AUGUST - 2016



BY: Roger Callow ‘The Outlawed Canadian’ in an 'Outlaw Justice System' employescasecanada.ca (30 year unresolved 'standing case' legal matter in 'illicit' West Vancouver, B.C. teacher lay-off in 1985) now known judicially as ‘the cluster-fuck case’ which has been through 12 different court systems and over 40 judges. No compensation (includes pension rights) has been paid. Currently there is one of two SCofC hearings slated (QC-refused a hearing June 09-2016) & SK with a pending hearing in P.E.I. and Alberta with renewed activity in Ontario as the Justice System gets ubered (external threat from an unexpected source) through the interlocking legal proceedings from different courts across Canada. Pulitzer Prize seeking writer is sought in this one-of-a-kind story of the century. This edition is focused on the topic of law and/or order.


QUOTES: From the original site over a decade ago comes these haunting quotes:

A) "The curse of the world is not decisions taken, Blake reflected, it's the decisions shelved, bought off, sidestepped."  War Dance Tim Sebastian

B) It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong. Pierre Elliot Trudeau (1919-2000) '...Every government must accept responsibility for the rights of the citizens within its own jurisdiction. Canada as a whole suffers when any of her citizens is denied his rights, for that injustice places the rights of all of us in jeopardy.' Someone should tell that to the bozos who now run this country but the idea of any entity being more than the mere sum of its parts would escape them. 'The Outlawed Canadian'

C) 'The law's a farce, sonnyboy. You can plant evidence and suborn witnesses and make sweetheart deals with the prosecution. The only laws we're really interested in making stick are the laws of contract - because if commerce doesn't work we're eating tree bark instead of bread.' Cassidy Morris West

D) 'What needs we fear it, for who can call us to account?'  Lady MacBeth

E) 'Where is Hitler now that Canada is ripe for takeover?'  'Black Roger'

F) 'The whippings will continue until morale improves. 'Black Roger'




1) The Employee's Case has defined the dichotomy between 'law' and 'order' which the legal fraternity would present as a couplet when in fact they are now mutually exclusive in Canada. In brief, if the court cannot convince the public of the 'law' prevailing; they will resort to all types of subterfuge to claim that 'order' is at least being maintained.

2) Until the Employee's Case, this dichotomy has never been exposed as the justice system is predicated on 'finality' to achieve order. In brief, the presiding judge cannot pick up the ball and go home without a finding but that is exactly what happened when the original arbitration justifying the lay-off of senior West Vancouver teacher, Roger Callow, for economic reasons in June of 1985 was quashed leaving him in a permanent state of limbo where no compensation (includes pension  rights) has been paid. That's preposterous but now reflects the current status of a Canadian justice system without credibility. The oversight bodies including Parliament and the Office of the Prime Minister are negatively impacted in this debacle in which Canadians are deprived of a democratic government as all are MIA.

3) The second Supreme Court of Canada Challenge in 2016 (there were two previous ones in 1997 and 2004) 36993 (Saskatchewan) is to be set before the SCofC momentarily. The key lies in the appointment of the 3 judges as 3 have been used with the Chief Justice being 'used' in 1997. In short, all Appeal Courts have at least 3 'compliant' judges under the thumb of the Chief Justice which, in the case of the SCofC, leaves 5 from which to choose. Will the SCofC duplicate any of the 'used' judges thus compromising all three?

4) The above feature is significant as another 'set-up' is reflective of a court system intent on inveigling the PMO into the same blackmail position which the Employer successfully seduced the court in 1986. The rest is cover-up.

5) On June 9-2016, the SCofC rejected 36883 (Quebec) leaving the people of Couillard's Quebec nowhere but the streets to turn for justice in a story labeled 'Lavery De Billy (for the employer) tail wags Quebec judicial dog'. SEE web. Premier Couillard & P.M. Trudeau have been badly exposed on this account.

6) The Quebec case lay solely on disclosure which in turn is the essence of habeas corpus on which all precedent law lies. The meeting notes of the June 1985 School Trustee meetings hold the genesis of this government fraud in which the B.C. government was hi-jacked (imposed BILL 35); the justice system co-opted (gerrymandered government arbitrator) to sanction a 'sweetheart deal' (almost all dismissals have an element of this relationship) between employer and Union. The point here is that all these bodies have been exposed; a first in the legal jurisprudence of a democratic nation...and that will never do.... The SCofC rejection in QC placed the  P.M. in the embarrassing position of having to invoke such as the 'peace, order and good government' or 'notwithstanding' clauses of the constitution. Trudeau did nothing. PLACARD:TRUDEAU IS AN AMBASSADOR / NOT A LEADER.

7) While 36993 (SK) still includes the disclosure question; it raises - for a first time - the constitutional question as to whether BILL 35  is ultra vires in that current demonstrated ability is undefined in the Act or in the law in general plus BILL 35 was 'in addition to' statute law and therefore did not displace any part of the collective bargaining rules. As Justice Southin stated in 1986, 'The Board used the Act for the wrong reason...they should return employment to this targeted teacher'. The point here is that it fell to the Employer to rebut my constitutional argument above otherwise my assertion must be accepted as fact in law. They didn't do that which explains why, should the SCofC hear this SK appeal, I will ask for a directed verdict; namely, that all action under BILL 35 is indeed 'null and void' according to the law and 30 years of back salary plus interest which exists apart from judicial outcomes (I should always have been kept on salary until this matter was resolved), must be paid. Ducking out of this case by the SCofC is not similar to Quebec as the whole concept of government legislation is on trial.

8) Recently, a case has been laid in Alberta against the Employer with a different and even more basic constitutional question underlying the relationship between government and the courts. More in a future newsletter. The case in P.E.I. against the Union is solely for their copy of disclosure.

9) Make no mistake, whatever course the courts of law may choose to take in Canada, they are FUBAR. If the U.S. election is considered as a 'race to the bottom'; then the Canadian Justice System has already hit bottom.


TO: Minister of Justice (Canada)           FROM: Roger Callow - self represented plaintiff

Hon. J. Wilson-Raybould                          SCofC  36993 (SK)

PERSONAL                                                    1285 Cahill Drive E. #2001

'employescasecanada.ca'                                    Ottawa, ON K1V 9A7

284 Wellington St.                                    

Ottawa, ON K1A 0H8



1) To be blunt; while you inherited the 30 year unresolved Employee's Case where no compensation has been paid, it is your failure to be pro-active on this issue which explains why the Prime Minister is faced with a catastrophic disaster in QC (SCofC 36883 declined on June 09-2016) now awaiting some sort of executive action from the Office of the P.M.

2) In the event that this failure of yours  is paralleled by a second such failure of SCofC Appeal 36993 SK not yet sent up to the 3 judges as of August 01-2016; then I sincerely hope that the P.M. sees fit to shuffle you out of the Ministry of Justice portfolio.

3) Enclosed with this letter are excerpts from letters which deserve your immediate attention:

(a) The focus of the Employer's B.C. counsel, Harris & Co. expressed in their 3-page letter of May 30-2016 (included here) is that as the Plaintiff, I am being frivolous and vexatious in matters already decided (res judicata). Regrettably no judge has seen fit to ask the specifics of 'which matters and when' as I am without a judicial finding which is the precursor to any compensation in this 'illicit' teacher lay-off in 1985. Pages 01-03

(b) The second major issue relates to the collection of costs which the courts consistently assign to the Employer's Counsel in ON, QC, SK (B.C.'s Harris & Co.) As early as February 11-2016, I requested a record of the sums of money paid by the West Vancouver School Trustees out of their own pocket 'for reasons best known to themselves' in what appears to be a case of 'double-billing'. Included here is a one-page Harris & Co. letter. A 2-page unanswered letter to you dated June 21-2016 outlined the problem regarding costs. If not you, hopefully your successor will address these very real issues. Pages 04-09

4) The background to the frivolous & vexatious accusation relates to the machinations of the ON courts, particularly the Appeal Court under Chief Justice George Strathy. A 3-page letter to newly-appointed A.G. Yasir Naqvi has not yet received proper attention. In brief, Ottawa Superior Court Justice, C. McKinnon 13-59060 is accused of duplicity by writing two different judgments; the second not referring to the existence of the first. Harris & Co. knowingly filed that second account in SK court of which I had informed the court of this duplicitous fraud. Pages 10-12 dated July 20-2016 outline this fraud.

5) The reason this matter has been directed to the Ministry of Justice is due to the complete collapse of the oversight bodies. SEE CANADA'S CORRUPTOCRACY  JUNE 26-2016 in which the perfidy of the Law Societies in QC and SK are highlighted. In particular the SK Legal Society examination of the fraud allegations is vital to the holding of SCofC 36993.   Pages 13-16

6) The case against the Employer in AB appears to be on track but you should keep a watcher's brief on it.

7) Not so is the case in PEI where an action is to be laid against the Union for their copy of the disclosure material (which underlies the entire case) although to date, the courts steadfastly refuse to honour this request = conspiracy. See THIRD REQUEST August 01-2016 to PEI Premier MacLauchlan as they appear to believe that hiding their head in a 'potato patch mentality' is the best answer here. Pages 17-18

8) The question which needs be asked here is how any court can give 'due process' to an issue when vital information is kept concealed by the Employer and is abetted in that process by the court? All Canada pays a price under those circumstances.

Yours, in disappointment,

Roger Callow - Plaintiff

cc  SCofC 36993 SK

West Vancouver School Trustees


cc P.M.  J.Trudeau / Premiers Notley/Couillard/Wall/  MacLauchlan 

ON. Attorney General  Yasir Naqvi


August 03-2016


TO: RCMP                                                     FROM: Roger Callow-plaintiff  SCofC 36993                         

Commissioner Bob Paulson                                    1285 Cahill Drive E. #2001

1200 Vanier Pkwy.                                                   Ottawa, ON K1V 9A7

Ottawa, ON K1A 0R2                                           



1) You are not going to like this message to the RCMPP (political police).

2) The Montreal 'C' Division in Westmount, QC, has a running file on this allegation of criminal fraud.

3) A week doesn't pass without a police oversight body coming under fire for infractions.

4) Legal cases involving the police are also being questioned such as the dismissal of CBC's Jian Ghomeshi whom was found 'not guilty' by an 'honest' judge.

5) A second 'honest' judge found Senator Mike Duffy 'not guilty' due to Senate 'loosey goosey' rules.

6) I raise the above two scenarios as examples of 'Whom called in the RCMP?' It would appear in the Duffy case that when the P.M. says 'leap', the RCMPP ask 'how high'? When it is a citizen, one is told to 'wait for the next bureaucrat'.

7) And yet the copious materials that I have supplied the RCMP regarding fraud on the part of an Employer (West Vancouver School Trustees) and Government (B.C.'s Bill 35 in 1985) cannot elicit the seizure of key disclosure material (for which I have supplied the RCMP addresses of pertinent legal offices) central to this unresolved 30 year labour matter where no compensation has been paid.

8) As to honesty among judges which are demanding of witnesses 'to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth', this admonishment as evidenced by the employescasecanada.ca obviously does not extend to the judges themselves in this case with their 'half truths' which usually consists of listening to one side (the employer)and ignoring the other (the employee).

9) On June 09-2016, the SCofC rejected the hearing of 36883 (QC) which was solely for disclosure while the upcoming 36993 (SK) adds a constitutional question.

10) That disclosure amounts to the meeting notes of the West Vancouver School Trustees in June of 1985 in which they discussed the lay-off of senior teacher, Roger Callow (for whistle blowing) for economic reasons. Justice Mary Southin of B.C. Supreme Court in 1986 called for all such evidence and then returned (why return it??) the material to the Employer and Union (rather than me) because 'she did not use them'.

11) While I know most of the story, the point here is what part of the story was presented to Southin j. which successive courts believed that they had to cover up at my expense?

12) When the court quashed the arbitration and the School Trustees did not return to a re-arbitration ordered by Southin j., I returned to B.C. Supreme Court in 1995 before Justice Spencer against the employer asking that the earlier 'should' return employment by her be altered to 'must' return employment due to Employer abandonment. Spencer neither ordered my re-instatement or a re-arbitration.

13) Spencer created the bogey of the collective bargaining system claiming that this Union client lacked status to appear in court as only the Union was recognized (in this 'sweetheart deal'). The Employer did not recognize the status of either the courts or the Union (includes B.C. Labour Board) to displace the conditions of the imposed BILL 35 (since withdrawn in the 1990's before this sole laid case was resolved = banana republic justice).

14) 'Disclosure' was always at the root of cases in B.C. up to July of 2013, where this plaintiff was expelled from B.C. by the 'Cullen Creed' for 'reasons best known to a judge'.

15) Every court across Canada reverted to has failed to discuss the 'Cullen Creed' nor to acknowledge the request for disclosure; usually for technical reasons. All those courts have been thoroughly compromised in that endeavor to which the oversight bodies would apply a blind eye. In the case of 36883,Quebec, Premier Couillard and Prime Minister Trudeau have been badly exposed in their failure to take executive action. Both are being kept fully informed of this case as evidenced by the web site and the files in RCMP Montreal.

16) Very soon, the SCofC will assign a date to handle 36993, Saskatchewan. In the event that the necessary disclosure is not included, then it will be directly on the heads of Minister of Justice Wilson-Raybould, P.M. Justin Trudeau, and yourself as RCMP Commissioner. In such an eventuality, all three of you must step down - Canada and Canadians are owed that much.


Yours truly,


Roger Callow


cc  Wilson-Raybould  /  Trudeau

SCofC  36993

Sun Media's Christine Blizzard - columnist


August 05-2016


TO: The Supreme Court of Canada

       ATTN: Melissa Bishop Registry Officer

       301 Wellington St. Ottawa, ON K1A 0J1


       Tel: 613-947-0327  Fax: 613-996-9138    SENT BY FAX  2:00 p.m.


FROM: Roger Callow   employescasecanada.ca

              1285 Cahill Drive #2001

              Ottawa, ON K1V 9A7


REFERENCE: SCofC #36993 (SK) and #36883 (QC)



1) In a telephone call to Melissa this afternoon, I learned that while no hearing date has been set for 36993, this matter was to go before the same panel of judges appointed to 36883; namely, Cromwell (r. Sept. 01-2016)/ Wagner / Coté  which earlier rejected 36883 for further response on June 09-2016.

2) This letter is being sent by fax today at the suggestion of Melissa considering my objection to the same panel and the fact that Rule 25C (conflict of interest) has been rescinded.

3) While recognizing the limited number of SCofC judges available for reviewing Notices to Appeal; nonetheless, the three judges named herein have created grave problems for Premier Couillard and Prime Minister Trudeau both of whom were kept apprised of events in Quebec as they unfolded:

a) The issue was limited solely to disclosure of allegedly fraudulent material in a 30 year unresolved B.C. Labour case. Disclosure underlies habeas corpus on which precedent law is built which, in turn, is the essence of our justice system.

b) The highly irregular treatment of this issue in Quebec courts is a fraud in itself which was ignored by the QC Premier / Minister of Justice / oversight bodies / Prime Minister. As such, the action of the SCofC amounted to a 'cover-up' of the 'cover-up'.

4) Every effort under these circumstances must be made to appoint a fresh panel to adjudicate 36993 SK for further action.


Yours truly,



Roger Callow


cc Minister of Justice Wilson-Raybould / P.M. Trudeau / RCMP




BY: Roger Callow ‘The Outlawed Canadian’ in an 'Outlaw Justice System' employescasecanada.ca (30 year unresolved 'standing case' legal matter in 'illicit' West Vancouver, B.C. teacher lay-off in 1985) now known judicially as ‘the cluster-fuck case’ which has been through 12 different court systems and over 40 judges. No compensation (includes pension rights) has been paid. Currently there is one of two SCofC hearings slated (QC-refused a hearing June 09-2016) & SK with a pending hearing in P.E.I. and Alberta with renewed activity in Ontario as the Justice System gets ubered (external threat from an unexpected source) through the interlocking legal proceedings from different courts across Canada. Pulitzer Prize seeking writer is sought in this one-of-a-kind story of the century. This edition is focused on the topic of wheeling & dealing plus Letter to Yasir Naqvi, ON Attorney General

QUOTE: 'If you must break the law, do it to seize power' Julius Caesar



1) In the current SCofC hearings (36883 QC & 36993 SK), whether that body realizes it or not, it is relinquishing power. To carry this analogy further, the Canadian Justice System may be paralleled to the dissolute Roman Senate immediately before the generals took over.

2) By dismissing 36883 without a hearing on June 09-2016; the court created untold grief for Premier Couillard and P.M. Trudeau whom, in turn, failed to take executive action against a  highly fraudulent QC Court system leaving Quebecers nowhere but the street to seek justice.

3) Perhaps SCofC judges Wagner & Coté (rumoured to be McLachlin's successor) both QC products believed that they were protecting one of their own as opposed to exposing both themselves and the QC court structure to contumely. But then every Appeal Court has its three-some to do 'the necessary' as defined by the Chief Justice.

4) Now the SCofC has to choose a new set of 3 judges for 36993 SK. Rejecting a hearing would be support for 36883 QC to the extent that the request for disclosure would be sanctioned as being irrelevant which supports 11 court venues and over 40 judges in that opinion. In brief, it is an admission that judicial cover-up is to be the order of the day. The fact that Chief Justice B. McLachlin sat with then Chief Justice A. Lamers -d.(1997) in rejecting a SCofC hearing makes that for a total of 7 out of 9 SCofC judges prepared to commit to this 30 year judicial fraud.

5) While disclosure is at the heart of both cases, the upcoming SK appeal has the additional element of a constitutional question never raised before; namely, BILL 35 (B.C. Gov't) is ultra vires in that current demonstrated ability is undefined in the Act or in law in general hence everything flowing from that Bill is null and void. The fact that the Employer did not defend against this accusation (they do not recognize the court as having any authority over this government Act) means that my assertion must stand. Hence I will ask for a 'directed verdict' should the SCofC approve a hearing. Will the court, in other words, reject their power to review defective government legislation?...it is a slippery slope considering that other legalities are being pursued which can expose the SCofC in a manner never before experienced.

6) In other words, can the SCofC count on the anti-employee media and Parliament (Trudeau / Ambrose / Mulcair / May) to retain their silence in the face of this historic challenge to the very values of democratic Canada?

7) Of course, the SCofC can choose Plan B which is to hear the case but bury it on the grounds that this targeted victim did not act in a timely manner and therefore the court need not deal with such minutiae such as disclosure in this case...or some such similar jurisdictional excuse.

8) The problem with that approach is that 'fraud' does not have a time limit and functions on many levels in this case in which those concerns pre-empt other legalities:

a) The initial fraud of West Vancouver Principal, John Williams, in changing his professional report on teacher on me from a positive to a negative. I caught him on that basis and provided this dichotomy to Victoria. BILL 35 was their answer. That fraud was exposed in Arbitration but 'reworked' by the arbitrator.

b) The fraud of the arbitrator whom was labeled patently unreasonable when the arbitration was quashed leaving me, as events turned out, in a 30 year limbo with no compensation paid.

c) The fraudulent actions of the Employer as covered up by Justice Southin in 1986. (The disclosure futilely requested in every court to date.)

d) The fraud of Harris & Co. knowingly producing highly questionable Ontario legal material in a SK court which was created under fraudulent conditions in Ontario.

e) The fraud of the lead SK Appeal Court judge Jackson whom conspired before the hearing to make an agreement with Harris & Co. in which he would not speak at the hearing. That was done without my knowledge nor, certainly, my approval as I wished him to address the matter of the fraudulent Ontario legal material. Proper action in that regard, if the judge so wished it, was to discuss not hearing Harris & Co. in open court in my presence.

f) While it may not be outright fraud, the Appeal Court dispensing funds from a surety paid by me under unusual circumstances without any request (the judge earlier turned the rules on surety 'upside down' by declaring this a 'special case'). Again, if an action had been filed to that purpose by Harris & Co., I would have raised the ON fraud matter mentioned above. No attempt to settle out of court was made hence, at the very least, those funds were dispensed prematurely and therefore should be returned to this plaintiff by the SCofC.

 9) As matters stand, Canada has no right to celebrate its 150th anniversary next year as the Employee's Case , aptly called the 'cluster fuck case' has exposed the weak underbelly of a government and court system driven by wide scale corruption at the top: systematic judicial malfeasance.  PLACARD: WELCOME POTUS / BRING TRUMP NOW THAT CANADA NEEDS HIM MOST (Seen outside the U.S. Embassy at time of President Obama's visit at the end of June.)








AUGUST 06, 2016


TO: Hon. Yasir Naqvi                                             FROM: Roger Callow

ON Attorney General                                            Defendant 13-59060 C. McKinnon j.

Room 223, Main Legislative                                (1st Decision-Apr.23-14; 2nd Decision-Sept.15-14)

Building, Queen's Park                                     Plaintiff 14-61592 R. Scott j. no Decision-Sept.23-14)

Toronto, Ontario M7A 1A2                                 (Both judges originally Federal Court appointees

t.416-325-7754     F.416-325-7755               and therefore are under Can. Judicial Council rules)

            3 pages sent by fax                                 1285 Cahill Drive E. #2001 Ottawa, ON K1V-9A7


MESSAGE:  'What to do with a tyrannical justice system'

1) I have written to you earlier concerning major discrepancies in the above cases which are a factor in two Supreme Court of Canada hearings 36883 QC and 36993 SK focusing around the legal topic of 'frivolous & vexatious behaviour' on the part of this litigant.

2) As you have not replied in any meaningful manner to the issues involved, a copy of this letter goes to Justice Minister Wilson-Raybould, also MIA, leaving the entire matter in the lap of P.M. Trudeau and his executive powers.

3) Hicks, Morley et al for the Employer (West Vancouver School Trustees, B.C. S.D. #45) filed 13-59060 in Ottawa Superior Court with the hearing in April-2014 and decision on April 23-14.

4) In their submission, they asked the court to entertain all issues relating to the -apparently illicit-  laid-off senior teacher, Roger Callow, in June of 1985 under the conditions of the neophyte BILL 35 (used only against this teacher before being withdrawn before a conclusion was reached in this case = banana republic justice). No compensation has been paid. As the Defendant, I was in entire agreement with this discussion of all issues.

5) In their submission, Hicks, Morley et al for the Employer did not recognize the jurisdiction of the court or B.C. Labour Board claiming that BILL 35 had its own conditions for lay-off hence any court appeal of the imposed BILL 35 was therefore 'null and void'. The arbitrator's decision was final and, as such, the Employer owed no money to this employee.

6) That position flew in the face of a decision of B.C. Supreme Court's Justice Mary Southin in 1986 (r. 2004) whom quashed the arbitration ruling, in that process, the arbitrator to be patently unreasonable. She ordered a re-arbitration when the Employer did not return employment as she recommended.

7) Southin's 'opinion' as phrased by the Employer was appealed by the employer whom lost.

8) The Employer never went back to arbitration. Much litigation by this writer ensued beginning in 1995 until he was expelled for reasons 'best known to a judge' in this unresolved legal matter from B.C. Courts in 2013 by the 'Cullen Creed'. This self-labeled 'Outlawed Canadian' took up the battle in many courts outside of B.C. in which irregularities in Ontario courts play a major part.



9) In brief, the two ON judges noted above between them are accused of making 'a black letter error of law (meaning a legal mistake that is clear-cut and technical in nature)' through collusion with the Justice Department in Ottawa and with Hicks, Morley et al. The accusations were forwarded to the Canadian Judicial Council (under the aegis of SCofC B. McLachlin) and the Ontario Legal Society. There was never any response from either body although Hicks, Morley et al dropped representation of the Employer.

10) McKinnon did not acknowledge the Employer's argument in 13-59060 regarding the discussion of all issues. What he did, with the use of Justice Department files supplied to him by unknown interests, was to give a detailed definition of why this defendant was frivolous and vexatious'; a ruling which found its way to the front page of the Ottawa Citizen  on April 29-2014 which refused my 'right of rebuttal' detailing how I had never had the opportunity of presenting my argument on 'frivolous & vexatious' accusations in court.

11) A detailed  rejection of McKinnon's frivolous & vexatious accusation was filed by me in the subsequent 14-61592 where I was the Plaintiff. The Employer did not file a Notice of Hearing so it was much to my surprise to see their representative appear on Sept. 23-2014 at court. 'Did Justice Scott approve of your presence?' I asked to a wrinkled nose of disgust.

12) When court was announced, the Hicks, Morley representative strode to the bench with material grabbed onto by Justice Scott amid my most strenuous objections. I was then provided with a copy of a second judgment by McKinnon j. dated September 15-2014 which was essentially the same but here is the point; Justice Scott would only entertain my comments as they related to this second judgment  which I saw for a first time thus obviating my earlier rejections of the first McKinnon judgment. The second judgment made no reference to the existence of the first judgment.

13) To add insult to injury, Scott j. never brought down a decision preferring to enter a 'stay of proceedings' thus my appeal to the Appeal Court of Chief Justice George Strathy was rejected.

14) Earlier proceedings before Ottawa Superior Court's Robert Maranger 12-54944 and Divisional Court Appeal 12-1872 were also messed up in the Registry of the Appeal Court of Chief Justice George Strathy.

15) All these cases are significant in that costs are always assigned to the Employer; something I object to paying until the charge of fraud on the above accounts has been examined. That's where the Appeal lies to A.G. Yasir Naqvi with his reputed aspirations of being the next Liberal leader appears to come in. Solving this case is a pre-requisite to his political success.



16) The McKinnon Decision(s) loom large in both the above provinces where SCofC cases have been filed: 36883 QC and 36993 SK. Both provinces were told by me to avoid using this highly contentious material.  Both ignored that request inviting the charge of fraud to be added to other court irregularities in both provinces.

17) By assigning a second lower court judge in Gatineau to a hearing limited to disclosure (meeting notes of the Employer in June of 1985); the court was able to 'run a court within a court'; a highly illicit process where the second judge made no reference to the existence of the first judge and gave Lavery de Billy a second kick at the can as 95% of their original factum was based on the McKinnon 'frivolous & vexatious' notion as noted by that second judge.

18) My attempted appeal was usurped by Lavery de Billy whom made a separate approach to the Appeal Court for a docket number which was granted. No mention in their factum was made of the earlier duality of judges in Gatineau.

19) The Quebec Law Society called in by me stated that the courts would decide on this caper labeled by me as; Lavery de Billy tail wags Quebec judicial dog. The court did no such thing forcing a SCofC Appeal heard and rejected on June 09-2016. My bottom line? Quebecers have only the streets to turn to for justice. P.M. Trudeau has failed to date to apply executive action on this Canadian debacle without equal in Canadian jurisprudence.

20) In SK, with the addition of a constitutional question in 36993 yet to be heard, the second McKinnon j. Decision only was quoted by B.C.'s Harris & Co. thus confounding their presentation. To date, I do not have a decision on their alleged misbehaviour from the SK legal society which impairs the Employer's presentation in the SCofC. (The SK Appeal Court, similar to QC, was riddled with judicial improprieties which again, go unacknowledged by the oversight bodies). I object to the court improperly paying out from a surety that I was forced to provide under highly specious circumstances as a means of concealing questions that I had raised regarding the allegedly fraudulent McKinnon judgment. (No application was made for these funds as the court apparently sought to run an end-game around accusations of fraud.)

21) Do I have faith in Yasfir Naqvi to act properly in this matter? Not if I were to judge by his disastrous performance in his former portfolio relating to the handling of long term atrocious conditions at the Innis Road Jail in Ottawa which was the subject of a recent media exposé.

22) The scope of this systematic judicial malfeasance in the unresolved Employee's Case where no compensation has been paid can be summed up in constitutional terms by the following under employescasecanada.ca RECENT:

AUGUST 05-2016 Ottawa Sun p.8'Trudeau's Supreme Court plan a clever ruse' David Krayden 'When you see Parliament Hill on Wellington St., keep walking west. There, ahead of you, is the Supreme Court (of Canada): where the real political power  resides in Canada...But have I mentioned lately that P.M. Trudeau is more democratic hoax than populist politician?...So here comes Trudeau with his judicial star chamber...to fill those Supreme Court seats (N.B. Thomas Cromwell who dismissed 36883 QC on June 9-2016 along with Coté and Wagner-Que. roots - to cover up one of the most egregious QC court excesses ever, is retiring Sept.01-2016)...We have a Parliamentary system with no separation of executive and legislative powers while possessing an unelected judiciary that is unfettered by any Parliamentary oversight and can legislate at will, imposing social and economic policies while rejecting legislation whenever it pleases. It's like Pierre Trudeau forced an American court over a British Parliament and brazenly told it work. It doesn't...my comment: Which is why the 30 year unresolved Employee's Case is a 'standing case' in that the Justice System has rubber-stamped 'no legal answer to be a legal answer' in this kafkaesque legal debacle forcing a 21st century P.M. to invoke his executive powers. It doesn't get any bigger than that...but try and tell that to the anti-employee media which runs a national boycott on this story.


Yours truly,


Roger Callow

cc  Justice Minister Wilson-Raybould / RCMP/P.M.

     Christina Blizzard (Sun Media columnist)




BY: Roger Callow ‘The Outlawed Canadian’ in an 'Outlaw Justice System' employescasecanada.ca (30 year unresolved 'standing case' legal matter in 'illicit' West Vancouver, B.C. teacher lay-off in 1985) now known judicially as ‘the cluster-fuck case’ which has been through 12 different court systems and over 40 judges. No compensation (includes pension rights) has been paid. Currently there is one of two SCofC hearings slated (QC-refused a hearing June 09-2016) & SK with a pending hearing in P.E.I. and Alberta with renewed activity in Ontario as the Justice System gets ubered (external threat from an unexpected source) through the interlocking legal proceedings from different courts across Canada. Pulitzer Prize seeking writer is sought in this one-of-a-kind story of the century. This edition is focused on the topic of What to do with a tyrannical Justice System ...or a 'Court of Star Chambers'?



A) 'Nobody ever knows what's really going on. Nobody'  The Ascendant  Drew Chapman

B) 'If the facts are on your side, argue the facts.(my employee's position) If the facts are against you, argue the law' (employer's position) The Halls of Justice  Lee Gruenfeld

C) 'There is nothing in this whole world, nothing that I (prosecutor) hate worse than a crooked judge. Not murderers, not pushers, not corrupt politicians, not the mob, not anything.' Ibid

D)'...this wasn't about athletes (litigants) cheating the system, but about a state-run system (Justice System) cheating the athletes (litigants). bastardized parallel between Russian doping abuse of Olympics with Canadian Justice System abuse of the Employee's Case.

E) '...I don't view courts as "legislating", that's a label some people put on it, but I believe that what we are doing is our constitutional task of determining whether a challenged law is consistent with the Constitution....' SCofC Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin  my comment:  How then can she justify keeping this litigant in a 30 year state of limbo before over 40 judges including herself (1997)? Is it that by litigants being accused of being 'frivolous and vexatious', the Justice System has indeed found a way of 'legislating' themselves out of dealing with any question, including constitutional ones?


1) The original question in the title relates to 'What to do with a tyrannical king? (replace him with as little fall-out as possible which is not as easy as it sounds) When the whole system is tyrannical, you are pretty much left with massive firings (China and Turkey) or civil war (Sudan)

2) Many looking at my declaration of July 01 (Canada's Birthday) as being 'Anti-judge Day' for Canada no longer deserves a birthday for failing to 'stand on guard for thee' (anthem), could easily miss my message. Many, perhaps most judges work under very difficult circumstances and are doing a credible job. Unfortunately the structure of appointments (N.B. I am not advocating the U.S. system of elected judgeships) can be easily undermined by a hierarchy working through the offices of the Chief Justices of the land (grey eminence) which has never been seriously challenged by the oversight body of Parliament in the history of Canadian Jurisprudence. Until now that is with the Employees Case Canada; a 'whistleblower story' without equal which in terms of one analogy, has attached itself as a mite to the bureaucratic bees futilely seeking to protect the judicial hive which has lead to its collapse known biologically as colony collapse disorder. To be sure, many judges and lawyers wish me every success as when they speak out regarding inequities in the judicial system; they are hounded by the powers that be.

3) The novelist, Albert Camus (The Plague) picks up on this theme in that no-one recognizes the initial danger of a single dead rat (from plague) in a North African city. Similarly, no-one fully appreciated the significance of B.C. government's BILL 35(read that to mean controversial action by  B.C. Education Deputy Minister Jim Carter, a former principal of West Vancouver Secondary School from which - as a senior teacher - I was laid off in June of 1985 under the imposed BILL 35 'for economic reasons'.) SEE web ORIGINS as to Carter's own firing of a senior teacher in 1978 where the media claimed that as three, not just one arbitrator ruled, hence more justice was meted out.  A Union leader told me that as the Union selected one arbitrator, the Employer the second and the third appointed by the government (an old fuddy duddy Superintendent in retirement) the outcome was obvious: 2-1 against the teacher.

4) The central point that I wish to make here is that Carter thought nothing of hi-jacking the  legislature (a useless body); co-opting the judiciary (gerrymandered government arbitrator) to sanction a 'sweetheart deal'. (Most dismissals have behind the scenes these agreements...'As the Union we don't like it, but as long as you don't go after a Union leader....')

5) It should have been a 'slam dunk' but my change of lawyers from the arbitration led to a court hearing in which the arbitration was quashed and the arbitrator labeled patently unreasonable. When the Employer did not return employment as recommended by the court, a re-arbitration was ordered which never took place although the matter was placed before many judges in B.C. by me starting in 1995 and ending in 2013 with my expulsion from B.C. for reasons 'best known to the judge' (Cullen Creed). That began my ventures into other legal venues across Canada with the 'grey eminence' always one step ahead of me.

6) This latter story culminated in two trips to the Supreme Court of Canada in 2016: 36883 QC and 36993 SK (the third and fourth trip as there were two inconsequential trips in 1997 and 2004; the latter where the justice system imploded under the 'ultimate remedy' label) which are marked by judicial improprieties in both QC and SK (see web) unequaled in the annals of Canadian Jurisprudence. In brief, no matter what outcome for the 2016 ventures, the Canadian Justice  System royally screwed itself taking down with it the credibility of Parliament and the anti-employee media leaving the rank and file of Canadians with no-where but the streets to seek justice. SEE ALBERTA  Aug.08-2016 for a sample of this type of infighting.

7) The Justice System is about to make the biggest mistake ever with the 36993 SK decision to be brought down by the end of August. Should they follow through with their intention of appointing the same three SCofC judges who rejected 36883 QC on June 09-2016 to hear 36993 SK before the end of August; all Canadian justice is at an end.

8) In such an eventuality, Justice Minister Jody Wilson-Raybould must stand down and Chief Justice B. McLachlin must be fired. The other 4 SCofC Judges would be expected to step down 'as a matter of conscience'. 

9) The U.S. has Donald Trump and Hilary Clinton. Canada has Beverley McLachlin. Whom do you warn against whom? (news item: on an earlier visit, President Obama did not warn American investors about the risks of dealing with Canadian courts of law as I admonished.)


cc SCofC 36993 / Wilson-Raybould /Trudeau / RCMP




BY: Roger Callow ‘The Outlawed Canadian’ in an 'Outlaw Justice System' employescasecanada.ca (30 year unresolved 'standing case' legal matter in 'illicit' West Vancouver, B.C. teacher lay-off in 1985) now known judicially as ‘the cluster-fuck case’ which has been through 12 different court systems and over 40 judges. No compensation (includes pension rights) has been paid. Currently there is one of two SCofC hearings slated (QC-refused a hearing June 09-2016) & SK with a pending hearing in P.E.I. and Alberta with renewed activity in Ontario as the Justice System gets ubered (external threat from an unexpected source) through the interlocking legal proceedings from different courts across Canada. Pulitzer Prize seeking writer is sought in this one-of-a-kind story of the century. This edition is focused on the topic of Walking Back the Supreme Court of Canada's Cat and the role of systematic judicial malfeasance.


A)'We make tactical judgments based on the strength of the case, not who our friends are. The system makes the decisions. Prosecutors fight for convictions, defense attorneys fight for acquittals, everybody puts on their best show and the system sorts it out. When one side bends and doesn't do its job, the whole house comes crashing down...' Halls Of Justice Lee Gruenfeld

B) '...The judges are the gatekeepers. They enforce the rules. If the judges can't be trusted, then the rest of us are left as animals, biting and tearing at each other until somebody wins or loses for all the wrong reasons.'  Ibid

C) 'That's the real power of the press, not in fabrication, but in editing, serving up carefully apportioned dollops of the larger truth to whatever purpose the reporter and editor feel appropriate.' Ibid




1) The Supreme Court of Canada is not going to admit to any folly...that is to be directed against the government above them or the law courts below them. Recently, for example, Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin chastised the government for the slow replacement of retiring judges on the one hand, while on the other, the SCofC placed time limits such as 30 months for Superior Courts to bring matters to court after the charge is laid. One Senator claims that  this manoeuvre will merely turn miscreants onto the streets without due process.

2) And then there is the Employee' s Case (Canada)  which makes a lie of the entire extant legal process with the Supreme Court of Canada being front and center:

a) In 1997 the SCofC (B. McLachlin one of the sitting members) rejected a hearing in the above case espousing the theme of 'the jurisdiction of unions'. In brief, the court in their non-action condoned the 'sweetheart deal' thus destroying the Union movement.

b) In 2004 when McLachlin was Chief Justice, a rejection of this case under 'ultimate remedy', the cornerstone of contract and hence the entire civil code, left Canada as a Third World entity

c) In June of 2016, the SCofC refused to hear an appeal of 36883 QC limited to disclosure which is at the heart of habeas corpus and hence, all law.

d) In August of 2016, a second appeal of 36993 SK includes the further constitutional question on the ultra vires nature of B.C's BILL 35 passed in 1985 to facilitate the lay-off of this senior West Vancouver teacher. Should the above pattern be seen to repeat itself as in 36883 QC, the SCofC loses all credibility in overseeing government legislation...and on it goes....

3) At the core of the above rejections is the activity of the 'bobbsey twins'; Justices C. McKinnon and R. Scott of ON Superior Court (Ottawa) whose fraudulent actions in labeling this writer as being frivolous & vexatious are at the root of accusations made by me in Quebec, Saskatchewan and Ontario as the source of this perfidy. SEE web for details. ON Attorney General, Yasir Naqvi, still hasn't moved against the ON Appeal Court of Chief Justice George Strathy creating untold grief in all courts as noted above; especially that of the Supreme Court of Canada which has shown every indication of ducking out of a legal matter which - due to the unusual circumstances of this case - has no lower court decision to fall back on. That's anarchy.

4) 'Finality' is the essence of any court system except, it would appear, in Canada as evidenced by the Employee's Case. Prime Minister J. Trudeau is on the hook to take immediate executive action - particularly in the absence of Premiers Couillard & Wall - in this matter which may consist merely of sending in the RCMP (as my requests go unrequited). Doing nothing is not an option...and that includes the do-nothing anti-employee media.

5) Coming soon in a court near you if you live in Alberta...the grand-daddy of all constitutional questions raised by the Employee's Case; the connection between imposed government legislation and statute law in Canada's courts of law. In P.E.I., disclosure - the Union's copy.


cc  SCofC 36993 / Wilson-Raybould /Trudeau / RCMP


AUGUST 24-2016

I turned 75 today amid birthday cards and telephone calls wishing me 'pleasant returns'; even from strangers to whom I respond...'So good of you to remember!.... I gave a thought on this day to my deceased older only sister whom passed away in her homeless shelter in B.C. at age 62 in June 2001 (divorced after 25 years of marriage; no children; no substance abuse; money available; mental affliction the problem). Among her paltry remains was one birthday card (April 4 was her birthday) from a couple whom ran a local bakery and were probably supportive of this highly intelligent woman no doubt supplying her with food. I often wondered what she dreamed about at night. She was reported as a missing person at one point which is a story in itself and was located by the RCMP in B.C. She never spoke to me but in the way of homeless people, she had her own way of acknowledging my consideration in searching for her. On my parades around downtown Ottawa with my placards, I have a nodding acquaintance with some of the older regular street people...we are all people after all. Our charity of choice is the Ottawa Food Bank.