BTW< when the prosecuter at the trial tried to use a similar argument to yours in suggesting Davila could get an infection, the doctor’s response clearly put that in a secondary cause category, treating it entirely differently from the direct causal relationship between the shooting and renal failure if not treated.
IN case you are still going to make your lame argument. Read the testimony, it will become clear what the difference is.
I would think that would be clear to anyone but, given your posts on this thread, I have serious doubts.
17 Q. Okay. So the urethra is no longer intact? 18 A. Correct. 19 Q. And the -- what happens if the urethra is not intact? 20 A. The patient is unable to urinate, and they actually will 21 have back pressure, and potential back pressure into the 22 kidneys, if they're unable to urinate. 23 Q. Okay. What do you mean by that? 24 A. The bladder fills, they get a pressure sensation, as though 25 they have to urinate, but cannot. And that pressure will be 1 transmitted back to the kidneys over time. 2 Q. Okay. And, over time, then, what would happen to the 3 kidneys? 4 A. Anybody that actually was obstructed for that period of 5 time could potentially have some acute renal failure. 6 Q. Okay. And is that a life-threatening problem? 7 A. Yes. 8 Q. What about infection? 9 A. Infection, because you're not draining your bladder system, 10 is there. It's a possibility. But the renal failure, or the 11 back pressure and the discomfort, is going to be the number one 12 things. 13 Q. Okay. And what about bladder rupture? 14 A. Bladder rupture is unusual, to actually see that, because 15 most people are going to present with something as far as pain 16 and discomfort before that. Is it a possibility? It's always 17 a possibility, but it would be very rare.