B.C. Supreme Court Summary Trial - Rule 18A Application - Judicial Fraud
Justice Blair said:
[18] Mrs. Dianna Lynn Postnikoff deposed in her affidavit filed February 2, 1998, that she attended with her husband at Dr. White's office on September 20, 1994, and discussed birth control options including vasectomy and tubal ligation. She understood from that conversation that a vasectomy was a "simple procedure that carried no risk". Dr. White deposed that on September 20, 1994, he saw Mr. Postnikoff with regard to another medical matter and his notes make no reference of a discussion about a vasectomy on that date. His records reflect the initial conversation with Mr. Postnikoff regarding the vasectomy occurred on September 30, 1994. Blair, J. BLAIR J.
B.C. Court of Appeal Madam Justice Ryan said:
[11] In this case Dr. White had no recollection of discussing the operation with Mr. Postnikoff on September 20... "Madam Justice Ryan"
Expert Evidence Question # 3
| Question 3: |
| 3) Within his affidavit did Dr. Philip Anthony White dispute any submissions that had been presented by Mrs. Dianna Lynn Postnikoff within her affidavit? |
| Expert Answer 3: |
| 3) No, the affidavit does not even refer to an affidavit presented by Mrs. Dianna Lynn Postnikoff. ... John David McGreevy, Barrister & Solicitor. |
Accepted Government Judicial Standard - Contradictory Evidence
WARNING! Fraudulent Judicial Allegations For Benefit.
The Truth
Absolutely no "Memory Shortage" was claimed by Dr. White regarding the Plaintiff and his wife's attendance and the discussions at his office on September 20, 1994 as alleged by Madam Justice Ryan regarding this Rule 18A application summary trial. Nothing disputed these discussions. Dr. White getting paid for the same September 20, 1994 attendance that Judge Richard Blair claimed to not happened is judicial fraud. Fraud is claimed on an alleged consent and alleged evidence that failed to appear. Without a reasonable explanation and producing his alleged evidence on claimed contradictory evidence, B.C. Supreme Court Justice Richard Blair is Judicial Fraud who continues to hear cases today.
Justice Blair said:
[11] I conclude that a decision in these Rule 18A applications ought not be precluded solely because Mr. Postnikoff is unrepresented. I am further satisfied that from the material filed in these applications I can find the facts and make conclusions on contradictory evidence as are necessary to reach judgment and that to do so would not be unjust: ... Blair, J. BLAIR J.
[16] ... However, I find that the material provides me with the requisite base upon which to reach conclusions on the issue of consent. Blair, J. BLAIR J.
A trial was not permitted by Judge Blair, no witnesses or cross-examination. (the following is taken from real court documents)
40. It is respectfully submitted that the Notice of Motion be set aside on the grounds that the Honourable Court should be allowed to examine all the material facts and all the evidence that is to be presented at the trial and the examination of all the witnesses; and that a proper examination of the evidence and the facts may not be possible during this notice of Motion. Important details that I wish to present to the Honourable Court to assist the Honourable Court in making its final ruling.
I respectfully request that the Notice of Motion be set aside so that the defendants Dr. Philip Anthony White and Dr. Donald Ray Morrow; The Kelowna and District Hospital Society provide its nurses, emergency room physician and all persons having first hand, direct or personal knowledge of the facts so they are available to me by the defendants for cross examination at trial.
|
