Frank Meza 2:53:10 at LA Marathon (70 years old) unofficial time (just finished)

HS stepped up? wrote:

Ethical? wrote:

That’s not a question of ethics.

Ok, so it's not a question of ethics. Then it must not be unethical.

If suggesting to one person that they google this person is not unethical, then making the same suggestion to many people must also not be unethical.

It is neither ethical nor unethical.

I think the question is do you have an obligation to that person, as your friend, to tell him what you know about Frank Meza? I would say yes. Your friend might be disappointed if you had information about the doctor that you did not share.

Then are you further asking if you also have an obligation to tell many people who are considering using Dr Meza’s services that they should google him?

The answer is no. You have no obligations to strangers. Strangers are more likely to tell you to mind your own business because they don’t know you. They have no reason to trust you, and they don’t know what your motive is.

The Mooch wrote:

he tries, whenever possible, to avoid breaking and stopping,

Yeah well, with Frank the problem is he keeps stopping.

Frank does seem to have a hard time putting the brakes on this scam, so in that sense it’s an appropriate story.

Perspective wrote:

Investigatorz wrote:

I think we need to investigate those two.

The other two didn't claim age group world records or use their running accomplishments to promote themselves or a business. Unless they are Frank accomplices, let it be.

Yeah but, in that event pictured they did (along with Bland) scam a children's charity event, which to my feeble little mind is ten times worse.

Roderick old son this is the clearest most sensible post I think I've seen from you and it's even worth quoting in full.

Post of 5/14/2019 4:49PM:

Roderick Powell wrote:

It made sense all along that it was a family thing. Kind of sweet, really.

:)

Ethical? wrote:

HS stepped up? wrote:

Here's an ethical question .... If you lived in the LA area and your friend said "I'm going to see the doctor tomorrow for a consult. His name is Frank Meza."

Would you suggest to the friend to google "Frank Meza" before the consult?

That’s not a question of ethics.

-----------------

It's DEFINITELY a question of ethics:

Ethics are the moral principles which shape/determine your behavior, choices and actions.

Q: "Should you share negative information with a friend about a someone accused of wrongdoing in a field unrelated to your friend's inquiry?"

Your answer depends on how you characterize "friendship," "privacy," "gossip," and "responsibility," how much weight you put on matters of character, how WRONG the "wrongdoing" was in your estimation, how much evidence you need, &c. &c. &c.

And if it were me, and my "friend" was anything more than a passing acquaintance... Yeah, I'd recommend she google "Frank Meza."

Agree wrote:

Being awkward doesn’t invalidate anything. It’s just exactly how I imagine a lot of the posters here.

I am awkward around people like you seem to be, politeness means that I keep up the pretence that I don't think you are a moron but I am not very at ease doing so.

This guy still seems to be doing okay, so many years later and having his story published in the New Yorker, Runner's World, The Guardian, and NPR.

http://drkiplitton.com/

Even his smile is phony, ha ha!

To each his own I guess.

I find his behavior creepy and wouldn’t go near him. But he might be like the eccentric uncle who is an awesome guy outside of a few oddities.

If it were me, I would recommend that my friend pull the court records from Estate of Garcia v. Kaiser Foundation Hospitals, L.A. Superior Court no. BC481579, in particular Exhibit D to the defendant's Notice of Petition and Petition to Confirm Arbitration Award filed on June 6, 2013.

It's not uncommon that even competent California State's surgeons have to fight patient litigation.

If it were me, I would recommend that my friend pull the court records from Estate of Garcia v. Kaiser Foundation Hospitals, L.A. Superior Court no. BC481579, in particular Exhibit D to the defendant's Notice of Petition and Petition to Confirm Arbitration Award filed on June 6, 2013.

Care to save us the $14 to download the document and just quote it here?

Toeachhisown wrote:

To each his own I guess.

I find his behavior creepy and wouldn’t go near him.

Agree, I'm thousands of miles away but, knowing what I know now about his long term calculated cheating, when I watch and listen to him on those videos I squirm and feel embarrassed for him, it's hard to watch.

Doubler, if you read this I have just 1 question. "Banditing" races is a far bigger financial loss to races than course cutting. (course cutters actually pay to "run" the race -- while using little or no race provided "fueling") The 3 so-called "banditos", (Francisco Meza, Sara Tartof and Phillip Bland) clearly ran the race...or at least most of it, and are not listed in the race "results"....would it not be part of what matters re Pasadena 2019....to find out from the race reps if they were bandits. I think the answer is highly relevant to any investigation of Frank Meza's races.

MI Email: results@marathoninvestigation.com

Ends justifies the means? wrote:

Murphy has admitted on MI of being deceptive in order to get information whenever he thinks it’s ok.

What are you talking about?

Trigurureview wrote:

bored troller wrote:

I agree that one or both are the "guru." I believe Doubler/Derrick is above that.

I’ll concede that.

Leaving these types of reviews hurts me. It’s fuel for those that say that I’m promoting this behavior and that MI encourages shaming. I do what I can to keep posts referencing employers, personal pages etc..off of my social media pages.