Skip navigation

Tag Archives: mens rea

When I first filed the charges against our sitting Prime Minister and then Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird, I realized I would come across as being a little naïve. However, I wanted to stick a pin into that moment of time so it would be recorded and remembered. What I didn’t expect was the extents to which I would have to go to raise public awareness of the issue. I’ll summarize this briefly and to the best of my ability as this is the last piece to contextualize the tweet and the day I was pulled in.

Charges were filed with the RNC on the 21st of July. At the time, open war was being waged by the Ukrainian military and mercenaries from the West against the separatists in the East. The media was filling airtime with speculations of Russian weaponry being used to down MH17. Meanwhile, Gaza was being brutally assaulted by Israel. The story received minor coverage compared to the events in Eastern Europe.

Social media outlets like Twitter were a different story altogether. Videos, pictures and horrifying cries of damned souls being bombarded and executed were a near constant barrage, interspersed with periods of relative quiet. Even those periods of quiet were filled with prayers for salvation from those the rest of the world had abandoned to their fate.

I started the petition the weekend prior to filing the charges to advise others to step forward and file similar charges within their own jurisdiction. I did this in the hopes of speeding up the process, but local police they contacted refused to acknowledge the issue as presented.

Thursday the week after I filed the charges, I finally received a call from a RCMP officer in St. John’s, NL. He informed me he would be driving out the next day, August 1st, and wanted to bring me down to the station to discuss the charges. I met him at Tim Horton’s and we drove to the station where he brought me into the conference room instead of a standard interview room. I know the difference in this particular station as I’ve been inside their interview rooms four times since and am quite familiar with their standard layout and practices. This first encounter was quite unusual. You should also note that prior to these events, I have had no real professional contact with the RCMP or RNC. I didn’t even have any traffic fines on record, my last ticket for missing a stop sign being back in 2003 or 2004.

The officer informed me that the video was being considered a policy direction and that my only option to see foreign policy change was to vote. Charges were being dismissed and there would be no follow up investigation. When I asked how genocide could be considered a foreign policy directive and whether or not anyone properly investigated the Israel-Palestine situation, he suggested I file a complaint if I didn’t believe they’d done their job properly. At that point I left before my growing outrage made me say something insulting or unprofessional, then walked home.

My first response was to update people who were following through the petition and on Twitter. I was pretty upset at the way the entire issue had been handled. I wondered how anyone could think that these kinds of immoral actions in inciting war and genocide could be justified in the eyes of God and the law. Section 27 of the Rome Statute, to which Canada is a signed and ratified party, denies the use of governing policy in crimes pertaining to genocide, yet this was the excuse offered by the RCMP.

I began to wonder what kind of system could have arisen to allow these kinds of abuses to go unchecked. How could a nation traditionally known for peacekeeping suddenly become such an overt warmonger yet not be called to account for its actions? I resolved that as someone who had borne witness to the problem, I was duty bound to see it through to the end. To simply ignore it was to forsake my soul to apathy and fear of an unlawful authority.

Most of the information regarding that time is stored within this blog and the petition. There’s a blog post titled ‘The Problem with Canadian Federal Politics’ that examines a lot of what I was seeing on the world stage back in November.

Here are some of the highlights:

I took the advice of the RCMP officer who’d brought me in to dismiss the case and filed a complaint with the Commission for Public Complaints against the RCMP on the 5th of August, once their offices were open after the long weekend. They received and accepted the complaint that the officer “Failed to conduct a thorough and complete investigation into allegations, of criminal misconduct, including, but not limited to, advocating genocide (sec. 318 CCC).”

The Commission for Public Complaints mailed out their formal complaint notification on the 6th of August of 2014. I received my copy late the following week, but not before an interesting action was taken by the government. The Monday after the complaint had been filed, at 6:30am in the morning, Global News released the news that the Commission replacing the one I’d just filed a complaint with was now being required to take a lifetime gag order. Anyone working for the new commission would now be required to take a lifetime oath of secrecy, the violation of which could get them 14 years in prison.

For example, if someone working for this new commission were to provide information to the media regarding a complaint that was being investigated, despite that information being in the public interest, that informant could be dragged off to 14 years of prison.

This made me a little worried. I entertained the thought that perhaps the formal complaint appearing on a certain Minister’s desk on Friday afternoon was sufficient to provoke such a response early Monday morning, but kept biding my time. I did email the Public Safety Critic for the Liberal Party, Wayne Easter, as he’d voiced his opinion on the matter, but he never responded.

I wrote letters to all the Premiers and Regional Chiefs prior to the Premiers Conference in the summer. The full text is available at this link ( Not one of them responded either.

I received my first documented response from the RCMP at the end of August to inform me they didn’t even review the video as their letter says no evidence was provided to support the basis of the charges, despite the YouTube link being included in the charges I filed.

On September 22nd 2014, I contacted the Commission for Public Complaints against the RCMP to ask about the status of my complaint. As it stood, I hadn’t been contacted by a single police officer.

During the wait for the RCMP to acknowledge the complaint, following the dismissal, non-response of Premiers, Aboriginal Chiefs and a horde of other MPs I emailed directly, I decide I would have to hatch a new plan to try and see justice upheld. One of the issues I’d flagged with the letter I’d written prior to the Premier’s conference was that the repeal of Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act in June of 2013 was exacerbating both Anti-Semitism and Islamophobia in the wake of the Israel-Gaza war. Section 13 prohibited hate speech online. Unlike alcohol prohibition, this one was actually good for society. As Premiers, they had the power to use the notwithstanding clause of the Charter to restore the repealed section. When I realized I’d been completely ignored, with not so much as a follow up email, I decided I’d have to use the tools that had been provided as best I could.

I began trying to get myself flagged on Twitter to have to speak with the RCMP. Unable to just walk into an RCMP office and request charges be re-filed, I had to come up with a new way into the system. A backdoor, if you will. I would have to walk a fine line between establishing a psychological profile through Twitter that might get me pulled in as a possible criminal with showing that no mens rea existed to carry out these idle threats beyond raising RCMP awareness of needed action.

Newfoundlanders might recognize the situation as something that might arise on a long boat voyage in days gone past. Working closely with people on long sea voyages requires strict social discipline. It wouldn’t be uncommon for someone to blow their top and utter threats in the heat of a moment. Everyone on the boat might hear the argument between two people and this would bring the social order established on the boat into disarray. To remedy the situation, both parties would be brought before the Captain in the standing room of the boat. He would act as the judge of the issue. If the offending party was unable to control themselves enough to speak their mind at this point, they were likely tossed into the brig for a portion of the voyage. Being able to speak calmly, eloquently and displaying appropriate restraint while before the Captain was as much as psychological examination as a legal one. The Captain was required to assess the possibility of a danger to the wellbeing of his crew. Simply uttering idle threats without a connection to violence would likely have been a common occurrence on longer voyages, especially with newer crews. After all, the phrase ‘swear like a sailor’ didn’t exist just because seafarers have developed an unusual way of affirming oaths on a Bible.

In short, I was going to attempt something that could end with me thrown in jail. As I was up against a government that was openly advocating for genocide and war, I thought it worth the risk.

To establish that the threats were idle and spoken out of anger, I limited myself to tweeting them while watching CPAC and listening to the speeches of MPs. The first one that got me pulled in was in regards to comments I made directed at Greg Rickford as he explained to Parliament how they wanted to reform Canada’s nuclear energy policies. Reading over his Bill, the implication arose that this would open the door for the proliferation of nuclear material in Canada and reclassified facilities as operators. After seeing how close this government’s ties were with the growing Ukrainian crisis and their requests for nuclear armaments, I uttered an idle threat out of anger, desperation, bitterness and frustration. I still managed to make it a joke about his greasy Hitler hairstyle.

It didn’t take long for that to gain the attention of the local RCMP, but that first meeting was a little more nerve wracking than the last as I didn’t know what to expect at all. They called me up out of the blue and requested a meeting. I offered to meet them at Tim Horton’s and we arranged it for the following day. They met me in and unmarked vehicle in the parking lot and gave me a pat down to make sure I wasn’t armed.  Then we drove to the RCMP station for an interview. Unlike the last time I was there, this time I was brought into the Interview room with a camera instead of the back conference room.

Once the tweet at issue was presented, it was easy to recall the circumstances under which I’d ‘uttered’ it, in a moment of anger in response to a perceived threat by someone advocating for a return to the Cold War logic of the build up of nuclear armaments. I perceived this to be an indirect threat against my friends and family. After that issue had been cleared up, while still on camera for the interview, I presented the interviewing officer with a copy of the charges as originally filed. I explained to him that I was trying to get their attention to get the information into the system and that no follow up had been made on my formal complaint months after it was filed. Not even a letter had been issued at this point acknowledging the complaint. They informed me that they had no knowledge of the complaint and that as no charges were being pressed, they couldn’t conduct any follow up information on the information I was providing. They released me with a warning to stay off CPAC.

