Read Online Blind Eye: The Terrifying Story of a Doctor Who Got Away With Murder by James B. Stewart - Free Book Online

denied that he had failed to examine any patients or had removed any files. He denied plagiarizing or fabricating the cesarean patient’s H & P. Almost tearfully, he explained that he had no choice but to moonlight as an emergency medicaltechnician because his father had died earlier that year, and he was virtually the sole support of his mother and two brothers. And he argued that not allowing him to graduate with the class would be a terrible hardship, since he would lose his coveted internship at the University of Iowa.
    Most members of the committee, especially the two student members, were unmoved. Roddick flatly called Swango a “bald-faced liar” and said that alone was sufficient grounds to expel him.
    But Dr. Murphy rallied to Swango’s defense. Murphy had grown up in a large family, and he felt that competing with his siblings had given him an instinctive sympathy for the underdog. His father had also died recently. He understood and sympathized with Swango’s need to support his family, and he felt other students in the class were unfairly picking on him simply because he was different. Swango had been his student, and while his performance had not been exceptional, Murphy found it entirely adequate, better than that of some other students who were going to graduate. At one point in the debate Murphy turned to Chapman, who was arguing strenuously for Swango’s dismissal, and said, “Your whole class is full of goof-offs and jerks. Why pick on him?”
    Murphy had done some investigation of his own. From the records department of the maternity ward, he told the committee, he’d learned that at about the time Swango was supposedly examining the cesarean patient, another doctor had asked that student comments be expunged from patient records. That, he argued, might explain the absence of any entry by Swango on the patient’s chart and the disappearance of the files.
    But no one investigated Swango’s emotional claim that he was supporting his widowed mother and family. In fact, Muriel had a well-paid job as business manager at the Casino Lanes bowling alley and received a pension as the widow of a military and Foreign Service officer; she was helping to pay for Michael’s medical school education.
    When the deliberations ended, the committee took its vote, on which all Swango’s hopes to become a medical doctor rested. Any decision to dismiss a student required unanimity. Eight members voted to expel Swango. One abstained. And one—Dr. Murphy—voted to give him another chance.
    D ESPITE the outcome of the committee vote, serious concerns had been raised about Swango’s character and fitness to practice medicine. Even Dr. Murphy agreed that some form of punishment was warranted, and that Swango’s record should reflect what had happened. The dean and several faculty members went so far as to consult several psychiatrists, who advised them that if Swango really suffered from a significant character disorder, as some testimony suggested, or was a habitual liar, as most committee members had concluded, he would not be able to conceal these traits if he was placed under close scrutiny.
    It was one thing to fail Swango on the basis of certain objective criteria for a course, but the school worried that it would be difficult to defend any action taken on the basis of relatively vague concerns about his character—especially in light of the fact that Swango had a lawyer. A series of negotiations ensued between SIU’s lawyers and Swango’s lawyer, and a compromise was reached that averted litigation. Swango would not be allowed to graduate with his class. But neither would he be expelled or asked to withdraw. He would be required to repeat his OB/GYN rotation. He would also be given assignments from some of the faculty’s strictest professors in other specialties, all of them aware of the allegations against him. If he passed these assignments, he would be allowed to graduate. If not, he would be