"Young and Cairns played a role in building Smith’s reputation as the most eminent pediatric forensic pathologist in Ontario and they actively protected him from critics.
In late 2008, immediately after the inquiry, the college announced it was investigating the trio. But it dropped its investigation of Young earlier this year in a deal similar to Cairns’.
Like Cairns, Young gave up his licence to practise medicine on his own accord last year. In his deal, Young said he didn’t intend to reapply for it, but should he change his mind, he would have to notify the college, which would then have the right to reopen the probe......
Victims, like William Mullins-Johnson, who spent 13 years in jail after being wrongly convicted of murdering his niece, said he’s angry over the move: “It’s not right. These people created an environment that destroyed lives and there is no punishment.”
Said his lawyer, James Lockyer: “The lack of accountability in these types of cases marches on. . . . The whole thing is a paper tiger.”
REPORTER THERESA BOYLE: THE TORONTO STAR;
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Background: The inquiry focused largely on the flawed work of Dr. Smith — formerly the province's chief pediatric pathologist — whose errors led to innocent people being branded as child murderers.
The 1,000-page report by Justice Stephen Goudge slammed Dr. Smith, along with Ontario's former chief coroner and his deputy, for their roles in wrongful prosecutions and asked the province to consider compensation.
The provincial coroner's office found evidence of errors in 20 of 45 autopsies Dr. Smith did over a 10-year period starting in the early 1990s. Thirteen resulted in criminal charges.
William Mullins-Johnson, who was among those cases, spent 12 years in prison for the rape and murder of his four-year-old niece, whose death was later attributed to natural causes.
In another case, Dr. Smith concluded a mother had stabbed her seven-year-old girl to death when it turned out to have been a dog mauling.
The inquiry heard that Dr. Smith's failings included hanging on to crucial evidence, chronic tardiness, and the catastrophic misinterpretation of findings.
The cases, along with other heart-rending stories of wrongful prosecutions based in part on Smith's testimony, also raised a host of issues about the pathology system and the reliance of the courts on expert evidence."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario has dropped its investigation into former deputy coroner Jim Cairns, arguing there is “nothing to gain” from disciplining him over his role in the Charles Smith saga," the Toronto Star story by reporter Theresa Boyle published earlier today begins, under the heading, "Coroner probe dropped in Charles Smith saga."
"Cairns has signed an “undertaking” with the college to never again practise in Ontario or anywhere else in exchange for having the investigation dropped," the story continues.
"Victims of wrongful murder charges and convictions are crying foul over the move, arguing those who enabled Smith to ruin so many lives are not being held accountable.
Cairns and former chief coroner James Young came under harsh criticism from Justice Stephen Goudge for running a dysfunctional coroner’s office which lacked oversight and accountability.
Goudge presided over an inquiry into pediatric forensic pathology in Ontario, which heard that the pair was blind to the many errors and shortcomings of Smith, whose bungled autopsies, reports and testimony contributed to miscarriages of justice.
Young and Cairns played a role in building Smith’s reputation as the most eminent pediatric forensic pathologist in Ontario and they actively protected him from critics.
In late 2008, immediately after the inquiry, the college announced it was investigating the trio. But it dropped its investigation of Young earlier this year in a deal similar to Cairns’.
Like Cairns, Young gave up his licence to practise medicine on his own accord last year. In his deal, Young said he didn’t intend to reapply for it, but should he change his mind, he would have to notify the college, which would then have the right to reopen the probe.
In explaining why the college dropped the investigations, counsel Carolyn Silver noted that the regulatory body’s prime mandate is to protect the public and the toughest sanction it can impose is revoking a doctor’s licence.
“When a physician resigns from practice and they give up their licence to practise, the protection of the public becomes no longer an issue because the public is not at risk from that physician anymore,” she said.
“(There is) nothing to gain because it has been done.”
Victims, like William Mullins-Johnson, who spent 13 years in jail after being wrongly convicted of murdering his niece, said he’s angry over the move: “It’s not right. These people created an environment that destroyed lives and there is no punishment.”
Said his lawyer, James Lockyer: “The lack of accountability in these types of cases marches on. . . . The whole thing is a paper tiger.”
Some victims question why no criminal charges have been laid against the trio, but Lockyer opposes that idea, saying it would be difficult to prove “intent” and make the charges stick.
Curiously, the college is proceeding with disciplinary action against Smith even though he has allowed his medical licence to expire. Asked why he is being treated differently, Silver said: “Dr. Smith role was different in all of these cases.”
While revoking a licence is the toughest sanction the college can take, it can also impose a fine of $35,000."
The story can be found at:
http://www.thespec.com/News/BreakingNews/article/787105
Harold Levy...hlevy15@gmail.com.
