Dr. Mark Lacroix pleaded guilty before a disciplinary board on Monday, claiming that Nunes “lacked” by adopting “clear positions” at the outset of the epidemic on a matter that was beyond his ability.
Also read: “I am not anti-mask,” Dr. Mark Lacroix testified
He has been asked questions on his Facebook posts since March 2020, including when he wrote “buffoon” on Dr. Arruda’s video, the owner of Clinics Medicals Lacroix, facing “particularly moral criticism for making decisions out of control. Health emergency”, by talking about “instability” of public health officials. Defended himself.
At the time, Dr. Lacroix shared a video of the former national director of public health 22 times in 10 days, claiming that the mask “gave a wrong impression about security”.
As the government prepares to make face shielding mandatory, Dr Lacroix also aired a demonstration against the wearing of a detention mask by conspirator Stefan Blaise.
“It was completely face-to-face and I condemn it,” the doctor said, adding that he did not know the show organizer at the time.
Oliver Boldak’s lawyer, who filed a private complaint against Dr. Lacroix, used the doctor’s responses in the request to argue that he lacked “nunes” in his Facebook posts and interviews with Jeff Fillian on CHOI Radio.
According to the lawyer, the defendant “lacked moderation”, “weakened government authority in public health” and “minimized the effects of COVID”.
The physician has the right to express his opinion in the media, assuring the plaintiff, however, that during the interviews Jeff Fillian’s statements “he never objected”, but unlike the “argumentative”, the physician has a duty to show reserve.
Freedom of expression
In response, Dr. Lacroix’s lawyer argued that experts have the right to speak in public. “It’s at the heart of freedom of expression, hosted by My Mai Springate.”
However the chair of the disciplinary council repeatedly questioned the lawyer during her argument.
“Vadena [ne] At least not verify? “Mary-Josie Corio was asked specifically about the show organizer against the detention mask.
The lawyer believes his client is “not overstepping all bounds”. In contrast, she also filed a motion alleging abuse of process to withdraw all charges by the end of the argument.
The Council took this request as well as judgment on ethical grounds against the physician under counsel.
See also
About The Author
More Stories
How List Acquisition Helps Your Political Campaign Become Successful
Four escaped cows were caught
A simple administrative decision? | Press