Tag Archives: Gordon G. Watson

Free Speech Warrior Gordon Watson Victim of A Trans Complaint

Posted on by

To : BROWN BROS. AGENCIES LTD.
ATTENTION Gurwinder Kaur
delivered by hand


Bill of Particulars
01 your letter to me dated January 23 2026 warns that I am in jeopardy of litigation. Therefore
it is important that BROWN BROS AGENCIES is aware of my 35 years’ political activity out of
which I got a legal education, the hard way. A Justice said of me “Mister Watson is a longtime
political activist”. I am one of the lay experts in Canada on the topic of contempt of Court.
Twice, in separate cases, I demanded the Prosecutor stipulate what they alleged I had done
wrong. Both times, they refused to do so. Each time I went before a judge who then directed
them to provide a Bill of Particulars. Similarly, I hereby demand something in the nature of a
Bill of Particulars itemizing precisely the complaint made by ‘Unit 1’ about me. And without
limiting the generality of such document, whether or not the tylerperson, or the other tenant in
Unit 1, told you that they are proceeding to the BC Civil Rights Tribunal.
Signage
02 I draw your attention to NO PARKING signs which appeared on the fence, shortly after
new residents moved in to Unit 1. My understanding is, that the road allowance goes from the
centreline to 40 feet South up to the lot line at 5177 William Head Road. Thus, those signs
mislead people to believe that the roadside where we park is private property. I think it’s public
space where anyone can park legally. By what authority was the signage posted ?
“Yes” ? or “no” ? did Unit 1 obtain permission from BROWN BROS. to post those signs?
03 the signage came off as presumptuous but I didn’t care. Why it matters at all, is, because it
told me that whoever put them up, did so to stake their territory. It was the first hint of the pattern
in which Unit 1 made herself obnoxious. After the ‘conflict’ ( your word ) of Jan 7 th 2026,
there is no doubt in my mind but that – from the start – the tylerperson was bent on asserting
herself so as to compel attention to her malady.
first impression of her
04 first time I saw the tylerperson she appeared to be a woman presenting herself as a man.
I find transgender people unsettling, sensing an element of the supernatural, which creeps me
out. But I don’t make a scene about it. At first, I was polite so there was no problem. Shortly
after she moved in, as I came across the lawn she was standing sideways. I noticed she had an
extraordinarily flat chest. Which told me that her breasts were removed, indicating she had
advanced to the next stage of gender dysphoria, i. e. the profound mental illness known as
Apotemnophilia.
incident in the laundry room
05 A couple of weeks before the “conflict” purported in the letter of Jan 23 2026, I was in the
laundry room ready to use the washing machine. The machine cycle was finished with clothes
still in it. The habit around this building – for the 7 years that I’ve been here – is, if someone
else’s laundry is in a washer or dryer in which the cycle has finished, we take them out and set
them aside on a chair. In this instance, I put what was in the washer on a chair right by it. Shortly
after, the tylerperson approached me, saying that they ‘had not finished… that they’d gone for a
walk down to the beach and hadn’t finished doing their laundry’. She was civil.
I decided I wouldn’t again take the chance of encountering her … I’d wait til it was completely

Page | 5

2

empty before using a machine. That is a bit more circumstantial evidence indicating that the
tylerperson arrived at 5177 William Head Road with a chip on her shoulder.
her misapprehension re the particular parking spot
06 about the beginning of January 2026 , the tylerperson spoke to me about a particular
parking spot out front of the property at 5177 William Head Road. She asked whose car was in it.
I told her that the car belonged to Robin’s father, that he usually stayed a few days and it would
be vacant when he left so she could use it. Considering what happened later, it seems she got the
notion that I had given her permission to use that particular parking spot from then on,
exclusively. But that isn’t what I said : what I did say, was, after Robin’s Dad left, anyone
could then use it. That conversation was civil.
her interaction with another tenant
07 It is important for BROWN BROS. to take in to account the incident – a couple of weeks before the
altercation about the trash and the parking spot – when the tylerperson encountered Robin Penfold in the
laundry room. Later, Robin told me that the Unit 1 tenant had said quite nasty things to her. … some kind
of modern woke perjorative about Robin being ‘an entitled white woman.’ Dave and Robin’s family are
the nicest people you’d want to meet. Ideal tenants, for a long time. A newcomer throwing their weight
around re something as basic as using the laundry, speaks volumes about their their attitude. This bit of
circumstantial evidence indicates that the life of the tylerperson is all about the politics of ‘gender’.
08 whereas your letter sez I “ … had a dispute with another tenant, Tyler, on January 7
2026”, in fact, nothing was in dispute. On the evening of Jan 7 th 2026, the tylerperson knocked
on my door. When I opened it, she backed away from me to the far side of the porch landing. At
the time, I though it odd, but it didn’t matter. In light of what happened after, I now believe that
she distanced herself , anticipating trouble. It started out OK, but degenerated. She asked
about the parking spot where my friend Stephanie was sitting in her Jeep using her phone at that
moment. , ‘you told me that place was ours”. Calmly, I said that the car there belonged to a
friend of mine. And that I would get her to move it right away. I explained ‘ it’s available to
everyone’. She persisted arguing that I’d allocated it to her and the other resident of Unit 1,
exclusively. I was bemused. I said “do you think you own that spot?” To which she replied
“I’m the master of the universe. I own that parking spot. I own everything” direct quote.
I took that as comic relief indicating she agreed that it was a small thing, not worth quibbling
about. Again, I said “OK I’ll go and get SL to move her Jeep right now.” direct quote
09 I met SL around 2022 at the precinct of the Legislature. In those days, she
and I and thousands of people were witnessing against imposition of medical martial law,
occasioned by the Covid19 HOAX. In late December 2025 I emailed her a photograph of her on
the sidewalk on Belleville Street in happier times. She replied asking what I’d be doing on New
Year’s eve. I told her to come on over if she felt like doing so.
10 At that time, she was homeless, living in her Jeep off and on. I invited her to stay at my
place, ad hoc. Which she did until the day of the “conflict” which is the premise for your letter to
me of Jan 23 2026. It is important for BROWN BROS. to appreciate that Stephanie Lockett is
not some drug-addled vagrant. She is a health-conscious young woman, employed by an agency
to clean houses, and is actively seeking a place of her own. BROWN BROS. is well aware of the
difficulty ordinary people are having finding decent shelter. Thus, I was happy to be able to
extend a bit of respite in the depth of the cold weather. Although SL did sleep on
the kitchen floor in my suite a couple of times, she found it more comfortable to bed down in her
Jeep while coming in to use the bathroom and do a bit of food prep. She would find the most
level place to park. Which is why she’d parked in that spot.

