Eysselinck vs Ronco Consulting: PTSD Injustice prevails
Posted by defensebaseactcomp on August 18, 2010
Guest Post by Marcie Hascall Clark
This case was apparently lost based on the opinion of an elderly retired psychiatrist paid for by CNA, the testimony of two Ronco Employee’s, Mike Hartling and Brandt Marshall (how’d that work out for you Brandt ?), who were coached on what to say before their depositions and told the same lies we were all told after his death, and a failure on the part of the claimants original counsel to properly represent the claim. The Judge would not consider the testimony of Will Haynes as he found it to be unbelievable. So who is believing you now Will ?
Tim Eysselinck worked for the same company as my husband, had the same job title, only he was deployed to Iraq following my husbands repatriation via Landstuhl and Walter Reed. Certainly the job was dangerous as that is how my husband was so critically injured ???
Iraq was extremely dangerous before Tim arrived. Just Iraq, just being there.
In the weeks and days leading up to my husbands injuries in July of 2003 he was shot at by the US Army, rescued by the Marines, woke up to bullet holes in his tents and vehicles, and traveled roads where soldiers had been abducted and killed. The only reason they were working the day he was injured is that he was told to work anyway It was more important for them to work without security than to have it appear that the mission may not have been accomplished.
The world, except possibly Judge Clement Kennington, et al, watched the safety and security in Iraq deteriorate before their eyes on television over the next six months that Tim worked there. The Unclassified Safety and Security Reports available even before the Wiki Leaks spoke to the daily life threatening security situations.
In January of 2004, just a few months before Tim’s death, he attended a conference in Florida with fellow Ronco employees. Some of these Ronco employees came to our home following this conference to spend time with my husband who was still recovering. While here they were discussing how odd Tim was acting and how he over reacted to some of the conference topics was absurd. I was later told by others who were in country with Tim that he was behaving strangely while still in Iraq.
Had there been any screening or concerns for mental health, or awareness of PTSD back then Tim’s behavior might have been recognized as symptomatic of the life threatening condition that it turned out to be. And today I doubt that anyone involved in this case from Kennington, to the three judges that just shot this appeal down, doubt that Tim was suffering from a mental condition brought on by his time in Iraq.
Once I learned that his widow had filed for death benefits based on PTSD I thought that this information might be important to her claim. I emailed her attorney that I thought I had information important to her claim and would like to talk with him but he failed to respond. I thought maybe I was too late but I was not. I still have the email.
So while Judge Kennington, the BRB’s, and the Fifth Circuit in Texas found that working in Iraq for the last half of 2003 was not life threatening and that Tim Eysselinck’s widow and children do not deserve DBA death benefits because her first attorney did not file a claim based on Depression, which is a symptom of PTSD, rather than PTSD, they did choose to highlight the fact that he had two glasses of wine with dinner that evening.
Watch out for that second glass of wine guys it may just cause you to have an uncontrollable urge to put a gun to your head and pull the trigger.
Maybe they should put a warning on the bottles.
I hope that everyone realizes by now that if this claim were allowed to be started over again with all the available facts, the lies allowed to be fully countered, that Tim’s widow and his children would be receiving the benefits that Congress intended and the taxpayer paid for them to have.
We’d still recommend staying away from the Covington Cabal and the Fifth Circuit at all cost. Move if you have to. Certainly never allow your attorney to move your claim there because he lives there. Your choice of attorney is extremely important as well. If you lose your claim due to a lack of evidence you will never be allowed to present it.
Even if the whole world recognizes it as fact.
Thank you Birgit Eysselinck for your years of fighting this wretched biased system for all of us, for not accepting pay offs from CNA to shut you up.
I apologize to you for the way my country has treated you, your children, and your husbands good name.
And that after his many years of service. We should all be ashamed.