Ontario’s Bay Street Cabal and law society circle the wagons to protect judge; Ignoring conflicts of interest and the public trust – #2 in a Series
Law Society of Upper Canada sides with Judge over misconduct some lawyers call “disgusting”, “reprehensible”, “worthy of removal from the bench.”
Surrounded by Law Society Benchers, newly elected Treasurer, Paul B. Schabas (centre), chairs his first meeting.
Our first article in this series exposed how Ontario Superior Court Justice J. Bryan Shaughnessy hired a conflicted lawyer to represent him in an ongoing Judicial Review of a Canadian Judicial Council decision about Justice Shaughnessy.*
Law Society of Upper Canada senior bencher Peter C. Wardle is Justice Shaughnessy’s new attorney. However, in a closely related matter Wardle also represented two lawyers who are almost certain to be called as primary witnesses in a CJC investigation or public inquiry into allegations of serious misconduct against Justice Shaughnessy.**
Of the over 50,000 licensed lawyers in Ontario, Justice Shaughnessy just happens to be represented by Mr. Wardle – the only lawyer in Canada who:
- represented two important witnesses to the judge’s misconduct in a closely associated legal matter, and,
- represented eleven high profile law firms and lawyers (including the current Treasurer of the law society) in the same closely related matter, and,
- is a senior bencher of the Law Society of Upper Canada (‘LSUC’) – the regulator of all lawyers and paralegals in the province that has been extensively involved in this very series of legal actions, and,
- works closely with LawPRO, the law society’s company insuring lawyers in Ontario that is also involved in legal matters closely associated with the current Judicial Review.
Senior bencher Peter Wardle represented lawyers Gerald Ranking and Lorne Silver during a civil law suit launched in July, 2014 by former Toronto Police Sergeant (Detective) Donald Best. Wardle represented a total of 11 lawyers and law firms in that lawsuit, including some of Canada’s largest Bay Street law firms. (Best was forced to discontinue that lawsuit in 2015 when he could not pay hundreds of thousands of dollars in court costs previously awarded against him on the basis of false testimony by Ranking and Silver.***)
The Law Society of Upper Canada and its insurance company LawPRO have been following this series of actions in the courts since at least 2009, and became even more involved in 2014 when Donald Best sued lawyers Gerald Ranking, Lorne Silver, bencher Paul Schabas and other people and entities who acted in the civil lawsuit that saw Best maliciously convicted of contempt of court and sentenced to prison upon provably fabricated and false evidence.
Paul Schabas
Today, Paul Schabas is law society’s highest elected official, the Treasurer. Schabas and his Blakes law firm appeared extensively before Justice Shaughnessy on the Best legal cases and acted in concert with lawyers Ranking and Silver during many motions and submissions against Best and his company.
As a senior bencher, Peter C. Wardle is an elite on the inside of the law society. He regularly acts for the law society’s LawPRO lawyer insurance arm and probably did so during Donald Best’s civil lawsuit against Ranking, Silver and Schabas. He serves on internal committees and often works directly with Treasurer Paul Schabas.
Wardle undoubtedly gained privileged, insider information about the case and about Justice Shaughnessy’s actions during the case, from his clients Ranking, Silver and Schabas. Wardle also likely gained similar insider information about the case that he obtained formally or informally as a direct result of his position as senior bencher and/or his relationship working with LawPRO.
Many persons find this arrangement and the relationship between the Law Society of Upper Canada, LSUC senior management, LawPRO insurance, Bay Street law firms and Justice Shaughnessy, to be all too cozy.
Who is looking after the public trust and the broader interests of lawyers in Ontario in this Judicial Review of the Canadian Judicial Council? With these potential and real conflicts of interest, both ordinary citizens and lawyers I’ve spoken with have little confidence that the Law Society of Upper Canada is doing anything other than circling the wagons to protect a judge facing strong – even irrefutable – evidence of serious misconduct.
The question is asked by many:
Are the law society’s actions in this judicial review being driven by the broad public and professional interests… or, are the law society’s actions more closely aligned with the personal agendas of the involved LSUC senior leadership and Bay Street law firms?
Big Law Firm lawyers Gerald Ranking (left), Lorne Silver & Justice J. Bryan Shaughnessy
Lawyers Gerald Ranking and Lorne Silver are witnesses to Justice Shaughnessy’s serious misconduct
Gerald Ranking and Lorne Silver are connected to Justice Shaughnessy’s misconduct through a series of civil court actions involving Donald Best, and due to their presence with Justice Shaughnessy on May 3, 2013 during at least some parts of the judicial misconduct.
