Déjà vu at the Four Courts

Rounding of Wagons

Déjà vu at the Four Courts

An attempt to have the Irish High Court investigate the criminality of Covid vaccines risks being suppressed. Immediate action is required to prevent a recurrence of certain events of 2020.


26 APR 2023

A disturbing and quite nauseating article was published in an Irish newspaper on Tuesday. It concerns an ongoing court case, arising from an application from three Irish citizens seeking to assert their constitutional rights to a legal hearing in order to challenge the unprecedented events of the past two years in the context of what are termed ‘Covid vaccines’. Though the applicants — Sharon Browne, David Egan and Emmanual Lavery — are not known to me, I had become broadly aware of the case and its essential nature. A third party, who is not known to me either, last week sent me links to a database on which the various pleadings and submissions in the case are available. I read these cursorily at the time and was impressed by their detail and scope.

The iteration of the report that caught my attention was on the website of independent.ie, the online version of the Irish Independent, though it undoubtedly appeared on other platforms also.

Consider that this case relates to what are — without a shadow of a doubt — the gravest issues of public health and safety to arise in this country for many decades. Then consider the Independent ’s headline:

‘Covid vaccine conspiracy theorists to be hit with legal bill over “scandalous” lawsuit’.

My immediate response was one of recognition. It was déjà vu all over again.

The opening paragraphs of the report read:

‘Anti-vax conspiracy theorists, who claim the Covid-19 vaccine is a “bioweapon” inserting “nanochips” into recipients, face being hit with a legal bill for tens of thousands of euro by a High Court judge to discourage them from continuing their “unmeritorious and scandalous” lawsuit against the State.

‘Among the “baseless allegations” made in the lawsuit taken by Sharon Browne, David Egan and Emmanual Lavery are that the HSE was responsible for “mass killing” comparable to Nazi Germany and that the vaccine was “part of a plan by Bill Gates to depopulate the world”’.

This is beyond shocking: that three citizens who have put their very beings on the line to confront a wicked establishment should be described, in the very first words of this scandalous report, as ‘anti-vax conspiracy theorists’, and their detailed case, comprising several millions of words, be reduced to a single tendentious sentence. The placing of the words bioweapons and nanochips in quotation marks, as though to insinuate that these are bizarre, unheard-of concepts, is simply puerile.

The report continues:

‘Mr Justice Michael Twomey said the “breath-taking” claims were made in 5,000 pages of affidavits and exhibits in which the “alleged evidence” was “a combination of hearsay, speculation, commentary, questions, internet sites, blogs and YouTube videos”.’

The judge was making these comments not at a full trial of the issues but in the course of a pre-trial application by the three plaintiffs for a protective costs order, which would have removed the risk of a crucifying bill for legal costs in the event of their not succeeding. This is standard procedure in a public interest case of this nature, and it is entirely inappropriate that the judge has used this opportunity to disparage the case in such a prejudicial manner as properly ought to disqualify him from any further participation in it.

The déjà vu aspect of my response was somewhat personal, since — almost word for word — this was more or less precisely identical to the treatment of the case taken by Gemma O’Doherty and me back in April 2020, when we submitted an application for a judicial review of the lockdown measures: the same judicial contempt and abuse, the same media distortions and lies, the same emphasis on the costs of the proceedings, designed to titillate the public by exciting a toxic schadenfreude , the same elevation of minor sidebars of the application to the level of headlines, so that they appear to the innocent reader to be the sole substance of the case…

Read Full Article in link below

One of the most frustrating things about the case brought by Gemma O’Doherty and me in April 2020 was that we had no effective way of getting into the public realm the actual detail of what we had submitted to the court, so that a pincer movement of judge and journaliar was able utterly to misrepresent the nature and content of our case, and deprive the public of its right to know what was actually being asserted. For this reason, I wish to do what I can to put into the public domain the true facts of this case, so that people can at least make up their own minds. I urge those who have even an inkling of what is happening here to do what they can to ensure that the establishment is unable to pull the same trick a second time. I accordingly request that anyone reading this who has access to social media platforms and, yes, ‘blogs’ or ‘internet sites’, or any other way of circumventing the corrupt legacy media hegemony, might consider putting this article out with all possible expedition, so as to ensure that as many people as possible come to understand what is happening here.

1 Like