Saturday, August 9, 2014

Ben Geen. UK. Major development: New evidence has been presented to the CCRC (The British Criminal Cases Review Commission) that his supporters claim proves the statistical evidence used in court regarding the rarity of respiratory arrest was flawed and inaccurate - and that it should never have been relied upon in court. (The case is presented in the context of "an international epidemic of falsely accused health care serial killers." HL);

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: On April 28, 2010, I ran a post on Ben Geen, the UK nurse convicted of killing 2 patients and harming 15 others. As usual, I undertook to readers that I would follow and report on developments in the case. I have recently learned that  new evidence has been presented to the CCRC  (The British Criminal Cases Review Commission) that   his supporters claim proves that the statistical evidence used in court regarding the rarity of respiratory arrest was flawed and inaccurate and that it should never of been relied upon in court.  Other new developments include the news that the campaign team that fought for and secured the release of dutch nurse Lucia de Berk have been recalled and are campaigning to overturn Ben's conviction as they believe that this is another miscarriage of justice that has alarming similarities to the wrongful conviction of Lucia de Berk case.  It is good to hear that such positive developments have occurred. I will be following future developments with keen interest on behalf of the readers of this blog.

Harold Levy Publisher. The Charles Smith Blog.

BACKGROUND: A Wikipedia entry informs us that:  "Benjamin Geen is a former nurse convicted of murdering two patients and causing grievous bodily harm to 15 others while working at Horton General Hospital in Banbury, Oxfordshire," the Wikipedia entry begins.  "Between December 2003 and February 2004, at least 17 patients suffered respiratory arrests for then-unknown reasons," the entry continues. "While 15 patients recovered soon after, two patients died in January 2004: Anthony Bateman and David Onley. Geen, who was on duty during these incidents, was arrested on February 9, 2004, whereupon a syringe filled with a lethal dose of muscle relaxant was discovered in his pocket. The hospital found 27 cases that Geen could have been involved in, though nine were discounted and Geen was acquitted of one other case. During his trial, the Oxford Crown Court was told that Geen purposely used potentially lethal doses of drugs to cause patients to stop breathing because he enjoyed the thrill of resuscitating them. He was found guilty in April 2006, and given 17 life sentences. The trial judge recommended that he should spend at least 30 years in prison before being considered for parole. This recommendation is likely to keep him behind bars until at least 2035. Geen's case was reviewed by lawyers and volunteers from the London Innocence Project. The review found a number of flaws in the original trial, and lawyers came to the conclusion that Geen was "the victim of a major miscarriage of justice." A leading medical statistician, Prof Jane Hutton, submitted that the Crown's central evidence - that there had been an 'unusual' pattern of illnesses - was of 'no value' because no statistical modelling had been done to show that the pattern was unusual. She found the 'pattern' method to be at grave risk of bias. Dr Mark Heath, a consultant anaesthesiologist who has testified in US supreme court cases, found the pattern of patient collapses to be totally inconsistent with the drugs Geen was said to have injected in seven cases. Rather than passing out, patients injected with muscle relaxants as the crown stated would be paralysed, unable to breath but totally concious and terrified. Other doctors came forward who decided that the cause of death in Mr Onley, a gravely ill patient who Geen was alleged to have killed, was not a heart attack triggered by respiratory arrest but liver failure. Mark McDonald, Geen's barrister, has stated that he believes the case against Geen was the product of a "witch-hunt" in a health service terrified of a repeat of the case of Dr Harold Shipman. A first Appeal failed in November 2009. In February 2010, lawyers submitted Geen's case to the Criminal Case Review Commission and a public campaign was launched."

The Wikipedia entry can be found at:

The previous post can be found at:

A recent  analysis of the statistical issues inherent in the case - which is presented in the context of  "an international epidemic of falsely accused health care serial killers." can be  found at:


Dear Reader. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog. We are following this case.
I have added a search box for content in this blog which now encompasses several thousand posts. The search box is located  near the bottom of the screen just above the list of links. I am confident that this powerful search tool provided by "Blogger" will help our readers and myself get more out of the site.

The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at:

Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at:
I look forward to hearing from readers at:

Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog;