(Download PDF)

Suite #101 22678 – 28th Avenue, Langley BC, Canada V2Z 3B2
Phone: 604 277-2201 Email: [email protected] Website: CultureGuard.com

Attention: David Eby, Attorney General of BC
Email: [email protected]
Copied to: John Horgan, Premier of BC
[email protected]
Adrian Dix, Health Minister of BC
[email protected]
Dr. Bonnie Henry, PHO
[email protected]

Via Email
October 1, 2021

RE: Urgent Legal Matters

Dear Sir,

As this province continues to plummet into crisis, discord and medical chaos, I write to serve notice to you that your conduct (or lack thereof), specifically as it relates to your statutory duties as Chief law enforcement officer for the province of British Columbia, can no longer be ignored.

The office of the Attorney General has obligations not only to the Lieutenant Governor, the Executive Council, and the administration of justice; but also, most importantly, to the people of British Columbia.

As Attorney General, either you have failed in your duties to properly advise the Executive Council or they have failed to listen. You are duty bound to have availed yourself of the vast amount of COVID related information, from all reliable sources—not just those convenient to one narrative.

You are duty bound, as legal advisor, to inform the Executive Counsel when their orders, or orders issued by those empowered by statute to make orders, infringe without lawful justification on the rights of those living in British Columbia. These rights include not only our Charter Rights, but also those found in the BC Human Rights Code—a Code with which you, as former head of the BC Civil Liberties Association, are very familiar.

In your capacity as AG, you are duty bound to inform yourself about the research, good and bad, associated with experimental drug programs like the one that is currently masquerading under the misleading label of being a ‘vaccine’.

This fraud—that is being forced on the population of BC through coercion, abuse of power, assault and battery, as well as misinformation and deceit—must cease. There is no denying this reality. Distressingly, for Dr. Bonnie Henry, Minister Dix, the Premier and others, there is too much reliable information from medical professionals, scientist and other jurisdictions now available to allow this insidious and dangerous experiment to continue.

Most reasonable British Columbians can easily affirm the growing skepticism, anger and failed confidence in those who ostensibly conned and coerced the populace into a false narrative with manufactured statistics and misinformation designed to force participation in a mass social experiment masquerading as a ‘pandemic’.

I’m sure you can recall, as many in BC do, the “2009 Swine Flu Pandemic” that is now mocked as a hoax; or the forerunner in 1976, where those in charge of protecting the public’s health were blinded by their zeal and failed to see the devastating consequences of the “mass vaccination” program. The New York Times concluded after the program was suspended that the swine flu affair, had been a “sorry debacle” and “fiasco” marked by political expediency and unwarranted confidence.

As a lawyer, you are aware that ignorance of the law is not a defense. I would venture to say ignorance of crucial COVID related research addressing the increasing harms and false justifications of efficacy will not be a defense in this matter if—or rather, when—you are required to justify your continued silence.

I appreciate there are many who, through believing a propaganda narrative of false optimism, want to participate in the experiment. For those wanting continued access to as many “boosters” as they want, let them poke away! However, the doctrine of informed consent requires that the facts must be represented in a true, comprehensive format and must be free from coercion. “Informed consent” also imposes a “duty of care” requirement that is currently not being met (I have videos).

As AG, you are responsible, in your duty to protect British Columbians, to educate health care professionals in their high-level duty to deliver factual and relevant information as it relates to “informed consent” and other laws that exist to protect individuals.

It is obvious those involved in making directives and orders have locked-in their sights on “immunization” being the salvation of the nation. But it isn’t working. As AG, you must know that Dr. Bonnie Henry has a fixation on immunization. Her resume includes being past chair of “Immunize Canada”, and other “immunization” focused activities, this portrays a dedicated, but perhaps unbalanced and unjustified obsession with vaccinations that has clearly blinded her to the reality that is unfolding in BC.

BC’s children are now in her crosshairs, young children. There is no justifiable rationale available to subject children, or young adults, to this dangerous experiment. This targeted conduct has to ring alarm bells in those who are following her disastrous path. At some point someone must question her actions and put a full stop on her ill-fated hope in an unproven intervention that is now proven to be deadly for some, dangerous to others.

The current orders, masking young children, “vaccine” passports, and coercive tactics to double—even triple inject individuals, are clear acts of immunization zealots with a desperate and false hope in an intervention that has indisputably failed.

As AG you have the responsibility to ensure balanced perspectives are integral to the decision-making. The idolization of experimental “immunization” by “vaccine” zealots cannot be allowed to continue in assaulting the people of BC; with directives based on a manufactured narrative of false hope and unsubstantiated belief.

The serious and unlawful events transpiring across the province are abusive, oppressive, and hostile to our rights; and violate numerous laws. As Attorney General and a “public official” as defined in section 122 of the Criminal Code of Canada, you, above all others, are required to put a stop to this unlawful, oppressive abuse and end the medical assaults being committed against children and the people of British Columbia.

As you know, there are certain laws that protect Canadians from those who abuse their public office and the public’s trust. Section 122 of the Criminal Code of Canada is one of those, it states:

Breach of trust by public officer

122. Every official who, in connection with the duties of his office, commits fraud or a breach of trust is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years, whether or not the fraud or breach of trust would be an offence if it were committed in relation to a private person.

In R. v. Boulanger, [2006] 2 S.C.R. 49, 2006 SCC 32, the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) detailed the legal test the Crown must meet in order to convict someone under section 122, “Breach of Trust by a Public Officer”. There are some prominent BC “public officers” who should be notified of this section forthwith.

It is important to provide prominence to the words of the SCC in citing the significance of crimes by “public officers”. At paragraph 1 the court states:

The crime of breach of trust by a public officer, embodied in s. 122 of the Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, is both ancient and important. It gives concrete expression to the duty of holders of public office to use their offices for the public good. This duty lies at the heart of good governance. It is essential to retaining the confidence of the public in those who exercise state power. Yet surprisingly, the elements of this crime remain uncertain. This appeal requires us to clarify those elements so that citizens, police and the courts have a clear idea of what conduct the crime encompasses.

This is what the high court said about the first of the five elements of the section 122 test:

“The offence of breach of trust by a Public Officer is established where the Crown proves beyond a reasonable doubt that:

(1) the accused is an official”

Mr. Attorney General, there is no doubt that Premier Horgan, Health Minister Adrian Dix, Dr. Bonnie Henry, public school officials, school board trustees and numerous others like Dr. Monika Naus, would be deemed “public officers” within the meaning of the Criminal Code. The serious abuses of power and “breach of trust” by Horgan, Dix and Henry are well-known and recorded.

You might not have been informed about Dr. Naus, so in good faith, I will now make sure you know. Dr. Monika Naus, writing as the “Medical Director for the BC Centre for Disease Control”, on September 3, 2021, sent a “update” to Medical Health Officers and Branch offices, Public Health Nursing Administrators and Assistant Administrators, and all “Holders of Communicable Disease Control Manuals” This update asserts a directive that advised of a change in protocol involving a minor’s consent to health care. Specifically, this directive is to facilitate “mature minor consent for children 12 years of age and younger.” She states, “this change has been made to remove any perceived barriers for such children who are deemed capable and wish to provide consent on their own behalf.”

I am certain that you are aware of the test associated with determining a “mature minor” under the Infants Act. Dr. Naus has already received legal notice about her directive from one of our lawyers. As AG, you might want to educate her on what the ramifications of producing this directive means for her, and the province.

The second element of the test is pretty easy, too. The numerous transcripts, videos, orders, and directives provide ample evidence of those “public officers” acting in their capacity as “public officials.” This element of the legal test therefore is quite easy to prove, specifically:

(2) the accused was acting in connection with the duties of his or her office;

The next element is very important. The third factor in this legal test is exacerbated by the fact that not only have these public officials misled the public, lied, bullied, and engaged in abusive tactics of coercion and lockdowns that endangered the health and well-being of British Columbians and abused their positions, but in the process, they have incited contempt and mandated division amongst friends, families and the general population.

The court states:

(3) the accused breached the standard of responsibility and conduct demanded of him or her by the nature of the office…

Element four does not need too much explanation. The directives associated with the “public officers” were at the very least questionable to begin with. The evidence that now exists concerning the dangers of the COVID intervention under the false claim of being a ‘vaccine’ is overwhelming. The provable harm to the mental health of children and others, plus the economic hardships, are just some of the verifiable abuses that have been foisted upon the people of British Columbia by these “public officials.”

The fourth element:

(4) the accused’s conduct represented a serious and marked departure from the standards expected of an individual in the accused’s position of public trust;

Lastly, the fifth element—and perhaps the most serious particular of the test to meet, as it contemplates the motives of these “public officers”. The court states the fifth element as:

(5) the accused acted with the intention to use his or her public office for a purpose other than the public good; for example, a dishonest, partial, corrupt, or oppressive purpose.

There is no “public good” defense available to someone who deliberately lies and misleads the public with skewed statistics, redefined terms, and emotionally-charged imagery that fails to depict an accurate and balanced account of what is transpiring.

There is no “public good” achieved when a public official deliberately misleads the public, the media and others in government about laws that are designed to protect children, our society and individual rights.

There is no “public good” achieved when the conduct of public officials engages in characterizations of certain identifiable groups by calling them “COVIDiots”, “whack jobs” and other false characterizations like “anti-vaxers”, designed to incite hatred and contempt for them.

There is no defense for the unjustifiably oppressive tactics that have been employed.

As Attorney General for this province, you are duty bound to uphold the law. You have failed.

The Attorney General Act of BC states:

Duties and powers

2 The Attorney General

(a) is the official legal adviser of the Lieutenant Governor and the legal member of the Executive Council

(b) must see that the administration of public affairs is in accordance with law,

Your accountability doesn’t stop there. As mentioned above, Section 2(b) of the Attorney General Act demands that you ensure that the administration of public affairs in BC is “in accordance with the law.” Clearly, you have failed on this front, too; and our province is paying the price.

As AG you are also responsible for the lawful administration of the BC Human Rights Code and the protections therein. Section 3(1) of the BC Human Rights Code demands that you ensure that the purposes of that Code are actuated; specifically the purposes of the Code, which are:

(a) to foster a society in British Columbia in which there are no impediments to full and free participation in the economic, social, political and cultural life of British Columbia;

(b) to promote a climate of understanding and mutual respect where all are equal in dignity and rights;

(c) to prevent discrimination prohibited by this Code;

(d) to identify and eliminate persistent patterns of inequality associated with discrimination prohibited by this Code;

(e) to provide a means of redress for those persons who are discriminated against contrary to this Code.

(f) and (g) [Repealed 2002-62-2.]

Section 4 of the Code provides protection to all British Columbians from oppressive orders, edicts or other “enactments” made by “public officers” or anyone else, designed to violate, trespass, neutralize, oppress, coerce or deny British Columbians from freely participating in the “economic, social, political and cultural life…” in British Columbia. Section 4 states:

4 If there is a conflict between this Code and any other enactment, this Code prevails.

As you are aware, our laws are not made in ignorance. As British Columbians we acknowledge that our right to engage, without impediment in our civil society is a protected right. Our protected right to full participation, including going to restaurants without declaring our status within an experimental program, trumps the oppressive and unlawful orders of Dr. Bonnie Henry (a public official within the meaning of Section 122 of the Criminal Code of Canada).

In closing, please also consider the requirement in section 3(1)(e). It is time that a properly-funded and staffed entity is available to those seeking redress.

The BC Human Rights Tribunal (BCHRT) has been recognized as being unfair and partial, and the current situation of backlog is denying British Columbians access to justice. This must change. Those members assigned to hear matters can no longer be driven by their political ideology or personal agendas. Instead, a proper application of the law must be the determiner in matters brought before the Tribunal.

Lastly, there is no argument available at this point to justify the conduct of Dr. Bonny Henry. The dangers and harm associated with the ‘vaccine’ indisputably outweigh the benefits, most critically where children are involved. This devastatingly harmful social, psychological and medical experiment must cease, or appropriate consequences will be sought.

The Crown, under your administration is compromised. Your compliance and deficiency of action in your duties inspires no confidence in your performance as AG. As you know the Criminal Code of Canada provides the people of Canada with the ability to bypass the Crown. I have enough evidence in my possession to justify the laying of Private Information charges on numerous public officers. If you fail to act immediately, I will proceed with a Private Information and if successful I will seek a special prosecutor in this circumstance. My witness list of experts is impressive, and the stories of those harmed compelling.

It is time to end the insidious lunacy, assaults (battery), abuse and the unlawful conduct of “public officials.” I implore the Executive Council to initiate an immediate pause on all COVID related orders, expand their advisory base and meet with those health care professionals who are better informed, independent and balanced in their knowledge of COVID, COVID testing, COVID treatments, immunization, immunization protocols and chemicals—and other unknown substances being injected into the bodies of those you are responsible for protecting.

I am attaching THE COVID-19 CANADIAN COVID CARE ALLIANCE (CCCA) DECLARATION, published September 24, 2021. I believe you can easily access the necessary experts through this organization to give you a better-informed and balanced understanding of COVID related matters.

Please act in a timely manner, enough damage has been done.

Sincerely yours,
Original signed by:
Kari Simpson
Executive Director, Culture Guard
Campaign Chair 300K.ca