The lawyers were also involved in a previous incident during the same civil case where Justice Shaughnessy backdated a court order for them on November 12, 2009 – backdated ten days to November 2, 2009.****
Here is a basic summary of what lawyers Ranking and Silver witnessed and may have witnessed during Justice Shaughnessy’s misconduct on May 3, 2013:
- On May 3, 2013, both Ranking and Silver were present in court and witnessed Justice Shaughnessy declare (on the transcript) that he would not set aside his January 15, 2010 conviction of self-represented litigant Donald Best for contempt of court. Justice Shaughnessy ordered that the stay on his original January 15, 2010 warrant for the arrest and imprisonment of Donald Best would now be lifted, and that Best would be taken to prison to serve his 3 month sentence according to Justice Shaughnessy’s January 15, 2010 warrant of committal and court order.
- Ranking and Silver also witnessed Justice Shaughnessy order that Best was not to have input into any court order to be made on that day May 3rd 2013 and that Ranking and Silver would prepare an order for Justice Shaughnessy.
- Ranking and Silver also witnessed the judge order that Donald Best was never again to be brought before him, and that some other judge must deal with Best in the future.
- Ranking and Silver witnessed that court ended, the judge left and then the court staff packed up and left. Court Police allowed Donald Best 10 minutes to pack up, after which he was taken in handcuffs to the basement cells and then to prison.
- After court had finished on May 3, 2013 and Donald Best had been taken away to serve his three-month sentence, Justice Shaughnessy went to a backroom and secretly signed a new and secret warrant of committal that increased the Best’s prison time by a month. Justice Shaughnessy did this off the court record, out of court, without telling the self-represented prisoner and without placing the new warrant of committal or any mention of it or the increased sentence into the court record. This was all contrary to the sentence and order the judge himself delivered earlier in court on the record.
- The judge gave the only copy of the new warrant to prison authorities after ordering that Best was not to have knowledge of the creation of the court order.
- As secretly planned and arranged by Justice Shaughnessy, Best only discovered the increased sentence when informed by authorities at the prison.
The above shows that lawyers Ranking and Silver are, at the very least, important witnesses to parts of Justice Shaughnessy’s misconduct on May 3, 2013 – raising questions about conflicts of interest now that Peter C. Wardle is representing Justice Shaughnessy.
Complicating the conflicts of interest even further, lawyers Gerald Ranking and Lorne Silver may not be just witnesses. Court transcripts indicate it is also possible that these lawyers assisted Justice Shaughnessy in carrying out his judicial misconduct.
Details on the Gerald Ranking and Lorne Silver story are coming next week.
New Series: Abandoning Public Trust: Conflicts of Interest by Ontario’s legal profession
The series…
Part 1: Justice Bryan Shaughnessy chooses conflicted lawyer as personal counsel in Judicial Review.
Part 2: Ontario’s Bay Street Cabal and law society circle the wagons to protect judge; Ignoring conflicts of interest and the public trust.
Part 4: Should conflicted lawyer Peter C. Wardle resign from representing Justice J. Bryan Shaughnessy?
Part 5: Abandoning the Public Interest. When Canada’s legal profession circles the wagons to save club members, who looks after the interests of Canadians?
Part 6: Previous incident – How Justice Shaughnessy backdated a court order for lawyers Gerald Ranking and Lorne Silver.
… Additional articles in this series will be added later.
Notes
* Justice Bryan Shaughnessy chooses conflicted lawyer as personal counsel in Judicial Review.
** Federal Court refuses to release judge from Judicial Review of Misconduct Complaint
*** Best secretly and legally recorded phone call with lying lawyers Gerald Ranking and Lorne Silver
**** Details and court exhibits coming in Part 6 – Previous incident – How Justice Shaughnessy backdated a court order for lawyers Gerald Ranking and Lorne Silver.
Peter Wardle has too many conflicts of interest on the go here. Does the law society support what Justice Shaughnessy did to a self represented litigant? The article is right about everything being too cosy. Wardle shouldn’t have taken the case. Judge Shaughnessy is obviously desperate to sabotage the review any way he can.
“Did Lawyers Ranking and Silver know of Justice Shaughnessy’s intentions and actions? Did they assist in his judicial misconduct?”
The answer is probably YES.
The main focus for Judge Shaughnesseys hearing will not only be for judicial misconduct that he participated in but also who engaged him to do such acts. When hearing all the evidence and reading the affidavits the said lawyers have engaged in a very evident fabrication of evidence that put an innocent person behind bars that being Mr. Donald Best the owner of this website and it is also very evident that Judge Shaughnessey participated in that fabrication as well by his conduct within the court and behind the scene in judge’s chambers.
How sickening.
For the hearing to be a flawless and honest hearing will have to investigate the full extent of the judicial misconduct of Mr. Shaughnessey with emphasis on the fabricated evidence of the said lawyers. The hearing will have to listen to the supporting evidence of the affidavits that Mr. Best has posted on this website that deal with a phony business that was not registered and where the money went. The hearing will have to delve into where the purolator courier recei;pt is and no point to fabricate any years later. Pros can tell what printer was used, how old ink is etc. Mr. Best lawyer can ask very pertinent questions that deal with affidavits of the lawyer who stated one thing and another affidavit by another person directly in conflict with the lawyers affidavit and ask why the OPP never conducted a search of the security cameras which would show the lawyer entering and leaving the premises where he stated he never went to.
This hearing for judicial misconduct hinges on the direct link of the lawyers and the judge using fabricated evidence to convict and imprison an innocent man. Nothing short of a competent and thorough hearing to uncover the truth. The truth that we the people can see but our court system cannot or refuse to see and the Supreme Court of Canada better be ashamed of themselves because this case is of the highest importance to all Canadians that our judicial court system needs to be under a microscope. Do not insult the intelligence of the people of Canada. We are far from having our intelligence insulted by inept incompetent, lying cover up people.
In the above commentary you state that the lawyers Ranking and Silver might have been involved with Judge Shaughnessy in the judicial misconduct. My personal perspective is you bet they were right from day one-they committed judicial misconduct in a different way.
As lawyers who are a part of our justice system they created false affidavits with their own signatures attached. They included in documents a business name for which they have tried to use a name change with a different name so therefore they have proved that the original name in the affidavits is phoney.
Therefore the lawyers committed fraud upon the courts and even worse they put you Mr. Best in prison on a phoney contempt of court charge both because of phoney affidavits and a phoney private investigator-he apparently had no license to be a private investigator.
That is the very serious and beyond imaginable part of your story that outrages all your readers who support you.
Dear Mr. Best,
I want to hear more about how and when Justice Shaughnessy back-dated a court order for the lawyers Lorne Silver and Gerald Ranking. Was it on your case? Why did the judge do it? What do you mean by “back-dated”? What did the lawyers gain by the judge backdating the court order?
If a judge backdates a court order is that not some kind of crime?
I see the Law Society of Upper Canada has cleared a member to practice who is on bail for sexual assault.
http://www.torontosun.com/2017/04/28/tribunal-lawyer-calls-sex-assault–minor-offence
Ho hum. Another day at the LSUC Tribunal.
This is terrible that every time we turn around our leaders in society are found wanting. The worst part of Donald Best’s situation is not that some crooked lawyers lied to a vindictive judge. The worst part is that the other judges, courts and law society covered it up to save the crooked lawyers. They sent an innocent man to prison to save those lawyers. The tape recordings prove everything but the courts wouldn’t listen to them.
I don’t believe in our courts anymore. What they did to Best is the final straw.
I agree wholeheartedly. The worst part of this is the coverup by the judges. They really showed whose side they are on and it is not the side of justice and the law. Every one of the judges should be ashamed of themselves.
In July 2014 Best started publishing evidence that shows these lawyers lied to convict him. He calls them ‘LIARS’ and publishes comments about Justice Shaughnessy by honest lawyers >>>>
> “In all my years of practicing law, this is the most disgusting thing I have ever seen a judge do.”
> “Reprehensible misconduct by a judge that undermines the very foundations of justice.”
> “Shaughnessy’s misconduct is worthy of his removal from the bench.”
There’s not a GODDAMNED thing the police, judge or law society can do against Best because it’s all true. The comments about Shaughnessy are no different than the public comments some made about the “Keep Your Knees Together” judge.
All they can do is to ignore Best and whitewash the CJC and judicial review but so many people are watching and we’re going to fill that goddamned courtroom with citizen journalists. They don’t know what’s coming!!! ShitStorm will happen sooner or later and every time they whitewash it gets worse for when the storm starts and the story breaks.
How can no judge ever have listened to the taperecordings before they put Best in jail? How could they refuse a self represented litigant like Best the right to cross-examine his accusers before they put him into jail? What a fuc*ing bunch of corrupt lawyers and courts did that to Best? Publish all the names of the judges and every time they didn’t listen to the tape recordings that prove the lawyers lied! Do it!
