May 18, 2012  Evelyne Green Applied for an Order disclosing vital information for her defence of Criminal Assault charges.


Here is the link to the Application which was filed:


http://www.scribd.com/doc/94141715/Notice-of-Application-of-Evelyn-Greene-following-an-attempt-to-murder-her-Missing-Surveillance-camera-video-Why-the-Lock-Down-Secure-Room-expe#page=1

For Video: http://youtu.be/W7KCC9... The applicant, Evelyn Rebecca Greene will apply to the Court at 427 Queen Street, Fredericton, New Brunswick, for the following orders:

1. An Order that the Information against the applicant, Evelyn Rebecca Greene, dated June 2011, herein be quashed under sections 7, 8, 9, 10 (a) (b) (c), 11(a) (d),(g), (12) 15(1) (2) 24 (1) (2), and 28, 32 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and ss. 603, 605, 625.1 of the Criminal Code of Canada on the ground that the continuation of the proceedings is an abuse of process because the proceedings are brought:

a. Arbitrarily and for an oblique and improper purpose,

b. On the basis of false, contrived and fabricated evidence, and

c. In a manner calculated to deny the accused the right to a fair trial.

To see more please read document at provided link above.

May 18, 2012 I was in Provincial Court for an adjournment of a trial of a bylaw matter. The date was set for the trial of the bylaw matter, regarding Fredericton bylaw, T4 Section 15, which was then rescheduled by the Court for an unexplained reason.  

What was interesting is that at the previous hearing, the Court, Judge Richards, refused to allow me to cross examine the Witness Police Officer Constable David Beck on a later date (despite my objections and protests), but did adjourn the hearing of the argument of the matter.  The reason I asked for the adjournment was because I had filed a FORM 16D Application for Judicial review  In the mean time I had filed a Notice of Application regarding constitutional issues, challenging the City of Fredericton Bylaw regarding bicycles on the sidewalk. The Court did state that since I had filed that document, the Court did change its mind regarding allowing me to cross examine the witness.

A new Date is to be scheduled regarding the Trial of the Bylaw matter.

This was the fifth hearing date of this bylaw matter:

Wednesday, December 14, 2012

Wednesday,  January 11, 2012

Wednesday, 4 April, 2012

Friday, April 20, 2012 

video 1 Pre hearing Post Hearing Video

Jurisdiction of Provincial Court Judge - Recusal

Jurisdiction of Provincial Court Judge - Recusal

ISSUES

1. What is the inherent jurisdiction of a superior court trial judge and is it complete with regard to the matter seized?

2. If this is complete jurisdiction, does this prevent any other superior court judge from hearing an application for recusal of the superior court trial judge seized with the matter?

3. Is there anything in relevant statutes or rules which changes this jurisdiction? Do any statutes or rules confer special jurisdiction on the Chief Justice to hear this application?

4. Is there something special about an application for recusal based on apprehension of judicial bias, such that the Charter demands a different practice regarding jurisdiction?

Full write up:
http://newbrunswickprovincialcourt.blogspot.ca/p/jurisdiction-of-provincial-court-judge.html

As a Defendant to a Criminal Charge one has a right to full disclosure so that they may properly defend that charges agaisnt them.

THE GROUNDS FOR APPLICATION FOR DISCLOSURE ARE:

1.      Full disclosure of the requested documents and records are required so that the applicant may make full answer and defence to the charges against her.

2.     The documents and records requested will assist the applicant to prove that the charge brought against them are false.

3.     The  applicant is entitled to full disclosure pursuant to Sections 7, 10, 11 (d) 15 (1) and 24(1)(2) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom and sections 603, 605 and 625.1 of the Criminal Code of Canada; and all other charter rights mentioned in paragraph , including, but not limited to ss. 603, 605, and 625.1 of the Canadian Criminal Code.

4.     The applicant is entitled to full disclosure pursuant to the following case authorities that are binding law that the judges of the Provincial Court of required to follow and apply.  See Supreme Court of Canada – Decisions – R. v. McNeil, 2009 SCC 3, [2009] 1 S.C.R. 66:



Read full Article:
http://newbrunswickprovincialcourt.blogspot.ca/p/as-defendant-to-criminal-charge-one-has.html

The Fredericton police chief says the force is about to formally close its investigation of a local blogger and it will soon return the man's computer equipment.


Officers searched Charles LeBlanc's home in January and seized his computer equipment in connection with allegations he criminally libelled a member of the force in comments posted online.


LeBlanc, who writes a blog on politics and social justice issues, can expect a return of his equipment back very shortly, said Barry MacKnigh


http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/story/2012/05/08/nb-blogger-case-fredericton.html?cmp=rss&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

Fredericton Police Chief Responds to CCLA Request for Information

By sheetal on April 4, 2012

CCLA recently received a response from the Fredericton Chief of Police to its Request for Information under New Brunswick’s Right to Information and Protection of Privacy Act.


Following the arrest earlier this year of a Fredericton blogger in connection to comments he had made on his blog about a city police officer, CCLA wrote to Police Chief Barry MacKnight to express its concerns regarding the use of Criminal Code defamation provisions, and to ask for information about the use of these provisions in the jurisdiction. CCLA sought information on the number of criminal libel investigations the Fredericton Police Force had undertaken, as well as the number of charges and the disposition of those charges.


Chief MacKnight has reported that since 1988, there have been 12 complaints to the Fredericton Police Force under the Criminal Code criminal libel provisions; 4 occured between 1988 and 2006, and 8 occured between 2007 and 2012. Of the 12 complaints, 10 were concluded without charges, and 2 cases remain under investigation.


Read Chief MacKnight’s letter here.


Read more about CCLA’s response to this case here.

Criminal libel charges against Fredericton blogger Charles LeBlanc have been dropped.

 Criminal libel charges against Fredericton blogger Charles LeBlanc have been dropped.


"Following an extensive review of case law, it is clear that other jurisdictions have found this section to be unconstitutional," the provincial government said in a statement on Friday.


"Though we are not bound by those decisions, the legal principles found within are quite sound and it is highly unlikely that any court in New Brunswick would come to a contrary decision," the government said.




"We have advised the Fredericton Police Force we are of the opinion that section 301 is unconstitutional and that the matter against Mr. LeBlanc cannot be approved."


LeBlanc was charged last September under section 301 of the Criminal Code, which relates to criminal libel.


He was accused of damaging the reputation of a city police officer in blog posts last summer.


Last month, six University of New Brunswick professors sent a letter to Attorney General Marie-Claude Blais saying they thought the case would not result in a conviction and was not in the public interest.



http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/story/2012/05/04/nb-charles-leblanc-charges-dropped.html