Misprision of a Felony-Need to Expose Corruption and Fraud in Health Care Systems

img_1154

The scope and severity of the crimes seen below is tremendous.  Equally abhorrent are those who know about what they are doing but look the other way.  The evidence seen here is clear and unequivocal. It also took a lot of work to get it and the fact that the Physician Health and Compliance Unit run by Board attorney Deb Stoller are given the power to act as hearing officers and present cases to the Board is mind boggling.

This is top down corruption.  Sanchez is former President of the FSPHP and Jones is VP of Lab Operations at USDT.   The tone at the top is unethical and these documents show how easy it is to fabricate a positive toxicology test on someone without hesitation or any apparent compunction.  That is frightening and sociopathic.  Additionally there are  increasing reports of physician suicides related to allegedly fabricated tests just like this one and at this very lab and as long as the tests are putting coins in his purse I doubt he gives two shits.  This corruption needs to be  addressed head on. It is only going to get worse and fester.  Sunshine is the best disinfectant and these groups have plans to  expand in scope to other segments of the population.


Argument by assertion is when someone tries to argue a point by merely asserting that it is true, regardless of contradiction.   It is a logical fallacy that has the following structure:

  1. X is true

An assertion itself is not proof of anything. It isn’t even a real or proper argument.  AAG Bryan Bertram has been defending the Massachusetts Board of Registration in Medicine (Board)  before the Supreme Judicial Court (SJC).  He has dug his heels into the ground in support of Deb Stoller and the Physician Health and Compliance Unit but all he has left is logical fallacies and lies.  In response to a Motion for Summary Judgment he simply replied he was not going to respond to any more motions. His dismissiveness of our precise and persuasive arguments is not appropriate as what we have presented is detailed below. He has acknowledged none of it.    For about a year he simply tried to make a round peg fit in a square hole by imposing administrative law technicalities on my complaint.  No matter what was presented he would simply change it to his script and deliberately avoid key facts. His logical fallacy took on the following structure where X = carefully considered, X= findings of fact, X=untimely challenged, X= stay of suspension,  X= quasi-judicial, etc. etc.

X is true. No really, X is true. , X is true  But X is true,

When justice Hines requested we come to an agreement it is interesting that he did not go beyond he Physician Health and Compliance Unit (PHCU) which is independent of the Board.  They are also given the power to act as their own hearing officers which explains how Stoller was able to conceal all of the evidence of fraud and corruption for so long.  Under Board Policy 94-002 Stoller and her associates simply intercept evidence and either toss it or enter it into the Digital Imaging Unit after the hearing.  Bertram claims entering evidence into the DIU after hearings is standard operating procedure but this is more wishful thinking.   Evidence is entered into the DIU prior to hearings so that Board members can see the documents on their home computers and laptops prior to the hearings.  Dr. Patricia Recupero’s report clearing me in 2013 and implicating PHS in misconduct was entered after the hearing at which it was supposed to be heard. Are we to believe they all thumbed through an 87-page report during the hearing?   A myriad of serious crimes is seen below.  Either disprove my assertion or do something about it.  This is a serious threat to the health and public welfare and the evidence is not going away and neither am I.


Bertram asserts the following:

  1. Physician Health Services (PHS) has not committed any crimes (because they have not been charged with any crimes)


 

I assert the following:

  1.  Former Medical Director Luis Sanchez has committed  multiple crimes including multiple felonies.  These involve fraud, falsely created evidence, conspiracy to commit fraud, false statements, perjury as well as conspiracy against rights and color of law abuse.  

  2. Physician Health and Compliance Unit Board counsel Deb Stoller has committed multiple crimes, including felonies and conspiracy against rights, concealment of a felony and others.

 


screen-shot-2016-09-11-at-11-29-03-am

Summary:

1.  Medical  Director of Physician Health Services (PHS) Dr. Luis Sanchez reports positive toxicology test to Medical Board July 2011.   Results in Requirements placed on medical license by Physician Health and Compliance Unit (PHCUU) Board counsel Deb Stoller (   December 22, 2011  Board Order)

2.  Sanchez reports non-compliance with the requirements imposed on license in October 2012  and  license suspended by Deb Stoller o ( February 6, 2013 Board Order)


  Timeline

 July 1, 2011–PHS requests blood sample at Quest Diagnostics lab.  Told it is for alcohol biomarker.   (No indication, no precipitating events or reason given. No history of alcohol related problems. No DWI.  no issues at work or home.   15 years at Massachusetts General Hospital. No malpractice.  Work performance, patient-care consistently rated as superlative.  Had filed patent-license agreement two weeks prior to bring epinephrine auto-injector device to FDA approval within 3-years).  Concerned about “set-up” and have two independent complete examinations.  I request I be tested in every way possible for alcohol (physical exam, labs (GGT/AST, CDT, ALT, AST, MCV, etc.)

July 19, 2011–Notified by Sanchez that the blood test was positive for alcohol biomarker and he requests an evaluation at an out-of-state “approved” assessment center. Sanchez provides written documentation that the July 1, 2011 blood test was positive on  July 28, 2011.   Provide him with the two independent evaluations both with no concern.  Have evaluation at Hazelden –assessment finds no past or present history of alcohol abuse)

I request the  “litigation packet” from PHS.- legal document generated on  all forensic drug tests that documents chain-of-custody.  ( USDTL Litigation Packet fee Schedule ). PHS initially refused.

The full “litigation packet” is dated December 3, 2011 and was provided to me by Sanchez with a letter dated December 11, 2011.


Full litigation packet can be seen here:   USDTL -Litigation Packet obtained 12/3/2011

Documents show  July 1,2011 blood test was  both invalid and falsely created.   No documents from the collecting lab (Quest)= No chain-of-custody = invalid test.

Documents sent to PHCU Board counsel Deb Stoller and copied to PHCU Board counsel Tracy Ottina with attached  letter dated December 15, 2011  from my attorney specifically requesting the litigation packet documents be heard at the December 21, 2011 board hearing to decide on sanctions.

NOTE:  Litigation packet is exculpatory.   Test both invalid and fraudulently created. Matter should have been dropped right then and closed the case.

Screen Shot 2014-11-04 at 10.47.41 PM

 

Documents include a faxed request from PHS to USDTL drug testing labs that requested an attached lab report (that was positive for the alcohol biomarker) be “updated” to reflect chain-of-custody was maintained and that the donor ID Number be changed to #1310.  The records also included the lab report that resulted from the fax from PHS to the lab which noted: “revised” (per clients request) and donor ID and collection date “corrected”

Screen Shot 2016-05-02 at 8.00.01 PM.pngChanges include:

(1) Donor ID # 461430 changed to #1310 ( My ID # )  

(2) A Blank collection date is filled in with  July 1, 2011.

(3) Reporting date of July 14, 2011 is changed to July 20, 2011.   

The positive test result is reported  unchanged  with a level of 365.4 


BEFORE

screen-shot-2016-05-02-at-8-01-41-pm


AFTER


screen-shot-2016-05-02-at-8-05-56-pm


screen-shot-2016-09-11-at-11-34-37-am

This is no mistake. It bears repeating that July 19, 2011 is the date Sanchez reported the positive test.

It is a deliberate and intentional act.   #1310 is my unique identifier (just as my name is). Chain-of-custody is absent. It cannot be “updated” and the collusion between PHS and the lab is clear. 

Sanchez reported result to board with full knowledge the test was false in violation of M.G.L. 156 (B) Section 69  (false statements) and also a felony ( false statements under penalty of perjury)  General Laws of Massachusetts – Chapter 268 Crimes Against Public Justice – Section 13E Tampering with record, document or other object for use in an official proceeding ( c. 268 s. 13E(b))

18 USC-1343 (wire fraud), 18-USC-1001 (false statements) and 18-USC-371 (conspiracy to defraud). He has additionally broken the  General Laws of Massachusetts including Chapter 268 (Crimes Against Public Justice) and laws that specifically prohibit false material statements or the omission or concealment of “a material fact in a written statement.” M.G.L. 156 (B) Section 69

STOLLER COMPLICIT 

The December 21, 2011 Board hearing resulted in  Board Order dated December 22, 2011  and lists multiple requirements demanded on medical license.  These include  cessation of hand sanitizers;  discontinuation of asthma inhalers that were controlling severe asthma for over ten-years. ( multiple ER visits, hospitalizations as child/teenager including near fatal respiratory arrest) ;  that  I obtain an AA sponsor,  attend three 12-step meetings per week and provide  proof of attendance (PHS required I provide them with names and phone numbers of supposedly anonymous attendees who they could call) ; and that I do whatever they say promptly and any attempt to negotiate or dispute > immediate license suspension.  I am also warned that if I do not agree with the proposal I will face disciplinary action at the next board hearing.  This is signed by Deb Stoller.

Under the  new public records law signed by Governor Baker I requested  that the Board provide records they previously refused to provide including the “litigation packet” The documents sent by the Board on June 8, 2016 can be seen here.

Langan PDF copy

Only one of the five documents had a legible date-stamp on it.   The rest were blurred and indecipherable. Requests for clarification have been stifled with the last response from the Board on  June 17th claiming they were “working on it. ”  Multiple subsequent inquiries have been ignored by both Bertram and the Board..

The only document with a legible date stamp was a December 15, 2011 letter  from my attorney  requesting  an attached “litigation packet ” be considered at a December 21, 2011 Board proceeding.  (I had requested the “litigation packet” as one of the documents but had never seen the letter).

Screen Shot 2016-08-08 at 7.29.02 PM

Screen Shot 2016-08-08 at 7.23.35 PM

Both the letter and the 47-page “litigation packet” are date-stamped   January 17, 2012.

The letter is addressed to physician health and compliance unit (PHCU) Board counsel Deb Stoller and cc’d to her underling Tracy Ottina.  The documents show clearly that the two were in possession of these documents  prior to a December 21st Board hearing.  They are date-stamped 27 days after the hearing and to support his claim that    “documents are typically scanned into the electronic repository after being used or after a proceeding, not before”

 

 

Both the letter and the 47-page “litigation packet” are date-stamped January 17, 2012.

The letter is addressed to physician health and compliance unit (PHCU) Board counsel Deb Stoller and cc’d to her underling Tracy Ottina. (both PHCU board counsel). The documents show clearly that both were in possession of the docs before the December 21st Board hearing. They are date-stamped 27 days after the hearing. Bertram claims they obtained new documents from off-site storage which does not exist.

Conclusion–documentary evidence that blood test was invalid  (with no chain of custody) and falsely-created (intentional) are provided to PHCU Board counsel Deb Stoller prior to December 21, 2011 Board hearing.

The invalidity and fraudulence should have immediately closed the case.  Instead Stoller sanctioned me at the hearing and made restrictions and demands on my license.   Documents obtained under new  Records Reform Act in August 2016.  

Date-stamps are not before the hearing but after suggesting they were withheld by Stoller.  

She is in violation of multiple Title 18 Criminal Codes including 18 USC-4 (concealment of a felony) and 18 USC-1505 (obstruction of justice).

 

False Statements in Procurement-State Violations

General Laws of Massachusetts – Chapter 268 Crimes Against Public Justice – Section 1A Statements containing declaration relative to penalties of perjury; verification; false statements.   The General Laws of Massachusetts specifically prohibit false material statements or the omission or concealment of “a material fact in a written statement.” M.G.L. 156 (B) Section 69  (false statements) and also a felony (false statements under penalty of perjury c. 268 s. 13E(b)(i).

268 s. 6 STATE AGENCY, FALSE STATEMENT TO

screen-shot-2016-09-09-at-9-08-56-pmscreen-shot-2016-09-09-at-9-09-10-pm


CONSTITUTIONAL  AND OTHER CIVIL RIGHTS VIOLATIONS

This  falsely-created test  resulted in restrictions on my medical license and impacted other constitutionally protected rights and I was forced to attend 3 12-step meetings per week and obtain names and phone numbers of fellow attendees (even though I am not an alcoholic–this was simply done to induce emotional distress)  I had 19 severe asthma attacks that year and had to stop going to the gym.  Multiple other issues are well documented and the Board’s very own recommended and approved evaluator Dr. Patricia Recupero wrote an 87-page report clearing me completely and implicating PHS in misconduct and the Certified Administrative Record contained the Recupero report and it was dated after the hearing at which it was supposedly heard.

Stoller has been suppressing evidence of serious crimes for over 5-years including national forensic fraud.

Conspiracy Against Rights:     Section 241 of Title 18 is the civil rights conspiracy statute. Federal law makes it a felony “for two or more persons to agree together to injure, threaten, or intimidate a person in any state, territory or district in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him/her by the Constitution or the laws of the Unites States, (or because of his/her having exercised the same). Unlike most conspiracy statutes, Section 241 does not require that one of the conspirators commit an overt act prior to the conspiracy becoming a crime.  The offense is punishable by a range of imprisonment up to a life term or the death penalty, depending upon the circumstances of the crime, and the resulting injury, if any.

