The formation of an opinion by a former deputy State pathologist without supporting pathological evidence was “indescribably dangerous” and risked a miscarriage of justice, a Medical Council inquiry has heard.
Dr Khalid Jaber is facing three allegations of professional misconduct and poor professional performance concerning postmortem reports and evidence given in two cases before the Central Criminal Court.
He is accused of giving evidence in the trial of Michael Furlong for the murder of Patrick Connors in Enniscorthy, Co Wexford, in April 2011 when there was no pathological evidence to justify his opinion that blunt force trauma contributed to the man’s death. The trial collapsed due to concerns surrounding his evidence and a retrial was prohibited.
Dr Jaber, who served as a deputy State pathologist between 2009 and 2013, resigned amid reports of differences with the State pathologist Prof Marie Cassidy. He now lives and works in the Middle East and did not attend the hearing, with the committee hearing multiple attempts were made to contact him through email, calls, texts and WhatsApp messages.
Pathologist Dr William Lawler, an expert witness, told the fitness to practise inquiry on Friday there was no pathological evidence to justify or to support any of Dr Jaber’s conclusions concerning traumatic head and neck injuries contributing to Mr Connors’ death.
Despite Dr Jaber’s previous “insistence” that it was the cause of death, Dr Lawler said, based on the evidence available to him, he did not believe it was a conclusion that could “justifiably” have been drawn.
He said there was “no way” this opinion was pathologically sustainable, which he described as “very serious” and something he had never encountered before.
“If you do that, and if that is a policy you adopt, then you are guaranteed to a greater or lesser extent to mislead the court,” he said.
While serious in any court setting, Dr Lawler described it as “indescribably dangerous” in a murder trial, saying there is a risk of a miscarriage of justice given juries are susceptible to being misled by expert witnesses.
“There is a potential for a miscarriage of justice if an argument is put forward which is not based on good, sound, reliable pathological evidence,” he said, describing it as “dangerous in the extreme”.
While agreeing with Dr Jaber that Mr Connors’ scalp wounds contributed to his death by causing blood loss, he disagreed that blunt force trauma to his face contributed significantly to his death, saying there was no significant cerebral trauma or spinal cord injuries.
Dr Jaber is also accused of refusing to accept the possibility of hypothermia possibly being a factor in his death.
Although accepting that Mr Connors’ body did not show any diagnostic features of hypothermia, he noted that he was discovered naked “from the waist up” on an unheated staircase with an outside temperature of about 5 degrees.
Despite this, he said Dr Jaber did not refer to hypothermia until it was raised by the defence in the case.
Dr Lawler’s view was that Dr Jaber “completely dismissed” the notion of hypothermia rather than considering it after it was raised by the defence, adding that he should have realised it was an important factor. Despite a “thorough and detailed” postmortem, Dr Lawler said it seemed to him that Dr Jaber had difficulties in explaining Mr Connors’ death.
He said Dr Jaber should have realised his hypothesis of Mr Connors’ dying due to blunt force trauma was “completely untenable” as there was “absolutely no pathological evidence” of same. He said it was a “serious failing” on behalf of Dr Jaber.
The inquiry adjourned on Friday until a later date.
- Sign up for push alerts and have the best news, analysis and comment delivered directly to your phone
- Join The Irish Times on WhatsApp and stay up to date
- Listen to our Inside Politics podcast for the best political chat and analysis
