Self-Defense to an Assault and Battery Charge

My question involves criminal law for the state of: Arkansas

My question is in regards to a self-defense case that occurred in Arkansas. I have been a licensed concealed carry holder for 14 years, and recently plead "no contest" to one count of aggravated assault. I have no other criminal record. I am 35 years old with a BA in English Literature and a Minor in Philosophy. Facts of the case: I suffer from a neurovascular disease commonly referred to as "migraine." I needed to get a refill of medication of Crestor and a beta-blocker called Toprol XL (for migraine prophylaxis). I stopped at a local family practice clinic on my way home from work, and provided the clinic with my medical records.

At this time, my right arm was in a support brace due to a dislocated ECU tendon, and I had just had an embolization splint removed by a hand surgeon approximately 9 days before. I also have 3 herniated discs in my c-spine at C5, C6, and C7 with a “right side cord compression”, which means the spinal cord is being compressed by the vertebrae on the right side. I was scheduled to undergo spinal epidural injections in 72 on the day this took place, in order to reduce the pressure on my spinal cord and improve function of my right arm, as well as reduce pain. This procedure is performed under anesthesia, and the patient is placed in an MRI machine so that the doctor will not damage the spinal cord. Needless to say, I am not exactly in the shape to be fighting anyone.

When the doctor entered the exam room, he began to berate me for a prescription in my medical records that was written for 10 narcotic pain pills, which were prescribed to me by my migraine specialist. The doctor stated that the medication was not appropriate for migraines, and that I needed depression medication. I told him that I was not there to discuss my migraine disease with him, but only to discuss a prescription for Crestor (for high cholesterol), and the blood pressure medication Toprol XL. The doctor continued to ask degrading questions, and stated, “I am not about to write a bunch of narcotics for headaches.” I again told him that I was not seeking narcotics and that I would trust the specialist over his advice.

We continued in this fashion for a few minutes, with him making inappropriate comments about migraine disease, that migraines were over treated and that I was most likely a drug seeker. As my wife is a doctor as well, he then stated, “How long has your wife been prescribing you narcotics?” I, of course, took umbrage at his assertions, and told him that not only had my wife never written me a prescription for anything, but that if she was to prescribe me narcotics, not only would she immediately lose her license and job, but that the pharmacist would never even fill the prescription. I asserted that he knew this, and that his comments were out of line. He then stated, “Well the only people I know that die from migraines are the idiots that go home and kill themselves”, and before I could respond he walked out of the room. Migraines and cluster headaches are colloquially referred to as “suicide headaches.”

I waited for the nurse to return with my medical records, and then I left the exam room, as I did not want any type of treatment from this “doctor.” As left the exam room, he was standing at the end of the hallway leading to the exit. I yelled out his name, and walked down the hall to the exit. I then stated, “Before I leave here, I wanted to tell you that the reason those people you call idiots, who are actually called patients, go home and kill themselves is because they are treated like criminals by doctors like you.” He responded by grabbing my left arm and squeezing until I yanked my arm away, and then he began to bump his chest against mine. He would continue to push and shove, and call me a “little punk” as I walked towards the security door leading to the lobby. He followed me through the security door, and then he followed me outside the front door of the clinic, into the parking lot, and to my vehicle. When he came outside, he used his right hand to sweep his white coat back, and reached behind his back as if reaching for a weapon.
I know this movement to be consistent with someone carrying a firearm in the small of their back, in what is termed an “inside the waistband holster.” He then threw down his stethoscope on the pavement and told me, “You better get the Hell out of here you little punk.” As I thought he was reaching for a firearm, I took cover behind my vehicle. At this time 3 nurses came out of the front door and began to tell the doctor to come inside, they pulled as his arms and coat, and stated “Dr. X, please come inside, it is not worth it.” As he redirected his attention to the nurses, and stepped back up onto the sidewalk of his clinic, I came out from behind my vehicle to try and get inside and leave. As I moved to my car door, he immediately turned toward me and ran at me, causing one of the nurses to try and stop him by jumping in front of him (facing him). He reached over the nurse, and grabbed me by the back of the neck. I immediately responded by drawing my firearm as I spun around towards my attacker, and shoved him with my left hand, and pointed the pistol in his face as I screamed, “GET BACK! GET BACK!”

He immediately started back-peddling, but as he had stepped off of the sidewalk, he ended up tripping over the sidewalk and falling down. I used this as my opportunity to get into my vehicle and I immediately drove away, while calling 911. I was the first person to call 911, and refused the dispatch request to return to the scene, as I explained to her that it did not make sense to return to a location where I had just drawn my gun to protect myself. I explained that I thought he was armed, and that it was not safe to return to the scene. I told her I was going home to disarm, and provided all of my contact information as well as my concealed carry license number, and license plate, make and model of my vehicle, etc.

I called a family member on my way home, and my uncle came over to my house to wait with me for police to arrive. After 1 hour I called the police again, as no officer had responded to my 911 call. Dispatch then told me that they had given my information to the responding officer, and that she would have him call me back. During the next four hours, I would call the police 2 more times, as I had no idea why no officer had responded. Finally, the responding officer called me, and explained that if either one of us wanted to file a criminal complaint, that we would need to come down to the station and file a report. I then contacted a criminal attorney, and he advised me to shut up and make no further statements to police.

Four days later, I was arrested at my home by half-a-dozen officers, who arrested me at gunpoint. I refused to answer any questions, and was remanded to the county jail where I was released by a bail bondsman in less than 1 hour. I was offered at total of 4 for plea deals, and I rejected all of them because I refused to plead guilty. Each time I rejected a plea deal, the prosecutor would respond by adding an additional charge. On the day of court, I was facing 1 count of aggravated assault against the doctor, another aggravated assault against the nurse who tried to intervene, and 1 count of terroristic threatening. All of these charges were a class D felony, with a maximum sentence of 6 years in jail, for a total possible exposure of 18 years in jail. I have a 16 month old daughter, and I am a dedicated father and husband. It was the most difficult decision I have ever had to make, but I again refused to plead guilty. The prosecutor responded by adding a firearm enhancement statute to my charges, which doubled my time for a possible exposure to 36 years in jail. We were a week out from trial when the Treyvon Martin case hit and every media outlet in existence was bleating and baying about the dangers of concealed carry. The night before court, I decided to plead guilty, as it was more important to me to be a father and husband than it was to have my civil rights. I spent several nights before court just standing in the corner of my daughter’s bedroom and watched her sleep in her crib.

However, on the morning of court, about 10 minutes before I was to appear before the judge, I could not sign the plea agreement in which I stated I was guilty. When I got to that question on the plea agreement that stated I was guilty, I froze, and refused to sign. I left my attorney and the prosecutor sitting at the table about 10 feet from the judge, and went and sat with my family in the gallery to await my fate. Neither my attorney nor the prosecutor was sure how to proceed, as neither one of them was prepared to argue the case at that time. However, it had been 12 months to the day since I was arrested, and they were a few hours away from violating my right to a speedy trial. They both walked into the hallway, and began a discussion. A few minutes later, my attorney called me into the hallway, and explained that the prosecutor would agree to a plea of no contest. Reluctantly I accepted the plea agreement as it was a small psychological satisfaction that I did not have to admit guilt. To this day, I have never admitted guilt, and I will go to my grave maintaining my innocence The judge, after asking the prosecutor to state the facts of the case, agreed to my plea, and I was sentenced to a 30 day curfew which was monitored via electronic bracelet, $1000 fine, and 5 years of probation.

After the trauma of the trial was over, I finally had my mind back, and I asked my attorney for the evidence file provided to him in discovery. I was astonished to find that when the investigating detective interviewed the witnesses (whom were all employees of the clinic), they were all sitting in a conference room, and could all hear each other’s account of the events. I also was shocked to find that the doctor’s wife, who was not even present on the day of the event and who was also the clinic manager, was allowed to sit in on all the interviews as an “observer.” At the end of each interview, the detective would turn to the doctor’s wife and state, “Mrs. X do you have anything to add?” To which she would respond with a curt, “No.”

I also discovered from reading the court reporter transcripts that several of the witnesses would contradict themselves during the interview. One of the nurses who was interviewed was asked by the detective, “Did you see the gun?” to which she responded, “No, I was looking through a crack in the front door.” He then asked her, “What color was the gun?” She responded by saying, “Well…I thought it was silver, but everyone else is saying it was black…so it was black.” The detective responded by saying, “OK”, and made no attempt to point out her contradictory statements, nor did he question why she would change her statement based on the testimony of other people. There are several other instances with all witnesses involved where similar statements were made, and then altered a few questions later, as their testimony changed as they discussed amongst themselves what happened. I have counted 14 times in the transcripts, where the court reporter wrote, “Unintelligible-many people speaking at once.”

The prosecutor never interviewed one witness or victim, nor was any effort made by the detective or prosecutor to find any exculpatory evidence that would mitigate my supposed guilt or reveal their testimony as false or contradictory. I asked my attorney if it was legal for the detective to allow the doctor’s wife to sit in on the interviews as this would obviously affect their statements, and whether it was legal for the detective to interview all the witnesses at the same time, in the same room, with all witnesses hearing the other’s version of events.

My attorney responded by saying, “Well, it is probably a violation of criminal procedure, but not technically illegal.” My attorney filed no motion to consolidate the charge of “terroristic threatening” even though to my understanding the terroristic threatening charge (which was added weeks after my initial charge) should be encompassed in the aggravated assault charge. He made no motion to dismiss the aggravated assault charge against the nurse who was responding to the same threat cue as me, and put herself in the middle of the conflict in the same instant I reacted to his attack. He filed no motion to have witnesses statements excluded as evidence due to blatantly obvious contradictions and changes in testimony based on the statements of others. He filed no pretrial motions of any sort that would exclude biased or untruthful testimony, and he told me that the fact the doctor’s wife was present during the interviews was of no merit.

My questions are the following: 1. Should the charges have been consolidated? 2. Should my attorney have filed a motion to dismiss the charge involving the nurse, as she was the one responsible for jumping in between the doctor and me, and since I was not facing the doctor, had no idea she was even behind me? 3. Should he have filed a motion to exclude the witness testimony based upon blatant contradictions, and the fact that the statements changed during the course of the interviews as people discussed what actually happened? 4. Is there any recourse my attorney should have pursued regarding the violation of criminal procedure during the interviews and the fact that they sought no exculpatory evidence in my defense.

I apologize for the long post, but this is the best way I know how to convey what happened. I humbly plead for any advice or counsel that could be provided in regards to this matter. I was a commercial real estate broker with a great career, a volunteer for BigBrothersBigSisters, and a decent citizen with no criminal record. Now I am a felon, with no credibility, no ability to hold a professional license, and no future prospects for a career. I had intended to go to law school next fall, but now I will never be able to be an attorney, as I will never be admitted to the bar with a violent felony. Who would hire a violent felon? I wouldn’t even hire me if I went by how this looks on paper.

I never, ever, threatened anyone. I did not lord over him with the weapon or attack him while he was on the ground, nor did I cop an attitude like I was 10 feet tall and bullet proof. As soon as I could get into my vehicle I got away from him as fast as I could. I was scared for my life, I was scared that he was going to make my spinal injuries worse, and I followed my training exactly as I have been trained in my required concealed carry class, in advanced concealed carry classes, shooting in competitions for International Defensive Pistol Association (IDPA), and the experience I have acquired over the last 14 years carrying a firearm without incident.

I don’t understand why this happened or what else I could have done to prevent the altercation. I retreated as far as possible, was not the original aggressor, waited until the last second to draw my firearm, and was the first person to call 911 for help. I was in no condition to defend myself, and I had a reasonable belief that this person was armed as well. He either had a gun or wanted to scare me and make me think he had a gun. The problem is he succeeded in making me think he had a weapon, and that escalated my response in turn. To this day, I have no idea whether he had a weapon or not, although his wife did write on her blog about this the next day, and stated he did have a concealed carry license as well. She also wrote my full name, disclosed my private health information by asserting that I came to the clinic, and that I came specifically to get narcotics (she was not even there), she told people that I had a child, where I lived, that she “prayed that I don’t hurt my child or wife”, that I was a drug addict, etc. That post was viewed by over 4800 different people.

I keep having nightmares about this incident, and I go several days without sleep because I can’t sleep or I am afraid to go to sleep because of the horrible dreams. In my dream I am faster than him, just like in real life, and he pulls out his gun, but I land my shot first. He goes down, and I rush over the help him. I used to work as an EMT, and in my dream for some reason I have my EMT uniform on, and I have my scissors attached to my chest just like when I was working. I cut his shirt off, and apply pressure to the wound. I roll him on his side and check for an exit wound. I am screaming at the nurses to come and help me. I keep yelling over and over, “Help me! Please help me! I am not going to hurt you! He is going to die! PLEASE HELP HIM! You know what to do!”

But in my dream they do not come and help him. They stay hidden behind the corner of the building and watch. They won’t come and help him because they are afraid; they are afraid of me. And that is how I wake up; with my body and sheets soaked in sweat, in a panic, and heart racing. The dreams are so vivid I can smell the gun powder, and I can feel the warm blood on my hands as I try to help him. This last year has been the worst of my life, and I don’t know how to move on. I don’t know how to be a criminal, and when I go to my probation officer, I can barely talk without falling apart in tears.

I feel like I have lost everything, and I don’t know what to do, and as horrible as the dreams are, the real nightmare beings when I wake up.

hindsight is 20/20

You plead no contest. You chose to not fight the charges. It's over. Time to move on. You had the opportunity to review all of the documents your read after court before you plead. You didn't.


Honestly, it sounds like you are writing a book and looking for input. If your account is true, seek counseling. I suggest some EMDR sessions. Odd treatment and not accepted by all but it seems to work for some folks.

and since the wife is a doctor, I don't see you being destitute regardless what it has done to your career.

You created the escalation by acting belligerent. After you caused the situation to get out of control, you kept running your mouth, then drew a gun and try to claim self defense. Good luck with that.

I was only given the opportunity to review the evidence 4 days before trial, but I am not an attorney who knows the rules of evidence, criminal and police procedure, etc. I had to finally plea, as the chances of going to a jury trial were just too great and I didn't want to risk losing my family. You would have done the exact same thing if you were potentially facing 36 years in prison, and your fate was going to be decided by 12 people that have no understanding of self-defense, nor are they experienced in the legal profession in general. I don't believe for a second that you would have chanced a jury trial, knowing the ambiguity of juries and the potential biases involved. It is very easy for people to sit behind their keyboard and make statements like, "I would have never plead guilty if I was innocent", because in their detached reflection they have no stress and nothing to lose, and their armchair is very comfortable.

Unless you have actually been in this situation, you have no idea of the power a prosecuting attorney has to apply pressure and legally extort a plea of guilty. It is weighty beyond all measure, immovable, and infinite. I trusted my attorney to inform me, and repeatedly called him to schedule meetings to talk, and to try and understand what the evidence was against me. We had 3 meetings over the course of a year, and each lasted between 20 and 45 minutes. I was the one that asked him to make me aware of the evidence, he made no mention of it, and had I not asked him, I would have never received one piece of evidence.

He finally sent me an email with the statements attached, but he gave no insight as to whether the testimony was credible and made no mention of the contradictory statements of witnesses, until I kept calling him and questioning him if this was legal. And I posted his reply in my original thread, which was "It is probably a violation of police procedure, but not technically illegal." What does that even mean? Does that mean it is perfectly OK to violate police procedure? Does that mean that having a pow-wow to organize their testimony was ethical and just?

I was lead to believe that these statements were not admissible, and would have to go on what they said on the stand. He did not indicate that there was anything wrong with the investigation, but I believe there was a violation of police procedure. Do you really think his wife being present had no affect on their statements, especially since she was treated as an investigator or law enforcement herself? She was the clinic manager, and could have fired everyone of them, and they knew it. Do you think someone would risk their lively-hood, health insurance, income, retirement benefits, etc. by speaking ill of her husband while she glared at them?

Do you really think that the witnesses being interviewed together in the same room, at the same time, and changing their stories to match each other (which I would be glad to post with personal information redacted so that you all can see for yourselves what they say) was a proper and objective investigation?

It is only because of the research I have done after receiving the statements that I have come to believe there were serious errors made, and that there was no attempt by anyone involved to further pursue the exculpatory evidence that clearly existed. As I said, the prosecution did not even interview any of the witnesses or the supposed victim. This is exactly why Mike Nifong was disbarred in the Duke Lacrosse team case, among other violations he committed.

Writing a book? I don't understand where this comment is coming from, as I am only trying to learn whether or not what happened was indeed ethical and legal in regards to the way the investigation was handled. As not one person made any attempt to objectively investigate exculpatory evidence on my behalf, as it is their duty to do, all I had to go on was my word against the doctor and his staff. If you don't believe me, that is fine, but please do not impugn my integrity by making assumptions about me that are unfounded. You don't know me at all, and the least you could do if you are actually going to take the time to respond is give me the benefit of the doubt.

I have sought counseling, and I was diagnosed with PTSD. My doctor told me that this was very common for people who were involved in traumatic events. She told me that the dreams were very common to people and law enforcement that had been through a traumatic event such as this, and I am working very hard to put this behind me. I don't talk to my wife about it because she is already worried about me, and she knows what type of person I am, and has never doubted my story, especially after reading the statements. I don't sit around the house pining and feeling sorry for myself but I have continued to keep myself busy and try and provide some benefit to my community and family. Please understand that I have never been through anything like this before, and it is very difficult to be a felon at the age of 35, when I have had no criminal charges against me in my life, and I truly am innocent.

I don't see how my wife being a doctor has any bearing on this issue, nor do I understand why having money should make me any less likely to feel like an embarrassment, a criminal, and a worthless citizen. Are you suggesting that because my wife earns a decent income that I should be able to just swallow the fact that I was charged and convicted of a crime I did not commit? If someone offered you a million dollars to confess to a crime you did not commit would you take them up on that offer?

Whether or not I am destitute has no bearing on how I feel about my loss of credibility, my loss of civil rights, or whether people are going to consider me a lousy person for the rest of my life when they look at me on paper. Not one person I know has ever suggested I did anything wrong, and every member of my family and friends have stood behind me through this entire event. I have been trained by State Troopers, Federal Marshalls, former SWAT members, and I followed my training perfectly. I trained very hard because I wanted to be able to protect my family and fellow citizens should something tragic occur. I didn't want to make a mistake and shoot someone when it could have been avoided, nor did I want to make a mistake and have a stray bullet hurt an innocent civilian. It is because of my training that the doctor is alive. Had I been the person the prosecution was trying to portray I would have shot him or attacked him when he was down. I did nothing of the sort; I used the minimal amount of force I had available to me in order to stop the attack. I did not hurt anyone, nor would I ever hurt anyone if it could be avoided.


I don't think it is over, as even if I have no chance to have the case thrown out and get a new trial, I can always try for an expungement or a pardon. I have already had a year of probation removed from my record, and I only have to report once a year do to my low intake score. In Arkansas all people that are on parole or probation are given an extensive intake interview. They asked me questions about everything in my life, looked at my nonexistent criminal history, education, associates, volunteer work, etc. and out of a scale of 1-49, with 1 being the least likely to re-offend and 49 being the worst, I scored a 0. A score of 0 must be approved by the Director of Community Corrections as it has always meant that the intake officer left out some information on the computer. However, the director interviewed me as well, and he approved my score of 0. According to the director, I am the only person to ever have a legitimate score of 0 in the entire county in the 16 years he has been there.

Could you please, just for a minute assume the best of me, instead of automatically assuming the worst? I am only trying to understand and make sense of what to me seems nonsensical. I am asking for help, and I am a good person who does not deserve to be a criminal, nor do I deserve to have derogatory assertions thrust upon my integrity by someone who is sitting behind a keyboard and looking at this situation with a detached and indifferent reflection.

Quote:

---

You would have done the exact same thing if you were potentially facing 36 years in prison,

---

based on your explanation? I really don't think so. I would have done some things very differently but I do not see myself allowing another to see guilt where I know there is none.

Quote:

---

Could you please, just for a minute assume the best of me, instead of automatically assuming the worst?

---

I'm not doing either. The issue is moot so it does no good to lament of the "what ifs" and "should have, could have, would have's"

Quote:

---

I have sought counseling, and I was diagnosed with PTSD.

---

exactly what emdr is intended to treat.

Quote:

---

I don't see how my wife being a doctor has any bearing on this issue, nor do I understand why having money should make me any less likely to feel like an embarrassment, a criminal, and a worthless citizen.

---

It shouldn't but that is not why I mentioned it. Many people in your position do not have the benefit of being married to a person that is likely to have a very good income. That financial security allows you time to escape your situation and heal. Many people have to live with situations such as yours and still try to find jobs just so their family can eat. It is easier to heal if one is not reminded daily of their situation with things like "sorry but due to your criminal record..." You can actually drop out of life for a time without fear of starving. Take advantage of that.

Quote:

---

Unless you have actually been in this situation, you have no idea of the power a prosecuting attorney has to apply pressure and legally extort a plea of guilty.

---

not that situation but close enough to understand the situation. As well, I am not ignorant to the ways of our courts.

Quote:

---

"It is probably a violation of police procedure, but not technically illegal."

---

it means their boss might slap their hands but it doesn't change the impact in court.

Quote:

---

Please understand that I have never been through anything like this before,

---

I would expect not and I doubt you will ever go through anything like that again. I am sure once is enough.

Quote:

---

Do you really think that the witnesses being interviewed together in the same room, at the same time, and changing their stories to match each other (which I would be glad to post with personal information redacted so that you all can see for yourselves what they say) was a proper and objective investigation?

---

proper and objective? Proper and objective doesn't really matter. What matters is what was discovered and what and how a jury would see it and if it was legally admissible. As long as it was not illegal, the best your attorney could have done is suggest their renditions may be a collaboration of all of the witnesses stories and not individual observations. While the lawyer could have attacked that point if they were used as witnesses, it is not going to change the underlying facts. Realize, since the jury would probably have realized it anyway, that especially since all those witnesses work together, they quite likely discussed it at work anyway. It still doesn't change their testimony.

Quote:

---

I don't think it is over, as even if I have no chance to have the case thrown out and get a new trial, I can always try for an expungement or a pardon.

---

those are different issues and issues not asked about in your original post.

Quote:

---

As I said, the prosecution did not even interview any of the witnesses or the supposed victim.

---

and they felt they had enough evidence to prosecute you? WOW!! I just wonder what they were intending on presenting in court since the entire issue was based on victim and witness testimony.

how about you looking into ineffective counsel. That is more likely than anything presented so far, im my opinion. . It is very difficult to prove but I surely don't see you winning on attempting to overturn your plea on what you are asking about.

Quote:

---

Do you think someone would risk their lively-hood, health insurance, income, retirement benefits, etc. by speaking ill of her husband while she glared at them?

---

um, realizing that lying could eventually lead to them going to jail or being severely punished financially; yes, yes I do.

besides, if your lawyer believe it colored their testimony, he could have brought that up in trial and let the jury decide.

Quote:

---

Not one person I know has ever suggested I did anything wrong, and every member of my family and friends have stood behind me through this entire event. I have been trained by State Troopers, Federal Marshalls, former SWAT members, and I followed my training perfectly.

---

well, I disagree with every one of them and believe your training to be faulty.

Quote:

---

He reached over the nurse, and grabbed me by the back of the neck. I immediately responded by drawing my firearm as I spun around towards my attacker, and shoved him with my left hand, and pointed the pistol in his face as I screamed, “GET BACK! GET BACK!”

---

he had already not pulled a gun when you claim he started the motions to do so. How he escaped the nurses holding him back is a bit of a mystery but here you are with a nurse between you and the doctor with him grabbing you (both hands?) and you pull your gun, push the doc back (what happened to the nurse between the two of you), point your gun at a man that, at this point, is grabbing for you and tell him to back off. (again, what happened to the nurse between the two of you?)

Of course when the nurses were holding him back, for some reason you did not get into your car and attempt to leave. Maybe the anger you were expressing back in the office when you decided to yell at the doctor and confront him rather than just leave as you started to, kept you from getting into your car when you had the chance. At that point, remember, you believed he may have a weapon, one he had not unholstered, yet.

Quote:

---

As soon as I could get into my vehicle I got away from him as fast as I could.

---

So, how did you get from "I had the gun in his face with the other hand pushing him back", to; I got into my vehicle as soon as I could?

If you pulled your gun in the belief he had a weapon, I really would like to see how you holstered your weapon and got into the car with that belief still in your head. or did you hold him at bay with your weapon drawn as you got into your car, all the while pointing your weapon at him in case he pulled that gun you thought he might have, and drove away, most likely in reverse so you could continue to keep him in view and in a position you could fire on him if he drew that weapon you thought he had.

The huge problem I see is that, as a defensive device, you waited way too long to pull your gun. You claim you believed he was going to pull a weapon when he reached behind his back. That is when you pull your weapon to defend. You do not wait until he gets close enough to touch you. That is a great way to get your weapon taken away from you and used against you. Again, poor training.

I got to say, after reading this tale, written in your own words, I believe you are a substance abuser who in the pursuit of obtaining the substances you abuse while armed exercised extraordinary bad judgement resulting in felonious criminal behavior.

Get yourself some help for your addiction problems and move on.

Quote:

---

Quoting Insons Insontis

---

I had to finally plea

---

Didn't HAVE to. CHOSE to.

Quote:

---

as the chances of going to a jury trial were just too great

---

And you successfully avoided the jury trial. So that part of the choice worked out exactly as you wanted it to. The downside is that such avoidance also means that the trial process stopped dead in its tracks. No motions to suppress (no need to suppress anything if there isn't going to be a jury trial . No examination and cross of witnesses who might have supported your version (no jurors involved to hear it). None of that. Pleading "no contest" moves the case right to sentencing.

Quote:

---

and I didn't want to risk losing my family.

---

Which appears to have also been successful. Doesn't appear that you've lost your family. Doesn't mean there aren't tradeoffs, however.

Quote:

---

You would have done the exact same thing if you were potentially facing 36 years in prison, and your fate was going to be decided by 12 people that have no understanding of self-defense, nor are they experienced in the legal profession in general.

---

Maybe. Maybe not. But I would understand that making a plea isn't the equivalent of making everything go away. Pleading is a form of admission of guilt, whether you want to recognize it as such or not, or play with the technicality of your plea having the word "guilty" in it or not. You accepted the plea to the agreed charges.

Quote:

---

I don't believe for a second that you would have chanced a jury trial, knowing the ambiguity of juries and the potential biases involved. It is very easy for people to sit behind their keyboard and make statements like, "I would have never plead guilty if I was innocent", because in their detached reflection they have no stress and nothing to lose, and their armchair is very comfortable.

---

Neither you nor we are in a position to guess about that. That what you have an attorney for - to have an objective third party, who knows the local climate, the sentencing propencities of the judge, and a working relationship with the prosecutor. A good portion of what you're paying for isn't just the attorney's black and white knowledge of statutory law, but also for the experience - which can be just as valuable.

Quote:

---

I am only trying to learn whether or not what happened was ndeed ethical and legal in regards to the way the investigation was handled.

---

The reality being that it doesn't MATTER - it ceased to matter the moment you accepted the plea, instead of challenging all of the things above in court. That's what the trial is FOR. Waiving trial in favor of a plea means "I'm not going to fight it". It doesn't mean "I'm not going to fight it because they are right". But it does mean that you don't get to challenge it later if things were wrong. Had you gone to trial and gotten an unfavorable outcome, you may have had grounds to appeal. But that's not the choice that was made. Circumstances under which you might be able to appeal after entering a plea are very slim, and the clock ticks fast. If you're to have any chance at appeal, get off the internet, stop arguing with strangers who aren't going to tell you what you want to hear, and retain a highly experienced appellate attorney IMMEDIATELY. If you miss the window for appeal, then even if you are 100% correct in your assessment of the situation (which you're not, but just for the sake of argument), it's over forever.

Quote:

---

As not one person made any attempt to objectively investigate exculpatory evidence on my behalf, as it is their duty to do, all I had to go on was my word against the doctor and his staff. If you don't believe me, that is fine, but please do not impugn my integrity by making assumptions about me that are unfounded. You don't know me at all, and the least you could do if you are actually going to take the time to respond is give me the benefit of the doubt.

---

Benefit of the doubt isn't an issue. Doesn't need to be. YOU PLED TO THE CHARGES.

Quote:

---

Are you suggesting that because my wife earns a decent income that I should be able to just swallow the fact that I was charged and convicted of a crime I did not commit?

---

Not at all. But you PLED to the charge. You're not understanding what that means. You TOLD the court that you committed whatever charges were included in the plea agreement. Your words are on the public record as essentially saying "I did it."

Quote:

---

If someone offered you a million dollars to confess to a crime you did not commit would you take them up on that offer?

---

What I would do, or anyone else would do would depend on their own personal circumstances. Today, no I wouldn't make that choice. At times in the past, I might have. At some time in the future, my evaluation might differ and the million might be worth it. Your circumstances only apply to you, and the circumstances you were facing at the time. Similarly, you may have made a different decision had you not been married, had been close to retirement, had more or less to loose, etc. (There was a study done several years ago which hinted that persons involved in long term relationships tended to plead more often than single people - which might suggest that single people are more "aggressive" about pursuing their cases, as they don't have the "baggage" of a family to suffer if they loose. Just interesting.)

Quote:

---

It is because of my training that the doctor is alive. Had I been the person the prosecution was trying to portray I would have shot him or attacked him when he was down. I did nothing of the sort; I used the minimal amount of force I had available to me in order to stop the attack. I did not hurt anyone, nor would I ever hurt anyone if it could be avoided.

---

All good. That means that all the state could go after you for was the assault (the threat), and not for something much more serious like agg battery (had there actually been shots), or God forbid, attempted or actual homicide. Keeping those bullets in the firearm served you well. As hard as things are now, the PTSD would be much worse if you had to play the visual of your bullet striking the doc in slow motion over and over. Even seasoned military and law enforcement officers, when fully justified to do so, suffer when they are forced to kill.

Quote:

---

I don't think it is over, as even if I have no chance to have the case thrown out and get a new trial,

---

No NEW trial, because there never WAS a trial. That's the whole problem.

Quote:

---

I can always try for an expungement or a pardon.

---

Yes. After a pardon, it can be expunged, such that you can say it never happened.

Quote:

---

I have already had a year of probation removed from my record, and I only have to report once a year do to my low intake score.

---

That's not too surprising. You've got no criminal history, are stable within the community, and don't appear to have a single one of the common criminal risk factors.

Quote:

---

Could you please, just for a minute assume the best of me, instead of automatically assuming the worst?

---

While it may feel that way to you, no one's assuming the worst. We can only work with what we have, and what we have is a plea. That says nothing about you as a person, a man, a husband or father or son, or employee, or homeowner, or basketball coach, or any other aspect of your life. All it says something about is your criminal history, so what we have to work with is a criminal history that came to be not because you were found guilty by a jury of your peers, or even by a judge in a bench trial, but because you stood before the court, heard the charges read, and chose not to contest them - the legal reality of which is equivalent to accepting guilt. We can opine for you on what to expect from or how to interpret actions of the court - because even with the highest degree of empathy one or more of us may have, and even if we agreed with you 100% on every point, what matters is the LEGAL, not the emotional, reality of your case. That reality is that with a plea, your options are now extremely limited, to either getting an experienced attorney to evaluate if any chance for appeal is possible, or waiting out the time until you can apply for pardon, and ultimately expungement (obviously a much longer process).

Quote:

---

I am only trying to understand and make sense of what to me seems nonsensical. I am asking for help, and I am a good person who does not deserve to be a criminal, nor do I deserve to have derogatory assertions thrust upon my integrity by someone who is sitting behind a keyboard and looking at this situation with a detached and indifferent reflection.

---

No one's disputing your character. But neither does our, or anyone else's, opinion of that character alter that a plea was entered - any more than me being a night person makes the night last longer or the sun come up in the west. It's all simply irrelevent to the matter at hand, which is the entering of the plea. Focus your energy on what you can CHANGE, which is the future, via appeal or addressing the criminal record as you already outlined. You only have finite emotional energy. Spend it wisely, and "forward".

Quote:

---

It is because of my training that the doctor is alive. Had I been the person the prosecution was trying to portray I would have shot him or attacked him when he was down. I did nothing of the sort; I used the minimal amount of force I had available to me in order to stop the attack. I did not hurt anyone, nor would I ever hurt anyone if it could be avoided.

---

wow, due to the verbosity of the OP I missed this.

No, it had nothing to do with your training. In fact, one could suggest that because of your training you were carrying a gun where without the training, you would not have and this would not be an issue.

The reason the doctor is alive is because you did not pull the trigger. That and that alone is the only reason the doctor is alive.

As I stated before, I believe your training was faulty and as a result, you got a lot closer to a dead doctor than it should have. A person that is angry and finally pulls their weapon to actually demand a person let loose of them and move away really is not trained properly. It should have never gotten to that point either because your were calm enough to diffuse the situation without pulling your weapon or used your weapon appropriately and stopped the attack before it got to the point that you were in a position where the doctor could have attempted to disarm you.

Quote:

---

It shouldn't but that is not why I mentioned it. Many people in your position do not have the benefit of being married to a person that is likely to have a very good income. That financial security allows you time to escape your situation and heal. Many people have to live with situations such as yours and still try to find jobs just so their family can eat. It is easier to heal if one is not reminded daily of their situation with things like "sorry but due to your criminal record..." You can actually drop out of life for a time without fear of starving. Take advantage of that.

---

I understand that I have advantages of many people in that regard due to income, but at the moment I am trying to fix what is broken, not what is already working properly. I have dropped out of life for the last year, and while I can certainly continue to do so, as my wife does not care if I work or not, I do not want to "drop out of life", I would very much like to live it. I have had a job since I was 14 years old, and I like to work. I don't feel right sitting at home and letting her work her butt off while I mow the grass 3 times a week. I want to be able to go to law school as I originally intended, but I put that on hold because it got to the point my wife was walking in the door as I was walking out, which doesn't make for a fun time or happy marriage.

Quote:

---

it means their boss might slap their hands but it doesn't change the impact in court.

---

Thank you. That is about what I thought it meant, but I didn't know if the police would face any sanctions or if that would exclude blatantly false and contradictory statements.

Quote:

---

and they felt they had enough evidence to prosecute you? WOW!! I just wonder what they were intending on presenting in court since the entire issue was based on victim and witness testimony.

---

The prosecution relied on the "investigation" conducted by the detective, who made no effort to challenge the contradictions in the witnesses testimony or the fact that they change their story as other people in the room try and correct each person's statements. I thought it was the duty of the prosecutor as well as the detective to explore any exculpatory evidence that would mitigate my supposed guilt.

Quote:

---

how about you looking into ineffective counsel. That is more likely than anything presented so far, im my opinion. . It is very difficult to prove but I surely don't see you winning on attempting to overturn your plea on what you are asking about.

---

Thank you. I am already in the process of doing this now. To my understanding, I cannot appeal a plea agreement, nor did I ever think that was the case.

Quote:

---

um, realizing that lying could eventually lead to them going to jail or being severely punished financially; yes, yes I do.

---

I don't think they had any fear of this because they had a very long time to collaborate and exchange stories about what they saw before the detective even arrived for the interviews. This is my point about interviewing the witness together in the same room. Had the detective interviewed them individually, I think this would have been a more pressing factor in their given statements, as they would have no idea what the other witnesses would say. As they were all in the same room, they were very confident that their statements would be consistent with all other parties.

Quote:

---

well, I disagree with every one of them and believe your training to be faulty.

---

That's fine, and I have no doubt in your detached reflection you imagine yourself doing everything perfectly. Unfortunately, I did not get to sip on a latte and think for 30 minutes about how to react. I reacted to the threat in the way I was trained, and because of that I did not respond out of anger, nor did I draw my weapon until it was absolutely necessary. I didn't accidentally shoot him, nor did I draw the weapon prematurely. I also know of a few firearms instructors a Front Sight Firearm Training Institute that would disagree with your assertions. Everyone has an opinion on what the person involved in a self-defense encounter should have done, as they are certain they will never find themselves in that situation or if it does happen to them, they will rise to the occasion and perform like they are in a Steven Seagal movie. I had seconds to decide what to do, and those decisions were changing as quickly as the events progressed. There is no black and white response to being attacked, no matter how many times you say it.

Quote:

---

he had already not pulled a gun when you claim he started the motions to do so. How he escaped the nurses holding him back is a bit of a mystery but here you are with a nurse between you and the doctor with him grabbing you (both hands?) and you pull your gun, push the doc back (what happened to the nurse between the two of you), point your gun at a man that, at this point, is grabbing for you and tell him to back off. (again, what happened to the nurse between the two of you?)

---

He stopped the motion of the draw as I took cover, and as the nurses began to yell out his name to stop and come inside. The nurses never "held him back", but made a couple of ineffective tugs on his coat and mainly just yelled at him "to come inside, it is not worth it." The nurse that tried to step in between him and me never got completely in front of him, as my car was parked next to another vehicle and she could not get in front of him completely, but did have her right arm around his waste at the same instant I turned to defend myself. As I spun around with the gun she hit the deck in front of the car that was beside my vehicle.

Quote:

---

Of course when the nurses were holding him back, for some reason you did not get into your car and attempt to leave. Maybe the anger you were expressing back in the office when you decided to yell at the doctor and confront him rather than just leave as you started to, kept you from getting into your car when you had the chance. At that point, remember, you believed he may have a weapon, one he had not unholstered, yet.

---

The nurses were not holding him back, they were trying to get him to come inside. However, since he is a half-foot taller than me, and outweighed me by 30 pounds or more, I don't think the 3 of them would have had any effect of stopping him even if they had a harness attached to his crotch. When he started for the draw, the proper action is NOT to stand in the line of fire and try and outdraw him. The proper action is to get off the X and take cover. The objective is not to shoot the other person as much as it is to not get shot. Taking cover was the best option, and while I was behind my vehicle I worked my hand into my pocket for my Ruger LCP .380 and had it ready to draw within a second. I was watching him through the back glass of my suburban, and he never cleared leather. Had he done so, I would have been in a better position to fire at him from cover while he was out in the open.

Quote:

---

So, how did you get from "I had the gun in his face with the other hand pushing him back", to; I got into my vehicle as soon as I could?

If you pulled your gun in the belief he had a weapon, I really would like to see how you holstered your weapon and got into the car with that belief still in your head. or did you hold him at bay with your weapon drawn as you got into your car, all the while pointing your weapon at him in case he pulled that gun you thought he might have, and drove away, most likely in reverse so you could continue to keep him in view and in a position you could fire on him if he drew that weapon you thought he had.

The huge problem I see is that, as a defensive device, you waited way too long to pull your gun. You claim you believed he was going to pull a weapon when he reached behind his back. That is when you pull your weapon to defend. You do not wait until he gets close enough to touch you. That is a great way to get your weapon taken away from you and used against you. Again, poor training.

---

As he walked back up on the sidewalk, approximately 15 feet away from my car door, he turned his attention to the nurses. This is when I made my attempt to get into my car. However, as soon as I made it to my car door his attention returned to me and he closed the distance very quickly. You are correct that when I spun around and pushed him back I kept my weapon trained on him as I entered my vehicle, and I kept it on him as I was prepared to shoot through my windshield should he decide to draw his gun. I backed out of the parking lot, into the street, and into the parking lot across the street. This is when I put my vehicle in drive and drove down the length of the parking lot across the street to the furthest exit, and floored it out of the danger zone.

No. You don't stand there and pull your gun when someone goes for theirs, you take cover. As he did not finish the draw, I did not want to escalate it further by drawing my firearm thus guaranteeing a gun fight. My weapon was secured in my hand inside my pocket, and should he have decided to attack, I had the weapon readily available to use in my defense. Yes, I am very familiar with weapon retention and the ability to take a weapon away from someone if needed. He never had a chance to take the weapon as I created as much distance as possible with the shove and drawing of the firearm simultaneously. In one movement that took less than a second he was on his back and I had enough time to enter my vehicle. My response was perfect. I waited until it was absolutely necessary to draw my firearm, and I did not have to fire a shot. I was able to get away without getting shot or having to shoot. Perfect. Yes, he was close to me, but if I had followed your logic and drawn my weapon while I was behind my vehicle, as soon as he saw it he would have responded by going for his weapon, which would have resulted in a dead doctor. My training did not fail me, the justice system did.

- - - Updated - - -

Quote:

---

No, it had nothing to do with your training. In fact, one could suggest that because of your training you were carrying a gun where without the training, you would not have and this would not be an issue.

---

Wrong, as had it not been for my gun he would have pummeled me, as I was in no shape to use any real effective hand-to-hand combat techniques. Remember, I had limited use of my right arm, and had I tried to defend myself against a bigger assailant who was not injured, and I had only one hand to strike with, I very likely could have lost and had my spinal cord compressed even further or he would have been losing the fight and drawn his gun and shot me.

Quote:

---

The reason the doctor is alive is because you did not pull the trigger. That and that alone is the only reason the doctor is alive.

---

Correct, and thank you for making my point.

Quote:

---

As I stated before, I believe your training was faulty and as a result, you got a lot closer to a dead doctor than it should have. A person that is angry and finally pulls their weapon to actually demand a person let loose of them and move away really is not trained properly. It should have never gotten to that point either because your were calm enough to diffuse the situation without pulling your weapon or used your weapon appropriately and stopped the attack before it got to the point that you were in a position where the doctor could have attempted to disarm you.

---

There was no diffusing the situation, as he was irate, and often at times unintelligible as he screamed at me. I did my best to diffuse the situation by retreating as far as possible, not drawing the firearm prematurely, and leaving as soon as I was capable of doing so safely. I did not pull the gun and demand he let go, I made him let go by delivering a swift and effective shove to his face with my palm just under his chin. It was the gun that kept him away after the shove, and after he got up off the ground. Again, you can try and pick this apart for eternity, but circumstances are not ever like they are portrayed in the textbook. In my opinion, my response was the best I could do with the circumstance I was given. It would have been great if he was 30 feet way, I agree, but he wasn't, and I can't just draw a gun on the man because he is walking towards me. He never had a chance to disarm me as the fight was over before he knew what happened.

argue what you want. You made a lot of mistakes and your idea of what one should do is erroneous.

Quote:

---

My response was perfect

---

Not even close.

You do realize that if he actually had a weapon and intended on using it, he had a lot of chances to do so where you were not in a position to escape or defend yourself. He didn't pull a weapon because he probably didn't have one.

Quote:

---

You are correct that when I spun around and pushed him back I kept my weapon trained on him as I entered my vehicle, and I kept it on him as I was prepared to shoot through my windshield should he decide to draw his gun.

---

Ah, the old "don't move while I am getting into my car or I'll shoot routine". Sounds like an old James Bond movie playing out. Did you roll down your window and hold it outside the car when you closed the door too?

and shooting through your windshield with a .380?? You got me chuckling on that one. Have you ever shot a windshield with a .380, especially a pocket gun? Try it sometime. Just watch out for the ricochet.

Quote:

---

My weapon was secured in my hand inside my pocket, and should he have decided to attack,

---

Yep, I've seen a guy trying to get his hand with his weapon out of his pocket. Kind of humorous. You want to think you were going to quickdraw out of your pocket? sure.

Quote:

---

He never had a chance to take the weapon as I created as much distance as possible with the shove and drawing of the firearm simultaneously

---

Really? If you could reach him, he could reach you plus remember, he is a half foot taller. If he had any self defense training, your movement was perfect to allow him to take the weapon from you especially since you had it one handed.

Quote:

---

No. You don't stand there and pull your gun when someone goes for theirs, you take cover.

---

Um, no. You go for cover WHILE you are withdrawing your weapon. Ya see, if you believed he had a weapon, your biggest failure was failing to draw yours in that exchange. Once you determine a person has a weapon that you believe they are going to use, you NEVER allow them the situation to draw it without you already having your weapon drawn. That mistake WOULD have cost you your life if he actually had a weapon and intended on using it.

Quote:

---

Correct, and thank you for making my point.

---

that wasn't a pat on the back. It was a simple statement refuting your claim that the reason the doctor is alive is because of your training. Not pulling the trigger is the only thing you did right that day.

Quote:

---

I agree, but he wasn't, and I can't just draw a gun on the man because he is walking towards me.

---

and drawing a weapon. Remember, you believed he was attempting to draw a weapon.

Quote:

---

Quoting indybail

---

I got to say, after reading this tale, written in your own words, I believe you are a substance abuser who in the pursuit of obtaining the substances you abuse while armed exercised extraordinary bad judgement resulting in felonious criminal behavior.

Get yourself some help for your addiction problems and move on.

---

Sure. I have never abused drugs in my life, and I have to take regular drug tests as a requirement for being prescribed the medication for my migraine disease. Not to mention, I have a wife who is a doctor, and would no doubt be divorced should I be a drug addict prone to rage and violence. Thank you for reminding me why I didn't want a jury trial.

The simple fact is that I have to take pain medication at times as this is the only way to stop the excruciating pain of the migraine. I don't think I am going to start a drug cartel with 10 pain pills. Migraines are one of the most painful experiences that a person will ever have to suffer through and I was born with them and diagnosed with an MRI/MRA scan of my brain when I was 5 years old. Do to think I began my conspiracy to deceive doctors at birth so that I could take pain medication that makes you feel like crap?

I hate taking pain medication, as it makes me ill, itchy, dumb, and unable to perform at my best. You couldn't take 1 week in my body, let alone one of my migraines, so please, go troll somewhere else. Migraines are a genetic, hereditary, neurovascular disease, and they are referred to as "suicide headaches" for a reason. Another genetic and hereditary disease that runs in my family is called degenerative disc disease, and that is the reason my c-spine resembles a set of broken tinker toys. The dislocated ECU tendon was a result of me trying to surprise my pregnant wife with a Christmas tree when she got home from work, as she was pregnant and did not feel like she could lift parts of the heavy tree we have in our attic. She made the comment that she wished we could get the tree up, but neither one of us could lift anything very heavy at that time.

I took a day off, and while she was a work I got a nylon bag and began to take the tree down one piece at a time, as I can't lift over 35 pounds without risking further injury to my back. As I was coming down the staircase, the strap on the bag, which I had wrapped both of my hands in snapped on the left side, which let all the weight jerk my right wrist in a direction it is not designed to turn. I never asked for pain medication for this injury, and did not accept the pain medication when offered. This is part of the agreement I have with my headache specialist, and I do not take pain medication prescribed by any other doctor besides him. If I were to do so, he would see it in the pharmacy records, and that could be the end of his treatment. ALL pain patients have to sign agreements such as this in order to receive narcotics to treat their pain.

My doctor actually makes an exception to this rule if there is an acute injury that has nothing to due with migraines, but I wanted him to feel comfortable that I was not taking more pain medication than needed. The arm and wrist hurt, yes, but it mainly only hurt if I was bending my wrist, and that problem was solved with an splint that stretched from my wrist to my elbow, thus I had no need for narcotic pain medication, although I will admit that I took Advil. Should I seek treatment for an addiction to Advil? I don't even take pain medication for my herniated discs, but I do a lot of physical therapy and traction splints in order to help ease the pressure on my spinal cord.

Thank you for your baseless assertions that I am a drug addict, and proving yourself as ignorant as the doctor. I can just as easily assert you are a pedophile. Get yourself some help and quit molesting children. See how easy that was?

Quote:

---

I hate taking pain medication, as it makes me ill, itchy, dumb, and unable to perform at my best. You couldn't take 1 week in my body, let alone one of my migraines, so please, go troll somewhere else

---

while I think the other poster was a bit off the mark, that one statement speaks volumes. It is a "Oh whoa is me. I have it so bad. Nobody could handle what I have to"


Tell ya what. I have a friend with a kid that has CVS (look it up if you want to know). Some kids with the illness move to a different stage as they mature. That stage happens to be migraines and the crazy thing is; they consider that a relief from what they have experienced prior to that.

Not trying to minimize migraines but honestly, if you think you are the only person with problems, you need to go back to the counselor.

Quote:

---

ALL pain patients have to sign agreements such as this in order to receive narcotics to treat their pain.

---

Um, no, they don't. and yes, I know several people that would have to sign an agreement if that was the case and I know, for certain, they haven't.

Fine JK, you are a ninja and know everything that should have happened based on an internet post. With your extensive experience in gun fights, I am sure you would have done everything perfectly, and that people clear a 20 foot diameter in any direction you walk, as they know you are the best internet commando around.

All of you are just trying to fight instead of offer any insight or opinion on the questions I asked. Luckily I have found another forum where the people are not so angry or determined to degrade a person who was only trying to educate themselves further, and I will spend my time there while waiting on the appointment with an attorney later this week. I will leave you all to your bickering and bloviating, as you are no help and are not interested in doing anything but debating for the sake of debating. This is mental masturbation for a bunch of people who are internet lawyers and keyboard commandos. I thought there would be some "experts" on this forum that were interested in explaining some options available to their fellow man, and I was obviously mistaken.

In a way though, you have all made me feel better about taking the plea deal, as I don't want people as arrogant, and angry as the lot of you deciding my fate. Luckily for me, I am rich ;), and I will find someone who is an actual expert, and does not spend their time creating a disagreement over details that have nothing to do with the actual questions posted. I hope you all find someone to give you a hug, as I think you all need one badly.

I would humbly suggest that you all work on your manners, and try to find a way to feel good about yourselves that doesn't involve castigating innocent people for a situation that was out of their control. I know who I am, and I know I performed perfectly, and if I had it all to do over again, I would do the exact same thing. The only real problem with being a felon is that it is very hard to find employment, but as I work for myself, I don't have that problem, which is just one of the great benefit of being me. In time, I will accept the injustice, as it will have little effect on my life, other than to serve as a reminder that the majority of humanity is biased, unfair, indifferent, and more disappointed in themselves than I will ever be.

Even though you had no intention of helping, you actually did help me realize why I didn't want a jury trial. The plea was certainly the best option, as I have no doubt the jury would do just as you all have done, which is to bicker and degrade without any real reflection on what happened, and instead would spend their time defending their own cognitive bias fallacies. I think you all would be served greatly if you focused more on your critical thinking skills, instead of trying to develop a rhetorical style that barely contains your enormous egos. I hope none of you ever have to go through what I did, but it might just be the thing that knocks you off your high-horse, and makes you better people, and certainly less judgmental towards other people who have been on the wrong end of the justice system.

I still have all of my guns, as I hid them before police ever arrived, which turned out not to be unnecessary as I would not allow them consent to enter into my home, and they had to stand outside flipping through the cliff notes of law every dolt that is a police officer is given because they can't memorize any case law or statute. I still laugh at the memory of them trying to figure out a way to get into my home, but all they had was an arrest warrant, and they were too stupid to find an exigent circumstance to enter into my home. Not to mention, that they would have never been able to get into my gun safe, if they were even able to find it, as it is better than a bank vault. (another benefit of being rich and me) My safe costs more than they will make in the next 5 years. LMAO! That is what they get for not going to college, and spending the majority of their time learning how to tackle people. You were right about one thing JK, I do have the ability to drop out of life, and basically do whatever the hell I want. Thanks for reminding me of that fact, and that I will never have to depend on people like you for anything.

I am going to throw some money at an attorney or two on Wednesday, and I will let them worry about it. If it gets expunged that would be a bonus, but if it doesn't, the felony really has no impact on my life at all now that I think about it. I am not treated any differently by my friends, family, colleagues, and thus nothing is going to change in that regard either. I have a private shooting range on some farmland that I bought 10 years ago, and no officer will even be able to walk onto the property, let alone catch me shooting a firearm for fun. Nor will they be able to prevent me from keeping some of those firearms in my home for self defense. Hell, they will not even be able to stop me from carrying concealed. So in reality, I have just allowed myself to get too stressed for no reason at all, and I have let the unwashed masses make me feel bad about myself, when I actually have no reason to be ashamed at all.

I am a good person, good looking, rich, have a beautiful family and wonderful daughter, many friends, and I have no doubt that when I finish my Phd. I will have no problem getting this conviction expunged or pardoned, as I have many friends that work for the governor, and my family is very involved in fundraising for political candidates. Did I mention I was rich? That also helps a lot too. I think you all may be so angry because you are not rich, which is a shame, and while it is great to be me, it must suck being you. Especially when it is your turn to have a bizarre and illogical legal issue thrust into your life.

All in all, besides the dreams, I have it very, very well. The dreams will stop in time as I realize that it was not my fault what happened, and especially the way I feel after hearing all of your blathering, armchair opinions. I know I made the right decision, and giving this case to a bunch of uneducated, American Idol worshiping, couldn't get into even a crappy community college, angry and bitter poor people, would have been the only bad decision I made in regards to this case.

You kids have fun getting up early in the morning to go to work, and think about me sleeping in late, and earning twice what you make in a month with one tenant on my farmland, while I lay beside my pool and laugh at the idiocy of humanity. Cheers! :cool:

Quote:

---

Quoting Insons Insontis

---

My questions are the following: 1. Should the charges have been consolidated? 2. Should my attorney have filed a motion to dismiss the charge involving the nurse, as she was the one responsible for jumping in between the doctor and me, and since I was not facing the doctor, had no idea she was even behind me?

---

Your questions reflect great confusion about criminal procedure, and really amount to wishful thinking. When you have more than one victim, you can face separate charges for each victim. Your confusion about who was standing where doesn't change the the fact of where you pointed a loaded gun. You can be charged with both aggravated assault and terroristic threatening - terroristic threatening is not a lesser included charge of aggravated assault - and even if you had an argument for "consolidation" (a term you don't properly use) you rendered the issue moot when you chose to enter a plea bargain.

Quote:

---

Quoting Insons Insontis

---

3. Should he have filed a motion to exclude the witness testimony based upon blatant contradictions, and the fact that the statements changed during the course of the interviews as people discussed what actually happened?

---

The proceeding at which you challenge a witness's testimony and question them about alleged contradictions is called a "trial". You chose to enter a "no contest" plea, so there was no trial.

Quote:

---

Quoting Insons Insontis

---

4. Is there any recourse my attorney should have pursued regarding the violation of criminal procedure during the interviews and the fact that they sought no exculpatory evidence in my defense.

---

The police don't work for you and don't have to question witnesses in the manner you believe they should. If they obtain exculpatory information they need to turn it over, but that does not apply to "evidence" that exists only in your imagination.

Quote:

---

Insons Insontis;623288]Fine JK, you are a ninja and know everything that should have happened based on an internet post. With your extensive experience in gun fights, I am sure you would have done everything perfectly, and that people clear a 20 foot diameter in any direction you walk, as they know you are the best internet commando around.

---

Hey, I like that. Maybe I'll see if I can change my user name to internet ninja

Quote:

---

All of you are just trying to fight instead of offer any insight or opinion on the questions I asked.

---

that was addressed long ago.
.

Quote:

---

I thought there would be some "experts" on this forum that were interested in explaining some options available to their fellow man, and I was obviously mistaken.

---

Hey, you are the one that wrote the novel and included way more information than was necessary to ask what few questions you did ask.

Quote:

---

Luckily for me, I am rich ;),

---

Ya, I can tell. Remember when OJ was on trial? How many lawyers did he have? Start looking around to see who a rich person has at their defense table and how many there are. Who did you have?

Quote:

---

I would humbly suggest that you all work on your manners,

---

I guess you wanted this site

Quote:

---

and try to find a way to feel good about yourselves that doesn't involve castigating innocent people for a situation that was out of their control.

---

Out of their control? You started the fight, remember, where you yelled at the doctor and felt the need to chastise him?

Quote:

---

I know who I am, and I know I performed perfectly,

---

hey insons. It's time to wake up. You've been having those delusional dreams again. Come on now. Wakey wakey.

Quote:

---

and if I had it all to do over again, I would do the exact same thing.

---

including starting the fight? Wow, I guess you aren't as smart as you think you are.

Quote:

---

The only real problem with being a felon is that it is very hard to find employment, but as I work for myself, I don't have that problem,

---

Oh, so now you work for yourself? Oh, I get it: prostitution;) Get it?? work for yourself!!

Quote:

---

In time, I will accept the injustice, as it will have little effect on my life, other than to serve as a reminder that the majority of humanity is biased, unfair, indifferent, and more disappointed in themselves than I will ever be.

---

yes, become comfortable with being branded: felon. I bet is suits you well.

Quote:

---

Even though you had no intention of helping, you actually did help me realize why I didn't want a jury trial. The plea was certainly the best option, as I have no doubt the jury would do just as you all have done, which is to bicker and degrade without any real reflection on what happened, and instead would spend their time defending their own cognitive bias fallacies.

---

You're a funny boy. You have no idea how a trial works apparently. What you presented here just isn't fodder for the courtroom witness chair.

Quote:

---

. I hope none of you ever have to go through what I did, but it might just be the thing that knocks you off your high-horse, and makes you better people, and certainly less judgmental towards other people who have been on the wrong end of the justice system.

---

I can guarantee I won't. I don't like to yell at doctors that speak their mind. In fact, I specifically ask every doctor I see to do just.

Quote:

---

I still have all of my guns, as I hid them before police ever arrived, which turned out not to be unnecessary as I would not allow them consent to enter into my home,

---

Ok, now I know you are out and out lying.

a.

Quote:

---

I still laugh at the memory of them trying to figure out a way to get into my home, but all they had was an arrest warrant, and they were too stupid to find an exigent circumstance to enter into my home.

---

You are writing comedy now, right?

Quote:

---

if they were even able to find it, as it is better than a bank vault. (another benefit of being rich and me) My safe costs more than they will make in the next 5 years. LMAO! That is what they get for not going to college, and spending the majority of their time learning how to tackle people. You were right about one thing JK, I do have the ability to drop out of life, and basically do whatever the hell I want. Thanks for reminding me of that fact, and that I will never have to depend on people like you for anything.

---

adding chapters to the book I see.

Quote:

---

I am going to throw some money at an attorney or two on Wednesday, and I will let them worry about it. If it gets expunged that would be a bonus, but if it doesn't, the felony really has no impact on my life at all now that I think about it.

---

. Oh ya, this does affect your wife. Being a doctor living with a felon tends to have some odd and bad effects. I guess you haven't figured that out yet. You will and so will she.

I am not treated any differently by my friends, family, colleagues, and thus nothing is going to change in that regard either.

Quote:

---

I have a private shooting range on some farmland that I bought 10 years ago, and no officer will even be able to walk onto the property, let alone catch me shooting a firearm for fun.

---

Oh really? Apparently that little stint in law school didn't teach you much.

Quote:

---

Nor will they be able to prevent me from keeping some of those firearms in my home for self defense.

---

Sure. When you wake up from your dream you will realize the problems you have.

Quote:

---

I am a good person

---

obviously not.

,

Quote:

---

good looking,

---

so? are you impressed by such things?

Quote:

---

rich,

---

Not a chance. If you were rich you would have walked away from this.

Quote:

---

have a beautiful family and wonderful daughter, many friends, and I have no doubt that when I finish my Phd.

---

so now you are working on a phD. sure, sure.

Quote:

---

I will have no problem getting this conviction expunged or pardoned, as I have many friends that work for the governor, and my family is very involved in fundraising for political candidates.

---

Ha ha ha ha. Where were they when you were fighting this? Huh? Left you out to dry?

Quote:

---

Did I mention I was rich?

---

well, you said it but if you didn't walk away from what you described being declared not guilty, I am confident you are lying.

Quote:

---

I think you all may be so angry because you are not rich, which is a shame, and while it is great to be me, it must suck being you. Especially when it is your turn to have a bizarre and illogical legal issue thrust into your life.

---

bizarre? illogical? Most criminal minds tend to work that way but all I see is a small man, both in stature and worth crying about his problems.

Quote:

---

All in all, besides the dreams, I have it very, very well.

---

sure. I think you mean; in your dreams you have it well.

Quote:

---

You kids have fun getting up early in the morning to go to work

---

,work? I don't work. Oh, didn't I tell you. I am not near typical retirement age and guess what; I don't work anymore. And guess what else; I'm not a felon.

I can see it now. A nice holiday break from school for the kid. She's setting on your lap, looks up to you and says, dad, what's a felon and why are all the kids at school telling me you tried to kill your doctor. You aren't going to try to kill mommy because she's s doctor, are you?

So a doctor carries when he is at his own office. That does not seem reasonable ... you may have gotten off, who knows....but we are only hearing one side of the story. Your "no contest" plea indicates that they had a strong case. And the time period for prison? That's set by the legislature, not by the DA.

I always tell people ... don't pull out your gun unless you shoot it ... a gun is not to scare people with.

Quote:

---

Quoting Insons Insontis

---

Sure. I have never abused drugs in my life, and I have to take regular drug tests as a requirement for being prescribed the medication for my migraine disease. Not to mention, I have a wife who is a doctor, and would no doubt be divorced should I be a drug addict prone to rage and violence. Thank you for reminding me why I didn't want a jury trial.

The simple fact is that I have to take pain medication at times as this is the only way to stop the excruciating pain of the migraine. I don't think I am going to start a drug cartel with 10 pain pills. Migraines are one of the most painful experiences that a person will ever have to suffer through and I was born with them and diagnosed with an MRI/MRA scan of my brain when I was 5 years old. Do to think I began my conspiracy to deceive doctors at birth so that I could take pain medication that makes you feel like crap?

I hate taking pain medication, as it makes me ill, itchy, dumb, and unable to perform at my best. You couldn't take 1 week in my body, let alone one of my migraines, so please, go troll somewhere else. Migraines are a genetic, hereditary, neurovascular disease, and they are referred to as "suicide headaches" for a reason. Another genetic and hereditary disease that runs in my family is called degenerative disc disease, and that is the reason my c-spine resembles a set of broken tinker toys. The dislocated ECU tendon was a result of me trying to surprise my pregnant wife with a Christmas tree when she got home from work, as she was pregnant and did not feel like she could lift parts of the heavy tree we have in our attic. She made the comment that she wished we could get the tree up, but neither one of us could lift anything very heavy at that time.

I took a day off, and while she was a work I got a nylon bag and began to take the tree down one piece at a time, as I can't lift over 35 pounds without risking further injury to my back. As I was coming down the staircase, the strap on the bag, which I had wrapped both of my hands in snapped on the left side, which let all the weight jerk my right wrist in a direction it is not designed to turn. I never asked for pain medication for this injury, and did not accept the pain medication when offered. This is part of the agreement I have with my headache specialist, and I do not take pain medication prescribed by any other doctor besides him. If I were to do so, he would see it in the pharmacy records, and that could be the end of his treatment. ALL pain patients have to sign agreements such as this in order to receive narcotics to treat their pain.

My doctor actually makes an exception to this rule if there is an acute injury that has nothing to due with migraines, but I wanted him to feel comfortable that I was not taking more pain medication than needed. The arm and wrist hurt, yes, but it mainly only hurt if I was bending my wrist, and that problem was solved with an splint that stretched from my wrist to my elbow, thus I had no need for narcotic pain medication, although I will admit that I took Advil. Should I seek treatment for an addiction to Advil? I don't even take pain medication for my herniated discs, but I do a lot of physical therapy and traction splints in order to help ease the pressure on my spinal cord.

Thank you for your baseless assertions that I am a drug addict, and proving yourself as ignorant as the doctor. I can just as easily assert you are a pedophile. Get yourself some help and quit molesting children. See how easy that was?

---

Hey, you're the one going to the doctor's office with a gun looking for a scrip. I know several folks who suffer with migraines without resorting to taking a gun to the doctor's office. Speaking of prescriptions, having one doesn't exempt you from having a substance abuse problem.

At the end of the day pain management does not always require drugs so do yourself a favor and get some help.

Quote:

---

Quoting indybail

---

going to the doctor's office with a gun looking for a scrip

---

In a nutshell, that's the reason ANY attorney would have recommended a plea. Whether the seeking of the pain meds was nefarious or not, you'd be asking jurors to find it perfectly innocent to bring your firearm to a doctor's visit - and not just any doctor's visit, but one intended to secure a controlled substance. We don't have professional jurors - juries are made up of your average folk (emphasis on the word AVERAGE), the majority of whom get their understanding of the law from what they see on the news and television. That means that guns + drugs = crime and that the jury would be frothing to hang you halfway through the opening statement. Why? Because normal people going about innocent business don't take guns into their doctor's offices. And the confrontation with the doctor stopped being innocent the minute you didn't simply leave after being told you weren't getting a prescription - REGARDLESS of the doctor's comments, which you chose to respond to with an escalated discourse, instead of a simple "thanks for nothing" and leaving. Juries don't like drug issues mixed with guns, or anger issues mixed with guns - because regardless of the actual circumstances, you're in a massive uphill battle to overcome how such couplings inherently appear. Juries like guns when used in a home to protect against intruders. Juries like guns when used by innocent persons engaged in innocent activities who are victimized through no action of their own. You stacked the deck against yourself here, and your attorney made the recommendation most likely to result in the lowest penalty against you. Regardless of what investigation may have uncovered about other circumstances, at the end of the day, you brought a gun to a botched drug transaction and that fact alone put your case in the attorney's "can't win, better plead" column.

Get off the internet and work on your appeal. The clock is still ticking down against you.

in defense of inson (not sure why I am doing this but...)


I know many people that carry concealed. One thing you will be told: if you carry, always carry (of course respect the limitations in your states laws). It has to do with comfort both in having the weapon on you as well as being able to be comfortable in your reactions to any given situation. If you only carry once in awhile, it really throws off your reactions to a situation. Can you imagine carrying but not all the time and being faced with a need for your weapon? Your instinct says "reach back, withdraw weapon, aim, shoot if appropriate" but when you reach for it, it's not there. Care to guess what the other guy that has a gun is thinking and will likely do in reaction?

When you carry, you must carry all the time so your reactions become nearly instinctual.

realize that insons reaction was not correct, at least in regards to the reaction to when he believed the doctor was pulling a gun. One doesn't just withdraw. One uses what they trained for and pulls their weapon to be on the ready or to stop the situation where it is. If you refuse to draw your weapon when it is proper, you might as well not bother carrying it.

end of defense.



You can defend your actions if you have an honest belief of the claim that you feared for your life. If you do what inson did and not react properly, he was then faced with drawing his weapon later and at touching distance, pointing it in a man's face (which really is a show of a lack of training again). He then had a problem defending drawing his weapon as he was not in imminent fear of his life. That and the "I got into my car and backed away until I could speed away" does not show a person truly defending themselves as the law allows but more of a "I got a gun, get out of my way" action.

His going home and claiming to disarm is s stupid statement. If he remains at home, where his weapon is, just how disarmed is he? If the cops show up, they are coming guns drawn due to the knowledge he had just aimed his weapon at a man, ran from the scene, and is now holed up in his house, admittedly with that weapon.


Basically, his story is BS. Cops do not act as he described, at least any with any decent training and I like to think most cops are afforded that.

I carry. I carry ALMOST all the time. But there are places I don't carry - even though I could, because should the presence of the firearm be detected, it's likely to cause people to get their panties in a wad, rather than be a calming presence - and those places INCLUDE doctor's offices. "Hang on doc, before you go to examine me or I take off my shirt and expose my cold blue steel, you need to know I'm armed." Perfectly legal, but still STUPID.

Quote:

---

Quoting aardvarc

---

I carry. I carry ALMOST all the time. But there are places I don't carry - even though I could, because should the presence of the firearm be detected, it's likely to cause people to get their panties in a wad, rather than be a calming presence - and those places INCLUDE doctor's offices. "Hang on doc, before you go to examine me or I take off my shirt and expose my cold blue steel, you need to know I'm armed." Perfectly legal, but still STUPID.

---

I have to disagree with ya on this. In fact, given your explanation of telling the doc of the weapon prior to the exam is quite appropriate so he does not simply see the weapon and wonder.

Now, what I think is stupid is while in our state, as long as you carry exposed you do not need a permit so we have these idiots walking down the street every once in awhile that have a pistol strapped to their thigh. Generally it's to evoke a reaction from people, or more specifically, the cops so they can argue their rights to carry.

Quote:

---

Quoting jk

---

telling the doc of the weapon prior to the exam is quite appropriate so he does not simply see the weapon and wonder

---

Problem is that this presumes that simply telling the doc you're carrying will put the doc at ease. Or your accountant, your convenience store clerk, or indeed MOST people that you're going to encounter in a situated transaction (much different circumstance than just people walking down the street). Closer to reality, however, is that there ISN'T a "nice" way to tell most people that you feel the need to bring your firearm to your APPOINTMENT with them. Absolutely NO reason to walk that firearm into the doctor's office. An action being legal doesn't mean that the basics of human psychology go out the window - rather, announcing one's armed status in a setting like this is going to put the other person in a state of sudden and heightened alert - even if that's not the carrier's intent. And that other person (the doc) is whose shoes the jury is going to see the event from - because most of them would feel the same way. It really isn't about legalities - OP was within the law until, as you pointed out, his poor handing of the situation led to the gun being holstered until arm's reach. I'm saying that his poor decision making began MUCH sooner than that moment.

Quote:

---

Problem is that this presumes that simply telling the doc you're carrying will put the doc at ease. Or your accountant, your convenience store clerk, or indeed MOST people that you're going to encounter in a situated transaction (much different circumstance than just people walking down the street).

---

no need to explain it to the convenience store clerk IMO and not sure how the accountant knows, unless you happen to reach the same level of contact with your accountant as you do the doctor :eek:

I can understand respecting any or all of them but realistically, if one is bothered by carrying to the point they feel the need to explain to everybody, maybe they shouldn't be carrying.

Quote:

---

Closer to reality, however, is that there ISN'T a "nice" way to tell most people that you feel the need to bring your firearm to your APPOINTMENT with them

---

didn't know nice had a place here. It's a factual thing. If I need to tell them it's : I carry. I have it on me. If it bothers you, and you have the right to demand it, I'll leave. Nothing nice or nasty about it.

Quote:

---

Absolutely NO reason to walk that firearm into the doctor's office.

---

so cops should disarm before entering whether it's for business or personal appointments? on or off duty?

I think it raises much more interest to secure your weapon as you set in the vehicle than to leave it as it.

Of course, if a person wants to be really nice they can speak with their doctor prior to wearing it in to get their opinion.

Quote:

---

Quoting Insons Insontis

---

I stopped at a local family practice clinic on my way home from work, and provided the clinic with my medical records.

---

You had doctors managing your chronic migraines, your high cholesterol, your high blood pressure, your post-surgical care, your tendon injury, your back injury, and perhaps other matters as well, and are married to a doctor. You were scheduled to be treated by one of your doctors later that same day. How did it come to pass that you were unable to have one of your many doctors simply call in your prescriptions to your regular pharmacy, and instead stopped by the clinic of a doctor who didn't know either you or your medical history?

Quote:

---

Quoting Insons Insontis

---

The doctor continued to ask degrading questions, and stated, “I am not about to write a bunch of narcotics for headaches.” I again told him that I was not seeking narcotics and that I would trust the specialist over his advice.

---

In other words, as you had surely figured out and as the doctor later confirmed, the doctor thought you were pill-seeking - a common problem at walk-in clinics.

Quote:

---

Quoting Insons Insontis

---

We continued in this fashion for a few minutes, with him making inappropriate comments about migraine disease, that migraines were over treated and that I was most likely a drug seeker.

---

The doctor had... your prescription history. You've not indicated that he had any other part of your medical record. If in fact you presented and simply said, "I'm out of my high blood pressure medications and need a refill," I don't see why there would be a need to discuss your migraines at all, except to the extent that the doctor was concerned about drug interactions. Had you reiterated, "I only want refills on my blood pressure medications," I expect that the doctor's concerns would have been resolved. What really happened?

Quote:

---

Quoting Insons Insontis

---

I waited for the nurse to return with my medical records, and then I left the exam room, as I did not want any type of treatment from this “doctor.”

---

And then you went home? On to your scheduled medical appointment? Alas... no.

Quote:

---

Quoting Insons Insontis

---

As left the exam room, he was standing at the end of the hallway leading to the exit. I yelled out his name, and walked down the hall to the exit. I then stated, “Before I leave here, I wanted to tell you that the reason those people you call idiots, who are actually called patients, go home and kill themselves is because they are treated like criminals by doctors like you.”

---

So you chose to instigate a confrontation and create a public disturbance.

Quote:

---

Quoting Insons Insontis

---

He responded by grabbing my left arm and squeezing until I yanked my arm away, and then he began to bump his chest against mine. He would continue to push and shove, and call me a “little punk” as I walked towards the security door leading to the lobby. He followed me through the security door, and then he followed me outside the front door of the clinic, into the parking lot, and to my vehicle.

---

In other words, you were acting in an unruly fashion so he escorted you out of the building.

Quote:

---

Quoting Insons Insontis

---

When he came outside, he used his right hand to sweep his white coat back, and reached behind his back as if reaching for a weapon.... He then threw down his stethoscope on the pavement and told me, “You better get the Hell out of here you little punk.”

---

The problem at this point is that your inferences are unsupported by any facts, and your belief that the doctor was going to draw a gun on you (let alone shoot you) is not the product of a rational thought process. This is the second time when, presented with the opportunity to leave, you escalated things.

Quote:

---

Quoting Insons Insontis

---

I immediately responded by drawing my firearm as I spun around towards my attacker, and shoved him with my left hand, and pointed the pistol in his face as I screamed, “GET BACK! GET BACK!”

---

Did you, perchance, also pistol whip him? Despite all of the details you have shared, I still had trouble finding any articles on what I thought would be a well-covered story, but I did find a police beat column about a guy in Arkansas who pulled a gun on his doctor and struck him in the face with the gun.

Quote:

---

Quoting Insons Insontis

---

I never, ever, threatened anyone.

---

When you point a gun at somebody, that's a threat.

Quote:

---

Quoting Insons Insontis

---

I don’t understand why this happened or what else I could have done to prevent the altercation.

---

You could have... left without creating a disturbance. You could have... left when, after you created a disturbance, the doctor escorted you out of the building and told you to leave. You could have responded in a reasonable, rational manner to the doctor's actions, rather than imagining that he was going to pull a gun and shoot you. You could have put your gun away and apologized after you pulled your gun, when you could see plain as day that you were wrong about the doctor's intentions and that you were the only one brandishing a weapon. If you are the guy who hit the doctor in the face with his gun, you could have refrained from doing that.

Quote:

---

Quoting Insons Insontis

---

...although his wife did write on her blog about this the next day....

