Before 1993, I served as a physician. Afterwards, I went back to school and got an MBA and a Master’s degree in Finance. I have successfully tutored students for the SAT, ACT, LSAT, GRE, GMAT, and MCAT. In 1974, I graduated with honors from the UCLA School of Medicine. I went on to residencies at Duke University, the University of California at San Francisco, and Denver General Hospital, eventually specializing in Emergency Medicine and Family Practice.
The news media got a hold of the story, and after one particularly aggressive investigative reporter for a local television station made a decision to air the story and ask other alleged victims to come forward, a handful of people (including even one laughable male patient) called the number given on the television screen with ”me too” stories. What the woman was unaware of was that since early childhood, I had suffered from a medical condition known as Essential Tremor and what she may or may not have perceived as an inappropriate touch was actually an uncontrollable movement disorder of my hands, a neurological condition shared by my mother and one of my sons. (Please see the attached document on Essential Tremor.) My treating neurologist was anxious to testify that he had been prescribing potent medication for the tremor for over 10 years and that he had reviewed my medical records dating back to my teenage years when I was seen by a prominent neurosurgeon in Beverly Hills for the same affliction.
My attorney, Harvey Steinberg (https://www.elance.com/s/a_md/resume/), endorsed the neurologist 10 months prior to trial, but failed to alert the prosecution that the doctor was indeed a neurologist and not just another physician willing to testify about the specifics of how a pelvic examination should be performed. After Mr. Steinberg told the jury in opening statements that my neurologist would testify about my tremor, the judge in the case made a ruling at the behest of the prosecution that since my attorney had been guilty of a discovery violation (although without bad faith intent), my treating neurologist would be disqualified from testifying. He also ruled against forcing the prosecution to have its own neurologist examine me and against allowing me to present copious records of my diagnosis and treatment over a 30+ year span. I was, in fact, forced to testify on my own behalf but limited to testifying that I had treated myself for the condition. I was specifically prohibited from any mention of two decades of legitimate high-level medical therapy from some of the most qualified experts in the medical community. The jury was left wondering about what happened to the neurologist promised to put on the witness stand.
Despite the aforementioned legal handcuffs, I was eventually acquitted of all but one of these felonies. But the jury heard all the cases and reasoned that “where there was smoke there must be fire.” They convicted me only of the original charge since by their reasoning the original “victim” had not come forward as the result of a publicity blitz and therefore must have been telling the truth. The judge in the case, having heard all the evidence, questioned his own legal decision in disqualifying exculpatory evidence on a legal technicality and gave me the minimum sentence (citing mitigating circumstances) allowed under his discretion for the alleged assault. My case was taken to the Colorado Court of Appeals by Jean Dubofsky, an outstanding appeals attorney and former Justice of the Colorado Supreme Court, a lawyer I hold in highest regard. The appeal failed and the Court refused a motion to publish the case. A petition for a Writ of Certiorari was denied by the Colorado Supreme Court. I feel that Ms. Dubofsky, in an attempt to limit the scope of the appeal, may have overlooked significant habeas corpus issues. I served a little over a year in the county jail. When I was released, I faced a new hurdle. How would I get my life back together? I went back to school in 2002, in an attempt to regain my dignity. I became a full time day student at the University of Denver where I graduated with Masters
Degrees in both Finance and Business. I earned a 3.98 GPA and held a teaching assistant ship with the faculty fully aware of my previous history. My mentor at the University went as far as to offer me a teaching position within the Department of Finance at the conclusion of my studies. I have since taught high level medical resuscitation classes for doctors and ancillary medical personnel as well as college admission courses for high school students, and have tutored several home-schooled students in chemistry, physics, and math. I can add that since the time of the accusations, no allegations of sexual improprieties have been made against me and that at no time have I ever been accused of being a predator or a pedophile; my record has been clean. In spite of all of this, I remain on the Sexual Offender Registry (a registry created ex post factor while I was incarcerated) and have a great deal of trouble securing work. I am defended and supported by a number of friends and students as well as by various members of the medical and legal communities (see attached letters to the Board of Medical Examiners) who feel that a travesty of justice has occurred and that if I choose to capitulate to social pressure, a significant talent will have gone to waste. I would like to restate and reiterate my argument from a legal point of view: Exculpatory evidence is evidence favorable to the defendant in a criminal trial that exonerates or tends to exonerate the defendant of guilt. It is the opposite of exculpatory evidence, which tends to prove guilt. In Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 87, 87 (1963), the Supreme Court held that “the suppression by the prosecution of evidence favorable to an accused . . . violates due process [under the Fourteenth and Fifth Amendments] where the evidence is material relevant either to guilt or to punishment, irrespective of the good faith or bad faith of the prosecution.” Per the Brady v. Maryland decision, prosecutors have a duty to disclose exculpatory evidence even if not requested to do so. While the prosecution is not required to search for exculpatory evidence and must disclose only the evidence in its possession, custody, or control, the prosecution's duty is to disclose all information known to any member of its team, e.g., police, investigators, crime labs, et cetera. In Brady v. Maryland, the U.S. Supreme Court held that such a requirement follows from constitutional due process and is consistent with the prosecutor's duty to seek justice. In my case, the prosecution was privy to and asked for possession of my medical records. Those records dated back to 1963.
