Tuesday, January 18, 2022

yuan0011

PDF: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Ui0_P-Pp8cYYsjW2mmhZkn309To_Z7Kk/view?usp=sharing

 

My submission to Taiwan's High Court system at Tainan City today, 18 Jan 2022.

 

The second appearance happened on 9 Jan 2022.  Apparently that was pre-trial.  We're still working out when and where the assessment of mental health will happen. 

At the first appearance on 9 Nov 2021, in High Court (after the lower court verdict on 24 Aug 2021), the judge said she wasn't qualified to speak to mental health assessment criteria, that I should speak with a psychiatrist about that.  We agreed to send me back to the hospital which declined to make the assessment on 31 May 2021.

On 31 May 2021, the doctor said I didn't cooperate because I refused to do a brain scan.  However, he also said that the brain scan is necessary because the mental condition doesn't exist independently of the physical condition.  I am challenging the common psychiatric assumption.  I'm directly asserting that an individual's self-awareness (the ability to make free will choices) exists after death of the physical body.  And, legally, the doctors must allow psychiatric patients to retain the right to believe that the mental condition exists independently from the physical body because that's what the constitutional freedom of religious believe is all about.  Doctors can't take away someone's right to believe that their minds are part of an eternal mind, that their minds exists eternally with or without a temporary physical body.

So, we're still waiting on a date to have a mental assessment.

I'm going to ask the psychiatrist on what grounds the psychiatrist can assess me after the last doctor told me that a brain scan is obligatory (and the constitution allows me to refuse to conduct the brain scan).

I'm pretty sure that psychiatrist is going to refuse to assess me after the psychiatrist learns that everything the doctor writes about me is going online.

So, in preparation of another criminal trial, without a mental assessment, in a country that isn't really a country because the Constitution of the Republic Of China (i.e. Taiwan) actually belongs to the people of China (because the Constitution was signed in China in 1947 to protect the rights of all Chinese people)... I'm asking to have two Defence witnesses and three Prosecutor witnesses subpoenaed. 

In the above-linked document, I included the laws I'll be using at the trial, and a summary of what happened at the first trial (or absolute lack of a trial, as it actually happened).  That way I can go after the first three judges later if the trial flops again.

The story continues.

To be continued.

Wednesday, December 29, 2021

tlaw0010

folder

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1W0u09QZYfRcVaoz9KH2p8q9cDirW5fYQ?usp=sharing


29 Dec 2021 first submission (opens civil case)

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1UjFFJTk6kqgwf5LLNC74dm9osL8CiaVu/view?usp=sharing


Wednesday, December 15, 2021

tlaw0009

 PDF: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1VQXnrytQBJwNe0gbR6viPsy98nsWLirY/view?usp=sharing

Tuesday, November 16, 2021

tpro0010

 PDF: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ghAn8MN2dYDR-EA46t1Ke5hRyXiwHDfs/view?usp=sharing

Tuesday, November 9, 2021

tlaw0007. Civil Suit against Psychiatrists, assessment protocol violation @CNPC

 www.MiracleU.org Tracking Page: tlaw0007

_tlaw0007 | dated 9 Nov 2021, by Rene Helmerichs

Folder: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1jrs6CmOEcdxzfUye6W226h43UWuIlVZQ?usp=sharing

9 Nov 2021 PDF: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1XAChawwDFoeBnJFriKeGKnBlD-tOA6H4/view?usp=sharing

This is a new case. 

A separate case deals with the Constitutional Rights violation of mental patients when doctors force patients to have a physical assessment as a mandatory prerequisite of a mental assessment.

In this case, we begin with the argument that all psychiatric diagnostic reference texts, to be a standard book of reference, must allow patients to have their cultural beliefs.  We use the DSM, the Diagnostic And Statistical Manual Of Mental Disorders, as an example to prove that psychiatrists are not following the stipulated assessment guidelines.  That's what this case is about.  And, of course, there are witnesses and real harm imposed on the plaintiff, so it's not just an airy case.

The first submission occurred on 9 Nov 2021, to begin the case.  It's linked at the top.

Back to list of TLAW Suits: http://p18.rene.guru

====

Upholding the Republic Of China Constitution

www.MiracleU.org | www.MiracleU.work | http://talk2dream.com

End of page.

Tuesday, November 2, 2021

tlaw0008. Retrial of tlaw0004, Constitutional Rights Of Mental Patients @CNPC @TPRO

www.MiracleU.org Tracking Page: tlaw0008

_tlaw0008 | dated 2 Nov 2021, by Rene Helmerichs

Folder: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1aPGHNssRZaQ5lug8Njajt9AFUU-UaK-o?usp=sharing

First submission on 2 Nov 2021: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1WROVve9Htz9ZLukugZkvXm277tQn8__h/view?usp=sharing

 

This is a retrial of tlaw0004.

tlaw0004 claimed that Psychiatrists in Taiwan are not allowing mental patients to have the Constitutional freedom of religious belief.  The Constitution is of the Republic Of China government, which was enacted in 1947.  In 1947, the Constitution represented all people of China, and nothing has changed since that time.

Current in Taiwan (aka the "Republic Of China"), doctors insist that an assessment of physical health (a brain scan, urine sample, x-rays, and blood work) is compulsory before doctors are able to perform an assessment of mental health. 

The requirement of a physical assessment stops mental patients from believing that everyone shares a common eternal mind.  However, if everyone shares a common eternal mind, then the eternal mind sustains (governs) a person's soul.  That is, a person's soul causes (allows or creates) all thinking of the person.  In other words: if an eternal mind exists, then then thinking never originates in the physical body.  And, if thinking never originates in the physical body, then an assessment of physical health cannot be a prerequisite to determining the mental health of a person.

It doesn't matter whether an eternal mind actually exists.  We can also call an eternal mind "a common Spirit" or God, since eternity is without limits or end.  Anything eternal is necessary part of a singular consciousness, which everyone must implicitly share (despite personal beliefs to the contrary). 

The issue is only the fact that the law must allow a person to have the option to believe that God exists.  If doctors insist that thinking originates in the physical body, then doctors stop people from believing that thinking continues after death of the physical body.

It's not really an argument, since the world is always changing.  That is: because the world is always changing, fact of an "eternal" existence is proven.  There is a second way to "prove" that thinking cannot originate in the physical body. 

This is really only superfluous information to the reader of this website (it doesn't affect the court proceedings): a person's thinking includes the ability to bridge time.  We "think" (plan, consider, imagine, scheme, associate with past experiences) in order to "learn", we literally decide what future we want to experience based on our current thinking.  (And yes, that means all futures do exist, and yet a reality beyond concept of time also exists).  Because our natural thinking process can bridge different points in time, therefore thinking cannot be limited to anything inside the system of time.  That means our thinking process originates in a reality which exists beyond time. 

As mentioned, the courtroom argument only concerns the ability of the people (specifically psychiatric patients) to maintain the belief that an eternal reality exists at all times during the mental assessment.  Psychiatrists in Taiwan current do not allow mental patients to believe that thinking doesn't originate in the physical body because doctors require patients to undergo a physical assessment (specifically a brain scan) before doctors allow patients to receive an assessment of mental health.  In Canada, there is no requirement of a brain scan, yet doctors in both Canada and Taiwan use the same international standard diagnostic manual, the Diagnostic And Statistic Manual Of Mental Disorders (DSM).  The current version in 2021 is DSM-5.

If this case is denied, tlaw0007 presents a second law suit designed specifically to address the fact that psychiatrists are also violating the assessment requirements of the Diagnostic And Statistic Manual Of Mental Disorders.

Anyway, it's a work in progress and it'll probably take a lot more words to ensure psychiatrists stop violating the patient's religious freedom of belief.  Or at least a lot more support!  So share the news!

I'm going to drop documents I get from the court into the folder, which I linked at the top.  That way I don't have to keep updating this page.  Updating this website takes time out of my day, and really isn't necessary.  A simple folder link is enough.  I just need a public folder to share with friends and lawyers that become involved in the case. 

All documents which the court receives are public documents.  Therefore, none of the content on this website is violating any actual laws, although I'm certain complainers will wonder about that.

Share it if you want to help.  Involve the news if can.

This was the first submission to begin the High Court appeal of the Tainan District Court's decision (the decision which allows doctors to violate my personal belief that my thinking continues after my physical body dies, and I know for a fact that it does.)

PDF (22 pages): https://drive.google.com/file/d/1WROVve9Htz9ZLukugZkvXm277tQn8__h/view?usp=sharing

Folder: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1aPGHNssRZaQ5lug8Njajt9AFUU-UaK-o?usp=sharing

 

 

Back to list of TLAW Suits: http://p18.rene.guru

====

Upholding the Republic Of China Constitution

www.MiracleU.org | www.MiracleU.work | http://talk2dream.com

End of page.

Monday, September 13, 2021

yuan0010

 PDF: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1YE9exsa52pdj2GsDIuw9TfdB8swvemkw/view?usp=sharing 

yuan0011

PDF: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Ui0_P-Pp8cYYsjW2mmhZkn309To_Z7Kk/view?usp=sharing   My submission to Taiwan's High Court syste...