The Emerson Avenger

The Emerson Avenger is a "memory hole" free blog where censorship is scorned. This blog will "guard the right to know" about any injustices and abuses that corrupt Unitarian Universalism. Posters may speak and argue freely, according to conscience, about any injustices and abuses, or indeed hypocrisy, that they may know about so that the Avenger, in the form of justice and redress, may come surely and swiftly. . . "Slowly, slowly the Avenger comes, but comes surely." - Ralph Waldo Emerson

My Photo
Name:
Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada

In 1992 I underwent a profound revelatory experience of God which revealed that the total solar eclipse "Eye of God" is a "Sign in the Heavens" that symbolizes God's divine omniscience. You may read about what Rev. Ray Drennan of the Unitarian Church of Montreal contemptuously dismissed as my "psychotic experience" here: http://revelationisnotsealed.homestead.com - This revelatory religious experience inspired me to propose an inter-religious celebration of Creation that would take place whenever a total solar eclipse took place over our planet. You may read about what Rev. Ray Drennan and other leading members of the Unitarian Church of Montreal falsely and maliciously labeled as a "cult" here: http://creationday.homestead.com - I am now an excommunicated Unitarian whose "alternative spiritual practice" includes publicly exposing and denouncing Unitarian*Universalist injustices, abuses, and hypocrisy. The Emerson Avenger blog will serve that purpose for me and hopefully others will share their concerns here. Dee Miller's term DIM Thinking is used frequently and appropriately on this blog. You may read more about what DIM Thinking is here - http://www.takecourage.org/defining.htm

Sunday, June 30, 2019

As It Happens. . . Montreal Unitarian Clergy Abuse Cover-Up Enabler Sue Montgomery Brazenly Lied To Carol Off On CBC Radio 'As It Happens'

This is my response to the written transcript of what Sue Montgomery told Carol Off on CBC Radio's 'As It Happens' a couple of weeks ago now.

It is a work in progress and has some formatting problems that need to be corrected.

Harassment of mayor

Guest: Sue Montgomery

JD: Yesterday, a Montreal judge ruled that Sue Montgomery has been harassed. But Judge Flavia Longo decided that the harassment wasn't criminal -- because the Crown had failed to prove that Ms. Montgomery was experiencing fear. Sue Montgomery is the Mayor of the Montreal borough of Cote-des-Neiges Notre-Dame-de-Grace. Before that, she was a criminal reporter in the city. We reached Mayor Montgomery in Montreal.

LOL! I won't argue with CBC Radio's 'As It Happens' asserting that Montreal Unitarian clergy abuse cover-up enabler Sue Montgomery was "a criminal reporter" in Montreal before getting herself elected as Mayor of the Montreal borough of Cote-des-Neiges Notre-Dame-de-Grace, not to mention being appointed as Montreal mayor Valérie Plante's first Deputy Mayor.

CO: Mayor Montgomery, how did you respond to this verdict when you heard it yesterday?

SUE MONTGOMERY: Well, obviously I was very disappointed. When the judge read the verdict, well, when she read her judgment, I thought it was going towards a guilty verdict, until she got to the element of talking about how fearful I was. And then she said that my body language and my facial expression demonstrated that I wasn't fearful enough. And then she concluded by saying it is harassment, Robert Edgar has been harassing me. But is it criminal harassment? No.

How fearful was*is Sue Montgomery? During her election campaign, Montreal Unitarian clergy abuse cover-up enabler Sue Montgomery advertised herself to Montreal voters as "a tough cookie" who isn't afraid of anyone on several occasions, including within minutes of rather dubiously accusing me of "harassment" for asking all three CDN-NDG mayoralty candidates a legitimate question about SPVM police repression of my peaceful public protest against Unitarian Universalist clergy abuse etc. outside the Unitarian "Church" of Montreal.

CO: And this is over a very long period of time, some years, where this harassment was happening — that she confirms is harassment. But then in one incident that was filmed, you appear to not be afraid of him. You're standing close to him, and not responding in your face or your body language, according to the judge, that showed fright. Can you describe what that incident was?

The videos which made it abundantly clear to Québec Court judge Flavia Longo that Sue Montgomery is not afraid of me may be viewed in The Emerson Avenger blog post titled:

Montreal Deputy Mayor Sue Montgomery Trampled On My Charter Rights And Freedoms Today

Sue Montgomery can be seeing approaching me very determinedly, without the slightest hesitation at all, about 15 minutes into this "body cam" video that was filmed during my protest of Sunday March 18, 2018.

Sue Montgomery shows no fear of me whatsoever throughout the video, and even goes out of her way to try to provoke me into violating conditions not to communicate with her by repeatedly kicking and throwing my picket signs protesting against Unitarian Universalist clergy abuse etc. into the street.

SM: Well Robert Edgar, he was expelled from the Unitarian Church in 1998. And since that day, he has protested every Sunday. So when he was charged with criminal harassment towards me, one of the conditions was he wasn't supposed to be at the church or within 300 meters of me. So when I showed up that Sunday, he was there. Unbeknownst to me, that condition not to be at the church had been lifted. I had not been informed of that. So I was quite disconcerted to see him there with his regular signs. And so I called the police. And I you know out of anger and frustration, and I think anyone would understand the exasperation I would feel after 20 years of this. I pushed his signs onto the street. He filmed the whole thing as he is want to do. He always films me wherever I am. So he had that as evidence. And she felt that because I was not leaving the scene or acting as a good victim by running away or crying or I mean she didn't specify what a good victim would have done in that situation. But she claimed that my behavior wasn't indicative of being afraid of him.

This is inaccurate, and a deflection. Sue Montgomery tries to make it appear that my protest is only against being expelled from the Unitarian "Church" of Montreal. That is misinformation aka "spin". My protest began in May of 1998, and it was initially against non-sexual clergy abuse that I was subjected to by Rev. Ray Drennan, which was all but officially approved of by the leadership of the Unitarian "Church" of Montreal and the Unitarian Universalist Association (UUA) in Boston. I soon added UU clergy sexual misconduct to the issues that I was protesting against because I had been informed by Rev. Deborah Pope-Lance, and other advocates for victims of UU clergy abuse, that many women had had their clergy sexual misconduct complaints ignored and-or dismissed by the UUA and its aptly named Ministerial Fellowship Committee; and many had been completely silenced thanks to being cajoled or coerced into signing confidentiality agreements aka non-disclosure agreements.

Sue Montgomery did not have conditions saying that I could not be within 300 meters of her on Sunday March 18th, 2018, and my conditions had been reduced to allow me to resume my protest outside the Unitarian "Church" of Montreal. The excessive and unjustified 300 meter perimeter around Sue Montgomery was only added on September 6th of 2018 after I was arrested for alleged breach of conditions, and additional criminal harassment, for asking questions at Montreal city council meetings, just days before I was supposed to go to trial on the original charge.

I find it very hard to believe that such a high-profile "victim" would not have been informed by the police and-or Crown prosecutors that my release conditions had been reduced almost a month earlier on February 19th. As for the "exasperation" that Sue Montgomery claims to feel after "20 years of this", we are talking about 20 years of peaceful public protest against Unitarian Universalist clergy abuse which includes, but is by no means limited to, what the UUA's Canadian attorney described as "such despicable crimes as pedophilia and rape" in the cease and desist demand letter he had me served with in which he falsely accused me of the archaic criminal act of "blasphemous libel' for allegedly making "unfounded and vicious allegations to the effect that ministers of the Association engage in such despicable crimes as pedophilia and rape". Why is #BeenRapedNEVERreported hashtag co-founder Sue Montgomery expressing "exasperation" at a protest against "such despicable crimes as pedophilia and rape" committed by Unitarian Universalist clergy, to say nothing of Unitarian Universalist Religious Educators etc., and the cover-up and denial of such sex crimes by her "religion"?

I film "the whole thing", as I am wont to do, for multiple reasons, but the main reason that I film as much of my church protest as possible is to protect myself from false accusations brought against me by Montreal Unitarians.  I have been falsely accused of assault at least three times by Unitarian Universalist women seeking to punish me for protesting and to suppress my protest. In January of 2014 SPVM police officers were told that I had assaulted a Montreal Unitarian woman when the exact opposite had happened. Thankfully I had video evidence of Margo Ellis's assault on me, but when I tried to file assault charges against Margo Ellis the SPVM did not act on them, nor did they charge Margo Ellis or her "eye-witness" accomplice(s) for the public mischief of making a false report to the police. . .

I also keep my camera running to record any assaults on me, and other harassment and interference in my protest, by Montreal Unitarians, and to record any interactions with the police. In that I am pretty much obliged to keep a video camera filming throughout my protests I do a narration aka running commentary on what is happening and what the protest is about.

CO: Why did he go after you in the first place? I mean the story goes back to 20 years ago, you are a reporter for the Montreal Gazette. He approached you, wanted you to investigate something, you found no basis to do a story about. That began then and then carries on to that to your time in politics. Why does he pursue you?

I publicly criticize Montreal Unitarian clergy abuse enabler and "criminal reporter" Sue Montgomery, because she has been "running interference" for the Unitarian "Church" of Montreal, and the larger Unitarian Universalist "religion", for well over a decade. Sue Montgomery has not only repeatedly refused to report eminently newsworthy stories about Unitarian Universalist clergy abuse etc. that have plenty of basis to do a story about, but she has actively involved herself in the abusive misuse of the SPVM police force, and the criminal justice system, to suppress my peaceful public protest against U*U clergy abuse outside the UCM. When Sue Montgomery entered politics I protested in an effort to ensure that she would not be elected so that she could not abuse her power as a politician to help the Unitarian Universalist "church" conceal its clergy abuse problem from the public. Unfortunately I was not successful in trying to warn the public of Sue Montgomery's serious ethical failings and her proclivity to abuse her power and influence.

SM: Well, he wanted me to write about the fact he was expelled from the Unitarian Church. I looked into it. I found that the church had done its due diligence, and had gone through all kinds of things to help Mr. Edgar before taking this step to expel him. So I decided there wasn't a story. He would not take no for an answer, and kept asking me to write about it, despite my journalistic right to decide whether or not something is a story. And then in 2014, I created the hashtag #beenrapedneverreported, which created this whole #MeToo movement. And you know people coming forward about their their rape experiences. He then started doing riffs on that, claiming that I was complicit in the cover up of sexual abuse at the Unitarian Church. So a, there has been no such sexual abuse. I've looked into it. I've even asked him like if you are a victim then go to the police. He's just saying I'm covering it up. And if anyone knows my track record as a journalist, that's the last thing I would have done. I've written all kinds of stories about sexual abuse. And then when I decided to run in politics, he showed up at my debates, he sort of followed me around during my campaign filming me. And at one debate, he was sitting in the front row filming me. I asked him to stop. He would not stop. The organizers of the debate would not step in until a bunch of women in the audience stood up and said we don't feel safe. Tell him to stop. He has no right to be doing this. So now he's claiming because I'm a politician, I'm shutting down his freedom of expression, which is so far from the truth. As a public official, I understand that people have a right to criticize me, to confront me, to be angry with me. But when it goes on for 20 years with no clear grievance, to me, his sole goal is to make me uncomfortable, to disturb my life, and to upset me. And he was also charged with breaking his conditions before this trial for criminal harassment. And in that case, he was found guilty. The judge wrote a 30-page judgment clearly saying that Mr. Edgar’s sole goal was to disrupt my life.

This is exactly the kind of misinformation and "spin" that Sue Montgomery fed to her colleagues in The Gazette, and even in the larger Montreal journalistic community, to "bury the story" and try to discredit me. To the best of my recollection the first story that I ever asked Sue Montgomery to report on was my arrest for allegedly violating section 176.3 of the Canadian Criminal Code on the first Sunday of December 2000. I called The Gazette's city desk, and told the person on the other end of the phone line that I had been arrested for alleged "public nuisance", within hours of my arrest. I did not know the exact charge when I called The Gazette. The woman at the City Desk who I spoke with repeatedly insisted that my arrest was "not newsworthy". I found this to be quite bizarre, so I asked her name, she said "Sue Montgomery". At the time I had no idea that Sue Montgomery had joined the Unitarian Church of Montreal in 2000. I only found that out within the last few months, as a result of the trials for alleged criminal harassment. Can you say "conflict of interest" and "running interference"?

For the record, the Montreal Mirror, The Suburban, The Monitor, CJAD and CTV all reported on that false arrest, and-or my previous expulsion from the Unitarian Church of Montreal. It was certainly newsworthy to them, but not to newly minted Montreal Unitarian Sue Montgomery. Quelle surprise.  . . I will add that two other The Gazette journalists became members of the UCM in later years, including The Gazette's religion columnist Harvey Shepherd, and words columnist Mark Abley. A retired Gazette staffer named Nancy Lorimer was-is a long time member of the Unitarian "Church" of Montreal. Thunder Bay and Guelph newspaper publisher, and self-appointed "Citizens Police Officer", Peter Kohl was also a member for a while. Funny how The Gazette kept things under wraps for the better part of two decades until Sue Montgomery's ever so newsworthy false criminal harassment accusation against me. . .

Sue's claim that, "I found that the church had done its due diligence, and had gone through all kinds of things to help Mr. Edgar before taking this step to expel him." is a lie. My first call to her was about my arrest, not about my expulsion which occurred more than a year earlier. In any case, as in most cases of clergy misconduct complaints, the church most certainly had not done any due diligence, nor had it "gone through all kinds of things to help (me)" before taking this step to expel me. Au contraire. . . The church backed Rev. Ray Drennan to the hilt and sought to silence me. Sue Montgomery is lying to make the church look good, and me look bad. Happens all the time when people complain about clergy misconduct aka clergy abuse.

It is a brazen lie for Sue Montgomery to assert that "there has been no such sexual abuse. I've looked into it. I've even asked him like if you are a victim then go to the police." I have never claimed to be a victim of clergy sexual abuse myself. I have always made it clear that the abuse by Rev. Ray Drennan was verbal abuse, psychological abuse, and abuse of power etc. On December 6th, 2012, I had a chance encounter with Sue Montgomery as I was documenting a vigil in front of Montreal's Palais de Justice on International Day Against Violence Against Women. Knowing Sue Montgomery had repeatedly refused to responsibly report newsworthy stories arising out of my church protest etc., and knowing also that 4-5 years earlier she had participated in an abusive misuse of the SPVM etc. to force an end to my church protest for one full year by claiming to fear for her safety in a deposition to the police (along with Rev. Diane Rollert and a dozen or so other "less than honest" Montreal Unitarians) I decided to capture on video Sue's reaction to my asking her to report on the UUA's false blasphemous libel accusation against me which had been made six months earlier. The video may be viewed here. Judge for yourself if Sue Montgomery's dismissive response in this video does not make her "complicit in the cover up of sexual abuse at the Unitarian Church", to say nothing of the various other ways that she is most certainly complicit in the cover-up and denial of sexual abuse in the Unitarian Universalist religious community. Judge for yourself how much fear she displays. None whatsoever, just disdain and contempt.

I did not "follow" Sue Montgomery around during her municipal election campaign filming her. I held three peaceful public protests at three different election debates, and documented those protests on video. Yes, at one mayoralty debate, I was sitting in the front row filming the whole debate, which obviously included filming Sue Montgomery's participation in the debate. Sue Montgomery asked me to stop filming when I tried to document her response to a "tough question" that I had asked all three mayoralty candidates about SPVM police repression of peaceful public protest etc., not just her as an individual. I declined her request-demand because I was perfectly within my rights to film the public election event as a citizen, or indeed a "citizen journalist". Many other people were filming the debate with their cellphones etc., and mainstream media had also filmed part of it. Where does Sue Montgomery get the idea that I have "no right to be doing this"? She did not object to anyone else filming the debate, just me. . .

Sue Montgomery absolutely is shutting down my freedom of expression, with an egregious abusive misuse of the SPVM police force, and the criminal justice system, by falsely accusing me of criminal harassment to force release conditions on me that prevent me from asking any questions at city council meetings, and also prevent me from protesting against clergy abuse etc. outside the Unitarian Church of Montreal. It most certainly is not "so far from the truth" for me to accuse Sue Montgomery of trampling on my freedom of expression and other Charter rights and freedoms by falsely accusing me of criminal harassment etc.

If "As a public official, (Sue Montgomery) understand(s) that people have a right to criticize (her), to confront (her), to be angry with (her)", why does she behave in a manner that makes it very clear that she does not believe that I have those very same human rights? Is it because she does not consider me to be human?

Nothing has gone on for 20 years with no clear grievance, as Sue Montgomery falsely claims. It is a gross exaggeration for her to pretend that I have been harassing her for 20 years. It seems that she believes that my protest against clergy abuse constitutes "psychological harassment" of her. If she really cared about women who have been sexually abused she would have joined my protest years ago. Instead she has repeatedly sought to suppress it and discredit it, and is still doing so. . . I have very clearly stated what my personal grievances with Sue Montgomery as an individual are, and I very generously offered her conditional forgiveness two days after she falsely accused me of libel on December 4th, of 2014. She ignored that offer of forgiveness, and thus rejected it. It is just another lie for her to claim that I have "no clear grievance" with her.

It absolutely is not my "sole goal" to make Montreal Unitarian clergy abuse cover-up enabler Sue Montgomery "uncomfortable", to disturb her life (with no valid reason), and to "upset" her. My goal is to expose and denounce Sue Montgomery's complicity in Unitarian Universalist clergy abuse cover-up efforts so that she may face some accountability for her role in UU clergy abuse cover-up and denial, so that Montreal voters are made aware of her UNethical behaviour, and so that the MUCH bigger story of Unitarian Universalist clergy abuse cover-up and denial is made known to the North American public. That being said, Canada's criminal harassment law was never intended to protect "less than ethical" politicians from being made to feel "uncomfortable" and "upset" by legitimate public criticism of their bad behaviour.

CO: Because this law says that they have to prove that you demonstrate fear in order to have a conviction, and the judge felt you didn't meet that. Now, Mr. Edgar is saying everything I'm doing in terms of Sue Montgomery is perfectly legitimate. That's what he's quoted as saying. What does that mean for you?

Everything I'm doing in terms of Sue Montgomery IS perfectly legitimate. Do some responsible research, call me up and interview me, and you will quickly discover that everything I am saying about Sue Montgomery is very truthful and supported by various forms of evidence.

SM: Well, it's horrible. I mean I don't know from one day to the next. You know he can show up now at city council. He can come to my borough council meetings. He can continue protesting outside of the Unitarian Church. But I did get an email today from the police commander in my borough, saying that should this continue, I should come back to the police and make another report, and we will continue along those lines.

Oh dear. A vocal critic of a "less than ethical" politician can show up at city council meetings to ask that politician some "tough questions". He can come to that politician's borough council meetings to ask questions. What a terrible injustice! What a heinous crime! Only I can't actually do so yet thanks to Sue Montgomery's highly UNethical legal shenanigans that The Crown is playing along with in what former SPVM Media Relations officer Ian Lafrenière might recognize as being "ingérence politique". . .

What a terrible crime! I can continue protesting against Unitarian Universalist clergy abuse, which includes "such despicable crimes as pedophilia and rape", and the shameful cover-up and denial of "such despicable crimes", and other U*U clergy abuse, outside of the Unitarian Church of Montreal. Assuming that right does not remain suppressed by The Crown when it hands down its sentence for my alleged breach of conditions on August 5th.

How is it possible that the co-founder of the #BeenRapedNEVERreported hashtag is opposed to such a protest against Unitarian Universalist clergy abuse which includes hundreds of cases of clergy sexual misconduct committed by UUA clergy?!!

CO: Your hashtag, #beenrapedneverreported, you created that for a reason. So the fact that you do have that experience, how has that changed this man's impact on your life?

How about this meme-picket sign slogan?


SM: Well, I'm a survivor of sexual abuse and rape. And to have someone falsely telling me, and telling the world, that I am complicit in the cover up of sexual abuse is frankly it's hurtful. And it shouldn't be allowed. And I don't believe that his right to protest and to say false things about me should take precedence over my right to live without fear.

I am not falsely telling Sue Montgonery, and telling the world, that she is complicit in the cover up of sexual abuse committed by UUA clergy and Religious Educators etc. Frankly it's a readily provable fact. At minimum she is guilty of complicit silence, but it is FAR worse than that. Sue Montgomery has repeatedly helped the UU "religion" keep its clergy abuse problem under wraps, including by brazenly lying to Carol Off in this 'As It Happens interview'. . .

CO: And do you live with fear?

SM: Yes. Yes, I live with fear. I live with anger. I live with frustration. I don't know what it's going to take to make this stop. Like come on! Twenty years, 20 years. I think any reasonable person would agree that this has gone on too long, and needs to stop

The only fear that Sue Montgomery lives with is the fear that her past, and indeed ongoing. . . complicity in, indeed knowing and willful participation in, the cover up and denial of Unitarian Universalist sexual abuse will become known and believed by the Canadian public. She has no reasonable grounds to fear that I will physically harm her. She even told CJFE staffer Kevin Metcalf that she had no such fear. Canada's criminal harassment law was not designed to protect corrupt politicians, and shameless clergy abuse cover-up enablers, from feeling psychological discomfort brought on by a guilty conscience.


CO: Mayor Montgomery, I appreciate speaking with you thank you.


Does Carol Off *appreciate* that she has been bamboozled into helping Montreal Unitarian clergy abuse cover-up enabler Sue Montgomery spin her slanderous fear-mongering false narrative about me, and that she has helped Sue Montgomery to mislead the Canadian public about Unitarian Universalism's serious clergy abuse problem? Does Carol Off *appreciate* how "less than credible" Sue Montgomery's bullshit claims are? NO sexual abuse whatsoever in the Unitarian Church? Is that remotely credible?

SM: Thank you very much.

Yes, I am sure that Sue Montgomery is VERY thankful for Carol Off's and As It Happens' assistance in pulling the wool over the eyes of the Canadian public and spreading her slanderous false narrative about me.
JD: Sue Montgomery is the Mayor of the Montreal borough of Cote-des-Neiges Notre-Dame-de-Grece. We reached her in Montreal.

Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

Saturday, June 22, 2019

Citizen Journalists And Unitarian Universalist Clergy Abuse Cover-Up And Denial - What's The Connection?

How about the fact that a Montreal vlogger aka citizen journalist operating out of his home has done a better job of interviewing me about my arrest and trial for alleged criminal harassment of Montreal Unitarian clergy abuse cover-up enabler Sue Montgomery that ANY professional journalist in the mainstream media so far?




Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Friday, June 21, 2019

Gazette Columnist Allison Hanes Yellow Journalism aka #FakeNews Is Infuriatingly Vague Shoddy Writing

But don't take *my* word for it U*Us. . .

Take the word of one Jason Rabin, who posted the following comment in response to Gazette Columnist Allison Hanes' infuriatingly vague shoddy writing aka Yellow Journalism aka #FakeNews which was published in The Gazette yesterday under the headline:

Hanes on harassment: 'What does your average woman have to do?

This story is infuriating in how vague it is.

What does this man say his grievance is with this woman? 

Why was he expelled from the church? 

What does he say to her (and her parishioners) when he pickets the church? 

Is it obscene? Threatening?

Without such basic background information, the story is meaningless and I have no earthly clue how to judge what I am reading.

Talk about shoddy writing
.

end quote

More later. . .





Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

Thursday, June 20, 2019

The Gazette's Opinionated Opinion Editorialist Allison Hanes And Unitarian Universalist Clergy Abuse Cover-Up Efforts - What's The Connection?

How about this rather opinionated Opinion Editorial aka Op-Ed by Gazette columnist Allison Hanes who, by her own admission in the Op-Ed itself, was "longtime colleagues at the Montreal Gazette"?

I am republishing the whole Gazette article with embedded links to the actual underlying facts, and interspersed with my point-by-point rebuttals. This "citizen journalism", as opposed to Alison Hanes' public relations. . . is a work in progress, and it may be updated over the coming hours and days.

Hanes on harassment: 'What does your average woman have to do?'

For 20 years, Robin Edgar has followed, filmed and written about Sue Montgomery. A judge has ruled it's harassment, but it's not criminal

:I have not actually "followed" Sue Montgomery, and certainly not for 20 years as Allison Hanes falsely claims, no doubt because she takes her former "longtime colleague at the Montreal Gazette" at her word, without doing any responsible fact-checking. My earliest filming of, and writing about, Sue Montgomery dates back to December 6th, of 2012, and I have no qualms linking to what I wrote about Sue Montgomery and embedding the "body cam" video below:


Before Sue Montgomery, it was Diane Rollert.
:The reverend at the Unitarian Church of Montreal said she was repeatedly approached and harangued by the same man a judge last week found harassed Montgomery, the Côte-des-Neiges–Notre-Dame-de-Grâce borough mayor — but not criminally.

This is BS, unless by repeatedly "harangued" Rev. Diane Olenick Rollert means that I repeatedly protested against Unitarian Universalist clergy abuse, and related or other U*U injustices, abuses, and hypocrisy etc., outside the outrageously hypocritical Unitarian "church" that she has been the minister of since the fall of 2006.
:After an incident more than a decade ago that left her badly shaken, Rollert sought a restraining order against Robert Michael Edgar, a.k.a. Robin Edgar, to keep him away from her and her flock.

The incident that allegedly left Rev. Diane Olenick Rollert "badly shaken" was little more than me asking Rev. Diane Rollert if she had received an email that I had sent to her seeking dialogue with her so that I could explain to her why I was protesting etc. I did raise my voice somewhat as she was walking away from me, but only because I felt she needed to hear what I had to say when she was 20-30 feet away from me. The "incident" is described in this The Emerson Avenger blog post that was posted the very same day that it happened.
: “The court granted me, personally, the peace bond after I sat through four hours of being grilled by him when he didn’t have a lawyer,” Rollert said.
: For one year, from about 2008 to 2009, the community was spared the marching, picketing, yelling, filming and sidewalk-chalking Edgar greets men, women and children alike with each Sunday. Rain, shine, snow, hail, he has been demonstrating for more than 20 years outside the church he was once a member of, before a falling out resulted in his expulsion. But the reprieve didn’t last.

The above is "true enough", it describes what is known as "peaceful public protest", but it is not accurate, and it is somewhat misleading in what it does not say. . . I rarely yell during my protests, although I did so last Sunday outside the Lakeshore Unitarian Universalist Congregation with some justification, in 2008-2009 there was very little filming done because I did not have a video capable digital camera that could film video for more than a few minutes at a time. I don't recall protesting during a hail storm. . . This is what is known as "hyperbole" aka "exaggeration".
: “He came back the day the peace bond ended,” Rollert said.

This is "true enough". I resumed my peaceful public protest outside the Unitarian "Church" of Montreal the first Sunday after the unjustly granted peace bond expired. I distinctly remember Rev. Diane Rollert coming out of her "church", walking right up to within a few feet of me, and telling me that I had "no right" to be there. Strange behaviour from a woman who obtained a "peace bond" aka "restraining order" against me on the basis of claiming to fear for her personal safety. It seems to me that if Rev. Diane Rollert genuinely feared for her personal safety in the sense of a physical assault on her by Yours Truly, that she would not ever so fearlessly walk right up to me without any "body guard" and (wrongly) tell me that I had "no right" to be protesting against Unitarian Universalist clergy abuse outside her outrageously hypocritical Unitarian "church".
: Rollert is anxious about what comes next. After Edgar was charged with three counts of criminal harassment against Montgomery in 2017, he was again prevented from his weekly demonstrations outside the church where she is a member. While Edgar was acquitted of the harassment counts, he was earlier found guilty of violating his release conditions. He has a sentencing hearing on June 27.

Yes, I don't doubt that Rev. Diane Rollert is "anxious" about me resuming my peaceful public protest against Unitarian Universalist clergy abuse, and related injustices, abuses, and hypocrisy, such as Unitarian Universalist misuse and abuse of the SPVM police force and Canada's criminal justice system to prevent me from protesting outside the Unitarian "Church" of Montreal and to try to intimidate me into "memory holing" The Emerson Avenger blog post that tell the readily verifiable truth about what the Unitarian Universalist Association's Canadian attorney describes as "such despicable crimes as pedophilia and rape".
: Depending on the outcome, Rollert fears a nightmare that has gone on for the better part of two decades could resume.

How is a usually very peaceful public protest against Unitarian Universalist clergy abuse, which includes "such despicable crimes as pedophilia and rape" a "nightmare"?
:It’s harassment, but it’s not criminal.

How is peaceful public protest against Unitarian Universalist clergy abuse etc. "harassment"?
: That was the stunning conclusion of Quebec Court Judge Flavia Longo in acquitting Edgar. She agreed that following, filming, writing, blogging and tweeting about Montgomery and showing up on her street was indeed harassment.

Again, I do not "follow" Sue Montgomery as in "stalking" her. And I comparatively rarely specifically film her. On the rare occasions that I do specifically film Montreal Unitarian clergy abuse cover-up enabler Sue Montgomery, I have very good reasons to do so. Dare I point out to Montreal Gazette "journalist" Allison Hanes that filming, writing, blogging and tweeting about people is something that professional journalists do, and that there is such a thing as a "citizen journalist" thanks to the fact that "professional journalists" often do not report newsworthy stories that a deserving of some mainstream media news reporting? Heck, I can even assure Allison Hanes, and ALL other "journalists", that there are professional journalists who are MUCH more aggressive at *following* people that they want to film, write, blog and Tweet about than I ever have. . . Has Allison Hanes given the slightest thought about the legal implications for professional journalists of judge Flavia Longo (allegedly according to Allison Hanes) ruling that "following, filming, writing, blogging and tweeting" about a person constitutes "harassment", albeit thankfully not "criminal harassment"? If professional journalists can engage in "following, filming, writing, blogging and tweeting" about corrupt politicians etc. why can't I, or ANY other Canadian citizen?

:But she found Montgomery failed to show she was scared enough — an element of the Criminal Code definition of harassment — so Longo let him off.

Not exactly. . .

Quebec Court judge Flavia Longo found that self-described "tough cookie", Montreal Unitarian clergy abuse cover-up enabler, and Valérie Plante's first choice for Deputy Mayor of Montreal, Sue Montgomery showed no signs of fear whatsoever, which is entirely consistent with a person who is on public record as saying “I am a tough cookie.” In fact, in a relatively polite and restrained manner, judge Flavia Longo ruled that Sue Montgomery had effectively lied to her about her kicking and throwing of my picket signs on Sunday March 18, 2018, while she was under a solemn oath to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Something that seems to be exceedingly difficult for an apparent pathological liar like Montreal Unitarian clergy abuse cover-up enabler Sue Montgomery to do. . .
:It’s a twist of logic that raises troubling questions about the justice system’s ability to protect women in the wake of #MeToo, the hashtag for the social movement that has exposed authorities’ reluctance to believe sexual assault complaints and tendency to shame and blame victims.

How ironic that I have been protesting against the reluctance of Unitarian Universalist church "authorities" to believe clergy sexual misconduct complaints, and the tendency of not only "church" authorities, but Unitarian Universalists more generally. . . to shame and blame victims of clergy abuse, whether it be clergy sex abuse, or non-sexual forms of clergy abuse such as verbal abuse and psychological abuse. Here is a U*UTube video of Montreal Unitarian #ChildSexAbuse cover-up enabler David Horan "shaming and blaming" Yours Truly after I caught him erasing my chalk slogans protesting against the cover-up and denial of child sex abuse committed by UUA clergy by top level UUA leaders like former UUA President Rev. Dr. Peter Morales, UUA Executive *Vice* Presdident Kathleen "Kay" Montgomery, and UUA Moderator Jim Key.


:This judgment — acknowledging harassment, but denying criminality — only adds fuel to the fire.

Who knew? Not ALL harassment is of a criminal nature. I am sure that the members of the Resistance and the Partisans who *harassed* Nazis during WWII will be relieved to learn that they are not criminals. Likewise the British fighter pilots who flew up in Hurricanes and Spitfires to *harass* the Luftwaffe bombers heading for London and Coventry etc. are not guilty of "criminal harassment", just ordinary run-of-the-mill "good harassment" as it were. . .
:“Am I supposed to cower and run away? Do I have to be a damsel in distress?” Montgomery wondered. “We’re telling young women to stand up for themselves and young people to stand up to bullies. What message does this send?”

: The message it sends is that Quebec Court judge Flavia Longo seems to think that it's OK for middle-aged men to stand up for themselves and stand their ground when arrogant and contemptuous Unitarian Universalist clergy abuse cover-up enabling bullies like Sue Montgomery go out of their way to *harass* them and intimidate them. . . The message it sends that that Montreal Unitarian clergy abuse cover-up enabler Sue Montgomery should think twice about minimizing aka lying in sworn testimony. And yes, if someone genuinely did fear for their personal safety, especially if someone genuinely feared that another person is likely to murder them, as "tough cookie" Sue Montgomery dubiously claims in her slanderous fear-mongering suggesting that I am the next Valery Fabrikant, or Marc Lepine, or Richard Bain, that it may not be necessary to "cower and run away", but it is "less than wise" to very deliberately go out of one's way to approach that alleged future mass-murderer and seek to provoke them to anger. Someone like that might actually assault you or even kill you. No? It's much more advisable to simply choose a different route to one's church to avoid any close physical confrontation if one can.

:Needless to say, Montgomery is no shrinking violet.

Needless to say. . .

In fact, Montreal Unitarian clergy abuse cover-up enabler, former Gazette "Justice Reporter, and former Deputy Mayor of Montreal, Sue Montgomery publicly told Montreal voters that she is a "tough cookie" who "isn't afraid of anyone" during the Montreal municipal election campaign in October 2017. In fact, she made that claim during a CDN NDG mayoralty debate within minutes of claiming that asking a question to all three mayoralty candidates, and video recording how it was responded by them, constituted "harassment" of her, allegedly because she is a woman.

