Holocaust Survivor Mandate Case

Holocaust Survivor Mandate Case

Holocaust Survivor Jab Mandate Case

Re: the Legality of forcefully Injecting a Person with an alleged Medication Against their Will

 

Back to All Cases

Facts of the Case

  • Dates: Dec 14 2022
  • Location: Stuttgart, Germany
  • Court: District Court of Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt
  • Case #:
  • Plaintiff: 85 yr old Holocaust Survivor
  • Plaintiff’s Lawyer: Holger Fischer
  • Defendant: Guardian
  • Trial Type:
  • Judge: Dr. L
  • Status: Under Appeal
  • Verdict: TBD


*updated Jan 31. 2023

 

Background

A court in the German city of Stuttgart, in the state of Baden-Württemberg, sought to force COVID-19 vaccinations for an 85-year-old Jewish composer and a Holocaust survivor.  [1]….in order to institutionalise her “for her own good,” [2] 

The composer’s guardian had been trying to institutionalize his charge for years because she had once refused to take her medication. [2] 

Mascha Orel, co-founder of a holocaust survivors’ advocacy organization, comments that this suggests that there are financial interests at play, which also was observed by Report24. Orel published an open letter to the court, asking it to reconsider the order. [8]

Zhvanetskaya was born in 1937 in Vinnytsa, Ukraine, and moved to Germany in the late 1990s. She writes for various musical instruments, including contrabass, tuba, and trombone, and is a prolific composer, having authored two operas, more than twenty song cycles, symphonic works, and numerous sonatas. [8]
 
Issued December 2022, the order authorizes Zhvanetskaya’s guardian and medical support staff to force their way into her home, calling on police if needed, then lock her up in a psychiatric institution until December 2024 at the latest so that she can be administered two shots of the Covid-19 vaccine she has repeatedly insisted she does not want. [2]

According to the verdict of judge Dr. L. at the district court Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt, the accommodation of the affected person in the closed ward of a psychiatric hospital or a closed ward of a care facility was approved by the duty caregiver until December 5, 2024 at the latest. At the same time, two vaccinations against Covid-19 (Corona) for basic immunization were approved as compulsory medical measures, in each case after internal examination of the ability to vaccinate, until January 16, 2023 at the latest, with the consent of the duty caregiver. [7]

The court claims that Zhvanetskaya has been diagnosed with several mental illnesses, including frontotemporal dementia, “change of character,” delusional disorder, “narcissistic self-image,” egocentrism, and logorrhea. She also allegedly suffers from morbid obesity and cardiac issues. [8]

The judgment further states that the forced vaccination against Covid-19 against the will of the person concerned in the context of the accommodation was necessary for the welfare of the person concerned in order to avert an imminent significant damage to her health. [7]

Inna Zhvanetskaya had not been convinced of the necessity of this medical measure, on the contrary. She strictly rejected the vaccination. Therefore, the judge found that the substantial health damage could not be averted by any other measure reasonable for the person concerned, since the expected benefit of the medical measure would substantially outweigh the expected impairment of the person concerned. [7]

The non-consensual treatment is said to be justified by the composer’s alleged mental and physical illnesses, which the order claims include narcissism, egomania, logorrhea, dementia, obesity, heart disease, and an obsession with music. [2]

“She is completely caught up in her compositions and so busy with music that it is impossible to have a meaningful conversation with her,” the document states. [2]

 

The outlet Report24 posted a copy of the court order, which authorizes the woman’s transfer to a psychiatric ward and administering inoculations. According to the translation of the court documents done by Children’s Health Defense, if Zhvanetskaya or her guardians refuse to cooperate, the authorities should use force to make them: [8]

If the competent guardianship authority cooperates in the process of bringing the person concerned to [the] accommodation specified, it may, if necessary, use force and call in the assistance of the police enforcement authorities. [8]

The home of the person concerned may be forcibly opened, entered and searched for the purpose of carrying out the procedure. [8]

The immediate effectiveness of the decision is ordered. [8]

 

Attorney Holger Fischer got the case rolling. He reported about it in his Telegram channel, contacted Masha Orel, a co-founder of “We for Humanity”, who in turn contacted Report24. First, Report24 asked the court for an opinion on Sunday, January 8, 2023. This came on Monday and stated dryly and factually on what basis the deprivation of liberty measures as well as the compulsory medical treatment were ordered and that a complaint was pending (that of attorney Fischer). [7]

In the channel of attorney Holger Fischer one could read: 

With me the year began among other things with a cry for help from Baden-Wuerttemberg: At the request of the duty caregiver, a guardianship court approved the two-year closed accommodation of an old lady, which means compulsory treatment in a psychiatric hospital, followed by admission to the protected area of a nursing home. Without first waiting for the success of the hospital treatment and then, for example, deciding the case anew by obtaining a new expert opinion regarding the need for further accommodation, a decision is immediately made here about the future of this not so dependent woman. [7]

This alone is not disproportionate. Besides, the court expressly approves the compulsory vaccination against Covid-19. [7]

While a forced medication with psychotropic drugs may only be ultima ratio, accordingly not already included in the decision, here a court decides that the affected person receives her Covid injection by force without hesitation, i.e. possibly still directly after her transfer by means of police coercion to the psychiatric hospital. (, with the use of force. ) [7]

All for the benefit of the person concerned in accordance with Section 1906 (1) (2) of the German Civil Code, according to which placement against the will of a person concerned is only permissible because “an examination of the state of health, a medical treatment or a medical intervention is necessary to avert imminent significant damage to health, the measure cannot be carried out without the placement of the person concerned, and the person concerned cannot recognize the necessity of the placement or act in accordance with this insight due to a mental illness or mental or psychological disability.” [7]

Since the order is immediately enforceable, she now waits daily to be removed from her home, transported to the psychiatric ward, and forcibly inoculated by the guardianship authority, which will assist the duty caregiver in carrying out the order, which in turn will call in the police to apply coercive measures. The person concerned was born before the beginning of the Second World War and is of Jewish origin. [7]

In the channel one finds also the first legal statement of him. Among other things one can read there: It is not yet certain how the fate of the old lady will continue, who is to be accommodated today. By the legal remedy of the complaint the decision of the guardianship court to the long-term accommodation and compulsory vaccination is contestable and was contested. The decision of the Appeals Board of the Regional Court is pending. [7]

 
Hiding & Video

Zhvanetskaya was reportedly rescued ahead of their visit by “friendly activists.” On January 10, 2023, 1n a video recorded from her hiding place, the composer told Report24 that “music is my life, and if they take away music from me then they take my life.” [2]

Zhvanetskaya’s acquaintances have countered that the video she made this week proves she is of sound mind and body. While admitting the composer was “introverted and autistic,” Mascha Orel, co-founder of a holocaust survivors’ advocacy organization, told German outlet TKP after speaking to Zhvanetskaya that this was “normal for a highly talented artist”  [2]

According to Report24, the “exclusive video shows: She is neither of unsound mind nor endangering herself or others. She’s just afraid for her life,” rendering the psychiatric admittance questionable. [1]

 
Public Reaction
  • Austrian professor Martin Haditsch has argued that forcibly vaccinating Zhvanetskaya would violate the Nuremberg Code, a set of laws prohibiting non-consensual medical experimentation that was adopted during the Nazi war crimes trials that followed World War II. [2]
  • Politicians and legal experts, including the ‘Alternative for Germany’ (AfD) party’s Martin Sich, have decried the court order against the composer as a violation of Germany’s Basic Law. [2]
  • German outlet TKP and the Society of Physicians and Scientists for Health, Freedom and Democracy reported about lawyers, activists, and physicians defending Zhvanetskaya and criticizing the authorities for violating the Nuremberg Code, committing crimes against humanity by forcing an experimental drug on a person. [8]
 
  • Dr. med. Bodo Schiffmann also picked it up in his channel

“Holocaust survivor is to receive a compulsory medical measure twice tomorrow January 11, 2023: She is to be forcibly vaccinated against Covid-19 against her conscious decision. Furthermore, she is to be forcibly committed to a psychiatric institution. There she is to be vaccinated twice against COVID-19. The woman has consciously decided against this vaccination and is now being subjected to a compulsory medical measure as a Holocaust survivor in Germany.” and urges his readers to share the information widely in order to protect the lady. [7]

 
  • And Beate Bahner, specialized lawyer for medical law, commented:

This decision is a gigantic judicial scandal!!! Immediately executable! Tomorrow the composer is to be picked up. Then she will be vaccinated tomorrow at noon and, in addition, will probably be sedated with medication. I am stunned! A lawyer (Holger Fischer) has already filed a complaint. However, this does not prevent the judiciary and police from the immediate execution of this scandalous decision. This case must go to the public and to the press! Everyone must become active!“ [7]

  • The society of physicians and scientists for health, freedom and democracy e.V., MWGFD e.V., reports comprehensively and additionally publishes the letter of Mascha Orel, which is another Jewish woman living in Germany, born in Ukraine. In her open letter (engl. translation) she asked the court in Stuttgart to reconsider this decision. I spoke briefly with her to get more background information. [7]
 
  • Mascha Orel, co-founder of a humanitarian organization for holocaust survivors and their descendants, “We for Humanity,” reportedly spoke with the woman, and could not “confirm anything that was diagnosed in the report,” describing Zhvanetskaya as “vulnerable and frightened,” but having a “sharp mind.” Her true diagnosis is that she’s autistic, and “finds it difficult to interact with the outside world outside of her music,” said Orel, adding that “if it goes after that, one would have to isolate all autistic people.” [8]

 

What was your experience with Inna?

I talked to her on the phone for an hour. It is a madness. I wanted to see for myself what her condition is. She is vulnerable, frightened, and has been living in this state for about 2 years, as her duty caregiver has apparently tried to institutionalize her several times. The sword of Damocles of institutionalization has been hanging over her head for a long time. She has drawn an unequivocal comparison, “It’s like when Dad was at the front and Mom had to flee with me and my brother.” [7]

Why was psychiatry pushed forward?

Inna has a good soul around her, a woman who is there for her out of Christian charity. The woman has a sharp mind. She told me that about two months ago the nursing service was given the task of washing and dressing her. She could do that herself, she was always well groomed. Why was this done? Then probably the next instruction came from the caregiver that they had to control the acceptance of medication. These are two knock-out criteria. If you don’t take care of yourself and refuse to take medication, you are worthy of care. But both are just not true, according to Inna Zhvanetskaya’s confidante. Her father was a doctor and pharmacologist, and she pays close attention to the side effects and expiration dates of medications. Her father probably also taught her to weigh the benefits and risks, she has a very conscious approach to the subject and that is probably why she so strictly rejected vaccination. She probably takes the prescribed medication (e.g. because of water in the leg). [7]

Do you know how she feels about her situation?

She finds it difficult to interact with the outside world outside her music. Interaction with the outside world outside of her music is difficult for her. If that were the case, all autistic people would have to be isolated. It was a big effort for her to record the video, simply talking without a piano is not hers. But for her, it’s about her life. She talked and played for her life. That moved me to tears. That’s what Report24 called it: “Inna Zhvanetskaya plays for her life. And how she plays!” [7]

 
  • Children’s Health Defense stressed that “there is no medical or legal justification for compulsory vaccination,” and that the ruling is arbitrary. [8]
  • Martin Arieh Rudolph, chairman of the Jewish community in Bamberg, Bavaria sent a letter to the president of the Jewish community in Stuttgart, Barbara Traub, asking if she and the Jewish community could intervene to help Zhvanetskaya. [1]
 

“The facts seem unbelievable, because Germany has really learned nothing at all from history,” Report24 wrote. [4]

 
  • Michael Blume, the civil servant assigned to protect Jewish life in Baden-Württemberg state, including in its capital Stuttgart, is facing criticism on Twitter for failing to prioritize Zhvanetskaya’s case. There are calls for Blume to resign. [4]
  • Shai Glick, CEO of the Betsalmo—Human Rights in a Jewish Spirit NGO, told JNS,

“Anyone who acts against the people of Israel under the guise of anti-Zionism and anyone who supports the BDS movement, which applies a double standard solely towards the State of Israel, is himself antisemitic…. Mr. Blume should certainly not be in charge of the fight against antisemitism,” said Glick. [4]

 
Appeal

Zhvanetskaya’s lawyer, Holger Fischer, filed for an emergency appeal. On January 12, he posted on his Telegram channel that the Stuttgart regional court granted his application to suspend the compulsory vaccination until the decision on the appeal is made. Still, the composer might be forcefully institutionalized at any time, according to the lawyer. [8]

 “We for Humanity” also contacted the court with an appeal. On the same day, the employees of the care service succinctly informed that Ms. Zhvanetskaya would have to sign the work assignments finally, no more would be needed, as Ms. Zhvanetskaya would be picked up the next day. The supervisor would be there. [7]

