R. v. Patrick Fox; Court of Appeal Nos. CA47391, CA48145 [Patrick Fox; David Layton (BCPS)]

I will prepare an Amended Notice of Leave to Cross-Examine, with greater specificity, and forward it to you.

The cases you had provided me, which deal with the issues of applying for leave to cross-examine counsel on their affidavits, were all based on allegations of ineffective assistance against the defense lawyers and it was the defense lawyer who was tobe crossed; whereas here it's allegations of prosecutorial misconduct and it's the prosecutor that is to be crossed. Based on that, I question how analogous those cases are to the current circumstances.

In your letter you mentioned, a few times, thta if I prefer, we could discuss the given matter in a CMC. I consider a CMC, or any court involvement, to be a last resort, only when it is clear that a given issue cannot be resolved without the court's involvement.

Thank you for stating, in writing, that you will not admit that Johnson lied to the court or in his affidavit - but not actually denying that he lied to the court and in his affidavit.

I will prepare an amended Notice of Application to Adduce Fresh Evidence, explaining the reason for the additional transcripts and RFJ.

In the trial transcript for 244069-8-B/CA48145, there are a couple of errors which are critical to an issue I am raising in that appeal. They are: I believe these should be corrected before the Court of Appeal reviews the factums because I refer to them in my arguments. I would contact JC WordAssist about this myself, but historically they haven't paid much attention to me.

I've not heard anything from you regarding my request for assistance in accessing the email message I sent to editor@desicapuano.com on 2021-08-13 (see my letter dated 2022-07-18). May you please confirm you have received that letter?