Patel Jury retires.

[azureline**]

THE jury in the manslaughter trial of former Bundaberg surgeon Jayant Patel has retired to consider its verdict.

Earlier, a judge has told the jury in the trial that they are duty-bound to pay attention to the evidence when deciding whether he is guilty or not guilty.

In the Supreme Court in Brisbane, Justice George Fryberg began his closing address just before midday on Monday, using a PowerPoint slide presentation to help the jury of five men and eight women to consider their verdict.

"It is your duty to pay attention to the evidence and to say whether he is guilty or not guilty," Justice Fryberg said.

"You must determine the facts and that includes determining what evidence to accept and what evidence you do not accept."

He stressed the burden of proof lay with the Crown and asked the jury to "ignore" anything heard outside the case and to put aside "any feelings of sympathy or dislike".

"The accused is presumed to be innocent and you can convict him only if the prosecution established he is guilty," Justice Fryberg said.

"The prosecution must prove guilty beyond reasonable doubt."

[catsnknots]

well no surprise there... found not guilty... 

he got away with it... 

now i guess he is free to go dupe another hospital.... 

[azureline**]

Yes, no surprise but hopefully now something will be done about the way things are done and a blind eye to questionable behaviours will no longer happen.

[azureline**]

A JURY in the Jayant Patel manslaughter trial has asked for the judge's help for an explanation on the test for gross negligence.

In the Supreme Court in Brisbane on Wednesday the jury of five men and seven women asked Justice George Fryberg for a re-direction following two days of deliberation behind closed doors.

Justice Fryberg said the test applied to criminal conduct was objective, and the standard was that of "a reasonably competent surgeon" in all of the circumstances.

"You should assess what a reasonably competent surgeon would have done," he told them.

He said criminal negligence required a standard of conduct that was "so unskilled or careless as to be grossly negligent".

"It’s very much an assessment you have to make based on your commonsense," Justice Fryberg said.

"It’s a question of degree."