WHEN IS AN “ACCIDENT” NOT REALLY AN “ACCIDENT”?

This is a follow-up to the posts CRISES INDUCED IDENTITY TRANSFER as well as HOW IS ACCCIDENT INDUCED IDENTITY TRANSFER COMPLETED?  The answer to the introductory question lies in the manner in which, the accompanying events developed as follows: 1) the “accident” victim just qualifies for medical benefits as an intern just (weeks) prior to the event at a major Employer, 2) an Officer “coincidentally” is involved in and is a witness to the “accident”, 3) they were coincidentally a total of forty-eight (48) minor accidents and one (1) critical “accident” on the date in question, 4) immediately following the “accident” the local Police Chief retires, 5) two individuals are placed in charge of the local Police force in the interim, 6) the “accident” victim who suffers from traumatic brain injury is NEVER interviewed by anyone connected with the on-going investigation, 7) the Chief of Police position is filled finally approximately seven (7) months after the “accident” and 8) the brain injured victim whose life is severely altered is “imprisoned” with the unpaid expenses and recurring aftermath of the injuries.

Under these circumstances, the “accident” appears to be more consistent with the pattern for State sponsored identity transfer, (see the post HOW DOES STATE SPONSORED ID THEFT WORK?), and as a result, the following two-part question is central; why did the authorities not interview the victim and was any other individual interviewed in place of the “actual” victim for this accident? The “real” answer to this 2-part question will determine whether or not State Sponsored Identity Transfer has taken place, allowing “Society’s” types to walk away with an identity while imprisoning the “actual” victim with recurring expenses, which she is trying to pass onto others because of her condition. What a “novel” manner to attempt to imprison another with a financial burden. “Society’s” types never cease to amaze when it comes to “imprisoning” with financial obligations created by their action, while escaping with “new” identities, “new” wealth and without “new” injuries in the myriad of accidents they are apparently so fond of “creating” to continually attempt relive and/or recreate another accident from distant shores from long ago (see Days 32 and 33 from the CONSERVERY CHALLENGE Page). The answer to this question posed at the outset, is when the events allow identity theft to occur in support of an illegal redistribution scheme that enable a TITAN, MOGUL, ARBITER OF “THRUTH” and OPPORTUNISTIC SUPPORTER to continue their perpetual wealth-generating means.