Court Continues its Obstruction of PS Knight Defence
June 20th, 2021
Tomorrow, Monday June 21, is the start of a five-day Trial in Ontario Provincial Court. Maybe. I mean, it might not happen at all. It’s a total mystery what will happen when Court opens in the morning. This will take some explaining.
In this Trial, the Canadian Standards Association (CSA / the Civil Service) is trying to punish me for, among other things, accurately reporting the activity of the Civil Service on our RestoreCSA site and for accurately reporting Civil Service conduct to the police.
But there’s a wee problem. I can’t file anything for the Trial. We’ve covered bits of this already (see HERE) but the runaround I’ve been getting has gotten worse since our last reporting. It looks deliberate.
Given the record of the Court on this file, (denying me the right to defend myself, denying me the right even to “speak” in Court, holding secret hearings to decide my fate, trying to put me in prison for complying with Court agreements, etc.) it seems that the Court doesn’t want me to file my defence.
Recall that my defence filing, known as a Trial Affidavit, was to be filed by May 21. Recall that the Court cancelled my filing account prior to the filing deadline, making it impossible to comply with the deadline, and that they deleted the defence documents already uploaded on that account.
Our filing efforts didn’t stop at our last reporting. On May 27, I wrote to the Ontario Civil Claim Online office thusly;
“I am trying to file re CV-15-005255809-0000 on the Portal and received this error; ‘We are unable to process your request at this time due to an account registration error’.”
Now, for clarity, this is a different filing portal than Caselines, the main filing portal. Yes, it’s odd, but Ontario Court mandates that defendants file the same documents in three places; with opposing counsel, with Caselines, and with the Civil Claim Online portal. All three are apparently needful for each filing.
Note that my account with Ontario Civil Claim Online was deleted also. As they put it, my account had “an account registration error.”
I notedly noted in my note that the Online system had a contact number to help with account issues but, amazingly, this number only works within Ontario. I’m not in Ontario, so cannot access the account administrator.
So, in my note, I asked them to “please urgently advise with instructions on how to file,“ either on their system directly or by email.
I received a warm, hugely personal response, as;
“Thank you for your message. We will read and consider it carefully.”
Ah. Alright then.
The Ontario Civil Claim Online team has been considering my inquiry carefully for nearly a month now, but there’s been no response from them.
Trying again, on June 3, at 12:41PM, I wrote to the Court, this time directly to the Court official managing the case as I happened to have his name from previous correspondence. The Court official responded fifteen minutes later, saying;
I did so, four minutes later.
To date, the Court has declined to respond to the inquiry.
So, by June 3 I had repeatedly inquired of the Court on filing my defences but had nothing to show for it. The Court was ignoring my inquiries, all of them. I was locked out of both Court filing systems.
The Civil Service of course, wasn’t locked out of anything. They could file all they liked and were making full use of this facility.
On June 9 at 12:08PM, the Civil Service filed an Objection to my Trial Affidavit.
Ok, just a moment. Recall that the Court hasn’t received my Trial Affidavit, only CSA has. Thus, the Civil Service is asking their colleagues in the Court system to strike parts of my filing without Court review.
Which parts? Well, the inconvenient parts, obviously.
The Civil Service wants the Court to strike all, or nearly all, of;
Defendant’s Trial Affidavit
Five Year Trial Brief
Affidavit of Gordon Knight July 25, 2017
Appendix H – The Case for Restoring CSA
Appendix J – Newspaper Articles
Appendix L – Freedom of Information Responses
Appendix M – Academic Article
Appendix R – Original correspondence of Gordon Knight
Appendix S – Original correspondence of Gordon Knight
Appendix T – Original correspondence of Gordon Knight
Appendix U – Original correspondence of Gordon Knight
Appendix W – Supplementary Factum of the Defendants
Appendix X – Supplementary Factum of the Defendants
That folks, is the bulk of my defence filing; that’s what they want to delete from the record. What’s left is the pablum of procedure; one’s name, one’s address, anodyne records -nothing remotely damaging to Civil Service interests.
Since the Court has deleted my Caselines filing account and since I’m likewise barred from the other Court portal, I cannot file an objection to their striking the bulk of my defences.
By the way, much of the Civil Service objection is nonsensical on the face of it. For instance, the Civil Service wants Appendix H struck because it’s excerpted from the RestoreCSA blog. The contents of this site are “inadmissible hearsay if relying on [sic] for truth of its contents.” Ok, but the RestoreCSA blog is the subject of this trial. How can the subject of the trial be inadmissible in the trial?
Anyway, on June 11 at 10:49AM, the Civil Service filed a whole bunch, a bucketload, of new documents for Trial. They did this eight days before the Trial was scheduled to begin.
Again, as I’m left without the right to file an objection, the Civil Service’ last minute documents are entered unopposed.
Then something unexpected happened. Remember Ms Theodora Apostolopoulos? She’s the Caselines Administrator responsible for deleting my account. Well, Ms Apostolopoulos emailed (or rather, her computer system sent a generic advisory) that;
“You have been given access to an electronic bundle on Caselines […] by Ms. [sic] Theodora Apostolopoulos.”
Hurrah! I’m in. Now I can file, right?
Whoa, let’s not assume too much. When I logged onto Caselines I found that I could indeed see the electronic bundle Ms Apostolopoulos referred to. That bundle was the Civil Service filings for the Trial. But there were no defence filings there. Indeed, the original defence filings which I had uploaded back in April were still missing from the system.
Also, try as I might, I couldn’t find a way to upload my Trial Affidavit. I was stuck.
So, I wrote to the Caselines Helpdesk that same day, somewhat frustratedly as follows;
“I am trying to file Defence documents for the CV-15-00526680-0000 litigation. Alas, the Upload instructions at the Help screen are not matching the actual Sections page. The original Caselines email is included at page bottom. Could you please advise how to upload documents in this context?
“Kindly note that this inquiry is time sensitive.
“This is what the Help screen shows;”
And then I posted screenshots of the file management screen depicted in the Helpdesk section of the portal, and of the actual file management screen on my account. The Helpdesk depiction shows upload buttons for file posting, whereas the screen on my account had no upload buttons at all.
As is becoming a pattern, the Court has not responded to my inquiry.
I appears that Ms Apostolopoulos did not give me access to file anything, only to read Civil Service filings. I was granted read-only access.
Adding salt to the wound, Katie Gautier, the Civil Service’ lead Counsel on this file, sent me a letter on that same day (yes, it was an action-packed day), very thoughtfully sharing that;
“Please be advised that further to the attached email from the Trial Coordinator, Theodorova Apostopoulos, your materials for the upcoming summary trial need to be uploaded on Caselines. Based on my review, it does not appear that your trial materials have been uploaded.”
Oh, and the “attached email” wasn’t attached, so I’ve no idea what Ms Apostopoulos wrote to Ms Gautier.
Then, at 1:10pm on that same day, the Civil Service uploaded their Trial Record document. I could read it but, of course, I couldn’t respond to it.
Then, at 3:26pm on that day (yes, the same day), the Civil Service filed a Letter to the Court requesting that the as-yet unidentified Judge in the case issue a Rule “exempting this matter from mandatory mediation and that this matter proceed to trial”.
The Civil Service was in technical breach of Court Rules on mediation but rather than bringing themselves into compliance they wanted their colleagues in the Court to just exempt them from the Rules they’d broken.
And I couldn’t reply to that either.
The next day, June 16 at 1:10pm, I received an automatic notification from Caselines that “a change has occurred in section A in case CANADIAN STANDARDS ASSOCIATION v. P.S. KNIGHT CO. LTD. et al.”
That was the Civil Service filing yet another last-minute document without my consent or ability to oppose it.
On June 18 at 3:14pm, the Civil Service filed a financial claim with the Court, demanding that their Court colleagues require that I pay $254,292.26 for their trouble in this case.
I couldn’t respond to that either but, let’s face it, what would be the point of filing a response in this slanted system?
Is this third-world enough for you? Is it? Well, there’s one more point to ponder, sort of a kicker to the thing….
The five-day Trial is scheduled to start tomorrow, on Monday morning. As of Sunday night however, Ms Apostopoulos has declined to advise what the start time will be. Or what the location will be. Or what the Zoom coordinates will be. Or who the Judge will be. Indeed, the last email from Ms Apostopoulos, sent to both parties on June 18, was that she “would advise” us of the particulars of the Trial sometime on June 21, presumably sometime in the morning, possibly before the Trial actually begins.
The Civil Service launched this case nearly six years ago. Yet they bombard with new filings the week before Trial, at the very last minute, while the Court itself can’t be bothered to advise a non-civil servant with the most basic information on the Trial they’ve been prepping for half a decade.
Only the Civil Service gets to file, gets to know what’s coming and to prepare for it. Mere ordinary people aren’t so lucky.
So, do we start the Show Trial tomorrow? No idea, but it’ll be an adventure finding out.