Skip to content

Case Won: Stay of Proceedings

The Breach of Undertaking charge was laid via Information #649 on June 24, 2002. The Information contained four different counts, all related to the same Breach charge. The Crown proceeded by indictment, which is more serious to the accused than summary charges.

On July 6, 2006 the Crown granted a formal Stay of Proceedings for the Breach charge after I demonstrated that the evidence had been fabricated by Sgt. James Bracken in collusion with Dr. Joel Yelland.

The Crown stayed the Breach charge, but kept the evidence related to that charge namely Exhibit #83 well away from the Judge.

A few months before, in January 2006 I had begun representing myself in court; this was my own choice. Previous to that, through 2004-2005, my attorney was Robert Borden of Saskatoon.

The Stay was granted at a Preliminary Inquiry session held July 6, 2006 before Judge Barry Singer at Saskatoon Provincial Court. The Prosecutor was now Inez Cardinal. The Court Transcript is an indelible record of how the Crown maneuvered in every way possible to keep any knowledge of the Breach exhibit away from Judge Singer. There were three such incidents in July 2006 alone.

The most significant testimony from the Court Transcript is quoted below. To read the full text for each incident in July 2006, click the link at the end of each section.

TRANSCRIPT:  July 6, 2006 (page 1057)

INEZ CARDINAL:

Your Honor, with respect to Information #649, there's four counts. The Crown directs Stays of Proceedings on each of the four counts.

JUDGE SINGER:

Okay. These counts are gone, #649 is gone.

GEORGENA SIL:

Will they state their reasons?

JUDGE SINGER:

No, they don't have to and they don't even have to state it in Court. They can – they stayed the charge, that's done by the Clerk, not by me. I have no say in it.

INEZ CARDINAL:

The – I just wondered if that – some of those envelopes had anything to do with Information #649. I think they may have on one of them, but if they do, I won't tender those, Your Honor, at this Preliminary Inquiry.

GEORGENA SIL:

Well, the date on the postmark precedes even the first undertaking, so –

INEZ CARDINAL:

If they're relevant to #738, I'll file them.

Role of the Speakers
Judge Singer: Provincial Court Justice
Inez Cardinal: Prosecutor
Georgena Sil: Client / Self-Represented

TRANSCRIPT:  July 6, 2006 (pages 933-937)

Earlier in the day of July 6, 2006

GEORGENA SIL:

Am I allowed to file pages from the disclosure as an exhibit?

JUDGE SINGER:

Only with the consent of the Crown. Not for the truth of it and you should only be able to file it with the consent of the Crown, I think, at this stage. It depends what it is. I don't know what it is so –

GEORGENA SIL:

It's the envelope that refers to the breach of undertaking charge.

JUDGE SINGER:

That's not before me.

GEORGENA SIL:

Okay. I'm not certain when I'm supposed to deal with this.

JUDGE SINGER:

Just deal with all of the charges that are Information #738.

GEORGENA SIL:

Okay. The charges ending in #649, when do I deal with that?

JUDGE SINGER:

I don't know. It's not before me. It's just been carried along. We'll find out at the end of the day what the Crown intends to do with that … I'm sure the Prosecutor will tell you if you ask. Maybe you should just ask her. All right. Ms. Cardinal, what do you intend to do about the charges ending in #649?

INEZ CARDINAL:

Your Honor, there's no need for her to refer to #649 at this point. We're on #738 and I was going to leave that until the end to deal with that.

JUDGE SINGER:

All right. There's no need for you to refer to anything that's on #649.

GEORGENA SIL:

Okay. So I deal with the time period up to the time when the charges were laid, May 22nd, 2002?

JUDGE SINGER:

21st of May, yeah. You deal with what's the charge on #738.

GEORGENA SIL:

Okay. So I can file with the Court an exhibit that precedes that date?

JUDGE SINGER:

If it's relevant.

GEORGENA SIL:

Well, I would like it filed because it was not examined by the RCMP.

JUDGE SINGER:

Okay. What is it that you want filed? I write this down and we'll deal with all of these things at the end. Just tell me what it is you want to file.

GEORGENA SIL:

Okay. The envelope of the exhibit that the police numbered 83.

JUDGE SINGER:

All right. Okay.

GEORGENA SIL:

And if I'm allowed to, an occurrence report, a fairly short one, half a page, by Sergeant Bracken dated June 26th, 2002. And it relates to the previous envelope. It explains the relevance. Actually, sorry, that's in June. I'm not allowed to – that's right, I wouldn't be allowed to. Okay.

GEORGENA SIL:  

(Sil consulting transcript):Yes, looking at the transcript page from August 5th, 2004 in regard to the charges ending in #649, simply to quote what was said, Your Honor – actually, Mr. Borden said this, In relation to that, meaning the charges ending in #649, we'll proceed on #738 and at the end of the Preliminary Inquiry we'll do as we usually do, we'll take it under advisement and speak to it then. Is that what you were telling me?

JUDGE SINGER:

Yes.

Role of the Speakers
Judge Singer: Provincial Court Justice
Inez Cardinal: Prosecutor
Georgena Sil: Client / Self-Represented

TRANSCRIPT:  July 13, 2006 (pages 1068-1069)

In my absence on July 13, 2006 the Prosecutor Inez Cardinal tried to convince Judge Singer to reverse his decision about letting me file the Breach exhibit with the court. The arguments offered by Ms. Cardinal were garbled and evasive. But pressure tactics make a Judge suspicious. Take a look:

INEZ CARDINAL:

I wonder if at this point it's appropriate to revisit some of the comments Your Honor made to the Crown last date about filing certain envelopes, those kinds of things. That – I'm – I would ask the Court to not order the Crown to do that. I believe I actually consented. The issue I have, Your Honor, is that these weren't put in at the Preliminary Inquiry proper by the Crown and I'm a bit reluctant to do it at this stage, being that the Crown has already closed its case.

INEZ CARDINAL:  

(continued):As, of course, you know, the police have those exhibits we talked about, the envelopes, that kind of thing. And, of course, both of my officers are no longer with the department and that will still require me some time to go through, figure out what envelopes they are and to get them from someone at the police station, which may take some time now. Maybe by September, yes, but I'm just saying it's going to take some time in addition to my other duties.

JUDGE SINGER:

Okay. I don't want to make any changes in my decision with her not being here because I think you consented to that.

INEZ CARDINAL:

Yes, I did, I think, Your Honor, yes.

JUDGE SINGER:

Yeah. What I'll – what I will do is say that they don't need to be filed until the September date.

INEZ CARDINAL:

They don't need to be filed –

JUDGE SINGER:

Until the next Court date. And hopefully by that time you will have your Inventory done as well for her.

Role of the Speakers
Judge Singer: Provincial Court Justice
Inez Cardinal: Prosecutor
Georgena Sil: Client / Self-Represented
Georgena S. Sil
Saskatoon, Canada
Physicist & Technical Writer
Alumnus: University of British Columbia
TuumEstContact@protonmail.com

Copyright © 2008-2018 Georgena Sil. All Rights Reserved.