A decade later: (Part four): Hospital For Sick Children; Dr. Gideon Koren; Charles Smith; Toronto; Editorial: Gideon Koren wasn't the only prestigious staff member who the Hospital for Sick Children failed to curb before serious harm was done: How about Charles Smith? Just take a look at Justice Stephen Goudge's independent report... From editorial: "There is much in common between Gideon Koren and Charles Smith: Both brought fame, prestige and money, to the world-famous hospital; Both were treated with silk gloves in spite of the disturbing allegations against them which called for a strong measure of protection of the public. Both were permitted by SickKids to carry on their work - Koren, in spite of the Discipline Panel's statement that there were grounds for dismissal, Smith in spite of the fact that his colleagues at the hospital believed that children of trusting parents were at risk. Both Koren and Smith have left legacies of destroyed lives and families; Some of the Smith cases have yet to be sorted out in the Ontario Court of Appeal, and the aftermath of Motherisk, as innocent parents ae forced to fight in the courts to get their children back, could go on for years."

EDITORIAL: Rachel Mendleson reports in her Toronto Star story, (April 29, 2017) headed, "Years before Motherisk scandal, SickKids stood by doctor who wrote ‘poison pen letters,'  that, after finding the allegations against Dr. Gideon Koren proven,"  a discipline panel,   composed of  the former presidents of SickKids and the University of Toronto, ruled,  "Your actions constitute gross misconduct and provide sufficient grounds for dismissal.” Although the panel upbraided Koren  for "repeatedly lying” and showing a “reckless dereliction of duty,” Mendleson notes: "But, citing his research achievements and the many young doctors he supervised, who they said would be “disproportionately disadvantaged” if Koren were fired, they instead docked him two months’ pay, fined him $35,000 and continued his suspension until June 1, 2000. Koren remained head of the Motherisk Program he founded in 1985.  Charles Smith, the notorious namesake of this Blog, also faced a barrage of serious allegations before his voluntary, departure from the Hospital in July, 2005.  However, before he quietly slunk out into the night - without announcement or ceremony. the once celebrated pathologist had been the subject of a battery of complaints made by physicians at the hospital who were concerned about his diagnostic accuracy. In response to evidence called about the hospital's response to these complaints, Justice Stephen Goudge, concluded in the report of his independent Inquiry into many of  Smith's cases: "As well as timeliness, the hospital had concerns about Dr. Smith's diagnostic accuracy, Clinicians rely on pathologist's  diagnoses to make critical decisions of treatment. Diagnostic discrepancies in surgical pathology can have profound effects on patient care. As pathologist-in-chief, Dr. Becker dealt with diagnistic concerns about Dr. Smith's pathology reports on several occasions. Arround 1997, there was deonstrable convern at Sickkids about Dr. Smith's clinical skills in the reading and interpretation of microscopic slides. ........"On March 21, 1997, Dr. Paul Thorner, the associate head of pathology at SickKids, wrote a memo to Dr. Becker regarding diagnostic discrepancies in four of Dr. Smith's surgical pathology cases. The identification of four misdiagnoses within a short time frame was concerning. The first involved an error in what should have been a straightforward diagnosis. In the second case, the  proper diagnosis was one that was easy to confuse with the diagnosis made by Dr. Smith. The third case involved diagnosis of an unusual lesion that might be difficult to recognize. These three cases did not affect patient care. The fourth did. In the fourth case, Dr. Smith misdiagnosed two frozen  sections of tissue. Dr. Smith reported that  the two frozen sections were reactive, or non-malignant. Based on Dr. Smith's diagnosis, the patient was removed from the operating roo to recover.  Subsequently the tissue samples were blocked and the permanent slides were prepared. Dr. Smith correctly read the permanent section as malignant. The child had to return to the operating room for placement of a chemotherapy line. At a minimum, the child required a second surgical procedure. More seriously, the peoper treatment may have been  delayed unnecessarily. In April 1997,  Dr. Becker prepared a letter addressed to Dr. Smith about "a disproportion in the number of complaints about  diagnostic inconsistencies from pediatricians and surgeons"  regarding Dr. Smith's surgical pathology work. The letter indicated  that Dr. Becker was curtailing Dr. Smith's responsibilities in surgical pathology  until Dr. Smith completed continuing medical education courses  to improve his surgical pathology skills. The letter was unsigned and appears not to have been sent. Dr. Smith testified that no one ever advised him of significant concerns regarding his surgical pathology work or informed him that, as a result, he should cease performing surgical cases. Dr. Becker's letter also stated that, as Dr. Smith woud not be conducting surgical pathology on a regular rotation, his "salary from the Division of Patholgy will be reduced by $20,000 for 1997." However, Dr. Smith's salary was not reduced in this matter. Whether the letter was sent or not, it clearly reflects Dr. Becker's concerns with Dr. Smith's diagnostic skills.".........Also, in 1997, a SickKids oncologist complained about two surgical pathology cases in which Dr. Smith had made errors.........These cases were a small minority of all the surgical pathology work that Dr. Smith conducted during the course of his career. However, at times, his colleagues were clearly frustrated with his diagnostic mistakes. This frustration was evidenced by an email written by Dr. Thorner to Dr. Becker in May, 1997 in which he referred to two complaints  regarding Dr. Smith as "another nail for the coffin." However it must be said that the complaints regarding diagnostic issues did not rise to the level where the pathologist-in-chief formally restricted Dr. Smith's privileges."  There is much in common between Gideon Koren and Charles Smith: Both brought fame, prestige and money, to the world-famous hospital; Both were treated with silk gloves in spite of the disturbing allegations against them which called for a strong measure of protection of the public. Both were permitted  by SickKids to carry on  their work - Koren, in spite of the Discipline Panels statement that there were grounds for dismissal, Smith in spite of the fact that his colleagues at the hospital believed that children of trusting parents were at risk.  Both have left legacies of destroyed lives and families: some of the Smith cases have yet to be sorted out in the Ontario Court of Appeal, and the aftermath of Motherisk, as innocent parents fight to get their children back, could go on for years.

Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog.

-----------------------------------------------------------.

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. 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: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com. Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog.

A decade later: (Part 3): Hospital for Sick Children Toronto; Dr. Gideon Koren: Charles Smith; What was learned? In a second Page One feature published this weekend, Toronto Star reporter Rachel Mendleson reports that, "Years before Motherisk scandal, SickKids stood by doctor who wrote ‘poison pen letters," - (Just like it stood up for the namesick of this Blog, the notorious former doctor Charles Randal Smith. HL)..."James Turk, a Ryerson University professor and former head of the Canadian Association of University Teachers, which led an extensive investigation into the Olivieri affair, said the Motherisk crisis makes clear “there is a fundamental institutional problem that needs to be addressed.” “(SickKids has) to detail what they did wrong in the past. Unless they can show they understand the problems they caused, there’s no reason to think that their solutions are going to solve those problems,” he said. “You can’t just say, let bygones be bygones.”

STORY: "Years before Motherisk scandal, SickKids stood by doctor who wrote ‘poison pen letters,’ by reporter Rachel Mendleson, published by The Toronto Star on April 30, 2017.

SUB-HEADING: "The ongoing fallout from the Motherisk lab’s faulty drug and alcohol tests has raised questions about SickKids’ decision to keep Dr. Gideon Koren at the helm despite his behaviour towards a whistleblower colleague two decades ago."

GIST: "Fifteen years before scandal engulfed the Hospital for Sick Children’s Motherisk lab, SickKids, by its own acknowledgment, had every right to fire the doctor in the middle of it all. In late 1999, Dr. Gideon Koren was identified as the author of “poison pen letters” sent to SickKids doctors and the media during a heated dispute with a whistleblower colleague, Dr. Nancy Olivieri. For months, Koren had denied writing the anonymous letters that disparaged Olivieri and her four supporters as “a group of pigs,” among other insults. He confessed only after DNA testing provided irrefutable proof. “Your actions constitute gross misconduct and provide sufficient grounds for dismissal,” the former presidents of SickKids and the University of Toronto wrote in an April 2000 decision following a disciplinary hearing on Koren, whom they upbraided for “repeatedly lying” and showing a “reckless dereliction of duty.” But, citing his research achievements and the many young doctors he supervised, who they said would be “disproportionately disadvantaged” if Koren were fired, they instead docked him two months’ pay, fined him $35,000 and continued his suspension until June 1, 2000. Koren remained head of the Motherisk Program he founded in 1985. The Motherisk scandal has cast doubt over thousands of child protection decisions across Canada that relied on the hair-testing lab’s flawed drug and alcohol tests, and prompted a re-examination of some of the program’s influential research on drug safety in pregnancy. It has also raised questions about the hospital’s decision to stand by Koren, which suggests “the institution valued image over the safety of patients,” said SickKids doctor Brenda Gallie, who was among Olivieri’s defenders.  James Turk, a Ryerson University professor and former head of the Canadian Association of University Teachers, which led an extensive investigation into the Olivieri affair, said the Motherisk crisis makes clear “there is a fundamental institutional problem that needs to be addressed.” “(SickKids has) to detail what they did wrong in the past. Unless they can show they understand the problems they caused, there’s no reason to think that their solutions are going to solve those problems,” he said. “You can’t just say, let bygones be bygones.”  (Yet another excellent feature by Rachel Mendleson which is way too comprehensive to summarize. So, once again, dear reader, read on. HL)

The entire  story can be found at:

https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2017/04/30/years-before-motherisk-scandal-sickkids-stood-by-doctor-who-wrote-poison-pen-letters.html

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. 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: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com. Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog.

DNA mix-up; West Australia: Investigation launched after wrong man convicted of a crime over a decade ago because of a DNA mix-up at state-run pathology service PathWest, ABC News reports..." WA Health Minister Roger Cook said. "I am particularly concerned about the impact that it's had on this gentleman, and on behalf of all I represent I sincerely apologise for this." The man was arrested in 2004, aged in his early 20s, after DNA found at the scene of a home invasion was incorrectly identified as his. The DNA apparently belonged to someone with the same name as the man and a laboratory worker mixed them up. According to the Government, the man initially protested his innocence before pleading guilty on the advice of his lawyer, who told him he would not be believed. He received a suspended jail sentence and spent over a decade with a criminal record. It is understood the man was unable to get a police clearance to help gain employment. Last week the man, and the State Government, were finally told about the mistake."..."

STORY:  "PathWest DNA mix-up: Investigation launched after wrong man convicted" by reporter Eliza Laschon, published by ABC NEWS on April 28, 2017.

GIST "The WA Government is demanding answers after a man was wrongly convicted of a crime over a decade ago because of a DNA mix-up at state-run pathology service PathWest." "This is deeply concerning and distressing that this incident has occurred," WA Health Minister Roger Cook said. "I am particularly concerned about the impact that it's had on this gentleman, and on behalf of all I represent I sincerely apologise for this." The man was arrested in 2004, aged in his early 20s, after DNA found at the scene of a home invasion was incorrectly identified as his. The DNA apparently belonged to someone with the same name as the man and a laboratory worker mixed them up. According to the Government, the man initially protested his innocence before pleading guilty on the advice of his lawyer, who told him he would not be believed. He received a suspended jail sentence and spent over a decade with a criminal record. It is understood the man was unable to get a police clearance to help gain employment. Last week the man, and the State Government, were finally told about the mistake. "I was advised on Friday evening (by the Department of Health) that further review of this result way back in April 2016 had revealed that is was in fact a misidentification and that someone else by the same name was in fact the true match," WA Attorney General John Quigley said. "The people processing it (at PathWest) back in 2004 to 2005 had not checked the date of birth, therefore the wrong person was identified.". PathWest discovered the error in April 2016, when the suspected offender was arrested over another matter. WA Police said they were told of the error that same month in 2016. "Last week, an officer from the WA Police travelled to the regional address of the person to deliver a letter outlining the error," the statement said. "The letter also encouraged the person to seek legal advice as to further steps that could be taken. "WA Police accepts its notification should have been dealt with more expeditiously and we regret the oversight.".........An investigation is already underway after the sacking of WA's leading DNA scientist Laurence Webb from PathWest that cast doubt on the convictions of at least 27 people.

That also promoted a "root and branch" review of the facility to gain a better understanding of its processes and procedures. The McGowan Government has vowed to hold individuals responsible and expects the man's conviction to be swiftly overturned. The other man with the DNA match has a serious criminal record and the prosecution process has started."

The entire story can be found at:

 http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-04-27/man-wrongly-convicted-over-pathwest-dna-bungle-govt-wants-answer/8475888

 PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. 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: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com. Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog.

A decade later: (Part Two): The Goudge Inquiry; Disgraced former pathologist Charles Smith: What has been learned? (Part Two); National Post reporter Christie Blatchford says uncomfortable questions are once again being asked of Dr. Michael Pollanen, Ontario’s chief pathologist - and that an Ontario Superior Court Justice suggested, in a court ruling that early signs that some of the same trappings that led to Smith becoming virtually unassailable in court for so long – deferential if not reverential treatment, a growing self-confidence and the simple fact that scientists can often bedazzle lawyers with scientific language — may have been in play for Pollanen too."..."She (Justice Anne Molloy) found that he had failed to properly prepare before testifying and “nevertheless expressed an opinion with certainty”; had “offered opinions beyond his area of expertise”; looked for ways to shore up those opinions; and “started from a position that this was a case of abuse, which he then sought to prove.”

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: Two important stories published this weekend (Saturday April 29, 2017) raise  serious doubts, ten years later,  about what was learned from the Gouge inquiry, which as the Toronto Star points out "exposed the devastating fallout of SickKids pathologist Charles Smith, the Hospital for Sick Children." In one of these articles,  (Part One) the Star's Rachel Mendleson asks "What is ailing Sickkids?" - and investigates "how Toronto’s world-class children’s hospital missed the warning signs." As the Star points out: "A decade after a public inquiry exposed the devastating fallout of SickKids pathologist Charles Smith, the Hospital for Sick Children is grappling with Motherisk, another scandal involving families torn apart by flawed forensics. A Star investigation reveals lingering questions and a battle to rebuild public trust by an institution that can’t afford to get it wrong again." In the second story, Christie Blatchford, writes about  "The uncomfortable questions once again being asked of Ontario’s chief pathologist," - Dr. Michael Pollanen - in the National Post, and asks,  " How can it be that almost a decade after the Goudge inquiry released its report into the messy trail left behind by former SickKids’ pathologist Dr. Charles Smith, the white knight who rode in to build Ontario a new forensic service and save the day is now being asked uncomfortably familiar questions? "The white knight, of course, is Dr. Michael Pollanen," says Blatchford. "Ontario’s chief forensic pathologist since 2006, the year that allegations about Smith reached a critical mass and prompted a sweeping coroner’s review. It found that Smith had reached dubious conclusions of foul play in 20 child autopsies, some of which ended in wrongful convictions."

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

STORY: "The uncomfortable questions once again being asked of Ontario’s chief pathologist," by Christie Blatchford, published by The National Post on April 28, 2017.

PHOTO CAPTION: "Dr.  Michael Pollanen has been Ontario's chief forensic pathologist since 2006.

GIST:"To borrow from the immortal words of the Talking Heads in Once in a Lifetime, “And you may ask yourself, well, how did I get here?” How can it be that almost a decade after the Goudge inquiry released its report into the messy trail left behind by former SickKids’ pathologist Dr. Charles Smith, the white knight who rode in to build Ontario a new forensic service and save the day is now being asked uncomfortably familiar questions? The white knight, of course, is Dr. Michael Pollanen, Ontario’s chief forensic pathologist since 2006, the year that allegations about Smith reached a critical mass and prompted a sweeping coroner’s review. It found that Smith had reached dubious conclusions of foul play in 20 child autopsies, some of which ended in wrongful convictions. That in turn led to the Goudge inquiry, headed by now-retired Ontario Court of Appeal Justice Stephen Goudge, who concluded in 2008 that Smith had “actively misled” his superiors, “made false and misleading statements in court” and exaggerated his expertise. Compare that to the language reluctantly used last month by Ontario Superior Court Justice Anne Molloy to describe Pollanen. She found that he had failed to properly prepare before testifying and “nevertheless expressed an opinion with certainty”; had “offered opinions beyond his area of expertise”; looked for ways to shore up those opinions; and “started from a position that this was a case of abuse, which he then sought to prove.” In other words, Molloy was suggesting, like his disgraced predecessor Smith, Pollanen did not approach the case with an open mind and was “thinking dirty.”.........The former boy wonder – he hung out at the old forensic pathology department as a teenager – had testified before Molloy in a voir dire at the trial of Joel France. The 39-year-old France was accused of second-degree murder in the July 14, 2013 death of two-year-old Nicholas Cruz, the child of his live-in girlfriend.........Molloy was clearly shocked. As she put it once, “he started his task with the mindset that this child had been the victim of assault and he approached everything thereafter from that mindset, including his testimony in court…” She also pronounced Pollanen’s answers around how long he’d belatedly spent doing the literature review “evasive and disingenuous.” Molloy ruled he couldn’t give his opinion on whether an assault had caused the boy’s injuries and couldn’t say the required force was “significant” — a decision that knocked the stuffing out of the Crown’s theory that France deliberately administered the fatal blow. After the ruling. prosecutors and defence lawyers reached a plea bargain, with France pleading guilty to manslaughter for failing to get Nicholas medical help. It was a bolt out of the blue – a stunning, uncharacteristic and eerily familiar flaw in a man who prided himself on being the anti-Charles Smith. Yet there were early signs that some of the same trappings that led to Smith becoming virtually unassailable in court for so long – deferential if not reverential treatment, a growing self-confidence and the simple fact that scientists can often bedazzle lawyers with scientific language — may have been in play for Pollanen too.".........Pollanen hasn’t yet commented upon Molloy’s criticism and is out of the country until Monday. However, Dr. Toby Rose, Ontario’s deputy chief forensic pathologist, said that it isn’t just pathologists’ reports that are subject to peer review, but also “court transcripts following expert testimony of forensic pathologists, which will be the case in this instance as well.”"

The entire story can be found at:

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/christie-blatchford-the-uncomfortable-questions-once-again-being-asked-of-ontarios-chief-pathologist

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. 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: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com. Harold Levy; Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog;

A decade later; (Part one): The Goudge Inquiry; Disgraced former pathologist Charles Smith; What has been learned? (Part One); Toronto Star reporter Rachel Mendleson asks 'What’s ailing SickKids?' and sheds light on how the iconic hospital managed to miss the warning signs. (An insightful investigative article. HL)..."In late April 2007, the province launched the Goudge Inquiry into pediatric forensic pathology in Ontario and Smith. In the months that followed, Waudby was a regular in the public gallery on the 22nd floor of a grey office tower on Dundas St. West, as the evidence untangled a knot of systemic failings at some of the province’s most trusted institutions, including SickKids. “I was really hopeful that they’d learned,” she said. “I was hopeful that the systems had corrected their issues.” That hope faded with news of Motherisk, another scandal involving a SickKids doctor, flawed forensics, marginalized parents and families torn apart. “It’s like we were disregarded. All we went through, that didn’t matter,” she said. “How could they forget so quickly?”

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: Two important stories published this weekend (Saturday April 29, 2017) raise  serious doubts, ten years later,  about what was learned from the Gouge inquiry, which as the Toronto Star points out "exposed the devastating fallout of SickKids pathologist Charles Smith, the Hospital for Sick Children." In one of these articles,  (Part One) the Star's Rachel Mendleson asks "What is ailing Sickkids?" - and investigates "how Toronto’s world-class children’s hospital missed the warning signs." As the Star points out: "A decade after a public inquiry exposed the devastating fallout of SickKids pathologist Charles Smith, the Hospital for Sick Children is grappling with Motherisk, another scandal involving families torn apart by flawed forensics. A Star investigation reveals lingering questions and a battle to rebuild public trust by an institution that can’t afford to get it wrong again." In the second story , Christie Blatchford, writes about  "The uncomfortable questions once again being asked of Ontario’s chief pathologist," - Dr. Michael Pollanen - in the National Post, and asks,  " How can it be that almost a decade after the Goudge inquiry released its report into the messy trail left behind by former SickKids’ pathologist Dr. Charles Smith, the white knight who rode in to build Ontario a new forensic service and save the day is now being asked uncomfortably familiar questions? "The white knight, of course, is Dr. Michael Pollanen," says Blatchford. "Ontario’s chief forensic pathologist since 2006, the year that allegations about Smith reached a critical mass and prompted a sweeping coroner’s review. It found that Smith had reached dubious conclusions of foul play in 20 child autopsies, some of which ended in wrongful convictions."

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

STORY: "What’s ailing SickKids? How Toronto’s world-class children’s hospital missed the warning signs," by reporter Rachel Mendleson, published by The Toronto Star on April 29, 2017.

SUB-HEADING: "A decade after a public inquiry exposed the devastating fallout of SickKids pathologist Charles Smith, the Hospital for Sick Children is grappling with Motherisk, another scandal involving families torn apart by flawed forensics. A Star investigation reveals lingering questions and a battle to rebuild public trust by an institution that can’t afford to get it wrong again.

GIST: "When Brenda Waudby pulled up the article on her cellphone, she could barely process what she was reading. She can no longer remember the headline, but the words took her back to the most horrifying time in her life. The Hospital for Sick Children. Evidence. Unreliable. “I felt like throwing up,” she said. “It was like, ‘Oh my God. Here we go again.’” In 1997, Waudby was a single mom in Peterborough, Ont., recovering from cocaine addiction and the violent death of her 21-month-old daughter, Jenna Mellor, when SickKids pathologist Charles Smith ran a bulldozer through her life. Smith’s flawed opinions led police to charge Waudby for Jenna’s murder. It took years to regain custody of her two other children, clear her name and bring the real killer — Jenna’s 14-year-old babysitter — to justice. Smith’s faulty autopsy analyses tainted more than a dozen cases, including that of William Mullins-Johnson, who was jailed for 12 years after being wrongfully convicted in the 1993 death of his niece. In late April 2007, the province launched the Goudge Inquiry into pediatric forensic pathology in Ontario and Smith. In the months that followed, Waudby was a regular in the public gallery on the 22nd floor of a grey office tower on Dundas St. West, as the evidence untangled a knot of systemic failings at some of the province’s most trusted institutions, including SickKids.

