Canadian Injured Workers Society

SIGN THE PETITION!

TAKE ACTION
JOIN the CIWS

workers compensation Canadian Injured Workers Society for workers compensation reform

What's Wrong with Workers Compensation?

NEWS
Injured Workers' Stories
About Us
Current Activities
Past Activities
Commissions & Reports
Law Court Decisions
Related Articles
Medical Professionals
Employees' Info
Employers' Info
Politicians' Info
Resources
Privacy and Copyright
Contact
Home

SIGN THE PETITION!




Back to Article Index



April 2001

Dr. John David Kuntz - His Story:

As posted at http://british-columbia.ca.human-rights.org/DoctorKuntz.html

LONG DOCUMENT TO FOLLOW - INITIAL SUMMARY IN GREEN:

". . . collusion of the Workers Compensation Board (WCB), British Columbia Medical Association (BCMA), B.C. College of Physicians and Surgeons, Canadian Medical Protective Association (CMPA), Medical Services Commission (MSC) and B.C. Attorney General Department, all of whom joined to create and perpetuate the scientific fraud that state of the art spinal disc replacement surgery was "experimental" . . ."

" The WCB was cheating Napoli of his legitimate benefits as he deteriorated neurologically and abused its authority so as to cover up this known condition by delaying authorization for treatment while focusing their efforts on psychological testing of Napoli to justify terminating his legitimate claim for benefits."

"In 1981 Justice Bouck delivered his landmark judgment in Napoli v. WCB which ordered the opening of Napoli’s WCB file. File disclosure exposed known pathology of spinal stenosis being covered up by the WCB and they then settled the file and awarded Napoli his pension."

"The total amount of taxpayer funded money entering the CMPA coffers by 2001 was $1.37 billion. This phenomenal increase in the size of the CMPA unfunded liability coffers depended upon the WCB, College and BCMA perpetuating the "experimental surgery" myth over the subsequent years so as to ensure that this cash flow continued whereby taxpayers were now funding the medical malpractice premiums of B.C. and other Canadian doctors . . . The CMPA agenda was to obstruct justice by withholding the evidence . . ."

"WCB doctors plotted, planned and directed my suspension . . ."

"I was forced into bankruptcy after my October 25, 1988 erasure from the medical register."

"Mr. Ewachniuk was the third of my three consecutive lawyers who were getting close to exposing the truth when they were suspended to obstruct justice: Robert Gardner Q.C., Jack Cram and Mr. Ewachniuk were all suspended. In particular, my last lawyer Mr. A. Ted Ewachniuk worked on this for 15 years until his recent disbarment by the Law Society of B.C. "

"Furthermore, Mr. Ewachniuk filed case No. C932720 Vancouver Registry May 14, 1993, John David Kuntz v. WCB, College, BCMA, MSC, Dr. Stansfield, Dr. Bolton et al and Dr. D. Bolton, the former MSC Chairman was being defended by the Attorney-General Department. The informed person acting reasonably would conclude that since the Attorney-General Mr. Ujjal Dosanjh and his successor were Benchers of the Law Society of B.C. that the Benchers advantaged their own clients by disbarring my lawyer before the case went to trial."

"On December 4, 2000 I obtained . . . evidence that the AG Department’s client the former MSC Chairman Dr. D. Bolton had ordered the immediate shredding of all the key documents after the MSC was served notice of the litigation. "

"On September 5, 2000, the Ministry of the Attorney General wrote my lawyer Mr. A. Ted Ewachniuk stating "I am in the process of preparing an application for a Summary Judgment on behalf of my three clients, the Medical Services Commission of British Columbia, Dr. David M. Bolton and Dr. C.B. Henderson." Obviously it was advantageous to the AG Department, the Benchers and their clients to disbar my lawyer of 15 years Mr. A. Ted Ewachniuk forthwith and this was accomplished by December 29, 2000 just as the applications for Section 18 Summary Dismissal of the cases against their clients were proceeding through the courts leaving me without counsel to oppose their applications to dismiss before any cross-examination of their clients and without a trial on its merits. The benchers disbarred my lawyer to obstruct justice and deny me my day in court."

"The MSC had been supplying statistics to the BCMA Patterns of Practice Committee as a smokescreen to hide the WCB involvement in having me investigated in 1979 in advance of the Napoli v. WCB trial and the MSC statistics were used to support the false position that so much surgery in such a small town as Kitimat implied "unnecessary" surgery which I now know was support for the hidden WCB agenda that "unauthorized surgery" was "unnecessary surgery."

"The AG Department joined the BCMA and College in hiding the WCB role as an accuser. I was only advised on May 1, 1979 that I was being investigated for "rather vague complaints" which failed to identify the WCB. The AG Department assisted the cover-up."

"The AG Department has perpetuated criminal defamation to cover up scientific fraud used to justify a CMPA insurance fraud valued at over $1 billion. This has resulted in 5 years of annual taxpayer contributions totaling over $203 million in B.C. alone as negotiated by BCMA with the Health Ministry to cover doctor’s medical malpractice premiums contributing to rising physician’s office overheads. Taxpayers across Canada continue to fund the CMPA scientific fraud based on the myth of liability exposure for "experimental surgery" which was never "experimental" at all material times. The taxpayer funds were deposited in the CMPA "unfunded liability reserves" and were then used to fund frivolous litigation against doctors across Canada to the detriment of Medicare."

"It was during Mr. Dosanjh’s tenure as AG that the Law Society of B.C. obstructed justice by harassing my counsel . . ."

"I was then suspended without a hearing August 24, 1986"

" . . . despite the widespread community support and 8000 petitioners demanding a public enquiry into my suspension and erasure, the AG Department Director of Operations Mr. Ernest Quantz did nothing but cover up the wrongdoings"

"There were a lot of government regulated bodies working together to perpetuate a scientific fraud and deny patients state of the art surgery in British Columbia and a lot of lawyers profiting by robbing the insurance funds. Those collusive efforts required the assistance of the Attorney General Department and Law Society working together to obstruct justice . . ."

"It must be remembered that the WCB caused my bankruptcy."

"Mr. Ojjal (sic) Dosanjh was the Attorney General from 1995 to 2000 when his Department covered up for the shredding of the MSC evidence and denied me the benefits of the rule of law . . ."

"The citizens of British Columbia are entitled to know why all defendants have been denied me file disclosure and the Charter rights of cross-examination. The public is entitled to know why the CMPA insisted that litigation would continue against their client as a condition of my Discharge from Bankruptcy, why they required the "irrevocable control" of my defense and why every case against me for experimental surgery has been lost in Canada in contrast to the USA where there has never been a successful case for experimental surgery against a doctor using MMA disc replacement. The Law Society will have to answer why three consecutive lawyers were suspended while attempting to represent me beyond the control of the bencher Harvey Grey Q.C. and the CMPA. And finally, the AG must explain why I was denied the rights to a fair hearing by an impartial and independent bench and that excludes the former Deputy Attorney General. "

David Kuntz


FULL TEXT:

.Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2001 1:41 AM

Subject: Lack of separation between Crown and Court in B.C.

Attention: J.D. Peach.

Please find attached a copy of the 52 pages of events resulting in the AG department involvement(pages 34 to 52)in the shredding of evidence to obstruct justice.

Regards,

Dave Kuntz.
________________________________________________________________________

Attention: Darcy Fish.


This is the second e-mail and consists of 52 pages describing the background leading to the AG Department directing the shredding of evidence by the former MSC Chairman Dr. David Bolton where the AG Department acted as counsel of record for Dr. Bolton and provided the former Deputy AG Mr. E.R.A. Edwards Q.C. as a judge to dismiss the case without a hearing on the merits so as to save the government from scandal.

The government has been actively driving medical consultants out of B.C. as part of its cost-containment strategy to control the underfunded Medicare program. The government pretends to provide "universal" care but accomplishes this by denying patients state of the art procedures and treating them all equally badly. 

Pages 34-52 specifically refer to the role of the AG Department in obstructing justice to prevent this scandal from surfacing. The AG Department even provided the judge Mr. Justice Edwards to put the lid on the exposure of abuse of authority for other than its intended purpose in B.C. which is leading to destruction of Medicare.

Regards,

Dave Kuntz.
_________________________________________________________________________


March 17, 2001

John David, Kuntz,
5620 Montgomery Place
Acadia Park, U.B.C.,
Vancouver, British Columbia,
V6T 2C7, Canada,
Tel: (604) 221_9269
Fax: (604) 221_9268

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN

RE: THE MYTH OF INDEPENDENCE OF THE COURTS IN B.C.



I have been requested to outline the events resulting in the appearance of a former Deputy Attorney General sitting in conflict of interest as a B.C. Supreme Court Judge to hear a case wherein the Crown was adverse in interest and his former Department of the Attorney General was acting for the Defendants which shredded the evidence.

I am an orthopaedic surgeon who had the busiest spine surgery referral practice in British Columbia until victimized by an insurance fraud valued at $25 million annually in B.C. alone being funded by B.C. taxpayers and which affects taxpayers in other jurisdictions across Canada. The insurance fraud was initially estimated in the Press to have a valued of approximately $300 million and could never have succeeded without the joint collusion of the Workers Compensation Board (WCB), British Columbia Medical Association (BCMA), B.C. College of Physicians and Surgeons, Canadian Medical Protective Association (CMPA), Medical Services Commission (MSC) and B.C. Attorney General Department, all of whom joined to create and perpetuate the scientific fraud that state of the art spinal disc replacement surgery was "experimental" as an excuse to incite frivolous litigation culminating in a Class Action lawsuit initially estimated to be worth $200-300 million before being adjusted upward with successive judgments. The lawyers retained by my CMPA insurers were in conflict of interest in defending the WCB-funded litigation against me and accordingly failed to properly gather, prepare and present my evidence demonstrating that methyl methacrylate (MMA) disc replacement and spinal fusion was never "experimental" since 1955 but was already accepted as safe and advantageous for this purpose in humans and already in usage by advanced spinal surgeons internationally as well as in Canada.

The College scapegoated me causing public defamation because the then College Registrar Dr. J.A. Hutchison feared being enjoined as a co-defendant in the forthcoming Class Action. These very real concerns arose because the College participated in preparation and approval of the 1979 surgical consent forms used by Wrinch Memorial Hospital and Kitimat General Hospital. Those institutions described MMA (methyl methacrylate) disc replacement on their consent forms as a "new procedure" and not as an "experimental procedure" for obvious reasons: it was never "experimental" at all material times since 1955. The plastic material methyl methacrylate is the most commonly used implant material used in humans and is used for fusing spines, skull plates, hip and knee replacements et cetera. In fact the usage of MMA for disc replacement and fusing spines predates its usage in his and knee replacements.

I began doing this advanced spine surgery procedure in 1979 using MMA disc replacement a quarter century after it was considered safe for this usage in humans. Accordingly, it was never experimental at all material times and this usage was only new to B.C. but not to the rest of Canada or the world because MMA usage for replacement of vertebrae and adjacent discs had already been approved by the federal Food and Drug Administration without restrictions before I entered medical school. In fact by 1960 informed advanced spinal surgeons at Montreal Neurological Institute began a 20 year study of the benefits of MMA in replacing vertebral bodies and adjacent discs and fusing spines, their results published in 1980 supporting continued usage.

The case of "medical malpractice" trumped up against me by the WCB, CMPA, College, BCMA, MSC was that I failed to get "informed consent" by failing to advise patients they were undergoing what my outdated critics erroneously alleged to be "experimental surgery". These were official bodies and had a responsibility to remain current yet they fell a quarter of a century behind current advances in spinal surgery being practiced by informed spinal surgeons. These bodies were abusing committees for other than their intended purposes and supporting a scientific fraud by alleging MMA disc replacement was "experimental" in humans in 1981 which was two decades after this usage of MMA disc replacement was already accepted internationally by all informed spine surgeons. By 1960 the Montreal Neurological Institute were using it to replace vertebrae and adjacent discs in humans and in 1980 they published a 20 year follow-up study advocating the advantages of MMA in fusing spines. I only began using MMA disc replacement and fusion on June 29, 1979, a full quarter century after it was already accepted as safe and advantageous for this purpose for human usage in Canada and the rest of the world.

The Workers’ Compensation Board of British Columbia had a vested interest in perpetuating the scientific fraud of "experimental surgery" so as to remove competition. from surgeons working independently beyond the WCB control. My political problems with the WCB began in 1976 before I ever used MMA for disc replacement. At that time I annoyed the WCB by treating the injured WCB-disenfranchised Worker Vincenzo Napoli of Smithers without prior WCB authorization for payment for my services. The WCB had known for 8 years that Napoli had severe central spinal stenosis at multiple levels of the lumbar spine as diagnosed by another orthopaedic surgeon and recorded independently on the then closed WCB medical file system. The WCB was cheating Napoli of his legitimate benefits as he deteriorated neurologically and abused its authority so as to cover up this known condition by delaying authorization for treatment while focusing their efforts on psychological testing of Napoli to justify terminating his legitimate claim for benefits. Accordingly I performed "unauthorized" but necessary and successful decompressive laminectomy surgery and during recovery, Napoli sought and received my full support in his appeal of the WCB decision to terminate his claim. The WCB consultant Dr. Peter Kokan covered up the proven pathology of spinal stenosis and focused instead on denigrating Napoli’s character, describing him as poorly motivated man with emotional overlay and relied upon undisclosed psychological testing in downplaying the legitimacy of his claim. I assisted his counsel James Sayre leading to the Napoli’s lawyers legal demands to examine the psychological reports upon which Dr. Kokan relied on the WCB’s closed medical file system.

That led to the precedent setting Napoli v. WCB legal challenge regarding a Workers’ rights to see his file during appeals which threatened to open the then existing WCB closed file system across Canada. I was Napoli’s only expert medical witness whom the WCB identified as their "worst offender" on Napoli’s closed file for doing "unauthorized surgery" before launching an attack on my professional reputation to discredit the witness in advance of the trial. This plan to obstruct justice by having Napoli’s witness suspended by the College was not uncovered until fourteen years later in May 1991 when access was obtained to the Napoli WCB file. The suspension plan was then confirmed by memos written on the then closed Napoli file with the expectation that they would never be read. In particular, the WCB Executive Medical Director Dr. J.S. Gibbings targeted me for suspension to obstruct justice before the Napoli v. WCB trial in his January 7, 1977 Memo to Dr. Little who was the Chairman of the WCB wherein Dr. Gibbings stated: "He being the only orthopaedic surgeon in N.W.B.C. makes it hard to suspend him".

The WCB Chairman then positioned Dr. J.S. Gibbings on the BCMA/WCB Liaison Committee as a platform to launch his recorded suspension plans and with the assistance of Dr. H. Stansfield who was the BCMA representative to that Committee they abused the committee for other than its intended purpose because Dr. Gibbings had solicited British Columbia Medical Association support for continuation of the then existing WCB closed file system. Dr. Stansfield protected the identity of my WCB accusers who lodged hidden complaints implying that "unauthorized surgery" (for which the WCB refused authorization for payment beforehand) meant "unnecessary surgery" when all it really meant was that WCB was cheating the Worker and refusing to pay medical bills as required under the Workers’ Compensation Act. By now claiming that "unauthorized" surgery was "unnecessary", the WCB was now attacking the professional reputations of those prepared to work independently of the WCB influence either pro bono publico or under Medicare by caring for disenfranchised Workers abandoned by the WCB in dereliction of its mandated duties under the Act.

On March 12, 1979 a WCB/BCMA Liaison Committee meeting was held without my presence so as to deny me any opportunity to respond when the WCB lodged secret complaints then forwarded to the BCMA Patterns of Practice which convened March 15, 1979 "because the WCB is disturbed" to discuss me without my participation as recorded in their Minutes. Dr. H. Stansfield was Secretary of the Patterns of Practice Committee which recommended that my Patterns of Practice should be investigated because of the unsubstantiated and undisclosed WCB allegations of "unnecessary surgery", all of which was a smokescreen for the WCB’s hidden agenda of discrediting me as Napoli’s expert witness against the WCB in advance of the Napoli v. WCB trial which was still outstanding until 1981.

Because the WCB was funding Professor F.P. Patterson’s orthopaedic residency research program, Dr. Patterson assisted his economic benefactors by chairing the subsequent BCMA Patterns of Practice Committee meeting convened May 17, 1979. Dr. H. Stansfield (by denying me opportunity to respond to false hidden WCB allegations) and Dr. Patterson both behaved as de facto agents of the WCB which was greatly disturbed over the forthcoming Napoli v. WCB case threatening to open their then closed medical file system. At that May 17, 1979 meeting, the Minutes demonstrate that after I departed the meeting, Professor Patterson recommended my suspension and retraining in the absence of a single patient complaint and before review of a single file. They were abusing the Committee for other than its intended purpose to assist WCB to obstruct justice by discrediting Napoli’s only expert medical witness in advance of the landmark 1981 Napoli v. WCB trial.

The BCMA (B.C. Medical Association) never followed Dr. Patterson’s recommendations because there were no patient complaints and the Secretary of the BCMA Patterns of Practice Committee Dr. Stansfield hid the WCB involvement as well as Dr. Patterson’s bias and prejudice by failing to inform me of his recommendations for suspension and "retraining". I had graduated from Patterson’s own training program in 1970 passing my examinations on my first attempt and by 1979 I was receiving over 51% of all referred cervical spine surgery in the Province of B.C. There was not one single patient or referring doctor complaint when Patterson made these recommendations for "retraining" without bothering to examine one single office file, hospital file, x-ray, or interview a single patient.

The College also supported continuation of the then existing WCB closed medical file system and accordingly the College Registrar Dr. J.A. Hutchison was a participant at the March 15, 1979 BCMA Patterns of Practice Committee convened "because the WCB is disturbed." Both the College and BCMA were now using committees for other than their intended purpose under the legislation and abusing authority to appease and support WCB attempts to maintain the status quo of the then existing WCB closed file system then threatened by Napoli v.WCB. The WCB Executive Medical Director Dr. J.S. Gibbings published in the May 1979 B.C. Medical Journal that he had polled the executive of BCMA, College and WCB and all supported continuance of the then existing WCB closed file system; he didn’t bother to poll practicing physicians. This was the same Dr. Gibbings who had already recorded his plans to suspend me on the then closed Napoli WCB medical file and then lodged undisclosed complaints through the WCB/BCMA Liaison Committee which became the excuse to have me investigated, suspended without a hearing and erased..

In 1981 Justice Bouck delivered his landmark judgment in Napoli v. WCB which ordered the opening of Napoli’s WCB file. File disclosure exposed known pathology of spinal stenosis being covered up by the WCB and they then settled the file and awarded Napoli his pension.

However because this was the first time the Court of Appeal had ordered WCB files opened in Canada, it was a major setback to the modus operandi of the monopolistic WCB. They appealed and retained the Law Society bencher Harvey Grey Q.C., a Harper, Grey, Easton and Company lawyer with considerable influence in the legal profession to argue their case. On July 7, 1981, the B.C. Court of Appeal upheld the Bouck judgment opening WCB files across Canada.

On that same day, July 7, 1981, after two years of inactivity on Patterson’s recommendations for "retraining", the BCMA’s Director of Professional Relations Dr. Hugh Stansfield summarized my BCMA Patterns of Practice profile and referred my file to the College Registrar Dr. Hutchison. The July 26, 1979 BCMA Minutes record that Dr. Hutchison had already attempted helping the WCB by soliciting a complaint against me in advance of Napoli v. WCB so that he could "take action". The reason the BCMA involved the College in assisting the WCB in 1979 was because the BCMA did not have the power to suspend a doctor - only the College had those powers. These official bodies were all abusing committees for other than their intended purpose with the common goal of discrediting Napoli’s only expert medical witness in advance of Napoli v. WCB to assist the WCB to keep their file system closed and unavailable to Workers and their counsel for cross-examination during appeals of WCB decisions.

After the Bouck judgment, the BCMA forwarded my file to the College which then attempted to appease the WCB for the adverse outcome of Napoli v. WCB. These official bodies now perceived me as the sole physician responsible for undermining their united support for the WCB closed file system because I was Napoli’s orthopaedic surgeon, performed "unauthorized surgery" by helping Napoli despite WCB withholding prior authorization for payment so as to obstruct his access to treatment and then supported Napoli during his appeal. I was perceived as responsible for the outcome of Napoli v. WCB which resulted in the opening of the then closed WCB medical file system in Canada contrary to the expressed and published wishes of WCB, BCMA and College before the trial.

The WCB sent out a notice to the medical profession in 1981 expressing their apologies and concerns because now there was nothing they could do to prevent the judgment of Bouck from being applied retroactively to existing WCB files. That meant derogatory remarks would now be open to review during appeals despite physicians having made them on the then closed file system with the expectation that nobody outside of the WCB in-house staff would ever review them. Their derisive comments often minimized the Workers’ problems to facilitate claim termination and now lawyers representing injured Workers could review their WCB files before proceeding to the WCB Boards of Review. The Bouck judgment also meant that the credentials of anonymous unnamed WCB consultants could now be challenged whereas in the past the closed file system allowed WCB the freedom to employ retired general surgeons, obstetricians and general practitioners to give opinions behind closed doors overruling the opinions of practicing orthopaedic surgeons all of which facilitated premature termination of legitimate claims.

In 1981, the College Registrar Dr. Hutchison appeased the WCB for the adverse outcome of Napoli v. WCB which opened their file system to disclosure. The BCMA forwarded my file to the Registrar who re-appointed the WCB-friendly Professor to chair a College Section 50 Investigation of myself under the "infamous conduct" section of the Medical Practitioners’ Act. Dr. Hutchison knew Professor Patterson had already been involved in 1979 and had already been involved in attempting to help the WCB before the Napoli trial when Patterson recommended my suspension and retraining. The College never did disclose the WCB as the source of the allegations of "infamous conduct" and withheld the paper trail disclosing that the College was a participant on March 15, 1979 when the BCMA Patterns of Practice convened because "the WCB was disturbed" over unauthorized surgery on disenfranchised Workers such as Vincenzo Napoli which culminated in Napoli v. WCB and the opening of WCB files in Canada.

The College Registrar Dr. Hutchison knew the Section 50 investigation committee he commissioned was illegal because the Medical Practitioners’ Act required three investigators all of whom were members or past members of Council whereas the two man committee of Dr. Patterson and Dr. A.S. McConkey did not constitute a quorum and neither were members or past members of Council. Furthermore, the Registrar knew Dr. Patterson was biased and prejudiced as he had already taken a position to have me "retrained" in 1979 and ought not to have participated further. Dr. A.S. McConkey was also in conflict because he performed 1974 wrong-level wrong-sided surgery on WCB Claimant Tina Boonstra for which performed "unauthorized surgery" to correct in 1977 after WCB withheld prior authorization by WCB for payment for services rendered. That "unauthorized surgery" resulted in improvement and Boonstra then successfully appealed to the WCB Boards of Review where the errors of McConkey were uncovered and reported in the 1978 WCB Reporter article titled WCB Decision No. 276 re Payment for Unauthorized Surgery (referring to the unauthorized surgery I performed on Tina Boonstra) wherein the Review Board ordered the WCB to accept payment for her claim. Accordingly the embarrassed Dr. A.S. McConkey could never be considered impartial and independent in 1981 when the Registrar Dr. Hutchison assisted the WCB by having the prejudiced Dr. McConkey appointed to the invalid two man College Section 50 Committee to investigate me for "unauthorized surgery" to correct McConkey’s errors which WCB was covering up with psychological testing in lieu of authorizing the appropriate salvage surgery I performed without their prior authorization after it was obvious it was not forthcoming.

On November 19, 1981, Dr. Patterson’s Section 50 Report erroneously identified MMA disc replacement as "experimental" in humans a quarter century after it was declared safe in humans. He recommended doing animal studies which was like reinventing the wheel: they had already been done a quarter century earlier. Since I trained under Professor F.P. Patterson, I knew he was out of touch with recent advances in spine surgery when his report recommended that the College impose a moratorium on MMA disc replacement in 1981. Informed spine surgeons knew this advanced spine surgery technique was not "experimental" in humans since 1955 and that the Montreal Neurological Institute had been using MMA for fusing spines since 1960 in a long term study already published in 1980, In fact, by 1981 even the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeon papers advocated that MMA was safe and advantageous for fusing human spines. In 1982 the American Academy of Neurological and Orthopaedic Surgeons was advocating its usage and by 1987 the International College of Surgeons gave a seminar in Washington D.C. for advanced spinal surgeons advocated the usage of MMA for cervical disc replacement and fusion. All of this international usage was reported in the authoritative medical literature and was known to all informed spinal surgeons prior in time to the WCB-funded June 1987 Coughlin v. Kuntz litigation wherein Justice B. Cohen accepted the tainted testimony of Dr. Patterson supporting the scientific fraud that MMA usage for disc replacement in humans was "experimental" and awarded exemplary damages against me; I was the first Canadian doctor ever to have "exemplary" damages awarded against him after the WCB-funded consultants fraudulently described state of the art surgery as "experimenting" on human beings.

The WCB consultant Dr. J. Noble appeared at Coughlin v. Kuntz and supported Dr. Patterson’s scientific fraud that I was "experimenting on human beings" at that June 1987 trial stating that he searched the authoritative medical literature and found no evidence whatsoever of prior MMA usage for disc replacement in humans. My evidence demonstrating otherwise was never presented by my CMPA-retained WCB-friendly Harper Grey Easton and Company lawyers Harvey Grey Q.C., Mark Skorah and Barbara Norell because of their hidden agenda to assist and appease the WCB.. Mr. Grey Q.C. was in conflict of interest because he was counsel for the WCB in their failed July 7, 1981 appeal of the Bouck judgment in Napoli v. WCB. The evidence demonstrated that Dr. Peter Van Peteghem injured Coughlin at surgery on his shoulder, then advised Coughlin to sue me for "unnecessary surgery" and "experimental surgery". My lawyers refused my instructions to enjoin Dr. Van Peteghem as a co-defendant and I have since learned that my lawyer Harvey Grey Q.C. hid his conflict in that he was contemporaneously acting for Dr. Van Peteghem in Knudsen v. Van Peteghem; he was scapegoating me for Dr. Van Peteghem and failed to disclose that Van Peteghem who was adverse in interest was also his client.

The WCB made a concerted effort to undermine the 1987 trial of Coughlin v. Kuntz by positioning Professor Patterson’s 20 year shared office associate and successor Professor McGraw on the WCB-directed College Section 48 Investigation Committee which discussed the Coughlin case July 8, 1986, then authored a biased July 31, 1986 Investigation Report, and circulated it widely in contempt of the Medical Practitioners’ Act and Section 57 (5) and (6) of the Evidence Act to obstruct justice. The College Council relied upon that biased Report to suspend me without a hearing August 24, 1986 before the 1987 Coughlin v. Kuntz trial.

The WCB made an application before Justice Cohen in May 1987 before the main Coughlin v. Kuntz trial began, the application being to cross-examine Dr. Patterson’s 20 year office associate Dr. McGraw on the College July 31, 1986 Investigation Report he had prepared. McGraw’s report echoed and adopted the 1981 Patterson Report without correcting the fraudulent "experimental surgery" myth. McGraw’s report was relied upon by the College Council to suspend me without a hearing before Justice Cohen sat in judgment of the Coughlin v. Kuntz trial after reading McGraw’s Report echoing Dr. Patterson’s Report. That untested July 31, 1986 Investigation Report was already sealed and ought not to have been circulated by the lawyers for the WCB before Justice Cohen and they did so to prejudice the judge before Cohen sat in judgment of the WCB-funded Coughlin v. Kuntz case. That Report defamed me and both the College and the Courts (Justice Legg of the B.C. Supreme Court and Justices Seaton, Anderson and McLachlin who upheld the Legg judgment in the B.C. Court of Appeal) denied me cross-examination of its authors. Justice Cohen also denied cross-examination of the principal author Dr. R.W. McGraw. All the judges were so biased after the College and WCB duped them into wrongfully reading the untested sealed Report that they denied me section 7 Charter rights to cross-examine my accusers, the Report’s authors Drs. R.W. McGraw, P. Kokan and M. Tile.

Because the College was wrongly circulating the July 31, 1986 Investigation Report in violation of the Medical Practitioners’ Act and the Evidence Act, I retained independent counsel from another law firm beyond the CMPA influence and applied to have the July 31, 1986 Investigation Report sealed. In retrospect, the College had a hidden agenda to defame me in advance of Class Action litigation which they anticipated since 1983 wherein their internal memos indicate the College feared being named as a co-defendant. Accordingly they made a pre-emptive strike against my professional reputation when they abused their authority by acting ultra vires the Medical Practitioners’ Act in 1983 by imposing a wrongful moratorium on MMA disc replacement surgery. Because the College was abusing its committees for other than their intended purpose under the legislation they had to guarantee the members of the investigation committee who authored the scathing untruthful Report that they would enjoy protection from cross-examination. They were hiding behind the presumption of regularity usually associated with quasi-judicial bodies but in reality were abusing authority with the purpose of defaming me and distancing themselves before the Class Action knowing I posed a threat in the forthcoming litigation as an expert witness adverse in interest to the College. The College did not want to stop the illegal circulation of the Report because it was specifically commissioned not for its purported purpose of determining whether I had sufficient skill and knowledge to practice medicine in the absence of a single patient complaint but rather to defame the expert witness against the College in advance of forthcoming Class Action litigation. The College was unsuccessful in opposing my application on January 21, 1987 when Justice Huddart sealed and banned the distribution of the Report. The College unsuccessfully appealed and on June 16, 1987 Justice Lambert of the B.C. Court of Appeal upheld the seal and distribution ban. But that didn’t stop the quasi-judicial College from continuing to circulate the Section 48 Investigation Report in contempt of Court because they had commissioned it for other than its intended purpose under the Medical Practitioners’ Act, namely to defame me as a witness and thereby undermine my position against them in future litigation in which both the College and myself were named as co-defendants adverse in interest.

Despite the above, the WCB acted in contempt of court and placed the untested and judicially sealed July 31, 1986 Investigation Report before Justice Cohen in a May 1987 application to cross-examine Dr. McGraw on the Report at the beginning of the WCB-funded Coughlin v. Kuntz trial for "experimental surgery" wherein the WCB falsely alleged that MMA disc replacement was "experimental" in humans. Justice Cohen wrongfully read and considered the judicially sealed report commissioned by the College and prepared by a WCB-directed Investigation Committee of Drs. McGraw, Kokan and Tile to assist WCB defame me before the trial. As a result of improper consideration of the uncross-examined and untested sealed Report, the newly ordained judge Mr. Justice Bruce Cohen was himself unduly biased and prejudiced when he ruled in May 1987 that Dr. McGraw should be spared from cross-examination. Mr. Bruce Cohen had just been appointed to the bench a month or two earlier and was easily duped by the WCB tactic which served its intended purpose of putting the sealed Report under the judge’s nose to prejudice him just before the main trial began. Mr. Cohen then sat in judgment of the May-June 1987 WCB-funded Coughlin v. Kuntz trial where the WCB provided all the witnesses.

The WCB was even positioned to adversely influence my own Harper Grey Easton and Company lawyers who refused to take instructions from myself despite being identified as my counsel of record.. Although HGE and Company held the contract from the Canadian Medical Protective Association and were assigned by CMPA to defend me, the HGE and Company lawyers took instructions from everybody else but myself. In particular the former College Registrar Dr. J.A. Hutchison (who imposed the moratorium on MMA disc replacement under CMPA advisement during his tenure as Registrar so as to limit the size of the anticipated Class Action against me for "experimental surgery") positioned himself as a CMPA Council member in 1984 and was able to secretly control the lawyers retained by CMPA to handle my defense when the Coughlin Writ was served. Furthermore, the WCB were also positioned to secretly influence my CMPA-selected Harper Grey Easton and Company defense lawyers. The senior counsel at Harper Grey Easton and Company was the WCB-friendly bencher Harvey Grey Q.C. who acted as counsel for the WCB at their failed July 7, 1981 appeal of the Bouck judgment in Napoli v. WCB. Accordingly Mr. Grey and his law firm were in conflict of interest in defending me against any WCB-funded litigation and in particular the Coughlin v. Kuntz litigation where WCB took a subrogated interest in the settlement awarded by Justice Bruce Cohen. The Cohen judgment awarding "exemplary damages" or punitive damages against me for performing what the WCB witnesses falsely alleged to be "experimental surgery" became the legal precedent used in all subsequent WCB-funded litigation that followed.

The myth of "experimental surgery" began with Dr. Patterson’s invalid Section 50 Committee Report commissioned by the College after the Court of Appeal upheld the Bouck judgment in Napoli v. WCB. That prejudiced November 19, 1981 opinion of Professor Patterson spawning the experimental surgery fraud not only exposed me to litigation but also jointly exposed the College, Kitimat General Hospital and Wrinch Memorial Hospital to litigation because they all collaborated and participated on the approval of the 1979 surgical consent forms used thereafter by all the Hospitals where this new procedure was practiced.

In 1979 I first introduced the advanced spine surgery procedure of MMA disc replacement and fusion to British Columbia and it was not until after receiving the tainted November 19, 1981 Patterson Section 50 report that the College became concerned over their own legal exposure. The College concern was that despite their improvement after surgery, according to Dr. Patterson the patients had been subjected to "experimental surgery" without their "informed consent." The WCB was planning litigation and contacting satisfied Workers after disc replacement surgery to solicit, encourage and demand that they join a Class Action litigation being funded by the WCB against me for performing "experimental surgery" and WCB was advising patients that they had to sue within limitation periods or risk having their future WCB claims rejected in the event that they developed problems in the future.

Furthermore, because in 1979 the College and Hospitals had approved surgical consent forms which stated only that MMA disc replacement was a "new procedure" and not an "experimental" procedure as alleged November 19, 1981 by Professor Patterson in the College-commissioned Section 50 Report, the College now feared that it was equally exposed to being enjoined as a named defendant in WCB-funded Class Action anticipated as early as 1983 as identified in the Minutes of the College Council and described as "liability concerns" which were their reasons for imposing a moratorium on MMA disc replacement ultra vires the Medical Practitioners’ Act..

Unfortunately College Registrar Dr. Hutchison had fallen into the WCB trap when he attempted appeasing them in 1981 for the adverse outcome of Napoli v. WCB. Dr. Hutchison appointed the tainted Dr. Patterson to conduct the 1981 College Section 50 investigation and when Dr. Patterson then declared my surgery "experimental" he exposed the College and Hospitals to litigation for allowing me to perform the alleged "experimental surgery" in their institutions from 1979 onwards. Simply put, if I was being accused of failing to obtain "informed consent" before performing what their biased Section 50 Investigator Dr. Patterson called "experimental surgery," then the College and Hospitals which approved and prepared the consent forms were equally liable for failing to obtain such "informed consent."

The entire case against me was built upon a false presumption of regularity. It was presumed that Dr. F.P. Patterson as Professor of Orthopaedic Surgery for the University of British Columbia would be telling the truth in 1979, in 1981 and at the 1987 Coughlin v. Kuntz trial when in fact he was acting under a hidden agenda to appease his WCB economic benefactors. The reality was that Dr. Patterson was receiving WCB grants for his residency research program and at all material times acted as a de facto agent of the WCB so as to obstruct justice before the Napoli v. WCB trial and then at the 1987 WCB-funded Coughlin v. Kuntz trial where he committed perjury and denied having previously recommended my "retraining" in 1979 so as to hide his bias and prejudice before Justice Cohen.

On January 22, 1982 I appeared before the College Council to respond to Dr. Patterson’s false allegations that MMA disc replacement was "experimental surgery". I then advised Council that Dr. Patterson was out of date because MMA usage for disc replacement was no longer "experimental" and the Council recorded that correct position in their January 22, 1982 Minutes. The College Council responded positively when correctly informed about this advance in spine surgery and requested my assistance in educating the BCMA Sections of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Orthopaedic Surgery "as soon as possible" about the advantages of MMA usage in disc replacement and the Registrar stated in correspondence that my contentions if correct were a most valuable piece of information which should be disseminated as soon as possible. The College Minutes and correspondence confirmed that it would arrange a time and place for my presentation "as soon as possible" and then made the fatal error of delegating the task of making the arrangements to the biased Professor Paterson who was secretly planning WCB-funded litigation against me for "experimental surgery" where he would appear as their expert medical witness supporting the experimental surgery fraud.

The College Registrar Dr. J.A. Hutchison was operating on a hidden agenda to appease the WCB for the adverse outcome of Napoli v.WCB and accordingly delegated the task to the WCB-friendly Dr. F.P. Patterson whose own hidden agenda was to assist WCB to retaliate for Napoli by spawning, supporting, and assisting WCB-funded litigation for "experimental surgery" wherein Professor Patterson would appear as the WCB’s expert medical witness supported by the presumption of regularity and authority associated with his position as Professor of Orthopaedics.

In fact the hand-written notes of my CMPA-retained WCB-friendly counsel Mr. Harvey Grey Q.C. were later retrieved from the Coughlin v. Kuntz Appeal Books where Mr. Grey inadvertently left his notes inside the transcripts of Dr. Patterson’s testimony. Mr. Grey’s notes demonstrate his own bias dating back to when he was counsel for the WCB’s 1981 appeal of Napoli v. WCB and working with the WCB-friendly doctors planning my suspension because Mr. Grey’s own hand-written notes recorded Dr. Patterson’s "motivational point of view" (which Mr. Grey certainly didn’t learn from me) as follows:


"Patterson:

1. old, outdated, opposed to new or novel theories. Unaware of the literature regarding the use of acrylic. Wrong re "hard foreign substance" theory.

2. Kuntz was a former pupil who "left the fold". (A superb technical surgeon.) As a wayward or errant son, Kuntz is not only to be corrected, he is to be crushed, (this is Patterson's motivational pt. of view).

3. originally had no objections to K's procedures (1981 - Patterns of Practice Cttee review)...."



Accordingly from 1982 onward the College Registrar Dr. Hutchison asked Dr. Patterson in correspondence to arrange a time and place for my presentation "as soon as possible" but the influential Professor Patterson blocked it, his goal being to prevent any dissemination of my information from the authoritative medical literature demonstrating MMA disc replacement was never experimental since 1955. Dr. Patterson did not want me educating other B.C. doctors about this advance in spine surgery because informing them would jeopardize the false case of WCB-funded litigation he had instigated against me for performing "experimental surgery" to appease WCB for the outcome of Napoli v. WCB opening their file system to disclosure. Dr. Patterson knew the litigation would fail if the rest of the uninformed doctors were brought up to date. Dr. Patterson knew the WCB was already attempting to exploit his scientific fraud in the WCB-funded Coughlin v. Kuntz case where he would eventually surface as their expert medical witness supporting his own prior false position that MMA usage for disc replacement was "experimental surgery".

In 1982 the Registrar Dr. Hutchison circulated Dr. Patterson’s false November 19, 1981 Section 50 report to the Chairman of the BCMA Section of Orthopaedic Surgery Dr. David Harder. This circulation was in violation of the Evidence Act Section 57 (5) and (6) and was done to create bias and prejudice amongst the BCMA Section of Orthopaedics who were then influenced by Professor Patterson’s fraudulent position that MMA disc replacement was "experimental".

In 1983 when the College Registrar Dr. J.A. Hutchison knew their own adviser Dr. Patterson was blocking the presentation that would bring other B.C. doctors up to date on the subject, the College grew progressively nervous about its own legal exposure and the possibility of being named as a defendant in forthcoming WCB-funded Coughlin v. Kuntz litigation. The WCB proposed suing me for what the College Section 50 investigator Dr. Patterson falsely alleged to be "experimental surgery" and the College knew it had failed in 1981 to impose the moratorium Patterson had recommended. In fact it waited until 1983 and when it realized Professor Patterson would never allow my presentation to educate other doctors about MMA usage for disc replacement, the College became concerned about its own liability for failing to get "informed consent" because the consent forms it approved never mentioned "experimental surgery". The College feared WCB could expand its litigation to include the College for allowing the alleged "experimental surgery" to continue after Dr. Patterson’s November 19, 1981 recommendation that the procedure be stopped. The allegation the College faced was that it had ignored Patterson’s recommendations and thereby exposed Workers to "experimental surgery" for another 2 years until 1983. The 1983-1984 Minutes of the College Council document the Council’s own "liability concerns" about being enjoined in forthcoming WCB-funded litigation.

The CMPA was advising the College in 1983 to impose the moratorium. The CMPA or Canadian Medical Protective Association insured over 50,000 doctors in Canada against medical malpractice including the College Council. It was the College’s 1983 "liability concerns" about being included as a co-defendant in proposed WCB-funded litigation for "experimental surgery" that led to the College imposing the moratorium ultra vires the Medical Practitioners’ Act. The College was now denying the public state all access to state of the art spinal surgery because of the "experimental surgery" scientific fraud being now perpetuated by both WCB and College.

By December 1982 the WCB was instigating the WCB-funded Coughlin v. Kuntz litigation against me and Professor Patterson eventually surfaced to earn retirement income appearing repeatedly as the WCB’s expert medical witness stating MMA usage for disc replacement was "experimental surgery". I was being defended by the WCB’s old lawyer Harvey Grey Q.C. who refused to expose Dr. Patterson and present my evidence from the authoritative medical literature that demonstrated otherwise that MMA disc replacement was never considered "experimental" in humans after 1955.

It was the threat of the Coughlin v. Kuntz litigation that triggered the February 9, 1983 activity of the College Registrar Dr. J.A. Hutchison to write the Hospitals to impose a litigation. The College was concerned that the WCB-funded litigation would expand to include both the College and the Hospitals which worked together to prepare and approve the consent forms. Although the litigation was being directed principally at me for failing to obtain informed consent" from patients undergoing what the WCB falsely alleged to be "experimental surgery", the College feared that both themselves and the Hospitals were also vulnerable to the same charge because they jointly prepared and approved the consent forms signed by all the patients before undergoing the alleged "experimental surgery". The case against me was that those forms never mentioned the word "experimental". My defense was simple: all the Harper Grey Easton and Company lawyers had to do was gather and present the evidence that MMA usage for disc replacement was at all material times since 1955 never "experimental". My lawyers didn’t do that because they were acting as de facto agents of the WCB, assisting the College to distance itself from the litigation by scapegoating me for the College adviser Dr. Patterson’s errors in calling MMA disc replacement "experimental" and generally acting to deceive and undermine the defense of their own client. My lawyers were selling me to the highest bidder: the Canadian Medical Protective Association which was directing my lawyers. The former College Registrar Dr. Hutchison was by now positioned as the BCMA adviser to the CMPA. In 1984 he became a member of the CMPA Council which was planning to profit by perpetuating the myth he helped to perpetuate during his tenure as College Registrar; the CMPA plan was to raise insurance premiums and bolster their unfunded liability coffers to cover future legal exposure for "experimental surgery".

On February 9, 1983 the College Registrar Dr. Hutchison wrote the Kitimat General and Wrinch Memorial Hospitals recommending a moratorium on MMA usage for disc replacement. It was improper for the College to abuse its authority to deny the public access to advanced surgical procedures because of its own liability concerns. The moratorium was an abuse of authority and ultra vires the Medical Practitioners’ Act.

On February 9, 1983 the College Registrar Dr. J.A. Hutchison acted without any authority under the Medical Practitioners’ Act to appoint a Committee of Dr. David Harder (Chairman of BCMA Section of Orthopaedics), Dr. Barry Purves (Chairman of BCMA Section of Neurosurgery) and Dr. Tessler (Chairman of BCMA Section of Neurology). The already biased Dr. Harder did not follow the Council’s mandate to arrange a time and place for my presentation to the BCMA Sections of Orthopaedics, Neurology and Neurosurgery "as soon as possible" to inform and educate the members of those sections about advanced spine surgery techniques; he was under the influence of Dr. Patterson and turned it around into a peer review of myself which was not what they were asked to do. But even worse, Drs. Harder, Purves and Tessler never even bothered to meet with me and solicit my input before preparing their uninformed March 23, 1983 report echoing Dr. Patterson’s errors without reviewing the authoritative medical literature as required to learn Dr. Patterson was a quarter century out of date. They merely echoed and adopted the fraudulent November 19, 1981 Patterson report as the basis of their own uninformed March 23, 1983 Harder Purves Tessler report which simply echoed Patterson’s scientific fraud alleging that MMA disc replacement was "experimental".

In 1983 there was a public outcry from 23 patients awaiting surgery and the College responded by rescinding its moratorium on MMA disc replacement surgery until after the completion of all the remaining cases on the then existing waiting list. After the remaining 23 patients were completed, the College received the March 23, 1983 Harder Purves Tessler report echoing the Patterson report and relied upon it as an excuse to distance Dr. Patterson and reimpose the moratorium. The new waiting list of over 120 patients which then formed began to intensively lobby the College for reinstatement of the state of the art MMA disc replacement procedure to which they were being denied access. Because there was not one single patient complaint, the College at first advised the dissident patients that the College had to impose the moratorium because of "liability concerns." When the patients stated there was no complaints and no litigation filed against me, the Registrar Dr. Hutchison and Deputy Registrar Dr. C.R. Arnold had to manufacture new reasons to justify the illegal moratorium and began giving false advice to patients that MMA disc replacement was "experimental surgery".

In 1983 the College expressed "liability concerns" as recorded in the 1983-1984 Minutes of the College Council, fearing that the College would be enjoined in a $300 million medical malpractice litigation being planned and funded by WCB which was actively soliciting litigants against me. The CMPA exploited those fears in 1983 to coerce the College into enforcing an illegal moratorium ultra vires the Medical Practitioners’ Act so as to limit the size of the Class that would sue the College in the anticipated WCB-funded Class Action.

The fear was that the Class Action would bankrupt the CMPA, College and Hospitals for allowing"experimental" MMA disc replacement surgery without obtaining "informed consent" from patients who were never told it was "experimental". The fear was that all of the above would be named as Defendants in the anticipated WCB-funded litigation. The economic stakes were so enormous that the College and CMPA worked in collusion to transfer of Dr. J.A. Hutchison from the College staff to the CMPA staff where he surfaced in 1984 as a CMPA Council member to direct and undermine my future defense while distancing the College from the anticipated litigation for "experimental surgery"; Dr. Hutchison was to make me the College scapegoat being sued for $300 million in litigation caused by the College by disseminating the scientific fraud of "experimental surgery" while keeping it secret that the College was also a named Defendant..

That same year in 1984 the CMPA changed its policy from "pay-as-you-go" to "collect-in-advance" so as to profit from Dr. Hutchison’s dissemination of Dr. Patterson’s scientific fraud of "experimental surgery" which the CMPA adviser Hutchison knew was not "experimental" as recorded in the January 22, 1982 Minutes of the College Council meeting he chaired and as verified in the authoritative medical literature published since 1955 which was available in the College’s own library if they would only review the published papers on the subject.

In 1985 the CMPA raised the medical malpractice premiums across Canada to over 50,000 doctors to cover an anticipated $300 million unfunded liability exposure for the falsely alleged "experimental surgery". The CMPA then bolstered its "unfunded liability reserves" from $88 million in 1986 to $1.18 billion in 1996 and over $1.4 billion by the year 2000. This enormous increase depended on maintaining Dr. Patterson’s scientific fraud of CMPA liability exposure for 1900 patients that the WCB counsel Mr. Powers and his associate Mr. Tommy Griffiths claimed were exposed to "experimental" MMA disc replacement despite there being only 300 patients who had undergone MMA disc replacement, none of which were "experimental". The CMPA knew very well that I had only performed MMA disc replacement on 300 patients with a 98% success rate and not one single patient had complained until the WCB contacted my patients and threatened them with discontinuance of future benefits unless they agreed to sue me now before expiration of the limitations period despite their clients having been helped by the surgery and returned to the workforce. The CMPA remained silent and did nothing to correct the false information about the existence of 1900 patients suing me for disc replacement because they were profiting by perpetuating the fraud as an excuse to raise insurance premiums across Canada so as to cover unfunded liability exposure for an alleged 1900 cases of "experimental surgery".

In 1984 the WCB filed the Coughlin v. Kuntz writ suing me for "experimental surgery" and in 1985 the WCB set out to ensure the success of the litigation by having Dr. Patterson’s 20 year shared office associate Dr. R.W. McGraw appointed as Chairman of a College Section 48 Investigation Committee appointed under the Medical Practitioners Act. Then on January 29, 1985, Dr. F.P. Patterson was referred two WCB cases George Bavle and Cecil Coughlin wherein he supported WCB-funded litigation against me for "experimental surgery".

Contemporaneously, the documentary trail demonstrates that the WCB was directing and influencing the Investigation Committee chaired by Dr. Patterson’s 20 year shared office associate and successor as Professor of Orthopaedics Dr. R.W. McGraw. The WCB Executive Medical Director Dr. A.D. McDougall was providing Dr. McGraw with specific WCB files that were never shared with myself so as to deny me all opportunity to respond and rebut with evidence from office and hospital files supported by both the patients and referring doctors.

The WCB agenda was to obstruct justice by adversely influencing the Investigation Committee to have the College suspend me without a hearing in 1986 for "insufficient skill and knowledge to practice medicine" in advance of the 1987 WCB-funded Coughlin v. Kuntz trial so as to discredit me as a credible expert medical witness in my own defense where the WCB-friendly lawyers at Harper Grey Easton and Company failed to call a single witness in my defense. The WCB had positioned Dr. Patterson as their own principal expert medical witness against me and he was in turn supported by WCB consultant Dr. J. Noble who also falsely stated that there was no evidence of prior MMA usage for disc replacement in the authoritative medical literature and that the WCB librarians had done a search finding no references supporting this usage. Accordingly Dr. McGraw’s Investigation Committee recommended my suspension and the College relied upon the defamatory untested Report authored by Dr. McGraw to perpetuate Patterson’s scientific fraud that MMA disc replacement was "experimental" and suspend me without a hearing before the trail. The College undermined its statutory authority to administer the Medical Practitioners’ Act by abusing its Committees for other than their intended purpose under the legislation and assisting WCB-funded litigation against me.

In 1986 Dr. Finlayson, Director of Professional Relations for the BCMA invited me to accept an appointment to sit as a member of the three man WCB Boards of Review Panels that heard Workers’ appeals but I refused to participate, citing I would rather help than hinder the Disenfranchised Workers. At that time I advised the B.C. Minister of Labor Mr. Segarty that during the appeal process the WCB was in economic conflict of interest and adverse in interest to the WCB-Disenfranchised Workers and ought not to be in control of the care of Disenfranchised Workers during the appeal process.

I went further by proposing changes to the Workers Compensation Act that would allow neutral third parties to independently manage the Disenfranchised Workers’s care whenever the WCB failed to solve their medical problems which precipitated the appeal. The WCB Executive Medical Director Dr. A.D. McDougall was angered at my attempts to change the WCB appeal process for Workers and responded by chastising me for doing "unauthorized" surgery for Ben Sakawsky after the WCB failed to respond to requests for authorization in a timely manner.

In 1985 the College and the WCB could no longer use the biased Professor Patterson for the third time and so they appointed another biased investigator to take his place. They selected Professor McGraw to conduct another biased investigation knowing McGraw could never have been considered independent and impartial or at arm’s length from his mentor Professor Patterson after sharing office for 20 years. Dr. McGraw ought never to accepted the position as Chairman of the Investigation Committee commissioned under Section 48 of the Medical Practitioners’ Act and the College ought never to have appointed him knowing of his close relationship to Patterson. Dr. McGraw was little more than an echo of Dr. Patterson and the WCB.

In 1986 the WCB Executive Medical Director Dr. A.D. McDougall began secretly sending undisclosed WCB files to the WCB-directed College Investigation Committee. The Chairman Dr. R.W. McGraw never shared them with myself so as to deny opportunity for rebuttal and even knowingly perverted the successful outcomes of surgery on disenfranchised Workers such as Teodoro Ruiz and Ron Williamson when the files in Dr. McGraw’s possession on patients such as Mr. Ruiz clearly demonstrated otherwise: that the surgery was effective for its intended purpose, relieve pain and disability, and restored the Workers to their previous occupation. The subsequent affidavits of WCB Claimants Ron Williamson and Teodoro Ruiz confirm that their "unauthorized" surgery was successful in relieving symptoms and restoring them to the workforce after the WCB failed to solve their problems. This was contrary to the conclusions of the Investigating Committee in the fraudulent July 31, 1986 Investigation Report.

Dr. McGraw failed to gather my evidence, failed to disclose in advance what cases would be discussed at the forthcoming July 8, 1986 Oral Interview of myself by the Investigating Committee and denied me all opportunity to prepare. He failed to review the evidence from my office files on the patients including the notes from their referring doctors, nor did he contact, examine or review a single patient to determine the successful outcomes of the surgery which he condemned. Dr McGraw failed to identify by name any of the cases being discussed during the July 8, 1986 Oral Interview and accordingly their names do not appear in the transcript. The July 31, 1986 Section 48 Investigation Report authored by Dr. McGraw echoed and adopted the invalid 1981 Patterson Section 50 Investigation Report without correcting the erroneous Patterson position that MMA usage for disc replacement was "experimental". The Committee recommended my suspension for "insufficient skill and knowledge to practice medicine in B.C. or the rest of Canada".

Dr. Patterson then resurfaced as the WCB’s expert medical witness in the champertous WCB-funded trials that followed wherein the WCB took a subrogated interest in the settlements. The WCB lawyer Mr. Powers contacted my satisfied Workers and advised them to sue. WCB consultant Dr. Noble advised my satisfied patients such as Addy Lunz to sue but Mr. Lunz refused. WCB was advising patients they had to sue me so as not to jeopardize their claims in the future if they did have problems after expiration of the limitation period.

The WCB was fear-mongering amongst my satisfied patients to incite litigation by giving them fraudulent advice that they were in imminent danger of problems due to their exposure to "experimental surgery". The WCB then advised them to sue, funded the lawyers, took a subrogated interest in the settlements, and exercised direct influence over the WCB-friendly lawyers retained by CMPA to defend me. My lawyers were the WCB’s old lawyers from Harper Grey Easton and Company and Mr. Harvey Grey Q.C. hid their conflict of interest by failing to disclose that they had acted for WCB July 7, 1981 when WCB unsuccessfully appealed the Bouck judgment in Napoli v. WCB which opened the WCB closed file system in Canada.

When I was advised in 1985 of the pending College Section 48 investigation, I was insured by the Canadian Medical Protective Association (the CMPA) and sought their legal assistance. I did not then know that College Registrar Dr. J.A. Hutchison who imposed the 1983 moratorium because of College "liability concerns" had joined the CMPA as a Council member.

This was the same Dr. H.A. Hutchison who during his tenure as Registrar disseminated Dr. Patterson’s 1981 Report containing false information declaring MMA disc replacement "experimental" to Dr. Harder in 1982, then appointed the tainted Harder Purves Tessler Committee February 9, 1983 to echo the Patterson position that MMA disc replacement was "experimental", all of which was designed to assist the WCB to instigate the WCB-funded litigation. Dr. Hutchison had initially advised my patients that the College imposed the moratorium because of "liability concerns" and then changed his story stating that it was because I was performing "experimental surgery".



Dr. Hutchison had now positioned himself to undermine my defense of the litigation he caused against me during his tenure as Registrar. He was a CMPA Council member and the official B.C. adviser to the CMPA which empowered him to select and direct the CMPA retained lawyers appointed to defend me. Dr. Hutchison’s influence over my lawyers ensured they acted in the best interests of the College and not myself since all their bills were paid by the CMPA. Those lawyers he directed then withheld all my key evidence that would be damaging to the College including all evidence that MMA usage was never "experimental" as recorded in the January 22, 1982 Minutes of the College Council and authoritative medical literature supporting that position.

Harper Grey Easton and Company lawyers Harvey Grey Q.C., Mark Skorah and Barbara Norell all took their instructions from the former College Registrar Dr. Hutchison and the CMPA while ignoring my own instructions to present evidence supportive of my position. It was my name and not the CMPA that appeared as the Defendant on the Writs and yet my lawyers always refused my instructions. In effect they never did act impartially, independently and at arms length from the College but rather took instructions from the former College Registrar Dr. Hutchison who assisted CMPA during his tenure as Registrar by imposing the moratorium. Dr. Hutchison disseminated false information of "experimental surgery" to incite litigation, assisted the WCB and Dr. Patterson to block my presentation "as soon as possible", and generally caused the 1981 investigation by soliciting complaints against me as far back as 1979 so as to help the WCB discredit me as an expert witness for Napoli in advance of the 1981 Napoli v. WCB trial. Dr. Hutchison ensured that my Harper Grey Easton and Company lawyer Mr. Mark Skorah undermined my defense during the College investigation and Dr. Hutchison directed the WCB-friendly lawyers retained by CMPA that "pretended to defend" me as they feigned a defense against WCB-funded litigation for the falsely alleged "experimental surgery".

CMPA Council member Dr. Hutchison was positioned to undermine my defense against the very litigation he had himself caused against me during his tenure as College Registrar by imposing the moratorium and then spreading the myth of "experimental surgery" amongst the patients and public. Dr. Hutchison ensured that the tainted WCB-friendly law firm Harper Grey Easton and Company was appointed to defend me against the forthcoming 1986 College investigation because he knew Mr. Grey had represented WCB at their unsuccessful appeal of Napoli v. WCB and could be relied upon to appease WCB by ensuring my suspension. Mr. Grey Q.C. and his law firm retained by the CMPA could be relied upon to protect the College by failing to gather and argue material on the College files supporting my position and that he could also be relied upon to withhold my evidence that MMA disc replacement was never "experimental" which if argued in Court would embarrass the College and in particular Dr. Hutchison who had written my patients disseminating false information that MMA disc replacement was "experimental".

Mr. Grey Q.C. and the Harper Grey Easton and Company lawyers he influenced including Mark Skorah and Barbara Norell were in conflict of interest and ought never to have pretended to defend me in all subsequent actions because Mr. Grey Q.C. was a participant on the WCB team that had planned my suspension during the course of the Napoli v. WCB trail. Accordingly, the Harper Grey Easton and Company could never be considered impartial and independent in accepting my defense of the College Section 48 investigation which resulted in my suspension without a hearing. The law firm failed to adequately prepare, to gather my evidence, to disclose the identity of my accusers or what the allegations were against me. Mark Skorah failed to identify what files would be discussed and abandoned me the day before the July 8, 1986 Oral Interview by the Investigation Committee. Mr. Skorah advised me at the eleventh hour that I was not entitled to counsel and never advised me that I ought to seek alternate counsel because their law firm was in conflict of interest. Mr. Grey failed to advise me that the law firm acted for two of the members of the College Investigating Committee. Mr. Grey knew Dr. P. Kokan was in conflict sitting as a member of the College Section 48 Investigation Committee because he was the WCB consultant in Napoli v. WCB and furthermore, his own law firm Harper Grey Easton and Company represented Dr. Kokan in approximately ten medical malpractice cases including Semenoff v. Kokan where Kokan was accused of experimental usage of chymopapain enzymes, a cactus plant extract banned in the U.S.A. which left Semenoff in a semi-vegetative state and eventually settled in Court for $1.7 million awarded against Dr. Kokan.

Mr. Grey’s law firm represented Dr. D. Griesdale in other unrelated medical malpractice litigation and he knew Dr. Griesdale was in conflict in accepting a position on the Investigation Committee because of the George Bavle case where Dr. Griesdale recommended unnecessary surgery on my patient George Bavle at two asymptomatic levels C5-6 and C6-7 already successfully fused and asymptomatic after MMA disc replacement. Dr. Griesdale ignored Bavle’s new whiplash suffered at Houston B.C. which injured C4-5 and caused recurrence of headaches which had disappeared after his successful C5-6 and C6-7 fusion. Dr. Griesdale erroneously recommended unnecessary surgery on the already successfully fused levels and his shared office associate Dr. Murray then operated at those levels with disastrous results. Dr. Murray was doing wrong level surgery when he broke down the existing successful C-5-6 and C6-7 MMA fusion, injured the dural sac with a diamond drill bur, produced a dural leak, caused cord edema requiring steroid treatment, and ignored the newly symptomatic C4-5 level which was the real cause of his recurrence and not the previously fused levels. Bavle’s C4-5 headaches caused by the new whiplash injury at C4-5 failed to improve after their successful but unnecessary bone fusion which replaced an already successful MMA fusion, the failure to improve being because they were at the wrong level and failed to deal with the new problem at C4-5. Drs. Griesdale and Murray then advised Bavle to sue me for "experimental surgery" so as to distance themselves from their own errors and then referred Bavle to Dr. Patterson.

The law firm Harper Grey Easton and Company knew the Writ was served in 1985 in Bavle v. Kuntz before Dr. D. Griesdale accepted a position in July 1985 as a member of the College Section 48 Investigation Committee and hid his conflict to jeopardize my defense of the College investigation while advantaging himself and Dr. Murray in the forthcoming WCB-funded Bavle v. Kuntz litigation by facilitating my suspension beforehand. My CMPA law firm of Harper Grey Easton and Company refused my instructions to enjoin Drs. Griesdale and Murray into the litigation as co-defendants. The Bavle v. Kuntz case was eventually dismissed in my favor.

Harper, Grey, Easton and Company were advising Drs. Griesdale and Murray who injured the WCB Claimant George Bavle. Dr. Murray referred Bavle to Dr. Patterson knowing he would help them cover up their own injury to Bavle and blame the problem on the previous surgery which Patterson described as "experimental". George Bavle was then advised by the WCB and a group of doctors including Dr. Patterson, Dr. Griesdale and Dr. Murray to run newspaper advertisements in the Personal columns of northern newspapers soliciting other patients to join the WCB-funded Class Action against me for "experimental surgery". Bavle did contact my patients at home or through newspaper ads and falsely advised them that they had been subjected to "experimental surgery" and were entitled to insurance money even if they felt well. Bavle then referred them to personal injury lawyer Mr. Tommy Griffiths who worked in association with the WCB and filed a Class Action Writ against me.



Accordingly the Harper Grey Easton and Company law firm knew the College Investigation Committee was stacked with biased members in conflict of interest and that Dr. Griesdale ought never to have participated in any investigation of myself because of his involvement in causing the injury to George Bavle for which I was being scapegoated in the WCB-funded Bavle v. Kuntz litigation which Harper Grey Easton and Company was defending. The CMPA had already assigned Harper Grey Easton and Company to protect Drs. Griesdale and Murray and I was being scapegoated for their errors. Accordingly the law firm refused my instructions to enjoin Drs. Griesdale and Murray as co-defendants in the Bavle v. Kuntz litigation against me which resulted from the errors of Griesdale and Murray. That litigation was eventually dismissed in my favor and during the course of that litigation, my lawyers assisted defamation against me by refusing to take action to stop Bavle’s newspaper solicitations encouraging others to join the WCB-funded Class Action against me for "experimental surgery" which was never "experimental" and his dissemination of false information that I performed "experimental" surgery.

When Mr. Skorah abandoned me at the eleventh hour on the day before the July 8, 1986 Oral Interview by the Investigation Committee, he failed to advise me to seek alternative counsel. Accordingly I appeared without legal representation during the 1986 College Investigation commissioned to carry out the WCB suspension plans. In effect my CMPA-retained counsel from Harper Grey Easton and Company behaved as de facto agents of the College and the WCB and undermined my defense so as to distance the College in the forthcoming Class Action instigated by Dr. Hutchison and the quasi-judicial College by disseminating misinformation that MMA usage for disc replacement was "experimental surgery" when it was not "experimental" since 1955.

My CMPA-retained lawyer Mark Skorah failed to identify my accusers much less the allegations that led to the College investigation. I was suspended August 24, 1986 without a hearing after inadequate preparation by that WCB-friendly Harper Grey Easton and Company law firm which then continued to represent me in the 1987 WCB-funded litigations that followed for "unauthorized surgery" which WCB alleged to be "unnecessary" and "experimental". My own lawyers were being directed by CMPA Council member Dr. J.A. Hutchison who during his tenure as College Registrar caused the litigation against me by disseminating Dr. F.P. Patterson’s November 19, 1981 invalid Section 50 report in violation of the Evidence Act Section 57 (5) and (6) spawning the myth fabricated by the WCB that all my cases were "unnecessary" and "experimental." The WCB’s old lawyer Mr. Harvey Grey Q.C. was now positioned to feign a defense for me against his old WCB friends suing me for "experimental surgery". This was an unacceptable conflict of interest because Mr. Grey Q.C. had been a participant on the WCB’s Napoli v. WCB team working with the WCB staff that had plotted my suspension in advance of that trial. Mr. Harvey Grey Q.C. is deemed to have perused Napoli’s WCB file wherein WCB Executive Medical Director Dr. J.S. Gibbings had written the memo to Dr. Adam Little stating: "It will be hard to suspend him as he is the only orthopaedic surgeon in N.W.B.C." (North West British Columbia).

Accordingly, Mr. Grey and none of the members of his law firm Harper Grey Easton and Company could ever be considered impartial, independent or at arms’ length from the College or WCB. They ought never to have feigned to defend me against the premeditated WCB suspension plan which began in 1977, led to the 1979 BCMA Patterns of Practice Investigation, to the 1981 College Section 50 investigation which culminated in the 1986 Section 48 Investigation, my 1986 suspension without a hearing and 1988 erasure from the medical register. Mr. Grey participated on the WCB team that plotted my suspension between 1977 and 1981 and his law firm then assisted the WCB to undermine my defense during the 1985-1986 College investigation directed by WCB Executive Medical Director Dr. A.D. McDougall. Mr. Grey’s law firm only feigned a defense against the WCB-funded litigation that followed.

Mr. Harvey Grey Q.C. and his law firm Harper Grey Easton and Company intentionally undermined my defense so as to distance the College from the forthcoming Class Action. They took instructions from the former College Registrar Dr. J.A. Hutchison and acted as a de facto agent of the College to ensure my WCB-directed suspension went ahead without legal resistance and in violation of all the rules of natural justice.

Contemporaneously with my suspension, the WCB Executive Medical Director Dr. A.D. McDougall was secretly directing undisclosed WCB files to Chairman Dr. R.W. McGraw and the Investigation Committee which included WCB consultant Dr. P. Kokan. Dr. A.D. McDougall was also directing the WCB-funded Coughlin v. Kuntz litigation against me for "experimental surgery"wherein the WCB retained Dr. McGraw’s friend and associate Dr. Patterson as the WCB expert medical witness so as to harness the influence of the former Professor of Orthopaedics on the other witnesses provided by the WCB who testified in unison to deceive the judge into believing that MMA usage for disc replacement was "experimental" in 1987 and even outrageously testifying that there was no prior usage of MMA for disc replacement in the authoritative medical literature.

In contrast, my Harper Grey Easton and Company lawyers ignored my evidence, failed to report the authoritative medical literature demonstrating that MMA usage for disc replacement had been declared safe in humans for at least 32 years by the time of the Coughlin v. Kuntz trial, and did not call one single witness in my defense.



In 1986, and in anticipation of the Coughlin v. Kuntz litigation which could involve the College as a defendant, the Council moved proactively to suspend me without a hearing August 24, 1986 so as to distance the College from the forthcoming WCB-funded litigation.

Although it was a violation of Section 48 of the Medical Practitioners’ Act to circulate the July 31, 1986 Investigation Report beyond the College Executive Committee, the Registrar circulated the untested Report to every member of Council before any hearing took place on its merits. Contemporaneously the College refused my requests to exercise my Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 7 guarantees of cross-examination of my accusers, the members of the Investigation Committee Drs. McGraw, Kokan and Tile who authored the fraudulent Report.

This illegal circulation of an Investigation Report was intentional and calculated to create insurmountable bias and prejudice against me before any hearing took place. It is important to realize that those reading the fraudulent Report were not spine surgeons, orthopaedic surgeons or neurosurgeons. The members of the College Council who received it were uninformed general practitioners, breast surgeons, haematologists, cardiologists, internists and others, none of whom had any significant experience in spine surgery. They were reading a tainted Report dealing with matters beyond their own fields of expertise and were unable to recognize the scientific fraud contained within the Report concerning matters which they were not qualified to judge. There was not one member of Council who could be considered my "peer" in orthopaedics, neurosurgery or spine surgery as not one of them practiced in this area. The purpose of the illegal dissemination while I was being suspended without a hearing and before any hearing took place was to create bias and prejudice amongst the Council members who would eventually be sitting in judgment. This was no different than allowing individuals to freely discuss evidence amongst their friends so as to arrive at a position before sitting on a jury to judge the same material. It was also a serious violation of Section 57 (5) and (6) of the Evidence Act and this illegal circulation by a quasi-judicial body operating under the presumption of regularity denied me all opportunity for a fair hearing. That was what triggered my efforts to have the Report sealed by the Court so as to stop this aberrant quasi-judicial body from causing more damage to my professional reputation by continuing to circulate the defamatory untested Report before any hearing ever took place.

The College continued to widely circulate the fraudulent Section 48 July 31, 1986 Investigation Report authored by Chairman R.W. McGraw which echoed, endorsed and perpetuated Dr. Patterson’s fraudulent Section 50 November 19, 1981 Investigation Report which described MMA disc replacement as being "of an experimental nature". The Executive Committee of the College relied upon that tainted Report to suspend me without a hearing August 24, 1986 and illegally circulated it to all members of Council before any hearing took place. The denial of any opportunity to respond to the falsehoods in McGraw’s report served to create bias and prejudice and obstruct justice in advance of the Coughlin v. Kuntz trial where that same untested and tainted Investigation Report being illegally circulated by a quasi-judicial body was placed before Justice Cohen at the beginning of the Coughlin v. Kuntz trial. The College was protected by a presumption of regularity; the Report was protected by a presumption of validity; the authors were protected by College refusal to allow cross-examination; and the Courts echoed the College position denying me cross-examination. Essentially what happened was that the College had guaranteed Dr. McGraw immunity from cross-examination and that was the condition upon which Professor McGraw agreed to participate in the defamatory scathing Report designed to defame me and distance the College from the anticipated Class Action.

The College erased me from the medical register on October 25, 1988 and that forced me into bankruptcy in 1989. I retained an independent law firm Russell & DuMoulin and applied for Discharge from Bankruptcy using that outside firm so as to distance myself from the adverse influence of the CMPA and Harper Grey Easton & Company who had refused to gather and present my evidence, to enjoin other doctors as co-defendants, to expose the perjury of Dr. Patterson at the Coughlin v. Kuntz trial, and to present the authoritative medical literature to vindicate me as Mr. Grey had ensured me he would do before he argued my appeal of the Cohen judgment in Coughlin v. Kuntz.

However the CMPA sent Harper Grey Easton & Company to appear adverse in interest as interveners at my application for Discharge from Bankruptcy before Chief Justice Esson. The CMPA wanted to ensure that litigation would continue against me as a condition of my Discharge and I did not then understand why it was so important for the CMPA to continue litigation against their client. The hidden CMPA agenda was to distance the College from the litigation, scapegoat me for work performed by other doctors insured by the CMPA, and perpetuate the myth of "experimental surgery" which CMPA exploited by feigning a non-existent $300 million liability exposure for 1900 patients subjected to "experimental" MMA disc replacement as reported in the newspapers. This was all a scientific fraud because I had only done 300 cases of MMA disc replacement, none of which were "experimental" and CMPA knew the 98% success rate which my patients enjoyed with the new procedure was much higher than the bone graft spinal fusion methods it replaced.

The CMPA sent Harper Grey Easton & Company lawyer Mark Skorah to appear on their behalf as an intervener at my 1989 Discharge from Bankruptcy application to ensure continuation of litigation against me and to gain the "irrevocable control" of my defense. Other interveners included Mr. Powers representing the WCB and Mr. Griffiths, counsel for the WCB whose affidavit admitted he was instructed by the WCB to contact my patients to determine whether they would sue me. The WCB was using the Claimant George Bavle of Houston to run newspaper ads soliciting other patients to sue me for "experimental surgery" which litigation the CMPA now insisted would continue against me as a condition of my Discharge from Bankruptcy.

The CMPA additionally required "irrevocable control" of my defense against the ongoing litigation for "experimental surgery" as a condition of my Discharge from Bankruptcy and then reassigned the defense to Harper Grey Easton and Company would could then control the coverup of their own previous errors in perpetuity. The CMPA had no intention of ever presenting my evidence that MMA disc replacement was never "experimental" nor did they ever want to vindicate me from the false allegations that I was "experimenting" on humans.

The CMPA presence at my Discharge from Bankruptcy hearing was to ensure that I never escaped from Harper Grey Easton and Company into the hands of independent counsel who would simply gather and present my evidence from the authoritative medical literature demonstrating MMA usage for disc replacement in humans was never "experimental" after it was published as safe in 1955 which was even prior to its usage for hip and knee replacements. The CMPA feared that independent counsel would present my evidence and exposed the scientific fraud thereby terminating the College and WCB myth of "experimental surgery" which CMPA desired to keep alive as an excuse to raise premiums and bolster "unfunded liability reserves".

The CMPA did not want their phoney claims of future unfunded liability exposure for "experimental surgery" to disappear if independent counsel beyond their control presented my evidence. The CMPA knew otherwise at all material times that MMA usage for disc replacement was never "experimental" because their new Council member and B.C. adviser was the former College Register Dr. J.A. Hutchison who attended the January 22, 1982 meeting where I appropriately advised the College Council of this correct position that MMA disc replacement was not "experimental" for at least 10 years. The Council recorded this correct position in their minutes. Accordingly Dr. Hutchison knew the correct position when he enforced the College moratorium in 1983 and when he resurfaced in 1984 as a CMPA Council member and CMPA adviser for B.C. the CMPA is deemed to know that MMA disc replacement was never "experimental" at all material times.

Accordingly, in 1989 Chief Justice Esson presided over the Discharge from Bankruptcy and assisted the CMPA and WCB to continue frivolous litigation against me. Justice Esson ordered not only that litigation would continue against me as a condition of my Discharge from Bankruptcy but that the "irrevocable control" of my future defense in these medical malpractice cases for performing what the WCB falsely alleged to be "unnecessary" and "experimental surgery" would be assigned to CMPA and the law firm Harper Grey Easton and Company. That law firm was already in irreconcilable conflict of interest because they were protecting the College economic interests by hiding information from myself that the College was in an irreconcilable economic conflict of interest when the Council sat in judgment of myself October 19, 1988 after the College had been named as a co-defendant with myself in a $300 million Class Action and when Council erased me from the medical register thereby causing my subsequent bankruptcy.

Harper Grey Easton and Company never told me that my WCB accusers had secretly enjoined the College May 6, 1988 as a defendant in the $300 million 1988 Rita Linnea Harriet Wilson et al v. College of Physicians and Surgeons, Kitimat General Hospital, Wrinch Memorial Hospital et al Class Action which was prior in time to the College sitting in judgment of myself October 19, 1988. My CMPA lawyers knew that it was a violation of all the rules of natural justice for the College to sit in judgment of their co-accused. My lawyers Harvey Grey Q.C., Mark Skorah and Barbara Norell all knew the College had a $300 million interest in the outcome of its own judgment when it erased me from the medical register October 25, 1988 in advance of the 1990 trial regarding Rita Linnea Harriet Wilson et al v. College of Physicians and Surgeons, Kitimat General Hospital, Wrinch Memorial Hospital et al.

My lawyers knew that no accused can sit in judgment of another co-accused and even worse, they knew the July 31, 1986 Investigation Report reviewed Case 8: Rita Wilson in Dr. Tile’s Appendix 1 to the Report. That meant the College was sitting in judgment of its own cause when they suspended me without a hearing and then erased me from the medical register. The Harper Grey East and Company lawyers knew the College was in economic conflict when it terminated my employment and forced me into bankruptcy, none of which would have happened had my CMPA-retained Harper Grey Easton and Company lawyers been honest and forthright and advised me of the irreconcilable College conflict. Any other counsel acting impartially and independently without a secret agenda and not under the influence of the former College Registrar Dr. Hutchison would have brought the College conflict to the attention of the Courts as grounds to have me immediately reinstated to the medical register thereby averting bankruptcy.

On March 23, 1983 the BCMA (BCMA) assisted the College to perpetuate the "experimental surgery" in the report authored by the Chairman of the BCMA Section of Orthopaedics Dr. D. Harder, the Chairman of the BCMA Section of Neurology Dr. B. Tessler and the Chairman of the BCMA Section of Neurosurgery Dr. B. Purves. The BCMA knew that the College used that Report to justify the 1983 moratorium on disc replacement and that the CMPA then used that myth to justify the escalating medical malpractice premiums for "unfunded liability exposure".

In 1986 the BCMA exploited the "experimental surgery" myth they helped to create. The resultant increase in CMPA premiums that occurred in 1985 in anticipation of the Class Action was then used by BCMA to negotiate an annual BC government subsidy in lieu of a further fee increase to compensate for the escalating CMPA premiums contributing to rising doctors’ office overheads. In 1986 the government contributed $1.9 million to the BCMA members’ medical malpractice premiums. By the 1996-97 fiscal year this annual contribution had increased to $15 million; by 1997-98 to $15.75 million; by 1998-99 to $17.561 million; by 2000-01 to $25.61 million. The total contributions of taxpayer money contributed by the B.C. Ministry of Health to cover doctor’s escalating CMPA medical malpractice premiums between 1986 and 2001 was $203.6 million. The total amount of taxpayer funded money entering the CMPA coffers by 2001 was $1.37 billion. This phenomenal increase in the size of the CMPA unfunded liability coffers depended upon the WCB, College and BCMA perpetuating the "experimental surgery" myth over the subsequent years so as to ensure that this cash flow continued whereby taxpayers were now funding the medical malpractice premiums of B.C. and other Canadian doctors. It was easy for the CMPA to perpetuate that scientific fraud by continuing to withhold my evidence, especially after the CMPA and Harper Grey Easton and Company gained the "irrevocable control" of my defense as a consequence of Chief Justice William Esson’s Discharge from Bankruptcy Order. Thereafter the CMPA and its lawyers repeatedly refused my requests to present my evidence and then refused my requests for a change of counsel to other lawyers of my own choice who would present my evidence of prior MMA usage for disc replacement.

The CMPA agenda was to obstruct justice by withholding the evidence I wanted them to present, their reasoning being that they had every faith in my Harper Grey Easton and Company lawyers, that they had "irrevocable control" of my defense and that the CMPA was under no obligation to present the evidence I wanted them to present. The CMPA Secretary-Treasurer Dr. Lee responded to my pleas to "protect me from the CMPA" by stating that just because they didn’t present the evidence I wanted them to present did not mean they did not defend me properly.

The CMPA deliberately withheld evidence in successive trials to ensure higher judgments against me which their actuaries exploited to recalculate CMPA "unfunded liability" projections. The premiums continued to rise to bolster unfunded liability reserves. This theft of taxpayer funds continued annually since my 1986 suspension despite my continued protest and demands that the CMPA present my evidence which they refused to do while citing Justice Esson’s Order giving them "irrevocable control" over my defense. The CMPA-retained Harper, Grey, Easton and Company lawyers never acted at arms’ length from the College or the WCB that was funding litigation against me and the law firm profited considering by withholding my evidence of prior MMA usage for spinal fusion and disc replacement so as to perpetuate litigation against me for the scientific fraud of "experimental surgery".

Mr. Harvey Grey Q.C. represented WCB at Napoli v. WCB when WCB doctors plotted, planned and directed my suspension. Mr. Grey knew Dr. Peter Kokan was the WCB consultant on the Napoli v. WCB case who missed the diagnosis of stenosis. He knew that the WCB consultant Dr. Kokan was in conflict when he accepted a position on the College Investigation Committee to sit in judgment of myself in the WCB-directed investigation.

Furthermore, Harper Grey Easton and Company defended Dr. Peter Kokan in approximately ten medical malpractice actions, some for "experimental" usage of chymopapain, an enzyme derived from cactus plants and used to dissolve discs in a procedure already banned as "experimental" in the USA. Mr. Grey knew that Dr. Kokan was in conflict in sitting in judgment of myself to deter and detract from his own "experimental" procedures, especially when the College Section 48 Investigation Committee echoed and endorsed Dr. Patterson’s fraudulent November 19, 1981 report alleging MMA disc replacement was "experimental".

Mr. Grey Q.C. knew Kokan was not competent to sit in judgment of myself because he was Kokan’s lawyer in the Semenoff v. Kokan litigation wherein Kokan injected Semenoff with chymopapain leaving him semi-comatose and in a vegetative state from which he never recovered. The judge ruled that Dr. Kokan failed to diagnose stenosis in Semenoff and caused the injury by injecting chymopapain into the cerebrospinal fluid in 1986 just two months before Kokan sat on the Investigation Committee in judgment of myself. Dr. Kokan therein condemned me for my use of state of the art wide decompressive laminectomy in the treatment of multiple level stenosis and was a signatory of the Report recommending my suspension. Mr. Grey Q.C. knew that his client Dr. Kokan was not competent to judge me in the area of spinal surgery which Dr. Kokan did not perform and the law firm failed to disclose its own conflict in that it acted for Dr. Kokan in the Semenoff case. After WCB consultant Dr. P. Kokan recommended my suspension, Mr. Grey’s law firm lost Semenoff v. Kokan which was judged against Kokan for $1.7 million. The judgment disclosed that Mr. Semenoff remained in a semi-vegetative state and never left St. Paul’s Hospital. The 1988 College President Dr. J.W. Ibbott practiced at St. Paul’s Hospital and knew that Dr. Peter Kokan was not competent in spine surgery when Dr. Ibbott chaired the October 19, 1988 College hearing resulting in my erasure because by then it was widely known that Dr. Kokan and St. Paul’s Hospital were named as co-defendants in the Semenoff v. Kokan et al litigation.

It is important to understand that after College Registrar Dr. J.A. Hutchison assisted the CMPA by imposing the 1983 College moratorium to limit the Class size suing for "experimental surgery" and after he disseminated false information to the public that MMA usage for disc replacement was "experimental" the CMPA rewarded him by appointing him in 1984 as their new CMPA Council member. Accordingly, Dr. J.A. Hutchison was positioned in 1984 to control my defense in the WCB-funded litigation he caused against me during his tenure as College Registrar because Dr. Hutchison was now directing my CMPA-retained lawyers at Harper, Grey, Easton and Company and acting in his own best interest and that of the College to cover up and distance themselves from the proposed litigation against me for "experimental surgery".

As Registrar, Dr. Hutchison had acted in violation of the Evidence Act Section 57 (5) (6) by illegally disseminating Dr. Patterson’s invalid Section 50 report which wrongly stated that MMA usage for disc replacement was "experimental." This illegal dissemination by a quasi-judicial body invited litigation against me while affording Dr. Patterson’s report the presumption of validity and regularity usually associated with a quasi-judicial body such as the College. I was being accused by an official body of "experimenting" on humans when in reality all informed advanced spinal surgeons knew otherwise that it was not "experimental" and an ever increasing number of informed spinal surgeons were using MMA disc replacement in their own practices.

The CMPA was profiting economically by perpetuating that "experimental surgery" myth and Dr. Hutchison’s influence as a CMPA Council member over the lawyers defending me ensured that my evidence would never be presented demonstrating that MMA usage for disc replacement was never "experimental". He made sure that I would never be vindicated because that would be an embarrassment to both himself and the College which he directed to declare a moratorium in 1983. It was the ignorance of Dr. Patterson, Dr. Hutchison, the BCMA and College and their failure to remain current with advances in spinal surgery that resulting in harm to the public being denied access to state of the art spinal surgery.

The CMPA intentionally abused its powers by seeking "irrevocable control" of my defense so as to obstruct justice by withholding my evidence of prior MMA usage for disc replacement so as to perpetuate the scientific fraud being used to justify raising premiums to bolster the CMPA unfunded liability reserves. The CMPA was wrongly accumulating funds and fraudulently expanding reserves to cover a false liability exposure which never did exist and which would disappear immediately if my evidence was ever brought forward. This was why the CMPA required "irrevocable control" of my defense and had to ensure that litigation continued against me as a condition of my Discharge from Bankruptcy. The CMPA was perpetuating a scientific fraud on 55,000 doctors it insured across Canada and against all Canadian taxpayers who funded doctors medical malpractice premiums. The CMPA had to ensure that my evidence demonstrating MMA disc replacement was never "experimental" would never be presented and that I would never be vindicated in Canada.

I was forced into bankruptcy after my October 25, 1988 erasure from the medical register. Chief Justice Esson accepted all the conditions which the interveners required as a condition of my Discharge from Bankruptcy. The interveners included counsel Mark Skorah representing the CMPA and counsel Mr. Powers representing the WCB. They all required that medical malpractice litigation would continue against me as a condition of my Discharge from Bankruptcy and that the Chief Justice would assign CMPA "irrevocable control" of my defense to the CMPA. Accordingly in 1989 I lost the "irrevocable control" of my defense which was assigned forever to the CMPA which was already in conflict and the CMPA then delegated it to Harper Grey Easton and Company which was also in conflict: both were hiding the College conflict in being named as a co-defendant in the Rita Linnea Harriet Wilson et al Class Action before sitting in judgment of their co-accused which is a violation of all the rules of natural justice.

Thereafter CMPA and all counsel they retained continued to rely upon Justice Esson’s Discharge from Bankruptcy Order granting them "irrevocable control" of my defense as their excuse for refusing my repeated pleas to simply present my evidence. There was voluminous authoritative medical literature demonstrating that MMA usage for disc replacement was never "experimental" since 1955 and they worked in unison to withhold that evidence. The CMPA refused my requests for a change of counsel stating they had "irrevocable control" of my defense and the lawyers they appointed used the same argument. The CMPA pursued its own hidden economic agenda of perpetuating the "experimental surgery" fraud and exploited that myth as justification for raising premiums under the pretense that the CMPA was at risk for legal exposure as a result of the Order of Chief Justice Esson that cases continue against me for experimental surgery as a condition of my Discharge. However it is important to remember that it was the CMPA which resisted my attempts to have the litigation die with my bankruptcy; it was they that insisted that litigation continue against their client as a condition of my being granted the Discharge. The CMPA successfully exploited the assignment of the false "liability exposure" to themselves which they won as interveners at my bankruptcy and used it to obstruct justice and to perpetuate annual CMPA medical malpractice premium increases levied to 55,000 doctors they insured across Canada. This constituted nothing less than major organized crime against Canadian taxpayers who funded the medical malpractice premiums of doctors across Canada.

The CMPA repeatedly obstructed justice and denied me vindication by withholding evidence of prior MMA usage for disc replacement. Their lawyers abused the CMPA’s "irrevocable control" of my defense to withhold evidence so as to perpetuate the false myth that all my satisfied patients who enjoyed successful MMA disc replacement now posed a threat of liability exposure to the CMPA as an excuse to increase premiums and bolster CMPA unfunded liability reserves.

In 1990 the American Academy of Neurological and Orthopaedic Surgeons (AANAOS) discovered my 1985 clinical research published in Canada on MMA disc replacement called The Organ of Stress. There was a paper being presented at their annual scientific meeting by Dr. S. Genest on 10 year follow-ups of MMA disc replacement and I was asked to comment from the floor about that paper. I introduced my remarks by advising the entire academy that I was accused of doing "experimental surgery" in Canada for using MMA for disc replacement and had been erased from the medical register for "insufficient skill and knowledge to practice medicine in B.C. or the rest of Canada." The AANAOS recognized MMA disc replacement as advanced state of the art spinal surgery taught and endorsed by their own members and responded by appointing me Chief of the Academy’s new Division of Neuropaedic Surgery which dealt with the newly recognized field of intervertebral disc replacement.

In 1991 the Academy invited me to deliver the Organ of Stress lecture series which was recorded and disseminated to neurosurgeons and orthopaedic surgeons in audio and video format and attendees of the lectures received continuing medical education credits. This was the same lecture series that the B.C. College Council instructed College Registrar Dr. Hutchison on January 22, 1982 to arrange for my presentation "as soon as possible" and which were then delegated to the biased UBC Professor of Orthopaedics Dr. Frank Porter Patterson who blocked the presentation. Accordingly this information was suppressed in Canada by both Professor Patterson and his successor Dr. Robert W. McGraw both of whom abused their authority to assist the WCB to perpetuate a scientific fraud.

In Canada, the CMPA lost every case against me that their lawyers "pretended to defend" for the falsely alleged "experimental surgery." This outcome was diametrically opposed to what happened in the USA to doctors sued for using MMA for disc replacement. The Chairman of the American Academy of Neurological and Orthopaedic Surgeons Dr. Kazem Fathie advised me on February 10, 1997 that there has never been a successful case of litigation in the United States against a doctor using MMA disc replacement. His letter stated that 200 neurosurgeons and orthopaedic surgeons polled at their annual scientific meeting all agreed that usage of MMA disc replacement was not "experimental surgery". Dr. Fathie emphasized that everybody eventually understood that it was not "experimental" and accordingly there had never been a single case of successful litigation for "experimental surgery" against a doctor in the USA for using MMA disc replacement which was not overturned on appeal.

In Canada there has never been a case successfully defended against me by the CMPA because it was perpetuating a scientific fraud on the Canadian public so as to bolster its unfunded liability reserves on the backs of Canadian taxpayers. My CMPA-retained lawyers were in conflict and refused my instructions to present my evidence of prior MMA usage for disc replacement. They all abused Justice Esson’s Order assigning "irrevocable control" of my defense to the CMPA as their excuse for withholding my evidence so as to perpetuate the taxpayer funded insurance fraud. The CMPA refused my requests to assign other counsel who would present my evidence.

Accordingly, in 1993 I sued CMPA and its lawyers at Harper Grey Easton and Company which litigation forced CMPA to appoint other lawyers such as David Roberts Q.C. and Irwin Nathenson Q.C.. However nothing changed because they also took instructions from CMPA and not myself and accordingly refused to present my evidence. When I protested, they stated they took instructions from CMPA and not myself and continued to deceive the court..

I then fired Mr. David Roberts Q.C. and advised him to cease and desist but he refused to quit and CMPA refused to remove him. I then complained to the Law Society of B.C. about Mr. Roberts continuing to present himself as my lawyer after I fired him and Mr. Roberts responded to my complaints by circulating a judicially sealed July 31, 1986 Investigation Report before the Law Society to defame me. Mr. Roberts received the sealed July 31, 1986 Investigation Report from the CMPA and not myself and acted in contempt of court by circulating it to the Law Society lawyer Tim Holmes. The Law Society then acted in contempt of court by circulating the judicially sealed Report back to Mr. Roberts Q.C. who had requested its return after it had served its intended purpose of defaming his client so as to discredit me with Law Society and thereby perpetuate the myth of experimental surgery.

Mr. Holmes and the Law Society of B.C. were now in contempt of court themselves and after reading the defamatory untested and judicially sealed Report they refused my request that the Law Society suspend Mr. David Roberts Q.C. and order him to cease and desist "pretending to defend" me after I fired him. The Law Society relied upon the Order of Esson to permit Mr. D. Roberts Q.C. to continue feigning a defense on my behalf after I fired him. It must be stressed that only my name appeared on the Writs suing me for "experimental surgery" and not the CMPA which refused to vindicate me by presenting my evidence. In effect, the CMPA was placing its own hidden economic agenda first and was perpetuating the scientific fraud of "experimental surgery" as the excuse to bolster its unfunded liability reserves and build its financial empire.

After I fired Mr. D. Roberts Q.C. and after he defamed me with the Law Society of B.C. which refused my demand that they instruct him to cease and desist, Mr. D. Roberts continued to appear in Court claiming to represent me. Mr. Roberts feigned my defense while withholding evidence I had previously forwarded to the CMPA of prior MMA usage for disc replacement. Accordingly another WCB-funded case Archibald v. Kuntz was judged against me for approximately double the amount awarded at the Coughlin v. Kuntz case which gave CMPA actuaries a new excuse to recalculate their unfunded liability reserves upwards for the remainder of the 1900 cases that never did exist, all of whom were alleged to have undergone "experimental surgery" that was not experimental.

Accordingly, the Courts, CMPA and Law Society of B.C. have denied me the right to fire my CMPA-retained lawyers who "pretend to defend" me in cases of alleged "experimental surgery" while withholding my evidence that it was never "experimental" since 1955. This was organized crime being carried out in the courts where lawyers are robbing the taxpayer funded CMPA reserves by perpetuating a scientific fraud.

I sought assistance from the Attorney General Department but they were themselves actively involved in perpetuating this fraud by facilitating the continuing obstruction of justice. I was referred to the AG department in 1988 after being erased from the medical register and complained to them about criminal activity by the College which had denied me the Section 7 Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees which included the rights to cross-examine my accusers, the authors of the Investigation Report. At that time the College was actively circulating the untested judicially sealed July 31, 1986 College Investigation Report which they commissioned in bad faith to appease the WCB for the adverse outcome of Napoli v. WCB opening WCB files in Canada. The College knew the Report was not even supported by its principal author Dr. R.W. McGraw who stated in his September 14, 1987 Affidavit: "Had I known I would be subpoenaed to testify I would have refused to participate in the investigation in the manner in which it was conducted." However the College continued to circulate the sealed Report in contempt of court to undermine trials and the AG department did nothing to enforce the seal so as to ensure me a fair trial before an independent and impartial tribunal.

Furthermore, the AG department knew the circulation of the Report was in violation of the Medical Practitioners’ Act, the Evidence Act (Section 57 (5) and (6), the January 21, 1987 Order of Justice Huddart of the B.C. Supreme Court sealing the Report and banning its distribution, and the June 16, 1987 B.C. Court of Appeal Order of Justice Lambert upholding the seal and distribution ban until further Order. There has never been any such "further Order" and the seal and distribution ban remains in effect to this very day. However despite the Order, the quasi-judicial College continued to illegally circulate the Report in contempt of court. It acted "above the law" and continued its campaign to defame me by defying Court Orders. The College was circulating the judicially sealed Report to destroy my professional reputation and credibility as a witness against themselves before the Class Action which was still outstanding until 1990. The AG department remained silent and did nothing to enforce the law.

The Minutes of the College Council in 1983 and 1984 demonstrate that it imposed the illegal moratorium on disc replacement because of its own "liability concerns" in anticipation of the College being enjoined as a defendant in the long anticipated WCB-funded Class Action that the College Registrar Dr. J.A Hutchison caused against me by disseminating Dr. Patterson’s Section 50 Report alleging "experimental surgery". That Class Action eventually surfaced in 1987 as the WCB-funded $300 million Rita Linnea Harriet Wilson et al v. J. David Kuntz et al Class Action and was further expanded in 1988 to include the College as a named defendant in the Rita Linnea Harriet Wilson et al v. College of Physicians and Surgeons of B.C., Kitimat General Hospital, Wrinch Memorial Hospital et al Class Action. The AG Department knew the College was enjoined as a co-defendant in the Class Action and withheld that information from me.

The AG Department knew the College acted in bad faith to appease the WCB for the adverse outcome of Napoli v. WCB in 1981 when it appointed the biased Professor Patterson who falsely stated MMA disc replacement was "experimental" to trigger premeditated WCB-funded litigation in retaliation against Napoli’s expert medical witness. They knew the College acted in bad faith to deny the public the benefits of state of the art advances in spinal surgery when it moved proactively February 9, 1983 to impose a moratorium. They knew it acted in bad faith in July 1985 when it commissioned an Investigation Committee chaired by Dr. Patterson’s shared office associate Dr. McGraw and which included WCB consultant Dr. P. Kokan and that the College guaranteed immunity from cross-examination for authoring the defamatory July 31, 1986 Investigation Report echoing and adopting the invalid 1981 Patterson report. They knew the College acted in bad faith by then circulating the sealed Report while denying me cross-examination of the authors who were guaranteed immunity from cross-examination. The AG Department knew the College relied upon that fraudulent Report to suspend me without a hearing August 24, 1986. The College continued to act in contempt of court by circulating the defamatory Report to undermine all subsequent trials and the Attorney General Department covered up this abuse of authority to obstruct justice.

The WCB failed to have me suspended before the 1981 Napoli v. WCB trial and learned from that experience not to repeat the same error twice; accordingly after having me suspended without a hearing in 1986 the WCB in 1988 enjoined the College as a named defendant in the $300 million Class Action so as to blackmail the College into compliance with WCB plans to have me erased. On May 6, 1988 the WCB filed a second Writ enjoining the College as a co-defendant with myself in the Rita Linnea Harriet Wilson et al v. College of Physicians and Surgeons, Kitimat General Hospital, Wrinch Memorial Hospital et al Class Action.

The AG Department knew that 1988 Writ placed the College in economic conflict of interest and that it contravened all the rules of natural justice for one accused to sit in judgement of another co-accused. They knew the College had to ensure that neither the public, the press, nor myself was ever informed that the College had been enjoined in the outstanding Class Action because then it would be obvious to all concerned that the College was abusing its Committees for other than their intended purpose under the legislation. The AG Department knew that there would be an even greater outcry from the public if it ever discovered that the College Council was in economic conflict when it sat in judgment of its co-accused and abused its authority to obstruct justice by destroying the credibility of expert medical witnesses detrimental to the position of the College in advance of Class Action litigation where the College was a named co-defendant.

May 6, 1988 was the date on which the College was enjoined as a defendant in the Class Action prior to the October 19, 1988 College hearing when Council hid their economic interest in the outcome of their own judgment and erased me from the medical register. This hidden Writ and secret agenda undermined the statutory authority of the College to fairly administer the Medical Practitioners’ Act.

The AG Department knew the College abused authority to obstruct justice by discrediting my professional reputation in advance of the forthcoming Class Action where the College was adverse in interest and that the Class Action remained outstanding until 1990. The AG Department knew the College had to violate all the rules of natural justice when it sat in judgment of its co-accused October 19, 1988 when the Council had a $300 million economic interest in the outcome of their own judgment. The AG Department knew this was a criminal abuse of authority and that I had been denied the Charter right of cross-examination of my accusers, the authors of the Investigation Report used to suspend me without a hearing all of which was a violation of Section 7 of the Charter. The AG Department also knew the College contravened Section 11(d) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms which states: " everyone has the right to a fair hearing before an impartial and independent panel" and that my co-defendants in a $300 million Class Action could never be considered impartial or independent.

Accordingly, the AG Department covered up the College conflict when it voted unanimously to erase me from the medical register so as to distance themselves from the forthcoming Class Action which was still outstanding until 1990 before being dismissed in my favor. The College retained Mr. David Martin from Douglas Symes & Brissenden to defend them in the Class Action and the College retained the same Mr. David Martin to resist my appeal for reinstatement which placed Mr. Martin in conflict: he could never be considered impartial. I was being scapegoated as the sole Defendant ever identified publicly in this litigation and Mr. David Martin made sure it remained that way by ensuring that the public and press never knew the College was a co-defendant or that the College caused the litigation by disseminating false information that MMA usage was "experimental". Mr. Martin knew it was the Council’s failure to follow its own mandate to set a time and place for me to educate outdated doctors "as soon as possible" that allowed the WCB-funded litigation to proceed against me that eventually expanded in 1988 to name the College as a co-defendant.

When I appealed the College’s October 25, 1988 decision to erase me from the medical register, the College used the same lawyer Mr. David Martin to resist my appeal knowing he was at all material times in conflict of interest when he was already defending the College in the Rita Linnea Harriet Wilson et al Class Action where we were adverse in interest. Accordingly he ought to have declined acting for the quasi-judicial College body when I appealed their erasure decision. It was obviously beneficial to Mr. Martin in his defense of the College in the Class Action to ensure that Council did not reinstate my license and thereby restore my credibility as an expert witness against the College which would make his defense of the College in the forthcoming Class Action more difficult . This conflict explains why a lawyer retained by a quasi-judicial body subsequently advised the College President Dr. Bill Ibbott to tamper with my sworn Exhibits while they were being held in the custody of the College.

In 1992 my lawyer Mr. Ewachniuk retained the then retired and highly respected B.C. Court of Appeal Judge, Mr. R.P. Anderson Q.C. to review the College erasure decision. Mr. Anderson was the same Judge who delivered the 1988 Seaton Anderson McLachlin judgment upholding the Legg judgment denying me cross-examination of the authors of the Investigation Report. On May 29, 1992 Mr. Anderson’s letter of opinion to Mr. Ewachniuk stated that the October 19, 1988 College erasure hearing was void ab initio because the original July 31, 1986 Investigation Report was never entered into evidence as required under Administrative Law for a legal hearing under Section 48 of the Medical Practitioners’ Act. Mr. Anderson observed that only an edited version of the report had been entered which version deleted large blocks of hearsay evidence while retaining all the conclusions based upon the deleted hearsay. Mr. Anderson also stated that Justice Legg relied upon the judgment of Lysyk in Wilson v. MSC and that the Court of Appeal which upheld Legg also relied upon that precedent which was subsequently overturned on August 5, 1988 before my October 19, 1988 College erasure hearing. The significance of the reversal of the Lysyk judgment by a five judge bench was that Legg and the Court of Appeal relied upon the wrong precedent in denying me cross-examination and that the Charter law was already clarified before I appeared at the College erasure hearing where Council still denied me the Charter right of cross-examination. Mr. Anderson Q.C. declared on May 29, 1992 that I must be immediately reinstated to the medical register.

That May 29, 1992 opinion of the Honorable Mr. R.P. Anderson was forwarded by my lawyer Mr. Ewachniuk to counsel for the College Mr. David Martin who orchestrated a College coverup whereby the Exhibit numbers on my sworn exhibits being held in the custody of the College were subsequently changed. The material I filed under oath was replaced with new exhibits bearing undated exhibit stamps signed by the College President Dr. J.W. Ibbott who had chaired the October 19, 1988 hearing. In answer to Mr. Anderson’s criticisms, the College belatedly entered the original July 31, 1986 Report as a false Exhibit in an attempt to legitimatize an illegal hearing. This had to happen following the formal conclusion of the hearing because some of the phoney Exhibits bore College "Received" stamps dated after the formal conclusion of the hearing.

Accordingly, Mr. Martin presented false material as "the record of the hearing" during my 1998 appeal of the College erasure before Justice Loo and the record he entered appeared different from the sworn exhibit lists and sworn transcripts prepared contemporaneously in 1988. The May 29, 1992 opinion letter of retired B.C. Court of Appeal Justice Mr. R.P. Anderson criticized the October 19, 1988 College hearing as illegal under Administrative Law because the original July 31, 1986 Investigation Report was never formally entered into evidence. After that opinion was shared with Mr. D. Martin, he counseled the College President Dr. W. Ibbott to tamper with my evidence as filed and together they then inserted the original July 31, 1986 Investigation Report into evidence as a false exhibit as they belatedly attempted to legitimatize an illegal hearing under Section 48 of the Medical Practitioners’ Act. That was Mr. Martin’s way of dealing with The Honorable Mr. R.P. Anderson’s May 29, 1992 report which stated that the College decision must be quashed and I must be immediately reinstated to the medical register.

It also explains why Mr. Martin acted in contempt of Court during my 1998 appeal of the erasure before Justice Loo by circulating the judicially sealed July 31, 1986 Investigation Report which was never filed in evidence at the October 19, 1988 hearing.

Mr. Martin had been fully forewarned through the Affidavits of J.D. Kuntz and S.E. Kuntz, through his review of transcripts of the October 19, 1988 hearing, and through the sworn exhibit lists prepared by a sworn Court Reporter all of which evidence reinforced the opinion of Mr. R.P. Anderson that the original Report was not in evidence.

Mr. David Martin did not participate at the October 19, 1988 hearing and was not a witness to the events when the exhibits were filed. He refused my counsel Mr. Berger’s request to provide an Affidavit from the Registrar Dr. Arnold and refused my lawyer Mr. Ewachniuk’s request to provide and Affidavit from Dr. W. Ibbott confirming the validity of the exhibits. He refused this because his witnesses could never withstand cross-examination on the tampered exhibits. Mr. Martin then knowingly circulated a false record which included the sealed Report before Justice Loo in contempt of court to create judicial bias and prejudice and undermined my appeal especially when it was not entered before the Council in 1988.

The judgment of Madam Justice Loo in 1999 was itself in contempt of court because therein she quoted four pages of the untested defamatory sealed Report which was never even entered into evidence at the 1988 College hearing where I was only required to answer to the material before Council and not to material that was never tendered in evidence before them. Madam Justice Loo behaved as an extension of the untested authors of the sealed Report by quoting their defamatory Report which was not part of the Record of the October 19, 1988 hearing. Since the July 31, 1986 Investigation Report was never entered as an Exhibit before Council at the 1988 hearing, it ought never to have been put before Justice Loo by College counsel Mr. David Martin who was in contempt of court in circulating that sealed Report before Justice Loo to undermine the trial. Justice Loo ought never to have considered much less quoted a sealed Report in her judgment which was not part of the record of the 1988 College hearing and her doing so caused criminal defamation of my good name. Mr. Martin duped the judge into becoming little more than a gossip-mongerer echoing the authors that both the College and the Courts had protected from cross-examination and by repeating their defamation and scientific fraud Madam Justice Loo brought the Supreme Court of British Columbia into disrepute.



I appealed Madam Justice Loo’s judgement to the B.C. Court of Appeal and the College counsel Mr. D. Martin refused to sign the appeal books so as to obstruct justice. Accordingly I appeared before the Registrar of the B.C. Court of Appeal to request that the original exhibits entered under oath at the October 19, 1988 College erasure hearing would be filed in their original format as Supplementary material before the Court of Appeal. Mr. Martin objected to my request to file the material in its original format and he lied to the Registrar, falsely stating that the original material I filed under oath as verified in the sworn transcripts and exhibit lists of that 1988 hearing and as verified by the late Honorable Mr. R.P. Anderson in his 1992 review of the transcripts was never entered in evidence at the October 19, 1988 hearing. It was the College counsel Mr. Plommer who attended the 1988 hearing and not Mr. Davit Martin who was not a witness to the events at which he had never participated. Mr. Martin had tampered with my sworn evidence, changing my exhibit numbers and placing the unentered July 31, 1986 Investigation Report before Justice Loo as a false exhibit and that was why he lied to deceive the Registrar by stating that the material I filed as Exhibit 1 and Exhibit 2 at the October 19, 1988 hearing had not been filed. Mr. Martin was obstructing justice again by refusing to sign the appeal books so as to deny me an appeal because he now had to cover up for counseling the College to alter my sworn exhibits when he placed a false Record of that erasure hearing before Justice Loo. The exhibits Mr. Martin placed before Loo are now different from the exhibits I filed under oath and entered into evidence at the 1988 College erasure hearing as documented by the sworn court reporter on her sworn transcript of the October 19, 1988 College erasure hearing. After appearing before the Court of Appeal Registrar, the appeal books were submitted again and Mr. Martin still refused to cooperate by signing the appeal books containing material recommended by the Registrar which included copies of the material in the original format as it was filed at the 1988 College hearing. Obviously if the original exhibits were entered at a forthcoming hearing before the B.C. Court of Appeal it would be easier to demonstrate which exhibits have been altered and Mr. Martin feared exposure for tampering with my sworn exhibits which were in the custody of the College. This fear of exposure for the criminal obstruction of justice motivated his refusal to cooperate so as to stagnate the appeal process.

When the College Council voted unanimously to erase me from the medical register October 25, 1988 so as to distance themselves from the forthcoming Class Action, Mr. Martin was their lawyer and preparing for their defense of the Rita Linnea Harriet Wilson et al v. College of Physicians and Surgeons et al Class Action which was still outstanding until 1990 when Justice Finch, a former Guild Yule lawyer whose former law firm held the CMPA contract before he became a judge in 1982, dismissed the case against myself and the College. That litigation had initially named me as the sole defendant in 1997 and then expanded in 1998 to include the College; however during that time the College counsel Mr. David Martin made sure that I continued to be scapegoated in the press as the sole defendant and that the public and the press were never informed that the College was named as a Defendant in the Class Action. Mr. Martin never informed me that the College was in economic conflict when they sat in judgment of myself, nor did my Harper Grey Easton and Company lawyers ever inform me that the College was a named co-defendant. The lawyers worked in unison to hide the economic conflict of interest of the College Council in sitting in judgment of their co-accused in 1998 while the $300 million Class Action naming the College as a defendant was still outstanding until 1990. Even worse, that litigation could never have proceeded if the College had followed its own mandate as agreed January 22, 1982 that they would set a time and place "as soon as possible" for me to educate my orthopaedic, neurosurgical and neurological confreres who were 25 years out of date regarding advances in spine surgery, nor could it have happened if College Registrar Dr. Hutchison had not wrongly disseminated Dr. Patterson’s invalid Section 50 Report June 1982 to Dr. Harder before inviting him on February 9, 1983 to head the Harder Purves Tessler Committee echoing the Patterson report. Dr. Hutchison knew from his attendance at the January 22, 1982 meeting of the College Council with myself that MMA disc replacement was not "experimental as recorded in their Minutes and he knew very well that Dr. Patterson’s November 19, 1981 Section 50 Report falsely claimed MMA disc replacement was "experimental surgery". The College Registrar Dr. Hutchison was abusing authority to assist WCB-funded litigation against me when he knew that the circulation of investigation reports to spread misinformation was in violation of Section 57 (5) and (6) of the Evidence Act.

Accordingly, I was the only Defendant identified in newspapers across Canada in the Class Action and both the College and my own CMPA lawyers made sure neither myself nor the public was ever informed that the College was named as a Defendant. It was dismissed in my favor in 1990 and I have since learned that the case against the College was dismissed on the same day. The Harper Grey Easton and Company lawyers ignored my repeated requests that they inform the public and press that the $300 million Class Action was dismissed in my favor so as to vindicate me and rehabilitate my reputation but they refused because they wanted to assist the CMPA to keep the "experimental surgery" myth alive as well as the CMPA fraud alive wherein they were exploiting that myth as an excuse to raise premiums and bolster the unfunded liability reserves in anticipation of judgments for 1900 cases of "experimental surgery" which had never been done and which was never experimental. That was why in 1983 Dr. Hutchison imposed a moratorium ultra vires the Medical Practitioners’ Act and in 1984 resurfaced as a member of the CMPA Council so as to manage my defense of his own deceit while the CMPA profited by raising premiums to over 50,000 doctors across Canada to cover the estimated $300 million value of the Rita Linnea Harriet Wilson Class Action which was touted in the Press as the largest medical malpractice case ever.

I now know why the CMPA positioned the former College Registrar Dr. Hutchison as their B.C. adviser and a member of their Council so as to protect the College while he directed and undermined my defense. Dr. Hutchison was more interested in protecting himself and his College benefactors from exposure while appeasing the WCB by allowing the litigation conspiracy against me to proceed as planned during his tenure as Registrar. Dr. Hutchison had worked diligently from 1979 onward as a de facto agent of the WCB when they were attempting to maintain the closed WCB file system. It was in 1979 that Dr. Hutchison first invited the BCMA Patterns of Practice Committee to send a complaint to the College so he could "take action" as recorded in the July 26, 1979 Minutes of the Patterns of Practice Committee. Dr. Hutchison acted at all material times to assist the WCB to investigate, harass and eventually suspend and sue me during his tenure as Registrar. He was abusing the authority he enjoyed as the Registrar of a quasi-judicial body operating under the presumption of regularity when he helped the WCB to spawn litigation against me during his tenure as Registrar. Dr. Hutchison was in control of my Harper Grey Easton and Company lawyers and that was why they maintained a code of silence about the College involvement as a co-defendant in the Rita Linnea Harriet Wilson et al Class Action and did nothing so as not to draw any further attention to the case. It would have been scandalous if the public knew that the governing body of the College of Physicians and Surgeons was in economic conflict of interest when they imposed a moratorium denying the public access to state of the art advanced spine surgery techniques, spread false information that it was "experimental", caused litigation against me which spread to involve themselves as co-defendants, and then sat in judgment of their co-accused when they had a $300 million economic interest in the outcome of their own decision to erase me from the medical register so as to obstruct justice by proactively defaming the witness against themselves in the forthcoming Class Action. The cover-up was successful because the public, press and myself never did know that the College and Hospitals were co-defendants in the Class Action while I was scapegoated in the Press across Canada as the sole named defendant. I only uncovered this hidden material fact about the College being named as a co-defendant after November 27, 1995 when I performed an independent search of the archives of the Vancouver Courthouse and discovered the May 6, 1988 Writ enjoining the College and the Hospitals.

In 1988 my patients numbering approximately 8,000 demanded a Public Enquiry into my suspension and erasure with a demand for my reinstatement. Jack Kempf, MLA for Omineca arranged an audience with the Minister of Health Mr. Peter Dueck who in turn directed me to the Attorney General Department’s Chief Prosecutor Mr. Ernest Quantz.

The AG Department became part of the College coverup and failed to take my allegations of criminal wrongdoing seriously. The Chief Prosecutor Mr. Ernest Quantz merely humored me in 1989 stating "you only want your job back" and "you were doing surgery that was unnecessary and replacing parts that didn’t need replacing." At that time the College was still withholding the 1979 BCMA Patterns of Practice Minutes which were not released until May 29, 1991 wherein I discovered that the WCB was my hidden accuser in 1979 claiming that "unauthorized surgery" was "unnecessary surgery" which allegation had been hidden from me before my erasure and before I was referred to the Attorney General Department. I now know the AG department was part of the coverup for the WCB abuse of authority and that the Chief Prosecutor Mr. Ernest Quantz had access to that College file wherein the WCB never identified or substantiated a single case of "unnecessary surgery" by name. The AG department ignored the perversion of evidence by the Investigation Committee where Chairman McGraw perverted the outcomes of successful surgery on WCB patients such as Teodoro Ruiz and Ron Williamson who were pleased with the results of their "unauthorized surgery" which restored them to the workplace as verified on their Affidavits. The Attorney General Department knew the College Investigation Committee of Drs. McGraw, Kokan and Tile never interviewed a single patient and the Deputy Attorney General Mr. E.R.A. Edwards Q.C. directed this coverup by Mr. Ernest Quantz allowing the College and WCB perversion of evidence to continue to obstruct justice while the College circulated the sealed Report to undermine trials and perpetuate the experimental surgery fraud. In effect the AG Department covered up the WCB and College abuse of authority and perversion of evidence to obstruct justice while contemporaneously destroying the delivery of orthopaedic services to North West B.C. where I was the only resident orthopaedic surgeon serving the region for the past 15 years.

Despite widespread public support for a public enquiry and demands that criminal charges be laid against those involved in destroying the orthopaedic service I provided in North West B.C., the AG Department was an active participant in covering up the College economic conflict knowing it was a violation of all the rules of natural justice for one accused to sit in judgment of another accused while the $300 million Class Action was still outstanding.

The AG Department refused to investigate and respond to legitimate public concerns from Unions, Municipalities and 8,000 citizens demanding a public enquiry and demanding my reinstatement and requesting that criminal charges be laid against the wrongdoers.



In 1985 the AG Department appointed Mr. Edwards as Assistant Deputy Minister and in 1990 as Deputy Attorney General. During his tenure with the AG Department Mr. E.R.A. Edwards Q.C. covered up and allowed the quasi-judicial College to operate in contempt of court by circulating a fraudulent judicially sealed Report to cause criminal defamation of my good name. The citizens of North West British Columbia were deprived of orthopaedic surgery services for the next five years until continuing public outcry resulted in Kitimat General Hospital providing a $100,000 per year subsidy to entice Dr. Phelan, an unqualified surgeon reportedly from Wales to fill the orthopaedic position made available as a result of my suspension. While my North West British Columbia patients were still demanding my reinstatement, the College allowed the unqualified Dr. Phelan to practice without supervision for the next five years on my patients on condition he pass his orthopaedic examinations. After Dr. Phelan was forced him into College mandated rehabilitation for drug addiction and failed his examinations, the Kitimat General Hospital then sued Dr. Phelan to recover hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Mr. E.R.A. Edwards was appointed by Order #1471 July 18th 1985 as Assistant Deputy Minister in the AG Department. He was appointed by Order #1432 September 20th 1990 as the Deputy Attorney General. Mr. Edwards was at all material times in a position of authority and had a fiduciary obligation to ensure that Mr. Ernest Quant fairly and impartially investigated the College and WCB fraud. He had a duty to stop the ongoing contempt of court by a quasi-judicial body, the College of Physicians and Surgeons of B.C. which continued to circulate a sealed Report in violation of Court orders so as to undermine trials and obstruct justice.

Mr. Edwards did nothing because his own department was an active participant in protecting my 1979 accusers which included the MSC Chairman, Dr. David Bolton. In 1984 the MSC began investigating me for what they alleged to be the wrongful billing of fee item 5625 which was "orthopaedic interpretation of submitted x-ray films" and in 1985 launched frivolous MSC-funded litigation against me wherein I was being prosecuted by lawyers from the Attorney General Department. That resulted in the 1986 case before Justice Locke who ruled that "there was not one single shred of evidence that one single case had been wrongfully billed" when he awarded costs against my MSC accusers. The AG Department appealed on their behalf and only dropped their appeal after I was erased from the medical register.

Accordingly when I was referred to the Chief Prosecutor Mr. Ernest Quantz in 1989, I did not know the Department was already in conflict of interest and taking instructions from my MSC accusers Dr. David Bolton and Dr. R. Henderson who had been involved since 1979. In fact both doctors had been forwarding statistics to the BCMA Patterns of Practice Steering Committee as a smokescreen and an excuse to have me investigated so as to distance my undisclosed WCB accusers who were secretly alleging that "unauthorized" surgery was " "unnecessary surgery." The AG Department continued the cover up in 1989 because the AG Department was already assisting the MSC to cost-contain Medicare by destroying my orthopaedic service to North West British Columbia. The AG Department Chief Prosecutor Mr. Ernest Quantz and his assistant Mr. Isaacs were already reporting directly to my MSC accusers and Mr. Isaac’s 1989 letter dismissing my complaint of criminal wrongdoing was directed to one of my MSC accusers Dr. Henderson who had been involved since 1979.

The Attorney General holds a seat as a Bencher of the Law Society of B.C. and the duties of the Deputy Attorney General include sitting as a Bencher at meetings whenever the Attorney General fails to attend. In reality it is usually the Deputy AG that attends meetings held by the Benchers who are the governing body of the Law Society of B.C. Accordingly, the A.G. department has direct influence over the Benchers and their decisions to investigate individual lawyers. It was not surprising that every single lawyer that subsequently took on my defense was suspended by the Law Society of B.C.

Mr. E.R.A. Edwards Q.C.’s appointment as Deputy Attorney General was rescinded February 3rd, 1993 by Order #0124 when he was appointed a Justice of the Supreme Court of British Columbia. He was proactively positioned on the bench by the AG Department so as to continue their cover up of wrongdoings by government regulated bodies including the College, WCB and MSC.

Mr. Justice Edwards then surfaced in 1999 to hear a WCB Section 18 application by Mr. E. Dolden to dismiss my action against the WCB without a trial before cross-examination of the WCB defendants on their perjured Affidavits and before the WCB provided an adequate list of documents as required before any such application could be heard. Mr. Justice Edwards knew very well that he was in an irreconcilable conflict of interest and in violation of the requirement for independence of the courts when he sat in judgment knowing that he had previously been in charge of the investigation and cover up of the same case during his tenure as Deputy AG. Justice Edwards ignored my own Affidavit protests and those of my counsel over the WCB circulation of a sealed investigation Report before him. Mr. Edwards dishonored the court by allowing the WCB to circulate it in his courtroom in contempt of the sealing Order, refused to allow the cross-examination of the WCB Defendants Dr. A.D. McDougall and Dr. J. Noble on their perjured Affidavits, dozed off on the bench on several occasions, could never once even look me in the eye despite my sitting beside my counsel and allowed the WCB application to dismiss. He even awarded special costs against me so as to place a financial impediment before me in attempting to correct his errors in judgment where the biased Mr. Justice Edwards did not judge on the evidence before him.. This would never have happened before an impartial judge.

This was the same biased and prejudiced Mr. E.R.A. Edwards who previously held tenure as Deputy Attorney General when he directed his AG department to prosecute me in a case where Justice Locke ruled in my favor stating that there was not one single shred of evidence of wrongful billing which ruling the AG Department then appealed and eventually dropped. It was a violation of the ancient rule of impermissible partiality for Mr. Justice Edwards to come with prior knowledge to sit in judgment of myself after he had unsuccessfully directed the AG Department of myself in a case where the judge ruled there was not one single shred of evidence which equated to a vexatious abuse of the court by the AG Department under his direction.



In 1993, the Patients’ Advocacy Rights Association President Gerry Stevenson approached the Attorney General Mr. Colin Gablemann with affidavit evidence sworn by J.D. Kuntz and S.E. Kuntz demonstrating College tampering with my sworn exhibits which were in the custody of the College and their counsel Mr. David Martin. The evidence demonstrated that the College President Dr. Ibbott changed exhibit numbers and added new material as exhibits following the formal conclusion of the October 19, 1988 hearing. In fact some of the documents that the College now presented as "exhibits" were stamped as "Received" on October 20, 1988 and October 21, 1988 which was after the formal conclusion of the hearing verified in the sworn transcripts and exhibit lists of the hearing.

The AG failed to respond in 1993 and when Gerry Stevenson followed up, he claimed not to have received the material sent by registered mail. Gerry Stevenson went to the Liberal Health critic Jeremy Dalton who confronted the Attorney General on the floor of the legislature about the missing evidence whereupon Mr. Colin Gabelmann conveniently discovered the missing material the same day and referred it to the new Deputy AG Brian Neal who had replaced Mr. Edwards who was just appointed as a judge. Mr. Neal again covered up this criminal wrongdoing by the College and the evidence of sworn exhibits having been tampered with while in the custody of the College and their counsel Mr. David Martin.

It was the AG department’s failure to act by investigating and prosecuting the criminal wrongdoings of a quasi-judicial body that tampered with sworn exhibits held in the custody of the College that allowed Mr. David Martin to introduce a phoney altered Record of the October 19, 1988 hearing in the subsequent 1998 Appeal of the College erasure decision before Justice Loo. The false exhibits which Mr. Martin introduced on behalf of the College as phony exhibits at my appeal before Justice Loo were at variance with the sworn exhibit list and sworn transcripts recorded contemporaneously at the October 19, 1988 hearing by a sworn Court Reporter who was in attendance. None of this could have happened without the full cooperation of the Attorney General department in 1992 in covering up these College irregularities designed to obstruct justice in a case in which the AG Department was an active participant and appearing as the counsel of record for some of the key defendants.

In 1993, my lawyer Mr. A. Ted Ewachniuk sued the WCB, BCMA College of Physicians and Surgeons, MSC, and MSC Chairman Dr. David Bolton and Dr. Henderson et cetera in Kuntz v. WCB, BCMA, College, MSC, Dr. D. Bolton et al. The AG Department then appeared as counsel of record for three of the Defendants (the MSC, Dr. Henderson and former MSC Chairman Dr. D. Bolton) and were giving legal advice to the former MSC Chairman Dr. Bolton.

After MSC was served with the Writ and Statement of Claim and while under legal advisement provided by the AG department, Dr. D. Bolton then ordered the immediate shredding of all the key documents so as to obstruct justice.



In 1995, Mr. Ujjal Dosanjh became Attorney General. In 1999 my supporters Randy Haigh of Terrace and Derek Bawn of Vancouver advised Mr. Ujjal Dosanjh that the judicially sealed Investigation Report was being circulated to defame me and undermine trials. Mr. Dosanjh was responsible for the administration of justice in B.C. and yet he stood idly by and did nothing to stop this contempt of court by a quasi-judicial body because the AG Department was itself involved in actively covering up for the WCB, College, BCMA and MSC. Mr. Dosanjh knew his own AG Department was acting for the MSC Defendants. The AG Department had already positioned the former Deputy Attorney General Mr. E.R.A. Edwards on the bench as a judge to advantage their own clients. Mr. Dosanjh did nothing to stop circulation of a sealed Report because his own AG Department would only benefit from my continuing criminal defamation, especially when they were applying for a Section 18 Summary Dismissal judgment of my case against all the government regulated bodies abusing authority such as WCB, College and in particular the Attorney General Department’s clients, the Defendants MSC, Dr. Bolton and Dr. Henderson.

Justice Edwards was at all material times in conflict of interest after he came to the bench in 1993 and ought to have refused to participate in hearing any portion of Kuntz v. WCB et al involving the same government regulated bodies he covered up for during his tenure as Assistant Deputy Minister and then as Deputy Attorney General.



Justice Edwards’ subsequent participation after coming with prior knowledge to sit in judgment of myself was in violation of Section 11 (d) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms wherein Mr. Edwards denied me a fair hearing by an independent and impartial judge. He was in conflict of interest hearing Kuntz v. WCB, College, MSC, Dr. Bolton et al and ought not to have participated after covering up for the same bodies during his tenure as Deputy AG. Despite the oral protestations and written argument of my counsel Mr. Ewachniuk supplemented by my own Affidavits protesting circulation of the sealed July 31, 1986 College Investigation Report in contempt of court, Judge Edwards allowed counsel for the WCB Mr. Eric Dolden to circulate the sealed Report in his own courtroom and granted the WCB’s Section 18 application for a Summary Dismissal of my case against the WCB, then rewarded the WCB for its abuse of the Section 18 process by awarding special costs against me.

Judge Edwards acted as an advocate for the WCB rather than in impartial and independent judge as required when he dismissed my case against a government regulated body without a trial on the merits. Mr. Edwards ignored my counsel’s outstanding requests to cross-examine WCB defendants on their perjured Affidavits contradicted by material affixed to my own uncontested affidavits and my outstanding requests that WCB produce an adequate list of documents as required, all of which was an abuse of the Section 18 process.

In 1993, my lawyer A. Ted Ewachniuk launched Kuntz v. CMPA et al suing CMPA, the CMPA Secretary Treasurer Dr. Lee, Harper Grey Easton and Company, Harvey Grey Q.C., Mark Skorah, and Barbara Norell for acting in conflict of interest, causing my suspension, erasure and bankruptcy, failing to gather and present my evidence, perpetuating a scientific fraud, arranging for "irrevocable control" of my defense to transfer to CMPA and their law firm where they continued to profit from the defense while in conflict, ensuring that litigation continued against me as a condition of discharge from bankruptcy, failing to present my evidence so as to perpetuate the "experimental surgery" fraud and assist the CMPA to bolster its unfunded liability reserves at the expense of my professional reputation.

Mr. Ewachniuk was the third of my three consecutive lawyers who were getting close to exposing the truth when they were suspended to obstruct justice: Robert Gardner Q.C., Jack Cram and Mr. Ewachniuk were all suspended. In particular, my last lawyer Mr. A. Ted Ewachniuk worked on this for 15 years until his recent disbarment by the Law Society of B.C.

Mr. Harvey Grey Q.C. was a Bencher or member of the governing body of the Law Society of B.C. and after the 1993 Writ was served against Mr. Grey, the Benchers appointed a biased Law Society lawyer to prosecute my lawyer Mr. Ewachniuk. They appointed Mr. Herman van Ommen as the Law Society prosecutor but he was never independent and impartial as required. He had a hidden agenda to disbar my lawyer because Mr. Herman van Ommen was the husband of Barbara Norell, one of the Defendants named in Kuntz v. CMPA et al. Barbara Norell worked under the Bencher Harvey Grey Q.C. at Harper Grey Easton and Company. Mr. Van Ommen’s vindictive attack on Mr. Ewachniuk served his own hidden agenda to obstruct justice for myself in the case against his own wife Barbara Norell, Mark Skorah, the Law Society bencher Mr. Harvey Grey Q.C. and the CMPA..Van Ommen recommended that Mr. Ewachniuk should be disbarred because he was "beyond rehabilitation" and when Mr. Ewachniuk advised the Law Society of Mr. Van Ommen’s conflict of interest as the husband of one of the Defendants he was suing on my behalf,, they considered it irrelevant.

The Attorney General Mr. Ujjal Dosanjh was a Bencher of the Law Society from August 1995 to February 2000 when he was appointed as Premier. During that period the Law Society harassed my lawyer Mr. A. Ted Ewachniuk and demanded that he justify why he defended me in Kuntz v. WCB, College, MSC, Dr. Bolton et al after former Deputy AG Mr. Edwards granted the WCB application for Summary Dismissal before any trial on its merits and without allowing me my day in court. Even worse, when the Law Society abused its authority to intimidate my lawyer, the judgment of Justice Edwards was still under appeal to the B.C. Court of Appeal.

Several other law firms that represented defendants in Kuntz v. WCB et al and Kuntz v CMPA et al also had a member of their firm sitting as a Bencher on the Law Society of B.C., all of whom were positioned to benefit by sanctioning this abuse of Law Society committees for other than their intended purpose to remove my lawyer and thereby advantage their own clients. Contemporaneously those law firms all refused to comply with my counsel Mr. Ewachniuk’s request for an adequate list of documents or to allow cross-examination of the Defendants they represented as they worked together to stonewall my case and obstruct justice. For example, the solicitors for CMPA filed a Notice of Motion for a Section 18 Summary Dismissal application before Mr. Herman van Ommen recommended disbarment of my lawyer.

Mr. Ewachniuk sued my previous lawyers in the companion case No. C932722 (Vancouver Registry) filed May 14, 1993, John David Kuntz v. The CMPA, Dr. S.B. Lee, Harper Grey Easton and Company, Harvey Grey Q.C., Mark M. Skorah and Barbara J. Norell. The law firm Guild Yule & Company represented the Defendant lawyers including the bencher Mr. Harvey Grey Q.C.. That same law firm of Guild Yule also had its own member William J. Sullivan positioned as a bencher on the Law Society. It was not surprising that two years after the above Writ was served, the Benchers conveniently appointed Barbara J. Norell’s husband Mr. Herman van Ommen as Law Society prosecutor to investigate my lawyer Mr. Ewachniuk who was suing his wife.

At least one of the benchers William J. Sullivan, Q.C. sitting in judgment of my lawyer Mr. Ewachniuk knew that Mr. H. van Ommen could never be considered independent and impartial when he recommended disbarment of my lawyer. The informed person acting reasonably and knowing that bencher William J. Sullivan, Q.C’s law firm was acting for Barbara Norell when the benchers appointed her husband Mr. Herman van Ommen as prosecutor would perceive this as an abuse of authority by the benchers to advantage their own clients and obstruct justice by disbarring my lawyer and leave me without counsel in the case against their own client, in particular the Law Society prosecutor Mr. Herman. van Ommen’s wife Barbara Norell.

Furthermore the informed person knowing that the CMPA had filed an outstanding application for a Section 18 Summary Dismissal of that case would have real apprehension of bias that Mr. Ewachniuk was disbarred to obstruct justice when that application proceeded to court especially after Mr. Ewachniuk advised the Law Society of prosecutor Van Ommen’s conflict and the Law Society did nothing about it.



Furthermore, Mr. Ewachniuk filed case No. C932720 Vancouver Registry May 14, 1993, John David Kuntz v. WCB, College, BCMA, MSC, Dr. Stansfield, Dr. Bolton et al and Dr. D. Bolton, the former MSC Chairman was being defended by the Attorney-General Department. The informed person acting reasonably would conclude that since the Attorney-General Mr. Ujjal Dosanjh and his successor were Benchers of the Law Society of B.C. that the Benchers advantaged their own clients by disbarring my lawyer before the case went to trial.

On December 4, 2000 I obtained from counsel for the BCMA Ms. Fitzpatrick and Mr. E. Gouge the evidence that the AG Department’s client the former MSC Chairman Dr. D. Bolton had ordered the immediate shredding of all the key documents after the MSC was served notice of the litigation.

On September 5, 2000, the Ministry of the Attorney General wrote my lawyer Mr. A. Ted Ewachniuk stating "I am in the process of preparing an application for a Summary Judgment on behalf of my three clients, the Medical Services Commission of British Columbia, Dr. David M. Bolton and Dr. C.B. Henderson."

Obviously it was advantageous to the AG Department, the Benchers and their clients to disbar my lawyer of 15 years Mr. A. Ted Ewachniuk forthwith and this was accomplished by December 29, 2000 just as the applications for Section 18 Summary Dismissal of the cases against their clients were proceeding through the courts leaving me without counsel to oppose their applications to dismiss before any cross-examination of their clients and without a trial on its merits. The benchers disbarred my lawyer to obstruct justice and deny me my day in court.

Furthermore, in the case No. C932720 Vancouver Registry May 14, 1993, John David Kuntz v. WCB, College, BCMA, MSC, Dr. Stansfield, Dr. Bolton et al, the defendant Dr. H. Stansfield and the BCMA were being defended by the law firm Lawson Lundell Lawson & Mcintosh who also had an outstanding application for a Summary Judgment dismissing the case against their clients without cross-examination and without providing the required documents. The informed person acting reasonably and knowing that the Bencher William M. Everett, Q.C. was from the law firm Lawson Lundell Lawson & McIntosh would have a reasonable apprehension of bias that the Benchers joined forces to abuse authority so as to advantage their own clients by disbarring my lawyer Mr. Ewachniuk to leave me without counsel before their applications for dismissal went ahead.

The Benchers disbarred my last counsel Mr. A. Ted Ewachniuk on December 29, 2000. The Law Society decided to disbar him upon their biased prosecutor Mr. Herman van Ommen’s recommendations that my lawyer was "beyond rehabilitation." The disbarment was then made public January 3, 2001 leaving me without benefit of counsel as their own client’s Motions for Summary Dismissal proceed through the courts.

There were a lot of other benchers that would benefit from the disbarment of my lawyer Mr. A. Ted Ewachniuk so as to avoid embarrassment to themself. The Partial Lifetime Benchers List of the Law Society of B.C. lists seven more lawyers and judges who ought to be embarrassed by a trial on its merits. The informed person acting reasonably would perceive their influence on the Law Society as introducing a very real apprehension of bias that their presence would have an adverse influence contributing to the disbarment of my lawyer A. Ted Ewachniuk so as to avoid causing themselves any future discomfort. The list includes:

Justice Bruce Cohen who reviewed the sealed Report in May 1987 before then sitting in judgment of Coughlin v. Kuntz ; in 1997 when Mr. Ewachniuk attempted in an unopposed application to reopen the case before Cohen on grounds of scientific fraud and perjury by the key WCB witnesses, Mr. Cohen refused to correct the errors of his own prior judgment which continued to be used as a precedent for subsequent judgments against me for "experimental surgery";

Ujjal Dosanjh Q.C. who during his tenure as Attorney General did nothing to stop the illegal circulation of the sealed Report to obstruct justice;

Hugh Legg Q.C., who considered and summarized the then sealed Report in his erroneous judgment which relied upon the Lysyk judgment in Wilson v. MSC to deny me the section 7 Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms right to cross-examine my accusers, the authors of the defamatory untested July 31, 1986 Investigation Report who supported a scientific fraud and who continued to circulate their Report in violation of the seal and circulation ban;

Chief Justice Allan McEachern whom I criticized to the Canadian Judicial Council for appointing stacked benches using judges who had already judged adversely and who retaliated by ordering security of costs deposited with the Court before my appeal could be heard, then limited the two appeals to 21/2 hours, then refused to withdraw when requested by my counsel, then sat in judgment of his own critic and considered the sealed Report filed by Mr. Giles Q.C. and Mr. E. Dolden and did nothing about their contempt of court to undermine cases in the court below;

Justice Mary Southin who judged De Sousa v. Kuntz and then came with prior knowledge in violation of the ancient rule of impermissible partiality to sit in conflict on the five judge BCCA bench where she led the 3-2 majority decision in Kuntz v. College that overturned the existing Order of Justice Oppal for full disclosure of my College file before my appeal of the College erasure hearing and even worse, who extensively quoted four pages of the defamatory untested sealed report in her judgment causing my judicial defamation;

Justice Thomas Braidwood who participated on the BCCA bench of Esson Finch and Braidwood upholding the Hood judgment and quoting four pages of an untested sealed Report causing judicial defamation of my good name;

Arthur Harper Q.C. (Retired) of Harper Grey Easton and Company whose confreres were being sued in the companion case naming the CMPA and the Harper Grey Easton and Company CMPA-retained lawyers including the Bencher Harvey Grey Q.C., Mark Skorah and Barbara Norell whose husband Mr. Herman van Ommen was selected as the not-so-independent Law Society prosecutor of my lawyer Mr. A.Ted Ewachniuke/



In summary, the Attorney General Department and its former Attorney Generals Mr. Gablemann and Ujjal Dosanjh abused authority to advantage their MSC clients including MSC Chairman Mr. David Bolton who shredded key documents after being served. The AG Department participated in the obstruction of justice by failing to stop the tampering with exhibits in the custody of a quasi-judicial body and permitting the illegal circulation of a sealed Report to continue so as to create judicial bias, prejudice and defamation to undermine trials by denying me a fair hearing by an independent and impartial panel.

The AG Department was at all material times in conflict of interest in that it was working with my MSC accusers in 1985, reporting to them when I complained of criminal activity in 1989, and in 1993 the AG Department surfaced as counsel of record for these same MSC Defendants. The AG Department was covering up while their client the former MSC Chairman Dr. David Bolton arranged for the immediate shredding of the key evidence at the offices of the BCMA shortly after the Writs and Statement of Claim were served. The MSC had been supplying statistics to the BCMA Patterns of Practice Committee as a smokescreen to hide the WCB involvement in having me investigated in 1979 in advance of the Napoli v. WCB trial and the MSC statistics were used to support the false position that so much surgery in such a small town as Kitimat implied "unnecessary" surgery which I now know was support for the hidden WCB agenda that "unauthorized surgery" was "unnecessary surgery."

The AG Department joined the BCMA and College in hiding the WCB role as an accuser. I was only advised on May 1, 1979 that I was being investigated for "rather vague complaints" which failed to identify the WCB. The AG Department assisted the cover-up.

The AG Department has perpetuated criminal defamation to cover up scientific fraud used to justify a CMPA insurance fraud valued at over $1 billion. This has resulted in 5 years of annual taxpayer contributions totaling over $203 million in B.C. alone as negotiated by BCMA with the Health Ministry to cover doctor’s medical malpractice premiums contributing to rising physician’s office overheads. Taxpayers across Canada continue to fund the CMPA scientific fraud based on the myth of liability exposure for "experimental surgery" which was never "experimental" at all material times. The taxpayer funds were deposited in the CMPA "unfunded liability reserves" and were then used to fund frivolous litigation against doctors across Canada to the detriment of Medicare. The CMPA pays both the Plaintiff’s lawyers and Defendant’s lawyers out of the same coffers and only 10% of the monies reach patients; the remaining 90% goes to lawyers and only 10% of cases ever reach settlement. In the cases against myself the CMPA withheld evidence that the usage of MMA for disc replacement was never "experimental surgery" and settled cases out of Court against my wishes. This was an insurance fraud of enormous proportions which will continue forever because the Chief Justice Esson assigned CMPA the "irrevocable control" of my defense to the CMPA which continues to abuse that Discharge from Bankruptcy Order of Esson by refusing to present my evidence.

When I sued the lawyers at Harper Grey Easton and Company, the CMPA had to involve other lawyers. However the CMPA refused to reassign the cases to lawyers of my own choosing who would act independently and present my evidence. The CMPA only reassigned my cases to lawyers of Mr. Grey’s own choosing who could be relied upon to continue the same course of refusing to present my evidence. Although I escaped Harper Grey Easton and Company by suing the law firm I was unable to escape the Bencher Mr. Harvey Grey Q.C.’s influence over the lawyers he selected to carry on the suppression of my evidence. The CMPA continued to support the myth of "experimental surgery" that CMPA exploited to raise premiums and build CMPA "unfunded liability reserves".

When I found three consecutive independent lawyers including Robert Gardner Q.C., Jack Cram, and A. Ted Ewachniuk who were willing to take my case, in each instance the Benchers of the Law Society of B.C. moved to suspend the lawyers. It is no coincidence that the Attorney General Mr. Ujjal Dosanjh was also a Bencher after his August 1995 appointment as Attorney-General until his February 2000 appointment as the Premier of British Columbia, nor was it a coincidence that the AG Department acted for some of the Defendants..

Mr. Dosanjh was AG when the benchers allowed Barbara Norell’s husband Herman van Ommen to prosecute my lawyer two years after my lawyer had served the bencher Harvey Grey Q.C. and his employee Barbara Norell. Mr. H. van Ommen vindictively pursued my lawyer Mr. A. Ted Ewachniuk. Van Ommen re-opened the 1981 OEX case where Justice McKenzie described the defendants as "remorseful liars" in his judgment and then exploited the testimony of those same "remorseful liars" to recommend disbarment of my lawyer after Mr. Ewachniuk worked for 15 years to bring these cases to court exposing the "experimental surgery" fraud.

It was during Mr. Dosanjh’s tenure as AG that the Law Society of B.C. obstructed justice by harassing my counsel Mr. A. Ted Ewachniuk for representing me in the case judged by Justice Edwards. The benchers knew Mr. Edwards was the former Deputy Attorney General and ought not to be hearing cases where the AG Department represented some of the Defendants. The AG Department was defending MSC Chairman Dr. D. Bolton who ordered the immediate shredding of the evidence forwarded by MSC to BCMA after being served. It was no coincidence that the AG Department positioned the former Deputy Attorney General Mr. E.R.A. Edwards as a judge to dismiss my case and cover up for the Crown Corporations involved.

The AG Department did nothing to stop the violation of the seal under AG Dosanjh and neither did Justice E.R.A. Edwards who acted as an advocate for the WCB rather than an independent and impartial judge when he allowed the sealed July 31, 1986 Investigation Report to be circulated in his own courtroom despite oral and written objections of my counsel and my own Affidavits protesting that usage of the sealed Report constituted contempt of court.

The Attorney General Mr. Ujjal Dosanjh and his department ought to have intervened to stop this contempt of court which resulted in my judicial defamation which could only serve to improve the position of the AG Department’s own clients. That they did nothing to intervene verifies a lack of separation between the Crown and the Courts in British Columbia. The former Deputy AG Edwards in charge of investigating my complaints of criminal activity by Crown Corporations ought not to appear as the judge reviewing the WCB application for Summary Dismissal judgment concerning the same complaints.

Justice Edwards ought not to have sat in judgment of Kuntz v. WCB et al so as to assist the government perpetuate the scientific fraud that MMA usage was "experimental" at taxpayer expense. Mr. Edwards was appointed Assistant Deputy Minister of the Attorney General Department in 1985. and that was when his department took instructions from MSC Chairman Dr. David Bolton in Case No. 850099 Her Majesty the Queen in Right of the Province of British Columbia v. John David Kuntz heard May 28, 1986 in Victoria.

The Medical Services Commission used the AG Department to harass me through costly litigation wherein MSC demanded the return of $63,280 alleging I billed more work than my confreres under fee item 5625 for "orthopaedic interpretation of submitted x-ray films". The MSC and AG Department ignored my argument that I was the only orthopaedic surgeon in North West B.C. qualified to do this work and additionally inherited the unsolicited workload of radiologist Dr. Fred Hogg who died in an airplane crash. On October 10, 1986, Justice Charles Locke ruled:


"Not one claim is proved to have been wrongly paid. There is not one shred of evidence as to any single individual bill submitted by Dr. Kuntz establishing that there is no request from a referring doctor asking him to carry out an examination under item 5625. It is clear to me from the Act and Regulations that each submission of a bill to be paid is a separate individual claim. (Emphasis added)

In an action for money had and received I do not see how I can possibly speculate, even statistically, as to the amount of money that was probably advanced on a mistaken set of facts. In the result therefore, the action must be dismissed with costs."



I was then suspended without a hearing August 24, 1986 by the College and on October 31, 1986 the Attorney General department filed a Notice of Motion to Appeal to the B.C. Court of Appeal (C.A. No. V000372). They did not drop their appeal until after I was erased. When I later went to the AG Department in 1988 seeking their assistance, I did not realize that the AG Department was already working with MSC Chairman Dr. D. Bolton to harass me. Accordingly, despite the widespread community support and 8000 petitioners demanding a public enquiry into my suspension and erasure, the AG Department Director of Operations Mr. Ernest Quantz did nothing but cover up the wrongdoings of the College, WCB, MSC and the MSC Chairman Dr. Bolton. Mr. Quantz and his assistant Mr. Isaacs reported their findings in a letter to the then MSC Chairman Dr. C.B. Henderson who was one of my 1979 MSC accusers and adverse in interest. The letter of January 3, 1989 from Mr. Isaac of the Criminal Justice branch to Dr. Henderson was copied to the Executive Assistant to the Attorney General. Accordingly, the AG department had always been working with the MSC to cover up abuse of authority.

On May 14, 1993, I filed the Writ of Summons naming multiple defendants and in particular the defendants MSC, MSC Chairman Dr. David Bolton, Dr. Henderson, BCMA and Dr. H. Stansfield. The AG Department then surfaced as counsel of record for the MSC, MSC Chairman Dr. David Bolton, and Dr. R.B. Henderson.

In October 1993 when I complained to Attorney General Colin Gablemann about evidence tampering he delegated the complaint to the Deputy AG Mr. Neal who consulted with Criminal Justice Branch Director of Operations Mr. Quantz and refused to take action. The AG Department covered up again for criminal activity because the AG Department was already working with the MSC wrongdoers and reporting to them.

Dr. David Bolton left MSC to position himself as the BCMA Director of Professional Relations (which was a position previously held by another Defendant in these proceedings, Dr. H. Stansfield) where he continued to act as a de facto agent of the MSC. The AG Department appeared as his defense counsel of record and advised, directed and defended Dr. Bolton from 1983 to the present including when Dr. Bolton ordered the immediate shredding of evidence while under the AG advisement.

Dr. D. Bolton abused his new position of authority when he ordered the shredding of the MSC statistical evidence which he had previously sent to the BCMA Steering Committee when Dr. David Bolton was the MSC member to that committee. Dr. Bolton requested that the BCMA Patterns of Practice Committee investigate me in 1979 so as to bolster the secret WCB allegations that surgery they refused to authorize payment for was "unnecessary surgery". They were abusing their committees for other than their intended purpose to assist the WCB in advance of the Napoli v. WCB trial. The MSC statistics gathered by Drs. Bolton and Henderson were a smokescreen for the false WCB allegations that "unauthorized" surgery was "unnecessary" surgery and the MSC correspondence falsely implied that "so much surgery in such a small town as Kitimat" meant the surgery was unnecessary when MSC knew the cases were referred from across the Province and only a small percentage came from Kitimat.

The AG Department advised and defended Dr. D. Bolton after he was served the Writ and Statement of Claim identifying the WCB, MSC, BCMA and College as Defendants. Dr. Bolton ordered the "immediate shredding" of all the key MSC and WCB documents held at the offices of the BCMA. In his December 9, 1993 Memo to the Executive Committee of the BCMA Dr. Bolton ordered destruction of evidence that he knew would be vital to forthcoming litigation against MSC and BCMA. Dr. Bolton’s memo stated:

"7. All paper copies of profiles and mini-profiles representing the period prior to the 1986/1987 fiscal year are to be destroyed by confidential shredding immediately. ..."



The BCMA Executive Committee acted with undue haste to destroy evidence at the advice of Dr. David Bolton when they moved at their December 10, 1993 meeting, Resolution #E94-112:



"THAT DESTRUCTION OF THE RECORDS OF THE PATTERNS OF PRACTICE COMMITTEE BE APPROVED AS SET OUT IN PARAGRAPHS 7, 8 AND 10 OF DR. BOLTON’S MEMORANDUM OF DECEMBER 9, 1993.



It was only after I filed the Writ against the WCB, MSC, and BCMA that the work of destruction of records that the BCMA received from the MSC proceeded with great urgency. They began by June 1, 1994 and destroyed 36 feet of 108 feet of records by July 14, 1994. By September 7, 1994 the BCMA had destroyed 86 feet of a total of 108 feet of on-site Patterns of Practice Committee records and were 79% complete. The BCMA goal was to complete the document destruction by December 31, 1994.

On October 28, 1994 I filed the Statement of Claim in this action and I verily believe that precipitated an even greater urgency by the Executive Committee of the BCMA to specifically target all key files and correspondence relating to myself as soon as possible for destruction despite the impending litigation. On December 16, 1994, the Patterns of Practice file on myself still existed and the originals were placed into the custody of the Executive Director of the BCMA Dr. Norman D. Finlayson at his own request, presumably because he was also acting as a de facto agent of the MSC despite his new position with the BCMA and in response to receipt of my Statement of Claim.

It is noted from correspondence of May 10th 1978 that Dr. Finlayson had previously been associated with Dr. Bolton and the MSC as well as the BCMA Steering Committee whose documents were being shredded to obstruct justice. The then BCMA President Dr. Milobar wrote the Honorable Robert H. McClelland, Minster of Health on that date and said:


"As you may be aware, after representation form the Medical Services Commission, Dr. Bolton was placed on the steering Committee of the Patterns of Practice Committee. Unfortunately, he found it difficult to attend, but Dr. Finlayson since his appointment has attended on a regular basis. The Medical Services Commission has been in possession of the minutes and deliberations of the committee and all matters raised by the Commission have been dealt with...."



The September 20, 2000 Affidavit of the BCMA archivist Wendy Hunt (pages 4-5, pp. 1720) documented the passage of my Patterns of Practice Committee file (POPC file) to the then BCMA Executive Director Dr. (Norm) Finlayson and further stated:

"...He knew the file ought not to be destroyed."

 



I believe Dr. Finlayson had both a legal and a fiduciary duty to protect the evidence in his custody as BCMA Executive Director who knew about the impending litigation naming the BCMA and the MSC as a defendant. However because of his prior association with the steering Committee when MSC statistical documentation was submitted to assist WCB to trump up the 1979 BCMA investigation of myself, Dr. Finlayson now assisted Dr. Bolton in the destruction of evidence.

The Affidavit of Hunt further stated:


"Dr. Finlayson believes that the Plaintiff’s POPC file was later destroyed in the normal course by BCMA staff who were not aware that the Plaintiff’s POPC case file was not to be destroyed."



Accordingly, when during the course of litigation, the critical documentary evidence detrimental to the position of Dr. Bolton, MSC, BCMA, College and WCB is shredded on the advice of the former MSC Chairman Dr. David Bolton who is being advised by his lawyers from the Attorney-General Department, and when key evidence disappears while in the custody of the BCMA’s most senior officer, the BCMA Executive Director Dr. Finlayson, then all adverse inferences must apply towards the conclusion that the Attorney General Department acting for Dr. Bolton and the MSC was a party to sanctioning the destruction of key evidence at the BCMA offices to obstruct justice.

The Attorney-General Department was involved in the cover-up for Dr. Bolton and the MSC because on July 8, 1983, Dr. D.M. Bolton, Chairman of Medical Services Commission, wrote the Honorable James A. Nielsen, Minister of Health and stated;


"...the insertion of the methyl methacrylate prosthetic disc which Dr. Kuntz used in human beings is experimental surgery".



Upon receiving that false information, on October 17, 1983 the Minister of Health Mr. Nielsen wrote my satisfied patient Mrs. James N. McKeown of Terrace who was seeking that the College moratorium be rescinded and disc replacement services be reinstated to benefit others. The Minister of Health stated:


"...the surgery, at this time, is still considered to be experimental and it is felt that, before this surgery is recommended for human use ....the procedure must remain on the experimental surgery list."



There never was an "experimental surgery list" for British Columbia and this surgery never was "experimental" at all material times. Accordingly the Minister of Health, acting upon the false information received from MSC Chairman Dr. David Bolton, was disseminating a scientific fraud and supporting false rumors and innuendoes used to justify WCB-funded litigation against me.

After the 1993 Writs were served in Kuntz v. WCB et al, my counsel Mr. A. Ted Ewachniuk further served all these defendants including BCMA and MSC on March 26, 1996 with a demand for discovery of the Defendants documents and gave them 21 days to comply by sending their List of Documents. They failed to respond knowing very well that they had already destroyed all the key documents to obstruct justice yet remained silent. I verily believe that the proper order is for disclosure of documents to come before the examinations for discovery and that the failure of the AG Department representing the MSC Defendants to disclose that they had already destroyed all the key documents by December 1994 demonstrates that they intentionally delayed progress of the litigation to protect their client Dr. Bolton from cross-examination which ought to follow the disclosure of documents in the usual course of legal events.

By February 28, 2000 the BCMA and MSC had still not disclosed the shredding of key files during the course of active litigation and the WCB and College also failed to provide the important files which were requested concerning the MSC, WCB and WCB/BCMA Liaison Committee. Accordingly my counsel advised them of his intention to proceed with the cross-examination of the Defendants Dr. H. Stansfield. The lawyers Ed Gouge Q.C. and Anne Fitzpatrick of Lawson Lundell Lawson & McIntosh made an unsuccessful application to have a guardian ad litem appointed to spare Dr. Stansfield from cross-examination on his perjured April 20, 1998 Affidavit after Mr. Ewachniuk asked on February 28 and 29, 2000 for a list of convenient times to cross-examine Dr. H. Stansfield and the BCMA. When the application failed, Mr. Ewachniuk demanded that they produce Dr. H. Stansfield for cross-examination on the discrepancies on his perjured Affidavit and lawyer Ed Gouge refused stating he would never produce him. Mr. Gouge than appealed the decision while contemporaneously moving ahead on an application for Summary Dismissal while my requests of document disclosure and cross-examination remained outstanding. Mr. Gouge was stonewalling and it was only subsequent to that time that the evidence of document shredding came to my attention for the first time. He was then successful in his appeal wherein Dr. Stansfield’s wife was then appointed as guardian ad litem so as to prevent his cross-examination on the perjured Affidavit. Accordingly, after 15 years of litigation wherein lawyers stonewalled in unison to obstruct justice, I have never been allowed to cross-examine one single Defendant living in Canada.

On December 27, 2000, the Ministry of Attorney General lawyer Jakob de Villiers Q.C. wrote to threaten my lawyer Mr. Ewachniuk and stated:

"Re: John David Kuntz v. The Workers’ Compensation Board of British Columbia et al Supreme Court Action No. C932720 - my clients, Medical Services Commission, Bolton and Henderson."

"...Please be advised that the Trial Co-ordinator has fixed a date of Hearing of my clients’ application for summary dismissal of your client’s action for March 21, 2001 at 10:00 a.m....Please be informed that upon the hearing of the application my clients will seek an Order that special costs be assessed against you personally in a lump sum to be fixed by the Court."



That A.G. Department letter was copied to Lawson Lundell Lawson & McIntosh, attention J. Edward Gouge acting for BCMA, Dr. Stansfield and Dr. Purves who also had an outstanding Section 18 Application for Summary Dismissal of my case against BCMA, Drs. Stansfield and Purves.

The Attorney General Department also copied its letter to Sugden, Mcfee & Roos attention of Craig Dennis who was acting for the Defendants Dr. Tessler, Dr. P.K. Van Peteghem, Dr. R.N. Meek and Dr. F.P. Patterson, all of whom intentionally misled the public and the courts by their support of the scientific fraud that MMA usage for disc replacement was "experimental." Mr. Sugden whose law firm acted for the above defendants was now in conflict by accepting the defense of my lawyer when his firm acted for Dr. F.P. Patterson who was the source of the experimental surgery fraud. Mr. Sugden ought never to have agreed to allowing the Law Society to use a biased Prosecutor Mr. Herman van Ommen to investigate my lawyer knowing that Mr. van Ommen was the husband of Barbara Norell whom Mr. Ewachniuk was suing on my behalf. Furthermore, Mr. R. Sugden of Sugden, Mcfee & Roos was the counsel retained by WCB in 1987 when I unsuccessfully appealed the Cohen judgment in Coughlin v. Kuntz and when my WCB-friendly lawyer was the bencher Mr. H. Grey Q.C. whose law firm withheld my evidence of prior MMA usage for disc replacement in feigning a defense in the WCB-funded Coughlin v. Kuntz case. The informed person acting reasonably would perceive apprehension of bias knowing Mr. Sugden’s law firm now acted for the defendants recorded above who were advantaged when Mr. Sugden inadequately defended my lawyer resulting in his disbarment so as to leave me without counsel in the case against his law firm’s own clients including Dr. F.P. Patterson who was the source of the experimental surgery fraud. Accordingly it appears virtually impossible to escape the WCB and the incestuous conflicts of interest that exist within the legal profession in British Columbia.

The Attorney General Department also copied the letter to Douglas Symes & Brissenden attention David Martin who acted for the College in the Rita Linnea Harriet Wilson et al v. College of Physicians and Surgeons of B.C., Kitimat General Hospital, Wrinch Memorial Hospital et al. This was the same David Martin who acted for the College when I appealed the erasure decision. David Martin received the May 29, 1992 letter of opinion of the Late Honorable Court of Appeal Judge Mr. R.P. Anderson Q.C. stating that the Council’s decision to erase me had to be quashed because the October 19, 1988 hearing contravened the requirements of Administrative Law in that the July 31, 1986 Investigation Report was never filed in evidence and was not before the Council. Mr. Martin counseled College President Dr. J.W. Ibbott to tamper with my sworn evidence which were in the custody of Mr. Martin and the quasi-judicial College such that Exhibit numbers were changed and false Exhibits inserted so as to belatedly deal with the criticisms of Mr. R.P. Anderson by belatedly introducing the July 31, 1986 Report as part of a newly altered record which included tampered material which was not before Council at the erasure hearing. Mr. Martin then placed this false record of the College erasure hearing before Justice Loo at my 1998 appeal of the College erasure where Madam Justice Loo pronounced against me on February 3, 1999.

Therein at the trial before Judge Loo, Mr. Martin circulated the untested sealed July 31, 1986 Investigation Report as a false record knowing it was never entered into evidence at the erasure hearing as confirmed in the May 29, 1992 letter of opinion of the late Honorable Mr. Justice R.P. Anderson Q.C. Mr. Martin altered the record to obstruct justice and my appeal of the College erasure before Justice Loo was unsuccessful. Judge Linda Loo then quoted four pages of the sealed Report in her judgment causing judicial defamation of my good name. Mr. Martin then refused to sign the Appeal Books when my counsel Mr. Ewachniuk appealed the judgment of Madam Justice Loo, all of which was designed to obstruct justice.

I appealed the judgment of Justice Edwards to the Supreme Court of Canada. The WCB lawyer Mr. E. Dolden circulated the sealed Report in contempt of court before Justice Edwards who then ruled against me. Mr. Dolden then won an Order of Justice McEachern for deposit of security for costs of $20,000 before I could proceed to the B.C. Court of Appeal. When Justices Esson, McEachern and Donald upheld the judgment of Edwards, I appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada. Mr. Dolden’s subsequent "Submission of the Applicants to Obtain Security for Costs" dated December 22, 2000 was designed to place another financial barrier in the way of my appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada.

A week later on December 29, 2000, the Law Society disbarred my lawyer Mr. A. Ted Ewachniuk so as to facilitate the obstruction of justice and on January 3, 2001 counsel for the WCB Mr. E. Dolden filed the Respondents’ Response to the Application for Leave to Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada stating:

"These Respondents are asking for security for costs prior to the Applicant’s Leave to Appeal application being considered..." and further requesting: "That leave to appeal to this Honorable Court be dismissed with costs."



In summary, the Law Society and Department of the Attorney General worked together in collusion to intimidate and disbar my lawyer Mr. A. Ted Ewachniuk before the AG Department’s application for a Summary Dismissal of the case against their clients was heard. They worked in collusion with Mr. Ed Gouge Q.C., counsel for the BCMA, Dr. Stansfield and Dr. Purves who also had an outstanding application for Summary Dismissal. But even worse, they did it to block my appeal of the judgment of the biased judge Mr. Justice E.R.A. Edwards who had dismissed my case against the WCB. The Law Society did it to leave me without counsel as the case to expose the bias of the bench proceeded to the Supreme Court of Canada for Leave to Appeal where I was appealing under Section 11(d) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms which states that everyone has the right "to be presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law in a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial panel."

There is an old Arabian proverb "Judge a man by the reputation of his enemies". There were a lot of government regulated bodies working together to perpetuate a scientific fraud and deny patients state of the art surgery in British Columbia and a lot of lawyers profiting by robbing the insurance funds. Those collusive efforts required the assistance of the Attorney General Department and Law Society working together to obstruct justice by leaving me without counsel as they now move swiftly to exploit the precedent set by Mr. Justice Edwards.

There was no separation whatsoever between the Crown and the Court in British Columbia where the former Deputy AG appeared as Judge Edwards and behaved more like an advocate for the WCB than a judge. The informed person acting reasonably would perceive Justice Edwards as little more than a de facto agent of the AG Department which was acting for the MSC defendants. Mr. Edwards allowed the WCB Defendants to circulate a judicially sealed Report in contempt of court and rewarded them by granting the WCB application for a Summary Dismissal with special costs against me. The WCB then demanded those special costs to be deposited with the Court before proceeding to the B.C. Court of Appeal and the WCB is now demanding more security for costs to block my appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada.

It must be remembered that the WCB caused my bankruptcy. The WCB directed the 1979 BCMA Patterns of Practice Committee investigation against me using Dr. Patterson, the 1981 College Section 50 Investigation by Dr. Patterson which spawned the scientific fraud of "experimental surgery", and the 1986 College Section 48 investigation where they used Dr. Patterson’s friend Dr. McGraw to echo and perpetuate Dr. Patterson’s myth that MMA usage for disc replacement and fusion was "experimental surgery". The WCB then exploited that scientific fraud for the 1987 WCB-funded Coughlin v. Kuntz litigation followed by the 1987 Rita Linnea Harriet Wilson et al Class Action naming myself as a defendant and the expanded May 6, 1988 Rita Linnea Harriet Wilson et al Class Action enjoining the College as a co-defendant before the College sat in judgment of myself October 19, 1988 and erased me from the Register thereby forcing me into bankruptcy.

The WCB then appeared as an intervener at my 1989 Discharge from Bankruptcy hearing where they required that litigation for an alleged 1800 cases of "experimental surgery" would continue against me as a condition of my Discharge from Bankruptcy and further required that the "irrevocable control" of my defense be assigned to CMPA and their old WCB-friendly Harper Grey Easton and Company lawyer. The WCB knew it was important to have Mr. Harvey Grey Q.C. in charge of my defense because he had represented the WCB at their unsuccessful appeal of Napoli v. WCB when the WCB first attempted to have me suspended. When I finally escaped the adverse influence of the WCB through independent counsel Mr. Ewachniuk, they joined forces to disbar my lawyer so as to regain "irrevocable control" of my defense to obstruct justice and perpetuate the "experimental surgery" fraud on the public.

Accordingly, there is no separation whatsoever between the Crown and the Court in British Columbia when the AG department represents some of the Defendants and positions its own judge on the bench to sit with prior knowledge. Justice ought to be equal for all citizens across Canada whether in Ontario or B.C. and the AG department ought to have protected me from criminal defamation by the quasi-judicial College of Physicians and Surgeons of B.C. The College unsuccessfully opposed the judicial sealing of the untested defamatory July 31, 1986 Investigation Report which they commissioned to defame me in advance of the Class Action trial and the AG Department ought to have enforced the seal to ensure I received a fair hearing. For example, in Ontario the government enforced a judicial seal to protect the rights of multiple murderer Paul Bernardo to a fair hearing and in BC the government currently enforces a judicial seal to protect the rights of former B.C. Premier Glen Clark to a fair hearing in a criminal trial where abuse of influence to facilitate granting of casino licenses to friends is alleged. I have the same sealing Order and should enjoy the same enforcement of the Order to ensure a fair hearing.


Mr. Ojjal Dosanjh was the Attorney General from 1995 to 2000 when his Department covered up for the shredding of the MSC evidence and denied me the benefits of the rule of law by refusing to enforce a seal so as to ensure me a fair hearing in a civil trial wherein the AG Department represented the MSC Defendants. The citizens of British Columbia are entitled to know why all defendants have been denied me file disclosure and the Charter rights of cross-examination. The public is entitled to know why the CMPA insisted that litigation would continue against their client as a condition of my Discharge from Bankruptcy, why they required the "irrevocable control" of my defense and why every case against me for experimental surgery has been lost in Canada in contrast to the USA where there has never been a successful case for experimental surgery against a doctor using MMA disc replacement. The Law Society will have to answer why three consecutive lawyers were suspended while attempting to represent me beyond the control of the bencher Harvey Grey Q.C. and the CMPA. And finally, the AG must explain why I was denied the rights to a fair hearing by an impartial and independent bench and that excludes the former Deputy Attorney General.

David Kuntz.

John David Kuntz,
[email protected]



Related:
A Giraffe has been sighted in Vancouver BC - David Kuntz MD
The Matter of Dr. David Kuntz
Collusion, Cover-ups and Conspiracies
http://wcbcanada.com/modules/WCB-BB/viewtopic.php?t=1889&highlight=kuntz
http://aiws.sphosting.com/drkuntz2.htm
A Tale Of Spines , Surgeons and Skullduggery In British Colombia



Back to Article Index

SIGN THE PETITION!

TAKE ACTION
JOIN the CIWS

workers compensation Canadian Injured Workers Society for workers compensation reform

What's Wrong with Workers Compensation?

NEWS
Injured Workers' Stories
About Us
Current Activities
Past Activities
Commissions & Reports
Law Court Decisions
Related Articles
Medical Professionals
Employees' Info
Employers' Info
Politicians' Info
Resources
Privacy and Copyright
Contact
Home

SIGN THE PETITION!