Please reload

RECENT POSTS

All,

In February 2012 Cracked Open was released for public consumption via a Canadian Press article written by Neil Davidson.

While the article was high...

Cracked Open - Supreme Court of Canada; Non-Redactions; Documents

May 13, 2020

1/4
Please reload

FEATURED POSTS

Dear Supreme Court of Canada Justices, James vs York University Docket Number (#36795) Asking Questions With Answers; Asking the Right Questions

January 12, 2020

 

 

 

Dear Supreme Court of Canada Justices

 

James vs York University Docket Number (#36795)  

 

Please review the following as it relates to the Paul J James matter. 

 

Respectfully 

 

Paul J James 

 

Asking Questions With Answers

 

What should Paul J James do now?  What would you do Honorable Justices? Leave Canada?  Put life on the line again through ruthless starvation?  

 

Paul J James will Leave Canada.  Starvation Protest will accelerate.  You will never have my obedience to such oppressive behavior from York University and all those whom have colluded with them. 

 

How would the Obituary on Paul J James read?  Scapegoat or Memorial? 

 

It will not be possible to scapegoat in perpetuity because of the Transparency and Truth of the information provided via the Confronting the SODA and the Paul J James submissions to the Canadian Judiciary through the York University and Mooredale Soccer Club human rights claims

 

Were the Supreme Court of Canada Incompetent, Corrupt, or "Skillful for the Greater Good" in the administrative and procedural handling of the James vs York University matter while the human rights discrimination claim was at the Honorable court?

 

Whatever the answer the Canadian Public cannot be assured Paul J James was treated equally and fairly in the James vs York University matter and on that basis  the file must be reviewed and corrected at the Supreme Court of Canada.

 

What are the most distressful actions taken against persons with exposed past or present substance use?  

 

When:  Persons and organizations hold the issue over your head like a machete asking inappropriate prejudicial, loaded questions:  When was the last time you used?  How long have you been clean?   Pejorative discriminating inquiries having nothing to do with the matter of the discrimination which took place back in 2008/09 at York University and beyond but in this case to intimidate and scapegoat.  It has been absolutely disgusting.  Horrific.  York University, Canada Soccer, Bob Rae, Colin Perkel, Adam Vaughan,  Barry Swadron, Michael Barcelos, Maureen Armstrong, Nick Bontis, JP Savage etc, etc, should be fired and removed from their positions for what they have delivered.  The issue is bad enough without such immorality being applied.

 

When: Persons treat your circumstances as not being legitimate, worthy.  People and organizations treat and bully you as worthless, an invalid, or criminal,  You get scapegoated at every conceivable turn. 

"I'm out of the Paul J James business"; "You could be in a wheel chair or Afflicted with Cancer - be grateful"  "Why are you leaving our place - it is to use Crack"  "Good luck in your recovery" , "Be well".  "Start writing a script for the documentary - its not like you do anything ALL day - your just homeless"  etc, etc, 

 

With consideration of all that had taken place in PJJ's life past and present and the truth of the matter before the Canadian Judiciary can the Honorable Justices not see the malevolence and sickness behind the Toronto Star immorality harming progress to the detriment of the overall good? 

 

On the Paul J James Distress Odometer how high did it travel once the September 8, 2018 Toronto Star article was released? 

 

It was up there as one of the worse experiences over a lifetime. 

 

Knowing the Paul J James matter needs to be returned to the Honorable Court to correct the extreme social injustice - why would Rhodes Scholar Bob Rae, former Premier of Ontario, Order of Canada Recipient not have taken the file back to the Honourable Court as he should have in January of 2018?  After all, Bob Rae disagreed with ALL York University and Canadian Judicial decisions in the matter. 

 

To Protect York University and the Canadian Establishment and/or to delay justice being served for as long as he could.  Whether I died was irrelevant or experienced tremendous duress was irrelevant.  Doing  the right thing was not a part of the process.

