THE ANAND-CLEMENT RULE
AI(alg*)= AS
republished and re-reported by youarewithinthenorms.com
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. IN THE SPIRIT OF WALTER R. CLEMENT BS., MS, MBA. HARVEY JENKINS MD, PH.D., IN THE SPIRIT OF C.T. VIVIAN, JELANI ZIMBABWE CLEMENT, BS., MBA., IN THE SPIRIT OF THE HON. PATRICE LUMUMBA, IN THE SPIRIT OF ERLIN CLEMENT SR., EVELYN J. CLEMENT, WALTER F. WRENN III., MD., JULIE KILLINGSWORTH, RENEE BLARE, RPH, DR. TERENCE SASAKI, MDLESLY 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., 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
This online article from “youarewithinthenorms.com” was originally published August 9, 2023, which critically examines the work of Dr. Timothy E. King, labeling him “The Great King Rat and Mother of All Forensic Fraud.”
The authors argue that Dr. King has engaged in deception and fraud, particularly in the context of opioid task forces and his analysis of forensic data, including bite mark evidence. By drawing a parallel to the Queen song “The Great King Rat,” the piece suggests Dr. King is a dangerous figure whose pronouncements should be questioned.
The article aims to expose Dr. King’s alleged misconduct and advocate for greater scrutiny of forensic science and expert testimony in legal settings.
🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀
🐀
“…The Great King Rat is a compelling and enigmatic song by the legendary British rock band Queen. Released in 1973 as part of their debut album, it showcases the songwriting prowess of the band’s late front man, Freddie Mercury…”
🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀
THE LYRICS BY EDDIE MERCURY 1973 OF QUEEN
“…depicts a world where the Great King Rat is revered and feared, representing the vices that can corrupt both individuals and societies… the song serves as a cautionary tale about idolizing charismatic yet dangerous personalities, urging listeners to question those who seek to control and dominate…”
🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀
“THE GREAT KING RAT,” and ONE OF THE FATHERS OF PAIN CARE NEO-EUGENICS
🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀
OBLITERATING DR. TIMOTHY E KING’s FRAUDULENT DATA ANALYSIS
The President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) Report released its latest report in September 2016, 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 various forensic disciplines, many of which employ feature-comparison methodologies, including hair, latent fingerprint, firearm, DNA complex-mixture sample, footwear, and bite mark analysis and undermines the so-called Forensic Methodologies of Dr. Timothy E. Kings, MD.
BITE MARKS AND THE UNCOVERING OF TIMOTHY E. KINGS’ FRAUD
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 the use of forensic evidence that do not pass an objective test of scientific validity.”
🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀
“Bite mark evidence, otherwise known as forensic odontology, has been the subject of significant scrutiny. Forensic odontology entails examining marks left on the skin or an object to determine if they are human bite marks and then comparing those human bite marks to a suspect’s dental impressions.
🐀
🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀
Not only has the discipline proven incapable of reliably individuating an alleged bite mark—that is, establishing that a bite mark belongs to a specific individual—it cannot even reliably identify skin marks as either human or animal bite marks.
As recently as the spring of 2015, the American Board of Forensic Odontology (ABFO) could not find consensus among thirty-nine ABFO-certified bite mark experts on whether a patterned injury was a human bite mark or if it had identifying features for individualization.
The Case of Dr. Timothy King: A Recap of the Allegations
The saga of Dr. King’s involvement in various legal proceedings has garnered widespread attention and generated significant controversy. Those who have been closely following the developments of these cases have expressed concerns about Dr. King’s impartiality, credibility, and adherence to scientific principles in his capacity as a government expert on opioids and pain management.
DR. TIMOTHY E. KING, MD “THE MOTHER OF ALL RATS AND FORENSIC FRAUD”
The allegations against Dr. King, often called “The Great King Rat,” center around his purported misuse of his expert status to perpetuate false narratives, biased interpretations, and unverified claims in federal courtrooms throughout the United States.
These allegations were laid bare in several letters criticizing his actions and questioning the veracity of his expert testimony.
