1

Frank Trek for Justice

Began June 30 2005 through the Canadian maze and beyond

Ra the Mulroney Media connection
Interactive appointments with some proclaimed independent such as the senate, judiciary and the
Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP independent of the RCMP that immediately
forwarded my complaint against the RCMP for refusing to investigate my irrefutable evidence of
government corruption and conspiracy to the RCMP to investigate self citing the RCMP Act

www.DamageControl13.com

Finding self innocent and via the Access to Information and Privacy Act, went for the Report as they citing
consistent with Privacy of the Act seeked out the criminal element mentioned in complaint for thei r
permission to release and finely long over due of allotted time under the Act the Report I am led to believe
I requested
http://www.scribd.com/doc/105694093/RCMP-Sarge-States-Apparently-I-Thought-Were-Actually-Going-
to-Investigate-Government-Corruption-as-Per-Complaint

They sold our souls to the devil not theirs as one with
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UbACCGf6q-c

Reform after exhaustive effort money spent status quo set 2 go
In continuance of CLIPS Common Law Insinuated Precedent Statutes due process

If the silent majority had a voice and proficiently coherent to use it I suspect they would insist an ample
budget for reformers reform school

Historically reality attests the majority cannot handle the truth as the minority will not permit the experience
lest they exercise and run over them with it

www.Frank13.com
Twitter suspends me so what have ya got on twitter? SIN Sane Insanity Normalcy!!!
No different than the norm ,,, however as far as I know the rest of the blog spots provides a chance to ORBIT
ROP Outside Routine Box Intrinsic Truths Reverse Osmosis Psychosis

Doublethink
"It is only the wisest and the stupidest that cannot change"
They must often change who would be constant in happiness or wisdom

Creatures of habit will not change doting (I) double crossing
Tax Evaders Exposing Self
TEES
Too Easy Evidencing Self

SELF
Scum Earths Life Forms
2


www.OrbitRop13.com

There were no dates in this history, but scrawled this way and that across every page were the words
Benevolence Righteousness and Morality
finally I began to make out what was written between the lines.
The whole volume was but a single phrase,
Eat People

Confucius wanted his disciples to
THINK

At Ten Tion
Absentia tyrannical Truths elusivity nefarious Transmitter inventor of nothing


Desire to have things done quickly prevents their being done thoroughly



3
A little learning is a dangerous thing;
Drink deep and taste not the Pierian spring;
There shallow draughts intoxicate the brain;
And drinking largely sobers us again.

Alexander Pope 1688 - 1744

Humanity one mother earth Reality almighty consecrated element
www.HomeRace13.com
Form a clich click and think to coherence transmit HA - human achievement
Ah So!!
A humanity Solidarity obligatory

Reality is the Truth impervious to perception yet precisely due to perception
Truth that which God would observe whether or not He exists or whether or not one believes He exists
IDEAL
Simply Reality Sanely Dealt with

No Poo

POE
Peace on Earth

Xmas 24/7 365 circle of life



http://www.scribd.com/doc/185451020/On-Second-Thought-to-My-Query-Will-the-Curia-Contact-Me

"Thy kingdom come"

Mc Pig
Musical Chairs Puppets in glomming

Thy Kingdom Come
Pro cons
Puppets in Governance Media Elusives
PIG ME
The request for God's kingdom to come is usually interpreted as a reference to the belief, common at the time, that a Messiah
figure would bring about a Kingdom of God.
Traditionally the coming of God's Kingdom is seen as a divine gift to be prayed for,
not a human achievement.
This idea is frequently challenged by groups who believe that the Kingdom will come by the hands of those faithful to work for a
better world. It is believed by these individuals that Jesus' commands to feed the hungry and clothe the needy are the Kingdom to
which he was referring.
PIG MEOW
Puppets in Governance Media Elusives Opposition Web
Con pros

4

http://www.scribd.com/doc/191773511/Circle-of-Life-to-Wits

www.RCMP.frank13.com
www.cdfji.Frank13.com
www.cdf1.Frank13.com
www.Docket13.Frank13.com

www.DamageControl13.com

www.IyffyI.com
In your face for your Information

I Reiterate upon Reiteration Reiterate

www.Frank13.com
Form a clich click and think to coherence transmit HA - human achievement


October 8, 2006

To: Toronto Sun
News Room
Fax: 416-947-1664

From: Frank Gallagher
34 Riverglen Drive
Keswick, On
L4P 2P8
franklyone@hotmail.com now >>>> kccm13@gmail.com
Kleptocratic Corruption Conspiracy Messenger

Re: Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing
Obstruction of Justice

Dear Editor and News Room

I have been trying to find the justice and the guarantee of our Charter Rights and Freedoms for over a year
now since August 8 2005 when an Order was issued by the Ontario Rental Housing Tribunal to evict my
tenant for arrears of rent $10,000 and for refusing to vacate my premises on May 31 2005.

I proved beyond a doubt that my tenant filed false and misleading information which is an offense under
the Tenant Protection Act, 1997.

During the course of the hearing the tenant committed FRAUD right there in front of the Judicator.

I had attached a copy of a May 6 2005 agreement to my application to evict which the tenant and I had both
signed. By doing so the tenant agreed to vacate my premises as stated and on page 4 he agreed that he owed
me so much for rent.

5
I should note that this 4 page agreement dealt with other matters including shares in his company.

The tenant denied having ever seen the agreement and also denied having signed it or initialed it.
I produced another agreement which he had also signed dated April 13 2005 which stated the same in
matters of the Tribunal and the tenant denied having ever seen it or signed it.

I introduced the person who had witnessed the tenant sign it and he attested to the fact.
He had signed them with a different signature than he has used on all the other documents including the
dispute.
These agreements proved that he had agreed that he owed me rent which proved his dispute was BS

In the dispute he had claimed that at the time I invested through some strange fabrication he was paid up
until February 2009.
His dispute has other stories which I submitted documents to prove that they were fabricated.

If the Tribunal had found for him I would have been out $43,000 and had the crook in my basement for
another 3 years.
Its a long interesting story leading up to the Tribunal hearing about him and my son trying to swindle me
leading me to start trying to get him out of my house back on December 17 2004 and around New Years I
told him I would be going to the police when he started a campaign to frame me for fraud and went to the
York Regional Police to charge me. (Its all documented)

But, much more interesting is what happens after the Hearing but first things first.

Back to the Tribunal

His dispute also stated that if the court didnt accept his first argument then he would argue that he had paid
$7000 toward the rent because I was holding money belonged to him regarding an investment.(This was
related to his attempt to frame me for fraud)

I submitted evidence to prove this was false and misleading information.

Every item in his dispute was proven to be fabricated.

The May 6 and April 13
th
2006 agreements concerned matters of $150,000 in stock for me and some friends
and another $100,000 plus regarding matters concerning investors before I came along and I protected their
investments with these agreements also.

During the hearing when the Judicator came to realize what was going on I said There oughta be a law
and she responded There is and went on to state that she could forward the file on to Investigation and
Enforcement.. lasting a minute or so.

When the Order came in the mail the Tribunal had found for me and the tenant was ordered to pay me
$10,000 in arrears and vacate my premises but there was no mention of FRAUD.

That set me out on a trek to find justice which has gone on for over a year now and on route I
documented a conspiracy against the people by the authorities which proves the peoples rights and
freedoms as guaranteed by the Charter are not being protected by the system.

6
The proof is in my file called the BLACK BOOK which is 266 pages filled with correspondence from the
ORHT, Investigation and Enforcement Unit of the MMAH, the York Regional Police, the RCMP , the
Ombudsman and the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing and others.

I addressed the BLACK BOOK dated September 1 2006 to the Premier of Ontario , Dalton McGuinty and
sent the others that I have mentioned a copy, as well as my MPP Julia Munro and my MP Peter Van Loan
but none have responded except the Honourable John Gerretsen, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and
Housing who I am looking to have investigated under the Tenant Protection Act, 1997.

I have simply been trying to get my ex tenant charged with filing a false and misleading information under
the Act and they have tried to cover this up.

