Our Ode to Perjury! We have shocking news for our readers, and we want you to know that we will be with you, supporting you and keeping you going whilst you digest it all. If you have a nervous disposition that requires you to spend your entire day watching your supposed stalkers, please don’t read on without someone to hold your hand. So take a deep breath and read on if you feel able to do so.
It turns out that Jessica Yaniv Simpson, the bravest and most successful litigant and LGBTPPPPPQHGHGHGS campaigner, is a criminal LIAR.
Take a moment to calm down from this completely unforeseen shock. Plenty of hot tea, coffee, or even a good swig of medicinal brandy will help. If you need counselling, the “Practice of Jessica Simpson” is willing to help. Big Jessica can also give you the contact details for a dial-a-hug service.
Let’s look at what sections 131 & 134 actually say.
131 (1) Subject to subsection (3), everyone commits perjury who, with intent to mislead, makes before a person who is authorized by law to permit it to be made before him a false statement under oath or solemn affirmation, by affidavit, solemn declaration or deposition or orally, knowing that the statement is false.
Section 134(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada deals with the offence of perjury “false statements”. It specifies that any person who knowingly makes a false statement under oath or solemn affirmation, either by means of a written affidavit, a solemn declaration or a deposition or orally before an authorized person, is committing an offence punishable by summary conviction. Perjury is a serious offence as it involves lying under oath or affirmation, which undermines the justice system and can result in wrongful convictions. It is important to note that section 134(1) only applies to statements made under oath or solemn affirmation that are not permitted, authorized or required by law.
So, on top of lying whilst being physically in court, the codes also cover any sworn statement, like a written affidavit or a sworn oral statement. It is a bit like oral statements to the police that are covered under the public mischief charges, except this is a whole new level. As it says, Perjury is an extremely serious crime even when the cases are not related.
What we hear, you ask has Yaniv said or done that has caused us to make these never made before allegations against Jessica Yaniv Simpson? This.
This is taken directly from Yaniv’s third or fourth attempt at filing a legally compliant and admissible answer to the application Donald Smith has made for a restraining order. As is the case of everyone so far, it is 40 pages too long and full of outright lies or confessions. Judges really do not like people who mess about.
But the biggest issue in it has Jessica Yaniv Simpson ADMITTING to perjury AND destroying his plea bargain for the weapons charges. We know you will all remember Yaniv’s defence to those charges, and the subsequent plea bargain was that “a friend had given them to” her for her own personal safety and that she knew they were illegal but had tried to hand them into RCMP Langley numerous times because of this. Jessica even claimed that RCMP Langley told her that she was permitted them.
Jessica Yaniv Simpson now claims that despite knowing they were illegal and that she was committing criminal acts, she sourced the weapons HERSELF; she purchased the weapons from abroad HERSELF, and she illegally imported those illegal weapons HERSELF. Jessica Yaniv also confirms she wanted to use them on a victim (Donald Smith). WOW. Is this the truth at last?
The crown must also prove several elements of the offence, such as confirming the accused’s identity, the date(s) and time(s) in which the incident(s) occurred, the jurisdiction, that the accused had knowledge that their actions were intended to commit the offence of false statement.
Clearly there is no doubt about the identity of the alleged criminal, Jessica Yaniv Simpson. The crimes were committed in Langley, BC, so RCMP Langley has full jurisdiction to investigate. The evidence is in the form of statements and oral evidence given by Ms Jessica Yaniv and is a matter of public record. Lying to the courts in an attempt to avoid more serious charges and to negotiate a plea deal is a flagrant breach of the solemnity of the justice system,7 and Jessica Yaniv’s own sworn statements make it clear she is lying in either the court (section 131) or the affidavit (section 134) or perhaps both. The presumption of innocence applies in that the accused is presumed innocent until convicted of the offence. The dates are readily available to anyone who wishes to complain.
It would be a real shame if the CPS RCMP in BC were to find out about this in a calm, reasoned, and detailed fashion.
The best bit? Yaniv either admits he lied to the courts during his criminal trial or that he has lied to the courts in this civil matter with DFS. The self fucking virgin does it again?
What are your thoughts? Have we missed anything out?
