Forensic medicine dilemma in the Newborn Gang murder case

Nurse Arzu Başaran Başkıran lost her baby in 2016 due to negligence at the Private Esencan Hospital, owned by Fehmi Alperen of the 'Newborn Gang'. Retired General Manager Elif Şahin was selected as the expert witness in all 5 investigations launched following the family's complaints. It has been learned that the family also filed a lawsuit against the 1st Specialized Board of the Council of Forensic Medicine due to the contradictory and incomplete report issued by the board, and that a decision of 'no grounds for prosecution' was issued despite the contradictions in the report.

Don't leave your news choices to an algorithm - decide for yourself what you read. Add 12punto to your preferred sources!

Forensic medicine dilemma in the Newborn Gang murder case

Utku Beycan - Journalist

Nurse Arzu Başkıran gave birth in 2016 at Esencan Hospital, owned by Newborn Gang member Fehmi Alperen. The baby, who was intubated 6 hours later than necessary, was also taken off life support, resulting in multi-organ failure in the infant.

16 days after birth, the baby was transferred to another hospital in an ambulance that lacked even specialized personnel, and it was revealed at the hospital where the baby was transferred that the infant had been left starving at Esencan Hospital.

SAME EXPERT WITNESS IN 5 CASES

According to journalist Utku Beycan's report in 12punto, the family had filed complaints against the unidentified doctor present on the night the baby was born, the 112 Command and Control Center, the 112 Emergency Health Services Chief Physician's Office, an individual named M.S. involved in the baby's transfer, as well as the obstetrics department staff, radiology department staff, and neonatologists at Esencan Hospital. Former General Manager Elif Şahin was appointed as the expert witness for all five investigations. A decision of 'no grounds for prosecution' was issued at the conclusion of all five investigations; however, following appeals, the decision was overturned regarding the 112 Command and Control Center, the 112 Emergency Health Services Chief Physician's Office, and the individual named M.S. involved in the transfer.

FORENSIC MEDICINE REPORT DILEMMA

It was observed that the family also filed a lawsuit against the Council of Forensic Medicine's 1st Specialized Board due to the contradictions in its report, and that a decision of 'no grounds for prosecution' was issued. The complaint petition stated that the number of fresh frozen plasma treatments conflicted across three different epicrisis reports and the Health Directorate's investigation, yet the board accepted the treatments as complete. The petition also noted that the Specialized Board's report ignored the fact that there was no neonatologist present and that the stamp of the baby's doctor, Y.D.K., was used while the doctor was not at the hospital.

The complaint petition also alleged that the information in the report regarding the heart, the connection between the deformations that appeared in the organs, and the fact that the baby was left starving for 16 days at Esencan Hospital were deliberately covered up.

BRAIN HEMORRHAGE IN AUTOPSY REPORT OMITTED FROM SPECIALIZED BOARD REPORT

The complaint petition further emphasized that the brain hemorrhage mentioned in the Council of Forensic Medicine's Autopsy Report was not written in the Specialized Board's report. Although the autopsy report, which provided information that there was a hemorrhage in the brain and that the brain had reached a jelly-like consistency, was copied verbatim, the Specialized Board's report did not define the intracranial hemorrhage, brain hemorrhage, or tissue damage, and stated that there was no medical evidence that the baby died due to a traumatic effect.

THE SECRET AUTOPSY REPORT

Another point highlighted in the complaint petition was the 'secret autopsy report'. The petition stated that while there was no information about the heart muscle in the autopsy report, the specialized report contained the phrase, 'In addition to the findings described in the autopsy, it is recorded that no features were seen in the myocardial sections,' adding, 'This indicates to us the existence of a second autopsy report.'

Despite the contradictions in the reports, a decision of 'no grounds for prosecution' was issued via a document notified by the Bakırköy Chief Public Prosecutor's Office in January 2018. The family appealed the decision in February 2018.

The appeal was rejected by the Bakırköy 1st Criminal Judgeship of Peace. In September 2018, the Bakırköy Chief Public Prosecutor's Office upheld the decision of 'no grounds for prosecution'.

News Source: 12punto