Note

I have a copy of the recording of the hearing on disk (It took about 3 weeks to get it)

The ORHT have removed information from the disk regarding my comment There oughta to be a
law and the judicators response.
For some reason the 2
nd
day of the hearing was not recorded.

The Ombudsman investigated my complaint about the ORHT not filing fraud charges by just asking the
ORHT if they are guilty and the Minister of the MMAH declined to investigate the Investigation and
Enforcement Unit because he trusts the people who are mandated to Investigate.

There is a huge COVER UP and a huge story here if you are interested.

Pages Numbers Pages
I have attached 3 files: My Commentary Tribunal Hearing 11-13 3
Tribunal Hearing Documents 14-63 50
MMAH Correspondence 64-73 11
Index of BLACK BOOK 7-9 3
If you will confirm my statements pages 11-13 with the evidence pages 14-63 you will see that the tenant is
guilty of filing a false and misleading information and is guilty of fraud by signing the May 6 2005 and
the April 13 2005 agreements with a false signature for the purpose of denying that he had ever seen
them or signed them.

That is the foundation of this story.

It boils down to this.

I had attached the May 6 2005 agreement to my application to support my claim that he was in arrears of rent
and that he had agreed to vacate my premises on May 31 2005.

The tenants dispute was filed by him obviously or there would not have been a hearing and this story was
completely different than that of the May 6 2005 agreement.
7

The tenant had signed both, so all that needed to be decided was which of his stories was true.

He attested that he could provide documents to support the first part of his dispute and then tried to discolor
my character for the rest of the dispute.

He did not submit one piece of evidence to support his written or oral dispute while I had a briefcase full of
evidence to support my claim.

Even the ORHT supports my claim by the Order under section 69 Tenants Protection Act and Investigations
and Enforcement states.well lets just have a look at what Dave Grech states













8

9




So there you have it. My word against the tenants and the whole damn government.

What are you going to do ? They suggest that the only option is to put a couple of lawyers in the ring to battle
this out.

If you look at the index you will find that I have evidence against the Law Society of Upper Canada.
The evidence here is even much clearer than this I have under the Tenants Act and it is further proof that the
system is geared for scamming the people at their pleasure and leisure.

The authorities have used their higher learning to develop a plan to scam the people and make it look like they
are doing it legally under the guise of the Constitution Act. It is explained in depth in the BLACK BOOK.
It is documented as well as the Tenant Vs me and yet the Government will argue that it is just my word against
them and I should get a lawyer to argue that out in court.

So, I will have my Constitutional right to justice equal and fair even though I will only have one lawyer against
every lawyer in the system supported by the taxpayers money and if I should happen to lose with all my
benefits of the Charter I will have my Constitutional right to appeal and I could continue to do so until either the
taxpayers are broke or I am.

I wonder what the people would say if they knew about this?
How could they possibly find out about this?

I wonder if we should have to pay for lawyers while they practice it.
What kind of citizens are they that debate it all the time .The Constitution Act, 1982 is the supreme law.
Start there with your case and make sure that you get that right, then practice what ever you like. The do not have the right
to interfere with my rights and freedoms any more than anyone else. (See the section in the BLACK BOOK under Law
Society of Upper Canada)


10

The ORHT declined to forward the file for investigation and the Investigations and Enforcement unit claim
the evidence is insufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt.

The MMAH file contains correspondence with the ORHT, Investigations and Enforcement and the Minister
of Municipal Affairs and Housing.

The disk of the recording of the Hearing commences at about 3: 20:52

On this recording you will hear the incompetence of a wanna be Judge Judy and my timid, nervous first time
at playing Perry Mason and the creative art of a habitual fabricator.

The basement which the tenant rented is a nice above the norm basement apartment with a walkout to the
river and a wood burning fireplace, living room, kitchen and a bedroom set off from the rest with all utilities
included. It is nicely furnished and a two piece bathroom is off the laundry room as well as a shower off the
laundry room. The laundry room has 2 doors, one from the hall from the living room and one which exits out
to another room under the first storey deck which exits to the outside.This I gave him rent free for 6 months
and although I had wired the kitchen for a stove I had never put one in because I had fixed it up for me and I
ate with my mother upstairs. I had told Don when he moved in we could eventually get a stove but I never
heard nor thought another thing about it. He made do with the two grill hot plate and microwave that was
there.

I mention this so that you may have a laugh when you hear the tenant describe it on the recording.

I could mail a copy of the disk if you are interested but better still why not send a reporter experienced in
such matters such as the guys involved in the Watergate thing for a copy of it and have a look at the BLACK
BOOK and other evidence I have? (A look at the basement apartment will be most beneficial to get an idea
of the tenants ability to fabricate.)

I promise you this is a most serious story regarding a government conspiracy using their authority to rip off
the people through taxation while not backing the guarantee of the Charter to the people. It even proves the
Tenants Act, 1997 is unconstitutional and it proves when I have brought the matters to the authorities
attention they have addressed the matter by covering it up as they have in even more serious matters
documented in the BLACK BOOK consisting of a cover page addressed to the Premier, 3 index pages,266
pages and a back cover. The BLACK BOOK file was closed September 15 2006 and the BLUE BOOK
opened which contains such material as the correspondence with the Minister of Muni cipal Affairs and
Housing and of course all correspondence since September 15 2006.

This Act of fraud by the government is evidenced as well as the evidence is documented against the tenant in
the files I have sent you.

Its going to reach the public without you or with you and I suggest the latter would be most beneficial to us
both and for heavens sake let us not forget the people.

The following three pages are the index of the BLACK BOOK.





11


Letter to Premier Dalton McGuinty (Constitution Act, 1982) BLACK BOOK INDEX

WHERE IN HELL IS THE GUARANTEE?

Date Chronological Index From Page To Page

September 1 2006 Commentary (Constitution Act, 1982) 0, 1 11
September 3 2006 Commentary (Lawyers,Control Corporations) 46 50
Commentary (Law Society of Upper Canada) 144 146
Commentary (Law Society- Bolsover Contract) 147 148

Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing

August 10 2005 To: Investigations and Enforcement Unit 16
August 11 2005 Elizabeth Tan 18 19
August 12 2005 Elizabeth Tan 17 19
August 12 2005 Elizabeth Tan 20 August
25 2005 Catherine Pagliaroli 21 24
(Sent Aug. 31/05)
September 6 2005 From: Dave Grech I add commentary Aug 25/06 25 26
September 13 2005 To: Dear Dear Dave Grech Indicate displeasure 40 42
September 30 2005 From: ORHT File closed- Period 43 45
October 3 2005 To: Dave Grech I delivered to Roel Pascual in Daves absence 27 42
August 31 2006 To: Hon. John Garretsen (Minister) Also sent pages 0,1-11 12 45
Request charges & Inquiry
York Regional Police

October 11 2005 To: Armand LaBarge YRP June 29 2005 Chronicle (51-80) 51 80
Chief of Police
October 11 2005 Armand Labarge (Recap meeting Det F. Kerr) 81 96
October 14 2005 From: APL Acknowledgement 97,105
November 8 2005 Comments on meeting with Inspector Michael Fleming 98 103
November 8 2005 From: Michael Fleming Instructions how to do it myself 104
January 2 2006 To: Bruce Herridge e-mailed September 12 2006 227 231
January 10 2006 From: Bruce Herridge Will reiterate my concerns when asked 111 112
Deputy Chief
January 13 2006 To: Bruce Herridge What have you done previously ? 113 125
February 6 2006 To: Bruce Herridge 130 143
Don Wilson 131 143
March 23 2006 To: Armand La Barge Inform of OPP letter 243
September 5 2006 To: Bruce Herridge Correspondence Rod Bradbury 179 185
Have you reiterated my concerns?
September 6 2006 To: Phil Moreau Standards Re: phone call 219 226

Royal Canadian Mounted Police

January 3 2006 To: Chief I gave P. Goulet a folder at his office 187 191
January 3 2006 From: P Goulet Acknowledges receipt-forward to com- crime unit 192
January 18 2006 To: Michael Thompson Response to M.Thomson Jan 19/06 193 197
Request 2
separate fraud
charges be laid
against Don
Wilson
See page 182. This was page
13 in letter to Don Wilson
12
January 19 2006 From: Michael Thomson No investigation 137
February 6 2006 To: Michael Thomson Informed of Rod Bradbury not VP 198
March 12 2006 To: Michael Thomson More words- no response 199 204
March 23 2006 To: Michael Thomson Inform of OPP letter 243
September 5 2006 To: Michael Thomson Sent copy Premier McGuinty Letter 205

January 19 2006 To: OPP Sent documents system pumping air 241
March 2006 From: Amy Laughlin YRP have jurisdiction 242

MP (York)

February 1 2006 To: Peter Van Loan No response 244 247
February 27 2006 Peter Van Loan No response 247 259

Ombudsman

May 31 2006 To: Ombudsman Sent complaint Re: ORHT 206 207
June 9 2006 From: Janet Ortved They have jurisdiction but wont review? 208
Early Resolution Officer
June 13 2006 To: Janet Ortved I ask her to think again 209 210
June 23 2006 From: Janet Ortved Go through small claims court 211
June 27 2006 To: Janet Ortved More words 212 214
July 4 2006 From: Tim Arkell File will remain closed 215 216
July 7 2006 To: Tim Arkell I try again 237 240
September 6 2006 To: Tim Arkell Sent copy Premier McGuinty Letter 217 218

MPP (York North)

July 10 2006 To: Julia Munro No response 260 263
August 11 2006 Julia Munro Please forward to Chief of Police 264
August 16 2006 From: Julia Munro I would be wise to get legal advice 265

Premier of Ontario

August 14 2006 From: Dalton McGuinty Suggests Honourable John Gerretsen 266 Last Page
Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing
Go to Blue Book
Mayors Office

May 25 2005 To: David Miller I delivered gallagher papers May 26/05 160 161
August 12 2005 Carmen Smith Request for update 162
October 5 2005 From: Carmen Smith Received & forwarded ?? Farid Amin 163
Special Assistant See web site for gallagher papers
http://groups.google.ca/group/franklyone
October 18 2005 To: Fareed Amin Request for update 128,165
Deputy City Manager
November 4 2005 From: Fareed Amin Regret to inform - papers vanished 128,165
January 5 2006 To: Fareed Amin My response to vanished papers 160 165
January 15 2006 To: Carmen Smith Questionnaire to Carmen 126 129
April 3 2006 To: Irene Schneider, Carmen Smith, Fareed Amin, etal 166 172
May 31 2006 To: FareedAmin Posted gallagher papers on web 173
13
June 1 2006 From: Fareed Amin Swamped but retrieved gallagher papers 173
June 5 2006 To: Fareed Amin I reiterate again I logically presumed 174
June ? 2006 From: Fareed Amin Identified 2 issues Waiting (see page 178)
June 21 2006 To: Fareed Amin Request for response main issues 175 176
July 4 2006 To: Fareed Amin Request for investigation missing papers 176 177
September 5 2006 To: Fareed Amin Request for copy of e-mail prior to my June 21 178
Still waiting

Law Society of Upper Canada

June 16 2006 From: Bourne, Jenkins & Mulligan Terminate Contract 153
June 23 2006 To: B,J & Mulligan Complaint- copy to Law Society 154 155
August 15 2006 From: Aldonas Maria Bigos Sides with lawyer 156 158
August 22 2006 To: Aldona Maria-Bigos Disappointed with response 149 158
August 23 2006 From: Aldona Maria-Bigos Reviewing my file- Still waiting


September 3 2006 Commentary 48 49
Commentary 144 146
Bolsover Contract 147 148






























September 11 2006 Self Test Reality Check Pages 232 - 236
14




I have started to prepare a request for the investigation of the Minister but at this point I have no idea who to
address it to.
I have e-mailed the Minister of Justice and the Attorney General of Canada, the Honourable Vic Toes and his
office acknowledged receipt.

If you know to whom I should address the following to I would appreciate your help.

October 4 2006

To: ?

From: Frank Gallagher
34 Riverglen Drive
Keswick, On.
L4P 2P8

Re: Obstruction of Justice
Tenant Protection Act, 1997

Dear ?
I hereby formally request the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, Honourable John
Gerretsen be investigated for obstruction of justice under section 206 subsection 6,i of the Tenant
Protection Act,1997 whereas he has hindered, obstructed and interfered with my right to secure a
right or seek relief under this Act
(2) Any person who does any of the following is guilty of an offence:
1. Furnish false or misleading information in any material filed in any proceeding under this
Act or provided to the Tribunal, an employee or official of the Tribunal, an inspector, an
investigator, the Minister or a designate of the Minister.
Duties of Minister
200. The Minister shall,
(a) monitor compliance with this Act;
(b) investigate cases of alleged failure to comply with this Act; and
(c) where the circumstances warrant, commence or cause to be commenced proceedings
with respect to alleged failures to comply with this Act. 1997, c. 24, s. 200.

206 (1) Any person who knowingly does any of the following
6. Harass, hinder, obstruct or interfere with a landlord in the exercise of,
i. securing a right or seeking relief under this Act or in the court
Seems to me that Don
Wilson (Tenant) is guilty
of 206 (6) i
15
October 4, 2006

June 30 2005 (Day 1) Tribunal Hearing (ORHT) File # TNL-67103
Nancy Fahlgren (Judicator)

I filed an application to evict Don Wilson (Tenant) on June 6 2005 on the basis that he had given me notice
to vacate the premises on May 31 2005 and he had agreed to pay me $800 a month for rent commencing
August 1 2004 and he failed to do either. (Pages 19-26)

I attached a copy of the May 6 2005 agreement to the application which confirms this.(Pages 27-30)
Don Wilson signed it along with me and my mother witnessed it.
This clearly documents the facts.

Don Wilson was delivered a copy of the eviction notice on the same day I filed and Don Wilson must file his
Dispute within 5 days or no hearing (Page 37)
Don signed the dispute June 10 2005 (Page 38)

Don reiterates that which appears on the Dispute which he faxed to the ORHT and stated: (in italics)

Firstly

he could provide documents which show that Edythe Gallagher actually bought the shares and transferred
$30,000 to BioSafe.(Page 38 1
st
paragraph)

I submitted a copy of my purchase agreement dated February 11 2004 which calls for a $30,000 dollar
payment and a $10,000 cheque to follow. (See Page 41)

I submitted a copy of the TDCanada Trust deposit slip which shows $30,000 transferred from my account to
Don Wilson. (Page 42)

I submitted a copy of the canceled cheque for the balance of $10,000 (Page 42)

Secondly

he states that his rent is paid up until February 2009 as per his Dispute (Page 38 2
nd
and 3
rd


paragraph)

(That would be $ 43,000 worth of rent).

I submitted another copy of the May 6 2005 agreement, which I had attached to the application to evict, to
Nancy Fahlgren which shows on page 4 that Don Wilson signed to acknowledge that he owed me so much
for rent and other money he had failed to pay me. (Pages 27-30)

Thirdly

if the Tribunal doesnt accept his first argument then he would argue that I kept $7,000 from a person,
(Midge) intended to be invested in BioSafe to purchase 2,800,000 shares and I applied it to the rent.
The transaction has never been approved by BioSafe at this time (Page 38 4
th
paragraph).

My Commentary Tribunal Hearing
16
I had attached a copy of the May 6 2005 agreement to my application to evict and on page 3 of this
agreement I have subtracted the $7000 from the total of the money he owed me for 3 outstanding promissory
notes. It was never applied to the rent. (Page 29)

I query if Don Wilson had $43,000 tied up in rent why would he argue the $7000 has been paid towards the
rent that he doesnt owe me?
Why would he state that the transaction has never been approved at this time implying that at some date it
may be approved?

