Read All About The Unfake News Here!
That's what the headline should have read in the Sunday Telegraph article.
A piece that sought to besmirch my reputation in a smear campaign; now
part of a legal case, where I've been prevented from practising in any NHS-
funded GP medical practice in the UK.
This black-list is also now directly because of the contents of this
website...or so the NHS says.
Link to article here
But we're all used to fake news by now, right?
Pre-Trump, the phenomenon of "fake news, pre-Trump, was not such a
bigly thing. The gullible public swallowed whole anything the newspapers
told them, with little or no critical thinking about the actual facts.
to go public and bring out this website, when the incorrigible UK media
wrote that very defamatory piece about me and my family.
Many other medical doctors before me have sued the media, on the premise
that a doctor heavily relies on his/her professional reputation.
The article is still important because the legal case is still ongoing since this
was published.
Treat this as a case study in to how the media conducts smear campaigns.
But we're all used smear campaigns by now too, aren't we...?
However, in my case this exactly why the article was published - during the
middle of a case concerning my profession as a medical doctor and GP,
when it was propagated during a May bank holiday weekend, presumably
during peak readership.
Let's see how many fake news' we can find in this article:
1. Firstly, I was not "struck off"
In UK media parlance, "struck off" refers to medical doctors whose names
have been removed from the regulatory body's register. This body is known
as the General Medical Council, or GMC.
All medical doctors need to be registered with the GMC to practise in the
UK, in any speciality and in any medical/health organisation.
In order to do this, the doctor has to pay the GMC an annual fee. If this is
not paid - for any reason, not necessarily controversial - such as the doctor
taking a year out to travel the world - the registration is described as being
"relinquished". However, this does not mean that the registration cannot
be initiated after payment of fees.
Saying the doctor is "struck off" means they can no longer practise a
medical doctor in the UK. This decision is made by the regulatory body, the
GMC, after a thorough investigation of the complaint against the doctor
and a resultant hearing that relies on a burden of proof, that was of a
criminal case level, until relatively recently.
However, I, Dr Rapinder Adekola, am allowed to practise in the UK as a
medical doctor and in any speciality, as far as the GMC is concerned. There
are no restrictions on my right to practise, that could have been imposed by
the UK's medical doctors' regulatory body in the UK.
This body has 160 years of experience in regulating medical doctors and is
considered the expert in this field.
As I am not currently working as a medical doctor, I have not
registered with the GMC until I pay their annualfees again.
The media often reports these "struck off" cases, if they're sensational
enough to produce an exciting headline.
The UK public are generally familiar with the colloquialism and most
understand it as a removal of a professional license.
However, in my case, there has been no removal of any such "license".
When this does occur, and the GMC prevents a doctor from practising by
removing their name from its register, andit includes doctors who have
committed serious crimes such as rape, child offences and murder.
For example:
Quite serious cases where doctors have been arrested, charged and
convicted.
However, this does not automatically mean the doctor will be "struck off",
as it is for the GMC to decide whether the doctor's clinical competence is
affected, while still regarding the severity of the criminal offence.
The same newspaper, 'The Telegraph', wrote about such
doctors, though its reasoning about "human rights" preventing these
doctors from being "struck off" was generally inaccurate, in my opinion.
Often these "struck off" cases refer to lack of patient care or neglect of
duty usually due to clinical incompetence or a knowledge deficiency.
More often than not, these doctors are usually suffering from physical
and/or mental illnesses that has prevented them from carrying out their
duties effectively.
In my case, there was no evidence of any criminal charge; criminal
conviction, or of any physical or mental deficiencies.
Hence why the GMC allows me to practise as a medical doctor in the UK.
The accusations made by two employees at Northamptonshire NHS were
not related to any clinical competence issues or anything linked to patient
safety.
This was purely about my "character" and Dr Christine Hopton's and Ms
Sue Field's opinion that my personality did not meet that required of a GP.
There are no tenets in law that disallow a doctor from
practising medicine based purely on that premise.
However, Dr Hopton wrote to the GMC implying I had a "paranoid
personality", thus triggering an investigation with regards my competence
and whether this could signify a patient safety risk.
Dr Hopton concluded this because she read letters between myself an my
employer where I made accusations of illegal surveillance and
institutional racism.
These were deemed the rants of a paranoid mind, according to
Northamptonshire NHS. This without any medical assessment.
Bear in mind that I had never met, spoken to or worked with Dr Hopton or
Sue Field at any time and at the time the accusation was made I had been
working in General Practice for 7 years and as a medical doctor for 11 years
before that in numerous specialities and across the UK in numerous
different hospitals and medical establishments.
In fact I started off my medical career as a Psychiatrist, training across
London before becoming a General Practitioner.
The point is that I was not struck off the GMC register and in fact am
allowed to practise in the UK as a medical doctor in any speciality, as far as
the GMC is concerned.
There are a couple of anomalies though.
First, the Sri Lankan doctor I took over from was also referred the GMC by
the very same medical practice - one that he ran. This doctor retired early.
However, this is a statistically significant pattern - that two consecutive
GPs at the same medical practice should both be referred to the GMC?
Both doctors also of an ethnic minority status - in an area that was 99%
white and in a practice that had no other non-white permanent staff.
The two Northamptonshire NHS employees, Hopton and Field did make a
complaint about me to the GMC in June 2011. This was investigated for a
ratherprotracted period of two years.
Essentially, the GMC commissioned a medical assessment that did not show
any evidence of mental incapacity on my part.
In June 2013 the case collapsed.
Coincidentally, the NHS PCTs were also dissolved around the same time.
Funny thing is that there does appear to have been another health
professional, a dentist, with a Nigerian name, who has taken to scribbling
down his own recollection of events - in several books now sold online.
He particularly described Ms Sue Field - who was also very involved in a
campaign of harassment, thinly veiled as a case against me.
Adekola is my married name; a Nigerian name.
Prior to this case, my record was flawless.
As far as clinical competence and patient safety is concerned, it's still
impeccable.
2. I was not trying to buy venom
My husband, Mr Adekola, made an internet enquiry with an online firm that
was freely advertising insect venom with no restrictions to the site.
This was not unlawful. The insect venom is not a regulated or restricted
substance.
However, despite this he did not actually buy any venom at any time.
2. The quantities of insect venom advertised by the online company were not "lethal".
This was confirmed by the vendor himself, Mr Steve Trim, who said he was
the owner of the company my husband contacted.
He went onto say that the venom enquired about was only harmful if
injected directly into a blood vessel.
In fact, the headline contradicts the body of the article because it confirms
that the venom enquired about was not lethal.
If injected into a blood vessel, the ensuing symptoms would be similar
to that of an insect sting and this would only be lethal if left untreated.
That's why being stung by a scorpion while hiking in the Australian outback
is far more dangerous than if you're sitting in Sydney - purely because
medical assistance is not readily available.
In fact, very few people die of scorpion/spider stings and it usually occurs if
medical aid is not sought rapidly enough.
Let's look at what the Sunday Telegraph reporter, Ben Leach says, and
compare that to the actuality.
Paragraph 1:
FAKE NEWS!
Where did he get this information from? A source was never revealed.
I had no such plans.
I had no poisons.
To be fair, Leach did quote me in this respect:
However, the 'Sunday Telegraph' reporter contacted me by
email (how did he get hold of my contact details? which were not freely
available?).
Details of the case were not publicised by the GMC at the time of this
article's publication - still don't know how Ben Leach got hold of my
personal data or such specific details about the GMC case.
The only others with access to this information were the NHS employees
themselves - Hopton and Field.
He came with the disingenuous line that he thought the case against me
was unfair and he wanted to write about how unfair it was.
He quoted my return email - as I never spoke to him personally or even by
telephone.
He had no way of knowing whether I was speaking from my new home.
He also knew very well I was not speaking from Australia - as his article
implies this and misleads the reader.
The newspaper did admit to sending two of their underlings all the way to
Australia to interview me, but after a search were unable to locate my
whereabouts.
The GMC case collapsed in 2013 with no adverse findings being made
against me, supporting my assertion that it was a maliciously construed
case.
FAKE NEWS!
