This week on the Mad in America podcast, we are joined by activist and artist Jim Flannery.

Born and raised in suburban Weathersfield, Connecticut, Jim was committed at four mental hospitals across the United States. There he received the best care available in the modern world… torture, which included seclusion, restraints, forced drugging, coercion, and a psychiatric diagnosis.

Later, he turned to the arts to speak out publicly about his experiences with the mental health system through performing stand-up comedy under the pseudonym Flim Jannery and now through music with his new album, “Sorry, It’s Not Funny,” which will be released on Friday, October 14.

In 2020, Jim began hearing voices, which opened his eyes to what he terms a genocide against neurodiverse people. He shifted his creative efforts towards hip-hop, believing the genre was the best medium to communicate his perspective.

The transcript below has been edited for length and clarity. Listen to the audio of the interview here.

Karin Jervert: Thanks so much for being here, Jim.

Jim Flannery: Thank you for talking to me, and having me here. Appreciate it.

Jervert: I’m also a voice hearer, so I feel this will be a really interesting, wonderful conversation between two peers. I’m also an artist, so we both have used the arts in our work and in our lives, so I’m excited to talk to you about that.
To start with, I wanted to ask you about your experience as Flim Jannery, the comedian. How did that come about and what was your experience as a comedian in this space? Do you identify as a psych survivor?

Flannery: That’s the term that I’ve used. The trouble with it is I don’t think people really know what I’m talking about, and so lately I’ve been using the term “ex-mental patient,” which feels a little more appropriate. Since I’ve had this experience of becoming a voice hearer, and given my previous experiences, I sure as hell wasn’t going to go to a mental hospital to ask for help. I’ve gotten support through hearing voices groups, and that kind of thing. But the reality is, I’d be too scared to be a mental patient again. Once I open my mouth and say things then it’s trouble. I kind of prefer now “ex-mental patient,” although that doesn’t really get to the point of being a survivor of something.

Jervert: I absolutely agree. Sometimes when I use the term “psychiatric survivor,” people actually say to me, “what does that mean?”
Did using your comedy in the space of the psychiatric survivor movement—and for yourself personally—did that help you to heal from the abuse you experienced?

Flannery: I guess the first question is how did I get started? When I was a kid, I was really into stand-up comedy. I remember being really young listening to Chris Rock and feeling like I was hearing things that I wasn’t supposed to hear at that age. At the same time, I was being exposed to ideas and stories and things about the world that I wasn’t exposed to before. There was a journalistic aspect that I saw in comedy. Guys like George Carlin sharing their ideas. He, later in his career, thought of himself as a writer that performed his material instead of a comedian that wrote his own material. I learned a lot from these people, and they influenced me.

There were other comedians. I remember being a big Dane Cook fan, and David Attell. There’s something amazing about it. You’re laughing, you’re learning, you share it with friends. I hate to say it because I just put out a hip-hop album, but I still think comedy is my favorite medium of art. I just need it even if I’m not doing it.

I tried doing comedy in high school, but, by the time I got onto a stage there was all this writing, and writing, and writing and then I perform and it was like, “Oh, well, this kind of sucks.” I thought [being on stage] was supposed to be the part that everyone worked towards. I was like, “What am I doing up here? I’m 16, there are all these adults and what am I doing here?” I just stopped. It’s sort of anticlimactic to spend all that time, maybe a year or something, writing notes and putting together this five-minute thing and then just stopping.

Then I was 22 and got locked up in a mental hospital. For me, did I deserve to be? Is there something wrong with me? First off, is there anything wrong with me biologically? Is there something going on right now that I need some help with? Well, that’s not so much a biological flaw, but maybe I need some support or help.

My family took me there, they were worried something was going on. They thought I’d hit my head or was on drugs. Something is wrong with Jim. I was not pleased to be going there.

I took on a lot [at that time]. I was 22 and had started a company with a classmate of mine, we raised all this money and there’s all this pressure and I didn’t have any mentors or people to talk to. There was a lot going on and a lot of pressure. The idea that somehow, I’m biologically flawed because I couldn’t handle that pressure is partly the argument that the hospital is making for why I was locked up there—there’s something wrong with me.

Not only is there something wrong with me, but they can’t cure it. They can give me drugs for the rest of my life… just the whole experience. It’s bad. It’s the worst. You don’t even know anything about it. You have no idea that these things exist, and then all of a sudden you’re the dude who is getting surrounded by people, injected, tied down to a hospital bed and you’re like, what the hell is going on?

I thought I was going to Boston that night to meet with the people I was working with. We have this huge thing going on, and you’re telling me that I can’t leave? Even though I haven’t broken a law? What the hell are you talking about? There’s shock and like “What the hell?” Now, of course, you’re in this situation where you’re surprised, you’re shocked, you’ve almost been kidnapped from your life. Maybe at this point, you’ve been injected with [a drug], and all this is going on and you’re supposed to act calm. They’re judging you this entire time based on your reaction to what’s going on. And they’re using everything you do to build their case about how you’re mentally ill.

How is a human being supposed to react in that situation? I didn’t do anything violent. It’s like what is the point of even doing anything violent? There is no escape from this place. The doors are locked. There are staff, there are cameras, and you’re just [stuck]. I had my sister there for part of the time, but you’re there alone. Then you get injected, you get tied down, you wake up and then you’re really alone.

Jervert: You and a lot of people use the term “torture” to describe this experience. I myself use that as well, that this was a form of torture.

Flannery: Right, I use the word torture and people think I must be overreacting or using some artistic literary tool to exaggerate. What part of it do other people think is torture? You got tied down, but what did you do? You must have done something. Oh, they shot you up, what did you do? That’s the part that people focus on as being the torture, the needles, the restraints.

It is impossible to capture the experience of waking up in this hospital and being like, wait I can’t leave here? I didn’t do anything wrong. Oh, there’s something wrong with me? Then my reaction is, fuck you there’s nothing wrong with me. Or prove it. No, no, there’s something wrong with you. The fact that you don’t accept it? Well, that’s a symptom. We will write that down. One more symptom. Well, what am I supposed to do?

I was 22, and I called people. That was one of the things that seemed a crazy thing to do, right? There’s a payphone there with a phone book and I’m locked in this place. What am I going to do? I’m going to try to get out. I’m calling people from the mental hospital, which is great. That’s the best place to call people from. “Hey, I got locked up in the mental hospital, and they won’t let me out. I don’t know what the hell to do, please help me, somebody please help me.” But, there’s nobody that can help you, and now you’re just a crazy person because you’re calling everybody you know saying I’m locked in a mental hospital.

Some of those people might call other people and say, “I got this call from Jim, he’s locked up in a mental hospital.” All this is going on outside and you’re creating this storm. In your mind you’re thinking, maybe that’s a good thing. Maybe if as many people as possible know that I’m in here, somebody’s going to do something.

My family is friends with the probate court judge at the time in Hartford. I was in Hartford at the Institute of Living. I’m locked up there and I think I saw on a pamphlet or something that I could have a meds against the will hearing. Naturally, there was a period of time where I was like, why would I take these drugs and all that?

It’s embarrassing, and there’s a lot of shame with the fact that then eventually they did talk me into there being something wrong with me, and I did take the drugs. To be an activist or somebody speaking out about this, it feels like you’re a failure. You weren’t strong enough, you couldn’t handle being in there without ending up taking these damn drugs. Yet, you talk to people on the outside when you’re locked up in there, and the best advice that you get is you’re going to be there for 30 days. If you keep putting up a fight, they’re going to transfer you over to a state hospital because your insurance is going to run out.

Jervert: I want to ask you specifically, when you got out, and years later when you started speaking out about it, where did comedy take you? When you started engaging with comedy?

Flannery:  Your question seems to be, how did it help me? That is sort of an awkward response in that it didn’t help me really in anything. It mostly made my life worse, for me personally. There are folks that do benefit from talking about their experiences and maybe, in a way, being at a hearing voices group and saying it out loud and being able to communicate with people, that’s a very effective therapeutic thing. To say, “I can’t just have this in my head, I need to talk about this. I need to find the words to describe these experiences. Otherwise, won’t I have some mental instability if I don’t talk about this with anyone?”

But if you talk about it publicly you could ruin your life, because once you say these things publicly, you’re shutting the doors on employment opportunities, potentially romantic partners, friends, and potentially family. To say that it is therapeutic to come out like that, I don’t know. Maybe. I’ve heard people relate it to coming out for people who are homosexual.

I’ve got to believe that there are some benefits to being open and being yourself. But, comedy, in some ways, made my life much worse. The effort to speak out publicly about these experiences, because I didn’t know about any of this stuff when I got locked up. If I had known something, maybe it could have gone differently, if my family had known something. If people knew about these things, they sure as hell wouldn’t have taken me to a mental hospital.

I hate to say it, I heard voices, it started a couple of years ago. I felt I needed help. I don’t know that I needed biological help, as in psychiatric drugs, but I needed to go somewhere and talk to someone. But based on what had happened to me, I’m never going to hospital for that and I’m not taking someone else there.

Jervert: When you started doing the comedy, you did a lot of work with MindFreedom International and things like that. How do you think comedy works in the activism space?

Flannery: I really believed in comedy. I’m not saying that it’s not a good medium. But, beginning to hear voices changed my perspective about the seriousness of the subject matter I’m talking about. I’ve tried to laugh and talk about it. It’s just, how the hell do I laugh and talk about it? It’s hard to make jokes about it. Then it just got angrier. I’ve gotten a lot angrier over time. Some comedy can come from anger, but the goal here was to become the biggest comedian that exists on the damn earth, so everybody knows about these experiences and talks about this stuff. But ultimately, and I hate to say, I have a bad sense of humor, but something about comedy, or maybe it’s the way that I do it, that somehow someone’s the brunt of a joke.

I try to talk about myself and my own experiences as much as I can. But there’s something that absolutely sucks about knowing people’s feelings are being hurt by the jokes I make. I don’t mean to sound like I’m trying to cancel comedy. I’m not trying to do any of that. It’s my own work, my own words, my own stuff. I guess you could say, I cancelled myself, I just didn’t want to hurt people anymore. It almost makes me think of John Taylor Gatto a little bit.

Gatto was the New York State Teacher of the Year a couple of times, and then he ended up giving a speech for being awarded it and saying “I no longer want to hurt children. I’m not going to teach anymore.” There was a part of that for me. It’s like all right, I’ll stop doing comedy, but what do I do instead?

I thought for a while about hip-hop, because there’s something about that genre that is so raw and honest and authentic. Some of it is funny, but it doesn’t need to be. I wanted to make hip-hop music, but it seemed like something that I could not do as the main thing I did, I couldn’t be a hip-hop artist. I could be a comedian that made a song but it just couldn’t be who I was.

Jervert: My next question is about the voice hearing. You came out recently in a blog post revealing that you were a voice hearer. I want to ask you how this emerging new experience was for you?

Flannery: One of my instincts is to bring up anger because after I heard voices my feelings about the mental health system were validated. There’s a part of me that just wants to believe that the goddamn world is a good place. That anything bad that happened was a mistake, it wasn’t intentional, or I just got mixed up in the system. It’s just what happens when you have these systems, you’re not really a person, you’re just treated like a number coming through. I wanted to believe that. Then there was the summer of 2020.

In the beginning, I thought I was talking to a spirit, right. I’m laughing about it because I don’t believe that now. My feelings about spirituality and religion—if you listen to the song “Punitive Damage,” you’ll hear that I have some uncomfortable feelings about religion. In particular, that song emphasizes the idea of hell. It doesn’t make sense to me, I don’t believe there’s a hell and just because it’s written in a book, and people say it, I’m supposed to fear for my life all the time? I’m already scared of the damn mental health system. Now, I got to worry that I’m going to go to hell on top of that. Come on, please.

I was trying to do an experiment of sorts that involved cannabis. Previously, there were a couple of times that I thought I was hearing a voice. This particular time felt very cause and effect. I remember it was this unusual thing that I mixed together a little bit of sativa with indica.

I took a long time off of smoking weed when I was on psych drugs, and getting off them, all that time and then I tried starting again. This particular evening, I took a hit of the pipe and next thing you know, I get the first of two or three encounters with this being, a leprechaun, and it’s so stupid.

Jervert: You don’t have to qualify this to me. So many voice hearers have a diverse way of understanding their voices. It’s important that the frame we use is helpful to us. There’s no judgment here from me, don’t worry.

Flannery: All right, well, I do feel like I judge myself. As a person who believes in science, and also knows that we don’t have the answers to everything. I like to think I’m open-minded.

Jervert: You call this a feature, not a bug. Did the journey you took lead you to that?

Flannery: Oh, absolutely. It’s been two years now. That’s where all this anger and rage comes from. My first encounter was a feeling that there was someone or something else here and I’m communicating with it. I’m wondering, is something biologically different about me that’s allowing me to communicate with a spirit? Is it because I smoked this weed that I’m communicating with a spirit? Is it a combination of the weed and something about my biology, because I’ve been locked up and doctors have been saying there’s something different about me? What is it that’s allowing me to do this right now?

There’s a little bit of weirdness that there were times before that when maybe I was talking to a voice. Talking to a spirit, especially when you’re only hearing one voice and you’re like, well, this must be very important. I’m hearing one voice, is this God? Is this spiritual? Is this something? I was pretty convinced it was real.

I remember a specific day that, at least in my memory, marks when it went from spirits to “I’m hearing voices.” There was a day. The first time I interacted with these spirits is July of 2020. Somewhere in February, I woke up and I’m hearing voices all day. I didn’t do anything to summon them to talk to me. They’re just there. There’s a changing out, I talk to one and then there’s another, then another, and it’s happening so quickly.

First off, there’s no spirits here. If there are, well I’m blessed because I got a bunch of them. What do we even talk about?

I want to bring this up because it seems important. There were a few days, at least, where I was trying to figure out—is there a chip in my head? I say I was one of “those people” but if you hear voices and you think of a chip in your head, you must be psychotic, right? But I have to say, if you hear voices, and you don’t at some point think you got a chip in your head… you should at least consider it. You would say, “psychotic” because I’m thinking about that, but I am, I’m trying to figure out how that would work.

What if I go in another room? Does the volume change? Does the clarity change? Should I go to a Faraday cage? The way it was changing from voice to voice to voice, it seemed as efficient as if someone was maybe passing the microphone around or something. I had that thought and it wasn’t brief, I thought it for a while. But, then I was like, “Oh, I just hear voices.”

Jervert: There’s that time period where you’re trying to figure them out—almost doing experiments. What am I going to believe about this experience? Scientific inquiry, that is one of the ways you find a path. I definitely had experiences like that, too. Where I was just trying to sort out what this was made of and how can I find out more? How can I investigate?
When you started realizing that this was really a feature of just being human, a neurodiverse situation, where it’s a feature, not a bug, you talk about how this gave you a revelation that there was what you termed “a genocide” going on around neurodiverse people. If you want to talk about that a little bit, I’d like to hear more.

Flannery: Those first experiences happened in the summer, in July. As the fall was rolling around things in my own life got a little bit uncomfortable. I gave a testimony at the Connecticut Valley Hospital where it was over Zoom. That is when I started to get really scared. I spoke out publicly about it, and said exactly how I felt about what was going on. I thought, well, there’s going to be repercussions for this. I shouldn’t be saying these things out loud on record and challenging them. Then I started getting more nervous and scared.

Meanwhile, that’s going on in the real world, right? These are real-world things that are happening. Meanwhile, I’m still trying to figure out exactly what is going on. Am I hearing spirits? Am I talking to the spirits? I don’t think at that point I thought, “The voice is in my head.” But this idea that there was a genocide, this must be unique to me and my biology. I’m smoking a plant and communicating with a spirit.

I’ve never heard anyone talk about doing these things before. I don’t think I’m crazy. This is very real. This is some sort of secret or something that’s being kept from people. If not everyone can do this then I start thinking that all the efforts that were put into destroying my soul through the mental health system. Now, all of a sudden there’s an intention. Now, there’s a reason.

If there are some people who biologically can talk to spirits and some people who cannot, I would think the people who cannot are either going to think those folks are crazy that they are talking to spirits, or they’re going to say, “Let’s get rid of these people, they’re a threat. If they get to talk to spirits, who are we?”

Jervert: There’s some part of me that always goes back to indigenous cultures around the world who do know about these practices and have specific roles for people like us. This diversity of hearing voices, this “feature” we have that’s different from everyone else, in indigenous cultures was recognized, and honored, and respected. People were given specific roles to do certain things, medicine people or shamans. In modern society, where are we? We’re in mental institutions. It does make sense to me to frame it as an intentional effort to eradicate people like us.

Flannery: It’s interesting that I have this feeling and almost a belief that the mental health system destroyed me in some way, with the drugs physically. But, it destroyed me. Yet, if I believe that then what am I doing right now sitting here talking to you? I can’t be that destroyed if I’m still here talking about these things and doing something.

Jervert: Honestly, making a hip-hop album is an amazing accomplishment. This journey took you to hip-hop. Tell us about that.

Flannery: There was all this feeling about my life being destroyed and ruined, and I’m not making nearly the goddamn impact that I set out to do with comedy. There was this feeling through comedy that as a comedian I can talk about anything. I can say anything. I could talk about anything and get these ideas out there. It felt like comedy was the way to talk about it.

Then I get the idea in my mind, that running for president would be a way to do this without anybody’s feelings being hurt. I don’t have to step on anyone by making a joke.

Jervert: Wasn’t the president of Ukraine originally a comedian?

Flannery: He was a comedian, which is great. At least there’s one out there, right? I start thinking this is the only way to move forward. It’s going to take more than a comedian talking about these things for something to change. I start thinking I’ll run for president and it’s like, why not? Legally, I’m just of age that I could pull that off. If I believed that the words I was going to say were going to move people in such a way that it’s going to change the world in a meaningful way then maybe that is the kind of person that can run for president. I start thinking I’m going to do that. I barely told anybody. Then the minute that I started talking to people about it, I started getting worried, and scared. I got scared and life got worse.

The person I loved left me, that was pretty devastating. Still is a bit. Then I’m stuck. Do I keep doing comedy? Do I pursue this run for the president thing? Do I do this hip-hop thing? All I want to do is be able to change this system. I say change the world, I would love to have this mental health system, all this be fixed amongst other things the wrong with the world. I’d never made a hip-hop song before so it started off with writing a lot of poetry and writing and writing and writing.

Jervert: Did you do much research around hip-hop?

Flannery: Not as much into how to write a song. I didn’t really get into that. It was more of the history of it, and all the different artists, the things they talk about. But I’m writing all these things and what is it that I want to say? What is it that I want to do? One challenge that I have is if the thing that drove all of this is the mental health system and wanting to change that, if I make an entire album talking about mental health then it’s going to be a gimmick.

If I want to be a big artist, I need to show that I can talk about other subjects. There are other things that I care about. It is a little unusual for me to express myself about other subjects. But comedy did do something like that for me because I felt the same way about comedy. I can’t go up and do an hour show where all I talk about is the mental health system like you might expect me to talk about it. Things I say might be through the perspective of somebody that’s been harmed.

Jervert: Compared to the comedy, do you feel like the album has a different role, a different way of acting in the activist space?

Flannery: One of the great things about it, as you mentioned earlier, is that I performed under a pseudonym, Flim Jannery. I would make things up, I would exaggerate, I guess, you’d say lie—it’s entertainment, it’s comedy. I want to talk about all this, but I have to edit it in that I don’t want to incriminate people or talk about people and tell these stories. Whereas with hip-hop the whole point of this is to say exactly what I want to say, I don’t need to use the name Jim Flannery for hip-hop. Most hip-hop artists are using a stage name. With comedy, most people are using their real name. I ended up using the stage name so.

Jervert: Do you feel like the genre of hip-hop actually holds more truth to it for you? Along with the anger, too?

Flannery: Yes, that is actually one nice thing about it. I have been told that sometimes I’m funny when I’m angry. I try to go back and do comedy again and I was like, this is so angry. I could turn this into something funny. This is something that really frustrates me as I feel maybe I was a better comedian, that was a better direction in the long run. Let’s say as a career I could be as good as, in time, as the greats. With hip-hop, it’s a hell of a lot harder to be as good as the greats.

There’s the whole aspect of there’s music now. It’s not just the words I say. It’s not just the way I say it. There’s the music, there’s all these other aspects, which makes it way more difficult. But for me, in that case, I was writing these words and making sure every goddamn thing in here is something that I believe and then when I do it, I can rap that way, because I’m saying stuff that I believe.

Even the title, “Sorry It’s Not Funny.” I tried to make the album not funny because if I start making it funny then first off, I’m creating a whole different art form. I’m not going to get to say things the way I want to say it. Now it’s being judged on whether it’s funny or not. The message, the words, the truth, all the stuff that I’m talking about is important and it matters, and the goddamn world needs to change. But if I’m not funny enough, or not a good enough rapper, no one’s even hearing it, and it’s not going to be good enough.

I keep thinking that I haven’t really talked about giving up or quitting, and I think about that now a little bit. It just eats at me. I worry that the album’s not good enough. I made it. I thought it would be this magnum opus of mine that maybe it would attract a record label, or people would love it, and so many people would hear it that somehow even if I know that I don’t have the musical talent, and I am an inexperienced rapper, that somehow the words in the message and the meaning and even something about my voice at least hopefully it doesn’t hurt people’s ears.

Jervert: I think you’re serving a community of people who have gone through what you’ve gone through. You’re also raising awareness by those people sharing it with others. It’s courageous what you’ve done. I would not for a second think that it’s not making an impact or it’s not good enough.
It’s making an impact the way it needs to. Like we said before, you put the art into the world and it does what it’s meant to do. I think your album is doing what it’s meant to do, which is serving those people who have been through that horrific experience of being institutionalized in mental hospitals and being tortured.
Please, see the courage you took to do that album. Art is hard, like you said, art is freaking hard. Where can people find the album? How can they listen?

Flannery: They can go to and then click on music and find it. It’s on Spotify, Apple Music, YouTube, Pandora, SoundCloud, and Tidal. There are a couple of college radio stations that have put my songs in rotation, so that’s something.

Jervert: My last question for you is what your hopes are for the future in two realms: in the realm of the mental health industry, how people accept neurodiversity in our culture, and in your life and work as well.

Flannery: I think you can’t have one without the other. If the mental health system is going to change, you’re going to have some amount of acceptance in the culture of neurodiversity. I wrote this book Leave School, and I remember mentioning this idea about culture and the laws, that if you want the laws to change, you have to change the culture. How do you change the culture?

My hope is that hearing voices is no longer assumed to be some sort of a biological defect; that people would see this as a feature and not a bug. That if they do that, maybe somebody will think it’s a little fucked up that you’re doing this to people who have a feature and not a bug.

The label of bipolar disorder, I wish no one would say that to anyone ever. Having doctors say that to me has been the most destructive thing in my life. I would love for that to change. If those things change, is there any reason to lock people up in mental hospitals if you don’t think that there’s anything wrong with hearing voices? Or you don’t think that people are bipolar? There are other reasons why they lock people up. One other hope is Soteria Houses, peer respites, and no forced drugging.

Jervert: How about your art? What do you think you will be going to next?

Flannery: I would really love it if I could keep doing hip-hop and rapping. I love doing it, I feel good about it when I’m doing it. Nothing in my mind says “oh shit, I might hurt someone”; I’m more concerned whether are they liking it, are people dancing, are they listening to the words. I would love to keep doing that. If the goal here is to change the damn world… I already made this album. After everything I poured into this thing, if it isn’t quite good enough, then I don’t know if I can believe I can make something that is going to surpass that on my own.

Jervert: It comes down to being able to feel comfortable in your own experience and create and share your story, as you have through your album, and do that safely without the kind of consequences that people like us face.

Flannery: I don’t know if that’ll ever happen. I wish that would happen. But I don’t feel safe.

Karin Jervert: I understand. As a person who also shared her voice hearing experience, I hear you on all those fronts. It can be very frightening and the consequences of it sometimes you don’t even know until later. A lot of solidarity to you. But, I want to commend you for the courage it took for you to create this album and even the comedy work that you did before, and the activism work you’ve done. Just you know you’ve done an amazing job.


MIA Reports are supported, in part, by a grant from The Thomas Jobe Fund.


  1. I realise that the US has not ratified the Convention against the use of torture (and given that the country that I live in has, and that it isn’t worth the paper [or internet] it is written on) but;

    Article 1

    “1. For the purposes of this Convention, the term “torture” means any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions.”

    Note the use of the terms “inherent in or incidental to lawful sanction”? Know how many abuses occur and are then concealed by bringing the victims under the provisions of the Mental Health Act? You never will, because the State is “editing” the legal narratives to ensure that they NEVER torture…. and with the push to make sure the only people who can actually make reports of torture to the U.N. are the State, who are enabling these acts of torture with their “editing” and denial of access to legal representation ….. well, you can see where that might be going. A blanket cover up ensuring nothing ever makes it through, and the ‘agreement’ which has been ratified is worth absolutely nothing. (“They will take their oaths as a cover”)

    Torture victims become ‘patients’, patients are then ‘medicated’ with a chemical kosh (no National Standard as to what constitutes a ‘chemical restraint’), and any complaints means you will be ‘fucking destroyed’ (to quote the public officer who “edited” my legal narrative to make me into a mental patient of ten years before I was subjected to acts of torture. That and the release of slanderous documents from my old medical records, “edited” to do as much character damage as possible….. with plausible deniability of course)

    I didn’t actually meet the “Inherent in or incidental to lawful sanction” loophole as I was not an “Outpatient” (or any other type of patient) before being ‘spiked’ with date rape drugs and snatched out of my bed by police. Well, until the documents were “edited” for my ‘legal representatives’, who in fact place the interests of the State before the interests of their ‘clients’ (using the “elegant method of overcoming ‘resistance'” described by Frantz Fanon in his book The Wretched of the Earth)

    What is the strict legal definition of Torture in the U.S.?

    I know my ‘treatment’ certainly met the standards set out in the Convention…… unless you have the power to utter with forged documents and deny reality (as does our Minister for Health). That and intimidation and threats to peoples families and witnesses. It does however expose the methods being used by the State to others who do not have a conflict of interest, and who “don’t have the stomach for it”.

    Spikings with date rape drugs (made inot “Regular Medications” with a forged prescription signed post hoc), and use of police to cause “acute stress reactions” before interrogations (tell police the victim is an “Outpatient” and make them appear dangerous by planting a knife and some drugs on them once they collapse from the ‘spiking’). Concealed post hoc with forged documents, and the denial of access to legal representation.

    Report comment

    • Hi Boans,
      I’m responding to one of your rather old posts (Oct 13 2022). I’m from Melbourne, Australia and from a few things you have said on this and other posts I was wondering if you are also from Australia.
      If so, I thought you may be interested in a small group of mostly Melbourne based MH activists who are currently looking very seriously at ways of aggressively challenging state governments in Australia where mental health atrocities appear to be as bad if not worse than anywhere else in the world.

      One of the legal challenges currently being considered is based on the concept that Australia, as party to a number of international human rights treaties, has signed and ratified –

      * The Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment of Punishment (CAT)

      * The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD)

      These treaties, which Australia has voluntarily entered into, sets out Australia’s international human rights obligations. Our understanding is that under international law, Australia, including all the states and territories are bound to comply with these provisions and to implement them. Furthermore these obligations suggest that the states and territories may be criminally and/or civilly liable for engaging in torture and other cruel inhuman and degrading treatment or practices.

      I’d be interested in any constructive thoughts or input you might like to offer.

      Report comment

      • Hi Tim Wilson,

        Yes I’m definitely still stuck in Australia.

        I don’t know that my thoughts are constructive, but they’re certainly facts.

        I was absolutely astounded to find out that violations of human rights (eg acts of State sanctioned torture) are being concealed by post hoc “editing” of legal narrative, and with the assistance of a persons legal representative, the matters never progress beyond the ‘treatment’ of the victims. Winston Smiths work in the Ministry of Truth being the method chosen by the Sandgroper State to deal with any complaints about their violations of such ‘treaties’. That has been the most horrible truth I have had to come to terms with.

        So Article 13 violations of the Convention against the use of Torture would be a regular feature. There is NO MECHANISM to allow anyone to complain, and once you have been identified as having a valid complaint, you are then ‘flagged’ by Police for a ‘referral’ to mental health services for your “hallucinations” (never to be heard of again. unpersoned). All roads lead to Rome as the saying goes, with acts of torture being reported immediately to the torturers to tidy up their mess with labels and ‘medications’. The recent insertion of ‘mental health professionals’ at every Police Station not being fully or openly discussed with the public by the ‘media’……. though I feel sure that with a little ‘inside knowledge’ it’s easy to see how it works….. Police provide the questions they want answered to Doctor with the electric cables and he administers the ‘treatments….. which stop when you tell them what they want to hear (not necessarily the truth)

        I feel sure that you are aware of the issue with Nicola Gobbo?

        That is the situation with our Mental Health Law Centre, with legal representatives conspiring with the State (their ‘funders’) to ensure that they identify anyone with a valid complaint early, ensure they don’t take the evidence/proof of the breaches (of both the law AND human rights protections) and have police retrieve any proof/evidence that they individual may have obtained (eg documentation)

        In my instance once they felt sure that the proof of the abuses had been retrieved, they ‘assisted’ me by drafting a complaint based on the “edited” legal narrative provided by the hospital (took nearly 2 years) Then despite the human rights protection of the Mental Health Act that my legal representative has the right to examine unredacted documents (on provision of a confidentiality agreement), they were provided with these “edited” documents which had the information relating to the fact I had been ‘spiked’ with date rape drugs AND the police had been lied to and told I was an “Outpatient” of the hospital concerned removed, and some other documents inserted (a ‘prescription’ making the date rape drugs my “Regular Medications” [I have never been prescribed these drugs…… ever] and a ‘referral’ making me appear to have been a “patient” of the hospital for more than ten years).

        Based on these fraudulent documents, the Mental Health Law Centre drafted a complaint to the Chief Psychiatrist, and then forged and uttered with the response to that letter of complaint. The State authorities fully aware that this was what had been done were ‘prepared’ for my further complaining, and ensured that I was denied access to any further legal representation……. The letter of response purporting to be from the Chief Psychiatrist enables arbitrary detentions and torture in the manner he rewrites the law….. and someone being ‘gaslighted’ isn’t going to know that the Chief Psychiatrist doesn’t get to rewrite the law? Well, the people who examine his letter, know what’s going on, and tend to run for the Hills.

        A long story but……. I still actually had the documents proving what I am alleging. This created a number of problems for those conspiring to pervert the course of justice and conceal the fact I had been arbitrarily detained and tortured.

        “They will take their oaths as a cover” See the comments from the High Court regarding the breaches by Gobbo AND Police.

        I approached a Member of Parliament with my concerns regarding this fraudulent set of documents ending up in the Federal Courts when my divorce proceedings went ahead (are they really going to put these documents into the Federal Courts when I have the REAL set?). Sure the State has the ability to commit such offences when they are the only once who know of the crimes they are committing, but stepping into the Federal Courts and committing such offences???? At that point I was then denied my right to even try and retrieve my property or divorce the person who set this whole situation up for the State …… and take everything I ever worked for in the process (including the money I was paid in compensation for the damage done to me by my employer, the State).

        So I guess what I am saying is that in a world where the State complied with the rules, regulations, legislation and laws they are passing, there might be a chance that the people who are being subjected to arbitrary detentions (simply tell police they are your “Outpatient” and police will do the deed for you), torture, and the ‘unintended negative outcomes’ for being “querulous” and “breathing threats of litigation” (these being symptoms of a ‘mental illness’, and not a response to being tortured).

        What I find hilarious Tim Wilson is that the people who would be being screwed over the most by such ‘methods’ are actually ex public officers like police and nurses. And it may just be that I ‘slipped through the net’ based on that knowledge (though I got the feeling that there were some who had evil intent, and feel that the protection of corrupt public officers over rides the rights the community doesn’t actually have despite the boasting of our Politicians. See my comments regarding the claim there were “added protections” when the State undermined the statement of the CRPD “Australia’s Mental Health Laws ARE a violation of human rights, and the treatments MAY constitute torture”….. that was the old Acts, things are much much worse with the new Act, and the statement is no longer valid….. see you in another 20 years United Nations)

        Tom Wilson writes;
        “Our understanding is that under international law, Australia, including all the states and territories are bound to comply with these provisions and to implement them. Furthermore these obligations suggest that the states and territories may be criminally and/or civilly liable for engaging in torture and other cruel inhuman and degrading treatment or practices.”

        Not if they kill you first……. see Article 3 of the Convention against the use of Torture. It is obviously a flaw in the ‘complaints process’ which doesn’t actually exist (though there appears to be such a process, I would have thought the Commission on Human Rights might have taken complaints regarding torture but they hand it back to the State Ombudsman who can not investigate matters involving the Minister who just happens to be the person authorising the acts of torture and ‘unintended negative outcomes’ (clearly a breach of Article 2 Item 3 but who are you going to complain to? Your government?

        I’m not an Australian citizen but my own government turned their back on me when I went and provided them with the evidence/proof). The Human Rights Commission doesn’t take complaints regarding acts of torture? But they will take a complaint from a lesbian who can’t make a Muslim barber cut her hair? A baker who because of his religious beliefs refuses to make a cake for a gay mans wedding? But torture, nooooooo no one ever gets to make a complaint about that and still have a heartbeat.

        I’d be interested in what you think regarding the States use of legal representatives as ‘confidential informants’ in situations where the State has a problem regarding public sector misconduct AND violations of the agreements that have been ratified by the respective governments, and human rights abuses such as State sanctioned torture? Especially where they are killing anyone with a valid complaint (or at least turning a blind eye while Doc has a ‘little accident’ in the E.D. [and thus police can keep their hands clean]

        Happy for Steve to provide you with my email details should you wish to discuss further.

        Report comment

      • Hi boans,
        Mounting a high court legal challenge to state mental health legislation as we are attempting to do in Australia is a difficult and complex business.

        It requires a substantial amount of credible, provable, evidence that will stand up to intense scrutiny by the court.

        We have at hand documented evidence from sources such as government publications and records that support some of the issues we are concerned about. These include practices such as the overuse of involuntary treatment and involuntary confinement and the negative impact that these practices have on peoples’ lives.

        You mention that there are no mechanisms for complaint about inappropriate or abusive treatment under the various state mental health systems. Our view would be that such mechanisms do exist but that they are frequently ineffective.

        Some of the other things you mention no doubt relate to your own experiences but it is difficult to see how any of these contentions could be proven in a way that would lend additional weight to our proposed action.

        Thank you anyway for taking the time to respond.

        Report comment

        • No worries Tim Wilson.

          I guess the only thing I would suggest that might add weight to your claim would be the letter of complaint drafted by the Mental Health Law Centre, and the response from the Chief Psychiatrist.

          It seems to me that such a letter (whilst it is my belief that it was forged, along with others including the author lol) may just provide an example of the kind of barriers faced by anyone who is being abused within the system.

          I had no idea that the legal protections afforded the community by the law could be removed by the person who is charged with ensuring their enforcement. The fox in charge of the hen house situation.

          Someone with legal knowledge would spot the ‘issues’ immediately……. as they already have. Though this document was never meant to go any further as minus the documented proof that the Chief Psychiatrist was aware of the offences and human rights abuses, people would simply ‘go along’ with the ruse and continue with the slander. But writing what he did with the documents he based that ‘investigation’ on demonstrates gross criminal negligence…… and stands up to intense scrutiny.

          You write:
          “Mounting a high court legal challenge to state mental health legislation as we are attempting to do in Australia is a difficult and complex business.

          It requires a substantial amount of credible, provable, evidence that will stand up to intense scrutiny by the court.”

          I’m sure it is, especially when documents are being “edited” to change legal narrative. This I can prove, though I was never meant to be able to…… fact. there is a lot of what I am saying which stands up to intense scrutiny, though the people who were meant to do that have ensured that they didn’t challenge the ‘truth’ preferred by the State. Police refuse to even put their hands on the documents I have and then claim “insufficient evidence” , try to ‘refer’ me to mental health for having the proof, and then threaten to charge me with having the documented proof? And me not allowed access to legal representation? Wow. And they reckon China is bad?

          “Truth does not mind being questioned. A lie does not like being challenged”

          If you know of someone who has an hour to spare I would be more than happy to provide them with the documents and leave them to ‘speak for themselves’.

          Funny but it is actually the letter of response from the Chief Psychiatrist which doesn’t stand up to the slightest of scrutiny. His changing of the burden of proof from “suspect on reasonable grounds that a person should be made an involuntary patient” (s. 29 of the MHA with Criteria set out in s. 26) to “the AMHP need only ‘suspect’ that the person requires an examination by a psychiatrist” (his preferred verison enabling arbitrary detentions and NOT requiring any criteria or standards such as the person MUST have a treating psychiatrist before mental health can use police as their thugs and kidnappers) that a lawyer would recognise as being ‘suss laws’. When did he obtain the power to rewrite the law and remove the protections afforded the community? When they can ‘spike’ people and snatch them from their beds because the ‘suspect’ that there is “potential for damage to reputations and meaningful relationships'”? Namely theirs?

          “You mention that there are no mechanisms for complaint about inappropriate or abusive treatment under the various state mental health systems. Our view would be that such mechanisms do exist but that they are frequently ineffective.”

          Not really. The Criminal Code contains a ‘mechanism’ that provides protection against citizens being labelled “Outpatients” and then mental health services using Police to arbitrarily detain them. Police being used to beat ‘mental patients’ into speaking with their ‘carers’ on a regular basis (common knowledge to any long term ‘patient’ who has tried to resist being taken from their home when family members need the house for a party or something). But what if the person was not an “Outpatient”? Then an offence has occurred and a complaint gets made?

          The hospital looks at the documents and lets you know if you continue with your complaint they will “fucking destroy” you and your family. Because they are aware of what is contained in the documents, and you and your legal representative will never be…. despite the s. 160-1 provisions allowing the legal representative to examine unredacted documents on provision of a ‘confidentiality agreement’ AND the Operational Directive of the Chief Psychiatrist (same guy who doesn’t know what a burden of proof is, “suspect on reasonable gorunds”).

          So the mechanism is there to ensure that human rights abuses are identified and can be actioned, but the legal representatives are being told to not be “over zealous” on insisting that they are provided with what they have a right to (something I note is claimed by human rights lawyers as being an “abuse” in other Nations)

          Anyway, thanks for your time Tim Wilson. I did speak to a Q.C. about these matters, and things looked promising for a short while…….. though he was more concerned about the psychiatrist at the Private Clinic where my medical records were unlawafully released from once we got to the point in the legal narrative where the ‘spiking’ which had been arranged with the psychologist from that Private Clinic was concealed with a fraudulent prescription by the hospital Senior Medical Officer. It’s a shame we didn’t have a little more time to go through and identify that the “Provisional Diagnosis” which had been completed by the SMO in three minutes, actually proves that the records were provided from the Private Clinic.

          Either that or it was magic.

          Anywhere ‘we’ (that is people being subjected to State sanctioned abuses over long periods)can read about your progress with your “proposed action”? I guess like the victims of the child raping priests we may have to wait a long time before a person of integrity stands up and says “this was wrong” (and how many of those victims did they find also being victims of mental health services?)……..

          I wouldn’t be holding my breath in a system where they are “editing” documents to conceal public sector misconduct despite the laws protecting the community from such misconduct. Failure to report to the Corruption watchdog a major issue with these sorts of cover ups.

          The destruction of documents an offence, the failure to report to the Corruption watchdog “as soon as you become aware that misconduct you suspect on reasonable grounds may have occurred”. See the Chief Psychiatrist didn’t need to report because he prefers reporting of matters which he suspects on grounds he believes to be reasonable (not on “reasonable grounds”), and such suspicions never occur when his Community Nurse claims to have travelled through time and read peoples minds on statutory declarations (ie suspected forge and utter with documents to police). It doesn’t meet the threshold of a reportable matter. Got it covered he has. The slightest suspicion on the part of a Community Nurse and you can be ‘spiked’ with date rape drugs, made into an “Outpatient” and jumped in your bed by police with weapons before he even meets you. But suspected misconduct by Community Nurse means the legal narrative is “edited” until the misconduct is not suspected, and then it isn’t a crime to not report.

          Good luck.

          Report comment

          • The protection of personal observation within the prior 48 hours a problem for the Private Clinic psychologist (with a masters degree no less)

            No longer a ‘client’ of the Private Clinic (I needed a report for my legal representatives over a workplace matter which had been resolved) the psychologist attributes powers to herself that defy logic.

            Knowing she has no right to make a lawful referral, she arranges for my wife to return home and ‘spike’ me with benzos. No right to be making such ‘orders’ when she hasn’t got any prescribing rights for these date rape drugs, it doesn’t really matter because I will be in custody soon and my human rights will have been removed…….. the ‘mechanisms’ protecting me (that is the law) no longer work.

            So my wife then waits for the Private Clinic psychologist to get to her day job (at the University Counselling Service) and then calls the Mental Health Emergency Response Line. She provides them with the information which was discussed the night before when it was realised that the psychologist couldn’t make a referral lawfully.

            Boans has been seeing a psychologist (care to call her?). He needs to be subjected to an “acute stress reaction” because he will refuse to speak to a ‘mental health professional’ (I had already refused to speak to the abuser who arranged this ‘set up) So you will need police with weapons and a penchant for violence. I have ‘spiked’ him with date rape drugs and he doesn’t know this. He has told my parents that he is leaving me, but I need to pretend that I don’t know about this because I want it to look like I care about him. Let me know when you want the knife planted for police (once you have procured their services) and I will plant it on him. Please be careful if you need to shoot him because whilst I did try and plunge a carving knife into his heart, I don’t really want him dead. I just want him to do what I tell him which is stay with me and be abused.

            Hospitals take? Cal the Private Clinic psychologist (with a Masters degree) and release the confidential medical records stolen from the Private Clinic….. and find a way to conceal the ‘spiking’ with the date rape drugs….. that is, once in custody, have the Senior Medical Officer forge a prescription for them and make them my “Regular Medications” administered by my ‘carer’. He can also make himself look good by giving a detailed “Provisional Diagnosis” based on the three minute disagreement we had over seating arrangements (obtaining that information unlawfully from the Private Clinic psychologist….. committing offences to make what would be unlawful, does NOT make the release lawful. ie unlawfully incapacitate someone with date rape drugs means you can now release their medical records because they can not consent. Apply that to sexual assault situations?)…….

            And the Senior Medical Officer pretending to be the psychiatrist was a bit slippery too. Though how else was he going to obtain ‘consent’ if he had informed me of his designation and authority (ie he had none). “implied consent” would be his defense. So does this guy often get people who have been ‘spiked’ with date rape drugs in a small room and insert objects into their mouths or anus without their express consent? He did seem a bit shakey once I told him I was aware he wasn’t the psychiatrist and DID NOT have my consent to assault me. Did it anyway, like who cares? Doesn’t matter, the Chief Psychiatrist says such assaults are “standard procedure” (and documented his own assault of me), and well, lets do some more “editing”…. and look, the “referred person” (I wasn’t even a “referred person” under s.36 of the MHA, as Police had NOT referred me. I had been kidnapped by criminal co conspirators who were actively concealing their crimes from police and anyone else who may have intervened) with limited rights (the right to liberty removed, the right to consent not until a psychiatrist has examined) is now an “Outpatient” before even being examined by a psychiatrist…… and it was alllllll lawful.

