Skip to main content

View Diary: Medical Error, Liability, and Murtha (322 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I did read it (0+ / 0-)
    1. You are reiterating that doctors are on a plane above layman and not their peers (equals).
    1. Yes, I only heard what the lawyers, including the plaintiff's lawyer, allowed me to hear.  Interestingly, when the defendant's lawyer stated to refer to possible old injuries, the other side objected and the judge stopped him and told us to disregard. (Quick, stop thinking about elephants!)
    •  As an aside (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Anthony Segredo

      I no longer give expert testimony in jury trials.  it was too distasteful.
      The final straw was when the judge, the plaintif lawyer and the defendent lawyer agreed amongst themselves to lie to the jury-
      The plaintiff, while being badgered by the defendents lawyer, blurted out ," I wouldn't be here if it weren't for the doctor, you and the insurance company".  She had never been told that it was verbotin to mention that the doc might have malpractice insurance.  So, to avoid a mistrial, all three jurists agreed to have the judge lie to the jury and tell them that the doctor had no malpractice insurance. ( not simply to disregard the issue).  They all agreed that it was perfectly ok for the court to lie to the jury!

      When I asked one of the lawyers why this was ok, he said, "Don't worry.  They won't believe the judge!"
      If I was on the jury, I would have believed the judge.   I won't now.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site