Tribunal issues ruling that Internet Spy Dean Steacy has to return to witness stand to answer questions on possible entrapment of Marc Lemire and Conservative website FreeDominion
OTTAWA : Shockwaves are rattling through the befuddled Section 13 pre-crime enforcers at the Canadian Human Rights Commission
, as a monumental decision was handed down by CHRT (Tribunal) Vice-Chairman Athanasios Hadjis. The ruling forces CHRC senior Investigator and internet spy, Dean Steacy to return to the witness stand to answer questions under oath on his internet spying operations against Marc Lemire and the popular conservative website – FreeDominion.
Next hearing date:
Marc Lemire vs. Section 13 Censorship Enforcers
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal
160 Elgin Street , 11th Floor
Against the vigorous chest-beating of the Canadian Human Rights Commission, Attorney General of Canada, Richard Warman and the B’nai Brith Group (Canadian Jewish Congress and Simon Wiesenthal Centre), on March 3, 2008 the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal
ruled the following:
1) The Respondent [Marc Lemire] may recall Hannya Rizk and Dean Steacy to testify before the Tribunal, solely with respect to the questions to which the Commission had made objections under s. 37 of the Canada Evidence Act, when these witnesses first testified in 2007. … The hearing will resume for the purposes of this evidence on March 25,2008.
2) The Tribunal will now allow the issuance of the subpoena for Bell Canada that the Respondent had previously requested, but which the Tribunal had at that time denied given the then pending s. 37 objections of the Commission (see Warman v. Lemire, 2007 CHRT 21).
Ruling on August 8, 2007 motion (just ruled on now)
1) With regard to the documents referred to in paragraphs 2, 3, and 4, the Respondent will be permitted to enter them as exhibits, at the March 25, 2008, hearing in Ottawa.
2. Documents disclosed by the Commission on July 6,2007 as a result of testimony about them given by Mr. Harvey Goldberg in June (Transcript, Vol. 25, pp. 5501-5502). These documents are correspondence between the Canadian Jewish Congress and the Canadian Human Rights Commission, in which the CJC suggested a mechanism for ISP's to block
access to Internet sites without
going to a Tribunal.
3. Documents disclosed by the Commission on July 6,2007 pursuant to the
Commission's undertaking to search for correspondence between the Commission and ISP's that had been missed
. [By the original CHRT ruling]
4. Pursuant to the Commission's undertaking to do a further review of Harvey Goldberg's email with respect to "hate", a number of documents were disclosed under cover letter dated July 31, 2007 which the respondent wishes to rely upon in the constitutional argument. These documents consist in the main of emails to or from Mr. Goldberg with attachments.
Canadian Human Rights Commission Internet Spying Apparatus Exposed!
In May, 2007, Barbara Kulaszka, asked Senior CHRC investigator Dean Steacy about an account on Stormfront.Org called “Jadewarr
”, that was used to attempt to setup and possibly entrap Marc Lemire. The CHRC claimed National Security and pulled out a draconian piece of legislation called Section 37 of the Canadian Evidence Act
to block, amongst other things, all questioning on “jadewarr” infiltration account.
Section 37 allows the government to conceal any disclosure of information that they claim will injure security and hurt the “operations of the Canadian Human Rights Commission” and reveal it’s “investigation techniques.” The only way to challenge a Section 37 invocation is for the victim to appeal, within 10 days, to the Federal Court of Canada. Against all odds .. that’s exactly what Marc Lemire did
The CHRC hoped that Marc Lemire would not be able to withstand another legal battle in the midst of the most important Constitutional Challenge ever filed of the Canadian Human Rights Act. … but they were wrong!
On May 17, 2007, courageous lawyer Barbara Kulaszka filed a Judicial Review (Section 18) application with the Federal Court of Canada for a ruling on the absurd claims of Section 37.
From May 2007 to January 2008, the Judicial Review moved through the legal system. All along the way the CHRC made every lurid attempt to deny Marc Lemire any of the remedies he was seeking from the Federal Court.
First the CHRC went to the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, and in lengthy motions, demanded the case against Lemire and the Constitutional Challenge not wait for the Federal Court and the Tribunal should order
Final arguments BEFORE
the Federal Court had ruled. This would make sure that whatever came out at Federal Court would not have been part of the Constitutional Challenge or the case being forwarded by Lemire.
The Tribunal would not go for that, and ruled that the case against Lemire would be stopped “Sine Die” until after the Federal Court of Canada ruled.
Then the CHRC tried to deplete all the resources and grind down Marc Lemire, in hopes he would abandon the Federal Court case. Financial intimidation and legal maneuvers are the preferred method at the CHRC – justice be damned
. Once it was clear Marc Lemire would not back down to these bullies, the CHRC came up with a new and devilish plan to reveal partial answers in hopes that under NO circumstances would Dean Steacy and Hannya Rizk have to fully testify under oath.
The new plan was to give triple-hearsay evidence
in hopes of stopping the Federal Court appeal. In December 2007, a letter came from CHRC counsel – Margot Blight, that Dean Steacy and Hannya Rizk would tell her the answers to the Section 37 questions, and she would in turn reveal them to the Lemire defence team. This was utterly unacceptable. In the letter by Margot Blight, it was revealed that Dean Steacy had indeed signed up the “jadewarr” account which was used to try to setup and entrap Marc Lemire.
Undeterred by the CHRC’s political shell game, off to the Federal Court of Canada the defence team went in January 2008
. At this point, the CHRC was so scared of losing the ability to ever claim Section 37, they withdrew almost every objection they made under Section 37. By withdrawing the objections, the Federal Court of Canada no longer had any jurisdiction to rule on the judicial review brought by Marc Lemire. But the CHRC is completely befuddled and forgot to withdraw the Section 37 objection they made in regards to a subpoena request by Marc Lemire of Bell Canada’s records for “jadewarr’s” subscriber information. Duuuh oops
... For that Lemire was awarded costs by the Federal Court on January 15, 2008
The day after the Federal Court of Canada victory
, it was made public that not only had 007 Dean Steacy (licensed to CHILL
) tried to entrap Marc Lemire using his “jadewarr” account, but Dean Steacy also mysteriously signed up on the conservative message board FreeDominion
a few weeks BEFORE
a message was posted which lead to a Section 13 complaint against the conservative website. This whole story is far from over…
Now, back to the Tribunal the defence team went. With defeat in the air, the entire gaggle of Section 13 enforcers had closed ranks and wanted to make sure Lemire was not allowed to recall the witnesses or bring forth any more evidence on the spying operations of the CHRC. During a conference call with all parties, the tribunal stuck it on Barbara Kulaszka to make a motion to reconvene the Tribunal hearing.
The Section 13 pre-crime enforcers were in near hysterics to make sure no further evidence was submitted by the Lemire defence team. The CHRC after being smoked at the tribunal and at Federal Court on this issue .. were doing their usual song-and-dance two-step. Again the Lemire defence team was supposed to accept some obscene triple-hearsay letter from Margot Blight that the answers given to her were true and no need to do anything silly like; recall the witnesses and actually ask them. Talk about a street full of rats, where the pied piper left a long time ago and the rats aimlessly wonder around…
Most of the CHRC’s legal maneuvers are usually designed to cause “maximum disruption” of the poor victims that are in their clutches. But this time the CHRC was scrambling to hide and cover up their misdeeds / possible entrapment of respondents while their cases are before tribunals!
With the Tribunal’s ruling of March 3, 2008
, the entire CHRC spying operating and entrapment will be brought into the open in a hearing room in Ottawa on March 25, 2008. This is devastating news for the censors who almost always are allowed to impose their will on poor unrepresented victims, who have no means to fight back and defend their rights.
Canadian “Human Rights” Commission senior investigator conducts spying operation against the Conservative Website FreeDominion.ca
The dark plot of the CHRC’s Agent Provocateur agenda Exposed!
Rest of the story on FD here: http://www.freedomsite.org/legal/jan..._and_CHRC.html
Marc Lemire is a human rights consultant and Certified Computer Systems Engineer and Computer Forensics Technician based in Toronto , Ontario Canada . He has advised numerous victims of the Canadian Human Rights Commission. In 2005 Mr. Lemire filed a Constitutional Challenge of the Canadian Human Rights Act. After 25 hearing days, his case is still before the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, which amazingly has the power to decide on the constitutionality of its own enabling legislation.
April 5, 2006 Dean Steacy signs up the account “Jadewarr” on FreeDominion.ca and logs in. Uses the official E- Mail address “[email protected]”
April 19, 2006 A message posted to FreeDominion which forms the basis of a complaint before the Canadian Human Rights Commission filed by Marie-Line Gentes
September 29, 2006 The actual complaint by Gentes is received by the Canadian Human Rights Commission. Complaint investigated by Sandy Kozak
Chronology of CHRC’s Dean Steacy on FreeDominion
Support Marc Lemire's Constitutional Challenge
Be part of our team and contribute what you can to defeat this horrible law and protect Freedom of Speech in Canada !
152 Carlton Street
PO Box 92545
I'll be going to the hearing on March 25. If anybody wants to tag along from London or would like a pickup anywhere along the way, just let me know. Numbers in court do make a difference. When judges see you have a lot of supporters it affects the judgments they pass. They know full well that we are watching the events closely and pay close attention to their names and their actions.