PRESIDENT JUSTICE CHANEY'S OF SAT ORDER THAT HIS HONOUR IS REFUSING TO RECUSE HIMSELF FROM HEARING THE VR158 OF 2012 AFTER SAT HAD DISAPPEARED WITH THE SINGLE PAGE BANK STATEMENT DEPOSITED BY DAVID TAYLOR ON 29.11.2011 AS A RESULT OF HIS ORDER DATED 15.11.2011.
MAURICE LAW SAYS: I REQUESTED PRESIDENT CHANEY TO PROVIDE ME WITH THE EVIDENCE THAT RESULTS FROM MY HAVING SUBPOENAED DAVID TAYLOR ON 7.11.2011.
ReplyDeleteMAURICE LAW SAYS: AS A RESULT OF MY REQUEST, PRESIDENT CHANEY ISSUED AN ORDER TO DAVID TAYLOR DATED 15.11.2011 THAT HE PROVIDE THAT SUBPOENAED EVIDENCE TO SAT ON OR BEFORE THE 29.11.2011.
ReplyDeleteMAURICE LAW SAYS: DAVID TAYLOR DID OBEY THAT ORDER BUT NOT IN FULL. HE PROVIDED SAT WITH A COPY OF THE BANK STATEMENT THAT SHOWS THAT THE COURT FEES OF $654.20 WAS PAID INTO THE SUPREME COURT ON 19.5.2009 (TWO YEARS LATER THAN THE DATE THAT IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE PAID) AND THAT AMOUNT WAS WITHDRAWN ON THE SAME DAY
ReplyDeleteMAURICE LAW SAYS: THAT PAYMENT MADE ON 19.5.2009 WAS FOR THE PURPOSE OF ENABLING REGISTRAR POWELL TO PRODUCE THE SUPREME COURT INVOICE BEARING NO. 202483 DATED 19.5.2009 BUT ALSO DATING IT AS 16.2.2006. THAT IS A FRAUD UPON THE COURT.
ReplyDeleteMAURICE SAYS AGAIN: THAT IS THE SINGLE PAGE BANK STATEMENT THAT WAS VIEWED BY MAURICE LAW AT SAT ON 30.11.2011 AND IT WAS SHOWN TO HIM BY MS. JACQUI OF SAT. MS. JACQUI NOW DENIES THAT HE EVER SHOWS THIS DOCUMENT TO MAURICE LAW.
ReplyDeleteMAURICE LAW SAYS AGAIN: THAT SINGLE PAGE DOCUMENT WAS THE SUBJECT OF MAURICE LAW'S ORAL AND WRITTEN REQUEST SINCE THE 30.11.2011 TILL THE 13.2.2012. JACQUI SAID TO MAURICE: DO NOT THREATEN SAT... BY THAT 13.2.2012, SAT THROUGH TONI SHERWOOD PRODUCED TO MAURICE LAW NOT THE SINGLE PAGE DOCUMENT BUT A 7 PAGE SUPPLANTED DOCUMENT. THIS IS A FALSIFICATION OF COURT RECORDS AGAIN. THIS TIME BY SAT. THESE SEVEN PAGE DOCUMENT IS CLAIMED BY TONI SHERWOOD TO HAVE BEEN SEEN BY MAURICE LAW. MAURICE LAW HAS NEVER SEEN THESE SEVEN PAGE DOCUMENTS UNTIL THE 17.2.2007 WHEN HE RECEIVED IT THROUGH THE POST.
ReplyDeleteMAURICE LAW SAYS IT AGAIN:WHY DID SAT REFUSE TO PRODUCE THE DOCUMENT THAT WAS DEPOSITED WITH IT BY DAVID TAYLOR ON 29.11.2011 AND VIEW BY MAURICE LAW ON 30.11.2011? WHY, WHY, WHY?
ReplyDeleteMAURICE LAW SAYS: WHY DID JUSTICE CHANEY ON 13.3.2012 REFUSED TO GRANT THE FULL TRANSCRIPT OF THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE HIM ON THAT DAY AND IN FUTURE HEARINGS? IS THIS NOT A DENIAL OF NATURAL JUSTICE TO MAURICE LAW. IS THIS NOT AN INDIRECT WAY OF SAYING: HEY MAURICE, YOU CANNOT APPEAL AGAINST MY DECISION BECAUSE I AM GOING TO DECIDE YOUR CASE FOR YOU. I AM NOT GOING TO RECUSE MYSELF ALTHOUGH YOU KNOW THAT I AM BIASED AGAINST YOU.
ReplyDelete