Chapter 2; 911 – Terrorists in Canada Exposed, left mouse click then scroll down to read; Evidence past Prime Minister of Canada, Stephen Harper’s legacy was to avoid the issues of 1181 missing & murder indigenous women and girls, government fraud committed against senior citizens with Alzheimer’s, Dementia, Heart and Kidney failure but instead chose to participate with his wife Laureen Harper’s ambition to save stray cats and condem a legal cougar hunter through social media by making derogatory comments about Mr. Ecklund’s genitals.




Canadian Judicial Corruption


Stephen and Laureen Harper

Willfully blind


Willfully participated?

You the reader be the judge!

Priorities versus Non-Priorities

Prime Minister Stephen Harper said;

“1181 missing and murdered indigenous women and girls”

are a;


Image result for stephen and laureen harper picture

Let’s try to add some clarification to what;

Stephen and Laureen Harper

consider a;

Priority or Non-Priority


Save the missing and mistreated Cats.


Image result for stephen and laureen harper picture


Save the felines


 reference male hunters genitals

as to hunting legally!


Mr. Ecklund

confirmed he hunted legally with dogs

during the specified dates

 prescribed in

The Alberta Hunting Regulations

issued by

The Alberta Government.


The other comment made by

Laureen Harper suggesting that

Mr. Ecklund

must be compensating for something, small penis probably

So you the reader do the comparison on how;

Large Penis vs. Small Penis 

 affects who is a

Priority or a Non-Priority


Joyce M Broder

picture taken July 24, 2011

Joyce Broder passed away on

September 23, 2011.

Stephen and Laureen Harper’s 


Joyce Broder at the Good Samaritans Lodge

Click on the documents below for full reading versions to open up.

Alberta Treasury Branch correspondence of July 6, 2011 regarding Joyce Broder’s pension being garnished again.

Joyce Broder Garnished – again

Garnishes of Joyce Broder and Letter of Doctor

Justices of the Court sent their

Judicially Order

Hound Dogs

for whom must be compensating for something

to corner an innocent vulnerable

75 year old senior citizen

Joyce M Broder

in her wheelchair

for whom was in late stages of

Dementia and Alzheimer’s

and did not know what was happening to her

but now with garnishees on her bank account was left

with no money  to pay her long term care facility monthly living expenses at

The Good Samaritan Care Centre in

Stony Plain, Alberta

You the reader decide;

Are these CROWN hounds compensating for something

 possibly a

Small Penis

or maybe they all believe that they have the 

Big Penis?

Laureen Harper is the expert so we will let her decide? 



Justices and lawyers

conspired to orchestrate the outcome,

therefore framing and defrauding an innocent senior citizen

Donald Broder – Defendant within

The Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench

Action 9703-12949

and as such Garnishee’s were

Court Ordered against

Donald Broder

and because it was easier the

Hound Dogs from

The Alberta Justice Department

went after the easy money in

Joyce Broder’s bank account.

Sending a message to

Donald Broder

“Don’t you dare mess around with the big Penises in the Justice system”


We will unravel the conspiracy of how,

Canadian & Alberta Justice Departments, Justices and lawyers

 frame, defraud and falsely incarcerate  

an innocent 75 year old senior citizen

Donald Broder.

 1909  – Edmund Broder – Donald H Broder’s soon to be Father was a big game hunter just like Mr. Ecklund.

1926 – Edmund Broder harvested a Mule Deer Buck that would eventually go down in the record books.

1927 – Edmund Broder married Hazel Bailey.

1929 – Donald H Broder was born to Edmund and Hazel Broder.

1962 – The Mule Deer Buck was Edmund Broder harvested in 1926 was pronounced a World Record.

1967 – Hazel Broder passed away.

1967 – Hazel and Edmund Broder’s valuable personal belongings were distributed according to Hazel’s Will.

1968 – Edmund Broder passed away.

1969 – 1970 –  Hazel and Edmund’s children competed the distribution of the few personal effects of Edmund Broder.

1970 – Edmund Broder’s  Model T, Guns and hunting gear, Saddle and Blacksmith Tools, Carpenter Tools and

the Mule Deer Trophy went into exclusive possession of different children and

Donald H Broder eldest living son of Edmund Broder took

exclusive possession of the

Mule Deer Trophy.

1970 – 1997  

27 Years have passed 

then in

March 1997 – Donald H Broder’s brothers and sisters have a lawyer,

Grace Parrotta – King send a demand letter to

Craig Broder that

the Mule Deer Trophy be returned to them.

The brothers and sisters of 

Donald H Broder

George Broder, Earl Broder and Richard Broder,

Doris Bibaud, Margaret Macphee, and Luella Adams

have no personal or equitable right to the Mule Deer Trophy and as such

Donald H Broder maintains possession of the Mule Deer trophy and is advised by legal counsel

he does not have any obligation to turn over the Mule Deer Trophy until

The Application for Probate is successful at the Surrogate Courts

with the appointment of an

Administrator or Personal Representative

that can legally act on behalf of the deceased

Edmund Broder.

Case Law – Mugford vs. Mugford

Newfoundland Court of Appeal.


Only an administrator appointed by the courts can initiate a legal action on behalf of a deceased.”

July 8, 1997

Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench

Action # 9703-12949
is initiated by

Grace Parrotta-King


by being filed at

                                                                                                         The Edmonton Law Courts                                                                                                      and served on

Donald Broder and Craig Broder


Earl Broder, George Broder, Richard Broder,

Margaret Macphee, Doris Bilboe and Luella Adams



Donald Broder and Craig Broder.


July 28, 1997

The Statement of Defence.

was filed by the

Defendants lawyer;

Joseph J. Kueber

of Bryan & Company.

The Statement of Defence plead

Alberta Rules of Court Rule 129;

“the action was frivolous, vexatious and abuse of process”

Simply stated the Plaintiffs as named had no standing to sue

 this matter required an application for probate to

appoint an Administrator / Executor at

The Surrogate Courts

And only if successful in the appointment of an Administrator / Executor

they the Administrator / Executor would be in a legal position to

 to initiate a lawsuit on behalf of a deceased.




Judicial Predators caught for participating in this crime are;

Attorney General – Justice Minister 

Alison Redford

“so full of herself, refused to follow a court order to investigate”

She has something that controls the penis!

Past Chief Justice W. Kenneth Moore,

Plaintiff’s Lawyer Elizabeth McInnis – Moore  – daddy

Chief Justice W, Kenneth Moore

“big penis but no stamina” 

Justice A. H. Wachowich,

Replaces Justice W. Kenneth Moore as

Chief Justice at Alberta Law Courts in December of 2001.

“Pretends to have a big penis but his Court Orders have no balls!”

Justice Myra Bielby

Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench Trial Judge.

“she has no penis but can make any penis have erectile disfunction”


Criminals by association;

Justice C. P. Clarke,

“his penis responds during court when he winks at male lawyers”

Justice Jed Hawko,

“first time he saw his shadow he discovered he had a penis”

Justice Karen Horner,

“plays the role of having a big penis but we all know shes bluffing”

Alberta Appeal Court Justices

Carol Conrad,

“she feels good hanging around with the Big Penises”

Peter Costigan

” going through adolescence and still trying to figure out what it takes to grow a big penis.”

 Ronald Berger.

“knows his days are numbered so to maintain a big one takes viagra”


Elizabeth MacInnis – Moore of Weir Bowen

The Plaintiff’s lawyer who had access to removing filed documents from the court file, delete audio from trial tapes and

commit perjury with no consequences.

“no penis – but relied on using her daddies Chief Justice W. Kenneth Moore to scare everyone”

Joseph Kueber of Bryan & Company

Donald Broder’s first lawyer that agreed to give irrelevant testimony at trial and pretend he was helping.

“his penis gets intimidated until he helps the opposite side to win against his own client”

Guy Lacourciere of Lacourciere & Associates

Donald Broder’s lawyer that new all along what was going on but let his own client be falsely incarcerated.

“his penis gets excited when he plays both sides”

Bryan Kickham of Miller Thompson

Donald Broder’s trial lawyer that framed his own client the minute the retainer check cleared.

“his penis gets excited when he’s the go to man and trusted to assist in framing an innocent senior citizen”

Marvin Bloos of Beresh, Depoe, Cunningham

Donald Broder criminal lawyer and Supreme Court of Canada lawyer.

“big or small it didn’t matter cause his penis was so scared when

Donald Broder sued him its probably still recovering”




Elizabeth MacInnis – Moore 

Based on who her Father and friends are at

The Edmonton Law Courts

The Alberta Justice Department

and lets not forget her husband for whom

is employed at the

Edmonton Police Services “EPS”  

This page is entirely focused on exposing

Stephen &  Laureen Harper


 The Federally Appointed Justices of the Court

to willfully act in collusion to

frame and convict

Canada’s most vulnerable


Senior Citizens

suffering with

Dementia, Alzheimer’s


Heart and Kidney Disease.

Image result for stephen and laureen harper picture


stop insulting a legal hunter about his


And Stephen Harper

should confirm he has one

then stand up and protect


most vulnerable

Senior Citizens, Women, Girls and Children

of all races and walks of life.





And as such

Laureen Harper

must know more than anybody about

Penis Size = Power

when it comes to


April 17, 1998

Grace Parrotta-King



filed a cease to act on behalf of the Plaintiffs

as she was in a conflict of interest because

 she had represented

Donald Broder on a previous matter.

June 1, 1998

Elizabeth MacInnis



Files a notice change solicitor

she will be acting on behalf of

The Plaintiffs.


