Meadow ruling 'risk to witnesses'

Sir Roy denied serious professional misconduct

Expert witnesses could be deterred from taking part in trials as a result of Sir Roy Meadow being struck off, their professional body has warned.

The General Medical Council found Sir Roy guilty of serious professional misconduct after his "misleading" evidence in the Sally Clark case.

Mrs Clark was convicted of murdering her two sons, but she was exonerated after an appeal in 2003.

The Society of Expert Witnesses said it was astonished by the decision.

Professor Sir Roy Meadow was found guilty for providing evidence which was misleading and "fell short" of the standards expected of a medical professional.

They have thrown the book at Prof Meadow for what is acknowledged to be a situation in which he did not intend to mislead Tom Magner, Society of Expert Witnesses Profile: Professor Sir Roy Meadow What now for expert witnesses?

The Society said the whole system of using witnesses in court needed to be radically overhauled.

Tom Magner, a spokesman for the society, said "The GMC panel has concentrated on one expert witness and one case.

"Within these narrow limits they have thrown the book at Prof Meadow for what is acknowledged to be a situation in which he did not intend to mislead.

"The severity of the penalty will cause many expert witnesses, particularly doctors, to reconsider whether to offer their services to the courts as expert witnesses."

During Mrs Clark's trial, Sir Roy said the probability of two natural unexplained cot deaths in the family was 73 million to one.

Mrs Clark was eventually freed after it become apparent that another witness at her trial, pathologist Alan Williams, had failed to disclose key medical evidence.

'Fundamentally unacceptable'

The chair of the GMC panel considering Sir Roy's case said it was vital the public had confidence in the experts brought before the court and that was why he had to be struck off, rather than be given a lesser penalty.

Sir Roy had stood by his evidence, but admitted his use of statistics at Mrs Clark's 1999 trial was "insensitive".

The GMC said Sir Roy's conduct had been "fundamentally unacceptable".

Frank Lockyer, Mrs Clark's father, who brought the case, broke down in tears as he welcomed the verdict on Friday.

He said: "The GMC has applied the ultimate sanction to the doctor who played such a huge part in my daughter's conviction.

"Now perhaps we, as a family, can put the last seven years of hell behind us and move on."

MEADOW CASES Sally Clark: Served three years after being wrongly convicted of killing her two sons Angela Cannings: Served 18 months after being wrongly convicted of killing her two sons Donna Anthony: Served six years after being wrongly convicted of killing her son and daughter Trupti Patel: Cleared of killing three of her children

The figure given by Sir Roy in the trial was later disputed by the Royal Statistical Society and other experts have said that once genetic and environmental factors are taken into consideration, the odds are closer to 200 to one.

The panel's chairman, Mary Clark-Glass, said Sir Roy was an eminent paediatrician.

But she added: "You should not have strayed into areas that were not within your remit of expertise."

The panel had earlier decided Sir Roy had not meant to mislead the Clark trial, but said his evidence had done so because it "erroneously implied" two natural deaths in a family would have to be independent of one another.