Some background on the Dr. Kuntz Story and British Columbia Chief Justice Chris Hinkson

Chief Justice Hinkson 

Readers are encouraged to read the blog post made on September 10, 2010 to get the big picture of what happened in the case of Dr. Kuntz and why he was destroyed. 

What follows is a reprint of email correspondence from Dr. Kuntz to his friend "Derek" that puts the present Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of British Columbia squarely in the middle of some very deep corruption in British Columbia that may explain why Chris Hinkson was appointed to his exalted position. (Photos are added)

Readers must understand that the CMPA referred to by Dr. Kuntz is formally known as the Canadian  Medical Protective Association and consists of a number of large Canadian law firms that regularly represent doctors in medical malpractice cases. In British Columbia, the key CMPA law firm is Harper Grey Easton. 

Communications by Dr. David Kuntz with Reference to:

J. Ted Hinkson and Harper Grey lawyers Harvey Grey and Chris Hinkson.

Chris Hinkson is Ted Hinkson’s Son

Ted Hinkson Graduated from Law School with Mary Southin,

And worked he as a lawyer with Guild Yule

31 Aug 2015 6.35 pm (Email)

Derek:

I am still discovering judicial fraud.  For example, a valid B.C. Court of Appeal hearing requires three Court of Appeal judges.   Harvey Grey told me not to attend my appeal of the Cohen judgment in Coughlin v. Kuntz  "just in case we lose".  I disobeyed his orders not to attend and to his dismay I appeared in Court.  I did not know Harvey Grey's partner was Chris Hinkson and I did not know that the biased judge on the bench was Justice Ted Hinkson, a former CMPA  Guild Yule lawyer whose son Chris Hinkson was also a former CMPA Guild Yule lawyer was now Harvey Grey's partner at Harper Grey Easton and Company which held the CMPA contract to defend all CMPA-insured doctors (including myself) in B.C..   Harvey Grey had earlier told me he would "vindicate" me by using the "new evidence"  of prior usage of methyl methacrylate and he had lied to me - he did not enter a single published paper nor did he argue the evidence that would vindicate me.  Justice Ted Hinkson and the CMPA and Harvey Grey had a vested economic interest in upholding the Cohen judgment against me because it would ensure more litigation would continue based of the experimental surgery scientific fraud of the Cohen judgment which Harvey Grey was supposed to correct.  In retrospect Ted Hinkson was enriching his son Chris Hinkson who was already a financial partner with Harvey Grey.  Ted Hinkson yelled out from the bench at Harvey Grey who hung his head in mock shame  as Hinkson defamed me by yelling " Your client is knife happy!".    Over a quarter of a century later I now realize that this was a one judge Kangaroo Court - a B.C. Court of Appeal required three judges and there was only one judge present and his son was Harvey Grey's partner.  Justice Ted Hinkson sat on the bench alone to enrich the Hinkson family  and he was working in collusion with Harvey Grey in the absence of the two other required Court of Appeal judges to uphold the Cohen judgment that would enrich both Harvey Grey and his partner Chris Hinkson and their mutual CMPA benefactors by perpetuating the scientific fraud the Methyl Methacrylate usage for disc replacement was "experimental surgery".   

The Hinkson BCCA Court of Appeal judgment was "void ab initio", firstly because Justice Ted Hinkson was in conflict judging a case which would enrich Harvey Grey and Ted Hinkson's son Chris Hinkson, and secondly because the Court did not have a quorum which required a three judge bench. That means the BCCA judgment was invalid and it requires a new trial and that Justice Ted Hinkson and Harvey Grey should both face criminal charges for fixing cases. Harvey Grey was a bencher of the Law Society and knew that I was entitled to a three judge bench and that I did not receive a fair hearing under S.11(d) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. 

Similarly, the Southin judgment in De Sousa v. Kuntz and Kitimat General Hospital was "void ab initio" because the Kitimat General Hospital was filed and defended by lawyers at Bull Housser Tupper who were Mary Southin's partners at BHT and she was still a lawyer at BHT when the Hospital was being defended by her partner Chris Grauer at BHT.  Southin and Grauer were acting in collusion and she sat in conflict to enrich her BHT partners and she had a duty to recuse herself when she stalked me from the bench.  That means the Southin judgment was void ab initio. 

Robert Bauman

[Editors Note: The present Chief Justice of British Columbia is Robert Bauman (swhown in photo on left) who was, at one time, a senior partner at Bull Housser Tupper along with Canada's Chief Justice Beverely McLachlin.]    

That means that both the De Sousa case must be overturned by the Parliament and the Coughlin case must be overturned by the Parliament.

The College erasure must also be overturned by the Parliament because the College Council sat in conflict in judgment of their co-defendent Kuntz and adverse in economic interest in a case valued at $300 million because the College was a covert defendant with myself in the secret undisclosed second Writ filed as the  Rita Linnea Harriet Wilson et al Class Action v. Dr. Kuntz, College of Physicians and Surgeons, Kitimat General Hospital and Wrinch Memorial Hospital .  This was a violation of S.11(d) of the Charter which does not allow one defendant to sit in judgment of another defendant because the Charter requires a fair hearing and the College had a vested interest in defaming and discrediting the witness against themselves in 1988 in advance of the Class Action which was still outstanding.  

JDK

1^st Sept 2015 12.05 AM (Email)

Derek:

I think we should send John Carten a copy of this recent material on the judicial scam of Ted Hinkson who was working with Harvey Grey to enrich his son Chris Hinkson who was Harvey Grey's partner by denying me a fair B.C. Court of Appeal hearing when I appealed the Cohen judgment in Coughlin v. Kuntz.  The BCCA hearing was bogus because it was supposed to be a Court of Appeal hearing and there was only one biased judge present - Ted Hinkson - and a B.C. Court of Appeal is supposed to sit three BCCA judges on the bench.   That shows that Justice Ted Hinkson and Harvey Grey were in cahoots to obstruct justice and deny me my S.11(d) Charter right to a fair hearing at the B.C. Court of Appeal.   I was entitltled to a fair Appeal hearing before three judges.  Where were they?   Ted Hinkson was the father of Chris Hinkson who was the covert partner of Harvey Grey since 1978 and both Harvey Grey and his partner Chris Hinkson stood to profit if Ted Hinkson obstructed justice by proceeding without a quorum of three BCCA judges when he upheld the Cohen judgment to ensure that the precedent would stand and thereby invite a large number of cases against me based on the Cohen judgment, all of which would enrich Harvey Grey and the judge's son Ted Hinkson who were jointly partnered to profit from the theft of CMPA funds so long as more cases for experimental surgery continued to be filed against me which required Ted Hinkson to uphold the precedent Cohen judgment.  That was why I was denied a three judge B.C. Court of Appeal hearing.    The federal parliament has a duty to exercise the Charter S.33 power to overrule the judge Ted Hinkson on grounds that he knowingly held a bogus BCCA hearing without a quorum so as to uphold the Cohen judgment and deny me a fair hearing before a three man BCCA bench and thereby enrich his son Chris Hinkson who was Harvey Grey's covert partner at Harper Grey Easton and Company which held the CMPA contract to defend doctors in B.C. 

JDK

1^st Sept 2015 12.35 PM (Email)

Derek:

Justice Ted Hinkson – changed the names of BCCA judges who heard the Napoli and Coughlin Appeals.

The information below cannot be correct because Dr. J.D. Kuntz was in the Courtroom at the Appeal of the Cohen judgment in Coughlin v. Kuntz  and there was only one judge present for the entire appeal and it was BCCA Justice Ted Hinkson.   There was no other judge present in the courtroom other than the biased Justice Ted Hinkson.  There was absolutely no presence of Justice Taggart and Gibb in the appeal of the Cohen judgment in Coughlin v. Kuntz!

If the information recorded below by JDK was taken off the published BCCA documents of the appeal, than those false records of the  Kuntz Appeal of the Cohen judgment in the Coughlin v. Kuntz  Appeal  were clearly altered by the tainted Justice Ted Hinkson who was the only judge present at the Appeal and the only one capable of tampering with the published court documents containing that fraudulent information that stated  Taggart and Gibb were present when they were never there.  That means that Justice Hinkson was conducting a fraudulent court of appeal session as the sole judge on a three man bench which did not exist and that makes his deceitful publication of the outcome of a phony BCCA hearing nothing less that void ab ignitio because it occurred in the absence of a quorum of three judges. 

The following three  paragraphs were most likely copied by Kuntz from the published BCCA  records that named the judges who were were supposed to have judged the Coughlin Appeal and the De Sousa Appeal.   Since Dr. Kuntz disobeyed Harvey Grey’s instructions not to attend and because he did attend the entire appeal,  Dr. Kuntz knew that Ted Hinkson was the only judge on the BCCA bench hearing his Appeal.   That means Ted Hinkson altered the records.

It should also be noted that this was the second time that Ted Hinkson altered published records of BCCA trials in which he was involved.   Ted Hinkson also altered the records of the Napoli V. WCB Appeal where the court records show his involvement as a judge at the trial whereas the published record shows that Hinkson’s name was replaced by MacDonald so as to hide Ted Hinkson’s involvement.

The following three paragraphs were taken from the document #10 Ted Hinkson authored by Dr. Kuntz:

On December 19, 1989, Justices Hinkson, Taggart and Gibbs in the

B.C. Court of Appeal dismissed Dr. Kuntz’s appeal of the Cohen

judgment in WCB-funded Coughlin v. Kuntz case [CA008375].

Dec. 19, 1989 B.C. Court of Appeal

judgment of Justices Hinkson, Taggart and Gibb who dismissed Dr.

Kuntz’s appeal of the Cohen judgment in the WCB-funded Coughlin

v. Kuntz case [CA008375]].

On March 9, 1988, Justices Hinkson, Craig, Wallace of the B.C. Supreme Court

upheld the De Sousa v. Kuntz judgment of Justice Southin [CA009275].

JDK

Sept. 2^nd 2015 8.59 AM (Email)

Derek:

The modus operandi of Harper Grey Easton and Company was to withhold evidence that would undermine the defense of their clients to instigate more litigation which would be directed to their law firm by CMPA by right of their monopoly on the defense of medical malpractice litigation of doctors insured by CMPA in British Columbia.  HGE and company was in the business of expanding litigation against doctors that they would get to enrich themselves from defending while dipping into the CMPA coffers. 

JDK

[Editors Note: When  John Carten and Derek met with a CBC reporter about this story and showed the CBC reporter the documents that proved the whole class action case against Dr. Kuntz was a massive fraud because the case was dismissed without ever dealing with the claims of 1400 patients that Dr. Kuntz was alleged to have harmed with experimental surgery the CBC reporter got scared and said the case was too big for her to report.]
[Editors Note: If the patients were really hurt by the surgery done by Dr. Kuntz they would not have dropped their lawsuit and the case would have proceeded to court and there would have been a huge award in damages. One of the frailties of human beings that scammers, deceivers, liars and dirty lawyers take advantage of is that the bigger the lie, the more readily people will believe it.]