The People vs. The Banks
The Greatest Battle


MENU
John-R: Dempsey BSCr. LL.B
Home
Class Action #1
Class Action #2
Class Action #3
John Dempsey
JFK VS BANKS IN MEMORIAM
Illegal Debt Collection
FAQs
links
site map

"The Law was made for man, not man for the Law"
...John-R: Dempsey, 1976 .........for Audio Interview Click Here

John by choice is not a member of any BAR association or law society. He does not "practice" law and therefore he does it for real and he does not represent his clients for money. He represents people as an independent representative in order to avoid any conflict of interest between himself, his principals, and the powers that be, namely, the governments, financial institutions, BAR associations and law societies. He pledges allegiance to no one but his CREATOR. He believes that true righteousness or justice is a free gift from God. He adheres faithfully to his motto: "MY GOD IS MY RIGHT."

As an independent legal specialist, listed below are the things John is not and will never be the lawyer who:

* Prosecute on behalf of the Internal Revenue Service or Canada Revenue Agency in order to imprison anyone for "failing to file" their income taxes.
* Be appointed or foisted upon you by a judge upon your being accused of any crime.
* Reject your filing of private documents into public record.
* Initiate and file criminal complaints against anyone.
* Confiscate property and funds from marital partners nor dictate child custody during divorce proceedings.
* Regulate private property via land use, planning laws and codes.
* Advise employers to confiscate funds by way of withholding tax from paycheques.
* Approve the confiscation and kidnapping by child protection agents of children from their families.
* Initiate foreclosure proceedings on behalf of banks and mortgage companies when you miss a few payments.
* Initiate debt collection proceedings on behalf of financial institutions who "advance credit" by way of counterfeit, electronic digital money.
* Confiscate your property when property taxes are not paid.
* Pilfer your estate by way of probate after you or your love one dies.
* Turn into a "crime" an activity which has been natural and lawful for centuries, yet due to new legislation or statutes, now requires licensing.
* Initiate actions against you for committing a crime which until recently was a lawful activity.
* Reap hefty fees for exaggerating personal injury claims causing insurance premiums to skyrocket.
* Claim to be able to handle personal disputes better than those involved.
* Complicate simple contracts between two parties where simple contracts become completely incomprehensible.
* File unnecessary, embellished paperwork for what would normally be considered simple claims.
* Depersonalize and complicate intimate processes such as adoptions.
* Be the only one allowed into a jail cell even though a friend or relative might be better to assist you.
* Play both sides of the court.
* Be a member of a BAR that police itself, in charge of accredititions of law schools, determine the curriculum in law schools by granting or refusing accreditition, make and enforce laws designed to work only for himself, make and enforce statutes which are impossible not to violate because there are millions of them.
* Be the power behind all agencies which control the rest of you.
* Be a henchman and revenue collector for the IMF and International Banksters.
* Become "power of attorney" when you hire him (grant him a "license to practice law"), thereby rendering yourself imbeciles and incompetent.
* Throw away your case and then send you a bill for screwing you up.
* Put a lien on your property and foreclose on your home if you can't pay your legal bill on time.

If you need help on any of the above, call your local BAR or law society. Please do not call :John-R: Dempsey.

You may contact :John-R: Dempsey via email at: classaction_cpa@hotmail.com or classproceeding@yahoo.ca

John has a new nickname: "The Vexatious Litigant"

Please see article published by the Province" a British Columbia newspaper. http://www.freewebs.com/classaction/VexatiousLitigant1.pdf

The Webster's dictionary defines the word "to vex" means to irritate, to annoy, to pain, to grieve, to disturb, to trouble. Vexation is the act of vexing or the state of being vexed; vexatious means, causing annoyance.

The SYSTEM, which includes the mainstream media such the Vancouver Province newspaper decided to brand John as a vexatious litigant without proper hearing or trial. This is a perfect example of how corrupt the legal system is. Should anyone be interested in finding out from John himself why he was branded a "vexatious litigant, John has created a new hotmail email account: vexatiouslitigant@hotmail.com .

It is really true that John must be a vexation, a thorn on the side of the corrupt legal system who wants to silence him for going against corrupt lawyers and judges who hides behind the statutes and other man-made rules in order to prevent anyone from suing them and exposing them of their crimes against the People of Canada and humanity.

The Law Society of British Columbia has filed a Petition in the Supreme Court to stop John from representing indigent clients in their lawsuits against corrupt governments and financial institutions.

John filed a lien against the useless criminal cartel called the Law Society of British Columbia in the amount $450,000.00 for their deliberate failure to compensate John for the theft committed by a corrupt member lawyer which caused the foreclosure of one of John's properties.

Read John's letter to Mr. Justice Williams: http://www.freewebs.com/classaction/LetterToJusticeWilliamsAug9.doc

Another title for John - "vexatious litigant" ya gotta love him. The SYSTEM hates him.
   
WITHOUT PREJUDICE ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
 
WARNING

The materials and information contained on this website are not intended to provide legal advice, but instead to provide general information regarding legal developments in the area of commercial litigation. Laws change rapidly, and judges have great discretion in these matters. Any court outcome will necessarily depend upon the specific factual and legal circumstances of each case. Some of the materials and information contained herein may include some obsolete information. No attempt has been made to address and comment on every development in the law. Persons viewing the materials and information contained herein should not take action based upon the contents of this web site, but rather should seek the advice of quality legal counsel. :John-R: Dempsey is not licensed to practice law in Canada or in any jurisdiction that requires membership in a BAR association or law society. Without exception, seriously consider consulting with a lawyer before you make any decision affecting your legal rights.

PEOPLE vs THE LEGAL SYSTEM

The Average Citizen Believes:
Our Legal System Believes:
The laws passed by elected officials constitute the "law of the land." The laws passed by elected officials plus all rules and procedures of the court including all legal precedents, past practice and case law constitute the "law of the land." If any of these are used to negate the other, "the law" is still being followed.
Rules and procedures of the court, legal precedents, past practice and case law are in place to give force to the will of the legislature. Judicial decisions are to give force to "the law." It is irrelevant whether rules and procedures of the court, legal precedents, past practice and case law give force to the will of the legislature since rules and procedures of the court, legal precedents, past practice and case law are all "law."
A Judge is wrong if their decision is not giving force to the clear intent of laws passed by legislatures. So long as a Judge's decision, however farfetched it may be, uses logic that in some form or fashion incorporates some legal reasoning, the decision can be considered legally sound.
The courts are in place to assist Citizens to right a wrong. The courts are in place to provide a procedure to Citizens. Whether Citizens are able to right a wrong is irrelevant.
The Canons Of Judicial Conduct are rules of behavior that are to be interpreted literally. Literal interpretations of the Canons Of Judicial Conduct are considered petty and can hinder a Judge from performing their duties.
Due Process' purpose is to bring about a result. Due Process is a process. A result is irrelevant.
Obtaining Justice is the ability to right a wrong. Justice is granted if a procedure is followed. End results or "righting wrongs" are irrelevant and would indicate a bias on the part of the Judiciary.
The courts take every precaution to insure Citizens don't go to jail unnecessarily. So long as Citizens can appeal we consider our job as being done correctly. Whether Citizens are in jail or not is irrelevant.
What if I can't afford an appeal or can't get the issues properly handled? Tough. Then you get into what is called the doctrine of finality. In other words, things stay as they are and your "due process" is complete.
The court screwed me in their rulings involving my case. Most likely what happened is your lawyer, the Judge or opposing counsel agreed to something either while at the bench, in chambers or at some other time when you couldn't hear what was going on. The court is covered because you were represented. If you were wronged, sue your lawyer.
It is almost impossible to get one lawyer to sue another involving cases like mine. We know that.
And my Lawyer and the Judge wouldn't allow me in chambers. We know that too.
So how am I supposed to know what is going on? You're not. Trust your lawyer.
A lawyer's first duty is to his client. All lawyer's first duty is to the COURT. [this includes law however it is received, procedures however selectively followed, policies, whims, current practices and appeasing Judges] Many lawyers second duty is to their incomes. The client comes at some point after that.

We are no longer a country of laws, we are a country of creative interpretations of laws!

Due Process as defined by most Judges: "First, decide how we want the case to go. Second, formulate a legal logic to support our decision. Third, manipulate, dissect or eliminate the facts and evidence to support our decision. Then the rubber stamp doctrine of "judicial discretion" will prevent most decisions from being overturned."

Truth as defined by most Judges: "Whatever lawyers say. After all, they have taken an oath when becoming members of the bar. Therefore it is acceptable to assume that the unrepresented may not be saying the truth since they have taken no such oath."

Truth as defined by most Lawyers: "Whatever works."

 

The above was taken from The Pro Se Way - an excellent website for self-represented litigants.

http://www.caught.net/caught/myths.htm

 
 
Other class actions filed by :John: Dempsey CLICK HERE: