Part 1: The Mother of all Motions!!

Mark this Thursday, January 29, on your calendar and make plans to attend what may very well be an historic day in the Supreme court of PEI. The Hearing is scheduled for 9:30 am.

A “Refusal Motion,” is being heard in open court where the public can hear first-hand what former PEI Premier and now Canada’s Ambassador to Ireland, Dennis King, will say to justify his sworn testimony claims that the documents are a fraud, which documentary evidence from Paul Maines, the Plaintiff in this action, will challenge.

Counsel for the Plaintiff is asking the court to provide the following:

Thursday will also be an historic day in that as far as I know it’s Kirk’s first appearance in open court in PEI on behalf of Philips Barristers!

I want to offer some observations in this article to consider this entire affair from a slightly different angle than simply “who’s telling the truth,” which is something we’re going  to have to trust a Judge will finally determine with this Motion Hearing. 

The evidence on the table is however, as I see it, pretty clear that King “lied under oath” during his cross-examination regarding the question related to his communications with Reynolds.

Consider the following answer to this question from Kirk:

Andrew Kirk Question. So, as we’re going through this, I see that in Mr. Jeffery Reynolds’ Statement of Defense, he says that he was acquainted with you before you were first elected and that he communicated with you on various topics using various media. Can you confirm that that is true?

King’s Answer. I had started a … I’d say a Messenger conversation with Mr. Reynolds prior to me entering or becoming a leadership candidate. Largely because I had gone to high school with a Jeff Reynolds and I thought it was the Jeff Reynolds that I went to high school with from Murray Harbour PEI. But yes, the answer would be yes.

Anyone know a “Jeffrey Reynolds” who went to Montague Regional High School with Dennis King?

No one?

Let’s move on.

A little later in the cross-examination, things got really interesting when John Phillips took a turn asking questions, and once again brought up the matter of King’s communications with Reynolds, but Phillips’ interest was in communications AFTER King had became Premier:

Page 30, para 12

Phillips Question:

So, I’m just going to go back through a couple of the questions my friend… my colleague here has asked you to just ask for a couple of clarifications just because I needed to make sure I understand your evidence today. You mentioned that you spoke with Jeffery a number of times on Facebook Messenger, that’s correct, and that you had continuing Facebook Messenger continuation with him after you became Premier, correct?

King Answer: I did not say that. No.

You … you didn’t have any more Facebook Messenger communications with Mr. Reynolds after 2019, is that correct?

A. I did not speak to him on Messenger after that, that’s correct.

Q. Okay. And you had no other social media communications with Mr. Reynolds or any other communications whatsoever, text message, anything like that?

That’s correct.

Why would King deny that communications between him and Reynolds happened, when the Premier’s office has already provided documents to Maines in a Freedom of Information (FOI) request proving that those communications did indeed happen?

The documents were unfortunately “completely redacted”:

This is an example of a completely redacted communication between Reynolds and King AFTER he became Premier that Maines obtained from that FOI. Although the content was erased, the “metadata”, i.e., contact addresses and the date on which that communication happened, were left in tact, proving that King’s statement about having no communication of any kind with Reynolds after becoming Premier is NOT true.

Why has our government never had any interest in a matter that should have been, quite frankly, a major security issue, a potential “emergency” situation with multiple “deep fakes” of real-world Island politicians like “King” operating in the real world, a potential for any amount of chaos and confusion demanding action from government and law enforcement so as to ensure both:

(1) the integrity of government operations, and

(2)  government transparency and accountability in the eyes of the general public.

Never happened.

Perhaps we’ll find out why on Thursday.

PART 2:  WHY NO INVESTIGATION?

It’s always been the case in democratic countries like Canada that whenever allegations surface that government records may have been fabricated, altered, or improperly withheld, the public expectation – and government response to that expectation, as well as the situation itself – is simple and straightforward: 

Investigate.

Immediately.

Yet, here we are four years since a major fraud – according to the sworn affidavit claims of Dennis King, Allan Campbell, Chris LeClair and others (there’s even a sworn ‘denial’ affidavit from Frank Zhou, who is mentioned in the documents related to the Gamesys proposal) – but there’s never been a mention nor response to this situation from the King & Lantz PC governments.

Why not?

This is the context that makes this FOIPP-related Supreme Court of PEI civil litigation case such a fascinating story.

It isn’t just the seriousness of the allegations at the heart of the legal action that makes for a fascinating story, and they are indeed serious; its the length of time that has transpired with such serious, public allegations being made with no mention or action from government.

What’s behind that?

It isn’t really that surprising to me that King did nothing for three years while still in the Premier’s chair (which wouldn’t have happened if those documents are not ‘fake’ and the allegations in the law suit against King et al. are in fact true!), given that he is the key Defendant in the legal action;

But it’s been almost a year now since Lantz became Premier, with no evident interest from him or his caucus in finding out the truth, in making that information public, and then in taking the appropriate actions to deal with this matter in an ethically-responsible manner, with transparency and accountability.

It’s a pretty simple question; and it’s just one question – one I suspect could be answered in very short order as well: i.e., “are those hundreds of documents alleging a fraudulent “gamesys” online off-the-books gaming scheme by King et. al. real or fake?”

We know one thing at least: “There’s criminals at large”

The dicey issue we’re dancing around here needs to be spelled out more clearly to grasp the true gravity of “inaction” and silence from the government. This isn’t some academic curiosity our government has completely ignored for four years: a federal crime HAS BEEN committed.

(1) Either  Jeffery Reynolds & his wife Keri committed a serious crime in providing false and fraudulent documents to Paul Maines as authentic from senior government officials, including the Premier; or

(2) Dennis King et. al. committed a crime in swearing false statements that all said documents are fraudulent IF THEY ARE NOT!

The RCMP began an investigation a year and a half ago to answer that one question (i.e., who is lying – JR & his wife Keri, or Dennis King, Allan Campbell, Chris LeClair in their sworn Affidavits). So far, not a peep to the public.

[I wrote an article providing a lengthy document I presented to the RCMP as a witness in this investigation, along with 1 1/2 hrs. of video testimony: See: “Episode #15: My testimony in the criminal investigation into Dennis King et. al.“].

The long delay in answering this one simple question matters a great deal of course.

The fact that no one with the political or legal authority to do something about it seems to want to answer this incredibly important question is both very unusual, and very suspicious!

Although the lawsuit at the centre of this matter was filed in 2021, it’s only now—four years later—that these key issues are finally going to be dealt with by a Judge in open court. 

NO INVESTIGATION – NO ACCOUNTABILITY

Transparency laws don’t operate in a vacuum; they require timely scrutiny if they are to have any pragmatic significance and concrete ‘real-world’ effects to remedy a problem, otherwise, the system fails to maintain public trust in the integrity of government.

A careful scrutiny of court filings and public records reveals that the allegations being made by Paul Maines have never triggered an internal investigation despite being seen by many senior political and legal people.

Again – SOMEONE is lying, someone has committed a crime, yet it seems there is no interest in finding out “who” within government.

My pointing out this “absence of action” by the PC government is not a legal conclusion of any kind. It’s simply an observation of a serious procedural gap that acts as a very deliberate, conscious and ‘formal’ response or decision to do nothing about a very serious matter on which government has a moral duty to take action…. for four years!

SUMMARY

If the documents turn out to be fraudulent, forged and engineered in some way, then serious misconduct may have occurred involving the filing of false materials in court by Maines.

That kind of allegation normally triggers immediate scrutiny because it strikes at the integrity of the justice system itself.

Never happened.

If the documents are authentic, then serious questions arise about record retention, disclosure practices, and the use of private communications channels by senior officials—issues that FOIPP legislation exists precisely to guard against.

What is especially striking to me in all of this is that for four years, no independent process appears to have been tasked by government with determining which of these possibilities is true.

This isn’t one of those, “…the matter’s before the court” situations. It’s more like a legal action against someone going around torching buildings…you don’t wait for the courts to find and stop such a person from doing further damage, notwithstanding any legal issues….you take immediate and decisive action, bring in law enforcement if necessary, etc.

Never happened, despite sworn claims by the sitting Premier at the time that what we are dealing with is obviously a master of masquerades able to orchestrate elaborate ruses of the highest caliber!

Our PC government has apparently taken another route…let the buildings burn!

THIS MOTION IS BECAUSE KING ET. AL. TRIED TO ‘KILL’ THE ACTION

One aspect of the case that deserves public attention is how accountability efforts unfolded. I already mentioned the legal risk Paul Maines may be in having filed documents that might be fakes, involving the highest level political and business figures in PEI. 

As for the Defendants, there was nothing “sworn” on the matter until relatively recently, when King et al. made a play to ask a judge to throw the entire case in the garbage can in a ‘Summary Judgement” motion.

After those sworn affidavits were filed by Dennis King et. al. asserting that the documents were not genuine, a referral to law enforcement was made. 

However, that referral asking the RCMP to investigate, according to the record, did not originate from government authorities, but from Maines, who had relied on the documents and now faces the consequences of their alleged falsity.

This inversion is unusual.

Again, in most systems, when the integrity of court filings or government records is questioned, institutions move first to protect the process. Here, the only known referral to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police appears to have come from outside government – Maines.

That fact alone does not establish any wrongdoing. But again, it does raise questions about institutional reflexes when transparency laws are  being tested. (i.e., .the doctor is pounding the knee, but the foot remains perfectly still).

FOIPP’s Integrity in PEI is What is Really at Stake

FOIPP legislation exists to prevent governments from circumventing scrutiny and accountability by having control over information. Its effectiveness depends not only on the particular provisions and terms of the statutory language purportedly “giving access to government records” to the public, but more importantly, on how institutions respond when those rights are being denied by government.

When allegations of circumvention or document falsification are met with years of silence rather than timely investigation, the damage extends beyond any single case. Public confidence in transparency mechanisms erodes, even if allegations are ultimately rejected.

Accountability delayed is accountability weakened, and four years represents a lot of “weakening” for the PC government in this matter!

Why Open Court Matters

The upcoming public motion is incredibly significant not because it guarantees answers, but because it restores a missing element: transparency.

Courts require sworn evidence. They impose consequences for making false statements and claims. They provide a forum where uncertainty must be confronted rather than managed. That’s not an attack on any individual. It’s simply the ordinary function of the rule of law.

Accountability Is Not Accusation

It is important to be clear about what this case is—and is not—about.

From my vantage point, this lawsuit Motion is not about presuming guilt or political score-settling. Maines has been put in a position where (if the documents are fraudulent) he could be in some pretty serious legal trouble himself.

This particular Motion is therefore also about whether allegations serious enough to implicate the very justice system and transparency laws that are meant to ensure our rights to access to information are protected were met with the level of scrutiny that democratic accountability requires – plain and simple!

As this matter finally gets dealt with in open court on Thursday, the most important question may not be “who is right?” regarding the authentic or fraudulent nature of those documents; but rather, “why has it taken four years to have the question asked publicly?”.