Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Medical experts never testified in Katrina hospital deaths
CNN ^ | 8/26/07 | Drew Griffin and Kathleen Johnston

Posted on 08/26/2007 11:12:24 AM PDT by wagglebee

(CNN) -- A New Orleans grand jury that declined to indict a doctor on charges that she murdered patients in the chaotic days after Hurricane Katrina never heard testimony from five medical experts brought in by the state to analyze the deaths.

All five concluded that as many as nine patients were victims of homicide.

In detailed, written statements, the five specialists -- whose expertise includes forensic medicine, medical ethics and palliative care -- determined that patients at Memorial Medical Center had been deliberately killed with overdoses of drugs after Katrina struck New Orleans in 2005.

The grand jury had been asked to consider second-degree murder charges against a doctor and two nurses in four deaths. But in July, the grand jury decided that no one should be indicted.

A grand jury is charged with determining whether there is sufficient evidence to indict a defendant and pursue a trial. The grand jury's proceedings are held in secret, and grand jurors and officers of the court are typically prohibited from divulging what goes on in grand jury sessions.

In a decision that puzzled the five experts hired by the state, New Orleans District Attorney Eddie Jordan never called them to testify before the grand jury. What remains unclear, because of grand jury secrecy laws, is whether the grand jury even saw the experts' written reports.

"They weren't interested in presenting those facts to the grand jury," said Dr. Cyril Wecht, the former coroner of Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, and a past president of the American Academy of Forensic Scientists.

"The hard scientific facts are those from five leading experts, [the patients died] from massive lethal doses of morphine and Versed. As far as I know the toxicological findings were not presented to the grand jury and certainly not with quantitative analysis."

(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Extended News; News/Current Events; US: Louisiana
KEYWORDS: annapou; bioethics; euthanasia; hurricanekatrina; moralabsolutes; morphine; neworleans; pou; prolife
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 221-235 next last
It is disgusting that these murderers are escaping justice.
1 posted on 08/26/2007 11:12:26 AM PDT by wagglebee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: cgk; Coleus; cpforlife.org; narses; 8mmMauser

Pro-Life Ping


2 posted on 08/26/2007 11:13:04 AM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 230FMJ; 49th; 50mm; 69ConvertibleFirebird; Aleighanne; Alexander Rubin; An American In Dairyland; ..
Moral Absolutes Ping!

Freepmail wagglebee or little jeremiah to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.

FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]


3 posted on 08/26/2007 11:13:25 AM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

I am certain that under deplorable conditions the doctors did everything they could to save as many lives as possible and to ameliorate suffering. I’d not judge them until I walked in their shoes, and I expect the prosecution and gj thought so, too.


4 posted on 08/26/2007 11:16:38 AM PDT by the Real fifi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: the Real fifi

No, some of these doctors deliberately killed people.


5 posted on 08/26/2007 11:18:36 AM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Dr. Wecht’s credibility and credentials are above reproach. If he believes these were homicides than I believe they were. His chief rival for the spotlight,
Dr. Michael Baden, has far less credibility as far as I am concerned and he is showing it in the Phil Spector trial.


6 posted on 08/26/2007 11:28:11 AM PDT by stm (Fred Thompson in 08! Return our country to the era of Reagan Conservatism now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: the Real fifi

I agree with you, but think we’re in the minority here. I’m a pro-lifer as well, but from what I remember reading at the time, it was not possible to move these people and they would have drowned in the environment in which they were in. It sounds as if the doctors had to choose between letting them drown, or giving them the injection. And as horrible as what they did may be, it seems like a more humane death than drowning would have been.


7 posted on 08/26/2007 11:31:04 AM PDT by Joann37
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

“It is disgusting that these murderers are escaping justice.”

They’re not — they’re getting American justice, which just happens to be arbitrary and capricious and not reflective in any way of the textbook definition of “justice.”


8 posted on 08/26/2007 11:31:36 AM PDT by vetsvette (Bring Him Back)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: the Real fifi

I agree with you.


9 posted on 08/26/2007 11:35:01 AM PDT by toldyou
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: the Real fifi
Bunkum.

From all available information, these patients were given drugs knowing that it would likely kill them. The intent as expressed by the hospital administrator was to kill them. Some doctors and nurses refused to do so. Dr. Pou did so gladly. Dr. Pou murdered the patients.
10 posted on 08/26/2007 11:36:38 AM PDT by Iwo Jima ("Close the border. Then we'll talk.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

“No, some of these doctors deliberately killed people.”

Maybeso, maybeso not. The grand jury decided there was no crime. End of story. You or I might have done the same, in their situation. (or might not.) It would depend in large part on what the patients asked for, among other things.

My mother asked me to make sure she did not have to suffer when she was dying of cancer. I promised I would help her if needed, even though I don’t believe euthanasia is right. Fortunately for us both, she did not get so bad as to need to ask. Those folks in the hospital may have asked. And frankly, there is no way to tell who, exactly, gave them large doses of morphine. It could even have been accidental, due to the screwed-up situation and lack of power, sleep, etc.

Pray for the souls of all involved, and let it go. If there is guilt, God will take care of it in his own time.


