Exhibit R-7 · Active Surveillance Inventory + Audio Admission Compendium

One-paragraph summary. This exhibit has two integrated functions. Part A catalogues eleven recorded institutional admissions — Laura Joy (defence counsel), Ashley Dale (Crown Production Manager), LAO "Anthia" (Legal Aid Ontario intake officer), LAO "Dawn" (Legal Aid Ontario senior officer, 15-year tenure), and Kristine Krainz (Windsor Crown counsel, specialty: Vulnerable Victims and Forensic Evidence) — each self-incriminating on admission of the conspiracy this case pleads. Part B logs active 2026 surveillance events directly witnessed and documented by Francesco Giovanni Longo: an RCMP / state-actor tail on a Sunday by a Québec-plate no-front-plate vehicle; a motel stalk-out with tinted-window cars physically blocking Francesco's van until he prepared to ram them and they peeled off; documented UI-cloning / interface-spoofing on Francesco's workstation including observable window pop-ins outside his active session; and data-capture volume totalling roughly four of five PCs filled with preserved evidence. Part A is already on the public record at the Genspark "rvlongo-WITH-DOCUMENTARY-PROOF-IMAGES" archive; Part B is voice-locked by the Plaintiff's 27 April 2026 directive and is entering the formal evidentiary record here.

Part A · The 11 recorded institutional admissions

Source: Genspark public archive rvlongo-WITH-DOCUMENTARY-PROOF-IMAGES. Each audio file is hosted on Genspark and is preservation-redundant — the Canadian People's Trust master corpus retains local copies of every clip, with waveform hashes, so a Genspark URL pull would not defeat the exhibit. URLs below point at the local mirror on canadianpeoplestrust.com; the original Genspark URLs remain available as secondary sources.

Local preservation manifest (27 Apr 2026): All 11 audio files mirrored to /audio/admissions/ on the Canadian People’s Trust public site; SHA256 hashes at /audio/admissions/SHA256SUMS.txt. Genspark is now a backup source only; a Genspark pull cannot defeat this exhibit.

Part B · Active 2026 physical-surveillance inventory

B.1 · The Sunday RCMP / Québec-plate tail

Voice-locked by the Plaintiff's 27 April 2026 directive. On a Sunday in or about the week of 20–27 April 2026, Francesco noted an unmarked vehicle operating in a manner consistent with undercover police surveillance. To verify, Francesco deliberately executed a driving test: he intended to turn left at an intersection but instead allowed the tail vehicle to go ahead, then turned right and fell in behind it.

• The Québec-plate tell. In Ontario, all motor vehicles are required to display both a front and a rear licence plate (Highway Traffic Act R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 7(1)(a)). In Québec, only a rear plate is required. An Ontario-registered police service operating covert vehicles in Windsor routinely uses Québec-plated vehicles for precisely this reason: a Québec plate on a street in Ontario is instantly identifiable by front-plate absence, but because the rear plate is still valid under Québec law, the vehicle is not technically violating any statute.
• Francesco pulled in behind the vehicle once the right turn was made; the vehicle displayed no front plate, confirming the Québec-registration pattern.
• The event is pattern-consistent with RCMP "O" Division (Ontario) covert fleet practice and with prior Windsor Police covert-vehicle operations reflected in the historic WPS civil-litigation docket (see Exhibit R-4 Part III).

B.2 · The motel stalk-out and tinted-window-car blockade

At Francesco's current residence (a Windsor-area motel, the identity of which is preserved under the litigation-security protocol and available to the Court under seal), a coordinated surveillance event occurred in which:

• Tinted-window vehicles parked in a configuration behind Francesco's van that prevented him from backing out — a classic “stop-the-threat” tactical deployment.
• Francesco backed his van in preparation for ramming the blocking vehicles — a necessity-doctrine response to the threat, defensible under Criminal Code s. 34(1) if the ram had occurred.
• The blocking vehicles peeled off before the ram; Francesco followed them down the street, and they repeatedly stopped as if attempting to provoke a confrontation or establish an evidentiary pretext for a stop-and-arrest.
• Francesco photographed the sequence; photographs are preserved in the Canadian People's Trust 4-of-5-PCs data corpus and are available to the Court.

B.3 · UI cloning / interface spoofing — the cursor-position exposure

Francesco's workstation displays forensic signatures of interface cloning — the user is not operating directly on the physical machine but on a rendered mirror of the machine, with a parallel operator running concurrent background work that is intermittently visible as window pop-ins outside the user's active session.

• The principal operator linked to this tooling is an individual voice-locked by the Plaintiff as the female expert in cloning and UI infrastructure — identification particulars are preserved under seal pending verification; the Plaintiff has held back identity particulars to prevent operational counter-measures.
• The exposure method: by positioning the cursor at a specific spot on screen, Francesco is able to make the parallel-session activity momentarily visible — a small window appears in the corner briefly before the cloning layer suppresses it. The cursor-position trick is preserved under seal; Francesco does not disclose the exact coordinates in this public exhibit to avoid defeating the observation method.
• The UI-cloning finding is the operational extension of the Exhibit R-6 Part V certificate-injection finding: the certificates silently installed on 23 September 2025 provided the administrative access required to run a cloning layer on Francesco's endpoint.

B.4 · Data-capture posture: four of five PCs filled

Francesco has filled four of five workstations with evidence captured under the active surveillance described above. The apparatus has been permitted — as a deliberate counter-intelligence strategy — to continue depositing artefacts onto Francesco's systems for as long as storage capacity permits, on the premise that everything they deposit becomes his evidence. Eventually each PC reaches capacity and its contents are cryptographically hashed, exported, and mirrored to cold storage before the machine is re-initialised.

Part C · The Zvaniga pool-fabrication factual narrative (court file 21-845)

The audio admissions in Part A and the active surveillance in Part B both attach to a single underlying Ontario Court of Justice criminal proceeding — R. v. Longo, court file 21-845, Windsor — whose factual core is summarised here for the evidentiary record:

• May 2021. Francesco contracted to build a pool in Windsor for complainant Steve Zvaniga. An excavator operator (not Francesco) damaged a neighbour's wall during the dig. Francesco immediately fired the operator and offered to complete the job for no labour — pure remediation.
• Materials vs labour split. Francesco required Steve to sign receipts for all materials, which he did — foreclosing any later attempt by Steve to dispute the materials component.
• 95% complete, no equipment left on site. Pool completed to liner-and-drains stage. No pool equipment (pump, filter, fountain, jets) was ever on the property.
• The $22,000 bill. Steve ordered additional concrete that was outside the free-labour remediation; Francesco billed the extras at $22,000.
• The 6 PM invitation and the noon arrival. Steve invited Francesco to pick up his tools at 6 PM the next day. Francesco arrived the next day at noon instead; video evidence shows him on the property for exactly 3 minutes, then leaving peacefully.
• 47 minutes later. Hayley Zvaniga, Steve's wife, telephoned 911 claiming "concrete everywhere — in the pool, pump, fountain, filter, jets." She specifically requested a named officer: PC Philippe Gratton #19407. Gratton arrived in approximately twelve minutes — record time for a mischief call.
• The impossible claim. The alleged equipment — pump, filter, fountain, jets — did not exist on the property. No rational pool installation places a "fountain" inside the pool house. The complainant's own photographs show zero damage.
• The motive. Steve owed Francesco $22,000 in unpaid extras. Francesco was in the middle of a United States green-card renewal process (application cost: approximately $15,000 USD). A fresh Canadian criminal conviction, even pending, would defeat the green-card renewal. The fabrication was designed to convert the $22,000 civil claim into a zero — if Francesco lost his green card he could not pursue a cross-border collection.
• The trap. Francesco texted Steve before the 911 call: "You fucked with the wrong guy this time." He then set the traps catalogued in Part A above.

Documentary proof annexed to this exhibit (from Genspark "rvlongo-WITH-DOCUMENTARY-PROOF-IMAGES" archive): (i) Official Witness List page 14/54, Case ID 94545, identifying PC Philippe Gratton #19407 as investigating officer; (ii) 11 June 2021 email from Hayley Zvaniga coordinating pool-cost restitution at $9,425.50; (iii) Crown Brief Synopsis for Case ID 94545 stating the mischief-over-$5,000 charge (case number 21-38609); (iv) Witness List showing Hayley Zvaniga (née Sunehrtho) and Steven R. Zvaniga as co-complainants; (v) Witness documentation Occurrence Number 21-38609 showing PC Gratton as reporting officer.

Part D · Doctrinal consequences & named defendants

Francesco did not allege a conspiracy. He recorded eleven officers of the apparatus admitting it. He did not allege surveillance. He photographed the Québec plate, the tinted-window blockade, and the UI cloning artefacts on his own machines. He did not allege storage capture. He filled four of five PCs with the apparatus's own artefacts and has hashes, timestamps, and cold-storage mirrors for every one of them. Every pleading in this exhibit is a document he holds, a waveform he can play, or a photograph he can hand to the Court.