Federal Court Forces Barrett Deposition… What Fun Life Can Be…

Opinion by Consumer Advocate  Tim Bolen 

In September of 2010 I wrote an article about why the Doctor’s Data v Barrett Federal Court case was so important to America.  Just below is an excerpt of that article:

Why the Doctor’s Data v Barrett case is important to North America…

The US health care system is in tatters.  It is total crap, run by crooks and idiots, who on their best day, either by design, or stupidity, cannot find any solutions.  The “War on Cancer” has been running almost 39 years – and we are not even close to official answers – because the “war” is intentionally designed to fail.

The US health care system, itself, is the number one killer of Americans. Health problems that could, and should, have been solved years ago, like autism, diabetes and heart disease tear our society apart.

Why is this happening?  Because the system generates way too much money the way it is.  No one within the system wants change.  And, “the system” has built in defense mechanisms designed to kill threats to itself.

One of those built in mechanisms is the “quackbuster” operation, a cleverly designed process whereby virtually any treatment, lab test, device, author, practitioner, or idea that is outside of the current US health care “status quo” gets systematically rolled in excrement, so to speak, and publicly held up to ridicule by a mostly hidden group.  The flagship for this operation is Quackwatch.com and its aging, bitter, loser, Stephen Barrett.

But there is much more to the “quackbuster” operation than Barrett.  Why do I say that?  Because, although Barrett intentionally publicly paints his enemies with sewage, no one would care what this rabid old fart has to say if his material never floated to the top of search engines.  But it does – and it is not by accident.

In short, Obamacare, nor any other current health care solution, on the table, proposed by the “thinkers,”  is going to help North Americans for one simple reason.  The proposed solutions fail, at first, to identify the real problems of North American Health Care – and that problem is that we are on a maintenance of symptom system rather than a cure system.  In short, Cancer, Heart Disease, Diabetes, Stroke, Autism, Cerebral Palsy, and more can all be beaten right now with existing science and technology – but all of that science and technology is blocked, and its proponents intentionally smeared in the public’s eye.

But then, something happened that could change all that.  Someone had enough.  That “someone” is a laboratory called Doctor’s Data, that, in essence, did one simple thing – they took the leash off their junkyard dogs (their attorneys – Augustine, Kern, and Levens) and let them go do what they are supposed to do – bite an unwanted intruder.”

And now, we’re getting down to the nitty-gritty.  After every effort to lock, block, block, delay, delay, delay, on Barrett’s part, the actual Courtroom Trial is looming.

Barrett is terrible in a courtroom situation, and the attorney he picked Michael K. Botts, is, to me, a joke – one we, on this side of the argument, can enjoy time-after-time.

So, this is all going to be a hoot.

And, I’ll make sure you all have a front row seat.

What about those Depositions?

A Deposition is, by definition (from the Free Dictionary):

“The testimony of a party or witness in a civil or criminal proceeding taken before trial, usually in an attorney’s office.

Deposition testimony is taken orally, with an attorney asking questions and the deponent (the individual being questioned) answering while a court reporter or tape recorder (or sometimes both) records the testimony. Deposition testimony

is generally taken under oath, and the court reporter and the deponent often sign affidavits attesting to the accuracy of the subsequent printed transcript.

Depositions are a discovery tool. (Discovery is the process of assembling the testimonial and documentary evidence in a case before trial.) Other forms of discovery include interrogatories (written questions that are provided to a party and require written answers) and requests for production of documents.

Depositions are commonly used in civil litigation (suits for money damages or equitable relief); they are not commonly used in criminal proceedings (actions by a government entity seeking fines or imprisonment). A minority of states provide for depositions in criminal matters under special circumstances, such as to compel statements from an uncooperative witness and a few provide for depositions in criminal matters generally.”

If you care to read the whole article on Depositions, click here.

This, for Barrett, is a disaster.  For, as I’ve said before, Barrett comes out like an arrogant buffoon in a courtroom – because he actually is one.  Judges, juries, and spectators, alike simply don’t like him.  Why?  Because he talks like he writes, and he really does think that he has somehow been anointed (self anointed?) as the Czar/God of US health care.

And (smile here), I am certain this Deposition will be videotaped.  You can be absolutely certain that I, Tim Bolen, will be applying to the Court for a copy of that video – and once I have it, so will you.

So, what will Doctor’s Data’ attorneys be asking of Barrett in a Deposition?

I’m glad you asked…

In my last article on this subject “Doctor’s Data v Barrett Case – January, 2013 Update,” I pointed out that Doctor’s Data had to go to the judge to force Discovery answers in seventy-three (73) areas out of the one-hundred-twenty-three (123) main topics.  Let me remind you with an excerpt from an earlier article:

“Things are about to get VERY, VERY bad for Stephen Barrett, his co-conspirators, minions, and supporters.  The judge in the Doctor’s Data v Barrett case has come down hard, very hard, on Stephen Barrett and the other Defendants regarding their refusal to provide Discovery documents demanded by the Plaintiff Doctor’s Data’s attorneys.

The judge’s Order to Compel carries significant penalties, including the threat of arrest of Barrett, under the “Contempt of Court” rules, for failure to comply with the Order.  And they, the Defendants, have only until September 12th, 2012 (four days from now), to clean up their act.

On August 27th, and 29th, 2012 attorneys for Doctor’s Data, Augustine, Kern and Levens, Ltd., filed two separate Motions to Compel, asking the Judge to force Stephen Barrett to comply with Discovery demands.  The Motions separately complained that Barrett had been given one hundred twenty three (123) discovery demands, and to date, had only partially answered eleven (11) of them, claiming various ludicrous “privileges” for not answering one hundred and twelve (112) of them. 

Barrett, frankly, was DESPERATE, I think, to hide certain things – and he has failed.  Refusing to answer is a “Contempt of Court” issue which would result in his jailing until he answered.

So, I’ll bet that right about now, certain of his minions, paymasters, etc., are sweating blood, wondering what Stevie is going to say about them.

Just to remind you of the subject material, let me copy below the seventy three areas of interest Doctor’s Data had to go to court to get an Order for Barrett to comply.

Let’s look at what Barrett, et al, are trying to hide…

Let’s look at the seventy three specific demands for information, individually.  In the first part (from 1 to 33), the information demands are certainly interesting, and tell a story.  But, starting at 34, things get VERY interesting – right through 42.  Then very quickly, comes another bombshell at 46.

(1)  E-Mail exchanged between Barrett and Baratz – Doctor’s Data points out that there are, very, clearly, significant numbers of missing emails between these two dweebs.  Barrett, as we already know, is in the habit of filing complaints against people with various agencies, and then offers Robert S. Baratz MD, DDS, PhD (bobbie baratz) as a witness for the agency.  See this Texas article.

(2)  DEF 04728-32 – DDI wants an un-redacted copy of this complaint filed against DDI in New York State.

(3)  Barrett’s email with attorney Wilzig plus documents responding to request 110 – Question one hundred ten (110) and one hundred eleven (111) ask, again, about communications with anyone suing Doctor’s Data.

(4)  Follow up Barrett received from Ms Astin of NYDH – Interesting situation.

(5)  DEF 04583 – Emails exchanges between Barrett and the State of oregon regarding DDI.

(6)  Coman/Barrett/Wilzig emails – A case where Barrett, Baratz, and David Wilzig were involved in suing DDI.  DDI wants to see all of the emails between the parties.

(7)  Emails between Vinny Tidwell and Barrett –  Tidwell is suing DDI in Indiana.

(8)  DEF 0476 – All emails between Barrett and Oregon State Public Health laboratory regarding DDI.

(9)  Emails to Consumer Health Digest subscribers – DDI wants the email list. I suspect the list is made up of county health department employees, state Medical Board members, investigators, and decision makers at individual medical boards, etc., and federal agency employees – it is, I think, how Barrett, et al, propagandize county, state, and federal employees into believing whomever Barrett, et al, is currently attacking is a bad person.

(10)  Email exchanges with Mr. Stemp’s attorneys – Stemp is suing DDI in Texas.  Barrett was a PAID consultant.

(11)  Barrett’s emails with Todd Barnes – another lawsuit.

(12)  Barrett’s emails with John Acres – regarding a Nova Scotia complaint.

(13)  Documents responding to request No 6 – All documents with any Illinois agency.  Barrett, laugh here, is REFUSING to produce any documents without a release from the State.

(14 thru 17)  Documents from –  the States of Texas, Florida, Wisconsin, Connecticut,  Washington, Tennessee, Indiana, and Georgia.  Barrett, laugh here, is REFUSING to produce any documents without a release from the State.

(18)  Documents responding to request No 23 to Barrett – Barrett has not yet produced any information regarding his communications with individuals he counseled to sue DDI.  He denies there are any – but DDI has copies of some already.

(19)  Documents responding to request No 27 to Barrett – Barrett has not yet produced any information regarding his experts and consultants he claims to want to use in this case, or had used for his articles.

(20)  Documents responding to request No 45 to Barrett – Communications with David Wilzig regarding court cases he is involved in with David Wilzig.   Barrett refuses.

(21)  Documents responding to request No 46 to Barrett – Barrett has not yet produced any information regarding his complaints to Medical Boards, at all.

(22)  Documents responding to request No 47 to Barrett – Communications with Plaintiff.

(23)  Documents responding to request No 53 to Barrett –  income received from NCAHF.

(24)  Documents responding to request No 54 to Barrett – documents regarding income for Barrett.

(25 thru 31)  Documents responding to request No 59, thru 65 to Barrett – Barrett is refusing to provide all versions of Exhibit A, B, C, D, E,  F, and G.

(32)  Documents responding to request No 69 to Barrett – All documents exchanged with attorneys suing DDI.

(33)  Documents responding to request No 81, thru 84 to Barrett – Barrett is refusing to provide agreements with his experts or consultants.

(34)  Documents responding to request No 89 to Barrett – Quote: “Barrett has not produced documents and agreements pertaining to any person who assists him or contributes to his work on his websites.  Barrett has stated that his son, Dr. Baratz’s son, and others assist him or contribute to Barrett’s  work but no documents have been produced to evidence the capacity in which each assists him.”

(35)  Documents responding to request No 90 to Barrett – Quote: “Barrett has not produced documents evidencing donations and contributions he, or any of his websites, have received.  Plaintiff has learned from a subpoena to PayPal that over the years Barrett has received more than $70,000 through PayPal and has encouraged donors to send checks and cash directly to him.  However, he has not produced any document evidencing donations received or evidence that such income has been reported.”

(36)  Documents responding to request No 91 to Barrett – Documents about referral agreements with others.

(37)  Documents responding to request No 93 to Barrett – Documents about Barrett’s hosting service for Quackwatch.com, or Quackwatch.org.  This is VERY, VERY important.  Perhaps THE MOST IMPORTANT thing.  Why?  I don’t believe, even for a second, that Barrett actually runs the Quackwatch operation.  He is too stupid, ignorant, untrained, and bigoted.  He is a man who failed at his medical career years ago.  I think he is simply a dupe, a front man, a frontis-piece.  I don’t think he even maintains the websites himself, nor writes, or edits, most , or perhaps ANY, of the articles.

Every website ISP has an automatic feature, called a Log, which records the date, time, and IP location from which a web page is edited from.  I’d be willing to bet that an examination of that ISP Log would show that, in fact, NONE of those anti-DDI articles on Quackwatch or the other Barrett controlled websites originated, or were edited, from Barrett’s IP address.  Think about that…

So, where did they originate from?  Guess…  After all, isn’t the Doctor’s Data lab test about finding heavy metals in the body -specifically mercury, as in Thimerosal, the preservative in vaccines?  Do I need to hand you, my readers, a card that says “Vaccine Industry?”

(38)  Documents responding to request No 97 to Barrett – membership info on NCAHF and Quackwatch, Inc.

(39)  Documents responding to request No 98 to Barrett – Documents about Barrett’s relationship with Prometheus Books of Paul Kurtz.  Barrett claimed to be an editor for Prometheus Books.  Which books?  The sex books?

(40)  Documents responding to request No 99 to Barrett – communications with Barrett’s so-called legal or Scientific Advisory Boards.

(41)  Documents responding to request No 100 to Barrett – communications with Barrett’s so-called legal or Scientific Advisory Boards about exhibits A thru G.

(42)  Documents responding to request No 109 to Barrett – communications with bloggers like Orac the Nipple Ripper, Liz Ditz, or any of the “skeptics” who attacked Doctor’s Data before or after the lawsuit was filed.

(43)  Documents responding to request No 111 to Barrett – communications with attorneys.

(44)  Documents responding to request No 113 to Barrett – financial statements of co-defendants.

(45)  Documents responding to request No 116 to Barrett – communications with Elizabeth Woeckner.

(46)  Documents responding to request No 118 to Barrett – VERY, VERY IMPORTANT – Barrett has not produced documents pertaining to who is funding his legal defense.

(47 and 48)  Documents responding to request No 121 and 123 to Barrett – maintenance items.

(49)  Documents responding to request No 1 to NCAHF – VERY, VERY IMPORTANT – regarding questions about who funds them.

(50 thru 56)  Documents responding to all requests to NCAHF – similar to those asked to Barrett above.

(57 thru 69) Documents responding to all requests to Quackwatch Inc. – similar to those asked to Barrett above.

(70)  Copies of all attachments to all emails and letters produced in discovery –  40% of Barrett’s emails to others had attachments which WERE NOT produced.  Barrett’s attorneys claimed they had been “disassociated,”  whatever that means.

(71)  Evidence of Fraud and Conspiracy supposedly committed by Plaintiff – This whole case is about Barrett, et al, accusing Doctor’s Data of criminal fraud, and conspiracy with its doctor clients to commit that fraud.  Barrett, nor any of the Defendants have produced any such evidence.

(72)  Documents prior to 2005 – Defendants unilaterally shortened the relevant discovery period from 2000 to 2005.  DDI wants all of the documents.

(73)  Barrett and Quackwatch, Inc. financial information – Quote:  “Plaintiff requests inspection of Barrett’s complete financial information, including his bank statements, in addition to his tax records.  Defendants have not produced any information concerning donations.  Plaintiff learned from documents received pursuant to subpoena from Paypal that Barrett/Quackwatch have received more than $70,000 since 2004 through PayPal.  Plaintiff suspects Barrett/Quackwatch received just as much, if not more, through donations made by cash, chaeck, money order, as each of Barrett’s websites encourage the mailing of cash. and check donations.  In addition, Barrett’s bank statements will show any larger payments Barrett may have recieved for his consulting or referral activities.

Furthermore, Barrett’s tax returns contain redacted information which needs to be unredacted.”

In short…

We’re coming to the REALLY FUN part…..

Stay tuned.  And smile.

Tim Bolen – Consumer Advocate


– See more at: https://bolenreport.com/feature_articles/Doctor’s-Data-v-Barrett/barrett%20deposition.htm#sthash.P19GPmxX.dpuf