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 ...
Your attempt at humor escapes me.
Louisiana law is in many ways different from the rest of the country. However, there is a hearsay exemption for statements against one's own interests. Also, I believe hearsay is permissible in a grand jury proceeding (there is nobody to object to it).
A court can not seal hard evidence of a crime. A court can not seal the mouth of a witness to a crime, which in this case is the con doc that refuses to deal in facts.
And like his father did in Rodney King.
Yes, that’s it, WB. Thanks!
15K old folks in nursing homes died in France the summer of their big heat wave...imagine the hell of an unairconditioned hospital ward, no running water, no light...wonder if they knocked the windows out to get a little air.
Yes, I have a VERY big gripe with the prosecutor and his legal tactics. Not so much with the judge who does not make these decisions.
You ain't just whistlin' Dixie.
Let's just say, then, that hearsay shouldn't convict someone of murder.
Also, people often discuss things that they really have no intention of doing, particularly under conditions of duress. So I don't find "discussions" particularly convincing as evidence.
Everyday, there are terrible crimes of black humor being committed in the hallways of our hospitals! The shame of it, Corporal Klinger.
There are experts and there are experts. You can probably get as many as you wish to testify on either side. I’m sure the state would only bring in ‘experts’ who would strengthen the state’s case.
I’ve only briefly followed this story. Question -— How many patients received morphine? And how many of those died? All?
On the basis of the 8mg dose, failure of any of the whining parties to give evidence that lethal does were administered, and the fact that the one doc fled the scene. IMO, his accusaitons are simply an attempt at obfuscation to cover for and excuse his desertion.
The discussion may have involved discussions of appropriate dose, and/or treatment, but it was not the intent of anyone to cause death. I think these were terminal patients and believe the docs intent was to comfort them, not to kill them.
See Luke 10:30-37.
Prof that prosecutors only get the indictments they want.
It must be difficult for the culture of death to weigh their options.
The have two basic choices in any case:
1. The dead person wanted to be killed and/or it was the "humane" thing to do. (With this option, they cannot seem to accept that this is still illegal.)
or
2. There was no intent to kill the person. (They really hate this option because it totally contradicts their premise that euthanasia is ALWAYS "humane.")
No. That is the dose that indicates what they all probably recieved. The lawyer gave the dose that was given to his ma. Are you going to tell me doc Pau noted the old lady's kid was a lawyer, so she got singled out for a special dose?
"As far as I can tell, everyone admits that lethal doses were given, even Dr. Pou."
She absolutely denies giving a lethal dose, and so do the others involved.
"The account of the "doctor who fled the scene" is supported by other staff who were there and to my knowledge has never been disputed."
The account of the doc that deserted has been vigorously disputed by all those he slandered. As I said, there may have been a discussion regarding treatment, but no one advocated killing the patients.
"You Pou apologists need to get their stories straight."
Ridiculous. You've provided no concrete evidence, such as the results of a tox report that shows the presence of a lethal dose of meds. You're following the lead of a deserter and "experts" that have repeatedly and still fail to provide any evidence whatsoever that a crime was committed.
Nonsense. You left out the doc's stated intent, whwich was to sedate them through the ordeal. The 8mg morphine dose + versed is consistant with that.
No, you are just flat wrong on all accounts.
NO! That is very clearly covered under option 2.
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.