October 5 2007 Cc The Minister of Justice, and Attorney General of Canada

Honourable Robert Nicholson

Louis Theoret webadmin@justice.gc.ca
Executive Director
Federal Ombudsman for Victims of Crime victimsfirst@ombudsman.gc.ca
victimsfirst@ombudsman.gc.ca

RE: Government corruption and conspiracy

In response to your e-mail of October 5, 2007 , please bear with me as I recap the sequence of events of our
correspondence which began September 20 2007 with me writing you. (see pg

But first a little commentary on your October 5, 2007 e-mail

I doubt very much you could say you are regretful, careful and attentive reviewing the material, and far from shrewd
when conveying the results of the analysis to me.
You guys are not shrewd, you are corrupt and in on the conspiracy and know no matter what you state it would be
acceptable to your partners in crime who hold all the key positions in the legal system.
That is as long as it appears to be helpful to the people but isn’t.

That is common place with you, not shrewd.

Shrewd is what a person would have to be to beat you people having organized against the moral majority using
their money to structure a system to appear to be for their benefit while actually being beneficial to the powers that
be of our elected representatives, affluent associates and members of the Law Society of Upper Canada and
associate societies. Henceforth to be known as Law Society of Upper Tier Canada.

Just 2 days ago I was at the dentist and he had less trouble pulling my big back tooth than I trying to get a
coherent response from any of you FFF. Forthright, Forthcoming, and Forthwith

As always one must read between the lines, which is quite simple once you get the hang of it and I have now had
more than 2 years experience at it.

Nothing has changed in more than 2500 years when these words attributed to Confucius said

"There were no dates in this history, but scrawled this way and that across every page were the words
BENEVOLENCE,RIGHTOUSNESS AND MORALITY....finally I began to make out what was written between the
lines; the whole volume was filled with a single phrase : EAT PEOPLE"

I do not write this for you, but for the record, for you obviously know being the author and part of the conspiracy

The following is the correspondence between me, Frank Gallagher citizen of Ontario, Canada and you,
Lois Theoret Executive Director, Federal Ombudsman for Victims of Crime.

I Frank Gallagher have been victimized by the members of the government of the Province of Ontario, specifically
referred to in Lawyer Files 1-14, 13A dated March 30 2007 and later into early April which I have provided copies of
to the aforementioned Lois Theoret for his immediate, coherent, undivided attention to deal with the issues
contained therein, of matters of government corruption and conspiracy as stated in my preliminary e-mail dated
September 20 2007 ( see page ) to Steve Sullivan of the Office of the Federal Ombudsman for Victims of
Crime.

I know it’s just terrible how I insinuated that through experience I knew that he was part of the conspiracy
and explaining why I knew, but I had hoped he may make a better effort to appear as if he was a
responsible person of integrity, competent and coherent, dedicated to the plight of victims with the

1
initiative to remove hazards and perils from the arena where people are likely to be which is anywhere
and everywhere in Canada.

In the September 20 2007 e-mail I requested they study the 73 page letter to the Toronto Sun Editor
dated October 8 2006 and the ““Dave Grech compiled correspondence September 1 2007 “ file for the purpose
of being coherent to the fact that…….here’s an excerpt from said e-mail

“It is imperative that you study these documents until you are coherent to the fact that Dave Grech, Coordinator of
Investigations and Enforcement Unit of the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing has refused to perform his
duty in accordance with the Tenant Protection Act, 1997 or conducive and consistent with the Constitution Act,
1982 in particular with due respect to the individual’s guaranteed Charter rights.”

I clearly identified the problem of government corruption and conspiracy, identified the government
personnel who were immediately involved defined in the Lawyer Files #s 1-3

On September 27 2007: Office of the Federal Ombudsman for Victims of Crime responded

The Office of the Federal Ombudsman for Victims of Crime has reviewed your e-mails sent September
20, 2007, and attached documents.

The mandate of the Office of the Federal Ombudsman for Victims of Crime is limited to issues affecting
victims of crime exclusively within federal responsibility. Secondly, our office is unable to review any
complaints or matters relating to occurrences prior to the establishment of our office in March 2007.

We understand that the issues you raise are of a serious nature, however as your complaint falls under
Provincial Jurisdiction and occurred prior to March 2007, we are unable to assist you in these matters.

On October 1 2007 I responded to the September 27 2007 and decided to address the whole matter to
include The Minister of Justice, and Attorney General of Canada, Honourable Robert Nicholson to kill two birds
with one stone, so to speak.

I had written him providing the evidence many times but he declined to respond.
I had also written Vic Toews when he held the office but he declined to respond.

So for convenience sake when The Minister of Justice, and Attorney General of Canada, Honourable Robert
Nicholson declined to respond this time on these issues of a most serious nature as the Office of the Federal
Ombudsman for Victims of Crime Responded On September 27 2007: We understand that the issues
you raise are of a serious nature the Office of the Federal Ombudsman for Victims of Crime would be
up to speed and alert to the fact that The Minister of Justice, and Attorney General of Canada, Honourable
Robert Nicholson was now guilty of neglect of duty in matters of administering and enforcing the Constitution
conducive to and consistent with the individual’s guaranteed Charter rights as clearly defined in the Charter and
either stated or implied that the Federal government who enacted the Constitution Act, 1982 guaranteeing the
individuals Charter rights is the government with jurisdiction and responsibility to do so.

Upon reading the evidence which I provided requesting the Office

of the Federal Ombudsman for Victims of
Crime be coherent to the fact that the crimes by my former tenant were committed and Dave Grech
coordinator Investigations and Enforcement Unit of the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing
refused to commence or cause to commence proceedings against said former tenant who committed the
criminal act of fraud and filed false and misleading information, an offense under s. 206 (2) of the Tenant
Protection Act, 1997 which the Office of the Federal Ombudsman for Victims of Crime understands is of a
serious nature and it is incumbent upon some one of the government personnel to do something about it consistent
with and conducive to the spirit of the Constitution so as to support the guarantee of the Charter and therefore

2
ensure due diligence in the protection of all individuals of Canada who are equal in all matters before and under the
law.

So presuming I allow Lois Theoret to shrew the result of the analysis of the Office of the Federal Ombudsman
for Victims of Crime : A careful and attentive review of the material and your messages was
conducted. Allow me to shrew the results of this analysis, as stated in Louis Theoret’s response of October 5
2007 .I must now be aware of his and their incompetence, incoherent to the facts as the evidence itself attests to,
where Reality is the Truth (How it is) impervious to perception however Reality is precisely due to
perception.

The truth of reality is I must deal with and live with the reality of Lois Theoret because he would have me believe A
careful and attentive review of the material and your messages was conducted.

If I were to prove that his statement is not factual then his conclusion based on that is also not factual, Right?

Reality is the truth (How it is) impervious to perception Right? However Reality is precisely due to perception, Right?
So if I and anyone else relied on Lois Theoret’s conclusion based on the perception he would have you believe, reality would go
on with me remaining a victim, the criminal walking free on the streets and other people vulnerable to his criminal and immoral
inclinations. Right?

However, we know the reality of the conclusion of Lois Theoret is not consistent with or conducive to the guarantee
of the Charter in as much as the immoral benefit and the victim is deprived of his rights detrimental to the moral
society promised by the Charter.

So, with that in mind, considering the conclusion being precisely opposite of the intent of the Charter with the
immoral benefiting detrimental to the moral we must go back and revisit that which brought Lois Theoret to such a
ridiculous absurd conclusion attentive to all the evidence with the endeavor to correct the situation so as to
eliminate reoccurrence of such ridiculous conclusions detrimental to fundamental principles of justice. Right?

I mean we don’t want it to continue to go on and on and on for another 2500 years do we?

So believe it or not, once you get the hang of the concept exampled here, it comes easy to apply it anywhere,
anytime instinctively.

The fist very prominent clue as to the seriousness of the issues I have raised comes from the Office of the
Federal Ombudsman for Victims of Crime in their first response of September 27 2007, We understand
that the issues you raise are of a serious nature.

I agree so I have no problem with that, however I do have a problem with Lois Theoret’s decision to
close the file knowing full well that We understand that the issues you raise are of a serious nature.

Do you see what I mean? Not at all responsible is he?

Each of us individuals is guaranteed protection and benefits in all matters before and under the law dangling at the
end of a chain of a modus operandi of a legal system structured by the personnel of the establishment which must
be able to demonstrate due diligence in the design and application of it to be consistent with the Constitution and
capable and conducive to the support of the individual’s guaranteed Charter rights. Right?

It only takes one weak link in that chain to compromise the guarantee and with the safety of the people and the
sanctity of the Constitution at stake, it is imperative that every person of the government personnel are alert to the
fact and are adept to the task in the whole scheme of things which demands responsible and accountable
government personnel.

It is incumbent upon the heads of each department, or Ministry to be irreproachable in all matters required to
maintain the integrity of the Constitution which guarantees us all equality in protection and benefit in all matters of
law. That is either stated or implied and obviously demanded of a guarantee, especially in the likes of a guarantee
dire to quality of life and life itself.
3
So without further ado and with that understanding, the evidence speaks for itself.

A careful and attentive review of the material and your messages was conducted.

If that were true given the facts of the evidence they are either incompetent or otherwise, making the chain of
guarantee compromised requiring attentiveness to the resolve.

Given the seriousness of the circumstance We understandthat the issues you raise are of a serious nature
nothing will suffice less than a scrutinized PUBLIC INQUIRY

Office of the Federal Ombudsman for Victims

There is no point in me detailing all the inconsistencies with the
of Crime statement We understand that the issues you raise are of a serious nature when the evidence
speaks for itself.

Of course the evidence must be studied and analyzed carefully and attentively, FFF, Forthright,
Forthcoming and Forthwith.

Having done that and we look at my first letter to the Office of the Federal Ombudsman for Victims of
Crime dated September 20 2007 and note that the spirit is of the eradication of government corruption and
conspiracy which victimizes the majority of Canadians who are all people of the lower tier and in fact due
to the conspiracy and the existence of the Law Society of Upper Tier Canada. That alone is inconsistent
with and contrary to the spirit of the Constitution in respect of the Charter whereas Canada is founded
on principles that recognizes the supremacy of God and the rule of law

Make note that it is God who is supreme not the rule of law
15. (1) Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection
and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based
on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.

Make note that 15. (1) is consistent with the aspirations of God who is supreme
Guarantee of Rights and Freedoms
1. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it
subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free
and democratic society.

Make note that 1. either states or implies due diligence to the administration
and enforcement is demanded in support of the guarantee

Make note that it is the Federal government which enacted the Constitution
and therefore is their responsibility to administer and enforce it consistent
with and conducive to the support of the guarantee.
It must be presumed that every person involved with the administering and enforcing of the Constitution is loyal to it
with integrity, competent and responsible and accountable to be in compliance and consistent with the Constitution

Sanity and common sense is also either stated or implied

4
The evidence shows in Lawyer Files 1-14, 13A, the personnel of the Province of Ontario who I presented the
evidence to for them to deal with the issues. These documents are all dated March 30 2007 and later within the
jurisdiction date of the September 27 2007 Federal Ombudsman response: Secondly, our office is unable to review any
complaints or matters relating to occurrences prior to the establishment of our office in March 2007.

The Lawyer Files #s 1-3 deal with matters of the personnel of the Ministry in Ontario. Obstruction of Justice
Lawyer File # 4 deals with matters of the Province of Ontario Ombudsman’s Office. Obstruction of Justice
Lawyer File # 5 deals with matters of Julia Munro my MPP who declined to help: Obstruction of Justice.
Lawyer File # 6 deals with the Premier Of Ontario Dalton McGuinty: Obstruction of Justice
Lawyer File # 7 deals with the Attorney General Michael Bryant: Obstruction of Justice
Lawyer File # 8 deals with the OPP Anti Rackets: Obstruction of Justice
Lawyer File # 9 deals with the York Regional Police: Obstruction of Justice
Lawyer File # 10 deals with the Ontario Civilian Commission on Police Services: Obstruction of Justice
Lawyer File # 11 deals with the Attorney General Office - Judy Phillip Obstruction of Justice
Lawyer File # 12 deals with the YRP Phil Moreau Standards Department Obstruction of Justice
Lawyer File # 13 deals with Crown Attorney Newmarket: Obstruction of Justice
Lawyer File # 13A deals with Crown Attorney Toronto: Obstruction of Justice
Lawyer File # 14 deals with the RCMP Newmarket: Obstruction of Justice

None of these people have acted to the issues as of today October 5, 2007 Obstruction of Justice

The Office of the Provincial Ombudsman responded October 5 2007

(1) A careful and attentive review of the material and your messages was conducted. Allow me to shrew
the results of this analysis.
Who are you going to believe? Them or the evidence they purportedly reviewed and analyzed carefully and
attentively?

(2)Our office is not able to provide you with legal advice. The issues you raised occurred prior to the
establishment of our office in March 2007 as indicated in a note sent to you September 27, 2007.
Who asked for legal advice? I did ask them to confirm who is responsible for the administering and enforcement of
the Constitution Act, 1982 which I presumed to be the Federal Government.The issues I raised are since March 30
2007. See paragraph top of page.

(3) strictly within the aegis of the provincial government of Ontario. They are not within the purview of any agency
within the Federal Government of Canada including the Federal Ombudsman for Victims of Crime.
See my commentary to (4)

(4)Once you have exhausted all other avenues to resolve your concerns you may decide to share your concerns
with the Office of the Provincial Ombudsman should the matter affect a provincial Ministry in Ontario.
The Lawyer Files show I have already exhausted all other avenues and Lawyer File # 4 to the Office
Provincial Ombudsman shows having already exhausted all avenues including the Ombudsman

Clearly they have not reviewed the evidence carefully and attentively, and have no right to use the word analysis to describe
their findings when they couldn’t have looked at in a manner conducive to responsible professional investigation.

5
From: Ombudsman for Victims of Crime - Ombudsman des victimes d'actes criminel
To: franklyone@hotmail.com
Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2007 10:38 AM
Dear Mr. Gallagher,
This is in response to your previous e-mail sent to our office earlier today. I have reviewed the contents
of your message which apparently pertain to some concerns you have with the ''Roles and Responsibilities
of the Attorney General of Ontario and the Constitution Act, 1982''.
Unfortunately, this issues you raised do not appear to fall within the mandate of this office and it is
unclear from the nature of your message what precisely your specific concern is. Therefore, without the
benefit of something more precise or specific it is difficult to refer you to an appropriate office that can
respond to you.
Your file in this matter is now closed and we will be taking no further action.
They seem to be of the opinion that if they close the door on us we will go away. It’s always best to get one foot in ….no surely
they would it slam it. They are like that you know.

As I have stated many times I downloaded the “Roles and Responsibilities of the Attorney General” from
his web site and the contents of it can be found in Lawyer File # 7 which is addressed to the Attorney
General Michael Bryant

From observation of the contents of it I am led to believe that he is the person responsible to ensure the
laws of Ontario are consistent with the Constitution and has power influencing the personnel of the whole
legal system in Ontario.

He is the guardian of – the rule of law- which protects the individuals and society as a whole.
The rule of law is described as an elusive concept, hard to easily define and a well established legal
principle which is obviously well known by professionals in law but hardly commonly known to the
individuals of society.

It is important to note that it is pathetic that the rule of law which protected the individuals and society as
a whole which was well known by the professionals prior to the enactment of the Constitution Act, 1982
was allowed to exist as elusive concept and hard to easily define without being amended in concern for
the people of society.

In any case it gives one a fair idea of the integrity of the members of the legal profession prior to the
inclusion of the Charter

Since the enactment of the Constitution Act, 1982 with the inclusion of the Charter the rights of the
individual were clearly defined and guaranteed

Clearly either stated or implied the Federal Government is responsible to administer and enforce the
provisions of the Constitution in a manner consistent with and conducive to the support of the guarantee
which provides for the equality of protection and benefits before and under the law for each and every
individual of society.

Clearly the “Roles and Responsibilities of the Attorney General” shows the Ontario Attorney General
Michael Bryant is responsible for these constitutional matters in Ontario

6
Clearly the Lawyer Files show the Attorney General Michael Bryant is derelict of his responsibilities
which brings the matter back to you of the Office of the Federal Ombudsman for Victims of Crime and
The Minister of Justice, and Attorney General of Canada Honourable Robert Nicholson:
It is not too far of a stretch for me or anyone to presume that the Minister of Justice, and Federal Attorney General
of Canada, Honourable Robert Nicholson is the man responsible to administer and enforce the Constitution
consistent with it and conducive to the support of the guarantee of the Charter, which has removed the elusiveness
of the concept of the rule of law and the hardness to easily define.

The establishment prior to the inclusion of the Charter to the Constitution ACT, 1982 were pathetic, morally and
competently and perhaps legally they were allowed to be unethical devoid of integrity, I don’t know and see no
reason to revisit that abhorred era however the law is clearly defined, who is responsible at the top and who must
be held responsible and accountable for the tyrannical system in place today.

Louis Theoret Executive Director

Federal Ombudsman for Victims of Crime

You have jurisdiction in these matters of government corruption and conspiracy as the Obstruction of Justice
perpetrated by the members of the Ontario Government referenced to in the aforesaid 15 Lawyer Files listed above
were the direct result of the Attorney General Michael Bryant’s derelict of responsibility to demonstrate due
diligence to Administer and Enforce the laws of Ontario consistent with and conducive to the Constitution Act, 1982
and in particular in support of the individuals rights as guaranteed by the Charter
I provided each of the departments referred to in the 15 Lawyer files a complete set of the 15 Lawyer Files on or
after March 30 2007, after the establishment of the Office of the Federal Ombudsman for Victims of Crime.

The province of Ontario is under the leadership of a tyrannical government and I have provided you the irrefutable
evidence to this conclusion. By their indifference to the issues, which you understand to be of a serious
nature, and my exhaustive search to find someone of the Ontario Government personnel to deal with the issues
has taken me to the department or agency of last resort, the Ombudsman and upon their refusal to act in a manner
consistent with and conducive to the well being and safety of the people of Ontario I bring the issues to the Federal
government for them to restore law and order or perhaps I should say take immediate and urgent steps to eradicate
the dire situation in Ontario under the tyrannical forces of the Law Society of Upper Tier Canada.

You have the evidence as referred to in these writings and the previous correspondence commencing September
20 2007 which are attached and in chronological order below.

Once again I refer you to 32.(1) that clearly state the legislature and government of Ontario are obliged to not only
abide by the provisions of the Charter but they are required to administer and enforce it consistent with and
conducive to the Charter so as to back the guarantees to the individuals and society as a whole, equally in all
matters before and under the law.

32. (1) This Charter applies (a) to the Parliament and government of Canada in respect of all
matters within the authority of Parliament including all matters relating to the Yukon Territory and
Northwest Territories; and (b) to the legislature and government of each province in respect of all
matters within the authority of the legislature of each province.

The legislature and the government of Ontario have refused to accept their responsibility and they must be held
accountable and the parliament and government of Canada are obliged to not only abide by the provisions of the
Charter but they are required to administer and enforce it consistent with and conducive to the Charter so as to
back the guarantees to the individuals and society as a whole, equally in all matters before and under the law.

I have told you it is my presumption that it is the Minister of Justice, and Attorney General of Canada
Honourable Robert Nicholson who is responsible to administer and enforce it consistent with and conducive to the
Charter so as to back the guarantees to the individuals and society as a whole, equally in all matters before and
under the law.

I have asked you to confirm this or advise me as to who is, or which department of the Federal government is
responsible to deal with the issues of the Legislature and the Province of Ontario Government’s non compliance
with the Charter for the safety and well being of the people has been severely compromised with people sleeping
and living on the streets and poverty running rampant
7
I ask you to answer a simple question as to who the hell is in charge over there in Ottawa to ensure compliance
with the Constitution and you reply on October 5, 2007
“Our office is not able to provide you with legal advice.”

It takes a certain kind of person to deal with you people, quite rare I am sure, not to explode in rage when
attempting to correspond with you in the spirit intended of the Constitution with the inclusion of the Charter.

You most definitely have not cooperated in a manner consistent with and conducive to the Charter similar to all
whom I have brought the issues to.

You have all demonstrated that it is impossible to get justice according to the Constitution.
You have all demonstrated your indifference to the guaranteed rights of the individual.
You have demonstrated why it takes so long to deal with issues in court and why costs are prohibitive to the
majority of the people who happen to be those of the lower tier.
You have all demonstrated that in fact there is a two tier system which reality alone attests to.
The York Regional Police, Deputy Chief Bruce Herridge has admitted that there is a “Threshold” in which evidence
is judged as to whether or not they will proceed before the courts and my particular evidence regarding the original
criminal acts committed by Don Wilson, my former tenant at the ORHT hearing June 30 2005 in front of the
judicator in a building provided as part of the legal system in Ontario, financed by the people to administer and
enforce the law consistent with and conducive to the provisions of the Charter is irrefutable as to the crimes and by
the government personnel’s refusal to deal with it and refuse to answer just what the term “Threshold” means in
terms of the personnel who respect it, suggest heavily in terms of a two tiered system.

Phil Moreau of the York Regional Police Standards department spoke of discretionary ideologies of the police
stating you aren’t going to treat a fellow going to university from a well to do family the same as you would one not
in university from a hard done by family. That was September 6 2006 right after I sent him a copy of the BLACK
BOOK dated Sept 1 2006 which I was distributing at the time and each person referenced in the Lawyer Files were
provided a copy except for the ORHT.
A preponderance of others were also provided a copy of this including the members of the opposition of the
Legislature.
The whole legislature or most have received copies of the 15 Lawyer Files as have the Senators and the former
Attorney Genera Vic Toews, and my MP Peter Van Loan who has also received a copy of the BLACK BOOK.

So as you are aware I have provided all the information that you have which will include this, to the Minister of
Justice, and Attorney General of Canada, Honourable Robert Nicholson who is responsible to deal with the
corrupted government of Ontario who are in on a conspiracy against the people of the lower tier.The government,
which has allowed the two tier system to exist since the enactment of the Constitution Act, 1982:

You responded to me on September 27 one week after I provided you the evidence in which you stated the serious
nature of the issues.

So what have you done about it?

You know the big secret which I have been trying to solve since June 30 2005 and you tell me you ain’t telling .
nah nah nah nah nah

Come on, please tell………. Pretty please.

I’m going to find out anyways, you know. So come on. Play fair. I’ll tell …… Who will I tell?

I’ll tell the people on my web site. That’s who I will tell.

Okay the funs over. TELL ME

I’ll think about it some more but at the moment I’m betting on the afore said Minister.

8
Well, I got to thinking about the RCMP pension fund scandal and how it eventually revealed serious problems
between the rank and file and the upper command and then it was all linked to the DOJ and a Public Inquiry was
called for by members of the Standing Committee of Public Accounts when they were made to Sit on it.

How upsetting can that be for a Standing Committee made to Sit?

Actually I have watched them many times and they are always sitting so perhaps if they wanted to express
themselves, that they won’t stand for it they should Stand and while they are at it, while they have the advantage
over those sitting, Demand a Public Inquiry.

That’s what I would tell the people and I will to who ever has the time to listen to me.

So what do you know?

When I mentioned DOJ
the thought occurred to me
to go to the web and type
in DOJ and what do know.
There he is Honourable
Robert Nicholson.

I see in January 2007 he

was appointed as the
Minister of Justice and
Attorney General.

But was he in power when

the RCMP was linked to
the DOJ?

I mean when was the era

of the improprieties of the
DOJ, before or after
January 2007

Heck he couldn’t be
involved because he is
married with children.

Damn maybe he is,

because it takes lot’s of
money to put them through
university

He replaced Vic Toews.

I wonder why?

I just hate this when they won’t tell me anything. Speculating can be fun for a while but it’s like a dog
chasing its tail. Please tell me if he is the man I’m looking for to rat on the rest of them. He is probably just
the front man. Right? Somebody has him under their thumb. Well, he’s the man who will take the fall
anyway. Unless he turns, that is. I see in 2006 he was involved in Democratic Reform.
Here we go, right up his alley. I have given my stuff to the right man. He surely knows who is responsible.
So I remain pat, with the hand I was dealt with. Aces full and one up my sleeve.

The kids stuff is over, and I have it documented 3 feet high and spread far and wide..

9
I remind you that you have admitted that you understand the serious nature of the issues as any rational person
would and in public you people must certainly act rationally and appear to be of integrity and you are
representatives of the people and trustees of our money. Right

You are always FFF and responsible and accountable, Right?

So why in the hell did the Prime Minister Stephen Harper go to all that trouble enacting the Federal Accountability
Act, 2006?

Why wouldn’t he deal with the issues I have addressed to you and him?

You remember the e-mail from the Prime Minister dated July 20 2007 don’t you?
Sure you do. You were careful and attentive when you reviewed the evidence I sent you before you shrew your
analysis at me.

Page 30 of the “Government Correspondence compiled September 1 2007” You will find lots of correspondence
there dated since your Office of the Federal Ombudsman for Victims of Crime was established eh. Louis Theoret,
Executive Director

All these people who have taken an oath to uphold the law of Canada and have accepted money and benefit
making it binding and considering the serious nature of the issues any one of them had the opportunity to deal with
the issues and let’s face it, if anyone of them were as truly dedicated to the people as they would have them believe
to get elected they would have jumped on the chance to truly and actually do something that would really benefit
them and of course it would just be the right thing to do, morally and most importantly it is their sworn duty.

And Hell, they have taken our money, created a poverty level in Canada which is absolutely disgraceful in a
democratic country like ours under the supreme law of Canada, the Constitution. The one with the Charter inclusion
where God is supreme. Do you suppose He accepts your behavior?

As long as anyone knows that what you are doing is wrong, the spirit of God is alive.

His spirit is very alive.

So, the bottom line is you have a serious responsibility to see that all the evidence and writings that I have provided
you gets to the proper hands and if that has already been accomplished I recommend you follow up on it and
document every step of the way for your sake and everyone concerned.

Anything less and any more of your fuddle duddle remains on record for all to see.

Remember I am rare, to not get enraged from the truth the facts show.

Some just don’t comprehend the necessity to keep their heads when all around them are losing theirs.

Boy, I bet that would have gone over big in the days of Henry the Eight

Perhaps it would have been over their heads, given the seriousness of it all. I am sure you would understand.

When in conversation again with the Honourable Robert Nicholson and you find you can’t convince him to deal with
these matters then you know what you have to do don’t you?

Do your thing whatever it is the Federal Ombudsman for Victims of Crime is required to do with due diligence to
prevention in accordance with the backing of the individual’s Charter right’s.

The evidence referenced here and much more

can be found on my web site.
Ha Ha Ha Why not join our membership so I can
be honest when I say our and we.
I will be uploading preponderance more as time 10
permits.
 Correspondence from the beginning September 20 2007 – October 5 2007 between me, Frank
http://groups.google.com/group/peoples-law-society
Surely, the people won’t believe you if you told them the truth.That you are dedicated to the flourishing of victims
Gallagher victim of the
which keeps your office government
in business. RightofLouis
Ontario, Canada,
Theoret citizen
Executive of Canada and Louis Theoret Executive
Director?
. Director Federal Ombudsman for Victims of Crime
From: Frank Gallagher [mailto:franklyone@hotmail.com]
Sent: 2007-Sep-20 10:53 PM
To: Ombudsman for Victims of Crime - Ombudsman des victimes d'actes criminel
Subject: Victim due to government corruption and conspiracy

September 20, 2007

Steve Sullivan
Federal Ombudsman
victimsfirst@ombudsman.gc.ca

I am quite aware of your limitations regarding government corruption and conspiracy for they would hardly
authorize you to bring them to justice and just as likely would they hardly appoint you if you weren’t on side with
them. (Sorry, but I have been at this for 2 years with justice just as elusive)

However I request you review the attachments “Federal Ombudsman…….” and Sun Editor (Part 1). The rest of the
73 page letter to follow as Part 2 to get the gist of the corruption.

It is imperative that you study these documents until you are coherent to the fact that Dave Grech, Coordinator of
Investigations and Enforcement Unit of the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing has refused to perform his
duty in accordance with the Tenant Protection Act, 1997 or conducive and consistent with the Constitution Act,
1982 in particular with due respect to the individual’s guaranteed Charter rights.

To this endeavor I will also forward you a copy of “Dave Grech compiled correspondence September 1 2007 “ and
Lawyer Files #s 1-3

I have a prodigious amount of evidence in support of all that I allege including the remainder of 15 Lawyer Files
which I will send next week.

I can not over emphasize the importance of your attentiveness to the studying of these preliminary documents until
you are confident that Dave Grech was negligent of his duties by refusing to commence proceedings against Don
Wilson my former tenant.

Thank you in advance

Frank Gallagher

PS

This eventually links to the DOJ as did the RCMP pension fund scandal which the powers that be stopped an
inquiry flat in its tracks as it was obviously hot on their trail.
The York Regional Police, the OPP Anti-Rackets and the RCMP are into this up to their necks, which inevitably
leads to the powers that be who appoint the upper echelon.

It is prudent to mention that one senator is reviewing my concerns and another has forwarded it on to the Task
Force on Governance and Cultural Change in the RCMP.

Obviously this all puts somewhat of a challenge on your integrity.

I am dedicated to getting this to a public inquiry one way or another and should that occur I recommend you keep
your records in order.

11
Given that you all are authorized positions under the Constitution Act, 1982 and are required by law to be
consistent with it I recommend that you do what is right conducive and consistent with it.

You are purportedly independent of the government presumably acting on behalf of all the people but I also
presume you are a lawyer and a member of The Law Society of Upper Canada who has stated or implied in their
correspondence to me on a completely separate issue that their members only concern it to advance their clients
interests with no concern about the guaranteed Charter rights of the individual.

That kind of explains a lot since the whole legal system is operated by lawyers who act in conflict of interest of the
people of Canada who finance them.

I would like to remind you who your client is. The people who actually pay your way.

There is two ways of looking at this depending on where your loyalty is.

Perhaps you will have to argue that out.

Perhaps you can wait like I must to see how you respond to the issues.

May I suggest that “They won’t let me do what is right” is not particularly a good response however you could
expand on that if an inquiry makes it to the public.

“To see what is right and not do it, is want of courage, or of principle”

It’s easy for Confucius to say.

12
From: Ombudsman for Victims of Crime - Ombudsman des victimes d'actes criminel
[mailto:victimsfirst@ombudsman.gc.ca]
Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2007 4:30 PM
To: franklyone@hotmail.com
Subject: RE: Victim due to government corruption and conspiracy

The Office of the Federal Ombudsman for Victims of Crime has reviewed your E-mails sent September
20, 2007, and attached documents.

The mandate of the Office of the Federal Ombudsman for Victims of Crime is limited to issues affecting
victims of crime exclusively within federal responsibility. Secondly, our office is unable to review any
complaints or matters relating to occurrences prior to the establishment of our office in March 2007.

We understand that the issues you raise are of a serious nature, however as your complaint falls under
Provincial Jurisdiction and occurred prior to March 2007, we are unable to assist you in these matters.

Office of the Federal Ombudsman for Victims of Crime

P.O. Box 55037

240 Sparks Street
Ottawa, ON K1P 1A1

1-866-481-8429
www.victimsfirst.gc.ca

13
October 1 2007

To: The Minister of Justice, and Attorney General of Canada

Honourable Robert Nicholson
webadmin@justice.gc.ca
and

To: The Office of the Federal Ombudsman for Victims of Crime.

victimsfirst@ombudsman.gc.ca

Dear Honourable Robert Nicholson

Please be advised that there are serious issues which I have raised with the Office of the Federal Ombudsman and
I forward you the same information I e-mailed to the Ombudsman September 20 2007, attached Federal
Ombudsman October 1 2007 which contains a copy of the said September 20 2007 letter pages 1-5 and I have
added pages 6-14 for your attention and in particular I have added them to address the Ombudsman concern that
their office can not deal with matters which occurred prior to March 2007. I make particular note that the matters
addressed in the 15 Lawyer Files are dated March 30 2007 and later.

I will address these issues forthwith, but in the interest of killing two birds with one stone I request you deal with the
issues stated herein and in the accompanying attachments.

Although this is a reply to the Federal Ombudsman for Victims of Crime response to my e-mail and accompanying
attachments which include Lawyer Files # 1-3 and the “Dave Grech compiled correspondence September 1 2007”
which I have attached, I request that you deal with all the issues contained within my writings referred to herein
which I will also be forwarding which includes Part 1 and 2 of a 73 page letter to the Toronto Sun Editor dated
October 8 2006 which contains irrefutable evidence of crimes committed at an ORHT hearing in a Newmarket
building financed by the people to administer justice to and for the people of Ontario under the Tenant Protection
Act, 1997 and the Constitution Act, 1982.

Dave Grech coordinator of the Investigations and Enforcement Unit of the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing
and the Minister Hon. John Gerretsen have declined to commence or cause to commence proceedings against
Don Wilson my former tenant who committed an offence under s. 206 (2) of the Tenant Protection Act, 1997 and
committed fraud over $100,000 right there in a public building mandated to administer justice for the people of
Ontario in compliance with the Constitution Act, 1982.

Dave Grech explains in his one and only letter dated September 6 2005 why he will not commence or cause to
commence proceedings against Don Wilson for either matters of the Tenant Act, 1997 ot the criminal act of fraud
for absurd reason incoherent to the evidence I provided him.

The Minister Hon. John Gerretsen declined to deal with the issues because he trusts Dave Grech and claims he
can not interfere with decisions made by the ORHT because it is independent of the government.

I have written him and many others stating I have difficulty believing that since it is the duty of the Minister to
monitor compliance with the Tenant Protection Act, 1997 and investigate where required.

The ORHT operates under the Tenant Protection Act, 1997 and the evidence proves they have declined to do their
duty under the Act.
14
This is an offence under s.206 (1) of the Act regarding obstruction of the rights of a landlord.

They are all guilty of this and Obstruction of Justice under the criminal code.

I will be forwarding the remainder of the 15 Lawyer Files which includes Lawyer File # 7 which is addressed to
Ontario Attorney General Michael Bryant requesting he deal with all the issues contained within the Lawyer Files
which he has declined to do. You will also note the dates of these Files are March 30 2007 and later which are
clearly within the jurisdiction of the Federal Ombudsman for victims of Crime who opened shop in March 2007.

Within the Lawyer File # 7 is a copy of the “Role and Responsibilities of the Attorney General” which clearly states
he is responsible for dealing with issues related to the Constitution and furthermore on page 11 second paragraph it
states Ultimately the Attorney General is accountable to the people of the province, through the
Legislature, for decisions relating to criminal prosecutions. Such accountability can only occur, of course,
once the prosecution is completed or when a final decision has been made not to prosecute
I have provided within my writings clearly proving the ORHT, Dave Grech and Hon. John Gerretsen who all are
responsible for filing the said charges against my former tenant have definitely decided not to prosecute and I have
forwarded their responses to the Attorney General confirming this.

Ultimately
Having said that and with reference to the Roles of the Attorney General excerpt above it clearly states
the Attorney General is accountable to the people of the province, through the Legislature, for decisions
relating to criminal prosecutions. Such accountability can only occur, of course, once the prosecution is
completed or when a final decision has been made not to prosecute

Such accountability can only occur when a final decision has been made not to prosecute..

The Attorney General is ultimately accountable because the decision not to prosecute had definitely been
made.

They are all guilty of Obstruction of Justice under the criminal code and the Tenant Act.

In case it may appear in conflict of interest of the Attorney General I have also provided the evidence to
two Crown Attorneys, Newmarket and Toronto, Lawyer Files #s 13 and 13A but Toronto did not respond
and Newmarket declined to deal with the issues. I have also addressed the issues to the Ontario Lieutenant
Governor, both the in and the new incoming without response.

I have written many government personnel in an attempt to find someone responsible to deal with these
issues but they have all declined to do something about it.

I will be forwarding a copy of “Government Correspondence compiled September 1 2007” which

contains most of the correspondence of those who responded declining to act.
I am confident that I have addressed the issues to the personnel of the Ontario Government who should be
responsible and I remain of the belief that it is the Attorney General Michael Bryant who is ultimately responsible.

I have bombarded the members of the Ontario Legislature opposition with the evidence but they have declined to
address the issues.

I have also addressed the issues to the Premier Dalton McGuinty and members of Cabinet and my MP Peter Van
Loan who have declined to respond to the issues. My MPP Julia Munro declined to deal with the issues

I have written your office on several occasions regarding these issues but I have received no response.

15
You will note that these are issues regarding the Constitution Act, 1982 and the guaranteed Charter rights of all
individuals of Canada and I presume your office is the office responsible to assure compliance with the Act.

I believe you could say that it is either stated or implied that the Constitution Document will be administered and
enforced in a manner conducive to and consistent with the Constitution in particular in a manner to back the
provisions of the guarantee of the Charter and at the moment I am presuming it is your office which deals with such
matters and I request that you do so.

I will also follow this e-mail with a copy of a letter dated June 20 2007 to Hon. John Gerretsen and a copy of a letter
to Attorney General Michael Bryant dated July 9 2007 which are clearly also within the jurisdiction of the Federal
Ombudsman of Victim Crimes which began in March 2007.

I will now continue the matter addressed to the OFOVC representative but all matters addressed to him are also
addressed to you, and vice versa, for your attentions to all the issues herein or reference herein.

OFOVC Representative.

Firstly, I must thank you for your response and consideration of my complaint of government corruption and
conspiracy and I especially appreciate your acknowledgement that the issues I raise are of a serious nature.

As you are aware for more than 2 years now I have persistently endeavored to find someone in the employ of the
government to deal with issues of corruption and conspiracy against the individual of Canada
who have guaranteed Charter Rights and Freedoms under the supreme law of Canada, the Constitution.

To my understanding, this is a Federal law to which every citizen of Canada must comply with, including (a) the
parliament and government of Canada in respect of all matters within the authority of parliament and (b) the
legislature and government of each province in respect of all matters within the authority of the legislature of each
province.

32. (1) This Charter applies (a) to the Parliament and government of Canada in respect of all
matters within the authority of Parliament including all matters relating to the Yukon Territory and
Northwest Territories; and (b) to the legislature and government of each province in respect of all
matters within the authority of the legislature of each province.

Obviously the Constitution Act, 1982 is a Federal document which guarantees me and every individual Charter
rights and in fact lays out the schedule as to how the system is to be structured and how authority is distributed and
so on and I am quite sure there is no provision or assignment of authority to deal specifically with government
corruption and conspiracy for obvious reason just as your powers are limited and specific.

The following was extracted from the Law Society of Upper Canada Lawyers Rules of Conduct.

(103) Interpretation
(f) rules of professional conduct cannot address every situation, and a lawyer should observe the rules in the
spirit
as well as in the letter.

Seems to me that applies to the Constitution.

Makes sense right?

As you are aware a guarantee is just a useless piece of paper if there is not a modus operandi set in place by the
provider of the guarantee which as I say appears to me it is the Federal government which made the guarantee and
they must be able to demonstrate due diligence to that endeavor.

So with that thought in mind I care to address that fact to you in response to your first statement of decline to
address the issues which you have confirmed that you understand are of a serious nature.

16
Of course you understand that I understand they are of a serious nature as I have applied my self as previously
stated for 2 years to the endeavor, night and day, 24/7 with time out for a couple of hours sleep here and there.
I have a prodigious amount of documentation to support this fact and all other issues I have raised.

So, if you will be kind enough to address this issue about which authority would be responsible to back the Charter
guarantee written and enacted by the Federal Government I would appreciate it.

Further to s. 32. (1) This Charter applies to (b the legislature and the provincial government of each province in
respect of all matters within the authority of the legislature of each province.

So again words are great, but am I to presume we are all on our honor to comply with the law and when we don’t
we might get a two fingered shame on you and if that is the case why do we taxpayers need to finance a Federal
and Provincial government to administer and enforce the laws if they are not going to accept the responsibility to do
so.

It seems to me when a person accepts a job and I am not putting my finger on you or anyone, at the moment, for
my endeavor is to find one responsible person in either government to deal with the issues.

As for the provincial government and the Legislature they are obliged to comply with all matters of the Charter
within the authority of the legislature.

I have documented that they are not in compliance with the Charter and refuse to deal with the issues which I have
addressed to them and therefore it must be the responsibility of who ever is responsible to administer and enforce
the Constitution Act, 1982 which at the moment I presume is the responsibility of the Minister of Justice, and
Attorney General of Canada
Honourable Robert Nicholson.

I request once again you respond as to whether this is true or not or as to who is responsible for the enforcement of
the Constitution Act, 1982.

You will also note that I have written the Prime Minister Stephen Harper on these issues and his office declined to
deal with the issues.

I had suggested to PM that since he had enacted the Accountability Act 2006 I thought he may be concerned and
get involved with the issues.

The response that no one is responsible for the administering and enforcing of the Constitution Act, 1982 will not be
well received although to date that seems to be the fact.

I believe the documents evidencing Obstruction of Justice leaving me a victim of crimes committed by my former
tenant in disregard of my Constitutional rights and the fact I have clearly demonstrated the Legislature and the
Attorney General Michael Bryant of the Province of Ontario have not put a modus operandi in place capable of
backing the individual’s guaranteed Charter rights and in fact the system is only beneficial to the immorally inclined.

As I have stated all the issues, addressed or referred to in this response addressed to both you of the Office of the
Federal Ombudsman and the Minister of Justice, and Attorney General of Canada are matters for both of you to
deal with.

I have documents to support everything I state in these writings and a prodigious amount more.

Please respond to these issues in a timely and appropriate manner conducive to and in the spirit consistent with the
spirit of the Constitution Act, 1982 FFF, Forthright, Forthcoming and Forthwith.

Thank you both in advance and I appreciate the seriousness of the predicament which circumstance has chanced
upon you and likewise I request you appreciate the seriousness of the predicament which circumstance has
chanced upon me.

I remind you that I did not write the Constitution, enact it or guarantee the individual’s Charter rights and it is not
within my wherewithal to do so.

17
That in fact appears to be an intricate part of the ingenious conspiracy against the people of the lower tier who are
the majority of the populace of Canada.

I fully understand the seriousness of these issues and I have circulated them far and wide should the need arise to
carry the issues on without me.

I personally wouldn’t mind seeing my endeavors to fruition and it’s not too far of a stretch that many of you would
prefer just the opposite and what the hell, in another 3 weeks I may be an old 65 so my eventuality is closing in one
way or another anyway.

I really don’t see what is wrong about doing the right thing………conducive and consistent with the Constitution
that is.

Sincerely

Frank Gallagher

PS

The other documents referred to will follow shortly along with maybe a few others which I may feel helpful at this
time but should you require any further evidence in support of that which I allege I will be only to happy to forward it
ASAP.

Upon my completion of sending the documents I will list them and request you both acknowledge receipt and
indicate your intentions regarding these issues and I reiterate if either of you are of the opinion that these issues are
not within your jurisdiction I ask that you tell me who is and perhaps provide me with their e-mail address.

18
From: Frank Gallagher [mailto:franklyone@hotmail.com]
Sent: 2007-Oct-03 10:11 AM
To: Ombudsman for Victims of Crime - Ombudsman des victimes d'actes criminel; Web Administrator
Subject: Please respond

October 3 2007

To: The Minister of Justice, and Attorney General of Canada

Honourable Robert Nicholson
webadmin@justice.gc.ca
And

To: The Office of the Federal Ombudsman for Victims of Crime.

victimsfirst@ombudsman.gc.ca

Dear Honourable Robert Nicholson and representative of the Office of the Federal Ombudsman for Victims of
Crime.

You both should now have files

Federal Ombudsman
October 1 2007 cover page
Federal Ombudsman October 1 2007
Lawyer Files 1-14,13A
Toronto Sun Editor dated October 8 2006 73 pages (2 Parts)
Dave Grech compiled correspondence September 1 2007
Government Correspondence compiled September 1 2007
Dear John June 20 2007
Attorney General July 9 2007
Point of Order September 17 2007
Fax cover Ombudsman September 17 2007
Chamber of Chief Justice September 19 2007

Please reply acknowledging receipt of these documents, identifying your self and indicate your intent
regarding the issues within them.
With your response I would appreciate your answer as to which Federal department is responsible to deal
with matters of non compliance with the Constitution Act, 1982 and who heads the department at present.

As you know the Ontario Government doesn’t seem to know or they are of the opinion they don’t need to
be responsible. and the Prime Minister Stephen Harper has indicated that with the enactment of the
Federal Accountability Act, 2006 where the charade just goes on and on.

19
I remind you that the “Roles and Responsibilities of the Attorney General” of Ontario, Michael Bryant
published on his web site clearly show he is responsible for constitutional matters and clearly should
know how to deal with the situation FFF, Forthright, Forthwith, and Forthcoming.

Can there be any doubt that he has been anything but and can there be any doubt as to why he has not
been FFF?

Obviously it can not be my responsibility to deal with this matter and surely
The Minister of Justice, and Attorney General of Canada
Honourable Robert Nicholson
webadmin@justice.gc.ca

would be able to venture a guess as to who is responsible for compliance with the Constitution in Ontario
and should irrefutable evidence be provided that person is in derelict of his or her duties that it is a very
serious matter and the department responsible to see that 32. (1) This Charter applies (a) to the
Parliament and government of Canada in respect of all matters within the authority of Parliament
including all matters relating to the Yukon Territory and Northwest Territories; and (b) to the
legislature and government of each province in respect of all matters within the authority of the
legislature of each province. is complied with.

Please be FFF with your responses

Thank You
Frank Gallagher

PS

Please let me know which documents you have not received of the list above if that is the case.and
identify yourself please.
I will forward them ASAP

“He who is sincere hits what is right, and apprehends without the exercise of thought”

20
----- Original Message -----
From: Ombudsman for Victims of Crime - Ombudsman des victimes d'actes criminel
To: franklyone@hotmail.com
Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2007 10:38 AM
Subject: RE: Please respond

Dear Mr. Gallagher,

This is in response to your previous e-mail sent to our office earlier today. I have reviewed the contents
of your message which apparently pertain to some concerns you have with the ''Roles and Responsibilities
of the Attorney General of Ontario and the Constitution Act, 1982''.

Unfortunately, this issues you raised do not appear to fall within the mandate of this office and it is
unclear from the nature of your message what precisely your specific concern is. Therefore, without the
benefit of something more precise or specific it is difficult to refer you to an appropriate office that can
respond to you.

Your file in this matter is now closed and we will be taking no further action.

Louis Théorêt
Executive Director

Office of the Federal Ombudsman for Victims of Crime

P.O. Box 55037

240 Sparks Street
Ottawa, ON K1P 1A1

1-866-481-8429
www.victimsfirst.gc.ca

21
.

From: Frank Gallagher [mailto:franklyone@hotmail.com]

Sent: 2007-Oct-04 3:56 PM
To: Ombudsman for Victims of Crime - Ombudsman des victimes d'actes criminel
Cc: Web Administrator
Subject: Ambiguity removed

October 4 2007

To: The Office of the Federal Ombudsman for Victims of Crime.

victimsfirst@ombudsman.gc.ca
Louis Theoret

Cc: The Minister of Justice, and Attorney General of Canada

Honourable Robert Nicholson
webadmin@justice.gc.ca

Dear Louis Theoret

In response to your e-mail of October 3 2007 which was in response to my -mail of the same day (copy at bottom of
page) I oppoligize for not making precisely clear what my specific concern is.
To be succinct my precise concern is the corruption and conspiracy of the government against the people
of Canada

On October 1 2007 I replied to your e-mail of September 27 2007 which was in response to my e-mail of
September 20 2007 and to kill two birds with one stone I included the e-mail address of The Minister of
Justice, and Attorney General of Canada to whom I have previously written to but the minister has declined to
respond.

This was way of letting your office know that the Minister Honourable Robert Nicholson has been provided the
same information that you originally responded to on September 7 2007 in which you stated

We understand that the issues you raise are of a serious nature, however as your complaint falls
under Provincial Jurisdiction and occurred prior to March 2007, we are unable to assist you in
these matters.

22
In my October 1 2007 reply to your September 27 2007 which I also forwarded to Minister Honourable Robert
Nicholson (a copy of which follows immediately after this response to your October 3 2007 which follows
immediately after the October 1 2007 down at the bottom of this reply)

The intent of my October 1 2007 was to provide the pertinent evidence of the corruption and conspiracy and I
identified the material I would be sending you in that endeavor and I had requested an answer as to who or which
department of the Federal government was responsible to enforce compliance with the Constitution Act 1982 or we
all on an honor system.

I attempted to address your concerns that my complaint falls under Provincial Jurisdiction and occurred prior to
March 2007 which were why you were not able to assist me in these matters.

To make it precisely clear I am requesting you to assist me in eradicating the government corruption and
conspiracy for the benefit of the people of the Constitution of Canada and I have made it clear that the issues I
have addressed, backed with irrefutable evidence are of a serious nature as you have confirmed.

I have e-mailed you the evidence I stated that I would in the October 1 2007 and on October 3 2007 I sent you a list
of the documents I sent you as I had stated I would in the October 1 2007.

In the October 3 2007 I simply requested you to confirm that you had received the said documents and presuming
you had read the Octocer 1 2007 and were coherent to the contents I reitteratd the questions I had raised in the
said October 1 2007.

Who or which department of the Federal government is responsible to address the issues of non compliance with
the Constitution Act, 1982 and I had presumed that to be the Minister Hon. Robert Nicholson being why I presented
him the same evidence I sent you which you understand that the issues I raise are of a serious nature but feel
helpless in their resolve.

The evidence which I have sent you which I asked you to confirm that you have received in the October 3 2007
includes the "Government Correspondence compiled September 1 2007" file which contains
correspondence from the Ontario government personnel which clearly indicates I have provided them the
evidence which you have confirmed to be of a serious nature but their response clearly shoe they are
indifferent to them and incoherent to the facts.

The Lawyer Files 1-14,13A are addressed to the pertinent government personnel who I presumed were
responsible to deal with the issues contained within Lawyer Files 1-3 where the personnel have not only
Obstructed Justice which is my right and that of the people consistent with the Charter inclusion to the
Constitution.
I made particular note that these 15 Lawyer Files were dated March 30 2007 and later so as to address
your concern that these issues occurred after the establishment of your office.

Lawyer File # 7 was addressed to the Ontario Attorney General Michael Bryant which details the
Obstruction of Justice committed by the personnel referenced in Lawyer Files 1-3 and his refusal to deal
with the issues which you and I understand to be of a serious nature.

I have referred to the "Roles and Responsibilities of the Attorney General" which I have downloaded from
his web site and copied to Lawyer File # 7 which clearly indicates he plays major roles in the legal system
of Ontario and is clearly responsible for constitutional matters and the assurance that the adminstering and
enforcement of the Ontario laws are consistent with and conducive to the guarantee of the Charter for
without such consistency in support of the guarantee it is nothing but a worthless piece of paper
compromising the sanctity of the Constitution itself.

So, having providing the evidence that those people of the Ontario government who are responsible to administer
and enforce law consistent with the Charter have declined to do so since March 30 2007 when your office, The
23
Office of the Federal Ombudsman for Victims of Crime was up and running and they are a matter affecting victims
of crime exclusively within federal responsibility I request you deal with the issues.

32. (1) This Charter applies (a) to the Parliament and government of Canada in respect of all
matters within the authority of Parliament including all matters relating to the Yukon Territory and
Northwest Territories; and (b) to the legislature and government of each province in respect of all
matters within the authority of the legislature of each province.

I reiterate my precise concern is the Ontario government corruption and conspiracy against the
people and it is evidenced by their refusal to deal with the obstruction of justice committed by
the government personnel referrenced in the Lawyer Files #s 1-3 dated March 30 2007 who
have declined to act conducive to and consistent with the Constitution.

It appears to me that it is the Attorney General Michael Bryant who is ultimately responsible for
the adminstering and enforcemant of Justice consistent with the Constitution as it clearly states
in the aforesaid "Roles and Responsibilities of the Attorney General" and as it states in 32. (1)
above it the legislature and government personnel's responsibility to do so under Federal Law.

So I request again, "Who or which department of the Federal Government is responsible to deal
with non compliance with 32. (1) above and I again say I presume it is The Minister of Justice, and
Attorney General of Canada, Honourable Robert Nicholson and have provided him all the evidence I have provided
you and will forward a copy of this also in an effort to clear up any ambiguity which may have existed prior to this.

If indeed it is the Minister Hon. Robert Nicholson's responsibility to deal with these issues of a serious nature which
you and I both understand and he fails to deal with the issues FFF, Forthright, Forthcoming and Forthwith you are
up to speed on the issues as well as he and you can commence or cause to commence proceedings relative to
your authority as of March 2007 under your Federal Jurisdiction which then be the issue of the Honourable Minister
Robert Nicholson's not so honourable Obstruction of Justice and failure to uphold the law of the country to which he
took an oath which said law contains the guarantee of the Charter which demands, either stated or implied, the
establishment structure a system with a modus operandi conducive to support the guaranttee provisions of the
Charter without such a system with responsible, competent personnel the guarantee is woth much less than the
piece of paper it is written on.

I also draw to your attention that it is hardly likely that specific words are not spelled out within your mandate one
way or another about dealing with matters of government corruption and conspiracy and I suggest it is either stated
or implied within your mandate to resolve issues that left unattended will cause others to fall victim and this is a
matter of your ability to demonstrate due diligence to remove such obstscles of predictable harm likely to the
creation of victims which ultimately their must be to keep your office in business.

I must inform you all that the intent of government, our elected representatives is to deal with the necessities of a
moral society not create the necessitites to make work programs at the expense of the taxpayer and to the great
detriment of society as a whole. Immorality is not a necessity of the moral society under the Constitution and yet
immorality runs rampant throughout the very establishment financed ny the people to eradicate it from society.
The following was extracted from the Law Society of Upper Canada Lawyers Rules of Conduct.

(103) Interpretation
(f) rules of professional conduct cannot address every situation, and a lawyer should observe the rules in the spirit
as well as in the letter.

May I suggest that you must be of the spirit to deal with it in the spirit and anything else is representative of the true
spirit you are.

The shit is going to hit the fan sooner or later and those people performing their mandates in the spirit intended and
expected by the people will celebrate with them as those who caused the shit are demoted to latrine duties.
24
I suggest I have provided enough information to back my allegations and any further effort to dismiss them or
demonstrate your efforts are to close the file instead of endeavoring to do everything that is right in the spirit of the
Constitution, which you are financed and authorized to act consistent with its spirit with the intent to make things
right attest to precisely that your concern is to cover the fact not expose and deal with it.

Once again, I request you deal with the issues in the spirit of the Constitution and the people and the spirit of God
who is supreme in matters of the Charter so as to eradicate the corruption and conspiracy detrimental to the people
of Canada.

"The mandate of the Office of the Federal Ombudsman for Victims of Crime is limited to issues affecting
victims of crime exclusively within federal responsibility. Secondly, our office is unable to review any
complaints or matters relating to occurrences prior to the establishment of our office in March 2007."

(1) Have you received the following documents?

(2) If not state which ones you are missing and I will forward them ASAP?
(3) Will you study them and respond in the spirit of the Constitution as to to how you intend to deal with the issues?
(4) Will you answer the question as to who and which department of the Federal government is responsible to
assure the province of Ontario government and Legislature are made to comply with the Constitution
and structure a system with a modus operandi capable of guaranteeing the provisions of the Charter in all
matters of the law.?
(5) Given the seriousness of the issues will you request further information from me where you might need
clarification instead of looking for a way to close the file.?

Please respond immediately to the 5 questions above.

Remember this, victimsfirst@ombudsman.gc.ca

Thank you
Frank Gallagher

PS

Immediately following the following documents is the e-mail reply I sent to you October 1 2007
and following that is a copy of your October 3 2007 to which the above is responding to.

Federal Ombudsman
October 1 2007 cover page
Federal Ombudsman October 1 2007
Lawyer Files 1-14,13A
Toronto Sun Editor dated October 8 2006 73 pages (2 Parts)
Dave Grech compiled correspondence September 1 2007
Government Correspondence compiled September 1 2007
Dear John June 20 2007
Attorney General July 9 2007
Point of Order September 17 2007
25
Fax cover Ombudsman September 17 2007
Chamber of Chief Justice September 19 2007

----- Original Message -----

From: Ombudsman for Victims of Crime - Ombudsman des victimes d'actes criminel
To: franklyone@hotmail.com
Sent: Friday, October 05, 2007 9:38 AM
Subject: RE: Ambiguity removed

October 5, 2007

Dear Mr. Gallagher:

This is further to your e-mail sent to our office on Thursday October 4, 2007 outlining a number of concerns
you have pertaining to the Ontario Ministry of the Attorney General and the Ministry of Municipal Affairs
and Housing. Additionally, you raised issues in relation to the Charter of Rights and the Constitution.

A careful and attentive review of the material and your messages was conducted. Allow me to shrew the
results of this analysis.

Our office is not able to provide you with legal advice. The issues you raised occurred prior to the
establishment of our office in March 2007 as indicated in a note sent to you September 27, 2007.
Additionally, the issues are strictly within the aegis of the provincial government of Ontario. They are not
within the purview of any agency within the Federal Government of Canada including the Federal
Ombudsman for Victims of Crime.

Once you have exhausted all other avenues to resolve your concerns you may decide to share your
concerns with the Office of the Provincial Ombudsman should the matter affect a provincial Ministry in
Ontario.

As indicated to you in previous messages of September 27, 2007 and October 3, 2007 our office will not be
taking any further action and your file in this matter is now closed.

I trust this information is of some use to you and thank you for sharing your concerns with our office but
regrettably we cannot proceed any further.

Sincerely,

26
Louis Theoret
Executive Director

Office of the Federal Ombudsman for Victims of Crime

P.O. Box 55037

240 Sparks Street
Ottawa, ON K1P 1A1

1-866-481-8429
www.victimsfirst.gc.ca

27