UPDATE: Doctor Charles Smith, MD
DISGRACED DOCTOR A COWARD TO THE END
from an article by Michelle Mandel – The Toronto Sun
His broken victims were there, his disgusted peers were present as well.
But a coward to the end, Dr. Charles Smith was a no-show at the disciplinary hearing that stripped the discredited pathologist of his license to practice medicine.
Disgraceful. Dishonorable. Unprofessional. Incompetent. He was labelled all of those things by the College of Physicians and Surgeons Tuesday after his lawyer indicated that he was pleading no contest to their charges.
But it’s not enough. Revoking his medical license is hardly much of a punishment when Smith hasn’t tried to re-register since it expired under a cloud of controversy in August 2008.
From a regulatory body that looked the other way for so long, it’s too little, too late.
“That’s a spit in the face of myself and the public of this province,” complained Williams Mullins-Johnson, who was wrongly convicted of the first-degree murder of his niece based on Smith’s “erroneous” conclusions. “A slap on the wrist, pat on the head and told to be on his way.”
The innocent people Smith helped send to prison want much, much more.
“Criminal charges,” insisted Mullins-Johnson outside the college’s offices. “His actions were no less than perjury and
obstruction.”
It was his bungled case which brought to light for many the frightening depth of the pathologist’s incompetence. While Smith testified that Mullins-Johnson had sodomized and killed the four-year-old, his conviction was overturned in 1997 when other experts concluded she’d likely died of natural causes.
“For 12 years in prison, I could have been shanked, I could have been hung, I could have been beaten over something that didn’t even happen,” he said bitterly. “And for the attorney general’s office to step aside now and not take action against this man is wrong, unconstitutional and illegal.”
As criticism mounted against Smith, Ontario’s chief coroner called for a review of 45 child autopsies where the once renowned pathologist had determined the cause of death was murder or criminally suspicious. In 2007, the outside experts concluded Smith had made major errors in 20 of those cases — 13 of which had resulted in criminal convictions.
That was followed by the damning inquiry report from Justice Stephen Goudge that skewered Smith as incompetent, arrogant and unqualified. Five wrongful convictions based on his evidence have now been overturned, with many more pending appeal.
One of those still waiting to clear her name is Maria Shepherd. The 40-year-old mother wants nothing more than to have
Smith walk the same prison corridors she did, labelled a child killer and in fear for her life.
“Charles Smith is a disgrace to the medical profession and to humanity itself,” she wrote in one of six emotionally-charged victim impact statements read to the discipline committee.
Shepherd spent two years less a day in jail — eight months of it pregnant — after she was convicted of manslaughter for the death of her stepdaughter Kassandra. She felt she had no choice but to plead guilty in the face of Smith’s unchallenged expertise or risk never being with her other children again.
Eloquent and impassioned, Shepherd has never spoken publicly before of her ordeal. But she had come with son Jordan and daughter Chelsea to witness Smith’s censure and couldn’t remain silent when he failed to appear.
“The absolute closing line for me is to see this man to face prison,” she said after the hearing. “I do hope one day that the Crown and the police will find some way to hold you accountable criminally for all that you’ve done.”
For what he did was ruin the lives of many innocent parents and caregivers during his two-decade “reign of terror.”
In an agreed statement of facts, the panel heard Smith conducted autopsies in criminally suspicious child deaths from 1981 to 2001 yet had no formal forensic training.
He exaggerated his experience, “misinterpreted autopsy findings” and expressed “erroneous opinions” not supported by the evidence.
College lawyer Carolyn Silver called Smith’s conduct the “most egregious” and “most shocking departure” from the level of professionalism expected from its members. The panel agreed Smith deserves their most severe punishment and ordered him to appear before them March 25.
Somehow we doubt the spineless coward will suddenly find the courage to do so.
35 Comments »
An extremely evil man…. may he rot in hell forever more.
Wicked man him and his people at the hospital put Tamara Broomfeild in prison for wrongfully conviction. Pray she will be free soon.
Like I said the last time – he ought to be made to spend an amount of time in prison equal to the total time he sent everyone else there.
Absolutely unconscionable what this man did. How does he sleep at night knowing he lied and destroyed so many lives?
*sinking into the persona of charles smith*
Why, you ignorant little bitch, I sleep perfectly well. I never lied intentionally and as for the lives I allegedly destroyed, none of the responsibility rests on my shoulders. Those children should never have died in the first place, if the parents had, in fact, taken care of them properly, and isn’t it reasonable to assume that if I were as incompetent as these vindictive assholes would make it seem, the court would have noticed the faults in my deductions and would not have convicted these persons? The courts didn’t, ergo I was never wrong, and none of the blame for anything can be pinned on me.
Besides, I already apologized once, though there was no reason for me to do so, so what the hell more do you people want? Just… leave me alone. I did nothing wrong, not really, why can’t anyone understand that?
*rising out of the persona of charles smith*
Oh jesus fuck, I feel dirty now. Like I’ve been kissed by justin bieber.
*projectile vomiting*
Why the fuck did I just write that? *sigh* Anyway, while I’m not saying this is how that incompetent idiot of a doctor really thinks, I am willing to bet it’s not far from the truth. Arrogance often hides cowardice behind a veil of self-justification. It could easily be so that he didn’t show up simply because he believes he has no reason to do so.
Goddamn, I hope that fucker burns…
LMFAO! Homer :-)
Hahahahhaahhahaha
That was great! You should be an actor. You’re probably 100% right. That’s exactly what this asshole thinks.
I don’t like to be a pot stirrer or play devil’s advocate, but there are lots of other questions that this case brings up. First off, what’s the deal with these defense attorneys? Are they all really that bad? Did none of them bother to get second, third or even fourth opinions? Did none of them question this “presitgeous” doctor at all? Was there no cross examination? I know in US law, that if the evidence disappears, then it can not be used to prove a case. I’m no expert on canadian law, so I don’t know how their process works, but this seems like common sense to me. Are you guilty until proven innocent in Canada? Where does the burden of proof lie?
Based on the information, Smith started his career in 1981, at a ripe old 27 years old. How does being 1 year out of medical school qualify anyone as an expert, a leader in his field? I’m not sure I would even take him seriously at that point. Clearly Dr. Smith is a narcissist and I’m sure getting his first conviction really stroked his ego, but what if he really was just a bad doctor. What if he really just sucked at his job that much? What if he never fully understood the causes of deaths, the human body and its processes or anything at all that involved medicine? Does it make him any less guilty, no, it doesn’t. But i can’t help but question the level of defense that was provided. He should have been ripped to shreds after his first testimony experience, or second or third. He should have been questioned until his ears bled and then stripped of his licensce because of his incompetance. At the very least he should have been censured for drawing conclusions without providing evidence.
Yea I hear what you’re saying so I went back and read the original post on him a second time. For a second, I thought the same. Maybe he’s just dumb and didn’t realize whst he was doing? No no no There’s just no excuse for all his fuck ups. He automatically assumed things without thoroughly looking into them, was careless, made too many mistakes and probably never bothered to ask for help if he was unsure of something. I think he just didn’t care enough to put all the work and effort into these cases and I’m sure he didn’t give a shit about all the people he was hurting. “Hey, I’m getting paid good money and who’s gonna bother going against my testimony”. He just didn’t give a shit and maybe it’s because of the resentment he has towards his parents? Its such a shame he made tons of money fucking so many people, ruined their lives and their families on top of it. I also can’t believe nobody caught on to him sooner. How do all these mistakes slip through the system. WTF?
l’m not trying to diminish what the doctor did but don’t the courts and defense attorneys share at least some responsibility? One or two cases, maybe, but this is excessive.
And, just hypothetically, is there an acceptable margin of innocent people going to jail?
Yea like over 30 cases! They should all be re-opened because there’s definitely innocent people sitting behind bars cause of this idiot.
I’m surprised that there weren’t inconsistencies in Smith’s testimonies. Surely there would have been enough holes to give a half-decent defence attorney a field day..? If the only evidence that sent these people away was his testimony, then how did the police files (where the body was found, what state it was in etc.) not save them? Although it is as clear as day that Smith was the malicious force behind the wrongful convictions, I believe the justice system in general failed all these people for: 1) not noticing the inconsistencies that surely must have been present in his testimonies; and 2) not bringing criminal charges against Smith.
Canadian justice system: hang your heads in shame (again).
Getting 2nd opinions costs, and the public defence system ain’t gonna pay for it unless there is a compelling reason (ie. not a chance, so don’t bother even applying). People get the impression from celeb trials like OJ’s that numerous expert witness appear for each side. That happens only when someone is prepared to cough up a small fortune on top of the fortune already spent on the lawyers etc. My familiarity is with English law but the same economics apply to legal systems everywhere, regardless of who has to foot the bill (the state legal fund or the client themselves).
They didn’t gouge out his eyes and stick a damn broomstick up his ass to pierce his bladder yet?
Lol Get outta my head! 8^D
I wish PYSIH had a like button, Sherry. You are too funny.
I hope the next update is either he’s dead or in prison. Either way, as long as the public doesn’t have to see him ever again, I’m good.
Begs the question just how many people condemned to “hell” here on pysih.com are innocent of the crimes they are accused of.
There are of course genuinely condemned individuals, I do not dispute this fact. I also do not dispute the fact many should be deprived of their liberty, if not their lives, for their transgressions.
But when I read stories like Charles Smith’s, I can’t help but remember the vitriol by which many on this site would happily send people to their deaths via state laws, or vigilante “justice”, while being completely innocent of the crimes they have been convicted of.
Luckily in the modern western world we have enough checks and balances to avoid lynch mobs (for the most part), and a long drawn out appeals process which ensures justice, not tragedy.
I am sure there are people out there willing to send a few innocent (and more likely than not, minority) people to their deaths to “satisfy” their need for (the appearance of) a criminal deterrent.
Perhaps there is a place in “hell” for supporters of such a mind set. I don’t know.
How do you draw the conclusion that this story begs the question of how many innocents were ‘condemned’ on this site? This guy is guilty as hell.
You put too much faith in our justice system. It is far from perfect. It could be more perfect if the officials in charge weren’t so corrupt. How does our lengthy appeals process ensure justice? What about the tragedy of that appeals process, the pain it brings to all of the victims? How is that not tragedy? How is that justice?
Doctor Charles Smith is not a ‘minority’. You’re trying too hard to be self-righteous. You’re failing miserably.
Perhaps I did not express myself well enough.
Charles Smith is part of a horrendous miscarriage of justice, this is undeniable. Whether it is because of economic conditions, racism, mistaken identity, overzealous law enforcement / prosecutors innocent people get put behind bars. This is something I am sure you can agree with me on.
Your assertion about victims’ rights is of course warranted. But I will state again (and confirmed by tone in your reply) your desire for justice would rush many an innocent person to their unneeded State sanctioned murder.
The miscarriage of justice as performed by Charles Smith quite possibly has led to 13 convictions, which in turn would have 13 people on this site condemned to “hell”, and finally (if given the choice) those same 13 people would be burned alive and rushed to their death by the base mob mentality that doesn’t seek justice, but revenge.
Of course most could still be guilty, I don’t know. But I know you can agree with me that several people were completely innocent. And as the case is with most miscarriages of justice, the faces of the innocent usually are a slight darker shade than my own.
Perhaps there is was a miscommunication here, I hope I have stated my position in a manner which people can understand.
Do you mind listing the other Nym’s you may have used on this website before?
Your patronizing and falsely superior tone sounds very familiar.
Long time reader, first time poster.
I apologize if my attempted eloquence doesn’t suit your internet sensibilities.
Perhaps more spelling mistakes are inorder.
You are welcome to your opinions, I am not forced to recognize any sort of scholarly or rewarding significance, and your criticisms miss the mark, the substance and the character of the vast majority of the articles or even the more common posts by the majority of the top contributors.
You’ve entertained logical fallacies ranging from ad hominem to call to authority, and you’ve chosen a nym not unlike other trolls this site’s had to endure through. My internet “sensitivity” is fairly good at detecting this sort of thing. In the real world I’d just call it a bullshit detector.
I’m not Max and I’m not Admin, so I don’t get to pour through the internet and find out who and what you are. I only get to measure you by the words you use and the way you say them.
What can we confirm about you?
1. You don’t speak in substantive or concrete terms
2. Because you lack concrete terms and evidence to support your opinions, you rely on a cutting rhetoric
3. You think your rhetoric is effective or even novel–it is not.
4. You claim to be a long time reader, but apparently haven’t ever read how one of these little quibbles go down. You’ll be asked to put up or shut up, when you fail to put up, you’ll be shouted down for failing to add to the conversation. Most likely you’ll cry and write the internet version of the “suicide note,” a euphemism for “you’ll see how right I am.” “I’ll get you my pretties,” and “you won’t have me to kick around anymore.”
5. You are still holding onto that “false superiority” I mentioned, maybe because you haven’t bothered to consider the topic of this website, read the about page, or investigate very far into the subtext and currents that are regular concepts here. It’s okay to be new, it’s even okay to be a little pissy and over-opinionated, but self-righteous, hypercritical, vague, ironic, sarcastic, and cliche in the first three posts would be impressive if there weren’t a ban list of at least seven trolls with exactly the same parameters.
Let me simplify this for you and go down a different route, by countering your assumptions.
1. Mobs are tools that are sometimes terribly useful. They’re employed in most successful revolutions, they often help to respond to disasters and they can provide a large amount of effort to a variety of tasks in a short amount of time. The etymology of the word “mob” comes from the mobility of the lower classes as they rose up against their oppressors. I believe in Republics and Democracies and I think that Mobs should surrender much of their power to legal governments, but I do see advantages to the mob and like that courts pay careful attention to the will of a mob in as much as their formula of justice must have buy in form the mob to exist. We’re an experiment in dissolving the mobility of the common man and sublimating the common will for the common good in a representative government that effects gradual change. When I say we, I refer to both the United States and Canada, in as much as the mobs of these nations have formed capable governments.
2.a Those who call for mob style justice, tortures of the damned and even cruel and unusual punishments do not do so at jeopardy of their soul or in equal guilt to the crimes portrayed on this site. Burning a guilty party in effigy is a common tactic for mobs, a focusing point for free and fair discussion and a demonstrative form of both performance and literary art when used on a message forum to describe how throughly despicable some of these crimes are.
2.b Voicing and releasing these angry calls is human, reasonable, legal, and under the circumstances, far better than actually acting on these impulses and taking the actual route of vigilante justice. I can think of only one example of vigilante justice actually being performed by someone who post on this site, and that person admitted to doing the deed before he read the article here.
3. The purpose or rather purposes of this site are myriad and created by the community, not by some playwright. That said, there are dramatic pieces here that seek to entertain and inform the classic tiers of the theater experience, while also providing comfort for the victims of these crimes. There’s a subtext as old as our oral tradition of discussing crimes and the criminals who perpetrated them, and efforts to quell heated or impassioned displays that are actually positive when viewed through the lens of my earlier arguments.
In conclusion, I encourage you to be more forgiving of people who are displaying the right kind of emotion, in the roughest sort of way, or those who disagree with you, because you’re unaware of any way to empathize or understand their position. I urge you to work on reading comprehension, literary deconstruction and formal argument before you try to swing that cat around again. You are of course welcome to say anything you want to say, within the limitations of the good will of the site’s owners(I am not an admin, editor or owner), but if you think what you’re saying is new, you’re mistaken. If you think what you’re saying is true, I urge you to back it up. If you think you’re being “helpful,” I think you really know you’re wrong.
Thank you, Jason. I was having a hell of a time understanding what this person was trying to say, in the context of this thread and even in the context of this website. It still makes absolutely no sense at all. I’m glad someone could flip that rock back over. ;)
Well said! (Applauding…)
Once again i have to thank Jason for replying to your presumptive comment about some of our regulars. It must be nice to read articles about child murder and rape with such an analytical mind – how do you keep your emotions from creeping into your replies?
I confess I have yet to master that talent, and to be honest, I don’t really want to. Baby rapers and baby killers piss me the fuck off, and I want them to suffer exponential pain as punishment for what they’ve done. I admit I’d make a lousy juror and and even lousier judge, but fortunately this is just a place of words where no real harm is done. I’m surprise that someone as intelligent as yourself didn’t pick up on that, but instead chose to resent us for being human beings with normal human emotions.
Is he going to be practicing medicine in Hell?
I really hesitate to ‘defend’ an a$$ like ‘The Questioner’ but there is an actual point burried in the ad-hominem attacks, faulty logic, and race baiting up there. There are a number of criminals on this site that were convicted based on forensic evidence indicating foul play. I’ve voted ‘hell’ for most of them myself. The question is, how much of the forensic evidence was supplied by people like Dr. Charles Smith? Of course, it doesn’t really matter. Nothing we say on this site dictates punishment, temporal or divine. The real question is more of a hypothetical: if you or I had been on one of those juries would we have sent those innocent people to jail? What if it had been a country with a death penalty and someone innocent died? Would we be hell-worthy, or could we blame it all on Dr. Charles Smith? How much blame is there to spread around?
Goi, is it alright if I call you that?
I agree in that, while the questioner raises some understandable points, he does come off as someone walking in specifically to play devil’s advocate to the regulars here and ruffle the feathers of a crowd that generally shares a common opinion of the people featured on this site.
However, what he said does raise a good question. How many people are truly innocent, who may have been written about on this site, inciting virtual lynch mobs and threats of anal rape, evisceration, and other horrors?
While many of the cases are very cut and dry, leaving very little to no evidence of innocence, I’m sure if one were to go back, and talk to direct sources, they could find more than just a little doubt. Maybe. In most cases, the people featured are pretty damn guilty though.
The only time I have any inclination to play Devil’s Advocate is when people working in state and government positions are also put at the stake for doing their assigned job. And this is because both my parents are state workers, who have the ability to advocate for the rights of the less competent (my mother) and make sure that the unemployed aren’t swindling the state of the Unemployment Benefits it provides (my father). Have there been cases where they’ve been the assholes making someone’s life less fun? Yes, but in most cases, they don’t personally profit from it, contrary to what I’ve heard some say about state workers. If they profited monetarily every time they had to be seen as the bad guy, I wouldn’t have to rely on merit scholarships to get through school. State Workers are not all a bunch of assholes, and they do have families. And in the cases of those wrongly accused, well, it’s a good thing they had a defense attorney.
Either way, this Doctor is an asshole who will get his in the end. Do I think this article may give people pause on what may happen to those wrongly accused, even though they may seem guilty and worthy of torture? Yes. But it’s no one’s job to come out and say it’s someone’s fault, or that someone is to blame.
Again, I’m sorry for the soap box, y’all.
But seriously, Questioner, if you know how this site works, and are a long time reader as you so claim, then you should also follow the motto, “When in Rome” here.
Am I implying that everyone here wants to start a lynch mob? Only if they want to. And it’s their right to have that thought about an individual. Last time I checked, we’re allowed to think freely still.
I personally am against violence and killing, but I believe in punishment for those in the afterlife. That is why I come here, to see what others think of the sick individuals on this site.
Do I always agree 100% with everything said? No, I’m human, dipshit. The last time I even replied to an article, it was about animal cruelty, so you can see who I care about the most.
The majority of the people I’ve seen up here in the last month or so have been pretty disgusting individuals, deserving of at least some holy retribution. So, Max and the rest of the writers here, keep it up.
that man is a sick fuck how could he put people in prison for years when they didnt do anything those people will never get those years of their life back i hope that man gets the chair for putting thise familys and friends through that someone needs to put him away for good…
This is proof that we must watch the watchers. Dirty cops,dishonest layers the list can be a never ending one. The sad thing is, is that we cant always get a second opinion on things like this.
Richard Brant, of Belleville, Ont. had his conviction overturned after nearly two decades. Smith had concluded that Brant’s two month old son Dustin had suffered from shaken baby syndrome. The real evidence that Smith dismissed showed the baby probably died from pneumonia brought about by a pre-existing condition. Thank goodness Brant didn’t spend all those years in jail, but how do you live a good life when you’re branded a baby killer?
http://news.sympatico.cbc.ca/home/ontario_drops_charges_against_mother_in_sons_death/7f26d698
This woman spent 14 years in PRISON for killing her baby :( When she did not…. Go to hell Charles Smith…
he’s vermin, but what about the prosecutors and defence attorneys who let him get away with this sort of gross ineptitude for years and years? A whole lot of necks need to be wrung for this.