Analyze This: The Bradley Report
First off, I won’t play the political blame game concerning Jane Brady and Beau Biden on this issue until we know whether Beau is going to be fine. Today, I am just reporting the substance of the Bradley Report, or more specifically the findings and recommendations of Widener Univerity School of Law Dean Linda Ammons. The Bradley Report, as prepared by Ammons, spreads the blame all around, rightfully so. The report “pinpoints a multitude of failures and lack of action by people in position to stop Bradley dating back to 1994.”
“A tragedy of this magnitude may have been pre-empted if the individuals directly involved had been more focused and alert, less willing to give Bradley the benefit of the doubt, and if they had scrupulously followed the law,” Ammons wrote. “Systems were in place to catch a perpetrator, but, they were either not properly accessed, or when called upon, human and mechanical error prevented the appropriate actions from being taken.”
FAILURE NO. 1Delaware’s Board of Medical Practice issued Bradley a medical license in April 1994 even after knowing that there was a complaint pending against him in Pennsylvania. In June later that year, the Pennsylvania’s board did dismiss the complaint and the Philadelphia police decided the complaining mother’s statement was not credible. Still, with a pending abuse complaint against an applying Doctor, our medical board should have never issued a license.
FAILURE NO. 2 No one in law enforcement or the medical community contacted Delaware’s medical board about Bradley’s inappropriate contact with girls after a 1996 investigation by Beebe Medical Center, despite a state law requiring police, prosecutors, doctors and nurses who “reasonably believe” a doctor is guilty of misconduct or unfit to practice medicine to file a written complaint to the board.
The first known complaint against Dr. Bradley in Delaware occurred in 1996, when Joan Davis, a nurse who worked with Bradley at Beebe, complained to her supervisor about what she thought were too many catheterizations of female patients for urine samples by Bradley in his annexed office next to the hospital. Davis’ allegations regarding Bradley also included allegations of excessive kissing of patients, inappropriate remarks about females, and that Bradley was taking pictures of patients’ without out their parents consent or knowledge and putting them on his computer. The hospital did conduct an internal investigation and after consulting with three independent doctors, deemed that the catheterizations were medically appropriate and closed the investigation. Relying on Delaware’s peer review statute, the procedures of their accreditation standards, federal statutes, and the fact that other experts in the field had cleared Bradley’s actions as accepted medical practice, Beebe Hospital did not report Davis’ allegations to law enforcement or the Board of Medical Practice. It does not appear that Beebe’s internal investigation addressed Davis’ other allegations.
It does not appear that the records of Beebe’s investigation in 1996 were ever given to law enforcement until after Dr. Bradley was arrested in 2009. That is true even though Bradley’s records at Beebe were subpoenaed in 2005, but more on that in a second. That is simply astonishing.
FAILURE NO. 3 No one in law enforcement or the medical community contacted Delaware’s medical board about a 2004 report to the Medical Society of Delaware, a trade association of and for Delaware physicians, by Bradley’s sister, Lynda Barnes, despite a state law requiring police, prosecutors, doctors and nurses who “reasonably believe” a doctor is guilty of misconduct or unfit to practice medicine to file a written complaint to the board.
In October 2004, Dr. Bradley’s adopted sister, Lynda Barnes, sent a letter to the Delaware Medical Society alleging that Dr. Bradley was self-medicating, writing prescriptions in the name of a relative for himself, that he physically and emotionally abused his son, that he had abused a stepchild in another state, and she mentioned complaints from parents concerning improper touching of their children. Several of the above allegations were supposedly not contained in the version of Barnes’ letter that was received by the Medical Society.
Regardless if the Medical Society was aware of the allegations of improper touching, the letter appeared to provide enough allegations to at least put into doubt Bradley’s fitness to practice medicine. Therefore, the Medical Society should have filed a formal complaint with the Board of Medical Practice, even if all it did was forward the Barnes letter.
FAILURE NO. 4 The then-society president Dr. James P. Marvel Jr., a colleague of Bradley at Beebe, refused to recuse himself in deciding on the 2004 Barnes report, despite the obvious conflict of interest.
FAILURE NO. 5 Dr. Marvel decided the 2004 tip from Mrs. Barnes should be dismissed because, outrageously, “it was a family matter.”
FAILURE NO. 6 No one in law enforcement or the medical community contacted Delaware’s medical board about a 2005 investigation into complaints about Bradley by Milford police, which was overseen by Attorney General Jane Brady, despite a state law requiring police, prosecutors, doctors and nurses who “reasonably believe” a doctor is guilty of misconduct or unfit to practice medicine to file a written complaint to the board.
In March 2005, the Milford Police Department initiated an investigation of Dr. Bradley after a three-year old patient stated that Dr. Bradley had “kissed her tongue”. As part of the investigation, the Milford Police Department identified three additional victims and five witnesses who alleged Dr. Bradley was performing improper examinations and /or exhibited unusual behavior. One of the witnesses Milford Police interviewed was Lynda Barnes, who provided police with the letter she had faxed to the Delaware Medical Society in October 2004. […]
Besides allegations of sexual abuse, Barnes and others told Milford investigators that Bradley was self-medicating, that his office was in disarray, and that he had abused his own children. Such allegations seemingly put into question Bradley’s fitness to practice medicine, and therefore such allegations should have been reported to the Board of Medical Practice. While there appears to be a factual dispute regarding who assumed the responsibility for reporting the results of the Milford Police Department investigation to the Board of Medical practice, the bottom line is that the Board never received a written complaint regarding Bradley, which the law required.
FAILURE NO. 7 Attorney General Jane Brady refused to prosecute or open her own investigation after the Milford PD reporting the findings of their investigation.
On May 23, 2005, after Milford Police presented the findings of their investigation to the Attorney General’s Office, who decided not to prosecute Bradley based on the evidence that they had at the time, the Milford Police Department investigation was closed. Without opining on the propriety of the decision not to prosecute, and regardless of the criminality of Bradley’s alleged
conduct, the Attorney General’s Office should have reported the findings of their investigation to the Board of Medical Practice.
FAILURE NO. 8 No one in law enforcement or the medical community contacted Delaware’s medical board about the 2008 state police investigation, which was overseen by Attorney General Beau Biden, despite a state law requiring police, prosecutors, doctors and nurses who “reasonably believe” a doctor is guilty of misconduct or unfit to practice medicine to file a written complaint to the board.
FAILURE NO. 9 Even though Bradley’s practice of using a catheter on young girls to take urine samples was so widely known that Lewes area mothers jokes about it at parties (JOKED!!!), no one filed a report or a complaint save the above referenced individuals.
FAILURE NO. 10 The mysteriously unnamed, even now, Superior Court judge refused to grant a search warrant for Dr. Earl B. Bradley’s office in December 2008, even though, inexplicably, he (aha, the judge is a man) told investigators he would sign a warrant for the pediatrician’s arrest. So, there was enough probable cause to arrest him for abuse, but not enough for a search warrant. That does not compute. That Judge should be named, and I want to hear his legal theory behind his decision.
Ammon’s Recommendations
1. Ammons recommends that current Delaware law be amended so that the Board of Medical Practices and other peer review groups’ records are not held strictly confidential, but may be available under certain circumstances, including via subpoena by law enforcement.
2. In order to better ensure that mandatory reporters fulfill their duty to report, the General Assembly should couple reporters’ immunity in the statute with stiffer penalties for failing to report. In addition, all licensees of the Board of Medical Practice should receive mandatory training regarding their duty to report.
3. The General Assembly clarify whether law enforcement are exempted from the duty to report allegations against medical professionals to the Board of Medical Practice during the course of a criminal investigation. In addition, all complaints to the Board, whether they are written or oral should be documented and investigated by the Board.
Tags: Beau Biden, Earl Bradley, Jane Brady, Linda Ammons
That judge’s name (under Failure No. 10) needs to be released to the public immediately. It is widely known in the law enforcement and government communities, and until it is released they are all guilty of stonewalling the public.
It is truly pathetic that it took ten failures, and still nothing was done to end these atrocities.
Being somewhat familiar with the attitude of some of the medical community associated with Beebe Hospital, I am not the least bit surprised.
Not only the abused children and their parents and relatives suffer due to these neglects of duty, but also the entire community suffers, and will for some time to come, because Beebe is our community hospital. We are being told that Beebe may now declare bankruptcy due to the pending civil suits against it.
Certain people need to be removed from their positions due to their neglect of duty in this case.
Shorter Perry: “Heads gotta roll!”
Agreed.
In a state as small as Delaware, it appears clear that it was an open secret that Bradley may well have been a pedophile. Yet neither the Medical Society nor the Board of Medical Practice acted. Their defense is that ‘the doc ate my homework’. That’s b/c they really have no defense.
The proposed solution is to enact legislation clarifying that the State reallyreally means it when it seeks to hold these parties, and the law enforcement community, accountable. Of course, they already were statutorily accountable, but just didn’t bother to act like it.
It is now up to the Attorney General, may he have a speedy and complete recovery, to hold them accountable. Their failure/unwillingness to protect the public has resulted in horrific abuse of our most vulnerable. No legal technicalities should protect them in this situation as they failed to protect the victims.
And, as has been previously mentioned, there is no justifiable reason to keep the name of the judge in this case anonymous. Since when should a publicly-appointed official be allowed to escape accountability for their actions?
Just as we have suspected all along the medical and legal trade unions (dentists too) protect themselves from us ‘the great unwashed’.
Let’s have the names of all involved and resignations en masse starting with Dr. Marvel (what a misnomer there, huh?) the old A.G. now Judge and Superior Court Judge ‘Molester Protector’……wouldn’t surprise me that Minner was not somehow involved or at least aware of this gross secret circle jerk.
That’s right I am calling on all those so-called professionals tainted by this miscarriage of justice to finally do the right this and resign immediately.
Many readers will vividly recall the ‘discomfort’ of being catherized…..oh, those darling little girls.
Consider, for a moment, that the Judge was essentially saying “I am not going to let you execute a warrant unless you have enough evidence to arrest Bradley.”
The AG then declined to issue an arrest warrant. Had the AG issued an arrest warrant, then he would have been able to get the search warrant, too.
Unless you want to live in a society where judges rubber stamp search warrants, the judge was doing his duty if he felt the evidence wasn’t sufficient for a search warrant or an arrest.
I don’t know why the judge’s name is being withheld, however.
That is apparently not what the Judge said, anonone. The mysterious Judge said that he would issue an arrest warrant right then, but would not issue a search warrant. Of course, an arrest means nothing unless you got enough evidence to convict.
I just printed out the full 60 page report and I will be reading it tonight, so if I read anything that sheds light on this aspect, I will post a comment.
I think that if the AG requested an arrest warrant the judge would have issued a search warrant, too. He would have had to. What I think the judge was doing was saying that if the state did not have enough evidence to arrest Bradley then the judge wasn’t going to let the state search a medical doctor’s office, including the medical records of Bradley’s patients.
Even though the Judge said that he would sign an arrest warrant, It was up to the AG to request one and he declined to do so.
Being falsely accused of child abuse is a pretty devastating experience, as you can easily imagine. I think the judge was essentially telling the AG to build a better case.
“First off, I won’t play the political blame game concerning Jane Brady and Beau Biden…”
Really!? This seems to be you m.o. as far as I can see. Or, do you only jump to ridiculous conclusions and place unwarranted blame when it involves conservatives?
What a hypocrite!
Well done DD. Thanks.
According to stories in TNJ some weeks ago, a doctor formerly in practice with Bradley told investigators Bradley kept photographs of his patients on his computer. There’s no way on earth that shouldn’t be enough to issue a warrant to search that computer. Pressure must be applied for this jurist to explain himself. The Delaware Way nonsense of “all quiet, stand shoulder to shoulder” can’t be allowed. This was a failure of every institution involved, judiciary included. FOIA requests should be issued.
This case is very heartbreaking, not only because of the horrible acts by Dr. Bradley but also because of the COMPLETE FAILURE of the institutions meant to protect kids. I’m disgusted by all of it but I’m especially disgusted by the medical associations. From where I’m sitting it looks like the medical society closed in to protect its own.
“it looks like the medical society closed in to protect its own.”
The law enforcement community should not be permitted to do the same. They’re on our dime.
If the Medical Society and Board of Medical Practice are “statutorily accountable,” what is the next step in having them locked up?
Great blogging BTW.
Good question, Jason. The Board of Medical Practice MUST be put under Joint Sunset Review so that protecting the public will be, as it should be, its paramount responsibility. Gov. Markell should call for the resignation of any and all board members who failed to carry out their mandate.
I would not be surprised if members of the Medical Society have some criminal liability in this.
I also believe that there may well be some Beebe Hospital officials who might have the same problem.
We’ll just have to see what the AG does. Get well soon.
Perhaps the reason no one is releasing the name of the judge is that he would have no opportunity to defend himself from public criticism. Ethical requirements seem to prohibit the judge from making any public comment on this matter, even were his name disclosed.
“RULE 2.10 Judicial Statements on Pending and Impending Cases.
(A) A judge should abstain from public comment on the merits of a pending or impending proceeding in any court, and should require similar abstention on the part of personnel subject to the judge’s direction and control.
Comment:
The admonition against public comment about the merits of a pending or impending action continues until completion of the appellate process. If the public comment involves a case from the judge’s own court, particular care should be taken that the comment does not denigrate public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary in violation of Rule 1.2.”
This warrant and the facts underlying it are almost certainly going to be part of the evidence presented in the merits of any number of civil suits currently pending in the overall Bradley matter.
Judges given a warrant make decisions based on the information presented, within the proverbial “four-corners” of the document itself. This judge, like every other in the same position, made the call on probable cause as he saw it at the time. Arrest and search warrants get turned down all the time and the prosecutor or cop goes back to work and finds more evidence or re-works the documents or something, if they think they have a case. That is the protection of the Constitution at work. “No Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause.” Just because a judge does not sign a warrant doesn’t make him “Judge ‘Molestor Protector'”.
Would having a name and a face to go along with this story make any difference? If you knew and the judge was not able to comment, would that make you condemn him even more? We either trust judges to make these calls, or we don’t. If you don’t, then go to work trying to get an elected bench or something where you have more say. As it stands right now, you don’t get to second guess with the full luxury of hindsight having a ton more facts on the table and then pillory someone for making the call we as a society have entrusted him with making.
Excellent points, Political Observer. Thanks.
Excellent points if you’re interested in defending the Delaware Way. As I noted above, unless investigators are lying — and they would have to be doing so with the knowledge that the truth would probably come out eventually — the information before the judge was clear.
I don’t know where the heck you think you’re living, PO, but in a society with a transparent government we DO get to to second guess with the full luxury of hindsight. Those who can’t take those conditions shouldn’t take the job.
Well, I am not interested in defending the Delaware Way, but I am also not interested in having a Judge violate his professional rule of ethics. I will wait for the Judge to explain himself until after the Bradley case is over.