We have our reading cut out for us!

Manitoba Lawyer has left a new comment on your post, "Law societies? You be the judge!"

Clare,

I did some quick research to see if I might be able to locate Alvin Esau's (Law Professor, University of Manitoba) old Legal Profession and Professional Responsibility (LPPR) lecture outlines webbed online, and voila!

http://www.umanitoba.ca/Law/faculty/esau.html#lppr

You will find these extremely interesting, and - as incredible as I know it sounds right now -you might even want to think about reproducing these on CyberSmokeBlog. Ordinarily, reading lecture outlines is about as exciting as watching paint dry, but somehow (as with his lectures) Esau has the talent of making potentially dull subject matter come alive.

It was by perusing one set of his outlines that I found the two books - both dealing with the implosion of the old American "megafirm" Finley Kumble - that I would strongly, strongly recommend to you as serious examples of malfeasance in the legal profession:

Kim Isaac Eisler, Shark Tank: Greed, Politics, And The Collapse Of Finley Kumble, One Of America's Largest Law Firms (Beard Books; New Ed edition, 2004).

Steven Kumble & Kevin J. Lahart, Conduct Unbecoming: The Rise and Ruin of Finley, Kumble (Carroll & Graf Publishers; 1 edition, 1990).

... and while you're at it, you should take a look at this absolutely stupefying story about life in a Wall Street firm:

http://www.city-journal.org/html/7_1_a2.html

I remember reading this piece some time ago, and it literally gave me the chills. Happy to say Winnipeg isn't nearly as bad as this, but I can tell you I've observed certain parallels in my own practice experience.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Manitoba Lawyer:

Thank you so very much for taking the time to write with the results of the research you've done. We'll start going through the sources provided and post the best of what we find on this site. May even try to arrange a meeting with Professor Esau.

This is reminiscent of the book Executive Jungle written several years ago by David Levy who had worked as a presidential speechwriter, television producer and network programmer. The author witnessed firsthand the seediness at the top of the corporate ladder - the ruthless climbers who populated Madison Avenue ad agency Otis and Meade at the time.

In the introduction, he described giving a copy of the manuscript for comment to a business school graduate student only to be asked later if it were fiction. The reviewer couldn't believe many of the incidents documented.

Sincerely,
Clare L. Pieuk

"..... purporting to be an affidavit of documents ..." - now you've made us angry!

Tansi/Good Day Folks:

Counselor Trachtenberg shouldn't be so nasty. Look at all the $250/hour (minimum) taxpayer dollars we've made for him with his lawsuit. How is this public expenditure helping Manitoba's Metis citizens?

Sincerely,
Clare L. Pieuk
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
POSNER & TRACHTENBERG
Barristers, Solicitors & Notaries Public
710-491 Portage Avenue
Winnipeg, MB R3B 2E4
Fax: (204) 944-8878

Gerald S. Posner
Manitoba & Ontario Bars

Murray N. Trachtenberg. B.A., LL.B.
Direct Line: (204) 940-9602
e-mail: mtrachtenberg@ptlaw.mb.ca
________________________________________
December 31, 2007

Mr. Clare L. Pieuk
2 - 371 Des Meurons Street
Winnipeg, Manitoba R2H 2N6

Dear Mr. Pieuk:

Re: MMF et al vs. Clare L. Pieuk et al
Queen's Bench File No. CI 05-01-41955
My File No. 2003-20

I acknowledge receipt of your email dated December 27, 2007 which was marked "Without Prejudice" and provided Schedule B to your Affidavit of Documents.

I note that in the draft Affidavit, paragraph 2 refers to Schedule B as documents that you "do not object to producing for inspection."

Schedule B to the Affidavit of Documents as prescribed by the Court of Queen's Bench Rules refers to documents that one objects ot producing on the grounds that such documents are privileged. Accordingly, I require clarification from you as to whether or not the documents you have listed are in fact documents that you will produce.

If you are prepared to produce these documents, I would suggest that they be included in a Schedule A not Schedule B. Furthermore, I request that you provide me with copies of all of them and I will pay your reasonable photocopying charges.

In any event, the undertakings given at your examination for discovery referred to specific emails that you undertook to produce. I have requested these from you previously and I note that you have not yet provided copies to my office. Please provide those copies in the very immediate future.

Yours truly,
MURRAY N. TRACHTENBERG
MNT/lec
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
POSNER & TRACHTENBERG
Barristers, Solicitors & Notaries Public
710-491 Portage Avenue
Winnipeg MB R3B 2E4
Fax: (204) 944-8878

Gerald S. Posner
Manitoba & Ontario Bars

Murray N. Trachtenberg, B.A., LL.B.
Direct Line: (204) 940-9602
email: mtrachtenberg@ptlaw.mb.ca
________________________________________
January 25, 2008

Mr. Clare L. Pieuk
2 - 371 Des Meurons Street
Winnipeg, Manitoba R2H 2N6

Dear Mr. Pieuk:

Re: MMF et al vs. Clare L. Pieuk et al
Queen's Bench File No. CI 05-01-41955
My File No. 2003-20

I acknowledge receipt of your letter dated January 2, 2008 received in my office on January 10, 2008 enclosing a series of written interrogatories.

Queen's Bench Rule 31.04(1) permits a party who seeks to examine a plaintiff to serve interrogatories only after having served an affidavit of documents.

You have previously provided me with an unsworn document purporting to be an affidavit of documents. I have alrady written to you with regard to that document (my letter of December 31, 2007). The document you have provided does not comply with the requirements for an affidavit of documents.

In the circumstances, the delivery of interrogatories by you is premature and not in accordance with Queen's Bench Rule 31.04(1).

