TURMEL: Crown files to Strike "End Lockdown" Fed Court Actions JCT: Canada had until today to file their motion to strike our claims. http://SmartestMan.Ca/c19cn.pdf is quite generic. What can they do when they have no cards than just repeat "We win." Court File No.: T-130-21 FEDERAL COURT B E T W E E N : JOHN C. TURMEL Plaintiff (Responding Party) and HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN Defendant (Moving Party) NOTICE OF MOTION TAKE NOTICE THAT the defendant, Her Majesty the Queen ("Canada") will make a motion to the Court in writing under Rule 369 of the Federal Courts Rules. THE MOTION IS FOR: 1. An order striking the claim without leave to amend; or 2. In the alternative, an order requiring the plaintiff to provide security for costs in the amount of $11,350, and not take any further steps in the action until security for costs is provided; JCT: That's going to be a lot of fun for the Case Management Judge. The Crown promoted me as the Lead Plaintiff so they could object to me as the Lead Plaintiff and maybe get a few extra months of suicides out of it. Now what does she do? Without me, how does she handle the other stayed motions? Appoint another Lead? I can think of a few who'd like to keep going. Who remembers Prothonotary Aylen at the Mar 11 hearing saying she wasn't going to let the issue of past costs matter. I must admit, I'd forgotten about all the times I stiffed them on costs and thought they were aiming at my brother Ray. Let's see if she changes her mind to waste more time and add more suicides to her tab. Remember, I started this Jan 19. Statement of Defence due Feb 18. So a properly filed motion by Feb 18, 10 days for my Response and 4 days for their Reply and it would have been on a judge's desk by March 4. Here we are now looking at their motion June 5, Response by June 15th, Reply by June 19th. So they've managed to stretch March 4 to June 19th. 15 extra weeks of suicides from when it should have been adjudicated thanks to the Registry process. But disqualifying me and appointing a new Lead Plaintiff would add a few months more worth of suicides to their tab. What kind of idiot would want to be front man for keeping the genocidal scam from being exposed and lockdowns called off? Poor Benjamin Wong. We'll be able to put names from the tombstones with his signature on them. CR: 3. The costs of this motion and of the action; and 4. Such further and other relief as this Honourable Court may allow. THE GROUNDS FOR THE MOTION ARE: A. The claim 5. The claim seeks declarations that Canada's COVID-19 mitigation measures unjustifiably infringe the plaintiff's rights under ss. 2, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 12 of the Charter, an order prohibiting any restrictions that are not imposed on the flu, a permanent constitutional exemption from any such restrictions, and damages for pain and losses incurred as a result of the restrictions; B. The Federal Court lacks jurisdiction over the claim 1. The Federal Court lacks jurisdiction to grant the relief requested; JCT: Oh well, if the Ministry of Justice says that Federal Court has no jurisdiction over the Federal Government, what can we do? Just remember, government lawyers will say anything. Doesn't have to be true unless it's sworn in an affidavit. Remember, nothing said in court is true unless it's been sworn in an affidavit. So they're usually lawying. CR: 2. The claim alleges that the plaintiff's rights are infringed by "lockdowns & curfews, quarantines, mandatory masks, mandatory social distancing, mandatory vaccine, mandatory immunity card for public services"; JCT: Seems that's what everyone is complaining about. Rights are infringed. But he says not so a court can remedy it. CR: 3. However, the claim provides no particulars concerning the measures being challenged, and insofar as these measures exist for the general public, they are provincial and municipal measures; JCT: We say we want no restrictions based on fraudulent stats and they want more information on how restrictions are hurting us. They want to see the blood even though it all stems from Health Canada as major regulator. CR: 4. While the federal government has adopted targeted COVID-19 mitigation measures in specific contexts, such as the requirement to wear a mask on flights, the claim in question does not allege that the plaintiff was affected by these measures; JCT: He says we need to know how those measures affected me in particular, not just everyone in general. CR: C. The claim does not disclose a reasonable cause of action and is frivolous and vexatious 5. It is plain and obvious that the claim does not disclose a reasonable cause of action; JCT: This is a standard ploy. It is plain and obvious to Crown lawyers that being tricked into a murderous lockdown does not disclose a reason to be angry. CR: 6. Insofar as the claim is challenging provincial and municipal measures, there is no reasonable cause of action against Canada; JCT: If Health Canada's restrictions are struck down, everyone else's will follow. So let's strike down Health Canada's rules and see what's left. CR: 7. Moreover, even in the event the