OCTOBER 01-2018  SEE B.C. Chief Justice Hinckson - Fraud Sub-heading                    


October 02-2018


TO: Premier Francois Legault                 FROM: Roger Callow self represented litigant

CAQ Party-QC                                                           1285 Cahill Dr. E. #2001

831 Boulevard de l'Ange                                        Ottawa, ON K1V 9A7

Gardien N local 100                                                 Fax: 613-521-1739

L'Assomption QC  J5W 1P5                                  

Sent by Registered Mail - 2 pages                  employeescasecanada.ca


encl.   a) 3-page letter to Supreme Court of Canada Registry Officer, Suzanne Sarrazin Apr.04 2016  b) 4-page letter to QC Appeal Court 'The Letter Which Hangs the QC Judiciary' Dec.16-2016  c) 3-page letter to the QC Law Society (web) Canada's Corruptocracy  April 01-2016



1) You will forgive me from withholding my applause in your election success until I see how you handle some unfinished 'dirty business' left over from the previous government. My French Canadian wife and family has kept me cognizant of QC affairs.


2) In brief, the dismissal of B.C. senior West Vancouver teacher, Roger Callow, in June of 1985 under the auspices of the imposed  BILL 35 (only ever applied to this litigant before it was withdrawn = banana republic justice) has never been resolved. No compensation for 33 years (includes pension rights) has been paid contrary to any number of laws.

3) In 2013, the 'Cullen Creed' (Associate Deputy Justice, Austen Cullen r.2017) expelled me from B.C. in this unresolved case 'for reasons best known to a judge' as the Order was held on his own recognizance, without taking argument nor quoting specific laws. Hence I was forced to turn to other courts across Canada to acquire justice in this unresolved legal matter.

4) The issue in Quebec courts focused solely on disclosure; a problem which has plagued this case for 33 years. The assigned judges refused to call for this disclosure nor, alternatively, request that the RCMP seize this material. (The Montreal Fraud Squad has a dossier on these attempts by me.)

5) As in other provinces, regrettably, court procedures were marred by judicial malfeasance with the oversight bodies failing to acknowledge very serious shortcomings: In Quebec;

a) The Gatineau courts ran 'a court within a court'; a situation anathema to any justice system.

Goulet cj wrote the Decision on behalf of the hearing judge, Therrien j. without any reference to the existence of the sitting judge. He may yet find himself part of the civil fraud charges which I have extant against two ON judges if the RCMP do not investigate him.

b) The level of judicial cupidity detailed in the letters sent to you dealing with the 'behind the scenes' Appeal Court in league with Lavery de Billy for the B.C. Employer defies description which I provide in any event in the enclosures.

c) Regrettably the Supreme Court of Canada (36883-2016) 'whitewashed' the above perfidy by refusing to hear this matter. Two of the judges sitting on that rejection were QC appointees - Suzanne Coté j. and Richard Wagner j. the incumbent Chief Justice.

6) See the web site as to how B.C. Justice Hinckson cj in September took a step from which there is no return. For a first time, he allied the courts directly with judicial decision rather than using jurisdictional excuses - e.g. frivolous and vexatious; matters already resolved, - to evade responsibilities.

7) If the B.C. Government does not deal directly with Hinckson cj at the risk of imperiling the entire NDP structure in Canada; I will be adding his name to my civil fraud list similar to the two ON judges. The cases are all interlocked. You are under a similar 'gun' should you choose to do nothing as is the case with the oversight bodies.

8) A word on Nova Scotia is pertinent here where I unsuccessfully sought to raise a constitutional question relating to the matter of asking whether the courts of law have authority over imposed legislation? As there was no change of government in the last election, it was pointless to address another letter similar to this one to the premier. I did, however, call on President Trump to invoke the Magnitsky Act (legal and moral turpitude) against N.S. Supreme Court's Rosinski j. (This act may not be applied internally in Canada.)

9) Until concrete action is seen from you personally on the above issue, all court credibility in QC is suspended.


Yours truly,


Roger Callow (litigant)


cc RCMP Commissioner Brenda Lucki


OCTOBER 06-2018


1) '...The reflexive response of not speaking about matters potentially before the courts is what is taught in law school - but it is almost invariably misguided. If a story is going to appear, your job should be to help shape it. If your lawyer lacks those skills (or is part of a sweetheart deal) obtain assistance from a... public relations firm.'

2) As a generalization, Levitt and I do not like each other but on this one, he is dead on.

3) I was pro-active with my senior teacher lay-off for economic reasons under the Imposed BILL 35. But that was no match for School Trustee Margo Furk and her successor, Mike Smith, who were permitted to libel me in the right wing tabloid, The North Shore News. SEE employeescasecanada.ca RED NECK MEDIA. Even when the Court quashed the arbitration ruling, in that process, the arbitrator to be patently unreasonable, the NS News sniffed their disapproval. Unfortunately, the Canadian Justice System bought into that scam at their own peril and have self-destructed in the process = anarchy.

4) In 2014 ON Superior Court Judge, Colin McKinnon (he of recent fame of 'very nice pimp') wrote not one, but two judgments with neither referencing the existence of the other. Currently, along with a second judge, Robert Scott plus the legal firm of Hicks, Morley et al are targeted in a case for civil fraud in ON Courts where all material goes to Premier Ford considering that A.G. Carolyn Mulroney has shown herself to be 'less than competent' in this file. The Ottawa Citizen on April 29 p.1 published the opening of McKinnon's April judgment but refused rebuttal time to me.

5) Two others have been the topic of high profile stories in recent years where the press has been 'judge, jury and executioner'; Jian Ghomeshi, the former CBC employee whom won his case against sexual assault with the cost borne by a most reluctant union, and Senator Mike Duffy whom was screwed by his Tory compatriots in the Senate and appears to be on his way to a multi-million pay-out on this one. If the Tories had won the last election, the legal decision could just as easily have gone the other way.


October 12-2018


TO: ON Premier D. Ford                           FROM: Roger Callow  Plaintiff

PERSONAL                                                                   1285 Cahill Dr. E. #2001

Legislative Building                                                   Ottawa, ON  K1V 9A7

Queen's Park                                                             

Toronto, ON M7A 1A1                                             employeescasecanada.ca

 1 page


cc  Ottawa Superior Court Registry

161 Elgin St.

Ottawa, ON K2P 2K1

REFERENCE: ON Supreme Court (Ottawa) File number CV 18000 769 0000



1) As you know, I have kept you apprised of this national legal matter since the day that you won the election in June.

2) Your appointment of A.G. Carolyn Mulroney at the end of June, unfortunately, turned out to be someone who was 'less than competent' with this file hence all materials have reverted to you since August.

3) I have not heard from the court for some time now. I trust that they have not 'lost the file' and are requesting that it be re-filed. At any rate, I am keeping Ottawa Sun columnist, Mark Bonokoski, aware of such guff should it happen.

4) It is now up to you.


Yours truly, Roger Callow  Plaintiff


TO: PREMIER FORD  by fax (2 pages)

SEPTEMBER 19-2018 - annotated to reflect updates (Oct. 23-2018)

What Premier Doug Ford doesn't know about the Justice System which I have learned the hard way over the past 33 years

by: Roger Callow 'The Outlawed Canadian in an outlaw Government and Justice System due to systematic judicial malfeasance in an unresolved legal issue.'   employeescasecanada.ca


1) Ford is in a position of being 'dead right' and in that order. The point is that if one is first dead, who cares whether or not he is right?

2) It does not appear that Ford is getting very good legal advice; the key one being that one may not be critical of a judge personally due to his decision; that is what appeal courts are for.

3) What a litigant can be critical of is the process by which the court conducted itself. That's why I am able to file a civil case for fraud in Ontario listing two judges with the West Vancouver School Trustees being the 'engine' of this charge for $20 million. No legal counsel will represent the WVST (as well as in B.C. in a second $20 million action) under pain of being sued separately for $20 million. In this unprecedented manoeuvre; two judges are named in the conduct of that fraud along with Ontario legal counsel for the Employer dating from 2014. SEE website for details.

4) What Ford needs and hasn't got is a casus belli to justify his action of reducing Toronto City Council from 48 to 24 seats. (Oct. 23-2018; 'perverted 'court action led to his success)

5) In dealing with the Ford issue above, the presiding Justice is not limited to the 'notwithstanding clause' as many other factors can be cited in dealing with an issue. Indeed, I quoted the Charter on a number of occasions only to be ignored which is the prerogative of the presiding justice. In the unresolved  Employee's Case; the matter was reduced to this litigant merely being frivolous and vexatious on matters already decided. As to which matters were decided, the School Trustees are never specific and, here's the key point, the court does not ever demand that they be specific. That's been the story for 33 years.

6) A side note to the above is that I am dunned for all legal costs which I have never paid considering that I have never received an invoice. The Trustees refuse to say if they paid these bills and the North Shore News Tabloid refuses to challenge them on this level.

7) Other than a personal animus on the part of the Premier, the only thing to warm the cockles of his heart is the loud-mouth braying of the Conservative media bent on selling papers.

8) First past the post is a vital point in law as trying to come from behind leaves a litigant carrying baggage difficult to dispose. Ford already has one court loss. I had the loss of the arbitration dealing with my senior teacher lay-off in 1985 despite the succeeding court quashing the arbitration ruling, in that process, the arbitrator to be patently unreasonable for failing to show a causal factor (this perp; this crime). I have been left in limbo since that ruling with no judge willing to act to draw a conclusion. In essence, they pick up the ball and go home before the game is completed. That's how the Justice System imploded in 2004 under the 'ultimate remedy' conditions before the Supreme Court of Canada. 'You have exhausted all remedy under the law' volunteered my legal representative.

9)Today, I am 'walking back the cat' with the two charges one being for judicial fraud; a challenge unequalled in the annals of any legal system as I hit directly at 'the process'.

10) It would seem that Ford has not put out the money for qualified legal help and is about to pay the price a second time as judges do not take kindly to any one judge being personally 'dissed'. (Oct.-23-2018: SEE Point 4)

11) For my part, it matters little to my welfare as to which way the winds blow for the Ford Government on this issue. The key advantage is that both of us, in our own ways, have revealed activist judges which have always permeated the system. As I put it; the Justice System imploded in 2004; corpse to follow. The now putrid corpse is currently following in B.C. and ON with the Employee's Case....



OCTOBER 23-2018 - SECOND APPEAL: CV 18000 76950  0000 (Ottawa Supreme Court) copy to Ottawa Sun columnist, Mark Bonokoski

1) Considering that the B.C. action mentioned above filed after the Ontario Action has been adjudicated (with much prejudice - see employeescasecanada.ca), why is there a delay in providing a written Decision in Ontario particularly considering that the Employer did not file for an appearance in either case?

2) Also in contrast to B.C. is the fact that the Ontario action lists two Ontario judges whose actions still go uncontested as to malfeasance and were a factor in other venues across Canada.  The Ontario action, also in contrast to the B.C. action, is for civil fraud although production of the disclosure by the highly politicized RCMP would most likely lead to a criminal charge of fraud. Under those conditions, in the event of a successful suit, everything flowing from the imposed BILL 35 (1985) as used by the Employer in an illicit senior teacher lay-off in 1985 would be 'null and void'.

3) At heart of all court actions for 33 years has been the issue of disclosure (as is the case of the criminal trial against Vice Admiral Mark Norman but that trial continues with this difference; I have no media coverage. Is that what Canada has become?...a newspaper democracy?)  Bonokoski, are you listening?

4) The proper course for the Ford government (all correspondence now goes to Premier Ford considering the abject performance of his A.G. Carolyn Mulroney on this file) is to place the Ontario Judiciary under a trusteeship until answers are forthcoming explaining why the above legal case appears to have disappeared down the proverbial black hole.


Yours truly, Roger Callow aka 'outlaw'


OCTOBER 24-2018


TO: Ontario Premier Doug Ford  (2 pages by fax)

FROM: Roger Callow  Plaintiff  CV 18000 76950 0000 (Ottawa Supreme Court)

REFERENCE:  Callow letter to you dated October 23, 2018 sent by fax

cc  Ottawa Sun columnist Mark Bonokoski charged by me with breaking the media boycott on employeescasecanada.ca



1) Acknowledgment of a letter under your personal signature dated Oct. 15 and received Oct. 24 is made.

2) That you see fit to sign your personal name to a letter to this plaintiff rather than hiding behind faceless cliché ridden bureaucrats is a positive note although I reserve the right to question the message.

3)Your Opposition NDP leader, Andrea Horwath, has not even seen fit to acknowledge the Employee's Case on any level and due to the national character of this legal case, the B.C. NDP Party was wiped out in a recent Court Decision (SEE web) taking down with it, as it did due to interlocking case elements, the National NDP under Jagmeet Singh as well as Horwath:


5) Your letter to me reads completely as follows:


Thank you for your letter about a matter before the courts.


I hope you will appreciate that it would be inappropriate for me, as Premier, to intervene in the matter because elected officials are not permitted to interfere in matters before the courts or comment on legal decisions.


Thank you again for writing.


Sincerely, (signed)  Doug Ford   Premier


6) Your letter reflects a basic misunderstanding of the legal system as it is the process which is being questioned here and yes, elected officials in terms of oversight bodies are indeed charged with making the process move smoothly. A popular quotation in that regard is from Justice Estey (St. Anne Nackawic)...What must be avoided at all costs is a fundamental miscarriage of justice under the law.

7) That is what happened under McKinnon j. and Scott j. in 2014 whom conspired with the assistance of the Employer's legal firm, Hicks, Morley et al to provide two judgments on the same April 2014 hearing; the second not referencing the first. These two judges should not, it is submitted here, be sitting on the bench. They are named in this fraud action above due to the failure of the Canadian Council of Judges (they were both originally Federal Court appointees and therefore escape provincial scrutiny) to acknowledge the complaint.

8) Perhaps you are correct in the microcosm as stating that as Premier, you should not be involved; that should fall to your Attorney General, Carolyn Mulroney who never responded to these concerns. She is your appointee, so yes, you should be taking direct action, whatever that action may be.

9) Perhaps I mistake with my appellation of 'neanderthal' as any Premier whom, during an election, reduce the number of council seats in Toronto with the assistance of a preposterous three person Appeal Court ruling of entering a 'Stay of Proceedings' (similar to 'tabling motions' as a means of getting rid of them) suggests that you know more about legal process in Ontario than I do although I have experienced a number of '3 person Appeal Court rubber stamps' in my own case.

10) What is unique about the Employee's Case is that - due to the original arbitration being quashed by the courts - as the target I was left in limbo. The Employer refuses to pay compensation whether it be under the collective bargaining process, the imposed BILL 35, or any other scheme in law devoted to employee compensation until, understandingly, they have a court decision. The fault, therefore, in terms of legalities lies entirely with the failure of process with the Canadian judiciary. Hence any decision as to how to proceed by the courts is at the root of the current difficulties particularly as it revolves around disclosure which all courts steadfastly refuse to call for. The politicized RCMP won't act. And that story the media would sit on, amid this implosion of the Canadian Justice System.

11) No-one can trust to any court decision in Canada under these circumstances. Credit raters such as Moody's which assesses government debt and the U.S. president whom has a direct interest in the courts of Canada and their operation considering that Canada forms the northern flank of their military protection will no doubt have other ideas as to Canada's credibility. At the very least, U.S. investors have a right to know about the dissolute Canadian Justice System.

12) Once again, thank-you for the personal touch, more authorities should follow your example.


Yours truly,


Roger Callow  plaintiff


cc RCMP Commissioner Brenda Lucki

U.S. President Donald Trump