The hospital at the centre of the iatrogenic murder scandal of @evlaica's husband is @RCHTWeCare
The twitter handle is inappropriate.
If you are a nurse at #Treliske hospital who wants to get your story out anonymously, my DMs are open.
🧵
As presented, this story from @JacquiDeevoy1 represents an iatrogenic (doctor-caused) death no different from those resulting from Harold Shipman's serial murder campaign.
All Stuart needed was #3tablets antibiotics for a chest infection.
...according to his wife's testimony he was physically restrained, catheterised and forcibly injected with high dose opiates and #midazolam without consent.
This would constitute an illegal act of assault leading to an unlawful death.
Deaths arising from medical malpractice may be categorised as manslaughter in the UK.
@EVlaica's testimony is that the consultant concerned disagreed with Stuart's medical choices and as a consequence deliberately mismanaged him.
That is no longer manslaughter under UK law, sorry @RCHTWeCare, it's murder.
And unfortunately for @RCHTWeCare you are under mandatory reporting rules.
Which means that if you were aware of this act and failed to report the consultant concerned, you inherit liability.
Nobody reading the story in Jacqui's report can take away anything other than a deliberate intention to deny antibiotics at first presentation and then to administer respiratory depressants, which will kill you if you have pneumonia.
That is the #midazolam scandal that killed over 100,000 British people.
Instead of treating early for post-viral pneumonia, elderly, disabled, infirm, or - in the case of @RCHTWeCare - anybody that disagreed with the government mantra, were denied antibiotics and instead given drugs that hastened their death.
And - for those who shout "antibiotics don't treat viruses" - the following drugs do NOT treat bacterial pneumonia.
You were lied to about the Merck measles vaccine develop in the 60s. When injected into babies it caused fevers, rashes, diarrhoea and febrile convulsions.
Why?
I'm going to show you.
@SecKennedy @RetsefL @MaryanneDemasi @DrJulieSladden @RWMaloneMD
Merck claimed that the "measles vaccine" was an "attenuated version of measles" giving the impression that it was a virus that was made safe.
That was a lie.
It was just measles, passaged in cells in a lab.
We injected our babies with actual measles.
How do I know?
Recently released Australian Road Deaths data confirm that the @epiphare study claiming that COVID vaccination reduced road deaths by 32% was, as suspected, a complete fake.
Here are the actual road deaths data plotted from the Australian BITRE data repository using a trendline for 2000-2019 (excluding 2020 as it was a quiet year)
The pink area shows the inflection and increase in road deaths over the predicted number.
Note that road deaths have a downward trend despite an increase in population (due to safety measures and slowing of traffic).
So the question becomes...
"what is the probability that - if the @epiphare study was real (showing a 32% reduction in road deaths after vaccination) - the Australian road deaths (where nearly 100% of the adult population was vaccinated) would increase by 36%"?
Debbie's tweet was about her case against @HHSGov when her son developed Type 1 Diabetes after a routine vaccine, when he had a negative glucose test prior.
So it was clearly vaccine linked, but her case was denied.
Not only was the case denied (despite clear evidence of a new diagnosis immediately after vaccination) but the case was used by the "judge" to essentially ban ANY further cases that alleged a link between new diabetes and a routine vaccine.
Here is the clip from the (decent) interview with Pelle Neroth Taylor of @RealTNTRadio.
In it Boyle is asked whether the mRNA vaccines are themselves biological weapons and he explains that because "in your system, it generates the COVID-19 cells" they would be.
But of course that's incorrect, because mRNA vaccines don't recreate the COVID virus (the biological weapon - assuming as we now know that it was synthetic not natural).
So his explanation was incorrect because he misunderstood that the mRNA only provides the spike protein and he would have been destroyed on this point in court.
Of course he never got to court. And never gave an affidavit for the Dutch court - confirmed here (8/3/25):
I'll say it again. The vaccine industry [KNOWINGLY] hijacked cell pathways that cause cancer in order to induce antibody responses so that they can claim that their product "worked" by demonstrating those antibodies - even if they offered zero protection.
To explain, when you induce an immune response you have an immune debt to pay. You can't just keep creating an immune response - or, as in the case of cancer, you will die.
A vaccine creates an artificial immune response...
Which might be fine if it was done every now and again. But what they didn't tell you was that the human body will not respond to an injected antigen alone. It will ignore it (thankfully) and the generic immune system will mop it up, no antibodies required.