Segment, transcript, and “rearview mirror” comments
Shorter segment from my Coronavirus Investigation Committee conversation nearly two years ago. [Begins at 57:39 in longer video]
Wolfgang Wodarg: [57:39] What we speak about is possible murder. I try to, I just would like to know whether there was already some court, someone who was claiming, who was excusing some hospitals for murder. And then there would be witnesses. They would have the right to get all the data from the insurance company and so on. If there is a good attorney, and he goes after this murder question, then he could get all the data he needs.
Jessica Hockett: Yeah. Or at the very least democide. State-sponsored euthanasia. I don’t necessarily disagree with the word murder, especially using it for effect. One challenge in the states anyway is that people don’t want to say that individual doctors crossed ethical lines, that they murdered anybody individually. So, I’ve tried to say democide or iatrogenocide, because I think the government, ultimately, is responsible for this.
But, you know, I think the only thing that’s scarier than this [New York City death] event actually happened as presented is that it didn’t. It didn’t happen this way. It didn’t happen to this magnitude.
And I can’t speak to Germany, but I can tell you that, in the U.S., New York was used to convince, the spectacle of New York was used to convince people that something, that there was an emergency and that kids needed to be shut out of school, restaurants needed to be closed, right? People’s lives needed to be completely upended because Look, we don’t want in Chicago or in San Francisco, what’s ‘happening’ in New York, right?
And then the narrative was that New York got hit really hard by this virus and got caught off guard, even though New York City is one of the most disaster-prepared cities in the world, right?
Wolfgang Wodarg: Just think of all the people traveling around U.S. with airplanes and whatever each day millions of people crossing over the continent and there was nothing in San Francisco. Nothing. You didn’t see anything. This is not possible with the virus. Not possible with a respiratory virus. And each person, each doctor, or everyone who is responsible for public health, he must have put this question. And they didn’t, I get the impression. Why didn’t they ask for it? Why didn’t they compare the regions? Why do you, you have to have a picture how a virus is spreading, and it’s spreading each year, and they know how it viruses are spreading and this is not possible what we observe there in New York and nowhere else. I think this is the story. There have to be other explanations than viruses.
Jessica Hockett: I did see you speak with Dr. [Martin] Kulldorff a few weeks ago, and I really appreciate the professional and gentle way that you pushed him. But on New York, he basically said that it was international travel and random chance.
I don’t think he’s actually looked at the data if he’s saying that. And “random chance” has a certain meaning scientifically. I don’t think that it’s “random chance” that New York City, the densest city in the United States, the most disaster-prepared city in the United States was caught off guard by a coronavirus bomb.
I mean, you know, whatever we all thought in the moment, and I get it. I think it was a shock and awe campaign against all of us. I can forgive anybody for thinking anything at the time.
But this is four years later, and we have some of the most prominent scientists in the United States that will not – including pro-freedom, anti-mandate scientists like the signatories of the Great Barrington Declaration, who will not look at this event with any kind of intellectual honesty. I’m sorry. I can’t account for it.
Wolfgang Wodarg: You know, this is why I didn’t sign the Barrington thing. I didn’t sign it because there were so many inconsistencies. There’s so many questions. I didn’t sign it. They asked me to sign it, but I didn’t. I like the engagement of many doctors. I like the questions that were put, but this paper I didn’t sign.
Jessica Hockett: I signed it at the time because in the moment, because we were living in the Chicago area. Our kids were really suffering from these mandates. At the time, the Great Barrington Declaration was at least, you know, counter-government, right? Or counter dominant narrative. But, looking back at it now, I would not sign it again.
And, importantly, even if it was a good document in the moment, and a good stand for some people to have taken publicly, and I really appreciate that, as scientists, they need to look back at the document and say, “What did this assume it does? Is the, are these things still true? Does this need to be revised? Where were we wrong? What questions remain?” And it doesn’t seem like they’re willing to do that. But they need to, because they, no one was right, you know?
Wolfgang Wodarg: So I think this question, whether there really was a virus or whether it was just a theater and PCR test, this question is dividing the whole scene is dividing the critical people too and it’s still doing. So it’s very important to ask the questions: How could we find out the truth? What do we need to find out who’s right and then discuss it? I think this has not been done enough. I’m very much after this.
Jessica Hockett: Yeah, I agree. And what are we afraid of? I don’t know if you know Meryl Nass, but she, the other day on her Substack, was basically calling for just everybody to agree, or agree to disagree and not talk about certain things and just, you know, get behind the effort to push back against what the WHO is trying to do. And I understand the effort to try, or I understand that the WHO is trying to do evil things, and so are the countries that are participating in the WHO, including the U.S. But I don’t agree with this let’s not talk about uncomfortable things. I’m a relative nobody. But I’ll meet with anybody and show them this data and say, “How do we explain this?” or “How can we get the government to explain it?” Right?
Because I’m not going to figure out the answer, and maybe even we together won’t figure out the answer, but we have to do something to make sure that the truth is known about this. I don’t want people to keep talking about “The next pandemic.” Can we talk about whether there was a pandemic here, or whether there’s ever been such a thing as a pandemic? I don’t think there has been, by the way.
Wolfgang Wodarg: My position taking part in many discussions on this topic is, on one side, Meryl Nass, who is very convinced that something extraordinary happened — some virus, extraordinary has happened. And JJ Couey has said no. So, I’m just in between, you know. And I cannot say “You are a nice person” or “You are a nice person.” This doesn’t interest me in this thing. I want to know how would you recognize that the other one is wrong and that you are right? What should we do to find out that the other one is wrong and you are right? And this we have to agree on, and when we have those indicators we want to go after, then we could have some truth. But if we avoid it, it’s not possible.
28 March 2026 “Rearview Mirror” {Jessica Hockett}
Great Barrington Declaration
Over the course of events and interactions I witnessed and experienced from 2020 through 2025, I came to better apprehend who and what was involved in The Great Barrington Declaration. I now regard it as a staged and strategic tool for managing dissent and controlling, aggregating, and directing opposition — one that, quite possibly, was planned before 2020, even if specific participants and managing agents were not explicitly identified, and even if not everyone involved in the orchestration understood what was going on or what part(s) they were playing.
I may never be able to write about some of the things I know happened, or the things I suspect happened (and are still happening) because of what was involved. Moreover, no human being is omniscient, and even the things I came to learn and realize over six years (and counting!) are only snapshots in a much larger photo mosaic, akin to the “Magic Eye” posters of the mid-to-late 1990s.
In October 2025, I learned that there is no record of me having signed the GBD, despite believing that I did:
To my knowledge, and as best I can recall, my later pushback on the ideas espoused by the GBD — and by Jay Bhattacharya, Sunetra Gupta, Martin Kulldorff, and others — was genuine, not the result of any individual or group explicitly directing me to engage in public debate or critique the views of other COVID dissidents.
In most cases between 2023 and 2025, the opinions I expressed were not shared by prominent or elevated participants in the COVID debate. Even when some of those views seemed to align with positions expressed in the Dissident Arena, I later came to see that apparent alignment as part of a larger pattern of managed dissent.
Explanations for the New York City Event:
I have never been at a loss for possible explanations for many aspects of the New York City event.
When I have said in articles, or in presentation titles, things like “What Happened in New York?” — or referred to it (and the Metro counties and Bergamo and London and Madrid etc) as “without explanation” — I have meant without sufficient or reasonable explanation from governing authorities.
Not only on Twitter but in “Toward a New York City Hypothesis” for PANDA Open Science and in many articles and recorded conversations & presentations, I have written and spoken about ventilators, protocols, drugs, orders, and numerous other factors/potential factors.
The conclusion I came to (articulated here, here, and elsewhere) is that, even considering the range of documented and plausible factors, there are still too many unresolved discrepancies and anomalies, and too much “missing” evidence, to accept either “Official” or prevailing “Counter-Official” narratives as sufficiently explanatory. The event remains unsubstantiated, with many associated storylines contradicted by quantitative and qualitative data.
Wolfgang Wodarg was correct: Massive lawsuits are needed, especially against hospitals.
Minor edits for clarity and form made post-publication.
Leave a Reply