Dr. Barry Eppley review: Poor Plastic Surgeon 53

The post has been temporarily removed.

Misconstrued information about Dr Barry Eppley.
None of these people personally knew lucille lacovelli or if she was even struggling with mental illness prior to cosmetic surgery. In which case, was a disaster waiting to happen. This woman was clearly not well she needed help.
Blaming Dr Eppley for her fate is absolutely absurd. He did NOT disfigure her. Everyone should know the limits of cosmetic surgery that it will not fix the inside. if anyone let her down it was mental health services.

I find these comments interesting about Dr. Eppley. I had multiple breast surgeries with another surgeon and went to him to fix another surgeons work. So I can be very hard on a surgeon's cosmetic result I think he did an excellent job on downsizing overly large breast implants and revising the pocket and tightening my breast fold. I have seen people bring up the "Eppley v Iacovelli". This appears to be a very sad case as the woman committed suicide but I get the feeling this lady had issues not neccesarily caused by Dr. Eppley. His only mistake I think was not really evaluating if this lady had a mental problem but that is very hard for plastic surgeons to identify if someone has underlying issues that make them not a good candidate. I am thinking that this woman spent so much time tearing him down why didn't she seek help from another surgeon to possibly fix what she thought was wrong. Two things, she didn't have the money or no one would take her revision because they did not see her complaint as valid or thought she was unstable. I am sure if you google any surgeon out there, you can find some kind of negative review you cant make everyone happy. I can tell you that he works inside the IU Hospital in Carmel Indiana. If this surgeon had a bad reputation the IU Hospital would not let him take up shop inside their facility.

Wow evie142546 that's such a black-hearted comment

I had a surgery done by Eppley several years ago. It was supposed to be the last of my 24 surgeries. My doctor retired and recommended me to him. Eppley messed up everything that had been fixed in the previous surgeries. I had to have a surgery to remove an implant that got infected, a surgery to remove wisdom teeth that he claimed he removed, he paralyzed my face, and lots more. I am just now getting ready to have the surgery to fix his errors. It took me over 6 years to feel confident enough to go through another surgery. Anyways, we knew something was wrong right away, but he blew it off and told me to take more medication, not knowing, I did so. When I went for my follow up, I was informed that he had left the practice. And by the time I got everything fixed, I was told I had waited to long to file against him. I guess you only have two years. What I don't understand is, if you're still having complications 6 years later, why can't you file a lawsuit? Anyways, I hope this gets out. No one deserves to go through this.

This is the most horrible plastic surgeon I've ever heard in my entire life. I have seen how he does his facelift on youtube, opening up the whole neck.., , , leaving the patient a huge scar, , Is that how to do a facelift to a patient.? while watching that video, I just felt that he was just on his anatomy class lab doing his own experiment to a cadaver. He should be in jail for the rest of his life~~~!

You guys are idiots. She is the ONLY patient complaining about him! Her condition was due to a panic disorder that she developed after MULTIPLE plastic surgeries, not from having one freaking facelift. Also, do you really think a doctor would purposely do this to someone and risk losing their license and losing money? I mean, really? People are so blind and quick to judge it's sad... look at both sides of the story and educate yourself before commenting on things.

The doctor had every right to sue this woman. She signed a consent form agreeing that there could be any number of risks, including permanent or fatal damage, and that the surgeon and hospital are NOT to be held liable! Because she broke the contract, he lost business - he had every right to sue her. Even if what you guys are saying is true and he didn't explain the risks and procedures before she signed the forms, it's her own fault. She should have asked, or better yet, read the fine print. It takes months for a plastic surgery to go through BECAUSE of all of the paperwork required beforehand. Plenty of time to do your own research and decide whether or not the risks are worth it. She took that risk. It's unfortunate that she developed such a strong panic disorder afterwards, but again, that is NOT the surgeon's fault.

I HAVE AN PROBLEM THIS LAW FIRM THAT IS FROM NEW YORK THIS GUY NAME DAVID JOHNSON KEEP CALLING ME ON MY CELL PHONE AND ON MY JOB SAYING THAT I DID AN PAYDAY LOAN CALLED CASH ADVANCE PAYDAY LOANS THEY SAYING THAT I GOT AN PAYDAYLOAN FROM THEM AND I DID NOT GET AN PAYDAY LOAN THEY SAYING THAT I RECIVED MONEY OF $1, 500 AND THAT I WILL HAVE TO PAY $15, 000 BACK WITH COURT COST AND EVERYTHING ELSE SO WHAT DO I NEED TO DO THE NUMBER OF THIS LAW FIRM AND IT DIRCTLY GOES TO DAVID JOHNSON [protected] THE PHONE CALLS NEVER STOP IT STARTS ABOUT 7:00AM AND GOES TO 12:00MIDNIGHT I AM SO TIRED OF THEM CALLING ME AND THREATING ME WITH THIS I DID NOT RECIEVED ANY FUNDS AND DID NOT APPLY OR AN LOAN

i am one of Dr appele's victims too and do not recommend anybody going to him.
Before going to him i knew about this lady's story but i ve said to myself it's just one unhappy patient but after being operated on by Dr appeley i am not the same anymore and in consultstion he seems like the best doctor in the world .
he's in for the money and i don t think he cares too much about the patient.
People don t write negative things about other Doctors like they are about Dr appley so think abouy it.
search the internet and see what i am talking about.
meanwhile i am looking for another doctor to fix what Dr appley couldn t or did not do, i don t wanna be specific about what procedure i ve done with him but he complety made things worse for me.
this is a honest message, i do not know Dr appley so there s no reason for me to talk negative about him i am just warning everybody to be carefull with him just like other patient who had bad experience with( lot of them)

this is stupid. You people forget the plastic surgery is a choice. No one told this lucille woman to get a facelift. She chose to, knowing all the risks of plastic surgery. despite this one bad case dr eppley does alot of good work, every doctor makes a mistake sometime, no one is perfect. No plastic surgeon has perfect cases every time. and crying like a little a baby and trying to smear this guys name around isnt gonna solve anything.

If anybody's interested, I did a little digging, and here's the problem: She'd done this before. See link: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/09/24/health/main523129.shtml. In any case, apparently she recently died - I don't know what from. I'm sorry for anyone in pain, but it does kinda make you wonder about what she said about Dr. E.

Evie, you're the one who is out of your mind for thinking you could judge her. You wouldn't have lasted a minute if you suffered from what she did, and she battled through 9 years of tough days and nights in constant torture.

Here is a recent piece done by Fox News 11 in LA:

http://www.myfoxla.com/dpp/news/investigative/truth-behind-plastic-surgery-20110223

Lucille's true story will not be squelched by people who seek to misrepresent her pain and suffering as psychosis. It was nothing of the sort. I knew her and saw what she went through. You obviously didn't, and your comment just proves how ignorant you really are of the facts of her case.

nO to me lucilles pictures prove that shes out of her mind. what she needs to do is stay at a mental health facility before she mutilates her self any more!she clearly suffers some kind of mental health problems.

Im suprised that there is no body that sees thru her but me?

R.I.P Lucille.Surely the good Lord will forgive you for the lies you made about all the people u took stabs at.Hope that you are in a better place.

umm..you guys need to just leave dr.eppley alone! because he aint did nothing to you!he fixed alot of people noses recunstructed many breasts after cancer he helped children with a cleft lip for free! he is a kind hearted surgeon he is very professional and knows alot about his expertice. yes i have met him and hes great! so get a life quit tryin to ruin this man's career cuz it wont happen. if what lucina or w/e was sayin was true and she not crazy then he would of lost his job! but hello that woman is CRAZY!

Lucille has died. She died on August 2. 2010

Lucille Iacovelli is dead. She died on Monday, Aug 2, 2010.

You can view her obituary here:
http://www.legacy.com/obituaries/metrowestdailynews/obituary.aspx?page=lifestory&pid=144533719

Those who loved her, believed in her, please sign the guestbook. It will remain online forever.

Glad to find this site still up and running. I tried to access this thread yesterday and got one of those pages saying the site didn't exist.

This is the best consumer site on the Internet. Thank goodness it's still up.

I have an appeal working its way through the 7th circuit. It's taking a while, so I hope they are giving my application for a writ of mandamus a thorough read. I know it has all the right ingredients to help overturn this injustice. For now you can go to www.judgesarahevansbarkersucks.com to learn more.

Dr Barry Eppley claimed in his lawsuit that Lucille "maliciously and without reason threaten to destroy" him with a fantastic "public suicide", forcing her to be locked up "mostly to her own benefit and also that of Dr. Eppley, who is a highly professional", etc.. The quotes are taken directly from the court documents.

Highly professional? I think not. The real dangerous psychotic in this ugly scenario is Dr. Eppley. He is a sociopath liar and sexual predator who should not be allowed to examine female patients without a chaperon in the room. Why did he lose his position at University Hospital? Dr. Eppley stoops to any lowly level to silence the truth. He claimed Lucille's website caused him to lose patients and income, yet forked over plenty in attorneys' fees in his attempt to have Lucille incarcerated in a psychiatric hospital. Dr. Eppley is under the impression that his MD and healthy bank account allow him to persecute and inflict irreparable harm on Lucille because she is poor. Dr. Eppley is worried prospective patients will think poorly of him after reading her website. He failed to see that they would have a higher opinion of him had he addressed her concerns with honesty and a sincere attempt to help find another surgeon to help her.

If you read everything Lucille wrote about her surgery with Eppley, it's apparent that she suffered serious problems with breathing, swallowing and jaw closure, ear pain and pressure, IMMEDIATELY after the surgery. This shows in her photos, videos and medical records. These are all problems he denied and said were "impossible".

If you read the letters she sent Eppley before and after her surgery, it's clear that he ignored her main concerns, especially her adamant belief that a transection of the platysma muscle had to be done. She even sent him diagrams of various ways to do this and mentions reviewing these articles with him in person when she met him a few months before her surgery. Yet this is the very thing he did NOT do in her operation which common sense and an analytical eye can easily deduce was the main cause of the injury she suffered.

After the surgery, she asked him to provide the details of my surgery, which he refused to supply. What was difficult about providing Lucille with a diagram showing where he excised tissue, or the exact vectors of tension and placement of the excessively excised and pulled tissue? This is routine for plastic surgeons. As a former professor of plastic surgery, he has undoubtedly drawn numerous such diagrams for teaching purposes. Yet he refused to give her this basic information. Why? Perhaps he was not even in the OR for her entire operation and allowed the resident to complete the job.

If it's any consolation to her, Lucille should know that there are people who see right through Dr. Eppley's subterfuge. Let's hope his "prospective patients" are wise enough to see as well.

I wouldn't let this low life touch me even with a 10 foot pole. If any doctors, mutilates my face, I will get even with them by shooting them in the face.

I've never had any kind of elective surgery. But, I have read most all of the comments about people havng botched plastic surgeries. It's disturbing to see how often the doctor who screws up won't face up to it. It's like they are suddenly in denial, and refuse to repair the patient as if it was in their head, or "they" have the problem and it's not "Dr Frakenstein's" fault.

It just makes me realize I would never go to that kind of doctor for anything elective. It seems there are too many of them out there who are overly greedy, underskilled and deficit in moral character. I hope this disgusting Eppley guy is ruined He doesn't deserve to practice medicine. He is basically a criminal and very dangerous.. I also think everyone should post everywhere their results of their elective surgeries with the doctors names. Maybe then, these so called plastic surgeons who are always advertising, will think twice before taking on a case they know they probably are not up to handling. It might keep some of them a bit more honest. They need to be kept in line and we need to have a laymens board overseeing these guys on a regular basis. It's sthe only way to protect their patients. I think it's a stupid practice to have patients sign their rights away so doctors can mess up. I can't believe w e go for it.

I don't understand how a judge can prohibit outside observers from discussing this case. Yes, I can see how the judge can prohibit Iacovelli or Bergeron or those in direct contact with them being asked to proxy postings. But how can a judge prohibit people from commenting on an article published in a news paper and also the very court documents themselves (on a website).

The journalist is within his/her rights to write an article about Eppley suing Lucille It's public record Eppley sued Iacovelli. I fail to see why it's somehow 'illegal' for Bergeron to upload the actual legal documents of the court case on a legal document storage site. Seems to me it would have to be illegal for a journalist to write a story that Eppley was suing her and also illegal to show the actual court documents for Barker to prohibit outside observers from commenting.

It looks to me that the judge is pulling a fast one here by wanting to classify anyone reading a published article or the court documents as 'in concert' with Lucille when a review of those documents alone would call the judges judgement into question. Looks like the judge would like to define even outside parties as being in "contempt of court" for criticizing this judge and Eppley's lawyers. Outside on lookers are not parties to this case. How can Lucille or outside parties be in "contempt of court" if outside parties read those court documents and also the article about Eppley suing her and conclude it's a crooked case.

Yes, I would call into question if Judge Barker did due diligence to make sure it was a FACT that Iacovelli lodged a suicide threat before she put through a case contingent on it being fact.

Yes, it does look like Eppley, his lawyers and Judge Barker don't want that possible error being called into question.

Something is going on that definitely weird here. For one, Lucille's comments (or at least comments that looked like they were from her) have been deleted from another string.

The other thing is this whole court case was sparked by Eppley getting an entry in one of his websites where someone signed in as "lucillebella" (?) purporting to be Lucille Iacovelli leaving a suicide message. With that, Eppley called the police and had her locked up. He then got an injunction and proceeded with the litigation process. The initial court complaint from Eppley is strongly hinged on Lucille leaving him a suicide threat and from there, he makes the case that any publicized suicide on her part would ruin his career and the public interest would be in favor or her not committing suicide and he's just wanting to stop her from doing something she does not have right to do anyway (suicide being illegal) and then furthering it by doing it publicly as means to destroy his career.

OK, sure. A suicide threat, (ostensibly from Lucille Iacovelli) is going to be a shoe in for starting the court process with a restraining order; retraining order initially being one aimed at forbidding her from furthering any suicide plans that could be associated with her desire to do that and have it associated with Eppley. Naturally, the court is going to be in favor of a restraining order aimed at preempting a suicide and public one at that and especially one where the suicide threat is one that shows career destruction as motivation.

However, as the court case grew, they then forbid her from discussing the court case and any of the details relating to how this suicide entry got into Eppley's website and told her they would consider it contempt of court if she openly griped about the injustice she felt was going on with this court case and to remove all sites in her control devoted to discussing this court case.

One thing she was griping about is already out there for public viewing; her contention that she did not write the suicide letter on Eppley's website and someone else wrote it to set her up (his partner). She claims that. This claim can be found in a published article: http://cms.ibj.com/ASPXPages/6iframes/FrontEndArticlesDetailPage.aspx?ArticleID=35344&NoFrame=1
and also on her own affidavit to the court where she says the entry was lodged on a website and did not actually come from her own e-mail address and that anybody could have filled in anybody else's name and e-mail address when making the entry and he had no proof this entry came from her e-mail address.
Her affidavit states she did not make this suicide entry which is found in the many court documents published on doc stoc. She denies making this entry herself.

As to her claim that the suicide letter was not one she made herself (and that's in her affidavit to the court and also in the newspaper article) and also the whole court case proceeds on that premise which she says is a false one, take a look here:
http://www.makemeheal.com/directory/view.php?userentry_id=2239

On that website, someone signs in as "lucillebella". They use this name in year 2007. They use this name to counter complaints made by Lucille Iacovelli on there in year 2006. In year 2009 (month January), Iacovelli writes (on above string): "A word about the positive review by "lucillebella". This was posted by Dr. Eppley's partner, Andrea Bradley-Stutz. She actually used my own email address to register this complaint. If that isn't underhanded, what is? "

The screen name used to lodge a suicide threat on Eppley's website was very close to one of "lucillebella" and Iacovelli, in her affidavit to the court says she never used that name and did not lodge this suicide threat herself. She says Eppley's partner lodged it.

From the entry above, she did spot someone using a screen name very similar (if not the same?) to the one used to lodge the suicide threat and she called attention to that in Jan 2009 before this court case. That would tend to support Iacovelli's statement that she, herself did not lodge that suicide threat. Yet the case initiates with the claim that she lodged it. If not for that suicide threat being lodged, the first injunction probably would not have been made as it was stated; something needed to be done to preempt Iacovelli's planned suicide.

It's hard not to notice the coincidence that she is forbidden to discuss this court case, (in which she is already on record for stating she did not lodge that suicide threat but would most likely want to point that out again) along with the fact that someone else already had used a name similar to that used in the suicide threat.

From reading over the court documents concerning the reasons for the initial injunction (precipitated by "her" suicide threat), in light of the entries found in: http://www.makemeheal.com/directory/view.php?userentry_id=2239, it does appear that Eppley lodged this injunction in the absence of proving that the suicide threat he found on his website actually came from Iacovelli. There does seem to be some circumstantial evidence here that someone associated with him, or "in concert" with Eppley used a similar screen name to the one in the suicide threat to tackle Iacovelli's complaints about him.

This whole court case is predicated and brought forth due to Iacovelli's "suicide threat". It does seem that something is 'wrong' or 'off' with that or 'fishy' when she's contending she did not make the suicide threat and Eppley never proved she did.

I would think that proof that she made this threat should have been contingent on lodging this injunction given the injunction seemed to be contingent on taking his word at face value that she made that threat. Yet does he really have "proof" Iacovelli made this threat?

It does not look that way. On the contrary. It looks like someone "in concert" with him, who used a similar screen name prior may have made the suicide threat as means to initiate court case.

So, the main question here would be: "If this court case was initiated contingent on a suicide threat by Iacovelli being "true" (lodged by her), then why wasn't Eppley required to prove the threat came from Lucille?

Could it be that one of the main reasons they don't want her to discuss the court case is because the whole thing could be predicated on a suicide threat she did not make herself?

Seems to me that if Judge Sarah Evans Barker did proceed with this case without establishing, if in FACT the suicide threat came from Iacovelli and without ruling out those in concert with Eppley lodging it in her stead, she would have every incentive not only to forbid Iacovelli from further elaborating on that point in the public venue but would also have incentive to attempt to preclude others who could do so as "in concert" with Iacovelli.

Someone does not need to be "in concert" with Iacovelli to notice this and to comment on it. It's very noticeable when the court documents are read that the case is predicated on a suicide entry from Iacovelli, yet Iacovelli's affidavit states she did not lodge the threat. It's even more noticeable when there is some prior documentation that another party, other than Iacovelli is on record for using a similar name to the one used in this suicide threat.

I don't think it's within Barker's power to preclude others who do read those court documents to refrain from discussing this major flaw. The fact that her wording of "in concert" with Lucille would conveniently define anybody questioning this possible error in judgement as "in concert" with Lucille is suspect in itself as a possible attempt on her part to cover up an error of judgement on her part. Error of judgement being failure on her part to establish as FACT whether or not Iacovelli lodged the suicide threat before she proceeded with a case contingent on that being fact.

So did Judge Baker establish as fact if Iacovelli lodged that suicide threat or did she not before granting the injunction contingent on it being fact that Iacovelli actually lodged it? If she didn't, it does call into question why the case is worded as defining anyone who could openly question a possible error in her judgement as "in concert" with Lucille.

I've just been reading (and commenting on) more of the legal documents about Eppley's lawsuit against Lucille on docstoc.com . He's worse than I thought!

Dr. Barry Eppley and his lawyers are guilty of full blown harassment to this lady! He even forced her to have her computer examined! But here's the thing: Remember that "suicide message" he claims she sent him that he used to have her sent to the hospital for suicide evaluation? The examination of her computer never showed that she sent it!

If this doesn't prove that he wrote it himself specifically for the purpose of having her put away while he initiated his lawsuit, I don't know what does.

Eppley is guilty as sin, not only of causing Lucille horrible damage, but forging a suicide threat and abuse of his authority as a doctor to get the police to take her from her home. This guy is a real low life character.

The judge is just as bad. If she's not crooked, why would she sign an order prohibiting anyone from writing about this lawsuit? The original article in the Indianapolis Business Journal isn't on that website any more, but it is still available online:

http://www.accessmylibrary.com/article-1G1-198714047/doc-sues-web-savvy.html

Have you people read the legal crap this Eppley used to attack Lucille Iacovelli?
The documents are on docstoc.com. If you search the site for "Eppley v Iacovelli" you'll find them. They are worth reading because they reveal just how much of a sleazy liar Eppley is.

It stands to reason that any doctor who would carry a lawsuit to the ridiculous extreme he has against one lady with a website up for years, must have plenty to hide! The legal papers are incredible! Wonder how much he spent on lawyers just to silence one person?

After reading most of the stuff on both sides it's clear that Eppley, his lawyers and even the judge have gone way overboard in trying to exterminate this lady's credible story. Eppley would never try to have photos and medical records from other doctors taken off the internet if they weren't proof that her story is true. But that's what he did! He wants all her pictures taken off the Internet, even those before he operated on her!
He may as well advertise the fact that he's a liar and trying to exploit people. Any honest doctor would have the before and after pictures speak for themselves. Barry Eppley is AFRAID of that. He doesn't want Lucille's pictures online because they prove what he did is responsible for the damage she has.

NO surgeon worth consideration would EVER do what he's doing. He needs a new PR person!

We should all copy the posts on this page just in case! These postings ought to be preserved somehow.

Her website is still up, too:

http://losingface.net

You can still watch Lucille's videos here:

http://vodpod.com/facelifthell

You can still read most of the stuff they took offline here:

http://www.docstoc.com/profile/Boxer47

(I don't know how to make links active, so you will have to copy & paste the URL's)

Even in searches for Eppley, if you click on the links and the page is gone, you can click where it says "Cached" or "Cached page" and the page will appear.

I think people copied lots of this stuff and put it online themselves when they what Eppley was doing.

Dr. Barry Eppley is a big disgrace for the medical profession. Maybe he is better at being a dentist cuz teeth and plastic surgeries are completely different. Botched work done inside the mouth is not very noticeable, whereas botched plastic surgeries on the face is too obvious to hide. Whenever I see Dr. Barry Eppley'ss ugly face, I feel like vomiting. Yes, he botched my surgery too. The law is not on the victims' side. When will victims get to pick a jury of their peers which mean the public. The general public have eyes and botched surgeries are very obvious to see and why do we victims need to hire an expert witness in order to sue those ###?

I agreed with Lucille a zillion times. She took the words out of my mouth. I was suckered by Dr. Richard A. Weiss. If I was even given the information that there is a chance of uneven eyelid crease from eyelids surgery, I won't have had it done in the first place. Back in 1990's brochures you get from doctors' office printed that eyelid surgery is safe and leaves a very thin hairline scar hidden in the eyelild creases. No where did it printed that there is chance of unevenness, ugly scars, dry eye issues from removing too much skin. None of the doctors I went to see ever even told me verbally or in written form that there is cons to eyelid surgeries. They just talk about the pros! The first surgery left me with uneven inner eyelid creases (the part near the nose bridge), but I didn't have loads of scars, indentations, puncture marks, need marks, surgical scars in all different directions on my face.

I am a victim of Dr. Richard Alan Weiss out in Newport Beach, Ca. I never consented to such a surgery. He used my face to do experimental work without my consent. I went for eyelid surgery and ended up with scars on my forehead and eyebrows too. I have to live with pucker forehead, pucker eyebrows, and pucker eyes of two different size and shape. I also have a droopy right eyebrow that is created by dr. Richard A. Weiss. My whole eyelids is super pucker. The delay for putting up my youtube video is I need to find some photos. It is most likely at my parents house and I have not the time to go back there yet. Until I can, then my youtube video is on hold.
I would like Lucille to see this!

It is not that easy to sue a doctor. You need a expert witeness which is usally a medical doctor in the same profession as the person you are suing. Back in 1992, I didn't know what I can do with what happen to my face. I only found out recently from an honest plastic surgeon that what Dr. Richard Alan Weiss of newport beach, CA did to my face was considered battery. Had I known that, I could have gone to the police and file a report and he woudl be arrested. I paid for eyelids surgeryand he touched my eyebrows & part of my forehead. I didn't know that was a crime. In 1992, there was no internet for the general public to used. Even in the late 90's there wasn't as much as nowdays. Nowdays, there is online lawyers that can answer questions. I was 27 and I didn't have a whole lot of money either. I have a lot of surgical scars all over the place and it is very noticeable too! I am not an unreasonable person, but if you see how much scars there is, then you will wonder if a monster had scratched me up all over the top part of my face and stitched me back up super tight causing my eyes, brow, to the side of my eyes, and my forehead to be pucker looking (the gathering look). My eyelids is filled with so many wrinkles. He made many cuts on my eyelids and stitched me up tight and he stitched my eyelid creases super tight, so both of my eyes make me look like I am in my 70's. I am of east asain descent. I don't know of anyone even into their 60's have eyes so wrinkle like mine.

Oh, another thing about Lucille, not only did Dr. Barry Eppley mutilated her face, but caused her great suffering. She must have so much medical bills due to the botched work of this ###.

I should not titled it botched eyelid surgery. I should title it "my face was mutilated by Dr. W. ".

I know that doctors can get away with a lot once you sign consent to surgery. I am a victim of a super botched eyelid surgery plus Dr. Richard Alan Weiss out in Newport Beach did work on my face without my consent. He used my face as some kind of experiment . I am left with scars all over part of my forehead, to the sides of each of my eyes, I have cuts, indentions, puncture marks, zig zag stitch markings all over my eyelids, eyelid creases, inside my eyebrow, outside of my eyebrow. This happen in early spring of 1992 when I went to him for eyelid revision. My inner eye eye creases were not even, but I was happy everywhere else. Dr. weiss did not listen to a single world I told him at consultation time and most likely did not write anything down. I am left with so much horrible scars. Dr. Richard Alan Weiss is one of the most evil person I ever encountered in my entire life. What make him think I wanted scars, indentations, pucture marks all over the top part of my face. I have super pucker eyelids, pucker eyebrow and pucker forhead. I have horitzonal and veritical scars all over the place. One plastic surgeon really think that he did it on purpose! That shocked me. I asked him for eyelid revision work which he didn't do. I still have the same uneven inner creases on my eyes. Dr. Weiss gave me two different size of eyes and different shape, a droopy right eyebrow in his attempt during a post surgery followup to fix a deep incision he made on my right eyelid. That botched too! Please people don't be so trusting of any doctors. I read most doctors can do plastic surgeries without being certified. I pay for eyelid sugery and this evil doctor touched my eyebrows and forehead. I cannot get the mess fix either. I am not the type that is not realistic, but if you see the result you will say "what the hell was he trying to do to your face".
Someone thinks maybe he was on drugs the day he did my surgery. Maybe that is it. Cuz I cannot think of why he would think I want so much scars all over my face. Only recently I found out that what he did to me was considered battery. I paid for eyelid surgery and he had no business working on my forehead, eyebrows or anyhwere else. I am so unlucky too cuz there was no internet in 1992 to look information up. Even in the late 1990's, internet was not flooded with as much information as nowadays. I now how this woman feel with what dr. Eppley done to her. We should thank her for coming out with this nightmare. I will soon come out with my story on youtube . Lucille didn't sue cuz it is hard to sue. Why? You need an expert witenss which is usually a doctor. No doctor is going to be doing it for free. In order for a doctor willing to tell the truth of a botched surgery, he will most likely want millions of dollars to be your expert witness. The case will never net that kind of money and most like Lucille don't have millions of dollars to throw away. Only rich and/or famous people go after their plastic surgeon/dcotor for the principle. The rest of us have to live with our mutilated face of a botched sugery. I was only 27 when Dr. Richard Weiss put all these horrible scars onto my face. I have have aged eyes now. People please stay tune and look for my youtube video titled Dr. W. Botched eyelid surgery.

This doctor is clearly an ###. He mutilated his patient's face. I saw her videos and it show clearly that he mutilated her face. She wasn't even sagging at much better. After he touch her, she had all kinds of problem I can clearly see in her pictures and videos That ### Dr. Barry Eppley go to hell.

I think it's terrible that this Dr, Eppley sued this lady to shut her up. Another review about him on Complaints Board said he was highly recommended to the patient by some referral service. By what that person said, the service lied. The only way you get real honest information is through boards like this where real people can say what happened to them personally. Nobody can make up details like this lady who was seriously injured by this Eppley surgeon. Now he hires lawyers to shut her up to hide what a quack he is.

I saw a video of what he did to this lady on youtube. What the heck was he doing? He should not practice anymore plastic surgeries every again. She has the right to air the truth. I love the internet and I love Complaints board. My mother is interested in getting some plastic surgery for a youthful look. She wanted an eyelid proceudure, but I told her she better be very careful.

Let's just hope the 7th Circuit Appeals Court Will Overturn the biased judge and prevent Dr. Eppley's attorneys from wiping out all her criticism for good.

This is horrible. I saw this lady on youtube. There is overwhelming evidence that he ruined this lady's appearance. She looked way better than before plastics surgeries. This sucks. We need to change the laws in regard to plastic surgeries . Too many doctors are getting away and many do not tell their patients the truth before signing the consent form. By signing the consent form, this protects the doctor and gives him the full authority to mutiated people. This is wrong!