Cancer fraud consultant jailed for four years

A consultant surgeon who defrauded almost €750,000 from insurance companies through a false breast cancer claim has been jailed for four years by Judge Patrick McCartan.

Dr Emad Massoud (aged 52), Woodview, Brownstown, Ratoath, County Meath and his wife, Gehan Massoud (aged 45), a nurse, were convicted by a jury last month following a three-week trial for what Judge McCartan described as "a particularly evil and nasty offence".

Judge McCartan imposed a three-year sentence at Dublin Circuit Criminal Court on Gehan Massoud which he suspended because he said he didn’t want both parents of their family to be incarcerated at the same time.

The judge said their offence was at the higher end of the scale and done "simply to satisfy the greed of two people well cabable of supporting their family".

Judge McCartan said there were many people in this county who "suffered bravely" from cancer either as victims or dependants and they would "be disgusted" by the actions of the Massouds.

Judge Patrick McCartan described the fraud as "a clever scheme of deceit put together by them".

He noted that Mrs Massoud’s mother had sought the assistance of her daughter and son-in-law when she was diagnosed with breast cancer in Egypt and they then used her tissue sample for this fraud.

Judge McCartan noted also that it was never suggested to the jury that Mrs Massoud was forced in any way to engage in the fraud and added that "she made her own body available and agreed to it being desecrated" so that her husband could create a scar consistent with a tumour being removed from her left breast.

He said considering the fact that there were no prospects of the Massouds "righting the wrong they have been found guilty of doing" and compensating the insurance companies for their losses, the offence warranted a seven-year sentence.

He reduced this to four years for Dr Massoud, having taken into account the fact that he was previously of good character, and to three years for Gehan because he said she must be given credit for not giving evidence and deliberately misleading the jury.

The Massouds used a tissue sample from Gehan Massoud’s mother who had just been diagnosed in Egypt as having breast cancer and claimed that the tumour had been taken from her.Dr Massoud admitted through his counsel, Mr John Peart SC (with Mr Charles Corcoran BL) on the first day of the trial, that it was he who he had removed 237 grammes of tissue, including a tumour from his wife’s breast, rather than a colleague, Doctor Mohamed Hilal, as he fraudently stated in the insurance claim forms.

Judge McCartan commended Detective Sergeant Declan Daly, who led the investigation, and his garda colleagues on the way they compiled, presented and prepared the evidence, which he described as "frankly overwhelming".

"Certainly the work put in by the prosecution has greatly assisted justice being done," said Judge McCartan.The couple had pleaded not guilty to intent to defraud the insurance companies by falsely pretending that Mrs Massoud had suffered breast cancer and that there was an obligation on them to settle serious illness claims.

The Massouds were found guilty of defrauding €685,658 from Scottish Provident Ltd on March 25, 2002 through having that amount made payable to Permanent TSB and €45,338 on February 22, 2002 from Lifetime Assurance Company Ltd by having that sum transferred to their account at the Bank of Ireland in Letterkenny, Co Donegal.

The jury of seven men and four women deliberated for two hours before returning the guilty verdicts. The couple have four children and have dual Irish and Egyptian citizenship. Dr Massoud had been working as a consultant surgeon with both the Wellman Clinic and the Nobel Clinic which operate out of the same building in Eccles Street near Dublin city centre.

Det Sgt Daly told prosecuting counsel, Mr Dominic McGinn BL, that neither Massoud had any previous convictions and that the insurance companies had instituted High Court proceedings to seek reimbursement of the money defrauded.

Mr McGinn told the jury in closing the case that the "ultimate issue" for it to decide was whether Mrs Massoud had breast cancer as she claimed.

He suggested that the only surgery that had taken place on Mrs Massoud was the one that created a scar on her left breast and added "that given the stakes were €700,000 she may have been willing to undergo the pain of making such a mark".

Dr Maureen Smith, a DNA expert with the Department of Justice told the trial that a DNA profile taken from a sample of Mrs Massoud’s blood did not match that of a tissue sample provided to the Mater Hospital for diagnosis.

