Dear All,

Some more good news. Darlene Sherrell has forwarded to us the news that the judge ruled in her favor against self-styled “quackbuster” and fanatical promoter of fluoridation, Stephen Barrett.

Congratulations Darlene! It must be a huge relief to get this irritating, and probably highly debilitating, slapsuit off your back.

Below are exerpts from the judge’s ruling.

Paul Connett.

p.s. You can access the complete ruling at: http://www.rvi.net/~fluoride/decision.htm
————————————————————————

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
.
STEPHEN BARRETT, M.D.,
Plaintiff,
vs.
DARLENE SHERRELL,
PHILIP HEGGEN,
Defendants.

CV 99-813-HO

FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
.
EXCERPTS:
.
“… defendant testified that plaintiff cannot name a study demonstrating the safety of current fluoridation levels, because there is no scientific method capable of detecting chronic fluoride poisoning in the full spectrum. Defendant stated that she considers any claim by plaintiff to the contrary to constitute “bogus consumer advocacy” and “the big lie,” and that plaintiff has abandoned the public in making such a claim.”
.
“With respect to defendant’s statement that he cannot name a study demonstrating the safety of current fluoridation levels, plaintiff testified that this statement is false. At the same time, however, he was careful to state that he is and was aware of hundreds of studies pertaining to the safety of fluoridation of drinking water. He did not testify that any study demonstrates the safety of current fluoridation levels.”

“In sum, the evidence adduced at trial establishes that plaintiff is a public figure and the defamatory statements involve a matter of public concern, and that plaintiff has failed to meet his burden to prove actual malice, and/or actual injury. … For the reasons stated above, this action is dismissed. Plaintiffís defamation claim is dismissed.”

Print PDF