A few days before this hearing, I had received a copy of my GCMS report from IRCC, which contained all of the CBSA Officer's notes from when I turned myself in to them on 2019-03-15. Up to this point, CBSA, the RCMP, and the prosecutor Bernie Wolfe, had all been insisting there is absolutely no record of CBSA having any interaction with me on that day. Wolfe had been brazenly lying to the court about it and insisting that I must be lying about turning myself in because surely there would be some record of that.
Knowing that I now had to proof that I'd been telling the truth and that Wolfe had been lying to the court, I said in open court, on the record, that if Wolfe actually believed what he's been saying to the court for the past few months, that I didn't turn myself in to CBSA and that I'm lying about it, then he would WANT someone from CBSA to come and testify about it. I point out that Wolfe's outright refusal to even request from CBSA, the identity of the officer that was working that day, proves that he's full of shit p6l4-46. That he knows I did present myself to them!
Wolfe responded that he's not going to "get into a fishing expedition or running around grabbing this witness or that guy" p8l47-p9l2. To which I responded that I'm not asking Wolfe to pursue evidence that would benefit me, I'm asking him to pursue evidence which would prove his casep9l27-31.
The judge also repeatedly point out at this hearing, that if we proceed as is, without anyone from CBSA, and I testify about the events of that day then there would be nothing to rebut my story. That is, if no one from CBSA testifies, then he would have to deal with case based solely on whatever I claim happened on 2019-03-15 p6l47-p7l3; p9l18-23. In other words, he's saying "Look, let's not push to have the CBSA officer testify. If you, Mr. Fox, testify and say the CBSA officer denied you admission, then I will have to rule based on that because there will be nothing to refute what you're saying." I get the impression the judge, like Wolfe, was trying very hard to not have someone from CBSA testify.
Amazingly, a few days after this hearing, Wolfe informed me and the court that CBSA is now claiming I did turn myself in to them on 2019-03-15, that they will provide the officer's notes, and allow the officer to testify! So when it came down to it, that lying prick Bernie Wolfe through CBSA under the bus just like that other lying prick prosecutor Mark Myhre through Tony Lagemaat under the bus about that recording of Desiree laughing and joking with the RCMP.
(ACCUSED APPEARING VIA VIDEO FROM NORTH FRASER PRE-TRIAL CENTRE)
Judge:
Mr. Wolfe.
Wolfe:
Yes, Your Honour, Wolfe, initial B., for the Provincial Crown. I have conduct of Number 16 on the morning list in relation to Patrick Fox.
Judge:
To Fox. Okay.
Mr. Fox. Okay, well, I didn't know this was going to be on the list, so I hope I don't have to remember anything.
Wolfe:
Let me assist you as much as I can on that point.
Judge:
Okay.
Wolfe:
So may I, then, sort of make an introductory comment to try and focus the appearance?
Judge:
Fair enough.
Wolfe:
First, Mr. Fox, can you hear me?
Fox:
Yeah.
Wolfe:
Sorry, I'll speak louder. Is this better for you?
Fox:
Yeah, I can -- I can hear you.
Wolfe:
Thank you.
So today, as I recall, Your Ho nour, we're here really to take stock of Mr. Fox's attempts to obtain information --
Judge:
Oh yeah.
Wolfe:
-- from CBSA.
Judge:
Yeah.
Wolfe:
Identify potential witnesses, and find out from him whether or not he's been successful in subpoenaing anyone from CBSA or elsewhere.
Judge:
Right.
Wolfe:
So that -- because we have a continuation date in March.
Judge:
That's right. Okay, I remember now.
Mr. Fox, how's it going?
Fox:
Things are progressing. I did receive a number of very interesting responses from CBSA. But putting that aside for a moment, on the issue of the document that I had received about the FOSS log that we had discussed at the previous hearing, and I had sent a letter asking them for further clarification on that matter, I haven't received any response on that. Lately they've been -- they seem to have been taking the position of just not responding to anything, so more and more of the outstanding requests have been getting forwarded to the Privacy Commissioner. Although, I did receive a very curious response last week from them that almost seems to -- well, how can I say it?
The RCMP had some emails at -- that they brought up at the trial that were not disclosed prior to the trial, that seem to show some communication between the RCMP and CBSA regarding the security video footage from March 15th.
Judge:
Yeah.
Fox:
CBSA, though, is now claiming that those emails possibly don't exist.
Judge:
What do you mean "possibly don't exist"?
Fox:
Well, one of the people that the RCMP was claiming to have communication with, whose name was in those emails, was Alexander Lo. He's an administrative superintendent. So I had requested all emails from Alexander Lo which referenced or pertained to me. The ones that were returned have nothing to do with what the RCMP was claiming, or what the RCMP had disclosed. And so, it seems like it's kind of suggesting that maybe there's some question about the authenticity of the emails that the RCMP was basing their testimony on. But --
Judge:
Well, I mean the bottom line is what you were -- you were solely concerned with some information about March 15th between 4 and 6 p.m., is my understanding.
Fox:
Yes.
Judge:
And with respect to that --
Fox:
Right. With respect to that, CBSA is being notably silent on that. They have not responded to the request that I sent to the analyst that had provided that to me. And I've also forwarded -- forwarded their official response to the Privacy Commissioner. And, obviously, I haven't received a response from the Privacy Commissioner yet.
Judge:
Mm hmm.
When are we set for, Mr. Wolfe? When is the continuation?
Wolfe:
2, 4, and 6 of March 2020.
Judge:
March 2, 4, and 6. Okay.
Fox:
At this point, I'm looking at -- I've begun some communication with lawyers, to possibly get counsel to assist with subpoena applications for CBSA.
Judge:
Yeah, why don't you get a lawyer to help you with the disclosure aspects and that -- I mean possible subpoenas, because it's difficult for you to do when you're in custody.
Fox:
Yes.
Judge:
And I know you don't want to be represented at trial, but this would just be to facilitate the matter moving forward. You can get the information you want. Do you know somebody that could help you?
Fox:
Are you asking me do I know a lawyer who can help me ?
Judge:
Yeah.
Fox:
There's one lawyer in particular that might be willing to touch my case. Most lawyers want to stay as far away from all of this as possible. The biggest problem I'm having, though, is that LSS will only fund a lawyer if that lawyer is going to completely represent me. They seem to have an aversion to funding a lawyer just for limited purposes like this.
Judge:
You've applied for the limited purpose?
Fox:
I've spoken with LSS. I haven't put in a formal application about that, though. And their response was, "Well, we don't really do that. We can fund a lawyer for you if that lawyer is going to represent you, but not in a limited capacity like this." So what I might have to do is hire the lawyer to represent me, and then beyond disclosure and --
Judge:
Well, you're a person who's in custody who's having difficulty getting disclosure that you say is relevant to your case.
Fox:
Yes.
Judge:
I would think that Legal Services Society, who hasn't had to expend any money on your actual trial representation, could assist you in that regard. You know, it seems to me that that would be a useful -- a useful expenditure of the funds that are there to represent people who are in custody.
Maybe I would have a transcript of today's proceedings. Madam Registrar, can we have one prepared --
Clerk:
Yes, Your Honour.
Judge:
-- on an expedited basis, provided to Mr. Fox. Maybe he could use that with Legal Services.
Wolfe:
On that point, I wonder if Mr. Fox could advise whether he received a copy of the transcript from the last appearance.
Judge:
Yeah, I ordered a transcript.
Fox:
Yes, and I have tha there.
Judge:
Okay. So you can use that as well with the Legal Services Society.
Fox:
Thank you.
Judge:
I mean, that's the only thing I can suggest. I mean, you're going to have -- it's just pragmatic. It's impossible, practically speaking, for you to do some of the things you want to do while you're in custody.
Fox:
Yes.
Judge:
I mean the access that you have to communication devices, etc., is limited, and it would really smooth things over if you had somebody to assist you with that.
Fox:
Yes, it would.
Judge:
Certainly a lawyer.
Wolfe:
Sorry to interrupt. Is Mr. Fox comfortable identifying the lawyer he thinks who might help him out?
Fox:
Not at this point. Not yet.
Wolfe:
Okay.
Fox:
Until I know for certain whether or not --
Wolfe:
Sure, okay.
Judge:
Okay.
Fox:
There is one other recent stumbling block that I've been dealing with, with respect to North Fraser, that for some reason just came up recently with them; they are officially refusing to allow me to send more than seven items, mail items per week, which usually isn't an issue, because I might have one or two items. But sometimes I'll get a lot of responses back, say from the RCMP or CBSA, and within a one-week period I might have to send 10 or 12. And so, lately, they've been complaining about that and actually withholding some of my outgoing mail until the following week, which I wasn't aware of.
So I just wanted to make sure that the court was aware of that, because that might potentially become an issue.
Judge:
Yeah.
Wolfe:
Well, I'll tell you what. I'll send an email.
Fox:
I think part of the problem was because ADW Campbell, I guess, had left. And I believe that's who Mr. Wolfe was primarily dealing with. And for some reason maybe ADW Campbell didn't inform the other staff.
Wolfe:
No , no , no, I've dealt with more than one assistant deputy warden out there.
Fox:
Okay.
Wolfe:
So --
Judge:
All right. Thank you, Mr. Wolfe, for doing that. I appreciate that.
It doesn't sound like there's much that we can do today except confirm March 2nd.
Wolfe:
Before I send the email, if I may ask you directly, is this like a one-off problem? Like -- if I'm going to write an email, I've got to make sure I'm on solid ground here, right? So --
Fox:
There have been three times that the staff has brought it to my attention. Two previous times -- not the most recent time, but the two previous times, the staff said , "Oh, okay, well since this is related to evidence in your case we'll let it go." This most recent time, though, I actually have a written response from the ADW here, saying that no, they're only going to allow seven items per week.
Wolfe:
Who is it signed by?
Fox:
Well, it's actually just a CS that signed it, but she was speaking on behalf of --
Wolfe:
Who's the CS?
Fox:
Or not -- yeah , CS Bionder [phonetic]. But she -- I confirmed with her that she was speaking on behalf of ADW Kay, K-a-y.
Judge:
Yeah, all right.
Thanks , Mr. Wolfe, for doing that.
All right, Mr. Fox, yeah, you're still waiting for responses from the Privacy Commissioner with respect to some complaints about the speed at which disclosure is coming from Canada Border Services, right?
Fox:
Yes.
Judge:
Okay.
Fox:
Yeah.
Wolfe:
But I have to -- if I may put on the record, I'm keen to have this thing continue in March without any further adjournments.
Fox:
Well --
Judge:
Well, everybody is.
Wolfe:
Sure; right?
Fox:
Right. I would like to point out that the issue of the identity of the officers that were working at the west counter at the Douglas Border Crossing on March 15th, 2019, between 4 and 6 p.m., I've submitted a number of requests to the Field Officer Supervisor at Douglas Border Crossing, and an ATIP request, which they didn't respond to at all. And then I forwarded it to the Privacy Commissioner. It is peculiar to me that, if Mr. Wolfe would like this matter to move forward, and if he believes that what I'm saying is not true, I don't understand why he couldn't just contact CBSA and say, "Look, can we please have this person testify, or at least get the identity" --
Judge:
Well, I suggested that many times. It's easy to disprove your allegations.
Fox:
Right.
Judge:
But I'm not running the case, so --
Fox:
I mean Mr. Fo -- or Mr. Wolfe has had five months to simply make a single request to CBSA for the identity of those parties so they could be subpoenaed, but he hasn't.
Judge:
So there's limited options for you, Mr. Fox. You can do it -- you can try to get the information yourself; you can testify about what's within your knowledge if you want to call evidence yourself; there's a couple of options you have. But again, I can't give you legal advice.
Fox:
No, no, I'm not seeking legal advice. I'm just pointing out that Mr. Wolfe seems anxious for this to proceed. Mr. Wolfe, if what he's saying is true, if he sincerely believes his argument, he could easily have CBSA provide the identities of those people, so that he could subpoena them, so that they could come and testify that I'm lying.
Judge:
Well, you haven't even testified yet. So if you testify under oath and there's no evidence to rebut your story, well, that's the case, I've got to deal with it.
I'm going to have to deal with it at some point. So, all right?
Fox:
Okay.
Judge:
But you have to get advice about that.
Do we need another date? Do we need an interim date?
Wolfe:
Sure.
Judge:
Mid-February maybe -- no, I'm actually --
Clerk:
[Indiscernible].
Judge:
Okay. Yeah, sure. Sure thing.
It's going to have be before the -- the 14th, because I'm away as of the 14th, so --
Wolfe:
All right.
Judge:
Maybe the 13th or something like that?
Wolfe:
I'm not around. I'm away from the 12th of February until the 18th. So if you want to --
Judge:
Okay, and then we start March 2nd; right?
Wolfe:
I can --
Judge:
The 11th are you around?
Wolfe:
Yeah, I'm in 101, but, you know, I -- do you know where you are?
Judge:
Oh, okay. Maybe pop up to where I am on the 11th.
Wolfe:
Yeah. Do you know where you are on that day?
Judge:
Let me have a look. I think I'm scheduled -- oh, that doesn't help. I'm in North Vancouver that week.
Wolfe:
Okay.
Judge:
We could arrange, I suppose --
Wolfe:
Do it by video?
Judge:
-- to do it by telephone.
Wolfe:
Sure.
Judge:
If you were, say, in 100 or something, I could appear by phone.
Wolfe:
Sure, I'm open to making a 100 appearance on the 11th.
Judge:
Yeah.
Wolfe:
Sure.
Judge:
Okay. What time do they get here on the bus? What time do they get here?
Fox:
Usually about 9:15.
Judge:
9:15. Okay.
Fox:
But if the next appearance is just going to be another conference like this --
Judge:
Yeah.
Fox:
-- I guess I could appear by video. I mean --
Judge:
Yeah, why don't you appear by video, then.
You can appear, Mr. Wolfe, by video. I can attend -- and hopefully they have some room in 100 I could appear by telephone.
Wolfe:
So could we set it directly from here to Court 100 on the 11th?
Judge:
Yeah, we'll try that. They'll tell us if we can't at some point in time, at any event. But you're here on the -- the next appearance will be by video on the 11th.
Clerk:
[Indiscernible].
Judge:
Yeah, I direct set things if I want to direct set things.
Clerk:
[indiscernible]
Judge:
101?
Clerk:
[indiscernible]
Judge:
You're going to be in 101?
Wolfe:
Yes.
Judge:
Put it in 101 and they can move it up. Yeah. They're always telling me I can't do stuff, but it's necessary to do it, in order for the trial to go ahead. So I don't -- I used to do what they asked me to, and I'm too old to do that anymore, so I won't do it. Okay.
Fox:
There was one other thing that was discussed at the previous hearing that I just want to ask if Mr. Wolfe has any progress on: the possibility of having the CBP officer that I first spoke with testify or provide some statement. Remember I had asked you about that, and you said maybe you'd look into it. Because they would be able to testify about whether or not they were notified by CBSA prior to me presenting myself to them.
Judge:
Isn't that the sticking point? That's assuming that you actually met with somebody on the 15th, and that hasn't been established yet, has it?
Fox:
Well, the thing is, if CBSA had notified them that I was on my way over there, I must have spoken with someone. That's what that proves, is that I must have presented myself.
Judge:
Okay, I'm not going to -- Mr. Wolfe.
Wolfe:
I'm sorry, it's like I'm not going to get involved in a fishing expedition or running around and grabbing this witness or this guy --
Judge:
That's the whole issue, Mr. Fox --
Wolfe:
Yeah.
Judge:
-- is we're trying to get information about your dealings with CBSA and the CBSA won't cooperate.
Wolfe:
It's -- then Crown is - like, conscripted to do investigation. And I'm not being cheeky here.
Fox:
But the thing is --
Wolfe:
I'm not being cheeky, I'm just saying that straight out.
Judge:
It doesn't matter. The bottom line is, Mr. Fox, is you keep wanting to get evidence to buttress your defence.
Fox:
The thing is --
Judge:
The defence that you're going to have to testify to advance. If you testify under oath and there's no evidence, no evidence to rebut your story --
Fox:
Mm-hmm.
Judge:
-- that's the case that I'm going to have to deal with.
Fox:
Okay.
Judge:
Okay?
Fox:
The thing is, I'm not asking Mr. Wolfe to get evidence in my favour.
Judge:
Mm hmm.
Fox:
I'm asking Mr. Wolfe to get evidence that he claims to believe would prove his case.
Judge:
Yeah, I understand that. Mr. Wolfe understands that.
Wolfe:
Right.
Judge:
Okay, the 11th. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Fox, we'll see you on the 11th.
Fox:
Thank you.
(PROCEEDINGS ADJOURNED TO FEBRUARY 11, 2020 TO CONFIRM TRIAL DATE )