SOME TRICKS AND SCHEMES OF CERTAIN FRAUDULENT LAWYERS, NOT ONLY IN MY CASE BUT ALSO IN SEVERAL CASES
OCL 2023
1. The children's lawyer, Sam (Rasim) Michel, deliberately concealed all the strong evidence supporting our case, including the CAS investigation report, which confirmed concerns about the father and assured that the children were safe with the mother. The CAS file was closed without any action being taken against the father because he was outside of Canada.
2. The way the witnesses were mentioned in the affidavit by CAS was cunningly crafted to give me the false impression that their statements would be considered by the judge during the trial. However, Canadian law does not give any weight to third-party statements unless direct evidence is presented by the third party, and they testify before the judge during the trial.
3. His insistence on preventing the children from attending court during the trial was concerning. Despite my direct request to Judge Tobin (the judge responsible for the case of international abduction in 2023—since, in Canadian courts, cases are generally handled by random judges unless they involve special circumstances, such as international cases like this one), Judge Tobin confirmed that both I and the children had the right to attend court, even if there was a children’s lawyer, as per Canadian law. Strangely, after that session (immediately), during which Judge Tobin allowed me to submit all my evidence with a written order (since the court staff had previously refused to include my evidence in the court file), the case was oddly transferred to Judge Kiran Sah just days before the final trial. Judge Sah directed the course of the trial, rejected all my submitted evidence in a suspicious manner just days before the trial, and even removed all the documents from my file with a written order. Moreover, she refused to allow the children to testify or attend court, despite my specific concerns about the children’s lawyer—especially after he brought in an expert on Islamic Sharia law who, in reality, had no connection to my faith or beliefs. How could he be considered an expert on my religion when he misinterpreted the verses and hadiths, making completely unacceptable false claims about my religion?
4. Attorney Rasim (Sam) Michel is of Lebanese descent and fluent in reading and understanding Arabic. I sent him the falsifications in the translations submitted by my ex-husband to make him aware of them (as they completely distorted the meaning). Despite both him and my ex-husband’s lawyer, the Sudanese lawyer Abeer Abu Sharia, ignoring these fraudulent translations, I was shocked to later find that the children's lawyer’s expert submitted the same translation errors concerning Sharia law, as well as Jordanian and Kuwaiti law, without providing an official certified translation. In court, it is required that translations be certified by a sworn translator.
5. He was extremely angry when I requested Judge Tobin to have the children testify and verify the accuracy of their statements provided in the OCL documents. There were several errors and strange details in the children's lawyer’s affidavit (between the lines), which raised my suspicions. The only way to uncover the truth and verify the accuracy of the statements is for the concerned individuals themselves to be present. This is in line with Canadian law, and there are hundreds of cases in Canada where children the age of my children (Baraa and Lujain) were allowed to appear before the judge and were given the right to be heard directly.
6. Despite Judge Kiran Sah having complete control over my case—voiding all my evidence and controlling which witnesses from my side could appear—she issued an order preventing any motions from being submitted to facilitate actions in my case before trial, unless she personally gave direct permission. However, in reality, motions in Canadian courts can be presented to any judge without needing prior court approval because motions are meant to address urgent matters. Additionally, in Canada, the process of requesting witnesses does not happen directly from me without a court order. The purpose of these strange (and unlawful) orders in my case was to undermine the strong foundation of my case. Even if a preliminary ruling were issued against me, there are specific conditions for accepting an appeal based on certain grounds in the ruling, which primarily depend on the evidence and documents submitted. (Thankfully, the ruling was in my favor after a 16-day trial by Judge Tobin, following multiple complaints I had filed against Judge Kiran Sah and the lawyers who manipulated my case and tampered with the facts.) However, when Judge Tobin returned to my case, although he allowed me to present my evidence and defend myself, he refused to hear from the children at all (which contradicted his previous permission). He also did not listen to me regarding the evidence that existed within Canada, saying, 'You are not a lawyer.' The children’s lawyer and his friend, the amicus, insisted on preventing the submission of the complete report from CAS. They also insisted on not issuing a final custody ruling and focused on their concerns about the mother’s religion! What does my religion and beliefs have to do with custody in a free, multicultural country that allows full freedom of expression and the right to follow any religious, intellectual, or spiritual beliefs? Why does this issue specifically seem to arise with Muslims?"
Is my case truly a family and custody matter regarding the protection of children, or has it been transformed into a case of hatred against committed Muslims?!
7. The strange focus, which contradicts Canadian law regarding freedom of expression of religion, beliefs, and culture, on my daughter Lujain wearing a niqab is concerning! The children's lawyer emphasized this matter, and my ex-husband repeated several phrases in his documents stating that I hold 'strange beliefs' that do not belong to Islam. He even claimed that I insisted on him growing his beard! He aimed to create a negative impression of me in court by exploiting the image of the niqab and beard. (I never caused any problems with him regarding his beard, nor did I ask him to grow it, even though I wished he would. It seems he portrayed himself in a certain way during a specific period to claim to people that he is religious. Now, in the Canadian court, he has even shaved his mustache! How hypocritical...) And I want to say clearly, despite all the accusations he made by exploiting the image of my niqab, I genuinely hope that all Muslim men grow their beards—not to conform to a celebrity or a trend, but because it is the correct image of a peaceful, pious, good-natured Muslim who upholds morals and beliefs. If my belief in this is considered a 'crime' in the family court in Canada, I request to be provided with the relevant law!
8. It seems that both the previous and current children's lawyers are not treating this case as a regular family matter according to Canadian law; instead, it has become categorized under religion and beliefs. Why is there such significant focus (even during the court proceedings and the final judgment) on the issue of the niqab?! ((Paragraphs 260 and 261...) Why were two experts (Shia) brought in—one from the children's lawyer Michel and the other from my ex-husband in Kuwait—despite the fact that I am Sunni, and there is a significant difference between Sunni and Shia? (For example, just as there is a difference between Catholics and Orthodox Christians. Is it reasonable to bring in an expert from one to address the other?!) One of the statements my ex-husband submitted to the court and the CAS and OCL investigations is as follows..."
(I am also concerned that I have not been unable to see my daughter, Lujain’s face during calls. Lujain who is only 10 years old, has been wearing niqab (face covering). This is not a religion requirement and can be “DAMAGING” to Lujain.))..
Oh my LORD, all this destruction just because of the niqab! They might as well consider it like a mask that became popular around the world during the COVID-19 pandemic!
Aldahleh v. Zayed, 2024 ONSC 547 (CanLII), at para 260, <https://canlii.ca/t/k3bl0#par260> retrieved on 2024-10-22
[260] L. now wears a veil when speaking to the father. When asked by Ms. Heslop why, she began to cry. Her response was,
“I did not wear it in Kuwait. I started in Canada. Technically, when he kicked us out of the home, he did not mind that I am his daughter. He did not care I was his daughter.”
Aldahleh v. Zayed, 2024 ONSC 547 (CanLII), at para 261, <https://canlii.ca/t/k3bl0#par261> retrieved on 2024-10-22
[261] Quietly she continued, “why would I recognize him as my father and remove my veil?”
I have provided my explanations: First, my ex-husband is the one who requested that conversations with the children be recorded using the 'Talking Parents Communications' app, so it's only natural that the one who wears a hijab will be wearing it during the recording!
Second: The children have completely refused to communicate since the time we were in Kuwait, not just in Canada. They answer the calls and repeatedly say, 'We don’t want to talk to you,' especially after the ongoing violence and anger displayed by their father during the conversations with them in the recorded calls from 2023, which clearly show the father’s character.
Third: Lujain, even though she was only 10 years old at the time, was considered mature enough to understand her situation from a legal and religious perspective."
"Fourth: It is well known that Canada is a country of freedom and multiculturalism that welcomes all religions and beliefs. Why is there such excessive focus in my case on religion and our religious attire? Why isn’t there a deeper exploration of these matters with other religions, such as (the priesthood, various types of Christianity, Zoroastrianism, or paganism)? Every person in Canada has their personal freedom. Why should a Muslim woman fear the consequences of this personal freedom and compromise her beliefs and principles to manage her life?
NO, THIS WILL NEVER HAPPEN, AND WE WILL NOT GIVE UP ANY OF OUR RIGHTS UNTIL THE LAST MOMENT OF OUR LIVES."
Fifth, and most importantly: I did not force my daughter to wear the niqab; it is her personal decision alone, and she has the freedom to choose! Every child living in Canada has the right to make any decision (including changing their gender, even if the parents oppose it). There is no doubt that my daughter, like any child, has the complete right under Canadian law, humanitarian law, or any law you wish to reference, to make decisions freely and absolutely without any bias against their religion and beliefs.
Sixth: Despite many people addressing this issue and advising me and my daughter to remove the niqab (ALLAH forbids), claiming it is not obligatory and that there is a disagreement about its ruling, I respond by saying: this is our belief, and we will not abandon it; we have the freedom to do so. Even if the niqab is considered a Sunnah, it undoubtedly elevates one’s status and rewards in the afterlife. I don’t understand why the father (if he is a Muslim) would exploit this issue in court and investigations if he genuinely cares about his daughter’s faith and her elevation in paradise! When my ex-husband communicates with mosques and Sunni Muslims, he claims he is concerned about their religion and portrays the mother as bad for not raising them properly in an Islamic manner. Yet when he speaks to non-Muslims, he describes the mother as a terrorist and a danger to the children simply for wearing the niqab! Additionally, when he contacts my relatives in Jordan, Palestine, and Kuwait, he spreads rumors from 2021 that I moved to Canada to remove my hijab, claiming I do not cover my hair and engage in sinful behavior here (ALLAH forbids), and that I came to Canada solely to escape the application of Islamic law. Now, here in Canada, he is using the opposite narrative to attack me because of my adherence to proper attire and beliefs! ((It’s sudden).
If the father truly cared about his daughter and her well-being, he should be happy and proud of her for making significant decisions in her life! What could possibly anger him?
10. This is a family case concerning the custody of children. I am astonished as to why this case (within Canada) has been transformed into matters of faith, with Sharia law being introduced by both the previous children's lawyer and my ex-husband! One of the strange statements my ex-husband made against me is...
(My main concern is to return my kids back to Kuwait where they were living in PEACE and HAPPINESS since they were born and rescue them from their abusive mentally disturbed mother who she thinks she is the descended of a holy blood line of prophet Mohammad)!!!!
Oh, Allah! What is my ex-husband trying to do in a family case?!
"It was mentioned that I spoke about my religion during the ruling (paragraph 274 of the final judgment). Yes, without a doubt, I will speak about my religion in response to the report from the children’s lawyer and my ex-husband’s expert from Kuwait, emphasizing that Islam does not promote violence, abuse, or killing children without holding the abusive father accountable. This is not Islam, nor is it the true image of my peaceful and beautiful faith that has been distorted. They are the ones who introduced religion into this case, and the judge allowed their reports to be included in my case file despite my statement of objection from the beginning. These accusations come from fraudsters who have misrepresented the religion in my case!
I will not remain silent about matters that are sacred and unacceptable, and which no one can overlook, especially from those who attack my faith and falsely claim against my sacred texts—ALLAH’s words (the Quran) and my Prophet, the best of creation (Muhammad, peace be upon him). You, deceitful individuals, have inserted my religion into this family case, and I will not remain silent until you respect boundaries and stop all these violations and deceptions that mislead justice!"
I did not bring your beliefs into this, and it is not my place to do so. Stop making false accusations against me!
11. Attempts to prevent me from defending myself, efforts to silence me, and denial of my right to present evidence of the violence and danger I faced over the years in Kuwait.
12. The amicus lawyer appointed by the judge (who is the subject of my complaint and was removed from this case for a period, but has now returned to continue the games against the mother and children): and the true nature of their friendship with the children’s lawyer.
13. The reality is that both lawyers (Sam Michel and Anthony Macri) from Toronto, despite requesting that all lawyers attend in person during the trial, which lasted 16 days! Who disregarded the cost of 16 days of hotel stays for lawyers despite the thousands of child lawyers and court lawyers available in London, Ontario? Who deliberately intended for specific individuals to be chosen and gathered carefully in my case file for a particular purpose?!
14. If my ex-husband is indeed as low-income as he claims and cannot afford child support for years, and he was forced to pay for the Islamic school fees for the months of September and October of this year despite his insistence on denying child support, then who paid for two lawyers to represent him in London, Ontario, throughout 2023? Who covered the costs of the additional lawyer who appeared via Zoom at the beginning of the case from Toronto (whose fees are several times higher than those of the London lawyers)? Where did all this money suddenly come from within Canada? And who is gathering these individuals in our case file?
Despite the fact that I was the one who requested a children's lawyer from the previous lawyer, Selim Al-Kout, it was my ex-husband's lawyer from Toronto, along with the first lawyer from London, who requested that the judge appoint lawyer Michel from Toronto specifically for this case, claiming they know him and that he is 'excellent'! What does 'excellent' mean by their standards, and why him specifically? Is there a deliberate effort to gather certain individuals in my case for a specific purpose?"
Salim Al-Kout's silence in several instances during the sessions in 2023 and his failure to present my strong evidence was a significant source of concern for me. It wasn't until I went to court in August 2023 and requested all the documents in my case that evidence of his manipulation in my file was actually uncovered. That was a shock!
However, after that, I was prevented from obtaining the documents from the court, and my papers were not properly filed into my case file (which I will explain soon... perhaps this will serve as a warning to some mothers to be cautious of the tricks of fraudsters!).
15. Lawyer Michel submitted a motion on the same day of the trial (November 14, 2023), despite a written order dated October 24, 2023, prohibiting the submission of any motions beforehand. Michel was the one who specifically requested that lawyer Anthony Macri be appointed as the court's lawyer for this case to 'facilitate the court proceedings.' During the session with Judge Kiran Sah, Michel made it clear that lawyer Anthony Macri was ready and prepared to begin the trial immediately and that he was fully knowledgeable about the case (all of this occurred before the motion was raised and before the approval for appointing the amicus!). SUBHANALLAH, they couldn’t find any amicus lawyer in all of London or the surrounding areas, nor even in Toronto, except for Macri!
16. The children's lawyer requested to grant the amicus the right to AMEND the pleading and documents and evidence submitted (by the mother) because I do not have a lawyer and am defending myself independently. This was stated in Form 14 (Notice of Motion dated November 14, 2023), Request 2.
2. That this Honourable Court considers the appointment of Amicus in this proceeding to assist the Applicant mother / and this Honourable Court on the attached terms or such terms as this Honourable Court may determine just. (See schedule attached for the proposed terms)
And referring to the terms and conditions of his appointment, there are 14 points, including the following (these are strange conditions, so what is the underlying goal behind them?)
1) Amicus curiae shall be appointed to assist the court in its role of ensuring the trial is orderly and fair to all parties.
2) Amicus shall be entitled to fully participate in the trial, including making opening statements, summons and examining witnesses who support the plan being forward by amicus on behalf of the mother, cross-examining, witnesses, and make evidentiary objections as appropriate, prepare or amend pleadings. Amicus may bring motions and file relevant evidence with leave of the court.
3) The terms and conditions of the appointment of amicus may only be varied by further order of this Court. Only the Court has the authority to terminate or limit the involvement and participation of amicus in this proceeding. Neither the Respondent father nor any other party has the authority to terminate the involvement or change the role of amicus in this proceeding.
4) Legal Aid Ontario shall locate counsel willing and able to fulfill the role of amicus, and such person shall be appointed to act as amicus pursuant to the terms of this Order.
5) Amicus shall be entitled to full production and disclosure of documents relevant to the case. Within 10 days of confirmation of the appointment of amicus, the Respondent father shall furnish to the amicus copies of the court record, as well as any disclosure previously provided to the parties in this case. Amicus shall have disclosure of any further documents produced by any party in this case.
6) Amicus is entitled to order the transcripts of any court appearance.
7) The Ministry of the Attorney General shall provide funding for amicus in accordance with the terms of this order.
8) Amicus shall be paid at legal aid rates.
9) Amicus will abide by Legal Aid Ontario's policies and procedures, including authorization for disbursements, monitoring and review of accounts, billing practices, and payment rules.
10) Legal Aid Ontario shall manage funding of amicus in accordance with this order, the Ministry of the Attorney General - Legal Aid Ontario Protocol for Management of Court- Ordered Publicly Funded Counsel, and LAO's policies and procedures, including authorization for disbursements, monitoring and review of accounts, billing practices, and payment rules.
11) Amicus will not have a solicitor-client relationship with any of the parties to this matter; however, amicus' communications with the Applicant mother for the purposes of carrying out the terms of this order will be treated as confidential.
12) Amicus is at liberty to seek directions from the Court, on notice to the parties and the Attorney General of Ontario, as may be necessary to carry out their duties.
13) This order shall bind any future amicus who may be appointed by this Court.
14) In the event that the Applicant mother retains counsel, amicus shall only participate in the trial as directed by the trial judge.
If we open our minds, think critically, and read between the lines—because we are the 'Ummah of Iqra'—it would be great to lift the fog that clouds our eyes and stop following the superficial talk that makes us laugh at ourselves under the pretext that only licensed lawyers understand the law! I wish we could read and understand before becoming followers, chasing after the 'toad in its hole' without thinking!
Regarding the first point, his addition was indeed fair to all parties, especially since he is the reason for not listening to the mother or allowing her to present evidence of the father's forgery, evidence of her innocence from the father's accusations, and evidence of the father's psychological and emotional abuse against the children after their travel from Kuwait. The father showed no remorse and continued to abuse them during the allotted parenting time through calls in Canada, which caused the children to explode and refuse to maintain any contact with their father!
Undoubtedly, his intervention was just when he requested the judge not to issue final judgments regarding all matters based on the documents presented by both parties, but instead requested to postpone the custody decision, claiming they needed further investigations! (If there are hundreds of videos and dozens of final rulings from the Court of Appeals in Kuwait that prove the father's abuse of the rights he holds, and if the Canadian government relocated the mother and children to Canada to protect them from what they were subjected to in Kuwait, especially in recent times, then what do the fraudulent individuals in this case seek?! To issue a false report about the mother being mentally ill (as they stated during the trial)? Or is it because she is dangerous due to her religious beliefs and her daughter's choice to wear the niqab (which is a personal freedom for the daughter)?!
Regarding the second point! By what right does the children's lawyer request to stipulate that the amicus represent me and change all the documents and papers submitted by me?! This is my case, and I have the right to defend myself! If that is the case, then why is there no enforcement of any ruling on the amicus on my behalf? If I am the concerned party in this case, and I am the one who has gone through these experiences in Kuwait and Canada, I have the right to be heard and not silenced. No one has the right to change my papers and the evidence I submitted.
The reason for canceling this condition is that I had submitted an official complaint against the racist judge to the Judicial Council of Canada, which made her cautious about the orders she issues to eliminate the charges of racism and abuse against individuals. However, based on what is currently being presented in court by the other parties, it is clear that they are planning the same thing or something worse. But my complaint this time has been submitted exclusively and is restricted to the Judge of the heavens and the earth, so praise be to ALLAH for what He will write for us (whatever it is, it is good).
!
The decision to introduce the amicus was issued cautiously by the judge to avoid being condemned for anything, so she could close the complaint through deceitful means and return to the case to continue her plan! However, she certainly wrote what she wanted and claimed that I said things I would never have said, as her ruling was crafted with a specific intention. Indeed, Allah is sufficient for us, and He is the best disposer of affairs!
Aldahleh v. Zayed, 2023 ONSC 6540 (CanLII), <https://canlii.ca/t/k1lc9>
Regarding point three: Nice! Of course, the father will not refuse the amicus because it was essentially introduced into the case file in a joint coordination with the network associated with our case, and it is a supportive element for him (behind the scenes), so why would he refuse it... (Try another one)! As for preventing the mother from refusing the appointment of the amicus or requesting its change, this is a very strange matter, especially since the previous point stated that the mother would not have the right to present documents or even represent herself, as the amicus would be her representative. By what right of human rights or any law in any country in the world is a specific person chosen by the other parties in court and the first party forced to remain silent and prohibited from objecting to or canceling the appointment of any person representing them?! This has never happened except in cases where there is deceit and a pre-planned agenda for what the decision will be, even before the session takes place! They carefully choose a specific method to reach the decision and create supporting reasons for them, even if they are 100% false! Oh, the justice!
Regarding points four and eight: First of all, if the legal aid doesn’t pay much, and not just any lawyer accepts payment from legal aid, who covered the costs for this lawyer (Anthony Macri) for his accommodation in London hotels during the trial that lasted (16 days from 9 AM to 4:30 PM and even longer at times)?! Logic dictates that hotels are not cheap at all! Appointing a lawyer and bringing him specifically from Toronto to handle our case file!
Regarding point five: It seems he is very clever to understand a case that has over 5,000 pages presented to clarify the basis of the case. The mother is not allowed, according to point two of lawyer Michelle’s request, to represent herself, nor can she prevent the amicus from changing the documents submitted from her side, or even object to his inclusion in the case and request his recusal!!! Very nice and clearly reflects the pinnacle of justice and wisdom!..... It is expected that the 10 days are just a formality, and that prior to submitting the motion or even appointing Macri as the court lawyer, there had already been a plan in place regarding what documents would be submitted, what the content would be, and what would change in the documents submitted by the mother's defense!
Regarding point seven: Greetings to the Ministry of Justice, which was presented with an official complaint against Judge Kiran Sah, along with evidence of her racism and injustice towards the mother. After a confirmation number was sent for the complaint file and it was stated that civil actions would be taken against the judge and that the mother would be informed of the procedures... the very next day, without any prior warning and without logical explanation, an email was sent notifying the mother of the closure of the file due to the lack of "authority and jurisdiction" of the Ministry of Justice against Judge Kiran Sah. However, what they do not know is that my file is still open in the hands of the Judge of the heavens and the earth, and ALLAH willing, the ruling is near. I apologize if the payment for the amicus, who lost the case, and the plan they devised exceeded the financial capacity for hotels, transportation, and fees! Forgive us for the cost... but who is exactly responsible for the payment? If I knew the name specifically, I would fulfill my thanks towards him!
Regarding point thirteen! Very interesting! Since when does someone request the appointment of a court lawyer (under the pretext of helping the court in certain circumstances) and set a condition that this decision be permanent for the future in case any amicus is appointed? If all the previous conditions were aimed at controlling the case to steer it in a direction they predetermined, which is unjust to the mother and the children, then why set the condition that these same rules apply in the future? (And I expect the goal of this is in case of an appeal). This is exactly what happened in the case presented by the children's lawyer, Michel, to support his request, and unfortunately, that case was also primarily controlled and the appeal was to prevent individuals from representing themselves and to specify a certain amicus for the court.
Okay, never mind! Let’s see, analyze, and understand more details! Who is the amicus they chose for my case (Anthony or Antonio Macri - who is the same person but changed his preferred name after we exposed him in the announcement and a prior ruling was issued against him)? What are the details of the case that Michelle relied on to support his request? Is there a reason they insist on my physical presence in court rather than via Zoom, especially since my ex-husband is outside the country and he is attending via Zoom? Why the insistence on my personal attendance? What is the plan he has in mind?
"The amicus (lawyer Antonio (Anthony) Macri) is someone who disrespected the law and violated the ethics of his profession in 2017. He threatened his client with direct messages, leading her to file an official complaint against him with the Ontario Bar Association.
Of course, according to the court cases site in Canada, CanLII, I personally found the details of his case and have kept a PDF copy of it. I submitted it in my request to review the forgeries and fraud occurring in my file for the past two full years. The case was displayed on CanLII for the public and carries the citation..
Citation:
Law Society of Upper Canada v. Macri, 2017 ONLSTH 19 (CanLII),<https://canlii.ca/t/gx9sp>
I have attached a photo to confirm its previous display on the site. After I submitted my evidence against the colluding parties in my case, suddenly the details of the case were removed from CanLII, which is indeed strange and raises suspicion. Who has all this power and influence to assist my ex-husband and the fraudulent lawyers in my case to erase the evidence against them and help them control my file?
Moreover, if the client who was threatened by Macri dared to file a complaint against him with the Law Society (and the details of the 'light' judgment issued against Macri were one of the reasons the plaintiff did not attend the testimony without any reason mentioned, with representation from the Law Society by Lisa Vermann and the accused lawyer [Mantonio - Anthony - Macri] only), then why did the complainant disappear during the hearing and not show up at all (her name was not even mentioned, and she was referred to by the initial A.)? What is the secret behind her absence in court to complete her case? Who is behind Macri and others to silence anyone who exposes them in various ways, covering up all the manipulations and forgeries on their part? Is it an international organization with vast power and influence, with connections everywhere to help each other? Is the financial support and gathering of various individuals from different regions and cities in one case premeditated and planned, or is it just an illusion as they claim (against those who discover their actions)?"
What are the details of the case that the children's lawyer Sam (Rasim) Michal relied on (in the Factum) to support his request for the appointment of an amicus and to restrict my freedom to present my evidence and defend myself directly (on the first day of the trial)? And why did he not submit his request a few days before the trial? The case is Morwald-Benevides v. Benevides, 2019 ONCA 1023 (CanLII), https://canlii.ca/t/j49b6
Michel focused on the mother's inability to defend herself and that the trial was beyond her capacity. This is mentioned in paragraph 13 of the judgment issued in the above case.
Morwald-Benevides v. Benevides, 2019 ONCA 1023 (CanLII), at para 13, <https://canlii.ca/t/j49b6#par13> retrieved on 2024-10-22
[13] After dismissing five counsel, including Mr. Thomson, the mother decided to represent herself at trial. She brought an unsuccessful motion at the outset of trial for an adjournment on medical grounds. The trial judge described the mother's behaviour on the first day of trial as bordering on hysterical. Just before noon she collapsed in the courtroom and was rushed to hospital by ambulance. In the afternoon her brother attended court on her behalf.
Upon reading that the mother dismissed five lawyers, I suspect there is a conspiracy and manipulation of her case, and I believe she is a victim of such a plot. No one understands the mother's feeling of danger that threatens her children except her! She is a gift from ALLAH to the mother, a part of her instinct to protect her children with mercy from ALLAH. No one knows the truth of what happened in court before the break and before the mother returned to the session in the afternoon! No one knows if the mother was injected with any substance by someone hostile to her in court! No one knows the real reason behind this written text and the judgment issued? This does not mean it is the truth; it is possible that the people involved in her case are fraudulent and are plotting harm against her, just like what happened in my case!
What lawyer Michel presented on the first day of the trial in terms of requests and reasons (which the biased judge determined would force me to attend in person in the courtroom rather than via Zoom like my ex-husband) is evidence of their premeditated scheme. They will claim my inability to defend myself to silence me and prevent me from my right to defend myself or even to challenge the credibility of my ex-husband before the judge during the trial, thereby covering for him
Yes, children's lawyer Michel and his amicus friend focused during the trial on questioning my mental capacity due to the years of abuse I suffered from my ex-husband. But what does that have to do with anything? It didn't affect me; on the contrary, it was the reason for my transformation and the source of strength that ALLAH granted me through His justice and fairness. Additionally, they emphasized the danger of my beliefs and religion in their eyes! However, the reality is that they repeatedly tried to silence my voice and prevent me from presenting all my evidence in court to issue an unjust ruling against me based on the control they exerted over my case.
They are still trying to do the same thing to control the upcoming proceedings, but what is their justification now?! My credibility and ability to focus during the 16-day court examination have been proven, and the ruling was issued in favor of me and my children, defended by the Creator's judge, as follows:
Aldahleh v. Zayed, 2024 ONSC 547 (CanLII), at para 15, <https://canlii.ca/t/k3bl0#par15> retrieved on 2024-10-22
[15] The mother answered fully questions put to her, though sometimes with more information than was required.
Aldahleh v. Zayed, 2024 ONSC 547 (CanLII), at para 16, <https://canlii.ca/t/k3bl0#par16> retrieved on 2024-10-22
[16] The mother was knowledgeable about the details of the case and had a strong grasp of the documentary evidence.
Aldahleh v. Zayed, 2024 ONSC 547 (CanLII), at para 18, <https://canlii.ca/t/k3bl0#par18> retrieved on 2024-10-22
[18] The mother’s evidence remained consistent throughout her testimony. Her narrative was coherent and was corroborated by the documentary record. She acknowledged the adverse findings that had been made against her in Kuwait and explained them.
Aldahleh v. Zayed, 2024 ONSC 547 (CanLII), at para 19, <https://canlii.ca/t/k3bl0#par19> retrieved on 2024-10-22
[19] During Ms. Guslits’ searching and lengthy cross-examination of the mother, she was not meaningfully impeached.
Aldahleh v. Zayed, 2024 ONSC 547 (CanLII), at para 20, <https://canlii.ca/t/k3bl0#par20> retrieved on 2024-10-22
[20] Amicus submitted, and I agree, that the mother could be faulted for being too honest.
Aldahleh v. Zayed, 2024 ONSC 547 (CanLII), at para 21, <https://canlii.ca/t/k3bl0#par21> retrieved on 2024-10-22
[21] Counsel for the Children’s Lawyer characterized the mother as “honest to a fault”.
Aldahleh v. Zayed, 2024 ONSC 547 (CanLII), at para 27, <https://canlii.ca/t/k3bl0#par27> retrieved on 2024-10-22
[27] The father also argues that the mother’s credibility is suspect because she abducted the children from Kuwait. I do not put much weight on this submission. As will be explained below, I find that the mother genuinely and reasonably believed that she had the right and ability to move with the children from Kuwait when she did.
But this was only because I presented evidence of the lawyers' fraud in my case to the judge during the trial when they announced their intention to take the children from me and accuse me of forgery and lying, which would serve as a conclusive reason to remove the children from me. They said, 'If the father is corrupt and abusive towards the children, and the mother is fearful of her beliefs and mental state and has doubts about issues in Kuwait, we must take the children and protect them under the care of competent families!' I possess all the evidence of my innocence, but when certain evidence is ignored by officials, know that something is being planned and orchestrated behind the scenes. Moreover, I presented dozens of pieces of evidence regarding the father's fraud and manipulation, whether in Canada or Kuwait. Why weren't they taken into account to prevent him from the current custody dispute? Or is the intention to grant custody and give care over the children to someone other than the mother in Canada? Unfortunately, it seems that the judges are not prepared to stand against the lawyers, or perhaps the one standing behind the lawyers and supporting them has more influence than the judge themselves! It is said that no one is above the law in Canada, but the reality is completely different! Unfortunately! But they do not realize that everything is in ALLAH's hands.
Aldahleh v. Zayed, 2024 ONSC 547 (CanLII), at para 28, <https://canlii.ca/t/k3bl0#par28> retrieved on 2024-10-22
[28] At times during the trial, while giving his evidence, the father did so in a measured and thoughtful manner.
Aldahleh v. Zayed, 2024 ONSC 547 (CanLII), at para 29, <https://canlii.ca/t/k3bl0#par29> retrieved on 2024-10-22
[29] However, there are concerns with respect to evidence given by him.
Aldahleh v. Zayed, 2024 ONSC 547 (CanLII), at para 30, <https://canlii.ca/t/k3bl0#par30> retrieved on 2024-10-22
[30] When asked about a spousal support collection matter directly, the father had difficulty answering questions put to him. He provided a narrative that had little obvious connection to the question asked. Another example of this was when he was asked about visits between himself and the child, B., after the parties separated.
Aldahleh v. Zayed, 2024 ONSC 547 (CanLII), at para 31, <https://canlii.ca/t/k3bl0#par31> retrieved on 2024-10-22
[31] The father struggled in his answers in response to evidence of his inappropriate discipline of the children. In this regard, his evidence was not consistent with the documentary evidence in many respects.
Aldahleh v. Zayed, 2024 ONSC 547 (CanLII), at para 32, <https://canlii.ca/t/k3bl0#par32> retrieved on 2024-10-22
[32] The father was evasive in answering questions about renewing his Ontario driver’s license when he was not resident in Ontario.
https://canlii.ca/t/k3bl0#par33
Aldahleh v. Zayed, 2024 ONSC 547 (CanLII), at para 33, <https://canlii.ca/t/k3b[33] He did not answer a question put to him about his American social security card.l0#par33>, retrieved on 2024-10-22
[33] He did not answer a question put to him about his American social security card.
Aldahleh v. Zayed, 2024 ONSC 547 (CanLII), at para 34, <https://canlii.ca/t/k3bl0#par34> retrieved on 2024-10-22
[34] The father’s denial of knowledge of the payment of a child tax benefit from Canada Revenue Agency was not believable. The documents sent by the government were addressed to the same address the father used when he renewed his Ontario driver’s license.
Aldahleh v. Zayed, 2024 ONSC 547 (CanLII), at para 35, <https://canlii.ca/t/k3bl0#par35> retrieved on 2024-10-22
[35] The father appears to have misled the Kuwaiti authorities when he unilaterally renewed the mother’s Kuwaiti residency status. Her status in Kuwait and right to remain in that country depended on her being his spouse. The father renewed the mother’s residency status the day before the divorce sought was granted. He renewed the mother’s residency status as his spouse again after they were divorced and the mother had already left Kuwait.
Aldahleh v. Zayed, 2024 ONSC 547 (CanLII), at para 36, <https://canlii.ca/t/k3bl0#par36> retrieved on 2024-10-22
[36] The father’s unwillingness to concede any positive attributes to the mother’s care of the children is of concern. This evidence supports a finding that his interest in the outcome of the case is greater than his willingness to be candid and truthful. As noted above, he did not contest the mother’s claim for custody when the original order was made in Kuwait.
Aldahleh v. Zayed, 2024 ONSC 547 (CanLII), at para 37, <https://canlii.ca/t/k3bl0#par37> retrieved on 2024-10-22
[37] The father was inconsistent in his expectations for access with the children should they return to Kuwait. Again, this suggests that his evidence in chief on this point had much to do with his interest in the outcome of the case.
Aldahleh v. Zayed, 2024 ONSC 547 (CanLII), at para 38, <https://canlii.ca/t/k3bl0#par38> retrieved on 2024-10-22
[38] These examples bear on the credibility assessment that must be made regarding the father’s evidence. These are examples of inconsistency and weakness in the father’s evidence. The documentary evidence related to family violence and other circumstances of the parties before the mother left Kuwait is less consistent with his evidence than it is with the mother’s. This makes the mother’s evidence more plausible in relation to the core issues.
Aldahleh v. Zayed, 2024 ONSC 547 (CanLII), at para 39, <https://canlii.ca/t/k3bl0#par39> retrieved on 2024-10-22
[39] Another factor that bears on the father’s credibility is the basis of his plan should the children be returned to Kuwait. It is premised upon the parties getting along and agreeing on important aspects of their responsibility for the care of the children. The basis of his plan is not consistent with the evidence of the parties’ relationship. It is predicated on an idealized version rather than existing circumstances.
Aldahleh v. Zayed, 2024 ONSC 547 (CanLII), at para 40, <https://canlii.ca/t/k3bl0#par40> retrieved on 2024-10-22
[40] I find the mother’s evidence to be more credible and reliable than the father’s. Her evidence regarding the recollection of events was more vivid than the father’s and accords more with the documentary record.
Aldahleh v. Zayed, 2024 ONSC 547 (CanLII), at para 41, <https://canlii.ca/t/k3bl0#par41> retrieved on 2024-10-22
[41] I am satisfied that the mother was more willing to speak the truth as she believed it to be than was the father.
Aldahleh v. Zayed, 2024 ONSC 547 (CanLII), at para 42, <https://canlii.ca/t/k3bl0#par42> retrieved on 2024-10-22
[42] For these reasons, where the evidence of the parties differ relating to the issues, I prefer the evidence of the mother unless otherwise stated.
17. The lawyers’ focus in my case on taking the children from me within Canada (even after my innocence from kidnapping has been proven and evidence of the danger we faced in Kuwait from my ex-husband and his friends in the Ministry of Interior has been presented) is based on their claim that the mother has committed crimes in Kuwait (despite the fact that the mother possesses evidence of her innocence, showing that all that has been presented is part of her ex-husband’s scheme with his friends in the Kuwaiti Ministry of Interior after the mother and children left Kuwait)! Since when does Canada recognize (in absentia) judgments without the presence and defense of the person living at that time (in Canada)? Or is the case now under a religious banner rather than the child’s rights law or Canadian family law, and what has been fabricated in this file over the past two years is to (create and prepare) a path to take the children from the mother?
Aldahleh v. Zayed, 2024 ONSC 547 (CanLII), at para 25, <https://canlii.ca/t/k3bl0#par25> retrieved on 2024-10-22
[25] A further concern is that, in a Kuwaiti court order made after the mother arrived in Canada, a finding of fraud was made against her.[1] The basis of this finding of fraud arose because the mother “claimed to temporarily travel with the children to their country of origin, Jordan…”. In evidence, the father claimed the fraud related to evidence the mother gave the court in support of her request to travel outside of Kuwait. The father claimed that the mother gave the court a false itinerary of her proposed travel. The mother denied this was the case and produced the itinerary she said was provided. She also showed that there was an error in the English translation of the date of one of the documents referred to by the father. It was suggested that this change in the date undermined whether the fraud finding should be made. The mother also stated that she was not able to appear in person at the Kuwaiti court hearing in question because it did not allow for remote attendance.[2] It is not proper for this court to look behind the Kuwaiti court order. The Kuwaiti court made a decision based on the evidence that was put before it. The father did not put all of those documents in evidence before this court.
[1] The expert retained by the father, Jumana A. Bebehani, referred to it as “… a form of cheating…” by the mother.
[2] This court order notes that the mother did have counsel present. However, the mother’s evidence is that counsel who appeared on her behalf had not been instructed by her.
Are they a network working together? Is there a specific intention to gather certain individuals in my court case to execute a certain and planned scheme? It seems that we need to open our eyes to all the cases where children are taken from their mothers by court order (especially since what is issued in reports or plans is aimed at silencing the mother and children about their undeniable right to defend themselves and represent themselves directly in court)! The hidden is greater! What has been pre-planned is much larger than you can imagine! They are creating the reasons and ways that allow them to take the children, but they themselves do not respect the law and manipulate it, with the help of hidden individuals who have the influence to carry out certain procedures in strange and suspicious ways.
And as soon as their truth is revealed, they use the weapon of claiming mental illness, lying, and lack of credibility against those who have discovered them and possess evidence against them. This is their well-known approach since the time of the prophets. So who are we to Let’s be free from their accusations?"
They do not realize that the believers understand their tricks with their hearts before their eyes. They do not understand that the affairs of the believer are all good, even if the outward appears to be evil (but we do not know the good that ALLAH has chosen for us). No matter what happens, I swear it is good (Say, 'Nothing will befall us except what ALLAH has decreed for us').
OCL 2024
18. Kimberly Doucet, and the fact that a written order was issued stating that all temporary orders in the case were canceled immediately after the conclusion of the trial and the issuance of the final ruling.
19. Doucet is part of the team of the former lawyer, Salim Al-Kot, who manipulated my case, deceived me, and complicated matters. He did not represent me according to the ethics of his profession; rather, he extorted me to pay a huge amount to represent me correctly and requested protection for my children. So who brought her into my case in a strange and illegal manner, ignoring all the reasons for her immediate removal from the file? I previously detailed this in this petition dated 13/10/2024.
20. Doucet provided false information for the upcoming court session, claiming that she did not know where the children were or where their school was. She stated that she visited Eagle Heights, my children's school, two and a half years ago to meet them, but she 'discovered' that the children were absent from school! Glory be to ALLAH! Did the school not inform you that the children transferred to Stoney Creek School according to our new address since 2023? And all court documents contain my new address. Did you not review the documents submitted to the court that showed the children switched to online learning last year after I discovered the fraud and manipulation in my case and the danger from influential people seeking to take my children? Did you not review the emails sent over the past two months confirming that the children are studying at a private Islamic school and that the father refused to pay the tuition fees? And that he does not trust the mother, which is why he wants to appoint this 'stranger' to handle the payments for him?!!!! Or have the fraudsters become accustomed to winning cases through forgery before judges, exploiting their licenses as lawyers to incite judges against the mother, claiming she is irresponsible and that she is hiding the children and changing her address without notifying the court? (ALLAH will suffice us against all of you) (And the plot will not ensnare except its people).
21. It seems that attorney Doucet wants to continue the conspiracy of attorney Sam Michel, and her office has sent two emails to force me to attend the upcoming session (Thursday, 24/10/2024) in person! Does the children's lawyer have the right and authority to issue orders for the mother to attend in person without a judge's ruling?! Is there a plan to inject the mother with a substance or something to induce unconsciousness or loss of control so she can be taken to the hospital and claim that she is unable to withstand the court proceedings (after her success—by the grace of ALLAH alone—in the kidnapping trial, which is one of the most challenging international cases)?! Or will they create a problem out of nothing to accuse the mother of a certain charge and throw a prison order against her, claiming that the father is not behind this conspiracy, as they did in Kuwait? And thus the mother loses custody?!!
Who is violating all the laws and procedures followed in Canada?! Who is behind all these fraudsters?!
Patience is beautiful, for by Allah, I am not the one who protects my children. I have no power or strength; rather, they are under the protection and care of ALLAH, who forbids injustice and is the Just, Glory be to Him.