I write in response to the slanderous / libelous comments made by, U.S. Attorney, Paul F.  "Jerk-Off" Fishman i.e. the man prosecuting my personal pain management doctor.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                      A permanently disabled American citizen for over 20 years, I've by necessity and chance, been treated by over 30 doctors in my life, and most I've been quick firing, owing the sub-standard type of medical treatment received therefrom.  Hence,  I consider myself well educated as I equally well qualified, to judge my doctor through the medical treatment received from each. And none, except for, Doctor Dov Rand,  has fairly earned and additionally deserved my stating in this sworn by written testimonial, the care received by Doctor Rand,  was so exceptional, not only am I thankful there is at least one doctor (Doctor Dov Rand), still practicing medicine according to the noble standards, originally embedded in the,

Hippocratic Oath -  Whose Classic translation into English Follows:

I swear by Apollo the Physician and Asclepius and Hygieia and Panaceia and all the gods, and goddesses, making them my witnesses, that I will fulfill according to my ability and judgment this oath and this covenant:

To hold him who has taught me this art as equal to my parents and to live my life in partnership with him, and if he is in need of money to give him a share of mine, and to regard his offspring as equal to my brothers in male lineage and to teach them this art – if they desire to learn it – without fee and covenant; to give a share of precepts and oral instruction and all the other learning to my sons and to the sons of him who has instructed me and to pupils who have signed the covenant and have taken the oath according to medical law, but to no one else.

I will apply dietic measures for the benefit of the sick according to my ability and judgment; I will keep them from harm and injustice.

I will neither give a deadly drug to anybody if asked for it, nor will I make a suggestion to this effect. In purity and holiness I will guard my life and my art.

I will not use the knife, not even on sufferers from stone, but will withdraw in favor of such men as are engaged in this work.

Whatever houses I may visit, I will come for the benefit of the sick, remaining free of all intentional injustice, of all mischief and in particular of sexual relations with both female and male persons, be they free or slaves.

What I may see or hear in the course of treatment or even outside of the treatment in regard to the life of men, which on no account one must spread abroad, I will keep myself holding such things shameful to be spoken about.

If I fulfill this oath and do not violate it, may it be granted to me to enjoy life and art, being honored with fame among all men for all time to come; if I transgress it and swear falsely, may the opposite of all this be my lot.

The Hippocratic Oath has been updated by the Declaration of Geneva. In the United Kingdom, the General Medical Council provides clear modern guidance in the form of its Duties of a Doctor^[6] and Good Medical Practice^[7] statements.

U.S. Prosecuting Attorney, Paul J. Fishman, does a disservice to himself and to the public, by breaking the law insofar as committing slanderous libel and defamation illegally against, Doctor Dov Rand, before he has even been formally judged and found guilty of committing the crime for which he is being accused.

In the Star Ledger News article, which I re-posted in this article, U.S. Prosecutor Fishman, formally accuses, Doctor Rand, of making decisions based not on his concern for his patients, such as myself, but based on how many monetary "kickbacks" he will receive.

Merely in stating, "After being on the Real Housewives of New Jersey Show, I will have many more patients to recommend for MRI's to you," in and of itself proves nothing since all pain patients must have an MRI in hand when asking a Pain Management Specialist, for medications. This is owing they must prove the have injury and are not merely seeking opiate drugs for other reasons such as addiction. Since all pain patients of, Doctor Rand, have to have a recent MRI before treated by him with pain medications, it is DEFAMATORY and ruinous to, Doctor Rand's present and future medical profession, for U.S. attorney Fishman, to accuse Rand of making mental decisions to send patients for MRI's anywhere at all, based solely on monetary terms.

For example, perhaps, Doctor Rand, who has many many years in the pain business, made a medical mental decision that for patients in the general Newark , New Jersey area, the Orange Community MRI company happens to be one of the best in his medical opinion. Merely excepting a gift for undertaking a business recommendation is commonplace and is not indicative of anyone committing criminal acts in and of itself.

Furthermore, also in this article, U.S Attorney Fishman, goes on to accuse, Doctor Rand, of committing bribery based on his saying, "I give my allegiance to you," after accepting an envelope of cash for what, Fishman, says was for recommending patients to the Orange Community MRI company for testing. Am I concerned about my doctor, Dov Rand, making a statement such as this ? Not at all! Accusing, Perhaps, Doctor Rand, believes irregardless of accepting monetary gifts from the Company, believes as formerly stated, the Orange Community MRI has a very high standard of medical care and this is wherefore he sends most his Newark Area patients there? Perhaps it has nothing at all to do with making a mere $417 (the amount stated in the news article)!