claim challenges federal measures, the claim does not set out sufficient material facts to establish breaches of ss. 2, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 12 of the Charter; JCT: Remember, guys with their eyes closed can always claim they haven't seen enough. It's a standard judicial ploy. A judge can say anything and everything isn't enough to be convincing. CR: D. The claim is frivolous and vexatious 8. The claim is it frivolous and vexatious; JCT: It's frivolous and vexatious trying to put an end record suicides during the delay. CR: 9. The claim is prolix and repetitive, and fails to set out a concise statement of material facts capable of establishing a deprivation of any of the Charter infringements alleged; JCT: All we proved was that lockdowns are based on lies. It actually is a concise statement of material facts capable ot establishing a deprivation of rights. But remember, in their efforts to keep the suicides going, they'll say and deny anything. CR: 10. The claim makes unparticularized allegation of malice and fraud; JCT: Apple was compared to orange. What more malice and fraud do they need to be particularized. Sure, lawyers are the scraping the bottom of the math barrel but can they be bad enough not to get how an Apple Orange comparison works? CR: E. If the claim is not struck without leave to amend, the Plaintiff should be required to provide security for costs 11. Canada has six orders against the plaintiff for costs in other proceedings, which remain unpaid; JCT: So that's the reason they wanted me as Lead Plaintiff, so they could object to me as Lead Plaintiff and spend more time appointing another and causing a lot more suicides. CR: 12. The outstanding costs awards total $13,003.39, including post-judgment interest; JCT: I finally know how much I've stiff them for over the years. Can't be counting my costs from the 1980s. CR: 13. The claim is frivolous and vexatious and there is reason to believe the plaintiff will have insufficient assets available to pay Canada's costs; JCT: So they sought to get me as Lead Plaintiff knowing I would have insufficient assets available to pay Canada's costs and that they'd object and spend more time. So it means the CMJ will have to name someone else for the Crown to file a new motion to strike the new Lead Plaintiff claim. And of course, allow more suicides during the delay. I stress the suicides because I've heard of so many recently and it's not like people who died after missing cancer screenings. How to you prove that death was due to the Covid mal-comparison? That's tough to pin on the Crown and the Court but suicides, since February when they they started stalling, is easy. CR:L 14. Federal Courts Rules, SOR/98-106, Rules 3, 174, 181, 182, 221, 369, 416(1)(f), 416(1)(g), and 418; and 15. Such other grounds as counsel may advise and this Honourable Court may accept. THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE will be used at the hearing of the motion: Affidavit of Deborah Telesford, affirmed May 20, 2021 Per: Benjamin Wong Counsel for the Defendant JCT: http://SmartestMan.Ca/c19cna.pdf Her affidavit says nothing about our Statement of Claim at all. It deals only with my past costs! So what you read here is all they have to argue our claims are frivolous. They think so. Nothing else. So poor Benjamin is the point man on upping the suicide numbers. Hope he's getting paid enough. The rep he'll get I wouldn't wish on my worst enemy, all those suicides since he missed his first February 18 deadline for a Statement of Defence. Finally, the judge gave me until June 7 to file any affidavit in response and until June 17 for examinations and the Defendant files its Motion Record 15 days after examinations or after being advised the Plaintiff does not intend to serve and affidavit or conduct examinations. John C. Turmel, B.Eng., Friday May 21 2021 VIA EMAIl Benjamin Wong Department of Justice re: John Turmel v. HMTQ T-130-21 Dear Mr. Wong: Pursuant to the date May 6 Order of Case Management Judge Aylen, I advise you that I do not intend to serve an affidavit or conduct cross-examinations. Dated at Brantford on Thursday May 20 2021. John C. Turmel JCT: So skipping the useless affidavit stage where the CMJ put me at the disadvantage of having to figure out my defence without making them include their offence, the Crown has until June 5 to file the Motion Record with the Written Representations of arguments of why our actions should be dismissed as frivolous. Remember, Written Representations should have been in the original documentation so her splitting them up only gained them 2 extra weeks of suicides from today. Sorry, but I just can't help repeating over and over how the delays have put blood on their hands. And not the kind that can be repaired. Those lives are lost and there's nothing Wong or Aylen J. can do to get them back. "Oops" won't cut it. Especially when you consider all the other things done to slow-walk the bucket of water to the fire. Remember, they are the only two who officially have the documentation of how lockdowns are based on lies as they give their all to keep the bloodletting going.