Wednesday, June 18, 2025
ISSN 2765-8767
  • Survey
  • Podcast
  • Write for Us
  • My Account
  • Log In
Daily Remedy
  • Home
  • Articles
  • Podcasts
    Navigating the Medical Licensing Maze

    The Fight Against Healthcare Fraud: Dr. Rafai’s Story

    April 8, 2025
    Navigating the Medical Licensing Maze

    Navigating the Medical Licensing Maze

    April 4, 2025
    The Alarming Truth About Health Insurance Denials

    The Alarming Truth About Health Insurance Denials

    February 3, 2025
    Telehealth in Turmoil

    The Importance of NIH Grants

    January 31, 2025
    The New Era of Patient Empowerment

    The New Era of Patient Empowerment

    January 29, 2025
    Physicians: Write Thy Briefs

    Physicians: Write thy amicus briefs!

    January 26, 2025
  • Surveys

    Surveys

    Perception vs. Comprehension: Public Understanding of the 2025 MAHA Report

    Perception vs. Comprehension: Public Understanding of the 2025 MAHA Report

    June 4, 2025
    Understanding Public Perception and Awareness of Medicare Advantage and Payment Change

    Understanding Public Perception and Awareness of Medicare Advantage and Payment Change

    April 4, 2025

    Survey Results

    Do you believe national polls on health issues are accurate

    National health polls: trust in healthcare system accuracy?

    May 8, 2024
    Which health policy issues matter the most to Republican voters in the primaries?

    Which health policy issues matter the most to Republican voters in the primaries?

    May 14, 2024
    How strongly do you believe that you can tell when your provider does not trust you?

    How strongly do you believe that you can tell when your provider does not trust you?

    May 7, 2024
  • Courses
  • About Us
  • Contact us
  • Support Us
  • Official Learner
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Articles
  • Podcasts
    Navigating the Medical Licensing Maze

    The Fight Against Healthcare Fraud: Dr. Rafai’s Story

    April 8, 2025
    Navigating the Medical Licensing Maze

    Navigating the Medical Licensing Maze

    April 4, 2025
    The Alarming Truth About Health Insurance Denials

    The Alarming Truth About Health Insurance Denials

    February 3, 2025
    Telehealth in Turmoil

    The Importance of NIH Grants

    January 31, 2025
    The New Era of Patient Empowerment

    The New Era of Patient Empowerment

    January 29, 2025
    Physicians: Write Thy Briefs

    Physicians: Write thy amicus briefs!

    January 26, 2025
  • Surveys

    Surveys

    Perception vs. Comprehension: Public Understanding of the 2025 MAHA Report

    Perception vs. Comprehension: Public Understanding of the 2025 MAHA Report

    June 4, 2025
    Understanding Public Perception and Awareness of Medicare Advantage and Payment Change

    Understanding Public Perception and Awareness of Medicare Advantage and Payment Change

    April 4, 2025

    Survey Results

    Do you believe national polls on health issues are accurate

    National health polls: trust in healthcare system accuracy?

    May 8, 2024
    Which health policy issues matter the most to Republican voters in the primaries?

    Which health policy issues matter the most to Republican voters in the primaries?

    May 14, 2024
    How strongly do you believe that you can tell when your provider does not trust you?

    How strongly do you believe that you can tell when your provider does not trust you?

    May 7, 2024
  • Courses
  • About Us
  • Contact us
  • Support Us
  • Official Learner
No Result
View All Result
Daily Remedy
No Result
View All Result
Home Perspectives

Anatomy of a Physician Prosecution

It's less facts and more sensation

Joseph Parker, MD by Joseph Parker, MD
March 12, 2024
in Perspectives
1
Anatomy of a Physician Prosecution

Arthur Lambillotte

Over the last several years, I have been reviewing hundreds of physician prosecutions, trying to answer a simple question.  How does the federal government get members of a grand jury to indict an innocent doctor? It turns out to be really simple.  You feed them false information.  I’m not talking about differences of opinion; I’m talking about allowing government witnesses to go in front of a grand jury and say things that records in the government’s possession prove are false.  I refer you to a recent case where the DEA was pursuing a specific physician after their algorithm had flagged his practice.  This doctor worked at the confluence of four states, so avoiding “out of state” patients was nonsensical.  One of the four states was Texas, and the city the doctor practiced in was about an hour and a half drive from any other similar sized city.  This means that patients in between these cities will need to drive at least sixty miles at 75mph one way: Thereby exceeding the 25-mile trigger point noted in multiple prosecutions of physicians and used as evidence of a “pill mill” at trial.

Once targeted the government placed agents at intersections around the clinic, pretending to be advocates of medical cannabis, asking patients who stopped at the lights to sign a petition, filling out their names and addresses.  Using this and license plate information they then scanned the doctor’s patients for anyone with a criminal record or who was on probation.  Once these patients were identified they were pulled over by local police working with the federal authorities on pretext stops, and their cars searched.  If you are on probation, you lose your right to deny the search, if someone is not on probation and refuses consent the officer can “smell marijuana” and use that pretext to call a canine unit and search the car.

Now it is not impossible that many chronic pain patients who are advocates of medical cannabis have experience informing their advocacy and may perhaps have something in the car of a contraband nature.  Now the agents have a compromised patient, one who is more fearful of jail than most, knowing that their chronic pain will be ignored on the inside, and that they will suffer terribly.  Then they take the patient downtown for questioning by federal and state authorities.  This is not to see if the doctor is good or bad, in the relevant case above a patient later said during his interrogation that when he said the doctor was a good physician trying to help people the agents got angry and shouted, “No, he’s not.”  So this is not a search for truthful evidence, this is a manufacturing process, designed to produce the desired outcome, which has been predetermined as surely as any convicted by the Spanish inquisition.

The desired product of the patient is a familiar litany of canned statements that we have seen in hundreds of prosecutions.  Patients drove “great distances” to see the doctor who took “no vital signs” and was known as “Doctor Feelgood” etc.  In the above case, the witness who went before the grand jury was desperate.  He had indeed been caught trading or selling his medication.  It may seem contradictory that a patient with true severe chronic pain would do so, but don’t be mistaken, this is not uncommon.  Disabled patients must often choose between having food or paying the rent, as disability payments are far below any reasonable level of subsistence and selling a few of their pills means a little more agony but not being on the street or starving.  It is a choice only the chronically comfortable would fail to understand, even if it can not be condoned, as it places everyone at risk.

This patient was looking at a decade or more behind bars which, with his medical condition, would be almost certainly fatal.  He was going to be the government’s star witness against the doctor but there was one small problem.  Prior to the government’s targeting of this patient, he had tested positive for an unprescribed narcotic, and had received the following notice from the practice. “It has come to our attention that you may be using your medication in an unsafe manner.  We will taper and discontinue your medication over a reasonable period of time and offer you opiate treatment to help you through this transition.  We understand that you have a medical condition that warrants pain management but do not feel that you can continue to safely use your medication at this time.  We will offer you a treatment program that will, over time, allow you to discontinue all dangerous narcotics.  If you choose to seek medical care elsewhere, we will offer a referral.  Please understand that this action is taken out of concern for your health and safety.”

The patient did indeed want to be seen elsewhere and, at least until recently, a second opinion was considered reasonable care.  Now when two doctors have a difference of opinion the DEA thinks one or the other of them needs some prison therapy, but I digress.  The patient was referred to a pain specialist and was eventually continued on opiate pain medications.  So, after his arrest and with full access to his medical records what did the federal government let him say to the grand jury?  First, that he had stopped seeing the doctor on his own after the doctor had “killed his friend”.  Second, that the doctor never took vital signs, despite the government having the medical records showing clearly that vital signs were taken every visit without fail, and third, that the doctor, “handed out prescriptions in the waiting room”, without seeing patients, despite the fact that the government had been told in virtually all the patient interviews that the doctor took up to thirty minutes seeing each patient, which made for long waits.

