From the desk of:

Captain E. G. da Costa Duarte

June 8, 2006

Dear Judge de Couto:

The pursuit of justice details aspects of safeguarding law obeying citizens from harm. This is a fundamental issue governing written laws throughout the human world. Professional code of ethics, usually follow similar guide lines created to safeguard individuals from harm. In Canada, the rule of law allows everyone to participate in safeguarding society as a whole from harm. On April 7, 2006, Supreme Court Judge Pitfield exemplified such by stating the following:

“The criminal system….you either have a public prosecution or a private prosecution….an offense has been committed. It is open to the complainant to secure your own information. The Criminal Code then provides process…..to monitor private prosecutions”.

                                                                                                                                                  BC Supreme Court Judge Pitfield

Our society depends on leadership, the rule of law and democratic principles to maintain order while respecting individual rights and freedoms. Whether leadership emerges from a court judge or a ship’s captain an obligation to pursue the rule of law protecting society remains the same, exemplifying such, the captain of a ship performs a judge’s duty when he or she faces crew or passenger activities endangering the ship or others onboard. Fundamentally, whether the individual entrusted with the rule of law is a court judge, or a ship’s Captain the ultimate aim is to ascertain guilt from available evidence followed by human decency dictating that no individual should receive punishment until evidence proves beyond a reasonable doubt that a crime occurred. To complete the argument Canada’s system of justice assures Canadians the following:

“Laws help to ensure a safe and peaceful society in which people's rights are respected. The Canadian legal system respects individual rights, while at the same time ensuring that our society operates in an orderly manner. An essential principle is that the same law applies to everybody, including the police, governments and public officials, who must carry out their public duties according to the law”.

“Laws are also aimed at ensuring fairness. By recognizing and protecting basic individual rights and freedoms, such as liberty and equality, our laws ensure that stronger groups and individuals do not use their powerful positions to take unfair advantage of weaker groups or people”.

“Our legal system, based on a tradition of law and justice, gives Canadian society a valuable framework. The rule of law, freedom under the law, democratic principles, and respect for others form the foundations of this important heritage”.

                                                                                                                                                       Department of Justice Canada

Again, on April 7, 2006, Supreme Court Judge Pitfield did not dismiss the fact that police officers are governed by the same rules all Canadians abide by:

“The public and the community generally respect the work that is done by the law enforcement officers in the country….they are to be commented when it’s appropriate to commend them and they are to be reprimanded when it’s appropriate to reprimand them”.

Emphasizing above-mentioned quotes the judges of the Provincial Court of British Columbia are governed by a Code of Judicial Ethics indicating an independent judiciary:

“The Provincial Court of British Columbia is committed above all to upholding the Rule of Law and the Constitution of Canada. We aspire to be fair, impartial, compassionate and patient in a knowledgeable and consistent application of the law to all persons, with due regard to each person’s circumstances. We strive in serving the communities of BC to provide reasonable and equal access to justice for all persons through traditional and innovative processes which, to the extent permitted by law and our resources, are practical, speedy, inexpensive, and simple”.

Before my exposure to events governing the sale and modifications of an ex-Canadian ship named “El Conquistador”, reflections of a justice system governing Canadian society were of praise dictating that ignorance surpasses all when a lack of involvement allowed my belief that our judicial system knows best how to protect all Canadians from harm. Nothing was further from the truth exemplified by a series of court appearances supported by expensive transcripts indicating a travesty of great proportions. Beginning with idiotic statements such as “He who represents himself has a fool for a lawyer”, uttered by your subordinate Provincial Court Judges in support of the least respected profession in the country, allowing prostitution to surpass it, the legal profession enjoys free marketing from the bench. Relating to my early years at sea, I never witnessed a sailor receive services from prostitutes accompanied by lies and exuberant fees seen in today’s client lawyer relations. Further, an individual encountering the Canadian Legal system relying on the services of a defense lawyer without knowledge of its rules, regulations and procedures, invites tragedy, whether financial, mentally or both. The Provincial Court of New Westminster, under your administrative powers exemplifies these statements yet I am just touching the surface.

Given the fact that I chose to self-represent myself and file charges against a member of a Canadian “sacred” institution, namely RCMP, a determination originating from judges under your administrative influence, not reflected by the RCMP itself, I committed a sin. Obviously, there is no forgiveness in sight, once the sin is committed every mistake made before presiding judges entrusted to preserve this institution, whatever it is they are preserving in support of corrupt civil servants, no forgiveness is ever given. Judge Joanna Challenger merits mention in the annals of judicial stupidity supporting this behavior. A judge confessing to have no knowledge of maritime rules and regulations involving the Canada Shipping Act and IMO conventions enforced by Canada, she instructed the following: “you have to sit here and identify the issues to me and answer questions, so I have some idea of what your charter application…….indicates that Transport Canada is involved in the investigation”. Subsequently, allowing me no time to explain anything Judge Challenger instructed a sheriff to escort me out of court. Judge Challenger refused to issue process against RCMP Sgt. Peers by refusing to hear the evidence available before her. The fundamental rule dictates that evidence determines a crime and must be heard. Unfortunately, these early events before Judge Challenger determined a stupid judge it did not indicate future events presently identifying a judicial system far removed from the above-mentioned statements by Justice Canada and Judge Pitfield. Obviously, it is imperative that an effort from you mandates a review of all court transcripts and documented applications involving both files. Namely, files 67140 and 67891.

Given that we are all equal before the law, several judges, under your administrative rule including yourself, decided that Crown Counsel can lie and mislead court proceedings at will. Exemplified by Crown Counsel Irene Plett statements before Judge Dohm, Judge Alexander, yourself, and Justice of the Peace Ron Bennett. All events involving misleading statements received my request asking the court to look at evidence indicating a purpose to mislead the court. After repeated request to the court to deal with my allegations, submitted in written and oral form, the only response came from Judge Angelomatis instructing me to complain to the Bar. According to Criminal Code Section 131. (1) this behavior is a crime and not for the Bar to resolve. During recent application hearings, Crown Counsel Irene Plett no longer bothers to show up in court, Crown Counsel Bruce Stewart, the replacement, maintains the same tradition initiated by a statement before Judge Pothecary that I was charged with falsifying a “certificate of sale of a ship”. Upon my demand for justice indicating this behavior to be of a defamatory nature, Judge Pothecary praised Crown Counsel for his honesty and knowledge. This type of behavior, again exemplifies a court that is completely aloft of its duties to pursue justice as per our written laws bringing the word disrepute into view yet elevating it to new heights. The Canadian Charter of Rights is very clear about bringing the administration of justice into disrepute:

“24. (1) Anyone whose rights or freedoms, as guaranteed by this Charter, have been infringed or denied may apply to a court of competent jurisdiction to obtain such remedy as the court considers appropriate and just in the circumstances”.

“(2) Where, in proceedings under subsection (1), a court concludes that evidence was obtained in a manner that infringed or denied any rights or freedoms guaranteed by this Charter, the evidence shall be excluded if it is established that, having regard to all the circumstances, the admission of it in the proceedings would bring the administration of justice into disrepute”.

Summarizing evidence issues, again bringing the administration of justice into disrepute, the crown has no legal right to evidence obtained from my office on September 20, 2002. My property was ordered returned in 2003 by Judge Angelomatis, clearly one year before I was charged and the search warrant used to enter the office involved fabricated evidence presented to a Justice of the Peace forming Count 1 of court file 67891:

“Sergeant M. G. Peers, member of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, on his written statement produced July 17, 2004, at or near New Westminster, in the Province of British Columbia, committed fraud, and breach of trust by a public officer, contrary to Section 122 of the Criminal Code. The elements of the fraud consisted of a false and material misrepresentation of facts by knowingly to be false or ignorant of the truth”.

Another alarming issue reflects the investigation by RCMP Sgt. MacDonald, West Coast Marine Detachment of all the events involving my actions, Transport Canada and RCMP Sgt. Mark G. Peers. This investigation clearly indicates that Sgt. Peers past activities show neglect of duty and fabricated evidence yet, Judge Angelomatis endorses a subpoena bringing Sgt. MacDonald to testify, dismissing it later, preventing his appearance before the court. In other words, describing this mannerism in the simplest form; your court is robbing me of justice. Unfortunately, it does not end there, with eight witnesses available to testify about all the events, your subordinate Judges refuse to hear the evidence consisting of documents, images, and witnesses. During a recent conversation with an official from the United States Homeland Security, under Capt. Gerrity’s command, monitoring these court activities, I failed to properly explain these court activities given that Hollywood has not produced a film of this bizarre nature. Since 2002, the Canadian vessel ex-Gulf Ivy remains detained in the USA in an unseaworthy condition. We continue to send the same message to US citizens assuring them that we are a country that does not care for safety of life at sea. My website, sealegacy.com continues to receive a high number of hits since the publication of images and partial information about these events.

An interesting aspect involving both court files reflects RCMP activities after Sgt. McDonald’s investigation. Information given to Crown Counsel is useless indicating a strong message to the court that this stupidity should end. Since the beginning I have maintained constant contact with RCMP officials, presently knowing their wishes.  While I am receiving praise from international authorities for my actions, the New Westminster Provincial Court, the Office of the Attorney General, Crown Counsel Irene Plett and Bruce Stewart continue to embarrass Canada. Unfortunately, embarrassing Canada also embarrasses me, I am Canadian.

Sincerely,

Capt. E. G. da Costa Duarte

Click to Return; The Flag of Inconvenience Page