YES! Publish the name of each judge who wouldn’t listen to the tape recordings.
Justice Susan Healey dismissed Mr. Best lawsuit as frivilous and vexacious. Justice Susan Healey also ruled in the case of a lawyer and made him pay costs back to his client because the lawyer used a witness that was biased. So my question here is to Mr. Wardell the new legal representation of Judge Shaughnessy are you not biased here with respect to the two lawyers who will be witnesses in this judicial misconduct hearing? Would Justice Healey not consider what Mr. Wardell is doing as biased based on her ruling in Jeffrey Striesfeld case? However Justice Healey also called all the evidence of Mr. Best as being frivolous and vexacious. HMMM cant have your cake and eat it too!!!!!!!
It looks like Mr. Best is rattling someone’s cage. Poking the tiger. Jumping the shark.
What an array of senior legal talent to squash this little mosquito that won’t stop biting!
They thought they finished with Best when they put him away in jail. Then the court denied his appeal because he couldn’t pay the huge costs assessed against him based upon lies of lawyers and a crooked OPP cop. Justice Shaughnessy couldn’t help himself from pulling a dirty trick and illegally gave him another month in jail. Then Best complained about the judge’s disgusting misconduct and the CJC whitewashed it. Then Best launched a judicial review and Shaughnessy tried to get his name taken from the court record AND FOR THE FIRST TIME A COURT SAID “ENOUGH”!
The Federal Court slapped Shaughnessy in the face, denied his motion and ordered that he personally pay Best’s legal costs!
Has the legal community decided they can’t save Shaughnessy?
That damned little mosquito keeps biting and it might have malaria.
The federal court judge is worthy of removal from the bench.
Mr. Best’s story is true. We have all listened to the evidence and we do not need to go to school to be able to discern the truth. We do not need to have QC after our name to listen to irrefutable evidence of wrongdoing and figure out who is in the wrong and that justice has been tampered with.
Actually it should have read that the federal court judge who has not allowed this corrupt judge Shaunessey to walk away free without facing a Hearing is worthy of sitting on the bench unlike the corrupt individuals here on this website who have no business sitting as a Judge or walking into court, preparing afidavits etc. That is the crime that has been committed here and we can praise the Federal court judge who did not release Shaunessey from facing questions at a hearing.
The two lawyers will never be called to testify against the rogue judge and if they are they will use procedures and delays and appeals and do whatever they can to avoid putting that bible in their hands.
Justice Shaughnessy has already coasted through four years since he secluded himself in that backroom and engaged in what probably is a crime. He’ll wait out until this is about to go to trial and he will resign with his fat pension.
What an evil little despot. What a corrupt system.
While I agree with everything that Donald Best is trying to achieve, i.e. exposing the corrupt practices occurring within our “justice system” in relation to his case (perhaps the iceberg in many cases), I disagree with his terminology of “circle the wagons” to describe the strategy by the lawyers and LSUC to defend the scenario they are involved in.
Can we drop this insensitive 19th century American terminology whereby settlers in wagon trains travelling West in America invading “Indian” land were “attacked” by Indians defending their rightful and lawful property, and the settlers circling their wagons to better defend themselves from the “savages”.
The very statement of “Circle the wagons” connotates the “Indians” were the bad guys, and reinforced by Hollywood Western movies portraying Indians as nothing but evil. Nothing could be further from the truth !!!
Let’s get with the 21st century and realize we, the white men, decimated the Indian’s (Aboriginal) way of life, stripped them of their culture, and committed genocide in the name of trying to “civilize” them (residential schools). The disgusting abuse of our Aboriginal brothers and sisters continues by both Provincial and Federal Governments to this day. Quite unbelievable.
Let us show respect to our Aboriginal Canadian family and not use unintentional racist remarks Mr. Best.
Thank You,
A continued supporter of your cause.
Hello Mr. Fabarge,
Thank you for coming to my website and taking an interest in my case, and in the broader perspective that ordinary Canadians do not have access to justice (A2J). There are so many systemic obstacles against #A2J that the current justice system is best described as a money making machine for the small group of elites who run it.
And my sincere thanks for being, as you express it, “a continued supporter of (my) cause.”
As to your comments about ‘Circling the Wagons’, I disagree on a number of levels; and especially that the term itself is racial – whether intentional or unintentional
I hope that we can discuss this. Perhaps you will convince me to take your side, or, perhaps I will convince you that your position is not factual and ill-advised if you wish to support aboriginal causes in Canada.
