Corrupt Federal Court Holds Jury Trial with No Defense Representation.
(Added on June 17, 2011)

If June 13, 2011 was the "New Day of Infamy," then surely June 14, 2011 will go down as the New Day of Supreme Injustice.

As has been stated many times by Dr. Carpenter, every step of the legal process (term used loosely here) in this particular matter has been either a violation of law, or a violation of the basic Right to Due Process guaranteed in the Constitution of the United States; had Due Process actually been served, we would very likely be looking at a completely different outcome.

On Tuesday, a jury selected entirely by the plaintiff's attorney (Will Bond, former Arkansas politician with close political ties to UAMS Cancer Center in Little Rock), with no involvement of a defense attorney whatsoever, and all defense testimony having been either disqualified or excluded from record; rendered a 2.5 million dollar judgement against Dr. Antonella Carpenter and Lase Med Inc. In the "major media" coverage of this event so far, nothing has been published to explain how attorney Will Bond managed to make this happen, and how or why a Federal Judge allowed it to happen.

Standing Her Ground

Below is video footage of Dr. Carpenter standing her ground against yellow journalist and establishment propaganda tool Lori Fullbright, of Tulsa's KOTV, during a phone interview on June 17, 2011. Fullbright keeps twisting the conversation to her own angle and Dr. Carpenter vehemently calls her out on it. The phone interview took place early in the day of that evening's broadcast. During the interview Carpenter says "Ask an attorney. It's illegal to have jury selection and trial with only one party." Fullbright later asked an attorney, namely Will Bond, who replied that since it was a civil trial, it was completely legal. We would now like to direct the reader to the online definition of "Default Judgement" on Wikipedia.com.

"Default judgment is a binding judgment in favor of either party based on some failure to take action by the other party. Most often, it is a judgment in favor of a plaintiff when the defendant has not responded to a summons or has failed to appear before a court of law."

It was ordered by this very judge in his own signed court order, that Dr. Carpenter had until May 7, 2011 to retain counsel. The date passed and she did not retain counsel, therefore by law a default judgement was in order. Yet the court still conspired to hold an illegal one sided jury trial with only two working days' notice given to the defendant.

In the interview Carpenter comments "If someone put a gun to your head and ordered you to 'pay this', would you not fight it?"
Fullbright responds "I don't think any jurors had a gun to their head," when it is obvious Carpenter was talking about herself, not the jurors. It should also be noted that in light of the coming "news piece" for which Fullbright was gathering info that day, some of Dr. Carpenter's successful ex patients had called the KOTV studios trying to reach Fullbright before the story aired. All of these calls went straight to voice mail, and none of these calls were ever returned by the "reporter."

Dr. Carpenter's Press Release.

The following is the official response statement given to the press by Dr. Carpenter. Mainstream news coverage only used a portion of it, if any at all.

From the moment I was served with this lawsuit by the Arkansas Federal Court, Eastern District, outside of their jurisdiction, the Constitutional Rights and the right to Due Process of Lase Med Inc and myself have been violated.

When I first answered the lawsuit, I was certain it would be dropped, after all of the evidence I presented. Instead, I was told that I could not represent Lase Med Inc, since I am not an attorney.

Due to the financial strain caused by the legal fees and mishandling of this case, and another lawsuit that has since been dropped, we were not able to retain an additional counsel.

According to the terms of the partial Summary Judgment released on April 7, we had 30 days to find new counsel, or a Default Judgment would be awarded to Ms. Westphal. The 30 days passed, and we were not notified that anything had been decided.

On June 8, 2011, only two business days before the trial date, we received official notification from the Arkansas Federal Court that a trial date had been set for June 13, 2011. By law, we should have been given at least 30 days notice to prepare, and we should have been notified that the terms of the Summary Judgment had been ignored.

A decision was rendered by a one sided jury and an absurd amount of money was granted to the plaintiff, on the basis that she now had "Stage IV" cancer, while during last January's deposition she stated to be in good health.

During this unheard of one sided trial, both the plaintiff and the "expert witness" openly lied about her condition, easily done without a defense showing evidence from her medical records.

In conclusion I like to add that this Country claims to have "Liberty and Justice" for all, so where is it?

Not in Arkansas and not for me.

Sincerely, Dr. Carpenter

"With Liberty and Justice for All?"

This week, using methods typical of former Bolshevik Russia, a Civil Court awarded to the plaintiff in the Westphal vs Lase Med Inc et al case a sum of 2.5 million dollars.

This is a case involving the L.I.E.S.H. Therapy and a patient who had rejected standard care, elected the LMI’s treatment based on the information received from another patient, traveled 2,000 miles to receive the therapy, and signed a waiver of liability, along with the Post Treatment Guidelines agreement.

This is a case involving defense attorneys cooperating with the opposition, to hide vital evidence and intentionally steer a case, which should have been easily defended, and actually should have qualified for a dismissal on grounds of being totally frivolous.

This is a case where the defendant, not being able to find a lawyer who would actually fulfill his duties (other than the duty of collecting his fees), finally gave up and decided to let the case go into default.

This is a case where the defendant was forced to let the deadline pass for the court-ordered introduction of new counsel, due to financial strain caused by previous attorneys, and by the hate/ slander campaign spearheaded on the web by the plaintiff’s attorney, along with the help of professional hackers and a professional agent-provocateur-turned-stalker, who to this day continues to stalk people online whom she believes may be current or former Lase Med patients, a stalker who even found the physical address of two Lase Med staff members and contacted their neighbors by phone for the purpose of spreading her hate.

We need to stress that, following legal procedure, said dead line had been set by the same presiding Federal Judge, in a decree posted on Justia.com. The defendant didn’t receive any additional communication from the judge, until two business days prior to a trial date set by the Court.

The trial was carried out without any defense nor opposition, a rhetorical monologue, with accusations of "defiance and disrespect" for the Court leveled at the absent defendants by the plaintiff’s attorney. Had Dr. Carpenter gone to Court on the 13th, they could and would have immediately arrested her for practicing law without a license, since the main defendant was a Corporation.

Prior to June 8, the only communication from the Court to Lase Med Inc. had been the one indicating that May 7 was set as the deadline for Lase Med Inc. to provide a new attorney representing the Corporation. In consideration of the fact that such dead line had been missed, the only possible conclusion, for reason of a trial date having been set anyway, is that the Judge and the plaintiff's attorney together were planning to entrap Dr. Carpenter into appearing in Court and then to arrest her for trying to practice law without a license. This was probably done in collusion with Dr. Carpenter's ex-spouse, who for his own agenda had been feeding wrong information to the opposition and the trolls on the web.

The trial concluded in the absurd award indicated above, by a jury selected solely by the plaintiff’s attorney, after hearing one sided depositions and one sided perjurous statements on the claimed imminent demise of the plaintiff, and without the required submission of supporting documentation normally requested by the defense.

The question is: how could a federal judge allow such a trial to take place in a US Court? How could it be that no member of the jury questioned the proceedings?
How could it be that we get hounded by the press, who ignore everything we say and still insist that the jury was correct, and that LMI and Dr. Carpenter are guilty for not showing up in Court?

How could such a blatant violation of basic civil rights occur in this Country, which claims the motto "Liberty and Justice for All?"