 |
| Herman Van Ommen, a Weasal of a Man |
Herman Van Ommen is a partner with the giant Canadian law firm of
McCarthy Tetrault. Herman practices law in Vancouver, British Columbia, and frequently represents the
Law Society of British Columbia in cases involving allegations of professional mis-conduct by lawyers. It was in this capacity that
Herman Van Ommen crossed paths with British Columbia lawyer
Karl Eisbrenner who was exposing political corruption in
British Columbia, that most corrupt of
Canadian provinces.
The
Law Society of British Columbia has a reputation for deviousness and corruption which should come as no surprise to readers because
Vancouver and other parts of
British Columbia are controlled by various organized crime groups.
Karl Eisbrenner presented a problem for the
Law Society of British Columbia and his story is better told at the web site dedicated to his memory
http://karleisbrenner.blogspot.com/ . On this blog our focus is the role of
Herman van Ommen and the devious strategy of character assassination by psychiatry employed by the corrupt employees and the
Law Society.
When the
Law Society of British Columbia decided it needed to dis-bar and dis-credit
Karl Eisbrenner and his cliients, 188 senior citizens whose retirement lives were thrown into chaos by an allegedly illegal mining operation carried on by
British Columbia politician,
Bill Barisoff, they hired Vancouver psychiatrist,
Dr. Jeanette Smith, to conduct a psychiatric assessment of
Karl Eisbrenner. Dr. Jeanette Smith wrote a report in which she declared that
Karl Eisbrenner was delusional about the case he was working on. The problem with the report of
Dr. Jeanette Smith is that she never interviewed a single witness and never read a single affidavit from the case - a fact she admitted under cross-examination by
Mr. Eisbrenner at his disbarrment hearing. So, how could she possibly state that
Karl Eisbrenner was delusional about the facts if she never checked the facts. This is not rocket science. It is common sense and basic science.
The problem for
Herman Van Ommen is that, as a lawyer, he should have known, and, probably, did know, that the report of
Dr. Smith was bogus.
Firstly, we say
Herman Van Ommen should have known the psychiatric report was bogus because as a competent lawyer,
Herman Van Ommen, would have known that a psychiatrist cannot determine that a lawyer is delusional about a lawsuit without checking the facts and, based on the record of the proceedings at the
Law Society hearing that disbarred
Karl Eisbrenner,
Herman Van Ommen would have known that
Dr. Jeanette Smith admitted under Oath that she had not checked the facts of the case to see if
Karl Eisbrenner was delusional or not.
Secondly, we say that because he was the
Law Society lawyer,
Herman Van Ommen would probably have been well aware of the
Law Society strategy of character assassination by psychiatry - a strategy the
Law Society has used in other cases.
So, in our opinion. when
Karl Eisbrenner appealed his disbarment to the
British Columbia Court of Appeal, Herman Van Ommen knew that the disbarment had been procured by fraudulent means and, by remaining silent,
Herman Van Ommen, in our opinion, engaged in obstruction of justice and carried out fraud on the court.