She also said that there was a 99.53% chance that the tissue donor was Mrs Massoud’s mother.

This amount of tissue was later described by prosecution witness, Professor Michael Kerin, a breast cancer surgeon who has dealt with 150 such operations a year, as equating to half the average sized breast.

He said that a mammogram taken of Mrs Massoud’s left breast, a month after the alleged surgery showed no signs of any surgery or tissue being removed.

Dr Mohamed Elsayed Attia, who claimed to be a friend and colleague of the Massouds said he saw a jar of human tissue in their home a short time after he learned that Gehan’s mother had been diagnosed with breast cancer.

He said he later spoke to a man who worked with the Massouds who described bringing something in a jar from Egypt to Ireland after being requested to do so by Dr Massoud.

Dr Massoud broke down in tears when he said in evidence that "he would never forget" the day his wife discovered the lump in her breast while she was taking a shower as they was going out to celebrate her birthday in September 2001.

Dr Massoud said that the mammogram his wife had taken a month after her surgery would not have shown the location of the operation he performed on her because the "surgical field was outside the field of the mammogram".

Dr Anne O’Doherty, a consultant radiologist, later told the jury that she had "absolutely no doubt" that the area of the scar would be included in Mrs Massoud’s mammogram, which she described as perfect.

Dr Massoud agreed with Mr McGinn (prosecuting counsel, Mr Dominic McGinn BL) that his wife had recently found a second lump in her left breast but said he couldn’t operate on her because he was no longer registered to practice, saying that if he performed the surgery now it would be "a criminal offence rather than an ethical one".

He accepted that the only reason he thought a surgeon should not operate on his own family was because it was against the rules of the Medical Council and added that "if a tiler can tile his own bathroom, why can’t a surgeon operate on his family".

Dr Massoud said he felt that he was the best surgeon to operate on his wife and he didn’t want her to be exposed to anything other than perfection.

He denied that a copy of a pathological report from the Mater Hospital found in his home by gardaí in November 2003, which had his wife’s name cut off and his mother-in-law’s name written on the bottom, was actually relating to a diagnosis of a breast tissue sample that had come from her mother.

He claimed that the reason the name ‘Gehan Massoud’ had been taken off was for confidentiality purposes, but also because his mother-in-law would be disgraced to produce an unaltered version of the report to her surgeon because she was a Christian and it showed that her daughter had married a Muslim.

Dr Massoud claimed there were many differences between his wife’s pathology report and that of her mother’s which he had sent over to Ireland from Egypt.

Professor Kerin said a tissue sample of 237 grammes which it was accepted had been taken from the accused’s breast equated to half of the average-sized breast and that it "was a vast amount of "tissue" considering the small size of the lump (3cm)" that was later identified as the tumour.

He said Mrs Massoud had such a large amount of tissue removed without a preoperative diagnosis, and that while such surgery would normally be performed under general anaesthetic in a cancer operating theatre with about five staff members and two anaesthetists, she had her operation in a clinic under local anaesthetic.

Dr Attia said he saw a jar of human tissue in the Massouds’ home a short time after he learned that Gehan’s mother, who was still living in Egypt, had cancer.

He claimed he had earlier discussed with Dr Massoud and Mr Hilal, who was also a friend of the Massouds, if they should organise for the sample to be brought to Ireland to get a second opinion on her diagnosis.

Dr Attia said Mr Hakem Elsaadany, who then worked for the Massouds, told him he brought a jar from Egypt to Ireland for Dr Massoud after being directed to do so and that the fluid from it had spilled all over his suitcase.

Dr Massoud, in evidence, described Dr Attia as "a clever illusionist" who had contacted the insurance companies "with this made-up story" using some facts to give weight to "the illusion".

Mr Elsadany, who testified as a witness for the defence, said he had been in Egypt in September 2001 for his sister’s wedding but that he never brought anything back to Ireland nor was he asked to do so by Dr Massoud.