Open Travesty of Justice at Todd Giffen’s Mental Competency Hearing May 23, 2019

–Ramola D/Posted May 26, 2019

In an open travesty of justice at Todd Giffen‘s mental competency hearing held May 23, 2019 at the US District Court in Oregon written about here earlier, as per Dr. Farber’s reports, the expert witnesses lined up to testify at the hearing, Dr. Seth Farber, Todd’s psychologist over several years and Ron Unger, a clinical social worker also familiar with Todd’s case over several years were not permitted to testify, address the issue of competency, or speak for more than ten minutes, while Dr. Cynthia Low, the court psychologist who wrote up a 12-page report detailing Todd’s background after a few hours of speaking with him in jail was given the floor for 90 minutes and permitted to run with her notions of delusion and incompetency based, it appears to many on her bias against and dislike of Todd Giffen rather than fact. Notions the judge endorsed without examining if true, declaring Todd incompetent and needing to be “restored to competency.”

Key players in this farce include the US attorneys Billy J. Williams and Joseph H. Huynh striving to name Todd incompetent, who, by Dr. Farber’s account, questioned Dr. Farber briefly and then did not let him speak when he sought to answer, cutting him off with an objection when he mentioned he did not find Todd incompetent and started to explain why, an objection sustained by Judge Mustafa Kasubhai and absurdly not objected to by Lisa Ludwig, Todd’s assigned defense attorney from the Public Defender’s office in Oregon.

Dr. Farber notes the following transpired:

“The Government attorney asked me,”Did you call Dr Low after she had evaluated Giffen?”

I said, “Yes I did. I was astonished because I felt she had deemed him incompetent. I would have expected her to call him mentally ill but incompetent —“

“Stop Stop Stop. I object, Your Honor, I did not ask him about competency. Can you strike that from the record?”

“Objection sustained, It is struck from the record.”

Which brings up the question as well of the negligent and disinterested defense Lisa Ludwig has provided, from all accounts, failing to maintain communications with Todd’s friends, supporters, and expert witnesses–including responding to important emails, failing to contact and request key witnesses Todd sought to have testify in his defense, failing to provide a medical doctor for Todd when he reported an infection as well as other health issues, failing to contact a key psychiatrist, Dr. Breggin, in time for the hearing, and failing also to inform Dr. Seth Farber the judge was fixated on finding a “forensic” psychologist or psychiatrist to evaluate mental competency, a notion that is highly disputable according to other attorneys familiar with competency hearings. In addition, Lisa Ludwig informed all three days before the hearing that according to the judge’s request, only Dr. Farber and Ron Unger could testify, while others whom Maraed Walsh, her contracted Private Investigator had requested earlier on Todd’s request to testify, such as myself, would not be allowed to testify; she also made a neutral call for declarations from supporters, and stated that if people wished to submit other medical professionals for the hearing to do so by 5 pm the day before–when her own basic job for the past several weeks had been to ensure this much earlier herself. Todd Giffen later relayed through Dr. Farber whom he had been telephoning that his own conversation with Lisa Ludwig had determined it was not the judge who made these assignments but Lisa Ludwig herself.

It is notable and remarkable and perfectly astonishing really that Lisa Ludwig ignored my emails to her not once but twice, both when I sent in my Investigative Reporter Statement for Todd Giffen and when I sent in my Declaration by Ramola D in Support of Mental Competence of Todd Giffen and did not bother to acknowledge receipt of these documents, both of which will make adequately clear to any judge, attorney, or psychologist with a modicum of college education sincerely interested in determining whether the US Government (DOD/CIA) is engaging in covert neuro-experimentation in this country currently or not, and whether the remote-influence neuroweapons that victims claim exist–matters on which the supposed “delusionality” of the defendant hinges–that indeed it is, as per the whistleblowing testimonial of military scientists and Congressmen as well as public-domain disclosures and documents reported therein.

Notable too is the fact that this question of non-consensual neuro-experimentation, which Dr. Robert Duncan, former DOD/DOJ/CIA scientist has repeatedly testified to, in books, videos, lectures through his own explorations of testimonials from reporting victims and in conjunction with his understanding of the algorithmic and radio-frequency technologies which permit neuro-hacking of human brains, was deliberately mangled in language by the court as “Government mind control,” phrasing historically suggestive in skeptical (propagandizing media) contexts of delusional “conspiracy theory” and thereby, within those misinformed perspectives, dismissible.

While an educated and probing intellectual or attorney might ask, “What do you think or know about Government neuro-experimentation?” Dr. Farber reports that the US attorneys asked him, “Do you believe in Government mind control?”

Seeking to correctly define the terms, Dr. Farber stated: “I believe that there are non-consensual experiments that affect the brains. But there is evidence for this. Dr. Amy–” (He may have intended to address Amy Gutmann, President of the University of Pennsylvania’s statements and conclusions regarding covered experiments involving human subjects confessed to by the CIA in her Moral Science report of 2011, after the Presidential Bioethical Commission hearings she chaired, where hundreds of reporting victims came forward–a matter addressed as number one in the list of proofs under the section PROOF POSITIVE OF SECRETIVE NON-CONSENSUAL GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIMENTATION ONGOING IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: NOT A CONSPIRACY THEORY in my Declaration in Support of Mental Competence of Todd Giffen.)

He was interrupted. “Dr. Farber, stop. This was a Yes or No question.”

Dr. Farber notes that the phrasing sought to discredit him. “The purpose of the question is to demonstrate I am a kook. They do not want a discussion of mind control. I could have won anyway–had I been allowed to debunk Dr. Low. My argument would have been Rivers v Katz.”

As a consequence of the multiple failings of the public defender’s performance, which included a failure to support Todd’s expert witnesses in court, and the failing of the judge to include the expert witness of Dr. Farber which would have, it appears, demolished the faulty claims of Dr.Low as to Todd’s incompetence, the judge issued a faulty judgment and further decreed that Todd could no longer file further pro se motions on his own . The decision is appealable, according to Lisa Ludwig, when questioned by Kelly Wallace, but she is not going to file a motion for reconsideration, she stated. This evidence of bias or calculated disinterest on her part speaks volumes for the interest the Public Defender’s office in Oregon has in defending the public. Todd’s friends and supporters, including this writer, have written to Lisa Ludwig, reminding her of her duties and asking her to file a motion to appeal the decision. Complaints to the Oregon State Bar of negligence and malpractice by this lawyer and judge by all concerned readers are encouraged.

Dr. Farber discussed his experience and thoughts about the court hearing in a podcast with Kelly Wallace and myself on Friday, May 24: