Weitzel trial is a sham

The Utah Medical Association recently quoted the Kansas Court of Appeals in a professional resolution regarding trials such as Robert Weitzel's: ". . . where the only way the defendant's actions may be found to be criminal is through expert testimony, and that testimony is strongly controverted in every detail . . . we have criminalized malpractice, and even the possibility of malpractice."

Indeed. I picture myself on a huge plane about to crash. There is a debate over what will be the best landing procedure between the pilot and co-pilot, who have obviously sacrificed and trained for quite some time to earn their positions. But they can't settle the debate, and so call in the flight attendant, to whom they present their thoughts, and ask for a binding decision on what to do. Sound insane?

Weitzel's five demented patients, average age 86, were given a compassionate, peaceful landing, one I would want for myself or loved ones someday. But prosecutors are now relying on a lay jury to weigh medical evidence to ascertain if Weitzel's version of a decent landing should not have been harsher, because, as one of the prosecutors' nurses boldly informed the world on "60 Minutes," "old people don't feel pain."

My dear nurse and prosecutors: This sham of a trial is a deep and sorry pain that greatly affects us all.

Daniel Geery

Salt Lake City

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
© 2002 Deseret News Publishing Company