@barnes_law
English courts for time immorial considered medication without consent battery. Informed consent developed from this Tort when courts decided that battery still occured if consent was not informed. Battery & informed consent are inseparable at common law.
English courts for time immorial considered medication without consent battery. Informed consent developed from this Tort when courts decided that battery still occured if consent was not informed. Battery & informed consent are inseparable at common law.
So it was great to hear you mention informed consent and battery on infowars regarding vaccine passports, but the solution is that the remedy to failure to obtain express informed consent is not to attack the mandate. Instead assert that mandates are no defence against battery.
Your litigation target for the Tort is the vaccinator for battery or the employer for unlawful inducement to break a contract based on a threat with malice that they must be battered. Plus, the threat of being sacked is bribery that directly invalidates informed consent.
Rather than sue the government, who have massive resources and who have the defence that "the employer in implementing a mandate must consider all other legal obligations", the employer, vaccinator or venue owner has no such defence. They can counter-sue above to form a Tort Map.
Once the courts establish where in the Tort map the liabilities are, anybody who has or will suffered any loss, see Uzuegbunam v Preczewski 592 U. S. (2021), can sue for unlimited nominal loss & injunctive relief, let class actions begin. supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf…
All other remedies are aggravating factors, e.g. discrimination, negligence, etc. etc.
This bypasses Supreme Court cases allowing mandates by arguing that notwithstanding the mandate, there is lawful exemption and excuse at common law, rending the mandate moot.
This bypasses Supreme Court cases allowing mandates by arguing that notwithstanding the mandate, there is lawful exemption and excuse at common law, rending the mandate moot.
With battery being a broad Tort, the analogy for the lay person reading is, that just as there is no statutory defence to punching somebody in the face, you can only do that in self defence, so too, there is no statutory defence to vaccinating without informed consent.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
