The appeal is set for the November 22nd 2021 assize. I am hoping for November 23rd so that I can physically get to Court on public transport.
OVERVIEW
The Crown accused Mr Holsworth of failing to have income tax returns at the CRA office which does not comply with the Income Tax Act s 238(1). During the 5 hearings prior to Trial Mr Holsworth made Abuse of Process arguments and requests for legal and financial assistance which were ignored. At trial Mr Holsworth presented TWO Constitutional Question’s with 2 weeeks notice but they were both ignored. Mr Holsworth was declared guilty by the Court. All defence arguments were ignored and all Charter of Rights arguments ignored, except for providing a minimal right to freedom of speech. Mr Holsworth appeals the conviction, sentence and alleges abuse of process. In apparent retribution the
Crown appealed on the sentence. The errors in law prompting Mr Holsworth’s appeal are straightforward. The court did not provide Mr Holsworth his constitutionally guaranteed Charter of Rights prior to passing sentence. Therefore, the ruling is invalid and has no force of law.
In regards to the abuse of process all argument were ignored, including this right to appeal being arbitrary, ignoring constitutional questions, and ignoring the argument of abuse of process itself.
There is a miscarriage of justice as Crown Prosecution, the BC Law Society, Canadian Judicial Council, RCMP and Minister of Justice are implicated in breaches of the Criminal Code and the Charter of Rights.
The judge failed to act judicially in the resolution of the matter.
The Canadian Judicial Council has made a ruling on the conduct of Judges which contradicts the Charter right to fundamental justice which compromises the integrity of the Court. The Council has ruled that the exercise of judicial discretion is not a matter of conduct so effectively creating unbounded discretion not subject to examination by Parliament, in order to avoid the examination of judicial conduct in the context of the Charter, which is incorrect. The Ruling is the subject of the Constitutional Question #2.
The errors should be corrected by this court issuing a Writ of Mandamus compelling the Minister of Justice to present my Charter complaint to Parliament. The authority of this court is in question until that breach is resolved.
This Appeal does not present the evidence regarding the failures of the public service to recognize the failure of the judiciary to administer the Charter of Rights, the rule of law, and the basics of administrative law to be held to account to their own documentation.
I reserve the right to amend this Appeal to consider new evidence from the Canadian Judicial Council,
The BC Law Society, Crown Prosecutor’s office, the Minister of Justice, and other public services including RCMP, FMEP, CRA and others that are involved in the administration of justice. All requests for information have been denied.
I have attempted to communicate with the Crown Prosecution Service within their seemingly unbounded discretion and requested alternative dispute resolution procedures and conflict of interest statements and am awaiting response at this time.
In the spirit of the judgment in Pintea and the CJC’s recent paper regarding Self Represented Litigants I request that the Court forgive my lack of familiar form in my written word, the inaccuracies in my arguments or understanding of the complexity of the law but relate to me as a human being, standing before you, pleading for justice and restoration of my rights.
The appeal is necessarily incomplete because of the complexity of the issues at stake, the lack of legal advice, the denial of evidence, the love for the time I spend with my family, the result of the PTSD and mental trauma that I suffered through the abuses of the legal process, the time limit at trial, the page limit at Appeal, and the emotional and financial hardships placed upon Mr Holsworth and his family.
I appreciate your efforts to listen to my voice. It means the world to me.