Projects
![]()
No projects found
Investors
New
DAO Treasuries
DATs
Lend / Borrow APRs
Chains
Categories
Spaces
Barry Young - Whistleblower Court Case Irregularities
Recorded: Dec. 10, 2025 Duration: 0:38:49Space Recording
Short Summary
In a heated discussion, Barry Young and Andrew Bridgen address the urgent legal challenges facing whistleblowers in New Zealand, emphasizing the need for transparency and justice in the face of potential suppression. They highlight significant trends in public health scrutiny, particularly regarding vaccine safety investigations, and the implications for whistleblower protections globally.
Full Transcription
Music Thank you. Music Music Music
Music
Music
Music
Music
Music
Music
Music
Music
Music
Music Music Music Music Music Music Music Music Music Music Music Thank you. Music Thank you. Music Thank you. Music Barry Young and Andrew Bridgen,
I have asked you to come on this urgent Twitter spaces and welcome to other listeners tonight.
It is evening New Zealand time on the eve of Barry Young being in the Wellington District Court on December the 11th at 9am.
Barry, welcome.
Can you hear me? Is your mic on Barry? Just have a listen. Just see if you can down the
bottom turn your mic on, bottom left of the screen Baz. And Andrew, I'll go to you. Andrew
Bridgen, welcome from the UK. Thank you. Can you hear me, Liz?
And just while Barry's getting his sound organised,
Andrew, we have got a dire legal situation in New Zealand.
You know, there's a great adage that I think you've quoted to me,
for justice to be done, justice must be seen to be done.
And I've had a message from Barry today saying that they are going to lock
the public out effectively of the court tomorrow when Barry goes in
for the decision on whether he's a whistleblower or not.
And this is like the King's Star Chamber courts. And this was why the Magna Carta was
brought in, so that the people could see that it wasn't the King carrying out unjust justice,
which isn't justice at all. So your view on that, Andrew, when I rang you earlier to say
we've got a real crisis here in New Zealand, in our courts?
Well, you're absolutely right.
Justice has to be done and has to be seen to be done.
That's why the courts are open.
Just move a little closer to your microphone, Antoine.
It's a bit quiet.
Yeah, the justice does have to be done and seen to be done.
That's why the courts are open to the public so that they can see the workings of the judiciary.
And the very fact that this is going to be a closed hearing suggests
that the judiciary are ashamed of what they're going to be doing tomorrow
to the brave whistleblower Barry Young.
You also told me that they'd slipped in last minute submissions of evidence at the 11th hour, bringing in some spurious expert evidence that will try and claim that Barry's not a whistleblower.
Is that correct?
Yes, they did. pages from an epidemiologist whose record as an epidemiologist we immediately got across to Steve
Kirsch, Andrew, and he looked up his record. There's very strong evidence in his background
of a strong bias against anyone who questions vaccination safety, which of course, Andrew,
as you and I know, is now being questioned at the highest
levels of the Trump administration in America.
The CDC announced yesterday in America the examination of vaccine harms and deaths.
We need your sound just a little bit closer to the microphone.
In America, the CDC have just announced that they're extending the investigation into child deaths following vaccination with the COVID-19 vaccine to also include adult deaths as well.
And that's quite a milestone.
It truly is. And Barry, is your sound issue sorted yet? We've had constant sound issues when I've tried to do interviews with Barry.
It's become the norm now on his equipment that was uplifted by the police.
Barry, can you hear me and are you able to join in the conversation?
It may not work, Andrew.
It's been constant with Barry.
The interference at every level.
There was another thing, Andrew.
A lawyer, Sue Gray, was going to go into the court as his amicus curi to be able to
speak in the court or to be there to help him if he needed. For example, if he needs to cross-examine
himself, he needs his amicus curi to step into that position because Barry is defending his own
case. He needs that third party. And he may not be allowed to have Sue Gray in court,
as is Amicus Curie, for the reason that she is not vaccinated,
which is utterly unheard of, I think, in any court around the world
when the vaccines are being openly discredited in real time as we speak.