Title 18, U.S.C. Section 242 deprivation of rights under color of law makes it a crime for any person acting under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom to willfully deprive or cause to be deprived from any person those rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution and laws of the U.S.   

Stoller is also in violation of Section 241 of Title 18 (the civil rights conspiracy statute) and Title 18, U.S.C. Section 242 (deprivation of rights under color of law).

The misconduct seen in the “litigation packet”has never been acknowledged by the Board. (or AAG Bertram).  I have long suspected that Stoller had been concealing  evidence of fraud, perjury or misconduct involving PHS.   The records that were sent contained only one document with a readable date-stamp was the “litigation packet” which was dated after the December 21, 2011 Board hearing.

CONCEALMENT AND FRAUD BY OMISSION

I had filed a complaint with the College of American Pathologists against USDTL drug testing lab (As the tests used by state PHPs are non-FDA approved laboratory -developed tests (LDTs) the only oversight that exists is CAP which is an accreditation agency not disciplinary.  They can force a lab to correct a test but do not have the ability to punish). I was informed they would be investigating  January 12, 2012.  ( CAPLetter)

In October 2012 I was told by PHS that they were going to report me for non-compliance with the meetings.  On October 19, 2012 Sanchez made a verbal report to the Board  of non-compliance.  On October 23, 2012 Sanchez provides the Board with written confirmation 10:23:12 PHS Letter to BORM-noncompliance.  This report of non-compliance results in the February 6, 2013 suspension.

In December 2013 I was  contacted by the Chief Investigator for CAP, Amy Daniels, who wants to know how things are going since the test was corrected on October 4, 2012.    I tell her I did not know anything about it and confront Sanchez who claimed to know nothing about a revision of the test.  Sanchez then wrote a letter stating that PHS “had just found out” about the amended test. The documentary evidence shows that he was made aware of the “corrected” test 67-days prior to his admission of it.

The full documents received from USDTL under HIPAA-Privacy Rule can be seen Complete USDTL Records Obtained 8/16/2014

Opinion Letter of Director of MGH Chemistry and Toxicology Laboratories Dr. James Flood

screen-shot-2016-09-09-at-7-48-17-pm

The contradictory documents from Sanchez alone constitute a crime (withholding information in concealment and providing false information to a state agency).  But what he did is far far worse.

In response to a  complaint I filed against the labs they revealed that the blood test was intentionally changed from a “forensic” specimen to a “clinical” specimen at the request of PHS and that makes it “Protected Health Information” (PHI) under the HIPAA Privacy-Rule and with the help of the College of American Pathologists I requested the records from both labs and received them.

(false statements) and also a felony (false statements under penalty of perjury c. 268 s. 13E(b)(i).  He has violated  c.268 s. 6 by making false statements to a state agency and has repeatedly engaged in perjury, a most serious common-law felony punishable

in Massachusetts by up to twenty years’ imprisonment under M. G. L. c. 268, § 1   Sanchez has also violated Title 18 U.S.C. Section 241 (the civil rights conspiracy statute) and a  felony under Federal law and also Title 18, U.S.C. Section 242 (deprivation of rights under color of law).  Additionally he has violated the HIPAA criminal statute, 42 U.S.C.A. § 1320d-6

AAG Bryan Bertram’s Willful Ignorance

Bertram’s assertion that PHS has not engaged in any crimes is absurd in light of the multiple serious crimes seen here. Sanchez, Jones and Stoller have engaged in very serious felonies and they need to be held accountable.     I am asserting that the crimes seen here are easily recognized and clear.  The evidence is substantial and easily proved by the documents alone.   

Therefore they cannot be ignored.  No plausible deniability exists.  These individuals should not get “allowances.”  They show no remorse and action must be taken.

Bertram has never directly addressed any of the crimes but pretends they don’t exist.  I have provided documentary evidence to him and pointed them out multiple times.

Any reasonable person could recognize the serious violations of law  by all parties.

Anyone can see that the statements are false.

Moreover,

A lawyer is prohibited from making false statements of material fact or offering evidence that the lawyer knows to be false under  Mass. R. Prof. C. 3.3.  A  “a lawyer cannot ignore the obvious.” (  Comment 3 to Rule 1.13).  And According to Mass. R. Prof. C. 1.13(c), a Government lawyer representing an organization must examine Mass. R. Prof. C. 1.6, 3.3, and 4.1 :  

Rule 1.6(b)(1) requires disclosure of confidential information gained in the representation to prevent conduct that is likely to cause, among other things, “substantial injury to the financial interests or property of another.”

Rule 3.3(a)(2) requires a lawyer to disclose a material fact to a tribunal to avoid assisting a client’s criminal or fraudulent act.

Mass. R. Prof. C. 4.1(b) prohibits a failure to disclose a material fact to a third person if disclosure is necessary to avoid assisting a client’s criminal or fraudulent act.

Any of the circumstances outlined in these three rules requires an attorney to blow the whistle and three should have been blowing long ago Pursuant to Mass. R. Prof. C. 1.6, 3.3, and 4.1 and Rule 1.6(b)(1) Bertram was required to disclose the misconduct and fraud not pretend it doesn’t exist.

And this presents a problem for him.  Comment 3 to Rule 1.13 of the Massachusetts Rules of Professional Conduct in reference to government attorneys representing organizations specifically states “a lawyer cannot ignore the obvious.”

PERJURY

Perjury is a most serious common-law felony that is punishable in Massachusetts by up to twenty years’ imprisonment in noncapital cases under M. G. L. c. 268, § 1   The crime of perjury is committed when one “required to depose the truth in a judicial proceeding or in a proceeding in a course of justice, wilfully swears or affirms falsely in a matter material to the issue or point in question . . . .” G. L. c. 268, s. 1. Our case law instructs that a false statement is material if it “tend[s] in reasonable degree to affect some aspect or result of the inquiry.” Commonwealth v. McDuffee, 379 Mass. 353 , 360 (1979), quoting Commonwealth v. Giles, 350 Mass. 102 , 110 (1966).

Both Stoller and Sanchez concealed evidence while taking action against my license.  This is color of law abuse.and the documents clearly indicate Board counsel Deb Stoller was complicit in the presentation of full knowledge of its falsity and engaged in perjured testimony that was made willfully corruptly false and with the sole intent to deceive in violation of both state and federal law as criminalized by 18 U.S.C. §1621.

Moreover, the ordering a “clinical” test is outside PHS scope, practice, and function of PHS. According to M.G.L. c. 111, § 203 (c):

The HIPAA criminal statute, 42 U.S.C.A. § 1320d-6, reads in pertinent part:

”A person who knowingly and in violation of this part—

•   uses or causes to be used a unique health identifier;
•   obtains individually identifiable health information relating to an individual; or
discloses individual identifiable health information to another person, shall be punished as provided in subsection (b) of this section.”

”Whoever willfully causes an act to be done which if directly performed by him or another would be an offense against the United States, is punishable as a principal.” 18 U.S.C. § 2(b).

The contradictory documents from Sanchez alone constitute a crime (withholding information in concealment and providing false information to a state agency).  But what he did is far far worse. Sanchez also violated the Board of Registration in Medicine own rules as below.


243 CMR 1.03(5) (a) Disciplinary Proceedings for Physicians

  1. Commitment of an offense against any provision of the laws of the Commonwealth relating to the practice of medicine, or any rule or regulation adopted thereunder;
  1. Conduct which places into question the physician’s competence to practice medicine, including but not limited to gross misconduct in the practice of medicine, or practicing medicine fraudulently, or beyond its authorized scope, or with gross incompetence, or with gross negligence on a particular occasion or negligence on repeated occasions;
  1. Practicing medicine deceitfully, or engaging in conduct which has the capacity to

deceive or defraud.

  1. Violation of any rule or regulation of the Board
  1. Malpractice within the meaning of M.G.L. c. 112, § 61;
  1. Misconduct in the practice of medicine.

img_3919


 

 

img_8851

 

 

Advertisements

4 thoughts on “Misprision of a Felony-Need to Expose Corruption and Fraud in Health Care Systems

  1. Interesting parallel: I have documentation that the Program Director of the Colorado Medical Board sanctioned me for pursuing advocacy for an injured worker by wholly legal means and that she committed perjury in Denver County Court by swearing a false affidavit against me for harassment. She recanted her swearing in comments two months later to an Assistant District Attorney in Arapahoe County Colorado who recorded her statements in a so-called Rule 16 Memorandum. I received a copy of that memorandum and referred the matter to the Colorado Supreme Court Office of Attorney Regulation Counsel (case # 16-2496) as the Program Director, Karen McGovern, is a licensed Colorado Attorney.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s