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
