DOCSLIB.ORG

Rivera's Opening Brief

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Rivera's Opening Brief No. 09-1060 ________________________________________________________________________ In the Appellate Court of Illinois Second District PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, ) ) Plaintiff-Appellee, ) Appeal from the ) Nineteenth Judicial ) Circuit Court ) v. ) Case. No. 92 CF 2751 ) JUAN A. RIVERA, JR., ) Hon. Christopher C. Starck ) Judge Presiding. Defendant-Appellant. ) ________________________________________________________________________ BRIEF OF DEFENDANT-APPELLANT JUAN A. RIVERA, JR. ________________________________________________________________________ Lawrence Marshall Counsel of Record Stanford Law School 559 Nathan Abbott Way Stanford, California 94306 Thomas P. Sullivan Jane E. Raley Terri L. Mascherin Jeffrey Urdangen Jenner & Block LLP Bluhm Legal Clinic 353 N. Clark Street Northwestern University Chicago, Illinois 60654 School of Law 357 E. Chicago Ave. Chicago, Illinois 60611 Counsel for Defendant-Appellant Juan A. Rivera, Jr. ________________________________________________________________________ ORAL ARGUMENT REQUESTED i _____________________________________________________________________ POINTS AND AUTHORITIES NATURE OF THE CASE ...................................................................................................1 JURISDICTION ..................................................................................................................1 ISSUES PRESENTED FOR REVIEW ...............................................................................1 STATEMENT OF FACTS ..................................................................................................2 I. CRIME SCENE INVESTIGATION AND ANALYSIS OF PHYSICAL EVIDENCE..............................................................................................................2 II. THE FOCUS ON JUAN RIVERA ..........................................................................4 A. October 27 & 28 Questioning ........................................................................... 4 B. October 29 & 30 Questioning ........................................................................... 6 1. The Trip to Chicago .................................................................................... 6 2. The Questioning from 8:00 p.m. to 11:30 p.m. .......................................... 8 3. The Questioning from 11:30 p.m. to 3:00 a.m.. .......................................... 8 4. Rivera’s Condition from 3:00 a.m. to 8:10 a.m. ....................................... 11 5. Continued Questioning from 8:10 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. ................................ 12 6. The Meeting in the State’s Attorney’s Office ........................................... 13 7. Rivera’s Condition in the Jail from 9:15 a.m. to 10:30 a.m...................... 13 8. The Final Round of Interrogations from 10:30 a.m. to 2:30 p.m.............. 14 III. THE EARLIER TRIALS, APPEALS AND NEW TRIAL BASED ON NEW DNA RESULTS ..........................................................................................17 IV. THE RECENT TRIAL ..........................................................................................18 A. The Prosecution’s Case ................................................................................... 18 1. The Crime Scene & Rivera’s Statements.................................................. 18 2. Other Witnesses ........................................................................................ 18 3. Jailhouse Informants ................................................................................. 20 B. The Defense Case ........................................................................................... 22 1. Evidence Affirmatively Excluding Rivera................................................ 22 a. DNA and Other Physical Evidence..................................................... 22 b. Electronic Monitoring Records & Other Evidence Rivera Was At Home .............................................................................................. 25 2. Defense Evidence Relating to the Confessions ........................................ 26 a. Rivera’s Condition During the Interrogations and Confessions ......... 26 ii b. Rivera’s Mental Health and Capacity and Its Impact on the Confessions ......................................................................................... 26 c. Inconsistencies Between Confession and Facts of the Crime ............. 27 d. The Absence of Any Information in Rivera’s Statements Not Known to the Police ............................................................................ 28 V. DELIBERATIONS, VERDICT, AND SENTENCING ........................................29 SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT ................................................................................30 ARGUMENT .....................................................................................................................32 I. THE EVIDENCE IS INSUFFICIENT TO PROVE GUILT BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT. .....................................................................................32 A. The DNA Evidence ......................................................................................... 33 B. The Role of the Confessions in the Analysis .................................................. 38 C. The In-Custody Informants ............................................................................. 45 II. RIVERA’S CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO PRESENT A MEANINGFUL DEFENSE WAS VIOLATED WHEN HE WAS BARRED FROM PRESENTING EXPERT TESTIMONY CRITICAL TO THE JURY’S ASSESSMENT OF THE RELIABILITY OF HIS CONFESSION. ......................................................................................................46 A. The Barred Evidence....................................................................................... 47 1. Dr. Galatzer-Levy’s Testimony Concerning Rivera’s Psychiatric State During the Interrogation ........................................................................... 47 2. Dr. Kassin’s Testimony Regarding the Impact of Specific Interrogation Techniques on Individuals with Particular Mental Disorders................... 48 B. The Trial Court Erred in Precluding Drs. Galatzer-Levy and Kassin from Testifying on These Matters. .......................................................................... 49 1. The Law of the Case ................................................................................. 49 2. Rivera Was Entitled to Present Testimony from Dr. Galatzer-Levy Explaining How His Psychiatric and Psychological Disorders Were Apt to Have Affected Statements He Made in the Course of the Interrogations. 52 a. Knowledge and Qualifications Uncommon to Lay Persons ............... 52 b. The Barred Testimony Would Have Aided the Trier of Fact. ............ 52 c. Dr. Galatzer-Levy’s Testimony Reflects Accepted Scientific Principles............................................................................................. 55 3. Rivera Was Entitled to Present Testimony from Dr. Kassin Concerning Specific Psychological Attributes and Interrogation Techniques that Can Increase the Risk of False Confessions. .................................................... 56 a. Knowledge and Qualifications Uncommon to Lay Persons ............... 56 iii b. The Barred Testimony Would Have Aided the Trier of Fact. ............ 57 c. Dr. Kassin’s Testimony Reflected Generally Accepted Scientific Principles. ........................................................................... 61 4. The Exclusion of Expert Testimony Violated Rivera’s Constitutional Right to Present a Meaningful Defense. ................................................... 65 III. RIVERA IS ENTITLED TO A NEW TRIAL BECAUSE OF THE IMPROPER ADMISSION OF EVIDENCE PURPORTING TO EXPLAIN THE DNA EVIDENCE BY CLAIMING THAT HOLLY STAKER WAS THE KIND OF GIRL WHO WOULD HAVE WILLINGLY HAD SEXUAL INTERCOURSE WITH SOMEONE OTHER THAN THE ATTACKER WITHIN 72 HOURS OF HER MURDER. .............................................................................................................65 A. The Evidence .................................................................................................. 67 B. The Admission of the Evidence About Prior Sexual Activity Violated the Rape Shield Statute. ........................................................................................ 68 C. In Addition to Violating the Rape Shield Statute, the Prior-Sexual-Activity Evidence was Irrelevant. ................................................................................. 72 D. Even When Admissible, Character Must be Proved Through Reputation Evidence, Not Particular Acts. ........................................................................ 73 IV. JUAN RIVERA’S CONVICTION MUST BE REVERSED BECAUSE THE TRIAL COURT DID NOT ALLOW THE DEFENSE TO DISABUSE THE JURY OF THE INACCURATE IMPRESSION THAT POLYGRAPH RESULTS IMPLICATED RIVERA IN THE CRIME. ...............75 A. The Polygraph Examination ........................................................................... 76 B. The Polygraph Evidence Introduced at Trial .................................................. 78 C. The Trial Court’s Ruling ................................................................................. 79 D. Rivera Was Entitled to Inform the Jury That No Polygraph Results Indicated He Had Lied in Denying Involvement in the Crime. ...................................... 80 V. THE TRIAL COURT VIOLATED THIS COURT’S MANDATE WHEN IT ALLOWED THE STATE TO INTRODUCE GENERALIZED CRITICISMS
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Sexual Abuse of Elders Kearsley Home 1. Margaret Eckard
    Sexual Abuse of Elders •Kathleen Brown •Associate Professor •University of Pennsylvania •School of Nursing Kearsley Home Retirement home for elderly women Located in West Philadelphia Gothic stone home over 200 years old 60 residents, ages 60-94 Security force on grounds Small in-patient unit; Highly trained staff 1. Margaret Eckard Popular, bubbly 92 year old resident One of longest residents at Kearsley January 23, 1983: missed at breakfast Nurse went to investigate; door ajar Body lying on floor next to rumpled bed Clad in nightgown; curled in fetal position Signs of rigor mortis starting to appear 1 Examination MD concerned over bruises on face; smears of blood around nose and mouth Streaks of blood in vagina and anus Decided not sufficiently disturbing to make an issue; decided natural death due to her age Funeral held 2. Katherine A. Maxwell 85 year old resident February 12, 1983: 21 inch snow storm Katherine failed to show for breakfast Door ajar; body lying on bed Pajamas spotted with blood Storm kept Dr. Webster from the Home Katherine Maxwell Body taken to hospital; no autopsy Blood believed to have occurred by natural causes at her death 2 3. Elizabeth Monroe Celebrated her 86th birthday with a party Next morning, failed to appear at breakfast Nurse found door ajar and her body in bed Face discolored; vaginal bleeding Dr. Webster away; substitute MD Sent body to undertaker Dr. Webster’s Concern Webster called the undertaker; suspicious over the 3 deaths ME’s office were not concerned over the 3 elderly victims’ deaths Webster insistent and ME accepted it for investigation but embalming made it difficult Ruled natural cause death 4.
    [Show full text]
  • Rail Trespasser Fatalities Federal Railroad Administration Demographic and Behavioral Profiles
    U.S. Department of Transportation Rail Trespasser Fatalities Federal Railroad Administration Demographic and Behavioral Profiles June 2013 NOTICE This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The U.S. Government assumes no liability for its contents or use thereof. Any opinions, findings and conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the U.S. Government, nor does mention of trade names, commercial products or organizations imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. The U.S. Government assumes no liability for the content or use of the material contained in this document. NOTICE The U.S. Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the objective of this report. NOTE: This report was prepared by North American Management (NAM) at the direction of the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) for the purpose of more accurately identifying the types of persons who trespass on railroad rights-of-way, and ultimately reducing the number of trespassing casualties, which contribute significantly to the total annual railroad-related deaths and injuries in the United States. This report is an extension of a March 2008 report produced by Cadle Creek Consulting titled, “Rail Trespasser Fatalities, Developing Demographic Profiles” (2008 Report). The entire 2008 Report can be found at http://www.fra.dot.gov/eLib/Details/L02669. The current report was generated as part of FRA’s continuing efforts to reduce trespassing on railroad rights-of-way and associated fatalities and injuries.
    [Show full text]
  • STATE of MISSOURI, ) ) Plaintiff-Respondent, ) ) V. ) No. SD35688 ) Filed: May 15, 2020 CHRISTOPHER L. PASCHALL, ) ) Defendant-Appellant
    STATE OF MISSOURI, ) ) Plaintiff-Respondent, ) ) v. ) No. SD35688 ) Filed: May 15, 2020 CHRISTOPHER L. PASCHALL, ) ) Defendant-Appellant. ) APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF NEWTON COUNTY Honorable Jack Goodman, Special Judge AFFIRMED Christopher Paschall (Defendant) was charged by amended information, as a prior and persistent offender, with two counts of first-degree murder, three counts of armed criminal action (ACA), and one count of parental kidnapping. See § 565.020 RSMo (2000); § 571.015 RSMo (2000); § 565.153 RSMo Cum. Supp. (2014). These six charges were based upon allegations that: (1) Defendant knowingly shot and killed Casey Brace, the mother of his two children (Mother); (2) Defendant knowingly shot and killed Mother’s grandfather, Herbert Townsend (Grandfather); and (3) Defendant kidnapped his youngest child (Child). After a jury trial, Defendant was found guilty on all charges. He was sentenced to imprisonment terms of two life sentences without parole for the murder convictions; 60 years, 20 years and 90 years for the ACA convictions; and 7 years for the kidnapping conviction. All sentences were to run consecutively. Defendant presents one point for decision. He contends the trial court erred by admitting testimony from two witnesses that Grandfather told them the person who shot him was Defendant. According to Defendant, “the statements were inadmissible hearsay and did not fall into the dying declaration exception[.]” Finding no merit to this argument, we affirm. Factual and Procedural Background We view the evidence and all reasonable inferences derived therefrom in the light most favorable to the verdict. State v. Belton, 153 S.W.3d 307, 309 (Mo.
    [Show full text]
  • Spinning Babies Core Principles for Spinning Babies® Parent Educators
    Spinning Babies Core Principles for Spinning Babies® Parent Educators Mission of the Spinning Babies® Parent Educator Promoting awareness of the Spinning Babies approach among parents to optimize pregnancy comfort and birth ease (body balance and function) with attention to fetal position. Values Values express our core beliefs that guide and motivate our attitudes and actions, including those stated in our contracts and guidelines, rules and requirements. Our values emphasize solutions which are physiologically appropriate for pregnancy and birth. We understand that, due to limits within the field of research, that not all valuable care is evidence based. We value the non-invasive, non-stressing physiological approach to comfort and function. We value options that avoid taxing the person’s financial or physical resources. Our commitment is to de-emphasize language which states one fetal position as optimal or good and another as bad, and which assumes that a particular plan of action will assure a particular result. Respect for the person of the patient or client avoids force in treatment, communication, belief or ideology, and in professional and social interactions. Tolerance for the range of birth providers, bodywork modalities and practice styles allow for the broad application of concepts and principles regardless of birth plan or birth setting. All pregnant parents are treated with fairness, kindness and a non-bias recognition of the inherent value of every individual. All professions are spoken of with respect. Our bias towards physiology doesn’t excuse discrediting professionals who practice in a technological, medical model. The person is not the ideology. Prioritizing physiological treatment appropriate to each parent and baby may enhance health.
    [Show full text]
  • SC07-841 Merits Initial Brief
    IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA RICHARD KNIGHT, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) ) CASE NO. SC07-841 STATE OF FLORIDA, ) L.T. NO. 01-14055 CF 10A ) Appellee. ) ) _______________________________ INITIAL BRIEF OF APPELLANT ___________________________________________________________________ On Appeal from the Circuit Court of the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit in and for Broward County, Florida ___________________________________________________________________ MELODEE A. SMITH Florida Bar No. 33121 LAW OFFICES OF MELODEE A. SMITH 101 NE Third Ave. Suite 1500 Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301 Tel: (954) 522.9297 Fax: (954) 522.9298 [email protected] Attorney for Appellant TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS . i TABLE OF AUTHORITIES . iii PRELIMINARY STATEMENT . 1 JURISDICTIONAL STATEMENT . 1 STATEMENT OF THE CASE AND FACTS . 2 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT . .. 41 ARGUMENT: I. THE TRIAL COURT ABUSED ITS DISCRETION IN REFUSING TO GRANT A MISTRIAL BASED ON FAMILY WITNESS MULLINGS’ COMMENT IN JURORS’ PRESENCE THAT HE KNEW KNIGHT TO HAVE A “VIOLENT BACKGROUND” . 42 II. THE TRIAL COURT ABUSED ITS DISCRETION IN REFUSING TO GRANT A MISTRIAL BASED ON JURORS’ HAVING BEEN EXPOSED TO THE FACT THAT KNIGHT HAD BEEN WEARING BOTH HANDCUFFS AND LEG SHACKLES DURING THE GUILT PHASE OF JURY TRIAL . 48 III. THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN RULING THAT NO DISCOVERY VIOLATION OCCURRED AND IN REFUSING TO GRANT A MISTRIAL WHEN THE STATE’S DNA EXPERT GAVE A NEW OPINION UNDISCLOSED PRIOR TO TRIAL THAT DID NOT EXCLUDE KNIGHT AS A DONOR OF KEY DNA EVIDENCE FROM WHICH THE EXPERT’S LAB EARLIER EXCLUDED KNIGHT . 50 IV. THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN REFUSING TO SEAT A NEW JURY PANEL FOR PURPOSES OF THE PENALTY PHASE OF TRIAL BASED ON FAMILY WITNESS MULLINGS’ COMMENT IN THE JURY’S PRESENCE DURING THE GUILT PHASE PROCEEDINGS THAT MULLINGS KNEW KNIGHT HAD A “VIOLENT BACKGROUND” .
    [Show full text]
  • Roe V. House: a Dialogue on Abortion Katie Condit Cedarville University
    Cedarville University DigitalCommons@Cedarville CedarEthics Online Center for Bioethics Fall 2007 Roe v. House: A Dialogue on Abortion Katie Condit Cedarville University Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.cedarville.edu/cedar_ethics_online Part of the Bioethics and Medical Ethics Commons Recommended Citation Condit, Katie, "Roe v. House: A Dialogue on Abortion" (2007). CedarEthics Online. 28. http://digitalcommons.cedarville.edu/cedar_ethics_online/28 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalCommons@Cedarville, a service of the Centennial Library. It has been accepted for inclusion in CedarEthics Online by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@Cedarville. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Roe v. House: A Dialogue on Abortion by Katie Condit It is a typical day in Princeton Plainsboro Hospital. Paramedics are hurriedly escorting trauma patients into the emergency room, nurses are attending to the many demands of patient needs, and Doctor Gregory House, famous diagnostician, is lounging in his office watching an episode of General Hospital. A small woman enters the hospital. She is about sixty years old, and it is evident that she has an important task to accomplish. With a glint of wisdom in her eyes, she approaches the information desk and requests to know where Dr. House’s office is. The secretary directs her to the elevators, and the woman sets off to see the noted physician. The woman calls herself Norma McCorvey, but you are more likely to recognize her as Jane Roe, the woman that helped launch the nation into a legal frenzy over the rights of women and the rights of the unborn child in the Roe v.
    [Show full text]
  • Malpositions of the Occiput and Malpresentations
    31 Malpositions of the occiput and malpresentations Terri Coates CHAPTER CONTENTS Occipitoposterior positions 574 Management of labour 593 Causes 574 Complications 599 Antenatal diagnosis 574 Shoulder presentation 600 Diagnosis during labour 576 Causes 600 Care in labour 576 Antenatal diagnosis 601 Mechanism of right occipitoposterior position Intrapartum diagnosis 601 (long rotation) 577 Possible outcome 601 Possible course and outcomes of labour 578 Management 602 Complications 581 Complications 602 Face presentation 581 Unstable lie 602 Causes 581 Causes 602 Antenatal diagnosis 582 Management 603 Intrapartum diagnosis 582 Complications 603 Mechanism of a left mentoanterior Compound presentation 603 position 583 REFERENCES 603 Possible course and outcomes of labour 584 FURTHER READING 604 Management of labour 585 Complications 585 Brow presentation 586 Causes 586 Diagnosis 586 Management 587 Complications 587 Breech presentation 587 Types of breech presentation and position 587 Causes 588 Antenatal diagnosis 589 Diagnosis during labour 589 Antenatal management 590 Persistent breech presentation 592 Mechanism of left sacroanterior position 593 573 574 LABOUR occupy the roomier hindpelvis. The oval shape of the Malpositions and malpresentations of the fetus anthropoid pelvis, with its narrow transverse diameter, present the midwife with a challenge of favours a direct occipitoposterior position. recognition and diagnosis both in the antenatal period and during labour. Antenatal diagnosis This chapter aims to: Abdominal examination • outline the causes of these positions and presentations Listen to the mother • discuss the midwife’s diagnosis and management The mother may complain of backache and she may • describe the possible outcomes. feel that her baby’s bottom is very high up against her ribs.
    [Show full text]
  • ABDOMINAL PALPATION to DETERMINE FETAL POSITION at the ONSET of LABOUR: an ACCURACY STUDY By
    ABDOMINAL PALPATION TO DETERMINE FETAL POSITION AT THE ONSET OF LABOUR: AN ACCURACY STUDY by SARA SAMANTHA WEBB A thesis submitted to The University of Birmingham for the degree of MASTER OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology School of Clinical & Experimental Medicine College of Medical & Dental Sciences The University of Birmingham September 2009 University of Birmingham Research Archive e-theses repository This unpublished thesis/dissertation is copyright of the author and/or third parties. The intellectual property rights of the author or third parties in respect of this work are as defined by The Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 or as modified by any successor legislation. Any use made of information contained in this thesis/dissertation must be in accordance with that legislation and must be properly acknowledged. Further distribution or reproduction in any format is prohibited without the permission of the copyright holder. ABSTRACT Since the late 19th Century, abdominal palpation of the gravid uterus has been routine, worldwide obstetric practice to determine fetal position. A systematic review showed a dearth of research on the accuracy of this ubiquitous test. A test accuracy study was carried out prospectively to assess accuracy of abdominal palpation (index test) to identify the Left-Occipito-Anterior (LOA) fetal position at the onset of labour, in nulliparous women over 37 weeks’ gestation, with ultrasound as the reference standard. Trained observers blind to the index test results performed the ultrasound independently. Midwives palpation data on the position of 629 women were obtained and 61 (9%) fetuses were verified as LOA by ultrasound. The sensitivity, specificity and likelihood ratio of abdominal palpation to detect LOA position were 34% (23- 46), 71% (67-74) and 1.2 (0.83-1.74) respectively.
    [Show full text]
  • Purpose Synopsis of Event the Criminal Investigation LVMPD
    Office of Internal Oversight Review Key Findings, Conclusions, and/or Recommendations of an Officer-Involved Shooting: Non-Fatal 3520 Maule Avenue – January 27,2019 Purpose The purpose of this report is to publish key findings, conclusions, and/or recommendations of the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department’s (LVMPD) internal review of this incident. There are a variety of actions that can be taken administratively in response to the Department’s review of a deadly force incident. The review may reveal no action is required or determine additional training is appropriate for all officers in the workforce, or only for the involved officer(s). The review may reveal the need for changes in Department policies, procedures, or rules. Where Departmental rules have been violated, formal discipline may be appropriate. The goal of the review is to improve both individual and Department performance. Synopsis of Event On January 27, 2019, at approximately 1235 hours, the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department (LVMPD) was involved in a critical incident under LVMPD Event LLV190100125940. The incident occurred near 3520 Maule Avenue, Las Vegas, NV 89118. This address was located within the LVMPD Enterprise Area Command (EAC); sector beat Ocean 1 (O1). The incident was an officer-involved shooting (OIS). Sergeant Jeffrey Blum was the involved officer. Sergeant Blum discharged his firearm at suspect Torred De Leon, who was armed with a walking cane. Prior to the OIS, a person reporting (PR) called 911 reporting De Leon shattered the front window of their residence with a rock. The PR stated De Leon fled, on foot, down the street to a neighbor’s residence.
    [Show full text]
  • FETAL DEATH EVALUATION PROTOCOL Iowa Department of Public Health
    FETAL DEATH EVALUATION PROTOCOL Iowa Department of Public Health Iowa Department of Public Health 321 E. 12th Street Lucas State Office Building Des Moines, Iowa 50319-0075 2005/Revised 2011 Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................................................................................................................................... 2 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................................................................................... 3 SURVEILLANCE FETAL DEATH EVALUATION FORM ......................................................................................................................................... 5 MATERNAL/FAMILY INTERVIEW .............................................................................................................................................................................. 7 ASSESSMENT FORM ....................................................................................................................................................................................................... 8 GRIEF AND FAMILY SUPPORT .................................................................................................................................................................................. 15 FOLLOW-UP ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Instrumental Vaginal Birth (C-Obs
    Instrumental vaginal birth This statement has been developed and Values: The evidence was reviewed by the reviewed by the Women’s Health Women’s Health Committee (RANZCOG), Committee and approved by the RANZCOG and applied to local factors relating to Board and Council. Australia and New Zealand. A list of Women’s Health Committee Validation: This statement was compared Members can be found in Appendix D. with RCOG, ACOG and SOGC Guidelines on instrumental vaginal birth. Disclosure statements have been received from all members of this committee. Background: This statement was first developed by Women’s Health Committee in July 2002. During the statements review in Disclaimer This information is intended to November 2015 Rotational Forceps (C-Obs provide general advice to practitioners. This 13) was incorporated to create one information should not be relied on as a statement on Instrumental Vaginal Birth. substitute for proper assessment with respect to the particular circumstances of each Funding: This statement was developed by case and the needs of any patient. This RANZCOG and there are no relevant document reflects emerging clinical and financial disclosures. scientific advances as of the date issued and is subject to change. The document has been prepared having regard to general circumstances. First endorsed by RANZCOG: July 2002 Current: March 2020 Review due: March 2023 1 Table of contents 1. Plain language summary .......................................................................................................... 3 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Episode Guide
    Last episode aired Monday May 21, 2012 Episodes 001–175 Episode Guide c www.fox.com c www.fox.com c 2012 www.tv.com c 2012 www.fox.com The summaries and recaps of all the House, MD episodes were downloaded from http://www.tv.com and processed through a perl program to transform them in a LATEX file, for pretty printing. So, do not blame me for errors in the text ^¨ This booklet was LATEXed on May 25, 2012 by footstep11 with create_eps_guide v0.36 Contents Season 1 1 1 Pilot ...............................................3 2 Paternity . .5 3 Occam’s Razor . .7 4 Maternity . .9 5 Damned If You Do . 11 6 The Socratic Method . 13 7 Fidelity . 15 8 Poison . 17 9 DNR ............................................... 19 10 Histories . 21 11 Detox . 23 12 Sports Medicine . 25 13 Cursed . 27 14 Control . 29 15 Mob Rules . 31 16 Heavy . 33 17 Role Model . 35 18 Babies & Bathwater . 37 19 Kids ............................................... 39 20 Love Hurts . 41 21 Three Stories . 43 22 Honeymoon . 47 Season 2 49 1 Acceptance . 51 2 Autopsy . 53 3 Humpty Dumpty . 55 4 TB or Not TB . 57 5 Daddy’s Boy . 59 6 Spin ............................................... 61 7 Hunting . 63 8 The Mistake . 65 9 Deception . 67 10 Failure to Communicate . 69 11 Need to Know . 71 12 Distractions . 73 13 Skin Deep . 75 14 Sex Kills . 77 15 Clueless . 79 16 Safe ............................................... 81 17 AllIn............................................... 83 18 Sleeping Dogs Lie . 85 19 House vs. God . 87 20 Euphoria (1) . 89 House, MD Episode Guide 21 Euphoria (2) . 91 22 Forever .
    [Show full text]