News Photos Evidence Comments Interviews Media Similar Cases Contact Us Home

Open Letter to the Swedish Prosecution Authority Requesting Reconsideration of Ezbjörn Hahne’s Case

8 October 2008

This is an open letter to the Swedish Prosecution Authority and in particular to Senior Prosecutor Jörgen Almblad and Prosecutors Fredrik Wersäll, Jörgen Almblad, Guntra Åhlund and Stefan Johansson with respect to case 4230–07 before the Supreme Court of Sweden concerning the petition for a new trial in the Ezbjörn Hahne case. This letter is an Amicus Curiae submission to the Supreme Court of Sweden, with copies to Advocate Percy Bratt, Dr Mohammed al–Bayati and others.

I am writing in English since I am copying this to aids/hiv experts who do not speak Swedish, in particular journalists Janine Roberts and Celia Farber, and David Crowe of Rethinking Aids, The Group for the Scientific Reappraisal of the HIV/AIDS Hypothesis, who works closely with Etienne de Harven, MD, Peter H. Duesberg, PhD, and others. They will pass this letter on to others.

Advocate Percy Bratt has asked the Supreme Court of Sweden to grant a new trial. His client, Ezbjörn Hahne was convicted and sentenced to a long prison sentence for allegedly shaking his baby daughter to death. A conviction was secured in the court of appeal thanks to the testimony of Dr Olof Flodmark, despite the fact that many of the features that are supposed to designate Shaken Baby Syndrome were missing and despite the fact that, as Dr Yazbak has pointed out, Dr Flodmark would not be considered an expert witness in an American court and would not be allowed to testify. Professor Torleiv Ole Rognum and Dr Arne Stray–Pedersen have criticised the autopsy of Dr Mario Verdicchio as incompetent. In their reports on the case, Drs Yazbak, Scheibner and al–Bayati have pointed out that the baby in question was born prematurely to a mother who smoked and commented that the child was underweight and extremely sickly and exhibited no signs of shaking or violence whatsoever. They suggested a number of other probable causes of the baby’s untimely demise, including a reaction to antibiotics, lack of vitamin C and lack of vitamin K. Dr Mohammed al–Bayati’s report has been published in Medical Veritas (Analysis of causes that led to bleeding, cardiac arrest, and death in the case of Baby Nadine). Al-Bayati has been an expert witness in about 70 cases, 14 of which required him to testify in court, and he is currently involved as an expert for 20 cases.

In their submissions to the Supreme Court, Prosecutors Fredrik Wersäll, Jörgen Almblad, Guntra Åhlund and Stefan Johansson first try to discredit Dr Scheibner because she wrote in her report that doctors are not scientists and often do not read or understand scientific studies. However, this is common knowledge. See, for example, the article in the British Medical Journal aptly entitled “Doctors are not Scientists”.

Wersäll and Almblad then try to discredit Dr al–Bayati on the grounds that he does not believe that hiv causes aids. Wersäll writes: “He has published articles stating that hiv does not cause aids. Even though I am a layman, I contend that his attitude is so astounding that it raises questions about the reliability of al–Bayati’s research.”

As will be clear from this letter, al–Bayati is not alone. Many of the world’s leading scientists question that hiv even exists, let alone causes “aids” (however that condition may be defined and diagnosed) and this includes Dr Kary Mullis who won the Nobel Prize for inventing Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR), a vital tool in the study of viral particles, used for the ‘Viral Load Test’

Moreover Wersäll is not a layman. He is a prosecutor. Thanks to the Swedish Prosecution Authority, a considerable number of people are serving long prison sentences for the crime of being “hiv–positive” and are paying large sums of money in damages to their “victims”. It is now clear that these convictions are unsafe and I must respectfully ask the Swedish Prosecution Authority to grant new trials in every single case. Clearly it cannot be proven to a court beyond reasonable doubt that HIV exists, nor that it causes “aids”.

Also, the trials clearly violated the principle of “Equality of Arms”, a subject on which there have been clear rulings by the European Court (see Neumeister v Austria for example). In every Swedish “HIV” trial, it has not been possible to present a proper defence and the only experts called have been believers in the hiv/aids hypothesis. Moreover these “experts” have often been the very people who sounded the alarm about the accused person being “hiv–positive” and were directly or indirectly responsible for initiating the prosecution in the first place. The convictions were based on the assumption that there is a retrovirus called “hiv”, that it causes “aids”, that tests can detect it and that “hiv–positive” means that someone is infectious and dangerous. These assumptions may not be true: leading experts point out that “hiv” has not been properly isolated and that there have been different ways of detecting “hiv” “ in different times and places; that the tests are unreliable and false positive test results are triggered by other conditions and the definition of “aids” has varied with time and place as well. Not only that, leading experts insist that there is not even any evidence to prove the existence of “hiv”, let alone that it causes “aids” (however we define it).

It appears that Gallo, who claims to have discovered “hiv” and proved it to be the cause of “aids” only just escaped prosecution for fraud thanks to the statute of limitations.

Your sincerely

Alan Rees
Ginstgatan 7
218 36 Bunkeflostrand
Sweden