Jonathan Yaniv / "Jessica Simpson" / @trustednerd / trustednerd.com / JY Knows It / JY British Columbia - Canada's Best Argument Against Transgender Self-Identification

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Can a legal scholar and gentleman (or lady) please explain the last point that says that said nigger can apply the day after this was filed to vacate the order?
Does that mean they can technically file an appeal the day after but the judge is gonna take away their rights for the foreseeable future?
Is there any point to including that last part?
 
Can a legal scholar and gentleman (or lady) please explain the last point that says that said nigger can apply the day after this was filed to vacate the order?
Does that mean they can technically file an appeal the day after but the judge is gonna take away their rights for the foreseeable future?
Is there any point to including that last part?
That's 2 years later.
 
This is NOT a vexatious litigant order. A vexatious litigant order would be under s. 18 of the Supreme Court Act, and they’re not all that rare now.

This is preventing him from filing an information, which in American means he is no longer allowed to SEEK PRIVATE PROSECUTION of anyone. These orders are indeed rare, because who the hell even has cause to lay an information on the regular?
 
Can a legal scholar and gentleman (or lady) please explain the last point that says that said nigger can apply the day after this was filed to vacate the order?
Does that mean they can technically file an appeal the day after but the judge is gonna take away their rights for the foreseeable future?
Is there any point to including that last part?
If I'm reading this correctly, it is saying after October 25th of 2025 he can apply for a review of this order (aka appeal) and potentially have it removed.

It doesn't neccessarily mean he will get it back, but the judge will rubber stamp the order see if he's a good boy girl that can have it back.

So basically in 2023 he was put into timeout because he was 'busing the legal system, and the judges are seeing if he will cool off.

Permanently removing or restricting a person's access to the legal system (no matter how justified it would be) would be a sticky human rights issue for any government, so they need a way to CTA.
 
Last edited:
The equivalent in the US, if I am not mistaken, would be the Department of Justice filing a direct application to have a private citizen designated as a vexatious litigant in a given federal court, which, to the best of my knowledge, is extremely rare. I would imagine it is likely equally rare in The Commonwealth.
You are mistaken, in Canada all legal proceedings brought by the government and courts are in the name of the King, that is in this case Rex, due to the fact the King holds sovereignty and the provinces and federal government are merely delegated the authority to exercise his sovereignty. That's why all Canadian criminal cases are titled R. v Defendant.
 
How the fudge did Jonny get 100k from the RCMP?

As to the court order, its obviously been rescinded as fat boy been suing all year long. It does make sense now why he went on a legal bender in November.
 
How the fudge did Jonny get 100k from the RCMP?

As to the court order, its obviously been rescinded as fat boy been suing all year long. It does make sense now why he went on a legal bender in November.

Read more carefully - as per the replies above you:

This order prevents him from “filing an information.”

This is in regards to his filing a private prosecution. Not relevant for civil claims. It’s a criminal court issue. The court equivalent of a citizen’s arrest.

 
A vexatious litigant order is made under the Supreme Court Rules or the Court of Appeal rules. Supreme Court is the court of inherent jurisdiction in BC (as opposed to Provincial Court, where the above order was filed). Generally it's made upon application by one of the parties in the lawsuit. So in Greer v. Kiwifarms (a website), Kiwifarms (a website) files an application asking for an order under s. 18 (or s. 29 in the Court of Appeal). The Court then decides whether to issue such an order. If it does, then Greer is forbidden from bringing any action in either Supreme or Provincial Court without leave from the Court first. Greer can then appeal that immediately, but he'd probably lose, since the Court of Appeal would give tremendous deference to the lower court as it's a matter of judicial discretion.

The styling wouldn't be "R. v. Greer." It would still be "Greer v. Kiwifarms (a website)."
 
That's 2 years later.
They could get it varied, but i don't think there is any point. This document will be a key piece of evidence in a vexatious lit app. They also got served with a litigation in saskatchewan, and since government actively enabled it through misfeasance they will be held culpable.

We have a number of determinations from the legal system now where yaniv's antics have been exposed and commented on and addressed by judges in their determinations, and we feel that at this point the threshold has been exceeded to meet the vex lit application, but it must also go further and extend to tribunals like the crt as well. We may seek to have a global lift on the publication bans that have been used to obfuscate this vexatious behaviour. It is our intention to use this past behaviour to demonstrate a longer pattern and to prevent any variance in the future in relation to this previous order and the future vex lit order.

Another interesting note is that they transmitted their own protected image after a protection order was applied to it. Not sure what great victory the province is hoping to achieve by getting involved, sending their lawyers in, and mysteriously crt lawyer is on an indefinite hiatus till at least may? This to me suggests that they may have shit the bed and require some people to clean up their mess.

My hope is that when the other lawsuits start to pile in directed at the authorities that failed everyone, that they will try being more reasonable. I doubt they'll get reasonable, but one can hope (the crown in surrey's actions make me think it's possible).

The funny thing is, yaniv could have dropped their shit and walked away, they were offered opportunities to do so and consistently denied. That is gunna come back to bite them in the ass in january and february. They made their own bed and can sleep in it.

Still unconfirmed is their involvement in an iipa claim for a claimant that had $200k worth of ivermectin seized in a drug bust. There has also been talk about a hit put on yaniv and a david drover. There's so much more depth to what is going on that i can't really get into.

I would suggest that any recent victims of yaniv can reach out to either myself, cultureguard, or westpoint investigations, so that we as a group can get justice for all.

As a final note, i would imagine the rcmp did not want this embarassing payment to be known. It might have been a settlement and often as settlements go the party being paid off must not disclose anything about it. Perhaps the rcmp will want their money back? We will definitely be uncovering the details of this, as on it's face it looks like collusion.
 
Last edited:
You might want to avoid alerting the grammar police too. “Hence” (for this reason) and “why“ serve the same function and using both is redundant.
Related grammar tip for @dfslegal: “whom” isn’t just a fancy way to say “who.” Who is used in the nominative case, and whom the objective. It’s totally fine to always use who and not worry about it, but misusing whom is an easy way to out yourself as a person trying to look more educated than you are. (No judgement - we all have blind spots like this)

I have no thread tax to provide, but I hope helping the good guys avoid grammatical shibboleths is good enough. I’ve been watching Yaniv for years, and even if he never quite reaps all he’s sown, at least I can take some solace in his misery.
 
This document will be a key piece of evidence in a vexatious lit app.
You've got plenty of evidence for a vexatious litigant application. Has one been made before by any party to a lawsuit? If so, how many times and when?
They also got served with a litigation in saskatchewan, and since government actively enabled it through misfeasance they will be held culpable.
Huh?
How the fudge did Jonny get 100k from the RCMP?
Could someone link me to some information on this? The only 100k I can find in relation to Yaniv is the administrative penalty against X.com that went to the government, not him. He generates so much Stuff to go through and I guess I've been out of the game for awhile.
it must also go further and extend to tribunals like the crt as well
I can't find any judgements extending a vexatious litigant order from the BCSC to the Tribunals explicitly but several strongly imply that it extends to the Tribunals. I certainly don't see any reason why they couldn't. The Tribunals couldn't apply their judgement to the BCSC but the BCSC has wide-ranging powers to control its own process and those of the other courts.
We may seek to have a global lift on the publication bans that have been used to obfuscate this vexatious behaviour.
I don't know that this is possible.
This to me suggests that they may have shit the bed and require some people to clean up their mess.
It is highly unlikely that a lawyer is on leave until May because of this. Nothing about this is highly irregular.
My hope is that when the other lawsuits start to pile in directed at the authorities that failed everyone, that they will try being more reasonable.
Nothing that has happened here is way out of the norm of the Canadian legal system. Judges are almost completely unaccountable and Tribunals regularly (notoriously) make decisions that make no sense to anyone else.
As a final note, i would imagine the rcmp did not want this embarassing payment to be known. It might have been a settlement and often as settlements go the party being paid off must not disclose anything about it. Perhaps the rcmp will want their money back? We will definitely be uncovering the details of this, as on it's face it looks like collusion.
When did the RCMP pay 100k? I asked above but I can't find this. Why does it look like collusion and with who?
 
When did the RCMP pay 100k? I asked above but I can't find this. Why does it look like collusion and with who?

There was a screenshot provided above that purportedly showed the RCMP sending Yaniv an electronic deposit of $90,000 CAD.

...Tribunals regularly (notoriously) make decisions that make no sense to anyone else.

It really is something to behold. I don't know how anyone tolerates it.
 
There was a screenshot provided above that purportedly showed the RCMP sending Yaniv an electronic deposit of $90,000 CAD.
Do you have any idea where I could find it? And where it came from? It seems it could only be from Yaniv, and he's the definition of an unreliable source. 90K would be an exceptionally large payment for the RCMP to make.

It really is something to behold. I don't know how anyone tolerates it.
They use it as a way to set the facts in stone before the inevitable hearing at an actual court. But I hear especially bad things about the CRT and know people who prefer to avoid it when possible.
 
Do you have any idea where I could find it? And where it came from? It seems it could only be from Yaniv, and he's the definition of an unreliable source. 90K would be an exceptionally large payment for the RCMP to make.


They use it as a way to set the facts in stone before the inevitable hearing at an actual court. But I hear especially bad things about the CRT and know people who prefer to avoid it when possible.

As far as where to find it, it should be in this thread, probably within the last 10 pages. I will give a look and see if I can find it.

As far as the provenance of the picture, I have absolutely no idea. I don't remember if it's origin was proffered in the post where it appeared. I agree with you that it only makes sense that it would indeed be Yaniv himself, but I can't say with any certainty since I only quickly glanced at it as I was reading through this thread recently.
 
Back
Top Bottom