Former Raiders receiver Henry Ruggs returned to court on Thursday for a hearing on an issue that, on the surface, seems trivial. At a deeper level, it may not be.
Via Katelyn Newberg of the Las Vegas Review-Journal, Justice of the Peace Robert Walsh ruled that prosecutors will have access only to the results of Ruggs’s blood tests, along with and testimony from medical professionals about those tests.
Attorneys David Chesnoff Richard Schonfeld argued successfully that testimony from medical professionals about anything other than the results of the blood test would violate doctor-patient privilege.
Ruggs has been charged with felony counts of DUI resulting in death, DUI resulting in substantial bodily harm, along with two counts of reckless driving. Tina Tintor, 23, died after Ruggs’s car collided with the Toyota Rav4 she was driving. Ruggs’s girlfriend, Rudy Washington, was injured in the crash.
Washington’s lawyer appeared in court to argue against the release of her medical records, too. Prosecutors contend that they are required to show that she suffered substantial bodily injury.
So why aren’t the records of Ruggs’s blood-alcohol concentration (reportedly twice the legal limit) good enough for prosecutors, and why do they want his girlfriend’s medical records? Prosecutors could be concerned about their ability to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Ruggs was actually driving the car. With Washington also in the car, the possibility that she was driving the car could create reasonable doubt. If Ruggs said to doctors “I was driving” or if Washington said to doctors “I wasn’t driving,” then it becomes easier to prove that Ruggs was driving.
That’s not to say Ruggs plans to defend the case on the basis that he wasn’t actually driving -- or, more accurately, that prosecutors can’t prove he was driving. But the importance of proving Ruggs was driving likely has compelled prosecutors to pursue medical records or other testimony that would include a non-hearsay admission from Ruggs that he was driving the car.
