00:29:05.460But, I mean, you know, I have the advantage maybe that you didn't in self-preservation as well.
00:29:09.820I mean, because, again, I was this naive, you know, guy protesting, thinking he knew the law,
00:29:16.080And now being told he's facing, you know, two years in jail because the crown pulled out all stops to try and to scare me.
00:29:24.040So the advantage I had in that respect is that I was forced into it.
00:29:28.300So in, you know, that self-preservation mode as well, you know, I didn't I didn't care if it was three in the morning and I'm researching something.
00:29:35.960Right. So I was just it's just time. That's all it is.
00:29:39.380I mean, it's you don't even need superior intelligence.
00:29:43.100I think in the end, you got to put the time into it and understand what case law is, how it applies, that you can't just say what you want in court.
00:30:11.140like hey yeah oh these two youths you do you have have you been in court have you advocated for
00:30:21.460people in court like a lawyer is that even allowed you have done it is it is yep i have and um you
00:30:30.900know i've been fortunate enough where uh you you get uh some reasonable judges which i found most
00:30:36.420the more reasonable um they'll allow it because they see that the the person sitting in front of
00:30:41.780them may not know anything so the question is is it more in the to the advantage of the self-rep to
00:30:50.100have me there than not having me there and i think you know anyone after two minutes of you know not
00:30:56.660because i'm so smart just because i've done my homework and maybe the person in that situation
00:31:01.220hasn't had time or just hit them that they're being arrested and processed where i was processed
00:31:06.420a year before and learning all that stuff so a lot of times judges will allow it and and it's uh
00:31:12.020through originally i did it through mckenzie friend which allows you to to assist and help
00:31:17.620and through the court's decision or their discretion they'll allow you to address the court
00:31:21.940or you can do it through uh which is a better one power of attorney and you actually have a
00:31:26.740signed document where you're acting as power of attorney and then you can actually uh again with
00:31:31.780with permission from the judge and most of the time they will agree maybe three quarters or 20
00:31:37.380they won't uh they'll allow me to to speak and make arguments and and um address witnesses etc
00:31:45.460so i've been fortunate that way this is up to the judge to decide whether or not you can be there or
00:31:50.100not? I mean, it's, it's, it's the judge's ruling. So, I mean, you could always appeal it if they
00:31:57.120say no, but you have the case law and plus you've got in the criminal code that you're allowed to
00:32:02.380as per power of attorney. You just can't go in there. Obviously I can't charge people. It's all
00:32:07.460for free. So as long as I tell the truth, which is I'm doing it all for free, it's not paying the
00:32:13.060bills and I'm there to only assist and help address the court. I have no financial gain
00:32:19.380whatsoever uh if if you explain all that up front which is what i do from the very very beginning
00:32:24.580uh usually reasonable judge will say yeah okay that that makes sense and uh have you ever had
00:32:30.400a situation where a judge goes all right we'll allow this and then a couple of days later the
00:32:34.780judge kind of pulls you aside and says you know what dave you're doing a great job up there like
00:32:38.260holy crap i didn't believe that you could do something like this are they ever actually0.96
00:32:42.580surprised when they hear what comes out of your mouth sometimes uh yeah i had a judge one time0.99
00:32:48.000He actually said he wanted to come back from vacation just to see if the bail review finished because it was a two-day one.
00:32:56.200But, yeah, usually they keep that stuff to themselves.
00:32:59.840But I have crowds that come to me and talk to me in the side.
00:33:02.920You learn really quick how the system works.
00:33:06.700And, you know, if you abide by the rules, you know, obviously take off your hat, say you're on or et cetera, et cetera, you can get a lot done.