I mean when reasonably considering the amount of money, Doctor Rand, accepted as a gift for recommending some patients to the Orange Community NROI, it is truly a mere drop in the bucket to the hundreds of thousands of dollars (probably more each year) that my doctor makes in his pain management medical practice.  IT IS ILLOGICAL TO ACTUALLY BELIEVE DOCTOR DOV RAND IS SO CHEAPLY BOUGHT OFF OVER A BRIBE OF A MERE $417-! IN FACT THE ENTIRE IDEA OF ATTEMPTING TO PROVE HE ALLOWED HIMSELF TO BE BOUGHT OFF SO CHEAPLY IS NOT ONLY INSULTING, IT IS CRAZY! One thing is certain, Doctor Dov Rand, interned at the best medical hospital/colleges in America (Montifore- The Albert Einstein of Medical Colleges as it is called)... the man is not dumb! Certainly only an idiot would allow them self be bought off for merely $400- when making so much more yearly on their own !

In a jury of his peers, certainly what I have just said leaves way too many 'shades of gray' in the form of, "Criminal Doubt," to prosecute, Doctor Rand, of being guilty of any crime. in my own estimation, Doctor Rand, probably viewed the money he received as a gift fro recommending clients to the imaging center in Orange, New Jersey owing to this is commonplace practice in the  business world. It is legal for doctors to receive "kickbacks" off all kinds, from variant pharmaceutical companies, and, everyone in business makes monetary commissions for referring clients to attorneys etc...so wherefore ought the medical profession be any different. Docgtor Rand most likely didn't even view accepting the small $417- monetary gift for referring patients to Orange Community MRI as a criminal offense.

The truly guilty party here is, U.S. Attorney Paul J Fishman. He is guilty of slanderous libel and DEFAMATION, ironically of the man hs is attempting to prosecute, Doctor Dov Rand. Moreover, Stare decisis (Anglo-Latin pronunciation: /ˈstɛəri dɨˈsaɪsɨs]) is committed and/or involved, and especially involved by it being illegally committed by the very man, in this case the prosecutor trying a case against, Doctor Rand (the defendant in the case), according to legal principle by which judges are obliged to respect the precedents established by prior court and legal judicial precedent, the case can be entirely dismissed against, Doctor Dov Rand, altogether.

In American law in cases involving defamation, the four (4) categories of slander actionable per se are (i) accusing someone of a crime; (ii) alleging that someone has a foul or loathsome disease; (iii) adversely reflecting on a person’s fitness to conduct their business or trade; and (iv) imputing serious sexual misconduct. Here again, the plaintiff need only prove that someone had published the statement to any third party. No proof of special damages is required. In, U.S. Attorney, Fishman's, accusing, Doctor Rand, of making medical decisions based on bribery as IF , Doctor Rand, was already tried and found guilty of the crime of bribery already, such defamatory statements will prove to badly  effect, Doctor Rand's, future medical practice, perhaps indefinitely ! In America, a person is innocent, until found by a jury of their peers, to be guilty (and not a moment prior! Making, U.S. Attorney Fishman, the one, not, Doctor Rand, guilty of not upholding the noble standards of their profession, ironically.

Only a fair trial will tell whether, Doctor Rand, is innocent or guilty of the crimes he is being accused of, but, Attorney Fishburn, could be burning himself acting as a "fish out of water" so to speak by committing defamation against, Doctor Rand, before the case gets to court. Exemplary is the 'Public figure doctrine (absence of malice) which are special rules applicable in the case of statements made in the press (such as those made by, Fishman, in this Star Ledger Article).  Being a doctor, actor and/or otherwise public figure, such as, Doctor Rand, can be used as a defense.

The four (4) categories of actionable slander per se are (i) accusing someone of a crime; (ii) alleging that someone has a foul or loathsome disease; (iii) adversely reflecting on a person’s fitness to conduct their business or trade; and (iv) imputing serious sexual misconduct. Here again, the plaintiff need only prove that someone had published the statement to any third party. No proof of special damages is required.

And, it may interest, U.S. Attorney Fishburn, to take note there are international criminal laws against defaming persons'. in a much broader consensus against laws that criminalize defamation. Human rights organizations, and other organizations such as the Council of Europe and Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, have campaigned against strict defamation laws that criminalize defamation.^[33][34] The European Court of Human Rights has placed restrictions on criminal libel laws because of the freedom of expression provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights. And even, Article 17 of the United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights states

1. No one shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to unlawful attacks on his honour and reputation.

2. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

So let's all do what I is right not only in the case involving, Doctor Dov rand, but also in the ICTY Hague Court Cases involving Radovan Karadzic and Ratko Mladic, which is to immediately HALT calling them name whether it is a 'raunchy doctor, and/or a butcher of the Balkans."

Everyone is supposedly innocent until proven guilty. Yet unfortunately, the multi mogul media news outlets seem to believe they are above this law in the manner in which they constantly use accusing language whens speaking and., in referring to persons accused and awaiting trials in America as well as internationally. 

No one will ever receive a fair trial if this bad and dangerous behavior continues. So let's begin with the reading of this article and wish a fair and speedy trial for all accused of crimes, wherever they may be so international Social Justice and International Criminal Law becomes a legacy bequeathed to our shared world's future posterity that we all can be a part of being proud of!

Thank You and Written By Miss Jill Louise Starr

lpcyu@optonline.net