do credentialing they used the purity of medical society who were the medical society appears to have a very lax or at least that and their very lax background check what they did was they went ahead and check on people and they would go ahead and check their connections to see if they were a doctor see if they what we didn't get to see the records because of the medical studies and the recess determined by the judge in the case well we have this is the joint commission standard requires require employers be contacted but the interesting part is we only have the  her husband who is it dental professional he goes ahead and says no honey you gotta be wrong she takes it a different way and you know and doesn't like the fact that she's now being bullied frankly she's a person who went ahead she was a person who was a stripper in the dale so the whole issue here is should they have no no what they did is in two separate occasions because if you're a medical society we conduct an exhaustive investigation of his background is the investigation was done understand your to stay a wish by the joint commission which is considered the gold standard nationwide this is employed by over seventeen thousand hospitals across the country proper medical society to perform this of valuation this background check now we are very fortunate to live in the peoria area in that we have one of the single most of  sophisticated medical communities in the entire midwest area outside of chicago every single hospital credentials its physicians through the peoria medical society and those of medical society read up on disputed testimony that they perform those investigations under the principles the standards of the stand which by the joint commission now try to imagine if we had done what players suggest and conducted our own investigation what if we had said forget about the purity of medical society we can do better can you imagine the posture in this case you mean you turn your back on the standard which is the peoria medical society every hospital every physician in the peoria area is it is credentialed under that through that process and you turn your back to be your own investigation where frankly we would be in some in a really uncomfortable situation we had every right to lie to you or your medical societies background check the trial court looked at this instance the court in its order it said had the defendants conducted more than a cursory review they would have won the east is describing the plaintiffs are going to have that in the defendant's connected more than a cursory review they would have learned of the existence of prior complaints and yet should that question with a single word oh how do you do that we would have sent the same letters to the pure evil pure medical society sent we would have asked  has this doctor ever been so subjected to disciplinary action and is there any reason to think that we would have received a different answer now they do have the affidavit of d and she says well she's never worked with fury of medical society but apparently she had an opportunity to bring gage them into business and she said i'm not going to do it because i believe that there are very grown checks are not very good that they don't look into prior disciplinary actions which on a series is a little bit hard to believe but but that's not the issue here we're not we're not here to convey to attack her the biggest the believe ability to credibility of her opinion but it is just bad it's ok in the end now what do we have to respond to that what we have is sworn testimony that in this case the hospitals were asked whether dr daigle men had complied with all rules and regulations at st clair hospital in this case peoria medical society inquired as to whether any disciplinary action had been taken they did this on two separate occasions in on two separate occasions saying clear hospital responded no there's been no disciplinary action against him did the proper differentness have a right to rely on those answers on behalf of the hospital dishy represent that hospital there's no indication that they're all the letter on its face is a ball conclusion of the from some from an attorney in wisconsin that person is not an officer of this court and it's not a sworn letter know the back door they sinned by giving this letter to the dawn mostly and she says why relied on that on support a problem in this case oh oh to play to sort of claim you will you have sworn testimony from the fury of medical society saying you looked into his the day don't miss background we have sworn testimony from proctor hospital for probably mispronouncing your name but ms show really who said i reviewed the editorial and sinclair hospital did respond and they told us that there were no disciplinary problems and they said but that's the only evidence we have well it's true under the medical studies are adequate bench will finals are privileged now that is not an interpretation and is not our reading of the act that is the explicit loose if they didn't inquire about his background is that our problem is that can that negligence be imputed to us the fact is is that every single hospital in understand that illinois has no subpoena power over wisconsin but apparently on my understanding was they responded to the subpoena now for the first time i'm hearing that to the here ours we can't do that we can't strike a deal after the fed that the whole purpose of this inquiry is what did we know prior to the sexual harassment and  finally to your honor you touched on the response you secure your arguments and again i've seen numerous course in all different contexts f that respond the superior will not survive claims involved through sexual misconduct and the and the reason for this quite frankly is simple there is no way that you can fly if you characterize sexual misconduct facts about the village of death but yes had he been disciplined when i say we i see the fury medical society asked that and they said no if they answer truthfully they would have said yes he was disciplined for sexual harassment we didn't get that information in the fact we can be told liable for seeing clear of hospitals of neglect in failing to inform your your medical society we should not be held responsible for purely medical societies inability to issue subpoenas for straight deals with the doctor to have human wave privileges intentionally just did you do this because at the time he was hired the proper hospital was not certified by the joint commission soon after he was hired to believe it was a two thousand and one they sa joint commission accreditation that was his initial background check through p m s oh you'll recall if you were the medical society they do that every two years if you or your medical society conducts a