 

Why would Bob Rae not suggest and initiate claims/complaints to the Canadian Judicial Counsel for the inappropriate behavior of Paul Aterman, Justice Edwards and Justice Eileen Gillese throughout.  The latter of which awarded $1000 to York University at the Ontario Court of Appeal in spite of knowing that Paul J James "was a street person in the making" and when both Applicant and Respondent declared  NO COSTS.  Highly inappropriate.   

 

Because he did not want to expose and bring attention to the claim in general to the public and Judiciary which would have required immediate correction

 

Why did Bob Rae communicate with Paul J James' contact and connection - 19 time EMMY winner - Mike Young and Kelly Kidwell from California?  

 

So he could cuckoo the documentary project on behalf of York University and the Liberal Government in order to manipulate the narrative. 

 

 

Asking the Right Questions 

 

Why are Supreme Court Justices desirous of being Supreme Court of Canada Justices? To deliver social justice. To make Canada a better nation. Or to harm Canadian citizens? 

 

How do you gauge the performance of the Canadian Judicial Process? 

 

Does Canada maximize its potential as a nation? 

 

Who is accountable for the social injustices delivered to so many Canadians over so many years? 

 

Should Canadian citizens have trust and faith in the Canadian legal system? 

 

Who is ultimately responsible for the 11 overdose deaths a day in Canada? Canadian citizens? Canadian Parliaments over many years? Canadian Judicial system? A lack of consensus on the issue? Bad politics? 

 

Is the Canadian Judicial system equal, fair, dignified, and respectful for ALL Canadian citizens? 

 

Is it permitted for persons to submit Canadian Judicial testimony which is False? 

 

Is it fair that an organization and supporting legal system can discriminate, LIE and Cheat through the process against someone who provided much to the organization and Canada as a nation? 

 

Is it humane to have mental health disability human rights claims as a part of an adversarial judicial process? 

 

Is it a crime to be diagnosed with a substance use disorder? 

 

Are substance disabilities medical illness and/or diseases or bona-fide psychological disorders which can lead to periods of illness and/or disease but can be learned to be lived with? 

 

Is the one-year delay for filing a human rights discrimination claim a systemic barrier preventing access for fair social justice? 

 

Was it fair that the Administrative Branch of the Honorable court deliberately and falsely certified the James Leave to Appeal only to then two and half month’s later scapegoat the error of deficiency onto the Applicant? 

 

Was it fair and equal for the Supreme Court of Canada to have communicated to the world that a reason why the human rights James claim against York University was dismissed before it was even adjudicated by a Supreme Court of Justice? 

 

How do you explain to Canada as a nation the disconnect between what you and all oppressor stakeholders in this matter know to be true and the non delivery of fair social justice in this matter, and in spite of the visibility of such pain and humiliation and further injustice, onto one Canadian citizen. 

 

Is it fair and equal that every single time a Canadian citizen faces plain and obvious injustice they must accept it and advocate for a cause whether they are suited to do so or not, or want to do so or not? 

 

Can you see how organizations rely on the Canadian Judicial system to park their improprieties, misdemeanors and errors with the confident knowledge the system will protect against private individuals. 

 

Why is it appropriate for Tribunal adjudicators to lie with impunity in their decision rationales - as in Paul Aterman’s comment that Paul J James did not respond to the argument regarding Globe and Mail writings and Cracked Open when I did on March 22, 2013. 

 

Why is it permitted that in matters of mental health disability an adjudicator as in Paul Aterman in this case ignore and discriminate against the Applicant through deliberate non consideration of the devastating consequences of societal and self-stigma? 

 

If Paul J James uses $20 of a substance of need one day and not the next; every day; once a month or sporadically and is able to perform all normal functions and be highly successful should he be defined and considered a criminal? Ill? Diseased, an Addict? An anomaly? Or a normal Canadian Citizen who is de-stigmatized from his substance disability status which has been stabilized? 

 

If Paul J James ceases to exist will you permit the scapegoating of his life onto mental illness to the detriment of societal progress within Canadian society?   

 

Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter
Please reload

FOLLOW US
Please reload

SEARCH BY TAGS