ANM

Those of you who have read ANM’s content on Low Dose Naltrexone, during and after the passage of the Access to Medical Treatments Act, will know that the GMC investigated a doctor, Thomas Gilhooly, who was supplying the cheap non-toxic and effective drug, and that the GMC made the Grandiose Medical Connerie of finding that he was caring too much for patients.

Whatever you think of that, of Gilhooly or LDN, or even of the GMC itself, I’d like to put some information next to that admonishment, that may help to put the UK tax spent on the GMC into a better light. And by better, I mean more realistic.

 

Gross Misconduct

Because contrast that case with the GMC’s response to being informed about the harassment perpetrated by the doctor shown in the picture to the right.

Dr Richard Byng, an influential academic specialising in mental health at Peninsula Medical School, Plymouth University, and a lead UK researcher in Criminal Justice and Mental Health, encapsulated the entirely normal reactive stress of a person facing bereavement, who he didn’t know and was not his patient, into a ‘risk’ diagnosis of BPD (Borderline Personality Disorder), and lent his credentials to the wide promulgation of that lie by his “humanist” wife, Melanie Byng,  and others including “skeptic” Andy Lewis.

If Byng had had any genuine belief in his smear, professional ethics would obviously have necessitated a very different course of action and under that circumstance what he did could only be seen as an attempt to provoke a BPD sufferer to violence, or suicide.

Due to the devious and covert nature of the course of conduct, we were forced to try and address the ensuing five year hate-campaign through a punishing Civil legal action, in which Judge Anthony Seys-Llewellyn would neither allow us Civil Harassment claims nor allow Criminal charges to be assessed and applied to Byng and the other perpetrators.

We had to listen to Jonathan Price of Doughty Street Chambers greasily claim Byng couldn’t have been involved in anything like that because he was a “professional”, which he did  in order to get the doctor excluded from the case at an early stage, before the evidence was available.

Then when he turned up as a witness in the eventual hearing, Dr Byng chirruped “I would not say that I had nothing to do with it”.

 

Unmistakable Assumptions

When we told the desk officer at Swansea central police station what Byng had done.  “Oh, well” she said  “you write to his boss, that’s what you do in a situation like that”. 

That is a comment of great irony, as Judge Seys Llewellyn has severely punished us for doing precisely that, by forcing our whole family out of our home and literally just giving it to Richard Byng and his friends.

At para 99 of the judgement, he said:

 

“There was an email from the Second Claimant to the Human Resources Manager at Plymouth Medical School of 5 December 2012 which described his behaviour as “severely victimising”; and said that he was involved in the “victimisation of whistle blowers”.  I find that this was unmistakably intended to damage his reputation at work and that the Claimants thereby intended to persuade the university if they could to reconsider his employment”.

 

This email, which we will shortly publish along with other papers from the case, didn’t mention anything at all about him losing his job but rather desperately sought help for being so viciously targeted, asking whether the University was happy that their staff should be mounting psychological assaults on members of the public.

The Judge’s instant unmistakable assumption that merely mentioning it to the University meant Byng was likely to be sacked, only illustrates his true awareness of the seriousness of Byng’s abusive course of conduct.

Yet he failed to uphold the public interest by completely and very studiously ignoring how incredibly frightening it is when a person in a position of influence and public trust, turns that into a weapon of power with you as the target, and never obeyed his judicial duty to ask what the effect of the course of conduct might be on the victim, which is the supposed “essence” of harassment.

 

The Wheels of Avoidance

When really bad things happen to you, you tend to attract a lot of conflicting advice, and we are no exception. We do hear a lot of variations of “you may have to accept there is no justice”.

Another thing we hear a lot of variations of is “The GMC is a totally corrupt organisation”.

And we’re not the only ones. Since our original complaint, the GMC are quite aware that at least one other party has had cause to make similar complaints about Richard Byng, including to the GMC themselves. Contrary to their own guidelines, however, they have cited it as our job to somehow organise that other party’s complaint, and used us not doing that as part of their reason not to investigate Byng’s harassment at all.

This is in spite of having admitted in December 2015 that:

“The type of behaviour you describe would be considered a departure from the standard set out to all doctors in good medical practise”

You think?

So first it happened to us, we later published about it, and that other person came forward, and… well…we haven’t come very far have we, abusers are still getting away with it while their targets are forced to re-invent the wheel.

 

 

The Connerie is On 

Following disclosure of Byng’s wife’s emails, exposing an extensive networked covert campaign of cyber-stalking and harassment, which she described as a bit of fun, as well as claiming to have similarly warned a lot more people by other mediums, including by phone, we re-approached the GMC. Prior to this disclosure we had previously only been able to show them guess work about Dr Byng’s involvement in the smearing based on third party reactions to us.

Although we didn’t know the importance of attaching the evidence to our original complaint, instead of making a new one, the GMC did. So of course they opened a new complaint, claiming that the allegations were different. In fact, they were the same allegations, now backed up by evidence. But this has again allowed them to avoid investigating Byng’s misconduct, under Rule 12 – new information.

In fact, the new information proves that our previous guesswork was a gross underestimation of the actual extent of Dr Byng’s very active involvement in promulgating smears, as well as stalking and harassing members of the public.

All of these examples are taken from emails written by his wife to people she wanted to convince I was dangerous and had to be shunned:

 

“Richard is going to write to Dan – don’t worry, he can’t mind us reading his email” 

“R is quietly robust – he thinks clearly and acts strategically. This has improved with age, you can look forward to controlling your rages in time. At the end of this is his clinical judgement, which she seems to have forgotten.”

“But the horrible thing is that he doesn’t know me or my son, he doesn’t know that I’m reliable. He doesn’t know to trust Richard’s clinical opinion.”

“Richard is happy to write to this org enclosing their email to the Dean of the Peninsula Medical School, and so on.”

“R says she certainly has constructed her own reality.” 

“I think he made that analysis in his spare time” 

“Exactly our thoughts. R is going to write (with his uni email) asking this very question.”

“Angel has a borderline personality disorder. This is a clinical judgement, not a personal opinion. It isn’t simply depression. It makes her very dangerous”

“A couple of incidents (which had little to do with their project) convinced us that she is unstable and we withdrew from contact.”

“he has to support her. Otherwise he would lose his children. If the diagnosis is accurate she might even have made threats to hurt them. Or herself. Or him.”

 

Although the GMC are in fact bound to investigate any complaint by members of the public going to the integrity of a doctor in the public interest, the reports above, separated now from our earlier allegations, which they entirely corroborate, are handily just not enough evidence for them to open an investigation.

Yes that’s right – lack of evidence, prior to any investigation, is held to be substantive. And this is a bit of a theme with Richard Byng, as Judge Seys-Llewellyn held that there was no email evidence of him having actually done anything in his disclosure, although he must know (presuming he is compos mentis) that Richard Byng didn’t have to disclose any of his emails as he wasn’t in the case by that time.

Somebody has got some very powerful friends haven’t they! How far to the right have we gone now?

Let’s try and look on the bright side: not only have we exposed the assault being planned on my family, but the legalistic jiggery-pokery provides a crystal clear view of elite privilege at work. As shown above Richard Byng can write to whoever he chooses to spread vicious lies, but if a target complains about it, that’s ‘trying to lose him his job’ – quick, take their home away, that ought to shut them up.

A brief glance at the recent case of Tim Yeo, whose personal integrity was judged not to have been interfered with by what was said about him being likely to cause others to shun him, illustrates how far up it’s own backside the GMC has gone.

No wonder it can’t hear us.

 

 

What’s At Stake?

It’s pretty obvious that if doctors who want to hate on people are allowed to just label anyone they don’t like with risk diagnoses, the whole of the mental health services in the NHS and beyond are meaningless money-pits.

Mental health diagnoses are all devalued if doctors are just allowed to make some of them up because they want to hurt people.

And what about respect and care for those who actually do suffer from distressing mental health conditions?  Not much kudos there for either Byng, Plymouth University, Peninsula Medical School or the GMC, is there?

Grandiose Medical Connerie can afford the luxury of targeting a doctor like Gilhooly at tax-payers expense, someone who cares for their patients enough to overcome the huge legal fears so many doctors express about prescribing the little wonder-drug LDN, but investigate media-skeptic Dr Byng for abusing the public trust and perpetrating stalking and harassment, as in, you know, the GMC’s remit?… not a chance.

Their extraordinarily named lawyer Ms Crook won’t be surprised to hear that we are not bothering to apply for Judicial Review, having now got the tenor of several judges who also dealt with mental health smearing, hate-crime, cyber-stalking and harassment by rewarding it, punishing the victims, all displaying all the careful and sensitive rights-balancing enthusiasm of the Taliban.

 

Public Protection?

We’re going back to following the advice of the desk officer, and we’ll just make sure the evidence is as visible as possible so that other targets can see it.

It will not escape the notice of those paying attention to the facts that in doing so we, whose home is being robbed by corruption, are performing the public protection role the GMC has failed so spectacularly to uphold. You’re welcome.

Given how frightening it is to be targeted like this, how chillingly far the Byngs, Lewis and their cronies had got in their plan to move in on us and split our family up, and how publicly they’ve been rewarded for what looks to be a potentially serial course of conduct, we also feel safer in public.

A lot safer.

As far as the Grandiose Medical Connerie is concerned, when as we suspect, these stalking harassers execute further plans for “neutralising” me and my family, using Byng’s very useful credentials, we’ll be back, wiser to their devious obfuscations and vacuous sound-bites: all in a proud day’s work with your tax money, apparently.

Less public protection really, more public protection racket.

 

 

 

---

 

We’ve seen the evidence of how many people have been threatened or coerced into joining in with stalking and harassment and/or public shunning of us, and we understand – it’s hard to stand up to bullies.

People have told us that having seen what we’ve been subjected to, they are afraid. But that’s how bullies win, and we don’t believe people should be robbed of their home as a punishment for correctly identifying that they are being cyber-stalked and harassed.

Please show your support for principles of open debate, democratic exchange, by sharing this information, and say no to devious abuses of power.

Please click the link to our crowd fund and help us to start to put a stop to the bullying, and overcome this injustice by making any small donation and passing it on.

(You can even donate anonymously so they don’t even have to know.)

 

Image of Richard Byng from (and linked to) Plymouth University profile.

 

 

 

 

3SA90091, Amazon News Media, Andy Lewis, Angel Garden, Doughty Street Chambers, Dr Richard Byng, featured, Fitness to Practise, GMC, harassment, HRH Anthony Seys-LLewellyn, humanism, Jonathan Price, justice, Medical Innovation Act, Melanie Byng, misconduct, Richard Byng, stalking, Thomas Gilhooly, victimisation, World Mental Health Day

By ANM

---