Bulletin: Dr. Waney Squier: U.K. (Aftermath 1): Medical Council investigation said to have been triggered by prosecutor's concerns over fall in rates of convictions: "The GMC investigation into Squier followed prosecutors’ concerns at falling conviction rates in cases of shaken baby syndrome as scientific scepticism about it grew, said Dr Michael Powers QC, a supporter of Squier and a expert in medico-legal issues. Speaking after the ruling, Powers claimed the panel, which included a retired RAF officer, a retired policeman and a retired community psychiatrist “was not qualified to understand the complex pathology of the developing brain”. He said they had reached the wrong conclusion."....Supporters charge in a statement that, " “Her further studies lead her to express an increasing scientific scepticism at the hypothesis,” it said. “As a result, the General Medical Council charged her with failing to show sufficient respect for the opinions of her peers.”....."Stafford Smith, who is assisting Squier with her case, said the ruling had taken “a devastating personal impact” on the doctor. “Shaken baby syndrome is not a medical diagnosis to be treated but, almost uniquely, it is a doctor’s opinion that a crime has been committed,” he said. “I have represented a number of people who have been sentenced to death based on this ‘theory’ although increasingly the evidence suggests that it is unscientific nonsense. Justice demands that a doctor who honestly holds views supported by scientific evidence be permitted to give testimony that challenges the hypotheses of others... “Today, unqualified though they may be, the panel announced that the GMC will brook no scientific dissent.”

PUBLISHER'S VIEW: (EDITORIAL): The decision of the British Medical Council finding that Dr. Waney Squier committed misconduct by misleading the courts in cases where she gave her opinion  as an expert witness about shaken baby is much more than a “British” problem – it’s ramifications could lead to the  wrongful conviction of innocent parents  far beyond England’s borders. Until this finding can be reversed by an appellate body, it will hang over her head  like a black cloud whenever she testifies in Canada, the United States  or any other jurisdiction. The first question posed  when the defence seeks to qualify her as an expert witness will be – aren’t you the Dr. Waney Squier found guilty of misleading the courts.?The Syndrome -  the  powerful film  documentary made by Meryl and Susan Goldsmith - revealed  that specialists, such as Dr Squier. who dare to question the conventional wisdom on shaken baby syndrome, are coming under vicious attack.  Dr. Squier now faces public humiliation – for her courageous, scientific, principled attack on this dangerous, flawed ‘theory”  that she and other experts have demolished,  as well as a range of sanctions including ouster from the medical profession in  the U.K.  It is therefore crucial that she knows that she has the support of others throughout the world – and that a strong message be given to the Medical Council before her sentencing hearing, that’s it’s  disturbing decision is unjustified and has disturbing implications  for her, others who are part of the battle   against the “Syndrome,”  - and individuals, such as parents and caregivers,  who face being falsely convicted, imprisoned  and destroyed.

Harold Levy. Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog.

See The Syndrome's home page at the following link:  "A mother of three spent 11 years in prison for killing a baby she never harmed. That’s what happens when widely held beliefs based on junk science lead to the convictions of innocent people. The explosive documentary The Syndrome follows the crusade of a group of doctors, scientists, and legal scholars who have uncovered that “Shaken Baby Syndrome,” a child abuse theory used in hundreds of U.S. prosecutions each year, is not scientifically valid. In fact, they say, it doesn’t exist. Filmmaker Meryl Goldsmith and national award-winning investigative reporter Susan Goldsmith document the unimaginable nightmare for those accused and focus on the men and women dedicating their lives to defending the prosecuted and freeing the convicted. How did the myth of “SBS” begin and who are the shocking people behind it who have built careers and profited from the theory? Both are unflinchingly identified. Shaken baby proponents want to silence their critics even as countless lives are ruined."
http://www.resetfilms.com/

"A leading doctor who cast doubt on claims that parents had shaken their babies to death has been found guilty of misleading the courts. Dr Waney Squier, a senior neuropathologist at the Radcliffe hospital in Oxford, was wrong to tell trials at the Old Bailey and the high court that fatal or serious brain injuries suffered by six babies were not caused deliberately, the Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service ruled on Friday. But the attorney Clive Stafford Smith, a supporter of the prominent sceptic of shaken baby syndrome, said Squier had merely placed scientific evidence ahead of a “theory ... that the evidence increasingly suggests is unscientific nonsense”. The ruling will fuel controversy about the validity of shaken baby syndrome as a medical phenomenon which is being widely contested internationally as a cause of serious injury and death. In the US, parents have been sentenced to death on what critics believe to be little more than a theory. The adjudicating panel found Squier made assertions which were “insufficiently founded upon the evidence” and that she used research that did not support her opinion. Her actions and omissions were ruled “misleading, irresponsible, dishonest and likely to bring the reputation of the medical profession into disrepute”.........The GMC investigation into Squier followed prosecutors’ concerns at falling conviction rates in cases of shaken baby syndrome as scientific scepticism about it grew, said Dr Michael Powers QC, a supporter of Squier and a expert in medico-legal issues.  Speaking after the ruling, Powers claimed the panel, which included a retired RAF officer, a retired policeman and a retired community psychiatrist “was not qualified to understand the complex pathology of the developing brain”. He said they had reached the wrong conclusion.........Responding to the verdict, Squier was said to be “shocked and saddened”. She faces sanction at a hearing next week. Possible punishments include suspension and being struck off. She is considered one of the UK’s foremost experts in infant brain pathology and 15 years ago she began studying the scientific underpinnings of shaken baby syndrome and started to develop doubts, her supporters said in a statement. “Her further studies lead her to express an increasing scientific scepticism at the hypothesis,” it said. “As a result, the General Medical Council charged her with failing to show sufficient respect for the opinions of her peers.” Stafford Smith, who is assisting Squier with her case, said the ruling had taken “a devastating personal impact” on the doctor. “Shaken baby syndrome is not a medical diagnosis to be treated but, almost uniquely, it is a doctor’s opinion that a crime has been committed,” he said. “I have represented a number of people who have been sentenced to death based on this ‘theory’ although increasingly the evidence suggests that it is unscientific nonsense. Justice demands that a doctor who honestly holds views supported by scientific evidence be permitted to give testimony that challenges the hypotheses of others...“Today, unqualified though they may be, the panel announced that the GMC will brook no scientific dissent.”
http://www.theguardian.com/law/2016/mar/11/doctor-doubted-shaken-baby-syndrome-mislead-courts-waney-squier