"WHERE DID SHE GO?!" — Judge LOSES IT When "Expert" Doctor Secretly Flees Courtroom!

Ajouté : 2026-06-01

[00:00:00]Your honor, I'm gonna have a tough time pronouncing this name.

[00:00:04]>> Okay.

[00:00:04]>> So, I think it's best that I spell it.

[00:00:07]>> Okay.

[00:00:08]>> It's doctor and then it's K H A L. Is it A L or A T? It's T I excuse me. K H A T I B S H.

[00:00:25]It's a U or a H.

[00:00:29]>> A H I D I.

[00:00:33]>> So it's K h A T I B S H A H I D >> ID ID I sorry Dr. Kashidi is it Dr. Kashidi >> Katip Shahiti >> Katip Shahiti Ah, thank you. Katip, can you please come up here and be sworn?

[00:00:58]>> Can you ask her first name?

[00:01:00]>> Ma'am, and and when you come up here, I'm going to ask you to pronounce it and state your first name for me. Will you do that, please?

[00:01:07]>> No. Right up to the witness chair here.

[00:01:13]>> Good afternoon. Can you raise your right hand? Do you sly swear affirmative penalties of perjury that the testimonial given in these proceedings will be the whole truth. So help you God.

[00:01:21]>> Yes.

[00:01:22]>> All right. Have a seat. What is your first name?

[00:01:26]>> Beta.

[00:01:27]>> I'm sorry.

[00:01:28]>> Bula.

[00:01:29]>> Can you Can you spell that?

[00:01:31]>> B A T U L D as in boy I t >> Bulba. And then the last name pronounce again for me is Katep Shahiti.

[00:01:44]>> Katip Shahid.

[00:01:46]>> Okay. Thank you very much. You can proceed.

[00:01:49]>> Okay. Thank you.

[00:01:52]Dr. First, thank you for coming through today. Um how are how do you know um my client?

[00:02:04]>> Collaborating physician.

[00:02:06]>> Collaborating physician.

[00:02:07]>> Collaborating physician. What does that mean?

[00:02:10]>> I've been with him um in the sidelines with monitoring his blood glucose levels because of his family history as well as his own with diabetes coronary artery disease biological artery plaque which is significant for diabetics.

[00:02:28]>> What is your specialty? What type of >> family medicine?

[00:02:31]>> Okay. So, you're a family doctor and you're monitoring his blood glucose levels as well as what?

[00:02:40]>> His blood pressure, heart rate, anything else.

[00:02:48]>> His basic labs, regular legs, cholesterol levels, uh, corateed arteries, heart.

[00:02:57]I've seen him in stress tests.

[00:03:00]How long have you been seeing him? How long has he been a patient of yours?

[00:03:05]>> Well, he's been a patient of Dr. Kazov, family medicine physician, and I was collaboration with her.

[00:03:13]>> How many times have you seen Mr. Pastor >> more than a few years?

[00:03:21]>> Okay, go ahead. Oh de um what is the difference between pre-diabetes and di diabetes?

[00:03:31]>> Well pre-diabetes is a diagnosis with the A1C of 5.7 to 6.4 and diabetes is 6.4 and up. In the case of diabetics where in considered diabetic anyone with a A1C above 5.7 with a history of high blood pressure is considered diabetic. Even though the range is 5.7 on lab when you have been a study of high blood pressure history and heart disease and family history we consider diabetes treated as such to prevent it from getting worse.

[00:04:07]>> Okay. Thank and he has hypoglycemia as well.

[00:04:11]>> I'm just going to put this out. Show Sean Bowman. Um when I get blood testing done, it's like sometimes 8, 9, and he says it should be seven um or closer to seven.

[00:04:26]What does that mean?

[00:04:27]>> Depending on age and risk factors, below seven is safe in some people. However, the actual is 6.4 is considered diabetes. 5.7 is considered diabetes but you have history of high blood pressure family history and risk factors.

[00:04:44]>> So 5.7 is you said I thought you said it was pre-diabetic >> 5 >> 5.7 6.4 four is pre-diabetic.

[00:04:54]>> Correct sir. However, when you have a history of high blood pressure, family history, anyone with A1C 5.7 and up is considered diabetic to be treated as such, not meaning insulin, meaning due to the risk factor risk factor modification to prevent it from getting worse. Eye doctors, all the eye doctors consider diabetes 5.7 and up. Doesn't matter whether it's pre-diabetes, they call it diabetic. Do >> you have your medical records with you?

[00:05:26]>> The medical records of >> Mr. Pastor. Okay. Go ahead. Thank you, coach. Um, so for instance, let's say I'm eight or seven and they call me pre-diabetic.

[00:05:42]Would that be correct or >> No. Okay. Um, thank you.

[00:05:48]The what is in you already talked about pre-diabetic um does pre-diabetic do you know about acetones?

[00:05:59]>> Absolutely.

[00:06:00]>> And please explain what acetone is?

[00:06:04]Acetones are what um can build up in your blood with significant stress of muscles or with fasting and build up because your body goes into a state of ketosis becoming acidabic to compensate for the blood glucose levels that are high or low depending on the exertion level and whether you are fasting or not. If someone is diabetic or pre-diabetic, would the acetones be higher?

[00:06:34]>> Yes.

[00:06:36]>> Is it a form of ethanol?

[00:06:39]>> Is not a form of ethanol. It's acet acetone.

[00:06:44]>> Okay.

[00:06:44]>> Is a type of I guess acid in the body. Same as methanol but as >> can um that be emitted out of your mouth when you talk at all?

[00:06:58]>> Yes.

[00:06:58]Will it um if somebody's pre-diabetic or diabetic, are they usually on medication of some sort?

[00:07:07]>> Yes.

[00:07:08]>> Um what type of medication was um my client on?

[00:07:13]>> Metformin.

[00:07:14]>> And what is that?

[00:07:15]>> Metformin is for diabetes, thousand milligrams once or twice a day.

[00:07:20]>> Okay. Was did he take any shots?

[00:07:23]>> No.

[00:07:24]>> Okay. And you said he takes prescribed once or twice a day.

[00:07:29]>> Metformin. Yes. And that is known to cause metabolic acidosis in people who are fasting, which is why we do not give it when you're admitted to hospital cuz you're already not eating as much.

[00:07:40]They're already in fasting mode. So anyone who is on metformin at home is not on metformin when you're in the hospital cuz you become acidotic. It it makes ketones in your urine, in your breath. That's why his CO2 was high in his blood levels too which is reported in his labs as well as can be detected as a acetone in the breath that's how you can tell um if you're going to measure by an instrument measure somebody's blood alcohol content and somebody blows into it the tube or whatever blows into Would it be accurate if somebody has these acettoins as a pre-diabetic?

[00:08:26]>> No.

[00:08:27]>> Why wouldn't it be?

[00:08:29]>> Because you're already acidotic and on metformin and being fast.

[00:08:33]>> She's not a toxicologist, right?

[00:08:36]>> She's not a toxicologist, >> but she you could testify to um acetone that in practice.

[00:08:47]>> Absolutely. Okay.

[00:08:48]>> Absolutely.

[00:08:50]And >> I just want you to know if you're going to if I'm not going to consider that testimony. She's not a qualified toxicologist.

[00:08:59]>> So I'm going to strike that.

[00:09:00]>> All right. The uh but you did state earlier if I heard you right that these higher acetones will come out of a person's mouth that is a pre-diabetic or diabetic.

[00:09:15]>> Yes. And if somebody was measuring that would it be at how high are they than normal?

[00:09:24]Is there a way quantitatively?

[00:09:27]I often see on the what what your measurement level is it nanog per deciliter or milligram per liter depending on how you measure it in the blood versus breath. So >> no matter what they would be higher >> you cannot that is not appropriate. She is not qualified to testify to that.

[00:09:46]>> Well, she >> if you're No, no, no, no. You're going to have to get a toxicologist. You should have brought a toxicologist in here then.

[00:09:55]>> Ma'am, let me ask you a question. When did you have all your records related to Mr. Pastor?

[00:10:02]>> Yes.

[00:10:02]>> When is the first time you saw him and take your time reviewing those records?

[00:10:08]>> 2019.

[00:10:11]>> Okay. And you talked about these levels as to diabetic pre-di tell me what his levels were in 20 you said 2020 correct >> correct >> what were his levels at that juncture >> fasting glucose levels were 120 and up which is considered diabetic A1C I don't have the 2020 records of A1C but fasted glucose above 120 is considered diabetics it's still your fast >> did you Did you write your I presume you wrote your diagnosis in your records?

[00:10:47]>> Correct.

[00:10:47]>> I have I have the diagnosis in the records, >> but you you any physician correct me if I'm wrong.

[00:10:54]>> They typically go through histories, >> conduct tests, and then they come up with a diagnosis.

[00:11:01]>> Correct.

[00:11:02]>> Correct. Show me the first time that you diagnose him in your records with I don't see any reason to not have those marked, right?

[00:11:13]>> Um just so it's not a public record, >> Mr. Bolognia.

[00:11:19]>> It's a public record. If it's put into evidence, you just need to protect and sensitive information at home.

[00:11:28]>> No, I I think it should be if this is the record they want to make or not. I think they have to be. So >> I I regard a part of the record. I just think there's anything sensitive.

[00:11:40]I haven't seen these.

[00:11:42]>> I think we should have a mark defense one.

[00:11:46]You agree, Mr. Cl?

[00:11:47]>> Yes, your honor.

[00:11:47]>> So, let's have them marked and received as defense one. And I'll be happy to give you an opportunity if you'd like to go back and to uh >> to redact whatever you'd like. In other words, you can't redact it without >> I'm sorry.

[00:12:06]>> That's a little close.

[00:12:08]>> Okay. Well, can we test? There's three items here. Can we just call it all defense? Uh, number one.

[00:12:15]>> Yeah. As long as all it's copies of all of her records.

[00:12:18]>> These are all >> that she has maintained with regard to Mr. Pastor.

[00:12:24]>> Which ones were you asking?

[00:12:26]>> I think we should first time.

[00:12:29]I I think we should have all of our records as it relates to Mr. Pastor marked as defense one. If you want to take a minute and go through and redact those or you doctor needs or the doctor needs us to make copies, >> we can make copies and then we can go from there.

[00:12:46]>> Can we go over them together so I can see which one is appropriate?

[00:12:53]>> Yeah. I mean, I don't want this is all about whether or not he's died.

[00:12:58]>> Correct.

[00:12:58]>> I'm not looking to have uh his medical whole medical history divulged.

[00:13:05]>> So, if if it relates, but but I think we I still need a clean copy. You need your original copy and then there should probably be a redacted copy that's marked as defense one.

[00:13:18]Can you also ask the prosecutor based upon this evidence to do sip that he's afraid I have?

[00:13:24]>> No.

[00:13:27]>> Why not?

[00:13:28]>> Wait a minute. Now it's not your turn to ask questions. Come on.

[00:13:33]>> Well, don't be confused. You let the lawyers do the work and I'll do the work. I wouldn't tell you ought to be a physician, right?

[00:13:41]I wouldn't. So, don't don't start questioning why the prosecutor isn't stipulating or why Mr. Glovis isn't stipulating or why anybody's asking any questions here today. I'll be happy to give you take the original records, make copies, two of them. One that will be returned to you, the original, plus one that we will have in a redacted form if it's going to suppress information that is not involved. And then other words, >> understand judge.

[00:14:17]>> And then another copy that's at least a clean copy.

[00:14:20]>> Um, yeah, these are >> Did you find an area where you said in a diagnosis that he was diabetic? Doctor, >> I No, come on. I asked you.

[00:14:34]I've been going to doctors, too. I want I want a straight answer here. Did you ever write in any of those record records? diagnosis the fact subject is diabetic >> then I want to see them where are they >> are they here they just pull them out it's not diagnosed >> why would you not bring all of your records >> I didn't know why you know to bring it down >> well go get them >> you have >> go get them this this hearing is going on day and and really go get them. Have them send them to you. They can email them to us. They can fax them to us. I I don't need anybody to see anything, but I want to see all your records.

[00:15:27]>> Where's your office?

[00:15:28]>> Newport.

[00:15:29]>> Have them send them over.

[00:15:32]Have them send them over right now.

[00:15:36]Yeah.

[00:15:46]>> What are we doing? Are we going to the hearing?

[00:15:48]>> Yes.

[00:15:53]>> Do you guys have the video?

[00:15:55]>> Yes. We both have it.

[00:15:58]>> I'm finishing this other case today. I I I'm I am so sorry that this has happened. I really truly am. I'm sorry to you bringing you in. I'm sorry to you. I'm sorry to all you. I I just We have a jury coming up though, right?

[00:16:22]>> Yes.

[00:16:32]>> This will take care of us. The only issue was to stop. So nothing after that other than statements in the video. Is that is that correct?

[00:16:40]>> Yes.

[00:16:42]>> Yes. Um call.

[00:16:47]>> Yeah. Let me call the case. Christine Francis Luzinski 26F245459.

[00:16:53]Your names?

[00:17:01]>> Your name?

[00:17:02]>> Sure. your name.

[00:17:03]>> Officer Vanhor.

[00:17:05]>> Good afternoon, everybody. So, I'm trying to figure out how I want to proceed here. I read the briefs.

[00:17:11]>> You've got um I think what you're trying to tell me or I don't know if you wrote it to Mr. Homeberg that that he was approaching from the opposite direction. Correct. Is that not what you're saying?

[00:17:25]>> That's essentially what I'm saying. Yes.

[00:17:27]>> That he wasn't capable of following her and seeing her cross the line.

[00:17:31]>> Correct.

[00:17:33]Does the video show that one way or the other? The >> video shows the statements that were made that are written in my >> Yeah, I know. But >> judge, we don't have an incar video.

[00:17:44]>> No, there's no incar video.

[00:17:46]>> It doesn't start soon enough. I I reached out Well, not only Mr. Kyle informed us, but I also reached out directly to that PD to see if they had anything.

[00:17:55]>> Guys, I'm not going to cut these guys off. I'm going to get done with this case. It's been going on for months.

[00:18:02]I would prefer that you see how I'm doing in half an hour and we might be able to do this. If you want to go out to lunch, you want to do something, come on back at 2:45, 3:00 and I can let you know one way or the I'm sorry I >> put me in a bit of a bit of a scheduling lash to be here. I didn't anticipate.

[00:18:23]>> What do you have?

[00:18:24]>> I have four appointments available at my office starting at 3:30, four o'clock.

[00:18:29]>> Well, that's okay. If I'm if we start at 2:45, we should be be able to be done, right? So that's what I'm going to ask you to do. Come on back at 245. I'm >> recalling Norbert Pass 25T644584.

[00:18:45]>> Where's the physician at, Mr. Clovis?

[00:18:49]>> She went to Newport to get the >> I didn't tell her to go to Newport and get the records.

[00:18:53]>> Well, I didn't tell her anything.

[00:18:55]>> What in the world is going on with her?

[00:18:57]She comes here with parts of her records recalling people against pastor 25t644584.

[00:19:08]Who told her to leave? Did anybody tell her to leave?

[00:19:12]>> I did not tell her to leave.

[00:19:14]>> Well, then why'd she leave? I said send them. Get on the phone with her. Tell them to call and get have the office send her the send the records. I'm not waiting for her to go to Newport. She should have come here with all her records. I have a feeling they don't exist. Tell her I said to come back here right now or else I'm striking every bit of her testimony.

[00:19:33]>> Hey, judge.

[00:19:34]>> Call her. Mr. Pastor, go out in the hallway and call her.

[00:19:38]>> You know, your honor, I did want to um respond a um June 23rd, 22 uh >> tell her to come back right now. Nobody said for her to leave.

[00:19:54]>> Okay.

[00:19:55]I want her back now.

[00:20:00]>> Don't be if I may.

[00:20:01]>> No, I'm not going on on this case until she comes back. This is ridiculous. I said she could have them mailed here, emailed them here. She only brought part of her records. I want to go back and just ask