Miraculously Cured of Hepatitis C

exchemist said:
It would be thrown out by the judge, though, because recovery can occur quite naturally anyway. So that would make your “testimony” mere personal opinion rather than actual evidence.
Click to expand...
Not if we claim that our testimonies explain these "natural" occurrences.
 
bearer_of_truth said:
Not if we claim that our testimonies explain these "natural" occurrences.
Click to expand...
People claim all manner of things in law courts. A judge will decide if your claim is credible before accepting it.

And it isn't, because people do recover from this disease on their own. So a judge would not accept it.
 
exchemist said:
People claim all manner of things in law courts. A judge will decide if your claim is credible before accepting it.

And it isn't, because people do recover from this disease on their own. So a judge would not accept it.
Click to expand...
It's a fact that supernatural explanations and testimonies are admissible in a court of law. Anything relevant to the case would not be dismissed.
 
Last edited:
bearer_of_truth said:
I'm guessing around 2001.
Click to expand...
Ok they offered interferon treatment at that time. Is that what you mean?

Also as has been said, spontaneous remission and cure can happen with Hep C and other diseases. 3 in 10 is one figure, why do you think your cure was miraculous?
 
bearer_of_truth said:
Ours is a testimony which is admissible in a court of law as evidence suggesting the truth.
Click to expand...
Sure. So would testimony that there is no God. So would testimony that the Earth is flat. So would testimony that abortion saves lives. All perfectly admissible in a courtroom.
 
Pinball1970 said:
Ok they offered interferon treatment at that time. Is that what you mean?

Also as has been said, spontaneous remission and cure can happen with Hep C and other diseases. 3 in 10 is one figure, why do you think your cure was miraculous?
Click to expand...
The nurse did say chemotherapy. It was merely a brief conversation. She may have meant to say interferon. I was not interested.

I no longer have any antibodies in my blood. I was healed so perfectly that there is no trace of my ever having it in the first place.
 
billvon said:
Sure. So would testimony that there is no God. So would testimony that the Earth is flat. So would testimony that abortion saves lives. All perfectly admissible in a courtroom.
Click to expand...
I disagree. I do not believe any of that would be admissible in a court of law. Can you produce a court case that would suggest any of that to be true?
 
bearer_of_truth said:
I disagree. I do not believe any of that would be admissible in a court of law.
Click to expand...
Of course they would be.

Testimony only has to be pertinent to the case, and the person has to be sworn in. As long as those two standards are met, lawyers can have anyone they want testify.

If you are a defense lawyer, and want to claim that your client was abducted by space aliens so he could not have committed the crime? You are 100% free to call a witness to that event. The jury then gets to decide whether or not that person is credible.
 
billvon said:
That's unfortunate.
Click to expand...
Having antibodies in your blood for hep C means that you either have hep C or you once had it. Even if you are cured you would have antibodies in your blood. Again, I no longer have the antibodies. It's as if I never had it in the first place. It's a miracle!
 
bearer_of_truth said:
The defendants claimed demonic possession in the case of Anneliese Michel.
Click to expand...
Yes you and billvon are quite right and I was wrong, it's all admissable. In a jury trial it would be up to the jury to dismiss it - which they would. In a judge-only trial (e.g. civil cases in UK law), the judge would dismiss it in the reasons for the judgement.
 
bearer_of_truth said:
Having antibodies in your blood for hep C means that you either have hep C or you once had it. Even if you are cured you would have antibodies in your blood. Again, I no longer have the antibodies. It's as if I never had it in the first place. It's a miracle!
Click to expand...

Well we have your word on that. Why would god remove the antibodies do you think? They are not harmful and could well protect you from further infection should you encounter the virus again. That is what anti bodies do.
 
bearer_of_truth said:
. Can you produce a court case that would suggest any of that to be true?
Click to expand...
You mean like suggesting demons are true?

People who claim that Jesus, aliens or demons told them to kill, have to have a psychological assessment from a medical professional to determine if they are of sound mind or not.
The UK law term is diminished responsibility
I would google Peter Sutcliff, Yorkshire Ripper.
 
bearer_of_truth said:
Having antibodies in your blood for hep C means that you either have hep C or you once had it. Even if you are cured you would have antibodies in your blood. Again, I no longer have the antibodies. It's as if I never had it in the first place. It's a miracle!
Click to expand...

Was your case written up and presented to the AMA? Were there follow up studies done on your bloods?
 
exchemist said:
Yes you and billvon are quite right and I was wrong, it's all admissable. In a jury trial it would be up to the jury to dismiss it - which they would. In a judge-only trial (e.g. civil cases in UK law), the judge would dismiss it in the reasons for the judgement.
Click to expand...
There are laws against a judge or jury throwing out relevant evidence to a case.
 
Pinball1970 said:
Well we have your word on that. Why would god remove the antibodies do you think? They are not harmful and could well protect you from further infection should you encounter the virus again. That is what anti bodies do.
Click to expand...
The Lord is perfect and thus His healing would be perfect as well. And the Lord would know I will not be getting hep C again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top