Wired Magazine: The Painful Truth About Long Covid

[Utsikt]

British members of the BPS cult have had some claims of threats dismissed ny courts as unfounded, and the Norwegian BPS queen Reme has a history of lying about requiring police protection for the OCFN meeting, portraying the recent French protests as threatening, and claiming they were flooded with FOI requests to the extent that it impacted their ability to do their work when the total amount of FOI sent to all institutions was less than what an average journalist would send in a week and they have a department that handles the requests for them.

And then there’s the constant lies in their publications.

They shouldn’t have any credibility left in a sane world. But here we are..

 

[Nightsong]

Those examples aren't proof of anything. Anyone can send a picture or video to someone on social media. Anyone who knows a public figure can attest that they routinely receive all manner of unwanted, bizarre and malicious messages, sometimes from fixated individuals, on social media; such is the nature, unfortunately, of our age.

But a serious threat of death or physical harm from someone who is verifiably a patient, of the kind that would occasion the serious interest of the police or of the judiciary; of the kind that would result in criminal convictions? If there were any such cases these people would shout about them from the rooftops; they seem desperately to wish to be seen as downtrodden victims of patient "activism".

 

[Utsikt]

Those examples aren't proof of anything. Anyone can send a picture or video to someone on social media. Anyone who knows a public figure can attest that they routinely receive all manner of unwanted, bizarre and malicious messages, sometimes from fixated individuals, on social media; such is the nature, unfortunately, of our age.

But a serious threat of death or physical harm from someone who is verifiably a patient, of the kind that would occasion the serious interest of the police or of the judiciary; of the kind that would result in criminal convictions? If there were any such cases these people would shout about them from the rooftops; they seem desperately to wish to be seen as downtrodden victims of patient "activism".

This barrister says:

To secure a conviction, the prosecution must prove all of the elements of the offence to the requisite standard, that being beyond reasonable doubt. So, the prosecution must show that:

1. Threat Was Made- The threat can be verbal, written, or even implied through actions (e.g., brandishing a weapon).

2. Fear of the Threat Being Carried Out- The victim must have reasonably believed that the threat could be acted upon.

3. Intent of the Accused- The person making the threat must intend to cause fear, not just use reckless language.

If they fail in any of these then the accused is entitled to a not guilty verdict.

Sending an image of a weapon ticks #1. I think it’s reasonable to think that it might be carried out, so that’s #2. It’s difficult to get around that the sender probably intended to cause fear, so that’s #3.

The fact that these are common today, doesn’t make them less of an issue.

 

[Hoopoe]

A picture isn't proof of anything. There are probably many places on the internet, not accessible by seach engines, where these pictures could be found. And anyone can claim to have received death threats by an anonymous person.

In any case, even if it were true, it is repugnant to use this to try and score points against a whole group in public. It is smearing by association with unconfirmed rumours.

 

[Jonathan Edwards]

But a serious threat of death or physical harm from someone who is verifiably a patient, of the kind that would occasion the serious interest of the police or of the judiciary; of the kind that would result in criminal convictions? If there were any such cases these people would shout about them from the rooftops; they seem desperately to wish to be seen as downtrodden victims of patient "activism".

My memory of going in to this in the past is that there was one documented case that did occasion interest from the police and that there was legal constraint on any public release of information. It seems to me appropriate that no prosecution occurred. I would expect a psychiatrist to consider abuse and threats a normal part of dealing with the 'psychosocial' aspects of their service delivery. What was reprehensible was capitalising on an event that could not be verified because of the legal constraint and portraying it both as being related to criticism of bad science, and something to be awarded a prize for tolerating.

 

[Lou B Lou]

Valerie Eliot Smith saw a video in 2011 that had been sent to Wessely, and she said it could easily be interpreted as a death threat. I believe her on that one. Now, that doesn't mean the whole thing wasn't exaggerated and hyped etc etc. But I count that as at least one actual "death threat." I also wouldn't be surprised if there were others. But that's the only one I know that's been confirmed.

The video in question was put on Youtube and was up on Youtube for 6 - 8 weeks. I don't recall any claim that it 'was sent to Wessely'. The video was NOT removed from Youtube 'almost straight away' due to it's content, as was claimed by the person who sent a copy of it to Valerie Elliot Smith.

I watched the video a few times at the time and do not recall any death threat. The video was a clever montage of still images, with a spoken commentary. It was in the style of an art film. It was clear the person who made the film had been harmed very badly by the BPS mistreatment, by abusive treatment by certain Drs, and left physically damaged and very traumatised. Where the film maker blew it was by including a photo of Mengele.

.

.