|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|||
|
||||
|
||||
Re: NPR ... Food For ThoughtFrom: Dean Huffman . (dean@thehuffpeople.net)Wed Nov 16 20:24:25 2005
.. Clearly you have a point. If I were to vote on the issue, I would probably vote against it (I think), depending upon the wording. In fact, in the 1800's the US Supreme Court found an exemption from liability. (Sorry, I do not know the case or the details). On the other hand, I think that there IS a place for compensation for victims and punishment of judges and/or prosecutors. If you have never seen it, you need to rent the documentary "The Thin Blue Line". It is about a murder conviction in the killing of a police officer in Dallas, Texas, with the death penality, in a case which the prosecutors clearly knew that the defendant was guiltless. The person who killed the police officer (and the prosecutors clearly knew that he killed the police officer) was under age and therefore could not get the death penality. And since the public "wanted blood", they went after someone who was innocent. It is a documentary that I believe everybody should see. Or the case in one of Chicago's "collar counties" where a death penality was obtained against someone whom was clearly known not to be guilty. At least in this case, the prosecutors went on trail themselves (but were found to be not guilty). In Illinois, more than half of the people on death row were later found to be innocent. Some point out that this shows that "the system works". Rather than considering that a vindication for "the system", I wonder how many more have been executed wrongly. If somebody was wrongly convicted and then later shown to be innocent, the prosecutors will often fight tooth and nail to uphold the conviction. Shouldn't they get some compensation for the time spent wrongly in proson? Even if it was an "honest mistake". And what about those who clearly lie. A few years ago there was a lab technician in Chicago who was found to have lied in hundreds of cases concerning DNA and other evidence. And what about those who are given "inadequate representation" in court. OJ and Michael Jackson get pretty good representation (I believe both should have been found guilty), but if they were of ordinary means, or less, they clearly would have been convicted. Maybe our system is the best there is (or, stated another way, the worst except for all the others), but it certainly could be improved. The arguement that judges perform a job that is so important that they should be free of liability could be made for physicians, too. It just isn't. Dean Huffman Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 18:15:42 -0600 From: DoctorJoe@aol.com Subject: Re: NPR ... Food For Thought
> ----- End forwarded message -----
|
|
Return to
|
Mail a New Message to the Forum: ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net Forum Administrator: geffrey.klein@obgyn.net Report Technical Problems: webmaster@obgyn.net Last Updated: Thu Oct 2 04:50:43 2008 |
The American Medical Association is no longer designating CME hours for AMA Category II CME credit. However, physicians themselves may self designate learning activities as Category II CME credit hours if they feel it is of sufficient educational merit and meets the formal definitions of continuing medical education. OBGYN.net believes these interaction in this forum meets these criteria. For further information see the AMA web site.