While I’m at it blogging about the trial of Anne Mitchell, the nurse who is being maliciously prosecuted for having reported a doctor who hawks serious woo in the form of colloidal silver for H1N1 and who also happens to be buddies with the County Sheriff, I thought it would be worthwhile to post this update from ABC News:
I also want to report report on the latest update I’ve received from the Texas Nurses Association, which is covering the trial every day:
THANK YOU to everyone who has contributed to the TNA Legal Defense Fund in support of Anne Mitchell. A number of donations have come in within the last several days.
We wanted to give you a short recap of what happened during the first day and a half of the trial.
Yesterday, after jury selection the prosecution began its case. The State called only one witness, the Winkler County Investigator. The investigator testified about finding the letter to Texas Medical Board on the nurse’s computer. John Cook, one of the defense attorneys, pressed for “facts” that the investigator relied on to conclude Anne was harassing the physician, but the investigator could only say he relied on the sheriff’s investigation. The investigator admitted he did not try to verify if the allegations had substance.
The State called the hospital’s Information Technology (IT) technician next. Mr. Cook objected on the grounds that the IT tech was going to testify on extraneous matters and that the prosecutor had not turned over this information as required. The jury was dismissed for the day and witnesses were called to the stand to explain what their testimony would be.
The IT tech was put on the stand to testify as to what he would say in front of the jury during the trial. His testimony will be that in April 2008, Anne said the physician would be gone in a year. The Court said it would allow the witness’ testimony.
Next, the Winkler County Sheriff was called to explain what his testimony would be. In April 2008, the Sheriff heard Anne say the physician was a witch doctor, and shouldn’t be there, etc. The Court said it would allow this testimony.
The County Attorney said the State will present six to eight additional witnesses, who will testify that Anne said something similar to them also.
Today, the physician testified and the defense attorney’s cross-examination was effective.
That’s all the prosecution’s got? An IT guy who allegedly heard Anne Mitchell say bad things about Dr. Arafiles? Six to eight people who heard her complain about Dr. Arafiles? Hell, if I were one of the nurses and thought a doctor was practicing bad care, I’d be complaining about him too! It takes (or should take) a lot more than that to prove maliciousness in reporting Dr. Arafiles.
And so this travesty of justice continues.