Perhaps you are imposing your own overly sensitive perspective on a term that is not racial – although as you say it has ‘Indian wars’ as its origin.
Although I am conscious of the way our language changes and that some terms that were commonly used in the past have racial roots or were even created to disparage certain races, this is not true of every historically used phrase – and I don’t believe that it is accurate in this case.
‘Circling the Wagons’ is about going on the defensive when under attack, and yes, during the ‘Indian Wars’ – or to use a more accurate description: During the invasion and conquest of lands occupied by natives, when under attack from the natives the invaders would ‘circle the wagons’ to provide a better defence from the attacking natives.
That’s it. And the term has been used in every war since – whether just or unjust war, whether fought with tanks or battleships, the call of ‘circle the wagons’ means exactly that: come together and take a defensive position. ’Circle the Wagons’ is used worldwide by the mainstream press – who are very sensitive to charges of racism. Yet the Washington Post, New York Times, Toronto Star, Globe and Mail have all recently published this phrase.
By your description, I am the ‘evil’ attacker and the Law Society, lawyers and judges are ‘the good guys’. You must agree it is quite the reverse in my case.
My use of the phrase ‘Circle the Wagons’ is not racist, but it does remind us of battles fought, and massacres on both sides of those Indian Wars.
The British, French and Americans ‘won’ the Indian Wars. Both the invaders and the ‘Indians’ did terrible acts of violence to prisoners, women and children.
Doubters are well referred to documented accounts. I always suggest that people start with the ‘famed’ (or as I put it, INFAMOUS) death of General George Armstrong Custer and the 7th Calvary at Little Bighorn, Montana, where the first to die were old men, women and children deliberately targeted and slaughtered by the 7th Calvary.
Truly, the deaths of Custer and the 7th Calvary soldiers were part of a disgusting era of American history.
I urge Mr. Fabarge to continue in his heartfelt work to right the wrongs against native Canadians.
But I also urge him to not diminish his cause with unwarranted linguistic battles that distract from the foundational issues.
Yours truly,
Donald Best
With respect, “CLOSE RANKS” would give a much better description of the situation and would NOT distract from the foundational issues at hand. Notwithstanding the media have used this phrase, it inevitably leads one back to those “Indian Wars” (INVASION BATTLES ?) where the founding peoples of this continent had their land stolen from them. Perhaps the media, and anyone else for that matter, should move into the 21st century and refrain from using such INSENSITIVE damning racist comments.
Thank you.
I think most canadians feel that the founding peoples of our country had their land stolen from them. If you read Mr. Best story and listen to all the evidence it cries out injustice and cover up and same goes to the injustices reaped on the founding fathers of our nation.
I do not feel that Mr. Best was making any racial overtones here with his heading. If you have no racial inclinations then his wording conveys a point that is portrayed in movies and that is as far as it goes. Considering that our first nations were deprived of their rights and their land was stolen then I have no problem with your comment Mr. Farbage either.
I believe that we can all help one another when we see injustice being done and cover ups. Thats the true indication that this website is reaching people far and wide who are reading Mr. Best story and giving their perspective. The internet is making whitewashing and cover up far more difficult then in the past so everyone reading its important to give your two cents worth. Two cents adds up when lots of people contribute and then carry on here to writing letters to the appropriate departments.
Donald Best calls lawyers “liars” throughout this blog and labels their pictures “Lawyer Gerald Ranking fabricated evidence and lied to the court” and does this many times since 2014 and it is still printed on this blog.
These are big shot lawyers from big shot Toronto law firms. You search their names on bing or google and it leads you right to this blog on the first few search hits and for two years they sat back and let Best print more stories.
What does that tell you?
It tells me that Best is telling the truth becasue they would squash him like a bug and take down this website with court orders if he wasn’t telling the truth. It tells me they are afraid of Best and these stories and evidence he keeps putting out.
The Durham Police investigated this blog for a month so says one of Best’s stories printed here and the Durham Chief refused to tell his lawyer anything. The police would have taken down Best if they could. The judge Shaughnessy probably sic the police on Best.
The newspapers won’t interview Best and they won’t cover this story.
I think Best is right. There is a Bay Street Cabal that runs the Law Society of Upper Canada and run some judges too.
What an incestuous arrangement.
It makes them all conspirators, eh?
Best tweeted “Access to justice will not happen as long as legal system is run only by lawyers who profit from limiting #A2J to self represented litigants”
Got that right!
Great post. The boys club on Bay Street would never have been able to get away with stuff if our police forces investigated judicial misconduct properly. Thus the sad story of Mr. Best and others.
When lawyers walk into court with fabricated evidence and an ex opp cop worked illegally as an investigator and our police forces do nothing then the police forces can hang their heads in disgrace. They cannot look their children with honesty and conviction when they do not uphold their oath and badges. Cops who cover for dirty cops are crooked and until they come forward they remain crooked and when they arrest someone they are dishonorable cops no better than the criminal they handcuffed.
The lawyer Mr Wardell carries on the story of corruption because he knows conflict of interest is needed but it’s what will cause him problems . He represented two lawyers who blatantly fabricated evidence so Mr. Wardell has caused a huge problem in the hearing to come and the Feds better be ready to take action before the hearing begins.
Every case judge shaughnessey presided over is under the microscope. So are the two lawyers involved and so is the former OPP officer and any affidavits he signed prior to Mr. Best case.
Yes there is a major problem here requiring the feds to take action. Any inaction on the part of the feds proves strings being pulled illegally
JOSSIE NAILED IT!
“The lawyer Mr Wardell carries on the story of corruption because he knows conflict of interest is needed”
That’s right Jossie! Shaughnessy and his Bay Street Boys have to go full tilt conflict of interest to save Shaughnessy’s ass because no honest justice system would let him go for what he did in that back room and secret warrants. That was full-tilt Star Chamber and Kangaroo Court judicial misconduct.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kangaroo_court
The name kangaroo court is a disdainful appellation for a judicial tribunal or assembly that blatantly disregards recognized standards of law or justice, and often carries little or no official standing in the territory within which it resides. The term may also apply to a court held by a legitimate judicial authority who intentionally disregards the court’s legal or ethical obligations.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_misconduct
Judicial misconduct occurs when a judge acts in ways that are considered unethical or otherwise violate the judge’s obligations of impartial conduct.
Actions that can be classified as judicial misconduct include: conduct prejudicial to the effective and expeditious administration of the business of the courts (as an extreme example: “falsification of facts” at summary judgment); using the judge’s office to obtain special treatment for friends or relatives; accepting bribes, gifts, or other personal favors related to the judicial office; having improper discussions with parties or counsel for one side in a case; treating litigants or attorneys in a demonstrably egregious and hostile manner; violating other specific, mandatory standards of judicial conduct, such as judicial rules of procedure or evidence, or those pertaining to restrictions on outside income and requirements for financial disclosure; and acting outside the jurisdiction of the court, or performance of official duties if the conduct might have a prejudicial effect on the administration of the business of the courts among reasonable people.
I left a comment on the first post and this post makes it ten times worse if that is possible.
I commented on #1 post “Hiring Mr. Wardle was not a smart move on Justice Shaughnessy’s part, it is more of an expression of panic because if he is found guilty this and this alone defines his legacy.”
I changed my mind after reading this #2 post. Hiring Mr. Wardle was the smart move for Shaughnessy because everything is arranged and that is what it means. Everything is arranged. No need for a trial at the judicial review because everything is already arranged. Shaughnessy will walk free and Best and his lawyer will be punished again with cost awards against them.
All will see again the power of LSUC and Bay Street and bow down before them as court security drags away Donald Best and his lawyer Slonsky.
Everything so far about Best’s conviction and prison sentence was arranged. Why shouldn’t this CJC thing be? I’ve never heard of an accused (Donald Best) not allowed to question the witnesses the court used to convict him. What is this place? Russia? Nigeria? Saudi Arabia?
Everything about Mr. Best conviction was arranged. So of course this CJC hearing is trying to be arranged thats why the public is needed to cry FOUL. So like one poster stated time to press the FEDS to come in before the Hearing to clean house. There is a phony business that brings into question money laundering and then when you google links given on this site it proves money laundering has been done with Price Coopers Waterhouse and they have been busted for it. So why not investigating here in Canada for a phony account that our court system preferred to overlook. Would a full scale investigation by the Feds expose a huge fraud that has been going on? Have lawyers been involved in such a fraud upon the courts? Only the feds can answer that question for us and it is the Feds job to so do because the phony company has been exposed here and its up to the Feds and the courts to prove that.
Paging the FEDS —
This kind of incest happens every day at the Law Society of Upper Canada. Donny Best is the first person I’ve seen to document the corruption and publish nameing names. I would love to be a fly on the wall when this shit hits the fan at Osgoode Hall.