Jury acquits North Dakota surgeon accused of drugging and raping his wife on all counts

  • Article by: DAVE KOLPACK , Associated Press
  • Updated: November 21, 2012 - 4:24 PM
  • 8
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
  • 1 - 8 of 8
annie55441Nov. 22, 1212:55 PM

First question: how many women were on the jury? Second question: This "doctor" illegally administered an anesthetic to his wife. Won't that keep him from ever practicing medicine again? Third question: Who will protect the women he comes in contact with in the future, especially if his medical license is reinstated? Rape, no matter who the victim; children, women or men, is a horrible, heinous crime that needs to be obliterated from the world. It is too often used as a weapon; in marriage, in war, on the street.

3
34
hecklesNov. 22, 12 9:50 PM

Nice view Annie; guilty until proven innocent, then guilty anyway.

33
0
hecklesNov. 23, 12 7:50 AM

Annie, he was proven innocent. You see cliams like this all the time in divorce and custody cases. I agree, he should not have been administering the drug and that is a completely different situation that is up to the medical board to decide upon. Overall, Annie, I do not understand why you would comment something like this on a man that had been proven innocent?

30
0
angelanimsNov. 23, 12 1:21 PM

"She says he called it by its brand name, Diprivan, and that she wouldn't have taken it if she had known it was propofol." She's lying. This is all I needed to read to know that the husband is telling the truth and that she is full of it.

19
0
lordhawhaw1Nov. 23, 12 2:15 PM

Her testimony rung hollow for me when I read she woke up to find he was forcing her to perform oral sex. Try as I might I cannot seem to figure out how that could work with an unconcious person. And I hope Annie isn't called for jury duty anytime soon.

20
1
marcodevichNov. 26, 12 7:11 AM

Heckles - I totally agree with you except on one point. The jury said the doctor was "not guilty". Not guilty is not always "innocent", it sometimes means not enough evidence to prove one as guilty.

2
4
martiniaz2Nov. 26, 1212:21 PM

She says he called it by its brand name, Diprivan, and that she wouldn't have taken it if she had known it was propofol." Isn't she a physician as well? Wouldn't a physician know or want to know what is being placed in his or her body? Furthermore, it was an injection, not a little pill that can be crushed and dissolved in a person's drink. For those two reasons alone, a reasonable person could conclude she was not being truthful.

5
0
hungry4newsNov. 27, 12 1:22 PM

One must understand this WASNT a case about "illegally administered an anesthetic to his wife". This was a case of malpractice(INFORMED CONSENT) and rape. Any MD is allowed by law to prescribe and administer any legal drug. Diprivan is not an illegal drug. Administering the drug without life support equipment thou is foolish and borders on stupidity as things can go bad quickly with using too much of the drug, BUT IT'S NOT ILLEGAL!.

1
0
  • 1 - 8 of 8

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT