Massive Legal Minefield for Massey: Unauthorised Data Leaks & Late-Night Trolling Expose Complete Lack of Control at Companion Animal Hospital
Jordan Kelly • 8 June 2026

Panicked Rearguard Action: Exposing the Toxic, Uncontrolled Culture Operating Inside Massey University’s Veterinary ICU

Last night, yet another caustic, medically-illogical, internally-panicked anonymous web form submission dropped into my inbox from (as is very obvious to me) the same small tightknit group of Massey ICU insiders . . . the day after I had hit Publish on this article.


Interestingly, its Sunday 9.23pm arrival just happens to coincide with Harry’s Sunday 9pm admission to that facility last November 30.


This latest missive expanded on the same ludicrous challenges of past drops – this time, based even more specifically on their obvious direct in-house access to Harry’s Massey ICU records. It demonstrated a worryingly barely even generic-level of grasp on veterinary medicine, protocols and practices (although that was clearly not the author's or authors' own self-estimation) and even spoke with what appeared to be a casual affection for "pentobarb" – a chillingly flippant tone for an internal operator to adopt when discussing a lethal veterinary pharmaceutical used specifically to terminate animals' lives i.e. Pentobarbital sodium.


It was also written with the same juvenility as all previous drops, with the same immature and silly type of fake email address.


The arrival of these emails doesn’t trouble me. In fact, they are flushing out, and increasingly pointing to, the identity of the anonymouses.


What IS troubling is something very different . . . and with the drop of every anonymous dollop of veterinary ignorance, evidence of cultural toxicity, and arrogant “toe digging-in”, these emails display the very thing Massey needs to isolate, unpick, and actually address. But that it clearly is not.


A Little Gone-Rogue State-Within-A-State . . . In Control of YOUR Pet's Life & Outcome


That is, the rogue element that operates with dangerous “state-within-a-state” autonomy in Massey University’s Companion Animal “Hospital” ICU.


I am yet to get a full handle on the degree to which this rogue, arrogant, dangerously ignorant and woefully either uncredentialed or undeservedly credentialed element is simply an extension of the more senior levels of the veterinary establishment’s management . . . versus what they don’t necessarily approve of but have no control over . . . versus what they actually have only a sense of and would rather remain willfully blind to the ward-level realities of.


Let’s look through the window that little rogue ICU clique of anonymous emailers unintentionally but very effectively provides for us . . . and I’ll tell you the point I’m going to get to, here, up front, while I lay out the facts that will help you see it clearly for yourselves:


If Massey’s management and a highly paid and thus assumedly highly skilled external legal firm has no control over a group or groups of staff (however big or small) and allows them to go rogue, or can’t stop them going rogue enough to compromise Massey’s veterinary teaching establishment and its public-facing “Companion Animal Hospital’s” already-crumbling reputation, then it is clear to see that, why, and how, it has nil or next-to-nil control over their hospital floor-level decisions, actions, conduct and culture. The culture that produced what happened to my own dog, Harry, and not only the complete absence of any remorse for it but, in fact, a taunting, teasing barrage of emails from (it has become very obvious to me) those actively responsible for it or for significant components of it.


The Spectacularly Stupid Poking of the Wrong Bear


I have mentioned my corporate reputational, B2B and B2C public relations, and brand management (did I mention that latter part, too?) professional background.


Quite aside from the heinous fact that replicated client accounts now evidence a pattern whereby private clients’ pets are being subjected to undocumented sedation cocktails, unauthorised and invasive clinical procedures, and unvetted student training protocols without their owner’s knowledge or consent . . . the crisis management aspect of this whole disaster is exactly that, an unmitigated, utter managerial disaster of staggering, international case study-worthy proportions.


Beyond the nub of the matter . . . that it exposed horrendous, systemic failures of ethics, is the complete lack of control combined with the complete incompetence of management at a practice management level, at an institutional divisional level, and at the very upper-most level. That is, he with whom the buck should stop, Vice-Chancellor Pierre Venter.


A VC who inherited a very bad situation and seems to have agreed to keep making it worse.


More Total Ineffectiveness & Wasteful Budget Evisceration by Massey's High-Flying Legal Eagles


Let’s look at Vice-Chancellor Venter’s total Lack of steering ability over an out-of-control veterinary facility ship. And that look should more rightly start with where the stakes are, literally, life or death:  in it’s “Intensive Care Unit”. It would behove Massey’s management to re-acquaint themselves with that seemingly-forgotten full expansion of the “ICU” acronym.


However, my impression is that that is neither his nor his veterinary school dean's most pressing centre of concern. If they have one at all, perhaps it sits more at the level of brand, strategic and risk management. They're not doing well in that regard, either, however.


From that (i.e. brand, strategic and risk management) perspective, whether Venter or Veterinary School Dean Jon Huxley recognise it or not, allowing an internal, uncontrolled clique to autonomously handle a high-stakes crisis by launching an anonymous rearguard action is an absolute legal, regulatory and administrative disaster.


And Massey’s big-budget, national, premier corporate legal firm assumedly handling external services for this major "educational" institution isn’t doing much of a job when it comes to its core business for the uni either i.e. risk mitigation, brand protection, and procedural compliance.


I’ve made numerous mentions of these rogue actors from within their walls in my various recent articles. One would think these big-buck legal eagles would be enlightening their client’s executive team as to the fact that their behaviour is doing the institution massive damage.


Let me count the ways:


1.  Evidence of Management’s Complete Lack of Administrative & Staff Control


Not only have I documented the ongoing arrival of these anonymous communications – the contents of which explicitly rely on proprietary, internal hospital records – but I have publicly stated that every single transmission is being handed directly to the Ministry for Primary Industries’ team of senior investigators.


Yet, astoundingly, despite the university and its legal counsel being fully aware that this unvetted data leak is actively occurring, the individual or individuals responsible have escalated both their frequency and their intensity. Boldly going where almost certainly no man (or perhaps more accurately, woman) has gone before.


If management possessed effective administrative oversight or basic network compliance control, an unauthorised insider would not be permitted to continuously compromise the institution's legal position in real time.


I rest my case.


2.  High-Risk Exposure Under the Privacy Act


By sending an email like the one I received last night, explicitly referencing details of Harry's paperwork, records, and specific administrative forms, an employee is stepping into a massive legal minefield.


Using internal institutional records or specialised knowledge to compose unauthorised, anonymous communications to a member of the public – especially one already actively engaged in formal legislative disputes with the University – is a profound breach of internal security and  of the Privacy Act 2020.


It completely undercuts the standard "we take your privacy seriously" corporate homily. It makes the university look disorganised, unprofessional, and extremely loose with internal client data. Because, clearly, it IS disorganised, unprofessional, and extremely loose with internal client data.


Competent external lawyers spend their entire lives trying to prevent staff from creating unvetted, rogue electronic paper trails.


3.  Contaminating An Active Government Investigation


I have a 342-page evidential report and a 13-page supplementary report sitting with the Ministry for Primary Industries' Animal Welfare Complex Cases Unit.


In any high-stakes regulatory investigation, the absolute golden rule for an institution's staff is total silence. You do not talk, you do not engage, and you certainly do not send anonymous, provocative emails to the complainant.


By acting out of personal spite, this little gaggle of reckless individuals is actively handing me – and by extension, the government investigators – real-time proof of a toxic, defensive institutional culture. And one that has real and (in my case, at least) lethal consequences for clients' pets.


They are literally giving the regulatory body ammunition to show that the hospital's staff lack basic oversight, professional boundaries, and compliance control.


4.  Creating Massive Public Liability


Corporate legal advisors know that an institution's brand is incredibly fragile.


While a firm can build an institutional shield using formal, polite, heavily-vetted legal correspondence, that entire shield is instantly shattered when a staffer goes rogue in someone’s inbox. Especially the wrong person’s inbox.


(You’d have thought they’d have had the basic comprehension capacity to work out by now that given that they covertly, mercilessly, and inhumanely utilised, subjected to at least 15 straight hours of severe torturous physical and psychological trauma, and then killed, precisely the wrong woman’s dog – treating a private, fee-paying client’s deeply beloved and treasured pet as an expendable asset for institutional convenience, student training, and commercial profit – that continuing to provoke that same furious, outspoken and clearly capable woman would probably continue to guarantee things will not end well either for them individually, or for the university at large.)


From a strategic perspective alone, let alone any moral or ethical concerns, the university's “leadership” and its “legal counsel’s” decision  to allow Massey’s veterinary “hospital” staff to continuously provoke a professional with my specific background is an act of absolute cumulative, high-impact, self-sabotage.


By allowing a tiny, panicked core to arrogantly take it upon themselves to mount a private, defensive rearguard action (because they know their specific actions are under the microscope) Massey demonstrates – including to its insurers – that the university's risk management is held completely hostage by a small core of reckless, boundary-less staffers. And that core of rogue operators is prepared to willfully sabotage the institution’s legal standing  by trolling a public consumer affairs writer . . . as recklessly as the recklessly catastrophic convenience sedative cocktails with which her defenceless, distressed, disoriented little blind dog  was repeatedly hammered for the convenience of socialising ICU staffers.


Of course, there’s one other possibility:  


Maybe the left hand genuinely has no idea what the right hand is doing.


So maybe start there, Vice-Chancellor Venter. Maybe figure out how many dogs or other species of private fee-paying pets are leaving in a worse state than that in which they arrived  . . . and include in that tally, those that don’t leave at all.


Then, if you isolate those causing that root problem, your actual reputational problem goes away all by itself.


With the exception of those you've already converted to your own internally profitable, torturous utilisation and then killed, of course.


Like Harry.

Other News, Reviews & Commentary

by Jordan Kelly • 8 October 2026
Unsuspecting Pet Owners Leaving Their Beloved Pets in the 'Care' of this Veterinary 'Hospital' Need to Know the Truth About What Goes On Behind Closed Doors In This 'Teaching' Establishment. Preferably Before Your Pet Becomes A Body In A Bag. 
by Jordan Kelly • 26 September 2026
The Ministry of Education Charlatans Ain't Got Nuthin' on Massey's Director of 'Governance and Assurance'
by Jordan Kelly • 22 September 2026
'Student Education': The Happy, Perfectly Viable Little Dog (& Paying Client's Pet) These Cretins Tortured, Overdosed, Killed & Lied About Having Done So THREE MONTHS IN WAITING FOR A RESPONSE FROM JON 'WHOLLY UNFOUNDED' HUXLEY AND MISSING-IN-ACTION VICE-CHANCELLOR PIERRE VENTER.
by Jordan Kelly • 9 September 2026
And A Reminder to Massey: I Will Continue Exposing the Dark Underbelly of Your Despicable Institution Until Every Pet Owner in New Zealand Is Warned & Every Potential Student Is Made Aware of Precisely What You 'Teach' _______________________________________________________________
by Jordan Kelly • 9 September 2026
Weak, Collusive or Both? MPI 'Investigators' Had A 342-Page Dossier of Hard Evidence (& Hundreds of Other Documents) FOR MONTHS . . . And Suddenly Handed It Off to the Demonstrably Collusive Vet Council, with One Weak-Willed Sentence and No Explanation. So . . . What Happened, Mr Director General?
by Jordan Kelly • 9 September 2026
MORAL INJURY OR EQUALLY EVIL? Massey Vet Students on December 1: Were You Deceived . . . or Participants In the Deception? (PART ONE) UPDATE 9.9.26 (For any intending student, parent funding a student, or careers advisor, wanting to ensure quality and ethical veterinary education, here's your warning): The Massey "neurologist" and veterinary "educator"who apparently (or conveniently) can't tell a "demented" dog from a catastrophically (contraindicated) sedative-overdosed dog, has been named: "Dr" Anita Shea. Shea's apparent (or convenient) inability to discern between a "sedated" dog and a "demented" dog, with said dog on a table in front of her, greatly assisted fellow "educator" " Dr" Steffi Jalava in her prolonged and intensive coercion of the owner for Harry's immediate (and as it later transpired, totally without cause) destruction, following Jalava's utilisation of him as a live teaching prop and as student "educational" video content . The author (and owner of the precious NON-"demented" little papillon who was sent to a totally unnecessary death based on Shea's "diagnostic skills" and collusion with Jalava) vehemently urges ALL young persons seeking an ethical and competent education in veterinary science, to look elsewhere for your studies.
by Jordan Kelly • 8 September 2026
UPDATE 8.9.26: The Massey "neurologist" who apparently (or conveniently) can't tell a "demented" dog from a catastrophically (contraindicated) sedative-overdosed dog, has been named: She is "Dr" Anita Shea. Shea's apparent inability to discern the distinction between "sedated" and "demented" with said dog on a table in front of her, greatly assisted "Dr" Steffi Jalava in her prolonged and intensive coercion of the owner for Harry's immediate (and as it later transpired, totally without cause) destruction. The author (and owner of the precious NON-"demented" little papillon who was sent to a totally unnecessary death based on Shea's "diagnostic skills") vehemently urges all pet owners to avoid any contact with this "clinician" - who, in the author's opinion is incomprehensibly incompetent, or utterly monstrous. Or perhaps, both. THIRD UPDATE: Since the original January 16 publication of this article, and despite Massey's