>Grell, you may remember, is the one who brought the original action against
>Hulda Clark, allegedly on behalf of his clients, the Figueroas.  Stephen
>Barrett, and his parrots, made a big deal about this case.  After a period
>of time the Figueroas fired Grell - right after they were required to be
>deposed about their claims.  Then Grell sued Hulda Clark personally,
>claiming that she had hired me (Tim Bolen) to defame him (insert guffaw
>here).

> On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 17:48:41 +0000 (UTC), "john"

>>Grell, you may remember, is the one who brought the original action
>>against
>>Hulda Clark, allegedly on behalf of his clients, the Figueroas.  Stephen
>>Barrett, and his parrots, made a big deal about this case.  After a period
>>of time the Figueroas fired Grell - right after they were required to be
>>deposed about their claims.  Then Grell sued Hulda Clark personally,
>>claiming that she had hired me (Tim Bolen) to defame him (insert guffaw
>>here).

> I've asked many times what happened to the Figueroas ... it seems to
> me that they too, were victims of the Quacks and their misguided
> hatred of Dr. Clark ...

> How did they benefit in any way with having Mallicious Prosecutor
> Grell sue Dr. Clark ...???

> She was a very ill woman, I understand ... and being used in this
> court case probably harmed her even more.

> Notice how there is no link to the current FTC order.

> Bolen must have been tripping over his fingers to get this spun the right
> way (for him). Let's wait to see what the FTC actually says, and that which
> they (i.e. Clark et al) agreed to.

>As we all know, Bolen can spin a good
> yarn.

> Here are the claims the FTC objected to, and required withdrawn (not
> vindicated)..

> Quote---

> The FTC alleges that the defendants made numerous unsubstantiated claims
> about the Zapper, the Syncrometer, the 21 Day Program for Advanced Cancers,
> and the Herbal Parasite Cleanse, including through the use of testimonials.
> Specifically, the complaint alleges that the defendants made unsubstantiated
> representations that:

>   a.. use of the Super-Zapper Deluxe is effective to kill bacteria, viruses,
> and parasites in the human body, and is effective against chronic
> infections, cancer, and AIDS;
>   b.. the Super-Zapper Deluxe, used together with the Complete Herbal
> Parasite Program, is effective to cure all forms of cancer in humans and to
> cure AIDS;
>   c.. the Supper-Zapper Deluxe, used together with the Complete Herbal
> Parasite Program and avoidance of pollutants, is effective to cure diabetes,
> multiple sclerosis, Alzheimer's, endometriosis, asthma, and many other
> diseases;
>   d.. Dr. Clark's New 21 Day Program for Advanced Cancers is effective to
> cure all forms of cancer in humans; has cured numerous people diagnosed with
> advanced cancer; and when used with the Super-Zapper Deluxe, make surgery
> and chemotherapy unnecessary; and
>   e.. the Syncrometer device is more accurate than the best testing methods
> at diagnosing all forms of disease; and can detect the presence of any
> substance at specific points in the human body.
> The FTC charges that the defendants did not have a reasonable basis to
> substantiate the claims made in their adverti{*filter*}ts.

> > On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 17:48:41 +0000 (UTC), "john"

> >>Grell, you may remember, is the one who brought the original action
> >>against
> >>Hulda Clark, allegedly on behalf of his clients, the Figueroas.  Stephen
> >>Barrett, and his parrots, made a big deal about this case.  After a period
> >>of time the Figueroas fired Grell - right after they were required to be
> >>deposed about their claims.  Then Grell sued Hulda Clark personally,
> >>claiming that she had hired me (Tim Bolen) to defame him (insert guffaw
> >>here).

> > I've asked many times what happened to the Figueroas ... it seems to
> > me that they too, were victims of the Quacks and their misguided
> > hatred of Dr. Clark ...

> > How did they benefit in any way with having Mallicious Prosecutor
> > Grell sue Dr. Clark ...???

> > She was a very ill woman, I understand ... and being used in this
> > court case probably harmed her even more.

> Why is she ill?  She has the "cure for all diseases". she says..

> In article

> .au>,

> > > On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 17:48:41 +0000 (UTC), "john"

> > >>Grell, you may remember, is the one who brought the original action
> > >>against
> > >>Hulda Clark, allegedly on behalf of his clients, the Figueroas.
Stephen
> > >>Barrett, and his parrots, made a big deal about this case.  After a
period
> > >>of time the Figueroas fired Grell - right after they were required to
be
> > >>deposed about their claims.  Then Grell sued Hulda Clark personally,
> > >>claiming that she had hired me (Tim Bolen) to defame him (insert
guffaw
> > >>here).

> > > I've asked many times what happened to the Figueroas ... it seems to
> > > me that they too, were victims of the Quacks and their misguided
> > > hatred of Dr. Clark ...

> > > How did they benefit in any way with having Mallicious Prosecutor
> > > Grell sue Dr. Clark ...???

> > > She was a very ill woman, I understand ... and being used in this
> > > court case probably harmed her even more.

> > Why is she ill?  She has the "cure for all diseases". she says..

> Indeed. If it is true that Hulda Clark is "very ill," one wonders how
> great her "cure for all diseases" really is. It can't be that great.
> Otherwise, why can't she (or one of her acolytes) "cure" herself?

> In article

> .au>,

> > Here are the claims the FTC objected to, and required withdrawn (not
> > vindicated)..

> > Quote---

> > The FTC alleges that the defendants made numerous unsubstantiated claims
> > about the Zapper, the Syncrometer, the 21 Day Program for Advanced
Cancers,
> > and the Herbal Parasite Cleanse, including through the use of
testimonials.
> > Specifically, the complaint alleges that the defendants made
unsubstantiated
> > representations that:

> >   a.. use of the Super-Zapper Deluxe is effective to kill bacteria,
viruses,
> > and parasites in the human body, and is effective against chronic
> > infections, cancer, and AIDS;
> >   b.. the Super-Zapper Deluxe, used together with the Complete Herbal
> > Parasite Program, is effective to cure all forms of cancer in humans and
to
> > cure AIDS;
> >   c.. the Supper-Zapper Deluxe, used together with the Complete Herbal
> > Parasite Program and avoidance of pollutants, is effective to cure
diabetes,
> > multiple sclerosis, Alzheimer's, endometriosis, asthma, and many other
> > diseases;
> >   d.. Dr. Clark's New 21 Day Program for Advanced Cancers is effective
to
> > cure all forms of cancer in humans; has cured numerous people diagnosed
with
> > advanced cancer; and when used with the Super-Zapper Deluxe, make
surgery
> > and chemotherapy unnecessary; and
> >   e.. the Syncrometer device is more accurate than the best testing
methods
> > at diagnosing all forms of disease; and can detect the presence of any
> > substance at specific points in the human body.
> > The FTC charges that the defendants did not have a reasonable basis to
> > substantiate the claims made in their adverti{*filter*}ts.

> Interesting, if this is the order to which Ilena was referring, the one
> that Hulda is going to accept as part of a settlement with the FTC. ;-)

>And now you know another reason why the know-nothing crowd demonizes
>Grell...he beat them.

> > > In article

> > > .au>,

> > > > > On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 17:48:41 +0000 (UTC), "john"

> > > > >>Grell, you may remember, is the one who brought the original
action
> > > > >>against
> > > > >>Hulda Clark, allegedly on behalf of his clients, the Figueroas.
> > Stephen
> > > > >>Barrett, and his parrots, made a big deal about this case.  After
a
> > period
> > > > >>of time the Figueroas fired Grell - right after they were required
to
> > be
> > > > >>deposed about their claims.  Then Grell sued Hulda Clark
personally,
> > > > >>claiming that she had hired me (Tim Bolen) to defame him (insert
> > guffaw
> > > > >>here).

> > > > > I've asked many times what happened to the Figueroas ... it seems
to
> > > > > me that they too, were victims of the Quacks and their misguided
> > > > > hatred of Dr. Clark ...

> > > > > How did they benefit in any way with having Mallicious Prosecutor
> > > > > Grell sue Dr. Clark ...???

> > > > > She was a very ill woman, I understand ... and being used in this
> > > > > court case probably harmed her even more.

> > > > Why is she ill?  She has the "cure for all diseases". she says..

> > > Indeed. If it is true that Hulda Clark is "very ill," one wonders how
> > > great her "cure for all diseases" really is. It can't be that great.
> > > Otherwise, why can't she (or one of her acolytes) "cure" herself?

> > You misunderstand. Mrs. Figueroa was a very ill woman who apparently
tried
> > Hulda Cure for All Diseases and was snot successful. Here is the true
story:

> > The civil case was filed by Esther and Jose Figueroa of New York City
> > against Clark, the Dr. Clark Research Association, Century Nutrition,
and
> > several associated individuals. Mrs. Figueroa, who had been medically
> > diagnosed with {*filter*} cancer, sought treatment in September 1998. The
court
> > papers state that she was told:

> > Dust from her apartment was responsible for her {*filter*} cancer.
> > Returning to her apartment would place her at special risk to develop
> > leukemia because of her {*filter*} type.
> > She had asbestos, lead, and a lot of copper in her system.
> > The Syncrometer detected a parasite called "rabbit fluke" inside her
{*filter*}.
> > She also had E. coli, asbestos, and salmonella due to improper cooking.net">food
> > sterilization.
> > Several teeth should be removed and "cavitations" in her lower jaw
should be
> > scraped out.
> > The suit also charged that:

> > Clark subsequently arranged for all of Mrs. Figueroa's front and molar
teeth
> > to be removed, prescribed more than 30 dietary and herbal supplements to
be
> > taken during a 12-week period, and badly burned her {*filter*} while
> > administering treatment with a "Zapper" device.

> > During the 3-month period of treatment, the tumor increased from 1.5 cm
to
> > 14 cm.

> > Despite this fact, Mrs. Figueroa was falsely told that she was getting
> > better, that tests for "cancer markers" were negative, and that pain she
was
> > experiencing did not reflect persistence of her cancer.

> > In 2001, the Figueroa family indicated to their attorney (Christopher
Grell)
> > that undergoing a deposition would be too stressful for Mrs. Figueroa.
Mr.
> > Grell therefore petitioned the court to withdraw from the case, and the
case
> > ended shortly afterward. One of the defendants (Self Health Resource
Center,
> > operated by Clark's son Geoffrey) then sued Grell and two associates for
> > malicious prosecution and abuse of process. Grell responded with a
motion to
> > dismiss, which was granted and upheld on appeal, with an award of costs
and
> > attorneys fees to Grell. The Court of Appeal concluded:

> > The evidence amply supports a reasonable belief on the part of these
> > defendants [Grell and associates] that plaintiff [the Self Health
Resource
> > Center] was part of a network of persons and entities who acted
recklessly,
> > at best, luring Mrs. Figueroa into a bizarre, grotesque, and extremely
> > expensive regimen of "alternative" cancer treatments which has no effect
> > other than to exhaust the Figueroa's life savings and divert Mrs.
Figueroa
> > from conventional treatments, thereby reducing her prospects for
recovery
> > and survival [15].

> > 15. Sepulveda J. Decision of the Court of Appeal of the State of
California,
> > First Appellate District, Division Four, in Self Health Resource Center
v
> > Christopher Grell et al. A098285 (Alameda County Superior Court No.
> > 2001-030441). Filed May 19, 2003.

> > Anyone who claims that this account is inaccurate should be prepared to
post
> > the original decision.

> Thank you for the clarification. I had not been aware of the details of
> this case.

> > In article

> > .au>,

> > > > On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 17:48:41 +0000 (UTC), "john"

> > > >>Grell, you may remember, is the one who brought the original action
> > > >>against
> > > >>Hulda Clark, allegedly on behalf of his clients, the Figueroas.
> Stephen
> > > >>Barrett, and his parrots, made a big deal about this case.  After a
> period
> > > >>of time the Figueroas fired Grell - right after they were required to
> be
> > > >>deposed about their claims.  Then Grell sued Hulda Clark personally,
> > > >>claiming that she had hired me (Tim Bolen) to defame him (insert
> guffaw
> > > >>here).

> > > > I've asked many times what happened to the Figueroas ... it seems to
> > > > me that they too, were victims of the Quacks and their misguided
> > > > hatred of Dr. Clark ...

> > > > How did they benefit in any way with having Mallicious Prosecutor
> > > > Grell sue Dr. Clark ...???

> > > > She was a very ill woman, I understand ... and being used in this
> > > > court case probably harmed her even more.

> > > Why is she ill?  She has the "cure for all diseases". she says..

> > Indeed. If it is true that Hulda Clark is "very ill," one wonders how
> > great her "cure for all diseases" really is. It can't be that great.
> > Otherwise, why can't she (or one of her acolytes) "cure" herself?

> You misunderstand. Mrs. Figueroa was a very ill woman who apparently tried
> Hulda Cure for All Diseases and was snot successful. Here is the true story:

> The civil case was filed by Esther and Jose Figueroa of New York City
> against Clark, the Dr. Clark Research Association, Century Nutrition, and
> several associated individuals. Mrs. Figueroa, who had been medically
> diagnosed with {*filter*} cancer, sought treatment in September 1998. The court
> papers state that she was told:

> Dust from her apartment was responsible for her {*filter*} cancer.
> Returning to her apartment would place her at special risk to develop
> leukemia because of her {*filter*} type.
> She had asbestos, lead, and a lot of copper in her system.
> The Syncrometer detected a parasite called "rabbit fluke" inside her {*filter*}.
> She also had E. coli, asbestos, and salmonella due to improper cooking.net">food
> sterilization.
> Several teeth should be removed and "cavitations" in her lower jaw should be
> scraped out.
> The suit also charged that:

> Clark subsequently arranged for all of Mrs. Figueroa's front and molar teeth
> to be removed, prescribed more than 30 dietary and herbal supplements to be
> taken during a 12-week period, and badly burned her {*filter*} while
> administering treatment with a "Zapper" device.

> During the 3-month period of treatment, the tumor increased from 1.5 cm to
> 14 cm.

> Despite this fact, Mrs. Figueroa was falsely told that she was getting
> better, that tests for "cancer markers" were negative, and that pain she was
> experiencing did not reflect persistence of her cancer.

> In 2001, the Figueroa family indicated to their attorney (Christopher Grell)
> that undergoing a deposition would be too stressful for Mrs. Figueroa. Mr.
> Grell therefore petitioned the court to withdraw from the case, and the case
> ended shortly afterward. One of the defendants (Self Health Resource Center,
> operated by Clark's son Geoffrey) then sued Grell and two associates for
> malicious prosecution and abuse of process. Grell responded with a motion to
> dismiss, which was granted and upheld on appeal, with an award of costs and
> attorneys fees to Grell. The Court of Appeal concluded:

> The evidence amply supports a reasonable belief on the part of these
> defendants [Grell and associates] that plaintiff [the Self Health Resource
> Center] was part of a network of persons and entities who acted recklessly,
> at best, luring Mrs. Figueroa into a bizarre, grotesque, and extremely
> expensive regimen of "alternative" cancer treatments which has no effect
> other than to exhaust the Figueroa's life savings and divert Mrs. Figueroa
> from conventional treatments, thereby reducing her prospects for recovery
> and survival [15].

> 15. Sepulveda J. Decision of the Court of Appeal of the State of California,
> First Appellate District, Division Four, in Self Health Resource Center v
> Christopher Grell et al. A098285 (Alameda County Superior Court No.
> 2001-030441). Filed May 19, 2003.

> Anyone who claims that this account is inaccurate should be prepared to post
> the original decision.

> On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 17:04:32 -0500, "Mark Probert" <Mark

> >And now you know another reason why the know-nothing crowd demonizes
> >Grell...he beat them.

> Figueroa fired Grell you idiot.

>> In 2001, the Figueroa family indicated to their attorney (Christopher Grell)I'
>> that undergoing a deposition would be too stressful for Mrs. Figueroa. Mr.
>> Grell therefore petitioned the court to withdraw from the case, and the case
>> ended shortly afterward.