trial day 32: the defense continues it's case in chief #91

[mikeysmommom]

I can see Juan asking him if it is a violation of ethics and patient dr. confidentiality to discuss your patients on national television? I hope the the woman sues his *advertiser censored* again.

I would think that was a huge NO NO! I hope they both sue him! He also discussed the Husbands failing business anxiety issues! What a loser!

 

[Davia18]

Strange as it may seem, I think all this conflict of interest crap has inspired JA.

If I'm reading her correctly, she's got the hots for JM!

"Dear Diary, if loving Juan is wrong, I don't wanna be right."

BBM : I almost had an accident that was gooood :floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

 

[AngelWings444]

The complaint and disciplinary action against him is really not a big deal IMO and Wilmott is doing the right thing by getting this out there on direct.

I would imagine it is true that there are an unusually large number of complaints filed related to custody evaluations (which is probably why it's hard to find custody evaluators these days).

On its face it does appear that in that one case it might tend to show bias towards the father, but I bet if we knew the underlying facts of the case there was probably plenty of evidence to support his custody evaluation for the father. Based on experience I would also bet the mother who filed the complaint was personality disordered -- that's who typically files complaints when they lose.

He should have kept everything above board, but it does not mean his custody evaluation was flawed. JMO

Ethical custody evaluators do not write letters on behalf of ONE party without meeting with both parents. They shouldn't view or read any material provided by anyone other than the courts. They shouldn't get involved in any manner other than doing the evaluation. Testing has to be done on both parents before rendering any opinion. If the mother refused to come in, then this "doctor" should have notified the court and the judge would have made an order for her to come in.

It's not fair to assume the mother who made a complaint, has any personality disorder. Especially, since this guy was sanctioned for his actions. It's not fair to the mother to say this "doctor" made a good evaluation of the father, since the doctor was compensated for his opinion.

JMO

 

[carnnell]

Well well well, Dr Samuel sure sanitized his "little Jersey" story how he screwed up. I have never heard of a colleague barter during evaluating clients and/or seeing them as clients. He could easily charged the man ten dollars to avoid any impropriety with the boards and courts. sheeesh

JMHO

 

[LambChop]

I don't think bartering is the main problem. He was the JOINT custody evaluator, and he then began treating ONE of the two clients that he was supposed to be assessing. That is unethical, bartering or not.

And NOW he is airing that families dirty laundry on live national television?

Well now, I guess he wasn't quite so objective with that snide remark about the wife and her "attorney" boyfriend now was he. Anyone see another unethical complaint coming in against Mr. Samuels..... Jodi, the gift that keeps giving.

 

[QueenD]

Did I understand this correctly? He is paid by the State to give an objective custody report in court. It does not happen. So afterwards he takes on the man as a client and gets paid by way of the barter system so that he can testify for this man in court. No one see anything wrong with this???? jmo

I wonder how many people he went against in custody just heard him admit that. Now they will be wanting to come back and sue the state which this happened in.

 

[JusticeJunkie]

OMG! That sneaky, sick murderess! Sliding things off the table while she stares ahead with that shark look... ugh!

And HI! I'm new!

WELCOME to WS where every opinion is welcomed and encouraged!!

 

[wenwe4]

This Dr. has a flooded hippocampus and did not form the memory of any wrongdoing - therefore he has dissociative amnesia and Temporary Global amnesia from the post traumatic stressful event of getting caught bartering testimony and services for dental work. Furthermore, he was fined $2500 but this woman and her Atty boyfriend have made multiple complaints on many other professionals - so it's all good!

 

[Nosey Parker]

OMG! That sneaky, sick murderess! Sliding things off the table while she stares ahead with that shark look... ugh!

And HI! I'm new!

:wagon:

 

[lisalei321]

Please tell me Wilmott is done with this guy...meh....

 

[Truth Detector]

OMG! That sneaky, sick murderess! Sliding things off the table while she stares ahead with that shark look... ugh!

And HI! I'm new!

 

[mobius99]

I'm half expecting Dr Samuels to jump up and yell "just kiddin' folks, I'm not a real doctor I just play one on the teevee!"

 

[MeeBee]

What was the judge's ruling at the hearing this morning? Did she disallow the premeditated part of his testimony? TIA!!!

 

[Ammonitida]

I kind of hope now that PTSD can cause memory loss so that in the event that she is acquitted my hippocampus will shrink and I won't remember this case!

 

[alwaysonmymind]

Glad to be able to follow with y'all again Home sick today. Been resigned to watching it on you tube in the late late hours.

Hi babycat, hope you feel better soon.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[katiedid2]

Noon recess .. . . . jury is excused.

Judge did not stand for the jury . . . . . she looks pizzed! Dr. Samuels you will step down - counsel I will see you in chambers.

Wonder who she pissed at. I'm leaning towards nurmi and :floorlaugh:wilma?

 

[lil_buddy]

Taking on a client for whom you have acted as a custody evaluator is unethical.

From the Guidelines for Child Custody Evaluations in Family Law Proceedings by the Ame. Psych Assn:

"Psychologists strive to avoid conflicts of interest and multiple relationships in conducting evaluations."

"Psychologists conducting a child custody evaluation with their current or prior psychother- apy clients and psychologists conducting psychotherapy with their current or prior child custody examinees are both examples of multiple relationships."

 

[tinkabella]

Okay there needs to be some kind of alert system when Juan gets up. I can't take another second of watching this guy. I'm really about to post my phone number...lol j/k




















but maybe not....

 

[neesaki]

This 'expert' seems a little overly defensive imo, which makes me question if it's something he's developed over time because of problems in his history. And JA, just look at her expression during his testimony, she's changed her persona yet again to this non-blinking, stare into space, and "see how wounded I am" poor thing...:what: Though this 'doctor' hasn't convinced me of a thing to do with her, he sure seems to have her convinced, lol.

Oh, also that point he made about her being "covered in blood", is he not aware that there was no blood found leaving Travis' rooms? Also, there was no blood found in the car either IIRC. So how could she have been covered in blood ?
Oh, that's right, that's what she told him, :lol:.

It's really sad what some so called professionals will do for money. jmo

 

[MandyLeigh]

Because it didn't pay???? Did he REALLY just say that?

Yes the more this guy talks the more amazed I am.

They should not have brought this guy to the stand. They are paid (a lot!) to get Jodi a proper defense. She is not blocked off from seeing someone besides Samuel. To me, it's another case of laziness. Getting someone else to evaluate and testify must have been too much work. Even for their own staff. Jodi has two attorneys and they have a crew of people themselves. So putting that man on the stand is pathetic to me.