Re: Re: MMR VACCINE COURT RULING -BOY PREVAILS

[Guest guest]

Here is the case. While this may not discuss autism it is highly legally significant in the "causal" relationship of MMR to brain damage/seizures/.. I am not sure why we can only get the video. It was emailed to me so I will ask the sender. If it is old, I am surprised we never heard about it. Is there a lag from the time decissions are decided and then recorded in this court perhaps???

http://tinyurl.com/9rzzbd---

Subject: Re: MMR VACCINE COURT RULING -BOY PREVAILSTo: EOHarm Date: Thursday, December 25, 2008, 7:12 PM

This item is undated and there is no text transcript that I couldfind. They reference a ruling released dated "last month" "in July". While it is about vaccine caused brain damage, it is not specificallyor directly about autism. They mention the Zeller or Zueller family.Could not find anymore with a google search. If you can find more,post it here, if you please.Lenny-Lenny>> Merry Christmas/ (sorry if already posted)> http://tinyurl. com/8qwxbj>

[Guest guest]

Sorry -the name is Zeller scroll down page. This video was very difficult to watch- My heart truly goes out to that family.

From: schaferatsprynet <schafersprynet (DOT) com>Subject: Re: MMR VACCINE COURT RULING -BOY PREVAILSTo: EOHarmyahoogroups (DOT) comDate: Thursday, December 25, 2008, 7:12 PM

This item is undated and there is no text transcript that I couldfind. They reference a ruling released dated "last month" "in July". While it is about vaccine caused brain damage, it is not specificallyor directly about autism. They mention the Zeller or Zueller family.Could not find anymore with a google search. If you can find more,post it here, if you please.Lenny-Lenny>> Merry Christmas/ (sorry if already posted)> http://tinyurl. com/8qwxbj>

[Guest guest]

This case is against the HHS? Why not in the vaccine

court? The only thing that makes sense is the date on the Sun Sentinel is

today, nothing like sneaking out a bit of such controversial news on the day of

the year, least likely to be watched by anyone.

Anyone send this to ? Maybe he could interview the

parents or the Lawyer? -

From:

EOHarm [mailto:EOHarm ] On Behalf Of L.

T.

Sent: Thursday, December 25, 2008 9:43 PM

To: EOHarm

Subject: Re: Re: MMR VACCINE COURT RULING -BOY PREVAILS

Sorry -the name is Zeller

scroll down page. This video was very difficult to watch- My heart truly goes

out to that family.

From: schaferatsprynet

<schafersprynet (DOT) com>

Subject: Re: MMR VACCINE COURT RULING -BOY PREVAILS

To: EOHarmyahoogroups (DOT) com

Date: Thursday, December 25, 2008, 7:12 PM

This item is undated and

there is no text transcript that I could

find. They reference a ruling released dated " last month "

" in July " .

While it is about vaccine caused brain damage, it is not specifically

or directly about autism. They mention the Zeller or Zueller family.

Could not find anymore with a google search. If you can find more,

post it here, if you please.

Lenny

-Lenny

>

> Merry Christmas/ (sorry if already posted)

> http://tinyurl.

com/8qwxbj

>

[Guest guest]

Thanks Theresa. My confusion came from the statements of the

reporter, who said; that the family is looking at getting tens of millions because

of this ruling. Why wouldn't they mention the cap of 250, 000??-

From:

EOHarm [mailto:EOHarm ] On Behalf Of Beedle@...

Sent: Friday, December 26, 2008 6:09 AM

To: EOHarm

Subject: Re: MMR VACCINE COURT RULING -BOY PREVAILS

All

the cases in " vaccine court " are against the HHS.

Theresa

One site keeps you connected to all your email: AOL Mail, Gmail,

and Yahoo Mail. Try

it now.

[Guest guest]

The report is from last summer. The decision finding that the MMR was a "cause in fact" of the injury to the little boy was issued July 30, 2008.It is published on the United States Court of Federal Claims web site and on the commercial legal reporting services.Compensation is not yet determined. There is no cap on economic damages. The $250,000 cap applies to pain and suffering only.There was no mention of "autism" in this case - it was not an issue. The child had a brain injury and seizure disorder following the MMR.This is one of many cases over the years in which children have been injured by vaccines. Congress recognized that some children are injured seriously by vaccines which is why we have a vaccine court.The pharmaceutical companies and others pushed for a "vaccine court" as part of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims not because of their fear of "frivolous" lawsuits, but of their concern for liability for lawuits that had merit and would result in large awards.If anyone is interested I have a pdf of the decision in this case and a pdf of the docket.I suspect the reason the news report appears on the station's web site now is as part of year end recap. The report first aired last summer.Bob Krakow J. KrakowLaw Office of J. Krakow, P.C.1205 lin Avenue, Suite 110Garden City, New York 11530 (NYC) (fax) (Mobile)rkrakow@... Thanks ,This may or may not be old news. There can be a lag between the timeof the published ruling and that making its way into the press. Ihave not heard of this case ruling before, so maybe it is a new report. It is interesting that it is not appearing in the media elsewhere ifit is new news. AP and Rueters trip over themselves in the rush toget vaccines-safe propaganda out.Lenny > >> > Merry Christmas/ (sorry if already posted)> > http://tinyurl. com/8qwxbj> >>

[Guest guest]

Based on the reasoning of this case- one could replace 's facts with one child with autism. I read this case to mean that MMR can cause autism. Some childrens' autism first manifests with seizures (my child's did) - regardless it is an insult to the brain. It is only a matter of time (short time) that this case is about a child with autism.This case knocks out those that attempt to brainwash the public with the statement that MMR cannot cause autism.

Subject: Re: MMR VACCINE COURT RULING -BOY PREVAILSTo: EOHarm Date: Friday, December 26, 2008, 1:54 PM

Thanks, Bob for the note. Lenny> > > >> > > > Merry Christmas/ (sorry if already posted)> > > > http://tinyurl. com/8qwxbj> > > >> > >> >> >> >>

[Guest guest]

Here's some more info about Ben Zeller Jr.:

http://www.drneubauerhbo.com/profiles/new_page_6.htm---

Subject: Re: Re: MMR VACCINE COURT RULING -BOY PREVAILSTo: EOHarm Received: Friday, December 26, 2008, 10:13 PM

Based on the reasoning of this case- one could replace 's facts with one child with autism. I read this case to mean that MMR can cause autism. Some childrens' autism first manifests with seizures (my child's did) - regardless it is an insult to the brain. It is only a matter of time (short time) that this case is about a child with autism.This case knocks out those that attempt to brainwash the public with the statement that MMR cannot cause autism.

From: schaferatsprynet <schafersprynet (DOT) com>Subject: Re: MMR VACCINE COURT RULING -BOY PREVAILSTo: EOHarmyahoogroups (DOT) comDate: Friday, December 26, 2008, 1:54 PM

Thanks, Bob for the note. Lenny> > > >> > > > Merry Christmas/ (sorry if already posted)> > > > http://tinyurl. com/8qwxbj> > > >> > >> >> >> >>

[Guest guest]

> This case is against the HHS? Why not in the vaccine court?

>

I haven't followed it, but my suspicion would be either because

Vaccine Court is already " clogged up "

- and lawyers may not be taking cases -and a case against HHS is more

likely to get heard and/or get att-

ention (in political circles or otherwise).

At some point the HHS has to be held accountable because they have

to have known about this. I think

they think NVICP is an easy way not just for the manufacturers to

escape responsibility, but for the HHS

itself to escape responsibility. " Oh - we knew it could happen,

that's why we set up the NVICP in the first

place.. "

I think I heard somewhere that the strain of measles that was

attenuated for use in the MMR was a strain

known to be more prone to causing encephalitis too..

> The only thing that makes sense is the date on the Sun Sentinel

> is today, nothing like sneaking out a bit

>

> of such controversial news on the day of the year, least likely to

> be watched by anyone.

>

Common news practice - I think they do this with bad economic news

too.

Jim

[Guest guest]

Just so you know - as was pointed out earlier - this report was about a case in "vaccine court" - the United States Court of Federal Claims ("USCFC") that administers the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. Every petition filed in "vaccine court" names the Secretary of Health and Human Services - "HHS" as the respondent.The report was first aired last July after the decision was issued July 30, 2008 and early August after the decision was issued July 30, 2008. It appears to be reposted on the web site as a year-end recapitulation. It is not new.The decision is available on the USCFC web site.I am attaching the pdf here.

> This case is against the HHS? Why not in the vaccine court?>I haven't followed it, but my suspicion would be either because Vaccine Court is already "clogged up"- and lawyers may not be taking cases -and a case against HHS is more likely to get heard and/or get att-ention (in political circles or otherwise).At some point the HHS has to be held accountable because they have to have known about this. I thinkthey think NVICP is an easy way not just for the manufacturers to escape responsibility, but for the HHSitself to escape responsibility. "Oh - we knew it could happen, that's why we set up the NVICP in the firstplace.."I think I heard somewhere that the strain of measles that was attenuated for use in the MMR was a strainknown to be more prone to causing encephalitis too..> The only thing that makes sense is the date on the Sun Sentinel > is today, nothing like sneaking out a bit>> of such controversial news on the day of the year, least likely to > be watched by anyone.>Common news practice - I think they do this with bad economic news too.Jim