Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
letter to Dr.Randall Moore MD JD

letter to Dr.Randall Moore MD JD

Ratings: (0)|Views: 120|Likes:
Published by Shirley Pigott MD

More info:

Published by: Shirley Pigott MD on Mar 26, 2011
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





Shirley Pigott MD301 WoodwayVictoria, Texas 77904April 20, 2009Randall Moore MD JDScott & WhiteTemple, TexasDear Dr. Moore,As you know, I have been dedicated for several years to my work at medical board reform. Although Ihave been successful in stirring some public outcry, recruiting dozens of other doctors to the cause,earning the support of my patients, and possibly contributed to the resignations of Drs. Kalafut, Patrick and Miller, the medical board brazenly suspended my license March 24, 2009, stating that I am/was"mentally impaired".Although you implied that I might be delusional because believe I am being
stalked by lawenforcement 
, I suspect you doubt the board's allegations that I am a continuing danger to the public.You probably are as surprised as I was that a board attorney, Scott Freshour, would use your statementsto conclude the latter.Mr. Freshour, alone, determined that I
was/am a danger to the public,
and presumably a danger to mypatients. Either he violated his "oath of an attorney" or he is miserably incompetent when it comes tounderstanding basic logic and correct use of the English language. Additionally, Mr. Freshour deniedme my right to present evidence of patient support. His actions were, I believe, taken in bad faith andat the direction of Mari Robinson, their Executive Director.At the most recent regularly scheduled board meeting prior to my "temporary suspension hearing", Ipublicly testified, to the whole board and to Mari Robinson, as to her imminent danger to the publicdue to repeated criminal behavior.On March 25th, the board maliciously sent the following "press release" to my hometown newspaper,the Victoria Advocate: FOR IMMEDIATE RELE:Media contact Chief of Staff Jane McFarland at (512) 305-7044 or jane.mcfarland@tmb.state.tx.usNon-media contact: (512) 305-7030 or (800) 248-4062"Medical Board Suspends License of Shirley Pigott, M.D., of VictoriaA panel of the Texas Medical Board temporarily suspended the license of Shirley Pigott, M.D., license#F7054, of Victoria, after determining that Dr. Pigott’s continuation in the practice of medicine presentsa continuing threat to the public welfare.The action was based Dr. Pigott’s failure to comply with a previous board order, unprofessional anddishonorable conduct, and impaired mental status.The temporary suspension hearing took place Tuesday, March 24, and the suspension was effectiveimmediately. The length of a temporary suspension order is indefinite but it remains in effect until theboard takes further action."
***For some time I have tried to persuade the Advocate to investigate my evidence of fraud and abuse of power by the medical board, but they have not. They were willing, however, to jump on the sensational"news" disseminated by a wicked medical board.Robinson testified under oath at recent hearings of the House Committee on Public Health (recordedand kept in committee archives, available for viewing) that the medical board does not "shop for experts". Her behavior demonstrates otherwise.Several Texas physicians who have been harmed by the TMB are eager to testify, under oath in publicproceedings, to their own evidence that the board shops until it finds an expert who will fraudulently dotheir biddings. When the board is lucky enough to find an ethical expert who honestly believes there issome truth in their allegations, they refuse to allow him to reevaluate a licensee when new evidencemight be contradictory to a previous conclusion.Scott Freshour has told my attorney that you are
expert and they do not want me reevaluated.However, they repeatedly refer to you as the "evaluating physician". Until now, they have never mentioned your opinions were their property or that they have any authority not to disclose evidence toyou. Consistent with the concept of an evaluating physician rather than a "board physicians" is the factthat I have agreed to see you and, in fact, I pay you for your services. You are bound by ethicalconsiderations to find out and testify to the truth.At our most recent visit, you made suggestions which Dr. Brams, my treating physician, and I agreedwere reasonable and would assist you in determining the truth.We have made those changes and wish to have you make your own conclusion as to the results.This is especially important since Dr. William Reid repeatedly relied on your opinions to conclude thatI might be psychotic.If you had questioned my sanity prior to my most recent visit with you, you probably would have askedme to show you some evidence which might allow you to determine the truth.Hopefully you recall the Sixth Amendment of the US Constitution:
"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right ... to be informed of the natureand cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to havecompulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor ...
and the Fourth Amendment:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, againstunreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, butupon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the placeto be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Although the board has not charged me with anything criminal, it has used a felony charge for which Ihave not been found guilty as evidence I am a danger to the public. I am not aware that the board hasbeen charged to find a doctor "innocent until proven guilty".
I have evidence which proves, I believe, collusion among, at minimum, four Texas agencies (TexasDepartment of Public Safety, Texas Medical Board, the Texas Attorney General through the WhartonCounty DA, and the Texas Judicial Branch (through the 329th District Court in Wharton County).I and two other individuals have seen an email exchange among the following persons in an evidencefile held by the Wharton County District Attorney in their prosecution against me for a first degreefelony charge. The series of emails passes DPS identification information, including the residenceaddress, of good friends of mine who have assisted me with TMB related investigations. These peopleare writing each other in a manner which strongly suggests this is not their first communication. Thesepersons are:1. A DPS Captain (DPS)2. Keith Miller's nurse practitioner (TMB)3. An assistant Wharton County DA (representative of the Texas Attorney General)4. The Executive Director of the 329th Wharton County District Court. (Who reports to the 329thDistrict Judge, who represents the Texas Judicial Branch)You may recall that I have, in my possession, a public affidavit sworn by Bridget Hughes RN, KeithMiller's nurse practitioner, in which she acknowledges the forgery of over 50 Schedule II ControlledSubstances
It is signed by Katherine Thomas, Executive Director of the Texas Board of Nursing. The affidavit states that she has been employed by Dr. Miller for several months. I havesworn deposition testimony in which Dr. Miller admits he was Hughes' "supervising physician" duringpart of the time she was engaging regularly in felonious activity and was fulfilling her non-disciplinaryorder under Miller's supervision.Hughes' one-year order had these requirements:1. She was not to refer to herself as a nurse practitioner.2. She had voluntarily given up all prescriptive authority, including her controlled drugs licensenumbers with DPS and the DEA.Before the order expired, my female amateur investigator friend visited Hughes in Shelby CountyTexas as a patient. She has pictures of a sign in front of Miller's office which refers to Hughes as anurse practitioner. She has an audio recording of Miller's receptionist referring to Hughes as a nursepractitioner. In the recording, Hughes calls herself a nurse practitioner. The receptionist confirms thatMiller was not in the office that day supervising Hughes. Hughes gave my friend medication sampleswhich were to treat a condition Hughes had diagnosed. Hughes called in a second prescription to aCenter, Texas, pharmacist, Lacory Miller. I have personally requested a written copy of theprescription, upon my investigator's request. Pharmacist Miller refused to fax me a copy, presumablybecause no copy existed. Pharmacist Miller acknowledged to me personally by phone that he knewHughes did not have prescriptive authority but that he filled her prescription anyway.

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->