I am so so sorry if you think I sound foolish. I have no idea what actually happened. I am just pointing out that no legal proceedings have even taken place yet. Too many times things change when the whole story is examined in court. Also, the headline on the blog says that the license was suspended for "sexual contact with patients". It is weird that nowhere in the suspension order did they accuse him of "sexual contact". It seems that if indeed he had sexual contact they would have come right out and said it. That is the kind of thing that would come out in a trial. All I said is that I am curious to see what happens in the end. It just seems really strange to me. The document says nothing about "lies" to the psychiatrist. It says that he was "not fully forthcoming". If he lied, they would have said that he lied. Bottom line is that it seems weird, and there will be a trial. I wonder what that will show.

The legal definition of a summary suspension means that the action (taking away his license) was done without any legal proceedings, in other words it was a precaution. I wonder what the results of the hearings were, if they happened yet. Lots of times people can just complain about their doctor and the State has to act even before they do a full investigation. The document says he was going to have a hearing in front of a judge. I wonder if this will turn out to be just an angry patient. Notice that two of the patients "B & C" had very vague complaints that he "seemed to be" hitting on her. It smells weird to me. Too many times it turns out simply to be that the guy accused just needs to learn better social graces. I guess we will see when the actual hearings occur if they give him back his license.