TURMEL: Judge Trent Horne sets 6-week timetable for strike motion 

JCT: I filed an action to strike the vax requirement for air 
travel issued by the Minister of Justice on Jan 15 2022. 

Documents: 
220219 Action to strike Air Travel Vax Requirement like Peckford
http://SmartestMan.Ca/c19100.txt 

220222 Motion for Unvaxed Travel Ban Exemption for False Alarm 
http://SmartestMan.Ca/c19102.txt

220311 Judge sets timetable for Crown motion to strike action 

At the hearing, the Crown said that they were going to make 
a motion to strike our action for "no cause of action." We 
have no reason to be angry about having our rights 
restricted by being tricked into thinking Covid was a plague 
when it was really a mild flu. 

The Crown presented a timetable of 6 weeks. I pointed out 
that taking our time was going to cost lives. I could 
mention that Dr. Joffe found 63% of his vaxed patients had 
D-Dimer tests showing blood clots. So of the 26 million 
Canadians who have taken their vax, 16 million should have 
clots. And with 50,000 new vaccinations in the past week, 
that's 32,000 new Canadians with blood clots. So 6 more 
weeks would mean 300,000 more vaxed with 200,000 new 
clotteds. 

I also pointed out the Ottawa U survey that found one 
myocarditis adverse effect victim per 1,000 doses mean one 
heart problem per double-dosed patient. 1/500 will get 
Myocarditis. And Myocarditis is permanent heart damage that 
usualy kills within 5 years. So 100 per new 50,000 patients 
means 600 expected victims in 300,000 new vaxed.

Sadly, the judge agreed with the Crown timetable. 
    180 Queen Street West Suite 200
    Toronto, Ontario M5V 3L6 

    March 11, 2022
    VIA EMAIL
         RE: T-277-22 JOHN TURMEL v. HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

    Direction of Case Management Judge Horne dated March 11, 
    2022:

    "Further to a case management conference on March 
    11,2022, the defendant's motion to strike and for 
    security for costs will be determined before the 
    plaintiff's motion for a personal constitutional 
    exemption. The defendant has elected to bring its motion 
    in writing. Materials will be exchanged on the following 
    timetable:
          i. the defendant shall serve a notice of motion 
    and supporting affidavits by March 18, 2022;
          ii. any reply affidavits from the plaintiff shall   
    beserved by March 25, 2022;
          iii. cross-examinations, if any, shall be 
    conducted by April 1, 2022; 
          iv. the defendant's motion record shall be 
    servedand filed by April 8, 2022;
          v. the plaintiff's responding motion record shall 
    beserved and filed by April 15, 2022. The plaintiffmay 
    indicate in his written representations anyreasons why 
    the motion should not be disposedof in writing (subrule 
    369(2)).; and 
          vi. the defendant's written representations in 
    replyshall be served and filed by April 22, 2022.

The parties may, but are not required to, agree to earlier 
deadlines, particularly if cross-examinations are not 
conducted."

JCT: So even if we skip affidavits and examinations, we 
still get stalled the full 6 weeks. I have mentioned that 
the Crown is hoping the restriction gets dropped so they can 
say the action has now been mooted. So 6 weeks to end it to 
scuttle my case.

So what I'm going to do is prepared another template 
Statement of Claim on the violation of mobility right that 
anyone else can use. 

Remember, in our first case that was thrown out because it 
asked to have "any" restriction based on the false alarm and 
there had to be a restriction to strike down. Now we have 
the air-travel restriction. 

In that case, the Crown didn't object to me being named Lead 
Plaintiff while other cases were stayed. Stayed plaintiffs 
would have the chance to continue if I lost or just give up 
with no costs. I pay costs, the others do not!

The Crown then pointed out I owed costs from previous cases 
and should be made to post security for costs. They've 
brought that up again so I won't be the Lead Plaintiff in 
this action since they asked. I'll write the documentation 
and let some other Lead Plaintiff file it and take the fight 
to the top. Since I pay the costs if it loses, I'll pay the 
costs for another Lead Plaintiff if it loses.  

Since my Statement of Claim for the first C19 action was
http://SmartestMan.Ca/c19scjct.pdf and the template for 
others was: http://SmartestMan.Ca/c19sc.pdf 

My new "b" action is named
http://SmartestMan.Ca/c19bscjc.pdf and the template for 
others will be http://SmartestMan.Ca/c19bsc.pdf Stay tuned. 
I'll announce when it's ready (soon) and also post it my 
documents page: http://SmartestMan.Ca/c19docs.htm 

If the Crown agrees to drop the demand for security, I'll be 
Lead. If not, I won't.