Ramola’s Sabotage of Dr. Horton’s Projects

Ramolas.Campaign

By engaging in systematic slander campaigns, intrigue, and malicious defamation of Dr. Horton, Ramola Dharmaraj broke up the Joint Investigation Team (JIT) and single-handedly terminated the Techno Crime Fighters’ Forum, two collaborations that were intended to run the investigation into crimes against humanity and provide a public broadcast to continuously report about it, respectively. She afterwards embarked on a targeted campaign to destroy Dr. Horton’s reputation and every important collaboration that Dr. Horton was involved in.

After the break-up of the JIT and the Techno Forum, Ramola Dharmaraj lobbied to bar Dr. Horton from working with a Belgian university on a scientific project to measure non-consensually implanted radio-frequency chips in victims. In the end, Dr. Horton withdrew from that project. It should be noted that Ms. Dharmaraj lives in Boston, USA, and was actively campaigning to have a supporting physicist removed from the only university-level body chip scanning project in Europe to date.

Subsequently, Ramola Dharmaraj proceeded to break up the collaboration between Melanie Vritschan, the President of the human rights charity ICATOR, and Dr. Horton through a malicious defamation campaign that lasted almost 4 months and in which Ms. Dharmaraj at first claimed that Dr. Horton was an Intelligence Agent, and later even claimed that she was a double agent. These claims had zero proof and were false, but nevertheless contributed to Dr. Horton withdrawing from the collaboration as her working relationship with Melanie Vritschan became impossible.

In parallel to the above, Ramola Dharmaraj ran an intrigue and character defamation campaign against Dr. Horton to one of her clients, Frederic Laroche, for whom Dr. Horton was acting as an expert witness in a running court case. Through that, the client was entangled in Ramola’s machinations and was induced to lie about Dr. Horton, claiming his court case had to be shifted because Dr. Horton hadn’t turned up in court for the hearing, even though the court case was actually shifted because Mr. Laroche himself had sacked his lawyer 3 days before the hearing and requested more time for the new lawyer to get acquainted with his case, see evidence below. As a direct result of Ms. Dharmaraj’s actions, the client’s behaviour became so erratic that Dr. Horton had to withdraw as an expert witness from the court case.

Ramola Dharmaraj then put out a 2.5 hour video, see below, with Melanie Vritschan, in which the two raised a very large number of serious, yet unfounded, malicious and provably false allegations against Dr. Horton. This was aimed to be the total destruction of Dr. Horton’s credibility and reputation.

In this video, Ms. Vritschan also requested that Dr. Horton do not mention her case in her own litigation even though this had been agreed by Ms. Vritschan as a last resort to free her baby that had been kidnapped by Hospital Erasmus under false pretexts. This was also counter to what was advised to be in the best interest of Ms. Vritschan’s case by a retired war crimes judge who had discussed the case with Ms. Vritschan and Dr. Horton. However, as this U-turn is very much in keeping with the destructive manoeuvres of Ramola Dharmaraj, Dr. Horton suspects that Ms. Dharmaraj might have induced Ms. Vritschan to this decision.

Fact of the matter is that Ramola Dharmaraj’s systematic character defamation and malicious intrigues led directly to the termination of a leading weekly public interest broadcast, the Techno Crime Fighters’ Forum, the break-up of the only investigative team working to support victims, and the destruction of the closed front that was to be formed by the 4 European victim court cases running in parallel, namely:

1. Frederic Laroche in France,
2. Melanie Vritschan in Belgium,
3. Siegfried Tomys in Switzerland,
4. Katherine Horton in England.

Through her malicious actions and persistent defamation campaign, Ramola Dharmaraj had a devastating effect on the efforts to bring the crimes against humanity against victims finally to justice and put pressure on the courts to stop the rampant criminality.



Timeline of Ramola’s Defamation Campaign

01 August 2018: Dr. Horton meets Catherine Austin Fitts in Zurich.

02 August 2018: Ramola excludes Dr. Horton from the Techno Forum and terminates the show started by Dr. Paul Marko and Mindy Urken. Dr. Horton is completely unaware of these plans and is waiting to join the call when she sees the show go live without her. She has to express her amazement in the Live Chat.

02 August 2018: Ramola calls Melanie Vritschan in Brussels and tells her to stop working with Dr. Horton. This is reported by Melanie to Dr. Horton during a phone call in the evening, which Dr. Horton receives half way up a Swiss mountain where she had to flee after DEW attacks on her exploded after the break-up of Techno.

03 August 2018: Thomas McFarlan contacts Dr. Horton and a friendly email exchange follows. There is no suggestion that McFarlan thinks that Dr. Horton is a

very VERY good actor
highly skilled infiltrator and agent provocateur
outright impostor
highly-skilled social-movement infiltrator
”Dr Horton” is an act not a person

as he would claim 3 weeks later without any further exchange between McFarlan and Dr. Horton!

06 August 2018: Dr. Horton’s public response to the Techno break-up.

16 August 2018: Barbara Hartwell, CIA, wades in.

18 August 2018: Ramola’s republication of Hartwell’s Article.

26 August 2018: McFarlan’s Defamation Video 1.

28 August 2018: McFarlan’s Defamation on Twitter.

31 August 2018: McFarlan’s Defamation Video 2.

02 September 2018: Ramola’s Defamation Article & Republication of McFarlan videos.

02 September 2018: McFarlan’s Defamation on Twitter.

03 September 2018: McFarlan’s Defamation on Twitter.

03-19 September 2018: Ramola pressures Melanie Vritschan to stop the collaboration with Dr. Horton. Ramola claims that it is because of Dr. Horton’s involvement that she cannot come to Brussels to have herself scanned. This is reported to Dr. Horton by Melanie Vritschan over Skype and during their meeting in Belgium for the university scanning project.

18-19 September 2018: Ramola intensifies the campaign against Dr. Horton trying to sabotage the scanning at the university in Brussels while Dr. Horton travels from Zurich to Brussels and is working at the university. This is reported by Melanie Vritschan to Dr. Horton during their work in Belgium for the university scanning project.

19 September 2018: During the scanning, Melanie tells Dr. Horton that Ramola was harassing her with near daily messages asking Melanie to stop working with Dr. Horton since the Techno Forum break-up at the start of August.

19 September 2018: In the work meeting after the scanning, Dr. Horton learns that Ramola warned Melanie that she was about to publish “testimonials” from people against Dr. Horton including from Paul Baird and Cassandra. Dr. Horton never worked with Paul Baird and the only person named Cassandra who Dr. Horton is aware of is a woman in the UK who sent suggestions to Dr. Horton for items to add to the affidavit template.

14 October 2018: Melanie tells Dr. Horton that Ramola has approached her claiming that Dr. Horton sabotaged Frederic Laroche’s court case by not turning up in Jun 2018. In actual fact, Dr. Horton had travelled back from Hungary specifically for the court case but Frederic had sacked his lawyer 3 days before the hearing!

14 October 2018:
What is most curious is that Melanie Vritschan takes a screenshot of Dr. Horton’s reaction and doesn’t notice that Skype posts it automatically in the chat. Dr. Horton has the chat open in the side-bar and sees the screenshotting of her face. Melanie seems amused by Dr. Horton’s reaction to the allegations, which are completely false and highly malicious. The screenshotting of Dr. Horton is an extremely odd incident and is even more curious considering that a close near-daily interaction has been going on between Ramola and Melanie targeted against Dr. Horton for the past 2.5 months at this time. The question naturally arises if the screenshot was intended for Ramola to show her the effect that her malicious slander had on Dr. Horton. Melanie Vritschan subsequently claimed in a video with Ramola that she didn’t take the screenshot herself and blamed hacking of her computer by the Intelligence Agencies for the appearance of the image.

2018.10.14_Melanie.tells.me.about.Laroche.case.slander_AND.SCREENSHOTS.MY.FACE.EXPRESSION


15 October 2018: Dr. Horton speaks with Frederic Laroche who confirms that the claim that Dr. Horton had sabotaged his first court hearing in June is not true. He further confesses that he made that lie up to appease Ramola.

Frederic Laroche confessing about lying to Ramola
15 October 2018.

In fact, Dr. Horton has the evidence that those claims are not true because it was Frederic Laroche himself who had sacked his lawyer 3 days before the hearing and instructed his new lawyer to shift the hearing.

16 October 2018: Dr. Horton receives an email from Melanie complaining about Ramola, stating “Ich werde hier wieder von Ramola über Deine “Agententätigkeit” und “echo-stalking” zugetextet…. ich weiss echt nicht mehr, was ich noch machen soll…. einfach…. too much !
Translation:I’m being blasted again by Ramola about your “agent operations” and “echo-stalking” …. I really do not know anymore what I should do …. just …. too much!“).

Melanie Vritschan’s complaint about Ramola’s defamation harassment
16 October 2018.

19 October 2018: Dr. Horton receives the public notice against Melanie by Dr. Alfred Webre and stops her collaboration with ICATOR for the reasons outlined below.

20 October 2018: Dr. Millicent Black complains to Dr. Horton about her website logo Top-Screwup and a slanderous remark about her that is said to come from Dr. Horton but actually originates from Melanie Vritschan.

Millicent’s complaint about Dr. Horton’s banner and the slanderous remark by Melanie
20 October 2018.

27 October 2018: Ramola publishes a libellous public notice, see below.

12 November 2018: Dr. Horton publishes this webpage documenting Ramola’s libel campaign for the upcoming court cases, after having endured her smears for 3.5 months.

13 November 2018: Entering the 4th month of Ramola’s campaigning obsession against Dr. Horton, Ramola announces publicly that Dr. Horton is “apparently paid to malign, sabotage, provoke, abuse, create a Spectacle, grandstand, lie, engage in NLP echo-stalking, and mirroring and hypnotize — not necessarily in that order, and not all to the same people she has many under her spell.” As is typical for Ramola, she has no evidence for any of those ludicrous allegations, which makes it malicious libel yet once more.


2018.11.13_Ramolas.long.list.of.accusations.2

16 November 2018: Ramola adds the newest public libel of Dr. Horton equating her with a bully and abuser who will continue abusing if people do not stand up to her, forgetting that it was Ramola herself who conducted a targeted campaign against Dr. Horton behind Dr. Horton’s back for over 3 months without Dr. Horton saying anything against her or even mentioning her publicly.


2018.11.16_Ramola.calling.me.bully.and.abuser

22 November 2018: After repeated slander and public defamation from Ramola, Dr. Horton makes a public response about the allegations and accusations in the second half on a video broadcast (starting at 1:50:30).

29 November 2018: Court case of Frederic Laroche, where Dr. Horton appears as an expert witness and takes along Gerhard Ulrich as an independent court observer.

02 December 2018: 3 days after Frederic Laroche’s court case, Ramola Dharmaraj and Melanie Vritschan add the newest public libel of Dr. Horton exactly 4 months after the Techno break-up. This time, she is accused of list of new alleged misdemeanours including sabotaging a scanning 1.5 years ago, arranging the analysis of Melanie Vritschan’s throat implant for nefarious purposes that are undisclosed, as well as serious misconduct as an expert witness and even sabotage of Frederic Laroche’s case. Again, there is no concrete evidence. In fact, the broadcast contains incidents of pathological lying so outrageous that these instances have to be debunked below individually.

13 December 2018: Dr. Horton is using her right to reply to the allegations levelled at her by Ramola Dharmaraj and Melanie Vritschan on 2nd December 2018 and in order to clear her name begins to edit this webpage to upload the evidence of Frederic Laroche’s lying and of Melanie Vritschan’s lying below. Apparently, checking the website obsessively, Ramola Dharmaraj launched already a new list of accusations on her blog without even Dr. Horton having had time to talk about the evidence upload publicly for the previous set of ludicrous allegations. This time, Ramola Dharmaraj is alleging the following:

  1. Dr. Horton “appears to be engaged in an on-and-on Targeted Slander, Defamation, and Libel Campaign against Ramola D”, thereby forgetting that it was herself who led such a campaign from 2 August – 12 November before Dr. Horton even made use of her right to reply.
  2. Dr. Horton “has not heeded any Public Notices to cease and desist her slander, despite efforts made to address her false allegations and clearly show the falsehoods she is publishing, as in Report # 99”, thereby forgetting that it is precisely in order to rectify the false and malicious defamation in Report #99 that Dr. Horton began to update her website with new evidence to prove that both Frederic Laroche and Melanie Vritschan were lying.
  3. Dr. Horton is “spreading lies and falsehood continuously, distorting facts, inventing claims, and constructing false narratives”, thereby forgetting that it is Ms. Dharmaraj herself who is spreading lies and falsehoods about Dr. Horton continuously without any proof, which the latter has to spend hours of work going through and uploading evidence to disprove.
  4. Dr. Horton is running a “Targeted Campaign [that] is both malicious and indicative of Intentional Destruction of Reputation, much in the style of the JTRIG operations run by GCHQ/NSA/MI5 to “sow dissension and disseminate false information””, thereby forgetting that she herself has been campaigning against Dr. Horton, particularly aiming to destory Dr. Horton’s reputation and to break up her work on the Techno Forum, her collaboration with the university in Belgium, her support for Melanie Vritschan’s court case and her work as an expert witness for Frederic Laroche.



Frederic Laroche’s Lying

(1:59:00 following)

The fraudulent claim that Dr. Horton sabotaged Frederic Laroche’s court case is taken up again by Ramola. She claims that Frederic contacted her after confessing to Dr. Horton that he lied to Ramola about Dr. Horton sabotaging his case (at 1:59:00 following).

”Apparently, the next day she speaks with Frederic Laroche who confirms that the claims that Dr. Horton sabotaged his court case are not true and gets in touch with Ramo/a. [Giggles] Ok. So I know what happened over here. And I’m going to publish a little bit of text from Frederic, ok? To prove this and set this to rest once and for all. And I told Frederic this. [Laughs] So what Frederic did was when Katherine went and spoke to him, he promptly, because he had asked her to be an expert witness, wanted to stay on the right side of her, and he promptly said to her ‘No no no no, I, you know no I never said that. And you know it’s Ramo/a, she says you’re an agent, and you sabotage things all the time.’ So that’s what Frederic told me. Ok, that’s what he said to her. Then she comes up with this story. I mean this is so bizarre and ridiculous. It’s like high school. So then she says: ‘Oh, Frederic says it’s, you know, you all Ramola. And then she gets a complaint from you complaining about me. So now she is building a case here for what a monster that I am. Frederic is complaining about me. You [Melanie] are complaining about me.” (At 1:59:00 following)

As Dr. Horton is bound by confidentiality, she has to discuss with Frederic Laroche before making a detailed public response. Dr. Horton asks Frederic for a meeting to discuss these allegations. However, he refuses and entangles himself ever further in lies trying to rectify Ramola’s allegation.

This leads eventually to Dr. Horton quitting being an expert witness for Frederic Laroche due to a break-down in trust between her and Laroche. Dr. Horton informs Frederic Laroche that she will publish the part of their correspondence that is required to clear her name after his outrageous lies. All this is directly caused by Ramola Dharmaraj’s maligning and intrigues.

Dr. Horton withdraws from Laroche’s court case
4 December 2018.

The following letters from Frederic Laroche prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that Frederic was lying and Ramola gleefully spread serious defamation against Dr. Horton as a result.

Frederic Laroche decides to sack his lawyer 4-5 days before the hearing
7-8 June 2018.
Laroche’s new lawyer shifts the court hearing to Nov ON HIS ORDERS
12 June 2018 (1 day before the hearing).
Original court date 13 June shifted to 29 Nov 2018.
Frederic Laroche confessing about lying to Ramola
15 October 2018.



Melanie Vritschan’s Lying

(29:00 following)

At 29:00-36:05 in the video by Ramola Dharmaraj and Melanie Vritschan above, Melanie Vritschan is outrageously lying, trying to make it sound like Dr. Horton forced the implant analysis in Switzerland on her through Dr. Horton’s own initiative. Ramola Dharmaraj furthermore claims that Dr. Horton had sinister motives for doing so. This couldn’t be further from the truth as shown with the evidence of the Skype conversations and email exchanges between Melanie Vritschan and Dr. Horton below.

At 29:00 following, Melanie Vritschan is heard as saying (Dr. Horton’s response in red):

Melanie: “Katherine Horton has also talked long about the fact that she came to Belgium to take the sample removed from my throat with her and blamed me at the time for the sabotage and the car repair costs she had the next day, according to her.

The truth of the matter is that Dr. Horton blamed Swiss Intel NDB for the car sabotage as only they could have accessed her garage over night so that the car that travelled flawlessly from Brussels to Zurich the day before, had suddenly ignition issues amounting to over CHF 1300.- in damages. The repair costs were entirely born by Dr. Horton, as were the CHF 230.- of taxi costs to make it to the appointment at the Paul Scherer Institute the next day.

The real story regarding the analysis is the following: Katherine Horton took the initiative of finding the Swiss laboratory specialised in nano- and biotechnology by herself. I remember that very well as I received an email in August 2017 while being on holiday with my father in the South of France being pregnant.

That is not true, see evidence below. In actual fact, Melanie Vritschan had expressed dissatisfaction on 6th July 2017 with a lawyer from Sweden who had offered to have the implant analysed. Melanie disagreed with the suggestion by the lawyer of asking for the implant to be analysed by a woman named Irene Caesar in Moscow. In Ms. Vritschan’s view Irene Caesar was a blonde “hussy” (“Flittchen”) who studied social sciences, whereas the lawyer was expected to make contacts with a Swedish laboratory (“Yes…. das blonde Flittchen, das Sozialwissenschaften studiert hat….. sorry, es so direct auszudrücken, aber das ist, was ich denke….. Sie sollte Kontakte in dem Labor in Schweden knüpfen…. das war eigentlich alles…..”).

2017.07.06_Melanie.uneasy.about.Swedish.implant.analysis

Flittchen.translation

Furthermore, on 9th July 2017, Melanie Vritschan and her lawyer received a note from a Belgian university declining to analyse Melanie’s implant stating that “this seems beyond our scope and expertise”. Later that day, Ms. Vritschan notified Dr. Horton that she still cannot find a lab, see her Skype posts at 15:00-15:01 in the evidence screenshots below. At 15:02, Dr. Horton called Melanie and after a brief conversation Dr. Horton suggested the Paul Scherer Institute, a research lab that Dr. Horton was aware of because it had a particle accelerator. See the link to the PSI posted by Dr. Horton at 15:04 in the Skype conversation that lasted 14:43min.

So it is clear that Dr. Horton suggested the Paul Scherer Institute in Switzerland and offered to supervise the analysis as a physicist in response to Ms. Vritschan’s plea for assistance in the face of repeated disappointment with finding a lab to analyse her throat implant. The urgency of the case arose out of the fact that Ms. Vritschan was in touch with a lawyer who was going to sue the Belgian state for her illegal implanting. Evidence of a lawyer being involved is the email of the lawyer as can be seen in the message that Ms. Vritschan quoted to Dr. Horton as @advocat.be.

After a short interval that was used by Dr. Horton and Ms. Vritschan to look at the PSI website, a 35:16min call followed moments later at 15:25 on 9th July 2017 in which the PSI option was discussed between Melanie Vritschan and Dr. Horton. Ms. Vritschan posted her concerns that were sent to the Swedish lawyer about Irene Caesar and the fact that a Russian victim association had said that the institute Ms. Caesar claimed to have graduated from doesn’t exist in Moscow. Ms. Vritschan also posted two scientists’ contact details that she asked Dr. Horton to investigate, see evidence below. It can thus be established with complete proof that Ms. Vritschan knew about the suggest of the PSI over one month before the implant analysis was arranged with the lab and even instructed Dr. Horton to investigate the option.

She informed me that she had contacted this laboratory, got a quote for the analysis and suggested she would come to Belgium to pick it up in September as she was going to come here anyway in this period since she had an appointment with a dermatologist, which I had set up for her to confirm her body scars by medical certificate.

Later on that evening at 19:40 of the 9th July 2017, Dr. Horton called to report back about her investigation of possible analysis sites in Switzerland. She Skype call lasted 32:02min. She suggested the ETH Zurich as an alternative, see link to the pricing page posted by Dr. Horton at 19:41 in the screenshot below. At 19:57, Melanie Vritschan posted herself the link to the contacts page, showing that she was fulling involved in the investigation of Swiss research labs.

In that call, it was discussed how the implant might be taken to Switzerland. The idea was floated by Ms. Vritschan that Dr. Horton could combine her trip to Brussels to pick up the throat implant with a visit to a trusted dermatologist used by Ms. Vritschan who had found the laser surgery scars on her body. At 20:02, Ms. Vritschan then posted the phone number of the dermatologist for Dr. Horton to call and make the appointment. This proves that the idea of the dermatologist appointment and the fixing of the appointment itself came after the implant analysis at the Paul Scherer Institute or the ETH had been discussed extensively by Ms. Vritschan and Dr. Horton.


2017.07.09_Melanie.suggest.ETH.later.and.gives.me.dermatologists.contact

8 days later on 17th July 2017, Melanie Vritschan asked Dr. Horton if there were any news from the Swiss lab, proving that she was fully informed about the request to have her implant analysed at the Paul Scherer Institute. Dr. Horton was tasked with obtaining a price quote for the analysis and Ms. Vritschan was eagerly waiting for a response from the Paul Scherer Institute.

Melanie asking for news from the Swiss lab
17 July 2017.

I offered I would ask one of our sponsors to cover the costs of the analysis, but she refused that, calling her an agent – right, one more agent on a planet full of agents under Katherine’s agent sky – and she would rather we would use ICATOR funds for this analysis and raise the funds.

The real issue was that the lawyer who had offered to analyse Melanie Vritschan’s throat implant had also funded a chip scanning by Melinda Kidder in Stockholm. Ms. Kidder was flown out to Sweden with expenses paid and the scanning for about 10 people was funded by this lawyer out of private funds. Victims where also attacked in Sweden (like they are everywhere they go) and the lawyer then promised to launch a court case in Sweden. The catch was that the contract for representation also contained a clause that a fraction of the profits that victims might derive from telling their story afterwards would also go to this lawyer. While Melanie Vritschan didn’t mind it, Dr. Horton considered such clauses unethical and was not willing to “sell her soul” for posterity for work she was involved in as a scientist. Therefore, Dr. Horton advised that the implant scanning that she was involved in better be paid from donations without strings attached that would tie Dr. Horton’s work to someone else’s profit-making for posterity. Dr. Horton also raised questions about how it could be that a victim came out of nowhere at just the right time and had large sums of money ready to pay for a party of over 10 to be scanned.

So, she indeed came to Belgium and took the sample with her to take it to the laboratory where she had fixed an appointment. But her visit to Belgium at these dates was planned, as she had asked me to fix her dermatologist appointment here, which I indeed did. Now, we’re coming to her claims about Alfred Webre.”

That’s false, as proven above. The implant scanning was discussed first on the 9th July 2017 before Melanie Vritschan gave Dr. Horton the contact phone for the dermatologist to arrange an appointment, see screenshot above.

Ramola: “Can we hold on just… Can we hold on just one minute? ’cause I think this is so important what you are talking about, Melanie. So basically, you are actually giving all of us information that many of us have not had before, that the one… The story that we’ve been left with is that Katherine did the implant analysis. Now what you are telling me is while you were pregnant, before you had given birth, Katherine off her own initiative wrote to you, sent you an email and suggested that she drive down to Brussels, pick up this implant which she had known about through conversation with you and then take it all the way back to Zurich is it? Or Geneva? To a lab?”

Melanie: “Yeah, to Zurich, yeah.”

Melanie: “To Zurich to a lab. So this was her initiative, her planning.”

Melanie: “Entirely hers. “

Ramola: “Her planning, her strategy. Whatever. To me this sounds extremely sinister after everything that went down at Erasme. So she offered to do it herself. And then you had actually set up an appointment for her because you are a kind soul and you had set up an appointment for her with one of your own dermatologists.” (emphasis added)

Melanie: “Exactly.”

Ramola: “So she had a reason to visit.”

Melanie: “Yeah.”

Ramola: “She had a reason to visit Brussels.”

Melanie: “Ya ya. She was scheduled to come here for this dermatologist visit.”

Ramola: “Scheduled to come for that visit. Great. And the third thing that I wanted to emphasise was the money. Right now, Katherine is making a big song and dance about how she didn’t.. she wasn’t supported. She didn’t get any funds from ICATOR. She didn’t get any funds from you. She came on her own steam, spent her own money and drove all the way 100’000 miles or whatever it is from Zurich to Brussels on her own, you know, daring those hair-pin bends and all of the many machine-gun attacks et cetera. “

Melanie: “Ya.”

Ramola: “And she came and did this great favour for you and you didn’t pay a penny to her for her petrol costs or whatever. And what you are saying now is. You had offered to pay her.”

Melanie: “Ya, for the analysis. “

Ramola: “You had offered to pay her for the analysis. “

Melanie: “Yes.”

Ramola: “Had you offered to support any of her petrol costs?”

Melanie: “No.”

Ramola: “Had she offered to do that on her own steam?”

Melanie: “She.. when she come here I never asked her to come or do anything. She came because she wanted to come. She came because she wanted to be part of the scanning. So she came for that. And we will soon talk about the scanning and, you know, the first scanning it’s is even her who suggested it and made me invite all of the ICATOR members for nothing, I may say. But I’ll come to that. So she either came because she had the scanning or, you know, we had an appointment at a university, or she had a dermatologist appointment that I had set up for her, but she had asked me to do that. To get her medical evidence, medical certificate.”

Ramola: “And it… Great, but at this particular case…”

Melanie: “So it was in anyway planned that she would come at this period. “

Ramola: “So at this particular point she came…”

Melanie: “I never asked her to do anything. I also never eh… did ask her to do the analysis, so it’s an eh… initiative that she chose by herself.”

Ramola: “Great. That’s what I wanted to clarify. Yah, let’s clarify that for everybody. You did not ask her to come. You did not ask her to pick up the implant. You did not ask her to do the analysis. “

Melanie: “No. And probably I can even still pull up that email that I received in August 2017 when I was in the South of France for holidays, pregnant. And she said: “Well, I contacted this lab and they can do this analysis. And I have taken an appointment or the lab says come on the 8th of September, I think. And so, ya. Then she was gonna come anyway in September here because she had her medical appointment. So at that point, she took the foreign body with her and took it back to Switzerland.”

Ramola: “And the money that you had offered her was…”

Melanie: “But it was her initiative. It was not I who had asked her to do that at all.”

Ramola: “Great. So you didn’t ask her to do it. But when you heard that she was going to do it, you offered…”

Melanie: “Ya.”

Ramola: “…that a certain person that you knew…”

Melanie: “Ya.”

Ramola: “…would pay for it, right?”

Melanie: “Ya.”

Ramola: “…would sponsor it.”

Melanie: “Ya.”

Ramola: “And would underwrite this effort…”

Melanie: “And she [inaudible], by the way. “

Ramola: “…to get the implant analysed.”

Melanie: “She sent me supporting evidence that she had agreed to finance it. And this particular person Katherine Horton, like all of the others, she called her an agent. And she also said that she didn’t want this person to have the right to the analysis, to have any access to the analysis.”

Ramola: “Oh really?”

Melanie: “So the access should have only me of course because I’m the patient that it’s concerning, and concerned by it, and her of course.”

Ramola: “And her.”

Melanie: “Right. That’s all I have to say about the analysis story.” [smirks and looks down]

Ramola: “Ok. So that’s what this is all about. This is all about the a… This is about the analysis of the implant, taking control of the implant and about acquiring the raw data for the analysis. “

Melanie: “Ya. I’m calling it a foreign body.”

Ramola: “And maintaining some sort of right over it.”

Melanie: “Eh-hm. Right. So she eh… Ya. So she indeed came to Belgium and took the sample with her to take to the laboratory, where she had fixed an appointment. But her visit to Belgium at these dates was planned as she had asked me to fix her dermatologist appointment here, which I indeed did. “



Response to Ramola’s & Melanie’s Libel Video

Coming soon!



Response to Ramola’s Libellous Public Notice

On 27 October 2018, Ramola published the libellous public notice shown below. Dr. Horton’s comments are shown in red.

Disclaimer Re. Reportage by Dr. Katherine Horton on the Subject of What Transpired at Erasme Hospital, October 18, 2017 onwards, in the Medical Kidnapping of Ms. Melanie Vritschan’s Newborn, as Recorded in JIT Press Releases and Articles at The Everyday Concerned Citizen

–Ramola D/October 27, 2018

I am making a formal disclaimer to disassociate myself from any of Dr. Katherine Horton‘s disputed reportage as conveyed to me and later reported in the press releases and articles I wrote in October to December 2017 reporting the matter for JIT, the US-Europe Joint Investigation Team, for which I acted as Press Officer.

What precisely is that “disputed reportage”? And what is the evidence, if any exists, to imply that it was false?

I do stand by all reportage I have published in these releases and all articles as later corroborated by Ms. Melanie Vritschan.

Given that you are so suspicious, has it occurred to you that Ms. Vritschan might act out of self-interest or self-preservation given that her stakes are so high? And should it perhaps occur to you as a budding journalist to exercise at least as much caution as to grant Dr. Horton her right to reply if Ms. Vritschan makes hitherto unmentioned allegations about her version being false?

I reported all matters during that time in good faith, trusting the veracity of Dr. Horton’s accounts, but I can no longer stand by the truth of all her reportage given the recent numerous lies, denials, distortions of truth, inability to acknowledge her own statements,

Care to provide evidence for those “numerous lies, denials, distortions of truth, inability to acknowledge her own statements”?

and extremely verbally-abusive behavior she has currently leveled at members and former members of the Joint Investigation Team, including Melanie Vritschan, the founder of ICATOR,

Care to provide proof like a screenshot, PDF or audio recording? And then care to grant Dr. Horton her right to reply?

myself,

Care to provide the evidence? And isn’t it bizarre that you feel extremely verbally abused on the day of publishing these claims on 27 October 2018 even though Dr. Horton and you haven’t spoken in person since the last Techno Forum on 26 July 2018 and haven’t had any email contact since 2 August 2018?

and Dr. Millicent Black,

In actual fact, Dr. Millicent Black had sent Dr. Horton an accusatory email out of nowhere complaining about Dr. Horton’s website logo “Top Screwup” (a sarcastic play on Top Secret) which Dr. Horton had had for almost 2 years, and accused Dr. Horton of having made a joke about Dr. Black, which turned out to be a slanderous remark by Melanie about Dr. Horton, which Melanie had made in retaliation against Dr. Horton withdrawing from ICATOR (see below).

Millicent’s complaint about Dr. Horton’s banner and the slanderous remark by Melanie
20 October 2018.

as well as the duplicitous behaviors of mirroring/echo-stalking/gaslighting and defamatory, slanderous remarks she has directed at myself. (Some of these lies and denials, along with the duplicitousness and defamation, were addressed in my written statement, The End of Techno Crime Fighters Forum: The Real Backstory,

What on Earth is “echo-stalking”? How can Dr. Horton conduct echo-stalking of you when you live in Boston and she lives in Zurich? What evidence do you have of gaslighting and mirroring? And why have you never raised it with her throughout the 1.5 years you two worked together?

some of them have been newly detected in podcasts by Melanie Vritschan,

Care to provide evidence and grant Dr. Horton her right to reply?

some of them have been newly discerned by us through internal conversations,

Then the evidence, should there be any, isn’t known to anyone outside of yourself and whoever is part of those internal conversations. Given that you are making public accusations against a person you didn’t have anything to do with for a quarter of a year would it not be journalistic standard to state what those are and provide evidence?

and some (the most concerning/addressed below) remain in question.)

Given that what is below is not exactly Earth-shattering, it’s curious to read that those are the most concerning. It is rather revealing that they remain in question. But how are you going to settle the question if you never ask Dr. Horton for a statement like a journalist would have to do?

Prompting this disclaimer is the fact that Dr. Katherine Horton has recently broken off her collaborative work on ICATOR projects with Melanie Vritschan after leveling several serious allegations and accusations at her,

I rather suspect that prompting this disclaimer is in reality Melanie Vritschan’s dissatisfaction with Dr. Horton having broken off her collaborative work on ICATOR projects.

all of them proved false by Ms. Vritschan,

Not at all. It would assist your judgement to know what Dr. Horton was so unhappy about that she decided to withdraw from ICATOR. But how would you know given that you haven’t asked her? Dr. Horton’s reasons were the following 21 points:

  1. EUR 1200.- had been raised for 1 day of work at the university through a crowd-funding effort run by Dr. Horton for ICATOR together with Melanie Vritschan. Extra funds were raised subsequently to cover what Ms. Vritschan termed “running costs”. A few days before the scanning on 12 Sep 2018 and after Dr. Horton had already fixed her travel arrangements, Ms. Vritschan revealed that only a half day of work was possible at the university as over EUR 600 had already been spent by Ms. Vritschan on “running costs”. THIS REMAINS AN UNDISPUTED FACT.
  2. This meant that Dr. Horton had to drive 16 hours (2 x 8hrs) for only 4 hours of work (which turned out to be more like 3 in the end). THIS REMAINS AN UNDISPUTED FACT.
  3. Dr. Horton had not been warned about this beforehand and no warning had been issued by Ms. Vritschan as she had been cutting into the 1200 EUR already raised and ear-marked for the work with the university. A reasonable person would have issued a warning or heads-up when the funds dropped to EUR 1100, 1000, 900, 800, 700 and then 600. THIS REMAINS AN UNDISPUTED FACT.
  4. Given that the work with the university was the main and only project of ICATOR at the time, and given that Dr. Horton had to specifically travel from Switzerland to assist and supervise the scanning, this was highly disrespectful towards Dr. Horton and her efforts, especially as Ms. Vritschan was aware that Dr. Horton put her life into serious danger every time she travelled to Brussels due to the retaliatory attacks on her. In fact, this time, Dr. Horton incurred several thousand Swiss Francs of damages when her car was rammed from behind in a stop-and-go traffic jam on the French motorway on the way back. THIS REMAINS AN UNDISPUTED FACT.
  5. The reduction from 1 day of work at the university to in the end 3 hours seriously sabotaged the entire project for ICATOR. This was particularly unacceptable to have occurred given that Frederic Laroche, an ICATOR member, had a high-profile court case coming up on 29 November 2018 and desperately required a professional chip scanning for his court case. THIS REMAINS AN UNDISPUTED FACT.
  6. What was even more disrespectful and highly inappropriate was that the covering of Ms. Vritschan’s running costs had taken priority over both ICATOR’s main project and over covering the travel expenses of Dr. Horton as previously agree. They had taken priority without prior warning or discussion and despite the fact that Ms. Vritschan herself had stated in the public announcement for the crowd-funding appeal that the money was intended to cover both the university’s fee and Dr. Horton’s travel expenses. The paying of Dr. Horton’s travel expenses was suggested by Ms. Vritschan based on the fact that Dr. Horton had already travelled 4 times to Brussels to assist the scanning and Ms. Vritschan’s implant analysis at her own expense (1st ICATOR chip scanning, 2nd ICATOR chip scanning at the university 16 May 2017, taking Melanie Vritschan’s throat implant for analysis at the Paul Scherer Institute Sep 2017, 3rd ICATOR chip scanning at the university Oct 2017). THIS REMAINS AN UNDISPUTED FACT.
  7. When the final bill was sent by the university in October 2018 not even EUR 600 were left to pay the university. Again, this had come about without prior warning to Dr. Horton, and again it was Melanie Vritschan’s running costs that had consumed the money. THIS REMAINS AN UNDISPUTED FACT.
  8. When Dr. Horton enquired what the money had been spent on, Melanie Vritschan explained that it was the utility bills of her private flat and the fuel expenses to visit her daughter in the children’s home. THIS REMAINS AN UNDISPUTED FACT.
  9. When Dr. Horton questioned how Ms. Vritschan could use the funds of a publicly registered charity to pay for her private expenses, Ms. Vritschan explained that she thought that she was entitled to deduct the entire utility bills of her flat from ICATOR because her living room had been registered as the ICATOR office. Dr. Horton then informed Ms. Vritschan that, as far as she was aware, only the percentage of square meters of the flat’s area used for office purposes could be deducted. Furthermore, according to German tax law, if the area used as an office was also used as a private living room (which was the case at Ms. Vritschan’s flat) then none of the utility expenses could be deducted from the income. This was the case in Germany even if it was the income of a commercial business and not a charity handling other people’s donations. Later on, Dr. Alfred Webre who had experience running large facilities in North America confirmed that this is indeed standard accounting practice across the Western world. THIS REMAINS AN UNDISPUTED FACT.
  10. Ms. Vritschan then added another entitlement to the funds through the fact that at a Board Meeting that had taken place before Dr. Horton had joined ICATOR it was decided that Ms. Vritschan is entitled to take EUR 100.- per month from the charity’s income. While Dr. Horton did not dispute that fact as she hadn’t been present when that decision had been taken, she questioned the validity of claiming so many past EUR 100.- entitlements in one go from funds that had been ear-marked for work with the university, that it would sabotage the ICATOR project itself and not even leave enough to pay the final bill for the half day at the university. No satisfactory answer has been provided for that todate. THIS REMAINS AN UNDISPUTED FACT.
  11. Melanie Vritschan then demanded that Dr. Horton continue to do fundraising with her to cover Ms. Vritschan’s running costs and raise the funds to pay the EUR 600.- bill of the university. Dr. Horton complied and conducted fund-raising for ICATOR on 16 Sep 2018, 5 Oct 2018 and 14 Oct 2018. Dr. Horton did that despite the fact that her travel expenses were again the last priority on the list. THIS REMAINS AN UNDISPUTED FACT.
  12. After a wait of 6 weeks, the university sent a very questionable analysis report from the half-day of scanning. Upon request by Dr. Horton the university also refused to release the raw data. This caused enormous frustration for Dr. Horton because she had already expressed her dissatisfaction with the way the scanning was conducted on the day and her suggestions for improvements had not been taken seriously. Dr. Horton felt that while she had travelled to Belgium to provide her expertise it had been brushed aside as nothing on the day. She seriously began to question the point of her continuing to provide her expertise when it was unpaid, unrespected and incurred her substantial travel expenses and personal danger. THIS REMAINS AN UNDISPUTED FACT.
  13. By the middle of October, it became clear that there would be a long time-period of wrangling with the university before the final bill was paid. This meant that Dr. Horton was going to be bound into endless fund-raising for Ms. Vritschan’s utility bills as ICATOR “running costs” while neither Dr. Horton’s ICATOR travel expenses nor her own utility bills would be paid. As a target herself, Dr. Horton was under enormous pressure to make her own living and since, unlike Ms. Vritschan, Dr. Horton was not entitled to state support, she considered her treatment highly unfair and long-term unsustainable. THIS REMAINS AN UNDISPUTED FACT.
  14. During her work for ICATOR, Dr. Horton had already experienced that she was the scape-goat for everything while providing the highest academic standard of any of the members of ICATOR. For example, Dr. Horton had incurred substantial damage to her reputation by the fact that she had been blamed repeatedly for the failure of the first ICATOR scanning that had taken place when Dr. Horton had just joined ICATOR as a brand-new member without prior knowledge of body scanning or implants. Dr. Horton was blamed repeatedly despite the fact that the measurement had failed because the main device brought by the long-term ICATOR member Horst Kümmer, who also had previous scanning experience, hadn’t been charged and no charger had been brought by Kümmer. THIS REMAINS AN UNDISPUTED FACT.
  15. Dr. Horton had also incurred devastating damage to her reputation by being blamed for the kidnap of Melanie Vritschan’s daughter by Hospital Erasmus, whereby the kidnap was based on comically feigned disbelief by the hospital that Ms. Vritschan had a synthetic throat implant in her throat. Dr. Horton’s written affidavit, available to Ms. Vritschan along with a fully prepared court bundle since 24 October 2017, was the only document that simultaneous proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that Ms. Vritschan’s throat implant was synthetic advanced technology and at the same time the only document that had never been presented to a judge by Ms. Vritschan. THIS REMAINS AN UNDISPUTED FACT.
    Witness Affidavit of Dr. Horton
    available since 24 Oct 2017 for the court case and withheld by the defence lawyer Odette Haas from the judge since then. Implant evidence p.7-9.
  16. Dr. Horton had grown increasingly tired of Ms. Vritschan’s manipulative habit of calling up third parties to put pressure on Dr. Horton every time Ms. Vritschan didn’t get her way. Recent examples of this were Ms. Vritschan slandering Dr. Horton to Dr. Millicent Black (see email exchange above) after Dr. Horton decided to leave ICATOR. Another example was Ms. Vritschan contacting the former judge Dr. Alfred Webre on 28 August to put pressure on Dr. Horton to take a lawyer in Belgium to sue the hospital. When Dr. Horton explained the situation and her legal strategy, Dr. Webre not just agree that it was the best overall legal strategy if Ms. Vritchan and Dr. Horton pursued their own separate strategies, the 3-party roundtable also ended with Dr. Webre getting infuriated with Ms. Vritschan and the latter breaking off the call as Ms. Vritchan was unwilling to accept Dr. Webre’s legal insight as a former judge or engage with what he was proposing. THIS REMAINS AN UNDISPUTED FACT.
  17. After the issue with ICATOR’s funds for the university scanning, Dr. Horton had consulted with 3 highly regarded people with whom she intended to collaborate on future efforts to shut down the criminality. All three had advised Dr. Horton to withdraw from ICATOR to avoid being drawn into a scenario where ICATOR could be accused of mismanagement of funds, false accounting or financial fraud. Dr. Horton had held out against that advice for several months while she continued to do fundraising for ICATOR to help Ms. Vritschan. However, Dr. Horton was growing increasingly uneasy about being drawn into something she had no control over given that she had neither access to nor control over the use of ICATOR funds by Ms. Vritschan. THIS REMAINS AN UNDISPUTED FACT.
  18. On 19 October 2018, Dr. Horton received a public notice from Dr. Alfred Webre about Ms. Vritschan publicly supporting a man who both Dr. Webre and Dr. Horotn considered to be a disinformation agent and posting a highly damaging 12-page document by him. That man had appeared out of nowhere under the cover name Marc Delantre and claimed to be a new Belgian Intel whistleblower. He was making outlandish claims that neither Dr. Webre nor Dr. Horton found credible. When Dr. Webre and Dr. Horton had separately raised their concerns with Ms. Vritschan they were both blown off, whereby it didn’t occur to Ms. Vritschan to pause for a moment and consider that two people with substantially higher education and analytical skills were presenting their views to her. Ms. Vritschan subsequently proceeded to publish the 12-page document on her Facebook page in which this alleged Belgian Intel whistleblower tried to draw connections to Dr. Webre cancelling an interview with him, Hurrican Michael and a car accident in New York with the highest number of fatalities in recent history. Ms. Vritschan published the report by Delantre despite knowing very well the concerns that both Dr. Webre and Dr. Horton had expressed. This led to a cataclysmic break-down in the relationship between Dr. Webre and Ms. Vritschan and resulted in Dr. Webre’s public notice of withdrawal of all support from Ms. Vritschan. Dr. Webre advised Dr. Horton to withdraw from ICATOR to avoid being drawn into the schemes of Delantre. Dr. Horton wholeheartedly agreed with that advice. THIS REMAINS AN UNDISPUTED FACT.
  19. Dr. Horton decided to withdraw from ICATOR after the newest dispute and public notice from Dr. Alfred Webre because she agreed with Dr. Webre’s assesment of the situation and had herself grown tired of being drawn into Ms. Vritschan’s schemes to her detriment. THIS REMAINS AN UNDISPUTED FACT.
  20. Dr. Horton also reckoned that her expertise as a physicist was no longer required after Ms. Vrischan announced that she had a Belgian microwave weapons expert who was also a court expert to help her with the scanning project. THIS REMAINS AN UNDISPUTED FACT.
  21. The broadcasting of ICATOR updates was also something that Ms. Vritschan could easily do herself over YouTube, just like Dr. Horton and all other victims were doing. Therefore, Dr. Horton decided to withdraw from ICATOR on all of the above grounds. THIS REMAINS AN UNDISPUTED FACT.

in a series of extremely abusive and defamatory emails over this past weekend—October 21 and 22, 2018–to which I was witness.

Is that what’s called perl-clutching? And if it is not then surely you can provide evidence? After all, you’re putting out a public notice and not just airing your private opinions, aren’t you?

The nature of these false statements

Which false statements precisely? Where is the evidence that the statements – whichever statements you mean – are false?

–in conjunction with previous lies and defamatory slander,

Where is the evidence of any lies and defamatory slander please?

wrongful and misleading generalizations and statements about neurotechnology she is not an expert about,

Now that’s interesting. Surely you could name those given that it would be super-important to put those wrongful and misleading generalizations about neurotechnology right?

and her revealed duplicitousness in the echo-stalking behaviors directed at me —

For which you still have neither provided evidence nor explained what “echo-stalking”, a term that you have made up, actually is.

distressingly call into question previous statements she has made, surrounding the events at Erasme Hospital in relation to the medical kidnapping of Melanie Vritschan’s child shortly after her birth.

So far no evidence has been provided for anything so it’s anyone’s guess how they call what into question.

In particular are statements she has made about a report by a nurse supposedly confided in by Ms. Vritschan about “hearing voices informing her the hospital was planning to take the baby away”; while stating the story was fabricated, Dr. Horton said this nurse could later not be found.

Yup, that’s still Dr. Horton’s current state of knowledge. What you are referring to is the first explanation that Ms. Vritschan and Dr. Horton were given when Hospital Erasmus had tried to explain the kidnap of Melanie’s baby. It was claimed that Melanie Vritschan had confided to the night nurse about hearing voices after Dr. Horton had left that evening. The fact that this was the case is made clear by the fact that in the the day of the kidnap while this was still the fraudulent justification put forth by Hospital Erasmus, Ms. Vritschan and Dr. Horton were trying to find out from the staff who that mysterious night nurse was. Ms. Vritschan insisted that she had only talked about breast-feeding and other maternity related issues to her. This is also the version that Dr. Horton had found credible, while considering Hospital Erasmus’ version outright bat-shit crazy.

Ms. Vritschan has confirmed that no such conversation like this with any night-nurse or other nurse ever transpired; and it is not clear from Dr. Horton’s and Ms. Vritschan’s statements where this story came from.

That story came from Hospital Erasmus as reported by Ms. Vritschan to Dr. Horton on the day of the kidnap when Dr. Horton and George Peers arrived at the hospital after the baby had already been taken.

Other statements in dispute between Dr. Horton and the nurse-midwife on what was said during their pivotal conversation —on the primary basis of which it appears Ms. Vritschan’s child was wrongfully removed by Erasme Hospital psychiatrists,

Technically, this isn’t true as no hospital can remove a baby based on what an accompanying person says to a midwife about her own work. The primary basis upon which Hospital Erasmus took the baby away was the interview that Ms. Vritschan had with Prof. Marie Delhaye, in which Ms. Vritschan was talking about implants and house-breaking and Prof. Delhaye confirmed that she didn’t have the foggiest clue about implants. Hospital Erasmus then lied to Ms. Vritschan and said that the baby was to be taken away for testing because the baby had developed jaundice. This was totally made up and false. Then there was a second interview of Ms. Vritschan by 3 paedo-psychiatrists who were equally clueless about body implants. Then there was an interview with a normal doctor at another Brussels hospital, Hospital Brugmann, between midnight and 2am (!!!) where Ms. Vritschan was taken without pain-killers and just over 24hrs after her Caesarian section. Then Judge Serck, who had been summoned fraudulently by Hospital Erasmus, took the baby based on the report by Prof. Marie Delhaye about talking to Ms. Vritshan, the report by the 3 paedo-psychiatrists and the report by the doctor at Hospital Brugmann who had his arm twisted at 1am to produce a fake report after having said that Ms. Vritschan should be returned to the maternity ward of Hospital Erasmus. The report by the mid-wife Ms. Sinan wasn’t produced for months and in the end was said by Ms. Vritschan to contain false statements. Dr. Horton has never seen the report by Ms. Sinan. In contrast, Dr. Horton’s affidavit has been available to Ms. Vritschan and her lawyer Odette Haas since 24 October 2017 before the first court hearing at Hospital Erasmus, proving undeniably that Ms. Vritschan had a synthetic object in her throat and even showing the implant in a photograph, but has not been used to this date.

Witness Affidavit of Dr. Horton
available since 24 Oct 2017 for the court case and withheld by the defence lawyer Odette Haas from the judge since then. Implant evidence p.7-9.

and Ms. Vritschan subjected to further extreme trauma by being dragged across town near midnight to another hospital, psychiatrically evaluated there and found to be perfectly sane and mentally stable, yet then fraudulently committed by Erasme Hospital to a Psychiatric Ward for a week—

Exactly. And given that extreme trauma and dragging across town near midnight is not something that a normal hospital would do to a patient with a 30cm surgery scar, not to mention locking her in a holding cell without painkillers and without a hospital bed for the night, and the next day locking her into a room with only a dirty mattress on the floor while having 4 empty beds just meters away from here, then sending one of the paedo-psychiatrists to abuse her while she was sitting on the floor with her Caesarian surgery scar, then drugging her with neuro-toxins that were not compatible with breast-feeding, then locking her into a room with a screaming mentally ill woman for a week and with a screaming man in a padded cell next door, it almost looks like there is a criminal syndicate at work that executes a plan, whatever counter-evidence is thrown in it’s way, doesn’t it? After all, if it were a normal hospital and doctors acting in good faith, a hospital wouldn’t have a dirty mattress on the floor or provide abduction services at midnight, right? Hmmmm. Perhaps, just perhaps these facts should make a buddying journalist pause and think. Think, just a bit.

include what was said and by who on the subject of implants (being covertly implanted in people by the Intelligence agencies), home break-ins, the extensive capabilities of implants, scanning projects to locate implanted microchips, and whether those statements were general statements or pertained in any way to Ms. Vritschan.

Yes, and after all this time of Dr. Horton’s testimony being available, would it not be nice if the midwife’s testimony would be available to Dr. Horton? After all, it is said to be statement against statement, and Dr. Horton procured the scientific evidence for her statements herself from the Paul Scherer Institute, and Dr. Horton has a right to reply to whatever that midwife, whom she considers to be a pathologically lying little glorified cleaner, was babbling without any relevant higher education to speak of. And why is it that Dr. Horton stands accused as the main culprit while a mendacious mid-wife who repeatedly visited Ms. Vritschan after the baby kidnap and sadistically emphasised her own daughter’s birthday and was demonstratively coo-cooing into the telephone to her daughter during a meeting with Ms. Vritschan in the presence of Ms. Vritschan’s father and Dr. Horton is not held responsible once?

Some of this information was reported to me at the time by Dr. Horton, and reported therefore by me in my Press Releases for JIT, as being “partially fabricated” by the nurse-midwife whom Dr. Horton had conversed with.

Yes, that is precisely what Dr. Horton said, that the midwife’s statements were partially fabricated.

Ms. Vritschan has reported that there were discrepancies between what Dr. Horton stated she had said to the nurse-midwife, and what the nurse-midwife stated she had been told by Dr. Horton, and what the Erasme Hospital psychiatrist Dr. Marie Delhaye informed Ms. Vritschan had been said to the nurse-midwife by Dr. Horton, including a story about hearing voices promising great harm to the baby.

No shit Sherlock. And it gets even better than that: There were also discrepancies between proven fact about Ms. Vritschan’s personal details and what Prof. Marie Delhaye and Judge Serck wrote in their reports and judgements, respectively. It was almost like they were making shit up as they went along.

I understand also that Dr. Horton refused to return later to Erasme Hospital, which, as reported to me by Ms. Vritschan, was discussed earlier as a request by phyicians there, for a “mediation” to include both Dr. Horton and the nurse-midwife, stating that she would only return to Brussels for a “jury trial,” so the truth of those statements by her were never openly examined.

Dr. Horton had said to Ms. Vritschan that before she would travel 16 hours by car once more at her own expense, the mediation procedure should use her written testimony and Dr. Horton could be taking part at the meeting over Skype. This was known to be possible as both Ms. Vritschan and Dr. Horton had connected to Skype using the hospitals most excellent WiFi coverage that extended not just into every patient room with a massive Cisco Systems router on the ceiling of every room, but even into the operating theatres as both Ms. Vritschan and Dr. Horton had been tortured via their body implants throughout their entire stay at Hospital Erasmus.

Dr. Horton had also stated to me and to others on the JIT team several times that she would take action herself and file a legal complaint to Brussels Police about the wrongful and criminal kidnapping of Ms. Vritschan’s baby—based on a conversation, she, Dr. Horton, had with a nurse–but I understand from both herself earlier and Ms. Vritschan that she did not then follow up on this stated plan,

That’s correct and the reason for that is the same reason why you haven’t been reporting about Ms. Vritschan’s case as often as you like, as you told Dr. Horton, namely that Ms. Vritschan wanted to pursue her own way and discouraged any amount of rocking the boat. A discussion had indeed taken place about making a complaint to the police after Dr. Horton had suggested that a police complaint would be appropriate. Legally speaking, it would have been the mother’s job to notify the police of her baby’s kidnap. It would have been very odd if Dr. Horton as a German citizen would have made a report to the Brussels police from Switzerland while the own mother of the baby didn’t raise a finger in Brussels herself. Dr. Horton agreed to proceed nevertheless, however, the day or next after agreeing to that course of action, Dr. Horton discovered that Ms. Vritschan had again been emailing the victim community blaming Dr. Horton for her predicament while at the same time continuing to complain about your good self and the news reporting of her case by you. Dr. Horton then decided that it would be best to leave Ms. Vritschan to her own course of action, because it has been Dr. Horton who had been pushing for complaints to be made to the police and to the medical associations responsible for regulating the staff at Hospital Erasmus, while Ms. Vritschan had been saying that her lawyer Odette Haas strategy of appeasement was the best way forward. After the all that Dr. Horton had been blamed for, she did not want to be blamed for making Ms. Vritschan’s case any worse and she thus bowed to the strategy that had been proposed by Ms. Vritschan’s lawyer. After all, it would have been the lawyer’s job to decide on such a course of action.

nor take any other action whatsoever to support Ms. Vritschan in her efforts to get her baby back,

That is false. Dr. Horton wrote a detailed affidavit for Ms. Vritschan and compiled a court bundle for her that took her a week to assemble. She worked 16-hour days during the entire week from 19 October to 26 October 2017 to make that court bundle and take care of Ms. Vritschan’s father at the same time. She publicly campaigned for Ms. Vritschan in several interviews with Alfred Webre and afterwards conducted fund-raising for further chip-scanning with Ms. Vritschan on a weekly basis. She raised several thousand Euros for ICATOR. She followed the case in detail and was talking to Melanie regularly and provided a testimony to SOS Enfants. She drove 16 hours to Brussels and back to work on the chip scanning with the Belgian university. And she shouldered several thousand Swiss Francs of damages to her car in a traffic accident that was clearly in retaliation for her work. This comes after over one thousand Swiss Francs of damages to her car when it was sabotaged on the day she had to drive to the Paul Scherer Institute to analyse Ms. Vritschan’s throat implant. Not to mention several thousand Francs combined in travel expenses and private donations to ICATOR over the course of her work with the charity.

including modifying her witness statement as requested by Ms. Vritschan for a shorter presentation to the Juvenile Court judge.

That is misinformation clearly coming from Ms. Vritschan complaining about Dr. Horton to you in retaliation to Dr. Horton leaving ICATOR. That’s pretty clear given that Dr. Horton’s affidavit has been in Ms. Vritschan’s possession since October 2017 and for over a year Ms. Vritschan refused to use it. In complaining about the affidavit’s length Ms. Vritschan had merely passed on her lawyer’s nonsensical and feigned opinion that the affidavit was too long, completely ignoring that

  • 10 pages was not long for an expert affidavit by any means,
  • the affidavit was so long because Dr. Horton testified about the implant analysis, as well as Ms. Vritschan’s mental health, as well as mentioning every piece of evidence in the court bundle so that no item of evidence could be ignored or disappeared,
  • it had been agreed with Ms. Vritschan that Dr. Horton should mention every item of evidence in her affidavit,
  • Dr. Horton had agree to write a shorter version and requested to be told which paragraphs to take out but Ms. Vritschan had never told her which to take out and which to keep in, making it clear that Ms. Vritschan hadn’t even read or concerned herself seriously with the affidavit but was just making demands.

To this day, Ms. Vritschan hasn’t sent Dr. Horton the list of which of the numbered paragraphs in her affidavit to take out, leave in or modify. Ms. Vritschan also hasn’t given Dr. Horton the impression that she intends to use Dr. Horton’s affidavit in the foreseeable future.

I understand she has also only recently apologized in writing to Ms. Vritschan about what occurred at Erasme,

That is a lie, or rather a recurrent myth perpetuated by Ms. Vritschan. The fact is that Dr. Horton expressed how sorry she was about what had happened on the day that Ms. Vritschan had returned from Hospital Erasmus. Dr. Horton had then repeatedly expressed her regret about what had happened at regular intervals when Ms. Vritschan would accuse Dr. Horton that she hadn’t even apologised for what happened. The most recent such repeat reproach was after the work at the university in Belgium. Dr. Horton had then repeated her regrets. And Dr. Horton repeats her regrets now yet once more. And after so much expressing of how sorry she is, Dr. Horton also reminds everyone that she is not responsible for the actions of sadistic sociopaths and that the kidnap of the baby, while extremely shocking and regrettable, is not exactly surprising given that Belgian Intel had gunned Ms. Vritschan’s abdomen throughout the entire pregnancy and had already launched two brutal abortion attempts on the child during pregnancy during which the child had gone into shock for 24 hours as reported by Ms. Vritschan and as can be verified from the doctors visits that Ms. Vritschan had to undertake to check up on the child.

interestingly directly after conversation on Skype I had with Ms. Vritschan on the subject,

Yeah, unsurprising really given that that’s when Ms. Vritschan had yet another whinge to Dr. Horton that she hadn’t apologised sufficiently to Ms. Vritschan about what had happened.</p.

and she has recently sought to remove herself from any responsibility for what transpired at Erasme,

False. Dr. Horton just stated as she has done from the beginning that she is solely responsible for her own actions but not for the actions of Prof. Marie Delhaye, Dr. Maya Szombat, Dr. Frederic Millcent, 3 paedo-psychiatrists, Ms. Sinan, the unnamed doctor at Hospital Brugman, Judge Serck, Hospital Erasmus’ trauma-based mind-control programs that produce rooms with dirty mattresses on the floor, the Youth Court, Belgian Intel and the child trafficking rings.

as per email correspondence I have been copied on or/and been informed about by Ms. Vritschan.

Yes, it is known to Dr. Horton that yourself and Ms. Vritschan had been talking about Dr. Horton continuously and with near daily warning about Dr. Horton being issued by you to Ms. Vritschan since the Techno Forum break-up while Dr. Horton was neither privy to those conversations nor had her own daily conversations with former team members where she was issuing warnings about any of you two.

Given that (as reported earlier) Ms. Vritschan’s baby has, on the basis of the extended conversation a nurse had with Dr. Horton, been removed from her care by Erasme Hospital psychiatrists

Nope, the baby was removed on orders of the Head of the Neonatal Unit, on the basis of the interview of Ms. Vritschan by Prof. Delhaye, the lie of jaundice, the interview of Ms. Vritschan by 3 paedo-psychiatrists, the interview of Ms. Vritschan by a doctor from Hospital Brugman and by a judgement by Judge Serck.

and handed over to a Juvenile Court in Brussels which has continued, like the Erasme psychiatrists, to completely ignore all physical, medical, and surgical evidence of implants,

Yes, sounds like outright criminality flourishing quite apart from any of Dr. Horton’s statements, doesn’t it?

and has continually relied on Erasme psychiatrists’ inexplicably entrenched but avidly false and misdiagnosing statements to call this more than mentally competent and highly responsible and caring mother “paranoid delusional,”

Otherwise known as lying.

and has wrongfully held this sadly-traumatized child, first at Erasme Neonatal for a long while and later for over six months in a children’s home, where the mother has been allowed to visit only for half an hour per week—in an absolutely egregious miscarriage of justice;

Which sounds strikingly just like trauma-based mind-control of the newborn, doesn’t it?

given that the future of this child’s life continues to be in jeopardy, as she continues to be held in this home; and given that this matter is now the subject of litigation brought by Ms. Vritschan against Erasme Hospital—this is indeed a high-level scandal in Belgium and a very serious international human rights matter.

Yes, indeed. Perhaps it’s time to use the affidavit of the single expert witness who can testify about the issue that is fraudulently taken to be the lynch-pin of all this, namely that Ms. Vritschan had a synthetic implant in her throat?

My reports and press releases on this story derived at first from continuous narrations and updates from Dr. Horton in personal Skype conversations and texts, from podcasts and discussions with her at Alfred Webre’s channel, and then later on from direct telephone conversations and reports from Ms. Vritschan as well as later Skype conversations with Ms. Vritschan (I called and spoke to her a few times at the hospital while she was in the Psych Ward, she also reported after her release from the hospital on Alfred Webre’s channel), and from phone-conversations I had with Erasme hospital personnel incuding the Erasme Director of Communications (they did not reveal much, and prevented open reportage).

Sounds like Hospital Erasmus has something to hide, doesn’t it?

As far as the disputed reportage from Dr. Horton goes, given that I no longer have any trust in her statements and can no longer vouch for the reliability or veracity of any of it, I have no idea now what was true and what wasn’t,

You don’t seem to have an idea about what is true and what isn’t in general quite apart from Dr. Horton’s statements.

I simply reported her statements as true at the time.

Good job, as they are true.

The fact remains that directly after the birth and after her extended conversation with the nurse-midwife revealing unauthorized medical information about Ms. Vritschan,

That is false. It wasn’t “unauthorized medical information” given that Dr. Horton revealed just the medically relevant fact that Ms. Vritschan couldn’t breathe lying on her back (important to know before engaging in major surgery) because she had an obstruction in her throat that was constricting her air pipe (very important to know before major surgery and public knowledge after about 20 broadcasts of Technokriminalermittler on YouTube) that was still in there after surgery on Ms. Vritschan’s throat (the massive surgery scar for which was clearly visible to all the doctors present) and that was the counterpart of a massive device that had already been operated out of her throat (public knowledge after the device had been shown publicly on Techno Crime Fighters’ Forum Episode 26 which turned out to be synthetic (public knowledge after showing the scientific analysis on Techno Forum 26 above). So no “unauthorized medical information” had been revealed. Besides, as this was an operating theatre all doctors present were bound by confidentiality of patient data and entirely concerned about Ms. Vritschan’s medical situation.

Dr. Horton left the hospital that night, stating on our joint podcast at Alfred Webre’s channel that she left to give the mother and her baby privacy (while Ms. Vritschan informs us now that was a lie, she left saying she needed to work on her court case),

Both statements are correct as Dr. Horton had been with Ms. Vritchan since 6am and at 9pm after 15 hours of being continuously by Ms. Vritschan’s side, she thought it best that Ms. Vritschan should get some time to herself with her baby. She even said so to Ms. Vritschan. She then left the hospital and was indeed working on documents for her court case. Which of these is so objectionable?

Erasme psychiatrists swung into action against the mother, turned the baby over to Juvenile Court, and have since continued to stick by their actions, instead of acknowledging their (gigantic) error and taking steps to immediately release the baby from the custody of the Juvenile Court back to her mother.

Yeah, it’s almost like they are being paid or pressured to do that, isn’t it?

It is an absolute tragedy that this has occurred, and, in the interests of humanity, the Juvenile Court in Brussels should most definitely act immediately to return Ms. Vritschan’s child to her.

Which they have no reason to do, given that the only piece of evidence that proves their claims about implants being a delusion wrong is the analysis of the throat implant, which is in Dr. Horton’s affidavit, the only piece of evidence withheld from the judges to this day.

The truth of what exactly was said by Dr. Horton and what was said by the midwife will perhaps be discerned at court in the public trial that is upcoming.

What was said by Dr. Horton is already discernable in her affidavit and has been for over a year since October 2017. What the midwife claims was said remains a mystery to Dr. Horton and the world to this day.

Ms. Vritschan, whose newborn was taken from her by a group of medical doctors and psychiatrists at Erasme Hospital without examining and verifying proffered medical evidence, is, contrary to their confabulated misdiagnoses, more than mentally stable;

Yep. So ask yourself why doctors wouldn’t look at evidence and confabulate misdiagnoses.

I have known her as highly responsible, competent, compassionate, and effective as a human rights advocate and mother. Remember too that she is the founder of a cutting-edge human rights organization which seeks to help today’s victims of clandestine abuse by the secret services with scientifically finding physical evidence and making legal claims—and was making great headway in her work when this was done to her.

Can we possibly discern a motive in that that would explain all that ignoring evidence and confabulating misdiagnoses?

The Intelligence agencies are known to use all matter of rotten tricks to keep from being challenged, exposed, or found out, after all—and there appears to have been all manner of those committed here.

Yup. So what does that tell us?

It is my sincere hope that the next upcoming custody hearing will see the Juvenile Court judge recognize the infamy of what has occurred and immediately release the child back to her mother’s care.

Why would they reach a different conclusion from before if no new evidence is being presented?

For all my reportage in this matter in JIT Press Releases and articles I have published at The Everyday Concerned Citizen, please use the Keyword search box. I have linked in-text here to the relevant videos published at Alfred Webre’s channel, including at specific time-reference points where needed.

My Interviews with Changemakers interview with Melanie Vritschan highlights her outstanding human rights advocacy.

–Ramola D/Oct 27/2018

With comments in red by Dr. Horton.