March 29, 2010
David John Thornton
COURT OF JUSTICE
7755 Hurontario Street
Hurontario Street at County Court
Brampton , Ontario
ATT: Madam Justice Deena Baltman
RE: Sentencing Hearing re: Alan Kippax
Dear Justice Baltman:
It is imperative in my view that the following matter be brought to the attention of the Court. I do this under increasing intimidation, threats of violence, death threats, unjustified libelous and slanders attacks designed to both intimidate me into silence and to unjustly discredit our efforts to expose devastating economic crime. It is abundantly clear that the alleged perpetrators hope victims and potential victims, by example, will either submit to intimidation; be persuaded to ignore or disbelieve our message.
The work I am engaged in Your Honour, exposing as we do, international money-laundering racketeers resulting in losses to these white-collar criminals of tens and hundreds of millions, even billions of dollars and the destruction of their schemes and reputations, while a necessary endeavor in a world of exponentially increasing commercial crime, is not a savory occupation and with it comes threats. In the beginning I tended to not take these threats too seriously: That is until a “whistleblower,” Randy Rankin, living near Ottawa was executed at his home at approximately 4:45 AM with a single shot to the head through his basement window as he sat at his computer posting to the Internet.
These matters I respectfully wish to bring to the attention of the court, concern Mr. Alan Kippax and his registered corporations, Treasure Traders International and Business in Motion.
My name is David John Thornton: I am the defendant named in the $10,000,000 defamatory liable suit abandoned subsequent to the decision of Justice Quigley in the failed attempt to obtain an injunction for the purpose of preventing me from further exposing TTI & BIM, Mr. Kippax, and those associated with his “business opportunities.”
I did not attempt to advance this evidence through the prosecutor’s office either prior or during the trial of Mr. Kippax on dangerous driving causing death, simply because attempting to attach a “cause and effect” relationship to the tragedy, would, in my opinion, have been too remote, at least in law, to be considered relevant to the specific charges.
With respect Your Honor, I wish the court to understand from the onset, I do not know Mr. Kippax personally and have no personal vested interest in seeing Mr. Kippax incarcerated other than that of justice prescribed by our laws. The whole matter is very sad, tragic, and worse; it was, in my view, a preventable tragedy. My only interest is in seeking and seeing justice for the benefit of society.
I have learned that all cases, even those litigated in civil court by individuals are subject to the principal of the “Public Interest.” And that principle is no more apparent or crucial than in the criminal courts of our nation.
Civilly, individuals may not legally contract outside the law, nor, as I learned through the decision of Justice Quigley of the Ontario Superior Court, litigate against the public interest and, as Justice Quigley further cautioned in his Judgment of November 30, 2006 at  “The court cannot… permit itself to become an unwitting accomplice….”
But it should be considered that in cases where well seasoned clever attorneys and equally well seasoned and clever wealthy professional “business” gurus and their well paid and oft times corruptible experts, manage, through mischief, to “pull the wool over the eyes” of the court, the court will, and has, at times, become that unwitting accomplice: Not because the court “permitted” is itself so to be, but because of trickery & treachery, that, like victim’s of these commercial criminals, the court itself has been also duped.
And that is never more apparent, I submit, as when those involved in law enforcement at any level, and/or those in the administration and prosecution of law; officers of the court, (whose word the court should unquestionably be able to rely upon) withhold evidence or submit misleading or untruthful evidence upon the record of the court.
But notwithstanding, unfortunately there does exists Judges and Justices of the Peace led by corrupt Crown prosecutors who knowingly and willing do allow their courts to become coconspirators and also involve themselves in bribery and money-laundering. They are the unconscionable, rather than the unwitting accomplices to international money-laundering racketeering using the power of their courts to illegally and corruptly silence whistleblowers. This, I submit is nothing new, one only needs to conduct a modicum of research to find many judges disciplined and in fact serving time in prison.
In the matter before the Court, it was only while in attendance at the victims’ impact hearing that I became concerned listening to Mr. Kippax’s counsel promoting, for the purpose of mitigating sentencing, the BIM “corporation” and Mr. Kippax as a respectable, reformed businessman providing employment to thousands of “independent distributors.”
It is my belief and I believe confirmed, that this action certainly opened the door to the submission of fact for the purpose of denouncing this “business opportunity” and to repudiate the assertions of defense counsel. I was shocked and dismayed that Crown counsel, remained mute on this issue. I respectfully submit Your Honour, considering myriad postings on the Internet, the several re-runs of CBC Marketplace exposing Business In Motion, the decision by Justice Quigley of the Ontario Superior Court in this matter, the aborted investigations of the RCMP and the Federal Competition Bureau, numerous news articles with respect to the tragic car crash also mentioning in many of these stories, both Treasure Traders International and Business In Motion; the obvious investigation by Peel Regional Police etc…. that Crown prosecutor Sean Doyle would be hard pressed to claim he was unaware of Business In Motion, Justice Quigley’s decision or at the very least the allegations and news stories attached to the Business in Motion “Corporation” and should have properly argued those facts and property called witnesses familiar with the BIM “operation” to denounce and repudiate the assertions by defense council.
With due respect, Your Honour, I truly believe that available evidence would logically call into question the integrity of Crown council, leading to the irresistible conclusion that by withholding negative comment with respect to the Business in Motion “Corporation” may well have been an attempt by the prosecutor at protecting the “integrity” of the office of the Crown Attorney rather than the advancement of either the Interest of Justice or that of the Public Interest: Actually one in the same.
It follows that for the Crown Prosecutor Doyle to uncover and argue in open court the alleged abhorrent operation of the BIM “Corporation,” confirmed by the decision of Justice Quigley; an equally logical question would then arise…. “Why, if police authorities and the prosecutor’s office are aware of the prima facie violation of the Criminal Code with respect to BIM “Corporation” have appropriate charges not been laid in the approximate six years since Treasure Traders International was first created then quickly shut down as a fraudulent pyramid scheme by England’s Court when Mr. Kippax and his cousin Peter Kippax attempted to perpetrate this alleged scam in that country, then their alleged pyramid scheme subsequently and simply renamed, Business in Motion?”
I respectfully submit Your Honor, that I am, as was noted by Justice Quigley, at  in his judgment November 30, 2006… a “self appointed champion” who, noted at  “in his judgment, …. freely acknowledges that he campaigns publicly against those who would cause economic and emotional damage to ordinary Canadians by enticing them into pyramid sales schemes.”
As a knowledgeable and devoted Canadian consumer advocate, president of the non-profit organization CrimeBustersNow, I believe it can be successfully demonstrated that as president of the CrimeBustersNow organization, our organization and I, truly represent the Public Interest and as such, with respect Your Honour, I petition the court to be officially recognized as representing the interest of the public in this matter.
Again, with respect Your Honour, I would plead that you might consider the following, explaining why it is I believe so forcefully that I am correct in this matter.
During an assault trial in Kitchener Ontario in which I was the victim, having spoken out publicly against pyramid/Ponzi schemes, and subsequently beaten, near rundown in traffic and sent to hospital, I was interviewed by the prosecuting attorney just before court. He explained that the matter had been resolved through a “plea bargain” agreement and I was not required to give evidence. I asked to be allowed to give a victim impact statement. He emphasized that he did not wish to get into the details of pyramid/Ponzi schemes as it was, in his view, irrelevant to the charge of assault. He handed me $160 the defendant had paid him for the destruction of my bull horn. I insisted that I be allowed to give at least some sort of victim impact statement. He said he would represent my views to the judge in a proper and professional manner. However, near the end of his presentation it was apparent he has no intention of even mentioning it. He explained to the judge that he and defense counsel had come to agreement as to sentencing.
Surprisingly to me, this raised the ire of the judge. At some length the Judge admonished and berated both counsel. He explained to them is some detail…. I am not here to “rubber stamp” your secret pleas deal. I want to know the facts in the case, Next time you make a deal I want both of you in my office explaining the particulars of the case. At that point I stood up, somewhat timid and nervous in those days: “Excuse me, Your Honour may I speak?” I requested. “Yes” he answered…. “Come forward, what would to you like to say.” The Judge’s softened tone and his obvious desire to get at the “whole truth” gave me the confidence and impetus to explain, without reservation, what I truly believed he ought to know.
I told His Honour, without reservation, that the prosecuting attorney was withholding information from the court: Withholding the circumstances leading up to the assault during a peaceful demonstration: An attempt to expose publicly, for the protection of the public, the practices of these commercial “enterprises,” since the media in that area had refused so to do, and authorities would do nothing.
Again, with respect Your Honor, I mention that incident so you might understand, from my perspective, why it is that I believe I should inform you of certain matters I also now believe are truly relevant in sentencing phase of the trial of Mr. Alan Kippax and relevant to the Public Interest, with respect to his character and these “businesses” that Justice Quigley of the Ontario Superior Court concluded in his judgment to be “at least prima facie violations of both sections 55. 1, of the Federal Competition Act and section 206 (1) (e) CCC.”
The fact that Your Honour has, as the Crown prosecutor Doyle pointed out to me, found the decision of Justice Quigley and with respect to Your Honour’s remarks, March 5, indicate to me that this Civil Judgment is relevant and also confirms for me, my belief my actions and requests are indeed justified.
Available evidence reveals that Mr. Kippax has coerced and recruited corrupt, active and retired police officers from the RCMP on down, government personnel, business owners, school teachers, entertainers, church ministers etc, and according to several of his “distributors, even a judge, and persuaded unwitting victims such as immigrants, the financially unsophisticated, struggling single moms, desperate dads, university, college, and even high school students into what Justice Quigley of the Ontario Superior Court described in his ruling, November 30, 2006, with respect to “this ‘alleged web of deceit’ at least a prima facie violation of section 206 (1)(e) C.C.C.”
CORROBORATIVE EXCERPT: NCIS U.K.
2.34 …….Criminals can also find backers prepared to finance their activities, dishonest lawyers and accountants who will defend, conceal or legitimize criminal activities and profits, and former law enforcement officers willing to sell their knowledge.
With respect, I believe I am correct in my assertions, Your Honour, that this is truly organized criminal activity; a conspiracy to coerce the already corrupt and corruptible, and leading into criminal activity, the financially unsophisticated along with the financially desperate, the unwitting etc, whom, once “infected” with this at least professionally identifiable financial “virus;” the pyramid/Ponzi scheme, knowingly or unwittingly recruit, and as is the characteristics of a pathological virus, exponentially infect others. Common… and in fact virtually essential, as with other organized criminal activity…. hand and hand with fraud goes intimidation, assault, threatening, castigation etc.
All of this hypothesis is born out in the recorded “conference call” March 21, 2010 moderated by Mr. Alan Kippax included in an electronic USB “flash drive” as Exhibit# 3, along with this brief.
I am alleging that there exists skullduggery and collusion between, government, police and the office of the Crown prosecutor.
With respect, Your Honour, I truly believe this is merely another example of a prosecutor, not unlike a paid “prizefighter,” “pulling his punches” in favour of his opponent or in fear of exposure of his, and those he represents, duplicity in withholding from the Court and the public, vital information; evidence that is now actually being used by his opponent in an attempt to establish a “mirror image” of the truth in a desperate attempt to influence the Court into accepting and considering this distorted image as a mitigating factor in the sentencing of said defendant.
With respect Your Honour, should Crown council take umbrage with these allegations, he is at liberty to take legal action which would require, in my defense, that I produce evidence supporting these claims. But this is a matter of Public Trust and the Public Interest.
A serious event transpired since the last court hearing that I am convinced is also relevant in this matter. An e-mail alert was sent to our organization by a concerned and fearful BIM “recruit” informing me of an upcoming BIM conference call mentioned above. I dialed in on the call moderated by Alan Kippax, March 21 2010. A recording is presented along with this brief as Exhibit# 3.
Below, are the most poignant and relevant statements contained in the approximate one hour and twenty-four minute conference call.
This brief, and its exhibits has been presented for consideration to Your Honour, for the Public Interest and the Interest of Justice and for no improper purpose.
David John Thornton
World-Wide Fraud Investigation
EXHIBT# 1 Copy of Motions Record Re: TTI & BIM
EXHIBT# 2 Copy of Judgment TTI & BIM November 30, 2006
EXHIBT# 3 Electronic data “storage stick” Re: BIM Conference Call March 21, 2010
CONTENT – EXHIBIT# 3
Relative Time References – Conference Call moderated by Alan Kippax March 21, 2010
@ 10:33 A discussion of lying crooks
@ 15:00 Allegations the government is railroading Mr. Kippax.
@ 15:80 connections with RCMP who Kippax claims also deny responsibility and denounce Court Decision.
@ 19:00 Denial.
@ 19:30 Advocates assaulting distracters
@ 22:30 To come back; bigger, better, stronger
@ 25:10 Government out to get him
@ 27:30 email – Justice Baltmanto defence attorney: Judge is “snowballing,” railroading, also denounces Justice Quigley.
@ 29:40 “send something to blow that frigging guy up.”
@ 45:24 pleads innocent
@ 47:30 David Thornton joins conversation – Kippax – shoot first re: CBN President David Thornton
@ 48:25 Class action suit against David Thornton
@ 49:00 Accuses CBC of lying
@ 51:90 Oliver Koncz citizen’s arrest – false statements re: David Thornton arrest
@ 58:30 Defames Wendy Messley CBC Marketplace
@ 53:08 Admission of Hamilton assault on D. Thornton False statement of arrest.
@ 54:00 D. Thornton – Devil
@ 57:00 Too bad D. Thornton wasn’t run over
@ Claims U.K. Lawyer says TTI legal
@ incites hatred “1000’s that hate you with a passion” re: D. Thornton
@ 100:00 Anna Bassett defamed. She volunteered to testify against Alan Kippax
@ 103:00 Throw D. Thornton back onto the road in front of traffic
@ 110:00 subtle suggestion to use baseball bats
@ 114:25 Indian gentleman desperately wanting to take BIM “operation” into India.