Lawyer Scott Lively presents the case that Governor Andrew Cuomo is guilty of murder:
The Murder Trial of Andrew Cuomo
(An Opinion Piece in the Form of an Opening Statement -- May 18, 2020)
In the
matter of The People v Andrew Cuomo, on the charge of murder, I am
Attorney Scott Lively, representing The People. You have been empaneled
as the jury in this matter, and it will be your job to determine the
guilt or innocence of the defendant in this case, Mr. Andrew Cuomo,
Governor of the State of New York, on the charge of murder in the deaths
of thousands of elderly Americans who lost their lives in nursing homes
as a consequence of infection with Covid 19 disease caused by exposure
to infected individuals intentionally discharged from hospitals and
placed in these homes. These initial facts are uncontested and news
reports have informed the entire world of the great human tragedy
suffered by these victims and their families. But the question before
you today, is the degree of responsibility for those deaths that should
be borne by the defendant. This is a question of fact that only you, the
jury, can decide.
What the
evidence will show is that in the first five months of 2020, as the
Covid-19 Pandemic raged through the State of New York, more than 5000 of
New York’s citizens most vulnerable to the ravages of this terrible
disease were killed by this virus in nursing homes. We will show that
these nursing home deaths represented 25% – literally a quarter – of all
Covid-19 deaths in the State of New York, a vastly disproportionate
number of victims compared to the size of the general population of
infected persons.
The
People will call witnesses from the State Health Department to explain a
March 25th policy directive of the state health department directive
requiring nursing homes to take coronavirus patients. These witnesses
will testify that this legally binding directive barred nursing homes
from requiring incoming patients “to be tested for COVID-19 prior to
admission or readmission.”
They will
also affirm that this policy was not just holdover bureaucratic red
tape that forced nursing homes to accept infected patients, but was a
premeditated policy change, specifically implemented at the height of
the pandemic, in response to it!
We will
show that the March 25 order states, "Residents are deemed appropriate
for return to a [nursing home] upon a determination by the hospital
physician or designee that the resident is medically stable for return."
And we will call witnesses to verify that while the notification gives
no specific definition of “medically stable,” health experts insist that
those patients should have been assumed to be contagious.
We will
further show that even when the disease began rampaging through these
care facilities like a hurricane, the state would not reverse the
policy. We will call the head of Brooklyn’s Cobble Hill Health Center
and introduce as evidence his frantic email exchange with state health
officials on April 9th begging for permission to send suspected covid
cases to the Javitz center or the medial ships in New York harbor. He
will testify that he was denied permission and more than 50 residents at
his home died. Other nursing home officials from around the state will
tell similar stories.
The
Defense will argue that Governor Cuomo should not be held responsible
for the actions of his state health officials, and that in the month of
May he eventually did intervene to rescind the March 25th directive, but
we will show that Governor Cuomo’s policy recision occurred only after
calls for an independent investigation had begun circulating in the
media, and we will call a Cuomo aide who will state that the May policy
change was not a reversal in recognition of error, but simply a new
policy based on increased hospital capacity and testing. We will also
show that Governor Cuomo wielded defacto dictatorial power during this
period.
The
People will call witnesses who will testify that the Cuomo
administration intentionally withheld the data on nursing home deaths
from the public, and it will be up to you, the jury, to decide whether
this evidence proves knowledge of guilt, and whether precious lives
could have been saved by an earlier public outcry.
In this
trial, there will be a lot of back and forth about just how deadly the
Covid 19 disease really is, and how many of the Governor’s actions and
policies that now seem erroneous to critics can be justified by the
exigent circumstances at the time. And surely the people would agree
that no leader can bat a thousand in the best of circumstances, let
alone under the pressure of a major public health emergency.
However,
we will argue that this case is not about any one bad choice or policy,
but a pattern of choices that reflect at the very least a gross and
callous disregard for human life, and at worst, a deliberate intention
to sacrifice the elderly and infirm as more expendable than others in
the battle against Covid 19, or, even worse, considering them so
disposable as to not be worthy of efforts to sequester them in less
contagion-susceptible facilities.
That’s an
extremely serious charge, but we will show that it is not an
unreasonable conclusion, and that other policies enacted under
Governor’s leadership bolster it. We will, for example, take a close
look at an April 17th directive of New York state health officials
ordering emergency service workers not to revive anyone without a pulse,
stating in a memo, the change is “necessary during the COVID-19
response to protect the health and safety of EMS providers by limiting
their exposure, conserve resources, and ensure optimal use of equipment
to save the greatest number of lives.” Like the nursing home directive,
this policy was also eventually rescinded, but only after public
outcry.
In the
end, however, your determination of Governor Cuomo’s culpability may
have less to do with the enormous volume of evidence The People will
present, than with the simple common sense observation that while the
Governor was justifying the near total lock down of the State of New
York, sacrificing hundreds of thousands if not millions of jobs,
suspending the peoples’ most fundamental constitutional rights, and
forcing mandatory masked-up social distancing on everyone in the name of
protecting the most vulnerable – he was knowingly and intentionally
sending hundreds of disease carriers into the very facilities where the
very most vulnerable were congregated in conditions most optimal for the
spread of the disease.
If that’s not murder, then words have lost their meaning. [Scott Lively's Mission Dispatch, January 31, 2021, www.scottlively.net Observations and Action on Current Events, History and Theology.
Subscribe by email request here scottlivelyministries@gmail.com ]
Francis Notes:
- Doctor
of the Church St. Francis de Sales totally confirmed beyond any doubt
the possibility of a heretical pope and what must be done by the Church
in such a situation:
"[T]he Pope... WHEN he is EXPLICITLY a heretic, he falls ipso facto from his dignity and out of the Church, and the Church MUST either deprive him, or, as some say, declare him deprived, of his Apostolic See."
(The Catholic Controversy, by St. Francis de Sales, Pages 305-306)
Saint Robert Bellarmine, also, said "the Pope heretic is not deposed ipso facto, but must be declared deposed by the Church."
[https://archive.org/stream/SilveiraImplicationsOfNewMissaeAndHereticPopes/Silveira%20Implications%20of%20New%20Missae%20and%20Heretic%20Popes_djvu.txt]
- "If Francis is a Heretic, What should Canonically happen to him?": http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2020/12/if-francis-is-heretic-what-should.html
- "Could Francis be a Antipope even though the Majority of Cardinals claim he is Pope?": http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2019/03/could-francis-be-antipope-even-though.html
- LifeSiteNews, "Confusion explodes as Pope Francis throws magisterial
weight behind communion for adulterers," December 4, 2017:
The AAS guidelines explicitly allows "sexually active adulterous couples
facing 'complex circumstances' to 'access the sacraments of
Reconciliation and the Eucharist.'"
- On February 2018, in Rorate Caeli, Catholic theologian Dr. John Lamont:
"The AAS statement... establishes that Pope Francis in Amoris Laetitia
has affirmed propositions that are heretical in the strict sense."
- On December 2, 2017, Bishop Rene Gracida:
"Francis' heterodoxy is now official. He has published his letter to the
Argentina bishops in Acta Apostlica Series making those letters
magisterial documents."
Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church by the bishops by the grace of God.
Election Notes:
- Intel Cryptanalyst-Mathematician on
Biden Steal: "212Million Registered Voters & 66.2% Voting,140.344 M
Voted...Trump got 74 M, that leaves only 66.344 M for Biden" [http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2020/12/intel-cryptanalyst-mathematician-on.html?m=1]
- Will US be Venezuela?: Ex-CIA
Official told Epoch Times "Chávez started to Focus on [Smartmatic]
Voting Machines to Ensure Victory as early as 2003": http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2020/12/will-us-be-venezuela-ex-cia-official.html
Pray an Our Father now for the grace to know God's Will and to do it.