 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / AIDS / May 2007Australian court decides HIV does exist
<http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,21631724-1702,00.html>: A HIV-positive man convicted for having unprotected sex with three women has lost an appeal, after a South Australian judge rejected defence claims the virus does not exist. Andre Chad Parenzee, 36, was convicted on three counts of endangering life last January after one of the women, a mother of two, became infected with HIV. Defence lawyers launched an appeal calling two Perth medical researchers Eleni Papadopulos-Eleopulos and Dr Valendar Turner who testified in the South Australian Court of Appeal that the virus did not exist and could not be sexually transmitted. The two AIDS-dissidents are members of the Perth Group, founded by Ms Papadopulos-Eleopulos, that believes HIV is not the cause of AIDS. Justice John Sulan today dismissed the witnesses' testimony, saying the pair lacked credibility and were advocates for a cause rather than independent experts. He said the evidence that HIV existed was compelling and he rejected the application for a re-trial. "I am satisfied that no jury would conclude that there is any doubt that the virus HIV exists," he said in his judgment. "I consider no jury would be left in any doubt that HIV is the cause of AIDS or that it is sexually transmissible." Justice Sulan said Ms Papadopoulos-Eleopulos, a physicist who works at the Royal Perth Hospital, relied upon opinions of others, which she often took out of context and misinterpreted. He said claims that HIV testing methods were flawed were unfounded and the virus had been thoroughly studied by international experts. Parenzee's application for leave to appeal his conviction was the first time that the existence of HIV/AIDS had been tested in an Australian court. The hearing spanned more than a year with controversy lining much of the witness testimony. Under earlier cross-examination, Ms Papadopulos-Eleopulos was asked by the prosecution if she would have unprotected vaginal sex with a HIV-positive man. "Any time," she replied. In other testimony, Ms Papadopulos-Eleopulos declared that Africa did not have an AIDS epidemic because HIV did not exist and efforts to curb the spread of the virus were merely political stunts. To counter the claims, the prosecution called eight HIV experts including AIDS research pioneer Professor Robert Gallo. Prof Gallo, who was one of the scientists who discovered AIDS in the early 1980s and linked HIV as the cause of the disease, testified via video-link from his home in Bethesda, Massachusetts. He told the court the Perth Group members was misguided, inappropriate and delusional. Parenzee was remanded in custody to be sentenced at a later date.  SignatureShould I begin ART? Vote: <http://hiv-positive.freehostia.com/vote/> > <http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,21631724-1702,00.html>: > > Justice Sulan said Ms Papadopoulos-Eleopulos, a physicist who works at > the Royal Perth Hospital, relied upon opinions of others, which she > often took out of context and misinterpreted. <snip> > He {Gallo] told the court the Perth Group members was misguided, inappropriate > and delusional. Gee, yuh think? And the conspiracy theorists are already out in full force... http://www.paradigmoverthrow.com/blog/adelaide-a-bust.htm :o) Bennett HIV Positive wrote... > <http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,21631724-1702,00.html>: > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > life last January after one of the women, a mother of two, became > infected with HIV. And the only reason the case went to trial at all is because the victim was female. There were a handful of cases that were prosecuted in the USA where the victims were females infected by males, and one single case where the victim was an underage male. But every day hundreds of gay Australian men are deliberately infected with HIV, and Australian prosecutors do not seem to have a problem with that. > HIVPositive wrote... > > <http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,21631724-1702,00.html>: [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > gay Australian men are deliberately infected withHIV, and Australian > prosecutors do not seem to have a problem with that. Important video relating to HIV and AIDS. http://www.aidsfraudvideo.com http://aidsmyth.addr.com/enteraidsmyth.htm http://www.amazon.com/Science-Sold-Out-Really-Cause/dp/1556436424 http://www.amazon.com/Inventing-AIDS-Virus-Peter-Duesberg/dp/0895263998 http://aras.ab.ca/rethinkers.php http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig7/culshaw1.html http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1430/is_n9_v14/ai_12508167 http://www.ourcivilisation.com/aids/chap6.htm http://www.hiv-aids-factorfraud.com/producer.htm another good video: http://youtube.com/watch?v=yVcxP0wTOCo# Its not rocket science If the Perth Group are "delusional," we must all be living in some sort of "HIV" matrix. Their work on the phenomena that comes under the rubric of "HIV/IDS" are a great example of how scientific claims should be examined. I've taught the history of science for many years, and I can't think of a better example (in terms of their understanding and their depth of analysis). However, if any court claims that the Perth Group don't have the "expertise" then what they are saying is that Duesberg is a person whose opinion is the most important on this subject (or as important as anyone else's). When Duesberg was challanged to be "infected with HIV," however, he made a crucial mistake. He should have asked, exactly what do you intent to "infect" me with? The cellular debris (mostly "microvessicles") that you've found when you tried to find "HIV?" Or blood from someone who is very ill, due to living the life of a homeless IV illegal drug user? Or are you going isolate a few particles you feel resemble the textbook model of "HIV" closely enough (none found actually conform to "infectious HIV" in all ways), put them in a solution known to be benign, and call that "HIV?" Because of Duesberg's "expertise," he was unable to shake the lab artifacts out of his head and realize that there is no way for anyone to be "infected" with a dangerous "retrovirus," except under the most un-natural of conditions, conditions which simply do not occur outside the laboratory. Fortunately, the Perth Group had no such preconceptions, and at some point in history will be lauded for the work they've done to stop this crime against humanity known today as "HIV/AIDS sicence." >If the Perth Group are "delusional," we must all be living in some >sort of "HIV" matrix. No dear, Occam's razor suggests that the only ones living in a psychotic matrix are those armchair a.sholes in Perth. > <http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,21631724-1702,00.html>: > [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > the pair lacked credibility and were advocates for a cause rather than > independent experts. That's interesting - is he an expert on the relevant branches of science? I wonder how as a mere judge he comes to have an opinion about a scientific issue of this sort. > He said the evidence that HIV existed was compelling and he rejected > the application for a re-trial. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > "I consider no jury would be left in any doubt that HIV is the cause > of AIDS or that it is sexually transmissible." Same problem here. Maybe if the jury in question were composed of scientific experts rather than laymen, this would be more relevant. > Justice Sulan said Ms Papadopoulos-Eleopulos, a physicist who works at > the Royal Perth Hospital, relied upon opinions of others, which she [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > He told the court the Perth Group members was misguided, inappropriate > and delusional. I assume they just took his word for it. Ain't the law grand? > Parenzee was remanded in custody to be sentenced at a later date. Qazfez wrote... >>Justice John Sulan today dismissed the witnesses' testimony, saying >>the pair lacked credibility and were advocates for a cause rather than [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > wonder how as a mere judge he comes to have an opinion about a scientific > issue of this sort. But who gives a f.ck? My experience with AIDS patients is that the minute they test HIV+ is when their IQ suddenly increases 150 points and they become experts on molecular biology, even though they can't spell "DNA". As for the judge's expertise on molecular biology, well I think it's probably slightly more authoritative than that of my crack-smoking, AIDS- infected fucktard of a brother (he's been described as the sperm our mother should have swallowed). Anyway, he went so insane from the gay lifestyle and all the crack and tweek that we had to have him involuntarily committed to the mental hospital. After a week a judge was required to review his case and the staff psychologists raved on about how much progress he had made since arriving in a straightjacket, and that he was ready to be released. But the judge, who lacked the scientific wisdom that comes from watching several episodes of the Dr. Phil show, heard him mention that he could talk to dead people and decided that perhaps he hadn't made as much progress as the Dr. Phil-watching staff psychologists, and ordered him held for an additional week of observation. > Qazfez wrote... >>>Justice John Sulan today dismissed the witnesses' testimony, saying [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > But who gives a f.ck? Anyone who cares about the integrity of the legal process should give a f.ck. >My experience with AIDS patients is that the minute > they test HIV+ is when their IQ suddenly increases 150 points and they [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > mother > should have swallowed). I doubt that the judge had any expertise in molecular biology whatever. His problem, presumably, is inability to admit to uncertainity, due to fear it would undermine his authority. > Anyway, he went so insane from the gay lifestyle and all the crack and > tweek that we had to have him involuntarily committed to the mental [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > progress as the Dr. Phil-watching staff psychologists, and ordered him > held for an additional week of observation. Spare us your whining complaints about life. They're irrelevant. > I doubt that the judge had any expertise in molecular biology whatever. His > problem, presumably, is inability to admit to uncertainity, due to fear it > would undermine his authority. Most judges are very familiar with molecular biology because it is used in a large variety of ways in criminal justice (DNA evidence from crime scenes) and family law (paternity testing, etc). It does not take a genious, to read the testimony presented in the judgement, and see that Ms. Papadopoulos-Eliopulos and Mr. Turner were not simply misinformed, they were telling deliberate lies. The full transcripts much of the trial are available for all to read here: http://garlan.org/Cases/Parenzee/index.php >> I doubt that the judge had any expertise in molecular biology whatever. >> His [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > used in a large variety of ways in criminal justice (DNA evidence from > crime scenes) and family law (paternity testing, etc). Please note the word 'expertise.' Judges may know something about molecular biology, but they can hardly become experts in the subject, because it is difficult to do that while also being an expert in the law. [snip] >"HIV Positive" <hiv.positive@gmail.com> wrote in message >> The two AIDS-dissidents are members of the Perth Group, founded by Ms [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >> the pair lacked credibility and were advocates for a cause rather than >> independent experts. >That's interesting - is he an expert on the relevant branches of science? I >wonder how as a mere judge he comes to have an opinion about a scientific >issue of this sort. That's what judges do. :) I'm not really up to speed on this particular case, however I believe the defendant had already been found guilty and 'HIV does not exist' was part of his appeal against the conviction. What the judge has done here is decide that there's not enough evidence for the appeal to progress. So, presumably, this means the 'HIV does not exist' defence could still be used in future cases in Australia at trial. And then, of course, it would be up to a jury to decide. However with 25 years of HIV=AIDS=Death behind us a jury would probably take some convincing. And, I suspect, that if the prosecution knew such a defence was going to be put forward they'd firstly offer the defendant a reduced charge/sentence or quietly drop the case all together. It would be interesting to see how such a case would go here in the UK. Until recently it was understood that 'expert witnesses' had immunity from prosecution and being punished by their professional body if they 'got it wrong' while giving evidence. However, after several wrong convictions for cot death things seem to have changed. I wonder if there are any doctors in the UK who would be willing to stand up in court and argue that HIV exists *and* that it causes AIDS? AFAIK the HIV doesn't exist or cause AIDS arguments haven't been used as a defence here yet. SignatureShould I begin ART? Vote: <http://hiv-positive.freehostia.com/vote/> > <http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,21631724-1702,00.html>: > "I am satisfied that no jury would conclude that there is any doubt > that the virus HIV exists," he said in his judgment. > > "I consider no jury would be left in any doubt that HIV is the cause > of AIDS or that it is sexually transmissible." No surprise there, all judges are masons, and masons run the aids industry |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.