Torture in a Civilised Way: My Own Real Case History: When the Mentally Evaluated Evaluates the Evaluator, Malingering of Mental Evaluation Can Be Also Useful

Copyright © 2014 by Dr. Sammy Khan.

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the copyright owner.

Any people depicted in stock imagery provided by Thinkstock are models, and such images are being used for illustrative purposes only.

Certain stock imagery © Thinkstock.

Rev. date: 10/14/2014

Xlibris

0-800-056-3182

www.xlibrispublishing.co.uk

521331

CONTENTS

Section 1: Introduction

Section 2: Brief Summary Of My Case

Section 3: The Russian Mafia Case Of April 2006

Section 4: Relevant Account Of My CV

Section 5: Summary Of All My Mental Evaluations

Section 6: System Non-Compliance, Deviations, And Bias

Section 7: Final Discussion And The DSM-V

Section 8: Summarising And Closing Comments

Section 1

INTRODUCTION

For making a proper and ethical mental evaluation of a patient for treatment or for a trial of the defendant suspected of having mental illness, worldwide associations of psychiatrists and psychologists in civilised industrial countries issued ethical rules, recommendations, and guidelines for forensic psychologists and psychiatrists to make ethical and proper mental evaluations for use in a trial or for the treatment of a person suspected of having mental disorder. These ethical rules recommend that a mental assessor or a clinical mental evaluator should prior to evaluation start with obtaining all available information on the assessed person from all available sources, such as from the person himself or herself, including his or her own self-mental assessment, the assessed person’s childhood, adolescence, and adulthood social and criminal histories; obtaining all information about the assessed person’s present and previous social and mental behaviours from assessed collaterals, such as family members, work colleagues, and third party who might have had close connections to the assessed person; and obtaining all available medical and health reports, police reports, and information about the evaluated person from the national police criminal register and the national psychiatric register. In addition, the mental evaluator should find out the reasons for the person to be mentally evaluated and obtain all previous mental evaluations of the assessed person if any are found.

The logical and ethical principle behind such a recommended initial step prior to assessment is that in this way the assessor can compare the information obtained from the assessed and the assessed collaterals and third party with the actual results of the evaluation made, and in this way the assessor can detect and isolate any cheating and malingering by the assessed to achieve specific personal purposes in order to obtain an actual evaluation of the mental condition of the assessed person for fair trial and correct treatment.

Forensic psychiatrists and psychologists suggest that morally malingerers should be punished for cheating and tampering with their own mental evaluations to satisfy specific purposes. I totally agree with this moralistic judgement on a malingerer of his own mental evaluations, but only when the mental assessor who is making the assessment is honest and competent and that evaluation is done correctly, with the correct tests and evaluation tools under suitable conditions and done ethically without any abuse of the evaluation by the assessor for achieving specific purposes and without bias to the police, turning mental evaluation as a gun in the hands of the unethical police or tool of prejudice against specific type of people. But when mental evaluation is done incorrectly by a dishonest or incompetent or biased evaluator or a prejudiced evaluator, who might purposely use a deficient or deviant evaluation procedure to satisfy his harmful behaviour, resulting in improper and not actual or biased mental findings with harmful consequences for the assessed with a lifelong stigma, then I find malingering as a good countermeasure to be used by an assessed person to defend himself against such improper behaviour of the evaluator, resulting in not an actual and harmful evaluation for obvious or not so obvious reasons to achieve specific purposes for the evaluator or planned harm against the assessed person.

In some cases, like my own case which I am presenting here, I will show how my purposeful malingering in my first court-ordered mental evaluation as a convicted defendant was useful in stopping further police torture against me by their purposeful prolonged police isolation custody imprisonment of me after I had appealed a local court prison sentence. I was kept in police isolation custody for twenty months just to wait for my appeal case to be processed in court when all police investigation in the judged case was finished and I was already sentenced for the case before I was sent into this long police custody for new fabricated accusations which had nothing to do with the offences I was originally sentenced for. I had malingered my first court-ordered mental evaluation, because just before and during the evaluation process I found out that the evaluation itself was done by incorrect evaluation procedures, under unsuitable conditions, and without taking any considerations of my own conditions and impairments prior to the evaluation, like my different race and ethnicity, my very bad physical health, and my initial inborn physical and acquired impairments.

I became aware of this evaluator’s negligence of my unsuitable conditions and situations; the results of my evaluations were going to be negative and I would be found to be mentally abnormal irrespective of how I was going to perform in the testing and evaluation, but such negative results could rescue me from the torture I was enduring in the horrible purposely prolonged police custody which lasted for twenty months just for waiting for my appeal case to be processed in court, only if the appeal court was to accept the malingered negative results of my mental evaluation ordered by the legal system prior to my appeal trial, as reasons to change my local court prison sentence to psychiatric sentence. And this fact encouraged and assisted me to malinger the evaluation in a way to achieve my purpose of getting rid of police torture and their prolonged custody imprisonment, and therefore, I malingered and played myself at the psychological testing and evaluation exactly as I was described by the police charges I was sentenced for at the local court. That succeeded in changing my local court prison sentence to a psychiatric treatment sentence and upheld the temporary sanction on my medical license (MEDL), and this appeal sentence released me from imprisonment in police custody and unblocked my horrible isolation from the outside world and allowed me to see my children, and I started managing my problems and ruined economy, which were due to the prolonged police isolation custody for twenty months.

