|If they prosecute in Rhode Island......||ClydeTri|
Feb 24, 2003 11:01 AM
|If they prosecute for negilegent homicide or the comparable for the fire in RI, one could easily make an argument for prosecution in the tragic death of the teenage at Duke Hospital. If the investigation shows that a person or people screwed this up, that would comparable gross negligence resulting in a death. Even though it was just one death, there is NO excuse for such things to happen. However, I really doubt we will see a prosecution for the death at Duke.|
|Thats an interesting point||Kristin|
Feb 24, 2003 11:13 AM
|There is a big difference between a flurry of people who missed a step during a surgical procedure and some labeling clerk somewhere who got confused--which sadly lead to someones death--and a band who decides to do a fireworks show on the sly without checking any building codes first--which sadly leads to the deaths of 75 people.
Also, can a corporation or organization be criminally charged or can only individuals be charged with crimes? In the case of Duke, you won't be able to find just one person who was soley neglegent or who broke any laws at all. It was an organizational failure. Tragic and sad, but quite different from the club fire.
In the case of the club(s) several people have violated specific laws. In Chicago, the whole thing was open illegally. In RI, the building that wasn't up to code, was probably over filled and the band who chose to do pyrotechnics without first making sure it was legal. In the club case, you can easily proove negligence and crimes that lead to the deaths of 75 people.
|Thats an interesting point||ClydeTri|
Feb 24, 2003 11:20 AM
|I am not a lawyer, but, have never heard/read of a corporation being tried in criminal court. You have to identify the people who committed the crime. Of course, there will be a civil case, although, I doubt it will go to court unless the family wants an obscene amount of money. I do disagree with your organizational failure remark. It might end up being that, just as well as it might be ONE person who didnt do their job and was negligent. It will take time for the investigation, I just predicted there would not be a prosecution because there will not be the political/public outcry for one as there will be in RI.|
|Arthur Andersen was criminally prosecuted||Captain Morgan|
Feb 24, 2003 11:27 AM
|...and found guilty (although not for murder).|
Feb 25, 2003 8:37 AM
|I believe AA was charged under securities laws which were written to apply to both individuals and corporations. The penalties are basically financial and loss of licenses.
Legally, a corporation is an individual. However, prisons were not built for paper individuals. I'm sure a creative district attorney could find more appropriate criminal charges for any of the bad actors in this discussion.....
|Maybe not the whole corporation...||Alpedhuez55|
Feb 24, 2003 12:53 PM
|would be put on trial but some representatives of a company can be charged for fraud. THat happens a lot. You are not going to arrest everyone who ever worked for Enron, but you will target executives and auditors who fudged the numbers.
As for the Dr., he could loose his license but I doubt he will. His name is most likely mud but at least he came out and took the blame. I worked for the Doctors who treated Late Boston Celtic Reggie Lewis. They were dragged through a malpractice suit and another one through a retrial, but ultimately they were found not responsible.
I do not think you can hold a Dr. criminally responsible for a mistake. We would never have enough people going into medicine if that were the case. Sure they should be charged for things like Fraud or if someone tries to recreate some of Dr. Mengeles experiments. You could not charge soneone for a crime for a slip of the knife or a missed spot on an xray. Civil sanctions and loss of licenses should be enough for that.
|As for the Duke case...||PaulCL|
Feb 24, 2003 12:45 PM
|My wife and I talked to a surgical nurse on our local hospitals' transplant team. My wife was in her aerobics class on Saturday AM.
Her comment on the Duke situation was very interesting. First off, she said there was almost no way to mess up blood type at the receiving end. The organs are repeatedly marked with the bloodtype from the receiving forms to the cooler to the tag on the plastic bag holding the organs - each to be initialed by numerous MDs, nurses, techs, etc... Checking bloodtype is priority #1. Was it packaged or labeled wrong somewhere???
Second, and more enlightening, was the rate of rejection for organs. Her feeling was that the first set of heart/lungs were from a universal donor - O+ (I think) blood type as opposed to this patients' specific bloodtype. Why? Because the young girl was so desperate they had to take the increased chance of rejection (although slight) for a universal donor organ. According to the nurse (Netso, feel free to correct my third hand report), the transplant "community" does not want the general public to be afraid of universal donor organs and possibly refuse them lest the donor system fall apart. Duke may be willing to absorb the temporary heat and cash outlay to preserve the organ transplant community integrity.
Either way, its' a horrible tragedy. I'm sure the docs at Duke did everything they could. A mistake or accident isn't murder. If they try a murder charge, I'm sure Duke will bring up the fact that the young girl was critical before she came to them. Just my $.02
|The report I heard was that the cooler was mislabeled||Kristin|
Feb 24, 2003 12:54 PM
|So everything arrived stating that the organs were the girls blood type, when in fact, they were not.|
|I thought the girl was type O||Captain Morgan|
Feb 24, 2003 2:14 PM
|...and they tried to put in A, which is incompatible. I don't think the organs were from a universal donor.|
|I hadn't read those reports||PaulCL|
Feb 25, 2003 6:44 AM
|The lead MD is taking the blame personally. It sounds as if it wasn't his fault at all. There is no way he can test bloodtype in the OR.|
|CM is correct||KeeponTrekkin|
Feb 25, 2003 8:33 AM
|The girl was O+ and the organs were A+. Clearly incompatible. I still don't understand how the typing or labeling error arose.