UK Info Commiss: U of Sheffield may face "contempt of court" charge over bogus "SARS-COV-2" FOI response & nonresponse

University's protection of "covid test" fraudsters Paraytec Ltd & Carl Smythe comes to a head

Greetings and Best Wishes,

I have previously reported on the University of Sheffield’s commercial relationship with a company called Paraytec Ltd, their research program led by Carl Smythe Professor of Cell Biology - aimed at development of a fraudulent “covid-19 test” that will fake-detect the imaginary “SARS-COV-2” - and the university staff’s protection of this racket via improper freedom of information responses:

May 19, 2023:
"germ" FOIs - Joshua Quick 'King of Primers'; Carl Symthe/U Sheffield

September 16, 2023:
Fake-covid test developers Carl Smythe, U of Sheffield, Paraytec Limited, and a "virus" FOI

October 24, 2023:
University of Sheffield protects fake-covid test developers Paraytec Ltd & Carl Smythe... again

The great radio host Jesse Zurawell and I reviewed the situation during one of his November 2023 programs.

Briefly, the university’s freedom of information staff have provided one lame excuse after another in response to my formal requests for records containing necessary foundational evidence regarding the existence of the alleged-but-imaginary “SARS-COV-2”.

They haven’t been willing to admit that they have no such records (because they don’t exist… anywhere on the planet) and they don’t want to release, for public scrutiny, the pseudoscientific records relied upon by Carl, the people behind Paraytec Limited and the university.

The university’s FOI staff have openly admitted to putting private commercial interests ahead of the world’s interests.

So, on November 22, 2023 I filed a 2nd complaint to John Edwards acting as the UK Information Commissioner (pgs 1-12).

On June 12, 2024, I received an email from “Keeley Christine, Senior Case Officer, Information Commissioner's Office” with the subject line Service of Decision Notice: IC-283697-J8J5 (pgs 40-48). (Keeley’s letter is not signed. I will be writing back to her for a signed copy.)

Long story short, according to Keeley’s June 12, 2024 decision letter (pgs 41 and 47) she decided that (bolding added):

"3. The Commissioner requires the University to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation:

• Disclose the requested information or issue a fresh response to the complainant’s request that complies with FOIA and which does not rely on section 14(1).

4. The University must take these steps within 35 calendar days of the date of this decision notice. Failure to comply may result in the Commissioner making written certification of this fact to the High Court pursuant to section 54 of FOIA and may be dealt with as a contempt of court.

...30. The Commissioner requires the University to provide the complainant with a fresh response to the request which does not rely on section 14(1) of FOIA. He notes that the University has already advised the complainant that information within scope of their previous request is intended for future publication. If, upon reviewing this request, it is the case that the University still intends to publish the specific information that has been requested at a future date, it should confirm that in its response."

Thirty five calendar days came and went with no one from the university contacting me. And so today I wrote back to Keeley, copying staff at the university (bolding added):

“More than 35 calendar days have passed and no one from the university has contacted me at all.  Therefore I ask that you make written certification of this fact to the High Court so that it may be dealt with as a contempt of court.”

Judging by his new emails to me (not copied to the ICO or anyone else at the university), it seems that Luke Thompson who acts as Head of Data Protection & Legal Services at the university is in a bit of a panic… poor thing (see email exchange, pgs 50 - 53).

***** July 23, 2024 ADDENDUM *****

Added to the pdf, pgs 54-56: a new, late email from Luke:

And my response, directed to Keeley:

(Note: this information has been sent to ~200 people who work for “the state”, lamestream media, etc. at Canada, Isle of Man, England and the U.S., so that they can’t claim later that they didn’t know.)

Official Confessions/Evidence Showing that Virology is Pseudoscience

Freedom of Information Responses reveal that health/science institutions around the world (223 and counting!) have no record of SARS-COV-2 (the alleged convid virus) isolation/purification, anywhere, ever:
https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/fois-reveal-that-health-science-institutions-around-the-world-have-no-record-of-sars-cov-2-isolation-purification/

Excel file listing 223 institutions:
https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Institution-list-for-website.xlsx

FOI responses re other imaginary viruses (HIV, avian influenza, HPV, Influenza, Measles, etc., etc., etc.):
https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/fois-reveal-that-health-science-institutions-have-no-record-of-any-virus-having-been-isolated-purified-virology-isnt-a-science/

FOIs re secretive and unscientifically "mock infected" cells (aka invalid controls) and fabricated "virus genomes":
https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/do-virologists-perform-valid-control-experiments-is-virology-a-science/

3000+ pages of "virus" FOIs in 8 compilation pdfs, and my notarized declarations re the anti-scientific nature of virology:
https://tinyurl.com/IsolationFOIs

Failed freedom of Information responses re contagion:
https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/freedom-of-information-responses-re-contagion/

Do health and science institutions have studies proving that bacteria CAUSE disease?
https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/do-health-authorities-have-studies-proving-that-bacteria-cause-disease-lets-find-out-via-freedom-of-information/

Because "they" (HIV, influenza virus, HPV, measles virus, etc., etc., etc.) have never been shown to exist, clearly don't exist and virology isn't a science.

For truth, freedom and sanity,
Christine