The headline numbers
| Measure | Longo (75) | Ceylan (22) | All (97) |
|---|---|---|---|
| With receipt proof | 22 (29.3%) | 7 (31.8%) | 29 (29.9%) |
| With any response | 13 (17.3%) | 8 (36.4%) | 21 (21.6%) |
| With a substantive (merits) determination | 2 | 2 | 4 |
| With a procedural determination | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| With administrative processing only | 4 | 3 | 7 |
| With substantive assistance on the matter | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| With any assistance at all | 5 | 3 | 8 |
Totals recomputed by script from the audit's enumerated tables; reference date October 27, 2026.
The four determinations — and what they are
Not one of the four is a decision on a court proceeding. All four are complaint-level decisions, and every one went against the filer or closed the door:
- The Canadian Judicial Council dismissed Lucy Ceylan's complaint (August 29, 2018) and maintained the dismissal as "vexatious" (February 12, 2019).
- The Law Society of Ontario dismissed her complaint (recorded in the Council's letter; no Law Society document is on disk).
- The Canadian Judicial Council issued its decision on Frank Longo's complaint, file 26-0430 (September 16, 2026) — the three letters examined at The Three Denials.
- Global Affairs Canada refused his 2026 consular request in writing (June 17, 2026) — a letter signed by title only, sent from an unmonitored mailbox, refusing further action on the consular file whose production is now demanded.
Plus one procedural determination: the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador rejected an Originating Application on form (October 23, 2026). The audit verified the rejection against the transmitted paper: the instrument named no respondent and the affidavit was unsworn — the Registrar was accurate on both points, except "unsigned": the application is signed. A cure was prepared and never re-filed.
On the habeas chain, the civil claims, the mandamus sets, the estate application, and the FSRA complaint: determinations — zero. The 76 filings with no response include every habeas application, every mandamus, all 32 notices of civil claim, the estate application, the completed complaint GF-012E, and every October 2026 demand.
The one assistance — and its date
Exactly one row in the entire audit shows substantive assistance on the matter itself: Global Affairs Canada's consular assistance from June 13, 2007 until his release in 2011 — admitted in the Department's own letter of June 17, 2026. It is historical. Every request made since 2025 stands at zero assistance. The other seven "assistance" rows are administrative processing only: a file opened, intake questions asked, an internal referral, a statement forwarded, a partial production.
What the offices sent back, graded
The audit also grades the 33 productions the offices ever supplied — letters, releases, decisions, acknowledgments — on four checks:
The filer's classification
The filer applies his own rule to every reply: a reply counts only if it comes over a named human's signature, from a door that can be answered. An unnamed title answering through an unmonitored mailbox is a non-response — in his words, "mute, defaulted to silence." Under that rule, the 21 documentary replies become:
Both counts are published here because both are true on their own stated definitions: 21 filings received something in writing; 7 were ever responded to in the sense his rule requires.
Corrections this audit makes
An audit that corrects everyone else's record has to correct its own side's first. This one does:
- An earlier summary in the filer's own ledger stated that no court, ministry or regulator had issued a substantive determination on any instrument. Enumeration shows four complaint-level determinations (above). The corrected sentence, which this site uses: no court or ministry has ever determined any Longo or Ceylan court instrument; the only determinations anywhere are the four complaint-level decisions, all adverse or refusals.
- An earlier Ceylan audit contradicted its own table the same way; its table was right and its summary sentence wrong. Same correction.
- The FSRA record holds three replies (May 19, May 22, May 27, 2026), not two — all intake-level. No investigation has ever been opened and no file number ever issued on complaint GF-012E, and nothing on this site claims otherwise.
- Where a delivery cannot be proven from the record, the audit says UNPROVEN — 13 filings — rather than upgrade transmission into receipt. Delivery is not acceptance: several court instruments were delivered by a channel the court does not accept for filing, and the audit states those gaps in the affected rows.
"So far all guilty — breach of oath and trust." The offices whose sworn duties are set out in the audit — to see that the administration of public affairs is in accordance with law, to aid in the administration of justice, to answer access requests inside 30 days on pain of a deemed refusal, to acknowledge a complaint in 3 business days (the FSRA's own published standard) or 48 hours (the Law Society's) — received 97 filings between them and produced, on the matters themselves, zero determinations and zero assistance.
Filings audit, October 27, 2026, §§1–2A and §3 tables (enumerated from the Master Ledger's sends-and-filings lane, the October 24 Gmail filing-evidence dig, the October 26 Ceylan unanswered audit, the October 22 court-wave delivered-vs-accepted audit, the 31 follow-up sheets, and the October 27 email review); proof and sworn duties report, October 27, 2026. The full audit is held with the filer's records and can be produced.