Sunday, March 20, 2016

The Charles Smith Blog Award: To Dr. Waney Squier (UK) and Meryl and Susan Goldsmith (USA) respectively for their courage and fearlessness in challenging the validity of the 'shaken baby syndrome' - in spite of the threat posed to their professional status, their reputations and their ability to perform and display their work by the Syndrome's zealous proponents in the medical profession and prosecutor's offices.

The Charles Smith Blog Award: Presented to Dr. Waney Squier (UK) and to Susan and  Meryl Goldsmith (USA) respectively   for their  courage and fearlessness in challenging  the validity of the  'shaken baby syndrome' -  in spite of the threat posed to their professional status, their reputations and their ability to perform and display their work by  the Syndrome's zealous proponents in the medical profession and prosecutor's offices.

Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog;

PUBLISHER'S NOTE:  It is always a pleasure to present a new Charles Smith Blog Award. Indeed, in the seven years that the award has been in existence, I have only presented the award to ten individuals. (Listed below); This presentation is to a neuropathologist, Dr. Waney Squier, who is facing expulsion from the medical profession in the UK for giving opinions in court which do not conform to the prevailing medical views on shaken baby syndrome -  and Meryl and Susan Goldsmith,  the two filmmakers behind the groundbreaking documentary "The Syndrome", which exposes the ugly attacks by the Syndrome's proponents against those, like Dr. Squier, who  dare question its scientific  validity. The attack on Dr. Squier is typified  by the language in a news story in the Times which ran under the damning headline, "Dr. Waney Squier: Expert's fitness to practice impaired. "Impaired" a term more commonly used for drunken drivers.  Other inflammatory words aimed at discrediting Dr. Squier in the article are "mislead courts," gave "irresponsible evidence," provided "deliberately misleading and dishonest evidence," and "her integrity cannot be relied upon." This  is the  corrosive  language of vendetta aimed at stripping away Dr. Squier's credibility in the public eye. The  General Medical Council  has shown ignorance, malice and stupidity in its blatant attempt to shut up Dr. Squier and intimidate any doctor who chooses to give expert evidence which goes against the medical profession's prevailing view. The prosecutors who prodded the General Medical Council to take discipline action against Dr. Squier  so they can no longer lose shaken baby prosecutions have also acted disgracefully. Innocence be damned.  Shame on all of them. As publisher of the Charles Smith Blog, I want to honour Dr. Squier with a place on my personal heroes list  - and presentation of the Charles Smith Blog award for her courage and fearlessness in challenging shaken baby syndrome in a rational scientific way, in spite of the threats posed by the vindictive, ignorant British medical profession, as exemplified by the General Medical Counsel, its regulatory body. I have picked Meryl and  Susan Goldsmith  as recipients of the award because of the fearlessness and courage they have displayed in making the movie "The Syndrome" - which exposes the ugly attacks  which doctors who dare challenge the science of shaken baby syndrome  have been exposed to. Asked by an interviewer for Pacific Standard Magazine whether the filmmakers had experienced a 'backlash.' one of the Goldsmith's is quoted as replying: 'Yes it's been incredibly intense. Pacific Standard Magazine did a great piece about it because we are being threatened with litigation and promoters of the diagnosis of shaken baby syndrome tried to get us pulled from three film festivals! We are under heavy attack by those defending a scientific theory that is collapsing. There are an estimated 1,000 people in prison for this right now. Also, this is a major theme in our film because the doctors who are challenging the science of shaken baby syndrome have faced and continue to face outrageous attacks, which we get into in our film." Bravo to all three recipients. They are courageous and deserve our support, admiration and respect.

Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog.

ORIGIN OF THE CHARLES SMITH BLOG AWARD:  I launched the award in 2009 as a forum in which I could honour these individuals who help  expose and remedy miscarriages of justice caused anywhere in the world by flawed pathology, flawed pathologists, junk science, pseudo-experts or a combination of any of the above.

UNUSUAL NATURE: This award is entirely virtual. There is no no ceremony; There is no prize; There is no certificate. It is a pure and unadulterated honour bestowed by myself as publisher in recognition of contributions  by others to this important facet of criminal justice.


0: Kevin Morgan (AUSTRALIA): author of "Gun Alley: Murder, Lies and Failure of Justice, who single-handedly fought for and obtained the forensic materials which led to Colin Ross's pardon almost ninety years after he was executed.

0: Michael Hall (U.S.A.): For his excellent work in Texas Monthly exposing the miscarriages of justice that have occurred as a result of scent-lineups and the "experts" who conduct them, and

0: Sun-Sentinel reporter Paula McMahon (U.S.A.) for her ground-breaking reporting over a nine year period which led to the freeing and exoneration of Anthony Caravella.

O: Journalist Stewart Cockburn (AUSTRALIA) for his ground-breaking work in "The Advertiser" which exposed the miscarriage of justice suffered by Ted Splatt and triggered the Royal Commission which led to Splatt's exoneration.

0: Australian scientist Tom Mann (AUSTRALIA) for his sterling efforts to publicize the injustice perpetrated on Ted Splatt in the courts including the publication of "Flawed Forensics: The Ted Splatt case and Stewart Cockburn," a monumental book which demonstrates the tragic consequences which can unfold when science gets twisted out of proportion in the courts and those entrusted with the task of protecting our criminal justice system abdicate their responsibilities.

0: New Yorker staff writer David Grann (U.S.A.)for his awesome exposee of the faulty arson "science" that resulted in the wrongful conviction and execution in Texas of Cameron Todd Willingham. (Photo: David Grann);

0: Pamela Colloff (U.S.A) for her Texas Monthly stories which resulted in the freeing of Anthony Graves within 30 days of the appearance of her first story. Anthony Graves was convicted and sentenced to die in 1994 for six horrific murders in the Central Texas town of Somerville.

0: Spencer Hsu (U.S.A) for his  revelations in the Washington Post  that for years, the U.S. Department of Justice has known that flawed forensic work by FBI experts may have led to the convictions of innocent people, but prosecutors rarely told defendants or their attorneys. Hsu discovered that Justice Department officials began reviewing cases after defense attorneys pointed out problems with evidence coming out of FBI labs. But the review was limited. "As a result," Hsu wrote, "hundreds of defendants nationwide remain in prison or on parole for crimes that might merit exoneration, a retrial or a retesting of evidence using DNA because FBI hair and fiber experts may have misidentified them as suspects."

O: Robert Moles and Bibi Sangha. (AUSTRALIA) 
for their monumental campaign to persuade South Australia to establish a statutory right of appeal - and the impact this will have on remedying miscarriages of justice caused by flawed forensic science. 

O: Journalist Mike White; NEW ZEALAND  for his investigation of the Mark Lundy case - and his exposure to the public of  the many factors which made clear that Lundy could not have commited the terrible crimes. Wikipedia informs us that:  "In 2009, North and South magazine published the results of an investigation into the case by Mike White titled  "The Lundy murders: What the jury didn't hear.


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:

Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to:

Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog.