As it have earlier been seen with, for example,
"Tamilsagen" State employees are not always trustworthy,
Attorney Claus Bonnez
Give me one example of a patient who has taken action and filed a lawsuit
Highcourt Judge Hanne Kildal,
East Jutland's Chief of Police Jørgen Illum.
I don't know whether you're going to interview the
opposing side, e.g. the offiicial adminstration
In next episode of "Denmark increases the volume_2",
we'll contact Aarhus District Court
Is Justice something that is being used
selectively in Denmark - a country that used to have
It does not occur
in weeklies of the judiciary,
Music by Niklas Aldén
Produced by
RED-tape-inc.com
Serious accusations from humanrights lawyer
Claus Bonnez against the Danish state
So it is normal that
Danish Law doesn't follow
Soundeffects
Special Thanks to:
That is very problematic!
The Snuff Street Journal editorial office will in subsequent
editions make an interview with "Domstolstyrelsen"
The Ultimate Freedom:
the Freedom of Crime
The only source of ammunition that the patients have access to
This is absurd,
and a breach of the fundamental
Torben Thygesen and Michael Møller
Hansen
Two of the District attorneys employees whom
we know have processed such a case:
With law, thy must build the country
after the psychiatric law, and has been permitted
to obtain expert impartial assistance
and possess the integrity and
independence that would be expected in their position.
and the European Court of Human Rights,
Article 5
but instead the courts emphasize the doctor
whom hospitalized the patient
for an interview with one of its
representatives District Court Judge Mette Helby Jensen,
human rights traditions we have in
Danish Law
is the opposing side's information
concerning themselves
or in other legal periodicals
that I have knowledge of
patient an opportunity for a
critical expert assessment
the European Court of Human Rights
practice that allows the former
to discuss the punitive consequences of officials
administrationally, violating the Danish constitution
traditions and reputation for respecting
human rights.
whom are branding Denmark as the
worlds happiest country
snuffstreetjournal.com presents
Denmark increases the volume_1
a documentary film about the new criminals
Danish Presidency of the EU
EU-Values?
Would you please
present yourself?
I am Claus Bonnez
and I'm a defence attorney,
and lawyer in other areas as well:
i.e. compulsory hospitalization,
"Retsplejlovens" Chapter 43a
The diagnosis is not my speciality
This, I'll leave for the medical
specialists to explain
Do you know the renowned 'Rosenhan Study',
and if you do, do you have an opinion about it?
I have heard about it
It was a study where some students were
called in to participate in an experiment
They were here detected having a psyciatric
diagnosis, despite the fact that they
didnt' suffer from any mental illness -
that's what I know about the experiment
Could psychiatrists in America
distinguish between madness and sanity?
He was called David Rosenhan and he
devised a dramatic experiment
He assembled 8 people, including himself,
none of whom had ever had
any psychiatric problems
Each person was then sent across the
country to a specific mental hospital
At an agreed time they all presented
themselves at that hospital,
and told the psychiatrist at duty they
were hearing a voice in their head
that said the word “thud!"
That was the only lie they should tell,
othervise they were to behave
and respond completely normally
And then what happened?
They were all diagnosed as insane,
and admitted to the hospital
All of them?
All of them!
And were any of them insane?
No. There were nobody that could
have judged these people as insane
But I told friends, I told my family:
"I'll get out when its fine to get out...thats all!"
"I'll be there for a couple of days,
and then I'll get out!"
Nobody knew that I would
be there for 2 months!
Once admitted, all 8 fake patients
acted completely normally
Yet the hospitals refused
to release them,
and diagnosed 7 as suffering from
schizophrenia and one from bi-polar disorder
They were all given powerful
psychotropic drugs
They found that there was nothing they could
do, to convince the doctors they were sane
And it quickly became clear
that the only way out
would be to agree that they were insane
and then pretend to be getting better
The only way out was to point out
that they were correct.
They said I was insane,
”I am insane, but I'm getting better"
That was an affirmation
of their view of me
In court, when I am called in to question
a compulsory hospitalization;
which is from judicial human rights
aspect
If the rules are respected, which under Danish law is
critical,
because in praxis, the law generally doesn't permit a 'second
opinion'
which is an alternative opinion beside the conclusions of the
official assessment,
which you must bring to bear on a person
to meet the legal criteria
of being compulsorily hospitalized in
Denmark
Ok, does that often happen?
But... it's the rule!
Is it the rule that there is no possibilty for the patient to get
get a 'second opinion'?
Yes, absolutely,
according to Danish psychiatric law,
if you are compulsorily hospitalized, you have the right
to have your case tested in the Danish courts, to see if the
hospitalization was entitled,
and this justice is elementary under
Danish law,
according to the European
Human Rights Convention Article 5
You have the right for this impartial
justice,
and of course also because we are members of the
Council of Europe
to respect the Danish
constitution
So, when we have these cases,
in my opinion, they become nothing
more than a sham
because you in reality have no other expert opinions, than the
ones from the hospital even though
they are the ones, that have kept the
individual in custody
And hereby we need a critical second
opinion
that can eventually dispute the offcial authority's
opinion
And it is understandable that as judges, courts and
attorneys
we have no specialist psychiatric
knowledge,
and I as an attorney don't know when a doctor says that an
individual is insane
Very often you can't see whether the clients
are normal or insane,
so this I can have no clue about, and neither does
the judge,
and the attorney working on behalf of the
hospital doesn't either
When we have this sort of case in the
courts
we base the case on the documentation from the concerned
hospital,
and it's not very surprising that they
say their own decision was entitled
And therefore these cases are very subjective and
hollow,
and in my conviction, conflicting with the European Human Rights
Convention
This statement I base on concrete
decisions
from the European Court of Human Rights:
that there should be an impartial body which
make the subsequent assessment
if the concerned individual
is or was insane,
therefore not the institution that has
decided the enforced detention was originally justified
For me it is quite obvious,
and the European Court of Human Rights
practice is not very surprising
but when you try and invoke it in Danish Law
it's like talking to deaf ears
Both County and High Courts.
They basically do not care!
And now I've taken an action against with a concrete
case in front of the Human Rights Court
Aha, on this basis?
On exactly this question
where no
impartial body was allowed to
make a subsequent assessment
Both County and High Courts focused in this specific
case,
as in the many of the
other cases I have taken,
exclusively on the testimony
from the authorities,
the admitting doctor's
expert assessments,
and the expert's assessment which
maintained the forced hospitalization
And in my opinion,
it doesn't comply with the
legal requirements as provided within
the European Human Rights
Conventions Article 5
Hospital reported to "Arbejdstilsynet"
(Official Work Inspectorate) - EPN.dk
Doctors uses illegal force every 2nd day
- dr.dk
The boss to the staff: "Stop being caring
towards the patients" - dagensmedicin.dk
"Arbejdstilsynet" returns streessplan
from psychiatric hospital - stiften.dk
14 year old girl illegally fixated 286
times
Pharmaceutical companies gilders official
control panel - borsen.dk
Psychiatric patients loosing 9 out of 10
court cases against the authorities
One publised case, was when the staff at
Risskov pschyhiatric hospital,
in the suburbs of Aarhus, due to very
heavy workloads,
filed a complaint to "Arbejdstilsynet" to get assistance
in facilitating a dialogue with the
Direction of the Hospital; who had maintained
a rigid agenda from their singluar
viewpoint
MADLY BUSY - I must do, I must do, I must
do!!! Calme, calme - take it easy; take a pill
The staff reported:
"Jobs are not being done, the staff have to seriously weaken the quality and it affects the
treatment and the work they do"
"...time for professional reflection and
immersion is not present in the daily work"
"Time for professional reflection and
immersion is not present in the daily work"
Yes, it is clear
You could say it's a bit of another
problematic question that you raise,
because the question is: when you
are admitted to a hospital,
if the working conditions
is so poor
as described in the study
from "Arbejdstilsynet",
it creates the risk that the staff of the hospitals
can simply mis-diagnose the patient,
and it can have an impact, both on people
who benefit from being under treatment at
the hospital - they may be too
early written out and sent home -
while others who shouldn't be at the
hospital for example: because they are not sick
remain at the hospital unwarranted
Which obviously is a serious problem
when people are in involuntarily
custody
But, if so, one imagines
that the hospital
had proper working conditions,
very professional
and competent staff
it is still in violation with the
rule of law
as the European Court of Human Rights
interprete in Article 5,
that it can not be the same institution which
subsequently
so to speak, deliver the opinions and the assessments
which the court makes its decision upon
when a citizen claims in front of court,
that a compulsory admission was unjustified
This of course is amplified by a poor
working environment
Because of this, the validity of the medical
staffs opinion is called into question
However, even if this not the case,
it remains problematic due to the
contradictory thought-process,
present in a democratic states courtroom,
which is the fact that the defendant
has the opportunity to
submit arguments in favor
as well as the opposing side, has this
opportunity,
and that is the position of the patients when
discharged