PRT-2 FROM SUNDAY SUMMARY UNITED STATES vs. DR. NEIL ANAND, MD, et al., “STOUT,” MICHAEL PETRON AND THE RISE OF DATA MERCENARIES: AI IN HEALTHCARE ECHOES PAST INJUSTICES:

from 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, MD 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., IN THE SPIRIT OF LEROY BAYLOR, JAY K. JOSHI MD., MBA, AISHA GARDNER, 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

The provided excerpts detail specific instances, such as the United States v. Neil K. Anand case and the activities of firms like STOUT in which it is further illustrated how these technologies allegedly have weaponized data and reinforced existing inequities.

Echoing historical injustices where science and medicine are being deliberately perverted to target vulnerable populations.

This part-2 series presents a contemporary movement drawing a stark parallel between the Nazi “euthanasia” program, Aktion T4, and current uses of artificial intelligence in healthcare and the justice system.

The proponents of a “Nuremberg 2.0” argue that biased AI algorithms (algorithmic alchemy) and data-driven government initiatives are perpetrating “systemic crimes against humanity,” particularly targeting marginalized communities through flawed predictive analytics that lead to the denial of care and unjust prosecutions.

THE DOCTORS’ TRIAL OF NUREMBERG

United States of America v. Karl Brandt, et al., commonly known as the Doctors’ Trial, was the first of the twelve “Subsequent Nuremberg trials” for war crimes and crimes against humanity after the end of World War II between 1946 and 1947.

The accused were 20 physicians and 3 SS officials charged for their involvement in the Aktion T4 programme and Nazi human experimentation.

The Doctors’ Trial was held by United States authorities at the Palace of Justice in Nuremberg in the American occupation zone before US military courts, not before the International Military Tribunal. Seven of the accused were sentenced to death by hanging, five were sentenced to life imprisonment, four were given prison sentences from 10 to 20 years, and seven were acquitted.

THE ANAND-CLEMENT RULE

AI(alg*)= AS

Instead of hard evidence, these prosecutions have relied upon extrapolations, statistical guesses and modeling assumptions to project economic damages exceeding millions of dollars.  Thus generating power-point figures thru the result of their cleverly creative auditing, then utilizing AI algorithmic alchemy (bias algorithms), converting patient care into supposed criminality.

This tactic, now standard in HFPP-enabled prosecutions of medical providers and has alarming implications. By leaning on historical claims data that already reflect decades of over-policing and under-serving minority populations, predictive AI algorithms become a mirror of fascist Government institutional racism echoing the past healthcare mindset uncovered in the Nazi “euthanasia” program, Aktion T4.

The judges, heard before Military Tribunal I, were Walter B. Beals (presiding judge) from Washington, Harold L. Sebring from Florida, and Johnson T. Crawford from Oklahoma, with Victor C. Swearingen, a former special assistant to the Attorney General of the United States, as an alternate judge. The Chief of Counsel for the Prosecution was Telford Taylor and the chief prosecutor was James M. McHaney. The indictment was filed on 25 October 1946; the trial lasted from 9 December that year until 20 August 1947.

Nuremberg Code

The Nuremberg Military Tribunal’s decision in the case of the United States v Karl Brandt et al. includes what is now called the Nuremberg Code, a ten point statement delimiting permissible medical experimentation on human subjects.

According to this statement, humane experimentation is justified only if its results benefit society and it is carried out in accord with basic principles that “satisfy moral, ethical, and legal concepts.”

—“Permissible Medical Experiments.” Trials of War Criminals before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals under Control Council Law No. 10. Nuremberg October 1946 – April 1949, Washington. U.S. Government Printing Office (n.d.), vol. 2., pp. 181-182.

1. The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, over-reaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion, and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision. This latter element requires that before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject there should be made known to him the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method and means by which it is to be conducted; all inconveniences and hazards reasonably to be expected; and the effects upon his health or person which may possibly come from his participation in the experiment.

The duty and responsibility for ascertaining the quality of the consent rests upon each individual who initiates, directs or engages in the experiment. It is a personal duty and responsibility which may not be delegated to another with impunity.

2. The experiment should be such as to yield fruitful results for the good of society, unprocurable by other methods or means of study, and not random and unnecessary in nature.
3. The experiment should be so designed and based on the results of animal experimentation and a knowledge of the natural history of the disease or other problem under study that the anticipated results will justify the performance of the experiment.
4. The experiment should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury.
5. No experiment should be conducted where there is an a priori reason to believe that death or disabling injury will occur; except, perhaps, in those experiments where the experimental physicians also serve as subjects.
6. The degree of risk to be taken should never exceed that determined by the humanitarian importance of the problem to be solved by the experiment.
7. Proper preparations should be made and adequate facilities provided to protect the experimental subject against even remote possibilities of injury disability or death.
8. The experiment should be conducted only by scientifically qualified persons. The highest degree of skill and care should be required through all stages of the experiment of those who conduct or engage in the experiment.
9. During the course of the experiment the human subject should be at liberty to bring the experiment to an end if he has reached the physical or mental state where continuation of the experiment seems to him to be impossible.
10. During the course of the experiment the scientist in charge must be prepared to terminate the experiment at any stage, if he has probable cause to believe, in the exercise of the good faith, superior skill and careful judgement required by him that a continuation of the experiment is likely to result in injury, disability, or death to the experimental subject.

MICHAEL PETRON AND THE Rise of “Data Mercenaries”:

Consulting firms like STOUT are portrayed as entities whose business model relies on creating “convincing fictions for juries” by drawing false correlations from data.

“STOUT, the firm with which he is affiliated, has become emblematic of a new class of data mercenaries—consulting entities whose business model depends not on rigorous statistical integrity, but on the production of convincing fictions for juries.”

• Erosion of Foundational Scientific Principles: The text argues that the principle of “correlation is not causation” is being disregarded in favor of data models that confirm pre-existing biases and serve prosecutorial agendas.
• Quote: “The principle that correlation is not causation, once a foundational tenet of scientific reasoning has been discarded in favor of models that confirm institutional biases and serve prosecutorial convenience.”
• Targeting of Marginalized Communities (“Tulsification”): The text uses the term “Tulsification” to describe the alleged destructive impact of these practices on marginalized communities, drawing a parallel to the historical racial violence in Tulsa. This suggests a pattern of systemic injustice.
• Role of Individuals: The text specifically names Mike Petron, AUSA P.J. Koob, and Arun Bodapati, accusing them of orchestrating these tactics.

Michael Petron

LEADERSHIP

President – Disputes, Claims, & Investigations

Michael Petron is an expert in the application of statistics, accounting and finance to white collar crimes and civil litigation matters. His practice focuses on financial and healthcare frauds as well as False Claims Act (FCA) and Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) investigations.

PETRON’S WILL TO POWER

Mike has over 20 years of experience, which encompasses a number of significant criminal and civil litigation matters. He assists clients in a variety of litigation consulting services, including damages, complex data analytics, fraud investigation, statistical analysis, forensic accounting, money laundering analysis, asset tracing, and inability-to-pay determinations.

Stout is a global advisory firm specializing in corporate finance, accounting and transaction advisory, valuation, financial disputes, claims, and investigations. We serve a range of clients, from public corporations to privately held companies in numerous industries.

Our clients and their advisors rely on our premier expertise, deep industry knowledge, and unparalleled responsiveness on complex matters and works collaboratively with clients to implement transformative change. Our consultants work side by side with organizations to manage risk through industry-leading analysis; make informed decisions from machine and deep learning; and contain costs through process improvement.

He has testified as an expert and summary witness, interviewed witnesses, conducted audits, and assisted in self disclosures. He provides strategic consulting to counsel throughout all phases of the

Investigation and litigation process. He also provides operational consulting to companies and regulators to improve processes and internal controls.

Mike’s clients include AML100 law firms, in-house counsels, states attorneys general, state regulators, and a broad range of federal agencies and regulators.

He has extensive experience supporting the United States Department of Justice (DOJ). In this role Mike received an Award of Excellence by the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency for his work on the joint DOJ/HHS OIG Advanced Data Intelligence and Analytics Team.

He also received a Special Commendation from the DOJ’s Civil Division for contributions made to the Medicare Outlier Analysis Team. He is a frequent speaker at various training programs for the DOJ and for other federal, state and local law enforcement officials

Michael Petron, CPA, CFE 

Stout

I am a Managing Director and lead the Dispute Consulting group at Stout. I am an expert in the application of statistics, accounting and finance to white collar crimes and civil litigation matters.

My practice focuses on financial and healthcare frauds as well as False Claims Act (“FCA”) and Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (“FCPA”) investigations. I have 19 years of experience, which encompasses a number of significant criminal and civil litigation matters.

I assist clients in a variety of litigation consulting services, including damages, complex data analytics, fraud investigation, statistical analysis, forensic accounting, money laundering analysis, asset tracing and inability-to-pay determinations.

I have testified as an expert and summary witness, interviewed witnesses, conducted audits and assisted in self disclosures. I provide strategic consulting to counsel throughout all phases of the litigation process. I also provide operational consulting to companies and regulators to improve processes and internal controls.

My clients include AML100 law firms, in-house counsels, states attorneys general, state regulators, and a broad range of federal agencies and regulators.

I have extensive experience supporting the United States Department of Justice (“DOJ”).

I have received an Award of Excellence by the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency for my work on the joint DOJ/HHS OIG Advanced Data Intelligence and Analytics Team.

I also received a Special Commendation from the DOJ’s Civil Division for contributions made to the Medicare Outlier Analysis Team.

I am a frequent speaker at various training programs for the DOJ and for other federal and local law enforcement officials. 

Michael Petron, CPA, CFE | LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/in/michael-petron-cpa-cfe-779b484/ 1/4 Experience Co-President & Managing Director Stout · Full-time Feb 2014 – Present · 11 yrs 2 mos Washington D.C. Metro Area Managing Director Invotex Group Jan 2007 – Jan 2014 · 7 yrs 1 mo Accounting, Financial & Economic Consulting, Intellectual Property Management Manager Ellin & Tucker, Chartered Jul 2003 – Dec 2006 · 3 yrs 6 mos Statistician Immigration and Naturalization Service Jun 2002 – Jul 2003 · 1 yr 2 mos Consultant Navigant Consulting Jul 2000 – Jun 2002 · 2 yrs Education 

Washington, DC mpetron@stout.com Office +1.202.370.9979 3/29/25, 12:59 PM Michael Petron | Stout

OR SEND

TO CASH APP:$docnorm

ZELLE 3135103378

ALL WATCHED OVER BY MACHINES OF LOVING GRACE

BE SURE TO DONATE TO THE MARK IBSEN GOFUNDME DEFENSE FUND, WHERE THE SON ALWAYS RISES!!!

FOR NOW, YOU ARE WITHIN

THE NORMS

REFERENCES:

Detailed Timeline of Main Events

This timeline and cast of characters reflect the main points and individuals discussed across the provided sources, highlighting the historical context of the Nazi “euthanasia” program and the contemporary concerns raised about the DEA’s approach to prescription painkillers in the United States.

Early 20th Century – Pre-Nazi Germany:

• Early 20th Century: Sterilization of individuals with hereditary defects and perceived “antisocial” behavior is a respectable field of medicine in some countries (Canada, Denmark, Switzerland, US). Germany is noted as being relatively reluctant to introduce such legislation.
• 1920s: Studies rank Germany as unusually reluctant to introduce sterilization legislation.
• 1924: Adolf Hitler, in his book Mein Kampf, writes about racial hygiene as a future great deed.

Nazi Era and Aktion T4 (1933-1945):

• July 1933: The “Law for the Prevention of Hereditarily Diseased Offspring” is passed in Germany, prescribing compulsory sterilization for individuals with conditions deemed hereditary, including schizophrenia, epilepsy, Huntington’s chorea, “imbecility,” chronic alcoholism, and other forms of social deviance. Hereditary Health Courts (Erbgesundheitsgerichte) are established to administer the law.
• 1933-1939: An estimated 360,000 people are sterilized under the 1933 law.
• Mid-1930s: The Nazi Party conducts a propaganda campaign in favor of euthanasia, highlighting the cost of maintaining asylums for the incurably ill. Films like The Inheritance (1935) and Victims of the Past (1937) are produced.
• 1935: Hitler tells the Leader of Reich Doctors, Gerhard Wagner, that the “euthanasia” problem could be more easily carried out in wartime.
• After 1937: Labor shortages due to rearmament lead to a decline in the rate of sterilization as those capable of work are deemed “useful.”
• Late 1938: The Aktion T4 program begins with a “trial” case involving the “mercy killing” of Gerhard Kretschmar, a child with blindness and disabilities. Hitler instructs Karl Brandt to proceed similarly in other cases.

• August 18, 1939: The Reich Committee for the Scientific Registering of Hereditary and Congenital Illnesses is established to register sick children and newborns identified as “defective.” Secret killing of infants begins and increases after the start of WWII.
• September 1, 1939: Hitler drafts a letter (backdated to this date and kept confidential) entrusting Reich Leader Philipp Bouhler and Dr. Karl Brandt with the authority to grant “mercy death” to patients deemed incurably ill based on “human judgment.” This serves as the informal basis for Aktion T4.
• September 1939 – 1945: The systematic killings of people with mental and physical disabilities take place in psychiatric hospitals across Germany, Austria, occupied Poland, and the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia. An estimated 275,000 to 300,000 people are killed.
• October 1939: First experiments with gassing patients using carbon monoxide occur at Fort VII in Posen (Poznań). Heinrich Himmler witnesses a gassing in December 1939.
• January 1940: The first gassings in Germany proper take place at the Brandenburg Euthanasia Centre, using bottled pure carbon monoxide.
• 1940-1945: Extermination centers are established at six psychiatric hospitals: Bernburg, Brandenburg, Grafeneck, Hadamar, Hartheim, and Sonnenstein. Over 1,000 children are killed at Am Spiegelgrund and Gugging in Austria. Nazi doctors take thousands of brains from “euthanasia” victims for research.
• August 1940: Justice Minister Franz Gürtner is shown Hitler’s 1939 letter to secure his cooperation with Aktion T4.
• 1941: More than 5,000 children have been killed under the child euthanasia program. The film I Accuse (Ich klage an) is released, based on a novel by Hellmuth Unger, a consultant for “child euthanasia.”
• 1941: Bishop Clemens August Graf von Galen begins to publicly preach against the killings in August, leading to widespread, albeit suppressed, opposition.
• June 29, 1943: Pope Pius XII issues the encyclical Mystici corporis Christi, condemning the killing of physically deformed, mentally disturbed, and hereditarily ill people in Germany.
• September 1943: Bishops across Germany read a condemnation of the killings from pulpits.
• May 29, 1945: Richard Jenne, the last known child victim, is killed at the Kaufbeuren-Irsee state hospital, after the US Army occupied the town.

Post-World War II Era:

• December 1946 – August 1947: The Doctors’ Trial, an American military tribunal in Nuremberg, prosecutes 23 doctors and administrators for their roles in war crimes and crimes against humanity, including the systematic killings under the “euthanasia” program.
• August 1947: The Doctors’ Trial concludes, with 16 defendants found guilty. Seven are sentenced to death.
• June 2, 1948: Karl Brandt and Viktor Brack, among others sentenced to death in the Doctors’ Trial, are executed.
• Post-War: Trials are held in various locations (Dresden, Frankfurt, Graz, Nuremberg, Tübingen, Hadamar) for individuals involved in the Nazi euthanasia program.
• 1951-1977: Josef Hirtreiter serves time for gassings of Jews at Treblinka; his involvement at Hadamar could not be proven.
• 1960s: Albert Widmann is convicted in two trials for his role in the gassing of patients and serves six years in prison.
• 1964: Werner Heyde, a key operational leader of Aktion T4, commits suicide before his trial after evading detection for 18 years.
• 1967: Joseph Mayer, who wrote a paper on the churches’ likely reaction to euthanasia for Viktor Brack, dies, denying he formally condoned the killings.
• December 1968: Reinhold Vorberg is sentenced to ten years time served.
• 1980: Philipp, Landgrave of Hesse, is tried and sentenced to two years “time served” for his role in Aktion T4; he dies in 1980.
• 1990: After German Reunification, the Stasi archives containing around 30,000 files on Aktion T4 become publicly available, leading to new research.
• 2001: Children’s brains preserved from Am Spiegelgrund are discovered in the basement of the clinic and in the private collection of Heinrich Gross.
• September 2, 2014: Germany dedicates a Holocaust memorial in Berlin for the disabled victims of the Nazi “euthanasia” program.

United States – War on Prescription Painkillers (Late 20th – 21st Century):

• Late 20th Century: The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) traditionally focuses on illegal drugs.
• 2000-2001: The Department of Justice criticizes the DEA, stating its goals are inconsistent with the President’s National Drug Control Strategy.
• Early 2000s: The DEA shifts focus to the “illegal diversion of otherwise legal medication,” particularly prescription opioid painkillers like OxyContin. This is framed as a new drug epidemic.
• 2001: The DEA contacts medical examiners, instructing them to report “OxyContin-related deaths.”
• May 2001 – January 2004: The DEA’s OxyContin Action Plan leads to over 400 investigations and 600 arrests, with 60% involving medical professionals.
• April 11, 2002: DEA Commissioner Asa Hutchinson testifies before the Senate, describing the nonmedical use of OxyContin as a deadly new epidemic.
• May 16, 2002: The DEA releases a “Summary of Medical Examiner Reports on Oxycodone-Related Deaths,” announcing 464 such deaths over two years.
• 2005: Ronald T. Libby publishes a report, “Treating Doctors as Drug Dealers: The DEA’s War on Prescription Painkillers,” criticizing the DEA’s methods and the flawed criteria for “OxyContin-related deaths.” The report highlights the DEA’s focus on “red flags” that may not accurately indicate criminal behavior in medical practice.
• October 2004: The DEA disavows the contents of a pamphlet related to prescribing practices, contributing to confusion among doctors.
• Ongoing: The source suggests a continuation of overzealous prosecutions of medical professionals based on flawed data analysis and the conflation of legitimate pain management with criminal activity. The terms “Tulsafication” and “5th Generation AI Lawfare” are used to describe these alleged practices, drawing a parallel to the Nazi “euthanasia” program in their dehumanization and targeting of marginalized communities. The role of data analytics firms like STOUT and the involvement of individuals like Mike Petron, AUSA P.J. Koob, and Arun Bodapati are highlighted in this context.

Cast of Characters with Brief Bios:

Aktion T4 and Nazi Era Figures:

• Adolf Hitler: Führer of Nazi Germany. His informal letter in 1939 provided the basis for Aktion T4. Believed in “racial hygiene” and the elimination of “life unworthy of life.”
• Karl Brandt: Hitler’s personal physician. Entrusted with Bouhler to oversee the implementation of Aktion T4. Convicted and executed at the Doctors’ Trial.
• Philipp Bouhler: Head of Hitler’s Chancellery. Entrusted with Brandt to oversee Aktion T4.
• Gerhard Kretschmar: A child born near Leipzig with blindness and disabilities whose “mercy killing” in July 1939 served as a trial case for Aktion T4.
• Heinrich Himmler: Reichsführer-SS. Witnessed early gassing experiments and played a key role in the development of extermination methods that would later be used in the Holocaust.
• Viktor Brack: SS-Oberführer. Administered Aktion T4 from Tiergartenstraße 4. Convicted and executed at the Doctors’ Trial.
• Werner Blankenburg: SA-Oberführer. Subordinate to Bouhler and Brack in the implementation of Aktion T4.
• Herbert Linden: Official in the Interior Ministry who led the child killing program and was involved in Aktion T4.
• Ernst-Robert Grawitz: Chief physician of the SS and Polizei. Involved in the Reich Committee for the Scientific Registering of Hereditary and Congenital Illnesses.
• August Becker: SS chemist. Involved in the technical aspects of the gassing program.
• Leonardo Conti: Reich Health Leader and State Secretary for Health in the Interior Ministry. Bypassed by Hitler in the formal authorization of Aktion T4.
• Hans Lammers: Head of the Reich Chancellery. Involved in discussions with Hitler regarding the “euthanasia” program.
• Wilhelm Frick: Interior Minister who administered the 1933 sterilization law through Hereditary Health Courts.
• Emil Kraepelin: Influential psychiatrist who promoted racial hygiene and eugenics.
• Eugen Bleuler: Psychiatrist who advocated for the eugenic sterilization of individuals diagnosed with schizophrenia, believing in the prevention of racial deterioration.
• Joseph Goebbels: Reich Minister of Propaganda. His physical disability required careful handling of the inclusion of physically disabled individuals in the “euthanasia” program.
• Gerhard Wagner: Leader of Reich Doctors. Informed by Hitler that the “euthanasia” issue would be addressed in wartime.
• Hellmuth Unger: Physician and consultant for “child euthanasia,” whose novel was the basis for the film I Accuse.
• Carl Schneider: Professor of psychiatry who was recruited to participate in Aktion T4. Committed suicide after his arrest post-war.
• Max de Crinis: Professor of psychiatry from Berlin who was involved in Aktion T4.
• Paul Nitsche: Professor of psychiatry and director of the Sonnenstein state institution who became an operational leader of Aktion T4.
• Werner Heyde: Operational leader of Aktion T4, succeeded by Nitsche. Committed suicide before his trial.
• Albert Widmann: Chief chemist of the German Criminal Police (Kripo) who developed the improvised gas chamber and supervised gassings. Convicted and imprisoned post-war.
• Christian Wirth: Kripo officer involved in the gassing program who later played a prominent role in the Final Solution. Killed by Yugoslav partisans.
• Joseph Mayer: Professor of Moral Theology who wrote a paper for Brack on the churches’ likely reactions to euthanasia, suggesting they wouldn’t oppose it if seen as in the national interest.
• Lothar Kreyssig: District judge and member of the Confessing Church who protested against Aktion T4 as illegal. Dismissed from his position.
• Clemens August Graf von Galen: Catholic Bishop of Münster who publicly preached against the killings, leading to popular opposition.
• Pope Pius XII: Issued the encyclical Mystici corporis Christi in 1943, condemning the killing of disabled and mentally ill people in Germany.
• Alfons Klein, Heinrich Ruoff, Karl Willig: Staff members of the Hadamar killing center tried and executed by American forces in 1945 for killing Allied nationals.
• Adolf Wahlmann, Irmgard Huber: Chief physician and head nurse at Hadamar tried and convicted by German courts for the murders of German citizens.
• Philipp, Landgrave of Hesse: Governor of Hesse-Nassau, tried and sentenced to two years “time served” for his role in Aktion T4.
• Josef Hirtreiter: Served time for gassings at Treblinka. Alleged involvement at Hadamar could not be proven.
• Ernst Illing: Director of the Vienna Psychiatric-Neurological Clinic for Children Am Spielgrund, where he killed approximately 200 children. Sentenced to death.
• Marianne Türk: Doctor at Am Spielgrund who worked with Illing in killing children. Sentenced to 10 years prison.
• Reinhold Vorberg: Sentenced to ten years time served for his involvement.
• Richard Jenne: The last child known to be killed under Aktion T4 in May 1945.
• Heinrich Gross: One of the directors of Am Spiegelgrund, whose private collection contained preserved brains of child “euthanasia” victims.

United States – War on Prescription Painkillers Figures:

• Mike Petron: Expert in the application of statistics, accounting, and finance to white-collar crimes. Affiliated with STOUT, a consulting firm. Celebrated by the federal bureaucracy for his role in data analytics. Accused in the source of manufacturing mathematical illusions that conflate human behavior with criminal intent and weaponizing data in legal contexts.
• STOUT: A consulting firm described as a “data mercenary” that specializes in producing convincing fictions for juries by drawing false correlations from data. Affiliated with Mike Petron.
• P.J. Koob (“Little Napoleon”): An Assistant United States Attorney (AUSA) accused in the source of using data sculpted by firms like STOUT to fit predetermined narratives in court.
• Arun Bodapati (“Punkhawallah-in-Chief”): Also accused in the source of using flawed data and AI lawfare tactics.
• Asa Hutchinson: Former DEA Commissioner who described the nonmedical use of OxyContin as a deadly new drug epidemic and shifted DEA resources to address it.
• Ronald T. Libby: Author of the 2005 report “Treating Doctors as Drug Dealers: The DEA’s War on Prescription Painkillers,” which is heavily cited in the source. The report criticizes the DEA’s methods, flawed data, and overzealous prosecutions of doctors.
• Andrew Kolodny: Psychiatrist mentioned in the context of the “dehumanization” concept and seemingly aligned with the narrative of an opioid crisis driven by over-prescribing.
• Rajendra Bothra, MD: Physician who was awarded a high civilian honor in India and known for his work with the poor. Was subject to an overzealous prosecution in the US but found innocent.
• Freddy Williams, MD: A Black physician who died in federal prison in 2006 after receiving a 40-year sentence, labeled a “DRUG DEALER IN WHITE!!!”

• Preston Phillips, MD, and Stephanie Husen, MD: Spine surgeons murdered in Oklahoma, mentioned in the context of “Tulsafication” and the destructive impact of opioid restrictive laws.
• Anne Milgram: US Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) Administrator in the more recent period, whose social media activity is presented as indicative of the ongoing approach.
• Steven Hyman: Director of the National Institute of Mental Health, quoted describing the US approach to narcotics as “pharmacological Calvinists.”
• Jennifer Oliva: Law professor who asserts that the DEA’s Prescription Drug Monitoring Program (PDMP) predictive platforms deserve scrutiny due to their use in clinical decision-making without validation.
• Mathew Fogg: Former DEA Special Agent quoted as saying “muzzle the intel” in the context of the War on Drugs.
• Harold O. Alexander, MD: OB-GYN who stated that the “Fascism OPIOD PANDEMIC” started by fascinating the fools and then muzzling the intelligent.
• Nancy Seefelt: Pain Patient Advocate who echoed the sentiment of fascinating fools first.
• Sam Quinones: Author on the opioid epidemic, quoted focusing on the racial aspect involving “white people” and describing common pain medications as akin to heroin.
• Justice Potter Stewart: Supreme Court Justice who raised concerns about convicting physicians based on departures from conventional medical practices.
• Paul L. Friedman: Individual who affirmed that a defendant in a case was indeed a physician, not a fraud.
• Steve (Pharmacist Steve): A pharmacist licensed for 52 years, mentioned in the context of Black and Brown doctors vs. Blue Cross Blue Shield.
• Chad D. Kollas, MD: Internist in Orlando, Florida, mentioned in the context of healthcare providers being targeted by the DEA based on skin color and nation of origin.
• Richard A. Lawhern, PhD: Individual listed after the mention of Justice Potter Stewart and DEA targeting, suggesting an association with critiques of these practices.
• Carl Nelson: Award-winning individual who dismissed reports of DEA targeting as “not news,” indicating a media gatekeeping perspective.
• Leroy Baylor, Dr. Wilmer Leon, Juandolyn Stokes, Angela Green-Johnson, John Fuglesang, Anthony Parks Muhammed, Rev. Al: Individuals mentioned as exceptions in the media who have reported on the targeting of Medical Providers.
• Dr. Davis Lewis, MD, and Dr. Jay Joshi, MD: Interventional Spine Specialists mentioned in the context of media bias affecting public perception of physicians.

DEA-DOJ FINAL SOLUTION