Judge Allows Two Limited ‘Other-acts’ Witnesses; Expert Debate Over Suture Exams, Gloves and Penetration Anchors Closing Arguments

A judge in the 252nd District Court on Monday allowed the state to present testimony from two prior-patient witnesses for the narrow purpose of showing intent and absence of mistake, then sent the case to jurors after competing testimony and argument over surgical practice and the legal meaning of penetration.

The judge told jurors before the testimony: "You are about to hear testimony about other acts that are not charged in the indictment. The state is offering these for the limited purpose of showing intent, lack of accident, or absence of mistake. You may only consider them if you believe them beyond a reasonable doubt." That limiting instruction was the basis for the court’s decision to admit two witnesses the state proffered — identified in court as TK and SM — and to exclude other proffered witnesses as too remote or prejudicial.

On direct examination the state presented Tammy Kennedy Grovershow, who testified that after an October 2021 inner-thigh lift she returned to the defendant’s office when an incision opened and later "felt as if I had been penetrated" after the local anesthetic wore off. Grovershow also told the court she…