Anderson Innocent of Paradigm Tax Evasion?

Tax Gap – Why CRA Refuses Measuring It?
January 29, 2018
Comeau Beer Case Corroborates Ordinary Employment is Outside Federal Jurisdiction
April 27, 2018
Show all

Anderson Innocent of Paradigm Tax Evasion?

Debbie Anderson, former human rights advocate with Paradigm Education Group, hauls her papers into court. They show CRA changed her T1 returns. These changes makes one guilty of tax evasion. The CRA Investigator then lied in her affidavit by claiming that Anderson made the changes! Despite exposing CRA's lies through her cross-examination, Judge Neill Brown convicted her using CRA's false affidavit.

Debbie Anderson, former human rights educator with Paradigm Education Group, hauls her papers into court. They show CRA changed her T1 returns. These changes makes her guilty of tax evasion. The CRA Investigator then lied in her affidavit by claiming that Anderson made the changes! Despite exposing CRA’s lies through her cross-examination, Judge Neill Brown accepted CRA’s false affidavit, and convicted her.

The CBC has regurgitated CRA’s press release on the Anderson tax evasion conviction with Paradigm Education Group.

The REAL Story

  1. Judge Neill Brown ignored Anderson’s unchallenged, sworn facts. One is jurisdiction. Another is that her Paradigm educator income is her private property.
  2. CRA altered Anderson’s T1 tax returns, so that they show her income is not her private property, but is Canada’s “public money“. This leads to being guilty.
  3. CRA Investigator Cheryl Irving swore a  false affidavit that Anderson filed the T1 returns that CRA altered.
  4. When Anderson’s cross-examination exposed CRA Investigator Cheryl Irving’s false affidavit, her response was, “I didn’t think of it”.
  5. Crown Prosecutor Suzanne Manery used CRA’s false affidavit instead of calling it out as a miscarriage of justice.
  6. Judge Brown ignored Anderson’s sworn, uncontested facts. Instead, he accepted CRA’s false facts in order to find her guilty. Therefore, Judge Brown endorsed Crown’s miscarriage of justice.
  7. Judge Brown’s ruling stated Anderson “cited no legal authorities.” In reality, she cited twelve. One (Tab F) is a 1936 Supreme Court of Canada case where the federal government conceded that they had no jurisdiction over ordinary employment contracts within the provinces. That is why WCB and Human Rights tribunals are provincial.
  8. Crown and Judge also conspired to have the trial when Anderson’s lawyer was unavailable, thus forcing her to go to trial unrepresented.
  9. Crown Prosecutor Manery corresponded with the Law Society about Anderson’s lawyer. The Law Society then suspended her lawyer. A coincidence?
  10. There is no decision in writing. There is none in the court file either.
  11. Judge Brown refused to answer a simple question from Anderson. Instead of providing assistance, he fled from the bench and had the sheriff bully her into silence.

As a result of Justice Brown’s continual bias,  Anderson filed a complaint to the Canadian Judicial Council.

Anderson has filed a complaint on Justice Brown to the Canadian Judicial Council.

Samaroo Slams Same Crown Prosecutors Used in Paradigm Cases

Tony and Helen Samaroo own the Harbour Light Motel, MGM Restaurants, and a nightclub in Nanaimo, B.C.

Tony and Helen Samaroo’s three companies own the Harbour Light Motel, MGM Restaurants, and a nightclub in Nanaimo, B.C.

The recent Samaroo decision slammed Canada’s behaviour and culture. Samaroo involved Crown prosecutors Bruce Harper and Janna Hyman. Both were also involved in Paradigm cases. Harper prosecuted Porisky, the head of Paradigm, in his first trial. Hyman prosecuted Eva Sydel, the first trial of a Paradigm student. Gosh, what a coincidence!

Making Anderson fit a “Paradigm Decision”: CRA and Crown Resort to Lying

Canada follows stare decisis, where common-law based courts have to follow prior decisions. Having used that to convict 100% of 60-plus Paradigm taxpayers, it would be unthinkable to Canada to lose this case. But Anderson is different:

  1. Anderson is the first Paradigm related case where evidence was presented properly – on the witness stand, and subject to Crown’s cross-examination. Interestingly, they chose not to cross-examine Anderson’s claim that her income type is her private property and not Canada’s “public money”.
  2. It is also the first case where CRA’s planted false facts that lead to being guilty (which CRA also planted in Samaroo, and in those 60-plus Paradigm cases) were refuted.
  3. In her 80-page legal argument Anderson refuted CRA’s planted false facts. Part of her argument is “Apu’s Theory”, which also shows income tax is legal and constitutional.

“Apu’s Theory” shows how income tax is legal and constitutional.

Therefore, to force Anderson into the mold of previous Paradigm decisions and find her guilty, the judge had to lie and state that Anderson “cited no legal authorities.” Or: nothing new to see here, let’s just move along.

Anderson: No Rule of Law – Again

Canada also ruled against her, not, it seems, because she is guilty, but to cover their butts. After all, finding her not guilty would be admitting that they entrapped, jailed and fined other taxpayers who could have been also not guilty. It also would be admitting that they have misled us about how individual income tax really works for 100 years. As we said earlier, there is no Rule of Law in Canada anymore.

So, with their eyes on their pensions, these federal officers (CRA, Crown prosecutors, and judges) once again did what Canada historically does over and over: abuse people now; apologize and pay up later. Much later.

Judge Neill Brown sentenced Debbie Anderson to 4.5 years for standing up for our private property rights.

Judge Neill Brown sentenced Debbie Anderson to 4.5 years for standing up for our private property rights. Gee, I didn’t know Canada’s form of government is Communism.

So instead of just regurgitating CRA’s press releases (which Samaroo, at paragraph 328, criticized CRA for releasing), when will the press cover the real story? Trust me: that would sell a lot of newspapers.

Get Your FREE 460-Slide PDF
of Apu's Theory
Get the latest content first.
We do not track you or sell your information.
".">

Share this info!

Apu
Apu

5 Comments

  1. […] property made within a province. Ordinary employment is outside federal jurisdiction. However, recent court cases show they no longer respect the rule of law. This means they will win and you will lose. That is […]

  2. […] theoretically seemingly correct, attracts tax evasion and underreporting charges. Examples are Anderson, Steinkey, Lawson, Millar, Mori and Porisky, all charged with tax offences. This is because […]

  3. […] The CRA Investigator swore a false affidavit that Anderson filed $1! (Anderson entered certified copies of her $0 T1 filings into evidence.) Despite that, the judge accepted CRA’s false affidavit, ruled Anderson had filed $1, and found her guilty. Is that because Apu’s Theory is more than a theory? Read more about her case here. […]

  4. […] tax agent, CRA, regularly fabricates evidence. For example, in the Anderson case, it changed the taxpayer’s T1 filings so that it could be evidence of tax evasion. The CRA […]

  5. […] such as Russ Porisky, Michael Millar, Keith Lawson, Doug Amell, Bob and Terry Steinkey, Bill Mori, Debbie Anderson, Clarke and Margaret Webster, Kin Tung Fong, and Tania Kovaluk being found guilty. Were they […]

Leave a Reply