Dr Deagle Show 082009 5/5 - CRIME OF FORCED A H1N1 VACCINATION SPECIAL

http://www.nutrimedical.com/news.jhtml?method=view&news.id=2291

- - - THIS IS NOT AN OFFICIAL CHANNEL OF THE NUTRIMEDICAL REPORT OR DR. BILL DEAGLE - - -

NUTRIMEDICAL REPORT SHOW -- THURSDAY, AUGUST 20TH 2009 -- HOUR ONE TOP NEWS -- ANALYSIS CRIME OF FORCED A H1N1 VACCINATION SPECIAL -- DR FRED GRAVES J.D. AND DR MAYER EISENSTEIN M.D. J.D. -- INJUNCTION AGAINST FORCED A H1N1 MEXICAN FLU VACCINATIONS - USA AND WORLDWIDE BASICS -- HOUR ONE LAST SEGMENT AND HOUR TWO FIRST SEGMENT -- STATEMENT OF TRUTH BY DR BILL DEAGLE MD RE PAST PROFESSIONAL AGENDA OF GOVERNMENT AND REGULATORY LICENSING AUTHORITIES

Injunctions are orders of a court of competent jurisdiction commanding an individual, business entity, or government agency to do or stop doing something. Injunctions invoke what is called the equitable powers of the court and, as such, those seeking an injunction must come to court with ?clean hands?.
The party bringing such an action is called the petitioner (not plaintiff). The party against whom the action is brought is called the respondent (not defendant).
Injunctions are commenced by filing a petition with a court of competent jurisdiction (could be state or federal), effective service of a summons1 and copy of the petition on the respondent(s) by an authorized process server2
The elements that must be (1) alleged in the petition and subsequently (2) proven by the greater weight of admissible evidence through the use of discovery are: , and payment of required court fees.
1. Existence of an imminent likelihood of irreparable harm if the injunction is not issued,
2. Unavailability of any adequate remedy at law (i.e., an award of money damages after the harm has occurred will not restore the petitioner?s threatened loss,
3. The threatened harm to the petitioner outweighs any substantial harm to the respondent,
4. Granting the injunction will not contravene a substantial public interest, and
5. Petitioner has a substantial likelihood of success based on the allegations, i.e., the facts alleged are likely to be proven and are not merely speculative.
Note: In the aforementioned ?essential elements? that must be (1) alleged and (2) proven by the greater weight of admissible evidence, each word has a particular technical meaning that will be used by the court to read the petition.
Note also: You need only allege those ultimate facts that, if proven, establish all the five elements. Fail to allege sufficient facts to establish all five, and your petition will be dismissed for failure to state a claim on which the court can grant relief (in some courts called a cause of action). Allege too many facts, and you weaken your case by muddying the waters beyond what is necessary.
Note this, too: You must be able to prove all the facts you allege, so you will surely shoot yourself in the foot if you allege innuendo, assumptions, wild accusations, etc. Stick to those facts that, if proven, will suffice to establish all five elements. That?s how you win!

Category:

Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

• FORCED VACCINATION
• DR FRED GRAVES J.D
• H1N1