         |
Background to the Suspension of Dr Raj Mattu
45. Following 11 September 2001, Dr Gieowarsingh let it be widely known that he had suffered serious financial losses and was in debt by about £20-30,000. He started to demand ex-gratia payments from Dr Mattu, to which he was not entitled.
46. The very afternoon upon which Professor Liam Donaldson (Chief Medical Officer) announced that there would be absolutely no further consultant suspensions permitted unless there was clear demonstration of risk to patients, Dr Mattu was suspended by Dr Lionel Booth, under cover of a 'formal statement' by Dr Gieowarsingh. Interestingly, this occurred just eleven days before Mr Loughton's apparently unforced resignation was declared publicly.
47. Dr Booth took it upon himself to suspend Dr Mattu despite the fact that the "formal statement", was neither a formal complaint nor grievance by Dr Gieowarsingh; the statement was addressed to Dr Mike Harrison (Joint Medical Director) and not Dr Booth; Dr Harrison was unaware of Dr Booth's interception of his mail and unilateral action to suspend Dr Mattu.
48. This was particularly suspicious in light of the fact that Dr Gieowarsingh had previously informed a number of witnesses that Dr Booth had recently promised him an ex-gratia payment of about £20,000.
49. It then emerged that Dr Gieowarsingh was promoted out of the Trust on 31 March 2002, with references and support from Dr LJ Booth and Dr M Been, and allegedly on the basis of a dubious CV
50. Notably in March 2002, when the longest serving cardiologist in the department, Dr H Singh, raised formal concerns about irregularities in Dr Gieowarsingh's CV, the Trust charged the same Dr Booth and Dr Been to investigate this.
51. Dr Singh had also declined to provide Dr Gieowarsingh with a reference on noting the irregularities in his CV, despite being the only other supervisor that Dr Gieowarsingh had had during his appointment. To date, the Trust has failed to interview Dr Mattu during their investigation, even though he was Dr Gieowarsingh's primary supervisor, or to release a report of their findings.
52. Interestingly, Dr Lencioni signed his witness statement on 28th May 2002, tampered with and deleted Dr Mattu's files and data on 30th May, prevented Mr Needham rightful access to Dr Mattu's data on 30th May (claiming this was on senior advice), threatened Mr Needham on 30th May, left Dr Mattu's team on 31st May after securing promotion to a position working alongside Dr M Been, having also tampered with and removed Dr Mattu's name from Dr Mattu's own research.
53. Dr Lencioni has since apparently committed perjury, as he now indicates that an earlier 9-page affidavit that he had composed and sworn at his own expense, with his own solicitor, in support of Dr Mattu was neither his own composition nor truthful position. This was despite evidence from Mr S Campion and others that this affidavit was freely provided by Dr Lencioni at his own suggestion.
54. Having made Dr Mattu wait for over 6 months before releasing the two witness statements (26 August 2002), the Trust then hastily imposed dates upon Dr Mattu to meet and provide a detailed response to thirteen pages of statements. They set aside 23 August (three days prior to receipt of the written allegations of Drs Gieowarsingh and Lencioni by Dr Mattu), then 30 August and then finally 12 September 2002 despite Dr Mattu's representative being unavailable on the latter.
On behalf of Dr Raj Mattu Reinstatement Committee,
PO Box 2912, Coventry. CV1 3YX
