By Greg Szymanski

The tentacles of the Vatican-led NWO stretch deep into every segment of American society, even dictating the type of dental floss used to clean teeth.

Sound far fetched?

Well it’s not, according to inventor and product developer, Sean Dix, who spent two years in jail for trying to fight the corporate state of America set up destroy anybody who tries to buck the system and disrupt the powers that be.

And Dix’s incredible story serves as a prime example of how the Illuminati minions in business, the media and the Vatican have teamed up to create a devouring monster ready to consume total freedom in this country, including the freedom for “the little guy” to bring new and improved products and technology to the market place.

Dix appeared Thursday on Greg Szymanski’s radio show, The Investigative Journal on the Republic Broadcasting Network at www.republicbroadcasting.org, telling how he tried to take on Johnson & Johnson with a new and improved type of dental floss, but instead of being allowed to compete fairly, became the subject of death threats and finally put in jail for two years.

“All the powers that be teamed up to keep my product off the market, including Ted Turner’s CNN, the anti-trust department, the courts and Johnson & Johnson,” said Dix during the radio interview, explaining that he came up with the first sterilized dental floss on the market with a new and improved packaging system.

“I didn’t even realize that not one dental floss company in the market sterilizes its flossing product. When J&J got wind of my product after I filed for a patent, all hell broke loose. They realized they would have to retool their entire production department, costing a fortune. They also realized how it could devastate their business because if you had the choice to use a sterilized floss or one that wasn’t, what would you do?”

Dix further explained in his radio interview how CNN conspired with J&J to discredit his product, running a series of stories which were misleading and false. He added that the rest of the media wouldn’t touch his story, leaving him alone and penniless as investors jumped off his band wagon after the unfounded and negative publicity.

“They all conspired to get rid of me and my product because, I guess, it was cheaper and more cost effective to get rid of me then compete fairly on the open market,” added Dix, whose product is demonstrated at www.flossrings.com. “In a nutshell, they got me out of the way and I ended up in jail. I have been ignored by the media and even the story of how I was railroaded in court has been suppressed.”

Besides telling his story on the Investigative Journal, Dix has provided this written statement about his 10 struggle to provide America with a new, improved and sterilized floss product.

Here is his story, rather lengthy but worth reading:

Truth is stranger than fiction.

This story is for those who continue to ask why “FlossRings” are not available in any major drug store for the past decade and how that has prevented the development of the Sterilized Floss Segments to the detriment of oral hygiene in general. This story is posted for public record because the mainstream media have refused to cover it after playing a lead role (CNN) in creating it. My apologies to those who continue to ask these questions year after year but given the circumstances I hope you will understand that my progress has been significantly delayed due to events that were, and continue to be beyond my control.

The following five page summary highlights the story from beginning to present. A detailed summary of part one and a one page summary of part two follows. The full story is still being written as it is a living document. Let it be a source of inspiration and information for those who have the courage to embark on their dreams whatever they may be. The FlossRing Story is titled, “This is CNN”.

This is CNN

(summary)

In the early 90’s, working as a diamond setter, I invented FlossRings, to make flossing easier because I had eczema which made flossing more painful than it normally is. The idea was simple, what followed is not. Lacking funds for this venture, I offered it to industry approaching a few companies, Johnson & Johnson expressed interest so I engaged them in good faith. What I didn’t know was that J&J had tried to come up with a similar idea years earlier and after several years, and lots of money, J&J gave up failing to solve the problem of traditional flossing. After throwing in the towel J&J’s company policy disavowed the viability of flossing devices or so I was told. Needless to say when J&J saw the FlossRings and Sterilized Floss Segments, (the razor and razor blade for oral care), they were excited and furious at the same time. The unintended blow to J&J’s ego was compounded by showing J&J the Sterilized Floss Segments two months into their biggest cover-up since their inception (the Ethicon Suture Scandal where J&J knowingly released hundreds of thousands of un-sterilized sutures into distribution causing at least one death, several amputations and virulent infections that have lasted some victims for years). They did such a good job of covering that up that I knew nothing of it at the time and only found out about it years later. Unfortunately, J&J did not deal fairly with me although a fair fortune is what they were offered. I left the negotiating process due to J&J’s unethical behavior and founded my company, in November of 1995. 

An iceberg is 10% visible with 90% of it’s bulk below surface and so in my naivety I proceeded to cast my bread upon water unaware of the forces at work below the surface to prevent me from fulfilling my potential.

June 12, 1996 would remove all doubts about what lay below the surface of my path when I believe J&J influenced CNN to air a trivializing and factually incorrect news piece two weeks before my FlossRings were inaugurated into the Dr. Samuel D. Harris National Museum of Dentistry where they are listed under George Washington’s not so wooden dentures as one of the 32 permanent exhibits to visit.

The fallout of a 3 ½ minute negative news piece airing every hour on the hour for several days was devastating. My phone went dead, my sales force disappeared, financial backers did not return my calls and eventually my distribution at CVS drugstores was terminated.

Family and friends were initially silent in disbelief not knowing what to say. Some were helpful, some were not. The negative impact of having CNN intentionally misrepresent my invention was unavoidable.

I spent the next two years pleading with CNN to do the right thing, but my requests fell on deaf ears. Finally after two years of engaging CNN in a polite manner an opportunity arose to resolve the situation. I was told by Ted Turners secretary that Ted Turner would personally review and resolve this matter and that I should send an information package to her and he would get it. Finally my patience and persistence had paid off. If they reviewed the piece they would see that it was clearly inconsistent with an invention that was about to be inaugurated into a museum not to mention the instruction by CNN to have dentists (their own) use the product improperly. I sent off my package and followed up in a few days and was told that they never got it and to please send another. I sent another Fed-Ex and this time upon following up I was re-routed to their security where I was told “don’t you get it…we don’t care”. After two years of trying to resolve a conflict that any child could see was unjust they built my hopes up only to knock me down one more time.

That was the “Straw that broke the camels back”, lacking the funds to sue them on top of getting zero help from the Gov’t after much effort I decided to bring CNN into court to expose this crime which severely altered my life, stunting my progress and ultimately oral hygiene in general. Seeing as how CNN requested an information package and then denied receiving it twice I decided to fax CNN the evidence they requested some 6,000 times to be sure they would receive it (Can you hear me know). After a few days of that miraculously they found my packages and promised to get back to me but they never did. Had they tried to have me prosecuted for that it would have backfired because one of the dentists who panned the FlossRings explained in a letter that CNN did not give him a package which had the instructions on the back and in a phone conversation explained that CNN instructed him to use the FlossRings improperly telling him to use 18 inches of floss when the package instructions clearly state to use 5 inches. Dr. George Reskakis further stated in his letter, “ In retrospect, I believe my initial criticism may have been premature. “I now feel this is a viable and potentially valuable product for my patients.” Needless to say CNN did not want to use that letter as evidence to press charges against me as it would have proven my point.

My fax campaign eventually inspired a CNN security official (Thomas McCormick) to threaten me with being lost in prison inferring that this would never come to trial. When that didn’t work, an ex-employee from J&J entered my life (coincidentally?) to warn me that J&J is capable of all kinds of unethical conduct including a multitude of indirect threats against my life. If he was paid to intimidate me and I believe he was that would actually constitute a direct threat against my life from J&J but tough to prove without the authorities to investigate and although that is what the authorities are paid to do they have not, will not currently, and probably never will investigate it. My rights Constitutional or otherwise are not recognized by this Gov’t only my actions in defense of them.

The F.B.I. and all relevant Gov’t agencies refused to fulfill their duties by investigating this and so ultimately I decided to use a letter with threatening language in return designed as a tool to generate a federal trial for the sole purpose of exposing this injustice. Instead of putting an end to this oppression by acknowledging that every living being has a right to defend its ability to sustain itself as long as it  does not violate anyone else’s right to the same, the Gov’t took the ball and ran with it using the letter to further disenfranchise me knowing full well that it was not a true threat but a demand for justice at the end of a long process of criminal and civil disenfranchisement.

The trial was a complete mockery of justice from the beginning when  I was brought in front of the Jury pool with my hands behind my back escorted by the U.S. Marshalls from the holding chamber (clear grounds to dismiss the case for prejudicing the jury) to the prosecutor (Todd Alley) who described himself as “a little bitty thing” to gain sympathy from the jury while contradicting and perjuring himself for the record while suppressing exculpatory and extrinsic evidence in an all out effort to convince the jury on the narrowest of margins by declaring that my “intent” in a “specific intent crime” was irrelevant and that all that mattered was that I sent a letter containing threatening language from point A to point B. On the other hand CNN and J&J’s threats which were real and were intended to silence me which came years before my letter were never acknowledged. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

Given that framework (illegal and unconstitutional) and not hearing any of the evidence like E-mails and letters describing in detail that I was going to do this to expose this in court the jury still came back hung not once, but twice, before the judge gave the Allen Charge meaning that the jury had to go back and come up with a verdict as if a “hung jury” were no longer an option.  The jury eventually gave in and came back with a guilty verdict. After being sentenced, I completed 15 months and was released on probation with the court ordered condition of seeing a psychologist once a week for three years.

The intention in my opinion was to allow me to vent with none of my energy directed towards meaningful progress the intended result being the end of my spirit to defend my livelihood. Quite the opposite happened, with the psychologist admitting on tape that he was willing to bet money that J&J was criminally involved, along with CNN and that the Gov’t further harmed me by prosecuting me for a threat that he and the Gov’t both knew was not a true threat. He went on to add that he could do something about all this, but that he didn’t want to.

That was the next straw that broke the camels back yet again, causing me to leave his office never to return thus violating the conditions of probation. I then wrote a letter to my probation officer declaring my right to end participation in a process that was admittedly forcing my cooperation in my own disenfranchisement. 

If the Gov’t truly believed that I was a danger to anyone, they should have arrested me on the spot as anything less would be negligent. Instead they waited one whole year to the day I refused to continue to cooperate in what was admittedly a criminal violation of my rights. On Feb. 12, 2004 the U.S. Marshall’s came at 8:00 A.M. to arrest me knocking me to the floor in my underwear and bathrobe while grinding a .45 Caliber gun into the back of my head, one of them shouting “I could have shot you, I could have shot you” before taking me back into the prison system in shorts, my bathrobe and shoes… no socks. Only this time the confidence in their case was beginning to unravel as all fabrications of the truth eventually do. Upon re-appearing before the Dishonorable Judge Clarence Cooper he actually acknowledged that Turner (CNN) had perpetuated a wrong upon me, his exact words, “Let me ask you this, are you telling this court you are going to spend the rest of your life trying to rectify the wrong that Turner perpetuated on you?” after explaining that I would he then admitted that he believed that I generated the trial to expose what had happened to me, his exact words, “Sean if you recall, you wanted a trial so you could expose what happened to you”. These two revelations are more than enough to exonerate me, saddle the judge, prosecutor, and CNN with criminal and civil liabilities, and implicate J&J as the source but even admitting that for the public record, I was sentenced to nine more months in federal prison.

I endured Prison complete with real death threats from inmates, abusive conduct from correctional officers and a host of humiliating and life threatening situations that I will not share with you at the moment and may never. There were some good experiences with decent people (inmates and officers) but those were few and far between in this decade long battle for the freedom to fulfill my potential.

I was released Nov. 12, 2004 and although I’m no farther along than when I started as far as justice is concerned, I have amassed a paper trail that is public record which irrefutably speaks for itself, paid for with the loss of my livelihood for over a decade. The truth is out there. Tragically, justice is the one commodity whose supply rarely ever meets its demand to the detriment of humanity.

In 1998 a clinical study conducted at Indiana University proved that FlossRings removed 23.8% more plaque than floss alone. The study was never published by Indiana University but that’s another chapter in this story.

So how did this re-launch of the FlossRings with the new website happen after all that ? Well, I could not in good conscience ask anyone for financial help after going through all of that knowing that every time I made one step forward I got pushed back two so when my mother insisted that I accept her help to get this back on track I accepted. Who knew better what I have been through than my mother.

This.... is CNN

By  Sean Dix

In the early 90’s while working as a diamond setter in the jewelry business, a severe case of eczema on my hands inspired me to invent a device allowing me to floss without wrapping floss around my fingers. FlossRings were invented. I then invented the first Sterilized Floss Segments to be compatible with the FlossRings, much like the Razor and Razor Blade Concept. I was a piece worker in a factory and was insufficiently funded so I decided to approach established companies like Johnson & Johnson to adopt this venture. J&J was initially interested but began dealing with me in an unethical manner. I ended negotiations with J&J which they were not too happy  with. I went to other Oral Care Manufacturers ultimately meeting with similar consequences. Surprisingly, J&J came back two months later and again engaged me in confidentiality agreements only this time they concluded their studies early and then decided not to make any further progress. While other companies simply refused for various reasons J&J initially responded favorably only to begin down a path of criminal activity which ultimately includes CNN, AOL Time Warner and the U.S. Government and continues even as this is being written. I will reference laws “word for word” throughout this document for you to determine if the actions that have been taken against me are properly defined by the laws that I refer to, and for you to decide on the merits of the measures which I have undertaken in response. I will also include quotes in this brief that I believe are relevant to the circumstances.

The first law that I believe that has been violated may or may not be clear at first but I believe that after reading the whole brief you might very well conclude that the preponderance of evidence is met, beyond a reasonable doubt and that the laws that are referred to have been violated to say the least.

The first law I believe to have been violated against my company and I is found in Title 18, Part 1, Chapter 13, Section 241 under “Conspiracy against Rights”. “If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or

If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured-

They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

The essence of that law in my opinion is that the ability to exercise and enjoy your rights and privileges shall not be illegally infringed upon without severe consequences. The right to Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness are to be protected in that order, and vice versa for without the protection to exercise your right to pursue Happiness you would not have true Liberty, and without true Liberty what is Life. If we are to set the standard of mandatory legal protection at life threatening situations only while eliminating the need for mandatory legal protection in the exercising of ones rights then we will inevitably see an increase in life threatening situations as the quality of life will be reduced to a point  where no recourse short of vigilant self defense will preserve ones quality of life. Aside from my own opinions let me recite to you to the relevant portion of the “Declaration of Independence” dated July 4, 1776 which is the foundational concept of the United States of America. “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among men,...That whenever any form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it.”

From that declaration arose the common belief and understanding that individual rights are to be protected even if it means altering or abolishing this government if or when it seeks to deprive individuals of their secured rights and freedoms. The founding fathers of this country risked their lives to defend those beliefs. The Bill of Rights was to follow and I will refer to that in the following pages. Having stated that let’s get back to the brief and see how this comes into focus.

In Nov. of 1995, I left my 11 year job as a diamond setter to build Dix Preventive Products Inc.  To generate publicity I sent out press releases and Forbes FYI was the first to pick up on it. Shortly thereafter, I got a review in the Boston Globe and those two articles garnered a meeting with CVS which  prompted CVS to order them. When word got out that I had shelf space at CVS product brokers from all over the country began calling wanting to represent the FlossRings. Soon I had N.A.G.M.R. (National Association of General Merchandise Representatives ) product brokers in every region of the U.S. promoting FlossRings. I learned from the ADA that there was a dental museum opening in Baltimore so I gave them a call and sent some samples. A few months later they decided to place the FlossRings in the “Dentistry in Transformation” section in the Museum based on their merits and potential future impact on the public’s oral health. The FlossRings were scheduled to be placed in CVS by mid-April of 1996.  Additionally, the FlossRings were  to be inaugurated into the Dr. Samuel D. Harris National Museum of Dentistry in late June of 1996. To stimulate press coverage, I sent out a Video News Release (instructional Video) and Bloomberg News picked up the story and did a fair, and accurate news piece on their morning show a few weeks before the CNN piece aired. The response was huge with interested investors calling, and more product brokers calling seeking to represent me; a buzz of potential was in the air. 

I was in Michigan dealing with K-Mart when CNN called and decided to do a story. I was excited as anybody would be. This was the big break that I needed to solidify commitments from financial backers, retail buyers, and get the word out to the public. I spoke with Linda Djerejian of CNN and she scheduled to film the meeting I had coming up with Drug Guild (A drug wholesaler ). I met Linda in the Drug Guild parking lot and we talked a little and then filmed portions of my meeting.

Linda then wanted to schedule another meeting with reporter, Jeanne Moos, in my home. I agreed and the next meeting began at a local CVS store where they took some footage of the FlossRings on the shelf and then it was off  to my house for  the completion of the footage. Jeanne Moos and her film crew  wrapped up the shooting.  In a parting comment Jeanne Moos said, “You realize that a piece like this can make you or break you”.  It didn’t register that she must have said that to emphasize the latter because the FlossRings were going into a Museum based on their merits which is normally a rewarding experience. I called CNN to find out when the piece would air and was told that they had to bring the FlossRings to some regular dentists for an opinion and then it would air. I called again in a few weeks and was told when the  piece would air. I called again the day the piece was to air and thanked Linda for the exposure that would soon take place. To which  Linda  replied “Don’t thank me yet .You might not like the piece”!!.

June 12, 1996 at around 9:00 PM the piece began airing. I had previously called all of my friends, family, retail buyers, product brokers, venture capitalists, potential financial backers, and people in the Dental Trade ( ADA ) etc.  So I was fully aware of how many people were watching this supposed “Olympic Moment” which turned out to be a trivializing and factually incorrect piece. The lead in’s to the piece included CNN anchors making such statements as “ Believe it or not it’s the Stuff Dreams are made of for one man at least,..Dental Floss we’ll look into the mind of Innovation struggling to change the World’s flossing habits. When we continue.”  The piece was then led in by two anchors whose opening statements immediately went south with “Give a guy enough rope and well, you know the rest of that one”...”Well, now there ought to be a line about giving a guy enough floss....Just enough to give him ideas”.  Then the piece began with an analogy of the Mission Impossible Sweepstakes held by Kellogs CornPops as the reason most inventions never see the light of day. The FlossRings were taken to “Dentists” for a review and the first dentist ( Dr. Reskakis ) is shown fumbling with the FlossRings using what is at least an 18 inch piece of floss when the FlossRing package clearly says to use 5 inches. Then the second dentist ( Dr. Mindell ) says “now I have 5 inches here and I can’t get it to the back of my mouth” before he even tries which suggests that the piece was choreographed. Linda Djerejian of CNN then prompts the second dentist ( Dr. Mindell) by saying “So you don’t see these sweeping the nation?” to which Dr. Mindell says, “No, they’re not going to sweep the nation”. The piece finishes with the Mission Impossible theme playing on that cheap sound chip from the box of Kellogs CornPops and Jeanne Moos saying “he’s a man with a mission... try playing that on your Flossrings”.  The innuendo was a little to hard to miss. 

I wouldn’t mind anybody giving their own opinion and then standing by it so if they are proven wrong, they will know they were wrong and no one else. I do have a problem with CNN manufacturing a negative opinion from a third party professional and then airing it as spontaneous and unbiased. Basically, what I later found out by doing a little bit of investigating was that CNN prompted the dentists to use 18 inches which is the wrong size piece of floss and then didn’t provide them with a package which any consumer would have had the opportunity to do before buying them.

This fraudulent deception put the dentists in the position to pan a product that they had not even been allowed to investigate as would the average consumer shopping at CVS. The further prompting by CNN to the dentists regarding the FlossRings “not sweeping the nation” can only be considered malicious realizing that CNN is the only one that knows that the Dentists are using the FlossRings improperly at CNN’s instruction or maybe they did know and were in on it? The act of  conspiring to manufacture false information and communicate it with the intent to damage a person or corporations property, intellectual or otherwise is a felony under Title 18 Chapter 65 Section 1365 “Tampering with Consumer Products” and I will quote the Federal Criminal Law Handbook with the most relevant parts of that law. Specifically

Subsection (b) “Whoever, with intent to cause injury to the business of any person, taints any consumer product or renders materially false or misleading the labeling of, or container for, a consumer product, if such consumer product affects interstate or foreign commerce, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

Subsection (c)

1. “Whoever knowingly communicates false information that a consumer product has been tainted, if such product or the results of such communication affect interstate or foreign commerce, and if such tainting, had it occurred, would create a risk of death or bodily injury to another person, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

2. As used in paragraph (1) of this subsection, the term “communicates false information” means communicates information that is false and that the communicator knows is false, under circumstances in which the information may reasonably be expected to be believed.

Subsection (e)

“Whoever is a party to a conspiracy of two or more persons to commit an offense under subsection (a) of this section, if any of the parties intentionally engages in any conduct in furtherance of such offense, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both”.

Subsection (g)

1. (A)  The term “consumer product”means- any “food”, “drug”, “device”, or “cosmetic”, as those terms are respectively defined in section 201 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 321); or

(B) Any article, product, or commodity which is customarily produced or distributed for consumption by individuals, or use by individuals for purposes of personal care or in the performance of services ordinarily rendered within the household, and which is designed to be consumed or expended in the course of such consumption or use.

Getting back to the story. The fallout was immediate and specific. My product broker network resigned in less than two weeks, all previously interested financial backers disappeared and a few months later CVS discontinued the FlossRings. I called the dentists out of curiosity, I wanted to know why the first dentist shown had an 18 inch piece of floss and the second dentist had the right size piece but still couldn’t use it.

I spoke with Dr. Reskakis who explained that Linda Djerejian had instructed him to use 18 inches and that he had not been given a package to read the instructions. Dr. Reskakis provided me with letters confirming this along with offering the fact that his partner Dr. Mindell is Jeanne Moos’s dentist. I approached CNN giving them the benefit of doubt that a mistake had been made even when it had become obvious that it was not.

Jeanne Moos stood behind her story stating that the dentists did see the instructions despite what Dr. Reskakis told me. Thankfully I taped our conversation in which Dr. Reskakis states no less than eight times that he was not given a package and did not see the instructions. Upon seeing the instructions after I sent him a package he thought that his initial review was premature and that the FlossRings were very useful.

I tried to appeal to CNN’s sense of morality stating that the FlossRings were placed in the Dr. Samuel D. Harris National Museum of Dentistry only two weeks after the CNN piece aired which CNN knew months before they aired the piece. If their piece hurt my business, which it most certainly did, and if they didn’t do it on purpose, then why wouldn’t they do a retraction or another story that reflected the facts? Needless to say, CNN stonewalled straight for the next year. This was not the only thing on my mind during that time as one might think, but trying to get distribution with no sales force is almost impossible. Without financial backing, which disappeared after the news piece, it was impossible to pay for a sales force or get another one to work on commission. Meeting with potential investors I had to discuss the CNN piece as my fiduciary duty concerning disclosure of good news as well as bad news that would materially affect the company. Word spreads pretty fast in the retail world and with no sales force, few retailers were confident in giving me shelf space. CNN was not the only factor in this uphill battle, but it was the “tip of the iceberg” and it was in full view of the public.

In February of 1997 I was told by one of Ted Turners secretaries to send a package to “Ed Turner” who, I was told, was Ted Turner’s brother who normally reviewed things of this nature. I sent a Fed-Ex package on 2/26/97 but received no response. When I followed up I was directed around in circles again for another year.

Finally, in 1998, I was told by Blaine Sergew, one of Ted Turners secretaries, that I should send a complete package and Ted Turner would personally review and resolve the matter. I thought persistence had finally paid off. I sent a package and followed up a few weeks later only to be told that they never received it and that I should send another package. I did, this time Fed-Ex, and again I was told they had never received it and this time they transferred me to security where I was told “Don’t you get it ? We don’t care”.

That was the “straw that broke the camel’s back”.  Realizing I was financially unable to sue and unable to resolve this with CNN in an amicable manner, I decided to get this into a court for the purposes of public scrutiny. Allow me to add here a quote that I feel is relevant to the situation. “In no sense do I advocate evading or defying the law...That would lead to anarchy. An individual who breaks a law that his conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for the law.” Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.  With that being my frame of mind for the Govt’s refusal to apply the “equal protection under the law” of the Fourteenth Amendment to enforce the obvious violation of the “Consumer Products Tampering Laws” and even more basically my right to the pursuit of the American Dream, I loaded up my fax machine with the letters provided by the dentist that CNN had requested and then denied receiving and began faxing them to all of CNN’s fax lines. Before I finished sending some 6,000 faxes, Tom Johnson’s secretary contacted me stating that they found the package and that they would be in touch within a week. They never did get back to me and again stonewalled stating  they could absorb my faxing and that they would not press charges which would give me a platform to expose them with.

Frustrated, I continued to call CNN asking what it would take to get into court so that we could discuss this in a civilized manner. The head of CNN security or so he said, Thomas McCormick, threatened to have me “lost in an Atlanta Prison” stating that this would “never come to trial” which I thought clearly overstepped the boundaries of our conversation and which I taped for posterity. That statement from Thomas McCormick of CNN was a form of  intimidation that was clearly meant to oppress any attempt at justice and would fall under the “Conspiracy against Rights” law.  I called CNN’s head of security “Dwight Ellison” to inform him of the threat made by Thomas McCormick and he simply stated that they were not going to give me a platform; end of story. That did have an affect on me and I backed off for a while because up until that point I still believed that at some point they would realize that what they had done was wrong and that it would be in their best interest to correct it. 

Shortly thereafter, a guy I knew in  high school Adam Wong appeared on my doorstep after having almost no contact for some ten years except for passing him in the street . He seemed insistent on having lunch with me and I agreed although I really had no desire to. He is one of the people that everyone has in their life that they are happy to have lost contact with.

He began discussing drugs and guns and telling me stories to get my “opinion” and it was all very staged, but I was stuck like a deer in the headlights as to how to end this conversation without being rude so I humored him for the duration of his inquisition and then we parted. The next day an older man got on the elevator in my apartment who I had never seen before and pointing to the emergency telephone said, “there should be a sign that reads....No guns allowed.”  I nodded in agreement not knowing what the hell he was talking about until it hit me, that this was a set up. I tried to find Adam to ask him who had sent him but I could not find him. Weeks later I got a call from Adam and when I asked him if we could get together he refused vehemently although just a few weeks earlier he wanted to have lunch with me as if it were the most important event of his life. He asked me if I wanted to buy guns to which I said “No”and it was then more clear than ever that this was a set up. I said that I could stop by his work to talk with him and he responded “if you do, I’ll shoot you”, “you know I’ll shoot you” and then the conversation ended.  I immediately called the 13th Precinct and after beginning to explain the story I was put on hold, when the officer got back on he said there was nothing he could do and that it sounded as if “I was in over my head and that I could get hurt” and that “I should leave it alone”.  That scared me more than Adam’s comments because I was providing the police with information to at least find out why this guy would make such a statement and they did not want to do anything. That was one of the most “loneliest feelings” I had ever had in my life.  Whenever there was a car accident at the 14th St. and 3rd Ave. intersection that I can see from my window or someone was calling for help I would stop whatever I was doing even if it was to jump out of bed at three in the morning to call 911 for an ambulance or police, knowing that it was people who you don’t know who might one day have to call for you when or if you need help. If they keep the 911 tapes I swear on my life you will hear me quite a few times reporting an accident and leaving my name and phone number as they routinely request. Aside from the fact that the Policeman’s Benevolent Society along with the Fireman’s Fund routinely call me asking for donations which I have supported even being poorer than one could imagine, to have a response like what I got made me feel physically sick and betrayed. 

A month or so passed and one morning I got an unexpected visit from the F.B.I. who wanted to speak to me about the CNN faxing campaign that I had undertaken several months ago. We went for a walk in a nearby park where Thomas Swink opened his briefcase to display a yellow legal pad and his gun in a holster in his briefcase. He asked me for my side of the story and I told him.  Even though I thought it odd that his gun was in plain view, I will say this in his defense he was put up to it, his heart was not in the intimidation that he was sent to perform. He knew what he was doing was wrong and he appeared to be doing what he was told to by warning me that if I faxed CNN again they would be back to arrest me. Before  we parted I asked him to wait while I got him a package of information regarding what my company was about etc. He did not seem enthusiastic about reading it. A few days later I decided to call the F.B.I. to confirm that Thomas Swink was actually with the F.B.I. and I was referred to another Thomas who when I began introducing myself did not know who I was.

This really made me nervous until I learned that this Thomas was from the N.Y. office and that the other Thomas (Swink) was in Atlanta. We both had a few laughs and then I began to explain the situation about Adam and he said it sounds “like something we would do....maybe you’re being investigated....and you should be careful of who you speak to and what you say.” Now this made no sense that the F.B.I. would condone using someone I knew in high school to set me up by offering to sell me guns and then threatening  to “shoot me” when I wanted to meet with him to ask him who had put him up to this. This was way over the line and I felt compelled to get this whole matter into court for the purpose of public scrutiny again. 

Enter the ex Johnson & Johnson employee whose name I will leave out for the time being because I do not want to compromise him as a source of information until such time as a formal investigation is opened. My uncle owns a bakery and from time to time customers  come in and somehow the topic of conversation includes me and I occasionally get a call from my uncle who wants to introduce me to a lawyer who may be able to help etc. So my uncle tells me about this guy who used to work for J&J who has come in recently and that he would like me to meet. I often visit my uncle and so it was not to long that I was there when this ex J&J employee comes in. We strike up a conversation and I explain that I’m planning to protest this whole matter in front of CNN in the not to distant future. He cautions me and tells me about how J&J has successfully kept the Ethicon Suture Scandal largely under wraps right up till now. For those of you who don’t know about that let me explain, about the same time that I was showing J&J my new Sterilized Floss Segments back in 1994 they were engaged in serious damage control over the release of several million packages of un-sterilized sutures that had caused at least one death, several amputations, and virulent infections that have severely compromised the health of unsuspecting patients who came into their local hospitals for what they thought would be adequate health care. They never informed the doctors until the F.D.A. issued a warning that if they didn’t recall the sutures that they would make them recall them. A complete lapse of judgement on both the part of J&J, and the F.D.A. left doctors and patients in complete darkness about the source of these virulent infections. If you want to read more about it do a Google search on “Ethicon Suture Victim” and it might make you take a deep breath the next time you need any kind of medical treatment that might require sutures. The thought that such a reputable company would leave everyone in the dark on such a serious matter is truly scary and reeks of corruption the likes of which should  be unheard of in this day and age. In any case I began to see why J&J might have been so arrogant and unethical when I was showing them the first Sterilized Floss Segments because their floss wasn’t sterilized and they were in the middle of covering up a scandal that goes directly to the heart of their companies foundation which is sutures. In any case this ex. J&J employee may be a genuine coincidence or he may have been sent to discourage me by telling me stories of such injustices that were still un-resolved, I will elaborate more on that in a minute or two.

