Doctor acquitted of sex assault sues police, accusers
A Beaver County endocrinologist claims in a federal lawsuit filed yesterday that he was the victim of a conspiracy between police and three of the eight women who accused him of fondling them during medical examinations and treatments.
A Beaver County jury last week cleared Dr. Robert Knapp, 57, of criminal charges. He claims in his lawsuit that Bridgewater police Chief Douglas Adams, county detective Lt. Kim Clements and the women conspired to bring the charges against him so the women could file civil lawsuits seeking monetary damages.
Adams said he hadn't seen the lawsuit and couldn't comment. District Attorney Anthony Berosh couldn't be reached.
Knapp, whose office is in Bridgewater, claims in the lawsuit that Clements, a high school friend of one of the women, encouraged her to file charges. The woman talked to a civil attorney after she complained about Knapp's actions in 2007 and started seeking out others willing to press charges, the lawsuit says. One of the other women is married to a friend of the first accuser's husband, according to the lawsuit.
The third woman contacted the same civil attorney as the first complainant, the lawsuit says. The Tribune-Review does not identify accusers in sexual assault cases.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.