Then ten years later, during my second court-ordered mental assessment to be used for lifting the sanction on my license to practice as MD, I found out that my new assessors were already initially made biased by the police prosecutor’s case file sent to them, which contained only exact copies of the negative findings of my first influenced malingered evaluation, described above, and when this case file didn’t contain any of my other previous actual and positive mental evaluations made in the prison during my twenty months’ stay in police custody and also didn’t contain all the relevant information on me mentioned above, such as information of my age, my different race and ethnicity, physical health, impairments, and my CV were missing from the case file sent by the police prosecutor to my new assessors. Therefore, before I took this second mental evaluation, my defence and I become confident that my new mental findings were going to be similar if not the same as my first malingered mental evaluation, and in such a case, I was confident that I would lose the court hearing on lifting my sanction. And also in such a case, I had to pay the costs of the trial; therefore, I decided to get something for my money and time.

So as an MD (Medical Doctor) with some knowledge of forensic psychiatry and psychology, I wanted to use my second court-ordered mental evaluation to prove my previous suspicion that my mental evaluation and perhaps also generally all mental evaluations in this country where I lived and was judged and evaluated mentally as not an ethic citizen of this country involved in my case and presented in this book, which I will call the country of my case (COMYC), were made in very unusual ways which do not comply with the internationally recognised and recommended ways for making proper and ethical evaluations of a defendant or a patient. And for this purpose, I decided again to malinger my second mental evaluation, but this time in a positive way and in an opposite way than I did during my first assessment. This time my purpose in my decision to malinger again my second mental evaluation but in an opposite and different way from that of my first mental evaluation ten years previously was that this time I wanted to make my second mental evaluation as my own personal investigation to evaluate the methods and the work behaviours of the assessors themselves. It was to find out if it was really true, as I and my defence lawyer strongly believed that there was a very high likelihood that the new assessors were going to follow the same evaluation pattern and procedures as my previous evaluators did and to find out if they were really going to be biased to my negative not actual findings of my first court-ordered mental evaluation which was influenced by my unsuitable pre-testing conditions and by my purposeful malingering, which was found in the case file the assessors had received from the police prosecutor and where it was repeated exactly word to word by three different sources of my previous evaluators in their enclosed final mental findings reports. Those reports during my second court-ordered evaluation had already become ten years older and I, the person who was to be evaluated, had also become ten years older along with the deterioration of my physical health conditions. I had developed physical disabilities, but still had stayed re-offending free during my second court-ordered mental evaluation and also have stayed re-offending free to this day of writing this presentation for the past sixteen to nineteen years.

Besides, this time the case file for my second mental evaluation, ten years after my first court-ordered mental evaluation, didn’t contain any information about my different race, ethnicity, bad physical health, inborn and acquired and developed impairments, and it also even didn’t contain any information about my CV. Therefore, this time for the planned private study of my own second and court-ordered mental evaluation, I decided to precondition the assessors to encourage them to comply to the above-mentioned international guidelines for making a proper and ethical mental evaluation, which recommend and oblige forensic mental assessors to obtain prior to assessment all relevant information about the assessed from all available sources. Most of this information about me were missing from the case file sent to them by the police prosecutor, and I also wanted to draw their attention to the existence of my other previously ignored positive mental findings from the prison and other places, which were purposely not enclosed in their case file, and to make them aware of the existence of my previously mentioned conditions and features which could influence the findings of their mental evaluation of me and which also were totally ignored during my first court-ordered mental evaluation which I also had malingered in order to stop further police torture of me by leaving me to rot in their isolation custody imprisonment just to wait for my appeal case to be processed in court.

As part of my plan to evaluate my own ethnic evaluation and the work of my new ethnic evaluators, I delivered to them, prior to their evaluation of me, in the form of words a 146-pages folder containing all this missing information and my previous missing mental findings which were not enclosed in their case file. In this way, I wanted to find out if my second court-ordered mental evaluation was going to be done in the same way as the first one, which then would prove to me that such an improper procedure which was used in making my previous mental evaluations must be a sort of a standard national way of making mental assessment in the COMYC where I lived as a non-ethnic but of different race and ethnicity. And thus my planned investigation would allow me to find out from their reported findings to the court if they were really made biased to the contents of the case file which was edited and reconstructed by the police prosecutor for the planned second court hearing on lifting my sanction. In that case file, stress was laid on the not actual and improper mental findings of my first court-ordered mental evaluation which was presented by the police prosecutor in this case file, as my previous mental findings were referred to by three different sources who actually copied each other’s description.

After I received a copy of the findings of this second assessment, my suspicions were totally correct. I lost the case at the court hearing and had to pay a high price for the cost of the trial, but I obtained what I considered valuable results on how mental evaluations were made in what it seemed an unusual way that did not comply with the internationally recommended and recognised methods of making proper mental evaluations and the correct ways of diagnosing mental disorders. It also proved that mental evaluations could actually be manipulated for achieving specific purposes by all the involved parts and that in the country where I lived, the COMYC, and was judged as a citizen of different race and ethnicity, the ways all my mental evaluations were made for legal decisions in my case were done in the same way with the same procedures and with the same special local moral codes and ethics, whenever and wherever they were made. It seemed like a nationalised standard way used for doing mental evaluation for courts in this non-English speaking and non-English cultured civilised European country, COMYC, where I lived; it deviated totally from internationally known and recognised applied methods of making ethical, proper, and actual mental evaluations of a defendant for trial, especially when the defendant such as myself was of not of the same race and ethnicity and the ways my own mental evaluation were made were not different from the ways other mental evaluations were made of my previous non-ethnic patients (Pts.), which I had reviewed as I had been their general practitioner and actually had exactly the same final mental diagnosis.

This can be explained by the influences of the different language, culture, and the social moral norms of this non- English speaking and non-English cultured COMYC on the translated and adapted original psychiatry and psychology and methods of making mental assessments which are founded and published in English with different morals behind their use, which become modified or even misunderstood when these translated and adapted mental tools are applied in the mental health system and the legal system of this non-English country. The interesting thing in the course of my mental evaluations was that some of my own previous patients, who also were of different race and ethnicity like myself, and even some of my previous ethnic patients were mentally evaluated like myself using the same improper methods and ethics with nearly the same not actual, improper, humiliating, and disgraceful mental findings and diagnosis, which after my stigma and suffering because of my wrong and unethical mental evaluations shed a doubt on my mind that there was really something wrong with the forensic psychiatry and psychology in my domicile country, the COMYC, which as in my case the judging people were not aware of as I was judged according to these improper and not actual descriptions of my own habitual characters and core personality.

This is not an attack or critic of this COMYC and its system. I am just presenting my own many years of findings and experiences which might be useful for other curious mental professionals in this COMYC to do something about it and avoid such mistakes in mental evaluations, especially leading to inhumane judgement of non-ethnic residents, which can damage completely the evaluated person socially and economically and harm his or her family even with a lifelong stigma. And based on my fifty years of observations and experiences in the COMYC, people have even committed suicide after such harsh and inhumane consequences of improper and unethical mental evaluations.

As a graduate medical doctor (MD), this presentation is an account of my own legal–mental case which was processed through the mental, health, and the legal systems in the COMYC. My case started in 1999, and at the time of writing this presentation in 2013, a part of my case had still not been terminated and the improper findings of my mental evaluations described here had still not been corrected.

My case mainly shows how my being a citizen of the minorities in the COMYC from a different race and culture and living in a small European country with a civilised but tribal-like unique society greatly influenced the outcomes of my mental evaluations for legal decisions against me with very harmful and inhumane consequences for me as a family man and a father of twelve children born in the COMYC to ethnic mothers. Moreover, my presentation of my own case shows how the legal decisions in my case were done unfairly according to blind acceptance of improper and biased wrong mental evaluations of me, which were made in improper and very peculiar ways that were translated from English modified and adapted tests and methods which deviate from internationally recognised recommended methods and guidelines for proper and fair mental evaluation of convicted defendant for trial or a patient for treatment. The reason for bringing my case out in the public after a period of ten years was because during this ten years’ period of time my case was treated several times by the same locally modified versions of the international mental tools and was legally treated by the same procedures in the mental health and legal systems of this civilised European country, the COMYC where I lived; the last time was in 2011. Every time, I receive the same judgement after the same wrong and biased procedures and methods used in evaluating me mentally for processing my case legally are applied.

Such improper standardised procedures and their findings were not changed or improved despite changes in my behaviours, characters, and the decline of my physical health caused by my ageing. My physical health, naturally as it is true for all human beings, became different from my behaviours, characters, and physical health when I was mentally evaluated after the court ordered the first time in my life ten years earlier. And even ten years after my first mental evaluation, during my second mental evaluation I was given the same mental findings of my first mental evaluation, which were ten years old and which were improper and not actual findings as they were influenced by my ignored unsuitable conditions of testing and impairments and which also were malingered by me. Those old mental findings were copied word by word and were made to appear as the findings of my second mental evaluation, stating that I had the same very high re-offending risk value even when I had become over seventy-one years old and had stayed re-offend free for seventeen years at the time of my second evaluation and even when I had become a disabled man with very bad physical health and dependent on other people to manage my life.

The shocking thing in the mental report of my second court-ordered mental evaluation was the final mental findings’ report was made by the cut–paste copying method using a scissor and glue. Thus, after my experiences with regard to my own case and my reviews of many similar cases concerning my previous Pts. when I worked as their GP, it proved to me that mental evaluations made in this civilised European country, the COMYC which is a non-English-speaking and non-English – cultured country, for use in trials and for treatments, were made by special ways and methods which for me seemed to be entirely deviants from the internationally recognised and normally used methods and procedures. And the reasons could be that either these deviants of unusual methods and procedures were officially issued and recommended locally by the concerned authority of this COMYC or that the country’s forensic mental evaluators and treating psychiatrists and psychologists had developed their own mutual evaluations and testing procedures to benefit the prosecution and the police to achieve their own specific interests, but after my own case, I believe the latter reasons are true and are recognised by the unions and associations of these forensic mental evaluators. Anyhow, in my presentation I will describe the ways by which my mental evaluations were made in this COMYC, point out where their procedures do not comply with the recognised international methods and procedures, and show how their findings do not match my conditions and situations.

For me, as I have been a convicted defendant, my legal–mental case described in this book seemed to be processed and treated in ways which are out of the common sense and logic; it seemed to me as if there was something not quite justified and not scientifically right with the methods and procedures which were used for dealing with my case, resulting in very harmful consequences for me and for my social and economic existence. Therefore, I felt that perhaps my presentation of my case can be an interesting research case. But I can be wrong in my analysis and evaluations of my own case, but I will leave it to the reader to evaluate. My presentation is not an attack on anyone or any country or authority and it is not my appeal for mercy or judgement. I am not claiming that I am right and they were wrong. I am presenting my case as I saw it and as I felt it, and I am very sure that whatever I write and explain here wouldn’t help to improve or change the systems and procedures used in dealing with legal–mental cases in the concerned country, but it can be an interesting subject to know.

The last fifty years of my life I have been a non-ethnic citizen of a small civilised west European country which I call COMYC, where I had moved to live and work after I got married to an ethnic woman, who didn’t want to spend her life in England where I was living before. Before moving to the COMYC, I had already become a graduate in another academic field which was useful in hospitals and in patients’ care. Immediately, after moving to the COMYC, I was employed in the field of my qualification in a big industrial company, where I worked for some years as a system designer. After this, I was employed for four years as a member of a research and development group at a technical university in the country, which mainly worked in the medical–technical fields, and later at the same university, I did my PhD degree in the field of digital signal processing methods which were used, among other things, in medical facilities, hospitals, and for patients’ care. After that, I was employed for thirteen years as a research and development engineer in a government establishment in the country. I was employed in the COMYC as a technical design and research engineer for a period of twenty-one years.

During my last thirteen years of employment at the above-mentioned government establishment, I succeeded in studying medicine at the university of the capital of the COMYC, and after eight years of hard work and studies, at the same time having a family with children, I graduated as a MD and received my first medical license (MEDL). After this, I stopped my engineering employment work to work as MD at different hospitals in the COMYC, where I also did my internship, and after further employment as MD and further courses, I received another two medical licenses; the third one was a license which allowed me to work as a general practitioner (GP) for the National Health Services (NHS) of the COMYC.

After working for some years as a replacement GP for different ethnic solo GPs, who were seriously ill and where some of them had over 2,000 patients (Pts.) in their solo practices in different towns, I finally purchased my own GP clinic in a small town called Malm that had a population at that time of about 50,000. And the solo clinic which I had purchased initially had 1700 NHS-registered Pts. who mostly were immigrant Muslim workers from Turkey, political refugees from the Middle East, and a large number of ethnic of COMYC, mostly socially hard Pts. who had already accumulated in this clinic when I had purchased it and which was already forty years old when I took it over. After working for some years as a GP and taking additional courses, I received the country’s license as a specialist in general medicine. In all, I have worked as an MD in the COMYC for twenty-one years, including working as a GP in a European country and also as a camp doctor in Africa. In all, I had worked in this COMYC for a total of forty-two years after I moved to live in it as a young graduate engineer from England.

After I had worked for thirteen years in the town of Malm out of my sixteen years as GP in the COMYC, I was suddenly arrested in 1999 by a police officer by the name of Brian (BR) from the crime office at the local police station in the small town of Malm without prior questioning and was accused of sexually assaulting two women Pts. (patients) two years earlier in 1977, among my 1,700 Pts. I was informed by the arresting police officer that these allegations were reported to him indirectly by words only and one of them was reported by a fourth party. Both allegations were without any witnesses or any technical evidences. Those allegations were set up against me as for many years I had become unfriendly with Officer BR and his police station by refusing to cooperate with them in inhumane and unfair combined social welfare and police actions against some of my weak and defenceless patients, especially those who were old but not disabled. I had also refused for many years to deliver medical records and private data of my Pts. to Officer BR and his police station; a large number of them were street drug addicts, dealers, prostitutes, and nearly all the hard alcoholics who lived in the town and even many criminals.

Because of these difficult and hard types of Pts., I also had become extremely unfriendly with a few social welfare workers (SWELWs) from the local welfare office in the town of Malm who worked directly with me on social cases and with Officer BR on social–legal cases of the large number of such socially hard Pts. with many very difficult and complicated social and legal problems. These social–legal problems, according to my official duties as their GP in this COMYC with a well-established social welfare system, required me to coordinate with the welfare office on social as well as in combined welfare–legal cases for my Pts., especially those who were socially weak and poor with many complicated problems and who were unable to defend their social rights to obtain the provisions they were entitled to. Besides, some of them also had legal problems with the local police, and because of my official duties to help these types of Pts. with their needs and problems, especially my Pts. who were non-ethnics, I had many disagreements and disputes, even quarrels, with these few SWELWs who were racists and arrogant and very difficult to work with on needs and legal-social problems concerning my non-ethnics Pts or similar needs and legal -social problems of some of my ethnic Pts. My disputes and quarrels with such SWELWs were mainly over their improper, inhumane, and prejudiced treatments of my Pts., especially the large number of my Pts. who were from the disliked minorities in the COMYC such as myself.

I will explain the reasons for the police case in section 2 of this presentation. After ten years of constant disputes and quarrels with those few racists and arrogant WELFWs, they become real dangerous enemies for me in the town of Malm and they started to harm me and my work with their evil actions of jeopardising my work by agitating their social clients who were my Pts. against my services, encouraging them to leave my clinic for other GPs, but their attempts didn’t succeed as those Pts. were loyal to me and were satisfied with my services for them. Then my enemies realised that the only way to stop me from practicing and getting rid of me from their town was a police case involving my own Pts., especially those who were mentally unstable and easy to manipulate and who were all through their lives social clients of the welfare, especially the drug addicts, alcoholics, and some very cheap street girls who were members of a known street gang in the town of Malm, who nearly all were my own Pts.

After ten years, my few enemies from the welfare and others in the town of Malm succeeded in using very few of this type of my Pts. from the known street gang, who were also known Officer BR for their own crimes and who mainly were mentally unstable and very unreliable women in the above-mentioned known street gang in the town of Malm. It was a group of mostly drug addicts, dealers, hard alcoholics, and prostitutes who created and claimed false accusations against me, which was turned by officer BR with the help from a couple of my enemies from the welfare office into a real police case against me. They started with only two false accusations against me which were two years old and which, as Officer BR claimed, were reported to him in words two years earlier, without any witnesses and any technical evidences.

After the Officer BR and his superiors found out that they couldn’t set up a trial against me and secure their victory in order to stop me from practicing in their town by using only the two years’ old false allegations without any witnesses and evidences, thereafter, they changed tactics and decided to search for and collect any complaints, dissatisfactions, and any claims found against me from among my very large number of Pts., especially my Pts. who were considered by all other GPs in the town as mentally unstable and very risky for a GP to work with as patients and who also were commonly known and were sorted out by the people of the town of Malm as socially degenerated people from a well known street gang in their town. The street gang was very well known for the local police, especially to Officer BR, for their street crimes and abuse and who were accumulated in my clinic in order to make the number of police charges against me large for any price by using a plan based on the proverb, ‘no smoke without fire’. After applying such a search–collect and fabrication tactics for a period of two years locally in the town of Malm from 1999-2001, Officer BR didn’t find the large number of allegations needed for securing police victory against me. Therefore, Officer BR and his superiors had decided to widen their search to cover the whole country for collecting any claims against me and any private or official information about me, by freely allowing Officer BR to use help from his private friend, a journalist at a local sensational publishing newspaper, in order to find anything they could use against me from the time I had moved to live in the COMYC fifty years earlier, as a large number of police charges against me could lay doubts about my innocence in the minds of any judge and juries and thus secure police victory over me.

One of the methods of searching and collecting more claims against me from among my 1,700 Pts. which officer BR had used for a period of two years from 1999 to 2001, for fabricating more police charges against me to enlarge his initial police case against me of only two false accusations of sexually assaulting two female patients, was that with the help of my enemies from the SWELWs in the local welfare office of the town of Malm and via one of my clinic’s secretaries, who was a private acquaintance of Officer BR, along with additional help from a few women patients from the above-mentioned street gang itself Officer BR succeeded in openly doing unethical and illegal police search among my large number of Pts. by illegally visiting their private homes sometimes up to five times without court order. The police questioned, persuaded, and intimidated them to report me to the police for any sort of complaints and dissatisfactions which they might have had with my medical services. And he even collected some wishes to revenge form me from some very few angry Pts. who had waited for such a chance to revenge their anger over my many years of refusal to satisfy their illegal demands from me, such as refusing to provide them with prescriptions for narcotics medications.

In this process, he even tempted the Pts. he visited to report me for anything they had against me by promising them police help and protection and that they would be covered by the police for any damages if the police was to lose their case against me. He did such illegal home-searching not only without court order, but also without permission from me as those Pts. that he visited were still registered as my own NHS Pts. He also visited their homes and questioned them without they having reported me to the police or them wanting to talk to the police about me or my work.

I was told the details about this illegal and unethical police action by BR against my Pts. by a large number of those Pts. that were visited, when they came to my clinic in a rage, complaining about police violations of their private homes and about the police assaulting them, especially sexually–verbally assaulting their under aged daughter who were questioned about sexual intimate matters, making them believe that any touching of their bodies during the standard doctor’s examinations were sexual harassments which had to be reported to the police. They claimed to those visited and questioned women that by reporting me to the police they would help the police to stop me from raping more female Pts., as the visiting police had initially told these visited Pts., claiming that I had already raped many women Pts. and had to be stopped from turning into a sex monster, even though at the time Officer BR did those illegal home visits I was not yet charged for any crime. Even at that time of his search, I had never earlier committed any crime in the whole of my life, as I always had had a clean criminal record and was not known in the national police criminal register of the COMYC, and I had officially received police indictment of this fabricated police case against me the first time two years later after officer BR and his policemen and women did their visits to the homes of my Pts. without court order and cheated the visited women Pts. by their false claim that I supposedly had had raped many female Pts.

I still have in my possession taped and video recordings of my interviews with some of these angry Pts. that were visited, telling me about such illegal police actions against them and their private homes without their requests or their reporting of me, which, out of fear of police confiscation and revenge, I stored them outside the COMYC.

By using this searching and collecting methods for a period of two years from 1999 to 2001, Officer BR succeeded in collecting a number of all sorts of complaints and claims among very few Pts. of my 1,700 Pts., and strangely enough only from female Pts. Some of these claims were already four to seven years old at the time when he had collected them, and by his repeated questioning of these few women Pts. who were found to be dissatisfied or angry or revengeful over my services or treatments, he succeeded in 2001, after two years and very costly efforts, to collect all sorts of complaints and dissatisfactions with my services and some false sexual and non-sexual claims mostly from few of the most unreliable, mentally unstable, and socially degenerated women from the street gang. By repeated questioning, persuasions, and promises, Officer BR succeeded in converting them into twenty-three police charges against me, using the tactic of turning most of them into having sexual content. They were mostly accusations of touching the breasts of a few women Pts. during my treatment of their neck-back pain by a standard recognised medical treatment method called Manual Medicine, also known as the musculo-facial technique, which is a combination of physiotherapy and chiropractic methods.

Among them there was a claim of an accusation from a woman who claimed that she felt herself verbally assaulted when, as she claimed, I had asked her about how many men she had slept with, which I never did. Even then, it was a relevant question by a doctor when she kept coming back to consult me for her sexually transmitted infections. Another charge was by a woman patient who complained to Officer BR when he had visited her home unexpectedly. She didn’t accuse me of sexual assault, but she complained to Officer BR that I had done a gynaecological examination of her when she had fever and back and abdominal pain. She strongly believed that her symptoms were merely because of back pain which didn’t require gynaecological examination, while my theory was that she had an infection in her womb, which she had several times and which was treated every time by antibiotics.

Such complaints were not police cases but were made and turned into police charges against me by Officer BR, playing himself the legal–medical expert; instead, such complaints should have been first sent to the State Commission for patient’s complaints regarding the doctor’s malpractice in the COMYC, which could have reviewed these complaints and decided if they were cases to be dealt by the police. During the open and free search and collection of complaints from among my Pts. against me as their GP, which Officer BR had carried out while I was sitting practicing in my clinic, he was allowed by a biased police medical officer of the county, who was the representative of the Medical Board of the COMYC and under whose jurisdiction I had practiced in the town of Malm, to manipulate freely and, as it suited his fabrication, to turn even my standard doctor’s examinations and procedures into sexual harassments in order to match the claims he had collected in a period of two years of searching to the two previous allegations of sexual assaults with which he had started the case in 1999, whose dates were committed two years earlier in 1997. Not only that, he had adjusted the dates of all the claims he had collected in a period of two years, which turned into sexual assaults having been committed by me in the same year 1997, to match them to the two initial claims with which he had started his police action against me in 1999 in order to secure police victory with a large number of charges and the same content of sexual assaults committed by me in the same year of 1997.

After two years of searching and collecting all sorts of old claims against me and turning them into twenty-three criminal police charges, the local police tried in March 2001 to use these fabricated twenty-three charges at the local court in the town of Malm to remove my national MEDL (medical license) and stop me from practicing even before I was first tried and convicted for these twenty-three charges or for any other crimes or any lawless activities, even though before these police accusations, I had never committed any crime of assaulting anyone in my life in the COMYC or anywhere else. The police request for removing my MEDL was rejected by a real male ethnic local court judge, and the appeal court upheld his ruling after the police appealed it and I was allowed by this judge to continue my practice as before.

Later in May–June 2001, the local police replaced the male local judge who rejected their twenty-three charges by a woman police court magistrate, and they took me again to a trial at the local court in the town of Malm for their fabricated twenty-three charges which were earlier rejected in March 2001 both at the local court and at the appeal court. One week, before starting this second trial in June 2001, the woman police court magistrate, who was chosen by the police chief to preside over my trial for their twenty-three police charges, issued an official written court ruling which forbid me from using my pre-trial selected twenty-four witnesses for my defence and also forbid me from playing my tape and video recordings and showing photos from my clinic as my evidences to disprove the police claims against me. Those tape and video recordings and photos, in my belief that the police of Malm was honest, I had myself delivered them to Officer BR when he questioned me, to disprove the claims set up against me by the few women Pts, because I believed the police charges would be dropped against me because of the evidences.

On 29 June 2001, the woman magistrate sent me to three years and nine months’ imprisonment for half of the twenty-three charges and ruled a non-perpetual suspension (NONPS) of my MEDL. I immediately appealed this ruling of the local court to the appeal court of the COMYC. A few hours after my appealing of the prison judgement, the local police officer BR took me suddenly from my clinic to a new trial session at a new court location which was kept a secret from the local media, my Pts., my family, and my friends. This time at this extra court session, the local police of Malm used a new police claim against me of an allegation which had nothing to do with my practice as GP or of assaulting Pts. This time, I was accused through claims fabricated by the same police officer BR (as the prosecutor explained in the court) that he had received telephone calls from two women informing him that I had in my possession two nationalities’ passports and was planning to flee the country with my newborn son who was on breast feed. His mother, who was one of the two women who had called, as claimed by Officer BR, was extremely unfriendly with me as she wanted to cut off my rights of parenting our son. The other woman was one of my previous secretaries who later seemed to have been a private acquaintance of Officer BR without my previous knowledge of this relationship when she was working in my clinic.

The names of these women were mentioned in the court by the prosecutor who was also the vice-police chief. At this extra trial, he requested the same police magistrate, who had a few hours earlier sent me into imprisonment, to send me into police custody while waiting for my appeal case as he claimed that I was planning to flee the country before the appeal judgement.

My trial for the police twenty three charges at the local court of the Malm started on the end of May 2001 and lasted for the whole following month, while in April 2001, just few weeks before the start of this trial I was participating in a one week psychiatry course on Cognitive Therapy in Spain, and I easily could have fled the country COMYC from Spain before my trial at the local court in the town of Malm, as at that time, I was aware of the danger which might happen to me as I become to know how the case against me was created and run by Officer BR and knew well the purpose of it and besides, I after had lived in the COMYC for 50 years knew well that, the police in the COMYC never loses a court case set up by them for any price, as in the COMYC, a police losing a case in court was and still is considered as unforgivable act and a disgrace for the whole police force of the country, even if the police is totally wrong or unethical. But, I returned to the COMYC to face the police and the trial as I was sure that the trial was going to be fair and the presiding police Magistrate was honest and not biased to the local police of Malm, but I was totally wrong and become disappointed, as the trail showed that the police Magistrate who was selected by the police Chief to preside my trial, was in the pockets of the local police of Malm for reasons later explained in this presentation.

