The former head of the Suspected Child Abuse and Neglect (SCAN) team at the Hospital For Sick Children has told the Goudge Inquiry that he does not believe it was appropriate for Dr. Marcellina Mian, a physician with no training in pathology, to have co-authored a report with Dr. Charles Smith specifying a cause of death in the Mullins-Johnson case;
The controversial report was the subject of a previous posting published under the heading, "Mullins-Johnson: Sick Kids Pediatrician tells Court she "deferred" to Charles Smith," which read as follows:
Dr. Marcellina Mian, a pediatrician at the Hospital for Sick Children in Toronto has defended the opinion she co-signed with Dr. Charles Smith which has been discredited by subsequent events in the William Mullins-Johnson case.
In 1993, Mian was a pediatrician and Director of the Suspected Child Abuse and Neglect (SCAN) Program at the Hospital For Sick Children in Toronto - and Smith was Director of Autopsy Pathology and Director of the Ontario Pediatric Forensic Pathology Unit which is located at the hospital.
The joint report, dated August 6, 1993, ends with Dr. Mian's signature above Dr. Smith's, and was an exhibit at the trial which resulted in Mullins-Johnson's conviction for first-degree murder.
The co-authors say in their "Conclusion" that, "This child's (Valin's) photographs show findings which if confirmed by the post-mortem examination, indicate death by asphyxiation, trauma to the head and injury to the perineum and anus. In the absence of a reasonable explanation by history, they indicate non-accidental trauma, including sexual abuse."
The photographs had been taken during an autopsy conducted on June 27, 1993.
Dr. Michael Pollanen, Ontario's Chief Pathologist, told the Ontario Court of Appeal on Monday September 15, that subsequent testing has shown that 4-year-old Valin was neither sexually assaulted or murdered but died a natural death.
Pollanen explained that the experts had wrongly interpreted pathological changes which occurred in Valin's body after her death.
Dr. Mian was recently cross-examined by Toronto lawyer Andrew Czernik, at the aggravated assault trial of Gregory Johnson.
The transcript reads in part:
q. Well sometimes do you ever find you might give an explanation for what you think may have happened and it turns out to be wrong?
A. Occasionally, yes. Sure.
Q. I say this with a great deal of delicacy. The Mullins-Johnson case, William Mullins-Johnson, you are familiar with that one?
A: You will have to refresh my memory;
Q. It's a long ago case. However it's quite famous because it involves Dr. Charles Smith.
A: Mm, hmm.
Q: Where William Mullins-Johnson was convicted of murder back in I think 1994 because it was alleged that he had sodomized his four year old niece and then murdered her. And it was the sodomy of the four year old niece which elevated it from second degree murder to first degree murder. Does that ring a bell?
A: Yes. I recall it, yes.
Q: And it has been the subject of a great deal of press, hasn't it?
A: I believe so, yes.
Q. And in fact the prevailing view, and you stop me if I am wrong on this, the prevailing view is that there was no sodomy, no murder, and that this man is going to be exonerated; Is that correct?
A: That's my understanding, yes.
Q: But you yourself opined in 1993 that this child had been sodomized, didn't you?
A: No. I believe I opined, if I am recalling the case, that what i saw was of concern but I deferred to the pathologist (Dr. Smith) in terms of any specific findings. So I don't believe I reached a definitive conclusion in the case."...
At the outset of his testimony at the Mullins-Johnson trial, Smith was asked by the prosecutor to describe how he had been brought in to the case.
"It would be, oh help me, about a year ago I believe, Doctor Meehan (sic) had received some photographs from Dr. Rasaiah, (The pathologist who conducted the autopsy on Valin Johnson) that related to the autopsy on this little girl who we're discussing today," Smith replied.
"Dr. Meehan (sic), Dr. Marcie (Marcellina) Meehan (sic) is head of a program at the Hospital for Sick Children which deals with child abuse and neglect.
She had examined these photographs, she was quite comfortable in dealing with aspects of those photographs that dealt with possible sexual abuse, but there were aspects of the photographs that dealt with the mechanism of death which of course she is a pediatrician, was uncomfortable discussing, so she brought the photographs to me, and they asked me to help with the interpretation of those.
So we both authored a report together, based simply on the photographic evidence that Dr. Rasaiah had provided to Dr. Meehan (sic((Mian);"
Mian's signature on the report came under fire at the Goudge Inquiry Thursday, when lawyer, Alison Craig, who represents the Association in Defence of the Wrongly Convicted at the Inquiry.
Craig asked asked Dr. Dirk Huyer, Head of the Hospital For Sick Children SCAN team at the time of Mian's involvement, if he would agree, "that it's inappropriate for a pediatrician to be authoring a report indicating cause of death?
"Generally speaking, I do not think it's the role of a pediatrician without
additional training or expertise in pathology to be authoring a report that states the cause of death," Huyer replied.
Craig then asked Huyer if he would agree that a report containing an opinion coming from an expert in child abuse who is connected with the SCAN team at the Hospital for Sick Children would be held "in fairly high regard" - by anyone reading it (such as a juror).
"I think that certainly the criminal justice system would likely hold this in high regard, yes," Huyer replied.
To me, this is one of the understatements of the century.
Here you have a report co-authored by the illustrious Dr. Charles Randal Smith who had been endorsed by the prosecutor as a pillar in the world of forensic pathology and a physician from a prestigious unit at the world famous Hospital For Sick Children in Toronto which was dedicated to fighting child abuse and neglect.
The reality is that Dr. Mian had no professional qualifications in pathology and Dr. Smith had never been professionally qualified as a forensic pathologist.
But with a report co-authored by the two of them William Mullins-Johnson did not have a chance.
Huyer also testified that co-authored reports are problematic because, "I think it's important for anybody reading to understand who's providing what opinion."
"So, no, I would not support this," he said.
I was particularly fascinated by Huyer's observation that as he read through the report it appeared to him, "that she may have been the initial draft report producer" and that, "probably the bulk of the authoring was done by her."
All of which has this humble Blogster wondering how consistent this could be with merely "deferring" to Doctor Smith, as Dr. Mian testified in Court.
Harold Levy; hlevy15@gmail.com;
Spring 2024 Cannabis Update (Part II)
10 hours ago
