December 20, 2003 — A Connecticut doctor with a Bronx practice was
arrested for alleged sodomy yesterday after a patient claimed a
physical exam went beyond the routine when the physician performed
oral sex on him.
Dr. Brian Shaw, 41, of Wilton, was charged with sodomy and sexual
misconduct after a 49-year-old male patient said the doctor initiated
sexual contact after examining the man’s genitals during a Dec. 9
office visit at his East Tremont Avenue office.
The patient, who was not identified, went to Shaw with a rash on his
body. During the examination, he told police, Shaw handled and
examined the man’s scrotum. When the patient questioned if that was
routine, Shaw allegedly replied, “Yeah, I’m looking for fatty tissue.”
The patient admitted to police that he became aroused, whereupon Shaw
began performing oral sex on him. It was unclear when he reported the
incident.
Shaw, a 1993 Eastern Virginia Medical School graduate, was arrested
yesterday morning in the 45th Precinct and was due to be arraigned
last night on charges of committing a criminal sexual act in the third
degree and sexual misconduct.
Shaw was acquitted of a similar crime in January 2002, said
law-enforcement sources.
In that case, a 20-year-old man had claimed Shaw abused him during an
examination at a Bronx-Lebanon Hospital clinic in Highbridge.
Wait just a minute here, are we to believe the man?? Afterall, there
apparently wasn’t an unbiased witness to this event, was there? I mean, are
we to go on his word alone? Perhaps he’s a slut, known to make these kinds
of accusations in the past?? Was there any ‘physical’ evidence, cause if
there wasn’t then there is absolutely no proof.
Just because this guy says he was victimized, doesn’t make
it so! He probably just loves the attention he gets. Probably just trying
to get the attention of an ex-girlfriend. I’ll bet he even tried to kill
himself a couple times in the past few months. Maybe they should look into his
past medical history and splash his name and picture all over the internet.
How come they name the accused, but not the accuser?