Immediately, and while I still had on my clinical uniform, I was taken from the courtroom and was put into isolation police custody, first in the detention house in the town of Malm, which was located in the same building as the local police station and exactly under the office of Officer BR. After one week, I was transferred to continue twenty months of police brutally closed police custody in a very old horrible prison in the capital city of COMYC, called LIL prison, where I had stayed in a cell in the hospital wing of this prison from June 2001 to February 2003 because of my bad physical health, just to wait for my appeal case to come to court, even though all police investigations concerning the judged police case were finished and I was already judged at the local court.

After the first twelve months in that horrible police isolation custody, where I was under extreme indescribable mental stress and developed very bad and critical physical conditions such as acute heart problems, critically high blood pressure, and a bleeding stomach ulcer and was totally cut off and blocked from the outside world, even from seeing my small children and was even not allowed to use the telephone to save my clinic and economy, I was suddenly sent in June 2002 by the legal system to take a Forensic Psychiatric Mental Assessment (FPSYCHIMA) at the government-owned Justice Ministry Forensic Mental Clinics (GFPSYCHIC) located in another old prison called BL for use in my appeal judgement. Prior to taking a psychological testing at that clinic which was a part of that FPSYCHIMA in June 2002, I was subjected to eight hours of extra horrible physical and mental torture when I was left to wait for my turn to be tested, locked as I was in a very small dark dirty horrible prison cell without food or water and without receiving my daily medications, which added to my already existing severe sufferings I was enduring from having been twelve months in police isolation custody at the prison LIL.

The combined enormous severe stress and torture prior to taking that psychological testing suddenly broke me down as I couldn’t bear any more torture and questioning at my age of over sixty-two years, because of my very bad physical health conditions. Also, I discovered just before and while undergoing this psychological testing that the psychological tests were unsuitable, which were designed for testing an ethnic man in my age range although I was not ethnic, as such psychological tests required good knowledge of the ethnic language, grammar, and spelling, and that I was going to be tested by the wrong procedure of making actual and proper ethical psychological testing and evaluation. I noticed that the woman psychologist started testing me without first asking me to give an account of myself, a self-mental evaluation, prior to testing; moreover, she didn’t obtain any relevant information from my collaterals such as my family members, colleagues, and third party for testing about my behaviour and mental condition before the police case.

So when she started without following this prior testing procedure, I become aware that irrespective of how I was to perform and respond in her testing, the expected findings of this test were going to be negative and I would be described as mentally abnormal, as my ignored unsuitable conditions, features, and impairments would influence my performances, but then I also became aware that such negative findings of this psychological testing and evaluation could rescue me from the horrible prolonged police isolation custody. And then I decided to use my knowledge of these tests to malinger the tests and to play myself exactly as I was made, described, and judged as a sex offender because then I could secure the findings of insanity and the role of sex offender, and I was helped to do so also by my extremely stressed, irritated, and rather angry mental state because of the torture, negligence, and humiliation I had been enduring at the hands of the police.

As long as they kept me in their custody imprisonment, it would secure more the possibility of changing my prison sentence to a psychiatric sentence, sending me out of the police prison custody. That would also allow me to see my children and manage the problems caused by the police case and their very long brutal closed imprisonment which totally blocked me from the outside world and from my family. I had succeeded in malingering that psychological test by playing myself as a sex deviant when I was tested with the Rorschach psychological test, which is commonly used by psychologists to test a person’s sexuality, and as I expected my inborn and developed impairment such as my strong dyslexia, strong short-sightedness without having my correct reading glasses with me during this testing, and my strong chronic pain, etc., helped to achieve my simulation and to be described as mentally not normal and a sexually deviant man with bizarre sex fantasies with deficit concentration and memory due to organic origin.

At the same time, when I was forced to take this psychological test in June 2002 at the GFPSYCHIC and also during the whole of my twenty months’ stay in police custody at the LIL Prison, I was physically and mentally observed and evaluated every hour of the day by the prison’s wards and every day by the prison’s many nurses who served me medicine and several prison’s doctors who saw me very often. Also very often, I was mentally evaluated by the prison’s psychologist and the specialist in psychiatry, and all these prison personnel wrote their observations and diagnosis of my physical and mental conditions in my prison records using the international system, the WHO ICD-10 diagnosis system, which is the standard system used in the COMYC. And during the whole of twenty months of evaluations, they gave the ICD-10 diagnosis of my mental condition as DF-432 and DF-439, which means that I was evaluated to have been a mentally normal man suffering from extreme stress and adaptation difficulties to prison’s life, which both are passing temporary mental conditions.

Those twenty months of diagnosis of my mental condition do not describe me as an insane and sexually deviant man as I was described by the psychological findings of June 2002 after just one hour of psychological testing. It meant that, as I was the same person, I was during the same time period in June 2002 described mentally by two entirely different mental findings and diagnosis by the same type of professionals in the same country; here we have two mental evaluations made at the same period of time with two different mental evaluation results of me, the same person.

After my first FPSYCHIMA at the GFPSYCHIC in June 2002, the appeal court changed my prison sentence from that of the local court on 29 June 2001 to a sentence of psychiatric treatment at an open psychiatric ward and upheld the NONPS (not perpetual suspension) of my MEDL; it seemed that my malingering of that psychological testing in June 2002 had succeeded in ending my endless, long horrible police custody done by the police. The police had purposely delayed my appeal case and let me stay in the old closed prison to punish me until I had spent the time length equivalent to the local court prison sentence length in their custody, which was at that time in the COMYC defined as 2/3 of the three years and nine months’ prison sentence which I had received in the local court. It meant that if I had stayed up to thirty months in police custody imprisonment, then I would have had served the local court punishment sentence and the police would have achieved their goal whatever the appeal court was to rule, even if I would have quitted, which I think was the main purpose of the police to keep me waiting for my appeal case to be processed at court.

After the twenty months in police custody, I was transferred to an open psychiatric hospital ward and stayed there for four weeks after which I was discharged and became an outpatient to be treated at a psychiatric ambulatory of a hospital. First, I was psychiatrically treated by only interview therapy sessions that lasted from half an hour to one hour, starting with once a month session by the same psychiatrist who was in charge of me in the same ward where I had spent four weeks after appeal judgement. Then I was transferred to continue treatment as an outpatient at another psychiatric ambulatory within the same jurisdiction of the county of my home residence, where I was treated by another senior psychiatrist who treated me also only through interview sessions which also lasted half an hour to one hour during the period 2003–2006, starting with once a month for four times and then once every third month for four times and finally once every sixth month for the rest of the period. These treating psychiatrists also wrote down their mental findings of me during their treatment sessions in my respective ambulatory records.

Later, in August 2006, my guardian, who was appointed for me by the police of the town of Malm, after my appeal judgement asked the district prosecutor to release me from serving my appeal psychiatric treatment sentence in order to allow me to stand up again on my own feet to manage my life since the police case had left me in social and economic ruins and had also mentally and socially harmed my children; after this, my psychiatric treatment was terminated by a court hearing at the same local court in the town of Malm and by the same police woman magistrate who sent me to imprisonment and to twenty months’ police custody.

Later, two years after the termination of my appeal psychiatric sentence, I asked the district prosecutor, according to my legal rights, to consider lifting the sanction of NONPS on my MEDL which was carried out in September 2008 by a court hearing. The local court was presided by another woman court police magistrate, who ruled to uphold the sanction on my MEDL after the police prosecutor told her that the evaluations of me made in June 2002 made me a dangerous man to be left alone with women patients, and I appealed the ruling to the appeal court which also upheld the local court ruling maintaining the NONPS of my MEDL.

Two years later, in 2010, I asked again for a new court hearing on lifting the sanction on my MEDL, which was carried out first in September 2011. This time despite a strong protest from the police prosecutor who was the same prosecutor at the above-mentioned court hearing of 2008, the local court woman judge agreed after a request from my defense to send me to a new and a second FPSYCHIMA as the first one of June 2002 had already become ten years old in 2011. Before taking this assessment in 2011 and after I and my defense lawyer reviewed the case file sent by the same police prosecutor of the hearing of 2008 to my new mental assessors prior to the assessment, we found out that the police case file contained only the negative parts from the findings of my previous mental evaluations, especially those which repeated word by word the exact text of the findings of my mental evaluation of June 2002 made at the DFPSYCHIC. Those were not actual mental findings of me as they were influenced by my unsuitable testing conditions and impairments which were totally ignored by the psychologist, and additionally they were malingered findings by me. Moreover, we found that the case file additionally contained very twisted negative revived descriptions of only the very few serious offences of the terminated police case of 2001 for which I had been punished.

Therefore, we become convinced that the outcome of that new mental assessment of me in 2011 was going to be similar to that of 2002, which I had malingered and which meant that I was again going to lose my chance for lifting the NONPS on my MEDL. In that case, I had to pay the costs of the case; therefore, this time I had decided to use my money and time to turn my new and second court-ordered FPSYCHIMA of 2011 as my own small private study to investigate if the new assessors were going to be biased by the negative and manipulated police case file sent to them, containing only repeated negative findings of 2002, and whether the evaluation procedures were going to be similar to the evaluation procedures used in my previous evaluation.

To achieve my plan, I had decided to malinger again the psychological testing of 2011, but this time in a positive way in which I decided to give normal responses and performances during testing and to strictly avoid any reactions, responses from me or performances supporting the police’s initial sexual theme of the allegations for which I was sentenced and punished in 2001. For this, I decided not to ever mention sex, sexual descriptions, or any descriptions of sexual art. I did this because my experiences from my first FPSYCHIMA of June 2002 showed me that in COMYC, as it happened in my case, forensic psychological testing and mental assessment was done in very different ways than the ways recommended internationally for making proper and actual FPSYCHIMAs for use in trial and treatment where evaluators did not comply to the internationally recognised and used methods. During my second FPSYCHIMA, I was psychologically tested in February 2011 by a psychologist hired by the same police prosecutor of 2008, and the next day I was interviewed for only one hour by a psychiatrist. Such a one-hour interview was legally considered as a full court-ordered Forensic Psychiatric Mental Assessment (FPSYCHIMA) of me to be used for the court hearing