11 posted on 08/26/2007 11:37:00 AM PDT by Old Student (We have a name for the people who think indiscriminate killing is fine. They're called "The Bad Guys)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Joann37
See my post #10. Conditions were deplorable, but there was ABSOLUTELY no threat of these patients drowning. They could have been moved and would have been shortly, although Dr. Pou may not have known that.

Why were the patients not asked if they wanted a) to wait on a rescue or b) be killed? What would your decision have been?
12 posted on 08/26/2007 11:40:14 AM PDT by Iwo Jima ("Close the border. Then we'll talk.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: vetsvette
If this is the way the justice system is supposed to work, why was there no medical evidence given to the grand jury? The Atty. Gen. based his accusations on medical opinions from multiple experts, but the prosecutor chose not to present any of that evidence to the grand jury? WHY???

Of course, the grand jury brought back a no bill. The evidence was not presented to them which would have proven the charges.

Dr. Pou won't skate so easily in the civil trials.
13 posted on 08/26/2007 11:44:00 AM PDT by Iwo Jima ("Close the border. Then we'll talk.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Iwo Jima

If the conditions are such as you’ve outlined (the patients were not in jeapordy, and they did NOT want the drug adminstered), then of course the doctors should have not administered any such substance. That is not how I remember seeing the story presented at the time, however, but if additional info. has come forward as you suggest, then maybe the doctors (or at least that one) should have been indicted.


14 posted on 08/26/2007 11:48:18 AM PDT by Joann37
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Old Student
No, not "end of story."

The grand jury was not given any of the considerable medical testimony. That evidence will be presented in the civil trials AND hopefully to another grand jury.

This story has only just begun.

As to your mother, would you have killed her if she had not requested it or agreed to it, or if she rejected it? These patients were not asked what their desires were. And there is no evidence that they were suffering to the point that they would want to be put out of their misery.

It was definitely Dr. Pou who gave the lethal injections after the hospital administrator told doctors to do so and other doctors and nurses refused. That's how this all become public -- those doctors and nurses went to the authorities with what they witnessed.
15 posted on 08/26/2007 11:52:25 AM PDT by Iwo Jima ("Close the border. Then we'll talk.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Old Student

There were some vague stories that the hospital was like a bunker for most of a week, no communications, looters struggling to get in, and supplies had run out after the recipients were prioritized according to who was most likely to live. It sounded like hell, and I’m very hesitant to judge people in that environment.


16 posted on 08/26/2007 11:58:42 AM PDT by elfman2 (An army of amateurs doing the media's job.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: NautiNurse; NYer

ping


17 posted on 08/26/2007 11:59:25 AM PDT by AliVeritas (Today's stolen graphics courtesy of: http://arewelumberjacks.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Joann37

You’re arguments and memory are wrong.

The were plenty of floors ABOVE flood level in the hospital.

And even if the patients asked for it, even if killing them was “humane” (and by definition taking an innocent life takes a person’s humanity and therefore CANNOT be humane), the FACT remains that it would still be MURDER.


18 posted on 08/26/2007 11:59:27 AM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
Justice is an ongoing process. Here is an article from just a few days ago discussing the unsealing of the documents used in the Grand Jury proceedings. NOLA article so I'm only posting an excerpt with a link.

Judge delays ruling on Memorial records

Despite assurances from Attorney General Charles Foti's office that his investigation into nine patient deaths at Memorial Medical Center is now officially over, an Orleans Parish judge Monday postponed ruling on whether to unseal documents relating to events at the Uptown hospital after Hurricane Katrina.

In delaying a decision, Criminal District Judge Calvin Johnson said he feared the document release -- sought by Foti -- would unleash secret material meant only for the eyes of the special grand jury, which recently refused to indict a surgeon who had been accused of murder.

Twenty attorneys came to contest the release of records, including those for the indicted surgeon, Dr. Anna Pou, along with those for two nurses also charged, unnamed medical workers and Tenet Health Corp., which owned the hospital at the time.


19 posted on 08/26/2007 12:03:07 PM PDT by deport (>>>--Keep your powder dry--<<< [ Meanwhile:-- Cue Spooky Music--])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Iwo Jima
“The grand jury was not given any of the considerable medical testimony.”

You might want to go back and reread the article. There is no way to tell if the grand jury was or was not given that information. Not even to ask the grand jurors, as it is illegal for them to talk about the case.

I would not have killed my mother if she was not asking for it, as I think I made clear. I would most certainly have done so if she had asked. As for did they or did they not ask, how would you (or I) know if we weren’t there? How would you know that they did not ask the doctors or nurses, or any random passer-by? Some doctors and nurses refused, and told on the one they think did it? Did they testify that they saw her do it? If so, why did they not interfere? Or are they just blaming the doctor who they think was willing to give lethal injections because someone did, so it must have been her?

The whole situation stinks, frankly, but I think it’s a lot more over than you know. Among other things, I don’t believe they can call another grand jury for this. Double-jeapordy, that would be.

20 posted on 08/26/2007 12:03:38 PM PDT by Old Student (We have a name for the people who think indiscriminate killing is fine. They're called "The Bad Guys)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 221-235 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson