You be the Judge

www.you-be-the-judge.com is designed to be both educational and informative. It has been created to expose the legal harassment that George Fraser is experiencing after he exercised his Charter

Sc. 2(b) "freedom of expression", a fundamental freedom right, on another web site, www.abandonedandbetrayed.com, that he owns.

• David Siville, KPA Lawyers, is representing the plaintiff, Kimberly Gillespie

• George Fraser, the defendant, is representing himself

This web site is designed to provide full public disclosure of the ongoing tort action by the plaintiff, Kimberly Gillespie; so that, the readers can be the judge as to the legitimacy of the plaintiff's claims and to whether this ill-conceived tort action constitutes legal harassment.

Readers should be fully aware that all court documents appearing on this site are publically available from the Superior Court of Justice at Kingston Ontario.

• The Court File Number is CV-22-00000076-0000

All legal correspondence that I have received from the plaintiff's counsel, KPA Lawyers, has been included to give contextual background to the legal harassment of my Charter "freedom of expression".

• I am an open book, regarding this matter; nothing is considered to be either private or confidential.

The publication of this site, www.you-be-the-judge.com, goes beyond exercising my Charter Sc. 2(b) "freedom of expression" rights. This is because it involves another deeply embedded principle in our common law tradition and that is the 'open court' principle.

'Open court' means members of the public have a right to receive information pertaining to all judicial proceedings, including the pretrial stage, subject to overriding public interests (Edmonton Journal (1989), supra; Re Vancouver Sun, [2004] 2 S.C.R. 332 at paragraph 27; Toronto Star Newspapers Ltd. v. Canada, [2010] 1 S.C.R. 721).

The 'open court' principle is connected to freedom of the press, as the media are an important means by which the public receives information.

• My publicist is seeking to have the press cover this bogus harassment tort. No promotional postcards this time but rather, there will be direct promotion to the media by all the usual means.

I would remind the readers, that the 'open court' principle under section 2(b) is not limited to criminal proceedings as the Supreme Court has also relied upon the principle in the civil context (Sierra Club of Canada v. Canada (Minister of Finance), [2002] 2 S.C.R. 522 at paragraph 36; Edmonton Journal (1989}, supra at paragraphs 5-11 and 55-63}.

This civil suit by Kimberly Gillespie is legal harassment under the basic principles of tort law.

This is because 'duty of care' is the central tenet of negligence determination without which no liability can flow, no matter how awful, in the plaintiff's mind, the alleged conduct of the tortfeasor.

There is no 'duty of care' or 'standard care' and / or 'wrongful act' on an individual's Charter Sc. 2(b) "freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression including freedom of the press or other media of communications" that in this the 21st Century includes internet social media platforms.

The SCC has been unwilling to place obligations or reciprocity on the Charter's Sc. 2(b) "freedom of expression". The protection of "freedom of expression" is premised upon fundamental principles and values that promote the search for and the attainment of truth and the opportunity for individual self-fulfillment through expression in reference to Irwin Toy Ltd. v Quebec (AG) [1989] and Ford v Quebec [1988].

Further, the SCC has interpreted "freedom of expression" in a "large and liberal" orientation to Charter guarantees to ensure that all manner of expressive activities qualify for constitutional protection - no matter how offensive, unpopular or disturbing cannot deprive it of Sc. 2(b) "freedom of expression" in reference to R v Zundel [1992].