should have been the ones charged with criminal actions against me. On September 3rd after the hearing and another hearing was marked for today October 1st, Judge Coffey ordered ADA attempting to prosecute me to give me a copy of the documents that I was entitled to view. In return I gave her my Canadian contact number so that we may confer about this matter. I then returned to Canada to defend my rights and freedom. The ADA never called. I was not surprised because upon viewing the material provided I discovered that there is in fact no complaint against me. The complaint in this matter is not signed or witnessed by anyone. Apparently the DA did not expect me to make it to court on September 3rd and certainly did not wish to discuss it with Canadian authorities. I now consider the DA Conley to be just another corrupt politician just like Tom Finneran and further proof of why it was so necessary for me to go to Canada and run for Parliament in order to speak in a public forum of my knowledge of public corruption. I gave all the crooks to the last possible minute for one to act ethically and uphold the Public Trust. All I got in return was continued harassment with the little perk of Colonel Foley quitting his job before I left and Tom Finneran quitting his as soon as I got back. It appears that I must complain of the Queen and President Bush if no one in public service is willing to uphold the law and act within the scope of their employment. For the record I must state the reason I was alarmed by this malicious action against me. The fact is it was the Trail Court of Massachusetts on April 1st, 2003 that had made false allegations against me to agents of the DHS claiming that I had threatened the life of George W. Bush. Now the same court was demanding that I return to the USA to stand in court and answer charges it knew to be false the morning after the President's big Political Speech in New York. I had no doubt whatsoever that the DHS would pounce on me at the border and use a policy of rather than safe than sorry upon me and take me away for the benefit of many a low man in high places. The RCMP would do nothing to protect me and in fact attempted to run me out of Canada on Sept 2nd That was the very day of the Republican National Convention was much in the news about protests and presidential propaganda. In order to be of no possible threat to the President I was compelled to come to the USA after the President left New York and drive all night in order to appear in court on the morning of the 3rd. The most alarming fact of all is that everybody knows that I am bounty hunting for Whitey Bulger. The order to come to his old stomping grounds and amongst his friends by the same corrupt justice system that allowed him to practice his criminal behavior for so long and then allow him to escape justice is indeed a very malicious summons. April 1st, 2003 was also the only day that I ever met with the lawyer, Angela Troccoli before Sept 3rd. I argued her before Judge Livingstone in Plymouth Probate Court. I have argued her again in Norfolk Probate Court on Sept. 21st, 2004. That court found it necessary for no stated reason to place six court guards around me. I am far more than a mere acquaintance to her but obviously a rather formidable litigant against

her criminal actions. I did send her emails asking her to ask her clients to stop harassing me with attached photos of the proof. The emails were necessary because she would not return my phone calls and sent my correspondence to her partner Dane M. Shulman to Barry Bachrach claiming that I was his client. I am not and never was. Mr. Bachrach had informed Troccoli many times that he only represented my wife, Jean F. O'Meara because the court had Stricken my right to do so pursuant to M.G.L 201B. Barry Bachrach has now withdrawn from all of my wife's matters with my assent because of a conflict of interests over one of his partners and myself about a fraudulent Title V inspection. However he is an important witness to be called because he has complete knowledge of all my contact with Troccoli during the time frame that I have been accused. Barry Bachrach also has several original wiretap tapes in his possession in case the ones given to the District Attorney have disappeared like so much of my other material has. On April 1st, 2003 I became aware that Troccoli and the Massachusetts Trial Court had practiced fraud against me and had created a Notice of Appearance in my name with a false document in order to strike me and cover up their own wrongs. On April 1st, 2003 I had also spoken to a Judge in Quincy District Court in my best effort to have the court place a restraining order against my brother in laws William, Robert and Brian O'Meara in my name because after I had tried to do so a few days before in my wife's name under her Durable Power of Attorney the court laughed at me and denied it. Within a day of my first appearance in Quincy District Court William O'Meara called my wife at her work and implied that the homes would burn down and he was willing to pay the insurance premiums. Those same insurance premiums were continued to be paid by us and one policy was canceled over one month after the property in Plymouth was destroyed by Troccoli clients. The Plymouth Probate Court called a Trial quickly with no notification to the litigants after Sept 3rd and on September 9th it authorized a very fraudulent real estate sale about a property that had been illegally destroyed for five months. The lawyer Troccoli and the Massachusetts Trial Court have been assisting the criminal actions of my brother in laws and many others in order to protect the interests of many lawyers and politicians from my actions in other courts. My wife's family have forged her signature on a Purchase and Sale Agreement, created fraudulent Title V inspection, broke into our home, assisted in the theft of her rightful inheritance, stolen personal property and food, made false allegations against me in other states, threatened to burn down the homes and harassed us on sometimes a daily basis with the knowledge and assistance of several Police Departments. It is time we sought relief. Whereas two of my most recent documents have disappeared from the Public Record in two countries I have attached them to this affidavit for the court and the public to view. Exhibit A is a Motion to Dismiss Troccoli's latest malicious action. It was filed on September 13th, 2004 and stricken from the Public Record by Judge Langlois on September 21st. Exhibit B is a copy of two letters with the same enclosures that were sent to the RCMP in Newfoundland byway of the Canada Post and one was sent to the Canadian Consulate by US Mail. Both mailings were tracked and not received. They are obviously now in the possession of some sort of secret authority. As the court views these documents it can easily see what I say is true and my material is of no concern for

the public safety. They are filed in the public record for the benefit of all in my best effort to see that the Public Trust is upheld. I have also brought to court a case of documents requested by Utica Mutual Insurance Company of New York to investigate the actions of their client Jan Whiting. However once they knew the truth they refused to accept or pay for what they had requested. If the court deems it necessary I shall file it into evidence to refute the false allegations made against me. Since I have last appeared in this court a great deal has transpired that cannot be told of within this affidavit but it concerns the pursuit of justice for many people in two counties. Much has been done by many to stop my friends and I in revealing the truth of our concerns. Thus far we have been able to thwart our adverasies actions. The court should pray that it does not get our blood on its hands. The proof of some of what I state can be found in Exhibit B. Signed before the court and under the Pains and Penalties of Perjury by Dated October 1st , 2004 David R.Amos, Pro Se 153 Alvin Ave. Milton, MA. 02186 617 698-6549 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEI, David R. Amos hereby certify that on October 1st, 2004, I served upon the Suffolk County District Attorney Daniel F. Conley a true copy of this document with all its attachments. David R. Amos 153 Alvin Ave. Milton, MA. 02186

2005 01 T 0010

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEWFOUNDLAND AND LABRADOR TRAIL DIVISION BETWEEN: WILLIAM MATTHEWS PLAINTIFF AND: BYRON PRIOR DEFENDANT AND BETWEEN: BYRON PRIOR DEFENDANT/PLAINTIFF BY COUNTERCLAIM AND: WILLIAM MATTHEWS PLAINTIFF/FIRST DEFENDANT BY COUNTERCLAIM AND: T. ALEX HICKMAN SECOND DEFENDANT BY COUNTERCLAIM AND: THOMAS MARSHALL THIRD DEFENDANT BY COUNTERCLAIM AND: DANNY WILLIAMS FOURTH DEFENDANT BY COUNTERCLAIM AND: EDWARD M. ROBERTS FIFTH DEFENDANT BY COUNTERCLAIM AND: JOHN CROSBIE SIXTH DEFENDANT BY COUNTERCLAIM AND: PATTERSON PALMER SEVENTH DEFENDANT BY COUNTERCLAIM ORDER Before the Honourable Chief Justice Green. Filed January 21, 2005 UPON HEARING Stephen J. May, of Counsel for the Plaintiff, AND UPON READING the Application and Affidavit filed herein, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, until further order of the court, Byron Prior is prohibited from publishing, causing to have published, distributing or causing to have distributed the Statement of Defence and Counterclaim pending the determination of the Applicant's Application to strike the Statement of Defence and Counterclaim in its entirety, and that the Court's file in this proceeding is not to be made available for review by anyone other than the parties or their legal counsel pending the determination of the Applicant's Application to strike the Statement of Defence and Counterclaim in its entirety, and that the requirements relating to the obligations of the Defendants to the Counterclaim to file Defences are be waived pending the determination of the Applicant's Application to strike the Statement of Defence and Counterclaim in its entirety. AND IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT the content of the Statement of Defence and Counterclaim shall not be published or broadcast in any manner whatsoever until further order of

the court. AND IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED that the Application to strike the Statement of Defence and Counterclaim is scheduled to be heard on January 26, 2005. AND IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED that costs of this Application be in the cause. DATED at St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador this 21st day of January, 2005. Signed by J. Derek Green, Chief Justice 2005 01 T 0010 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEWFOUNDLAND AND LABRADOR TRAIL DIVISION BETWEEN WILLIAM MATTHEWS



DEFENCE The Defendant, Byron Prior, admits to the statements of the plaintiff, William Matthews in the paragraphs numbered one (1), two (2) and seven (7) of his claim. Defendant, Byron David Prior (Prior) and his friend David Raymond Amos (Amos) With respect to this claim for damages by a Member of Parliament, have no understanding how the Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador can legally proceed with this civil matter until the Attorney General Thomas Marshall (Marshall) and the Premier Danny Williams (Williams) answer the Defendant's and Amos' criminal allegations proven to them in September of 2004. The Defendant has the right to know the results of any of the Attorney General's investigations of his concerns about Public Corruption before any proceedings in this matter. Furthermore Amos' as a candidate for a seat in Parliament in the last election certainly deserves an answer from the Arar Commission. That Commission has ignored him and allowed him to be illegally imprisoned in the United States of America (USA) long after it was made irrefutably aware of his supporting evidence to Mr. Arar's matters. Every Member of the 37th and the 38th Parliament has been made well aware of the facts of this matter by the Defendant and Amos for over one year byway of email if not hard copy in the mail or personal service. The Defendant and Amos are just members of the Public but they demand that those in Public Service uphold the Public Trust and expose Public Corruption.

The Defendant further states that hard copy of much evidence of many crimes practiced against the Defendant and Amos were given to Williams by the Defendant on September 9th, 2004 and to Marshall by the Lieutenant Governor Edward Moxon Roberts (Roberts) on September 10th. On September 11th, the Governor General of Canada Adrienne Clarkson (Clarkson) affirmed to Amos that he had taken the appropriate steps and properly contacted all authorities having jurisdiction over his and the Defendant's concerns about criminal actions. In support thereof Defendant states the Deputy Prime Minister Anne McLellan (McLellan) of the 37th Parliament had directed Amos to do so in December of 2003 and the Defendant was directed to do so by the Minister of Justice Irwin Cotler of the 38th Parliament in July of 2004. Both aforesaid persons are members of the same Liberal caucus as the Plaintiff now seated on a backbench in Parliament. The Defendant further states that former law firm of Williams had successfully defended him in a criminal trial against other false allegations and charges of criminal acts in 1998. At that time law firm Williams was completely informed by the Defendant of the sexual abuse of his family. The Defendant has no doubt Williams used that knowledge to become the powerful person of his political party he is today rather than assisting his client, the Defendant in attempting to up hold the law and see that criminals with other politically powerful positions be properly prosecuted. The Defendant further states that whereas this claim of much embarrassment of the Plaintiff as a Member of Parliament, he feels no pity towards a man that had practiced sexual abuse against his family and was never punished. The Defendant clearly states in his web site (Site) and now in this document signed in his own hand that every word he has published is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help him his God. The Defendant further states that whereas this claim by the Plaintiff against him comes about byway the words he legally published in his web site ("Site") published in the USA under the First Amendment its Constitutional pursuant to the freedom of speech and the freedom of the press, the onus is upon the Plaintiff to prove without any reasonable doubt that the Defendant's allegations are false. The defendant is well prepared to argue that every word he has ever said or written about the Plaintiff is true and he is willing to call many witnesses to support the true facts of this matter. The Defendant further states as he does within his Site that the quickest way for the Plaintiff to prove one of the allegations false without burdening the court would be a few blood tests to prove he is not the father of the person named Aaron whom he chooses to mention within paragraph three (3) his own statement of claim. That is a very small task for a Member of Parliament to do in order to help protect his reputation and save himself from a lot of further embarrassment. The Defendant further states that he does in fact welcome this claim against him. Plaintiff has finally given the Defendant an opportunity to see justice served upon the plaintiff and his cohorts after over forty years of seeking it for over fifty years of much abuse. Hopefully this will be done byway of this answer and a very justifiable counterclaim that should not be easily dismissed. It is quite honestly the only way a man on welfare can make a legitimate complaint against some of wealthiest and most corrupt persons in Canada. The Defendant further states whereas the Plaintiff complains that the published words of the Defendant can be found on the Internet, other web sites and within many emails etc, the Plaintiff should complain all the other persons that support the Defendant allegations as well.

Otherwise this malicious claim is fruitless to stop the justifiable embarrassment of the Plaintiff and his lawyers. The Defendant further states if the claim against a layman on welfare were to be won by the legal trickery of a malevolent wealthy law firm it would merely support all what the Defendant has published is true. If the Plaintiff truly wishes to protect his reputation in a legal fashion he must prove with witnesses and evidence in front of a jury that all the allegations of the Defendant are false. The Plaintiff merely claiming falsehoods does not prove the allegations untrue. The Defendant further states that the Plaintiff makes mention of many emails in his statement of claim paragraphs numbered five (5) and six (6) containing the Defendant's published work. The Defendant states that one of the persons to send thousands of emails in support of the Defendant and his allegations is his friend Amos. The defendant points out the fact that Amos had sent emails containing the entire text of the Defendant's Site to every Member of the 37th Parliament before he came to Canada to run for a Seat in the June Election of the 38th Parliament. One of the persons to respond to Amos' emails was an assistant of McLellan as the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness on March 16th 2004. That person sent back the entire text of the Site the Plaintiff finds so offensive. The Plaintiff should name McLellan as a defendant. The Defendant further states that Amos would welcome the opportunity to be joined into this matter as a defendant and argue the lawyers he has already crossed paths with his own matters and the Defendant's during the time he was in Canada running for a seat in Parliament. If any Member of Parliament including the Plaintiff had acted ethically one year ago. Amos would not have been imprisoned to sleep on a cement slab in the Physc Ward of a Downtown Boston Jail while being illegally held against his will under the false charges of "other" until the Yankees could think of something to charge him with. Furthermore the statement of claim of the Plaintiff would not exist and the Defendant would not be still suffering today from more abuse by the Judicial System. The Defendant further states that this answer and many other documents etc. involving the governments of Canada and several Provinces including Newfoundland will be used in defence of Amos' freedom during the course of his pending Criminal Trial before a jury of his peers in the USA. However this answer in this civil matter is no less important for the Defendant because the justice system of his own province has failed to uphold the law with regards to the crimes practiced against him for over forty years. The Defendant states in defence of Plaintiff's claim in paragraph numbered three (3) that the lawyer Stephen J. May ("May") of the law firm of Patterson Palmer acting for the Plaintiff, the benefit of his own law firm and many others maliciously edited many words from the very first statement in the Defendant's Site This is a very fraudulent attempt by a lawyer to exclude the names of many other parties who should be plaintiffs as well if in fact the Plaintiff's claims were valid. For the sake of brevity demanded by the rules of this court the defendant offers only the first statement in the Site because that is where his edited words were gleaned from in the plaintiff's third statement of his claim. The first words of the Site in their entirety are as follows: Canadian Corruption Sexual Abuse & Political & Legal Conspiracy. RCMP Incompetence & Cover up. Priors Of Grand Bank NFLD Canada How do I get a corrupt legal system to investigate, charge and convict

itself? If T. Alex Hickman, Justice Minister, 1966 to 1979 also Health Minister 1968 to 1969 and Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Newfoundland 1979 to 2000, 34 YEARS OF COMPLETE LEGAL SYSTEMS CONTROL, at 41 years of age, rapes and impregnates your younger sister Susan, at 12 years old, what would you do? Liberal MP Bill Matthews & his friends, raped the same child repeatedly, for more than 3 Yrs. At 14 ,she had a second baby, Aaron, she said she was 80% sure he is Matthews son. A third baby, Harriett, at 18 & 3 miscarriages also, by this time, what abuse of a child. Matthews & his lawyer, Ed Roberts, pressured me to sign papers, saying Matthews had nothing to do with my family & I imagined it all. NOT SO. I have copies of their letters. 2 weeks after I signed these papers, MR ED, THE HORSE'S ASS, ROBERTS was made LT. Governor of NFLD. & LAB. by MR JEAN, THE JACK ASS, CHRETIEN, soon to be known as Canada's most CORRUPT Prime Minister After the Justice Minister, Rapes & Impregnates a 12 Yr. old child, in a small town & everyone knows, who will stop or charge anyone else, for Raping & abusing that same child?? PAUL MARTIN, IS THIS FEDERAL ENOUGH FOR YOU OR MUST I NAME MORE LAWYERS & JUDGES?? DO SOMETHING NOW or I will be forced to name many more, RESPECTABLE NEWFOUNDLANDERS, many names you won't like to read yourself. I am willing to take any tests and answer all questions regarding my entire life. All they have to do is take one blood test. It's time for them to stop manipulating our legal system and face the truth, which I have be telling anyone else who would listen, all of my life.I didn't just awake one morning and decide to accuse the most powerful and most corrupt legal animal in this province. I have had, no childhood, no education, no family, no hometown, no self- esteem or self-respect and no past, present or future as a contributing person. By the time I was 14 years old I was responsible for 9 younger children, all of us abused and molested while our hometown either joined in, bothered us about our situation, or looked the other way and said we were all trouble......... The Defendant altered the above statement published within the Site in October of 2004 upon taking the advice of Amos after he had been released for jail on bail. Amos advised the Defendant take back his promise to the Plaintiff's lawyer Roberts years ago and tell all that he knew to be true about all things as soon as possible for their own protection and the benefit of all Canadians. The Defendant further states that one of the aforesaid named parties in his published Site Roberts is a former partner of the law firm Patterson Palmer. In 2002 acting on behalf of the Plaintiff with the assistance of the law firm of Patterson Palmer. Roberts, the well-known and powerful political lawyer had maliciously threatened to sue the unemployed Defendant and his family if his client's name was ever mentioned in the Defendant's Site as it existed at that time. The Defendant further states that it was not the Defendant's fault that the Plaintiff's guilty conscience about his own sexual abuse of children had compelled him to hire lawyers to cover up his crimes. However the defendant buckled under Roberts' pressure and signed a document promising never to mention the Plaintiff within the Site; The Defendant further states that at that time in of his encounter with Roberts in 2002 and until October of 2004 the Defendant was seeking justice for the sexual abuse of his family by T. Alex Hickman (Hickman), the former Minister of Justice and Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. That fact was plainly stated for the world to view from the very beginning of the Defendant's first published web site. Not once over the years did Hickman openly refute the Plaintiff allegations but he did indeed send many of his cohorts employed within law

enforcement and others to harass the Defendant. The Defendant further states that within mere months of the Defendant's signature on the documents demanded by Roberts he was appointed the 11th Lieutenant Governor of Newfoundland and Labrador. The defendant has no doubt whatsoever it was a political reward to Roberts for protecting the false integrity of a Member of Parliament with a very guilty conscience within Jean Chr�tien's scandalous government. The fact that May employs the phrase "inter alia" which means "among other things" does not indeed negate the fact that he is a deliberate conspirator in a scheme to cover up Public Corruption assisted and practiced by members of his own law firm of Patterson and Palmer.. The Defendant demands to argue all of his published words not just the words a malicious lawyer has chosen to take out of context to suit his own ends. Justice would not be served again. The Defendant further states that the following words found within his published Site were also edited by May within the Plaintiff's fourth (4) paragraph of his claim for the same aforesaid reasons stated in paragraph number two (2) of this defence. The complete context of the Defendant's words are as follows: To Whom It May Concern: July 24, 2001 My name is Byron Prior. I'm the oldest living of these 12 children. I not only had to livethrough my abuse but, watch as the rest of my sisters and brother were abused and raped. Three of my sisters raped, 1 by a grandfather at the age of 4, a second raped by T. Alex Hickman, Justice Minister, at age 12 & Bill Matthews & friends from 13 on. A third sister raped by a young man in our home town. The legal system are onlyconcerned with keeping all this under cover and protect themselves. Please people, if you have a heart, walk one day in my shoes and tell me you would just forget because these bureaucrats say so. I have copies of my full statement on all the details of what happened, which I gave the R.C.M.P. on March 9, 1998, 52.5 hours at their office. I will send it to anyone who will send me an E-mail address. I will never forget the abuse, shame, and persecution to this day, from the animals who did this to my family. Sincerely, Byron Prior The Plaintiff should have joined as plaintiffs T. Alex Hickman, Edward M. Roberts, Jean Chretien and Paul Martin the persons first mentioned in the Site and numerous others including many members of the RCMP and the justice system named throughout the remainder of the Site pursuant to Rule 7.02 (2) which states as follows: Subject to the provisions of any statute and unless the Court otherwise orders, a plaintiff, who claims any relief that any other person is entitled to jointly with the plaintiff, shall join all persons so entitled as parties to the proceeding, and any of them who do not consent to be joined as a plaintiff shall be made a defendant. The fact that the lawyer May carefully edited the defendant's published work in the plaintiff's statement of claim does not negate the fact that many parties are named within the Defendant's Site. The Defendant further states in answer to the Plaintiff's statement of claim paragraph six (6) that denies his allegations of the criminal actions made on his published Site against the Plaintiff and many others are false. The defendant clearly states that all of his allegations made against all parties mentioned within the Site are absolutely true and he has sworn to the truth of some of the stated allegations the Courts of Newfoundland in the past. The text of one of

his statements to the RCMP can be found on the published Site. The Plaintiff desires the Freedom of Speech and the Freedom of the Press in another country to be ignored in order to save himself from embarrassment from his own wrongful acts for which he has never been prosecuted and punished because of his association with T. Alex Hickman, the former Minister of Justice an Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador. The Defendant clearly states that the Plaintiff, Bill Matthews and his cohorts living in Grand Bank many years ago used against the Minister of Justice at the time, their knowledge of the sexual abuse of the minor children of the Prior family by T. Alex Hickman's in order not to be prosecuted for their own many crimes including their own sexual abuse of the same family. The Plaintiff has continued to prosper ever since that time because of crime not integrity. The Defendant will not take back one word of his truthful publications in the USA. The defendant prays to the court for his right to a jury trial in his own native land in accordance with all the rules of the Supreme Court in order to call many witnesses in support of his defence to insure that the truth about many criminal acts become widely known in order that all the perpetrators including the Plaintiff, William Matthews and the Former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador, T.Alex Hickman may be finally prosecuted for the sexual abuse of his family and himself. The Defendant prays that the crimes against his family will never be forgotten, never repeated upon anyone and never covered up by any Judicial System ever again. In closing the Defendant, Byron Prior sincerely believes that the conspiracy by so many highly placed public officials over the past forty years to cover-up the crimes of others warrants an investigation by a Royal Commission immediately. . DATED at Conception Bay South Newfoundland and Labrador this 21st day of January, 2005. Byron


Reader's Crescent,

Conception Bay, NL A1W 5B4 The



Suite 1000, Scotia Centre 235 Water Street P.O. Box 610 St. John's, NL. A1C 5L3 Solicitors for the plaintiff




The Plaintiff, Byron Prior was born and raised Grand Bank Newfoundland. He is an out of work former employee of the offshore oil exploration industry who is now on social assistance. He has been unable to find employment in the area of his expertise because his outspokenness in the 1980's about oil industry matters that caused Crosbie Offshore Services to be investigated for its wrongful acts. The aforesaid company was then controlled by Andrew Crosbie, brother to John Crosbie a former Minister of Justice of Canada The Defendant, John Crosbie, is now a partner in the law firm of Patterson Palmer. He was served much evidence of many crimes including the crimes practiced against the Plaintiff byway of his partner, Gregory Byrne a former Minister of Justice of New Brunswick in Fredericton N.B. on August 24th, 2004. This was done by personal service by David Raymond Amos (Amos) a friend of the Plaintiff. The Defendant, Edward M. Roberts was once a member the law firm of Patterson Palmer who acted against the Plaintiff years ago on behalf of the Defendant William Matthews. He knew the truth of the plaintiffs allegations and did nothing to up hold the law in the pursuit of his own gain. On September 8th, 2004, the Plaintiff made personal service upon Edward Roberts as the Leutenant Governor of Newfoundland Hard irrefutable evidence proving the crimes that concern his friend David Amos on the same day that Amos was having a lawyer file the same documents attached to his affidavit in defence of a friend unjustly charged with criminal behavior in a New Brunswick Provincial Court in Sussex NB. Roberts continued to stay the course of his deceit and merely passed the evidence on the Defendant, Thomas Marshall the Attorney General of Newfoundland and Labrador who has done nothing whatsoever to uphold the law. Marshall has refused to answer or return one phone call or email in order answer or ask one question about the allegations of crime by the plaintiff and his friend Amos. The Plaintiff further states the Defendant, William Matthews was born and raised Grand Bank Newfoundland. on July 22, 1947. He attended Memorial University and in 1969 he earned a B.P.E., B.Ed. He was first elected to the Newfoundland and Labrador Legislature in 1982 as the MHA for the Grand Bank District. He was re-elected in 1985 and was appointed Minister of Culture, Recreation and Youth. In 1988, Mr. Matthews was appointed Minister of Career Development & Advanced Studies. In 1989, Mr. Matthews was re-elected to the Newfoundland and Labrador Legislature and was appointed Finance Critic. From 1990 to 1995, he served as Fisheries Critic, and in 1991 was appointed as Opposition House Leader. In 1993, Mr. Matthews was again elected to the Legislature and was re-appointed House Leader and Fisheries Critic. On June 2, 1997, he was elected as the Member of Parliament for Burin-St.George's. the Defendant did serve as Vice-Chair of the Standing Committees on Fisheries & Oceans. On Sept 1st, 2000, he was appointed Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs. The defendant was re-elected November 27, 2000 as the Member of Parliament for Burin-St. George's and re-appointed September 1, 2001 as the Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs. The Defendant was reelected on June 28th, 2005 but is now a backbencher in the Liberal caucus of 38th Parliament of Canada still representing the constituency of Random-Burin-St. George's having apparently fallen out of favor with Paul Martin's minority government. The Plaintiff further states he has no doubt that his actions are part

of the reason for the Defendant's loss of Stature within the Liberal Caucus and the cause of his stated embarrassment in paragraph number six (6) of his statement of claim. The Plaintiff further states the Defendant, T. Alex Hickman was born and raised Grand Bank Newfoundland. The Plaintiff whose mother was a whore with Hickman as a client has known him since childhood. The Plaintiff witnessed the fact that Hickman sexual abused his younger sibling at 12 years old on the night of his first political win in 1966. Hickman and his associate John Crosbie rose to positions of great power and wealth beginning under the corrupt leadership of Joey Smallwood before turning coat on the Liberal party and climbing even higher on the political totem pole of Public Corruption. Hickman finally retired as the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Newfoundland and was later awarded the Order of Canada with the courthouse in Grand Bank now bearing his wicked name. The Plaintiff has never made any secret of the fact that he hated and despised the Defendants Matthews and Hickman ever since he was a child chucking rocks in the street at Matthews' big green fifties Chrysler as he sped away to sexually abuse another one of the Plaintiff's underage siblings. Both the Plaintiff and Matthews knew that that he would never be punished because of what everybody in Grand Bank never of the sexual misdeeds of Hickman. The Plaintiff is grateful for the invention of the World Wide Web in his lifetime in order that he may tell all who wish to read of it what he knows to be true in Newfoundland. Now the Plaintiff can hurl simple truths far and wide at the defendants done the Internet highway. He will not stop telling the world the truth because the defendant, William Matthews feels embarrassed and justifiably hated and despised by many others. The Plaintiff is proud of his work legally published in another country so that the crooks in his home Province of Newfoundland can no longer keep their dirty secrets to themselves. Plaintiff was denied legal aid in this matter by the government lawyer, John Duggan for no stated reason that the Plaintiff can find within the Legal Aid Act. However the Plaintiff is well aware that he will never receive any assistance from law enforcement or the judicial system because of the cover up the sexual abuse of his family when he was a child by T. Alex Hickman, the former Minister of Justice and the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador. The Plaintiff further states that when his friend Amos heard that the Province was unwilling to offer legal to him or even look at the supporting evidence from Amos they knew for certain all government employees in Newfoundland were acting against the Plaintiff under orders from the Premier Danny Williams. Amos did the best he could to help compose the Plaintiff's answer and countercomplaint within the time allowed by the rules of this court. The Plaintiff further states that Amos also went one step further to make certain their suspicion of the malice of Danny Williams was true. On January 20th, 2005, Amos called Danny Williams' office personally and asked why he had not responded to the identical letter and materials Roberts, Crosbie and the Newfoundland Law Society had received. The Plaintiff had served it upon his office on September 9th and the receipt is signed by one of his assistants. The aforesaid material also included a copy of a police surveillance tape numbered 139 recorded in the USA of the mob. It letter certainly warranted a valid answer for someone in law enforcement. However later in the day another one of Danny Williams' assistants called Amos back and denied any knowledge of anything. That man's words affirmed what the plaintiff and his friend already knew and that is almost everyone

employed within the justice system is willing to be a liar and support Public Corruption for their own personal gain. People employed in the Public Service of law enforcement only act ethically and do their job if it politically correct to do so in order to keep their job. It truly is just that simple and everybody knows it. The plaintiff and his friend merely went to great lengths to prove it after the Justice Systems of two countries had practiced many crimes against each of them. The true facts of this matter are stated as best the Plaintiff could in his answer to William Matthews now a defendant in this Counterclaim. For the sake of brevity for the court, the benefit of the Plaintiff and the Public Trust, the Plaintiff, Byron prays the court to review his answer filed at the same time as this counterclaim in a timely fashion as per the rules of this court. The Plaintiff is now prepared to reveal all that he knows to be true about wrongful actions within the offshore oil exploration industry and to be a supporting witness to the allegations of much Public Corruption within Canada and the United States of America (USA) recently exposed by Amos. The Plaintiff truly believes that is the reason he was served the malicious claim against him by William Matthews at this time and compelled to answer it on by January 21st, 2005 is because of the actions of actions of Amos in the USA and his court ordered appearance in Dorchester District Court in Boston Massachusetts on the very same day. All of the above named defendants are involved in a cross border conspiracy to cover-up many crimes. The Plaintiff further states that he and his friend are well aware that their knowledge and evidence of many crimes are a very serious and legitimate threat to the false integrity of many persons employed to protect the Public Interests of the people around the world. They have no doubt whatsoever that their lives are in great danger. History has proven many decent men acting as they have died for much less. However history has also proven that if good men do nothing evil will prevail. The Plaintiff and his friend have no choice but to proceed in their efforts to expose Public Corruption because it is not in their nature to quit. They also recognize the fact that as fathers they owe to their children what their forefathers fought so hard in so many wars to secure for them, Freedom within a Just Democracy. The Plaintiff further states that the sincere actions of he and his friend to make what they know of many crimes become common knowledge has the entire corrupt Justice Systems of Canada and the USA greatly concerned. If the two friends do prevail in revealing the truth to all it will be to the detriment of many malevolent Global Corporations, Bankers, Politicians, lawyers and the most importantly the Catholic Church. There has been much ado in recent times about the affiliations within such societies as Skull and Bones and the involvement Presidents and Senators who attempt to appear to be on the opposite side of the political fence. Politicians come and every four years or so. However it is the puppet master that pulls the strings who always remains behind the scene that is the one who is truly obscene. The Plaintiff, Byron David Prior and his friend David Raymond Amos want the world to know they truly believe their most evil foe is none other than Count Peter-Hans Kolvenbach the Superior General of the Jesuits. 15. The Plaintiff therefore claims: a. general damages to be assessed; b. aggravated, exemplary and/or punitive damages;

c. pre-judgment and post-judgment interest pursuant to the provisions of the Judgment Interest Act, R.S.N. 1990, c. J-2; d. cost on a solicitor if one is found and own client basis; e. such further relief deems to be equitable and just in the circumstances. DATED at Conception Bay South Newfoundland and Labrador this 21st day of January, 2005. Byron Prior Reader's


Bay, NL A1W 5B4






AND: PATTERSON PALMER SEVENTH DEFENDANT BY COUNTERCLAIM REQUEST FOR POSTPONEMENT RE: An Amended Interlocutory Application of the Plaintiff to maintain an Order of the Court restricting publication; to strike portions of the Statement of Defence pursuant to Rule 14.24; and strike the Counterclaim in it's entirety pursuant to Rules 11.02 and 14.24 and ss. 93 and 94 of the Judicature Act, RSN 1990, c. J-4 as amended. (Inter Partes) The Defendant/Plaintiff by Counterclaim in this proceeding requests a postponement before attempting to argue the above stated Application served upon him on January 25, 2005. In support thereof he states as follows: The Defendant/Plaintiff by Counterclaim is a resident of Conception Bay South who is a layman on welfare with a Grade Eleven GED who has yet to secure legal assistance in his defence and counterclaim in this matter and is ordered by the court to argue a very long and very complicated memorandum of law within one day of being served. The Plaintiff/Defendant by Counterclaim and Applicant is a resident of Mount Pearl, Newfoundland and Labrador, and a Member of the 38th Parliament of Canada who is represented in this action by the wealthy and influential law firm of Patterson Palmer, which is also the Seventh Defendant by Counterclaim. The Defendant by Counterclaim, Patterson and Palmer had acted hastily and maliciously in an "ex parte" fashion in order to protect its own interests in this matter and later was compelled to amend the first Interlocutory Application it had composed in order to correct errors and cover up the justifiable existence of the other Defendant by Counterclaim. The past managing partner of the Seventh Defendant by counterclaim, Stephen J. May (May) had caused the above stated documents to be served upon the Defendant/Plaintiff by Counterclaim in an admitted untimely fashion. May promised not to oppose this request for postponement within a cover letter signed in his own hand one day before the scheduled hearing, The text of May's letter states as follows: Please find enclosed our further materials that now seek to strike only portions of your Statement of Defence but still seeks to strike the entire Counterclaim. Our Application also now seeks to refer this proceeding to case management in order to address the service and scheduling of any future Applications that may be brought in advance of a Trial. As I advised previously, the Application is scheduled to be heard by the Supreme Court at the Court House off Duckworth Street on Wednesday, 26 January 2005 at 10:00 a.m. The enclosed Affidavit has not been filed with the Court but I will seek leave to do so on Wednesday. As weather prevented these documents from being served yesterday, we will not oppose a request for a postponement to allow you further time to prepare your position. Signed by S, J. May

May declares to have served upon the Defendant/Plaintiff by counterclaim his own sworn Affidavit in which he has admitted to the prior contact between himself, his law firm and other named Defendants by the counterclaim with the Defendant/Plaintiff by counterclaim and David R. Amos a willing Joiner in this matter pursuant to Rule 7 02. Whereas it appears that May does not wish to file his Affidavit in this matter until the counterclaim has been stricken from the Public Record, the Defendant/Plaintiff by counterclaim prays that the court allows May to file his documents immediately and that his Affidavit and related Exhibits be studied closely by the court before considering the Defendant's latest untimely Application. DATED at Conception Bay South Newfoundland and Labrador this 25st day of January, 2005. Byron Prior Reader's Hill Crescent, Conception Bay South, NL A1W 5B4 The Defendant/Plaintiff by Counterclaim

TO: Stephen J. May PATTERSON PALMER Suite 1000, Scotia Centre 235 Water Street P.O. Box 610 St. John's, NL. A1C 5L3 Seventh Defendant by Counterclaim and Solicitors for the Plaintiff/Defendant by Counterclaim


TRIAL DIVISION BETWEEN:WILLIAM MATTHEWS PLAINTIFF AND: BYRON PRIOR DEFENDANT AND BETWEEN: BYRON PRIOR DEFENDANT/PLAINTIFFBY COUNTERCLAIM AND: WILLIAM MATTHEWS PLAINTIFF/FIRST DEFENDANT BY COUNTERCLAIM AND: T. ALEX HICKMAN SECOND DEFENDANT BY COUNTERCLAIM AND: THOMAS MARSHALL THIRD DEFENDANT BY COUNTERCLAIM AND: DANNY WILLIAMS FOURTH DEFENDANT BY COUNTERCLAIM AND: EDWARD M. ROBERTS FIFTH DEFENDANT BY COUNTERCLAIM AND: JOHN CROSBIE SIXTH DEFENDANT BY COUNTERCLAIM AND: PATTERSON PALMER SEVENTH DEFENDANT BY COUNTERCLAIM SUMMARY OF CURRENT DOCUMENT Court File Number(s):2005 01 T 0010Date of Filing of Document:25 January 2005Name of Filing Party or Person:Stephen J. MayApplication to which Document being filed relates:Amended Application of the Plaintiff/Defendant by Counterclaim to maintain an Order restricting publication, to strike portions of the Statement of Defence, strike the Counterclaim in it's entirety, and to refer this proceeding to case management.Statement of purpose in filing:To maintain an Order restricting publication, to strike portions of the Statement of Defence, strike the Counterclaim in its entirety and refer this proceeding to case management. A F F I D A V I T I, Stephen J. May, of the City of St. John's, in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, Barrister and Solicitor, make oath and say as follows: THAT I am a Partner in the St. John's office of PATTERSON PALMER solicitors for William Matthews, the Member of Parliament for Random-Burin-St. George's in the Parliament of Canada.

THAT Mr. Matthews originally retained Mr. Edward Roberts, Q.C. on or about 30 April 2002 after Mr. Byron Prior, the Defendant/Plaintiff by Counterclaim, had made allegations against Mr. Matthews in a publication called "My Inheritance - The truth - Not Fiction: A Town with a Secret". In that publication, the allegation was made that Mr. Matthews had had sex with a girl who had been prostituted by her mother. That girl was alleged to have been Mr. Prior's sister. THAT upon being retained, Mr. Edward Roberts wrote a letter to Mr. Prior. That letter to Mr. Prior is attached as Exhibit "1" to my Affidavit. THAT subsequent to Mr. Roberts' letter to Mr. Prior, Mr. Roberts received a 1 May 2002 e-mail from Mr. Prior. That e-mail is attached as Exhibit "2". THAT subsequent to Mr. Roberts receipt of the e-mail, Mr. Prior swore an Affidavit acknowledging that what had been said in that publication was false. That Affidavit is attached as Exhibit "3" to my Affidavit. Following Mr. Roberts' receipt of that Affidavit, Mr. Matthews advised that he was satisfied not to pursue the matter any further and our firm closed our file. THAT on or about 25 October 2004, I was retained by Mr. Matthews following his gaining knowledge that a web site, made a series of allegations against him relating to my having sex with a girl of approximately 12 years old through to an approximate age of 15 years old. It also accused him of being a father of one of her children and accused him of having raped that girl. Upon checking the web site I saw that Byron Prior, the Defendant, had been identified as the author of the material on the site. THAT Mr. Matthews instructed me to write Mr. Prior, to remind him of the fact that the allegations had been admitted to being false through a 16 May 2002 Affidavit to advise him of Mr. Matthews' intentions to commence legal proceedings if the comments were not removed from the web site. A copy of my letter to Mr. Prior is attached as Exhibit "4" to this Affidavit. THAT I attach as Exhibit "5" a transcript from a 5 November 2004 voicemail left by David Amos, identified in the voicemail as a friend of Mr. Prior. THAT I attach as Exhibit "6" a portion of a 6 November 2004 e-mail from Mr. Amos. THAT until I received his voicemail and e-mail, I had never heard of Mr. Amos.

THAT Mr. Amos has continued to send me e-mail since his 5 November e-mail. Including his 6 November 2004 e-mail, I have received a total of 15 e-mails as of 23 January 2005. All do not address Mr. Matthews' claim or my involvement as Mr. Matthews' solicitor. I attach as Exhibit "7" a portion of a 12 January 2005 e-mail that Mr. Amos sent to me but originally came to my attention through Ms. Lois Skanes whose firm had received a copy. This e-mail followed the service of the Statement of Claim on 11 January 2005 on Mr. Prior. I also attach as Exhibit "8" a copy of a 19 January 2005 e-mail from Mr. Amos. THAT I attach as Exhibit "9" a copy of a 22 November 2004 letter addressed to me from Edward Roberts, the Lieutenant Governor of Newfoundland and Labrador covering a 2 September 2004 letter from Mr. Amos addressed to John Crosbie, Edward Roberts, in his capacity as Lieutenant Governor, Danny Williams, in his capacity as Premier of Newfoundland and Labrador, and Brian F. Furey, President of the Law Society of Newfoundland and Labrador. I requested a copy of this letter from Government House after asking Mr. Roberts if he had received any correspondence from Mr. Amos during his previous representation of Mr. Matthews. He advised me that he received a letter since becoming Lieutenant Governor, portions of which involved his representation of Mr. Matthews. Mr. Roberts' letter also covered his reply to Mr. Amos. THAT I attach as Exhibit "10" an e-mail from Mr. Amos received on Sunday, 23 January 2005. THAT I swear this Affidavit in support of the Application to strike Mr. Prior's counterclaim.

SWORN to before me at St. John's, Province of Newfoundland and Labrador this 24th day of January, 2005. Signed by Della Hart STEPHEN J. MAY Signature STAMP DELLA HART A Commissioner for Oaths in and for the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. My commission expires on December 31, 2009.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term' -------------------------------------------------------------------------------Celebrate Yahoo!'s 10th Birthday! Yahoo! Netrospective: 100 Moments of the Web -------------------------------------------------------------------------------Do you Yahoo!? Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site! -------------------------------------------------------------------------------Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site! -------------------------------------------------------------------------------Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site! -------------------------------------------------------------------------------Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site! -------------------------------------------------------------------------------Do you Yahoo!?

Sponsor Documents

Or use your account on DocShare.tips


Forgot your password?

Or register your new account on DocShare.tips


Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link to create a new password.

Back to log-in