Primary Statement: The 3-judge appeal panel could have only relied on Rhonda Sails the alleged FRAUDSTER's Letter sent to Justice O'brien, September 12, 2007. Which is could have only been an asumption. Too many things on there "Memorandum of Judgment" was fiction. Too many things not taken from the appeal material provided, and Mr. Achtem is left in the dark as to how they came up with so many fictional statments said on the 3- panels's judgment.
Their judgment took an extreme amount of time to map out there deluded Kangaroorudeded judgment. Mr. Achtem would appriciate being provided an explaination as to how they came up with some much fiction not taken from the appeal material? Having the knowledge how they may have acidently came up with so many fictional thing may restore Mr. Achtem's faith in the judges our elected members of Goverment to the individual they appoint as judges. I have made an agreement to not make the 3 judge panel. So as to this statement of truth. This nothing less than the truth and nothing we be left out all the way from beginning to end. Mr. Achtem has made a choice to let the 3 judge panel of the hook. However when it comes to a judicial Review. Mr. Achtem does not prepare judgments and he is not the judge or a Decision Make of the Federal Court of Canada. Mr. Achtem has stepped away from issue that have arisen at the Court of appeals of Alberta, Calgary.
The hooker house incident with Fank Jones has potentialy effected Mr. Achtem's case. Mr. Achtem's father who has the same name fine tuned the Dean's Bust for the cops. yeah, I remeber the EPS Detective coming over to my parents house often when I was a child to Plan the Hooker house Bust with my dad. You will have opportunit to know every single word that I state all the way from the introduction of the Evidence when I'm in the Witness Box. I will not have a openning argument either, just a prescripted rebuttal. My words in the rebuttle will not change either because they cannot. Because what I say will be nothing less than the precise TRUTH. You will know my rebuttal before I will hear your your argument. I will lay it all out for you when I lauch my case on Monday May 25, 2010.
Furthermore, the changes of me of getting a nuetral judge is impossible due to the Frank Jones incident infecting my case considering his past position as the former Dean of Law. This incident which happen when I was child was totally not of me doing and I haven't seen my father in years and I will never see him again. Mr. Morton somehow, something led him to Believe I was a lawyer. So if any lawyers out there want to think that I was a lawyer thinking I am father who represented myself in my appeal. Such as York University Law Proffessor James Morton writing blog as such [please view a copy of a blog James Morton has posted, Exhibit #?] Mr. James Morton cannot take that one down, because the blog here is undeletable. He is stuck with that blog. University proffessors and a Dean of Law do have great infuence. My father had the dean busted in retaliation of over the Millwoods landscandal which my dad has said Frank Jones was the one to blame. I am so terrified that all you judges want to burn me alive. So I hope you appeals court judges understand my frustrations. I said time a time again to Justice Rawlins at Pre-trial, that I was incompetent to stand trial Last night started to have dought about one of the untuths on your "Memorandum of Judgment". That 1 of the 13 lies in my You Tube Video my not be a lie. It may be an untruth because of Ms. Sails misleading justice. I just started to think objectively about it. My understanding of this must be Precise and perfect. I do not want to fry a judge, if a judge does not want to fry me. however today I feel because of the Frank Jones perhaps judges want to fry me. My truth cannot be twisted with dought. I will have to review it and keep reviewing it until I do get it right. Nothing less that truth. I will not make my claim vexacious.
Justice Horner was biast without any dought. She always cross-examined Mr. Achtem , and examined Ms. Sails (Achtem). I have been looking at your "Memoradum of Judgment" objectictivily with Kevin Moore about my my biggest question in issues about you stating Exhibits were adduced that I may have a dought it was a deliberate lie, and It did not ever occur until last night. Althouth it is untruth and as fictional as Star Treck. Mr. Achtem has decided he feels the 3-judge appeal panel judgment because it's just to much fiction, and the judgment does not indicate anythng at all as to how their findings were so fictional. Mr. Achtem is not going tackle and articulate on fiction. He does not want to make this Federal Court Application a huge wordy slog of fiction. He will make it simpler buy just providing the Federal Court 2 photo copies of the "Memorandum of judgment". One with all the untuths underlined in red. Then another one issolating the untruth in red with most of the text errellevant whited out and the untruths number from untuth #1 to untuth #13. As to how the 3-judge panel was mislead to beleive this was fact was not indicated on the judgment. If the Federal Court want Proform a Vulcan Mind Meld with something as fictional as Star Trek then they can do that based on that Mr. Achtem will not direct them into a complicated web of fiction.
Please by all means Stay tuned. There's alot more to come on the 25th
This will become the first case in Canadian History where the Defendents will know exacty what Mr. Achtem is agoing to say, and the script will not have to be change. Mark my Word Rhonda. let me whisper in your ear psss. You will know what my rebuttle will be even before this Action Starts. And Remember when we lived in QueensLand when you said to me; "You can really get things done when you you put your mind to it"?
Here a smug and condescending Good Luck to you Rhonda.