Friday, 5 February 2016

WHY WOULD THE BCSC LIE ABOUT SEIZING A BANK ACCOUNT, WHY WOULD ATTEMPT TO TELL ME WHO MAY OR MAY NOT REPRESENT ME WHEN WE CANNOT AFFORD A LAWYER?



T h e Ho n o u r a b l e Wa l l y Op p a l , QC . B o u g h t o n L aw Ema i l me s s a g e e x c h a n g e b e twe e n B C S C a n d E c h o P a r t n e r s L t d . Oc t o b e r 2 8 , 2 0 1 4 t o Oc t o b e r 23, 2 0 1 4

P a g e 1 o f 8 F r om: P e t e r Ha r r i s T u e s d a y , O c t o b e r - 2 8 - 1 4

Tuesday, October-28-14



Dear Mr. Oppal,

Further to our previous case overview report and for your convenience and quick reference we have attached said document.

In addition, we are sending you the below message exchange with the Commission and this is only an example of the treatment we have been subjected to by these so called investigators.

We look forward to meeting with you this coming Thursday your offices at 3:30pm

Cheers

Peter Harris

On 28/10/2014 6:31 PM, Teresa Mitchell-Banks wrote:

Mr. Harris,

You are entirely welcome to attend the Hearing Management Conference on October 31st. In fact, it is staff’s position you should all come and represent yourself. As I have previously advised you, the position of the Commission is that Mr. Harris should not be representing any of you and that you should either act on your own behalf or hire counsel.



On 28/10/2014 3:16 PM, Peter D. Harris - Echo Partner Ltd. wrote:

Exhibit: SM00075 - SP-181 RESPONSE IS NOT REQUIERED Subject: Unlawful Freezing of Trust Accounts Mr. John and Diane Thibert British Columbia Securities Commission



Mr. James K. Torrance,

Senior Litigation Counsel

Mr. Torrance,

We refer to Ms. Mitchell-Banks below message and it’s beyond comprehension why Ms. Mitchell-Banks keeps sending email messages to Mr. John Thibert affirming that Mrs. Diane Thibert’s trust account was never frozen by the Commission. T h e Ho n o u r a b l e Wa l l y Op p a l , QC . B o u g h t o n L aw Ema i l me s s a g e e x c h a n g e b e twe e n B C S C a n d E c h o P a r t n e r s L t d . Oc t o b e r 2 8 , 2 0 1 4 t o Oc t o b e r 23, 2 0 1 4

P a g e 2 o f 8 F r om: P e t e r Ha r r i s T u e s d a y , O c t o b e r - 2 8 - 1 4



As per the attached letter from TD Waterhouse dated October 17, 2014, it clearly confirms Diane Thibert’s account was order frozen on February 6, 2014. This was not an error on the part of TD Waterhouse as implied by the Commission, otherwise TD Waterhouse would have immediately unfrozen Diane Thibert’s trust account.

In fact when Mr. Blair Payton of TD Waterhouse received a copy of the order to freeze Diane Thibert’s account and the Thibert’s joint account, Mr. Payton call Lindsey Donders to question the legality of the frees order, Mr. Payton’s phone conversation with Ms. Donders was terminated quickly as she hung-up the phone.

In addition, we did receive a message from the Commission that the freezing of the Thibert’s joint trust account was a computer glitch and was subsequently lifted on February 13, 2014. This does not absolve the Commission from an unlawful and negligent action.

TD Waterhouse is an established Canadian financial institution and why on earth would they make false statements to the Commission?

The repudiation on the part of the Commission investigative staff, clearly shows tunnel vision and unwillingness to accept new evidence.

