JCT: I've already written about the irregularities going on at
the Ontario Court Court of Appeal with respect to James Turner's
appeal a few times. Despite his letter to the Registrar demanding
an answer, no satisfactory response has been forthcoming though
they've rescheduled the un-perfected appeal for Tues Aug 18 2009.
So I've advised to demand proof of the a perfecte appeal before
showing up. James sent this to the Deputy Registrar:

Court File No. C49904

COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO
Between:
JAMES TURNER
Appellant-Accused
and

Her Majesty the Queen
Respondent/Plaintiff


Friday Aug 14 2009
Attn: Sandra.Theroulde@...

REQUEST FOR CERTIFICATE OF PERFECTION OR ORDER
DISPENSING WITH THE RULES OF PROCEDURE.


0. On July 31 2009, I wrote Registrar of the Ontario Court of
Appeal Huguette Thomson that:

1. The correspondence in the court file shows that you informed
me that the transcript prepared by the Ottawa Court Reporter had
been rejected by the Court of Appeal Registry and we were all
waiting for the transcripts to be available before each filing
our facta and then the Certificate of Completion. Unfortunately,
while upgrading the transcript, the court reporter died and the
transcript languished on the back burner of the Ottawa Reporter's
Office but is now ready.

2. Yet, I was informed that the appeal had somehow been scheduled
for hearing on June 16 2009 without the transcripts, the factums
or the Certificate of Perfection, in Kingston after Appellant had
indicated I wanted to be heard in Toronto with my supporters.

3. Criminal Appeal Rule 15: "Where the appellant is not
represented by counsel, the Registrar may require the Attorney
General to prepare an appeal book."

4. Fine, the Crown has been preparing the appeal books for the
self-represented since R. v. Parker in 2002.

5. Rule 16(1) "Except in an inmate appeal, all parties to an
appeal shall deliver a factum."

6. There are no exceptions for skipping the filing of factums in
an appeal. Is my R. v. Turner the first appeal to have gone to
hearing without any factums in the record? Is this a first?

7. Rule 18(1) "Except in an inmate appeal, the appellant shall
serve on every other party to the appeal one copy of the appeal
book, one copy of the transcript and one copy of the appellant's
factum and immediately thereafter shall file with the Registrar
proof of service of the appeal book, the transcript and the
factum..."

8. None of these documents nor proofs of service have been filed.

9. Rule 18(2) The appellant shall file with the Registrar two
copies of a certificate of perfection stating..."

10. The Certificates of Perfection have not been filed. Is
scheduling the appeal without it another first?

11. Rule 18(3) "the appellant shall perfect the appeal within 90
days after the transcript has been delivered to the Court of
Appeal."

12. Transcripts have just been mailed to the Court of Appeal.

13. Despite the failure to comply with these four rules, I was
given notice by the Crown that the hearing of the appeal for June
16 2009 was now a fait accomplit which could only be changed by
Order of a judge.

14. I brought these irregularities to the attention of Justice
MacPherson and asked for an Order quashing the hearing date until
of the appeal until all transcripts, facta and Certificate of
Perfection were filed upon perfection of the appeal. I also asked
how the Crown had managed to get the appeal scheduled without the
required filing of transcripts in Rule 18(3); the required filing
of factums in Rule 16(1); the required filing of the Certificate
of Perfection in Rule 18(2); the required proofs of service in
Rule 18(1)?

15. Justice MacPherson dismissed the motion to quash the date of
the hearing until the rules had been complied with and approved
the unobtrusive way of taping the proceedings for my own notes
with a small tape recorder. I was told that the court would
explain at my appeal why they were not proceeding by the rules.

16. Before the hearing of the appeal, a member of the panel
slated to hear my appeal died and it was delayed.

17. Appellant has since continued to try to find out how the
Crown was able to schedule the hearing without complying with
rules 16(1), 18(1), 18(2), 18(3).

18. I again received notice from the Crown that the appeal is
once again scheduled for hearing on Aug 18 2009 upon the
incomplete record complained about in Kingston.

19. I ask the Registrar of the Ontario Court of Appeal to explain
why the Crown was able to schedule the hearing of the incomplete
appeal without complying with Rule 18(3) requiring transcripts,
Rule 16(1) requiring facta, Rule 18(2) requiring Certificates of
Perfection and Rule 18(1) requiring proofs of service? Yours
truly, James Turner, Appellant.

20. To date, the Registrar has not been able to explain how a
non-perfected appeal could have gotten around the rules to be
scheduled without all the documents required to perfect the
appeal.

21. On Thurs Aug 12 2009, Sandra.Theroulde@... emailled
the Appellent to explain:
"Further to our telephone conversation and your subsequent e-mail
dated August 11, 2009, you are advised that this appeal was
originally scheduled to be heard on June 16, 2009 on the basis of
the crown's representation that it was ready to be argued. You
applied for an adjournment on the basis that the matter was not
yet ready to proceed. Your request was dealt with by Justice
MacPherson on June 9, 2009. He refused to grant an adjournment
but indicated that you could renew your request before the panel
scheduled to hear the appeal.
Unfortunately, for reasons beyond our control the appeals
scheduled for hearing on June 16, 2009 had to be adjourned. They
have been re-scheduled for hearing at the next sitting of appeals
in Kingston which occurs on August 18, 2009. You are still
entitled to request an adjournment although you should be
prepared to argue your appeal if the adjournment is refused.
Any further issues or concerns you may have with respect to the
scheduling of the appeal can be addressed to the panel on August
18, 2009. Sandra Theroulde
Deputy Registrar and Manager of Court Administration

22. Since when is a representation that a Certificate of
Perfection has been filed substitute for a Certificate of
Perfection being filed? A Crown representation is an improper
substitute for a Certificate of Perfection.

23. At no point has the Registrar explained how the Crown has
been able to circumvent the rules so I must conclude the
Registrar probably helped in the circumvention of the rules. Why
is registrar ignoring the Crown's breaking the rules unless the
Registrar is in on it?

24. The final irregularity is hearing the appeal in Kingston with
inmate appeals. I am not an inmate and do not wish to be treated
like one either before or after the hearing of the non-perfected
appeal.

25. The transcripts and affidavit of service were filed within
the last two weeks and the rules say I have 90 days to file
factums and perfect the appeal from the filing of the transcript.

26. Though the Court seems untroubled by these irregularities, I
do not want an appeal hearing without the proper documentation.
If you want me to attend the hearing of the non-perfected appeal
in Kingston, please fax me a copy of the Certificate of
Perfection or an Order dispensing with the rules of procedure in
my case.

Yours truly,
_______________________________
James Turner, Appellant
C-2501 Prince of Wales,
Ottawa, K2C 3H1
Tel/Fax: 613-212-3344/519-753-0645
Email: jamesturner1326@...

CC: mmcguire@...
Hai-Anh.Nguyen@...
johnturmel@...