Open Letter To Jason Bowman (feat. Kevin Annett)

Oh shit, I’m busted!

cc: Law Society of Upper Canada
cc: Ontario RCMP
cc: Kevin Annett


I’d never heard of you until you hooked-up with Kevin Annett- neither had anyone I know. That said, some people who have been following your antics have come to me since that time. Apparently, you’ve been making a fool of yourself for a while now, and you’ve caught the attention of a few others. If it wasn’t for their help, I’d never had found that angry letter from your mother that you posted online- what’s up with that? What sort of person would break confidence with their own mother like that?

Well, it turns out that it isn’t only your mother, and people on Facebook, who think you are a fool. Your brother and sister in-law seem to feel the same way. And, now, there are 100’s of people out there watching as you continue this bad behaviour. Don’t you think it is about time to stop?

We caught you red-handed on July 4th, and I called you on your bullshit that day. Yet, for some reason you decided to go on with your lies. You said that day that you were going back to the court on July the 9th. Two of us waited there all day for you, but you never showed-up. Then, when Lawrence McCurry called you to find out what happened, you said that there was never a court date. When called you on your lie you hung-up on him. What’s up with that?

I believe you are dangerously close to impersonating a lawyer. Sure, you use the phrase ‘citizen prosecutor’ – but it is my understanding that you have taken money from people and you are offering them legal services. I’m not a lawyer (nor do I play one on the Internet like you do), but I’m guessing you may be breaking the law. I will be contacting the Law Society and will ask them their opinion later today.

You’ve agreed to join a roundtable debate on Global F.A.C.T. radio on Sunday. I must say, I’d never had thought you would be so foolish to try once more. After all, you were caught in a very big lie last week, and you are at risk of being caught for many more. You have no idea what you are going up-against, there are many people researching your background and previous scams right now. I wish you the best of luck.

In order to be fair, I’m going to give you a head-start Jason- that’s the purpose of this letter. Here’s a list of reasons why I think you should stop what you are doing right now. I challenge you to defend yourself on Sunday and bring us some answers on why I am wrong on these points. I’m quite confident that I’m not- but, if I am wrong on any of these points, I apologize in-advance.

1. You were dishonest at your press release on July 4th

You said on July 4th that you had filed a ‘motion’ at the federal court in Toronto.  Then you said that you had another court date set for July 9th. The clerk of the court confirmed, on-camera, that there were no filings under your name. When called-out on this, you spoke on several radio shows and said that you had filed in the court. You also released documents that said they proved you had filed. Then, in July 9th, you didn’t show-up for the court date you said you had- despite the fact you said you were going both on July 4th, and on a radio show that weekend.

If you want to prove that you were telling the truth, come to the show on Sunday with the name of the person at the clerk of the court who you were working with. Then, other people can contact him/her and confirm that what you are telling us is the truth. If you can’t provide this information we will only be able to assume that you are lying. And, be assured, you will not be allowed to double-talk your way out of this- there is no valid excuse for you not to be open with this information.

2. You have consistently proven that you have a poor understanding of the law and court procedures

You have made a number of statements that shows you have no real understanding of the law. Yet, you are telling Bill Squire, and other people at the Six Nations that you are qualified to be handling their land claims. This is highly irresponsible Jason, land claims are the most valuable asset of indigenous people, if you screw them up, you could cost them their birthright.

a.) On July 4th you said that you were filing an ‘ex-parte’ case, and you insisted that this means that the other parties in the case are not allowed to see the documents that you filed against them. I asked you to confirm this during your ‘press conference’ and you repeated these words. You totally misstated the meaning of ex-parte Jason, your definition was not even close. I propose this is because either you are not educated in the law and unqualified to handle a legal case- or, it is because you were deliberately trying to deceive people and cover-up for the fact that your case was not on the court’s docket. Regardless, the clerk of the court had a belly laugh when I explained your definition to her.

b.) When tried to cover-up the fact you were not on the docket by saying that you filed a ‘motion’ before the court on July 4th, and not a case.  I’ve confirmed with two lawyers that it is impossible to file a motion unless a case has been filed- motions are filed upon cases, not the other way around. Regardless, either way, the court would give you a filing number, a receipt and stamped documents before they initiated any action. If you want us to believe you, I suggest you have them ready to share with us on Sunday.

c.) In the documents that you released (in a pitiful attempt to convince people you had actually filed with the court) you didn’t call for an action and/or  resolution. Both lawyers I’ve consulted with laughed out-loud when they saw this was missing. This is such a fundamental part of a court filing that, to miss adding it, is the height of incompetence.

d.) There was another glaring omission in these documents, you didn’t provide any material facts to support your case. This is an essential part of any filing- without having material facts, your case would be immediately thrown out of any and all courts. Yet, you said in your press interview that the court enthusiastically supported your case. I don’t believe what you said, and I propose that the lack of having these facts in your documents is proof of that.

e.) You stated that the judge and the clerk of the court were giving you advice on how to proceed in your case. The problem is that no judge, nor any court clerk, would possibly offer you advice on how to proceed with a case. Legal advice comes from lawyers- courts don’t give advice on how to proceed because that would affect their ability to be impartial. The only thing the court would have given you is a printout of the court’s rules- you had that printout on July 4th. If you understood anything about how courts operate would have been smarter than to have said this.

f.) You stated that you were operating a criminal case against the defendants, and that you were operating the trial under ‘common-law’. The problem is that criminal trials are held under ‘statute law’ (I mistakenly called this administrative law on the show last Sunday), not under ‘common law’. Anyone who is qualified to handle and indigenous land claim would know this. That you don’t know the difference between the two is proof that you are not qualified to be assisting Bill Squire with his case.

g.) You were on Doreen Agostino’s radio show with Kevin Annett when he said it was legal for people to make citizen’s arrests on priests for crimes that were committed in the past. If you understood the law, as you profess you do, you would have immediately corrected him. Because, if people took that advice, they would find themselves in deep legal trouble. It is only permissible to commit a citizen’s arrest in cases where one sees a crime being committed at the time.

 h.) You have labelled myself, and many others as ‘government agents’, and as people who are being paid to attack your work. If you understood the law, you never would have said this without having proof. I ask you to bring proof with you on Sunday, or that you publicly apologise for your accusation. Take this as official notice that if you don’t make a public apology on Sunday, I will be filing a case against you for defamation- you can bank on that.

Jason, I believe that this is enough evidence to make it very clear that you are not qualified to help anyone with any sort legal support. The reality is, with such long list of (very obvious) mistakes, you are completely inept in your understanding of the law. If you were a real lawyer, and you handled your cases like this, you would be very quickly disbarred.

Perhaps I’m wrong on some of these points. If so, please provide references and documentation to prove that. You can try to double-talk as much as you wish- but, the facts are quite clear that you don’t know what you are talking about when it comes to law. Bill Squire, and whoever else you are working with at the Six Nations should take note of this. Anyone who reads this would be highly irresponsible to let you touch their legal business. To allow you to get involved in indigenous land-claims, or claims for survivors of residential schools, would be very foolish indeed.

3.) You have left a trail of destruction in the wake of your previous legal endevours

Your Promises To Cathe Douglas

 Let’s start with the story of Cathe Douglas. She claims that you offered her your services as a ‘citizen prosecutor’ to help her with a problem she had back in Alberta. You said that you were going to file a case for her in Federal court (is this not offering legal services?). She also claims that you offered her a job as a researcher, and said that she and her son could stay at ‘your’ house.

She arrived at your house and found out there was no place to stay- so, she ended up living in a tent in your back yard (is this what your mom was writing about?). She then realized that there was no job, and you ended up asking her for money (was that in exchange for your legal services?). She said that you used her money to buy ‘beer and dope’. She also says that you used the money the Mohawks gave you to buy ‘beer and dope’.  She says that you consumed some of the ‘beer and dope’ on Mohawk sacred lands. She said that on one visit to the Mohawks you were so drunk that you nearly set the longhouse on fire (and that she has a video of that).

Cathe posted that video of your brother, Jamie, throwing a rock at her in her tent. She says that Jamie was not impressed that you had her living in a tent in the back yard. She said that this was because the person living at the front of the house was running a cocaine trafficking business from the house on Jamie’s behalf. She said that the cocaine is sold out of Jamie’s store called “The Tunnel” and the cocaine is sold to Alliston’s youth.

Will you please confirm or deny if this is true?

In the end, you didn’t deliver on your promises to Cathe. And, unfortunately for her, she ended up living in a women’s shelter because of your broken promises. What will happen to Bill Squire when you are done with him Jason?

Your “Farm Debt” Prosecution Against Henry Vanroboys

In 2008 you conducted a case against Henry Vanroboys contesting a foreclosure on a farm. Like everything else you seem to take on, you made a lot of noise about your case. You said that under the Farm Debt Mediation act he had no right to foreclose.

The problem is, according to Mr Vanroboys, you weren’t running a farm. He said that you had no machinery, and only a few pets. He was quoted saying that you were “using every thread of the law to continue living for nothing.”

When it came time for the hearing for this “prosecution” of yours, you didn’t even show-up in the courtroom. Why didn’t you show up- was this because Vanroboys promised to pursue malicious prosecution against you?

4.) Your Support For Kevin Annett

One of the things that totally confounds me about your performance on last Sunday’s show was how you continued to stand behind Kevin Annett. First, when things got hot back in July, Kevin threw you under a bus. He called you a disinformation agent (sound familiar?), he said that you were part of a plot to attack him. He left you to flounder out on your own.

But, more importantly, even Bill Squire disagrees with you on Kevin. He has stated to more than one person that there were no human bones discovered when Kevin did his dig at the ‘mush hole’. Yet, even after Kevin said that human bones were found when he spoke on Sunday, you still stood behind him.

What’s up with that Jason? Why do you disagree with Bill Squire on this point? And, why do you still stand behind and support Kevin even after he slandered you like that? Is it possible that you are still working with Kevin? If not, why?

Jason. You can say what you want about me. You can accuse me of being a ‘disinformation agent’, you can say that I torture puppies in my basement, you can accuse me of murder, you can say I’m a bad writer. None of these things are true- but it wouldn’t matter if they were- that doesn’t change any of the facts about what you have been up to. I’m not the one who called a press conference saying I was leading “one of the most important lawsuits in the history of mankind.”  I’m only someone who watched it happen and called you out on what you were saying.

The harder you try to attack me, and the less you focus on giving answers to where you have conflicted yourself or given bad information, the more obvious it will be that you are trying to deflect from having to answer the questions that a growing number of people want to hear the answers to.

I’ll give you the benefit of doubt and give you the opportunity to answer these questions openly on Sunday. But, you must have evidence to back what you are saying. For example, if you claim that I am wrong on my definition of ‘de-facto’, share with us some documentation that proves it. Or, if you want us to believe your statements about what happened in the courthouse on July 4th, show us some documents and tell us the name of who you were working with.

That said, if you can’t do any of these things, perhaps it is better that you do a ‘Kevin Annett’ and just don’t show up on Sunday. Because if you do show up and you are unable to answer, or you try to deflect, it will be blatantly obvious to the audience that you have been lying.

There is one last option you could take- it’s what most people would call the ‘honourable path’. You could come onto the show and apologise to everyone for wasting their time. You could even join us in helping to stop Kevin Annett from continuing his deception.

Who knows, you may even come out looking like a good guy…


Permanent link to this article:


Skip to comment form

    • Notfooled on August 31, 2012 at 08:33
    • Reply

    I don’t think he’s gonna answer like an honorable man, but he may however demand a reach around from you. He’s been known to favor this sport!

    1. Oh, I sure hope he doesn’t ask me for a reacharound- phone sex does nothing for me…

  1. I’d be willing to take bets that he don’t show up at all for this show, just like his bogus court cases.

    1. I’m 50/50 on this. On the one hand, he was cowardly enough to have hung-up on you when you called him. But, on the other hand, he’s dumb as a box of rocks- so, he may just call in and try to BS his way out of this mess he is in.

      Sunday will be a very interesting show…

  2. A cliffhanger if there ever was one…..Can’t wait to see what happens next.

    1. Me too. Imagine if Jason decided to stand-up and do the right thing? It would do wonders for my belief in humanity…

    • Foxtrot on August 31, 2012 at 14:54
    • Reply

    If he’s selling legal services without being a licensed lawyer or paralegal then it’s the LSUC who you should contact.