After a full review of those records (which discussed my essential tremor in depth), the prosecution moved the court to exclude the exculpatory material and proceeded to tell the jury that my tremor was a figment of my imagination. The prosecution motion contradicted the spirit of Brady v. Maryland dealing with the prosecutor's duty to seek justice. The prosecution also moved to disqualify my treating physician from testifying about the exculpatory evidence, despite the fact that the physician had been endorsed and identified to the prosecution 10 months prior to trial. The prosecution argued that it had called my physician’s office (which, by the way, always answered the phone with the greeting “Neurological Associates”) to elucidate the nature of his testimony, but that when the physician failed to come to the phone after several minutes, it abandoned its attempt to speak to him. The prosecution disingenuously stated that it assumed that the physician was a gynecologist recruited by the defense to testify about the specifics of a pelvic exam. The court ruled in favor of the prosecution on both motions. The court also ruled that I could testify as my own expert witness about my tremor in lieu of the testimony of my treating physician (thus challenging me to “voluntarily” give up my Fifth Amendment right not to testify), but that I was not only precluded from discussing my medical records, but specifically prohibited from telling the jury that any physician had ever examined, diagnosed, or treated my essential tremor. The court never explained why, despite its ruling that there was no bad faith intent on the part of the defense (to ambush the prosecution), it would not allow a very short continuance, to give the prosecution a chance to have me independently evaluated by a neurologist of its own choice. Such a continuance would have been a far less extreme remedy, allowing me to preserve my 6th Amendment Compulsory Process Clause right to call any and all witnesses in possession of exculpatory evidence. The 5th Amendment claim was never brought forth on
appeal and appears to have little chance of prevailing at this time because of Federal and State statutes of limitations regarding post-conviction relief. I hope that the failure of any lawyer to alert me to the 5th Amendment argument prior to 2014 might be persuasive at the time that I submit a pardon petition to the Governor. 2.
The following is a Mayo Clinic description of the tremor from which I suffer: see: http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/essential-tremor/home/ovc-20177826
Essential Tremor Definition By Mayo Clinic staff Essential tremor is a disorder of the nervous system that causes a rhythmic shaking. Essential tremor can affect almost any part of the body, but the trembling occurs most often in the hands — especially when the patient tries to do simple tasks, such as drinking from a glass, tying shoelaces, writing, or shaving. Essential tremor also may affect the head, voice, arms, or legs. Although usually not a dangerous condition, essential tremor worsens over time and can be severe in some people. It isn't caused by other diseases, although it's sometimes confused with Parkinson's disease. Essential tremor can occur at any age but is most common in older adults. Symptoms By Mayo Clinic staff Essential tremor signs and symptoms:
- · Begin gradually even at an early age
- Worsen with movement
- · Usually occur in the hands first, affecting one hand or both hands
- · Can include a "yes-yes" or "no-no" motion of the head
· Are aggravated by emotional stress, fatigue, caffeine or extremes of temperature Essential tremor vs. Parkinson's disease many people associate tremors with Parkinson's disease, but the two conditions differ in key ways:
· When tremors occur. Essential tremor of the hands typically occurs when the patient uses his hands. Tremors from Parkinson's are most prominent when the hands are at the sides or resting in the lap.0
· Associated conditions. Essential tremor doesn't cause other health problems, whereas Parkinson's is associated with a stooped posture, slow movement and a shuffling gait. However, people with essential tremor may sometimes develop other neurological signs and symptoms — such as an unsteady gait (ataxia).
· Parts of body affected. Essential tremor can involve the hands, head, voice and legs. Tremors from Parkinson's typically affect the hands but not the head or voice. Causes By Mayo Clinic staff About half of essential tremor cases appear to occur because of a genetic mutation. This is referred to as familial tremor. What causes essential tremor in people without a known genetic mutation isn't clear. There are two known risk factors for essential tremor:
· Genetic mutation. The inherited variety of essential tremor is an autosomal dominant disorder, which means that a defective gene from just one parent is needed to pass on the condition. If the patient has a parent with a genetic mutation for essential tremor, he or she has a 50 percent chance of developing the disorder himself or herself.
· Age. Essential tremor is more common in middle age and older. Complications By Mayo Clinic staff Essential tremor is not life-threatening, but symptoms often worsen over time. If the tremors become severe, the patient may find it difficult to: • Hold a cup or glass without spilling
· Eat normally
· Put on makeup or shave
· Talk, if the voice box or tongue is affected
· Write — handwriting may become increasingly large, shaky and illegible