2009-05-04T10:27:39Ztag:sursumcorda.salemsattic.com,2018:/isso/thread/post/the-trial-some-final-thoughtstag:sursumcorda.salemsattic.com,2018:/isso/338/12292009-05-04T10:27:39ZSursumCorda<p>Here's a <a href="http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09121/966807-110.stm" rel="nofollow noopener">good letter to the editor</a> published May 1 in the Post-Gazette. (It's on the bottom of the page.)</p>tag:sursumcorda.salemsattic.com,2018:/isso/338/12282009-04-30T14:51:44ZJon Daley<p>If I remember correctly, Judy's computer didn't actually contain any medical records at all - that she used paper for all of that.</p> <p>I think all they used it for was logging onto her instant message account and tried to talk to her friends (who were surprised to see her online, since they knew her computer had been taken, so I assume that strategy didn't work all that well)</p> <p>Presumably, the district attorney should return it now, right?</p> <p>Your last point is a good one, though it didn't seem to me that he was horribly biased in the medical direction. He didn't seem to understand that the prosecutor was being antagonizing, but Lee didn't seem to see it either, so I think that must just be normal in a courtroom, so it didn't seem out of place to them.</p> <p>Apparently (according to the newspaper reporter) this case is different than Diane's, because Judy was charged with practicing midwifery without a certificate, rather than practicing medicine without a license - which I didn't notice the difference before. So, Diane was cleared given the statutes that clearly separate midwifery from medicine, but Judy was found guilty of not having a certificate (though the state doesn't provide a certificate anyway, and I don't think ever has, so I don't know what the point of that law is).</p>