Dirty Dicky Dean

David Amos <motomaniac_02186@yahoo.
com> wrote:
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 14:30:55 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Amos <motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com>
Subject: Since the Premier does not like my attachment have some text
everyone else has read
To: premier@leg.gov.mb.ca, minjus@leg.gov.mb.ca,
minister@justice.gov.sk.ca,
premier@gov.sk.ca
David Amos <motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com> wrote:

Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 10:26:23 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: I just called ya O'Brien
To: OBrien.P@parl.gc.ca, Martin.P@parl.gc.ca, Harper.S@parl.gc.ca,
Duceppe.G@parl.gc.ca, Layton.J@parl.gc.ca, McLellan.A@parl.gc.ca
We all know the score on Harper and Martin. I am just trying to figure
out who amongst my fellow Canadians is dumber, you or Parish or
McLellan, or Cadman or Stronach or Kilgour or the Bloc Quebecois or the
NDP or Billy Matthews or Johnny Crosbie or Andy Scott maybe just me?
Methinks time will tell EH?
Maybe you should ask the Cubans. They are pretending they are as
clueless as that moron George W. Bush and don't want me to say stuff on
the phone. Hell everybody know what I know. I am just the only one will
to say it, thats all. Whereas James Carville thinks Karl Rove is oh so
smart, I guess I will have ask him EH? Say hey to the Cubans in Ottawa
that pissed me off yesterday and I will say hey to Allan Rock at the UN
for you.
Here is their number in case ya didn't know. Their associates in the UN

are getting the same hard copy of material I gave Rob Moore, John
Herron, Joe Day, Paul Zed, Brad Green, Danny Williams, Franky McKenna,
the Arar Inquiry etc etc last year.
H.E. Ernesto A. Sent� Darias
388 Main St.,
Ottawa, ON, K1S 1E3
Tel 613 563-0141
Fax 613 563-0068
Yesterday, Mr. Cotler would not comment on whether the bill would be
delayed. Rather, he said he was not aware of any commitment to Mr.
O'Brien.
"I only know what I said to Pat O'Brien, which I suspect is the same
thing the Prime Minister said . . . and that is this bill will have
hearings as do all prospective legislation before committees, but it is
the judgment of the committee as to what the nature and scope of those
hearings will be.
"So the committee will make those determinations. It's not for us, a
minister of the Crown, to make those determinations."
Said justice critic Vic Toews: "It appears to me that Paul Martin is
just fooling with O'Brien in a desperate attempt to keep him. . . . "
Earlier this week, Mr. Martin lost one of his party's two Alberta MPs
when David Kilgour left to sit as an independent. The Edmonton MP also
opposes the same-sex marriage bill.
In welcoming back Mr. O'Brien with open arms, however, Mr. Martin
raised the ire of New Democratic Party Leader Jack Layton, who accused
him of kicking anti-Bush MP Carolyn Parrish out of his caucus but not
an MP who is anti-equality and anti-woman.
Mr. O'Brien had referred to a female colleague, Liberal MP Sarmite

Bulte, who disagreed with his position, as a "dumb blond bimbo."
Mr. Martin and his Liberals have been making efforts all week to shore
up support wherever they can after polls showed their fortunes
plummeting. The testimony at the Gomery inquiry into the sponsorship
scandal and allegations that millions of dollars of taxpayer money
found its way into Liberal Party coffers have caused an election frenzy
on the Hill.
The government is doing everything it can to stay in office, including

a proposal -- if it survives until the autumn -- to prorogue the
Commons (officially end the session). The scenario, laid out at a
recent meeting of senior ministerial staffers, involved, according to a
source, proroguing the Commons in September so that it would not sit
when the Gomery commission reports in the fall, then bringing the House
back in January of 2006 with a Throne Speech followed by a budget and
then an election.
After jumping ship from the federal Liberals, Edmonton-Beaumont MP

David Kilgour announced yesterday the next election will mark the end
of his political career. Kilgour also categorically ruled out running
again for the Conservatives at a press conference yesterday at a Mill
Woods pizza restaurant in his constituency.
"Read my lips. I intend to remain an Independent on the Liberal side of

the house until the next election," he said.
"I am saying that I will not run in the next election, and therefore I
will not be running for anybody. Twenty-seven years is probably long
enough to be an MP."
Kilgour also said he wouldn't consider rejoining the Liberals before

Prime Minister Paul Martin steps down as party leader.
"If Paul Martin were to see the writing on the wall, and decide to
resign, and somebody who I agreed with most of the time ... I would
probably go back to the Liberals," he said.
Nor would he actually be very welcome in the Conservative circles in

the riding, according to Tim Uppal. He lost the seat to Kilgour by a
whisker in last June's election.
With explosive testimony from the Gomery inquiry expected to lead to

another election in the spring, Uppal said the Conservatives are
ramping up their nomination process.
"At one point, he was the safest Liberal seat in Western Canada," Uppal
said yesterday, adding Kilgour still enjoys a tremendous amount of
respect in the riding.
"Good for him. But coming over to the Conservatives, he would face a
very tough nomination battle, and it's a battle he would not want to
fight.
"The Liberal party is hurting across Canada, and the Liberal party does
not have a chance in this riding."
Kilgour said yesterday the party's stand on same-sex marriage and the
scandal surrounding revelations of the Gomery inquiry were a big part
of his decision to leave.
But he stressed the deal-breaker was Canada's failure to act to help

civilians overrun by civil war in the Darfur region of Sudan. Kilgour
blamed Martin for not acting.
In the wake of Kilgour's departure from caucus Wednesday, Martin said

he was glad to be rid of someone who wasn't willing to stick it out
through tough times.
Kilgour said he'll write a book and devote his time to helping
underdeveloped nations after he retires from politics.
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 10:13:07 -0700 (PDT)

Subject: I just talked to ya Stevey Boy thanks for showng me your arse
so fast
To: stephenb@cba.org, john.e.lowman@esso.ca, jfuhrer@ridoutmaybee.com,
jharris@myersfirm.com, leila.gosselin@calgary.ca, CWade@Heenan.ca,
gavin.wyllie@bellnet.ca, wdanson@mccuaig.com,
george@mcallister-law.com,
cmasse@mccarthy.ca, gordon.murphy@aegoncanada.ca,
mcornish@cavalluzzo.com, kirsten.embree@fmc-law.com,
susandumont@telus.net, Brian.Carr@fmc-law.com,
pjrenaud@duncanandcraig.com, christian.whalen@gnb.ca, cba@unb.ca,
cbanb@cbanb.com, jean.trahan@gnb.ca, Pettigrew.P@parl.gc.ca,
cuba_onu@cubanmission.com, cuba@un.int
Christian R.C. Whalen, I just called you too and was put on hold
while trying to explain my concerns. I hate that. May I suggest that
you sit up and pay attention and act within the scope of your
employment once you get back from lunch. The fact that I can use a
phone and send emails must at least prove that I am human too and have
at least the same rights as you. Rest assured I will be giving you hard
copy once I return home in order to prove what I say is true. Putting
me in jail or on hold will no longer do.
Just so you all know, there is no need to send your organization,
the CBA hard copy. Your buddies George McAllister and Jeff Mockler
amongst many others in Fredericton got it last year. I received their
malevolent answers before I was was falsely imprisoned in the USA. I
bet Georgey Boy and Elizabeth Weir are shitting bricks right now after
what they have said in the newspaper about the insurance industry last
year and the fact that old Hank Greenburg of AIG is in a world of
trouble. When Elliot Spitzer went forward and sued Marsh McLellen
whilst I was in jail it really pissed me off. I wonder if he and
McAllister understand the term "personal injury" because they certainly
failed to uphold the law and assisted John Ashcroft in my false
imprisonment under the charges of "other"
These emails just prove that you all knew the truth before I take
up my matters with the UN and then come home to run for Parliament
again. We all know Franky McKenna and Allan Rock ain't worth a damn
when it comes to speaking for the best interests of our fellow
Canadians. Who knows maybe there is some other country that will assist
and honest pigheaded Maritimer to expose the awful truth for the
benefit of all people excepting lawyers of course. By water Cuba is a
close neighbor may we should become better friends.
Rest assured if there is no one who will stand with me I will
still sue your entire organization for failing the public trust placed
in your profession. Methinks the Maritimes should separate from Canada
and claim our natural resoures as our own. Lawyers know the maritimes
is far from poor why else would buffons such as Franky McKenna and
Bernard Lord get to rub elbows with all the rich and powerful? Danny
Williams talks the talk should I walk the walk and inspire a true
separation? If that were to come about I will wager many lawyers would
move to Toronto or Montreal. Everybody knows most Maritimers hate
lawyers because they are the ones that have caused us to suffer so
while Upper Canadians such as Paul Martin's many cohorts have gotten
wealthy off of our assests. Stephen Harper don't give a good god damn
about the Maritimes in fact he has called us defeatists. Well he has
met one that will challenge his thinking anyway of the week and six
times on Sunday. What say you? Wanna call me a liar?

Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 08:49:50 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Fwd: Here is some heavy reading for ya
To: mdavid@shadleybattista.com, kilgour@parl.gc.ca

Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 09:16:35 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Here is some heavy reading for ya
To: EaganBraude@969fmtalk.com
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 09:54:17 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Fwd: The most effective email for Thelma
To: atkinn@sen.parl.gc.ca, doodyw@sen.parl.gc.ca, murral@sen.parl.gc.ca
CC: spivam@sen.parl.gc.ca, jcrivest@sen.parl.gc.ca,
prudhm@sen.parl.gc.ca,
plamom@sen.parl.gc.ca, lachah@sen.parl.gc.ca

Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 06:08:14 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Fwd: The most effective email for Thelma
To: info@traderinafishbowl.com, warren.tolman@hklaw.com,
dan@dankennedy.net,
w.kirtz@neu.edu, howiecarr@wrko.com, bzelnick@bu.edu,
n.daniloff@neu.edu,
barnicle@969fmtalk.com, info@grahamdefense.org
CC: johnduggan@legalaid.nf.ca, McLellan.A@parl.gc.ca, david@lutz.nb.ca,
cynthia.merlini@dfait-maeci.gc.ca, ethics@harvard.edu,
INFO7@elections.ca, inquiry.admin@bellnet.ca, cotlei@parl.gc.ca,
Robert.Creedon@state.ma.us, Brian.A.Joyce@state.ma.us,
Jack.Hart@state.ma.us, Rep.WalterTimilty@hou.state.ma.us,
Rep.AStephenTobin@hou.state.ma.us, Dianne.Wilkerson@state.ma.us,
Daphne.Thompson@gems2.gov.bc.ca, coulter.osborne@oico.on.ca,
WayneGreen@mail.gov.nl.ca, gallanpm@gov.ns.ca
Hey
Yesterday morning I put one over the bow of a bunch of bad acting
Yankees in Beantown. I got a very predictable response from them,
nothing. It seems they struck themselves dumb. It comes to them
naturally, I might add. They seem to think the whole world revolves
around them and their Big Digs and by-elections. Yet while I was
teasing those dumb bastards what was far more important to me and my
fellow Canadians was the budget vote up home. If Martin's government
fell and my name came up as part of the cause of it, shit would roll
down hill and I could impeach Georgie Bush in a New York minute. Then
the Yankees would sit up and pay attention. It was a small wonder to me
that the Conservatives refrained from voting and Georgie Bush picked up
the phone and made his peace with the snake, Paul Martin.
Thus far everything has gone as I have predicted. However

everybody does not know about me and the UN yet. Now there is a
different kettle of fish. While everybody felt their own fat arses were
so important and my dumb ass was not worth a damn, I was still playing
the political game on many fronts. Watch out when I line them up.
That said, I listened with interest this morning to the Virgin Fat
Bastard on Fox News to hear what he had to say. The most offensive
things he said were about Canada and how we don't matter. Perhaps he
should have read what I gave to Murdoch's General Counsel, Mr.
Siskland last year. There is good reason Canada does not want Fox on
its airwaves. It is Fox that does not matter. Plus does VB think
Canadians do not buy and sell on the stock market as well? Hell it is a
Canadian firm called Thomson that sells all you Yankee lawyers your
information that makes you appear so wise. They sell their shares on
the Yankee Stock exchange and their General Counsel is right here in
CT.
I also heard what VB had to say about Reilly and his speach in
front of the Taxpayer Dudes. Does Fox forget the fact that I sued
Reilly, the IRS and everybody else years ago for not collecting Taxes?
Then I heard from another Mike Sullivan who writes for the Herald
and talks on Fox. What he had to say was truly comical if you know what
I know about what he don't know about. How many Mike Sullivans are
there in Massachusetts anyway? He had a lot to say about the stock
market. Perhaps he should confer with two other Mikey Sullivans to get
the real scoop. One produces Frontline and the other is the US
Attorney. Then if he wants to make some serious dough as a
whistleblower perhaps he should talk to me. I will forward an email
about the Media that contians a Tiff file that should properly
introduce the three Mikey Sullivans.
I waited for the results of the budget vote to write my wife's

last affidavit and then I am gone. You find what court she files it in.
I ain't telling it would spoil my fun when I get back to Beantown in
time for Tax Day up home. The Bloc Quebecois can call for a confidence
vote anytime they want. Everybody knows how easy it is for me to piss
off Frenchmen. I put it under the heading of sport.
Read on or not I don't care this email just saves me a lot of toner
and paper and Us Postage in order to support my final mailings to
expose Public Corruption. I am at the top of the heap it is time to
deliver the Coup de Grace in order to cause an Confidence Vote in
Canada. The bad acting Yankees can do nothing to stop me now.
Good bye Yankees. I do not wish you a Good Day.
"OTTAWA (Reuters) - Canada's minority Liberal government won a crucial

budget vote on Wednesday after the official opposition Conservative
Party abstained to ensure the administration stayed in power.
But Conservative leader Stephen Harper, who says Canadians have no

desire for another election so soon after the vote last June, did not
rule out voting against Ottawa's spending plans in the next few weeks.
This, too, could trigger an election.
Legislators approved the budget by 132-73. The government had declared

each of the budget votes to be a matter of confidence that could spark
an early election.
The Liberals and the Conservatives are not enthusiastic about a new
election since neither party has gained support since last June's vote,
when the Liberals lost their majority in Parliament.
The Liberals hold 133 of the 308 seats in the House of Commons, with
the Conservatives holding 99, the Bloc Quebecois 54, and the New
Democratic Party 19. There are two independents and one seat is vacant.
"It's not in the national interest to have an election now," Harper
said before the vote. His party -- created 15 months ago through the
union of the Alliance and Progressive Conservative parties -- holds its
first policy convention next week."
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2005 14:12:57 -0800 (PST)

Subject: The most effective email for Thelma
To: HJMcClure2@msn.com
I truly believe that this email is the most important and timely email
for Thelma and my little Clan as well. There is a lot more to this
email than what first meets the eye. However if someone like Dick
Gregory could have someone like Bill Cosby introduce Thelma to Martha
Stewart and she could introduce what I know about lawyers and the SEC
crooks to her. All of our troubles would be over when Martha Stewart
gets mad as a wet hen. No kidding. It is hard for me to explain but
very easy to do. The only problem I have is that nobody believes me.
Maybe it is Thelma's credibility and friends are what I need to get the
job done because I am too much of a radical. However if I were not such
a fierce character I would not have been able to do what I did. Talk
about a Catch 22 EH?

Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 16:45:28 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Fwd: Fw: Governor M. Jodi Rell I just callel your office
To: mbevis@nhpr.org
David Amos <motomaniac_02186@hotmail.com> wrote:

From: "David Amos"
To: "moto maniac" ,
,
Subject: Fw: Governor M. Jodi Rell I just callel your office

Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 10:23:10 -0500
----- Original Message -----

From: David Amos
To: dennis.schain@po.state.ct.us ; Governor.Rell@po.state.ct.us ;
attorney.general@po.statect.us ; chris.beaman@mail.house.gov
Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2005 10:10 AM
Subject: Governor M. Jodi Rell I just callel your office
Shame on you Ms. Rell. I read your spiel about Ethics and wanted
to talk to you or your lawyers about Attorney General Blumenthal and
his actions with Elliot Spitzer and many other people connected with
your State involving Securities Fraud before I sued your State.
Whomever the woman was answered your phone demanded to know my
business. Either she is very malicious or as dumb as a post. She only
managed to be able to repeat what I said but seemed incapable of
independent thought to answer a simple question and introduce me to
your lawyers. Therefore I will sue you in federal court in order to
meet them but not before calling Blumenthal to testify at my Trial.
Long before that time you will have received Hard Copy of what
Blumenthal had received under the reign of your former Governor and
will stress test your ethics byway of Martha Stewart as soon as she
gets out of jail. Meanwhile obviously I am telling the world what I
think of Connecticut and all of its crooks. Tell me honestly. Whom do
you do the common people will believe, me or a bunch of Yankee
Carpetbaggers? I read about Howard Coble teasing Martha Stewart in
prison. I truly hope she gets to return the favor. However Coble likely
already knows that I will be suing him along with the Free Agent the
loser/lawyer John Edwards.
If I were you I would have your dim witted help read this real
slow a couple of times because many other people are receiving this
email as well. Martha Stewart alone will make the shit hit the fan once
she see her copy. However perhaps you had better have your lawyers
contact me real fast because my evidence of crimes are far more
powerful than hers and Martha would need my support to sue those that
have offended her. I am making my best effort to embarrass you into
ethical conduct. If that doesn't rest assured I will sue.
November 14, 2003
Lawrence J Lasser,
Juan M. Marcelino,
342 Warren St,

360 Forest
Brookline, MA 02445
Bridgewater, MA 02324
Phone 617 566-5253

Phone 508 279-3341
Hey fellas,
Seems to me you two played dumb too long, then resigned from
your lucrative positions way past too late. I know that you and I know
you underestimated me. I know your prompt but secretive resignations
from your posts are simply part of a cover-up and fraudulent attempt to
display ethical behavior at a state, federal and private level. Is this
an honourable act? Would Mr. Marcelino swear to it with "Scout's
Honor"?
I know you, Mr. Lasser, know your Kickham neighbors. You do

cruise the same haunts. Watch out for Uncle Franky, if you see him
behind the wheel of that 4x4. He is as blind as a bat. Why Safety
Insurance gave him a good driver discount I will never understand. He
has never even had a driver's license. Watch out for Uncle Bill as
well, I know he drinks and drives. Good thing for him has many buddies
in the Cop Shops. I also know you know about my appearance at the
Brookline Savings Bank Shareholders meeting. You must have known about
my contact with George Putnam before attending. What you may not know
about is the Kickham's Court Ordered Second Accounts that were filed
the same week. The documents are hereto enclosed. Have your best lawyer
explain the ramifications to you. Then ask him if he will defend you
after you receive a copy of my complaint. The instant he admits that he
has read it and does not affirm the crimes of Charles J. Kickham Jr. I
will sue him too. If no lawyer will talk to you, give Mr. Marcelino a
call. He is a lawyer. He can't be too busy these days and his
concerns are the same as yours. I am sending you both the same
documents that I sent every U.S. Attorney but only he gets a copy of
the tape. Lucky for you, Mr. Lasser, that you are not a lawyer.
Seems to me that both of you and I may go toe to toe Pro Se.
Even under the Patriot Act, the First Amendment and Freedom of Religion
still stands. Watch me reel you in under the Rico laws for three times
the total loss because of the conspiracy. If any lawyer disagrees, dare
him to send me a letter. The transcripts of the Feb 8/02, May 16/02 and
Oct 16/02 hearings in Norfolk Probate Court are enclosed for your
review.
Seems to me that the worm has turned. I hope the Kickhams live
long enough to go to jail. None of us can predict the future but I got
a feeling that my kid's future is looking brighter every day. Pretty
soon they are gonna have to wear shades. As for me I has always been
lucky. I have been living on borrowed time since I was three years old.
All doctors were betting I would never come out of the coma. Would you
like to make a little wager as to whether or not I complete my task
before slipping back into the coma? One thing is for certain. Because
you are now reading this letter you can never play dumb no more. Say
hey to Chucky, Willy, Franky, Mr. Koski, Mr. Randazzo, Mr. Chapman and
Mr. Tripp for me.
David R.
Amos
Cya'll in CourtJ
153 Alvin Ave.
Milton, MA. 02186
Conn. AG Sues Marsh & McLennan, ACE

Friday January 21, 4:26 pm ET
By Laura Walsh, Associated Press Writer
Connecticut Attorney General Blumenthal Sues Broker Marsh & McLennan,

Insurer ACE
HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) -- Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal

on Friday sued insurance brokerage giant Marsh & McLennan Inc. and a
unit of the Bermuda-based ACE Ltd. insurance company for illegal
commissions in connection with an $80 million state contract.
It was the latest in a series of actions that Blumenthal has taken
since New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer filed suit last October
against Marsh & McLennan, which is headquartered in New York, for bid
rigging, price fixing and demanding incentive fees from insurance
companies in exchange for sending more property and casualty business
their way.
AIG, Marsh Execs Plead Guilty to Fraud
Tuesday February 15, 3:46 pm ET
By Joseph A. Giannone
NEW YORK (Reuters) - A former senior executive at Marsh & McLennan Cos.
Inc. (NYSE:MMC - News) and two executives from American International
Group Inc. (NYSE:AIG - News) pleaded guilty to fraud charges stemming
from New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer's sweeping investigation
of fraud in the insurance industry.
May 29th, 2004
Thomas P. Puccio Brendan V. Sullivan Jr.
c/o The Law offices of Thomas P. Puccio c/o Williams & Connolly LLP
230 Park Avenue, Suite 301 725 Twelfth St., N.W.

New York, New York 10169 Washington, DC 20005
RE: Corruption
Sirs,
I called and emailed both of your offices yesterday. Today

someone called me from CT (203 964-0156) stating it was on Mr.
Puccio's behalf. He asked me what I knew of Cendant. Now I support my
statements to him with these enclosures that are exactly the same
material sent to Mr. Ferguson of the Federal Reserve Bank quite a while
ago. The copy of wiretap tape numbered 139 is served upon you in
confidence as officers of the court in order that it may be properly
investigated. I have also enclosed copies of two letters sent to the
lawyers employed by Cendant Corp and a copy of a filing in Plymouth
Probate Court in which the actions of Cendant Corp are mentioned.
I do not know nor do I judge the actions of your clients,

Walter Forbes and Kirk Shelton. I do state that the Office of the US
Attorney prosecuting them has no right to complain of anyone for not
upholding the law. There is also the irrefutable fact that the lawyers
now employed by Cendant Corp and at least two of its Directors , Brian
Mulroney and William Cohen, both of whom are well known
lawyers/politicians, have proven to me that they have a total disregard
for upholding the law. They are far from worthy of the Public Trust. I
will be filing my own complaints against them soon.
Feel free to argue me if you disagree but I think I have just
served upon you a very big stick to use in the defense of your clients.
Perhaps you should use it for the benefit of all. Although I am heading
home to run for Parliament, rest assured I shall listen for the news of
their present prosecution. I have also included a copy of a letter to
Richard Blumenthal, the Attorney General of Connecticut, that has thus
far gone unanswered. Perhaps you should ask him why he has chosen to
ignore my allegations that should support the defense of your clients.
At the very least I will call you as witnesses to my complaints.
Perhaps you should consider my merits as a defense witness on your
client's behalf. I must say I would make fairly formidable rebuttal
witness against the actions of any government lawyer. If you doubt me
ask Assistant Attorney General Robb Quinan if I am capable of filling a
courtroom. Say hey to Martha Stewart's lawyers for me will ya? The
fact that Feds are now prosecuting one of their own Secret Service
Agents is just to funny in light of what I have sent to all parties
involved in that matter. Please impress us all with a fine display of
ethical conduct befitting your profession.
Cya'll in CourtJ
David R. Amos
153 Alvin Ave
Milton MA. 02186
Connecticut Attorney General

April 15th, 2004
Richard Blumenthal
P.O. Box 120,
Hartford, Connecticut
06141-0120
RE: Corruption
Sir,
Please find enclosed exactly the same documents etc. that were received
by the Solicitor General Ted Olson a while ago. The copy of wiretap
tape numbered 139 is served upon you in confidence as an officer of the
court in order that it may be properly investigated. Please be the man
I hope you are and not like the Attorney Generals in New York and
Massachusetts. As you can see, I do not have much respect for Yankee
lawyers but it does not follow that I hate them all. I have found one
ethical lawyer who will speak for my wife as I hit the road and I am a
proud father of two Yankees and am married to one. I can't hate
everyone. Please study this stuff and respond to me.
A couple of days ago I sent you an email that should have prompted you
to ask me for more information if you are truly concerned about the
actions of Big Banks and their recent mergers. When I received no
reply, I called your office, and tried to inform the lady that answered
of my concerns and of my sincere effort to make you aware. She had no
time or interest in talking to me and told me to send my stuff to you
by US Mail.
I am very curious if, when and what you may say about my concerns. As a
father you must understand me. However the lawyer in you confuses me. I
seek a friend not a foe. I have enough enemies. I have seen that you
have been quite popular in your campaigns on behalf of the little guy
and the people of your state obviously like you enough to keep you in
office for so long. I must stress test your ethics in pursuit of a
friend.
I know about other things far more important than crooked lawyers,
bankers or mobsters. The sad part is many others do to but are too
afraid to speak up. Therefore I must become a politician in order to
try to speak of it in Parliament so I can expose the truth in such a
way that others don't suffer from it. If perchance I fail and you
have proven to me that you are ethical, my ghost will make certain that
you will know all that I once knew. I do not have a death wish. I am
just laying low for a bit. If the bastards corner me, I will turn as
mean as a snake. As one father to another I will ask you this. What is
the point in raising happy children and sending them out to live in a
miserable world? Shouldn't we protect the future of all of the
children for the benefit of our own? Whether or not I receive response
from you, I must call you to court to testify. I sincerely hope that
you will stand with me and not against me.
Cya'll
in CourtJ
David R. Amos
153 Alvin Ave.
Milton, MA 02186
January 8, 2004
John R. Cuti and

Robert G. Morvillo
Hann M. Maazel Rebecca A. Monck and

Emery, Cuti, Brinckerhoff & Abady, PC John
J. Tigue, Jr. c/o
545 Madison Avenue

Morvillo, Abramowitz, Grand,
New York, NY 10022
Iason & Silberberg, P.C.
Phone: 212 763-5000
565 Fifth Avenue
Fax: 212 763-5001 New York, NY
10017
Phone 212 856-9600
John Keker
Fax 212 856-9494
Keker & Van Nest LLP

710 Sansome Street
Richard M. Strassberg
San Francisco, CA 94111
Goodwin Procter, LLA
Phone: 415 391-5400

599 Lexington Avenue
Fax: 415 397-7188
New York, NY 10022
Phone: 212 813-8859
Wayne M. Carlin ,
Fax: 212 355-3333
Alix Biel, Edwin H. Nordlinger
Mark K. Schonfeld, Caren N. Pennington

Mary Jo White, US Attorney
and Doria G. Bachenheimer
Michael S. Schachter her Assistant
Securities and Exchange Commission

Criminal Division
233 Broadway
One St. Andrew's Plaza
New York, New York 10279

New York, NY 10007
Phone: 646 428-1510
Phone: 212 637-2631
Fax: 646 428-1981
RE:
Corruption
Hey,
No one should ever say that I didn't diligently try to make

you people act ethically and professionally while many of your friends
tried very hard to impeach me. Each of you know that I tried to contact
you to stop the very improper political persecution and prosecution of
Martha Stewart, Peter Bacanovic and Frank Quattrone. Over the past six
months I have made each of you very well aware of my standing against
the corruption within the government and you all know that I can easily
prove it. Now I will drag you all to a place all lawyers fear to tread.
It is the witness stand. Imagine having to swear to tell the truth and
suffer through my questioning.
The first law firm that I notified was Goodwin Procter, LLP at
Exchange Place, Boston, MA I did so byway of a fellow member of Goodwin
Proctor, F. Dennis Saylor IV. It was done the instant I became aware
that he was nominated for a position as a judge in the US District
Court. I have no doubt they know exactly who I am.
It was not necessary to notify David J. Apfel and Richard M.

Strassberg but I did call and fax them out of courtesy. Thus far I have
heard nothing from them and do not expect to. No one else has contacted
me. F. Dennis Saylor IV has known the truth since August of 2002 and he
failed to act ethically in his bid to become a judge of the US District
Court. In fact I have yet to receive even an acknowledgement from Mr.
Saylor that I even exist. It seems I must complain of him and his law
firm in order to receive a response. F. Dennis Saylor IV should have
also acted in the best interest of the client of Goodwin Proctor, Peter
Bacanovic and brought into the light the fact that the matter of The
USA v. Martha Stewart et al is merely a case of the pot calling the
kettle black. The US Attorney Office claims that it is all about lying.
They should be very familiar with that act. The SEC are simply
attacking celebrities with some very vague charges to put on a smoke
and mirror show to take the public's eyes off of their own many sins.
Every single one of you knows that I am the ultimate rebuttal

witness against the government on behalf of the aforesaid defendants.
Each of you also know that the instant that I speak in a widely
witnessed public forum, the jig is up for many a corrupt government
employee, politician and lawyer in private practice. I can only imagine
your many discussions about what to do about me and my allegations. Why
did it never dawn upon you to simply tell the truth and let the cards
fall where they may for the benefit of all? The only possible answer is
that you failed to uphold the law because of you hold your own personal
self interests above your client's interests or the public trust.
Over the past two weeks I was particularly vocal in many ways
and in many forums that there is a hard rain about to fall upon the
justice system and the political arena because I was doing my best rain
dance and I had caught a few drips. The reason I could not come forward
earlier in the aforesaid defendant's behalf was because I did not
wish to prevent the Secret Service, the FBI and the IRS from finally
acting within the scope of their employment and investigating the Bank
Fraud and Tax Fraud within the Brookline Savings Bank that was reported
with a Form 211 six months ago.
I could not be certain as to whether or not the FEDs would

become overcome by a sudden fit of honesty because of all the
politicians I put over the pork barrel in the last six months. I know I
tried hard to make them act responsibly but the bell just tolled today.
Now I will sue them all as individuals. They are no longer sheltered by
immunity as government employees. I have received no response from any
of them. Although the Inspector General of the DHS promised to take a
look but he is gonna keep it a secret from me. I don't care what he
thinks is proper in my opinion he has already broken Rule 9 of the Code
of Ethics hereto attached within the enclosed documents. I will not be
further delayed. I will file my first federal complaint very soon.
Sooner or later the defendants, Martha Stewart, Peter Bacanovic

and Frank Quattrone, are going to hear of my efforts in their defense.
Methinks that all of you will have hell to pay when the shoe is on the
other foot. At the very least byway of the US Mail to you I have
reaffirmed the fact that I have made you witnesses to my pursuit of
justice. You will be named as such in my pending complaint.
I know it is a little redundant to send some of your offices the

same documents again but there are a few others that you may not have
seen and I wish to make certain that you all receive the same stuff so
that you will be all on an even keel when I summons you to court. In my
opinion John Keker has not offended me or anyone else as of yet. I just
made him aware of me yesterday and without enough stuff to prove to him
my sincerity. Now he should display his best ethical behavior very
quickly before I file my complaint. After that point in time I will
consider him way past too late.
Please find enclosed an exact copy of a letter with all

enclosures recently received by the CEO of Taxpayers against Fraud and
a copy of a letter sent to The IRS six months ago with the form 211 and
the evidence, Also included is a copy of letter sent to me by Francis
Galvin and a copy of my response to him and Elliot Spitzer. They have
ignored me too long and Spitzer in his malice even turned off his fax
machine on me in order to ignore me. The copy of wiretap tape number
139 is served upon you in confidence as officers of the court in order
that it maybe properly investigated. I have also sent an exact copy of
this letter with all of its enclosures to the following:
New York State Ethics Commission Thomas J.

Cahill, Chief Counsel
39 Columbia Street
Departmental Disciplinary Committee
Albany, New York 12207-2717 61 Broadway,
2nd Floor
Phone: 518 432-8207 New

York, New York 10006
Fax: 518 432-8255 Phone:
212 401-0800
Fax: 212 401-0810
Don't you think its high time someone does the right thing?
After all each of you swore before the Bar that you would in order to
practice law for a fee. Say hey to Martha, Peter and Frank for me will
ya. It's my turn to take a vacation and employ voicemail. I am tired
of waiting for someone to call. I know you don't wish me well but you
all better hope I don't die as well.
Cya'll in CourtJ
David R. Amos
PO Box 2
South Acworth, NH 03607
Governor Rell Testifies in Favor of
Ethics, Campaign and State Contract Reforms
Appears Before Committee to Promote Reform Package
Governor M. Jodi Rell took her message of reform in state ethics,

campaign finance and the awarding of state contracts before a
legislative committee today, declaring that the state has "a historic
opportunity" to "show the people of Connecticut that we are serious
about change" with genuine, comprehensive reform.
"Enacting the reforms I have proposed will send a strong message to

the people of Connecticut," Governor Rell told the General
Assembly's Government Administration and Elections Committee. "That
message will be that state government is open and accessible to them
- not just to the favored few. That state government is here to work
for them - not for the special interests. And that state government
is using their hard-earned tax dollars wisely - and not squandering
them in cozy deal-making."
Since taking office seven months ago Governor Rell has made ethics
reform the focal point of her administration. She has proposed a
sweeping package of reforms promoting "fairness over favoritism."
Governor Rell's personal appearance before the committee underscored
the depth of her commitment to reforming state ethics, political
campaigns and contracting processes.
In her testimony, Governor Rell said, "Over the past few

years, revelations of scandal and corruption here in Hartford - and
in city halls across our state - shook people's confidence in our
system. I have kept a steady focus on restoring public faith in our
state government since taking office July 1. Now it is time to make
even bigger and bolder gains through legislative action.
"We can take advantage of new leadership and a new spirit

of civility and bipartisanship that exists in this building to satisfy
the public's desire for reform. We have a historic opportunity to
literally rewrite our laws. To set the highest standards. To make it
clear that Connecticut expects the best.
"I look forward to seeing these bills arrive on my desk
for signature," Governor Rell told the GAE members. The bills will
"show the people of Connecticut that we are serious about change ...
that we are serious about regaining and keeping their trust by
upholding the highest standards of ethics and integrity in our state
government."
Governor Rell testified in support of six bills in her reform package:
An Act Concerning the Citizen's Ethics and Government Integrity

Commission
This act creates a restructured and improved Ethics and Government

Integrity Commission. It will focus the Commission's resources and
work on a stronger training and education component without
compromising its enforcement responsibilities. It also
compartmentalizes functions to avoid conflicts of interest, creates
clear lines of responsibility and establishes a structure that makes an
important distinction between the enforcement and advisory functions of
the Commission.
New restrictions will also govern the actions and activities of

Commission members to limit potential conflicts of interest.
An Act Concerning a Code of Ethics
This bill will allow a judge to reduce or revoke the pensions of public
officials or state employees who are found guilty or plead guilty to a
serious crime relating to their employment or the office they hold.
This bill would also:
� Prevent state employees and public officials from hiring a

contractor to provide personal services, if that contractor does
business with their agency
� Close several so-called "revolving door" loopholes to

restrict the actions of a state employee moving to a job in the private
sector
� Take important steps to tighten gift restrictions
� Require local Connecticut governments to adopt a Code of

Ethics
An Act Concerning Ethical Standards for State Contracting
This bill imposes new requirements and new limits on companies seeking
to do business with the state. It would:
Require these companies to report any state employee or public official

who solicits a gift
Hold private companies responsible if they violate "revolving door"
restrictions when hiring former state employees
Require that all large state contracts would have to include a summary
of state ethics laws as part of the actual contract (and subcontract)
language.
An Act Concerning Campaign Finance
This act seeks to limit the influence of special interests by

prohibiting lobbyists and people doing business with the state from
contributing to races for statewide office or the legislature. It also
prohibits lobbyists from fundraising or soliciting contributions from
their clients.
In addition, the bill:
� Lowers limits on contributions for all statewide and

legislative offices, and applies these lower limits to political
parties, Political Action Committees (PACs) and individuals.
� Limits the number of PACs for each legislative caucus
� Prohibits "ad books," in which sponsors buy advertising

in another fund-raising technique that the Governor called "just a
gimmick for getting around the law."
� Provides an incentive to encourage citizen participation and

hold down the cost of campaigns through a tax deduction for
contributions to candidates who voluntarily accept spending limits
� Includes an advance notification provision to stop the

troubling trend of surprise negative attack ads
An Act Concerning a State Contracting Standards Board
The Contracting Standards Board will be charged with establishing

contracting standards and practices that apply across the board,
without exception, to all state agencies. They will:
� Give small, minority- and women-owned businesses an equal

opportunity to obtain state business, and
� Encourage increased competition for state business
The Contracting Standards Board will assume the duties of the State
Properties Review Board and have the authority to:
� Conduct compliance audits of state agencies
� Review the substance of agency contracts, a great improvement

of the Attorney General's present authority to review contracts as to
form
� Under certain conditions, the Board will have the authority

to review and terminate an individual contract for cause and to suspend
or disqualify a contractor from state business for a period of time.
An Act Concerning False Claims
This measure encourages private citizens to get involved in cleaning up

state government. It empowers individuals with knowledge of potential
fraud to initiate lawsuits and win a percentage of any money recovered
by the state.
It also creates new penalties for those who try to steal from taxpayers
and the state.

From: David Amos
To: wpc-cpa@farris.com ; goodale@sasktel.net
Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2005 1:52 PM
Subject: Fw: You can't fool me McGuinty I'm too stupid

From: David Amos
To: dalton.mcguinty@premiergov.on.ca
Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2005 8:25 PM
Subject: You can't fool me McGuinty I'm too stupid
You lawyers are all the same but at least you can never say that you
didn't know. I will call and leave a message with my cell phone I will
have proof of that contact as well.
From: David Amos
To: david.anderson1@sasktel.net
Cc: anderd@parl.gc.ca
Subject: Fw: FYI I just called

From: David Amos
To: fbastien@bell.net
Subject: Fw: FYI I just called

From: David Amos
To: info@ccr-ny.org
Subject: FYI I just called
You are way past too late act ethical now

From: David Amos
To: INFO7@elections.ca ; ombudsman@npr.org ; ombudsman@washpost.com
Cc: info@cfif.org ; 2020@abc.com ; niteline@abc.com ;
cnn.feedback@cnn.com ; info@cnbc.com ; comments@foxnews.com ;
world@msnbc.com ; today@nbc.com ; dateline@nbc.com ; newshour@pbs.org ;
atc@npr.org ; letters@latimes.com ; letters@nytimes.com ;
editor@usatoday.com ; editors@interactive.wsj.com ;
letters@newsweek.com ; letters@time.com ; letters@usnews.com
Subject: My name is beginning to be Blogged
Attn Mr. Jeffrey A. Dvorkin
I just called you and left a message. I have crossed paths with
NPR before and just shook my head and went on alone to do what I had to
do. It has already proven to me that it is no better than any other
Media controlled by the wealthy few. So as I went about proving what
everybody knows in that public corruption is rampant and way out of
control. I figured I would prove the Media is a big player against the
public's best interests and the only possible way for ordinary folk to
know simple truths is what they can weed out for themselves from the
truth and fiction found in the internet. I truly believe it is every
bit the important tool the printing press was centuries ago before rich
folks bought them all.
I contacted you Mr. Dvorkin because you are the most outspoken
ombudsman on the web and you used to work for CBC in my native land. I
am not surprised that you have not called me back yet. Everybody else
does as well. As you can see I have sent this to many others just to
rub that fact in. Why would you be any different than any of them? I
will send only one more email to you and the others immediately after
this one. I contains much text that should concern your former rivals
at CTV in Canada and all Big Media in general. There is also attached
just one small Tiff file that should properly serve to embarrass
Frontline at PBS. After the end of the day I will ignore you too. Turn
about is fair play.
I go to great lengths to check my own ethics constantly in order that

none of my words may ever be impeached. In that regard I do agree with
your following statements in particular. Most blogs are slanted and
political just like the media. However not all are and since my battles
are with both sides of the political fence in an sincere effort to
expose the truth, I simply don't care who says what of me. It is far
better than being ignored as NPR and its ilk have done. I will be
comfortable with the fact that most ordinary people are more than
capable to sort out who is a liar and who is not. I will let my work
stand on its own and say no more to anyone. I am starting to bore
myself as much as I have bored my friends long ago. Enough is enough.
I do not deny the possibility that you may have no idea as to who
I am, If in fact you don't, it only further serves to prove my point
that blogging will be the only way to reveal the truth that media
willingly ignores in pursuit of its own interests and that of its
owners. However after my phone call and my emails you can never claim
that anymore. In my opinion the freedom of the press is a myth and any
individual is only free if he resists oppression upon his freedom. It
is up to you to challenge me in disagreement or run and hide your head
in the sand. My work cannot be undone.
I am quite simply begging you to stress test my ethics to the max.

The sooner the better for the benefit of all. Following your words and
that of some others are several motions affidavits, answers and
counterclaims that have been filed in two courts in two countries. I
can further support all that I say is true with many emails that
contain scans of legal documents letters and responses etc etc. If
anyone responds to me by the end of the day. am asks for it. I will
forward a rather large Tiff file that contains many legal documents,
letters and response etc. It was exactly the same material that I sent
to the Solicitor General Theodore Olson just before he quit his job
while I was running for Parliament. IT is also exactly the same
material that I served upon the Canadian Border Guards to send to their
boss, the Solicitor General Anne McLellan to let her know I had made it
home as was about to do my best to make all HELL break loose in an
ethical and timely fashion. Six months after I sent one hell of a
letter to Elections Canada I just received the funniest response yet.
It seems everybody is nervous that I am going to come home and run
again very soon. I am about to call their lawyer you answered me and
ask her what the heel she did with her copy of wiretap tape numbered
139.
"Skews Narrow?
Many listeners tell me that the media -- NPR included -- doesn't skew
left as much as it skews narrow. The range of issues needs to be
broader, they say.
NPR could do more to ensure that it allows other points of view -- from
the right and the left -- on the air. But not just the usual well-worn
suspects like Bill O'Reilly from Fox News. In recent days, O'Reilly has
admonished NPR for not having him on public radio to sell his book. But
NPR has no obligation to put O'Reilly or any other shameless
self-promoter on the radio.
There are a number of younger, more interesting thinkers and
journalists from both sides of the spectrum that deserve to be heard
and considered.
Perhaps fewer "think tankers" from the East Coast. More witty
conservatives and liberals (yes, they exist). P.J. O'Rourke? Al
Franken?
Maybe even Bernard Goldberg.".
"In Denial
NPR interviewed a number of academics and journalists about this story.

The academics seemed to be in denial, tending to pooh-pooh the
importance of this story for American journalism overall.
But others such as Bob Steele from The Poynter Institute and Tom
Rosenstiel from the Project for Excellence in Journalism took the
opposite view: that CBS' mistake will have consequences for all news
organizations and for some time to come.
After other recent scandals involving the BBC, The New York Times and
USA Today, it is sometimes hard to believe that journalistic ethics are
being given more than lip service these days. Yet, there are reasons to
be optimistic.
Rays of Hope?
First, we must acknowledge that the blogs have truly arrived. It is

hard for journalists who have led a sheltered life without public
accountability to acknowledge that those days are over.
Second, it will be tough for ombudsmen and women to admit that their
unique role as overseers on behalf of the public is also changing. We
need to make room on the bench and give the bloggers a place at the
dinner table. The question remains: who's for dinner?
NPR listeners have always been quick to point out our errors and
lapses, and in a non-partisan way. The blogs are different because many
are explicitly political. It will be interesting to see if the
"blogosphere" still has as much impact on mainstream journalism once
the election is over.
Third, while the bloggers will make life uncomfortable for the media,
ultimately, it is a sign of a healthy democratic give-and take. A
question for the bloggers is, "what are your standards? How can the
rest of us know that your sources are reliable?"
Making the rich and powerful squirm is a short-lived measure of

journalistic success -- both for the mainstream media and presumably,
for the blogs.
Bloggers must be as accountable to the public as they demand the rest

of us must be. That means there should be some consequence for
spreading false or partial information. Any thoughts on what those
consequences might be would be a useful discussion.
More, Not Less Investigative Journalism
CBS' failure will create a climate of timidity inside some

organizations when it comes to investigative journalism. It may be
understandable, but it would also be a mistake. There are still a
number of unanswered questions about this story.
Ethics for Investigative Journalists
Finally, CBS' problems should remind us of the ethical obligations of

investigative journalism. Aly Col�n from the Poynter Institute has
reissued the guidelines for those organizations (like NPR) that want to
enter into this area. (See link at bottom of page.)
They are worth posting in every cubicle. I especially like Aly's idea
that every investigative unit should appoint a "contrarian" whose role
is to question everything.
In my experience, the failure of investigative units occurs exactly

because expressing doubts is seen as not being "on board." Skepticism
inside the news organization is also a valuable journalistic tool.
In that spirit, NPR needs to do some clearing up of one of its own

sources."
The following words of David Limbaugh's from out of the Heritage

Foundation are truly hilarious to me. When one considers what I sent
them last year that have thus far been ignored they will laugh too. As
a double check I sent the same stuff to him as well to no avail but at
least his brother's lawyer Roy Black responded to me. It aided in me
forever proving some lawyers are too snotty for their own damned good.
"Men in Black" is a primer on the United States Constitution as well as

a clarion call to liberty lovers to wake up to the alarming damage the
Court continues to inflict on our republic. Levin documents how the
Court has morphed into a super-legislature, legislating from the bench
rather than honoring its constitutional role of interpreting the laws.
To be fair to the right here is proof that left wing lawyers are as
crooked as the right wing dudes.

From: David Amos
To: ecassel1@cox.net
Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2005 8:24 PM
Subject: Fw: A True Tale of Two Corrupt Governments

From: David Amos
To: Graham.B@parl.gc.ca
Cc: epeterso@justice.gc.ca
Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2005 12:44 AM
Hey Bill
Please explain this lawsuit to me real slow. It is by your buddy
Billy Matthews against Byron Prior in Newfoundland after you drew my
friend's plight to Irwin Cotler's attention? He did finally respond to
Byron with a not my job attitude on the very same day Paul Martin's
coal boat was caught with the load of cocaine in Sidney.
Furthermore I know what I sent you in my emails last year before I
can home to run for Parliament against your party. In return you
bastards allow me to be summoned back to the USA to be sent straight to
jail without due process of law. Now don't that just piss me off.
Methinks I will send you the same Hard Copy I gave John Crosbie last
year not too long before I sue some of you nasty lawyers for your
malice. What say you sir? Do you feel a sudden fit of ethical behavior
coming over you.
From: David Amos
To: caseyb@parl.gc.ca
Cc: scotta@parl.gc.ca ; andrew.holland@nb.aibn.com
Sent: Sunday, January 30, 2005 4:01 PM

From: David Amos
To: Cadman.C@parl.gc.ca ; Cotler.I@parl.gc.ca
Cc: Easter.W@parl.gc.ca ; Efford.J@parl.gc.ca ; Graham.B@parl.gc.ca ;
'Stephen Harper' ; Jack Layton ; MacAulay.L@parl.gc.ca ;
McDonough.A@parl.gc.ca ; Parrish.C@parl.gc.ca ; Scott.A@parl.gc.ca ;
Stoffer.P@parl.gc.ca ; Zed.P@parl.gc.ca
Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2005 9:57 AM

From: David Amos
To: Ind80@aol.com ; kbar@nbnet.nb.ca ; Herbert Snider ; cei@nbnet.nb.ca
; 2mollins@sympatico.ca
Cc: scotta@parl.gc.ca ; andrew.holland@nb.aibn.com
Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2005 9:18 AM
Subject: A True Tale of Two Corrupt Governments
Hey Fellas
Yesterday in the Supreme Court of Newfoundland my friend, Bryon

Prior gave his word to a court he knows to be very corrupt not to
publish or cause to have published some of the following documents in
order for Judge J. Dereck Green not to throw him in jail. I have no
doubt he will keep his word. Byron should not be punished for my
actions in the necessary defence of my freedom in another country.
Byron also also informed the court that there is no way for him to put
a muzzle on me.
I am sending this email out to men that I trust that have my

Durable Power of Attorney. Whether the bastards like it or not you are
me in word and deed as long as I keep breathing. All of you and the
court know I must make these matters widely known in order not to be
put back in jail. As you all know I gave my fair warning to all of
publishing the words within this email before Byron was compelled to
make his promise. The Rules of Newfoundland Supreme Court do not hold
nor do they mean a Tinker's damn to me until I am named and properly
invited to the circus. I would gladly stand as a defendant beside Byron
after the Court publishes that fact so it becomes widely known the
reasons for my coming home. However it is painfully obvious that the
Newfoundland Supreme Court and Byron Prior must wait until my present
pending criminal trial in the USA is over before I can become joined in
a civil matter up home. Never forget my native land denied me any
assistance in trying to stop my being persecuted down here and sent
straight to jail without due process of law. At least in compensation
Canada is sending down Franky MaKenna to speak for me as I sue his law
firm. Won't that be interesting?
The sexual abuse of Byron 's family long ago and wrongful actions
within the Offshore Oil Industry in Newfoundland are far more important
to everyone in Newfoundland and the rest of the Maritimes than my
arguments about Securities Fraud, Tax Fraud and dead ex Fbi agents etc.
with Yankees. That said, my must protect my freedom and my own family's
interests first before I can help anyone else. I am certain my friends
agree and I thank you for your help. Whereas no lawyer would come to
Byron's assistance, I did as best I could do from afar to study the
rules and write what I could for Byron to use in his defence and
counterclaim to expose the truth and to use in my own defence in the
USA. The serious mischief that is afoot is within the ex parte doings
of the desperate law firm Patterson and Palmer and a very corrupt
justice system to have Byron's document stricken after they had
demanded them of him. John Crosbie's partner Stephen J. May speaking on
behalf of his own law firm and Billy Matthews a Member of Parliament
was forced to agree with Byron's inablitity to put a muzzle on me. As
anyone can see Stevey Boy May in his Affidavit has admitted to the
knowledge of the reasons why I am very angry with his law firm's malice
towards Byron and I.
The fact that May refused to file his Affidavit and the court
refused to accept Byron's document requesting a postponement today
should prove to all what Byron and I say is true. If anyone wishes to
view exactly the same documents as were served upon Patterson Palmer
and their cohorts up home or upon the Suffolk County District Attorney
down here, all they have to do is ask. I will fill their email inbox
with scans in a Tiff format. All the documents have been filed in the
Public Record during the course of my criminal trial and there are many
more to follow. Many Canadian Politicians have received exactly the
same material from me and many have answered me. the most recent
Respond came from Senator Joe Day yesterday after a five month delay.
Any ethical lawyer could easily employ them in Byron's defence and to
support his counterclaim. Judge Green has ordered him to find a lawyer
to defend him "pro bono" by February 9th. Byron and I hold no
illusions about the impossible task. He has already emailed every
lawyer within the Newfoundland Law Society asking for assistance and
not one has responded before he stood in court yesterday. What is truly
necessary is an ethical Royal Commission to investigate T. Alex Hickman
and his friends in order for the truth to be revealed.
Since we all know that the Liberal Caucus is now in Fredeicton. I

ask that my friends take many of their friends and go see the MP Andy
Scott today and ask him why he did not respond to the material I
delivered in hand to his office with Dave Mollins before I returned to
the USA. The fact that I was falsely imprisoned makes me very angry
with people such as Andy Scott and his cohorts who are employed to
uphold the Public Trust. As a Member of Parliament he could have
stopped this nonsense out of the gate. As the Minister of Indian
Affairs he certianly should have contacted my friend the lawyer Barry
Bachrach by now. I called his office today and told them to expect some
sincere men to turn up with some simple but serious questions for him.
I also forwarded him this email to share with the Liberal Caucus now in
Fredericton.
Please find within this email three Motions and an Affidavit of

mine in a Yankee Court and A court order in Newfoundland with the
related Defence, Counterclaim and Request of byron Prior all of which
I wrote. Most importantly is an Affidavit by the crooked lawyer Stevey
Boy May.
Spotlight on N.B. culture for national Liberal caucus retreat
Maritime Kitchen Party welcomes Prime Minister, cabinet to Province
Fredericton (N.B.) - New Brunswickers are putting on a really big

show for Prime Minister Paul Martin and his Liberal caucus when they
come to Fredericton later this month.
The National Liberal Caucus Winter Retreat will bring the 135 Liberal
Members of Parliament, including Mr. Martin's entire cabinet, as well
as the 61 Liberal Senators to the Capital City for three days of
meetings. The retreat is co-hosted by Tobique-Mactaquac MP and Chairman
of the National Liberal Caucus Andy Savoy and Hon. Andy Scott,
Fredericton MP and Minister of Indian and Northern Affairs.
A Maritime Kitchen Party, Wednesday, January 26, will feature a full

evening of New Brunswick-flavoured food, song and dance, from
toe-tapping Acadian reels to high-stepping Scottish jigs.
The party headlines Fredericton's own Downtown Blues Band,

Bairdsville singer and songwriter Matt Andersen, the multi-talented La
Famille Arsenault and fiddling sensation Dominque Dupuis of Dieppe with
Moncton comedian Marshall Button, better known as Lucien, as emcee.
"This is a one-of-a-kind occasion to share our rich cultural heritage

with the leaders of our nation," Mr. Savoy said. "We are proud to
be an example of cultural diversity and harmony to the rest of
Canada."
"We want to give our friends in Ottawa the kind of warm welcome that
New Brunswickers are noted for," Mr. Scott said. "This will be a
showcase of our heritage and hospitality."
The Maritime Kitchen Party is open to the public and will begin at 8
p.m. at the Delta Fredericton ballroom. Tickets are now on sale at all
MP constituency offices in New Brunswick, as well as the New Brunswick
Liberal Association office in Fredericton. For further information,
contact the NBLA 1-800-442-4902;
Office of Andy Savoy at 1-866-542-4400 or the Office of Andy Scott,

(506) 452-4110.
Office of the Hon. Andy Scott
Towne Centre Building
412 Queen Street
Suite 100
Fredericton, N.B.
E3B 1B6
Phone: (506) 452-4110
Fax: (506) 452-4076
This is the fella I just called.
Andrew Holland
Excutive Assistant
Phone: (506) 452-3516
Read this fellas and then go cause the Liberals that are having
to much fun at our expense to weep and worry about their own malevolent
interests. Ask them if they still wish to support the Diddlers T. Alex
Hickman and their buddy Billy Matthews. At the very least tell
everybody to call Andy Savoy and Andy Scott and ask them the same
question Lois Skanes asked of Stevey Boy May. Who the Hell is David
Amos and what the Hell is he talking about?
THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
THE TRIAL COURT
DORCHESTER, SS.
DISTRICT COURT DEPARTMENT
THE COMMONWEALTH OF )
MASSACHUSETTS )
CRIMINAL ACTION
) DOCKET NO. 0407CR004623
v.
)
)
DAVID R. AMOS )
MOTION TO DISQUALIFY THE OFFICE OF THE SUFFOLK COUNTY
DISTRICT ATTORNEY ON THE BASIS THAT A CONFLICT OF INTEREST
EXISTS THAT WOULD RENDER IT IMPOSSIBLE FOR

THE DEFENDANT,
DAVID R. AMOS TO RECEIVE A FAIR TRIALNow comes the defendant, David R.

Amos a Citizen of Canada and a Legal Permanent Resident of the USA
within the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and demands that the Office of
the Suffolk County District Attorney be disqualified from prosecuting
this matter. This motion is based on the affidavit previously filed
with the clerk of this court and recorded in the public record, the
court herein and such matters as may be presented at the hearing on
this motion and points to his civil rights under the following
authority: the Declaration of the Rights of the Inhabitants of the
Commonwealth of Massachusetts PART THE FIRST Article XII which states
as follows: "No subject shall be held to answer for any crimes or
offence, until the same is fully and plainly, substantially and
formally, described to him; or be compelled to accuse, or furnish
evidence against himself. And every subject shall have a right to
produce all proofs, that may be favorable to him; to meet the witnesses
against him face to face, and to be fully heard in his defense by
himself, or his counsel, at his election. And no subject shall be
arrested, imprisoned, despoiled, or deprived of his property,
immunities, or privileges, put out of the protection of the law,
exiled, or deprived of his life, liberty, or estate, but by the
judgment of his peers, or the law of the land." The defendant legally
acting ithin his rights was imprisoned.
In support of this motion, the defendant states that on October 1st,

2004 he returned from safe haven in Canada to stand once more before
Judge Coffey of this court as ordered. The judge witnessed the signing
the aforesaid affidavit. This was done prior to any hearing of this
matter in a court not recognized by the defendant as having the proper
jurisdiction and venue for a trial of a Canadian citizen involving
serious criminal charges with an unsigned complaint. The defendant was
well aware that if he were to be convicted of the false charges he
would be subject to a prison term and the revocation of his status as a
permanent resident of the USA and that his family would suffer greatly.
The plaintiff went to great lengths to inform the correct Canadian
authorities of his persecution in the USA. Judge Coffey witnessed the
defendant serve the District Attorney and also provide the clerk of
this court an exact copy of the aforesaid affidavit before he properly
disqualified himself from hearing this matter as soon as he was
informed that he lives the defendant's neighborhood. This was done
before the defendant was ever served a complaint that he would be
compelled to answer. Attached to the aforesaid affidavit are two large
exhibits containing one or more affidavits and many other legal
documents etc. that prove the malicious actions of the District
Attorney supporting a criminal conspiracy against the freedom, civil
rights, interests and property of the defendant.
In further support of this motion the defendant states that beginning

in July of 2004, the defendant had fully disclosed to the District
Attorney the circumstances of this matter before the Clerk Magistrate
Owens went forward and filed his malicious complaint.
The defendant had every right to expect the District Attorney to uphold
the law and properly warn the Clerk Magistrate not to attempt to make
an illegal compliant. Instead the District Attorney attempted to
explain the illegal action while claiming not to be involved. In
response the defendant received a letter from the District Attorney
dated July 29th, 2004. In it the DA claimed that he as not yet involved
but attempted to explain the impending illegal action of the Clerk
Magistrate on August 13th, 2004. A true copy of the aforesaid letters
to and from the District Attorney in July of 2004 are hereto attached
for the court to review.
On September 3rd the District Attorney proved his malice and even
demanded imprisonment or bail to make certain that the defendant answer
an unsigned complaint that had yet to be served. Judge Coffey properly
denied the DA's request, ordered the DA to serve the defendant copies
of all that was in the docket of the matter and ordered a hearing of
the matter on October 1st in order establish the legality of the
complaint and the proper jurisdiction and venue. The judge suggested
that the defendant file the documents he had shown to the court byway
of a proper means on October 1st and then he would hear if the District
Attorney wanted to continue to prosecute the matter.
To date the defendant has not heard from or received on slip of paper
from the District Attorney other than the documents comprising of this
complaint ordered by Judge Coffey on Sept 1st. If there was in fact a
signed complaint against the defendant dated August 13th, 2004, it
should have been served upon him at that time not by Judge Hanlon after
he was compelled to waive his right to counsel in order to receive
swift justice. The defendant does have three separate copies of an
unsigned complaint. One is of the court's record, one is of the
prosecutor's copy and the last is the defendant's copy. The
defendant strongly believes that the signed copy of the complaint was
created October 1st, 2004 after the District Attorney had asked for a
recess and studied the defendant's affidavit. That fact should have
been blatantly obvious to the court and Judge Coffey because the
District Attorney's Office had asked to confer with the defendant
before he filed the affidavit but afterwards they did not wish to
continue with their own request.
It became blatantly obvious to the defendant and his witnesses that the
court and the DA were cohorts in the conspiracy against him as they
watched the clerk of this court give the District Attorney their copy
of the affidavit that that had been filed in the Public Record before
Judge Hanlon had the matter called before her on October 1st. On that
day Judge Hanlon did inquire about the last statement in the
defendant's affidavit and of his concerns with the well being of his
friend Byron Prior in Newfoundland and of the defendant's own
concerns with Canada. The defendant told the judge as much as she was
willing to hear before she sent the defendant to jail based on the
false allegations of an ADA claiming that Judge Coffey was threatened.
The allegations were absurd. If Judge Coffey had in fact felt
threatened then he would have dealt with the defendant immediately.
After the defendant was put in jail many Canadian authorities act
quickly to cover up their own conspiracy against the defendant and
Bryon Prior. At the time of the writing of this document a law firm of
a well-known Canadian politician, John Crosbie has made a statement of
claim against Byron Prior on behalf of the Member of Parliament Bill
Matthews while ignoring the very same material that was served upon the
Suffolk County District Attorney and this court on October 1st. That
matter will be addressed in Canada. However on October 19th as the
defendant stood before Judge Hanlon, she clearly affirmed the fact that
Judge Coffey had not been threatened but did nothing to chastise the
ADA for her false allegations and denied that the original wiretap
tapes served upon the District Attorney on Sept 3rd were any sort of
evidence in this matter even though the Clerk Magistrate had made note
of their existence on August 13th. Thus there is a need to sue the
District Attorney and the court.
Dated January 11th, 2005
David R. Amos, Pro Se
153 Alvin Ave.
Milton, MA. 02186
617 698-6549
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, David R. Amos of Milton, MA hereby certify that on January

12th, 2005, I with two friends accompanying me as witnesses served upon
the Suffolk County District Attorney, Daniel F. Conley a true original
copy of the attached Motion to his office within Dorchester District
Court at the following address 510 Washington St. Dorchester, MA
David R. Amos
153 Alvin Ave.
Milton, MA. 02186
THE TRIAL COURT
DORCHESTER, SS.
MASSACHUSETTS )
CRIMINAL ACTION
v.
)
DAVID R. AMOS )
MOTION TO DISQUALIFY JUDGE SIDNEY HANLON ON THE BASIS THAT A CONFLICT

OF INTEREST EXISTS THAT WOULD RENDER IT IMPOSSIBLE FOR THE DEFENDANT,
DAVID R. AMOS TO RECEIVE A FAIR TRIAL
Now comes the David R. Amos, a Citizen of Canada and a

Legal Permanent Resident of the USA within the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts herein named as the defendant and demands that Judge
Sidney Hanlon be disqualified from hearing all further proceedings in
the above stated criminal prosecution because of her personal interest
in the outcome. In support of this motion, the defendant has attached a
true copy of a letter received by Cynthia A. Robinson, the legal
counsel of Boston Municipal Court on January 4th,.2005 and a true copy
of the docket sheet of this matter. Also attached to the aforesaid
letter is a copy of an email that was served upon the Suffolk County
District Attorney and a Judge of Dorchester District Count on November
19th, 2004. Within the email are the irrefutable facts that support the
defendant's statements within an Affidavit and its attached exhibits
filed in the Public Record of this court on October 1st, 2004 and
ordered removed by Judge Hanlon on Oct 19th after she admitted that the
defendant did not threaten Judge Coffey. The defendant freely admits
that this is a very important trial about Criminal Harassment. However
he has always maintained the Criminal Harassment has been practiced by
the court against him. The defendant maintains his declaration of
innocence and only demands his right to a swift trial in front of a
jury of his peers in the proper jurisdiction and venue.
. As of this date the defendant has not received a response from Ms.
Robinson either in the spoken or written word to refute his allegations
of criminal activity supported by many people employed to up hold the
law and the public trust in their elected or politically appointed
positions within the justice systems of Canada and the USA. Whereas
this motion was the last day to file this motion according to law and
ordered by this court in order for it to be heard on January 21st,
2005, the defendant must make it well known to the court that he is
about to sue the court to regain lost assets and seek relief for
personal injury. Whereas it was Judge Hanlon who willing supported with
documents signed in her own hand the malicious actions of the Clerk
Magistrate Mr. Owens and the false allegations of the District
Attorney, the defendant demands that she be disqualified. The fact that
Judge Hanlon went even further and maliciously declared that she
believed the defendant had a prior history of mental illness and did
not believe his actions within the Canadian justice system and the
Parliamentary process was very offensive to the defendant. Please view
attachments bearing her signature.

153 Alvin Ave.
Milton, MA. 02186
617 698-6549
CERTIFICATE
OF SERVICE
I, David R. Amos of Milton, MA hereby certify that on

January 12th, 2005, I with two friends accompanying me as witnesses
served upon the Suffolk County District Attorney, Daniel F. Conley a
true original copy of the attached Motion to his office within
Dorchester District Court at the following address 510 Washington St.
Dorchester, MA
David R. Amos
153 Alvin
Ave.
Milton, MA.
02186
THE TRIAL COURT
DORCHESTER, SS.
MASSACHUSETTS )
CRIMINAL ACTION
v.
)
DAVID R. AMOS )
MOTION OF THE DEFENDANT, DAVID R. AMOS TO DEMAND THAT THE

MATTER BE SENT TO US DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF
MASSACHUSETTS IN ORDER THAT HE MAY RECEIVE A FAIR TRIAL BY A JURY OF
HIS PEERS IN THE PROPER JURISDICTION AND VENUE.
Now comes the defendant, David R. Amos a Citizen of Canada and a Legal
Permanent Resident of the USA within the Commonwealth of Massachusetts
and demands his right to a swift trial before a jury of his peers in
order to defend his freedom in the proper jurisdiction and venue of the
US District Court for the District of Massachusetts. The defendant has
already spent time in a malicious Sheriff's jail in a clear and
irrefutable violation to his Eighth Amendment rights. He asserts his
rights as follows and prays that the Dorchester District Court to make
note that there are two other directly related motions filed along with
this motion and that they should be heard first. The aforesaid motions
demand that the entire office of the Suffolk County District Attorney
and Judge Hanlon be disqualified because of their interest in the
outcome of this matter. This motion is based the affidavit previously
filed with the clerk of this court and recorded in the public record,
the court herein and such matters as may be presented at the hearing on
this motion.
In support of this motion the defendant states that he is being

prosecuted for criminal harassment byway of emails on behalf of the
lawyer, Angela Troccoli whom he has been litigating against in the USA
for years. One of the emails that she claims as harassment contain
pictures of police surveillance tapes that contain recordings of the
private conversations of several people that reside outside of the
Commonwealth of Massachusetts. The Boston Municipal Court does not have
jurisdiction to even begin prosecution particularly in light of the
fact that the Minister of Justice who is also the Attorney General of
Canada received the email that the court finds so offensive before the
lawyer Troccoli received her forwarded copy and made her false
allegations. If the emails were in fact criminally offensive then David
Lutz QC, a lawyer who litigates on behalf of the Attorney General of
Canada in the Province of New Brunswick should have filed a complaint
against the defendant while he was on Canadian soil. The defendant was
running against the candidate Mr. Lutz was supporting for the same seat
in Canada's Parliament. On July 29th, 2004, the very same day that
the Suffolk County District Attorney was composing his malicious
letter, the defendant was confronting David Lutz in front of many
witnesses including the RCMP in Sussex Provincial Court in the Province
of New Brunswick. David R, Amos who was yet to be charged with anything
was demanding an answer for the many documents served upon David Lutz
in his capacity as a prosecutor for the Queen in June of 2004. Mr.
Lutz's only answer was that he had given the material to law
enforcement. It appeared to the defendant that a solicitor appointed to
speak on behalf of the Queen was content in allowing a Clerk Magistrate
of a Boston Municipal Court to attempt to prosecute the defendant in
order to assist in the cover up his own wrongs. The defendant's
suspicions have since been affirmed many times over in many ways.
In further support of this motion the defendant states that he must

call many witnesses to testify in his defense in federal court. Many of
these people act under the federal code of law enforcement. If they had
acted within the scope of their employment years ago then it would not
have been necessary for the defendant to run for Parliament in Canada
let alone stand trail as an innocent man being criminally prosecuted in
order to protect the political interests of so many others. Indeed the
defendant will joyfully argue a criminal matter in defense of his
freedom in order to expose the rampant public corruption the people of
the two countries that he is a person of know to exist.
In further support of this motion, the defendant states that on October

1st, 2004, Judge Coffey of this court witnessed the signing the
aforesaid affidavit which has since been removed from the public record
under Judge Hanlon's orders. This was done prior to any hearing of
this matter in a court not recognized by the defendant as having the
proper jurisdiction and venue for a trail of a Canadian citizen
involving serious criminal charges in an unsigned complaint. The
defendant was well aware that if he were to be convicted of the false
charges he would be subject to a prison term of up two and one half
years and the revocation of his status as a permanent resident of the
USA and that his family would suffer greatly. Attached to the aforesaid
affidavit are two large exhibits containing one or more affidavits and
many other legal documents etc. that prove the malicious actions of the
District Attorney and this court supporting a criminal conspiracy
against the freedom, civil rights, interests and property of the
defendant. The defendant will have the aforesaid affidavit and many
other documents and wiretap tapes to support this motion with him in
court on January 21st, 2005. The defendant would refuse to give this
material to the Federal Bureau of Investigation or any other law
enforcement authority because he now needs it as evidence to be used
against them in a civil lawsuit. The material proves that he has been
pleading for years fo law enforcement authorities to act within the
scope of their employment. Perhaps the District Attorney Daniel Conley
upon reading this motion should reconsider and ignore Judge Hanlon's
opinions of the wiretap tapes that he has in his possession then give
tapes to the FBI as soon as possible. He has ten days to review all
that the defendant has provided him appear as an ethical officer of the
court. A true copy of the aforementioned affidavit is hereto attached
for the court to review.

153
Alvin Ave.
Milton,
MA. 02186
617
698-6549
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, David R. Amos of Milton, MA hereby certify that on

January 12th, 2005, I with two friends accompanying me as witnesses
served upon the Suffolk County District Attorney, Daniel F. Conley a
true original copy of the attached Motion to his office within
Dorchester District Court at the following address 510 Washington St.
Dorchester, MA
David R. Amos
153 Alvin Ave.
Milton, MA. 02186

THE TRIAL COURT
DORCHESTER, SS.
MASSACHUSETTS )
CRIMINAL ACTION
v.
)
DAVID R. AMOS )
AFFIDAVIT OF
DAVID R. AMOS
Now comes, David R. Amos, a Citizen of Canada and a Legal Permanent

Resident of the USA and asserts his Constitutional Rights pursuant to
Title 42 Sections 1981, 1982, 1985 and 1986 of the Federal Code and
freely swears under the penalties of perjury that the following
statements are true and to the best of his knowledge.
On September 3rd, 2004 I returned to the USA and stood before the
Dorchester District Court in response to a summons served upon my home
in Milton MA dated August 13th, 2004.
On September 3rd, 2004 I reported to the probation officer as ordered
after he joked and made fun of me he directed me to serve upon the
District Attorney the many original wiretap tapes that I had promised I
would bring to court and ask if they wished to continue. The District
Attorney Office wished to prosecute me so I returned to the probation
office and the required documentation was filled out. I did not discuss
the matter with anyone working for the Commonwealth on September 3rd or
since that time other than register my indignation about the lack of
diligence, professional behavior and malicious acts practiced against
me in an effort to impeach my character.
On September 3rd, 2004, before any hearing of the matter began I
protested the fact that the Clerk Buckley had claimed that I was
pleading not guilty. I had made no plea whatsoever. I refused to waive
any of my Rights and I demanded that the court prove its jurisdiction
to hear the matter.
For over a period of almost three months I had tried to resolve the
issues of this matter with the Clerk's Office of this court, the
Boston Police Dept., the Police Commissioner, the City's Legal Dept.
the Mayor's office, the Suffolk County District Attorney's Office,
The Governor's Office, the US Ambassador to Canada, the Royal
Canadian Mounted Police. CSIS and the Canadian Consulate in Boston. I
was refused the right to know what the allegations against me were and
no one would discuss my concerns about the possibility of foul play. I
knew I had done nothing wrong and I had fully disclosed the
circumstances to the Suffolk County District Attorney as Chief Justice
Robert A. Mulligan had suggested. I had received an answer from the DA
weeks before he was willing to prosecute me on false charges. I had no
understanding of the matter. I had not been given information to work
with and no one would speak to me. If the District Attorney Daniel F.
Conley had acted ethically and diligently the lawyer, Angel Troccoli
and her cohorts within the law firm of Dane M. Shulman should have been
the ones charged with criminal actions against me.
On September 3rd after the hearing and another hearing was marked for
today October 1st, Judge Coffey ordered ADA attempting to prosecute me
to give me a copy of the documents that I was entitled to view. In
return I gave her my Canadian contact number so that we may confer
about this matter. I then returned to Canada to defend my rights and
freedom. The ADA never called. I was not surprised because upon viewing
the material provided I discovered that there is in fact no complaint
against me.
The complaint in this matter is not signed or witnessed by anyone.
Apparently the DA did not expect me to make it to court on September
3rd and certainly did not wish to discuss it with Canadian authorities.
I now consider the DA Conley to be just another corrupt politician just
like Tom Finneran and further proof of why it was so necessary for me
to go to Canada and run for Parliament in order to speak in a public
forum of my knowledge of public corruption. I gave all the crooks to
the last possible minute for one to act ethically and uphold the Public
Trust. All I got in return was continued harassment with the little
perk of Colonel Foley quitting his job before I left and Tom Finneran
quitting his as soon as I got back. It appears that I must complain of
the Queen and President Bush if no one in public service is willing to
uphold the law and act within the scope of their employment.
For the record I must state the reason I was alarmed by this malicious
action against me. The fact is it was the Trail Court of Massachusetts
on April 1st, 2003 that had made false allegations against me to agents
of the DHS claiming that I had threatened the life of George W. Bush.
Now the same court was demanding that I return to the USA to stand in
court and answer charges it knew to be false the morning after the
President's big Political Speech in New York. I had no doubt
whatsoever that the DHS would pounce on me at the border and use a
policy of rather than safe than sorry upon me and take me away for the
benefit of many a low man in high places. The RCMP would do nothing to
protect me and in fact attempted to run me out of Canada on Sept 2nd
That was the very day of the Republican National Convention was much in
the news about protests and presidential propaganda. In order to be of
no possible threat to the President I was compelled to come to the USA
after the President left New York and drive all night in order to
appear in court on the morning of the 3rd.
The most alarming fact of all is that everybody knows that I am bounty
hunting for Whitey Bulger. The order to come to his old stomping
grounds and amongst his friends by the same corrupt justice system that
allowed him to practice his criminal behavior for so long and then
allow him to escape justice is indeed a very malicious summons.
April 1st, 2003 was also the only day that I ever met with the lawyer,
Angela Troccoli before Sept 3rd. I argued her before Judge Livingstone
in Plymouth Probate Court. I have argued her again in Norfolk Probate
Court on Sept. 21st, 2004. That court found it necessary for no stated
reason to place six court guards around me. I am far more than a mere
acquaintance to her but obviously a rather formidable litigant against
her criminal actions. I did send her emails asking her to ask her
clients to stop harassing me with attached photos of the proof. The
emails were necessary because she would not return my phone calls and
sent my correspondence to her partner Dane M. Shulman to Barry Bachrach
claiming that I was his client. I am not and never was. Mr. Bachrach
had informed Troccoli many times that he only represented my wife, Jean
F. O'Meara because the court had Stricken my right to do so pursuant
to M.G.L 201B.
Barry Bachrach has now withdrawn from all of my wife's matters with
my assent because of a conflict of interests over one of his partners
and myself about a fraudulent Title V inspection. However he is an
important witness to be called because he has complete knowledge of all
my contact with Troccoli during the time frame that I have been
accused.
Barry Bachrach also has several original wiretap tapes in his
possession in case the ones given to the District Attorney have
disappeared like so much of my other material has.
On April 1st, 2003 I became aware that Troccoli and the Massachusetts
Trial Court had practiced fraud against me and had created a Notice of
Appearance in my name with a false document in order to strike me and
cover up their own wrongs.
On April 1st, 2003 I had also spoken to a Judge in Quincy District
Court in my best effort to have the court place a restraining order
against my brother in laws William, Robert and Brian O'Meara in my
name because after I had tried to do so a few days before in my
wife's name under her Durable Power of Attorney the court laughed at
me and denied it. Within a day of my first appearance in Quincy
District Court William O'Meara called my wife at her work and implied
that the homes would burn down and he was willing to pay the insurance
premiums. Those same insurance premiums were continued to be paid by us
and one policy was canceled over one month after the property in
Plymouth was destroyed by Troccoli clients. The Plymouth Probate Court
called a Trial quickly with no notification to the litigants after Sept
3rd and on September 9th it authorized a very fraudulent real estate
sale about a property that had been illegally destroyed for five
months.
The lawyer Troccoli and the Massachusetts Trial Court have been
assisting the criminal actions of my brother in laws and many others in
order to protect the interests of many lawyers and politicians from my
actions in other courts.
My wife's family have forged her signature on a Purchase and Sale
Agreement, created fraudulent Title V inspection, broke into our home,
assisted in the theft of her rightful inheritance, stolen personal
property and food, made false allegations against me in other states,
threatened to burn down the homes and harassed us on sometimes a daily
basis with the knowledge and assistance of several Police Departments.
It is time we sought relief.
Whereas two of my most recent documents have disappeared from the
Public Record in two countries I have attached them to this affidavit
for the court and the public to view. Exhibit A is a Motion to Dismiss
Troccoli's latest malicious action. It was filed on September 13th,
2004 and stricken from the Public Record by Judge Langlois on September
21st. Exhibit B is a copy of two letters with the same enclosures that
were sent to the RCMP in Newfoundland byway of the Canada Post and one
was sent to the Canadian Consulate by US Mail. Both mailings were
tracked and not received. They are obviously now in the possession of
some sort of secret authority. As the court views these documents it
can easily see what I say is true and my material is of no concern for
the public safety. They are filed in the public record for the benefit
of all in my best effort to see that the Public Trust is upheld. I have
also brought to court a case of documents requested by Utica Mutual
Insurance Company of New York to investigate the actions of their
client Jan Whiting. However once they knew the truth they refused to
accept or pay for what they had requested. If the court deems it
necessary I shall file it into evidence to refute the false allegations
made against me.
Since I have last appeared in this court a great deal has transpired
that cannot be told of within this affidavit but it concerns the
pursuit of justice for many people in two counties. Much has been done
by many to stop my friends and I in revealing the truth of our
concerns. Thus far we have been able to thwart our adverasies actions.
The court should pray that it does not get our blood on its hands. The
proof of some of what I state can be found in Exhibit B.
Signed before the court and
under the Pains and
Penalties of Perjury by
Dated October 1st , 2004

David R.Amos, Pro Se
153 Alvin Ave.
Milton, MA. 02186
617 698-6549
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEI,
David R. Amos hereby certify that on October 1st, 2004,

I served upon the Suffolk County District Attorney Daniel F. Conley a
true copy of this document with all its attachments.
David R. Amos
153 Alvin Ave.
Milton, MA. 02186
2005 01 T 0010
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEWFOUNDLAND AND LABRADOR
TRAIL DIVISION
BETWEEN: WILLIAM MATTHEWS

PLAINTIFF
AND: BYRON PRIOR

DEFENDANT
AND BETWEEN: BYRON PRIOR

DEFENDANT/PLAINTIFF BY COUNTERCLAIM
AND: WILLIAM MATTHEWS

PLAINTIFF/FIRST DEFENDANT BY COUNTERCLAIM
AND: T. ALEX HICKMAN

SECOND DEFENDANT BY COUNTERCLAIM
AND: THOMAS MARSHALL

THIRD DEFENDANT BY COUNTERCLAIM
AND: DANNY WILLIAMS

FOURTH DEFENDANT BY COUNTERCLAIM
AND: EDWARD M. ROBERTS

FIFTH DEFENDANT BY COUNTERCLAIM
AND: JOHN CROSBIE

SIXTH DEFENDANT BY COUNTERCLAIM
AND: PATTERSON PALMER

SEVENTH DEFENDANT BY COUNTERCLAIM
ORDER
Before the Honourable Chief Justice Green.
Filed January 21, 2005
UPON HEARING Stephen J. May, of Counsel for the Plaintiff, AND UPON
READING the Application and Affidavit filed herein, IT IS HEREBY
ORDERED, until further order of the court, Byron Prior is prohibited
from publishing, causing to have published, distributing or causing to
have distributed the Statement of Defence and Counterclaim pending the
determination of the Applicant's Application to strike the Statement
of Defence and Counterclaim in its entirety, and that the Court's
file in this proceeding is not to be made available for review by
anyone other than the parties or their legal counsel pending the
determination of the Applicant's Application to strike the Statement
of Defence and Counterclaim in its entirety, and that the requirements
relating to the obligations of the Defendants to the Counterclaim to
file Defences are be waived pending the determination of the
Applicant's Application to strike the Statement of Defence and
Counterclaim in its entirety. AND IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT the
content of the Statement of Defence and Counterclaim shall not be
published or broadcast in any manner whatsoever until further order of
the court.
AND IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED that the Application to strike the

Statement of Defence and Counterclaim is scheduled to be heard on
January 26, 2005.
AND IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED that costs of this Application be in

the cause.
DATED at St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador this 21st day of

January, 2005.
Signed by J. Derek Green, Chief Justice
2005 01 T 0010

TRAIL DIVISION
BETWEEN
WILLIAM MATTHEWS
PLAINTIFF
and:
BYRON PRIOR
DEFENDANT
DEFENCE
The Defendant, Byron Prior, admits to the statements of the plaintiff,

William Matthews in the paragraphs numbered one (1), two (2) and seven
(7) of his claim.
Defendant, Byron David Prior (Prior) and his friend David Raymond Amos
(Amos) With respect to this claim for damages by a Member of
Parliament, have no understanding how the Supreme Court of Newfoundland
and Labrador can legally proceed with this civil matter until the
Attorney General Thomas Marshall (Marshall) and the Premier Danny
Williams (Williams) answer the Defendant's and Amos' criminal
allegations proven to them in September of 2004. The Defendant has the
right to know the results of any of the Attorney General's
investigations of his concerns about Public Corruption before any
proceedings in this matter. Furthermore Amos' as a candidate for a
seat in Parliament in the last election certainly deserves an answer
from the Arar Commission. That Commission has ignored him and allowed
him to be illegally imprisoned in the United States of America (USA)
long after it was made irrefutably aware of his supporting evidence to
Mr. Arar's matters. Every Member of the 37th and the 38th Parliament
has been made well aware of the facts of this matter by the Defendant
and Amos for over one year byway of email if not hard copy in the mail
or personal service. The Defendant and Amos are just members of the
Public but they demand that those in Public Service uphold the Public
Trust and expose Public Corruption.
The Defendant further states that hard copy of much evidence of many
crimes practiced against the Defendant and Amos were given to Williams
by the Defendant on September 9th, 2004 and to Marshall by the
Lieutenant Governor Edward Moxon Roberts (Roberts) on September 10th.
On September 11th, the Governor General of Canada Adrienne Clarkson
(Clarkson) affirmed to Amos that he had taken the appropriate steps and
properly contacted all authorities having jurisdiction over his and the
Defendant's concerns about criminal actions. In support thereof
Defendant states the Deputy Prime Minister Anne McLellan (McLellan) of
the 37th Parliament had directed Amos to do so in December of 2003 and
the Defendant was directed to do so by the Minister of Justice Irwin
Cotler of the 38th Parliament in July of 2004. Both aforesaid persons
are members of the same Liberal caucus as the Plaintiff now seated on a
backbench in Parliament.
The Defendant further states that former law firm of Williams had
successfully defended him in a criminal trial against other false
allegations and charges of criminal acts in 1998. At that time law firm
Williams was completely informed by the Defendant of the sexual abuse
of his family. The Defendant has no doubt Williams used that knowledge
to become the powerful person of his political party he is today rather
than assisting his client, the Defendant in attempting to up hold the
law and see that criminals with other politically powerful positions be
properly prosecuted.
The Defendant further states that whereas this claim of much
embarrassment of the Plaintiff as a Member of Parliament, he feels no
pity towards a man that had practiced sexual abuse against his family
and was never punished.
The Defendant clearly states in his web site (Site) and now in this
document signed in his own hand that every word he has published is the
truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help him his God.
The Defendant further states that whereas this claim by the Plaintiff
against him comes about byway the words he legally published in his web
site ("Site") published in the USA under the First Amendment its
Constitutional pursuant to the freedom of speech and the freedom of the
press, the onus is upon the Plaintiff to prove without any reasonable
doubt that the Defendant's allegations are false. The defendant is
well prepared to argue that every word he has ever said or written
about the Plaintiff is true and he is willing to call many witnesses to
support the true facts of this matter.
The Defendant further states as he does within his Site that the
quickest way for the Plaintiff to prove one of the allegations false
without burdening the court would be a few blood tests to prove he is
not the father of the person named Aaron whom he chooses to mention
within paragraph three (3) his own statement of claim. That is a very
small task for a Member of Parliament to do in order to help protect
his reputation and save himself from a lot of further embarrassment.
The Defendant further states that he does in fact welcome this claim
against him. Plaintiff has finally given the Defendant an opportunity
to see justice served upon the plaintiff and his cohorts after over
forty years of seeking it for over fifty years of much abuse. Hopefully
this will be done byway of this answer and a very justifiable
counterclaim that should not be easily dismissed. It is quite honestly
the only way a man on welfare can make a legitimate complaint against
some of wealthiest and most corrupt persons in Canada.
The Defendant further states whereas the Plaintiff complains that the
published words of the Defendant can be found on the Internet, other
web sites and within many emails etc, the Plaintiff should complain all
the other persons that support the Defendant allegations as well.
Otherwise this malicious claim is fruitless to stop the justifiable
embarrassment of the Plaintiff and his lawyers.
The Defendant further states if the claim against a layman on welfare
were to be won by the legal trickery of a malevolent wealthy law firm
it would merely support all what the Defendant has published is true.
If the Plaintiff truly wishes to protect his reputation in a legal
fashion he must prove with witnesses and evidence in front of a jury
that all the allegations of the Defendant are false. The Plaintiff
merely claiming falsehoods does not prove the allegations untrue.
The Defendant further states that the Plaintiff makes mention of many
emails in his statement of claim paragraphs numbered five (5) and six
(6) containing the Defendant's published work. The Defendant states
that one of the persons to send thousands of emails in support of the
Defendant and his allegations is his friend Amos. The defendant points
out the fact that Amos had sent emails containing the entire text of
the Defendant's Site to every Member of the 37th Parliament before he
came to Canada to run for a Seat in the June Election of the 38th
Parliament. One of the persons to respond to Amos' emails was an
assistant of McLellan as the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of
Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness on March 16th 2004. That
person sent back the entire text of the Site the Plaintiff finds so
offensive. The Plaintiff should name McLellan as a defendant.
The Defendant further states that Amos would welcome the opportunity to
be joined into this matter as a defendant and argue the lawyers he has
already crossed paths with his own matters and the Defendant's during
the time he was in Canada running for a seat in Parliament. If any
Member of Parliament including the Plaintiff had acted ethically one
year ago. Amos would not have been imprisoned to sleep on a cement slab
in the Physc Ward of a Downtown Boston Jail while being illegally held
against his will under the false charges of "other" until the Yankees
could think of something to charge him with. Furthermore the statement
of claim of the Plaintiff would not exist and the Defendant would not
be still suffering today from more abuse by the Judicial System.
The Defendant further states that this answer and many other documents
etc. involving the governments of Canada and several Provinces
including Newfoundland will be used in defence of Amos' freedom
during the course of his pending Criminal Trial before a jury of his
peers in the USA. However this answer in this civil matter is no less
important for the Defendant because the justice system of his own
province has failed to uphold the law with regards to the crimes
practiced against him for over forty years.
The Defendant states in defence of Plaintiff's claim in paragraph
numbered three (3) that the lawyer Stephen J. May ("May") of the law
firm of Patterson Palmer acting for the Plaintiff, the benefit of his
own law firm and many others maliciously edited many words from the
very first statement in the Defendant's Site This is a very
fraudulent attempt by a lawyer to exclude the names of many other
parties who should be plaintiffs as well if in fact the Plaintiff's
claims were valid. For the sake of brevity demanded by the rules of
this court the defendant offers only the first statement in the Site
because that is where his edited words were gleaned from in the
plaintiff's third statement of his claim. The first words of the Site
in their entirety are as follows:
Canadian Corruption Sexual Abuse & Political & Legal Conspiracy.
RCMP Incompetence & Cover up. Priors Of Grand Bank NFLD Canada
How do I get a corrupt legal system to investigate, charge and convict

itself? If T. Alex Hickman, Justice Minister, 1966 to 1979 also Health
Minister 1968 to 1969 and Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of
Newfoundland 1979 to 2000, 34 YEARS OF COMPLETE LEGAL SYSTEMS CONTROL,
at 41 years of age, rapes and impregnates your younger sister Susan, at
12 years old, what would you do? Liberal MP Bill Matthews & his
friends, raped the same child repeatedly, for more than 3 Yrs. At 14
,she had a second baby, Aaron, she said she was 80% sure he is Matthews
son. A third baby, Harriett, at 18 & 3 miscarriages also, by this time,
what abuse of a child. Matthews & his lawyer, Ed Roberts, pressured me
to sign papers, saying Matthews had nothing to do with my family & I
imagined it all. NOT SO. I have copies of their letters. 2 weeks after
I signed these papers, MR ED, THE HORSE'S ASS, ROBERTS was made LT.
Governor of NFLD. & LAB. by MR JEAN, THE JACK ASS, CHRETIEN, soon to be
known as Canada's most CORRUPT Prime Minister After the Justice
Minister, Rapes & Impregnates a 12 Yr. old child, in a small town &
everyone knows, who will stop or charge anyone else, for Raping &
abusing that same child?? PAUL MARTIN, IS THIS FEDERAL ENOUGH FOR YOU
OR MUST I NAME MORE LAWYERS & JUDGES?? DO SOMETHING NOW or I will be
forced to name many more, RESPECTABLE NEWFOUNDLANDERS, many names you
won't like to read yourself. I am willing to take any tests and answer
all questions regarding my entire life. All they have to do is take one
blood test. It's time for them to stop manipulating our legal system
and face the truth, which I have be telling anyone else who would
listen, all of my life.I didn't just awake one morning and decide to
accuse the most powerful and most corrupt legal animal in this
province. I have had, no childhood, no education, no family, no
hometown, no self- esteem or self-respect and no past, present or
future as a contributing person. By the time I was 14 years old I was
responsible for 9 younger children, all of us abused and molested while
our hometown either joined in, bothered us about our situation, or
looked the other way and said we were all trouble.........
The Defendant altered the above statement published within the Site in
October of 2004 upon taking the advice of Amos after he had been
released for jail on bail. Amos advised the Defendant take back his
promise to the Plaintiff's lawyer Roberts years ago and tell all that
he knew to be true about all things as soon as possible for their own
protection and the benefit of all Canadians.
The Defendant further states that one of the aforesaid named parties in
his published Site Roberts is a former partner of the law firm
Patterson Palmer. In 2002 acting on behalf of the Plaintiff with the
assistance of the law firm of Patterson Palmer. Roberts, the well-known
and powerful political lawyer had maliciously threatened to sue the
unemployed Defendant and his family if his client's name was ever
mentioned in the Defendant's Site as it existed at that time.
The Defendant further states that it was not the Defendant's fault
that the Plaintiff's guilty conscience about his own sexual abuse of
children had compelled him to hire lawyers to cover up his crimes.
However the defendant buckled under Roberts' pressure and signed a
document promising never to mention the Plaintiff within the Site;
The Defendant further states that at that time in of his encounter with
Roberts in 2002 and until October of 2004 the Defendant was seeking
justice for the sexual abuse of his family by T. Alex Hickman
(Hickman), the former Minister of Justice and Chief Justice of the
Supreme Court. That fact was plainly stated for the world to view from
the very beginning of the Defendant's first published web site. Not
once over the years did Hickman openly refute the Plaintiff allegations
but he did indeed send many of his cohorts employed within law
enforcement and others to harass the Defendant.
The Defendant further states that within mere months of the
Defendant's signature on the documents demanded by Roberts he was
appointed the 11th Lieutenant Governor of Newfoundland and Labrador.
The defendant has no doubt whatsoever it was a political reward to
Roberts for protecting the false integrity of a Member of Parliament
with a very guilty conscience within Jean Chr�tien's scandalous
government. The fact that May employs the phrase "inter alia" which
means "among other things" does not indeed negate the fact that he is a
deliberate conspirator in a scheme to cover up Public Corruption
assisted and practiced by members of his own law firm of Patterson and
Palmer.. The Defendant demands to argue all of his published words not
just the words a malicious lawyer has chosen to take out of context to
suit his own ends. Justice would not be served again.
The Defendant further states that the following words found within his
published Site were also edited by May within the Plaintiff's fourth
(4) paragraph of his claim for the same aforesaid reasons stated in
paragraph number two (2) of this defence. The complete context of the
Defendant's words are as follows:
To Whom It May Concern:
July 24, 2001
My name is Byron Prior. I'm the oldest living of these 12 children. I
not only had to livethrough my abuse but, watch as the rest of my
sisters and brother were abused and raped. Three of my sisters raped, 1
by a grandfather at the age of 4, a second raped by T. Alex Hickman,
Justice Minister, at age 12 & Bill Matthews & friends from 13 on. A
third sister raped by a young man in our home town. The legal system
are onlyconcerned with keeping all this under cover and protect
themselves. Please people, if you have a heart, walk one day in my
shoes and tell me you would just forget because these bureaucrats say
so. I have copies of my full statement on all the details of what
happened, which I gave the R.C.M.P. on March 9, 1998, 52.5 hours at
their office. I will send it to anyone who will send me an E-mail
address. I will never forget the abuse, shame, and persecution to this
day, from the animals who did this to my family.
Sincerely,
Byron Prior
The Plaintiff should have joined as plaintiffs T. Alex Hickman, Edward

M. Roberts, Jean Chretien and Paul Martin the persons first mentioned
in the Site and numerous others including many members of the RCMP and
the justice system named throughout the remainder of the Site pursuant
to Rule 7.02 (2) which states as follows: Subject to the provisions of
any statute and unless the Court otherwise orders, a plaintiff, who
claims any relief that any other person is entitled to jointly with the
plaintiff, shall join all persons so entitled as parties to the
proceeding, and any of them who do not consent to be joined as a
plaintiff shall be made a defendant. The fact that the lawyer May
carefully edited the defendant's published work in the plaintiff's
statement of claim does not negate the fact that many parties are named
within the Defendant's Site.
The Defendant further states in answer to the Plaintiff's statement
of claim paragraph six (6) that denies his allegations of the criminal
actions made on his published Site against the Plaintiff and many
others are false. The defendant clearly states that all of his
allegations made against all parties mentioned within the Site are
absolutely true and he has sworn to the truth of some of the stated
allegations the Courts of Newfoundland in the past. The text of one of
his statements to the RCMP can be found on the published Site. The
Plaintiff desires the Freedom of Speech and the Freedom of the Press in
another country to be ignored in order to save himself from
embarrassment from his own wrongful acts for which he has never been
prosecuted and punished because of his association with T. Alex
Hickman, the former Minister of Justice an Chief Justice of the Supreme
Court of Newfoundland and Labrador.
The Defendant clearly states that the Plaintiff, Bill Matthews and his
cohorts living in Grand Bank many years ago used against the Minister
of Justice at the time, their knowledge of the sexual abuse of the
minor children of the Prior family by T. Alex Hickman's in order not
to be prosecuted for their own many crimes including their own sexual
abuse of the same family. The Plaintiff has continued to prosper ever
since that time because of crime not integrity. The Defendant will not
take back one word of his truthful publications in the USA. The
defendant prays to the court for his right to a jury trial in his own
native land in accordance with all the rules of the Supreme Court in
order to call many witnesses in support of his defence to insure that
the truth about many criminal acts become widely known in order that
all the perpetrators including the Plaintiff, William Matthews and the
Former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador,
T.Alex Hickman may be finally prosecuted for the sexual abuse of his
family and himself. The Defendant prays that the crimes against his
family will never be forgotten, never repeated upon anyone and never
covered up by any Judicial System ever again.
In closing the Defendant, Byron Prior sincerely believes that the
conspiracy by so many highly placed public officials over the past
forty years to cover-up the crimes of others warrants an investigation
by a Royal Commission immediately. .
DATED at Conception Bay South Newfoundland and Labrador this 21st day
of January, 2005.
Byron
Prior
Reader's Crescent,
Conception Bay, NL A1W 5B4
The
Defendant
TO: Stephen J. May
PATTERSON PALMER
Suite 1000, Scotia Centre
235 Water Street
P.O. Box 610
St. John's, NL. A1C 5L3
Solicitors for the plaintiff
2005 01 T 0010

TRAIL DIVISION
BETWEEN WILLIAM MATTHEWS PLAINTIFF
and
BYRON PRIOR
DEFENDANT
AND BETWEEN BYRON PRIOR

PLAINTIFF
and
WILLIAM MATTHEWS
T. ALEX HICKMAN
THOMAS MARSHALL
DANNY WILLIAMS
EDWARD M. ROBERTS
JOHN CROSBIE
PATTERSON PALMER
DEFENDANTS
COUNTERCLAIM
The Plaintiff, Byron Prior was born and raised Grand Bank Newfoundland.
He is an out of work former employee of the offshore oil exploration
industry who is now on social assistance. He has been unable to find
employment in the area of his expertise because his outspokenness in
the 1980's about oil industry matters that caused Crosbie Offshore
Services to be investigated for its wrongful acts. The aforesaid
company was then controlled by Andrew Crosbie, brother to John Crosbie
a former Minister of Justice of Canada
The Defendant, John Crosbie, is now a partner in the law firm of
Patterson Palmer. He was served much evidence of many crimes including
the crimes practiced against the Plaintiff byway of his partner,
Gregory Byrne a former Minister of Justice of New Brunswick in
Fredericton N.B. on August 24th, 2004. This was done by personal
service by David Raymond Amos (Amos) a friend of the Plaintiff.
The Defendant, Edward M. Roberts was once a member the law firm of
Patterson Palmer who acted against the Plaintiff years ago on behalf of
the Defendant William Matthews. He knew the truth of the plaintiffs
allegations and did nothing to up hold the law in the pursuit of his
own gain. On September 8th, 2004, the Plaintiff made personal service
upon Edward Roberts as the Leutenant Governor of Newfoundland Hard
irrefutable evidence proving the crimes that concern his friend David
Amos on the same day that Amos was having a lawyer file the same
documents attached to his affidavit in defence of a friend unjustly
charged with criminal behavior in a New Brunswick Provincial Court in
Sussex NB. Roberts continued to stay the course of his deceit and
merely passed the evidence on the Defendant, Thomas Marshall the
Attorney General of Newfoundland and Labrador who has done nothing
whatsoever to uphold the law. Marshall has refused to answer or return
one phone call or email in order answer or ask one question about the
allegations of crime by the plaintiff and his friend Amos.
The Plaintiff further states the Defendant, William Matthews was born
and raised Grand Bank Newfoundland. on July 22, 1947. He attended
Memorial University and in 1969 he earned a B.P.E., B.Ed. He was first
elected to the Newfoundland and Labrador Legislature in 1982 as the MHA
for the Grand Bank District. He was re-elected in 1985 and was
appointed Minister of Culture, Recreation and Youth. In 1988, Mr.
Matthews was appointed Minister of Career Development & Advanced
Studies. In 1989, Mr. Matthews was re-elected to the Newfoundland and
Labrador Legislature and was appointed Finance Critic. From 1990 to
1995, he served as Fisheries Critic, and in 1991 was appointed as
Opposition House Leader. In 1993, Mr. Matthews was again elected to the
Legislature and was re-appointed House Leader and Fisheries Critic. On
June 2, 1997, he was elected as the Member of Parliament for
Burin-St.George's. the Defendant did serve as Vice-Chair of the
Standing Committees on Fisheries & Oceans. On Sept 1st, 2000, he was
appointed Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Queen's
Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs. The
defendant was re-elected November 27, 2000 as the Member of Parliament
for Burin-St. George's and re-appointed September 1, 2001 as the
Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Queen's Privy Council
for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs. The Defendant was
reelected on June 28th, 2005 but is now a backbencher in the Liberal
caucus of 38th Parliament of Canada still representing the constituency
of Random-Burin-St. George's having apparently fallen out of favor
with Paul Martin's minority government.
The Plaintiff further states he has no doubt that his actions are part
of the reason for the Defendant's loss of Stature within the Liberal
Caucus and the cause of his stated embarrassment in paragraph number
six (6) of his statement of claim.
The Plaintiff further states the Defendant, T. Alex Hickman was born
and raised Grand Bank Newfoundland. The Plaintiff whose mother was a
whore with Hickman as a client has known him since childhood. The
Plaintiff witnessed the fact that Hickman sexual abused his younger
sibling at 12 years old on the night of his first political win in
1966. Hickman and his associate John Crosbie rose to positions of great
power and wealth beginning under the corrupt leadership of Joey
Smallwood before turning coat on the Liberal party and climbing even
higher on the political totem pole of Public Corruption. Hickman
finally retired as the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of
Newfoundland and was later awarded the Order of Canada with the
courthouse in Grand Bank now bearing his wicked name.
The Plaintiff has never made any secret of the fact that he hated and
despised the Defendants Matthews and Hickman ever since he was a child
chucking rocks in the street at Matthews' big green fifties Chrysler
as he sped away to sexually abuse another one of the Plaintiff's
underage siblings. Both the Plaintiff and Matthews knew that that he
would never be punished because of what everybody in Grand Bank never
of the sexual misdeeds of Hickman. The Plaintiff is grateful for the
invention of the World Wide Web in his lifetime in order that he may
tell all who wish to read of it what he knows to be true in
Newfoundland. Now the Plaintiff can hurl simple truths far and wide at
the defendants done the Internet highway. He will not stop telling the
world the truth because the defendant, William Matthews feels
embarrassed and justifiably hated and despised by many others. The
Plaintiff is proud of his work legally published in another country so
that the crooks in his home Province of Newfoundland can no longer keep
their dirty secrets to themselves.
Plaintiff was denied legal aid in this matter by the government lawyer,
John Duggan for no stated reason that the Plaintiff can find within the
Legal Aid Act. However the Plaintiff is well aware that he will never
receive any assistance from law enforcement or the judicial system
because of the cover up the sexual abuse of his family when he was a
child by T. Alex Hickman, the former Minister of Justice and the Chief
Justice of the Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador.
The Plaintiff further states that when his friend Amos heard that the
Province was unwilling to offer legal to him or even look at the
supporting evidence from Amos they knew for certain all government
employees in Newfoundland were acting against the Plaintiff under
orders from the Premier Danny Williams. Amos did the best he could to
help compose the Plaintiff's answer and countercomplaint within the
time allowed by the rules of this court.
The Plaintiff further states that Amos also went one step further to
make certain their suspicion of the malice of Danny Williams was true.
On January 20th, 2005, Amos called Danny Williams' office personally
and asked why he had not responded to the identical letter and
materials Roberts, Crosbie and the Newfoundland Law Society had
received. The Plaintiff had served it upon his office on September 9th
and the receipt is signed by one of his assistants. The aforesaid
material also included a copy of a police surveillance tape numbered
139 recorded in the USA of the mob. It letter certainly warranted a
valid answer for someone in law enforcement. However later in the day
another one of Danny Williams' assistants called Amos back and denied
any knowledge of anything. That man's words affirmed what the
plaintiff and his friend already knew and that is almost everyone
employed within the justice system is willing to be a liar and support
Public Corruption for their own personal gain. People employed in the
Public Service of law enforcement only act ethically and do their job
if it politically correct to do so in order to keep their job. It truly
is just that simple and everybody knows it. The plaintiff and his
friend merely went to great lengths to prove it after the Justice
Systems of two countries had practiced many crimes against each of
them.
The true facts of this matter are stated as best the Plaintiff could in
his answer to William Matthews now a defendant in this Counterclaim.
For the sake of brevity for the court, the benefit of the Plaintiff and
the Public Trust, the Plaintiff, Byron prays the court to review his
answer filed at the same time as this counterclaim in a timely fashion
as per the rules of this court.
The Plaintiff is now prepared to reveal all that he knows to be true
about wrongful actions within the offshore oil exploration industry and
to be a supporting witness to the allegations of much Public Corruption
within Canada and the United States of America (USA) recently exposed
by Amos. The Plaintiff truly believes that is the reason he was served
the malicious claim against him by William Matthews at this time and
compelled to answer it on by January 21st, 2005 is because of the
actions of actions of Amos in the USA and his court ordered appearance
in Dorchester District Court in Boston Massachusetts on the very same
day. All of the above named defendants are involved in a cross border
conspiracy to cover-up many crimes.
The Plaintiff further states that he and his friend are well aware that
their knowledge and evidence of many crimes are a very serious and
legitimate threat to the false integrity of many persons employed to
protect the Public Interests of the people around the world. They have
no doubt whatsoever that their lives are in great danger. History has
proven many decent men acting as they have died for much less. However
history has also proven that if good men do nothing evil will prevail.
The Plaintiff and his friend have no choice but to proceed in their
efforts to expose Public Corruption because it is not in their nature
to quit. They also recognize the fact that as fathers they owe to their
children what their forefathers fought so hard in so many wars to
secure for them, Freedom within a Just Democracy.
The Plaintiff further states that the sincere actions of he and his
friend to make what they know of many crimes become common knowledge
has the entire corrupt Justice Systems of Canada and the USA greatly
concerned. If the two friends do prevail in revealing the truth to all
it will be to the detriment of many malevolent Global Corporations,
Bankers, Politicians, lawyers and the most importantly the Catholic
Church. There has been much ado in recent times about the affiliations
within such societies as Skull and Bones and the involvement Presidents
and Senators who attempt to appear to be on the opposite side of the
political fence. Politicians come and every four years or so. However
it is the puppet master that pulls the strings who always remains
behind the scene that is the one who is truly obscene. The Plaintiff,
Byron David Prior and his friend David Raymond Amos want the world to
know they truly believe their most evil foe is none other than
Count Peter-Hans Kolvenbach the Superior General of the Jesuits.
15. The Plaintiff therefore claims:
a. general damages to be
assessed;
b. aggravated, exemplary and/or punitive damages;

