© Official site for the takeover of the economy financed by royalties FERRAYE - 2021
Gerhard ULRICH fait la lumière sur le régime de l’oligarchie occulte de la franc-maçonnerie et  de ses clubs de services (Rotary, Lions Club, Kiwanis, etc.),  qui  dirigent le système judicaire actuel et les pouvoirs politiques. Le citoyen qui passe à la moulinette de la machine judiciaire bien huilée, ressent instinctivement qu’il est Victime d’un complot. Mais il est incapable de le prouver, car le système cultive soigneusement la non transparence. Si une telle personne invoque l’aide des politiciens, on se débarrasse d’elle sous prétexte du dogme  de la séparation des pouvoirs. Les dogmes ont toujours servi à asservir les peuples. L’auteur de ces révélations observe depuis 16 ans le dysfonctionnement judiciaire, archivant systématiquement les résultats dans sa base de données, devenue volumineuse. A l’opposé d’autres critiques du régime, il s’est montré jusqu’à présent prudent concernant ses attaques au sujet de la Franc-maçonnerie. Il était conscient que ses connaissances de ce qui se passe dans nos prétoires, étaient assez modestes. Cependant, la persévérance et un travail continu lui permettent aujourd’hui de rejoindre la position de Marc-Etienne BURDET sur le sujet Le dossier de la Victime Jacques ROMANENS démontre une fois de plus les conséquences des coups protés aux Victimes par les Francs-Maçons qui occupent les sièges du pouvoir judiciaire. Leur activité crasse en faveur de leurs “Frères” de Secte, contribue à mettre les justiciables dans des situations insoutenables. Pour les Victimes judiciaires, il est peine perdue de vouloir prouver à leurs bourreaux qu’elles sont dans leur bon droit... C’est seulement en démontrant à l’Opinion publique que les magistrats détracteurs sont indignes et ne sont pas légitimés à exercer leurs fonctions que les choses changeront ! Nous lançons un APPEL AU PEUPLE POUR METTRE FIN À CETTE TYRANNIE !
Denunciation of the attempt of liquidation of Jacques ROMANENS Jacques   ROMANENS   was   struck   by   rare   illnesses,   which   left   him   heavily   disabled and   vulnerable,   exposed   to   the   risk   of   choking.   According   to   his   will,   he   continued   to live in his flat in Renens VD, getting home care. On   June   17   2011   the   nurse   Augustine ANKER ,   av.   de   Montchosi   63,   Lausanne   and the    nursing    auxiliary    Aurore    BARBE     of    the    CMS    Renens    Nord    did    attempt    to liquidate this troublesome patient by waterboarding. He   survived   miraculously   and   was   able   to   witness   how   these   angels   of   dead had proceeded. The two women benefitted of the scandalous protection by their hierarchy: Manon FAWER , Service Manager, ch. des Glycines 10, 1022 Chavannes-près-Renens Francine JECKER , responsible at the DSAS, Grand’Rue 3, 1162 St-Prex Karim BOUBAKER , cantonal physician. Exploiting   a   complacency   expertise   established   by   the   forensic   physician    Patrice MANGIN ,   the   «   prosecutor   »   Pascal   GILLIÉRON   turned   down   the   complaint   of Jacques   ROMANENS   by   Order   of   classification,   approved   by   the   «Attorney   General»     Eric   COTTIER ,   Av.   de   Jaman   11,   Lausanne,   in   favour   of   ANKER ,   with   the   aim   to avoid   any   risk   of   a   public   debate   during   a   trial.   The   appeals   of   the   plaintiff   were buried   by   the   cantonal   «   Judges   »   Bernard   ABRECHT ,   r.   du   Vieux-Bourg   1,   Cully, Joël    KRIEGER ,    av.    Gratta-Paille    11,    Lausanne    and    Guillaume    PERROT .    the Vaudois    federal    «Judge»    Christian    DENYS ,    ch.    des    Crêtes    2a,    Lausanne,    well known   for   covering   Vaudois   corruption   cases   in   series,   did   as   well   act   as   a   partner   in crime of his Vaudois cronies in this case. The   State   Councillors   Pierre-Yves   MAILLARD ,   r.   du   Lac   34,   Renens   and   Béatrice MÉTRAUX ,   ch.   du   Ru   17,   Bottens   have   been   informed   of   this   attempt   of   liquidation. Both   barricaded   themselves   behind   the   chimerical   separation   of   powers,   becoming thus    partners    in    crime    of    an    assassination    attempt    at    the    costs    of    Jacques ROMANENS, by betraying their political ideals. Since   all   federal   Judges   are   challenged,   this   denunciation   was   addressed   by   Gerhard ULRICH   to   the   President   of   the   penal   federal   Court   of   Bellinzone,   Daniel   KIPFER- FASCIATI,   as depositary instance. In   view   of   the   censorship   imposed   by   the   Vaudois   «Magistrates»   concerning   the Internet   portal   worldcorruption.info    and   the   complicity   of   the   «   journalists   »,   this denunciation is spread massively by means of flyers. The partners in crime of the liquidation attempt against Jacques ROMANENS
Jacques ROMANENS did survive by a miracle and was thus able to witness and to describe, how the angels of dead had proceeded with him in the framwork of home care…
Gerhard ULRICH
Augustine ANKER Nurse Aurore BARBE Nursing auxiliary Manon FAWER Manager APREMADOL Francine JECKER Responsable DAS Pascal GILLIÉRON Prosecutor Patrick AUBERSON Prosecutor Laurent MAYE Prosecutor Eric COTTIER Attorney General Bernard ABRECHT Cantonal Judge Joël KRIEGER Cantonal Judge Guillaume PERROT Cantonal Judge Christian DENYS Federal Judge Patrice MANGIN Forensic physician Karim BOUBAKER Cantonal physician Pierre-Yves MAILLARD State Councillor Béatrice MÉTRAUX State Councillor
Did the liquidation of troublesome old persons start  ? The    uggly    word    of    guardianship    has    been    replaced    by    the    euphemistic    trusteeship    in    the    context    of    the professionalisation of the « protection of children and adults ». On   April   23   2014   the   journalist   Frederico   CAMPONOVO   /   24   Heures   denounced   the   case   of   Agnes   Rita ROSENSTIEL     who    has    been    placed    under    trusteeship    and    forced    to    live    in    the    retirment    home    Nelty    de Beausobre   in   Morges.   Practically   all   her   belongings   were   sold   or   thrown   away.   Today,   at   the   age   of   93   years,   she is   still   lucid   and   mobile.   She   is   sitting   every   day   in   front   of   her   PC   for   writing   her   biography   Pourquoi   ?   (Why?) which will be published soon (Neoprint, Morges). In January 2015 the RTS television followed with a report on this subject : http://pages.rts.ch/emissions/temps-present/societe-mœurs/6334067-places-de-force.html#6442230 In   this   case,   the   powers   tolerated   the   publication   in   the   form   of   a   well   dosed purifying   scandal.   The   public   opinion   reacted   very   lively,   since   we   are   all   risking to   fall   one   day   in   such   a   situation,   where   other   people   are   disposing   of   you against   your   will   because   of   old   age.   However,   the   society   is   unaware   of   the censorship put in place nowadays in our country, Switzerland. Our   authorities   are   tolerating   much   worse   cases   than   that   one   described   above, at   the   costs   of   old   persons   in   need   of   too   expensive   care.   The   case   of   Jacques ROMANENS,    victim    of    a    liquidation    attempt    by    two    nurses    of    the    CMS Renens    Nord    on    June    17    2011    is    probably    not    unique    because    the    old vulnerable   and   isolated   old   persons   who   were   really   liquidated   cannot   witness any more… For which reason do I dear to voice such a monstrous suspicion ? The   way   how   the   authorities   of   the   Département   de   la   Santé   et   de   l’Action Sociale   (DSAS   –   Department   of   health   and   social   action),   assisted   by   the judiciary   Magistrates   and   the   political   leaders   did   stifle   this   affair   by   a   determination   sending   chills   up   the   spine,   is letting   us   presume   that   those   people   are   informed   about   what   is   going   on   and   are   used   to   impose   the   silence   in such   cases.   Anyway,   the   family   members   of   Jacques   ROMANENS   never   managed   to   alert   the   Mass   Media   for publishing that crime. Why   do   the   authorities   cover   the   nurse   Augustine   ANKER,   Avenue   de   Montchoisi   63,   1006   Lausanne,   who   has attempted   to   suffocate   Jacques   ROMANENS,   disabled   and   without   defence   ?   Do   the   authorities   protect   this angel   of   dead   because   she   may   know   too   many   things,   or   being   even   the   executioner   of   these   sly   practices?   Did the liquidation of troublesome old persons start   ? The illnesses of Jacques ROMANENS (10.09.1934 – 01.11.2015) This   patient   was   suffering   of   two   rare   illnesses,   i.e.   the   myasthnenic   syndrome   of   Lambert-Eaton,   diagnosed   in June   2010,   and   the   cerebellar   syndrome,   discovered   in   August   of   the   same   year      ( document   1 ).   His   language had   become   difficult   to   understand,   and   he   was   exposed   to   the   risk   of   choking.   Although   heavily   disabled   and vulnerable,   he   had   decided   to   continue   to   live   in   his   flat.   The   CMS   Renens   Nord   provided   the   necessary   care   at his home. In addition, his ex-wife Suzanne SCHAER was very present. On    February    2011    he    was    seriously    choking    and    had    a    catastrophic    broncho-aspiration.    He    had    to    be hospitalized    urgently    at    the    CHUV    (Centre    Hospitalier    Universitaire    Vaudois).    Impressed    by    this    traumatic experience,   the   patient   changed   his   habits   of   alimentation,   being   afraid   of   chokings.   He   lost   20   kg   of   his   weight within   one   year.   The   doctors   decided   to   have   him   hospitalized   once   more   from   May   24   to   June   13   2011   for introducing   a   gastric   probe   (PEG)   for   a   partial   artificial   nutrition.   The   report   of   release   to   the   address   of   the   CMS Renens Nord specified : «   Is   presenting   a   dysphagia   to   solids   and   liquids,   important   choking.   It   is   necessary   to   thicken   the   liquids.   Is eating   a   meal   thoroughly   mixed   with   plenty   of   sauce   for   binding   well   altogether?   Must   use   the   small   spoon, otherwise he is swallowing too big bites ». ( document 2 ). The   CMS   Renens   Nord   had   to   intervene   again   for   providing   care   at   home   and   delivering   the   meals. A   nurse   from the   laboratories   BICHSEL,   furnishing   the   artificial   nutrition   did   train   the   staff   of   the   CMS   Renens   Nord   how   to   use this gastric probe. The troublesome patient The   occupational   therapist   of   the   CMS   Renens   Nord   who   had   been   in   charge   of   Jacques   ROMANENS   had voiced   loudly   his   astonishment   that   Mister   ROMANENS   had   not   yet   joined   a   retirement   home.   Other   humiliating behaviours   added   up,   in   order   to   have   Suzanne   SCHAER   to   intervene   at   the   Management   of   the   CMS   for obtaining   by   bad   grace   the   change   of   the   person,   taking   care   of   this   troublesome   patient.   He   was   replaced   by   the nurse   Augustine   ANKER ,   a   change   to   the   worse.      In   the   morning   of   June   17   2011   this   nurse   attempted   to liquidate the patient,  in complicity with the nursing auxiliary Aurore BARBE . Extract from the penal complaint of September 9 2011 of Mr. ROMANENS : «…   in   the   morning,   there   remained   three   or   four   decilitres   in   the   bag.   My   referent   of   the   CMS,   i.e.   Mrs.   ANKER, whose   first   name   I   am   ignoring,   decided   thus   to   have   me   the   rest   to   take   in   via   the   mouth.   For   this   purpose,   she filled   a   glass   with   the   product.   She   forced   me   to   drink   it,   in   spite   of   my   expression   of   being   terrorized   and   of   my contesting.   In   fact,   I   was   very   well   aware   of   the   risk   that   the   product   would   invade   my   lungs   that   way   and consequently   threaten   my   life.   (…) At   that   very   moment,   when   I   understood   that   Mrs. ANKER   wanted   to   force   me to   drink   this   liquid,   tasting   by   the   way   awfully,   I   was   terrorized.   It   is   impossible   that   this   passed   unnoticed   by   the concerned   person,   but   she   proceeded   nonetheless   against   my   will.   My   panic   yet   increased   when   she   did   force me   to   drink   this   substance   via   the   mouth   and   I   was   choking.   The   woman   watched   me   peacefully,   that   picture   is sticking   in   my   mind,   observing   me   to   suffocate,   and   thereafter   she   left   without   others,   leaving   on   the   table   the   rest of   is   source   (thereafter,   one   will   also   speak   of   Novasource,   since   two   different   liquids   had   been   prescribed   for   the patient),   just   after   having   filled   in   the   notification   book   of   administered   cares,   but   without   signing   it.   I   produce   a copy of this care notices. I   remained   frozen,   paralyzed,   and   unable   to   emit   the   slightest   sound.   In   these   conditions   the   nursing   auxiliary found   me,   coming   in   as   usually   for   performing   my   toiletry   towards   11   a.m.   What   a   horrible   surprise,   when   I understood   that   my   sufferings   had   not   come   to   an   end.   As   a   matter   of   fact,   in   her   turn,   this   nursing   auxiliary whose   identity   I   am   ignoring,   filled   a   glass   with   the   rest   of   Isosource,   and   all   by   having   a   phone   conversation   at low   voice,   forced   me   to   drink.   I   was   unable   to   make   the   slightest   movement,   I   felt   destroyed   and   frozen. Inevitably,   there   were   again   chokings,   reflux   through   the   nose.   Subsequently,   the   nursing   auxiliary   left   without making   any   annotations   in   the   care   diary.   Nonetheless   I   did   survive,   although   the   sufferings   were   terrible.   As   a consequence, I had to be hospitalized at the CHUV for 26 days.»  ( document 4 ). As   a   matter   of   fact,   these   very   heavy   chokings   caused   reiterated   broncho-aspirations.   Already   next   day,   he   had fever   temperature   and   on   June   22   2017,   a   pneumonia   overcame.   He   had   to   be   hospitalized   urgently   ( document 3 ). The   irresponsible   behaviour   of   the   representatives   of   the   Department   of   health   and   social Action   (DSAS   - Department headed by the State Councilor Pierre-Yves MAILLARD) The   Lady   Manager   of   APREMADOL    of   the   CMS   Renens   Nord,   Manon   FAWER ,   chemin   des   Glycines   10,   1022 Chavannes-près-Renens ordered an «inquiry». Of what did this inquiry consist ? She   asked   the   consulting   physician   of   the   AVASAD,   the   Dr.   HONGLER   to   question   the   accused   nurse,   and   one got   confirmed   by   the   supplier   of   the   artificial   nutrition   that   the   product   was   not   poisonous   when   taken   in   orally. Subsequently,   FAWER    hurried   to   deliver   a   disculpatory   certification   in   favour   of ANKER    in   the   form   of   letter addressed to Suzanne SCHAER on September 30 2011. Extracts : «   Henceforward,   and   taking   into   consideration   the   foregoing,   we   can   confirm   that   our   employee   has   not   forced the    client    at    any    moment    to    drink    the    Novasource.    (…)    Considering    the    above    specified    elements,    the management    of    the    APREMADOL    does    not    recognize    any    professional    mistake    to    have    occurred    when administering    the    delegated    medical    acts,    realized    by    our    employee    (…)    We    regret    lively    the    defamatory statements you are mentioning in your mail, and we cannot accept them by any means...»  ( document 5 ). This   behaviour   of   FAWER   is   scandalous   and   irresponsible.   In   her   letter,   she   is   passing   under   silence   the intervention   of   the   nursing   auxiliary   and   accomplice   Aurore   BARBE.   One   can   presume   that   BARBE   and   ANKER did   communicate   with   one   another   via   mobile   phones   put   at   disposal   by   the   CMS   Renens   Nord.   If   so,   it   would have   been   very   easy   for   the   Management   to   check   on   the   monthly   invoicing   extracts   of   phone   calls,   whether there   had   occurred   a   phone   contact,   as   reported   by   Jacques   ROMANENS.   Anyway,   FAWER   should   have   had interrogated Aurore   BARBE   separately,   and   should   have   compared   their   declarations   with   that   one   of   the   patient. She   might   have   had   organized   as   well   two   separate   confrontations   between   Jacques   ROMANENS   and   the   two nurses.   However,   the   complaints   of   Jacques   ROMANENS   remained   inexistent   for   Mrs.   FAWER.   She   did   not   even ever   talk   with   him   !   This   is   the   behaviour   of   a   partner   in   crime,   and   certainly   not   that   one   of   a   Manager   of   a socio-medical entity. On   the   basis   of   this   complacency   attestation,   the   responsible   of   the   claim   administration   of   the   of   the   Health   and Social   Action   Department   Francine   JECKER,   Grand’   Rue   3,   1162   St-Prex,   did   corroborate   on   Nov.1st   2011   the forged   statement   «   that   there   has   been   no   professional   mistake   committed   by   the   nurse   on   which   suspicions   of mistreatment   had   rested»,   and   this   rag   has   been   countersigned   by   the   cantonal   physician   Karim   BOUBAKER    ! ( document 9 ). Up to date, BOUBAKER is hiding behind this wrong statement ( document 49 ). The   Vaudois   do   have   the   right   to   know   who   is   this   Karim   BOUBAKER   :   a   man   who   is   betraying   his   duties as a physician and as a government employee. «The inquiry» of the «prosecutor» Pascal GILLIÉRON The   penal   affair   was   allocated   on   September   12   2011   to   the   «prosecutor»         Pascal   GILLIÉRON   ( document   30 ), who   terminated   his   «inquiry»   3   years   and      7   months      later      with   an      Order   of   classification   in   favour   of Augustine     ANKER ( document 35 ). One is instantly understanding that this Gentleman did not kill himself on the job. The   first   witness   who   he   questioned   after   3   months   of   incubation   on   December   8   2011   was   Mrs.   Suzanne SCHAER   ( document   06 ).   Two   months   later,   his   diary   permitted   him   on   February   17   2012   to   listen   to   the witnessing   of   Nathalie   BELLO   –   the   nurse   of   the   laboratories   of   BICHSEL   who   had   trained   the   personnel   of   the CMS   Renens   on   the   use   of   the   gastric   probe   ( document   07 ),   and      as   well   the      speech   therapist      of   Jacques     ROMANENS, Mrs.Séverine ISOARD ( document 8 ). Almost   one   year   after   the   crime,   GILLIÉRON   interrogated   finally   Augustine   ANKER    «as   a   person   called   to provide   information   »   ( document   10 ).   She   showed   up   sheltered   with   the   Laundering   certificate   established   by the   government   clerk   Francine   JECKER   and   countersigned   by   the   cantonal   physician    Karim   BOUBAKER   ( document 09 ). It   goes   without   saying   that   the   declarations   of   Augustine   ANKER   are   in   direct   contradiction   to   those   of   Jacques ROMANENS.   She   claimed   particularly   not   to   have   been   briefed   not   to   administer   the   artificial   nutrition   liquid orally. She even repeated it. Extracts, of which the equivocal passages are printed in bold letters : «   When   I   arrived   at   8   a.m.   on   June   17   for   checking   the   conditions   of   Mr.   ROMANENS,   I   realized   that   there   had remained   liquid   in   the   nutritional   bag.   This   bag   was   in   the   bedroom   of   Mr.   ROMANENS.   What   concerns   him,   he had   left   already   his   bed   and   was   in   the   kitchen,   sitting   in   his   Wheelchair.   The   gastric   probe   had   been   already rinsed.   When   I   realized   that   there   had   remained   liquid   in   the   bag,   I   suggested   him   to   drink   it.   I   remember   very well   to   have   asked   him   first   to   taste   the   liquid.   So   he   did.   To   my   big   astonishment,   he   said   that   it   tasted not   badly    (One   knows   that   this   liquid   has   a   repulsatory   taste).    He   drunk   than   the   whole   lot   of   the   liquid,   which   I had   poured   into   a   glass.   There   was   no   problem.   He   did   not   choke.   He   did   not   seem   to   suffocate.   He   did   not protest    What   concerns   me,   I   thought   that   there   was   no   risk   to   proceed   this   way.    Actually,   at   that   time,   Mr. ROMANENS   did   feed   himself   during   the   daily   hours   with   liquid   food   which   he   stocked   in   his   refrigerator   and which   were   as   thick   as   the   liquid   of   the   probe,   are   even   more   liquid   than   that   product.   I   did   thus   not   fair   a possible   choking.    I   gave   practically   all   the   content   of   the   probe   to   drink   to   Mr.   ROMANENS.   According   to   my memory,   I   disposed   of   the   rest    (in   contradiction   with   what   she   had   said   previously).   Answering   to   your question,    I    say    not    to    have    given    the    whole    remaining    quantity,    for    not    overcharging    the    stomach    of    Mr. ROMANENS   (This   is   in   contradiction   with   her   previous   statement   !).     You   let   me   know   the   description   provided   by Mr.   ROMANENS   in   his   complaint.   I   am   extremely   astonished.   At   no   time   I   observed   that   Mr.   ROMANENS   felt terrorized,   are   just   reluctant   to   drink   the   liquid. As   I   have   told   you,   I   did   not   observe   him   to   have   suffocated.   When I   left   at   about   9   –   9.15   a.m,   (How   to   explain   that   she   has   stayed   75   minutes,   whereas   usually,   she   stayed   just during   20   to   30   minutes    ?   –   document   29    ),   Mr.   ROMANENS   was   still   in   the   kitchen.   He   prepared   to   lunch   and   to swallow the pharmaceuticals prepared by Mrs. SCHAER. He was perfectly calm. A   nursing   auxiliary   came   to   see   Mr.   ROMANENS   during   that   morning   for   the   toiletry   of   Mr.   ROMANENS.   I   ignore who   was   in   charge.   You   indicate   that   Mr.   ROMANENS   is   specifying   that   it   is   a   person   prenamed Aurore.   We   do have   an   auxiliary   with   this   first   name   at   our   service.   I   ignore   her   family   name.   Usually,   if   the   auxiliary   is   observing a   problem,   she   has   to   report   it   to   me,   and   I   notice   the   incidence   on   a   diary.   As   you   see,   there   does   not   exist   an indication   corresponding   to   such   an   event   (Aurore   BARBE   was   reporting   to   her.   She   knew   here   thus   perfectly, and   that   day,   in   opposition   to   the   routine,   BARBE   had   made   no   inscription   at   all   in   that   diary   –   document   29 ).   I do   not   remember   neither   that   an   auxiliary   would   have   come   to   see   me.   I   point   out   that   a   diary   of   events   is   existing as   well   at   the   residence   of   the   patient   where   the   intervening   staff   is   noting   observations.   You   show   me   the documents   6/2,   6/3   and   6/4.   That’s   it.   For   answering   you,   the   auxiliary   did   go   to   the   home   of   Mr.      ROMANENS   on that day of June 17 in the morning; shed did not phone me during her service hours ». GILLIÉRON   could   have   ordered   retroactively   the   survey   of   the   phone   conversations   recorded   by   the   operator   of the   mobile   phones   of   the   two   nurses.   He   did   not   do   it   intentionally.   He   never   called   BARBE   for   an   interrogation, avoiding thus any contradiction. It   is   as   well   surprising   that   the   Lawyer   of   Jacques   ROMANENS   did   not   have   the   idea   to   request   to   have Augustin ANKER   put   under   investigation   for   preventing   the   collusion   with   her   subordinate,   Aurore   BARBE.   Or   to   have   at least   insisted   to   call   the   first   one   for   a   second   interrogation,   for   provoking   more   contradictions   in   her   declarations, since that Lawyer has not been available to assist to the interrogation of Mrs. ANKER on May 14, 2012. When   a   Vaudois   prosecutor   wants   to   have   an   innocent   condemned   without   evidences,   he   is   putting   him   in   pre- trial   custody   in   isolation,   harassing   him   day   and   night   with   interrogations   up   to   the   point   where   the   client   is depressing,   having   the   objective   to   yield   finally   diverging   versions,   which   unmask   the   person   to   be   a   liar.   To repeat   the   interrogations   moderately   and   at   intervals,   is   without   any   doubt   a   valid   tactic.   There   exists   a   good chance   to   collect   exploitable   contradictions   of   a   guilty   person.   Why   to   hell   did   GILLIÉRON   renounce   in   the present case to this approach, so dear to the Vaudois Magistrates ? The   pretexts   of   Augustine   ANKER,   according   to   which   she   had   ignored   that   one   could   not   give   to   drink   to   this patient   unthickened   liquids   are   totally   incredible.   The   whole   staff   of   the   CMS   Renens   Nord   was   aware   that   the very big risk of this patient were chokings. She is telling it herself : «   I   remember   as   well   that   the   whole   staff   of   the   CMS   was   querying   very   much   the   manner   how   to   handle   this patient.      I   remember   to   have   spoken   to   the   liaison   nurse   of   the   CHUV   who   voiced   her   doubts   about   the opportunity   and   the   risks   to   send   a   patient   back   home   on   whom   a   gastric   probe   had   been   introduced.   (…) Furthermore,   he   had   to   sleep   with   the   upper   part   of   his   body   elevated,   in   order   to   avoid   chokings.   I   hand   you   out an   extract   of   diary   of   the   CMS   in   relation   with   this   patient. As   you   will   see,   I   noted   this   need   on   June   10   2011   after a phone contact with Mrs. DONZALLAZ, dietician at the CHUV »  ( document 10 ). She   was   as   well   informed   about   the   instructions   provided   by   the   CHUV   in   this   context   ( document   02 ). The   sheer existence of the gastric probe could not let ANKER ignorant ! Nonetheless,   GILLIÉRON   wrote   to   the   CHUV   for   obtaining   the   confirmation   that   this   patient   was   hospitalized subsequently   to   a   pneumonia   caused   a   few   days   earlier   by   the   repeated   broncho-aspirations   provoked   by ANKER  ( document 11 ). The plaintiff had thus not fantasized. For   the   prosecutor   Pascal   GILLIÉRON,   an   assassination   attempt   is   to   be   dealt   with   by   a   lower   priority than   property   offenses   !   And   he   overshadowed   means   of   evidences   by   ommitting   to   realize   certain investigations, which would deserves that designation. By   letter   of   June   13   2012   the   Lawyer   of   Jacques   ROMANENS   requested   that   the   head   of   the   service   MENH   of the   CHUV   (the   specialist   in   this   matter)   furnished   a   more   detailed         expertise         about   the   consequences   of        broncho-aspirations    ( document    14 ).    Having    received    no    reaction    whatsoever,    this    Lawyer    lodged    finally    a complaint   for   denial   of   justice   at   the   cantonal   court   ( document   18 ).   Invited   to   give   an   explanation   about   his laziness, GILLIÉRON did express himself in a way which is unmasking him ( document 19 ). Quotations : «   The   actors   of   the   penal   chain   have   to   face   an   explosion   of   a   number   of   certain   crimes,   especially   concerning burglary   and   drug   trafficking.      (…)   In   these   circumstances,   the   Prosecutors’   Office   must   make   a   choice   of priorities   to   dedicate   to   certain   inquiries   more   sensitive   on   the   level   of   the   criminal   politics.   (…).   The   undersigning is   estimating   that   the   infringements   reported   by   Jacques   ROMANENS   are   belonging   to   the   category   whose treatment   is   less   urgent.   On   the   one   hand,   one   can   already   exclude,   considering   the   already   administered evidences, a worrisome criminal determination with the denounced person … » «   The   undersigned   estimates   that   the   Prosecutors’   office   has   not   to   mandate   blindly   any   measure   requested   by the   parties,   but   that   it   is   up   to   this   instance   to   measure   the   opportunity,   before   ordering   them.   In   the   present   case, the   request   of   the   plaintiff,   tending   to   have   an   psychiatric   expertise   carried   out   in   a   medico-social   surrounding,   is inevitably   injuring   the   reputation   of   the   concerned   person   (….)   Considering   the   situation   in   which   the   Prosecutors’ Office   is   today,   the   undersigned   is   estimating   that   the   reproaches   of   inertia   which   are   voiced   against   him   are unfounded and t his because measures of inquiry had been indeed realized in this file ». The   arrogance   of   this   Magistrate   is   speaking,   and   Mister   Prosecutor   has   been   the   guts   to   pretend   that   he   has   not been   inactive.   As   a   matter   of   fact,   the   Lawyer   of   the   plaintiff   had   to   relaunch   GILLIÉRON   by   two   dozens   of messages.    Examples    :    document    12     –    document    14     –    document    15     –    document    16     –    document    17   document 24   And the second Lawyer of Jacques ROMANENS who had to intervene again in at least a dozen of occasions ! Not   being   impressed   at   all,   GILLIÉRON   continued   to   refuse   to   order   the   requested   medical   expertise      ( document 20 ). The   appeal   for   denial   of   justice   was   nonetheless   accepted   ( document   21 ).   GILLIÉRON,   for   not   «   ordering   blindly any   measure   which   could   be   requested   by   the   parties»   mandated   the   forensic   physician   of   the   canton   of   Vaud, and not a specialist in the subject, to provide a complacency expertise.  See next chap. The   Lady   Lawyer   of   Augustine   ANKER   did   suggest   to   GILLIÉRON   ( document   13 )   to   call   as   a   witness   the nurse   Kelly   QUINTON,   who   had   allegedly   administered   care   to   Mr.   ROMANENS   from   6.32   to   6.52   p.m.   on   June 11   2011. This   was   an   attempt   to   introduce   a   fake   witness. Actually,   it   has   been   the   nurse   Laurence   VILLARS   who had   given   that   care,   and   she   had   been   shocked   of   what   she   has   heard. Anyway,   the   Lawyer   of   Mr.   ROMANENS had   insisted   for   nothing   to   have   this   witness   called   to   be   heard   ( document   15 ).   GILLIÉRON   did   not   react   in   both cases. As   indicated   above,   GILLIÉRON   did   issue   his   Order   of   classification   in   favour   of   Augustine   ANKER   on   April   13 15, with the approval of the Attorney General, Eric COTTIER  ( document 35 ). The complacency expertise issued by the forensic physician Patrice MANGIN Of   course,   GILLIÉRON   did   not   follow   the   request   of   the   Lawyer   of   Jacques   ROMANENS   to   mandate   the   Chief   of the   Otorhinolaryngology   Service   of   the   CHUV   to   establish   a   medical   expertise   in   this   case,   although   this   should have been imperatively the choice. Probably   after   having   received   orders   by   his   boss,   Eric   COTTIER ,   he   mandated   the   forensic   physician   of   the Centre   Universitaire   Romand   de   Médecine   Légale   (CURML),   Patrice   MANGIN    with   this   expertise   ( document 23 ).   This   is   surprising,   since   MANGIN   is   basically   a   toxicologist,   that   is   to   say   a   layman   concerning   the   illnesses of    Jacques    ROMANENS.    One    ignores    in    which    branch    the    co-author    of    this    «expertise»,    the    Dr.    Raquel VILARINO is specialized. One   has   to   know   the   ties   existing   between   MANGIN   and   the   Vaudois   Prosecutors’   Office.   See   document   50 . MANGIN   has   been   the   reliable   accomplice   of   the   Vaudois   Prosecutors’   Office,   serving   as   a   provider   of complacency   expertise   to   Eric   COTTIER .   which   enabled   latter   to   commit   his   judiciary   crimes   at   the   costs of François LÉGERET  and Laurent SÉGALAT . See : L’affaire Légeret – un assassin imaginaire. Jacques SECRETAN, éditions Mon Village, 2016. Et une condamnation bâtie sur du sable – L’affaire Ségalat. Jacques SECRETAN, éditions Mon Village, 2015. Suzanne   SCHAER   is   presuming   that   MANGIN   did   not   receive   the   complete   medical   file. As   a   matter   of   fact,   the report    of    the    CHUV    of    March    22    2011,    describing    the    illnesses    of    which    Mr.    ROMANENS    was    suffering ( document   01 ),   is   mentioned   nowhere   in   the   expertise   of   MANGIN.   She   did   observe   that   the   letter   of   the   Lawyer of   Mr.   ROMANENS,   dated   September   6   2013,   containing   as   enclosure   said   report   of   the      CHUV      had      simply     vanished  from  the  penal  file ( document 27 ). Whatsoever,   MANGIN   did   conform   to   the   expectations   of   his   sponsor,   GILLIÉRON   ( document   25 ).   The   greatest loophole   in   this   rag   paper   is   the   fact   that   MANGIN   is   simply   overshadowing   the   liquidation   attempt   experienced by   Jacques   ROMANENS,   for   concentrating   on   the   question   about   the   impact   of   choking.   The   angel   of   dead ANKER   was   sure   that   her   victim   heavily   disabled   and   vulnerable   would   not   survive   her   attempt.   However, Jacques   ROMANENS   did   survive   and   was   able   to   witness   about   what   had   happened   to   him.   Passing   this   fact under silence is evidencing the partiality of MANGIN. MANGIN   quibbled   in   detail   about   the   daily   chokings   of   the   patient.   Obviously,   for   him   choking   is   the   same   thing as   broncho-aspiration.   This   is   wrong,   as   Suzanne   SCHAER   is   explaining   it   in   one   of   her   letters   to   the   Lawyer   of Jacques ROMANENS  ( document 29  ). Quotation : «   Concerning   the   chokings.   On   the   DVD   which   I   did   hand   over   to   you,   Jacques   is   choking   because   of   a   coffee insufficiently   thickened.   You   will   observe   that   the   first   swallowing   is   always   prudent   in   order   to   test   the   thickening and   the   temperature   of   the   liquid.   Inevitably,   this   is   followed   by   an   unpleasant   coughing   and   he   needs   a   while   to start breathing again. It is harrowing. It   is   this   type   of   benign   choking   that   the   procedure   is   ruminating.   They   do   not   have   any   consequence.   (As contrast,    a    massive    false    road    brings    food    to    the    lungs,    what    the    CHUV    physicians    refer    to    as    broncho- aspiration). In   February,   Jacques   has   made   his   first   serious   choking,   an   «acute   dyspnea»,   due   to   his   dysphagia.   It   was extremely   serious,   because   occurring   non   expected.   It   is   at   that   time   that   the   doctors   have   diagnosed   his pathology.   Jacques   could   have   died   not   because   of   pneumonia,   but   by   suffocation!   Since   that   event,   he   became prudent. I   suspect   strongly   that   this   event   has   inspired   to   the   members   of   the   CMS   the   disastrous   scenario.   They   may have imagined that this would be easy ». In   his   report,   Dr.   Gontran   BLANC,   physician   in   charge   of   the   treatment   of   Jacques   ROMANENS   did   corroborate on   December   11   2013   that   his   patient   did   not   succumb   to   serious   choking,   causing   broncho-aspiration   and pneumonia   as   a   consequence,   apart   that   one   of   February   2011,   and   the   reiterated   broncho-aspirations   provoked by ANKER on June 17 2011 ( document 32 ). On that date, BLANC is pointing out : « With two years of distance looking back, we can analyse the evolution of the chokings with a greater precision During   this   period   of   two   years,   Mr   ROMANENS   has   not   presented   new   pneumonias   on   broncho-aspiration.   It   is thus   clear   that   Mr   ROMANENS   knows   to   adapt   his   manners   of   eating   for   avoiding   dangerous   events.   (…) Considering   the   quoted   facts   (which   are   clear,   precise   and   accepted   by   anybody),   the   facts   which   had occurred on June 17  2011 are of an exceptional nature and totally unusual ». The   conclusions   of   MANGIN,   according   to   which   there   would   not   exist   a   link      «   in   a   formal   manner   »      between   «   the   episode   of   June   17   2011   and   the   diagnosed   pneumonia   on   June   23   2011»   are   thus   dead   wrong. ( document 25 , point 6). In   June   2011,   Jacques   ROMANENS   has   had   definitely   only   broncho-aspirations   on   June   17.   The   following   day, he    had    already    fever    and    he    was    hospitalized    because    of    pneumonia    caused    by    the    repeated    broncho- aspirations   of   June   17   five   days   later,   on   June   22   2011.   This   pneumonia   was   therefore   caused   without   any doubt by those broncho-aspirations provoked by ANKER. For   MANGIN   to   have   forced   Jacques   ROMANENS,   suffering   of   serious   problems   of   deglutination   troubles,   to take   in   orally   the   unthickened   liquid   of   the   artificial   nutrition   «was   constituting   a   non-observation   of   the   provided instructions   in   this   particular   case,   rather   than   a   violation   of   the   rules   of   the   state   or   the   art   ».   This   is   clearly   a complacency attestation ordered by the Prosecutors’ Office. A stupidity pronounced by a scholar . Evidently,   the   Lawyer      of   the      plaintiff   did   criticize   vigorously   this      «   expertise   »   ( document   27 ).   With   the   only result that a «complement to the expertise», added volume to these silly allegations ( document 33 ). By   this   complacency   expertise,   MANGIN   and   his   co-author   descended   to   become   partners   in   crime   of potential murderers. The order of classification PE11.015201-PGN of April 13 2015 GILLIÉRON   was   exploiting   with   ease   the   expertise   /   complement   of   expertise   of   obvious   futility   of   MANGIN   for dismissing the plaintiff. The most daring lie was presented with the formula : «   No   element   in   this   file   is   speaking   in   favour   of   a   deliberate   act   from   the   part   of   any   member   of   the   staff responsible for the care at the residence of the plaintiff, for attempting to his life »  ( document 35 ). Just   prior   to   this   statement,   GILLIÉRON   mentions   the   key   evidence   of   the   file,   i.e.   the   DVD   submitted   by   the plaintiff   and   entitled   «   Jacques   ROMANENS   –   June   17   2011   –   the   day   where   everything   has   been   balanced.   1   h our   and   45   minutes   of   nightmare   !   ».   It   seems   that   GILLIÉRON   did   not   make   the   effort   to   listen   to   this   historic witnessing, otherwise, he could not have lied as roughly. It   is   established   by   the   reports   of   the   physicians   of   the   CHUV   ( document   3    and   document   11 )   as   well   as   by   the attestation   of   Dr.   G.   BLANC,   physician   in   charge   of   Mr.   ROMANENS   ( document   32 )   that   the   pneumonia   of   the plaintiff   has   been   caused   by   the   broncho-aspirations   suffered   on   June   17   2011.   On   February   13   2011   Jacques ROMANENS   almost   died   subsequently   to   a   single   broncho-aspiration   of   suffocation.   Suzanne   SCHAER   has calculated   that   half   a   litre   of   Novasource   is   representing   the   equivalent   of   30   average   swallowing   =   30   broncho- aspirations   ( document   22 ).   «   The   events»   in   the   morning   of   June   17   2011   were   equivalent   to   waterboarding (simulation   of   drowning),   method   of   torture   administered   by   the   secret   services   of   the   US   to   their   prisoners   in Guantanamo    under    the    BUSH    administration.    It    is    absolutely    sure    that    this    was    a    horrible    scene.    It    is unconceivable   that   the   two   nurses,   Augustine   ANKER   and   Aurore   BARBE    did   remark   absolutely   nothing abnormal.   Let’s   remind   that Augustine ANKER   has   admitted   to   have   made   swallow   to   Jacques   ROMANENS   the rest   of   liquid   which   had   remained   in   the   bag.   The   sufferings   of   their   victim   must   have   manifested   with   full violence.   The   first   equivocal   sentence   of   May   14,   2012   pronounced   in   front   of   GILLIÉRON   on   May   14   2012      «He did   not   seem    to   suffocate»    is   a   manoeuvre.   A   well   advised   interrogator   would   have   cornered   her   immediately. He   would   have   asked   her,   how   it   was   possible   that   she   had   not   observed   the   sufferance   of   his   victim   exposed   to reiterated and proven broncho-aspirations. It   is   a   miracle   that   Jacques   ROMANENS   did   survive   to   this   torture   for   being   able   to   witness   how   the   two   angels of   dead   Augustine   ANKER   and   Aurore   BARBE ,   covered   by   the   cantonal   physician   Karim   BOUBAKER    and his surrounding had attempted to assassinate him. ANKER   never   expressed   the   slightest   sign   of   regret.   In   the   contrary,   questioned   on   the   phone   by   Suzanne SCHAER   three   days   after   the   attempt,   who   did   have   the   idea   to   have   swallowed   the   liquid   of   the   gastric   probe, ANKER   had   an   access   of   laughter,   admitting   that   she   had   done   it   ( document   06 ).   One   has   to   repeat   the witnessing   of   Jacques   ROMANENS:   «   …   I   was   choking.   The   woman   watched   me   peacefully,   that   picture   is sticking   in   my   mind,   observing   me   to   suffocate,   and   thereafter   she   left   without   others,   …   »   -      It   would   be   in   the public   interest   to   know   the   past   of   this   woman   of   Austrian   origin.   Her   self-assurance   to   act   in   her   way   is legitimating   us   to   the   suspicion   that   this   person   of   a   very   peculiar   character   is   used   to   liquidate   old   vulnerable persons   without   defence.   The   fact   that   Jacques   ROMANENS   has   survived   and   could   witness   is   benefitting   to   the whole of our society. The   aim   of   this   order   of   classification   in   favour   of   this   nurse   of   dead   was   the   need   for   the   Nomenclature to avoid the risk of a public debate during a trial. The copy / paste of the superior instances The   superior   instances   are   confirming   usually   the   decisions   of   the   first   judges   /   prosecutors   by   copying   /   pasting. The   exceptions   are   very   scarce,   as   the   recent   invalidation   of   the   condemnation   by   the   Magistrates   of   Geneva   of Erwin    SPERISEN    without    any    evidence    by    the    Federal    Court,    after    the    nightmare    of    5    years    useless incarceration. This   does   have   the   purpose   to   present   the   nice   picture   and   to   feed   the   illusion   of   the   public   opinion that   the   judiciary   system   was   working   almost   perfectly.   The   reputation   of   the   Federal   Court   is   especially   cared   by the   Mass   Media,   manipulated   by   the   hidden   powers.   Actually,   the   former   President   of   the   Federal   Court   2013   2016   Gilbert   KOLLY    praised   before   the   annual   meeting   of   the   Swiss   Lawyers   on   June   15   2017   in   Lucerne   that   it was   possible   to   compress   the   rate   of   acceptance   of   the   recourses   submitted   to   the   court   down   to   2.3   %   at   the end of his Presidency. See page 53 of the publication : www.worldcorruption.info/index_htm_files/gu_2017-06-21_ohchr-e.pdf The   time   has   come   to   wake   up   the   Swiss   public   opinion   to   discover   this   scandal,   that   not   less   than   at least   80   %   of   the   97.7   %   defeated   applicants   in   the   year   2016   were   embezzled   and   stigmatized   as querulous by our federal «Judges». The   recourse   of   the   Lawyer   of      Jacques   ROMANENS   ( document   36 )   was   swept   away   on   July   6   2015   by   the Vaudois    cantonal    «Judges»,    well    known    for    their    heavy    past    –    Bernard   ABRECHT ,    Joël    KRIEGER ,    and Guillaume   PERROT.    ( document   37 ).   In   their   decision   of   12   pages   of   copying   /   pasting,   they   emphasized   that the   Order   of   classification   has   been   approved   by   the   Attorney   General,   Eric   COTTIER .   The   reader   must   know that   ABRECHT   and   KRIEGER   are   identified   as   Members   of   the   Freemasonic   plot   in   the   Canton   of   Vaud, managed   by   the   same   COTTIER.    PERROT,   cantonal   Judge   only   since   December   2012   is   figuring   as   well already with 4 negative references in our data base. By   rejecting   this   recourse,   the   cantonal   «Judges»   have   violated   the   principle   in   dubio   pro   duriore,   that   is   to   say that   in   the   stage   of   the   inquiry   level   of   a   prosecutor,   the   principle   in   dubio   pro   reo      may   not   be   applied,   and   the accused   must   be   sent   imperatively   before   a   court.   In   the   present   case,   there   is   no   res   iudicata   (enforcable decision), which is the great loophole in this affair. In   addition,   the   plaintiff   ROMANENS   did   not   have   the   right   of   a   public   and   fair   trial.   This   is   not   compatible with article 6 of the European Convention of Human Rights. On      September   4   2015      a   recourse      has      been      addressed      to      the      Federal      Court   ( document   38 ).   By   ATF 6B_856/2015   of   September   16   2015,   it   was   declared   inadmissible   ( document   39 ).   One   single   federal   «Judge» had   decided   :   Christian   DENYS .   DENYS   has   demonstrated   in   this   case   his   innovating   abilities   in   the matter   of   jurisprudence.   According   to   DENYS ,   the   Lawyer   of   the   applicant   had   omitted   to   present   the   civil conclusions.   Let’s   quote   him:   «   …   the   jurisprudence   is   aimed   to   be   restrictive   and   strict,   in   that   way,   that   the Federal   Court   is   not   entering   into   the   matter   if   it   does   not   appear   sufficiently   precise   from   the   motivation   of the   recourse   that   the   above   mentioned   conditions   are   met,   at   least   if   one   cannot   deduct   it   directly   and without ambiguity, considering notably the alleged infringements  ». Gerhard   Ulrich,   author   of   these   lines   is   practically   applying   in   monthly   intervals   to   the   Federal   Court,   and   he   has   a large   experience   of   being   dismissed   by   this   instance.   However,   he   was   so   far   never   dismissed   by   such   a scatter-brained   motivation.   Stating   that   the   recourse   is   inadmissible   has   the   great   advantage   that   one does not need do motivate the abusive decision. It   is   not   at   all   surprising   that   the   Vaudois   DENYS   joined   to   cover   up   the   manoeuvres   of   his   Vaudois   pairs: Actually. DENYS covers Vaudois corruption affairs in series . See www.worldcorruption.info/index_htm_files/gu_2017-06-21_ohchr-f.pdf This time, he has covered a potential murderer for supporting his Vaudois accomplices. Subsequently,   ROMANENS   called   in   an   expert,   the   French   physician,   Yvon   LESEC,   for   establishing   a   new medical   expertise   ( document   40 ).   Mais   Jacques   ROMANENS   est   décédé   le   1er   novembre   2015. Alors,   Suzanne SCHAER,   munie   des   procurations   des   fils   qu’elle   a   eus   avec   Jacques   ROMANENS,   a   requis   une   révision ( document   43 ),   récoltant   un   refus   de   suivre   du   «   procureur   »   Laurent   MAYE    ( document   46 ).   Suzanne SCHAER,   déçue   par   l’inefficacité   des   avocats   de   son   ex-mari   a   recouru   elle-même   au   Tribunal   cantonal   vaudois ( document   47 ).   Elle   a   été      déboutée   par   les      «   juges   »   cantonaux   vaudois   Christophe   MAILLARD ,   Bernard ABRECHT    et   Guillaume   PERROT   par   arrêt   du   27   avril   2017,   au   motif   farfelu   que   l’expertise   médicale   LESEC ne   constituait   «   aucun   élément   nouveau   justifiant   une   reprise   de   la   procédure   préliminaire   …   »    ( document   48 ). ABRECHT   et   PERROT,   ayant   déjà   pris   auparavant   des   décisions   dans   cette   procédure,   n’ont   même   pas eu la décence de se récuser spontanément. Cette affaire n’a donc jamais été jugée !  La pieuvre a des tentacules partout dans l’administration vaudoise Il est connu que  le système judiciaire vaudois est gangréné de A à Z. Voir : www.worldcorruption.info/index_htm_files/gu_2017-06-21_ohchr-f.pdf  et les dossiers BernLeaks Et cette pieuvre a des tentacules dans toute l’administration du canton de Vaud. Police : Jacques ANTENEN ,   commandant   de   la   Gendarmerie   vaudoise,   est   franc-maçon,   comme   son   sous-fifre   Philippe DESARZENS,   commandant   de   la   Police   Région   de   Morges.   Le   5   avril   2017,   lors   de   la   campagne   électorale vaudoise    des   mois   d’avril/mai   2017,   ces   individus   aux   ordres   des   Francs-Maçons,   ont   fait   disparaître   notre colonne   d’information   publique   roulante   dénonçant   les   crimes   commis   en   bande   organisée   par   leur   organisation secrète anti-constitutionnelle. Colonne d’information publique roulante disparue le 5 avril 2017 à Morges Plainte   a   été   déposée   le   jour   même.   Impossible   d’obtenir   la   moindre   réponse   de   la   part   de   la   Police   de   Morges. Suite   à   la   plainte   pour   vol   déposée   par   le   propriétaire   de   la   colonne,   son   assureur   a   été   informé   3   mois   plus   tard que   cette   colonne   se   trouverait   dans   un   dépôt   de   la   Police   de   Morges,   mais   aucune   information   formelle   écrite n’a été rendue à ce jour... Détails voir : www.worldcorruption.info/elections.htm De   par   ce   fait,   les   manipulateurs   qui   ont   le   contrôle   de   la   Police   vaudoise   ont   interdit   la   liberté   d’expression   et entravé    le    débat    politique    pendant    la    campagne    électorale    2017.    La    valeur    de    ces    élections    est    en conséquence nulle ; le gouvernement et les députés actuellement en place n’ont aucune légitimité. Offices des poursuites Lors   du   détournement   du   patrimoine   de   la   famille   BURDET,   début   des   années   2000,   le   préposé   de   l’ Office des poursuites d’Yverdon-les-Bains, Gilbert LAURENT  a joué des mauvais tours. Voir : www.worldcorruption.info/burdet.htm De   même,   le   préposé   de   l’Office   des   poursuites   de   Lavaux-Oron,   Christian   TSCHANZ,    trahit   actuellement ses devoirs aux dépens de Michèle HERZOG. Offices d’impôt Le   Conseiller   d’Etat   Pascal   BROULIS ,   en   tant   que   Ministre   des   finances   du   canton   pendant   15   ans,   a   réussi   à effacer   une   dette   de   15   milliards   de   francs   suisses   en   pressant   les   contribuables   modestes   comme   des   citrons, tout   en   octroyant   des   indulgences   fiscales   aux   oligarques.   Les   fonctionnaires   de   son   département   soutiennent ces magouilles. Voir : www.worldcorruption.info/index_htm_files/gu_2016-12-10_broulis-f.pdf Bien   qu’informé   par   lettre   recommandée,   également   remise   en   mains   propres,   BROULIS   n’a   jamais   contesté l’exactitude de cette dénonciation, et pour cause. Silence    complet    également    sur    le    dossier    scandaleux    de    taxes    d’imposition    en    violation    de    la    Législation fédérale,   à   l’encontre   des   bénéficiaires   de   l’aide   sociale   et   des   étudiants   mâles   sans   revenus   et   de   nationalité suisse… www.worldcorruption.info/aide_sociale.htm   Médecin légiste et Médecin cantonal, fonctionnaires du Département de la Santé et de l’Action Sociale Voir ci-dessus. Il   faudra   un   jour   compléter   le   tableau   en   analysant   les   cas   d’abus   commis   par   les   notaires,   par   exemple.   Nous   ne connaissons   certainement   qu’une   fraction   des   fonctionnaires   /   auxiliaires   de   l’Etat   intouchables   sous   influence. Mais    ce    que    nous    avons    découvert    suffit    pour    extrapoler    que    la    mafia    occulte    et    secrète    de    la    Franc Maçonnerie  a pris soin d’occuper par leurs pions, tous les postes clés de l’Etat de Vaud. L’implication des politiciens vaudois Au   sein   du   collège   du   gouvernement   vaudois,   on   trouve   deux   maîtres-chanteurs    radicaux-libéraux    –   Philippe LEUBA  et Jacqueline DE QUATTRO. Voir www.worldcorruption.info/elections.htm La   corruption   est   en   premier   lieu   l’apanage   de   la   droite   –   des   libéraux-radicaux,   des   UDC   et   des   verts-libéraux. Cependant,   les   politiciens   de   gauche   vaudois   sont   très   au   courant   des   cas   concrets   de   corruption   et   laissent passer. Le   Conseiller   d’Etat   socialiste,   Pierre-Yves   MAILLARD,   a   été   le   leader   bien   informé   du   syndicat   UNIA   à   l’époque. Il    doit    certainement    avoir    eu    vent    du    blanchiment    d’argent    du    clan    MARCOS    des    Philippines,    réalisé    par surfacturation   organisée   par   la   maison   BAUMGARTNER   Papiers   SA   à   Crissier   (disparue   entre-temps).   La Banque   Cantonale   Vaudoise,   où   Pascal   BROULIS   a   officié   en   tant   que   directeur,   s’est   occupée   des   transactions. Le directeur BCV BROULIS n’aurait-il pas au courant ? … Cela   n’a   pas   empêché   Pierre-Yves   MAILLARD   de   s’engager   dans   une   concordance   politique   à   outrance,   laissant passer    les    magouilles    de    la    droite    sans    broncher,    comme    le    dossier    de    l’aide    sociale    cité    plus    haut.    En conséquence,   les   magistrats   judiciaires   socialistes   obéissent   aux   directives   de   leur   parti   socialiste   vaudois,   alors que   le   socialiste   Pierre-Yves   MAILLARD   et   le   radical   Pascal   BROULIS   (dits   Malice   et   Brouillard)   sont   cul   et chemise   au   sein   du   gouvernement   vaudois   actuel.   De   fait,   au   nom   de   la   «   collégialité   »   synonyme   de   complicité, les   magistrats   gauchistes   couvrent   également   la   corruption   dans   le   canton   de   Vaud.   Ils   participent   activement   à la   répression   de   la   liberté   d’expression,   en   violant   les   Droits   de   l’Homme   fondamentaux,   pour   servir   les   intérêts de leur parti politique ! La   gauche   cohabite   de   façon   perverse   avec   la   droite   dans   le   canton   de   Vaud.   Les   juges   de   gauche   ferment   les yeux,   laissant   passer   les   magouilles   de   leurs   collègues   de   droite.   En   contrepartie,   le   parti   socialiste   obtient   sur   le plan   politique   des   concessions   en   faveur   de   son   électorat.   Cela   se   fait   sur   le   dos   des   victimes   judiciaires,   en trahissant les idéaux du parti. Les    politiciens    vaudois    de    gauche    ont    été    informés    du    vol    de    la    colonne    d’information    publique    roulante, dénonçant    le    complot    franc-maçon,    donc    de    la    répression    de    la    liberté    d’expression    flagrante    pendant    la campagne électorale vaudoise 2017. Ils ont fait semblant de l’ignorer. La   Conseillère   d’Etat   des   Verts,   Béatrice   MÉTRAUX,   ancienne   greffière,   est   également   une   opportuniste.   Elle   est responsable   des   agissements   illicites   de   ses   fonctionnaires   subordonnés   et   plus   particulièrement   du   complice de    faussaire    et    Maître    chanteur    Jacques    ANTENEN,    Commandant    de    la    Police    cantonale.    Elle    est responsable   des   agissements   illicites   de   ses   fonctionnaires   subordonnés.   En   sa   qualité   de   Présidente   de   la chambre   des   notaires   du   canton,   elle   couvre   les   actes   illicites   d’un   couple   de   notaires,   dénoncés   par   Michèle HERZOG. En   l’espèce,   les   Conseillers   d’Etat   vaudois   MAILLARD   et   MÉTRAUX   ont   été   mis   au   courant   de   cette   tentative   de liquidation de Jacques ROMANENS. Voir Dokument 31  – Dokument 44  – Dokument 45 . Tous   les   deux   se   sont   barricadés   derrière   la   chimérique   séparation   des   pouvoirs   et   se   sont   faits   complices de   la   tentative   d’un   assassinat,    aux   dépens   de   Jacques   ROMANENS,   en   trahissant   leurs   idéaux   politiques.   Ils se prostituent pour s’accrocher à un semblant de participation au pouvoir. Par   avis   de   droit   du   professeur Thierry TANQUEREL,   Université   de   Genève,   du   09   mai   2014,   la   Commission   de Haute    Surveillance    du    Tribunal    Cantonal    (CHSTC)    a    été    castrée,    respectivement    «    tanquerellisée    ». L’échange   de   correspondance   entre   Suzanne   SCHAER   et   le   Président   de   la   CHSTC,   Régis   COURDESSE,   en est    la    preuve.    Voir    Dokument    41     et    Dokument    42 .    L’abolition    de    cette    commission    serait    une    mesure d’économie   pour   les   contribuables.   Pour   le   débat   politique,   elle   est   aujourd’hui   totalement   superflue,   car   cette commission   ne   fait   que   gérer   des   papiers,   sans   exercer   la   moindre   surveillance.   Quand   un   citoyen   se   plaint   de dénis   de   justice   répétitifs,   la   CHSTC   répond   avec   humour   qu’il   suffit   d’utiliser   les   voies   de   recours   (expérience vécue par plusieurs citoyens vaudois), alors qu’elle sait que les voies de recours ont déjà été utilisées, en vain. Le tout est assorti d’une censure de certains sites Internet ordonnée par le Ministère public vaudois www.worldcorruption.info/index_htm_files/gu_2016-10-11_cottier_censure-f.pdf Et   par   la   chape   de   plomb   imposée   aux   médias   au   sujet   des   dysfonctionnements   gravissimes   du   système judiciaire. Voir : www.worldcorruption.info/index_htm_files/gu_2016-09-05_de_weck_rts.pdf   La   censure   ordonnée   aux   journalistes   et   autres   Médias   complices   est   telle,   qu’ils   prêtent   leur   concours   à   l’Ometa sur    l’information    concernant    les    crimes    d’Etat    dénoncés.    Ils    engagent    ainsi    directement    leur    responsabilité personnelle et individuelle, de manière solidaire. www.worldcorruption.info/reserves_civiles.htm Les   Journalistes   sont   parvenus   à   considérer   leurs   Lecteurs,   ceux-là   même   qui   les   font   vivre,   comme   leurs ennemis   !   Résiliez   vos   abonnements   !   Seule   la   Presse   alternative   sur   Internet   permet   d’avoir   accès   à   une information objective… « Viel Feind, viel Ehr ». (Beaucoup d'ennemis, beaucoup d'honneur) Georg VON FRUNDSBERG
Agnes Rita ROSENSTIEL In memoriam Jacques ROMANENS (10.09.1934 – 01.11.2015, contemporary witness of a liquidation attempt of a troublesome patient
Is it dangerous to age in the Canton of Vaud
Translation is coming soon