NO DISHONESTY OR LIES BY DR. BRIAN WEST

Quote from David Thornton, California Medical Board

2009-02-09T10:50:00.000-08:00

"David T. Thornton, Supervising Investigator II with the Discipline Coordination Unit of the Medical Board of California, writes, "The Board has no specific jurisdiction in regard to expert witnesses. The testimony of an expert witness stands on the basis of the information provided. It is the responsibility of the attorney who represents the opposing side to impeach the expert witness's testimony if it is not accurate and to point out significant discrepancies." Therefore, it becomes a battle of wits between counsel on opposing sides. Whether the defendant is innocent or liable is not the issue; the jury will believe whichever side is more convincing. And the licensing body, like Lady Justice herself, wears a blindfold."

Non-Adoption: When the Punishment For No Crime Is Not Severe Enough

2009-02-09T09:49:00.000-08:00

Non-Adoption: When the Punishment For No Crime Is Not Severe Enough

Most people will read the negative Press on the Brian West, MD, Non-Adoption, and will assume he got a fair trial. They will infer he had all the Civil Rights due an American citizen, and was allowed a full defense. After all, that is what the majority believe about the American Judicial system. However, they’d be wrong.

When someone earns an MD License in California, they get double jeopardy, or in the case of Dr.West, triple jeopardy.

The Decision in the case of Dr.West was Non-Adopted by the Medical Board of California (MBC). He was found to have committed gross negligence in the care of one patient. “Gross Negligence” – that sounds awful. Did he remove the wrong limb or organ? Did the patient die or become permanently disabled? NO!! She doesn’t like the size and shape of her breasts! After dozens of false accusations and Complaints of killing and maiming patients, that’s it!
Dr.West has been the target of a disgruntled former patient, the D’Angelo Fellmeth family business (CPIL), and a questionable reporter for CBS/Sacramento. They have worked together to damage him in every way possible. D’Angelo Fellmeth used him to destroy the Physician Diversion Program . The reporter got awards. The former patient, who works for the reporter, lost her lawsuits and Appeals. All she gets is the opportunity to appear on TV with Mrs. Fellmeth and at Medical Board meetings with her lynch mob. Mrs. Fellmeth used the good name and official publications of the University of San Diego to claim Dr.West, while in the Diversion Program, harmed patients. However, this particular case occurred prior to his entry into Diversion. All of the other solicited false Complaints were investigated and thrown out for no merit.

How does double jeopardy apply here? The undisputed facts are : Dr.West got two DUIs. Period. For MDs and non-MDs, that means having to deal with criminal Prosecution, defense and legal consequences. His DUI’s did not result in harm to others. He paid the price for his mistakes. This is where the double jeopardy arrives. With two DUI’s , an MD gets in trouble with the Medical Board. The Board has access to this information, and investigates whether there was harm to the public, or if this affected patient care. Defending against an Accusation by the Board is a very expensive, prolonged and painful process. It is also judicially lob-sided. The defenses afforded a criminal defendant are denied to MD’s. For example, Dr.West was not allowed to bring up 1) the patient continued to see him after her breast surgery to consider additional unrelated procedures, and 2) the fact that the patient was connected to the disgruntled former patient who solicited false complaints. This hurt Dr.West in two ways. First, these fact do not appear anywhere in the record. Second, by suppressing this information, the opposing Attorney was able to impune Dr.West’s documentation of satisfaction expressed by the patient with his care.

Now there is triple jeopardy for Dr.West. D’Angelo Fellmeth and company have made a mockery of Public Interest and Consumer Protection here. They routinely attack all Regulatory Boards, but the Medical Board has been a particularly profitable target for the Fellmeths. Mrs. Fellmeth appears regularly at Board meetings to chastise the Board, while simultaneously seeking lucrative Enforcement Monitor appointments. She is tireless in her efforts to reduce or eliminate the Civil Rights of Doctors. With her media Lobbyist, she plants insightful stories to pressure the Board to seize as many Licenses as possible. Using the old Ralph Nader techniques (Robert Fellmeth was a protégé of Ralph Nader in the 60’s), of creating voluminous, soporific reports combined with “purple prose rhetoric,” they have been effective in creating a false sense of risk and danger. Or as Mrs.Fellmeth likes to put it, “All doctors are dangerous!”

So now, Dr.West faces triple jeopardy. The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) gave Dr.West a one year extension of Probation, a 30 day Suspension and a requirement to take the PACE program at UC San Diego. The PACE Program evaluates the competence of doctors. This Decision, in perspective, is a harsh but not devastating outcome. However, the Board, by it’s positing of Non-Adoption, wants to Revoke Dr.West’s License to protect itself from further criticism. Often, Non-Adoption is used simply to financially break a doctor and force them to give up the fight. Appeals can cost millions and take years, while the doctor is deprived of their livelihood.

Young MD’s have no idea how a minor misdemeanor or even a family law issue can jeopardize their License. This dark factoid is not mentioned in Medical School. In the case of Brian West, the Consumer Protection Movement is severely damaged by such untruthful attacks and dark politics. Taking away the Licenses of decent, capable doctors is in no way in the Public Interest.

Judge wanders past testimony and creates inferences from fantasy speculation

2009-02-09T01:22:00.000-08:00

July 30, 2000- ALMOST 9 YEARS AGO!!!!!! Dr. West told the officer he was coming from Beverages and More and admitted that he had been drinking. If he was being dishonest to the Police Officer, he would have denied drinking and he wouldn't have told the officer he just left Beverages and More in hopes of avoiding a sobriety check and possible DUI. There was no benefit for him to lie about where he was going.

Greenback and Madison Avenue are approx. 2 miles apart! Since the Judge is making it up, here's another thought: Maybe he passed out... The exit immediatly after Madison is the off ramp to the Capitol City Freeway which Dr. West would take to get to his office off K. Street! The Judge is supposed to stick to the testimony and the facts, not make it up!

Police Report

2009-02-08T23:25:00.000-08:00

Letter to Dr. Kailath on 8/8/2000 from Dr. West regarding patient BA (dated August 8, 2000)

2009-02-08T23:21:00.000-08:00

Letter written on August 8, 2000- ALMOST 9 YEARS AGO!!!!

...On Sunday afternoon, just after we spoke, on my down I-80 and exiting on Greenback, I was involved in a motor vehicle accident and did not complete my rounds, needless to say, for that day. At the time I was ready to see her on Monday, you had discharged her from the hospital...

Court transcripts from MBC vs. West on 9/30/2008

2009-02-08T22:32:00.000-08:00

Deputy District Attorney, Mara Faust, asks Medical Board Investigator, Elizabeth Schlie questions

4 A. Well I asked him -- he had noted that he was
5 going to his office. Then I questioned as far as the
6 location of his office, which he confirmed was on K
7 Street which is downtown. And I asked him where the
8 accident occurred. He said at Greenback and 80, which
9 is Interstate 80. 18 Q. Did you then ask Dr. West if he intended to
19 treat BA on July 30th, 2000?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. And what was his response?
22 A. Not that I recall, not after wine tasting.
23 Q. Did you then discuss the route to his office
24 versus the route to San Juan?
25 A. Yeah, we did. I read that part again as far
1 as specifically where he was when the accident occurred
2 on 80 and exiting on Greenback, and I said, so that
3 doesn't sound like you were going to the office for
4 paperwork.
5 Q. And what was his response?
6 A. Honestly I don't remember writing the letter
7 and, no, I did not have any rounds after wine tasting.
8 Q. Did you then ask the question again if he
9 intended to treat BA on 7/30/00?
10 A. Yeah. I again --
11 Q. Go ahead.
12 A. So did you intend to treat BA that day. No, I
13 didn't. Not that I recall.

4 Q. At any time during the interview, did you get
5 any explanation from Dr. West as to in what context he
6 wrote the letter to Dr. Kailath?
7 A. No, not really.
8 Q. Did you get any admission from him that he
9 wrote the letter?
10 A. No, because in response to my question, I
11 asked him if I paraphrased the letter, do you remember
12 that, and he said, the letter, no.
16. Honestly, I don't remember writing the
17 letter, and no I did not have any rounds after wine
18 tasting.

Dr. West's Attorney asks Medical Board Investigator, Elizabeth Schlie, questions

10 Q. And you looked at that report with regard to
11 what the investigating officer said in that report as to
12 his conversation with Dr. West at that time?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. And this was a conversation that the
15 investigating officer had with Dr. West right at the
16 scene of the accident, correct?
17 A. Correct.
18 Q. And in fact, the investigative interview that
19 this officer had with Dr. West indicated that he asked
20 Dr. West where he was going at the time of the accident,
21 didn't it?
22 A. Yes, it did.
23 Q. And what does it say?
24 A. I'm not looking at it right now. I can --
25 Q. I will hand it to you.
1 A. I know he told him he was going to his office.
2 Q. Why don't you confirm that for us?
3 A. Where were you going; my office.

2 Q. And Ms. Schlie, so just so that we're clear,
3 at the time of this accident, July 30th of 2000,
4 according to this report by this CHP officer, what is
5 reflected here is that he specifically asked Dr. West
6 where he was going, and he said he was going to his
7 office, correct?
8 A. That's what the report indicated.
9 Q. And in fact, there is -- actually if you want
10 to look at the joint exhibit binder and look at Exhibit
11 4, maybe that's a way to do it. There is actually a
12 further description of where the accident occurred,
13 correct?
14 A. There is.
15 Q. And in fact, there is specific diagrams that
16 locate where the accident occurred with regard to where
17 Dr. West was at the time of the collision. True?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. And in fact, Dr. West was not on Greenback at
20 the time of the accident, was he, according to the
21 report?
22 A. Are you talking about the diagram?
23 Q. I'm talking about from your review of the
24 report, from the description in the report as to where
25 he was located at the time of the collision, including 1 the diagram, that information indicates where his car
2 was located at the time of the accident, correct?
3 A. Correct.
4 Q. And in fact, it's your understanding that it
5 occurred on I-80, correct?
6 A. It appears to me, and I'm not trained in
7 accident reconstruction and reading these diagrams, but
8 it appears to me that the actual accident in terms of
9 contact between Dr. West's vehicle and the other vehicle
10 occurred on the on ramp. The vehicle that he hit was on
11 the on ramp going to merge onto 80 right at Greenback.
12 Q. In other words, the accident occurred west of
13 where someone would exit to get onto Greenback, correct?
14 A. That I -- I don't know if I can really comment
15 on that.
16 Q. Okay. But in any event, the accident occurred
17 on I-80, not on Greenback as you understand it. True?
18 A. It appears it was on the on ramp onto I-80.
19 Q. Not on the off ramp, as far as you can tell?
20 A. It appears it was on the on ramp.

Dr. West's Attorney asks Dr. West questions

MS. POLLARA: And again, the allegation in the second
9 cause for discipline is that Dr. West was not honest with
10 either Medical Board Investigator Elizabeth Schlie about his
11 DUI arrest, causing him to miss his follow-up evaluation of
12 Patient B.A. on rounds at the hospital, or with Dr. John
13 Kailith about his alcohol use. That is the specific
14 allegation in the Accusation.
15 The evidence will be that Dr. West was not dishonest
16 with Investigator Schlie. In the interview that he gave on
17 February 1st of last year, he told her that he was on his way
18 to the office. That is what he told the CHP officer at the
19 scene. It is an admitted exhibit. I think it's Exhibit 4.
20 He was asked specifically by the officer where he was going
21 and he said, on his way to his office. The evidence will be
22 that his office was on K Street. The evidence will be that
23 the way Dr. West travels to K Street from Roseville is down,
24 traveling west on I-80 and then to Business 80, and the
25 evidence will be that the accident occurred west of the exit
1 ramp that would take him on to Greenback, and so he was not
2 on Greenback but he was on I-80 traveling west towards his
3 office, and the fact that the accident occurred closer to the
4 exit ramp than it did to his office, the evidence will show
5 that that doesn't have any bearing on the fact that he was
6 going to his office.
7 The evidence will be that Dr. Kailath did not have a
8 certain expectation as to when he expected Dr. West would be
9 there. The evidence will be that Dr. Kailath actually
10 doesn't remember the telephone conversation with Dr. West and
11 that his notes simply say that Dr. West will see the patient,
12 without indicating that there is any urgency or that there is
13 a time frame or that Dr. West indicated he would be there at
14 a specific time.
15 It is respondent's position that the evidence will be
16 that this is an effort on the part of the Medical Board to
17 inject an element of dishonesty in this case so the court
18 will question Dr. West's records with regard to the patients
19 that are at issue here.
20 And that, given Exhibit 30 is before the court, with
21 regard to the prior decision, which is dated from, I believe,
22 September of 2005, that it's an effort by the Medical Board
23 to have the court find Dr. West guilty of something more
24 recent than that time, so that it will affect his
25 probationary status.
1 The evidence will be that Dr. Kailath doesn't remember
2 getting the letter. He doesn't remember seeing the paragraph
3 and there is no testimony as to what impact that statement
4 had on him.
5 The evidence will be that the letter makes no comment or
6 reference to alcohol use at all, which is a specific
7 allegation in the accusation.
8 The evidence will be that Dr. West does not remember
9 writing the letter, but that this was a very embarrassing
10 situation for him, and that he will have an explanation,
11 which you will hear, as to why he believes that he wrote the
12 letter in the fashion that he did, but that it wasn't in an
13 attempt to -- well, let me rephrase it this way, that it was
14 not a reflection of what he was doing with regard to this
15 Patient B.A., but rather it was a reflection of his personal
16 situation at the time and his embarrassment over having been
17 in an accident which involved a DUI.

3 On July 30th, 2000, did you get a call from Dr. Kailath?
4 A. Yes. I recall I did.
5 Q. Do you remember where you were when you got the call
6 from Dr. Kailath?
7 A. Yes. I was at a wine tasting in Granite Bay.
8 Q. Can you recall what time it was when you got the call?
9 A. Not specifically. It was around lunchtime.
10 Q. And do you remember the conversation with Dr. Kailath?
11 A. Only vaguely.
12 Q. What do you remember of the phone call with Dr. Kailath?
13 A. He called and let me know that Patient B.A. had been
14 admitted to the hospital and then asked me if I would come by
15 and see her.
16 Q. And did you, in the conversation that you had with
17 Dr. Kailath, to your recollection, did he express any type of
18 urgency or emergency with regard to your going to see Patient
19 B.A.?
20 A. No. There was no urgency in the discussion at all.
21 Q. And did you agree to go and see her?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. What happened after the phone call?
24 A. I was at a wine tasting and it went longer than we
25 expected and I had more wine than I expected.
1 Q. And so what did you do at the end of the wine tasting?
2 A. Well, originally why I was at the wine tasting on a
3 Sunday afternoon was I had gone by to pick up some wine that
4 had been delivered and the wine tasting was rather
5 spontaneous. The owner and some other members of the wine
6 school were there, so originally I had planned to pick up my
7 wine and drop it off at my house and then go down to the
8 office. As it got later in the day and I had been wine
9 tasting, so I went down to my office originally from Granite
10 Bay.
11 Q. As you were at the wine tasting and as things went on
12 longer than you anticipated, did you have any intention of
13 going to the hospital to see B.A.?
14 A. When I initially spoke with Dr. Kailath, it fit in the
15 plans for the day easily, but as the wine tasting went on,
16 no.
17 Q. And so at that point, you left the wine tasting. Do you
18 recall approximately when that was?
19 A. Late afternoon.
20 Q. And where did you go from there?
21 A. Straight down I-80 towards my office on K Street.
22 Q. Now, from the area of Granite Bay -- the Lakeside Wine
23 Shop is in the Granite Bay area?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. You had traveled in that area down to Mercy San Juan
1 Hospital on other occasions from that general area?
2 A. Frequently. I lived in the area.
3 Q. So what was the course of travel that you customarily
4 took if you drove from that area to Mercy San Juan Hospital?
5 Would you get on I-80 or take some other route?
6 A. From that area of Granite Bay, I would get on I-80. The
7 easiest, fastest, most convenient way is getting off on
8 Antelope and going around through Van Buren down the back
9 side to Mercy San Juan.
10 Q. And is that the route that you customarily took when
11 going to Mercy San Juan at that time frame?
12 A. Absolutely.
13 Q. So when you were going down I-80 or heading west on
14 I-80, did you have any intention of going to Mercy San Juan
15 in the state that you were in to go and see this patient?
16 A. No. I knew I had been drinking.
17 Q. And at that point, do you remember the accident?
18 A. I remember a bang and I remember pulling over.
19 Q. Do you remember talking with a CHP officer?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Now, the accident occurred after the exit ramp.
22 Actually there is an exit ramp as you're heading west on I-80
23 and there is an overpass and then there is an on ramp to I-80
24 from Greenback. Is that generally correct?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. Where did the accident occur?
2 A. Just the west side of the -- past the overpass.
3 Q. So past where you would exit if you were going to exit
4 to get on to Greenback?
5 A. Quarter of a mile past that.
6 Q. When you met with Elizabeth Schlie, and I was there with
7 you at that time, did you answer her questions about where
8 you were going at the time of that accident?
9 A. Yes, I did.
10 Q. And what did you tell her?
11 A. I was heading to my office.
12 Q. And where was your office at the time?
13 A. On K Street, just off Business 80.
14 Q. And is that where you were going at the time?
15 A. Yes, it was.
16 Q. Now, you did write a letter to Dr. Kailath?
17 A. Yes, I did.
18 Q. And do you remember writing the letter?
19 A. No.
20 Q. The letter has been read. There has been a lot of
21 testimony about it. Why did you write the letter to
22 Dr. Kailath the way that you did?
23 A. In reading it, a couple reasons. One is, I made a
24 promise to a colleague and I failed that obligation. I had
25 not gone to see B.A. at that time.
1 Q. B.A.
2 A. At the time --
3 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE SARLI: I can't hear you.
4 THE WITNESS: At the time I was available to see B.A.,
5 she had been discharged from the hospital the following
6 morning, and I felt an obligation to communicate to
7 Dr. Kailath why I hadn't shown up to see her when I said I
8 would.

Deputy District Attorney, Mara Faust, asks Dr. West questions

7 CROSS-EXAMINATION
8 BY MS. FAUST:
9 Q. Okay. Going back to the letter to Dr. Kailath at
10 Exhibit 19, you write, "On Sunday afternoon, just after we
11 spoke, on my way down I-80 and exiting on Greenback, I was
12 involved in a motor vehicle accident and did not complete my
13 rounds, needless to say, for that day." So is it your
14 testimony today that that statement is not true?
15 A. That statement is not true.
16 Q. Okay. Is it true that you spoke to him Sunday
17 afternoon?
18 A. Correct.
19 Q. Okay. Is it true you were heading down I-80?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. So are you now denying that you were exiting on
22 Greenback?
23 A. I am denying I was exiting on Greenback.
24 Q. Do you deny that you were involved in a motor vehicle
25 accident?
1 A. No.
2 Q. You didn't disclose that there was a subsequent DUI
3 arrest; fair?
4 A. I did not disclose that.
5 Q. And are you saying that -- by saying you are not going
6 to complete your rounds because of the accident, that you had
7 no intention of completing your rounds?
8 MS. POLLARA: Question is vague, your Honor.
9 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE SARLI: Sustained.
10 BY MS. FAUST: Q. Is it your testimony now that
11 despite telling Dr. Kailath that right after the motor
12 vehicle accident, you did not complete your rounds, that in
13 fact you had no intention of completing rounds at Mercy San
14 Juan to see B.A.?
15 A. I had no rounds to complete. I had no other patients in
16 the hospital. No other clinical duties.
17 Q. Okay.
18 A. And --
19 Q. So are you saying you did not have rounds to complete?
20 A. Correct.
21 Q. Are you also saying that -- is it the truth or is it a
22 lie that you didn't go see B.A. because of the motor vehicle
23 accident?
24 MS. POLLARA: Well, that is vague, your Honor. It's
25 argumentative.
1 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE SARLI: Overruled.
2 MS. FAUST: You can answer.
3 THE WITNESS: I didn't go see B.A. because I was
4 arrested.
5 BY MS. FAUST: Q. Fair enough. But had you not
6 been arrested, was it your intention to see B.A.?
7 A. Eventually.
8 Q. Was it your intention to see B.A. before going
9 elsewhere?
10 A. At that time?
11 Q. Yes.
12 A. No.
13 Q. Then why did you write to Dr. Kailath that that was your
14 intention, to do rounds at Mercy San Juan, but were prevented
15 because of the motor vehicle accident?
16 A. I was trying to give myself a convenient excuse to cover
17 up the fact that I had not fulfilled an obligation that I had
18 promised to Dr. Kailath.

14 BY MS. FAUST: Q. Doctor, do you see this diagram?
15 A. Yes, I do.
16 Q. It looks like from this diagram that your car was in the
17 fast lane by the central median initially?
18 A. If the D-1 is my car, that is correct.
19 Q. Let's see. It should tell us what D-1 is. If you go
20 back two pages, D-1 is Brian R. West. So does it appear that
21 you were in the fast lane and that you moved over, clear over
22 past three lanes into the oncoming traffic lane?
23 MS. POLLARA: Your Honor, that misstates the exhibit.
24 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE SARLI: Sustained. Oncoming
25 traffic lane?
1 MS. FAUST: Right.
2 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE SARLI: That is vague.
3 MS. FAUST: Okay. It's not an exit lane. It's an on
4 ramp.
5 BY MS. FAUST: Q. Okay. That you crossed three
6 lanes of traffic on to the on ramp.
7 A. What is the question?
8 Q. Does this diagram demonstrate that that is what
9 occurred?
10 A. That appears to be what the diagram showed.
11 Q. And do you recall, after hearing the bang and pulling
12 over, were you in fact on the on ramp, freeway on ramp?
13 A. I believe we were at the very end of the merge lane or
14 just beyond that. We had passed underneath the overpass and
15 pulled off west of that.
16 Q. But at the place you hit the second car, was that car
17 actually on the freeway?
18 A. That is a freeway lane.
19 Q. Well, what is this planted area?
20 A. That is part of the merge area.

Accident Location

2009-02-08T22:30:00.000-08:00

Route Dr. West took when driving from Douglas Blvd. in Roseville to Mercy San Juan Hospital

2009-02-08T22:27:00.000-08:00

Route Dr. West took when driving from Douglas Blvd in Roseville to Mercy San Juan Hospital

2009-02-08T22:25:00.000-08:00

Route Dr. West took from Roseville to his office off K Street

2009-02-08T22:24:00.000-08:00

Christmas Card from patient Becky Anderson to Dr. West (outside of card)

2009-02-08T22:09:00.000-08:00

Christmas Card from patient Becky Anderson to Dr. West

2009-02-08T21:47:00.000-08:00

This is a Christmas Card from former patient, Becky Anderson, who was last treated by Dr. West in 1999 - 10 years ago. When she left Dr. West's care, her abdominal wall was intact and her breasts were healthy and symmetric. She died in 2008, 10 years later, from cancer, all unrelated to Dr. West.

Dr. West, (or Brian)

There are no words to express my gratitude for being such a patient and wonderful Doctor. You have always been kind even when I know my smoking has been a real frustration. I wish you a very Merry Christmas and a wonderful New Year.

Becky Anderson

And a note from the sister

Dr. West You're the best even though you're often late we still think you're great! Truly, I can't possibly thank you enough for the wonderful care you've given Becky. I appreciate your skill, your warmth and genuine kindness. You're not bad to look at either! Blessings to you and your children. I wish for you good luck with going out and building your own practice. Keep that great skill/warmth combination going and you'll have it made. Blessings, love, and joy are my wish for you during the holiday season and the new year. Terri