Conclusion Diagnosis Visit

Document Sample
Conclusion Diagnosis Visit Powered By Docstoc
					                        Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)   2010


                              Psycholegalanalysis

This new proposed medical science is a mental health science for psychiatrists
  (or similar) to assist with patients who come from a legal background (e.g.
police, lawyers, judges or similar). However, managers and executives in some
organizations follow “rules” or “guidelines” which they do not see as “law” but
which the brain understands in the same way – thus this new science may have
a broader application. This science could be considered a specialized subset of
                                  psychoanalysis.




 Clinical Manual Containing Definitions of Conclusions
          (Diagnosis) and the Diagnostic Criteria
                                         OR
    the CMPL (Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis)



                       Version 1.1, August 2010
                                Last Updated April 2012

    Once the science becomes understood and practiced, more and more
 definitions will be defined by analysts and existing ones may be improved or
                              made more general.




                                (c) Arthur Winarczyk

(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                              Page 1
                         Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)              2010


Content

Introduction



Page   Conclusion (Diagnosis)


       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Corrupt Conduct
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Aiding and Abetting Fraud by Deception
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Adultery-in-Law
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Blasphemy-in-Law
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Clarification-of-Law
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Confusion-in-Law
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Contempt-of-Law
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Corruption-of-Law
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Credibility Established
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Criminal Act
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Criminal Conduct
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Critical Event
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Crucifixion
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Dangerous-in-Law
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Deficient State of Mind
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Delusional Thinking
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Delusion of Grandeur
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Demented Thinking
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Divine Intervention
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Ego Burnout
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Endangering Human Life
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Evil-in-Law
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Failure of Duty of Care
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Failure to Thrive
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Financial Fraud
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Holy Duty
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Immature Modified Ego
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Inappropriate Conduct
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Inappropriate Jurisdiction
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Inappropriate Reference
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Incompetence
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Insanity (or Insane State of Mind)
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Insanity-in-Law
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Insanity in Last Will and Testament
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Judicial Confusion
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Justified Cause/Reason
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Magical Thinking
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Malicious and Prejudicial Conduct
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Manipulation of Expert Witness (or Professional)

(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                          Page 2
                         Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                   2010
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Medical Fraud
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Mental Dysfunction
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Mission Impossible
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Money Paid for a Court Order
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Natural Justice
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Non-Rational Understanding of Rationality and/or Reason
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Nonsense-in-Law
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Opinion Obtained Under Duress
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Opportunism
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Perjury (Lying in Court)
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Personality Issue Defence
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Perverse Law or Decision
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Perversion-in-Law
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Perversion of the Natural Course of Justice
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Pregnancy Situation
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Political Decision
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Power of Attorney Obtained by Deception (Fraud)
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Psycholegal Shock
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Psychopath
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Restricted Capacity to Understand Truth (or Facts)
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Senile Thinking
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Submission
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Subhuman Decision or Act
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Suspicious Arrest
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Suspicious Choice
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Suspicious Decision
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Thrill Order or Situation or Arrest
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Uncertainty (about a prior valid conclusion)
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Unconscious Sadism
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Valid-in-Law
       Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Will Fraud


Will Syndrome
Appendix A: Animal-Humans and Humans
Appendix B: When Asked to Revue a Psycholegalanalytical Report or Study
Appendix C: Condensed version of our treatise Neuroscience in Psychiatry: The Insanity of the
Religion of Law
Appendix D: Alzheimer’s Scam Report

Glossary of Terms




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                     Page 3
                          Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                      2010

Introduction

    Psycholegalanalysis is a medical science pioneered by Arthur Winarczyk. It is a science that
    emerged from one particular series of events which led to Australian NSW Supreme Court case
    number 2010/83570. The Alzherimer’s Scam in this document explains the events that led to this
    court case.

About 5GL-Doctor Medical Diagnosis Expert System

5GL-Doctor is a medical diagnosis expert system. A selection list of symptom/signs/labs is used to
select relevant information and a short list is presented of the most likely conditions that satisfy.
Complex internal “diagnosis” algorithms are used to form the short lists. There are various analysis
functions as well. The first version of 5GL-Doctor was available perhaps in early 1990’s. Medical
doctors are not used to using such computer aids hence the sales are not many, however, there
have been some notable successes even a group in Israel taking out a license to produce the
software in bulk and distribute it to their customers (pharmacies). Other successes include:

- a medical group in Canada purchased a license for the database alone
- a software group had at one time obtained a license to distribute a simpler version to the Japanese
market and some copies had been distributed by that process
- a medical group in India made an agreement to include some of the functions on Internet and paid
for myself travelling to India to reach agreement about this
- much later another Indian based medical group purchased license(s) to use the software as their
front line diagnosis tool in an Internet based diagnosis service – that group, however, perhaps for
legal reasons, did not last that long and their web site was closed.


About Psycholegalanalysis

The bulk of this document was written in a space of about three weeks when a massive energy in my
own subconscious formed the conclusions. Perhaps 90%-95% of conclusions were written in that
period. Typically there was about one hour before my brain compiled one conclusion and went onto
the next conclusion. About 5-10% of these conclusions came later, the process itself taking much
time to correctly work out the proper name and form of a conclusion. In the latter case, it was days
between the presentation of one conclusion and the next. Some conclusions, such as magical
thinking, while initially present, took a long time to formulate in words. Other conclusions only came
after a specific court room situation took place. However, as mentioned, the bulk of the conclusions
herein were put together during those three weeks.

    Compare to F.A. Kekule, the founder of modern chemistry. His reason could not decipher the
    models of how molecules come together. One day, as the story goes, he fell into a drowsy state
    on a local bus and his unconscious opened projecting into his mind’s eye visions of how
    molecules come together. Modern chemistry was thus born.


1.1 Explained simply, medical diagnosis areas in the brain are used to begin the process of
psychoanalysis but with a specific focus. The typical right brain (right cerebral hemisphere), in most
people the brain that sees in three dimensions, is the brain that performs the analysis. The left brain

(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                     Page 4
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                       2010
also does psycholegalanalysis but only in order so that the left brain is in a position to translate the
results into concepts and words. That is, the analyst may have some minor issues that can act as a
stumbling block to correctly translate the conclusions, thus the purpose of the process in the left
brain is to resolve internal tensions and conflicts so that the conclusion can be explained as well as
can be.

1.2 Psychoanalysis is a medical science pioneered by Freud. Perhaps anyone sufficiently intelligent
who reads Freud’s lectures, and understands such, is capable of self-psychoanalysis which is a
distinct process in the brain. Those who teach psychoanalysis explain that no one can use the
technique who themselves has not experienced the process of psychoanalysis. Hence no psychiatrist
can use the technique who has not personally experienced a type of mental turbulence (for want of
a more apt expression) as the process of psychoanalysis results in.

  A medical science of the mind can be repulsive to non medical people. For example, Freud’s
  concepts of the Oedipus Complex or Penis Envy may be offensive, or seemingly insane, to most
  people. Indeed, even the American Medical Association at first found the theories so offensive
  that psychoanalysis was banned – now it is an established medical science. In the same vein,
  the conclusions from psycholegalanalysis may not be palatable to any except psychiatrists who
  then have to struggle to put these into focus.




1.3 Psycholegalanalysis is psychoanalysis, however, it is constrained in that knowledge of the subject
is required not that much from a psyche perspective, but from a practical perspective. How do
lawyer’s think and reason and deliberate? An appreciation of the technique is required in order for
psycholegalanalysis to have the information it needs to work. A judge trying to decide if a medical
doctor has failed in his duty of care, may run a number of mental processes to do with duty of care.
Psycholegalanalysis understands the technique sufficiently to exclude thoughts leading to such from
the actual psychoanalysis. How many unconscious processes play a part in such deliberations? Thus
psycholegalanalysis can be compared to two distinct stages in the brain of the analyst. One is
psychoanalysis of the subject or relevant input, the other is an exclusion process that works out
which of the unconscious forces are likely to have contributed to the legal thinking process and
hence have no right to be included in the psychoanalysis process.

1.4 While the technique has come about from research into the Australian Anglo-Saxon legal system,
however, the technique of psycholegalanalysis can be applied to many areas. Even to religion. In any
area of human knowledge, “laws” are used in some fashion. These laws may be equated to “belief”.
A belief which is a conviction which compels a person to act or behave in a certain manner, is thus a
“law” to the person concerned.

1.5 Most of the names of the conclusions (diagnosis) were produced by psycholegalanalysis.
Sometimes it is not clear, for example the diagnosis “blasphemy-in-law”, why this is the name the
process decided on. Clearly, a great many internal unconscious input came together to produce such
a name.

1.6 “Laws” are in fact also natural entities. The law of gravity is something the child’s brain sees at
work every day. Many things in nature form the internal “law” structures in the brain. These
structures can be confused. A child may learn that dad goes to work while mum remains home to
look after the child. Suddenly dad can not find work but mum can and the roles reverse. This can

(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                        Page 5
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                      2010
cause a psycholegalshock to the child. Mild, unlikely to last long (unless the father is frightening to
the child due to stress of being unemployed which may come out against the child) usually, and the
brain reorganizes its internal appreciation of the laws it put into place.

1.7 An important aspect of documenting this science is input from 5GL-Lisa. This is a name for a part
of my brain that projects images of how aspects of the brain work. Some images are included in this
document. 5GL-Lisa has identified the “law” structure in the brain as a distinct mental calculation
that is one of the inter-dimensional steps which is how 5GL-Lisa projected the image of the purpose
of the corpus callosum in coordinating the left and right brain. The right brain, typically, is the 3-
dimensional perception brain and the left is 2-dimensional. The inter-dimensional steps act to
translate a 3-dimensional view into a set of 2-dimensional constructs such as sentences.

1.8 One of the reasons, according to 5GL-Lisa, that so few people can ever truly under complex
issues in law, is because in most lawyers, magistrates, judges, those inter-dimensional steps to do
with “law” are damaged, made dysfunctional. This is referred to as a brain dysfunction. This term is
used because it is likely a physical damage, albeit microscopic. It is known the brain can choose to kill
off cells and connections which it does not use or which obstruct some thinking processes. The
learning curve for lawyers is extremely difficult, and may include forgetting ethics and morals and
such matters, matters of right and wrong, etc. The brain in order to learn law as a field may need to
kill off connections between areas of the brain.

1.11 In theory, any psychiatrist ought to be able to put together this exact same clinical manual if an
appropriate situation arises.

 1.12 Psycholegalanalysis produces a conclusion (diagnosis) as well as a conclusion pattern. The
latter is rarely clearly understood at first. As Freud pointed out, two thirds of our thoughts are at the
unconscious levels. The hints and cues the psycholegalanalysis process picks up are from the
unconscious. Such is a broad three dimensional view, very general and rarely specific, and the reason
it is impossible to even speculate what the pattern is trying to explain. (refer Corrupt Conduct for an
example of a conclusion pattern and how only years later did this fit into place).

1.13 The complexity of a psycholegalanalytical process is considerable. Only after a
psycholegalanalyst understand how reflective these patterns are, and this can take years to map
such a pattern onto reason, only then can an analyst have the confidence to produce conclusion
patterns like this (but be free to alter some of the wording if a more conventional wording is best).

1.14 Psycholegalanalysis is a variation of psychoanalysis. The science uses most of the concepts and
definitions of psychoanalysis and psychiatry however these may have a unique or expanded meaning
in this science hence check with the glossary.

1.15 The conclusions of the science are a true and proper medical diagnosis, however, the term
conclusion is preferred to avoid confusion. The reason such is a true medical diagnosis is that mainly
the brain areas used in the practise of medicine are used by the brain during this technique. (i.e. the
areas that make a diagnosis). The medical experience need not be hands on – in rare situations
science and medical researchers, or a computer programmer who had spent a number of years
working with physicians to produce diagnostic software, may have such areas too – the process of
psycholegalanalysis ought to work as long as such areas are present in the brain and used in the
process of making a diagnosis (or preparing or formulating a diagnosis).




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                      Page 6
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                      2010
1.17 Psycholegalanalysis is intended mainly to define conclusions in regards to legal decisions and to
do with the legal process. This in turn can aid in understanding a patient who comes from such a
background.


Notes
1.30 A psycholegalanalytical conclusion is valid only until more input arrives that warrants changing
or negating the conclusion. No different to many a medical diagnosis – a presumptive diagnosis can
be made but if more laboratory tests are performed, this diagnosis may change.

1.31 It is important, not always essential and not always practical, that a psycholegalanalytical
conclusion is given in writing to the law firm or agent (or as appropriate) against whom it is made.
That is because in response the agent may provide the analyst with additional information that may
warrant changing or negating the conclusion. Thus the conclusion itself is made only on the available
evidence. It remains valid unless additional evidence is come upon that warrants a change to the
conclusion, or warrants negating such a conclusion.

1.32 The first diagnosis defined is that of Corrupt Conduct. The rules regarding how the conclusion
pattern is formed apply to all the conclusions presented. This is also true for the restrictions
explained in that conclusion.


Application of Psycholegalanalysis
1.33 Ideally, a setting in a psychoanalyst’s or psychiatrist’s office with a tormented soul or a troubled
patient who is or was a police officer, lawyer, judge, magistrate, or similar. (Hard to say to which
other or similar occupations this new field may also apply.) If we can use psycholegalanalysis to
produce a conclusion after a number of sessions with a patient – then we also may have the key to
diagnosis and treatment of whatever caused the patient to seek help from a psychiatrist.

 Example. Such a psycholegalanalatical diagnosis may identify the “stumbling block” that has caused
turbulence or confusion in a patient. After a number of sessions with a patient, the
psycholegalanalytical process makes the conclusion of “corrupt conduct”. This means that the
patient has either a guilty conscience and this has become a problem – he or she may have been
involved in corrupt conduct and this has become a burden on the psyche – or the patient has come
across such and this has become a problem for the patient and is distressing the patient. Asking
questions about corruption and similar may free up the unconscious and shift some of the id into the
ego in so doing mentally healing an aspect of a person’s psyche.

Example. A diagnosis such as “blasphemy-in-law” may indicate strong inner religious views have
been messed up and this is affecting the person’s ordinary or professional life.

1.36 Like in all medicine, clinical trials are the ultimate test of any new theory. Hence, a build up of
pscycholegoanalytical knowledge over time will confirm, or act to tailor or expand, some of the
definitions. Once this is clear, also proven treatment methods ought to be included in a future CMPL.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                       Page 7
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                     2010


State of Mind

The overall active processes in the brain that acts to compel an action or a decision. Such a decision
may be against logic or reason.

The state of mind forms from diverse anchors in the brain. Neuroscience knows that, for example,
what an apple is, is in fact stored in the area of the brain that has some notion of what an apple
tastes like. Which means it is not altogether possible to predict which areas of the brain are active,
form the anchors, that together form the state of mind.

In those into law, this is even less clear from a neuroscience point of view. Where or how does the
brain store information about words and expressions that can not easily fit into its sensory
structures?

A person has many varied beliefs as well as natural intuitive processes as well as biases and
prejudices. All such come together to form a state of mind.

In those into law, the state of mind is often restricted, formed from narrow paths in the brain. The
legal terms and concepts such people use is only relevant to the said state of mind. While such may
use English words that attempt to convey a meaning to others, this may not be so easy because in a
narrow state of mind each word may have a purpose and an exact and precise understanding.

Consider the sentence. “In relation to the aforementioned matter, I decline to accept this
submission.”

Each such word when used by a magistrate or similar, may have an exact and precise semantical
meaning unique to that state of mind. Only those who can reproduce this state of mind can truly
understand what is being said.

In plain and natural English, the sentence above could be said as “in the case of police versus
Johnston, I find the police submission full of holes and not worthy of being considered – the
submission looks invented and not factual.”

Of course, clearly, a state of mind may inhibit certain “truths” from being said, and instead a
particular expression is invented.

Perhaps no different to certain terms politicians and senior public servants lean to use, terms such as
“courageous” (meaning foolish) or “bold” (meaning he or she is likely to get the sack).

Exactly what any expression means, depends on the state of mind that produced it. Most people
hear such expressions and understand in their own natural way, which may be far removed from the
intent of the expression or word as a particular state of mind intended it. Further, a state of mind
may inhibit and negate certain “facts” or “truths”, consequently it leaves a “gap” which is filled in by
a word or expression which may appear simple on the surface but which may have an incredible
variation of complex meanings.

There are a number of views of a state of mind that can aid the physician. One view explained in the
Glossary of Terms. Another, a simpler view, is:


(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                       Page 8
                            Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                   2010


                  Deep reflective and contemplative thoughts

                ----------------- Intellectual reasoning -------------------

                            Natural or common sense


When a lawyer, judge, magistrate, or similar, can not understand how to make a decision using
common sense, he or she enters an intellectual reasoning state of mind. When this fails to work, he
or she may enter deep reflective and contemplative thoughts.

Note that not all people are particularly good at reflective and contemplative thoughts. A skilled
lawyer sensing he or she is loosing a court case, and knowing a particular magistrate (or similar) is
not competent with deeper thoughts, may attempt to push the magistrate’s state of mind into the
deeper thought patterns. This can be achieved by introducing more and more intellectual arguments
(which may be devoid of common sense when the aim is to push into the upper state of mind. To
also include common sense, risks the state of mind entering into the common sense decision process
formation).

The state of mind of those into law also attempts to overcome a natural attrition process. Over time
the brain begins to destroy parts of the corpus callosum, this in order to protect the ego. The input
from the right (say natural ethics and morals) are too often inconsistent with those who worship law
as in the letter of the law. In most junior courts that is what takes place. The higher meaning OR the
true intent of the law OR the complete framework of law is outside the competency of most of such
people, and the result is a restricted state of mind that tends to focus on the lowest common
denominator.

Hence, the significance of a state of mind forming in those into law is not only to focus their
thoughts, but also to overcome the deficiency in the corpus callosum that blocks or restricts natural
communication between the 2-dimensional thoughts of the left brain, and the 3-dimensional
perceptive right brain.

Consider the formation of a state of mind. Say a man is caught speeding. Two police officers give him
a ticket. The man objects and takes the matter to court claiming he was not speeding. The judge has
to form a state of mind to make a decision. Given the two police officers have no reason to lie, the
judge then forms a state of mind which makes a decision in favour of the police. May factors,
anchors in the brain, combine to produce such a state of mind: reliability of the witnesses, the
credibility of the witnesses, the circumstances, the credibility of the person who claims this is not
right, the employment status of such a person (e.g. a person who is unemployed may be motivated
to go to court and object in the hope he will not have to pay a fine.)

As the complexity of a legal matter increases, the factors that combine to form the state of mind are
a great many – but also include factors that can be far removed from truth, facts, evidence, or
common sense. A simple addition of these positive and negative factors can determine which way
the state of mind that forms will make a decision. A great many of these factors are also unconscious
forces, some subtle, some clever, some cunning. Given a particular case in which a “correct” or
“proper” decision is not readily apparent, the id of those entrusted to make the decision, may take
an opportunity to serve its own interests.


(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                    Page 9
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                        2010
Thus, in our view, it is not the ego, it is not the intellect, that compels a magistrate or judge or similar
to make a legal decision – it is the state of mind. That state of mind forms from all anchors that also
contribute to forming the ego, id, reason, intellect, whatever. But none of these factors on their
own, not even the ego, can overrule the state of mind that forms. The ego may be reluctant to make
such a decision, the intellect may have serious reservations about the merits of the decision to be
made – but the state of mind alone determines what the decision will be; not the ego, not the id, not
the intellect.

Most of these forces that form the state of mind are not easily understood. Many are unconscious
forces. Such forces will only reveal themselves through the process of psychoanalysis or
psycholegalanalysis. The combined effect, or view, of such forces, can be expressed as a “conclusion
pattern” to aid understanding a particular conclusion.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                        Page 10
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                        2010

Modified Ego

That part of the intellect that act as an ego that shapes reality, or hides the truth that the ego of a
person is shaping reality by certain actions or decisions.

An advertising executive is about shaping reality, not testing it. He or she wants to shape reality so
customers will purchase a product. It is not their ego which knows how to do this, it is a part of their
intellect which also has an appreciation of the ego (of customers or its own ego). Hence the reason
for the name “modified ego”. Certainly, the ego in the executive may be heavily involved in assisting
the intellect to form a clear perception of reality, but it does not become involved in shaping reality
(not by our definition, that is achieved by the modified ego).

Any magistrate or judge, or similar, by signing court orders, shapes a reality for some people or for
much of society. Courts orders are enforced by police, which means a court order shapes reality,
that a new reality is forced on a person or persons.

In a normal mentally healthy judge (or similar), the modified ego hides the truth about the person
shaping reality. It is a passive entity and hard to expose in that sense. Its only role is to mask from
the ego the fact that the actions of the ego shape reality. It is a self defence mechanism of the ego.
We could claim it is a part of the ego, but this is not useful for clinical reasons. (in any case, who can
say where or how the ego is present or active in the brain? It is a concept of psychoanalysis which
works in practise. A modified ego is also such a concept. This concept works well in the clinical
appreciation of those into law especially.)

In a rational and mentally healthy person, a modified ego is controlled by the ego and allowed to
take over for a time the consciousness but only with the ego’s permission. The reason why a
modified ego takes over may not be to shape reality but to hide the truth that reality is being shaped
by a particular action or decision.

Thus, there are two primeval states of the modified ego: passive or active.

Passive implies the modified ego does not choose to do anything other than to mask some truths
that would have an impact on the ego. Thus a mentally healthy judge (or similar) never uses the
modified ego, it passively masks the truth about legal decisions and their impact on reality. Due to
the fact that in a well balanced and mentally healthy judge (or similar) this modified ego is extremely
passive, it may be extremely difficult to expose it (by a psychiatrist). However, like any major area of
the brain, or area of major activity, such are a consciousness in their own right and hence possible to
expose – the consciousness then begins to respond directly.

Active implies the ego has handed control (for a time) to the modified ego. Thus an advertising
executive busy planning a campaign is more likely to be using a modified ego. A bank executive
talking to politicians about aspects of financial regulations is likely using a modified ego, attempting
to enforce a point of view. Note that the sole role of the modified ego in this situation is to compel
the politicians to act in accordance with what the modified ego wants to shape – it does not mean
the modified ego can compel another to do as it desires. The modified ego “compels” as far as it is
concerned. Not all modified egos have the same level of experience or tact or skill. Some might try
to compel in such a simple way this achieves nothing.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                       Page 11
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                       2010
There are two intellectual states of the modified ego.

Combined State takes place when the ego and modified ego join forces. The ego hands over not
total control to the modified ego, but has a hand shake agreement. We can loosely call this a
“combined ego”. This state occurs when the ego understand what the modified ego is, and how it
shapes reality, and something is important to the ego – thus, the ego reasons that, it being the
“reality test”, if it joins forces with the modified ego then the modified ego is in a better position to
assist the ego to shape a reality the ego desires. In this state, it can be close to impossible (and from
a clinical point of view perhaps a waste of time anyway) to try and work out the input from the ego
and the input from the modified ego.

Failed State is when the ego fails to control the modified ego. An example is gambling. In Australia
there is this shocking problem of some pensioners loosing their entire pension on poker machines in
one sitting at a club. Then they depend on charities for food and basic needs. The modified ego
depends on the brain’s excitory response to give it control, and when this happens, the modified ego
heads off to the club to gamble. Thus it is not the ego that briefly hands control, it is other parts of
the brain or psyche. Anyone who gambles has a modified ego, by our definition, that is attempting to
shape reality by winning lots of money. Note that the modified ego is not the ego, it does not care
how much money is lost, it knows that it is possible to win lots and lots and the reason it can
become addicted to this. The modified ego is not about testing reality, it is not about working out
how much money is lost or the odds of winning – it has a specific focus and that focus is to win no
matter what the cost.

There are two imaginary states of the modified ego.

Flights of fantasy is when the modified ego begins to believe in such a way that this may or may not
be reality to others. Authors of books need this type of modified ego and they can put themselves in
the role of each character one by one, for a time they feel like the character in their book. Actors
have to have such. This is not a failure of the ego, the ego does not care one way or the other, it
knows it can obtain control at will from the modified ego. The ego allows this state in the modified
ego to discharge all sorts of fantasies build up in the id. Note that if the ego fails to subdue the
modified ego when it is important to do so, then this is a failed state. Note that the fantasies
themselves are not important to understand because they could be about anything. The hallmark of
sanity, in our definition, in this situation, is to be satisfied that the ego can take over when it is
important from the modified ego. If it can not – then a classical definition of flight of fantasy may be
important clue to a psychiatric diagnosis.

Telepathy state. In this state the modified ego is active within a virtual reality type mental telepathy
interaction. In order not to confuse the ego, and the reason this is said to belong to the imaginary
state even though the telepathy could be genuine, is due to the fact that the modified ego
persuades the ego that this experience could be imaginary. The ego can not know without a doubt, it
is about testing reality. A modified ego is a strong intellectual influence on the ego. If, even when the
ego is certain beyond a doubt an experience was true and real, if the modified ego then persuades
the ego that it could be imaginary, the ego has no choice but to accept such. This is the healthy way
to appreciate telepathy in some situations and the ego may form an opinion such as “probably a
genuine experience but could be imaginary, my own thoughts spiralling into some imaginary world
in my head”

There are two corrupt states of the modified ego.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                      Page 12
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                       2010
External Projection State. In this state the modified ego attempts to gratify the id by shaping an
external reality. Thus a judge might sign a court order which does not have merit based on available
evidence but which acts to gratify the desires of the id. For example. A not very clear cut case of a
husband hitting his wife and being charged with assault. No marks on the woman and no witnesses
and her complaint a touch suspicious anyway. Most judges would dismiss this on the basis there is
lack of evidence. The magistrate in whom the modified ego is in this state, however, will not dismiss,
and will attempt to punish the husband even when there is no proper evidence. This in order to
appease some tensions, perhaps the unfinished business of childhood, that this particular situation
has resulted in. The modified ego depends on its survival on the ego, or its own ingenuity. The id
may want to eliminate the modified ego should it become directly aware of it (because the ego is
part of the id anyway, and the id is not about to allow two egos) and hence when the modified ego
senses a threat from the id, it will try to appease it.

Ambiguous State. In this state the modified ego is not clear on what to do next, or decide, because it
is about shaping reality but how to shape reality may not be evident. When the ego hands control, a
feedback mechanism takes over, the modified ego flowing to the ego that it does not know how to
shape reality, and the ego then tries to discern why the modified ego does not know, and will use its
own reality test to assist. Example. An advertising executive is given the task by the Catholic Church
in Australia to interest more people in going to church. The executive comes up with an idea for this
huge poster which shows a most lovely looking woman in a relatively sexy garment. Now the
modified ego becomes uncertain and enters an ambiguous state. Will this do it? Works for anything
else but for a church? That is what the modified ego is asking itself? The ego may decide, in order to
assist the modified ego, to go and try a few experiments to see if this will in fact work. So the
executive may dress neatly, create some pamphlets on his computer, then stand outside a church
during mass and hand these pamphlets to persons going past but who are not going into this church.
If this experiment shows that a few of the people who walked past had, after receiving the
pamphlet, turned around and went inside the church, the ego would be satisfied this technique
could work. This “truth” then would be passed to the modified ego.

In that sense, the modified ego either knows how to shape reality, or it does not. When it does not,
it pauses, waiting for input from the ego, a kind of nod that “yes” this will do it or a kind of shake of
the head “no” this is unlikely.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                       Page 13
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                        2010

Conclusions and Assertions

A psycholegalanalytical conclusion is a bona fide medical diagnosis because only the diagnosis areas
in the brain are used to execute the psycholegalanalytical process.

There are times when a conclusion can not be reached by this process, however, partial conclusions
are reached none of which result in a true conclusion.

At such times the human reason can be used to logically consider how to use these partial
conclusion to form a psycholegalanalytical assertion(s). This is probably equivalent to a qualified
opinion. Assertions, even a great many, still do not count in the same way as a conclusion and such
assertions could be tested in say a court of law for validity or applicability.

Clearly, as powerful as psycholegalanalysis is, it is only one highly reliable and intelligence process in
the human brain. There are other skills the brain has that can consider and combine partial
conclusions into an assertion. Hence, while the weight of an assertion can be debatable, it is still a
valid reasoning process in the brain.

Even hundreds of assertions are not as persuasive as one conclusion. All it takes is poor reasoning in
one assertion to distort the picture as a whole. Consequently, the psycholegalanalyst should always
strive to reach a conclusion but if this is proving impossible then assertions are still legitimate
findings of psycholegalanalysis, albeit not having the quality of a conclusion.

To date, at the time of writing this document, psycholegalanalysis has been used about 7 times. Each
time the conclusion pattern was impossible to clearly understand until facts fell into place which
were not known until many months after the conclusion was reached.

An assertion would be the other way around. Knows facts would be matched with partial conclusion
to produce an assertion. Hence while a conclusion pattern may seldom be clearly understood at the
time it is reached, an assertion should be readily understood.

Thus during psycholegalanalysis, the brain of the psychoanalysts can not reach a conclusion, but is
forning one highly relevant partial conclusion, then another, and so on in a loop. This is where
common sense and reason has to step in. Given many facts are understood, it is possible thus to use
logic and reason and any other skill, to form assertions which are consistent with the partial
conclusions and fit the known facts. The result is an assertion whose strength may lie not in the
same way as a conclusion, but in the fact that human reason may accept such a conclusion as
credible, believable, and in the light of known facts likely to be correct and acceptable to a jury.

How does a less experienced psycholegalanalyst know the difference between a conclusion and a
partial conclusion? When first reached, it may seem as a conclusion – but the next day it may not be
so clear and another conclusion may seem appropriate, and so on for a few days, until the original
conclusion seems correct again. This type of mental process means all of these are partial conclusion
and none can be said to be a conclusion. When a conclusion is reached, it remains fixed in the brain
and can not be “shaken” in the same way a partial conclusion can be. But note that the
psycholegalanalytical process may combine all the partial conclusions, if possible, to produce a
composite conclusion or to define a new conclusion. In such a case we can still use the partial
temporary conclusions as the basis of assertions.



(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                       Page 14
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                      2010
It is possible for a psycholegalanalytical process to “hover” over a number of conclusions before
reaching a determination. In such a case be cautious of the conclusion pattern that forms – it may
contain information relevant to the partial conclusions. Therefore, in such a case, keep the
conclusion pattern as “naked” as possible, as simple and accurate as possible.

The first time I reached this conclusion, my initial conclusion pattern went for half a page. This was
most unusual. Then it dawned on me that the many partial conclusions had contributed to the
pattern, and I focused the pattern to ensure only that directly relevant was present.

Partial conclusions are a field of information from which assertions can be formed. Which would be
clinically important? That probably depends on the target audience of a psycholegalanalytical report.

Here is an example of an extended conclusion pattern reduced to a conclusion and an assertion.
Assume the client is the Roman Catholic Church who has a priest charged with sexual assault of a
young boy, but the church is not satisfied and had asked for a psycholegalanalytical conclusion.
Feeding the input from the hearing into the diagnosis areas, as well as personal references about the
priest in question, the conclusion at first was:


  JUDICIAL CONFUSION

  The magistrate (name) failed to understand that no actual evidence had been presented
  other then a claim of a parent of a boy now an adult. The adult victim was cautious about
  what he said and that suggests manipulation of what he was to say in court. It is likely the
  adult victim was told to lie. It is far more likely the boy made advances to the priest which
  were rejected and later he invented the opposite in case the priest complains to parents.
  Hence the intent was to defame. The reason not understood. Perhaps a personal vendetta?


This conclusion pattern did not sit well because a typical conclusion pattern is not that “rational” at
first glance. The conclusion itself was correct, but a question mark arose about the pattern.
Therefore this was reduced to the following:

  JUDICIAL CONFUSION

  The magistrate (name) failed to understand that no actual evidence had been presented other
  than a claim of a parent of a boy now an adult.


  Psycholegalanalytical assertion: This is likely a vendetta. Possibly it was the boy who made
  some kind of sexual advances, and was turned down, but fearing the priest may tell his
  parents, the boy invented a sexual molestation angle. The fact that this was not reported at
  the time suggests the parents may not have believed, and for some reason, perhaps money,
  decided to bring this up now. The boy now adult was guarded as a witness suggesting
  manipulation of what he was to say, likely by the legal firm employed.

Note the conclusion pattern states that “no evidence was presented”. That means the
psycholegalanalytical process had not found the evidence as “valid” and has ignored it. As always, as
explained herein, be ever so careful interpreting a conclusion pattern. Think twice about any
conclusion pattern that appears “too rational” at first glance. In all cases thus far, it was at least
months before a conclusion pattern was seen in perspective when new facts came to light.


(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                     Page 15
                            Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                      2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Corrupt Conduct

Requirements

     1) Claimant must have provided instructions in writing to the law firm or agent. Not important
        how well or poorly he or she articulated such, or how short or long such a letter was.
     2) Some money must have been deposited with, or handed over to, the law firm or agent


Diagnosis Criteria

Criteria that must be satisfied before this conclusion can be made

     a) a law firm or agent that has previously responded in writing offering or suggesting
        representation, returns any money sent and refuses to continue or begin a legal process
     b) the law firm or agent refuses to speak and/or listen to the claimant to clarify his or her
        instructions (e.g. telephone call is not responded to or claimant is told a particular agent will
        not speak to him or her or does not want to take his or her call and no true reason given)
     c) the law firm or agent appears to misunderstand the instructions but has failed to telephone
        or talk to the claimant requesting clarification (alternatively, the law firm or agent
        attempted to confuse or confound the claimant, and after that said they will not assist.)

OR

     a) person claims to have been assaulted and calls police. Police find no evidence of assault
     b) a protection court order arrives, not applied for by the police but by the person who claimed
        assault that police found no evidence for. Such a court order may “protect” others not just
        the person concerned

         In this case the magistrate or judge who signed that court order is considered as having
         acted corruptly until a jury clears the said person

OR       a court order names a period which is not the legal or usual period


Example

  Psycholegalanalytical conclusion: Corrupt Conduct

  Jason and Roberts (the law firm) had refused to have anything to do with the matter because it is well
  known to experienced legal firms that magistrates in NSW sell court orders known as AVOs to
  solicitors and legal firms. The going price is $10,000. These can be used so a client can obtain a female
  child as s sexual slave, she named “protected” on the court order; or can be used to isolate the sole
  heir and sole executor of the Last Will and Testament of an elderly parent especially with Alzheimer’s,
  and engineer a Power of Attorney and new Last Will and Testament. On such AVOs, the parent is
  named as “protected” and no reason given and no just cause apparent. Most (or All or Major) legal
  firms in NSW are “house trained” to make sure they do not bring into the open the legal scams that
  AVOs make possible, hence the reason for the refusal of Jason and Roberts.



(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                      Page 16
                          Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                      2010

Conclusion Pattern

The first pattern that springs to mind during the deep reflective psycholegalanalysis technique, is the
one included in the conclusion. The pattern is written exactly as the modified ego presents it.
Subject to some practical constraints (see below) nothing is changed in the way the modified ego
presents it.

Further, sometimes only a jury can make a final determination. For example, if an unusual amount of
money was claimed in “legal costs”, and the original court order contains anything not usually
present (e.g. in Australia on AVOs there is a period of 2 years. On the AVO in the Alzheimer’s Scam,
the original number of years was 5. This is so perplexing that the puzzling 10,000 and the puzzling 5
come together to clearly make the diagnosis that the original magistrate was paid $10,000 to sign
that AVO. Is it true? That is of no interest to the psycholegalanalyst, that is up to a jury to make a
determination about.

Based on this, legal firms were approached about making a claim against that magistrate. It
wasponted out that what was truth, was not of interest in this context because on the available
evidence the jury would accept this. Thus it would be medical knowledge that would persuade, not
“truth” in that sense. When we are talking about magistrates or judges (or similar) “on the take”,
these people are far to smart to be caught out by simple means such as a picture of a judge
accepting a bribe. Hence, if the psycholegalanalytical process strongly favours forming the
conclusion that a magistrate or judge was paid money, then we do so, and the jury has to decide the
matter.

The human brain rarely works on “truth”, it works on facts or physical evidence and belief. Unusual
amounts are still “facts” but as to the importance of these, that is up to a jury to decide. Bear in
mind that the human unconscious automatically recognizes tones and expressions – thus under
cross-examination of a magistrate or judge, each member of the jury would also compile vast
amount of unconscious knowledge which together with “our facts” may result in a jury deciding they
accept the assertion that a magistrate was paid $10,000 to sign a court order.

Hence, while a psychoanalyst is not going to be in a position to be absolutely certain a bribe had
taken place, he or she is obliged to conclude “on the available evidence I believe a jury would make a
conviction” if the psycholegalanalytical pattern indicates this and there are “puzzling” contradictions
or “figures” which can not be explained in any particular court order or document. We never accept
this or that was a “mistake”, a “typo”, we look at the evidence we know. It is up to a jury to decide if
something was a “typo” or “error” and make the decision of “not guilty” - and not the
psycholegalanalyst.

Psycholegalanalysis is a highly refined medical skill. We have the professional responsibility to
produce the correct medical conclusions based on the evidence available. Only a jury under cross-
examination of a particular judge will be in a position to have more input and thus may decide to
overrule our conclusion. That is perfectly acceptable and in line with how conclusions are made and
changed if more input arrives that warrants a change to a conclusion.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                    Page 17
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                     2010
Restrictions

When a second opinion is required, the psycholegalanalyst should not be told what any prior
conclusion pattern was, merely what the diagnosis was and about which a second opinion is
required. All information available to previous analyst must be given to the analyst asked for a
second opinion. If this is not possible, the analyst should find any pattern but not the original
pattern. If this is not possible then a second opinion is not possible.


Considerations

It is important to write down the output of a modified ego exactly as this arrives in the head.
Another analyst who may be asked for advice or opinion is best made aware of the exact output of a
modified ego. However, sometimes a modified ego may produce a statement such as “the bloody
lawyer is shit scared of being deregistered!”

The reason this happens is because the modified ego reaches for the most appropriate associations
in the brain. Such a sentence may not be one a psychiatrist may be willing to write in a report.
Suggested alternatives:

“the () lawyer is () scared of being deregistered”

or

“the (exclamation) lawyer is (foul smell) scared of being deregistered.

or

“the (exclamation) lawyer is (extreme concern) scared of being deregistered

or

Write in your own words but somehow make it known to another analyst who may be asked that
such were you own words. For example:

I suspect Mr R White is very concerned about being deregistered

or

I am of the opinion that Mr R White is concerned about being deregistered.

or

whatever as long as you somehow attempt to convey to another analyst that you decided to decline
writing down what the modified ego came up with, and instead chose your preferred way of
explaining the sense of what the modified ego concluded

Another complication is that sometimes the expression the modified ego presents may be colloquial
or jargon – or for that matter in another language, if such a language contains the most apt
expression the modified ego had found. In our example the original expression was something like
“they all do it if they can get away with it”. This was translated to “Most (or All or Major)” with the

(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                    Page 18
                          Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                      2010
information in brackets intended to convey that an expression was used which is near enough to the
alternative. (i.e. the actual expression used in the example equated to “Most (or All or Major)”.
However, this is an individual choice, some analysts may prefer to use just one of these three
expressions and not include the brackets. (e.g. “Most legal firms” or “Major legal firms” instead of
“Most (or All or Major) legal firms”.


Reset your own ego

The output from a modified ego might be impossible to believe. That is how the ego ought to
consider some output. Consider the conclusion pattern in the example. On reflection, the ego ought
to decide that any industry has some bad apples so this could be the situation in rare cases, but it is
unlikely to be a trend or widespread corruption of any kind (it depends on your situation - if you
happen to work for a corruption body and come across judicial corruption often, then your ego may
be perfectly “ok” with such an output).


Practical Considerations in the Field

If you need to sit in a court of law or talk to police officers and the like, this in the context of
whatever you are into with psycholegalanalysis, then if possible avoid saying you are a psychiatrist or
even a doctor. Ideally, the more of a “nobody” you present yourself as, the greater your chance of
getting a great many subconscious cues from the faces or words of those you are observing and/or
talking to. Don’t drive an expensive car to a court or whatever either, consider a taxi or even public
transport. Car parks around courts and large legal firms, or banks, or police, are likely to have
cameras and sooner or later if you step out of a luxury car, regardless of how far away you parked it,
someone will put two and two together.


Don’t Underestimate the Power of This Technique

This conclusion pattern was formed about January, 2010. It did not really make sense completely.
However, it was only after in incident in the NSW Supreme Court in April that the pattern fell
completely into place.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                    Page 19
                          Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                     2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Aiding and Abetting Fraud by
Deception

Examples

A legal firm is given a Last Will and Testament of a person who had dementia at the time the Last
Will and Testament was written. The legal firm ignores this and pretends this is a document that can
not be contested and advises in writing they intend to take that document to probate (a court that
handles such matters).

It does not matter if the firm has obtained a medical report that states such a person is of sound
mind or has testament capacity or whatever.


A physician or specialist who fails to consult all immediate family members and writes a report
stating an elderly or otherwise incapacitated individual is capable of signing a new Last Will and
Testament, or has expressed an interest in doing this. Any barrier to consulting any family member is
not an excuse (e.g. a family member may be in prison; a family member may be restricted by a court
order from visiting the parent or as appropriate – such court orders can be purchased and used in
legal scams.)


Any doctor who states in writing an opinion that is not an accepted medical diagnosis, or who fails to
conduct the battery of tests required before such an opinion can be given. The important key here is
perform the tests – some tests are not that easy to interpret and a physician may err, this is not
considered as cause to reach this conclusion.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                   Page 20
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                      2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Adultery-in-Law

This diagnosis is made when an inappropriate frame of reference is used to make a legal decision,
and that frame of reference relies on the perceived authority figure or expert witness status of the
person(s) asked to provide evidence.

Examples

A free public hospital geriatric specialist is asked to write in a report that an Alzheimer’s victim has
retained their “testament capacity” and wants to leave all their wealth to a particular person(s). This
is then used in a court of law to lay a claim on a new Last Will and Testament signed by that
Alzheimer’s patient recently or will be signed, or Power of Attorney. The reference is inappropriate
and a court of law ought to know that, hence this diagnosis applies. In other words, using an
“expert” in a medical field to produce a “legal expression” that is not a medical diagnosis, but which
is then sold as a medical authority report and therefore can not be challenged by law. (Note: assume
the word “opinion” to a court of law means “diagnosis” hence if the specialist says “in my opinion”,
to a court this may be as conclusive as a medical diagnosis).

A mechanical engineer is asked to review a bridge or construction not familiar to them, and he then
produces a report such a structure is sound. This report is then used as expert witness evidence to
dismiss a claim of negligence in the construction of the bridge that led to a serious accident. (only a
bridge engineer could write such a report, not a mechanical or other engineer).

A Catholic priest who is a theologian is asked to produce a report on the sermon of a particular
Anglican minister who is being sued for religious intolerance (under Australian Law) because he said
something during service that a wealthy businessman took personally and decided to make it a
personal vendetta on a wider scale The report the priest produces does not mention he is a Catholic
because he himself never thinks of stating this, he simply explains he has a master of theology
degree. That report is used to prove in a court of law that the Anglican minister is guilty of religious
intolerance. (note: theology is like law, a unique framework of understanding has to be used, and
one distinct group of theologians (e.g. Catholic) is not going to completely understand another
distinct group of theologians (e.g. Anglicans).)




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                     Page 21
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                      2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Blasphemy-in-Law

This applies when all that law is about, or a particular legal forum, is ignored or abused.

Examples

Two police officers watch two strong men try to break into a car and they do nothing but watch. (if
they needed to call for assistance that is doing something, so in such a case they can wait and
watch.)

A body such as the Guardianship Tribunal (NSW, Australia) is asked to protect an elderly person
(from a relative or sibling) and such protection is to be by appointment of a public guardian. The
elderly person has limited capacity and judgment due to dementia such as Alzheimer’s, and the body
does not do this. If the person who had requested this is one of the siblings, then if the body fails to
do so this is automatically blasphemy-in-law by our science. (In the case of all the siblings having a
serious problem such as alcoholism, any relative may request such a thing).




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                    Page 22
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                     2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Clarification-of-Law

This applies when the third rule of the Science of Law applies. For a discussion see “analytical
criteria” explained in Corruption-of-Law.


Third Rule of the Science of Law – Clarification of Law

A court of law has the obligation to make a decision that clarifies or improves the meaning of a
particular law. However, this can never be the case if X approaches NIL.


Simple example

The law says “no car will travel more than 40 klms past a school zone between the hours of 8.30 and
9.30 am and 2.30 and 3.30 pm.”

A man is caught speeding in a truck. He claims the law does not apply.

Common sense and everything else clearly says it ought to even if the wording is poor and covered
only “cars”. Thus a court has a right to clarify this law by setting a decision that also covers any
vehicle not just a car.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                    Page 23
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                       2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Conditioned Response

Consider the hypothetical in the Alzheimer’s scam report:



A hypothetical court (or tribunal situation) which ought to demonstrate that trying to explain basic
medicine or common sense to such people (lawyers, judges, or similar) can be like hitting a brick
wall.

Yours truly: May I approach the bench? Now, let me get this straight. Some court or tribunal had
defined a legal precedent which says that a person has different capacities and therefore it follows
they also have testament capacity? Certainly, when of sound mind. But we are talking about a
person with Alzheimer’s. She can not read past a first paragraph of a book. She is taken to the local
shops and she thinks she is back in Russia. Sure, she can still recall the names of her children, not
such a problem for her – that tiny area of the brain that remembers names has not been damaged
and this is not a problem for her- but trying to recall where she was taken for her birthday two days
ago and by whom is impossible for her. Testament capacity? Any lesion to the brain has the
potential to destroy testament capacity relative to a sound mind.

Judge: No, you don’t understand. The legal definition of testament capacity just means a person still
recalls their children. That is what is required to be shown in a court.

Yours truly: So this person sitting there, who does not where she is, or what she is doing here, has
the legal right to sign a new Power of Attorney and Last Will and Testament even though she has no
concept of what she is signing or why?

Judge: As long as a medical specialist testifies under oath that she has testament capacity.

Your truly. Meaning that she recalls the names of her siblings?

Judge: Correct.

Yours truly: Why do you need a medical specialist? Why not ask family members?

Judge: No, it has to be a person who is an expert witness to the court.

Yours truly: An expert witness on what? No psychiatrist in his right mind would suggest such a thing.

Judge: No, we don’t ask psychiatrists, they don’t cooperate with us. Hospital geriatric specialists
cooperate with us.

Yours truly: Is this for real? Or is this an episode of Seinfeld and a bizarre topsy turvy world of some
kind? Could you tell me what your definition of a paraplegic is? Do you perhaps have a definition for
cardiac arrest? If so, you obviously would not ask a cardiac surgeon to write a report, which medical
speciality do you ask to produce such a report?




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                     Page 24
                            Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                        2010
To an ordinary intelligent person this may sound like madness. But is it insanity by our definition?
(i.e. loss of reality or loss of perspective on reality – note this mainly refers to self, not to how others
perceive or understand reality).

The answer is no. The judge in this hypothetical is using a preconditioned response. His state of mind
and his ego cooperate to ensure his ability to use his legal deliberation technique is not damaged.
While his intellect may appreciate the “unreality”, the intellect on its own has limited capacity to
change the ego or state of mind. In perhaps 95% of situations, his ego and state of mind serve him
well to come to correct and proper decisions – but in the 5% of cases the ego knows something is
not right but that does not matter, not important, the ego is set to protect the state of mind for the
benefit of the 95% of decisions.

What if our hypothetical judge comes to a psychiatrist and asks to be helped to understand why he
fails to understand some situations?

The skill required is on par with a cardiac surgeon. The psychiatrist needs to assist the ego to
understand the 5% of the situations, but in such a way that the state of mind or the ego is not
damaged. One possible approach is to appeal to the modified ego. Any person who can sign court
orders has a modified ego. Such may not be used for anything other than to contain within itself the
truth that by signing a court order, a judge modifies reality for some people. A modified ego is part
of the intellect. The intellect can be reasoned with – the question is how? A truly passive modified
ego, one that simply contains the truth that the ego shapes reality by signing court orders or making
legal decisions, does not have much of an interest in anything else. However, just like any other
larger area of the brain or activity area, it is a small consciousness in its own right. If this
consciousness comes to like you, and exposes itself, it may accept your suggestion that it would be
nice for the ego if the modified ego assisted the ego to understand certain situations. If we can do
that, then we win, because the modified ego will find a technique to do this.

My suggestion, if you are a psychiatrist in that position, is form a quick assessment of whether the
patient likes you or not. We all have different personalities. We are all different. Not everyone likes
everyone else and the reason for this is impossible to be clear about, it is just the way people are. So,
if you suspect the person does not like you, that you are not his or her type, suggest another
psychiatrist. If you are a lady psychiatrist, consider the choice of clothes when with the patient. In
some outfits, for who knows what reason, the modified ego may respond better and even expose
itself. All we need, in this scenario, if the theory is spot on, for the modified ego to expose itself and
then be explained what the patient would like. The modified ego will do this, if it likes you and
accepts your reasons. The modified ego will find a way – this may take up to 9 months, connections
in the brain may need to be put in place first before that which is desired is possible. When a
modified ego performs this type of brain surgery, it will make sure all the fine tuning is in place, all
the dendrites are connected as they have to be, in order to achieve the objective.



Here is an extract from the book Research-Based Strategies to Ignite Student
Learning by Judy Willis
Learning causes growth of brain cells. Now we know that although most of the neurons where
information is stored are present at birth, there is lifelong growth of the support and connecting
cells that enrich the communication between neurons. These dendrites sprout from the arms
(axons) or the cell body of the neuron.



(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                        Page 25
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                       2010
Dendrites increase in size and number in response to learned skills, experience, and information.
New dendrites grow as branches from frequently activated neurons. This growth is stimulated by
proteins called neurotrophins. Nerve growth factor is one of these neurotrophins. Although the
brain measurements of neurotrophins are highest during childhood (when the brain's connecting
cells are undergoing their greatest growth and development), as students continue to learn,
neurotrophin activity is elevated in the brain regions responsible for new learning (Kang, Shelton,
Welcher, & Schuman, 1997).

Once these dendrites are formed, the brain's plasticity allows it to reshape and reorganize the
networks of dendrite-neuron connections in response to increased or decreased use of these
pathways (Giedd et al., 1999).

Examples of brain plasticity have been noted when people repeatedly practice activities controlled
by parts of their visual, motor, sensory, or coordination systems for specialized learned activities.
Blind people who read Braille have significantly larger somatosensory cortexes, where the sense of
touch in their right fingers is processed. Similarly, violin players who use the fingers of their left
hands to do the complicated movements along the strings have larger somatosensory regions in the
area of their parietal lobe associated with the fingers of the left hand.

A 2004 report in Nature found that people who learned how to juggle increased the amount of gray
matter in their occipital lobes (visual memory areas). When they stopped practicing the juggling, the
new gray matter vanished. A similar structural change appears to occur in people who learn—and
then don't practice—a second language. The decrease in connecting dendrites and other supporting
brain connecting cells that are not used is called pruning. The loss of native language ability, juggling
skills, or learned academic material that is not practiced is the flip side of the brain's growth
response to learning. It is the “use it or lose it” phenomenon. The process is called “pruning”
because the brain pathways and connections that are used regularly are maintained and “hard-
wired,” while others are eliminated, or pruned.

Pruning. Just as hedges are pruned to cut off errant shoots that don't communicate with many
neighbouring leaves, the brain prunes its own inactive cells. By the time we enter adolescence, our
brain has chosen most of the final neurons it will keep throughout our adult life based on which cells
are used and which are not.

Neurons are pruned when they are not used. Active cells require blood to bring nourishment and
clear away waste, but cells that are inactive don't send messages to the circulatory system to send
blood. (The brain cells receive circulation not from blood, as seen in the rest of the body, but rather
from a colourless, filtered form of blood called cerebral spinal fluid.) This reduced blood flow means
that calcium ions accumulate around the cell and are not washed away. This build-up of calcium ions
triggers the secretion of the enzyme calpain, which causes cells to self-destruct.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                      Page 26
                            Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                        2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Confusion-in-Law

The human brain for all its biological ingenuity, is still a relatively superficial thinking apparatus.

Courts of law are about making decisions and not about saying “we are confused”. Such confusion
can only be detected by the psycholegalanalytical process.

Examples

A woman with dementia, severe perhaps Alzheimer’s type, is dragged to a medical specialist who
decides she has “testament capacity”. Another witness or report, not from a medical person,
explains to the court that there is no such medical diagnosis as testament capacity. The court is now
in a state of confusion. They are not medical doctors and depend on such to provide certain factual
evidence in accordance with current medical knowledge. Whom are they to believe? [Note: it is
important not to distract the court. If there is no such medical diagnosis then no amount of
neurological tests are going to be effective or useful or prove anything one way or the other. Trying
to, perhaps, explain why this or that test which may have been done has not yielded the result
required may only add to the confusion.]

An international law on human rights, by an agreement to which say Australia is a signatory,
guarantees every person the right to a fair and proper hearing before a court of law. However, some
domestic laws are “Draconian” and local courts hand out orders to do with these as a matter of
routine ignoring any reference to international law or other “higher” domestic laws. In a strict sense,
the psycholegalanalytical process accepts only that which is “legitimate” and not standard practises
not consistent with domestic and international obligations that courts are to uphold. Consequently,
any order of court that appears as a contradiction or a “slap in the face” of higher laws or
appropriate international laws, the analytical process will conclude “confusion-in-law”.

It is also important o appreciate that those into law are intelligent but not especially so (no doubts
there are exceptions but in general do not assume those into law are too smart). The lower the
intelligence, the more a person becomes “fixated” on what is defined as ideas of reference by our
definition (refer glossary). In other words, if a legal precedent has been set which is “incorrect-in-
law” but which no one has challenged, the judges may fix on that precedent to avoid confusion.
However, and this is the thing an analyst must look out for, the situation of a particular case may
have been such that the precedent that was set was more a “common sense” decision rather than
based on any expert or other evidence.

Example

A Supreme Court has decided that a woman pushed in her house and in a certain situation – this
amounted to physical assault. Local courts jumped on this and from that time on decided any one
who claims to have been pushed (note “claims”, in Australia when it has to do with AVO laws no
evidence is required in local courts that this has happened) is now covered by the assault laws. This
precedent (however appropriate the decision in the actual situation) may be called “dangerous-in-
law” because it had caused something the Supreme Court had not intended to take place at the local
court level.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                         Page 27
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                       2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Contempt-of-Law

Diagnosis Criteria

    1. An act, a physical act, that appears to demonstrate contempt for a higher court or specific
       law. (e.g. hand over something from a higher court and the person tosses it aside saying they
       are not interested)

    2. Verbal confirmation however it may be masked. Direct confrontation may yield a response
       that shifts the focus of the law into rules or procedures of a court


Notes

A higher court official may easily develop contempt for a lower court or a specific court not higher
court. This can be natural. This diagnosis can never be made using the frame of reference of a lower
court (decisions or statements or officials or judges or similar), only the frame of reference of a
higher court can be used. A “sideways” court, meaning still sitting below one higher court in the
hierarchy and in the same way as another court, may or may not be a suitable reference (depends
on how it is perceived. A consumer tribunal may sit below the higher court in the same way as a
district court might, however, the latter has “true clout” to most observers while a consumer claims
court may not be seen as court that has that much “clout”).

However, some caution is required. An example is the inheritance laws of NSW (in 2010) and the
sections still commonly known as the Family Provisions Act. What typically happens is that a sibling
left out of a Will can apply for “relief” under this act. A judge or registrar presiding over such a “room
full of mirrors” may, unconsciously, acquire contempt for this process because he or she knows,
unconsciously, this is corruption of some kind or poorly designed service. To be certain, lower the
ego defence mechanism so the right brain expresses its emotions. If the right is restrained, then you
may need to use other means to come to this conclusion (if your index of suspicion still remains
high). If the right attempts to “protect” the “left brain” and that portion of the “id” in that brain,
then yes, criterion (2) is satisfied. (i.e. protect in the sense of not interfering).

According to psycholegalanalysis, this diagnosis of a Supreme Court may equate to “treason” in
some countries.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                      Page 28
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                       2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Corruption-of-Law

Diagnosis Criteria

Law(s) have been passed but not sanctified

     1. The appropriate authority (e.g. government) had passed laws in regards to a particular
        matter

     2. The appropriate authority had to change these laws or introduce laws to negate the
        negative effect of the above

OR

It is clear to the psycholegalanalyst that the interpretation of a law (by courts or similar) can not be
understood from the wording of the law itself. This can happen, for example, when words that
require the brain to form vast associations (e.g. capacity) are used in the wording.

OR

The analytical criteria as defined herein (seethe criteria further down) is satisfied.

Notes

A complex diagnosis. It basically means the court(s) of law failed to understand the intent of the law
and had produced decisions that acted to negate the intent of the law, so much so the appropriate
authority had to develop laws to counter the negative effects, or had to change the law altogether.
Laws are usually defined using words. Words are a medium of communication but are hardly a
perfect medium. No matter how precise a sentence is, an understanding of such depends on many
factors internal to the psyche and soul and brain. In addition, the human brain is known to store and
process some words differently to others. For example, consider the sentence “from this time one
the files of yesterday are not stored in the filing room, even if there is room”.

Count the “f’s” in the above. Chances are you will not count the “f” in “of” and “if” because the
human brain stores short words differently. You need to use other parts of the brain to see the “f’s”
in short words. In some language, it may not be the shortness of the word that causes the brain to
store such differently, but the “shortness” of the pronunciation.

Courts of law use certain “principles of law”. Applying such to any law can act to corrupt its intent.
Be especially cautious when challenges to existing laws appear to be made using concepts that
include wide brain associations areas – e.g. word such as “capacity”. This has a specific meaning but
is also is used in so many ways which convey an overall understanding but not a specific meaning.
These types of words form large association chains in the brain which can shift or alter the active
state of mind into an “insane state of mind” which can then be manipulated.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                      Page 29
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                       2010

Analytical Criteria
Law is something that governs all countries. Usually a government decides on a law and the courts
implement such.

Let us examine the above. Is it an assertion? Is it a hypothesis? Or is it a statement of fact in which
case let us define such as “truth”.

What is a science? Allow us to define science as a study of natural phenonema. A science usually
involves observation, putting together a cohesive theory, and experimentation and validation or
improvement on that theory.

There are other laws not just man made laws. The law of gravity for example. Such natural laws are
all around us. A baby begins to observe such from a young age.

The plasticity or adaptability of the human brain has allowed the human species to dominate and
control much of its environment.

However, that adaptability works in all areas of society. The apprentice desiring to be a carpenter
has to learn a skill. Learning requires modification of brain pathways in order to accommodate that
learning. The human brain is known to selectively kills of cells no longer useful to it, cells which
contain old learning. Why it does this for some such learning, and not for other learning, is a
mystery.

The “science of law” is very much about observing “law” as made by man, however, the only way we
can observe this is by a study of those who are lawyers, law enforcers, magistrates, judges.
Politicians decide on laws. Law writers then attempt to translate the desires of the politicians into a
legal framework by defining laws.

Here is the first problem! How politicians think and reason, is not how lawyers think and reason.
Even when a politician had studied law, by the time they are elected representatives they no longer
can be counted on having the same brain pathway formations as lawyers.

Hence, the first “uncertainty” that enters any law is the “gap” between what the government wants,
and how it is put into words. Not an issue with simple laws. A law which restricts the speed of a car
on a particular road is hardly open to manipulation or misinterpretation.

The “uncertainty” that enters any non-trivial law is a variable, let us call is X. X is a measure of how
open to manipulation or misinterpretation a law is. For simple laws, X is always 0.

Consider a law “no car shall travel more than 50 klms on Ocean Road”.

A man caught speeding argues that he is not driving a car, but a truck, and the law is not about
trucks.

 Rationality What was
Is this valid?Measure 1 the intent of the law? If the intent was to reduce the speed of vehicles
because this was a busy road with many tourists, then the argument is not valid. Even if the law
writers wrote “car”, common sense clearly says that any vehicle is subject to this law.or term.
 A person who can appreciate an “intent” of a law and is not fixated on specific word




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                       Page 30
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                        2010
Assume, hypothetically, a driver is caught at 60 klms on that section of Ocean Road which has been
renamed to New Ocean Road. He argues in court that the law applies to Ocean Road and not New
Ocean Road. Is this fair?

 Rationality Measure 2

 When the intent of a law or rule is ambiguous, then in order to be fair, the law must not apply.



 First Rule of the Science of Law

 In order for this science to work, laws must always be correctly or fairly applied.

However, consider the uncertainty that can enter interpretation of a law.


 Second Rule of the Science of Law – Integrity of Law

 In order for the first rule of law to always apply, the X in a law must approach NIL.

Allow us to turn to a previous example. A man in a truck is caught speeding on Ocean Road. What is
the X in the law?

While the law is intended to cover any heavy object travelling or being pushed down the road,
because it only mentions “car” the X=100.

In this case, by our second rule, this law can never be correctly or fairly applied when anything other
than a “car” is caught speeding. This does not mean rule one is invalid or can not be used.

 Third Rule of the Science of Law – Clarification of Law

 A court of law has the obligation to make a decision that clarifies or improves the meaning of a
 particular law. However, this can never be the case if X approaches NIL.


Hence the judge making a determination can thus write “the law in question, in my view, also covers
any vehicle and restricts the speed of that vehicle.”

In ordinary life situations, things are seldom black and white. Any existing law which appears to
apply may have X=100 in which case it is up to the court to decide if the law should apply and if so to
modify by setting legal precedents.


 Fourth Rule of the Science of Law – Corruption of Law

 If X is sufficiently close to NIL, then making any decision that expands or alters the intent, is in
 fact corrupting the law.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                       Page 31
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                     2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Credibility Established

Diagnosis Criteria

    1. Facts satisfy a conclusion pattern


Notes

Regardless of how a person presents a case or argument, this could be emotional or driven by deep
hurt or pain or grief, as long as all the facts form a pattern, then credibility is established.

If what a person claims appears “unbelievable”, police or courts may continue trying to “trap” or
“test” the credibility of a person well beyond what is sensible or reasonable. A psycholegalanalyst
may need to step in and point out the facts satisfy a conclusion pattern. What the pattern means,
what it implies, such things, are of no interest to the psycholegalanalysts in the professional sense.

Clearly, a person, such as a victim of fraud, may not know all the facts and given other facts a
different conclusion may be evident.

A major problem can arise especially for police who may have many more facts than, for example, a
victim of fraud. Hence, such may not be able to see that a conclusion pattern has been satisfied
because they may want to see some of the facts they alone know fit into the claim or statement.

Bear in mind that we are looking at facts and the “overall claim” and not specific aspects of the
claim. Some people, e.g. with a psychiatric condition or who experienced a psycholegal shock, may
include even bizarre “speculation” in their statements.

This diagnosis in truth requires professional judgment as well as psycholegalanalytical skills. A person
that claims a situation may attribute such to an aid of “aliens” (whatever). This can be a way the
unconscious forces “escape” during interrogation or questioning. If challenged, a person is likely to
admit, after some reflection, he or she does not know why she is including such (and it may be
annoying to the person).

In essence, in a situation where a psycholegalshock (or similar) enters the equation, we almost
expect the unconscious to take any opportunity to release or unleash some of that pent up energy in
the psyche. Important to differentiate such from any psychological or psychiatric problems that may
have been caused by the shock situation. Even a person with, say, an illusion of grandeur in certain
situations, may still be able to produce a statement that satisfied all the facts. Others may have an
issue with this illusion of grandeur and may fail to understand that credibility has in fact been
establlished. Or, a person who may appear to some racist tendencies in stress situations may not be
believed by those against whom he or she appears racist, and here again the psycholegalanalyst may
need to step in and formulate the conclusion that credibility has been established.

This conclusion is more of a “reasoning” process than a psycholegalanalytical process.

As with all diagnosis, it is only valid until events come to light that may warrant negating or changing
this conclusion. May be wise to explain this well to say police who may want a psycholegalanalysis to
determine if credibility is established.


(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                    Page 32
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                     2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Criminal Act

This diagnosis applies in the following situations:

    1. When a court has placed an elderly parent in the custody of a sibling with an alcohol
       problem, be such a periodic problem. It is well known in medicine the greatest threat to an
       elderly parent is the sibling with an alcohol problem.

    2. When a court order has named a child as protected from a natural parent and no visiting
       rights where granted. The exception is when the child is examined by a psychiatrist and the
       doctor concludes it is in the best interest of the chid not to see that parent. A written report
       must be available and handed to the parent with the reasons clearly stated.

    3. A plain letter written to the registrar or as appropriate of a court, is not acknowledged as
       having been received nor any written advice provided. Such a letter would have to be sent
       again, this time registered mail, before this conclusion applies.


However, this is a diagnosis of exclusion. All other conclusions must be dismissed prior to this
diagnosis being correct. (other conclusions that are reasonable to use - conclusions such as valid-in-
law are more informative type conclusions).

This conclusion may also apply when two or more conclusions satisfy (e.g. if both suspicious arrest
and inappropriate conduct (e.g. by a court) are satisfied, considerations must be given if such, in the
situation, does not in fact add up to a criminal act.)




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                    Page 33
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                      2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Criminal Conduct

Examples

Magistrate or judge is not satisfied, and states so, in regards to a particular case but nevertheless
continues or signs a court order infringing on natural rights of any of the parties represented.

No reason given on a court order or in a court decision, a reason that explains and clarifies the need
for the court order.

No “just case” is apparent why a court order has been granted or issued. Our definition of just cause
in regards to court orders that “protect” a person is (in Australia, in NSW, these are known as AVOs):


Evidence obtained from witnesses, such would usually be family members or police who have
evidence of assault or similar, who are rational and of the opinion any court order called an AVO is in
the best interest of the person named as “protected”. Each must state their reasons in writing to the
best of their ability to articulate and such reasons to be included in the court order. The reasons
need not be in English but can be in the natural language of a witness. Any AVO not having such is
considered as being issued without a just cause. An AVO that restricts one family member seeing
another, while making no provisions for such a family member seeing the “protected” person, be it
under supervision, is considered as without a just cause. (Note: any AVO applied for by a legal firm
and not police is unlikely to have any just cause.)




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                     Page 34
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                      2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Critical Event

This diagnosis is ambiguous as to what it means. There is no exact diagnosis criteria. This is a
conclusion the psycholegalanalytical process may come up with.

A critical event may be one that begun a chain of events or one which begun the Will Syndrome. It
may be an event that was the turning point in a particular personal decision.


Notes

In the case of the Alzheimer’s Scam as documented, the psycholegalanalytical process identified
three critical events:

    (1) Mr R White producing a pamphlet which looked like a funeral pamphlet for his mother. This
        was about 8 years before she actually died. Did she have symptoms of Alzheimer’s in 2000?
        Yes, but not as bad of course as in the later course of the disease process.

    (2) About 12 years prior to death of Ms J White, someone had accessed Mr R White’s bank
        account and took about 2000 from it. Mr R White rang Mr A White and explained this but his
        whole manner gave Mr A White an impression that he was being “accussed”. At this point,
        however, Ms J White did not have symptoms of Alzheimer’s – or did she? The human brain
        picks up much input automatically at the unconscious level. Was there something in Ms J
        White already that Mr R White, residing with his mother, that his unconscious already
        detected as the future dementia? Was he, unconsciously, already activating the Will
        Syndrome? Or, is there another “legal scam” that can be used in Australia to engineer a new
        Last Will and Testament and Mr R White was preparing the grounds for this even then?




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                        Page 35
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                      2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Crucifixion

Magistrates, judges, tribunal members, or similar, can be sitting ducks for unscrupulous legal firms.
Such firms may form a very close appreciation of how certain forces in the brain and mind compel a
person to make a decision.

Once this is understood, certain (usually religious or ethical or moral, or along such lines) examples
may be used to focus like a “magic bullet” into the head of the judge(s). This would destroy the state
of mind resulting in the judges(s) not thinking for themselves but writing the exact and precise
decision that the legal firm that engineered this, desires.

Be suspicious of any religious or moral or ethical example used by a “winning” party to a legal case,
when such appears out of context of what the case is about. A typical hypothetical with this intent
would attempt to optimize in the judge(s) (or similar) impossible to rationalize contradictions.

Examples

The prosecuting lawyer, sensing he was loosing the case, decided to call a witness back and asked
the witness, “in your opinion, was Mary the mother of Christ a virgin?” (the mark are the judge(s) or
jury members, not the witness).

A lawyer, sensing the case was lost, reminded the judge, “your honour, my client is a solicitor and an
officer of the court. The court is legally obligated to accept his version of events.” (i.e. the state of
mind that has formed which is going to dismiss this claim, is now crucified, and the magistrate may
feel he has no choice but to accept the claim.)

Notes

A psycholegalanalysts ought to be able to put themselves in a state of mind sufficiently similar to the
state of mind that formed in the judges(s) or jury. It can be crystal clear to such a state of mind what
a “crucifixion” is and how it is played out in a particular situation.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                     Page 36
                          Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                   2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Dangerous-in-Law

In some situations, for example, a Supreme Court judge (or equivalent) has relatives or sons,
whatever, who own large law firms. Such a judge may take an opportunity in a particular case to
write a decision that also paves a way for an expansion of his son’s law firm.

Examples

A Supreme Court decision in a particular case decided a woman who claimed she was assaulted by
being pushed is correct. A push can be an assault in some situations. The reason this was so in this
situation is because her boyfriend had a police record of assaulting the woman. However, in the
actual decision, the judge declines to mention the history of the boyfriend, in so doing invents a
precedent which is dangerous-in-law because then all local courts can consider a “push” as “assault”
based on that decision. Such can also claim that “no evidence is required” because a judgment by
the Supreme Court in the matter of White vs Jones says so. Hence the Supreme Court judge explains
to his son in private that now with that precedent he can accept all sorts of cases, in so doing his
fortune will multiply tremendously.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                 Page 37
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                      2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Deficient State of Mind

Any lesion to the brain will automatically impact the state of mind.

In essence, a deficient state of mind is one that fails to understand the implications of a situation.
Commonly seen in a court of law. Examples:

    (a) orders that restrict a person’s access to parents or siblings are often given without any
        concern of the emotional and psychological impact on the person’s concerned. The active
        state of mind is incapable of empathy or appreciation of a situation in full. It is preoccupied
        with procedures or precedents, fixations on the law instead of people. It is a deficient state
        of mind.

    (b) legal firms and courts may prepare the legal work for a person seeking separation or divorce
        even when the circumstances are such that the person is likely to have a post traumatic
        stress disorder or has broken down under duress and seeks an escape

    (c) court orders are and can be purchased or can be obtained as favours. This has always been
        the case historically. Those into law are incapable, usually, of understanding this and are
        compelled to consider any court order as obtained legitimately with excellent reasons why
        the court order was granted. Such a narrow view contrary to evidence is a restricted state of
        mind. (Contrary to evidence implies no reason(s) given on the court order. Court orders that
        do not explain the reason are always to be considered suspicious by a psycholegalanalyst).

The intellect itself may not be impaired and may understand the impact, but the person concerned
can not help themselves and are compelled to act, by for example signing a court order, which is
contrary to a normal and natural situation.

Example

A sibling obtains a court order that restricts another sibling from access to a parent. No reason
stated on the court order. The sibling affected clearly suggests, as do other family members, this is
some kind of scam to get hold of the parents bank accounts and possibly engineer a Last Will and
Testament. A tribunal is asked to appoint a public guardian for the parent. The tribunal is
mesmerized by the court order and ignores the family plea to protect the parent and wealth of the
parent.

A woman decides to pursue separation to avoid being involved with her spouses claim on the Last
Will and Testament of his parent(s). The stress of the situation has brought about a reduced state of
mind and the woman thinks a separation will alienate her from the stress of the situation.

A person applies for welfare and is told he is entitled to a certain amount. The person points out that
this amount just covers his rent. The officials refuse to change this on the basis his last year’s tax
return showed the person earns a certain amount a year which they take into consideration. The
person attempts to point out that was the case last year but is unlikely to be the case this year
because he no longer has access to the same casual work. The officials are incapable of
understanding this and refuse to adjust the benefit.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                      Page 38
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                      2010
Notes

When no clear and unambiguous reason is stated on any court order, assume such has been
obtained under suspicious circumstances. If family members or others (depending on the court
order) fail to understand the reason for the court order, then the only diagnosis that can be made is
corrupt conduct.

A deficient state of mind can be caused for any number of reasons. Perhaps the most likely reason is
in fact a low intellectual capacity and deep guilt(s) buried in the unconscious. Hence one likely
reason why a government official may make things difficult for someone who is divorced is that he
or she personally does not believe in divorce and wants to “punish” those who are divorced. This
desire to punish translates to making life impossible or difficult for such a person, resulting in
frustration and possibly outbursts which further can compound an unsatisfactory situation. The
official can then claim, “told you, he is unstable”, when in fact it is the official who had frustrated a
person beyond endurance. This can be the “end aim” of a deficient mind, to attempt to cause such
frustration that a person will “explode” and in so doing the official proves his or her case.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                      Page 39
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                      2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Delusional Thinking

This type of thinking can be compared to thinking while intoxicated. In such a state anything makes
sense no matter how idiotic or unreasonable it may sound. However, it is also a question of whether
such is clinically significant. For example confusion brought about by age is notusually of clinical
concern.

Diagnosis Criteria

Criteria that must be satisfied before this conclusion can be made

a) belief(s) which have no basis in reality. For example, a person who believes they are Adolf Hitler,
or the person who believes that when his small finger hurts then his wife is being unfaithful. Or, in
our case, any official such as judge who believes by virtue of being such an official they can dismiss
fact(s) as not relevant or combine fact(s) in a way that forms a conclusion not based on reality (on
true evidence).

OR

     a) projection of self (first person) into a another person or object or animal and being certain
     that person etc., has acted or has thought in accordance with how the self has decided the
     person should have acted

     b) the first person must demonstrate that they are 100% convinced of their thought(s). Any
     magistrate or judge saying “I am satisfied” is automatically a 100% conviction.

     c) this conclusion does not apply if the person admits they simply “believe” their thought(s) or
     observations(s) or opinion(s) OR if the person admits they are not “100% certain”.


Example

Decision of a judge (or similar):

I am satisfied that the late Ms Jones had disinherited her daughters except Amy because the
daughters’ alcohol and gambling problems had become a concern.

In this example, regardless of the evidence, unless it is from Ms Jones and she is of sound mind, any
attempt to project oneself into Ms Jones’ state of mind and then being certain is delusional thinking.
No one but no one can project themselves into another’s state of mind with 100% certainty. To think
otherwise and be convinced of this without doubt is delusional thinking.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                     Page 40
                          Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                      2010


Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Delusion of Grandeur

This may be country specific.

In Australia, people known as barristers wear white wigs to court – to reflect the image of the British
lords.

Those who are lawyers are also called “officers of the court”.

Which court? (i.e. a law court or the King’s Court?)

At the unconscious level, a delusion may set in a person that he or she is part of the “royal ones”.
Careful observation of facial expressions may yield a clue as to “which court” is being referred to,
and whether this hints at possibly delusional thinking.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                    Page 41
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                      2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Demented Thinking

This type of thinking is caused by the brain loosing perspective. The most likely reason is damage to
the brain as caused by early or late dementia, or TIA’s, or similar. However, it is also a question of
whether such is clinically significant.

Diagnosis Criteria

a) thoughts are jumbled or appear to combine past and present in an inappropriate manner

OR

b) the brain finds it no longer possible to dismiss irrelevant information and tries to bind such
information in a way which make sense to it OR finds it impossible to act or carry out its duty
because the irrelevant information becomes an obstacle which the brain can not get past


Example

Decision of judge (or similar):

The matters before me raises serious issues about the defendant which while do not appear to be
relevant I am satisfied played a factor in the decision of the late Ms Jones to disinherit the defendant.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                     Page 42
                          Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                     2010


Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Divine Intervention

The complexity of a human being is considerable. How do people reach some complex decisions?

If the psychoanalyst can find no reason for a decision other than a person’s own religious
convictions, then such is deemed a diagnosis of “divine intervention”. Or, if there are reasons for the
decision but in the final analysis it was a person’s own spiritual zeal that forced his or her hand and
made a decision a particular way, again this diagnosis applies.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                   Page 43
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                      2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Ego Burnout

(extract from our treatise titled: Neuroscience in Psychiatry, the Insanity of the Religion of Law)

In order to preserve its own sanity, the ego becomes more and more “rational” as far as it is
concerned. Some of the measures of rationality the ego in those into law considers:

    -   credibility
    -   perceived hysteria
    -   reliability
    -   status
    -   image
    -   occupation
    -   wealth
    -   self delusion
    -   respect for authority figures
    -   financial business interest or personal financial interest
    -   any court orders in the past (in respect of the client) or any legal precedents (set by
        appropriate courts or forums). These are “holy”, beyond challenge, to the ego – regardless
        of how sick or outright corrupt such may have been. To challenge such is to challenge
        authority and that is not how the ego of those into law survives. To challenge any authority,
        be it a court order or a legal precedent, is outside the scope of such an ego.

This notion of “rationality” begins to restrict the states of mind that can form in those into law. Such
become reduced. Instead of the full natural brain being able to form a great many diverse states of
mind, more and more in those into law a narrow channel of states of mind forms. Each such
reduction has to destroy parts of the brain – because the states of the ego are determined by the
available brain connections. More and more the brain of those into law is destroyed in order to
secure the ego and present it with no complications.

From a clinical point of view, as harsh as this may sound, would it be prudent to consider those into
law as only capable of using half a brain? A challenge to say a bank executive or a politician may
seem trivial – to a lawyer or judge (or as appropriate) the equivalent challenge may be outside the
scope of their brain capacity. In an experienced lawyer (judge, or as appropriate) the brain is
functionally reduced to maybe even less than half the size of the normal brain (reduced in the sense
of available paths and connections). There is no other neuroscientific explanation.

When, using insights from psychiatry and neuroscience, we follow how the ego develops its defence
mechanisms, we find more and more "narrowed" states of mind form. The process may be best
understood from a top down approach. Say a senior judge is promoted to a higher court. What must
he or she do first? She begins to work out what the jurisdiction is and how to set boundaries. This
becomes the first and primary state of the ego. If the brain does not have the capacity in the sense
of connections, it will join paths together so it does form the correct state of mind. From then on,
any law, any decision, that falls within this jurisdiction - must fall within that narrow path the ego
forged in the brain. Anything else is seen as "irrelevant" or "not applicable evidence". The brain will
destroy the paths that "confuse" this particular "ideal" state of mind the judge wants during
deliberations. Not a simple state of mind to achieve, and the reason judges prefer to use precedents,
assuming those who made such were in the correct state of mind hence it is easier to follow or
make a decision as someone already has made in such a state of mind. Problem being, no two brains


(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                     Page 44
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                       2010
will always form the exact and precise state of mind. It may seem equivalent - but it may not be,
there could be thousands of different wiring in the brain that makes the state of mind different at
some fundamental levels. One judge might be able to understand something like "your honour. Dr
Chin has written a report saying in his opinion Mrs Smith, an Alzheimer's patient, has testament
capacity. That is not a medical diagnosis of any kind. Dr Chin's opinion has no more weight than the
local butcher's. Here are copies of the most distinguished medical tests, including Harrison's and
Merck. Nowhere is there mention of testament capacity. No such diagnosis. The term is a legal term
invented by courts in Australia to bypass the sound of mind principle and allow a rich client to
engineer a New Last Will and Testament and get away with it under current legislation." On the
other hand, another judge on hearing this argument may see nothing but a brick wall and think like
this "if a medical specialist wrote such an opinion, then this is law in my book." It depends on how
"finely tuned" the neural circuits are that form the state of mind. Note that this has nothing to do
with intellect or reason, to "believe" or "not believe" is purely a function of the state of mind (a part
of the intellect of course does contribute to the formation of the said state of mind; the intellect is
not excluded as such, but neither has it the capacity to interfere with a state of mind. The intellect
may see the merit of this argument - but the state of mind is looking after the ego and will not allow
the ego to be modified by accepting this argument).

(end of extract)


Too much information about any case a client may want, this given to a legal firm, may result in the
firm not wanting to assist the client. The cause can be ego burn out. Truth is not important. Law is
not important. Justice is not important. A client who wants a case managed but says to the lawyer,
“come on, every Australian knows local court sell court orders. Only the legal system is blind to this.
That court order against me was purchased from a legal firm. My neighbour paid 5,000 dollars.” This
client has very little chance of the lawyer acting for them. It is against the “holy grail” of the legal
system to act for such a client. It is the ego that “hides” or “burns itself out” – and it has to! Truth
and facts are the domain of the id. Only the id knows – has the resources - how to deal with such.
Once the ego burns out, it is the id that rejects the client. The id is not an enemy of the ego per se,
when it must, it will assist the ego that has burnt out or has hidden.

We could say facts and truth are surely the domain of reason and intellect – and of course they are
but only with the permission of the id. Freud had suggested a most complicated process, often in
dreams, in which the ego attempts to shift some truths or facts into the ego. Freud compared this
process to a court room with a judge and police. In a mentally healthy person the id is “normal”
meaning it does not force itself upon the ego (exclude stress situation). The id uses the facilities
available to modify the ego, or “persuade” the ego of the merits of certain facts and truths as it
knows such. Dreams are the best and most effective way in which a normal id can attempt to modify
the ego. Bear in mind the id discerns truths not just from what someone says or does, but also from
many unconscious signals. Thus the truths (or facts) the id accepts may contain elements that id
prefers to control itself. The id may not altogether understand if the ego can, or can not, cope with
some subtle truths – and the reason it is content allowing dreams to act as its messenger to the ego.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                      Page 45
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                     2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Endangering Human Life

This should be easy and the psycholegalanalytical process ought not be necessary. Any court order
or action (by a court or police) which endangers a human life satisfies this diagnosis.

This is more a common sense and medical practical sense diagnosis. Don’t become confused by law
or orders of courts, use your natural medical judgment with a clear head.


Examples

A magistrate signs an AVO that one sibling applied for. Because this sibling lives with his elderly
parent the parent is named as “protected” also. The sibling from whom the parent is protected has
no criminal record of any kind nor is there any family member who suggests this person has a violent
streak of any kind. The parent has Alzheimer’s. The sibling who wants this court order works and is
often not in the house. This sibling also has an alcohol problem. It is common knowledge in medicine
that the greatest threat to an elderly parent is the sibling with an alcohol problem. Thus such a court
order has in fact endangered the life of the parent.

In Australia, but this is likely the case in many countries, these types of court orders are literally
“sold” to legal firms and no just cause of any kind can be established. Always be suspicious of such
court orders that have not been applied for by police but by a law firm. In the latter case the usual
reason would be some legal scam or another.

However, even if there was just cause, the point is the parent is placed with a sibling that has an
alcohol problem. Common sense suggests such a sibling ought to be afraid of other siblings.

There are other things to consider. A person with Alzheimer’s or other neurological disabling
condition may not be able to stand after they fall. Some may have a device around their neck which
they can press to call for help. Alzheimer’s victims are unlikely to have the presence of mind to know
what that device is, even when it hangs around their neck, and when they fall they don’t press it.
Restricting access from any family member to such as person, if the parent is alone for much of the
time in their home, is by default endangering a human life.

In regards to a young, especially “sexy” looking young female, any court order which prohibits access
to that child by any adult, is possibly dangerous. The analyst must appreciate the situation in
context. Putting a child in a position in which she can be sexually molested, is endangering her life by
our definition (because the shock this causes may result in suicide in teenage years.)




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                    Page 46
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                      2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Error-in-Law

This conclusion applies when a particular order has been given without consideration of evidence or
the overall framework of law.

Examples

Two people are in court. One is a lawyer and the other a taxi driver. The lawyer is accusing the taxi
driver of stealing his wallet when he was in the taxi. The taxi driver denies this, pointing out the
impossibility of trying to steal a wallet while driving. The judge ignores the taxi driver on the grounds
that the lawyer is an officer of the court, a respected member of the community, and his word has
credibility to the court. The taxi driver is thus charged with stealing.

Police charge a person for violating a court order that restricts that person’s access to his elderly
parent with Alzheimer’s. The charge includes the words “...(name) knowingly and willingly...” The
person attempt to explain that as far as he understood this did not apply when the parent was
moved to a nursing home. This is ignored. (i.e. the person did not knowingly and willingly do
anything.)




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                     Page 47
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                     2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Evil-in-Law

This diagnosis applies to any law or any court decision, or police act, that is contrary to nature.
Modern medicine knows very well natural forces and hormones in people compel some people to be
different or to mature early. The public at large may not understand such things hence this diagnosis
could be controversial to the non analyst.


Examples

Laws or court actions or police actions that arrest a homosexual or lesbian for sexual acts in private.

Laws or court actions or police actions that stop a sibling seeing a dying parent. (Or parent seeing a
dying child; or along such lines).

Laws or acts which restrict or punish natural acts such as two thirteen year olds having sex in private.

Laws or actions that may arrest a man for having consensual sex with a fifteen year old, on the
grounds she is under age, when in fact anyone who sees the fifteen year old would say her age is
much older than fifteen.

Laws or acts that ignore overwhelming clinical or medical (e.g. from doctors or psychologists)
evidence that a person could not control a certain action or set of actions that broke the law.
However, this diagnosis is not appropriate when the person in question must be put away for the
sake of others in society.

A man or woman charged with contempt of court when in fact the situation was such that the
person could not help themselves and lost control of their ego under duress.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                    Page 48
                          Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                     2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Failure of Duty of Care

Examples

Police are given a written notice of a citizen’s arrest. This is ignored meaning no written reply is
received or an appropriate police officer, or representative, does not contact the claimant explaining
why the police will not act on the citizen’s arrest.

A court or tribunal, or as appropriate, is requested by claimant to call witnesses named in writing in
a letter requesting this, and the body refuses to allow this or refuses to call a random sample of such
witnesses.

Claimant is advised by a relevant party, example a researcher employed by a judicial panel or
tribunal, that the claimant has provided far too much information. (assume that means that much
has not been read and vital and important information could have been missed).




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                   Page 49
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                       2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Failure to Thrive

Applies mostly to those into law, be such police or magistrates or lawyers.

The intent of the law is to serve society. A law has a purpose.

As they progress in their career, some will not thrive, will not understand the more important
reasons for a law, and instead will become focused on the letter of the law and apply such even
when the situation is such that a particular law ought not be applied.


Example

A son is going as fast as he can to a nursing home to see his dying mother for the last time. He is
pulled over by a police officer. Ignoring his reasons, the police officer delays and delays, writing a
ticket, checking the car for faults, etc.


Notes

The diagnosis of failure to thrive ought to be carefully considered in the context of the situation and
the individual. For example, a magistrate, judge, or tribunal member, who fails to thrive, may begin
to form the Will Syndrome. If so, when an opportunity arises, he or she may set down decisions
(legal precedents) which will enable him or her, when the time comes, to make a grab to engineer a
new Last Will and Testament of his parent(s) (or similar) leaving everything to himself (or herself).

Or, such a person may have a view of divorce at some point in time. He or she may, when an
opportunity arises, set legal precedents which will make it easier to obtain a financial advantage
over their spouse in say a divorce settlement.

In general, when this diagnosis is made, assume some legal decisions made in the past served the
person’s own conscious or unconscious interests.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                      Page 50
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                      2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Financial Fraud

This is the easiest and most obvious conclusion the analyst can reach. It refers to someone trying to
obtain a financial gain by using any technique at their disposal.

However, in order to qualify as fraud (or theft) in our sense, the following criteria must be satisfied:

the person has obtained a court order or similar which restricts access to another person by a
relative or sibling

or

a person has transferred funds from a joint account (which either party can sign) to a personal or
business account to which the other party has no access, and this was done without written consent
of the other signatory to such an account

AND

the person has obtained documents from a court (or similar, e.g. a bank in some situations) that give
the person a financial advantage over any other sibling or relative or associate (who normally would
have some financial interest in the family or business situation)


Notes

A person guilty of financial fraud in our sense of this term, and who obtains a court order that
restricts access to a parent (for example) is likely to spread all sorts of rumours and cast all manner
of accusations against the said person. He or she may even claim to physicians or “trusted” or
“gullible” family members (claim this in private) that the reason the court order was granted is
because the parent was viciously assaulted (or even raped, anything is possible) by the person from
whom the parent is now protected by a court order. There is no end of “devil” tricks that can be
used once certain court order(s) had been obtained by deception or deceit.

Note that extreme anger can result in a person accusing another of this or that, however, the
difference is that this does not result in a court order being obtained to aid or mask financial fraud.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                      Page 51
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                       2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Holy Duty

A typical police officer has an IQ less than average, perhaps as low as 75. To such a person “respect
the law” is conditioned into them. To police, the courts are the law, and most general duty police
only ever deal with the local or junior courts. Such courts are not the ideal place for an
impressionable young man or woman with a below average intelligence to be exposed to for too
long. Such often deal with truly violent or anti-social behaviour. This stirs the id in many diverse ways
impossible to predict.

In some situations if a police officer can be persuaded by an authority figure (e.g. lawyer, magistrate,
or as appropriate) that so and so does not respect the law, the internal forces in the officer may
compel the person to make an arrest because such is their “holy duty”. As pointed out and
expounded in the treatise mentioned, to those into law, authority figures such as lawyers, judges, as
appropriate, become “servants of an ideal cause” which equates to a religious and spiritual fever in
those with limited mental capacity (say IQ below 100). A different type of mental energy forms
during holy fever, dimensional energy, that compels action in accordance with a “holy duty”.

In a strict neuroscientific sense, this diagnosis applies only when dimensional energy formed in the
brain and compelled the action. However, it is impossible to determine that beyond doubt. Prior to
such an arrest, if dimensional energy had formed, possibly the person may have been edgy, or
perhaps even thinking of matters to do with whatever religion they prefer in ordinary life. There may
have been a sense of a “divine” or “special” energy flowing into the body. The dimensional energy so
formed is likely to drain much of the superego (into the ego), and the reason for such sensations.

It is unlikely this diagnosis would apply or be relevant to anyone except police.

Diagnosis Criteria

1) no serious reason exists for the arrest (in the practical sense a court order or law is not a serious
reason for police because police have the legal right to caution a person and not arrest)

2) the circumstances of the arrest are unusual or even bizarre

3) the police cell (e.g. station) did not remand such a person in custody or ask for bail in the financial
sense (that is because most likely the senior police in that cell know the arrest is suspicious and
perhaps should not have taken place and do not want to risk bringing such a person before a
magistrate before the police prosecutors can invent a case that appears to justify the police action;
or the prosecutor has a chance and time to make some kind of deal with the legal firm hired to
represent the person arrested, this to avoid the charge of false arrest against police)

or

If a court order has lapsed or expired, then consider this a “holy arrest” until proven otherwise (i.e.
“holy arrests” are probably more likely to happen soon after a court order or warrant has expired,
and the arresting officer(s) use as an excuse an incident which may have taken place while the court
order was in place. This is most likely against the law in many countries, and the reason the police
cell will want prosecutors to be given time to somehow mask the fact that such may have been a
false arrest.



(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                      Page 52
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                      2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Inappropriate Conduct

The analyst has the right not to provide the law firm or agent with this conclusion. The reason being
is that in some situations the law firm or agent may not understand the significance of information
presented and fails to act or comply only because they failed to understand. Hence it may not be a
question of wrong doing but failure of education.

This conclusion can apply in so many situations that the only example given is that of a very hard
situation.


Example

A woman has contacted the law firm requesting formal separation or divorce. The spouse is sent a
letter from the legal firm advising of this. The spouse writes back saying his spouse is likely suffering
from post traumatic stress disorder. The law firm fails to understand the importance and continues
legal work to arrange a financial settlement or separation come divorce. (The proper action would
be for the law firm to request, prior to any legal work in court, the woman produces a medical report
stating she is not suffering from depression (or variants thereof) brought about by circumstances).


Note that this conclusion also depends on knowledge of the law firm or agent - whether they are
likely to have understood but ignored, or had failed to understand. (example: if the wife of the
lawyer doing the legal work is a doctor, then there is no reason why he had not asked her opinion
about this, in which case the analyst must present this conclusion to the law firm or agent).

But note: the woman may have a sister or brother (or similar) whom she had consulted before she
went to the law firm. If it was the woman’s sister or brother or some other close relative who
suggested a particular law firm, then it is more than likely the woman had considered separation or
divorce before (perhaps years back) but at the time changed her mind. Thus, if she had considered
such before, then even if she is in a state of depression, the analyst may conclude that the proper
action of the law firm was in fact to continue with the legal work disregarding any claims the spouse
may make. In such a case this conclusion is not warranted even when it applies and is correct.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                     Page 53
                          Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                     2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Immature Modified Ego

A modified ego is an entity that forms in people whose decisions can impact the lives of others. Thus
magistrates, judges, Commissioners, Ombudsman, etc., would fall into this category. In some
situations so would a police officer. Executives, such as bank executives or advertising executives
that deal with large campaigns, may also form a modified ego.

An immature modified ego serves its own interest.



Diagnosis Criteria

(a) a person in a decision making role who refuses to understand a complaint (or similar) and puts
into his or her own “words of convenience”, words which automatically can dismiss a complaint or
change its nature and intent



Example

(real-life case)

A complaint was made to the Legal Services Commissioner of NSW (2010) about a lawyer (solicitor
as these are known in Australia). The lawyer agreed to produce a letter stating legal options and
likely costs in a matter of a deceased estate. He was paid money to do so. The lawyer failed to
produce this letter and over subsequent months attempts at obtaining such failed.

The Legal Services Commissioner obtained all manner of records from the solicitor, then worded the
complaint into his own words, then decided there was not enough grounds for “professional
negligence”.

This term was not mentioned in the original complaint. Attempts to clarify to the Commissioner
what the complaint was, failed and the Commissioner closed the complaint – but in such a way that
it was not clear this is what he was doing. Over a period of 18 months attempts at obtaining the
status of this complaint failed. Eventually (in 2012) the Attorney General was asked to assist and find
out the status of this complaint. The Commissioner replied to the Attorney General that he had
dismissed the complaint in 2012. Of significance was the fact that the Commissioner also mentioned
to the Attorney General two other complaints made (against different law firms but in relation to
much the same overall issue to do with a deceased estate). This appears to be the modified ego
attempting to “discredit” the person who made the complaint by suggesting – unconsciously – that
this person makes complaints often and they have no merit.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                   Page 54
                            Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                    2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Inappropriate Jurisdiction

This conclusion is valid when a matter presented to a superior court is more a political issue, or a
non-issue in a sense, or while possibly or even likely valid-in-law, goes against an established and
enshrined traditions. (perhaps this conclusion can apply to senior police command and other senior
forums but in such cases would have to be scrutinised most carefully).

Consider the term jurisdiction. Junior courts and forums usually have their boundaries carefully
defined, but senior courts may not have. It may be up to the court to define its own boundaries.
Some issues while valid-in-law may be viewed by a court as outside their boundary. In upper courts,
the “depth” and “implication” of an issue may be more important than a superficial or literal
interpretation of any law or even the Constitution.

There are a great many forces and factors in any society. A literal interpretation of an instruction is
vital in most areas – the doctor who is prescribing a drug must follow the drug supplier’s instructions
as to the doses, contraindications, etc. A person putting together a chair that has to be assembled
has to follow instructions. In both cases, the objective of the instructions is to achieve the desired
effect. Many forces in the brain and mind come together to achieve higher ideals and objectives at
the same time as not causing too much of a disturbance to the way in which people live in the said
society. Some laws do not lend themselves to superficial interpretations, or literal interpretations, as
isolated entities but need to be considered as an integral part of a whole.

In cases of religion, say, Islam, the problem is similar. Even Islamic theologians may know many of
the laws in an Islamic country have nothing to do with the Prophet of Islam or his teachings, but such
are traditions that have been established. An Islamic high court may decline to offend the people
and government alike and may also make a decision that fits into this conclusion. For example: the
issue may be one to do with the very basis or foundation of Islam. A high court may reply “not in our
jurisdiction” (by our definition) when they might use words such as “up to Allah to resolve” (or
similar implication, meaning that in the view of the court such is up to the people and governments
to find a solution and not the upper court).


Examples

A company asked a superior court for permission to use certain types of advertising. The court
replied this matter is outside their jurisdiction.

A court was asked to give permission and authority for a research group to use a certain scientific
technique which while not banned neither is it completely clear if such might prove legal.

Again, a court replied this is not in their jurisdiction.

Of course, this can also be used as an excuse not to arrange a hearing for a matter which is not likely
to be “clear” and goes against tradition. Example: it may be possible to claim that the Australian
Constitution when understood correctly does not allow courts to award costs to loosing parties – but
this is a tradition going all the way back. Likewise, perhaps it can be argued that the Constitution
does not force a person to have to plead guilty or not guilty before a court, that is a matter to be
proven or established.


(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                    Page 55
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                        2010
In some situations the superior courts may need to balance what an international agreement or
Constitution is about, and the traditions that have emerged and no one had challenged these under
these traditions. Thus a claim may be correct-in-law, in a literal sense, but improper in the context of
traditions or practises that may have emerged and had not been challenged for a long time. In other
words, such may be viewed by a superior court as a matter for governments to resolve or find a
solution to, and not a court of law.

Note that in forming this conclusion, responses from the High Court of Australia on matters raised
were used to set the boundary of what we might call “reason” and “rationality”. A
psycholegalanalytical process might not come to this conclusion – this conclusion is more a common
sense and practical reason conclusion. We assumed the High Court was rational and normal (we
have no choice, such is used as our benchmark for what is reason and rationality in the upper
courts).

In other words, a conclusion such as this can be perfectly valid in a given situation even when the
psycholegalanalytical process is inclined to produce another conclusion.

But note that if a person or group submits a claim to a superior court, and police arrive on their door
step (or similar complications or pressure arise) suggesting the claim contains a threat or something,
then such is not covered by this conclusion and this diagnosis can not be made even if the court then
writes back saying a matter is not in their jurisdiction.

This conclusion is a mark of reason and rationality. Even if, in our example, it was accepted that in a
strict sense the awarding of costs is illegal under the Constitution – the upheaval this would cause in
an economic sense could be shocking and unpredictable.

Thus a superior court may need to balance the ego of society as a whole, not just the letter of the
law. If something works, then why change it? That may be an approach a superior court takes.

To stress, this conclusion is a mark of sanity and rationality (in particular by a superior court). It may
be wrong in a sense that a literal interpretation of a law or act or Constitution may suggest their
view is not the best or even correct, however, this is the decision a court has made and we need to
consider this a sane and rational decision.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                       Page 56
                          Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                     2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Inappropriate Reference

This conclusion applies when it is clear questions asked of a person were distant from what a person
was about or after.


Example

A person has a poor relationship with his or her spouse and applies for welfare on the grounds that
there was no true economic relationship between himself or herself and their spouse.

The judge (or as appropriate) with authority to make this decision spends a great amount of time
asking whether she or he sleeps with her spouse, has sex, how often, etc., and very little time trying
to establish the economic relationship that exists. This implies the person has already made up their
mind (before the hearing; perhaps he always refuses such requests and is not going to allow this
one) and is “being entertained” by the hearing.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                   Page 57
                          Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                      2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Incompetence

Other possible names: professional misconduct or professional negligence

Requirements

1 law firm or agent given verbal instructions and provided with the information requested

 2 law firm asked to put in writing what the options are and to send the letter to the claimant (or
claimant makes arrangement to pick the said letter from the agent’s office)

 3 after such a letter does not arrive within a month or thereabouts, the claimant reminds the agent
in writing or verbally that he or she has still not received the said letter

4 if no response is received between 1 and 3 months after (3), the claimant again writes to the agent
reminding such he or she is still waiting for the said letter

5 eventually, the claimant asks another law firm (or agent) to formally ask the original agent or law
firm for an explanation or clarifications (as the case may be)

6 If the second law firm chooses not to do this, and instead provides written advice stating the
options, then clearly the options are achievable and can be stated in writing


Example


 Psycholegalanalytical conclusion: Incompetence

 Mr J Jason had not provided any written advice because he was waiting until the last possible moment
 to telephone or write to the claimant, in so doing aiming to pressure the claimant into spending as
 much money as possible on a particular legal claim (or as appropriate).




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                    Page 58
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                       2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Insanity (or Insane State of Mind)

Any person who exhibits a pattern of behaviour consistent with the Will Syndrome as defined.

Any person who forms a state of mind that is “insane” by our definition which is an imbalance
between the left and right brain.

Note: isolating or removing such a person from any police or legal work may be all that is required to
begin a way to restore mental balance.

Insanity in this context implies loss of reality or perspective to the extent the rights of others are
impacted. However, a strict definition means an imbalance (or dysfunction in processing) between
the left and right brain.

Many unconscious factors can act to inhibit input from the left or right brain while forming a state of
mind. The “unifinished business of childhood” can act as a barrier to correct formation of a state of
mind.

Judge(s) and similar tend to strive for objectivity. Pure objectivity is not natural to the brain and can
only be attained by forming an insane state of mind. Not of clinical significance except such a state
of mind can be manipulated to begin to accept irrationality as rationality.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                      Page 59
                          Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                     2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Insanity-In-Law

This is a “predictive diagnosis”. The psycholegalanalysis process comes to the conclusion that a
person will most likely, at some point, suffer from a neurosis or psychosis or schizophrenia or other
similar condition. The individual themselves may have done nothing wrong other than follow an
accepted procedure.

The analyst may not clearly understand why the process has come to this conclusion.

The circumstances of the situation are an important input to the psycholegalanalytical process.

Examples

Magistrate or judge who issues a temporary court order naming a “third party” as protected and
does not within seven (7) days talk to other family members to understand whether such a court
order is warranted or ought to be revoked and an apology given to the person named as the one
from whom a third party is “protected”.

Any court that issues a court order than protects a third party from a family member and does not
allow access, be it supervised, on a regular basis and of reasonable frequency, to the said protected
person. Each magistrate or judge in that court shall be considered as insane-in-law.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                   Page 60
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                       2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Insanity in Last Will and Testament

This conclusion applies in certain situations to do with Last Will and Testament.


Automatic Exclusion

Any Last Will and Testament signed by a person of sound mind and less than 70 (around that age)
years of age is excluded from consideration. Sound mind implies the person has not been diagnosed
with a mental illness or mental deficiency or lesions in the brain or other neurological degenerative
disease.


Exception to Automatic Exclusion

a) In some countries where not everyone can afford medical care, or medical care is not within
   easy reach, a person with a condition that runs in the family will still qualify under this diagnosis
   criteria even when not officially diagnosed – there may be financial or practical reasons why a
   person had not been diagnosed with a certain condition which in fact medical specialists can
   agree the person had such a condition as described in the criteria below. (e.g. Alzheimer’s is a
   case in point; runs in the family; is typically diagnosed about two or three years after symptoms
   begin; and in some situations a sibling may not bother taking such a parent to a medical doctor
   for a formal diagnosis because they know there is something wrong with their parent that runs
   in the family.)

b) In some situations a parent with Alzheimer’s may be regularly brought to their physician but the
   family may not request an evaluation for dementia. If the person does not speak a native
   language that well, a physician may not be able to tell such a person has dementia if this is not
   mentioned by a sibling or relative or whoever). If a physician can tell, and even when not asked,
   we assume he or she would make a note of this in her patient records.


Diagnosis Criteria

         1) Any Will that appoints one person to look after all the funeral arrangements.

OR
         2)

     -   signed by a person over 70 (or near that age) years of age (unless exceptional circumstances
         arise such as death of a sibling or person mentioned in existing will; or such as a long lost son
         or daughter is found and DNA can establish the relationship)

         or

     -   signed by a person with a major lesion in the frontal lobes

         or


(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                      Page 61
                            Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                        2010
     -   signed by a person diagnosed with dementia most likely Alzheimer’s type

         or

     -   signed by a person who had more than three transient ischemic attacks (TIAs)

         or

     -   signed by a person who has difficulty orienting in time and space. Such evidence would most
         likely come from medical records. (e.g. some dementia patients may be driven to a local
         hospital to be examined for mental capacity, and while there when asked where they are
         they might shake their head saying “I don’t know where I am.”)

         or

     -   signed by a person who when asked shortly after what is in the Last Will and Testament,
         becomes confused or messed up. (in fact, such a person may have no memory of having
         signed such a document, or any document).

         or

     -   signed by a person over fifty years of age with Alzheimer’s in the family and the Will leaves
         out a natural sibling, or leaves a small portion, to a natural sibling. However, if such a person
         can provide a copy of that Will using their own words and articulation (as distinct from a
         lawyer drafting such a Will) and there is no suggestion to a psychiatrist of anything suspect
         in the thoughts at the time, then this criteria does not apply. (in other words, if a psychiatrist
         can be satisfied this person could not possibly have Alzheimer’s yet, then this criteria is not
         applicable. While Alzheimer’s can begin as early as the 50’s, this is also extremely rare).
         Alternatively, a psychiatrist may want to talk to this person (if they are still alive). Ideally, a
         person in this position (over 50 with Alzheimer’s in the family) and of sound mind would give
         each of his siblings not just a copy of the Will as prepared by a legal firm, but also as he
         wrote it down in his own words. The intent of the latter is to ensure, in case the person
         himself or herself is no longer aware of this, that what he or she has written is acceptable to
         natural siblings and consistent with what a natural sibling would expects a Last Will and
         Testament to look like. Note that such a Will may also leave a portion to nieces and
         nephews, or even godchildren or even a child of a special family friend, but overall the
         natural siblings would, usually equally, inherit by far the bulk of the estate.

OR

         3)


     -   the content of the Will leaves out a sibling that was in a prior Will signed before any of the
         above ( unless a sibling had died or became incapacitated in such a way he or she could not
         manage their own finances (e.g. a stroke victim))

         or

     -   one or more of the immediate siblings was not aware of the new Last Will and Testament


(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                        Page 62
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                        2010
         or

     -   the circumstances that led to the Will being signed are unusual or puzzling or suspicious

OR

A psychiatric evaluation finds the person has clouded or impaired judgment - or any other condition
which in the opinion of two psychiatrists may seriously impact a person’s ability to understand the
complexity or intention or significance or implications of a Last Will and Testament such had signed.


Notes

We assume any rational parent would divide their wealth equally among natural siblings. If a parent
does not do so, he or she is likely to explain in the Last Will and Testament a reason why he or she
wants one sibling to have more than another. (Bear in mind that Last Will and Testament engineered
by a legal firm, acting for a sibling or similar, may contain seemingly rational explanations as to why
this or that sibling is left out or is not allocated a fair portion).

Even in the case of one sibling choosing to live with the parent to look after them, a rational parent
might allocate a slightly larger portion of their wealth to the said sibling but such additional share
would not be offensive to any other sibling.

Consequently, any Last Will and Testament that leaves a sibling out, is cause for concern whether it
was written by a person of sound mind.

When a sibling attempts to use a legal scam to engineer a new Last Will and Testament, the most
obvious first step is to find a way to stop another sibling from taking the person to an independent
geriatric specialist or a psychiatrist. Hence, be suspicious immediately if such an event had taken
place.

What is in a Last Will and Testament is a good indicator of the rationality of a Will. A Will that
excludes a sibling close to the parent is automatically “invented” or “engineered” or “signed by a
confused state of mind”.

There is a natural human reaction that takes place in some situations. Consider divorce. The couple
may decide they both want to do this and yet once it is done both may feel resentment and even
anger, even inventing tales about the other party. This can happen to siblings too. One might decide
to “divorce” from other siblings and may have this reaction, perhaps even inventing all sorts of tales
about other siblings (especially the one named in the original Last Will and Testament as the
executor).

Note that any person when working on a Last Will and Testament might have some grand ideas,
even religious fever. Only those aspects of a Will that have lasting practical effects are the aspects of
immediate concern how rational and fair such are, or how appropriate. In particular, if any sibling is
left out assume fraud until satisfied otherwise. Similarly, if one sibling is receiving a very low portion,
assume fraud or deception has been used until shown otherwise.

Note that the last people to trust are lawyers acting for a sibling which appears to either have
engineered a Last Will and Testament, or seems to inherit a very large portion compared to other
siblings. Such lawyers can be experts at making explanations seem ever so rational and above board.

(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                       Page 63
                          Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                      2010
Typical nonsense are explanations such as “my father left my brother out of his new Will because he
has a house while I have not.” (not how a rational parent thinks - unless there are pressing reasons
such as, for example, one sibling in question has a mental incapacity, e.g. Down’s syndrome, and the
parent was worried about this and the reason they left the house, likely the house the sibling with
the syndrome lives in, to this sibling).

In unusual situations, the best way to gauge what a particular parent’s position or thoughts might
be, is to find some parents in similar situations. What would such do in regards to their Last Will and
Testament? Example: if a natural son or daughter has severe autism, how would a parent prefer to
have their Last Will and Testament? Such a parent might not leave anything directly to the autistic
child but make provision in the Will to have a trust account for the sibling and managed by either a
trusted body (e.g. a legal firm) or another sibling. Not possible to anticipate all the variations that
can take place and how a parent might prefer to formulate a Last Will and Testament.

Of course, and clearly, there is likely an “acceptable range” (of differences) in how a natural parent
designs their Last Will and Testament. Anything outside this range is suspicious in the extreme. Such
a range would need to consider the situation of parents (e.g. sibling with Down’s syndrome, such
parents may produce their own variations, or range, of what is proper in a Last Will and Testament;
parents with an autistic sibling may have a range depending on the degree of autism of their sibling).




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                    Page 64
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                      2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Judicial Confusion

Great care must be taken not to confuse this diagnosis with that of corrupt conduct. When there is
any doubt, this is the conclusion to use.

Diagnosis Criteria

    a) Request by judge or court official to change the wording or wording structure of a claim.

    b) Letter requesting formal written clarification has been forwarded to an appropriate court
       official such as the Chief Justice. No response had arrived.

    c) A superior court has been formally asked if there are grounds for appeal based on that
       request from a court official (e.g. registrar of a court who may or may not also be a judge).
       Such a court may not be able to say “yes” directly, however, if such a court provides
       information about the appeal process, then this is assumed as a “yes” for the purpose of this
       diagnosis criterion.)


Alternative Diagnosis Criteria

This diagnosis can also be made using neuroscientific reason and logic. Consider. A lecturer at a
university is developing a model of the mind and has drawn a large brain shape and explains “let us
view the mind like this. In the mind there are various ingredients. Let us look at this ingredient. What
if we add salt and pepper to this ingredient?”

Notice the shift? Mind we have defined in this scenario. Ingredients we have defined as components
of the mind. Suddenly we introduce salt and pepper! These we have not defined. Further, salt is
used in just about all cooking even ice-cream which we might never suspect has salt. The
associations in the brain to salt are vast. These activate when salt is processes by the brain in order
to understand meaning – and confusion results in that our original working area in the brain is now
made insignificant by the fact that association area with salt has been activated and this is likely to
have wide neural linkages. A state of mind has shifted from the theory we began, or the hypothesis
began, or argument, into another state of mind which takes its cues from cooking rules and common
sense about cooking.

What if, instead of reference to salt, the presentor says “let us assume this ingredient contains
information about the Toyota cars. We all know how reliable and good Toyota’s are.”

Here we define features of an ingredient which is fine, but then we shift into how good Toyota cars
are. This is an unwarranted authority figure (compare legal precedent) which is not consistent or
relevant to the argument being presented. Not only that, this can stir strong personal opinions and
feelings because not every person has a Toyota or thinks the world of Toyotas. Before we know it, or
even awaken to it, we begin to judge or form opinions about the mind model being presented not
based on merit, but about our attitude to Toyota, be it negative or positive.

As neuroscientists (medical) what we watch out for is the size of the association areas that light up in
response to processing input. A small linkage is unlikely to shift a state of mind. If the presentor used
say “exfoliated powder” (whatever that is) it is unlikey anyone would have adequate information

(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                     Page 65
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                       2010
about this to light up a large association area in the brain. The state of mind working on
understanding the model presented is not likely to be affected.

Other words to watch out for are those that have a correct meaning but also an ambiguous
meaning. The word “capacity” for example. It refers to volume, that is its only true correct usage,
but it is also commonly used in ever so many ways, e.g., “this factory does not have the capacity to
meet your deadline.” What does that mean specifically? We don’t know, the overall meaning is
clear, but the specific meaning is not. Capacity in what sense? People? Computers? Machines?
Time? The specialist presser is on holiday and not available? Notice how many association areas
need to light up in order to process the word outside its specific meaning? Enormous amount! This
word alone can shift the state of mind from rational (focused on the mind model) to irrational(e.g.
focused on cooking). That word can also begin to activate the “belief layer” of the brain. Because
when there is ambiguous meaning, it is also a question of what we choose to believe. If a salesman
says, “this car does not have the capacity to tow a caravan, you need the more expensive model”.
Do we believe this? What does it even mean? Engine power? Braking capacity? The manufacturer
prohibits towing of caravans in the warranty else the warranty becomes void? Endless possibilities
the brain may have to deal with when ambiguity enters any argument or any communication.


Explanation

A court may produce past judgments that were poorly thought out or completely irrational. The
prime example in Australia is the acceptance of “testament capacity” as legal grounds to accept a
Last Will and Testament signed by a person with devastating frontal lobe injuries (e.g. Alzheimer’s).

Once such precedents are in place, these will confuse officials and judges who will subconsciously
request people submitting claims to choose words which do not hint or suggest or confront past
irrational decisions set as precedents.

Notes

Under the Charter of the United Nations to which most countries including Australia are a signatory,
any new science can be freely explored. That is the international law and that is above domestic
laws. Which means the conclusions of psycholegalanalysis qualify and a psychiatrist or a person
qualified to use psycholegalanalysis, ought not be concerned how the conclusions are interpreted.

Of course, clearly, in some countries, with Islamic political systems the obvious ones, it may be
personally dangerous for a psychiatrist to state in writing some conclusions of psycholegalanalysis.
As a general law, when in doubt about personal safety, then refrain from doing so. Conclusions such
as this one and such as corrupt conduct may result in a psychiatrist ending up in prison in some
countries. It may not be possible to make a “political” court understand that which they are not
willing to understand.

On the other hand, in a country such as China where they tend to shoot corrupt police, magistrates,
or judges, even when the conclusion of corrupt conduct is more correct, the benefit of the doubt
should be given and this conclusion made. While to date psycholegalanalysis has proved 100%
correct, it had limited opportunity to be used and it is still a new medical science and we must
always retain some “ethical” doubt about producing a conclusion of “corrupt conduct” against
judges or similar. (Common sense suggests that if a police officer or judge is corrupt, there is likely to
be simpler evidence to digest that the conclusion of psycholegalanalysis).


(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                      Page 66
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                        2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Justified Cause/Reason

This diagnosis can be made if a person assaults or even murders a judge or family member of police
under the following circumstances:-

    -   provocation beyond ability of the psyche to control


Example

A person visits a dying parent or seriously ill or hurt child. In doing so he or she violates a protection
court order. He or she is arrested. Bail conditions are set that stop that person seeing the relative or
even close friend. The person then becomes so angry he kills a police officer.


Notes

Only an experienced professional psychiatrist should ever make this diagnosis and it depends on a
great many factors.

A psycholegalanalyst who is not a psychiatrist ought to refrain from making this diagnosis but
instead recommend psychiatric evaluation.

Always bear in mind that “protection” court orders can be “purchased” for large sums of money paid
to legal firms who “invent” reasons. This in itself can trigger an impossible to contain easily anger –
any action by police or court that pushes the person “over the edge” is provocation beyond capacity
of the person to contain. Such provocation could be intentional to cover corruption in a police unit
or a court of law or special legal firms who may have befriended senior police.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                       Page 67
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                       2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Magical Thinking

This type of thinking is the result of the mind or brain not having the education or skill to reach an
educated conclusion. This may be compared to acceptance of myths and legends as absolutely true.
This may also accompany delusional thinking and/or senile thinking as defined. However, it is also a
question of whether such is clinically significant.

Diagnosis Criteria

Criteria that must be satisfied before this conclusion can be made

a) the idea that a particular action can control something unrelated. (Can be a symptom of a
personality disorder or psychiatric disorder. However, in cases of judicial type decisions, this can be a
complex thought pattern to identify using this criteria)

OR

     a) accepting the opinion of one or more person(s), regardless of qualifications or experience, in a
     situation in which there is no correct or absolute answer. (e.g. if an expert or experts can not
     present evidence or opinions with 100% certainty then we do not have an absolute answer).

     b) senile thinking as defined (see Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Senile Thinking) has already been
     noted in other aspects of a decision or behaviour

     c) delusional thinking as defined (see Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Delusional Thinking) has already
     been observed in other aspects of decision or behaviour
Example

Decision of a judge (or similar):

While the late Ms Jones had Alzheimer’s, the geriatric specialist had pronounced her fit to sign a new
Will leaving out all daughters except the defendant. The fact that the Will was signed and dated only
two days before death is not relevant.

In this example we might also be able to establish magical thinking in this way: we have the
statement “The fact that the Will was signed and dated only two days before death is not relevant.”
This is the action, by saying this is not relevant, that attempts to control something unrelated namely
the state of mind of the deceased. In other words, the ego or state of mind of the judge attempts to
wash away reality by his or her action of stating that something is not relevant. Such a statement
when coming from a judge in a judicial decision is in fact an action.

Any normal person given the situation, and any jury, would rule that Ms Jones did not have any idea
what she was doing. This judge in his decision is attempting to force reality on all by his statement
that this is not relevant. By saying all this, the judge thinks and believes normal people will accept his
findings as “the word of God” or “the authority figure” and not to be challenged. Thus because he is
an authority figure, his internal magical thinking concludes that he can explain nonsense away and
everyone must accept this as truth and correct.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                      Page 68
                            Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                        2010


Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Malicious and Prejudicial Conduct

This is a likely conclusion with respect to certain actions of police. A general police officer is likely to
have an IQ similar to the general duties soldier and studies in the United States have found such an
IQ is typically 75. A person with that IQ may think it righteous to do the courts a favour by arresting a
person when such is not warranted. A person with that IQ may feel it is their religious duty even to
do so.

Essentially, the police are conditioned that anyone who appears not to respect the law is the
“enemy”. At IQ 75, these people are not capable of differentiating between right and wrong, ethics
and morals, of the legal system. They can not understand some laws are not fair, some are
disgusting and offensive, and that some court decisions are illegal but merely favours to mates (to a
lawyer or law firm or a politician friend). For this reason, it is this group that may take an action
which meets our diagnosis criteria.

Police officers are also conditioned to be as they are. Here are extracts from studies into
psychological conditioning of terrorists. In brackets the possible equivalent for police (probably
depends on the country what the appropriate or apt term in brackets should be; in some Islamic
countries anyone who has a rational view of “infidels” may be automatically the “enemy” and
“threat” to an Islamic police officer with an IQ of 75).

Dehumanization

Framing the enemy (those who have a court order against them or are "known to police") as being
less than human (arrest), turning them into objects (put them in a cage not fit for pigs at the back of
police stations) that are easy to attack without shame or guilt (the enemy does not respect the
law).

Others are thus defined as stupid (unemployed), immoral (no work ethic), unreliable (can't find
work; has no money), debased (is on welfare) and so on. They are... deserving of being killed
(imprisoned).

Demonization

Framing the enemy (person arrested or who protests about a court order or point of law) as being
evil (guilty), unrepentant and unredeemably bad, such that destroying them (imprisoning) is actually
doing the world a favour. [Another aspect of police in Australia is that criminals on parole have to
report sometimes daily to a police station. That too is straight out of psychological dehuminization
conditioning methods. There is never a need for such a thing, but that is not the point, the point is to
dehumanize a person and demonize them. (if you read our Alzheimer's Scam report, makes you
wonder how many people in prisons in Australia are innocent victims of sales of court orders known
as AVOs.)

Destroying evil (those before courts of law) thus becomes the act of the righteous and earns
salvation and other spiritual accolade and reward. [One reason for the title of our treatise: The
Insanity of the Religion of Law. It is a religion to those who worship the legal system, and of course
earning money is "worship" because in the final analysis the human brain works on basic drives and
not high ideals, and to work and be paid is "worship" stronger than any religious worship.]

(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                        Page 69
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                     2010

Diagnosis Criteria

The only legitimate arrest is one that is warranted. To enforce a court order or law is not a legitimate
reason for an arrest (in our science). The arrest must have the sole purpose of putting someone in
custody who is a danger to the public or to a particular person, or who has violated such laws that
most of society would accept are valid and such a person ought to be arrested. An arrest by its
nature is an intrusion into somebody’s life. It ought to be always the last or only resort.

A great many situations would give rise to arrests that are not warranted.

An arrest may also be made and may appear legitimate but its sole purpose to generate more clients
(money) for the legal system. Example: one time in Parramatta court I saw about 100 names from
the same company listed, all the employees. Some research revealed the Chief Executive Officer of
the said company had refused to provide a document to police – who in turn decided to charge
every employee of that company under some obscure law.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                    Page 70
                        Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                    2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Manipulation of Expert Witness (or
Professional)

Examples

   a) A medical specialist or physician is asked to examine a patient’s mental capacity but is not
      allowed access to some of the family members. [Any method that restricts access, including
      a court order which names the patient as “protected” from a family member, is
      manipulation].

   b) Deception by omitting essential information or misrepresenting such. [Any information that
      may have contributed to the specialist’s (or professional’s) decision is considered as
      essential or important].




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                Page 71
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                      2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Medical Fraud

A guarded conclusion!

Reasons why a medical specialist may produce a medical report which is “fraud” in ordinary
language:-

May be offered a large sum of money by a legal firm to produce a report containing certain legal
phrases

May be persuaded by a sibling wanting a particular report, or a legal body, this is in the best interest
of the patient


Diagnosis Criteria

    a) inconsistencies or errors in more than one report or letter prepared by a medical doctor
       (would be a specialist usually)

    b) unusual circumstances or situation leading to the production of the report

    c) A sibling has obtained a “protection” court order for the parent from a sibling who is the
       executor of an existing legal Last Will and Testament or the true executor is not present at
       an examination of the parent



Notes

Such “fabricated” medical reports may attempt to convey an image that all is normal. Thus, as in the
case of Ms J White of the Alzheimer’s Scam, the specialist in question wrote her blood pressure as
120/80. Why would an 80 year old, usually bedridden, with enormous difficulty standing up from a
chair of walking with her frame, who had made a journey to hospital and walked inside, have the
same blood pressure as a healthy young adult? [Note: in all the medical cases studies involving a
person over 70 that are in 5GL-Doctor, while there are not many not as such, however, not one has a
diastolic pressure that high!)




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                     Page 72
                          Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                      2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Mental Dysfunction

This diagnosis means there is suspected damage to the corpus callosum. The damage could be
anatomical, however, more likely it is damage caused by the brain killing off cells in the callosum,
this to aid the ego and states of mind to form with minimum interference from the right brain.

The damage is caused by continually blocking input from the right brain. Eventually the brain may kill
of cells in the callosum to conserve energy, that is, a blocking action is very energy consuming.

A desired state of mind may not be possible to achieve while the right brain is continually interfering
with the left, this is another reason why the brain may force itself to destroy parts of the corpus
callosum.


Signs

Unusual facial gestures during some types of contemplation or reflection.
Inability to perceive a picture as a whole.
Agitation when talking about some family members and/or relationships.
Inability to understand, or speculate about, the intent and purpose of a particular law.
Desire or interest to study a legal precedent not from the point of view of justice, ethics, morals,
social reasons, instead the focus is on what use (2-dimensional thinking solely used) can this decision
be put to in the sense of what can be “gotten away with” with this new precedent (or law).




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                    Page 73
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                      2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Mission Impossible

This diagnosis applies when anyone using legal logic can not balance such with common sense. It
depends on a situation. Legal thinking can form a specific state of mind. That may not be a rational
state of mind. The decision that results, if it is against common sense, requires a diagnosis of Mission
Impossible. The person is not capable of sustaining a correct state of mind that can form a decision
which is consistent with common sense.


Questions to Ask Yourself

Is the decision contrary to common sense?

Would a group of people accept such a decision as reasonable in a situation?

Does your own common sense suggest this was what the law was designed to achieve or address?

Can you emulate the state of mind that resulted in the decision, and if so would you classify this
state of mind as rational from a psychoanalysis point of view? Would you classify it as rational from
your own personal point of view.

Does the decision result in evil? (e.g. separating a child from parent without provision of access).
Bear in mind that children are resilient to adult hang-ups and can cope with much confusion – but
they do need access to both their parents. A judge may refuse to permit a father seeing his children
on the grounds the father has a gambling problem which may impact the children. This is not a
reasonable point of view, clinical evidence can usually be found to suggest this is not the case at all,
and children are not influenced by the “bad deeds” of their parents to the extent others may think.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                     Page 74
                          Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                      2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Money Paid for a Court Order

This conclusion can only be made once corrupt conduct has been established.

This conclusion is also made only when a sum of money is asked in legal costs which is out of
proportion to what any other legal firm would charge for such a service. Note that hiring of
additional lawyers or similar, if this is not needed because the matter is straight forward, may be a
technique to mask the reason for an out of proportion claim in legal costs.

The highest amount of money demanded in legal costs or similar is the amount of money paid to a
magistrate or judge or similar for such a court order or statement.

The bride involved may not be a direct cash transaction. It could be the use of an expensive holiday
house or anything. However, this conclusion is expressed in monetary terms.


Example

At the end of a hearing the plaintiff demanded $10,000 in costs.

Given corrupt conduct has been established, the $10,000 is the amount we conclude had been paid
to the magistrate or judge, not necessarily the one present at a hearing, to obtain that court order.

Some magistrates or judges or officials may sign court orders for a “small donation”. Whether the
amount seems large or small, it is still a “bribe” according to psycholegalanalysis.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                    Page 75
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                     2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Natural Justice

In some situations “closure” is vital for mental well being and healing to begin. A funeral can serve as
closure to an unexpected death. The conviction and imprisonment of a killer can serve as closure to
the grieving family. The findings of coroner suggesting that laws to do with fences around pools need
to be improved and enforced, may serve as closure to the parents whose infant sadly drowned in the
family pool.

In our science, that which is a necessity to begin the process of mental healing, this includes
psychological and emotional healing, is considered as “natural justice”.

In cases of a court order granted without a just cause, and such has a complex impact on one or
more persons, until compensation and/or possibly an apology is achieved, closure can not be
completed. A person or family may not be in a financial position to appeal against such a decision.
An appeal and victory would likely be closure, but this may not be a practical option for some
people.

A psychiatrist is in an ideal position to determine what is closure and what it is not. Rather, what
needs to be done to have closure. This gained experience is more likely hands on, meaning exposure
to many diverse patients would intuitively give the psychiatrist knowledge in what an effective or
proper closure is.

Common sense is another guide to what closure is or ought to be.

In a world made of stone, meaning it has its share of deception, corruption, evil of one kind or
another, situations can arise that require a proper assessment of what closure should be.

When it comes to offences by courts of law, such as mistakes in granting a court order, this requires
some complex analysis. Society wants to trust and respect their legal system. This kind of assault by
a legal system against a defenceless individual can be like an unexpected notice of divorce – a shock.
In such cases experts in justice may be the more correct people to suggest what closure should be –
perhaps compensation of a certain amount of money. This would begin the healing process,
however, if the ego had been damaged then some counselling may be best, perhaps some practical
talk about the imperfection of any system in society and mistakes can be made, and there is little to
be gained by blaming every lawyer, or police officer, or judge, or politician as the case may be.

Perhaps some simple explanation may be appropriate also. A person who had a psycholegal shock
(as defined) may have done things, or written complaints to various forums, but in such a way that
normally his or her ego would not allow such wording. A person may feel bad about this when on
the path of recovery. Thus an explanation as to why such might have happened could be in the
interest of the person troubled by this (and perhaps you don’t need to use the term psycholegal
shock, perhaps the term “stress” or “extreme stress” might suffice).




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                       Page 76
                          Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                     2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Non-Rational Understanding of
Rationality and/or Reason

In legal decisions, it is not uncommon to find expressions such as “what a rational and reasonable
person would consider...”

Rationality and reason is related to the state of mind, which in turn comes about from personal
experiences, education, beliefs, etc.

What a lawyer or police officer or those into law might consider as “rational” and “reasonable” may
be brought about by a restricted and narrow state of mind. (however, this is unlikely to apply to
police so much).

A legal decision or opinion, or similar, that uses such terms and yet defies common sense, has to be
understood using psycholegalanalysis with the view to whether the “rationality” and “reason” being
mentioned refers to a unique state of mind of the person(s) that made the decision, and does not
apply across the board.

The bias in those into law can be extreme! A person who is unemployed, for example, may be
subconsciously automatically assumed to be a potential thief. The view of any individual lawyer or
judge, or similar, as to what a “rational” person is, may be solely related to their own ego defence
mechanisms.

The psychiatrist may need to use all their medical and clinical skills to come to the conclusion
whether a legal decision that mentions such words is truly related to how normal people using a
natural state of mind view “rationality” and “reason”.

The state of mind that some lawyers, magistrates, and/or judges (or similar) attain during decision
making is a focused state of mind. Such a state of mind may or may not be able to work out what a
“rational” or “reasonable” person is like. Such a state of mind could equally produce a non-rational
view of “rationality” and/or “reason”.

Caution is required.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                   Page 77
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                      2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Nonsense-in-Law

The nature of law is such that it is above people’s heads ( except the essential and vital laws).
Consequently decisions made by courts are accepted as “law” even when such are nonsense.

It is vital the psycholegalanalyst is willing to make this diagnosis when logic, reason, knowledge of
human behaviour and state and neuroscience, suggests a particular decision is nonsense-in-law.

The more removed a law is from a simple and base understanding, the more potential for abuse.

Example

A tribunal has decided that a person has different capacities. Therefore it follows a person also has
“testament capacity”.

In order to define this new law, the tribunal also decided that:

    -   the term testament capacity means a person still remembers their siblings
    -   a report from a medical specialist is required to state that a person has testament capacity

Thus, a medical specialist is persuaded that “testament capacity” only means a person still recalls
their siblings, and writes such a report for a person with massive lesions to the brain, so massive the
person does not even know where they are when outside their house.

This medical report is sufficient for lawyers and this tribunal. In a higher court, this is meaningless
but this is never explained. The reason it is meaningless is because that a higher court may have
made a decision in regards to “testament capacity” and it means a new Last Will and Testament can
be made legal as long as a person has “testament capacity”. What this term may mean to a higher
court, may not be what it means to a lower court. Lower courts do not have the competency of
senior courts.

This is “nonsense-in-law”. It is medical nonsense and legal nonsense – except judging by the
Australian experience such nonsense can be used to engineer a new Last Will and Testament for
anyone with Alzheimer’s.

Notice how relatively easy it can be to persuade a medical specialist to write such a report – as long
as the specialist is persuaded what “testament capacity” means and it may on the surface mean
something benign.

Nonsense-in-law attempts to bypass existing legislation (and common sense) in order to serve the
interests of rich clients. A legal firm may invent such arguments that a junior tribunal will be
enchanted by these and define nonsense-in-law.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                     Page 78
                          Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                      2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Opinion Obtained Under Duress

A complicated conclusion. A person(s) who are lawyers, police, magistrates, etc., may be able to put
pressure on an expert to produce a report stating a conclusion or opinion that is unlikely to have
been made had the expert not been put under duress.

Example:

A geriatric specialist examines an Alzheimer’s patient and writes a report “in my opinion Mrs J Smith
has testament capacity and wants to leave everything to her son Jason.”

Upon questioning, the specialist explains that he was informed by a lawyer(s) the term “testament
capacity” (in law) meant that Mrs J Smith still recalled her children which she appeared to do when
the specialist spoke to her.

Consider this very carefully. The term “testament capacity” is not a medical diagnosis. There is no
proven methods to assess such a thing.

But the specialist is not a lawyer. What things “mean” in law are up to courts to adjudicate upon.
The specialist thus wrote a report using his status as a medical specialist, thus giving enormous
weight to the report before courts, but what he proposed an opinion about has nothing to do with
medicine – the butcher down the road who knows Mrs Smith may be more qualified and more
competent to state such an opinion.

This type of trick is used by lawyers to get medical reports to contain wording they want. It could be
used in courts of law also so beware.

How to draw a line in the sand in regards to whether this specialist may have been paid money on
the side to write such a medical report. If so, the specialist is guilty of corrupt conduct. However,
this is rarely necessary because in the right legal hands any expert can produce a report that they
should not have.

Signs of a Report Produced Under Duress

    -   Is likely to contain mistakes and errors and omissions
    -   The expert may have been asked to produce an updated report, once the lawyer(s)
        understood the mistakes and omissions, but refuses to do so
    -   An existing court order may have been purchased (or obtained legally meaning with just
        cause) and used to persuade the expert input from other family members has already been
        considered by a court and dismissed




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                    Page 79
                          Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                      2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Opportunism

This diagnosis comes about when a person(s) take an advantage of a situation to make a claim which
is nonsense. Medical situations are the tricky ones for lawyers.

Examples

An Alzheimer’s patient is moved to what John considers a better home for his mother who is in late
stages of Alzheimer’s. The person once moved appears to rapidly decline and dies. Jane, John’s
sister, hires a legal firm claiming her parent would not have died had she not been moved and it is all
John’s fault and since he thus is responsible for the death of the parent, she has the right to have all
the wealth the parent left in the Last Will and Testament to John.

Any medical doctor ought to know this is nonsense and that no one can predict when a person with
late stage Alzheimer’s will begin a rapid decline. True of some terminal cancers.


A male parent with serious mental deficiencies caused by repeated transient ischaemic strokes
(TIA’s) is handed documents by a next door neighbour(or whoever) to sign. The person does not
understand much of what they have read because their memory is seriously impacted. The
document names the neighbour as having Power of Attorney which means the neighbour can go the
bank and take out the victim’s money. (We hear you saying this surely can not happen. Did in
Australia, if media reports are to be believed, a neighbour almost a complete stranger suddenly
woke up to a sweet imagined possibility and got away with it.)




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                    Page 80
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                      2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Perjury (Lying in Court)

This can only be made if the psycholegalanalyst was present during a court hearing or similar and
listened to the evidence presented by a particular person.

The psycholegalanalytical process will itself determine this. No obvious or clear reason may be
identified as to why the process has come to that conclusion. It is all the unconscious keys that were
the input to this process.

Note that it is impossible, this is a 5GL Software opinion, for any analyst to work this out if they had
not seen and observed the person in question. Listening to a tape is unlikely to provide adequate
clues for the process to be able to produce a conclusion.

Note that the modified ego may attempt to explain to the conscious which aspects of the evidence
are lies. The modified ego can never be certain about this for this reason it is up to the analyst to
make a decision if a conclusion pattern is warranted or whether this would prejudice any inquiries
that police or others may need or wish to make.

The reason a modified ego can not be certain is because the psycholegalanalytical process has
identified a desire to deceive, but such might be in the “whole” of the evidence, or in a substantial
body of the evidence, and not necessarily in any particular aspect of the evidence.

Notes

This science is chiefly intended for experienced psychiatrists. There are other medically accepted
diagnosis that may be warranted to explain why a psychiatrist is of the opinion a particular individual
lied in court. It may not be useful to use a psycholegalanalytical process when there are simpler ways
of achieving the same objective and reaching this conclusion.

In the view of 5GL Software only a psychopath who is also a lawyer (or judge, magistrate, tribunal
member, etc.) has the potential to lie in such a way that a jury or the analyst may not be able to be
certain without using the psycholegalanalytical technique. (Note: a person with a Will Syndrome
would come across as a psychopath; the Will Syndrome is capable of also producing a result similar
to a psychopath).




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                      Page 81
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                          2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Personality Issue Defence

Perhaps no other people in the world use the “it is a personal issue” ego defence mechanism than
politicians. We might suggest that anything the politician talks about, that is in the public interest as
far as he or she is concerned and everyone else ought to be as concerned, but anything else brought
up by someone else can become a “personal issue” to be ignored (e.g. when it is not in the
politician’s ego to explore or agree or pursue).

This diagnosis is made when the “it is a personal issue” is used to mask serious allegations not
against the person themselves, but other forums especially police or courts of law.

Example of a reply: While the Minister (government minister) feels that the allegations that you
have brought up about local courts granting court orders without just cause are serious and
worrying, nevertheless he concludes that this is a personal issue and state funds can not be provided
for personal issues.

One of the difficulties in reaching this diagnosis is that the analyst themselves can be deceived and
manipulated. We all have personalities. A skilled craftsman (e.g. politician) is about manipulating
public and personal opinion. A politician has a skill, just like a psychiatrist.

In formulating this conclusion, detachment from the subject is essential. The analyst must think
clearly. Ask yourself:

    -   logically is the matter a personal issue or say in the public interest? (the single “I” is still a
        part of the great many “I’s” in society)

    -   from the point of view of ethics and morals, are a substantial group of people likely to feel
        the matter raised is in the general public issue to resolve

    -   is the matter to do with something unpalatable to a person (e.g. a politician), such as
        corruption in government or any of its branches (e.g. courts, police, etc.). If it is, chances of
        this being a “personal issue” as a politician might try to sell such, is close to zero.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                          Page 82
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                       2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Perverse Law or Decision

This applies when a law is in place, or a legal precedent, or a court order (or similar) which is against
what is natural and normal.


Examples

A hundred years ago left-handers used to be severely beaten and abused for using their left hand to
write. Modern medicine knows that being a left-hander is the result of how the brain is organised.

A law or court order that attempts to stop a person seeing a dying relative, is contrary to all that is
normal in human beings.

Laws against homosexual or lesbian acts in private are perverse laws.

Human stupidity, bias, prejudice, sense of being better than someone else, intolerance of those who
are different, can lead to perverse laws or precedents.

The role of the psychiatrist is to point this out to people, preferably in a way that teaches tolerance.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                      Page 83
                         Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                   2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Perversion-in-Law

This conclusion applies when one frame of reference attempts to distort another.

Law is a mega business. Expert law firms specialise in manipulating the minds of those on whom they
depend to make a particular decision. There is no end of schemes that legal firms can come up with.

The NSW (Australia) AVO laws are an example. Originally intended to protect a person from
violence, these degenerated into court orders any legal firm can obtain for any reason whatsoever
and no evidence is required. A complete perversion of what the law was about.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                Page 84
                         Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                    2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Perversion of the Natural Course of
Justice

Requirements

   1) At least two suspicious decisions had been made in a matter related to the issue being
      studied

   2) Considerable damage, financial or psychological or emotional, had resulted from at least one
      of the suspicious decisions to at least one of the person(s) impacted by the decision (e.g. the
      spouse of a person may be affected and PTSD may result even when the impact on the
      actual person against a decision has been made has little impact)




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                 Page 85
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                      2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Political Decision

This conclusion applies when no just cause is evident for a decision by a court or as appropriate.

A political decision has the intention of spreading the word that a certain act or actions are not
appropriate as far as the courts are concerned. Such actions may be legal and may not cause any
harm or offense to the community, however, the courts may choose to condemn that action by
issuing a court order.

The word “political” in this sense does not refer to elected governments – it refers to the “politics”
of the police-court system. However, some of these political decisions may be made because some
members of the government had expressed a certain point of view at some stage.


Example

In a particular area lives a paedophile, someone convicted of child molestation and imprisoned for a
term and released after that term. The community does not like this person living in their area. One
day a man puts a small coffin outside the door of the paedophile. The paedophile hires a lawyer who
arranges for an AVO to be issued against that person.

The decision has no basis in a just cause. A simple prank is the most likely reason for the coffin. An
AVO seriously impacts on natural rights of a person. It is not warranted except when the evidence is
overwhelming and persuasive that such is warranted.

Thus, when there is no rational or moral or ethical basis for a decision, and it does not violate any
law directly, the question arises of a political decision. In the example, what then is the “politics” of
the said decision? Does not matter, that is not for the analyst to work out, more a matter for
politicians. Politics can be cunning and may on the surface appear to defy rational explanation. To an
expert-in-politics the reason may be as clear as our Sun, to the analyst or others it may be
mystifying.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                     Page 86
                          Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                       2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Power of Attorney Obtained by
Deception (Fraud)

A “power of attorney” is an Australian tem for a legal document which gives many rights to a person
having power of attorney. Usually obtained in cases of severe dementia, or other lesions in the
brain, which limit the patient’s ability to look after their own affairs.

A parent entering dementia, especially Alzheimer’s, may appoint one sibling as their “power of
attorney” by their actions. Hence a parent with Alzheimer’s but still enough mental capacity, may
request that some essential reminders (e.g. house insurance) be sent by an insurance company to
the sibling the parent wants to have power of attorney.

Note that just because a sibling resides with a parent, this is not a reason why a parent might give
power of attorney to such a sibling. They may not, they may choose the sibling whom they trust to
ensure financial and other obligations (on critical matters, such as house insurance) are looked after.
The sibling that may reside with a parent may have a problem, such as gambling, which the parent
might be aware of and which would make the parent very concerned about giving such a sibling
power of attorney; or such a sibling may be thinking of marriage and wants a house of his own but
can not afford it, and the parent might be suspicious the sibling will kick the parent out if they are
given power of attorney.


Diagnosis Criteria

        If it is clear that a person with mental incapacity has appointed a sibling as having power of
        attorney, this with their actions, then any other document from anyone else claiming power
        of attorney is automatically considered as satisfying this psycholegalanalytical diagnosis.

        or

        The sibling named as executor of the Last Will and Testament signed when of sound mind, is
        automatically the sibling with power of attorney (this is not necessarily the legal position,
        this is the psycholegalanalytical position). Any other sibling obtaining any document that
        claims power of attorney, when the parent is no longer of sound mind by a medical
        definition, is considered as satisfying this criteria. The acceptable medical definition of sound
        mind can be found in the glossary.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                     Page 87
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                     2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Pregnancy Situation

Applies especially to females. Not always of child bearing age either. Using psycholegalanalysis a
new notion of “birth” emerges. In some situations a woman can give birth to a formation of energy
in the brain. The child could be a concept, an idea, or a solution to a problem. What the child might
be is in the beginning a mystery. In dreams, the presence of this energy appears as a child, son or
daughter.

The human brain as Freud had observed is many consciousness blended into one – or rather blended
into two, one of the left brain and the other of the right brain. Split brain patients report some
adjustment problems including one part of the body wanting to walk one way and the other side of
the body wanting to walk the other way. The two distinct consciousnesses can be observed from
studies of split brain patients in particular.

To prepare an area of the brain to begin a new learning that is complex, requires the birth of special
energy defined as dimensional energy. Term of pregnancy is typically nine months.

While this energy is being born and developing, the brain will compel the woman to act in
accordance with what is best to do by that energy. The woman will not be able to control her actions
or decision at times when such have a direct impact on that offspring.

What psycholegalanalysis identifies is that a female brain is sufficiently different to a man’s brain in
that it is capable of trapping in an association area many uncertainties. It is from these uncertainties
that a child energy system can be born. However, this process can also work in a male but this would
be extremely rare. The uncertainties are usually such that defy a simple logical explanation. For
example. What is the best thing to do by a child whose father is abusive? Isolate the child from the
father by a court order and forbid access to the child, or allow some visitation rights?

Due to the fact that a female is strong on using and refining feelings, these feelings of extreme
uncertainty begin to be trapped in an area of the brain. Over time, these can in turn form a fine
dimensional energy which attempts to “rationalise” (for want of better word) an association area in
the intellect that can be used to make decisions to do with whatever it was that gave birth to such
an offspring.

The primary or important difference between this energy system and any other, is that it
automatically balances the ego, superego, id, and many other forces and feelings. It has unlimited
scope to do this. Hence the resultant understanding, or association area in the brain, will
automatically be linked in such a manner as to balance all that was required to be balanced.

Hence, this diagnosis is extremely complicated and requires identifying the subtle or subconscious
confusion and/or feelings of “extreme uncertainty” to do with a particular issue. If there is a
sufficient number of these, we assume this is likely a pregnancy situation.

This can happen in a male but would be extremely rare. Unlike a woman, a male may have limited
capacity to refine or balance extreme feelings of uncertainty. A male may opt for legal options in an
attempt to find a solution to perplexing uncertainties in regards to a particular issue.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                    Page 88
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                     2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Psycholegal Shock

The precise medical definition remains elusive. This does not apply in a war situation or similar, only
in the normal ordinary life situations.

Freud compared the barrier of the unconscious to police and courts of law. A psycholegal shock can
result in unusual, puzzling, or bizarre, beliefs and perhaps a few actions. The cause is the breakdown
of the barrier between the unconscious and the conscious. Note that some people have a good
strong and healthy imagination (e.g. writers), and some people such as psychics may also have
formed complex beliefs or pseudo-beliefs in their unconscious. The consequences of a
psycholegalshock can not be easily predicted – depends on the person.

This can happen to a person against whom a court order was issued out of the blue. A court order
that may restrict access to parent or child. Especially when the court order is by a sibling, perhaps
not related directly such as a step brother or sister, and the person in question knows there is an
inferior motive for that court order.

Further, especially can happen if the sibling in question who attains complete access to the parent,
has an alcohol problem be it a periodic one. Medical doctors know the greatest threat to an elderly
parent is the sibling with an alcohol problem – family members may know this too.

The consequence of such a shock could be irrational letters and thoughts, the ego having lost control
of much of reality (relative to a particular group, namely courts or police) and may write all sorts of
things down because the id is out of control in the sense the ego can not stop it including
information in words or letters which is simply not something the ego would normally do. What sort
of information is the id likely to include – that is anybody’s guess, could be anything, from reference
to psychics or telepathy to threats of violence against the police. The ego would still retain enough
control not to “harm” itself too much with such outbursts.

The condition should wear off in time. Unless there is an ongoing marital or other situation which
acts to place additional stress on the ego.

A person suffering from a psycholegalshock may entertain some temporary strong views or
thoughts, but these are unlikely to shape much their focus or rational interactions. These views or
thoughts are not delusions in the classical sense – the person may not necessarily “believe” these as
such but may “choose to believe” such in order to pacify internal powerful forces being released at
times during the process of restructuring of the barriers between the conscious and the
unconscious. This could take years. Also, some legal processes may need to be put in place to
complete this process.

Example

A woman is restricted by a court order from seeing her parent (or child). She knows why her sister
had done it and why, but she herself does not have enough money for lawyers to defend herself
against this, and her husband refuses to give her the money she needs. This type of stress can cause
a prolonged recovery period.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                    Page 89
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                        2010
In fact, if the marital situation is very poor, this shock may not resolve (but will diminish with the
passage of time) until a separation and financial settlement takes place and the woman is in a
financial position to rationally (i.e. perhaps by finding a lawyer) to pursue this offense.

A psychic with a psycholegal schock may declare a “psychic war” on certain groups. (note: some
psychic circles often play war games where they choose an enemy, and a whole complex scenario
may be developed even the types of psychic weapons and how these are deployed, etc.) This could
apply to authors as well who have a strong vivid imagination.

Perhaps time alone, and some concrete actions such as taking a righteous matter to court, is the
only cure for a psycholegalshock. However, a physician ought to consider if the recommended
treatment for stress may also be of benefit.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                       Page 90
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                        2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Psychopath

 Some psychologists use their own instead of any accepted definition. Psychiatrists may diagnose an
antisocial personality disorder (or dissocial in accordance with the International Classification of
Diseases) with only the most severe grade equal to psychopath. In the context of this field, it is
important to distinguish this variant of a psychopath from a lawyer simply doing his job.

If psychopathy is a distinct clinical entity, which CMPL says it is, and which the current working group
on DSM-V also appears to accept, then those features found in serial killers will also in some way be
true of psychopaths not inclined to brutality by physical violence. When dealing with lawyers or
similar, it is important to consider the “action” and not whether it is in accordance with any law. A
lawyer psychopath may use points of law as masks of sanity.

Diagnosis Criteria

In relationship to parent or sibling, the person has no interest whatsoever about ethics or morals or
the natural sanctity of a parent sibling (or spouse, child) relationship, but if an opportunity arises will
manipulate matters, or organize matters, in such a way as to suit his/her interests and his/her
interests alone (but note that psychopaths are typically male). However, to differentiate between a
certain state of mind and psychopathy, we want to see at least two positive features such as
substance abuse (eg. bouts of alcohol consumption) and/or failure to pay bills and/or absence from
family functions (i.e. traits or “character” typical of psychopaths).

This psycholegalanalytical diagnosis is made when either (a) or (b) is demonstrated, and two items
from (c).

    a) A person who commits one act so callous that everyone else is shaken - example:
       engineering a new Last Will and Testament leaving himself solely responsible for all funeral
       arrangements. Only a "cold killer" in a sense would be so callous to disregard the effect of
       grief on other members of a family. Thus, according to CMPL, one act that stands out can
       form the diagnosis of a psychopath, however, other factors typical of psychopaths need also
       be present such as substance abuse, failure to pay bills, etc.

    b) Use your index of suspicion and your medical diagnosis areas of the brain. A severe form of
       the antisocial personality disorder is “psychopathy” according to some experts. Does the
       diagnosis of psychopath feel right and correct? That is the question the psycholegalanalyst
       must ask themselves. Research and studies into psychopaths suggest brain anomalies. All of
       the actions of a person must be considered correctly using the medical diagnosis areas of
       the brain which will determine whether psychopath or antisocial personality disorder is the
       most reliable or correct diagnosis.

    c) There must be evidence equivalent to an “index of suspicion” that one of the following may
       have taken place:

        i) prior to age of 10 (approximately) patient was witness to a traumatic incident which he or
        she may have “vaulted”

        ii) at some time after this incident, the patient was put on medication that potentially could
        cause a psychotic effect or episode (e.g. medication for severe acne or other skin condition)

(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                       Page 91
                            Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                        2010


Typical Profile

    -   Not married
    -   Highly intelligent
    -   Usually wins most legal cases
    -   Lives with his parent
    -   Likely to have a gambling or alcohol problem, not necessary an addiction. A “problem” in
        this sense is an uncontrolled desire to gamble or drink now and then. A “controlled” desire is
        one when a person makes a decision that he or she wants a drink or gamble, an uncontrolled
        one is when a person is compelled to do so. Careful about small social gamblers who may
        visit clubs even often – this could be to alleviate loneliness or boredom, not to gamble as
        such. From my persona observation, a person whom I might consider as possibly having a
        problem with gambling, is say a person who bets a fair amount when using a poker machine.
        A person, on the other hand, who extremely rarely bets more than the minimum practical, is
        unlikely to have any problem and does this for social or other reasons.
    -   Possibly prone to finding male/female friends with schizophrenia or whose partner has this
        Absolutely certain that any lie or confabulation can not be disproven by the people whom he
        depends on not to be able to disprove this (e.g. gullible family members)
    -   Likes to suggest when he can that any of his marks or victims are “insane” in some way. This
        seems to be a common pattern in all psychopaths. This suggestion could be direct or subtle.
    -   Play on “sympathy” to gain support. This feature of a psychopath can be incredibly effective.
        The cause according to psycholegalanalysis is a “hurt child syndrome” which remains at the
        age of the trauma and can be mapped onto the anterior cingulate cortex

Notes

Psycholegalanalysis indicates that a psychopath who is a lawyer can implant a “delusion” in the
“vulnerable” target. What is “vulnerable” is not understood. The Alzheimer’s Scam report clearly
indicates that magistrates appear to be vulnerable and some police officers. A delusion such as being
“assaulted”. Most lawyers tend to develop these strong “projection” of feelings when presenting
arguments, the aim is to make a person feel “guilty” or “inferior”. It is likely it is projection of feelings
that a psychopath who is a lawyer has learnt to use, possibly unconsciously, to implant a delusion of
assault (or other crime) in the target. Or, perhaps, such a lawyer may find a barrister or another
lawyer with “narcissism” trait and use such to implant a delusion in others. (in regards to a lawyer
with this trait, he or she may believe beyond doubt that he or she can cross-examine a person in
order to make a person “admit” to the “truth” as the lawyers wants “truth” to be; such a lawyer may
believe without doubt he or she can “trick” anyone into “admitting” to something that had not
happened but the lawyer wants it to have happened).

Neuroscience knows that in order to understand parts of the brain (say “image areas”) need to
emulate that which is being seen or observed or told. Possibly, the brain of a natural psychopath
who is a lawyer has worked out exactly how to “confound” the “image areas” in the brain of the
target so they accept a delusion or can not avoid “believing” such.

Researchers on psychopaths say that such have a regular need to enter the world of “filth and
degradation”. For this reason psychotherapy may be the best therapy for a psychopath – therapy
that may not cure but which may act to control and balance the urges. As Freud said “our aim is to
move some of the id into the ego.”


(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                         Page 92
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                     2010
Example Diagnosis of Mr R White of the Alzheimer’s Scam Report (some insight into the legal system
are possible to include – psycholegalanalysis will provide this (e.g. in the United States, the analysis
may produce a line “the courts are highly racist against blacks”). The analyst has to consider whether
to include this as is or leave such out.


                   Clinical Diagnosis in regards to Mr Ray White

                                   Diagnosis: Psychopath


Qualifications of author: Mr Arthur Winarczyk is the developer of the new proposed medical science
of psycholegalanalysis. The diagnostic manual (CMPL) is available for psychiatrists. Mr Arthur
Winarczyk has a science degree and about 20 years working on a medical diagnosis expert system.

Note that when Freud first proposed psychoanalysis, it was banned by the American Medical
Association on the grounds that it lacked scientific merit. Nowadays psychoanalysis is an established
medical science of the mind and psyche. Even so very few psychiatrists had extended on the science.
Psycholegalanalysis is sufficiently similar to psychoanalysis.

Recommendation to a court in regards to this science. In this particular scenario, the diagnostic
standard of DSM-V (American Psychiatric Association Diagnostic Guide to mental diseases; DSM-V
currently under field trials) contains a definition of the Antisocial/Psychopathy personality that can
be used by any intelligent objective person not just clinical people. Attachment B is that criteria.


Summary of Actions Leading to this Diagnosis

In October 2004, Mr Ray White either slipped or pretended to fall then called police claiming he was
assaulted. No evidence was found by police. Not long after a “protection” court order arrived
naming Ms Janina Winarczyk, an Alzheimer’s victim, as “protected” from her natural son Mr A
White. Note that such court orders granted when applied for by a legal firm (as distinct from police)
are usually without evidence and are an “evil act” by the standards of International Court of Justice.
Australian local courts appear to sign such court orders as a matter of “entertainment” (the Anglo-
Saxon “court” mindset is highly “racist”). Queues to obtain such in courts are large. Any reason can
be used. At the hearing in 2005 to do with this court order, Mr Ray White confabulated (lied) under
oath explaining in such intricate details how he was assaulted. (An assault that never took place
according to police at the scene). The magistrate said “not satisfied” but had to grant this on the
basis that Mr Ray White was an “officer of the court”. In 2008 Mr Ray White stalked Mr A White at a
nursing home and managed to eventually have him arrested for violating an AVO (at the time of
arrest the AVO had lapsed; in any case no legal firm contacted could explain why Ms J White was
“protected” other than “perhaps because Ray lives with her?”) In 2009 it became apparent Mr Ray
White had engineered a new Last Will and Testament leaving everything to him and making him
solely responsible for funeral arrangements.

Basis of Diagnosis

All the actions of Roman are those of a psychopath. Laws are used as a “mask of sanity”. The callous
action of wanting to be solely responsible for the funeral, that alone would satisfy the diagnosis
criteria for a psychopath. A psychopath has no concept or limited notion of others “grief”. Granted,

(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                    Page 93
                            Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                     2010
his likely motive was to quickly obtain the death certificate and pass the Will obtained by deception
and fraud through a process known as probate as quickly as possible – however, the CMPL does not
recognize legal actions in psychopaths as “legitimate reasons” but as “masks of sanity”.

The inventing of a “fall”, isolating a parent from a natural son, the detachment from family members
years prior to this incident, substance abuse, not paying bills on time, all such actions are traits of
psychopaths. There are other warning signs such as detachment from family members.

The diagnosis, in this case, is blatant and crystal clear.

Index of Suspicions

Medical people use a form of intuition known as “index of suspicion”. The following are my own
conclusions (be such untested) as to how Mr Ray White became a psychopath.

At age about 15 months he was burnt with boiling water. I suspect this damaged the deeper skin and
as a result in teenage year Ray suffered from severe acne for which he was placed on medication.
This was before 1982 and the current acne medication, and it is not known what the medication
was, however, the current medication can cause a psychotic effect in some people.

At about age 7 he witnessed a shocking incident that led to the divorce between his mother and
father. An incident that I suspect he had “vaulted”. If he then experienced a psychotic effect during
the taking of the severe acne medication, some of the “vault” may have been “opened” – however,
to mask the “father” image this was replaced by the psyche by his older brother. Thus, the long term
plan to somehow get even, to somehow prove to the world that it was not his “father” but his older
brother who was the “violent” type, may have begun at this time.

The CMPL further defines the Will Syndrome which is an entity that can form in typically
psychopaths. It is a stressful experience to have a parent with Alzheimer’s and coping with such
things as incontinence. That stress can become extreme and a person begins to form delusions in
regards to a “sense of entitlement”. There are many factors that may have combined or contributed
to the formation of the Will Syndrome. After all, Ray may claim he had lived with his mother for 27
years. It is easy to appreciate how a strong sense of entitlement began to form which began to
formulate a plan to obtain exclusive control of his mother’s bank account and estate, the former he
managed with the court order known as AVO which he obtained.

I personally am inclined to suspect there are “serial killer” type psychopaths who do not serially kill
but who share some traits such as wanting to “mutilate” the body especially the sex organs. If we
bear in mind the Oedipus complex, then Roman’s need for an AVO may have a deep rooted fetish.

Recommendations to a Judge and/or Jury

Should Ray ever be charged with perjury or perverting the cause of justice, whatever, in my personal
professional opinion he is “not guilty” on the grounds of “insanity”. (i.e. the term “psychosis” does
not apply to lawyers that well and the CMPL uses the term “insanity” but that means loss of control
between the left and right cerebral hemispheres). What a court or jury would make of all this – this
the author can not predict. While everyone ought to be accountable for their actions, to what extent
can a jury blame a person who can not help what he/she is doing because of various powerful
internal conflicts?



(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                     Page 94
                          Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                    2010
I personally would recommend that Ray accepts regular sessions with a psychiatrist. If he does this,
in my opinion, he could continue working as a lawyer with his own law firm. The alternative is, in my
view, that he will repeat a similar situation with someone else because psychopaths, as it is known
by those who study psychopaths, may not be able to control an urge to enter the world of “filth and
degradation”.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                  Page 95
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                        2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Restricted Capacity to Understand
Truth (or Facts)

Consider a magistrate faced with a dilemma. A person claims he was pushed. The person is a medical
doctor. The doctor claims he was pushed by his next door neighbour, who is unemployed and
recently divorced. There are no witnesses. The doctor was not hurt that much, so the doctor claims,
that he needed medical assistance. In other words, no marks on his body.

The neighbour claims this is a lie.

On the one hand we have a person with high standing in society, a medical doctor, claiming one
thing and the person supposedly who did this, claims this is not true.

Whom will the magistrate believe?

But, this is not, from a psycholegalanalytical point of view, a question of belief but facts (or truth).



Consider

Does the neighbour have criminal convictions or any record with police for offensive behaviour?

Can anyone be found to suggest this neighbour has a violent temper or has some grudge against the
doctor?

Can anyone be found who has a view that this incident was likely to have taken place?

If everywhere you look is negative, then it is impossible to be certain who is telling the truth. Hence
if the magistrate chose to accept the word of the doctor with no evidence other than his word, the
magistrate is incapable of, or has limited or restricted capacity, to understand truth. (confusing
perceived authority with truth and/or facts)



Explanation

What is the role of the ego? It builds defence shields. Only the id can contain truth within itself, such
is its nature. In those in the judiciary the id may have used that truth capacity and gave it to the ego.
This to act as a defence shield. The ego is not into truth but reality, into how to protect the body and
psyche and mind. Truth, if ego has this part of the id, when not convenient, will be masked or
hidden, only to express itself in dreams.

You would need to examine the magistrate to form this diagnosis. Perhaps a one hour
psychoanalysis session might reveal the nature of the defence mechanisms the ego has put into
place. You could also form it based on observations and limited listening, but this is not the
recommended approach.


(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                       Page 96
                            Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                   2010


Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Senile Thinking

This type of thinking is caused by aging or a breakdown of normal frontal lobe activity. The result is
fears from the amygdala blending with the conscious in a manner which affects judgment. The fears
are related to self but the self may go into denial and instead take any opportunity to project such
concerns onto others. However, it is also a question of whether such is clinically significant.

Diagnosis Criteria

Criteria that must be satisfied before this conclusion can be made

a) demonstrated confusion in regards to matters or evidence presented

OR

     a)A fear that has no basis in fact has intruded into thoughts or a decision

     The following must be satisfied before (a) applies

     1) In the past 2 years there is no evidence that the fear is valid
     2) Pessimism in regards to the future


Example

Decision of judge (or similar):

The sister who had inherited all may have earned $200,000 each year from her private business but I
am satisfied that she is seriously concerned about her future earning potential.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                   Page 97
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                     2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Subhuman Decision or Act

This conclusion applies when a decision is made contrary to common sense of what being human is
about.

Examples

The warden of a prison refuses to allow a prisoner to visit his dying parent in hospital.

A magistrate signs a court order that stops a parent seeing a sibling (or vice versa) with no just cause
evident to any family member (other than the person or family member who applied for such a
court order).




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                     Page 98
                          Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                      2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Submission

This conclusion applies especially when a person pleads guilty to a police charge only to avoid
expensive costs of hiring a legal firm to represent him or her. That is, a legal firm may offer the
person a choice of hiring expensive lawyers or pleading guilty in which case a particular arrangement
can be made with a police prosecutor.

The diagnosis can also apply to any situation in which a person submits to a legal situation only to
avoid large legal costs for which she or he may not have the funds (or the interest to spend such
funds on a particular issue).




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                    Page 99
                            Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                      2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Suspicious Arrest

Alternate expressions: engineered an arrest; an engineered arrest; a corrupt police act

Diagnosis Criteria

     1) The person who instigated the arrest is a police officer, lawyer, judge, or in relatively senior
        government position. The person who instigated the arrest is a person who makes a
        complaint or causes a situation that may lead to the arrest of another person.

     2) No just cause is evident. Violating a court order itself is not a just cause. There has to be a
        reason why an arrest is warranted. A court order on its own is insufficient need.

     3) The person arrested had made formal complaints in writing prior to the arrest, complaints
        suggesting corruption or improper actions by police or courts.


or


     1) The arrest involves a protection court order than names an elderly parent or a female child
        as “protected” and no reason given on the court order. When a court order does not specify
        reasons clearly, the analyst must view such a court order as suspicious meaning it could have
        been purchased for money or granted as a “favour”.
or

     1) An arrest based on a court order that attempts to enforce an unnatural situation.

         Form your own clear appreciation of a situation at the time of the arrest, and decide if the
         arrest was warranted (from a human point of view). In Australia there are these Draconian
         laws called AVOs which threaten a human being with prison if he or she goes in some places.
         It may not be natural for a person not to be in such a place in some situations. (e.g. an AVO
         is purchased to steal wealth from an elderly dying cancer patient; the AVO stops a sibling
         who can block such theft from visiting the parent. The sibling learns the parent is dying and
         rushes to their side and in so doing violates the AVO and is later arrested. This is not only a
         suspicious arrest, and not warranted, it is impossible for a sibling to stop seeing their dying
         parent for the final time – which means the court order is trying to force an unnatural
         situation which the human condition can not satisfy.


Notes

The general police officer has a low IQ. Such a person can be very easily persuaded especially by an
authority figure (e.g. lawyer, judge, magistrate, etc.) that John Smith “does not respect the law”. This
might trigger in the police officer a desire to teach John Smith a lesson and hence John may be
arrested.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                     Page 100
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                      2010
It is impossible to tell how many or which lawyers or judges (or similar) a police officer “befriends” in
a professional sense. Any arrest that appears to serve the interest of a lawyer or magistrate or the
courts (or as appropriate), is automatically suspicious.

A police officer is also seriously conditioned to believe there is something “holy” about courts of law.
There can be many ways in which an authority figure may be able to manipulate a person with a low
IQ to cause an arrest which is not warranted.

One of the key elements in legal cases is to try and discredit the opposition. If a person had been
arrested at some point, this automatically prejudices magistrates and jury alike. People into legal
scams want to discredit “truth” and may go out of their way to find a way that a person who is their
“enemy” in the sense of being a block to their interests, to try and get such a person arrested.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                    Page 101
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                      2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Suspicious Choice

This conclusion is reached by the psycholegalanalytical process in unusual circumstances.

The exact implications of this conclusion are not understood.

There is no diagnosis criteria as such. The process itself forms this conclusion from all the available
information.


Example

A person applies to a body known as the Guardianship Tribunal to appoint a power of attorney and a
public guardian for his elderly, frail, parent with Alzheimer’s.

The Tribunal dismisses this based on a report from a head of the geriatric section in a public hospital.


Notes

Common sense suggests to always be weary when “manager” and “administrative” type of doctors
are asked to produce a complex medical report. This is not really their speciality and the reason why
this done is suspicious. While there could be legitimate reasons of course, this action is also
“suspicious” in circumstances when this is not likely to be the most appropriate person to produce
such a report. In the case of the Alzheimer’s Report in which the Guardianshipt Tribunal was
explained the court order that named Mrs J White as “protected” was purchased for $10,000, this
Tribunal asked the director of the rehabilitation unit to produce a medical report about Ms White’s
“testament capacity”. It is entirely possible this was done for “political reasons” in order to protect
an established practise of the “sale” of “protection” court orders by Australian local courts. The
director knew what he must do (in order to remain a director in a public hospital). In these particular
reports to do with the Alzheimer’s Scam, in two reports the MMSE is given incorrectly – in one case
out of 20 and in another out of 29. The blood pressure is given as 120/80 (typical for a young adult
but for an 80 year old usually bedridden who made the effort of being taken to hospital and walking
inside, this seem curious). In other words, there was enough “cause for concern” in these reports
and in the situation for the psycholegalanalytical process to come to this conclusion.

While exactly what this diagnosis means is not understood, regardless, a jury is entitled to be told of
this diagnosis as long as it is stressed that the conclusion is open to interpretation.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                    Page 102
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                   2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Suspicious Decision

Definition

A decision for which no natural or just cause can be found. Such a decision is made by the
subconscious usually and the person or group making this decision may not be consciously aware of
why the decision was made.

Refer glossary for the only acceptable psycholegalanalytical definition of a just cause.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                Page 103
                            Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                        2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Thrill Order or Situation or Arrest

Some magistrates, judges, etc., get a thrill (the id is gratified, recall your pleasure principle) by
signing court orders which restrict the rights of a person or which are part of a legal scam. The
subconscious knows legal scams.

This is a very easy observation to make. Each psychiatrist is left to their own ingenuity how to test or
confirm such. You would need to talk to a person, or observe them, before you would be in a
position to make this diagnosis. It is most unlikely this diagnosis could be inferred solely from a legal
decision in writing or even from the transcript of a hearing. It is the visual cues (be it from what is
being said, recall the example in the introduction, deep parts of the brain can equate sounds to a
visual cue) which the brain of the psychiatrist picks up which the psycholegalanalytical process is
after.

The equivalent for police is not as easy to spot. A police officer is conditioned to seriously believe
anyone who violates the law or a court order “does not respect the law”. This can become a religious
type fetish in some. When the police arrest a person and then put restrictions on his or her
movements until a court makes a decision, be suspicious of such a situation and consider whether
the arrest was not a “thrill arrest”. Talk to the police officer who made that decision and consider if
their “spiritual ego” (for want of better word) was gratified by that act.


Notes

Some lawyers will instantly understand a thrill order or legal scam, and may unconsciously applaud
the cleverness or trickery – but that does not mean their ego will not do its best to protect a person
in such a situation, or to act in the interest of such a person. Compare to a party in which a person
falls in such a way that makes others laugh – but this does mean others will not rush to the person’s
aid no matter how funny or ridiculous the situation may have been that caused this. (Some
situations can gratify the id but that is not always bad especially in a person with a strong ego.)

On that score, when considering the Australian situation but this is probably true everywhere, some
magistrates may well know the legal system has its imperfections and legal scams are possible and
even frequent and that some magistrates may be involved – but sometimes such a magistrate will go
out of his or her way to assist a person to find the best legal avenue or option.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                       Page 104
                          Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                     2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Valid-in-Law

This refers to any argument, presentation, or legal case, which has the right to be adjudicated by a
court of law.

