Part - 4 California Crimes, No Justice By Dr. Dial

August 12, 2011 Friday

To be posted today on : www.googleblog.blogspot.com/LinoDial


Title : Part - 4 California Crimes, No Justice and Hanson Bridgett LLP
By Dr. Lino Dial


In Parts 1, 2, and 3 of California Crimes, No Justice and the connection
with prominent San Francisco Law firm of Hanson Bridgett was established.

Attorney Steven V. Schnier is a senior partner of Hanson Bridgett LLP.

http://www.hansonbridgett.com

In Part - 3 which I posted yesterday, I mentioned that Attorney Schnier
was the person in charge of a Judicial Hearing held according to Law in
the city of Vallejo, in Solano County, California 94589.

The main topic or evidences submitted and accepted as evidences during
the Judicial Hearing were those related to Peer Review investigations in
the hospital. Attorney Steven V. Schnier was the Hospital Attorney and
he was the person who presented the patients admitted into the Hospital.

There were 53 Crimes committed during that Judicial Hearing.
The crimes of Dr. Peter E. Philbin and Dr. Leonard A. Brant were made,
presented and documented yesterday ( pages 43 and 84 respectively ).

Frauds committed by Attorney Steven V. Schnier :

In Part - 3 , I noted the Frauds presented by Attorney Steven V. Schnier.

The evidence is the 100 - page transcript of the Judicial Hearing.

On page 8 Lines 24 - 25, Attorney Steven Schnier was asked whether
he received or asked for Monitoring or Medical reports during
the Peer Review and Hospital investigation.

On page 8 Line 26 , Attorney Schnier answered yes.

On page 8 Lines 27 - 28 , Mr. Schnier was asked: Were there reports
submitted by Doctors ?

On page 9 Line 1 , Attorney Steven V. Schnier answered yes.

In Part - 3 of California Crimes which I presented yesterday, I said that
Attorney Schnier's statements were F a l s e on three counts :

First ( Fraud ) : The patient could Not have been hospitalized because he
had been dead for a year before the so - called
Peer Review and Hospital investigation.

This is Fraud.

Second ( Fraud ) : As noted above, Attorney Steven V. Schnier said that he
had asked for and received monitoring or medical reports during the Peer
Review hospital investigation.

This is another fraud.

This was Not possible because the said patient had been dead for a year
at the time of the so - called investigation.

Third ( Fraud ) : As noted on page 8 also, Attorney Schnier said that the Doctors who monitored or investigated the patient made and submitted
medical reports.

This is another fraud because this patient was dead already before the
investigation.

More evidences of frauds committed by Attorney Schnier and documented
in the 100 - page transcript of the Judicial Hearing.

These have been submitted to the Cakifornia Medical Board and Justice
Dept. No investigation done.

More frauds recorded in the 100 - page transcript :

Page 58 Line 13 : another patient was supposedly hospitalized and investigated during the Peer Review hospital investigation.

Page 60 Lines 21 - 22 : the patient described on page 58 was not
hospitalized during the Peer Review hospital investigation.

In other words, the patient was not in the hospital during the investigation.

And yet Attorney Schnier speaks of monitoring reports of this patient.

This is clearly another fraud.

The statements of Attorney Schnier who presented the patients at the
Judicial Hearing are false or frauds on three counts just like on page 8
and page 9 in the 100 - page transcript.

Frauds committed by Attorney Steven V. Schnier :

1. First set of three frauds are noted on pages 8 and 9.

Attorney Steven V. Schnier was the one who presented the patients with
their Hospital records as evidences. He was caught in the act of telling lies,
deceits and falsehoods.

2. Second set of three frauds are noted on page 56 Lines 16 - 17.

First ( Fraud ) : This second patient was not in the hospital at the time of
the so - called investigation.

This is Fraud.


Second ( Fraud ) : Attorney Schnier was very Bold and confident in saying
that he had asked for and received monitoring or medical reports from the Doctors who monitored or investigated this patient.

Reason that this is another fraud :

A Doctor can not investigate a patient who was not there or absent from
the hospital.

Third ( Fraud ) : Attorney Schnier speaks of doctor's medical reports on
this second patient. This is also fraud.

No patient means no medical report.

Attorney Steven V. Schnier is a graduate of Stanford University Law School
in California.


In another language that Attorney Schnier could possibly understand :

1. A Doctor could not examine and make a report on a patient who was
not there or absent.

2. A Mechanic could not work on a car and make a job estimate or work
estimate if the car is not there or absent.

3. A Chef could not work on a fish or meat that is not there or absent.
If he submits a report on work that he did, that is simply fraud.

This is disgusting and despicable behavior.

And yet the California Justice Dept. and Medical Board do not do anything.
No investigation done.

There are more frauds and falsehoods committed by Attorney Schnier and
were documented in the transcript of that Judicial Hearing.

Question :

How many counts of Frauds do you need ?

A Judicial Hearing is a Legal proceeding.

The transcript is a Legal document.


To be continued. More frauds coming up in Part - 5.


The End.