Yours truly,
MURRAY N. TRACHTENBERG
MNT/lec

Distribution List
bkaternick@mnbc.ca
tonyb@metisnation.org
mdevlin@metis.org
Media
cadler@cjob.com
boris.hrybinsky@freepress.mb.ca
david.kuxhaus@freepress.mb.ca
dan.lett@freepress.mb.ca
carol.sanders@freepress.mb.ca
colleen.simard@freepress.mb.ca
gordon.sinclair@freepress.mb.ca
louise_charette@cbc.ca
terry_macleod@cbc.ca
brendan_o'hallarn@cbc.ca
staff@taiga-communications.com
publisher@grassrootsnews.mb.ca
publisher@thundervoice.ca
theverdict@ctv.ca
stymofichuk@ctv.ca
cblatchford@globeandmail.com
pcheney@globeandmail.com
jibbitson@globeandmail.com
gmason@globeandmail.com
mwente@globeandmail.com
dwalton@globeandmail.com
dmartin@nationalpost.com
pgoodspeed@nationalpost.com
Federal
The Prime Minister (Harper.S@parl.gc.ca)
Minister of Indian And Northern Affairs Canada (Strahl.C@parl.gc.ca)
Minister of Finance (Flaherty.J@parl.gc.ca)
President, Treasury Board of Canada (Toews.V@parl.gc.ca)
Minister of Justice (Nicholson.R@parl.gc.ca)
Rod Bruinooge (Bruinooge.R@parl.gc.ca)
Stephane Dion (Dion.S@parl.gc.ca)
Raymond Simard (Simard.R@parl.gc.ca)
Jack Layton (Layton.J@parl.gc.ca)
Pat Martin (MartiPD@parl.gc.ca)
Auditor General of Canada (petitions@oag-bvg.gc.ca)
Canadian Taxpayers Federation - National (jwilliamson@taxpayer.com)
Provincial
Premier, Manitoba (premier@leg.gov.mb.ca)
Minister of Finance (minfin@leg.gov.mb.ca)
Minister of Justice (minjus@leg.gov.mb.ca)
Auditor General of Manitoba (contact@oag.mb.ca)
Canadian Taxpayers Federation - Manitoba (abatra@shawbiz.ca)
Legal Community
PublicInterest Law Centre - Winnipeg (bwilliams@pilc.mb.ca)
Lionel R. R. Chartrand - Legal Aid Manitoba (licha@legalaid.mb.ca)
abruun@campbellmarr.com
jnieder@shaw.ca
thefirm@fleurcom.on.ca
bamyot@heenan.ca
jgj@aikins.com
wonchulenko@ltgg.ca
The Lawyers Weekly (tlw@lexisnexis.ca)
admin@cba-mb.ca
media@scc-csc.gc.ca
law-droit@scc-csc.gc.ca
harvey_secter@umanitoba.ca
lawdean@osgoode.yorku.ca
cchisick@osgoode.yorku.ca
afineblit@lawsociety.mb.ca
mtrachtenberg@ptlaw.mb.ca
lcoulombe@ptlaw.mb.ca

Law societies? You be the judge!

Manitoba Lawyer has left a new comment on your post, "Daily factoid!"

Clare,

You've picked a subject of great personal interest to me. If your readers are interested, they can read the response, itself quite fascinating of the Law Society of Manitoba's current President to Lawyers Gone Bad at

www.lawsociety.mb.ca/communique/communique-current.pdf.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Manitoba lawyer:

Thank you for writing and the heads up.

When interviewed by Maclean's (August 2007 page 20), Mr. Slayton made a very interesting comment about law societies in Canada:

Q: What happens to lawyers who steal? How is the profession regulated?

A: The disciplinary process of the law societies in this country is deeply flawed. Lawyers are disciplined for breaches of professional rules, but it's like so much in Canada: everything depends on where you live. What can get you disbarred in Alberta won't have much effect on you at all in, say, Nova Scotia. The first difficulty with the disciplinary system is that if you're a lawyer who's alleged to have stepped afoul of the rules, you're investigated by the law society. If they decide you're a transgressor, they'll prosecute you, they'll hire a lawyer to do that, and the disciplinary committtee itself is the law society. So you have the investigator, the prosecutor and the judge all essentially representing the same institution. I thought in this country we had a fundamental principle, that the person who investigates and prosecutes isn't the same person who judges.

To date, we've filed three complaints against two Winnipeg solicitors with the Law Society of Manitoba regarding their conduct in the lawsuit against www.CyberSmokeSignals.comy. Our assessment - unless you've got a ton of black print clearly demonstrating an attorney has embezzled at least $1 million from a client - forget it! It really is a self-serving body.

We've e-mailed The Penguin Group publishers of Lawyers Gone Bad asking Philip Slayton to contact us. Hopefully, he will.

Sincerely,
Clare L. Pieuk
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
October 2007
The Law Society of Manitoba
____________________
COMMUNIQUE
____________________
President's Report
Doug Bedford

Prior to writing this report I did some reading. First, I purchased, reluctantly, Philip Slayton's new bood Lawyers Gone Bad. As of this date, I have read the introduction, the three chapters devoted to 'case studies' of Manitoba lawyers 'gone bad' and the conclusions with suggested remedies. Slayton and his book, of course, received significant publicity this summer in a couple of issues of Maclean's magazind. I read both issues along with a short articdle authored by Slayton in the August 4, 2007 issue of the Globe and Mail.

I read a number of articles written "in reaction" to Slayton. Two of the better pieces, in my opinion, where those of Michael Milani, the current President of the Federation of Law Societies of Canada, which appeared in The Globe and Mail on August 9, 2007 and Jim Peacock, Q.C., the President of the Law Society of Alberta dated August 7, 2007. Then I turned to past issues of this Communique, starting with the May 2002 issue, to refresh my memory as to what my immediate predecessors, Tim Killeen, Lori Spivak [as she then was], Patrick Riley, Bill Hohnston, Garth Smorang and Jon van der Krabben had to say on the subject of the legal profession and self-governance. I finished with Allan fineblit's comments on "The infrastructure of Trust" in the February 2007 Bencher Bulletin.

Self-governance is the basis of the mandate of the Law Society of Manitoba and I am not disappointed on my short trip down memory lane to see that each of my predecessors was alert to that. For example, in May 2003 Lori Spivak reminded us of the "enormous privilege of belonging to an independent bar with the right of self-governance and regulation." A year later, Patrick Riley chose, in his final report to us, to stress that we "remain vigilant to avoid erosion of our role as independent protectors of our clients." In September 2005, Garth Smorang, quoting a speaker at a meeting of the Federation of Law societies as "risk managers in the public interest." And in April of this year, Jon van der Krabben, without I think, any knowledge of what would be on the cover of an issue of Maclean's magazine three months later, cautioned his readers to "be vigilant as lawyers to do our job of protecting the public properly lest we come under justifiable scrutiny for failing to do so and undermine our ability to self-govern."
____________________________________________________
Self-governance requires more than just dealing with "lawyers gone bad"
____________________________________________________

It has been Slayton's criticism of self-governance in the legal profession that primarily prompted my interest in his book and the response of the public and of lawyers to it. On August 9, 2007 he writes in The Globe and Mail: "The history of self-governance by the Canadian legal profession is spotty, to say the least." He is more blunt in the final chapter of his book, where I read: "There are no good arguments for the view that only lawyers can regulate lawyers, and many good arguments for the contrary position." Is he correct? If lawyers, starting with presidents of law societies, cannot respond adequately to such criticism, then perhaps he is.

I echo Jim Peacock when I say that I think this is a proper, indeed, an important subject for debate in a free and democratic society. In my experience, too many lawyers who do not directly participate in the activities of their respective law societies give little or no thought on a day to day basis of the importance of self-governance. I am periodically surprised to hear some lawyers complain that our Law Society fails to "protect" the interests of lawyers, thereby demonstrating confusion between the role of the Law Society and the Bar Association. I wish Slayton had interviewed some of them, it might have helped him to avoid the same misunderstanding. Lori Spivak was of course correct, self-governance is a privilege and a right. I would add also a "responsibility," one that we must be "vigilant" in carrying our and in explaining to our fellow citizens if we wish to avoid the seduction of the latter by critics like Slayton who suggest, rather than prove , that there is a better way of governing lawyers in the public interest.

Self-governance requires more than just dealing with "lawyers gone bad," a fact which will escape entirely some readers of Slayton's book. I find Slayton's passing observations in his concluding chapter worth repeating here. He notes that "law school can put the child of a poor immigrant into a Bay Street bank tower" and "make the daughter of immigrants from Taiwan into a provessional." Of course, it is law societies, not law schools, which have the responsibility of determining whether the "child of poor immigrants" has become qualified and competent to practice on Bay Street and whether the daughter of immigrants from Taiwan has met the threshold to practice law in Winnipeg.

Law societies (and law schools) I though, must be doing a pretty decent job of ensuring that certain barriers which once restricted entry to the profession have been removed. Surely, it is in the public that competent and ambitious citizens have an equal opportunity to become educated in the law and that the processes for their admission to practice be fair, transparent, objective and impartial. Many persons can 'administer' tests but, frankly, who better than lawyers can design and administer programs designed to determine whether those seeking entry into the profession have a core level of competence to practive in it?

Slayton's real interest is in those lawyers who having demonstrated adequate competence on admission, reveal subsequently through their conduct that they have no sustained ability to proctice law competently, at least in circumstances which place their personal interests in conflict with those of their clients. and how well do law societies deal with such "bad lawyers?" In the case of the Law Society of Manitoba, my conclusion based on the three case studies in Slayton's book, is "very well." All three lawyers in question were identified and disbarred, which was obviously in the public interest given the bare facts regarding each which Slayton chooses to relate. Indeed, Slayton's only criticism of how self-governance worked in Manitoba with these three is a reference, with respect to one, that the "wheels" of self-governance ground slowly. However, at no time does he identify in any way that the public was prejudiced by the time which elapsed between the identification of "bad lawyering" and disbarment. He notes, correctly, that there were interim suspensions and that in one particularly notorious case, the Law Society waited until the completion of criminal proceedings before completing disciplinary proceedings.

Slayton, correctly, does not advocate for "summary" disbarment proceedings nor does he question the obvious common sense of awaiting the outcome of a criminal trial where the same evidence supporting charges of professional misconduct against a lawyer will be canvassed by a court. Slayton also passes over the obvious -- the standards of conduct applicable to lawyers, which are of course another responsibility of a self-governing legal profession to set, start with the incorporation of standards of conduct expected of all citizens in this country and then build upon those.

Slayton's chief recommendation for improving the regulation of lawyers in Canada is that we read and adopt the reforms proposed in Britain by Sir David Clementi. At the time of Clementi's report the English system did not provide for separate bodies, "law society" and "bar association," to carry out the often incompatible tasks, respectively, of "protecting the public interest" and "advocating in the interests of the legal profession." Reform thre may have made some sense. But even there, Sir David recommended that the disciplinary function, a critical responsibility of regulation, remain with the governing bodies of the legal profession. Apparently, that part of self-regulation was working well in Britain. It works will in Manitoba too.

Slayton did not choose to use a case study yet another recent Manitoba example of a lawyer "gone bad." He he researched the "Kunzman" case, he would have written, towards the end of this sad tale, that the victims of Kunzman's thefts were all reimbursed to the full extent of their respective loses through the reimbursement fund of the Law Society of Manitoba, yet another example of a self-governing legal profession protecting the public interest and carrying out well the responsibility of governing "in the public interest.

Slayton is critical of the "economic imperatives of practicing law today to which he attributes to the dependence of lawyers on 'billable hours' and "inefficient work habits." He makes the illogical linkage between the cost of legal services and self-governance. I could find no explanation (perhaps I have not read the right chapters) by Slayton as to how the elimination of self-governance of the legal profession would result in "affordable" legal services to all Canadians.

Whether or not the increase in the number of unrepresented litigants in recent years can be explained simply as a consequence of lawyers' rates rising faster than the rate of inflation or whether there are more comples reasons, I have read nothing this summer in the to and fro over Slayton's book which persuades me that "lawyers gone bad" are making it more difficult for ordinary citizens to find "affordable" lawyers. On the other hand, I have no difficulty at all in understanding, and in accepting, that any business, including the business of practicing law, necessitates that the costs of maintaining the business be passed on to the consumer.

I cold find no discussion in Slayton's book about the trends in the past decade in the costs of regulaiton of the legal profession. I found much about the topic in the 17 Communiques I read. In Manitoba, at least costs went down and they have been maintained at a level significantly below what they used to be. This is in the public interest. If the "public," including, of course, Philip Slayton wish to move the regulation of lawyers by lawyers to a different model, it would be responsible to look at what the now costs of regulation might be. Slayton provides no forecast that I could find. Whatever they might be, one can be certain that they would be passed on to the consumer.

My guess is that Slayton set out on his research with a much more interesting objective in mind and one that I would have been keenly interested in seeing him resolve. That is, why did these lawyers do it? What "made" them go bad? Slayton touches on the topic, but it appears that the answers, at least in the cases of three Manitoba lawyers remained very much a mystery to him. In January 2006, in a well written report entitled "In Trust We Trust," Garth Smorang wondered what more we can do as a profession to try to identify at an early stage lawyers who might in future "go bad." He did not have an answer. I do not either.

Slayton, in the frontpiece of his book, quotes the author Sybille Bedford's rhetorical question in her memoirs: "What does any of us know about one another?" I read this summer Sybille Bedford's account of the 1957 trial of Dr. John Bodkin Adams. I conclude with her succinct comment on the effectiveness of a court which, I think, is equally appleciable to the challenges of self-regulation: "But the ends of a court of law are relative, limited, and temporal; the best must be made, here and now, of the best that can be got. Fallibility is not a specter but a calculable risk, and we plod on." (Sybille Bedford, The Best We Can do)
..... to be continued

You got that right!

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Yet another abuse of the legal process?"

Why are you surprised? This is the same .......-... who is clearly milking his ....... clients for all they're worth.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Anonymous:

Thank you for taking the time to write. You got that right. The part that blows us away is the MMF's Provincial Board of Directors keep blithely signing his cheques for such an ill conceived, ill advised lawsuit. Do they really understand or care what's going on? Then again, why should they it's not their money rather Canadian taxpayers'. They're making Murray Trachtenberg rich as he laughs all the way to the bank.







Counselor Trachtenberg on his way to the bank!

Sincerely,
Clare L. Pieuk

Daily factoid!

"A 2004 Leger poll found that only 44 percent of Canadians trust lawyers, a dramatic fall from the 54 percent reported by the same pollster two years previously. (Firefighters headed the 2004 poll, with the trust of 97 percent of Canadians, while politicians were at the bottom with 14 percent). A 2006 Harris poll in the United found that only 18 percent of Americans trust lawyers completely; 50 percent trust doctors completely (top of the poll), and 6% trust stock brokers completely (the bottom)."

LAWYERS GONE BAD
Money, Sex And Madness In Canada's Legal Profession
Philip Slayton
Published by the Penguin Group
Page 3

This is getting very interesting indeed!

Tansi/Good Day Folks:

The following was posted quite recently on www.derrylsanderson.blogspot.com:

Deposed (I like that word) MMF Board of Director Darrel Deslauriers is reporting that Rosemarie McPherson has been phoning him quite regularly. The Metis womens advocate is known to be a close ally of David Chartrand. More to follow....

Wonder why? Both Darrel Deslauriers and Rosemarie McPherson are plaintiffs in the defamation lawsuit against www.CyberSmokeSignals.com.

Sincerely,
Clare L. Pieuk








Rosemarie McPherson

Darrel Deslauriers

Gentlemen - everything you wanted to know but were afraid to ask!

Tansi/Good Day Readers:

We did something we haven't done for a very long time - picked up a copy of the latest issue (February 2008) of Chatelaine for it's first ever sex survey which has been getting a lot of mainstream media attention. Must say, while thumbing through it came upon several other interesting articles.

Also purchased Philip Slayton's, Lawyers Gone Bad - Money, Sex And Madness In Canada's Legal Profession. The author studied law at Oxford University (Rhodes Scholar) before teaching at McGill University and the University of Western Ontario (became Dean of Law) eventually accepting a partnership in a major Canadian law firm. Since leaving practice (2000), Mr. Slayton has commented on legal matters in newspapers, magazines, on television and radio. He currently resides in Toronto.

Look for some very interesting quotes and stories from both these publications in the days and weeks ahead.

Sincerely,
Clare L. Pieuk

Yet another abuse of the legal process?

Tansi/Good Day Readers:

Under Queen's Bench Rules, lawyers are permitted to conduct Examinations for Discovery. These are done before a court reporter usually in an attorney's office. In my case, this occurred September 18, 2007 and lasted from 9:30 a.m. until approximately 2:15 p.m. Co-Defendant Terry Belhumeur will have his Monday, January 28, 2008 beginning at 9:30 a.m.

Part or all of the official transcript can be entered into the record at trial. An educated guess is my Examination likely cost the taxpayer funded MMF at least $5,000:

(1) Cost of court reporter plus copy of transcript at least $900-$1,000

(2) Counselor Trachtenberg's preparation time plus attendance at Examination the balance (He bills at a minimum $250 calculated in tenths of an hour!)

To obtain a copy of the transcript I must pay for it out of my pocket while Counselor Trachtenberg simply charges the cost to the Federation.

Fortunately, written interrogatories are available whereby self-represented defendants can submit questions to the attorney representing a plaintiff(s) who is then obliged to respond. A form (available online from Manitoba Justice) is used. It states in part:

The (identity examining party) requires that the following questions be answered by affidavit in Form 35B prescribed by the Queen's Bench Rules, served within 15 days after service of these questions.

On January 2, 2008 I mailed Counselor Trachtenberg the following covering letter. Attached were 38 pages of questions for the plaintiffs. Since I have yet to receive his written answers, he is in violation of the within 15 days after service rule.

Sincerely,
Clare L. Pieuk
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
WITHOUT PREJUDICE

January 2, 2008

Mr. Murray N. Trachtenberg
Posner & Trachtenberg
Barristers, Solicitors & Notaries Public
710-491 Portage Avenue
Winnipeg, Manitoba R3B 2E4
mtrachtenberg@ptlaw.mb.ca

Counselor Trachtenberg:

Re: MMF et al. vs. Terry Belhumeur et al.
Queen's Bench File No. CI 05-01-41955

Attached are written interrogatories for each of the Plaintiffs remaining in the aforementioned lawsuit.

Forthwith, govern yourself accordingly.

Yours truly,
Clare L. Pieuk

Distribution List
bkaternick@mnbc.ca
tonyb@metisnation.org
mdevlin@metis.org
Media
cadler@cjob.com
boris.hrybinsky@freepress.mb.ca
david.kuxhaus@freepress.mb.ca
dan.lett@freepress.mb.ca
carol.sanders@freepress.mb.ca
colleen.simard@freepress.mb.ca
gordon.sinclair@freepress.mb.ca
louise_charette@cbc.ca
terry_macleod@cbc.ca
brendan_o'hallarn@cbc.ca
staff@taiga-communications.com
publisher@grassrootsnews.mb.ca
publisher@thundervoice.ca
theverdict@ctv.ca
stymofichuk@ctv.ca
cblatchford@globeandmail.com
pcheney@globeandmail.com
jibbitson@globeandmail.com
gmason@globeandmail.com
mwente@globeandmail.com
dwalton@globeandmail.com
dmartin@nationalpost.com
pgoodspeed@nationalpost.com
Federal
The Prime Minister (Harper.S@parl.gc.ca)
Minister of Indian And Northern Affairs Canada (Strahl.C@parl.gc.ca)
Minister of Finance (Flaherty.J@parl.gc.ca)
President, Treasury Board of Canada (Toews.V@parl.gc.ca)
Minister of Justice (Nicholson.R@parl.gc.ca)
Rod Bruinooge (Bruinooge.R@parl.gc.ca)
Stephane Dion (Dion.S@parl.gc.ca)
Raymond Simard (Simard.R@parl.gc.ca)
Jack Layton (Layton.J@parl.gc.ca)
Pat Martin (MartiPD@parl.gc.ca)
Auditor General of Canada (petitions@oag-bvg.gc.ca)
Canadian Taxpayers Federation - National (jwilliamson@taxpayer.com)
Provincial
Premier, Manitoba (premier@leg.gov.mb.ca)
Minister of Finance (minfin@leg.gov.mb.ca)
Minister of Justice (minjus@leg.gov.mb.ca)
Auditor General of Manitoba (contact@oag.mb.ca)
Canadian Taxpayers Federation - Manitoba (abatra@shawbiz.ca)
Legal Community
PublicInterest Law Centre - Winnipeg (bwilliams@pilc.mb.ca)
Lionel R. R. Chartrand - Legal Aid Manitoba (licha@legalaid.mb.ca)
abruun@campbellmarr.com
jnieder@shaw.ca
thefirm@fleurcom.on.ca
bamyot@heenan.ca
jgj@aikins.com
wonchulenko@ltgg.ca
The Lawyers Weekly (tlw@lexisnexis.ca)
admin@cba-mb.ca
media@scc-csc.gc.ca
law-droit@scc-csc.gc.ca
harvey_secter@umanitoba.ca
lawdean@osgoode.yorku.ca
cchisick@osgoode.yorku.ca
afineblit@lawsociety.mb.ca
mtrachtenberg@ptlaw.mb.ca
lcoulombe@ptlaw.mb.ca

Welcome home!

Riel Sash Going Home
The Winnipeg Sun
January 25, 2008
Page 21
The Canadian Press

DAWSON CREEK - There were mixed feelings when the general manager of Winnipeg's Louis Riel Institute arrived here to pick up the Metis sash previously owned by Riel.

On one hand, the historical artifact will be taken from Dawson Creek and the home where it resided for decades.

On the other, the important piece of Canadian history will be cared for in a place of honour, currently being built at the institute.

Little relieved

Rose Aasterveit, a North Eastern Metis Association board member and lifelong proponent of Metis culture, was glad to see the sash going to the institute.

Marian Hackworth, who until Tuesday retained possession of the sash, agreed the item was better left to the institute, and even seemed a little relieved to have it off her hands.

On February 18, Manitoba will celebrate its first ever Louis Riel Day in honour of the sash's former owner.

Hackworth and Aasterveit are being flown there to take part in the day's festivities and join in on a sash passing ceremony.

The Riel sash will then be left at the St. Boniface Museum.

Government funders, how does this minimum $250/hour taxpayer expenditure help our Manitoba Metis citizens?

WITHOUT PREJUDICE

As a Winnipeg lawyer laughingly remarked upon seeing the original Statement of Claim in 2005 (subsequently revised several times), "This looks like Murray's retirement project."

POSNER & TRACHTENBERG
Barristers, Solicitors & Notaries Public
710-491 Portage Avenue
Winnipeg, MB R3B 2E4
Fax: (204) 944-8878

Gerald S. Posner
Manitoba & Ontario Bars

Murray N. Trachtenberg, B.A., LL.B.
Direct Line: (204) 940-9602
E-mail: mtrachtenberg@ptlaw.mb.ca

January 23, 2008

Mr. Clare L. Pieuk
2 - 371 Des Meurons Street
Winnipeg, Manitoba R2H 2N6

Dear Mr. Pieuk:

Re: MMF et al vs. Clare L. Pieuk et al
Queen's Bench File No. CI 05-01-41955

MMF will be providing an amended affidavit of documents in the future. At this time, I am providing you with a revised Schedule A and Schedule B which will form part of that affidavit. The following additional documents have been added to Schedule A:

1(a), 55(a), 110(a), 114(a), 119, 120 and 121.

Yours truly,
MURRAY N. TRACHTENBERG
MNT/lec
Encs.

SCHEDULE A

Documents in the Corporations' possession, control or power that they do not object to producing for inspection.

1. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated June 21, 2003 (6 pages);

1 (a) Administrative Panel Decision dated June 5, 2001;

2. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated September 15, 2003 (22 pages);

3. Articles from Grassroots News dated October 22, 2003 (3 pages);

4. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated November 11, 2003 (26 pages);

5. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated November 12, 2003 (4 pages);

6. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated November 21, 2003 (5 pages);

7. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com November 25, 2003 (24 pages);

8. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated January 21, 2004 (2 pages);

9. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated January 22, 2004 (14 pages);

10. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated January 28, 2004 (2 pages);

11. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated January 28, 2004 (3 pages);

12. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated January 28, 2004 (3 pages);

13. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated January 30, 2004 (5 pages);

14. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated January 30, 2004 (7 pages);

15. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated February 5, 2004 (3 pages);

16. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated February 5, 2004 (11 pages);

17. Posting from Manitoba Metis news dated February 5, 2004 (3 pages);

18. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated February 6, 2004 (4 pages);

19. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated February 6, 2004 (2 pages);

20. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated February 6, 2004 (1 page);

21. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated February 7, 2004 (2 pages);

22. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated February 9, 2004 (1 page);

23. Copy of letter from Murray Trachtenberg to Lionel Chartrand dated February 9, 2004 (2 pages);

24. Copy of letter from Murray Trachtenberg to Terry Belhumeur dated February 9, 2004 (2 pages);

25. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated February 10, 2004 (2 pages);

26. Posting from metisvoices.com dated February 11, 2004 (6 pages);

26 (a) Copy of letter from Murray Trachtenberg to Petition Co-ordinator in Duck Bay, Winnipegosis, Camperville and Skownan, Manitoba dated February 24, 2004 (2 pages);

27. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated March 3, 2004 (1 page);

27 (a) Posting from metisvoices.com dated March 3, 2004 (1 page);

27 (b) Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated March 3, 2004 (1 page);

28. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated April 10, 2005 (2 pages);

29. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated April 13, 2005 (2 pages);

30. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated April 15, 2005 (1 page);

31. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated April 15, 2005 (2 pages);

32. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated April 16, 2005 (3 pages);

33. Copy of email from Murray Trachtenberg to metis_mom@hotmail.com dated April 18, 2005 with attached copy of posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated April 16, 2005 (4 pages);

34. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated April 18, 2005 (2 pages);

35. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated April 25, 2005 (4 pages);

36. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated April 26, 2005 (3 pages);

37. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated May 5, 2005 (1 page);

38. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated May 16, 2005 (2 pages);

39. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated June 17, 2005 (2 pages);

40. Copy of fax from MMF dated June 23, 2005 with attached posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated May 6, 2005 (3 pages);

41. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated July 1, 2005 (2 pages);

42. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated July 25, 2005 (2 pages);

43. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated July 26, 2005 (1 page);

43 (a) Posting from Manitoba Metis News dated July 28, 2005 (1 page);

44. Copy of fax from Mr. Al Brolly to Murray Trachtenberg dated July 29, 2005 (2 pages);

45. Letter from Jeffrey J. Niederhoffer to Murray Trachtenberg dated July 29, 2005 and enclosures (56 pages);

46. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated July 30, 2005 (5 pages);

47. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated July 30, 2005 (5 pages);

48. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated July 30, 2005 (5 pages);

49. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated August 5, 2005 (1 page);

50. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated August 11, 2005 (1 page);

51. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated August 15, 2005 (3 pages);

52. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated August 15, 2005 (2 pages);

53. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated August 15, 2005 (3 pages);

54. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated August 15, 2005 (2 pages);

55. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated August 17, 2005 (6 pages);

55 (a) Copy of email from Clare Pieuk to publisher Grassroots News;

56. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated August 20, 2005 (2 pages);

57. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated August 26, 2005 (2 pages);

58. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated August 26, 2005 (2 pages);

59. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated August 29, 2005 (32 pages);

60. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated August 29, 2005 (2 pages);

61. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated August 30, 2005 (3 pages);

62. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated August 31, 2005 (2 pages);

63. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated August 31, 2005 (2 pages);

64. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated September 6, 2005 (2 pages);

65. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated September 9, 2005 (2 pages);

66. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated September 13, 2005 (4 pages);

67. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated September 14, 2005 (2 pages);

68. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated September 19, 2005 (7 pages);

69. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated September 23, 2005 (3 pages);

70. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated October 15, 2005 (7 pages);

71. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated October 17, 2005 (1 page);

72. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated October 24, 2005 (2 pages);

73. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated November 11, 2005 (4 pages);

74. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated November 15, 2005 (3 pages);

75. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated November 15, 2005 (2 pages);

76. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated November 16, 2005 (2 pages);

77. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated November 28, 2005 (3 pages);

78. Posting from jeffreyniederhoffer.blogspot.com dated November 30, 2005 (3 pages);

79. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated November 30, 2005 (3 pages);

80. Posting from freedominion.ca dated November 30, 2005 (4 pages);

81. Posting from pressbox.co.uk dated November 30, 2005 (2 pages);

81 (a) Copy of letter from Murray Trachtenberg to Jeffrey J. Niederhoffer - Niederhoffer Law Firm dated December 1, 2005 with attached copy of Press Release dated November 30, 2005 (4 pages);

82. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated December 7, 2005 (3 pages);

83. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated December 7, 2005 (3 pages);

84. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated December 8, 2005 (2 pages);

85. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated December 13, 2005 (3 pages);

86. Posting from pressbox.co.uk dated December 14, 2005 (2 pages);

87. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated December 23, 2005 (5 pages);

88. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated January 5, 2006 (4 pages);

89. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated January 5, 2006 (4 pages);

90. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated January 17, 2006 (4 pages);

91. Posting from Jeffreyniederhoffer.blogspot.com dated January 19, 2006 (3 pages);

92. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated January 19, 2006 (2 pages);

93. Article from the Winnipeg Free Press dated January 19, 2006 (1 page);

94. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated January 20, 2006 (2 pages);

95. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated January 24, 2006 (1 page);

96. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated January 26, 2006 (4 pages);

97. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated January 29, 2006 (3 pages);

98. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated January 30, 2006 (2 pages);

99. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated January 31, 2006 (2 pages);

100. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated February 11, 2006 (5 pages);

101. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated February 12, 2006 (6 pages);

102. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated February 14, 2006 (6 pages);

103. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated February 15, 2006 (2 pages);

104. Posting from jeffreyniederhoffer.blogspot.com dated February 16, 2006 (2 pages);

105. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated February 16, 2006 (3 pages);

106. Posting from jeffreyniederhoffer.blogspot.com dated February 17, 2006 (3 pages);

107. Posting from derrylsanderson.blogspot.com dated February 17, 2006 (6 pages);

108. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated February 17, 2006 (3 pages);

109. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated February 21, 2006 (3 pages);

110. The Manitoba Metis Federation Board of Directors Report on the Cybersmokesignals.comLawsuit dated February 24, 2006 (13 pages)

109 (b) Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated March 24, 2006 (3 pages);

109 (c) Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated March 26, 2006 (3 pages);

109 (d) Letter from Clare L. Pieuk to Murray Trachtenberg dated May 1, 2006 (1 page);

109 (e) Posting from cybersmokeblog.blogspot.com dated May 8, 2006 (1 page);

109 (f) Email from Terry Belhumeur to Murray Trachtenberg dated May 9, 2006 (1 page);

109 (g) Posting from cybersmokeblog.blogspot.com dated May 9, 2006 (1 page);

109 (h) Posting from cybersmokeblog.blogspot.com dated May 13, 2006 (1 page);

109 (i) Posting from cybersmokeblog.blogspot.com dated May 14, 2006 (1 page);

109 (j) Posting from cybersmokeblog.blogspot.com dated May 16, 2006 (5 pages);

109 (k) Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated May 16, 2006 (3 pages);

109 (l) Posting from cybersmokeblog.blogspot.com dated May 29, 2006 (2 pages);

110. Letter from Christian Asselin, Office of the Auditor General of Canada to Murray Trachtenberg dated July 7, 2006 enclosing various documents bundled and labelled as:

MMF Binder Part I

MMF Binder Part II

MMF Binder Part III

Orange folder entitled Pieuk, Clare (Rec'd @ July 4/05) Chartrand Insurance

Orange folder entitled Clare Pieuk - Folder #2 (Copies @ June 10/05)

Yellow folder entitled "Red Binder" (re Clare Pieuk; copies @ June 10/05)

Orange folder entitled MMF @ June 21/05 Copies

Orange folder entitled Clare Pieuk - Folder #1 (Copies @ June 10/05)

110 (a) Posting on cybersmokesignals.com dated August 3, 2006 (1 page);

111. Letter to MMF Inc. Persident David Chartrand signed by Vanessa Everton dated November 9, 2006;

112. Posting from cybersmokeblog.blogspot.com dated May 13, 2007 (2 pages);

113. Posting from cybersmokesignals.com dated May 13, 2007 (7 pages);

114. Letter from Gordon E. Hannon - Manitoba Justice to Murray Trachtenberg dated June 21, 2007 and enclosures;

114 (a) Posting from cybersmokeblog.blogspot.com dated September 5, 2007 (9 pages);

115. Pleadings;

116. Routine correspondence with defendants;

117. Routine correspondence between counsel;

118. Box of documents containing bundles of documents produced by Mr. Pieuk in May 2006;

119. Register.com Whois Results search for cybersmokesignals.com;

120. Register.com Whois Results search for cybersmokesignalscanada.com;

121. Register.com Whois Results search for cybersmokesignalsinternational.com;

SCHEDULE B

Documents that are or were in the Corporation's possession, control or power they object to producing on the grounds of privilege.

A. Lawyer and client communications

The following groups of documents are in themselves communications between client and lawyer made with a view to receiving advice with respect to the matters at issue in the action or instructing counsel in this action:

1. Correspondence between Posner & Trachtenberg and the plaintiff Manitoba Metis Federation Inc. and individual plaintiffs.

2. Various memoranda prepared by counsel relative to discussions with the plaintiffs.

B. Lawyers' work product or brief

The following groups of document or documents were created or obtained by Posner & Trachtenberg to enable them to act for the plaintiffs in this action:

1. File notes of case law or issues of fact or law to consider in this matter.

2. File notes prepared by counsel relating to discussions with third parties.

3. Correspondence between Posner & Trachtenberg and the Office of the Auditor General of Canada.

4. Correspondence between Posner & Trachtenberg and Manitoba Justice.

5. Correspondence between counsel on a "without prejudice" basis.

6. Without prejudice letter from T. Belhumeur received May 4, 200

Distribution List

bkaternick@mnbc.ca

tonyb@metisnation.org

mdevlin@metis.org

Media

cadler@cjob.com

boris.hrybinsky@freepress.mb.ca

david.kuxhaus@freepress.mb.ca

dan.lett@freepress.mb.ca

carol.sanders@freepress.mb.ca

colleen.simard@freepress.mb.ca

gordon.sinclair@freepress.mb.ca

louise_charette@cbc.ca

terry_macleod@cbc.ca

brendan_o'hallarn@cbc.ca

staff@taiga-communications.com

publisher@grassrootsnews.mb.ca

publisher@thundervoice.ca

theverdict@ctv.ca

stymofichuk@ctv.ca

cblatchford@globeandmail.com

pcheney@globeandmail.com

jibbitson@globeandmail.com

gmason@globeandmail.com

mwente@globeandmail.com

dwalton@globeandmail.com

dmartin@nationalpost.com

pgoodspeed@nationalpost.com

Federal

The Prime Minister (Harper.S@parl.gc.ca)

Minister of Indian And Northern Affairs Canada (Strahl.C@parl.gc.ca)

Minister of Finance (Flaherty.J@parl.gc.ca)

President, Treasury Board of Canada (Toews.V@parl.gc.ca)

Minister of Justice (Nicholson.R@parl.gc.ca)

Rod Bruinooge (Bruinooge.R@parl.gc.ca)

Stephane Dion (Dion.S@parl.gc.ca)

Raymond Simard (Simard.R@parl.gc.ca)

Jack Layton (Layton.J@parl.gc.ca)

Pat Martin (MartiPD@parl.gc.ca)

Auditor General of Canada (petitions@oag-bvg.gc.ca)

Canadian Taxpayers Federation - National (jwilliamson@taxpayer.com)

Provincial

Premier, Manitoba (premier@leg.gov.mb.ca)

Minister of Finance (minfin@leg.gov.mb.ca)

Minister of Justice (minjus@leg.gov.mb.ca)

Auditor General of Manitoba (contact@oag.mb.ca)

Canadian Taxpayers Federation - Manitoba (abatra@shawbiz.ca)

Legal Community

PublicInterest Law Centre - Winnipeg (bwilliams@pilc.mb.ca)

Lionel R. R. Chartrand - Legal Aid Manitoba (licha@legalaid.mb.ca)

abruun@campbellmarr.com

jnieder@shaw.ca

thefirm@fleurcom.on.ca

bamyot@heenan.ca

jgj@aikins.com

wonchulenko@ltgg.ca

The Lawyers Weekly (tlw@lexisnexis.ca)

admin@cba-mb.ca

media@scc-csc.gc.ca

law-droit@scc-csc.gc.ca

harvey_secter@umanitoba.ca

lawdean@osgoode.yorku.ca

cchisick@osgoode.yorku.ca

afineblit@lawsociety.mb.ca

mtrachtenberg@ptlaw.mb.ca

lcoulombe@ptlaw.mb.ca

Motivational poster of the day!

You can only die once!

Cellular phones, don't you just love them!

THE OTHER STALL!












This could happen to you!

I was barely sitting down when I heard a voice from the other stall saying: "Hi, how are you?"

I'm not the type to start a conversation in the restroom but I don't know what got into me, so I answered, somewhat embarrassed, "Doin' just fine!"

And the other person says, "So what are you up to?"

What kind of question is that? At that point, I'm thinking this is too bizarre so I say, "Uhhh, I'm like you, just traveling!

By now I am just trying to get out as fast as I can when I hear another question. "Can I come over?"

Ok, this question is too weird for me but I figured I could just be polite and end the conversation. I tell them, "No...I'm a little busy right now!"

Then I hear the person say nervously... "Listen, I'll have to call you back. There's an idiot in the other stall who keeps answering all my questions."

Legal bullying 101 MMF style!

Tansi/Good Day Readers:

Here's some background you'll need so Counselor Trachtenberg's letter (below) makes sense:

(1) In late January, 2004 www.CyberSmokeSignals.com posted a petition calling for the Manitoba Metis Federation to reform its archaic election procedures. Even though the organization is taxpayer funded, to this day there is no requirement in the MMF's constitution or bylaws requiring candidates to disclose the amount expensed campaigning or the source of these funds. Nor are there spending guidelines/limits

(2) The petition was written by Winnipeg Metis "lawyer" Lionel R. R. Chartrand who had publicly agreed to serve pro bono as CSS.com's General Legal Counsel. It was posted with his knowledge and approval. At no time did he request it be removed or revised until several months after MMF attorney Murray Trachtenberg issued a defamation warning letter (February 9, 2004). By that time it was no longer displayed on the main page having been stored in an archive

(3) Lionel R. R. Chartrand has not been named a Co-Defendant in the action?

(4) In the March 26, 2003 election, the only challenger for the Presidency was Manitoba's former Lieutenant Governor, and Canada's first Metis to hold such a position, The Honourable W. Yvon Dumont who lost by 20 votes after a recount

(5) A court challenge ensued and in January, 2004 Justice Perry Schulman, Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench ruled another election be held for the position of President. Prior to handing down his decision, David Chartrand publicly stated if a new election were ordered, the MMF would require another $100,000 from the federal and provincial governments to revise election bylaws and update voters lists

(6) After each election, the Chief Electoral Officer is required to prepare a written post-mortem report for the Provincial Board of Directors which is never made public. However, the court case file showed every one since David Chartrand became President (1997) were critical of:

(i) Inaccurate voters lists
(ii) Flawed election bylaws

In fact, it got so bad one CEO (retired Manitoba Provincial Court Judge Alvin Hamilton) became frustrated to the point of threatening not to serve as Chief Electoral Officer unless the changes he'd been recommending were implemented

(7) In June, 2004 the Manitoba Court of Appeal ruled against Mr. Dumont who incurred his own legal expenses. Mr. David Chartrand's were paid by the Manitoba Metis Federation using taxpayer dollars

(8) Metis mom, contrary to Counselor Trachtenberg's suggestion did indeed exist. She is Vanessa Everton who signed a letter to President Chartrand (2007) removing her as a Co-Defendant. Although we have a copy, Queen's Bench Rules prevent us from publishing it on the internet otherwise we would

The petition instructions called for those collecting signatures to send their data sheets to one of four post office boxes. Here's the letter Counselor Trachtenberg sent not knowing who owned them. They were senior, exemplary Manitoba Metis citizens whose names are widely recognized and highly respected within their communities. In fact, one was a Elder. Now that's real class sending them a letter like this isn't it?

Sincerely,
Clare L. Pieuk
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
POSNER & TRACHTENBERG
Barristers, Solicitors & Notaries Public
710-491 Portage Avenue
Winnipeg, MB R3B 2E4
Fax: (204) 944-8878

Gerald S. Posner
Manitoba & Ontario Bars

Murray N. Trachtenberg, B.A., LL.B.
Direct line: (204) 940-9602
e-mail: mtrachtenberg@ptlaw.mb.ca
_____________________________________________
February 24, 2004

Petition Co-ordinator
Post Office Box 72
Duck Bay, Manitoba
R0K 0N0

Petition Co-ordinator
Post Office Box 128
Camperville, Manitoba
R0L 0J0

Petition Co-ordinator
Post Office Box 523
Winnipegosis, Manitoba
R0L 2G0

Petition Co-ordinator
Post Office Box 130
Skownan, Manitoba
ROL 1Y0

Dear Sir/Madam:

Re: Cybersmokesignals.com
Election Petition
My File No. 2003-20

I am the lawyer for the Manitoba Metis Federation.

This post office box was listed in a message dated February 6, 2004 posted on the website for cybersmokesignals.com. The message suggests that individuals who are signing an election funding petition posted on that website should forward those petitions to your post office box.

The petition contains statements which are untrue and defamatory of the Board of Directors of the MMF. These include the following:

"AND WHEREAS the Manitoba Metis Federation has been needlessly spending vast amounts of money for inappropriate travel and accommodation for David Chartrand, as well as, some Board Members.

AND WHEREAS David Chartrand has already spent tens of thousands of dollars on pre-election campaigning in anticipation of the court order.

AND WHEREAS very large sums of money intended for appropriate purposes such as consulting with members on hunting and harvesting issues have already been spent by David Chartrand on campaigning.

AND WHEREAS the Federation's Board has been illegally authorizing campaign spending for David Chartrand and unlawfully spending your public monies to pay his election court challenge legal fees.

AND WHEREAS unnecessary Board travel had been authorized for public relations purposes to one candidate only, namely David Chartrand.

AND WHEREAS the Metis have no confidence that any extra funding provided to the Federation will be spent in a legal or appropriate manner but rather believe all principles of fair play will be set aside by the Board of Drirectors approving campaign and public relations expenses for David Chartrand only.

AND WHEREAS the Metis believe that any extra money provided to the MMF will be used in attempts to hinder and suppress the rights of the other candidates for the presidential election rather than providing them with an equal opportunity."

I have already written to Mr. Terry Belhumeur who is the registered domain holder for cybersmokesignals.com and advised him that a lawsuit will be commenced against him, Clare L. Pieuk, and the individual identified as "Metis mom" on the website (if, in fact, such an individual does exist.

I am writing to you to advise you that any distribution of defamatory material (such as the election funding petition) by you to any other individual will result in you being liable to pay damages to the Board of Directors and the MMF.

In the event that you disbribute any copy of the election funding petition thereby publishing the defamatory statements, a lawsuit will be commenced against you as well.

GOVERN YOURSELF ACCORDINGLY!

Yours truly,
MURRAY N. TRACHTENBERG
MNT/lec

Distribution List
bkaternick@mnbc.ca
tonyb@metisnation.org
mdevlin@metis.org
Media
cadler@cjob.com
boris.hrybinsky@freepress.mb.ca
david.kuxhaus@freepress.mb.ca
dan.lett@freepress.mb.ca
carol.sanders@freepress.mb.ca
colleen.simard@freepress.mb.ca
gordon.sinclair@freepress.mb.ca
louise_charette@cbc.ca
terry_macleod@cbc.ca
brendan_o'hallarn@cbc.ca
staff@taiga-communications.com
publisher@grassrootsnews.mb.ca
publisher@thundervoice.ca
theverdict@ctv.ca
stymofichuk@ctv.ca
cblatchford@globeandmail.com
pcheney@globeandmail.com
jibbitson@globeandmail.com
gmason@globeandmail.com
mwente@globeandmail.com
dwalton@globeandmail.com
dmartin@nationalpost.com
pgoodspeed@nationalpost.com
Federal
The Prime Minister (Harper.S@parl.gc.ca)
Minister of Indian And Northern Affairs Canada (Strahl.C@parl.gc.ca)
Minister of Finance (Flaherty.J@parl.gc.ca)
President, Treasury Board of Canada (Toews.V@parl.gc.ca)
Minister of Justice (Nicholson.R@parl.gc.ca)
Rod Bruinooge (Bruinooge.R@parl.gc.ca)
Stephane Dion (Dion.S@parl.gc.ca)
Raymond Simard (Simard.R@parl.gc.ca)
Jack Layton (Layton.J@parl.gc.ca)
Pat Martin (MartiPD@parl.gc.ca)
Auditor General of Canada (petitions@oag-bvg.gc.ca)
Canadian Taxpayers Federation - National (jwilliamson@taxpayer.com)
Provincial
Premier, Manitoba (premier@leg.gov.mb.ca)
Minister of Finance (minfin@leg.gov.mb.ca)
Minister of Justice (minjus@leg.gov.mb.ca)
Auditor General of Manitoba (contact@oag.mb.ca)
Canadian Taxpayers Federation - Manitoba (abatra@shawbiz.ca)
Legal Community
PublicInterest Law Centre - Winnipeg (bwilliams@pilc.mb.ca)
Lionel R. R. Chartrand - Legal Aid Manitoba (licha@legalaid.mb.ca)
abruun@campbellmarr.com
jnieder@shaw.ca
thefirm@fleurcom.on.ca
bamyot@heenan.ca
jgj@aikins.com
wonchulenko@ltgg.ca
The Lawyers Weekly (tlw@lexisnexis.ca)
admin@cba-mb.ca
media@scc-csc.gc.ca
law-droit@scc-csc.gc.ca
harvey_secter@umanitoba.ca
lawdean@osgoode.yorku.ca
cchisick@osgoode.yorku.ca
afineblit@lawsociety.mb.ca
mtrachtenberg@ptlaw.mb.ca
lcoulombe@ptlaw.mb.ca
Websites
www.free-press-release.com
www.pressbox.co.uk
www.press-base.com
www.freepressreleasewire.co.uk

Know your rights!

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post, "Notice of Discontinuance!"

I bet Trachtenberg wouldn't let him (Darrel Deslauriers)! Richard Delaronde still talks about how this lawyer would always try to bully him around.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Anonymous:

Thank you for writing. Any plaintiff has the right to withdraw from a lawsuit. A lawyer who refused to issue a Notice of Discontinuance for a client would be committing an unspeakable breach of professional conduct - that's grounds for disbarment. Murray Trachenberg is working for Darrel Deslauriers not the other way around.

Sincerely,
Clare L. Pieuk

Notice of Discontinuance!

Dear Mr. Deslauriers:

The following was posted by you today on www.derrylsanderson.blogspot.com:

Dear Derryl,

It was brought to my attention this weekend Clare Pieuk (CyberSmokeBlog) has been writing about me and using your blog for information.

First, I would like to thank him for putting my story out there. Second, I wish to inform him I requested around a year or so ago to be removed from this lawsuit. My reasoning is this, after listening to some MMF staff and watching Elbert Chartrand feed false information to Clare (some about me) and the delay with this lawsuit I believe his site is being used to divert David and his group's problems on to other people. I also believe all information he receives is being fed to him.

Therefore I wish to make it public I am no longer in favour of this lawsuit and will not be held reponsible for any actions. Because I don't know this Clare or go on his site I wish to make this statement here, if he wishes to have his lawyer contact me I'm sure he knows how.
10:44 AM

Mr. Deslauriers, if what you say it true, something is terribly, terribly wrong. Any plaintiff in a lawsuit has the right to request their name be removed. Approximately a year ago, who did you ask and what did they say?

You need only contact your MMF attorney in this matter Murray Norman Trachtenberg and instruct him (Remember, you are the client!) you would like to sign a Notice of Discontinuance. He must compy. Counselor Trachtenberg will then send me a copy for my signature which, of course, I'd agree. Once that is done you are no longer a plaintiff. You may recall that's what Bonnie McIntyre and Richard Delaronde did during the Summer of 2006.

Should Mr. Trachtenberg refuse (He must comply!), you would have extremely strong grounds for filing a very serious complaint against him with the Manitoba Law Society. In fact, if I were to become aware he denied your request I too would officially complain (My third!) in writing to the MLS. Such action would constitute yet another abuse of process by Counselor Tracchtenberg.

As for Elbert Chartrand and other MMF staff's possible shenanigans, if they contact a Blog using "anonymous" or a pseudonym, there is no way to identify them.

Sincerely,
Clare L. Pieuk

Bye, bye for you Darrel!

Tansi/Good Day Folks:

Below is a copy of Darrel Deslauriers termination letter as a Manitoba Metis Federation Board of Director posted on www.derrylsanderson.blogspot.com. Although signed by President Chartrand, did he write it? If not, who?

Unfortunately, the font size can't be expand to make it legible.

Sincerely,
Clare L. Pieuk
---------------------------------------------------------------------------