I submitted a copy of a certificate signed by Don Wilson (BioSafe ) made out to Midge for 2,800,000 shares
of BioSafe which cost $7000.00. (Page 43)
I also submitted a copy of the purchase agreement he gave me for Midge but it is unsigned. (Page 44)

That is recorded on page 3 of the May 6 2005 agreement which Don Wilson signed. (Page 29)


Summary

The evidence provided by me clearly shows that Don Wilson filed a false and misleading information.
All the evidence was filed by me and although Don Wilson stated that he had documents to prove
his statement under Firstly he never did produce them. How could he?

He is guilty of trying to defraud me of approximately $43,000



I also gave a document to Nancy Fahlgren (Judicator) which was on BioSafe letter head which Don Wilson
confirmed most emphatically that he was the author. It read that he owed me rent money totaling $6400 at
$800 a month.
This seems to be the only copy I had but it is filed with ORHT. File Number TNL-67103

This is all on the disk and was brought up a number of times. Nancy read it out and questioned Don.


















17
FRAUD
During the course of the hearing Nancy Fahlgren asked me to show Don Wilson a copy of the May 6 2005
which he stated that he had never seen it nor signed it. Nancy questioned something like, That isnt your
signature? He said NO Those arent your initials? she questioned. NO, he replied.
Nancy So are you saying these are forgery Don No, I am saying that is not my signature.

I agree that is not the signature that he has used on previous documents for me.

I then showed Don another agreement dated April 13 2005 which was replaced by the May 6 2005
agreement which he had just denied ever seeing or signing. (Pages 31-36)

Don denied having ever seen this document or having signed it as he had done with the May 6 2005
agreement.

I handed the April 13 2005 agreement to Nancy and said, Don says he hasnt seen it. See here (pointing at
the witness signature) Thats Dave Kirbys signature. See the fellow that is sitting with me, that is Dave
Kirby.

Nancy questioned him and he attested that Don Wilson signed it.

Somewhere around this time I said There ought to be a law. and she said There is and she could forward
the file on to the Investigations and Enforcement Unit

Nancy was beginning to see what was happening here and eventually asked if I had any more evidence and I
gave her more.

The last document I gave her was a 14 page chronicle noting events since I first met Don Wilson until June
10 2005 when Don Wilson faxed his Dispute to the ORHT. (Pages 46-59)

Don Wilson had never seen this document so he was given a copy to take home and told to submit any
arguments to the ORHT by July 21 2005 and provide me with a copy by the same date.

When the ORHT hearing continued July 28 2005 Don Wilson had not filed an argument to this document
nor had he given me anything.
How could he? It was all true.

The hearing was adjourned with the knowledge that we would receive the ORHT decision in the mail.
I asked on the way out if Don Wilson will be charged but Nancy avoided the question.

On August 10 2006 I received a copy of the ORDER under section 69, Tenant Protection Act, 1997
dated August 8 2005 File Number TNL-67103. (Pages-60-62)

There was no entry as to whether or not Don Wilson was being charge and the events that followed are
recorded in my BLACK BOOK up until September 15 2006 which is 266 pages with 3 index pages and
front and back cover pages.

To date I have not been able to get the authorities to file charges and additional efforts since July 15 2006 are
recorded in a folder called the BLUE BOOK.

Frank Gallagher This document is filed in the RED BOOK
18

19


20






21

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31




32
2 of 4
May 6 2005
Agreement
33
3 of 4
May 6 2005
Agreement
34


4 of 4
May 6 2005
Agreement
35
36




37
2 of 4
April 13 2005
Agreement
38
3 of 4
April 13 2005
Agreement
39



40





4 of 4
April 13 2005
Agreement
41


42

If it were true that he had prepaid rent until February 2009 that would be 54
months.
February 1 2004 to February 2009 =60 months- 6 months free= 54 months at $800
a month = $43,200 he was trying to beat me for
43
44
45
46














47
48
49
50
14 Page Chronicle
51

52
53

54
55
56

57

58

59

60
61

62

63

64




65
66

To: Investigation and Enforcement Unit
1-888-772-9277
67
Fax: 416 585-6464

From: Frank Gallagher
Landlord
Tribunal # TNL-67103

August 10, 2005

I have requested a copy of the records of the June 30 2005 and July 28 2005, Tribunal Hearing by fax 416-
314-9567

I am trying to find out if charges are being laid upon the tenant Don Wilson who has deliberately and
blatantly filed a dispute composed of words contradicting a May 6 2005 agreement which he signed with me.

This agreement is attached to my application to evict him.TNL-67103
Therein he agrees that he owes me past due money for rent and agrees to leave on May 31 2005.

At the hearing Nancy Fahlgren asked me to show Don Wilson a copy of this May 6 2005 agreement to Don
Wilson who stated that he had never ever seen it before even though he had signed it .

I then showed Don another agreement dated April 13 2005 which he had signed but he denied ever seeing
this.

I told Nancy that the witness who signed the agreement was here with me today and he confirmed that Don
Wilson did indeed sign it.

Both of these documents were signed by Don Wilson and both were witnessed, but he told the court that he
had never seen them. You will note that the signature which he used is a short form of his actual signature
and in fact this signature was fraudulent and intentional to argue the legitimacy and rights of my friends and I
who have invested with his company called Bio Safe.

I also provided a 14 page document to Nancy Fahlgren and Don Wilson at the June 30
th
hearing which
provides the facts and Don was asked by Nancy to read it and respond to it by July 21 2005 which he never
did.

I have all the documents to prove that he once again tried to swindle me and in fact if I was unable to prove
the truth I would have lost another $10,000 due to his criminal actions.

I hope the penalty for his crime is more than a $100 fine.

That 14 page document has now been expanded to 23 pages and climbing and everything I say is
documented.
I suggest that someone from your unit meet with me at your convenience of time and place so that I may
better explain the situation.

Thank you
Frank Gallagher
68

69

70

71

72




73




74




75




76
77

McFrauds
Manipulative conspirators Fiduciary responsibly accountable usury demonstrate schematics


www.DamageControl13.com
Mulroney steals the RCMP making Commissioner Deputy Minister
Mulroney connect with Sun Media
Mulroney admitted tax evader recipient of armament lobbyist bribe walked due an ad hoc
loophole so as not to have the integrity of high station falsified avoiding court due process that
would have to use Charter section 24. (2) so the administration not found in disrepute

Such bribery is legal as long as registered as a Lobbyist providing opportunity to all on the take

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toronto_Sun
Political affiliation

78
















It is also possible for a majority to be self oppressed by a tyranny of the majority to the ultimate benefit of
a
Curia minority via due process

PRICK mi FIBIB
Political Religious Insidious Charlatan Kleptocracy media inciting Fickle Inherent Bias Ignorant Bliss

Political Religious Implicit Complicit Explicit
PRICE
Political Religious Insidious Capitalist Emperors

Like other financial empires in history, Smith claims the contemporary model forms alliances necessary to
develop and control wealth,
as peripheral nations remain impoverished providers of cheap resources for the imperial-centers-of-
capital.[1]
Belloc estimated that, during the British Enclosures, "perhaps half of the whole population was proletarian",
while roughly the other "half" owned and controlled the means of production. Now, under modern
Capitalism, J.W. Smith claims
fewer than 500 people possess more wealth than half of the earths population,
as the wealth of 1/2 of 1-percent of the United States population roughly equal that of the lower 90-percent.


www.Frank13.com
www.Trek.Frank13.com


Majority rule is often listed as a characteristic of democracy.
However, it is also possible for a minority to be oppressed by a "tyranny of the majority" in the
absence of governmental or constitutional protections of individual and/or group rights. An
essential part of an "ideal" representative democracy is competitive elections that are fair both
substantively [15] and procedurally.[16] Furthermore, freedom of political expression, freedom
of speech, and
freedom of the press
are considered to be essential,
so that citizens are adequately informed
and able to vote according to their own best interests as they see them.[17][18] It has also been
suggested that a basic feature of democracy is the capacity of individuals to participate freely
and fully in the life of their society.[19]