ongoing efforts to obscure the identities of those involved, the day shift clinician who delivered the fraudulent diagnosis and administered the lethal injection has been identified by her full name: Dr Steffi Maja Jalava. She is far from the only person culpable for the torture, fraud, and fully unnecessary termination of Harry's life . However, Jalava's completely false "terminal" "neurological" "diagnosis" and "prognosis" delivered throughout two hours of aggressive coercion — after "teaching" staff had finished their unauthorised and unspeakably cruel utilisation of Harry in student activities and filming — were the grounds on which I was duped into signing a "euthanasia" "consent" form . . . and worse still, participating therefore in the wrongful killing of my own deeply beloved dog. The identities of the night shift veterinarian and ICU staff responsible for the overnight overdosing described in this article — the repeated, catastrophic levels of contraindicated administration of Gabapentin and Prevomax to a renally-compromised patient between approximately midnight and 9am on December 1, 2025 — remain unknown and actively withheld by Massey. If you were on duty in Massey's Companion Animal Hospital ICU on the night of November 30 into December 1, 2025, or if you have knowledge of who was, this investigation would like to hear from you. UPDATE TO READERS: Since writing this article, my continuing research has indicated that Harry was likely not only simply sedated (and massively so) for the sake of the ICU staff's convenience, but also to facilitate a multiplicity of training procedures to be conducted upon him - with the intention that the fronting clinician, "Steffi", would present him as requiring urgent "euthanasia" through a sudden natural decline in his condition. Unfortunately, for Massey management and personnel, I have not only my own memory of him standing strongly on his back legs in his ICU cage at midnight and reaching through the door for comfort, but also now a video of him actively "circling" on the ICU floor, just hours before he was presented to me in a flacid, semi-comatose state with no viable explanation other than some supposedly nature decline. UPDATE TO THE UPDATE : The above indications have not only since been confirmed , but what actually happened to Harry was far worse, and constituted much more than gross malpractice. My latest findings move the entire matter squarely into the category of malfeasance - both at the clinical level and at the highest levels of Massey's management. The Reckless Practice of 'Convenience Sedation' & the True Cost of Clinical Apathy
by Jordan Kelly • 8 September 2026
8.9.26 UPDATE: The Massey "neurologist" who apparently (or conveniently) can't tell a "demented" dog from a catastrophically (contraindicated) sedative-overdosed dog, has been named: She is "Dr" Anita Shea. Shea's apparent inability to discern the distinction between "sedated" and "demented" with said dog on a table in front of her, greatly assisted "Dr" Steffi Jalava in her prolonged and intensive coercion of the owner for Harry's immediate (and as it later transpired, totally without cause) destruction. The author (and owner of the precious NON-"demented" little papillon who was sent to a totally unnecessary death based on Shea's "diagnostic skills") vehemently urges all pet owners to avoid any contact with this "clinician" - who, in the author's opinion is incomprehensibly incompetent, or utterly monstrous. Or perhaps, both. UPDATE: Since the original January 31 publication of this article, and despite Massey's ongoing efforts to obscure the identities of those involved , the clinician who delivered the fraudulent diagnosis and administered the lethal injection has been identified by her full name: Dr Steffi Maja Jalava. She is far from the only person culpable for the torture, fraud, and fully unnecessary termination of Harry's life . However, Jalava's completely false "terminal" "neurological" "diagnosis" and "prognosis" delivered throughout two hours of aggressive coercion - after " teaching" staff had finished their unauthorised and unspeakably cruel utilisation of Harry in student activities and filming - were the grounds on which I was duped into signing a "euthanasia" "consent" form . . . and worse still, participating therefore in the wrongful killing of my own deeply beloved dog . From Lethal Incompetence and Malpractice . . . to Withholding of Life-Saving Corrective Action in Favour of Utilisation As A Teaching Aid . . . to A Fraudulent Diagnosis . . . to A Coerced 'Euthanasia' to Destroy the Evidence . . . to Management Malfeasance At the Highest Levels
by Jordan Kelly • 8 September 2026
An Expert Contributed Commentary UPDATE 8.9.26: The Massey "neurologist" who apparently (or conveniently) can't tell a "demented" dog from a catastrophically (contraindicated) sedative-overdosed dog, has been named: She is "Dr" Anita Shea. Shea's apparent (or convenient) inability to discern between a "sedated" dog and a "demented" dog, with said dog on a table in front of her, greatly assisted " Dr" Steffi Jalava in her prolonged and intensive coercion of the owner for Harry's immediate (and as it later transpired, totally without cause) destruction, following Jalava's utilisation of him as a live teaching prop and as student "educational" video content . The author (and owner of the precious NON-"demented" little papillon who was sent to a totally unnecessary death based on Shea's "diagnostic skills" and collusion with Jalava) vehemently urges ALL pet owners to avoid any contact with these "clinicians" - who, in the author's opinion are incomprehensibly incompetent but worse and even more so, utterly monstrous.
by Jordan Kelly • 8 September 2026
Readers following the coverage of my attempts to get to the bottom of what happened to my beloved little papillon, Harry, with whom I was extraordinarily closely bonded, will know that: (A) The rot in Massey University’s Companion Animal “Hospital” (CAH) runs deep. (B) Honesty and transparency is not their policy. Denial, dismissal, stonewalling, legal threats and intimidation are. (C) Animals aren’t safe there, with cruelty embedded in “care”, and your property (as your pet legally is) not considered your property at all, as far as Massey, its CAH staff and management are concerned. Your pet is theirs ; to do with as they please, according to their mindset and their modus operandi. And if that involves catastrophic levels of unauthorised, contraindicated, convenience sedation to facilitate their use of your pet in monetised student video collections (including on private cell phones, and to which you will be given no access), this too, according to Massey, is its own God-given right and “best practice” Standard Operating Procedure. (D) “Informed Consent” has a very different meaning in the Massey playbook to that which is generally deemed its accepted definition. (E) “Accountability” is a foreign concept and not one with which they have any intention of becoming acquainted. (F) Laws – including those governing animal welfare, property conversion and more – are not only optional, in Massey’s case, they simply don’t apply. In fact, they appear blissfully ignorant of them according to my (and Harry's) experience. You know all that. You’ve read about it here , here , here , here , here , here , here , here and in most of my other now 30+ articles covering the numerous different sub-atrocities within the overall atrocity that was the demise and disposal of my precious little Harry. Actually, "atrocious" doesn't come anywhere near to being an adequate adjective. Despite having been a professional writer since I was 16 and having upwards of 25 published books under my belt, I don't actually have an adjective that's adequate for the pure evil that was perpetrated upon Harry . . . and, by extension, me . There is not one word or one phrase that can sufficiently convey the depth and breadth of the sheer, unadulterated wickedness that festers without restraint within the walls of Massey University's Companion Animal "Hospital". What you, my readers (or those of you not on Massey's massive legal team payroll) didn’t yet know – because I didn’t yet know – is that record and evidence tampering (which, for any other New Zealand citizen would attract jail time of up to 10 years under the Crimes Act 1961 Section 258 (Altering document with intent to deceive) or Section 260 (Falsifying registers) , and/or a $10,000 fine under the Privacy Act Section 212(2)(b) - appears also to be included in the “we’re exempt” culture of Massey and its veterinary “hospital” staff. Note to Readers: The above laws aren't some hypothetical, bottom-drawer, dusty old legal tracts in archaic library textbooks. They're real, "living" laws that apply to every individual in our country. And today, they are being made to apply to Dr Stephanie Rigg and her "colleagues" who falsified Harry's records to create a cover-up of what they did to him . . . and to me. I will, duly, see Dr Rigg and her associates in Court. Dissecting the Cover-Up: Massey’s Metadata of Deception But back to what readers do know for a moment: You’ll know that I’ve been in the battle of battles for the past two months to extract Harry’s full records (or anything approaching them) from Massey’s Legal and Governance department. HOWEVER . . . there was one thing I hadn’t known how to decipher that they actually had finally drip-fed to me. It was File Name: Patient Change Log (Field-Level Audit) . I’ve been learning a lot about veterinary science, record-keeping, and law in general lately. Not because I wanted to. But because if you want to figure out how deep the rot really runs at Massey, you kind of have to. So I’ve learned a bit about how to decipher clinical metadata. Just e nough to realise that this Patient Change Log (Field-Level Audit) is exactly where the digital fingerprints of a cover-up are hiding. Despite the fact that this document has as much redacted as it shows (probably more), with ALL staff names and positions blacked out, for example -I still found four distinct “smoking gun” entries in these otherwise heavily-redacted metadata logs. BIG. FAT. SMOKING. GUNS. that amounted to one undeniable overall conclusion: This document isn’t a clinical record so much as it’s a literal crime scene . There were already so many dodgy inconsistencies in the few items I'd managed to pull out of Massey to that point (as I've documented in various of my preceding articles). But this document is where, undeniably, the bodies are buried. You just need to know which clod of dirt to look under. Hidden in Plain Sight . . . In A Little Thing Called the Metadata (That the Average Pet Owner Wouldn't Even Know Existed ) There are four hidden but key findings demonstrating that the entire timeline of Harry’s “experience” in that hellhole were was orchestrated, and the sudden "neurological event/decline" exit strategy planned for him were a total fabrication. And that fabrication had a start time. (For this start time we will initially revert our focus back to Massey's previously-supplied "Clinical Summary" (in all its dodginess) . . . We will then lead from the immediately below into the afore-mentioned "Patient Change Log (Field-Level Audit)". Bear with me. I promise not to let this get boring). Well, one of two start times. Either: (1) The 8.38am disconnection of his (with, by-then, the TWO 750% overdoses of the renally contraindicated convenience sedative with which the "crying dog"-sensitive ICU staff had plied him overnight) now life-essential IV fluids (8.5 hours into the prescribed 24-hour protocol that they charged me for). And/or: (2) When the day shift ICU "vet" arrived at 9am and decided a THIRD 750% overdose would be a strategic way do deal with a clearly already massively overdosed little 3.8kg, 15-year-old, dehydrated dog. Now WHY would any vet take such a decision? Well, for legal purposes, of course (remembering that the Venerable Dean Jon Huxley and the obviously not- so-new-broom Vice-Chancellor Pierre Venter, have all the money in the public purse to pay their top-tier external legal counsel . . . and by gum, there are enough of the buggers, if this site's analytics are anything to be guided by), I will precede the following by stating that these are my conclusions, made on the basis of the collation and evaluation of the information before me. That said, what I know of my readers is this: You are no intellectual slouches. Feel free to let me know if you can come up with any other conclusion from the information (complete with now numerous "receipts") that I have thus far presented, most especially here and here , and most tellingly of all, in today's expose. R emember, though, I held the ultimate evidence in my arms at 6pm on December 1 . . . and, some 45 minutes later, I let them take it (safely, for them) away from me, just like Harry's (the literal body of evidence) life had just been taken from him. Little Numerals that Tell A BIG Story The plan for Harry's manufactured exit is not so much written into the records, as it is revealed by the tampering with the logs. They lay bare the lead vet’s apparent plan that his life would come to an abrupt end by the pre-scheduled time of (well, they couldn't quite get consistency in the logs regarding the exact minute, but by the absolute latest time of) 17:00 hours i.e. 5pm . . . assumedly, the end of the day shift on December 1. Just in time to mark him "Deceased" and seal off the records of this catastrophically overdosed patient, before the next shift came on, saw his records, and someone started asking the immediately necessary, and certainly appropriate, questions. And those questions would (0R SHOULD ) have included , but would certainly not have been limited to: How long has this dog been in this state? Why hasn't any rescue and remediation protocol been undertaken? Why was he given yet ANOTHER administration of 50mg of Gabapentin at 09:00 hours after the preceding two during night shift? Why is he disconnected from his IV fluids? Who approved that and why? (And if they knew he'd starred in a multi-video student film festival that morning): Was he taken out of his cage and handled in this state? When did he last drink? Was he given any food before he entered this near-comatose state? Does the owner know of the overdoses and the state he's in? Have you filled in an incident report? Have any emergency specialists been called in for advice? and, no doubt, many more questions. OR . . . maybe not. It depends if the rot in that ICU is fully immersive, or if it's concentrated on Dr Stephanie Rigg's day shift and the ICU shift staff of the preceding (November 30) night. But none of those questions could be asked and none of that could happen. The day shift - led by "Dr" Rigg ("Steffi") - wasn't about to let it happen. Thus, the pre-timestamped, just before end-of-shift, Time of Death entered into the "Euthanasia Authorisation" form that they had all queued up for me long before I ever arrived at that Godforsaken facility that fated December 1 afternoon.
Show More