Reply To What Was In My Opinion A "Straw Man" Response By The Court Oversight Judge...
(2 emails were sent... and were NEVER responded to... attachments were omitted here)...
NOTE: "The SILENT PRESS" is also on the distribution list...
The serious issues not addressed in Judge Ellies' "Straw Man" Response!
Judge Ellies failed to address 3 very, very serious issues in what was in my opinion a "straw man" response to my resquest for a review/investigation of what was in my opinion, nothing short of a "kangaroo court trial" on September 12, 2013. er
1) He does NOT mention ANYTHING pertaining to the fact that Deputy Judge Patricia Cassidy had altered her judgment 3 DAYS AFTER THE TRIAL WAS OVER AND THAT THIS ALTERED JUDGMENT IS NOT FOUND IN THE OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT OF THE TRIAL - NOT EVEN AS A NOTATION IN SPITE OF THE FACT THE PRESIDING JUDGE MUST REVIEW THE TRANSCRIPT PRIOR TO MAKING IT "OFFICIAL" AND/OR "PUBLIC".
2) The REAL issue is, in my opinion, NOT whether a "non-settling party can be forced to trial" but rather WHETHER A COURT SHOULD BE ABLE TO DISMISS A NEGLIGENCE CLAIM AGAINST A PERSON INVOLVED IN PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUES (SUCH AS AN ENGINEER) WITHOUT THE CASE AND/OR ARGUMENTS HAVING BEEN HEARD AT ALL! THIS IS NOT IN THE INTEREST OF THE PUBLIC AND IS A COMPLETE DECEPTION OF THE PUBLIC IN MATTERS PERTAINING TO "PUBLIC DATABASES" MAINTAINED BY ENFORCEMENT BODIES SUCH AS THE PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS OF ONTARIO, WHICH THEN SHOW "NO ISSUES" FOR AN ENGINEER AGAINST WHOM A CLAIM WAS MADE BUT NEVER HEARD!!!
3) DOES MONETARY COMPENSATION ALONE CONSTITUTE "JUSTICE" AND/OR "A TRIAL"... IF YES... "JUSTICE" WOULD BELONG TO THE HIGHEST BIDDER AT THE EXPENSE OF PUBLIC SAFETY!!