- Expert -Witness Conspiracy
Recently in England there has been a case of a mother Sally Clark being found to have been falsely imprisoned accused of the murder of two of her babies, because supposed Experts had with held evidence in court. She was released on Appeal. This begs the question- how many other people have been found guilty due to Experts withholding evidence.
From article below : ".... the pathologist who gave evidence for the prosecution was withholding vital evidence..."
What happens is that the Expert working for the Prosecution does not think it is duty while in court to reveal evidence that could help the Defence.
i.e. The Expert says what the person paying him wants him to say.
With this attitude the Justice System is corrupted, and when this is found to happen the Appeal changes the original verdict.
There are many examples of Experts who are Professionals and by what is meant Professionals - they are being paid by someone, usually government. And being paid, they feel obliged to say what their paymasters tell them to say. With Governments now so committed to "spin", there is a lot that governments want their paid Experts to say, and a lot that they want them not to say.
In the UFO study that happened in the 1950s. Ruppelt reported that evidence of ET explanation of some UFOs was being covered up, debunked etc., while emphasis was placed on mundane UFO cases that had no ET possibility. The reason for this was because the Paymasters were unsatisfied with the original study that had concluded that some UFOs were unexplained, and had demanded a second study were a definite answer to all UFOs was required.
i.e. the Experts were responding in the UFO study by giving their paymasters the answer that they requested to UFOs. (UFO Cover Up by Experts)
Our whole society now has Experts saying what their paymasters want them to say.
When these Experts go to court they want to give only what their paymasters want them to give. When this is spotted then the Court System decides that there has been a Miscarriage of Justice.
If the Court System had been applied to the UFO Study Conclusion, then it might have too concluded that there had been a Miscarriage in the Methodology used to reach the conclusion that it had reached.
It is often said that if the UFO subject was presented as Court Case with all the witnesses testifying to their UFO encounters then the Court would reach the answer that some UFOs were ET crafts. But Science requires more than just witness testimony, and would not reach the same conclusion as such a court case. But what this fails to take into account is the corruption in the supposed Experts of Science. A court case would reveal that the Science Experts opposed to the UFOs, were avoiding mentioning a the relevant evidence, in the same way that the Experts in the cot death case avoid mentioning the evidence for the Defence.
There are many accounts in papers dealing with the Sally Clark case. One of those accounts follows:
Article: Anguish of mums branded as killers, Daily Express Feb. 1 2003
I remember how my heart sank at Sally Clark's trial for 'murdering' her two babies. I had no idea that the pathologist who gave evidence for the prosecution was withholding vital evidence but from the moment it was said in court that the chances of a cot death occurring twice in the same family were 73 million to one, I knew she would be convicted.
I was equally sure that she was innocent. A woman who can kill two of her own children must surely be in the grip of some psychosis, and there was no evidence that Sally was in the grip of anything but profound grief for her babies.
The statistic quoted in court is grossly misleading. The Foundation for the Study of Infant Deaths says that second deaths, in fact, occur more often than average after a cot death.
The fact is that police and the Crown Prosecution Service tend to view all sudden and unexpected infant deaths with suspicion, particularly where there is a second cot death in the family.
This is exactly what happened in Sally Clark's case.
She stood no chance of being acquitted, and the jury no chance of reaching a fair verdict, when vital medical evidence was withheld and wildly misleading statistics were presented as facts.
Cot deaths can lead to witch- hunts. Even now there is another woman in jail for the murder of two of her babies. Angela Cannings was convicted last April. She and her husband Terry continue to protest innocence.
Terry is convinced the babies died of cot death, possibly due to a genetic defect which runs in the family. Angela, he says, is no killer. "She was the most loving mother in the world."
Even the judge (incidentally a woman) was reluctant to sentence her, saying: "I have no doubt that for a woman like you to suffocate these babies there must have been something seriously wrong with you. You wanted these babies and you cherished them."
When we've just witnesses a miscarriage of justice as grave as the Sally Clark case, can we afford to take the risk of letting another grieving, innocent mother serve a life sentence for a crime she did not commit?
In the interests of justice and humanity, Angela Cannings' case should be reopened.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]