Acting judge criticises medical experts for misleading evidence in child brain injury case

AN ACTING judge had strong words for medical experts who concluded that a child - the victim of a car accident - had suffered brain injuries, simply by looking at pictures taken of the child after the accident.

- ZELDA VENTER

A neurosurgeon told the Gauteng High Court that by looking at the pictures of the child - six years after the accident — he could see with his trained eye that the child had swelling on his head. This, in spite of a CT scan done immediately after the accident, proving that there was no brain injury. None of the hospital records also revealed a brain injury.

All the other experts who delivered reports regarding the child to the court mentioned the brain injury as it was contained in the neurosurgeon’s report. A neurologist also told the court that she concluded that the child had suffered a brain injury because the child’s mother, who had instituted the damages claim against the Road Accident Fund, told her so.