ACTIVE EVIDENCE FABRICATION (2024-2025)
U.S. docket number 05-000573-CR-T-17MSS HANDWRITTEN onto documents
TWENTY YEARS after alleged 2005 extradition
20
Years Later
✍️
Handwritten
0
Originals Exist
NOW
Crime in Progress
If legitimate extradition documents existed from 2005, why is someone HANDWRITING docket numbers onto documents in 2024/2025? The act of fabrication proves the original case was fraudulent.
Document Date: February 1, 2026 | Status: HABEAS CORPUS EXHIBIT | Classification: ACTIVE CRIME
"Your Honour, the alleged extradition occurred in 2005. The docket number 05-000573-CR-T-17MSS was HANDWRITTEN onto documents in 2024/2025 — as the case approached trial after reopening in 2021.
Why is someone creating evidence NOW for a case that allegedly happened TWENTY YEARS AGO?"
The only answer: NO ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS EXIST — THE EXTRADITION WAS FABRICATED
This document presents irrefutable proof of ACTIVE, ONGOING evidence fabrication. The evidence establishes:
s. 137 CCC — Fabricating evidence (14 years)
R. v. Cuerrier, [1998] 2 SCR 371: Creating false evidence for proceedings
s. 366 CCC — Forgery (10 years)
Altering document with intent to defraud
s. 139 CCC — Obstruction of justice (10 years)
Wilfully attempting to pervert course of justice
s. 465(1)(c) CCC — Conspiracy (life)
Coordinated fabrication across institutions
EXTRADITION RECORD
Subject: Francesco Longo
Year: 2005
Jurisdiction: Canada → United States
U.S. Case Reference:
[Remainder of document contains typed text from original era]
Original Document
Typed text from 2005 era
Handwritten Addition
Docket number added recently
The Question
WHY add this 20 years later?
If legitimate: NO handwriting needed
Reality: ACTIVE FABRICATION
Handwriting analysis can identify the author. This person committed s. 137 CCC fabrication.
DEMAND: Produce handwriting samples from all personnel with access to file.
Ink dating analysis can determine approximate date of writing. Case reopened 2021 — approaching trial 2024/2025.
DEMAND: Forensic ink analysis of handwritten portion.
"Toronto" or "basement" — the origin matters. Where was it stored for 20 years? Who had access?
DEMAND: Complete chain of custody documentation.
If one document has handwritten additions, others likely do too. This reveals the scope of fabrication.
DEMAND: Produce ALL documents with post-2005 handwritten additions.
If the extradition was legitimate, the docket number would have been on documents in 2005.
THE ANSWER: Because NO original documents exist. The extradition was FABRICATED.
| If Respondents Claim... | Then They Admit... |
|---|---|
| "The number was always there" | Handwriting analysis will prove otherwise — perjury |
| "It was added for clarification" | Why clarify 20 years later? — consciousness of missing original |
| "Standard administrative practice" | Show the policy — none exists for handwriting dockets |
| "The original was lost" | Then the case is void — no foundation |
| "Someone else added it" | WHO? — identify the fabricator |
| Remain silent | ADMISSION OF GUILT — s. 137 CCC in progress |
NO ESCAPE PATH EXISTS
The handwriting PROVES fabrication. The timing PROVES conspiracy. The act PROVES consciousness of guilt.
"Your Honour, legitimate court documents do not require handwritten additions twenty years later. The docket number 05-000573-CR-T-17MSS was written onto this document as the case approached trial in 2024/2025.
Why is someone CREATING evidence for a case that allegedly happened in 2005?
Because the original documents DON'T EXIST. Because the extradition was FABRICATED. Because this is a CRIME IN PROGRESS."