Site Meter

Archive for October 19th, 2012

Share

Charles Manson Video: Charles Manson Parole Hearing   Parole Denied

The 2011, aged 77 Charles Manson

This revelation was mentioned back in May with the Charles “Tex” Watson’s attorney’s bankruptcy case.

But, now the LAPD is pushing forward with the investigation.

The Los Angeles Police Department disclosed Thursday that it has open investigations on a dozen unsolved homicides that occurred near places where the Manson family operated during its slew of murders four decades ago.

The Police Department made the revelation amid a legal battle to obtain hours of audio tapes recorded in 1969 between Charles Manson follower Charles “Tex” Watson and his attorney. The LAPD has said detectives believe tapes could shed more light on the activities of Manson’s group.

Watson has been fighting to limit the LAPD’s access to the tapes. This month, a federal judge in Texas granted an emergency order preventing the police from executing a search warrant at an office where the tapes are kept.

LAPD officials did not disclose details of the cases and said the department is examining the murders because they occurred near known Manson hangouts around the city.

“These cases have circumstances that are similar to some of the Manson killings,” Cmdr. Andy Smith said. “We are hoping that these Tex Watson tapes can provide us further clues on these cases… We are doing this for the families of these victims.”

Manson and his followers were convicted of killing eight people in a notorious plot to incite a race war that he believed was prophesied in the Beatles song “Helter Skelter.”

Here is a video report from KNBC, Channel 4, Los Angeles:

YouTube Preview Image

The federal bankruptcy court should speedily consider Charles “Tex” Watson’s appeal and rule that the police have the ability to search the tapes.

Justice demands nothing less.

Share
Tags: ,

Comments Comments Off on LAPD Probing into Twelve Unsolved Murders Linked to the Charles Manson Family

Share

Screencap from the Aspen Dental website

From the Aspen Dental website

This is a federal lawsuit, filed in New York state yesterday.

Aspen Dental Management and the private equity firm that controls it illegally operate dental clinics across the country and engage in aggressive, misleading profit-driven practices that cause patients economic harm, claims a federal lawsuit filed Thursday in New York.

East Syracuse-based Aspen and Leonard Green and Partners are violating laws that require clinics to be owned by dentists actively performing procedures onsite to prevent business interests from trumping those of patients, according to court papers filed at U.S. District Court in Albany.

The suit is on behalf of 11 people in 11 states, but their lawyers are seeking class action status that could cover tens of thousands of current and former patients and untold monetary damages.

They argue that the structure of Aspen Dental puts a premium on getting patients to consent to expensive treatment plans through aggressive sales pitches after they’ve been attracted to the clinics by free exam and X-ray promotions.

Lawyers Brian Cohen and Jeffrey Norton said the goal is to maximize profits for the non-dentist owners of Aspen by using dentists as “sham” owners of clinics, some of which operate too far away, including in other states, for the dentists to practice there. That, they say, violates New York’s law against “unlawful corporate practice of medicine.”

Aspen’s “so-called ‘Practice Owners’ are nothing more than de facto employees and/or independent contractors” of the company, which controls its 358 clinics’ marketing, credit offers, hiring, training and bookkeeping, according to the court papers.

This is an interesting legal complaint since it is federal and may involve a class action across many states.

In California, there is a complex set of laws in the Dental Practice Act regarding corporate practice and ownership of dental offices. However, some states have banned the outright ownership of dental offices to anyone, but a dentist.

I think America is ready for the debate as to whether dentists should be the sole owners of dental practices. If not, then who will be ultimately responsible financially and for patient care.

I will cover more of this lawsuit, as it progresses.

Share
Tags: ,

Comments 1 Comment »

Share

Protester out front of Dr. Wisdom Teeth office

I just received this photo in the e-mail and will be following up.

But, it seems that Trooth.Com have taken their grievances with Dr. Wisdom Teeth, Heath Hendrickson, D.D.S. to a new level – protesting out in front of his dental office.

Stay tuned…..

The Trooth.Com archive

Share

Comments 2 Comments »

Share

Trooth Website Trooth.Com – The David Nicholls DDS Interview Part Three

From the website Trooth.Com

You remember the FLAP.

A number of Utah oral and maxillofacial surgeons have begun a dentistry turf war with a fellow dentist, Heath Hendrickson, over the extraction of wisdom teeth. The surgeons have sponsored a website (Trooth.com) and a billboard on I-15 in Utah County, Utah.

The oral surgeons who are listed below have a beef with general dentist, Heath Hendrickson, who refers to himself as Dr. Wisdom Teeth.

Here is the billboard found along I-15 in Utah:

billboard 600 Trooth.Com – The David Nicholls DDS Interview Part Three

Monday afternoon, I had the opportunity to speak with David Nicholls, D.D.S., one of the oral and maxillofacial surgeons who comprise the Board of Trooth.Com.

Part One of my interview with Dr. Nicholls is posted here. Part Two is posted here. Part Three of the interview is here.

The interview continues:

Flap:

You know about the Federal Trade Commission, right?

Nicholls:

Yes

Flap:

You know they make sure there is a fair marketplace for goods and services across the country – federal?

Nicholls:

Yes

Flap:

Do you know that the Federal Trade Commission (has acted) lately on the North Carolina Dental Board with regards to bleaching services in the shopping malls? And, there has been court action where the federal government has actually told North Carolina to cease and desist their enforcement action against the people in the malls, because it is anti-competitive.

So, going back to my Devil’s Advocate thing with the Federal Trade Commission, why wouldn’t somebody at the Federal Trade Commission in Washington say, you know, these dentists are ganging up together in an anti-competitive monopoly to try to force Dr. Hendrickson out of business – because the oral surgeons want to monopolize the extraction of wisdom teeth in Utah?

Nicholls:

Well, someone could argue that and they are entitled to argue that. But, I will keep saying what I am saying. It is not about revenue and it is not about business.

It is about ethical behavior as a professional – that is what it is about.

It is about protecting the public and making sure the health care practitioners in our area are representing themselves ethically to the public, so the public can make informed decisions, when they seek care.

And, someone can argue that, but it is not about that. Because, if it were about that then we would not have tried the other avenues and not try to contact him. And, request that he comply with the advertising statute.

Because, we realize, actually what you are saying that if we ask him to do more than anything than comply with the Dental Practice Act that we could fall into that category.

And, we are being very careful not to.

We want to protect the public and want the public to be educated. And, it is not about revenue.

That is the truth of it.

Flap:

Couldn’t you foresee the argument being made that the reason you posted the website and posted the billboard was to actually harm his business? As an anti-competitive type of action?

Nicholls:

Someone could argue that. But, we have been careful looking at the law, what we can or can’t do. And, what we understand the law to say is if you say something that is true, and we are not defaming the person in what we say publicly and that is exactly what we are doing.

We are not being critical of him of how he does things. We are not being critical of his surgical technique or whatever complications he gets. You know, what his business model is.

We are saying that he is not an oral surgeon – which he is not.

It is like someone putting up an advertisement near my business and saying David Nicholls is not a plastic surgeon. Correct, I am not.

I have no response to that, because it is true.

So, we are not doing anything defaming or openly critical. We are not critical writing pieces about patients that we see. We are not complaining about anything that he does – other than how he represents himself, period.

Flap:

Have you talked to him (Dr. Hendrickson)? Personally?

Nicholls:

Well, we wrote him a letter from our group and asked that he change his advertising. And, that if he didn’t change his advertising that we were going to proceed with our campaign.

Flap:

Could you e-mail me the letter?

Nicholls:

I don’t know what would be appropriate. We would have to check with our legal counsel.

This ended the interview and I have not received the letter which the Trooth.Com Board sent to Dr. Hendrickson warning him of the public awareness campaign which would be undertaken, if he did not change his advertising.

Perhaps, Dr. Hendrickson will supply the letter when I interview him.

I will, today, be interviewing Utah Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeon and Trooth.Com Board member Tate Viehweg of Alpine Surgical Arts.

Stay tuned…

Share
Tags: , ,

Comments 2 Comments »

©Gregory Flap Cole All Rights Reserved