---------- Original message ----------
From: James Lockyer <jlockyer@lzzdefence.ca>
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2022 22:59:21 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: Is Lockyer sending the Ghost of the
Hurricane to Nova Scotia just as a real one is bearing down on us???
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>

I will be out of the country until September 23. I will respond to
your email as soon as I return.

If your matter is urgent, please contact Kathy Doyle at
kdoyle@lzzdefence.ca or Katie Ray at katie@lzzdefence.ca.

---------- Original message ----------
From: Premier <PREMIER@novascotia.ca>
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2022 23:01:08 +0000
Subject: Thank you for your email
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>

Thank you for your email to Premier Houston. This is an automatic
confirmation your message has been received.

As we are currently experiencing higher than normal volumes of
correspondence, there may be delays in the response time for
correspondence identified as requiring a response.

If you are looking for the most up-to-date information from the
Government of Nova Scotia please visit:
http://novascotia.ca<https://can01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fnovascotia.ca%2F&data=04%7C01%7CJane.MacDonald%40novascotia.ca%7Ceeca3674da1940841c1b08da0c273c2c%7C8eb23313ce754345a56a297a2412b4db%7C0%7C0%7C637835659900957160%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=%2BUnVWeFXmCZiYsg7%2F6%2Bw55jn3t3WTeGL9l%2BLp%2BNkqNU%3D&reserved=0>

Thank you,

Premier’s Correspondence Team



---------- Original message ----------
From: Ministerial Correspondence Unit - Justice Canada <mcu@justice.gc.ca>
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2022 23:01:07 +0000
Subject: Automatic Reply
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>

Thank you for writing to the Honourable David Lametti, Minister of
Justice and Attorney General of Canada.

Due to the volume of correspondence addressed to the Minister, please
note that there may be a delay in processing your email. Rest assured
that your message will be carefully reviewed.

We do not respond to correspondence that contains offensive language.

-------------------

Merci d'avoir écrit à l'honorable David Lametti, ministre de la
Justice et procureur général du Canada.

En raison du volume de correspondance adressée au ministre, veuillez
prendre note qu'il pourrait y avoir un retard dans le traitement de
votre courriel. Nous tenons à vous assurer que votre message sera lu
avec soin.

Nous ne répondons pas à la correspondance contenant un langage offensant.

 

<Sean.Fraser@parl.gc.ca>, PREMIER <PREMIER@gov.ns.ca>, "blaine.higgs"
<blaine.higgs@gnb.ca>, "Louis.Leger"<Louis.Leger@gnb.ca>,
"mary.wilson"<mary.wilson@gnb.ca>, washington field
<washington.field@ic.fbi.gov>, "Brenda.Lucki"
<Brenda.Lucki@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, "Bill.Hogan"<Bill.Hogan@gnb.ca>,
"Bill.Blair"<Bill.Blair@parl.gc.ca>, "barb.whitenect"
<barb.whitenect@gnb.ca>, "Moiz.Karimjee"<Moiz.Karimjee@ontario.ca>,
"Michelle.Boutin"<Michelle.Boutin@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, andrew
<andrew@frankmagazine.ca>, "Kevin.leahy"<Kevin.leahy@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>,
andrewjdouglas <andrewjdouglas@gmail.com>, "darren.campbell"
<darren.campbell@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, "Michael.Gorman"
<Michael.Gorman@cbc.ca>, "michael.macdonald"
<michael.macdonald@thecanadianpress.com>, "Rhonda.Brown"
<Rhonda.Brown@globalnews.ca>, sheilagunnreid
<sheilagunnreid@gmail.com>, jesse <jesse@jessebrown.ca>, jesse
<jesse@viafoura.com>, publiced@thestar.ca, newsroom@therecord.com,
stevemckinley@thestar.ca, paulpalango <paulpalango@protonmail.com>,
NightTimePodcast <NightTimePodcast@gmail.com>, nsinvestigators
<nsinvestigators@gmail.com>
Cc: motomaniac333 <motomaniac333@gmail.com>, jessica@lzzdefence.ca


https://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.com/2022/07/spouse-of-ns-mass-shooter-shows-how.html


Thursday, 14 July 2022

Spouse of N.S. mass shooter shows how deadly rampage began in video
re-enactment


---------- Original message ----------
From: MICHAEL GORMAN <michael.gorman@cbc.ca>
Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2022 17:25:48 -0700
Subject: Out of office reply Re: Methinks folks should tune in and
listen to Paul Palango and his all knowing pumpkin before the show
goes "Poof" N'esy Pas?
To: david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com

Thanks for your email. I'll be away until July 18, 2022. I'll reply to
your message when I'm back in the office. If you need to speak to a
reporter sooner, please contact cbcns@cbc.ca.

--
Michael Gorman
CBC Nova Scotia
902-420-4320 (desk)
@michaeltgorman


The Lockyer Factor By Paul Palango
July 20, 2022


FRANK MAGAZINE JULY 20, 2022

THE LOCKYER FACTOR

by Paul Palango

If you haven’t already noticed, something truly strange happened on
the road to finding the truth about what actually happened before,
during and after the Nova Scotia massacres of April 18 and 19, 2020.

Lisa Banfield and her $1,200-an-hour lawyer, James Lockyer, appear to
have been controlling the show from the very beginning. The Lockyer
factor as a not-so-hidden influencer on the news is important to
address.

On April 19, 2020, just hours after Lisa Banfield arrived at the door
of Leon Joudrey, she contacted lawyer Kevin von Bargen in Toronto to
seek advice and help. The lawyer, a friend of Wortman and Banfield,
put her onto James Lockyer.

From that moment forward, her every word has been treated as gospel.
By the RCMP, by the Mass Casualty Commission, and by the compliant
media. Even those who believe her to have been a victim of domestic
violence at the hands of Gabriel Wortman (and she clearly was), but
also believe she might know more than she’s letting on — and that what
she knows might be important to the inquiry’s purported fact-finding
mission — have been dismissed as cranks and conspiracists.

According to financial documents released by the inquiry after Lisa
Banfield’s dramatic “testimony” on July 15, Banfield reported earnings
of $15,288 one recent year.

That would cover a day, plus HST, of Lockyer’s valuable time.

He has been on the clock for 27 months or so, his fees covered by
taxpayers through the Mass Casualty Commission.

Banfield’s finances, such as they are, would have been a juicy subject
for any curious lawyer, but she wasn’t allowed to be cross examined.
Too traumatic, remember.

Questions abound.

Why did Banfield hire an esteemed criminal lawyer? Did no one let her
in on her status as a victim?

Lockyer seems like an exotic choice. He made his name from the early
‘90s onward representing men wrongly convicted of murder, such as
Stephen Truscott, David Milgaard, Robert Baltovich and Guy Paul Morin.
Morin was falsely accused of killing 9-year-old Christine Jessop in
Queensville, Ontario, near Toronto.

I was the city editor at the Globe and Mail then. I was intimately
involved in the story which was being covered by one of our reporters,
Kirk Makin. I even at one point had a meeting with Makin and Morin’s
mother, who protested his innocence. At the time I was wrongly unmoved
and skeptical of her story, but Makin persisted in digging into it and
worked closely with Lockyer. Morin was eventually exonerated. Kudos to
all. I hope I got smarter after that.

Lockyer, who lived a block away from me in Toronto, went on to become
a champion of the wrongly convicted and started the Innocence Project
to work on their behalf. Among his many clients was Rubin (Hurricane)
Carter, the former boxer who was wrongly convicted of three murders in
Paterson, NJ and was the inspiration for the 1976 Bob Dylan epic
Hurricane.

In recent years, Lockyer and his Innocence Project became involved in
the case of Nova Scotia’s Glenn Assoun, who was wrongly convicted in
1999 of murdering Brenda Way in Dartmouth four years earlier.

Lockyer worked along with lawyers Sean MacDonald and Phil Campbell to
have Assoun’s conviction overturned after he had spent 17 years in
prison. In the final years of that campaign an activist reporter named
Tim Bousquet took on the Assoun case and wrote about it extensively
for years, channeling and publicizing what the lawyers and their
investigators had uncovered. To his credit Bousquet uncovered some
things on his own.

Perhaps the biggest revelation in the Assoun case was that the RCMP
had destroyed evidence and had mislead the courts about Assoun.

Bousquet joined with the CBC in 2020 and produced a radio series, Dead
Wrong, about the case. As Canadians should know well by now, both the
federal and Nova Scotia governments ignored what the Mounties were
caught doing.

Fast forward to the Nova Scotia massacres and the news coverage of it.

As I wrote in my recent book, 22 Murders: Investigating the Massacres,
Cover-up and Obstacles to Justice In Nova Scotia, I had a brief fling
with Bousquet and his on-line newspaper, The Halifax Examiner, in
2020.

After publishing an opening salvo in Maclean’s magazine in May 2020, I
couldn’t find anyone else interested in my reporting, which challenged
the official narrative. Maclean’s writer Stephen Maher introduced me
to Bousquet. I knew nothing about either him or the Halifax Examiner.

Over the next several weeks, Bousquet published five of my pieces and
I was pleasantly surprised to find that the Examiner punched well
above its weight. Its stories were being picked up and read across the
country. Although I had never met the gruff and the usually
difficult-to-reach Bousquet, I thought we had a mutual interest in
keeping the story alive as the mainstream media was losing interest in
it and were moving on. At first blush, Bousquet seemed like a true,
objective journalist determined to find the truth. Hell, I was even
prepared to work for nothing, just to get the story out.

“I have to pay you, man,” he insisted in one phone call.

I felt badly taking money from him. I had no idea what his company’s
financial situation might be, and I didn’t want to break the bank. He
said he could pay me $300 or so per story and asked me to submit an
invoice, which I did.

Soon afterward, a cheque for $1500 arrived. I cashed it and then my
wife Sharonand I sent him $500 each in after tax money as a donation.
Like I said, I didn’t want to be a drag on the Examiner.

Once we made the donations, Bousquet all but ghosted me. He was always
too busy to take my calls or field my pitches. I couldn’t tell if I
was being cancelled or had been conned.

I began to replay events in my head and the one thing that leapt out
to me was Bousquet’s defensive and even dismissive reaction to two
threads I thought were important and newsworthy which I wanted to
write about.

One was the politically sensitive issue of writing objectively about
all the women in the story. There were female victims who had slept
with Wortman, which I though was contextually important in
understanding the larger story. Bousquet had made it clear that he
wasn’t eager for me to write about that. (Be trauma informed!-ed.)

There was also the fact that female police officers were at the
intersection of almost every major event that terrible weekend. The
commanding officer was Leona (Lee) Bergerman. Chief Superintendent
Janis Graywas in charge of the RCMP in Halifax County. Inspector
Dustine Rodierran the communications centre. It was a long list that
will continue to grow.

I believe in equal pay for work of equal value but that comes with
equal accountability for all. I am gender neutral when evaluating
performance.

But it didn’t take psychic powers to detect that gender politics was a
big issue with Bousquet – his target market, as it were.

I really wanted to write about Banfield. My preliminary research
strongly suggested to me her story was riddled with weakness and
inconsistency, but nobody in the mainstream media would tackle it.
Hell, for months her name wasn’t even published anywhere outside the
pages of Frank magazine.

Bousquet’s position was that Banfield was a victim of domestic
violence and that her story, via vague, second-hand and untested RCMP
statements, was to be believed. No questions asked.

“You’re going to need something really big to convince me otherwise,”
Bousquet said in one of our brief conversations.

Afterward, I did have one face-to-face meeting with him in Halifax. He
actually sat in the back seat of our car because Sharon was in the
front. We met up because I wanted to tell him about sensitive leads I
had which, if pursued, would show that the RCMP had the ability to
manipulate its records and destroy evidence in its PROs reporting
system.

Considering his involvement in the Assoun case, where that very issue
was at the heart of Assoun’s exoneration, I thought Bousquet would be
eager to pursue the story.

As I looked at him in the rearview mirror, I could sense his
discomfort and lack of interest. So could Sharon who was sitting
beside me.

“That was weird,” she said.

Bousquet got out of the car, walked away and disappeared me for good.

It was all so inexplicable. If this was the new journalism that I was
experiencing, there was something terribly wrong with it. I couldn’t
believe that a journalist like Bousquet who aspired to be a
truthteller felt compelled to distill every word or nuance through a
political filter first or even something more nefarious.

Later, while writing for Frank Magazine, I broke story after story
about the case. Incontrovertible documents showing that the RCMP was
destroying evidence in the Wortman case. The Pictou County Public
Safety channel recordings showing for the first time what the RCMP was
doing on the ground during the early morning hours of April 19. The
911 tapes. The Enfield Big Stop videos. That Lisa Banfield lied in
small claims court on two different occasions.

Bousquet either ignored or ridiculed most of those stories in the
Halifax Examiner or on his Twitter feed, as if I were making the
stories up.

For the most part throughout 2021, the Halifax Examiner didn’t even
bother covering the larger story. There was no discernible legwork or
energy being expended on it. And regarding the stories he did publish,
I began to see a pattern. Naïve readers might have thought that he was
digging for new stories when in fact the Examiner was merely mining
court documents and uncritically reporting what resided therein. It
was all stenography, straight from the mouths of the RCMP and the MCC.

Time and time again, “new” stories would be published which were
essentially no different from previous ones but all with the same
theme: as Ray Daviesof the Kinks put it in his masterpiece Sunny
Afternoon: “Tales of drunkenness and cruelty.”

The Monster and the Maiden stories, as I called them, reinforced in
readers' minds that Banfield was a helpless victim controlled by a
demonic Wortman, a narrative that, upon reflection, seemed to
perfectly suit Lockyer’s strategy.

For 27 months the RCMP and the Mass Casualty Commission played along,
sheltering Banfield as part of their “trauma-informed” mandate, even
though there was plenty to be skeptical about her story.

Banfield was beside Wortman for 19 years during which he committed
crime after crime. She was reportedly the last person to be with
Wortman and her incredible, hoary tale of escape should have been
enough to raise suspicions about her.

From the moment she knocked on Leon Joudrey’s door she has been
treated as a victim, which to this day astounds law enforcement
experts and others who have monitored the case. Many observers,
including but not limited to lawyers representing the families of the
victims, have serious questions about how Banfield spent the overnight
hours of April 18/19. Not helping matters is that she doesn’t appear
to have been subjected to any level of normal criminal investigation
or evidence gathering. Her clothing wasn’t tested. There were no
gunshot residue tests. She wasn’t subjected to a polygraph or any
other credible investigative procedure.


Enter James Lockyer of the Innocence Project.


The puppetification of Tim Bousquet

As we moved closer to July 15, the day that Banfield would be
“testifying” at the MCC, it is also important to consider what
Bousquet and his minions were doing at the Halifax Examiner.

In the weeks and days leading up to Banfield’s appearance, the
Examiner’s reporting and Bousquet’s Twitter commentary began to take
on an illogical, more contemptuous and even hostile approach to anyone
who refused to buy into the RCMP and Banfield’s official version of
events.

In a series of hilariously one-sided diatribes, Bousquet lashed out at
Banfield’s critics whom he wouldn’t name. Some (likely us) were
“bad-faith actors.” He decried the “witchification” of Banfield.

He tweeted: “And just to repeat for the 1000th time: I’ve read
transcripts of interviews with dozens of people. I’ve read three
years’ of emails between Banfield and GW. I’ve read her Notes app.
There is ZERO evidence that she had any prior knowledge (of) GW’s
intent to kill people…. The notion that she is ‘complicit’ is pulled
out of people’s diarrhetic asses and plain old-fashioned misogyny.”

Oh, misogyny, that old woke slimeball to be hurled at any male who
dare be critical of any female.

One can’t help but sense the deft hand of a clever and experienced
defence lawyer running up the back of Bousquet’s shirt. That makes
sense.

Look at what has transpired on Lockyer’s watch.

Since April 2020, the RCMP and the federal and provincial governments
have wrapped themselves in a single, vague and inappropriate platitude
– trauma informed.

The original selling point was that this approach would prevent the
surviving family members from being further traumatized by the ongoing
“investigation” into the massacres.

What actually happened is much more sinister.

Lisa Banfield was coddled and protected the entire time not only by
the authorities but also by Lockyer’s friends in the mass media. The
wily old fox had the opportunity to mainline his thoughts into the
Globe and Mail, the Toronto Star, the CBC, CTV and Global News who
unquestioningly lapped it up.

At the MCC, Banfield wasn’t allowed to be cross examined because, as
Mr. Lockyer so eloquently explained, cross examination would just lead
to more conspiracy theories.

That’s rich.

The search for the truth will only confuse matters -- it’s better for
everyone that Banfield spin a much-rehearsed tale without challenge.
That’s clearly a $1,200-an-hour lawyer speaking.

The whole world has gone topsy-turvy. The Mass Casualty Commission,
the federal and provincial governments, the RCMP and Lisa Banfield are
now aligned on one side of the argument.

Meanwhile, the re-traumatized families find themselves agreeing with
this magazine and other skeptics and critics.

The final irony is that the Halifax Examiner bills itself as being
“independent” and “adversarial.” It seems to be neither these days.

In the end, Tim Bousquet’s approach to covering the Nova Scotia
Massacres is, to use his words: “Dead Wrong.”

paulpalango@protonmail.com

Paul Palango is author of the best selling book 22 Murders:
Investigating the massacres, cover-up and obstacles to justice in Nova
Scotia (Random House).

--

Andrew Douglas
Frank Magazine
phone: (902) 420-1668
fax: (902) 423-0281
cell: (902) 221-0386
andrew@frankmagazine.ca
www.frankmagazine.ca