An Officer of the Courts Corrupting the Justice System to Cover Up for Supporters of Islamic Terrorism in Academia
Background and Summary
Throughout the litigations in the courts of BC, Kennedy’s main goal of obstructing justice through hiding the facts of the case and relevant documents did not change. To this criminal end, he activated his corrupt links within the courts, in both administration and decision-making branches- and protected the enablers of a terrorist regime at the expense of corrupting the justice system.
Robert Kennedy‘s role prominently came to light immediately after the individual defendant, Amélie Trotignon, received Plaintiff’s Notice of Claim. As demanded by Petter’s administration, Kennedy immediately contacted Trotignon and silenced her by way of intimidation. Notably, Plaintiff’s claim contained a clause for mitigation of damages offering Trotignon to write a detailed description of her communications with SFU and the factual context of her relationship with Plaintiff in place of her liability for the damages caused to Plaintiff. For the obvious reason, that clause was a huge source of concern for the SFU administration, which had already engaged multiple offices of SFU in covering up their widespread conspiracy against Plaintiff, including how Trotignon was weaponized against Plaintiff.
Kennedy openly advised the court, in filed pleadings he prepared and signed, to cancel Plaintiff’s access to the open court due to Plaintiff’s support for conservatism. He “signalled” the court that Plaintiff politically and culturally supports conservative public figures, naming expressly Dr. Jordan Peterson and President Donald Trump, for which “reasons” he instructed the court to cancel Plaintiff.
Kennedy did not stop short of obtaining false affidavits, with the aid of SFU officers, only to mislead those judges to whom he and Petter’s administration did not have direct access.
Other lawyers
Yun Li-Reilly
privately employed by the court, corruptly representing SFU
Claire Hunter
family and political business with the courts of BC
Robert B. Kennedy
protecting supporters of terrorism at the expense of corrupting the justice system
(1) COLLUSION BETWEEN THE LAWYERS AND THE COURTS FROM THE ONSET:
Rule of the Jungle overruling the Rule of Law
Petter’s administration was quite adamant about using every possible illegal measure, including backchanneling to courts, to evade an open court trial of the action on the merits. A defendant, however, cannot simply ignore a legal action and refrain from filing a defense within a specified time frame without facing the consequences such as a default judgment. In that situation, the plaintiff can get a default judgment against the defendant after the court, upon the plaintiff’s request (formally called a “requisition”), searches the records and, generally in a matter of minutes, confirms that no response was filed by the defendant.
In this matter, while the defendants were undeniably in default the Supreme Court of BC decided to collude with the SFU administration to block Plaintiff’s path to obtaining a default judgment.
Default in filing and serving response to civil claim
(1) A plaintiff may proceed against a defendant under this rule if
(a)that defendant has not filed and served a response to civil claim, and
(b)the period for filing and serving the response to civil claim has expirede
BC Supreme Court Civil Rules: Rule 3-8 DEFAULT JUDGMENT
The front page of Form 1- Notice of Civil in the Supreme Court of BC
Here is how this process played out due to the collusion between Kennedy and the Supreme Court of British Columbia:
(2) Directing the courts to act as a puppet of the cancel-culturists of the Left, pointing to Plaintiff’s conservative views
Kennedy explicitly begged the courts to cancel Plaintiff because of the cultural and political views that Plaintiff maintains and expresses. From that point, it has been clear that the SFU administration has zero care for the integrity of the justice system when, in filed and publicly accessible pleadings, directed the court to an absolutely barbaric approach which had previously been even uncharacteristic of activist judges installed by the Liberal government.
The sole consideration of this absolutely reprehensible conduct must be sufficient for every decent individual to conclude that Robert B. Kennedy is a shameless thug continuation of whose legal practice is an assault against the core principles of justice and fairness. Apparently, a gowned thug is still a thug.
Robert Kennedy‘s instructions to the courts, exeplifying gowned thuggery in British Columbia:
"[The plaintiff] has difficulty with concepts such as feminism, liberalism, left-wing politics and strong women as well as persons who ... are secret affiliates or supporters of the Iranian regime."
Words of Robert Kennedy filed on Feb 1, 2021, instructing the courts to barbarically cancel a conseravtive litigant who pursues justice
“[The plaintiff] professes admiration for Donald Trump, Jordan Peterson, Tucker Carlson and Rush Limbaugh.”
“These views do not disclose a reasonable cause of action. The [plaintiff’s claim] should be struck.”
Courts protecting Islamic terrorism 