c. pre-judgment and post-judgment interest pursuant to the provisions
of
the Judgment Interest Act, R.S.N. 1990, c. J-2;
d. cost on a solicitor if one is found and own client basis;
e. such further relief deems to

be equitable and just in the circumstances.
of January, 2005.
Byron Prior
Reader's
Crescent,
Conception
Bay, NL A1W 5B4
The
Plaintiff
2005 01 T 0010
TRIAL DIVISION
BETWEEN:WILLIAM MATTHEWS
PLAINTIFF
AND: BYRON PRIOR

DEFENDANT

DEFENDANT/PLAINTIFFBY COUNTERCLAIM



AND: DANNY WILLIAMS


AND: JOHN CROSBIE

REQUEST FOR POSTPONEMENT
RE: An Amended Interlocutory Application of the Plaintiff to maintain

an Order of the Court restricting publication; to strike portions of
the Statement of Defence pursuant to Rule 14.24; and strike the
Counterclaim in it's entirety pursuant to Rules 11.02 and 14.24 and
ss. 93 and 94 of the Judicature Act, RSN 1990, c. J-4 as amended.
(Inter Partes)
The Defendant/Plaintiff by Counterclaim in this proceeding requests a

postponement before attempting to argue the above stated Application
served upon him on January 25, 2005. In support thereof he states as
follows:
The Defendant/Plaintiff by Counterclaim is a resident of Conception Bay

South who is a layman on welfare with a Grade Eleven GED who has yet to
secure legal assistance in his defence and counterclaim in this matter
and is ordered by the court to argue a very long and very complicated
memorandum of law within one day of being served.
The Plaintiff/Defendant by Counterclaim and Applicant is a resident of
Mount Pearl, Newfoundland and Labrador, and a Member of the 38th
Parliament of Canada who is represented in this action by the wealthy
and influential law firm of Patterson Palmer, which is also the Seventh
Defendant by Counterclaim.
The Defendant by Counterclaim, Patterson and Palmer had acted hastily
and maliciously in an "ex parte" fashion in order to protect its own
interests in this matter and later was compelled to amend the first
Interlocutory Application it had composed in order to correct errors
and cover up the justifiable existence of the other Defendant by
Counterclaim.
The past managing partner of the Seventh Defendant by counterclaim,
Stephen J. May (May) had caused the above stated documents to be served
upon the Defendant/Plaintiff by Counterclaim in an admitted untimely
fashion. May promised not to oppose this request for postponement
within a cover letter signed in his own hand one day before the
scheduled hearing, The text of May's letter states as follows:
Please find enclosed our further materials that now seek to
strike only portions of your Statement of Defence but still seeks to
strike the entire Counterclaim. Our Application also now seeks to refer
this proceeding to case management in order to address the service and
scheduling of any future Applications that may be brought in advance of
a Trial. As I advised previously, the Application is scheduled to be
heard by the Supreme Court at the Court House off Duckworth Street on
Wednesday, 26 January 2005 at 10:00 a.m. The enclosed Affidavit has not
been filed with the Court but I will seek leave to do so on Wednesday.
As weather prevented these documents from being served yesterday, we
will not oppose a request for a postponement to allow you further time
to prepare your position.
Signed by S, J. May
May declares to have served upon the Defendant/Plaintiff by
counterclaim his own sworn Affidavit in which he has admitted to the
prior contact between himself, his law firm and other named Defendants
by the counterclaim with the Defendant/Plaintiff by counterclaim and
David R. Amos a willing Joiner in this matter pursuant to Rule 7 02.
Whereas it appears that May does not wish to file his Affidavit in this
matter until the counterclaim has been stricken from the Public Record,
the Defendant/Plaintiff by counterclaim prays that the court allows May
to file his documents immediately and that his Affidavit and related
Exhibits be studied closely by the court before considering the
Defendant's latest untimely Application.
of January, 2005.
Byron Prior
Reader's Hill Crescent,
Conception Bay South, NL A1W

5B4
The Defendant/Plaintiff by
Counterclaim
TO: Stephen J. May
PATTERSON PALMER
Suite 1000, Scotia Centre
235 Water Street
P.O. Box 610
St. John's, NL. A1C 5L3
Seventh Defendant by Counterclaim and
Solicitors for the Plaintiff/Defendant by Counterclaim
2005 01 T 0010
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF

NEWFOUNDLAND AND LABRADOR
TRIAL DIVISION
BETWEEN:WILLIAM MATTHEWS
PLAINTIFF
AND: BYRON PRIOR

DEFENDANT

DEFENDANT/PLAINTIFFBY COUNTERCLAIM



AND: DANNY WILLIAMS


AND: JOHN CROSBIE


SUMMARY OF CURRENT DOCUMENT Court File Number(s):2005 01 T 0010Date of

Filing of Document:25 January 2005Name of Filing Party or
Person:Stephen J. MayApplication to which Document being filed
relates:Amended Application of the Plaintiff/Defendant by Counterclaim
to maintain an Order restricting publication, to strike portions of the
Statement of Defence, strike the Counterclaim in it's entirety, and
to refer this proceeding to case management.Statement of purpose in
filing:To maintain an Order restricting publication, to strike portions
of the Statement of Defence, strike the Counterclaim in its entirety
and refer this proceeding to case management.
A F F I D A V I T
I, Stephen J. May, of the City of St. John's, in the Province of

Newfoundland and Labrador, Barrister and Solicitor, make oath and say
as follows:
THAT I am a Partner in the St. John's office of PATTERSON PALMER

solicitors for William Matthews, the Member of Parliament for
Random-Burin-St. George's in the Parliament of Canada.
THAT Mr. Matthews originally retained Mr. Edward Roberts, Q.C. on or
about 30 April 2002 after Mr. Byron Prior, the Defendant/Plaintiff by
Counterclaim, had made allegations against Mr. Matthews in a
publication called "My Inheritance - The truth - Not Fiction: A Town
with a Secret". In that publication, the allegation was made that Mr.
Matthews had had sex with a girl who had been prostituted by her
mother. That girl was alleged to have been Mr. Prior's sister.
THAT upon being retained, Mr. Edward Roberts wrote a letter to Mr.
Prior. That letter to Mr. Prior is attached as Exhibit "1" to my
Affidavit.
THAT subsequent to Mr. Roberts' letter to Mr. Prior, Mr. Roberts

received a 1 May 2002 e-mail from Mr. Prior. That e-mail is attached as
Exhibit "2".
THAT subsequent to Mr. Roberts receipt of the e-mail, Mr. Prior swore
an Affidavit acknowledging that what had been said in that publication
was false. That Affidavit is attached as Exhibit "3" to my Affidavit.
Following Mr. Roberts' receipt of that Affidavit, Mr. Matthews
advised that he was satisfied not to pursue the matter any further and
our firm closed our file.
THAT on or about 25 October 2004, I was retained by Mr. Matthews

following his gaining knowledge that a web site, made a series of
allegations against him relating to my having sex with a girl of
approximately 12 years old through to an approximate age of 15 years
old. It also accused him of being a father of one of her children and
accused him of having raped that girl. Upon checking the web site I saw
that Byron Prior, the Defendant, had been identified as the author of
the material on the site.
THAT Mr. Matthews instructed me to write Mr. Prior, to remind him of

the fact that the allegations had been admitted to being false through
a 16 May 2002 Affidavit to advise him of Mr. Matthews' intentions to
commence legal proceedings if the comments were not removed from the
web site. A copy of my letter to Mr. Prior is attached as Exhibit "4"
to this Affidavit.
THAT I attach as Exhibit "5" a transcript from a 5 November 2004

voicemail left by David Amos, identified in the voicemail as a friend
of Mr. Prior.
THAT I attach as Exhibit "6" a portion of a 6 November 2004 e-mail from

Mr. Amos.
THAT until I received his voicemail and e-mail, I had never heard of
Mr. Amos.
THAT Mr. Amos has continued to send me e-mail since his 5 November
e-mail. Including his 6 November 2004 e-mail, I have received a total
of 15 e-mails as of 23 January 2005. All do not address Mr. Matthews'
claim or my involvement as Mr. Matthews' solicitor. I attach as
Exhibit "7" a portion of a 12 January 2005 e-mail that Mr. Amos sent to
me but originally came to my attention through Ms. Lois Skanes whose
firm had received a copy. This e-mail followed the service of the
Statement of Claim on 11 January 2005 on Mr. Prior. I also attach as
Exhibit "8" a copy of a 19 January 2005 e-mail from Mr. Amos.
THAT I attach as Exhibit "9" a copy of a 22 November 2004 letter

addressed to me from Edward Roberts, the Lieutenant Governor of
Newfoundland and Labrador covering a 2 September 2004 letter from Mr.
Amos addressed to John Crosbie, Edward Roberts, in his capacity as
Lieutenant Governor, Danny Williams, in his capacity as Premier of
Newfoundland and Labrador, and Brian F. Furey, President of the Law
Society of Newfoundland and Labrador. I requested a copy of this letter
from Government House after asking Mr. Roberts if he had received any
correspondence from Mr. Amos during his previous representation of Mr.
Matthews. He advised me that he received a letter since becoming
Lieutenant Governor, portions of which involved his representation of
Mr. Matthews. Mr. Roberts' letter also covered his reply to Mr. Amos.
THAT I attach as Exhibit "10" an e-mail from Mr. Amos received on

Sunday, 23 January 2005.
THAT I swear this Affidavit in support of the Application to strike Mr.

Prior's counterclaim.
SWORN to before me at
St. John's, Province of Newfoundland
and Labrador this 24th day of
January, 2005.
Signed by Della Hart STEPHEN J. MAY Signature
STAMP
DELLA HART
A Commissioner for Oaths in and for
the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.
My commission expires on December 31, 2009.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term'
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Celebrate Yahoo!'s 10th Birthday!
Yahoo! Netrospective: 100 Moments of the Web
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?

Dirty Dicky Dean

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Dirty Dicky Dean

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

David Amos <motomaniac_02186@yahoo.

David Amos <motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com> wrote:

Here is their number in case ya didn't know. Their associates in the UN

H.E. Ernesto A. Sent� Darias

388 Main St.,

Ottawa, ON, K1S 1E3

Tel 613 563-0141

Fax 613 563-0068

Mr. O'Brien had referred to a female colleague, Liberal MP Sarmite

The government is doing everything it can to stay in office, including

After jumping ship from the federal Liberals, Edmonton-Beaumont MP

"Read my lips. I intend to remain an Independent on the Liberal side of

Kilgour also said he wouldn't consider rejoining the Liberals before

Nor would he actually be very welcome in the Conservative circles in

With explosive testimony from the Gomery inquiry expected to lead to

But he stressed the deal-breaker was Canada's failure to act to help

In the wake of Kilgour's departure from caucus Wednesday, Martin said

David Amos <motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com> wrote:

Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 10:13:07 -0700 (PDT)

David Amos <motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com> wrote:

David Amos <motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com> wrote:

David Amos <motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com> wrote:

Thus far everything has gone as I have predicted. However

I waited for the results of the budget vote to write my wife's

Good bye Yankees. I do not wish you a Good Day.

"OTTAWA (Reuters) - Canada's minority Liberal government won a crucial

But Conservative leader Stephen Harper, who says Canadians have no

Legislators approved the budget by 132-73. The government had declared

David Amos <motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com> wrote:

Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2005 14:12:57 -0800 (PST)

David Amos <motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com> wrote:

David Amos <motomaniac_02186@hotmail.com> wrote:

Subject: Fw: Governor M. Jodi Rell I just callel your office

----- Original Message -----

November 14, 2003

342 Warren St,

Phone 617 566-5253

I know you, Mr. Lasser, know your Kickham neighbors. You do

153 Alvin Ave.

Milton, MA. 02186

Conn. AG Sues Marsh & McLennan, ACE

Connecticut Attorney General Blumenthal Sues Broker Marsh & McLennan,

HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) -- Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal

May 29th, 2004

Thomas P. Puccio Brendan V. Sullivan Jr.

230 Park Avenue, Suite 301 725 Twelfth St., N.W.

I called and emailed both of your offices yesterday. Today

I do not know nor do I judge the actions of your clients,

153 Alvin Ave

Milton MA. 02186

Connecticut Attorney General

P.O. Box 120,

153 Alvin Ave.

John R. Cuti and

Hann M. Maazel Rebecca A. Monck and

545 Madison Avenue

Phone 212 856-9600

Keker & Van Nest LLP

Phone: 415 391-5400

Phone: 212 813-8859

Alix Biel, Edwin H. Nordlinger

Mark K. Schonfeld, Caren N. Pennington