|
| |
- March 15, 2002
Ministry of the Attorney General Ontario
Ontario Court of Justice (Criminal)
530 Queensway St. West
SIMCOE, Ontario
Attention: Judge/Justice of the Peace or Whom it May Concern
Private Information #1
This “information” sworn to Ministry of Transportation Ontario for:
Conspiracy and Fraud as Related to Forged
Government Documents To The Illegal Interference with Business Relations of
Nichols Gravel Limited
In 1989 Nichols Gravel
Limited sub contracted to Huron
Construction to supply Granular A for shoulders to #3 Highway M.T.O.
contract 89-66. This aggregate had to meet M.T.O. specification, and on the
second day of the project, we were informed that our gravel from Pit. 3 had
failed to meet the petrographic stone hardness specification based on 2 test
results, and a stop work order was issued by M.T.O. which resulted in the
loss to Nichols Gravel of this $100,000.00 contract. Further investigation
revealed that a young lady named “Mara” did the testing and that she had
received her training under Chris Rodgers of M.T.O. the previous year and
that this was her first experience testing on her own at the M.T.O. London
Geotechnical Laboratory.
A letter of protest
was written to the Minister of Highways regarding the arbitrary actions of
M.T.O. staff London who refused to conduct further testing before
cancellation of contract. See Letter April 14th, 1997, O.P.P. Staff Sergeant
Erskine enclosure, Item #5
M.T.O. staff were not
accustomed to having their negligent
actions criticized, and I believe this resulted in animosity to Nichols
Gravel Limited and developed into a conspiracy to retaliate against Nichols
Gravel Limited. In support of this contention I offer the following
evidence.
Our
gravel was disqualified based on
2 incomplete test results by an inexperienced lab technician. No comparative
testing done by an experienced M.T.O. Lab technician before
cancellation of contract on August 18th, 1989. NOTE: Petrographic test
results not completed and published until August 21st, 1989 after
cancellation stop work order had been issued. See test #1
When there was objection from Nichols Gravel Limited to the August 18th,
1989 M.T.O. stop work order and the testing which provoked the order, M.T.O.
staff Chris Rodgers, C.M. Bond, Cy Barber and others conspired to selective
Granular B pit face sampling in order to confirm the accuracy of their
original 2 test results.
This allowed Cy Barber to visually look at the pit face and select from
specific areas where shaley aggregate was present in order to ensure that
Nichols aggregate would exceed the Petrographic limit number of 200. However
this was slightly overdone as the test results revealed in the September
22nd, 1989 letter compared to the original 2 tests confirm a huge increase
in P.N. values over the original 2 test results further confirming the
conspiracy of deception in an attempt to cover for staff’s negligent
actions.
The stop work order was issued based on only 2 tests of Granular A -
Contract 89-66 did not specify the use of Granular B, therefore there should
have been no sampling or testing from the pit face of uncrushed Granular B
aggregate. It should also be noted that there were 5 separate stockpiles in
the pit for this project. Rather than take selective samples from the pit
face, what M.T.O. should have done was test the existing 3 stockpiles which
had not been tested as a correlation to the first 2 tests. The fact that
this was not done and selective pit run samples were taken from the pit face
confirms the intent of the conspiracy to cover-up for the negligent
inaccurate testing and the arbitrary stop work order issued by M.T.O..
Later testing by Professor Hudec from the University of Windsor who had
taught Chris Rodgers of M.T.O., and George Woda, retired from M.T.O.
confirmed from testing the same stockpiles that our gravel had met the
required specification, then the cover-up began when all later testing by
M.T.O., the petrographic number values continued to increase to become worse
than the previous test results. See letter September 22nd, 1989 enclosure
April 14th, 1997 O.P.P. S.S. Erskine #1
back to
top
2.
The
second conspired fraudulent production
occurred when in 1990 officials of M.T.O. conspired to illegal interference
with business relations, when they became aware of our intent to purchase
another pit property adjacent to our Pit 2 in Burford Township.
This property owner, Robert Spriet had previously requested that M.T.O. test
his property for gravel, and in May of 1990 M.T.O. suddenly appeared and
requested permission to proceed to dig test holes, which permission Mr.
Spriet granted. I noted at the time that M.T.O. was digging test holes, but
I had no contact or discussion with any M.T.O. staff at that time.
On July 19th, 1990 Nichols Gravel Limited concluded an agreement for land
purchase from Mr. and Mrs. Spriet owners of R & L Tobacco Acres Ltd.
approximately one and a half months after M.T.O. dug test holes on the
Spriet property.
It was not until the dispute with Delhi Township and Mr. Andersons’
October 1993 Aggregate Sources List Policy that we became aware of the
conspiracy of M.T.O. officials, when we received through a F.O.I. Request in
December 1993 a copy from Delhi Township files of a 1991 A.S.L. 91-06 which
had listed the log hole testing done on the property of R & L Tobacco
Acres in May 1990 but which had been listed under
G. Nicholls name without our knowledge or permission and circulated publicly
throughout the Province for then a period of 3 years. It is not possible to
calculate the damage to our business due to the manipulated inaccurate test
result information in this document. I immediately called Cy Barber M.T.O.
London and demanded that this pit be retested, and a man was at our pit from
London within 2 hours to take samples. The testing of December 1993
confirmed that our gravel was acceptable for Granular A, further confirming
the manipulated damaging information on the 1991 A.S.L. for ASL B13-140,
which indicated (N) not acceptable. See copy of May 1st log hole testing by
D.W. Mantle under G. Nicholls name. This was a fraud because the property
owner at the time of M.T.O Log Hole Testing was R & L Tobacco Acres
Ltd.. April 14th, 1997 O.P.P. S.S .Erskine enclosure #10
Further evidence of conspiracy to injure by M.T.O. is found in the
comparison record for Pits 2 and 4 listed on M.T.O. A.S.L. as B13-140. It
should be noted that Pit 2 consisting of approximately 38 acres was
established in 1980 and Pit 4 in 1990 with a total of 47 acres adjacent to,
and directly south of Pit 2. Pit 4 was log hole tested in May 1990 the
following spring after the August 1989 dispute at Pit 3 over M.T.O. testing
contract 89-66. Total acreage of Pits 2 and 4 is 85 acres.
In respect to the M.T.O. testing record entered in evidence at trial May
1996 by M.T.O. Mr. Katona (retired) please note the average of petrographic
numbers on this deposit prior to 1990 at 118.5 and the huge increase in
petrographic number values to 177.8 after the 1989 testing dispute with
M.T.O. all in the same deposit encompassing 85 acres.
