Defense attorney Dan Webb closed for the defense today in the Engle-progeny tobacco litigation trial Putney v. R.J. Reynolds.
According to the defense, the treating physicians were not really "eye-witnesses," because they had no recollection of Ms. Putney or treating her. Instead, they were only testifying based on the medical records, which was true of the defense witnesses as well.
Further, Webb argued, the treating physicians did not have an incentive to precisely determine the origin of the cancer, because the treatment was the same either way. In fact, tests to establish the cancer's origin -- a CT scan or a bronchoscopy -- either were not performed or did not show a mass in the lung, and so there was no evidence to support the plaintiff's theory, and therefore the plaintiff did not meet the burden of proof. "I will talk about gaping holes in the evidence, because they do have the burden of proof."