And when's the last time we heard of someone dying of COVID-19 in the developed world?
No, they're pulling every dirty trick in the book, and it has all the hallmarks of it's
going to be a complete stitch up.
I hope that Barry has a lot of support in New Zealand.
I know he has support around the world.
And the eyes of the world need to be on the New Zealand justice system,
which I'm afraid is a legacy of the corruption we've got in the UK justice system at the moment.
It's absolutely horrific.
Draw some parallels of what you're hearing from New Zealand
with what you have witnessed in the UK and beyond around Europe, Andrew.
Well, we've seen people bring claims in the Netherlands against senior figures involved in the vaccine manufacture and rollout.
And we've seen lawyers there arrested without charge for months and detained.
The cabal are absolutely desperate at the moment to keep a lid on top of the COVID deaths,
COVID harms. Barry was very brave to release the portion of the record level data for doses, dates and deaths that he had access to in
New Zealand, the very same information which the UK government refused in court to release to the
public, because apparently our mental health couldn't cope with the analysis of those results,
of those results, that data.
So it must be pretty damning.
I'm very concerned that they're going to make an example of Barry.
That's the way that whistleblowers are treated,
despite all the protections that they've been afforded in law
by our respective parliaments.
respective parliaments, whistleblowers are vilified to ensure that no more whistleblowers
come forward. And the public around the world have got to get behind Barry Young and say,
enough's enough. We want justice. And to get that, we have to have the facts.
That's brilliant, Andrew. And this is a man who has never had any problem with the law,
who has been the archetype of the law abiding citizen
and in fact even when he put out this data he notified every parliamentarian,
he notified the bosses at Health New Zealand,
he fully expected they would come with open arms and say, Barry, you're building this database. It's your database you're building for us as a contractor, but you're
seeing worrying signals. Please tell us. And instead, Andrew, they've spent close to $3 million
to suppress the truth from the people about the people's data. It is just so criminal. What's an example in the UK that
you can think of? Do you want to talk about the Lucy Letby case?
Yes, I personally believe that Lucy Letby was going to blow the whistle on the increase in
stillbirths and miscarriages in her maternity unit and around the world
since the COVID vaccine rolled out.
And I believe that she was targeted and given a massive criminal sentence of 25 years in
prison to make an example of her to dissuade any other whistleblowers coming forward
I've spoken to over the last few years I've spoken to so many confidentially spoken to so many
midwives in the UK who I mean they're basically suffering PTSD from the trauma of seeing so much death and destruction of the innocents in their departments.
It is going to be so revealing if New Zealand's justice system shows that it is on the side of the lying criminal cabal
who are represented by our globalist politicians who have sold out New Zealand
and sold out their own integrity.
For what?
For a pile of shekels, I don't know, for 30 pieces of silver.
It has no value money against their lost integrity.
Barry, can you speak now?
I see that you are there as a speaker.
Let's see if you're able to come on.
Yes, I can speak.
Can you hear me? Yes, andrew how are you doing i'm bearing up barry how are you more importantly
no that's not more important that's always good to hear from you andrew it's been a while
i must say um hello to everyone thank you for joining. And yeah, thank you. Yeah. Well, you've had a
hell of a few days. You've had evidence presented at the last minute. Let's just update Andrew on
that. The horror of section 19. Was it section 19 of a 19 page document or paragraph 19?
19 of a 19-page document, or paragraph 19, said what, Barry? Could you just update Andrew?
What are you talking about? I'm talking about the one where he said we no longer have to collect
the evidence of... That was section 70 of Professor Scrag's 19-page, was actually 22 page, addendum report, this expert epidemiological
witness. And yeah, it's paragraph 70. And it says word for word, I'll just read it out.
A measure of the safety of the COVID-19 vaccines is that MedSafe no longer maintains reports on them. It's so safe, we don't have
to monitor it. So he says, I'll paraphrase then, if it had deemed the vaccine to be unsafe,
MedSafe would have continued to monitor its safety. Now this is incredible, this is absolutely
unbelievable, that an epidemiologist would et cetera. And this is,
this is after calm and New Zealand med safe have had 20,000
adverse, serious adverse events reported to them.
