What a wonderful day!!! Despite how much I Love to use Word Play in My Writing, and even after having been a teacher in Japan who was called ‘Sensei Sean’, I didn’t make the connection until today.
Teaching was a theme for today so, “Sunday ‘Sensei-Sean‘” is somewhat appropriate. The Ottawa Citizen are now ten days overdue in their reply, which is fine – Fine to the Tune of $370,000.00. now. The Ottawa’s Citizen’s “Housing the Homeless Fund” gains greater potential to create positive change in the city of Ottawa with every passing day. For Me, it’s very exciting. The Quest Ion (question) My friends have been as King of Me is what to do if the Ottawa Citizen continues to ignore the grievance. The answer? Nothing, at least not right away.
Received = Accepted, Silence = Consent.
I made it very clear to Michelle Richardson, Editor in Chief of the Ottawa Citizen, that she has violated the anonymity and privacy of three men without their consent. The Citizen also implied that the three men were either ‘Vanier residents’ [opposed to the shelter move], or ‘the shelter’. There is no other way to interpret the photo as the men are clearly the subject matter of the photograph, and the only two subjects described in the caption under the image are ‘the shelter’ and ‘Vanier residents’.
At best, the Citizen is guilty of misrepresentation of character and trespass on man’s right to privacy and anonymity. Most importantly, My other two friends are genuinely offended by the photograph, self conscious that everywhere they go people are now looking at them differently, judging them. Whether this is psychological or real is irrelevent, they were significantly emotionally and pyschologically damaged by the incident. By failing to respond to the complaint, the Citizen is demonstrating Willful negligence – they are saying they don’t even care that they have hurt and offended these men, and they continue to profit from their Willful negligence.
I am non commercial, a spiritual man, and My image may not be used for any commercial purpose without My express Writ of consent and that is on the Superior Court record of Canada. I have as King of the Citizen to ensure that My opinions on the subject matter of the article be published to reflect the true nature of My character and dispel (dis-Spell, undo a spell) any presumptions made or implied by the Citizen. I am as King for nothing but fair representation of My character and failing to Honour that request is Willful and deliberate defamation to My character. I keep careful receipts of all correspondence, including all e-mail, so Michelle cannot claim ignorance. Failing to respond to My letter of complaint is evidence of Willful negligence.
What I am Writing now relates to all of the letters I have Writ that were sent registered mail or where I have obtained a signature to show the letter was received. Writing letters is how a mature, responsible man should communicate his intentions, especially when one has offended another, it is a meeting of Minds. For simple offences, We don’t need to Write a letter, We can use verbal contracts, but the process would be the same.
For example, let’s say that a man calls another man an idiot for tripping over a snag in the carpet, causing him to spill his drink on the other man’s shirt. To make the hypothetical story even more interesting, let’s say that the man who’s shirt was soiled by the spilled drink is also the homeowner with the snag in the carpet.
The man being called an idiot probably isn’t going to feel so bad about spilling his drink, and might say something like, ‘I was going to offer to dry clean the shirt for You, now I’m hoping it costs You a fortune.’
Offering to dry clean or replace the shirt was the best scenario the man could have offered, there is nothing that can undo the act that has already occurred, however accidental or intentional it may have been. At no point did the man ever deserve to be called an idiot, as subtle and innocent as the offence may seem. Some people are very sensitive to attacks upon their character and it could have seriously escalated the situation. Similarly, the response I postulated is just as aggressive, suggesting the man is now happy to have accidentally spilled his drink, which is also likely to seriously escalate the situation.
The responsible thing to do would be for each man to take accountability for their own actions and as King of the other for forgiveness. “I lost My footing, please forgive Me. I would like to replace the shirt or take care of any dry cleaning costs for You.”
“Not at all necessary, it was a reminder for Me how important it is to get that snag in the rug fixed, someone could get hurt. I’m glad You’re okay, the shirt is nothing, don’t sweat it.”
That would be the responsible resolution, each man taking accountability for their actions. What Michelle Richardson should have done was at once apologize for having offended the men photographed, then sought to understand how she had harmed the men and how she might be able to remedy the offence, take an opportunity to reflect the character of the men more favourably. Perhaps a personal letter of apology followed up with a public apology in the paper that allows the men to express their opinion on the subject matter of the article they were featured in. That is all I was as King to them for. The financial compensation My friends as King to the Citizen for is reasonable; the Ottawa Citizen have offended three men, trespassed on their privacy, anonymity, and published the image to an audience of over 100,000 readers, subjecting them to whatever social stigmas and controversy that might be associated with shelter residents and homelessness. It is also a huge issue in Ottawa right now so a lot of people, especially in the local community, will have read the article and recognize the individuals. There really is no excuse for what the Citizen has done. They should have at least as King of the men if it was okay to publish their photo with the article and/or as King of them to share their opinion [on the shelter move to Vanier]. The truth is, both men would have declined to comment and refused to have their photograph featured.
So, what do I do if the Ottawa Citizen fails to respond? Charge them daily. There is no question whether or not I Will win in court, only a matter of how much it Will cost the Citizen. The Ottawa Citizen is a corporation which does not have the protection of the common law (which is also an interesting coincidence – citizens do not have the protection of the common law in court either, as they are acting as corporations). They are bound by commercial admiralty law and subject to common law. No commercial admiralty law can interfere with a common law right, man has supreme authority over the corporation in law. If the matter goes to court, I have the title of King in any court, they can’t win, My paperwork has already clearly defined what the terms and conditions for offending the men are, and how much the Citizen Will pay for refusing to acknowledge their crime and settle the grievance in a reasonable time. If a judge were there, He/She would likely ask what part of My letter the Citizen did not understand, at which time their legal representative Will stutter… I am also putting the money I am as King to the Citizen for back into the community, as it Will be used to put Ottawa’s homeless into dignified housing, and the Ottawa Citizen Will be credited for their generous donation. Finally, what I as King of the Citizen for does not encroach on their annual profits, so the Citizen stands to lose nothing by settling the claim. It’s a win for all parties concerned, even the Citizen – I’m sure they will get a serious tax break for their charitable donation.
Once again, this is the aftermath of an entry started yesterday, at which time the Ottawa Citizen’s “Housing the Homeless Found A Sean” was at $370,000.00!!! That brings Our eleven day total to $407,000.00. Almost half way to a million!!!
Love and Blessings, Happy Monday!!!