Probably some of you already know that Steve Jobs he went through a liver transplant operation two years before he died, the procedure being necessary to keep him alive in the fight against cancer. What few of you probably knew is that the doctor who performed the procedure was questioned repeatedly in connection with the manner in which Steve Jobs he received the liver, but not only that. The doctor was repeatedly asked why Steve Jobs was placed at the top of the transplant list and how he justified this decision, considering that the former CEO of Apple lived for 2 years after the operation. As an answer, the doctor stated that Steve Jobs was extremely ill, so his placement at the top of the list of patients waiting for a transplant was logical, but for the second question he only talked about Apple products and nothing more.
Records show Riley, who worked as Apple's outside counsel, wrote personal checks in 2010 and 2011 totaling $23,585 to cover the property taxes. Riley also used his MasterCard to pay Memphis Light, Gas & Water $8,770 for utilities at the home through 14 payments between May 2010 and May 2011 — again as Dr. Eason lived there before buying the house. Eason put the utilities in his name after he purchased the home on May 5, 2011, records show. Eason said he lived in the home only part-time during the first of those two years as he tried to reconcile with his wife.
If you wonder why these questions are asked, well they are based on the fact that a lawyer engaged in various Apple lawsuits paid the utility bills, and not only, of a house where the doctor moved after performing Steve Jobs' surgery . The house would have been owned by a subsidiary company of Apple, and the doctor lived there for 2 years, during which time Apple paid him bills of over $30.000. Although the doctor would buy the house 2 years later and pay his own bills, some wonder why Apple, through a lawyer, would have taken care of Steve Jobs' doctor for 2 years if the procedure done by he was totally legal.
From a legal point of view, a doctor can receive absolutely nothing from his patients, but here we are talking about defrauding the organ donation system and probably many others. Of course, there are small chances that any authority will get involved in the case, but many questions will remain that probably have no point.
