Hi,
Its a small world at times and fate seems to have let me get this little nugget. Can’t say how or why yet but so chuffed! This is taken from an article by someone who doesn’t like dishonesty by fellow medical professionals. What a good egg, as he says earlier in his piece that there are good and bad in all jobs.
He makes some good points, I bet there are quite a few people out there that won’t like this man…I like him!
Nearer home, I reported Clive Handler to the GMC and he was found guilty of serious professional misconduct (Dyer 2002). His offence was not research fraud, but he embezzled charitable research funds at Northwick Park Hospital. He used charitable research funds to pay for hire of his private consulting rooms, to pay his Medical Defence Union and British Cardiac Society subscriptions, and to pay for social events.
The technicians in the Cardiac Department at Northwick Park Hospital were very angry about this and they reported him to the hospital management. An investigation confirmed that Handler had embezzled thousands of pounds. We will never know exactly how much because the hospital reached a severance agreement with Handler that if he went quietly they would not tell the police or the GMC, they would destroy the documentation and they would let him continue to use the private facilities at the Hospital until he got set up in Harley Street (Dyer 2002). The Trust Board agreed this deal. The most senior doctor on the Trust Board at the time was its Medical Director, Professor Peter Richards. Richards should have known that embezzling was the sort of thing one ought to report to the GMC, because Richards was a member of the GMC.
When Handler appeared before the Professional Conduct Committee of the GMC Richards was its Chairman. Richards had to stand down from the hearing and let someone else chair it, because of his conflict of interest (Anonymous 2002). After the finding of serious professional misconduct against Handler, Richards returned to chairing Professional Conduct Committee hearings.
Can you imagine a similar situation in a criminal court, with a judge having to stand down from hearing a case because he had been implicated in the cover up of crimes and then, as happened to Richards, being permitted to going back to being a judge? The GMC’s own solicitors and I asked that the GMC act against Richards. The GMC will not act against him and the GMC will not tell me its reasons. The GMC let Richards remain on the Professional Conduct Committee. In the case of Banerjee and Peters, Peters was found guilty of serious professional misconduct by the GMC because he had not taken action to expose Banerjee’s misconduct.
Surely the behaviour of Richards was similar to that of Peters, because Richards had failed to report Handler’s misconduct? The GMC seems to have special rules for protecting its own.
Its me I am back…well we wills ee cos when this is over I will be banging on the GMC’s door with quite a few issues and I will damn well make sure if they haven’t already cleaned up their act they better bloody had!
New Sheriff in town chaps, some of you may have been abe to con, some of my Police Colleagues with your unproven theories…but I have seen the light and I am going to turn it on you….
Fiat Justicia