It wasn't in the paper because they post the story back in January but it was on their website!!!
I like this one because it goes into a few details....If I had a lawyer? It would be $600,000!!!!
Having the Fredericton Police telling the Public that I was exploiting kids for Sex is VERY damaging and the new Politicians at the New Brunswick Legislature will be confronted on this issue.
Too bad it was in the Irving paper because I guess this story was talked about on the radio this morning. I didn't knopw there were so many people who listens to the radio these days...:)
Controversial blogger suing City of Fredericton for $60,000
DON MACPHERSON Fredericton Daily Gleaner
September 30, 2014
Fredericton blogger Charles LeBlanc is suing the City of Fredericton
for more than $60,000. He alleges in his statement of claim that the
Fredericton Police Force sought retaliation after LeBlanc videotaped a
controversial police takedown.
Controversial blogger and anti-poverty activist Charles LeBlanc is
suing the City of Fredericton over what he claims is retaliation by the
police force for his role in the prosecution of a constable.
LeBlanc filed a notice of action and statement of claim in the Court of
Queen’s Bench in January, seeking damages in excess of $60,000.
He claims members of the Fredericton Police Force turned their
attention to him after he recorded three officers using force to effect
an arrest in the city’s downtown bar district in July 2009.
That video and other information led to the prosecution of Const.
Stephen Stafford for assault, a charge of which he was acquitted in June
2011.
“The plaintiff contends that the Fredericton Police
Force began to target him after the trial was concluded because of his
incriminating video and corroborating testimony,” LeBlanc’s statement of
claim says.
Go read the reast of the story on my facebook -
https://www.facebook.com/charles.leblanc.5437
A term in the legal community Negligence: Standard of Care, ought to foresee .. and there is more which we will see in the arguments put forth by the plaintiff. Interesting that the city is now threatening Charles for publishing the actual data in regards to child exploitation.
ReplyDeleteFrom what I understood from Charles had he received a personal apology from the chief and the city on this matter he would ceased to pursue the issue. Regardless to the outcome of the Law suite, the letter of apology would not have cost much except the paper and the time to write it up. As it stands the arrogance of this city could cost the Fredericton tax payers 60,000+, monies that could be spent else where.
Good luck Charles, I'm so tired of seeing police forces calling their MASSIVE screw-ups "clerical errors." lol, and whenever the government screws up they call it a "cut/paste error," lol! They love thinking we're all idiots. I will go to the wall for you, I KNOW they have had it out for you for a long time. And even though I know they will NEVER be held accountable (bad cops should just change their middle name to "Acquitted" just to save time), I have found that seeing a grievance through, to the bitter end, is the only way to keep the heat under their corrupt asses. I applaud you. I wish you could have the peace you deserve by being able to walk away, but I'm also the kind of person that never finds peace by walking away, so I get it. Keep up the good work (and is it my imagination or has Don MacPherson been reporting more ethically lately? Wonder if it has anything to do with me (and many others) reporting him to the media ethics committee? If so, then see? Taking action sometimes works )
ReplyDeleteLettin them off easy!
ReplyDeleteAre you fking me? $60.000?
ReplyDeleteYour serious? Try for a few millions at least.
Maybe 50 years ago $60.000 would have been ok.
They arrested you a few times, they put you in jail and denied you of your prescription drugs.
They raided your place and took all your electronic shit.
They went through all your hard drive snooping through all your personal things.
They know everywhere you went ever on the internet.
They said you were a pedophile.
plus a shitload of other stuff....
Sue them for $10 millions
Where is the iron horse? tell him you want to sue them for $10 million and you will give him half if you win or post that you will give any lawyer half... someone will gladly represent you for there half of the cash. Kelly Lamrock aint doing nothing so even him would drool over that case....never mind Lamrock......It was just a brain fart.
--maurice the homeless guy--
Maurice ...there are no lawyers in this province that will take a case like this because they will end up on the blacklist...I'm just going to show that the system does not work....the cops are corrupt......cops are lying telling people that a person is exploiting kids for sex....The Fredericton council agrees with this....have to bring these issues in court.....a true lawyer would sue for at least $600,000...
ReplyDeleteDid you actually talk to lawyers in OTHER provinces Charles? These are two different systems, this is the civil court system. And you've already started breaking those rules, so you can't actually complain that the system is corrupt. And again, the cops didn't tell anybody this, YOU did, they filed a wrong form (and I agree it was probably on purpose and you could sue just for that), but it went to Rogers, NOBODY else. It took Bernard Richard's investigation to even find this out.
ReplyDeleteYou easily had a case against the Saint John police, the province, and now fredericton police. We know from reading your blog which systems are corrupt.
No lawyer would represent you for the simple reason that you don't pay attention to the basic rules of court. If you had a lawyer and started blogging discovery materials then THEY would be on the hook for those costs. Since you don't listen to free legal advice when you get it from McInnes Cooper, its doubtful you'd listen to your own lawyer.
What is Discovery??? Just for the record? I had lawyers in the past and I paid attention to their orders...I don't understand these new papers so lets go to court....maybe the less fortunate can do accuse of exploiting children for Sex and that's ok....don't forget one thing Mike...THIS IS FREDERICTON!!!!
ReplyDeleteI hope you realize that if you do happen to win you are going to have to stretch that 60,000 very far as you will be taken off of social assistance.
ReplyDeleteI plan to donate my windfall to the New Brunswick Liberal Party!!...:)
ReplyDeleteThat's way over the personal contribution limit.
