Pat King vs. Deena Hindshaw Alberta CMOH!! She didn’t show, and No evidence of Virus
Video from July 21, 2021
ALBERTA CHIEF MEDICAL OFFICER HINSHAW WILL FIGHT HER SUBPOENA TO APPEAR IN ALBERTA COURT ON WEDNESDAY
By Chuck Black 16 July 2021
ALBERTA CHIEF MEDICAL OFFICER (CMOH) DEENA HINSHAW WILL CONTEST HER SUBPOENA TO APPEAR IN AN ALBERTA COURTROOM NEXT WEDNESDAY TO TESTIFY IN THE CRIMINAL COURT PROCEEDINGS OF PATRICK JAMES KING, WHO WAS ISSUED A TICKET FOR CONTRAVENING ALBERTA LOCKDOWN REGULATIONS ON DECEMBER 5TH, 2020.
Documents filed on Friday in Red Deer, AB with the Court of Queens Bench in Alberta (court file #2110 00751) indicate that Hinshaw’s chance to contest the subpoena will take place in special chambers on Monday, July 19th, 2021 at 10am MT.
Although it’s unlikely that Hinshaw will attend in person, she is expected to be represented by CMOH legal council. Presiding Judge Snider will also be in attendance, as will crown prosecutor Michelle Kai and Pat King, the accused, who will likely be defending himself.
According to the filed documents, Hinshaw’s lawyers will attempt to make the following arguments:
The original subpoena is “technically deficient” since Judge Snider, who allowed the subpoena to go forward “did not have jurisdiction to issue the subpoena under s. 34(3) of the Alberta Evidence Act, RSA 2000, c. A-18.”
According to the CMOH documents, there is also “no material evidence” to present in this case because:
Mr. King (the defendant) “has no evidence showing that the evidence sought from the CMOH is likely to be material to the Provincial Court proceeding contrary to ss. 698 and 699 of the Criminal Code.
As such, the Justice of the Peace did not have jurisdiction to issue the subpoena, and it should be quashed on this basis.“
As well, given the reasons for original subpoena “it is clear that Mr. King seeks evidence relating to the rationale for orders issued by the CMOH under the Act: he seeks evidence about the “crafting of the statutes.”
In essence, the CMOH position is that lack of information possessed by Mr. King invalidates the original subpoena since he’d have to know the answers to his questions before issuing the subpoena to get the answers to his questions.
Which seems a bit confusing on the face of it. The argument might simply be “lawyer speak” for “we don’t want to tell you and you have no right to know” or it could be something more sinister.
The CMOH documents also argue that this “Provincial Court proceeding is about the December 5, 2020 enforcement of the law (when Mr. King was issued the ticket), not (about) the rationale for the law,” and suggests that any questions relating to the “rationality” of any edicts or legislation should more properly be the subject of a constitutional challenge.
The documents go on to note that, in this case at least, there can be no constitutional challenge:
… in the absence of proper notice to the Attorney General of Canada and the Minister of Justice and Solicitor General of Alberta under the Judicature Act, RSA 2000, c. J-2.
Mr. King has not given any such notice in the Provincial Court proceeding.
According to accused Pat King, “by responding to my subpoena this way, the CMOH has strongly indicated that Alberta’s decision to lockdown all business and public facilities had no relationship to medical science or to doctor recommendationis.”
In a July 16th, 2021 phone conversation with this publication, King went on to note that the CMOH seems to be arguing that current Alberta laws and edicts allows Hinshaw to do whatever she wants, whenever she wants:
They’ve pretty much admitted that there is no science to back up their decision, or at least nothing they feel comfortable sharing.
There ain’t no better way to take the legal and moral high ground in this battle than to throw out the medical research and show the masses the science the government insisted it followed.
But Hinshaw’s lawyers don’t seem to want to make that argument.
If the CMOH lawyers fail to make their case on Monday morning, Hinshaw’s lawyers and Pat King are scheduled to return to court on Wednesday, July 21st, 2021 to answer a few questions.
The original subpoena was “issued by a Justice of the Peace under s. 699 of the Criminal Code, RSC 1985, c. C-46 (the “Criminal Code”).“
It requires the CMOH to bring “all white papers describing the isolation of the COVID-19 aka SARS-CoV-2 virus in human beings, directly from a sample taken from a diseased patient,” since “these white papers would have been integral in the crafting of the statutes made under the “Public Health Act” here in Alberta.”
Hinshaw has managed to avoid producing evidence supporting her government’s decision to lockdown Alberta at least once before.
|Sensitivity||Normal - Content that is suitable for ages 16 and over|
6 months, 3 weeks ago
1 week, 4 days ago
1 week, 4 days ago
Warning - This video exceeds your sensitivity preference!
To dismiss this warning and continue to watch the video please click on the button below.
Note - Autoplay has been disabled for this video.
This advertisement has been selected by the videos creator, mr_crowley.
This advertisement has been selected by the BitChute platform.
By purchasing and/or using the linked product you are helping to cover the costs of running BitChute.
It is free for anyone to opt-out of receiving advertising via the Interface tab on the Settings page.
To help support BitChute or find out more about our creator monetization policy: