A pretty major omission: in addition to testimony provided Brinkley’s happy patients, this hearing featured days of testimony from both very unhappy patients and a slew of medical experts who skewered, mocked and insulted Brinkley and his goat gland procedure. He really looked pretty bad at this hearing, but we’re leaving all that out.
Victims testify, medical experts debunk the procedure: "Brinkley Will Have His Inning" The Lincoln Star, 20 Jul 1930, Sun, Page 7.
On the testimony of Brinkley's "mauled and mutilated" former patients: Brock, 150-1.
On the testimony of medical experts: "The rest of the prosecution's case consisted of expert witnesses with withering opinions of Brinkley's work. Dr. Thomas G. Orr of the University of Kansas School of Medicine said the goat-gland graft Brinkley claimed to perform was 'absolutely impossible,' a professor of urology called the procedure 'so silly it is ridiculous/' and a third said would have no effect at all 'unless he introduced infection with it.' as he frequently managed to do. One testified as an eyewitness. Dr. R.R. Cave of Manhattan, KS, had journeyed to Brinkley's clinic the year before out of simple curiousity. Cave had already studied Brinkley's illustrated pamphlet outlining the four-phase compound operation– how he transplanted 'an artery and a nerve so as to increase the blood and nerve supply to certain organs . . . to strengthen them and rejuvenate them'; how he shrank enlarged prostates by cutting off the blood supply. but when Cave viewed the procedures for himself, he was surprised to find that 'no attempt was made to do any of these things,' that the doctor just put 'little pellets' in the patient's scrotum and sewed him up. 'this particular patient,' Dr. Cave added, 'complained bitterly of pain throughout the operation . . . Brinkley insisted he was mistaken.' Cross examining these experts, Brinkley's lawyers could do little but insult them and be insulted in return" (Brock, 151-2).