Statement of Claim, Version #2

2014/02/16 Update:   This is now obsolete and replaced by Version #3.  See SOC-Version #3

 Based on your feedback, I have the new, improved version of the Statement of Claim for the bogus Feed Conversion Ratio potential lawsuit

The Crown (Federal + Ontario) have the previous version, and has 60 days to examine it and decide what they want to do.  I'd prefer them to try admitting to the significant errors in the past, a promise to do better in the future, and negotiations for  a reasonable settlement, without having to go to court.

Somehow, I don't think that is going to happen.  All of the Defendants will likely deny any problem exists, stonewall, and avoid facing the truth of their illegal and unjust actions.

However, we must wait 60 days for them to respond.

In the interim, I have Version #2 of the Statement of Claim ready.  The previous version is now obsolete.

Please look over the new version, and send in your comments and suggestions:

Statement of Claim, Version #2   (Obsolete as of 2014/02/16, see SOC-Version #3 )

We Need More Objective Evidence

During the next 60 days, we need to collect objective evidence to support the allegations made in our Statement of Claim.  While I have been developing some significant pieces to this puzzle during the last 2 years, we need much more hard evidence (or circumstantial evidence) of their wrong-going.

The following form can make it easy to record that necessary evidence, and send it to me.

Form: Evidence Supporting SFPFC's Allegations Against #ChickenMafia   Adobe Acrobat pdf form

Instructions

1. Click on the link.  Depending on your browser configuration, you can open the form in your browser, or you will have to download the form, then open it in Adobe Reader (free software, download by clicking the link).
2. Fill in the form with your info.
3. When done, in the top right of the form, click the link "Submit Form".
4. A new window will open, fill in (or confirm) your email address and your name.  When OK, click on "Send".
5. Your computer will email your feedback to SFPFC's Legal Research Data Centre (ie. me)

The Legal ball in the court of the #ChickenMafia

A previous Blog post published the draft Statement of Claim against the controlling minds of the #ChickenMafia (see SFPFC takes #ChickenMafia to Court over Bogus FCR).

One analogy of this situation is the Defendants were the security guards of the public treasury. Instead of protecting the treasury, they opened the doors and put out signs inviting their friends and any looters to come in and take whatever they wanted. They have some of the loot that they took for themselves (unjust enrichment), but the majority of the public treasure was taken by their friends and unknown looters (due to negligence by the security guards). The security guards however, as the controlling minds, have responsibility for what they did (both unjust enrichment and negligence), and the wrongs they allowed others to do by their negligence.  In the end, they are responsible for all of it.

It's going to be interesting to see how all the controlling minds in Chicken Supply Management respond to this. Some may want to resolve the issue and have it go away as quickly as possible.  Others will have the knee jerk reaction to open up their legal war chest, hire the best legal gun slingers available, and fight forever to block this issue and deny or avoid any resolution.

I'm sure they will want to have a united front, stick together through thick & fin, but with hard feelings between CFC and CFO, will the common enemy (Small Flockers) bring them together, or will it drive them apart? Will one blame the other for getting them into this mess? I'm sure there will be many dynamics and intrigue behind the scenes on this.

My personal lawsuit is nothing but a mosquito at their BBQ; a mere nuisance to them.  However, if successful, they know what comes next.  Somebody else will pick up the torch and try to follow in my path.  Then another.

Eventually, some enterprising lawyer sitting in the audience watching this spectacle will be unable to contain himself any longer.  He will salivate only so long over a potential Class Action lawsuit for all Canadians, and the full $10 Billion that the #ChickenMafia stole from Canadians.

That's when it will get really interesting.

This is way out there, but if it goes to the ultimate success via a Class Action lawsuit for all Canadians, where will the #ChickenMafia get the $10 Billion to pay the Court-awarded compensation to Canadians? At $1.5 million in quota value time 2,700 quota farmers, that is $4.05 Billion. Not quite enough.

Will they mail out 66% off retail store coupons for chicken to all Canadians until the debt is discharged?  How will they cash flow that loss of ongoing revenue?

I'm sure Farm Credit Canada ("FCC") will loan the #ChickenMafia the money to pay the Court judgement.  Oh wait, FCC is very over-extended already, and may have great difficulty collecting on the loans they already stuffed into farmer's pockets (see FCC: The Farm Debt Trafficker and Frightening Farm Finances ).

A previous Blog posting The New Chicken Farmer shows that the starter chicken farm has a capital investment of $4.6 Million. Some farms are bigger than this "starter" farm, but depreciation of the older assets may bring it back to somewhere close to this value. At 2,700 quota farmers in Canada, this is a total capital asset of $12.42 Billion, which will cover the Court award with $2.4 Billion left over for legal fees and miscellaneous costs.

Here's a wild and crazy solution.  Perhaps Canadians should "nationalize" the quota-based chicken farms as part of the settlement.  Canadians will own all quota-based chicken farms (as a National Co-op perhaps ?), and each farmer gets a $888,000 buyout paid over 20 years (the $2.4 Billion excess divided up amongst the 2,700 farmers, which is a $44,400 per year per farmer payout) as a levereged buyout (see LBO).  If they want, the quota-based farmers can keep their jobs, now as a wage slave, running those publicly owned quota-based chicken farms.

Interesting turn of events, don't you think?

Of course, all this is just wild speculation that will take at least the next 10 years to play out.  There is just a slim chance that any of this really occurs, but it's fun to dream.

Dreaming these kind of dreams also helps in the interim, to survive another day of oppression and tyranny at the hands of the #ChickenMafia without going crazy.

I can't wait to see how it all comes out.

Plaintiff for the Poisoned

The Reader's Choice, the all-time favorite Blog posting by readers is where I described the arsenic poisoning forced onto the public so that mega-factory, quota bearing chicken producers could earn an extra 4% profit.

See my April 2, 2013 posting Choose: Frankenstein Chicken, or Naturally Raised Chicken? which so far has collected a total of 1,819 views.

Why so popular?  I guess it's because people get really interested when they learn they have been chronically poisoned with arsenic-laced chicken without their consent.

I've seen reports that estimate 70% to 90% of the chicken from the mega-factory producers was laced with arsenic.  So if you ate chicken you bought from a grocery store between 1970 and 2012, you are a likely victim of arsenic poisoning at the hands of the Chicken Mafia.

If people are so interested in reading about this, perhaps they'd be interested in doing something about this, beyond reading.

I wonder if anybody has (or should) file criminal or civil (negligence, class action, or otherwise) charges against the mega-factory chicken producers for the administering of a noxious substance.

Section 245 of the Canadian Criminal Code reads as follows:

Administering noxious thing
245. Every one who administers or causes to be administered to any person or causes any person to take poison or any other destructive or noxious thing is guilty of an indictable offence and liable

(a) to imprisonment for a term not exceeding fourteen years, if he intends thereby to endanger the life of or to cause bodily harm to that person; or

(b) to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years, if he intends thereby to aggrieve or annoy that person.

R.S., c. C-34, s. 229.

It should be noted that the Crown does not need to prove that the accused knew the substance was noxious, and that intent can be implied by the actions of the accused (see here and  R. v. Burkholder, 1977 ALTASCAD 8 at 32 ).

Where was Health Canada and CFIA when all this was going on?

Is there any Crown Attorney or lawyer in private practice interested in this case, or willing to advise further?