BE FRAUD AWARE - THE REAL STORY OF THE BC SECURITIES COMMISSIONS CRIMES IN HIP HOP

See YouTube to for a Hip Hop song Be Fraud Aware

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Unl2N7SifY

 As always stay tuned for more..
PH
CB

BE FRAUD AWARE - 5 REASONS THE BC SECURITIES COMMISSION IS A SHAM

March 24/16

On the ongoing saga between the BC Securities Commission and the Directors of U-GO Brands

The U-GO Directors would like to outline five of the main reasons that will highlight their legal position against the BCSC, every one of these reasons has multiple Federally Indictable offences behind it. As the Directors have previously alleged the case is flawed from the very beginning and the Dec 2015 ruling against the U-GO Director’s is further evidence of a malicious prosecution filled with lies and deception to say the least.

On Dec 14 2015 the BC Securities Commission ruled that the U-GO Brands Directors had distributed Securities without a prospectus violating the Securities Act, as a result the Directors have received significant market bans as well as financial penalties of up to $3 million dollars. These penalties are unprecedented especially considering no Fraud was committed and the Director’s did not benefit from ill gotten gains however a necessary punishment according to the BCSC. The BCSC maintains that the Directors were reckless in their actions fund-raising and running U-GO Brands and that Mr. Peter Harris and Mr. Christopher Burke's dissent and allegations of criminal behaviour against the BCSC represents a serious threat to the integrity of the financial markets in British Columbia. As a result hefty and unprecedented fines and market bans currently face the U-GO Directors.

Mr. Peter Harris and Mr. Christopher Burke allege that the BCSC has been deceptive from the very start of this case when Mr. Harris contacted the BCSC to report Fraud in regards to an offshore company Spyru. Mr. Harris contrary to the insistence of the BCSC self-reported possible breaches of the Securities Act other then the Fraud reported and the U-GO Directors offered to step down if they had committed any violations of against the Securities Act and pay any normally associated with such a contravention. Their sole concern from the start, the reason they started U-GO Brands, hired a Securities Lawyer and contacted the BCSC was to save the Spyru investors money and maintain legal compliance.

According to the U-GO Directors what the BC Securities Commission fails to mention or acknowledge is the evidence the U-GO Directors have provided to prove their innocence from the very beginning of any allegations the BCSC has made. Further evidence regarding the Directors allegations can be seen at www.bcsccriminalcharges.blogspot.com, and www.bcsecuritiescommissionasham.blogspot.com.

The Directors pose five main reasons they disagree with the BCSC and have made claims that they have committed multiple Criminal Code offences including but not limited to Obstruction of Justice, Tampering, Fraudulent Concealment, Perjury, Break and Entering, False Pretense Slander\Libel, Breach of Trust etc.

Reason the BCSC is a Sham #1

LIES AND PERJURY

Whether committed under oath or simply in writing as an affidavit the BCSC, its staff including but not limited to the the main investigator (Ms. Donders) in this case, the Council for the Executive Director (Mila Pivnenko and James Torrance), and the former Director of Criminal Enforcement Ms. Mitchell Banks have repeatedly lied in over the course of this investigation in order to make a case. There are more lies then have yet been counted so for now we will outline just one at this current time.

The BCSC illegally Cease Trade ordered a pair of private trust accounts then lied to cover up the fact.

There is numerous pieces of evidence in regards to deception and lies on behalf of the BCSC on this matter alone, the following is taken from Ms. Mitchell-Banks email communication with the Mr. Harris who was at the time head of the Criminal Enforcement division of the BCSC.

This statement by Ms. Mitchell-Banks that denies the BCSC is responsible for the CTO can be compared to the following evidence provided by the TD Waterhouse investment bank that the BCSC issued the Cease Trade order on two private trust accounts, accounts which it knew could not possibly have received the proceeds of criminal activities as no cash had been deposited in almost 20 years. In addition the entire procedure in regards to the operation of the BCSC is full of lies and deception, for a Regulatory Enforcement agency charged with ensuring the integrity of the financial markets in BC this pattern of deception and lies is very alarming. The BCSC has lied about everything from its refusal to release the Oct 2014 Hearings Transcripts to alleging that we did not turn our minds to the Securities Act and Legal Compliance.

The BCSC lies or is deceptive and withholds the truth on a regular basis whether in its attempts to prosecute the Director’s for Fraud long after the BCSC knew they were innocent or the recent refusal on the behalf of the Commission to tell the public the truth about Director of Criminal Enforcement Division Ms. Mitchell-Banks and her recent departure from the BCSC. Inside sources have confirmed that indeed Ms. Mitchell-Banks was fired by the BCSC, why does the BCSC hide this? See the Cease Trade order below and compare to the statements made by Ms. Mitchell-Banks denying any BCSC involvement. Why the lies?

To summarize the first reason the U-GO Directors claim the BCSC is a sham one need look no further then the vast amount of lies and deception that are perpetrated by its employees, in one hearing lead investigator Ms. Donders even lied under oath and denied the accounts were Cease Traded by the BCSC. The entire investigation is built on the evidence of liars. How many lies are allowed to be committed to make a case before a case no longer has any validity? Twenty, thirty, seventy, one hundred? One? Two? Most of the rest of the following reasons are the related to the lies and deceit of the BCSC.

Reason the BCSC is a Sham # 2

THE BCSC ATTEMPTS TO PROSECUTE PERSONS IT KNOWS TO BE INNOCENT FOR FRAUD

The U-GO Brands Directors argue that the attempted Fraud charges before them for well over a year after the BCSC knew they were innocent are simply more evidence of their claims, the BC Securities Commission has been deceptive from the day the U-GO Directors contacted the BCSC until now. Why would the BC Securities Commission continue to press charges over a year after they knew those charges had no merit? See the email exchange between U-GO Brands Lawyer and BCSC investigator Ms. Lindsay that indicates this to be true, that the BCSC knew this as early as April 2014 yet the Council for the Executive Director continued to attempt to have the charges stick until July 2015.

The BC Securities Commission has argued that none of the U-GO Directors complaints are valid due to the fact that this is a highly regulated Securities issue, the U-GO Brands directors in return point to the fact that it stopped being a Securities issue when the BCSC attempted to press false Fraud charges for which jail time may be applicable.

See our lawyer inform us that after a conversation that he had with Ms Donders she informed him that the allegations facing the U-GO Brands Director’s had no merit in April of 2014.

Why then over a year later in 2015 would the prosecution (The Council for the Executive Director) still be attempting to have Fraud charges pressed? See evidence below..

The outright refusal of the BCSC to acknowledge the truth in this case combined with malicious intent are just some of the factors that lead to our reason number two that the BC Securities Commission is a Sham, public servants attempted to push false charges on innocent citizens for over a year. As the BCSC itself admits they had access to all the banking accounts they, they knew better and attempted to push Fraud charges anyways.

Reason the BCSC is a Sham #3

ENTRAPMENT AND FALSE PRETENSE

In early 2013 Mr. Harris discovered that his former boss and mentor for 30 years in the shipping industry Mr. Klaus Glusing, recently turned business partner was embezzling funds from an offshore start-up Spyru. Spyru had many BC investors and a product on the shelves from BC to New York. Mr. Peter Harris took multiple steps to protect the investors and do the right thing including quitting Spyru, hiring a Securities Attorney in order to issue an Offering Memorandum and maintain legal compliance, starting U-GO Brands in BC in order to save the Spyru shareholders and contacting the BC Securities Commission in order to report fraud and maintain compliance.

U-GO Brands was a promising all natural and organic entry into the beverage drink market, in partnership with an industry veteran from the lower mainland who had a product and branding developed in the SuperDrop (tm) project. U-GO produced over 80,000 bottles which all sold well and had orders pending for 30,000 retail outlets across North America including 10,000 7-11s, U-GO Brands was a legitimate company with a bright future before it was destroyed by the BCSC.

The BCSC was aware from the beginning that the U-GO Brands directors had wanted to gift old Spyru shareholders shares in the new U-GO Brands company. This may have conflicted with the Securities Act, in an email the initial case investigator Mr. William Ting sends to the director’s attorney at the time Mr. Ting indicates he is aware of the U-GO Brands directors resolve and will let them proceed for the time being. See the email inserted above as evidence that the BCSC is fully aware of the Director’s plans to gift Spyru shareholders shares in the new U-GO Brands company and despite questions about legal compliance will let the Directors proceed. Why would they mislead the Directors for months and then turn around and attempt to charge then for the very Fraud they reported as well as offences that never would have occurred had the BCSC done its job in the first place, after refusing to help us or even talk to us at one point.

 

To sum up reason number three that the BCSC is a sham, the U-GO Brands director’s went to them for help and did the right thing. They spent nine months deceiving, it took them seven months to even bother telling them they were not going to look into the Spyru fraud as they had no jurisdiction. Why?

Reason the BCSC is a Sham #4

The BCSC is Not to Be Trusted, it runs 'Courts' without recording transcripts.