ReplyDeleteUh, the papers were pretty clear charles and I know you understood them. They told you to stop posting the papers that you recieved from their law firm. They told you to stop mentioning them, and told you that if you didn't take down the blogs that mentioned them then they were going to add them to costs.
ReplyDeleteThat is not unique to Fredericton. Discovery is the process of getting information about your case, thats why you recieved those papers, its not hard to understand. The rules they are mentioning are all across the english speaking world. If this protection didn't exist, then the fredericton police wouldn't have released them or would have 'lost' them. That is why the rule exists, so that the legal system can actually function, otherwise nobody would keep anything around.
Oh Mikel, you just fail to understand the basics. The Fredericton City Police used fraudulent, criminal,defamatory and libelous accusations against Charles, to obtain evidence in support of a search warrant to enter his home, seize his equipment and shut down his blogsite to then falsely charge him with an unconstitutional, indictable, criminal offence carrying a five year jail sentence, and you wonder why Charles is angry? You, my son, have the brains of a rocking horse - driftwood - and you just seem incapable of understanding the extent to which the police went to lock him up and shut him down. The Fredericton City Police LIED and COMMITTED FRAUD to criminally charge a member of the public, under false pretenses. This repeated act by them was intentional, conspiratorial, abuse of process, breach of trust and an abuse of office - but you think Charles is the one with the problem.
ReplyDeleteThis latest fiasco - shutting down his blogsite (which is theft of intellectual property and the right to free speech), and threatening him to remove evidence of municipal corruption, just confirms their agenda is the same - hiding corruption by the City and FPFarce regardless of the public interest. Mikel, you are a moron.
You don't seem to understand that New Brunswick has manipulated the law (including the Rules of Court in civil procedure) and created case law that is diametrically opposed to the constitutional rights of every Canadian. You haven't lived the lack of justice system in New Brunswick, so you should stop pontificating over what you clearly have no real knowledge or understanding of - or the lives it destroys.
Go for it Chas!
ReplyDeleteHey idiot, repeating something over and over again doesn't make it true. And nowhere did I wonder why Charles is angry. I was helping him get his first computer back when you were getting drunk and apparantly banging your head against the wall to get rid of any brain cells you had left. You are one of those drunken pinheads who egg on people with bricks and tell them to go throw it through a window because you haven't got the guts to do it yourself.
ReplyDeleteOnly a retarded monkey (sorry to retarded monkeys, you are rightfully distressed to be included in the company of real idiocy) thinks that a form nobody sees can be considered 'libel'. Whether it was 'fraudulent' we dont' know, as there was no investigation, but because you are sitting on your crapper with a toilet paper gown on doesn't make you a judge.
There was nothing 'illegal' about what the police did, thats just stupid. Charles likes to tout out Bernard Richard's report, but glosses over the fact that Richard states pretty plainly that the force easily had the information necessary to charge him with Section 300.
They dropped the charge mainly because of the publicity. If your head wasn't so full of baloney you'd know that a provincial court doesn't have to accept the verdicts of courts in other provinces. Thats why New Brunswick is still the only province to fine and jail panhandlers when every court and every other province has long ago said that panhandling is a charter right.
You seem too stupid to be able to tell reality, but for other readers, again, the city lodged a complaint. It was GOOGLE who shut down his blog. And they didn't take his property, he was hosting his blog with them. There was nothing stopping Charles from backing up his blog so he could put it up elsewhere. Most people know to back up their work.
And the lawyers were giving him legal advice. Charles complains that he has no lawyer and so doesn't get legal advice, then when lawyers explain the rules of court to him, you are dumb enough to think that is 'corruption'?? Thats the stupidest thing I ever heard and I"m embarrassed to be called the same species as you.
As I've said numerous times, but you seem too idiotic to be able to comprehend, its perfectly clear that Charles charter rights have been infringed, and not just by the Fredericton police force, but also the Saint John police force and the province. But I suspect you may actually be a police officer, maybe one involved, since clearly you simply want to egg on charles so that he is completely ineffective in everything he tries to do. Only a tin foil hat wearing lunatic thinks the system is corrupt because the process of discovery has rules that prohibit people publicizing information.
And charles should think hard about who his friends are. In the past he's been burned by almost all the people he thought were his friends just because they talk nice to him. Supporting charles doesn't mean blindly accepting every crazy thing he does. Nobody needs friends like that.
Geez I Luv this Blog!
ReplyDeleteAnon 17:47, go back to your gutter or sewer or wherever you came from.
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, freedom of speech is NOT protected on this site, because the government does not own it; Google does, and they received a complaint and acted on it. (It's also not theft of IP, because Charles does not own the site, Google does).
You seem to forget that the charter has in section one that any charter right can be infringed on if it is deemed necessary. But because you like to preach injustice when there is none, you wouldn't know that.
Mikel has it right, and as you said, the lives it destroys, is crap (unless you were convicted in court that you broke the law, then your life deserves to be tanked)
10:25: You are as foolish as Mikel but that seems to be because you are Mikel - you write jsut like him, caps and all. You say freedom of speech is not protected on this site because the government doesn't own it!!! You seem to be saying only government sites protect freedom of speech, which is garbage. Google do indeed seem to have infringed Charles' right to free speech and stole his intellectual property. They did not only remove the allegedly offensive posts, they removed everything Charles created, including many informative and public interest stories. For other very offensive bloggers Google removes only the complained of posts but they treated Charles differently and stole over 20,000 posts, of which only a very small number were possible offensive.
ReplyDeleteBy the way, sorry to disappoint you but I have never been convicted of anything and have witness many people suffer incredibly at the hands of our very corrupt establishment. 10:25 - you really sound like Mikel with a hangover.