QLD Criminal Law - Offender After the Fact?

[Dwayne Harry]

My question:

If a person (a) provides false information to Medical Staff of a hospital that results in a misdiagnosis causing irreparable physical, psychological, emotional and financial harm to a person is that not the same as causing Grievous Bodily Harm?

Where another person (b) refuses to provide evidence that will prove that person (a) lied, does that not mean that they are an offender after the fact under criminal law?

 

[Rod]

Yes for person (a)
Yes for person (b). And providing false information to a court is an additional offence of contempt of court.

Proving the offences may be difficult.

 

[Dwayne Harry]

Yes for person (a)
Yes for person (b). And providing false information to a court is an additional offence of contempt of court.

Proving the offences may be difficult.

If I am to proceed with charges, is it then the responsibility of the Police to obtain the evidence from the Hospital or do they proceed with charges without the evidence?

 

[Iamthelaw]

I disagree with the above, based on the limited information you've provided. Who is person A? Your doctor?

You have to prove inter alia that (1) the defendant did grievous bodily harm to you and (2) that doing so was unlawful.

1 - You must prove that the gbh was the direct result of the acts of the defendant.

2 - Again, based purely on the limited facts provided, I assume consent would have been given to the surgery. Not seeing an avenue for gbh.

3 - Psychological, emotional and financial harm wouldn't constitute gbh as per the definition in QLD. Irreparable physical damage? Perhaps so but again without knowing more facts it's difficult to say whether it would fit within the definition either. Usually this stuff is reserved for the loss of part or all of an organ, injury that if left untreated would result in death or permanent injury and serious disfigurement etc.

In regard to person B - No, I'm just not seeing how, based on what you've provided, Person B was complicit in the original offence. If anything Person B ought to be deemed a witness. Did Person B assist or encourage another to commit the offence against you or agree to pursue a joint enterprise?

In regard to charges - I assume you mean a private prosecution? They're inherently rare. You'll also find that if you bring a private prosecution for an indictable offence the DPP will take it over and discontinue it. Notwithstanding this, the onus is on you to prove the elements of the offence, this would include collecting and presenting the evidence.

From what you've very briefly described - I think you'd have more luck in pursuing a medical negligence claim.

 

[Rod]

Based on previous posts Person (a) is likely to the OP's wife/ex and medical negligence cannot be extended to her. She would have a duty of care as a wife and normal negligence would apply. Agree injury needs to be physical, not psychological, emotional or financial. If a 3rd party (ie wife) lies to doctors and who subsequently operate on the patient as a result of the proven lie, the third party may be guilty of GBH. No different to hiring thugs to bash someone. Still need to prove all elements of the crime but this was not the point of the OPs post.

I make no comment on the culpability of the doctors in this situation though it may well be a factor in attempting to prove person (a) committed any kind of crime. It would have to be some kind of unusual situation (patient unconscious is one possibility that comes to mind) whereby doctors ignored the patient and solely believed a wife's story.

Person (b) is more than a witness if they knowingly refuse to co-operate and helped cover up a crime. Concealing a crime is an offence in itself. Proving it is often the hard part. Person (b) does not need to be complicit in a crime to be guilty of accessory after the fact.

OP's post made certain assumptions and I answered based on those assumptions being true. OP feels aggrieved over an event or series of events that happened at least 12 months ago and is attempting to prosecute the person/s he feels is responsible with seemingly no luck to-date.

The police are the ones that would normally prosecute both people IF they felt there was enough evidence to do so. They would also be responsible for gathering what ever evidence they felt was relevant and necessary.

Though I am concerned that continual focus on past events may not be helping with a full recovery. Sometimes it is healthier to accept what happened, let it go emotionally and move on with life. We cannot always correct all injustices in life.

 

[Iamthelaw]

Person (b) does not need to be complicit in a crime to be guilty of accessory after the fact.

Refusing to provide evidence does not automatically qualify one to be an accessory after the fact. They have to assist person A to escape punishment or dispose of evidence of the offence (while knowing that person A has committed an offence). This is so obscurely remote in the current scenario even with the limited facts provided. After all the original question was if Person B refuses to give evidence does that make them an accessory after the fact - The answer is no.

 

[Iamthelaw]

If a 3rd party (ie wife) lies to doctors and who subsequently operate on the patient as a result of the proven lie, the third party may be guilty of GBH. No different to hiring thugs to bash someone. Still need to prove all elements of the crime but this was not the point of the OPs post.

Supposedly Person A provides false information to the hospital that results in a misdiagnosis. The hospital then operates based on this false information. It is actually very different to the hiring thugs example you've provided.

This is a medical negligence claim - not a criminal law issue. The hospital owes a duty to the patient to confirm the 'false' facts provided. It would be like a cardiac surgeon performing cardiac surgery on a patient because the patient's mum says he has angina. The hospital aren't going to double check that?

Again I'm not seeing how GBH flows from this.

 

[Rod]

re: Person (a) It could be both but agree causation will be in play. The facts we have are very limited and I suspect the missing facts are important.

re: Person (b) Agree, person (b) needs to assist person (a) to be an offence. I haven't looked at case law to know the CL definition of 'assists' in crimes of this nature. Again much depends on missing facts.

 

[Dwayne Harry]

Thanks Gents, fantastic feedback. I will expand on my story to provide a bit more detail. Whilst my story sounds quite extreme, I assure you it's true:

My wife left me in December 2013 and conjured up false charges of DV. Therefore, the only contact was when I picked up our children and returned them to their mother. In June 2015, I was bitten by what I now believe to be a Redback Spider which caused extreme damage to my peripheral nervous system due to my misdiagnosis and subsequent treatment.

My sister, from Ballarat, Victoria, flew to Brisbane in August 2015 and advised the medical staff that I was an alcoholic who consumed 4 bottles of wine per day. Why she told them this complete lie, I don't yet know! My sister's completely false information led to me being diagnosed and treated for an alcohol related illness call Wernickes Encephalopathy. Not the "actual" cause which was Systemic Envenomation from a Redback Spider bite.

The Neaurotoxic Venoms have done extensive damage to my peripheral nervous system which could have been avoided had I been diagnosed and treated correctly. I continually advised the medical staff that I had been bitten by a spider, as stated on my Medical Discharge Report. My sister continues to deny it was herself that provided the false information and states that it was my wife.

My wife, on affidavits, has refused to admit or deny that it was herself by making statements such as "Dwayne states that his sister told the Hospital" that's as much as she states, but then adds to the lies by stating that "during our marriage Dwayne consumed excessive amounts of alcohol". She starts off with 2 bottles per day and by the end if her affidavit she is making further false statements where she claims I was drinking up to 6 bottles per day.

Apparently I was drinking this much alcohol whilst successfully performing my role as an Executive Manager, working 12 to 14 hours a day, managing 14 staff and a budget of $14 million.

Anyway, two and a half years later, I have lost everything, except my self belief and never ending love for my two beautiful boys whom I haven't seen since my misdiagnosis. I will continue to fight until I prove that I never chose alcohol over my boys. I love them and miss them so very much.

Thanks again for your feedback

 

[Iamthelaw]

Thanks Gents, fantastic feedback. I will expand on my story to provide a bit more detail. Whilst my story sounds quite extreme, I assure you it's true:

My wife left me in December 2013 and conjured up false charges of DV. Therefore, the only contact was when I picked up our children and returned them to their mother. In June 2015, I was bitten by what I now believe to be a Redback Spider which caused extreme damage to my peripheral nervous system due to my misdiagnosis and subsequent treatment.

My sister, from Ballarat, Victoria, flew to Brisbane in August 2015 and advised the medical staff that I was an alcoholic who consumed 4 bottles of wine per day. Why she told them this complete lie, I don't yet know! My sister's completely false information led to me being diagnosed and treated for an alcohol related illness call Wernickes Encephalopathy. Not the "actual" cause which was Systemic Envenomation from a Redback Spider bite.

The Neaurotoxic Venoms have done extensive damage to my peripheral nervous system which could have been avoided had I been diagnosed and treated correctly. I continually advised the medical staff that I had been bitten by a spider, as stated on my Medical Discharge Report. My sister continues to deny it was herself that provided the false information and states that it was my wife.

My wife, on affidavits, has refused to admit or deny that it was herself by making statements such as "Dwayne states that his sister told the Hospital" that's as much as she states, but then adds to the lies by stating that "during our marriage Dwayne consumed excessive amounts of alcohol". She starts off with 2 bottles per day and by the end if her affidavit she is making further false statements where she claims I was drinking up to 6 bottles per day.

Apparently I was drinking this much alcohol whilst successfully performing my role as an Executive Manager, working 12 to 14 hours a day, managing 14 staff and a budget of $14 million.

Anyway, two and a half years later, I have lost everything, except my self belief and never ending love for my two beautiful boys whom I haven't seen since my misdiagnosis. I will continue to fight until I prove that I never chose alcohol over my boys. I love them and miss them so very much.

Thanks again for your feedback

I'm sorry for the difficulties you've been experiencing. Unfortunately, my original position is unaltered and in fact somewhat strengthened.

You were bitten by a spider - You sought treatment at the hospital. The hospital was responsible for your care and ought to know better than to rely on the word of some one without conducting any further tests. You also say that the incident of the spider bite and medical treatment took place in June 2015 but your sister told them this in August 2015.

As mentioned above, this is a medical claim, not a criminal law issue.