Medical/legal pedes, have the protections of HIPAA been suspended for the scamdemic response? It was my understanding that it is illegal to even ask someone about their personal medical information.
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (35)
sorted by:
Herewith, demanding that someone to be vaXXXinated, or to wear a mask (which is designated by the FDA as a “medical device”) is the unlicensed practice of medicine. Ordering employees, vendors and patrons to accept medical advice from your employer or store attendants (wearing a face mask, proof of vaXXXination, or other) is not only a crime (unlicensed practice of medicine), but violates the [State] Statutes §XX.XX Public Access, §XX.XX Public Services, and 42 US Code §2000(a) Public Accommodations, which prohibits discrimination of people with a disability and certain religious convictions. Simply stated, your employer has no idea of my medical condition and is not licensed or insured medical practitioners. The employer or store manager and other employees are prohibited by law from giving medical advice, such as advising customers to wear face masks, or being vaXXXinated.
[COMPANY] is dicta prius, not an insured medical practitioner, nor is it equipped to respond to medical emergencies created by its own rules (that violate the law and its own policies). If I was forced to act on your medical advice and then experienced a medical emergency, [COMPANY] is liable henceforth to any injuries that may occur and may also be criminally negligent.
“It is unlawful for any person to practice medicine by offering or undertaking to prevent or to diagnose, correct, or treat in any manner or by any means, methods, devices, or instrumentalities, any disease, illness, pain, wound, fracture, infirmity, deformity or defect of any person;” [Provide the specific State Statutes website link here]
Any employer and employee assisting in enforcing such unlawful policies is also liable.
[State] Statute §XX.XX. Liability for Crimes of Another. Subd.1. Aiding, abetting; liability. “A person is criminally liable for a crime committed by another if the person intentionally aids, advises, hires, counsels, or conspires with or otherwise procures the other to commit the crime.” Subd. 2. Expansive liability. “A person liable under subdivision 1 is also liable for any other crime committed in pursuance of the intended crime if reasonably foreseeable by the person as a probable consequence of committing or attempting to commit the crime intended.” [Provide the specific State Statutes website link here]
16 Am Jur 2D Section 98. An emergency can not create power and no emergency justifies the violation of ANY OF THE PROVISIONS of the United States Constitution or States Constitutions. Also, 16 Am Jur 2d, Sec 177 late 2d, Sec 256
Interesting angle. Problem is, you and I do not get to prosecute criminal cases.
You will have to have a prosecutor agree to bring an action like that against someone.
Our power is more on the civil lawsuit side, as well as getting people elected who will remove corrupt bureaucrats and judges via impeachment, and elect/appoint prosecutors who will file these types of criminal cases.
Why do you think George Soros spent all that money to get corrupt DA's appointed/elected?
I hear what you are saying and you are 100% correct. However, it is the civil suit aspect of it that employers and businesses try to avoid. In fact, the vast majority of cases are arbitrated and settled outside of the court room. If in the case a civil suit did go to trial, a new set of perils may be at stake. Discovery could reveal criminal activity, especially when it is clear that's what occurred. In the case the employer loses the case, now there's a real possibility that a criminal case could ensue.
True, but if it was you or me who was on the other side of that lawsuit (across from the corporation/employer), then we would not be under any obligation to settle. Maybe under pressure (psychological), yes, but not under any legal obligation. THAT is when you go balls to the walls -- when they are trying to keep you from going to trial.
And that is one the reasons you do NOT settle before trial (unless they capitulate to everything you want, and then some).
No matter the circumstances, you STILL have to get a prosecutor to do the criminal case. You and I are not "allowed" to do it. My understanding is that under early American law, ANYBODY could be a prosecutor and bring criminal charges. Today, they will shut that idea down in a heartbeat.
This is WHY my earlier statement was that we need to REPLACE prosectors who will not pursue criminal charges just because the prosecutor is corrupt.
We DO have THAT power.
Well, we'll just throw down decades of precedent and go with your theory. I've been there.