 Appendix
2: PROOF
Presenting
the smoking gun to the downfall of Democracy
- Proof of the BAR violating CRIMINAL BREACH OF TRUST
is as easy as reading the Commissioner’s 2003 Annual Report
on The BC Police Act Reform White Paper & Draft Police
Complaints Act,
The first fundamental Principle of Part-9 - is 'Civilian
Oversight':
with an opening statement of: “There is an inextricable
link between Democracy, the rule of law and police accountability.”
“Police must be authorized to do things that would
be illegal for ordinary citizens,” and “Police must
not be unduly fettered in the exercise of those powers.”
Under this mandate police no longer serve the people,
they serve the rule of law of commerce This mandate totally
abolishes sec 8 CCC and converts the BAR into rulers of a police
state
 This
transparent report outlines why this 'white paper and draft' is
being enforced by the Commissioner
Quote:
“The legislature wisely contemplated the excellent work
of Judge Oppal on the new Part-9 could not be 'frozen in time',
so under s-50 the power to 'engage in research' was
conferred onto this Commissioner, by a special committee of the
Legislature, for a 3-year trial period The Special
Committee's recommendations were tabled (within the 3- year mandate)
and these recommendations are based on the 2-1/2 years of experience
in applying Part-9.
In other words this unlegislated section of the
Police Act is operating as if it is legislated law, base on the
forecast that the Legislation necessary to support this Act would
be enacted.
 The
3-year mandate expired in 2002, and the necessary legislation
has never been passed. T he reason the order died on the table
is the Commissioner of Police Complaints was denied his removal
from his oath, is because of a ruling by Judge Oppal, who reiterated
before the 'Special Committee' May 10, 2002: His position
is that:“
The 'Officer of Legislature status' was necessary given
the nature of his Office.” BC law states THAT:
An officer of the legislature cannot be removed, from liability
of his Oath, except by a public process, through a public vote
within the Legislative Assembly
The
Commissioner clearly outlines how this liability affects his Office,
but he clearly report that: quote
“Even the best administration cannot transcend the problems
of inadequate Legislation -What is at fault is the legislation
itself. It's unclear, ambiguous and does not provide adequate
remedies to the Office of the Police Complaint Commission to ensure
effective 'civilian oversight'.”
What is at fault is not the legislation, it's
that: the Commissioner does not see how he can stop enforcing
this new Part 9, due to the liability created by having been allowed
to enforce it,
- So the experiment is allowed to continue, on an excuse
to improve on the model, by Orders in Council [not legislature]
This is issuing an O.C. to cover-up an O.C. in order to continue
violating Sec 8 CCC What is at fault here is a clear note
of defiance by the Commission, after posting this report-
It becomes self-evident that the Commissioner is undertaking
an act of civil disobedience
 Civil
Disobedience: (as
it defined in Black .s 7th)
A deliberate but nonviolent act of
lawbreaking to call attention to a particular law or set of
laws of questionable legitimacy or morality.
“Social protest and even civil disobedience
serve the law's need for growth. Ideally, reform would
come according to reason and justice without self-help and disturbing,
almost violent, forms of protest …
- Still, candor compels one here and again to acknowledge the
gap between the ideal and the reality. Short
of the millennium,
sharp changes in the law depend partly upon the stimulus of
protest.”
Archibald Cox,
Civil Rights, the Constitution, and the Courts,
Upon careful
examination of Archie's legal papers, I hold as irrefutable that
the implementation of this police state is a Natural digression
from the BAR blindly following a flawed archetypal form. The actions
of someone like our Commissioner were predicted thirty years in
advance
I hold as irrefutable that “sharp changes
in the law occurred”, by changing the definition of
a few key words, which created the total collapse of Democracy
itself, and it is this plan that is manifesting itself
That there is more than a coincidence that Black's
7th, the Dictionary of Canadian Law, and the passing of NAFTA
all were enacted in 1991
-You cannot underestimate the power of words -Orson Wells
The
laws themselves must not violate the "natural rights"
of individuals that exist by the "law of Nature. - John Locke
 To
present the American changes
read Black's 5th Legal Law Dictionary'
Colore Officii: By
color of office. Officer's acts unauthorized by officer's
position, though done by form that purports that acts are done
by reason of official duty and by virtue of office. See colour
of office
Colour of Office:
Pretense of right to do acts made by someone
who has no such right. An act of color of office is an
act of an office that claims authority to do the act by reason
of his office when the office does not confer on him such authority
 After
over 3,000 years,
the foundation of Democracy changed in the USA,
in Black 7th
Colore Officii: Latin by color of office. See
color of office
Color of Office:
The authority or power that is inherent in an office especially
a public office. Acts a taken under a color of an office
are vested with, or appear to be vested with, the authority
entrusted to that office
 To
present the Canadian situation, I
introduce this definition in Stroud's Judicial Dictionary 5th,
1986.
Colour:
1) Colour of Office is
always taken in the worst part, and signifies an act of evil
done by the countenance of an Officer, and it bears a dissembling
face of the right of the Office, whereas the Office is but a
veil to the falsehood, and the thing is ground in Vice, and
the Office is a shadow to it.
- It must be noted that the new definition
came in the 1st Dictionary of Canadian law and Parliament declared
that this was a proud moment for Canada, and if any word is
recognized in this book then it's the only allowed definition.
Colour of Office:
Pretense of authority to carry out an act for
which the actor
has no such authority Colore Officii: Latin
for colour of office. See DURESS
Duress: Threats
to another's property, threats of - economic duress, which includes
a contract. See ECONOMY
Economy: The acquisition,
at the lowest cost and at the appropriate time, of financial,
human and physical resources in appropriate quantity and quality.
(Ps: I don't stand-under what this means. It's insane)
...
Perverting
one 3000 year-old word rocks the King domino that will manifest
into a new Millennium
Democracy
stands on a platform of Hope.
Past
generations have made a mess of things, ours no less then our
fathers. The hope of mankind is always that a new generation may
begin to make a new world quickly.
Archibald Cox
...
|