This is like a serious life changing, not just a cold or a, you know,
bad feeling, nausea, whatever. These are serious, serious life-changing events.
20,000 people have been
affected out of a total number of dose of four million that is a one in 200 adverse reaction
rate and if any other vaccine previous to this had had those kind of figures it would have been pulled
instantly but this is the world we're living in now.
And for people who are wondering who this epidemiologist is,
his name is Robert Scrag.
He's been brought out of retirement to bear witness tomorrow against Barry to say that Barry does not and should not qualify
as a whistleblower.
But somebody like him, because he has a university degree,
should qualify.
And yet in paragraph 70, he's writing a circular argument saying,
we no longer monitor the jabs because we believe they're so safe.
And therefore, because we have no evidence of their lack of safety,
because we no longer check on them.
Because we don't monitor, we have no evidence.
It's ridiculous. It's circular logic.
And it's so wrong. It's completely wrong that he's saying that. But he's going to be allowed
to say that. And the thing is, an expert is not required under the Protected Disclosures Act.
It does not mention anything about having an expert to say what reasonable grounds are.
anything about having an expert to say what reasonable grounds are it's framed for the
ordinary employee like me an ordinary worker who has concerns to come forward and voice them safely
and be protected by that so they say one thing in the act um they dangle this carrot of immunity
and say yes we'll we'll look after you but really in reality it's a giant stick
and they're gonna just beat you with it and that's why yeah because there's no concerns that's why
the cdc are launching a full investigation into the deaths following vaccination in children and
adults now in america well that's america and that's great that they're doing that but new
zealand vaccines barry same back i, we're stuck in the stone edges here
And this was where
Steve Kirsch offered to have an open
debate with Professor Scrag after
he gives his evidence tomorrow
to have a debate to bring forward
the Czech Republic data that he
has and the data out of
Japan on the jabs
all of which Steve Kirsch
has been following closely as well as the New Zealand
data, and saying they all back each other up, Andrew. They all bear fruit, saying that there are
What we've seen, Liz, since the vaccine rollout, it's not as if there's a pile of evidence here
saying they're safe and effective and a pile of evidence here saying they're not. It's all on one
side and it's all going the same way, that the vaccines were neither safe and effective and a pile of evidence here saying they're not it's all on one side and it's all going the same way that the vaccines were neither safe nor effective they
were they were they were never effective that's why the manufacturers knew that they were never
effective that's why they never tested them for that and I've seen the contract unredacted that
Pfizer signed with the South African government six months after they signed the contract with the UK government.
And in it, they say they do not know how effective the vaccines are.
They can't guarantee that. And they don't know what the long term side effects are either.
I doubt that the contract we've never seen that they signed with the UK government prior to that will have anything different in it if they didn't know six months later.
Absolutely not.
So that is the professor who is being put up against Barry to say Barry doesn't qualify as a whistleblower, but he does when it's manifestly inadequate what he's written in this late stage evidence.
But Barry, tell us what's happened today.
So that was three days ago, three days prior to a trial.
And Andrew, they've had 700 days to present that evidence.
They do it three days out to a man who is defending himself in court.
And then today, what happened, Barry?
They dumped this on me.
So today, basically out the blue, two things happened, really.
I got a huge disclosure from the police, like just suddenly,
and this thing is colossal.
So the police have just dropped this enormous disclosure on me,
which is fresh evidence that I'm supposed to look at.
You need to ask for an adjournment so you can analyze.
No, that's what they want.
That's what they want.
I'm not going to go there.
This is just, this is a trial by ambush is what it is.
And the other thing is that the judge gave a ruling and this is previously I've asked several times repeatedly is it public
court is it are the people going to be allowed in there and every single time they said yes I've got
four or five different emails asking this confirming it irrefutably by the registrar
of the district court in Wellington New Zealand Zealand, saying, yes, of course, the public are allowed in.
