 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, in order to improve on the model, by
Orders in Council
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 Welles
- 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
quicker.
Archibald Cox
...
|