-13-
neglected to confirm independently petitioner’s physical
condition, she did not doubt the veracity of his alleged health
complications, because she regarded petitioner’s representative
as a prominent, trustworthy attorney and observed petitioner in
what may be inferred to have been impaired physical health.
Teal’s testimony excerpted above conflates petitioner’s
emotional suffering with the consequent physical reaction
petitioner experienced as a result of that trauma. This
illustrates the fact that the District conceived of petitioner’s
illness, although evidently grievous, as emanating from a
physical manifestation of emotional distress encompassed within
the limitation set forth in the penultimate sentence of section
104(a). Petitioner’s divergent positions during the course of
the proceedings regarding the cause of his injuries further
indicate that his symptoms exhibit the hallmarks of a stress-
induced condition. At trial, petitioner testified that negative
publicity engendered by the Washington Post’s investigative
reports was a substantial contributing factor to the onset of his
ailments:
Q You testified that you had a physical and
emotional reaction to this whole process. Did this
publicity have any effect on that, and if so, what?
A Yes. This was a significant component of the
whole problem. * * * But there is my name in The
Washington Post. You know, my name is at the city
council hearing when they had the investigation. So
yes, all this publicity had a huge impact on me.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011