Thursday, March 20, 2008
Monday, March 17, 2008
Here. I suggest that any mention of these regulations in any claim, any expert testimony, or any factual testimony be followed by a countersuit against the garbage peddling utterer, and by a cross claim against any regulatory entity that authors any like it. Such entities have an affirmative duty to do no harm, and to validate their regulations before enacting garbage guidelines.
Saturday, March 15, 2008
1) The intent was to help, not to hurt. This case is missing a mens rea. The act, handing someone a gun, without knowledge of an imminent crime, is hardly an actus reus.
2) If the intent had helped and not hurt, there would be no criminal case. The intent and act was that of the suicider, not that of the defendant. The defendant was scapegoated for a negative outcome.
3) The defendant was subject to outcome bias, a violation of his procedural due process right to a fair hearing.
4) At worst, the defendant could be sued for trying to rescue the deceased, but failing to do so adequately. I would defend that tort with the idea of no duty by a bystander. The act of an impulsive person cannot be foreseen, per se, not even by the person, herself.
Friday, March 14, 2008
Sunday, March 9, 2008
"Manke’s psychiatric expert witness, Dr. Logan, testified:
I believe if Dr. Fernandez had done an adequate assessment and follow-up assessment within the standard of care, that he would have recognized this [Crystal's potential for suicide] and would have; number one, recommended she not come to Children's Square; or number two, if they decided to take a risk of trying to treat somebody like this--and it would have been a risk given their staffing and orientation--that they make staff very much aware of her potential.
Dr. Logan also testified:
This is a girl that is pretty sick, and I think all this GAF score is really saying, that Dr. Fernandez recognized that, the real question is, given that he recognized this, did he really do enough to follow up and make sure that she got the treatment she needed to avoid going even lower and eventually killing herself, and my opinion is he did not.
We find Dr. Logan's testimony was sufficient to submit the issue of proximate cause to the jury. His testimony cites a causal relationship between Dr. Fernandez's breach of the applicable standard of care and Crystal’s death by suicide. Because the district court did not err in submitting this issue, we affirm its ruling denying Dr. Fernandez's motions for directed verdict and judgment notwithstanding the verdict."
Saturday, March 8, 2008
Thursday, March 6, 2008
Sunday, March 2, 2008
Suiciding is transmitted within families, independent of depression, as a separate risk. It may represent imitation. It may represent a genetic predisposition. Once a genetic locus can be located, suicide malpractice is really payment for a pre-existing condition. See the crumbling skull defense, that has yet to be used, as far as I know.
Saturday, March 1, 2008
And another example, here.