04 Latest News

The reason for the hunger strike is the RIGHT of every citizen, under the European Convention on Human Rights and the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights, to appear at a PUBLIC hearing.

It was Norman ("The Conqueror") Scarth who told me of the plight of Maurice Kirk.

That same Norman Scarth, at the "Norman Conquest" in Strasbourg, defeated the British government on this very issue:

www.ukmm.org.uk/.../scarth.htm

I have been shouting to the hilltops that it is ILLEGAL for the government to insist on a video link that can be censored and tampered with. I have also been telling people about Maurice's hunger strike.

Thank you, all who have visited him. Please also spread the word about his distress.

Make it clear also that he is not mad. The corrupt government ALWAYS uses that excuse.

For example, whilst passing the Bush ranch he landed five or six miles away (outised the exclusion zone). He wanted to hand in a letter at the GATE. He did not "buzz" the ranch, nor land on the lawn.

Charles Douglas Wehner

I am sorry to hear Maurice has been sectioned for a further 28 days.    I wonder if anyone has considered paying a Psychiatrist on a private basis to give a Psychiatric report on Maurice since I think that might help him to be released from sectioning under the Mental Health Act.    

I wonder if Maurice was admitted just to be assessed since if he was this url written for lawyers says that the nearest relative can get the sectioning discharged.      www.psychiatryforlawyers.com/chapterView.php

It's a shame that a gouvernment/court has to go through the length of sectioning some one because it can not handle the situation. I did suggest to set up an independent fund to employ an independent psychiatrist for an independent assessment of Maurice.

regards

rogue & braveheart

her is the quote:

Duration: up to 28 days.

Right of appeal: to a Mental Health Tribunal within the first 14 days, also the nearest relative has the power to discharge the patient from the Section.

rogue

Obtain the book:

TRAUMA AND RECOVERY - Judith Lewis Herman, MD.

At the time of writing “Trauma and Recovery” Judith Herman was Associate Clinical Professor of Psychiatry at the Harvard Medical School and Director of Training at the Victims of Violence Program at Cambridge Hospital.

CAPTIVITY

A single traumatic event can occur almost anywhere. Prolonged, repeated trauma, by contrast, occurs only in the circumstances of captivity. When the victim is free to escape, she will not be abused a second time; repeated trauma occurs only when the victim is a prisoner, unable to flee, and under the control of the perpetrator. Such conditions obviously exist in prisons, concentration camps and slave labour camps.

Captivity, which brings the victim into prolonged contact with the perpetrator, creates a special type of relationship, one of coercive control. This is equally true whether the victim is taken captive entirely by force, as in the case of prisoners and hostages, or by a combination of force, intimidation, and enticement, as in the case of religious cult members, battered women and abused children. The psychological impact of subordination to coercive control may have many common features, whether that subordination occurs within the public sphere of politics or within the private sphere of sexual and domestic relations.

Authoritarian, secretive, sometimes grandiose, and even paranoid, the perpetrator is nevertheless exquisitely sensitive to the realities of power and to social norms. Only rarely does he get into difficulties with the law; rather he seeks out situations where his tyrannical behaviour will be tolerated, condoned, or admired. His demeanour provides an excellent camouflage, for few people believe that extraordinary crimes can be committed by men of such conventional appearance.

The perpetrator’s first goal appears to be the enslavement of his victim, and he accomplishes this goal by exercising despotic control over every aspect of the victim’s life. But simple compliance rarely satisfies him; he appears to have a psychological need to justify his crimes, and for this he needs the victim’s affirmation. Thus he relentlessly demands from his victim professions of respect, gratitude, or even love. His ultimate goal appears to be the creation of a willing victim. Hostages, political prisoners, battered women, and slaves have all remarked upon the captor’s curious psychological dependence upon his victim. George Orwell gives voice to the totalitarian mind in the novel 1984

“We are not content with negative obedience, not even with the most abject submission. When finally you surrender to us, it must be of your own free will. We do not destroy the heretic because he resists us; so long as he resists us we never destroy him. We convert him, we capture his inner mind, we reshape him. We burn all evil out of him, we bring him over to our side, not in appearance, but genuinely, heart and soul.”

The desire for total control over another person is the common denominator of all forms of tyranny. Totalitarian governments demand confession and political conversion of their victims.

PSYCHOLOGICAL DOMINATION

The methods that enable one human being to enslave another are remarkably consistent. The accounts of hostages, political prisoners, and survivors of concentration camps from every corner of the globe have an uncanny sameness. Drawing upon the testimony of political prisoners from widely different cultures, Amnesty International in 1973 published a “chart of coercion”, describing these methods in detail. In tyrannical political systems, it is sometimes possible to trace the actual transmission of coercive methods from one clandestine police force or terrorist group to another.

The methods of establishing control over another person are based on the systematic, repetitive infliction of psychological trauma. They are the organized techniques of disempowerment and disconnection. Methods of psychological control are designed to instill terror and helplessness and to destroy the victim’s sense of self in relation to others.

Although violence is a universal method of terror, the perpetrator may use violence infrequently, as a last resort. It is not necessary to use violence to keep the victim in a constant state of fear. The threat of death or serious harm is much more frequent than the actual resort to violence. Threats against others are often as effective as direct threats against the victim.

Fear is also increased by inconsistent and unpredictable outbursts of violence and by capricious enforcement of petty rules. The ultimate effect of these techniques is to convince the victim that the perpetrator is omnipotent, that resistance is futile, and that her life depends upon winning his indulgence through absolute compliance. The goal of the perpetrator is to instill in his victim not only the fear of death but also gratitude for being allowed to live. Survivors of domestic or political captivity often describe occasions in which they were convinced that they would be killed, only to be spared at the last moment. After several cycles of reprieve from certain death, the victim may come to view the perpetrator, paradoxically, as her saviour.

In addition to inducing fear, the perpetrator seeks to destroy the victim’s sense of autonomy. This is achieved by scrutiny and control of the victim’s body and bodily functions. The perpetrator supervises what the victim eats, where she sleeps, when she goes to the toilet, what she wears. When the victim is deprived of food, sleep, or exercise, this control results in physical debilitation. But even when the victim’s basic physical needs are adequately met, this assault on bodily autonomy shames and demoralizes her.

Once the perpetrator has succeeded in establishing day-to-day bodily control of the victim, he becomes a source not only of fear and humiliation but also of solace. The hope of a meal, a bath, a kind word, or some other ordinary creature comfort can become compelling to a person long enough deprived. The perpetrator may further debilitate the victim by offering addictive drugs or alcohol. The capricious granting of small indulgences undermines the psychological resistance of the victim far more effectively than unremitting deprivation and fear.

Political prisoners who are aware of the methods of coercive control devote particular attention to maintaining their sense of autonomy. One form of resistance is refusing to comply with petty demands or to accept rewards. The hunger strike is the ultimate expression of this resistance. Because the prisoner voluntarily subjects himself to greater deprivation than that willed by his captor, he affirms his sense of integrity and self-control.

Additional methods, however, are usually needed to achieve complete domination. As long as the victim maintains any other human connection, the perpetrator’s power is limited. It is for this reason that perpetrators universally, seek to isolate their victims from any other source of information, material aid, or emotional support. The stories of political prisoners are filled with accounts of their captors’ attempts to prevent communication with the outside world and to convince them that their closest allies have forgotten or betrayed them. And the record of domestic violence is filled with accounts of jealous surveillance, such as stalking, eavesdropping, and intercepting letters or telephone calls, which results in solitary confinement of the battered woman.

The destruction of attachments require not only the isolation of the victim from others but also the destruction of her internal images of connection to others.

Prisoners of conscience, who have a highly developed awareness of the strategies of control and resistance, generally understand that isolation is the danger to be avoided at all costs, and that there is no such thing as a small concession when the issue is preserving their connections with the outside world. As tenaciously as their captors seek to destroy their relationships, these prisoners tenaciously seek to maintain communication with a world outside the one in which they are confined. They deliberately practice evoking mental images of the people they love, in order to preserve their sense of connection.

Prisoners of conscience are well aware of the danger of ordinary human engagement with their captors. Of all prisoners, this group is the most prepared to withstand the corrosive psychological effects of captivity. They have chosen a course in life with full knowledge of its dangers, they have a clear definition of their own principles, and they have strong faith in their allies. Nevertheless, even this highly conscious and motivated group of people realize that they are at risk of developing emotional dependence upon their captors. They protect themselves only by uncompromising refusal to enter into even the most superficial social relationship with their adversaries.

Whereas prisoners of conscience need to summon all their resources to avoid developing emotional dependence upon their captors, people who lack this remarkable degree of preparation, political awareness, and moral support usually develop some degree of dependence. Attachment between hostage and captor is the rule rather than the exception. Prolonged confinement while in fear of death and in isolation from the outside world reliably produces a bond of identification between captor and victim.

TOTAL SURRENDER

Terror, intermittent reward, isolation, and enforced dependency may succeed in creating a submissive and compliant prisoner. But the final step in psychological control of the victim is not completed until she has been forced to violate her own moral principles and to betray her basic human attachments. Psychologically, this is the most destructive of all coercive techniques, for the victim who has succumbed loathes herself. It is at this point, when the victim under duress participates in the sacrifice of others, that she is truly “broken”.

Survivors of political imprisonment and torture similarly describe being forced to stand by helplessly while witnessing atrocities committed against people they love.

Prisoners, even those who have successfully resisted, understand that under extreme duress anyone can be “broken”. They generally distinguish two stages in this process. The first is reached when the victim relinquishes her inner autonomy, world view, moral principles, or connection with others for the sake of survival. There is a shutting down of feelings, thoughts, initiative and judgement.

This state of psychological degradation is reversible. During the course of their captivity, victims frequently describe alternating between periods of submission and more active resistance. The, second, irreversible stage in the breaking of a person is reached when the person loses the will to live. This is not the same thing as becoming suicidal: people in captivity live constantly with the fantasy of suicide, and occasional suicide attempts are not inconsistent with a general determination to survive. Timerman, in fact, describes the wish for suicide in these extreme circumstances as a sign of resistance and pride. Suicide, he states, “means introducing into your daily life something that is on a par with the violence around you...It’s like living on an equal footing with one’s jailers.” The stance of suicide is active; it preserves an inner sense of control. As in the case of the hunger strike, the captive asserts his defiance by his willingness to end his life.

Byron Prior's family was destroyed as young children by Incest, Child Rape and Abuse of every kind in a small town of 2500 people. Supreme Court Judges, Politicians and RCMP are involved.

Byron has 50 years of being deprived justice in Newfoundland and has now been sentenced to the Waterford Mental Hospital in St. John’s. The court ordered him to have a psychiatric assessment done with Dr. David Craig. The assessment lasted for 55 minutes and then Dr. Craig wrote a report to the court saying Byron was delusional. A group from British Columbia paid for his trip to Toronto for 2 weeks of medical tests and examinations with five different Psychologists and neither of whom found him delusional.

Byron has been tied up in the Newfoundland Court System since 1998 until July 20, 2009, when he was just sentenced, because he reported the people who abused him and his family. Politicians names and faces change but the Corruption continues to rule our country. He spent 7 months in 2006 in Ottawa on Parliament Hill, with permits, handing out information sheets about what happened to his family and still no one has resolved this great INJUSTICE. A simple DNA test would see Justice served and prove Byron's allegations. The system protects the Criminals and itself, not the public or victims.

Byron was arrested on May 29, 2008. He is alleged to have published a defamatory libel.

The trial started on February 02/09 in Provincial Court, St. John's with Judge David Orr and the victim, Byron, was further persecuted for telling the truth and this system will protect the criminal, Alex Hickman. Byron's Government appointed lawyer told him she won't even ask for a DNA test to prove the TRUTH. Once again Newfoundland courts will knowingly convict the wrong person.

The court continued over the months and was concluded on July 20, 2009 with Judge Orr making no disposition at that time. Byron is remanded in custody to the Waterford Mental Hospital pending a disposition by the review board. There was a hearing scheduled for September 01, 2009 at the Waterford Hospital but was postponed until October 06, 2009 because they didn't have a report from Dr. Lynch,  the Psychiatrist who is suppose to be assessing Byron.  She has been on vacation for the past 2 weeks and she didn't see him before she went.  Byron only found out about this doctor last week, he thought Dr. Ladha was doing the assessments. He has been appointed a lawyer from Mental Health Project and Court Support Services to represent him.

Byron is being further abused and persecuted by the Newfoundland Legal System and Politics. He says that the staff at the Waterford are constantly trying to provoke him to get him to act out so they will have something on him in order to keep him in for an extended sentence.

He needs help. No one in Newfoundland will represent him and the last lawyer he asked told him, "If any lawyer in Newfoundland represents you, it will be the last job they have in this province."

To understand why Byron Prior and his family cannot get justice in this province please check the websites and You Tube listed below.

maxpages.com/sexualabuse

www.youtube.com/cdnjusticedelayed

www.petitiononline.com/TRUTH/petition.html

www.equalparenting-bc.ca/.../prior_byron.htm

www.meetup.com/.../763132

The Radical Press » Blog Archive » Newfoundland Sexual Abuse

gov-Injustice: from Byron Prior to Danny Williams his old lawyer///??