In an attempt to bring Thomas McCormick’s threat about being lost in prison along with everything else to light for the obvious reason of trying to right this wrong, I decided to protest in front of CNN in October of 1999. To make a long story short I was thrown down a flight of stairs and arrested for 24 hours. The trial was postponed three times because CNN failed to show and the case was dismissed. I could not believe the length with which CNN was willing to go in an effort to hide their dirty laundry, instead of just giving credit where credit is due.  I then contacted this ex. J&J employee to talk with him about possibly testifying against J&J and he refused stating that he had to much to lose. In a forty five minute conversation that I recorded he made several telling statements that I would like to include here. Obviously I can’t transcribe the whole thing but the way he is talking to me it’s as if he is a new friend of mine who is just giving me some worldly advice as he stated “I don’t want to plant thoughts in your head”, “Sean, people have been whacked for less and it can be made to look like an accident, it could be made to look like a suicide.” Now I’m going to include a few more high points and like I said he is not talking to me as if these threats are directed at me but rather as someone in the know who is just passing along some worldly advice. Please remember at this point I have already had a guy from high school pop up out of thin air and directly threaten me, along with CNN’s Thomas McCormick who strongly alluded to having me lost in prison.

Later in the conversation I say  “You  believe, you really believe that they (J&J) would do something like that. The ex J&J employee replies.. “Fuck yeah, are you kidding me, you gonna fuck with these people for two or three hundred million dollars and you don’t think they’re gonna get pissed. My friend , my friend let me tell you something, they will fuckin kill you for that, your dealing with a very, very big company...there’s no such thing as ethical behavior. These people will whack  you, you will get in your car one day, start it up, drive down the road and your brake lines will be cut, or you’ll get fuckin poisoned in a restaurant by mercury, or it’s like the CIA these are not nice people.” I responded “Then why haven’t they done it already ....”  He responds by laughing ... “How do you know, you haven’t hurt them...you hurt somebody enough and they gonna hurt you back. You have to worry about your family, your retributions. You know they can break into your apartment, rifle your apartment and steal all your documentation.” I responded .. “They haven’t done that..” To which he responded ... “Yet..Yet .. I hope you got all your documentation stored in a safety deposit box.” I then referred to the threat made by CNN’s Thomas McCormick stating that although it was a threat it was not a death threat ( not wanting to acknowledge that myself at the time) to which he responded “ people get raped in jail, people get beat up, people get stabbed, your cell could be set on fire, you could be poisoned , they could give you Aids, they could put a botulism into your food,  jail is a death sentence if your not wanted there.” “ People get killed for a thousand dollars, Sean in New York City, you fuck with hundreds of millions of dollars you think your gonna make friends, your gonna make a lot of enemies.” “ I’m not trying to discourage you, just be careful I’m trying to bring reality into perspective because I don’t think you see it all.” 

The conversation ended shortly there after because my tape ran out but as I said he could be just some guy who was giving me his thoughts on the subject or he could have been sent by J&J to plant the seeds of “Terror” and discouragement in my mind. It has happened before, at least with Adam. There is no doubt in my mind so it is entirely possible that this ex. J&J employee was offering a little more than just worldly advice. 

All of this was quite disturbing as you can well imagine to a guy who from humble beginnings was simply trying to live the American Dream by being a productive citizen.

After calling CNN again on a friday in March of 2000 I told them that if they didn’t respond as they had previously agreed after the last faxing campaign that I would begin sending embarrassing faxes on the following Monday. On Monday it became clear that again they had left me no choice and I apologized in advance for the vile faxes that were to come. I began sending humiliating faxes to Ted Turner including challenging him to a televised boxing match as he once did with Rupert Murdoch, in an attempt to have him file a law suit so that I could counter sue pro-se. If you are wondering why I didn’t just file pro-se myself , realize that CNN committed a felony on air and the Government wasn’t doing their job there so if Ted had filed a suit it would have guaranteed me an opportunity to counter sue. I was almost out of ideas on how to bring CNN into court to document all of this when I wrote several letters to the Anti-Trust Dept..beginning on April 6, 2000. They basically refused to do anything responding with such a quickness that it was obvious that they were telling me don’t even  waste your time.

Unfortunately Ted Turner did not take action against my faxing campaign, but CNN did send a detective on April 10, 2000 to try and persuade me to stop the faxing or CNN was going to “throw the book” at me. I told the detective to “bring it on”. I had been trying to get into court since 1998, what did I have to do threaten to kill him? The light bulb clicked in my head and then I said, “He should die, if he were here, I’d rip his throat out.”  I explained that I would get into court even if I had to technically break the law to do so. I was expecting him to arrest me right there, but he left. Realizing that he must have told CNN what had happened because CNN sent him, I thought they would press charges, but they didn’t.

After two letters faxed and two rejections received from the Anti-Trust Dept. I sent a final letter to Joel Klein the head of the Anti-Trust division on April 12, 2000 and to quote myself in the letter I stated, “I want my day in court even if I have to break the law so that a judge will hear my side of the story.” I received no reply to this final letter to the Anti-Trust Dept. Further infuriated with the fact that I had by now been threatened once by inference, once directly, and a third time in the form of worldly advice I realized that I could not live under this cloud of intimidation. I hope at this point you begin to see my reference to the law “Conspiracy against Rights” from the beginning of this brief starting to take shape. 

So, on April 18, 2000 I wrote a letter explaining the whole story and then included a death threat against Ted Turner or any CNN employee, but ended the letter with the last sentence stating, “let us let a Federal court observe the conditions that have led us to this impasse”. Thus undermining the threat with the real intention of getting into court, I sent that fax to CNN, Channels 2, 4, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, and the Associated Press.  

In addition I sent an E-Mail to the editor of Prevailing Winds an alternative news magazine describing the fax I had just sent with the intention of generating a court appearance. That E-mail was “Exculpatory” in nature in that it described the “death threat” as a tool to get into court. For that reason the E-Mail was not given to me before or during the trial to explain what should have been obvious in my fax. I would not see that piece of evidence until several months after being wrongfully convicted and completing my jail sentence and being released when it was really useful please excuse my sarcasm. 

Thirty hours later, on April 19, 2000, the detective showed up with two other officers and told me I  “finally got my day in court”.  I was arrested and asked to carry my own computer downstairs, a true sign of securing a potentially dangerous person. I was brought to Central Booking, I stayed there for a week before being sent to the V.C.B.C. ( a prison barge) in the Bronx where I stayed for another week. I was then shipped to the M.C.C. ( Federal holding facility ) where I stayed for another week before being shipped to Oklahoma D.C. ( another Federal holding facility ) where I stayed for another week. I was then shipped to Atlanta U.S.P. ( United States Penitentiary ) for a few days before being arraigned at the Federal Court House on May 19, 2000.  From there I was  transferred to the A.C.D.C. ( Atlanta Correctional Detention Center ) where I awaited trial.

The court appointed a psychiatrist ( Dr. Dave Davis ) who, during his evaluation confirmed the threat made by Thomas McCormick of CNN, that I could get lost in the Atlanta prison system among other intentionally discouraging statements. His evaluation was more of an interrogation/intimidation than anything else. This was throughly discouraging as I expected him to understand my predicament. I thought as a doctor he would understand the right to defend oneself and because of his complete lack of objectivity I found it necessary to file a complaint against him. I contacted the American Psychiatric Association who sent me the necessary paperwork and the “The Principles of Medical Ethics” with “Annotations Especially Applicable to Psychiatry.” In that code book of ethics I found the following to be relevant to my situation Section 3. “A physician shall respect the law and also recognize a responsibility to seek changes in those requirements which are contrary to the best interests of the patient.” 1. It would seem self-evident that a psychiatrist who is a law -breaker might be ethically unsuited to practice his/her profession. When such illegal activities bear directly upon his/her practice, this would obviously be the case.

However, in other instances, illegal activities such as those concerning the right to protest social injustices might not bear on either the image of the psychiatrist or the ability of the specific psychiatrist to treat his/her patient ethically and well. While no committee or board could offer prior assurance that any illegal activity would not be considered unethical, it is conceivable that an individual could violate a law without being guilty of professionally unethical behavior. Physicians lose no right of citizenship on entry into the profession of medicine.” 

Now realizing that Dr. Davis understood from his professional experience that I was not a true threat and that I had basically used that letter as a tool to raise the consciousness of the courts to the injustices that had been fostered upon me I believed I would have received anything but the absolute abuse of his psychotherapeutic power but I did not.

In addition to the rights of citizenship described in, “The Principles of Medical Ethics” I would like to add, “The Necessity Defense” as found in the Model Penal Code. The following is an essay on this defense taken in part from the Criminal Law Bulletin by Mathew Lippman.

“ The judiciary was obligated to apply a principle such as necessity which is found in every code of laws divine or human, and has from time immemorial been in-grafted into the common law of the country from which our jurisprudence is borrowed. Where such rules or principles exist and have invariably and on all occasions governed courts in the administration of criminal justice, they become as much a part of the law, and are as obligatory on a court as the statute which it may be called upon to expound”.

The Model Penal Code

“The Model Penal Code (MPC) adopted at the 1962 Annual meeting of the American Law Institute reflects the expansive judicial interpretation given to the “Necessity Defense” by American courts. The commentary notes that court decisions interpreting the defense of necessity have been rare and legislative interpretation infrequent. It goes on to criticize statutory schemes which are cast in terms so “narrow” that they reduce the scope of the defense at common law. The commentary observes that a “developed legal system” must provide for a broad necessity defense that is “essential to the rationality and justice of all penal prohibitions”.

“The MPC requires that the Evil sought to be avoided by the criminal conduct be greater than that sought to be prevented by the law defining the offense charged”. The commentary specifies that the final weighing of values is to occur at trial , without specifying whether the determination is for the judge or jury. The commentary concedes that any weighing of values of necessity lacks precision since certainty is “unattainable in practice” and there will always be “disagreement on what constitutes an evil and which of the two evils is greater”. “However, it concludes that it is preferable to have a defense of “uncertain” ambit than none at all”.

Although the MPC specifies that an actor must reasonably believe that his criminal conduct is necessary to avert an evil to himself or to others, the code does not require that the harm be imminent or that there be an emergency. Under the MPC, a criminal act arguably is justified by necessity based on the fact that it is undertaken to preserve morally preferred values, rather than because that actor was compelled to act to avoid an imminent danger and, therefore, is considered to have lacked a criminal intent. The MPC does not require the exaustion of other non-criminal alternatives, and no restriction is placed on the type of criminal conduct in which an individual may engage to avert the threatened harm.  Nor does MPC limit the scope of the defense to cases where the evil sought to be avoided is death, bodily injury, or other specified harm. The use of the term “Evil”, rather than “Harm”, suggests that the defense may be extended to encompass intangible, nonphysical injuries.  The only explicit limitations on the necessity defense imposed by the MPC are legislative preclusion and the defendant’s  negligently or recklessly bringing about or appraising the situation that was believed to require a choice of evils.

The MPC thus adopts a liberal interpretation of the necessity defense. No imminence or exhaustion requirements are imposed, and the individual pleading necessity is not required to demonstrate that his act was directly calculated to avert the threatened harm. Necessity becomes a question of reasonableness to be determined by the judge or jury in light of all the circumstances. The MPC considers necessity a justification defense, meaning that although it involves a violation of positive law, it is “socially acceptable” and deserves “neither criminal liability nor censure”. Unlike excuse, which absolves only a particular defendant, justification provides a defense for all similarly situated individuals . This defense, in effect is a recognition that certain obligations and values transcend those embodied in positive law.

In conclusion the MPC requires that the Evil sought to be avoided by the criminal conduct be greater than that sought to be prevented by the law defining the offense charged.

The  required elements of the Necessity Defense according to the MPC include :

1. The MPC requires that the “Evil” sought to be avoided by the criminal conduct be greater than that sought to be prevented by the law defining the offense  charged.  Additionally the MPC does not limit the “Evil” to imminent physical harm or emergency.

    Under the MPC, a criminal act is arguably justified by necessity based on the fact that it is  undertaken to preserve morally preferred values and therefore is considered to have lacked a criminal intent. The use of the term “Evil”, rather than “Harm”, suggests that the defense may be extended to encompass intangible, nonphysical injuries.

2. No casual relationship between the act and the harm sought to be avoided is required.

    Under the MPC it is not required to demonstrate that the act was directly calculated to avert the threatened harm.    

3. The MPC does not require the Exhaustion of other Non-Criminal Alternatives.

     The only explicit limitations on the necessity defense imposed by the MPC are

Legislative preclusion and the defendant’s negligently or recklessly bringing about or appraising the situation that was believed to require a choice of evils.

Elements of Necessity Defense demonstrated in

United States Vs. Sean Dix

1. The “Evil” sought to be avoided by the criminal conduct must be greater than that sought to be prevented by the law defining the offense charged. Additionally the MPC does not limit the “Evil” to imminent physical harm or emergency suggesting that the defense may be extended to encompass intangible, non-physical injuries”.

The “Evil” sought to be avoided is the destruction of the “Truth” which has perpetually damaged the intellectual property value of my patents and the actual loss of financial and social status resulting from the purposely malicious and criminal CNN piece. The residual effects of which are far greater than the “criminal act charged” by sending a letter containing threatening language intentionally designed to generate a trial as a last resort defense when the government whose sole responsibility is to protect the governed did nothing.   The core principle of this case is that I intentionally violated positive law by writing a letter to be used as a tool to expose the morally preferred value of the “Truth” and not as the crime of a “True Threat” that I was charged with. CNN’s  violation of the  core principles of the “Consumer Product Tampering Laws” left un-rectified perpetually violates my inalienable right to the pursuit of Happiness which is unfortunately perpetuated by my fiduciary duty to disclose any negative information that materially affects my company. With or without exoneration  I am obligated to disclose the CNN piece to potential investors and now my felony status as a result of defending my company against CNN.. Without Justice, Exoneration and Restitution my current indigent status is virtually guaranteed . Liberty is lost if not physically then in every other sense. The perpetual criminal oppression of one’s pursuit of Happiness, results in a re-defining of what Liberty is which ultimately re-defines the right of Life to that of a threatened  “Existence”. The resulting limitation of my potential prevents the public at large from benefitting from the use of FlossRings which have been clinically proven to remove 23.8% more plaque than floss alone rivaling the effectiveness of the Toothbrush.

2. Casual Relationship between the act and the harm sought to be avoided.  

There is a direct relationship between the act and the harm sought to be avoided. The act of transmitting the letter of April 18, 2000 specifically designed to initiate a court proceeding where the “Truth” would be revealed and the resulting evidence would exonerate me. Exoneration would dictate the need for justice and restitution and would end the perpetual limitation of my potential.

3. Availability of Non-Criminal Alternatives

It can be adequately demonstrated that all relevant governmental agencies, public institutions and private counsel regarding non-criminal alternatives known to DIX and within the financial, intellectual and politically correct  means of DIX were exhausted, including two violations of positive law referring to the faxing campaign and the protest outside of CNN before the letter of April 18, 2000 was sent.    

Having defined that I will get back to the story.

The speedy trial act was delayed when my court appointed lawyer refused to give me Discovery until I demanded it, which prompted me to have her removed as counsel. At the change of counsel hearing my lawyer lied stating that I had not asked her for the psychiatric report which was used to detain me without bond which I had begun asking for the day after it was finished and to which I was legally entitled. The judge did  not believe my lawyer and appointed me new counsel which was worse than the first.

Additionally, I told the judge about the psychiatrist confirming the threat about being lost in prison so that he could investigate it. Instead, the judge (Joel M. Feldman), erased that portion of the hearing transcript, which he admitted in a letter signed by him almost eight months later. To add insult to injury, he then denied that he did it in another letter only two weeks later. This by the way is called : Fraud Involving Depravation of the Intangible Right to the Honest Services of Public Officials, which is a felony.

Regardless, it was seven months before I would have my trial. On October 19, 2000, I was offered “Time Served” by the government. I refused for the wealth of information that would be unearthed at the trial. One day later, on October 20, 2000, the F.B.I. interviewed Pilar Keagy Johnson and Sarah Smith Flynn of CNN ( the head legal counsel and her secretary) who both gave statements that were completely fabricated and can be proven so by the discovery that they provided.

Needless to say, they gave their statements 6 ½ months after the letter of April 18, 2000 was sent, and one day after I refused “Time Served”. Further, the trial was originally set to begin on Oct 3, 2000  and if it had begun on schedule, neither of their statements would be even available. These were statements made in furtherance of a conspiracy and therefore a criminal act.   

The trial took place on Dec. 5, 2000.  It was stacked against me as you can imagine. The prosecutor, along with the F.B.I. agent, both supported perjury and it can be proven in the discovery they provided. CNN had three people get up on the stand and lie to get me convicted which again can be proven. As for me, I told the jury why I was there and what this was about. To narrow the trial to the most important issues I would like to point out that the prosecutor “Todd Alley” made two very different arguments each  nullifying the other. The first argument he made was that my intentions were irrelevant and that all that mattered was that I sent a letter containing threatening language period. If that argument is let to stand and the context and content within which it was sent doesn’t matter then even if it is used as an exhibit in an appeal the simple act of sending it through the mail is another felony. You may counter with the argument that a court understands that such a document is part of an appeal and therefore not another felony but you would then be upholding the argument that the context within which it is sent does matter. The second argument that he made was that I was attempting to manipulate the justice system by sending that letter to get into court and that I should “get what I deserve”. Now if I sent that letter to get into court then it couldn’t be a true threat because the true nature was to get into court.  You could try and argue that I made a true threat to get into court but it would still leave you with the ultimate intention of being heard in court which is asking for help out of desperation when all other options have failed and not the intention of carrying out the contents of the letter. These are simply two different arguments and I believe that the prosecutor knew that in full. They simply wanted to punish me for demanding justice and putting them on the spot for not doing their jobs to begin with.