 |
| 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
1st 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
1st 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. 2nd 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.]
