Abortion Doctor Who Works a Practice in Bellevue

[Someone]

http://www.huffingto..._n_3139986.html

http://www.foxnews.c...gosnell-tossed/

http://www.nytimes.c...snell.html?_r=0

http://www.mediaite....kermit-gosnell/

 

Wow that took all of three seconds.....man google is really tough. He is charged with 3rd degree murder of Karnamaya Mongar, for medication overdose death. The 4 remaining 1st degree murder charges are for babies he is accused of killing post failed abortion by using scissors to cut the spinal cord.

 

And word of advice to help you out on your husker board future, argue the post and not the poster.

http://www.huffingto..._n_3139986.html

http://www.foxnews.c...gosnell-tossed/

http://www.nytimes.c...snell.html?_r=0

http://www.mediaite....kermit-gosnell/

 

Wow that took all of three seconds.....man google is really tough. He is charged with 3rd degree murder of Karnamaya Mongar, for medication overdose death. The 4 remaining 1st degree murder charges are for babies he is accused of killing post failed abortion by using scissors to cut the spinal cord.

 

And word of advice to help you out on your husker board future, argue the post and not the poster.

I believe this thread is only discussing the Carhart case and not the Gosnell case.

You are correct, got my sh*t mixed up....too many bad abortion doctors running around.

And BOOM goes the dynamite!

 

I think the post should read 'TWO bad abortion doctors'.

 

This is goes to show, sometimes there is a rush to judgement and in that rush, the facts get overlooked.

[carlfense]

http://www.huffingto..._n_3139986.html

http://www.foxnews.c...gosnell-tossed/

http://www.nytimes.c...snell.html?_r=0

http://www.mediaite....kermit-gosnell/

 

Wow that took all of three seconds.....man google is really tough. He is charged with 3rd degree murder of Karnamaya Mongar, for medication overdose death. The 4 remaining 1st degree murder charges are for babies he is accused of killing post failed abortion by using scissors to cut the spinal cord.

 

And word of advice to help you out on your husker board future, argue the post and not the poster.

I believe this thread is only discussing the Carhart case and not the Gosnell case.

[Ziggy]

Whatever floats your boat someone.

 

Anyways all I am saying is just because an ME rules it a death by natural cause, or a accidental death, does not mean the Doctor is going to get off scot-free of all legal troubles. If a patient of a doctor dies while under their medical care they are going to face the possibility of litigation. If pressed they can be charged with criminal negligence, have their license revoked, or various other charges/punishments leveled against them for falling to do their sworn duties.

[carlfense]

Anyways all I am saying is just because an ME rules it a death by natural cause, or a accidental death, does not mean the Doctor is going to get off scot-free of all legal troubles. If a patient of a doctor dies while under their medical care they are going to face the possibility of litigation. If pressed they can be charged with criminal negligence, have their license revoked, or various other charges/punishments leveled against them for falling to do their sworn duties.

If pressed? What?

 

Let's wait and see. I'm guessing from your described possibilities that you don't have much experience with this sort of thing . . .

[Ziggy]

Anyways all I am saying is just because an ME rules it a death by natural cause, or a accidental death, does not mean the Doctor is going to get off scot-free of all legal troubles. If a patient of a doctor dies while under their medical care they are going to face the possibility of litigation. If pressed they can be charged with criminal negligence, have their license revoked, or various other charges/punishments leveled against them for falling to do their sworn duties.

If pressed? What?

 

Let's wait and see. I'm guessing from your described possibilities that you don't have much experience with this sort of thing . . .

[Someone]

Anyways all I am saying is just because an ME rules it a death by natural cause, or a accidental death, does not mean the Doctor is going to get off scot-free of all legal troubles. If a patient of a doctor dies while under their medical care they are going to face the possibility of litigation. If pressed they can be charged with criminal negligence, have their license revoked, or various other charges/punishments leveled against them for falling to do their sworn duties.

If pressed? What?

 

Let's wait and see. I'm guessing from your described possibilities that you don't have much experience with this sort of thing . . .

Anyone can sue just about anyobdy for just about anything, I guess. None of that seems to have occured yet in this situation.

 

(Not every rabbit can balance a pizza on it's head.)

 

I hope that if the Doctor failed to do any of his sworn duties, someone will press him so he can be charged with whatever crime he committed.

 

On the other hand, if such sworn duty failures are not found (and so far, we have a Medical Examiner and the dead woman's family who haven't seen the need to come forward and suggest a crime occured) I hope the family of the desisted are afforded a modicum of respect.

 

I think they deserve that.

[carlfense]

Anyone can sue just about anyobdy for just about anything, I guess.

The important part is paying attention to who is winning those lawsuits.

[StPaulHusker]

Anyone can sue just about anyobdy for just about anything, I guess.

The important part is paying attention to who is winning those lawsuits.

The problem is even if you win, you lose because you have to pay for your defense. Isn't in Europe somewhere that if you sue and lose, you are responsible for the defendants bills?

[carlfense]

The problem is even if you win, you lose because you have to pay for your defense.

In this sort of case it's actually paid for by your malpractice insurance. The deterrent is that the plaintiff also has to pay for their case if they lose.

[StPaulHusker]

The problem is even if you win, you lose because you have to pay for your defense.

In this sort of case it's actually paid for by your malpractice insurance. The deterrent is that the plaintiff also has to pay for their case if they lose.

Yeah, I know. I was speaking more in generalities. More on the frivolous lawsuit side of things.

[sd'sker]

The problem is even if you win, you lose because you have to pay for your defense.

In this sort of case it's actually paid for by your malpractice insurance. The deterrent is that the plaintiff also has to pay for their case if they lose.

Yeah, I know. I was speaking more in generalities. More on the frivolous lawsuit side of things.

i know what you mean. someone will settle rather than pay to defend it because settling is so much cheaper than even defending yourself against a claim and winning.

 

to me, that is what 'the social network' was all about. those twins completely extorted zuckerberg.

[carlfense]

The problem is even if you win, you lose because you have to pay for your defense.

In this sort of case it's actually paid for by your malpractice insurance. The deterrent is that the plaintiff also has to pay for their case if they lose.

Yeah, I know. I was speaking more in generalities. More on the frivolous lawsuit side of things.

i know what you mean. someone will settle rather than pay to defend it because settling is so much cheaper than even defending yourself against a claim and winning.

Sometimes . . . unfortunately I can't think of a better system to screen out frivolous lawsuits than the court system.