~5~

Finally, prosecution agreed to drop all medical negligence charges against Dr. Patel. He said that, “ we don’t have evidence to convince a jury in a criminal trial, so it would be in interest of justice to drop all the charges.” Of course, they needed something to save the face. Dr. Patel agreed to four counts of fraud.

These four counts of fraud stems from single act of omission or commission. At the time of application Dr. Patel faxed his medical license from Oregon that was current. But he had a restriction – namely if he were to perform surgery on esophagus or pancreas, he should seek a second opinion. On one page where it said any restriction on license it said, “see attached” however according to the hospital they never received the attachment. (If they had read original application and asked for it I am sure they would have received it) So this one act was multiplied four times since he worked two years and he was registered for two years!!

So there it is. After all these years and millions spent DPP successfully got a conviction on Patel for not attaching a page during his application.

Where is all the evidence of Medical negligence by Dr. Patel? If he was even 10% as bad as DPP was charging why is it that they have not been able to get a single conviction about his medical care?

I feel sorry for the families and patients of Bundaberg hospital, someone wanted to shift all the blame on Dr. Patel so you would not blame real culprit – your healthcare system. Political parties were posturing for benefit rather than look at the issue from every angle. Your journalist was too busy regurgitating whatever sensational information was fed to them. Thomas Headly (now retired) could not wait to write the book “Sick to death” but he did not bother to investigate the other side of the story

~6~

All surgeons have complications and deaths. More they operate more likely they are to have such events. More they perform complicated high risk procedure more they are likely to have adverse results. Just the fact that someone has more deaths and complication does not mean you have to drag him to the court. And the job of monitoring such adverse event should not be in hands of politicians or attorneys but Peers. A bad surgeon should be spotted by his peers.

Criminalizing a medical practice is a very slippery slope. Dr. Patel case has taught us an expensive lesson. DPP, do not act on your passion but on hardcore evidence. If you are trying in a criminal court make sure you have the evidence to meet that threshold. If the evidence does not exist let people know – they will get over it.
This case has embarrassed DPP on a world stage. Many international physicians who may be considering to come to Australia are now looking at other options.

It is time there is an open dialogue as to what went wrong and what could have prevented the whole tragedy

@ Foxy

It is the responsibility of Public Prosecutor to evaluate the evidence at hand. To determine that given evidence is good enough to convict the accused of the crime. As it stands right now the prosecution has admitted that they did not have strong enough proof to convict Dr Patel of a single charge of medical negligence. All the charges related to medical care were dropped by them.

So only thing they could charge Dr. Patel (so called four counts of fraud) consist of Dr Patel omiited to send one page from State board of Oregon. The page preceding this page was addressing 'do you have any restriction on your medical license' the board file stated " see attached" Apprantly, in the next page it was mentioned that He was required to get a second opinio (as to the necessicity of surgery) in case he were to perform esophageal or pancreatic surgery.

Now, the person who hired Dr. Patel never read this carefully to realize that a page was missing. Second, you do not ask the applicant to send you the license but directly to the Medical Board, Third all you had to do was to google his name. In US all medical board actions are matter of public knowledge. Remember Dr. Patel came as a surgeon and within few months he was promoted to Director of survey.

This one act has been multiplied four times for registration as well as getting the job and for two years.

He was given a suspended sentence, which means he does not have to serve any time and not get in any legal trouble for next two years. If this is all DPP had there was no point in international man hunt and millions of dollars of taxpayer's money.

DPP has a lot of explaining to do.

Dear V. Mehta,

J. Patel is the one who has a lot of explaining
to do not the DPP as you infer Sir.

1) The Court heard that J. Patel had been effectively
struck off by medical boards in the United States over
complaints about his competence, before applying for the
position of Senior Medical Officer at Bundaberg Hospital.

2) He failed to inform Queensland Health Authorities of the
restrictions upon him in the United States answering "NO"
when asked whether his registration had ever been subject to
cancellation, suspension, or disciplinary action.

3) J. Patel spent a total of 788 days behind bars after being
convicted in 2010 of unlawfully killing one patient and
causing grievous bodily harm to another. J. Patel had
served 131 days of pre-sentence custody.

4) Crown Presecutor Peter Davis, QC recommended J. Patel be
sentenced to 4 years imprisonment, wholly suspended allowing
the former surgeon to walk free from court and last week,
Queensland's Director of Public Prosecutions, Tony Moynihan,
QC decided not to proceed with further criminal negligence
charges possibly to allow J. Patel to leave this country
and thus get rid of the expense involved in further trials
and have this man continue to live in this country.

Your defence of this man to me is somewhat questionable.
Being a fellow American ( a Texan), and a retired thoracic surgeon,
are you perchance a friend of J. Patel's?

Just asking.

May I say both welcome to our author.
And thank you for a well put together thread, but too that we should not defend just because we share racial roots with the defendant.
History has a word to add to Doctor Death.
Words written before he came to this country, and they are unkind to him, and the QLD health system that employed him.
Racism? I doubt it! I am in the hands of the best Doctor in my life, a Gentle yet brilliant man from Iran.
Second to him was my previous a Doctor from India.

@ foxy
"The Court heard that J. Patel had been effectively
struck off "

There is misunderstanding. At the time of his application Dr. Patel had a license to practice surgery in Oregon. He was even allowed to do surgery on esophagus and pancreas with the restriction that he had to get a second opinion prior to operating. The word struck off implies he was not allowed legally to practice medicine that it is not correct.

As you may already know when you have multiple licenses anytime there is any question you have to go to each board and each board conducts hearing to decide the action they may take. Dr. Patel was holding New York license also and he chose not to go through hearing in New York and his NY license was not valid.

This is not uncommon to give up a license specially at the end of your career in the states that you are not likely to go.

Once again Dr. Patel had Oregon License that was valid and active.

It is duty of the employer to get such vital information directly from the board and not from the applicant or recruiting agency. The employer was required to read the application properly where it stated "see attached" and look for attachment - which was not done. As you probably know all medical board are a matter of public knowledge so going to the board's website will yeild you the information necessary