In regards to the missing hearing transcript for Oct the 8^th and Oct 31^st 2014 preliminary hearing. The BCSC insists no such transcript ever existed and it is not standard practice for one to be recorded for a preliminary hearing. At this preliminary hearing there was a stenographer, the director’s all had to state their name for the record at the beginning of the hearing. All other hearings and interviews had transcripts produced including the hearing precluding the Oct 8^th hearing. Why would there not be a transcript for this hearing? Even if it is a preliminary hearing? There is a transcript for the March 13/14 2014 preliminary hearing and we will attach it as proof. Why would the next hearing even if 'preliminary' not be recorded?

Either the BCSC is lying and withholding the transcript, or the transcript was destroyed.

For arguments sake lets pretend the director’s didn't see the Stenographer and nothing was really recorded then this would beg the question how can the BCSC claim to operate as a court with all the authority of Supreme Court as it is so fond of informing us it has. The BCSCs mandate is to operate in a fair, just and impartial manner yet its court proceedings are so far from impartial and just that its a complete joke. Attached is copied a section of the Commissions own policy on hearings. Keep in mind that policy is not law, it must however fall within the confines of the law.

<<< Exert from Commission Policy on Hearings>>>

PART 2 HEARINGS

2.1 Procedures – The Commission conducts hearings less formally than the courts. The Act

and Regulation prescribe very few procedures the Commission must follow in hearings.

Consequently, except for these, the Commission is the master of its own procedures. In deciding

procedural matters, the Commission considers the rules of natural justice set by the courts and

the public interest in having matters heard fully and decided promptly.

<<<End of exert>>>

How can the BCSC claim to operate as a court of law yet operate in such an arbitrary manner, by its own admission if it is to follow the rules of natural justice set by the Courts then certainly everything should be on record including a preliminary hearing.

The Commission and its Agents have repeatedly stated that the Commission is not governed by the Canadian Constitution nor is it obliged to operate in a manner that is in accordance with the procedures and rules of Canadian Supreme Court. This is contrary to the Constitution which clearly states that unless specific Provincial Legislation outlines otherwise all laws, regulations, rules, courts, tribunals etc shall operate in accordance with the Constitution Act of 1982 in section 32.

Application of Charter

• 32. (1) This Charter applies
  
  • (a) to the Parliament and government of Canada in respect of all matters within the authority of Parliament including all matters relating to the Yukon Territory and Northwest Territories; and
    
  • (b) to the legislature and government of each province in respect of all matters within the authority of the legislature of each province.

Either the transcript was destroyed or withheld or their never was one in the first place as the BCSC insists. Whichever answer is true it is the position of Mr. Harris and Mr. Burke that the BCSC has lost all credibility as it operates in contravention of either the Canadian Constitution and the guidelines for Supreme Court or the Criminal Code. Neither of these positions would support any supposed authority the BCSC operates with, it has compromised its position and is not fit to regulate the securities market in British Columbia as it does not operate in accordance with the principles of justice and the rule of law.

The BCSC is guilty of either withholding/destroying evidence or a breach of the Canadian Constitution either way the BCSC is compromised.

According to Ms. Mitchell Banks the following is what happened to the Oct hearing transcripts.

To sum up reason number four the BCSC is Sham, the BCSC is deceptive and cannot be trusted. Its destruction and subsequent denial of the existence of the Oct 2014 Hearings Transcripts is evidence of the director’s claims against the BCSC.

Reason the BCSC is a Sham #5

Spy Games

In early 2015 after it was clear to the BCSC that the Directors were innocent of fraud charges the BCSC decided to break into Mr. Christopher Burke's Family Hotel room in Vancouver BC and hack his computer in an effort to attempt to pin anything they could on the U-GO Brands directors, there were multiple witnesses present at the time. Since then the BCSC has harassed Mr. Christopher Burke for over a year with black-ops military ops units, choppers random death threats and cyber attacks. After the December 2015 ruling against the Directors the BCSC stepped up the intimidation game against Mr. Burke, the following picture is of one of the Surveillance vans that the BCSC had following him. It was taken on New Years eve day 2015 after the ruling by the BCSC, the van is parked in a position to watch Mr. Burke go to the Bank, his parents, friends, shopping and any general errands he would run in his neighbourhood. The van was found to have a cardboard cut-out with eye holes in it facing the side of the street Mr. Burke would walk.

Mr. Burke for his own safety has conducted multiple counter-surveillance operations to accumulate evidence, the photos of this van are not the only photos of such activities other vehicles and people have been recorded or photographed. Small portions of that evidence are made public at the following sites.

http://bcsecuritiescommissionasham.blogspot.ca/2016/01/bc-securities-surveillance-files-two.html

http://bcsecuritiescommissionasham.blogspot.ca/2016/02/the-surveillance-files-3-brief-rundown.html

http://www.reportingfraudinbc.blogspot.ca/2016/02/helicopter-games.html

And also on these news releases from a couple of US Papers the LA Daily News and the Chicago Daily Herald..

http://markets.financialcontent.com/mng-lang.dailynews/news/read/31453431/Why_Does_a_Regulatory_Agency_Hide_Behind_Carboard

http://finance.dailyherald.com/dailyherald/news/read/31453431/Why_Does_a_Regulatory_Agency_Hide_Behind_Carboard

To summarize reason number five the BCSC is a complete sham, if their was any real truth to their allegations and findings they would not feel the need to harass the U-GO Directors with black ops units and helicopters all year but especially AFTER their Dec 2015 ruling. The Directors maintain that this is further evidence of the lengths the BCSC will go to to suppress justice and the truth. The BCSC will send thugs to threaten Mr. Burke into silence but will not sue the Director’s despite its repeated threats to do so should the U-GO Brands director’s continue to make their allegations against the BCSC public.

If the BCSC was innocent it would have enough faith in its case to take the U-GO Brands Director’s to a real Court of Law and have them sued for slander, libel and harassment and charged with contempt of court for their refusal to co-operate with the Commission regarding its findings. Instead the BCSC chose to hide behind secret armies of thugs hackers and helicopters to intimidate the U-GO directors into silence and submission. That is reason number five the BCSC is a sham.

One would be best to remain fraud aware, the BCSC is the real fraud and threat to the integrity of the market.

Christopher Burke

Peter Harris

BE FRAUD AWARE - THE BC SECURITIES COMMISSION IS A SHAM!

Thursday, March 17, 2016

MANITOBA SECURITIES COMMISSION

Letter sent from Christopher Burke to the Manitoba Securities Commission

Wednesday, February 24, 2016

Dear Teresa Sigurdson and Kimberly Laycock,

I represent myself on the matter between BCSC and U-GO Brands. With all due respect I ask the Manitoba Securities Commission back off of this matter until the allegations against us from by the BCSC have been proven in a Federal Court of Law. The BC Security Commission has committed the following Federally Indictable offences in an effort to prosecute in a case full of lies. We have evidence for every claim we make and are prepared to give testimony in Canadian Supreme Court where we should get a fair trial. Nothing the BC Securities does, says or tenders as evidence has any legal credibility after we have been through the following fiasco.

I must also explain it is due to a lack of trust from being lied to and deceived by public officials including the magical disappearance of emails, transcripts and documents that prompts us to respond by sending emails to many parties so that everything we do is on record. 

• Perjury
• Tampering/withholding evidence
• Collusion
• Fraudulent Concealment
• Break and entering
• Breach of trust as a Public official
• Accessory
• Conspiracy
• Illegal Wiretapping
• Criminal Harassment
• Slander
• Libel

These are just a few of the Crimes the BCSC has committed in its attempt to make a case when there never should have been one. We went to them and reported Fraud, they deceived and lied to us for 9 months before telling us they couldn't help us, meantime they were busy entrapping us and attempting to prosecute us for crimes we did not commit. I have attached several papers that will outline the chain of events, the crimes committed, and some evidence to back our position. We have filed criminal charges with the RCMP.

In addition to the crimes committed the BCSC has committed several serious breaches of the Charter of Rights. We are not the only ones to undergo this type of abuse at the BCSC, in addition to criminal charges a class action law suite is a very real possibility.

We do not mean to be vindictive or threatening to the Manitoba Securities Commission as we have no quarrel with the MSC however we are absolutely fed up with our rights being trampled on and being prosecuted based on a series of lies.

Questions regarding the BC Securities Commission:

We have evidence that warrants and validates each question asked..

• How can a Regulatory Agency mandated with ensuring fair and ethical actions in the marketplace maintain any legal credibility when it operates in the following manner
  

• Holds hearings without records, according to the BCSC rules its the master of its own domain in legal proceedings. How can a legal ruling be made with unbiased integrity when as they themselves said they only sometimes record said hearing?
  
• What do the Securities Act say about this? What about Supreme court law and our Constitutional rights?
  

• How can an agency be trusted to make a fair and impartial decision in a case when it knowingly uses the testimony of an investigator who has perjured herself multiple times?
  

• Why would a Regulatory and Enforcement agency in charge of maintaining the integrity of the financial markets mislead citizens who went to them for help for seven months in regards to the reporting of Fraud?
  

• Why would the BCSC lie to U-GO Brands directors in regards to Klaus Glusings fraudulent activities?
  

• Why would a BCSC investigator tell the lawyer for U-Brands that he is going to let us proceed with issuing shares in U-GO Brands although he knows we may be in contravention of the Act by doing so?

• Why would the lawyer and the BCSC lead us on to think its all legally OK when they know they are entrapping us into committing an offense against the Act?
  

• Why would an agency tasked with protecting shareholders in BC actively work to destroy a legitimate company and in doing so lose 400 shareholders money?
  

• How can the BCSC justify posting private banking info online on its website TWICE contrary to the privacy act?

• Why would the BCSC illegally Cease trade trust accounts then lie to cover it up?
  

• How can the BCSC justify attempting to prosecute us for fraud well after they know we are innocent of fraud?
  

• Would the BC Securities Commission break into someone’s hotel illegally and hack their laptop if they are desperate to pin a crime on someone and cant?

• Would the BCSC hire surveillance teams and choppers to intimidate citizens into silence if it cant scare them into silence with the threat of a lawsuit?

• Would the BCSC attempt to force citizens to settle for all the allegations facing them including fraud even if they know the fraud charges are not true?

• Is entrapment and collusion standard protocol for the BCSC?
  

• Do the rule of law and due process not apply to the financial markets?
  

• What about the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty?
  

• the right to a fair and impartial trial (Hearing) in any legal proceeding?

• Can the BCSC really just make declarations about someone that are not true and operate as though its the law? Can they prosecute someone based on these declarations without evidence presented?

Sincerely,

Christopher Burke

BE FRAUD AWARE - THE BC SECURITIES COMMISSION ARE THE REAL CROOKS

   THE BC SECURITIES COMMISSION HAS A HISTORY OF CORRUPTION ..

See www.waterwarcrimes.com for more on corruption in BC


The following is taken from Water War Crimes..



Corruption Clean Up Continuing in British Columbia

6/13/2012

0 Comments

 

Premier Christy Clark Terminates Hyndman, Chairman of B.C. Securities Commission

Unreported in Canada's mainstream media and, to our knowledge first reported here, Premier Christy Clark, and her colleagues, fired or terminated Douglas Hyndman from his lofty sinecure as Chairman of the British Columbia Securities Commission by Order In Council made May 28, 2012.  Mr. Hyndam was paid an obscene and outrageous salary (from British Columbia taxpayers money) of $523,000.00 in 2010/2011.

From 1987 to 2012, Douglas Hyndman was the man in responsible for supervising much of the activity at the Vancovuer Stock Exchange, one of the great crime scenes of the Western World. 

 The Investigation Continues

At this time, we do not have enough information to determine if Douglas Hyndman is a crook but the investigation continues.  Three weeks after he was terminated from the his top job, the story remains unreported by the mainstream media in Canada.

The British Columbia Securities Commission (BCSC) was established by the Government of British Columbia to supervise and regulate securities trading, i.e. the stock market,  in British Columbia.

Mr. Hyndman was appointed Chairman of the BCSC, in 1987, by the notorious Premier Bill Vander Zalm who, like every elected British Columbia Premier after him, was  forced from office due to a corruption scandal.   And, those elected politicians, Michael Harcourt, Glen Clark, and Gordon Campbell, continued to keep Mr. Hyndman in office, for 25 long years, until Premier Christy Clark finally showed some courage, did the right thing, and rescinded his appointment.       

Under Mr. Hyndman's, arguably incompetent and/or corrupt supervision, the Vancouver Stock Exchange grew from a modertaely corrupt regional stock exchange into a major player as a den of thieves specializing in for money laundering, racketeerring, pump and dump, fraud and corruption.   During this period, it was protected by a corrupt legal and judicial system and an incompetent police force that are discussed elsewhere on this web site. 

The situation was so bad that Canada's former top cop, RCMP Commissioner Zacardelli, stated: "When it comes to international money laundering, all roads lead to Vancouver".
Put simply, Douglas Hyndman should have been removed from his job two decades ago but successive corrupt Premiers refused to do the job for reasons that have yet to be explained. 

In relation to the Water War Crimes, Hyndman was Chairman of  the BCSC when W.C.W. Western Canada Water Enterprises Ltd.  was touting and selling its shares based on the secret illegal agreement it had made with the Government of British Columbia that gave it an exceedlngly favourable position in the marketplace.  Hyndman turned a blind eye and a major stock market fraud took place with many investors losing millions upon millions of dollars.
 
Click here to read more about WCW Western Canada Water Enterprises Ltd. and its fraudulent stock market swindle

NDP Party Leader Adrian Dix
and
Douglas Hyndman

The Editors believe that the British Columbia New Democratic Party and its members made a major mistake when it selected Adrian Dix to be its leader for the next election which will be called in 2013 and where Premier Christy Clark will be his opponent.  

Mr. Dix had been Chief of Staff to former Premier Glen Clark and Premier Clark was well informed of the corruption taking place at the Vancouver Stock Exchange under the negligent or corrupt supervision of Mr. Douglas Hyndman.  In fact, Premier Clark made several speeches in the legislature were he railed and ranted about the "crime scene" known as the Vancouver Stock Exchange but  when he was elected to the premier's office, Premier Glen Clark and his roomate / Chief of Staff, Adrian Dix, forgot about those speeches, they forgot about the public interest and they did nothing about Douglas Hyndman the man who is arguably most responsible for the massive corruption that took place at the Vancouver Stock Exchange while he was Chairman of the BCSC from 1987 to 2012.

To be fair to Mr. Dix while he was with Premier Clark's office, he had to follow orders from his boss, but in April, 2011, Adrian Dix became leader of the NDP Party and he has remained silent about the continuing presence of Douglas Hyndman at the British Columbia Securities Commission which, abjectly and miserably, failed to stop the massive stock market fraud taking place on the Vancouver Stock Exchange - the scene of some of the biggest stock market swindles in Canada -  for 25 long years.   

Douglas Hyndman
and the
Water War Crimes

By following the career of Douglas Hyndman one can make a better judgment of his probable involvement in the Water War Crimes.

Hyndman`s online resume states he joined the Ministry of Finance in 1975 and worked as staff member of the Treasury Board until 1984 when he became the Assistant Deputy Minister responsible for the Treasury Board where he remained to 1987. 

During this period, he would have been in a position to influence and guide the emerging British Columbia government policies which were favouring W.C.W. Western Canada Water Enterprises Ltd.  It is a certainty that he would have regularly had dealings with the Canadian Federal Treasury Board in Ottawa that was also using its powers to favour W.C.W. Western Canada Water Enterprises Ltd.   It is probable the Douglas Hyndman met and knew James "Jim" Whiteside who had worked in a senior position with the Federal Treasury Board but who suddenly moved to British Columbia where W.C.W. Western Canada Water Enterprises Ltd. became his first with his newly established financial advisory business

When W.C.W. Western Canada Water Enterprises Ltd. was ready to seek public financing through the use of false and misleading documents to be filed with the Vancouver Stock Exchnage and the British Colubmia Securities Commission, Douglas Hyndman, a man with absolutely no private business experience, was inserted as Chairman of the British Colubmia Securities Commission, the public body charged with the responsiblity of insuring the investing public were protected from swindlers, fraud artists, deceivers, cheats and the like.   This appointment would have been approved by the Ministry of the Attorney General where many of the Water War Crimes took place and where the crooked Robert Edwards was the Deputy Minister.   

The Editors are of the opinion that that the appointment of Douglas Hyndman to the British Columbia Securites Commission was part of a deliberate plan to insure that W.C.W. Western  Canada Water Enterprises Ltd. would be permitted to carry on its dirty business of ripping off the public without sanction from the responsible public authority.

As a general rule, a person who was at the crime scene when the crime was carried out is regarded as a suspect until proved otherwise.  Certainly, Douglas Hyndman should be taken in for questioning by the police.   

"The void created by the failure to communicate is soon filled with poison, drivel and misrepresentation."

Tuesday, March 15, 2016

"The void created by the failure to communicate is soon filled with poison, drivel and misrepresentation."

— C. Northcote Parkinson

ARE WE LIVING UNDER AN OPPRESSIVE GOVERNMENT?

IT SEEMS THAT CANADA IS NO DIFFERENT!

Tuesday, March 15, 2016

The Honourable Michael de Jong, Q.C.
BC MINISTER OF FINANCE  
PO BOX 9048 STN PROV GOVT
Victoria BC V8W 9E2

BRITISH COLUMBIA SECURITIES COMMISSION
Brenda M. Leong, Chair and CEO 
701 West Georgia Street
P.O. Box 10142, Pacific Centre
Vancouver, BC V7Y 1L2

Reference: Letter sent to Mr. de Jong dated March 9, 2016 

Subject: BCSC Wrong Doing

Dear Mr. de Jong,

Why are you not responding to my request for a private audience with you regarding the BC Securities Commission’s abuses and ethical wrong doings? 

It is disheartening to find out that living in British Columbia, Canada is no different than living under a dictatorial and oppressive government. It is immoral when a citizen is denied the right to be heard by his/her Government. I can appreciate the fact that an MP cannot influence the courts or any tribunals administering the law. 

However, what happens when an Independent Government Agency is operating outside the law and violating its own Code of Ethics in order to generate revenues as the BC Securities is a self funded government agency. Mr. de Jong, how can the government explain that an independent enforcement agency be self-funded and its only source of income, is to impose Disgorgement and Administrative fines? Just imagine if the police departments operated in this fashion?

It is immoral when a citizen is denied the right to be heard by his/her Government. I can appreciate the fact that an MP cannot influence the courts or any tribunals administering the law. 

However, what happens when an Independent Government Agency is operating outside the law and violating its own Code of Ethics in order to generate revenues as the BC Securities is a self funded government agency. Mr. de Jong, how can the government explain that an independent enforcement agency be self-funded and its only source of income, is to impose Disgorgement and Administrative fines? Just imagine if the police departments operated in this fashion?

Our allegations against the Commission are extremely real and factual about are being railroaded by the Commission investigators and litigators. From day one, when I contacted William Ting to advise him that we had been defrauded by an offshore partner, it was wrongfully assumed that since Klaus Glusing was my mentor and I knew him for forty years, the investigators wrongfully determined that Cire and Harris were guilty by association, this is not the way to conduct investigations and ruining people's lives.

Now that the Commission Panel has rendered its decision this past December 2015, why can you not grant us our request to meet with you in good faith? 

The only problem we see, is that the Commission registered the Panel’s decision with the BC Supreme Court, we have not been advised that the Commission plans to take us to Court or just supress you from taking any action by leaving the case file open and this way your office cannot interfere. I call that being set-up!

As a matter of fact, Mr. de Jong, its been well established that the Commission messed-up big time and that you Sir and Ms. Leong are playing the time card hoping by your silence and not interacting with Christopher Burke and myself, will result in our giving up and going away. 

The fact that Ms. Mitchell-Banks is no longer with the Commission and that Ms. Pivnenko is on leave of absence, again we can only ascertain that the Commission is in “Big Time Damage Control”. This is why Ms. Leong is not communicating with us, she has lawyered up and on the advice of legal counsel she is not to communicate with us. If that’s the case, then provide us with legal counsel’s coordinates so that we can proceed.

Mr. de Jong, your silence and refusal to work with us, is immoral, unethical and just out and out mean! Your silence is condescending and not right. How would you feel if you heard about a friend or a family member being mistreated by a government agency? What would you do? 

All we are requesting is to resolve this ongoing dispute to are mutual benefit, the Commission has to be held responsible and accountable for the wrong doings and malicious methods its employees perpetrated against us. 

Mr. de Jong, lets stop the time and silence card and let’s site down and workout our differences. 

For your information, we have been made aware that a few weeks ago the Commission did lose three appeal cases at the BC Supreme Court on the basis of abuse of power. 

Mr. de Jong, we have no interest in fighting with the Commission, but if we have to, we will, all we want is for the Commission to admit to its wrong doings and pay the price for ruining over four hundred investors lives that the Commission should have protected. Unfortunately, the investigators went on a witch-hunt and personal character assassination.

Mr. de Jong, we will not go away, the Commission plaid us and now it’s time for reckoning! 

I truly hope we can start a communicating and respecting each other to reach an amicable resolve.

Respectfully Submitted,

Peter Harris

Why Did the BC Securities Commission Tamper With Evidence?

the company newsroom of

U-GO Brands Inc.

U-GO Brands Seeks Court Injunction - Why Did the BC Securities Commission Tamper With Evidence?

Press Release - Feb 1, 2016

Why did the BC Securities Commission tamper with hearings transcripts in its case against U-GO Brands? What is the BC Securities Commission hiding?

Kelowna BC, February 1, 2016 (Newswire.com) - Accused: British Columbia Securities Commission
Plaintiffs: U-GO Brands, Board of Directors and Shareholders
Seeking Court Injunction
tampering
withholding evidence
June 24, 2015
Kelowna law court
1355 Water St,
Kelowna, BC V1Y 9P4
This brief is in regards to the missing hearing transcripts for October 8th and October 31st 2014, preliminary hearings. The British Columbia Securities Commission insists no such transcripts ever existed and it is not standard practice for one to be recorded for a preliminary hearing. At these preliminary hearings there was a stenographer present all day and we all had to state our name for the record at the beginning of the hearings. All other hearings and interviews had transcripts produced including the hearing preceding these two hearings in October. Why would there not be a transcript for these hearings? Even if they are preliminary hearings? There is a transcript for the march 13/14 2014 preliminary hearing and we will attach it as proof. Why would the next hearing even if 'preliminary' not be recorded?
Either the British Columbia Securities Commission is lying and withholding the transcript, or the transcript was destroyed.
For arguments sake let’s pretend we didn't see the stenographer and nothing was really recorded then this would beg the question how can the BCSC claim to operate as a court with all the authority of a supreme court as it is so fond of informing us it has. The British Columbia Securities Commission mandate is to operate in a fair, just and impartial manner yet its court proceedings are so far from impartial and just that it is a miscarriage of justice. I have copied a section of the commissions own policy on hearings. The commission believes since the securities act does not outline specific instructions on how to run its court proceedings that the commission may proceed as it sees fit and create its own procedures.
<<< Exert from commission policy on hearings>>>
Part 2 Hearings
2.1 procedures – the commission conducts hearings less formally than the courts. The act
And regulation prescribe very few procedures the commission must follow in hearings.
Consequently, except for these, the commission is the master of its own procedures. In deciding
Procedural matters, the commission considers the rules of natural justice set by the courts and
The public interest in having matters heard fully and decided promptly.
<<< end of exert>>>
How can the BCSC claim to operate as a court of law yet operate in such an arbitrary manner? By its own admission if it is to follow the rules of natural justice set by the courts then certainly everything should be on record including a preliminary hearing.
The commission and its agents have repeatedly stated that the commission is not governed by the Canadian constitution nor is it obligated to operate in a manner that is in accordance with the procedures and rules of the Canadian Supreme Court. This is contrary to the constitution which clearly states that unless specific provincial legislation outlines otherwise, all laws, regulations, rules, courts, tribunals shall operate in accordance with the constitution act of 1982;
Application of charter

• 32. (1) this charter applies
• (a) to the parliament and government of Canada in respect of all matters within the authority of parliament including all matters relating to the Yukon territory and northwest territories; and
• (b) to the legislature and government of each province in respect of all matters within the authority of the legislature of each province.

BC Securities Policy is not Federal or Provincial Legislature that allows it to ignore due process and the Rule of Law. Nothing in the Securities Act of British Columbia legalizes or validates such arbitrary and malicious behavior as we have experienced.
Either the transcripts were destroyed or withheld or there never were any in the first place as the BCSC insists. Whichever answer is true it is our position that the BCSC has lost all credibility as it operates in contravention of either the Canadian constitution and the guidelines for supreme court or the criminal code. Neither of these positions would support any supposed authority the BCSC operates with. It has compromised its position and is not fit to regulate the securities market in British Columbia as it does not operate in accordance with the principles of justice and the rule of law.
The British Columbia Securities Commission is guilty of either withholding/destroying evidence or a breach of the Canadian constitution. Either way the BCSC is compromised.
 Also see how BC Securities Act legislation as no protection for a massive string of willfully committed Criminal Offenses.

http://www.bcsecuritiescommissionasham.blogspot.ca/2016/01/no-protection-under-section-170-of.html

 See further allegations against the BCSC claimed by the U-GO Directors here..
http://finance.dailyherald.com/dailyherald/news/read/31486859/How_Are_Fake_FBI_Agents

and here..
http://markets.post-gazette.com/postgazette/news/read?GUID=31453431

Christopher Burke
Peter Harris
U-GO Brands Nutritional Product Inc.

HOW MUCH MONEY HAS THE BCSC SPENT TO TRY TO PROSECUTE U-GO BRANDS FOR A FRAUD THEY KNOW WE DID NOT COMMIT?

HOW CAN A GOVERNMENT AGENCY REFUSE TO COMMUNICATE WITH US AFTER IMPOSING OVER $3,000.000 IN FINES WHEN NO FRAUD WAS COMMITTED BY U-GO BRANDS DIRECTORS?

Thursday, March 10, 2016

BCSC Investor Impact Statement Forms

On 23/10/2014 8:00 PM, Peter D. Harris - Echo Partner Ltd. wrote:

Mr. Terrance,

Can you explain as to why Ms. Donders has been sending out BCSC Investor Impact Statement Forms to our U-Go Brands shareholders and the SPYru investors?

With all due respect Sir, a Victim Impact Statement is used to provide the victims of fraud once a conviction has been made that allows them to document losses for possible restitution. 

The Victim Impact Statement is provided to the victim by the plaintiff of the criminal fraud case, which is usually a governing authority.

Mr. Terrance, we respectfully request that Ms. Donders send us all of the BCSC Investor Impact Statements she received by no later than this coming Monday October 27, 2014.

Sincerely,
Peter Harris