带你走进加拿大的司法世界，唐炜臻下星期一，星期二两天到多伦多市中心出庭指控政府司法迫害。
responding motion records ( volume one) 1
Responding Motion 9
Notice of Application of Production and Adduce Fresh Evidence 30
October 25, 2009 at the investors’ meeting Minutes 35
Investors’ collective Petition to OSC 37
Minutes of the OCF Investors’ Meeting of October 25, 2009 38
Mr. Tang and about 50 of his investors attended the meeting. 38
Letter to the Ontario Securities Commission of Nov. 13, 2009 44
ISSUES WITH OSC 50
Many issues were raised including whether: 50
1. OSC unreasonably freeze my trading account and cease my trading and stop my legal business and destroyed my defence in no time since march 18, 2009. 50
2. The evidence of the crown forensic accounting “expert” should not have been admitted as he was an investigators as opposed to an “ independent “ 51
3. There was a reasonable perception of bias and competent concerning the expert and incorrectly applied his own expertise to enhance the evidence; 51
4. The so-called senior investigator, Mr. Jeff Thomson, the questions are who is him and what background and expertise he has and what he believe or not believe cause me and damages to the case and investors. 51
5. Withholding evidence, there were 44 investors and interviews, only used those few witnesses against the accused, ignored the majority of supportive and positive evidence 51
6. Failed to apply proper standards in determining what constitute its quash-criminal charges and charge criminally 51
7. OSC abused my motion to lift Cease Trade order transcript from OSC Nov 13 2009 to find evidence against me, not to properly consider and make decision for my investors and business. 51
ISSUES WITH LEGAL AID ONTARIO 51
ISSUES WITH THE POLICE 52
ISSUES WITH USA SEC APPOINTED RECEIER, TOM TONG 56
US SEC APPOINTED RECEIER, TOM TONG used my investors name and interest to defraud our companies and investors over one million dollars. And hired Canadian Law firm 56
ISSUES OF CIVIL JUDGES OF SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE 56
Unofficial Transcript of Endorsement of Justice Pepall dated December 3, 2009 and Dec, 2010 56
Three sources of funds have been frozen. $950,000 US is held by receiver in the United States; $237,000 US is held by the law firm, Bennett Jones LLP, in Toronto; and $360,000 is frozen pursuant to OSC directions to Interactive Brokers. 56
Justice Pepall used new investors’ money to pay old investors and gave opportunity for investor representative counsel to stop me to retain counsel and interrupt my fair trial and stole our money. Where was and is my money to retain lawyer 57
Order of Justice Morawetz Appointing Representative Counsel: October 9, 2009 57
There was no respondent lawyer, Justice Morawetz single-handedly gave fraudulent investors representative counsel opportunity to steal money from investors. 57
ISSUES WITH THE CORRECTIONAL SERVICE OF CANADA 57
CSC overriding my security classification and high potential to integrate to the community 57
ISSUES WITH PAROLE BOARD OF CANADA 57
ISSUES WITH TORONTO DOMINION BANK 58
ADDITIONAL ISSUES 5
ORDER REQUESTED 6
FRUSTRATION of all the contracts, not only TD Bank, 6
ISSUES WITH THE PER-TRIAL JUDGE, JUSTICE IAN NORDHEIMER 6
Transcript of Court proceedings to argue before Justice Nordheimer to release personal funds to retain counsel on June 29, 2011 6
Court looks to release OSC frozen $200,000 personal funds to retain counsel on July 12, 2011 6
Transcript of Court proceedings to argue before Justice Nordheimer to release personal funds frozen by OSC to retain counsel August 15 , 2011 25
And when my (the judge) first inquiry at the pretrial of Mr. Tang is, “ do you intend to continue to represent yourself in these proceedings?” I am told immediately that he is desirous of having counsel with respect to this matter 27
Transcript of Court proceedings of August 15, 2011 p. 13 27
Nordheimer J. Noticed that Mr. Tang’s right to use those funds to fulfill his constitutional rights to counsel and to make full answer and defence? 28
Body of law: Mareva injunctions 28
Transcript of Court proceedings to argue Rowbotham Application before Justice Nordheimer on September 23, 2011 30
Mr. Hutchison: one might ask that with respect to every single fraudster who walks in here and has legal aid. 30
Justice Nordheimer: They might. 30
BAIL VARIATION TO OBATAIN EMPLOYMENT AND RETAIN COUNSEL Before Justice Nordheimer on October 17, 2011 31
The Appellant talk to the Justice Nordheimer, Crown refused to talk and withdraw the charge before Justice Nordheimer July 12, 2012 40
ISSUES WITH COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO 40
Pre-charge Conference on October 26, 2012 41
THE COURT: ONE OF THEOTHER ASPECTS THAT CAME UP IN EVIDENCE VERY FREQUETLY, WAS Mr. Tang’s evidence that there is a group of investors that constituted a majority that wanted him to continue trading, and I think he put it into context of how they liked what I was doing and they wanted me to continue it”, and then even subsequently and after being charged, not to have the cease trade order lifted by a motion. I do intend to tell the jury consistent with Terrow (ph) that it’s no defence to the charge of fraud for the accused to say he didn’t intend to cause a loss or he believed that his actions would be subsequently ratified, so that that evidence about investors wanting to have and continue trading does not constitute ratification or defence of no intent . 61
MANY ISSUES WITH THE TRIAL JUDGE 65
The trial 65
Weizhen Tang 25 reasons to stop the extension of OSC cease order was admitted as evidence 65
Admission of evidence 68
Judicial interference by the trial judge 68
Apprehensions of bias 68
The jury charge was misleading to the jury 68
In some instance, the abuse will be sufficiently serious to deprive the court of jurisdiction. 68
In these circumstances it may be possible to apply to the court of appeal for an order of prohibition. 68
Alternatively, in some instance, the accused may be able to apply for a stay of proceedings seeking to invoke the court ‘ inherent power to control the process. 68
As a general rule, where the matter is sufficiently grave that it erodes the entire process, the proper remedy is to quash all of the findings of guilt. 69
Reversable Errors in the Trial Judges’ Charge to the Jury 75
If you’ve read any of the jury charge, it’s important to keep the words of King Solomon in mind:” The first speak sound right – until the cross- examination begins” ( Proverbs 18:17). In other words, when only one side of a case is heard, the evidence often seems convincing, yet when the whole story is in, the initial case often crumble. 75
1: Central Issue - Was the investors’ money put at risk? 75
Why is this important? 76
2: Closing Statement for defence Judge A. O’marra declined to let both Amicus and Mr. Tang to make open and closing submissions to the jury- this was an error 78
3: Nordheimer J. erred in refusing to appoint counsel for the applicant pursuant to my R. v. Tang Rowbotham application; 78
4: In the charge to the jury, the trial judge stated that “…It is no defence to the charge of fraud for an accused to state that he did not intend to cause loss or that he believed that his actions would be subsequently ratified.” 81
Judicial Interfering for Quash the Conviction 83
Bias, malicious and vindictive: 83
Institutional bias and Individual Bias 84
Rosenberg J. A. Denies my reasonable bail and legal right and protection to appeal so I could not win my appeal and Rosenberg J. A. to secure 84
Merits of the proposed appeal based on the supplemental record or supplemental arguments not before Rosenberg J.A. submitted by court appointed pro bono duty counsel 88
More List of Global Appeal Grounds are 88
The Conduct of the Court and the Trial 91
The Defence Close Submissions and Address to the Jury 91
Why does Weizhen Tang insist that he is not guilty. 92
Tang Bias 94
Tang – Impecunious 95
Tang Bias 96
Petitions 97
Straight from Weizhen Tang 98
Issue with the sentence judge 100
SENTENCING PROCEEDINGS 101
The Rise and Fall of Weizhen Tang 101
SENTENCE HEARING- Cross-examination of Indigence and Unable to Pay\ 110
SENTENCE HEARING- Cross-examination of the wife of weizhen tang, lack of personal gain and family Suffering 129
NOTICE OF CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTIONS 143
The following are the material facts giving rise to the constitutional question: 143
The followings are the legal basis for constitutional questions: 144
REMEDIES 145
CONCLUSION 146
It is in everyone’s interest that the applicant has a counsel present his appeal and that is what the interest of justice requires here. 147
As a general rule, where the matter is sufficiently grave that it erodes the entire process, the proper remedy is to quash all of the findings of guilt. 148
Certiorari may be available in respect of a complete denial of nature justice and the right to call a witness. 148
A finding of bias in respect of the inferior court will result in a denial of nature justice and give rise to an order of prohibition; an abuse of process may well be seen as a violation of principle of natural justice. 148
NOTICE OF APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL 149
TAKE NOTICE 149
AND FURTHER TAKE NOTICE 150
AND FURTHER TAKE NOTICE 150
MEMORANDUM OF ARGUMENT 152
PART I : STATEMENT OF THE CASE 152
PART III: ADDITIONAL ISSUES 162
TABLES OF AUTHORITIES 183
|
狗仔卡
发表于 2016-4-5 10:32:36
收藏
顶
踩
提升卡
置顶卡
沉默卡
喧嚣卡
变色卡
显身卡
楼主
发表于 2017-3-4 12:29:30
