Print this page
  The Fraudulent Use of Psychiatric Evaluations Is a deliberate attempt by court officials to obstruct and pervert the course of justice by refusing to properly answer questi0ns concerning the true operation of the law and the courts. Therefore, it is of the utmost importance of anyone fraudulently ordered to undergoe a psychiatric evaluation to understand their rights and to ensure any court appointed psychiatrist properly record any objections without additional fraud.  
     
  Ensure your objection is noted for appeal  
  When a judge or magistrate fraudulently uses an order of a psychiatric evalutation as a way of seeking to claim you are mentally incompetent as a way of avoiding answering key questions concerning the true operation of the law and the courts, ensure you remain calm, respectful but that your objection is noted on the record.  
  "With respect your honor, I object to this deliberate attempt to obstruct and pervert the course of justice and if any adverse finding is concluded I will be lodging an immediate appeal."  
  "Furthermore, if your honor issues such an order then any compliance on my part shall be under duress and threat and therefore any such alleged consent, oath, signature or information shall be null and void."  
  Remember, so long as you make it know that the court is forcing you to comply against your will and any such action shall be null and void, then the judge has a problem. Many times, the Bar members like to issue punitive notices in order to get a person not to comply. They then use the non-compliance against you.  
  But when you make it absolutely clear to them that they are forcing you to do things against your will and that you will do them against your will, under duress- it defeats the purpose of such game playing.  
  At any rate, here are some points to consider when one is forced to attent a psychiatric evaluation because a court has been cowardly and fraudulent in not answering fundamental points of law by which the case and the court functions.  
  The opportunity to ask the psychiatrist questions before you start  
  While the job of the court appointed psychiatrist is ultimately to discredit any of your claims as well as to declare you mentally incompetent, they are generally reasonable and professional people. Therefore, they should agree to your opportunity of asking a couple of questions before the interview starts.  
  Furthermore, bring your own tape recorder. Do not bring it out, nor turn it on unless you are dealing with an unreasonable psychiatrist that does not permit you to ask a couple of questions before you start. In such a case, produce the tape recorder, place it on the desk and press record.  
  The psychiatrist in all likelihood will say to you you are not permitted to do this, or it is against the law. These points are complete rubbish. You have every right to record any interview, if the evidence may be used against you and if the interviewer refuses to give you a copy of the recording.  
  First question- Domain Competence  
  Here is the first key question to the psychiatrist:  
  Are you an expert at Trust Law, Commercial Law and Positive Law?  
  The psychiatrist may also have a law degree, so some might answer yes. So press them further to confirm they are an expert. Most will yield that even if they have studied it, they are not an expert.  
  So as you are not an expert at Trust Law, Commercial Law and Positive Law and therefore not competent to discuss such subjects in relation to the material presented in my case, I presume you will not be asking any questions or trying to make any kind of assessment on this information in your report?  
  The psychiatrist may not answer for a moment, or may try to wriggle, because part of their job is to actually discredit your claims on trust law, positive law and commercial law using psychiatric spin. In the end, so long as you push the point respectfully, they can only do one thing and yield that they are not competent to interview you, nor make comments on such expert information.  
  Some smart psychiatrists may use an old trick to unbalance you, by putting the question back onto you such as "well are you an expert?"  
  I do not need to be an expert at Trust Law, Commercial Law and Positive Law?, because I am not the one doing an assessment of competency- you are. So the question is whether you are an expert and therefore competent to make such assessments?  
  In the end, even the smartest psychiatrist cannot overcome the logic. Remember, if the psychiatrist simply displays threat or rudeness to honest and polite questions, pull out the tape recorder and start recording.  
  Second question- Mind Competence  
  Once you have confirmed that the psychiatrist has no expertise and competence to assess your material before the court in terms of its validity or otherwise regarding trust law, positive law and commercial law, it is time to ask a second and key question- the question of competence of mind.  
  As this a competency assessment, I presume the competency in question is mental competency, correct?  
  99% of psychiatrists will simply say yes.  
  And because you are a qualified psychiatrist, am I correct in presuming you are also qualified to make an assments on the competency of my mind and state of mind?  
  Again 99% of psychiatrists will say yes.  
  Then my question to you, as you are as a qualified and professional psychiatrist, is in your professional opinion where is the mind, and indeed my mind located?  
  Now, almost all psychiatrists at this point will get very angry. They will say such questions are irrelevant, that you are being disrespectful. Some may even warn you. Remember, this is reflective defense behaviour because of what you have just exposed. Do not be intimidated. Press on.  
  Given the whole purpose of this assessment ordered by the court is to assess the competency of my mind, the question of where the mind is located is a perfectly logical and reasonable question. Are you saying you are not willing to answer or are not competent to answer?  
  Now some smart psychiatrists may put the question to you.  
  I do not need to be an expert in Psychiatry or the location of the mind ?, because I am not the one doing an assessment of mind competency- you are. So the question is whether you are an competent to make such assessments if you cannot even prove the location of the mind?  
  At this point a number of psychiatrists will terminate the interview. At this point, you need to be clear given they are not an expert on the domain information of the case, nor the location of the mind, no report can possibly produce an adverse finding without being prejudice.  
  Others may still force the point. You have every right to state that from this point on, you are not speaking with an expert in either domain knowledge nor competent as an expert of the mind. Pull out your tape recorder and start recording.  
     
     
     
     
Copyright © One-Heaven.Org Ab Initio. All Rights Reserved