Difference between revisions of "Brook Jackson"
(add image) |
(Conflicting loyalties subsection) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
|image=Brook Jackson.png | |image=Brook Jackson.png | ||
|description=A [[whistleblower]] who witnessed numerous violations of [[standard operating procedure]] in the experiments carried out regards [[COVID jabs]] | |description=A [[whistleblower]] who witnessed numerous violations of [[standard operating procedure]] in the experiments carried out regards [[COVID jabs]] | ||
| − | }}'''Brook Jackson''' is a [[whistleblower]] who witnessed numerous violations of [[standard operating procedure]] in what she thought were trials of the [[COVID jabs]]' "[[safety and efficacy]]". She reports that she "repeatedly informed her superiors of poor laboratory management, patient safety concerns and data integrity issues" during the two weeks she was employed by [[Ventavia]] in September 2020.<ref>https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/pfizer-whistleblower-brook-jackson-lawsuit-dismissal-fraud/</ref> | + | }}'''Brook Jackson''' is a [[whistleblower]] who witnessed numerous violations of [[standard operating procedure]] in what she thought were trials of the [[COVID jabs]]' "[[safety and efficacy]]". She reports that she "repeatedly informed her superiors of poor laboratory management, patient safety concerns and data integrity issues" during the two weeks she was employed by [[Ventavia]] in September 2020.<ref>https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/pfizer-whistleblower-brook-jackson-lawsuit-dismissal-fraud/</ref> She gave a cache of information to the [[BMJ]], which published a piece on her claims.<ref>https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj.n2635</ref> |
| − | |||
| − | She gave a cache of information to the [[BMJ]], which published a piece on her claims.<ref>https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj.n2635</ref> | ||
== Court case == | == Court case == | ||
| − | In January 2021 Jackson sued [[Pfizer]], [[Ventavia]] and [[ICON PLC]], another Pfizer contractor. She charged that the companies committed numerous violations of the False Claims Act (FCA) | + | In January 2021 Jackson sued [[Pfizer]], [[Ventavia]] and [[ICON PLC]], another Pfizer contractor. She charged that "Ventavia’s trial protocol and regulatory violations were so widespread, in fact, that [she] observed them on a near-daily basis during her brief employment period", and that the companies committed numerous violations of the False Claims Act (FCA), alleging "a deeply flawed clinical trial that violated FDA regulations".<ref>[[File:Brook Jackson lawsuit.pdf]]</ref> |
=== Other Transaction Authority === | === Other Transaction Authority === | ||
| Line 16: | Line 14: | ||
=== Case dismissed === | === Case dismissed === | ||
| − | In his March 31 ruling, U.S. District judge [[Michael Truncale]] dismissed the case.<ref>https://youtu.be/z_bNs0pk5bA</ref> | + | The defendants moved to dismiss the case. On January 18, 2022, the United States declined to intervene in this action, but on October 4, 2022, the United States took the unusual step of filing a Statement of Interest Supporting Dismissal of the Amended Complaint. |
| + | |||
| + | In [[File:Truncale dismissal of Brook Jackson case.pdf |his March 31 ruling]], U.S. District judge [[Michael Truncale]] dismissed the case. His ruling cited the precedent that "if the Government pays a particular claim in full despite its actual knowledge that certain requirements were violated, that is very strong evidence that those requirements are not material."<ref name="dismissal">[[File:Truncale dismissal of Brook Jackson case.pdf]]</ref><ref>https://youtu.be/z_bNs0pk5bA</ref> | ||
| + | |||
| + | === Conflicting loyalties=== | ||
| + | [[Daniel Greer]] wrote in May 2024 that "a former FDA lawyer who worked at the agency when Jackson’s complaint was filed has moved to the DOJ and is now representing the government in its attempt to shut down the suit, raising concerns about regulatory capture and the use of government to shield companies from accountability."<ref name="tsc">https://texasscorecard.com/federal/analysis-the-doj-is-trying-to-protect-pfizer-from-a-whistleblower-lawsuit/</ref> | ||
| + | |||
{{SMWDocs}} | {{SMWDocs}} | ||
Latest revision as of 14:35, 15 May 2024
 Brook Jackson    (whistleblower) | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Exposed | COVID-19/Vaccines |
A whistleblower who witnessed numerous violations of standard operating procedure in the experiments carried out regards COVID jabs | |
Brook Jackson is a whistleblower who witnessed numerous violations of standard operating procedure in what she thought were trials of the COVID jabs' "safety and efficacy". She reports that she "repeatedly informed her superiors of poor laboratory management, patient safety concerns and data integrity issues" during the two weeks she was employed by Ventavia in September 2020.[1] She gave a cache of information to the BMJ, which published a piece on her claims.[2]
Contents
Court case
In January 2021 Jackson sued Pfizer, Ventavia and ICON PLC, another Pfizer contractor. She charged that "Ventavia’s trial protocol and regulatory violations were so widespread, in fact, that [she] observed them on a near-daily basis during her brief employment period", and that the companies committed numerous violations of the False Claims Act (FCA), alleging "a deeply flawed clinical trial that violated FDA regulations".[3]
Other Transaction Authority
Brook Jackson's case is cited by researchers including Sasha Latypova as having highlighted the USDoD's use of the Other Transaction Authority to order the jabs as prototype countermeasures, avoiding contract and pharmaceutical laws that would have applied to them if they had been classed as medical treatments.
Case dismissed
The defendants moved to dismiss the case. On January 18, 2022, the United States declined to intervene in this action, but on October 4, 2022, the United States took the unusual step of filing a Statement of Interest Supporting Dismissal of the Amended Complaint.
In File:Truncale dismissal of Brook Jackson case.pdf, U.S. District judge Michael Truncale dismissed the case. His ruling cited the precedent that "if the Government pays a particular claim in full despite its actual knowledge that certain requirements were violated, that is very strong evidence that those requirements are not material."[4][5]
Conflicting loyalties
Daniel Greer wrote in May 2024 that "a former FDA lawyer who worked at the agency when Jackson’s complaint was filed has moved to the DOJ and is now representing the government in its attempt to shut down the suit, raising concerns about regulatory capture and the use of government to shield companies from accountability."[6]
Related Document
| Title | Type | Publication date | Author(s) | Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Document:Researcher blows the whistle on data integrity issues in Pfizer’s vaccine trial | article | 2 November 2021 | Paul D Thacker | Whistleblowers from a contract research company helping to carry out Pfizer’s pivotal covid-19 vaccine trial say never experienced such a “helter skelter" work environment, saying speed may have come at the cost of data integrity and patient safety. |
- ↑ https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/pfizer-whistleblower-brook-jackson-lawsuit-dismissal-fraud/
- ↑ https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj.n2635
- ↑ File:Brook Jackson lawsuit.pdf
- ↑ File:Truncale dismissal of Brook Jackson case.pdf
- ↑ https://youtu.be/z_bNs0pk5bA
- ↑ https://texasscorecard.com/federal/analysis-the-doj-is-trying-to-protect-pfizer-from-a-whistleblower-lawsuit/
