Join the new world

At midnight, I made a final decision on the fate of Samuel de Champlain through the proper channels of private arbitration before sending the case to the courts, and through negotiation between the defendant and the team of the Attorney General, the Rt. Hon. Prime Minister, and myself, we came up with a settlement before the case went to the courts.

######################################## ##################################

MARCH 21, 2010, 12:00 AM EST
From the Desk of the Rt. Hon. Minister of Justice, Zblewski

To all eCanadians:

On March 7th, 2010, I received a formal petition from jfstpierre, on behalf of his client, Samuel de Champlain. The petition requested the review of the policies regarding the case of de Champlain "...concerning the allegations of being a threat and traitor to Canada". jfstpierre made known that "[no] official accusation, including no arrest warrant request and no case in Supreme Court, was addresses against Samuel de Champlain", and further stated that his belief was that the allegations about his client were based on no proof.

Jfstpierre took the initiative to go through the proper channels to investigate the matter. However, it has been in my understanding that the justices of the Supreme Court, the Right Honourable Prime Minister and the Director of CSIS were in the belief that the matter was not perusing. This onus to clear the charges was not in the cards, and I requested the information on the case from Marcchelala in order to investigate the matter further. The Honourable Attorney General did his own investigation, and filed his findings with me and the Right Honourable Prime Minister, and laid out what he believed to be fair terms of settlement. After review with Jfstpierre and his consultation with his client, both sides have come up with a amicable agreement.


1.) A 1 month Congressional ban
2.) 5 q1 weapons as a symbolic gesture, donated to the country accounts
3.) 2 q2 weapons as bail, if the defendant wishes to run for Congress this month
4.) The accused is to be relieved of his forums ban for treason and to have the Canadian Citizen mask



In addition, I would like to make the following sub-statement as part of the agreement:


After reviewing the evidence given to me, and after working closely with all parties involved, I am satisfied to say that the accused, Samuel de Champlain, is not a traitor to Canada, nor is he of any possible threat to the nation or its' people. de Champlain has been dogged for a lengthy period of time, without the due process of law. In my opinion, de Champlain was not given equality under the law, nor was he given equal application of the law. I am in the hopes that this investigation serves as a final measurement of the government's view in the matter. While his acts may have irked some in the eCanadian community, these acts were not done with malice to eCanada, but rather acted with the french citizenship automatically given to him, thus he felt he had a certain role to fuffil alongside the french community. He has long repented. Samuel, I wish you well in your life as a proper eCanadian citizen, and that you may serve well in our nation as a responsible citizen.


The Rt. Hon. Zblewski
Minister of Justice

######################################## ####### ##################################

Du bureau de l'Hon. Ministre de la Justice, Zblewski
21 MARS, 2010, 1h30 EST

À tous les eCanadiens.

Le 7 mars 2010, j’ai reçu une demande formelle de jfstpierre, au nom de son client Samuel de Champlain. La requête demandait la revue de la politique regardant le cas de Champlain "…concernant les allégations de menace et de traîtrise envers le eCanada". Jfstpierre a fait savoir "qu’il n’y avait aucune accusation officielle, incluant une requête d’un mandat d’arrêt et une cause à la Cour Suprême, qui ait été adressée contre Samuel de Champlain", et a de plus indiqué qu’il croit que les allégations faites à propos de son client ne sont basées sur aucune preuve.

Jfstpierre a pris l'initiative de passer par les bonnes personnes pour faire une enquête sur l'affaire. Toutefois, ma compréhension de l'affaire a été que les Juges de la Cour Suprême, le Très Honorable Premier Ministre et le Directeur du CSIS croyaient que l’affaire ne valait plus la peine d’être continuée. Effacer les charges aurait été irresponsable, j’ai donc demandé de plus amples informations sur le cas a marcchelala afin de pouvoir enquêter plus profondément. L’Honorable Procureur général a fait sa propre enquête, puis partagea ses trouvailles avec le Très Honorable Premier Ministre et avec moi-même, et présenta se qu’il croyait dîme d’être des termes équitables. Après révision avec Jfstpierre et après la consultation avec son client, les deux partis furent arrivés a un accord amical.

1.) Banni du congrès pour 1 mois
2.) Don de 5 armes Q1 au pays comme geste symbolique
3.) Caution de 2 armes Q2 comme caution si le défendant souhaite participer au congrès ce mois-ci
4.) L’accusé n’est plus banni du forum pour trahison et se voit accorder le mask de Citoyen Canadien.


Par la suite, j’aimerais faire cette sous-déclaration comme faisant partie de l’accord :


Après avoir revu les évidences qui m’ont été données et après avoir travailler étroitement avec les deux partis impliqués, je suis satisfait de dire que le dit accusé Samuel de Champlain n’est pas un traitre du eCanada, de même qu’il n’est en aucun cas une menace face à la nation ou à ces citoyens. De Champlain n’a pas reçu d’équitabilité sous la loi, ni reçu une application équitable de la loi. J’espère que cette enquête servira comme mesure finale quant à l’opinion du gouvernement dans cette affaire. Même si ses actes ont pu avoir contrarié certaines personnes dans la communauté eCanadienne, ses actes n’ont en aucun cas été faits par méchanceté envers le eCanada, mais agissant plutôt en accord avec la citoyenneté française qui lui a été donné automatiquement, il se sentait ainsi obliger de remplir certains rôles au côté de la communauté eFrançaise. Il s’est repenti, il y a bien longtemps. Samuel, je te souhaite une bonne continuation dans ta vie en tant que vrai citoyen eCanadien, et que tu puisses bien servir notre nation en citoyen responsable.


Le T. Hon. Zblewski
Ministre de la Justice

######################################## ###### ##################################

To Tyler F Durden:

"As a free citizen I hereby declare myself immune from eCanada Court action by virtue of not having confidence in the courts ability to know justice from treason."

Cry me a river. The investigation done by the Attorney General was thorough, and the CSIS investigation filed to me was based off of suspicions and character evidence which had no solid evidence. The results of Adasko's investigations were that his actions were indeed there, but, I repeat, as a French Citizen, he was simply serving orders by the nation that controlled him. He was not privy to Canadian law.

If I may quote jf's topic, and his posting of the proceedure:

The pre-hearing was done by private messages between the Honourable Minister of Justice, the Attorney General and [Jfstpierre] representing [his] client, [As well as the Rt. Hon. Prime Minister supervising the entire procedure]. The CSIS Director was implicated at the beginning of the process for an investigation and the Prime Minister received the messages, being in BCC.
This is in accordance with the Criminal Code of Canada, section II.
viewtopic.php?f=47&t=2329
As it is written in the official statement, [Jf] contacted the Minister of Justice to know if there was any charge or offence alleged against [de Champlain] by the Government of Canada (as per Sect. II, art. 4 and 5). Allegations and actions were made formerly, but no accusation. He collected the evidence (as per Sect. II, art. 6) from the CSIS and from me. After analysis of the evidences between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, the Min. of Justice has considered that there was no offense to be charged against Samuel de Champlain (as per Sect. II, art. 7).
The allegations against my client were proved to be wrong factually. Therefore, there is no case opened by the Government of Canada in Supreme Court. If the Min. of Justice would have considered my client as a traitor and enemy of Canada, a case would have been opened in Supreme Court in accordance to the Sect. II, art. 8 of the Criminal Code of Canada, following the procedures in the Section II, art. 8 to 10 of the Criminal Code and in the Section III, Part II of the Constitution of Canada.This is the procedure that was written down. We followed those rules as it should be normally.

Indeed, Mr. de Champlain fought on "the other side". This was during the period that he was no longer a Canadian citizen. The Attorney General decided, even with the evidence for and against, that since de Champlain had shown tremendous progress and willingness to serve as a proper Canadian citizen, even in the face of sharp criticism, that the first three terms be imposed on de Champlain and that the matter be considered settled. The defendant accepted the terms, and added the fourth for good measure, to which both parties agreed. I approved the settlement.

Now, as I previously stated before this case started, I am seriously considering putting libel charges on anyone who wants to enflare this matter further. You may openly criticism the ruling, but to continue to actually implicate de Champlain for matters that have already been settled will mean a charge of libel, and the onus will be on you to prove de Champlain committed the acts with malice.