This obviously confirms the manipulated testing of M.T.O. as it is not
possible to have this huge variation in one small deposit. See M.T.O.
testing record comparison. Mr. Katona Court Evidence 1996.
The testing manipulation is further confirmed on the Granular A February
4th, 1994 test results with stone hardness micro Deval test at 11.4% and Los
Angeles abrasion test at 8%. It is not possible to have these 2 tests this
low, and have a Petrographic number test this high at 210.6. Definitely a
product elimination scheme by M.T.O..
What further confirms the manipulation, is an M.T.O. test result on concrete
stone from Pit 2 B13-140 completed September 13th, 1993 from gravel from the
same stockpile as the December 2nd, 1993 sampling which confirmed a
petrographic number of 119.4 H.L. and concrete, actually 91.2% lower than
the February 4th, 1994 completed test result H.L. and
concrete at 210.6. This extreme variation also is not possible, same pile,
same pit. See M.T.O. test result February 4, 1994 and September 14th, 1993.
See copy of our Lawyers’ letter confirming the date of closing on property
purchase and registry date of transfer of legal ownership of land July 19th,
1990 to Nichols Gravel Limited. See letter August 13th, 1990. April 14th,
1997 O.P.P. S.S. Erskine enclosure #10.
The May 1990 testing was first listed for A.S.L. M.T.O. contract 90-95
issued February 6 1991 and contained additional fraudulent information as it
listed the source owner as
Gary Nicholls. Our Lawyer’s letter August 13, 1990 confirms the property
was purchased and registered to Nichols Gravel Limited.
This conspired illegal interference with fraudulent information involved
Chris Rodgers, C.M. Bond, Cy Barber and D.W. Mantle, the District Engineer
and Mr. Richard Puccini who also was the author of the July 1990 fraudulent
letter regarding performance testing #3 Highway.
The conspiracy to illegal interference is confirmed by the production and
distribution of these falsified documents and manipulated testing
information in respect to Nichols Gravel Limited as published on the M.T.O.
1991 ASL 91-06. See 1991 A.S.L.
See copy M.T.O. December 1993 Test Results. Date stamped February 4th, 1994
back to
top
This
incident confirms:
1. Falsified and Forged documents.
2. Fraud through the production and public distribution of these documents.
3. Conspiracy to illegal interference with business relations through the
production and public circulation of these documents without our knowledge
or authorization, which in fact eliminated this source from competing for
M.T.O. contracts in the area until it was retested and approved for Granular
A December 1993.
back
to top
See Documents:
1. Copy of log hole testing by D.W. Mantle May 1990.
2. Copy of Lawyers August 13th, 1990 letter confirming legal date of
purchase through registration of land on title.
3. Copy of M.T.O. ASL 90-95
4. Copy of M.T.O. A.S.L. 1991 91-06 with inaccurate information yellow
marked Granular A unacceptable.
5. Copy of December 1993 M.T.O. test result confirming this source
acceptable for Granular A.
Further note that the distribution of information from the May 1990 M.T.O.
Log Hole Testing found on Aggregate Sources List 90-95 and A.S.L. 91-06 and
others up to December 1993, as listed under the Nichols name without our
knowledge, permission or authorization, is in fact an infringement of
security and privacy rights under Privacy and Information Legislation
further confirming this conspired scheme by officials of Ministry of
Transportation Ontario.
3.
- The
third conspired fraudulent production
by M.T.O. was the July 9th, 1990 letter addressed to Gary Nichols
by Deputy Director of M.T.O. London, Mr. Richard
Puccini and copied to M.P.P. Robert Nixon and M.P.P. Gordon Miller. See
letter
enclosure #8 of April 14th, 1997 letter O.P.P. S.S. Erskine.
This letter described sampling and performance testing on Nichols gravel
retrieved from the shoulders of #3 Highway south of Delhi as related to
contract 89-66 for which Nichols gravel was rejected based on 2
incomplete test results by M.T.O.. We were not aware at that time of the
false statements of fact presented in this letter, and became aware of
this only when we received documentation from M.T.O. relative to
disclosure evidence to be presented in Court in May 1996 by Delhi
Township lawyers to confirm that our aggregate was substandard. The
documentation revealed, that in fact gravel from Wisemans’ pit and
T.C.G. pit had been hauled and placed on top of our gravel therefore the
two gravels had been mixed together and it made it quite impossible to
retrieve a sample of our gravel from the road shoulders for testing.
Compaction testing records also further confirmed this fact. See Record.
Enclosure 8 B
When Chris Rodgers of M.T.O. was put on the stand in court May 1996,
under cross examination by our lawyer, rather than Perjure himself he
admitted that M.T.O. was unable to retrieve samples of Nichols gravel
from #3 Highway April, 1990 and therefore no testing was done on our
material. This further confirmed Mr. Puccinis’ letter to be a
fraudulent and forged production without basis in truth or fact. See
Chris Rodgers cross examination in court. April 14th, 1997 letter
enclosure #4 Page 10, 12, 13.
This fraudulent production was further promoted by the Head of London
Geo technical C.M. Bond in his letter of January 31st, 1991, when he
makes reference to Mr. Puccinis’ letter of July 9th, 1990 and the
performance testing (that never happened) on Nichols gravel from
shoulders of #3 Highway.
As of 89/11/17 in the memorandum to Chris Rodgers from Bob Cook
confirming that Nichols gravel at #3 Highway had been covered over
certainly at the date of this letter January 31, 1991. All of these
people, including Mr. Puccini, Chris Rodgers, C.M. Bond and Cy Barber
and staff were well aware that no testing had been done on Nichols
gravel as described in Mr. Puccinis’ letter and Mr. Bonds’ letter,
but they nevertheless continued to promote this fraudulent ass covering
deception, resulting in this information further impacting Nichols
Gravel Limited when David Anderson in 1993 circulated these letters to
Delhi Township Council to conclude our gravel was not suitable for Twp.
use. See letter January 31st, 1991. Page 1, last paragraph.
It should also be noted, that although Justice Carvarzan heard Chris
Rodgers testimony in respect to no testing having been performed on
Nichols gravel from shoulders #3 Highway, contrary to Mr. Puccinis’
statements in his July 9th, 1990 letter, and therefore there could be no
assessment of performance of Nichols gravel on that project, Justice
Carvarzan disregarded this evidence and made reference to statements of
the Defences expert Mr. Zoltan Katona who made a statement in this
respect to quality and performance of Nichols Gravel Pit #3. See Katona
transcript Page 1065 #15 & 20.
On page 1048 #5 Mr. Katona made the statement quote: “I have to depend
on M.T.O. information.” unquote. There was absolutely no evidence
provided in respect to Geotechnical consultant investigations either by
Delhi Township or M.T.O. in respect to the cause of any road failure or
to confirm that any gravel supplied from Nichols Gravel
Limited was substandard or was identified as the cause of failure. All
evidence presented was based on speculation and assumption of fact.
There was no investigation to performance by M.T.O. There was no
investigation to performance by Delhi Township, therefore in respect to
the fact that Mr. Katona relied only on M.T.O. information Mr.
Katona’s statements are in fact false. This evidence was quoted by
Justice Carvarzan Page 21 first paragraph “Reasons”. See Chris
Rodgers letter 90/01/26 warning that all tests should be done before
issuance of stop work order in respect to only 2 incomplete test results
in 1989 Nichols Pit 3.
On Page 1020 #15 In.-Ch. Mr. Katona when questioned if he was a
petrographer, stated quote: “No, I am not a petrographer.” unquote,
but under questioning in Cr. Examination Page 1141 #20 & 25 whether
or not he could distinguish between T.C.G. granular A and Nichols
granular A on #3 Highway where Nichols gravel had been covered over, Mr.
Katona replied that he could tell the difference quote: “If I did a
petrographic analysis I could tell the difference.” unquote.
This was a most amazing response in respect to the fact that Mr. Katona
had previously admitted that he was not a qualified petrographer, and
also by the fact that he could distinguish the difference between 2
gravels from 2 different sources, whereas the most qualified person
under M.T.O. employment in petrography Chris Rodgers determined with the
mixing of the 2 gravels it would be quite impossible to provide reliable
and accurate test results, and no testing was done on Nichols gravel
from #3 Highway. See Chris Rodgers transcript April 14th, 1997 O.P.P.
letter #4 Pages 9 and 10 We must therefore conclude that Mr. Katonas’
statements in this respect are also in fact false.
It should further be noted that the Appeals Court Justices Keenan,
Somers, and Cumming J.J. relied on this false evidence contained in
Justice Carvarzans’ decision, without the benefit of reference to the
transcripts for clarification and quoted Justice Carvarzan in respect to
“Bonafide concerns about field performance in the appellant gravel
pits.” See Page 2 Appeal Decision. There were in fact no bonafide
concerns as there was no evidence whatsoever presented by the Defence in
respect to proper geotechnical investigation to confirm the cause of any
problem of any project complained of, including M.T.O. contract 89-66.
Webster dictionary explains bonafide as quote: “true, genuine,
sincerely” unquote. I suggest these Ontario Court Justices used the
wrong word description. What we really have here in fact are lies,
deception, and misrepresentation. I suggest this does not provide
bonafide anything.
This false information and the perception taken by all of these Ontario
Court Justices in respect to Mr. Puccinis’ letter and Mr. Katonas’
statements created a further detrimental impact to Nichols Gravel
Limited with the dismissal of our case relative to the wrong information
relied upon which is confirmed by the statements issued in the
respective decisions.
*** [what does this 2. refer to? is there a 1.? I
couldn't find it easily.]
2. However I do have a concern as to the truthfulness of some of Mr.
Rodgers other statements in court in particular:
back
to top
Cross
Examination:
#1. Page 5. Q: And one of the consultants Mr. Nichols used was a fellow
named George Woda?
A: Yes.
Q: Is he a former boss?
A: No. I worked with him.
- Comment:
My information is that George Woda was previously head of the M.T.O. Geo
Technical Section Downsview, and that would indicate that he was Chris
Rodgers boss. Further to that when George Woda retired, Mr. Rodgers
assumed that same position.
- #2. Page 5 Q: And another consultant Mr.
Nichols hired was a fellow named Prof. Hudec from the University of
Windsor?
A: Yes.
Q: Do you know him?
A: Yes.
Q: It is fair to say that he is generally known and respected by you and
others as a very experienced person and knowledgeable person in the
field of petrography?
A: No I would say he was all these things in the area of evaluation of
aggregates but not specifically in the petrography area.
Comment:
This statement is absolutely contrary to Report EM-91 Petrographic
Examination of Aggregate and Concrete in Ontario by Chris Rodgers. April
14th, 1997 Letter enclosure #3. On page 11 of this report first
paragraph describes an Ontario funded evaluation on petrographic
procedures which was commissioned to study reports by Professor Hudec.
This would appear to confirm that the Provincial Government had a high
regard for Professor Hudecs’ expertise in respect to petrographic
evaluation and testing and must have considered him an expert in this
field.
On page 27, there are 3 separate references to Professor Hudecs’
research and expertise.
This certainly would confirm Mr. Rodgers statement in court to be false.
See Professor Hudecs’ petrograghic analysis March 25th, 1992 Nichols
Gravel Limited Pit #3, Con.9, Burford Twp., and further extensive
analyses to comparative M.T.O. testing April 9th, 1996.
#3. Page 11. Q: All right, can I ask that Exhibit #1 tab 12 to be placed
before this witness please? Mr. Rodgers I am showing you a letter from
Mr. Richard Puccini?
A: Yes.
Q: Do you know him?
A: No I don’t. I don’t believe he works for the Ministry of
Transportation anymore.-
Comment:
In Mr. Puccinis’ July 9th, 1990 letter he refers to performance
testing by his staff. We confirm that Mr. Rodgers was at #3 Highway on
April 18th, 1990 to make observations from which we assume he prepared a
report that must have arrived at the office of Mr. Puccini. “There was
no copy of such a report provided in disclosure.” It would seem
logical that Mr. Rodgers and Mr. Puccini would have had some
communication prior to release of Mr. Puccinis’ July 9th, 1990 letter.
It would therefore also seem logical that Chris Rodgers would know Mr.
Puccini.
Our information is that Mr. Puccini was still employed by M.T.O. late
1997 and we believe that he remains to this day employed by M.T.O.
I request that incidents 1, 2, and 3 as listed be investigated to ensure
no falsity of fact was provided in court by Mr. Rodgers.
back to
top
The
Fourth conspired fraud involved
not only M.T.O. officials, but also various officials of the Region and
Haldimand-Norfolk as a result of a road tour organized by David Anderson and
M.T.O. Winston Oostenbrug to observe project suspected of not having
performed as expected where Nichols aggregate had been used previously. The
participants on March 9th 1994 were M.T.O. Chris Rodgers, Winston Oostenbrug,
David Anderson Delhi Township, Jamie Francisco Norfolk Township Nil Lambert
Haldimand-Norfolk Director of Roads.
The conspired fraud was the production of falsified documents and test
results regarding samples of stone chips taken by Winston Oostenbrug and
Jamie Francisco at Norfolk Township yard Road 45 with all of the road tour
participants present with the source owner identified as Gary Nichols.
In order to identify the conspired fraud we must first review the false
information contained on the M.T.O. Sample Data Sheets of March 9th, 1994.
See April 14th 1997 Letter #8.
Identified Information:
1. Source Owner: Gary Nichols. Wrong! See M.N.R. Pit License to Nichols
Gravel Limited
2. County: Region of Haldimand-Norfolk Burford Twp. Lot 1 & 2, Con.9.
Wrong! Burford Township is located in Brant County.
3. Source Location: Pit #3. Wrong! Nichols Gravel Limited has never produced
stone chips from aggregate from this pit. By M.T.O. own testing there is
high content of soft shale not suitable as this gravel would not meet the
P.N. hardness test for stone. See M.T.O. comment on 1991 A.S.L. this Pit #3
not suitable for any M.T.O. use.
Quite amazing how dumb all of these people are, and how stupid they think
this family is, after having been in this business 51 years at this point in
time.
To further confirm the falsity of this exercise See F.O.I. response 1-96,
April 3rd, 1996 from Norfolk Township indicating the record for stone chips
purchased for the 2 years previous to the March 9th, 1994 sampling.
How was it determined that the ¼ “ stone chip purchased from Nichols
Gravel Limited in 1992 or 1993 was not mixed with stone purchased from Gary
Mussel?
The record indicates that 3/8” stone was purchased from Waterford Sand
& Gravel in 1992 and Norfolk Quarries and Oxford Sand & Gravel in
1993. No 3/8” stone was purchased from Nichols Gravel Limited in either of
those 2 previous years, therefore it would be quite impossible to retrieve
samples of Nichols 3/8” stone from Norfolk Township yard on March 9th
1994.
This definitely confirms the “conspiracy”, the forged documents and
falsity and fraud of this exercise by all the participants of this road tour
as confirmed by these records F.O.I. #1-96 April 3rd, 1996.
It is a fact, of which M.T.O. Rodgers and Oostenbrug were well aware, you
cannot identify the source of aggregate for testing unless samples are taken
at the source further confirming the conspired intentional attempt to injure
and adversely impact our company.
The problems experienced by Nichols Gravel Limited with the Region of
Haldimand-Norfolk and Mr. Eric D’hond’t date back to incidents in 1980
and 1983 in particular when Mr. D’hond’t and Nil Lambert conspired to
cancel a tender contract for supply of gravel on Road 25.
Mr. Lambert prior to the start of the project had without permission entered
Nichols Gravel Limited Pit #2 and retrieved samples of Granular A for
testing. This gravel was tested, found to not meet specifications, and then
Eric D’hond’t called to request that the Region be allowed to take
samples of the stockpile. At this point I was unaware, that the Region had
already conducted testing on Nichols stockpile, however I had noticed 3
holes that had been dug into the top of the stockpile a week or so
previously.
When Mr. D’hond’t and Mr. Lambert arrived at the pit, Mr. Lambert
grabbed his shovel and bag out of the car and started climbing up the
stockpile toward the 3 holes that were still visible. At that point the
light bulb flashed on, and I asked Mr. Lambert where he was going, and he
replied, “I am going to take some samples,” to which I replied, “No,
you are not, as that is not the properly prescribed method of sampling a
stockpile.” Mr. Lambert then became quite indignant and angry and stated
quote: “I have been sampling and testing gravel for 25 years, and no one
is going to tell me how to take gravel samples.” unquote.
I then reminded Mr. Lambert that he was standing on Nichols Gravel Limited
property, and that he would properly sample this stockpile, or he could put
his shovel and bag along with his body back in the car and get his ass off
of the property and down the road. Mr. D’hond’t then intervened stating
that they required samples from the stockpile and that they would take them
under my supervision.
Samples were then taken and about 1 week later Eric D’hond’t and Paul
Swick drove into the pit Friday 11 a.m. and provided test results that
indicated that Nichols gravel had failed to meet specifications and that the
Region would purchase from the next low bid which was Cayuga Materials.
The next morning we crushed a new pile of Granular A, and delivered samples
to our consultant Dominion Soils Waterloo for testing and on Monday morning
provided a test result to Commissioner of Engineering W.C. McDowell which
indicated that Nichols gravel met the specifications of Tender. Mr. McDowell
instructed that the trucks stop hauling gravel from Cayuga Materials, and
the next morning Eric D’hond’t sent Nil Lambert to Pit 2 to sample the
new pile, which I declined him permission to sample. Mr. D’hond’t called
about 1 hour later to insist that they required samples from the new pile to
which I agreed, only if my consultant was present to view their sampling
procedures and to take comparative samples to ensure there was no
manipulation of test results by the Region, with a further condition that
all of the sampling to be done under the Supervision of M.T.O. District
Engineer, Frank Clarke.
This was arranged and sampling was done to the prescribed methods, and after
everyone had left I asked Lou Maeir our consultant to look at the test
results by the Region from the old stockpile. Mr. Maeir quickly identified
that the Region had not tested our gravel to the form 1010 specification as
required on the Tender, and in fact by the Regions’ own testing Nichols
gravel had met the specification of Tender. See Region Test results and
letter. See evaluation and comments Dominion Soils
When this disgusting deception was revealed and confirmed, Nichols Gravel
Limited filed litigation in respect to this incident and a 1980 incident
whereby the Region verbally accepted our Tender bid, ordered the gravel to
be prepared, and then declined to purchase the material by changing the
specifications of the road project, to sand stabilization after contract
award and preparation of aggregate for the contract. This case came before
the Hon. Judge Pringle who awarded in favour of our company. The gravel test
rigging incident was so bad that the Region settled this claim for damages
out of court. The fact that the court awarded in favour of Nichols Gravel
Limited and that the Region settled the gravel test rigging incident out of
court, confirms the “conspiracy” and the illegal interference to
business relations by Eric D’hond’t and Nil Lambert. Various elected
Regional Councils rewarded Mr. D’hond’t and Mr. Lambert for their
manipulative criminal activities by promoting them to the senior positions
of Commissioner of Engineering and Director of Roads respectively. This
provided the authority to further manipulate and conspire to injure Nichols
Gravel Limited as resulted in 1994 and thereafter with restricted limestone
only granular A Tenders, and manipulation of Winter Sand purchases as
confirmed by F.O.I. response 97-07 and cancellation of Nichols Tender Bid
1994. In respect to the May 31st, 1994 adoption of report ERD-24/94 by the
H-N Regional Engineering Committee which stated quote: “Accordingly with
the poor performance of the material supplied in 1993 and the provisions of
the Region purchasing policy Schedule C-95 (d) staff cannot recommend the
purchasing of any granular materials from the low bidder Nichols Gravel
Limited of Delhi, Ontario.” unquote. See Report. See Golder report Rd. H-N
19 1994. See my presentation to Regional Council. See Newspaper articles.
See F.O.I. request record of Granular A purchased by the Region which
confirm not one dollars worth of gravel purchased 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997,
which confirms the conspiracy to bankrupt Nichols Gravel Limited by Lambert
and D’hond’t.
This conspiracy to illegal interference to business relations continued to
evolve through 1989 when the Haldimand-Norfolk Region implemented a new
Corporate Purchasing Policy and Robert Davies Commissioner of Engineering
refused to comply with it in order to further discriminate and defer work to
other aggregate suppliers other than Nichols Gravel Limited. This was
confirmed by an internal investigation by C.A.O. Charles Douglas when he
brought forward a motion which was approved by Regional Council on September
26, 1991. See letters October 2, 1991. And Council resolution Quote: “That
the quotation and tendering procedures set out in Regional by-law 206-89 be
strictly followed.” uquote.
The conspiracy and discrimination further expanded after a dispute arose in
1993 with Delhi Public Works Superintendent David Anderson who organized a
conspiracy to completely shut Nichols Gravel Limited out of the work. This
conspiracy in particular involved David Anderson, Officials of M.T.O. Chris
Rodgers, Winston Oostenbrug, H-N Region Commissioner of Engineering Eric
D’Hond’t, H-N Director of Roads Nil Lambert, and Norfolk Township
Director of Public Works Jamie Francisco and others. On March 9th, 1994
there was a witch hunt road tour which involved all of these individuals,
which concluded with another fraudulent presentation with samples of stone
chips taken at Norfolk Township yard and identified as Gary Nichols Pit 3 as
the source. See sample sheet March 9th, 1994 document. Previous to this in
October 1993 David Anderson had succeeded in getting Delhi Council approval
for an Aggregate Sources List Policy whereby he circulated to Council the
fraudulent M.T.O. documents, the 1991 Aggregate Source List and Mr. Puccinis’
forged letter in order to convince Council that Nichols Gravel was
substandard and not suitable for Township use.
At that point the adoption of that policy completely eliminated the only
taxpaying commercial pit operation in Delhi Township from competing for
Township work. Had these fraudulent documents not been available and
provided by Winston Oostenbrug of M.T.O., Mr. David Anderson would not have
been able to accomplish this elimination scheme, and there most likely would
have been no lawsuits between Nichols Gravel Limited and Delhi Township
because of the deception and fraud which was promoted by Anderson and
Gelinas based on this falsified information from M.T.O.
4. It is a fact that M.T.O. Senior Supervisor Winston Oostenbrug became a
major participant in the conspiracy with various municipal officials of the
Region of Haldimand-Norfolk to the illegal interference and elimination of
Nichols Gravel Limited from the right to free enterprise competition for
municipal contracts in our service area of Haldimand-Norfolk, Brant and
Oxford Counties. See letter Brant County.
Please reference the various
events involving M.T.O. Senior Supervisor Winston Oostenbrug:
1. He recommended to Mr. David Anderson the Aggregate Sources List
Policy adopted by Delhi Township in 1993. See David Andersons
transcript.
2. He attended the March 9th, 1994 witch hunt road tour.
3. He conspired with other members of this road tour at the end of the
road tour the falsified stone chip testing at Norfolk Township yard to
take stone chip samples and designate the source as Gary Nichols Gravel
Pit #3 with the help of Norfolk road supervisor Jamie Francisco of
Norfolk Township.
4. He attended the Haldimand-Norfolk Engineering Committee meeting of
May 23, 1994 in support of Eric D’Hond’t and Nil Lambert for the
recommendation to cancel $100,000.00 of Nichols Gravel Limited low bids
for Granular A. See meeting minutes.
5. He conspired with Jamie Francisco Norfolk Township to cancel our
tender low bid for supply Granular A 1995 and tested only 2 of the 4
sources listed on the Tender. Then wrote a fraudulent intimidating
letter to Norfolk Council advising that our Pits 1 & 3 were not
acceptable when in fact Pit 1 was shown as an acceptable source on the
A.S.L. 94-04 and had not been tested. See Letters.
6. He proceeded to further libel Nichols Gravel Limited business and
products to the Press July 12th, 1995 in support of David Andersons’
Church St., Delhi incident where the police were called to remove a
Nichols Gravel Limited truck from a construction site. See newspaper
article and see A.S.L.
7. In 1995 Mr. Oostenbrug also succeeded to intimidate municipalities in
Brant County who declined to deal with our company even though we
operated 3 pits and paid business tax in Brant County. See letter Brant
County March 13th, 1996.
When it was confirmed on the March 1994
Aggregate Sources List that Nichols aggregate was acceptable and this
“new” Policy was not going to serve the elimination scheme, Anderson and
Gelinas resorted to plan B which was the “Direction” from Council which
cannot be verified by resolution, therefore was hearsay information and had
no valid authority for enforcement in law, but continued to be enforced
until December 31st, 2000 even after the dismissal September 28th, 2000 by
the Supreme Court of Canada of our case against Delhi Township.
In order to describe the magnitude of this huge conspiracy to bankrupt and
eliminate Nichols Gravel Limited which transpired after the March 1994 road
tour, please review the correlation of events thereafter which impacted our
company, our business and this family.
1. March 9th, 1994 conspired fraudulent stone chip sampling at Norfolk Twp.
Yard, Rd. 45 by M.T.O. Chris Rodgers, Winston Oostenbrug, David Anderson,
Nil Lambert and Jamie Francisco, which confirm that these people all had a
plan to get Nichols Gravel Limited for something somehow, someway, as this
was the end of the road tour and their last chance to come up with something
negative to impact Nichols Gravel. Ref. #1.
2. May 4th, 1994 False and fraudulent statements to the press by Delhi Twp.
C.A.O. Frank Gelinas based on David Andersons’ false and forged document,
Township of Delhi Summary of 1994 Aggregate Quotations, with respect to
Class 5 Aggregate designation and acceptability on the M.T.O. Aggregate
Source List 91-06.
Comment: There is no such designation for Class 5 aggregate on any Aggregate
Sources List produced by Ministry of Transportation in Southern Ontario.
Ref. #2 Oostenbrugs’ letter. See Gary Nichols May 16th, 1994 letter of
response to the false statements published in the Delhi News Record. See
newspaper.
3. May 9th, 1994 Norfolk Township cancelled all of Nichols Gravel Limited
low bids for Granular A without testing. No reason provided. Contract loss
$97,215.60. Ref. Tender Bids.
4. May 31st, 1994 Haldimand-Norfolk Region cancelled all of Nichols Gravel
Limited low bids Granular A Tender as recommended by Eric D’Hond’t and
Nil Lambert citing problems on H-N Reg. Rd. 19 spring breakup where Nichols
gravel was used for reconstruction in 1993. Contract loss $100,000.00.
This section of road was asphalt paved the summer of 1994 after the problem,
and has performed well ever since with no breakup or pothole patches
visible, which indicates to me that if this kind of surface pavement had
been applied in the first place, instead of application of double surface
stone chips in the rain, there would have been no road surface failure and
no problem to scapegoat onto Nichols Gravel Limited for the Regions own
negligence. Ref. The Golder Consultant report which indicates negligent
construction methods by the Region as the cause of the problem, and not
Nichols gravel. See Newspaper Article.
5. March 3rd, 1995 H-N Director of Roads Nil Lambert had J. Emery
Consultants sample and test Nichols gravel retrieved from a watermain
roadcut H-N Road 42 where Brantford Engineering had placed Nichols gravel
the previous fall contrary to the Regions direction that they could not use
Nichols gravel. The gravel was still frozen at this time of year which
resulted in using a pick to break it free, which crushed the stones and
altered the gravel with the result that it did not meet specifications when
tested. Mr. Lambert then directed Brantford Eng. to remove Nichols gravel
from the roadcut and replace with limestone aggregate. This gravel used in
the roadcut was from a stockpile previously approved by M.T.O. and had also
been tested by M.G.L Consultants prior to placing in the roadcut by
Brantford Eng. and was found acceptable. It was decided by Nichols Gravel
Limited and Brantford Engineering to conduct further testing at the roadcut
before the major expense of removal and replacement was incurred. Samples
were taken by independent consultants of Brantford Eng. and Nichols Gravel
then tested and found to meet the required specifications. Nichols gravel
was not removed from the roadcut and another fraudulent conspiracy by the
Region to cause embarrassment, and detract contractors from dealing with
Nichols Gravel Limited was exposed. What a most pathetic performance!
6. March 7th, 1995 Delhi Township cancelled Nichols contract purchase order
from winter sand without discussion, when Nichols Gravel Limited refused to
allow Mussels trucks to haul from Pit #3 for the Twp., due to a company
decision to have no dealings with Mussels trucking due to a previous loss of
contract with Norfolk Twp. when Councillor Gary Mussels interfered and
prevented contract award to Nichols Gravel Limited and was in conflict of
interest as he wanted his trucks to haul the stone for the stone chip supply
contract.
At no time did Nichols Gravel Limited refuse to load other hired trucks or
Delhi Twp. trucks. This breach of Tender was taken to court by Nichols
Gravel Limited in respect to losses, and recent information would indicate
that acting Deputy Judge Lados who dismissed the action against the Twp. may
have had a conflict of interest, as my information indicates that he had
previously acted in his capacity as lawyer, for the Mayor of Delhi Twp.,
Roger Vermeulen.
7. May 31st, 1995 Conspiracy by M.T.O. Winston Ostenbrug and Jamie Francisco
Norfolk Twp. to cancel $117,413.00 Nichols Gravel Limited low bid Granular A
and Class 5 chips Tender. M.T.O. again manipulated test results and failed
to test 2 of the sources listed on the Tender. Oostenbrug then wrote an
intimidating letter to Norfolk Twp. advising that M.T.O. supported the
decision not to use any aggregate from Nichols Gravel Limited when there was
no information whatsoever to confirm that the pits not tested did not meet
specification. In this letter Oostenbrug libeled our company in respect to
current information on the M.T.O. Aggregate Sources List. 94-04. See letter.
8. June 27th, 1995 David Anderson, Delhi Twp. Public works Superintendent
prevented Elgin Construction from using Nichols gravel on the Church St.
reconstruction in Delhi and called the police to remove a Nichols dump truck
from the job site. Anderson suspected Perjury identified as statements in
court as to why Nichols gravel was rejected, do not compare to statements to
police at the time of the incident, as contained in the Police report. See
newspaper account. See Anderson transcript. See Police report.
9. June 26, 1995 Bethel Road Brantford Twp. signs of distress occurred in
spring from this 1994 project where Nichols gravel from Pit #3 had been
placed by Wraymar Construction, and immediately Nichols gravel was suspect
due to the adverse publicity circulated by M.T.O., H-N Region and Delhi and
Norfolk Twp. regarding Nichols gravel. A proper consultant Geo technical
investigation was conducted with sampling and testing Nichols gravel from
the roadbed with the conclusion that Nichols gravel was not the problem.
M.T.O. Winston Oostenbrug was most interested but I expect disappointed with
these results. Please also note the Petrographic Number Test at 140 well
within the specification limit of 200 contrary to comparable testing by
M.T.O. on this same pit in the same time period.
10. July 12th, 1995 M.T.O. Oostenbrug again libeled our company and products
when he provided false information to the press that was published in
respect to Nichols Gravel Limited pit designations and acceptability on the
M.T.O. Aggregate Sources List 94-04. See Newspaper.
11. October 16th, 1995 Delhi Township failed to honour Nichols Gravel
Limited low bids on the H-N Regional Winter Sand quotation. Gary Nichols
charged with trespassing by David Anderson when he entered the old Windham
pit to inquire as to why sand was purchased from another supplier at higher
cost. The courts dismissed the trespass charge for lack of evidence. Cost to
defend against this absolute stupidity $1200.00. See charge and lawyers
bill.
12. Dec. 6, 1995, deputation by Gary Nichols to Delhi Public Works Committee
requesting clarification on winter sand purchase. C.A.O. Frank Gelinas
advised committee not to respond and that he would respond in a couple of
weeks. See presentation January 22nd, 1996. Letter to Toby Barrett.
13. February 7th, 1996 C.A.O. Gelinas response with Council “Direction”
not to have any further business dealings with Nichols Gravel Limited. See
report response to deputation of December 6, 1995. No record of Council
resolution. This illegal “Direction” enforced until Delhi Twp. was
dissolved December 31st, 2000 by restructuring.
14. May 6th, 1996 8 ½ days in court Nichols Gravel Limited v. Township of
Delhi David Anderson and Frank Gelinas. Review of transcripts of evidence
revealed numerous false statements by Anderson and Gelinas in Court
15. September 18th, 1996 Letter to the Editor. See letter.
16. February 13th, 1997 Request O.P.P. Simoce to investigate suspected
Conspiracy and Perjury, Anderson and Gelinas. No investigation. Evidence
provided by Gary Nichols reviewed by Const. Thomas MacLean and Cr. Attorney
Lois Aicken. Reported no grounds to lay criminal charges. See O.P.P. Report.
17. April 14th, 1997 Request O.P.P. Staff Sergeant Erskine, London to
investigate. M.T.O. and Anderson and Gelinas.
18. April 14th, 1997 Request transferred to O.P.P. Det. Const. Robert Scott,
Brantford who began 6 months investigation which was completed and reported
September 7th, 1997 with no grounds to lay Conspiracy and Perjury charges to
Anderson and Gelinas, as Cr. Attorney Swanson refused to file charges and
instructed Det. Scott not to investigate M.T.O. but to leave it alone, then
took the golden handshake and retired at age 54.
Find enclosed my letter to the editor account of the September 11th, 1997
meeting with Det. Const. Robert Scott and Staff Sergeant Beecroft after
completion of the investigation previously requested and directed to Staff
Sergeant Erskine. You will note that Crown Attorney Swanson directed Det.
Const Scott not to investigate M.T.O. therefore there was no investigation.
See letter to Editor September 16th, 1997. See newspaper. See reconstructed
final report May 1999 after F.O.I request. Very bad smell here!
19. November 1998 Justice Carvarzan decision appealed to Ontario Court of
Appeal. In the interim period Justice Osborne mistakenly(?) or intentionally
approved the transfer of our appeal of Justice Carvanzans’ decision from
the Ontario Court of Appeal where it had been properly filed, to Divisional
Court Hamilton, who we later found out after our appeal had been heard that
this court had in fact no jurisdiction to hear our case as the claim was in
excess of $25,000.00, so that in fact our appeal was illegally heard in the
wrong court. Unbelievable!
20. June 3rd, 1999 Appeal heard in Hamilton after our February court date
had been deferred and cancelled by “Darren”, I believe in order to
provide additional time to hand pick the Justices that would give our
company the deep six. At the start of the hearing Justices Keenan, Somers,
and Cumming J.J. informed our lawyer that they had not received the
transcripts of evidence from the trial, and then instructed our lawyer Mr.
Brooks to proceed as they could use the appeal books as reference. This was
also quite unbelievable.
In my perception these Justices were not interested in hearing our evidence.
Did not require the Defence to speak and dismissed our case quoting:Justice
Carvarzans’ decision almost word for word, stating they found no error in
law with Justice Carvarzans’ decision.
21. July 16th, 1999 Request to Investigate to O.P.P. Insp.Denckert the lost
transcripts.
22. November 24, 1999 Leave to Appeal “dismissed” without reasons.
Justices Finlayson J.A., Weiler J.A., O Conner J.A..
23. May 17th, 2000 Letter to Federal Justice Minister Anne McClelland and
Ontario Attorney General James Flaherty appealing to someone to address this
long term law perverted discrimination to our business and this family which
stress was causing an impact on the health of this family and in particular
my wife.
24. May 31st, 2000 Net results of May 17th, 2000 Letter? A Prohibition
Warrant Served under Criminal Code Section 111 acting on false evidence in
witness statements received by O.P.P. Det. Cost. Rob Scot from David
Anderson, Frank Gelinas and John Harrison in respect to a statement in my
letter which was perceived to be threatening, but did not directly or
indirectly name any of these individuals.
25. June 2000 H-N Regional Chairman John Harrison requests and receives
O.P.P. police protection for Councillors at Regional council meetings
attended by Regional Councillor Gary Nichols. What an absolute farce!
26. September 6, 2000 H-N Councillor Nichols requests investigation of
illegal dumping of solid waste Tom Howe Regional Landfill site. Another
O.P.P. spin job. No investigation.
27. September 28th, 2000 Supreme Court of Canada decision Nichols Gravel
Limited v Township of Delhi David Anderson and Frank Gelinas “dismissed”
without reasons or consideration.
28. November 6, 2000, Delhi Twp. council meeting Councillor Gary Nichols
under personal attack in respect to recent Supreme Court of Canada decision.
Libeled by Mayor Roger Vermeulen and Councillor Dan VanLondersele in the
weekly local newspaper, Wednesday edition prior to municipal election the
following Monday.
29. November 14th, 2000 H-N Councillor Nichols requests O.P.P. to
investigate in the Public Interest Patronage contract award by David
Anderson and Eric D’Hond’t on stone chip tender. O.P.P. spin job no
investigation.
30. November 13th, 2000 Municipal election, Councillor Gary Nichols
political contribution to Public Service ended, placing next to last in the
polls after having served 3 years on both Township of Delhi and H-N Regional
council.
31. Claim for defamation and libel filed against Roger Vermeulen, Dan
VanLondersele, the Delhi News Record, Simcoe Reformer, and the Brantford
Expositor.
32. July 11, 2001 Request to investigate to Det. Const. Rob Scot by Gary
Nichols of identified false statements provided in court by David Anderson
and Frank Gelinas also identified false statements by John Harrison. See
letter Det. Scot response in August after the July 23rd court Prohibition
hearing. No investigation.
33. July 23rd, 2001 Prohibition Application “dismissed” conditional upon
Gary Nichols signing a 6 months Peace Bond.
34. We shall at a later date address the conspiracy by corporate staff of
both Haldimand and Norfolk Counties to suppress information for requests
through Freedom of Information, in order to cover-up for the further
conspiracy to illegal interference with business relations of Nichols Gravel
Limited by David Anderson, Eric D’hond’t and Jamie Francisco of the
previous Region of Haldimand-Norfolk for purchase of winter sand from other
than the low bidder Nichols Gravel Limited in November, December year 2000.
back
to top
35.
Conclusion to Correlation of Events.
This entire law perverted horror story began with a libel by Frank Gelinas
and David Anderson in 1994 in respect to the business and products of
Nichols Gravel Limited, which reflected on the honesty and integrity of this
family, and because of unaccountable, unresponsive governments and the same
kind of justice system this provided the tools to conspiring Councillors and
staff to promote this huge unjust deception to cover for all of their
negligent actions and in the end provide the ultimate conclusion with
another libel and disgrace on this family at the November 6, 2000 Delhi Twp.
Council meeting with the support of the Supreme Court of Canada dismissal
which provided a conclusion for
not Justice but Injustice.
Thanks to the Ontario Provincial Government and the Haldimand-Norfolk
Transition Board all of these conspirators managed to be hired into the new
government of Haldimand and Norfolk Counties, so that the conspiracy to
illegal interference has continued this past year namely from Eric
D’Hond’t, David Anderson, Frank Gelinas, Chris Baird, Bill Cridland and
in particular Jamie Francisco.
The Haldimand-Norfolk Transition Board and Senior Officials of the Ontario
Ministry of Municipal Affairs given the responsibility for the restructuring
of the Regional Municipality of Haldimand-Norfolk, took action, or inaction
contrary to the Public Interest, and were therefore in Breach of the Public
Trust when they failed to respond to a letter dated March 13th, 2000
received at the Transition Board office and dated stamped that date. See
Letter.
This Breach of Trust was provoked when this letter and a request for
deputation from Dwayne Nichols and Darryl Nichols along with 79 pages of
documentation which clearly defined the negligent misconduct and
discrimination to Nichols Gravel Limited by Delhi Township staff David
Anderson and Frank Gelinas, and condoned by Council, was not even
acknowledged as having been received by the Transition Board. This letter
clearly provided examples of the waste of tax dollars by Delhi Township from
1994 to 1999 of approximately $246,473.00 in order to enforce their
discrimination on Nichols Gravel Limited. The Transition Board in order to
have a “seamless” transition, ignored the problem rather than direct and
require Delhi Township to follow an open competitive Purchasing Policy in
the restructuring year 2000 and proceeded to approve the Delhi Township
budget which in fact supported the discrimination and waste of tax dollars
that continued. And then to add insult to injury having been made fully
aware of the problems created by the various Regional Staff the Transition
Board proceeded to hire and appoint these people to key managerial positions
which acted to ensure that the discrimination to Nichols Gravel Limited
would continue as in fact it has in this past year of 2001. These actions
did in fact make the Transition Board a party to the discrimination and
conspiracy to illegal interference to Nichols Gravel Limited, and I shall be
filing another “information” in this respect when I have completed
documentation for presentation.
In respect to the Town of Haldimand Act October 1999 it would appear that
the H-N Transition Board was negligent and failed to comply and perform
their duties in reference to 21 Sub Section 5 (A) and (B) when they took no
appropriate action in response to the letter from Dwayne and Darryl Nichols
after clearly having been made aware of the waste and inefficiency contrary
to the Public Interest, which they in turn approved in the Township of Delhi
year 2000 budget, which in turn supported the continued discrimination by
Delhi Township to Nichols Gravel Limited until December 31st, 2000 when
Delhi Twp. ceased to exist.
back
to top
In
Summary
If after reading this presentation there is anyone who can conclude, as did
Justice Carvarzan, Appeals Justices Keenan, Somers, and Cummings J.J. and
Leave to Appeal Justices Finlayson, O Connor, and Weiler and Supreme Court
of Canada Justices L’Heureux-Dubé, Bastarache and LeBel J.J., that there
was no problem, there has been no discrimination , no “conspiracy” to
illegal interference to business relations, no libel or fraud in respect to
comments about Nichols Gravel Limited and aggregate products, and no damage
to this company and family as a result of the various actions by Anderson
and Gelinas, and various other H-N Regional and M.T.O. officials, and that
this company and this family received lawful, fair and just treatment before
the courts, then I suggest these persons have a very serious problem with
perception of truth and fact, and should immediately check into a
psychiatric clinic for a mental assessment, in order to determine their
level of mental stability and ability to reason.
Of course this would not apply to Justices of the Courts as there seems to
be no requirement that they be accountable for their actions, but the news
media and the press may have an interest in asking a few questions as to how
these court decisions concerning this case, provided for the proper and fair
administration of law and justice.
In respect to receiving 8 years of this horrific spin job of injustice and
the related stress relative to the destruction of my wife’s health as
referred to in my May 17th, 2000 letter to Federal Justice Minister Anne
McClelland and Attorney General of Ontario James Flaherty, this has now been
confirmed by the fact that my wife had undergone a bowel operation last
September and 2 breast cancer operations before Christmas 2001 and has just
finished 16 radiation treatments in this fight for survival.
In regard to all of the evidence herein provided, I hereby request that this
matter now be investigated subject to Criminal Code Section 122 and 123 and
any other applicable section of the Criminal Code in respect to the long
term far reaching “Conspiracy” and discrimination for the purpose of
illegal interference with business relations of Nichols Gravel Limited
through libel, and false statements, and fraud directly related to
manipulation of test results and production and distribution of forged and
falsified government documents by:
back
to top
Conspirators:
Co-conspirators:
Mr. Helmet Welker, M.T.O. Mr. David Anderson
Mr. Richard Puccini, M.T.O Mr. Frank Gelinas
Mr. Chris Rodgers, M.T.O. Mr. Eric D’hond’t
Mr. Winston Oostenbrug, M.T.O. Mr. Nil Lambert
Mr. Cy Barber, M.T.O. Retired Mr. Robert Davies
Mr. C. M.Bond, M.T.O Retired Mr. Jamie Francisco
Mr. D. W. Mantle, M.T.O. Mr. John Harrison
Mr. Z. Katona, M.T.O. Retired
Please further be advised that this is our final appeal to the justice
system to respond to this gross deception and miscarriage of justice to
which a non response is not acceptable. In the event that we receive no
immediate response confirming that these matters will now be properly
addressed, we shall as previously stated make all related information public
as directed to the news media and interested parties via the internet at
HTTP://www.thecomplaintstation.com/.
Sincerely,
Gary Nichols, Pres.
Nichols Gravel Limited
c.c. Ministry of Transportation Ontario Legal Service Branch
c.c. Federal Minister of Justice
c.c. Premier of Ontario
c.c. Ontario Minister of the Attorney General
c.c. Chief Justice Supreme Court of Canada, Rt. Hon. Madam Beverly McLachlin
c.c. Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, Hon. Patrick LaSage
c.c. President, Ontario Trial Lawyers Association, Mr. Gary Will
c.c. M.P.P. Toby Barrett
c.c. Norfolk and Haldimand Councils
back to top |