# Not Guilty of inappropriately touching patient



## medic417 (Jan 22, 2012)

Wonder if he can get his certification and reputation back?

http://www.ems1.com/ems-news/122296...t-guilty-of-inappropriately-touching-patient/

"BRENTWOOD, N.H. — A jury found a former emergency medical technician not guilty on all charges that he inappropriately touched an 18-year-old patient while she was being driven to Hampstead Hospital."


----------



## Sasha (Jan 22, 2012)

Of course not. That is why I am all for those accused or sexual assault or child abuse to have their identities protected until they are found guilty. 

He is more of a victim then his formerly alleged victim.


----------



## Veneficus (Jan 22, 2012)

His certification should not be difficult to get back. 

At least in states I have worked in it wouldn't be.

Reputation on the other hand, an entirely different matter.

It is unfortunate, but he will probably have to move rather far away from his current residence even if he doesn't want to work in EMS again.

The bright side is, there are so many people looking for EMS jobs, in a week nobody outside his area of the world will even remember the name.

Similar to what Sasha said, I think anyone accused of a crime should have their identity withheld until convicted. 

Not only does it wrongfully destroy a reputation to even be accused or arrested, it seems to completely destroy any presumption of innocence.


----------



## Trauma_Junkie (Jan 22, 2012)

Certification back? Maybe.
Reputation back? No way. 

It makes one wonder if he would turn around and push a defamation lawsuit. I know it wouldn't really do much for reputation but for a career ending allegation, it'd be something to look into.


----------



## Veneficus (Jan 22, 2012)

Trauma_Junkie said:


> Certification back? Maybe.
> Reputation back? No way.
> 
> It makes one wonder if he would turn around and push a defamation lawsuit. I know it wouldn't really do much for reputation but for a career ending allegation, it'd be something to look into.



and collect what from who?


----------



## Trauma_Junkie (Jan 22, 2012)

Veneficus said:


> and collect what from who?


Point taken. I will quote from your previous post as I concur with your statement.


Veneficus said:


> It is unfortunate, but he will probably have to move rather far away from his current residence even if he doesn't want to work in EMS again.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jan 22, 2012)

I don't think we've heard the last of this, though.  This part concerns me in more ways than one.


> Reid argued that the woman's testimony about what happened remained consistent and supported by the ambulance driver with Donovan that night.
> 
> The driver described Donovan's hands "moving up and down and around the patient's body," Reid said during closing arguments.


----------



## Aidey (Jan 22, 2012)

Up and down and around the pts body...wow sounds like an assessment to me, which happens to be what the girl described. Now, there is no way to tell if the femoral pulses legitimately needed to be assessed, at least that is a legitimate medical procedure. It isn't like he gave her a purple nurple like the guy did in the Christmas day case. 

I know how much you can see from the driver's seat depends on the type/build of the ambulance and the position of the gurney head. If the gurney head it up at all in the ambs about all I can see is the person moving around, and not exactly where their hands are. If someone asked me what I saw it would amount to "Well, I couldn't see their hands, but they were moving around on the bench seat and I could see their arms reaching towards different areas of the body."


----------



## Veneficus (Jan 22, 2012)

Aidey said:


> Up and down and around the pts body



I thought that was the prosecutor's summary, not the actual testimony by the driver. 

Even if the driver did say those words, which was probably like a dream come true for the prosecutor, it may not have been made as an accusatory statement nor implied inappropriate actions.

"Was the accused moving his hands up and down and around the body of the patient?"

"Yes" is still a true statement. 

There is no mention of whether or not it was improper.




Aidey said:


> .wow sounds like an assessment to me, which happens to be what the girl described.



Me too. In fact, it could probably be used to describe every physical exam I have ever done.

I think a lot of the accusation may be subjective. Most people are nervous over a physical exam, particularly more "intrusive" parts of the exam. 

It is also situationally and culturally variable.

Imagine your first physical exam by a healthcare provider without a parent. Perhaps you were a bit nervous, maybe outright scared.

So you are telling your mom you didn't like certain parts after the fact. 

Somebody  "overhears" this, decides this hearsay sounds inappropriate for the circumstances. (let's just accuse a nurse  ) then comes in and tells you how it was inappropriate and that you should contac t the authorities. 

Now you believe it was inappropriate because somebody who would know or you trusted told you it was.

As such, the legal system is engaged. The LEO investigates, a prosecutor decides there is enough to proceed. Eventually there is a plea or a trial.

Maybe you just don't like the person or reason you are having the exam so to exact some revenge you level an accusation?

Maybe you do so hoping to not have to pay a bill for service?

Even this clip leaves many unanswered questions.

Just to be the devil's advocate, who is to say he didn't do something wrong and just told a good story in court or left insufficent evidence?


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jan 22, 2012)

Veneficus said:


> Just to be the devil's advocate, who is to say he didn't do something wrong and just told a good story in court or left insufficent evidence?



The jury.


----------



## Veneficus (Jan 22, 2012)

ffemt8978 said:


> The jury.



That doesn't mean the defendant wasn't guilty, only he was not found guilty. 

I am sure there are more than a few famous cases of that.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jan 22, 2012)

Veneficus said:


> That doesn't mean the defendant wasn't guilty, only he was not found guilty.
> 
> I am sure there are more than a few famous cases of that.



I realize that, but one of the basic tenants of our judicial system is that the jury is the final say in what happened.


----------



## Veneficus (Jan 22, 2012)

ffemt8978 said:


> I realize that, but one of the basic tenants of our judicial system is that the jury is the final say in what happened.



very true,

But it also supposedly is a jury of your peers.

How often does that really happen?


----------



## Shishkabob (Jan 22, 2012)

Time to sue her...


----------



## medic417 (Jan 22, 2012)

Driver driving can only get small glances so any statement from them would be meaningless.  As others have noted basically all they could truthfully say is that they noticed you near the patient.  

No point in suing as patient already is considered mental so hard to find anyone to rule against her in a law suit.  I would not be shocked if she sues the medic though.


----------



## Sasha (Jan 22, 2012)

I would even argue her name needs to be released so providers who care for her in the future know to be extra cautious as she has a hx of fabricating assaults for attention.


----------



## Handsome Robb (Jan 22, 2012)

Sasha said:


> I would even argue her name needs to be released so providers who care for her in the future know to be extra cautious as she has a hx of fabricating assaults for attention.



I agree with the theory but in reality it doesn't seem like it would work. Think about how many people we see on a daily basis, the names all blend together after a while.


----------



## Sasha (Jan 22, 2012)

Heck even removing a Tele can be perceived as inappropriate. I try to disconnect the leads through the gown to preserve the patients modesty. That sometimes means running my hand over their torso to locate them.


----------



## jjesusfreak01 (Jan 22, 2012)

Sasha said:


> Heck even removing a Tele can be perceived as inappropriate. I try to disconnect the leads through the gown to preserve the patients modesty. That sometimes means running my hand over their torso to locate them.



I've seen some medics who just grab the bundle of leads and pull (when appropriate with the pts condition). They usually just all pop off without a problem.


----------



## bstone (Jan 24, 2012)

He needs to ask for a legal declaration of innocence, something like this: http://standdown.typepad.com/weblog...-files-suit-for-declaration-of-innocence.html

It's not enough to be found not-guilty in this case.


----------



## EMSLaw (Jan 24, 2012)

bstone said:


> He needs to ask for a legal declaration of innocence, something like this: http://standdown.typepad.com/weblog...-files-suit-for-declaration-of-innocence.html
> 
> It's not enough to be found not-guilty in this case.



For the most part, a finding of not guilty is the best you're going to get.  The only question the criminal court answers is whether the prosecution met their burden of proof to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was guilty of the charged crime.  

What you posted is in the case of someone who has been convicted of the crime, and then subsequently released and is now seeking compensation from the state for wrongful incarceration.  That's a different case - he wants the court to say that he was released because he was innocent, not because of what is commonly called a 'technicality' (and what lawyers sometimes call 'the Constitution' or 'the law' ).  

A case for malicious prosecution will be very difficult to make out here, probably.  First, remember that prosecutors and judges generally have absolute immunity for their official actions.  Also, anything said in court is absolutely immune from most causes of action.  But, let's say that you did want to bring a malicious prosecution claim...

Malicious prosecution requires (speaking generally, different states have different requirements, of course) that the case be brought without probable cause, that it be terminated in favor of the maliciously prosecuted party, and that there be intentional and malicious intent behind bringing the suit (scienter).  Here, there almost undoubtedly was probable cause.  There was a witness who said that the abuse happened, and the EMT's partner corroborated her testimony.  Unless she recants, and says she made it all up, the case isn't going to go far.  

Also, remember that litigation, especially criminal litigation, is a very difficult and wrenching matter for most people.  It's entirely likely the now-exonerated defendant won't want to go anywhere near a courtroom anytime soon.  And even if he did, it seems like a long-shot case.  Knowing only what I know here, I would tell him to walk away.  There would have to be something more to the story to make me think he had a cause of action.  

My opinion and two bucks will get you on the bus, but there you go, for what it's worth.


----------



## mycrofft (Jan 24, 2012)

$...........


----------



## medic417 (Jan 25, 2012)

I still imagine the only one that will collect money is the girl that falsely accused him.  It doesn't take much evidence to win a civil suit.  Of course by now he probably has nothing left, so even if she wins it would be worthless unless he wins the lottery later in life.


----------



## Veneficus (Jan 25, 2012)

medic417 said:


> I still imagine the only one that will collect money is the girl that falsely accused him.  It doesn't take much evidence to win a civil suit.  Of course by now he probably has nothing left, so even if she wins it would be worthless unless he wins the lottery later in life.



As I understand, most lawyers in a civil suit asking for damages generally want a percentage of the win.

Being rather clever creatures  , they may precalculate the value of time spent preparing and executing the case with what they are likely to collect. 

If resources>recourse, then generally I would say they must really have an axe to grind in order to spend the time and effort.

Probably best to sue the company, they have insurance, money and might even be willing to settle if it costs less than a court battle.

Suing somebody who has little/nothing is just a paper victory.

As one of my lawyer friends likes to say: "In law, you say "thank you" with money. You say "I'm sorry" with a lot of money."


----------



## downunderwunda (Jan 26, 2012)

Define innapropriate. 

You perform a 12 lead ECG on a woman with large breasts & have to move one to correctly place the dots. Can that be misrepresented? 

Or ladies you are called to a 21 year old male whom you suspect may have meningococcal septicemia & you need to look for a rash, per your protocol, this includes ALL areas. Could this be misinterpreted?

There is no black & white in ems, just many shades of grey. The fact this went this far says we don't know the whole truth. We never will. I believe not only should names but all details be surpressed. Why? Because 99.999999900% of those in EMS would not even consider what is being discussed.


----------



## medic417 (Jan 27, 2012)

Absolutely correct.  Anyone could claim a proper assessment was in fact improper touching.  That is a reason to make sure you are known for always doing a thorough proper assessment on everyone not just the hot ones.


----------

