Candidate 'Double-Dipping' Campaign Funds

The ugly question has been lingering in the air in relation to campaign funds and what I have referred to as 'double-dipping'. At a 'fun-do' or a fondue one would be most unpopular to try and get away with such a horrendous act. Somehow what we hear in the realm of campaign contributions it's really not so bad. Heck as a candidate I didn't have that problem, it is public record, and I wasn't going to bring it to the pages of MAYORGATE. Yet the clean up job by Marlene Bergsma of The Standard has forced me to raise questions that should of been publicly, but never will in The Standard or by Marlene Bergsma.

Now it's been made abundantly clear what the Municipal Elections Act allows. Confusion though reigns supreme. As candidates we all had to submit our financial statements by end of March 2011 for the Election of 2010. That's a fact. So when Matthew Van Dongen (grasshopper of The Standard no longer there) posted a story titled “This is our way of participating in the democratic process” and finished with the line “some councillor expenses were posted to the city website after this story was written,” then one can assume without an ass' tale that this was written sometime in early April. Pretty good assumption I think? The interview with Mr. Dan Raseta is all about pride of one's company and all that. Van Dongen begins with “Dan Raseta knows how to pick a winner.” And mid way Matthew Van Dongen quotes Mr. Raseta but first Van Dongen writes: “Raseta sees no issue with donating through various companies.” Now Mr. Raseta is quoted by Van Dongen “It's not unfair, because those are the rules” he said “We're very passionate about our community, so this is our way of participating in the democratic process, I would encourage anyone who feels the same way about their community to do the same.”

Mr. Raseta said “...because those are the rules.” Did Mr. Raseta know the rules? Fast forward to the present and near present. Mr. Raseta sends out letters wanting refunds. Oops maybe those were not the rules after all! Now Matthew (grasshopper/cub reporter) Van Dongen obviously did not bother to verify his story fully, or maybe he did and found himself confused as some of the newbies did. Marlene Bergsma does verify I know, or at least I hope. So one last observation of the literary masterpiece by Matthew Van Dongen of The Standard. Matthew mentions a number of names of councillors who had 'double-dipping' stains. Umm..... a little coincidental to have Ms. Lancaster grab onto these names? Hot grasshopper reporter Van Dongen of The Standard does in fact mention in the fourth paragraph Mayor Brian McMullan and says, “For example, his companies gave $1500 to Mayor Brian McMullan...” How is it that Ms. Lancaster missed this? Ms. Lancaster claimed only to search out the records of “closely contested seats.” Our venerable sensei of local politics Mr. Tim Rigby should be insulted with that claim. Yet I think the names of all the targets of Ms. Lancaster and her stand for ethics and the Municipal Elections Act are in the Van Dongen story - ALL BUT ONE. That is a fact. And true maybe Ms. Lancaster will say she never saw the story by Matthew Van Dongen. I still applaud her for dragging this mangy flea bitten cat out of the bag publicly.

So now I have a serious question lingering after all that I have said. Mayor McMullan was mentioned publicly in a Standard story in early April? The noise broke out only recently and somehow he was left out. To this day those with the 'double-dipping' stains have refunded the monies. Mr. Raseta now knows that it is unfair and that those are not the rules. Yet Mayor Brian McMullan still doesn't really know if he did get or did not get....? Wow now that's a beauty I dare say. Mayor McMullan needs to still consult with 'his people'. Now I want to help Mayor Brian McMullan out a little. After all we are the same age, early 50 years young. Mayor Brian McMullan seems to forget that he signed the Financial Statement – Auditor's Report Form 4, that's the official title on the page 1 of 8. On page 3 of 8 is the signature of candidate. Now Mr. McMullan, Mayor Brian McMullan is that your signature? You're not like a movie star or rock star and have oodles of assistants who sign autographs for you? This is indeed your signature? Oh that's right it had to be witnessed by the City Clerk or a Commissioner. Phew now that's established. Fact again Mayor Brian McMullan did sign his Financial Statement – Auditor's Report Form 4 on 2011/03/23.

Thank God that's out of the way. Now this raises another question of Mayor Brian McMullan. Mayor McMullan do you read what you sign? Mayor Brian McMullan do you look over what you sign? I pray you do or we in St. Catharines are in real trouble, as mayor you might be signing our financial lives away without reading what you sign. So I think it's a pretty good assumption again to say you did sign Form 4 and you read it first, that is before signing.

Now let's pop over to Page 1 of 1 of the Brian McMullan Election Customer Contact List March 9, 2011. There is only the one page. Now let's stroll down the right side. First you will see a Mr. Len Pennachetti listed twice. (Mr. Pennachetti has been the center of the Andrew Gill vs. Preston Haskell lawsuit in Small Claims Court). Let's continue, oops there is Angelo Nitsopolous and he makes a double appearance. Before that Mr. Dan Raseta appears under the 'contact' as did Mr. Pennachetti and Mr. Nitsopolous. Mr. Raseta corresponds to corporate name Port Dalhousie Management Corporation with address P.O. Box 29059, 125 Carlton Street. Further down the list York Bancroft Corporation with the same address 125 Carlton Street, P.O. Box 29059. A coincidence? But this time no contact name? Let's stroll up to the middle, shall we. Right there now stop. You will see Tom Rankin yes? Pull your vision a little to the right what do you see? “Donated $1500-$750 refunded.” Now, now this is on the Financial Statement – Auditor's Report Form 4 signed by you Mayor Brian McMullan in front of a witness dated 2011/03/23!!!! Do you think there are questions to answer here Mayor McMullan?

A quick synopsis is required. Matthew Van Dongen wrote about the 'double-dipping' (my term not Matthew's) in early April 2011. He mentions many names of candidates including Mayor Brian McMullan. Storm breaks and it's June, July 2011. Ms. Lancaster makes public a list of bad boys/gals (can't be sexist here). Sensei Tim Rigby says “It's only $750 it's not enough to sell your soul for.” Oops not a 'politically correct' comment I think Mr. Sensei. How much is a politician's soul worth then? Simply asking, don't get all nervous here any of you, you know thinking out loud so to speak. Marlene Bergsma does more than one piece on this mess. Strange though Mayor McMullan continues to require consultation with his people. Mayor Brian McMullan signed his Financial Statement – Auditor's Report Form 4 on March 23 2011. It now appears that since this public hoopla had hit he never looked at that signed and witnessed document. Mayor McMullan still needs to consult. To make it easier for you Mayor McMullan here it is and the page with your signature on it!!! Any more doubts Mayor McMullan? Looking at these FACTS one asks why has Mayor Brian McMullan not simply of stated the truth from the beginning. Mr. Rigby did and so had others. Mayor McMullan only continued to say he needed to consult. WHY? Mr. Raseta's lawyer has sent letters advising that money should be refunded. I guess his earlier comments to Matthew Van Dongen and urging others to do the same are a little flat now.

There are real and serious reasons why these rules are in place. Some have made excuses, others apologies, all sent refunds quick. I don't know what is the going price for the soul of a politician. Maybe there is a 'ladder of value'; you know municipal, provincial and federal. I can't say. Yet I ask what is the value of truth? What is the value of dignity? Hell you're caught finally you'll have to admit anyhow. Why the smoke screens and mirrors. Heck even Bill and Richard down south finally cried in the confessional of public spectre. Still Mayor Brian McMullan would only need to consult. It's all in black and white Mayor McMullan! What is it that you need to consult about? And to you Marlene Bergsma how is it you never raised the question of Mayor McMullan? How is it that you did not make public the facts? You did mention once on-line the fact that Pennachetti appeared twice on Mayor McMullan's records and never again. How is a mayor allowed to act in such a fashion? But I raised that question once before, and will again Marlene Bergsma. Remember your words from October 8^th 2010? (all on mayorgate.blogspot.com)

WHY MAYOR BRIAN MCMULLAN?

P.S.; Niagara this Week our so called other newspaper has stayed silent on the whole issue of the 'double-dipping' of political campaign contributions. Is it simply not 'news' anymore to NTW or what? Hey Mike and Mike and Doug and anyone there in NTW what's up? Today I got your Vol. 7 Issue 35, dated July 20, 2011delivered to my door with the front page breaking news “City names Arts Centre Director.” Hey guys we heard all that last week. Come on now is it breaking front page news material? Yet illegal acts by those who ask for the trust of the people doesn't get a mention? Mayor McMullan didn't just 'double-dip' he put the whole bowl in front of him and no one questions that. You claim to bring the news to the community, I heard Mike Williscraft brag about that. Maybe you should concentrate on news or editorials on fishing trips and the Transformers movie.

Look at Mayor Brian McMullan's list of contributors. The total of the corporate campaign contributions was $21,000.00. Of that total 4 individual contributors, Mr. Raseta, Mr. Pennachetti, Mr. Nitsopolous and Mr. Rankin contributed $6,000.00. That's over a quarter of the total. Now it is clear half of that was illegal! Venerable Regional Councillor and ex-mayor Tim Rigby says that $750 isn't enough to buy the soul of a politician. How much is enough Councillor Rigby? Chair of the Niagara Region Audit Committee Mrs. M. Pinder calls herself a business woman who wants to save the tax payers money. Mrs. Pinder how much is the law worth? Do we now expect nothing at all from those who ask for our trust? Mayor Brian McMullan needed to consult I can only wonder who. Look at the facts. Marlene Bergsma I read your report today and was not surprised. You Doug Herod not a bad job but how is it Mayor Brian McMullan the worst offender doesn't get a mention? Well it is the Standard after all.

Hey Mike Williscraft maybe there is a story there after all.

 Alexander Davidoff

53 Almond Street

St. Catharines, Ontario

L2T 1G2

July 21, 2011

Premier Dalton McGuinty

The Premier of Ontario

Legislative Building

Queen's Park

Toronto, Ontario, M7A 1A1

Dear Premier McGuinty:

I have come to you asking for help for the community I live in and for the laws that we as collective members of a democratic society live by. Sadly I hold little faith in anything now yet there is little choice other than to bring it to the attention of our elected government a situation that can no longer be ignored.

Our laws separate us from countries lacking democratic freedoms and equality. None are more important that the laws we govern ourselves by. Here in St. Catharines these laws have been turned into a farce. Personal gain has been the motivator of those asking for the trust of a community at the expense of legislation and law.

The Municipal Elections Act is not simply a 'how to' instruction booklet. It is a set of legislated rules where compliance is demanded with penalties instituted for anyone who ignores. These rules are required to protect our fair and democratic nature of government. Yet these laws have been turned into a game of convenient misinterpretation and abuse.

Regulations set in place for political campaign contributions are there for a real reason. Balance and fairness between candidates is a key. Potential pressure for personal gain against a candidate is lessened by these rules. Limitations on the amount of contributions and full disclosure an integral part of the process.

Here in St. Catharines questions have been raised publicly over the number and dollar value of campaign contributions. It is now clear that one candidate had abused the laws and regulations to an obscene level. Yet again he has been kept out of public and official scrutiny. Several business people have provided more than the permitted amounts for campaign contributions. Candidates have been publicly named. A committee has held a hearing. Chair of the Committee deciding that in the interest of saving the tax payers dollars no audits or action to be taken. The law left to wallow in an excuse of dollar value justice.

One candidate clearly stands as a primary abuser of the regulations of the Municipal Elections Act. Out of the $21,000.00 total collected and declared for corporate campaign contributions Mayor Brian McMullan had $6,000.00 contributed by four businesses. Half of that amount illegal. Mayor McMullan had to know of the illegal contributions months prior to the committee hearing held only days ago. Deceit was the motivator for evading any public comment. Many of the candidates admitted and repaid the over contributed amounts. Mayor McMullan would only state that he had to consult with his campaign manager. The evidence is damning.

The Niagara Region Compliance Audit Committee's decision must be put aside and a full inquiry requested on this issue. It is the realm of the provincial government to enforce our laws and legislation. Yet I do not hold much hope in that to happen. As this same Mayor McMullan was brought to question on another breach of the Municipal Act he was protected and sheltered from any action by your Minister James J. Bradley who was Minister for Municipal Affairs at the time. The same Minister James J. Bradley then made a campaign contribution to Mayor Brian McMullan's campaign. Thought the amount not serious in value it was declared on Mayor McMullan's financial statement. It was more symbolic of support given and without question a sign of further support to come. Minister Jim Bradley protected his pal, Mayor McMullan from action that should of been taken. I expect that shelter from the laws that others have to abide by will continue.

We in St. Catharines need you to act as the Premier of Ontario a leader of our government and not an absentee politician lusting for votes of trust. How much corruption is enough before action is taken by a responsible government.

All documentation and evidence available on mayorgate.blogspot.com update July 21, 2011.

Sincerely,

Alexander Davidoff.

C.C.: mayorgate.blogspot.com

         no_ad_lib.blogspot.com

Alexander Davidoff

53 Almond Street

St. Catharines, Ontario

L2T 1G2

July 21, 2011

Minister Rick Bartolucci,

Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing,

Office of the Minister

777 Bay Street, 17 floor

Toronto, Ontario, M5G 2E5

Dear Minister Bartolucci:

As Minister for Municipal Affairs you are responsible for the enforcement of both the Municipal Act and the Municipal Elections Act. Breaches of the Municipal Elections Act here in St. Catharines cannot be ignored any longer. Regulations on campaign contributions abused. A decision by Mrs. Pinder, Chair of the Niagara Region Compliance Audit Committee has to be set aside as improper. The chair's decision was not to conduct a full audit over contributions or multiple contributions on the basis to save the taxpayers money. She quoted a ludicrous dollar amount for audits and on that basis did not request that it should proceed. Evidence of abuse clear and in the case of one candidate overwhelming, was ignored and the question is why. Requirements of the Municipal Elections Act are clear and simple. If the decision was made on the merits of evidence available then arguments would be put aside. Here the decision was made on points that do not relate to the breaches of the Municipal Elections Act. For that reason as Minister for Municipal Affairs responsible for the enforcement of the Municipal Elections Act it is within your mandate to set aside this erroneous decision.

Sincerely,

Alexander Davidoff.

C.C: Premier McGuinty

        mayorgate.blogspot.com

        no_ad_lib.blogspot.com

Send any comments to: demtruth@gmail.com


McGuinty's Dirtier Ontario Exposed On no ad LIB

CASE STUDY: Andrew Gill vs. Preston Haskell

On June 29^th 2011, I sat as a witness in a court room to hear freedom of speech and democratic political discussion brought down to the level of lawyers arguing semantics. An ex-part time local little politician who chose to make himself a spokesperson for the local government that has little to no care for the ordinary citizens, felt hurt when the truth was raised as a question in a newsletter. The judge refused to accept or to listen to the most relevant evidence, and a lawyer who submitted on behalf of his client a picture of wow and hurt feelings.

Andrew Gill ex-part time City of St. Catharines councillor, and a wanna be Federal Liberalista (to set the record straight Andrew Gill came in third in his attempt to represent the Federal Liberal Party in the Federal Election 2011), claimed that Mr. Preston Haskell had said Gill made decisions as return favours for political contributions by a developer. Andrew Gill claimed that he had not known the developer, one Len Pennachetti, and that Pennachetti had never contributed to his campaign nor to the Liberal Party. Andrew Gill then said how as a councillor he had made all his decisions with the constituents in heart. He went on to say how hurtful this was.

Preston Haskell in fact wrote these words, and I quote directly from the newsletter: “Is it appropriate for Niagara Falls Firefighter, Federal Liberal Candidate, and City of St. Catharines Councillor, Andrew Gill to endorse the enhancement in value of any adjacent property, particularly if it benefits a political supporter/developer.” At no stage do these words claim that this developer had been a contributor of Andrew Gill. Preston Haskell does say “a political supporter/developer.” Len Pennachetti is a political supporter of the head of the City of St. Catharines Council!! Mayor McMullan had received a maximum contribution from Len Pennachetti in the 2006 election campaign and 2 maximum dollar contributions under 2 different corporate names in the 2010 election campaign. The evidence that proved this fact was refused to be entered on record by the judge. This judge could not see the relevance of the fact that the developer was indeed a political supporter!

Andrew Gill chose to speak on behalf of the City of St. Catharines government. It was not the first or last time either. In the Friday October 15^th 2010 Standard, Andrew Gill again puts his foot and mouth forward to speak on behalf of the Mayor, Mayor Brian McMullan and the City Council. Andrew Gill said and is quoted “I think he owes an apology not only to the mayor, but to councillors, to city staff. He owes the whole city an apology.” (This was an unrelated matter to Gill's current claims against Haskell.) No other councillor spoke or was quoted here either. It was only Andrew Gill and as with the comments of the developer it was only Gill. Len Penachetti announced his plans on the front page of The Standard on Friday October 8^th 2010. Is it possible to make plans for such a development and keep it a secret from city councillors? Is it possible for a Councillor who claims to have the benefit of his constituents at heart not to know that such a development was planned in his ward? This was your ward Andrew Gill? True in court you were confused on the boundary, facing the facts can be alarming and confusing eh.

Yet this was not enough for Andrew Gill. Andrew Gill a man who painted a picture of himself as being hurt by these nasty words then attacked mayorgate.blogspot.com and therefore me. Andrew Gill said on record that nasty words hurt an honourable person serving the people and defended Councillor Jennie Stevens and Mayor McMullan against Mayorgate. You made it clear Andrew Gill that you were fully aware of the corrupt act by Councillor Jennie Stevens and Mayor McMullan and defended them. Andrew Gill so hurt by questions, by the truth defends another Councillor who committed a corrupt act. Now maybe Andrew Gill you'll find a problem with me stating facts. After all it is a matter of court record. Maybe your lawyer Christopher Bittle of Lancaster, Brooks & Welch can now come after me.

You Mr. Bittle referred to a “kernel of truth” yet you refused to hear an 'ear' full of fact. You naturally objected to have the financial records of Mayor McMullan entered on record as it would blow your case out of the court room. It proved Pennachetti was indeed a political supporter and to the head of the City Council and the boss to little Andrew Gill! I would even ask the question how damaging would it of been with an election only a few months away to have Preston Haskell raise such questions? Andrew Gill wasn't running again for council. It was Mayor McMullan who praised the development in his all-candidates 'debate' on October 6^th. It was Mayor McMullan praising Len Pennachetti's 'dream,' making many promises for the future. A mind with a modicum of intelligence when faced with all the facts can only raise questions? The nature of democracy is to question. The enemy of democracy is censorship. Facts were censored in court Mr. Bittle, facts.

Now one who questions would wonder why a Small Claims Court issue would warrant the front page for The Standard and such a giant of journalism as Doug Herod. Although once again Doug Herod only writes what he wants. Facts were not going to be heard only a picture painted of a hurt ex-councillor Andrew Gill. Was it for a purpose? One can only speculate I guess. But I do ask if a Small Claims Court case warranted the front page surely all the facts were necessary?

