|
|
|
Doctor's
Data v Barrett - Why the Wait?
Opinion by Consumer Advocate
Tim Bolen
Sunday, October 9th, 2011
The last real
activity in the
Doctor's Data v Stephen Barrett
Federal court case, besides the monthly
re-scheduling of Status Hearings, was last July,
2011. I wrote about that:
"The legal
arguments, at this point, are over the "Motion
to Dismiss" filed by Stephen Barrett's legal
team. Barrett, it appears, is claiming
that he is IMMUNE to lawsuits because, in his
own words, he is "Assisting Government." (don't
laugh - he is dead serious).
More, it is
clear, that Barrett was originally demanding
that the US Federal court formally declare him
to be the "Czar/God of US health care."
(envision the word
MEGALOMANIA here - like in sky-writing).
But, the last
few documents filed by Barrett, it appears to
me, have lost their demanding, condescending
tone. They have settled into a whine -
sort of an effort to snivel, whimper, bleat,
blubber, and mewl, hoping, as it were, to
beseech the court for mercy - so he, Barrett,
can live another day, legally - avoiding, what
for him, would be the process of self-extinction
- "Discovery." That "Discovery" would be a
course of action where Barrett would have to
reveal the names and activities of his masters
and co-conspirators."
So, what IS
happening? Why is there no activity?
First, there
is a new Judge in the case. The new Judge
was recently appointed to the Federal bench.
This case has several legal issues that will,
without doubt, be Appealed by either party
should the Decision go against them. The
last thing a new Federal Judge wants is to have
one of his first Federal cases he decided to go
to an Appeals Court and be reversed. So,
not only does the Judge need to get the law
right, but he will want to get the language
right too.
I won't go
into the details of the legal issues involved.
I'll just summarize in layman's terms.
(1)
What the Defense (Barrett's legal team) is doing
is to stall, stall, stall, stall, stall with
every legal trick they can think of. Why?
I believe that Barrett's Masters thought they
could run Doctor's Data out of business, during
the case, by making an increased attack on them
on the internet. As you recall, the
"Skeptics," as I reported in an earlier article
called
"Quackpots
in a Tizzy Over Barrett Getting Sued..." had
organized an attack called a "Googlebomb." Below is an excerpt:
Besides the fact that "Orac" whined, like a
girl, through the entire article, his comments,
it looks to me, are more than enough to get him
added on as a Defendant in the case. I can see
that coming. But better, and this where I give
him the "dumb of the dumbest" rating, was his
last paragraph saying:
ADDENDUM:
You can help Dr. Barrett, too. If you're a
blogger, please write about this.
What "Orac" was doing was soliciting MALICE -
and he was successful. The kiss-ups went to
work organizing what's called a " Googlebomb"
insuring that their totally libelous version of
Doctor's Data, and their version alone,
dominated the internet search engines.
Orac the Nipple Ripper, as I
call him, has been exposed by Jake
Crosby over at Age of Autism (AOA).
David Gorski MD,
Orac the Nipple Ripper's real name,
works for the world's largest vaccine
maker Sanofi-Aventis. See what
Crosby says below about Gorski:
"He has
become the online spokesperson for the
vaccine industry, a member of the highly
trafficked, drug-industry-sponsored
“Science”Blogs where he heavily promotes the
tobacco science obscuring causes of autism.
Posting under the science fiction name
“Orac,” David Gorski has become the most
outspoken, self-styled “skeptic” in defense
of mercury that exceeds EPA limits in
vaccines. Another example of a cause of
autism he vehemently denies is the MMR - the
triple, combined live-virus vaccine
implicated in measles virus infection in the
ileum, peripheral blood mononuclear cells,
and cerebrospinal fluid of children who have
autistic enterocolitis.
In case anybody’s wondering what David
Gorski’s connection is to the autism debate,
he has undisclosed financial ties to the
vaccine industry. He has made no mention
of these connections, despite stating in one
of his many defenses of millionaire vaccine
industrialist Paul Offit, “A general
principle is that undisclosed potential
conflicts of interest (COIs) are of far more
concern and potentially far more damaging to
the scientific process than disclosed COIs.”
