March 15 2016

Richard Hennessy, Registrar

Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario
655 Bay Street, 14th Floor
Toronto, ON M7A 2A3

CORRUPTED PROCEEDINGS
Dear Richard Hennessy:

Re: Everall vs. Donovan

Tribunal File # 2015-22822-I
Perjury by the Respondent

The Respondent made a submission to the HRTO accusing me of altering an Email before sending
the Email to the HRTO as evidence on my own behalf. I deny this accusation.

I have retrieved the original email from my email account and am subsequently forwarding it to you
and to the Respondent respectively.

Upon viewing the Email that is in question one may use the 'view message source' to see that the
email has not been tampered with in any way, shape or form since it was originally sent to me by the
Respondent and whereby I further replied to the Respondent on March 1 2012.

This particular letter, addressed to you Mr. Hennessy, will be attached to the original forwarded email
between myself and the Respondent dated March 1 2012 where we corresponded between our
respective Hotmail email accounts. Therefore I will send TWO (2) Emails to you and to the
Respondent respectively. ONE (1) to me from the Respondent and ONE (1) to the Respondent from
me. The Email to the Respondent from me contains the original Email sent to me by the Respondent
as a default Hotmail feature.

I will deviate from using my Gmail email address as submitted in my Application and will instead
send the original Email from my Hotmail account, where it originated, to avoid any further confusion
in this matter. Once the original email is sent to both you and the Respondent I will re-send the
information, for the sake of clarity, from my Gmail Email account, the usual Email account used by
me in these proceedings.

The Respondent has obviously and actively committed blatant PERJURY, which is a criminal offense,
well, for those of us who are not above the law that is.

Please be aware that the Respondent has made perjured statements in most, if not all, of her
submissions to the HRTO since and including the Response to my Application. Now that the
Respondent has been found to be engaging in active PERJURY the HRTO has a duty to act on this
very serious crime. The HRTO has a duty to protect me, the Applicant, as well as having a duty to
maintain the integrity of the HRTO proceeding itself. I believe that criminal charges against the
Respondent are in order for her malicious and vexatious litigation strategies employed against me,
including, but not limited to, PERJURY.

I'm not on trial Mr. Hennessy and I REFUSE to spend my time and energy defending myself in these
proceedings. The HRTO knows full well what powers they have to rectify this situation and I will not
waste my efforts telling the well informed HRTO about the legislation and rules of procedure that
govern the HRTO proceedings. Either the HRTO does the right thing or it doesn't. So Mote It Be!

On another note, the submission made by the Respondent on March 11 2016 to you Mr. Hennessy
was completely irrelevant to these proceedings and is indicative of the Respondents behaviour of
stalking me, threatening me and conspiring against me for her own personal reasons. The YouTube
account that the Respondent has drawn your attention to was not created with respect to the within
proceedings that specifically target the Respondent as the Respondent alleges in her
correspondence to you. This is more perjury and defamatory libel on the part of the Respondent as
that particular YouTube channel was created in 2011. I did not post any HRTO documents so I'm not
sure what the issue is with me telling my truth online. If the Respondent is threatened by the truth it is
not my problem. I am well with in my rights to do as I do in my online activities and any attempt to stifle
me or my rights in this regard is a direct discrimination against my freedom of speech and personal
expression!

I find it quite odd to note that the Respondent requested a Summary Hearing back on January 25,
2016 and yet within 3 days of the Respondent writing to the Registrar with a 'kind request that this
matter be disposed of as soon as possible' the Respondent is granted the Summary Hearing that has
been stalled since January.

The Respondent is abusing the HRTO process, with her vexatious litigation, not me. The HRTO
should be able to see this clearly, in my opinion.

At any rate, you have been informed Sir. I now rely on this letter and the submitted Emails discussed
in this letter that are subsequently forwarded to you and the Respondent respectively, as well as the
submissions made by the Respondent to you on March 11 2016 as evidence in the HRTO
proceedings.

Sincerely
Brenda Everall
38 County Road 1
Picton, ON K0K 2T0
613-847-9460
brendaeverall@gmail.com