"Since Feb 21, 2011 when the police entered my home, searched my home without a warrant, and seized my computers without a warrant through the criminal charge that I had uttered threats towards women in a published Mobbing Research article that is protected by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the Freedom of Expression, and expresses the possibility that a criminal harassment network or mob may have written his suicide note in attempts to hide the cause, their use of homelessness as a weapon;"
"Would you note that if I commit suicide today 89-12-06 it is not for economic reasons (for I have waited until I exhausted all my financial means, even refusing jobs) but for political reasons." - Marc Lepine suicide note
"The Crown prosecutor obtained an "unlawful" assessment order for non-criminal responsibility when I was released under conditions that would sanction the wrong doing of the Police, searching a home and seizing computers without a warrant. During this period of time that I try to defend myself from these allegations I'm assaulted by powerful radar from surrounding neighbors "you have to run". The criminal allegations of uttering threats can be used for communications interception, surrounding neighbors are using HSS Hypersonic Sound for criminal harassment and sleep deprivation which is now interpreted as being part of an investigation, the provocation linked to adrenaline and anger, high blood pressure, the angry response "the police are listening". I'm sleep deprived before court appearances and at the court house criminal harassment participants try to induce as much stress and adrenaline so that when I appear before a judge I have difficulties speaking. My Appeal for the "unlawful" assessment order for non-criminal responsibility linked to an abuse of process that would stop the proceedings ceased to exist according to a Superior Court Judge, Appeals and Motions do not cease to exist. The Crown who needs to justify the Police entering my home and seizing my computers without a warrant claims he does not need my computers and that there are no copies in front of a Judges and Superior Court Judge. The delays linked to "unlawful" orders and a Judge ordering a trial over my objections that the Crown did not ask for, the Crown prosecutor is supposed to ask for a trial, at a later time he can claim he didn't ask for the trial, is linked to the length in time for communications interception. This criminal harassment network and its participants claim that my attempts to defend myself in court and expose wrong doing, not writing and being silent etc, is "working", a threat to my disability income, my means of subsistence, and linked to their use of homelessness as a threat for several years."
"The Crown was made aware very early in the criminal proceedings that I was the creator and founder of the website called Psychological Harassment Information Association, a world leading website on psychological harassment, bullying, and mobbing."
Danny Hunt, My Experience with Criminal Allegations and Circumventing the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
I’m assaulted by powerful radar at my apartment in Laval, leave this apartment to take refuge at my parents’ home, and file a complaint in regards to a human rights defender being attacked by powerful radar in Canada to the UN High Commissioner. I’m told not all domestic resources have been exhausted, the complaint is rejected; (Security of the Person)
The day after I advertise my apartment for rent the Laval Police arrest me, the criminal allegations is uttering threats in a published Mobbing Research article that is protected by the Charter, The Freedom of Expression; (Freedom of Expression)
Through these allegations my home is searched without a warrant and my computers are seized without a warrant; (Unreasonable Search and Seizure)
The Laval Police ask, a demand, that I remain incarcerated for an evaluation, I have no criminal record, I have a disability, mental illness, and in 2003-2004 I was charged with criminal mischief after I was led to believe by a criminal harassment network that I had caused the death of a team mate when a minor;
I’m released with conditions and an assessment order before trial for non-criminal responsibility due to mental illness. The assessment order is “unlawful” according to Judge Pittfield of the Appeals court in R v Muscheke, interferes with the accused defense and discrimination according to the Supreme Court of Canada; (Equality, Discrimination)
The unlawful assessment order puts me on the defensive to the powerful radar assaults “you have to run”, several police attempts to intervene linked to powerful radar shielding/attenuation attempts, which would lead to incarceration for evaluation such as the first Laval Police demand. The risk of being found not criminally responsible due to mental illness following this intervention, incarceration, and evaluation for a crime I didn’t commit that would sanction the Police wrong doing, for claiming to be assaulted by powerful radar during this period time I try to defend myself from the allegations; (Security, Equality)
The Crown Prosecutor claims that no analysis will be done of the computers and a Motion for restitution of computers is granted, my computers are returned;
An Appeal that is linked to a Delay Extension Motion and an Abuse of Process Motion ceases to exist according to a Superior Court Judge, and she provides an explanation. The Appeal ceased to exist because the assessment order has expired, you cannot Appeal an expired assessment order, that is why your Appeal ceased to exist and that I don’t have it in front me. Without the Appeal the Delay Extension Motion is useless, it is barred, and the Abuse of Process that would stay the proceedings without the Appeal is Out of Jurisdiction, and barred too. For those who do not know, the criminal judicial system does not work this way, Appeals and Motions do not cease to exist; (Fair Trial, Criminal Proceedings)
The Crown prosecutor claims he wishes to renew his demand for an assessment for non-criminal responsibility before trial, which he has been told several times that he cannot do according to the Supreme Court of Canada R v Swain, a judge orders a trial that the Crown Prosecutor is supposed to ask for over my objections. At a later time the Crown prosecutor can claim he did not ask for the trial along with the delays; (Fair Trial, Criminal Proceedings)
I present a professionally written Application for Destruction of any existing copies for the seizure of computers without a warrant, computers the prosecutor claims not to need and no copies either. The Crown Prosecutor has to eventually present a justification for the Police entering my home without a warrant and seizing my computers without a warrant, he has not yet done so, and claims not have copies. The conclusion of the Application is simple to understand, an order for any existing copies to be destroyed. The Crown prosecutor first told me I could not prove the Police have copies, in Court he claims again that there are no copies so this order for any existing copies to be destroyed cannot be given, the Judge agrees rejects the Application; (Privacy and Unreasonable Search and Seizure)
The crown prosecutor claims again at the Superior Court that there are no copies;
A Judge issuing an order for the destruction of any existing computer copies would mean that any data analysis during the delays by the Laval Police would be illegal, a crime and criminal proceedings. Without the order for destruction if the Crown prosecutor is “mistaken”, I would have to sue him for damages, a civil lawsuit; (Privacy, Unreasonable Search and Seizure)
The allegations of uttering threats can be used for communications interception, during this period of time criminal harassment participants use HSS Hypersonic Sound technology for sleep deprivation before court appearances and provocation linked to adrenaline, anger, high blood pressure, and this is now interpreted as being part of an investigation “the police are listening” to the angry responses to the provocation; (Security of Person)
The delays, a Judge asking for a trial instead of the Crown Prosecutor, is linked to the length of time of possible communications interception; (Privacy, Communications Interception); the Crown Prosecutor has not justified the search and seizure of computers and has to do so, and claims not to need them or have any copies, so even though he claims that there are no copies the length of time can also be linked to data analysis and planning to benefit in the criminal proceedings; (Privacy, Unreasonable Search and Seizure)