But isn’t it a crime to give false sworn testimony in a US court? Perjury? It is indeed.  But you invariably find that witnesses only get prosecuted when they say something the government doesn’t like, and the only people with the power to prosecute a federal attorney or witness is a federal attorney.  For some reason, these people rarely choose to prosecute themselves.  But what about the records proving this witness’s statements were false?  And the taped statements from patients supportive of the doctor? The government had those.  Wouldn’t they have to be turned over to the defense?  No.  In a grand jury, there is no defense, the government is allowed to say and present anything they want.  At the grand jury they don’t even need to pretend to be fair, with the assumption that any falsity will be exposed at trial.

But I’ve already told you that the government has absolute control over the evidence and witnesses at trial.  Witnesses can be pressured, threatened, and rewarded by federal agents and attorneys but somehow this is not considered “coercion”.  In the above case recorded statements made supporting this doctor were not turned over to the defense and prior false statements to the grand jury did not prevent the government from putting a witness on the stand at trial.   Now before you tell me that they “can’t” do this because it would be illegal, I will remind you that while they shouldn’t do it, there is no mechanism to ensure that they do not, or to punish them when they do.  I draw your attention to a recent case where two federal attorneys were caught withholding exculpatory evidence from a grand jury and the defense, resulting in an innocent man spending five years in federal prison.  In a rare attempt at accountability, the trial judge tried to suspend these attorneys from practice for six months, only to have the appellate court rule that this would be “too harsh”, overturning even this meager punishment.  And federal attorneys have absolute immunity from civil action, leaving them essentially above the law.

But can’t judges correct things?  Willfully withholding evidence favorable to the accused would be considered a Brady violation, so named for the famous case of Brady v. Maryland, where the prosecutor had withheld evidence indicating an alternative perpetrator was involved, thereby blocking the defense from raising this possibility to the jury, and this is the crux of the matter. State courts and police are justly held to account when they violate the constitution, but who has the power and will to hold federal prosecutors accountable?  The answer is no one.  The federal prosecutors have complete access to all the evidence and witnesses.  And in the case of evidence, no one knows what will be relevant to any specific jury much less an individual juror.  Life and liberty can hinge on facial expressions and biases.  By restricting the defense’s access to these, the prosecutor is able to obviate the very possibility of  raising a defense, leaving the physician exposed to any claim by the government’s paid witnesses.  No matter how contrary to evidence based medical science.

We say that our judicial process is adversarial, but this is impossible when your opponent possesses all the ammunition and gets to dole it out to his “opponent.”  By allowing government witnesses to give false testimony, testimony the government knew, should have known, or were willfully blind to being false, while at the same time allowing the prosecutor to be the arbiter of what evidence the defense is allowed to have, puts the accused not just at a disadvantage, but on a playing field so tilted in favor of the government that it looks like El Capitan.


Now before you think the US Supreme Court will step in and correct this behavior, I must refer you to a case from 2017, when a divided court ruled that the defendant proving that a Brady violation had occurred was itself insufficient to overturn the conviction.  They also had to prove that the suppressed evidence would “undermine confidence in the outcome of the trial”, creating a “reasonable probability” that there would have been a “different result”.  An impossible standard without direct access to the jurors, as noted by the dissenters, Justices Kagan and Ginsburg, who noted that if the withheld evidence “had a reasonable probability of changing a single jurors vote” then relief should be granted.

ShareTweet
Joseph Parker, MD

Joseph Parker, MD

Dr. Parker's journey began with four years of dedicated service in the U.S. Marine Corps, where he earned accolades such as the Meritorious Unit Citation and Good Conduct Medal. His exceptional dedication led to acceptance into the U.S. Air Force Officer Training School and a subsequent role as a Minuteman II ICBM Commander within U.S. Space Command, earning further recognition, including the Presidential Unit Citation, National Defense Service Medal, and the Air Force Achievement Medal. Transitioning into the medical field, Dr. Parker pursued studies at Mayo Medical School and joined the U.S. Medical Corps, ultimately achieving the rank of captain. Specializing in emergency medicine, he served as director of emergency medicine at two hospitals and founded an emergency medicine contracting company to save a foundering hospital from closure. He now speaks out as an advocate for physicians and patients and embodies a rare blend of scientific expertise, military leadership, and medical acumen, contributing significantly to the advancement of space exploration and the betterment of human health and safety.

Comments 1

  1. JOSH BLOOM says:
    1 year ago

    Really great article. You nailed it.

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Videos

Summary

In this episode of the Daily Remedy Podcast, Dr. Joshi discusses the rapidly changing landscape of healthcare laws and trends, emphasizing the importance of understanding the distinction between statutory and case law. The conversation highlights the role of case law in shaping healthcare practices and encourages physicians to engage in legal advocacy by writing legal briefs to influence case law outcomes. The episode underscores the need for physicians to actively participate in the legal processes that govern their practice.

Takeaways

Healthcare trends are rapidly changing and confusing.
Understanding statutory and case law is crucial for physicians.
Case law can overturn existing statutory laws.
Physicians can influence healthcare law through legal briefs.
Writing legal briefs doesn't require extensive legal knowledge.
Narrative formats can be effective in legal briefs.
Physicians should express their perspectives in legal matters.
Engagement in legal advocacy is essential for physicians.
The interpretation of case law affects medical practice.
Physicians need to be part of the legal conversation.
Physicians: Write thy amicus briefs!
YouTube Video FFRYHFXhT4k
Subscribe

MD Angels Investor Pitch

Visuals

Official MAHA Report

Official MAHA Report

by Daily Remedy
May 31, 2025
0

Explore the official MAHA Report released by the White House in May 2025.

Read more

Twitter Updates

Tweets by DailyRemedy1

Newsletter

Start your Daily Remedy journey

Cultivate your knowledge of current healthcare events and ensure you receive the most accurate, insightful healthcare news and editorials.

*we hate spam as much as you do

Popular

  • The Double-Edged Hype: Rethinking the Weight-Loss Drug Boom

    The Double-Edged Hype: Rethinking the Weight-Loss Drug Boom

    0 shares
    Share 0 Tweet 0
  • Feathers and Forecasts: Why the Bird Flu Surge Demands America’s Attention Now

    0 shares
    Share 0 Tweet 0
  • The Anxious Generation: Why Gen Z Is Leading the Mental Health Revolution

    0 shares
    Share 0 Tweet 0
  • The Grey Market of Weight Loss: How Compounded GLP-1 Medications Continue Despite FDA Crackdowns

    0 shares
    Share 0 Tweet 0
  • The First FBI Agent I Met

    3 shares
    Share 0 Tweet 0
  • 628 Followers

Daily Remedy

Daily Remedy offers the best in healthcare information and healthcare editorial content. We take pride in consistently delivering only the highest quality of insight and analysis to ensure our audience is well-informed about current healthcare topics - beyond the traditional headlines.

Daily Remedy website services, content, and products are for informational purposes only. We do not provide medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. All rights reserved.

Important Links

  • Support Us
  • About Us
  • Contact us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms and Conditions

Newsletter

Start your Daily Remedy journey

Cultivate your knowledge of current healthcare events and ensure you receive the most accurate, insightful healthcare news and editorials.

*we hate spam as much as you do

  • Survey
  • Podcast
  • About Us
  • Contact us

© 2025 Daily Remedy

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Articles
  • Podcasts
  • Surveys
  • Courses
  • About Us
  • Contact us
  • Support Us
  • Official Learner

© 2025 Daily Remedy

Start your Daily Remedy journey

Cultivate your knowledge of current healthcare events and ensure you receive the most accurate, insightful healthcare news and editorials.

*we hate spam as much as you do