Here’s went down in a nutshell in this, Our Land of Freedom™:
- Vermont parents Dario and Shujen Politella, in November 2021, explicitly warn the school where their six-year-old child attended, Academy School in Brattleboro, that he is not to receive the experimental gene therapy marketed as a “vaccine”
- An unidentified worker at the school’s “vaccination clinic” gives the shot to the kid anyway “by mistake” while they distract him with a stuffed animal
- The school writes a letter to the parents stating the administration was “deeply sorry that this mistake happened, and have worked internally to improve our screening procedures.”
- The parents file suit in state court
- State Supreme Court rules in favor of the school district, arguing that it is immune from liability because of an obscure 2005 federal law that grants emergency powers to the government in times of declared emergencies, such as COVID-19
Looks like a pretty cut-and-dry case of criminal malfeasance with, in an ideal world, summary executions for all involved school officials.
The Vermont Supreme Court sees things differently, per its recent ruling on the matter.
Via VT Digger (emphasis added):
“The Vermont Supreme Court on Friday affirmed a lower court decision that the state and the Windham Southeast Supervisory Union were immune from legal challenges brought by the parents of a student who received a Covid-19 vaccine against their wishes.
The litigation, brought against the state and the school district two years ago by Dario and Shujen Politella, claimed the defendants were not immune from legal challenges. Workers at a vaccination clinic held at the Academy School in Brattleboro in November 2021, the Politellas’ suit argued, were negligent when they mixed up name tags and mistakenly administered a Covid-19 shot to their child, who was 6 years old at the time.
Mark Speno, the Windham Southeast superintendent, later wrote to the parents that school officials were “deeply sorry that this mistake happened, and have worked internally to improve our screening procedures.”
The Politellas sued in Windham Superior Court, but Judge Michael Kainen dismissed the case in January 2023. They then appealed to the Supreme Court, where a hearing was held on May 28 of this year.
The litigation centers around the federal PREP Act, a 2005 law that provides immunity from liability to government officials administering “countermeasures” in response to a public health emergency — in this case, a vaccine against the Covid-19 virus that had caused a global pandemic starting in early 2020…
Justice Karen Carroll wrote in the decision that the federal PREP Act bars all claims based on state law against defendants and that the plaintiffs had failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted.
“We conclude that when the federal PREP Act immunizes a defendant, the PREP Act bars all state-law claims against that defendant as a matter of law,” Carroll wrote.
The Politellas and their attorney, Ronald Ferrara, argued that the PREP Act did not provide blanket immunity in this case, and said that the alleged negligence of the school district and the state’s clinic workers was subject to damages.”
Via Snopes (emphasis added):
“According to the ruling, the father spoke to the school’s principal a few days before the clinic, reiterating that his child was not to be vaccinated. The principal acknowledged this and confirmed his son would not be vaccinated without the parents’ consent.
However, on the day of the clinic, “an unidentified worker” incorrectly gave the child the name tag of another student. As a result, the child was vaccinated with the Pfizer BioNTech vaccine and the family then sued the school district.
In July 2024, the court said that, under federal law, the lawsuit could not proceed. Citing the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness (PREP) Act of 2005, the court ruled the school was immune from prosecution. Indeed, the PREP Act does provide “liability immunity to certain individuals and entities (Covered Persons) against any claim of loss caused by, arising out of, relating to, or resulting from the manufacture, distribution, administration, or use of medical countermeasures (Covered Countermeasures), except for claims involving ‘willful misconduct’ as defined in the PREP Act.”
In other words, during public health emergencies, the PREP Act protects people whose job it is to implement measures — such as vaccines and vaccination campaigns — designed to counteract these emergencies, from legal consequences…
In order for the lawsuit to have proceeded, the plaintiffs needed to prove the workers were guilty of “willful misconduct,” or the incident happened outside the timeframe of this public health emergency.”
So, you shoot a few kids up, shrug your shoulders and call it an accident, and get off scot-free. You want to make an omelet, you gotta break some eggs.
That’s called Democracy™, and I’ll be damned if these parents don’t find themselves on some Homeland Security domestic terrorist list in the future.
Ben Bartee is an independent Bangkok-based American journalist with opposable thumbs.
Follow his stuff via Substack. Also, keep tabs via Twitter.
For hip Armageddon Prose t-shirts, hats, etc., peruse the merch store.
Support always welcome via the digital tip jar.
Bitcoin public address: bc1qvq4hgnx3eu09e0m2kk5uanxnm8ljfmpefwhawv