Page | 5

3

11 Next on the agenda of the tylerperson was, complaint that someone else’s garbage had
been put in the bin for the residents of Unit 1. I said that it must’ve been my friend who had
done that, unknowingly. I assured her it wouldn’t happen again. I went back inside my suite,
put my shoes on, then came out and went downstairs to tell Stephanie who was sitting in her car,
using her phone. Tylerperson followed me down the stairs.
verbal conflict with her
12 As we walked under the porch, I assumed that I’d remedied the concerns she’d raised,
having made it perfectly clear that I don’t have authority to allocate who can park where. But she
went on talking about it. Again, I told her ‘people had regular spots in which they parked, but a
vacant spot was available to anyone’. Pointing at Lynn’s truck I said “for instance Lynn always
parks there”. Tylerperson remarked “Lynn doesn’t drive”. Direct quote Which struck me as a
nonsequitur. Exasperated by her relentlessly interrupting and talking over me, I said “are we
past that now?! look. it’s not up to me who parks where! It’s cold and wet out here. I just want
to get back inside.” Then, sarcastically, I said “What do you want? Shall we get our lawyers
and meet on neutral territory? !” direct quote hoping she would realize she was making a
mountain out of a molehill, and quit bitching. But Miss Bossyboots wasn’t finished … she
sneered “You’re raising your voice to intimidate me because you’re a man” direct quote.
I replied “I’m raising my voice and using repetition in order to get my message across to you!”.
direct quote. Mature people will appreciate that a man raising his voice when he’s reached the limit
of his patience with a nag is normal in female/ male interaction. In this case, me being the male
13 As I started walking to the parking spot, it dawned on me that she’d unloaded a classic
stereotype of male-female wrangling. I turned back and retorted
“it’s hard to tell if you’re a man or a woman!”
Immediately she came close alongside me, yapping-away as I strode up the hill. Political
activists with whom the tylerperson associates – Marxist commutards – are coached how to turn
confrontation with their enemies into full-on offences, which they exploit in court and in the
media. Their trick, is : insult the opponent into outrage so he pushes back. At which point, they
call the police, playing the victim. Intruding their body into the personal space of their
opponents is another tactic. I’ve seen it happen / experienced it during melees with my political
enemies. I worried she would literally “get in my face” provoking me to shove her out of my
way, then she’d have what she wanted, attention from the cops in which I’d be portrayed as the
villain of the piece. I ignored her. I did hear her say the words “you just misgendered me!
That’s illegal ! monster ! ”. direct quote
14 I determined to get-the-hell-away from her immediately thereafter have absolutely nothing
more to do with her. I went to the driver’s side of the Jeep. SL was opening the car door. I
said to her “you’ll have to move your Jeep”. Having heard the noise, SL was already
getting out, apologizing to the tylerperson, saying “It’s all my fault”. They continued speaking
as I walked away. The tranny then pursued me, calling out “coward !” repeatedly. Direct quote.
An intelligent person will grasp the irony of the accusation in the letter of Jan 23 2026 – i.e. that I
used “aggressive language” – contrasted with the vitriol spewed by the tylerperson. Reaching
the bottom stair, I stopped, saying to her “just so you know I’ve been through sixty court cases.
Sixty” direct quote Then went back inside my suite.
15 Contrary to your statement that
“during the meeting of January 16 the you acknowledged and expressed regret for the comments
and behaviour directed to your neighbour Tyler.” I do not regret the words of my retort to the
tylerperson. Reconsidering that bizarre encounter since the meeting, my response, now, is the modern

Page | 5

4

no-fault apology : ‘sorry not sorry’ Although it’s not hard to guess what sex she is … even with the
beard disguise … in fact, I did say “it’s hard to tell if you’re a man or a woman. NOTE BENE she’s the
one who provoked me, first, by voicing the sex-based stereotype.
materials in support of my position
16 The materials enclosed are integral to this my reply to the First Written Warning – Quiet
Enjoyment Conduct. They explain why people entranced in the trans-gender cult are hypersensitive to
an aspersion cast on how they identify themselves. I regret that the clash happened at all because the non-
sense resulting from it is wasting my time. First and last, I regret that I let her bullying drag me down to
her level. I resent your record making me solely at fault.
17 it is quite important that BROWN BROS. appreciate the fact that, neither of the vehicles driven by
the residents of Unit 1 has been parked in that spot since that night. Their vehicles are parked in places
farther down the road. Begging the question: what was that fuss about ?! It answers itself : the
“conflict” was a gambit in her dominance game. Because I outwitted her by acceding to her demand, she
then cranked up the drama. Comically in that stereotype = ‘a man using a loud voice to intimidate a
woman’ = she identified herself as female !
18 the transgender cult believes the absurd notion that a human being may be born in a wrong body.
They posit that masquerading as the opposite sex transmutes someone into a universe where human beings
are ‘non-binary’. After which they demand that everyone else must co-operate in such delusion. The main
thrust of the transgender industry, is, trolling normal people to pay attention to their malady. A friend of
mine worked at the clinic which treats transgender people. She said “they’re very unhappy people.”
Such insanity drives them to unload their own unhappiness on to normal folks. They are very active in
politics. Using the communist slogan “oppression is the root of all harm”, they agitate for laws to be
enshrined compelling compliance with their delusion. Transgressors suffer punishment at law for “wrong-
think”.
19 Trannies hate and fear guys like me because we refuse to go along with the doctrines of their cult.
According to her cult, I = a white Christian male = personify the “oppressor”. One of the tenets of my
religion, is, what Jesus said “who, by taking thought can add a cubit to his stature?” That device of
rhetoric compels one who hears it, to think for himself and consider it, so as to realize the limitation of a
human being. Parallel being “who by taking thought can change her sex ?” For those of us dwelling in the
real world, the answer is > a female does not become a male by imagining it to be so. The root cause of
the altercation was religious difference ; the tylerperson hates me because she’s already well aware I don’t
share her delusion that she’s a he.
20 Integral to this my rebuttal, is, the performance of George Carlin seen at
URL https://www.facebook.com/reel/2276177559787882
In one minute he speaks volumes : “when your ideology becomes your identity The incident on Jan 7 th
was a setup. She came to my door to play out a deepseated problem originating elsewhere in her own life.
21 whereas at the meeting Gurwinder Kaur faulted me for “aggressive talk”. In fact, the tylerperson
was the one bullying me in the first instance. Whereas your letter asserts that I “ understand that your
behaviour was unacceptable” … I do not so understand. What are you talking about?
Exactly what are the “ … comments and behaviour that were directed towards your neighbour Tyler ??”
One of the principles of British jurisprudence, is “audi alteram partem”. At the meeting at the office of
BROWN BROS. first thing I did, was, ask for the facts of what was alleged. Gurwinder Kaur refused that
much, as though her word “safety” said it all. The “comments” at issue were in context of a 2 way
exchange. Did Unit 1 tell you the whole story? … did she relate exactly what she’d said to me in the
“conflict”? I doubt it. Likely she unloaded a lie or 2 on you, presenting herself as the victim of a bigot.
Denied knowing what the complaint is, I cannot properly deal with it. At this point time, what I do know
for sure, is = a tranny lashed out at me with one of the patented insults of her cult, so I dished it back to
her. After which she pursued me, taunting. Nothing is so useless it can’t at least be used as a bad example
: that ‘teachable moment’ demonstrated a side effect of a woman injecting testosterone harvested from
pigs.

Page | 5

5

22 this my response is not exhaustive. What I said to Gurwinder Kaur at our meeting was not all of what
I have to say regarding the “conflict”. At that meeting I could not properly make my full answer because
she refused to tell me. I was left guessing after the brief phone conversation we had the previous day.
Heading to her office that morning I had made up my mind to abandon the meeting unless she gave me all
the information I needed in order to defend my position. She point blank refused to do so. In the meeting,
I changed my mind and asked her to record what I said. Which she did. I have more to say once I get
legal advice, and after I get more information about the political activity of the tylerperson, her criminal
record and lawsuits to which she has been party. I require and hereby demand a precise, complete
statement on paper, of what was conveyed to Gurwinder Kaur by “Unit 1” regarding the purported “conflict
“ of January seventh 2026 at 5177 William Head Road.
first, the identity of the complainant,
and second, the total complaint
23 up til Jan. 07 2026, I did not have a problem with a tranny living near me : I do now. The
tylerperson is the one who spoiled the quiet enjoyment which I had previously. BROWN BROS, too,
has a problem > the resident in Unit 1 threatened to go to court so as to upset the quiet enjoyment of the
other residents of this building.
24 finally, I point out the expectation at the end of your letter re “co-operation”. I am now
hypervigilant to stay away from all individuals who appear to be “transgender”. The extent of my own co-
operation will be to give both of them in Unit 1 a very wide berth. Since you say
“any further incidents of this nature will be considered a serious and
continuing breach of your Tenancy Agreement”,
that cuts both ways. I expect BROWN BROS. to warn them to do the same about me.
Gordon S Watson
Enclosures
PHOTOS OF SIGNAGE
Trish Wood WHY ARE CANADIANS SO VULNERABLE TO TRANSHYSTERIA
J D HALL VOICES VISIONS and SCALPELS : TRANSGENDERISM AND DEMON POSSESSION
EMILY JOFFE THE RISE AND FALL OF YOUTH GENDER MEDICINE
JAMES SEARS ACCEPTING “TRANSGENDERISM” AS REALITY PROMOTES MENTAL ILLNESS
MARGARET WENTE THE GREAT AWOKENING
JAMIE REED I THOUGHT I WAS SAVING TRANS KIDS
DETRANSITIONERS TESTIFY IN US GOVERNMENT HEARINGS

Next Stage in Complaint re: The Anti-Free Speech riot at the British Columbia Legislature, Sept. 20th, 2023

Posted on by

I have not forgotten the insult visited on us at the riot at the Legislature.   A mob of urban terrorist counter-protesters ruined the gathering at which speakers were informing the public about the IN-sanity of the SOGI program.

