Is it within the remit of an expert to decide which witness of fact they believe or... Is it within the remit of an expert to decide which witness of fact they believe or...

Is it within the remit of an expert to decide which witness of fact they believe or...

The judge noted that the expert readily accepted that integral to his reasoning was that he did not believe the claimant as to the symptoms he had...
Procedure for Determining Mental Capacity in Civil Proceedings Procedure for Determining Mental Capacity in Civil Proceedings

Procedure for Determining Mental Capacity in Civil Proceedings

A Civil Justice Council working group has published a report setting out recommendations for the development of a procedure for determing mental...
When the joint statement is no more than really two statements, one from each expert. When the joint statement is no more than really two statements, one from each expert.

When the joint statement is no more than really two statements, one from each expert.

The 'joint statement' prepared by two blockchain experts was really two statements, one from each expert. Fabrizio D'Aloia v Persons...
Podcast Episode 6: In Conversation with Giles Eyre Podcast Episode 6: In Conversation with Giles Eyre

Podcast Episode 6: In Conversation with Giles Eyre

In the 6th Episode of Expert Matters Podcast, Simon talks with retired Barrister and expert witness trainer, Giles Eyre, who is retiring as an EWI...
The dangers of a considerable burden of expert work The dangers of a considerable burden of expert work

The dangers of a considerable burden of expert work

The court found that a highly respected and hugely experienced histopathologist expert wtiness, who was overburdened with work, had made errors in his...

Check out our Case Updates and Member Magazine

Looking for more news relevant to the Expert Witness community? Why not check out our database of cases relevant to Expert Evidence or the latest and previous editions of our member magazine, Expert Matters.

News

Clicking on one of the topics below will display news items relevant to that topic. You can also use the search bar below to identify news items.

Psychiatrist removed from the GMC Register following misconduct as an Expert Witness
Simon Berney-Edwards 2148

Psychiatrist removed from the GMC Register following misconduct as an Expert Witness

bySimon Berney-Edwards

For those who believe they can act as an Expert Witness without the necessary training or understanding of their role, a recent case demonstrates why this is clearly not the case.

 

Dr Seshni Moodliar, a Consultant Psychiatrist, was removed from the GMC register following a hearing of the Medical Practitioners Tribunal.

 

Dr Moodliar had been instructed to provide expert evidence for the defence team. It was alleged that she:

  • Did not have the appropriate training or expertise
  • Failed to spend sufficient time to conduct an adequate assessment
  • Copied sections from another expert’s report into her own
  • Acted dishonestly

 

Dr Moodliar had admitted all of the allegations but some of the admissions were qualified. For example, she said that she should not remember exactly when she had started and finished her assessment and so had simply made an estimate of the time spent. These qualifications she put down as honest mistakes.

 

However, having assessed the evidence presented to the tribunal, they concluded that all the allegations were found proved.

 

In addition, the tribunal also conducted a review hearing relating to a tribunal which sat in 2022 which had imposed a sanction of conditions on Dr Moodliar for 18 months. That tribunal had found that Dr Moodliar had copied sections of someone else’s report and submitted it as her own work. In addition, in another case she had “failed to obtain a detailed background history; perform a mental state assessment; and check the veracity of B’s account. She also failed to explore the symptoms and possibility of insanity, schizophrenia or psychosis. In addition, she failed to prepare an expert report which was factually accurate. She also acted beyond her training and expertise in that she served as an expert witness without possessing sufficient knowledge of diminished responsibility and failed to keep accurate records”.

 

That tribunal had “determined that a period of conditional registration would allow Dr Moodliar to continue to work towards completing her journey of remediation, and to be able to demonstrate, with objective evidence, that she has learnt from her past failings and implemented steps to address them”.

 

In considering the sanctions to be imposed, the tribunal considered that:

  • Dr Moodliar demonstrated a lack of insight and has, in fact, regressed in her development of insight;
  • Dr Moodliar has undertaken some relevant training/courses but has not applied the training she has undertaken to develop her understanding of her misconduct;
  • Dr Moodliar misled the Tribunal during the hearing proceedings and failed to tell the truth during the hearing;
  • There has been a previous finding of impairment against Dr Moodliar for very similar allegations;
  • Dr Moodliar’s actions culminated in her giving misleading evidence before a Crown Court and she maintained her position until confronted with incontrovertible evidence to the contrary during cross-examination;
  • In preparation for this hearing, Dr Moodliar procured two testimonials as to her professionalism and honesty by misleading those who provided the testimonials;
  • Dr Moodliar misused her professional position when working with a vulnerable patient (as a consultant psychiatrist, the Tribunal considered this was particularly serious).

 

The Tribunal determined that her conduct was so serious that Dr Moodliar has been suspended with immediate effect and her name be erased from the Medical Register following the appeal period.

 

The full decision is available at the link below.

Share

Print
Comments are only visible to subscribers.