queen elizabeth ii ordered dismissal of confederation of canada

7/31/2019 Queen Elizabeth II Ordered Dismissal of Confederation of Canada

1/29

Mr. E. J. Krass, SoH

Just Call Me - Galileo II/Founder of the Unified College of MedicineSpokesperson for THE TRUTH BASED FREE Society and Its Realm

July 19, 2012

RE:Who is fighting The Holy Spirit and The Holy Trinity - SURPRISE QUEEN ELIZABETH II!

FOREWORD TO PETITION TO THE COURT NO. 95677 IN

THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA

To Everyone:

After reviewing the data since April 2, 2012 and it becomes patently obvious who

double-crossed me Queen Elizabeth II: the great whore who sits upon many waters.

All the data of the Petition to the Court no. 95677 concerning enterprise corruption

= racketeering = subornation of perjury = bringing the administration of justice into disrepute

dictates that the only conclusion therefore is Queen Elizabeth II and the confederation of Canada

KNEW all about what was being done was corruption and graft on A MASSIVE SCALE and they

had hoped that they could forestall The Truth/The Holy Spirit from purifying their corruption in the

minds of the indoctrinated to confederation being valid even though it was nothing more than a

super big lie where others rule you thoughts by giving you choices that they create and The Truth is

now anecdotal evidence.

The proof is in the pudding so to speak. READ THE PETITION TO THE COURT

no. 95677 and you will see nothing I said was not known to the confederation of Canada, the

advisors to the British Monarchy nor Queen Elizabeth II. So, they know just how corrupt they are

and that they are the Devil in Disguise whom the people have come to follow and whose order they

have come to accept for their lives and the lives of their children because there is no such thing as

everlasting life - just being a slave to them and their orders.

The only reason that the matter of the discovery of the enterprise corruption (=

racketeering) has gone uncompensated is due solely to Queen Elizabeth II and nobody else. The

3929 Woodell Road, WESTBANK BC V4T 1E1 1
http://cid-76d01868d933a2ac.skydrive.live.com/self.aspx/Public/Summary%20and%20Peremptory%20Order/Title%20bestowed%20upon%20me.pdfhttp://cid-76d01868d933a2ac.skydrive.live.com/self.aspx/Public/Summary%20and%20Peremptory%20Order/Title%20bestowed%20upon%20me.pdf


2/29



Truth about Canada and the continued existence of the confederation of the provinces of Canada

must now get out on order from your Majesty.

The Holy Spirit/the self evident Truth must now set the record straight and liberate

your minds from the control your parents gave over to what mankind created years ago.

Think of what has happened since the 1960's as the 40 years of travelling through the

desert under Gods Agent, Moses. This time, though, you have NOT been following an agent of

Truth and God Almighty/The Creator but rather the Devil in Disguise that pre-existed royal ascent

being granted to the corrupted and duplicitous Charter of Rights and Freedoms where democracy

is not an accepted INALIENABLE RIGHT whereas, prior to 2000, the right to a universal and free

education built around critical thinking was: in 1968, the American establishment crushed those

followers of this logic with its military in Chicago just as, in 1998, in Vancouver and at the Asia

Pacific Economic Cooperation Summit, Sgt. Pepper issued orders that gave peaceful protestors 5

minutes to clear out and, then, immediately started spraying the protestors and having them arrested.

The Truth is the military and the armed police are there to enforce the order ofthe

rule of law enacted by parliament and the legislatures and nobody, in this mind set, has any right toexist which means everyone is expendable and which explains why the RCMP in British Columbia

have the right to kill anyone with whom they come into contact and they are immune to prosecution.

Your provincial rulers also have this immunity because the province is not an

extension of the people but a living entity that MUST NOT FAIL at all costs including all persons.

Nobody knows about this corruption because the graft is based upon Queen Elizabeth

II printing money and buying people off for pennies on the real value of their knowledge and these

errors get hidden behind privative clauses.

Queen Elizabeth II concluded that my abilities were too great and that I was to make

everything public by action not words because my research is impeccable. So, I will not receive any

compensation just because Queen Elizabeth II has ordered this.

http://cid-76d01868d933a2ac.skydrive.live.com/self.aspx/Public/Summary%20and%20Peremptory%20Order/Title%20bestowed%20upon%20me.pdfhttp://cid-76d01868d933a2ac.skydrive.live.com/self.aspx/Public/Summary%20and%20Peremptory%20Order/Title%20bestowed%20upon%20me.pdf


3/29



Ladies and Gentlemen, that is why I am posting this evidence online and taking my

research public. READ THE MATERIALSand you will see that the confederation of Canada is a lie

and the provincial governments know that which explains why they pay out to the unwise trivial

amounts but to someone clearly beyond the rule of law principle, they will pay nothing and fight The

Truth and The Holy Spirit just because they are the Devil in Disguise: the counterpoint to The

Truth andDoing Rightby It.

Elected bodies as rulers are fully relying on the fact that they have immunity from the

standards to which you comply. But, this immunity demands insurance be paid out for those who

discover the corruption and take the matter to court but my being compensated will never happen

because I know too much both of the corruption and living right.

I implore you to read the materials as the self evident Truth is THERE!

The Defender of the Faith, Queen Elizabeth II, has declared war on The Holy

Spirit/the self evident Truth in my case just because she can as she is now a false god.

In The Name of Jesus Christ, Amen.


Speaking now as The Son of Heaven an agent of The Supremacy of God Due Corrective Process

Attached: amended Petition to The Court no. 95677 with the Supreme Court of BC;

April 2, 2012 email from The Office of The Assistant Deputy Attorney General,defence council for The Province of British Columbia;

Porrelli Laws letter of March 21, 2012

http://cid-76d01868d933a2ac.skydrive.live.com/self.aspx/Public/Summary%20and%20Peremptory%20Order/Title%20bestowed%20upon%20me.pdfhttp://cid-76d01868d933a2ac.skydrive.live.com/self.aspx/Public/Summary%20and%20Peremptory%20Order/Title%20bestowed%20upon%20me.pdfhttp://cid-76d01868d933a2ac.skydrive.live.com/self.aspx/Public/Summary%20and%20Peremptory%20Order/Title%20bestowed%20upon%20me.pdfhttp://cid-76d01868d933a2ac.skydrive.live.com/self.aspx/Public/Summary%20and%20Peremptory%20Order/Title%20bestowed%20upon%20me.pdf


4/29

Form 66 (Rules 16-1 (2) and 21-5 (14) )

No. ...... 95677 .......KELOWNA Registry

In the Supreme Court of British Columbia

Between

Ernst John Krass3929 Woodell RoadWESTBANK BC V4T 1E1 , Petitioner

and

The Province of British Columbia

The Honourable Christy Clark

Premier of British ColumbiaBox 9041 Station PROV GOVTVICTORIA BC V8W 9E1

Minister of Justice and Attorney GeneralHonourable Shirley Bond

PO BOX 9044 Stn Prov Govt

VICTORIA BC V8W 9E2 , Respondent(s)

PETITION TO THE COURT (AMENDED)

(Rule 8-1 (3))

[Rule 22-3 of the Supreme Court Civil Rules applies to all forms.]

ON NOTICE TO:

The Province of British Columbia

The Honourable Christy ClarkPremier of British ColumbiaBox 9041 Station PROV GOVT

VICTORIA BC V8W 9E1


5/29

Minister of Justice and Attorney GeneralHonourable Shirley Bond

PO BOX 9044 Stn Prov GovtVICTORIA BC V8W 9E2 , Respondent(s)

This proceeding has been started by the petitioner for the relief set out in Part 1 below.

If you intend to respond to this petition, you or your lawyer must

(a) file a response to petition in Form 67 in the above-named registry of this courtwithin the time for response to petition described below, and

(b) serve on the petitioner(s)(i) 2 copies of the filed response to petition, and(ii) 2 copies of each filed affidavit on which you intend to rely at the

hearing.

Orders, including orders granting the relief claimed, may be made against you, without anyfurther notice to you, if you fail to file the response to petition within the time for response.

Time for response to petition

A response to petition must be filed and served on the petitioner(s),

(a) if you were served with the petition anywhere in Canada, within 21 days afterthat service,

(b) if you were served with the petition anywhere in the United States of America,within 35 days after that service,

(c) if you were served with the petition anywhere else, within 49 days after thatservice, or(d) if the time for response has been set by order of the court, within that time.

(1) The address of the registry is:

1355 Water Street

KELOWNA BC V1Y 9R3

(2) The ADDRESS FOR SERVICE of the petitioner(s) is:

Ernst John Krass3929 Woodell Road

WESTBANK BC V4T 1E1

E-mail address for service (if any) of the petitioner(s): [email protected]


6/29

Claim of the Petitioner

Part 1: ORDER(S) SOUGHT

1 The wording ofs. 4 (b) and (c) of the 1996 through today Wills Act of British Columbia are found

to be aDENIAL of THE FREE Society and its standards for wills which makes the formal 2 witnessstandard for willsPATENTLY UNREASONABLE.

2 The current laws affirm that the provincial legislatures of British Columbia, Alberta,Saskatchewan, Manitoba, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland and Labradorhave dismissed completely Everyones concept of a will and simple inheritance through the

application of enacted technical provisions like that of the Wills Act of British Columbia, theEstate Administration Actand the Supreme Court Act of British Columbia that show exactly howthe provincial legislatures have dismissed a Deceaseds ability to will his residual assets as they see

fit.

3 The simplest and quickest correction to this matter is the reinstatement of the proper wording forRule 21-5 (1) of the Supreme Court Actto the following:

Interpretation

(1) The interpretation section of the Estate Administration Act applies to this rule IF AND ONLY

IF the Deceased died without having left ANY will, codicil or testamentary document that mustbe used by the court in the dispensing of the assets: a will is effective if the court is satisfied that the

will embodies the intentions of the Deceased.

4 With this rewording ofThe Supreme Court Act of British Columbia that also has to apply to the

Superior Court across Canada in every jurisdiction, the provincial legislatures lose forever the rightto void wills to impose theirEstate Administration Acts or whatever name of the enactment thatperforms the same function as theEstate Administration Act in British Columbia.

5 The loss of the right of the Deceased to will their assets as they see fit by provincial slight of handand lawyers wrongly claiming that the provincial governments have the right to void legitimate

single witnessed wills is truly cruel and unusual treatment that only bullies would do while the

Court, being prohibited its right to see the informal will/testamentary document and accept thewill of the Deceased, has brought the administration of justice through the Superior Court into

disrepute - s. 24 (2) of Canadas Charter of Rights and Freedoms!

6 As the wording ofs. 4 (b) and (c) of the current Wills Act of British Columbia combined withEXTRAORDINARY BAD FAITH were the only impediment to accepting the Will of Rudi Krassand the aforementioned sections ofthe Wills Act of British Columbia are to be reversed or outright

dismissed, the September 13, 2011 of the late Rudi Krass is accepted as legitimate and of full

force on all courts and all government agents forthwith.

7 As the wording ofs. 4 (b) and (c) of the current Wills Act of British Columbia combined with

EXTRAORDINARY BAD FAITH were the only impediment to accepting the Will of Rudi Krass


7/29

and these aforementioned sections are to be reversed or outright dismissed, the entire Estate of RudiHeinz Krass is to be transferred forthwith and without any other consideration to Ernst John Krass

as stipulated to by Rudi Heinz Krass in his September 13, 2011 will which means that all probateand other governmental fees are waived by order of this Form 66, Petition to the Court for aFundamental Justice Order is evidence that devils advocacy (outright DENIAL of a persons

simple right to will their assets on their death as they see fit) demanded the production of thisPetition on behalf of all persons across British Columbia - sees. 28 of the neutral citation of 2003SCC 54 andparagraph 2 on page 3 of this same neutral citation.

8 As Quintin D. Davidson has attested in writing in affidavit form to the fact that he did witness thegood will signing of the September 13, 2011 will of Rudi Krass and he knew Rudi Krass and his

family for close to 50 years, it is affirmed that the September 13, 2011 will of Rudi Heinz Krass isa valid testamentary document/informal will that is binding on the court especially since itcomplies withRule 21-5 (9) of The Supreme Court Actwhiles. 2 of Form 92 of The Supreme Court

of British Columbia confirms that intestate or a person dies intestate ONLY applies to theDeceased not having left ANY will, codicil or testamentary document.

9 As EXTRAORDINARY BAD FAITH demanded the production of thisForm 66, Petition to the

Court, all court fees will be returned to Ernst John Krass forthwith! Also, Ernst Krass is oweda very significant out of court settlement and, if necessary, Ernst Krass only needs to bring the out

of court process in-court and the Superior Court is obligated to sign off on this settlement as ErnstKrass is the only person across Canada to be able to assail this level of enterprise corruption as wellas advice as to the correction to the corruption.

10 The legal advisors have repetitively refused to acknowledgeRule 21-5 (9) of The Supreme CourtAct of British Columbia when advising Ernst John Krass which reads as follows and which allows

all single witnessed wills to be either probated when more than one surviving sibling exists or

recognized as an outright inheritance for those left as the last surviving member of a family unit -mother, father, brothers and sisters:

Proof of execution if no attestation clause

(9) If there is no attestation clause to a will or codicil, orif the attestation clause is insufficient,

a registrar must require an affidavit from at leastone of the subscribing witnesses, if they or either

of them are living, to prove that the requirements of the Wills Act as to execution were, in fact,

complied with.

11 The repetitive corrupt intent to impose The Estate Administration Acton the inheritance of Ernst

John Krass by the legal profession constituted an outright attempt at extortion and at Ernst Krass

most vulnerable time of his life ESPECIALLY SINCERule 21-5 (1) of The Supreme Court Act of

British Columbia acknowledges the possibility of EXCEPTIONS to the rule for applying the

Estate Administration Actand, when encountered, all legal professionals are ethically honour

bound to instruct the inheritor of his inheritance without taxes and transfer fees

FORTHWITH rather than impose reverse onus whens. 2 ofForm 92 is encountered and

cannot be affirmed to nor sworn to by ALL.


8/29

12 The legal advice given to the clients with single witness wills not only constitutes EXTORTIONbecause the only way it appears to the clients to get the estate probated in their vulnerable state of

mind is to accept the voiding of their Deceaseds single witness will inDENIAL of the definition ofa willand The Principles of Fundamental Justice but also this corruption of the legal advice has

brought the administration of justice through the law court into DISREPUTE!

13 Also, in Truth, the current Wills Act,s. 4 (b) and (c) and their demanding 2 witnesses to make a

binding will, is formally found to be of no effect(unconstitutional) and unenforceable. Therefore,the wording ofs. 4 (b) and (c) of the current Wills Actmust either be reversed or dismissed in

accordance withs. 24 (1) and s. 1 of The Charter of Rights and Freedoms as well as the words ofthe neutral citation 2003 SCC 54 and its correlation tos. 52 (1) of Canadas Charter of Rights andFreedoms. The corrupt wording ofthe current since 1996 Wills Act of British Columbia and the fact

that the government knew that it was imposing its will ILLEGALLY on all wills across BritishColumbia and across time - BAD FAITH - always indicates consent as what was done was wrong

and it having been done SOLELY to challenge Everyone To Petition The Courtand requisition

the formal dismissal of the offending provision of the law, i.e.s. 4 of the Wills Act and its 2

witness standard, in accordance with s. 2-1 (c) of the current Supreme Court Act of BritishColumbia that reads as follows:

(c) the sole or principal question at issue is (alleged to be) one ofconstruction of an

enactment, will, deed, oral or written contract or other document (it has been proven

in the matter of the will of Rudi Heinz Krass);

14 Refusing to advise - disclose fully to - anyone as to the true reality of the rule of law and its

application in the circumstances is unethical, immoral and constitutes a criminal act and isunacceptable in todays society or any legitimate society.

15 As the elected bodies could not eliminate wills outright without being caught dismissingEveryones right to pass on their inheritance in a simple expedited manner, the elected body ofBritish Columbia in 1996 and since then did an end run around this problem and introduced a

standard that DENIES the very concept of wills thereby eliminating all simple wills in BritishColumbia, i.e. it madeformal wills 100% inconsistent with the definition of a willor the concept of

wills (see Exhibit AA to learn about inconsistency);

16 No government nor its agents have the legitimate authority TO OPPOSE those who get caughtby the governments BAD FAITH actions and must strike down formally corrupt

statutes/provisions/policieswith the most expedited means that, according tos. 52 (1) of Canadas

Charter of Rights and Freedoms, should never have been produced except for defyingEveryonesGod Given LEGAL Rights and THE FREE Society of Equals and its Truth based standards: suchopposition to the people, hurt by the corrupt provisions, to dismiss formally or INFORMALLY the

enacted provisions is defined as devils advocacy/BAD FAITH/mala fides historically.

17 S. 2 of the Estate Administration Act is struck down entirely forthwith because it dismisses

entirely the will of the Deceased and squarely places the administration of all estates and inheritancesunder the authority of the provincial governments which violates the very definition of a will and is


9/29

wrong.

18 theSupreme Court Act Rule 21-5 is utterly misleading and wrong which is clear from its

reading:

Interpretation

(1) Unless a contrary intention appears, the interpretation section of the Estate Administration Act

applies to this rule.

This law is not only vague but it is a clear reverse onus statement where the victims of the

combined corruption ofthe Wills Act, the Estate Administration Actand the Supreme Court ActMUST have the wherewithal to dismiss the entire corruption and in their most vulnerable state whilefew actually know ofs. 52 (1), s. 24 (1) and s. 7 of Canadas Charter of Rights and Freedoms as

well as their combined power which has burdened Ernst Krass, the only one in Canada

with this combined knowledge, to complete this Form 66, Petition to the Court. The

wording of the supreme court act of british columbia,Rule21-5 (1), wrongly presents the impressionthat theEstate Administration Actautomatically applies to all estates and inheritances when the WillsActs definition of a willmakes is clear that Everyone has the right to dispense of their assets in a

(formal or informal) will, codicil or testamentary document and that right dispenses with the

Estate Administration Actsummarily in matters where a single witness will exists and people aretrusted to be honest first and treated as BAD beings who are liars right from the start.

19 In the case of the corruption of not justs. 4 of the Wills Act of British Columbia ands. 2 of theEstate Administration Actbut alsoRule 21-5 (1) of the Supreme Court Act, the legal and elected

body systems have acted in utter disrespect of andDENIAL of The Principles of Fundamental Justiceands. 7 of Canadas Charter of Rights and Freedoms as well as inDENIAL of the authority ofs.

52 (1) of Canadas Charter of Rights and Freedoms ands. 28 of the neutral citation 2003 SCC 54which reads as follows:

28 First, and most importantly, the Constitution is, under s. 52(1) of the Constitution Act,

1982, "the supreme law of Canada, and any law that is inconsistent with the provisions

of the Constitution is, to the extent of the inconsistency, of no force or effect". The

invalidity of a legislative provision inconsistent with the Charter does not arise from the

fact of its being declared unconstitutional by a court, but from the operation of s. 52(1).

Thus, in principle, such a provision is invalid from the moment it is enacted, and a

judicial declaration to this effect is but one remedy amongst others to protect those whom

it adversely affects. In that sense, by virtue of s. 52(1), the question of constitutional validityinheres in every legislative enactment. Courts may not apply invalid laws (or provisions oflaws), and the same obligation applies to every level and branch of government, including

the administrative organs of the state. (And now lawyers)

20 As The Office of The Assistant Deputy Attorney General, defense council for the government and

its agents, has already reviewed pretty much this whole document, it is demanded that this matter


10/29

be concluded with their findings and with the out of court settlement put to the government byErnst John Krass which was also reviewed by The Office of The Assistant Deputy Attorney General

and The Judge Advocate General and found to be acceptable in the circumstances.

Part 2: FACTUAL BASIS

1 Quintin Donald Davidson has affirmed in his June 21, 2012 affidavit that the single witness will

of Rudi Heinz Krass is valid as it was signed in GOOD FAITH by Rudi Heinz Krass. Thus, therequirement ofRule 21-5 (9) of The Supreme Court Act of British Columbia has been met as havethe reverse onus standards ofRule 21-5 (1) of The Supreme Court Act of British Columbia.

2 Following the passing of Rudi Heinz Krass in January 2012, I was consistently given illegitimatelegal advice concerning the validity of the single witnessed will of my dad as the Wills Act since

1996 imposed a double witness attestation created by governments attempting to invalidate throughtrickery all old standard wills while also extending Estate status to all wills in defiance of the

definition of wills.

3 I am the sole surviving child of Rudi Heinz Krass and Eleanor Alberta Krass who died in

November 1995. As such, Rudi Heinz Krass insured that I was to receive the remaining residual ofhis possessions as defined by the proper definition of a willas presented in the Wills Act of BritishColumbia. A single witness will is common knowledge because, prior to 1996 in British Columbia,

theEstate Administration Actdid not illegitimately apply to all wills which is consistent withTheSupremacy of Godand the person passing on having the right to will his residuals as he saw fit.

4 On January 26, 2012, I was left with the entire residual of Rudi Heinz Krass as determined bysimply reading the September 13, 2011 will of Rudi Heinz Krass and, according to the Rules of

Inheritance, my name is/was to stand in the place of Rudi Heinz Krass on his residual possessions.In short, it is as if I became Rudi Krass for the world.

5 Inheritance is established under The Principle of The Supremacy of Godbecause Christians are

taught that Jesus Christ and Heaven are returning to reclaim this planet and all those who believe inThe Covenant that is the resurrection of Jesus Christ between God and mankindwill return whenJesus Christ and Heaven return. Consequently, the inheritors are expected to do honour to their

ancestors by maintaining the residuals for when the ancestors return.

6 In spite of the historical rules of inheritance, I was repetitively and wrongly advised by all legal

professionals that all single witness wills are invalid (without disclosing how to validate thetestamentary document) which, according toRule 21-5 (9) of The Supreme Court Act of BritishColumbia, only one witness swearing in an affidavit as to the execution of the will is sufficient tovalidate all single witness wills contrary to the legal advice which is misleading the generalpopulation.

7 My circumstances make me the perfect example ofcontrary intentions to the application of theEstate Administration Act. In January 2012, I was made an orphan and I am not child orphan, so


11/29

there is no need for any estate principles as my name under the principles of inheritance was to standin the place of Rudi Krass on all his assets and secured debt including a line of credit on the house

in Westbank with a potential of $60,000.00 available for use to defray all costs until this legal hotbedof lies, duplicity and deceit was completed.

8 In spite of all the rules of inheritance, I was repetitively and wrongly told to get advice from alawyer who consistently refused to inform me - disclose fully - how to validate the September 13,2011 Will/testamentary document of Rudi Heinz Krass.

9 According to The Preamble to Canadas Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Canada is founded

upon principles that recognize The Supremacy of God and the rule of law . Nowhere does The

Preamble dictate that our decisions are to be based upon the advice of all lawyers rather thanthe hidden rule of law that isRule 21-5 (9) of The Supreme Court Act of British Columbia.

10 In Truth, the originating entity for this corruption, though, is The Province of British Columbiaand its administrative policies which have created a shell game/FRAUD scheme to swindle all single

witnessed will inheritors out of their inheritances as well as establish all residuals as an estate whosevaluation is all that is meaningful for the inheritors due to the illegitimate and illegal extending of

probate fees to all estates/inheritances against the standard of Canada not having any inheritance taxBECAUSE Canadas taxation policies are based upon the standard of pay as you go. So, a personpays income tax on everything they earn and, then, we pay our mortgages out of the remaining funds

and, unlike the United States, there is no writing off the mortgage payments ever. Thus, the residualsare free and clear of further taxation as that would constitute double taxation on the income whichis not really permitted in Canada especially on a large scale item like inheritances.

11 I followed the legal advice for as long as I could until I was presented withForm 92, Affidavit forthe seeking of Letters of Administration. S. 2 of this form reads as follows:

2 I have searched carefully and I believe that the Deceased died without having left any will,codicil or testamentary document.

This statement in theForm 92 immediately terminated the association between Porrelli Law and me:

see the reading material designated Exhibit C in the 3 Affidavit of Ernst John Krass on thisrd

Petition to the Court no. 95677 - I fired them immediately after reviewing the 3 card Monte

enactments, the Wills Act and Probate Acts across Canada andRule 21-5 (9) of the Supreme CourtAct of British Columbia. That is how an honest man responds to extortion/enterprise corruption soas to learn just how things became corrupted.

12 According tos. 2 of Form 92, Affidavit for the seeking of Letters of Administration, NOBODY

with a single witness will can get letters of administrationwithout being forced to swear to or

affirm it in the affidavit by the legal profession and also concerning Rudi Heinz Krass. So, I then

knew that the lawyers, Benson Law and Porelli Law and ALL OTHERS, were not fully disclosingthe rule of law as the court only needs to know that the September 13, 2011 will of Rudi Heinz Krasswas executed properly by one witness or the person that affirmed that they saw the signing and that

it was signed willing and in Good Faith as Rudi Krass himself asked Quintin D. Davidson on


12/29

September 13, 2011 to witness the will signing when he just happened along by chance that day.

13 Due to the demand that I lie inForm 92, I knew that the legal profession was attempting to extortprobate fees and legal fees from me and that they were doing it to everyone else as well which waswrong because it is a sin to bear false witness and it is not only completely unethical for a

Commissioner for the taking of Affidavits across Canada to demand that all single witness willedinheritors affirm to a known lie but also a criminal act as that is creates perjury and then the lawcourts system is forced to suborn perjury as it is not getting the full story at the start. This

understanding is why Nova Scotias Probate Enactment specifically states that the burden is uponthe court and not the legal professions to besatisfied that the will embodies the intentions of theDeceased- there is no corrupt 2 witness will provision here.

14 After being presented with a copy ofForm 92 at my insistence by Porrelli Law, I then researchedRule 21-5 of the Supreme Court Act of British Columbia, the Wills Actand the Estate Administration

Actof British Columbia as well as the Probate and Wills Acts of all 9 other provinces who signedCanadas Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

15 At this point, I notice that the administration of justice in British Columbia was being pervertedbecause single witnessed wills are easily validated, according toRule 21-5 (9) of the Supreme CourtAct of British Columbia, against the provisions ofs. 4 of the Wills Act of British Columbia whiles.

2 of the Estate Administration Actwas a violation of the English Language as onlypersons havingdied without having left any will, codicil or testamentary document are defined as having died

intestate AND, therefore, probate fees only applied or should apply to these persons because theinheritors were given explicit instructions usually in the will of the deceased. Under intestacy, anadministrator was usually appointed to deal with the matter and the fees for this were defined as

probate fees. ( If one of the inheritors did or does not like the terms of the will, they haveRule 21-4of the Supreme Court Act of British Columbia to amend the will, if possible, to their way of

thinking.)

16 Now a refusal to disclose fully is defined as a lie and, when this lie is uniform, the system isdefined as enterprise corruption. As single witnessed wills are still easily validated, this means that

the wills system andperversion of justice through the law court system has been ongoing since 1996according to the Wills Act of British Columbia and its sudden willingness to invalidate all simple andinformal single witness wills under provision or section 4 of the Will Act of British Columbia and

its standards being labeled formal wills.

17 As theEstate Administration Actof British Columbia has been wrongfully and illegitimately

extended to all wills and inheritors either by corrupt legal advice before the person dies or,afterwards, when the system attempts to extort probate fees and legal fees for seeking letters ofadministration rather than having the will easily validated and the process going from there wherethe inheritors deal with things according to the Estate Administration Act- government enforcedthinking and standards, reverse onus is imposed upon the persons writing the wills or attempting

to get the single witnessed wills accepted without probate fees and going through Letters ofAdministration orForm 91 orForm 93 and their respective legal fees.


13/29

18 In the current fraud scheme/shell game that is wills in British Columbia and other namedprovinces, probate fees and irrelevant legal fees are being demanded by the legal profession which

constitutes extortion because the inheritors are being told that, if we want our legitimate

inheritance, we still have to pay legal fees and probate fees when neither of these are necessaryespecially when affidavits seeking Letters of Administration in British Columbia which were created

by the government demand that the legal profession demand of their clients that they affirm orswear to a lie in order to gain access to their inheritance: that is the definition of extortion andunethical practices.

19 According to my personal experiences, it is clear/patently obvious that I encountered extortion,an attempt to have me swear to a lie, an attempt to mislead the law courts and all while I was

grieving the wrongful death of my dad and fighting with the government over its corrupt actions inthose circumstances. It was little wonder that I felt completely abused as I was indeed which only

makes me stronger and more under the authority of the power of God.

20 British Common Law is based upon the standards of: if it looks like a duck, walks like a duckand talks like a duck, everyone knows then that we are looking at a duck. But, the factualevidence affirms that there is FRAUD scheme in place before a person dies and prepares their will

under the advice of a lawyer in British Columbia and the other sited provinces and, worse still, upondeath, these single witness will inheritors are then told that their easily validated willis invalid andtherefore the Deceased died intestate and, thus, the inheritors must pay probate fees and legal fees

in order to get their inheritance accessed and, in the process, the lawyers have the inheritors affirm

or swear to a lie thereby perverting justice and bringing the administration of justice into disrepute!

21 The cited laws and the evidence of this section of thisForm 66, Petition to The Courtmake it

abundantly clear that Ernst John Krass has been bullied, browbeaten and had the very people, whom

he trusted to insure Right in his inheritance matters and to advice him properly for having his singlewitnessed will presented before the Superior Court and accepted quickly as valid, actually were

doing and imposing great harm at his most vulnerable of time in his life especially when being madea sudden orphan due to a wrongful death.

22 The Office of The Assistant Deputy Attorney General reviewed for 3 weeks this advice betweenMarch 4 and April 2, 2012 and were unable to find any grounds for defense of the indefensible as

reverse onus was the only impediment keeping Ernst John Krass from inheriting his

familys possessions.

23 As Ernst John Krass has already won this matter before The Office of The Assistant Deputy

Attorney General based upon the facts and the real rule of law, there can be no other outcome asstipulated by Ernst John Krass otherwise the standard of reverse onus and assailing it does not

exist and the rule of law orprovisions of the rule of law are beyond reproach in spite ofs. 52(1) of

Canadas Charter of Rights and Freedoms and Exhibit AA: The Supreme Court of CanadasDissertation on the functioning ofs. 52 (1) where, in s. 28 2003 SCC 54, it is acknowledged that

there is more than one remedy in situations where the rule of law is found to be a violation of thecriminal code, morals, ethics and actual wording ofs. 24 (1) of Canadas Charter of Rights and

Freedoms.


14/29

Part 3: LEGAL BASIS

1 In this fraudulent shell game imposed by The Province of British Columbia that hasillegitimately and illegally dismissed the right to inheritance without taxation, one must start with

a pea that gets palmed or removed from play unbeknownst to most: this pea in this fraud scheme

perpetrated by the elected bodies is the accepted standard ofThe Supremacy of Godwhere Everyone,in reality, has the God Given right to will, in writing or now by video or a voice recording, theresidual of their possessions upon their passing from this realm. This standard is accepted in thedefinition of a will in the Wills Act of British Columbia and other such enactments across all

provinces.

2 But, now comes the removal of this standard or the pea in the shell game, where 2witnesses are required on all wills all of a sudden so that single witness wills can wrongly be claimedto be invalid. In British Columbia, the government calls this a formal will while others simply

dont have a label for this but place this standard in their version of the wills or probate acts orwhatever they are called across Canada.

3 To further befuddle the inheritors of the possessions of the deceased, s. 2 of The EstateAdministration Actreads as follows:

Application of Act

2 This Actextends to all persons entitled or acting under a will, codicil or other testamentary

instrument whenever executed.

4 This begs the question, when did the government get the right to take over the operation of

all inheritances and extend intestate to include all those who did not have a lawyer draw upthe will?

5 Now, we have 2 shells in place of this government shell swindle that are known: the

designation of formal wills in the Wills Act beyond the typical single witnessed will that everyoneknows about and more than likely will produce; and beside it iss. 2 of the Estate Administration Act

that makes all persons and wills the domain of the government and not the deceased person and

their inheritors. So, the right to will your residual possessions is dismissed outright and nobody

even thought to look thinks over to determine if this constitutes a FRAUD shell style scheme thatmost encounter in the streets.

6 To further hammer home the GOVERNMENTAL FRAUD scheme isRule 21-5 (1) of The

Supreme Court Act of British Columbia which reads as follows:

Interpretation



7 The first section before the coma announces that THERE ARE EXCEPTIONS to theapplication of the Estate Administration Actand, now, the 3 shell of the shell fraud game isrd


15/29

exposed.

8 But, for a person dealing with the loss of their loved one, this is all too much and they signForm 92, Application for Seeking Letters of Administration for an Estate from the Supreme Courtof British Columbia that is presented to them by a lawyer - agent of the provincial government -

knowing that he or she is outright lying to the bereaved and demanding the swearing to oraffirming of a lie in an affidavit which is illegal (criminal code), immoral - thou shall not bear

false witness - and unethical as the affidavit and following court process is disreputable

because the will is being withheld from the court therefore the orders from the court really

have no validity.

9 S. 2 of Form 92, Application for Administration of an Estate stipulates the following:

2. I have searched carefully and I believe that the Deceased died without having left ANY WILL,

CODICIL or testamentary document.

10 These are interesting words as they show that the term estate really is meant only to applyto those having died without having left any will, codicil or testamentary document and NOT to

single witnessed wills.

11 In Truth,Rule 21-5 (9) of the Supreme Court Act of British Columbia applies to having asingle witnessed will validated and reads as follows:



a registrar must require an affidavit from at leastone of the subscribing witnesses, if they or eitherof them are living, to prove that the requirements of the Wills Act as to execution were, in fact,complied with.

12 Thus, the 3 shell -Rule 21-5 (1) of the Supreme Court Act of British Columbia - used in therd

governments fraudulent shell game is fully exposed and where the pea is the right of all persons

to will simply their residual possessions as they see fit - the definition of a will.

13 So, since 1996, many single witnessed wills were dismissed through legal trickery and therewas a motive for doing so: MONEY!

14 In Canada, there is no such thing as inheritance tax and to keep true to this standard, theprovincial governments quietly eliminated single witnessed wills so that all residuals NOW fall

under the term estate and theEstate Administration Actbut only if the inheritor(s) does/do notcatch this fact as reverse onus is in play in Rule 21-5 (1) of the Supreme Court Act of BritishColumbia as well asRule 21-5 (9) of the Supreme Court Act of British Columbia. The net result is

that many inheritances were placed under estate guidelines and millions of dollars of probate feesand legal fees were illegally collected and which were unnecessary other than to increase provincialrevenues.


16/29

15 The term, Unless contrary intentions appear... really means that Rule 21-5 (9) of theSupreme Court Act of British Columbia applies and DISMISSES the application of the Estate

Administration Actbecause everyone has the right to will their residual possessions as they see fitwithout governmental interference through its enacted web of 3 differing enactments fraud scheme/3 card Monte scheme taking this God Given Right away after death or, prior to the death, by ordering

that the will comply to fixed governmental standards as put forth by the elected bodies as if they arethe replacement to The Creator/The Supremacy of God.

16 Reverse onus means that the governments and their lawyers knowingly defied The Truth

and put in place this complex but easily discovered FRAUD scheme as a test for determining theperseverance of one of the wronged/disenfranchised from their outright inheritance where he or shewill get to The Truth and use it to make known the fraudulent shell game to all others and how to

break free from the web of lies, deceit and deception that was undertaken.

17 Ruling through the letter of the laws is a brutal civilization, often referred to as

Legalism/secularism/Nazism/Stalinism/etc., because it defies reality and those touched by the cruel

and unusual treatment under the law and its order for the civilization must then do as Shakespearestated hundreds of years ago in Hamlet:

To be, or not to be, that is the question:Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer

The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,Or to take arms against a sea of troubles

And by opposing end them.

18 Mankind has been fighting our own concept of rulership and administration beyond the

Roman Empire to the Jews and King David - see I Samuel 9:7-22. But, if we look at The 10Commandments (I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the

house of bondage. You shall have no other gods before Me. and mankind has many names for TheCreator, God Almighty, Allah, The Great Spirit, The Mandate of Heaven but the brashness ofmankind still does not allow mankind to reconcile the words of God in whatever language and see

that administration then becomes the devilfighting reality/anecdotal evidence) and the parable ofAdam and Eve, where Adam and Eve turned from the bounty and wonder of God before them andnow we only see that what exists on the physical or corporeal level and it is what mankind has

wrought whilst what existed before still exists awaiting the fall of the civilization. (If mankindceases its struggle in its civilization push against the manifestation of God which is this world, whatwe wrought under the civilization ceases to exist and is replaced with what existed there before: e.g.

Machu Picchu was overrun with vegetation before we stumbled back across the relics just as muchof Stonehenge has been washed away and only from satellite photos and high pictures are we

discovering what nature almost completely erased.) You have now been educated to the Alpha

and The Omega Law where the interim is just a defiance of The Truth.

19 In The Preamble to Canadas Charter of Rights and Freedoms, it is stipulated:


17/29

Whereas, Canada is founded upon principles that recognize The Supremacy of God

and the rule of law.

20 So, Canada does recognize creation and a Creator along with The Mandate of Heaven or

self evident Truth or its other name, The Holy Spirit, which imposes reality in all thought becausethe world was always round but our thoughts were wrong for millennia where administrators taughtthat the world was flat.

21 Currently, Canada has gone with the rule of law WITHOUT CORRECTION or TheSupremacy of Goddismissing all that exists now as created byfollowers of the rule of law without

God.

22 The current rule of law concerning 2 witness wills is an utter violation ofThe Supremacy of

Godthe rule of law WITH CORRECTIONand inheritance without taxation and just to imposeprobate fees on all residuals of the Deceased, as a new form of taxation, thereby making the

numerical valuation of the residual all that matters rather than honour our ancestors and awaiting thereturn of Jesus Christ and Heaven in one sudden shift in the cosmos: the universe exists in 2differing standards at all time, the corporeal and the ethereal and a unique unification of these 2

planes of existence; science has recently referred to this reality and a relationship between matter and

light or properly put outE=mc (for some strange reason, scientists are living in denial of the3

reality that energy leaves its source in 3 dimensions equally rather than 2 which is affirmed by whathappens when the earth goes around the sun as the same amount of energy hitting the northern

hemisphere is the same amount of energy that hits the southern hemisphere in its summer 6 monthor so later as well as the path of electrons around the atoms core of neutrons and protons or also,when the atoms energy is removed, the entire surface of the atom freezes and not just one side or

at some point of the atom).

23 By choosing not to see the wrong in its decision making, governments have enacted

legislation that clearly constitutes a FRAUD shell style scam or swindle of legal fees before anyonewith a single witnessed will dies. After that point, by demanding that all inheritorsswear to or

affirm a lie in the Affidavit for seeking Letters of Administration as well as seeking illegitimateprobate and legal fees, not only is the legal profession complying with an EXTORTION schemewhere those who have an easily validated will are outright being lied to by their legal council but are

also told that they will not get access to the residual of their deceased family memberFORTHWITH as to their orders in the will because the will is simply unacceptable under the rule

of law but also and, consequently, the administration of justice is in disrepute because the

legal profession is keeping The Truth from the courts so no judge nor decision of a judge for overa decade can be viewed as legitimate because they are not being allowed access to the wills of the

Deceased.

24 Exhibit AA also known as neutral citation 2003 SCC 54 or the dissertation on thefunctioning ofS. 52(1) of Canadas Charter of Rights and Freedoms where it is disclosed that

Courts may not apply invalid laws (or provisions of the laws especially when these laws or

provisions of the law bring the administration of justice into disrepute - s. 24 (2) of Canadas


18/29

Charter of Rights and Freedoms! (I am only using the exact words ofCanadas Charter of Rightsand Freedoms and there is no Charter Challenge direct or indirect as the words of the documentsaffirm the conclusion of judicial corruption.)

25 Rule 21-5 (9) of The Supreme Court Act of British Columbia which reads as follows:



a registrarmust require an affidavit from at leastone of the subscribing witnesses, if they oreither of them are living, to prove that the requirements of the Wills Act as to execution were, in

fact, complied with.

26 The reverse onus standard improperly embedded in the wording of the currentRule 21-5

(1) of The Supreme Court of British Columbia which is now dismissed and replaced as per the

Orders Section of thisPetition to The Courtand which demanded that Ernst John Krass go it aloneagainst the legal machine:

Interpretation



(See Order 18 to understand the imposition of fighting for right against the legal machine!)

27 Nobody not even I, Ernst John Krass, canswear to or affirm any ofForm 91, 92 and 93 of

the Supreme Court of British Columbia because there was an easily validated will that has nowbeen sworn to/affirmed before an agent for the taking of Affidavits and it is attached to this Petition

to The Court plus there is no need for an executor of any sort because there is only one survivingKrass Family member - my dad and my mother and my brothers are dead which left everything tome with the informal demands of trying to keep things together due to ancestral obligations.

28 Hence, the application of theEstate Administration Actin this instance is negated simplyand outright thereby making me a contrary intention that was acknowledged inRule 21-5 (1) ofThe Supreme Court Act of British Columbia and which gives me the authority to reform the system

due to the hardship it imposed upon me for no reason except to try and bring this exception into line

with the rule of law that does NOT apply to this exception according to the wording ofRule 21-5

(1) of The Supreme Court Act of British Columbia as well asRule 21-5 (9) of The Supreme CourtAct of British Columbia.

29 The legal basis then has to be the criminal code sections dealing with FRAUD/3 cardMonte/shell style swindles before a person dies and, after the person dies, the inheritor becomes the

target of EXTORTION by the provinces and the legal profession because, in order to get access tothe inheritance, the single witness will inheritors MUST swear to or affirm a lie in Form 92,


19/29

Affidavit for Seeking Letters of Administration OR go it alone which means: readRule 21-4 and 21-5 of the Supreme Court Act of British Columbia; have the witness to the testamentary document

swear to or affirm its execution was consistent with Good Faith and mental acuity before A

commissioner for the taking of affidavits within British Columbia; and then Petition the Court toget The Truth recognized by the Honourable Court. The latter is a tall task but, Everyone can now

say that it was done by the except to the application of the Estate Administration Actwhich makesme a very special individual who MUST reside beyond the rule of law principle and thatautomatically makes me part ofThe Supremacy of God.

(30 S. 17-23 of this section were added on the morning of Saturday, July 14, 2012 on order fromthe universe as I got up, it was impressed upon me that I had to add something to this document and

the words flowed out in less that 45 minutes.

31 I am an honest individual who was indoctrinated in my youth to the false reality that the

system is honest and would never assume the role of the devil and employ devils advocacy thatis the rule of law principle WITHOUT CORRECTIONall over again as the aristocracy and the Royal

Courts did over a century ago. So, I am quite frustrated trying to understand the rules of yourgame and playing a game that, in my mind and generation, was never supposed to re-occur becauseit was a lesson taught by 2 World Wars and the history of Legalism and dictatorship through the ruleof law under Emperor Qin, Adolf Hitler and Josef Stalin to name but a few dictators. I am still

befuddled by this situation and the discovery of The Judge Advocate General: everything and everyday seems to be a new discovery ofrules and protocolthat are NOT SUPPOSED to exist but do.

32 When you studyDoing Rightand onlyDoing Right, all you really know about Doing isDoing Right. Now, I am suddenly confronted with The Devil and devils advocacy and thingsbecame weird instantly. I had to state this because all of your rules and protocols are down right

illogical to me. Fortunately, God stepped in and gave me the strength that I need over the next few

weeks to finish this mess off and follows the Way of God meant for me.)

33 As the wording of s. 4 (b) and (c) of the current Wills Act of British Columbia combined withEXTRAORDINARY BAD FAITH: the creation of an elaborate shell game that resulted in theextending of the Estate Administration Act to all wills rather than just persons dying intestate andthe legal profession refusing to bring upRule 21-5 (9) of the Supreme Court Act of British Columbiato expose the easy validation process for single witness/informal wills: were the only impediments

to accepting the Will of Rudi Krass, the September 13, 2011 of the late Rudi Krass is accepted

as legitimate and of full force on all courts and all government agents forthwith.

34 As the wording ofs. 4 (b) and (c) of the current Wills Act of British Columbia combined with

EXTRAORDINARY BAD FAITH: the creation of an elaborate shell game that resulted in theextending of the Estate Administration Act to all wills rather than just persons dying intestate andthe legal profession refusing to bring upRule 21-5 (9) of the Supreme Court Act of British Columbia

to expose the easy validation process for single witness/informal wills: the entire Estate of RudiHeinz Krass is to be transferred forthwith and without any other consideration to Ernst John Krassas stipulated to by Rudi Heinz Krass in his September 13, 2011 will which means that all probate

and other governmental fees are waived by order of this Form 66, Petition to the Court for


20/29


21/29

[ ] in the terms requested in paragraphs ...................... of Part 1 of this petition

[ ] with the following variations and additional terms:

.................................................................................................................................

.................................................................................................................................

...................................................................................................................................

Date: .......[dd/mmm/yyyy]........ ....................................................

Signature of [ ] Judge [ ] Master


22/29

Form 92 (Rule 21-5 (4) )

This is the .....[1st/2nd/3rd/etc.]..... affidavit

of .............[name]............. in this case

and was made on .......[dd/mmm/yyyy].........

[Style of Proceeding]

AFFIDAVIT OF ADMINISTRATOR

[Rule 22-3 of the Supreme Court Civil Rules applies to all forms.]

I, ................[name]................, of ................[address]................, ................[occupation]................,

SWEAR (OR AFFIRM) THAT:

1 .............[name of deceased]............., late of .............[address].............,

.............[occupation]............., died on ........[dd/mmm/yyyy]........ at ........................, in theProvince of British Columbia.

2 I have made a careful search and believe the deceased died without

having left any will, codicil or testamentary document.

3 The deceased was survived by ........[Identify the applicant and any other person entitled

to inherit under sections 82 to 89 of the Estate Administration Act, clear off any person who has

a prior or equal right to apply for the grant and refer to all renunciations or consents filed.]........ .

