It's against the rules to analyse and publish living public figures from their speeches and pronouncements, practitioners who do so are generally struck off. Those that have done so for current leaders certainly have. However, the deceased have fewer rights.
The evidence cannot be diagnostic or conclusive. It was though, I would say, beyond reasonable doubt and backed up by multiple professional evidence on a criteria by criteria basis.

Those of us who heard it were pretty convinced, but I will not reveal the conclusion here, for two reasons:

1. There is going to be a publication of selected papers by Helion, and it may be one of them. BCMH will publish the remainder in it's journal, and I would not want to steal their thunder.

2. Discussion before the full evidence is available for scrutiny will likely lead to some jumping to conclusions, and therfore hardening or entrenching opinion before this has properly seen full light of day.

3. Rest assured though that this was not "psychobabble" but the result of a years worth of evidence gathering and analysis by a team of eminent and highly experienced military health professionals well used to dealing with those with battlefield experience in command positions, using modern diagnostic criteria.

I therefore believe it deserves proper, serious and open minded consideration.