Rex vs. Edward Brian Briscoe


The LOI Research Team has flagged this record for containing sensitive information. This record contains the following sensitivities:

  • Details of potentially serious or violent criminal activity, especially violence.

Rex vs. Edward Brian Briscoe


Title Proper F0 GR0419 BOX 569 FILE 155B
Date(s) 1947
General material designation
This file contains a textual record.
Scope and content
Edison Brian Briscoe was charged on 26 July 1947 at Rivers Inlet with possessing a stolen boat, alleged to have previously been known as the "Rio II" and sold several times before being stolen from Matt Nybo and James Barnett and renamed "Guess Who." Briscoe was found guilty and appealed the case, claiming that new evidence would prove that the "Guess Who" and "Rio II" were different boats. File is relevant because the Rio II was originally named "S.N." under licence 3271 when it was purchased by British Columbia Packers Ltd. from the Japanese Fishing Vessels Disposal Committee on 11 May 1942. File is very disorganized, documents presented in original order. It is recommended that researchers begin by reading the transcript on page 123 before returning to previous documents. See also bca_gr_0419_box_569_file_155a.
PDF Table of Contents: Pages 2-3 Information and Complaint, 28 July 1947. Page 4 Statement of the Accused, 26 July 1947. Pages 5-21 Preliminary Hearing, 1-2 August, 1947. Pages 22-25 Affidavit from Briscoe’s counsel Philip Sutton Marsden, 31 December 1947, affirming basic facts of case, granting of appeal based on evidence from Helmer Miller Hanna, requesting that new trial take place in Vancouver rather than Prince Rupert and that the ‘Guess Who’ be transported to Vancouver. Pages 26-28 Court schedules indicate Rex vs. Briscoe heard before Justice Manson February 16-25, with a verdict of guilty. Pages 29-35 Photos of Briscoe’s other boat, the Joker, featuring licence number. Pages 36-40 Annotated Affidavit from Helmer Miller Hanna, 2 December 1947, swearing that he witnessed previous owner John Goch’s sons remove ‘Rio II’ from Seacraft Marine, Coal Harbour in December 1946. Lists alleged differences between the ‘Rio II’ and ‘Guess Who’. Pages 41-43 Motion by appellant for new evidence, in which Briscoe differentiates between the ‘Rio II’ and ‘Guess Who’. Page 44 Statement by previous owner John Goch, 11 February 1948. Page 45 Note describing Briscoe’s trouble with the Canadian Fishing Co., Clay’s Wharf, and the fate of Briscoe’s boat the ‘ Joker’, 20 February 1948. Pages 46-62 Direct Examination of Albert Edward Lawson, credit manager for the B.C. Packers, who describes purchase of Rio II for 1300$ from the Japanese Fishing Vessels Disposal Committee when it was originally registered under licence 3271 under the name ’S.N’. It was initially renamed the ‘Mary S. and assigned licence 7387. The boat was eventually sold to Barnett and Nybo for $3350. Pages 63-80 Direct examination of Helmer Miller Hanna, 17 December 1947, contains further descriptions of the vessel. Page 81-92 Exhibits: condition sale agreement for ‘Mary S.’ for F.W. Turner of Ladner on 12 May 1942 (boat valued at $1300), condition sale agreement for ‘Rio II’ for John Goch of Steveston on 20 March 1944 (boat valued $2400), photographs of boat. Pages 92-93 Letter from Assistant Crown Counsel to Briscoe’s counsel, P.S. Marsden, regarding witnesses and evidence, 13 February 1948. Pages 94-97 Letter to H.R. Bray from Crown Counsel F.D. Pratt, 16 January 1948, enclosing order to change venue of trial from Prince Rupert to Vancouver. Pages 98-101 Letter to Bray from Pratt, 14 January 1948, enclosing Wilson’s order and a letter from Marsden regarding transport of boat to Vancouver. Page 102 Radiogram 6 December 1947 from officer of the court in Vancouver to Revelstoke counterpart asking if John Goch and sons can be reached to confirm existence of 2 boats named ‘Rio’ and answer charges that his sons removed ‘Rio II’ from Vancouver dock on 8 December 1946 as per Helmer Miller Hanna. Page 103 Radiogram 8 December 1947 Reply from Revelstoke with answers from John Goch and his sons regarding their whereabouts at time of alleged removal of the ‘Rio II’. Page 104 Radiogram 11 December 1947 from Vancouver officer to Revelstoke officer with questions regarding Goch’s son’s whereabouts on day of alleged removal. Page 105 Radiogram 11 December 1947 from Revelstoke to Vancouver with Norman Goch’s answers regarding his whereabouts on dates in question. Page 106 Oath from James William Barnett describing difference between the ‘Rio’ and ‘Rio II’. Page 107 Statement from Harvey Roy Hurst, 11 December 1947, attesting that referred Briscoe to Helmer Miller Hanna. Page 108 letter from Inspector F. Swanson to counsel for the respondent G.V. Pelton, 9 December 1947 regarding Phillip Goch’s time card at Imperial Cannery on 8 December 1946 and affidavits from Jon and Phillip Goch. Page 109 Notice of motion from Marsden, 3 December 1947 to introduce fresh evidence; the affidavits of Briscoe, Harvey Roy Hurst, Helmer Miller Hanna, and Mary Margaret Oliver. Pages 110-116 Affidavit from Mary Margaret Oliver, 3 December 1947, includes exhibits A-E, documents procured from Registrar of Shipping and Collector of Customs and Excise at Port of New Westminster. Pages 117-119 Affidavit from Briscoe, 3 December 1947 describing new evidence. Pages 120-122 Order allowing appeal and directing a new trial with registration of dissent from Judge Sidney Smith. Pages 123-142 Preliminary Hearing. Page 143 Statement from Mr. Yardley, Assistant registrar of shipping for Victoria, 20 September 1947. Page 144 Notes on ‘Rio II’.
Name of creator
Immediate source of acquisition
The digital copies of the records were acquired by the Landscapes of Injustice Research Collective between 2014 and 2018.
This record was digitized in full.



Rex vs. Edward Brian Briscoe
Publication Information: See Terms of Use for publication and licensing information.


Readers of these historical materials will encounter derogatory references to Japanese Canadians and euphemisms used to obscure the intent and impacts of the internment and dispossession. While these are important realities of the history, the Landscapes of Injustice Research Collective urges users to carefully consider their own terminological choices in writing and speaking about this topic today as we confront past injustice. See our statement on terminology, and related sources here.