Dr. Vanezis,
I really hope you read what Dr. Rafick wrote of you and hope your conscience is not troubling you:
Today a British pathologist (Dr Vanezis) gave his views. In his statement he said that TBH was alive when he "ejected" through the window. To quote, he said, "I'm a pathologist. All I can say is that person was alive, oriented and fell". I find that the choice of words use has been very carefully selected. Being alive and oriented means that TBH has been well. The word fell suggest accidental. He did not use the word push or thrown out from the window.
I am not a pathologist but as a doctor, I cannot comprehend on what basis that the Dr Vanezis claims that TBH was alive and oriented prior to his fall. How can one make such a conclusion by looking at a body during a second post-mortem? The absence of defensive injury on the deceased is not good enough to come to such conclusion. An unconscious person would also not have any defensive injuries. A man under tremendous intimidation and pressure would not fight especially if there is more than intimidator in the same room. Dr Vanezis has intentionally close his professional options by making such statements. It is down right unprofessional.
In any death, there are motives. The motives of a suicide are clearly missing here. The possibility of an accidental fall can be disputed by the following facts
Size of the window
The torn pants
The broken window latch
The unsubstantiated facts that he was released a few hours before he was found dead.
The fact that he had broken legs could jolly well means that he had been carried through the window and threw out of the window leg first and in the process his pants got stuck in the window latch and it broke it. Why isn't this possibility being considered by the pathologist in coming to a conclusion? A bruise mark around the neck if diffuse can be attributed to a fall but a bruise that matches a persons hand print cannot be equate due to a fall. This is a point that I agree with Dr Porthnip.
At the rate this case is dragging, I am not convinced that a reasonable explanation is being considered as the cause of the "ejection" and the eventual death. It seems that the MACC lawyers are looking at extra ordinary explanation circumstances that led to the death. From where I am standing it appears that MACC lawyers are not trying to seek the truth but behaving as if they are defending a guilty party. This is sad.
Source: Teoh Beng Hock Who?
3 comments:
ayo bro who is this dr rafick? ha ha ha
adakah macam Dr Venezis credentials.
Professor Vanezis qualified from Bristol University in 1972 (MB, ChB). In 1976 he was awarded the Diploma in Medical Jurisprudence (Pathology) (DMJ(Path). In 1978 he became a member of the Royal College of Pathologists and a Fellow of the college in 1990 (FRCPath). He was awarded his doctorate in medicine (MD) from Bristol University in 1985 for research into vertebral artery trauma. In 1990 he was awarded a doctor philosophy (PhD) from London University for research into “sudden death and the menstrual cycle.” In 1996 he became a member of the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Glasgow proceeding to fellow in 1998 (FRCP(Glasg.) . Recently he was elected as a Founding Fellow of the Faculty of Forensic Medicine of the Royal College of Physicians in 2006 (FFFLM).
He has been a practicing forensic pathologist since 1974 and has held a number of academic and service appointments up to the current day.
His current appointments in forensic medicine include:
1.Professor in Forensic Medical Sciences at Barts and the London (Queen Mary University of London) and Director of the Cameron Centre for Forensic Medical Sciences at Barts and the London, February 2006-
2.Member of Yorkshire and Humberside Group Practice, Medico-Legal Centre Sheffield, 2006-
3.Senior Honorary Civilian Consultant in Forensic Medicine to the Armed Forces, Appointed by the Ministry of Defence July, 1992-
4.Visiting Professor of Forensic Sciences, London South Bank University, London, 2000-
5.Visiting Professor of Forensic Medicine and Science, University of Glasgow 2003-
6.Home Office Pathologist, 1990-1993 and 2003-
7.Honorary Professor in Forensic Medicine at the University of Hong Kong 2003-
His past appointments in forensic medicine include:
1.Chief Forensic Medical Officer and Head of the Department of Forensic Medical Sciences at the Forensic Science Service, London Laboratory 2003-2006
2.Regius Professor of Forensic Medicine and Science and Head of Department of Forensic Medicine & Science, The University of Glasgow, October 1993-2003
3.Director General and Founder of The Centre for International Forensic Assistance (CIFA), July 2001- 2003
4.Reader and Head of Department of Forensic Medicine and Toxicology, Charing Cross and Westminster Medical School, London, 1990-1993
5.Senior Lecturer (lecturer from 1974) in Forensic Medicine at The London Hospital Medical College, August 1979 - September 1990
6.Deputy Police Surgeon (Metropolitan),1977 -1979
Other:
1.Past President of the British Academy of Forensic Sciences
2.Past President of the British Association for Human Identification
He became an Officer of the Order of the British Empire awarded in the Queen’s Birthday Honours List June 2001, for Forensic Pathology Services in Kosovo.
He is a member of a number of examining boards in forensic medicine and has served from time to time on college and medical school committees
The examining boards include:
1.Royal College of Pathologists, Forensic Pathology, 1990-
2.Society of Apothecaries London: Diploma and Mastership in Medical Jurisprudence, 1981-Diploma in Legal Medicine and M.D. (Forensic Medicine) Sri-Lanka. 1995-
3.Chief examiner and convenor of Diploma in Forensic Medical Sciences, Society of Apothecaries (DFMS) 1993-2003
4.Convenor, Diploma in Forensic Human Identification, society of Apothecaries, 2002-
5.External examiner in Forensic Medicine, University of Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur 2001-
6.External examiner Hong Kong College of Pathologists, 1999-
Committees include:
Mr. Anonymous,
Do you bother to read what Dr. Rafick has to say? Are you so blinded by "credentials" that you do not judge what is written on merits but have to depend on "credentials" to buttress your argument?
How about the fact that your "so admired" forensic pathologist added in his report something that came from the briefing of MACC.
Tell me what business has MACC's briefing had to be in a forensic pathologist report and why this "full of credentials" pathologist did not attempt to verify the truth of MACC's briefing by doing further investigation by asking more people rather than just depending his paymaster's briefing.
Dr Rafick is just an ordinary kampong doctor use with plenty of common sense in solving issues
Dr Rafick -rights2write
Post a Comment