By Dan Olmsted
If I were to commit a crime in Tennessee, I would have but one wish: not to be prosecuted by Rolf Hazlehurst.
Rolf is part Atticus Finch and part Sam Waterston on Law and Order, and all about bringing justice for his son, Yates, justice so far denied by the vaccine "court" autism omnibus proceeding, of which Yates was the second test case.
Rolf is an Assistant District Attorney General for the State of Tennessee, a criminal prosecutor in the aforementioned mold. Thursday at the congressional briefing leading up to the House reform committee hearings on vaccine court next month, he made clear he was not speaking in his official capacity.
But he also made clear that he has the goods on the sleazy, corrupt and in fact criminal behavior engaged in by HHS attorneys to hide the evidence that his son and so many others were vaccine-injured and now face a lifetime of the neurological catastrophe called autism.
Hazelhurst described how he virtually stumbled across two contradictory opinions by the same Johns Hopkins neurologist about whether vaccines cause autism, and how the government's lawyers deep-sixed one of them and trumpeted the other. As officers of the court, lawyers can't do that, and it really irritates Hazlehurst, to use a mild word, to see his profession pervert the course of justice.
Experts can change their minds, Hazlehurst said, but "What is wrong is for the United States government when faced with one expert with two opinions to use the opinion which is favorable and conceal the one that is not, especially when you consider that the entire purpose of this proceeding was to determine if vaccines can cause autism, and if so under what conditions.
"Well, the government's expert witness in neurology put in writing, yes, vaccines cause autism. Here's how vaccines cause autism. And the Department of Justice and HHS concealed it."
"The bottom line is that during the autism omnibus proceedings, the United States Department of Justice, representing the United States Department of Health and Human Services, willfully and intentionally concealed critical material evidence about how vaccines cause autism. ...
"Let me put that in perspective for you. If I did to a criminal, in a United States court of law, what the Department of Justice did to vaccine-injured children in the so-called vaccine court, I would be disbarred and I would be facing criminal charges."
To personalize the issue -- and believe me, this is both personal and professional in equal measure -- if Rolf did to a criminal what they did to Yates and so many others, he'd be in jail. I think the logical corollary is that they should be, too.
The wheels of Justice turn slowly, but I'm hopeful that Rolf will be allowed to tell his story at the congressional hearing next month. It needs to be heard, and he is the one to tell it.
So do the words of Mary Holland, who also spoke at the briefing, outlining the Unanswered Questions study that links vaccine court rulings and autism. Let's remember the court ruled that out of 5,000 or so cases, not a single one was triggered by vaccines, Hannah Poling notwithstanding.