“I was really hopeful that they’d learned,” she said. “I was hopeful that the systems had corrected their issues.” That hope faded with news of Motherisk, another scandal involving a SickKids doctor, flawed forensics, marginalized parents and families torn apart. “It’s like we were disregarded. All we went through, that didn’t matter,” she said. “How could they forget so quickly?” (Rachel Mendleson's  excellent feature is far too comprehensive to summarize. So, dear reader, read on. HL)

The entire story can be found at:

https://www.thestar.com/news/investigations/2017/04/29/whats-ailing-sickkids-how-torontos-world-class-childrens-hospital-missed-the-warning-signs.html

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. 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: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com. Harold Levy; Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog;

U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions' war on science/forensics: (Part fifteen); New York Times columnist Clyde Haberman takes 'a closer look at the evidence,' and goes into "The back story on bad forensic science."..."With the Trump administration’s move to end a commission investigating flaws in forensic science, Retro Report looks at the history of one now-challenged method: hair analysis."..."The reality is that forensic science is not the infallible discipline that television shows like “CSI” may lead many viewers to believe. That point is underscored in this brief offering from Retro Report, a series of video documentaries re-exploring major news stories of the past. In real life, crime labs are not the exclusive domain of une rring Gil Grissoms and Dr. Quincys. Mistakes happen. And often enough, errors send innocent people to prison and even, in some instances, to death row."

COMMENTARY: " A closer look at the evidence," by Clyde Haberman, published by The New York Times on April 26, 2017.

SUB-HEADING:  "The back story on bad forensic science."

SUB-HEADING: "With the Trump administration’s move to end a commission investigating flaws in forensic science, Retro Report looks at the history of one now-challenged method: hair analysis."
GIST: "Reverence for science has not been a conspicuous guiding spirit of the Trump administration, and forensic science is no exception. That was affirmed this month when Attorney General Jeff Sessions ended an advisory panel created under President Barack Obama to improve the reliability of crime-solving techniques like hair analysis, ballistics testing, bite-mark evidence, blood typing and shoe-print comparisons. This panel, the National Commission on Forensic Science, was made up of scientists, judges and lawyers whose brief was to raise the standards of laboratory work in criminal cases. What will emerge in its place is not clear. But perhaps not surprisingly, prosecutors in the main applauded the Sessions decision, and defense lawyers fretted that the rights of their clients could be undermined. The reality is that forensic science is not the infallible discipline that television shows like “CSI” may lead many viewers to believe. That point is underscored in this brief offering from Retro Report, a series of video documentaries re-exploring major news stories of the past. In real life, crime labs are not the exclusive domain of une rring Gil Grissoms and Dr. Quincys. Mistakes happen. And often enough, errors send innocent people to prison and even, in some instances, to death row. The video focuses on hair analysis, a staple of forensic work for decades. The advent of DNA testing in the late 1980s showed that hair samples found at crime scenes did not necessarily match those of criminal suspects, no matter what lab technicians may have concluded. “About 11 percent of the time, mitochondrial DNA said: ‘No, that hair actually came from someone else,’” Max M. Houck, a former forensics expert for the Federal Bureau of Investigation, told Retro Report. “It kind of shook us up.” And so it should have, says the Innocence Project...Mr. Sessions said that with the fade-out of the old commission, an in-house group at the Justice Department would work on a new strategy for forensics procedures. Nonetheless, his critics say they are troubled that an independent voice on science has been silenced."

The entire commentary can be  found at the   link below;

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/26/us/retro-hair-analysis.html?_r=0

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. 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: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com. Harold Levy; Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog;

Sandra Higgins: Ireland; Bulletin: Ongoing shaken baby syndrome trial: "Trial of childminder accused of assaulting baby hears injuries similar to 'non-accidental injury," the Independent I.E. reports. Reporter Sarah Jane Murphy; April 28, 2018..."The trial also heard evidence from Dr Peter Flynn, a Consultant Paediatric Neurologist at the Royal Belfast Hospital for Sick Children, who was called as a witness for the defence. He told Mr Farrell that a CT scan carried out on March 28 on the child showed acute bleeding on the brain. Dr Flynn also referenced the fact that an MRI showed that there was no damage to the spinal cord. “Usually in cases of shaking, damage will be done to this area,” he said. As regards the timing of the injuries, he said that it could be anytime between a few hours and 10 days. He also said that he saw evidence of older injuries, that could have been sustained two or three weeks previously. Evidence has now concluded in the trial and closing speeches before Judge Martin Nolan will begin on Tuesday."

 

"A retired consultant paediatrician has told the trial of a childminder, accused of assaulting a baby, that it is his belief the child was the subject of a non-accidental injury that occurred on more than one occasion.vProfessional childminder Sandra Higgins (36), is alleged to have caused the injuries to the 10-month-old baby she was minding at her own home by shaking the child. Ms Higgins, of The Beeches, Drumgola Wood, Cavan Town has pleaded not guilty at Dublin Circuit Criminal Court to intentionally or recklessly causing serious harm to the baby on March 28, 2012.On the fourth day of the trial, retired consultant paediatrician Dr Christopher Woods, who has worked extensively in the area of child protection and injury to children, said he was presented with the child's files and medical reports and asked to review the case.“When I reviewed the material I could see there was a pattern here, a collection of findings, and I've seen such a pattern before in cases of non-accidental injury,” he told Alice Fawsitt SC, prosecuting.Dr Woods referred to the fact that when Ms Higgins presented the child at Cavan General Hospital she was suffering from active seizures, had head injuries, a significant eye injury and bruises in various areas of her body. “She had a superficial skin abrasions on her legs, fractures to her ribs, head injuries and a detached retina as well as hemorrhaging in the eye,” he said. He told Ms Fawsitt that when such a combination of injuries occurred simultaneously it indicated a non-accidental injury. During cross examination by Remy Farrell SC, defending, Dr Woods agreed there were advantages and disadvantages to the fact that he didn't examine the child personally. “The main advantage is that I can look at things more objectively. The disadvantage is that you are reliant on the information you are provided with” he said.Mr Farrell asked if an accidental injury could cause the symptoms that the child exhibited in hospital on March 28. “Theoretically yes, but it's very rare and there are little or no cases to back this up,” he said. He explained that in cases like the one before the court, the gardai, medical professionals and child services work together. “It's like a jigsaw,” he said. Dr Woods agreed that pinpointing the time that the injuries were sustained proves difficult, as the multiple injuries make it complex. The trial also heard evidence from Dr Peter Flynn, a Consultant Paediatric Neurologist at the Royal Belfast Hospital for Sick Children, who was called as a witness for the defence. He told Mr Farrell that a CT scan carried out on March 28 on the child showed acute bleeding on the brain. Dr Flynn also referenced the fact that an MRI showed that there was no damage to the spinal cord. “Usually in cases of shaking, damage will be done to this area,” he said. As regards the timing of the injuries, he said that it could be anytime between a few hours and 10 days. He also said that he saw evidence of older injuries, that could have been sustained two or three weeks previously. Evidence has now concluded in the trial and closing speeches before Judge Martin Nolan will begin on Tuesday."

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/trial-of-childminder-accused-of-assaulting-baby-hears-injuries-similar-to-nonaccidental-injury-35664211.html

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. 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: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com. Harold Levy; Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog;

Patrick Pursley; Illinois; Free on bond while awaiting appeal and new trial after 23 years behind bars: Reporter Georgette Braun; RR Star; 27 April, 2017....From previous RR Star story: "A forensic scientist, during a hearing today before Winnebago County Chief Judge Joseph McGraw, backed off testimony from 1994 credited with convicting a Rockford man on charges of first-degree murder. Daniel Gunnell, now an assistant director of the Illinois State Police Joliet Forensic Science Laboratory, worked as a state crime lab firearms and toolmark scientist at the time of the murder trial. Gunnell concluded that bullets and two spent shell casings found at the crime scene had come from a Taurus 9 mm semiautomatic pistol recovered from the apartment of Patrick A. Pursley — a man sentenced to life in prison but who has for years proclaimed his innocence. Gunnell testified at the time that microscopic markings on the recovered bullets and shell casings, compared with test-fired bullets and casings, showed they had been fired by Pursley’s Taurus handgun “to the exclusion of all others.” New tests have called Gunnell’s 1994 testimony into question."

 
"Patrick Pursley emerged from the Winnebago County Justice Center this afternoon free on bond after being imprisoned for 23 years for the shooting death of Andy Ascher. Pursley, 51, will live with his fiance, Michelle Carr, in an apartment in Rockford as a condition of his bond while he awaits an appeal made by prosecutors and a new trial granted in March by Judge Joseph McGraw. Pursley was serving a life sentence at Stateville Correctional Center in Joliet."
 http://www.rrstar.com/news/20170427/patrick-pursley-free-on-bond-while-awaiting-appeal-and-new-trial-in-1993-rockford-murder

See related (December 13, 2016)  story at the link below: "A forensic scientist, during a hearing today before Winnebago County Chief Judge Joseph McGraw, backed off testimony from 1994 credited with convicting a Rockford man on charges of first-degree murder. Daniel Gunnell, now an assistant director of the Illinois State Police Joliet Forensic Science Laboratory, worked as a state crime lab firearms and toolmark scientist at the time of the murder trial. Gunnell concluded that bullets and two spent shell casings found at the crime scene had come from a Taurus 9 mm semiautomatic pistol recovered from the apartment of Patrick A. Pursley — a man sentenced to life in prison but who has for years proclaimed his innocence. Gunnell testified at the time that microscopic markings on the recovered bullets and shell casings, compared with test-fired bullets and casings, showed they had been fired by Pursley’s Taurus handgun “to the exclusion of all others.” New tests have called Gunnell’s 1994 testimony into question. Gunnell today said he had revisited the evidence himself in 2012. He still maintains the shell casings were more than likely fired by that particular gun. But his new review of the bullets — which is consistent with the conclusions of a new court-ordered examination of the evidence by the state crime lab — were inconclusive. Gunnell now says there is not enough evidence to prove conclusively that the Taurus fired the bullets, but neither could the gun be eliminated as the weapon that fired them. And Gunnell said that even if he had reached the same conclusions as he did in 1994, he would no longer describe the evidence the way he did then because of changing industry standards. Instead, he would tell jurors that his tests had concluded the bullets matched to a “reasonable degree of scientific certainty.” The testimony was so strongly worded in 1994 that it denied Pursley a fair trial and “turned a weak and collapsing case based on circumstantial evidence into a case purportedly built upon a solid forensic foundation,” Pursley’s lawyers, Steven Drizin and Andrew Vail, told McGraw in their written post-conviction petition. Pursley insists he is innocent in the slaying of 22-year-old Andrew Ascher, who was shot and killed during an attempted armed robbery."

http://www.rrstar.com/news/20161213/gun-expert-revises-testimony-that-helped-convict-rockford-man-of-murder

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. 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: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com. Harold Levy; Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog;

Jessie McKim: Missouri; The Marshall Project's Andrew Cohen exposes us to an intriguing case on a topic of interest to the readers of this Blog: Is It Murder if there is no homicide? The strange case of a convicted killer whose “victim” probably died of her own drug overdose..."There are a handful of legal reasons to doubt the justice of the verdict against him — allegations of prosecutorial misconduct, disreputable witnesses and ineffective assistance of counsel, for example — but what distinguishes his story is the fact that there now is little reason to believe that Wagnon was murdered at all. There is, instead, a consensus from several veteran forensic pathologists, doctors with thousands of cases as expert witnesses behind them, that Wagnon died from a self-administered overdose of methamphetamine after a weekend binge of drug use. If this is true, the prosecution’s original trial theory cannot be true. And that theory, as prosecutors and their medical examiner had told jurors in 1999, is that Wagnon died after being suffocated by McKim or his co-defendant, his uncle, a man named James Peavler. No homicide, no murder case, no possible conviction, right? Wrong. No state or federal court has been willing to grant McKim relief despite what the doctors now say."..." In 2013, a local judge conducted a three-day hearing on the issue and concluded that Wagnon did, indeed, die of a meth overdose; that the medical examiner had gotten his cause-of-death wrong. But that judge denied McKim’s request for relief anyway, concluding that there were procedural reasons for barring his claims and, alternatively, that McKim had not conclusively proven his innocence because of a new theory state attorneys offered to explain the crime."

STORY: "Is it murder if there's no homicide? The strange case of a convicted killer whose "victim" probably died of her own drug overdose," by Andrew Cohen, published by The Marshall Project on April 24, 2017.

GIST: "Last week in Florida a man named Randal Wagoner was released from jail after spending 1,140 days in confinement for murder. He was about to go to trial when prosecutors admitted their case against him was “weak.” Why? Because a medical examiner concluded after some deliberation (and the hiring of defense experts) that the victim’s death may not have been a homicide after all. And if there is no homicide there cannot, by law and logic, be a murder case or a resulting conviction. Now consider the case of Jessie McKim, a man who is serving a life sentence without parole in Missouri after he was convicted in 1999 of strangling a woman named Wendy Wagnon. There are a handful of legal reasons to doubt the justice of the verdict against him — allegations of prosecutorial misconduct, disreputable witnesses and ineffective assistance of counsel, for example — but what distinguishes his story is the fact that there now is little reason to believe that Wagnon was murdered at all. There is, instead, a consensus from several veteran forensic pathologists, doctors with thousands of cases as expert witnesses behind them, that Wagnon died from a self-administered overdose of methamphetamine after a weekend binge of drug use. If this is true, the prosecution’s original trial theory cannot be true. And that theory, as prosecutors and their medical examiner had told jurors in 1999, is that Wagnon died after being suffocated by McKim or his co-defendant, his uncle, a man named James Peavler. No homicide, no murder case, no possible conviction, right? Wrong. No state or federal court has been willing to grant McKim relief despite what the doctors now say. In 2013, a local judge conducted a three-day hearing on the issue and concluded that Wagnon did, indeed, die of a meth overdose; that the medical examiner had gotten his cause-of-death wrong. But that judge denied McKim’s request for relief anyway, concluding that there were procedural reasons for barring his claims and, alternatively, that McKim had not conclusively proven his innocence because of a new theory state attorneys offered to explain the crime. Having been foiled in court, McKim and the advocates on his behalf have asked Missouri Governor Eric Greitens for mercy. There is a new clemency request, an update on an older effort, from a Missouri attorney who says the facts of McKim’s case “stopped me dead in my tracks” when she first heard about them. The story starts on April 13, 1997, when Wagnon was found dead on the side of the road in Kirksville, Missouri... (Read on. HL);

The entire story can be found at:

https://www.themarshallproject.org/2017/04/24/is-it-murder-if-there-s-no-homicide#.CPq8X17KE
By Andrew Cohen 

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. 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: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com. Harold Levy; Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog;

Sandra Higgins: Ireland: Bulletin: On-going trial: 'Baby's symptoms were 'classic' and 'very typical' of shaken baby syndrome, court hears.' The Independent I.E.; Reporter Liz Farsaci; 27 April, 2017..."The prosecution’s final witness is expected to give evidence tomorrow in the trial before Judge Martin Nolan and a jury."

 

"A 10-month-old baby girl had “classic” symptoms of abusive head trauma, the trial of her former child minder heard today. Sandra Higgins (36) of The Beeches, Drumgola Wood, Cavan, has pleaded not guilty at Dublin Circuit Criminal Court to intentionally or recklessly causing serious harm to the baby at her home on 28 March 2012. Paediatric consultant Prof Alf Nicholson told the court he was on call on 1 April 2012, after the baby was admitted to Temple Street Children’s Hospital in Dublin, where she was transferred for specialist care from Cavan. The baby was suffering from a number of issues upon admittance, including bilateral retinal bleeding, or bleeding behind the eyes, bleeding along the surface of her brain and two rib fractures on the left side. Some facial bruising was also noted, Prof Nicholson said. The baby “wasn’t very well”, said Prof Nicholson, and was also experiencing seizure activity and weakness on one side. The baby’s symptoms – including the brain and eye bleeding, as well as the rib fractures – were “classic” and “very typical” of abusive head trauma, Prof Nicholson said. Shaken baby syndrome is now referred to as abusive head trauma, Prof Nicholson said, adding that both he personally and the staff at Temple Street had a great deal of experience in dealing with this condition. The bleeding in the eyes and the brain were two different bleeds, Prof Nicholson said. When a child was suffering from both “it increases the risk of this being non-accidental”, he told the court. Prof Michael O’Keefe, a consultant surgeon at Temple Street and professor of ophthalmology at UCD, said the baby came under his care after she was referred by colleagues in Cavan. He said he found the baby was suffering from haemorrhages, or bleeding, behind both eyes. She was also suffering from retinal detachment, with fluid behind one eye, and from bleeding in her brain. The blood from the eyes most likely came from the vessels at the back of the retinas, Dr O’Keefe said. The baby was examined by the paediatric team, who decided no intervention was needed. The baby attended the hospital again on several other occasions and by June of that year, the bleeding had gone away, the retinal detachment was resolved and she was using both eyes well. The prosecution’s final witness is expected to give evidence tomorrow in the trial before Judge Martin Nolan and a jury."

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/babys-symptoms-were-classic-and-very-typical-of-shaken-baby-syndrome-court-hears-35660846.html

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. 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: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com. Harold Levy; Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog;

Rodricus Crawford; Louisiana; Editorial; Connecticut Journal Inquirer looks at racial bias and a Death Row inmate’s reprieve, and concludes: "Caddo Parish owes this innocent father more than just an apology."

EDITORIAL: "Racial bias and a Death Row inmate’s reprieve," published by The Journal Inquirer on April 27, 2017.

GIST: "After serving three years on Death Row, a Louisiana inmate recently had all charges against him dismissed.  What was Rodricus Crawford’s alleged crime? Prosecutors said Crawford suffocated his infant son to death. The dismissal was based on a finding that the jury in the case of Crawford, who is African-American, may have been racially biased. The Caddo Parish District Attorney’s Office has now acknowledged that the defendants’ infant son had pneumonia and bacteria in his blood, which indicated sepsis, and it will not pursue a retrial. Oddly enough, it would seem that this information must have been known when Crawford was originally tried, but no one bothered to tell the defendant or his attorney. Caddo Parish, which supports a monument to the Confederacy outside its courthouse, has only 5 percent of Louisiana’s population but, according to Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer, imposes almost 50 percent of Louisiana’s death sentences. The Civil War is over in the sense that two armies are not in the field shooting each other. But Caddo Parish is apparently still a creature of a plantation-type philosophy. Caddo Parish owes this innocent father more than just an apology."

The entire editorial can be found at the link below:
http://www.journalinquirer.com/public/racial-bias-and-a-death-row-inmate-s-reprieve/article_b7349b88-2b2c-11e7-8b62-2fb67bf03e4f.html

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. 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: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com. Harold Levy; Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog;

Sandra Higgins: Ireland; Bulletin: Shaken baby syndrome; Trial begins: Irish Times: "Child-minder charged with causing serious harm to baby told gardai she didn't 'violently shake' or assault baby."...Reporter Fiona Ferguson: April 26, 2017..."Ms Higgins told gardai that the child had been unwell in the weeks prior to the incident and had been on antibiotics. She said the child was quiet when her mother dropped her off. She said the baby had two naps during the day and her cheeks were “flushed” when she was woken after the second nap. She said the child went “very quiet” and was sitting still like she was in a “trance.” The child minder said the infant fell forward, onto her side and then stomach. She said her whole body was jerking all over the floor before she started to vomit. Ms Higgins told gardai that after the seizure stopped, the child started choking and gasping. She said her body was limp and cold. The child vomited again in the car on the way to the hospital. She told gardai that the child had falls in her home but she had never assaulted her. After gardai read over the child's injuries to her, Ms Higgins told them “I never caused any injuries of any kind.”

"A child minder on trial accused of causing serious harm to a ten-month-old baby told gardai that the child was not “violently shaken” or assaulted while in her care. Sandra Higgins (36) told gardai during her interview that she drove the child to hospital after the infant suffered a seizure at her home. She said she had cared for the baby like her own children. Ms Higgins of The Beeches, Drumgola Wood, Cavan town, has pleaded not guilty at Dublin Circuit Criminal Court to intentionally or recklessly causing serious harm to the baby at her home on March 28, 2012. Detective Garda Linda Harkin told Alice Fawsitt SC, prosecuting, that she was made aware on March 30, 2012 that there was a suspicion of non-accidental injury to a baby and she attended at Cavan General Hospital to speak with the consultant paediatrician, Dr Alan Finan. She said Dr Finan told her that the child had come into the hospital in the care of Ms Higgins who had given an account of the child having a seizure prior to her arrival. The doctor told Det Gda Harkin that the child had unusual bruising to her head, face and buttocks. He said there was evidence of a subdural haematoma and two healing rib fractures, estimated to be four weeks old. He said there was a bilateral haemorrhage behind her eye.

The child was no longer at the hospital at this time, having been transferred to Temple Street.........The court heard that Ms Higgins told gardai that she had been minding the child since June 2011, when she was six weeks old. She said that the child was “treated like one of our own” and she had a good relationship with the child's mother. She said there had been incidents of the child falling in her home. She agreed with gardai that she had completed “incident reports” for two earlier events only after the child was hospitalised. Ms Higgins told gardai that the child had been unwell in the weeks prior to the incident and had been on antibiotics. She said the child was quiet when her mother dropped her off.

She said the baby had two naps during the day and her cheeks were “flushed” when she was woken after the second nap. She said the child went “very quiet” and was sitting still like she was in a “trance.” The child minder said the infant fell forward, onto her side and then stomach. She said her whole body was jerking all over the floor before she started to vomit. Ms Higgins told gardai that after the seizure stopped, the child started choking and gasping. She said her body was limp and cold. The child vomited again in the car on the way to the hospital. She told gardai that the child had falls in her home but she had never assaulted her. After gardai read over the child's injuries to her, Ms Higgins told them “I never caused any injuries of any kind.” She denied suggestions of “violently shaking” or assaulting the child. She told gardai she was shocked at the allegations and when asked how she felt about the child's injuries she replied “disgust and shock.” The trial continues before Judge Martin Nolan and a jury of six men and six women. There is a court order prohibiting publication of anything that would identify the child.

 http://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/childminder-accused-severely-injuring-10-10296586

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. 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: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com. Harold Levy; Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog;

Rodricus Crawford: Louisiana: Role of pathologist alleged to have misdiagnosed sepsis in miscarriage of justice examined in investigative journalist Domonique Benn's TV documentary broadcast last night (April 26, 2016) - as the Crawford case reinforces demands for an end to Louisiana's death penalty..."Crawford, once charged with first-degree murder, always has maintained his innocence. Dr. James Traylor was the pathologist who ruled the baby's death a homicide. When asked to comment on the autopsy, Traylor directed inquiries to the court records from the trial, which stated his autopsy findings. According to the autopsy report, Traylor determined smothering to be the cause of the child’s death, as evidenced by a small cut under the baby's top lip. Defense attorneys argued that the injury came from a fall, not a crime. Crawford says this is what happened that day, “He fell out the tub. I was taking him a bath. I set him right here, and I ran in to get a bath towel to dry him off. That's how he fell. Me, not paying attention, got on the phone and I heard him cry. His Mom came right down there and seen the bruises. That's how she knew where the bruises was.” Using tissue and blood samples, defense attorneys argued that the real cause of the child's death was his failing health. Crawford questions the coroner’s report. “If the coroner would have followed what he was supposed to do, he would have knew about the bruises. How old, when they did it. He didn't do none of that That's the question we need to be asking him.” Cecelia Kappel, the attorney who was assigned Crawford’s case after his death sentence, found nine doctors from throughout the country who dispute Traylor’s findings. All agree the child died of sepsis. “If I were him, I wouldn't be able to sleep at night knowing he put an innocent man on Death Row and he could have very well been executed for that,” Kappel said of Traylor. “I hope he re-examines the work that he did on this case. And I hope he can admit that he made a mistake.”

QUOTE OF THE DAY: “If I were him, I wouldn't be able to sleep at night knowing he put an innocent man on Death Row and he could have very well been executed for that...I hope he re-examines the work that he did on this case. And I hope he can admit that he made a mistake.” 

CECILIA KAPPEL: Rodricus Crawford's  appeal attorney: Assigned Crawford’s case after his death sentence, she found nine doctors from throughout the country who dispute  pathologist  Dr. James Traylor's findings: All agree the child died of sepsis.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

STORY: "EXCLUSIVE: Rodricus Crawford talks about his journey from Death Row to freedom," by reporter Domonique Benn, reported on KSLA on April 26, 2017.

PHOTO CAPTION:"He was arrested, tried and convicted of killing his year-old son."

TRANSCRIPT. (See link to video below): At age 23, Rodricus Crawford then was sentenced to Death Row at Louisiana State Penitentiary at Angola. He and his post-conviction attorneys fought for his freedom. Now, after five years on Death Row, Crawford is a free man. And he sits down with KSLA News 12's Domonique Benn for his first television interview and talks about the fight to prove his innocence.  He also talked about how he lived a real-life nightmare, life on the Tier. “I am seeing people that been here 30 years got sentenced.  I seen a man sign a death certificate and I am innocent.  Seeing that right there.  Reading paperwork, this man saying I should die a slow and painful death for something I didn't do.” For the first time, the Death Row exoneree watched the special that KSLA News 12 aired in November 2015. He still was on Death Row at that time.  When asked if it ever crossed his mind that he would be put to death, he responded, “Yeah, I was thought I was gone die.  I am on Death Row on the Tier. I thought I was going to die." In November 2015, KSLA News 12 uncovered the 911 calls and dash cam video from the day Roderius Lott died. That evidence never was presented at trial.  Now the actions that day all seem unbelievable to him.  On the 911 calls, you can hear chaos, crying and confusion moments after year-old Roderius was found unresponsive. Crawford, once charged with first-degree murder, always has maintained his innocence. Dr. James Traylor was the pathologist who ruled the baby's death a homicide. When asked to comment on the autopsy, Traylor directed inquiries to the court records from the trial, which stated his autopsy findings.  According to the autopsy report, Traylor determined smothering to be the cause of the child’s death, as evidenced by a small cut under the baby's top lip. Defense attorneys argued that the injury came from a fall, not a crime. Crawford says this is what happened that day, “He fell out the tub. I was taking him a bath. I set him right here, and I ran in to get a bath towel to dry him off. That's how he fell. Me, not paying attention, got on the phone and I heard him cry. His Mom came right down there and seen the bruises. That's how she knew where the bruises was.” Using tissue and blood samples, defense attorneys argued that the real cause of the child's death was his failing health. Crawford questions the coroner’s report. “If the coroner would have followed what he was supposed to do, he would have knew about the bruises. How old, when they did it. He didn't do none of that.  That's the question we need to be asking him.”  Cecelia Kappel, the attorney who was assigned Crawford’s case after his death sentence, found nine doctors from throughout the country who dispute Traylor’s findings. All agree the child died of sepsis.  “If I were him, I wouldn't be able to sleep at night knowing he put an innocent man on Death Row and he could have very well been executed for that,” Kappel said of Traylor. “I hope he re-examines the work that he did on this case. And I hope he can admit that he made a mistake.” In November, newly discovered evidence prompted the Louisiana Supreme Court to vacate Crawford’s sentence and order a new trial. At the time, Caddo Assistant District Attorney Tommy Johnson tried to prove his case was first-degree murder. No evidence was produced at trial showing Crawford ever abused his son. Instead, defense attorneys argued that the cards were stacked against their client from the beginning because of his race and the facts that he was unemployed and still lived at home with this mother. Crawford said he was interviewed five or six times. “I talked to them people and told them everything I knew. “They tried to make me say I did something. I told them I am not going to say I did something and I didn't do it,” he continued. “That was my first son. Every time I see my friends with their son, I think about my son. Every time, every day. That was my child. Why would I kill something I had? Prosecutors have decided against retrying Crawford in connection with his son's death. Even so, he said, his time on Death Row continues to haunt him. And he says he has forgiven the man who put him there, then-prosecutor Dale Cox. But Crawford said he cannot seem to move past not receiving an apology from the state. “They still ain't told me ‘I'm sorry.’ They still saying I did something. Can you believe that? Now how am I supposed to feel inside?” Crawford's attorneys are getting ready to ask for compensation. According to Louisiana law, if approved, he would get $25,000 for each year of incarceration. That amount is capped at $250,000. Another $80,000 is for loss of life opportunities. In order to win compensation, exonerees have to be factually innocent. And the Caddo district attorney's office says they did not find Crawford innocent.   Although the district attorney has opted not to retry Crawford on the charge of first-degree murder, he thinks a reasonable prosecution could be pursued on a charge of criminal negligent homicide. And that negligence could extend to other family members. Even if Crawford were to be successfully prosecuted on that charge, the length of time he has spent in jail is close to the maximum sentence of five years if he was to be convicted. KSLA News 12 again reached out to Traylor, the forensic pathologist in this case. LSU Health spokeswoman Lisa Babin released this statement: “Dr. Traylor declined to comment on allegations made by Rodricus Crawford.”

The entire transcript can be found at the link below:

 http://www.ksla.com/story/35260432/exclusive-rodricus-crawfords-journey-from-death-row-to-freedom

See related KSLA story -Debate continues on whether Louisiana should abolish the death penalty  - at the link below: "A senate committee voted Tuesday, 6 to 1, in favor of abolishing the death penalty in Louisiana, for any crimes committed after August 1. Lawmakers cited issues with the penalty in the past, believing it to be costly and ineffective at preventing future crimes. According to the Death Penalty Information Center, there have been 28 executions in the state since the law was reinstated back in 1973, but 158 people who were given the death penalty eventually had their sentence reversed.  Recently back on April 14, the death penalty sentence for Rodricus Crawford of Shreveport was reversed and a judge chose not to have a retrial for that decision. Crawford was convicted and sentenced to death in 2012 in the death of his one-year-old son, Roderius Lott. Louisiana's last execution was back in 2010. and 76 people currently sit on death row."
http://www.ksla.com/story/35250900/debate-continues-on-whether-louisiana-should-abolish-death-penalty

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. 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: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com. Harold Levy; Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog;

Dr. Michael Pollanen: Ontario; A 'nice, cautionary tale' presented by National Post reporter Tom Blackwell, one of this Blog's favourite scribes: He describes how a naked, bruised body in the woods looked like a sexual homicide - but then came the autopsy - and refers and refers to former doctor Charles Smith, the namesake of this Blog..."Her death was eventually blamed — not on rape and murder — but on heat exhaustion and insect stings, says the report by Dr. Michael Pollanen, Ontario’s chief forensic pathologist. The sexual-homicide “mimic” underscores the importance of considering alternative theories, of “disentangling our preconceptions from the actual truth,” he said. “This case … is a reminder to forensic pathologists to avoid tunnel vision,” wrote Pollanen in the journal Forensic Science, Medicine and Pathology."..."And yet, Pollanen himself was called to task recently for wearing blinders, with a judge saying he had been too dogmatic in justifying his opinion that a child’s injury was the result of violence, not mishap." (A 'cautionary tale,' indeed! HL);

STORY: "Naked, bruised body in the woods looked like a sexual homicide. But then came the autopsy," by Tom Blackwell, published by The National Post on April 25, 2017.

GIST:  "The Ontario woman’s naked body was found deep in a forest, her legs spread apart, what appeared to be bruises speckling her face, neck and torso. Evidence from the eerie scene and common sense pointed to one thing: sexual assault and homicide. But then authorities carried out an autopsy and did other investigation, producing a much different story — and a cautionary tale for a province where forensic science has a contentious history. The bruises were actually the effects of insect bites, while the victim had a history of mental illness and had once before run unclothed through the woods, says a newly published study of the case. Her death was eventually blamed — not on rape and murder — but on heat exhaustion and insect stings, says the report by Dr. Michael Pollanen, Ontario’s chief forensic pathologist. The sexual-homicide “mimic” underscores the importance of considering alternative theories, of “disentangling our preconceptions from the actual truth,” he said.

“This case … is a reminder to forensic pathologists to avoid tunnel vision,” wrote Pollanen in the journal Forensic Science, Medicine and Pathology. “We need to be skeptical of the allure of common sense based on first impressions of the scene and body. Forensic pathologists must be unafraid to scientifically explore improbable, but true, alternative explanations.” His warnings would seem to embody a key part of Pollanen’s original mission in Ontario. Appointed a decade ago, the highly respected expert overhauled the province’s forensic-pathology system in the wake of the scandal around Charles Smith, the pathologist whose rush to blame caregivers for children’s deaths led to several miscarriages of justice. Smith sometimes cited foul play when accident had resulted in a child’s death. And yet, Pollanen himself was called to task recently for wearing blinders, with a judge saying he had been too dogmatic in justifying his opinion that a child’s injury was the result of violence, not mishap.... “A nice cautionary tale, to be sure,” Dr. Brian Peterson, president of the U.S. National Association of Medical Examiners, said by email. “One of our toughest challenges is to see beyond our initial case impressions — it’s not so much about keeping an open mind, but keeping an informed, questioning mind at all times.” Nathan Gorham, the lawyer whose case resulted in the recent judicial dressing down of Pollanen, said he’s still troubled by the impact of such experts’ work on criminal cases. He declined to comment on the Ontario doctor’s work specifically, but lamented that pathologists often voice strong opinions based on general medical literature that may not apply to the case at hand, and essentially usurp the jury’s role by factoring in non-medical, circumstantial evidence. “It’s difficult to overstate how important this evidence is when it bears on a truly contested issue in a trial,” said Gorham. “It gives a real, unfair advantage when you have someone who is cloaked in all of this expertise and a stellar reputation … who is essentially providing a thinly veiled argument.”

The entire story can be found at:

http://news.nationalpost.com/health/naked-bruised-body-in-the-woods-looked-like-a-sexual-homicide-but-then-came-the-autopsy

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. 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: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com. Harold Levy; Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog;

Rodricus Crawford: Louisiana; Publisher's View: (Editorial); His Caddo Parish prosecutors got it wrong, terribly wrong, won't admit it, and are pursuing a malicious 'alternative truth.'...Harold Levy. Publisher. The Charles Smith Blog.

PUBLISHER'S VIEW: (EDITORIAL);

Reporter Gary Hines says distinctly in a KTBS story:  "The Caddo district attorney's office earlier this month dropped charges, based in large part on medical evidence showing Crawford's son died of an illness, not trauma-- as claimed by Caddo Coroner Dr. Todd Thoma and his forensic pathologist." KSLA  investigative reporter  Domonique Benn dug deeper into the flawed medical investigation that led to the murder charge, Rodricus's conviction, and more than three hellish years on death row for him and his family. "According to the autopsy conducted by the Caddo Parish Coroner's Office, Roderius Lott died of smothering. However, defense attorneys for the child's father say the Coroner's office ignored critical evidence that the child died of natural causes. "This was not a homicide, this child died of pneumonia and sepsis and Dr. Traylor was dead wrong," Kappel says. Dr. Traylor was the pathologist who ruled the baby's death a homicide. When asked to comment on the autopsy, Traylor would only point to his findings submitted to the court as evidence during the trial. In the autopsy report, Dr. Traylor cited a small cut under the baby's top lip as evidence of smothering. Defense attorneys say the injury came from a fall and was not evidence of a homicide.  They say Roderius fell down in the bathroom and cut his lip the day before he died and that the real cause of the child's death was his failing health. It's evidence they say is backed up by tissue and blood samples. "He missed the fact that this child had brain swelling, which indicated he did not die of smothering," says Kappel. "He didn't perform testing on the bruising on the child which could have pinpointed the moment those bruises occurred instead of assuming that Mr. Crawford inflicted those injuries."  Kappel adds that Dr. Traylor testified that the little boy had pneumonia, but that it was not serious enough to kill him. When questioned on the stand about the bacteria found during the autopsy, Kappel says Traylor testified that the results would have indicated sepsis if they were accurate but also said that his needle could have been contaminated.  "So based on his testimony either this child died of sepsis and this was not a murder or his autopsy was contaminated.  Either way, we can't have any confidence in this verdict," concludes Kappel. Nine other doctors around the country agreed that Roderius Lott died from sepsis." Instead of acknowledging that they got it wrong, terribly wrong, The Caddo Parish  District Attorneys Office constructed an alternate truth - something in vogue in America these days - that the State could somehow have convicted Rodricus  and even members of his family of criminally negligent homicide. As per the press release: "Rodricus Crawford was a chronic and heavy abuser of marijuana. This fact was well known to his family members as well as the fact the child had experienced multiple respiratory infections in his brief life. Crawford was provided a suction device to clear the child's sinuses/nasal passages. Bruising of the lips as noted in the autopsy could possibly be ascribed to use of this device while he was in a drug-induced impaired state. Also, the fact that Crawford could have rolled onto the child in a drug intoxicated state and suffocated the child is a reasonable possibility the State had to consider. These reasonable possibilities all point to a criminally negligent homicide."  'Criminally negligent homicide'? That is utterly outrageous! If you want to talk negligence talk about   pathologist Dr. James Traylor, who  Rodricus' lawyers alleged in The Supreme Court of Louisiana had  made a diagnosis of homicide before he did the tests that determined that Rodricus' son had pneumonia  and tested positive for sepsis, and who didn't bother to age the bruising that he said he found on the lips. The perverse suggestion that Rodricus and his family could have avoided all this if they had taken  Roderius to the hospital to check out Roderius' cold. It's perverse because most parents have to make the decision as to whether they should take a sick child to hospital from time to time. Most of the time it works out, The child gets better. In a few cases, sadly this one, the child does not. And that makes Roderius and his family criminally negligent! Blaming Rodricus and his family for the disease that took his son is utterly cruel. It  is  also perverse because on the appeal, the prosecutor took the position that Roderius didn't show signs of  illness that indicate sepsis. (On appeal, they didn't want Roderius to appear ill. On withdrawal of the murder charge they did. Give me a break.) A last point:  When asked by a reporter about Rodricus Crawford seeking restitution, District Attorney James Stewart is quoted as saying: “the only truly innocent party is the deceased infant. It seems sinful to try and profit from this tragic loss.” This is rubbish. Roderius is sadly dead because of a killer disease. The only innocent party is Rodricus. When his murder conviction was vacated by The Supreme Court of Louisiana  and ordered a new trial he returned to his status of presumed innocent. Rodricus deserves compassion for the loss of his son, and help to readjust after a  horrible experience in Louisiana's criminal justice system, including more than three years on death Row in the notorious Angola prison  known as 'the farm' which threatened to be his last address.

Harold Levy; Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog.

-----------------------------------------------------------

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. 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: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com. Harold Levy; Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog;