Action No.: 1003 14100 E-File No.: EVQ10NANYASHAA Appeal No.: IN THE COURT OF QUEEN’S BENCH OF ALBERTA

8/7/2019 Action No.: 1003 14100 E-File No.: EVQ10NANYASHAA Appeal No.: IN THE COURT OF QUEEN’S BENCH OF ALBERTA

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/action-no-1003-14100-e-file-no-evq10nanyashaa-appeal-no-in-the-court 1/46

Action No.: 1003 14100E-File No.: EVQ10NANYASHAA Appeal No.:____________________

IN THE COURT OF QUEEN’S BENCH OF ALBERTAJUDICIAL DISTRICT OF EDMONTONBETWEEN: :NANYA-SHAABU:EL, ADMINISTER FOR THE ESTATE OF JENSEY SELYWN HENRY, MERLEBERRINICE HENRYPlaintiffs

And

ALBERTA HEALTH SERVICES, CAPITAL HEALTHMENTAL HEALTHCRISIS SERVICE, CAPITAL HEALTH REGIONALMENTAL HEALTHPROGRAM, KENYOUTH LUCIEN HENRY, ROYALCANADIAN MOUNTED

POLICE

http://www.facebook.com/note.php?created&&note_id=10150124557007170#!/notes/nanya-ahk-heru-el/action-no-1003-14100-e-file-

no-evq10nanyashaa-appeal-no-in-the-court-of-queens-b/10150124557007170

http://www.scribd.com/doc/51249737/EVQ10NANYASHAA-NANYA-SHAABU-EL-ADMINISTER-FOR-THE-ESTATE-OF-

JENSEY-SELYWN-HENRY-MERLE-BERRINICE-HENRY

Action No.: 1003 14100E-File No.: EVQ10NANYASHAAAppeal No.: ____________________ IN THE COURT OF QUEEN’S BENCH OF ALBERTAJUDICIAL DISTRICT OF EDMONTONBETWEEN::NANYA-SHAABU:EL, ADMINISTER FOR THE ESTATE OF JENSEY

http://www.facebook.com/notes/nanya-ahk-heru-el/action-no-1003-14100-e-file-no-evq10nanyashaa-appeal-no-in-the-court-of-queens-b/10150124557007170


http://www.scribd.com/doc/51249737/EVQ10NANYASHAA-NANYA-SHAABU-EL-ADMINISTER-FOR-THE-ESTATE-OF-JENSEY-SELYWN-HENRY-MERLE-BERRINICE-HENRY








SELYWN HENRY, MERLE BERRINICE HENRYPlaintiffsandALBERTA HEALTH SERVICES, CAPITAL HEALTH MENTAL HEALTHCRISIS SERVICE, CAPITAL HEALTH REGIONAL MENTAL HEALTH

PROGRAM, KENYOUTH LUCIEN HENRY, ROYAL CANADIANMOUNTEDPOLICEDefendantsP R O C E E D I N GEdmonton, AlbertaDecember 9, 2010Transcript Management Services, Edmonton1000, 10123 99th StreetEdmonton, Alberta T5J-3H1

Phone: (780) 427-6181 Fax: (780) 422-2826iTABLE OF CONTENTSDescription PageDecember 9, 2010 Afternoon session 11 Submissions by Ms. Oltean (Strike Motion)6 Submissions by Mr. El (Strike Motion)18 Submissions by Ms. Oltean (Strike Motion)19 DiscussionCertificate of Record 24

Certificate of Transcript 2511 Proceedings taken in the Court of Queen’s Bench of Alberta, Law Courts,Edmonton, Alberta23 December 9, 2010 Afternoon session45 Master Breitkreuz Court of Queen’s Bench6 of Alberta78 J.Oltean Forthe Applicant9 (No Counsel) For the Respondents10 L.Andrews CourtClerk 111213 MASTER BREITKREUZ: Thank you. Have a seat, please.1415 MS.OLTEAN: Thankyou, Sir.



1617 MASTER BREITKREUZ: Good afternoon. Okay. I guess we are ready18 to begin.1920 Submissions by Ms. Oltean (Strike Motion)

2122 MS.OLTEAN: Thankyou, Sir. Sir, I’m Jaxine Oltean, counsel23 and agent for the Attorney General of Canada. I’m representing the defendantRoyal24 Canadian Mounted Police in an action brought by the plaintiffs. Sir, this isMr. :Nanya-25 Shaabu:El. He is one of the plaintiffs, and he sues in the capacity of administrator of the26 estate of Jensey Henry.27

28 Sir, this is the Crown’s motion to strike the plaintiff’s statement of claim, andthis matter 29 first came before you in September of this year, at which time you set aside anoting in30 default and adjourned the strike motion sine die so that it could be set down for an31 afternoon sitting of this court. Sir, I have some -- a set of materials that I will berelying32 on. You may have some of these before you, and I -- it may be convenient if Ipass them

33 up to you now.3435 MASTER BREITKREUZ: Thank you.3637 MS.OLTEAN: Thank you, Sir. Sir, when the Crown brought38 this motion, it was brought under the old rule 129; however, the general rule setout in the39 transitional provision of the new Rules provides that the new Rules will governthis40 motion as it is a, quote, existing proceeding within the meaning of the newRules.4121 MASTER BREITKREUZ: Yes.23 MS. OLTEAN: So I provided a copy of Part 15, which sets out4 the transitional rules and, in particular, I’m relying on rule 15.1 and 15.2(1).Those are



5 simply the setting out the general rule and the definition of existing proceeding.So as a6 result, Sir, the new rule that governs this motion to strike is rule 3.66 -- 68 --pardon me,7 and I’ve also attached a copy of that rule.

89 MASTER BREITKREUZ: Yes.1011 MS.OLTEAN: Under the old rule 129, Sir, the motion was12 originally brought on the grounds that the statement of claim did not disclose acause of 13 action, that it was frivolous and vexatious, and that it would prejudice or delaythe fair 14 trial of this action, and in my respectful submission, Sir, these grounds arecomparable to

15 the grounds set out in the new rule 3.68(2)(b), (c), and (e).1617 MASTER BREITKREUZ: Yes.1819 MS.OLTEAN: And like under the old Rules, Sir, rule 3.68(3)20 provides that no evidence may be submitted on an application made on thebasis that the21 statement of claim discloses no reasonable cause of action. And finally, Sir, inmy22 respectful submission the new Rules do not replace the existing and

longstanding plain23 and obvious test for striking out pleadings.2425 Sir, I have provided you with a copy of the statement of claim, and if I couldask you to26 refer to that.2728 MASTER BREITKREUZ: Yes.2930 MS.OLTEAN: Sir, in my respectful submission, even on a31 generous and charitable reading of this statement of claim, it’s not possible tounderstand32 the vast majority of it, and I don’t propose to review each paragraph in thisstatement of 33 claim but simply point out some of the highlights. The specific allegationsagainst the34 RCMP are contained in paragraphs 9, 10, 11, 15, 16, 17, 18, and 20, and Ibelieve I’ve



35 highlighted those for you.3637 MASTER BREITKREUZ: Yes.3839 MS.OLTEAN: And they appear to be a bald assertion of

40 trespass; however, Sir, I would note that the location of the quote/unquotesecured41 property is not identified, nor is the owner of the property identified, and in my31 submission, Sir, such vagueness and uncertainty on those points raise bothquestions of 2 standing and possibly jurisdiction. By contrast, Sir, the prayer for relief in thestatement3 of claim, which I believe is the second-last page of the statement of claim, makesno

4 reference whatsoever to trespass but rather asserts other wrongs which arenowhere5 identified in the statement of claim. So, for example, the prayer for relief againstthe6 RCMP, which is in paragraph (c) of the prayer for relief, seeks against theRCMP7 $5,000,000 in punitive and cumulative damages against the RCMP for knowingly,8 maliciously, and deliberately disobeying domestic statutes, legal procedures, and9 committing deliberate violations of international human rights, Charter rights

violations,10 Alberta Bill of Rights, and for deliberately committing the privation of rightsagainst11 :Nanya-Shaabu:El. The laws said to have been breached and violated are notidentified in12 the statement of claim and do not appear to be supported by any factualallegations in the13 statement of claim, and in my respectful submission, Sir, such bald assertionsof law14 simply are not sufficient to give rise to a cause of action.1516 In addition, Sir, the whole of the statement of claim is quite difficult tounderstand. The17 claim cites laws that to not apply in Alberta or Canada. For example, atparagraph 40,18 the United States Uniform Commercial Code is referred to. Much of thestatement of



19 claim simply alleges that the defendants have knowledge of certain thingswhich appear 20 completely unrelated to each other, and, with respect, some are simplynonsensical. As21 one example, I would commend the Court to paragraph 35 of the statement of

claim, and22 that paragraph says: (as read)2324 The defendants have knowledge that the manager of Crisis and25 Access Services was served a certificate of commercial dishonor 26 on March 19th, 2009, via process server, for $10,000,000. The27 defendants also have knowledge that Capital Health services28 director was sent an international notice of commercial default and29 admiralty maritime claim for damages in the amount of 30 $10,000,000 Canada Post registered mail in accord with L-O-S-T

31 and Article 15 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal32 Court published at a website.3334 Sir, in my respectful submission, that is characteristic of much of this statementof claim.3536 Other parts of this statement of claim speak about communications sent to thedefendants37 and then claims that because the defendants have not responded to thesecommunications,

38 they are bound by them or somehow admit them, and I would commend to youparagraph39 39 and 40 as one example of that.4041 In my respectful submission, Sir, the statement of claim does not disclose areasonable41 cause of action, and it is also frivolous, vexatious, improper, and prejudicialwithin the2 meaning of rule 3.68. I can advise, Sir, that with respect to another but similar statement3 of claim filed by Mr. El against slightly different defendants in this court, whichwas4 struck out, Mr. Justice Sanderman found that the statement of claim was, quote,absolute5 gibberish.67 MR. EL: Objection.



89 MS. OLTEAN: There’s no reported of Justice Sanderman’s10 decision, but I have provided you in the materials, Sir, with a copy of thetranscript of 11 those proceedings.

1213 MASTER BREITKREUZ: Yes.1415 MS.OLTEAN: Andit’s at page 4 of that transcript, lines 23 to16 25, where Mr. Justice Sanderman comments about the statement of claim beinggibberish.17 But also, Sir, if I could direct your attention to lines 38 to 40 of that page, Mr.Justice18 Sanderman comments that it would be an affront to the dignity of any Court toallow a

19 document such as this to stand and to force individuals to come to court to haveto answer 20 this. Sir, in my respectful submission, Justice Sanderman’s sentiments areequally21 applicable here. I think it’s also important, Sir, that I advise the Court that Mr.Justice22 Slatter of the Court of Appeal recently declared Mr. El to be a vexatiouslitigant, and I23 have provided you with a copy of his reported decision, should be the last --24

25 MASTER BREITKREUZ: Yes.2627 MS.OLTEAN: -- thing you have. So, Sir, after the other 28 action of the plaintiff had been struck by Mr. Justice Sanderman, the plaintiff appealed.29 Counsel for the defendant Kenyouth Henry, who is also a defendant in theseproceedings,30 applied in the Court of Appeal for security for costs and a vexatious litigantorder. In the31 course of rendering his decision, Mr. Justice Slatter found a number of facts,and those32 are set out at paragraph 3 of the decision. Finds the plaintiff "refers to statutesand33 instruments (such as the American Uniform Commercial Code) that are not inforce in34 Canada. . ."3536 MR.EL: Objection.



3738 MS.OLTEAN: ".. .or that have no application whatsoever to a39 civil cause of action."4041 MR.EL: Objection.

512 MASTER BREITKREUZ: Well, it is right in here. He -- she is reading3 from Mr. Justice Slatter’s decision. What can you be objecting about that?45 MR. EL: Oh, because The Hague Statute on Private

6 International Law. Canada --78 MASTER BREITKREUZ: She is just --9

10 MR.EL: --is a statute.1112 MASTER BREITKREUZ: She is just -- she is --1314 MR.EL: Canadais a signatory.1516 MASTER BREITKREUZ: She is just reading what Mr. Justice Slatter 17 finds.1819 MR.EL: Yes. And I have a right to object.

2021 MASTER BREITKREUZ: Well, you object till you are blue in the face,22 but it is not --2324 MR.EL: AndI accept that for --2526 MASTER BREITKREUZ: -- going to help you.2728 MR.EL: --value and consideration, and I tender that to29 the clerk.3031 MASTER BREITKREUZ: Thank you. It is being recorded. You do not32 need to tender it to the clerk.3334 MR.EL: Well,I’ll still tender it to the clerk.3536 MS.OLTEAN: Sir, Mr. Justice Slatter continues that the37 plaintiff:



3839 .. .purports to impose liabilities on third parties by sending them40 letters containing unsubstantiated demands and then taking the41 position that if the third party does not reply to the letter, they6

1 have accepted whatever obligation he attempted to unilaterally2 impose.34 He writes meaningless phrases (such as "accepted for value and5 consideration and honor") on letters and documents and then takes6 the position that this somehow affects the legal import of the7 document.89 He purports to sue on behalf of the estate of his father even10 though no grant of probate or administration has been issued in his

11 favour.1213 Sir, in my submission, most, but certainly not all, of these features are presentin this14 statement of claim; and in conclusion, Sir, with respect to this statement of claim, the15 defendant RCMP are at a loss as to the case they must meet. The whole of thestatement16 of claim is suffused with nonsensical and seemingly irrelevant statements suchthat it

17 ought to be struck in its entirety. It is simply not a pleading that can beresponded to in18 any meaningful fashion or with any confidence that any defence would beresponsive to19 it. For these reasons, Sir, the Crown also submits that it is also a frivolous,vexatious, and20 improper pleading. Subject to any questions you have, Sir, those conclude my21 submissions.2223 MASTER BREITKREUZ: Thank you.2425 MS.OLTEAN: Thankyou, Sir.2627 MASTER BREITKREUZ: Thank you.2829 Mr. El, go ahead.3031 Submissions by Mr. El (Strike Motion)



3233 MR.EL: Iproceed to tender my submission to the clerk 34 in accord with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of IndigenousPeoples and35 the United Nations Charter in accord --

3637 MASTER BREITKREUZ: Well, I am not sure. Are you -- are you38 making this application to the clerk, or are you making it to me?3940 MR.EL: Isaid I’m tendering. I didn’t say I’m making41 an application. I said I’m tendering this to the clerk in accord --712 MASTER BREITKREUZ: What are you tendering?3

4 MR. EL: Pardon?56 MASTER BREITKREUZ: What are --78 MR. EL: I’m tendering my submission. My oral9 submission that’s being recorded, I’m tendering that to the clerk.1011 MASTER BREITKREUZ: Well, then I will just sit back and have a --12 have a nap.13

14 MR.EL: Well, I can accept that for value and15 consideration.1617 MASTER BREITKREUZ: Okay. Go ahead.1819 MR.EL: AndI’ll tender that to the clerk.2021 MASTER BREITKREUZ: Go ahead and make your submissions to the22 clerk, but I guess I will listen to them anyway.2324 MR.EL: Onething -- the first thing I would like to bring25 up with -- with regard to our statement of claim, counsel makes a number of statements,26 and one thing I would like to bring up in -- in making reference to Justice --Justice27 Sanderman’s decision of the 4th of March -- pardon me -- of February of this --earlier



28 this year, I bring to your attention I was actually in front of you about a year ago this29 time regarding a case that I filed, which is actually on appeal with the SupremeCourt of 30 Canada, regarding a hospital breach and which resulted in my dad’s death, and

you had31 asked me if I had filed an affidavit, and I said I did not, and you said:3233 Ithink you should be filing an affidavit and I think they should --34 they will want to cross-examine you on it. I think we have to dig35 into this a little deeper frankly.3637 Now, according to the Court -- Alberta Rules of Court rule 142, when we wereback last38 time and I spoke with you and counsel had brought up the Crown Act and that

the Crown39 had a right for 30 days to respond -- right? So the -- this was of the 19th of August when40 the statement of claim was filed. We are now in December. Now, according tothe41 Alberta Rules of Court , you have 15 days. Under the Crown Act , it’s 30. Now,they81 have not responded. They have not even filed a statement of defence, so in thatcapacity,

2 the defendants, who are actually in default, cannot answer the statement of claim. They3 had --45 MASTER BREITKREUZ: Is -- wasn’t --67 MR. EL: They had a opportunity. You gave them an8 extension to give -- allow them a chance to respond to this.910 Now, the thing that seems to be overlooked is the -- there was an -- there weretwo11 officers that came along with Alberta Health Services over to the secureproperty out near 12 Lake Wabamun. Now, the Alberta Health Mental Health crisis unit, they cameout of St.13 Albert. The RCMP came from Stony Plain. Now, Stony Plain has its ownMental Health



14 crisis unit. And when I was on the phone with somebody from our nation, myindigenous15 nation, I was told by the RCMP to take -- to get off the phone, which I did, so--16 especially since he had black gloves on, so I already knew they were planning

to trying to17 grab me. He stated he wanted ID. I showed him ID. He came into the house,18 bow-guarded himself into the house and then asked me, I need to speak withyour mother.19 My mother, who’s present here today, was at work. He called her, and mymother asked20 him, What are you doing in my house, why are you in my house? She told himto leave.21 He wouldn’t leave. My mother said, I want to speak to a lawyer, I need to talk with my

22 lawyer. He said, You don’t need a lawyer. That officer did not have a namebadge on23 his left chest. Now, the other officer, his name was Officer Haney (phonetic).He was24 there. And they proceeded to be witnesses to an illegal psych assessment doneby Alberta25 Health Services in my mother’s dining room, and since that time, we’ve asked,Who made26 the call to have the Mental Health crisis unit from St. Albert come out to Lake27 Wabamun? This is very clearly outlined in the statement of claim, which

counsel was so28 kind to bring up. If we look at paragraph 9: (as read)2930 The defendants have knowledge of the illegal, unlawful, criminal31 trespass and unauthorized presence of Julie Meagan (phonetic) and32 co-worker, redhead with slight tan, who did not leave a business33 card, along with two RCMP officers from Stony Plain detachment,34 Officer Hanley? (phonetic) and a second unidentified RCMP35 officer with no name badge on left chest, who forced themselves36 into a house, which is secure property, on the basis of anonymous37 call made to St. Albert Mental Health crisis services on October 38 3rd, 2008.3940 Now, what’s interesting about that, My Honour, which I tender to the clerk, is Ihave a41 letter here from Capital Health addressed to myself, and the date of this letter was9



1 September 9th, 2008 -- this was a month before the RCMP came out --addressed to2 myself, Mr. :Nanya-Shaabu:El, United Nations IPO Number 2718 GD StationMain,3 Edmonton, Alberta, T5J 2G8. (as read)

45 Dear Mr. El, re: request for disclosure of health information re:6 Mr. Jensey Selwyn Henry. Your request for disclosure of health7 information was received by Capital Health on August 28th, 2008.8 We acknowledge your request for full disclosure of all your 9 father’s medical records in relation to his time at the Royal10 Alexandra Hospital psychiatric ward and emergency department on11 April 18, 2008. We will provide the information available to you12 as quickly as possible. Sincerely, Derek Watschaz (phonetic),13 Information Access and Privacy Advisor for Capital Health.

1415 So after that situation occurred on the 3rd of October, we now go to paragraph10: (as16 read)1718 The defendants have knowledge that I was on a long distance19 phone call with a member from my indigenous nation, who’s now20 a material witness, and, when answering the door while on the21 phone, was coerced under threat and duress by the unidentified22 RCMP officer on October 3rd, 2008, to end his long distance

23 phone conversation. The defendants have knowledge that I am24 indigenous and tribal in accord with international law and my25 website, which I have posted.2627 The unidentified RCMP officer asked me -- this is number 11 -- after forcinghis way into28 the secure property, if I had a weapon website, and I told him yes. The -- whenwe go to29 paragraph 13: (as read)3031 The defendants have knowledge of the illegal Charter violations,32 criminal trespass, privation of rights, and illegal mental health33 assessment they conducted on secure property, instigated by34 anonymous call on October 3rd, 20083536 And I bring to the clerk and to the Master’s attention that Dr. Sherman hasgone through



37 a very similar thing, which is probably looking at some potential litigation,because we38 dealt with the Privacy Act , and I give knowledge to -- to the Master of thisvessel that39 when I was in front of you a year ago, you had told the counsel by the name of

Barbara40 Stratton, who was the representative for Dr. Louis Francescutti, that thediscussion -- there41 was a issue of a Privacy Act with my dad being released. Now, when we go onto101 paragraph 14: (as read)23 The defendants have knowledge that the St. Albert psychiatric4 assessment Capital Health Mental Health crisis service did not

5 contact nor speak with Merle Henry on October 3rd, 2008.67 Now, I’m pretty sure it’s -- it’s standard procedure if this -- if an individual is athreat to8 themselves or their family, the first thing that the authorities would have to do istalk to9 their immediate family or next of kin, which happened to be my mother. Theofficer 10 had -- didn’t want to hear anything she had to say. When they did the illegalpsych

11 assessment, they never contacted by mother before, during, or after. So for some strange12 reason, my mother has become somewhat of an anomaly that the officialsregarding this13 matter don’t want to talk to.1415 Now, when we go to paragraph 15: (as read)1617 The defendants have knowledge that the RCMP forced their way18 into the secure property on October 3rd, 2008.1920 Who is going to call from St. Albert and tell the RCMP to go up to a propertylocated21 near Lake Wabamun, which is about a 45-minute drive, and Stony Plain has itsown crisis22 Mental Health unit? Obviously somebody in St. Albert made the phone call.Now, when23 we go to paragraph 16: (as read)



2425 The defendants have knowledge that the unidentified RCMP26 officer who contacted Merle Henry, who was at work when she27 got this phone call, did not allow her to speak with a lawyer and28 even stated, No, you cannot speak to a lawyer.

2930 Now, I tender to this Court, because this is available online at the UnitedNations Office31 of the High Commission on Human Rights. This is code of conduct for lawenforcement32 officials, and in -- it’s adopted by the General Assembly, Resolution 34-169 of the 17th of 33 December, 1979. Article 2:3435 In the performance of their duty law enforcement officials shall

36 respect and protect human dignity and maintain and uphold the37 human rights of all persons3839 As an addendum to that, I have an article here published by the Edmonton

Journal , page40 A4 of Thursday, September 13th of 2007. The UN vote may be black day for Canada.41 Resolution recognizing First Nations rights expected to pass. And I quote:111

2 While the declaration is not binding, Canadian officials say the3 country takes any international commitment it makes seriously,4 whether written in law or not.56 So that includes the Uniform Commercial Code and The Hague Statute on

Private

7 International Law. Further, I tender to the clerk and to the Master of this vessel,if 8 anyone was to pay attention and look on the back of a Canadian $50 note, theUnited9 Nations declaration on human rights is on the back. You might have to get amagnifying10 glass to see it, but it’s there. So therefore, since the Canadian money is legaltender, that11 means Canada is obligated to honour human rights.1213 Let’s see here. Now, further, the United Nations International Covenant onCivil and



14 Political Rights as published on the Internet. Part 1 and Article 1:1516 All peoples have the right of self-determination. By virtue of that17 right, they freely determine their political status and freely pursue18 their economic, social and cultural development.

1920 Article 2, Part 2:2122 Each State Party to the present Covenant undertakes to respect and23 to ensure to all individuals within its territory and subject to its24 jurisdiction the rights recognized in the present Covenant, without25 distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language,26 religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin,27 property, birth or other status.28

29 Now, when we continue to paragraph 17 on the statement of claim: (as read)3031 The defendants have knowledge that the unidentified RCMP32 officer and other defendants who entered secure property did not33 have a lawful or legal grounds to enter private, secured property.343536 So if they didn’t have an arrest warrant, which they didn’t, they had a publicofficial37 who’s there with no badge on, so therefore, it’s questionable whether he was

even38 working or employed by the RCMP. Although he’s dressed in the garb, he doesnot have39 a badge. None of them left any cards, none of the officers. So again, on whatgrounds40 did the RCMP come? Because they were told to aid Alberta Health Services.Why?41 Alberta Health Services got a phone call. They got a phone call from St. Albert.Again,121 these are things that have to be totally considered, that why would the St. AlbertMental2 Health crisis unit spend that kind of money to come all the way out to near Lake3 Wabamun on an anonymous call that the unidentified RCMP officer told me hedidn’t4 know who called, and the Mental Health crisis unit for St. Albert, they said theydon’t



5 know who called. However, when I got the -- the report on all the parties thatwere there,6 their names were conveniently whited out. So if they didn’t do anything wrong,why is7 Alberta Health Services sending me whited out reports? That’s a report that they

did an8 illegal psych assessment on me, and I have a right to know who were the parties.So9 again, that’s -- that’s definitely obstruction in that capacity.1011 The defendants have knowledge -- paragraph 18 -- that the unidentified RCMPofficer was12 questioned by Mrs. Merle Henry, What are you doing in my house, you bargedinto my13 house, and was told by Mrs. Merle Henry, You have no business coming into

my house.14 So for counsel to say that there is no grounds and the -- the claims are vague isabsolutely15 preposterous, because the simple fact is they came out there. It’s -- it’sobviously known16 that the RCMP have to do a report. So I’m sure if I contact the RCMPcommissioner and17 say I need a report on the two RCMP officers that came out there, we might be-- it18 might be very interesting to find out whether there’s actually a report issued for

October 19 3rd, 2008, from Stony Plain RCMP or not. But this is the -- this is one of themain20 reasons why I know that the RCMP cannot answer the statement of claim. Myuncle is a21 confidential informant. He’s the one who made the phone call, and then thatwill22 automatically make the defendants liable for participating in violation to humanrights,23 Canadian Charter rights, Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms,Edmonton24 Aboriginal Declaration, and the list goes on. It’s a matrix of violations.2526 So you granted them a -- an extension in accord with the Crown Act , which Iaccepted.27 However, the fact still remains, we are now in December. This was filed inAugust.





18 The defendants have knowledge that the interim director and19 director of Capital Health, Mareika Purdon, was sent a fax by me20 onOctober 4th, 2008, regarding the illegal and unlawful and psych21 assessment that was done.22

23 I bring to the Court, to the clerk, and to the public officials in this room, to their 24 knowledge, I had already been speaking with Mareika Purdon and her predecessor 25 regarding the hospital breach involving my dad, so they already, at CapitalHealth, knew26 who they were talking to. They knew who I was. So for them to come out anddo a27 psych assessment, that’s nothing more than a strong-arm tactic to threaten mefor some28 reason to shut up about the breach involving my dad, which resulted in his

death. Okay.29 Paragraph 35: (as read)3031 The defendants have knowledge that the manager of crisis and32 access services, Susan Connelly. . .3334 Who I have spoken with personally on more than one occasion and we’ve alsoe-mailed35 each other.36

37 . . .was served a certificate of commercial dishonor on March38 19th, 2009.3940 And incidentally, that was the week when Paddy Meade got terminated, so Iwonder what41 was behind all that termination of Paddy Meade.1412 This was via a process server, which is also an officer of the3 court, for $10,000,000. The defendants also have knowledge that4 Capital Health services director, Mareika Purdon, was sent an5 international notice of commercial default and admiralty maritime6 claim for damages in the amount of $10,000,000 in accord with7 the -- the Article LOST and Article 15 of the Rome Statute of the8 International Criminal Court, and the websites are published,9 officials served and presentments, which are available on Google.1011



12 So between Susan Connelly, Mareika Purdon, and her predecessor, which I wasalready13 dealing with an issue regarding getting documentation from my father regarding his death,14 they already knew the situation. So for the RCMP to come out and assist

Alberta Health15 Services is obviously Alberta Health Services did an excellent job of suppressing the fact16 that I had already been speaking with them. Also, when my dad died, I got theletter for 17 the ambulance that they had to use to pick him up from the Wal-Mart, when hewas18 found in the bathroom, on his back, on April 19th, 2009.1920 So when we go to paragraph 39, I will preface that with this, when I first was in

front of 21 you about a year ago, one of the first things I told you was according to theAlberta --22 they call it the Alberta Queen’s Bench. It says that once you give a publicofficial23 knowledge, they are responsible once they have been given knowledge. Sowhen we go24 to paragraph 39, the defendants have full knowledge of the all communicationssent to25 them and, since receiving information, have stayed silent, agreeing in

commerce by their 26 silence and tacit consent, which is equivalent to agreement that the facts asstated in the27 communication sent to them from the plaintiff are in fact true, correct, andaccurate,28 thereby confirming the defendants are liable for all damages, contractualviolations and29 violations of international and domestic law incurred by the defendants andassociated30 business partners. My mother and myself are the secure parties. The RCMP,they are our 31 debtors. They cannot answer in commerce. They are insured. They are bonded.They32 have oaths. I have sent counsel e-mails, and the counsel -- which is actuallyfiled, which33 I filed it as of yesterday, and in there, I ask counsel, I want the CUSIP number for her





24 Justice Slatter’s possession UCC1-202. Please inform Justice25 Slatter I require his tax ID number so I may finish the required26 1099-OID and 1099-A IRS tax forms as per his request for the27 security that he is demanding from myself, the secured party,28 secured creditor in this matter, and the website is

29 http://naturalcredit -- N-A-T-U-R-A-L C-R-E-D-I-T -- .tripod.com.30 Ialso give notice to Justice Slatter in accord with international law31 that we have not abandoned this legal matter or this appeal. I32 most humbly thank you all for your public oaths, insurance bonds,33 time, and consideration in this matter.3435 Now, we had a case on the Monday, November 29th in the Alberta Court of Appeal, and36 what is interesting about that is later on, after that case was adjourned and Iwent back

37 before the Appeal Court judges on the -- that was the 2nd, I believe it was, of December,38 the counsel made mention of the order from Justice Slatter, and this is what wasmade39 mention of in the courtroom on that day, and I asked the -- the -- the justices,Justice40 Hunt specifically, but all of them, since they were supposed to following thatorder, what41 were we doing in court on November 29th when the court case for November 29th was

161 not set until November 8th. I didn’t get notice of that, which was more than amonth --2 nearly a month after Justice Slatter’s order. We already had the court date set for 3 December 2nd prior to Justice Slatter’s order, so I don’t see how Justice Slatter’sorder is4 relevant when obviously there’s obviously official misconduct with regard toJustice5 Slatter’s order.67 So going on to paragraph 40, the defendants have agreed by their silence andtacit consent8 they that are subject and bound to the aforementioned communications and theterms9 therein in accord with the Uniform Commercial Code, specifically UCC 3-305,which10 deals with unconscionable contracts. The RCMP showed up. They got a call.They were



11 there. They did an illegal psych assessment. That right there is grounds. It’s aviolation12 of Charter rights. They haven’t responded. They can’t respond because their agent and13 informant in St. Albert is the one who made the phone call. UCC 3-306, the

defendants14 also agreed by their inaction, lack of response, and lack of written responsethey are15 bound by the following articles: Article 15 of the Rome Statute of theInternational16 Criminal Court, which is also mentioned in -- on the website for the AttorneyGeneral17 and, I believe, the Department of Justice for Canada on their website; and the18 International Law of the Sea, the United Nations Convention Against Genocide-- because

19 for the RCMP to come out on anonymous call and they can’t reveal or they saythey20 don’t know who made the phone call without speaking with my mother, whohappened to21 be at work, it obviously speaks to somebody went out of their way to do that.That is a22 violation of the Canada Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It’s actually aviolation of the23 Canada Criminal Code, section 318, dealing with genocide -- the UnitedNations

24 Convention Against Cruel and Unusual Punishment; United NationsDeclaration of Rights25 of Indigenous Peoples; the Edmonton Aboriginal Declaration -- because I havespoken at26 the United Nations, our nation is recognized by the United Nations as anindigenous27 peoples organization -- the Edmonton Aboriginal Accord -- which the City of Edmonton,28 they signed off on, and it’s available. You can see that and the EdmontonAboriginal29 Declaration down at City Hall -- the Canada Charter of Rights and Freedoms,especially30 section 35; Canada Criminal Code, section 318 of the Canada Criminal Code;and title 1831 or Canadian equivalent of 1091, which would be a fictitious conveyance of language; and32 section 35 of the Canada Constitution Act ; and the Alberta Bill of Rights.33



34 So I attach another thing, the article here in the Edmonton Sun, Alberta Justicebroke the35 privacy laws. This is coming from the commissioner. Now, the deputy minister has sent36 a letter of apology to those who are involved. This was:

3738 Alberta Justice broke the province’s privacy laws when it ran39 unauthorized credit checks on 25 employees, says the privacy40 commissioner.41171 So we go back to the premise and the whole principle of this statement of claim.It is not2 adifficult statement of claim. It’s very, very, very simple. Who called theRCMP? Why

3 did -- was it necessary for the RCMP to come with Alberta Health Services? So4 obviously Alberta Health Services must have been in communication with theRCMP.5 You’ve granted them 15 day -- you granted them 30 days, and it -- we’re inDecember.6 This was filed since August, and they can’t answer. So if it’s so frivolous, itshouldn’t7 have been an issue for counsel for the defendants as well as the AttorneyGeneral of 8 Canada to file a statement of defence if it’s that simple, if it’s frivolous and

vexatious.910 Now, one thing I do want to make mention of is I was again in front of you ayear --11 about a year ago this time, and you said that -- regarding a similar case, whichwe’ve12 appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada, you said there may be a valid causeof action13 in Dr. Francescutti releasing this man. You never said it was gibberish. Now,according14 to the Canada Criminal Code section 3.1, it says any act by a judge/justicetakes effect15 even if it has not been reduced to writing, and you said, as I stated before, that:1617 Ithink you should be filing an affidavit and I think they should --18 they will want to cross-examine you on it. I think we have to dig19 into this a little deeper frankly.20



21 So that’s obviously an order that you issued a year ago. So it’s obvious thatcounsel22 and -- for the defence and the defendants, they cannot answer the statement of claim.23 You cannot barge into somebody’s house. You can’t do that.

2425 Mom, would you like to say anything at this time?2627 MS.HENRY: Theonly thing I --2829 MR.EL: No. Come -- come forward. Come forward.3031 MS.HENRY: Theonly thing I just want to say is like in all32 this tragic, tragic --33

34 MR.EL: Come,come, come. Come up.3536 MS.HENRY: --circumstances --3738 MR.EL: Yeah.3940 MS.HENRY: -- happen with me and at my house, nobody41 from the Alberta Health Care or whatever, nobody spoke to me, nobody askedme18

1 anything. When I tried to talk to the RCMP, the guy told me practically shut up,I’m2 going to do what I’m going to do. It was very difficult, and I still can’t -- and Ilost all --3 Iused to believe in the RCMP, and I have no respect for them, ’cause here I wasat work,4 and he’s going to do whatever they going to do in my house. I said, You have awarrant?5 No. But like I said, reverse this to everybody in this room here, let them come upin your 6 house and do what they want to do. Tell me how you will feel in your heart. You7 cannot feel good, and I rest my case.89 MASTER BREITKREUZ: Thank you.1011 MR.EL: Okay. So that’s my mother’s statement. So12 with that at this point in the -- in where we’re at right now, with the cumulativedamages



13 and the -- as the counsel was claiming that there wasn’t any specification, I wasvery14 precise, $30,000,000 in punitive damages against Alberta Health Services,Capital Health,15 St. Albert Mental Health crisis service. The liens are filed here in Canada and

in the16 Commonwealth of Kentucky knowingly for an illegal, unlawful psychassessment on17 myself, a secure party, who’s non-resident to Alberta; never had an AlbertaHealth card,18 which was admitted to by the psychiatrist who did the psych assessmentwithout19 contacting or communicating with my wife or -- my wife Dionni Najabay(phonetic) El,20 or my mother, Merle Henry, by criminally trespassing on secure property

without free,21 prior and informed consent, which is required, or contact with Mrs. MerleHenry, who22 was at her place of employment when these unlawful and illegal actions took place in23 violation of the aforementioned international Canadian and Alberta laws;$5,000,000 in24 punitive and cumulative damages against the RCMP for knowingly,maliciously, and25 deliberately disobeying domestic statutes as Canada Criminal Code 126.1, 128;

legal26 procedures in committing deliberate violations of international human rights,Charter right27 violations, Alberta Bill of Rights, and for deliberately committing the privationof rights28 against myself, my mother, and the estate of my deceased father.2930 So at this point, counsel has been given ample time aside from the fact theyknew about31 this incident regarding my dad couple years before, so they have fullknowledge of what’s32 going on, and as we all know, ignorance of the law excuses no one. So this iswhat I’m33 tendering to the clerk and I’m tendering to the Master of this vessel onindigenous land34 known as Treaty 6, and at this point, all I will reiterate is I just want the CUSIPnumbers,



35 the bid bonds. I want the name of the insurance company and all the -- all thefinancial36 banks that are bonding this case and the application of counsel.3738 MASTER BREITKREUZ: Ms. Oltean, do you have any reply?

3940 Submissions by Ms. Oltean (Strike Motion)

41191 MS. OLTEAN: Very brief, Sir. Sir, I’m not sure the plaintiffs2 have answered the Crown’s motion, and just to be clear, we’re just applying tostrike the3 motion on behalf of the RCMP. My understanding is that the action as againstthe uncle,4 Mr. Kenyouth Henry, has been struck and court proceedings before Mr. Justice

5 Manderscheid on December 3rd -- counsel for the Provincial Health Authoritieshad the6 matter summarily dismissed. Sir, my -- Mr. El refers to matters not in evidence,this is a7 matter about the sufficiency of the statement of claim and whether it is avexatious and8 improper pleading. For my part, I’m not sure I followed the logic of the plaintiff.If 9 there is a glimmer of any cause of action, it is so embedded in vexatious andimproper

10 material that --1112 MASTER BREITKREUZ: Yes, but if you strip -- if you strip all of that13 away, you know, all these other international bodies, if you strip all that away,what is14 left? What is the heart of -- what is the heart of his complaint?1516 MS.OLTEAN: It appears to be a bare allegation of trespass,17 and I’ve addressed the deficiencies with that particular pleading in terms of the18 identification of the property, the identification of the owners of the property.Moreover,19 if I understood Mr. El correctly, he appears to want simply an answer to thequestion of 20 who called the RCMP, and I’m not --2122 MASTER BREITKREUZ: No, but he says he knows that. He says he23 knows that. He just he wants an admission of -- that it was.24



25 MS.OLTEAN: Right, and I’m not certain that an action is the26 proper venue to do that.2728 Discussion

29

30 MR.EL: Well,somebody has to know.3132 MASTER BREITKREUZ: Well --3334 MR.EL: Imean, it’s quite simple. If -- if it’s not him,35 then who made the call? The RCMP has to know. AHS has to know.3637 MASTER BREITKREUZ: But what difference does it make? Does that38 give you a cause of action?39

40 MR.EL: Oh,so you’re saying if somebody --41201 MASTER BREITKREUZ: No. I am asking. I am asking.23 MR. EL: And I’m -- I’m answering.45 MASTER BREITKREUZ: Yes?67 MR. EL: I’m answering the question. So you’re telling

8 me then that is acceptable for a public official to get anonymous call --somebody could9 have been at a phone booth, a cell phone someplace, say I think somebody over there is a10 threat to themselves and -- and -- and -- and the public and then that officialgoes over 11 there and, instead of following their own procedure and saying, Look, let’s getall the12 facts straight, let’s call the mother and find out what’s really going on -- andthen the13 mother says, What are you doing in my house? He doesn’t tell her he got aphone call14 from somebody. He said, Well, Alberta Health Services received it, soeveryone’s passing15 the buck here. Doesn’t -- I mean, at this point in the matter, it’s very simple.The AHS16 and the RCMP were working together because AHS came out because of aphone call, the



17 RCMP was there as support because they felt something was going on. Andwhat’s quite18 interesting is the Stony Plain RCMP has a statement from my mother andmyself. This is19 the weekend on the 18th of October -- pardon me -- the 18th of April, before

my dad --20 the day before my dad was found in the Wal-Mart in Spruce Grove. So at thispoint, I’m21 like this is just -- this is just here and there. I mean, to me, this is just a bunch of 22 mishmash.2324 MASTER BREITKREUZ: Well, tell me, are you -- are you suggesting the25 RCMP caused your father’s death?2627 MR.EL: I’msugg -- with regard to what?

2829 MASTER BREITKREUZ: Death period. Are you suggesting the RCMP30 caused your father’s death?3132 MR.EL: Well, I’m not suggesting that. I’m talking --33 we’re only talking about the -- we’re talking about unauthorized psychassessment.3435 MASTER BREITKREUZ: And that is $30,000,000 worth?36

37 MR.EL: No. That was for Alberta Health Services.38 That’s --3940 MASTER BREITKREUZ: Oh.41211 MR. EL: I’m not even -- that’s not the issue here --23 MASTER BREITKREUZ: Oh.45 MR. EL: -- as far as what we’re talking about.67 MASTER BREITKREUZ: That has been struck.89 MR. EL: Right. That’s struck on -- on that side. On the10 commercial --1112 MASTER BREITKREUZ: So you want 10 --



1314 MR.EL: --side, there’s still a lien.1516 MASTER BREITKREUZ: You want 10,000,000 --17

18 MR.EL: Soit doesn’t matter.1920 MASTER BREITKREUZ: You want 10,000,000 from the RCMP.2122 MR.EL: No. Five. I said that specifically.2324 MASTER BREITKREUZ: Oh, you are down to five. Okay.2526 MR.EL: Isaid 5,000,000.27

28 MASTER BREITKREUZ: I cannot remember what the ten was for.2930 MR.EL: No. The 5,000,000, it’s right there. 5,000,00031 punitive and cumulative damages, right? The thing here is like we -- like I --like we said32 before, when we spoke here the last time in this vessel and I brought up Robert33 Dziekanski’s mother, she just incidentally happened to be here about coupleweeks back,34 so I don’t look at that as a coincidence. The RCMP came out. Who called you?35 Somebod -- okay. AHS told us to assist. Why? We heard reason there -- this

person36 might be a threat to themselves or their family. My dad was on a Form 10,brought in by37 the RCMP and got released. My uncle was in there, talking with the doctor butain’t38 nobody questioning him, right? That’s why that -- that particular case, which Ihave here,39 is been appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada, so that will be dealt withshortly.4041 Now, as far as the psych assessment is concerned, they conducted a psychassessment221 with the RCMP there in my mother’s dining room.23 MASTER BREITKREUZ: Tell me, what is the issue before the Supreme4 Court of Canada --5



6 MR. EL: The --78 MASTER BREITKREUZ: -- in that case.910 MR.EL: Oh,what -- in the one that -- that I’ve just --

11 this one here?1213 MASTER BREITKREUZ: The one that is going to the Supreme --1415 MR.EL: Thisis the hospital breach. This deals with the16 hospital breach, and my uncle was down at the hospital.1718 MASTER BREITKREUZ: Okay. So that has got nothing to do with this19 case here.20

21 MR.EL: Oh, sure it does. It’s connected. It’s22 associated. If you check the file, you’ll see when I was filing the -- when Ifiled, I got23 two other appeals, right? One -- one of which is -- is still pending because thething is24 there’s been confusion now because there’s obviously been a violation of Woods v. The

25 King because now that -- if we’re to accept Justice Slatter’s order, despite thefact I26 provided a security, then we have an issue, because we should have never been

in court27 on November 29th.2829 MASTER BREITKREUZ: Which -- this security, that is this postage stamp30 you are talking about?3132 MR.EL: It’sright here. Here.3334 MASTER BREITKREUZ: That is --3536 MR.EL: Clerk, please tender this to the Master. Thank 37 you.3839 Right there in the top right-hand corner, and it’s cancelled by me. That is asecurity.4041 MASTER BREITKREUZ: This --23



12 MR. EL: I supplied a security.34 MASTER BREITKREUZ: Well, this is a real eye roller.5

6 Do you want to give this back to him. Do you want to show it to Ms. Oltean.78 MR. EL: Yes. Please show to counsel.910 MS.OLTEAN: Thankyou.1112 THE COURT CLERK: Yeah.1314 MASTER BREITKREUZ: That gives a whole new definition to security;15 that’s for sure. Anyway, I will reserve. I will read -- I will read more on it, and

I will let16 you know.1718 MS.OLTEAN: Thankyou, Sir.1920 MASTER BREITKREUZ: And --2122 MR.EL: Thankyou. I accept that for value, honour, and23 consideration.24

25 MASTER BREITKREUZ: Whatever that means.2627 MR.EL: AndI return that to the clerk.2829 MASTER BREITKREUZ: Do I have to return -- do I have to return any30 material to anyone? No?3132 MS.OLTEAN: Notfor my part, Sir.3334 MASTER BREITKREUZ: Thank you.3536 MS.OLTEAN: Thankyou.373839 PROCEEDINGS ADJOURNED SINE DIE404124



1 Certificate of Record

23 I, Lauren Andrews, certify that this recording is the record made of the evidencein the4 proceedings in Court of Queen’s Bench, held in courtroom 213, at Edmonton,

Alberta, on5 the 9th day of December, 2010, and that I was the court official in charge of the6 sound-recording machine during the proceedings.78910111213

14151617181920212223

242526272829303132333435363738394041



251 Certificate of Transcript

23 I, Sandy Voga, certify that4

5 (a) I transcribed the record, which was recorded by a sound-recording machine,to the best6 of my skill and ability and the foregoing pages are a complete and accuratetranscript of 7 the contents of the record, and89 (b) the Certificate of Record for these proceedings was included orally on therecord and10 is transcribed in this transcript.11

1213 DigitallyCertified: 2010-12-28 19:53:0014 SandyVoga, Transcriber 15 OrderNo. 21242-10-1161718192021

2223242526272829303132333435 Pages: 2736 Lines: 109937 Characters: 427043839 File Locator: e17e5cb0d90f10008001001a4b0a479e



40 Digital Fingerprint: cf713603e47d6991df495f02f62d0360de0bdd8cdf6db393959f1891f43f7b6c

41Transcript Management Services Tue Dec 28 19:48:58 2010Detailed Transcript StatisticsOrder No. 21242-10-1

Page StatisticsTitle Pages: 1ToC Pages: 1Transcript Pages: 25Total Pages: 27Line StatisticsTitle Page Lines: 48ToC Lines: 7Transcript Lines: 1044Total Lines: 1099Visible Character Count Statistics

Title Page Characters: 586ToC Characters: 189Transcript Characters: 41929Total Billable Characters: 42704Multi-Take Adjustment: (-)

Duplicated Title Page Characters

42118























Documents

Action No.: 1003 14100 E-File No.: EVQ10NANYASHAA Appeal No.: IN THE COURT OF QUEEN’S BENCH OF ALBERTA