The head of the Criminal justice Branch ignored my letters.  Then when I laid criminal charges myself, the Deputy Attorney General stayed my private Information.   By no means is this over.  I am now preparing for Judicial Review of that ‘stay’.   This message is sent to the 30 + people I know,  who were there that day,  outraged as I was  … and still am … by what we experienced.   I am gathering witness statements to put in front of a Judge

On February 21st 2024, I went in to the Provincial Court at Victoria and submitted a private Information. The 5 counts are spelled-out below.   Justice of the Peace P Braz   endorsed my complaint.   He then asked me to provide more information for the Crown Counsel.    I came back a day later and handed in the 3 letters which I had previously sent to Deputy Attorney General Peter Juk, head of the Prosecution Service. The letters recited the facts, including the transcript of the ZOOM call in which leaders of the labour unions in Canada declared they would  DISRUPT  DISTURB  DEMORALIZE rallies planned by the #1 Million March 4 Children. That transcript is hard evidence of criminal conspiracy to commit indictable offences.   Mr Juk  never replied.    

JP Braz set down the matter to be heard in Court April 17th 2024 to fix a date for the next stage in the process. 

After an Information is laId,  the Informant appears before that Justice of the Peace, or, a judge of the Provincial Court, for a Process hearing in camera.   Meaning : closed to the public.  After hearing the complainant and his witnesses,   the judge decides if a case has been made out sufficient for it to go ahead to trial.  If so,  he or she directs the Registrar to put the matter on the Court List. 

Over the last 40 years, I have laid a couple dozen private Informations.  Out of them, 
4 times my complaint did go for a full hearing. A few of them proceeded to trials, out of which came a couple of convictions.

I have been through more than a couple of Process hearings  So I know how it goes. Or, how it’s supposed to go.   On  February 29th 2024 Kimberley Henders Miller Deputy Regional Crown Counsel notified me that she had directed my charges to be ‘stayed’.

the Judicial Review tells the court that I have been denied my right to due process of law.  As well,  that the Criminal Justice Branch cannot treat this matter fairly because of perceived conflict of interest :ie.  that the Prosecution Service is fully entrained in the mind-set of the administration of the day ( the NDP government )  which assumes the mental illness of A-pot-em-no-philia is ‘normal’.    So that those of us who assert our political and /or religious opinion out loud,  are breaching the Civil Rights Code.  Result being : the government agency which ought to prosecute those who carried on a criminal conspiracy to “DISRUPT   DESTROY   DEMORALIZE”  ( as they boasted in their ZOOM call, 2 weeks in advance of the riot ) instead, protects the offenders from accountability at law in order to save the government from embarrassment. 

I am asking those of you who were profoundly offended by the riot to prepare a written statement of what you recall happened on the lawn of the Legislature,  on September 20th 2023.  Your statement can be as long as you like.  Then get it to me.  It will form part of the Materials to be relied upon  in my Petition for Judicial Review.

I am not a lawyer.  I do not pretend to be a lawyer. I do not take $$s for legal advice. Feel free to contact me to help you put together a “will say” statement.  If you want to,  your witness statement can be made in to an Affidavit,  then,  sworn at the Registry counter for $40.   Photographs and/or significant items/ documents can be attached to it as Exhibits in order to get them in as evidence.


What I want is, for a Justice of the Supreme Court to hear me out in a proper Process Hearing. Especially, for witnesses to each take the stand to corroborate my charges. At that stage, the thing is public.  Publicity is the soul of Justice

Gordon S Watson      May 11th 2024

…………………………………………………………………………………….

Court Identifier  187706-1

CANADA:

PROVINCE OF BRITISH COLUMBIA

PROVINCE DE LA COLOMBIE-BRITANNIQUE

In the Provincial Court of British Columbia
 

In the matter of  An Act respecting the criminal law   RSC 1985 Chapter C-46

Form 2

 

INFORMATION

This is the Information of / les presents constituent la denonciation de Gordon Stephen Watson, politician, (“the informant” / le denonciateur ) of / de Metchosin British Columbia, hereinafter called the Informant.

Count 1 :  The Informant says that he has reasonable and probable grounds to believe and does believe that:  on September 16th 2023 via a conference call in which some of its participants were in British Columbia, BC FEDERATION OF TEACHERS ;  BC FEDERATION OF LABOUR ;  BC GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES UNION doing business as BC GEU ; RON HALPIN ;  ONTARIO FEDERATION OF LABOUR ; PATTY JARVIS COATES ;  CHANDRA–LI PAUL ; VICKI SMALLMAN ; CANADIAN LABOUR CONGRESS ;  YOLANDA B’DACY  ; MARTIN REILLY ;  EMILY QUAILE ; PETER VEITCH ; CAROLYN EGAN ; ANTHONY MARCO ; MUNIB SJJAD ;  DON FRY ; CUPE ONTARIO ; SUSAN GAPKA ; JOHN DOE ; JANE DOE  did agree one with another to counsel commission of crimes at places across Canada, particularly, the grounds of the Legislature in Victoria, thus engaging in a conspiracy to commit an indictable offence,  to wit, common nuisance contrary to sections 465 and 180 of the Criminal Code.                                                                    

Count 2 :  The Informant says that he has reasonable and probable grounds to believe and does believe that:  on September 16th 2023 via a conference call in which some participants were in British Columbia, BC FEDERATION OF TEACHERS ;BC FEDERATION OF LABOUR ;  BC GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES UNION doing business as BC GEU ; RON HALPIN ;  ONTARIO FEDERATION OF LABOUR ; PATTY JARVIS COATES ;  CHANDRA–LI PAUL ; VICKI SMALLMAN ; CANADIAN LABOUR CONGRESS ;  YOLANDA B’DACY  ; MARTIN REILLY ;  EMILY QUAILE ; PETER VEITCH ; CAROLYN EGAN ; ANTHONY MARCO ; MUNIB SJJAD ;  DON FRY ; CUPE ONTARIO ; SUSAN GAPKA ; JOHN DOE ; JANE DOE  did agree one with another to counsel commission of crimes at places across Canada, particularly, the grounds of the Legislature in Victoria, thus engaging in a conspiracy to commit an indictable offence,  to wit,  wilfully disturbing or interupting an assemblage of persons met for moral, social or benevolent purpose,  contrary to sections 465 and 176 of the  Criminal Code.

Count 3 :  The Informant says that he believes on reasonable grounds that on September 20th 2023 WINONA WALDRON ; BC FEDERATION OF TEACHERS ;  BC FEDERATION OF LABOUR ;  BC GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES UNION doing business as BC GEU, via their union members,  agents and/or employees, did make common nuisance on the grounds of the Legislature in Victoria,  and that they did so deliberately to compel him to abstain from his lawful right to participate in the democratic process,  contrary to section 180 of the  Criminal Code.

Count 4 :  The Informant says that he believes on reasonable grounds that on September 20th 2023 WINONA WALDRON  ;  BC FEDERATION OF TEACHERS ;  BC FEDERATION OF LABOUR ;  BC GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES UNION doing business as BC GEU, via their union members,  agents and/or employees, did make common nuisance on the grounds of the Legislature in Victoria,  and that they did so deliberately to compel him to abstain from his lawful right to assemble peacefully with other citizens,  contrary to section 180 of the Criminal Code.   

Count 5 :  The Informant says that he believes on reasonable grounds that on September 20th 2023  on the grounds of the Legislature in Victoria 
WINONA WALDRON ; BC FEDERATION OF TEACHERS ;   BC FEDERATION OF LABOUR ;  BC GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES UNION doing business as BC GEU, via their union members, agents and/or employees ; JOHN DOE ; JANE DOE  did intimidate him and others and that aforementioned ACCUSED did so to compel him to abstain from his lawful right to participate in the democratic process, contrary to section 423 of the Criminal Code.

Pursuant to section 508 1. (2) of the Criminal Code and/or section 13.1 of the Offence Act ( British Columbia) the Informant states that all matters contained in this Information are true tomy knowledge and belief  Suivant le paragraphse 508.1 (2) du Code criminal et / ou l’article 13. 1  de l’Offence Act (Colombie-Britannique), le denonciateur declare croit vrais, au meileur de sa connaissance, les renseignements contenus dans la denonciation.  

_______________Signed by Gordon S Watson  _________________________
Signature of Informant / Signature du denonciateur

Dated / Fait le  February  21st    2024 A. D.

At  Victoria  British Columbia / Colombie-Britannique

Process / Acte de procedure  ________ confirmed

                                                Signed by P Bray

                                                 _______________

                         A Justice of the Peace in and for the Province of British Columbia
                          / Un juge de paix, dans et pour la province de la Colombie-Britannique

surface mail address : 
            #4  5177 William Head Road Metchosin British Columbia V9C 4H5

Telephone 250 39 1 1103
email < watson.gordons@gmail.com >
 

Posted on by

Arthur Topham RIP –

pril 28, 2024

topham.jpeg

Arthur Topham – 25 February 1947 – 23 March 2024
The thought police tried to silence this courageous Canadian. They failed.

March 2017–No jail time for Canadian man convicted of online anti-Semitism

Arthur Topham barred from internet for 6 months, says he has a duty to alert the public to ‘imminent threat of Jewish lobby’

https://www.timesofisrael.com/no-jail-time-for-canadian-man-convicted-of-online-anti-semitism/

by Monika Schaefer


Sadly, we have lost a great thinker, writer, teacher, courageous truth-teller, and brave warrior who always fought for what is right. Arthur Topham passed on after an illness with cancer on the 23rd of March, 2024 in Quesnel, BC. He was 77 years old.
Many people will remember Arthur through his brilliant writing and creation of memes and articles on his site Radical Press. This began in 1998 as a print publication called The Radical with a subtitle “Digging to the root of the issues”, and a few years later he switched from print to solely online production. The subtitle was a direct reference to the etymology of the word “radical” – the root. Digging to the root of the issues was what Arthur Topham did brilliantly. He had long been an activist who wrote frequent letters to political figures and to editors of newspapers, and over the years, as he dug down deep to learn about true history, his writings became ever more dangerous to the “establishment”. There were complaints from Jews about the contents of his Radical Press website, and a dozen or more years of legal harassment, persecution and conviction followed.
I was first introduced to Arthur Topham in about 2013, and I became an avid reader of his Radical Press on-line publication. In subsequent years Arthur published several articles in which he featured content from me. Later when I was thrown in jail, Arthur worked tirelessly to publicize my case. He created memes and posters, he informed the public about whom they could write letters to on my behalf, and he wrote excellent letters pushing for my release. He was so effective in fighting for me,in fact, that at some point he was accused of breaching his own sentencing conditions which resulted in more years of legal harassment for him.
I am forever grateful to Arthur Topham for all that he did, for all of us.

monika-schaefer-believes-holocaust-was-a-lie.png(Holocaust skeptic Monika Schaffer) 
This was how Arthur finished one of his emails to me a number of years back, before my incarceration. I include it here as a message of inspiration to us all.
“Be strong my friend and keep on loving, living, making music and speaking the truth! And may God protect you always. (My theme has always been Psalm 23 since I began this quest and I find great comfort in it. The table is just about prepared!)
Mehr Licht!”
[More Light!]

Although he at various times occupied various parts of the political spectrum, Arthur Topham was a consistent free speech warrior. He paid dearly for his outspoken courage. CAFE supported him at his 2015-2016 “hate trial” in Quesel. An eclectic group of free speech supporters attended the trial and rallied around him, people from as far away as Japan, England (expert witness Gilad Atsman), the U.S., Ontario, Saskatchewan, Alberta and, of course, British Columbia. 

In cross-examination, we learned many interesting things, especially from Len Ruidner, the Canadian Jewish Congress’s “expert” witness. Some of the problematic and horrific, yes, hateful, verses from the Talmud, for instance, justifying sex with little children, he didn’t disavow, except to suggest that these passages were merely rabbis “speculating.” The jury, in a typically Canadian half-and-half decision, convicted Arthur of one count of promoting “hate” and acquitted him of the other. Juries in Canada don’t give reasons. So, we never learned which writing they deemed “hate” and which was merely opinion. — Paul Fromm, Director, Canadian Association for Free Expression.

Arthur attended Simon Fraser University back around 1969. He became a school teacher and taught in Quesnel for a while.

For a long time, he published a hard copy tabloid called The Radical. It was a lot of fun — an old fashioned hippy paper advocating decriminalizing marijuana and all sorts of alternative ideas.
He/the Radical was put through the meatgrinder of Court because he printed the scandal about Indian Chief Ed John being accused as having committed sexual assault. At that point in time, Ed John had been appointed to the Cabinet of British Columbia, even though he was not an elected MLA! 
Arthur wound up in the Supreme Court of BC at Vancouver, along with Kevin Annett. The judge, James Taylor, issued an Order that Arthur was prohibited from publishing anything about the scandal. I was there. Arthur stood up in Court. Mr Annett was there, lurking around, but lacked the courage? to go into the Courtroom. The thing was just begging to break wide open as an important test of Freedom of the Press but Arthur did not have the means to pursue it. Years later, his own people called-out Ed John.
The turmoil Arthur went through after being charged with “hate speech” demonstrated how the meatgrinder process of the criminal justice system is a punishment unto itself. 

The cops / the Prosecutors did things that were blatantly ILlegal. For instance, they walked in with a very suspect Warrant to Search, seized everything in sight, especially his computer, which was crucial to him being able to prepare his Defence. Then they kept his computer for years.
Lawyer Doug Christie relished the case, because it gave him the opportunity to test his question about “if something happens in cyber-space, alleged to be a crime, where does it actually take place?” 

Sadly, Doug died in 2013 prior to Arthur’s trial.
At Arthur’s trial, the judge took Judicial Notice that the material at issue, Arthur repurposing the book Germany Must Perish”, into a perfect parallel entitled Israel Must Perish” was satire. 

I thought that what he had done was very witty.I am pretty sure that Arthur had composed his piece of Art ( satire) at his home in Quesnel British Columbia. Then sent it via the internet to a website with a server in the United States of America.
At that point, anyone who accessed that website, in order to view it on a computer screen, was “operating’ in the territory of the U.S. of A.The point being no-one ever did an act in the real world anywhere in the Dominion of Canada, which contravened section 319 of the Canadian Criminal Code. 

In the US, that material is not a criminal offence. In the US the concept of Free Speech, includes the reciprocal … the right to listenI was in communication with Arthur all that time. I got Dr Henry Makow to agree that he would take the witness stand for the Defendant. But Arthur’s lawyer never called him. 

As well, I was adamant that Arthur take the witness stand in his own defence. But his lawyer Barkley Johnson prevented him doing so. A jury wants to see the Defendant. They make up their mind whether or not they like him. Then they decide if he’s guilty or not.
The black humor at the end of the trial was there were two charges identical except for the dates of the allegations. The jury convicted him of one, but acquitted him of the other! The sentence was UN-believable: he was ordered not to talk about anything to do with the Jews for yearsHe was pretty de-moralized for years after. — Gordon Watson, Justice Critic, Party of Citizens Who Have Decided To Think for Ourselves & Be Our Own Politicians,

Free Speech Activist Gordon Watson Launches A Human Rights Complaint for Discrimination by Fountain Diner Because He Was Not Masked

Posted on by

Free Speech Activist Gordon Watson Launches A Human Rights Complaint for Discrimination by Fountain Diner Because He Was Not Masked

is the opening skirmish in my campaign to have one aspect of the KronaMadness scrutinized in a court of law. Starting with a tiny, apparently in-significant incident.  My technique, is = bundle-up your complaint so someone who knows nothing about it can grasp it, then put it in front of someone who can do something about it.

I am no fan of the BC Human Rights Commission. Yet it is a proper starting-point up the ladder of Court … getting a ruling on the legitimacy of Commissar Farnsworth’s  “mandate” for  muzzling British Columbians = particularly, the exemption which is expressly set out in his Ministerial Order. 

Gordon S Watson
Justice Critic, Party of Citizens Who Have Decided To Think for Ourselves & Be Our Own Politicians
……………………

December 1st  2020

 British Columbia Human Rights Commission

This is my complaint that on November 30th 2020  employees of the Fountain Diner restaurant in Langford British Columbia unreasonably denied me a service normally available to the public,   contrary to the BC Human Rights Code.          

01             since about June 2020, I have been paying attention to the issue of the imposition of regulations under the Emergency Program Act  and also  Public Health Act . In August 2020,
I received from the office of the Ombudsman a copy of his report   “Extraordinary Times Extraordinary Measures”.  That report is available at the URL on the internet website URL

https://bcombudsperson.ca/investigative_report/extraordinary-times-extraordinary-measures/

Over-simplified, the opinion of lawyer Jay Chalke, is :  the administration which had been in power prior to the election of 2020,  exceeded its authority, so that powers it presumed to enshrine in law, are un-constitutional ab initio.  UN-learned in the law as I am, I say that >
Orders predicated in those Acts, made consequent to illegal amendments to them, are each invalid.     Particularly:  the diktat of Commissar Farnsworth re compulsory wearing of face coverings = Ministerial Order M425 made November 24 2020 =   is of no force nor effect.
A copy of that order is enclosed as Item  ONE  of Materials to be relied-upon
 
02             in the fall of 2020, I began requesting copies of the Orders made by Chief Medical Health Officer Henry as they were advertised in the newsmedia.  Each time I called the main office of the Ministry of Health, asking for a hard copy of the most recent Order, I was told “it’s not available”. Then about a week later, it would be posted on the internet.  Point being : in the meantime, lacking proper NOTICE, the Chief Medical Health Officer had not complied with that Act ergo her Order was not in effect in that timeframe

03             After studying this topic for the last few months, my position today is =  the Covid 19 phenomenon is a HOAX of the first order.  It is the worst medical mistake in modern history.  Included as Item TWO and integral to this my complaint, is the transcript of remarks made by Dr Roger Hodkins buttressing my opinion.  Also : Item THREE of Materials to be relied upon is the article by the past president of the Ontario Medical Association Mask Laws Necessary or Nonsense? 

04            Item FOUR of Materials to be relied upon, is, a batch of pertinent pages from the Kaplan Report. It is crucial that the Human Rights Commission know and take in to consideration, that in her official capacity as a health officer in British Columbia Bonnie Henry md gave evidence to the Kaplan Commission re the efficacy of wearing masks to prevent transmission of contagious disease in hospital settings.  I have good reason to believe and I verily do believe, that in the labor arbitration carried on between the BC Nurses Union and the Health Sciences Association re the issue of whether or not nurses were compelled to wear masks in hospital settings   Bonnie Henry in her capacity as Chief Medical Health Officer for British Columbia signed a Memorandum of Understanding in which she acknowledged that the wearing of masks was irrelvant to transmission of contagious disease, particularly, the influenza virus. The labor arbitration was settled behind closed doors, in December 2019.   That Memorandum is now improperly hidden from the public.    It is crucial for the purpose of this my complaint against the Fountain Diner that the Human Rights Commission compel Dr Henry to produce that Memorandum of Understanding – or whatever that document is titled – as evidence in this my complaint. 

05            Also  Item FIVE of the Materials to be relied upon, the interview COVID-19: Americans are in ‘delusional psychosis’.    It is crucial that the Human Rights Tribunal appreciate that section 103 of the Public Health Act  RSBC provides for a categorical defence to a prosecution under it, if the accused had a sincere belief as to the veracity a certain set of facts.    

06            On or about September 2020,  in my investigation of the Corona Madness,  I came upon the letter of the Vancouver Coastal Health Authority,  informing Translink as to the legality of compulsion to wear the face muzzle. A copy of that letter is Item SIX of the Materials to be relied-upon.     When I learned about the exemption card offered by Translink,  I immediately published that image around the internet, and handed it to people whom I encountered in what we used to call “the real world”, recommending that they get it and use.  Dozens of people went to the Translink offices and got the card, for free, or printed it out from my email message. Feedback I got from them tells me that Translink drivers do acknowledge that that card is valid for the sake of exempting the bearer from wearing a muzzle. It is important that the Human Rights Commission appreciate that that policy was in effect on November 30th 2020, the day I was denied entry to Fountain Diner.   Around that same time, I came upon the image of a card which declares that the person using it is exempt from compulsion to wear a “mask”.  A photocopy of the front and back of that card is Item  SEVEN  of the Materials to be relied upon.     Ironically, when I came back home to compose this complaint, I saw a bus go by in which the driver was NOT wearing a muzzle.   Shocking, eh? !

07              For context, it is worth noting the following anecdotes.  On Monday November 23rd 2020 I was in Vancouver at work in the STAPLES store on Seymour street downtown. The manager of the store came about 20 feet from me and politely said “sir you have to have a mask on”.  I said to him “I’ve got the exemption card”. He was happy with that and left.  He did not ask to see the card itself.  Shortly thereafter, I attended the Registry of the Lawcourts building at 800 Smithe Street.  At the entrance, I was challenged by a deputy Sherriff.  I showed him the exemption card.  He glanced at it but did not read it.  He went through the protocol questions with me, then directed me to go ahead and enter.  I filed a document with the Registry Clerk, then left the premises.    In Vancouver and in Burnaby and in Surrey, I entered several other businesses including restaurants. When they politely asked me to put on a mask, I showed them the card and had no problem. With one exception.  In that instance, I simply ignored the fool who refused to acknowledge the declaration,  continued to finish what I was doing – photocopying – then left the premises. On Wednesday November 25th 2020 I came back to Swartz Bay on the ferry and had no problem with the staff as I walked around, breathing freely un-muzzled.   Despite relentless annoying messages over the public address system about requirement to wear a mask, no one challenged me anywhere on the ship.

08             On the morning of November 26th 2020, at approximately 10:30 am, I called the head office of the Ministry de Health :  250 952 1330 identified myself and told the telephone receptionist that the Public Health Act Order of which I’d heard rumors, was not available on the website of the office of the Chief medical Health Officer. Recognizing my voice from the other times I’d called asking for a copy of Orders which were pretended to be in force as of those days yet not available, she said “we’ve had this converstation before.”  I demanded her name and position. She said “Angela patient client relations”

09            The Public Health Act RSBC dictates that a person subject to an order must be notified of that Order.  I told “Angela” that I required a hard copy of that Order so that I could originate a Request for Reconsideration pursuant to its section 43 as I had done twice before. In both instances, there has been no reply from the Chief Medical health Officer nor anyone else in her Ministry. Even though in that exchange,  I offered to drive downtown and pick up a copy were they to make it available Angela told me that there was no Order available via the internet nor anywhere else.    Days later, I learned that the rumor about a “masking mandate” originated with Ministerial Order in Council M425 made – ostensibly – under the Emergency Program Act.  Thus,   the receptionist, in charge of advising the public what was going on for all things to do with the Ministry de Health was in ignorance about the state of the law

10             On Friday November 27th  2020 I went in to Langford.  UN-muzzled, I went in to the place where I do banking.    No one said a word to me about anything to do with a mask.  I then went to the Canada Post outlet in the Westshore Town Centre mall.    After noticing the headline on the Times-Colonist newspaper, I purchased a copy in the Fairways store.     No one there said anything to me about not being muzzled.    Reading the frontpage article headed At odds over whether doctor’s note required to not wear mask : item EIGHT of Materials to be relied upon, I noticed the quotation from the Emergency Management BC.  In the Canadian Journalism style manual,  such double quotation marks indicate that that is precisely what was said.   I went over to the STAPLES store on McCallum Road.   No one there said a word about me not wearing a muzzle, because I am a regular customer and have shown the exemption card to most of the employees, over the past couple of months.     I cut the article out of the newspaper and fitted it on one sheet then made many photocopies. My intent was,  to hand them out, for free, to people with whom I might come in contact so as to prompt discussion about the facts and logic to do with government policy to do with the so-called “pandemic”. 

11            On Monday November 30th 2020 I went up to the door of the Fountain Diner at  102- 2800 Goldstream Avenue Langford British Columbia.  I went inside the door and spoke to a waitress.  I gave her my name to put on the list of customers waiting to get in.  The look she gave me conveyed that she was unhappy that I was not wearing a muzzle.   About 10 minutes later, she came out and called my name. When I stepped up as though I would enter, she impeded me.  She said  “you have to wear a mask”.  I had in my left hand quite obviously, the exemption card.  Politely,  I put it closer to her face so she could get a good look.  She glanced at it but did not read it.  She said something like ‘it isn’t from a government office’.  I said to her  ‘read it.  The Human Rights commission is a government body.’  She turned away saying she would get the manager.

12            A few minutes later, another woman walked up to me saying she was the manager.  She spoke but it was hard to understand what she said through the cloth diaper she was wearing over her mouth.    After another try, I gathered her name was “Crystal”.  She told me she was refusing me entry because I did not have on a face mask.   I held out the exemption card for her to inspect. She sneered at it.  I pointed to the explanation on the back. She refused to read it. In short order, it became perfectly clear that she was not going to let me in. 

13            I warned her that if she was refusing to acknowledge the declaration on the card as excuse to deny me service normally available to the public,  I would make a complaint to the BC Human Rights Commission.   She said  “that’s your choice”.  I responded “no, that’s your choice.  You chose not to serve me contrary to the law    I left

I hereby entreat the Human Rights Commission to haul the Fountain Diner folks in to line …. educate them, as well as all citizens, as to their duty to obey the law
 

Gordon S Watson

Post Office box  47034   Langford P O British Columbia V9B 5T2