College Park Court Appearance February 23, 2021

 

HOW TO WIN IN COURT WITHOUT A LAWYER

Called the virtual court at 1-855-703-8985

Metting Id# 641 3389 8872

Then pound# for Participant Id.

Password:  507613

Laura and I were able to access virtual court successfully.  

We were remanded to March 17, 2021, at 2:40pm.  For pretrial.  

I was told that it was Wednesday, March 17, 2021, at 2:40pm.  

His honor instructed us to apply for legal aid.  

February 24, 2021

Information for Laura to contact Legal Aid:

• calling us at 416‑979‑1446, toll-free at 1‑800‑668‑8258, or through Bell Relay service at 1‑800‑855‑0511 from Monday to Friday, 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. (EST)

The complaint starts here:

Are you looking for help with a police complaint, lawsuit, human rights complaint, or legal advocacy?

COMPLAINT

1. I was arrested on March 22, 2019
2. Jessica told the officers that I was her power of attorney.
3. The officer told me to come to the wall.  So, that he could talk to me.
4. He asked me what was wrong with Jessica?
5. I told him that Jessica was just tired.
6. I asked him if I was under arrest?
7. He said, no.  
8. Then I told him that I needed to use the washroom.
9. When I started to leave.  He took hold of my arm.
10. He told me that it would make his day if I tried to get away.

He then took the fanny pack off me and placed it on the bench. Then he started going through my pockets.  

1. After he had searched me thoroughly.
2. He then put handcuffs on me.  He said he was putting it on.  So, he could search my bag.
3. After he searched me thoroughly.
4. He said he is conducting an investigation to find out what drugs I gave her.
5. He said she told his partner that I gave her Fentanyl.
6. He then took the fanny pack off me and placed it on the bench.
7. He then started going through my pockets.
8. He then placed handcuffs on me.  He said he was detaining me.  So, that he could search my bag.
9. He then started questioning me about what drug Jessica was on?
10. I told him that I did not know anything.
11. He told me that I could talk to him.  
12. He just wanted to know what drugs I had on me.  
13. And what drugs.  Jessica was taking. 
14. He told me just tell him the truth.  He doesn't care about drugs.
15. But, if he finds out that I'm lying, it will be a different story.
16. He told me that she was overdosing and dying.
17. And it will be my fault because I won't tell him what I gave her. 
18.  I didn't care about her because I won't tell him what drugs I gave her.
19. He told me he knew I had Fentnaly in my fanny pack. 
20.  And he was going to eventually search it.
21. I told him that, I had given her any drugs.  She was just tired.
22. I told him that she was on |Methodone and tired.
23. I told him that I was, KingoftheWorld!
24. He then told me he found a lot of Fentanyl in it.  
25. He said I was going to jail for a very time now.
26. I was taken to a clear plexiglass cell.  
27. I was searched
28. The officers then made me use the washroom in front of them.
29. I was not allowed to flush the toilet.  So, that they could search for it.

https://king6475572606.wxsite.com/writingsonthewall

www.HowToWinInCourt.com?refercode=MK0040

Case-Winning Paperwork ... Part 1

Want to drive your opponents nuts? Tie them down with word-power! Stuff your opponents in a word-box! Many pro se people don't understand this ... so they lose ... needlessly. Many lawyers don't understand ... so they also lose and take their client's money anyway! Sentences with ONE VERB. Sentences with ONE SUBJECT. One subject. One verb. Keep adjectives and adverbs to a bare minimum. If it's important to say your opponent's nose was gigantic, say so. Otherwise, leave it out! Each sentence is a complete thought. Mrs. Edgerton taught that in First Grade, and it wins in court today. No run-on sentences! Know how to write proper case-winning paperwork. What legal principles is my claim based on?   False Imprisonment A cause of action is a set of factual elements that entitle a plaintiff to sue and which, if proven, cause the plaintiff to win and be entitled to a remedy from the court.*  That remedy might be money, an injunction (i.e. an order of the court to “not do that again”), or some other type of relief. At its most basic, a cause of action is a behavior that judges have consistently found entitle a plaintiff to relief.  For example, to succeed in a claim for “false imprisonment”, the plaintiff must prove that: his liberty was totally deprived; the deprivation was against his will; and, the deprivation was caused directly by the defendant. If the plaintiff proves these elements, and the defendant does not successfully raise a defense to the action, the plaintiff will generally succeed with its lawsuit.

www.HowToWinInCourt.com?refercode=MK0040

JurisDictionary® shows how. You won't need a lawyer!

