Posted by defensebaseactcomp on June 29, 2010
Forwarded by a Contributor to the blog:
Dr. John Dorland Griffith, Star of the DBA X Files, AIG’s hired gun,
Thank you, Judge Jeffrey Tureck, for confirming what we at American Contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan have been saying all along about Dr John Dorland Griffith at the DBA X-files.
Dorothy Clay Sims you are a true American hero.
Your extensive knowledge on PTSD, your diligence and passion for justice has finally shown up this charlatan for what he is. Thank you for the lives you will have saved, for helping injured civilian contractors where very few will.
To those who stood idly by or even helped arranged for their clients to travel from five or six states away to see this bogus hired gun may you go down with him.
In light of this ruling, Case No. 2008-LDA-00287, we request that all prior cases that were denied because of Dr Griffiths’ misleading testimony (notably ALJs Romero and Kennington who declared themselves so impressed with him in earlier decisions) be reopened so that justice can be done.
From the decision Judge Jeffrey Tureck,
“In regard to Dr. Griffith, to put it bluntly, he was a terrible witness.
He was sarcastic, arrogant, argumentative and flippant, and often refused to answer the questions put to him.
On his own, he assumed facts for which there was no support in the record, and then offered his opinion based on these assumed facts.
For example, he assumed that the Claimant was at fault in the incident where his truck was shot at (e.g., TRG 142-48), that Claimant was worried that he would have to pay $17,000 to repair the truck (e.g .• TRG 35), and that Claimant was depressed due to his three divorces (TRG 48-49, 312).
He provided different answers to substantially similar questions throughout his testimony. As an example, his testimony regarding whether Claimant is malingering or exaggerating changed constantly, to the point that his opinion regarding this question is incomprehensible. See, e.g., TRG 49-53, 309-10, 317.
Further, he believes that anyone in Claimant’s shoes would be trying to collect compensation rather than work, since he believes “no one feels like working“. E.g., TRG 442.8
He also believes that if the Claimant actually was suffering from PTSD, the carrier would not be opposing the claim. TRG 161.
Moreover, his medical judgment is clouded by his belief that PTSD is a highly overused diagnosis. TRG 317.
The full flavor of Dr. Griffith’s testimony can only really be appreciated by reading the entire 490-page transcript and viewing the videotape of his May 8, 2009 deposition; but reading pages 29-35 of the transcript would be a good starting point.
His bias against Claimants; his irrationality; and his unwillingness to provide a straight answer to a question; are exhibited throughout his testimony.
Dr. Griffith’s opinion in this case is not credible and has no probative value.”
So this raises the question of why Dr. Griffith, who indicates he is well off financially continues to work at the age of78.
Is it just good sport helping AIG deny injured contractors the benefits they are entitled too?
There is more to come on this weasel. This claim is just the tip of the iceberg.
See also AIG, Their DME, the Saga Continues
Issue Date: 14 June 2010 In the Matter of DARCY FRASER Claimant v. KBR / SERVICE EMPLOYEES INT’L Employer and INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVA / AIG Carrier David C. Barnett. Esq. Ft. Lauderdale; FL For the Claimant Billy 1. Frey, Esq. Jerry R. McKenney; Esq. Houston, TX For the Employer/Carrier Before: JEFFREY TURECK Administrative Law Judge Case No. 2008-LDA-00287 OWCPNo.02-174615 DECISION AND ORDER