In recent times Serge Benhayon, Universal Medicine, and many others associated have been the subject of over 20 baseless complaints to government authorities.
Far from being a ‘Health Care activist’, Esther Rockett, Lance Martin and their cohorts have become what observers might assess to be serial vexatious complainants as the initiators of these 20 plus unsupportable complaints to government authorities all made in quite a short amount of time, largely repeating the same tired invective.
Whatever may have been reported in the media, in all cases all complaints have been dismissed in full. And in almost every case the complaints can be traced directly or indirectly to the activity of Lance Martin.
In the most recent round of vindictive complaints initiated by Lance Martin, he has attacked the charitable educational organisation, the College of Universal Medicine as part of his vengeful crusade to ‘bring Universal Medicine down’.
The College of Universal Medicine is a newly formed Charity that ‘is dedicated to promoting true health and well-being based on the teachings of the Ageless Wisdom…by founding a metaphysical school and conducting workshops, lectures and courses and an extensive publishing program.’
The college held its inaugural Community Forum on Addressing Cyber-bullying on Thursday 24th July amidst widespread community support, finding common ground amongst the participants to take a community based approach to internet abuse through the fostering of communication and building relationships with a foundation of support and understanding with each other.
This event was met with derision by Lance Martin and Esther Rockett. Martin’s threats to disrupt the event came to no avail, as he was a no show; this was not surprising as he has generally chosen to hide behind the anonymity of his computer screen and make complaints to government authorities, with disingenuous requests to not disclose the contents of his vile allegations to those that he defames in them.
A representative of the College of Universal Medicine observed about this latest complaint:
‘The problem for Lance Martin is that by attacking the College he is attacking something that represents true charity. The community recognises this. People’s response to the College’s inaugural activities has been tremendous and simply confirms that what we’re offering is meeting a real need.’
No doubt the contents of the current complaint against the College of Universal Medicine is without merit and has been concocted to suit Lance Martin’s malicious personal agenda. The sheer number of complaints by Martin and his associates over such a short period of time that have been dismissed, some without any investigation whatsoever, suggests that the group have been willing to exploit legitimate government processes with matters that are quite simply wasting valuable resources and making a mockery of official complaint channels.
What is bizarre is Lance Martin’s ill fated attempts to find resolution for his hurt and rage, obviously triggered by the breakdown of his marriage, in serial complaints to government authorities, consistently making the same complaint rebadged each time and consistently rejected by the authority concerned. It may have escaped Lance Martin’s attention, but revenge exacted through a government complaints process is not going to provide the psychological support he so obviously needs. He is perhaps desperate for a complaint to be successful, since it might give him justification for his own deluded views about Serge Benhayon, and justify his misguided view that his marriage ended because of Serge Benhayon. His own wife is clear – the marriage ended because it was characterised by abuse and control on Martin’s part.
UM Facts have examined how journalists have taken up these complaints with no fact checking of their sources and in effect used such complaints to make up a story. None more so than Jane Hansen of the Sunday Telegraph who gave these serial complainants airtime without checking the veracity of her sources.
Serge Benhayon had alerted journalist Jane Hansen to what she was dealing with before Jane Hansen published her story:
‘Are you in any cohort with the discredited and exposed cyber-bully and communications device stalker Esther Rockett and her co cyber-bully and informant Lance Martin? See link for the facts on this cyber-bullying and cyber-stalking gang — www.universalmedicinefacts.com
If the accusations made by Lance Martin and his various mouthpieces are true, then why place so much effort into anonymity and real character describing pseudonyms? Use link for the facts — http://universalmedicinefacts.com/lance-martin-exposed/
As for Ms Rockett, she is now re-badged as a ‘health care activist’. Be whatever name she seeks excuse in she cannot erase a 2-year digital cyber-bullying footprint, utter filth and vitriol she has penned against numerous individuals under the guise of Pranic Princess, Nobody’s Bitch, and Darkly Venus. Imagining herself as ‘Esther Rockett, Health Care Activist’, will not make her lies and distortions true.
A lie is lie Ms Hansen, no matter how many times it is repeated, or dressed.’
Serge Benhayon made Jane Hansen very aware of Lance Martin’s motives and that Lance Martin was increasing the intensity of his desire for a result as his ”revenge’, is increasingly heating up as the numerous baseless complaints meet with their right destiny – dismissed by each government agency they waste time and resources.’ He also alerted her to the likely content of the complaint that she would encounter and the likely outcome, if she scratched below the surface or looked at the information with which he presented her, indeed that:
Again – you have been informed of allegations that will go nowhere. Yes, they look good for a journalist, dressed as if there is something wrong. But, like all before, it will be nothing more than trumped up allegations.’
The Editor of the Sunday Telegraph was approached by the College of Universal Medicine before the story was published to suggest that the paper should have grave concerns about the balance and truth of what was to be published and the reliability of Jane Hansen’s sources:
‘Esther Rockett and Lance Martin are not reliable sources. The regulators have dismissed every single one of their past complaints, not for want of jurisdiction to investigate a deserving complaint but because the regulators determined that the complaints were groundless. The complaints to the Office of Fair Trading and the Office of Liquor and Gaming are simply the last of these. Equally conclusive against the credibility of Esther Rockett as a reliable source is a blog site that she has administered over the past two years. This site is dedicated to attacking Universal Medicine where she makes empty boasts that she holds evidence of misconduct that strangely she never produces, instead stooping shamelessly to the repetition of innuendo and deliberately damaging and vile aspersions, including allegations of pedophilia…
…it is difficult to envisage a clearer breach of journalistic standards of fairness and integrity were you to publish a story suggesting there are grounds for investigation of the College of Universal Medicine based on unsubstantiated complaints lodged by a complainant with Esther Rockett and Lance Martin’s predilection for making serial groundless vexatious complaints. This is especially so, since the regulators have not yet assessed or determined the bona fides of the recent complaints or indeed whether they raise grounds for investigation at all – matters over which there fairly hangs real doubt given the short shrift given past complaints.’
Yet Jane Hansen and her editor chose to ignore the clear warnings and went ahead and published a story with significant bias. There was plenty of available evidence from hundreds of professionals across the world who study with Universal Medicine for the journalist to draw on to create balance in what she presented – Hansen chose to ignore it.
Serge Benhayon had asked Hansen why she would align to the cyber-bullies and cyber-trolls. In his correspondence to Jane Hansen prior to publication he asked her to reflect upon her choices. In effect he was asking Jane Hansen to consider ethical journalism and to reflect upon her own integrity:
‘Of interest, we do know of your twitter association with the discredited and exposed cyber-bully Esther Rockett. You are just another one of her gang’s strategies. Of course, you have the right to align to whatever you choose. And thus, I ask you this Ms Hansen, (asked with due and sincere respect with regard to much of your past work) — is it a case of you being used for the sake of their revenge campaign and you in turn using them for the sensation their lies can deliver, for the sake of some readership arousal? Or Ms Hansen, will you draw on your senses and consider different here?’
It appears that Jane Hansen chose her path, but she did not do so in ignorance. She knew who her sources were, she knew of their background as vicious, malicious cyber-bullies who had been intent on distributing their own invective. Yet, in her article about the College of Universal Medicine, Jane Hansen chose to rely upon the complainant, Lance Martin. She did not report about the 20 or more malicious baseless and failed complaints and she ignored Lance Martin’s disturbing history with his consistently stated aim to destroy Universal Medicine by whatever means he can.
It appears apposite on any reasonable view of the story that Lance Martin’s disturbing online threats and vindictive agenda would be a relevant factor in reporting this story. In case Jane Hansen missed this pertinent fact – that Lance Martin has made a number of disturbing threats under various pseudonyms against Serge Benhayon and others.
On October 11, 2012 07:30AM under the pseudonym Concerned Partner, Mr Martin posted the somewhat disturbing comment on the Rick Ross Cult Education forum:
‘Don’t worry Serge, it is not like it is ending soon. The people out there who know who you are (that is many people in many places high and low), are hard at work collecting, collating, organizing, presenting. You cant escape what has happened, even if you think you have. And you cant undo what you have done, even if you try. Reality can’t be changed because you say it is not real no matter how often you tell that story. It is marching relentlessly towards you- your karma, in this life. The truth will be known, and they will be set free.
Rest well my friend.’
On March 30, 2013, 12.13 am, again as Concerned Partner, Martin posted:
‘Just let it be know that the sting may have gone, but the resolve hasn’t. Bringing you down is a commitment and it will happen’
On May 2nd 2014, under the pseudonym ‘You Know Who’, on one of Esther Rockett’s blogs, following him making a disparaging post about a woman who runs a very well respected behavioural management practice and has come to Lance Martin’s attention because she attends Universal Medicine events, Martin menacingly states:
‘Another pernicious tentacle of the beast that needs to get the chop. I guess the only way is to cut off it’s head.’
It appears that he is referring to Serge Benhayon as the beast and his head that Martin seeks to chop off.
As recently as 9 May 2014 again using the pseudonym ‘You Know Who’ on one of Esther Rockett’s blogs:
‘But let me tell you about the ones you need to worry about if you already can’t get a measure of my character. I AM RELENTLESS. Just like Venus, because I have seen so much despair and grief because of the little worm you worship that I will not rest until he is stopped- by the authorities. I know what he’s done, and I know what he is doing, and while it is not quite a fait accompli- worse luck- it will happen. That’s a promise.’
These are just a selection of Martin’s online comments in this regard, dating back to 2012, which clearly show a vengeful crusade that could be evaluated as emanating from a deeply disturbed individual.
If Hansen had looked behind the man she was relying upon for her story she would have discovered the orchestrated manoeuvres to get the press engaged in his story, she would have discovered the 20 or so failed complaints to regulatory authorities. Failed, not because of lack of power on the part of those authorities, but because the complaints made false allegations and unsubstantiated claims that could not be made out. Most were fabricated by Esther Rockett and Lance Martin and calculated to cause harm, not to air an authentic grievance.
Jane Hansen, if she had merely scratched beneath the surface would have found over 20 such complaints with absolutely no merit and perhaps she might, just might have discovered that Lance Martin had turned his vengeful crusade to the business of making extensive government complaints, and as Anna Douglass has observed:
‘… interesting to note, there was no media interest in Universal Medicine, and not one complaint ever lodged with any Government departments until my marriage broke down. Lance has been consistent and relentless at getting any sort of attention and smearing Universal Medicine, he will go to extraordinary lengths, and will distort the truth to achieve this. If Lance had put the same commitment, energy and time used for his hate campaign into our marriage, I have no doubt that our relationship would be in a very different place…’
Jane Hansen fell way below the standards of fair and balanced reporting when she failed to get the other side of the story with respect to her key ‘witness’. Hansen quotes Lance Martin as saying that he blames Universal Medicine for breaking up his marriage, but she did not seek comment from Anna Douglass for her side of the story. It might have added some balance to the story to consider Anna Douglass’s description of her ex-husband as ‘fuelled with jealousy and revenge towards Serge Benhayon and Universal Medicine’ in his blame of Serge Benhayon and Universal Medicine for their marriage breakdown. Anna Douglass has no doubt that her marriage did not end for the reasons her misguided ex-husband suggests, but because of ‘bullying and abuse’ on the part of her ex-husband – a fact that journalist Jane Hansen did not concern herself with. Anna states:
‘Jane Hansen did not contact me at all to cross- check any of the facts, rather she took the word of my ex-husband Lance Martin as being fact, a deeply hurt man on a revengeful, hate campaign towards Universal Medicine. I can tell you Lance has concocted many stories and makes unfounded allegations about Serge Benhayon.’
Anna Douglass wrote to the Sunday Telegraph asking for them to correct the story, but has received no response; she made the clear point that Jane Hansen failed to do a background check on her ex-husband’s account of what was presented:
‘It is a disgrace that Ms Hansen did not give a thought that there may be another side to this story, instead she preferred to believe the manipulations of my ex-husband…. It may also interest readers how I got the courage to leave an abusive relationship where I was belittled and judged for my choices. Also, how I now live my life free from the control and manipulation that had kept me imprisoned, I am sure Ms Hansen would agree that the choice to leave a marriage from a man who calls me a “witch”, “foolish woman”, and “idiot” and threatens custody proceedings was indeed a wise choice to be celebrated.’
If you are going to write a story on a subject it seems to me that a responsible journalist would examine the background of his or her subject matter – it appears significant that if you are reporting on a complaint made by someone and you have been provided with information that the complaint that you are reporting on is the latest in a line of complaints lodged by the cyber-bullies, Mr Martin and Ms Rockett, with various regulatory bodies all of which have been dismissed to date, you might consider this a pertinent fact to report – I have to ask, if no-one else does – why did Hansen not report this fact?
Serge Benhayon expressed his concerns to the Sunday Telegraph after Hansen published her articles – articles that are so bereft of truth and fair and balanced reporting that they barely rank as journalism, perhaps earning the title fictional journalism. He wrote:
‘Given my previous experience with the media, I am not surprised that Jane Hansen chose sensationalism over the true good news story I offered her in response to the loaded questions she asked of me prior to publication. The media has decided that the public prefer scandal to good news and the Telegraph, with Ms Hansen’s assistance, have fed the people what the media thinks they want. What is not newsworthy about a true story of the many hundreds of everyday people Ms Hansen could have spoken to who present a vibrancy and joy in their lives and are enjoying health results that go against global trends as a result of their association with Universal Medicine and use of the esoteric healing modalities and teachings? What sort of a world is it where cynicism and scandal are preferred over truth? I don’t agree that this is what people want. In fact, I consider that people are much smarter and wiser than some would like to accept.
It is Ms Hansen’s choice to align herself with cyber-bullies and serial complainants whose complaints against Universal Medicine and me have been dismissed again and again by every agency that they have complained to, not because of any lack of regulatory authority, but because they were baseless. However it is your choice, as Editor of the Telegraph, whether you wish to continue with this sham.’
Like all the other complaints that have been made against Serge Benhayon and others by Lance Martin and Esther Rockett, any investigation will be met with absolute openness and dedication to the truth being revealed. In Serge Benhayon’s case his integrity in fully and openly cooperating with any investigation scurrilously thrown at him will no doubt again yield the same result – a dismissal.
As Serge Benhayon has stated, ‘a lie is a lie and will always be a lie no matter who states it or how many times it is hurled’.
Lance Martin has put his name to his latest complaint this time against the educational charity College of Universal Medicine. He appears to have included the independent charity in his malicious pursuit of Serge Benhayon – he has made repeated references of his intention to harm Serge Benhayon and Universal Medicine, his only motivation in such complaints is malicious and no doubt the contents of the current complaint was concocted to suit this personal agenda and thus, like all others, it will no doubt be found to be without merit.
Jane Hansen has reported having nightmares about events from her journalism past that haunt her to this day. The things that haunt us in this life are often those things where we know that we could have done better, we know if we had followed what we truly know the consequences of our actions might not have been what they have become. This and Jane Hansen’s particular style of journalism will be considered in a future blog. But here, Serge Benhayon provides the conclusion I suggest that Jane Hansen herself should have reached if she had had the openness of mind or the tenacity to look a little deeper, he writes:
‘Finally Martin publicly comes out from behind the murkiness of his gang members after deceptively hiding under the shadows of anonymity and pseudonymous utterances that detailed much about his state of mind than the nonsense of his lies, further confirming why Anna Douglass chose wise and lovingly to leave such a controlling menace.’
It is perhaps time for official processes to be initiated to halt this outrageous abuse of government complaints procedures and this waste of public resources, time and money.