Brophy solicitors – the sequel!

Brophy 1

Our Ref: KB                                                                                                                                                                                              

Your Ref: Leonie Fennell,

By email only 20th July 2011

PROF. PATRICA CASEY

.

Dear Ms Fennell,

We refer to our letter to you dated 22nd June.

It is extremely disappointing that your reply to this letter consisted of you posting it on your blog along with the comment in bold “I will never be bullied, intimidated or silenced by Lundbeck or Professor Casey”.

We need to point out to you that when our client first came to us, we advised her that the comments you have now removed from your blog were seriously defamatory and that she would be quite entitled to issue legal proceedings against you. She did not wish to do so because she has enormous sympathy for the tragedy you have suffered.

You have removed the defamatory comments from your blog but you now accuse our client of bullying you and trying to silence you. This is despite the fact that we specifically stated that our client did not want you to remove your blog but only wanted you to remove the defamatory comments you made about her. What part of this constitutes bullying? What part of this constitutes an attempt to silence you? Are you saying that the simple fact that you received a solicitor’s letter asking you to remove certain defamatory comments which you subsequently removed, constitutes intimidation?

We must now insist that you remove this sentence from your blog as it is absolutely clear that our client is not trying to bully you or intimidate you or silence you. What she is trying to do is to protect her good name and she will not allow herself to be defamed again. We hope you will accept that the allegation that our client is a bully and that she is intimidating you and trying to silence you is both wrong and extremely damaging for her.

We have strongly advised our client that she should issue proceedings to prevent this repetitive defamation but once again our client has said that she does not wish to do so given the background to this case but she absolutely insists that you remove the defamatory comments that are appearing on the website at the moment and confirm that you will not repeat any defamation in the future.

Yours faithfully,

BROPHY SOLICITORS

************************************************************************

The information contained in this message may be privileged and confidential and protected from disclosure. If the reader of this messages is not the intended recipient, oran employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to message and deleting it from your computer.

************************************************************************

Reply..

Oh, I think I get it now, everyone is allowed to have an opinion except me! As long as I stick to the facts but don’t give my opinion, I’m Okay!

I have to say, I’m left rather baffled by this latest letter from Brophy Solicitors – I wonder if they will be contacting other bloggers who have an opinion, but anyway, here’s the revised post – Link.

Leonie

22 thoughts on “Brophy solicitors – the sequel!

  1. I have no doubt Prof Casey doesn’t want to issue legal proceedings because of the ‘background of the case.’ I sincerely doubt however that this is due to any compassion but because she doesn’t want your claims of her involvement with Lundbeck and the role of its drugs in Shane’s death tested in court. I think you are a bully with dubious ethics Prof Casey. So sue me.

    Like

  2. I find both Brophy Solicitors and Patricia Casey’s actions/reactions quite startling. As you know, I have just drafted an article regarding this matter on my blog. I have forwarded the link on to the Irish Times as it appears, to me at least, that Casey is seeking to have you silenced. I doubt if the Irish Times will respond to a blogger but if Casey wishes to sue you for having an opinion, I suspect the media will take more than a keen interest in your research where you have found that she [Casey] has an association with Lundbeck.

    Scratching my head as to why Casey wishes to suppress that association… unless of course she wants to keep it secret?

    Anyway, you have the support of many bloggers and a large group of people on Facebook. Investigative journalist friend of mine even left a few comments on my FB link.

    Casey and/or Brophy’s are more than willing to leave a comment on my blog and on the blogs of others that have highlighted this story… I doubt if they will though.

    Like

    1. I am currently hiring Brophy`s Solicitors. I am finding it confusing as to their approach toward my case,. It seems they don`t really care or are just plain incompetent. Could you please give me contact details of anyone who has dealt with Brophy`s Solicitors?

      Like

  3. IF Patricia Casey wasn’t attempting to silence Leonie Fennell via monitoring her blog and picking apart each word she writes looking for defamatory commentary on purpose, then having lawyers keep tabs on the blog and find other words and sentences they feel (they feel) are offending to Patricia Casey, then I ask why did she hire a lawfirm in the first place? it sure wasn’t to send sympathy cards!

    What is bullying? using power to intimidate someone the person or group feels is an easy or weak target, often preying on the most vulnerable people.

    What is intimidation? appearing larger than one actually is, tossing weight around or legal stature about in attempt to silence another person or get them to stop something the intimidator does not like.

    You see, Brophy Solicitors and Patricia Casey Leonie is a mother, as am I and we have suffered the loss in 2 different ways of our children. Our children, who we carried for 9 months and nurtured and loved and sent off to school became victims of pharmaceutical company greed and profit in the name of “care” by psychiatrists. Leonie’s son is dead, and my daughter is trapped in a disabled limbo unable to be the person she once was and is not even close to being a shadow of the person I once knew. Her brain is keeping a diligent candle of hope for all of us that it can repair itself from the damage of the psychiatric medications that damaged it, one day I hope to stand next to her and listen to her tell the world what that feels like, to have life stop as a teen and be stuck in a drugged state and crippled to the point of lack of communication and function in daily life. I hold the candle of hope every day she will be able to have a life one day and the years keep passing as I hang onto that small thread of hope.

    Leonie has no chance of her son returning to her at all. She lost her son to death which is something a mother never gets over.

    Leonie has the right to express herself on her blog, which is a personal diary, an outlet for her grief.

    If Brophy Solicitors continue to cause undue grief and stress over reading her blog and picking apart the wording on behalf of a psychiatrist who claims to have ‘sympathy’ then Leonie in my opinion should take on a suit of her own. Harrassment of an individual on a continual basis with letters that are threatening to her, is unnecessary grief she must endure after having one of the most horrific experiences a mother can ever have, the loss of a child and outliving her son.

    Patricia Casey also must not be thinking about how there are other victims of psychiatry around the world who will be outraged on Leonie’s behalf. We will not tolerate this treatment of Leonie. Also, each time Brophy writes a letter it draws more attention to the discussion and the result is causing Patricia Casey to appear as a bully and if they cannot see that, they need to sit back and understand this world of blogging reaches thousands of people on a 24 hour a day basis and the loss of respect will be served in a heaping dose to Dr. Casey as a result of not leaving Fennell alone in her grief. Casey has much bigger fish to fry, I would hope. There are countless articles and radio podcasts and interviews that can lend a bad name and opinion of Casey long before Fennell came along and blogged about her. The Internet is a mirror and once words are cast there they are permanent, even if Leonie deleted her blog, the words are cached onto the Internet, Google is a wonderful thing that way!

    Like

  4. Fascinating. Simply Fascinating! I am led to suppose that Psychiatry in Ireland must work Differently than it does in America, where Psychiatry itself has No Cures, & No Biological Science, and all that it Does have to sell, is Lifelong Defamation of its clients.

    In California its tool kit includes Life Long State Police Registration BECAUSE of the Non-Disclosed HOMICIDES its Risperdal CAUSES, without the purveyors of its Risperdal, EVER, having Cured Any of their own Psychiatric Opinions.

    But this couldn’t be the case with Psychiatry in Ireland, could it?

    Psychiatrists in Ireland Must have some similarly Non-Disclosed knowledge base which informs Their Defamatory Opinions which their American counterparts remain, as yet, somehow unaware of, Right?

    Irish Psychiatrists MUST have a super secret Diagnosing Playbook written by Geniuses whose grasp of Science far exceeds that of 2 Philosophizing Gasbags who were Suckered by a Table Knocker:

    http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/seance/78/schneidr.htm

    Irish Psychiatrists couldn’t Possibly be basing their Diagnosing Brilliance on the scribblings of a Marxist Orgone Swindler who died in an American Federal Prison: one whom the FDA Concluded was a “Fraud of the First Magnitude”, Could They?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilhelm_Reich#1947:_The_Brady_article_and_the_FDA

    Irish Psychiatrists couldn’t Possibly still be recycling the Theories of a Cocaine Pushing FRAUD who Faked his case histories to peddle his Theories, Could They?

    http://www.nytimes.com/1990/03/06/science/as-a-therapist-freud-fell-short-scholars-find.html?sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all

    While I don’t know the exact limits of legally actionable Defamation under Irish Law, I DO Know them under American Law, and I rather Doubt that it’s possible to actually Defame the practice itself of Psychiatry in America. It promotes itself as selling ‘Mental Health’ when it has NO actual ”Mental Health’ to sell, NONE. That’s called FRAUD.

    Don’t believe me? See Black’s Law Dictionary.

    http://www.journalofaccountancy.com/Issues/2004/Oct/BasicLegalConcepts.htm

    “Definition of Fraud

    All multifarious means which human ingenuity can devise, and which are resorted to by one individual to get an advantage over another by false suggestions or suppression of the truth. It includes all surprises, tricks, cunning or dissembling, and any unfair way which another is cheated.”

    Source: Black’s Law Dictionary, 5th ed., by Henry Campbell Black, West Publishing Co., St. Paul, Minnesota, 1979.

    What American Psychiatry Does have to sell are Defamatory Opinions, Brain Damage, Chronic Diseases, Murder & Suicide based upon the Theories of well documented Frauds, Confidence Artists and Flim Flam men.

    But that Can’t be the Case with Psychiatry in Ireland, Can It?

    Dr Casey, unlike American Psychiatrists, Must have Cured MANY of her clients.

    Perhaps her solicitors would be so generous as to share out a simple list of Dr Casey’s patients whom she’s ‘Cured’?

    Like

  5. Solicitors letters have long been used as scare tactics (everyone knows that) . And what is a ‘scare tactic’ but intimidation? High profile psychiatrists do not like being scrutinized, but they don’t seem to have any problem scrutinizing everyone else. They also don’t seem to see how ‘conflicts of interest’ between themselves and drug companies could be interpreted by some as fundamentally unethical. I find this quite baffling…

    Your interpretation from receiving the first letter was one of intimidation, and you felt that it was an attempt to silence and bully you into submission and therefore stifle your right of expression and opinion. I think that is an entirely justifiable reaction on your part. You have also complied with their requests, so personally, I don’t see the problem. But then again, that’s just my humble opinion. We are allowed to have them are we not?

    Keep Blogging Leonie.
    You have a right.

    Like

  6. “What part of this constitutes bullying? What part of this constitutes an attempt to silence you? Are you saying that the simple fact that you received a solicitor’s letter asking you to remove certain defamatory comments which you subsequently removed, constitutes intimidation?”

    I find the inclusion of these livid and emotionally toned rhetorical questions quite strange, surely these solicitors would be aware that it is not legal protocol to try to engage and to question a layperson in such a way? Solicitors are supposed to communicate with other solicitors, they’re not supposed to sound off irrational accusations to citizens. I’m not a legal expert, but I would say this kind of behavior is beyond the pale in the legal profession.

    Apparently Brophy solicitors are champions of ‘human rights’ cases in Ireland.. bizarre.

    Like

  7. Bullying? Bullying?

    I’m somewhat mystified by the connotations implied by that particular word.

    Shane and another young man are DEAD, following Shane’s being Poisoned. Their DEATHS appear to be directly attributable To that Poisoning and I’m getting the sense that “Bullying” is the greater evil?

    If Brophy Solicitors wish to take issue with the word Poisoned, I suggest they consult their desktop dictionary, or the Oxford English Complete Dictionary.

    And I’m Still waiting for that list of clients whom Any Psychiatrist has ‘Cured’ of their own Psychiatric Opinion that Any set of human emotions/snap shot of Any day in Any person’s life actually constitutes a Pathology requiring Psychiatric treatment, Especially when those Psychiatric Opinions are rooted in some of the most Risible excuses for Science ever chronicled.

    http://psychroaches.blogspot.com/2011/07/wilhelm-reich-marxist-fruitbat.html

    ‘Mental Illness’ can only be conquered by smashing capitalism and instituting socialism?

    http://psychroaches.blogspot.com/2011/07/occult-world-of-cg-jung.html

    Seances, Horoscopes, Flying Saucers and Alchemy?

    This PloS article is dated June 6, 2006, so it’s not as if it just hit the news racks yesterday.

    http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pmed.0030240

    Bullying?

    Another word starting with Bull comes to mind, but this is not my page: It’s the page of a mother whose son has been taken from her, and by accounts, many others, who also miss him.

    Like

    1. I’m sorry you got run over by these disability and drug pushers. They seem to have that effect, IE: RUINING everyone and everything they touch.

      http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/article.aspx?Volume=157&page=1527&journalID=13

      “In this example, the screening test identified 174 individuals as at risk for illness; 75 (43%) are correctly classified, and 99 (57%) are incorrectly classified. Thus, even with high specificity, more individuals identified by the screening test are false positive than true positive.”

      So, anyone involved here had a Better than even chance of not only being Branded, but being Misdiagnosed/Misbranded by Psychiatry’s own criteria.

      And our Courts allow them to offer their Opinions as scientific evidence.

      Like

  8. Hi Lisa,
    Thanks for sending the Article, wonder if the Indo were sent a Solicitor’s Letter?
    I do think there are some good Psychiatrists but unfortunately most just revert to the Chemical Cosh without mentioning the side-effects such as suicide, depression, violence, ect.
    Hope you are doing OK at the moment?
    Leonie
    P.S Thanks also to dbunkerdbunker for the Information.

    Like

  9. I cannot comment on this case, but my wife’s own dealings with Brophy are wholly unsatisfactory, on two occasions it has been unfortunate to deal with this man who is in the least been non cooperative and unhelpful, An irish based solicitor, and a english based solicitor both said he was not answering there letters or telephone calls so could not help me any further, this was regarding a family death and a business.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s