Saturday, April 17, 2021

The Bridge

Home Forums Community The Bridge

Tagged: 

Viewing 15 posts - 1,111 through 1,125 (of 1,156 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #80599
    boans
    Participant

    So what’s it all mean?

    At the top of it all it’s kind of ugly really. See, the major issue here has got to be if I was a “patient” or a “citizen”.

    From the communications I have had, and the fact that the Clinical Director can authorise “edits” of this sort because the person is someones “patient” seems ludicrous to me. Compassionate care? And if the person has the status of “patient” they can then be conspired against in such a manner to have them transported to a hospital for an assessment by a psychiatrist against their will? It’s okay to drug em with benzos without their knowledge and drop a knife in their pockets because we are being compassionate about our patients care? And well, you know how else was a therapist to have a person assessed when they refused to attend their therapist? Oh wait, not my “patient”? Wow, there’s a look on someones face I would have liked to have seen. And he has the documents and is going to the cops?

    See, if this was reasonable it means that if you have ever been referred to speak to a psychologist, then a mental health practitioner can have police with weapons ready wake you in your bed after you have been drugged and had a weapon planted on you, make up a mental illness on the spot (Form 1), have the police transport (Form 3) you to a locked ward of a mental institution and not inform you that you have been drugged with benzos without your knowledge, and no one will look because he completed a set of fraudulent documents to conceal it from the “patient”. I dunno, sounds suss to me.

    Of course the reason for an expiry date on referrals is a legal protection afforded “patients”. And I was not your “patient” was I? Funny, but I don’t remember anyone explaining this to me at the time. I do remember the rather ‘leading’ questioning of the Community Nurse though. Police would have known it was a ‘remote’, but not that I wasn’t even a “patient” would they? Just guessing. But I do think Senior Constable saw the rapid improvement when I had the chance to dress a little more appropriately, and wasn’t ‘intoxicated’ without my knowledge. And it has got to be more than a little embarrassing for the hospital to have people know they are allowing “patients” to be drugged without their knowledge (especially ones who “generally refuses medication”). And the knife? What I will say is that I don’t know that the law can stop me having a pocket knife in my pocket when i’m asleep. In public? Even that’s a maybe. Sikhs carry knives with them at all times in public, so ….. even that’s a maybe. Still, if it tricks the patient then I guess ……….

    I dare say that from what I said to the Community Nurse during his ‘assessment’ that he was aware that I was no longer the psychs “patient”. I certainly explained that if I needed a psychiatrist, I knew a good one who I HAD seen over work related matters. It was explained along with the reasons for ceasing the anti depressant the day before. End of ‘business’ if that makes sense. So whilst i’m certain he was aware this was remote detention, he may also have become aware that it was straight outright kidnapping, but so well set up for him, how could he resist?

    And you can change all that if I just …… get a referral? Nah, couldn’t possibly work because that means as a doctor you could just make any problems you had into “patients” and then you could drug em without knowledge, plant knives, or anything on them and set the cops and mental health on them? Still seems suss to me.

    Anyway, here’s what I’m gunna do. If I make a complaint now, it would mean that by 2021 you might get a slap on the wrist. But I want to see that slap on the wrist so I’m gunna keep complaining about your hustle. Coz I don’t think it’s right you showing people how to do this. Or is it really alright if they are your “patient”?

    Sorry to say it but two people planning to use this method to have a person (patient or not) transported for an examination by a psychiatrist is unlawful. And you hooked the Community Nurse into it, somehow. Because “you just need to know what to tell them” right? That initial fraud by the Community Nurse has spread and poisoned everyone who has come into contact with it. The questions being, were you aware that this person was NOT a patient? And if not, you would really authorize such methods for those who ARE patients? I’d be really uncomfortable answering that one lol

    Edit: now I know I have a unique perspective of things after what I have been subjected to. But do you know how ridiculous the current debate about euthanasia is to me after all this? Doctors voicing their concerns about breaking the law when assisting terminally ill patients who can no longer be given pain relief? Hey, have I got some news for you lmao. “Got a problem with the paper work here. Put em down for some unintended negative outcoming would ya?” The whole debate just seems ‘soft’ after what I witnessed. And with the methods used on me that are “reasonable” not a single person in the State couldn’t be snatched from their bed soooooo. I gotta be wrong somewhere, someone???? lol

    • This reply was modified 4 years, 8 months ago by boans.
    • This reply was modified 4 years, 8 months ago by boans.
    #80695
    boans
    Participant

    There is a thread about the ‘advertising’ of pharmaceuticals in churches in which cat posted a link to a site with biblical references called The Clinical Textbook of Biblical Psychiatry. (once again thank you cat) In regards Law it refers to Acts 16 : 37 “They have beaten us in public without trial, men who are Romans, and have thrown us into prison; and now are they sending us away secretly? No indeed!” He must be SOMEBODYS patient? Oh no, if they start doing it to Romans we have lawlessness? Think that’s what the story relates to.

    I’m not sure if it was on that page that I read something about mental illness being the only disease which is caused by gossip? Wherever it was, thanks 🙂 Take me for example, laying in my bed all drugged and knifed up, and all the gossips have me surrounded lol. “they say he ate three babies in one sitting some years back, but you didn’t hear it from me”; “communicated matters” lol. These events of that day need to be stretched out and detailed. The legal mechanism has been tampered with and needs correcting.

    tick………..tock………tick………. not a “patient” – “patient”. Different kinds of patients of course, and not understanding that difference is a distinct disadvantage in this type of situation. Private v Public, “inpatient” v “outpatient”, “voluntary” v “involuntary”, all with subtle difference in outcomes I believe. I’ve heard about methods of ‘bridging’ detainments etc via making a “patient” an “outpatient” for a very short period to ensure that the ‘case’ is not reviewed as required by law. I don’t agree with it, but understand their may be circumstances where if conflicts of interest are carefully monitored …… I dunno, gotta keep an eye on these things I reckon.

    Now I struggle to understand how this could be possible, that it is a matter of calling mental health and saying “got a new patient for ya, all prepped for a police referral” and they are surprised when the now stupefied without knowledge person is a little “agitated” when woken by a police officer with tazer ready, only to have a planted knife hit their foot? Okay, I get it, a “patient” wouldn’t be agitated by this and therefore you need to be a patient until your not agitated by this? One must be prepared for these types of interruptions to ones morning routines.

    The switches. Just because police woke me up and I walked into the kitchen area does not mean the Community Nurse had a police referral. He was expressly told that I did not wish to speak to him, and that I wanted them all out of my home. Their grounds for remaining? “‘e was in close proximity to a knife and ‘eavy objects yer Honor”. Truth of the matter is I was at a distinct disadvatage given the drugging and ‘alarm’ going off. And I would describe the conduct of the Community Nurse as refusing to remove himself from my home, and effectively requesting intimidation from police until he got his “assessment”. Even with this I am still not anyones “patient” (of any sort), because the nurse is not a doctor and can not give a diagnosis. What he can do is pretend that I am a patient and that’s good enough to conceal his kidnapping (and by default conspiring to drug without knowledge). All going to look like a police referral (and the doc isn’t even told about the spiking).

    3 minutes, now i’m a “patient” of a man who speaks to me like a dog, and then despite my protestation and denial of consent, assaults me anyway on the grounds that ‘no ones looking’. Now, I am an “involuntary patient”? Well, no actually. The only person who can make me a “patient” of any sort is the Consultant Psychiatrist, and he didn’t do so. All that trouble to conceal the kidnapping and he said ‘I can’t see it’? Hence the letter to lawyers denying access to documents under the MHA as I was never an “involuntary patient”. (EXTREMELY IMPORTANT POINT; the lawyers acting on the fraudulent documents they had, made an FOI application to the hospital. Why did they make application under the MHA? Because that’s what you do for “patients” like the ones in the documents they had. They needed the application for the drugging/kidnapping ones. It shows how these documents deceived. The lawyers acted according to the intent of the fraud)

    So could police refer from the coerced “assessment”? Possibly. But consider what the consequences of this would be. Public drug ‘suspect’, police hand over to mental health with some questions they would like asked. Refuse to answer those questions and you will be detained and transported by police to a locked mental institution and given stupefying drugs in copious amounts until you do answer police questions. If you are examined by a psychiatrist, there is now every reason to detain you for treatment for the drugs you were forced to take. I can see the advantages but …… think it’s extremely dangerous ground.

    So what would the police referral look like? Pissed of about a plant and having wife rip the rug out from under him during a mental health “assessment” we weren’t supposed to be listening to. Seemed pissed if ya ask me, couple of bottles of bourbon pissed.

    Your a fukn dangerous man Mr Community Nurse. Demonstrate “patient” to me. If not, where is your police referral? If not, your a fukn fraud and belong in prison.

    Edit: and so what is left after 7 hours in the locked ward? Just some fraud which has me flagged on the police system and “patient”, and some fraud in the hospital system used to conceal a kidnapping. Police would be more than willing to help out with a “patient” now wouldn’t they? Yeah, I think so. Hand him back to his “treating doctor” is it? Yes, we had a look and there’s a “few problems in the relationship” which should be resolved in an ED in about ohhhhhhhh three hours? Once we make him a “patient” lol

    and no one noticed that the psych and my wife now had motive to ????? Oh that’s right ya all don’t care what a doctor does to their “patients”, that’s just medicine. It’s not killing, we are just hastening the patients demise …….. by about 30 years. Means, motive and opportunity. Remove the motive and replace with “good faith” (ie doctor/patient relationship) and you got yourself ………. Still, one person did notice and saved the day. Nice bit of timing whoever it was the “formal investigation outcome”, fraud to lawyers, and setting police on me. Teach me to disagree on reasonable grounds

    Edit edit: So these days I hear police cars with sirens going and imagine them on their way to a scene where a “patient” has come within 1.5 meters of a knife in a kitchen, or worse on Saturdays, someone who was taking an SSRI has joined a base ball team and has their hands on a bat. Dirty dishes in sinks, women having more than one male friend, ……. our resources are being stretched and there’s just no time to be investigating people who are so good with their fraud. They’re kinda like ….. organised lol

    Eee: yeah, yeah we were all over it. And that’s why not only have those involved not been held to account, but actually promoted. Hospital waiting on the private sector to sort things out for them? Just need to see where the psych runs with this and then we can deal with the little issue of kidnapping? Get the documents back and have Boans perform a little task? How else were we going to silence him if killing wasn’t an option? All over that too? I doubt it.

    • This reply was modified 4 years, 7 months ago by boans.
    • This reply was modified 4 years, 7 months ago by boans.
    • This reply was modified 4 years, 7 months ago by boans.
    • This reply was modified 4 years, 7 months ago by boans.
    • This reply was modified 4 years, 7 months ago by boans.
    • This reply was modified 4 years, 7 months ago by boans.
    • This reply was modified 4 years, 7 months ago by boans.
    #80722
    boans
    Participant

    You were quite an addition to the ‘team’ Bob. My paranoid delusions are based on same rather flimsy evidence, and of course the whole idea was to make some of it so obvious to me that I would convey that information to others to confirm my ‘illness’ huh? The Community Nurse had already set that up for you. “guarded but concerned re internet”. So now with you hacking my computer and telephone services, if I should explain my ‘suspicions’ to anyone? Very nice. Might be some money in that for you trolling dating sites, hacking womens computers and finding out the dirt.

    But here’s what I do know in addition to the emails confirming the meeting between my wife and the psych regarding the plan to drug being removed from my email account. I go to divorce lawyers. Discovery provides me with some ‘edited’ financials, and none of the information I requested from my wife via them. They have made the assumption that I am mad claiming that I was drugged without knowledge, and have been subjected to some rather vile abuses. I provide them with the documents AND reasons for wanting ALL financials and telephone records. ie I would like to detail exactly when my wife joined the dating site and began her relationship with you. It is after these are provided that a number of things occur.

    1. the business website is shut down. This of course showed that immediately after I was evicted from my home that my wife and you had been on a two week “refreshing break” and had returned and were back in business.

    2. my lawyers were asking if I would be handing over ALL of my medical records to them as a result of my request for access to the “third party comments” at the hospital (three pieces of paper basically, and some comments to the Cons. Psych on the day). My answer was that no I would provide whatever was received as a result of any release. No deal.

    3. The Clinic Psychologist has left the State.

    Now I have no idea what was discussed between my lawyers and her lawyers, but wonder did they inform them that I had the documents already? In which case would they then have a need to ‘whiteant’ some more of the legal narrative? And if so, what? Because I would say it may be a little difficult making my wife out to be a battered woman with such assistance available to conceal the original crimes. And if the State authorities were involved? They are simply allowing citizens to commit serious criminal offenses because they can’t? And then taking no action over them? Bit of a fixed game wouldn’t it?

    I think you should be looked at hard (excuse the pun there). I think you may not have realised fully what you were getting involved with, and might be a turncoat who has also become involved in attempting to pervert the course of justice.

    Sure no one is doing a lot about the hacking of computers and the use of spy devices, because the laws are so flimsy that they can’t. Except where it involves evidence of crimes, different matter.

    And i’m just not sure the rules are that because the telephone account is in one persons name, means they can authorise the stealing of all data and information which travels along that line. Well, I am sure, even the government with all their legal clout can only obtain metadata.

    I didn’t know who it was, but I knew you were there. And you may have been seriously mislead as a result of my scrambling. Still, got your dick sucked, my wife tried to get me to move all my belongings to your country bunker (lol Bobs Country Bunker, see Blues Bros). Nice little earner for you wasn’t it. From what i’ve seen it’s about the only way your gunna get a fuk fat boy.

    Edit: did ya get into the University computer system with some assistance too? That’d be a concern for some. Or was the psych just told that my wife would get rid of the received emails and she get rid of the ones she sent? Like teamwork lol. All while she is being frustrated over having me knocked lmao. Kind of handy having her in your pocket too, does remote snow jobs and knocks for such a low price. And working for the same institution as my wifes doctor too? Got to be handy for any little problems he has gathering information under the guise of ‘therapy’. Thumbs up, thumbs down 🙂

    Edit edit. The Operations Manager holding off until the ‘private sector’ (my wife and her doctor) sort matters out. This is all outside the realms of State authority (though my not be, it is possible eyes were watching). Doc picks himself up a head of ED doing knocks, a psychologist and her psychiatrist husband working as a package. If the authorities were involved, what would have happened? Keep them in place and refer any problems your having to them for ‘treatment’? Mmmmmm I dunno how involved in these sorts of crimes the State really wants to have a hand in. Boans isn’t killed, and then use Boans to kill and ……. hospital now acts in good faith with their fraudulent documents and the complaints about their remote snow jobs is covered. State would have just killed me by now if they were involved. Must have been a shock when they finally got up to speed, a team of killers working where????? Psych only left town when the information about the documents not being retrieved flowed back through the ‘private sector’ channels. They were already available to the State authorities at this time, and had been for some time. State was not aware.

    Eee: Operations Manager/Clinical Director report to the appropriate authorities? Nope, doesn’t work that way, and as noted above matters could not have been reported to appropriate authorities because the Parliamentary Hansards show they weren’t. Unless of course lying in parliament ……… nahhhhhh lol

    • This reply was modified 4 years, 7 months ago by boans.
    • This reply was modified 4 years, 7 months ago by boans.
    • This reply was modified 4 years, 7 months ago by boans.
    • This reply was modified 4 years, 7 months ago by boans.
    • This reply was modified 4 years, 7 months ago by boans.
    #80737
    boans
    Participant

    From little things big things grow.

    This little operation within an operation. Quite simple really. Live bait the hook and catch the bigger fish. Unhook the bait and use the dog fight method. Prep the dog and at the appropriate time throw in the kitten. Dog kills kitten and the people who prepped the dog deny any motive for throwing the kitten in. Plausible deniability. Dog is responsible. And with the concealment of the motive for taking the bait (ie the documents demonstrating the kidnapping)? Nooooo, nothing to see here.

    Nice to see the government (ops Manager/CD) contracting out their, cough cough, reputation difficulties. Gee, where have I seen that done before?

    This was held at that level and not reported to the authorities. I’d be shocked to be informed of otherwise.

    Lots of money involved though in medical and pharma research. So I’m told anyway by a Chinese med student I met from the same institution. Seemed funny to be talking to a Chinese guy named Usama, who had quite obviously been ‘gaslighted’.

    • This reply was modified 4 years, 7 months ago by boans.
    • This reply was modified 4 years, 7 months ago by boans.
    • This reply was modified 4 years, 7 months ago by boans.
    #80760
    boans
    Participant

    The Great Wall of China, man these guys know how to use crowdfunding lol.

    Hospital couldn’t have the Law Centre obtain these documents because, even with a signed confidentiality agreement, could they really be seen to be acting in their clients interests by concealing that a “patient” was being drugged by their “carer” without their knowledge? Another one of those “just between you and me”s? And of course had they gone into any detail it would have become obvious that I was no anyone’s “patient”, or they might be requesting to meet my “carer”? Would that not be what any lawyer who was approached by a “patient” would wish to do? I don’t like the smell i’m getting from that quarter, but will assume “good faith”. I can say that if my “carer” was in touch with the lawyers, then I was certainly not informed of this, at all. So would lawyers representing me do this? And then give you the ‘flick’ with a letter of response from the Chief Psychiatrist? Possible.

    Lets all play pretend? No lets not.

    “Hi, i’m Boans carer but don’t tell him I said that okay? Now, as his carer it was my belief that drugging him without his knowledge, and arranging a kidnapping with the Ariel Castro Memorial was good for his mental health, just ask his “doctor”. So if you just keep pretending your his friend and are helping him while we sort out a little problem we have at this end, ie make him into a patient so that what we are doing here is lawful, then we should be good okay?” lol. Really? Wow.

    I’ve got two criminals running around claiming the right to commit crimes against me based on the ASSUMPTION that I am someones “patient”? And you call this backbiting “healing”? Al Humazah.

    I mean, there is no doubt that by the time I actually spoke to the Law Centre I was seriously traumatised. I was that on the day, as one could imagine if they have been in this type of environment after being snatched from your bed in your pyjamas and not informed you have been drugged/intoxicated.So they may have had reason to believe I was a “patient”, exhibiting all the symptoms of paranoid delusions (ie thinks he was drugged without his knowledge). Though if this is how we are delivering ‘healthcare’ to the community, I guess the law centre would be aware what a wonderful job is being done. They just don’t tell the “patients” how good for them this ‘treatment’ is. lol

    One of the most validating statements I have heard among all this was, once again by a psychiatrist. After hearing many times what had been done, I made mention of her “colleagues” at the Ariel Castro and she responded rather harshly “they’re not MY colleagues”. Glad to hear it Doc, and thank you for trying.

    Edit: Bottom line, why would my “carer” be asking me to sign over my medical records to them? Surely as “carer” that is a right one has?

    And consider, in divorce proceedings? No need for two lawyers, because my “carer” is instructing my lawyers as to what is good for me anyway. lmao. worth deep consideration that. 2500 dollars to tell you how expensive their time is, and my wifes lawyers offering well…… nothing.

    Edit edit: Now I may have become a Ghost of the Civil Dead as a result of your criminal conduct (wife, psych, CN manufacture a ‘patient’ for convenience), but just because a dead person can make no complaint, does not mean that the community does not respond to the persons who killed them, I hope. And keeping me destabilized whilst you lied to people and had me providing confusing information as well ……. not really helpful.

    Prove that I was “patient” and you were my “carer” and that the psych was my “doctor”. Or go to prison.

    Eee The Law Centre lawyer has her notes which I have not seen, and am not allowed access to. If these contain communications with my “carer”? Is the LIE being concealed from me by lawyers? All want me to be a “patient” to justify the brutality I have been subjected to by ‘good’ people?

    Hmmmm what to say. I could write a letter to said lawyer asking if she spoke with my “carer” and “doctor” and was she aware that this was a lie, but as “patient” they could simply LIE to me for my own good? What sort of ‘advocacy’ is THAT? No wonder the Chief Psychiatrist doesn’t recognise any protections for “patients”, there aren’t any. Phew, lucky I wasn’t a “patient” or I might have been treated reeeeeeal bad lol

    • This reply was modified 4 years, 7 months ago by boans.
    • This reply was modified 4 years, 7 months ago by boans.
    • This reply was modified 4 years, 7 months ago by boans.
    • This reply was modified 4 years, 7 months ago by boans.
    • This reply was modified 4 years, 7 months ago by boans.
    • This reply was modified 4 years, 7 months ago by boans.
    • This reply was modified 4 years, 7 months ago by boans.
    • This reply was modified 4 years, 7 months ago by boans.
    • This reply was modified 4 years, 7 months ago by boans.
    #80831
    boans
    Participant

    Saw a great Argentinian movie called Relatos Salvajes (Wild Tales). 6 short stories that ……. great. Check out the psychiatrist in story one lmao.

    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3011894/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1

    Speaking of short stories here’s one i’ve been thinking about for some reason. May be that I have read about it somewhere else….. I dunno.

    Goy walks in to an ED in NY on the 10th Sept 2000. He has been beaten badly and has numerous injuries and requires some emergency medical assistance. He is rambling on about a group of men who were planning to take planes and fly them in to buildings, though his English is not good. The man is given a label of delusional disorder and drugged with …. (someone call a doctor lol). As a result of him being drugged his begins to lose the ability to speak in English and reverts back to his native tongue. Trying desperately to tell people of the impending attack, he writes it down on the back of a complaint form in Arabic. As his frustration increases, the staff decide to use another type of sedative only to find the man become aggressive. He is restrained and given a ‘shot’.

    Some days later he wakes only to hear the news that the men who had beaten his had carried out their plan. He now tries to explain to the staff that he had told them about the attacks, but that they hadn’t listened and had instead drugged him unconscious. One nurse remembers the patient admission, and his ‘delusions’. She reports to her superiors, rather than confirm what the patient has said. They suggest it may be best that this is kept between them, and that the patient is still ‘delusional’. Unbeknown to these ‘select few’, someone had put the complaint form with the plot written in Arabic into the Nurse Station tray, and the document has gone on to be filed with the patients records. Someone call the Operations Manager lmao

    You know this guy is going to end up in Kalamazoo State don’t y’all? lol Still there to this day.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kH-lDwh7o1U

    Probably my favorite Tom Waits album (Blue Valentine is a really close second) Enjoy.

    Edit: Complaint Form. I said above to stretch out the legal narrative on that day. Covered the details above. What was contained in my written complaint, and when was it made?

    Well, the written complaint was made after the three minute interview with the SMO. “Sit THERE”. But it was also made BEFORE the assault. Why is this so important? Because that Complaint Form was the first point at which an allegation of Misconduct under the CCC Act was made by me, in writing. This is not insignificant. As I explained I requested a copy from the nurse appointed to me, and then believe the Complaint Form was sighted by the SMO and disposed of. I have a copy, they don’t. I also made the point above that given this IS a document which may be required by the CCC that disposing of it is also a serious offense under that Act. Just because the SMO did not allow that complaint to proceed in the appropriate manner has consequences. It is the content of that Complaint Form that would be a concern to these people. I distinctly remember the lawyer at the Law Centre saying to me when I explained that the hospital wanted a copy because they couldn’t find theirs “I’d be reluctant to say yes”. So I didn’t provide them with one. Slipping the lady back into the deck.

    So in one sense the hospital does not have a complete legal narrative. They are missing a piece as a result of the SMO. Does the legal narrative and paths change as a result of this document? Perhaps 🙂

    Edit edit: police could of course raid your home and obtain a copy (see the current debate about Steven Conroy and Parliamentary Privilege) but how would they know they were obtaining the original? Smart fella might leave a fake one laying around for them to find, and just not inform them that they didn’t have what they thought they did?

    Funny things bits of paper. Like cards. I still remember the post trauma psych asking about “who had the documents?”, and also explained to him that I had a system of marking mine to know who had what. Waaaaaaaaaa I want out. Nah fair enough, that was the agreement.

    • This reply was modified 4 years, 7 months ago by boans.
    • This reply was modified 4 years, 7 months ago by boans.
    #80888
    boans
    Participant

    Remote snow jobs. I’ve no idea if that is what they are called to those in the know, but my State is authorising remote snow jobs of private patients. Not from a psychiatrist mind you, a psychologist who I don’t even know has prescribing rights in this State. It was certainly never discussed because I spoke to the psychiatrist about ‘medications’.

    So what do I actually mean by remote snow jobs?

    Remote – A doctor making you their patient by telephone basically, and setting in motion actions on the part of others. In my instance this was done by reversing the phone call from the ‘doctor’ to the hospital via my wife contacting the hospital and them calling the ‘doctor’. The Community Nurse is now being instructed by my ‘doctor’ as to how she wishes me to be treated, as my ‘carer’ does not have the medical knowledge she has available. I will research this a little further to attempt to get a more precise definition of what is meant by a “remote detention”.

    Snow job – This is the brutal reality of psychiatry, not the fluffed up ‘chemical imbalance’ in your brain approach. This is about incapacitating individuals so that they are unconscious and therefore not capable of giving informed consent. Anyone not willingly cooperating with the ‘doctor’ is at risk of suffering this fate.

    I think it is better to remind oneself that this is more about ‘patient management’ rather than ‘patient care’. There are different motivations involved which can be subtle. However, perhaps an explaination of how the SMO prepared the way for a snow job on that day will tease it out.

    The SMO had the problem of a person who had been remotely detained (yes he knew this) and was non compliant. The person was agitated and had generally refused medication. So how do we get him to consent to being ‘managable’? Despite limited knowledge of me he prepares a list of drugs to be administered with my consent, called “PRN” (pro re nata, or as required) He then prescribes the administration of two benzos and provides this to the nurse. This is a blank cheque to inject the drugs listed as “PRN” and later claim it was with “informed consent”.

    Knowing that I would say “no” to the two benzos, the nurse can instigate the “emergency provisions” of the MHA and use force to restrain and inject. This incapacitates the person and they are now ‘manageable’. The protection of the right to consent is removed because the person is not now capable of consenting, and the concealment of the violation of the right is achieved.

    Why would I say no to benzos? “[4:43] O you who believe, do not observe the Contact Prayers (Salat) while intoxicated, so that you know what you are saying.” Thus being stupefied, intoxicated with known addictive and damaging drugs is not permitted. I will refuse and am thus to be subjected to being forced to take drugs I do not wish to, and have my right to consent removed by a doctor who I do not wish to treat me. He may want to be my doctor, but without any “reasonable grounds” I have a right to “no”.

    So what was the SMOs aim on this day? Patient management, or concealment of what he knew was a remote detention? I think he changed his mind at the last moment. Was it the Latin Doc? lol.

    This is of course a little more than dangerous. It opens up areas of abuse which could and are being exploited by those with evil intent.

    So they are all happy with “patients” being remotely detained, and using a method of drugging with benzos without knowledge and planting a knife? Well, they are just patients and we need to make it appear at least a little lawful. Personally I am disgusted that anyone would consider this sort of treatment of a “patient” under any circumstances as “reasonable”. Lets all pretend that we are allowed to do this, and then we can? I have no problem with your pretending, but you don’t get to act on your fraud. Depriving a person of their liberty is a serious matter.

    Now that we have established what is “reasonable” for “patients”, can we discuss what is “reasonable” for “citizens”? Because I think a change of heart may occur if you consider Minister, CP, CD, OM, CN, FOI officer, that you are saying this is okay for YOU.

    These snow jobs are from what I have seen being done for periods of about 8 weeks. They (police MH staff) are using simple baiting methods in order to achieve this. Not taking the bait is the only defense available to an individual, and given the lack of accountability, if the police want to pick you up for one of these, they may not even bother to bait. Just drop em.

    The administration of these drugs using these methods is an aggravated assault, though the crimes are being concealed with misleading documents. Here’s a druggin we prepared for you earlier, “PRN” and an offer your gunna refuse. This is not medicine, this is criminality being enabled to deal with social issues not strictly covered by the law, and opens up the possibility for punishing people for years for minor infractions. And no one is looking?

    Just an aside, I remember my daughter having to block my wife from contacting her by telephone she was pestering her so much after I had been evicted. She even went to her home after she blocked the phone and made it very clear she wanted no contact with her. What did she want? Control of me via my daughter after clear explaination to the hospital that my wife was not my next of kin. Have her sign records over as the hospital was still running with the false “patient” narrative? My wife did this independent of any ‘influence’ from others? My daughter did not sign over any of my records, and I would dispute the motive of having her sign such a document even if it did exist (wouldn’t put it past these people to forge signatures to be perfectly honest) And should any of my medical records turn up during any matters ……. I was NOT a patient, you were all pretending to deceive and conceal your original criminality.

    Hagakure: If you should make a mistake………..

    • This reply was modified 4 years, 7 months ago by boans.
    #80900
    boans
    Participant

    It is the case that if the SMO was made aware of the drugging with benzos without knowledge, and instead of ordering toxicology and completing an incident report (which should have been done by the Community Nurse) decided to conceal this offense by having me ‘consent’ to taking more benzos what we are talking about is GROSS CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE. Whether I was “patient” or not.

    The Community Nurse would know if he informed the SMO of the matter or not. Where is his incident report? Was he instructed to not complete it by the SMO who would snow to conceal? Or will he ‘take one on the chin’ and wear the Gross Criminal Negligence himself?

    This is the equivalent of police beating someone unconscious to ensure they do not complain about a wrongful arrest. And then being able to continue to beat them unconscious until they are no longer capable of complaining. And they get to call this medical care?

    And the key point here is that this is being done at the request of a person who has simply claimed that my right to consent has already been removed as I am a ‘remote’ patient?

    It matters nought that the intoxicating substance is in the form of a pill. What is being done to the person is that their ability to have a conversation with God is being interfered with. I would suggest that in order to do this they would need some “reasonable grounds”, not a request from another. So I ask this Ordained Minister, what were your “reasonable grounds” for interfering with my God given rights? That I had been suitably baited by being drugged without knowledge and kidnapped?

    Kind of difficult to be claiming that you are attempting to assist someone in distress when the first thing you do upon admission is a blow to the head to assist with management.

    Still, I feel sure that the people who you are deliberately damaging using these methods deserve everything they get. And with some effective propaganda you should be able to conceal this from the general public whilst ramping up the volume of people you are damaging and then allowing conditional release to the community. The odd one will explode and possibly kill others but ….. that kind of feeds back into the loop and creates an image of the need for more damage.

    And now with these police snow jobs your doing available for use with the general public (thanks Minister/CP) and at the fingertips of any psychologist? I look forward to seeing the need for mental health services growing exponentially.

    Edit: The Community Nurse can not attend the home of a citizen (me) at the request of another citizen (wife). If I am not a “patient” then the only way he can obtain the right to do an “assessment” is via a police referral. There’s the switch. Police were called by the Community Nurse on the grounds that he was visiting a “patient” who it had been claimed was in possession of a knife. Police would know he has no right to visit citizens in their homes to deliver psychiatric diagnoses.

    From that point on it appears to be a police referral to mental health, instead of a remote snow job. Mental Health call police when they have everything set up, police attend and it all appears lawful. Where is the incident report for the spiking? And if the SMO told you to neglect your duty and he would sort it out? YOU are responsible for not performing your duty CN, not him. And is it the case that you can, with prior arrangement, bring your own police referral with you to any citizens home? This is like a blank signed search warrant.

    So she said I was a patient huh? And you accepted that in “good faith”? I think not. I am saying your a criminal, and that is not in “good faith”, I say that knowing it to be fact. Where is your police referral? At what point did you obtain this? After you had ‘assessed’ and detained? Where is your Incident Report regarding the drugging without knowledge with benzodiazepines?

    Because I do hope that the CCC was informed of these matters as soon as the hospital became aware of them. “patient” or not. And if the CCC have authorised the actions taken over this? Police refusing to accept proof of criminal offences? Turn a blind eye while the victim is snowed? Not a chance this was reported to the appropriate authorities when it is within their power to fuking destroy people. And oh how easy with police resources to create the space for my ‘carer’ to commit the actual offenses, and then woopsie we didn’t see that document drop into a shredder did we constable? That is of great concern. Using psychologists to gather information about who has documents from victims of crime? After attempting to refer them for “hallucinating” because they thought the documents had been retrieved?

    Not just because it is me, but if I were an officer with the appropriate authorities, I would be having a damn close look at these events. Though I have reported on more than one occasion and nope…… not lookin. No “reasonable grounds” (well there is but …… we just pretend too)

    • This reply was modified 4 years, 7 months ago by boans.
    #80904
    boans
    Participant

    “in order to establish criminal liability the facts must be such that, in the opinion of the jury, the negligence of the accused went beyond a mere matter of compensation between subjects and showed such disregard for the life and safety of others as to amount to a crime against the State and conduct deserving punishment.”

    Lord Hewart CJ in the case of R v Bateman

    Question the three co conspirators (wife, psych, and community nurse) about the exact details of the plan to make this remote detention appear to be a police referral. Sworn statements would be enough thanks 🙂

    Now don’t tell me if it is as easy as this that there aren’t lots of them being done. And not a single report to the CCC? Or is this not being acted upon even when reported? Because we are talking about kidnapping, and it involves the production of fraudulent Statutory Declarations which are Federal Matters.

    Possible that the CCC authorised me being fuking destroyed and the evidence (retrieved by police) of the remote snow job of an ex public officer from a private clinic psychologist be concealed? More than concerning for my fellow union members I think*. Still, given that these are Federal matters, the CCC would have reported this hospital for such organised criminal conduct.

    * gee, look at that, only a couple of months after resigning from the public service, your dropped at a locked ward for some ‘treatment’? Okay, it looks like a police referral and that’s all that matters. Must be coincidence.

    • This reply was modified 4 years, 7 months ago by boans.
    • This reply was modified 4 years, 7 months ago by boans.
    • This reply was modified 4 years, 7 months ago by boans.
    • This reply was modified 4 years, 7 months ago by boans.
    #80916
    uprising
    Participant

    Lord Hewart CJ in the case of R v Bateman

    I misread that the first time as “R v Batman.”

    #80932
    boans
    Participant

    R v Batman lol. That’d make the R for Robin Uprising? Few contested matters over Batmans referral of Robin to Scarecrow (the drug pushing psychiatrist) to cover up that night he spiked Catwoman with benzos? 🙂

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-08-26/former-sydney-oncologist-john-kearsley-sentencing/7787510

    Judge Hock said the administration of an intoxicating substance with intent was one of the most serious offences.

    I know some who disagree with Judge Hock.

    I have watched the progress of this case in the media and just wonder a number of things about it. Why did the Prof not just make the registrar his “patient” and then this would have all been lawful? Why did he not refer her to a locked ward for an assessment by a psychiatrist and have her snowed before she had the chance to go to police? When did police find their copy of the Criminal Code to know this was Stupefying to Commit an Indictable Offense (20 years). Lucky they didn’t go for a drive to Maccas or he would have also been guilty of kidnapping? And how come he gets to prescribe his own benzos? Edit: and note the judge was “not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt the assault was pre-meditated and did not believe the victim was lured to Kearsley’s home”. Community Nurse was lured to mine. And hey look, beyond a reasonable doubt, a burden of proof. Not that a Doc gunna understand that eh CP?

    A number of differences though. This young woman went and got her own toxicology report after realising she may have been drugged. The hospital staff in my case knew I had been drugged and ensured that a toxicology report wasn’t ordered. See, when the woman went for her toxicology report, they should have pinned her down and injected her with benzos and then she had no chance of proving it. (the intent of the “PRN” prescription by the SMO. Conceal the spiking by having him take some ‘consensually’).

    Doc Kearsley seems to have been quite a caring chap though. Noted by the judge. So why wasn’t his spiking seen as “compassionate”? The were obviously friends, and did he intend “harm” as defined in the Criminal Code? Personally I think he intended to “deprive of liberty” to commit a further offense, assault.

    That of course is a difference, he stupefied to assault. I was stupefied to kidnap and assault. Mine was planned by people pretending to be my ‘doctor’ and ‘carer’, this was done by a real doctor not pretending to be this womans mentor lol.

    Seems suss if ya ask me. Because I didn’t think there was that much difference in our Criminal Codes (when we can find ours). Both went to police with proof, but look at the difference in the paths taken.

    Anyway, good news, i’m now a convict YAY. That at first must sound a little strange, but consider this. In order to be a convict I must first be defined human, and if I am defined human I may actually have some rights. Now I understand that being convicted of not returning a set of number plates off a car will have a major effect on my career prospects but, i’ll wear that to feel human. And well, anyone asks I can explain the reasons why police were stopping me through intimidation and threats from accessing my property. Loss of license is a pain though, especially given my driving record. I’d be one of the safest drivers a person could meet, been Granpa Boans on the roads since I was 20 lol. Still, looking at the outcome in the above case, and what was done to me and the outcome, ……. justice?

    Won’t even tell me which drugs I can be spiked with or by who. Really need to trust the people preparing your food and drink given that situation. So I get what the victim of Doc Kearsley is saying about the ‘impact’. Wonder if the registrar had as much trouble with police as I did.

    “they forgot the fish”

    • This reply was modified 4 years, 7 months ago by boans.
    • This reply was modified 4 years, 7 months ago by boans.
    #80988
    boans
    Participant

    The FOI process and the removal of “third party comments”.

    Boans makes a request for the documents relating to the detention. The first set are provided to me in redacted form. Not only are “third party comments” removed, but third parties are removed. I understand that the protection of “confidential informants” (‘snitch’ is the term in criminal argot) requires this. This left me with the ‘verballed’ Form 1 on, with my wifes comments to the Consultant Psychiatrist removed.

    This left me at a distinct disadvantage. I knew that my wife and the clinic psych had cooked something up, but exactly what was unknown. I knew what had occurred after I was woken, and that the Form 1 referral was fabrication. By removing not only “third party comments” but also third parties, one immediately begins to suspect ALL third parties. Paranoid? Mmmm it seems to be an automatic response from anyone subjected to these types of ‘interventions’. You know who the main players are, but are not sure of who or what resources they are tapping for assistance, ergo …… tread with caution.

    So from the first set of documents the two co conspirators and the request for police attendance by the Community Nurse are removed. It looks like a police referral. The comment “wife fearful for her safety” is removed from the “communicated matters” on the Form 1. The post interview notes make vague references to the events 4 weeks prior, though the redactions remove any reference to police. The “communicated matters” (3) could all have come from the clinic psych. “fearful” “knife for self protection” “damage to photo”. Subtle, but consider. My wife did not say she was fearful for her safety (of this I feel certain). The knife was planted and police left to (cough cough) draw their own conclusions. And the damage to photo was an actual observation by the Community Nurse. I took them all back into the house to see this blitzkreig I had been on when I made a hole so big in a photograph you could pass a pencil through it. Bit like a viewing of the Mona Lisa it was, sorry you will have to queue to get to see it, because it’s so small. I do also believe the Community Nurse made notes after my detention when speaking to my wife, though these would possibly been disposed of once he had worked out his manner of defrauding anyone looking at his handiwork.

    This creates a lot of confusion. Because when I ask for my wifes third party comments, I am given the clinic psychs, but attributed wrongly to my wife by the FOI officer. Once again the assumption that I was someones “patient” comes into play. Work with the “carer” to deceive the “patient” and conceal the “compassionate communications” (oh you people have got to be fuking kidding me that you believe that was what you were doing). What was being concealed was a remote detention, made to appear to be a police referral. Tell me you didn’t know that Ms FOI officer after speaking to my wife about the release of “third party comments”. And the motive from that point on to have me sign (a) the letter of 8th Nov? And (b) sign my medical records over to my “carer”? You really believe that what my wife and psych had done fits into the category of “care”? At least where you are working their is every chance you will receive the treatment you require, and if not, when you retire your position, we can send police and Mr Community Nurse to pay you a visit.

    Thus there is meant to be a protection for the first party in all this, your advocate/lawyer gets to look. Except, they don’t because we don’t want you to know the levels of criminality we have going on here. Drugging our “patients” without their knowledge and using that as justification for drugging and incarcerating them. Using throw down police referrals to cover remotes. Assaulting patients to bait and make ‘management’ easy. “It’s a hospital, and we delude ourselves into that false belief every day”.

    Hospital make a deal with the Law Centre? Don’t know that should be going on. “patient” or not. The SC note would reveal any ‘arrangements’ made with the hospital. And I feel certain that the Law Centre was aware that I was not a “patient”, they provided me with legal advice despite me falling outside the group of persons they provide assistance to. First question for a lawyer would have to be “whose patient” right?

    Edit: This would be the legal equivalent of not providing informed consent, and throwing clients under a bus to maintain cordial relations with hospital staff. That is not advocacy. Though I have no complaints about the information I was provided with. I would never have worked out what crimes they were concealing had it not been for the resources of the Law Centre. But acting in a manner which causes detriment to the client, and not informing them of reasons? Grubby grey area.

    ‘Oh yeah, the guy who got drugged and kidnapped, I remember him. Decided that the state he was in as a result he was gunna top himself anyway, so why have all those people in trouble over the drugging/kidnapping. Nobody sees the proof and we just put it down to a “chemical imbalance”, but ya owe us one’ lol

    Edit edit: So you speak to a lawyer alone, but are not informed that they are speaking to persons claiming to be your ‘doctor’ or ‘carer’? Shouldn’t that be established somehow? And obviously asking me at that time would have been fruitless as I was being mislead, misinformed, deceived, misdirected by those closest to me. Lawyers would surely want to see the proof? In the form of……. SC notes would be more than informative in this regard, they hold the key to the crimes.

    Eee: I think back to the Law Centre explaining to me that they could not provide me with assistance. I did not fit within their “vision” (ie person with an SMI).

    To be an expert and valued legal service for people with a mental illness in our community.

    They were inundated with work at the time as a result of a doctor acting as a psychiatrist who had treated over 200 “patients” when someone noticed lol. That takes fraud to a whole new level doesn’t it? Someone pretending to be a psychiatrist lmao

    • This reply was modified 4 years, 7 months ago by boans.
    • This reply was modified 4 years, 7 months ago by boans.
    • This reply was modified 4 years, 7 months ago by boans.
    • This reply was modified 4 years, 7 months ago by boans.
    • This reply was modified 4 years, 7 months ago by boans.
    #81000
    boans
    Participant

    So the ACTUAL documents show a conspiracy to stupefy and commit an indictable offense (kidnapping), made to look like a police referral to a Community Nurse. Fraudulent documents as he knew this was not a police referral, but a means of overcoming the protections provided to “patients” (ie no remotes).

    The documents provided to the Law Centre show a referral of an “outpatient” transported by police to hospital for assessment by a Psychiatrist. Psychiatrist report, no illness ergo, no assistance from Law Centre. Doesn’t make sense. Edit: and it is here that my concerns lay. Is it the case that the Law Centre provided me with assistance only long enough for the hospital to ‘tidy up their paperwork’? Once that was done, I am no longer provided any assistance? Calls to my wife (carer), clinic psych (doctor) and FOI office all stonewalling while a solution to the problems is reached? Not that the Law Centre could do anything about that other than complain to CP and get told “I dunno”. So their hands were tied. No accurate information provided, and once it was established that I was not “patient” no further assistance. And yet the fraudulent documents they received show otherwise (ie “outpatient”)

    Does that fit the category of Fraud? Would that raise some concerns on the part of the clinic psychologist? That I was putting this in front of police? Might be motive to start building a paper trail with police. Precisely what was done, and it did all “seem a bit too easy”.

    Definitely worth considering the dual roles of police as both stooge and patsy here. Stooging in the sense that they are puppets used to obtain what appears to be a referral for the Community Nurse. And patsies in that they would fall for a throw down knife. Patsies converted to stooges after the big find lol Nice one.

    Edit So ‘junior’ was Patsy, and Senior was Moe, Larry AND Curly lol Couldn’t work without the Community Nurse being “in”. So in that vein I leave you with this 🙂

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=def3ob2h-1s

    I also note that the request to sign my medical records over to my wife was not made through the Law Centre. Would this have raised an eyebrow?

    • This reply was modified 4 years, 7 months ago by boans.
    • This reply was modified 4 years, 7 months ago by boans.
    • This reply was modified 4 years, 7 months ago by boans.
    • This reply was modified 4 years, 7 months ago by boans.
    #81176
    boans
    Participant

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-xwS5W4iuM

    Someone had to say it 🙂

    Couple of days after 10 Dec 2011. Houston we got a problem. Four people who I know became aware that I was not a “patient” and therefore ….. this was not only disgraceful conduct which might be approved because the person is a “patient”, but criminal offenses which, if anyone asked, would become apparent.

    The key to public sector awareness lies in the release of the documents to me by the FOI officer. If she had proof that I was a “patient” then she could have denied access and screwed me around forever. She had no proof however, and this would have become apparent to her after meeting with my wife. Hence, release the documents, he’s a human with rights.

    Actions taken after this would have been known to be compounding of offenses, and therefore I believe authorisation would have been required by ????? Certainly not a Clinical Director authorising drugging without knowledge and kidnapping. So whom???? Someone is going to have to step forward on that surely???? Because I was not anyone’s “patient” when these events occurred, and believe I am owed at least an explanation, not one given to a person claiming to be my “carer” and leave it at that.

    Knowledge of where and when the initial 4 became aware of the significance of me having no referral to the clinic psych is important in that one must ask who was acting in a manner consistent with a false belief that I was the clinic psychs “patient”, and yet was aware that I was not a “patient”. This would be the demonstration of criminal intent on the part of certain public officers. You would have to know some pretty important people to be having this given the thumbs up let me tell ya. State creates the space for private citizens to pervert the course of justice? Owwwwwowowowow, Gawd I hope not.

    #81205
    boans
    Participant

    I like Dylan. He has a way with words and music that goes beyond ……. This song in particular shows what I mean.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mYajHZ4QUVM

    So where is the contact with Police? And how much were they aware of? And why are they willing to green light criminal offenses because someone claims that another is their “patient”? This becomes an exponential problem if they knew that not only were they green lighting criminal offenses, but doing so against a citizen who was being falsely presented as having the legal status of “patient”.

    Key here is who did and did not report to the relevant authorities. Was it the case that the Operations Manager with the approval of the Clinical Director was of the belief that they could ‘fly this one under the radar’? Wife’s Doc got a little integrity testing to do first, then we get to destroy him? Others in authority may not be so concerned about this, but for me State sanctioned murder is a concern.

    Edit: ‘fly this one under the radar’? Why is a DV officer with police making inquiries with my wife about what the CCC have been informed of? Misconduct, offense under the CCC Act (Part 11)(recorded conversation see letter from Police Integrity Unit, along with other information being provided to enable the commission of further offenses) Someone pulling strings there, corrupt strings. Failure to perform duty as a public officer (2 years), “don’t have a copy of the Criminal Code”? Who on earth is authorising these offenses? Incident report of 2014 returned “insufficient evidence”, and then inquiries as to who has the documents? Really don’t want anyone seeing these crimes do they?

    Good to know that police, uncovering evidence of serious criminal offenses (which they actually witnessed), will go to such lengths to see they are not prosecuted. Conspiring to Stupefy to Commit an Indictable Offense (20 years) namely Kidnapping (10 years), I guess adding a little perjury isn’t going to be a problem then?

    • This reply was modified 4 years, 7 months ago by boans.
    • This reply was modified 4 years, 7 months ago by boans.
    • This reply was modified 4 years, 7 months ago by boans.
Viewing 15 posts - 1,111 through 1,125 (of 1,156 total)
  • The forum ‘Community’ is closed to new topics and replies.