CARTOONS

(2004 up to 2015)

The same old, same old, for the employeescasecanada.ca as I continue to seek compensation for my hi-jacked career from the West Vancouver School Board (illicitly laid-off) under imposed BILL 35 (1985), the sole B.C. Teacher affected= banana republic justice.

EARLY CARTOONS

SUPREME COURT

$Description: C:\Users\Roger\Pictures\2011-12-16\2012photo.jpg$

JANUARY – 2012

$Description: C:\Users\Roger\Desktop\FTP\crop4.jpg$

$Description: C:\Users\Roger\Desktop\FTP\crop3.jpg$

2004 - beginning of public protest

OTHER PLACARDS

WELCOME U.S. PRESIDENT (BUSH) - CANADA NEEDS HELP!

JUDGES RUN ‘COURT OF STAR CHAMBERS’

NO INTELLIGENT PERSON WILL VOTE IN THE NEXT ELECTION

JUDGE-MADE LAW RULES - PARLIAMENT REDUNDANT

JUDGES APPROVE ‘SWEETHEART DEAL’ -UNIONS ‘GONE’

SAY NO TO 16% SALARY INCREASE FOR JUDGES

2016 - 2017

I conduct many cases before 50 judges across Canada who merely find my bids for compensation frivolous & vexatious which is an apt description of those judges, leading to the downfall of the Justice System at large.

...when pigs fly...

iconoclast

(2018)

Justice Canada at an end with a continuation of court obfuscation across Canada

(2019-2020)

October 2019 introduces the FRANCO ALULIO ALGORITHM in which I was deprived of my driver's license in Ontario for 'reasons best known to Deputy Minister of Transport-Medical Franco Alulio' for specious reasons as punishment for being a 'whistleblower'. The courts imploded in their efforts to reject properly filed actions against him and allied perpetrators. Few cartoons in 2020 after my release from Ottawa General Hospital as their first official political prisoner as all my efforts lay in pursuing the attendant Identity Theft (I don't exist!) which is the only topic being pursued by me in 2022 as I switch to Social Causes.(SEE rogercallow.com NEWSLETTER Jan.10-2022)

Preamble to Supreme Court of Canada Appeal

(This Appeal denied in June/04 – explains why Canadian Justice System imploded)

This preamble makes an unusual request regarding habeas corpus

The correctness of the lay-off of teacher Roger Callow from his teaching position in West Vancouver in 1985 has never been properly tested. That fact flies in the face of the law and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms of Canada and yet over 30 judges up to and including the Supreme Court of Canada has not seen fit to insist that Mr. Callow be provided the key evidence of School Board meeting notes pertaining to the matter of his lay-off. To that extent, the judicial system is a part of the conspiracy charge which Mr. Callow has laid against the Teachers Union and the School Board and yet, due to the nature of the law, can only be referred to obliquely. Should the Supreme Court of Canada proceed on the frivolous and vexatious charge by which Mr. Callow is estopped from being granted a legal hearing without insisting, in this most unusual of cases, for the necessary disclosure of evidence to be provided to him; namely, the School Board meeting notes of 1985, then all Canadian law is at an end. Conversely put, it may be asked, how may Mr. Callow defend a negative which is a logical impossibility; namely, that he was not indeed laid off by the West Vancouver School Board in June of 1985?

There are good grounds to conclude that Mr. Callow has been the object of a massive conspiracy to deny him access to the laws. In 1986, Justice Mary Southin, in quashing the arbitration favouring the School Board claiming, as she did, that the arbitrator had been patently unreasonable in his conclusion favouring the School Board, had stated that ‘nowhere did the Board express a willingness to lay off a teacher under the new statute’ implying the fraudulency of the School Superintendent’s letter to that effect. Mr. Callow from his experience from the condemned arbitration in which no School Board member was called to the stand to explain how an increase of 16 teaching positions – any number of which Mr. Callow was capable of holding – submits that, while knowing otherwise, he is being denied any hearing which would give him an opportunity to voice his dissent. Certainly no such reference to the lay-off was publicly made in the monthly report in June of 1985 where the additions were noted in arbitration. No mention is made of any lay-off.