The schadenfreude keeps a-comin' in Winkler County, Texas

[Jackmannii]

It just gets better and better.

Winkler County, a rural West Texas locale best known previously for being where Roy Orbison grew up, first got national headlines in 2009 when two nurses at the local hospital (in the booming metropolis of Kermit) were indicted for “misuse of official information” (a third-degree felony punishable by 2-10 years in prison). Their “crime” was reporting questionable medical and ethical practices by an influential local doctor, Rolando Arafiles to the state medical board. (Arafiles among other things marketed his line of “nutritional supplements” to patients, sutured a rubber scissors tip to a patient’s injured finger to “stabilize” it and rubbed an olive oil solution on a wound infected with antibiotic-resistant Staph).

Once Arafiles got wind of this, he told his buddy, the local sheriff (a patient who’d also been involved in the supplement business with him). The sheriff tracked down the nurses and got them indicted (they were fired from their jobs; in one case the criminal charges were dropped and the other nurse was found innocent). The nurses won a $750,000 settlement in a lawsuit, but for the real schadenfreude:

The physician Arafiles has been indicted on felony charges (of retaliation and misuse of official information, the latter being the same charge used to harass the nurses). And now the sheriff and county attorney in Winkler County have been indicted too.

“Yesterday’s indictment represents the latest legal repercussion against Dr. Arafiles and others involved in the nurses’ criminal case and job termination. Winkler County Sheriff Robert Roberts, Jr, and County Attorney Scott Tidwell were each charged with 2 counts of misuse of official information, 2 counts of retaliation (also a third-degree felony), and 2 counts of official oppression (a class A misdemeanor).”

The hospital administrator faces felony charges of retaliation as well. (the best article on this, complete with photos can be found on Medscape, which I couldn’t link to directly without applying for membership on the site).

So here we have a case of woo believers and good old boys persecuting defenders of good mainstream medical practice and having it thoroughly backfire. It would be completely wonderful if it wasn’t for what the whistleblowing nurses went through (they still didn’t have jobs, the last I heard) and the citizens of a poor rural Texas county who are paying for the venomous idiocy of their local officials.

I hope all these jackasses do prison time, with Doc Arafiles* as their dedicated jailhouse physician (“more olive oil for your stab wound, sheriff”?).

*Arafiles will also have to defend himself against multiple civil charges of bad medical practice filed by the state medical board.

[Cyningablod]

That’s fucking sweet. Schadenfreudelicious!

[Oakminster]

@Jackmannii

and the other nurse was found innocent.

No she wasn’t. Courts do not find people “innocent” in the U.S., they find people Not Guilty–ie, the evidence was not sufficient to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

[Cyningablod]

@Oakminster

No she wasn’t. Courts do not find people “innocent” in the U.S., they find people Not Guilty–ie, the evidence was not sufficient to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

:rolleyes:

[COUGH]Pedantic prick![/COUGH]

[Oakminster]

Meh, fighting ignorance, etc.

[Jackmannii]

Fortunately, pissantry is not considered an indictable offense in most American jurisdictions.

Here’s more on the Arafiles debacle.

[lieu]

@Oakminster

Meh, fighting ignorance, etc.

Ooooh, that there sounds like Assault.

[Der_Trihs]

@Oakminster

No she wasn’t. Courts do not find people “innocent” in the U.S., they find people Not Guilty–ie, the evidence was not sufficient to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Actually, they do find people “Innocent” and not just “Not Guilty”. It’s very rare; the one time I heard of it happening it was pointed out how extremely rare it is. Mostly because it’s much harder to prove your innocence than it is just to prove “a reasonable doubt”.

[Czarcasm]

@Der_Trihs

Actually, they do find people “Innocent” and not just “Not Guilty”. It’s very rare; the one time I heard of it happening it was pointed out how extremely rare it is. Mostly because it’s much harder to prove your innocence than it is just to prove “a reasonable doubt”.

Cite?

[Der_Trihs]

@Czarcasm

Cite?

I can’t find any; as technically inaccurate as the phrase usually is, people use phrases like “found innocent” all the time so Google isn’t much help. It was a minor news story here in California, I didn’t even have internet access back then IIRC much less have the story bookmarked.

[LouisB]

I had an uncle named Kermit; I used to believe that town was named after him. IIRC, Kermit ain’t too far from Muleshoe, home of Billy Dixon.

[LouisB]

My memory failed; Kermit is a hell of a way from Muleshoe. How could I forget a thing like that? But Billy Dixon did live in Muleshoe or at least his widow did.

[Chimera]

“and 2 counts of official oppression (a class A misdemeanor).”

First I’ve ever heard of such a charge.
And it’s only a misdemeanor?

Strangely hilarious and mildy annoying at the same time.

Trying desperately to avoid a Monty Python joke…

[Rex_Goliath]

@Der_Trihs

Actually, they do find people “Innocent” and not just “Not Guilty”. It’s very rare; the one time I heard of it happening it was pointed out how extremely rare it is. Mostly because it’s much harder to prove your innocence than it is just to prove “a reasonable doubt”.

At least in Massachusetts, a verdict of “innocent” is not possible.

http://www.massbar.org/about-the-mba/press-room/journalists’-handbook/6-not-guilty-does-not-mean-innocent

Technically, only three pleas can be entered by a defendant who is brought before the court to answer the charges against him. Under the Massachusetts Rules of Criminal Procedure, the defendant may plead not guilty, guilty or nolo contendere to any crime with which he is charged and over which the court has jurisdiction. The rules that are applicable to the criminal sessions of the trial court do not provide the defendant with the option of pleading innocent. There is no such plea available.

Similarly, the Massachusetts Rules of Criminal Procedure provide for only two possible verdicts that can be returned by a jury: guilty or not guilty. There is no verdict of innocent. And, not guilty does not mean innocent.

I think the most likely case is that you confabulated the memory, or simply played victim to poor reporting.

[Jackmannii]

@Chimera

“and 2 counts of official oppression (a class A misdemeanor).”

First I’ve ever heard of such a charge.
And it’s only a misdemeanor?

Sounds like it should be more*.

The penalty is up to a year’s imprisonment and up to a $4,000 fine.

As noted in the OP, being convicted of a third-degree felony (i.e. misuse of official information and/or retaliation) will get you 2-10 years and up to a $10,000 fine.
Official glowering, sneering and denigrating are Class A misdemeanors in Texas too. Wasting taxpayers’ money on vengeful witch-hunts is a first-degree felony.*

**Just made all that up, but it sounds righteous.

[Jackmannii]

As a further note re pissantry, it is common usage to describe an accused person as having been found innocent of something, while not declaring that a jury rendered a verdict of innocent.

And these nurses were innocent as hell. The jury took less than an hour to come back with its verdict (and probably took that long only to show they were doing their job).

[brossa]

@Jackmannii

The jury took less than an hour to come back with its verdict (and probably took that long only to show they were doing their job).

I was on a jury for an assault case, and we had a verdict within thirty minutes or so. The bailiff ( maybe court clerk?) told us to go ahead and eat lunch before we returned to the courtroom.

[DMC]

Considering that we go into this with the presumption of innocence, I think it is fair to use the phrase “found them innocent” if they are not found guilty, even if lawyers have veins bulging out of their foreheads when the phrase is used.

[alphaboi867]

@brossa

I was on a jury for an assault case, and we had a verdict within thirty minutes or so. The bailiff ( maybe court clerk?) told us to go ahead and eat lunch before we returned to the courtroom.

I was an alternate juror in a statutory rape case. The jury was sent to deliberate Thursday afternoon; I went home. That evening I found out the verdict, not guilty on all counts, the jury having reached that verdict before I’d even got home :eek:. Can’t say I was surprised either.

[EllisDee]

@Der_Trihs

I can’t find any; as technically inaccurate as the phrase usually is, people use phrases like “found innocent” all the time so Google isn’t much help. It was a minor news story here in California, I didn’t even have internet access back then IIRC much less have the story bookmarked.

The Duke Lacrosse scandal was one example, though it didn’t go to trial. After Mike Nifong was removed from the case, the AG or new DA or whomever was in charge of taking over called a press conference to declare the Duke Lacross players innocent. He clarified that he wasn’t saying there wasn’t enough evidence, or that he believed they weren’t guilty, but that they were, in fact, innocent of the charges.