Last month the DOJ's case was blown apart, the truth revealing the remarkable absurdity of their arguments. 🧵
This happened after the DOJ disclosed bombshell evidence to my legal team on September 13th. This came to us at 5:30 PM on a Friday which also happened to be the last business day before a critical deadline - we had to file our responses to their motions by that Monday.
We couldn't help but notice the irony that it was also Friday the 13th.
This disclosure showed that key factual evidence the DOJ was using in their indictment and all subsequent motions was egregiously false.
The story of how this played out is pretty unbelievable. Ryan Patrick, one of my attorneys, put it well - "How we've gotten to this place is beyond bizarre and in my nearly 20 years practicing criminal law, I have never seen a case play out like this."
I believe it's worth taking a deeper dive.
This is a thread of the basic summary from publicly available motions and statements from my attorneys (link to docket below).
courtlistener.com/docket/6886091…
The cost of all of this has been astronomical given the complexity of this case. We can't do this alone so any donation can go to the legal fund (link below).
givesendgo.com/texas_whistleb…
This happened after the DOJ disclosed bombshell evidence to my legal team on September 13th. This came to us at 5:30 PM on a Friday which also happened to be the last business day before a critical deadline - we had to file our responses to their motions by that Monday.
We couldn't help but notice the irony that it was also Friday the 13th.
This disclosure showed that key factual evidence the DOJ was using in their indictment and all subsequent motions was egregiously false.
The story of how this played out is pretty unbelievable. Ryan Patrick, one of my attorneys, put it well - "How we've gotten to this place is beyond bizarre and in my nearly 20 years practicing criminal law, I have never seen a case play out like this."
I believe it's worth taking a deeper dive.
This is a thread of the basic summary from publicly available motions and statements from my attorneys (link to docket below).
courtlistener.com/docket/6886091…
The cost of all of this has been astronomical given the complexity of this case. We can't do this alone so any donation can go to the legal fund (link below).
givesendgo.com/texas_whistleb…
The Friday the 13th disclosure refuted one of the central claims in the DOJ's case - that I requested access to the TCH medical record system under false pretenses.
They spell out this claim very explicitly since it is the basis for the first of four felony charges.
In a motion from September 6th, they state "after January 2021, the defendant had no patients under his care at TCH."
In the same motion they go on to say, "On April 19, 2023, the defendant emailed an administrator at TCH urgently requesting that his login credentials be restored so he could access “operative cases” he was “covering.”
They emphatically state their conclusion in four words, "This was a lie."
They spell out this claim very explicitly since it is the basis for the first of four felony charges.
In a motion from September 6th, they state "after January 2021, the defendant had no patients under his care at TCH."
In the same motion they go on to say, "On April 19, 2023, the defendant emailed an administrator at TCH urgently requesting that his login credentials be restored so he could access “operative cases” he was “covering.”
They emphatically state their conclusion in four words, "This was a lie."
Once we receive the DOJ's disclosure, it becomes clear many of the "facts" the DOJ were using were anything but factual.
First of all, the DOJ's claim that "after January 2021, the defendant had no patients under his care at TCH" was completely false.
The disclosure revealed that I was taking care of TCH patients (adult and pediatric) well after January 2021, all the way until April 2023.
And April 2023 is important because this is where they claimed I lied about needing to cover "operative cases."
Again, the opposite is true. It turns out I was operating at TCH in April 2023, the same time that I made my request for access.
A reasonable person might ask, how it is possible that the most powerful investigative agency in the history of the world, the FBI, could miss such basic facts? Did they even look into whether my requests were sincere, or did they simply assume I was lying?
First of all, the DOJ's claim that "after January 2021, the defendant had no patients under his care at TCH" was completely false.
The disclosure revealed that I was taking care of TCH patients (adult and pediatric) well after January 2021, all the way until April 2023.
And April 2023 is important because this is where they claimed I lied about needing to cover "operative cases."
Again, the opposite is true. It turns out I was operating at TCH in April 2023, the same time that I made my request for access.
A reasonable person might ask, how it is possible that the most powerful investigative agency in the history of the world, the FBI, could miss such basic facts? Did they even look into whether my requests were sincere, or did they simply assume I was lying?
But it only gets worse.
This disclosure was certainly helpful but not necessarily surprising. The reason is because we looked at the discovery provided to us by the government.
What we found is that the evidence they gave us disproved their own allegations! Their own evidence showed I was seeing patients at TCH after January 2021!
A recent statement from one of my attorneys Ryan Patrick summarizes this well:
"The digital audit trail leading us to these patients was in their own discovery they gave to me back in June. The FBI agent on this case told me in a face-to-face meeting in July that an "asteroid would have to strike Galveston Bay" for Dr. Haim to be called into cover a surgery at TCH. That's how certain he was of his own case. I guess the agent failed to look at the audit trails in the discovery folder titled "FBI" on the USB drive."
Now we have to ask an even more basic question - did they even go through their discovery before filing their indictment? Or did they assume I would opt for a plea deal just to make it all go away, leaving these errors to go undiscovered?
This disclosure was certainly helpful but not necessarily surprising. The reason is because we looked at the discovery provided to us by the government.
What we found is that the evidence they gave us disproved their own allegations! Their own evidence showed I was seeing patients at TCH after January 2021!
A recent statement from one of my attorneys Ryan Patrick summarizes this well:
"The digital audit trail leading us to these patients was in their own discovery they gave to me back in June. The FBI agent on this case told me in a face-to-face meeting in July that an "asteroid would have to strike Galveston Bay" for Dr. Haim to be called into cover a surgery at TCH. That's how certain he was of his own case. I guess the agent failed to look at the audit trails in the discovery folder titled "FBI" on the USB drive."
Now we have to ask an even more basic question - did they even go through their discovery before filing their indictment? Or did they assume I would opt for a plea deal just to make it all go away, leaving these errors to go undiscovered?
The following Monday, September 16th my attorneys argued for an extension of the trial. They stated the obvious - "the Friday the 13th disclosure has now blown apart the entire premise. As a result, Count 1 must be dismissed and the legitimacy of the rest of the indictment is now in question."
In subsequent motions the DOJ tried their best at damage control. They casually dismissed the factual concerns as inconsequential - "The new information is not the bombshell that the defense suggests it is."
The judge decided to schedule an in-person hearing so each side could make their case about a continuance. This was scheduled for September 26th.
In subsequent motions the DOJ tried their best at damage control. They casually dismissed the factual concerns as inconsequential - "The new information is not the bombshell that the defense suggests it is."
The judge decided to schedule an in-person hearing so each side could make their case about a continuance. This was scheduled for September 26th.
It just so happens that my wife, Andrea, was nine months pregnant at the time with our first child. Since the hearing was September 26th and her due date was October 1st, we thought it wouldn't be a problem.
But two days before the hearing on September 24th, a routine OBGYN appointment turns into an unexpected hospital admission. Andrea gets induced the next morning. She needs a C-section later that day. On September 25th at 6PM, our beautiful daughter, Talia, is brought into this world.
I have about two hours to spend with my wife and child before I leave for Houston.
I make it to the hearing the next day. It went well - my team the obvious victors.
Shortly after we finish, I head back home to Dallas because I have a bunch of surgeries scheduled for the next day. Although I was severely sleep deprived, I was lucky that my wife gave birth in the same hospital I work - I saw them between cases. We took Talia home later that day.
On October 1st, we find out we are granted the continuance. The new trial date is set for December 2nd.
But two days before the hearing on September 24th, a routine OBGYN appointment turns into an unexpected hospital admission. Andrea gets induced the next morning. She needs a C-section later that day. On September 25th at 6PM, our beautiful daughter, Talia, is brought into this world.
I have about two hours to spend with my wife and child before I leave for Houston.
I make it to the hearing the next day. It went well - my team the obvious victors.
Shortly after we finish, I head back home to Dallas because I have a bunch of surgeries scheduled for the next day. Although I was severely sleep deprived, I was lucky that my wife gave birth in the same hospital I work - I saw them between cases. We took Talia home later that day.
On October 1st, we find out we are granted the continuance. The new trial date is set for December 2nd.
Although the DOJ claimed the disclosure was "not the bombshell that the defendant suggests" they nevertheless had to scrap the indictment and start again.
They filed something called a superseding indictment on October 10th. This is when a new indictment is filed - either new charges are brought or revisions made.
The new indictment corrected all the factual errors that were used to support the false pretenses claim. Bizarrely, the DOJ doubled down on false pretenses in the second indictment - they kept it in count #1 and added it to counts #2-4.
Any reasonable person has to ask the question - how is it possible to not only keep but expand the false pretense claim when the evidence used to support this was proven to be egregiously false?
What evidence was the second Grand Jury possibly given to support false pretenses? Especially when they now know I was operating at TCH at the time of my request for access.
They filed something called a superseding indictment on October 10th. This is when a new indictment is filed - either new charges are brought or revisions made.
The new indictment corrected all the factual errors that were used to support the false pretenses claim. Bizarrely, the DOJ doubled down on false pretenses in the second indictment - they kept it in count #1 and added it to counts #2-4.
Any reasonable person has to ask the question - how is it possible to not only keep but expand the false pretense claim when the evidence used to support this was proven to be egregiously false?
What evidence was the second Grand Jury possibly given to support false pretenses? Especially when they now know I was operating at TCH at the time of my request for access.
The second indictment requires a deeper analysis so will be detailed in another thread.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
