The Correct Truthful Reponces to Mr. Sails's Cross-examintion of Exhibit R

[01] Rhonda Sails’s/(Ms. Achtem) cross examination of Exhibit R:
This was the last exhibit Rhonda Sails/(Ms. Achtem) cross-examined me on and I answered it correctly. Then after Rhonda Sails’s/(Ms. Achtem) was done her cross-examination, Justice Horner questioned me and I could of answered to her question more appropriately. But Justice Horner permitted Mrs. Sails to ambushed with me new Exhibits I new nothing about, and I was too terrified and confused to answer correctly.

[02] Justice Horner - The court, Questions me on page 125, line 31 to line 33;
"Is there any point of clarification you feel required, Mr. Achtem, based on what the questions that Miss Achtem has asked you?"

[03] If Justice Horner and Rhonda Sails had not failed to respect the boundary Law of "An Act Respecting Witnesses and Evidence", Sections 28(1) & 28(2) of The CEA c-5, and Alberta Rule of Court 158.5(1)(e). If I, Edward Achtem had been served the new exhibits in a resonable time before Trial instead as an ambushed Trial, then I could have answered like this instead of just saying, "no";

[04] "Yes Justice Horner I would like to reiterate a little bit about Ms. Achtem’s cross-examination over her exhibit Q which was an e-mail I sent to her November 19th, 2003. This was an e-mail in which was a proposal of a more persistant nature that corresponds with the e-mail I sent Ms. Achtem 2 days earlier, Exhibit O which is the same proposal that quotes I'm going to want more than $9000,00. I quoted higher figure to settle the matrimonial with a figure of $16,345.72 because she did not accept $9000 dollars to settle.

[05] "If the $9000 proposal would to be accepted, then the matrimonial split would have worked out in Ms. Achtem's favour. The way it stands now without the Medicine Hat home undivided Ms. Achtem has already taken two third matrimonial equity, without concidering any division of the Medicine Hat home. Based on the numbers I have calculated from my Exhibit 2A1. If you make a judgement Justice Horner to just let Ms. Achtem walk away on separation date with the entire equity in the Medicine Hat home you would be letting her what away with $38,466.58, and I will NOT tally in the $8000.00 in funds needed to close off HatFax/Quanta, then that only leaves me with $3,751.12. That to me would be an unfair split of $38,466.58/$3,751.12.
"Alls I'm asking for is for a fair 50-50 split on Matrimonial Property. If you’re going to make a Judgment Justice Horner to let Ms. Achtem walk away with 100% of the Medicine Hat home base on separation date then your increasing her split of matrimonial $38,466.58 + the deposit of 45,000 left on the Medicine Hat home).


[06] "If you let Ms. Achtem be a gluton by letting her walk away with 100% of the Medicine Hat home you will be throwing me and my 2nd family into a deep pit of poverty. you will make an even more un fair $83,266.58 to Ms. Achtem, then only a far more measley $3,751.12 to me, and that based on separation date. That is totally unfair and outragous 95.5%/4.5% split in Ms. Achtem’s favour. I object Madame Horner, you make sure you do your math lady! Let’s say if Ms. Achtem did accept my offer of $9000.00 back on November 17th and 19th of 2003. Then that would have made it an unfair split of $74,466.58 to Ms. Achtem, then only a measley $12,751.12 to met. It would have been a whopping lopsided 82.9%/17.1% split of matrimonial property in Ms. Achtem’s Favour. So do NOT tell me the $9000 unaccepted offer I made to Ms. Achtem in her Exhibits O and P the e-mails sent in November of 2003. Please do NOT tell me I was unreasonable. I know you want is too ruin me Justice Karen Horner and throw me into a deep pit of poverty"

[07] I was to confused by team that AMBUSHED me at trial to answer like this as I have stated. Too AMBUSHED and confused by the team that called Team Ambush [Justice Karen Horner and Rhonda Sails].