“THE CANDY EVERYBODY WANTS”
Falsehoods and Misleading Statements: A Pattern of Deception:
One of the core issues raised in these letters is Dr. King’s repeated use of false and misleading statements during court proceedings. An example cited pertains to Dr. King’s assertion that prescriptions of opioids should be deemed illegitimate if there is no objective evidence of functional improvement among patients. This premise, however, fails to account for the inherently subjective nature of pain – a critical factor in assessing the effectiveness of pain management.
🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀🐀
Moreover, Dr. King’s purported bias comes to light when examining his stance on opioid addiction and the dangers associated with these medications. His sweeping statement that “opioid addiction and the dangers associated therein have been known for 3,000 years” raises questions about his willingness to acknowledge evolving scientific understanding and emerging research that challenges such a blanket assertion. Critics argue that this stance disregards nuanced insights into opioid usage and safety.
A COMPARATIVE DATA ANALYTIC LINK TO TIMOTHY KING’S FRAUD
In the same year, the Assistant Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy singled out bite mark evidence as an example of an unreliable forensic discipline and called for its eradication.” Shockingly, courts continue to admit bite mark evidence in criminal trials and do so virtually exclusively on the basis of precedent. Demonstrating the powerful influence of the repeat litigant “Barratry” prosecutors, courts continue to admit prosecutor’s proffers of unreliable bite mark evidence in criminal cases, even though “bite mark evidence has led to more than two dozen wrongful arrests or convictions.”
According to Robert Curtis:
“King belongs in prison for the rest of his life.
For the pain and suffering plus all the convictions based on King’s lies in testimony should have him serving a life sentence if not on death row. After kings incarceration should come the arrest and convictions of top DEA AND DOJ officials who have also caused such needless pain and suffering and their dirty hand in these physicians’ convictions.”
DR. TIMOTHY E. KING, MD, BELONGS IN PRISON ON FEDERAL DEATH ROW
Indeed, admitting courts mistakenly rely on prosecutorial arguments that bite marks have been accepted as a valid scientific theory by a sister court instead of conducting an independent Daubert analysis. The treatise on Modern Scientific Evidence itself states that “rather than the field [of forensic odontology] convincing the courts of the sufficiency of its knowledge and skills, admission by the courts seems to have convinced the forensic odontology community that, despite their doubts, they were indeed able to perform bite mark identifications after all.
Michael J. Saks et al., Forensic Bitemark Identification: Weak Foundations, Exaggerated Claims, 3 J.L. & BIOSCIS. 538, 546 (2016) (explaining that, in Burke v. Town of Walpole, 2004 WL502617 (D. Mass. 2004), aff’d in part, vacated in part, 405 F.3d 66 (1st Cir. 2005), “the federal magistrate judge appeared never to doubt the validity of bitemark expertise though the best the court could do to support its faith was to cite cases that cite cases that express the same credulousness”).
FOR NOW, YOU ARE WITHIN
THE NORMS
RE:
DR.TIMOTHY KING’S MD ALLEGED MISCONDUCT CLICK HERE TO LISTEN
Timeline of Main Events
- 1973: The British rock band Queen releases the song “The Great King Rat” on their debut album. The article uses this song title metaphorically in reference to Dr. Timothy E. King.
- September 2016: The President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) releases a report titled “Forensic Science in Criminal Courts: Ensuring Scientific Validity of Feature-Comparison Methods.” The report highlights the need for increased rigor in assessing the scientific validity of various forensic disciplines, including bite mark analysis, and undermines the methodologies attributed to Dr. Timothy E. King.
- Spring 2015: The American Board of Forensic Odontology (ABFO) fails to find consensus among thirty-nine certified bite mark experts on whether a patterned injury was a human bite mark or if it had identifying features for individualization. This event is cited to highlight the unreliability of bite mark evidence.
- Unspecified Time: Dr. Timothy E. King gains prominence as a government expert on opioids and pain management, testifying in federal courtrooms. Allegations arise concerning his impartiality, credibility, and adherence to scientific principles.
- Unspecified Time: Letters criticizing Dr. King’s actions and questioning the veracity of his expert testimony are written.
- Unspecified Time: Dr. King asserts that opioid prescriptions should be deemed illegitimate if there is no objective evidence of functional improvement among patients. This is criticized for disregarding the subjective nature of pain.
- Unspecified Time: Dr. King makes the statement that “opioid addiction and the dangers associated therein have been known for 3,000 years.” This is criticized for disregarding evolving scientific understanding of opioid usage and safety.
- Unspecified Year: The Assistant Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy singles out bite mark evidence as an unreliable forensic discipline and calls for its eradication.
- Ongoing: Courts continue to admit bite mark evidence in criminal trials, often based on precedent rather than independent scientific validation. This is attributed to the influence of “Barratry” prosecutors.
- Ongoing: Bite mark evidence has reportedly led to more than two dozen wrongful arrests or convictions.
- June 6, 2023: A tweet by Claudia A. Merandi refers to Dr. Tim King as a “government-paid rat” who testifies against well-intentioned physicians, highlighting his alleged role in a “pain patient genocide.”
- August 9, 2023: The “youarewithinthenorms.com” article is published, further detailing the allegations against Dr. Timothy E. King, linking his alleged fraudulent data analysis in opioid matters to the unreliability of bite mark evidence.
- October 14, 2023: The article on “youarewithinthenorms.com” is updated.
- Unspecified Recent Time: Walter F. Wrenn, MD III, is arrested. The article includes a call for donations to support the “defense of health care truth” in relation to his case.
Cast of Characters and Brief Bios
- Timothy E. King, MD: The central figure of the article, referred to as “The Great King Rat” and “The Mother of All Forensic Fraud.” He is a government expert on opioids and pain management accused of misusing his expert status to perpetuate false narratives and biased interpretations in federal courtrooms. He is also criticized for his views on opioid addiction and the validity of opioid prescriptions. His work in forensic methodologies, particularly in areas like bite mark analysis, is deemed scientifically invalid by the PCAST report and other experts.
- Freddie Mercury: The late frontman of the British rock band Queen, who wrote the lyrics for “The Great King Rat” in 1973. His lyrics are used metaphorically to describe Dr. King.
- PCAST (President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology): A council that released a report in September 2016 criticizing the scientific validity of several forensic disciplines, including those associated with Dr. King’s alleged methodologies.
- American Board of Forensic Odontology (ABFO): A body of certified bite mark experts who, in 2015, could not reach a consensus on the identification of a bite mark, highlighting the field’s unreliability.
- Robert Curtis: An individual quoted in the article who believes Dr. King “belongs in prison for the rest of his life” for the pain and suffering caused by his alleged lies in testimony and calls for the prosecution of DEA and DOJ officials involved.
- Michael J. Saks et al.: Authors of the article “Forensic Bitemark Identification: Weak Foundations, Exaggerated Claims,” which is cited to support the argument against the reliability of bite mark evidence.
- Walter F. Wrenn, MD III: A medical doctor who has been arrested. The article includes a call for donations to support his defense, suggesting a connection to the broader issues discussed in the article regarding the treatment of healthcare professionals.
- Norman J CLEMENT, RPH, DDS, NORMAN L. CLEMENT PHARM-TECH, MALACHI F. MACKANDAL PHARMD, BELINDA BROWN-PARKER, et al.: A list of individuals mentioned at the beginning of the article, identified as “Medical Advocates” involved in “youarewithinthenorms.com.” They appear to be advocating against the issues discussed in the article, including the alleged fraud of Dr. King.
- Claudia A. Merandi: An individual who tweeted in June 2023, referring to Dr. King as a “government-paid rat” and accusing him of contributing to a “pain patient genocide.”
DONATE TO SUPPORT THE DEFENSE OF HEALTH CARE TRUTH SEND$100, $250, $500 TO ZELLE 3135103378 OR CASH APP:$docnorm
