Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
Posted on 02/03/2026 5:05:45 PM PST by Drew68
An appeals court overturned the conviction of a disgraced former UCLA gynecologist serving 11 years in prison for sexually abusing patients, after determining the trial judge failed to disclose that jurors had concerns that one of their own barely spoke English.
James Heaps, 69, will be retried on the charges involving the two patients he was convicted of abusing in 2022, a three-judge panel of the California 2nd District Court of Appeal ordered on Monday, the Los Angeles Times reported.
John Manly, who represented more than 200 former Heaps patients in a lawsuit that resulted in a $243.6 million settlement, said the decision to toss the conviction is “an indictment of California’s criminal justice system which allows criminals to threaten public safety and prey upon the most vulnerable.’’
“These brave survivors suffered through a four-year ordeal of prosecution and trial resulting in an 11-year prison sentence for this monster. Now they are being told that they must start over. And why?” the attorney raged.
“Because California has produced laws, policies and some prosecutors and judges who defend the rights of criminals and throw victims to the wolves.”
During the jury deliberations at the end of the two-month trial, LA County Superior Court Judge Michael Carter received a note from the foreperson that said there was a “collective concern” that juror No. 15 “did not speak English sufficiently to deliberate and had already made up his mind,” the panel ruled.
Juror No. 15 was originally assigned as an alternate, but replaced juror No. 8. The judge received the note just an hour later.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
|
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
I suppose his lawyer did not challenge the juror in voir dire. He was probably thinking, yes, if we let this guy on the jury we have good grounds for appeal.
Crackifornia.
Give him another trial.
Then triple the sentence.
L
I suppose his lawyer did not challenge the juror in voir dire.
Of course he didn’t.
Somehow I missed that story. I'm sure that's not because the media ignored it.
Neuter him before he goes to prison and the other inmates will take care of the rest.
You sir, are a bigot.
/sarc
If you want biodiversity, then each juror must read d9mething in english and answer questions more than yes no if a fair trial is ever possible.....by anti-whites in DC for a J6 defendant, lol
Aren’t the lawyers limited in the number of prospective jurors they can deny?
Sounds like the next Chief of Health & Human Services under the next democRAT Administration
How does a non English speaker get in the jury pool in the first place? Highly likely they are also a non-citizen because they can’t pass the test if they can’t speak English.
Why are non-citizen in the jury pool.
Furthermore, don't jury pools come from the voter registries?
Hmm...
I kinda think we owe him a fair trial first. A fair trial in front of a jury of his peers.
Not a jury of booga booga people ululating in some third world gurgle.
That’s old thinking. Today they just need to use their feelings and sense the “vibe”.
(wonder how this didn’t come up in jury selection?)
I thought they were chosen from the voter rolls
Plus did his attorney challenge the juror
The hell of it is, the jury foreperson told the judge, and the judge not only did not remove the juror, he did not tell the defense attorney about the foreperson’s concerns.
The cancer doctor’s mega-problems started from a single patient’s negative Yelp review that he touched her boob. Because she was given anonymity and millions of dollars, 500 anonymous women quickly followed suit and drained $700 million from taxpayer coffers. None of these 500 women had to face public scrutiny. It’s gotten to the point that men cannot associate with women, or likely Demonrats in general, although if that strategy is detected, that can be used to destroy a good man as well. If a man is forced to associate, he should wear a bodycam and have a third person present at all times, but even doing that is a legal mine field. In summary: never choose to allow a black cat, or a western woman, to cross your path.
Wow.
And for this he gets 11 years in prison, courtesy of a "jury of his peers" who can't even speak freakin' English.
I'm so, so tired of this BS.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.