|
Yes, things in the certified transcript have been changed, altered but what has actually been added? How can you prove it without listening to the tapes? Well if I was Mr Young all I'd have to do is make up a wild story, have someone write and sign my name. But since I'm not the Nazi stamp collecting, Ontario Court darling he is, I have to use logic, science and reason. REASON; When I tried to use the Crown's reluctantly supplied disclosure to ferret out the truth, I was questioned as to what I was talking about, how it mattered, why it mattered and so on. Much of the Court time was used up, explaining stuff to the Judge. So during the 11 week dinner break, in which Mr Young racked up 18 or so criminal charges, assaulting and criminally harassing us, I searched for a way around explaining each question to Judge Stephen Hunter who probably like all Judges never looks at the Crown's fabricated evidence. Why should they? Malicious Crown prosecutions are as Ontarian as Hockey, sodomizing little boys and maple syrup. LOGIC; I thought of two ways of getting around this imposing judicial roadblock to justice. The first was to show the Judge the Crown's evidence, however, Judge Stephen Hunter was having none of that. The second was a sacrifice strategy. I would withdraw the question rather than wasting taxpayer funded Court time explaining it, I would ditch one question in the hope that my next question based solely on the Crown's disclosure could be answered. I got the idea from watching the American TV show Law and Order during the 11-week break. When we got the transcripts, one of the first things that raised a red flag (or as Mr Young may say Pinko Fag) was an answer I wouldn't have given at the start of the cross-examination of Mr Tim Young. See I actually had lots of faith in our Courts at the start of this nightmare. I thought being respectful and polite was all I needed to be allowed to defend myself. Only later did it become obvious to me, that the Crown and Judge were just different parts of the same cruel beast, causing us to be homeless and allowing a Nazi stamp collecting racist to assault us almost daily. Science; if things were added, and this was normal or an ongoing problem without consequences the well-paid Government (of Dalton Mc Guinty) employees may get greedy and careless. Could that have happened? Could I use my favourite graphics program "Corel" to further analyze the certified transcript? In the words of Mr Young, you tell me! To recap; I don't recall saying, "I'll withdraw the question" during the first part of my trial (Abortion of Justice Part 1). I find it very strange why I would employ this creative solution to a problem that at the time I did not know existed, or I could not have known would exist, until later. And then not use this successful solution again. The phrase appears only once in Part I of the transcript. If it worked to make this trial easier for me, why would I not keep using it? If you look I follow a pattern, however, missed by the Court/Crown, and whoever altered the transcripts. When I catch Mr Young in a lie, I say, "Okay" quickly moving on. When I know Mr Young is lying in new info he is providing which I know to be false I say "Huh?" I did try and get Mr Young back on the stand to catch him in more lies during the Abortion of Justice Part 2, however first the Judge said he was not in Court, but when it was noted he was, the Judge just thought of a new reason to obstruct my defence or protect Ontario Court Darling Tim Young. Look at this below Jpg. Why or how did the red underlined phrase get raised. Did someone get a copy of the transcripts, put it in a typewriter try to line up the text to add stuff and get sloppy? It's what it looks like, and it's what I think happened, given the above evidence and circumstances. Noel notes, it's very difficult to line up text in a typewriter once removed and our copies are obviously from a photocopy machine. I note a word processor program and printer is directed by a source code that would repeat the error of mis-aligned text, in this case it does not. Conclusion; BUSTED Altering a Court Transcript. Moral and ethical solution; this person should be fired and face the hell of being made homeless, and endure an 11 week trial, while being pelted with rocks. Probable Premier McGuinty Solution; have the Attorney General Mr. Bryant promote this person and give them a raise using tax dollars. Maybe because they played a part in causing a disabled Ontarian to be homeless they should be promoted to a Judge....Again.     |