Login Join Us
A court cannot ignore an unchallenged expert report A court cannot ignore an unchallenged expert report

A court cannot ignore an unchallenged expert report

The High Court found that the Crown Court was bound to accept an uncontested expert report if it did not have a valid reasons for departing from the...
Expert Witness Survey - Equal Representation Expert Witness Survey - Equal Representation

Expert Witness Survey - Equal Representation

Take 5 minutes to help monitor progress
Appeal in the Cause Michael Marshall against Berkshire Hathaway International Insurance... Appeal in the Cause Michael Marshall against Berkshire Hathaway International Insurance...

Appeal in the Cause Michael Marshall against Berkshire Hathaway International Insurance...

The sheriff appeal court upheld the sheriff's award of damages for injuries sustained in a vehicle accident which were assessed, in the...
A Day in the Life of a Threat, Risk and Harm Consultant, Expert Evidence Trainer, and... A Day in the Life of a Threat, Risk and Harm Consultant, Expert Evidence Trainer, and...

A Day in the Life of a Threat, Risk and Harm Consultant, Expert Evidence Trainer, and...

EWI Honorary Fellow Tony Saggers has been a drug trafficking Expert Witness since 1995, alongside a career in law enforcement that spanned 30 years....
Forensic Science Regulator consultation on the code of practice Forensic Science Regulator consultation on the code of practice

Forensic Science Regulator consultation on the code of practice

The Forensic Science Regulator is consulting on the draft for the development of version 2 of the forensic science code of practice.

News

Psychiatrist removed from the GMC Register following misconduct as an Expert Witness
Simon Berney-Edwards
/ Categories: Industry News, Case Updates

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

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.

Previous Article Scottish Civil Justice Council publish consultation analysis
Next Article Experts making the evidence fit their own conclusions do not meet their duty to the Court
Print
1092
Comments are only visible to subscribers.