Shortly after this first meeting, I was called in again by the RCMP. Different officers were interviewing me this time. Again for uttering threats, but this time still stemming from tweets made when I was initially trying to get their attention. I knew I had to walk a fine line to establish the right psychological profile, so I’d since kept my tweets to a certain level of vulgar response without making direct threats. But this one had come from when I was initially trying to get their attention, so they had to follow up on it anyways. I walked to the RCMP station this time, taking with me a copy of the formal complaint. I don’t remember this specific tweet, but I remember it being easy to contextualize. All my specific tweets at politicians were made while they were speaking live on CPAC, in response to their actions. I wasn’t planning any attacks and they had no reason to believe that attacks were pending. I had some good discussions with the officers and once again was informed that they could take a copy to add to the file but not follow up on it as no charges were being pressed. Without charges pressed, they couldn’t investigate the issue. They also informed me that I should avoid angry live commenting about CPAC on Twitter in the future as if they had to talk to me a third time they might have to press charges. They did inform me that while my methods were unusual, they appreciated the respect and candor I was offering in coming in of my own free will and speaking without a lawyer present. The usual reaction they received when contacting the public regarding comments made towards politicians on Twitter were insults towards themselves and more threats. They told me there was usually no real follow up possible to place in their reports beyond that they’d tried to contact the person involved who usually denies everything or refuses to discuss the issue. I thanked them for listening to me, promised to avoid further idle comments on CPAC Parliamentary coverage, and went on my way back home.

On the 18th of October, after these two meetings with the RCMP had been completed, I finally received a follow up call from a further RCMP officer about my formal complaint. We scheduled a meeting for the following week on the 22nd of October at 9:30AM.

When I walked to the RCMP station that morning I had no awareness of how much was going to happen that day. I went in with my BlackBerry Playbook, my Z10 and some papers. I spoke with the officer again in the interview room regarding the complaint, showed him the video and walked him through the transcript. I also discussed the context of the Israel-Palestine and Ukraine situation and showed him some of the other propaganda material being distributed by the government that seemed to contain strange subliminal elements. We ended our discussion; he informed me that he’d continue his follow up investigation and file a report in the near future. I walked home.

On the way home, I learned of the situation emerging in Ottawa with the shootings through Twitter. I witnessed the fear coming out of people on Twitter as reports came in of multiple gunmen across the Ottawa area around Parliament Hill. A friend would later tell me of a commercial he saw on CNN while following their live coverage. The ad was a UPS commercial for a fictional company named the ‘Gunderman Group.’ The name of the company features prominently on the screen several times in the video, but what jumped out at him was how much of a coincidence to see a commercial featuring ‘Gun man group’ in a commercial as CNN was doing its best to terrify its American audience into believing that an entire squad of terrorists had attacked Ottawa.

As the situation cleared and the facts about the single shooter, Michael Zehaf-Bibeau, were released to the public, I was completely blown away by the situation. I couldn’t even bring myself to update the petition with information regarding the latest meeting with the RCMP. As with Mr. Don Dunphy, at the time I felt as though I was being presented with a version of me that could have been, had I made different choices in my life. Where I was advocating lawful submission to the process I was undertaking, Michael had chosen to take the law into his own hands in opposition to everything I stood for. Even his long hair looked similar to mine. Pull a bandana up over my nose and I’d probably look just like him from the famous picture with the shotgun. The timing of the event was what truly shocked me though. As I was sitting down with the RCMP for my interview, he was recording his final words onto his cell phone. As I was walking home from my meeting, he had killed Corporal Nathan Cirillo and stormed to his death in Parliament, frightening the bejesus out of everyone there.

When I finally did speak on the matter on my petition, I made sure to make it known that I have always advocated for lawful action. The Jewish, Muslim and Christian faiths all advocate following the law of the land within whose borders you reside. That even if religious interpretations of all Abrahamic faiths pointed to our current government being The True Enemy of all truly living humans and the planet we live on, they also say they will not meet their ends by human hands, but through legal action in a court of law. Anyone curious as to what I’m referring to can check ‘Daniel 7:26’ for the specific reference. You’ll also find his dreams of the unholy 10 province nation under a Crown (Canada) that would arise in the Last Days. You can find a cross reference in the second chapter of the Qu’ran, or any part of the book of Revelations that refers to ‘seals’. Seals aren’t just a sea mammal or the wax impression of a ring; they’re also legally binding documents.

While I stayed active on Twitter to try to keep interest in the petition alive, I was also developing a side project. For the most part, the majority of the volume of my tweets was simply the petition link cut and pasted over and over again. I’d just find an active hashtag that was throwing out lots of unique names and cut and paste the petition to plant a seed in as many new people as possible to try to spread the word as far and wide as I could. This was the most frustrating process in the entire experience. I wasn’t glued to Twitter, but the Z10 wasn’t designed for cut and pasting. Some days I’d just sit in front of my PC and do the cut and paste routine enough to get temporary locked, then switch to my phone for regular twitter discussions for the rest of the day. Occasionally my Twitter seeding would bring in a troll, and I’d exercise my new right to online hate speech without uttering threats, just hateful vulgar insults. All of them unfortunately no longer prohibited by Section 13 in Canada.

All of this occurred while I was waiting for the RCMP to file a report and deliver their letter of disposition towards the issue. As of the writing of this post, I still haven’t received any further updates on the complaint.

In the meantime, I kept working on my business and my research and my experiments with my miniature pot plants. I could think of no other legal option other than simply waiting until I was visiting a friend one evening in December. I’d been listening to someone discuss how he would have to appear on marijuana possession and possible trafficking charges in court the following day. He asked for advice, I told him he’d be better off asking a lawyer, but if he was providing to a medical user with a registered condition who was unable to get a prescription he could try saying he was facilitating. This backwards Newfoundland medical and legal system creates criminals for fear of either Doctor or Patient being stigmatized for prescribing or using marijuana medicinally. A charter challenge in favor of medical marijuana user’s right to access might actually help remedy the situation.

While I was thinking about Charter Challenges, I started wondering if there might be a way to challenge the process that was established by reporting an act of inciting genocide. After a few discussions with local lawyers and a more established constitutional law advisor, I made a decision. I drafted up a rough, and flawed, originating application for my Charter Challenge and went down to the Supreme Court house and tried to file it. I ended up missing a section and had to walk home, called for advice, updated and then filed again. The originating application was created on December 19th, 2014. I mailed it out to the Attorney Generals of Newfoundland and Canada the same day. The one that went to Ottawa arrived just before New Year’s, the one destined for St. John’s disappeared without a trace.

I didn’t really know what to expect when the day arrived to appear in Court. I put on a good suit, packed up a couple of notepads with some notes and a Bible I’d found left behind in an abandoned camp outside Pasadena. I appeared at the Court with the attorneys representing the Attorney Generals appearing by phone. I remember forgetting to say ‘M’lord or Justice’ when asked my name. The attorneys for the other side suggested that service hadn’t been completed properly. The judge offered that if they attorneys both had copies, they could consider themselves served. As they’d been declaring themselves to have been unprepared to argue the case, they requested a day to prepare arguments. The Justice told me to have my arguments submitted to the Court by March 2nd, with the responding attorneys having until the 9th.

I spent the next few weeks trying to figure out how to write my arguments and properly file the documentation. Then I wrote three drafts and submitted them to people on the petition, this blog and on Twitter. I accepted all intelligent feedback from interested individuals and finalized the initial document. I went ahead and submitted it a week early. The attorneys responded on the 9th.

Their response? The Court wasn’t even allowed to hear my argument. I had no standing. I hadn’t been charged with a crime, so I couldn’t say my rights had been violated to contest that crime. I wasn’t an elected official, so I had no defined public interest standing that the court should accept. Based on a system of common law precedence, the Charter Challenge should be simply dismissed and I should pay the lawyers for the government for their time.

The unfortunate problem with their argument is that they were largely correct. I hadn’t filed affidavits pertaining to the nature of the offense I’d mentioned. I could discuss the nature of the offense if the judge was allowed to hear the case, but based on the system of precedence it was likely I wouldn’t even be allowed to speak on the matter.

At this point I had to enact Plan B.

This would lead me up to the events of March 18th, the day I uttered the tweet that resulted in my house being searched by the RCMP, my devices being seized and my small supply of unlicensed, medical-grade, research marijuana being destroyed. This occurred while I was being unlawfully detained and missing the court appearance for my Charter Challenge. It wasn’t the same tweet that got me unlawfully detained on April 7th.

Interesting times we live in, eh? A few words on the Internet can turn your whole life upside down and inside out.

The next post in this series will be ‘My Life of Certified Insanity (Day 1).’

I’ll begin my story with the day that I was pulled in, but the roots of that day were set down much earlier than that. Back in July of 2014 I filed charges of advocating genocide against our current Prime Minister and then Foreign Affairs Minister, John Baird. The charges were summarily dismissed less than two weeks later as a matter of governing policy.

While a major violation of international law and treaties, this legal justification unfortunately works fine for the Canadian legal system. Under the Canadian Criminal Code the Attorney General is allowed to shape the prosecution of certain crimes, including by not limited to:

• 7(2.33) – offenses occurring in space
• 7(4.3) – sexual offenses against children
• 7(7) – denying prosecution of criminal foreign nationals
• 54 – assisting a deserter
• 24 – terrorism, hiding terrorist property, banking with terrorists
• 136(3) – providing false evidence
• 141 (2) – bribery
• 164(7) – voyeurism, corruption of morals, child pornography, advertising sexual services
• 283(2) – kidnapping
• 318(3) – advocating genocide
• 319(6) – public incitement of hatred
• 320(7) – denying seizure of hate propaganda
• 347(7) – allowing criminal interest rates
• 385(2) – concealing title documents
• 422(3) – breach of contract, intimidation and discrimination against trade unionists
• 477.2 (1) – offenses committed by a non-citizen on a foreign ship in Canadian waters
• 477.2 (2) – offenses committed in the economic zone of Canada by citizens or in relation to citizens
• 477.2 (3) – offenses committed in non-recognized states (ie: Palestine)
• 477.3 (3) – piracy
• 810.01 (1) – intimidation of the criminal justice system or a journalist
• 810.2 (1) – threatening violence, endanger safety, inflicting psychological damage and various forms of sexual assault

These crimes involve matters than have the potential to shock the conscience of the country. The reason the Attorney General is given so much authority over them is to protect the public from too much media exposure for matters that could damage the public peace. However, the wording of these clauses also allows for bad faith interpretations of laws that give them the ability to simply refuse to prosecute the crime as committed. If a corrupt Attorney General were to be paired with a corrupt Prime Minister or Premier, the results would be disastrous for the effectiveness of the judiciary and faith in law enforcement officials in general. My own incident illustrates how easy it is for a Crown Prosecutor to twist both the word and spirit of the law to suit their own needs. Before I get into that discussion any further, I’m going to talk about why I reacted so strongly to what happened to Mr. Dunphy.

Mr. Dunphy’s situation arose on Easter Sunday, a time traditionally spent with family. For me, it was the first time in several years I could spend the weekend with my entire immediate family. Brothers, sister, their wife, husband, and significant other, parents, nephews and the Love of my Life. Not only that, but we were also enriched by the presence of a new niece not yet a year old and finally able to deliver the Good News that myself and my Love were ourselves expecting a bundle of joy this summer. It was the nicest Easter that I have had yet in my life, but it felt marred when I heard about the shooting of an unnamed man and details began to emerge through Twitter. My gut told me there was something important going on, but I remained calm and waited for the story to be told.

When I finally found out what had brought a gun into Mr. Dunphy’s home and left him dead and his daughter without a father, I was horrified and outraged. Horrified at the inherent stupidity in a system that had not learned enough about social media to click a single button to see the full context of Mr. Dunphy’s words. Outraged at the visible legitimizing by the Premier’s office of a judicial response that created a situation where a gun was brought into a family home where children could be present. All of this due to ignorance and the inability of our current system to fundamentally deal with the complexities of the modern era.

My own understanding of the full context of Mr. Dunphy’s series of tweets is that he expressed his religious beliefs. He hoped that God judges the politicians who look down upon the poor and the unfortunate. His final tweet that was viewed as a threat was taken completely out of the context he’d intended. Read in context, he’s saying that he won’t offend the living by disrespecting the dead. There was nothing hostile or violent in his tweets. Only people with hostile, violent and ignorant minds would interpret them that way.

Mr. Dunphy was completely innocent of any crime. There’s no mens rea (the intending mind) in anything he wrote. Had he been charged with the crime of Uttering Threats, as I have since been, arrested and brought before a judge, he would have been able to provide the judge with the full context of his tweets from that day and been able to satisfy that none of the suggested mens rea that brought the Premier’s private security detail to his door existed in the slightest.

But that is unfortunately not what happened on that fateful day. Instead we hear a story that informs the public that the RNC officer approached Mr. Dunphy shortly after Easter dinner. He introduced himself, entered his home, spoke with him for a while, then Mr. Dunphy’s demeanour changed and he, a man suffering from chronic pain from a debilitating worker’s injury, quickly pulled out a loaded long gun before the officer could react to disarm him, aimed it at the officer, and the officer had to shoot Mr. Dunphy in self-defense.

While my opinion is obviously one of a layperson, I could speculate on what may have happened based on my recent experiences with law enforcement and the mental health system. My first speculation is that the officer could be telling the complete truth, up to the moment where he states Mr. Dunphy aimed a loaded rifle at him. Mr. Dunphy, a man already familiar with the RCMP due to his licensed medical marijuana production, likely felt comfortable allowing a police officer to enter his home. He probably offered him tea and some oatmeal cookies. But at some point during their conversation the officer brought Mr. Dunphy’s tweet into the discussion.

Imagine being confronted with by a single sentence from your life taken so far out of the context it was uttered that it bears no resemblance to the reality of the situation. Mr. Dunphy, having no mens rea, would have been dumbfounded by the accusation. A family man, a man who’s raised a daughter by himself after the passing of his wife at an early age, who kept his spirits up by being a vocal advocate for the poor and the broken, being presented with his own words twisted in such a psychotic fashion as to make him look violently angry and possibly homicidal towards families. Up until this point, Mr. Dunphy has no idea the officer he’s allowed into his home has any hostile intentions towards him, nor that the officer considers him a possible threat.  Mr. Dunphy had done nothing to put himself into a fearful state, unlike the RNC officer, who’s view on reality was becoming psychotic due to flawed and incomplete intelligence.

Likely presented with a printout of his single tweet and bearing witness to the sudden confrontational change in a man he was attempting to be friendly with, a gentle soul like Mr. Dunphy would have tried to immediately placate the officer to restore his peace of mind. Instead of reaching for his rifle to defend himself, it’s much more likely that Mr. Dunphy simply reached for his phone to bring up Twitter. The officer, ignorantly expecting to be in the home of a potentially violent and homicidal man, assumes Mr. Dunphy to be reaching for a concealed weapon and reacts as his training dictates.

What followed in the home after the shooting, only the officer and subsequent investigators know. But as someone who personally fits the psychological profile of Mr. Dunphy more so than that of the Ottawa Shooter as was suggested by the first doctor who assessed me, I can only imagine how the situation was altered before being presented to the public. The initial media slant of the tweet suggested that even those involved in the media release still didn’t realize they hadn’t understood the full context of the tweets. Even the morning after Mr. Dunphy’s death, they were all too happy to pat the officer and themselves on the back over a job well done ‘protecting the public peace.’

Again, this is all speculation on my part, but it seems much more likely to be the case that Mr. Dunphy, an outspoken and intelligent man, suddenly went to pull out his phone and the officer misinterpreted his actions. I see no reason for him to make the conscious decision to threaten a police officer he’d invited into his home with a gun and throw his entire life away.

The way the government of the province and the St. John’s media have treated this incident shows a callous disregard for the value of human life and families that extends downwards from the upper levels of government, but which is thankfully absent in Western Newfoundland. It also exposes a major blindspot in a system unable to cope with the complexities of a rapidly changing world.

My next post will cover the tweet that lead up to my detention on the 4th Floor of the Western Memorial Regional Health for 6 days, including a brief trip before the Supreme Court judge who oversaw the first hearing of my Charter Challenge. I witnessed him having his hands tied by an abuse of the system of common law precedence built on arbitrary schemes. 

I must warn you though, during all of the events that followed, I’m probably the least interesting person in all of them. Despite the system being flawed, there were a number of exceptional people either working or trapped within in it who experience it on a daily basis. I was only a tourist.

I should also note that during my experience every single officer, doctor, nurse and court official I met acted with the grace and patience of a saint… aside from the one lawyer who thought it would be appropriate to create a false pretense before a Supreme Court judge in front of a court full of witnesses.

They are, unfortunately, struggling within a system that favours marginalizing the problems of our society rather than dealing with them head on.

My only hope is that telling their story will help get them the assistance they so desperately need.