"The college, which governs the conduct of doctors in the province, had held off investigating Dr. Smith while a public inquiry, headed by Mr. Justice Stephen Goudge of the Ontario Court of Appeal, conducted a year-and-half-long probe into the pathologist and his superiors in the Office of the Chief Coroner. In a final report released in October, 2008, Judge Goudge concluded that the doctor's findings – most of which were made in connection with the deaths of babies and infants and often resulted in parents losing custody of other children – “defied logic” and were “simply baffling.”
REPORTER GREG MCARTHUR: THE GLOBE AND MAIL;
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Background: The inquiry focused largely on the flawed work of Dr. Smith — formerly the province's chief pediatric pathologist and a self-styled member of the prosecution team — 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, "losing" evidence which showed his opinion was wrong and may have assisted the accused person, mistating 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."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Disgraced pathologist Charles Smith’s professional future will be officially decided next week when he stands before a disciplinary committee of Ontario’s College of Physicians and Surgeons," the Globe and Mail story by reporter Greg McArthur published earlier today begins, under the heading, "College to decide professional fate of disgraced doctor Charles Smith."
"Dr. Smith, whose erroneous expert evidence and testimony contributed to more than a dozen criminal charges, many of which resulted in wrongful convictions, will have to answer on Tuesday to allegations that he is incompetent and acted in a manner that would be regarded as “disgraceful, dishonourable and unprofessional,” the story contnues.
The college, which governs the conduct of doctors in the province, had held off investigating Dr. Smith while a public inquiry, headed by Mr. Justice Stephen Goudge of the Ontario Court of Appeal, conducted a year-and-half-long probe into the pathologist and his superiors in the Office of the Chief Coroner. In a final report released in October, 2008, Judge Goudge concluded that the doctor's findings – most of which were made in connection with the deaths of babies and infants and often resulted in parents losing custody of other children – “defied logic” and were “simply baffling.”
It’s not clear what arguments, if any, Dr. Smith is prepared to offer in his defence. When he testified before the public inquiry, he stated that his mistakes were not intentional. He also made a tearful apology to William Mullins-Johnson, who spent 12 years in jail after being wrongfully convicted of sodomizing and murdering his four-year-old niece. Dr. Smith’s lawyer, Niels Ortved, declined to comment about what the pathologist is expected to say.
There are a range of penalties that Dr. Smith could face from the panel: His certification could be revoked completely, or merely suspended for a specified period of time; he could be required to pay a fine to the provincial government of not more than $35,000. He has been unable to practise medicine for nearly three years. He agreed to stop practising shortly after Judge Goudge’s probe commenced, and then later resigned his licence, said Kathryn Clarke, a spokeswoman for the College of Physicians and Surgeons.
In October, Ontario’s provincial Liberal government announced that Mr. Mullins-Johnson would receive $4.25-million in compensation. Earlier in August, the government pledged a maximum of $250,000 to the victims in the other cases examined by Judge Goudge."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The story can be found at:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/college-to-decide-professional-fate-of-disgraced-doctor-charles-smith/article1883002/
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: 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 accessed at:
http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith
For a breakdown of some of the cases, issues and controversies this Blog is currently following, please turn to:
http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2010/08/new-feature-cases-issues-and_15.html
Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog; hlevy15@gmail.com
