An American Tragedy
One May
26, 2014
Hi, my name is Richard Oehler. I’m a retired family doctor,
a graduate of the University
of Wisconsin in 1961. My
purpose today is to present a plan to create an American Tragedy. Sounds crazy.
Yes, this is a tongue in cheek
presentation. I hope to draw your attention to the real life case I will
present in you tubes 2, 3, and 4. So just pay attention for a few minutes and
see if this scenario might apply to you and your community. After my experience
of the past year, I believe it is common throughout the US.
1. First you need to select a horrible crime such as child
sexual abuse. This allows some child advocates to lose all perspective of right
and wrong. They see an abuser behind every tree. The mere accusation of abuse
is enough that some of these zealots demand that an accused is automatically
guilty and has no right to a fair trial.
2. It is helpful to live in a state where your Governor appears
to care more about an admitted murderer than he does about an honest, honorable
citizen. Oregon
is one of them.
3. You will need a legal system willing to appoint an
attorney who will fail to prepare even the most basic defense and ignore
previous cases which may have helped her client’s case.
4. Next you need a medical witness and witnesses from child
protective services who claim expertise in child sex abuse but seem to know
little about genital anatomy and reproductive physiology. No common sense will
be used by any of them.
The details of this case are presented on 3 more you tubes.
An American Tragedy 2 will present the lies told the jury.
An American Tragedy 3 will point out the response by our
governor and the agencies appointed by him to see that we receive justice in Oregon.
An American Tragedy 4 will analyze the medical study upon
which the medical expert states she based her expert opinion. Other studies
anyone claiming expertise would have to know about also will be presented. None
of them support the conclusions she stated to the jury as facts.
I recommend that you look at these 3 presentations and become
informed. You or a loved one may become the next American Tragedy.
To learn more about this case here are the references.
Ref 1 State of Oregon vs Keith Allen
McMullin
Case# 12-00400 Clackamas County
Oregon
Ref 2 Google: freedomforkeith.blogspot.com
Now on to number two
An American Tragedy Two May
26, 2014
Hi, this is Richard Oehler ready to outline the case I
talked about in video one
Memorial Day has just ended. A day on which we remembered
men and women who gave their lives to protect our right to a fair trial. The
following account will show you how our legal system has been corrupted to deny
us this fundamental right in certain crimes. Why? I believe it is a combination
of arrogance, ignorance, incompetence, and malice. After careful reflection on
true facts the jury was never allowed to hear and the lies they were told, you
decide. Substitute your name for Keith McMullin. Did he (you) receive a fair
trial? I’ve titled my presentation an American Tragedy.
On Feb 1, 2013 Keith Allen McMullin was sentenced to 25
years in prison by Judge Jeffrey Jones for a crime he did not commit. I believe
these are some of the lies told the jury that led them to vote for his
conviction. (page references are to the
trial transcript )
Lie # 1 Testimony by his 13 year old accuser who stated that
she was raped 2-3 times per week for the last18 months. p 66-72
Lie #2 Opening statement by the prosecutor, Stacey Borgman,
who said there is no physical evidence in this case. (Isn’t the normal hymen physical evidence?) p
28
Lie #3 Testimony by the medical expert a certified nurse
practioner, Christine Smith, who stated that she was as qualified as an MD to
do her job. She testified that in this case and others like it she EXPECTED to
find a normal hymen. In this case she found a normal hymen and documented it
with a video of the exam. (No qualified MD or DO would so testify.) p 311 312
Lie #4 In her closing statement the prosecutor said this whole
hymen business is a MYTH and ALL sexually active teenagers have normal hymens because
we are designed to have sex with each other. (This statement is such a flat out
lie that anyone making such a statement has no business being involved in a
case where someone’s life is at stake. A judge who is so uninformed medically
that he allows planting of false evidence in his courtroom also has no business
in making life and death decisions in such a case.) p 625
Lie #5 All of the child abuse/sexual assault experts from
child protective services had no knowledge of any thing involved in this case EXCEPT
what the accuser had told them. Yet all were allowed to vouch for the veracity
of her testimony and by implication that Keith was lying. Why was this allowed?
