[cappyjon431]

Originally Posted by swimdawg

We have said the word, "allegedly" when referring to the doctor's charges in the case.

Those who are so eager to run to the doctor's defense....read those 3 sentences above written by Posh. Think about it.

Did you read post #72? Part of it read:

"Posh, I never accused you of judging her (although several have, including some suggesting her medical license be revoked, some would never use her as a physician, and I think someone even condemned her for wearing a blouse that was too low cut), but reading back on this entire thread I have seen too many judging someone who is still "technically" innocent."

Many did not use the word allegedly. They were awful quick to act as judge and jury. That is my issue.

It is tragic to lose someone to a drunk driver. Most of us will never know that pain.

It is also tragic to have one's career ruined based on sensational media coverage of a crime that may have never been committed. In this country we are still supposed to be innocent until proven guilty.

[ilovetv]

This is information that causes major concern:

"A following search of the console of her car revealed a black bag of pills that included dextroamphetamines, for attention deficit disorder; and hydrocodone, a pain reliever; as well as hydrocodone, acetaminophen and other loose pills

Chief Terry Issacs said she didn't have any prescriptions for any of the 251 pills, none which were in bottles.

Hamnik, a Leesburg resident, was charged with DUI, three counts of possession of controlled substances and possession of a legend drug....."

Daily Commercial - <p>Police: Doctor was drunk, had pills</p>

I don't think physicians can prescribe narcotics for themselves nor their family members.

[cappyjon431]

Originally Posted by ilovetv

This is information that causes major concern:

"A following search of the console of her car revealed a black bag of pills that included dextroamphetamines, for attention deficit disorder; and hydrocodone, a pain reliever; as well as hydrocodone, acetaminophen and other loose pills

Chief Terry Issacs said she didn't have any prescriptions for any of the 251 pills, none which were in bottles.

Hamnik, a Leesburg resident, was charged with DUI, three counts of possession of controlled substances and possession of a legend drug....."

Daily Commercial - <p>Police: Doctor was drunk, had pills</p>


I don't think physicians can prescribe narcotics for themselves nor their family members.

Hadn't seen this article, sounds pretty damning. I'm still going to wait until she is convicted by a judge and jury before making my own decision.

[Posh 08]

Originally Posted by cappyjon431

Hadn't seen this article, sounds pretty damning. I'm still going to wait until she is convicted by a judge and jury before making my own decision.

If you are called for jury duty you should be excused.

[cappyjon431]

Originally Posted by Posh 08

If you are called for jury duty you should be excused.

Why?

I seem to be one of the few on this thread who is trying to keep an open mind on this case. I have said repeatedly that I could not make an informed decision until ALL of the facts are presented.

It would seem that in the best interest of justice, the ones who have already convicted her on this thread are the ones who should excuse themselves.

[Posh 08]

Originally Posted by cappyjon431

Why?

I seem to be one of the few on this thread who is trying to keep an open mind on this case. I have said repeatedly that I could not make an informed decision until ALL of the facts are presented.

It would seem that in the best interest of justice, the ones who have already convicted her on this thread are the ones who should excuse themselves.

How much do you know about this case? Where did you learn this information? Have you discussed this case with any persons? You decide.

[cappyjon431]

Originally Posted by Posh 08

How much do you know about this case? Where did you learn this information? Have you discussed this case with any persons? You decide.

I would certainly answer those questions truthfully, and i could truthfully say that I have no preconceptions as to guilt or innocence. I may be wrong, but i believe it would be up to the prosecutor and defense attorneys to make that decision. I wouldn't excuse myself.

[Posh 08]

Originally Posted by cappyjon431

I would certainly answer those questions truthfully, and i could truthfully say that I have no preconceptions as to guilt or innocence. I may be wrong, but i believe it would be up to the prosecutor and defense attorneys to make that decision. I wouldn't excuse myself.

Bingo.

[cappyjon431]

Originally Posted by Posh 08

Bingo.

Posh, I'm not trying to be disrespectful or argumentative, but I don't understand your point. You said I should excuse myself. Why should I if I have no preconceptions of guilt or innocence? If the defense attorney or the prosecutor wanted to excuse me so be it, but why should I excuse myself? I still think that those who have already convicted her (and conversely, those who believe she is innocent) without hearing all the facts are the ones who should excuse themselves.

[Posh 08]

Originally Posted by cappyjon431

Posh, I'm not trying to be disrespectful or argumentative, but I don't understand your point. You said I should excuse myself. Why should I if I have no preconceptions of guilt or innocence? If the defense attorney or the prosecutor wanted to excuse me so be it, but why should I excuse myself? I still think that those who have already convicted her (and conversely, those who believe she is innocent) without hearing all the facts are the ones who should excuse themselves.

Bingo = Agreed.

You had me at preconceptions.

[msalanius]

Originally Posted by cappyjon431

Why?

I seem to be one of the few on this thread who is trying to keep an open mind on this case. I have said repeatedly that I could not make an informed decision until ALL of the facts are presented.

It would seem that in the best interest of justice, the ones who have already convicted her on this thread are the ones who should excuse themselves.

Not the only one...I have also posted about convicting in the court of public opinion before she is convicted in a real court :-)

[graciegirl]

Whoa there. This isn't a jury picking session. This is a public forum where people can freely post their opinions and feelings.

We are all stating how we feel and our opinion. When I read that a prominent local doctor has been arrested for DUI...I think, how sad.

I am of the opinion that some people's opinions change about someone when they get in trouble with the law and if people are fair and kind they will change back when further information is added or the person's behaviour changes and stays changed for awhile.


I wouldn't want to hire a carpenter or a plumber who is addicted to a controlled substance.

Maybe this whole thing was a smear campaign by a local police force because she sent a bill collector after one of them???? or because they had someone have a stroke after they consulted her????? I still haven't heard any answers about allegations made on here about the Fruitland Park Police. Pointy hats...is very troubling to read...

It is hard to get useful information on a forum like this...we are all so emotional about how we feel.

I don't go to her. My neighbor does and says she is a great person and a smart person...but hearing about the arrest and the pills would give most people pause.

And a person with a substance abuse problem can be a great person and a smart person, but at some point the substance runs their life.

[swimdawg]

Originally Posted by graciegirl

Whoa there. This isn't a jury picking session. This is a public forum where people can freely post their opinions and feelings.

We are all stating how we feel and our opinion. When I read that a prominent local doctor has been arrested for DUI...I think, how sad.

I am of the opinion that some people's opinions change about someone when they get in trouble with the law and if people are fair and kind they will change back when further information is added or the person's behaviour changes and stays changed for awhile.


I wouldn't want to hire a carpenter or a plumber who is addicted to a controlled substance.

Maybe this whole thing was a smear campaign by a local police force because she sent a bill collector after one of them???? or because they had someone have a stroke after they consulted her????? I still haven't heard any answers about allegations made on here about the Fruitland Park Police. Pointy hats...is very troubling to read...

It is hard to get useful information on a forum like this...we are all so emotional about how we feel.

I don't go to her. My neighbor does and says she is a great person and a smart person...but hearing about the arrest and the pills would give most people pause.

And a person with a substance abuse problem can be a great person and a smart person, but at some point the substance runs their life.

Sad..........but so very true.

[cappyjon431]

Originally Posted by graciegirl

Whoa there. This isn't a jury picking session. This is a public forum where people can freely post their opinions and feelings.

We are all stating how we feel and our opinion. When I read that a prominent local doctor has been arrested for DUI...I think, how sad.

I am of the opinion that some people's opinions change about someone when they get in trouble with the law and if people are fair and kind they will change back when further information is added or the person's behaviour changes and stays changed for awhile.


I wouldn't want to hire a carpenter or a plumber who is addicted to a controlled substance.

Maybe this whole thing was a smear campaign by a local police force because she sent a bill collector after one of them???? or because they had someone have a stroke after they consulted her????? I still haven't heard any answers about allegations made on here about the Fruitland Park Police. Pointy hats...is very troubling to read...

It is hard to get useful information on a forum like this...we are all so emotional about how we feel.

I don't go to her. My neighbor does and says she is a great person and a smart person...but hearing about the arrest and the pills would give most people pause.

And a person with a substance abuse problem can be a great person and a smart person, but at some point the substance runs their life.

Gracie, you know I respect you and I agree that this forum is all about opinions. My opinion is that that I can't really have an opinion until I know all the facts. That is just me and I don't judge anyone who disagrees with me.

She very well could be guilty.

I also know that field breathalyzer tests can produce false positives.
I also know not to believe everything I read in the paper.
I also know that our system of justice is based on the fundamental belief that we are ALL innocent until PROVEN guilty.
I know that I feel very fortunate to live in a country where we are considered innocent until proven guilty. The alternative (places where you are deemed guilty until proven innocent, places like Iran, Afghanistan, Cuba, etc) are not all that attractive to me.

I also know it is human nature to pre-judge people. It is only natural. A scary mug shot, details in the paper, a doctor with the ability to get drugs all paint a disturbing picture. Pre-judging and prejudice are a way for us to rationalize the world around us. It is an innate instinct. My issue is that sometimes it is a good thing to "rise above" our base instincts and TRY to avoid pre-judging. This too is just my opinion.

I do not know this doctor, I have never met or seen her in my life. Before this thread started I had never heard of her. Sometime in the future her case will go to trial and all the facts will be presented. Maybe she will be found guilty and she will get the help she needs. Maybe she will be found innocent and she will be vindicated (unfortunately, her reputation might suffer because she has been pre-judged by many already). Personally, I will be happy with myself knowing that I left judgement up to a judge and jury.

just my $.02

[graciegirl]

Originally Posted by cappyjon431

Gracie, you know I respect you and I agree that this forum is all about opinions. My opinion is that that I can't really have an opinion until I know all the facts. That is just me and I don't judge anyone who disagrees with me.

She very well could be guilty.

I also know that field breathalyzer tests can produce false positives.
I also know not to believe everything I read in the paper.
I also know that our system of justice is based on the fundamental belief that we are ALL innocent until PROVEN guilty.
I know that I feel very fortunate to live in a country where we are considered innocent until proven guilty. The alternative (places where you are deemed guilty until proven innocent (Iran, Afghanistan, Cuba, etc) are not all that attractive to me.

I also know it is human nature to pre-judge people. It is only natural. A scary mug shot, details in the paper, a doctor with the ability to get drugs all paint a disturbing picture. Pre-judging and prejudice are a way for us to rationalize the world around us. It is an innate instinct. My issue is that sometimes it is a good thing to "rise above" our base instincts and TRY to avoid pre-judging. This too is just my opinion.

I do not know this doctor, I have never met or seen her in my life. Before this thread started I had never heard of her. Sometime in the future her case will go to trial and all the facts will be presented. Maybe she will be found guilty and she will get the help she needs. Maybe she will be found innocent and she will be vindicated (unfortunately, her reputation might suffer because she has been pre-judged by many already). Personally, I will be happy with myself knowing that I left judgement up to a judge and jury.

just my $.02

Excellent post and thoughtful argument and very rational and well written and so..very kind. No wonder I like you!!

We learn from each other on this forum. Posts like yours sometimes completely change my previous opinion.