Well, it looks like both Jason Bowman and Kevin Annett’s credibility is down for the count. Both were on Global F.A.C.T. radio today and completely discredited themselves. I’m not sure who went down harder, but I’ll put my money on Annett. Regardless, both hung themselves rather spectacularly…
Annett was on the show for about 45 minutes. He gave his usual stories about the residential schools, and claimed credit for Harper’s public apology to residential school survivors. Of course, Annett isn’t responsible for that- it happened because of the hard work and bravery of residential school survivors like Willie Blackwater (a man who has publicly denounced Annett.) But, that didn’t stop Kevin from stealing his glory- it is blatant actions like this that have turned so many people off of his work.
Kevin was asked about the controversy about the bones from the Six Nations reserve. Each time he has talked about them his story has changed- there are so many variations that it is hard to keep up. This time Annett said that he didn’t do a DNA test on the bones because it costs 1000’s of dollars. That’s a joke really, I told Annett back in April that a DNA test could be completed for $450 in 7 days (or your money back.)
The big surprise today was when Annett said that he had sent some of the bones to the Smithsonian Institute! Whoever it was must have been totally incompetent (if this actually happened) because Annett’s story is that his contact there said he couldn’t do a DNA test because the bones weren’t large enough. The reality is (as the lab I spoke with confirmed) all you need is a scraping of the bone to do a DNA test.
Kevin, if you are telling us the truth, will you share your contact at the Smithsonian with us? (I’ll be calling them tomorrow to see if they can confirm)
Then the host, Tony Boutros, started to ask Annett some hard questions. He asked him about how the Circle of Justice denounced Kevin for stealing their personal stories and refusing to return their evidence. You could hear Annett getting more uncomfortable as each new question was asked- if you listen closely you may be able to hear the sweat dripping from his brow.
Kevin told him that there were “four people of the twenty” at the Circle of Justice who spoke out about him. Boutros corrected him though, there were actually nine people who signed the statement. By this point Kevin sounded like he was in a full panic. Next the show went into a short break- and, according to Boutros, Annett hung-up right after.
After the break, Tony made several attempts to call Annett back. But, it seems that Kevin wasn’t willing to answer the phone. This is typical of his behaviour, as soon as someone ask’s him challenging questions he runs away with his tail between his legs. It is doubtful Kevin could have done anything more effective to discredit himself than to go run away like he did. Even Bowman laughed at this- he said it he was very familiar with Annett’s answering machine!
After today’s performance, it is quite clear that Kevin has exposed himself as the dishonest man that he is…
I came onto the show and told a bit of my story. Then, right after I finished speaking, I was pleasantly surprised to hear that Annett’s old partner Jason “Reacharound” Bowman came onto the line! And what do you know, Jason jumped right into the attack and called me a liar- only, he didn’t give a single piece of evidence to back his claims. This is typical of a con-artist.
So, I asked Bowman two simple questions. The first question was asking him why he claimed that he was filing an ‘ex-parte’ court case and the accused were not allowed to look at the evidence- but, the court confirmed (on video) that this was not possible, so what’s the explanation? And, the second question was to ask him why he claimed he filed a court case but the court said that no case was filed.
Bowman brushed-past my story about the ‘ex-parte’ case and didn’t answer it. Then, he claimed that he never said that he filed a court case- he said, “All I was doing was to file a motion, but we were on our way to filing a case.”
This is where he proved himself to be a clown- because, as anyone who understands the basics of how the court system works understands that Bowman got the chicken before the egg. The reality is that motions cannot be filed until a case has been filed. Filing a motion without having filed a case would be the equivalent of a single person filing for a wedding license before they had found themselves a partner.
So, there you have it- two weasels exposed in one show! Both Annett & Bowman totally discredited themselves today. Annett killed his reputation by running away in order to avoid hard questions. And, Bowman discredited himself by getting caught, again, in his lie about his phantom court case.
The host has invited them both to come back to his show next weekend. I have agreed, as has Heather Martin (who also appeared on the show today. The big question is will Bowman & Annett be brave to come answer some more hard questions? Time will tell- until then, here’s a recording of today’s con-artist busting action…
And very interesting day was had by all.
That it was. BTW, you made some excellent comments today Heather- your presence on the show helped keep it very balanced…
I left comments on the Blogspot site for that Crystal Light Kids Radio that contained links to some of your posts on Kevin Annett. Those comments were deleted shortly after. Looks like Kevin has found an ally. I would expect him to stick to kids radio shows from now on lol.
I’m beginning to think that Chrystal Light is a con in itself. After all, all of the usual suspects are there- Annett, Doreen Agostino & Alfred Webre for example. It seems to me that they have a kid asking some pre-assigned questions and the rest of the operation is run by some (sick) adults.
I had a chance to hear most of the show as there were a few short interuptions as a result of glitches in the feed.
I could not help but try to contain my laughter as Bowman tried just about means possible to back peddle from his July News conference he held here in Toronto back then when he outright proclaimed that he filed court documents .
The ability this has to talk a lot and say nothing is unsurpassed. I have never heard anyone flap their lips as he did and actually say nothing useful. All he was saying doing was talking in circles , the trademark of a good con artist, talk a lot, say nothing and attempt to try and throw people off.
You and I were both at Bowman’s “press conference” and both heard him say he had filed in court, and that he had a hearing on the 9th of July. It is beyond my imagination that Bowman can think he can get out of this one- seems he is just getting desperate.
At least he didn’t ask any of us for a reacharound this time!
Another good tactic of the con artist is to constantly talk about what you are going to do. Instead of what you are doing or have done. So much is in the future. Makes it hard to argue with them. Kevin Annett has been on this warpath for the better part of a decade. What exactly has he accomplished?
Another good question would be who has given his “Court” its authority? Furthermore, if they ever actually convict someone then who will enforce the conviction? Without enforcement laws and courts are meaningless. What police and or military force will ensure his convictions are enforced?
These are all good questions. Somehow I doubt Annett would be willing to answer them. lol
Check the posted from August 20th on Crystal Light’s facebook page. Someone tried to warn her about Annett and she is now defending him. Among other things Crystal says “Kevin Annett has not done one thing bad the only thing he is trying to do is tell the truth.”
And I have looked at some of the other people posting on there. They all fit into the Doreen Agostino, Alfred Webre, Art Bell galactic conspiricy nut group. Plus the name of this girl, Crystal light. All leads me to beleive her family is part of that cult.
Yeah, I think you are right. It looks a lot like a cult to me…
Bowman claims that Annett can still call himself a reverend because he received a divinity degree. No. That degree entitles you to put the appropriate letters after your name depending on the degree (eg B.Div, M.Div or D.Div) and, if it was a doctorate, he could all himself Dr but you can only call yourself Reverend if you’re an ordained minister. If you’ve been defrocked then you’re no longer a reverend. Now, of course, there’s no central authority in Canada that regulates this so there’s nothing really stopping anyone from forming their own religion and calling themselves a reverend or being ordained by a mail order church like the Universal Life Church but Annett doesn’t claim to have done that. Bowman btw said something interesting about Harvard – he admitted not being a Harvard graduate but said that he attended courses via the “Department of Extension”. In other words, he took a few correspondence courses.
You’ve got it right about the divinity degree- and beat me to the punch on that one. I’m writing an open letter to Bowman, and that will be a part of it. Good call.
I caught onto the “department of extension” part yesterday- if it wasn’t for the crash on Blogtalk last night I would have called him on it- unfortunately, he never came back.
I have a couple of questions for Bowman.
1. Is it true that you have two years formal post secondary education? And the year 1993-1994 at U of T you state “pre-law” but there is no such program at U of T?
2. What program were you actually in at Harvard in 1995 – 1996 ? (it wasn’t law school) How many months did you attend?
3. Why didn’t you show up at your own alleged farm debt “prosecution” in May 2008? Was it because the lender promised to pursue malicious prosecution against you? Did the fact that you were a deadbeat borrower owing thousands of dollars to those you attempted to prosecute have anything to do with it?
Enquiring minds want to know
Foxtrot, you are correct. Even in Law, a person cannot legally call himself a lawyer until he or she has passed the bar Exam and has been accepted to same. Also, if Bowman DID go to Harvard as he claims he did, he would still have to take at least some law courses here in a Canadian University to get Canadian accreditation as USA law differs from Canadian Law. In fact, in order to practice law in Canada, and you studied law at say UBC and passed the BC bar exam and was called to the Bar there, you would still have to be certified to practice law in , as one example, Ontario, if you move to Ontario from BC.
If Jason Bowman studied law at Harvard, and further, if he passed, he would not have to hunt for clients and take on these type of cases. He would be swamped with cases , be a full partner in a presitgous legal firm .
Jason here is a question you/ What are the three ways one can swear under an oath in court?
And jason, here is another question for you. If you went to law school you no doubt know the history behind the legal robes. Question for 75% of your final grade. The legal robes have a flap in the back that seems to appear as simply extra material. What is the significance of this flap historically ?