Sue Montgomery is also on public record as claiming, "I am not intimidated by anyone." in this "journalism" of one Samir Ben, or would it be public relations?

"Je suis forte. Je ne suis intimidée par personne. Je suis une femme d’action. Mon travail de journaliste m’a permis d’être sur le terrain avec les gens."

Quite evidently Montreal Unitarian clergy abuse cover-up enabler Sue Montgomery is "forte" aka strong enough to kick and throw my picket signs protesting against her religion's cover-up, and even official denial, of "such despicable crimes as pedophilia and rape" into the street. It is abundantly obvious that Valérie Plante's "tough cookie" Deputy Mayor Sue Montgomery is indeed NOT the least bit intimidated by the person known as Robin Edgar aka The Emerson Avenger in this U*UTube video of Sue Montgomery's FAILed attempt to suppress my legitimate peaceful public protest against Unitarian Universalist clergy abuse by trying to get me arrested for breach of conditions on Sunday March 18, 2018. Sue Montgomery truly is "a woman of action" in these videos, to say nothing of being quite the "woman of action" when it comes to persuading dozens of her incompetent and-or UNethical journalist colleagues aka cronies in the mainstream media to publish slanderous fear-mongering #FakeNews reports about Yours Truly. . .





(Full disclosure: We were longtime colleagues at the Montreal Gazette).

: Who would have thought?

I seem to recall phoning The Gazette's City Desk when Alison Hanes was manning it on several different occasions, to try to get The Gazette to responsibly report on newsworthy stories about Unitarian Universalist clergy abuse cover-up efforts, local or international, only to have Alison Hanes come up with all kinds of lame excuses for not assigning a Gazette "journalist" to report the story. . .

: As a survivor of both childhood sexual abuse and sexual assault as an adult, she won’t be silenced.

LOL! I'm not trying to silence Montreal Unitarian clergy abuse cover-up enabler Sue Montgomery, au contraire, I am trying to get her to talk about Unitarian Universalist clergy abuse, clergy abuse cover-up and denial, and related injustices amd abuses. I've asked Sue to report newsworthy stories on several different occasions, going back as far as December 2000 when I was arrested for allegedly violating section 176.3 of the Canadian Criminal Code. I'm not even trying all that hard to silence the slanderous fear-mongering that Sue Montgomery has been engaging in for some time now, but I suppose I had better get around to that before I am assaulted or murdered by some misguided "champion" of a certain "damsel in distress".

: In 2014, she helped launch the hashtag #BeenRapedNeverReported, a precursor to #MeToo, which revealed the staggering number of women who are assaulted, abused, raped and violated compared with the small fraction of assailants ever held to account.

Funny how #BeenRapedNEVERreported hashtag co-founder Sue Montgomery SO obstinately refuses to talk about the number of women assaulted, abused, raped and violated by abusive Unitarian Universalist ministers, compared with the small fraction of UUA ministers ever held to account for the clergy sexual misconduct aka clergy sex abuse by the UUA's ever so aptly named Ministerial *Fellowship* Committee. . . What's Sue's excuse for not only her continued silence about U*U clergy sex abuse of all kinds, but her continued "less than credible" outright denial of ANY abuse whatsoever in the Unitarian "church"? I've been asking Sue to *report* on that, amongst some other issues, for well over a decade now. . .

:It’s just not worth it in a justice system where a victim’s every move is judged — what she wore, what she said, how she responded in the aftermath — while the accused is given the benefit of the doubt.

I don't think Quebec Court judge said anything about what Sue Montgomery wore when she ever so fearlessly and determinedly made her way to the Unitarian "Church" of Montreal on Sunday March 18th, 2018, to try to provoke me into communicating with her so that she could then get me arrested for breach of conditions which prohibit me from communicating with her.
:Criminal harassment cases, it seems, are no different.

Wow! So now I am being compared to a rapist by Alison Hanes and-or Sue Montgomery, as if it wasn't bad enough being smeared as a potential mass murderer. . .
:“I’m a person of privilege. I’m a white, professional woman and a public figure,” Montgomery said. “But what about other women? What does your average woman have to do?”

Well it certainly is quite refreshing, and even gratifying, to see Montreal Unitarian clergy abuse cover-up enabler Sue Montgomery describing herself as "a person of privilege" and "a white, professional woman and a public figure", because she is most certainly more than a little bit privileged in her ability to somehow persuade a "less than competent" SPVM sergeant detective to order my arrest me for alleged criminal harassment, when she has little or no reasonable grounds to fear for her safety, assuming that Sue genuinely fears for her safety at all. . .

: True to form, she is channelling her disappointment into a new fight. She has already written to the Crown urging an appeal in hopes the Supreme Court of Canada might one day rethink the “fear factor.” And she is ready to press the federal government to modernize the law for the social media and #MeToo era.

LOL! Sue is ready to press the federal government to "modernize" the law so that it can be more easily used to repress the Charter Rights and freedoms of people engaging in legitimate public criticism of public figures, peaceful public protest, "citizen journalism", and other whistleblowing etc. Apparently Allison Hanes, and a whole lot of other willfgully ignorant Montreal "journalists", are foolishly oblivious to how that "modernized" criminal harassment law could be used to silence *professional* "journalists". Maybe Alison Hanes should read this redacted aka "memory holed" excerpt from this CJFE Alert.
: “It’s not just for me, but for all victims of harassment,” Montgomery said. “I don’t really back down on these things. It just makes me want to fight harder.”

LOL! Apparently Montreal Unitarian clergy abuse cover-up enabler Sue Montgomery has yet to figure out that *I* don’t really back down on these things. It just makes me want to fight harder. . .
***
: Is the law an ass, as the saying goes? Or did Judge Longo fall into the trap of holding the victim to a higher standard than the accused?

The law IS an ass, and so is Montreal U*U Sue Montgomery. . . for SO UNethically, and SO cynically and indeed foolishly attempting to abusively misuse Canada's criminal harassment law in a malicious prosecution that was quite obviously intended to suppress my ability to ask Sue Montgomery, or any other Montreal politician, "tough questions" about Sue's past and ongoing complicity in Unitarian Universalist clergy abuse cover-up efforts.
: In the part of her decision applying the law to the facts of the case, Longo devoted nearly as many paragraphs to assessing Edgar’s behaviour as to Montgomery’s actions — 15 versus 14, by my count. The complainant’s credibility was dissected in great detail based largely on videos filmed by Edgar. So the judge examined Montgomery through his lens.

LOL! The judge examined Montgomery through what my cameras lens saw and recorded. I had minimal influence over what the camera other than to ensure that it recorded Sue Montgomery's highly questionable attempt to suppress my peaceful public protest against clergy abuse on Sunday March 18, 2018.
: The verdict also hinges on one particular incident in the lengthy ordeal, where Montgomery lost her cool and kicked Edgar’s protest signs outside her church.

The camera shows that Sue Montgomery did not "lose her cool" when she quite contemptuously (dare I say "cooly"?) kicked and threw my protest signs into the street. Perhaps Alison Hanes can asked #BeenRapedNEVERreported hashtag co-counder Sue Montgomery exactly why she was, and still is. . . helping the Unitarian Universalist "religion" to suppress my protest against U*U clergy abuse which includes, but is by no means limited to, "such despicable crimes as pedophilia and rape". . . I'm curious to know thayt answer to *that* question.
: “The court interprets this as an attempt to provoke the accused,” Longo wrote.

So do I, and so will most people who view the video in question. . .
: “She remained close to the accused for eight minutes while waiting for police to arrive. (My emphasis.)

LOL! Alison Hanes is emphasizing She, and She alone?!!
: “She minimized her description of her true actions.
: “Her face and body language did not exhibit signs of fright.”
: There is barely a word criticizing or admonishing Edgar over the harassment. But Montgomery isn’t the perfect victim, so the harasser is off the hook.

Indeed Sue Montgomery isn’t the perfect victim, she's the perfect *tool* the Unitarian Universalist "church" can use to distract attention away from it's serious clergy sex abuse problem. . .
***
: Not all judges have taken Edgar’s conduct so lightly. While Longo closed the book on 20 years in nine pages, Quebec Court Judge Dennis Galiatsos took a much deeper look at Edgar’s behaviour in the ruling that found he had violated his condition not to communicate with Montgomery by showing up at city council to ask questions about her.
: “The accused used the question-period setting as a ruse to get around his communication prohibition. In that sense, his mens rea went beyond recklessness. The Court finds actual, calculated intent,” Galiatsos wrote. “This shows an extreme — and alarming — level of persistence and relentlessness.”

Nevertheless *he* persisted?

What a terrible heinous crime it was for me to dare to ask Sue Montgomery's number one enabler, Montréal mayor Valérie Plante, for her opinion of her Deputy Mayor's highly questionable behaviour of March 18, 2018, during the Public Questions Period of the March Montreal city council meeting. In fact, there was no "ruse" involved. I had asked my lawyer to get my court conditions reduced enough to be able to participate in the Public Questions Period of Montreal city council meetings, and be able to ask Montreal politicians questions about Sue Montgomery's highly UNethical behaviour, and he assured me that he had done so. Apparently there was some problematic jurisprudence that he was unaware of, but it is also possible that judge Dennis Galiatsos, who one veteran Montreal criminal defense lawyer descrivbes as "a hanging judge", made a mistake in ruling that I had communicated with Sue Montgomery when she was not even in the council chambers when I asked Valérie Plante what she though of this. Needless to say, I am appealing that questionable ruling.
***
: After his acquittal on the harassment charges, Edgar told journalists he plans to continue his protests and return to city council meetings.

What a nefarious crime. Continuing a protest against Unitarian Universalist clergy abuse, which includes, pedophilia and rape, and various other U*U injustices, abuses, and hypocrisy. What a terrible crime returning to city council meetings to ask Montreal politicians any number of legitimate questions, including questions about Sue Montgomery's highly questionable abusive misuse of Canada's criminal harassment law in a deeply misguided malicious prosecution whose primary goal was to prevent me from askingh questions at city council meetings, and prevent me from protesting against clergy abuse etc. outside the Unitarian "Church" of Montreal.
: “Everything I’m doing in terms of Sue Montgomery is perfectly legitimate,” he said.

Indeed it is as far as I am concerned.
: Montgomery must continue to look over her shoulder.

No, Sue Montgomery must not continue to look over her shoulder, because I have no intention whatsoever of causing her (or anyone else) the slightest physical harm. I just intend to continue to expose and denounce Sue Montgomery's past and ongoing complicity in Unitarian Universalist clergy abuse cover-up efforts until she accepts responsibly for her role in U*U clergy abuse cover-up efforts and stops being complicit in them. Sue Montgomery could have been an ally years ago, she chose instead to aid and abet Unitarian Universalist clergy abuse cover-up and denial, and she is still doin so, indeed she has raised the ante to an insanely high level now. . .
: Rollert and the Unitarian Church community, too, are bracing for the fallout.

LOL! They know what the fallout" will be, a resumption of my very legitmate peaceful public protest, that will continue until such a time as the very serious issues I am protesting against are responsible addressed, and ALL victims of ALL forms of Unitarian Universalist clergy abuse, sexual abuse and otherwise, finally receive a modicum of "justice, equity and compassion" from the Unitarian Univeralist "religion".
: “The only defence we have is many years of ongoing patience,” she said.

LOL! More like many years, indeed almost a quarter century. . . of ongoing clergy abuse cover-up and denial, and various other injustices, abuses, and hypocrisy.

Labels: , , , , , , , , ,