The "medical regulators" - the GMC - did not have any evidence for this.
The reason a case was initiated was because of accusations of "paranoid
personality", that the GMC subsequently investigated and then decided
were unfounded.
This is another fabrication.
There were no venoms at all and so, no homemade cures.
To go onto say that I would try them on my children is yet another
imaginative speculation, based on a fabrication, based on yet another
unlikely presumption...
FAKE NEWS!
There was no venom, no poisons.
Ergo, there were no tinctures or suppositories.
I had not been researching any pain relief.
I was working as a GP at Brackley Health Centre at the time in question -
over 4000 patients were listed with the 3-doctor practice.
In addition I was parenting two young children.
I did not have time to even go online, nevermind research anything un
related to my immediate work!
I was not arrested for trying to buy venom, which is not a crime.
No charges were ever brought.
I subsequently filed a case against Northamptonshire Police for wrongful
arrest.
Additional accusations against the Police: false imprisonment,
breaches in data privacy, unlawful surveillance and attempted entrapment.
Did this reporter speak to the police officers?
There was no "extensive material found". This is nonsense.
Claims of extreme "aggressiveness" were false and unsubstantiated.
Here's some photos of an "aggressive black man" speaking to the police in
his garden.
This plain-clothed police man doesn't look too threatened does he?
That's because he wasn't.
If anything, the situation was the reverse.
Also, he forgot to tell us he was a detective working for the fraud squad.
The Police also forgot to tell us that the owner of the company - Mr Steve
Trim - had contacted Counter-terrorism about us.
Mr Trim said he contacted this officebecause his former
colleague worked there so he could contact her directly at the local
counter-terrorism office.
The policewoman, Liz Ansell, who fabricated accusations, shown below,
parked at my home.
She retreated to her car once the camera came out.
Despite undertaking a search of my home for "fraud" and finding nothing.
Liz Ansell then told Northamptonshire Social Services, that she found
venom in a chemical flask in the shed. This was a complete fabrication.
There was no laboratory; no nitrogen flasks and no intention to set up a
laboratory.
She went onto say that because there were medical syringes in my home, I
intended to inject my children with this venom.
This was a complete fabrication. Medical equipment was also a part of my
doctor's 'black bag', stored in my home.
This triggered an urgent referral to social services.
However, the referralwas abandoned by them after a visit to my home.
Dr Hopton and Ms Field seemed dissatisfied with the GMC case - possibly
they were expecting to have gotten the doctor "struck off".
So, Northamptonshire NHS PCT decided to hold its own investigation -
without my knowledge - its own hearing - without my knowledge or
representations - and decided to prevent me from practising as a GP in any
medical practice in the local area.
At the time, I had already resigned and left the local area.
From the legal point of view, the NHS acted outside its powers and beyond
its jurisdiction.
I was not an NHS employee - so this was not "my NHS trust" - and held no
employment contract with the NHS.
Northamptonshire NHS had no powers to prevent me from working as a GP
in its local area, or in the UK.
It's a pity the same NHS Tribunal acted outside due process - the hearing
was held without my knowledge or representations and I was not sent any
decision letter about the hearing. Scary stuff.
During this time, the GMC had conducted a medical assessment that
dismissed any "paranoid personality" on my part or any alleged illness that
could have impinged on patient safety.
The above also contradicts the headline - which blares out about some
"lethal" venom.
Next:
I also worked in a medical practice in the Highlands while training as a GP
Registrar. I was not suspended and left this practice with full GP
qualifications.
The position taken up in 2005 was subject to references, that my employer
at the time - Dr Charles Perrott - who later stated these same references
were "satisfactory".
He also commented and described my trustworthiness:
The above is at odds with his later descriptions to the GMC.
My grandfather - a farmer and landowner - first came to England from
India in the 1950's. My own parents were born in India and emigrated to
the UK in the early 1960's - when they were in their 20's. My father worked
in a 6th form college teaching maths and physics to A level students after
achieving an MSc at an English University.
I was also schooled and went to University in the UK.
I have always practised medicine in the UK.
I state all this because of rumours propagated which said I was
a doctor from India - with the implication that I was therefore inferior to a
UK medical school graduate.
(More on Identity Theft on this website.)
My husband's company was lying dormant for 3 years. It was initially going
to be used professionally, but when this fell through in 2008, the company
was registered but dormant.
It was after my husband's attempt to re-activate this company that led to
the two police arriving at our door out of the blue one evening.
The police told us that the company had been dissolved by the Companies
House registrar. However, my husband had no knowledge of this and nor
was he ever informed of this action.
This still does not explain why the venom seller, Mr Steve Trim, thought it
necessary to contact his mate in Counter-terrorism about a dissolved
company, or why the fraud squad decided to act so quickly and turn up at
our home to interrogate us about it, particularly as no transactions had
been made.
I was the company secretary - not the director - so held no fiduciary duties.
This information was no longer on the Companies House website at the time
this article was written - as the company had been dissolved 3 years earlier
in 2008.
So,I don't know where this newspaper got its (dis)information from - as it
states Companies House as the source.
There is another anomaly associated with all this - a recently published
website (2018) that appears to have gotten hold of my data without my
knowledge or consent - including an address from 20+ years ago and my
date of birth.
Plus, the information is false and was not available on the Companies House
website, so could not have been obtained from there.
More about that below...
This website has been removed since I started asking it questions -
questions that still remain unanswered.
False: It said that I was a director of a company 20 + years ago while at an
address it seems to have obtained from somewhere.
False: It said I took up "my first appointment" as a director "at the age of
29 years".
How and more importantly, WHY did it dream up all this nonsense?
ANS: It suits the fake news narrative that the fraud squad attended my
home because of something related to my being a director of a company.
I was the company secretary of my husband's company that never traded,
that sat dormant, and one that Companies House dissolved without our
knowledge or consent.
Coincidentally, Ophiuchus became the 13th constellation in 2016.
I'd never heard of this constellation before 2008 either.
This was my husband's interest.
Let's move onto the next bit of fake news:
I never said any such thing, and nor is this true.
However, the police would have loved it had I said that. Maybe then, they
could have accused Mr Adekola of fraud.
This also fits the media-created Nigerian stereotype.
Where did this newspaper get its (dis)information from?
I resigned from my position as a GP at the Brackley medical practice at the
beginning of July 2011.
Here's my resignation letter:
Even with all the above documentary evidence, including an
acknowledgement from the employer, Dr Charles Perrott (below), the NHS
still maintains that I was fired.
I guess saying a doctor was "dismissed for gross misconduct" makes for a
more sensational story-line, right? Helps with the smear campaign.
The above is ancient history now because the GMC case collapsed in 2013,
the following year.
The GMC concluded that the case against me did not even merit a hearing
as it was curtailed after the investigation was completed. This also meant
that the accusers' witness statements were not publicly examined and
tested.
Although this is old news, for the record, the newspaper did get its facts
wrong again and also made certain important omissions.
The GMC suspension was essentially because Northamptonshire NHS had
fabricated a story that I was mentally ill; and unstable because I had left
the local area and moved house (yes, really).
In fact, I had taken up a lucrative job offer in Australia - an open offer that
had been made a few years earlier.
For this reason, and the fact I could not attend a GMC medical assessment
in Australia, my UK registration was suspended.
Once I returned to the UK and the assessments were completed, giving the
all clear, my registration was reinstated.
This allowed me to work in the NHS as well as in private practice, as the
newspaper incorrectly implies that the GMC did not allow me practise in the
NHS, when this is simply untrue.
Some standard restrictions were placed while the investigation was ongoing
and even more accusations were made against me during this time.
The NHS took all the allegations - including those made in this article - and
decided to black-list me from any NHS-funded GP medical practice in the
UK for 2 years from 2012.
When this time period elapsed - in 2014 - the NHS brought a new allegation
about this website - one that was written in response to the defamatory
newspaper article.
This did not make any sense either, but was used again to prevent me from
practising for a further 2 years.
The case continues. I will be giving out a fuller statement shortly...
Meanwhile, the NHS has a shortage of doctors and GPs are leaving the
profession in their droves.