Monday, May 16, 2016
Multicultural doctor suspended over lewd comments about an elderly patient's genitals and sexual remarks to a colleague before laughing them off as the 'African way'
A doctor has been suspended after he made lewd remarks to a colleague about an elderly mental health patient's genitals - and then laughed it off saying it was the 'African way'.
Dr Adewale Williams Lawrence, 36, placed his finger on a co-worker's lips, made rude hand gestures and pointed to her breasts while making a lurid remark.
A medical tribunal heard he abused his 'position of trust' when he asked her sexually suggestive questions, including if she had enjoyed seeing an elderly patient's private parts.
The hearing was told Dr Lawrence, who worked at the Ribbleton Hospital in Preston, Lancashire, also told the more junior doctor - named only as 'Dr A' - that she should have sex with him.
When challenged over his persistent behaviour, the doctor laughed and said it was the 'African way'.
Dr Lawrence has now been suspended for nine months by the Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service in Manchester and was told his conduct was 'sexually motivated'.
The tribunal heard that, between August and December 2014, Dr Lawrence said Dr A had 'beautiful lips' and made inappropriate remarks about her sex life.
On one occasion, he followed her down a corridor, the hearing was told, and said: 'It's a nice view. I like walking behind you.'
Tribunal chairman Debbie Hill said: 'Your conduct towards Dr A was sexually motivated and you failed to treat her with respect and were wholly inappropriate.
'You have abused your position of trust as Dr A's senior colleague. This was a working relationship and you were meant to be supporting her.'
On another occasion, when Dr A was leaning over, he said, 'Oh, that's a good position'.
Mrs Hill added: 'When Dr A requested you stop asking her inappropriate questions, you inappropriately laughed, told Dr A you were joking...made lewd hand gestures and told Dr A that 'friends talk about these things'.
Dr Lawrence, who has homes in Blackburn and Oxford, denied any wrongdoing and accused Dr A and a colleague of lying.
However, the tribunal found the allegations against him to be true and said Dr A had proved to be a convincing witness.
Dr Lawrence earlier admitted calling his colleague 'good looking' but denied his comment was inappropriate, though the panel disagreed.
A spokesman for Lancashire Care NHS Foundation Trust, responsible for the hospital, said: 'As soon as the concern was brought to our attention, it was raised with the deanery and the doctor's lead employer, who took appropriate steps.
'This has now resulted in this significant action by the General Medical Council.'
Nurse whose animals were removed by the RSPCA speaks of her joy after charity's boss admits it is too aggressive
The new head of the RSPCA has admitted it has lost its way after a sustained campaign by The Mail on Sunday to expose how the charity had become politicised and strayed far from its traditional role of caring for animals.
In a hugely embarrassing climbdown, newly appointed chief executive Jeremy Cooper yesterday admitted: ‘The leadership was too adversarial,’ and promised: ‘We are going to be less political.’
His comments came as the charity made an extraordinary U-turn in the latest scandal revealed by this newspaper.
Earlier this month we reported how retired nurse Irene Brown, 68, had returned home after two weeks in hospital to find her beloved cats had been taken away by the RSPCA while she was ill.
She had feared she would never see her pets again. But yesterday a delighted Miss Brown welcomed the return of three of her cats in a victory for The Mail on Sunday.
All five of her cats were removed by the RSPCA on the day Miss Brown was struck down by meningitis last December.
Police who were called to the property by concerned neighbours had contacted the charity.
Three sheep, which she also owned, were shot the next day in the presence of an RSPCA inspector.
Last night, Miss Brown thanked the MoS for highlighting her plight after three of the cats were returned.
But Miss Brown, 68, is still battling to get her other two cats back. Her legal adviser, Warren Salter, said yesterday: ‘It’s incomprehensible that the RSPCA feel they have the right to hold on to Miss Brown’s cats.
‘Right up until the last moment before the handover, they were still demanding the right to inspect Miss Brown’s home to see that it was up to scratch when she had not done anything wrong apart from fall ill. This sort of abuse of power is monstrous.’
There is no suggestion any of the animals in Miss Brown’s care were mistreated or neglected and the RSPCA said her family had asked the charity to rehome them, which was arranged by a third party.
The charity insists it did not ‘authorise’ the killing of the sheep.
When Miss Brown asked for her cats back, she was reportedly told by the inspector that her home was an ‘unsafe environment’.
She says the house was in disarray because the ambulance crew moved furniture to get her out after she collapsed.
She said: ‘I am relieved to have my cats home but I won’t rest until they are all back. They were taken without my consent while I was unconscious. I feel betrayed.
‘I am so grateful for the support I have had from The Mail on Sunday and its readers.’
The RSPCA, which has a turnover of £135 million, and has been accused of alienating farmers over badger culls and launching politically motivated prosecutions against hunts.
The MoS has led the way with a series of reports about the RSPCA. They included revelations that hundreds of healthy animals were being put down simply because the RSPCA could not find homes for them.
And the charity was accused of ‘cruel dishonesty’ earlier this year after it seized and killed an elderly cat when concerns were raised about its appearance – and then lied to its distraught owners.
The charity later apologised.
An RSPCA spokesman said: ‘It is a matter of regret that Miss Brown was distressed by our actions. Our priority, as always, was the welfare of the animals.
‘We are trying to track down the current owners of the two cats and we hope to resolve the matter as quickly as we can.’
These States are Standing Up to Obama's Transgender Tyranny
When the Founders got together, surely they envisioned a society where an all powerful executive would use his power to dictate to the states that sexually confused, mentally ill young men pretending to be women can use any schoolhouse bathroom they choose, or else. Right? Wrong.
Yet that's exactly what President Obama is trying to do. Luckily, ordinary Americans nationwide are standing up to him. As Newsmax reports:
President Obama's new directive ordering public schools to allow transgenders to use the bathroom with which they identify is stirring emotions in statehouses and living rooms from Texas to Indiana.
Reaction from Texas came fast and furious in advance of the directive being disseminated Friday to schools nationwide, The Washington Post reported.
"I got news for President Barack Obama," Port Neches-Groves (Texas) Superintendent Rodney Canvass told local TV station 12News. "He ain't my President and he can't tell me what to do. That letter is going straight to the paper shredder."
"This will be the beginning of the end of the public school system as we know it," Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick told Dallas-Fort Worth TV station NBC 5.
Reaction was fierce in Indiana, as well.
Dr. Zach Rozelle, superintendent of the Union County/College Corner Joint School District, did not mince words to CBS4 in Indianapolis.
"Another example of government … politicians using the public schools to promote their own political agenda -- little to no regard for the real impact on the right to privacy … security for all children," Rozelle said.
Good laws have a basis in sound reasoning. This law does not. It's nothing more than a vehicle for liberal self congratulation, at the expense of many tragically mentally ill, deluded people.
Sheriff David Clarke: Sentencing Reform and Corrections Act ‘Premised and Crafted on Lies’
Milwaukee County Sheriff David A. Clarke said at a Capitol Hill press conference Wednesday that a series of “lies” fueled the bipartisan effort pushing the Sentencing Reform and Corrections Act.
“This bill was premised and crafted on what I call three lies, the three lies of criminal justice reform,” he said.
“Lie number one: ‘It will only involve low-level offenders.’ First of all, we know that’s not true. If this truly did involve only low-level drug offenders, we wouldn’t put a dent in the federal prison population.” Clarke went on:
Lie number two: That it will reduce crime. We look at Prop 47 in California, a similar plan to empty the jails and prisons in California in favor of this crazy idea of programming. In its time that Prop 47 was passed, in the ten largest cities in California, violent crime has gone up 12.9 percent. And in that time, property crime has gone up in nine of the ten largest cities in California, ten percent. You want to know what this is going to look like three, four, five years down the road? There’s your snapshot. And there’s a lag time in this.
Clarke also criticized the label “low-level drug offenders,” put forth by the bill’s proponents.
“Let me disabuse of the idea of the low-level drug offender,” he said. “If you’re a single mom, living in the American ghetto, and you’re doing everything that you can to try to keep your child and your children away from the dope dealer who stands on the corner every day, or runs a dope house just down the street from yours, it is a huge relief for her to have that person taken out of circulation.”
“‘Low-level’? Much of the violent crime we’re talking about — armed robberies, burglaries, drive-by shootings — are the result of drug war disputes. So forget about the thought of this ‘low-level drug offender,’” he added.
Political correctness is most pervasive in universities and colleges but I rarely report the incidents concerned here as I have a separate blog for educational matters.
American "liberals" often deny being Leftists and say that they are very different from the Communist rulers of other countries. The only real difference, however, is how much power they have. In America, their power is limited by democracy. To see what they WOULD be like with more power, look at where they ARE already very powerful: in America's educational system -- particularly in the universities and colleges. They show there the same respect for free-speech and political diversity that Stalin did: None. So look to the colleges to see what the whole country would be like if "liberals" had their way. It would be a dictatorship.
For more postings from me, see TONGUE-TIED, GREENIE WATCH, EDUCATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS and DISSECTING LEFTISM. My Home Pages are here or here or here. Email me (John Ray) here.