 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / General / Alternative / April 2006Yurko is free
http://www.freeyurko.bizland.com/hearingupdates.html#free Now the shameless filth ball liar sacks of sh.t who called him murderer etc owe him and his family mega-apologies.. Anth Also :- Kudos to all the great doctors and people who helped free this innocent man. A round of applause is due! Anth > Also :- > Kudos to all the great doctors and people who helped free this innocent man. > A round of applause is due! > Anth What the f--- do you know about the issues, Anth? This illustrates how alt.med supporters can choose to commit their belief to something without the slightest reference to any of the evidence, or even sufficient medical background to understand what the evidence means.. I am saddened and angered by this. Babies do NOT get fractured ribs easily, Anth. In fact their bones are plastic and bendy, and it requires great force to fracture them. If Yurko was innocent he would not have plea bargained and admitted to manslaughter. . He would have wanted to clear his name by undergoing a further trial where all the evidence could be reviewed. If the anti- vac liars were sincere they would not be crowing about his release they would be disappointed that all the evidence supposedly showing the connection to vaccines being aired in court. . They would have been glad to put Vera Sceibner on the stand and have her ridiculous theories publicly examined. So would I. This is a victory for medical ignorance and the ability of the law to be manipulated by the unscrupulous. Peter Moran http://www.freeyurko.bizland.com/gorecompl.html Anth >> Also :- >> Kudos to all the great doctors and people who helped free this innocent [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > > Peter Moran > http://www.freeyurko.bizland.com/gorecompl.html > Anth While the prosecution says that all this ground was gone over at the first trial, I would agree that a further trial was probably indicated, if there is any new information. It does suggest an extraordinarily shoddy autopsy and I admit to being staggered by this in a capital case, but it merely makes other evidence more critical. A shoddy autopsy does not exclude child abuse, which is indicated by the fractured ribs and CT scan showing subdural haematoma, and it does not explain the bruises, which I have never seen on a child from "handling in the hospital". It is a great pity that this is not being tested in the courts so that we can hear ALL the evidence, for example all the information about the state of the child when first examined. Doctors are normally super-cautious before they diagnose child abuse, for obvious reasons, but the fractiured ribs are one of the hallmarks. Peter Moran >> http://www.freeyurko.bizland.com/gorecompl.html >> Anth [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > never > seen on a child from "handling in the hospital". Well if you look at the reports you can see that one doctor testifies that the baby was very sick and probably had brittle bones. > It is a great pity that this is not being tested in the courts so that we > can hear ALL the evidence, for example all the information about the state > of the child when first examined. Doctors are normally super-cautious > before they diagnose child abuse, for obvious reasons, but the fractiured > ribs are one of the hallmarks. How could they prove that he Yurko killed the baby? The autopsy was flawed, the evidence points to the fact that the baby was undernourished and had brittle bones (infantile scurvy). They even prevented the doc who did the autopsy from doing any more - why would they do this? > Peter Moran Anth Anth > "Peter Moran" <moringa@gil.com.au> wrote in message news:41310afb$0$15070$61c65585@uq-127creek-reader-02.brisbane.pipenetworks.com.au... > >> http://www.freeyurko.bizland.com/gorecompl.html > >> Anth [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > Well if you look at the reports you can see that one doctor testifies that > the baby was very sick and probably had brittle bones. If baby was very sick he would not have been vaccinated, and the other comment is speculative. > > It is a great pity that this is not being tested in the courts so that we > > can hear ALL the evidence, for example all the information about the state [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > How could they prove that he Yurko killed the baby? The baby died under his care with evidence of multiple trauma. It is also the classical circumstance of the husband/de facto minding the baby on his own. > The autopsy was flawed, the evidence points to the fact that the baby was > undernourished and had brittle bones (infantile scurvy). What evidence? > They even prevented the doc who did the autopsy from doing any more - why > would they do this? Who says they did and what further evidence was there to find? The anti-vac grown find a conspiracy under very rock. If the baby was "very sick" and doctors/hospitals/police/prosecutors wanted to hide a suspected vaccine reaction they could have blamed the illness, not framed an innocent man for murder. And why bother? It is already admitted there is a very tiny risk of serious complications from some vaccinations. Stick with what is plausible. Peter Moran >Subject: Re: Yurko is free >From: "Peter Moran" moringa@gil.com.au [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > >If baby was very sick he would not have been vaccinated OH, but he was. That's a proven fact. > and the other >comment is speculative. And you comment of above was a lie. <snip> >> How could they prove that he Yurko killed the baby? >The baby died under his care Many babies die, under people's care. > with evidence of multiple trauma. It is also >the classical circumstance of the husband/de facto minding the baby on his >own. Which proves nothing. > The autopsy was flawed, the evidence points to the fact that the baby was >> undernourished and had brittle bones (infantile scurvy). >What evidence? > They even prevented the doc who did the autopsy from doing any more - why >> would they do this? >Who says they did and what further evidence was there to find? >The anti-vac grown find a conspiracy under very rock. That's an organized medicine opinion. >If the baby was "very >sick" and doctors/hospitals/police/prosecutors wanted to hide a suspected >vaccine reaction they could have blamed the illness, not framed an innocent >man for murder. >And why bother? It is already admitted there is a very >tiny risk of serious complications from some vaccinations. Stick with what >is plausible. Care to rephrase that??? >It is already admitted there is a very >tiny risk of serious complications from some vaccinations. Lose the word tiny. It means nothing to the parents of a child whose life was ruined. Jan >>The baby died under his care > >Many babies die, under people's care. Indeed. I wonder how many died under Jan's care?? I wonder how many Jan blamed on vaccination or Ritalin?? I wonder how many who did not die, suffered irreversible damage (either psychologic or physical) as a result of being "cared" by her. Jan has amply demonstrated that she has nearly a complete inability to take responsibility for her egregious behavior. Usenet is simply a microcosm of a person's true life. Aloha, Rich ------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------- The best defense to logic is ignorance "Peter Moran" <moringa@gil.com.au> wrote in news:413158ce$0$15045$61c65585@uq-127creek-reader-02.brisbane.pipenetwork s.com.au: >> How could they prove that he Yurko killed the baby? > > The baby died under his care with evidence of multiple trauma. It is > also the classical circumstance of the husband/de facto minding the > baby on his own. Plus the fact that Yurko had been convicted of particularly brutal battery a few times before. >> "Peter Moran" <moringa@gil.com.au> wrote in message >> [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > If baby was very sick he would not have been vaccinated, and the other > comment is speculative. He was indeed vaccinated and very sick. >> > It is a great pity that this is not being tested in the courts so that > we [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > the classical circumstance of the husband/de facto minding the baby on his > own. If there was evidence of trauma then why did they release him? >> The autopsy was flawed, the evidence points to the fact that the baby was >> undernourished and had brittle bones (infantile scurvy). > What evidence? I posted an article on this. >> They even prevented the doc who did the autopsy from doing any more - why >> would they do this? [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > what > is plausible. This is common knowledge also. > Peter Moran Anth > > http://www.freeyurko.bizland.com/gorecompl.html > > Anth [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > Peter Moran Peter, before you look any more a fool, please research this issue. > > http://www.freeyurko.bizland.com/gorecompl.html > > Anth [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > before they diagnose child abuse, for obvious reasons, but the fractiured > ribs are one of the hallmarks. My son's peciatric neurosurgeon was called into the hospital many years ago to attend to a child who had vastly increased intracranial pressue. He decompessed as best he can do, but the child died from the damage already done. He examined the MRIs, etc. and was convinced that the child was shaken to death and reported his finding to the police. An autopsy was ordered and the parents were charged with abuse, and the father was charged with the actual shaking. The father was a physician, a fact known to him at the time of the report. My son's doc was outraged. He testified at trial as an expert. > This is a victory for medical ignorance and the ability of the law to be > manipulated by the unscrupulous. Really is this so, if this is medical ignorance then why did so many doctors testify against the prosecutors? > Peter Moran Anth >> This is a victory for medical ignorance and the ability of the law to be >> manipulated by the unscrupulous. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >Anth You mean doctors like Buttram, Yazbak and Orient? They testified because they are anti-vaccination liars.  SignaturePeter Bowditch The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles The Green Light http://www.ratbags.com/greenlight Quintessence of the Loon http://www.ratbags.com/loon To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com >Subject: Re: Yurko is free >From: Peter Bowditch myfirstname@ratbags.com [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >You mean doctors like Buttram, Yazbak and Orient? They testified >because they are anti-vaccination liars. *In your opinion* Which for the most part sucks. Jan Read carefully http://www.vaccinationnews.com/DailyNews/June2002/CaseAlanYurko.htm Anth >> Also :- >> Kudos to all the great doctors and people who helped free this innocent [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > > Peter Moran Also note that Dr. Archie Kalokerinos was disqualified, even though he was an 'expert' in scurvy and vaccinations. Anth [snip] > Also note that Dr. Archie Kalokerinos was disqualified, even though he was > an 'expert' in scurvy and vaccinations. > Anth > [snip] Yes, I would put "expert" in inverted commas, too. Peter >Also note that Dr. Archie Kalokerinos was disqualified, even though he was >an 'expert' in scurvy and vaccinations. >Anth >[snip] Kalokerinos is the maddest person I have seen outside an asylum. Do you believe that AIDS is being deliberately spread throughout Africa by the World Health Organisation and the Save The Children Fund? Do you believe that these organisations are engaged in a deliberate policy of genocide, and their method is to use vaccination campaigns to inject diseases into children? Do you believe that the various state governments in Australia are knowingly committing thousands of citizens to death each year by refusing to remove equipment like defibrillators from ambulances in order to make room for machines which just happen to be sold by Dr Kalokerinos? Would any sane person believe these outlandish things? Kalokerinos believes them, and I have been in the same room as him when he made the claims. SignaturePeter Bowditch The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles The Green Light http://www.ratbags.com/greenlight Quintessence of the Loon http://www.ratbags.com/loon To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com >From: Peter Bowditch myfirstname@ratbags.com Now we will hear the goods on all the docs who helped free Yurko Typical of organized medicine. Jan <snip hissy fit What we will hear is how 'We know Yurko is guilty' just we can't post any evidence to say so. There's 'evidence of trauma' so he must be guilty. Anth > >From: Peter Bowditch myfirstname@ratbags.com > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > <snip hissy fit >Subject: Re: Yurko is free >From: "Anth" anon@anon.com [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >There's 'evidence of trauma' so he must be guilty. >Anth You got it. Organized medicine is never ever wrong. Jan >> >From: Peter Bowditch myfirstname@ratbags.com >> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >> >> <snip hissy fit >>Also note that Dr. Archie Kalokerinos was disqualified, even though he >>was [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > which just happen to be sold by Dr Kalokerinos? Would any sane person > believe these outlandish things? Strawman argument, which doesn't bare any weight on the case. You can discredit a man by attacking what he is, this surely proves that anything he writes is wrong doesn't it? > Kalokerinos believes them, and I have been in the same room as him > when he made the claims. Anth >Also note that Dr. Archie Kalokerinos was disqualified, even though he was >an 'expert' in scurvy and vaccinations. It's well that you put "expert" in quotes. Very appropriate. -- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants were standing on my shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT) >Subject: Re: Yurko is free >From: "Peter Moran" moringa@gil.com.au [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >> >What the f--- do you know about the issues, Anth? Say what, Peter?? You too??? <snip> >I am saddened and angered by this. So we see. >Babies do NOT get fractured ribs easily, Anth. In fact their bones are >plastic and bendy, and it requires great force to fracture them. >If Yurko was innocent he would not have plea bargained and admitted to >manslaughter. . Shows your complete ignorance of our legal system. <snip> >This is a victory for medical ignorance and the ability of the law to be >manipulated by the unscrupulous. Well no, the medical ignorance and denial ls why he was there in the first place. As in six shots which was more than 100 times the EPA limit of mercury in one day, given to a baby who was already struggling with health problems. WHEN are you going to WAKE UP??? Jan > >Subject: Re: Yurko is free > >From: "Peter Moran" moringa@gil.com.au [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > > Shows your complete ignorance of our legal system. He had a significant defense fund, and could have tried to prove his innocence. He chose toplead guilty to manslaughter since it was the easiest way out of jail. He could care less for the truth. Remember, he has an extensive criminal recvord for vicious assualts. > > Also :- > > Kudos to all the great doctors and people who helped free this innocent [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Babies do NOT get fractured ribs easily, Anth. In fact their bones are > plastic and bendy, and it requires great force to fracture them. Peter, you are full of sh.t. Please get an enema. > "Peter Moran" <moringa@gil.com.au> wrote in message news:4130f8b3$0$15067$61c65585@uq-127creek-reader-02.brisbane.pipenetworks.com.au... > > > Also :- > > > Kudos to all the great doctors and people who helped free this innocent [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Peter, you are full of sh.t. Please get an enema. Said by usenet's prime sh.tter. > > "Peter Moran" <moringa@gil.com.au> wrote in message news:4130f8b3$0$15067$61c65585@uq-127creek-reader-02.brisbane.pipenetworks.com.au... > > > > Also :- > > > > Kudos to all the great doctors and people who helped free this [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > Said by usenet's prime sh.tter. Why, yes, I am regular, how are you? >Subject: Re: Yurko is free >From: "Anth" anon@anon.com [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >A round of applause is due! >Anth INDEED!!!! The truth always prevails, sometimes it takes years. I just watched 48 hours that was on last night. This man spent 18 years in jail for sexual child abuse. He is now free, his sister and mom spent 8 years and the mom who was only 71 died two years ago. They owned a daycare center, and it was proven the investigators coached the kids and made suggests to them which is what the jury used to decided the verdict. The proper way to question kids was shown. What a chunk of his life was wasted behind bars. No doubt this mess is what killed the mom. After giving of themselves for years to kids and then be accused of mistreating them. The lies and deceit during the trial were apalling. It seems if the law wants to build a case, they can do it. how these people slept at night knowing they were innocent is beyond my imagination. Jan > INDEED!!!! The truth always prevails, sometimes it takes years. I just > watched 48 hours that was on last night. This man spent 18 years in [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > and made suggests to them which is what the jury used to decided the > verdict. A little clarification: unless something new has happened *very* recently, Gerald Amirault hasn't been *formally* exonerated; he's on parole and is required to register as a sex offender, with notification to neighbors (which under Megan's Law, requires that he be rated on a three-point scale as to likelihood of reoffending; he's rated as being in the most-likely to reoffend category, for no other reason than that he's "in denial", i.e. refuses to admit committing the crimes he was accused of). <http://users.rcn.com/kyp/amirault.html> contains a good description of the Fells Acres/Amirault case and pointers to stories of similar cases. The page is written by Bob Chatelle, who's been instrumental in making the public aware of the injustice in the Amirault (and Bernard Baran) cases. I Dorothy Rabinowitz, a columnist for the Wall Street Journal, also wrote a number of articles about the case; some of them are online. > The proper way to question kids was shown. > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > can do it. how these people slept at night knowing they were innocent > is beyond my imagination. The big problem with the Amirault case was that a number of very high-level Massachussets politicians built their careers on it (former attorney general Scott Harshbarger and current attorney general Tom Reily, among others). Several appellate courts essentially concluded that the Amiraults were innocent, but the state appealed and the higher courts ruled that the public had an interest in "finality." One of the more disturbing aftermaths of the Amirault case is that some of the children he was convicted of molesting really *are* psychological basket cases because, even though it's now plain to everybody outside the MA justice system that they weren't molested, they've undergone years of therapy based on the asssumption that they were, and the most commonly used (but scientifically unvalidated; the preliminary scientific evidence shows that it often does more harm than good) psychotherapy in such cases is abreactive therapy, which involves repeatedly re-experiencing the supposed trauma in one's own mind. Now in their late teens and early twenties, they can actually remember the molestations, even though they didn't happen and in some cases were physically impossible (e.g. Amirault was accused of sodomizing a boy with a knife, something that would at the very least cause serious persistent bleeding and persistent pain, as well as a fair chance of bacterial sepsis. Yet the boy went home that day feeling perfectly fine, without even any stains in his underwear). Some practitioners insist that with such things "you've got to get worse before you can get better" and much of their work involves convincing well-adjusted people that they really aren't. Oh, <http://www.stopbadtherapy.com> also has good information on such matters. >Subject: Re: Yurko is free >From: Eric Bohlman ebohlman@omsdev.com [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >reoffend category, for no other reason than that he's "in denial", i.e. >refuses to admit committing the crimes he was accused of). Yes, a pity he still has to carry that around after 18 long years of being locked up. ><http://users.rcn.com/kyp/amirault.html> contains a good description of the >Fells Acres/Amirault case and pointers to stories of similar cases. The >page is written by Bob Chatelle, who's been instrumental in making the >public aware of the injustice in the Amirault (and Bernard Baran) cases An injustice was certainly done to this family. >Dorothy Rabinowitz, a columnist for the Wall Street Journal, also wrote a >number of articles about the case; some of them are online. I haven't read them and didn't read all of the above. >> The proper way to question kids was shown. > What a chunk of his life was wasted behind bars. No doubt this mess is >> what killed the mom. After giving of themselves for years to kids and >> then be accused of mistreating them. The lies and deceit during the >> trial were apalling. It seems if the law wants to build a case, they >> can do it. how these people slept at night knowing they were innocent is beyond my imagination. >The big problem with the Amirault case was that a number of very high-level >Massachussets politicians built their careers on it (former attorney >general Scott Harshbarger and current attorney general Tom Reily, among >others). Indeed, a pity one uses this sort of thing to get elected. >Several appellate courts essentially concluded that the Amiraults >were innocent, but the state appealed and the higher courts ruled that the >public had an interest in "finality." >One of the more disturbing aftermaths of the Amirault case is that some of >the children he was convicted of molesting really *are* psychological [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >and much of their work involves convincing well-adjusted people that they >really aren't. Yes. Yes and Yes. Thanks Eric. >Oh, <http://www.stopbadtherapy.com> also has good information on such >matters. Thanks, I'll read that when I have time. Jan >> he's rated as being in the most-likely to >>reoffend category, for no other reason than that he's "in denial", i.e. >>refuses to admit committing the crimes he was accused of). > >Yes, a pity he still has to carry that around after 18 long years of being >locked up. Sounds like Jan wants someone who is rated as most likely to reoffend, to not have to carry that around so that he could abuse another child. Still another example of Jan's complete contempt for children. I shudder to think about the countless helpless children who were forced to endure, God knows what. Aloha, Rich ------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------- The best defense to logic is ignorance >>> he's rated as being in the most-likely to >>>reoffend category, for no other reason than that he's "in denial", [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > shudder to think about the countless helpless children who were forced > to endure, God knows what. We were talking about Gerald Amirault here. If you look at the references I posted, I think you'll find that if he were to abuse a child, it would be the *first* child he had ever abused, and therefore it would be meaningless to talk about abusing "another child." Amirault was convicted according to the sort of standards of "evidence" that the most egregious alties use (fortunately, those "standards" are not usually legally acceptable today). We're talking about *no* physical evidence (OK, there was evidence of microscopic hymenal tears in a couple girls, but later research found that such tears were common in girls who hadn't been abused), only "recovered" testimonials. As I wrote, the only reason Amirault is rated as most likely to reoffend (as is one Paul Ingram; do a Google search on "Paul Ingram Washington") is that he refuses to perform Step 1 of 12 Steps that are part of a faith- based program for getting off the booze, applied to child molestation cases by a false analogy; namely, to admit that he's a child sex offender, something for which there is *no* hard evidence (scientific research conducted on actual child sex offenders reveals that they almost never deny their activities once convicted; rather, they come up with phony rationalizations as to why those activities aren't wrong). >Subject: Re: Yurko is free >From: Eric Bohlman ebohlman@omsdev.com [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] >their activities once convicted; rather, they come up with phony >rationalizations as to why those activities aren't wrong). Thanks Eric. Rich is obsessed with hatred. Jan > http://www.freeyurko.bizland.com/hearingupdates.html#free > > Now the shameless filth ball liar sacks of sh.t who called him murderer etc > owe him and his family mega-apologies.. Let's not jump to conclusions. He was not found *innocent* which is what he claimed for so long. Yes he was found 'innocent' they have released him. Anth >> http://www.freeyurko.bizland.com/hearingupdates.html#free >> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > he > claimed for so long. > Yes he was found 'innocent' they have released him. > Anth [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > he > > claimed for so long. No, Anth, he was not found innocent. He was released pending a new trial. However, he decided to accept a deal and plead guilty of Manslaughter and was sentenced to time served. "Alan Yurko, sentenced to life in 1999 for shaking his baby son to death, is a free man today after a judge ruled a botched autopsy and other new evidence warranted a new trial. Soon after Circuit Judge C. Alan Lawson's ruling Friday, Yurko reached a deal with prosecutors: He pleaded no contest to manslaughter and was sentenced to the time already served -- six years and 125 days." You can read the entire article at http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/orange/orl-asecyurko28082804aug28,1,65 97412.story?coll=orl-home-headlines registration (free) required. Obviously, he was not taking a chance on a second trial. Smart move. We will now place Yurko's name in the O.J. Simpson Hall of Shame. The evidence isn't consistent with shaking his baby to death, as quoted on the site. Anth >> Yes he was found 'innocent' they have released him. >> Anth [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > > We will now place Yurko's name in the O.J. Simpson Hall of Shame. If that is true, then he should never have taken the plea. > The evidence isn't consistent with shaking his baby to death, as quoted on > the site. [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > > > > You can read the entire article at http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/orange/orl-asecyurko28082804aug28,1,65 97412.story?coll=orl-home-headlines > > registration (free) required. > > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > > > We will now place Yurko's name in the O.J. Simpson Hall of Shame. > If that is true, then he should never have taken the plea. God! you ARE stupid! Many many innocent people take the plea because the system is stacked too high against truth. It is supported by scum like you. May you one day find yourself in front of that system, and perhaps you will understand reality somewhat better. Dumbass. > > If that is true, then he should never have taken the plea. > > > God! you ARE stupid! Many many innocent people take the plea because the > system is stacked too high against truth. It is supported by scum like you. > May you one day find yourself in front of that system, and perhaps you will > understand reality somewhat better. Dumbass. Sty, you are another who appears to have decided the issue for yourself on personal prejudice rather than any reference to the evidence, or ability to evaluate it. Peter Moran >Subject: Re: Yurko is free-to do it again.... >From: "Peter Moran" moringa@gil.com.au [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > >Peter Moran Oh my, I am sure glad the *gang* hasn't decided on any of the above. And of all things by Mark Probert a known liar whop just last week said his lie was a FACT. Another Ghee-whiz post. Jan >> known liar >http://tinyurl.com/6unlx > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >>reason! >>Jan No other reason?? But the work was not yet over and here is the proof in Jan's OWN WORDS: >>>http://www.google.com/groups?q=++%22I+hav+felt+better+today+that++%22+author:jdr ew63929%40aol.com&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=19990618194417.11038.00000497%40ng-fm1 .aol.com&rnum=1 >>> >>>From: JDrew63929 (jdrew63929@aol.com) >>>Newsgroups: alt.health.dental-amalgam >>>Date: 1999/06/18 >>>I believe the mercury is the cause of my problems. I hav felt better >>>today that [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >>> >>>Jan Oops. Jan felt better than she had in two years and was LOOKING FORWARD TO GETTING THE REST OF THE MERCURY OUT AND THE ROOT CANAL PULLED. Does this sound like all the work was done?? >Genesis 27:19-20, 24. Jacob had to lie again to cover up his first lie > >Jan >Your words come back to bite you. > >Jan Poor Jan. May God have mercy on her soul. Jan still has not explained why she felt better than she had in two years after having 8 out of 12 amalgams removed over two days. It was NOT because the work was over because it was not over. So what was it?? I think she felt better because of relief that she was finally getting rid of the amalgams that she *believed* were the cause of her problems. In the same way Jan felt better after a parasite cleanse because of relief that she was getting rid of what she *believed* was causing her problems. Relief makes one feel better. Worrying makes you feel worse. Worry about having parasite. Feel worse. Get parasite cleanse. Feel relieved. Feel better. Worry about having mercury poisoning. Feel worse. Get amalgams out. Feel relieved. Feel better. Aloha, Rich ------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------- The best defense to logic is ignorance > >Subject: Re: Yurko is free-to do it again.... > >From: "Peter Moran" moringa@gil.com.au [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > > Oh my, I am sure glad the *gang* hasn't decided on any of the above. The TruthSquad did decide, based on all the facts, and the impossibility of some of the defense arguments. > And of all things by Mark Probert a known liar whop just last week said his lie > was a FACT. Whop? Is that a misspelled slur against Da Vinci's people? > Another Ghee-whiz post. Gee whiz, Jan, why do you post your whizzes? > > > If that is true, then he should never have taken the plea. > > > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Peter Moran Peter, I have worked on a case of SBS, and found the parent to be innocent. >> > > If that is true, then he should never have taken the plea. >> > > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >> personal prejudice rather than any reference to the evidence, or ability >> to evaluate it. >Peter, I have worked on a case of SBS, and found the parent to be innocent. Wow, you worked on one whole case? I guess that must make you one of the leading experts in the world. -- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants were standing on my shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT) >> If that is true, then he should never have taken the plea. >> >God! you ARE stupid! Many many innocent people take the plea because the >system is stacked too high against truth. It is supported by scum like you. >May you one day find yourself in front of that system, and perhaps you will >understand reality somewhat better. Dumbass. And many guilty people take the plea because it gives them a lighter sentence than being convicted on a more serious charge. Tools, if there is anyone on m.h.a who's in a poor position to call others dumb, it's you. -- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants were standing on my shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT) >From: wright@clam.prodigy.net (David Wright) >Tools, if there is anyone on m.h.a who's in a poor position to call >others dumb, it's you. Yeah, quit stealing David's line!!!! Jan > >> If that is true, then he should never have taken the plea. > >> [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > "If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants > were standing on my shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT) So, David, just how closely do you work with attorneys on a regular basis? I do quit a bit. I see many cases. How bout you? >> >> If that is true, then he should never have taken the plea. >> >> [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >So, David, just how closely do you work with attorneys on a regular >basis? I do quit a bit. So, do they think they can get you acquitted, or are you going to take the plea bargain? How much time are you looking at? > I see many cases. Of what? Self-induced urine intoxication? Or to put it another way, I don't believe you, nor have you ever presented any indication why I should. -- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants were standing on my shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT) >Subject: Re: Yurko is free-to do it again.... >From: "sty" dehart12345@earthlink.net [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >May you one day find yourself in front of that system, and perhaps you will >understand reality somewhat better. Dumbass. Yep! Jan > > If that is true, then he should never have taken the plea. > > > God! you ARE stupid! Many many innocent people take the plea because the > system is stacked too high against truth. Yurko had a lot of outside support and could have gone back to trial. He chose to take a plea which got him out of jail forthwith. AFAIAC, he did not believe in his own innosence. > It is supported by scum like you. I love you too. > May you one day find yourself in front of that system, and perhaps you will > understand reality somewhat better. Dumbass. Another reference to the rear of human anatomy by usenet's biggest. If was in his place (and innocent) I would not want to go through more trials. Anth > If that is true, then he should never have taken the plea. > [quoted text clipped - 46 lines] >> > >> > We will now place Yurko's name in the O.J. Simpson Hall of Shame. >If was in his place (and innocent) I would not want to go through more >trials. >Anth What makes you so SURE that he is innocent?? Were you at the trial?? Have you examined ALL the evidence?? Aloha, Rich ------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------- The best defense to logic is ignorance >Subject: Re: Yurko is free-to do it again.... >From: "Anth" anon@anon.com [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >the site. >Anth As predicted the *gang* will continue their lies. They could nver admit that the six vaccinations given to a struggling baby and loading it up on thimerosal could be the cause. These shots amounted to 100 times the EPA safe limit of mercury for one day. Of course, conventional medicine has been taught to never never admit to any wrong doing. As for Mark, his credibility is zero, his last lie (easily proven) he called a fact and anyone who stated there was a asbestos coverup was a liar. Conclusion: Mark Probert is a liar. As well as a failed lawyer. Jan > continue their lies. >http://tinyurl.com/6unlx > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >>reason! >>Jan No other reason?? But the work was not yet over and here is the proof in Jan's OWN WORDS: >>>http://www.google.com/groups?q=++%22I+hav+felt+better+today+that++%22+author:jdr ew63929%40aol.com&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=19990618194417.11038.00000497%40ng-fm1 .aol.com&rnum=1 >>> >>>From: JDrew63929 (jdrew63929@aol.com) >>>Newsgroups: alt.health.dental-amalgam >>>Date: 1999/06/18 >>>I believe the mercury is the cause of my problems. I hav felt better >>>today that [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >>> >>>Jan Oops. Jan felt better than she had in two years and was LOOKING FORWARD TO GETTING THE REST OF THE MERCURY OUT AND THE ROOT CANAL PULLED. Does this sound like all the work was done?? >Genesis 27:19-20, 24. Jacob had to lie again to cover up his first lie > >Jan >Your words come back to bite you. > >Jan Poor Jan. May God have mercy on her soul. Jan still has not explained why she felt better than she had in two years after having 8 out of 12 amalgams removed over two days. It was NOT because the work was over because it was not over. So what was it?? I think she felt better because of relief that she was finally getting rid of the amalgams that she *believed* were the cause of her problems. In the same way Jan felt better after a parasite cleanse because of relief that she was getting rid of what she *believed* was causing her problems. Relief makes one feel better. Worrying makes you feel worse. Worry about having parasite. Feel worse. Get parasite cleanse. Feel relieved. Feel better. Worry about having mercury poisoning. Feel worse. Get amalgams out. Feel relieved. Feel better. Aloha, Rich ------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------- The best defense to logic is ignorance >The evidence isn't consistent with shaking his baby to death, as quoted on >the site. >Anth So why do you ASSume that the information on this site is valid? I don't know if it is valid or not. I am simply commenting on your apparent *certainty* that Yurko is innocent based upon information from a single website. I am glad you are not on the jury. You are obviously VERY biased. Your proclivity to believing evidence supporting Yurko tells a lot about your agenda Aloha, Rich ------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------- The best defense to logic is ignorance >No, Anth, he was not found innocent. He was released pending a new trial. And here you are ... a Quack Flack for Barrett & Polevoy's HealthFrauds ... making a legal conclusion ... that he did it before. Those "facts" are not in evidence ... As always ... regardless of what the verdicts really are ... you spread your lies about what happened ... What is in evidence ... "Marla" ... is how the Healthfrauds behave ... When I saw you call me a "bully" today ... you with "The Media" Quackheads Steve Barrett & Terry Polevoy & Junk Science Flack Andy Langer and many more lined up against me ... I was inspired to write a new page to show your antics. > >No, Anth, he was not found innocent. He was released pending a new trial. > > HealthFrauds ... making a legal conclusion ... that he did it before. > > Those "facts" are not in evidence ... Your reading comprehension, like your logic and analytical ability needs a tune up. He plead no contest to manslaughter, thus admitting that he did it. That is a FACT. Now he can do it again. Considering that he has a history of violence, the likelihood is that he will do it again. As far as I can see he pleaded to letting a sick baby get vaccinated. Anth >Subject: Re: Yurko is free-to do it again.... >From: "Anth" anon@anon.com [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >As far as I can see he pleaded to letting a sick baby get vaccinated. >Anth Yes, we are now seeing an excellent example of EVIL organized medicine and an EXACT example of how they twist things. Jan http://www.freeyurko.bizland.com/hearingupdates.html I was informed by phone, and the details are a bit sketchy, but apparently a "deal" was worked out via plead. Alan pleaded "nolo" to SBS, and guilty to manslaughter for time served. His feeling on the manslaughter is one of taking responsibility for allowing the vaccinations without sufficient investigation. My feeling is he's being a bit hard on himself, but one must do what he must. Anth > http://www.freeyurko.bizland.com/hearingupdates.html > I was informed by phone, and the details are a bit sketchy, but apparently a > "deal" was worked out via plead. Alan pleaded "nolo" to SBS, and guilty to > manslaughter for time served. His feeling on the manslaughter is one of > taking responsibility for allowing the vaccinations without sufficient > investigation. And you accept such crap, Anth? >My feeling is he's being a bit hard on himself, but one must > do what he must. I guess you do. Peter Moran > Anth Peter how is that crap? You know yourself that the reason the baby died was because of medical negligence. If you support people like that then there's no hope for you. They grasped onto every straw to show this man was guilty, even using false autopsy results and lies. I find it unbelievable that you support this, perhaps the reason you are supporting this is because you see it as us vs them? Anth >> http://www.freeyurko.bizland.com/hearingupdates.html >> I was informed by phone, and the details are a bit sketchy, but [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > Peter Moran >> Anth >Subject: Re: Yurko is free-to do it again.... >From: "Anth" anon@anon.com [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >supporting this is because you see it as us vs them? >Anth Hear Hear!! Jan >Subject: Re: Yurko is free-to do it again.... >From: "Peter Moran" moringa@gil.com.au [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > >And you accept such crap, Anth? Yeah Anth, how dare you believe something not endorsed by organized medicine. >>My feeling is he's being a bit hard on himself, but one must >> do what he must. > >I guess you do. > >Peter Moran And I guess you see no fraud, no cover-ups and no wrong doing from Dr Wilson who remains on staff after KILKLING Jesse!!!! >>Subject: Re: Yurko is free-to do it again.... >>From: "Peter Moran" moringa@gil.com.au [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] >And I guess you see no fraud, no cover-ups and no wrong doing from Dr Wilson >who remains on staff after KILKLING Jesse!!!! There were no cover-ups and that's the way it is. And, in no sense of the word did anyone "KILKLING" Jesse. >From: jkingoff@aol.comproven liar Andrew/Ilsa is just one of life's failures. >>His sole purpose in life is to serve to remind decent folk what decent really means. I guess you could say that his role creates comfort for many people so that>they can read what comes up from the bottom of the cesspool. >It is a tough job Andrew has taken on but he certainly is imminently qualified to wade up to his neck in the wastage of his own life. >> http://www.freeyurko.bizland.com/hearingupdates.html >> I was informed by phone, and the details are a bit sketchy, but apparently [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > >I guess you do. Anth is on record saying that most of practice of medicine is the pushing of meds onto people with the knowledge of & intention to inflict more suffering in order to milk the patient and their insurance. Anth is a f.cking idiot and I am not only being charitable, I am unanimous in that. >Peter Moran >> Anth > > http://www.freeyurko.bizland.com/hearingupdates.html > > I was informed by phone, and the details are a bit sketchy, but apparently [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > And you accept such crap, Anth? And you know better than Anth what Alan was think8ing? Wow! so now you are psyic too? Attorneys advise clients quite often to take a deal such as this to avoid the expense, time, and trouble of another court battle. Plus the fact that the courts are wrong far too often. You want Alan to trust the system that wrongly locked him up for seven years to be fair and just now? How absurd. > >My feeling is he's being a bit hard on himself, but one must > > do what he must. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Peter Moran > > Anth > http://www.freeyurko.bizland.com/hearingupdates.html > I was informed by phone, and the details are a bit sketchy, but apparently a [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > investigation. My feeling is he's being a bit hard on himself, but one must > do what he must. Your post made me sick. 2 things either he's wrongly convicted or he isn't. If he's innocent and has been hauled over the coals - would you take another trial risking losing your life because of bunglers and lies? The other point is self explanatory, but evidence doesn't point in that direction - that is all that matters.. Anth >> http://www.freeyurko.bizland.com/hearingupdates.html >> I was informed by phone, and the details are a bit sketchy, but [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Your post made me sick. > 2 things either he's wrongly convicted or he isn't. > If he's innocent and has been hauled over the coals - would you take another > trial risking losing your life because of bunglers and lies? If you mean the coterie of anti-vac liars are bunglers and liars, then, if I were Yurko, I, too would have taken the plea. Maybe he is not so stupid afterall. >> http://www.freeyurko.bizland.com/hearingupdates.html >> I was informed by phone, and the details are a bit sketchy, but apparently [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >Your post made me sick. Anth is a total Jack-a.s. > >> http://www.freeyurko.bizland.com/hearingupdates.html > >> I was informed by phone, and the details are a bit sketchy, but apparently [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > > >Your post made me sick. >> >No, Anth, he was not found innocent. He was released pending a new trial. >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >He plead no contest to manslaughter, thus admitting that he did it LOL ... as usual ... BS from a failed PharmaShill "attorney" ... Nolo Contendere or No Contest The term nolo contendere is a Latin term meaning "no contest." A plea of no contest is neither a plea of guilty nor not guilty. Pleading nolo contendere simply means that you do not contest the State's charges against you and that you are agreeable to paying the penalties assessed. > >> >No, Anth, he was not found innocent. He was released pending a new trial. > >> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > charges against you and that you are agreeable to paying the penalties > assessed. How can I have posted "BS" when I said exactly what you posted, i.e. that he plead no contest. Of course, if he were *innocent* he could have gone along with a new trial. However, getting out of jail was more important for this recidivist. > > >No, Anth, he was not found innocent. He was released pending a new trial. > > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > He plead no contest to manslaughter, thus admitting that he did it. That is > a FACT. No, dumbo, no contest means NO CONTEST, it admits NOTHING. No wonder you are not in practice. >Subject: Re: Yurko is free-to do it again.... >From: "sty" dehart12345@earthlink.net [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >No, dumbo, no contest means NO CONTEST, it admits NOTHING. No wonder you are >not in practice. Mark is loose with facts. his latest lie he called a fact. Jan >He plead no contest to manslaughter, thus admitting that he did it. That is >a FACT. So that is like you pleading "no contest" here ... Are you still claiming that the Mark S Probert listed on these two documents from the NY Law Fund are not you? www.nylawfund.org/pubs/97AnRep.pdf www.nylawfund.org/pubs/98AnRep.pdf On Sat, 28 Aug 2004 17:00:54 GMT, "M,a,r,k P,r,o,b,e,r,t-August 28, 2004" <M,a,r,k P,r,o,b,e,r,t 08-28-04@lambercartel.com> wrote: >He plead no contest to manslaughter, thus admitting that he did it. That is >a FACT. So that is like you pleading "no contest" here ... Are you still claiming that the Mark S Probert listed on these two documents from the NY Law Fund are not you? www.nylawfund.org/pubs/97AnRep.pdf www.nylawfund.org/pubs/98AnRep.pdf >Yes he was found 'innocent' they have released him. >Anth-hole First of all, you need to re-read all of the insults posted here in reference to you. Second of all, you need to understand that that US courts do not declare anyone "innocent". They may be found "not guilty", but that does NOT mean "innocent". Thirdly, you reading comprehension challenged a.shole, he was released pending a new trial. Fourth, you reduce the sum of human knowledge with every post you make. >>> http://www.freeyurko.bizland.com/hearingupdates.html#free >>> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >> he >> claimed for so long. >From: jkingoff@aol.com LOL. Along comes the next proven liar. He can't even keep track of who is who. Jan http://www.freeyurko.bizland.com/hearingupdates.html Alan Yurko Evidentiary Hearing: Day 4 ORLANDO, Fla.--26 August 2004 The fourth day of the evidentiary hearing brought to the stand three witnesses for the prosecution, who found the body of evidence in this case does indicate that Alan was guilty of shaking his baby to death. So there you go, clear & simple the evidence does not support that Alan shook his baby to death. Anth >> http://www.freeyurko.bizland.com/hearingupdates.html#free >> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > he > claimed for so long. The site is PRO-yurko. No credibility. > http://www.freeyurko.bizland.com/hearingupdates.html > Alan Yurko Evidentiary Hearing: Day 4 ORLANDO, Fla.--26 August 2004 [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > he > > claimed for so long. > The site is PRO-yurko. > > No credibility. No boo boo, Mark Probert = no credibilty. >Subject: Re: Yurko is free >From: "sty" dehart12345@earthlink.net [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >No boo boo, Mark Probert = no credibilty. Yep, pat reply $ 458. Watch for a flow of them. Jan >http://www.freeyurko.bizland.com/hearingupdates.html >Alan Yurko Evidentiary Hearing: Day 4 ORLANDO, Fla.--26 August 2004 [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >So there you go, clear & simple the evidence does not support that Alan >shook his baby to death. The way your mind works is not to be fathomed by others. The procecution presents three witnesses who found that the evidence is that Yurko shook the baby to death -- therefore, you claim that the logical conclusion is that he didn't. -- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants were standing on my shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT) >>http://www.freeyurko.bizland.com/hearingupdates.html >>Alan Yurko Evidentiary Hearing: Day 4 ORLANDO, Fla.--26 August 2004 [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > that Yurko shook the baby to death -- therefore, you claim that the > logical conclusion is that he didn't. This is wrong and a lie. > -- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net > These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. > "If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants > were standing on my shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT) >> The way your mind works is not to be fathomed by others. The >> procecution presents three witnesses who found that the evidence is >> that Yurko shook the baby to death -- therefore, you claim that the >> logical conclusion is that he didn't. > >This is wrong and a lie. What is a lie?? That Yurko did not kill the infant?? The only way you can know that this is a lie is if you were a witness. Anth is obviously very biased wrt this case. Anth does not know if Yurko is a murderer. I don't either. I DO know that Anth's reaction to this case tells much more about him than he would like others to know. AFAIK the evidence strongly suggests that Yurko did kill this infant. But I will allow the criminal justice system to run its course. Aloha, Rich >> -- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net >> These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. >> "If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants >> were standing on my shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT) ------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------- The best defense to logic is ignorance >>>http://www.freeyurko.bizland.com/hearingupdates.html >>>Alan Yurko Evidentiary Hearing: Day 4 ORLANDO, Fla.--26 August 2004 [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > >This is wrong and a lie. It's what you said. If it's not what you meant, I suggest you learn to express yourself more clearly. -- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants were standing on my shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT) (Not that someone like you would listen anyways) I've noticed the way you panther about with your egotistical postings, which is indictive of a lot of posters who profess to be 'sceptics.' The reports show that the autopsy is questionable to say the least, and also explains the fractured ribs. http://www.vaccinationnews.com/DailyNews/June2002/CaseAlanYurko.htm I don't expect someone of your type to apologise in any way, you just grunt onto other 'facts' and change your bar level. Anth |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message