The advocacy group Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (
PEER) has taken up Monnett's cause, calling the apparently criminal
investigation a politically - motivated «witch hunt»
against a scientist whose research threatens the government's ability to drill in the Arctic.
However, one of the aspects of the
peer review process, per section 8 of that statute, is that the
investigations, proceedings and records of the
peer review panel, a committee of a hospital board, disciplinary board, government board or agent of one of these «shall not be subject to discovery or introduction into evidence in any civil or administrative action
against a provider of professional health services arising out of the matters which are the subject of evaluation and review...» In other words, if you file a medical malpractice lawsuit
against a Florida doctor, the records contained in these
peer review files — even if relevant — can't be compelled.