Set Aside My Conviction, Jail Term, Medical Director Tells Court Of Appeal

The judgment of the High Court of Lagos State in Tafawa Balewa Square, TBS, presided over by Justice Adedayo Akintoye, that sentenced him to one-year imprisonment, has been challenged by the Medical Director, MD, of Excel Medical Centre, Dr Ferdinand Ejike Orji.

Dr Orji approached the Lagos Division of the Court of Appeal to set aside the judgment that convicted and sentenced him on four (4) counts out of the six (6) counts that touch on causing grievous harm to his patient.

The Appellant is asking the appellate court to determine whether he could be convicted after the lower court found him not guilty of having the intention to commit the offence in Count 1, (causing grievous harm to his patient).

It would be recalled that Justice Akintoye had in Charge No: LD/8963C/2019 convicted Dr Orji on four (4) counts out of six (6) counts of the offences he was charged with by the Lagos State Government, LASG, and sentenced him to one-year imprisonment on each of the four counts. 

The judge, however, held that the jail term is to run concurrently. But not satisfied, Dr Orji in his Notice of Appeal instituted by his counsel and Senior Advocate of Nigeria, SAN, Chief Bolaji Ayorinde, appealed against the judgment and prayed the court to discharge him on Counts 2, 3, 4 and 6 and set aside the sentence passed on him by the lower court.

The MD had particularly stated that the trial judge, having found that he (Appellant) did not have the 'mens rea' or intention to commit the offence in Count 1, (causing grievous harm to his patient), erred in law when she failed to consider the existence of 'mens rea' and intention of the Appellant regarding committing the offence in Counts 2, 3, 4, and 6.

The Appellant stated that the ingredients of the elements of a crime and offences charged must co-exist and must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt before a Defendant [Appellant] can be convicted of the offence.

He further argued that the trial judge failed to consider the evidence of DW1 on October 7, 2022, that a doctor can rely on the assistance of non-doctors to convey the patient in treatment rooms and even hold down a patient, especially during an emergency.

The Appellant stated that there was no evidence from the prosecution to establish that Defendant had the intention to cause harm or hurt PW10 by using PW1 and PW2 (untrained personnel) to manipulate PW10’s left leg, thereby aggravating a simple fracture of the said left leg.

On the issue that the Appellant was negligent and reckless by applying fibreglass cast tightly on PW10’s left leg and causing severe pain and refusing to remove same when requested to do so, Dr Orji contended that the trial judge failed to avert her mind that the Appellant upon the complaint made on July 27, 2018, by PW10 and PW3 of pain and discomfort at the left knee region, opened a rectangular window at the popliteal fossa aspect of the knee, over the area where the patient complained of and this relieved the patient.

He stated that when PW10 was taken back to his hospital following a complaint that “water was oozing out from the popliteal aspect of the knee where the window was cut”, the cast was halved and subsequently converted to a back slab to support the knee during the patient's journey to the United States, US, adding that the patient and his mother (PW3 and PW10) slept in the Appellant's hospital until July 28, 2018, without further complaints of excruciating pain or discomfort.

The Appellant submitted that the trial judge failed to avert her mind and consider the evidence of PW7, the first Orthopaedic Doctor who saw PW10 and his evidence of March 18, 2022, where he stated that “he saw a half cast and could not ascertain how tight the cast was before removing the entire cast.” Thus, the cast was not tight, or tightness doubtful.

He argued that the prosecution witnesses, (PW4, PW6 and PW7) in their testimonies had told the court that even medical students can apply a cast; thus the Appellant is adequately qualified to apply a cast to stabilize a fractured leg.

On the decision of the lower court that the Appellant committed a breach of his professional duty as a medical practitioner when he wilfully refused to promptly remove the tight fibre glass cast on PW10’s left leg despite complaints of severe pain which thereby resulted in Compartment Syndrome, Dr Orji submitted that Compartment Syndrome is a process and attributed to the time of when it sets in.

Dr Orji further argued that it has been the argument of the Appellant and that of the prosecution witnesses that Compartment Syndrome sets in within 4–6 hours, and it is that of an emergency which cannot be ignored but treated immediately.

Consequently, the Appellant prayed the court to pronounce him not guilty of Counts 2, 3, 4 and 6 of the amended charges dated February 4, 2022, and also set aside part of the Judgment delivered on January 20, 2023, by Justice Adedayo Akintoye.

All rights reserved. This material and other digital volumes on this website, may not be reproduced, published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed in whole or in part without prior express written permission from THE NEWS ACCELERATOR NETWORK.

For advert placement, please contact thenewsacceleratornetwork@gmail.com or 08033599492.