Free Course Preview

Physical Torts

• Assault

• Battery

• False Imprisonment

A cause of action is a set of factual elements that entitle a plaintiff to sue and which, if proven, cause the plaintiff to win and be entitled to a remedy from the court.*  That remedy might be money, an injunction (i.e. an order of the court to “not do that again”), or some other type of relief. At its most basic, a cause of action is a behavior that judges have consistently found entitle a plaintiff to relief.  For example, to succeed in a claim for “false imprisonment”, the plaintiff must prove that:

1. his liberty was totally deprived;

2. the deprivation was against his will; and,

3. the deprivation was caused directly by the defendant.

If the plaintiff proves these elements, and the defendant does not successfully raise a defense to the action, the plaintiff will generally succeed with its lawsuit.

Received the following email from Dr. Graves on February 22, 2021 

at 2:56pm

King …

Wrongful(sp) arrest is a cause of action, just like others, with essential fact elements

 that must be alleged and proved.

 

The course is How to Win in Court … the website is www.HowToWinInCourt.com

 

The company is Jurisdictionary ®.

 

Hope this helps.

DISCOVERY

I received the following email from Amy on February 22, 2021,

at 2:51pm.

Mr. Morgan

I have had a chance to speak to Mr. Charney about proceeding via emails and written questions. 

We are willing to proceed in this fashion.  Below is a letter from him.

Please reply to me with your answers.

Thanks

Amy

 

Mr. Morgan,

 

I understand that you booked a phone consultation with me, but you now would like to have me give you advice in writing.  I am agreeable to this, but I believe that it will be much less efficient than by phone and you will not get the same level of advice.  Talking by phone allows for much easier back and forth.  In any event, below are a few 

questions.  Please answer these questions and we can start there.

 

What is the reason for you contacting me?

If you are hoping to discuss a specific event, please give me details of the event.

What do you hope to achieve with legal representation?  What are your goals?

Are you looking for help with a police complaint, lawsuit, human rights complaint, or legal advocacy?

Can you pay for the services that you hope to obtain?  My rate is $375/hr.

What are the specific questions that you want me to answer?

Davin

www.HowToWinInCourt.com

No Lawyer? No Problem!

KingoftheWorld! Pleading

I understand that you booked a phone consultation with me, but you now would like to have me give you advice in writing.  I am agreeable to this, but I believe that it will be much less efficient than by phone and you will not get the same level of advice.  Talking by phone allows for much easier back and forth.  In any event, below are a few questions.  Please answer these questions and we can start there. 

On March 22, 2019, I was arrested.   Davin from your perspective it would be more efficient to talk on the phone because you know most of the answers for everything I will have to consider.  For me, writing is the best way to get results and communicate my thoughts.  Even in law writing is the most important thing.  What's written holds authority over what is said.  Unless you have the conversation recorded.  And even then the court would prefer the written pleadings.  Ultimately law is the written word.

Wrongful (sp) arrest is a cause of action, just like others, with essential fact elements that must be alleged and proved.

 

  The tort of false imprisonment involves an unlawful restraint on freedom of movement or personal liberty. 

 In order to establish false imprisonment, two essential 

elements must be proven.  

They are:

• Detention or restraint against a person’s will,
• The unlawfulness of the detention or restraint.

I will have to search for the transcripts to submit as evidence to prove the unlawful detention.

The elements to be considered by the jury in awarding compensatory damages in a false

 imprisonment case are physical suffering, mental suffering and humiliation, loss of time

 and interruption of business, reasonable and necessary expenses incurred, and injury to

 reputation[iii].

Similarly, in Pitts v. State, 51 Ill. Ct. Cl. 29 (Ill. Ct. Cl. 1999), it was observed that the

 the principal element of damages in an action for false imprisonment is the loss of 

freedom, although a court also takes into account, to a modest degree, the fear, 

and nervousness

 suffered as a result of the detention.

In order to constitute false imprisonment, there must be an exercise of force, 

or express or implied threat of force, by a person is deprived of his/her

liberty and compelled to remain where s/he does not wish to remain[iv]. 

The restraint of a person can be caused by threats, as well as by

actual force and the threats can be by conduct or by words[v].

In order to constitute false imprisonment, there must be an exercise of force,

or express or implied threat of force, by which a person is deprived of his/her

The restraint of a person can be caused by threats, as well as by 

actual force and the threats can be by conduct or by words[v].  

In order to constitute false imprisonment, there must be an exercise of force,

 or express or implied threat of force, by which a person is deprived of his/her

It is not necessary that the threat of force in an action for false imprisonment be express.

It can also be implied in nature.

However, mere threats of future actions will not constitute false imprisonment.  It is the 

apprehension or fear by which a person is restrained of liberty that can cause false 

imprisonment[vi].

It is to be noted that assault is also considered one of the elements of false imprisonment.  

However, it is not necessary that an individual be actually confined or assaulted, or even 

that s/he must be touched[vii].

Likewise, actual malice or bad motive are not recognized as essential elements

 of an action for false imprisonment[viii].  

The element that is necessary to make such a charge

 is that an individual is restrained of his/her liberty without any sufficient legal cause[ix].  

However, under certain jurisdictions, malice is considered an element of false 

imprisonment.

Similarly, lack of probable cause is not recognized as an essential element

of the action for false imprisonment.  At the same time, some courts require the parties

to show probable cause.  The presence of probable cause for imprisonment is a

 defense if it constitutes reasonable grounds for acting in defense of property or making

an arrest without a warrant[x].

The question of false imprisonment is a combined question of law and fact.  It is a 

question of law for the court to decide what facts will constitute false imprisonment and a

 question of fact for the jury, whether such facts are necessary to make it false

imprisonment under the law as settled by the court[xi].

[i] Pechulis v. City of Chicago, 1997 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11856 (N.D. Ill. Aug. 7, 1997).

[ii] Hoffman v. Clinic Hospital, Inc., 213 N.C. 669 (N.C. 1938).

[iii] Jenkins v. Pic-n-Pay Shoes, Inc., 1985 Tenn. LEXIS 536 (Tenn. July 15, 1985).

[iv] Harris v. Stanioch, 150 Wash. 380 (Wash. 1928).

[v] Id.

[vi] Roberts v. Coleman, 228 Ore. 286 (Or. 1961).

[vii] Hales v. McCrory-McLellan Corp., 260 N.C. 568 (N.C. 1963).

[viii] Broughton v. State, 37 N.Y.2d 451 (N.Y. 1975).

[ix] Adair v. Williams, 24 Ariz. 422 (Ariz. 1922).

[x] Aiken v. Holyoke S. R. Co., 184 Mass. 269, 271 (Mass. 1903).

[xi] Vandiveer v. Charters, 110 Cal. App. 347 (Cal. App. 1930).

In order to constitute false imprisonment, there must be an exercise of force,

 or express or implied threat of force, by which a person is deprived of his/her

 liberty and compelled to remain where s/he does not wish to remain[iv].  

The restraint of a person can be caused by threats, as well as by 

actual force and the threats can be by conduct or by words[v].  

It is not necessary that the threat of force in an action for false imprisonment be express.

It can also be implied in nature.

However, mere threats of future actions will not constitute false imprisonment.  It is the 

apprehension or fear by which a person is restrained of liberty that can cause false 

imprisonment[vi].

It is to be noted that assault is also considered one of the elements of false imprisonment.  

However, it is not necessary that an individual be actually confined or assaulted, or even 

that s/he must be touched[vii].

Likewise, actual malice or bad motive are not recognized as essential elements

 of an action for false imprisonment[viii].  

The element that is necessary to make such a charge

 is that an individual is restrained of his/her liberty without any sufficient legal cause[ix].  

However, under certain jurisdictions, malice is considered an element of false 

imprisonment.

Similarly, lack of probable cause is not recognized as an essential element

of the action for false imprisonment.  At the same time, some courts require the parties

to show probable cause.  The presence of probable cause for imprisonment is a

 defense if it constitutes reasonable grounds for acting in defense of property or making

an arrest without a warrant[x].

The question of false imprisonment is a combined question of law and fact.  It is a 

question of law for the court to decide what facts will constitute false imprisonment and a

 question of fact for the jury, whether such facts are necessary to make it false

imprisonment under the law as settled by the court[xi].

[i] Pechulis v. City of Chicago, 1997 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11856 (N.D. Ill. Aug. 7, 1997).

[ii] Hoffman v. Clinic Hospital, Inc., 213 N.C. 669 (N.C. 1938).

[iii] Jenkins v. Pic-n-Pay Shoes, Inc., 1985 Tenn. LEXIS 536 (Tenn. July 15, 1985).

[iv] Harris v. Stanioch, 150 Wash. 380 (Wash. 1928).

[v] Id.

[vi] Roberts v. Coleman, 228 Ore. 286 (Or. 1961).

[vii] Hales v. McCrory-McLellan Corp., 260 N.C. 568 (N.C. 1963).

[viii] Broughton v. State, 37 N.Y.2d 451 (N.Y. 1975).

[ix] Adair v. Williams, 24 Ariz. 422 (Ariz. 1922).

[x] Aiken v. Holyoke S. R. Co., 184 Mass. 269, 271 (Mass. 1903).

[xi] Vandiveer v. Charters, 110 Cal. App. 347 (Cal. App. 1930).

All of which leads to making the world better.

In order to constitute false imprisonment, there must be an exercise of force,

 or express or implied threat of force, by which a person is deprived of his/her

 liberty and compelled to remain where s/he does not wish to remain[iv].  

The restraint of a person can be caused by threats, as well as by 

actual force and the threats can be by conduct or by words[v].  

It is not necessary that the threat of force in an action for false imprisonment be express.

It can also be implied in nature.

However, mere threats of future actions will not constitute false imprisonment.  It is the 

apprehension or fear by which a person is restrained of liberty that can cause false 

imprisonment[vi].

It is to be noted that assault is also considered one of the elements of false imprisonment.  

However, it is not necessary that an individual be actually confined or assaulted, or even 

that s/he must be touched[vii].

Likewise, actual malice or bad motive are not recognized as essential elements

 of an action for false imprisonment[viii].  

The element that is necessary to make such a charge

 is that an individual is restrained of his/her liberty without any sufficient legal cause[ix].  

However, under certain jurisdictions, malice is considered an element of false 

imprisonment.

Similarly, lack of probable cause is not recognized as an essential element

of the action for false imprisonment.  At the same time, some courts require the parties

to show probable cause.  The presence of probable cause for imprisonment is a

 defense if it constitutes reasonable grounds for acting in defense of property or making

an arrest without a warrant[x].

The question of false imprisonment is a combined question of law and fact.  It is a 

question of law for the court to decide what facts will constitute false imprisonment and a

 question of fact for the jury, whether such facts are necessary to make it false

imprisonment under the law as settled by the court[xi].

[i] Pechulis v. City of Chicago, 1997 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11856 (N.D. Ill. Aug. 7, 1997).

[ii] Hoffman v. Clinic Hospital, Inc., 213 N.C. 669 (N.C. 1938).

[iii] Jenkins v. Pic-n-Pay Shoes, Inc., 1985 Tenn. LEXIS 536 (Tenn. July 15, 1985).

[iv] Harris v. Stanioch, 150 Wash. 380 (Wash. 1928).

[v] Id.

[vi] Roberts v. Coleman, 228 Ore. 286 (Or. 1961).

[vii] Hales v. McCrory-McLellan Corp., 260 N.C. 568 (N.C. 1963).

[viii] Broughton v. State, 37 N.Y.2d 451 (N.Y. 1975).

[ix] Adair v. Williams, 24 Ariz. 422 (Ariz. 1922).

[x] Aiken v. Holyoke S. R. Co., 184 Mass. 269, 271 (Mass. 1903).

[xi] Vandiveer v. Charters, 110 Cal. App. 347 (Cal. App. 1930).

In order to constitute false imprisonment, there must be an exercise of force,

 or express or implied threat of force, by which a person is deprived of his/her

 liberty and compelled to remain where s/he does not wish to remain[iv].  

The restraint of a person can be caused by threats, as well as by 

actual force and the threats can be by conduct or by words[v].  

It is not necessary that the threat of force in an action for false imprisonment be express.

It can also be implied in nature.

However, mere threats of future actions will not constitute false imprisonment.  It is the 

apprehension or fear by which a person is restrained of liberty that can cause false 

imprisonment[vi].

It is to be noted that assault is also considered one of the elements of false imprisonment.  

However, it is not necessary that an individual be actually confined or assaulted, or even 

that s/he must be touched[vii].

Likewise, actual malice or bad motive are not recognized as essential elements

 of an action for false imprisonment[viii].  

The element that is necessary to make such a charge

 is that an individual is restrained of his/her liberty without any sufficient legal cause[ix].  

However, under certain jurisdictions, malice is considered an element of false 

imprisonment.

Similarly, lack of probable cause is not recognized as an essential element

of the action for false imprisonment.  At the same time, some courts require the parties

to show probable cause.  The presence of probable cause for imprisonment is a

 defense if it constitutes reasonable grounds for acting in defense of property or making

an arrest without a warrant[x].

The question of false imprisonment is a combined question of law and fact.  It is a 

question of law for the court to decide what facts will constitute false imprisonment and a

 question of fact for the jury, whether such facts are necessary to make it false

imprisonment under the law as settled by the court[xi].

[i] Pechulis v. City of Chicago, 1997 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11856 (N.D. Ill. Aug. 7, 1997).

[ii] Hoffman v. Clinic Hospital, Inc., 213 N.C. 669 (N.C. 1938).

[iii] Jenkins v. Pic-n-Pay Shoes, Inc., 1985 Tenn. LEXIS 536 (Tenn. July 15, 1985).

[iv] Harris v. Stanioch, 150 Wash. 380 (Wash. 1928).

[v] Id.

[vi] Roberts v. Coleman, 228 Ore. 286 (Or. 1961).

[vii] Hales v. McCrory-McLellan Corp., 260 N.C. 568 (N.C. 1963).

[viii] Broughton v. State, 37 N.Y.2d 451 (N.Y. 1975).

[ix] Adair v. Williams, 24 Ariz. 422 (Ariz. 1922).

[x] Aiken v. Holyoke S. R. Co., 184 Mass. 269, 271 (Mass. 1903).

[xi] Vandiveer v. Charters, 110 Cal. App. 347 (Cal. App. 1930).

All of which leads to making the world better.

HOW TO WIN IN COURT CANADA

 Jurisdictionary ®

866-LAW-EASY

( 647-557-2606)

Then wanted to write some fiction?  Stay focussed.  You know what 

Is important.  

You know what the true law is my son.  You believe and you're

on the right course.  So, just enjoy life. My laws must

come first and must not be manipulated.  

What do you hope to achieve with legal representation?  

I will be seeking $200 000.00 in damages.  I want to come out of the

lawsuit with $100 000.00.  This is an acceptable settlement.  

They can gamble if they want?

What is the reason for you contacting me?

If you are hoping to discuss a specific event, please give me details of the event.

So, what I am requesting now is that you send me a copy of my final bill and your files to

Amy Walden contact info. of which contained in a previous text.
www.fredvictor.com

If you are hoping to discuss a specific event, please give me details of the event.

Ashley Audet – Legal Aid Ontario

www.legalaid.on.ca/lawyers/ashley-audet

Ashley Audet Contact Information. 155 University Avenue Suite 1920 Toronto, ON M5H 3B7 

Get Directions (416) 576-0612 Specialties. Criminal; Gladue Panel; Languages Spoken. English; 

English * Call us at 1-800-668-8258 Monday to Friday from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. ...

www.HowToWinInCourt.com?refercode=MK0040

Case-Winning Paperwork ... Part 1 Want to drive your opponents nuts? Tie them down with word-power! Stuff your opponents in a word-box! Many pro se people don't understand this ... so they lose ... needlessly. Many lawyers don't understand ... so they also lose and take their client's money anyway! Sentences with ONE VERB. Sentences with ONE SUBJECT. One subject. One verb. Keep adjectives and adverbs to a bare minimum. If it's important to say your opponent's nose was gigantic, say so. Otherwise, leave it out! Each sentence is a complete thought. Mrs. Edgerton taught that in First Grade, and it wins in court today. No run-on sentences! Know how to write proper case-winning paperwork. What legal principles is my claim based on?   www.HowToWinInCourt.com?refercode=MK0040 JurisDictionary® shows how. You won't need a lawyer!

Free Course Preview

 What are your goals?

I realized that both my goals and what I am hoping to accomplish become another book and

my statement of claim.   Or what I have to refer to as a statement of claim at this point.

Here I will be telling the court what compensation that I am seeking and how I feel the ordeal

has negatively impacted my life.  

I want to set the premise here as jail being the worst thing you can do to a human being.

Other than maiming a person.

Finding Evidence ... Part 4 Depositions Depositions get evidence before trial. Ask any questions and get answers under oath! Any questions that are "reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence" are allowed. Show people things and ask questions about those things. People must answer your questions under oath with an official court reporter making a written official court record of everything they say, the testimony you can use to win. The deponent (person being deposed) is exposed to criminal penalties for perjury (lying under oath). The deponent can also be found in contempt and sent to jail for refusal to answer your questions. Depositions put your opponent and every necessary witness under oath before trial and get answers to questions that go beyond the tight restrictions of the rules of evidence that control at trial! Facts you seek at a deposition need not be admissible at trial so long as they are "reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence". Know-how and when to take depositions. JurisDictionary® shows how. You won't need a lawyer!

Free Course Preview

Justice Should be for ALL! ( Not Just the Rich who can Afford Lawyers! ) Jurisdictionary® IS "Justice for ALL!" Share this Legal Tactics Newsletter!

https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashley-audet-547b42193/?originalSubdomain=ca

Amy Waldman

Office Manager

Davin Charney Law Professional Corporation

400 - 197 Spadina Avenue

Toronto, ON M5T 2C8

Phone: 647-346-9247

Fax: 1-855-867-7301

Toll Free: 1-866-710-4898

Email: amy@charneylaw.ca

Can you pay for the services that you hope to obtain?  My rate is $375/hr.

What are the specific questions that you want me to answer?