justicedonedirtcheap@gmail.com



 




Representations of the Lady of Justice in the Western tradition occur in many places and at many times. She sometimes wears a blindfold, more so in Europe, but more often she appears without one. She usually carries a sword and scales. Almost always draped in flowing robes, mature but not old, no longer commonly known as Themis, she symbolizes the fair and equal administration of the law, without corruption, avarice, prejudice, or favor.


CLICK ON HEREIN BELOW PROVIDED: LAW SCHOOL BOOK IMAGES, SIMPLY SELECT THE SUBJECT OF YOUR INTEREST AND ENTER OUR HUMBLE LAW LIBRARY; THIS IS A CHRONOLOGICAL ARRANGEMENT OF OUR MERITORIOUSLY RESEARCHED TORT LAW (TO REDRESS A WRONG DONE) THEN LISTED A DETAILED ACCOUNT OF THE PRACTICAL EXPERIENCES OF OUR CONTRIBUTING SELF REPRESENTED LITIGANT'S, CONCERNING:
the study, theory and practice of litigation
as it relates to The Court of Queen's Bench of New Brunswick, Provincial Court and The Court of Appeal of New Brunswick; Filing, and Procedure, in general.















       Please find - here below - this Link: My Brief Story - Introduction: Welcome, this is a 'Justice' Blog intended to benefit all;   'Self Represented Litigants'.


=================================================================================================

2013 New Year's Resolution:
To however, cause the Judiciary of New Brunswick to uphold the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Reason being, that, the Charter is applicable in New Brunswick, just as all provinces are bound by the Constitution.
Despite the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms was adopted in 1982, it was not until 1985, that, the main provisions regarding equality rights (section 15) came into effect. The delay was meant to give the federal and provincial governments an opportunity to review per-existing statutes and strike potentially unconstitutional inequalities.

=================================================================================================

NOTICE: above provided image is a link to the 'RANT' area of contributing Self Represented Litigants
========================================
=========================================================


Welcome, this is a 'Justice' Blog intended to benefit all;

'Self Represented Litigants'. follow this link to New Brunswick Legal Procedure 101

NOTICE: above provided image is a link to the 'Public Forum regarding our legal and judicial system


NOTICE: above provided image is a link to the 'RANT' area of contributing Self Represented Litigants

Back to Justice Done Dirt Cheap Front Page

Thursday, September 27, 2012

Constable David Beck, of FREDERICTON POLICE FORCE, examined under oath on the stand September 21, 2012, by Self represented Litigant Andre Murray




Constable David Beck a member of FREDERICTON POLICE FORCE required to 'Take The Stand' September 21, 2012, for cross examination, for that reason had sworn an oath to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, was asked the following questions by Self Represented Litigant Andre Murray, questions specifically regarding Constable David Beck comprehension of the Provincial Offences Procedure Act, SNB 1987, c P-22.1.

Please Note: this herein above mentioned Court Hearing of September 21, 2012,  for cross examination of arresting officer Constable David Beck was a continuation of a Trial regarding bylaw T-4 section 15, whereby Constable David Beck alleges Andre Murray was riding on the sidewalk with a bicycle in violation of a by-law of  THE CITY OF FREDERICTON. This subject cross examination of arresting officer Constable David Beck is only one of two most serious aspects of the challenge to the subject by-law matter. The second most serious aspect is that of Andre Murray's Constitutional Challenge regarding bylaw T-4 section 15, riding on the sidewalk with a bicycle which will amongst other things reveal that Andre Murray has been violated by the actions of Constable David Beck thereby denied his guaranteed protection under The Constitution Act, 1982 which contains the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms .

As if that is not enough, Self Represented Litigant Andre Murray will later illustrate that the Province of New Brunswick is negligent in having not brought all legislation of New Brunswick into compliance with The Constitution Act, 1982 which contains the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, as is required and long over due. 



Did you Constable David Beck believe, on reasonable and probable grounds, that a person had committed a prescribed offence? Yes or no?

Did you Constable David Beck serve that person with a ticket in prescribed form? Yes or no?

What is prescribed form Constable David Beck?  Please describe this______________.

Constable David Beck did you ask the defendant to sign a notice of prosecution corresponding to the ticket? Yes or no?

Constable David Beck did you certify on the notice of prosecution that the defendant failed or refused to sign? Yes or no?

Constable David Beck did you file notice of prosecution? Yes or no?

Constable David Beck when did you file notice of prosecution?  Date____________

Constable David Beck what was the date stated in the ticket for the defendant’s appearance? _____________________



Please Note: The implications of the answers given by Constable David Beck to questions such as provided herein above may be as follows:

According to section 12(2) of Provincial Offences Procedure Act, SNB 1987, c P-22.1 Proceedings in respect of the offence charged in the ticket (procedures), commence when the notice of prosecution is filed with the judge.


According to section 12(1) of Provincial Offences Procedure Act, SNB 1987, c P-22.1,  Unless payment of a fixed penalty is made in accordance with section 14 within the time stated in the ticket, the notice of prosecution shall be filed with a judge no later than the date stated in the ticket for the defendant’s appearance.


According to section 16(1) of Provincial Offences Procedure Act, SNB 1987, c P-22.1. Where the defendant has not paid a fixed penalty before the time stated in the ticket for the payment of the fixed penalty and does not appear in court at the time and place stated in the ticket, the judge shall examine the notice of prosecution and, if the notice of prosecution contains the certificate referred to in subsection (2), the judge shall, subject to subsection (3), convict the defendant and impose a fine in the amount of the fixed penalty set out in the ticket.


According to section 16(2) of Provincial Offences Procedure Act, SNB 1987, c P-22.1 The certificate on a notice of prosecution shall be in prescribed form, shall be signed, and shall state (a)that the person signing the certificate delivered personally to the defendant the ticket to which the notice of prosecution corresponds, and(b)that the ticket was in prescribed form and was completed in the same manner as the notice of prosecution.


According to section 16(3) of Provincial Offences Procedure Act, SNB 1987, c P-22.1 The judge shall not convict the defendant if (a)the judge has reason to believe that the certificate on the notice of prosecution is inaccurate, or (b)the notice of prosecution contains a defect and the defect cannot be cured under section 106.


According to section 106(5) of Provincial Offences Procedure Act, SNB 1987, c P-22.1 No curing of a defect under subsection (4) shall be permitted if (a)the defect was such as to mislead the defendant, (b)substantial injustice would be caused to the defendant by curing the defect, and
(c)the injustice that would be caused to the defendant by curing the defect cannot be overcome by the granting of an adjournment.


Pursuant to According to section 106(5) - Filing an information instead of a the Notice of Prosecution would (1) mislead the defendant (2) substantial injustice would be caused if the court overlooks the fact that a Notice of Prosecution was not issued at the time of the ticket being served to Andre Murray, furthermore a Notice of Prosecution was not Court Filed in prescribed form according to the subject relevant Act: Provincial Offences Procedure Act, SNB 1987, c P-22.1  furthermore the notice of prosecution was never filled with the Court before the date of the first appearance as required by section 12(1) of Provincial Offences Procedure Act, SNB 1987, c P-22.1, consequentially (c) the injustice that would be caused to the defendant by curing the defect cannot be overcome by the granting of an adjournment.


The "Information" document should be withdrawn, because it is completely the wrong form for this procedure and this matter should be dismissed in its entirety, furthermore, this Court should not convict the defendant According to the conditions as set out in section 16(3) of Provincial Offences Procedure Act, SNB 1987, c P-22.1.

No comments: