Have any lessons been learned from Sally Clark's case? asks Peter Gooderham
It is approximately five years since Sally Clark’s second appeal was successful and she was freed from prison having served three years for the murder of two of her sons, before the conviction was overturned (see R v Clark [2003] EWCA Crim 1020, [2003] All ER (D) 223 (Apr)). The case has acquired widespread notoriety, chiefly because of issues relating to statistical and pathological evidence. Some important changes relating to expert evidence have taken place as a result of this case.
LEARNING FROM
A key feature of was criticism of some of the medical expert witnesses involved. Some have had their reputations ruined, and careers damaged. It remains a matter of debate whether, and to what extent, this is justified.
Professor Sir Roy Meadow, a paediatrician, was found guilty of serious professional misconduct (SPM) by the General Medical Council (GMC), and struck off. He had quoted misleading statistics from a government publication, Confidential
-maryam-naaz-theo-corbett-and-rachel-carter-with-(front-from-left)-arya-vindlacheruvu-and-jessica-ashcroft.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=47f89300_1)
