Dr. Michael Seale seems to think that the courts and not the county are to blame for inadequate healthcare whenever inmates are taken to court instead of pre-scheduled outside medical appointments. His comments come in response to accusations that Multnomah County provides inmates with inadequate medical care whenever an outside medical appointment conflicts with a scheduled court appearance. In such cases, the inmate is taken to court and the medical appointment is rescheduled. This can happen over and over again for weeks as it did in this case.
"At the time of appointment scheduling, conflicts such as court proceedings are often not known. In this case, Corrections Health made appointments with OHSU Orthopedics for Mr. Sullivan that needed to be rescheduled because of scheduling conflicts." - Dr. Michael Seale
In this case, there were repeated scheduling conflicts resulting in the victim not being taken back to Oregon Health Sciences University (OHSU) for his one week follow up until week five. Dr. Seale seems to be deflecting blame from his department to the court even though the victim can prove, at least one medical appointment was scheduled long after his court date had been set. Specifically, the victim was found guilty of violating special conditions of supervised release in early June of 2017 and a sentencing hearing was scheduled for July. The victim's arm was broken on June 27, 2017. There is no way the county could have scheduled his follow up before the court scheduled his sentencing hearing. The Oregonian covered the violation hearing and printed a date for the upcoming sentencing hearing. If The Oregonian knew about the upcoming court proceeding then Multnomah County should have known as well.
Dr. Seale also cites reports containing false information. For instance, when the victim made a statement to PAC Brook Holter that the versions of events given by deputies were false, she wrote down the opposite. The government has referred to her false record ever since as if it shows an omission by the victim against his own case. Dr. Seale points to the same record as if it indicates no pain on the part of the victim at the time, but the victim never reported that his pain was being managed properly until after a pain specialist doubled his nerve pain medication weeks later. At the same time, records of visits prepared by outside medical personnel consistently report the victim as telling a story strikingly similar to that told in his pleadings. It seems the story he is said to have told depends most on who claims to have heard it.
Dr. Seale claims that a sling and swathe was recommended by staff at OHSU as well as a one week follow up. That is correct, but Dr. Seale does not mention that the purpose of the one week follow up was so that the victim could be fitted with a Sarmiento brace. He also does not provide any evidence Multnomah County told OHSU the victim would not be allowed a Sarmiento brace until his follow up five weeks later. That is important because OHSU had no idea that county policy would make the part of their treatment plan which called for a Sarmiento brace impossible.
Law enforcement agencies and their medical co-conspirators love to stack the deck with false information indicating that an inmate may have made a statement supporting the government's version of events. That is true in this case. PAC Brook Holter falsely accused the victim of telling her a story that if true would support the government's version of events (https://copblaster.com/blast/137/why-did-pac-brook-holters-report-contain-lies-quoted-as-my-story).
According to the docket sheet, Judge Hernandez issued an order on June 12, 2017 rescheduling the victim's revocation hearing previously scheduled for the 6th of July to the 7th of July. That order reads as follows:
"Scheduling Order by Judge Marco A. Hernandez as to Cyrus Andrew Sullivan (USM #74918-065). Due to a conflict in the Court's schedule, the Final Hearing re Revocation of Supervised Release set for 7/6/2017 at 1:00PM is RESET to 7/7/2017 at 01:00PM in Portland Courtroom 14B before Judge Marco A. Hernandez. (jp) (Entered: 06/12/2017)"
Dr. Seale says that the follow up was re-scheduled for the 10th of July, but re-scheduled again not due to a conflict with the court, but due to an undisclosed staffing conflict. It wasn't until the third visit got canceled due to a court conflict that Dr. Seale's department can argue that the court scheduled a hearing despite a pre-existing medical appointment. However, the county rescheduled that appointment from July 19th to August 3rd two weeks later. It was bad enough that they had failed to get the victim back to OHSU for his one week follow-up by the third week, but then they re-scheduled his appointment not for the same week or the next, but two weeks later. Even if the court were somehow to blame for that last conflict, it surely was not to blame for re-scheduling his appointment so far into the future.
There is no indication that the county shared the dates of the victim's upcoming outside medical appointments with his counsel in advance. Doing so would be necessary for the county to pass blame to defense counsel for requesting a hearing date change. There is also no indication that the county informed the court of the outside medical appointment so that the clerk could make sure not to schedule anything for that day.
Dr. Seale has never provided a compelling reason why the county can't simply refuse to take inmates to court when they have an outside medical appointment.
"If he needs to get to an appointment, their responsibility is to get him to an appointment, period. That's the way it works." Marco Hernandez, United States District Judge
UPDATE: Plaintiff pointed out in court today that Dr. Seale's report is inadmissible due to it not being a sworn statement.
To be continued...