Violation Ticket No.AH08253487-1
THE CROWN PROSECUTOR
A F F I D A V I T
I, David-Hunter: Thomson, a native of British Columbia, born in Vancouver on November 21st 1954, residing in Kelowna, my hometown for virtually all of my life, in the Province of British Columbia and now surviving on a "Group 2 Disability Pension", DO HEREBY MAKE OATH AND SAY AS FOLLOWS:
1. I am the Respondent herein and as such have personal knowledge of the facts and matters hereinafter deposed to except where the same are stated to be based on information and belief and where the same are so stated I verily believe them to be true.
2. This affidavit is also provided in support of and as proof of a vast array of extenuating circumstances that have caused me to mount a campaign, expending vast amounts of financial and other resources.
3. To ensure my safety and welfare and to ensure the safety and welfare of all British Columbians is why I have decided to violate Section 220 (4) of the Motor Vehicle Act and now request that this charge under Section 220 (4) of the Motor Vehicle Act, not only be dismissed but be struck, as it is a "bad law".
3. These extenuating circumstances that provoke me to challenge the above-noted "bad law", I believe are far more detrimental to my safety and well-being and that of my fellow British Columbians than any successful application of the above-noted "bad law"; ie: seatbelts do not necessarily save lives and are occasionally even responsible for fatalities.
4. My father, Robert-Hunter: Thomson, a paratrooper in the 2nd World War, one of about 2,100 survivors of about 10,500 that were dropped behind enemy lines and was awarded The Star of France, The Star of Belgium and The Star of Italy, drowned in a car accident. Attached to this affidavit and referred to as Exhibit "A" are newspaper articles, chronicling my father’s demise.
5. Accident victims have been found, still strapped in their seatbelts, upside-down in a ditch, drowned in a puddle of water. One such accident occurred on Highway 97, North of Kelowna, adjacent to Duck Lake. The near-victim, Brent was trapped in the driver’s seat, hanging face-down in Duck Lake, unable to release his seatbelt due to the weight of his body suspended in it. Brent survived, only because a witness to the accident swam to his rescue, cutting him free from his seatbelt.
6. Many accident victims have been found, still strapped behind the wheel of their vehicle, impaled on the steering column.
7. Logging-truck operators fear that their load of logs would come through the back of the cab on impact, crushing them from behind. In such an instance, being restrained by a seatbelt would surely be fatal.
8. Several years ago, on a stretch of Highway 97, just outside of Princeton, a 2-vehicle collision resulted in a fiery wreck, wherein an entire family burned to death, trapped inside. Witnesses in attendance reported that they could hear the screams but could not get close to the wreck for the flames to free them and that they burned to death, strapped in by their seatbelts.
9. Taxi-drivers are exempt from wearing seatbelts, provided their speed does not exceed 70 kilometers per hour.
10. Delivery drivers are exempt from wearing seatbelts, provided their speed does not exceed 70 kilometers per hour.
11. I was not exceeding 70 kilometers per hour.
12. School buses are exempt from seatbelt legislation. If seatbelts do save lives, this fact shows a total disregard for the safety and well-being of our children, contrary to the United Nations Rights of the Child, of which Canada is a signatory.
13. Commercial passenger coach transports are exempt from seatbelt legislation.
14. Section 15 of the British North America Act provides for "equality before and under the law".
15. Section 15 of The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms provides for "equality before and under the law".
16. The United Nations Declaration of Human Rights, of which Canada is a signatory, provides for "equality before and under the law".
17. Section 220 (4) of the Motor Vehicle Act is in violation of all 3 of the above-noted Canadian Federal and International Legislations.
18. Section 220 (4) of the Motor Vehicle Act is a part of a Provincial Statute and as such, is inferior to Federal and International Legislation, of which Canada is a signatory.
19. Under Section 220 (4) of the Motor Vehicle Act, I face prosecution and penalties in our Provincial Court but there is no victim or harm done, therefore, according to the definition of the word, "crime", no crime has been committed.
20. Last winter, 3 acquaintances and myself observed a crime in progress. We all witnessed a tall, slim, young man in his late teens or early twenties, sneak down my neighbours’ side of the fence that divides our properties. We watched the perpetrator divert north at the end of the fence, staying low in the shadows, then crossed the road, I assume, out of sight, obscured by the hedge that borders the front of my property.
21. Minutes later, we observed this same young man on the opposite side of the road, walking south. He bolted and ran the last 10 to 15 feet to his car, a red Chevrolet Cavalier that sounded like it had a V-6 engine and an automatic transmission. As he hastily escaped, his, back tires burned and smoked out of the snow-bank that he had been parked in.
22. Upon conferring with my neighbours to the south, we learned that 2 vehicles in their yard had been broken into, damaged and were missing the stereos. The neighbours, Sheri McLean and Brian Anderson phoned the RCMP and submitted an oral report but no officer ever attended.
23. The next day, an officer attended my residence to serve my room-mate a summons and when I asked the constable about the report of the theft, he told me that he was not made aware of the incident but that he would look into it and get back to me. I have not heard from this or any other constable, concerning the theft, since.
24. Several weeks ago, the same three acquaintances and myself, apprehended an intruder in my back yard. The intruder was in the same neighbour’s yard, Brian Anderson’s and jumped the fence into my yard, after being observed. This intruder, a young man closely resembled the purpetrator in the previous incident.
25. Upon summoning Mr. Anderson, we all debated as to what to do with this young man, commenting on his resemblance and going over other observations, including the lack of police response over the previous incident.
26. Mr. Anderson suggested that someone should call the police so I went in the house and called. By the time I got a real voice on the phone and explained our situation, I observed that Mr. Anderson and my associates had released the intruder and were following him down the driveway, towards the road.
27. Upon hearing this, the lady I was on the phone with, inquired why we were releasing him. I explained that while I was not privy to any debate that ensued once I left to place the call, it no doubt had a lot to do with the lack of response by the RCMP, upon reporting the previous incident.
28. It has been largely agreed upon by a good many who engage in such debate, that the RCMP spend far too much time on the side of the highway, imposing on motorists and creating victims of bad laws and spend far too little time attending to, investigating and prosecuting incidents that involve victims of crime.
29. Section 220 (4) of the Motor Vehicle Act is not only in violation of all 3 of the above-noted Canadian Federal and International Legislations, creating inequality in law through arbitrary non-application, it creates victims where no harm has been committed, expends policing resources and it has been proven that wearing a seatbelt can actually cost lives in a variety of instances.
30. The extenuating circumstances that I have referred to within, have caused me to embark upon a crusade to expose the arbitrary application of laws in this province, both good and bad, whereby in part, good laws are, inter alia, summarily dismissed and bad laws are more consistently enforced.
31. An essential element of this crusade that I have embarked upon is the publication of my website, WWW.OURCOURTSSUCK.COM. Attached and referred to as Exhibit "B" are introductory and sample pages of my website.
32. Within this website is documented various cases, primarily heard in the Supreme and Provincial Courts of British Columbia, such as the case against Howard Berge, former president of the Law Society of British Columbia (File No: 56750, Kelowna Registry), heard by the HONOURABLE ASSOCIATE CHIEF JUDGE E. M. BURDETT, wherein she describes acts that meet all of the test requirements of such criminal charges as "Criminal Negligence" and "Obstruction of Justice", yet Howard Berge faced only the much-lesser charge of "Undue Careless Attention". Further, Berge faced no charges of Breach of public trust or Public Mal/Misfeasance to which his behaviour, I believe had sufficient elements to warrant such additional charges.
33. It has come to my attention that the Attorney General of British Columbia has two (2) separate functions:
(a) The Office of Attorney General for the Province of British Columbia is the legal representative for all government agents in the Province of British Columbia and
34. As such, the Office of Attorney General for the Province of British Columbia is in a clear conflict of interest at such times that the Attorney General must decide on whether to prosecute criminal charges against any government agent for the Province of British Columbia.
35. Is this conflict of interest integral to the decision of the Office of the Attorney General to stay all criminal charges against Howard Berge, prior to trial, choosing to prosecute the much lesser offence of "Undue Careless Attention"? Did the Crown Prosecutor simply make a deal with him/herself?
36. The case against Howard Berge is but one of an assortment of cases that I have documented at my website, WWW.OURCOURTSSUCK.COM, that fail due process and fail to uphold the laws of this country, specifically the Criminal Code of Canada.
37. Section 15 of both the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and also the British North American Act, make clear that we are all "equal before and under the law", yet my website documents a variety of cases that all exemplify a failure by our courts to uphold this fundamental right that is also provided for in International Law.
38. In embarking on my "crusade" to make right the above glaring inadequacy, I have repeatedly demonstrated publicly in front of the Kelowna Law Courts, as well as several other Law Courts throughout this province, becoming bolder and louder in my efforts to be heard. Attached to this affidavit and referred to as Exhibit "C" is a copy of an article titled, "Busted?", documenting a recent such demonstration. Herein Exhibit "C", can be found, inter alia, documentation of questionable conduct on the part of constable(s) within the Kelowna RCMP detachment.
39. Attached and marked as Exhibit "D" of this affidavit is a letter of response that I faxed to Victor Janecki, a criminal lawyer in the City of Kelowna, addressing his criticism that my behavior in front of this courthouse was "disgraceful" and to remind him of his duty to uphold the integrity of our courts.
40. Attached and marked as Exhibit "E" of this affidavit is a letter that I mailed to RCMP Corporal S.B. (Steve) Albrecht, following his attendance at my home where he stated that he was following up on the concerns of Prime Minister Paul Martin, who had earlier said publicly, "Support whistleblowers". I had emailed Mr. Martin a copy of Exhibit "D", my letter to Victor Janecki.
41. Attached to and marked as Exhibit "F" of this affidavit is the transcript portion of the Affidavit of Robert William Nicholson, filed in the Provincial Court Registry in Chilliwack (File No. F3412), wherein countless incidents of questionable conduct, not just on the part of the RCMP but also on the part of various government agents, including but not limited to the Office of the Attorney General for the Province of British Columbia.
42. The degree of complicity that is evidenced within Exhibit "F", indeed calls for numerous criminal charges to be laid but further, reveals the need for an independent inquiry independent of the RCMP and the Office of the Attorney General, endowed with the authority, unfettered and willing and able to lay criminal charges wherever activities meet the tests as prescribed by the Criminal Code of Canada;
43. The degree of complicity that is evidenced within Exhibit "F", specifically (Paragraph 18(1), the words of Associate Chief Justice Patrick Dohm of the Supreme Court of British Columbia, who said; "I could do something but I won’t.", essentially choosing to ignore the very serious concerns that involve the safety and well-being of children, disregarding our laws that provide for our children’s protection, evidence the unwillingness of the Supreme Court of British Columbia to uphold our laws, our rights and freedoms and even those International Laws, of which Canada is a signatory.
44. The degree of complicity that is evidenced by the words of Associate Chief Justice Patrick Dohm of the Supreme Court of British Columbia, reveals the need for criminal hearings that are independent of our present court system. Clearly, the evidence that is also documented at WWW.OURCOURTSSUCK.COM concurs with the need for independent tribunals; jury trials, unfettered by the strings of "cronyism", and endowed with all the powers of any criminal proceeding.
45. I have escalated my campaign to now deliberately opposing laws that I view as "bad laws", such as the seatbelt infraction that has put me here, today. I am dedicated to the pursuit of the restoration of the integrity of our courts, even if it is an unpopular stance, recognizing the integral role that our courts play in the cohesion of our society.
46. The methods that I have employed and continue to employ have all been peaceful protests as is my right as a Canadian citizen. Even in escalating my tactics to a level of civil disobedience, I remain peaceful, carefully choosing "bad laws" and other laws that would be appropriate to disregard.
47. I cannot speak for others who would respond less appropriately to the arbitrary ways in which our laws are applied. Attached and referred to as Exhibit "G" is a copy of the published account of Eddy Annis Haymour, "From Nuthouse to Castle", that documents the years of persecution that Mr. Haymour and his family faced at the hands of various Ministers of numerous portfolios of the Provincial Government of British Columbia and various members of the RCMP, et al.
"Senior government officials, including ministers of the Crown and with the knowledge of then-Premier, W.A.C. Bennett, contrived to improperly curb Haymour’s development. They plotted to use the full force of government to persecute Mr. Haymour. No less than six departments - Lands, Municipal Affairs, Health, Attorney-General, Highways, and the Provincial Secretary - were involved in the conspiracy to prevent him from developing his island. The B.C. Governments actions have been highly, improper, illegal and even cruel." - Supreme Court Justice Gordon MacKinnon.
48. In spite of those findings of Justice MacKinnon, not one criminal charge was ever laid. With no criminal charges ever laid, no deterrent has been established to prevent further criminal behaviour and since, it appears that such criminal activity has escalated, threatening society with among other things, the escalation and associated repercussions of vigilante and other such activities that we can expect to see with the further decline of the integrity of our courts.
48. Based on the foregoing/above, I verily believe I have reasonable and probable grounds to ask this court to use its discretion to accept this affidavit as the basis for my sworn information under the Criminal Code of Canada.
SWORN BEFORE ME in the City of )
Email Your Senator