However, Gorski has steadfastly denied
possessing any conflicts, having once told
me online without my even accusing him,
“You are wrong. I receive no money from
pharmaceutical companies and haven’t for 14
years.”
Sanofi-Gorski
Well, it so happens Sanofi-Aventis – the
world’s largest vaccine maker - is involved
in several partnerships under which the
company may be required to pay a total of
€31 million ($39 million USD) from 2008 to
2013. Gorski’s employer, Wayne State
University, is one of the partners, and he
is conducting a clinical trial of one of the
company’s drugs. Therefore, like Offit (who
concealed the millions he received in Merck
royalty payments because Merck paid the
royalties to a third party, not Offit
directly) Gorski has a reasonable
expectation to receive money from a vaccine
maker, even if it is through a third party.
A look at the summary description of the
Gorski Lab reveals that his research focus
is drug discovery and development. However,
he is not developing a new drug, but rather,
developing new uses for an existing one.
Such a process is far more profitable to the
drug manufacturer as it eliminates the costs
of developing a new substance from scratch,
thereby maximizing profits for the company."
You can read Jake's excellent article about
Gorski by clicking
here. Make the connection? The
way I see it, Gorski, who works for
Sanofi-Aventis, was clearly trying to
organize Doctor's Data financial demise.
Did it work? Nope. Gorski is,
basically, an incompetent whiner. His
writing has an angry girly-boy tone.
He's like a seventh-grade girl, whose
parents ordered a limo for her Junior High
Prom, but no boy asked her to that Prom.
(2) "The stalling tactics" are
to avoid
Discovery as long as possible.
Once the
Discovery process begins the entire
quackbuster hidden operation is at risk.
Doctor's Data will have massive subpoena
power and demand almost anything even
remotely related to the case. What
interesting things could Doctor's Data
demand to see?
(a) Doctor's Data could subpoena
the "System Logs" from Barrett's website
host Global Net Access LLC in Atlanta,
Georgia. These logs contain details of
every activity on every page of Barrett's
twenty-two (22) websites, including
information that would lead, directly, back
to who actually wrote each of those
article with Barrett's name on them.
(b) Doctor's Data could subpoena
the "Payment Records" from Barrett's website
host Global Net Access LLC in Atlanta,
Georgia. Those records would
tell us exactly who is paying the bills for
those twenty-two (22) websites.
(c) Doctor's Data could
subpoena, following the "Googlebomb"
attack mentioned above started
by Sanofi-Aventis agent David Gorski (Orac
the Nipple Ripper), the "Skeptic"
network files, garnering information on who,
exactly, the hidden "skeptics" actually are,
and how they are funded.
All
of these subpoenas, I think, would lead to new
people, and entities, being added as new
Defendants.
To refresh your memory:
The case charges the Defendants with (1) Lanham
Act Violations - Restraint of Trade, Deceptive
Business Practices, and Trademark Dilution, (2)
Trademark Dilution under the Illinois Trademark
Registration and Protection Act, (3) Violations
of the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive
Business Practices Act, (4) Violations of the
Illinois Deceptive Trade Practices Act, (5)
Business Libel Per Se, (6) Business Libel Per
Quod, (7) Tortuous Interference with Existing
and Potential Business Relationships, (8) Fraud
or Intentional Misrepresentation, (9) Civil
Conspiracy, (10) Corporate Officer and Board
Member Personal Liability, (11) Temporary and
Permanent Injunctive Relief."
"The lawsuit seeks $5,000,000 in damages and an
additional $15,000,000 in punitive damages from
the Defendants, temporary and permanent
injunctions preventing re-occurrence, plus
whatever else the Court deems suitable.
Here, is a copy of the
actual lawsuit with the Exhibits:
A,
B,
C,
D,
E,
F,
G. Happy reading."
Stay tuned.
Tim Bolen - Consumer
Advocate
|
|