Now today, the registrar turns around and goes,
oops, sorry, we made a mistake.
It's going to be a closed court.
No public allowed in.
So this is like, this is, where's the justice that is seen to be done?
This is not North Korea.
So why are they doing this?
Because they're ashamed of what they're going to do tomorrow.
Exactly.
The reason they're saying this,
and this is the judge's rationale for it,
they are saying, well, we don't want people to come in
because Mr. Young might perjure or prejudice himself.
It's like, well, no, no, no, no, no.
I've got nothing to hide from the people of New Zealand.
Have you?
Well, sure.
They are the ones who are hiding, not me.
I've been completely honest and open, and I always have been.
And I think we need to add here, Barry, we emphasize it in every
interview that in the two years since you put out this data that was fully anonymized, they have
spent millions of dollars to try to track down some evidence of you compromising a New Zealanders
safety and privacy and they have not found one name that's compromised oh no i mean the thing is that the
data itself was not didn't have any contact details in it at all and maybe people don't
realize that it was not um a traceable um database it was a it was a um financial payment database
so it did not have any telephone numbers it did not have any email addresses did not have any physical
addresses so like in in the old days when you gave around white pages which had everyone's phone
number and name and address in it that was potentially a million times worse or more
revealing than the data i legitimately had access to so all my data how it was basically a bunch of
names and from that data it was basically a bunch of names. And
from that data, it was all, you know, anonymized carefully and scrubbed and what have you.
They spent millions and millions of dollars trying to find names from that database, real
people, real names. And from initially saying 12,000 identities have been revealed, that
was proven to be baseless.
And that was, it's still on the internet now, if you Google it, 12,000 names revealed,
Ministry of Health data breach, just put in those names and Google, you'll find it,
tons of articles still there. Those are actually baseless and 100% false. They admitted later
that all they could find after access to public domain data as well,
by the way, they couldn't find it on the database. They had to access the internet and all they could
find was six names, six people's names. And three of those were public figures like MPs or ministers, something like that. So six names from 12,000.
And even that they could only find from using the internet
and public available information.
So it means they basically had nothing.
There was no privacy breaches whatsoever.
No one's ever come forward and saying,
oh, I feel harmed by the breach or anything like that.
It's absolutely baseless.
They just used that as a giant stick to go after me.
And they told the police, they'd goosed it up,
and the police came after me, eight of them armed,
and they laid the maximum possible charge that they could under the law,
carrying a seven-year prison sentence.
For absolutely zero breaches of five...
Yeah, that was from a protected disclosure.
I legitimately made a valid protected disclosure,
even though I had no idea what the law was at the time.
I basically ticked all the boxes and I complied with it.
Andrew, what do you feel when you hear that? Our courts are so fallen in the
West, in the Five Eyes countries in particular, it seems. Well, we're supposed to have separation
between the legislature and the judiciary so that we have impartial courts. It's clear to me that
they're coming under a lot of political pressure because the
politicians around the world are completely vulnerable on this. They're the ones that said
it was safe and effective and they can't allow the real data to come out which will disprove that.
As I recall, the database that Barry bravely released for public interest. The names were removed before that was
analysed by senior statisticians to find any link between vaccination and harms. So
it was all done absolutely legitimately. I think Barry, tact tactically we also want to explain to people
why you do not want to have an adjournment tomorrow,
why you want to go ahead with this after what is shaping up
to be already the longest court case in New Zealand history,
legal history, and you're not even in the main case yet.
You're in a pre-trial hearing on whether you qualify
as a whistleblower, but why do you not want, given that dump of police evidence today,
why do you not want to call for an adjournment?
Barry, can you hear me?
I think Andrew, just while he gets his sound sorted,
the real reason is he can see that they are playing for time
and they really want the public to lose interest in this case.
That's my gut feeling.
If they can spread it out for another 300 days or 400 days,
700 days, which it's at now,
then they think the public will have moved on from the
COVID-19 scandal. But that's not my feeling. Andrew, is it yours? Do you think the UK public
are tiring of talking about the criminality of their politicians?
No, I don't think they are. And I think the information that will be released by the CDC
when they complete these investigations will be
damning. The truth is going to come out. I mean, as I've said many times, I was warned that they
were going to cover up the vaccine harms and vaccine deaths in the UK for 20 years. They're
not going to get anything like that. It's going to come out. The truth is like trying to hold a football underwater.
Eventually, as soon as they let go of it, they lose their grip on it.
It's going to burst to the top.
And I think it's coming.
And the sooner the better now.
And people like Barry and the many, many doctors.
I wrote a reference for a doctor today who spoke out about
concerns about the vaccines he's been um to have his license taken off him by the gmc
um now they're trying to put him onto a uh a list of people who are a risk to adults and children
i mean it's absolutely ludicrous the way they're vilifying anyone who speaks out
against the narrative. But they are going to be vindicated and they're going to be vindicated
pretty soon now. The majority of the public know exactly what's going on.
My intel says that what the dirty politicians will try to do is to point the finger at the mainstream doctors who went along with this and the mainstream nurses and say, hey, it's their fault.
They administered these things.
They are the four guys, not us, the politicians.
That's the threat that they're holding over the doctors and nurses around the world, the medical profession around the world to keep a lid on on
the truth coming out but the fact is that people are voting with their feet when you've got hospitals
now in the UK where 90 percent of doctors and nurses will neither neither take the COVID booster
nor the flu vaccine I'm afraid they've they've all become anti-vaxxers, haven't they? But they've
become that through the experience of what they've seen coming in through those hospital doors.
For anybody listening here today who doesn't yet know fully that Andrew Bridgen was a
parliamentarian in Westminster in the UK for 14 years and incredibly loyal to his
constituency. He got 63% in the prior election and in last
year's election was awarded in a very crooked election only 3% because they wanted him out
of parliament because this is probably one of the few politicians, if not the only one around the
world at the height of the pandemic, who spoke up for us, the people who were saying no to the jab.
the height of the pandemic, who spoke up for us,
the people who were saying no to the jab.
And I think it was last year, Andrew, wasn't it?
I got Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, who now heads the,
he's in the position of Fauci.
He's heading the health services in America.
And he came on an interview with Andrew Bridgen to say,
Andrew, I need to express my absolute admiration.
You were, I think, the only politician, those are the words he used,
who stood up for us when even Dr. Jay Bhattacharya was being hounded
for questioning the COVID-19 rollout response.
Barry is really a hero up with the, well, he's up with the likes of you, Andrew.
He's up with the ones who've really put
everything on the line to tell the truth is he not absolutely um and um he will be on the right
side of history but history is going to be written by the victors so we've got to make sure we win
um we're at a pivotal point for humanity uh And all the judiciary are doing by these dirty tricks on Barry
is exposing their own corruption to the public scrutiny.
And I'm not surprised they want to do that in private.
Just to give the judiciary a reminder, even on this call,
if you can press the emoji button, if you can put a thumbs up
if you support Barry in this call.
And there may be trolls on this call, but just put a thumbs up if you support barry in this call and there may be trolls on this call but just do a thumbs up right now if you want to send your support to barry
if you know how to do that it's you press the heart button down below certainly i am so what
well if yeah anybody who's supporting it keep pressing pressing those emoji buttons. Thank you. Find your emoji. There, they're lighting up now.
Because Barry, you do have huge support. So Andrew, what do you think
technically should be done tomorrow at the court when they try to
lock out the people and hold a King's Star
Chamber kind of court in secret? What do you think we should do? Should we call
tonight for thousands
more Kiwis to compete on Wellington and be in the streets outside the court to register that justice
in order to be done must be seen to be done? Make posters of that and carry those to the
court tomorrow. What's your suggestion Andrew? Yeah I suggest you get a protest outside the court
for the duration of the hearing
because where Barry's finding himself today,
if we don't make a stand and stop it,
that's where we're all heading tomorrow.
That's it.
Private court.
I mean, even on that,
could you just update us on what Stam is trying to do about jury trials in the UK, Andrew?
Oh, yes. They're looking to get rid of jury trials for all but the most serious of crimes, effectively murder and rape.
And that was telegraphed a very long time ago. They created a massive backlog in our judicial system
through the COVID pandemic.
And now they're saying, but he's never asked the barristers
and the barristers saying they don't want to get involved
in this perversion of justice.
And it's been estimated now it'll reduce the waiting time by 0.1 of a percent
of cases. So there's no time saving but what there will be is instead of having
the historic rights that we have in the UK to have your crime, your charges heard in front of
a jury of your peers, it'll be the decision of a politically appointed judge.
And I think having seen the way that people have been dealt with over the last couple of years
over social media posts, people have no confidence in that judicial system.
Barry, I'd like to hear from you if your sound is up again is it working?
Yep can you hear me?
Yeah I think a lot of people will want to know how you're feeling
on the eve of this court appearance Barry
you are inordinately resilient
what you've gone through has been ill
and you've remained good humid
and thousands of us
millions of us really support you around the world
how are you feeling tonight? and thousands of us, millions of us really support you around the world.
How are you feeling tonight?
Thank you for those messages.
I'm feeling surprisingly calm despite everything.
I think I'm in the eye of a hurricane.
I'm just witnessing corruption unfold in real time.
And it's quite a privileged position to be in, actually.
When I was a law student, I always wanted to be involved in a case like this,
but never as the accused.
But the reality of it is this is a case that even Harvey Specter couldn't win.
You know, pick your fictional legal character.
It's an unwinnable case for me right now.
But all I want to do, all I can do,
is expose the utter and complete breaking of the law,
breakdown of the legal system.
And if they choose to break the law,
what happens to the rule of law?
Andrew, your reply to that.
Well, I'll only repeat what I've already said, that if we don't stand with Barry and get justice for him where he is today, many of us will find ourselves in the very near future.
That's exactly right. It's not a case about if you're pro-vax or anti-vax.
You just park all that to the side.
This is a fundamental human right to be a whistleblower.
If you see something that is a concern,
you should be protected for that.
It doesn't matter what your stance is.
And I think we need to add there for people to understand
if Barry is not deemed a whistleblower in court tomorrow,
basically we have zero whistleblower
protection. Our statute is
absolutely meaningless
legally and that is a
grave concern for
all New Zealanders. This is a
very, very serious
case we are looking at tomorrow.
Please could everybody go on Barry Young's
ex- What is your ex- address? We are looking at it. Please could everybody go on Barry Young's X.
What is your X address?
It's easy, just Barry Young NZ.
Barry Young NZ on X.
If you could please post out any interviews you see there.
Please post out messages to him from around the world.
Please, thirdly, send it to anybody you know around the world
to get eyes on this. I believe that the eyes of the world. Please, thirdly, send it to anybody you know around the world to get eyes on
this. I believe that the eyes of the world on this case may embarrass whoever is the judge tomorrow
enough that he or she may feel such shame at betraying the honourable position of being a
judicial officer that she may go against what her globalist government puppets may
be pressuring her to do.
We hope, or him, if it's a him, we hope that he or she will find their moral compass at
the last minute and find steel in their spine and realise they have to live among us after
they betray a brave and ethical whistleblower if they do do that in the court
tomorrow. I thank you all for coming. If you can be at the court at nine o'clock tomorrow,
and I will see you there. Thousands of others of us, I hope, will be meeting up, combining
New Zealand and standing up for justice and for Barry Young. Thank you, Andrew, and God
bless you, Barry. We'll be there with you side by side.
Thank you, Liz.
Thank you, Andrew.
Thank you, everyone.
I really appreciate it.
Thank you all.
Good night.
See you tomorrow.
Thanks, Andrew.
Insights
P
