A High Court case involving the Astra Zeneca “vaccine” has made the British national newspapers. Of course they are covering it with the usual amount of pro-vax propaganda that has accompanied the roll out. It “was the best gift ever”, “a triumph for British science” and characterising the side effects (or the one that was centre of this particular court case – thrombosis/blood clots) as affecting the “unlucky few”.
It was approved for emergency use as the case for alternatives was ruthlessly suppressed. This was meant to accord it’s developers indemnity from being sued if anything went wrong.
Now, what is probably the first in many cases, as there are many other serious adverse side effects that have been caused by the “vax” – such as myocarditis, excess menstruation, anaphylaxis, Guillian Barre Syndrome, Bells Palsy – the list goes on.
This is a landmark legal case in which it has been put to the High Court that the Astra Zeneca Covid jab was “defective” and claims of efficacy were vastly overstated.
Test Case One
Source as above
The High Court test case involves a Mr Jamie Scott who suffered from a bleed on the brain and suffered a significant, permanent brain injury and is now unable to work. He was “vaxxed” in April 2021 and within a short time frame (one to two weeks) he suffered a serious blood clot.
The claim is being made under the Consumer Protection Act (1987). The case argues that the AZ “vax” was not as safe as individuals were entitled to expect. Mr and Mrs Scott had this to say;
We were told by the Government the vaccine was safe and effective but what’s happened to Jamie has been life changing and their vaccine caused that.
AstraZeneca cannot continue to ignore circumstances in which their vaccine has caused devastating injury and loss…
Our legal case will seek to hold AstraZeneca to account but we need to build a significant fighting fund to get justice.
Test Case Two
The second test case is being brought by the widower of Mrs Alpa Tailor, who died aged 35.
An inquest confirmed she died as a result of the “vaccine”. Vaccine-induced Immune Thrombocytopenia and Thrombosis (VITT).
The Medicines and Health Regulatory Authority (MHRA) suspect at least 81 deaths in the UK are suspected to be linked to clotting and low platelets. Of those suffering this particular side effect almost one in five died as a result.
This ruling could pave the way for 80 damages claims (£80 million) – payable not by AZ but by the British Government.
Once this precedent is accepted in the UK this could potentially be a landslide – and maybe not just in the UK either.
It is worth remembering that Germany banned the use of AZ in under 60s in March 2021. Canada had earlier suspended its use for under 55s. The UK stopped AZ for under 30s in April 2021 and then under 40s in May 2021. The Telegraph notes that a glance at the latest finance accounts show that in in the three months to the end of June, the Anglo-Swedish group recorded no sales of the Covid-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca, now called Vaxzevria. By comparison, in the first quarter of 2022 it had sold $455 million (£350 million) worth.
Under a Freedom of Information request we now know that there have been 148 payouts under the Government Vaccine Damage Payment Scheme. 144 of which were for AZ at a cost of £120,000. A woefully inadequate sum.
As above
The victims had the vaccination out of a sense of duty – it felt the right thing to do to help Britain out of the pandemic and to prevent more vulnerable people being made ill by stopping transmission of the virus – but the result for them and their families has been catastrophic.
However, to add insult to injury, the vaccines were never even tested to ascertain if they stopped transmission – they don’t! As the Telegraph covers;
Many have been left wondering why they bothered. A World Health Organisation report in June 2022 was unclear about whether the vaccine stopped transmission of the virus. “No substantive data are available related to impact of the vaccine on transmission or viral shedding,” states the report in relation to AstraZeneca. Experts have suggested the AstraZeneca vaccine – much in line with its rivals – prevented transmission for around 70 days after the jab.
Well, experts suggest – and people relied on them to be honest and correct.
Its also worth bearing in mind that AZ never applied for a licence in the UK. What's App messages reveal the US authorities had their concerns about the vax. Meanwhile we have the words of Professor of medicine Sir John Bell, the British Government's chief adviser on life sciences that AZ had become “really frazzled”. He said in the messages;
they (AZ) misjudged some things like clinical trials data and manufacturing…
Legal Argument
- No warning of the risk of VITT in the product info sheet
- AZ press release stating their vax was between 62% to 90% effective at preventing symptomatic Covid-19 in clinical trials whereas in fact the absolute risk reduction was only 1.2% (as from the Prescription Medicines Code of Practice Authority)
Lawyers are to examine government reassurance.
Matt Hancock in a departmental minute is quoted as stating;
The data so far on this vaccine suggests that there will be no adverse reactions, and so no liability.
As above
We know for a fact that there have been some adverse reactions – of course the media is still clinging to the narrative that these are very rare. However, one in a thousand can be described as rare – but when you give out 66 million doses that adds up to a lot of people. So how they can state – on the record – that there will be no adverse reactions beats me. Is any drug in this world 100% safe? Especially one that hasn't undergone rigorous clinical trials.
About one in 50,000 recipients under the age of 50 of the AstraZeneca vaccine were affected, and thrombosis is just the tip of the iceberg. Can you think of anyone who has just died suddenly? Because I know I can.
Sarah Moore, partner at Hausfeld;
...it is plainly factually inaccurate to claim that vaccines do no harm given the experience of our client group – the vaccine injured and bereaved.
AZ legal defence rests on that the MHRA gave “full marketing approval...for the UK based on the safety profile and efficacy of the vaccine.
The Telegraph states that the vaccine “undoubtedly” prevented a lot of deaths. This is the kind of rubbish we are still getting. It’s sheer propaganda. It’s based on suggestion and forecast by those with a vested interest.
It’s also note worthy that whilst those most at risk of dying from Covid-19 were elderly with two or more co-morbidities, the age profile for those who died or were seriously injured by the vax were fit and healthy younger people, for whom Covid-19 posed little or no risk.
On Jan 26th 2021, the UK recorded what is thought to be the first death from VITT. Dr Stephen Wright, who as a front-line health worker had been entitled to have the jab in the first wave of the rollout, died 10 days after receiving it.
At his inquest two years later, the coroner Andrew Harris would describe Dr Wright’s death as a “very unusual and deeply tragic case… My conclusion as to the cause of death is unintended complications of vaccination. Dr Wright’s widow is planning to sue AstraZeneca.
In a sad indictment of our age The Telegraph has spoken to relatives about their losses. and found some victims have been reluctant to speak out for fear of the stigma of being branded anti-vaxxers. People write about their vax injuries online in code so they aren’t victims of censorship.
