Lynne G. Greenhorn: Called to the bar: 1977 (SK)

Brent & Greenhorn, 3026 Taylor St. E.

Saskatoon, SK, S7H 4J2

Phone: (306) 955-9544 Fax: (306) 955-2656

Email: bandg@sasktel.net

Before Ms. Lynne Greenhorn, tries to use a court decision that was obtained by perpetrating a fraud on Queen’s Bench, she should think about what Mr. Jeff Kalmakoff, stated.

When Mr. Jeff Kalmakoff, one of Saskatchewan Justice’s senior Crown prosecutors, discovered that former police superintendent, Brian George Dueck, was responsible for allowing Kathleen Jessica Ross & Michell(e) Mimi Ross, to be sodomized and raped, for a period of 43 months, he informed the accused in front of a witness and did not deny that he had done so, when more than one justice was notified. Perpetrating a fraud just makes you corrupt, unlawfully protecting someone who under section 21, became a party to rape, makes you despicable.

___________________________________

BLACKMAIL, pure and simple!

Re-Posted by J. D. Lucas

June 15^th, 2006

Mr. J. Kalmakoff (Senior Crown Prosecutor)

Copy:

Mr. Dennis Berezowsky  (Registrar - Judicial Centre of Saskatoon)

Re: Blackmail

History

Mr. Kalmakoff,

My wife and I only became aware of Mr. Hunter by chance, when one of us was doing a search on the internet and discovered that he had posted positive comments about Johanna (J. E. Lucas). I then did a complete search and discovered that he was also interested in the Ross case and had mentioned Mr. Justice Hrabinsky, in regards to some sort of civil proceeding. To make a long story short, Johanna contacted Mr. Hunter and made various documents available, with my full approval. Johanna has with some deliberation, given Mr. Hunter’s ‘Blog site’, at least two links on every page of www.saskatchewanjustice.ca , because of his support for the Ross girls. Nobody as yet, has contacted Johanna and reported any inaccuracies which were posted on her site. If that day should arrive, I imagine she would correct said inaccuracy, with dispatch. My wife has two reasons to try and set the record straight. She was falsely accused and convicted and is also interested in the outcome of her husband’s trial. We both however feel the same about those who use blackmail. If you use your “view source”, on www.saskatchewanjustice.ca , you will find that written within the code, even though it remains invisible. If Ms. Greenhorn had wanted to take action against that which she claims is libelous on Mr. Hunter’s site, she should have done so, without making it contingent on her first receiving something of value. She is by definition, unlawfully blackmailing Mr. Hunter and inadvertently hurting my wife’s site, that I have found is helpful to my own case. Since one of her clients is not a lawyer, she is possibly an innocent. The same can’t however be said about Ms. Audrey Brent. There can be no doubt about what these two lawyers have done. They have knowingly blackmailed, Mr. Hunter. I have no idea whether or not the allegations made by Ms. Greenhorn on Ms. Brent’s behalf are true, but I am positive that they are blackmailers, who appear to believe that they have “friends” within the Court of Queen’s Bench. It is for that reason, that I want them called as witnesses at my trial.

My interest in the letter that Mr. Gall, purportedly received from Ms. Greenhorn, is just another example of the pattern of behaviour that is used by some lawyers in the province of Saskatchewan. It is corrupt to try and obtain a judgment, based on your adversaries known or published views, regarding another justice in Queen’s Bench. It is also a criminal code offence to obtain money by promising not to proceed with an action for libel, that has not even commenced. Threatening to inflame a court, only makes them more culpable. If either of these so called lawyers were honest, they would have reported that which they claim was libelous, regarding Justice Hrabinsky & Justice Dovell & not asked for a payment. A payment by the way, which is arguably inflated.

Since I can download and not upload, (like my wife) I trace back most of the hits on several sites. It is obvious that Saskatchewan Justice was fully aware of the so called libel, regarding members of Queen’s Bench, for more than a year, on “Star Chamber Proceedings”. This attempt to blackmail your opponents into submission, must stop. It has made the entire Court of Queen’s Bench, appear to be corrupt, which I find hard to believe.

A copy of the original that the following was taken from, uses an alternate way of spelling Justice Dovell’s (I changed it…) name. An O.C.R. was used, so there is always the possibility of an error, but a match was done with the copy. I am only including the paragraph and follow on that contains the outrageous observation made by Ms. Greenhorn.

Copy of Relevant Portions of Greenhorn Letter

LYNNE GREENHORN LAW OFFICE     (Saskatoon, Saskatchewan... e-mail: bandg@sasktel.net )

June 12, 2006

Gall Law Office (Saskatoon, Saskatchewan... e-mail: gall.law@sasktel.net )

Re: Gutenberg v Hunter

Dear Sir:

...“In addition, your client has posted libelous comments about not only my client, but also Madam Justice Dovell, Mr. Justice Hrabinsky and Audrey Brent. I enclose some copies of Star Chamber Proceedings posted by your client and his friend Gerry Hawke. My client would like these postings removed. If your client is prepared to remove the same voluntarily, and not repost the same, my client will accept this. If not, I have instructions to commence an action against him for libel on behalf of my client, and Audrey Brent, who has been called a common thief. As you are aware, damages are presumed for insult to a professional person such as Ms. Brent and I do not need to prove that these comments have damaged her. I am confident I would succeed in an order in front of any Queen's Bench judge, given your client, and Mr. Hawke's comments about Mr. Justice Hrabinsky and Madam Justice Dovell. I trust that Mr. Hunter will give you instructions in these matters so that his family law proceedings can be settled once and for all…”

Thank You,

_______________________

John D. Lucas

(For legal reasons, I became solely responsible for both this site & www.saskatchewanjustice.ca in August, 2006.)

March 10, 2007

Please Note !

Ms. Greenhorn has made sure that several thousand dollars were withheld from Mr. Hunter and at the same time failed to act on her threat to have this matter settled in court. Lawyers who believe they can obtain a JUDGMENT in Queen’s Bench on the basis of what a person may, or may not have said about a particular member of a Court, on a matter that is not directly related, are corrupt. Those who deliberately withhold funds from the disabled and make threats while impeding the distribution of same, are contemptible.

When Greenhorn made the threat & failed to act, she crossed the line. Since Mr. Gall is acting for Mr. Hunter, he should release those funds immediately. Though I am not conversant with the particulars in this civil matter, one thing has become abundantly clear. Mr. Gall knows that Ms. Greenhorn has failed to follow through on her threat. He is also aware that Saskatchewan Justice & Queen’s Bench, know exactly what Mr. Hunter, is alleged to have written. Neither of of those institutions have interfered and we haven’t heard a peep from those in the judiciary, that Ms. Greenhorn claims were besmirched. I wonder why? Or has this just become another rip-off ? The decent thing to do is to make sure Mr. Hunter receives every cent he is owed, plus interest. Divorce often has both parties taking very rigid positions. A zealous lawyer representing her client, is perhaps a good thing. While Audrey Brent may have any number of reasons for retaining a lawyer to commence a libel action, she sure as hell has NO moral right, to keep, or interfere with the distribution of the funds that are owed Mr. Hunter. Audrey Brent is also solely responsible for the tact she knew Ms. Greenhorn used, when she threatened to inflame the Court of Queen’s Bench, with allegations about Mr. Hunter.

While Section 346 (2) in the Criminal Code, makes it clear that a threat to institute civil proceedings, does not fall under this particular act, that does not mean that no Criminal Code offence has occurred. The threatened action has never materialized & neither Ms. Greenhorn or Ms. Brent, have a client who has even made a claim on the funds they are responsible for withholding. Everyone knows that those funds properly belong with Mr. Hunter. Despite the rancor, Mr. Hunter and his ex-wife, settled their differences. Ms. Brent had no right to make herself part of an agreement that would see material that she deemed offensive about herself removed, before the settlement between Mr. Hunter and his ex-wife, was fulfilled. Greenhorn, Brent & Gall, are fully aware of Mr. Hunter’s incapacity & have no right to withhold funds on the basis that they forced either Mr. Hunter, or someone acting on his behalf, to sign some sort of sidebar, that had nothing to do with the original agreement that Mr. Hunter fully complied with. That type of thinking would make it legal for a third party to withhold funds from myself until I said some kind words about Mr. Justice Paul Hrabinsky. The lawyers who were behind the original allegations that Mr. Hunter was not suffering from a serious medical condition that was certified by a specialist, should be ashamed of themselves. That sort of libel is far more serious than your alleged “common thief” allegation, or even the mix of blackmail, extortion & fraud, you have allowed yourselves to become entrapped in. Give Mr. Hunter his money.

If Ms. Brent, Ms. Greenhorn, or Mr. Gall, want any of the above facts corrected, please contact this writer.

For more information about Ms. Greenhorn:

http://justicehrabinsky.blogspot.com/

http://www.justicehrabinsky.com/

http://www.saskatchewanjustice.ca/

http://www.starchamberproceedings.ca/

http://starchamberproceedings.blogspot.com/