Why A New And Different Strategy Is Needed To Defend Doctors Against False Charges Of Drug Trafficking ?

Why A New And Different Strategy Is Needed To Defend Doctors Against False Charges Of Drug Trafficking ?

§   Current defense strategies are ineffective (98% success rate for gov.).

§  Current conservative wait and see, counterpunch strategies are helping the government to almost always  win by war of attrition (psychologically and financially).

§  Often there is no opportunity address egregious prosecutorial abuses and violations of due process and right a speedy trial.

§  Government almost always rely on coerced or blackmailed testimony by criminals . However often  fear ,intimidation and war of attrition may lead to plea-bargaining.

§  The criminal standard for malpractice in a drug-related indictment demands clear and compelling evidence of gross reckless disregard of patient care. In most cases this is a major burden for government to convince a jury.

§  Government often falsely relies on an association between reckless care and death of a patient. Often the evidence is weak and unscientific. (Frank Fisher in California was found guilty of seven overdose deaths. They were all found to be false and his conviction was overturned. Alen Salerian lost license in DC but  expert testimony proved his innocence and the charge was not included in the criminal indictment which is soon to be dismissed).

§  If  medical expert testimony is favorable this should be vigorously pursued and the prosecutor must be bombarded by the overwhelming medical evidence without waiting for a trial.

§  Prosecutorial abuses of due process and right to a speedy trial must be recorded to the Department of Justice and the court consistently and repeatedly.