JB's physician-patient privilege

Discussion in 'Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum' started by sue, Mar 1, 2005.

  1. sue

    sue Member

    Physician-patient privilege basically means that anything you tell your physician or your physician knows about you is private and can't be shared without your consent.

    As I am re-reading, I found something interesting in PMPT.
    In the paperback version, page 165:
    The battle on the horizon was made even more obvious on January 15, when Patrick Burke, Patsy's attorney, advised Keatley [the Boulder PD's legal adviser] that JB's death did not void her physician-patient privilege."
    What sorts of secrets might a 6 year old have that made preserving her physician-patient privilege so important???
    And why is it important for Patsy's lawyer to protect it??
     
  2. Deja Nu

    Deja Nu Banned

    Doctor-patient confidentiality is often argued in these kinds of cases, Sue. And while the privilege does extend beyond death, it can very easily be successfully challenged, especially when medical records are believed to contain viable evidence. A simple probable cause argument backing a subpoena or warrant request often suffices to get them.

    Why would Patsy's lawyer try to keep that from happening? ANY effort by LE to obtain any kind of evidence or possible evidence should be met vigorously by defense lawyers to protect their clients. Does this lend greater suspicion? It may or may not, but a munchausen syndrome or worse allegation against Patsy, backed by Beuf's records, would be extremely persuasive to a criminal jury. If those records contain any info re vaginal injuries, all the more so. Those records should have been obtained by BPD long ago.
     
    Last edited: Mar 2, 2005
  3. sue

    sue Member

    I knew that (working in a hospital). So since the records could still be obtained (although more slowly and with court involvent) the attorney knew he was not really preventing anything - just postponing it).

    It's interesting that 10 days after her death, they are already thinking of things like this (although, I guess if you are paying for a good defense lawyer, he would be thinking of these types of things.
    It does make me wonder though, what was in those records. it could be nothing, but most parents 10 days after their child's unexpected death would be offering the records if they thought they might help catch the perpetrator. It also makes me wonder if the lawyer did this to buy time.
    Maybe so his client could review the record and see what was in it, or maybe to talk with the doctor to find out what was in it, or maybe to have things that were in the record disappear.
    I guess all we can do for now is guess.
     
  4. Deja Nu

    Deja Nu Banned

    Actually, it takes less than a couple hours to get a judge to issue a warrant/subpoena for these records. All the cops have to do is present the request and state probable cause. It's very SOP. That is certainly what ST tells us they did re the Ramseys' phone records. The subpoenas were issued right away but BPD's efforts to obtain those records even with a subpoena were obstructed for many months. By the time those records became available, the entirety of December 1996 was missing. I've always asked WHO in CO has to power to make phone records disappear?

    I agree with all you say re lawyering up defenses, Sue. This has always been the biggest objection (and suspicion of Ramsey guilt) by the public. We have always compared the Ramseys' post-crime conduct to those of Mark Klass and the guy on America's Most Wanted (his name escapes me right now) who fully cooperated with police immediately to clear their names and get on with finding the real culprit. In both those cases, the culprits were eventually apprehended and prosecuted. Not so in the Ramsey case. So at the very least they can blame their conduct on NOT finding any "real" killer if one even exists.
     
  5. sue

    sue Member

    Could the Ramseys lawyers be present or argue against the search warrant/subpoena?
    I wondered if Patsy's lawyer mentioned it as a "threat" that he would keep them busy if they asked for the records.
     
  6. Deja Nu

    Deja Nu Banned

    No. Usually during an active homicide investigation, the detectives run to the judge with requests for warrants and subpoenas frequently without defense counsel's knowledge. Once the warrants/subpoenas are served, that's when defense counsel finds out about it and moves to challenge. But, given a typical case (and the Ramsey case obviously is not the typical homicide case), custodians of record upon whom those court orders are served, are cooperative/compliant and quickly furnish the requested evidence.

    But iff unsuccessful at this point, defense counsel wait to see if there will be a criminal trial and then, through pre-trial motions and whatnot, try to keep that evidence from being used at trial. Sometimes they succeed, sometimes not, and there are a plethora of reasons they base these objections in, usually errors on the part of LE in the process of obtaining it.
     
  7. Tez

    Tez Member

    DeJaNu, John Walsh is the AMW guy.

    I think we have Trip DeMuth to thank for lack of cooperation in regards to the warrants to obtain medical and all other records. He is such a putz. Like you said DJN, that is SOP, obviously something foreign to the Boulder County DA's office.
     
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice