Friday, April 22, 2011

Wakefield Transcripts Grouped

About the Transcripts

Transcripts for the UK General Medical Council disciplinary hearing against Dr.Wakefield, Professor Walker-Smith and Professor Murch grouped by type of witness. Transcripts are also available in day order without editorial comment at Wakefield Transcripts in Day Order at . A file with all transcripts zipped is here. For more information on the transcripts, including privacy concerns, see here.

From the closing submissions by Ms Sally Smith QC, lawyer hired by the GMC to 'prosecute' the doctors in the disciplinary hearing.

First of all, it is about a group of children whose ages in 1996 ranged from nearly three-and-a-half to nine.  Quite properly we have been anonymising them, but of course they were not numbers, they were vulnerable children.  I want to say at this stage, because of its importance, that no-one doubts or has questioned the tragedy of these children’s disorders,nor, of course, the love of their parents nor their parents’ desire to do the very best that theycould for them.  This case is about the nature of the doctors’ duties towards the patient, and ofcourse it is the child who is the patient in every case......

[W]e submit that underlying many of the allegations, perhaps those against Dr Wakefield in particular, there is a refusal to subject his own conduct to appropriate scrutiny, whether that is by an ethics committee or ultimately by the editor of the publication in which he seeks to publish his research, in this case The Lancet. He did not consult, we say, he went ahead on the basis of his own evaluation of the ethics of what he was doing and what he thought was or was not escapable.  We say that he did that without any regard for the boundaries which should have constrained him and that is what was wrong with what he did.   Day 122  page 2

That is the first limb of the case that we say is fundamental.  The second is about the integrity of papers which are submitted to scientific journals... We say the paper that was ultimately published, The Lancet paper, was profoundly misleading.  The clear impression that it gave was that during the course of research investigations into behavioural and gastrointestinal disorders in these children a striking coincidental temporal link with MMR vaccination was drawn by a series of parents.  If you like, it was stumbled upon by those parents, and of course by the doctors who then wrote it up in those terms.  In truth, we say that link was inevitably going to be made since, as was well known to Dr Wakefield and Professor Walker-Smith, those who had the investigations had come to the Royal Free Hospital for those investigations on the very basis that their parents had made that link.   Day 122/3

Into this case the defence have sought, we say, to inject layer upon layer of complexity. Remember all these three doctors were at the time of these charges senior members of their profession, some of course more senior than others... They have got no excuse for not understanding and operating the distinction between research and clinical medicine; the basic principles of medical research ethics; of the requirements relating to the submission for publication to scientific journals, and the requirement for rigour in the way in which thoseprojects were written up... We submit that all three of them have taken stances which it is our submission are in many respects frankly incredible and they have done so in an attempt to persuade you that the case against them cannot be proved.(emphasis added) Day 122/5   (emphasis added to quotations)

GMC Documents (Not Part of Transcripts)
Full GMC Fact Finding Determination
Formal Sanctions Determination for Dr. Wakefield
Formal Sanctions Determination for Professor Walker-Smith
Formal Sanctions Determination for Professor Murch
Opening Statement by GMC Lawyer
Day 1 Reading of Charges and Amendments GMC's Lawyer.  The GMC's lawyer while hired
by the GMC is independent of the panel deciding
the case.The GMC lawyer has the same role as a
prosecutor in a criminal case. 
Day 2
Day 3
Day 4
Opening Statement GMC GMC's Lawyer
Parents of The Children
The Big Lie
According to the Big Lie repeated over and over again by many supporters of Wakefield to explain the results of the GMC hearing --- the parents were not allowed to testify.

This Big Lie has been repeated so often and so effectively that the parents believe it. For example, in a testimonial for Professor Walker-Smith, the mother of Child 6 and & 7 stated:
I am saddened that I was not allowed to give evidence on behalf of my boys and was upset to hear the lies about my family from the other side. I felt we did not have a voice and my boys were not protected in this. Day 199/28 
And from an open letter by the parents read as a testimonial:
We have been following the GMC hearings with distress as we, the parents, have had no opportunity to refute the allegations. For the most part we have been excluded from giving evidence to support these doctors whom we all hold in very high regard. Day 199/33
But as the GMC's lawyer's stated in her opening submissions:
The parents in this case, with the exception of the mother of child 12, to whom I am going to be referring later as “Mrs 12”, are not going to be giving evidence, and it is not part of our case that they were anything other than content with the investigations which were carried out on their children. Indeed, as you will be hearing, some of them positively encouraged those investigations to be carried out, but in the last analysis it must never be forgotten that the patient is the child. Day 3/3
Parents wanted to testify but none were called by the doctors, for obvious reasons. All Parents were asked to testify by the GMC. Just as with the children's GPs, the parents could have given very important testimony.
Mrs. 12, who still supports Wakefield, provided testimony and documents that, by itself, proved most of the GMC case.
Day 28 Testimony and
Documents of Mrs. 12 
Mother of  Child 12
Children's Doctors
Day 5 Dr. Hopkins GP Child 10
Day 5 Dr. Shantha GP Child 3
Day 5 Dr. Barrow GP Child 1
Day 6 Dr. N GP Child 6
GP Child 7
Day 6 Dr.Letham GP Child 5
Day 6
Day 7
Dr. Tapsfield GP Child 4
Day 7 Dr. Stuart GP Child 12
Day 43 Dr. Stuart (added to statement) GP Child 12
Day 11 Dr. Shillam GP Child 5
Day 14 Dr. Kirrage Child JS
Day 14 Dr. Cartmel GP Child 2
Day 19 Dr. Jones (statement) GP Child JS
Day 19
Day 20
Dr. Andrew Mills Consultant Child JS
Day 29 Dr. Jelley GP Child 8
Day 23  Dr. Spratt (statement) GP Child 12
Day 43 Frances Wharton (statement) Secretary to Dr. Surtees re Child 2
Royal Free Hospital
Day 8
Day 9
Dr. Pegg Chairman Ethics Committee,
Royal Free Hospital
Day 12
Day 13
Dr. Berelowitz Child Psychiatrist,  Royal Free Hospital
Day 14 Dr. Hodgson Wakefield Employment Contract
Day 15
Day 16
Professor  Zuckerman Dean, Royal Free Hospital to 1999
Day 19 Mr. Else CEO, Royal Free Hospital
Day 21 Dr. Lloyd-Evans Child Neurologist,  Royal Free Hosptital
Day 21 Mr. Phipps Assistant Finance Officder Royal Free Hospital
Day 22 Professor Revell Chairman, Histopathology Royal Free  Hospital
Day 24
Day 25
Day 26
Dr. Casson Gastroenteroligist, Royal Free Hospital
Main Patient Contact
Wrote discharge summaries.
Day 30 Deborah Davies (statement) Personal Assistant to CEO for Royal Free Hospital
Day 31 Cenzig Tarhan Fi\nance Officer, Royal Free Hospital
Day 32
Day 33
Day 43
Dr. Davies Day 43
(addition to statement)
Histopathologist, Royal Free Hosptital
Legal Aid UK
Day 11 Mrs. Cowie Legal Aid Lawyer
Day 30 Sarah Alwyn Customer Service Manager

The Lancet
Day 16
Day 17
Day 18
Day 111
Dr. Horton  Testimony  Day 16, 17 & 18.
Important Statement read Day 111
Editor of  The Lancet
Day 22 Professor Candy Peer reviewed 1998 papers. Believed that
either both papers or neither paper be published.
Experts called by GMC
Day 18 Professor Hull Pediatric Research  Ethics Expert
Day 26
Day 27
Dr. Salisbury UK vaccination Expert. Testified on the history of
measles vaccine, MMR and Wakefield. Surprisingly,
lawyers for doctors did not ask any questions.
Day 35
Day 36
Day 37
Day 38
Day 39
Professor Rutter Child Development Expert
Day 40
Day 42
Day 43
Day 44
Day 45
Day 46
Day 47
Professor Booth Pediatric Gastroenterology Expert
Medical Research Expert
Day 47     Professor Lachmann Immunology Expert
Experts called by Doctors
All Defense Experts were called on behalf of Professor Walker-Smith
Day 101 Dr. Williams  Expert Gastronenterologist
Day 101
Day 102
Day 103
Day 104
Day 105
Day 106
Day 109
Dr.Victor Miller 
Expert Gastroenterology Witness
Day 107
Day 108
Dr. Thomas Expert Child Neurology Witness
Martin Walker Nonsensical Conflict of Interest Claim
Day 101 Martin Walker nonsense Hack who could not begin to report the
proceedings in a way that resembled reality.
Medical Research Council
Day34Medical Research CouncilTranscript of meeting read in part re selection bias. Video played.
Dr. Wakefield
Day 48
Day 49
Day 50
Day 51
Day 52
Day 53
Day 54
Day 55
Dr. Wakefield Examined by Wakefield's Lawyer
Day 57 Dr. Wakefield  Cross-Examined by Walker-Smith's Lawyer
Day 57
Day 58
Dr. Wakefield  Cross-Examined  by Murch's Lawyer
Day 58
Day 59
Day 60
Day 61
Day 62
Day 63
Day 65
Day 66
Day 67
Dr, Wakefield Cross-Examined  by GMC's Lawyer
Day 68 Dr. Wakefield Re-examined by Wakefield's lawyer
Day 69 Dr. Wakefield  Further Cross-Examination by GMC's Lawyer
Professor Walker-Smith
Day 73
Day 74
Day 75
Day 76
Day 77
Day 78
Day 79
Day 80
Day 81
Day 82
Day 83
Day 84
Professor Walker-Smith Examined by Walker-Smith's Lawyer
Day 85 Professor Walker-Smith Cross-examined by Wakefield's Lawyer
Cross-examined by Murch's Lawyer
Day 85
Day 86
Day 87
Day 88
Day 89
Day 90
 Day 91
Day 92
Day 93
Day 94
Day 95
Day 96
Day 97
Professor Walker-SmithCross-examined by  GMC's Lawyer
Day 98
Day 99
Professor Walker-Smith  Re-examined by Walker-Smith's Lawyer
  Day 100 Professor Walker-Smith Questioned by the Panel
Further Re-examined by Walker-Smith's Lawyer
Professor Murch
Day 110
Day 111
Day 112
Day 113
Day 114
Professor Murch Examined by Professor Murch's Lawyer
Day 115
Day 116
Day 117
Day 118
Professor Murch  Crosss-examined by GMC's lawyer
Day 119 Professor Murch  Re-examined by Murch's Lawyer
Day 120 Professor Murch Questioned by the Panel
Further Cross-examined by GMC's Lawyer
Re-examed by Murch's Lawyer

Closing Submissions
Day 122
Day 123
Day 124
Day 125
Day 126
Day 127
Day 128
Day 129
Closing Submissions
The first pages of  Day 122 are a great summary
of the case.
GMC's Lawyer

Day 130
Day 131
Day 132
Day 133
Day 134
Day 135
Day 136
Closing Submissions Wakefield's Lawyer
Day 137
Day 138
Day 139
Day 140
Day 141
Day 142
Day 143
Day 144
Day 145
Closing Submissions Walker-Smith's Lawyer
Day 146
Day 147
Closing Submissions Murch's Lawyer
Day 149 Advice from Legal Assessor Legal Assessor  Mr. Nigel Seed QC
Fact Finding Decision  28 January 2010
Day 197 Fact Finding Decision           The chairman read a shorter version of the panel'
 fact finding determinations. The full version is here.
Sanctions  Hearing
Day  198 Submissions On Behalf of GMC GMC's Lawyer
No Submissions On Behalf of Dr. Wakefield Wakefield's Lawyer (no submissions)
Day 199 Submissions On Behalf
of Professor Walker-Smith
Testimonial Evidence
Sir Christopher Booth
Robertr Heuschkel
Allan Walker
Sir Nicholas Wright
Day 200 Submissions On Behalf
of Professor Murch
Testimonial Evidence
Edward Piele
Michael Green
Alison Rodger
Concluding Submissions
Day 200 Legal Advice Legal Assessor  Mr. Nigel Seed QC
Sanctions Determinations 24 May 2010
Day 217 Sanctions Decterminations  Panel Sanction Decisions  The GMC published  the same sanctions determinations for each doctor separately.
Dr. Wakefield
Professor Walker-Smith
Professor Murch
The Rest of the Days
Day 10
Day 56
Panel Read Documents
Day 70
Day 71
Day 72
Day 70, Day 71 & Day 72 discuss the
legal issue of whether the panel should force Mr. Barr to testify. The panel decided on Day 72
 to not force Mr. Barr to testify
Mr. Barr was the lawyer suing MMR vaccine makers for causing autism.  All 11 UK children in the
1998 paper were clients.
Day 121Discussion on Adjournment
Days 150
to 196
Panel Deliberations (in
Camera) on Fact Finding 
Days 201
to 216
Panel Deliberations (in
Camera) on Sanctions

Creative Commons License
Wakefield Disciplinary Hearing Transcripts Grouped by sheldon101 is licensed under
 a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.5 Canada License

No comments:

Post a Comment