reported in youarewithinthenorms.com for WAOK, “ON POINT” Criminalization of your Doctor!!!! By DEA
NORMAN J CLEMENT RPH., DDS, NORMAN L. CLEMENT PHARM-TECH, MALACHI F. MACKANDAL PHARMD, BELINDA BROWN-PARKER, IN THE SPIRIT OF JOSEPH SOLVO ESQ., INC.T. SPIRIT OF REV. C.T. VIVIAN, JELANI ZIMBABWE CLEMENT, BS., MBA., IN THE SPIRIT OF THE HON. PATRICE LUMUMBA, IN THE SPIRIT OF ERLIN CLEMENT SR., WALTER F. WRENN III., MD., JULIE KILLINGWORTH, LESLY POMPY MD., CHRISTOPHER RUSSO, MD., NANCY SEEFELDT, WILLIE GUINYARD BS., JOSEPH WEBSTER MD., MBA, BEVERLY C. PRINCE MD., FACS., NEIL ARNAND, MD., RICHARD KAUL, MD., LEROY BAYLOR, JAY K. JOSHI MD., TERENCE SASAKI, MD., MBA, ADRIENNE EDMUNDSON, ESTER HYATT PH.D., WALTER L. SMITH BS., IN THE SPIRIT OF BRAHM FISHER ESQ., MICHELE ALEXANDER MD., CUDJOE WILDING BS, MARTIN NJOKU, BS., RPH., IN THE SPIRIT OF DEBRA LYNN SHEPHERD, BERES E. MUSCHETT, STRATEGIC ADVISORS
DEA and HHS Criminal Forensic Tools Are Junk Science
DEA and HHS, HHS-OIG introduce false evidence into criminal trials, violating Napue and Alcorta, through their biased, unproven, pseudoscientific, junk science, data analytic, criminal forensic tools. See In re Richards, 63 Cal. 4th 291, 315 (2016) (court granting civil writ of habeas corpus ruling bite mark expert’s criminal trial testimony constituted material false evidence).
DEA and HHS commit Constitutional violations against “suspect class” healthcare professionals for the pecuniary benefit of the DEA, HHS, Blue Cross Blue Shield Association, and/or the HFPP “Cartel”.
“Since Daubert, traditional forms of criminal forensic evidence, such as bite marks, handwriting, hair samples, and fingerprints, have been admitted routinely, bypassing the rigorous methodology scrutiny that applies to, for example, epidemiological and toxicological causation evidence in civil products liability and toxic tort cases.
As one commentator concluded, “[j]udicial scrutiny in civil litigation and judicial passivity in criminal litigation is aligned with the repeat-player dynamic unique to each forum.” Corporate defendants in civil cases routinely challenge the faulty forensic evidence used against them, pushing judges to be more skeptical in civil proceedings.
By contrast, prosecutors consistently introduce the same evidence in criminal cases, encouraging judges in criminal proceedings to rely on precedent. Over time, this has created a discrepancy in how trial judges rule on scientific evidence in civil versus criminal settings that cannot be explained by a difference in substantive law or the applicable rules of evidence.” See United States v. Havvard, where the court described Sherwood as an opinion “asserting that the reliability of fingerprint comparisons cannot be questioned.” 260 F.3d 597, 600 (7th Cir. 2001).
See also A Review of the FBI’s Handling of the Brandon Mayfield Case (where the FBI concluded that attorney Brandon Mayfield was involved in the 2004 Madrid train bombings because his fingerprints were a “100 percent match”. According to the court documents in the Honorable Judge Ann Aiken’s decision, this information was largely “fabricated and concocted by the FBI and DOJ); “https://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/05/us/spain-and-us-at-odds-on-mistaken-terror-arrest.html
The President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) Report released its latest report on September 2016, titled, Forensic Science in Criminal Courts: Ensuring Scientific Validity of Feature-Comparison Methods. “The PCAST Report highlighted the need for increased rigor in assessing the scientific validity of evidence from a variety of forensic disciplines, many of which employ feature-comparison methodologies, including hair, latent fingerprint, firearm, DNA complex-mixture sample, footwear, and bite mark analysis.
As the Report frankly explains, reviews by competent bodies of the scientific underpinnings of forensic disciplines and the use in courtrooms of evidence based on those disciplines have revealed a dismaying frequency of instances of use of forensic evidence that do not pass an objective test of scientific validity.”
The literal text method is not foolproof, but it’s an improvement over the ICD-10 codes, which the CDC admitted in 2018 “significantly inflate” the number of deaths involving prescription opioids — flawed data that Frieden used to make his “key driver” of the epidemic claim in 2016.
How inflated were the overdose numbers back then? Using the old ICD-10 method, which counted illicit fentanyl as a prescription opioid, Frieden’s CDC estimated that nearly 32,500 Americans died from overdoses of opioid medication in 2016. The death toll was later revised downward to about 17,000 overdoses after the CDC came clean about its flawed methodology.
Patient advocate Richard “Red” Lawhern has long been suspicious of CDC data, including studies that use literal text analysis.
“CDC suggests an incidence of drug overdose deaths ‘involving’ oxycodone at only 1.5 per 100,000. But they neatly avoid telling us that such a rate is so low that it confounds the non-uniformity of reporting from county to county, creating such statistical noise that the contribution of this agent (oxycodone) to overdose mortality is too small to accurately measure or report,” Lawhern said.
All of the above is credited to the work of Richard Lawhern, PhD. and Pat Anson of the Pain News Network. They go on to state:
“Another problem is the qualifications of county coroners and medical examiners varies. Some are elected to their positions without any medical training or experience. The death certificates they fill out usually don’t say if a prescription drug was obtained legally or illicitly, or what specific drug or combination of substances caused the death. That is determined later by a toxicology test. As a result, a drug may be “involved” in a death and be listed on the death certificate, but have little or nothing to do with someone’s demise.
“It is startling that CDC has so consistently and deliberately conspired to disguise the fact that oxycodone really isn’t significant in drug overdose mortality, and probably never has been,” Lawhern told PNN.
Of course, every death is a tragedy in some way, regardless of the cause or substance involved. The graphic below helps bring oxycodone’s role into more context – comparing the five leading causes of death in 2021 to those involving fentanyl, oxycodone and the other drugs.”
DOCTOR’S AND THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT
VILASHNI GANESH, MD FRAUDULENT PROSECUTION 63 MONTHS FEDERAL PRISON
WOKE We Offer Kindness Empathy
FORBES Fuck Over Red Black Ethnic Souls