            But how on earth is the hospital going to get Police to attend a persons home to make a ‘referral’? I know, call the Police and say you need help with an “Outpatient” and they will do the beating and stuff. And then rather than have the victim of the ‘spiking’ transported by ambulance to be medically assessed due to the significant risk of the drugs administered without their knowledge, have police deliver him on a Form 3 (forge and utter) and it looks like he is a ‘Police referral’ to everyone else at the hospital…. thus concealing the offence of creating a false belief by lying to police (1 year) AND the procuring of a person not suffering from a mental illness (3 years).

            Once ‘in custody’ find a justification for ‘chemically restraining’ the victim with enough drugs to lay an elephant out for a week, and describe the effects of that drugging as being a ‘mental illness’. easy given you have just had police traumatize them deliberately.

            “Potential for violence, but no clear intent or actual history”….. that’ll do.

            Tortured, kidnapped, and the response to such ‘treatment’ is justification for a life of arbitrary detentions and other torture sessions when my wife is having her boyfriend up from the country for the weekend? What a service that is, and I think it was best when they sent me a request for a review of their services, that I suggested she might be a little more positive in her assessment. (that and the “with Compliments” slip provided when police detained me and took me away in front of my Father and Mother in law as a receipt (due to my “potential for damage to reputation and meaningful relationships” I was glad they had the time to tell them I wasn’t be arrested for any crime, just being transported to the locked ward of a mental institution. That wasn’t going to dmage my reputation as much apparently).

            I must admit that when it comes to comedy, a Community Nurse using police to knowingly kidnap someone and then having the balls to write such a ‘receipt’ out is hilarious if it wasn’t for the need to fuking destroy me and my family) Like a rapist sending a Valentines card to their victim.

            Report comment

          • I note the use of the old paper type Forms by the Community Nurse when he forged and uttered to Police.

            I was fortunate to have a young Junior Constable explain to me that “they don’t use them anymore, it’s all done on computer these days”….. she was then told in no uncertain terms to shut her mouth by her Sargent.

            So this is how the Police are conspiring with mental health services to conceal their arbitrary detentions and torture sessions? Keep it out of the electronic system and then enable the “editing” of documents post hoc? A paper trail much easier to manipulate than an electronic one.

            Of course it is, and the young police officer was giving away the ‘tricks of the trade’ to a victim of their misconduct.

            Police had no record of me ever being an “Outpatient” until this particular day…… then a blip appears on the system. Which no doubt works well for organised criminals with access to a psychiatrist for example. Especially when police will neglect their duty while doctor sorts the little problems out in the E.D.

            Try to keep police out of it by not using them as a means to transport the victims. Have them walk in of their own volition…… (groomed by my wife, the clinic psychologist and the hospital administrators…… were they hoping for my death, or in on the ‘sting’? Unfortunately I think the latter, my wife putting the hospital in touch with her Prof friend at the meeting on the 23rd Dec. The E.D. events (rudely interrupt the attempt to ‘restrain and inject’ me with a cocktail) on the 2nd Jan, and then the fraudulent set of documents to the Law Centre on the 26th Jan., the day after I was evicted from my home and my wife and her new man had ALLLLLL my documents to go through to ensure the “editing” could not be proven. Fail)

            Personally don’t really care. I have spoken the truth, and people don’t like that. Fair enough, it’s not like it hasn’t been seen before. Governments need a ‘mechanism’ to ensure their good standing, and if that means ‘dropping’ a few in the E.D. well….. they know best. That’s why we elected them right? And it’s not like I’m a journalist, and these guys are Saudis right? And i’m not an American citizen, …… the British not as protective of their citizens……. providing zero consular assistance. (respect to the Canadian government who obviously are aware of what is occurring in Australia. They were quick onto one of their citizens being incarcerated in one of these ‘facilities’)

            Report comment

          • Hi boans,
            The mental health malpractices that have gone on and are still going on in Australia are mind boggling. These malpractices are usually repeated many times over for many different people.

            As I said previously, in order to challenge these issues in the courts we need hard evidence. This typically involves collecting pieces of collaborating evidence from many different people.

            You said
            “If you know of someone who has an hour to spare I would be more than happy to provide them with the documents and leave them to ‘speak for themselves”

            We would be most interested in looking at these.

            We are in the process of setting up an online registry (web page) where any Australian resident can lodge documents and details about mental health malpractices in Australia. Hopefully this will be up and running sometime in Feb 2023. I will let you know the details as soon as they are available.

            Thank you for your help and interest.
            Hopefully in time we will see a better and fairer system for all of us.

            Tim Wilson

            Report comment

          • Hi Tim Wilson

            you write;

            “As I said previously, in order to challenge these issues in the courts we need hard evidence. This typically involves collecting pieces of collaborating evidence from many different people.”

            My wife was certainly a witness to what occurred, and while I have been denied the ability to speak to her one on one (and she certainly spoke of the threats which were issued to her by hospital administrators to do certain things, eg not inform me that they had concealed the ‘spiking’ with date rape drugs, attempt to have me made into a “patient” after the fact to allow me to be force treated, have me attend the Emergency Dept where ….. [I doubt very much that there would be any admissions made about those events]) I can not see why she could not be forced into attending court via a subpoena. Same situation with the Clinic psychologist whom she conspired with…… oh, and I would love to hear the response of the Chief Psychiatrist to his letter (the opportunity was available to do this when both the current and past Chief Psychiatrist were called to give evidence to the Coroner into some deaths which occurred at a facility. I did mention this to the Q.C. and Prof of Psych who asked me some questions about these documents…. though I think it might have been considered an ‘ambush’ (not like me being ‘spiked’ and jumped in my bed semi naked was considered an ‘ambush’, how come they get to wear suits and have a ‘clear head’?)

            Point being that there are witnesses, though they would be reluctant given their involvement in such criminal conduct.

            You write;

            “We are in the process of setting up an online registry (web page) where any Australian resident can lodge documents and details about mental health malpractices in Australia. Hopefully this will be up and running sometime in Feb 2023. I will let you know the details as soon as they are available.”

            I don’t mean to sound paranoid but ……. I much prefer the old post system and hard copies. I know as my matters progressed and I was trying to get access to my medical records, my wife provided access to ‘our’ home computers via spyware to her boyfriend. He set up a computer business at our home literally days after I was evicted by police, and has more than 20 years of ‘experience’ (funny story about how I actually captured the proof it was him…. though I knew someone was accessing’ my computer (and had to bite my tongue because ‘they’ obviously wanted me to talk about it and sound paranoid). Anyway, I took screen shots of the business website, and my wifes business website posts regarding her “refreshing break” with her “new man” days after I had been evicted.

            I had also received some emails form the Private Clinic psychologist in which she admitted the meeting between my wife and her the night before I was ‘referred’ had involved discussing ‘spiking’ me with date rape drugs. My wife immediately on the phone to someone when I told her about this written admission. A rather strange situation where the ‘headers’ (all the details of the email re sender, title, time date etc) were left in my mail box, but the contents completely disappeared when I went to print them. I’ve no doubt now who the culprit was.

            So electronic methods are not necessarily secure…. and I have on a number of occasions used the post system to distribute these documents…..and there are others.

            These people committing these offences are not going to simply ‘roll over’. And in some cases they are being provided material support by the State in their offending. See for example my wife and her conspiring with the FOI Officer at the hospital. I had great difficulty understanding why I needed the permission of my wife to obtain my medical records….. and the FOI Officer aware of what was contained in them played a game of lets pretend he is a ‘patient’ while we make him one, and then we can deny him access to his own medical records. The FOI Officer did try to extract herself from the situation once she realised I was documenting and putting everything in writing to her and her office. For example the moment O was told of the ‘spiking’ and the ‘assistance’ she had provided in concealing that offence, I put it in a letter to her… lest she deny the fact that she had been actively concealing these crimes by using her position as FOI Officer ( a Breach of the FOI Act s. 10
            10 . Right of access to documents
            (1) A person has a right to be given access to the documents of an agency (other than an exempt agency) subject to and in accordance with this Act.
            (2) Subject to this Act, a person’s right to be given access is not affected by —
            (a) any reasons the person gives for wishing to obtain access; or
            (b) the agency’s belief as to what are the person’s reasons for wishing to obtain access.

            She was witholding access to conceal criminal offences (a number of offences demonstrable) AND attempting to have me sign documents which would have made what she was doing lawful. A compounding of the offending.

            “Hopefully in time we will see a better and fairer system for all of us.”

            I’m no longer part of that ‘us’ i’m afraid Tim Wilson. I never really was part of the system, it was just some criminals saw an advantage of making me appear to be that way. The State enabling citizens to be labelled “Outpatients” (and deny the existence of the protections afforded by the law) to arbitrarily detain and torture people is clever.

            But so was Hitlers legislation which enabled the killing of ‘enemies of the State’ for their “potential” (see the problems caused by Josef Hartinger by his investigation of two deaths at Dachau, and the response of Himmler). And I for one can most certainly see this ‘slide’ into an area where citizens are going to be detained not for anything they have actually done, but for what they might do in the future (their “potential for damage to reputation and meaningful relationships”)…… and psychiatrists are seen as being able to predict the future though they have failed to demonstrate this ability in regard suicide, why on earth would they be good predictors of violence (other than the violence they inflict on the bodies of others)?

            I know at the first viable opportunity I will leave this place, and go somewhere that documents are not being “edited” by the State to conceal their human rights abuses. And the trip I have done through Dantes Inferno will hopefully be forgotten (along with the family and career that the State deliberately ‘fuking destroyed’ for attempting to access the complaints system and the protection of the laws they have no respect for. Though I doubt I will forget those poor souls I saw being abused by these vile people who are doing the torturing [and finding it humerous] “editing” and ‘fuking destroying’ for the taxpayers. I still shed a tear about the young woman being snatched from her home at the request of her mother for having a ‘few too many boyfriends’ and not doing her dishes when requested. I had no idea this was an “illness” until I saw the way the Community Nurse is using the corrupt practice of “verballing” …… now I get it…… negligence, fraud and slander has become a ‘medical specialty’. And they complain about the ‘morality police’ in Iran? At least they only use sticks to beat the ankles, and not drugs to destroy the brain and mind.)

            Look forward to perhaps sharing with you these documents which as I say, speak for themselves. You might not like what you see, but it’s the truth. They’re being given the ability to arbitrarily detain, torture, and then uheemmmm “unintentionally negatively outcome” anyone who has a valid complaint.

            And it is all done by holding people outside the protection of the law…….. the weapon of choice? The Mental Health Act. It’s been done before, so nothing new under the sun….. it’s just the way they talk about ‘history’ you wouldn’t expect ‘them’ to be doing it.

            The shift of ‘responsibilities from Police to ‘mental health services’ of what were ‘exclusions’ reminiscent of a time when the responsibilities of the Police were being handed over to the Shutzstaffel. Hence we see people being ‘cared’ for in this manner.


            Some of your local ‘carers’ I think?

            Report comment

  2. Thank you, Karin and Jim, for this powerful discussion, one that I found extremely thought provoking.

    I especially found interesting Jim’s observations about how very human reactions are viewed as symptoms of serious mental illness. He got me laughing and thinking when he said “I have to say, if you hear voices, and you don’t at some point think you got a chip in your head… you should at least consider it.”

    I understand that Jim has moved from comedy to hip hop, but the “George Carlin talent” of being both profound and funny is something Jim has — and this is a gift.

    Carlin — as Jim, who is a fan of his, probably knows — while remaining in the general genre of stand up comedy, went through a couple of major metamorphoses in his career. He acknowledged that he began in his twenties as a “people pleaser” desperate for laughs and success, but by the end of his career, he cared less about laughs, caring mostly about his art and truth – and that last stage of Carlin is the one that many of us revere.

    Jim’s desire not to hurt others is a noble one, but it seems impossible in any art form not to offend and hurt some people. Back to Carlin – while his bits about the educational system may have hurt and offended teachers who are attached to the educational system, these bits validated and energized dissident teachers along with many of the rest of us who remember what school was like.

    George may have hurt and offended some people, but he for the most part “afflicted the comfortable and comforted the afflicted” – which I think is a noble talent and one that Jim clearly has.

    Again, thanks to both of you for a great discussion — Bruce

    Report comment

  3. “it seems impossible in any art form not to offend and hurt some people.” Yes it does. And those of us who “too truthfully” visually documented psychiatry’s iatrogenic bipolar epidemic, do upset the psychologists and psychiatrists, merely by showing our “too truthful” artwork.

    But given the undeserved and unchecked power the psychological and psychiatric industries have over their clients, anyone speaking out about the harms being done by the “mental health” industries, is afflicting the comfortable, while trying to comfort – and properly educate – the afflicted.

    Thank you, my fellow artists, for speaking truth to power. And I will say, given the huge number of artists who’ve been attacked by the “mental health professionals.” I do think the “mental health” workers need to garner insight into the fact that artists may work on their portfolios for years, prior to trying to market their work. But this is NOT the same thing as being “unemployed,” as I was unjustly described by a psychiatrist – who never even bothered to ask me what I do – prior to massively anticholinergic toxidrome poisoning me … 11 different ways, within 14 days.

    Let’s hope and pray the artists can help save humanity, from the seemingly, greed only inspired, scientific fraud based, “mental health” stigmatizers, and Holy Spirit blasphemers, of the “mental health” industries.

    Report comment

  4. There used to be walls on every city to keep the barbarians out.
    Today there are no walls.
    Everyone must follow orders. The barbarians are inside the city.
    This person hears ideas? He/she might not follow orders.

    Twelve Monkeys film in my head.
    James Cole:
    “So now it’s not about the virus at all. It’s about following orders, doing what you’re told.”

    Report comment

  5. I hear voices all the time. I hear voices, too, but my assumption is that it’s because somebody else is talking. If my assumption is wrong, well, I really don’t want to know it.

    We should do a comedy act together sometime, not that I’d know what to do. I just think, what an act! Flim Jannery and Blank Frankenship! Imagine it on the marquis. Now that’s potential, wouldn’t you say? Okay, maybe not…

    Interesting discussion about psychiatric survivor versus ex-mental patient Personally I like psychiatric survivor. I’m afraid if I called myself an ex-mental patient (as I have done) some people are likely to turn it down and tune it out. I’ve worked with non-psych-survivor activist groups, too, and then I’ve heard from people talking to me about this schizophrenic person or that, sometimes a relative, and how hopeless the person is. Far be it from me to explain that I was once labeled “schizophrenic” myself. I just find myself amused by the fact that they don’t think they’re talking to a “schizophrenic”. Progress is being made right there. Words are funny things, aren’t they, and especially a word like “schizophrenic”. I think the literal meaning is something like “pathetic” “hopeless” and incapable of doing anything except “deteriorating”. I love it, in such cases, when people are proven wrong.

    Glad to see that you’re still performing, Jim. Keep it up. I hope everything is going you’re way. (“Mine, too.”, a little voice pipes up.)

    Report comment