    1. I called them today- the person who I need to speak with won’t be in until Monday. This is lucky for Bowman. And, I’ll make him a deal- if he shows up and does the right thing, I won’t be calling the Law Society. The decision is up to him…

    • biffer on October 31, 2014 at 16:12
    • Reply

    This guy is a real piece of work. Among the many roles he has posed himself in, more recently he was heard huffing around calling himself ‘formerly of the advertising standards council’ and calling into question something that was being advertised during the municipal election that he personally was taking exception to – I think it was in the newspaper. Again there was much bluster about dark consequences and extensive knowledge of due process, and then – nothing. It was all a bunch of empty noise about nothing. Of course nothing was wrong – he just didn’t happen to know what he was talking about –

    1. Yes, indeed, he’s quite the piece of work. Do you know what newspaper this article may have been in? I’m very curious to know what he’s been up to.

        • biffer on November 6, 2014 at 13:49
        • Reply

        It was the New Tecumseth Times – article pasted here – he was ‘outraged’ that such an organization might exist and was able to comment on election proceedings. He was saying that he was a former officer of the Advertising Standards Council – lol…

        Recently, advertisements have been running in local newspapers (including this publication) indicating that “urban sprawl is plain dumb”. The ads, paid for by Wayne Hutchinson of the ‘New Tecumseth Citizens Coalition’, left many with questions – who and what is the New Tecumseth Citizens Coalition? Why are they endorsing certain municipal candidates? And has a lasting alliance been formed between the candidates who seemed to agree on at least the issue of urban sprawl?
        Wayne Hutchinson, is a long-time business owner in Alliston and a resident of the Township of Mulmur. He coached hockey in Alliston for 10 years, and his wife taught at Banting. His son was a graduate there as well. Wayne is also at the helm of the New Tecumseth Citizens Coalition (or NTCC), that formed in 2000 when the proposed ‘Cappuccitti’ development was brought to New Tecumseth council for consideration.
        The NTCC, bonded over preventing Cappuccitti from ever going through, and has met at least yearly since then to keep the discussion alive.
        Hutchinson told the Times his thoughts on Cappuccitti, a development that “would put a city the size of North Bay (50,000 people) between Alliston and Beeton.
        “The development would forever destroy thousands of acres of prime farm land. It would put a knife in the heart of the commercial town centres of Alliston, Beeton, and Tottenham,” he said.
        The NTCC started when Larry Keogh was Mayor. A meeting was held at Banting Memorial High School in Alliston, a public information session, to get feedback on the Mattamy development known as ‘Cappuccitti’.
        “Only two people at that meeting opposed the development, Mike MacEachern, who was a councillor back then, and councillor Richard Norcross,” said Hutchinson.
        “After the meeting, everyone on council lost their positions except MacEachern and Norcross. And, somehow, Rick Milne. It was then that a group of us got together and formed the New Tecumseth Citizens Coalition,” Hutchinson explained.
        Hutchinson went on, “Before the OMB (or the Ontario Municipal Board which regulates development disputes), towns had control over planning. When developers would come in with a proposal, council could say, ‘We don’t want this here’, and they would have to listen. The developers didn’t like this, and so, they founded and funded the ‘Ontario Urban Institute’ to lobby provincial politicians to pressure municipalities into unwanted developments.
        “This group, which has a lot of money and smart thinkers involved, would then make sure they were making the largest contributions to the campaigns of pro-development politicians to get what they wanted.
        “After that first Cappuccitti meeting at Banting, a group of us like-minded individuals, say ten or twelve of us (who Hutchinson would not name), came together to discuss the issue of ‘urban sprawl’. We have been meeting once a year since then.”
        Hutchinson went on to say that the dismissal of councillors (in the election year of 2000) in favour of Cappuccitti was a reflection of how angry the townspeople were towards ‘pro-development’.
        “Look, the developers know that we’re the last virgin area within striking distance of the GTA since the Oak Ridges Moraine was shut down, that’s why they all want to build here, and we have to protect ourselves,” Hutchinson said.
        Now at the OMB for reconsideration, the Cappuccitti development is not dead, and Hutchinson fears that should a ‘pro-development’ council be elected this term, the development could have a shot at being passed, a move, he says, that would mean tax hikes for established ratepayers and a negative effect on the local environment.
        When the Alliston Chamber of Commerce held its All–Candidates meeting at Banting (ironically) earlier this month, Wayne Hutchinson had an opportunity to meet with the candidates running in the 2014 election and ask them, face-to-face, their opinion on urban sprawl.
        Five candidates said they were strictly opposed: Kevin Kemp, Glen O’Leary, Paul Foster, Michael Beattie and Wayne Noye. These candidates also granted Hutchinson permission to print their names in his advertisements against urban sprawl (or lateral development), but, says Hutchinson, they have nothing to do with the original ‘New Tecumseth Citizens Coalition’, nor have they formed any other type of alliance (that he’s aware of) that could impact decision making in council chambers should they be elected.
        “I have never even met any of those people before except Kevin Kemp,” said Hutchinson. “Mike Jerry asked the candidates about their position on the Cappuccitti development and their responses got me interested in speaking with them further.”
        “Rick Milne answered first and said that he couldn’t speak to the issue because the matter was before the OMB. Kevin Kemp said that he was unequivocally opposed to Cappuccitti. The other four listed in my ad said ‘no way!’ as well. Doug Kowalinski has since said he’s opposed to the project as well.
        “Urban sprawl is an issue that is affecting us here in New Tec and it’s also affecting Adjala–Tosorontio and Essa Townships. In Adjala, Leo Losereit, Ken Pratt, Chantale Gagnon and Dave Rose are all opposed as well. They understand the legacy costs.
        “These people all have a few things in common – they all oppose urban sprawl and they’re not accepting donations from developers to fund their campaigns this election. They also understand that the developers profit is our taxpayers’ next tax increase.”
        Wayne Hutchinson says he’ll be watching the election closely, and he hopes that people are “now aware of the problem of urban sprawl”.
        A self-proclaimed “shit disturber”, Hutchinson says he plans to watch and wait and make waves a necessary. Ready to stir the pot is any of those ‘pro-development’ guys and gals get out of hand, or if any of the candidates who ran on the platform opposing urban sprawl go back on their word.
        • Reopening and improving the youth room in the Tottenham Community & Fitness Centre
        “The room was closed a while ago, because parents were using it as a ‘drop-off centre’ for their children while they watched the hockey game in the arena next door,” said one youth.
        YAC would like to see the room reopened, with a sign that says, “Unsupervised, youth under 13 not allowed”. They’d also like to see more vending machines installed, and more games tables available.
        • Changing up public skating
        “It worked better the way it was before,” said Dwyer.
        YAC aims to have public skating times changed to include extend hours (public skating is currently offered from 6–7:20 p.m. on Friday nights). YAC members are asking for the program to run from 6–8:30 p.m. so they, “do more than buy a bag of chips at the snack bar and leave”. They’d also like public skating offered during the day on weekends.
        The cost of public skating has also been increased from $2 to $2.50 this year – a value the teens say would be “worth it” if the hours were increased.
        YAC members also expressed an interest in having the concession stand open during all public skating hours.
        • The installation of a new skateboard park in Tottenham
        “They took out the equipment that was there two weeks ago,” said Sam Stone. “It was dilapidated anyway, made from plywood and recycled plastic with nails popping out everywhere.”
        YAC hopes to see the installation of a brand new, state-of-the-art skate park made from concrete – a lasting material with no hazardous parts that break down over time.
        “We’d like to have all the bells and whistles here,” continued Stone. “Half pipes, wedges, rails and banks.”
        The estimated cost of such a project is roughly $200,000 plus. YAC has access to $5,000 in funding, but would need to work with the Town and private sponsors to raise the rest.
        YAC group members are meeting with New Line Skate Park, a company that plans and builds skateboard parks for neighbouring communities, later this month. Once they have drafted a plan for the allotted space, they will move forward with fundraising efforts to see the concept through to completion – including public input sessions and meetings with council.
        This, confirmed all members, is YAC’s number one priority.
        A group of friends since elementary school, ranging in age from 13–18, YAC members hope to attract interested youth to join them and their mission to better the town of Tottenham.
        They meet every other week at Tim Hortons in Tottenham. Want to see what they’re all about? Plan to attend their next meeting this Sunday, October 26th.
        Fore more information e-mail them at: [email protected]

What's your opinion?

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: