October 26, 2016
5249 Laurel Street
Burnaby BC V5G 1N1
778 378 9009, email@example.com
– Registered mail
DECLARATION OF INDEMNITY
The Honourable Christopher E. Hinkson,
Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of
800 Smithe Street
Vancouver BC V6Z 2E1
Dear Mr. Hinkson,
A - THE STATEMENT OF THE FUNDAMENTAL FACTS
am a victim of a potentially fatal hit and run crime. Therefore, I have a DUTY to bring my offender-in-law, ICBC to JUSTICE; because
ICBC assumed the liability of the CRIME. I have struggled to discharge my DUTY for over seven years.
2. The members of the Law Society
refused to provide me with legal service I needed in order to carry out my DUTY, contradicting with the Canons of Legal Ethics 2.1-5
(c). Lawyers’ failure to provide legal service NECESSARY for the victims is tantamount to obstructing justice; because, ordinary people
cannot sue their offenders, on their own.
3. Michael G. Armstrong filed a court application to dismiss my legal action. His conduct
was NOT LAWFUL; because dismissing the legal action of the victim is tantamount to exonerating the offender.
4. Justice Nathan H.
Smith cooperated with Michael G. Armstrong and dismissed my legal action. His conduct was NOT LAWFUL; because it is impossible to
serve JUSTICE in a Court where the lawyers and judges have no respect for victims’ RIGHT and DUTY to sue their offenders.
5. I have
struggled to resolve this legal chicanery through litigation process, for three years. Finally, you labeled me “vexatious litigant ”
and issued an order without a proper signature stating that:
“No person is obliged to respond to the Notice of Civil Claim (my claim
#S155390) ….”, July 13, 2015.
6. ICBC, blatantly, sells insurance under the threat of seizing drivers licenses and FORCES the innocent
people to pay all the damages reckless drivers and hit and run criminals cause; even though, sale under duress is NOT LAWFULL.
provides insurance benefits for criminal offenders, under the cover of “accident insurance”, including the cases where offenders are
identified; even though, it is NOT LAWFULL to insure criminal offenders.