9th March 2012
JUDGMENT NOW AVAILABLE TO READ HERE
Darrim described himself as half English and half Iraqi. He was killed on 15 November 2009. He was only 34 years old. Please see this report of Darrim’s death in Crawley News.
During the last few years of his life, Darrim claimed that he was a victim of organised stalking and electronic harassment using directed energy weapons. He organised a protest against organised stalking and electronic harassment on 14 October 2009, as part of the international day of protest announced in this press release. Darrim testified on several occasions during the final few weeks of his life, that he had been receiving threats to his life.
The two types of harassment that Darrim alleged, were organised stalking, and torture inflicted from a distance by the deployment of non-lethal directed energy weapons, often called electronic harassment. Darrim designed a two-sided placard that he carried proudly on his “demonstration”, which was attended by eight people in all. At the top of this page, is displayed Darrim’s own artwork for the two sides of that two-sided placard. Darrim conducted an online survey of people who reported either of these two types of abuse, discovering that over 80% of those who reported either type of abuse, reported both types.
Darrim alleged that this harassment was inflicted upon him by the British public sector. He asked me to intervene in any inquest into his death, if he was violently killed. He confirmed to me and others that he was not suicidal. At first, the police told the media that Darrim’s death was “non-suspicious”. I wrote this letter to West Sussex Coroner declaring my interest in the matter of Darrim’s death. West Sussex Coroner made this decision that I was not a properly interest person in the inquest into Darrim’s death. I had not been granted judicial review of that decision by the time of the inquest hearing on 5th – 6th May 2011, reported here. I attended the whole of the two day-long inquest.
The first inquest jury heard evidence from a psychiatrist who had never met Darrim. That evidence is likely to have encouraged the jury to reach a conclusion that Darrim’s allegation of organised stalking and electronic harassment using directed energy weapons, perpetrated by the public sector, and including death threats, was the result of a “delusion” on Darrim’s part. I would have wished to ask the psychiatrist challenging questions after his oral evidence-in-chief, but I was not allowed to ask that witness any questions at all, because I was not considered to be a properly interested person at the first inquest.
The jury saw this video that Darrim had made and uploaded onto You Tube the day before he was killed. The jury was also allowed to read selected emails and other material written by the deceased. For example, Darrim had written, the day before he was killed, “Facial burn received from directed energy weapons. I have also been prevented from having any sleep for 133 hours so far.”
I was called to give evidence at the first inquest, but was expressly forbidden, despite an application in the absence of the jury, to bring evidence of the existence of directed energy capabilities of the infliction of sleep deprivation upon targeted individuals, a capability documented since the 1960s, for example, the LIDA Machine, documented on page 6 of this document. The jury therefore heard no evidence that would have encouraged them to believe the deceased’s own allegation, made in the text accompanying his last uploaded You Tube video, that sleep deprivation lasting 133 hours had been inflicted upon him artificially during the final days of this life.
The jury decided that Darrim had committed suicide “due to a disturbed state of mind.” There is evidence that this is a correct finding, at one level. However, the jury was not given evidence or directions on the possibility of unlawful killing, by the deliberate weakening of Darrim’s mind, and his will to continue living.
This truth campaign is brought by me, John Allman.