No such vouching was allowed Keith McMullin.
Lie # 6 In his jury instructions, Judge Jones stated that
the jurors needed to consider and I quote “evidence concerning the character of
the witness for truthfulness.” P 630 631
(He and the two attorneys agreed before the trial began that no one would be
allowed to testify about the character of the accuser and the accused.) See pre
trial discussion, many pages. (There were several adult and teenage witnesses
who had known the accuser and the accused for years but were not allowed to
testify about their character and reputation for truthfulness. Why? (See Lie #5
The experts who had interviewed the accuser for a few minutes [or in one case a
couple of hours] and NEVER had talked to the accused were allowed to vouch for
her story. I find this truly amazing logic by the judge and both attorneys!)
Lie #7 Judge Jones congratulated the two attorneys on their
professionalism in this case. P 665
Is he really so
unfamiliar with the law that he did not recognize incompetent conduct which
would be considered malpractice or misconduct in any other professional field?
As you examine this case, consider the conduct of these
professionals. Here is a simple comparison. A surgeon who operated without
washing his hands or wearing gloves resulting in serious infection would be
subject to malpractice for certain and probably even criminal misconduct.
Should not these courtroom professionals be held to similar standards? Look at
the mayhem they created in the life of Keith McMullin and his family through
their negligent, incompetent actions.
Where was the attention and focus of Keith’s defense attorney during the trial? Heather
Karabeika was obviously in the courtroom. Was there a conflict of interest? Did
she not want to rock the boat by doing her job because she was soon to be
appointed a judge? (Only she can answer that.)
I was informed that Ms Karabeika was briefed by at least two
other attorneys before the trial about what she should expect during the trial.
Did she pay any attention to this advice?
There were legal cases already decided that apparently addressed
some of the very medical issues raised in this case. She knew or should have
known about these cases. Why didn’t she use these to help in questioning Ms
Smith?
Why did she not call a qualified medical expert to refute
the false testimony given by Christine Smith? (These facts were pointed out in
the Ryan Scott letter. See blog )
Why did she not question Christine Smith about her
qualifications to be called as a medical expert?
Why did she not challenge the child protective service
witnesses who were called by the prosecution to vouch for the veracity of the
accuser? According to the appeals attorney if no objection is raised by the
defense attorney to lies and procedures during trial, there may be no legal
basis to grant an appeal even if the conviction is based on these lies.
Why did she not question the medical study cited by
Christine Smith?
Why did she not ask Ms Smith about some of the other medical
studies available to her? Especially the Slaughter study of 213 victims in
which 92 % had evidence of sexual trauma if examined within 48 hours of the
attack. The 81 adolescents included in this study had 100% evidence of sexual
assault if examined within 48 hours. None of several other studies agreed with the
Kellogg study on which Ms Smith based her expert opinion. One of the main
criterion of a valid study is that it can be and is repeated by other investigators
with the same outcome. Why did Ms Karabeika not ask Ms Smith to explain this
well known fact about medical studies?
It defies all logic that among the judge, the two attorneys,
the medical expert, and all the sex abuse experts from child protective
services not one questioned the accuser’s story in light of her normal hymen. NO
ONE questioned Ms Smith’s report. The two attorneys had my statement that I knew
it was a medical impossibility. Is this why I was not called as a witness? The
judge also knew before sentencing because I had told him in a letter it was
impossible. He also received a letter from a layman, Brian McNeil, questioning
a normal hymen in a petite girl who testified of at least 100 rapes by an adult
male.
Even if none of them believed me, an experienced physician,
or an obviously intelligent layman with common sense, they should at least have
had the professionalism to check with other qualified medical experts before
condemning an innocent man to possible death at the hands of imprisoned felons
who don’t like child molesters.
The judge and the two attorneys knew or should have known
about the previous legal cases that had already addressed some of these very
issues. Why did they choose to lie about the facts to convict a man they had every
reason to know was innocent? (It would
be interesting to hear them explain their actions in this case.).
I have known and associated with many fine lawyers, nurses,
and paramedics over my years of practice. I have learned much from their
insight and knowledge and hopefully contributed to their understanding of some
medical issues. We all can and do make mistakes but such blatant errors when
the life of this man and his family was at stake is inexcusable. The truth had
been pointed out to them BEFORE and AFTER the trial but definitely before
sentencing.
How would you like to be Keith McMullin? He has now been in prison
for over a year. His family is struggling and recently lost their home.
I don’t really like to think all of the persons involved in
this case acted with malice, but the results of their arrogant, ignorant, and
incompetent actions have brought about great harm to an innocent man and his
family. If they DID NOT HAVE EVIL intent and acted out of pure ignorance, it is
now time for them to step forward and correct their malignant actions. They
need to admit the lies and mistakes made during this trial and get this innocent
man out of prison and back to his family, now.
If there was malice and evil intent is still present, this
foursome will not look to find the truth but will do their best to attack my
credibility. They will also use every conceivable legal trick to bully me and
any other people who speak the truth. However, Keith’s conviction still boils
down to 2 questions that need to be answered “yes” by a qualified family
physician or OB-Gyn specialist.
1 Would you
EXPECT a petite 13 year old girl who had been sexually penetrated by an adult
male 2-3 times per week for 18 months to have a normal hymen?
2 Is this
whole hymen business a MYTH and ALL sexually active teenagers have normal
hymens because we are designed to have sex with each other?
No VALID study supports either conclusion nor would any QUALIFIED
physician.
Youtube An American
Tragedy #3 will discuss the response of
our governor and the various elected and appointed entities who are
charged with over seeing justice for our citizens.
Thank you. Now let’s go to three.
Richard H Oehler MD Keith McMullin vs State or Oregon Case #
12-00400
Circuit
Court
Clackamas County
An American Tragedy Three May
26, 2014
This has been the response to Keith McMullin’s trial by some
of the elected and appointed officials and agencies charged with overseeing
justice in the state of Oregon.
Governor John Kitzhaber MD:
After my 5 letters pointing out the lies told during medical testimony
to our PHYSICIAN governor, his office finally responded stating my letter would
be on file if Keith McMullin applied for clemency. (He is not asking for
clemency, Doctor, he is asking for justice. You had time to commute Gary
Haugen’s case, the admitted murderer. Taking a few minutes to check on an
innocent person’s case should not overwhelm your time.)
Attorney General: I
have no jurisdiction over the courts. (Even if there is perjury and malpractice
bordering on criminal conduct during the trial, you have NO responsibility to
investigate. Who does?)
Oregon
Medical Board: We have no jurisdiction.
You just published a bulletin pointing out the responsibility of the physician
supervising medical spas. Should not the physician supervising the Oregon City
Children’s Clinic for work done by Ms Smith at that facility have
responsibility? ( When a medical mistake is committed by someone claiming to be
as qualified as an MD and her testimony has the potential to send a man to his
death, who does have responsibility?)
Oregon Bar Association:
We don’t investgate individual cases. (Even when malpractice is apparent
to laymen. Who does?)
Committee on Judicial Fitness: Fill out a formal complaint about the judge.
Otherwise we don’t become involved. (So who investigates a corrupt system? This
individual judge is not the only problem.)
Oregon
Court of Appeals: All trials have lies.
If the defense does not object, there may be no basis for retrial even if
perjury was committed. (Perjury by the states witnesses and misconduct by the
judge and both attorneys is not a basis for appeal? The judge asked the jury to
decide the case based only on the testimonies presented and on their common
sense. He repeatedly admonished the jury not to check online or talk to anyone
about the case. Was he afraid they might ascertain the truth? This placed a
huge burden on the court to see that the jury be given the true facts. A
responsibility completely failed by this judge and these attorneys. Shouldn’t our
legal justice system be held accountable to show some common sense and ethical
behavior?)
Department of Human Services: Renamed I believe because it
had such a poor reputation as Child Protective Services. (This agency continues
to have a less than stellar reputation for competent service. They continue in
their role as experts in the field of child abuse/sexual assault in spite of
cases like this where not one of those involved seems to understand human
sexual anatomy and reproductive physiology.)
Remember Keith had a court appointed attorney, Heather
Karabeika, who was on a list of 19 candidates to be appointed a circuit judge
by Gov Kitzhaber. Shortly after this trial she received the appointment and is
now a judge. If she was the top qualified candidate, it is hard to imagine what
our court system is becoming. Or is it possible she was not the best candidate
and the appointment was based on support for his campaign to continue as
governor? You will have to ask him and her about that. However it does raise
the conflict of interest issue and why she made little attempt to present a
defense and challenge the court proceedings by being a strong advocate in his
defense.
With each of the above elected persons or legally appointed
entities denying responsibility, to whom does Keith McMullin turn? To a legal
system which denied him his right to a fair trial in the first place?
Unless you, the honest citizens, start to hold our elected
representatives locally and nationally responsible for this type of justice you
or your loved one could be the next Keith McMullin.
We have become very aware of bullying in our schools. This
type of case is a real world example of adult bullying. The child protection
people accuse you falsely. They combine with a legal system to tell lies about
you. Stamp on any defense you may try to put forward. Appoint a lawyer who
offers no competent help. And finally throw you in jail with no legal recourse
except to the very legal system which denied you justice in the first place. To
me this is just a LEGAL system, not a JUSTICE system.
This case was decided on two very clearly known medical facts.
Ask your family Physician or an OB-Gyn specialist these two questions:
1 Would you
EXPECT a petite 13 year old girl who testified she was sexually penetrated by
an adult male 2-3 times per week for the past 18 months (100-150 times) to
still have a normal hymen?
2 Do you
think the whole hymen business is a MYTH and ALL sexually active teenagers have
normal hymens because we were designed to have sex with each other?
If their
answer to either question is “yes”, get a new physician.
Think about your responsibility as a tax payer also. Every
one of the people involved in this case was paid by our tax dollars either
directly or indirectly. Should we continue to pay for such incompetence? This
type of case is happening in courtrooms through out the US costing us
millions. At the same time our schools, roads, bridges, welfare programs, etc
are suffering because of the lack of
these wasted tax dollars.
This is Dr Oehler saying, Thank you again.
In youtube 4 I will discuss a few of the medical studies
available to Ms Karabeika and Ms Smith, as well as the judge and prosecutor
involved in this case. They should have used these studies to inform themselves
before ever entering the court room. Or did they know and chose to ignore
them?
Thank you for your kind attention. Please write, call, or
email your elected representatives on every level until this type of modern day
witch hunting justice is no longer the norm in our society.
I hope any other past or present victims of this type of
justice will send me a brief email.
.
Richard H Oehler MD Keith
McMullin
Oehlerdick31@gmail.com Case
12-00400
Freedomforkeith.blogspot.com Circuit Court Clackamas County,
Oregon
An American Tragedy
Four May 26, 2014
This presentation will briefly discuss a few medical
articles available to the medical expert as well as the judge and the two
attorneys involved. The five studies discussed are listed on freedomforkeith.blogspot.com. There
are many more.
(pages are from the trial transcript)
Ms Smith testified to several things which were not true.
1 She EXPECTED a girl in a case like this to have a normal
hymen. P 311 312
2 Pregnancy proves sexual penetration. P 311
3 Tampon use has no effect on females using this method of
controlling menstrual flow.
p 323
4 Young girls are no more likely to show abnormalities if
sexually penetrated than older
girls. p 324
She based her expert opinion on the Kellogg study. P 311
( Numbers 2,3, and 4 have no direct application to this case
but do prove that Ms Smith is not the expert she claims to be.)
The Kellogg study specifically stated that all persons
examined within 2 weeks of the last penetration showed definite evidence of
assault. (14 of the 36 were not normal, but did not show conclusively that
there was a sexual assault) Few of these
girls were examined acutely allowing various periods of time, up to several
months, for the hymen to heal.)
The study avoids stating that pregnancy proved penetration.
It states that it proved sex abuse. (I agree impregnating an underage female is
sex abuse in most or all jurisdictions.)
There was no mention in this study of tampon use.
So on what facts in this study did Ms Smith base her expert
opinion as she testified?
The Teixeira study examined 500 cases of alleged sexual
assault and found 310 had a ruptured hymen. (62%) Ms Smith testified that she EXPECTED
to find a normal exam. According to this study she would be wrong 62% of the
time.
The Emans study specifically noted that sexually active
girls had hymenal clefts in 81%. Ms
Smith testified that she expected a normal exam.
According to this study she would be wrong 81% of the time.
This study also noted that tampon users had slightly bigger
vaginal openings and more likelihood of hymenal irregularities.
The fact that pregnancy does not prove penetration is so
well known that there is probably not a study trying to prove such an obvious
fact. Even Amy Dickinson addressed this fact in her advice column. (Oregonian
April 30, 2014)
I don’t believe Ms
Dickinson claims any medical expertise.
This statement by Ms Smith is 100% wrong.
The Adams study pointed out
that if examined within 72 hours of the last alleged assault, 69% of adolescent
girls had evidence of the assault.
According to this study Ms Smith would be wrong 69% of the
time.
The Slaughter study found and I quote: “Tearing of the hymen
was the only finding that was significantly related to age, occurring almost
four times more frequently in the younger age group.”
According to this study Ms Smith would be wrong 4 times and
right 1 time.
Would you want to be in jail with your life in jeopardy on
the basis of Ms Smith’s expert
testimony?
Not one of the studies directly addressed the issue in this
specific case. The accuser alleged that
she had penile vaginal penetration for at least the past 18 months. She still
had a normal hymen.
Not one of the experts in this case seemed to wonder about
the small number of cases in the Kellogg study. According to Ms Smith and Ms
Borgman all sexually active young women have normal hymens so the study should
have had at least 100 to 500 cases as did the other studies. Instead it had 36
cases BECAUSE having a normal hymen is the exception not the usual finding in
pregnant young women.
How many of the young women were having regular relations
and how many were victims of one assault? This very important issue was not
part of this study. So Ms Smith appears to have reached her own conclusions not
even addressed in the study. Why did she so testify? I would expect an expert
to be very sure of facts when testifying in a case of this magnitude. After all
Keith’s life was at stake.
In view of the literature emphasizing the importance of
immediate examination to find abnormalities in victims who allege assault, why
was the exam put off for several days?
Why was this not considered important by Ms Smith or Ms
Karabeika?
The questions could go on and on, but Ms Smith lied under
oath about definite facts that she as an expert should know so any statements
she makes should definitely be questioned.
Why was there such a rush to sentence Keith McMullin for a
crime any competent lawyer or judge should have known was a bogus charge? Judge
Jones knew medical questions were present before sentencing. Why not do the
obvious and check on some of the previous cases and with a real medical expert
before pronouncing his potential death sentence?
Why is such blatant incompetence by legal professionals
condoned in our courtrooms?
These legal experts could have used these studies to inform
themselves before ever entering the court room. There was headline news a year
or two ago about Dr Death. He was a trained surgeon. He got in trouble by doing
operations he was not trained to perform. I see no difference between him and
these lawyers. All three are probably well trained lawyers. Why not use common
sense to intelligently research a case involving well documented medical facts
before choosing to sentence a man to death in prison for a crime they had to
know he did not commit?
During our life experience we are fooled for two reasons:
1) We
believe things which are not true. or
2) We
refuse to believe things which are true.
Both factors were present in this case.
Thanks for your kind attention. Keith McMullin IS
INNOCENT. His case is a true American
Tragedy.
Now PLEASE contact your elected persons on all levels of
government. Until you and I act, these atrocities will continue in every county
courtroom in the United
States.
You cannot expect that most politicians will do the right
thing unless pressured by their constituents or unless they see some personal
advantage gained by their action.
Studies discussed:
Kellogg, Nancy MD Genital anatomy in pregnant adolescents:
“normal” does not mean “nothing happened”
Adams, Joyce MD Genital
findings in adolescent girls referred for suspected sexual abuse
Emans, S. Jean MD Hymenal findings in adolescent women:
impact of tampon use and consensual sexual activity
Teixeira, Wilmes MD Hymenal colposcopic examination in
sexual offense
Slaughter, Laura MD Patterns of genital injury in female
assault victims
