|
I commented extensively about the trial judge Pierre Boudreault, his attitude and the judgment. Since I was present during the 28 days of the trial of my case, I had a chance to observe the judge and make my own judgment about him. He is a cold, crafty personality. He knows how to make cynical jokes and does not like to be contradicted. He could be verbally violent. During rare interventions by my lawyer, he was able to hold him in check with sharp repulsive attack. I could not deny his cleverness.
I took this excerpt of his judgment first because it is typical of how both the psychiatrists and the judge go hand in hand in their duplicity. The reader can see how he is trying to appear that he is willing to be impartial. Because the reader could not go too far in the background of the judge's reasoning, he, with his bla-bla reciting of senseless details, would like to persuade us that he had done his best: the psychiatrists are crooks, but I remain crazy. The judgment is actually a mirror of his qualities. The size of the judgment shows that he is a laborious man.
The other reason why I decided to exhibit this excerpt is that I would like to show how the judge combined facts and fabrication of facts in a crafty manner.
Let's take the period of my transfer from St-Michel Archange Hospital to St-Jean de Dieu Hospital. The judge does not mention the discharge slip (see Exhibit No. 17) according to which I was "definitely discharged", but in fact, transfered with an escort for "therapeutic inflexible disciplinary policy". According to the notes below, the psychiatrists decided on the transfer because I was "without self-criticism" -- the cause of a lack of a "positive therapeutic relationship" -- and because, "there was still dangerosity". It seems the judge is happy to write this note.
To say that someone is incarcerated in order to apply therapeutic inflexible disciplinary policy is more than senseless, and a savage way to make someone "self-critical". This was neither therapeutic nor civilized. This kind of policies were applied in George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty Four and on Goli Otok in Yugoslavia.
The term "dangerosity" is another moronic expression used by both the psychiatrists and the judge. I use the word "moronic" for the judge's logic, but I do not use it just to insult him or express a whim. Judge Boudreault had a chance to read the whole medical record and could see for himself that I had not even tried to harm anybody during the six months of my internment. Further, I was the one who was beaten and suffered because of barbaric "therapeutic plans" imposed to make my life unbearable.
During the 28 days trial Mr. Boudreault witnessed my behavior and could see that I had never expressed any threat of violence to anyone. I was begging and pleading for what anyone in my position would desire -- a just verdict.
The judge, on many occasions, made his own conclusions and insinuations contrary to the facts presented to him. In the book, I have included many of such instances, but here I will examine just one example of how perfidiously he has dealt with my admission note (See Exhibit No. 18) from St-Jean de Dieu.
The note was not written by Dr. Jean Filotto. This is obvious because next to the typewritten name of the doctor is "per", meaning that someone signed for him. My understanding is that Dr. Filotto's notes were not suitable for crooks, so someone (who else but Dr. Juretic) withheld the notes and replaced them with his own, which the judge cites. But, again, the notes do not fit well with the context, or as I would say, the text is composed in a moronic manner. Moral is: You could not cover up for a crooks with a crooked edict.
|
The patient remained in the hospital without any appreciable improvement, his basically unchanged attitude with no self-criticism virtually inhibits a positive therapeutic relationship. However, since he renewed his wish to be transferred to St. Jean de Dieu, authorities agreed to this procedure in the hope that the transfer might be helpful. When the two hospitals reached an agreement, the patient was transferred to Montreal on February 17, 1972. The note made on his departure shows that his state had hardly changed. According to the physician, there is still dangerosity, and no other alternative was available because there was no one who might take care of him in Quebec. Self-criticism was still lacking.222
3. Commitment to St. Jean de Dieu Hospital
On February 17, 1972, after an agreement between the two hospitals was reached and Dr. Juretic gave his consent, the plaintiff was transferred to the St. Jean de Dieu Hospital in Montreal. There he was placed in the care of Dr. Legault, who is in charge of a ward reserved for men, but he was treated by Dr. Juretic, head of a ward reserved for women, because he speaks the plaintiff's language. At the time of the patient's admission, Dr. Jean Filotto223, chief of Admission Ward wrote in the records (Exhibit P-4): The summary in the record is extensive, and it certainly appears that the patient suffers of paranoia. It is our duty to confirm or invalidate that. Provisional diagnosis: paranoia. Dr. Juretic saw the patient the next day. On the same day, he inserted into the record his observations: We have seen the patient and have been able to ascertain that the patient is not profoundly disturbed, as the records would indicate. Evidently, he is depressed. His depression is situational in nature and relates to his family life, since his wife (according to the patient) behaves in a more or less orthodox manner in her marital duties, and her words are apparently the reason for this internment, which has already lasted two and a half months. The patient is lucid, well oriented, and rather lively from an intellectual point of view, but we must note that he is asking for many things that we are not prepared to give him. The patient is demanding. We intend to forbid him the use of telephones, since his account with Bell Canada has already reached $250, and also to forbid him outside excursions. We shall observe him as frequently as possible. We believe that this imbroglio of his being a landed immigrant, but not yet a citizen (of Canada) prevents us from making an immediate decision. We prefer to follow him, to observe him closely, and to give him a psychotherapy of support since (in our view) he needs it at this time. The patient is not psychotic, and his state of depression is amenable to significant improvement. The final paragraph of this note reads: Many paranoid and delusional interpretations despite a lucid appearance, complicated by a dangerous aggressiveness. A simple glance at the second page of this document makes us wonder why this last paragraph has not been typewritten with the same ribbon as were the others. The letters are darker. The plaintiff has brought a proof on this point. Mr. André Munch, a specialist in documents and a scientist employed by the police, expressed an opinion that this paragraph had not been written at the same time as had been the other parts of this note. He bases his testimony on the fact that those two lines are much darker and that their alignment is different. By comparing them to the other notes under "Mental Evolution", in which the name of Dr. Juretic is typed much farther below the last line of the text than in note 8i, he also concludes that the paragraph was added after the initial manuscript had been typed. This expert has also testified that the words "based on schizo-paranoid" and the comma that precedes them, as found under the heading "Diagnosis" in the document Exhibit P-4-C (which is the numbered page 5 of Exhibit P-4), was added after this document had been written and after the period placed at the end of the two words "situational depression" had been changed into a comma. In case one entertains any doubt about this opinion, it suffices to consult Exhibit P-6-C, which is the photocopy of the records given by the Montreal Hospital to Dr. Divic on August 18, 1972, in which the two words in question do not appear at all. Faced with such an overwhelming proof224, Dr. Juretic, now a defendant, had to admit that we are dealing with modifications which he later made in the records. He has also admitted that he modified the summary sheet of the record from St. Jean de Dieu Hospital in the rectangle reserved for diagnoses. In the section headed "Final Diagnosis (psychiatric)", he added the word "psychotic" to the original entry of "Situational depression". In the space under the heading "Other Diagnoses (psychiatric)", which was originally blank, he wrote "A paranoid, schizo-paranoid personality". If we return to the progress notes in the records, we read: a. the note of February 21, 1972 (page 8H): It appears to Dr. Juretic that the only therapeutic policy which is proper to adopt is inflexibility because the patient does not show the will to adapt; b. the note of February 23, 1972 (page 8G): Even though he is signing a form to provide for voluntary treatment, Dr. Juretic informs the patient that his confinement might be prolonged for a longer period than expected because he intends to meet Mrs. Delev in order to hear her version viva voce. The note shows that Dr. Legault agreed with the suggested disciplinary policy, which could be changed if the patient cooperates.225
|
|