 
Current Covid Regulations

Days before (the appeal Ruling) German Health Minister Karl Lauterbach announced an easing of one of the country’s last remaining pandemic restrictions. Lauterbach said Friday that as of February 2, there will no longer be a mask mandate for long-distance trains and buses. [3]

Masks will still be required in doctor’s offices, with masks and negative COVID-19 tests both required for hospitals and nursing homes. [3]

 
The Nuremberg Code

The Nuremberg Code ( from Wikipedia) is an ethical guideline for preparing and conducting medical, psychological and other experiments on humans. It has been part of the medical ethical principles in medical training since its formulation in the verdict of the Nuremberg Medical Trial (1946/1947), similar to the Geneva Vow. It states that in medical experiments on humans [7]

“the voluntary consent of the subject (is) absolutely necessary. This means that the person concerned must be capable, in the legal sense, of giving consent; that he must be able, uninfluenced by force, fraud, trickery, coercion, overreaching, or any other form of persuasion or coercion, to exercise his judgment; that he must have sufficient knowledge and understanding of the field in question in its details to be able to make an understanding and informed decision.” The Nuremberg Code was prompted by the crimes against humanity committed in the name of medical research during the National Socialist era, in particular “criminal medical experiments” and forced sterilizations. [7]

 

Significance

Austrian professor Martin Haditsch has argued that forcibly vaccinating Zhvanetskaya would violate the Nuremberg Code, a set of laws prohibiting non-consensual medical experimentation that was adopted during the Nazi war crimes trials that followed World War II. [6]

Covid Critic Robin Monotti tweeted

“This is opening the floodgates potentially to mass incarceration of people who refuse to be injected with experimental products” [5]

 

Plaintiff’s Argument

The Plaintiff argues that she is of sound mind and understands the risks of the experimental injections

 

Defendant’s Argument

The defendant argues that the Plaintiff is mentally ill and unable to make decisions for herself

 

Relevant Prior Judgements/ Cases

…More information is needed…

 

Decision

First Decision

On December 14 2022 a court order had authorized the forcible removal of Zhvanetskaya from her home in Stuttgart on Wednesday in order to institutionalise her “for her own good,” [2]

Second Decision

On January 12 2023 A regional court has overruled the decision. [1]

 

Aftermath

Soviet-born composer Inna Zhvanetskaya is reportedly in hiding from German authorities after they attempted to have the 85-year-old Holocaust survivor committed to a mental institution and inoculated against her will with a Covid-19 shot, German outlet Report24 said on Thursday. [2]

 

Media


Holocaust Survivor Jab Mandate Case – Jan 29 2023

source: Odysee / longXXvids


German court orders the forced Injection of Holocaust survivor -Jan 18 2023

source: Odysee / Towards The Light


Holocaust Survivor Pleads for her Life Link -Jan 10 2023

source: DeepThought


Holocaust survivor Vera Sharav speech at Nuremberg 75 -Aug 20 2022

source: Odysee / Towards The Light


Dr. Bodo Schiffmann Reports on the Forced Jab of Holocaust Survivor -Jan 11 2022

source: Odysee / 種 Datenarche


MUST WATCH: C19 Death Data Analysis for Every Country pre & post mRNA -Jan 12 2022

source: Odysee / Towards The Light


Rebel News Confronts Pfizer CEO at World Economic Forum -Jan 19 2023

source: Odysee / Towards The Light


Germany Vaccination Mortality Data -Dec 12 2022

source: Odysee / shortXXvids


Back to All Cases

 

NorthShore Jab Mandate Case

NorthShore Jab Mandate Case

NorthShore Jab Mandate Case

Re: the Legality of Mandating Experimental Injections as a Condition for Employment

 

Back to All Cases

Facts of the Case

  • Dates: October 2021
  • Location: Chicago, Illinois, USA
  • Court: Federal Northern District Court of Illinois
  • Case #: 1:21-cv-05683
  • Plaintiffs: 500+ health care workers
  • Plaintiff’s Lawyer: Liberty Counsel
  • Defendant: NorthShore University HealthSystem
  • Trial Type: Class Action
  • Judge: John F. Kness
  • Status: Decided (Jul 29, 2022)
  • Verdict: for the Plaintiff


*updated Jan 08,2023

 

Background

The case centers around workers at NorthShore University HealthSystem, who filed a lawsuit in October 2021 claiming their employer illegally refused to grant any religious exemptions to a COVID-19 vaccine mandate. [2]

The Suit was initiated by 14 employees, including nurses, a pharmacy tech and a senior application analyst. They were named anonymously in the litigation. [6]

These healthcare employees said they were victims of religious discrimination, and  were punished for their religious beliefs against taking an injection associated with aborted fetal cells. [4]

In October 2021, Liberty Counsel sent a demand letter to NorthShore on behalf of numerous health care workers who had sincere religious objections to NorthShore’s “Mandatory COVID-19 Vaccination Policy.” If NorthShore had agreed then to follow the law and grant religious exemptions, the matter would have been quickly resolved and it would have cost it nothing. But, when NorthShore refused to follow the law, and instead denied all religious exemption and accommodation requests for employees working in its facilities, Liberty Counsel filed a class action lawsuit, along with a motion for a temporary restraining order and injunction. [3]

Northshore has estimated that it denied Religious exemption to 523 employees between July 1 2021- July 1 2022. 204 of the workers succumbed to the pressure and were jabbed. The other 269 were fired or resigned. [6]

The Plaintiff’s Lawyer Liberty Counsel’s Mat Staver explained on “Fox & Friends”  that NorthShore implemented a “jab or job” policy, meaning employees were required to get the vaccine or be terminated. [1]

“All of them were denied religious accommodations,” Staver told host Will Cain. “It was literally no religious accommodation, which they’re required to do under the federal employment law called Title VII.” [1]

 
Liberty Council

Liberty Counsel advances religious liberty, the sanctity of human life, and the family through litigation and education. (from their website) [3]

Staver said his group is not just limiting the battle over mandates to the Illinois health care workers, telling the Washington Examiner that Liberty Counsel is working for private sector employees in industries such as airlines and other health care systems. [3]

“We have been working with thousands of employees across the country,” he said. “Many of them face the same jab-or-job mandate that is that issue in NorthShore.” [3]

 

Significance

This is the first US classwide lawsuit for healthcare workers over a COVID shot mandate.

Liberty Counsel Vice President of Legal Affairs Horatio Mihet said in a statement that the settlement should “serve as a strong warning to employers across the nation that they cannot refuse to accommodate those with sincere religious objections to forced vaccination mandates.” [2]

“Let this case be a warning to employers that violated Title VII,” Mat Staver, founder and chairman of Liberty Counsel, the group behind the lawsuit, told the Washington Examiner. “It is especially significant and gratifying that this first classwide COVID settlement protects healthcare workers.” [3]

 

Plaintiff’s Argument

Staver explained that Title VII applies to both private and public employers and requires that sincere religious beliefs be accommodated. [1]

Title VII Explained . . .

This federal law, which applies to all 50 states and every American territory, requires employers to make reasonable accommodations for both legitimately-held religious beliefs and medical exemptions.

Straight out of 42 U.S. Code § 2000e-2, what you need to know is there in black and white:

“It shall be unlawful employment practice for an employer — (1) to fail or refuse to hire or discharge any individual, or otherwise to discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of such individual’s race, color, religion, sex, or national origin; or (2) to limit, segregate, or classify his employees or applicants for employment in any way which would deprive or tend to deprive any individual of employment opportunities or otherwise adversely affect his status as an employee, because of such individual’s race, color, religion, sex or national origin.” (emphasis added)

Religious exemptions should, and must be accommodated, under the law.

Additionally, Title VII’s protections extend to nonreligious beliefs if related to morality, and ultimate ideas about life, purpose and death.

 

Defendant’s Argument

…More information is needed…

 

Relevant Prior Judgements/ Cases

…More information is needed…

 

Decision

NorthShore will be required to pay $10.3 million to employees who were denied religious exemptions. [1]

Anyone fired because of their refusal to get the jab will also be eligible for reemployment in the system. [2]

U.S. District Judge John Kness, who was appointed by former President Donald Trump, approved the settlement and appeared to side with Liberty Council’s claim that the mandate violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. [2]

The settlement must be approved by the federal District Court. Employees of NorthShore who were denied religious exemptions will receive notice of the settlement, and will have an opportunity to comment, object, request to opt out, or submit a claim form for payment out of the settlement fund, all in accordance with deadlines that will be set by the court. [3]

 
Compensation Agreement

NorthShore employees who were terminated or forced to resign will receive $25,000 and those who were forced to get the vaccine will receive $3,000 as part of the settlement. [1]

The settlement approved in the Illinois Northern District Court will result in 473 employees of the system becoming eligible for compensation for being denied a religious exemption to the vaccine mandate, with any of those fired as a result of the rules being eligible for $25,000. [2]

The 13 healthcare workers who are lead plaintiffs in the lawsuit will receive an additional approximate payment of $20,000 each for their important role in bringing this lawsuit and representing the class of NorthShore healthcare workers. [4] …while those who complied with the mandate to keep their jobs despite having religious objections will be eligible for $3,000. [2]

NorthShore will pay $10,337,500 to compensate these health care employees who were victims of religious discrimination, and who were punished for their religious beliefs against taking an injection associated with aborted fetal cells. [3]

 
Other Agreements

As part of the settlement agreement, NorthShore will also change its unlawful “no religious accommodations” policy to make it consistent with the law, and to provide religious accommodations in every position across its numerous facilities. No position in any NorthShore facility will be considered off limits to unvaccinated employees with approved religious exemptions. [3]

In addition, employees who were terminated because of their religious refusal of the COVID shots will be eligible for rehire if they apply within 90 days of final settlement approval by the court, and they will retain their previous seniority level. [3]

 

Aftermath

Plaintiff Reaction

Liberty Counsel’s Mat Staver said

“But as we went more into discovery, it was pretty clear they didn’t have a basis and they would lose big time,” [1]

 in addition to financial payouts, NorthShore will also have to change its policy. [1]

“There will no longer be a no religious accommodation policy. Every position will be accommodated,” he said. “All the people can come back with no loss of seniority or job status.” [1]

Staver said he believes the case will have a broad impact. [1]

“It’s a big wakeup call to employers across the country that did not do these accommodations as they’re required under Title VII,” he said. [1]

“And I think it’s an encouragement for the employees that were abused and lost their jobs or threatened to lose their jobs, and some of them retirement, that they can pursue justice.” [1]

Liberty Counsel Vice President of Legal Affairs and Chief Litigation Counsel Horatio G. Mihet said,

“We are very pleased with the historic, $10 million settlement achieved in our class action lawsuit against NorthShore University HealthSystem. The drastic policy change and substantial monetary relief required by the settlement will bring a strong measure of justice to NorthShore’s employees who were callously forced to choose between their conscience and their jobs. [3]

 


Further Research

Court Documents:
In the news:
On Corona Cases

 

Media


MO AG Full briefing: Judge’s ruling halts federal vaccine mandate for health care workers in 10 states

source: KSDK News


Victory for Medical Choice in Illinois

source: TrialSite News


NorthShore University Health agrees to pay $10.3 million in C19 Jab lawsuit

source: CBS Chicago


Vaccine Injury Claims Skyrocket & Government Won’t Resolve for Decades -Jan 6 2023

source: TrialSite News


Heavily Vaxxed Japan’s Covid Surge Turns Deadly

source: TrialSite News


Science Summit Uncensored: Dutch Excess Mortality Data -Aug 15, 2022

source: Odysee/ shortXXvids


Back to All Cases

 

LegalOpinion-PEI-Negligence

LegalOpinion-PEI-Negligence

Legal Opinion: PEI Negligence of Duty

Re: the Negligence by the PEI not to investigate the Unusual Death statistics as it is directed to by law

 

Back to All Cases

Background

This is a summary of the legal opinion of lawyer Frank Großenbach representing data analyst Tom Lausen and the arguments of Martin Sichert (MP) given in a press conference in the Bundestag 12th Dec 2022.


Full (in German) press conference -Dec 12 2022


English subtitled video of M Sichert’s introduction -Dec 12 2022

Link to lawyer Großenbach’s letter to the PEI detailing their obligation under law to investigate unexpected deaths. (in original German and English translation)

The conference concerned itself with results from the analysis of medical diagnostic code data obtained by M Sichert by an FOI requestto the National Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians (BVK). This data base covers about 72 million anonymised patient diagnosticrecords from doctor visits in Germany.

Expert Lausen’s analysis clearly showed an alarming deviation (increase) in the numbers of deaths associated with typical indicator codes temporally associated with onset of vaccination with the Covid-19 vaccines. Additionally, increased frequencies of diagnoses of a range of illnesses were observed also in temporal association with onset of vaccinations.

Link to Tom Lausen’s presentation


Legal Opinion:

The opinion of Sichert, Lausen and their lawyer,Großenbach is that the Paul-Ehrlich-Institute is in clear breach of its duty under law to investigate the significant number of unexpected deaths identified by Lausen using the same data available from the BVK.

The Paul Ehrlich Institute has NOT requested this data so far. They have never requested the data that could be obtained by means of a simple Freedom of Information (FOI) request to the National Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians. (ref. Tom Lausen presentation slide #24)

Großenbach’s detailed legal argument against the PEI can be found here in his letter (in original German and English translation)

In a German language article published Dec 20, 2022 (English translation here ) The Epoch Times summarised Großenbach’s legal opinion as follows:

Frank Großenbach, a lawyer from Frankfurt, is also of the opinion that there is an “initial suspicion” because of the excess mortality “of at least 30,000 in 2021, the year of the vaccinations”, which is proven by data. This is not only sufficient, but even obligatory, to “withdraw the mRNA active substances from circulation” until it can be “safely excluded” that the excess mortality is due to the vaccinations. According to section 69 of the Medicines Act and due to the legal mandate according to section 13, paragraph 5 of the Infection Protection Act, the occurrence of a “warning signal” is sufficient to immediately withdraw the mRNA active substances from the market. He considers this warning signal to be given after Lausen’s analysis.

At the very least, however, “the population must be informed about the factual connections”, “so that everyone can act in a self-determined manner in their own knowledge of the data on their body”, demanded Großenbach. On 12 December, the day of the AfD press conference, he had already made a statement to the PEI on behalf of Tom Lausen (video at Odysee).

In his estimation, the statements of KBV head Andreas Gassen had even strengthened the position of the vaccination campaign sceptics: “He explains that the presented increased mortality would represent a normal pandemic event. This is a simple assessment of the figures. This assessment is not plausible”. With his statement, Gassen had indirectly “confirmed that the excess mortality determined by Tom Lausen was statistically correct. It is just that his conclusions from the figures presented are different”, explained Großenbach.

Großenbach in his letter to the PEI gave a deadline to respond by Dec 19 2022

If we have not received a statement from you by 12.00 noon on 19 December2022, we must assume that you intend to continue to remain inactive even though the data are now available to you, or if the statement does not make it clear that you are taking appropriate measures, we will immediately report you, the persons addressed in this letter, to the public prosecutor’s office at the Darmstadt Regional Court without further hesitation or waiting, on account of the violation of criminal law associated with the breach of your guarantor status. In order to be able to file a complaint immediately, we will already formulate a complaint now.


Related Articles & Videos
  1. Media report from News24 about the press conference–Dec 12 2022
  2. Media report from ‘The Gateway Pundit’-Dec 13 2022
  3. Article in MOVIE –Dec 15 2022
  4. Corroboration of findings. Another German data analyst, responding to BVK and ZI criticism of Tom Lausen’s findings based on claims that the raw data set was somehow faulty and that no meaningful conclusions can be drawn from it, published this video on Dec 16 2022. In it he broadly agrees with the main findings of Lausen after demonstrating that the data set can be relied upon to extract results which look very plausible.
  5. A US doctor published this article on Dec 13 2022 containing links allowing anyone who cares to check the data set themselves to download it and search on the various diagnostic codes using an excel program provided.
  6. VID: Florida Gov DeSantis Announces Vaccine Grand Jury -Dec 14 2022
  7. VID: Vaccine Injuries in Australia -Dec 6 2022
  8. VID: Vax Victims are ‘Ghosts’ -Dec 7 2022
  9. VID: Prof Fukushima “Stop the Vax – You’re Killing People!” -Nov 29 2022
  10. VID: Science Summit Uncensored: Dutch Excess Mortality Data -Aug 15, 2022
  11. VID: Science Summit Uncensored: 2nd Experiment -Aug 15, 2022
  12. Proposed German Vaccine Mandate
  13. Austrian Doctors Warn of Vaccine Dangers & Un-Informed Consent
  14. Vaccine Crimes: German Lawyer B Bahner’s Legal Opinion on illegal implementation of the vaccines & violation of German & EU Medical Laws Legal Opinion-Bahner-VaxLegality


Keywords

Article, Bundestag, BVK, Darmstadt Regional Court, Data, Death, Duty, FOI, Gassen, germany, Großenbach, Lausen, Legal Opinion, Mandate, National Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians, Negligence, Obligation, Paul Ehrlich Institute, PEI, Sichert, Vaccine, Violation


Back to All Cases