September 1999 

Joseph J. Kueber

of Bryan & Company

is fired by

The Defendants

Donald Broder & Craig Broder

Because Joseph Kueber was agreeing to a

pre-trial conference to waste more time, money and create more legal fees

while he was aware of

The Decision at

The Alberta Court of Appeal 

Timberjack vs. Rocklake


“[19] The Rules of Court do not speak about limitation periods or times to amend. They have always been reconciled with limitations legislation by presuming that the powers under the Rules are to be exercised subject to the time limits under the legislation, when those are relevant; Furthermore, the rules of Court are Regulations, and were not confirmed by statute until the 1970s. Regulations cannot override statutes.

Joseph Kueber was fired in September of 1999 2 years and 2 months 

since the original Statement of Claim filed date

JULY 8, 1997 and as such the

2 year limitation period had lapsed on July 9, 1999, so if and when

Elizabeth MacInnis of Weir Bowen finally realizes she has to apply for probate and appoint

Personal Representatives at The Surrogate Courts and now that the limitation period of 2 years has lapsed

so she cannot substitute a new party to the Action and

Joseph Kueber of Bryan & Company

should have applied for the action to be dismissed.



The Application for Probate at The Surrogate Courts would be subjected to

The New Limitations of Actions Act

“2 year limitation period and the 10 year drop dead clause”
Only two limitation periods: the earlier of
two years from the time the claimant knew or ought to have known of the claim, or
ten years from the time the claim arose.

The Application for Probate is now excess of 30 years since Edmund Broder passed away on December 26, 1968.

“10 year drop dead clause has lapsed”


b. adding claims and new claimants

Where an added claim adds or substitutes a claimant:
the defendant must have received, within the limitation period applicable to the added claim (plus the time provided for service),
sufficient knowledge of the added claim that the defendant will not be prejudiced in maintaining a defence to it on the merits; 

click the mouse to open full version of;

Alberta’s New Limitation Act 

SEPTEMBER 30, 1999

Robert Sawers


R. J. Sawers & Associates

files a notice to change solicitor and is legal counsel for

The Defendants

Donald Broder and Craig Broder.

Robert Sawers office does research and locates case law 

Mugford vs. Mugford

Newfoundland Supreme Court

Case Law mugford vs. mugford

November 1999.

Robert Sawers of R J Sawers & Associates

suggests to Donald Broder and Craig Broder

to sit tight and let more time lapse

and also see what

Elizabeth MacInnis of Weir Bowen

next move is;

Donald Broder and Craig Broder have won the lawsuit as of July 9, 1999.


Reason 1

Excess of the 2 years  limitation period had lapsed since the original Statement of Claim was filed on July 8, 1997 and

The Plaintiffs lawyer Elizabeth MacInnis

will not be allowed to add or substitute a new Plaintiff, as per Surrogate Rules of Court

a deceased personal effects are subject to making an application for probate

and being successful with a formal appointment of a

Personal Representative – Administrator.

The formally appointed Personal Representative would have to initiate a new Statement of Claim

as the Limitations or Actions Act barred the substitution of a new Plaintiff on the original Statement of Claim.

Reason 2

And Donald Broder could prevent the Application for Probate from being successful as

The New Limitation Act legislated a 10 year drop dead clause and it was excess of 30 years since his

Father Edmund Broder passed away on December 26, 1968.


Under Construction!

The balance of this page will provide evidence that

Donald Broder and Craig Broder

 Win again and again but lose.

1) No Penis – Elizabeth MacInnis of Weir Bowen will close the pleadings by way of Court Order, then never follow the court order.

2) Big Penis – Incarcerate Donald H. Broder after the trial for not following a court order to teach him a lesson.

3) Small Penis – Bryan Kickham of Miller Thompson, lawyer for The Defendant Donald H. Broder causes his own client to lose again

by amending  the Statement of Claim on January 9, 2004, back dates the 2004 to 2003 and

forges the Judges signature on the FIAT to assist Elizabeth MacInnis – Moore in concealing

the issue of standing was plead in the original Statement of Claim.

4) Very Small Penis –  Joseph Kueber of Bryan & Company, The Plaintiff Donald Broder’s first lawyer

is asked to testify at trial to pre statement of claim correspondences the would prove unbeneficial

to pretend he was trying to help.

5)  No Penis – Elizabeth MacInnis – Moore of Weir Bowen knows someone that can have audio delete from trial recording.

6) Biggest Penis – ” wonder if it’s got anything to do with her Father Past Chief Justice W Kenneth Moore.

 HOW !


comes into play

or simply who knows who with

the largest Penis


The Alberta’s Justice System.

that can orchestrate the outcome

to frame, defraud and falsely incarcerate


Please keep in mind that it was Laureen Harper that started the male genital comparison

we are just trying add clarification to what

Stephen and Laureen Harper

are really made of?

Comments are closed.

Contact us:
Copyright © 2016 - 2018 Broder Buck. All Rights Reserved. Created by Blog Copyright.

Copyright © 2016 - 2018 Broder Buck. All Rights Reserved. Created by Blog Copyright.