4 I have made a diligent search and inquiry to ascertain the assets and liabilities of thedeceased.

5 The statement marked Exhibit A to this affidavit discloses the assets and liabilities of the

deceased, irrespective of their nature, location or value, that pass to the deceased's personal

representative, together with the names and addresses of the beneficiaries, their relationship to

the deceased and the property passing to them.

6 I believe there are no debts or liabilities for which the estate is or may be liable except as

disclosed in Exhibit A, all of which have been paid [except ........[state whether any consent in

writing has been given]........].

7 I will promptly disclose to the court the existence of any asset or liability that has not

been disclosed in Exhibit A to this affidavit when I learn of the same.

8 I will administer according to law all the estate that by law devolves to and vests in the

personal representative of the deceased and I will exhibit a true and perfect inventory of the

estate and render a just and true account thereof whenever required by law to do so.


23/29

SWORN (OR AFFIRMED) BEFORE ME )

at ...................................., British Columbia )

on ..............[dd/mmm/yyyy].............. . )

........................................................................ )

....................................................................................) ..........................................................

A commissioner for taking affidavits ) Name of person making the affidavit

for British Columbia )

.....[print name or affix stamp of commissioner].....

HOLD ON HERE!

S. 2 of this form constitutes SUBORNATION OF PERJURY which is a CRIMINAL

CODE OFFENCE for all single witnessed wills especially when that witness,

according to Rule 21-5 (9) of the Supreme Court Act of British Columbia has the right

to swear to or affirm in an affidavitthat the will he/she witnessed being signed was

executed properly.

In short, since 1996, the wills act of british columbia has imposed a known FRAUD scheme entitled

Formal Wills in order to indoctrinate people into accepting that estates are for all wills when,according to the English Language, the term estate applies solely to the residuals from persons

having died without having left a will. Ergo, estates as we have come to known them is WRONG

according to the English Language and law in the past!

However, by imposing the estates label on all wills, the provinces knowingly suborned perjury

by placing s. 2 of Form 92, Affidavit for Seeking Letters of Administration as well as imposed

EXTORTION on all inheritors of single witness wills after the death of their beloved and the

inheritors are NOT being allowed to have the court review the will nor have the witness attest to its

validity but instead are being forced to apply forLetters of Administration andswear to and affirm

a lie just to get access to the assets of their loved one which constitutes PROVINCE SANCTIONED

EXTORTION just as in olden days where wills were also used by the unsavory stealing the land andhaving an X placed on the paper and their people saying that the witnessed the signing of the

extorted will of the dead victim.

The June 21, 2012 Affidavit of Quintin D. Davidson affirms that the September 13, 2012 will of

Rudi Heinz Krass was easily validated against the legal council to the contrary as imposed by The

Province of British Columbia which constitutes attempted EXTORTION AND SUBORNATION

OF PERJURY BY THE GOVERNMENT AND ITS AGENTS THE LEGAL PROFESSION.


24/29


25/29


26/29


27/29

[email protected]

From: "AG LSB CSD Mail AG:EX" Date: Monday, April 02, 2012 4:17 PMTo: Subject: Your emails of March 4, 16, 22 and 26, 2012

Page 1 of 1

4/4/2012

Ernst Krass

Email: [email protected]

Your emails dated March 16, 22 and 26, 2012, addressed to the Minister of Justice andAttorney General, have been forwarded to me for response. I have also received a copy ofyour March 4, 2012 email to the Premier, and I am responding on behalf of both the Premierand the Minister of Justice and Attorney General.

I note your views and concerns regarding a legal action that you have started against theGovernment of British Columbia. It would not be appropriate for the Minister of Justice andAttorney General to comment on a matter that is presently before the court.

Please send any further communications regarding this matter to Leah Greathead, a lawyer inthe Legal Services Branch who has conduct of this matter for the Province. She can bereached at the following address:

Leah GreatheadBarrister and SolicitorMinistry of Attorney GeneralLegal Services BranchPO Box 9280 Stn Prov GovtVictoria BC V8W 9J7

Sincerely,

Richard J. M. Fyfe, Q.C.Assistant Deputy Attorney General

pc: The Honourable Christy ClarkLeah Greathead

This email constitutes "a letter of consent" due toNO LO CONTENDO, where the evidence of BADFAITH/mala fides was/is so overwhelminglyagainst attempting to defend the indefensible,after 3 weeks, the Confederation of Canada hadno choice but to declare the matter over and in

favour of me.For similar DNA matters, the Supreme Court ofCanada has 30 days to set aside the law courts'outcome and exonerate those wrongfullyconvicted.On May 2, 2012, this 30 day period expiredwithout so much as an acknowledgement fromThe Court of Fundamental Justice or TheDefender of The Faith as to its ultimateacceptance of The Truth and abiding by It in mymatters of GREAT HARM DONE by order of the

rule of law/"devil's advocacy".I hope that nothing is wrong as this matter alwayswas cut and dried in my favour due to FullDisclosure granting me access to the internalmemos and proof of corruption.


28/29

Ministry of Justice (British Columbia)

Office of the Assistant Deputy Attorney General (ADAG) - Legal Services Branch

The office of the ADAG provides leadership, management and direction to staff in the Legal

Services Branch. The Legal Services Branch, under the authority of the Attorney General Act, is

charged with the provision of legal services to cabinet, all ministries of the Government of British

Columbia and numerous government agencies. The ADAG reports to the deputy attorney general,

is a member of the ministry executive and is accountable for all legal services provided to the

Government of British Columbia. These include civil matters (both legal advice and legal opinions),

the negotiation and drafting of agreements, the representation of the Government of British

Columbia before courts and tribunals and the drafting of legislation and regulations.

Lawyers in the ADAGs office prepare opinions on constitutional and administrative law matters andprovide advice, generally, to the Premier, the Premiers office, cabinet, cabinet operations and other

government ministries and agencies. They also assist the ADAG with strategic planning and special

projects and generally assist the ADAG in meeting the responsibilities of that role.

Articling students participating in a rotation in the ADAGs office will assist with these functions.

They may be involved in research and writing on a variety of legal and policy issues and may

participate in meetings in relation to the functions of the ADAGs office and its lawyers. Students

participating in this rotation should expect to carry a diverse workload, must be prepared to manage

their time and workload and should approach the rotation with the flexibility to assist with a wide

range of duties.

copy of the web page: http://www.ag.gov.bc.ca/articling-program/divisions/adag/index.htm
http://www.ag.gov.bc.ca/articling-program/divisions/adag/index.htmhttp://www.ag.gov.bc.ca/articling-program/divisions/adag/index.htm


29/29

queen elizabeth ii ordered dismissal of confederation of canada

Documents