Home

CAN “BULLIES ON THE BENCH” ILLEGALLY MAKE NEW LAW IN MASSACHUSETTS AND GET AWAY WITH IT?

2 Comments

new-logo25Opinion by Doug Kinan – October 2, 2016

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

“In one of the most sensational decisions in Massachusetts court history these three judges have declared that it is perfectly okay for a person to file a motion in court as a litigant’s lawyer when she was not the litigant’s lawyer at all.”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

In my five decades of advocating, developing and implementing equal opportunity employment programs, one in which I fought at the risk of losing my own job, for the right of black employees to be gainfully employed in non-traditional positions other than sky caps, cleaners and polishers, I never imagined that some blacks would so totally turn their backs on the very same laws that helped them advance.

lionIn fact, I did lose my job at the DOD, Defense Contract Management Agency – East, (DCMAE) because I was required to engage in frame-ups, promotion fixing, signing fraudulent promotional certifications and discriminate and retaliate against black employees to cheat many of them out of merit-based promotions.

Time marches on. According to public pleadings, a Judge in Massachusetts Superior Court by the name of Angel Kelley Brown, a Judge in Massachusetts Superior Court by the name of Garry Inge and a Justice on the Supreme Judicial by the name of Geraldine Hines all have consciously defied the same United States Constitution they took an oath to uphold. And all three judges have knowingly and officially defied the rulings of the United States Supreme Court as well. And all three judges are African-American. More

BROOMSTICKS vs. BAZOOKA’S

3 Comments

new-logo25Douglas K. Kinan

______________________________________________

“Additionally, there is no such thing as the “rule of law”, no such thing as “equal justice under the law” and no such thing as a “fair trial.” If you think so, answer this: Can a pro se litigant or one with a public defender use a Broomstick against a Bazooka?”

______________________________________________

If anyone is to believe senior FBI officials, consider the story about one of Richard Pryor’s ex-wives who walked in on him while he was in bed with another woman. At her outrage he asked, “Who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?”
  • All of the world can see the video tape and its clarity of a retaliatory murder, under color of law. This retaliatory murder was unnecessary and unjustified.
  • I cannot speak for the rest of the country, but past leadership of the Boston office of the FBI has been one of the most corrupt and criminal operations in the history of America. I exclude the newly appointed Special Agent In Charge, Harold Shaw, whom I believe was selectively appointed by FBI Director James Comey to clean up the Boston office.
  • Sooner or later though, some crooked agents get caught. In September 2013, the former head of the Boston FBI office, Ken Kaiser, pleaded guilty to an ethics charge and instead of the possible one year in jail and $100,000 fine, the prosecutors recommended that he serve no prison time and pay a $15,000 fine. Why the US Attorney’s office cut a plea deal is unknown, especially when the legal and ethical standard is higher for law enforcement?
  • Ken Kaiser was the SAIC when I presented my 30-page affidavit and provided “sworn” testimony in a two hour meeting with the husband and wife FBI team of Robbins and Robbins.
  • My affidavit outlined conduct which included retaliatory frame ups, heinous and violent acts against women, well planned discrimination, promotion fixing designed to cheat women and minorities out of merit based promotions, fraudulent certifications, rigged investigations and the “suspicious” (his lawyer’s word) death of a government whistle blower. The conduct lawfully reported and in good faith is subsidized by unquantified millions of taxpayer dollars.
  • Special Agent John T. Foley, under Ken Kaiser’s signature block, wrote back that, that office was “not interested.”

More

Dr. Bharani: Four Years of Persecution by Massachusetts Board of Registration in Medicine

Leave a comment

new logoDoug Kinan

(See CHAPTER ONE: “A MEDICARE FRAUD STORY (ONE DOCTOR’S FIGHT FOR YOUR LIFE”).

______________________________________________________________________

CHAPTER TWO

This is another chapter regarding the story about Dr. Bharani Padmanabhan (Dr. Bharani) who is in his fourth year of being persecuted by the Massachusetts Board of Registration in Medicine for conscientiously complying with the rules, the law, his oath as a doctor and for his opposition to Medicare fraud.

Despite the fact that the Massachusetts Attorney General has a dedicated office to combat insurance fraud, the AG’s office has filed court pleadings asking the court to dismiss Dr. Bharani’s complaint on the grounds that the alleged criminal violations Dr Bharani opposed (retaliation, felony perjury, Medicare fraud and more) are immune from prosecution.

Maura Healey Board motion declaring immunity (2)

barry levin NKDA 4 pages (2)

When the top law enforcement official in Massachusetts asks a court of law to go along with criminal activity, at the very least it’s a bad faith admission that a crime has been committed. Is any court of law in America the appropriate forum to force anyone to be silent about crime or else? Is this due process?
According to the American Medical Association “there are 920,000 physicians in the US. This is a ratio of 10 nurses to 3 physicians.”

Thus, there are approximately 4 million licensed medical professionals working in hospitals, clinics and other medical care facilities in America.

One of the most important pieces of basic medical information needed to know, (not “nice to know”), for proper patient care is whether or not any patient has any drug allergies which could severely complicate medical care and treatment and in some cases result in death.
Meet “NKDA” which means “No Known Drug Allergies” and is present on every patient’s medical chart and in their medical record for medical staff to see upon interviewing and/or meeting their patient at bedside.

“NKDA” is a critical piece of information which allows medical personnel to be able to respond to health situations and treatments calmly and proactively, and to be able to promptly avoid medical complications by inadvertently prescribing the wrong drug. For any doctor or nurse to admit not knowing what NKDA means is similar to not knowing their own name.

Accordingly, the “expert” witness who testified under oath (see attached transcript) against Dr. Bharani indicates that the odds are 4 million to one that this “expert” witness may be the only one in the entire doctor/nurse medical community in the United States that is unsure or does not know what “NKDA” means. How can this be possible and what are the implications of a medical doctor with approximately 37 years of experience not knowing what NKDA means?

After reading the transcript testimony of a doctor who now works in a teaching hospital and admits to being unaware of critical medical knowledge, perhaps the Massachusetts Board of Registration in Medicine should change their focus?

%d bloggers like this: