Is There Fire Behind All the Smoke? Do Due Process and Rule of Law Apply to the Realm of Financial Regulatory Agencies?

Press Release • Feb 22, 2016

When do actions taken by a Gov't regulatory and enforcement agency lose the protection rendered by 'good faith' clauses and become crimes? Are public officials immune from prosecution for any crime committed during their course of duty by invoking a 'Good Faith' clause? If the allegations facing British Columbian public officials are true can they really be protected from Perjury, Tampering, Fraudulent Concealment, Entrapment, etc. by invoking 'Good Faith'?

Vancouver, BC, February 22, 2016 (Newswire.com) - It's time for an in-depth look at the practices and operations of the BC Securities Commission. The BCSC is a regulatory and enforcement agency in British Columbia responsible for maintaining the integrity of the financial markets, as well as protecting British

Questions regarding the BC Securities Commission:

On 20/11/2014 10:49 AM, TERESA MITCHELL-BANKS WROTE: "Mr. Harris, The matter is under review. There cannot be any settlement until all the Respondents, individuals and corporate, have admitted all the allegations. Are you all prepared to do so? If the allegations are agreed to then we can propose a settlement on sanction. Any settlement would have to include financial penalties."

Teresa Mitchell-Banks , Head of Criminal Enforcement division at the BCSC

How can a Regulatory Agency mandated with ensuring fair and ethical actions in the marketplace maintain any legal credibility when it operates in the following manner,
Holds hearings without records, according to the BCSC rules its the master of its own domain in legal proceedings. How can a legal ruling be made with unbiased integrity when as they themselves said they only sometimes record said hearing?
What do the Securities Act say about this? What about Supreme court law and our Constitutional rights? Do they not exist in the world of Finance? Why not?
How can an agency be trusted to make a fair and impartial decision in a case when it knowingly uses the testimony of an investigator who has perjured herself multiple times?
Why would a Regulatory and Enforcement agency in charge of maintaining the integrity of the financial markets mislead citizens who went to them for help for seven months in regards to the reporting of Fraud?
Why would the BCSC lie to U-GO Brands directors in regards to Klaus Glusings fraudulent activities?
Why would a BCSC investigator tell the lawyer for U-Brands that he is going to let us proceed with issuing shares in U-GO Brands although he knows we may be in contravention of the Act by doing so?
Why would the lawyer and the BCSC lead us on to think its all legally ok when they know they are entrapping us into committing an offense against the Act?
Why would an agency tasked with protecting shareholders in BC actively work to destroy a legitamate company and in doing so lose 400 shareholders money?
How can the BCSC justify posting private banking info online on its website TWICE contrary to the privacy act?
-Why would the BCSC illegally Cease trade trust accounts then lie to cover it up?
How can the BCSC justify attempting to prosecute us for fraud well after they know we are innocent of fraud?
Would the BC Securities Commission break into someones hotel illegally and hack their laptop if they are desperate to pin a crime on someone and cant?
Would the BCSC hire surveillance teams and choppers to intimidate citizens into silence if it cant scare them into silence with the threat of a lawsuit?
Would the BCSC attempt to force citizens to settle for all the allegations facing them including fraud even if they know the fraud charges are not true?
Is entrapment and collusion standard protocol for the BCSC?
Do the rule of law and due process not apply to the financial markets?
What about the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty?
the right to a fair and impartial trial (Hearing) in any legal proceeding?
Can the BCSC really just make declarations about someone that are not true and operate as though its the law? Can they prosecute someone based on these declarations without evidence presented?

Mr. Christopher Burke statements for the press below..

"We have never been trying to evade responsibility for any violations of the Securities Act. Our goal the entire time has been one that is the same as one of the mandates set out for the BC Securities Commission, protect our investors. We went to them for help in order to do just that and report fraud, the BC Securities Commission was aware from the beginning that we did not commit fraud yet continued to try to prosecute us for said fraud long after they knew we were innocent. All we have wanted was a fair and unbiased proceeding against us yet we have been denied every basic civil right that we have come to value as a nation. The BCSC has lied continually throughout this process, including perjury committed by the only investigator to tender any evidence against us, how is this brushed off as simply a 'Securities Issue' as many lawyers and public officials maintain? If the BC Securities can just make up stories and lie to prosecute someone are they still covered under the 'Good Faith' clause? As the lawyers and public officials suggest because the issue is a 'Securities Issue' the normal application of due process and adherence to the rule of law do not apply. If the financial markets fall outside the rule of law, the right to due process and a fair trial or 'hearing' as the BCSC holds true by its actions whats to stop me from robbing a bank? After all the rule of law, according to officials doesn't apply to the Financial Markets any more."

More from Mr. Burke..

"How can we be prosecuted for such a crime as Ms Mitchell-Banks insisted in Oct 2014 when both parties are aware of our innocence? Why did the BC Securities Commission illegally cease trade trust accounts of one of the Directors when it knew that it contained no proceeds of crime or ill-gotten gains? The accounts had not received money in almost twenty years, the BCSC has access to all the banking records they knew the accounts were not related and their was no reason to believe they were. Despite this fact they issued the cease trade anyway, then they lied to cover it up. The BCSC has more then one story about the CTO including blaming the bank, their lead investigator on the case lied under oath and numerous officials on behalf of the BCSC have given multiple different stories about what happened. How can we trust that a fair judgment will be rendered against us when it is clear the BCSC has an aversion to the truth and has operated with deception since day one? What happened to our Constitutional Rights?"

"BC’s reputation as the global securities fraud capital hasn’t changed yet. Still, to this day, people are losing their life savings to BC based frauds- and, the BCSC is no less toothless and no more competent than it was back then. British Columbia is a ponzi scheme, and the BCSC is a core part of it."

http://www.genuinewitty.com/2012/06/25/the-bc-securities-commission-is-a-bad-joke/

"It was only earlier this year that the CEO got arrested- but, that was two scams later…

So, who cares? We’re talking about bankers ripping off bankers- right? Not quite, it isn’t as much the bankers who are getting ripped off in BC as it is the 99%. It’s mom, and pop, grandma & grandpa who lose their investments- banks have resources to investigate the claims of who they invest in.

The BCSC is a wart on BC’s economy, they are ineffective and dangerous"

http://www.genuinewitty.com/2012/11/22/why-is-this-con-artist-dancing-because-the-bc-securities-commission-sucks/

Flag Resources is a 100 year old mining company rich in history with thousands of investors throughout the US and Canada. A Flag Resource official Mr. Rodney Snyder claims the BCSC is attempting to prosecute him for a crime that an outside accounting firm hired by Flag has already plead guilty to. The BCSC knows he is innocent yet proceeds anyways and is in the middle of destroying a perfectly good mining operation as a result. Mr, Snyders concerns can be seen here on the following link.

http://www.castanet.net/news/Letters/157110/Bureaucratic-domination

The preceding has been just a small part of the complaints and allegations against the BC Securities Commission. The Directors of U-GO Brands insist that their company should never have been destroyed, the worst that should have happened was a fine and the stepping down of the offending parties who did not commit any crimes but instead had the integrity to tell the truth in front of the BCSC. The Directors point to the complete absence of due process, a fair and impartial hearing, and the truth in the matter as evidence to back their position. The BCSC was intent on making a case against the U-GO Brands directors from the start regardless of whether or not the Directors were guilty.

According to the BCSC it is simply doing its job and ensuring the integrity of the marketplace. What does the evidence say in this regard? We let you the reader decide for yourself. Should any one wish to examine the details further the BCSC's rulings and findings against the U-GO Brands Directors are available on-line at www.bcsc.bc.ca

For more evidence on the claims of the U-GO Brands Directors you can visit their blogs as well as the attached links to Press releases from U-GO Brands Inc. pertaining to their position.

With questions like the ones asked by the U-GO Brands directors one would have to ask, is there a fire behind all this smoke? And if so who is responsible for it?

Pictures

1. Mr. Harris "whats taking so long"? 2. Mr. Harris first reports Fraud in 2013. 3. BCSC 2014 TO alleges the Directors paid no attention to the law. 4. Mr. Ting and Ms Tomchuk re U-GO Brands continuation. 5. Must Plead Guilty to all Allegations. 6. Lawyer reveals Directors not guilty of Fraud in July 2014. 7. BCSC issues Cease Trade Order. 8. BCSC Denies it issued Cease Trade Order.