ViaSwiss wrote:DonkeyDong10 clearly has an issue w Kramer and his "commentary" on this case is useless being that he is biased. Its also borderline defamation.
The truth is, NONE of us know any legitimate details surrounding this case apart from what is said in the article.
Dr. Kramer isn't an idiot, he isn't just going to take a random case to give expert analysis on for no reason. For all we know, this guy that is accused could have been his patient for years. He may have years of records and appointments telling him that this guy had ED for years and he wouldn't have been able to penetrate this girl (as she may be saying)).
I dont know.
You don't know.
So anyone claiming to know one way or another or projecting any type of strong emotion or commentary is shady.
True, but then are not others with opposite experience with Kramer biased? Does that mean then that their comments are useless? DD is not the only one who had problems with Kramer. I have had contact with others. When I first joined this site under a different user name I was contacted by the moderator at the time and informed that IP address had been traced and connected to Kramer for the purpose of promoting him and shouting down anyone who posted other than praise comments for him. At the time a user had a very bad results from him and required a reoperation. I have PM from another. One of Kramer's own video's shows a reoperation of one of his patients with a perforation and the rte and part of the cylinder out of the corpra. Kramer uses scissor's to make room for the cylinders. Another surgeons video shows the use of a rounded rod and the doctor states not to use scissor's as they can cause perforations. There have been others that I have not documented or cannot remember. And not all of his patients post on this board so it would be probable that there are more. So when others heap praise on him on a thread like this should it not also be as important to have the whole story and information on how he handles mistakes? Kramer is not perfect. No one is. How a surgeon handles mistakes no matter how few should be relevant.
You are correct about the rape case that we no not have enough information. And the statement in the article seems to imply that that full and repeated penetration is needed for rape. This is not the case. Only slight single penetration is required in the assault buy any body part or object to meet the legal statute for rape. Again we do not know the details of the case but testimony by doctors for the defense in these cases tend to be on the lower level of the profession. And subject to discredit by the DA under cross backed up by decades of case law and other testimony by highly qualified doctors. So we can only guess why Kramer decided to do this.