Silly Lawyer. Dirty Tricks Are For Kid Doctors: Why Criminal Prosecution Of Randolph Hospital CEO, Bob Morrison, Has Been My Only Good Option

For all of Sam Spagnola's posturing about his analysis of my legal options (which coincidentally mirrors Roch Smith, Jr's curt dismissal of my situation as nothing for anyone in Greensboro or anywhere else to care about), he still has not explained to me why perjury is not perjury . . . and why I do not have the right to ask for redress in criminal court.

ALL I have wanted to do for the better part of ten years is to return home and pick up the pieces of a shattered life & practice that never should have been shattered in the first place. The whole reason I went to Court was to be able to return home with some degree of fiscal stability and a sense of professional safety. This was not achieved because North Carolina's regulatory & legal systems are beyond corrupt. Headline after headline coming out of Raleigh (and other places) bears that out. Yet, the people who determine what our headlines will be in Asheboro and Greensboro do not believe my story is "relevant".

[Before I dive into the main post, anyone wanting to catch up on the details of why I found myself in civil court in the first place should read this link and this one. Dr. Joe Guarino has found the story I have to tell plausible & compelling. So did Billy & MeB. So have others along the way. It is my sincere belief that other local readers will too . . . and that they will find within the story MANY good reasons & motivations to demand CHANGE from our systems of medical & legal oversight . . . that is, if people like Roch Smith, Jr. would stop popping in to rain doom & gloom on my fight for justice denied.]

This post is addressed to Sam Spagnola. Last week, he asked me what would I have the local blogosphere do? After an intense week of pounding out the same answers to the same questions over and over again on three different blogs (make no mistake, I am grateful for the interest), I answered San's question as best I could.

Now I'm posing some questions to Sam . . . as a (thoroughly disgusted) lay-person to a lawyer. This post is also offered (as food for thought) to the "journalists" who populate the GSO-area blogosphere . . . most of whom have treated me & my story like a disease to be eradicated from their holier-than-thou midst. Before I get started, I will note that recent headlines indicate my approach (a request for criminal prosecution of healthcare administrators who stepped over the line) is perhaps not as novel as one might think. And maybe, just maybe what happens in Randolph County is indeed more "relevant" to Greensboro than those proponents of citizen-journalism who ban and de-link would like to admit. So here goes:

As a matter of public welfare and policy, telling the truth under Oath IS the FOUNDATION of our legal system.

Yes or No, Sam?

In the wake of the Jim Black and Mike Nifong and Thomas Wright corruption scandals, North Carolina prosecutors and legislators have made some very strong statements about EVERYONE being EQUAL under the law. So everyone IS equal under the law.

Yes or No, Sam?

So Sam. If these things are indeed true, can you tell me WHY most lawyers I've chatted up tell me that even though I had every reason to expect Randolph Hospital to play by the rules during litigation . . .

"Perjury is almost never prosecuted. People lie with impunity in court every day."

or this gem . . .

"You will NEVER get justice in this state (North Carolina). NEVER. You are not in the club."

Sam, do you think that Bob Morrison and Steve Eblin KNEW this when they put their hands on a Bible and lied? Yes or No?

Do you think that their expensive corporate lawyers knew this when they filed false anwers with the Court on behalf of their clients - answers they had to have known were false? Yes or No?

The thing IS, Sam, I've combed through the NC Constitution and its General Statutes. I CAN FIND NO MENTION OF "THE CLUB". Is there some special club I/others should be a member of in order to get justice in North Carolina? I'm just asking.

Given the "outbreak of corruption" about which the N&R's Doug Clark waxed poetic just this week (I beg to differ with Doug . . . it's NOT a sudden "outbreak" . . . it's business-as-usual in Raleigh), my friends back home are starting to ask local candidates for judgeships & such about their position on perjury. So far, the candidates are saying it's a serious crime and would be prosecuted aggressively if brought to their attention.

These judicial wannabes are not saying that perjury is a crime exclusive to politicians or rappers or navy commanders. They're saying that perjury is a serious crime . . . obstructive to both civil and criminal justice . . . and should be aggressively prosecuted. What say you, Sam?

I'm asking you in case you run for anything in the future.

I'll ask Roch too (the morally & intellectually superior We101 Wizard who has been hiding behind his curtain for quite a while now) if he ever runs for anything again.

[I suppose my tone here is going to be a bit "advesarial". But (before he asks) NO, MeB. While I am simpatico with Sam on many issues and bear him no ill-will, I don't feel the inclination to be "nice" to Roch . . . who has treated me like blogger-pond-scum since, well, FOREVER. Where Sam is concerned, I'll dance his legal fantastic to a point, but we are talking about MY life and MY case (something I know just a little bit more about than he does - because I FRICKING LIVED IT). And FYI, I never had to do much to "alienate" Roch. He/Sue/Cone/JR/etc. have hated my guts from the moment they figured out that, unlike other Pediatricians they adore, I would not be progressively toting water for Edwards/Clinton/Easley/or any of the other politicians on whose watches I got burned.]

Let's briefly review how I got to the "blagosphere" to plead this case (where I have begged for help for over three years) . . . when I should have had my fair day in Court long ago.

After being totally hosed by the lawyers on both sides of two civil actions* (suit and counter-suit) . . . and in the wake of being treated like dirt by two spiteful hospital administrators who had pledged to be helpful and cooperative at settlement (in terms of me getting back on my feet and practicing in Asheboro again - IF I agreed to settle both cases) . . . I sifted through the refuse of three years worth of legal documents & filings.

In the legal silt, I discovered that Randolph Hospital senior executives, Bob Morrison and Steven Eblin, had committed perjury when they stated, under Oath, that financial information relevant to my damages claims contained in IRS 990 returns (public record) was "highly confidential".

They wanted to get out cheap. And they did.

Lying under Oath about matters relevant/material to a damages claim is the definition of perjury, isn't it Sam? Yes or No?

Now Sam, if you/if Roch have indeed read what I've already got posted on the Web, you know that (in a response to a motion filed by my attorney) a judge ordered the hospital to cough up quite a bit of financial information . . . including anything pertinent to profits & losses of both the hospital and its "controlled affiliate" (the practice that fired me) . . . including their own salaries. The judge ordered that this information be produced because it was relevant (don't you just love that word?) to my damages claims. This information was contained in IRS 990 returns - which are, in fact, far from "highly confidential".

So we're not just talking about perjury.

The fact that Bob Morrison and Steven Eblin knowingly & willfully withheld financial information material to my damages claim . . . in defiance of the judge's order . . . is something called "criminal contempt of Court". Yes or No, Sam?

Armed with the documents I found in the legal silt (and feeling like I was coated in legal *hit), I confronted my lawyer . . . who squirmed uncomfortably in his chair (knowing full well it had been his responsibility to discover the ruse and get/present this information to me before we went to settlement/trial) and back-peddled. He subsequently had a chat with the hospital's attorney . . . who cast negative aspersions on the competency of the trial lawyers (who had been hired by the hospital's insurance company) for their "oversights".

But rather than offer a solution that took into account the information his clients had lied about and withheld, the hospital's corporate lawyer (the guy who came up with all of the elaborate machinations to screw me in the first place) pretty much invited me to sue the hospital all over again.

You can see, can't you Sam, that the lawyers all wanted me to get bogged down in Randolph County civil court again? Billable hours and all that. Yes or No?

Home-team "wink & nod" advantage too, Sam. Yes or No?

I'd already done the dance in two civil actions already, Sam. Your armchair analysis would have me go back to the same (clearly corrupted) North Carolina Court, and fill the pockets of the same players for a third time?

I believe that would meet the medical definition for insanity.

Now I know that I'm just a "whack-job" doctor, Sam. But after the hell I've been through, just how much faith in the North Carolina civil courts do you really expect me to have?

When none of the lawyers wanted to play fair ball, I pondered my options (none of them good), and decided to presented the evidence to the Randolph County DA, Garland Yates (who is running un-opposed for re-election this year).

I asked that the case be investigated and prosecuted by his office . . . or in the alternative (and what a number of lawyers both formally and informally have opined would have been the proper thing to do in this case), that it be referred to the NC Attorney General.

To this day, Mr. Yates has refused to meet with me or take my phone calls.

I would add, Sam, that I presented this information to the DA in 2003 . . . long before the three-year statute of limitations on fraud (the case was settled in 2001) had ticked out. But the DA simply ignored me, tabled/buried the matter and let the clock tick.

He clearly wanted me to "just go away".

Bob and Steve may not be rappers or crooked politicians, but the DA's behavior was not the "uniform application of law" (as prescribed by Article IV, Section 18 of the NC Constitution) I was expecting. And in tabling the case without so much as interviewing me, Garland Yates was hardly acting fairly or impartially. Yes or No, Sam?

When I insisted that Yates do something and started rattling chains at the SBI & AG's office, King Dozier (one of Yates' ADAs) left a message on my answering machine (the recording of which I still have) that the case would be sent to the SBI for consideration.

After weeks of hearing nothing, I contacted the SBI. I was told that Mr Yates had torpedoed the SBI investigation I requested before it could even start . . . telling the SBI that he would not prosecute the case no matter what conclusion investigators might reach. The SBI therefore set the matter aside. The agent put it to me very succinctly. What was the point of using the state's limited resources to conduct an investigation if the local DA was going to put up a stone-wall?

Now again Sam, I know I am a "terminally-self-absorbed" lay=person, but this sounds just a little bit BACKWARDS. I mean, like many people I watch "Law & Order". DA's are supposed to weigh the facts of a case AFTER some kind of law enforcement investigation has been conducted. Yes or No?

And Sam, since you (and Roch) have meticulously combed through my website, you know that a while back, I blogged on a previous experience (as an expert witness) with the Randolph County DA's office. You know that ADA, King Dozier coerced my appearance in a criminal case . . . in which he manipulated my testimony to circumvent the rights of the accused (specifically the right to face his accuser), and the man was convicted of a crime to which I actually did not testify.

As described in the post, my pre & post-trial interactions with the DA's office were so rancorous that I required legal representation. The case was (rightfully) reversed on appeal, and Mr. Dozier did not retry it. Of course, as I have pointed out previously, Mr. Dozier has had some issues with the truth & playing fair before. And my last interaction with the DA's office (ADA Andy Gregson) is described here. So there is quite a bit of compelling evidence to suggest that Mr. Yates and his "team" do not have an objective bone in their bodies when it comes to Dr. Mary Johnson.

Now, in any other town but Asheboro, a history like this would consitute a "conflict of interest" and provide very good reason for Mr. Yates to recuse himself from the case and pass it on & up to Raleigh. Yes or No, Sam?

I AM NOT A LAWYER SAM. I PAID A LAWYER CRAPLOADS OF HARD-EARNED MONEY TO REPRESENT ME. I RELIED UPON MY LAWYER TO REPRESENT ME AGRESSIVELY AND TELL ME THE TRUTH.

I ALSO RELIED UPON RANDOLPH HOSPITAL'S LAWYERS TO TELL THE TRUTH TO THE COURT.

I RELIED UPON THE RANDOLPH COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY TO GIVE A SMALL DAMN THAT LITIGANTS AND LAWYERS HAD WILLFULLY AND CORRUPTLY LIED IN A COURT UNDER HIS JURISDICTION.

So in frustration and desperation, with all doors slammed in my face, I reported the case & all of the lawyers involved (including the District Attorney) to the North Carolina State Bar. It was a drastic measure, but I had nowhere else to turn . . . and I was acting on several (apparently naive) assumptions . . . based on my review of the State Bar's rules of professional conduct.

TELLING THE TRUTH IS THE FOUNDATION OF OUR LEGAL SYSTEM. Yes or No?

"Everybody lies" is NOT A DEFENSE for perjury. Yes or No?

"Aggressive Representation" is NOT code for "lawyers can lie". Yes or No?

In addition to the State Bar's codes of professional conduct, North Carolina General Statute as it pertains to the duties of District Attorneys (§ 7A‑61) says:

The district attorney shall prepare the trial dockets, prosecute in a timely manner in the name of the State all criminal actions and infractions requiring prosecution in the superior and district courts of his prosecutorial district, advise the officers of justice in his district, and perform such duties related to appeals to the Appellate Division from his district as the Attorney General may require.

North Carolina General Statute also spells out specific duties to the victims of crime (§ 15A‑825).

So Sam, let's talk about some of my unreasonable expectations (as a stupid, gullible layperson) of the lawyers involved in my case . . . AND the Randolph County District Attorney:

Lawyers have clearly defined fiduciary obligations to their clients . . . and are supposed to aggressively (as opposed to negligently or carelessly) represent them. Yes or No?

Lawyers are not supposed to lie to their clients. Yes or No?

Lawyers (particularly those considered "experts" on "non-profits) are not supposed to file answers that they should know (by virtue of their "expertise") to be false with the Court. Yes or no?

District Attorneys are supposed to apply the law uniformly and prosecute cases in a timely manner. Yes or No?

District Attorneys are supposed to acknowledge conflicts of interest and recuse themselves/refer cases out & up if such conflicts exist. Yes or No?

District Attorneys have duties to the victims of crime which include informing the victim of their civil options. Yes or No?

In my case, it might have been hard for the Districi Attorney to inform me of anything . . . since he would not speak to me or return correspondence/phone calls. Yes or No?

After I filed the complaint with the State Bar, my lawyer (who had already stopped answering phone calls & e-mails . . . a common lawyer dodge that we doctors would NEVER be able to get away with) promptly dumped me. By that point, although infuriated, I barely cared . . . as he clearly had sold me out to keep his bar stool warm at the local Country Club. I could not trust this man . . . or believe a word he said.

He abandoned me long before he abandoned me.

Here's another point to make, Sam. Lawyers, although "a dime a dozen" are actually NOT a dime a dozen. Fairly early on, I tried to retain other attorneys to help me with another civil (fraud) action. The lawyer "referral service" that the State Bar provides is pretty worthless, and I was left with what/who I could find via word of mouth. I did ultimately get some good advice about what I could do in civil court . . . but the case was very complicated, and (at the time) getting someone to do it (especially someone locally that I could afford) was not going to happen. More than once, it was suggested that perjury was perjury and I did not have to pay a lawyer to "raise some hell" and light a fire under the DA's chair.

It was/is all the more reason to ask/want the regulatory & law enforcement agencies of the state & federal governments that had placed me in Asheboro to jump in and do some REAL regulating/policing.

One thing I can state unequivocally. The North Carolina State Bar is for damned sure not going to do it.

Since I am a white, primary-care doctor of good reputation (no matter how hard Morrison & Eblin tried to trash it) & comparatively meager means making a strong case against well-paid/well-insulated/well-connected Asheboro businessmen (as opposed to a black drugged and/or liquored-up lap dancer making false allegations against rich frat boys at Duke) . . . and since there was no press attention to heat their seats . . . my complaints were swiftly dismissed by the North Carolina Bar . . . once again without an investigator so much as speaking to me. The legal wagons were very clearly circled.

So Sam. Anytime, Barack Hussein Obama wants to talk about "race" and justice in America I am so there. This "whitey" who has paid her taxes and her dues, and played by every rule, and more than done her time on the front-lines of medicine . . . and who, as a result, has suffered countless insults and found herself "entitled" to absolutely-fricking-nothing (where everyone else is entitled to everything no-matter-what) . . . is tired of hiding under a rock.

I had the "audacity" to believe in the system . . . and to hope . . . for ten years. And as the big Dems suddenly turn their attention to North Carolina (which suddenly matters in their sad slugfest), I so don't want to hear them. Bill is just another lawyer who lied, Hillary is his enabler, and Barack Obama has nothing on me.

As I've said before, I will be voting for John McCain. He REALLY knows something of the dark side of public service. Oo-rah.

I've digressed again. But before we go any further, Sam, you brought up the subject of me suing my lawyer for malpractice . . . tossing it off as though that were something easy to do. But unlike medical malpractice (where any angry/disgruntled patient with even a mediocre ambulance-chaser to represent them and a filing fee can make a doctor's life miserable), successfully prosecuting a legal malpractice claim is much more problematic. Most legal clients, by the time they figure out they've been hosed, are too burned-out and lost and mired down in the legalize. Oftentimes, they are at a distinct financial disadvantage as well . . . already drowning in debt or looking at massive legal fees to undo the damage already done. Moreover, in terms of the burden of proof (which belongs to the burned client), the very nature of legal privilege in a "relationship" that requires total trust can easily be turned against the client (without meticulous documentation of every encounter on the part of the client . . . and I know I documented more than most). Plus, the good-ole-boy system is very much alive and well (that pesky "club" again), and the deck is overwhelmingly stacked in the lawyer's favor. So unless the State Bar has already slapped some hands, try getting a lawyer to handle a malpractice case against another lawyer. I don't know what color the "wall" is (ala "White Wall" or "Blue Wall"), but it's a wall just the same.

When it comes to ordinary lay people taking on corrupt lawyers (especially in North Carolina), Lady Justice's blindfold is down around her neck and her skirts are up over it.

Getting back to the core of my case (that would be perjury), it is important to note that, as executives of the "non-profits" involved, Morrison and Eblin signed the tax returns in question (clearly marked as public record and subsequently posted on the Internet - something they did not own up to during discovery).

So when they swore that information contained in the returns was "highly confidential", Bob Morrison and Steven Eblin willfully and corruptly lied. We'll get to that.

Moreover, Bob Morrison and Steve Eblin did not just lie once. They lied multiple times. It wasn't a simple "oversight".

Then they negotiated a deal on those lies . . . saving themselves quite a large chunk of change (based on my lost income alone . . . and not even considering the value or "good will" of my local practice - which they absorbed) at settlement. They and their lawyers represented the hosptial/practice as "nearly bankrupt".

A deception made for personal/corporate gain would be the common law definition of fraud, Sam. Yes or No?

Let's digress and fast forward, for a just a moment, to 2008. Smiling/lying Bob Morrison (ironically not a resident of Asheboro) is planning my hometown's future. It's a bit of a sticking point with me - as I appeared before the Asheboro City Council in 2004 (my Father stood with me) and told them what Bob had done to me . . . driving a a young "home-grown" doctor who came home to work at Randolph (despite a very, very bad childhood experience there) from Asheboro for doing the right thing. But despite all the blather about "small-town-values" this City Council turned right around and appointed Bob to chair their "strategic planning" efforts (the annexation of Dave's Mountain equals alcohol equals economic development).

Indeed, as it throws more public money after Bob's private projects (i.e. the "cancer center" Bob is fronting for the Cone Healthcare System), the Asheboro City Council seems completely oblivious to the concept of "conflict of interest". My parents, who paid city taxes for years and years (my Mother is still paying them), watched Randolph Hospital treat their daughter (a young professional in public service) like crap on the bottom of a mill-owner's shoe. Now Mama gets to watch her tax dollars shore up the private projects of that same hospital without so much as a public vote.

It really does makes me & mine (as natives to the area carbetbagging Bob drove me from) feel all warm and fuzzy.

On we go . . .

In terms of the basics, a criminal action is defined by NC General Statute (§ 1‑5) as,

(1) An action prosecuted by the State as a party, against a person charged with a public offense, for the punishment thereof.

(2) An action prosecuted by the State, at the instance of an individual, to prevent an apprehended crime against his person or property.

So Sam. Perjury is a public offense. Yes or No?

And I, as the victim of that offense (perjury), should be able to present my complaint to a DA or magistrate, swear it out, and reasonably expect an investigation to commence. Yes or No?

From NC General Statute (§ 14‑209, Punishment for perjury):

If any person shall willfully and corruptly commit perjury, on his oath or affirmation, in any suit, controversy, matter or cause, depending in any of the courts of the State, or in any deposition or affidavit taken pursuant to law, or in any oath or affirmation duly administered of or concerning any matter or thing whereof such person is lawfully required to be sworn or affirmed, every person so offending shall be punished as a Class F felon.

Now Sam, I know I'm just a "malignant narcissist" from Randolph County, but the law says that people cannot knowingly lie in ANY court proceeding/deposition/affidavit . . . be during discovery or on the stand. That's what the law says, Sam. Yes or No?

Moreover, Morrison and Eblin, as officers of a "non-profit" institution (which we lay people naively expect to act to serve the public good), lied about the "confidentiality" of information contained in federal tax returns. Here's what US Code (§ 1621. Perjury generally) says about that:

Whoever -

(1) having taken an oath before a competent tribunal, officer, or person, in any case in which a law of the United States authorizes an oath to be administered, that he will testify, declare, depose, or certify truly, or that any written testimony, declaration, deposition, or certificate by him subscribed, is true, willfully and contrary to such oath states or subscribes any material matter which he does not believe to be true; or

(2) in any declaration, certificate, verification, or statement under penalty of perjury as permitted under section 1746 of title 28, United States Code, willfully subscribes as true any material matter which he does not believe to be true; is guilty of perjury and shall, except as otherwise expressly provided by law, be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both. This section is applicable whether the statement or subscription is made within or without the United States.

Please note, Sam, that in my endless dance of jurisdiction, I've also met with investigators from the IRS. The low-down so far from the Federal end seems to be that you can lie to a US citizen in a court proceeding all you want to. You just cannot lie to the IRS. If I'm wrong about that, the US Attorney's office in Greensboro has yet to prove me wrong.

And if I were President Bush, I would fire her.

So Sam. Be it at the state or federal level, the law says that there are serious consequences to knowingly lying under Oath about matters relevant to a damages claim (which is what my case is ALL about). That's what the law says, Sam. Yes or No?

The laws also says that jail time and/or fines are in your future if you're caught committing perjury. That's what the law says, Sam. Yes or No?

You've said that sentencing guidelines in North Carolina would preclude Morrison and Eblin from getting any jail time if they were convicted of perjury. But that's not completely true is it, Sam? A judge has the discretion to do what he/she feels appropriate depending on the circumstances of the case. Let's take a closer look at my case and "weigh" the factors that would play into sentencing (as a judge did fairly recently with Jim Black). Although perjury is fairly high on the "gravity" score (as a class F felony), Bob Morrison and Steve Eblin would be "first-offenders" and have no "rap sheet".

But while pretend Judge Spagnola, might quickly "chart" that out to equal no jail time, there are a few aggravating factors in this case for a real judge to consider.

For instance, in this case, it's a bit "aggravating" that these two gentlemen are "non-profit" administrators who took the taxpayer for quite a bit of a ride . . . both in terms of the salaries & benefits they paid themselves for their own "service" to a small-town hospital . . . . and the absolute professional destruction they simultaneously reigned down upon a home-grown doctor for doing the right thing by a patient (retaliating against her for performing her sworn duties to the state . . . AND thwarting the stated missions of federal and state programs in the process).

It's also somewhat aggravating that all of Morrison & Eblin's legal fees were covered by the hospital . . . whose existance is subsidzed by the public they deprived of a good Pediatrician.

It's also a tad aggravating that these two executives, in an effort to prove the lady-doctor "disruptive" plundered confidential hospital peer review and Medical Board documents (that the doctor, as a whistle-blower had authored) and released them to discovery . . even when the law states (in the interest of the public welfare) that such documents are NOT subject to public consumption, and it is ILLEGAL to release them (not to mention a HIPAA violation these days) without the permission or consent of the doctor & patients involved.

It's also aggravating that I never got a patient list . . . one of the actual terms of the settlement . . . as being able to communicate with my ex-patients/parents might have gone a long way in terms of me being able to repair some of the damage Morrison and Eblin had done.

Those aggravating factors are some pretty legally-weighty stuff.

Moreover, given the ultimate irony that Morrison and Eblin lied in the discovery responses of their own "libel" lawsuit (a despicable legal intimidation tactic known as a SLAPP suit . . . designed to humiliate and financially destroy a defendant), there do not seem to be any real mitigating factors on the table.

So Sam. If is indeed your position (and you said it was) that my case is "important" . . . then don't you think that (in our current climate of public corruption) a judge of like mind might look at these circumstances very unfavorably . . . and could/would use his/her discretion to make an example of these two executives for other hospital and/or "non-profits" to to learn from? Yes or No?

It is quite possible that a judge might decide to give these bad-boys-in suits a little cell time? Yes or No?

So it's not really impossible or even unreasonable to expect Bob Morrison and Steven Eblin do jail time upon a conviction for perjury? Yes or No?

Moving on along (as Roch would say) to the matter of restitution . . .

Victims of crime in North Carolina do have some rights (although not many). One of those rights, as described in the NC Constitution (Article 1, Section 37, Number 1 (c)), is

The right as prescribed by law to receive restitution.

Yes or No, Sam?

Furthermore, Article XI, Section One of the NC Constitution (Punishments) says:

The following punishments only shall be known to the laws of this State: death, imprisonment, fines, suspension of a jail or prison term with or without conditions, restitution, community service, restraints on liberty, work programs, removal from office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust, or profit under this State.

Translation Sam: If Bob Morrison and Steven Eblin were found guilty of perjury, I would have the right (as the victim of their crime) to receive restitution. Yes or No?

NC Statute (§ 15A‑1340.34) further defines restitution:

(a) When sentencing a defendant convicted of a criminal offense, the court shall determine whether the defendant shall be ordered to make restitution to any victim of the offense in question. For purposes of this Article, the term "victim" means a person directly and proximately harmed as a result of the defendant's commission of the criminal offense.

(b) If the defendant is being sentenced for an offense for which the victim is entitled to restitution under Article 46 of this Chapter, the court shall, in addition to any penalty authorized by law, require that the defendant make restitution to the victim or the victim's estate for any injuries or damages arising directly and proximately out of the offense committed by the defendant. If the defendant is placed on probation or post‑release supervision, any restitution ordered under this subsection shall be a condition of probation as provided in G.S. 15A‑1343(d) or a condition of post‑release supervision as provided in G.S. 148‑57.1.

(c) When subsection (b) of this section does not apply, the court may, in addition to any other penalty authorized by law, require that the defendant make restitution to the victim or the victim's estate for any injuries or damages arising directly and proximately out of the offense committed by the defendant. (1998‑212, s. 19.4(d).)

So again, Sam. According to both NC Constitution and General Staute, if Bob Morrison and Steve Eblin were found guilty of (or pled guilty/no contest to) perjury (or any lesser crime for that matter), as the victim of the crime, I could petition a judge for fair restitution. Yes or No?

You will concede, Sam, that I suffered considerable direct and proximal damages as a consequence of the fraud perpeutated at settlement by Bob Morrison and Steve Eblin's pejury? Yes or No?

NC General Statute (§ 15A‑1340.35) offers a basis for restitution. Among the considerations are:

(a) 1 c. Income lost by the victim as a result of the offense.
(a) 2 b. If return of the property under sub‑subdivision (2) a. of this subsection is impossible, impracticable, or inadequate: (1). The value of the property on the date of the damage, loss, or destruction; or (2). The value of the property on the date of sentencing, less the value of any part of the property that is returned.
(a) 3 Any measure of restitution specifically provided by law for the offense committed by the defendant.

Without "retrying" the original case, you would concede, Sam, that factors figuring into the calculation of any restitution the Court might see fit to order might include any or all of the following: (1) the wholesale destruction and absorption of my practice as the hospital's own . . . mind your this was a practice that the federal service agreements I entered into made clear that I would to be able to transition without interferance (Randolph Hospital actually tried to deny that the hospital was a party to the agreement - until I produced it); (2) the fact that I was black-balled locally and branded a liar (by liars) on the front page of the local newspaper (great for your professional reputation - you should try it sometime); (3) the fact that hospital officials refused to provide anything but a "neutral reference" to future employers (kind of puts a damper on fellowship opportunities); (4) the fact that I was clearly shorted by several-hundred-thousand-dollars at settlement (by virture of Morrison & Eblin's perjury & fraud); and (5) the length of time Randolph Hospital's officers, lawyers and Board of Directors have refused to acknowlege or repair what they did.

All of this might have put a bit of a damper on my income/potential income, Sam? Yes or No?

You would concede that ten years after the fact, there's a lot that impossible and/or impracticable to replace? Yes or No?

Taking these arguments a step farther . . . towards corporate responsibility, as the law pertains to "non-profits", "non-profit" executives/officers are required by law to act in good faith. Yes or No, Sam?

Perjury would be the ultimate act of legal bad faith. Yes or No, Sam

Indemnification and immunity and all of those other fancy legal terms do not apply/protect/shield if a corporation or its officers act in bad faith. Yes or No?

Non-profit corporations are governed by Boards of Directors . . . legally responsible and/or liable for the actions of the corporation's officers. Yes or No, Sam?

Now, if Randolph Hospital's Board of Directors KNEW that their CEO and his right hand had committed perjury in a civil action . . . and if they had done absolutely nothing to discipline their corporate officers for that perjury (I mean, Morrison and Eblin are still employed) . . . and if they did nothing to compensate the victim of said perjury when they were told about it (in 2003) . . . the Randolph Hospital Board of Directors (especially those who benefited economically from my departure from Asheboro's medical scene) might be considered accomplices or co-conspirators to the perjury after the fact? Yes or No, Sam?

With reagards to restitution, there's another legal argument that could be made/attempted and it involves the concept of equitably "tolling" the statute of limitations on civil claims.

North Carolina General Statute (§ 1-15.1), "Statutes of limitation and repose for civil actions seeking to recover damages arising out of a criminal act" says:

(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, if a defendant is convicted of a criminal offense and is ordered by the court to pay restitution or restitution is imposed as a condition of probation, special probation, work release, or parole, then all applicable statutes of limitation and statutes of repose, except as established herein, are tolled for the period set forth in this subsection for purposes of any civil action brought by an aggrieved party against that defendant for damages arising out of the offense for which the defendant was convicted. Any statute of limitation or repose applicable in the civil action shall be tolled from the time of entry of the court order

(1) Requiring that restitution be made,

(2) Making restitution a condition of probation or special probation, or

(3) Recommending that restitution be made a condition of work release or parole, and until the defendant has paid in full the amount of restitution ordered or imposed.

Except as provided in G.S. 15B-34, an action to recover damages arising out of the criminal offense shall not be commenced more than 10 years from the last act of the defendant giving rise to the cause of action.

(b) In any civil action brought by an aggrieved party against the defendant for damages arising out of the offense for which the defendant was convicted:

(1) The defendant has the right to contest the amount of damages;

(2) The amount of any restitution ordered or imposed shall not be admissible into evidence; and

(3) All restitution paid by the defendant to the aggrieved party shall be credited against any judgment rendered in the action against that defendant.

(c) This section shall not apply if the offense of which the defendant was convicted was an offense established in Chapter 20 of the General Statutes.

(d) A plea of no contest shall be considered the same as a conviction for purposes of this section.

Again, Sam, there is no statute of limitations on perjury. Yes or No?

Now I do concede that the North Carolina case & appellate law on this point is a bit spotty, but it is AT LEAST ARGUABLE that (as this statute specifically reads), if Bob Morrison and Steven Eblin were convicted of (or pled "no contest" to) perjury (or even a lesser charge), that I would have the option to file a civil damages claim within three years (the statute of limitations on fraud) of the conviction/plea . . . provided I did so within ten years of the last criminal act. Yes or No?

By reviewing the information I already have posted on the Internet, you know that the perjury was committed during discovery in 1999 and 2000. The fraud was perpetuated in 2001 (at settlement). I reported the crime to the DA in 2003 and had the reasonable expectation that it would at least be investigated. Instead, I have been stone-walled and stalled by bad-faith and conflicted actions obstructive to justice on the part of the Randolph County DA.

I could argue to a judge that the DA's conduct in this instance has been prejudicial to the administration of justice . . . and brings the office into disrepute. Yes or No?

The official term is "Habitual Intemperance". Yes or No?

In fact, this kind of behavior is grounds for the removal of a DA from office. Yes or No?

So Sam, it is at least arguable that, if I could get this puppy moving and obtain a criminal conviction before 2010 . . . and I were then not happy with whatever restitution the Court awarded, based on the specific language of North Carolina Statute (and without assuming anything not specifically stated) . . . and given the behavior of the Randolph County District Attorney in this case (arguing the notion of "nunc pro tunc" - assuming the judges in North Carolina can translate the Latin) . . . I might still have some hope of successfully suing Randolph Hospital for damages? Yes or No?

And if I sued, Sam, it's reasonable to believe that a conviction for perjury would make a civil claim against Randolph Hospital a slam dunk? Yes or No?

Moving on along . . .

So Sam. I think I've made a fairly good case that, in North Carolina, legal dirty tricks are reserved for kid doctors in public service. Yes or No?

I've also made a good argument (similar to that many others pummeled by the system can make), that when it comes to the machinations of corporate America, somehow, somewhere, the law lost sight of who it is supposed to protect. Yes or No?

As for the local newspapers (specifically the N&R and it should know) being worried about reporting "potentially libelous" material, I've been on the Internet with this story for several years . . . first with a website . . . then a blog. Don't you think Sam, that maybe the reason I have not been sued for "libel" (again) is because everything I've been saying all that time . . . about the perjury that these "non-profit" hospital executives committed . . . and the perjury that their oh-so-honorable Board of Directors has determindedly condoned & overlooked - is absolutely TRUE? Yes or No?

Do you really buy the notion that the newspapers (in accepting the "no comments" from the hospital and ignoring my story) are really worried about being sued?

Or do you think that they're just covering the tracks of people they consider to be more important than you or I?

Because that's what I think, Sam.

And now, right out of Randolph County, we have another ugly story bubbling up from the slime . . . same time frame . . . same tactics . . . same buzz words (ala "team player" - every time I hear that term I want to hurl). Same response (so far) from the local press.

Silence.

We101 Wizard, Roch Smith, Jr., would have me blown off by the blogosphere (and the newspaper and everyone else) because, in his narrow view of the world, my problems are private ones. With a hat tip to Dale (another Randolph County blogger) allow me to quote a prosecutor recently in the news . . . "Public dollars were used, people's lives were ruined, the justice system severely mocked, and the public trust trampled on. This is about as far from being a private matter as one could get."

Sound familiar, Sam? We're hearing it a lot in North Carolina aren't we?

The case of Mary Johnson v. Randolph Hospital is about as far from being a private matter as one could get. Yes or No?

In Conclusion, Sam . . .

I think I present a very compelling criminal case that is certainly relevant to current events (and certainly demonstrates that current events have their foundation in a long-standing climate of public & private sector corruption in North Carolina).

Let's review the CORE of the case (for the umpteenth time): I was a Pediatrician in public service who was threatened, then fired (by a "non-profit" hospital-owned practice) for doing her sworn duty (to the state) and putting a patient first. I blew the whistle on bad care . . . and was destroyed and ostracized from my childhood home for my trouble. I then suffered countless snubs, insults & injuries inflicted both passively and actively by the regulatory and legal systems that were supposed to protect me (so I could protect patients).

You/Sue/Roch/Ed/JR tell me that's just the way it is and I should get over it and move on. And if I don't there's something wrong with me.

Well I am sorry, Sam. That is just BULLSHIT.

Fighting back in any way and in any venue (including the criminal one) I can does NOT make me ANY of the nasty/horrible/awful things people have called me in this blogosphere.

While we're at it, let's look at that experience too: Three years ago, I dived into the Greensboro, North Carolina blogosphere - at the invitation of people like John Robinson and Ed Cone and Sue Polinsky and Roch Smith Jr. - on the premise that they had all banded together, and had something new and different and unique to offer the public in terms of "citizen-journalism".

I begged for help - most specifically, I pleaded with the News & Record (as Asheboro's "alternative daily" and as champion of this new concept) to LOOK at my evidence, and report on the story and help publicize my case . . . a case that might raise public awareness (about the difficulties that employed & public-service physicians in North Carolina now face).

As happened with the Duke case, public scrutiny might prompt the local DA to recuse himself and refer the case on & up to Raleigh (something that every lawyer I have consulted has opined should have happened in 2003) where I might finally find some small measure of vindication/satisfaction.

But I discovered, rather quickly, that the same stone walls blocked my path in this ether that have blocked my path in the real world. The status quo is the status quo - and the same people/institutions "rule".

Moreover, there are some people in this blogosphere that seem threatened by strong, passionate voices . . . who are apparently determined not to change their minds or opinions . . . not to be educated . . . not to learn about anything/consider anything outside of their safe & preconceived notions of what is best - or their spheres of happy existance . . . no matter how clear it is someone has been hurt and is hurting . . . no matter how many times someone jumps through all their hoops and answers the same questions over and over again.

There is simply nothing different in the GSO blogosphere from the news black-out I've encountered in Asheboro (because the publisher of the Courier Tribune, David Renfro, cannot allow anyone to rain on his wife's notions of economic development - or question his good-buddy Bob Morrison's tactics & actions).

In three years, the king of "citizen-journalism", John Robinson, has not been able to spare a reporter for the hour or so it might take to go over the documents that prove my case. And self-described "tech-journalist" Ed Cone, whose family name adorns one of the hospitals involved in my story-of-woe, can't find a "hook" in this story to write a column . . . or blog about/network for.

And I am supposed to believe that, Sam? I mean I know I'm just a stupid hick chick from thorougly-red Randolph County. But do these people really think I'm that stupid? That anyone else is that stupid?

I know why JR's circulation is falling and the blood of laid-off reporters adorns his newsroom walls. No one believes a word he says anymore.

As for the rest of the local blogging crew, how did you put it, Sam? "We all have things we like/want to write about."

Why yes, I suppose that's so. And it's all well and good (I'd like to take this opportunity to express my great admiration for that angel of goodness, Cara Michelle). But my question to you is, WHAT is all of the writing really accomplishing?

ALL POLITICS IS LOCAL, SAM!!!

If you-all cannot get it together locally . . . if, with all of the writing that is going on, people cannot come together (on a higher plain than political ideology) to right the wrongs immediately around them and under their noses, then WHAT PRAY TELL makes any of this writing "relevant" to ANYTHING?

I gotta tell you, if we cannot get it together in our own backyard (or, as scandal after scam rolls out of Raleigh, our statehouse), it for damned sure doesn't matter what Presidential candiate/party one supports (which is what most people in the GSO "blaghosphere" want to write/argue about).

I've spent a lot of time over the last week hunched over a computer keyboard taking every punch people wanted to throw (and make no mistake, I am grateful for the attention local bloggers have seen fit to give my case). But I'm tapped out. I don't have a lot left to say and I have simply got to take a step back.

So take my story . . . and my legal position (which remains, PROSECUTE THE PERJURY) or leave it.

But if you leave it, PLEASE don't preach to me about "change" or "transparency" or "openess" or "relevancy" or "integrity" in government or journalism.

I'm taking a break for a little while. I've reached the point where I've got to throw this all out to the ether and step away. I'm not sure I'm even going to be back to moderate comments - because that too just sucks the life out of me.

So this post is going to stand for a while as I pursue other irons I have in the fire.

The content of this post is, in fact, relevant to the games currently being played in Asheboro by "the usual suspects" (we have them in Asheboro too) who want to annex my neighborhood (for reasons that make NO fiscal, common, or practical sense) . . . as it speaks directly to the trustworthiness and credibility of the City of Asheboro's hand-picked spoke-person for their strategic-planning efforts. The choice city leaders made does not say a lot for "small town values".

Lying, smiling Bob Morrison totes the city's water (which the Renfros hope to turn into alcohol). In return, the city gives Bob's hospital lots of public money to fund special projects which have NOTHING TO DO WITH PRIMARY CARE!?! I expect I'm not the only local who might have a problem with that.

It is my sincere hope that my neighbors stand up to this row of tanks ready to maul our neighborhood.

Finally Sam, some of the irons I currently have simmering in the fire are legal ones. As I close, I take some pleasure in the fact that, even as I have spelled out the heart of my criminal case, I have not revealed any civil hands I may yet play (which, if played, will be very big picture and outside the box - something designed to focus attention on things that need attention in an election year). Like I said, I'm did not come here to entertain Roch.

I came here for help. I want my life in Asheboro back and I am willing to fight for it. It makes a lot of people uncomfortable. Too bad. If people are put off by the fact that I'm angry. Too bad. I tried "nice". I tried playing by the rules. It does not work. And it's far past the time for other people to get mad about that. Because if the system did not work for me, it's for damned sure not going to work for them.

I also came here because I do not want what happened to me to happen to anyone else.

I do not want any other young doctor's dream to die.

I know you're a lawyer (and part of what we doctors refer to "the dark side"), but DO YOU?

To coin an Edwardian phrase, Sam, I wish you well.

The difference is, I mean it.

3/27 Update: I went to bed last night after answering Sam in the comments section (his response basically was that he's shutting down and he's not going to help - where have I heard that before?) with my head full of images from the 11 o-clock news. I was also profoundly disturbed by something I read at Cara Michelle's blog - about the expectations of a graduate student who should know better.

North Carolina is suddenly on the map in the Presidential campaign. We're "important" because Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama want something.

I've contacted a whole lot of politicians (especially at the state level) about my situation. ALL of them have shut me out (the case I present reveals many uncomfortable truths about our current climate of corruption). Many of them now are running for something. They all have a "message".

Every local/state/federal politician who has blown me/this case off is sending a very clear message: It is absolutely a-okay for a North Carolina hospital to retaliate against a physician for doing her job.

It is a-okay, in North Carolina, for an institution charged with the public good to lie, cheat and steal to get what it wants.

That message is unacceptable. I want change.