Respectfully,

Peter D. Harris

On 28/10/2014 9:54 AM, Peter D. Harris - Echo Partner Ltd. wrote:

Subject: We never know when the BCSC Commission is telling us the truth or are they trying to intimidate us again? REPLY NOT REQUIRED

What motivated the Commission not to request an audio recording and a transcript produced at the October 8 hearing? The BCSC Tribunal being a formal and legal forum always records and issues a transcript to the plaintiff and the accused of what was said during the hearing. Our problem is we never know when the Commission is telling us the truth or are they again trying to intimidate us? Peter Harris

On 27/10/2014 2:37 PM, Mila Pivnenko wrote:

Dear Commission Secretary, T h e Ho n o u r a b l e Wa l l y Op p a l , QC . B o u g h t o n L aw Ema i l me s s a g e e x c h a n g e b e twe e n B C S C a n d E c h o P a r t n e r s L t d . Oc t o b e r 2 8 , 2 0 1 4 t o Oc t o b e r 23, 2 0 1 4

P a g e 3 o f 8 F r om: P e t e r Ha r r i s T u e s d a y , O c t o b e r - 2 8 - 1 4



The Executive Director requests that the second hearing management meeting in Spyru et al. case scheduled to occur on October 31, 2014 be audio recorded and a transcript produced.

Thank you.

Tuesday, October 28, 2014

BRITISH COLUMBIA SECURITIES COMMISSION Mr. James K. Torrance



Senior Litigation Counsel

Mr. Torrance,

How can Ms. Mitchell-Banks advise us to retain legal counsel when she knows very well we have run out of money?

Not only that, we have spent in excess of $150,000.00 in legal fees in our case and we have nothing to show for it.

Facing very significant penalties

This is a very strong statement to make when we are the ones that contacted the Commission for help, not knowing that we would later be set-up and become accused. All of the allegations brought forth against our Group by the Commission, we have proven that the accusations have no merit. The only offence we are guilty of is badly administrating SPYru Inc. as Sales Agents.

As for the accusation pertaining to errors on the U-GO Brands subscription agreements relating to the miss classification of investors, this is a questionable issue as investors do not have to, or refuse to disclose personal finances information when signing the subscription agreement, this is validated by the VCMA as a serious discriminatory issue.

We find Ms. Mitchell-Banks above statement to be inflammatory, intimidating and daunting. This kind of statement coming from an Officer of the Court is unbecoming as an attorney and is totally non-ethical to attempt to scare people into submission.

You should all make sure you have competent legal advice

This statement is arrogant and again, totally unethical on the part of a civil servant.

Mr. Torrance, please understand we are not trying to defy authority, but we will defend ourselves against the Commission’s uncalled for abuses, torments, bullying and slanderous accusations on the Commission website. T h e Ho n o u r a b l e Wa l l y Op p a l , QC . B o u g h t o n L aw Ema i l me s s a g e e x c h a n g e b e twe e n B C S C a n d E c h o P a r t n e r s L t d . Oc t o b e r 2 8 , 2 0 1 4 t o Oc t o b e r 23, 2 0 1 4

P a g e 4 o f 8 F r om: P e t e r Ha r r i s T u e s d a y , O c t o b e r - 2 8 - 1 4



We certainly do not want to offend your profession or the Tribunal, however, we have no alternative but to attend the October 31, 2014 Management Hearing without legal representation as explained in prior messages.

Respectfully,

Peter D. Harris

On 27/10/2014 10:41 PM, Teresa Mitchell-Banks wrote:

Mr. Harris,

Your ‘letters of authorization’ are not acceptable and we will be opposing you representing anyone but yourself or a company for whom you are a director. You, your fellow respondents, and your companies are facing very significant penalties. You should all make sure you have competent legal advice.

On 27/10/2014 9:11 PM, Teresa Mitchell-Banks wrote:

Mr. Harris,

I write to advise you that we will not be forwarding your email directly to the Ms. Audrey Ho, as to do so would be entirely inappropriate. Counsel for the Executive Director will be opposing the entry of your email as an exhibit as it is not relevant to the matters before the panel. Further, most of it is taken directly from the article written by Kim Rossmer and has absolutely nothing to do with the matters with which you and your colleagues are charged. Your email contains submissions not evidence and as such, we will oppose its admission into evidence. You have been sent guidelines for the conduct of a hearing and you would be well advised to read them.

On 27/10/2014 8:06 PM, Teresa Mitchell-Banks wrote:

Mr. Harris,

Hearing management meetings are not usually recorded. As the October 8th management meeting was not recorded, there is no transcript. In the future, if you wish a management meeting to be audio recorded I suggest you ask COMMSEC, in advance, to audio record the meeting. This is an unusual request and so I stress that such a request should be done as soon as possible in advance of a matter so that COMMSEC can consider your request and make the necessary arrangements should they decide to audio record the meeting. T h e Ho n o u r a b l e Wa l l y Op p a l , QC . B o u g h t o n L aw Ema i l me s s a g e e x c h a n g e b e twe e n B C S C a n d E c h o P a r t n e r s L t d . Oc t o b e r 2 8 , 2 0 1 4 t o Oc t o b e r 23, 2 0 1 4

P a g e 5 o f 8 F r om: P e t e r Ha r r i s T u e s d a y , O c t o b e r - 2 8 - 1 4



With respect to your requests for copies of the Investor Impact Statements, these questionnaires are regularly sent out after the Notice of Hearing is published and are only tendered into evidence if there is a finding of liability and the matter proceeds to a sanction hearing. Staff for the Executive Director will comply with their disclosure obligations at an appropriate time and in an appropriate manner.

Again, staff for the Executive Director will not be responding to your emails. All correspondence will take place through me. This is a regrettable necessity which your previous correspondence has brought about.

Sincerely,

T.R. Mitchell-Banks

On 24/10/2014 12:03 PM, Christopher Burke wrote:

To whom it may concern:

I, Christopher Burke hereby authorize Peter Harris to represent me in any and all matters pertaining to dealing with the BCSC. Please cc and communicate with Mr. Harris anything that is communicated with me.

I will exercise my rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms:

Legal: 10 (b) (c)

My rights under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights:

Under the Great Writ (Habeas Corpus) to instruct any party I deem fit to represent me and speak on my behalf

Regards

Christopher Burke.

On 27/10/2014 10:23 PM, Teresa Mitchell-Banks wrote:

Mr. Burke,

I write to make you aware that the staff for the Executive Director will be opposing Mr. Harris representing you at the Hearing. With all due respect, your email makes no legal sense whatsoever. I have given a brief explanation below as to why your email is founded on a grave misunderstanding of the law. I strongly suggest that you take your email (and my response to it) to a lawyer and get some preliminary advice.

The Charter or Rights under 10 of the Charter of Rights (I note you cite b and c) reads as follows: T h e Ho n o u r a b l e Wa l l y Op p a l , QC . B o u g h t o n L aw Ema i l me s s a g e e x c h a n g e b e twe e n B C S C a n d E c h o P a r t n e r s L t d . Oc t o b e r 2 8 , 2 0 1 4 t o Oc t o b e r 23, 2 0 1 4

P a g e 6 o f 8 F r om: P e t e r Ha r r i s T u e s d a y , O c t o b e r - 2 8 - 1 4



Everyone has the right on arrest or detention

(a) To be informed promptly of the reasons therefor;

(b) To retain and instruct counsel without delay and to be informed of that right; and

(c) To have the validity of the detention determined by way of habeas corpus and to be released if the detention is not valid.



The bold and the underlining are mine. If you read the section you are quoting you will see that it does not apply to you. You are not under arrest or detention. The meaning of the word counsel is defined in the case law as meaning a lawyer. Mr. Harris is not a lawyer. The commission does not have the jurisdiction to hold a habeas corpus hearing and you are not detained in any event so no court would grant you a habeas corpus hearing. In short, s. 10 has no application to the case at hand.

Similarly, your insistence on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and what you call the ‘Great Writ (Habeas Corpus) are both equally inapplicable to your present case before the BCSC.

The allegations against you and your fellow respondents are serious. You should realize that if you are found liable by the Commission, staff will be seeking very significant penalties against you. Please get some legal advice from someone competent to give it to you. Legal advice may seem expensive but it will not be as expensive as going without it. If you have a defence you should lead it. Talk to a lawyer.

On 28/10/2014 3:38 PM, Christopher Burke wrote:

Ms. Banks,

Thank you for the clarification that you are NOT a Supreme Court and BCSC has no such jurisdiction to proceed in such a manner. This means however that as the Charter of Rights and Freedoms is the highest law in the land that all other laws, bylaws and acts both civil and criminal must fall within these guidelines unless a specific act of CANADIAN Parliament States otherwise.

Thus the BCSC under the Securities Act must operate within the confines of the law. BC Supreme Court Civil Rules allow me the right to choose any person I deem to speak and act on my behalf. The Canadian Bill of Rights again allows me to choose any party as I see fit to represent myself. T h e Ho n o u r a b l e Wa l l y Op p a l , QC . B o u g h t o n L aw Ema i l me s s a g e e x c h a n g e b e twe e n B C S C a n d E c h o P a r t n e r s L t d . Oc t o b e r 2 8 , 2 0 1 4 t o Oc t o b e r 23, 2 0 1 4

P a g e 7 o f 8 F r om: P e t e r Ha r r i s T u e s d a y , O c t o b e r - 2 8 - 1 4



Essentially if you are saying that your court does not have the authority regarding previously mentioned law then certainly your court being lesser then the Supreme Court of Canada and British Columbia does not have the right nor authority to tell me who may or may not represent me. Since I have no money for a lawyer and BCSC approved lawyers have no interest in justice in the first place and can clearly be seen as in collusion with the commission (Hence the instance upon one) I authorize Peter D Harris to speak on my behalf in all matters pertaining to the BCSC.

Power of Attorney documents will be produced to affirm said notion. And for the record an email IS now considered a legal document I may use as valid proof in a court of law.

Regards,

Christopher Andrew Burke

On 27/10/2014 9:11 PM, Teresa Mitchell-Banks wrote:

Mr. Harris,

I write to advise you that we will not be forwarding your email directly to the Ms. Audrey Ho, as to do so would be entirely inappropriate. Counsel for the Executive Director will be opposing the entry of your email as an exhibit as it is not relevant to the matters before the panel. Further, most of it is taken directly from the article written by Kim Rossmer and has absolutely nothing to do with the matters with which you and your colleagues are charged. Your email contains submissions not evidence and as such, we will oppose its admission into evidence. You have been sent guidelines for the conduct of a hearing and you would be well advised to read them.

On 27/10/2014 7:12 PM, Peter D. Harris - Echo Partner Ltd. wrote:

THIRD REQUEST Mr. Terrance, we again, respectfully request that you send us the October 8, 2014 hearing transcript and we want all of the Investor Impact Statement you have on file, we are simply exercising our right to information.

On 25/10/2014 11:29 AM, Peter D. Harris - Echo Partner Ltd. wrote:

Subject: SPYru / Echo Partners October 8, 2014 - Transcript of the Management Hearing and we want all of the Investor Impact Statements SECOND REQUEST T h e Ho n o u r a b l e Wa l l y Op p a l , QC . B o u g h t o n L aw Ema i l me s s a g e e x c h a n g e b e twe e n B C S C a n d E c h o P a r t n e r s L t d . Oc t o b e r 2 8 , 2 0 1 4 t o Oc t o b e r 23, 2 0 1 4

P a g e 8 o f 8 F r om: P e t e r Ha r r i s T u e s d a y , O c t o b e r - 2 8 - 1 4



Mr. Torrance Further to Ms. Mitchell-Banks message dated 24/10/2014 at 1:32 PM informing us and I quote, We are not in possession of a transcript of the October 8 Hearing We all know this is not true, every time there has been a hearing we received a transcript and now we are told you have no copy. Mr. Torrance honestly? Is this the way to act as a government independent agency? We all know that if it had been Greg Allen from Hunter Litigation requesting the transcript, the commission would have complied immediately. But since we cannot afford legal counsel, the Commission staff is doing everything in its power to continue to intimidate us and show us complete disrespect and they continue to violate our civil rights. Mr. Terrance, we again, respectfully request that you send us the October 8, 2014 hearing transcript and we want all of the Investor Impact Statement you have on file, we are simply exercising our right to information. Sincerely Peter Harris

On 23/10/2014 4:28 PM, Peter D. Harris - Echo Partner Ltd. wrote:

Subject: SPYru / Echo Partners October 8, 2014 - Transcript of the Management Hearing Mr. Torrance, Please send us as soon as possible the transcript of the October 8th Management hearing. Thank you, Peter Harris

No comments:

Post a Comment