View The Evidence View


That's what this site is about. Airing the evidence and naming the names! You to be the judge!

I refer to this order as a tampered court document. Note the circle in the centre of the bottom of the page that says "checked by" with the initials that have been scribbled out and the note at the top left side that says that the last paragraph of the order is not really there.This is the order that went missing from the File Search office of the Kelowna Registry about the time that Justice Hunter informed me that, as I'd referred to a document (the order) in my testimony, I must also be able to produce the document, or by law, he must disregard that portion of my testimony. Instead, I produced a copy of the court clerk's notes to verify my testimony regarding this order.

Several months after the trial, I filed a written complaint regarding the disapearance of several documents related to this case, including the "tampered" court order. Several months after that, the court registry contacted me to inform me that a couple of these missing documents had been recovered and that I was to see the Chief District Registrar, Gene Watt. Mr. Watt explained that the 1st (tampered) order had been drafted wrong (referring to the note at the top left side of the page) and that a 2nd order had been filed to correct the mistake. He then produced the corrected draft.

The corrected draft was not filed until January 1996, more than 2 years after the order was pronounced but just days before I was called to see Mr. Watt. The corrected draft is identical to the original except it has been laid out to use 2 pages instead of one and the last paragraph does not start with the word "and".

Another document that I had listed as missing was Marc Whittemore's 72 page affidavit. Mr. Watt claimed that he was able to find, not one but 2 copies of this affidavit and so naturally, I photocopied one more copy for my own use. So far, I've only loaded 4 pages to this site. (More coming)

In paragraph 11 on the 4th page of Marc Whitemore's affidavit, Mr. Whittemore swears that the realtor to told him that "this deal, by it's terms would be subject to the vendor's solicitor's approval..." Some time later, Mr. Whittemore received a copy of the real estate sales agreement with the above mentioned term listed as #4 on the contract.

In Justice Hunter's decision, paragraph 7 (page 3), Justice Hunter wrote that "Whittemore's evidence was that nobody told him of that clause.", contradicting Whittemore's own affidavit testimony and also what is evidenced by the sales agreement, the 1st document that Mr. Whittemore received to indicate that he would be representing my interests in the sale of my business.

A professional opinion on the subject of advice, marked as Exhibit 6 to the trial, suggests that there be a letter of advise written by any lawyer who is faced with a client who wishes to proceed contrary to the lawyer's advise. Mr. Whittemore produced no letter of advise, signed by me or otherwise, yet Justice Hunter chose to ignore this exhibit and rely on Mr. Whittemore's allegation that he advised me on the subject of security and that I insisted on proceeding with the sale anyway.

The realtor, Dell Arens, could not have, as he testified, dropped off the "only copy of the Subject Removal Form", that he could not produce.(see also paragraph 7 of Justice Hunter's decision). It is a triplicate document, as I later learned and pointed out in paragraph 6 of an affidavit that I later filed in Court of Appeals. My 1st Court of Appeals affidavit.

Justice Hunter not only relied on, but even referred to Dell Arens' testimony that made reference to a document that Mr. Arens could not produce. Twice, so far that Justice Hunter has contradicted himself, as he so advised me, regarding the law concerning the production of documents.

That pesky affidavit that Mr. Whittemore swore to support his application to have this matter dismissed without a trial! (Rule 18-18a). I suspect that Mr. Whittemore regretted filing this affidavit. This is the same affidavit that I couldn't find after my home was broken into. This is the same affidavit that was missing at the court registry for several months (until Mr. Watt found 2 of them). This is the same affidavit that was ommitted from the 2nd copy of the Motion Brief that defence counsel sent me after I lost the 1st Motion Brief in a court preliminary hearing.....You know; you read my horror story.

I photocopied the index from the Motion Brief to use as an exhibit in another affidavit that I later filed in Court of Appeals. See, no listing of Whittemore's affidavit to support his Rule 18 motion.

I filed a motion to tax Salloum Doak's bill, stating among other things that they had abandoned me, had admitted to prejudice, acted with prejudice and were not prepared to go to trial, contrary to a letter they sent me, stating that they would "see these matters to trial for a global figure of 10-15 thousand dollars".

In Fact, Grant Hardwick said that there'd be 5 cents remaining after their bill was paid.

More evidence to come as I edit and post new pages.



Marvin Geekie admits to prejudice

Grant Hardwick - 5 cents remaining

Tampered court document

Corrected draft.

4th page of Marc Whitemore's affidavit

Real estate sales agreement

Justice Hunter's decision

Professional opinion

Subject Removal Form

 My 1st Court of Appeals affidavit.

Index of Motion Brief

Letter of "Undertaking" from Marvin Geekie 

Back to OurCourts...

Back to My Horror Story