 

Send any and all comments to: demtruth@gmail.com

McGuinty's Dirtier Ontario Exposed On no ad LIB

Update: June 25th 2011

Freedom and democracy have been ideals man has fought for for centuries. For us in Canada the actions of the individual in Tunisia are unthinkable, in Canada democracy and its freedom of speech, of worship and the right to choose the government to represent us is long gone taken for granted. Brave men and women have sacrificed their lives in Syria, Egypt and Libya for an ideal that men have the right of choice and of speech without fear. We as Canadians have sent our sons and daughters, our brothers and sisters and our fathers and mothers in uniform to bring that ideal of freedom and democracy to foreign lands. Some have sadly paid the ultimate price for that ideal to have their blood soaking the sands. It is only the families of the fallen brave that understand the reason for such sacrifice.

Democracy only survives on the basic ideal of freedom. It is the freedom to speak without fear of persecution, to worship without threat. It is the freedom to choose those who ask for our trust in government. It is the freedom to demand equality of law and justice without discrimination. And it is the freedom of information without oppressive censorship.

Andrea Kriluck as managing editor of The Standard was at the helm of that tabloid when her reporter Marlene Bergsma lied about evidence of corruption by Mayor Brian McMullan and Councillor Jennie Stevens. When reporter Peter Downs repeated that lie once again Andrea Kriluck was at the helm, when city editor (now dumped by Kriluck and publisher Judy Bullis only days after the Mayorgate Blog made his phone call public) Rick Van Sickle permitted the lie by Bergsma and by Downs to be printed, and then called to cry like a coward about “fathers” on the phone. Andrea Kriluck was at the helm of The Standard during the intentional censorship of the facts surrounding the corrupt act by Mayor Brian McMullan and Councillor Jennie Stevens. Andrea Kriluck was at the helm as the Niagara Regional Police distorted and tampered with the evidence. The actions of The Standard were designed not only to censor the truth, not only to lie about the facts, but to influence directly the outcome of an election. Andrea Kriluck was at the helm of The Standard as managing editor through all of this.

Now Andrea Kriluck has left The Standard, as had city editor Rick Van Sickle although his departure more of a dumping, Andrea Kriluck was given the 'Khrushchev' retirement. As a parting gift Andrea Kriluck left us these words of wisdom as an editorial on Friday April 29 2011. Its heading was 'Take part in democracy and cast your vote Monday' and Andrea Kriluck wrote: “Yes, voting is our democratic right, but it is also a privilege that some people take for granted.” Words that are not befitting even a tabloid such as The Standard and without hesitation words that have no place at the hand of Andrea Kriluck.

In her editorial she speaks of people who have paid with their lives in a struggle for democracy. “The bravery of people struggling to be free,” are these really your words Andrea Kriluck? What did you do with democracy? What did your reporters Marlene Bergsma and Peter Downs do with democracy? These words from your hand only soil the memory of those brave people who have paid the ultimate sacrifice for an ideal that The Standard at your control as managing editor mangled and spat on. The people had a democratic right to know the facts yet you decided to censor evidence and remove that democratic right.

In a democracy we trust the press (well to some degree at least) to present the truth and not distort facts for any reason. Censorship is unacceptable to most Canadians, when that censorship is of the truth. As Canadians we do not have to set ourselves on fire, we do not have to stand in front of tanks for our freedom, for our democratic right. Yet sadly so many of us have become complacent with what our natural rights and freedoms are. True for a moment when we see the images on our televisions or in our newspapers of the struggles and sacrifice of those brave enough to fight for what we take for granted, we stop and think. That moment is short and to some degree understandable.

As Canadians we believe that there is a system in place; laws, checks and balances that safeguard our rights, our freedoms, our democracy. The oppressive violence by authorities during the G20 Summit of 2010 shocked not only Canadians from coast to coast but many from all around the world. A basic freedom of speech, of assembly was stomped on violently during the G20 Summit of 2010 in Toronto. Justice, although slowly, is moving to ensure such a horror can not be repeated. Under no circumstances do Canadians think that an election can be influenced or fixed. It has been here in St.Catharines and that is not only the concern for the locals it is of dramatic concern for all Canadians, for all who value the basic ideal of democracy. The local press censored the facts, and when that didn't work than those at the helm lied and distributed the lie to damage the evidence and the credibility of the one fighting for the truth. A regional police force, the largest regional police force in the province, intentionally distorts and tampers with the evidence. Police officers intentionally lie on official documents without consequence. All for one purpose. An elected minister of the Provincial Government responsible for the enforcement of the Elections Act, fully aware of the corrupt act, only folds his arms and sits back.

Not in Canada you think? YES this happened here in our Canada. In the dawn of any movement for democracy some of the loudest voices come from the institutions of learning. Who can forget the images of the brave soul standing in front of a tank in Tiananmen Square in China? Democracy has claimed many sacrifices even in the early days of our new millennium. Tiananmen Square China, Tunisia, Libya, Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan, the list grows as the blood flows.

We in Canada do not have to sacrifice our lives to fight for or protect our democratic rights and freedoms. Though some bruises and bone chilling fear was required in Toronto during the G20 Summit of 2010. So I don't expect the students of Brock University here in St.Catharines to stand in front of a Smart Car let alone a tank for their democratic freedoms. But I do ask you Professor David Siegel, Professor of Political Science, Director of the Niagara Community Observatory at Brock University, and all round political pundit and political commentator to explain your actions. I guess you would be thought of as a member of the 'intelligentsia'. The vocal chords of struggles for democracy come in the early stage from centres of learning. There is a thirst for discussion, of discovery that often ignites the fires for freedom. China and Tiananmen Square was an example. You teach Political Science Professor Siegel, what is it that you teach? How to drive the Smart Car? I challenged you to face me in front of your students but you ignored that.

On September 11 2010 you Professor Siegel, professor of political science was quoted, “Unless they've made a major misstep during this term in office, incumbents have the advantage and McMullan hasn't had major gaffes.” You gave McMullan the “halo effect” and I wrote you several days later. I set out all the events of the corrupt act by McMullan, you ignored my letter. At the Brock candidates' session you chaired the event and stayed clear. Yet throughout the campaign you extolled the virtues of a corrupt mayor, Brian McMullan. How far has this gone? It began with a corrupt act by Mayor McMullan and Councillor Stevens. The local press imposed intentional censorship on the facts, when that proved insufficient the same newspaper then printed lies. The largest regional police force then attempted to damage the credibility of the evidence and of the individual fighting for the truth. Niagara Regional Police in fact lied on official police documents of record. On October 26 2010 the one who committed the corrupt act was able to publicly say that there was no foundation for the truth and the tabloid printed those words. How far was it necessary to go to destroy the basis of democracy? As a professor of political science how do you defend your role in this?

The aftermath of the G20 Summit in Toronto has brought horror stories of abuse of by police. Democracy was shaken to its foundation and scenes reminiscent of a banana republic with police in uniform losing control. Images that come to public light bring horror that this was possible in Canada. Toronto Police Chief Blair sees nothing overly wrong and says that his police were overwhelmed. Premier McGuinty blames the Prime Minister for the whole mess. Yet a voice rings loud for the rights of free people, the rights that we take for granted guaranteed under our Charter and Human Rights Code. Professor David McNally, Professor of Political Science at York University stands up against the police, against Toronto Police Chief Blair.

Political Science examines and teaches man's maturity into the ability to govern himself. The essence of democracy is the freedom of speech, freedom of choice of representation, and freedom of information. Censorship , interference in a lawful election unacceptable under any terms. Your silence and ignorance of the facts Professor Siegel shows a dangerous path here in St.Catharines. I expect your silence to continue Professor Siegel.

Censorship is an enemy to democracy. The right of the people to know the facts is an integral part of the freedom of choice and freedom of speech. You Mike Williscraft of Niagara this Week brag and back slap yourself on page 7 of Thursday May 26 2011. Your ego is a giant I dare think. Your words Mike Williscraft, “....to deliver what we believe is a newspaper worthy of the communities we serve...” Oh my you show how you deliver when you censor news and facts from the community. Your reporter Forsyth did a story on April 6 2011 regarding the big pipe in Wainfleet being abandoned. I sent a letter with all information to Managing Editor K. Nadeau (copy attached) informing a Ministry of Environment investigation of a property in Wainfleet, heck I even included a copy of the MOE confirmation of the investigation.

Censorship is an enemy of democracy, yes I have already said this, yet it's worth repeating in relation to your act Mike Williscraft. You and your team decided to withhold the facts from a community. You decided to censor the truth. Was it for their collected greater good, or simply because of who brought you the news eh? Your words again Williscraft, “....yes, sometimes our editorial team feels crushed by the weight we put on ourselves to deliver what we...” Your ego radiated with great energy on Thursday May 26 2011 Mike Williscraft, more possibly than any windmill yet the facts are simply and less palatable. You and your team censored facts, you and your team censored news from a community.

Censorship is an enemy of democracy.

Alexander Davidoff

53 Almond Street

St.Catharines, ON

L2T 1G2

September 16, 2010

Professor David Siegel

Brock University

500 Glenridge Avenue

St.Catharines, ON 

L2S 3A1

Dear Professor Siegel:

I am writing as a response to your comments as published in the Standard September 11 2010 by Marlene Bergsma.  You gave McMullan the credit of the “halo effect” and said that “Brian hasn’t made any major blunders.”  These were your words as quoted by Bergsma.  You are a Brock University Political Science professor?  I assume that ethics, political integrity and corruption are issues that warrant some attention even comment to you?  As a professor in the science of politics you are aware of the Municipal Act and the Charter of Rights?  Maybe even have an opinion or two on code of conduct and the right of the public in a democratic government to have some form, some avenue for recourse when issues arise regarding conduct of our elected public servants.  Have you seen or bothered to look at mayorgate.blogspot.com?

No mayor or councillor has the legal authority to fix, forgive, pardon or get rid of any fine after it was issued and due process attempted.  Here you have the voice of Councillor Jennie Stevens leaving a telephone answering machine message to an individual that she spoke with Mayor McMullan and that the mayor had taken care of the fine and he didn’t have to pay it.  Back to the beginning, Mark had gone for some six weeks to Cuba it snowed and he wasn’t there.  City cleaned his sidewalk and under that by-law he was fined.  He came back and tried to explain to Public Works he was told as he knew he was going to be away he should have arranged for someone to take care of his sidewalk.  The fine stood as is.  He called Councillor Stevens and the result was her telephone answering machine message.  A further meeting with Mayor McMullan at the local Legion confirmed this face to face.

Now you are welcome to peruse the Municipal Act and the Charter of Rights.  I have read both.  I have had comment even from a former mayor, not to mention lawyers and businessmen.  I have spoken to a friend who is a Toronto Councillor who made it clear if this happened there and unfolded in such a manner both would be removed.  But here McMullan has a strangle hold on the truth.  Williscraft in a lengthy conversation with Mark, which was recorded, never denied that it was illegal.  He never denied that it was in contravention of the Municipal Act or the Charter of Rights, nor did he deny it was perjury of Oath of Office.  No Williscraft called it “after all it is only a small thing.”  Corruption was considered only a small thing!  The Standard well just look at the Macfest you were a part of.  Truth is not only inconvenient but downright dangerous.

It wasn’t enough that the press were put under control so the people of St.Catharines do not have a chance to hear the truth and make their own decisions, but we have the mama of Councillor Stevens sending bullying and threatening letters to advertisers in a local newsletter that printed a transcript of little Jennie Stevens and her answering machine message.  Little Councillor Jennie Stevens’ mama Pat Lindal who is asking for people’s

trust that as a Regional Councillor she will enforce her oath of office equally without bias, now is bullying innocent people.  You do know professor that an advertiser has no authority or right over content?  I know this after years in advertising, oh I know what Marlene wrote about me but heck Marlene and I have not seen eye to eye on important issues for a long time.

So as a professor of the science of politics I guess corruption is not considered a major blunder?  Having mama bully and threaten is a part of a democratic society I guess.  Soon enough little Councillor Jennie Stevens will face the truth and her own voice, then what.  All the attempts to ‘put a lid on it’ by McMullan will fail.  I have the opportunity to make this very public, and at the right time.  I wonder what will McMullan’s handlers or spin doctors do then, or Marlene.

Corruption my dear professor is unacceptable on any level.  A lie by a government is unacceptable on any point.  The rest have been games played by the corrupt.  Truth more than inconvenient, in fact it is very dangerous.  Will you reply?  I won’t hold my breath for that.

Sincerely,

Alexander Davidoff. 

P.S:  You have a copy of a letter sent by Pat Lindal to innocent small business advertisers.  As a bully and thug she threatens those who without any connection go about their business.  This same individual, this thug and coward dares to ask as a candidate for the people’s vote!  Now listen to her on this disk.  This coward attacked me and my children as we delivered the newsletter.  I recorded her!  You are a professor, what do you say to the ethics of politics, as Professor of political science!  Listen to her, “unsubstantiated dribble.”  Listen to Councillor Stevens on the blog!  Understand this, I have already made contact with Minister Bartolucci and provided all details and proof.  No bully or thug will be permitted to go to the public and ask for their vote.  No bully or thug will in any way dishonour the core, the foundation of our democratic society.  Mrs. Pat Lindal is not fit for public office and she soon will understand what the law and legal process means.  Every effort has been made to silence the truth.  I will not be silenced.  I will make all of this public.

I repeat I don’t expect or wait for a response from you.  Dare you or not!

Alexander Davidoff.

Send comments in privacy to: demtruth@gmail.com


McGuinty's Dirtier Ontario Exposed On no ad LIB

Update: June 7th 2011

You have seen the hard evidence of Niagara Regional Police lying and fabricating official documents or record. You have heard the recorded voices of two NRP officers, officer Cataldo and officer Donovan, and then were able to read the official Incident Reports both had filed for the record. The Ontario Police Services Act, Ontario Regulation 268/10 states under Part IV, Code of Conduct 30. (i) Any conduct described in the code of conduct, set out in the Schedule, constitutes misconduct for the purpose of section 80 of the Act. O. Reg. 268/10 (i). Under this schedule subsection (d) Deceit, in that he or she, (i) knowingly makes or signs a false statement in a record (ii) wilfully or negligently makes a false, misleading or inaccurate statement pertaining to official duties.

The Ontario Police Services Act is enforced by the Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services. I have now written Minister Jim Bradley explaining in detail all that has happened and provided Minister Bradley with the conclusive evidence that has been public now for several months. I have also written Premier Dalton McGuinty informing him of the situation.

Minister Bradley had been fully aware of a corrupt act by Mayor McMullan. As Minister for Municipal Affairs I had written him and provided all the hard evidence then. That letter and Minister Bradley's response has been posted on this blog for months. As Minister for Municipal Affairs, Minister Jim Bradley only chose to cover up for his pal Mayor McMullan instead of enforcing the laws of the Municipal Act. Minister Bradley walked away from his sworn duties and responsibilities. The question as to why has never been answered, not by Minister Bradley nor by the government.

Now Minister Bradley has been given the position of Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services, a ministry merged with the Ministry of the Solicitor General of Ontario, and responsible for the enforcement of the Ontario Police Services Act, Ontario Reg. 268/10.

I have an open question to you Minister Bradley. Are you going to perform your duties and responsibilities and enforce the Police Services Act or are you going to walk away from those responsibilities again? Premier McGuinty is your government going to take action finally and ensure that your minister does not abuse his powers and responsibilities or not? At this time the Ombudsman of Ontario is investigating one of your ministries, the Ministry of the Environment, for not enforcing its own legislation. Is there to be another investigation needed regarding the non-enforcement of legislation by another minister and ministry?

When the horrors of the G20 Summit became public the people of Ontario, and in fact throughout Canada were horrified. Here in St. Catharines direct evidence proves without a doubt that police officers have lied on Police Incident Reports. These are official sworn statements of record. Those officers in fact have committed perjury. An officer in any police force in Ontario swears an oath and that oath has been breached. Chief Wendy Southall, Chief of the Niagara Regional Police has been aware of the breach of oath by officers of her force. Chief Southall has stayed silent with the knowledge that false records in the form of Incident Reports have been filed by officers of the Niagara Regional Police. Chief Southall has done nothing at all about it. Now its up to you Minister Bradley. As the Minister for Community Safety and Correctional Services you are responsible for the enforcement of the Police Services Act, Ontario Reg. 268/10. You have clear and unquestionable proof of breaches of the Act and what are you going to do about it?

Post script: Both of the letters, one for Minister Bradley and the other to Premier McGuinty have been sent Express with signatures required so as no points are raised by either on receiving the material in this period of Canada Post rolling strikes.

Both letters sent by EXPRESS MAIL through Canada Post 06-06-2011 with signature required, tracking numbers 0179 6200 0032 2361 and 0179 6200 0032 2378.

A final point, election campaign information is public domain according to Elections Ontario rules. So I have a question to you Minister James J. Bradley. I went to your constituency office to request the campaign contributions for your 2006 election, mind you it was an individual from Elections Ontario who suggested I do this. On the first attempt there was only one young woman in the office. She seemed uncomfortable with my request and fumbled on the computer. She told me that she could not find that information while I stood and waited, she asked for my name and phone number and said she will call the next day. SHE DID NOT! I came back four days later, I made sure I gave her plenty of time to find an excuse to throw at me.

The second time I came I was prepared with my digital recorder at the ready, and to be clear I had a witness who drove me to your office on both occasions, a prominent member of the St. Catharines business community for decades. So I came a second time I asked the same woman if she remembered. She even remembered my name, though this time there were 3 other people in the office (two young men and an older woman). The young woman referred me to the older one who she named Betty. I had contact with Betty from Bradley before, a couple of years back. I was recording the whole exchange with Betty form Bradley. I explained what I wanted. Betty said she does not have anything like that in the office. She explained what the purpose of the office was. It was to aid any members of the community with anything that was needed. It seems that was a LIE Betty. I told her that a representative from Elections Ontario told me to come to the constituency office and request the information I wanted. Betty said, I wont give it, I cant give it, I don't have it. Betty from Bradley said she will call Elections Ontario and set them straight. I made sure to ask her again and Betty refused to provide the information I required! I RECORDED EVERY WORD!

CLICK ON HERE to listen to Betty from Bradley

The following day I called Elections Ontario and explained what I needed. Again I was given the alternative of trying the web or going to the constituency office. I told the individual from Elections Ontario that (Betty) refused to give it to me from the constituency office. The response was clear, and recorded, that they CANNOT REFUSE!

