Here's a short clip from Roadkill Radio providing an update from someone who isn't afraid to get her hands dirty.
That is very convenient. Hypothetically, it allows for the collation of exculpatory evidence that proves the malicious nature of the prosecution Crown started at the behest of Yaniv, possibly with falsified/distorted information. As demonstrated in Drainville v. Vilchez it is possible in extreme case (extreme like a predator potato) for damages to be awarded in a malicious prosecution case where the defendant wasn’t the police or the Crown, but a private individual. Wherein the informant acted malicuiously and in bad faith, and a malicious prosecution suit is being brought against a private individual.
Although, Adrian Picard seems a bit detached. I think he's retained by Legal Aid, or a state-provided attorney.
SUR-PA-237538 — The most recent victim of Dr Yaniv's vexatious litigation (Dec30 process application, Yaniv v Smith) is due in the Surrey Provincial Courts on 2020Jan29 at 0930PST.
This is for a release on bail.. Crown really shat the bed with this one, making an idiot of itself by being Yaniv's mule, and thoroughly calling the fair and equitable administration of justice into question.
SUR-PA-237538 | Interesting, almost slipped the schedule.. The most recent victim of Dr Yaniv's vexatious litigation (Dec30 process application by Yaniv) is due in room #102 of the Surrey Provincial Courts on 2020Jan21 at 0930PST.
This is for disposition of the charges, so we're actually hoping that Mr Smith's counsel requests bail, and Crown doesn't make an idiot of itself by being Yaniv's mule any longer.
Summary courtesy of Petch the Letch, and he describesYaniv's takedown (a calculated and self-serving extortion of a vulnerable adult in the community) that the events were more like.. Donald willfully and knowingly breached his conditions and he knows it.
Petch does in no way shape or form address the fact that Yaniv is not acting in good-faith, and abusing the legal system. A pattern he is well-known for describing to a T.
Conversation I had with the JP on the "private information" being brought by Dr J. Jonathan Yaniv with what has been suggested are breach of recognizance charges.
This was a short conversation, so I expect you to listen to it in entirety before making comments.
Here's the present COR for Mr Donald Francis SMITH, accused of a Criminal Harassment (Stalking) and Mischief (Public Interference). He is bound by seven (7) conditions, and Dr J. Jonathan YANIV, PhD recently made the initial utterance that he had filed an application to add 7 charges on Vancouver Law Courts Docket #28939 R. v SMITH, Donald (2019), presumably these were breaches...
CSO-VLC-S-S-1914076 | Donald filed his Notice of Claim on Dec12, Yaniv purports to have completed his Dec13, but they were merged with respective limited fee waivers on Dec16. Thus, Yaniv's claim was filed and logged as a Counterclaim on docket #1914076.
On Wednesday Dec 11th, Dr J. Jonathan Yaniv filed an application to make a motion before the judge presiding over R. v SMITH, Donald to "provide evidence..." and to "issue process on a private information". This will be heard on Monday Dec 30th, at 1400PST.
He's a bully, and the Criminal courts in Canada really don't like it when people abuse the systems of good governance to bully vulnerable adults...