Question: Ask The Nuwaupians, If Herpes Is One Of The Curses On Canaan, Then How Did Malachi York Get This Disease?

Answer: Prepare to be physically and verbally attacked.

 

According to the teachings of the Nuwaupian leader Malachi York, he fostered the idea that HERPES was one of the curses on the biblical character known as "Canaan".  

 

"If you look in your bible in the book of Leviticus Chapters 13-14 it describes leprosy as a plague and another form of being UNCLEAN, and something the serpent's seen is prone to having.  (Leviticus 13:3 'And the priest shall look on the plague in the skin of the flesh: and when the hair in the skin is turned white, and the plague in the sight be deeper than the skin of his flesh, it is a plague of leprosy: and the priest shall look on him, and pronounce him unclean.')   The word for leprosy in the Aramic (Hebrew) tongue is Tsara-ath meaning 'a malignate skin disease'..."

-Malachi York: Is Jesus God? pg. 335

 

York has made this claim since the 1970's of a curse on Canaan being everything from "white skin" to various deformities and other skin diseases.  York gets even more specific on the next page.

 

"In modern day language, it's defined as a chronic disease, chiefly affecting the skin, eyes, and the mucus  membranes of the nose and throat.  In advanced cases, it also affects the nerves.  The disease is COMMUNICABLE and is caused by a specific organism called, Microbaterium Leprae, which produces various glandular lesions in the affected areas.  There are many forms of leprosy and today these forms are encountered everyday.  These different forms are:

Psoriasis,  Gonorrhea,  Ringworm,  Syphilis,  Arthritis,  Rheumatism,  Seborrhea,  Dermatitis,  (dandruff), Eczema,  Chicken Pox,  Impetigo,  Nasal Disorders, Bone Disorders, Freckles,  AIDS,  HERPES,  and Lyme Disease, etc..."

-Malachi York: Is Jesus God? pg. 336

 

That being the case, ask the Nuwaupians to explain how did Malachi York, a self professed extraterrestrial and the biblical Angel "Michael", spread the disease Herpes Simplex 2?

 

The Facts:

Malachi York tested positive for Herpes-II on August 15th 2002 by Stanford Medical Center after a court order was issued giving the Government permission to have his blood tested.  The results were given to Dr. York through his attorneys, The Garland Law Firm shortly afterwards.  This event was the start of the problems between York, The Nuwaupians administration, and the Garland Lawyers.  The Garland Lawyers saw slim chances at York defending his innocents with positive Herpes-II results that were identical to some of the sexually molested child victims, so they clearly suggested a plea of GUILTY to lesser time and so forth.  This led up to the famous January 2003 guilty plea by York on video for a sentence of 15 years in jail. York and the Nuwaupians blamed this guilt plea on York being "tortured" and/or under "duress", but after investigating and knowing the facts of all the circumstances surrounding what led up to his guilty plea, including his medical records, you'll see torture and duress was being used as propaganda and a red herring.

 

Here's some of the evidence to support the facts:

07/29/2002 68 MOTION by USA as to Dwight D. York to Authorize Stanford University Medical Center to Analyze Defendant's  Blood for Herpes Viruses Simplex I & II (SEALED DOCUMENT) (ans) (entered: 07/29/2002) 

- A motion was filled by the government for a specific medical exam for Herpes.  The motion was a result of the government wanting to test York to see if he had Herpes as did some of the alleged victims in the case.

 

07/29/2002 69 ORDER as to Dwight D. York granting [68 -1] motion to Authorize Stanford Medical Center to Analyze Deft's Blood for Herpes Viruses Simplex I & II as to Dwight D. York (1) (Signed by Mag. Judge Claude W. Hicks Jr. ) (SEALED DOCUMENT) (ans)  (Entered: 07/29/2002

- Judge Hicks granted the motion. Note there was NO response motion by the Defense. This was due to fact that the prosecutors and defense agreed that the test would have helped York tremendously had he not tested positive for Herpes-II.

- The test was conducted on August 15th 2002. The result of this exam was sent to the US Attorneys Office August 23rd 2002 under subpoena. 

- York and Kathy Johnson were transferred into State Custody to face State charges October 15th 2002.

- During the months of November & December 2002, it was at this time that York's attorneys started to advise York of a plea agreement as a result of receiving the Medical Exam with results of Herpes-II being positive. It was also during this time when Ahmadou Varmer (Haru Hotep's Father) opened talks concerning Liberia assisting York in a transfer to Liberia. This was the ORIGINAL Liberian effort that people have heard about.  NO such transfer could have been made while there is an open case or one that is under collateral attack pursuant to Title 18 Sec 4100(c) which states "An offender shall not be transferred to or from the United States if a proceeding by way of appeal or of collateral attack upon the conviction or sentence be pending."  In other words, the cases had to be completed/terminated. York's attorneys sent a letter to the jail to notify them of a possible future prison transfer to Liberia. 

- January 23rd & 24th 2003, York enters two guilty pleas, Federal and State respectively. The Federal plea was rejected  and resulted in a failed plea attempt and ultimately a trial date of January 2004 was set for Federal Trial.

- In preparation for trial in late 2003, the issue of the positive Herpes-II resurfaced. York declined to have another independent test done initiated by the defense. This was a big issue and warranted a conference call/meeting with Attorneys, Doctor, Family, and those assisting on the case. The point was to have the information suppressed during trial.

- Jan 2004 during trial, the issue was raised in court. At NO TIME did York deny, protest, or contest his medical examination results known since late 2002.  At NO TIME did York request a second independent test done and when suggested, he declined.

 

 York's trial on the issue of Herpes-II and STDs:

 

January 5, 2004 USA vs York Case No. 5:02-cr-27-CAR (Trial Notes)

Richard Moultrie: Some of the children acquired Herpes Simplex II which is the virus most commonly contracted from sexual activity. One of the children contracted gonorrhea And I believe that is the extent of the sexually-transmitted diseases; The evidence that we expect the jury to hear. The relevance of the testimony your honor will be that according to the evidence that the government was able to generate through an expert, that Mr. York is also positive for Herpes Simplex II which is again the virus most commonly transmitted through sexual transmission. So the relevance, your Honor will be that one of the viruses for which Mr. York is positive also is a virus that some of our victims are positive for and at least two of the other diseases that is the Chlamydia both anal and vaginal are diseases that are easily treatable such that Mr. York we will argue could easily have been treated for those diseases

Adrian Patrick: Your Honor if I may I’ll just wait until Mr. Moultrie Finishes

Richard Moultrie: It will be your honor a jury issue and that is a question for jury to determine the weight of that kind of evidence the weight of its relevance. Obviously the Court may elect to exclude it, but we certainly don’t want to be in a position, your honor of the government to put in the physical findings of the victim and not offer all of the physical findings that this particular child also was positive for a sexually transmitted disease that the government didn’t introduce…

Judge Royal: Well let me ask you this question, Lets say I keep this evidence out, Would you agree not to make that argument?

Adrian Patrick: Me your honor?

Judge Royal: Yeah

Adrian Patrick: If you keep the STD’s out period?

Judge Royal: Yes

Adrian Patrick: Your Honor if the sexually transmitted diseases are out we don’t have to bring that evidence in unless there was going to be a partition like he was still going to try to bring some other physical evidence in.

Richard Moultrie: Absolutely

Judge Royal: Well what you’re telling me is something that the defendant may do is making this evidence relevant is the way it sounds to me.

Richard Moultrie: Well more specifically your honor the government is unsure as to how it would have been appropriate for it to make an effort to offer physical findings of a certain nature and include physical findings of a different nature. If the court is going to order that we limit the evidence of physical finding to physical injury and the physical condition of the children’s genital area when they were examined and the defense agrees to abide by..they don’t have objection to that, then of course we’ll abide by the ruling

Judge Royal: Okay

Richard Moultrie: But that’s the dilemma do you let in certain physical findings and exclude others

Judge Royal: Okay

Richard Moultrie: And we didn’t see a way we could ask for that your honor.

Judge Royal: I understand, Well I’m just

Adrian Patrick: Your honor I think with the physical injury though only, I think that’s left, isn’t it only 1 person we may be talking about or 2? I mean if we let the STD’s out, we’re only talking about..

Richard Moultrie: No, there at least I believe, There are about 4 children that have physical findings of either anal scarring or evidence that is consistent with them having been sexually active with someone and the reason why it is pertinent to offer that evidence your Honor, is the evidence from some of the witnesses is going to be that Mr. York told the children what to say in the event they were medically examined and that instruction could be found by the jury to be consistent with some of the versions that were given by these children of why it is their medical examinations revealed that they were sexually active. So the physical findings are both Germane as to prove the children’s medical examinations are consistent with the other evidence that Mr. York molested these children and also it’s consistent to show that the children when they say they were anally molested, that some of their physical findings prove that.

Judge Royal: Okay, well I have my brain trust right over there and I’m going to let them figure this one out tonight and I’ll think about it and you be prepared to talk about it some more tomorrow and it may very well be that it is so fact sensitive that I have to hear what the.. I guess I’m concerned about the connection, the time lapse so forth and so on.

Richard Moultrie: Well your honor I don’t know if the defense is ready to clarify this point or not, but is the defense saying it is not going to object to excluding the STD evidence? That would be, that would mean excluding both the STD evidence as it relates to the victims and the STD evidence as it relates to Mr. York so there is a benefit to both sides arguably. I’m just trying to figure out if the defense is willing to go along with that stipulation.

Adrian Patrick: Excluding all physical evidence you mean or just STD’s?

Richard Moultrie: No, excluding the evidence as it relates as to the STD’s both as to the victims who were positive for those STD’s and Mr. York who is positve for STD’s

Adrian Patrick: Well your honor that brings us back to if they are going to bring in physical evidence just to show that the individuals were active then we would be in a position where we would have to present evidence that the injury or that sexual activity could have come from someone else other than the defendant. So we still would get into about the rape shield.

Richard Moultrie: You can do that your Honor, the defense can do that without getting into sexually transmitted diseases if that’s what the courts concern is. You don’t have to get into the sexually transmitted disease evidence in order to go into the evidence that would otherwise be excluded by the Rape Shield Statute because we’re going to introduce evidence of physical findings that pierce that rape shield law as it relates to the defendant, but you will be able to get into everything else except sexually transmitted diseases because that seems to be what the courts concern is. So if the defense doesn’t object to it we don’t need to get into it.

Judge Royal: We’ll talk about this I have some concern about the relevancy of this but I think that your concern is a legitimate concern and so I’ll give this some consideration.

 

 

 Below are Malachi York's Herpes Test Results:

 

 

 

 

 

 

These are the facts, and what Nuwaupians, York supporters and sympathizers must face.  Based on York's teachings about Canaan  being cursed with "leprosy", (Herpes), he himself had the same disease, a disease he passed on to at least 3 children.

 

 

The victims of Malachi York may or may not have believed in York's biblical views of a curse on Canaan, but one thing is certain, the victims didn't want nor deserved the Herpes Simplex II virus passed on to them, be it a curse or the irresponsible sexual practices of a sexual predator.