CLICK ON HERE to listen to the Elections Ontario representative

So I ask you Minister James J. Bradley, Minister Jim Bradley, Jim Bradley ( I just want to cover everything for Google) what is the reason for Betty to state an untruth. The campaign contributions are public domain and I will get them. If you have nothing to hide then why have Betty act like you have something to hide? Listen to Betty and her voice here. Listen to Elections Ontario. Explain this Minister Bradley! Betty stated an untruth you know it and so do I. Didn't anyone tell her how wonderful a tool computers are? Heck everything is at your fingertips. Yet she refused, she said she did not have that information in the office, in fact the other younger woman seemed to panic on my first visit. I asked for the campaign contributions list for your 2006 campaign, your staff refused. Any explanations Minister Bradley? Is there something you don't want me to see Minister James J. Bradley? What was the reason for Betty to refuse to provide a member of the public information that is legally public domain Minister Jim Bradley? How do you explain this Minister Bradley? Listen to Betty from Bradley and listen to Elections Ontario and explain! I will get that information in the end. What are you hiding Minister Bradley and if not why did Betty refuse as she did? It's up to you to explain.

I have sent all of this to your boss Premier McGuinty to ask him why this can happen. I have sent all of this including the voice of Betty and the representative from Elections Ontario to the head of Elections Ontario. Your staff Minister Bradley breached the Elections Act and I want an explanation as to why.

Much more to come.

Alexander Davidoff

53 Almond Street

St. Catharines, Ontario

L2T 1G2

May 31 2011

Hon. James J. Bradley

Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services

18^th Floor

25 Grosvenor Street

Toronto, Ontario, M7A 1Y6

Dear Minister Bradley,

As the Minister for Community Safety and Correctional Services you are responsible for enforcing the Police Services Act of Ontario, Ontario Regulation 268/10. Your ministry is responsible for inspection of Ontario Police Services to make sure they comply with the Police Services Act. As an elected minister you are answerable to the people who cast their votes. The situation brought to you here is of extreme seriousness and demands immediate action.

The Police Services Act is a clear document that sets the parameters for all police services as to their responsibilities and authority. Part IV of the Police Services Act is Code of Conduct and section 2, subsection (d) headed Deceit. I quote, “Deceit, in that he or she, (i) knowingly makes or signs a false statement in a record, (ii) wilfully or negligently makes a false, misleading or inaccurate statement pertaining to official duties.” To ensure no confusion plays its hand here I quote again from the Police Services Act the description for “record,” “record means any record of information, however recorded, whether in printed form, on film.... regardless of physical form or characteristics, and any copy of the record (document).”

Officers of the Niagara Regional Police Service have intentionally and wilfully lied on police Incident Reports. A police Incident Report is an official document of record, to lie intentionally is to commit perjury. Each officer of the Niagara Regional Police Service swears an oath upon becoming an officer. Therefore to submit an official document of record as in a police Incident Report constitutes perjury of oath when that report is an intentional lie.

Officer Carmine Cataldo #9495 of the Niagara Regional Police submitted Incident Report number GO #2010-103419 dated Sunday 2010, Oct 24. This report is a complete lie and fabrication. Officer Cataldo was recorded during the interview with me and what he put in his Incident Report was a lie. A copy of the report and the recorded interview attached.

Officer Shawn Donovan #09508 of the Niagara Regional Police submitted Incident Report number GO #2010-102654 dated Friday 2010, Oct 22. This report is a lie and fabrication. Officer Donovan was recorded during the interview with me and what he put in his Incident Report was a lie. A copy of the report and the recorded interview attached.

Detective William Harris #03554 of the Niagara Regional Police submitted Incident Report number GO #2010-100048 dated Thursday 2010, Oct. 14. This report was intentionally “false, misleading and inaccurate.” All details on this report will follow.

The Police Service Act makes it very clear what constitutes breach of Code of Conduct and Deceit. Those officers prepared, signed and submitted into official record documents that were false and with full intent. Evidence that proves this is clear and cannot be disputed. All of the information relating to officers Cataldo and Donovan has been public on mayorgate.blogspot.com for several months. Information and evidence relating to Det. Harris to be posted in approximately 10 days. Chief Southall of the Niagara Regional Police Service has been aware of the intentional false reports by officers of the NRPS. Chief Southall has taken no action in this and has only stayed silent. Chief Southall has the duties of a Police Chief clearly outlined in the Police Services Act and nowhere does it state that the Chief of Police is to stay silent on proven deceit and submission of false record. In fact Chief Southall of the Niagara Regional Police has breached the Police Services Act and the Code of Conduct for a Chief of Police.

As the Minister for Community Safety and Correctional Services you are responsible for the Police Service Act of Ontario, Ontario Regulation 268/10. You cannot walk away from that responsibility and defer this to anyone else. Police Incident Reports are official documents of record, they are used to convict people to jail. Police officers have intentionally lied and submitted lies into record and it is proven. It is your responsibility to enforce the Police Services Act of Ontario. These officers cannot be trusted, their reports all of them are in doubt now. An investigation is imperative and required immediately. It is your responsibility to do so.

Sincerely,

Alexander Davidoff.

cc: Premier McGuinty

mayorgate.blogspot.com

Alexander Davidoff

53 Almond Street

St. Catharines, Ontario

L2T 1G2

May 31, 2011

Premier Dalton McGuinty

The Premier of Ontario

Legislative Building

Queen's Park

Toronto, Ontario, M7A 1A1

Dear Premier McGuinty,

I have written to Minister Bradley, Minister for Community Safety and Correctional Services. The situation brought to his attention is of extreme serious nature. As Minister for Community Safety and Correctional Services he is responsible for the enforcement of the Police Services Act of Ontario, Ontario Regulation 268/10. Police Services in Ontario faced a serious public blow with the violence extended to innocent individuals of the public during the G20 Summit. Yet the situation brought to Minister Bradley is of a much more grave a level as it puts in question not only breach of the Police Services Act, Code of Conduct but the legal standing of Incident Reports submitted by officers of the Niagara Regional Police Service. Officers of the NRPS have intentionally lied on Incident Reports submitted into record. Each officer swears an oath on becoming a police officer and breach of that oath is perjury. Incident Reports are serious official documents of record used in legal form to convict individuals to terms of imprisonment. Officers of the NRPS have lied and submitted those lies as Incident Reports on record.

Here you will find a copy of my letter to Minister Bradley with copies of all information sent to him. This is an issue of extremely serious nature and cannot be ignored. As the Premier you cannot walk away from responsibility in this serious situation nor can Minister Bradley.

Sincerely,

Alexander Davidoff.

cc: mayorgate.blogspot.com    

Send your comments: demtruth@gmail.com


McGuinty's Dirtier Ontario Exposed On no ad LIB

Update: May 1st 2011

You have read the lies by Officer Cataldo of the Niagara Regional Police in his Incident Report and have heard the voice recording of Officer Catlado from October 24th  2010. Now comes part two of the Niagara Regional Police and their attempt to destroy, taint and tamper with the evidence of the corrupt act by Mayor Brian McMullan and City Councillor Jennie Stevens. The Niagara Regional Police in fact made three separate attempts to discredit the facts and label me, the final update will follow soon and it is as alarming as Officer Cataldo's full and intentional lies on the Incident Report #2010-103419.

On October 22nd 2010 Officer Donovan of the Niagara Regional Police Service came to my home. Officer Donovan said he was sent to gather facts on the harassment and threat by the mother of Councillor Stevens, then a candidate herself for Regional Council, one Pat Lindal. Officer Shawn Donovan stayed in my home for over 30 minutes. HE WAS RECORDED, the full recording is available here. Before I say anything else Officer Donovan was respectful, polite and took pages of notes. You will hear him on several occasions stop me to read back his notes, as he put it so he gets it right. Well Officer Donovan, only because you showed more manners will I say then that you must of put your notebook into the dryer on a gentle tumble cycle. Yet a lie is a lie, it is the distortion of facts for an ulterior motive and Officer Donovan if you had in fact used your notes you may of written a report that was at least loosely based on fact and truth.

So now to page 3 of 7 of the Incident Report #2010-102654 compiled by Officer Donovan of the Niagara Regional Police, and again I stress Officer Donovan was recorded. Once again I stress that a police Incident Report is a serious legal document, it is used as evidence and can be the difference between a conviction or acquittal. One individual, and I've spoken to several, was told by a judge that he appeared honest and credible, and he had no record of any past wrong doing, yet the judge said that he had to take the officer's Incident Report as fact and convicted that individual. The officer in that situation LIED both in court and on his Incident Report. Sadly for Chief Wendy Southall, Chief of the Niagara Regional Police Service I can prove outright your officers LIED on their Incident Reports. That Chief Wendy Southall is a frightening situation.

This Recording of Constable Shawn Donovan October 22 2010. I Do Not Have A Transcript As It Would Be Too Long But Available Upon Request

Now Incident Report 2010-102654 and its contents. Constable Donovan I have to say that either your note taking isn't worth much or you simply had trouble with facts and truth. You open up paragraph number 3 with words that make no sense. First of all you were dispatched by Det. Sergeant Clint Sears because of my letter to Chief Wendy Southall. Now listen to your own voice on the recording and try explain your words on the Incident Report #2010-102654. I told you and Chief Southall, and indirectly then Sergeant Sears, that Pat Lindal harassed and threatened businesses for advertising in the newsletter. You wrote, “as a result of a article written by a Pat Lindal.” Do you have problems hearing people? You read your notes back to me on more than one instance through the 30 plus minutes you sat in my home! Preston Haskell is a senior but there is no junior Preston Haskell, and where the hell did you get all that stuff a “member of numerous environmental agencies boards in St. Catharines”? First of all St. Catharines has no environmental agencies, I think I am the only environmentalist in Niagara with a real background in environmental work. The “sounding board for virtually anyone wishing to be heard,” where did that come from?

Paragraph four starting with the famous “Davidoff,” oh before I go on though your grammar is crap you should read before pushing that print button. First of all, I NEVER said to you I had “knowledge” of something, that would diminish what I had done. I told you I had proof, evidence Constable Donovan of the corrupt act! So in paragraph 3 “Pat Lindal (no further information)” and now “Jennie Stevens....seeking re-election for regional council,” the rest of that sentence is pure insanity. You go on to say the stuff of “knowledge”....”regional council” and “violated rules under the Municipal Elections Act with the help of St. Catharines mayor Brian McMullen,” (by the way Constable Donovan 'mayor' should of been with capital 'M' as its a title and you misspelled the Mayor's name 3 times). All of this an absolute stupid lie! It does continue though. What I am “outraged” over Constable Donovan is the insanity of this paragraph and the complete stupidity of the lies. For God's sake man you were recorded don't you realize that? This paragraph, its sentences and dare I use the term 'thoughts' were taken and thrown into a dryer, tumbled and evidently came out dizzy, confused and simply stupid.

So paragraph 4 a total jumble of lies now onward we go to paragraph #5. This is truly an adventure eh. Now you have surgically separated the harassment by Pat Lindal of innocent people, turned it into a farce and now you step on the facts. You say, “he will conduct his own investigation....” When the hell did I say that Constable Donovan? Finishing you say, “To date the writer has no knowledge...” and that is the only truth you spoke of Constable Donovan.

Constable Donovan was sent on an expedition to discover facts for a Det. Sergeant. He had a 'handy dandy notebook' and sat in a comfortable chair. He was recorded, each and every word ( I no lie, just listen to him) even when he interrupts to re-read his notes so that he is getting all the facts correctly. He then writes an Incident Report that is a lie and a rambling misrepresentation of facts, jumbled up, twisted and wrapped with a cover sheet present to Detective Sergeant. What do you think the great detective did. Just look at the next page!

Chief Wendy Southall, Chief of the Niagara Regional Police, the opening words on page 5 are, “Following a police investigation.” What investigation? Was it the facts presented by Constable Donovan? Heck he lied and mumbled through his teeth. Did your detectives speak to any of the innocent people harassed and terrorized by Pat Lindal? Did your detectives speak to the publisher of the newsletter? Oh, that's right your detectives waited for the victims to contact them, that's how it works then? So a harassing letter sent to a business to force it not to advertise in a publication, a publication that made public the corrupt act of her little girl, so momma decides she doesn't like the truth public not even on a limited basis, she then decides to threaten those who have nothing to do with the article. But hell your 'detectives' read the letter and not the Criminal Code!

Chief Wendy Southall can you explain the lies by your Constable Cataldo in his Incident Report #2010-103419? Chief Wendy Southall can you explain the lies by your Consable Donovan in his Incident Report #2010-102654? No you can not Chief Southall not in any logical form, yet the truth is so damaging and dangerous. Both constables recorded, how were they going to get away with it Chief Southall? All that's left is part three, the final chapter of this evidence of the actions of the Niagara Regional Police in an attempt to destroy evidence, tamper with facts, label and slander an individual willing to fight for the truth and the law.

Send your comments in privacy to:  demtruth@gmail.com 

McGuinty's Dirtier Ontario Exposed On no ad LIB