Utah Dr charged with murder


Remember Nicola Riley? She is the still-practicing Utah Dr who had her Maryland physician’s license stripped last year because of “unprofessional conduct” while performing abortions in that state. She has been arrested and charged with murder and conspiracy following a 16-month investigation.  A botched abortion leaving an 18 year-old woman in critical condition with a ruptured uterus was the starting point of this investigation. If you remember the very disturbing story, when the abortion clinic where she worked was searched, a freezer full of dead babies was found, including one within a month of his or her due date.  Maryland is one of 38 states that allows murder charges to be brought against someone accused of killing a “viable fetus.”

Nicola was dishonorably discharged from the US Army following a court martial for credit card fraud 20 years ago. She served a year in Leavenworth. Earlier this year, she agreed to surrender her Wyoming medical license for misrepresenting those earlier charges, ones she also mis-represented on her Utah application.

So what does Utah do, not only with misrepresentation, but losing her license in two states?  The Department of Occupational and Professional Licensing lets her keep her license, but makes her write an essay, saying 1000 times “I will not lie on my DOPL application”. Oh wait – that’s only half true – she did have to write an essay but she merely had to describe her “unprofessional conduct.”  Unbelievable.


Tags: ,

9 Responses to “Utah Dr charged with murder”

  1. Daniel B Says:

    Is the essay available online?

  2. Anita Says:

    She is offensive, and DOPL makes NO sense what so EVER!!! They have a hard time with hair braiding, but let this un-human continue to hold a license?
    So when she gets out of jail in Maryland, she can come back and kill babies here and our state is ok with that?

  3. Jerome Borden Says:

    OK, how long is Maryland stashing her in the cooler? That would answer the ‘When could she become a Utah problem?’ question. OK, a little more math: Age 18 when she entered school, six to eight years to get a medical degree and enter the Army Medical Corps as a Captain, convicted 20 years ago and served one year in Ft. Leavenworth, 1.5 year investigation gives a total of 45 for her minimum current age. So, she could come back here when? If she gets five years in MD, she could be a spry mid-fifties, ready to kill again. [Gee, am I insensitive?]

    Holly, you nailed this one and hopefully others will get the word, especially DOPL.

  4. ERIC in Murray Says:

    CAN St. Marks FIRE her already or do we have to BOYCOTT the hospital till she is gone?
    Happy New Year. It will be when we get rid of the POSobama.
    Its the USA’s only HOPE!

  5. JBT Says:

    This will be an interesting trial even though Dr. Riley has already been tried and convicted in the Utah court of (conservative) public opinion.

    From one of the links provided by Holly:

    “Maryland is one of 38 states that allows murder charges to be brought against someone accused of killing a viable fetus. The 2005 law has so far only been used for cases in which defendants were accused of assaulting or killing pregnant women.

    “We are in uncharted territory,” Cecil County State’s Attorney Ellis Roberts said.

    “At some point in time,” he added, “you will hear our explanation” of the charges.

    The state law allows for murder or manslaughter charges to be brought against a person who intends to kill or seriously injure a fetus or who wantonly disregards the safety of a fetus. It does not apply to doctors administering lawful medical care and does not impinge on a woman’s right to terminate a pregnancy.”

    In this country persons are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Performing abortions per se is not illegal under the laws of the United States. Even later term abortions are permitted under exigent circumstances such as to save the life of the mother. Lets not be too hasty to condemn this physician until all of the facts of the case are revealed and proven beyond a shadow of a doubt.

  6. Pops Says:

    “In this country persons are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.” Not entirely true. That principle applies to law enforcement and to the judiciary. It does not apply to private individuals. We are free to presume guilt or innocence using whatever criteria we choose. (The notable exception to the rule is the IRS, in which case guilt is presumed by the government unless and until one is able to prove their innocence.)

    This case is interesting because it will presumably force the courts to address a long-standing contradiction in the law, to say nothing of the contradiction in logic which is the idea that someone becomes a sentient human being only after fully emerging from the birth canal.

  7. Drew Gilliland Says:

    While I agree that we as private individuals are free to assess guilt or innocence based on our own criteria, shouldn’t we strive to be above passing judgment on someone else? Not only that, even when we know the facts, it is hard not to squeeze them through our own prism of understanding. This one will unfortunately be politically loaded.

  8. Pops Says:

    In many instances, we must either pass judgment or be seen in retrospect to have behaved as idiots.

    The facts in this case do not seem to be in dispute. If it is the case that the facts have been reported correctly, I feel perfectly comfortable in judging that Dr. Riley has done wrong. If it turns out that the facts have not been reported correctly, or if important facts have been withheld, I will feel perfectly comfortable reversing that judgment if warranted.

    To lament that Dr. Riley has been judged in the court of public opinion isn’t particularly relevant or useful. The only purpose I can see it serving is an attempt to defuse the rightful outrage at the hideous things that are sometimes done by those who claim to have invented new “rights”.

  9. maryann Says:

    Anyone who is on the fence about this “doctor” hasn’t read the full complaint against her. I have and I had to stop midway for a break because it was so disturbing. It is not just about the late-term abortions, it is about total and complete disregard for her oath. This is someone who should be stripped of her medical license nationwide, no exceptions and I believe should spend some significant time in prison.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: