Doctor whose ‘erroneous’ evidence led to murder convictions struck off

THE family of solicitor Sally Clark yesterday welcomed the decision to strike off Professor Sir Roy Meadow over “erroneous” evidence he gave at her trial.

In a highly critical judgment, the General Medical Council (GMC) told Prof Meadow he had acted beyond the limits of his expertise and had “abused his position as a doctor.”

Finding him guilty of serious professional misconduct, the GMC’s fitness to practise panel said he had “seriously undermined” the position of all doctors acting as expert witnesses in trials.

Furthermore, he had compounded his errors by repeating his mistakes over a period of time and had failed to adequately explain the limited relevance of his findings.

Prof Meadow, aged 72, of Woodgate Lane, Leeds, told Ms Clark’s 1999 trial that the chance of both her sons dying a natural death was “one in 73 million.”

He said two cot deaths in an affluent family would only occur “once in every 100 years” and the odds of both children dying natural deaths could be compared to four horses winning the Grand National in consecutive years at odds of 80:1.

Yesterday, the GMC said he was wrong to use that analogy, saying the chance of two cot deaths within the same family was “far greater” than he had stated.

It said he had not intended to mislead the jury but had shown a “serious departure” from the standards expected of medical practitioners.

Prof Meadow also gave evidence in other high-profile trials, including those of Angela Cannings and Donna Anthony. They were jailed for murdering their children but later cleared by the Court of Appeal.

Ms Clark-Glass, who chaired the GMC panel, told Prof Meadow he had “strayed” into areas outside his expertise in giving evidence in Ms Clark’s trial.

She added: “Your misguided belief in the truth of your arguments, maintained throughout the period in question, and indeed, throughout this inquiry, is both disturbing and serious.

Striking the doctor off was the most serious punishment the GMC could administer.

She said: “You abused your position as a doctor by giving evidence that was misleading, albeit unintentionally.

“You were working outside the limits of your professional competence by straying into the area of statistics without revealing your admitted limited understanding of the subject.”

In a statement, the Clark family welcomed the decision, saying Prof Meadow had caused them “emotional”, “professional” and “financial” damage.

Ms Clark was jailed for smothering her two sons, 12-week-old Christopher and eight-week-old Harry, but had her conviction quashed by the Court of Appeal in 2003.

The statement said: “We are pleased that, after nearly seven long years, Meadow has finally been held to account by his profession for his erroneous and misleading evidence, which we feel was primarily responsible for the terrible miscarriage of justice suffered by Sally.”