B.C.’s Attorney – General office wants $7,500.00 for the transcript of Topham Trial By RadicalPress.com

http://jcword.com/

JCWordHdr

Dear   Mr. Topham:

Further to your request for an estimate for the preparation of transcripts regarding the above noted matter and based solely upon information we’ve received from the Quesnel Court Registry, the estimate for the proceedings heard the dates listed below, is as follows:

Normal delivery (within 20 business days):                                   $7,500.00
Expedited delivery (within 3 business days):                                 $9,000.00
Daily delivery (within one business day):                                       This is not an available service rate.

Please note, this is an estimate only based on information received from the Court Registry and the costs may vary upon completion.  Please also note this estimate is for one copy only which includes an electronic copy.

If you wish to proceed with this order, we will require payment in advance.  The acceptable method of payment for this transcript request is via bank draft or money order only.

This order will be placed on hold until we hear further from you and/or we receive your deposit in full.

If you have any further questions in this regard, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Many thanks,

JCWordAssist

__________

ATEditorPic185

Dear Radical Reader,

Well, there you have it. $7,500.00 for the transcript of R v Roy Arthur Topham less the Charge to the Jury which would have included another 62 pages raising the cost up a few hundred dollars more. Had I required the transcript in 3 business days the price would have jumped up another $1,500.00 bringing the total to $9,000.00.

It’s no wonder that the little guys and gals who get caught up in the machinery of Canada’s “Just”us system invariably find themselves in a position where it becomes just too cost prohibitive to challenge decisions that could, were they accessible financially, be amenable to positive change.

I can only thank my lucky stars for the ongoing support from people here in Canada and around the world who believe in the principle and importance of freedom of speech and who’ve come to my assistance over the many long years of seemingly endless litigation. The trial itself was a costly process even with the help coming from Legal Aid which, of itself, is twenty years behind in paying a Legal Aid lawyer an equivalent salary to that being paid Crown prosecutors.

Were I forced to rely solely upon my Old Age Pension Cheque to carry on with the battle for free expression it would have ended years ago, but, because I’m not alone in this struggle and because good people everywhere realize that our ability to confront the repressive power of censorship depends upon our ability to openly express our thoughts and ideas, they have lent their financial support in order to keep the struggle alive.

At this point in time we’re not that far from achieving the present objective of raising the exorbitant amount being charged for the words spoken in our (the people’s) courtroom. Thanks to a recent donation of $5,000.00 by Dr. James Sears of Ontario we’re around the $6,000.00 mark with another $1,500.00 left to raise.

Murphy’s Law (of course) would have it such that this final amount comes due right around Christmas when everyone who does have a few extra bucks in their pocket is thinking of gifts for their loved ones and family and friends not having to fork it out to maintain what they naturally expect to be their supposedly Constitutionally guaranteed rights.

The transcript of the trial is critically important for a number of reasons. The vast majority of people interested in its outcome were unable to attend the proceedings and therefore missed out on the daily unfolding of events. Having the transcript will allow for its posting to the net thus making it available for truth seekers everywhere to study what went on and gain a much broader concept of how the trial unfolded.

In terms of future events the transcript is vital to the defence in that statements made by Crown and Expert witnesses must be corroborated in order to verify our next moves which will be, in large part, based upon the evidence presented by the prosecution.

With a Sec. 2b Charter challenge to Sec. 319(2) of Canada’s criminal code coming up next year and the possibility of an appeal of the guilty verdict in Count 1 of the trial should the Charter challenge fail, it’s crucial that the evidence from the trial be available to us.

Please do what you can to help out with this important case and if you’re not in a position to help out financially then try to share this information with others who may be able to assist in keeping our right to freedom of expression alive and well in Canada.

Thanks so much to all who helped out.

Sincerely,

Arthur Topham
Pub/Ed
The Radical Press
Canada’s Radical News Network
“Digging to the root of the issues since 1998”
––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

•••0•••
 
Donations can be made online via my GoGetFunding site located at http://gogetfunding.com/canadian-publisher-faces-jail-for-political-writings/ or else by sending cash, cheques or Money Orders to the following postal address. Please make sure that any cheques or Money Orders are made out to – Arthur Topham – and sent to:
 
Arthur Topham
4633 Barkerville Highway
Quesnel, B.C.
V2J 6T8

An Open Letter to all Truth Deniers & Holocaust Believers By Arthur Topham

OpenLet2TruthDeniers&HolocaustBelievers

An Open Letter to all Truth Deniers and Holocaust Believers

By

Arthur Topham

August 22nd, 2014

 

RPEditor400

[Editor’s Preface:

What sparked this open letter to those who still believe in what historical revisionist and author Arthur R. Butz called “The Hoax of the Twentieth Century: The Case Against the Presumed Extermination of European Jewry” (the title of his 1976 book that demolished forever the mythological basis for what, in my estimation, was, and remains, the most colossal and earth-threatening lie ever to have been told to mankind) was a comment from a person (Nick Inglis) on a post that I had submitted to a local Quesnel, B.C. Facebook group of which I was a member at the time. It was the standard “guilty by association” ploy that both Jews and their deluded gentile lackeys in the west perpetually use whenever they don’t have anything intelligent to offer to a debate. In this case the fellow who posted it appeared to be a member of the science faculty at a B.C. university in the southern region of the province. Given that the author of comment represented what might be called a member of Canada’s intelligentsia I felt it was time to inform those of his mindset of a few things that they were unwittingly overlooking in their efforts to sustain this massive falsification that has plagued the world since 1945.]