00:33:14.400i know a lot of people have lost faith in the system but believe it or not ladies and gentlemen
00:33:18.880there are some good honest judges out there i mean i can even give you names right now
00:33:24.580of honest judges and there are ones that will just uh you know in my opinion i don't want to
00:33:30.200go down the defamation road here but you know obviously that uh you know are on the take
00:33:35.620and it becomes very obvious that they're on the take and sometimes you see crowns do what's called
00:33:41.360judge juggling sorry judge shopping sorry go right and that i think that's something you were telling
00:33:47.860me about before so the the advantage to being in a situation like yours is you can say these things
00:33:53.780publicly and not get disbarred right i mean you don't have to worry about being disbarred by the
00:34:00.100ontario law association or wherever else because you're not you've never been to the bar in the
00:34:06.780first place you're just a guy who knows a lot of stuff about canadian law and uh can advise people
00:34:13.080yeah so i i have been i have been you know a couple times threatened by some crowns and judges
00:34:18.560that say oh you're going to be in contravene of the the barristers act uh etc but i mean i i know
00:34:24.440it doesn't go anywhere because i'm not charging people money right so that that's the thing if
00:34:28.620it's an exchange of money that i'm charging for legal service just like i was pretending i was a
00:34:32.560doctor then that that would be a lot different um once they understand that you know i'm there only
00:34:38.640to help and i have no financial gain except to see a better canada the reasonable ones will say
00:34:44.560yeah that's cool with me and and don't even fight me on it i've had crowns fight me on it this is
00:34:49.100ridiculous i've never seen this before how is he allowed to do this uh you know that kind of stuff
00:34:55.600but i mean it's uh didn't didn't really intimidate me but i've been threatened a few times about0.69
00:35:00.000uh... that i've been caught in a country well but they've never seen this before because there's
00:35:04.320never been such ridiculous charges on mass across the country as there have been in the past three
00:35:10.000or four years where people go out and first of all i mean these people who have gone out to protests
00:35:15.120like you have like i have like everybody who is watching this has at one point or other in the
00:35:19.760past four years has never ever been out to a protest before in their lives but they saw what
00:35:24.640was going on in this country and they said i gotta do something i'm gonna go to the legislature i'm
00:35:55.800But for the most part, what we're seeing is just average people, people who live in suburbia, who want to come out and say enough is enough.
00:36:05.460And so the police, in order to quell this, to stem this tide, I suppose, have started to dig up charges that maybe haven't even been used in years.
00:36:16.300And if these cops are looking at these people, like some grandma, 75 years old, lives out in Brampton, right?
00:36:22.940She's never, ever been to one of these things before.0.76
00:36:25.800or etobicoke never been to never ever one of these things she's in a wheelchair cop's gonna
00:36:31.040say hey lady here's a ticket for trespass or what i've never seen trespass used more
00:36:37.340in my entire life even still even now with school boards and city and town councils and all of that
00:36:42.860that i've seen in the past year or two years it's absolutely crazy right so for that crown to say i
00:36:49.580have never seen this before of course they haven't seen this before it's a brand new thing
00:36:55.460how many people like you are there out there legal advocates don't charge money
00:37:01.140well there's a there's a few of us um you know uh uh the name escapes me of uh i mean
00:37:09.100there's a few of us that do this i mean there's not i i would if i won the lottery tomorrow i
00:37:14.800mean i would literally drop everything i'm doing and just do this full time and i would literally
00:37:18.820just hang out by the ottawa courthouse and and just play ambulance chaser and just are you are
00:37:24.100you and are you charged for something freedom related no okay you yes okay let's talk right
00:37:29.520i mean that's what i would do like i said my how i get off and what's you know this this not just
00:37:36.780the awakening but for me the the thrill i get out of it the the i guess the uh the accolades is to
00:37:44.400to to help people and and also to be a part of anything that can change law you know one thing
00:37:50.040that was very disgusting was that people when they attended the protest one guy give an example
00:37:55.020mr. Carr you know I would I represented him in a bell review that's in superior court and his
00:38:00.520conditions I thought what am I reading here they were worse than mine and he went to jail for 410.97
00:38:06.200days in a cell full of piss and shit I kid you not 41 days I think a total of maybe I think it was0.96
00:38:13.900like 23 minutes of light or something like that outside anyway this guy had conditions that he0.99
00:38:19.260couldn't even join a facebook group that talked about the you know what the jibby jabber or or
00:38:24.840discuss it and i think myself wait a second i thought he was arrested for mischief what's he
00:38:30.160being charged so it just becomes so obvious that the whole thing is just this political game and
00:38:35.540they're using these people as tools they're going after people they consider leaders to shut them up
00:38:39.780and and they wanted him to not post on social media they called him in his disclosure the you
00:38:45.220know the the middleman uh between the leaders and and and that's why they it was very very
00:38:50.800important that he could couldn't be on social media so that one was one of my one of my faves0.99
00:38:56.220in terms of uh president because that that now prevents them if they ever do this shit again0.93
00:39:00.100sorry for the french my bullet or the pet language uh they can you know they can't just um0.98
00:39:06.140they can't just say okay uh you lose your social media rights because now we've got a president
00:39:11.600that says it's unconstitutional and everyone has the right to freedom of speech and you can't just
00:39:19.320take away someone's social media. And we got that by a great judge, an honest judge who saw logic
00:39:25.860and got that actually times two. Another one was Mr. Blanchfield. Same thing. He was in Rolling
00:39:32.880Thunder. Given conditions, he couldn't go on social media. Again, I'm disgusted when I see
00:39:37.260this because why can't he talk about justin trudeau or whoever he wants but he if he does that he goes
00:39:42.280to jail and gets arrested for breach and then we got that one we got that one as well so that's uh
00:39:47.020so freedom my favorite is always freedom of speech if you don't have freedom of speech you've got
00:39:50.920nothing because without freedom of speech you don't have freedom of religion you can't do
00:39:54.020assembly you got nothing and then a freedom assembly would be my second favorite so when we
00:39:57.960get if i get wins like those that's also another motivation of mine because then you can change
00:40:01.940law in the country because we live in a common law country based on presidents anything that
00:40:06.540happens in these courts especially the higher you go superior court and above has a has an effect on
00:40:13.100on everyone else moving forward so what cases have you been involved with that have been kind
00:40:20.320of landmark for you what are what are you most proud of so far in these last few years
00:40:24.160um i mean most of them are end up being dropped um so you know i've someone out you know someone
00:40:33.640will just call me randomly hey uh uh you know i'm i've got this bylaw ticket eight i'm part of
00:40:40.000the 880 club and i would say well when were you when did you get the ticket uh 19 months ago great
00:40:46.220here's here's how you do an 11b and that's it and they get dropped or you know they might go to court
00:40:51.780maybe give them give them some information how they can defend themselves and um then the crown
00:40:58.060will just drop at last minute no questions asked most of these things are dropped because they don't
00:41:02.920want rulings that can affect them which surprised me even with byron carr and blanchfield because
00:41:10.680i thought to myself you know they're going to fight me on the social media because if
00:41:14.120they try and pull this again you know it's and and i get a judge who you know rules in my favor
00:41:21.720that's not good for them so i really thought just like the other ones they're going to drop it
00:41:25.980but most of the time they end up they end up uh dropping them um you know maybe one one percent
00:41:32.300actually go to trial between all the criminal charges and the the bylaw tickets etc i mean a
00:41:38.020lot do go to trial one percent stole a lot but the majority of because and they just say that
00:41:42.160it's not in the in the interest of the public that's what they get away with right and then
00:41:46.480of course it's a win but it's not it's not a precedent it's not president setting right and
00:41:51.720we need more precedent sets of these these bozos can't do it again can you please tell us about
00:41:57.000uh the chris weisdorf uh ruling from last week because this is one that you were very very
00:42:02.280very happy about yeah this this is another guy who is not a lawyer a very bright individual
00:42:09.460representing uh miss fernando um this was a case involving as everyone knows if you were to cross
00:42:17.180the border you were in many cases forced to take a pcr test and if you didn't you'd be in violation
00:42:24.500of the quarantine act and of course uh they started out i think a thousand dollars and it
00:42:30.420It went to $3,000, and then it went to $6,000 because, you know, people weren't learning their lesson.
00:42:34.620They were still crossing that border without providing their DNA and shoving up their nose.
00:42:40.720And so, you know, many people were, again, processed being the punishment, were going through that process, disclosure, show up again.
00:42:49.660And by the way, with the self-reps, they really nail you to the wall because what they do is all the lawyers and paralegals go first.
00:42:56.200So if you have an appearance at 10 a.m., they're really sneaky.
00:42:59.940Well, not sneaky, but this is what they do.
00:44:18.960there was some great case law he had a huge book of authorities which is basically another word
00:44:23.620for saying lots of case law and uh the the prime one was uh drum roll section 14 of the quarantine
00:44:33.280act and uh in that section excuse me just coughed a little bit they've been raining down heavily
00:44:43.300with the geoengineering last couple weeks so everyone i know is getting sick gotcha sorry
00:44:47.100um i love how i can say that you know exactly what i'm talking about love you okay so in section
00:44:52.860in section in section 14 of the quarantine act um i have the quote here let me just find it um
00:45:00.020so it says this in the quarantine act any qualified person authorized by the minister
00:45:06.460may to determine whether a traveler has a communicable disease or symptoms of one
00:45:11.340use a screening technology authorized by the minister that does not involve the entry into
00:45:19.660the traveler's body of any instrument or other foreign body. So basically it's telling you that
00:45:27.520they can't stick something in you because that would be a violation of the act. I watched when
00:45:33.520Chris was because he had two dates. One was the decision. One was when he had made arguments and
00:45:39.580submissions uh you know chris do a great job on that and and the crown had said well a swab is
00:45:46.400not entering the body i kid you not he actually said that i'm sort of saying that goes violently
00:45:52.120violently all the way up your nose does not enter your brain squishes your brain people get
00:45:57.860blood coming out sometimes but yes that was not apparently that didn't go in your body and he
00:46:03.300goes it's not the same thing as like a needle or this or that so you're saying it has to break the
00:46:08.460skin to go how does that make any sense anyway so he he was acting all confident this this crown
00:46:13.900and very pompous that he was right and that was it and the judge had just dismissed this appeal
00:46:18.300why are we even here is sort of his attitude uh and he had that attitude the entire time um
00:46:23.480anyway the the judge um reviewed all the paperwork and and he said you know listen i'm going to keep
00:46:30.220things very simple and uh yeah i'm just sort of paraphrasing here i'm looking at section 14 it's
00:46:36.060pretty cut and dry um they presented this as the argument and i'm going to say acquit so the judge
00:46:41.900acquits miss fernando uh through the job of chris weisdorf and and said that 14 was a violation
00:46:48.360and so now anyone that's currently in court appealing it um they can now uh try and get
00:46:55.460this overturned and use that as a case law now it's not in a a higher court but uh in the end
00:47:02.820And if they – I doubt that they're going to appeal it because I think if they appeal it, they're going to do Chris a solid because there's nowhere for a judge to go on this.
00:47:14.040So if they're smart, I think they'll just leave it as is in the entire court of justice.
00:47:18.580But in the end, because of this decision, it now is going to affect everyone else who is now fighting this ticket or who is currently – who lost and is currently appealing it.
00:47:27.060So it's definitely a big win for bodily autonomy, that's for sure.
00:47:32.140security of person in my opinion so so yeah but that's a that's a constitutional argument right
00:47:38.020security of the person and yes yes so yes you're right you're right right yeah that so it wasn't
00:47:43.760those were not those were presented as arguments but the judge wanted to keep things simple and
00:47:48.940said section 14 if you hear some noise it's raining over here so i apologize but uh okay
00:47:53.900sorry go ahead let me ask you why the judge rejected hearing the bill of rights in this
00:47:58.960particular case do you know so again strictly from an observer point of view uh the judge was
00:48:05.680clear that there was no there was really no need in going there or going that direction
00:48:11.460because the issue in his mind was very simple it's a violation of section 14 um now having said that
00:48:21.560section 14 of the quarantine act i'm sorry the quarantine act yes no it's a federal it's a
00:48:28.180federal federal one okay so the violation of section 14 so that's applicable anywhere in
00:48:33.420canada but is so he i guess the judge felt we don't have to use the bill of rights in this
00:48:37.440situation because we've got that violation of section 14 have you seen a case because i've
00:48:43.560heard a lot of uh... people say we've tried to use the bill of rights in certain cases and the
00:48:47.900judging flat-out respect for uh... just says no we're going to reject usage of that i don't know
00:48:53.580of any cases that have actually successfully argued the bill of rights have you seen that
00:48:57.980oh there's there's lots there's lots of them um now they're all in superior court and i can tell0.80
00:49:04.800you the reason for that and it's in my opinion they're they're dirty i call it their dirty little
00:49:08.900secret um but there's many wins there's actually uh i wish i had it in front of me right now but
00:49:14.640there's a case where judges to uh were um forget what section but they quoted a certain section
00:49:21.760of the bill of rights because it was uh they weren't getting their pension or something like
00:49:26.500that. And this is the, it was part of the judges act. So we're talking, you know, hot, you know,
00:49:31.680uh, high judges here in Canada using the bill of rights post charter, not pre-charter post charter,
00:49:38.540not even mentioned the charter and then won their case. That's just one of many examples. I, uh,
00:49:43.260there's a, there's a list I could probably post in the comments later of all the wins with the bill.
00:49:48.700but they're almost all in Superior Court or above.
00:49:54.660Now, with Ontario Court of Justice, that's a different little situation
00:49:59.940because I learned also there's a difference between what's called statute court
00:53:53.440you know, that's a great way to, you know,
00:53:55.180to get it thrown out um in terms of right you know freedom of speech or assembly that's a little bit
00:54:00.320different because if it's politically charged and they've already got a thousand presidents already
00:54:04.040set um through section one you don't really have much of a hope i mean you can still fight it um
00:54:10.660but that was freedom the judge in that ruling used specifically freedom of speech and freedom
00:54:15.980of speech is only in the bill it's only freedom of expression in the charter and that was both
00:54:20.960in blanchfield and in uh car so it depends on the wording that you use when you come in and to the
00:54:27.720judge and say i'm talking about freedom of speech freedom of speech in the bill of rights i don't
00:54:33.080see why it can't be argued in any court yeah well that you see you can't really argue well not
00:54:38.920really but the rules are because it's it applies only to federal uh it's federal statute right so
00:54:45.480you can't use it in um i see it differently because i mean my personal view um and i know
00:54:51.880i'm wrong in terms of how it's written because it says that you can only use it for uh in federal
00:54:56.800legislation right so it has to be part of the criminal code which is a federally regulated set
00:55:01.040of codes um but for a traffic ticket or you know that part of the 880 club for a bylaw um the
00:55:07.540charter 880 club remedy yeah yeah and so people have tried it you know it hasn't been successful
00:55:14.040that in that regard but for anything criminal uh no doubt there's many judges have already told me
00:55:20.220i've got transcripts uh rulings where they say yes the bill applies there so there's misinformation
00:55:26.660out there like wikipedia is what you know the first that pops up if you say okay and bill of
00:55:31.400rights what's this all about and the first thing it says the charter supersedes it which is not
00:55:35.620true at all you can use the bill and it's active and i've got you know rulings of judges saying
00:55:40.960that it is active and you can use it um but again lots of misinformation out there i like it because
00:55:47.580there's no there's no section one clause right the bill of rights when dieffen baker made this
00:55:52.360thing in 1960 um you know he there has to be a federal act of parliament that expressly states
00:55:59.940we're going to violate your rights so they have to say okay not only we're going to give you know
00:56:04.400we're going to make this stay-at-home order but we're going to say that we're going to violate
00:56:07.740your freedom of assembly blah blah blah and there has to be a federal act that does that
00:56:11.920so it's a very so i mean it is possible but it's a very very long process obviously if it was easy
00:56:17.680they would have done it but the charter is easy because it's 100 you know judge discretion okay
00:56:23.360well section one says this and uh obviously there was a uh you know a pandemic going on so
00:56:29.200were uh therefore uh section one section one section one yeah uh okay what are the uh what
00:56:36.740are the most important cases ongoing in this country right now and we know about tamara and
00:56:41.920chris and they're going to be going back at some point we've got uh pat king we've got uh chris
00:56:47.520carbert and tony olenek the coots too um we've got helen gruce but she's not going back and that's
00:56:53.780even a court case yet she's going back but not until january what are the biggest most important
00:57:01.700most precedent-setting cases what are they trying to use right now what is the crowd trying to use
00:57:06.820right now to make things even more difficult for us yeah i'll say yes i because a lot of people
00:57:12.660think we've already so we haven't followed communism yet so people have to panic i know
00:57:16.580it looks bad i know that you know it uh like i said the process of punishment they can keep you
00:57:21.060in limbo for a year or two years and and you're thinking what's going on here but you know if we
00:57:26.920have fallen to communism they wouldn't need to go through all these lengths of trying to get
00:57:31.620these court decisions and judge shop and you know it this takes a lot of effort it's a coordinated
00:57:37.620effort um and you know just the fact that they put all this effort into colin mcdonald for example
00:57:43.420uh shows you just how important that case is uh in so i can i'll just give the the rundown in my
00:57:49.920opinion uh probably the most significant three or four cases in canada that will change you know
00:57:56.260the law and and and uh and that will affect every single person in this country if they value
00:58:03.020freedom of speech and assembly and i would say colin mcdonald is up there because that one is
00:58:09.080so dangerous that if they if they introduce bylaws let's say the bird flu or climate change 50 minute
00:58:15.580cities or whatever and i know this is going to sound ridiculous but you could in theory if they
00:58:21.020put a bylaw like this out again and you leave your house and you're not going to go get groceries you
00:58:25.860just want to go to the park they could not only arrest you but they can throw you in jail and uh
00:58:32.600it and i know it sounds ridiculous but it actually is just that so colin is an example of someone that
00:58:38.860was arrested charged the same same as myself common nuisance um i'll back it up just by saying
00:58:44.380There was probably thousands of people, let's say hundreds to maybe a thousand, I don't know exactly, but I know many charged across Canada with common nuisance originally who were protesting against mandates.
00:58:54.960Every single one, including myself, as I mentioned, was dropped.
00:58:58.280Some went to just the cusp of trial, but they were all dropped.
00:59:03.120For whatever reason, they chose Mr. McDonald as the test case.
00:59:10.780And what that means in legal terms is it's the first of its kind.
00:59:13.260It's the first of its kind that the crown had nothing in terms of previous presidents, that they were using an HIV case from 1992, I believe, of a guy who intentionally spread HIV with partners.
00:59:26.440And they would use that as a comparison to this common usage charge of stepping outside your house and protesting.
00:59:32.700This is how new this is. Right. But they were just so desperate. Where did this come from? How does that even relate?
00:59:37.180I think I had Colin on not so long ago.
00:59:40.280maybe yeah that because yeah that was the night you came on that's right so that's that's a very
00:59:44.680very that was my cameo right yeah that's right um when is that going to be decided do we know
00:59:50.000so that's going to be august uh 16th um he's still uh we're still tweaking the uh the three
00:59:57.820factums so i'll just say uh i'll try and do it quickly the uh so he's got the first
01:00:02.400the first one so he won his first trial um and the crown is appealing that uh he lost his second
01:00:11.360one with a judge who saw surprise surprise exactly the opposite as the first judge and then he had
01:00:18.080uh and then also he has well then he was sentenced with a criminal record and i think the fine was
01:00:23.120seven grand but the crown is now appealing they're appealing the criminal record seven grand saying
01:00:29.200that's not good enough we want criminal record a fine and we want jail we want jail and the reason
01:00:36.160why the jail is so key is because next time they can go after the leaders they can you know by
01:00:42.400based on kamala previous president said in in this case superior court um they can now arrest you
01:00:48.220and if you're guilty give you jail time so they're going all out and and they're using him as this
01:00:54.140tool to make this happen you know they're they're a free way to communism to remind uh me and
01:01:00.700everybody else again what exactly did he or didn't he do sorry so he was just like me he was exactly
01:01:08.060the same thing i did uh protested peacefully uh instead of toronto in my case his was niagara
01:01:13.580falls he had protested there i think in april 2021 he actually uh so he had two trials that's
01:01:20.700That's why I said he won the first one or two charges, won the first one, lost the second one.
01:01:25.440And now he's dealing with his sentencing.
01:01:27.220But it was he was arrested for common nuisance for basically stepping outside his house and protesting outside, of course.