---

Alas, I couldn't find this. Down the memory hole?

Quote:

---

Quoting Insons Insontis

---

You would have done the exact same thing if you were potentially facing 36 years in prison, and your fate was going to be decided by 12 people that have no understanding of self-defense, nor are they experienced in the legal profession in general.

---

Actually, were I on trial with the same facts, my fear would be of having a jury full of people who did understand the laws of self-defense. If your story as shared here is the same as the one you shared with your lawyer, I can see why he apparently urged you to plea bargain.

Quote:

---

Quoting Insons Insontis

---

I trusted my attorney to inform me, and repeatedly called him to schedule meetings to talk, and to try and understand what the evidence was against me. We had 3 meetings over the course of a year, and each lasted between 20 and 45 minutes.

---

He was the only criminal defense lawyer listed in the phone book?

Quote:

---

Quoting Insons Insontis

---

As I said, the prosecution did not even interview any of the witnesses or the supposed victim. This is exactly why Mike Nifong was disbarred in the Duke Lacrosse team case, among other violations he committed.

---

Incorrect. Also, it's both routine and proper for prosecutors to leave the investigating to the police, and to make their charging decisions based upon the police report rather than playing detective.

Quote:

---

Quoting Insons Insontis

---

Could you please, just for a minute assume the best of me, instead of automatically assuming the worst?

---

People who know you filter the facts through their personal knowledge and relationship with you. People who don't know you can only look at the facts. The facts justify the charge and the outcome.

Quote:

---

Quoting Insons Insontis

---

..........As left the exam room, he was standing at the end of the hallway leading to the exit. I yelled out his name, and walked down the hall to the exit. I then stated, “Before I leave here, I wanted to tell you that the reason those people you call idiots, who are actually called patients, go home and kill themselves is because they are treated like criminals by doctors like you...............”

---

This is/was the pivotal moment and is what bought you the no contest arrangement. Had you not aggravated the situation and simply walked off into the sunset you could've saved your keyboard a lot of stress lately. At one point in your initial post you ask; "...I don’t understand why this happened or what else I could have done to prevent the altercation." Calling out the doc caused your situation. Nothing more, nothing less. Had you not done that there would've been nothing else that transpired.

Your response was most likely aggravated by your consumption of copious amounts of controlled substances.

Soooooooo, the cause, and subsequent solution lies in the person that stares back at you in the mirror. Some members suggested you seek professional help for your mental/psychological/substance abuse difficulties. That would appear to be a very prudent course of action at this point.

Would a moderator or an admin please delete this entire thread please. I am tired of the personal attacks and blatant harassment by every teenager with anger issues. I can't even begin to respond to all of the ignorant assertions in this thread, as everyone is hijacking this post for their own perceived edification. I can't even begin to address all the personal attacks and ignorant assertions, I do not intend to develop a diorama to keep up with the pedantic rantings of people that post for no other reason than to make themselves feel better about their own lives.

Please delete.

Although people have been skeptical of parts of your story, that's quite understandable given the facts that you've stated. There's no law that says we have to accept your claims at face value.

If you insist upon waking up a thread that seemed to have run its course, only to insult the people who have tried to help you with your issues and make ridiculous accusations of "harassment", you're apt to get another ear full of hard truths.

Like this one: I was a teenager once, I don't deny getting angry at times, but I have never been so angry or out-of-control that I hollered insults at my doctor at his office - and certainly not so angry or out of control that I pulled a gun on my doctor or pistol whipped him in the face. Motes vs. beams.

Deleting the thread means that others with similar questions or issues wouldn't be able to access it. If you're tired of it, quit looking at it.

By your own admission you made your situation needlessly worse, then wanna be all coddled by posting here after the Law does their business on ya and you feel you're some sorta victimized. Besides, there was not all that much "ignorant assertions" going on. The responses, which were for the most part spot-on interpretations of what you posted, were not quite what you expected and you kept digging yourself into a deeper and deeper hole thinking that you were gonna reach some sorta self justification at some point.

Much like your doctor 'visit', this didn't turn out like you planned and you take the obviously juvenile step of insulting the responses and wanting the whole thing deleted like it never happened. Well sorry about your luck! You're past the point of picking up your toys and running home 'cause someone's not playing nice.

Quote:

---

souperdave;624326] you kept digging yourself into a deeper and deeper hole thinking that you were gonna reach some sorta self justification at some point.

---

I'm thinking II was hoping to eventually find a opening at the other end of the hole if he dug far enough. The problem was: he kept surfacing here, rather than continuing his dig until he escaped, not covertly but with fanfare and failed to realize that when a skunk does that, the farmer eventually gets a good shot and takes him out.

You don't draw attention to yourself and then complain about the outcome. If you didn't want comment, you should not have invited it.

Quote:

---

Quoting jk

---

when a skunk does that, the farmer eventually gets a good shot and takes him out

---

Or he surfaces just as the combine is passing by. I hate it when that happens.

Quote:

---

Quoting aardvarc

---

Or he surfaces just as the combine is passing by. I hate it when that happens.

---

wow, it's has been so long since I have been involved in farming I had to think about that for a moment.


Then I went "eeewwwwwwwww!!!"

but if you hate it when it happens, just think how the skunk feels about it, at least for that fleeting instant he realized his mistake.

What you keep stating as "facts" are nothing more than your personal bias playing an inner narrative in your head that simply didn't happen. Yes, I agree that I should have walked out, but the FACT is that nothing I said was illegal or disorderly. Nor did I ever "pistol whip" anyone. Where do you even get this stuff? You also state that I "hollered insults", which is also false.

However, even if I had "hollered insults" it does not excuse the doctor from using physical force on me because I called him a name. Certainly he can tell me to leave, but I was already in the process of doing that as I began my comments to him (which were true) and as I finished them. I was walking toward the front door the entire time, and would have been gone without incident if he simply would have left me alone.

The FACT is that he got angry and began to use physical force, not me. He escalated the situation even further, as all he had to do was shut the security door behind me, instead of following through the door. He also could have let me leave out THE FRONT DOOR, but he chose not to. He chose to FOLLOW ME outside, into the parking lot, and TO MY VEHICLE. He chose to almost pull a weapon or even dumber, pretend he was going to pull a weapon, in which case I tried to hide behind the biggest metal object around. I did not call him names, follow him to escalate the situation, and I certainly never pushed, shoved, grabbed or used any physical force until there was absolutely no other choice.

I didn't draw my weapon because I was "angry" as you claim, I pulled the weapon to stop the attack, which is exactly what happened and is exactly what I was trained to do. If I could have gotten into my vehicle earlier I would have done so, but when someone that outweighs you buy 30 lbs, stands a half-a-foot taller than you, and behaves as if they not only want to hurt you, but further escalates by demonstrating their intent to use deadly force, you would back up away from your attacker just as I did. Especially if you had 3 herniated discs, a right arm in a splint, and were a decent human being who did not want to fight.

I never wanted to fight, nor did I even conceive that disagreeing with a doctor would provoke him to use physical force, let alone have him chase me around a parking lot like a lunatic. I never had time to get into my vehicle as he was on me the whole time, and it was only when he diverted his attention back to the nurses and walked back about 6-10 feet from MY CAR DOOR that I felt safe in trying to enter my vehicle for the 2nd time. THAT is when he got too close, and physically grabbed my neck from BEHIND, and I reacted just as I should have to make damn sure I was not hurt or killed. I did not know if he had a weapon, but any reasonable person would have felt threatened if someone was using physical force on them and would not stop, and continued to pursue a retreating victim ALL THE WAY TO THEIR CAR.

Are you seriously going to sit there behind your keyboard while sipping a latte and pretend that you know all the "facts", none of which have been expressed by me, but have been illogically inferred from other posters and yourself? Do you seriously think you would not feel threatened if someone who had already used physical force was following you out of a building you had just left, into a parking lot, and then to your vehicle? Forget the part about him reaching for a weapon, and actually THINK about his behavior and how he proceeded to attack and would not let me leave. You are insane if you think this is normal behavior by any person, let alone a doctor.

Further, to the poster who stated that I was seeing a hand-surgeon, a spinal surgeon, and that my wife was a doctor as well, NONE of these doctors had the ability to write me a prescription for blood pressure medication or high-cholesterol medication. THAT IS NOT WHAT THEY DO! My wife does not write me prescriptions for anything, as not only is it ILLEGAL, but it is unethical for her to treat her husband. She is a specialist as well, and does not even deal with the types of problems a family practice physician would deal with.

The reason I stopped off by the clinic was because due to my daughter being born, and everything that was taking place, I simply forgot to schedule an appointment with my regular family physician. When I did make the appointment, it was going to be another 2 weeks before I could get into his office, and while that is understandable due to the amount of patients, I needed the blood pressure medication immediately. Not only does the medication help prevent the migraines from occurring, but it also makes me less likely to die. Migraine is a neurovascular disease, and so that you will understand the immediacy of my needs, let me put this in perspective. More people die every year of migraine induced stroke than are killed by handguns, and THAT is why I needed the medication, besides the excruciating pain that migraines trigger.

Do a Google search, and you will read that on a disability scale that was determined by a cooperative study by the WHO, American Journal of Science, The National Headache Association, the New England Journal of Medicine, the British Medical Association, the American Academy of Neurologists, and the Center for Disease Control vital statistics reports for morbidity and mortality; that migraine disease ranked higher than quadriplegia on a disability scale.

When they compared the pain of migraine disease to other disorders to try and understand how much pain was involved with "actual migraine patients", who have had an MRI/MRA scan of their brain while a migraine was induced (like me), the lead author of the study wrote: "Migraine disease pain is tantamount to the pain experienced by a person suffering from a traumatic injury resulting in death; the problem for the migraine patient, is that they do not die." That is why I needed the blood pressure medication, I already had pain mediation as prescribed by my migraine specialist, a neurologist/pain management specialist. Family practice doctors DO NOT HAVE THE ABILITY OR TRAINING to treat migraine disease, as it is completely out of scope for their practice. Even if I had wanted to get narcotic pain medication from this doctor, IT WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN POSSIBLE, as it would be reported in the pharmacy records which all of my doctors can access freely.

Mr. Know-it-None states:

Quote:

---

The doctor had... your prescription history. You've not indicated that he had any other part of your medical record. If in fact you presented and simply said, "I'm out of my high blood pressure medications and need a refill," I don't see why there would be a need to discuss your migraines at all, except to the extent that the doctor was concerned about drug interactions. Had you reiterated, "I only want refills on my blood pressure medications," I expect that the doctor's concerns would have been resolved. What really happened?

---

Wrong again. I gave him ALL of my medical records, as because of the medications I take, and due to the nature of the disease I sometimes have to go to the ER when I suffer from a migraine attack that cannot be controlled, and which has lasted for 2 days. It is imperative that the ER doctors know what my medications are, and that they see the ORDERS from my neurologist on how to treat the migraines. Certain medications I can not take which are routinely given in the ER, however, due to the type of migraine disease I have those medications will KILL ME or cause me to have something called "Tardive dyskinesia" and seizures.

The reason I gave this new doctor my entire medical record is so that he would be aware of everything I was taking, my allergic reactions, and the nature of my disease. He also needed my last liver enzyme and blood work so that he could prescribe the Crestor, as this medication can have harmful effects on the liver, and he needs to see that my enzymes are at an appropriate level before writing the prescription for Crestor.

He walked into the room holding my records, and had 1 prescription for 10 pain pills (that was written over 65 days ago) in his hand, and began berating me about pain medication. I did present and tell him I only needed refills for blood pressure and Crestor medications, you just didn't read the post. Not only did I tell him, but I told the nurse when I called to see if I could "walk-in" or if I needed an appointment. I also told the nurse when I signed in to the clinic why I was there, and AGAIN when I was first interviewed by another nurse who came into the office to talk to me before the doctor entered the exam room.

Yes, you are finally correct about ONE THING when you state,

Quote:

---

I don't see why there would be a need to discuss your migraines at all, except to the extent that the doctor was concerned about drug interactions.

---

And this is exactly what I thought as well, and what I stated very calmly to the doctor. There was no reason for him to even bring up the migraines, but AS I SAID, he walked into the room already pissed off. I reiterated as much as I could, and tried my best to pull him down from the ceiling, and explained to him repeatedly that I had no intention of discussing my migraines with him. Not only does he not know anything about migraines, but he has no training to even SPEAK to the disease.

Quote:

---

And then you went home? On to your scheduled medical appointment? Alas... no.

---

Yes I went home and disarmed, and put the gun in my safe. I called some family members who are well known in the community, and we waited together for the police to arrive. I had to call the police over 4 times, finally to be told almost 6 hours later that if I wanted to file charges or if he wanted to file charges, we would both need to come down to the station to file a complaint. Remaining or returning to the scene would not only have been dangerous, it could have been interpreted by him as me coming back for a fight. It made no sense to return to the scene, and for your information, the police did not arrive for another 42 minutes after I placed the 911 call before anyone else involved.

Leaving the scene was a logical, safe, and trained response to the threat. No reasonable person would return to or remain at the scene where they had just drawn a firearm to protect themselves and was in fear for their life.

Quote:

---

You could have... left when, after you created a disturbance, the doctor escorted you out of the building and told you to leave. You could have responded in a reasonable, rational manner to the doctor's actions, rather than imagining that he was going to pull a gun and shoot you. You could have put your gun away and apologized after you pulled your gun, when you could see plain as day that you were wrong about the doctor's intentions and that you were the only one brandishing a weapon. If you are the guy who hit the doctor in the face with his gun, you could have refrained from doing that.

---

I WAS leaving, and the doctor did not "escort" me out of the building anymore than a kidnapper escorts a child into their vehicle. He was trying to fight me, and I did not respond in any fashion except to KEEP RETREATING, and telling him to "LET ME LEAVE", "BACK OFF", "GET BACK!"

I did not "imagine" he was going to pull the gun, I reacted just as a reasonable person would who saw his demeanor, behavior, and actions. Put my gun away and apologize? Have you actually read ONE WORD I have written without running it through your OWN PERSONAL filter of what you THINK happened? I pulled the gun to keep him away from me, as I did not have the ability to fight, nor did he respond to my repeated commands to leave me alone so that I COULD enter my vehicle and leave. Had I not held him at bay long enough to get into my vehicle (which was only a few seconds), I may not have been alive to be berated in this thread by people who have no intentions but to continually interpret this event in the worst light possible, without even ONCE mentioning that it may have been just a little freaking odd for a doctor to chase you out to your car. Have you ever had ANYONE chase you to your vehicle wanting to attack you?

I jumped into my vehicle as fast as I could and threw in reverse and gassed it until I was across the street as far way as possible. THEN I put it into drive and continued to retreat away from my assailant. I am not the person in whatever article you are reading, and I did not strike anyone with a pistol. First, the pistol was small enough that it was in my front pocket (it is about the size of a small cellphone that flips open, and easily fits into the palm of my wife's hands from grip to the end of the barrel) and you couldn't "pistol whip" someone with it even if your life depended on it. Second, there has been no article or website reporting the incident to my knowledge, except for what his wife wrote, which she deleted after 4 days because I had not been arrested and she was writing about my private medical information on the internet, which is a violation of HIPPAA, and she was NOT EVEN THERE when this happened. (She is actually in a lot of trouble for this as I write this post) I would not be arrested until 6 days after this incident took place.

Quote:

---

He was the only criminal defense lawyer listed in the phone book?

---

This is what I am talking about with your continued flippant and unnecessary retorts. Of course he was not the only attorney in the phone book, but as I have never been a criminal, nor have I ever had to hire an attorney for anything, nor am I an attorney or one that specialized in criminal law, I was hardly in a position to be able to critique his opinion. He had a good reputation, and I was rather naive about the whole process. In hindsight, yes, I should have hired someone else, but the solutions to problems are only easy once you know what they are. I wish I would have known the criminal trial process better, I wish I would have understood the rules of police and criminal procedure better, and I wish that I had not been under the most stressful circumstances I have ever had to face in my life.

If I had known more, and had not been terrified of losing my family, perhaps I would have been able to think more clearly and with a more informed opinion about the circumstances and hired another attorney or hired a self-defense expert or called one of my former instructors to teach him about self-defense and instruct the jury about how I was trained and why I responded the way that I did. My attorney suggested that this would make me look bad, as the more training I had, the more I would look like "Some soldier of fortune wanna be", which is the opposite of what the State concealed carry classes advise you to do. They advise you to train as much as possible, and to become as proficient as possible so that you don't make mistakes or cause an accident or hurt an innocent bystander with a misplaced shot.

Like I said, your detached reflection and analysis is much easier from your armchair and keyboard. I had less than 20 seconds to make about 500 different decisions, while I was under the treat of attack and possible deadly force. I sincerely hope if this ever happens to anyone else, that they have the ability to ponder and calmly reflect on their thoughts and decisions for days, like you have done, without any fear of death or permanent injury.

Quote:

---

Incorrect. Also, it's both routine and proper for prosecutors to leave the investigating to the police, and to make their charging decisions based upon the police report rather than playing detective.

---

In a general way you are correct. However, the prosecution is required by law to investigate and provide to a defendant's attorney any exculpatory evidence or circumstances that would mitigate the charges. From your own source , "Nifong refused offers from counsel for David Evans, who was eventually indited, to consider evidence and information that they contended either proved an alibi or otherwise demonstrated that their client did not commit any crime." (pg.9, .52)

Again, from your own source, which is the charging document against Nifong, it also states," The evidence and information referred to in paragrpahs 54 through 56 was evidence or information which tended to negate the guilt of the Duke Defendants." (pg.9. .57)

"Nifong came under severe attack not only from advocates of the indicted students but by mainstream news sources such as "60 mintues, The Washington Post, and the Los Angeles Times... that he refused to hear exculpatory evidence prior to indictment..." (1-4)

Sources:
1. Beard, Aaron (October 27, 2006). "Prosecutor Yet to Interview Rape Accuser". Washington Post. Associated Press.
2. "Duke Rape Suspects Speak Out". 60 Minutes. Oct 15, 2006.
3. "Prosecutorial Indiscretion". Washington Post. December 31, 2006.
4. "State Bar Says Nifong Skirted System in Handling of Duke Lacrosse Case". WRAL.com. March 20, 2007.

It is the job of the prosecution to make sure that the investigation was unbiased, and that any evidence or information that would mitigate my guilt was investigated and provided to my attorney and I. When the witnesses made blatanly contradictory statments, it was the job of the detective to challenge them on those statements, instead of just continuing with the questioning as if that had not just changed their story mid-sentence. It was the job of the prosecution to make sure those descrepancies were addressed before filing any charges, and it was the prosecutions job to make certain that the witnesses were indeed telling the truth in their recorded statements. You can't have a witness state in one question the logical equivelant of "water is wet" then to ask her the same question 3 minutes later in which she makes the statement "water is not wet." That is a discrepancy or outright lie that needs to be addressed by the detective during the corse of the investigation.

A detective conducting an objective, unbiased and proper investigation does not allow those types of statements to go unchallenged, especially when they speak to marterial facts that would clearly prove my innocence or mitigate my guilt. If someone is lying or changes their story mid-sentence in order to conform to peer pressure, that is a mitigating factor in my defense, and it should have been addressed by the detective and the prosecution. It should have also been addressed by my attorney, and my attorney should have told me that these witnesses were not very credible based on the contradictions and the likelyhood of his ability to impeach their testimony at trial.

Quote:

---

People who know you filter the facts through their personal knowledge and relationship with you. People who don't know you can only look at the facts. The facts justify the charge and the outcome.

---

The people who know me filter the facts through looking at the actual witness statements and evidence, which you have not done, and they filter the evidence based on my known character, training, reputation in the community, and my public and personal behavior that they have witnessed for decades. You are making up your own "facts" as you go along. You are stating your opinion of what you THINK happened, you are stating things that did not happen, and then claiming your opinion is a "fact."

Quote:

---

Yes, I agree that I should have walked out, but the FACT is that nothing I said was illegal or disorderly.

---

actually, there is a good possibility the initial confrontation can be considered to be disorderly. Beyond that, yes, you have described acts that are definitely considered disorderly.

that is based on what you said with no speculation on my part.

Quote:

---

However, even if I had "hollered insults" it does not excuse the doctor from using physical force on me because I called him a name.

---

actually, yes it does. You are on his property. He has employees and patients to be concerned about and your actions suggest you were a threat. He had the right to physically throw your ass out at that time and that is what you described.

Quote:

---

The FACT is that he got angry and began to use physical force, not me

---

So? You were the crazy SOB that yelled at the doc and then confronted him. If he felt you were a physical threat, you assaulted him. Due to that and the previous concern for his practice, he had every right to use physical force on you.

Quote:

---

but further escalates by demonstrating their intent to use deadly force

---

and that being what? You claim you believed he was reaching for a weapon but not only did he never draw it, you never saw it and nobody every confirmed he had one on his person. That was either a huge error on the part of your attorney or something you failed to state here.

Quote:

---

I never wanted to fight,

---

yes you did. You are the one that called to the doctor and approached him and refused to leave when the doctor told you to do so.

Oh, so now we have a new excuse. What don't you understand that a doctor is not going to prescribe you maintenance meds if they are not the doctor treating you for the reasons for the meds? That unknown doctor has no idea what your situation is and has no right to prescribe meds in that situation, regardless of what your medical records state (and who carries their medical records around with them anyway? HHmmm. maybe somebody that frequently visits unknown doctors attempting to obtain various prescriptions?)

Quote:

---

Are you seriously going to sit there behind your keyboard while sipping a latte and pretend that you know all the "facts", none of which have been expressed by me,

---

Oh, so you admit to having provided no facts? I guess that means everything posted has been lies, all lies.

Quote:

---

When I did make the appointment, it was going to be another 2 weeks before I could get into his office, and while that is understandable due to the amount of patients, I needed the blood pressure medication immediately

---

if you had any reasonable relationship with your PCP he would have written a scrip, at least for the interim period. The fact you went to a stranger for a maintenance meds suggests some untruthfulness to your statements and the fact your PCP would not prescribe a small amount of your meds to tide you over speaks even louder to a problem.

Quote:

---

Remaining or returning to the scene would not only have been dangerous, it could have been interpreted by him as me coming back for a fight.

---

it doesn't matter what he thought. That was the point of clearing this action with the police. Once the police were there and in control, your communication with them that you were returning to the scene (and weren't you advised to do that anyway) is not improper. If they directed you to go home, then that is what you do.

Quote:

---

He chose to FOLLOW ME outside, into the parking lot,

---

because you were still on his property and he had a right to ensure you were leaving. Your option at that point was to continue on and get into your car and leave, not turn and argue.

Quote:

---

Forget the part about him reaching for a weapon,

---

you mean the part where you claim that was your belief, you know, the claim that was never substantiated?

Quote:

---

Wrong again. I gave him ALL of my medical records, as because of the medications I take, and due to the nature of the disease I sometimes have to go to the ER when I suffer from a migraine attack that cannot be controlled, and which has lasted for 2 days. It is imperative that the ER doctors know what my medications are,

---

sure, sure. I happen to know how the records systems work in a local hospital and area doctors offices. Carrying the records with you is not required if you set it up as such. In fact, the ER would much rather have the direct access to the most recent records from your doctor than anything you bring in, that could have been altered by you.

Quote:

---

as it would be reported in the pharmacy records which all of my doctors can access freely.

---

Really? Then I have to presume you have signed a HIPAA release to allow such transfer of information.

Quote:

---

Not only does he not know anything about migraines, but he has no training to even SPEAK to the disease.

---

Oh, so now you know the complete education and training of a doctor you just met? Really now.

Quote:

---

, without even ONCE mentioning that it may have been just a little freaking odd for a doctor to chase you out to your car.

---

considering your actions? Not the least bit odd. In fact had he not followed you, then I would see it as odd. He wanted to make sure the patient he had never met before that felt the need to "call him out" and start yelling at him actually left the property. He was likely going to obtain your license plate and vehicle type so he could report you to the police for your conduct.

Quote:

---

Second, there has been no article or website reporting the incident to my knowledge,

---

so, a doctors run in with one of the areas wealthy residents involving the police and a weapon was not reported in the news? Sure.

Quote:

---

nor have I ever had to hire an attorney for anything, nor am I an attorney or one that specialized in criminal law, I was hardly in a position to be able to critique his opinion.

---

you have all those friends in high places yet you failed to seek a recommendation from people that are quite possibly attorneys or guaranteed to be in close contact with attorneys on a very regular basis.

Quote:

---

No reasonable person would return to or remain at the scene where they had just drawn a firearm to protect themselves and was in fear for their life.

---

so, even though you were directed to return to the scene and the police had been called and were responding to the scene, you somehow feared the doctor would whip out his gun and shoot you? Really?

Quote:

---

I pulled the gun to keep him away from me, as I did not have the ability to fight, nor did he respond to my repeated commands to leave me alone so that I COULD enter my vehicle and leave. Had I not held him at bay long enough to get into my vehicle

---

so of course you file assault charges against the doctor, right?

Quote:

---

If I had known more, and had not been terrified of losing my family, perhaps I would have been able to think more clearly and with a more informed opinion about the circumstances and hired another attorney or hired

---

this took how long from the incident to pleading? Very poor and unbelievable excuse. Not a reason, an excuse.

Quote:

---

A detective conducting an objective, unbiased and proper investigation does not allow those types of statements to go unchallenged, especially when they speak to marterial facts that would clearly prove my innocence or mitigate my guilt.

---

nor does a decent defense attorney yet here we are.

Quote:

---

. It was the job of the prosecution to make sure those descrepancies were addressed before filing any charges,

---

No it wasn't. It was your defense attorney's job to utilize those discrepancies to defend you yet, here we are.

Quote:

---

A detective conducting an objective, unbiased and proper investigation does not allow those types of statements to go unchallenged,

---

apparently you do not understand what "taking a witness statement" means. It is not up to the cop to challenge anything. It is his job to take what the witness states. Actually, if he influences the statement is when there is a problem. Then it isn't the witnesses statement any longer.

Quote:

---

It should have also been addressed by my attorney, and my attorney should have told me that these witnesses were not very credible based on the contradictions and the likelyhood of his ability to impeach their testimony at trial.

---

here is where we can only speculate as to the actions of your attorney. In doing so, I suspect he had a client that was guaranteed a loss and even after attempting to negotiate a deal, multiple times, he simply realize he had an idiot for a client that was simply going to end up convicting himself regardless what the lawyer did to try to save him from himself.

Quote:

---

. If someone is lying or changes their story mid-sentence in order to conform to peer pressure, that is a mitigating factor in my defense, and it should have been addressed by the detective and the prosecution.

---

Wrong, again. It is the duty of the defense to exploit any possible irregularities in statements. In fact, a defense attorney wants the witness statements to be as poorly conducted as possible as that allows them a means to attack those statements. The prosecution is attempting to gather evidence in order to gain a conviction. If they fail to do their job and the defendant is acquitted, then out justice system wins. That is how it is supposed to work.

Quote:

---

Quoting souperdave

---

This is/was the pivotal moment and is what bought you the no contest arrangement. Had you not aggravated the situation and simply walked off into the sunset you could've saved your keyboard a lot of stress lately. At one point in your initial post you ask; "...I don’t understand why this happened or what else I could have done to prevent the altercation." Calling out the doc caused your situation. Nothing more, nothing less. Had you not done that there would've been nothing else that transpired.

Your response was most likely aggravated by your consumption of copious amounts of controlled substances.

---

Disagreeing with someone, even a doctor, does not make it legal for them to physically attack you. Yes, I should have just left and written a letter of complaint to the medical board, but I chose to express my opinion, which was not illegal or disorderly in any way. I had no ability to foresee or even consider that he would turn into a raging lunatic and try and assault me, pursue me as I retreated all the way into the parking lot and then farther to my vehicle, demonstrate his willingness to draw a firearm, or attack me at my vehicle. Even if I had called him every insult in the book, it still does not make it legal or ethical for him to attack me.

Certainly the doctor had the right to tell me to leave; what he didn't have the right to do was attack me or try to prevent me from leaving. Further, he is the one that escalated a disagreement into a physical altercation. He is the one that was pursing me out the front door, into the parking lot, and all the way to my car door. He is also the one that demonstrated his intention to use a weapon, and he is also the one that attacked first after I had already left the clinic and was trying to get into my vehicle to leave. I never used any physical force until the last second, when it was almost too late. I indicated to him that I did not want to fight, and I retreated as far as possible. He is the one that escalated this by using physical force because he didn't like my opinion, he escalated it by pursing me during retreat, and he really escalated it by reaching as if he was going for his gun, and finally he was the one that tried to attack me again all the way out into the parking lot as I was trying to get into my car.

Quote:

---

5-2-607. Use of deadly physical force in defense of a person.

(a) A person is justified in using deadly physical force upon another person if the person reasonably believes that the other person is:

(1) Committing or about to commit a felony involving force or violence;

(2) Using or about to use unlawful deadly physical force; or

(3) Imminently endangering the person's life ...

---

"Imminently endangering" is defined in case law as causing a permanent injury or disability.

Do you think clobbering a person with 3 herniated discs in their c spine that are compressing their spinal cord resulting in loss of function could cause a permanent injury? Of course, and so does every neurosurgeon and reasonable person on the planet. Of course, from the comments you post, I am not certain you are a reasonable person. In fact, I am quite certain you are very unreasonable.

Even if I had punched him in the nose in the middle of his clinic, the moment I began to retreat and state that I no longer wanted to fight, my right to self-defense is restored. This is not only explicitly stated in many decisions by the SCOTUS, but it is explicitly stated by Arkansas statute.

Quote:

---

b) A person is not justified in using physical force upon another person if:

(1) With purpose to cause physical injury or death to the other person, the person provokes the use of unlawful physical force by the other person;

(2) (A) The person is the initial aggressor.

(B) However, the initial aggressor's use of physical force upon another person is justifiable if:

(i) The initial aggressor in good faith withdraws from the encounter and effectively communicates to the other person his or her purpose to withdraw from the encounter; and

(ii) The other person continues or threatens to continue the use of unlawful physical force

---

Arkansas law states the original aggressor is the person who first initiates any behavior likely to cause "physical injury or death to the other person..." I seriously doubt me telling him he is a bad doctor is likely to result in physical injury or death.

Quote:

---

Your response was most likely aggravated by your consumption of copious amounts of controlled substances.

---

You can keep bleating and baying this as long as you want, but just because you assert it does not make it true, no matter how many times you let the idiocy fall out of your mouth. I think your response to this thread is caused by your lack of consumption of the appropriate medication, and possibly the consumption of copious amounts of controlled or illicit substances. I also think you beat your wife, and kick puppies when no one is looking. (Seriously, that was not in jest) Perhaps it is because no one likes you in real life that you have relegated yourself to being a malcontent on the internet, where you can make baseless accusations while sitting safely behind your anonymous keyboard. For all I know, you are sitting at a computer in a prison library on your rec-time pathetically lashing out at the world because you are angry that mommy didn't hug you enough when you were a child. It's either that or you are 40 years old and living in your mother's basement, most likely with a gimp in a locked chest in your closet.

Quote:

---

5-2-607. Use of deadly physical force in defense of a person.

(a) A person is justified in using deadly physical force upon another person if the person reasonably believes that the other person is:

(1) Committing or about to commit a felony involving force or violence;

(2) Using or about to use unlawful deadly physical force; or

(3) Imminently endangering the person's life ...

---

yep, reasonably believes and since it is so difficult for the prosecution to disprove your claim, it is a generally easy argument to win yet, here we are.


All you had to to is prove the doc was wearing a gun or even usually carried it which would support your claim you believed he was reaching for his weapon and this would have gone away yet, here we are.

- - - Updated - - -

Quote:

---

Arkansas law states the original aggressor is the person who first initiates any behavior likely to cause "physical injury or death to the other person..." I seriously doubt me telling him he is a bad doctor is likely to result in physical injury or death.

---

and that would appear to be you when you confronted the doctor inside the office. You did more than simply tell him he was a bad doctor:

Quote:

---

I yelled out his name, and walked down the hall to the exit (obviously angry as evidenced by the following so the tone of voice would have been threatening let alone how you walked). I then stated, “Before I leave here, I wanted to tell you that the reason those people you call idiots, who are actually called patients, go home and kill themselves is because they are treated like criminals by doctors like you.”

---

- - - Updated - - -

Quote:

---

Even if I had punched him in the nose in the middle of his clinic, the moment I began to retreat and state that I no longer wanted to fight, my right to self-defense is restored.

---

wrong. You had to have clearly shown (it's going to take more than a "moment") show an intent to retreat. Your statements are meaningless as you had already shown your willingness to fight.

Quote:

---

He is also the one that demonstrated his intention to use a weapon,

---

yet there was absolutely no proof he had a weapon but only your belief he did based on his actions. Maybe he was grabbing his back due to pain he was experiencing due to 3 herniated discs and you clearly misinterpreted it.

I thought of offering you a shovel but you are doing such a find job of digging your own hole it is obvious you don't need one. Wisdom is when you know when it's time to quit?

Quote:

---

Quoting indybail

---

Hey, you're the one going to the doctor's office with a gun looking for a scrip. I know several folks who suffer with migraines without resorting to taking a gun to the doctor's office. Speaking of prescriptions, having one doesn't exempt you from having a substance abuse problem.

At the end of the day pain management does not always require drugs so do yourself a favor and get some help.

---

I have been licensed to carry a firearm for 15 years, and I wasn't going to see the doctor to get a "scrip", and this doesn't become true just because some dolt on the internet claims it to be. The firearm is carried for self-defense and in my line of work I often come across people that are not the best members of society. It was perfectly legal to carry my firearm into the doctor's office and there was no sign or policy prohibiting me from doing just that. Not one person in 15 years knew I was carrying a firearm, and that is why it is called a concealed carry license. Not only did the doctor have no idea I was carrying a firearm, there was no way for him to know. It's not like I am carrying a rifle slung on my shoulder, nor was the weapon unconcealed and on my hip for anyone to see. Seriously, you can quit commenting at any time, as you have absolutely no valuable information to share. There is not one thing anyone has learned from your posts other than the fact that you are very angry and useless.

I seriously doubt you know anyone that suffers from migraines, let alone "several." The simple fact is that I rarely take any pain medication, which is why I only had 10 pills. With that said, there are times when pain medication is the ONLY medication that migraine patient's can take to stop the attack, and it is not only necessary, but life saving. Chronic pain is a disease that is capable of causing tremendous damage to the body, but in the case of migraine patients the pain is so severe that they can suffer from stroke or heart attack as well. If you read anything besides your own bloviating tripe you would understand this simple fact.

As I have said, I don't like to take pain medication, but there are times when I have no choice. Do me and everyone else a favor and go do something useful with your time, instead of just jumping into a thread to bash someone. I hardly need a critique from a bail bondsman that was too stupid to get accepted into community college.

Quote:

---

Insons Insontis;624368]I have been licensed to carry a firearm for 15 years,

---

You were licensed to carry for 15 years. You no longer have a valid permit to carry due to your conviction.

Quote:

---

and I wasn't going to see the doctor to get a "scrip"

---

,wow, that is exactly what you said you were going there for. Remember where you couldn't get into your doctor for some time and needed your meds? Just what were you there for if not a scrip?

and this doesn't become true just because some dolt on the internet claims it to be.

Quote:

---

The firearm is carried for self-defense and in my line of work

---

Your line of work? I thought you were completely disabled and unable to work. What happened to that claim?

Quote:

---

. Not only did the doctor have no idea I was carrying a firearm, there was no way for him to know.

---

wrong. If you carry in the front pocket, especially when you are sitting directly in front of a person while you on on an exam table, it becomes quite obvious, either that or he had to have assumed you were really happy to see him.

Quote:

---

I seriously doubt you know anyone that suffers from migraines, let alone "several."

---

I know 3 that are very closely acquainted to me and 2 that are not as close.

Quote:

---

The simple fact is that I rarely take any pain medication, which is why I only had 10 pills.

---

that's good because you do not take "pain meds" for migraines.

Quote:

---

With that said, there are times when pain medication is the ONLY medication that migraine patient's can take to stop the attack, and it is not only necessary, but life saving

---

.BS. Show me proof of a person that died from the pain of a migraine. Just so you know, one of the people I know had migraines so bad they were considered to be untreatable. They were ever present. It was merely how painful they were. He even attempted a novel treatment of botox with no success.

Quote:

---

Chronic pain is a disease that is capable of causing tremendous damage to the body,

---

pain does not cause damage. It is the result of damage.

Quote:

---

but in the case of migraine patients the pain is so severe that they can suffer from stroke or heart attack as well.

---

sorry, but I will allow you to provide proof of your claim before I laugh.

Quote:

---

As I have said, I don't like to take pain medication, but there are times when I have no choice.

---

we always have a choice.

Quote:

---

Quoting aardvarc

---

In a nutshell, that's the reason ANY attorney would have recommended a plea. Whether the seeking of the pain meds was nefarious or not, you'd be asking jurors to find it perfectly innocent to bring your firearm to a doctor's visit - and not just any doctor's visit, but one intended to secure a controlled substance. We don't have professional jurors - juries are made up of your average folk (emphasis on the word AVERAGE), the majority of whom get their understanding of the law from what they see on the news and television. That means that guns + drugs = crime and that the jury would be frothing to hang you halfway through the opening statement. Why? Because normal people going about innocent business don't take guns into their doctor's offices. And the confrontation with the doctor stopped being innocent the minute you didn't simply leave after being told you weren't getting a prescription - REGARDLESS of the doctor's comments, which you chose to respond to with an escalated discourse, instead of a simple "thanks for nothing" and leaving. Juries don't like drug issues mixed with guns, or anger issues mixed with guns - because regardless of the actual circumstances, you're in a massive uphill battle to overcome how such couplings inherently appear. Juries like guns when used in a home to protect against intruders. Juries like guns when used by innocent persons engaged in innocent activities who are victimized through no action of their own. You stacked the deck against yourself here, and your attorney made the recommendation most likely to result in the lowest penalty against you. Regardless of what investigation may have uncovered about other circumstances, at the end of the day, you brought a gun to a botched drug transaction and that fact alone put your case in the attorney's "can't win, better plead" column.

Get off the internet and work on your appeal. The clock is still ticking down against you.

---

Quite frankly, while I agree with your assessment of the idiocy of the jurors, you exhibit the same ignorance when you start talking about what "normal" people would do, especially considering the organization you work with. You have no idea how many people you are sitting next to in your own office that are carrying a firearm concealed, nor do you know about it when they are preaching at your church or sitting beside you in the pew, standing next to you in the grocery line, sitting next to you in a movie theater, selling you a diet coke with a honey-bun at the local convenience store or out walking their dog in your neighborhood. Nobody walks around announcing the fact they are carrying a firearm, but there are hundreds of millions of people doing it every second of every day, you just are not one of them, thus in your very biased an uninformed opinion it is not "normal."

I agree with your summation about juries and their limited ability to overcome their personal biases and follow the law. I also agree that they have poor critical thinking skills and are incapable of analyzing the nuances of self-defense law. Just like the woman 2 weeks ago who was sentenced to 20 years in prison for firing a warning shot (I do not condone warning shots as a rule, but I have seen cases where it stops the attack and nobody got dead) into the wall to fend off her abusive husband. Not only had this man been convicted of beating her before, but she had a current order of protections against him when this incident happened. Do you think she was abnormal for carrying a firearm for protection?

You have no right to call this a botched "drug deal", and you are behaving like the rest of the posters who do nothing more than post ad hominem attacks as if that makes your argument stronger. This is the 2nd time you have told me to get off the internet, as if I can't meet with attorney's, work a full time job, volunteer for community organizations, take care of kids, clean the house, and post on the internet occasionally as well. I am not wasting my time (well I am in this thread at least) as I like to help people and I am trying to help some people on this board despite the malcontents that call this place home who stalk me around the forums and snipe at me anytime I post.

You would also do well to remember that you are not the only person that works to end domestic violence in their community. Some of us work with non-profit legal services that specifically deal with these issues every day. Some of us actually help these victims get protective orders established. Some of us actually risk our personal vehicles and safety to help the women of domestic violence move out of their homes. Some of us pick them up from the secret locations where victims of domestic violence are given a place to stay. Some of us risk our lives to help move their clothes, baby pictures, mother's jewelry, etc. into storage when the police are too busy or too indifferent to stand-by and help the women do this. Some of us pick them up from their secret locations and drive them to court, and then we make damn sure we are not followed when we take them back to the shelter. Some of us have actually been in charge of writing grants specifically for VAWA and VOCA funding so that free legal services and shelters are available for the victims of domestic violence. Some of us have had to take pictures of the bruises and listen to the stories of the horrible events so that the proper legal measures can be taken to protect them and so we can relay the story to private attorneys in the state and try to convince them to take the case pro bono. Some of us have been attacked in the furtherance of these goals, and had our windshields broken with bricks, bats, and flower pots. Some of us have been attacked personally when the abusive husband comes home early, when we are told he certainly should not be.

You have no idea what my life is like or what type of person I am, so please do me the very small courtesy of not casting your baseless assertions against my character simply because you do not like guns or the people that carry them. There was a very good reason I had a gun on me that day, and I broke no law or ethical code by keeping the weapon concealed during a routine doctor visit, and I was most certainly going about "innocent business" that day, unless you consider yourself a criminal. Concealed carry license holders are instructed to never leave the gun in the vehicle, as this is how the majority of criminals end up with firearms as they steal them from the cars of people who leave them under the seat, glove box, console, etc.

I took a drug test when I was arrested, I have had over a dozen drugs tests performed on me in the last 4 years in order to receive the occasional pain medication that I do take. I have never, ever, been a drug abuser, but it is very telling how ANYONE even mentioning the word gun or pain medicine triggers all the ignorance, stupidity, and sheep-like group-think in people without any justification or evidence for their assertions. What happened with that doctor is the same thing that is happening here. You all are talking about what you THINK you know, not what you actually do know, and there is a big difference.

The lot of you need to get off my back. Believe it or not, the justice system is not perfect, and innocent people get convicted every day. And more often take plea deals because they are afraid of the idiocy of the public and their inability to be fair and impartial, just like you point out in your post. You claim you are above the "average" majority who get their information from the news and television, and yet you exhibit the same behavior by making nonsensical assertions about "normal" people and guns. All of your responses reflect your own personal biases and confirmation fallacies that I knew a jury would exhibit, which is why I had to plead. I could have fought the charges, as I did have a good case, but the only way I could guarantee that I was able to continue being a good father and husband was to walk through the door that said plea on it.

If I had done anything else I was putting the life of my wife and daughter, not to mention my own, in the hands of the very people who are too bigoted and and biased to look at the issue fairly, and you admit it yourself. I can't even post on an internet forum without triggering this fallacy by nearly every single person reading, and THAT is why I took the plea. I didn't plea because I was guilty, a drug addict, or because I have anger issues. I plead because people in general lack integrity and are too stupid to think for themselves and critically about a hot button issue. I think what bothers me the most is that I knew the jurors would do exactly what you all have done here, and thus I had to give up the fight. I knew that is almost impossible for the average person to entertain an idea, without accepting it.

Thank you all for reminding me that I made the right decision. My wife, daughter, friends, family, and everyone I have ever helped or know in my community send their heartfelt thanks to you, and all the people just like you. You all should be proud and very happy with yourselves. In fact, whenever you all are feeling low, just come back into this thread and give me a good kick so you can feel better about yourself, as I can take it. Maybe then you will be a little more decent to the people in your community.

Had you not pulled a gun on people who were unarmed, you would not have put your life at risk. You would certainly not have put the lives of your wife and daughter at risk" - they weren't even there.

Here's the thing: You have been repeatedly asked to clarify some basic facts. Rather than complaining that we don't understand, help us understand. Your preferred approach of rambling, insulting people and complaining doesn't make you seem stable, so if that's your goal, reconsider your tactics.

Here's a question you didn't answer:

You had doctors managing your chronic migraines, your high cholesterol, your high blood pressure, your post-surgical care, your tendon injury, your back injury, and perhaps other matters as well, and are married to a doctor. You were scheduled to be treated by one of your doctors later that same day. How did it come to pass that you were unable to have one of your many doctors simply call in your prescriptions to your regular pharmacy, and instead stopped by the clinic of a doctor who didn't know either you or your medical history?

Here's another:

If in fact you presented and simply said, "I'm out of my high blood pressure medications and need a refill," I don't see why there would be a need to discuss your migraines at all, except to the extent that the doctor was concerned about drug interactions. Had you reiterated, "I only want refills on my blood pressure medications," I expect that the doctor's concerns would have been resolved. What really happened?

You were also asked if you struck the doctor with your gun. Did you?