There is no winner or looser from our perspective when a case is valid-in-law because it means only
a court of law can make a determination. (note: the upper courts are the main focus, the junior
courts often lack competence and jurisdiction).

If you ask a number of lawyers how will a court rule in this situation: a person is caught speeding by
a camera. He claims he was not driving and wants to take the matter to court. He claims he does not
know who was driving his car at the time because he was overseas and left his keys with his son, his
son left the keys around, one of his mates must have borrowed the car because his son says he was
not home at the time.

All the lawyers would suggest this is a “no win” case.

On the other hand, if you ask a good number of lawyers about a case and they can not be certain
how a court would rule, or if about half think one way and the other half the other way, then such is
a case that is valid-in-law.

But note that sometimes a situation arises in which a lawyer may say a matter is a no win case – but
that is only because to win may take an awful lot of money which the client is unlikely to have. If
your are suspicious such may be the reason the lawyers you asked said “no win”, then you may need
to alter your strategy and ask something like “if I gave you adequate funds, could you win this for
me?”




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                 Page 105
                          Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                     2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Uncertainty

The psycholegalanalytical process can only work on the information and input it has. This produces a
conclusion. With more input and information, a conclusion can be annulled or can alter – but in
some cases the conclusion itself may not alter but can become “uncertain”.

Example

At the first preliminary direction hearing to do with the right of Mr A White to a portion of his
mother’s estate, the registrar decided the wording of the claim was incorrect and that Mr R White
needs to find himself a lawyer.

The psycholegalanalytical process concluded this was “corrupt conduct”.

However, further “sitting in” at direction hearings resulted in the conclusion of uncertainty. While
the original conclusion was not changed, because it might still apply, the process decided that the
more likely reason for the registrar’s action was to assist Mr A White – the registrar from experience
knowing that a person representing himself or herself has less chance of a favourable outcome.
Hence the psycholegalanaytical process, while not dismissing or changing the original conclusion,
also formulated the conclusion of “uncertainty” (in regards to the conclusion of corrupt conduct).

What is interesting is why the process refused to alter the original conclusion. Possibly because such
is always a possibility in complex or suspicious circumstances, especially a situation in which
circumstantial evidence is such that a jury might accept the original magistrate that signed the
protection court order was paid $10,000 to do so. Possibly, because this suspicion can not be
dismissed by the psycholegalanalytical process alone, possibly that is the reason the process refused
to alter or amend this conclusion however it did also produce the conclusion of “uncertainty” in
regards to the original conclusion of corrupt conduct.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                 Page 106
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                       2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Unconscious Sadism

Psycholegalanalysis concludes that out of the 6 judicial officers studied during our case study
(magistrates, judges, associate justice, or similar), only 1, the youngest one, did not show clinical
signs of unconscious sadism.


Diagnosis Criteria

(a) Any judicial officer who accepts and is satisfied by what seems as evidence but which could be
invented or imagined or fabricated, or “inferred evidence”, and that evidence is particularly nasty,
has to be diagnosed with an “unconscious sadism” trait.

(b) any decision made that allocates a small sum of money to a person who needs such, whereas
much deliberations goes into how large a sum of money is to be allocated to law firms representing
that person

(c) any decision which severely impacts a person which a jury of normal and rational people would
not accept as just or proper or fair, regardless of whether this was correct in law.


Example

An individual who organized a Last Will and Testament for a parent with Alzheimer’s, leaving all to
himself, claimed in court that the reason his father had disinherited his brother was because the
brother gambled $5000 of his father’s money. As evidence this person presents a bank statement of
the now deceased parent and shows a sum of money being taken out from an ATM located near the
house of the other brother.

The judge accepted this evidence as is clear from his decision which clearly states “I am satisfied
John has gambled his father’s money.”

Notes

Unconscious sadism is not the same as a fetish. A judge may have a fetish of sadism which he is into
with consenting adults in ordinary life. This has no relationship to this diagnosis. Such fetish may be
“stress” that needs to release itself. In this case the conscious and subconscious are “in control”. The
unconscious binds this stress and the conscious finds an acceptable time to release it.

Whether this trait is congenital or acquired is not known. Possibly because of the horror stories
which judges are often exposed to ,this may be the way the brain adapts to survive - to form an
unconscious sadism trait which makes it possible to delight even in grotesque hearings or sentences.

It is not known if this is a permanent trait or whether this is the result of the conscious not being
able to control the sadistic nature of what is heard in many criminal or other trials. A person who
may have strong religious views, but who may be terrified of entering or experimenting with a fetish,
may be more prone to form this unconscious trait. The very reason this is called “unconscious” is
because the person is unlikely to be aware of it. If the person is aware this is no longer an
unconscious trait – but the conscious may still not be able to know how best to control this trait.

(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                    Page 107
                          Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                     2010

If you hear the comment from people such as staff who are familiar with a particular judicial officer,
a comment such as “he (or she) is just but fair” or similar – your index of suspicion should be
aroused that the subconscious in these people have identified an “unconscious sadism” trait.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                  Page 108
                          Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                     2010

Conclusion (Diagnosis) of Will Fraud

This diagnosis is automatic in the following circumstances:-

    a) A Last Will and Testament signed by a person with a diagnosed neurological deficit caused
       by any number of conditions such as dementia or substantial damage to the brain due to
       TIAs or other lesions, etc.

    b) A Last Will and Testament that leaves out a sibling, be such an adopted sibling, or a spouse
       who has been a spouse for more than 5 years.

    c) A Last Will and Testament is obtained in dubious circumstances, example, when one sibling
       is isolated from a parent by a court order.

    d) A Last Will and Testament signed by a person over 70 years of age that attempts to change
       the executor of an existing legal Will.


        The diagnosis can only be negated by a comprehensive hearing in a court of law and only
        providing all required witnesses have been made available and a full transcript is available
        and it becomes clear to the psycholegalanalyst that this diagnosis is not warranted.

        Always be suspicious when a sibling applies for a “protection” court order that isolates the
        executor of an exiting legal Will.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                  Page 109
                          Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                    2010

Will Syndrome

This proposed syndrome is a complex medical diagnosis. Unless the circumstances are very clear,
two psycholegalanalysts (or psychiatrists) may need to confer before this diagnosis is given.

This syndrome is considered a dangerous psychiatric condition for which treatment is mandatory.

The Will Syndrome does not apply solely to a person who is attempting to engineer a new Last Will
and Testament – a United States pilot whose story was explained in the series Air Crash
Investigations, had the Will Syndrome by this definition and attempted to kill three crew members in
order to crash an airplane so that he died during “work” and a huge amount of money would be paid
to his children, and he left a new Will on his bed prior to the flight which made sure whatever money
he receives is for his children.

The Will Syndrome is probably something you have to come across in order to truly grasp how
powerful an internal force it is. No ethics, morals, sense of right or wrong, or decency, anything
“human” is part of this syndrome, it is a pure “force” that wants its own way and will do anything to
achieve this. If you are talking or in the presence of someone with this, you may even feel like
slapping them in the face saying “wake up to yourself! You are not alone in the world.”

During the formation of this syndrome, permanent or semi-permanent delusions or fixations may set
in. A sense of entitlement may also be strong.


Diagnostic Criteria

Person who is not married and exhibits or appears to exhibit an inability to form a long term
relationship except possibly with a person who has a mental condition (e.g. schizophrenia,
regardless of whether this is or is not managed by appropriate medications)

OR

Person recently passed from promotion, or demoted, or a medical test or similar have been
conducted (or found in the person’s room or house or whatever) that may negate that person from
continuing his or her employment with the current employer

OR

Person has lied about past criminal convictions and has been found out and that may mean he or
she will be asked to resign from his or her current position

OR

Person may have an alcohol or drug problem (such may or may not be apparent to family members)

OR




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                 Page 110
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                      2010
Person who is a professional lawyer or court officer, or similar, and takes an interest in laws and
procedures to do with a Last Will and Testament after an elderly parent is diagnosed with a
condition that logically limits their remaining life (e.g. Alzheimer’s; incurable cancer)


AND


Actions of person appear consistent with a desire to engineer a new Last Will and Testament.

        Examples

        Air force pilot is acting strangely for weeks or days beforehand. On a day of a long flight,
        someone finds a New Last Will and Testament on their desk or bed (or similar; or a third
        party makes someone aware that a New Last Will and Testament has been made recently).

        A person obtains a court order protecting an elderly parent from a sibling named as the
        main beneficiary in an existing Last Will and Testament, or named as the executor of that
        Will or a sibling with a natural right to Power of Attorney (e.g. a sibling who already manages
        vital transactions such as house insurance for parent. This in fact, house insurance, is the
        most important and essential transaction. In the absence of a formal Power of Attorney and
        in the setting of a parent with Alzheimer’s or severe mental incapacity, this is the sibling to
        whom the parent, by their past action of asking the insurance company to send reminder
        notices to that sibling, has logically given Power of Attorney.)

        or

        Person exhibits tendencies consistent with the psychiatric diagnosis of a psychopath and
        may have mentioned, perhaps in passing, that his parent wants to make a new Last Will and
        Testament, or that the parent has complained about the current Will. [It can be impossible
        to anticipate how a psychopath might go about this so there are variations].

        or

        Person obtains or desires a medical report (other than from an experienced psychiatrist -
        say a psychiatrist who has practised for more than 6 years) in regards to an elderly parent’s
        “testament capacity” (or equivalent; or something along such lines), a report that names this
        person as the sole beneficiary of a Last Will and Testament (whether such a Will is in place or
        not; whether the words Last Will and Testament are mentioned directly or only alluded to).

        Even when such a medical report is from a psychiatrist, but the psychiatrist has a close
        association or affinity or family tie to the person in question, this report is not to be counted
        as reliable. Even when no immediate tie or link is apparent, and when the person is a man
        and the psychiatrist a woman, and if the two had ever slept with one another in the past
        regardless how long ago this was, such a medical report is not to be considered as reliable
        (and vice versa).

        or




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                    Page 111
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                    2010
        Person exhibits indirect evidence of focusing with the conscious or subconscious on a Last
        Will and Testament (either his or her own or a parent’s or sibling’s). Acceptable indirect
        evidence is (but the analyst must determine how many of such he or she would need to
        accept this alternative criterion) -

        a) man, not married, has girlfriend, goes to see her regularly and sleeps with her but does
           not have sex with her

        b) person creates, perhaps using a computer photo display, what might come across as a
           funeral pamphlet for an elderly parent who is still alive and not in immediate risk of
           death, and person shows this to at least one other sibling or family member

        c) person, not married, has girlfriend or boyfriend or appears to have, but refuses to accept
           telephone or similar voice messages from the said boyfriend or girlfriend, when another
           sibling is present

        d) family member is becoming detached from relatives and immediate siblings, for
           example, anytime a sibling and/or family arrive to visit parent with whom the family
           member lives, the family member quickly leaves and does not return while the family
           members are with the parent

        e) a sense of entitlement in regards to the property or wealth of elderly parent(s), that is,
           to an entitlement of a far greater portion (or all) of the parent(s) wealth should the
           parent(s) die

        f)   person is hardly ever present in the house of a parent (with whom the person lives)
             when another family member stays in the house for a weekend or more


Notes

The main input to the clinical development of this syndrome was the Mr R White of the Alzheimer’s
scam report. However, this syndrome is unlikely to affect only psychopaths.

Further, a few incidences in the life of Mr R White may provide some clinical keys into understanding
how such can come about (did any of the following contribute? This is not understood).

    a) When about three, a large pot of boiling water spilled on Mr R White, causing extensive
       burns.
    b) Between about 5 and 8, had to be looked after in an orphanage during the day because both
       parents had to work.
    c) When about nine, saw a shocking incident that resulted in divorce between Ms J White and
       her husband at that time. It is possible Mr R White had blocked this from memory.
    d) In teenage years, most prone to acne that required medication.

This syndrome is a complex entity and planning of events consistent with this syndrome may begin
years prior to the exact expression of this syndrome taking place.

This syndrome may cause delusions. How permanent such are is not understood.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                  Page 112
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                      2010

Personal Considerations
When I observed my half-brother (the Mr R White of the Alzheimer’s Scam Report) in the witness
box in a local court in 2005, he was telling one lie after another without any concern of exposure.
However, what struck me was somethings he said. It is possible, personally I even thought this highly
likely, is that the incident that led to divorce between his mother and father was blocked out of his
mind but I, for some reason, was being substituted in this incident?

That makes me suspicious whether the intent of the Will Syndrome is not “greed” or to “satisfy
sense of entitlement” as such, but this is a view anyone not skilled in psychiatry has a right to take,
but is in fact a far more powerful internal drive? Thus it is possible Mr R White’s Will Syndrome is
about punishing his mother for leaving him in an orphanage when young, this punishment by
isolating her from the son which she seems to prefer (a son with a family and children which she
adores), at the same time as “revenging” the “evil” this syndrome has shifted from the father onto
Mr A White.

The other mystery is the extensive burns Mr R White suffered when very young, perhaps 2 or 3. The
cause was his grandmother who put a pot of boiling water on the floor forgetting the 2 year old was
in the kitchen. The 2 year old crawled to it and pulled the handle, causing the water to run all over
him.

Ms J White adored her mother and was ever so sad to leave Poland for Australia. In time, when in
her seventees, Ms J White even made a trip to Poland whose primary purpose was to arrange for a
gravestone on her mother’s grave. Is it possible, as unlikely as this may seem, the Will Syndrome
may have begun back then in the child? The aim revenge? A insignificant as this may have been
then, it may have bloomed with successive episodes such as being left in an orphanage during the
day in some formative years. Freud had pointed out that some formative aspects of the psyche form
in childhood – normal adjustment may be restricted by life events as they eventuate. Hence while it
seems to me he was too young, and while there are other children who are burnt or traumatised but
do not develop the Will Syndrome, I have this suspicion that, somehow, that incident tied in with
later incidents and eventually the Will Syndrome bloomed.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                    Page 113
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                        2010

Appendix A: Animal-Humans and Humans

An animal human is defined as the person whose brain is not capable of forming a human mind.

It is not nice to call anyone an animal-human, this is only for clinical differentiation reasons.

5GL-Lisa (explained in treatise) projects three states of brain/mind:

    1. The body and brain as part of the same biological organism.
    2. The human mind is a transparent structure in the image of the brain with walls and
       pendulums and other structures. The structure forms from the activity in the brain but is not
       related directly to any area of activity.
    3. When mind closes, an oval shaped magnetic-like field across the brain forms which compels
       neural networks to rewire or to prepare an area of the brain to learn new information or
       skill. This is the only “superficial mind” the animal-human is capable of.

A rough estimate is that 9 out of 10 people are animal-humans.

The intelligence of a human and animal-human is exactly the same. Further, it follows that in rare
cases the brain of the animal-human will awaken to the deficiency of the mind and will condition
itself to in fact reproduce – or even improve on! - many of the higher functions of the human mind.

Subject to the natural individual differences of course, the physical appearance of an animal-human
and human is exactly the same.


The reason for these labels is only for the purpose of a medical diagnosis, or to assist healing, using
this new science. Example:


    a) A “human soldier” with a post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). According to this science,
       such is likely to be the result of the war situation and not repressed memories of childhood
       or negative experiences in childhood. Psychoanalysis is not appropriate. Just talking over the
       philosophy of war and conflicts, the fact that the world has walls whether we like it or not
       and armies are important and conflicts arise, ought to balance the ego.

    b) On the other hand, in the animal human soldier with PTSD thought to have been brought
       about by a conflict or war situation, then regardless of what took place, this ought have no
       impact on the natural animal brain – hence if PTSD develops, this is likely to do with what
       Freud described as the unfinished business of childhood. Psychoanalysis is appropriate.


Assume that general duties police and general soldiers are without exception animal-humans. The id
senses the young brain as lacking the capacity to form a human mind, and the id compels such a
person to become police or soldier. Within an estimated 2 years, the brain in such a person is
conditioned and becomes a natural animal brain. (Note that psychologists who have studied
soldiers, as I recall these were United States findings, have found the IQ typically around 75.)




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                     Page 114
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                      2010
Note that not all animal-humans join the police forces. It is those who are “compelled” to join, these
are the ones in whom the id had decided long ago that the brain (and person) is better off by
reverting back to a natural animal brain. These people can not help but try and join the forces. This
“compulsion” is likely to run in the family.

Note that not all soldiers or police are animal-humans. In some countries there is conscription. Or, a
clever military add, say with a young female soldier with long legs and brief skirt, may interest
impressionable young “human” males full of hormones to join the army.

So, assume all are, but keep an open mind because sometimes this will not be the case.

The use of the term “animal-human” is not warranted outside a clinical situation and if used then
solely under a medical oath and solely for the purpose of therapy.

We believe, completely, that if you need to explain to a police officer or soldier (who is your patient;
perhaps someone with PTSD) that you suspect their brain is what is known as “animal–human brain”
in one medical science – they will appreciate you! At first such may not like it, but then will because
they will know you understand them. The brain will be “content” with you, even if the person is not
so keen on that word, and will cooperate perhaps against the wishes of the person.

It is likely police detectives are commonly animal-humans (but usually with a high intelligence; but
not necessarily a very high IQ). This assumption is based on the fact that, from research, police
detectives appear to avoid investigating crimes by psychopaths like the plague! Such find these
baffling, with the psychopath having an agenda of their own. This is consistent with an animal-
human brain that can not relate to the human mind when it is twisted (as in a psychopath, and note
that it is unlikely any psychopath is an animal-human. However, a person with a Will Syndrome may
come across as a psychopath but in fact may be an animal-human). On the other hand, the animal-
human brain readily relates to the vast majority of crimes not acceptable in society. The more
natural the state of that brain (i.e. the natural animal brain), the sharper it would be (in theory) in
matters to do with finding the offenders. [It follows, ideally, hypothetically, that the most senior
detectives ought to have a true natural animal brain].

It is likely army officers at senior levels are all humans. The logic being that military strategy, while
may seem like a game to the ordinary person, requires a complex mind. While an animal-human can,
often, learn to do with the brain what the mind does in the human, nevertheless such a brain is likely
to be “impetuous”, wanting to get a job over and done with and prepared to only “half plan” an
operation (due to the fact such is eager to get the mission over and done with; most of the brain is
compelling itself to just do – its a natural animal brain, it does not plan as such in the same way that
humans plan, it prefers to do, that is what it craves, action not planning). The human mind, on the
other hand, restrains the brain from being too eager to begin something the mind has not
completed studying. It is highly unlikely, for these reasons, that an animal-human would get too far
in the army in the sense of promotions (could go quite high, true, but never the top echelons of
command or planning.)

It is most unlikely any air-force pilot is animal-human. High technology is not what the natural animal
brain is naturally into. The closer to nature, the more content the natural animal brain is. (But,
clearly, if the air-force generates sexy ads this may attract highly intelligent animal-humans also. The
animal-human may have better reflexes and response times than the human, however, such may be
reluctant to join the air-force because they have a natural aversion to any high technology such as a
fighter jet has). This does mean an animal-human does not desire to learn to use a mobile telephone


(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                    Page 115
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                      2010
or Internet, that is because there is little choice in this matter nowadays – but there is a choice
whether one wants to fly high technology jets or not.

It is unlikely lawyers who are animal-humans could ever get too far in the judicial system. Most of
the upper legal decisions require the human mind. On the other hand, due to the fact that the
animal-human brain does not have a conscience in the same way that humans do, such a lawyer
might be very successful because they may have no ethics or morals in how they go about winning a
case. (Example: if a human receives a letter and is asked in a court if she or he had received it, they
would say yes. On the other hand, an animal-human may say yes only if the letter had been sent
registered mail else he would deny it when this was not convenient to admit. A natural state of mind
causes this, this is not exactly lying as far as the brain is concerned - even though it comes across as
such to an observer.]




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                    Page 116
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                     2010

Appendix B: When Asked to Revue a Psycholegalanalytical
Report or Study

When asked to comment about, or revue, a report produced by a psycholegalanalyst, the following
is essential:

    1. The author of the report must have medical diagnosis association areas in the brain. This is
       fundamental! Any medical practitioner would have these. If the individual is not a medical
       practitioner, then if he or she has studied medicine for a number of years such should form
       also (assuming this person is not studying the first year always because he can not pass the
       first year). This study could be home study over at least say five years however a practical
       purpose or application would need to have resulted before we could conclude that such
       areas are in the brain. (e.g. a person working for a group of doctors for say five years and
       developing a diagnostic computer package is highly likely to have formed such areas even
       though he or she may not be able to diagnose in the manner a physician can – to diagnose is
       not the important bit, to have these areas in the brain is.)

    2. The person must have gone through psychoanalysis, be it self-psychoanalysis. If the person
       is not a psychiatrist, then ask them if they have read Freud’s lectures on psychoanalysis.
       These are such that anyone taking to these will, subconsciously, go through this process. This
       second criteria is not as critical as the first – makes little difference to what extent the
       psychoanalysis process worked (or even if at all really). Assume anyone having read some of
       the lectures of Freud would have gone through this process or is capable of this.


If the above are not satisfied, then a person is not capable of using psycholegalanalysis.

If you are asked to produce a second opinion in regards to matters raised in a report which claims to
be a psycholegalanalytical report – but it was not produced by a qualified person, then don’t waste
your time. If the person is not suitably qualified then any report they produce, whatever it is claimed
to be, can not be a psycholegalanalytical report by our definition.

And don’t be tricked! In large organization an executive might put pressure on a lawyer to produce
what looks like a psychoanalytical report, and then may pay lots of money to a psychiatrist to revue
the report and write a good revue. Focus on the criteria. Was the person who wrote it qualified? If
the answer is no then it does not matter if a hundred psychiatrists had given such a report a good
revue, it can not be, by our definition, a psycholegalanalytical report. The most vital key to being
able to produce one is to have medical diagnosis association areas in the brain. If you then talk to
whoever wrote it, and are not satisfied such could be present, then it can not be a psychoanalytical
report by our definition.

Also do bear in mind that the actual conclusion pattern can vary between two analysts. What you
need to be satisfied about is whether the diagnosis criteria was satisfied. The conclusion itself should
be of no special interest to you in that sense.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                   Page 117
                          Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                      2010
In regards to personal bias, prejudice, hate, or malice, etc.

If you are asked to be an expert witness and revue a psycholegalanalytical report, then a cross
examining lawyer may ask you about such matters, may ask if in your opinion such are present in the
conclusion. Such don’t actually apply, in this sense, to the process of psycholegalanalysis. There is
none of such in the process, in a sense, because in the final analysis these are exactly the forces used
to calculate a conclusion pattern. Due to the fact that the very process of psychoanalysis has mainly
to do with the unconscious, the process itself can distinguish between personal biases and so on,
and the conclusion. In any case, the conclusion pattern is formed by a modified ego and not the ego.
If the modified ego has introduced what comes across as a bias or prejudice or the like, then it has a
reason for doing this. The reason could be that we all have a particular bias (say in a certain culture
or group) and in order to get around this, the modified ego may have found a technique of using
what may come across as a “bias of a kind” to negate or hide a cultural or occupational group bias.

And good luck trying to explain this in a court room situation!


Try Your Best to Explain or Clarify a Psycholegalanalytical Conclusion Pattern

Any person who is impacted by a psycholegalanalytical report, be such an impact superficial or
imaginary, has every right to ask how parts of the conclusion fit together. You may thus be asked to
explain in a court or to a person a report from another analyst.

Recall the conclusion in the first diagnosis (the most important diagnosis):

Psycholegalanalytical conclusion: Corrupt Conduct

Jason and Roberts (the law firm) had refused to have anything to do with the matter because it is
well known to experienced legal firms that magistrates in NSW sell court orders known as AVOs to
solicitors and legal firms. The going price is $10,000. These can be used so a client can obtain a
female child as s sexual slave, she named “protected” on the court order; or can be used to isolate
the sole heir and sole executor of the Last Will and Testament of an elderly parent especially with
Alzheimer’s, and engineer a Power of Attorney and new Last Will and Testament. On such AVOs, the
parent is named as “protected” and no reason given and no just cause apparent. Most (or All or
Major) legal firms in NSW are “house trained” to make sure they do not bring into the open the legal
scams that AVOs make possible, hence the reason for the refusal of Jason and Roberts.

You may be asked how did the author come up with this figure of $10,000? A fair question. The
output is from a modified ego that deciphers the psycholegalanalytical process, and finds the best
memory areas from which the most appropriate associations can be drawn.

If need be, revue all the evidence and find the most likely source that the modified ego used. In this
case, in the Alzheimer’s Report, Mr R White at the original hearing to do with an AVO he engineered,
requested $10,000 in costs. This is so unusual the modified ego focused on this. In genuine cases it is
the police who apply for an AVO and it costs nothing. Even if a legal firm applies, a cost of $2000
would be high. So a figure of $10,000 is so extraordinary in this situation that the modified ego had
no choice but to put such into perspective.


You may be asked “does that mean a magistrate gets $10,000?”


(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                   Page 118
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                      2010
Think clearly and well about such matters. That is not what the conclusion says. It does not say “a
magistrate is paid $10,000 to sign a court order.” Sure, sometimes this may be so – assume there are
always a few rotten apples in any large organization. No, the conclusion pattern is referring to the
cost of getting such a court order, not that a magistrate is paid this amount of money. This is correct
if you read the Alzheimer’s Scam report and how much Mr R White wanted in costs - $10,000.

But note, the modified ego when it is uncertain, might produce an expression that can be
interpreted in more than one way. In this case the modified ego might have been uncertain whether
to mention directly that this is in fact the case as far as it deduced, that the $10,000 was going into
the pocket of the magistrate in question.

The word “sell” in the conclusion pattern might throw a person. Why is the word sell being used?
Recall our definition of “just cause”? To the modified ego producing that conclusion pattern, any
court order that does not have a just cause is “sold”. That is the legal definition the modified ego is
using. We could reword this as “as long as $10,000 is paid to a legal firm, a magistrate will sign a
court order known as AVO even when there is no just cause.”

Sometimes you may want to reword parts of the conclusion that you are explaining to others.

What about the sentence “well known to experienced legal firms”. You may be asked how might this
have come about. Well, Mr A White had enormous difficulty finding a legal firm to manage an aspect
of the claim to do with his late mother’s Last Will and Testament, an aspect very easily managed by
even a tiny legal firm. A claim under what is known as the family provision act which basically says
that even if an immediate family member is left out of a Will, they are still entitled to some share in
the deceased estate or wealth. A simple form is all that is required to be filled in by a lawyer. As this
proved impossible to find, the modified ego concluded lawyers had to be “house trained” to make
sure they don’t get involved in certain types of claims.

In a way, the result of a modified ego is like that of a master detective inventing a hypothetical
scenario that fits all the known facts. Then the detective might go about trying to find evidence for a
particular scenario. However, the modified ego in you that learns to do this, does this more like
Sherlock Holmes – dismisses all the possibles and whatever remains, however improbable on the
surface (and that which can not be explained from known facts) forms part of the conclusion
pattern.

In summary, it ought to be always possible to deduce how a modified ego produced a conclusion
pattern. Anything that is not clear, you may need to shift through the available evidence to find the
source of the information. The conclusion pattern need not be agreeable to anyone – neither is the
science of psychoanalysis agreeable to many – but the conclusion pattern has to be consistent with
the situation, circumstances, and the information presented and obtained.

If a modified ego produced something like “when police officer Johnson was in England”, when in
fact Johnson had never been in England, then this would not be a valid conclusion pattern. It would
not be from a modified ego deciphering a psycholegalanalytical process – assume someone
tempered with the conclusion in such a case. As disagreeable as a conclusion pattern may be to
many, a valid psycholegalanalytical conclusion will fit all the known facts.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                    Page 119
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                       2010

Appendix C: Simple Overview of Psycholegalanalysis (or
Neuroscience in Psychiatry)

IMAGINE yourself sitting in a large lecture room at University. A man at the front in a suit gives the
presentations. He has an assistant, a woman in a light red ladies business suit.



Presentation
1.1 Ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to introductory lectures in a proposed new medical science titled
psycholegalanalysis. This science comes under a larger umbrella titled Neuroscience in Psychiatry.
Psycholegalanalysis is very specific and, if you study psychiatry, in a way straightforward, however,
the umbrella of the science under which it logically belongs is not so straightforward.

1.2 Consider medicine. Anatomy is a critical part of medicine. I have named this new proposed
medical science as Neuroscience in Psychiatry because while much input is used from psychiatry, I
tend to use only that input which I can map onto the brain directly. There is much more in psychiatry
than I found a way of using, simply because I could not work out the brain process, be it a theoretical
process, that was involved. Without doubt, as the science improves, my initial dependence on relating
everything to how the brain works may prove not so necessary.

1.3 At University, I studied science, majoring in mathematics and physics and computer science. The
first years of my career was with the Department of Health in their computing sections. Besides
computer programming, there is no other field of knowledge as far as I know that can form in the
brain association areas that think and work in terms of bits and bytes. Eventually, after twenty or so
years developing the 5GL-Doctor medical diagnosis expert system, the medical diagnosis areas in my
brain may be unique in that these tend to put medicine together in terms of bits and bytes. However, I
do not believe this uniqueness of my medical diagnosis association areas is necessary for the medical
diagnosis areas to manage the process of psycholegalanalysis.

1.4 What is the new proposed science about? Perhaps the simplest explanation is about mapping the
truth from myths and fables. Is a politician presenting a point of view being truthful? Is a court of law
presenting a judgment consistent with the actual law? If a politician is not presenting truth, are they
lying? If you have ever worked with high quality door to door salesmen you may come to the
conclusion that what are lies to observers, are not lies to such people but the “skill” they develop in
“getting a foot” in the door. What is the truth? Is such a person lying – or has their unconscious lost
notion of what a lie is when it comes to survival in their work?

1.5 What about psychopaths who are serial killers? Sometimes doctors are asked to determine if such
a psychopath knew right from wrong. Sometimes doctors conclude that such must have because they
ran away from the scene of the crime. Superficial thinking. The human brain has many smart areas,
none of which may understand right or wrong, but some of which may understand an action a person
will be in trouble for and so run away.

1.6 The field of psychiatry accepts cultural biases and differences as normal within a particular
culture. Such are not a mark of, for want of better term, insanity. However, Neuroscience in
Psychiatry explains that there are cultural groups in society that also may work different to others. It
would be incorrect, from a clinical point of view, to label a police officer or magistrate as corrupt if
what they have done is something accepted in their subculture. As wrong as labelling a door to door
salesman as a liar and fraudster just because what some do is not acceptable to an observer (but is

(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                     Page 120
                            Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                         2010
acceptable to the subculture of door to door salesmen).

1.7 Neuroscience in Psychiatry, specifically psycholegalanalysis, attempts to study the unconscious in
such a way as to yield a medical diagnosis which are known as conclusions. Is a person lying or not?
Is a person corrupt or not? Such things are not readily understood relative to some subcultures such as
lawyers, politicians, door to door salesmen. (It is most unlikely a politician will tell a blatant lie, rather
he or she will use words in a manner that mask truth).

1.8 Neuroscience in psychiatry is very much about finding the unconscious clues and putting them
through a filter, the process of psycholegalanalysis, and allow this process to yield conclusions. A
person must have sound medical diagnosis areas in the brain for the process to work properly. I would
think that only medical doctors in particular psychiatrists can truly work with this science. There are
exceptions, such as myself, being people who develop strong medical diagnosis association areas in
the brain while not medical doctors as such, but this would surely be an extreme exception.

1.9 Freud, the father of psychoanalysis, pointed out that 2/3 of the psyche is in the unconscious. The
story of F.A. Kekule, the founder of modern chemistry, clearly shows how powerful the unconscious
is. It can think much better than the conscious, however, presenting the information from the
unconscious to the conscious is not easy.

1.10 Consider a word such as “politics”. How does a person understand this? The brain links to
images of politicians, government, all manner of things. The number of links in the brain are
enormous. Where the activity of the brain is, there I AM.

1.11 While there is an area at the front of the brain known as the anterior cingulate cortex which is
associated with the self or “I”, any major part of the brain when active results in an active energy
system that is a consciousness in its own right. A state of mind formed from wide associations in the
brain results in an “I AM” consciousness which understands no other point of view except those
aspects that gave it birth. Consider a strong toothache. Nothing but the pain matters! A tough active
association area in the brain will dominate other areas.

1.12 The left brain is the dominant brain in all of us. While there are exceptions to the structure of the
brain, we will use a typical model in these presentations. Thus for this discussion assume the left brain
is the two-dimensional brain while the right is the three-dimensional brain. In these presentations we
are also talking about the normal brain as distinct from one which may have neurological deficits such
as in dementia, or which may become active in different ways to normal brains such as the brain of a
psychopath. (to minimise complications at this point, we also refrain from thinking of brain’s that may
have dyslexia or a thought disorder or similar).

1.13 Words are an important tool in the modern world. Such are used to communicate, however,
sometimes such communication is shallow. Psychologists define their own terms which label people;
lawyers do the same; many aspects of society do much the same. Not only do some specialist lawyers
invent certain “patterns” and try to sell these to a jury, some may actually believe their own
inventions! Example. Consider the Islamic advertisement executive taken to court by the Catholic
Church not pleased with an ad campaign. The lawyer can invent all manner of reason why this person
is “prejudiced” against Catholics and will try to sell a jury that as the reason for the ads failing – that
this was intentional on the part of the executive. In a world more prone to being “insulted” by the
actions of another, in a world more prone to developing specialist lawyers than can find all manner of
actions which they then can contribute to say “malice”, a natural defence is important. Neuroscience
in Psychiatry offers such a defence.

1.14 Such labels and definitions can blind us to facts and truth. I recall a person who became
separated after thirty years of marriage due to his former wife’s mental breakdown. He went to an
employment agency to help him find work. Standard questions were asked including marital

(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                        Page 121
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                      2010
relationship. The person explained but the person behind the desk did not want to know all this, all
she wanted was to tick a box which said that either this person was capable of a relationship or was
not. She then ticked the box “relationship problems”. (30 years of marriage and relationship
problems? Defies rational sense!)

1.15 These standard slots into which people from all walks of life are put into by different groups,
how do they arise? Many arise from legal definitions. Not so much those laws defined by government
but by the courts. These people are into words and how to define everything. These people are not
into long tales and a thorough assessment of a situation - they want to categorise everything using
words and phrases which to them says it all.

1.16 There is big big difference between the need for names of car parts, for example, and the need to
label people. Without a complex naming convention for parts of a car, no one may be able to put a car
together. But, when it comes to understanding the psyche and soul and a person, the opposite holds
true. The more we label aspects of personality or behaviour, the more risk there is that what we end up
with may have no relationship to truth or facts or evidence.

1.17 However, labelling people and actions is so common, especially in law, that Neuroscience in
Psychiatry was developed in parts to come to grips with how does this work in the brain. How does
the state of mind form that knows how to label people or actions? What are the anchors of such a state
of mind? Is such a rational state of mind or not?

1.18 The major importance of this science is to understand a real life situation. That is the
Alzheimer’s Scam as defined, and also a room full of mirrors in the Supreme Court of NSW that
appears to be fraud after fraud to do with a Last Will and Testament.

1.19 An Expert Witness document prepared for that court in the case mentioned, explains all the
specifics. Here is a person, a laywer, who invents one lie after another and pays $10,000 to a specialist
legal firm to obtain a court order naming his Alzheimer’s mother “protected” from the true executor
of the only legal Will in place. Then this person organizes a new Last Will and Testament and this is
passed through a section of the court known as Probate Division - so for an investment of $10,000 this
psychopath obtained for himself a property he otherwise would not have.

1.20 It is not a question of corruption. Sometimes such may happen of course but our science is not
about such really. The person in question is a psychopath. His brain far more developed to process
techniques of manipulation. Throughout his career as a lawyer, his brain would have seen a court of
law as the perfect weapon for his special wants and needs. His brain would have worked out every
possible way he could obtain court orders, what lies he could tell without anyone detecting such, and
so on. His brain worked out how to use a court order to obtain exclusive access to a demented parent’s
bank account. His brain worked out how to engineer a new Last Will and Testament. His brain
worked out how to persuade a free public hospital geriatric specialist that his demented mother still
had “testament capacity” and on this basis a new Last Will and Testament was engineered. These are
not minor feats! (Unless this is a common and well known about scam, but even then, there is enough
in the Alzheimer’s Scam report to see the genius of a psychopath who is a lawyer).

1.21 That psychopath brain has provided all the clues required for us to focus on understanding using
a new medical science Neuroscience in Psychiatry. It was that brain that had worked out long before
psycholegalanalysis had, that in those who are magistrates and judges, the “objective” state of mind is
in fact an insane state of mind formed from delusions, fixations, and ideas of reference.

1.22 This is not so easy to appreciate in lawyers. However, consider a person who is unemployed.
What assumptions are you likely to make? Lacks education? Lacks skills? Let us say the person is a
medical doctor with much experience but suddenly can not find work even though there are many
positions. What is the recruitment consultant to make of this? He or she assumes this person may have

(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                    Page 122
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                        2010
some criminal history or anger management issues or such along such lines. In other words, the state
of mind that forms in that recruitment consultant is in fact a state of mind formed from delusions,
fixations, and ideas of reference.

1.23 In summary, Neuroscience in Psychiatry is a study of the unconscious that gives birth to a state
of mind. Psycholegalanalysis is a specific application of this science. Unlike psychiatry, Neuroscience
in Psychiatry is not so much about determining a mental illness or a behavioural disorder, it is more to
clinically define as correctly as possible certain actions and situations that on the surface may defy
explanation or logic or reason. The conclusions of psycholegalanalysis are legitimate and bona fide
medical diagnoses because it is the medical diagnosis areas of the brain that are used to reach a
conclusion. Now and then when a conclusion can not be reached, assertions can be put together from
partial conclusions. Assertions are not diagnoses but more of an educated opinion.



Our Definition of Insanity

                                       In a typical brain, the left and right cerebral hemispheres have
                                       different functions. Some people have atypical brains in the
                                       sense the roles of the left and right are reversed; or functions
                                       found in one brain are shared by both. The left and right brain
                                       are connected by a cell rich tissue known as the corpus
                                       callosum. This tissue is relatively larger in women. For the
                                       purpose of making this document as simple as possible, the
                                       typical brain is the model. Presented with an atypical brain, the
                                       neuroscientist needs to make adjustments to parts of this
                                       document. Of course, in persons such as psychopaths the brain
                                       can work differently too – this report does not consider such
                                       atypical or unusual brain activity patterns.




                                 A split-brain is a person whose corpus callosum has been surgically
                                 severed. Studies of such patients have demonstrated that the typical
                                 left brain is purely 2-dimensional, while the right brain is 3-
                                 dimensional. Only the right can see in focus, the left attempts to
                                 explain that focus using sets of two dimensional arguments or
                                 descriptions. In the image, a split brain patient is asked to cover one of
                                 his eyes and draw what the eye sees. The nerves from the left eye
                                 connect to the right brain, and vice versa. The left brain simply can not
                                 see a three dimensional view. However, note the top picture? The right
                                 brain draws one window instead of a number. The right brain while
                                 able to see a picture as a whole does not see in the manner of the left
                                 brain. Only together can the two brains perceive adequately. (Note that
the same can be observed in brain damage patients. Also note that this is a picture from one patient,
and because the left and right brain can be atypical and share functions, it may be possible to find a
split brain patient who in fact will draw three windows with the right brain. This does not alter the
thrust of this report which uses the typical brain as a model. Note that a split brain patient with an
atypical brain that shares functions, may draw say a three dimensional house but with one and a bit
window rather than the three windows in this example; the left brain may draw something that hints at
three dimensions).



(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                      Page 123
                            Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                        2010



                                             At the front of the brain is an area known as the anterior
                                             cingulate cortex. This area “lights up” on scans when the
                                             brain does something of its own volition – the area
                                             associated with the “self” or “I”. In Alzheimer’s, most of
                                             the frontal brain is damaged and so is this area. Without
                                             this area working correctly, no person can be said to know
                                             what they are doing. Either they do out of habit, that is
                                             procedural memory learnt in childhood and early adult
                                             years, or they do something because someone else becomes
                                             their “will”.



An insane state of mind is said to exist, as defined herein, when the left and right brain loose
coordination. This can be observed but often what we observe we fail to appreciate correctly.

There is an important distinction between an insane state of mind and a “diffuse” state of mind. The
latter tends to form from those brain areas not useful to its purpose. A used car salesman does not
want to stress the defects of a car and those brain areas which know about such are avoided when the
state of mind forms. A judge or similar may avoid issues that may suggest violations of other laws and
may desire to focus only on the matter at hand.

In studies of split-brain patients behavioural anomalies can be observed. A split brain patient may put
on a shirt, button it, but as the left hand buttons, the other hand unbuttons. An “insane” action, a
bizarre action, which we fail to observe for what it is. However, this insane action is not missed by the
mind – one split-brain patient while making soup was unable to stop her left hand adding more salt.
She solved the problem by tying her left hand to her apron.

Notice a contradiction? An observer might observe this act of tying a hand to an apron as a mark of
insanity. In fact it is the opposite. Tying the hand is a mark of sanity. In some situations, if we fail to
understand the state of mind, we may reach an incorrect conclusion. While a state of mind can form
that is insane by our definition, the rest of the brain and “will” may attempt to find a way around this
state of mind. Action(s) on their own may not demonstrate insanity by our definition – an action(s) in
the context of the situation has to be understood. The act of tying one hand to the apron is a sane
action that attempts to control an insane state of mind.

Note that certain neurotransmitters need to be present in sufficient quantities, for example dopamine,
for the “will” to work correctly. The discussion above assumes a brain with no hormonal or chemical
deficiency.


Hypothesis

One way in which a magistrate or judge (or similar) may attempt to control an insane state of
mind is by citing precedents. The more citations, the more likely an insane state of mind has
formed – or, the more citations, the stronger your index of suspicion should be that the brain
is atypical. One or two citations may be the norm when the brain is in an insane state of mind,
any more may suggest an atypical brain.



(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                      Page 124
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                        2010

The areas of law and religion are areas in which the citation of precedents or references can be an
indicator of an insane state of mind. In other areas, be such science or engineering or medicine,
citation of references is usually to indicate a particular research has been done already and it is
credible. In religion and law, this can be far from truth, and citations to precedents or earlier teachings
may be a “cover” to explain that which the brain fails to come to grips with.

Our definition of insanity applies specifically to those into law, hence we can use the expression
insanity-in-law. It means loss of coordination between the left and right brain thus distortion of
perspective resulting in irrational decisions presented as valid and legitimate and correct.

Hypothesis

Any legal decision that does not stand up to common sense, is likely an insane or twisted or
corrupt decision, or one gratifying the “id” of the decision maker(s). When politicians market
themselves to be elected by explaining a law or laws they will put into place, they are
appealing to common and natural sense in people, not to “legal deliberations”. Thus common
sense or natural sense must always be evident in a “sane” legal decision.




Psycholegalanalysis
The founder of modern chemistry is F.A.Kekule. No matter how hard he tried to work it out
using his reason, he could not – then one day while drowsy on a local bus into his mind’s eye
the unconscious projected images of chains of molecules and how such bond. Modern
chemistry was born! The point being, the human unconscious is a far superior intelligence to
conscious human reason and thoughts. No amount of consideration and deliberation can
surpass the power of the unconscious to analyse and reason in its own way. The information
in this report is also produced by a new medical science titled psycholegalanalysis – that
medical science has to do with the unconscious.



Psychoanalysis is a science of the mind practised by most psychiatrists. It is an “offensive”
science to the outsider, so much so it was at first banned by the American Medical
Association. Now it is the cornerstone of understanding the mind. The reason it is offensive is
because it deals with basic animal urges which the human brain harbors. Not urges people
who are not psychiatrists wants to know about or even consider they may have in the
unconscious. Zygmund Freud, the founder of the science, clearly told his students this
medical science is not a subject for a dinner table discussion. It is a science absolutely
offensive to non medical experts because it deals with matters we don’t wish to know about.


Psycholegalanalysis is a proposed new medical science pioneered by 5GL Software. It is the science
of psychoanalysis, however, all known unconscious input used by lawyers is removed from
consideration.

The conclusions of this science are medical diagnosis because only the medical diagnosis areas in the

(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                      Page 125
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                      2010
frontal lobes are used during this analysis. But note any conclusion is only valid until information
comes along that mandates or warrants changing the conclusion.

The conclusions are not easily interpreted using plain sense. In most cases so far, the conclusion was
reached well before it was clear why such a conclusion was reached.

There is a Clinical Manual for psychiatrists, the CMPL, which explains the conclusions of this
science. The manual can be downloaded from relevant 5GL Software web pages.

The conclusions can only be interpreted by psychiatrists (or equivalent) familiar with the science of
psycholegalanalysis and how the conclusions come about. Usually they can not be taken literally and
normal natural understanding can not, in the beginning, be used to understand such a conclusion. In
all cases thus far, only much later did facts emerge that put a conclusion into a rational framework.

The Legal Services Commissioner of NSW (the “police” of law firms) has been made aware of the
first and second formal conclusion as explained below.


First Formal Conclusion
The first formal conclusion was made against the law firm (name). The conclusion was
“incompetence”. (name) of (name) was formally informed of this via registered mail in about
November 2009.

Only in April 2010 did it become clear what this conclusion could mean. It would seem (name) had
failed to appreciate the information given to him, had assumed the law firm (name) representing
another sibling would act ethically and properly, and waited for this – in fact, (name) had not advised
(name) that they have a Will which they will use to apply for probate until after the process had
completed.

Clearly, (name) should have immediately applied for a Cavet which blocks probate until the matter of
a Will is resolved by the Supreme Court.

Thus the conclusion was correct and justified – incompetence. (name) failed to take proper action to
block a legal process based on a Will that had no legal status and which was obtained under highly
dubious circumstances.



Second formal conclusion
This was made against the law firm (name). The conclusion was awesome and impossible to
understand. The conclusion, as documented in the CMPL and as explained to the Legal Services
Commissioner, was:

(name) (the law firm) had refused to have anything to do with the matter because it is well known to
experienced legal firms that magistrates in NSW sell court orders known as AVOs to solicitors and
legal firms. The going price is $10,000. These can be used so a client can obtain a female child as s
sexual slave, she named “protected” on the court order; or can be used to isolate the sole heir and sole
executor of the Last Will and Testament of an elderly parent especially with Alzheimer’s, and
engineer a Power of Attorney and new Last Will and Testament. On such AVOs, the parent is named
as “protected” and no reason given and no just cause apparent. Most (or All or Major) legal firms in
NSW are “house trained” to make sure they do not bring into the open the legal scams that AVOs
make possible, hence the reason for the refusal of (name).

(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                    Page 126
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                        2010

This conclusion was impossible to understand properly until April 27th, 2010, when I walked in the
Supreme Court of NSW, into a room in which about 70 succession lawyers were waiting. The
conclusion hit me like a brick! Mass corruption in matters of inheritance!

Note that as explained in the CMPL, the “$10,000” does not mean a magistrate was paid that money.
While it could mean that in some cases, however, it refers to the amount of money the person who
instigated the Alzheimer’s Scam (refer Alzheimer’s Scam Report) wanted in legal costs for an AVO.
This amount was so extraordinary that psycholegalanalysis failed to find an alternate explanation
other than the one stated. It is stressed in the CMPL that the conclusions need careful analysis, and
such can not be taken literally and no assumptions are warranted as to what the conclusion implies.

Thus the conclusion was correct and justified.


Other Relevant Conclusions
(a) The state of mind of objectivity, that is the state of mind in magistrates and judges or similar, is
formed from delusions, fixations, and ideas of reference. It is an insane state of mind, however, it is
usually of no clinical significance because it simply compels areas of the brain to use natural skills –
the danger is that if this state of mind is manipulated and twisted, it will seek borders in the brain’s
association areas and use these as “rationality”. Thus nonsense can become a legal fact and acquire
legal status. The prime example is the acceptance by Supreme Court of NSW of “testament capacity”
as a valid reason to accept a Will signed by a person with devastating injury to the frontal lobes.
Absolute madness!

(b) The corruption of the inheritance laws has to do with primeval instincts and urges. The animal
brain strives to dominate and control others. The religion of law has become the most common means
of satisfying this primeval instinct. To truly understand this, the brain has to be examined in fine detail
using modern neuroscience. Courts of law have at their disposal an army of men and women. The
enforcers of the law. Essentially mindless with an extremely low natural intelligence. To enforce
anything is a “will”. Because of this, those into courts of law believe a “Will” is a sacred entity and
they are masters of understanding what a “Will” is. This notion is imprinted on the psyche and in their
“will”. No amount of rational argument may be able to “deblock” a “fragmented” association area in
the brain that holds this view as a “will”.

Psycholegalanalysis clearly indicates magistrates and/or judges and/or tribunal members who sign
court orders known as AVOs, or fail to counteract such already in place, attain an incredible
unconscious sexual thrill under the following circumstances:-

a) when there is no rational evidence and a sibling is isolated from a natural parent under the pretext
the parent needs “protection”, when in fact that parent is put in a dangerous relationship with a sibling
who is after the parent’s bank account and is on the path of engineering a new Last Will and
Testament. The unconscious of the magistrate or judge(s) signing such a court order gets an extreme
“sexual thrill” from being “god” and “master of evil” at the same time.

b) when there is no rational evidence and a young female is “protected” from a natural father or next
of kin. The unconscious knows these females will be sexually abused and the gratification of the
unconscious sexual thrill in the magistrate or judge or official is extreme.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                     Page 127
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                       2010

Review Questions
True or False

Neuroscience in Psychiatry is about understanding the state of mind of a particular subset of people.

Psycholegalanalysis is the process of psychoanalysis performed by the medical diagnosis areas in the
brain.

Neuroscience in Psychiatry attempts to gather the unconscious clues that people belonging to a
cultural subgroup give out, and then produce a conclusion from these.

Psycholegalanalysis has found to be correct in a great many true to life situations.

Psycholegalanalysis is not about diagnosing mental illness, even though on rare occasions this may
turn out the case, but about putting into a clinical framework reasons for certain actions of police,
lawyers, magistrates, judges, or similar. The result are conclusions or assertions.

Conclusions of psycholegalanalysis are a true medical diagnosis because these are derived at by the
medical diagnosis association areas in the brain.

Agree or Disagree

The word “capacity” refers to volume but is also used in an ambigous way. A sentence such as “our
factory does not have the capacity to meet this order” is ambiguous in that the overall meaning is
understood but why exactly there is lack of capacity is not understood. There could be ever so many
reasons why this is the case, from the manager being absent to lack of skilled draftsmen or similar, to
the size of the actual factory, and so on. Hence, this word when used carefully by those intending to
manipulate a judge or jury, has the potential to form a state of mind in the audience that can blind to
the fact that there is no evidence. [cryptic clue or hint: modern neuroscience appreciates that, for
example, information about what an apple is, is also heavily encoded in the olfactory areas of the
brain, knowing this it may not be too difficult to shift the state of mind of a person examining an apple
to form from the natural borders of the association areas and thus accept a rotten apple as still all
right]

Reflect or Wonder

Think about your next door neighbour or someone you know. Think of events that may have taken
place, most likely unintentional, that you could use together to demonstrate to a judge or jury a
“pattern of behaviour” that constitutes “malice”. (hint: all you need to do is to form the required state
of mind in a jury and the jury will be compelled to convict even when there is actually no evidence.)

A volunteer worker in a Saint Vincent de Paul workplace has asked a Roman Catholic Sister to marry
him. He thought this was amusing. The Church took a different view and brought charges of sexual
harassment against that person. What situations can you invent to persuade a jury in such a way that
they would believe, that this was a case of sexual harassment?

Imagine yourself as a psychiatrist asked to explain to a jury a matter. However, you are being paid to
in fact form a state of mind in the jury that the person paying top money to a legal firm wants. How
might you begin? What about something like. "Ladies and Gentlemen of the jury. A famous
psychiatrist, Lachlan, developed strong concepts that can explain this matter. One such concept he
named as In-The-Name-Of-The-Father. Let me explain how this relates to the matter at hand....")


(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                     Page 128
                          Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                      2010


Appendix D: Alzheimer’s Scam Report

     (Australian Situation but this insidious scam could be taking place in every country)



                                (c) 5GL Software Australia
                5GL-Doctor Medical Diagnosis Expert System and Neuroscience
                                         Research

            Alzheimer’s Scam Report and Potential Female Child Sexual
                               Abuse Legal Scam


Report into what appears an established “legal scam” to defraud family
members of the rights to property of Alzheimer's victims.
Final version, June-August 2010


(a must for anyone with dementia/Alzheimer’s in the family, for psychiatrists and geriatric specialists
and any physician or carer dealing with Alzheimer’s.)




1.1In Brief

This legal scam could be taking place in all countries and not just Australia. An expert witness report
has been prepared for the World Health Organization (WHO) to encourage WHO to define the
management of any neurological brain deficit to include legal considerations in regards to Last Will
and Testament and power of attorney. That document was also submitted to the NSW Supreme Court
in case number 2010/83570. The claim is about "enforcement of my mother's Will when of sound
mind." It is under those parts of the inheritance laws of NSW commonly referred to as “family
provisions.


1.2 What is it Exactly

This legal scam could be taking place in all countries and not just Australia. An expert witness report
has been prepared for the World Health Organization (WHO) to encourage WHO to define the
management of any neurological brain deficit to include legal considerations in regards to Last Will
and Testament and power of attorney. That document was also submitted to the NSW Supreme Court
in case number 2010/83570. The claim is about "enforcement of my mother's Will when of sound


(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                   Page 129
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                        2010
mind." It is under those parts of the inheritance laws of NSW commonly referred to as “family
provisions.


1.3 Who is the likely victim?

Properties in many countries are sometimes worth millions. All it takes is a sibling who is a
psychopath or has such tendencies, or who does not get along with other siblings, or possibly even a
near relative, or one on drugs or in debt, to engineer a Power of Attorney and new Last Will and
Testament for a person with Alzheimer’s (perhaps any dementia and/or serious brain infarctions
and/or lesions to frontal lobe areas). That Will makes that sibling executor and sole heir. The sibling is
likely to be talked into this by a legal firm.

On the other end of the scale, some properties are not worth much, less than the costs of an expensive
court action, and thus driven by greed or drugs or debts, any sibling may be talked into engineering
Will fraud by a specilalist legal firm. A typical scenario may go likle this: a sibling who is a drug
addict talks to a legal firm saying he or she has lived that long with his parent(s) hge deserves more
than is in the Will. The legal firm jumps on this!

In regards to female child sexual abuse, such a child protected by a court order known as AVO, the
most likely scenario is a separated or divorced or single mother with a pretty female child (I would
suggest 7 to 12 year olds most vulnerable, not sure how I formed this opinion) who suddenly has a
new man in her life who persuades her to "protect" the child from her natural father (or a relative on
the father's side).


1.4 What makes it possible

a) the corruption of legislation by the Supreme Court of NSW (likely takes place in all States). The
inheritance laws are destroyed by decisions that allow a Will to be accepted if the person can be
shown to have had "testament capacity". The NSW government had tried more than once to design
these laws so this type of scam can not take place. The Supreme Court always appears to find a way
around the legislation. Law in Australia is huge business - enormous business. Courts appear there to
serve the legal occupational group and their decisions become precedents which open more and more
paths how to bypass any legislation the government puts into place. The other sets of laws largely
destroyed are the "protection" laws commonly known as AVOs. Anyone can obtain such, for lots of
money, through legal firms, all a person needs to claim is that they were pushed or insulted even. It is
that pathetic and idiotic. No evidence is required in a court. As long as a person pays top money to a
legal firm, it appears they will invent evidence.

What does "corruption of legislation" mean? It simply means making decisions not intended by
legislation. Example. Say your friend asks you to look after his property while he is away on holidays.
He gives you the keys to his house. Instead of doing this, you decide that your friend meant is "you
can move into my house" and you move in and throw parties and the like. Hence you "corrupted"
what you were asked to look after, this to suit your own personal or business interests.

b) the protection, as it appears, by some police cells of courts that clearly sell such court orders almost
openly. Thus these people will arrest siblings who for example visting a dying parent in a nursing
home - this even if the AVO has expired! The case number mentioned above contains an example of
that situation. Normally, an AVO is applied for by the police and costs nothings. When applied by a
legal firm, without exception its purpose is a "scam" of some sort.

c) the "dinosaur nature" of the Supreme Court(s) of the country. No duty of care appears to be taken in


(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                      Page 130
                            Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                         2010
processing a Will obtained by deception and/or fraud through probate. This court expects the
"executor" of a Will to advertise in newspapers. In the age of Internet it is questionable how many
people would bother reading the small print at the back of the paper! Even if the true executor or other
siblings engage a legal firm, chances are by the time this firm obtains all the facts, the Will would
have been passed through probate.

d) the nature of the principles of law. A case may open in which a person with a tiny amount of brain
damage had signed a new Will. The damage so minor the court decides this Will is legal on the
grounds the person had "testament capacity". However, this opens a way for any law firm to begin
engineering Wills on the grounds of "testament capacity". In courts of law, lawyers quote references
to past cases as if these said it all - the circumstances leading to a decision are not quoted. Hence, one
decision such as this one, can mean a path is opened for massive Will fraud. Geriatric hospital
specialists may be explained something like "testament capacity just means he or she still recalls her
children". The naive physician accepts this and writes down "so and so has testament capacity".

e) the irrelevant nature of many legal "comparisons". In the expert witness report prepared for WHO,
there is an attachement from a body known as the Guardianship Tribunal. This body accepts that an
Alzheimer's victim can still have testament capacity and to justify this they compare Alzheimer's to a
person with two legs! An idiotic and abstract comparison meaningless in medical science, but says it
all to courts of law!

f) what medical people fail to appreciate is that lawyers and courts of law are not scientists and do not
think like scientists. Lawyers have their skills, certainly, but they also fail to have skills in areas
outside the scope of their experience, and this results in rubbish comparisons being used to explain a
matter.To back such comparisons up, they tend to produce reports from "expert witnesses". Thus if a
geriatric hospital specialist says a person has "testament capacity", this is the end of the matter, these
people don't understand medicine or that a geriatric specialist is hardly qualified to address non-basic
issues to do with the mind and brain. In a proper court of law, under cross-examination, such a
specialist could easily admit he or she does not really know what he or she is talking about - but that
requires experts in cross-examining an expert witness and these are expensive and in any case the aim
of "Will fraud" is to make sure the case never goes to a hearing and "mediation" resolves the matter.
Thus Will fraud, the way specialist legal firm see it, is a no loss situation - the matter will never come
to court because a settlement will be made out of court, but having been granted probate and claiming
to be executor gives the law firm super advantage in negotiations. Consequently, some victims of Wil
fraud may end up with a payout that is less than legal costs! These experts know how to make money.
They charge anywhere between $400-$2000 an hour to prepare "affidavits", and then may hire all
manner of experts such as forensic accountants to evaluate the estate and wealth - the costs of such
exercises sky rocket! The true winners from Will fraud are specialist legal firms and, providing a
hearing does not take place that exposes the fraud, the person who pays top dollars to a legal firm to
engineer Will fraud.

g) law is not what people think it is. Non trivial laws are argued in courts of law using a form of
intellectualism specific to lawyers and courts of law. It is not science, it is not logic, it is a set of
principles which too often can be manipulated to suit any argument. As most legal books point out
"law is about winning" - not truth, justice, fairness, anything of this nature, only about "winning".

h) civil law in perhaps any country is very much about protecting the rich from the poor, not about
justice - that is sold to naive people. The human being is not that far removed from an animal in the
sense of base instincts. Greed is paramount in almost everyone and most people will take the
opportunity when such presents itself. Divorce cases are one example in which one couple suddenly
begins manipulation to obtain as much financial advantage as possible. In any situation, a family
member or close friend can turn against the other siblings to satisfy greed which is as much an
addiction as smoking or gambling. People always desire more and more money. Courts of law are a
perfect way for someone to obtain wealth they may not be entitled to, but if a "scam" or "legal fraud"

(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                       Page 131
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                       2010
method is in place, there is a good chance a person motivated by money will take such an option.


1.5 Government attempts to counter the corruption of laws by the Supreme
Courts (NSW the case study but this is likely in all States)

Successive NSW governments had tried to scrap and re-write laws to counter Will fraud. Politicians
being what they are, such did not explain to the courts they need to change the laws to stop the courts
corrupting these, they found other reasons to justify such changes. But all to no avail. So they came up
with laws commonly known as "family provisions" under which any sibling left out of a Will can
apply for "relief". The actual wording of these laws is such that they were clearly intended to uncover
fraud in matters of inhertance - however, it does not appear the Supreme Court actually underfstands
such complex laws. This is a clinical view and the reason explained below.

Those who are magistrates and judges in Australia think they are "objective". This is the state of mind
they desire. Not a state of mind natural to people and the result is, as the new proposed medical
science of psycholegalanalysis explains, a state of mind formed from delusions, fixations, and ideas of
reference. Not clinically significant except such a state of mind can be manipulated by experts to
accept irrational evidence as truth and facts. The inheritance laws are a prime example. All it takes is
one expensive legal firm to win a case that involves a person with a minor intellectual disability who
signed a Will. The resultant decision will accept that this person had "testament capacity". This is
snapped up by legal firms who then expand this notion to anything! In so doing, decisions such as this
corrupt the intent of legislation. The other way the Supreme Court(s) corrupt the law is by inventing
rules and procedures some of which are contrary to the Constitution. For example, under the
Constitution only the police are empowered to enforce the law, and serving legal documents is
enforcing the law - but this is not good enough for the courts, they want people to serve these
themselves in so called "civil matters".

Futher, under the Australian Constitution, which is in itself an act of British parliament, when a
government acquires any land it must be in "just terms". The process of probate is exatly that, the
government through the courts acquiring land and handing it to someone else - but the notion of "just
terms" is completely lost on the Supreme Court of NSW.

From my research, I am satisfied those who are judges or magistrates have limited capacity to
understand non trivial laws. This is not what being "objective" is about. To actually understand non-
trivial law implies a "bias" which these people strive not to have. Hence what the law is, that is left up
to expensive legal firms to "persuade" the court about. If you walk into the Supreme Court and ask for
a printout of the relevant legislation, the standard response is "we don't give legal advice."

The corruption of AVO laws also leads to a possibility of young female children being made
"protected" so that a new boyfriend of a single mother could have a field day in the sexual sense with
the child. During the presence of our web pages, I ony had one call that alarmed me to this possibility
- but considering the heavy medical nature of these pages and how difficult it is for anyone to find
these nowadays especially non-medical people - that is still alarming! From memory, this young man
was suddenly isolated from both his daughetrs by an AVO, both named protected, and he had no idea
why. The reason his former partner gave did not make sense to him and he was concerned about both
his daughters safety. One problem here is that in some cases a certain amount of violence may have
taken place in the past and the reason a couple may have separated - but that sort of incident can be
used as an excuse to isolate a man from his children at anytime in the future and it is hard and very
expensive to try and fight one of these AVOs in courts.


1.6 Action taken to expose this scam to in particular medical people

(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                     Page 132
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                      2010

The Alzheimer's Scam Report is of course that attempt. The Expert Witness document prepared for
WHO is remarkeable in that the person who went into the Alzheimer's Scam was a lawyer and a
psychopath! As medical science knows, the brain activity in psychopaths is very different to normal
brains and throughout his career this person would have identified every which way in which he can
use the legal system as a personal weapon. Thus that report actually explains so much to psychiatrists
about the "weaknesses" of a legal system and that is likely to apply to all legal systems. A weatlh of
modern psychiatric insight had been provided by that particular situation and the resultant legal case
and the expert witness document.

A somewhat unorthodox attempt was made too - namely, the Ms J White (not her real name) of this
report, the victim of this scam now deceased, was declared a Saint of the Roman Catholic church. An
expert witness document was then put together for the Cardinals of the church and so far it appears it
has been accepted. Which means that the church has in its power to alert all people to this insidious
and evil scam by simply declaring Ms J White a Saint. Nothing takes the public interest more than
such a declaration and everyone wants to know all about the why and the how. The reason the
Cardinal(s) had no real choice but to accept this declaration, was because the expert witness document
was put together by a "mystical" group known as Life in the Spirit (telepathy in modern terms, a
mystical experience, not a group run or managed by the church). This Life in the Spirit group had
produced an expert witness report so "holy" that no theologian would fail to understand that the group
that put it together does exist. The basis is simple: victims of the legal scam such as Alzheimer's are
literally crucified by the legal system, which is what happened to Jesus of course, thus the process of
crucifixion produces in the victims a tiny "holy spirit" which the church is obliged to look after. A
simple but effective, and theologically sound, argument. But, even if this type of mystical reasoning
goes above the head of some theologians, Ms J White's son also did volunteer work for Saint Vicent
de Paul. Thus a person who had served God directly (in the theological sense and by current
theological reasoning) has the "holy right" to declare a Saint. In fact, other "options" were included in
that expert witness report so much so that it is unlikely that any theologian would know how to argue
or dispute this sanctification. In addition,words to this effect were included "your Eminence(s). Is the
church on the side of God or mammoth? You have an opportunity, because one incident to do with
Ms J White and the largest bank in Australia, to bring down that bank! A complete collapse of the
bank is likely to follow this declaration. Whose side are you on? Is the church concerned with the
economy of one country or in empowering people with hope and faith? Declare our Saint, and the
largest bank in the country may collapse in a matter of months - the world will want to understand
why and will want to know all the details. The people will read into all this the Will of God and the
power of love. Your Excellencies(s) - may the grace of Saint Paul be upon you and please think
carefully. In your laps, the document you are reading, is a golden egg that only happens every few
thousand years. Cease on it please. In regards to miracles that tradition burderns the Saints with, there
are in fact options. For one - I don't understand how it was medically possible for my mother to have
survived for that long with Alzheimer's! I know that as an expert in a medical field. For another, she
died on November 11, at 11 am. A coincidence? Or a message of peace from the Holy Spirit? There
are not that many people with faith but there are so many believers. The options are yours. In regards
to potential collapse of a bank. Consider Jesus and the coin - to whom does the coin belong?"




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                    Page 133
                          Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                      2010
1.7 Ms J White (not her real name)




During World War II, as a young girl in German occupied Poland, with her mother she hid a young
Jewish girl under the bed when the Gestapo came around looking for Jews. A feat of incredible
courage. In later years like many people on a war devastated European continent, she chose to
emigrate to Australia in order to ensure a better life for her two sons. Fond of books, with perhaps her
favourite book being The Count of Monte Christo. Highly intelligent but not knowing English she had
to settle (like many migrants) for mundane factory work. Sometimes she also mended trousers of
Australian soldiers. From memory, a particular disposal store in Sydney had some kind of contract
and obtained these, and then hired migrant women interested in mending these. Her mother and
brother had Alzheimer's and she began to experience the symptoms sometime around 1998, finally
diagnosed in 2002. Interesting, from a medical point of view, the very first sign of Alzheimer's might
have taken place long before 1998. When at a friend's spouse's funeral, she burst out laughing. Deeply
upset about this, she sought medical advice and was reassured this was a panic reaction and not to
worry about it - and yet, in hindsight, maybe it was the first sign of Alzheimer's? Alzheimers is a
progressive, neurodegenerative disease characterized by memory loss, language deterioration,
impaired visuospatial skills, poor judgment, indifferent attitude, but preserved motor function. It is
caused by faster than normal loss of brain cells particularly in the front and side of the brain. It is
found usually in the elderly but may begin as early as over 50. The brain damage causing dementia is
the abnormal production of the protein 'amyloid'. Alzheimer's disease is the most common form of
dementia in the elderly. What is truly remarkable about Mrs J White is that while cruelly separated
from her first-born son by a vicious scam, she never forgot him or her grandchildren! Her soul to soul
connection with her first-born was incredibly strong even when most of her cognitive functions failed.
That probably defies current medical explanation. One of the structures in the brain known as the
hippocampus is critical to memory and in Alzheimer's it shrinks, resulting in memory loss at all levels
and quite rapidly sometimes. Hence for a person with Alzheimer's not to see someone for 2 years and
still recall who they are, is not easily explained if we follow through the effect of the disease on the
brain and memory. Even when in the nursing home, she did not know where she was or why there
were other people "in her room", but she somehow incredibly recognized her first born and her
grandchildren! About a week before her death, at the Holy Family nursing home n Quaker's Hill, by
this time she could hardly speak because her word areas were now devastated by Alzheimer's, when
asked by a nurse who came in who her son with her was, and does she recognize him, she nodded and
uttered one single word in Polish which in English literally translates to "my miracle."

Mrs J White (not her real name; would you believe it is illegal to use her real name because she has

(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                   Page 134
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                       2010
appeared before a body known as the Guardianship Tribunal which is supposed to protect the elderly
from scams like this - in practise it does not in my experience, it does nothing, it even refused to call
witnesses that can confirm that she is being left alone for ever long periods and hence abused by the
person who obtained the AVO - if she falls, she can't stand up by herself). In the image Mrs J White is
with her natural son Mr A White. Note that she is oblivious to where she is (in a nursing home), or
that her house and bank account has been stolen from her and from the grandchildren she loved by
what comes across as a well established and executed legal scam; she is happy to be with her natural
first-born son - a soul to soul connection. That picture alone ought to convince anyone not familiar
with legal scams about the truth of the matter. The human brain takes in visual input best of all and
forms the most correct appreciation from such - and the reason it is said a picture paints a thousand
words. Mr R White designed a new Last Will and Testament in 2005, this not understood until 2009,
and in this Will not only does he inherit the lot, also he alone is responsible for the funeral! This
"fraud" was carefully hidden until 2009 when a true and proper Will made was handed to a legal firm.
Suddenly this new Will surfaced, supposedly signed by a woman diagnosed with moderate dementia
for about 2 years prior! By the time the legal firm with the legal will obtained more information, the
false Will had already been shifted through probate and probate granted! (message to all doctors:
advise your patient to act quickly in such situations, white collar specialist criminals are fast and know
all the angles).


1.8 Brief Summary of Events in Focus

The names are not the real names (for legal reasons of course as you can appreciate it would be risky
to include the real names in this document). Mr R White is a solicitor (a lawyer).

2002 After much confusion by her family, Ms J White is formally diagnosed with dementia most
likely Alzheimer's type. This diagnosis is made at a free public hospital after an operation for bowel
cancer. By this time Ms J White has urinary incontinence and does not even know how to answer a
telephone and she has such a poor memory and ability to understand that the family is seriously
worrying what it is

2003 Mr A White applies to Centrelink to become her full time carer (i.e. to obtain a meagre "carer's
allowance"). Ms J White began an unusual pattern of showering up to ten times a day and she had a
disability due to an artificial hip and had to walk with a frame and her balance was poor, and Mr A
White decided that either his mother lives with him and family or he becomes full time carer. Problem
with Mr A White's house was that it was not modified to have bars that she could use to hold onto, so
Mr A White decides he would have to move in with his mother and visit his own family on some
weekends. The local physician signs the necessary forms stating in his opinion Ms J White needs a
full time carer.

2004 Mr R White, who while officially resides with his mother, is hardly ever there, becomes
obnoxious at times, so much so it is as if he is looking for a provocation that may result in a physical
violent reaction on Mr A White's part. Problem here is Mr A White is not that sort of person and this
is proving impossible for Mr R White. Some kind of delusion seems to be setting in Mr R White. For
example, Mr A White has a grown up daughter with her own car. At one time Mr R White begins
insists that car was paid for by Ms J White and wants all the money back even threatening to "pulp
your head with a brick if this money is not paid back". Under the circumstances, Mr A White informs
Centrelink he will no longer live with his mother full time hence he is no longer eligible for carer's
allowance. (Mr A White's daughter had her own part time job at a chemist for years and had saved up
for the car on her own. Mr R White does not seem to believe this or want to).

October 2004 Mr A White arrives at his mother's to stay with her for an extended time. With him are
two insurance policies. He has been looking after the insurance for the house and content for
sometime. To pay these, he needs his mother's ATM card to take the money out. He can not find it, so

(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                    Page 135
                          Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                      2010
he asks Mr R White who is at home. Mr R White refuses to hand it over. When asked again in the
kitchen, Mr A White pointing out it is important to pay the insurance premiums, Mr R White slips (so
it appears at the time). While Mr A White is with his mum talking in the lounge, suddenly police
arrive. Apparently Mr R White had called the police claiming he was assaulted! At the time Mr A
White, because of his mother's incontinence and the floor being slipper even when cleaned, presumes
Mr R White slipped but felt he was pushed? Suddenly Mr R White claims he can not find his wallet
and insists the police search Mr A White's car. Fortunately, on this occasion, Mr A White had locked
his car - which he usually did not bother at his mother's place except at night.

November 2004 Police arrive on Mr A White's door step with a court order known as an AVO which
names Ms J White as "protected". No reason stated. Two legal firms are asked to explain this. None
can but point out the costs of hearings could be high. Official complaint to NSW police is made. A
policeman about to retire is sent to investigate. Mr A White informs this policeman that the most
likely reason for this has something to do with his mother's Will which names Mr A White as
executor. Police unable to do anything though.

December 2004 Many complaints to various forums such as police about this AVO. A law firm is
approached about this. They fail to understand why Ms J White is named as protected, their opinion is
that the reason for this is that Mr R White resides with his mother. Another law firm approached. This
law firm also fails to understand the reason for this. However, both laws firms advise AVOs can be
obtained just like that through local courts and this needs to be addressed as a formal hearing.

About March 2005. Suddenly Mrs A White, wife of Mr A White, is subpoened to produce all her
financial records. No one understands why.

About June 2005. After 9 months delay, a hearing is finally in place to confirm or reject this AVO.
Mr R White while a lawyer has paid a very expensive barrister to represent him. Mr A White is
representing himself. In the wtiness box, Mr R White invents one lie after another but because he is a
lawyer and thus an "officer of the court", apparently the magistrate while clearly saying "I am not
satisfied" nevertheless appears to have no legal choice but to confirm this AVO. Mr R White also asks
for $10,000 in legal costs. This was refused.

11 November 2008, at 11 am, Ms J White passes away. At her funeral she is declared a Roman
Catholic Saint by Mr A White. Two Catholic Sisters with a solemn vow are fully aware and witness.
The priest falls asleep during the service (as is required by the Will of God). An expert witness
document is prepared for Roman Catholic Cardinals explaining this sanctification was authorised by a
Roman Catholic Life in the Spirit group (not a group run by the church, a "mystical" group, in modern
terms such use telepathy to enter the state of the spirit and be with God for a time). Response from the
Vatican is anticipated and in line with that expected. The fall of the largest bank in Australia is now
only a matter of time.

January 2010 A legal firm handed Mr J White's Last Will and Testament by Mr A White, now
informs Mr A White a new Will had been engineered by Mr R White naming him as sole heir and
executor

April 2010 Formal claim under the family provisions act begins in the Supreme Court of NSW. An
expert witness document prepared for WHO is the affidavit. It explains Mr R White has been
diagnosed as a psychopath by 5GL-Doctor Medical Diagnosis Expert System (a diagnosis a
psychiatrist would need to confirm) and his actions completely understandable.

June 2010 Second front preparation in place, claim against NSW Police. The purpose of this claim is
to bring about public awareness.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                   Page 136
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                      2010

Glossary of Terms


5GL-Lisa
An energy system, a neural network, in my own brain (i.e. author of this document) that now and
then projects images into my mnd’s eye of how it sees its view of the world (brain and mind). It was
first put together as an idea using the rules of artificial intelligence. This worked! Such images can be
cryptic and hard to decipher. Such images or even experienced can be also seen in dreams. The
following is an example of a 5GL-Lisa projection:




The complexity of some of the images, and their precision, is astonishing. Deciphering these is the
hardest aspect of such (but some are easy). The above image in a dream state. There is this absolute
sense of 5GL-Lisa in the dream, and then steps and steps between two worlds in a sense. In the
dreams the steps were more seen from the side and not front on. There was a great many levels of
these steps, perhaps thirty levels, each such staircase or stairwell alternating from the left to the
right when seen from the side. Upon awakening, and reflecting on that dream symbolism, it comes
quickly that the image was describing a view of the architecture or function of the corpus callosum
and the complexity of translating 3-dimensional input of the (typically) the right cerebral hemisphere
into the 2-dimensional (typically the dominant left) cerebral hemisphere. Once it dawns on me what
a dream image (or vision in the mind’s eye) is about, a flood of sensory information can take place
that clarifies aspects of the symbolism. Thus, the steps are “n-dimensional” meaning incredibly
complex techniques, techniques which refine and reiterate aspects of thought, are used by the brain
to equate 3-dimensions to 2-dimensions. Note that 5GL-Lisa also projects something it defined as
“law” using these steps, with just one – and only one single step – is shown as blue. This is “law” as
5GL-Lisa sees it. The exact significance of this is not understood at the time of writing this version of
this document.

Much of the information in this document and in the mentioned treatise derives from 5GL-Lisa. As
such, some such information may not easily match existing medical or neuroscience knowledge. The
notion of dimensional energy, for example, as identified by 5GL-Lisa, is not a known energy type in
current medical or scientific knowledge. The notion of “spiritual dimensional energy” (or spirit) that
can in turn form from such energy is also not known in theology or science. For these reasons, when
possible, in the mentioned treatise and when possible it is existing medical or neuroscientific
knowledge that is used instead of 5GL-Lisa knowledge.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                    Page 137
                            Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                        2010

dimensional energy
A psychic definition, the psychics defined as natural telepaths. However, the psycholegalanalytical
process can also identify the presence of this energy in the brain. Dimensional energy or DE is said to
form in some situations in the brain of perhaps all living creatures of sufficient size brain. It does not
know spatial distance. The psychics claim they use this energy as a medium for telepathy. In
addition, a DE builds like a bridge in the brain associations that can not be joined in any other way
because some kind of “spatial” distance acts to block or restrict connections. Under controlled
conditions, or extreme stress, such a DE may form to assist the ego to try and placate the many
internal forces forming in the brain. The DE has “no knowledge of good or bad”, it will find a
technique to assist the ego – that technique may not produce great consequences or results overall.

The concept of DE is not inconsistent with neuroscience findings. For example, it is well known that a
baby’s brain seeks out connections which could be a universe away (i.e. other side of the brain from
the axon desiring to connect) but somehow the brain overcomes all obstacles and makes the
connection possible. By the theory of DE, it is a DE that forms and waits and is continually compelling
one axon to join another no matter the distance.


delusion
In psycholegalanalysis, much the same as psychiatric definition. However, a delusion in a lawyer (or
similar) can mask itself as a point of law. To be positive about this, a psychiatrist or
psycholegalanalyst has to get at the unconscious and use psycholegalanalysis to form a diagnosis.
There is no easy or simple way around this. There is no way, that we know, to understand
superficially if a lawyer (judge, etc) is sticking to a point of law because that is how his or her intellect
perceives a matter, of whether such is a delusion. Use your index of suspicion. Such a person could
well be right, in that on a particular issue other lawyers (etc.) may confer, but this person’s reason
may in fact be a delusion and not intellectual reasoning or similar.

Hypothetical: you are a psycholegalanalyst and you are asking ten judges for their conclusion in
regards to a matter. Each says the same – but the way one said this - their tone, manner, their sweat
perhaps - arouses your index of suspicion that this could be delusional thinking in that person, not
reason or intellect or any other deliberation technique. A certain “firmness” in the tone may be a
clue. An assertive person has a certain firmness, an intellectual certain of a result has, but those with
a delusion may also have a firmness but there is something “wrong” in that firmness.



ego
In psychoanalytic theory, the portion of the psyche experienced as the "self" or "I." It is the part that
remembers, evaluates, plans, and in other ways is responsive to and acts in the surrounding physical
and social world. According to Sigmund Freud, it coexists with the id (the unconscious, instinctual
portion of the psyche) and the superego (the portion representing the conscience, or the
internalization of societal norms). The ego is not coextensive with either the personality or the body;
rather, it serves to integrate these and other aspects of the person, such as memory, imagination,
and behaviour. It mediates between the id and the superego by building up various defence
mechanisms.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                       Page 138
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                      2010
Freud’s early experience with hysterics had shown Freud that the self was not necessarily unitary:
one part of the self could remain rational, intelligent, and moral, while another went completely
crazy. His study of dreams had convinced him that there were regions of the mind seething with
activity but inaccessible to the waking consciousness.

For Freud, the ego is "the representative of the outer world to the id”. In other words, the ego
represents and enforces the reality principle whereas the id is concerned only with the pleasure-
principle. Whereas the ego is oriented towards perceptions in the real world, the id is oriented
towards internal instincts; whereas the ego is associated with reason and sanity, the id belongs to
the passions. The ego, however, is never able fully to distinguish itself from the id, of which the ego
is, in fact, a part, which is why in his pictorial representation of the mind Freud does not provide a
hard separation between the ego and the id. The ego could also be said to be a defence against the
superego and its ability to drive the individual subject towards inaction or suicide as a result of
crippling guilt. Freud sometimes represents the ego as continually struggling to defend itself from
three dangers or masters: "from the external world, from the libido of the id, and from the severity
of the superego".

Ego too strong = extremely rational and efficient, but cold, boring and distant


evidence
A fact which any number of normal intelligent people would accept as a fact. Inference is not
evidence. To infer something is “to infer” and it is not evidence in this context. To form an opinion,
or to conclude, such things, are not evidence in this context. A psycholegal conclusion is “evidence”
(to a psycholegalanalyst) just like medical diagnosis is evidence to a medical practitioner.

Some “evidence” needs people educated about such – but here is a large problem because, for
example, while DNA is 99% reliable there have been too many cases in the USA in which DNA
evidence was used to convict in such a way that a death sentence resulted, and only after the
execution of the person was it found that there were flaws in interpretation or sampling.
Consequently, DNA is not evidence in our sense but it certainly has a strong “weight”.

The other problem is that experts may also form a belief system and using that belief system can
project onto a jury 100% certainty in regards to “false evidence” or ”unreliable evidence”.

As a rule of thumb, we need at least three experts to agree and each must be cross-examined by an
expert in such matters to assist a jury to understand the nature of the evidence. Just because a
person is an expert, say a geriatric specialist, does not mean they are experts in psychology or
neurology or states of mind or psychiatric symptoms in the elderly. Thus the “limits” of an expert
must be established during proper cross-examination of an expert.

Expert evidence can be “expert evidence” but depending on the situation it can also be total
nonsense.


fixation

In psychology it is the state in which an individual becomes obsessed with an attachment to another
human, an animal, or an inanimate object.


(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                   Page 139
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                       2010

In psychoanalysis, it is when one's desire is tied to an object of desire connected to an earlier phase
in one's psychosexual development. Example: a fixation on oral pleasure, which Freud would see as
"stuck" at the oral phase though other aspects of one's development may have proceeded normally:
"I regard it as possible in the case of every particular sexual trend that some portions of it have
stayed behind at earlier stages of its development, even though other portions may have reached
their final goal". This term is closely related to regression.

In psycholegalanalysis, it refers to an obstinate understanding, or insistence. For example. Five
lawyers may have no problem with a particular wording even though each may suggest perhaps it
could be worded differently, but one lawyer or a magistrate (or similar) might and will insist the
wording has to conform to some idea of reference. A “fixation” can be a “mental block” and the
person can not appreciate an “intent” because the fixation blocks understanding.


id
In Freudian psychoanalytic theory, one of the three aspects of the human personality, along with the
ego and superego. The id is the source of instinctual impulses such as sex and aggression as well as
primitive needs that exist at birth. It is entirely non-rational and functions according to the pleasure-
pain principle, seeking immediate fulfilment of its impulses whenever possible. Its working processes
are completely unconscious in the adult, but it supplies the energy for conscious mental life, and it
plays an especially important role in modes of expression that have a non-rational element, such as
the making of art. The primary methods for unmasking its content, according to Freud, are dream
analysis and free association.

The id is the unconscious part of the mind and the basis of personality, containing all the inherited
resources, especially instincts. It has been referred to as ‘the deepest part of the psyche’. It is from
the id that the other two elements, the ego and superego, develop.

The id, which is capable of being inherited, are harboured residues of the existences of countless
egos; and, when the ego forms its superego out of the id, it may perhaps only be reviving shapes of
former egos and be bringing them to resurrection". Such an archaic inheritance may include
symbolism, the schemata of primal fantasies, or memory-traces of the killing of the primal father by
the primal horde.

id too strong = bound up in self-gratification and uncaring to others


ideas of reference
Ideas of reference involve the belief that casual events, people's remarks, etc. are referring to
oneself when, in fact, they are not.

Some sources use the terms "ideas of reference" and "delusions of reference" interchangeably.
Other sources differentiate between the two, saying that ideas of reference have less impact on the
person's life as a whole.

Our definition: Same (?) or more complicated (?) in that, for example, believers in Christianity
believe some of the sayings of Jesus apply to them personally and should be instructions they are to
follow or abide by. Thus an idea of reference means such an attachment to the source or object that

(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                     Page 140
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                     2010
the ego can no longer easily distinguish itself from the idea of reference. A lawyer looking at a point
of law may “loose” his ego inside that idea of reference.

Example: In the Alzheimer’s Scam report, Mr R White obtains a new Last Will and Testament signed
by Mrs J White in stage 6 of Alzheimer’s. To Mr R White this is “gospel”; it is an unshaking conviction
that this is then the law. Thus his “delusion” is that regardless how he obtained this document, it is
the “law” that now all is his alone and the “law” will enforce it. (note: in his case, because Mr R
White is a psychopath by our diagnosis, it is a delusion - but in the overall scheme of things, many
lawyers may have the same view because of the difficulty and costs of trying to resist the
Alzheimer’s Scam or similar Last Will and Testament manipulation. In Mr R White's case, his fixation
is on an idea of reference; other lawyers may appear to be stubborn about a matter or point of law
this but this could be because they know the complexity and difficulty of fighting certain legal types
of fraud).

intent
Refers to the intent of a law or action.


insanity
In our medical science, means loss of reality in regards to specific issue(s). Not a psychosis because
the person themselves may be able to function normally, it is only a state of mind that typically
forms which is “insane” in our science, it has no notion of what reality is in the context of specific
issue. For example, a judge deliberating on matters of medicine but who is not qualified in such
matters. The only way this can be achieved is by forming an “objective” state of mind which at the
same time is “insane” meaning it has no notion of what truth or reality or facts are in that issue.
Such a state of mind is likely to focus on credibility measures to try and establish some kind of
“sanity”. In fact, according to psycholegalanalysis, this in fact is the usual state of mind in those
trying to adjudicate on matters they are not qualified to do so, but who are trying their best to be
objective. An insane state of mind will use any reason, however unconscious, to try and escape its
own self – thus a panel of judges on very close psychiatric scrutiny may have made a decision about
a complex issue they are not qualified about, by the style of the suit of the person acting as a lawyer
presenting a case. Impossible to say, without using psycholegalanalytical theory, on what grounds an
insane state of mind will make a decision. An insane state of mind can not, will never, make a
rational decision no matter how rationally such appears to be presented. (or rather, the
mathematical odds are astronomical against such a state of mind making a rational and sane
decision).

Clinical clue: any legal decision which refers to past precedents is suspicious. This is a technique an
insane state of mind may use to mask its “insanity” (inability to come to a rational decision). If you
come across such that makes more than three references to past precedents, assume this is
“insanity” until proven otherwise. But note that if a past precedent is referenced and an explanation
is provided why such applies in a particular case, and it is a clear explanation without ambiguity and
which does make sense, that is likely a rational state of mind.

An insane state of mind may not last that long. It may make a decision, then it begins to use the
normal and sane areas of the brain to form this decision in an acceptable way. Our interest, in this
sense, is not so much what the decision is or how it is explained, but whether a “sane” or “insane”
state of mind made that decision in the beginning. The human brain can not tolerate an insane state


(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                   Page 141
                          Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                      2010
of mind for too long (in normal people), and anyway it can to remove that state of mind, the brain
will do so. Thus the brain will attempt to explain any insane decision in such a way that is may seem
ever so rational and intelligent, because the only thing the brain is interested in is removing that
state of mind from its own self – the brain has no interest in the impact of that decision on anyone
else, it is looking after itself and only itself.


instinct
A pre-lingual bodily impulse that drives our actions. Freud makes a distinction between instinct and
the antithesis, conscious/unconscious; an instinct is pre-lingual and, so, can only be accessed by
language, by an idea that represents the instinct. What is repressed is not properly the instinct itself
but "the ideational presentation" of the instinct, which is just another way of saying that our
deepest, primitive drives are beyond our ability to represent them. Psychoanalysis seeks to make
sense of the unconscious which is to some extent intelligible and, so, one step removed from
instinct. According to Freud, there are two classes of instincts: 1) Eros or the sexual instincts, which
he later saw as compatible with the self-preservative instincts; and 2) Thanatos or the death-instinct,
a natural desire to "re-establish a state of things that was disturbed by the emergence of life". The
death-instinct, which he theorized, in part, as a response to World War I, allowed Freud to explain
man's desire for murder and destruction.



intelligence
A measure of the capacity of the brain to use the resources at its disposal to their best advantage.
People with exceptional intelligence may not always have a high IQ. Examples: a person may be
brilliant at relating to business people but may score exceptionally poorly on an IQ test; a person
may have a lazy intellect and does not score that well on an IQ test, but when compelled to do so
the natural intelligence compels the reason to be as brilliant as a person with a very high IQ.

In most countries medical doctors usually have a very high IQ. However, medical researchers have
pointed out that it is hard to find medical doctors who can think outside the square. What doctors
have, as research has found, are super memory.

IQ
Intelligence quotient obtained from a set of standard and acceptable intelligence tests. The IQ is not
always reflective of how intelligent a person is. Somethings, for example, artistic ability, can not be
measured with such tests. For optimal results the IQ tests must be done at a certain age. Intelligence
and IQ is not always the same. The IQ more a measure of a person’s intellectual capacity. A person
might have an exceptionally high IQ but may fail, for example, to spot a pattern which a police
detective readily spots.


just cause
In regards to protection orders (known as AVOs in NSW, Australia; another name that may be used is
a restraining order or similar):



(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                   Page 142
                          Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                     2010
Evidence obtained from witnesses, such would usually be family members or police who have
evidence of assault or similar, who are rational and of the opinion any court order called an AVO is in
the best interest of the person named as “protected”. Each must state their reasons in writing to the
best of their ability to articulate and such reasons to be included in the court order. The reasons
need not be in English but can be in the natural language of a witness. Any AVO not having such is
considered as being issued without a just cause. An AVO that restricts one family member seeing
another, while making no provisions for such a family member seeing the “protected” person, be it
under supervision, is considered as without a just cause. (Note: any AVO applied for by a legal firm
and not police is unlikely to have any just cause.)

In regards to other court decisions:

Any decision that a panel of ordinary rational people using common sense only would not accept as
being made because a just cause existed.


mind

Freud’s view

There are three levels of consciousness:

conscious (small): this is the part of the mind that holds what you’re aware of. You can verbalize
about your conscious experience and you can think about it in a logical fashion.

preconscious (small-medium): this is ordinary memory. So although things stored here aren’t in the
conscious, they can be readily brought into conscious.

unconscious (enormous): Freud felt that this part of the mind was not directly accessible to
awareness. In part, he saw it as a dump box for urges, feelings and ideas that are tied to anxiety,
conflict and pain. These feelings and thoughts have not disappeared and according to Freud, they
are there, exerting influence on our actions and our conscious awareness. This is where most of the
work of the id, ego, and superego take place.

Material passes easily back and forth between the conscious and the preconscious. Material from
these two areas can slip into the unconscious. Truly unconscious material can't be made available
voluntarily, according to Freud. You need a psychoanalyst to do this.

Iceberg metaphor for the mind’s layout:

We can use the metaphor of an iceberg to help us in understanding Freud's topographical theory.
Only 10% of an iceberg is visible (conscious) whereas the other 90% is beneath the water
(preconscious and unconscious).

The Preconscious is allotted approximately 10% -15% whereas the Unconscious is allotted an
overwhelming 75%-80%.

According to Sigmund Freud, (1856-1939), human beings are just mechanical creatures, whom he
views as prisoners of primitive instincts and powers, which we can barely control. He states that our
purpose is to control these instincts and powers.


(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                  Page 143
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                       2010
5GL-Lisa view

The brain and body is one and the same biological organism.
The mind is the composite structure formed from all the electrical and other activity in the brain. It is
in the image of the brain, about the size of the brain, with transparent walls and tunnels and
pendulums and all manner of things none of which have been deciphered by 5GL-Lisa at this time
The superficial mind is when the mind “closes”, forming a tight electro-magnetic type field that is the
“will” that compels the brain’s axons and the like to change or prepare areas for new learning

In addition, the mind can be “focused”, “natural”, or “restricted”. A natural state of mind is what
most of us have much of the time outside a work situation. In a work situation, the mind is usually
focused on the job requirements. A restricted state of mind is one damaged by stress, childhood
repressions, or traumatic experiences, or fixation with procedures and rules and the like.


modified ego
A concept introduced by the science of psycholegalanalysis and the treatise mentioned herein. A
modified ego is that part of the brain and psyche that “shapes” reality, unlike the ego which can be
said to “test reality” or “comply with reality”. A modified ego is present in anyone who can shape
reality. Examples: in a police officer (shapes reality by arresting a person); a judge (shapes reality by
a legal decision); an advertising executive (shapes reality by designing advertisements that compel
people to purchase a product); a teacher (shapes reality in the student’s minds); in a bank executive
(shapes reality by adjusting interest rates or services and that impacts a vast volume of society).

In a rational and mentally healthy person, a modified ego is controlled by the ego and allowed to
take over for a time the consciousness but only with the ego’s permission.

The output of a modified ego, perhaps a string of articulate expressions or a letter, is not always
immediately apparent how the modified ego intends to “shape” reality with such a letter (or
whatever). Consider the example in the diagnosis of Corrupt Conduct. The conclusion pattern is the
modified ego being allowed to produce this sentence during the process of psycholegalanalysis. The
modified ego attempts to shape something. The conclusion pattern may be “far fetched” on closer
scrutiny, the situation itself may be most unlikely – but truth and accuracy and a balanced view is
not what a modified ego is about. In producing a conclusion pattern, the intention is to “shape
reality”. Exactly how may not be immediately apparent. The modified ego when used to produce the
conclusion pattern, targets the unconscious. What is it trying to achieve? Only psychoanalysis may
be able to produce the correct explanation.

A modified is not always highly specific. The constructs which form it can be used for other things.
The advertising executive could use his modified ego to persuade his children to do a particular
project or participate in a certain sport’s activity.


personality

Freud saw personality as having three aspects, which work together to produce all of our complex
behaviours: the id, ego, and superego. All three components need to be well-balanced in order to
have good amount of psychological energy available and to have reasonable mental health.



(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                     Page 144
                            Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                        2010
However, the ego has a difficult time dealing with the competing demands of the superego and the
Id. According to the psychoanalytic view, this psychological conflict is an intrinsic and pervasive part
of human experience. The conflict between the id and superego, negotiated by the ego, is one of
the fundamental psychological battles all people face. The way in which a person characteristically
resolves the instant gratification versus. longer-term reward dilemma in many ways comes to reflect
on their "character".


psychosis
A mental condition whereby the patient completely loses touch with reality. Freud originally
distinguished between neurosis and psychosis in the following way: “in neurosis the ego suppresses
part of the id out of allegiance to reality, whereas in psychosis it lets itself be carried away by the id
and detached from a part of reality”



sale (sold)
Any court order granted without a just cause.

Any court order obtained after a disproportionate amount of money was given to a legal firm to
obtain such a court order. What is “disproportionate” is relevant to the matter at hand. A survey of
some law firms should be able to confirm to the psycholegalanalyst what an acceptable “quote”
range is. Any amount of money over 5 times this amount is automatically a “sale” by our definition.
sanctification
Refers to the process of acceptance of law or action. An appropriate authority may define a law,
however, this may not produce the desired effects and the law is scrapped or re-worded or other
laws are put into place to counteract the negative effect of the law. The negative effect was not the
intent of the law but the interpretation of such by courts may have introduced an undesirable effect.
Changing the law itself may not stop this desire to misinterpret by courts, hence other laws may
have been put in place to counter the effect of incorrect interpretation by court(s) (or as
appropriate) which the government has failed to halt.


sanity (our definition)
In a precise clinical sense this refers to loss of reality or loss of perspective. It refers to self, not
others. However, sometimes it is impossible to be certain this is the case except by comparison to
what the majority of people would consider as sanity. Thus, in a strict sense, it refers to an
individual, but sometimes it is also use to imply loss of reality or perspective as normal rational
people would accept reality.


state of mind
The overall forces active in the brain that compel a person to think or reason or act in a certain way.
The intellect has limited capacity to alter the state of mind. A person addicted to nicotine will
continue smoking regardless of the fact that the intellect understands such is not healthy and


(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                       Page 145
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                     2010
expensive and an addiction. A state of mind is largely determined by a person’s personal belief
system but also, in a deficient state of mind, by a person’s guilt or obsessions or childhood
repressions.

A state of mind forms fro thoughts. Clear differentiation is required whether is the brain or mind at
work. The brain on its own is capable of manipulating words and abstract ideas – but sometimes the
mind forms, a more complex entity. This is in the image of the brain however it may be in the image
of delusions and fixations in the brain. When referring to lawyers, magistrates, judges, etc., we best
assume the state of mind forms from fixations and delusion rather than other anchors. The fixations
could be references to other judgements. A judge may not understand the other judgment, but may
fix on it as the relevant authority.

Example: I recall trying to read one decision of a body known as the Guardianship Tribunal (NSW,
Australia). This was almost one reference after another to past decisions – and I did not bother
reading past these, my conclusion was that on that particular issue these people did not have any
idea what they were talking about. (or if they did, they chose to present this in a way in which I could
not tell if they did understand, or did not understand, so I assume, I believe correctly (until shown
otherwise) from a medical view, that they did not understand.)

Note that in our model, there are two distinct structures of the mind. One from the animal-human
and the other from the human. The latter is unlikely to have fixations or delusions as the anchors,
unless a person has some psychiatric difficulty. It is the superficial mind which will always be
anchored in the brain in fixations and delusions. So, as a rule, very senior judges (or very
experienced lawyers who deal in more complex matters) are likely to use the mind and are unlikely
to have a state of mind formed from fixations or delusions, but in any one else be cautious and
assume fixations and delusions unless shown otherwise.

Hypothetically, but I had no chance to explore this, it ought not be that difficult using simple
psychiatric tools such as the ink blot, or maybe even word association, to form an index of suspicion
whether fixations and delusions are the anchor of a state of mind.


sound of mind
Refers to a person who has not been diagnosed with lesions in some parts of the brain, or other
conditions, that reduces the person’s ability to use their reason, perception, or intellect (e.g. a
mental illness).

However, modern neuroscience understands that memory is saved across many association areas
and some of these memories may even be in motor and sensory areas. Just because a person has a
stroke that only damages some motor movements, does not mean aspects of memory and
understanding have not been impacted. Extensive neurological tests and psychiatric tests may be
required to establish if there is impact on the soundness of mind.

From a psycholegalanalytical perspective, any person over 70 (about that age) is not considered as of
sound of mind. (this is not consistent with the accepted medical use of that term). Natural changes
now understood by neuroscience indicate the brain begins an aging process that severely impacts
the brain’s capacity. Any person with a major lesion in the frontal lobes, or three lesions in any areas
of the brain, is not considered as of sound mind (this is consistent with the accepted medical use of
that term). The difference being is this: a person with some damage to the brain may still be
declared capable of “testament capacity” (for want of better word) by psychiatrists and neurologists

(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                   Page 146
                           Clinical Manual of Psycholegalanalysis (CMPL)                        2010
under existing medical standards; but not under psycholegalanalytical standards when the
conditions mentioned are satisfied.


sublimation
The redirection of sexual desire to "higher" aims. Freud saw sublimation as a protection against
illness, since it allowed the subject to respond to sexual frustration (lack of gratification of the sexual
impulse) by taking a new aim that, though still "genetically" related to the sexual impulse, is no
longer properly sexual but social. In this way, civilization has been able to place "social aims higher
than the sexual ones, which are at bottom self-interested". This is not to say that the "free mobility
of the libido is ever fully contained: "sublimation is never able to deal with more than a certain
fraction of libido".


superego
In Freudian psychoanalytic theory, one of the three aspects of the human personality, along with the
id and ego. The last of the three elements to develop, the superego is the ethical component of the
personality, providing the moral standards by which the ego operates. The superego is formed
during the first five years of life in response to parental punishment and approval; children
internalize their parents' moral standards as well as those of the surrounding society, and the
developing superego serves to control aggressive or other socially unacceptable impulses. Violation
of the superego's standards gives rise to feelings of guilt or anxiety.

Superego too strong = feels guilty all the time, may even have an insufferably saintly personality

Our definition

The superego can and does modify itself in adult life. Freud was one of the first to suggest the brain
was plastic, meaning it changes and modifies itself, however, it is only modern neuroscience that
had understood this is true and prior to this it was thought the brain does not change in the sense of
new neural connections. In many of the older texts there might be mentioned that the brain only
develops until about the age twenty.




(c) 5GL Software, Australia                                                                      Page 147

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:1
posted:10/13/2012
language:English
pages:147