_______

Dear Nick Inglis, Truth Deniers & Holocaust Believers:

While out getting firewood yesterday I got to thinking about your August 16th comment on the WTF Quesnel FB group where you had remarked on a post of mine, “I wonder what Councillor Thapar would think about being used as a reference to support a Holocaust denier.”

Apart from the fact that your words were obviously meant to imply “guilt by association” between myself and Quesnel City Councillor Sushil Thapar, thus reflecting badly on the councillor, that aspect of your comment wasn’t what I was meditating on while falling the beetle-killed pines along the Cariboo roadside.

It appears (from clicking on your FB profile) that you have begun a new job with the Biology Faculty at Kwantlen Polytechnic University in Surrey, B.C.  It was this point that caught my attention and got me thinking further about your remark concerning the fact that I don’t believe in the 6 Million myth and therefore am a prime candidate for labelling as a “Holocaust denier” by the Zionist Jews and those like yourself who support their psychopathy.

As someone who appears to be involved in science it begs the question as to why you would be so quick to make such an accusation against me and also why you would be buying into the “Holocaust” fiction in the first place given that your profession rests, for the most part, upon reason, logic and provable facts rather than assertions, accusations, emotions and beliefs (as odd, inconceivable and incomprehensible as they may be).

As a scientist I’m certain you must be aware of the situation that the 16th Century Italian physicist, mathematician, astronomer and philosopher Galileo found himself in when he discovered (thanks to his newly designed telescope) that his predecessor Nicolaus Copernicus’ theory that the Earth and all of the planets actually revolved around the Sun rather than the opposite world view  – one that postulated the Earth was the center of our Universe – was, in fact, true.

You must also be aware of the persecution, ignominy and lifetime incarceration that Galileo underwent thanks to the machinations of the Roman Catholic Church when he refused to recant his position, all of which relates to this 20th century phenomenon that the Jews have, with wilful and intentional malice, forced upon the world via their monopolistic control of all major media sources coupled with their inordinate financial and political influence over western nations and politicians (as has now become so patently obvious during the latest round of genocide in Gaza wherein no western “leader” has shown the courage or fortitude to question and demand a stop to the needless slaughter of thousands of innocent men, women and especially children).

It was the Renaissance Nick that first gave birth to what we now call the Scientific Method – a time, after centuries of darkness and ignorance, when man’s inquisitive and skeptical mind and spirit of inquiry finally burst forth in open opposition to the then accepted Authority of the day. Without this method of approaching any hypothetical question and proving it with verifiable facts the world would still be held in throng to superstition and religious speculation rather than actual truth. Given this new reality that the world adopted over four hundred years ago I fail to understand how you, as a scientist, can equate (and justify) making ILLEGAL the questioning of anything; be it a scientific theory, an accepted fact of nature or, even the fiction of “6 Million Jews” having been gassed to death and then cremated in ovens in German occupied territory during WW2?

Cannot you see that, in this particular case, i.e., the 6 Million myth, you are being confronted with the ONLY exception to the scientific methodology upon which your profession and all scientific professions rest? Why is it that, in this one instance, you are somehow able to suspend your understanding of the scientific method of discovery and suddenly accept, on hearsay and proven contrived “evidence”, that governments, under the influence of one small religious cult, can actually legislate laws that make it an indictable offence to question this fiction or anything else for that matter? Where does freedom of thought and inquiry play into this diabolical farce? Where does common sense and the basics of scientific research come in? Where, in truth, does anything logical or reasonable come into play when anyone, be they a government or a religious group (as in the case of the Jews) or an individual, is able to make it illegal to question any matter of history or any event or anything that may be theorized, ranging from the scientific up through the branches of philosophy and art to even the spiritual pinnacle of theological speculation?

One would think (reasonably and logically) that if any statement, of all the myriad questions that mankind has considered throughout history, ought to meet such a criterion and be prohibited by law it would be the denial of God rather than a purported historic event that has countless loopholes in it which would prevent it from becoming accepted by the whole world (scientific or otherwise) as an unquestionable fact. In other words are we to remain free to question the existence of the Creator Himself yet unable to question, based upon scientific evidence or otherwise, the fraudulent claims of the Zionist Jews who, through cunning and conspiracy, plus the heavily weighted influence of their purse and their control of all aspects of our major sources of communication, have not only successfully foisted this lie upon mankind and then exacerbated it by programming successive generations of people to accept it as the gospel truth but have now managed to actually elevate it to the apex of juridical absurdity through the manufacture of actual legislation in certain countries that make it ILLEGAL to question what is undoubtedly, as researcher Arthur R. Butz clearly proved back in 1976, the greatest hoax of the 20th century?

Of course I know why you made that comment just as I know why the Zionist Jews and the state of Israel have been slaughtering Palestinians and stealing their land for over a century. It is, as the Jews so often have stated in the past with respect to their 6 Million myth, “manifestly obvious” that your intent is to discourage others from any association with those who, like myself, refuse to accept the unacceptable and fraudulent premise of the 6 Million and thus segregate and isolate our thoughts and ideas and opinions and years of intensive research so that no one will be tempted to investigate further what I or numerous others have to say about any of the related problems that political Zionism has created throughout the 20th century and which now, are coming to a head, in the early beginnings of the 21st.

Here is your modus operandi and the scenario that you would have others believe:

The primary purpose of labelling a person an “anti-Semite” or a “Holocaust denier” or a “hate monger” or any number of other similar epithets is, pure and simple, outright vilification. In other words if you can first create labels like those just identified and then instil their circumscribed and false meanings in the minds of the general public through mass programming (via the mainstream media which the Jews control), then once this is established it precludes having to establish any further solid proof to support whatever allegations you may wish to make about a person, group, organization or even government for that matter, which you intend to destroy by first defaming them in order to discredit either their character and integrity or their work (i.e. opposing views).

To return to your original remark let us see how this program of vilification would work should it actually be followed through.

I have lived in Cariboo region of British Columbia, Canada since 1970 which amounts to forty-four years (with some brief absences). From 1975 on I have lived here steadily working and raising a family and contributing to the local community in a number of ways. 

The Quesnel area has a overall population of about 30,000 people which is not a large number to get to know  or become known to over the span of nearly half a century. Because of my propensity for writing and my interest in politics and history I have been a regular contributor to Quesnel’s community newspaper, the Quesnel Cariboo Observer where, according to statistics, I earned a reputation for having contributed more “Letters to the Editor” to that publication than anyone else in its 106 year history of publishing.  As well I have been a paid columnist for the same publication.

My civil commitments to the local region have also been  substantial and fulfilling with years of community service in my own local community of Cottonwood which lies approximately 20 miles east of the city of Quesnel. I’ve worked in a number of different professions ranging from school teaching to that of a Park Ranger and Supervisor to being a log builder, the owner of a registered carpentry business  as well as owning and running a registered publishing business known as The Radical Press along with placer mining and being the Secretary of the Cariboo Mining Association.

On top of these activities I’ve been actively participating in local politics at the regional, municipal and provincial levels of government having at different times ran for the position of Councillor for the city of Quesnel as well as for the provincial MLA’s position for the Cariboo North electoral district.

In other words I haven’t been sitting idle over the past forty years plus. It is this legacy of community contributions and effort that you are attempting to destroy by your calculated and malicious attempt to discredit my life’s work using worn-out tactics of slander and libel and defamation, all of which are meant to malign my character and denigrate all of my efforts over the past four decades. 

But that’s not the worst of it. You would have your mean-spirited accusations and spiteful assertions carry over to all those with whom I’ve established relations with throughout my lifetime here in the Cariboo. In other words all of my friends and associates and those within my community who I’ve had social or business dealings with for decades are all to suddenly void their association with me because now I am a “Holocaust denier” and no longer the person I’ve been all my life. Are you not capable of intellectually grasping the enormity of what you are attempting to do via your spurious, and, yes, hateful slander?

You mentioned Councillor Sushil Thapar in your comment but you have failed to mention the rest of the many councillors and mayors of the city of Quesnel who I have known and associated with and befriended over the past forty-four years. Are they also expected to treat me as if I were suddenly a pariah and a leper because someone of your mental measure has  inferred that I am a “Holocaust denier”?

Why it wasn’t that long ago that I was speaking with one of the former mayors of Quesnel and he remarked to me, upon hearing that I had been charged with a “hate crime”, “Why Arthur how can this be? I’ve always known you to be a “peace and love” sorta guy, one of the old Hippies who’s always strived to bring  social justice and brotherhood and sisterhood and environmental sanity back to the world.” Were he and all the other public figures who I know to take your ill-intentioned and evil advice they would all, needs be, have to see me in a totally different light and accept that they had been wrong about me all their lives and that in reality I’m just a no-good, worthless, hate-mongering, Jew-hating anti-Semite and, horror of horrors, a “Holocaust denier”!

And that, Nick Inglis, is the long and the short of your intentions and your sleazy tactics. Rather than have to defend your libellous accusations made against my person by offering up substantial evidence to prove what you are alleging is verifiable truth it’s much easier to merely resort to the Zionist Jew’s deceptive deck of shitty smear cards in the vain hope that whatever ones you pull out will somehow stick to me and save you having to actually offer credible sources to support your surreptitiously motivated intentions.

Like I mentioned earlier in this article the definitive proof that the so-called 6 Million Jewish Holocaust is nothing more than a fabricated fraud is all contained in Arthur R. Butz’s book, The Hoax of the Twentieth Century. Once again I humbly suggest to you and all the rest of the truth-deniers and holocaust believers in the world that you obtain a copy of this book and read it carefully. Having done that and you are still convinced that you can disprove what Mr. Butz has shown to be the truth regarding this deception then please share your findings with the rest of the truth seekers of the world who have already determined the veracity of this indisputable document.

In Peace and Justice for All,

I remain,

Arthur Topham

___________

 

 

 

Justice: Should Arthur Topham Have Sexually Assaulted 23 Women Instead? by Christoper di Armani

allegory-of-justice-and-peace800

Screen Shot 2014-02-23 at 11.24.07 PM

 Justice:

Should Arthur Topham Have Sexually Assaulted 23 Women Instead?

By

Christopher di Armani

 

That may seem a strange title for an article about our legal system, but after reading about Campbell Ernest Crichton, the former Duncan, BC, physiotherapist who faces charges he sexually assaulted at least 23 of his former patients, it seems to be the correct title.

A February 21, 2014, article in The Province started thus:

A hearing has been ordered in the case of a former physiotherapist who successfully argued he was too poor to pay for a lawyer to defend himself against charges he sexually assaulted 23 female patients.

Last year Campbell Ernest Crichton of Duncan, B.C., had his charges temporarily set aside after a judge found he was indigent and needed a government-funded lawyer for the complex criminal trial.

Anyone following my writings on Freedom of Speech will be well familiar with the case of Arthur Topham, the Quesnel, BC, publisher of RadicalPress.com, an alternative news website.

Mr. Topham currently faces criminal charges under Section 319(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada for “inciting hatred” against an identifiable group.

What, you ask, is the connection between Arthur Topham’s Freedom of Speech case and an [alleged] degenerate serial sex offender?

Quite simply, neither man can afford legal counsel for their criminal trials.

In the case of the [alleged] sex offender B.C. Supreme Court Justice Keith Bracken said there was a “real and substantial” risk to Crichton’s right to a fair trial if if did not have legal counsel. As a result of that “real and substantial” risk Justice Bracken ordered Crichton be provided a government-funded lawyer.

Arthur Topham is facing criminal charges for exercising his Right to Freedom of Speech. There is no “victim” here other than a few people whose actions lead me to believe they self-identify as victims. Topham sexually assaulted nobody. He physically harmed nobody. He never forced a single person on Planet Earth to read what he wrote.

Despite those facts Arthur Topham’s right to a fair trial with adequate legal counsel seems unimportant to the very same judiciary that ruled an [alleged] serial sex offender ought to have a government-funded lawyer.

Arthur Topham is not a wealthy man. He’s a modest man living on modest means in his rural home outside of Quesnel, BC. His application for legal aid was denied. His application for government funding under what is known as a Rowbotham Application was similarly denied.

By these standards it is far more important that a sexual deviant’s rights be safeguarded than a man who dared write a few words someone found objectionable.

That is a very dangerous precedent to set.

Sending a man to prison for the words he writes ought to scare the crap out of every single writer in Canada. Sure, today it’s Topham’s views that are “politically incorrect” and therefore fair game for our legal system, but what about tomorrow? Whose views will be deemed “incorrect” then? Who will stand up for you then?

Campbell Ernest Crichton is charged with sexually abusing 23 human beings. That is real, substantial physical and emotional trauma all for one sick man’s own sexual gratification.

There are real human victims.

Arthur Topham wrote an article someone didn’t like. For that the BC Hate Crimes Unit of the RCMP and the BC Attorney General want to send Mr. Topham to prison, while refusing him any chance of a true legal defense.

Shouldn’t we be far more concerned about sexual predators? Nope. We’ll happily pay their legal fees and send that darned writer to prison. After all, ideas are far more dangerous than sexual predators, right?
—–

Christopher di Armani is the editor and publisher of Canada’s Rights and Freedom Bulletin. This article appeared in Issue No. 167, Feb. 22, 2014. Visit Mr. Armani’s site at: http://Bulletin.RightsAndFreedoms.org

Frank Frost: Chilling Accounts of Pedophilia, Murder and Corruption in B.C.’s Judiciary, Ministry of Children & Family Development & the RCMP

FrostInterviewHdrFinal

Preface

“I wish sometimes that I had another medium than words, those pale and empty sounds and symbols.
I would like to tell a tale in acid, in poison, in vitriol, in fire and brimstone,
a tale that would sear and singe and scorch and curl up the pages as you read them.”

~ Douglas Reed, Disgrace Abounding, 1939

“Now the wintertime is coming,
The windows are filled with frost.
I went to tell everybody,
But I could not get across.”

Bob Dylan, It Takes a Lot to Laugh, It Takes a Train to Cry, 1965

RadPressEditorNew1 150

The incidents of rampant, overt corruption and cover-up of abominable criminal activities within the upper and lower levels of B.C.’s provincial government ministries, the federal and provincial judiciaries and the RCMP continue to expand with increased alacrity as new revelations by whistle blowing citizens, sickened and disgusted with what’s going on behind the smokescreen of media, court and police complicity in heinous acts of sexual abuse and pedophilia, step forth into the light of truth with their hitherto suppressed stories.

For the vast majority of victims who find themselves caught up in this vortex of venal depravity and perversion, without the financial means to hire high priced attorneys, there’s little recourse for them but to vainly cry out for help and recognition to avenues of public recourse such as  the RCMP Complaints Commission, the Human Rights organizations, the BC Civil Liberties Association, the Ombudsman and other miscellaneous agencies and government ministries that ostensibly exist to protect the victims of crimes here in this province, only to end up with the realization that all of them, ultimately, are but false and disappointing ruses whose primary purpose is to act as firewalls of protection for the criminals themselves.

When we tally them all up and then toss in the corporate, mainstream Zionist-controlled media whose primary purpose is to promote and protect these criminal elements within our judicial and social infrastructure we end up slamming our heads into what’s essentially a granite wall of collusion and criminality that not only boggles the mind but strikes fear into the hearts of those who once believed that their government and their courts and their police system were there to protect the honest and innocent and uphold the ideals of justice and fair play.

The sad and growing reality for all of the thousands upon thousands of victims of these forms of abuse is that the psychopaths have taken over the levers of government and foreign lobby groups representing the most voracious, avaricious, vile and decadent nation on the face of the planet have filled our national and provincial judiciary with cold-blooded, cruel replicas of themselves whose primary purpose is to serve and protect the sickos that are raping, abusing and murdering our youth and instilling fear and psychoses into their hearts and minds so that their lives are forever lived in terror and anxiety thus ensuring that they live dysfunctional lifestyles that again only benefit the courts and the corporate prison system (run by their demented brethren from the U.S.A.) which profit even further from the ongoing abuse of our present and future generations.

Were it not for the courage and tenacity and will of individuals like Frank FrostLonny Landrud and Byron Prior and Frank Martin & Helen Michel and Jack Cram and Jimi Townsend and Robert White-Erickson and Werner Bock and numerous others who’ve thrown off their shackles of fear and servitude and challenged this serpentine system of “law and order” and openly exposed the underbelly of these slithering slime balls the rest of the world would still be unaware of just how evil and psychotic the system really is once the veneer of media rhetoric is scraped off and the ghastly truth is revealed.

Here at The Radical Press I’ve been covering these and other tales of woe and misery and government misfeasance for well on to fifteen years and in doing so I’ve also had to pay the price that comes with challenging the authority of those who, in their deluded hubris and megalomania, still believe they have some god-given right to control and exploit and abuse our individual liberties and freedoms as human beings. For the whole of this duration I’ve been constantly in legal battles with the provincial government and  with the Zionist Jewish lobby groups who wield such inordinate and perverse influence over all levels of government in this once democratic and free nation we call Canada.

SLAPP-STIK 1000

I’ve been harassed, intimidated, charged and taken to the BC Supreme Court by the highest levels of this province’s government for exposing pedophile activities within the same Ministry of children and Families (as it was then called back in 2001) during the reign of the former NDP government then under the leadership of Premier Ujjal Dosangh. Now, fifteen years later, nothing has changed and the criminal activities of these same sick, satanic perverts continues, aided and abetted by their No. 1 mind-control weapon, the Zionist Jew criminal media that dominates 95% or more of Canada’s information technology.

SLAPPSTIK700

It was only recently while covering the legal case of criminal injustice involving Robert White-Erickson of McBride, B.C. that I became aware of Mr. Frank Frost. What made it even more uncanny was to find out from talking with him that, although he also resides in McBride, he once lived and worked in my own home town of Quesnel where for many years he worked as an advocate for the very same Ministry of Children and Family Development that he is now openly criticizing and exposing.

Like all stories of sexual perversion and abuse involving pedophilia, rape and murder Frank Frost’s story is not pleasing to either the ear or to one’s sense of moral serenity. What will very quickly become apparent for viewers of this two-part interview (filmed, incidentally by Robert White-Erickson who, as I write, is once again sitting in jail in the Prince George Regional Correctional Centre on additional trumped up charges laid by the same crooks that Frank Frost exposes) is that Mr. Frost is a man to be reckoned with. He’s someone who displays the traits of a determined and fearless fighter and to therefore suggest that his video presentation is “frank” would be an understatement of magnanimous proportions. Frank Frost holds no punches and when it comes to naming names he gives viewers the whole nine yards, sparing his adversaries  any of the niceties of language and protocol that many people today will likely find a bit shocking.

Like all the others Frank Frost has gone to the limit to try and exercise his Charter rights and to obtain justice via the standard procedures set up for such purposes. All of his efforts thus far have been in vain and realizing that his country has betrayed not only himself but his family and his friends and everyone one who has ever been unduly wronged Frost is not at this stage of his life what one would call a “happy camper.” Viewers will soon grasp that fact as they watch his presentation, one of the most riveting that I’ve ever encountered in my years of publishing.

Do share this post with others. We need to work together as Frank repeatedly states if we’re ever to end this seemingly endless cycle of perversion and injustice that’s permeated every level of our country’s legal system.

The only means of communicating with Frank Frost is to call him on his phone. The crooks in the RCMP and the Attorney General’s office have made it virtually impossible for him to access the internet or maintain an email address. Call Frank at 1-250-569-0338 if you wish to contact him.

Red spacer copy

THE FRANK FROST INTERVIEW PART ONE:

FRANKVID#1

CLICK HERE TO WATCH

Red spacer copy

THE FRANK FROST INTERVIEW PART TWO:

FRANKPT2

CLICK HERE TO WATCH

Radical Press Legal Update #15

NewLegalUpdateLogo-700

notice4RP

Regina v The Radical Press: LEGAL UPDATE #15

November 20th, 2013

Dear Free Speech Advocates and Radical Press Supporters,

My last Legal Update was sent out well over four months ago on July 11th, 2013 so for those who may not recall all what transpired up to that point I’ll give a brief overview so as to put subsequent events into some meaningful context.

All of what is going on concerns the matter of the Sec. 319(2) CCC charge and arrest for the purported crime of “willfully promoting hatred against ‘people of the Jewish religion or ethnic group’” originally brought on by B’nai Brith Canada’s Agent Z and serial Section 13 complainant Ricardo Warmouse.

Crown had anticipated that the Attorney General’s office was going to go for a “direct indictment” and skip the preliminary hearing stage of events but that strategy fell through on July 8th, 2013. That then brought my proposal to file for a Rowbotham application back to the forefront. As explained in earlier Updates the Rowbotham application was part of my former counsel’s plan to get government funded legal counsel to defend me and to act on my behalf during the preliminary inquiry to determine the merits of the aforementioned Sec. 319(2) charge. Of course when Doug was alive it was he who anticipated being that counsel.

I had met with the Trial Coordinator and via telephone spoke with Keith Evans, legal counsel for the B.C. Attorney General’s office in order to discuss my Rowbotham application which he was overseeing. Prior to that I had already submitted my Notice of Application and Affidavit to the AG’s regarding the Rowbotham back on April 23, 2013 and received a package of material back from Mr. Evans on May 11th explaining all the additional information that I was expected to furnish him with prior to a hearing taking place on the matter.

On August 13th I met again with the Trial Coordinator and a date was set to hold a hearing on the Rowbotham application on Monday, November 18th, 2013.

During the interim time period leading up the hearing I had to furnish the AG’s office with as much documentation as I possibly could that would show that I was not in a financial position to be able to afford to hire a lawyer to represent me at the upcoming preliminary hearing scheduled for January 22nd, 2014. As a result the month of September leading into the early weeks of October were spend doing what was basically a forensic audit of all of my finances and sending all of this information to the Attorney General’s office in Vancouver, B.C. It was quite time consuming and left little opportunity for doing much else besides publishing the occasional article on the website. Keith Evans of the AG’s office was very congenial and willing to assist me with any questions that that arose during the period that I was amassing all of my evidence I felt would show that I was in fact indigent and unable to cover the cost of a hiring a lawyer. The term “indigent” is one that the AG’s office uses and it means “impoverished or destitute or poverty-stricken or disadvantaged, hard up, etc.” All of these descriptive words I felt fitted my circumstances.

Approximately one week before the hearing on November 18th I received all of this information back from the AG’s office along with all of my email exchanges with AG lawyer Keith Evans. The booklet containing these communications ended up being 455 pages in length!

Screen Shot 2013-11-20 at 11.05.23 AM

Radical Press Publisher Arthur Topham displaying the Rowbotham application documents from the B.C. Attorney General’s office

There are basically two main features or parts to a Rowbotham application, the first deals with having to prove you are in fact “indigent” and the second being able to argue that your particular case is complex and out of the ordinary to the point where it is evident that without legal representation you would not have a chance of a fair trial and therefore your Charter right to a fair trial would be infringed upon.

The hearing began at 9:30 a.m. in the Quesnel courthouse with Judge Morgan presiding. Also in attendance was Christina Drake, a lawyer working for the Attorney General’s office out of Victoria, B.C. who had flown up to argue against the application.

Judge Morgan began by asking me to explain to him why I felt I was unable to afford to hire a lawyer and why I felt my case was so “extraordinarily complex” (another expression that the AG’s office employed throughout their argument repeatedly). I then proceeded to tell him about how I have been battling with legal issues brought on by B’nai Brith Canada’s two separate complaints, (the sec. 13(1) Canadian Human Rights Act complaint from 2007 and the  Sec. 319(2) CCC charge of May 16th, 2012), for the past six years and how having to do all the legal work on my own has affected my ability to earn a sufficient income that would allow me to hire a lawyer.

Following all of that (which took a couple of hours) I then outlined for the Judge the reasons why I felt my case was unusual and complex enough that it warranted having a professional legal expert to represent me during the preliminary hearing stage so as to show how the illegal search warrant that resulted in the invasion of my home and the theft of all of my computers and electronic files was an actual criminal offence on the part of the RCMP and the B.C. Hate Crime Team led by Det. Cst. Terry Wilson. It was my argument that because of this initial illegal act that the case should be thrown out at the preliminary hearing stage. In fact my former lawyer Mr. Christie had planned to set aside five days for the preliminary hearing in order to accomplish this. After his demise the court changed that time period from five days to five hours! Obviously they felt that whatever Mr. Christie was planning to present to the court didn’t warrant further consideration after he was out of the picture.

Due to space constraints I won’t go into the details of my argument for why I felt the case is complex other than I told the Judge that, based upon my personal experience with the whole free speech issue over the past six years, I felt it was the aim of Jewish lobby groups here in Canada, specifically B’nai Brith Canada, to set a precedent using my charge so that, were they successful in obtaining a conviction, it would affect every other publisher and writer in Canada who might try and criticize either the Jew’s-only state of Israel or anything else related to the Zionist political ideology or their religious practices as found in Judaism and the Talmud. It would, in other words, create a stifling climate of censorship that would negatively affect every Canadian’s right to freedom of speech and expression as stated in the Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

One additional point needs to be emphasized here regarding all of the sec. 13 controversy that has taken place over the past quarter century or longer. When I began to speak to Judge Morgan about sec. 13(1) and about the fact that the federal government had repealed that section of the Canadian Human Rights Code back in June of 2012 he confessed that he knew nothing about the whole issue! I was literally taken aback by this unexpected pronouncement on his part and my facial expression must have surprised him as he then stated that he actually sat on a “human rights” committee of some sort and yet he was still unaware of the whole issue. Then, only to exacerbate his revelations further, the lawyer for the Attorney General’s office also spoke up and informed the court that she, too, was aware of what was going on in terms of Section 13 and the Canadian Human Rights Code.

After a lunch break the hearing continued and Christina Drake, representing the Attorney General’s office, gave her arguments as to why I ought to be refused the Rowbotham order. She cited numerous case law examples and how in one way or another none of them met the financial threshold that the Crown demands. Of course it’s always a great advantage to be able to be the party that sets the threshold in the first place and when it comes to the state having to pay for a lawyer to defend an accused (and presumed innocent) citizen the Crown finds such a proposal most abhorrent and the thought of it appears to terrify them that such a precedent might actually occur (as it did in the case of Rowbotham) and they would have to actually defray the costs of a Canadian citizen receiving justice in the courts of the land.

When the issue of complexity was addressed Drake stated:

•     [The applicant] Has four years of university education and communicates effectively orally and in writing, as evidenced by the sophisticated written summary he provided of the arguments he wishes to make with respect to the search warrant;

•         Has experience in legal and quasi-legal proceedings, specifically in the context of a human rights complaint in which it appears that he represented himself;

Of course, to my way of thinking, there’s no direct correlation between a person’s ability to express themselves either orally or through the written word or having obtained a Teaching certificate for Elementary school and their ability to perform the work of a qualified and legally trained lawyer. To try and suggest that this is the case would be akin to asserting that the Applicant, because of his university training, would also be qualified to perform the work of a surgeon.

Drake argued that I hadn’t done enough to show that I had contacted other lawyers in order to find out if they would work at lower rates and represent me. Of course I had checked into this and did contact those who I felt might come to my defense but I never received a reply back from them. Again, what the AG’s office intentionally appears to overlook is the reality that defending cases such as mine is a very serious matter for any lawyer who wants to steer clear of being labeled a defender of “hate mongers” and “anti-Semites” and “racists” and end up with a reputation such as that which Douglas Christie acquired by his willingness to defend those charged with “hate crimes”. To defend a person against a charge of “willfully promoting hatred against ‘people of the Jewish religion or ethnic group’” is to accept that you will will also be attacked by these very same foreign lobbyists who are now threatening me.

It was around 4:00 p.m. by the time the AG’s argument was completed. I was then given an opportunity to “sum up” my financial picture which I proceeded to do culminating by emphasizing once again that I and my wife have been forced to live an extremely minimalist existence ever since 2007 and that this ought to be given consideration. Judge Morgan then left the courtroom for about fifteen minutes and returned to give his decision. Predictably, based upon the AG’s argument, he concluded that I hadn’t met the financial threshold and so therefor my reasons regarding the complexity of the case wouldn’t be considered. He added further that this might change after the preliminary hearing when, should the case go to trial (which it appears is highly likely), that I would then have the opportunity to file another Rowbotham application and give it another shot so to speak.

When we left the courthouse it was -20 Celcius outside with a cold, bitter wind blowing. Rather fitting in some respects.

—-

Topham applies for Rowbotham by Quesnel Cariboo Observer

QuesCariSent Editor:Pub

Dear Free Speech Supporters,

The June 7, 2013 weekend edition of the Quesnel Cariboo Observer featured another update on my legal battle with B’ai Brith Canada and the Queen of England.

I’m always thankful for whatever unbiased msm coverage that I do get as generally, beyond Black Press (not Conrad) which is an independent chain located here in B.C., the vast majority of the media is owned or controlled by the Jews and inevitably all that I receive from that viperous venue is more pro-Zionist, hate-filled venom.

I’ve posted the Front Page cover and a screen shot of the actual article for easier reading. Because of the nature of many online publications one cannot just go to the article in question and read and/or copy it to a text format. In the case of the QC Observer one must first buy a yearly subscription to the paper before being able to access the online digital edition. Seems pretty weird to me but that’s how they set it up.

 photo CaribooObsRowbotham_zps2223ba7f.png

RowbothamArticle photo ScreenShot2013-06-09at95814AM_zps08a1ae0a.png

Radical Press Legal Update #13

NewLegalUpdateLogo-700

notice4RP

Regina v The Radical Press: LEGAL UPDATE #13

 

Dear Supporters of Free Speech and a free Internet,

Tuesday, May 28th, 2013, saw the return to the Quesnel provincial court house of myself and my dear and lovely wife for yet another appearance on the charge of “willfully promoting hatred against ‘people of the Jewish religion or ethnic group’ as written in Canada’s criminal code sec. 319(2).

At this stage of the proceedings it has become virtually impossible to know what to expect beforehand when attending them. The last time I went on May 16th I was greeted with a completely new strategy by the Crown when they informed the court they had decided to go for a “direct indictment” rather than have the case unfold in a normal manner by allowing me to present evidence at a “preliminary inquiry” in order to determine whether or not the Crown actually had sufficient and viable evidence to warrant proceeding to a trial.

Crown told the court that they were awaiting a decision by the B.C. Attorney General’s office that would confirm this and that they expected it would happen prior to May 28th.

Well, as we all know about the best laid plans of mice and men, that decision by the AG’s office didn’t manifest and so the Crown told Judge Morgan that they would have to postpone that part of the proceedings until a later date at which time they fully expected that the Attorney General’s office would make up its mind one way or another.

Judge Morgan, the Honourable Judge who has been attending to my case from the beginning and who was absent on the previous court appearance, looked over the documents that were awaiting him when he entered the court room in order to get the drift of what had taken place on May 16th. He noted that I had filed an application for particularization of the Crown’s disclosure material and in perusing the document he read out excerpts to the court wherein it was stated that because of the volume of materials (over 1000 pages) presented that it was virtually impossible for me to address what specific posts on my website the Crown deemed to be “hatred”.  After doing so he addressed the Crown prosecutor, Jennifer Johnston, and asked her what she had to say about it.

The Crown’s response was rather vociferous and protracted, the main thrust of the argument being that the Crown was not legally bound in any way, shape or form, to divulge to the defendant the specifics of what posts they intended to argue were the ones they felt might prove to a court of law that I was guilty of the said offence. In the words of Crown prosecutor Jennifer Johnston, ” There is no case law anywhere” that says they are bound to do so.

Crown then further worded its argument to the effect that by doing so they would be giving away to the defendant their strategies and in saying that CC Johnston then proceeded to hand to the Judge a number of photocopied pages taken off my website that referred to an online book written by Elizabeth Dilling titled, The Jewish Religion: Its Influence Today. The document that Judge Morgan was presented with first was the Forward to Dilling’s book giving an overview of her various works and her experience in dealing with the negative influences that had come to bear upon America during the course of World War II and afterwards by Zionism.

Judge Morgan quickly scanned the page and then, giving Crown counsel Johnston a rather quizzical look, asked her if this was the sort of thing that Crown was planning to present to the court as evidence?

CC Johnston then launched into a somewhat convoluted and forceful explanation bordering upon become a diatribe. She told the Judge that the article in question was an example of how the defendant’s website was presenting the writer as a credentialed and erudite researcher and writer when it fact (and this was not stated but inferred in her comments) she was really just another anti-Semitic hate monger using the excuse of communism to spread lies about the Jewish Talmud and that the Forward to her book might be compared to a sexual predator who, by sending out an email to someone online telling them about a wholesome family camping trip and inviting them to attend, by stealth and deception lures the innocent (and presumed) youth into meeting with them so they can then violate them sexually!!!

It’s at times such as these that keeping a calm, straight face in the court room becomes extremely challenging.

After her presentation Judge Morgan then stated that he could sympathize with the fact that there was such an abundance of disclosure and that I might well be overwhelmed by it. He said that he was unable to give me any legal advice but that he felt that I should consider bringing this matter up in my Rowbotham application as an illustration of why I felt it was vitally necessary to have counsel to represent me in the event of a trial.

With respect to the Rowbotham application the Judge asked me whether I had filed it and I told him that I had sent off the proper papers to the government but that I was awaiting further word as to whether or not Crown would get their “direct indictment” decision which was to have happened today. Earlier the Crown had informed the Judge of the letter which I had been sent from the legal department for the AG’s office instructing me to either file a Rowbotham application for a counsel to represent me at a preliminary inquiry or to wait and file an application in the event of a trial. I told Judge Morgan that I had gone no further with the application pending today’s appearance because I didn’t know which way the Crown was going with the case. He appeared to have no problem understanding what I was saying.

Judge Morgan then decided that it was not the time make any decisions regarding any of the matters that came up and that he would, once again, have to postpone the case to a later date when Crown felt that they would know for certain whether a direct indictment was happening or not. Crown concurred with him and suggested that they might know better by the end of June or the early part of July, 2013. At that point the Judge instructed me to go to the office next to the court room after adjournment and I would be given the exact date when I was to return.

Following his instructions to me I asked the Judge if I might speak. He gave his permission and I then told him that I wished to register a strong objection to the manner in which Crown was continually making reference to Radical Press and comparing the website to either cases of child pornography or else, as in today’s arguments, cases of sexual abuse. I told the Judge that I felt this was highly unfair and prejudicial and that there was no comparison to what I publish and what the Crown was attempting always equate with those two references. The Judge then said that my objection was registered and following that the case was adjourned to Tuesday, July 9th, 2013 at 1:30 pm.
—–