The prosecutor in the trial of a doctor charged with the manslaughter of her profoundly disabled daughter has said she broke all the rules by giving her child too much sedative. Her defence said there was a clear indication in the postmortem of a possibility of a terminal seizure.
The barristers were giving their closing speeches on Tuesday in the trial of Dr Bernadette Scully at the Central Criminal Court. The Offaly GP is charged with unlawfully killing Emily Barut (11), who was profoundly disabled, at their home at Emvale, Bachelor's Walk, Tullamore. It is alleged she killed her by an act of gross negligence involving the administration of an excessive quantity of chloral hydrate on Saturday September 15th, 2012. She has pleaded not guilty.
Ms Barut had microcephaly, severe epilepsy and could not speak or move. She had been in pain for the last eight days of her life, having had a medical procedure to replace the tube into her stomach, through which she received fluids and medication.
Dr Scully said she had administered chloral hydrate when her daughter became upset at 2am and 6am that day. She said Emily then had a massive fit after 11am and she administered more.
Tara Burns SC, prosecuting, noted that 10 times the therapeutic level of chloral hydrate's metabolite had been found in Emily's system. "My submission to you is that in itself establishes gross negligence," she said.
She pointed out that the State Pathologist had given the cause of death as chloral hydrate intoxication. She said that, although Prof Marie Cassidy agreed that Emily’s illnesses could have caused her death, she had not demurred from her opinion that the intoxication was a substantial cause. “The law says the prosecution doesn’t have to prove it was the only cause,” she added.
Ms Burns noted that Dr Scully had a rule that she would not administer more than 15ml of chloral hydrate in a 24-hour period and an absolute rule that she would never administer more than 20ml. This was also the expert view of the safe levels, she said, “but on the 15th of September, 2012, Ms Scully broke all those rules”.
Absolute rule She said that by 6am, Ms Scully had already exceeded her first rule, pointing to her account of having given 17ml by then. She said her next absolute rule was well exceeded by 11am, when 34ml had been administered on Dr Scully’s evidence. Ms Burns also suggested that there was a question mark over what Dr Scully said she administered. She was not suggesting that she had lied, but she was exhausted, emotional and in a very fretful situation. She described Dr Scully as a holy person, noting evidence of a Padre Pio medal and prayer said with Emily every night.
Ms Burns said that in light of that knowledge and the dignity and respect she had wished for Emily, her two suicide attempts after her death did not equate with a belief that she had died of natural causes. She asked the jury to look carefully at any suggestion that giving more chloral hydrate was the only thing she could do. She asked if it was not time to seek other medical help at 6am when the chloral hydrate wasn’t working.
“I suggest that if she had acted as a reasonable doctor with her knowledge and her experience, she wouldn’t have administered that much,” she said. “She was grossly negligent on the night and I have to urge upon you to return a guilty verdict in this case.”
Kenneth Fogarty SC addressed the jury on behalf of Dr Scully. He said the only thing his client could use that morning was the medicine she had to hand. “The only one ready, available and that had worked previously was chloral hydrate.” He noted his client had been standing beside her own daughter, who was in a seizure, the likes of which she had never seen before. If the fit continued, he said, she was going to die.
“In the human condition, people do make mistakes,” he said. “They’re trying to make the person’s life better. Anybody who has looked at somebody in pain, would you not as a human being do anything to solve that problem of pain?”
He also said it was beyond his understanding that eyewitness evidence that Emily had suffered a colossal fit at about 11am was being ignored. “There is a clear indication in the postmortem of a possibility of a terminal seizure, but nobody investigates it.”
“Little princess” Mr Fogarty noted that the experts had all found Emily had been cared for extremely well during her life. Witnesses had noticed how well her hair, nails and teeth were looked after. “She was minded like a little princess.” He mentioned that Dr Scully, who the trial heard had burn-out, had sought help; she had called her professional body and gone to a psychiatrist but had not got the help she needed. “She’d gone beyond crying for help.”
He told the jurors they would probably have the hardest job that had ever been done by a jury. “I’d say there isn’t a person in the country that would envy the position you’re in,” he said. “I guarantee you this, you’ll never come across a case like this again. The emotional roller-coaster we went through as a group is nothing compared to the position that Bernadette Scully finds herself in.
“You don’t have to be a genius to work out that she’s an incredible woman,” Mr Fogarty added. “It’s not just my privilege to represent her, but it’s an eye-opener in a country like this that you can get somebody who goes to the extraordinary lengths to look after a child and when the child passes away, the instantaneous response is: ‘You killed her’.”
He described it as extraordinary. “I believe in the coverage that this case has got, that maybe there’ll be a debate, depending on your decision,” he concluded. “I believe it will be the right decision but it’s just a pity it’ll just be down to one word or two.” He asked for a verdict of not guilty.
Mr Justice Patrick McCarthy has begun charging the jury of seven women and five men and will continue his charge on Wednesday morning.