How the Law Society of Ontario Sent an Innocent Man to Prison to Save Three Corrupt Lawyers

Ontario Solitary Confinement Prison Cell

The client most lawyers fear – and won’t represent at any price

by Donald Best (First published 2016)

There is a class of self-represented litigants that the legal profession does not talk about or even acknowledge, at least publicly. These are the people who are ready and willing to pay a lawyer, but are forced to represent themselves because the vast majority of lawyers refuse to litigate cases involving a claim of professional misconduct against another member of the Bar.

In the past year I have spoken with dozens of such individuals. I am not a lawyer, but they appear to have good civil claims against lawyers for unethical or even unlawful conduct – apparently supported by strong evidence and backed by case law. Yet these Canadians are unable to find legal representation at any price.

Some of these victims choose to self-represent, while others abandon any thoughts of seeking justice. Increasingly, self-represented litigants are assisted behind the scenes with legal research and document preparation by lawyers who are sympathetic, but fear backlash and opprobrium from the profession if they take the case themselves.

Corrupt lawyers Sebastien Kwidzinski, Gerald Ranking & Lorne Silver lied to the courts.

The perils of challenging a lawyer in court

I approached over one hundred lawyers to petition the court to overturn my conviction for contempt. This conviction resulted from a private prosecution that was led by two senior lawyers from large Bay Street firms. All refused to take my case, even as they acknowledged its validity and the strength of the evidence against the Bay Street lawyers.

In brief: I had been convicted of contempt of court in a civil matter while out of the country, and sentenced to three months in prison. My conviction in absentia was based upon the written and oral testimony of two Toronto lawyers who swore that, during a conference call with them, I had confirmed that I had received a copy of a certain court order.

Their sworn evidence also assured the court that they had served the order upon me in Ontario via courier. (The courier company however, stated that they had never received the court order from the lawyers, and no shipping documents, signature receipt, or tracking number have ever been produced by the lawyers). An affidavit by their “private investigator” provided an expert opinion that I was deliberately avoiding service – because I use a commercial mailbox as my address.

In fact, I had not received the court order, and stated this many times clearly during the conference call (as a forensically certified recording proved). Instead I asked, many times, for the lawyers to please send me a copy.

Despite this, I was held in contempt based on the lawyers’ assertion that I had received the court order and confirmed that receipt to them during the call.

Looking for representation

I returned to Canada and hoped to put the recording of the conference call and other evidence before the court. I knew that I would face prison time for contempt if I were unsuccessful.

So I searched for a lawyer to represent me.

Many of the young lawyers I approached were sympathetic and forthright, even admitting that they were ashamed to have to turn me down. They explained that they dared not take my case because they feared the professional and social sanctions that would certainly result. Some cited conflicts of interest involving past colleagues and law firms, while others explained that they regularly receive work from the large Bay Street firms, and could not afford to jeopardize that source of business.

A surprising number of lawyers told me that it was their firm’s policy not to litigate against lawyers, or to bring motions or evidence that would harm the careers of other lawyers.

“Yes, Mr. Best, the lawyers lied to the judge to convict you, but our firm simply does not handle this type of case.”

When I explained all of the above to Ontario’s Law Society of Upper Canada and asked for assistance in finding a lawyer willing to represent me, I received a form letter referring me to the list of lawyers on the Law Society’s website {the Lawyers Referral Service).

Trying to defend myself

Since no lawyer would represent me at any price, I was forced to represent myself.

The judge {the same judge who presided over the original hearing) would not listen to the conference call recording or consider any other fresh evidence that proved that I had never received the court order, and that for the lawyers to claim otherwise was perjury. The judge also refused me permission to cross-examine the lawyers and the “private investigator” all of whom provided testimony the court relied upon to convict and send me to prison.

The judge sent me to prison.

It was while I was in prison that I finally found and retained a lawyer willing to appeal my conviction.

Mv appeal: finally represented by a lawyer

Principled Lawyer Paul Slansky Represented Donald Best

I shall never forget this moment.

When my lawyer introduced himself at the appeal hearing, opposing counsel refused to shake his hand, saying that he would not shake the hand of a lawyer who filed a motion stating that a colleague had deceived the court. And so the social and professional sanctions began: against the one lawyer I found with the courage and integrity to act on his sense of duty.

I was eventually forced to abandon my appeal because of punitive costs (that I could not pay) awarded against me earlier, and returned to prison to serve the rest of my sentence {which, as a former police officer, I served in solitary confinement). No court ever heard my certified voice recordings of the phone call with the lawyers. I was never allowed to cross-examine the lawyers and other witnesses upon whose testimony I was convicted and sent to prison.

My lawyer believes that everyone deserves Access to Justice and fair legal representation – but for over one hundred other Ontario lawyers, Access to Justice apparently ends if a litigant has evidence of misconduct by a fellow member of the Bar.

Donald Best is an Access to Justice & Anti-corruption advocate. A former Toronto Police Sergeant (Detective), he worked on deep-cover investigations against organized crime, corrupt police, and public officials. His website is DonaldBest.ca

University of Windsor Deletes Original Article, Cancels Author

The above article was originally published July 7, 2016 by the National Self-Represented Litigants Project at the University of Windsor Law School under the title The client most lawyers fear – and won’t represent at any price.

(The NSRLP article did not name the corrupt lawyers as this one does)

For the next seven years, the article was the #1 read article at the NSRLP website – a fact that was confirmed by both the NSRLP Director in a video presentation and in NSRLP Annual Reports.

In June of 2023, the National Self-Represented Litigants Project removed the article from its website and cancelled the author, Donald Best – removing all mention of him from the NSRLP website.

This was within a few days of Donald Best publishing a personal-website article featuring Lois Cardinal, a transsexual woman who self-identifies as:

“A sterilized Indian on a mission to save vulnerable children and young people from the predatory trans-industry that destroyed me.”

See Canada’s Largest Pharmacy Chain Quietly Deletes ‘Trans’ From Pride Month

NSRLP Executive Director Jennifer Lietch and many other members of the NSRLP refused to respond to written communications and phone messages from Donald Best – requesting the NSRLP to republish deleted article and about 50 public comments.

As of March 28, 2024, the University of Windsor Law School National Self-Represented Litigants Project is still banning and cancelling Donald Best.

Other Articles About The Corrupt Lawyers and Donald Best

December 24, 2018 – Cassels Brock website celebrates corrupt lawyer Lorne Silver who lied to jail a self-represented litigant

December 4, 2018 – Donald Best Receives the 2018 OCLA Civil Liberties Award

Ottawa Police Tribunal Biased To The Core Against Detective Helen Grus

Natural Justice Denied: The Fix is In

Hearing Continues January 8, 2024

  • Detective Grus Not Allowed to See Her Own Handwritten Duty Book
  • Tribunal Refuses to Allow Expert Defense Witnesses
  • Tribunal Allows Prosecutor’s Conflict of Interest: Sister-in-Law is Prosecution Witness.
  • Tribunal Allows Dishonest Prosecution Strategy of Preventing Cross-Examinations

There is little doubt that “The Fix Is In” for the trial of Ottawa Police Detective Helen Grus – who is charged with Discreditable Conduct for conducting an alleged ‘unauthorized’ investigation into a potential connection between mothers’ mRNA injections and the deaths of breastfeeding infants in a cluster of nine infant deaths.

For many observers, the final straw occurred when Hearing Officer Chris Renwick refused to allow Grus to examine her own hand-written duty book for January 30, 2022.

The prosecution alleges that Detective Grus’s on-duty investigative phone call to the father of a deceased infant on January 30, 2022 was improper. Grus made notes that day in her Duty Memo Book – but the Tribunal refuses to allow the veteran Detective to see her own official notes she made on the very day that the prosecution alleges she committed an on-duty offense.

Please read the above paragraph again so you can fully comprehend the injustice and illegitimacy of process faced by Detective Grus and her defense lawyers.

Trials Officer Supt (Retired) Chris Renwick

While the Memo Book Decision is a prime example of the Hearing Officer’s bias and unfair conduct, it is only one of many biased and unfair decisions – major and minor – that Superintendent Renwick made during the initial ten days of the Grus disciplinary hearing. The hearing continues January 8, 2023.

Every day of the hearing so far has seen multiple instances where the Tribunal’s bias was so open that the public gallery often gasped or guffawed at the outrageousness of it all. Each day journalists and the public also witnessed institutional and personal biases that further stacked the deck against Detective Grus.

Natural Justice Denied

The principle of Natural Justice is a cornerstone of Canadian society. In short, Natural Justice means that a court has a duty to act fairly.

There are principles of Natural Justice that cannot be violated without bringing a legal process into disrepute. These principles include…

  • An unbiased court and decision maker.
  • Just and Fair procedures and rules, known and applied fairly.
  • The accused’s right to know the case against them.
  • The right to be heard, to be allowed to present an unobstructed defense, and to have access to information and evidence that might support a defense.
  • The right to cross-examine prosecution witnesses, and to not be unfairly obstructed.
  • The right to a decision and rationale for that decision.

To protect an accused’s fundamental right to a fair trial in our adversarial system of justice, both prosecution and defense must have equal footing. The court should not be biased in its decisions or in its application of court procedures.

In the Detective Grus trial, the hostile bias has been so open that the coming verdict is already evident to many observers – even before the defense rises to present its case on January 8, 2024.

Ontario Superior Court Denies Defense Motion – Refuses to Interfere Until Tribunal Finishes

I have obtained from the Ontario Superior Court of Justice certain public documents filed with the court by both Detective Grus’s defense lawyers and by the Ottawa Police Service lawyers.

To the extent that I can without violating bans on publishing names of involved families and other Identity Information, I will be publishing redacted copies of all publicly available court documents on my website at the Grus Case List.

Public observers and journalists await the continuation of the hearing on January 8, 2024 – for what promises to be the most biased and out-of-control legal procedure that most of us have ever seen.

Defense Counsel Bath-Sheba van den Berg

Defense lawyers had asked a Court for a Judicial Review and other relief, but as is the norm the Court refuses to interfere with a Tribunal that is in-progress. In short, the current outrageously-biased hearings will have to finish before Grus’s lawyers are allowed to take steps towards overturning the coming verdict that is now completely evident.

Here is a paragraph from a court document filed by defense on November 27, 2023…

“The disciplinary proceedings against the Applicant concerning one count of discreditable conduct have been riddled with procedural unfairness towards the Applicant from the outset. The Applicant has been subjected to constant and continuing denial of disclosure by both the Prosecutor and the Tribunal as well as partiality of the Tribunal, which has become apparent in a ruling made on November 26, 2023 with respect to the Applicant’s request for expert witnesses to support her defence.

This context is important because it sets the stage for understanding why this Judicial Review is not premature and should be allowed based on the exceptional circumstances of a breach of natural justice, apprehension of bias, and want of jurisdiction. Further, Christopher Renwick ought to remain as a respondent in the Judicial Review for the reason that his submissions will assist the Court in being fully informed.”

From November 27, 2023 defense submission: APPLICANT RESPONSE TO ‘FACTUM OF THE RESPONDENT/MOVING PARTY, CHIEF OF POLICE, OTTAWA POLICE SERVICE’

Future articles will publish extensive details of the Tribunal’s and Ottawa Police Service’s incredibly open bias against Detective Grus. The Tribunal’s open bias will undoubtedly form the foundation of an appeal that must be filed should Hearing Officer Renwick convict Detective Grus.

This week I’ll be bringing daily coverage of the continuation of the hearing where Detective Helen Grus is not allowed to effectively defend herself.

For now, I’ll leave you with this observation from the first ten days of hearings…

Hearing Officer Chris Renwick’s approval of Prosecutor Vanessa Stewart’s outrageous conflict of interest and weaponization of objections to protect her sister-in-law – a prosecution witness – brought the entire legal process and the Ottawa Police Service into disrepute.

Prosecutor Stewart continually interrupted the defense lawyers’ cross-examinations of prosecution witnesses – even objecting to questions before the defense even started to speak the question. This weaponization of objections was and is a purposeful strategy to deny Detective Grus’s right to cross-examine the witnesses against her.

During the first ten days of public hearings Stewart’s outrageous behaviour, theatrics, and visible contempt for defense lawyers – and occasionally even rudeness to the Hearing Officer -was unhindered. The transcripts I made from my recordings are unbelievable to anyone with any court experience.

Public observers and journalists await the continuation of the hearing on January 8, 2024 – for what promises to be the most biased and out-of-control legal procedure that most of us have ever seen.

Former Ottawa Police Chief Peter Sloly’s Testimony Trainwreck – Panel Commentary

Jason Lavigne, Kris Eriksen, and Donald Best comment on the first morning of testimony from former Ottawa Chief of Police Peter Sloly…

“What dysfunction. What a complete mess. And this was the Chief.”

… Jason Lavigne, Candidate Federal Parliament

“It’s a shame… when you have someone like (Sloly) who is supposed to be a leader – the strain that it puts onto the other officers who were trying to do their jobs and were looking for direction… It seems like so much chaos… So much disorganization, so much Keystone Cops…”

… Kris Eriksen, former staff to Speaker, BC Legislature.

“What an unmitigated disaster of a trainwreck. I can’t remember the last time I’ve seen such testimony – such a disaster – from someone with so much experience and at such a high rank…”

“It’s obvious that despite his experience, his training, his C.V., and his wonderful use of police-management lingo… Peter Sloly was unable to meet the challenges of being the Chief of a major policing organization…”

“Compare (former Chief Peter Sloly) to the professionalism and the leadership qualities of the other police witnesses that we’ve seen so far – and he just falls short, let alone being the Chief of Police of our nation’s capital.”

… Donald Best

Why Donald Best was Imprisoned for 63 Days in Solitary Confinement

In this lunch hour panel Jason Lavigne, Kris Eriksen, and Donald Best discuss the first morning of Emergencies Act Inquiry testimony from former Ottawa Police Chief Peter Sloly.

Then Donald Best tells how he was convicted of Contempt of Court and sentenced to three months in prison – because three corrupt Ontario lawyers fabricated evidence, lied to the courts, and bribed a police officer to provide additional false evidence during a secret court hearing that Donald was not notified of.

(Donald’s full story can be found at: Donald Best Receives the 2018 OCLA Civil Liberties Award)

https://youtu.be/kfHFpCvyG24

Barry Bussey Interviews Donald Best About Ottawa Police Detective Helen Grus

Ottawa Police shut down SIDS investigation by Detective Helen Grus

“If other (Ottawa Police officers) did not consider whether the vaccine could have had an impact in these nine Sudden Infant Deaths, then I say that their investigations were incomplete, maybe even shoddy.”

“This Detective Grus case is going to be far more important, and garner far more public interest than the Ottawa Police ever thought possible… Thousands and thousands of people have seen the articles I’ve written. (Many) contacted me and discussed it. And that’s from all over the world. Because this is a police officer whose investigation has been shut down.”

Former Toronto Police Sergeant Detective Donald Best in conversation with lawyer Barry Bussey on August 11, 2022.

Posted below are the video and transcript of my conversation with Ontario lawyer Barry W. Bussey of the First Freedoms Foundation.

For those interested in how three corrupt Ontario lawyers fabricated evidence, lied to the court, and bribed police to convict me of Contempt of Court and imprison me in solitary confinement for 63 days… that’s covered in the first ten minutes.

We then discuss how there is a Canada-wide tolerance by judges, lawyers, and law societies, of corruption in the legal profession.

At 15 minutes, we start to discuss the case of Ottawa Police Detective Helen Grus, who faces internal charges for conducting “unauthorized” investigations into sudden deaths of nine infants – where she sought to know the vaccine status of the mothers.

Barry and I have a wide-ranging discussion about Detective Grus – and some of the recent developments that might impact the prosecution’s case against this officer.

Transcript PDF is here: Barry Bussey – Donald Best Interview 2022Aug11 V2

Video at First Freedoms Foundation.

Sign up for the First Freedoms Foundation newsletter.

PLUS – the transcript also appears after this embedded video…

 

Previous Posts about Detective Helen Grus

https://donaldbest.ca/detective-helen-grus-sent-email-to-ottawa-police-service-questioning-vaccine-adverse-effects-and-deaths/

https://donaldbest.ca/worldwide-interest-in-ottawa-police-detectives-sudden-infant-death-investigations/

 

Transcript

Barry Bussey – Donald Best Interview

August 11, 2022 • Recording length: 1:01:33

Transcript first pass. Check against recording. Not suitable for court.

SPEAKERS

Donald Best, Barry Bussey

 

Donald Best  00:00

During the initial trials of the Pfizer vaccine, 28 out of 29 babies in the womb, didn’t survive the vaccine. And all that was hidden from millions and millions of people who were forced into taking these vaccines. They can say it’s your, it’s your choice. All you have to do is… not feed your family, lose your job, lose your home, and be destitute. So hey, it’s your choice! That has undermined, I think, faith in institutions and in the government.

 

Barry Bussey  00:45

Welcome, everyone to Freedom Feature. I’m your host Barry Bussey. today. Our special guest is Donald Best. Donald Best is a former Sergeant Detective with the Toronto Police. And he was responsible for investigating Canadian police, lawyers and politicians involved in organized crime, and is a leading Canadian anti-corruption whistleblower, and activist. Welcome to our program, Donald.

 

Donald Best  01:11

Thanks, Barry. Great to be here. I just want to say I’ve read some of your pieces in Law Times and Epoch Time. Tough to disagree with any of it. So it’s good to be on your show.

 

Barry Bussey  01:11

Well, thank you so very much. You know, Donald can, can you just share with our audience a little more about your background and what’s motivated you and your work?

Read more

Donald Best Story – TV Documentary in production

Award-winning journalist Aaron Maté let the cat out of the bag during a live interview the other night when he revealed that a TV Documentary is in production about … The Donald Best Story.

In response to so many inquiries from my readers after they watched Aaron’s interview with Ryan Cristian (The Last American Vagabond) – yes, this is an actual TV production for the ‘Untold Stories’ Series. (Watch the excerpt above)

And yes – our American friends will probably be able to see the documentary through some American venues and broadcasters. ‘The Donald Best Story’ is only the working title, and it will likely be called something else by the time it hits the little screen.

The show was filmed across Canada this summer and is largely complete. I am fascinated by the filming and production process and the myriad of details that go into a professionally produced documentary for television.

It all takes time but we are getting ready for editing – which like everything else in the business has to be scheduled months in advance if you want the best. Our editor is among the best in Canada if not further afield.

I was invited to meet some folks at TIFF (Toronto International Film Festival) this year and had some excellent conversations with a few visiting doc producers and exhibitors.

Thanks for your good wishes, and I’ll update you when I can.

Donald Best

Have you ever defended someone who actually was framed?

My answer to the question – originally published at Quora.com…

by Donald Best, former Sergeant, Detective, Toronto Police

I was framed by corrupt lawyers and police – and was forced to self-represent and act as my own lawyer. I can freely tell you everything because what happened to me is a matter of public record – widely published and supported in court records and news media articles available on the internet since 2014.

My website https://donaldbest.ca has all the documents, recordings and other evidence available for public scrutiny – as well as a list of my supporters including lawyers, organizations and a former Commissioner of Police and Canadian Federal Cabinet Minister who filed sworn affidavits in my support.

This is the true story of how several corrupt lawyers from some of Canada’s largest law firms fabricated false evidence, bribed police and lied to the courts to convict me of Contempt of Court in a civil lawsuit costs hearing that I was unaware of and not present for as I was not in Canada.

This is also the true story of how the Canadian legal profession and courts, when confronted with forensically certified telephone recordings and other irrefutable evidence proving the lawyers fabricated evidence and lied to the court to convict me – closed ranks to save the corrupt lawyers, even when that meant knowingly sending an innocent man to prison.

But first a little background…

As a Sergeant (Detective) with the Toronto Police and later in private industry, for over thirty years I hunted organized crime members and their enablers including corrupt police, politicians and members of the legal profession.

Now I’m an independent journalist, documentary filmmaker and an anti-corruption advocate.

I am the sole recipient of the 2018 Ontario Civil Liberties Award for my work in exposing and fighting corruption of the police, the legal profession and the judiciary.

Oh… I also served 63 days incarcerated in a Canadian prison; spending every day in solitary confinement.

Senior Ontario lawyers Gerald Ranking (center), Lorne Silver (right) and junior Sebastien Kwidzinski (left) lied to the courts to convict Donald Best.

The Frame Job

In November of 2009, I was traveling in Asia – but this didn’t stop a group of corrupt Bay Street lawyers from falsely swearing to the court that they had served me in Canada with a certain civil court order and that during a subsequent telephone call with them I admitted to receiving that court order.

Twelve times during that telephone call, I denied receiving the court order and asked that it be sent to me. After the call, the lawyers immediately created a formal ‘Statement for the Record’ document that falsely indicated I had informed them during the call that I had indeed received the court order the day before. This was a deliberate fabrication of evidence, a lie – but they submitted their false statement as evidence to court.

Later, during a hearing that I was not notified of, and was therefore not present for, the lawyers doubled down on their false Statement for the Record by confirming it orally on the court transcript. Further, they submitted a sworn affidavit – falsely stating that they had couriered the order to me at an address in Canada. The judge convicted me of contempt of court upon the lawyers’ false evidence, sentenced me to three months in prison and issued a warrant for my arrest.

The Secret Telephone Recording

The corrupt lawyers didn’t know that I had secretly and legally recorded my telephone conversation with them.

The recording proved they fabricated evidence and lied to the court to convict me.

Evidence from the courier company showed that – contrary to their sworn affidavit – the lawyers had never sent the court order to me in Canada or anywhere else and they couldn’t produce any courier record, tracking number, invoice or receipt for delivery.

They lied to convict me, a self-represented person who did not have a lawyer. They lied because they knew they could, because they had the power, authority and credibility as Officers of the Court and as senior partners of large and respected law firms. They did it because they were corrupt and wanted to win a civil case so badly that they would commit criminal offenses to do so.

Senior Ontario lawyers Gerald Ranking, Lorne Silver and junior Sebastien Kwidzinski placed their false evidence before the court, swore it was true both in writing and orally on the transcript record, convicted me of Contempt of Court and obtained hundreds of thousands of dollars in costs against me based on their false evidence.

Ah… but I had my secret recording of the telephone call that irrefutably proved the lawyers lied to the court in writing and orally on the record. ‘No problem’ I said to myself – I’ll just return to Canada and play the recording for the court, who will overturn my conviction and justly imprison these corrupt lawyers for perjury, obstruct justice and fabricating evidence.

Abandoned by the legal profession and the Law Society of Ontario

When I voluntarily returned to Canada from Asia to appeal my conviction and present my evidence, over one hundred Ontario lawyers refused to represent me even as they acknowledged the veracity and power of my evidence. Many told me that while they personally sympathized with my situation facing injustice and corruption, they feared backlash and opprobrium from the profession if they harmed or even challenged the involved senior lawyers and their large Bay Street law firms.

Even the Law Society of Ontario refused to assist in finding a lawyer to represent me and chose to not investigate the wrongdoing that I reported in writing. The Law Society chose to not seize and preserve evidence from the corrupt lawyers and their law firms. Some Law Society senior benchers actively covered up for their fellow Bay Street cabal members at the highest levels.

So I was forced to represent myself before the court.

Self-Represented in the Ontario Courts

The judges did not allow me to appeal my conviction that was obtained while I was not in court. I was not even allowed to cross-examine the lawyers and other witnesses that the courts relied upon to convict and imprison me.

I was not allowed to cross-examine the corrupt Ontario Provincial Police officer, Jim Van Allen, who worked illegally for the lawyers as an unlicensed private investigator, and whose ‘expert’ evidence was also used to convict and sentence me.

Not Allowed to Cross-Examine Witnesses against me

As a Canadian facing prison, I was not allowed to cross-examine the witnesses who provided the evidence the court used to convict and sentence me.

Let me repeat that: As a Canadian facing prison, I was not allowed to cross- examine the very witnesses who provided the evidence the court used to convict and sentence me.

Right now, many of you are thinking, “That can’t be true. No way. Not in Canada.”

How naïve you are.

Ontario Superior Court Justice J. Bryan Shaughnessy

A Corrupt Judge takes his Revenge

On May 3, 2013 after refusing to even consider my recordings and other new evidence that proved my innocence, and after sending me off to prison and ending court for the day, Justice J. Bryan Shaughnessy went to a backroom.

There in that backroom, off the court record and without a hearing, trial or transcript, Justice Shaughnessy secretly and illegally increased my prison sentence by fifty percent without notifying me. He secretly created a new warrant of committal that he gave only to the prison authorities. He did not file the new secret warrant with the courts or make mention of it anywhere in the records.

Several senior lawyers and a retired Crown Attorney describe the Judge’s misconduct as “despotic”, “disgusting”, “reprehensible”, “malicious” and “worthy of his removal from the bench.”

Later, I was denied the right to appeal my conviction and Justice Shaughnessy’s actions to a higher court because I could not pay hundreds of thousands of dollars in court costs earlier awarded to the other side on the basis of their provably fabricated and false evidence.

Solitary Confinement prison cell very much like the one Donald Best spent 63 days in. Lights on 24 hours a day and the screams of other prisoners never stop.

Solitary Confinement

I spent 63 days in prison – every day in solitary confinement as I am a former Toronto Police Officer. The prison authorities told me that solitary was the only place they could keep me alive – and from what I saw, they spoke the truth. In my solitary cell I had to clean the faeces and blood of previous occupants from the floor and walls. The lights in the cell were on 24 hours a day – but the screams and moans of my fellow prisoners didn’t allow for much sleep anyway.

All this is still celebrated online as a victory by the group of corrupt Bay Street lawyers and their large law firms who wanted to win, and did win, a high-value civil case by any means possible – including fabrication of evidence, perjury, obstructing justice and bribery of police to illegally obtain confidential police records.

How the Courts protect fellow members of The Legal Club

But as disgusting as all that is, there is much worse. The Canadian legal profession, the Law Society of Ontario and the Courts themselves, when confronted with legally made certified voice recordings and other irrefutable evidence proving that the Bay Street lawyers deliberately fabricated false evidence and lied to the court to convict me while I was out of the country…

… when confronted with that irrefutable evidence, the legal profession, the Law Society and the Courts closed ranks to save the corrupt Bay Street lawyers – even when that meant knowingly sending an innocent man – a self-represented person in a civil case – to prison.

In response to my solid evidence of criminal wrongdoing by senior Law Society of Ontario lawyers, the courts refused to consider my evidence, my exhibits and refused to even listen to the voice recordings. In all these years before various levels of courts, no judge has ever listened to the voice recordings – at least officially.

When faced with a choice of ignoring irrefutable evidence of lawyers’ corrupt activities – or of receiving that evidence and then holding accountable senior partners from some of Bay Street’s largest legal firms – the Law Society of Upper Canada, the legal profession and the courts betrayed their duty to Canadians.

Canada’s Legal Profession & Courts cover-up legal system corruption

The worst though, is that my personal story is just one small part of a much larger disaster involving thousands upon thousands of Canadians who have been denied access to justice and justice itself because of systemic failings in our justice system.

Those systemic failings in our justice system include a Canada-wide tolerance by judges and lawyers for corruption in the legal profession.

There is an unwillingness in the Canadian legal profession to even talk about corrupt acts by lawyers and judges. When a lawyer actually presents evidence of corruption in specific terms, naming names… look out! The rest of the pack will turn and attack as my current lawyer and so many other Canadians have discovered.

My false conviction and imprisonment was possible only because there is a level of tolerance by judges and lawyers for corruption in the legal profession and in the courts. There is strong reluctance to damage the careers of fellow lawyers and judges – or to tarnish the profession itself by acknowledging serious deliberate wrongdoing.

Tolerance of corruption in our justice system is systemic and deep-rooted. It is fed by the low integrity of some individuals in positions of influence and authority, who are empowered by the total lack of courage and the unwillingness of our legal profession to hold fellow Club Members accountable in any meaningful manner.

Not a week goes by that I do not hear from five or ten other Canadians (totalling many hundreds in the past few years) who write to tell me their own stories of lawyers and judges committing serious acts of misconduct with impunity; confident that they will never be held accountable.

Many of the writers are desperate because they cannot afford a lawyer and must represent themselves in court – knowing as they do that the courts are set up to overwhelmingly favour and benefit the legal profession, not to provide justice to ordinary Canadians as purported.

Losing Faith in the Justice System

For a variety of well-founded reasons, ordinary Canadians are fast losing their faith in our justice system. Many believe that justice is now simply unattainable through the courts. This is a dangerous situation, the extent and seriousness of which has yet to be acknowledged by those entrusted with operating our justice system.

Unless individual police officers, lawyers and judges start to act with courage, integrity and a sense of duty towards ordinary Canadians and the Rule of Law – this situation will continue to deteriorate.

Much of the unrest, protests and violent flareups that we see in our cities has origin in the fact that people have lost faith in the professions and institutions charged with upholding the rule of law.

When the police, lawyers and courts are not to be trusted – anything goes.

Donald Best

Barrie, Ontario Canada

Supporting court evidence, documents, news media articles and much more can be found online at DonaldBest.CA | Access to Justice. Anti-corruption.

Twitter: @DonaldBestCA

Read Donald Best’s original answer on Quora.

Court hears of Donald Best story as mobster jailed for threats to murder former Toronto Police Chief Julian Fantino.

Former federal Cabinet Minister Julian Fantino “Abuses in the Donald Best case could undermine public confidence in the administration of justice.”
  • Mobster Delio Manuel Pereira jailed for 18 months for credible threats to murder former federal Cabinet Minister and Police Chief Julian Fantino.
  • Pereira, 66 years old, is a career thug who previously spent years in prison for his role in the 2001 murder of mafia enforcer and boxing champion Eddie Melo.
  • Ontario Judge Elaine Deluzio heard evidence that Pereira tacked news articles about  Julian Fantino on his wall, including one from a December 2017 edition of the Star.
  • That article, headlined “Fantino takes aim at judge, police and lawyers,” described Fantino’s allegations that a Canadian judge, lawyers and several polices forces acted improperly in the conviction of Donald Best on contempt of court charges.

Story of corruption, coverup by Canadian lawyers, police & judges in the news again.

by Donald Best

The ongoing Donald Best case concerning how corrupt lawyers, police and a corrupt judge acted improperly to convict and jail Best received a brief mention in a recent Toronto Star news article by crime journalist and author Peter Edwards.

The Toronto Star article ‘Man sentenced to 18 months for threats to kill former Toronto police chief Julian Fantino’ relates how mobster Delio Manuel Pereira threatened to murder former Toronto Police Chief Julian Fantino.

The court heard how Pereira had a December 2017 Star news story tacked to his wall – ‘Ex-federal cabinet minister Julian Fantino takes aim at judge, cops, lawyers’. That article told of Julian Fantino’s legal efforts to intervene in the case of Donald Best.

Judge Elaine Deluzio

After hearing all the evidence, including about the Toronto Star article pinned to Delio Manuel Pereira’s wall, Ontario Judge Elaine Deluzio sentenced the mobster to 18 months in prison.

The Toronto Star report of Pereira’s trial and sentencing makes no mention of what Judge Deluzio said or thought about Fantino’s accusations of corruption by lawyers, police and judges in the Donald Best case. Here is an excerpt from that article…

Former Federal Cabinet Minister Julian Fantino alleges wrongdoing by Justice J. Bryan Shaughnessy, lawyers & police

Former Conservative cabinet minister and provincial police commissioner Julian Fantino has accused a Canadian judge, lawyers and several police forces of acting improperly and even illegally in the conviction and jailing of a man for contempt of court.

In his submission, Fantino maintains that Justice J. Bryan Shaughnessy convicted Donald Best “upon the presentation by lawyers of provably false evidence.” He also argues that “disturbing” evidence suggests police resources and personnel were “improperly retained, used and co-opted” to help one side in the private civil dispute.

“The court also convicted Mr. Best based upon affidavit evidence that was the product of illegal actions by a serving officer of the Ontario Provincial Police at the time that I was OPP commissioner,” Fantino states. “Had I known about it at the time, I would have immediately ordered an investigation to gather all evidence … with a view to possible provincial and/or criminal charges.”

Fantino, who could not be immediately reached for comment, explains in his 33-page affidavit filed along with 100 exhibits why he wanted to get involved. The “abuses,” he said, could undermine public confidence in the administration of justice.

“I notice that, in this matter, no one represents the people of Canada,” Fantino states. “No one speaks for me and other Canadians who believe in and rely upon fairness, courtesy and honourable treatment within the justice system.” 

… Above from the Toronto Star article Ex-federal cabinet minister Julian Fantino takes aim at judge, cops, lawyers’.

Donald Best story gaining traction in the mainstream & online news media.

With increasing frequency in the mainstream media, the story is being told to the public of how corrupt lawyers Gerald Ranking, Lorne Silver, Sebastien Kwidzinski, corrupt OPP officer Jim Van Allen and corrupt Federal Court Justice J. Bryan Shaughnessy convicted and knowingly sent an innocent Donald Best to prison for Contempt of Court – to protect the corrupt Bay Street lawyers (Ranking, Silver, Kwidzinski) who fabricated provably false evidence and lied to the court.

Donald Best’s story has now been covered by every major Canadian newspaper. His interview on The Jimmy Dore Show attracted international attention by both the public and the news media.

Watch for more public exposure in the coming weeks as Donald Best appears in more video interviews and mainstream press articles.

Further Reading

Summary of Julian Fantino’s September 28, 2017 affidavit.

January 1, 2018 News Media censorship of Julian Fantino’s Canadian Judicial Council intervention crumbles.

Notice to readers, including Persons and Entities mentoned in this article

As always, if anyone disagrees with anything published at DonaldBest.CA or wishes to provide a public response or comment, please contact me at [email protected] and I will publish your writing with equal prominence. Comments left on articles are moderated at least once a day. Or, of course, you can sue me and serve my lawyer Paul Slansky. You can find Mr. Slansky’s information here.

Readers are also encouraged to thoroughly study all the evidence available here at DonaldBest.CA, to perform independent research on the Internet and elsewhere, to consider all sides and to make up their own minds as to the events reported on DonaldBest.CA.

Photos have been included to put context to the article. Their use is the same as with other Canadian news outlets.

Donald Best
Barrie, Ontario, Canada

Donald Best is a former Toronto Police Sergeant (Detective) who is now an independent journalist, documentary filmmaker and an anti-corruption advocate. He is the recipient of the 2018 Ontario Civil Liberties Award, and has been called “One of Canada’s most methodical and well documented whistleblowers.”

Did Superior Court Judge interfere with St. Michael’s College School sex assault investigation to protect his football coach son?

St. Michael’s College School teacher & football coach Kevin Shaughnessy with his father Ontario Superior Court Justice J. Bryan Shaughnessy in promotional video.
  • Legal experts say an Ontario Superior Court Justice should not have involved himself in the ongoing sex-assault investigation at St. Michael’s College School.
  • Judge’s son is a teacher & football coach of students charged with gang sexual assault & making / distributing child porn video of the attack.
  • Two sources say that in November 2018, Justice J. Bryan Shaughnessy attended St. Michael’s College School meetings during the sexual assault investigation where he called for the firing of principal Greg Reeves and school president Father Jefferson Thompson. The two school officials subsequently resigned on Thursday, November 22, 2018.
  • A source states that one of the meetings was ‘open’, but the other was a small private meeting that included various school board members, respected senior alumni and advisors who discussed with Justice Shaughnessy options in handling the scandal.
  • Justice Shaughnessy’s son Kevin Shaughnessy is a ten-year teacher at the school and was one of the teachers / coaches of the now-dismantled football team whose students were videoed in the school locker room (allegedly) sexually assaulting a boy with a broom handle.
  • Justice Shaughnessy is a St. Michael’s College School alumnus (1968) who has remained heavily involved in school affairs including law classes and mock trials. He founded and donated two longstanding student awards. His three sons also graduated from the school where one, Kevin, is employed as a teacher.
  • In May 2018 Justice Shaughnessy appeared in a promotional video for the school, associated with his receiving the ‘Order of St. Michael’. The video makes revelations about his involvement with other organizations, some of which are also involved with the courts and law enforcement in Durham Region where the judge sits on the bench – raising further questions about potential and/or perceived conflicts of interest.
  • Did Justice Shaughnessy have any contact whatsoever with law enforcement personnel concerning the St. Michael’s College School matter?
  • In an unrelated civil case, there are four known improper police involvements associated with Justice Shaughnessy. This raises strong suspicions of Shaughnessy’s improper use of, and relationship with, law enforcement. In 2017 Durham Regional Police launched major investigation into Donald Best immediately after Best’s lawyer filed legal documents about Justice Shaughnessy’s misconduct in a civil case. In 2009, a Durham Regional Police officer assigned to Justice Shaughnessy’s courthouse improperly conducted a secret investigation into Donald Best “in aid of the court”.
  • Justice Shaughnessy is already embroiled in separate litigation concerning his corrupt behaviour in a matter outside the St. Michael’s investigation. In the Donald Best civil case, Justice Shaughnessy – in a backroom after court closed – secretly and illegally doubled Best’s prison time for Contempt of Court without informing Best or placing any record of the judge’s secret order into the court record. Only the prison was notified of the increased sentence.
  • In the same Donald Best civil matter Justice Shaughnessy also backdated a court order by ten days to assist the opposing lawyers – and then convicted and imprisoned Donald Best for failing to deliver business records to opposing lawyers two days before Shaughnessy made and signed the backdated order that required Best to present the business records. (Yes, you read that correctly.)
  • Several senior lawyers and a retired Crown Attorney call Justice Shaughnessy’s behaviour in the Donald Best civil case “despotic”, “disgusting”, “reprehensible”, “malicious” and “worthy of his removal from the bench.” His corrupt actions earned Bryan Shaughnessy the monikers ‘Backroom Bryan’ and ‘Canada’s Backroom Judge’ with both the public and (quietly) in the legal community.
Ontario Superior Court Justice J. Bryan Shaughnessy in May 2018 promotional video for St. Michael’s College School.

How Involved is Teacher & Football Coach Kevin Shaughnessy?

by Donald Best, former Sergeant, Detective, Toronto Police

The scandal at St. Michael’s College School exploded in November 2018 and is only partially about the horrific behaviour of some members of the school’s football team who (allegedly) sexually assaulted a fellow student with a broomstick, videoed the attack and then distributed the child pornography.

Seven students now stand criminally charged involving multiple incidents on school property over a number of months.

In a breach of professional ethics and perhaps even the criminal code, for at least two days senior school administrators (and probably some teachers, board members and parents) failed to report the horrific sex attack and existence of the child-sex video to the police or Children’s Aid. Some possessed copies of the child-sex video during this time and distributed it to others.

It was not until the police were notified by the news media and came to the school that principal Greg Reeves surrendered the video to the police and informed them of the sexual attack – some two days after he knew and first possessed the child-sex video.

Why did so many senior members of the St. Michael’s College School community fail to report the existence of the child-sex video and horrific sex-attack to the police? 

Were the school staff and board members honestly just overwhelmed and unprepared to deal with such events? Were they naïve about their duty to protect a child at risk?

Or… was it an attempted cover-up? Were the staff and board trying to find some way out to protect the international reputation of the school? Did the worldwide revelations about child sexual abuse and coverups by the Catholic Church and clergy influence the St. Michael’s College School individual and corporate decisions?

Roster showing Kevin Shaughnessy as a football coach with St. Michael’s College School. From the OFSAA Team Rosters – St. Michael’s vs Cardinal Newman

What did Justice Shaughnessy know and when did he know it?

It would be only natural for Justice Bryan Shaughnessy and his son Kevin Shaughnessy to discuss the sexual assaults the moment either of them learned of the events. 

As a ten-year St. Michael’s teacher and football coach, Kevin Shaughnessy might have been worried about the school image and about his own career. He would naturally inform and ask advice of his father who is both a senior justice in the Ontario Superior Court and a respected member of the St. Michael’s College School community.

“(There should be) a full accounting of coaches, clergy and staff members assigned to sports teams. Where were they when that kid was screaming for help?”

Toronto Sun journalist Joe Warmington November 23, 2018

Both Justice Shaughnessy and his son Kevin would have known that public questions were bound to be asked about the school’s athletic and football team culture, why the assault was not prevented and when each staff member became aware of the assaults and videos. The public and parents would also want to know if anyone had knowledge of this type of behaviour happening in the past and what the response of the school was at the time. (Note: At least one former student has gone public claiming that hazing and assaults at the school have been part of the school culture for decades.)

Justice Shaughnessy should have recused himself from any involvement whatsoever.

In this situation, it would be a natural instinct for senior school officials, staff, board members and parents to contact Justice Shaughnessy for advice – perhaps not even considering that contacting a senior judge during a criminal investigation was improper. 

Bryan Shaughnessy, however, is no ordinary person, no ordinary alumnus or parent – ‘Bryan’ is Ontario Superior Court Justice J. Bryan Shaughnessy whose public and private statements on anything carry real influence and the heavy credibility of a senior judge. 

Further, Justice Shaughnessy’s son Kevin is a teacher and football coach and therefore directly involved at the very least as a witness – and potentially as the subject of investigations into the school’s staff and football culture.

“It was up to Justice Shaughnessy to recuse himself from the picture, but instead he deliberately chose to become involved.

Upon learning of the sexual assault at the school, as a sitting Ontario Superior Court Justice who is the father of an involved teacher and football coach, Bryan Shaughnessy should have immediately recused himself from any discussion, communication or any role at all in the school.

Further, he had a duty imposed by law to report any incidents himself unless he was absolutely sure they had already been properly reported.” (Senior Law Society of Ontario lawyer to Donald Best.)

There are recognized limitations on what a judge may or may not do both officially and in private life. According to several senior lawyers and a law professor I consulted with during the writing of this article, Justice Shaughnessy crossed the line when he made recommendations to the school in the middle of a criminal investigation – whether he made those recommendations in public at the general meeting or in private with school officials.

As a senior Ontario Superior Court Justice, Bryan Shaughnessy should not have involved himself in any way in a criminal matter likely to go before the courts.

According to the senior lawyers, Justice Shaughnessy’s actions during the criminal investigation crossed the line even before considering the obvious conflict of interest created by his son’s employment as a teacher and involved football coach at the school. 

Parents, staff and members of the public would naturally wonder if Justice Shaughnessy’s recommendation that St. Michael’s College School fire principal Greg Reeves and president Father Jefferson Thompson was intended to take the heat away from Shaughnessy’s son and his son’s fellow teachers and football coaches.

Too many unanswered questions.

Did Justice Shaughnessy’s teacher-son have a copy of the video or know of it and not report it to the police? Did anything that Kevin Shaughnessy do or failed to do influence his father to call for the firing of the school principal and director?

Exactly when and how did Justice Shaughnessy learn of the sexual assaults and of the existence of the video? Did he immediately call the police to report the crime himself? Did Justice Shaughnessy see or possess a copy of the child-sex video?

When sitting judges insert themselves or allow themselves to be inserted into criminal investigations – at the very least this causes public doubt about the judiciary and the rule of law. At worst, such actions bring the administration of justice into disrepute.

Add to that the fact that Justice Shaughnessy’s own son is at the very best a potential witness and at the worst an involved teacher and football coach.

Justice Shaughnessy made a deliberate choice to insert himself into an ongoing criminal investigation despite his obvious conflicts of interest.

He knew or should have known that his involvement had the potential to cause doubt about the integrity of both the internal and police investigation and to bring both his personal judgment and the administration of justice into disrepute.

Yet, Justice J. Bryan Shaughnessy chose to become involved in the St. Michael’s College School scandal.

Coming in Part II…

  • Update on the St. Michael’s College School criminal charges, including known timeline.
  • Analysis of the Justice J. Bryan Shaughnessy promotional video for St. Michael’s College School.
  • Discussion of what public activities are permissible for sitting judges. Is fundraising for organizations permitted? What if the organizations have an acknowledged role with the police or the courts in the judge’s jurisdiction?
  • Details of all police involvement associated with Justice J. Bryan Shaughnessy in the Donald Best civil case.

Further Reading

CBC Toronto, Nov 22/18 St. Michael’s College School principal and president resign amid student sex assault scandal

Toronto Star, Dec 19/18 What we know and don’t know about the scandal at St. Michael’s College School — and what we can’t report

Dec 2/15 Ontario Superior Court Justice J. Bryan Shaughnessy secretly increased prisoner’s jail sentence – in a backroom, off the court record, without informing the prisoner.

Jan 1/18 News media censorship of Julian Fantino’s Canadian Judicial Council Intervention Crumbles as Toronto Star Publishes bombshell article.

Notice to readers, including Persons and Entities mentoned in this article

As always, if anyone disagrees with anything published at DonaldBest.CA or wishes to provide a public response or comment, please contact me at [email protected] and I will publish your writing with equal prominence. Comments left on articles are moderated at least once a day. Or, of course, you can sue me and serve my lawyer Paul Slansky. You can find Mr. Slansky’s information here.

Readers are also encouraged to thoroughly study all the evidence available here at DonaldBest.CA, to perform independent research on the Internet and elsewhere, to consider all sides and to make up their own minds as to the events reported on DonaldBest.CA.

Photos have been included to put context to the article. Their use is the same as with other Canadian news outlets. With the exception of Kevin Shaughnessy who is a legitimate subject of this news article, all other members of Justice Shaughnessy’s family have been edited out of the photos.

Donald Best
Barrie, Ontario, Canada

Donald Best is a former Toronto Police Sergeant (Detective) who is now an independent journalist, documentary filmmaker and an anti-corruption advocate. He is the recipient of the 2018 Ontario Civil Liberties Award, and has been called “One of Canada’s most methodical and well documented whistleblowers.”

Donald Best receives 2018 Ontario Civil Liberties Award

Scandal, Cover-up by Federal Court of Canada Exposed.

by Donald Best, former Sergeant, Toronto Police

I’m surprised and deeply honoured to receive the 2018 Ontario Civil Liberties Award – announced this morning.

Today (and in my recorded acceptance speech – transcript here) I am calling upon the Law Society of Ontario and the law societies in every province to cease investigating complaints against their own members. This most serious conflict of interest undermines the profession’s credibility and the public’s trust in our legal system.

Self-investigation by the lawyers’ unions is a real conflict of interest that is unacceptable by any modern standard and cannot be resolved – except by the establishment of independent organizations in each province to receive complaints against lawyers, to perform professional unbiased investigations and to lay charges where appropriate. The retention of investigative functions by the law societies is indefensible.

Today, I also reveal details of an ongoing major scandal and active cover-up by the Courts Administration Service and the Federal Court of Canada that impacts every Canadian who has appeared before that court for any reason in the last few years.

This documented misconduct by Federal Court of Canada personnel throws into question every recent decision of the Federal Court of Canada. Dozens of lawyers and litigants have already contacted me about this revelation and I am aware of several lawsuits / legal motions that are imminent. At least one will be filed within days.

Regarding my personal legal battles, both the Ontario Civil Liberties Association (in their news media release) and University of Windsor law professor Julie Macfarlane in her introduction speech for my award – openly declare that I was unjustly convicted of contempt of court and imprisoned based upon false evidence fabricated by senior lawyers from some of Canada’s largest law firms. (Former OPP Commissioner of Police Julian Fantino said the same thing last year in a sworn affidavit and said that if he knew then what he knows now, he would have launched a criminal investigation against named Ontario Provincial Police officers and lawyers.)

To my friends and family who believed in me during the darkest times and gave me strength – thank you. This is your Ontario Civil Liberties Award as much as it is mine. To the legal profession and the courts… We want our justice system back.

Ontario Civil Liberties Association announcement…

http://ocla.ca/ocla-civil-liberties-award/

My acceptance speech…

https://youtu.be/AWUcVtnec9A

Professor Julie Macfarlane’s introduction…

https://youtu.be/trPU2uwUzOM

Donald Best Receives the 2018 OCLA Civil Liberties Award

(Ottawa, December 4, 2018) – The Ontario Civil Liberties Association (OCLA) presents its 2018 Civil Liberties Award to whistleblower and anti-corruption activist Donald Best.

Donald Best is a former Sergeant (Detective) with the Toronto Police responsible for investigating Canadian police, lawyers, and politicians involved in organized crime, and a leading Canadian anti-corruption whistleblower and activist.

In his ongoing legal cases and public advocacy, Mr. Best has exposed corruption in the Canadian legal profession including secret orders and investigations by judges, the submission of false evidence in court by lawyers, and the failure of disciplinary bodies such as the Law Society of Ontario and the Canadian Judicial Council to investigate complaints against judges and lawyers.

Mr. Best’s tireless efforts to create integrity and accountability in the Canadian legal system make him an exemplary leader in the fight for equality before and under the law of all Canadians, including self-represented litigants.

Embedded at the OCLA’s award website (link HERE) is a video of Donald Best’s acceptance speech for the 2018 OCLA Civil Liberties Award, following a video introduction of Mr. Best by law professor Julie Macfarlane, Director of the National Self-Represented Litigants Project, University of Windsor.

Background Articles available online

https://donaldbest.ca/faqs-about-best-v-ranking/

https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/ex-federal-cabinet-minister-julian-fantino-takes-aim-at-judge-cops-lawyers

https://business.financialpost.com/legal-post/internet-research-by-jurors-and-judges-during-cases-challenged-julius-melnitzer

https://donaldbest.ca/broadcaster-jimmy-dore-interviews-donald-best-the-lawyers-lied-to-the-court-and-as-a-result-you-were-convicted/

Broadcaster Jimmy Dore interviews Donald Best: “The lawyers lied to the court and as a result you were convicted…”

Jimmy Dore Show names corrupt Toronto lawyers Gerald Ranking, Lorne Silver, Sebastien Kwidzinski – plus corrupt judge and cop.

by Donald Best, former Sergeant, Detective, Toronto Police

For years the Canadian news media put a ‘kill’ on my story and shadow-banned my comments on their websites. Many supportive mainstream journalists informed me that their editors refused to publish any part of my story due to ‘libel chill’ – their fear of being sued by the corrupt lawyers who proveably lied to the court to convict and imprison me for contempt in a civil matter.

On those rare occasions when Canadian outlets did write about my case, the stories were invariably agenda-driven, inaccurate and obviously sourced from the opposition. To this day no Canadian news media has published a story comparing the provably false court testimony of the Toronto lawyers with the truth as shown in the forensically-certified secret voice recordings of our conversation.

Superior Court Justice J. Bryan Shaughnessy

Things started to change late last year when the Toronto Sun, Toronto Star, National Post and other outlets published Colin Perkel’s article Ex-cabinet minister Julian Fantino suggests judge, lawyers and cops part of conspiracy to convict man. Then on June 5, 2018 the Financial Post carried Julius Melnitzer’s story Internet research by jurors and judges during cases challenged: Julius Melnitzer.

Now the US news media is picking up the story with The Jimmy Dore Show out of Los Angeles being the first to publish a video of my guest appearance on the show. (YouTube video above or here: Cop Whistleblower Targeted by Canadian Court)

“There were secret recordings you made of your telephone conversations with the lawyers involved. I read the official court records showing what those lawyers told the court. They lied to the court, and as a result you were convicted for Contempt of Court while you weren’t even in the country.” (Jimmy Dore to Donald Best at about 10:30 into the interview.)

Jimmy Dore is the first journalist with the courage to publicly state that he compared my secret recordings with the corrupt lawyers’ testimony and finds that the lawyers lied to the court to convict me.

Corrupt Ontario lawyers Sebastien Kwidzinski, Gerald Ranking & Lorne Silver lied to the courts.

Jimmy Dore Show also names Justice J. Bryan Shaughnessy, Police Officer James ‘Jim’ Van Allen

At about 18:41 into the interview, I name and the Jimmy Dore Show names the three Ontario lawyers, Ontario Superior Court Justice J. Bryan Shaughnessy and retired Ontario Provincial Police officer Jim Van Allen – all of whom Jimmy Dore refers to as “corrupt”.

“Donald Best, we wish you all the best in getting to the bottom of this, getting justice in your case and exposing these corrupt lawyers and judges…” (Jimmy Dore to Donald Best at about 25:00 into the interview.)

Jimmy, his staff and presumably his legal team studied my case in detail prior to making his production decisions and final edits.

Viewers know exactly what it means when a citizen like me and a journalist like Jimmy Dore openly name lawyers and a judge as “corrupt” and they do not sue. The lawyers and the judge don’t dare because they would have to expose themselves to cross-examination for the first time – and they know they are guilty of corrupt acts.

Sometimes it takes a while to break through the news media gatekeepers. It looks like that time is approaching.

Notice to readers, including Persons and Entities mentoned in articles

As always, if anyone disagrees with anything published at DonaldBest.CA or wishes to provide a public response or comment, please contact me at [email protected] and I will publish your writing with equal prominence. Comments on articles are moderated about once a day. Or, of course, you can sue me and serve my lawyer Paul Slansky. You can find Mr. Slansky’s information here.

Photos have been included to put context to the article. Their use is the same as with other Canadian news outlets.

Readers are also encouraged to thoroughly study all the evidence available here at DonaldBest.CA, to perform independent research on the Internet and elsewhere, to consider all sides and to make up their own minds as to the events reported on DonaldBest.CA.

Donald Best
September 29, 2018
Barrie, Ontario
Canada

 

1 2 3 6