- 20/05/2025
The Jury Room S01E05
Category
🦄
CreativityTranscript
00:00In the series you're about to see, we review real murder cases in which the convicted killer
00:11refuses to accept the guilty verdict. Days, weeks, even months of courtroom deliberations
00:17may have been held, but generally cases whittle down into a handful of key disputed points
00:23of evidence. Our specifically selected jury will review the original trial evidence alongside
00:30revelatory new evidence or analysis. Will you and the jury find the convicted killer
00:35guilty or perhaps not guilty?
00:43I'm Will Hanrahan, welcome to the jury room. Today we are hearing the case of Ben Gein.
00:49Here's how it all began.
00:56A clutch of incidents sees elderly patients become inexplicably and seriously ill in an
01:02Oxfordshire hospital over two months. There is no link between the respiratory attacks
01:09they're suffering and the illnesses for which they've been admitted. Hospital bosses call
01:14in police, they believe they have a killer on the wards, and nurses arrested and incriminating
01:19evidence is found. Ben Gein is later convicted of murder, but did he do it? The jury room
01:25will debate the case of Ben Gein, cynical killer or suffering a miscarriage of justice.
01:45Ben Gein has been described as the unluckiest man currently serving life for murder in a
01:50British jail. A nurse, he was convicted of killing two patients and of causing grievous
01:54bodily harm to 15 others. Evidence suggested muscle relaxants, anaesthetic and insulin
02:00had been variously given to patients when they should not have been. But did he do it?
02:05Campaigners say he has been found guilty of murders and attacks which actually never happened.
02:10They blame his conviction, amongst other things, on hospital hysteria caused by earlier revelations
02:15about Dr Harold Shipman, a mass murderer convicted just a year before. In the jury room, 12 specifically
02:21selected citizens will be asked to revisit the case and consider evidence not heard by
02:26the original jury before reaching their own verdict. Will Ben Gein be found guilty or
02:32not guilty of murder? First, why Ben Gein is in prison for the murder of David Olney
02:37and Anthony Bateman and the attacks on 15 others. This is the case for the prosecution.
02:42In it, you will hear analysis by former detective Colin Sutton.
02:48Houghton Hospital in Oxfordshire has an accident and emergency unit. Between December 2003
02:54and February 2004, 18 people very nearly died there. They may have been admitted for relatively
03:00minor conditions, but within hours were fighting for their lives. One of the staff at the hospital
03:06had been on the scene of so many inexplicable occurrences that he had been given a nickname,
03:12one inspired by Beverley Allitt, an infamous killer nurse.
03:17Each time this happens, a nurse called Ben Gein, who's actually nicknamed Ben Allitt
03:24by his friends after Beverley Allitt, the nurse who was infamously responsible for causing
03:29deaths of patients, he's present. Ben Gein is present, not only present, he's actually
03:35listed and recorded as being a member of the team that worked on all 18 of these patients.
03:43The patients who seemed to go into sudden decline during the period tended to be elderly,
03:48the sort least able to recover if struck seriously ill. Somebody thinks this is odd.
03:55It's beyond coincidence. The police are called and an investigation is started.
04:02Ben Gein is walking into work and is called by one of his supervisors to one side to come
04:08to the office to have the matter discussed. He's wearing a fleece and he, in the pocket
04:16of that fleece, has a syringe and he is seen to empty that syringe in his pocket.
04:25The fleece is taken away for examination, scientific examination, and it's found that
04:31not only is the damp patch on the pocket where he discharged the syringe found to be muscle
04:40relaxant, but also in the same pocket there are traces of an anaesthetic.
04:47Both of these drugs are drugs which are found in the body of some of the victims of these
04:53respiratory attacks. Interestingly, an anaesthetist at the hospital says that she is the only
04:59person who would be authorised to give these drugs to that patient at that time and she
05:04didn't, so somebody else must have.
05:08After examination, another highly incriminating fact emerged about the syringe.
05:13When that syringe was examined microscopically, it was found that the needle was worn through
05:20multiple use. The practice almost every case, almost every case where a syringe is used
05:27in the hospital, the practice is the needle is used once and then the whole thing is put
05:32into a sharps bin. Needles don't get worn in hospitals because they're only used once,
05:38so it implies that the syringe that he had in his pocket was one that had been used on
05:43multiple occasions in the past.
05:46Bengeen, a territorial army reserve, is known by colleagues as a thrill-seeker regularly
05:51on hand to save the day when patients fall ill. Eighteen patients inexplicably suffer
05:57respiratory attacks in a short space of time. Nurse Bengeen is on duty on each occasion.
06:03When approached by detectives, he empties the contents of a syringe into his pocket.
06:08When analysed, the contents of that syringe match the drugs found in some of the patients
06:14who'd fallen ill.
06:20Our jury has selected a foreperson who will be tasked with collating the opinions and
06:24delivering the not guilty or guilty verdict, and it's Janet Cowell, who's a nurse.
06:28You didn't know we were going to have this case of Bengeen the nurse, so why did you select her?
06:34Well, we selected her for her honesty. She's a professional person and an upstanding citizen.
06:41So, she's a professional, she gets the job of being a foreperson on this occasion.
06:44Well, OK, it's going to be your chance at the end of the programme to collate all the verdicts.
06:48In the meantime, let's review what we've just heard. The prosecution case, you tell me,
06:53what have we just heard?
06:54Eighteen patients fall seriously ill, two died, and afterwards we find that it's through
07:04controlled drugs that they have been found in the body. Possibly one or two of the drugs,
07:11depending on which ones, could be used after surgery for other reasons.
07:19So, what else? There's certainly a link between the fact that Bengeen had something in a syringe
07:26in his pocket and substances found in the bloodstream of patients.
07:30It's funny, isn't it, that the syringe has been used multiple times probably, which doesn't happen in hospital,
07:34and it also seems funny to me that he should have a syringe full of the drug that he's bringing into the hospital,
07:40which I wonder, does he have the drug at home?
07:44One of his defences was that he'd left the syringe in his pocket.
07:48Yeah, but it's a syringe that has been used multiple times, it wouldn't be.
07:51Yeah, but also, it was in his coat pocket.
07:53Yeah.
07:54He wouldn't have your coat on, would you, when you're...
07:56When you're actually in hospital.
07:57When you're actually on the job, so to speak.
08:00What we've just heard in prosecution terms was he was approached by the police,
08:04and as he was approached on the way to work, a syringe is in his pocket.
08:08That's what we know.
08:09And he discharged it as he was approached, which is very, very suspicious.
08:13But as well, if he's going to take it back to put it in the sharps box, but it's already been used.
08:18Yeah.
08:19So, you put it in the sharps box every time, so if it's already been used,
08:24why would you be so intent on getting it to the sharps box if you've already used it before?
08:28So, with these attacks, they weren't related to the actual illness that the patient was going through.
08:34So, that, for me, is a question mark, just hearing from what we've just heard.
08:41Yeah, and then, obviously, that there's only, like, one nurse that can obviously give these types of drugs,
08:46and, obviously, he wasn't one of them, which is obviously another question mark.
08:50The insight into his character from his colleagues was very, very interesting.
08:55This idea of him being a thrill seeker and wanting to be the central role in that drama, refreshing to the rescue.
09:02The fact that he's in the reserves as well, which is a good thing to be,
09:06but, you know, it could go with that, as someone who wants drama.
09:11Named as Ben Ali as well.
09:13Yeah.
09:14So, people associating with that name, why would they do that? It's a bit suspicious.
09:17Yeah, exactly.
09:18You can sometimes get that sort of gallows humour thing there, can't you?
09:21Yes.
09:22Like, oh, something always happens when he's around, so, funny nickname.
09:27You know, two or three.
09:2918, as you said.
09:31I think we should take that into consideration, because it could be the fact that,
09:35not convicting the man before we've gone through all the evidence,
09:38but it could be the case of him applying these drugs to then come and save the day.
09:42Yes, that's what I think it is.
09:44To be the hero.
09:45He wants to be the hero.
09:46He didn't mean to kill them, he just wanted to be there to resuscitate them.
09:50Those type of drugs wouldn't have resuscitated anybody.
09:54They're the type that put people to sleep.
09:57But I think the suggestion is that if you put them to sleep,
10:00and then their respiration is suppressed,
10:02you can come as the avenging hero to save the day.
10:05And that was the thrill-seeker allegation that was made.
10:08He obviously assumed that he could save them all.
10:11Yeah, I don't think he intended on actually killing.
10:14So, if he's not intending on killing them, can it then be classed as murder?
10:17Is it then not classed as manslaughter?
10:19No, I would still say it's classed as murder,
10:21because he still gave the drugs, knowing that it could...
10:24That it possibly could.
10:25There was no risk there.
10:26It was possible, yeah.
10:27It's a reckless act that he's done.
10:29My thoughts were, when was he named Ben Allis?
10:33Was it...
10:34It was shortly after.
10:35Before these people began suffering respiratory problems.
10:42But...
10:43And how has he got hold of the drugs?
10:45Because drugs, controlled drugs, are controlled.
10:48He's supposed to be able to sign them out.
10:50Janet, you're a nurse.
10:51Yeah, they are controlled drugs,
10:53and it takes two qualified nurses,
10:56or it would have done in 2003-04, to check the drug,
11:01so that the second nurse is checking that that is accurate
11:05for that particular patient.
11:07They would then take it to the patient and give it to the patient.
11:12In the trial, the...
11:13And I'll finish on this, because I think we've got the prosecution case,
11:16but in the trial, the prosecuting barrister asked Bengean,
11:20do you accept that these drugs have been applied to the patients?
11:24And he did accept that these drugs had been applied to the patients.
11:28The defence will talk to that point in the next part of our programme,
11:32when we will hear the case for the defence of Bengean.
11:43Welcome back to the Jury Room.
11:45For those who have not spent time on a jury or do not know the rules,
11:49if a jury believes someone is guilty by a majority of 10-2 or more,
11:53then a guilty verdict can be offered.
11:56We have heard a summary of the prosecution case against Bengean.
12:00Now for the defence, analysed by a jury,
12:03we will hear the defence of Bengean.
12:07We have heard a summary of the prosecution case against Bengean.
12:11Now for the defence, analysed by barrister Matthew Stanbury.
12:21Bengean explained away his propensity to be at the scene of war dramas,
12:25specifically when patients became dangerously ill,
12:28by reminding the jury of his character.
12:31He was not the sort to run away from a crisis.
12:35The fact that Bengean had been overenthusiastic,
12:38if he had been overenthusiastic, was a point in his favour, not against him.
12:42The fact that he was a diligent nurse, somebody who wanted to help out,
12:46the defence said, was a point to his credit.
12:49Then there was the discovery of a syringe in his pocket.
12:52Bengean argued that he thought he might get into trouble
12:55if found with a syringe full of medication.
13:00The defence relied on the fact that he had been disciplined
13:03as a point in his defence,
13:05because he said he'd taken the syringe home by accident,
13:08he'd carried the syringe in his fleece in case it was needed at work,
13:11and he'd discharged the contents of the syringe,
13:14not because he was panicking because he'd been rumbled,
13:17but rather because he'd been disciplined for being overenthusiastic before,
13:21he knew how it might look,
13:23and therefore he panicked and discharged the contents of the syringe.
13:27Campaigners have argued that Nerskine's story about the syringe
13:30was backed up by his girlfriend, also a nurse, who lived with him on site.
13:34She'd seen the syringe and told Bengean to return it to the so-called sharp box
13:38at the hospital where discarded objects are placed.
13:41The defence also argued that the prosecution was mistaken
13:44to suggest that all patients had been wrongly or maliciously
13:47given a dose of medication.
13:49In not all of the cases could the prosecution prove
13:52that muscle relaxants had been administered.
13:54They invited an inference to be drawn that that was the case,
13:57but it was only in a limited number of cases that they were able to prove
14:00that muscle relaxant had been administered,
14:03where in fact it shouldn't have been.
14:05One feature of the case was that under cross-examination,
14:09questions from the prosecution barrister,
14:11Bengean accepted at the trial that somebody must have administered
14:16illicit drugs or drugs that weren't necessary to these patients,
14:20and he accepted that, and the prosecution said,
14:22well, look, he's an experienced nurse, he should know.
14:25But the defence would say it's not for him to say whether that's happened.
14:29His case is, I didn't do it.
14:31It's not for him to offer an explanation as to what's happened.
14:34His case is, it wasn't me.
14:36And the fact that he made that concession at trial,
14:39the fact that he accepted or appeared to accept
14:42that somebody must have administered it, is neither here nor there.
14:46It's what the experts say that matters. He's not an expert.
14:50Now we've heard the two sides of the Bengean case.
14:53The jury will review the defence points we heard from the prosecution earlier.
14:58What have we heard in Bengean's defence?
15:01Can I ask, Janet, when you are administering a drug,
15:07do you not do it on a case-by-case basis?
15:10Yeah.
15:11So you wouldn't have an extra one just in your pocket, just in case?
15:14No. Specially controlled drugs.
15:16All the drugs in a hospital situation are prescribed.
15:19Specifically for that particular person?
15:21Specifically.
15:22And that patient's got a cardex with that particular drug on it.
15:25With their date of birth, with their name, you have to...
15:28That's right, the dose, what time it should be given, et cetera.
15:31So the fact that it's got...
15:33If it's a controlled drug, it takes two qualified nurses
15:36to go to the drug cupboard, usually after the general drug round,
15:41check those drugs out, make sure they're safe,
15:44check those drugs out to make sure that that is the correct dose
15:48and that that is what's written up exactly for that patient.
15:52Both then go and give it to the patient.
15:55So you'd never have a nurse on his own actually administering it
15:58and he'd never have one in his pocket?
16:00Not in 2003, 2004.
16:02And is that the same in A&E? Because this was all in A&E, wasn't it?
16:06So that would be the same procedure?
16:08Exactly the same for a controlled drug.
16:10I wouldn't mind asking, Janet,
16:12the drugs that was found on the suspect,
16:15they're not a generic drug, such as antibiotics,
16:18that he may, if he was a fraud seeker,
16:20could use generically around the hospital to save somebody.
16:23They're a specific drug that needs...
16:25They're quite lethal drugs.
16:28But could he not have just made a mistake?
16:30Like, long hours, long shifts?
16:33I mean, he could have, but when you look,
16:36there was another 17 or 18 people that had these drugs in their system.
16:40No, there wasn't.
16:42This is what the defence is saying,
16:44that it's actually a limited number of people
16:47that were found with these drugs in there.
16:50They had respiratory issues, but not all of them had those drugs present.
16:54In several cases, there was drugs that shouldn't have been there
16:58and that coincided with the drug that was found in his pocket,
17:01so we know that.
17:03What do you think of his innocent reason
17:05for having the syringe in his pocket?
17:07It's kind of fair enough, actually.
17:09If you've been in trouble for, you know, being overzealous
17:13and then you go into work with this syringe full of stuff,
17:17you might think, oh, my God, I'm going to lose my job,
17:20OK, I'm just going to have to get rid, you know.
17:22He might have actually panicked.
17:24But the thing is, the syringe was actually used multiple times.
17:27Yeah, that's what I was going to say.
17:29So how could that just be a mistake?
17:31I thought the same as you, but it's the fact that it's been used multiple times
17:34and there was multiple people that were ill
17:36doesn't seem to... It's not like a generic drug.
17:38It's not going to help everybody. It's not going to help anybody.
17:41He's given it to other people.
17:43He could have taken it for somebody else out of the hospital.
17:47You wouldn't have it in your pocket.
17:49That's what I can't believe.
17:51He's still done something very wrong by taking a syringe
17:54that he's obviously used many times.
17:56Is that murder?
17:58Wasn't there traces of the drugs on his jacket?
18:02It was anaesthetics?
18:04Disposed of it?
18:06Yeah, there was anaesthetics around him there.
18:08Why would you dispose any drug or anything in your pocket?
18:11What he says was because he felt he was going to probably be dismissed
18:15because he's took home syringes before.
18:17But also there's another way of looking at it,
18:19that he was guilty and he wanted to...
18:21Does he have a guilty conscience?
18:23The defence said his girlfriend did support his story,
18:26that he'd gone home with it, and she said,
18:28take it back, he shouldn't be getting rid of it here.
18:31Innocent as well.
18:32He might have gone home with it because he wanted to use it again.
18:35It's obviously been used multiple times before.
18:37We've also got that one of his excuses, sorry,
18:39was that the syringe might be needed at work.
18:43We all know that.
18:45We all know it's not going to be reused again.
18:47That's it, that's it, exactly.
18:49I think we're reading into the fact that we're just taking for granted
18:53that it would have been reused again and again at work.
18:56He took it home with him.
18:58He may have been using it at home.
19:00We don't know.
19:01There might have been other reasons.
19:03He wasn't known as a known stalwart user.
19:05There was an incident I know he used.
19:07We don't have that evidence.
19:09But it's not like he's using muscle well actors incidentally.
19:11It might not have been for him.
19:13Is it very common for a nurse to accidentally have a syringe full of stuff
19:16and take it home in their pocket?
19:18Not with the stringent controls on the drugs.
19:20It's not really going to happen, is it, generally, in your opinion?
19:23And it was his coat pocket.
19:25Yeah, it wasn't even his work.
19:27He's going to be wearing his coat before he gets to work anyway.
19:29He's taken it home to begin with, in the pocket.
19:32If he jumped it into his coat,
19:34probably presuming he's going to go home and wash that coat
19:36before anyone's found evidence.
19:38If you're going to put these drugs into people,
19:42why would you use the same thing over and over again?
19:45Wouldn't you try and hide the evidence and just tuck it in the sharps box?
19:49Wouldn't you be more diligent?
19:51That's what he's trying to say.
19:53Why would you consistently use the same...?
19:55As Janet said, the drugs that was found on him,
19:58it's not, like, something you'd necessarily use to help people.
20:01Or you wouldn't carry it anywhere, on you.
20:03But that was his intentions, though, right?
20:05We don't know. It could have been pain relief.
20:08We don't know. He's saying he never...
20:10It was still wrong. He's not admitting to ever administrating any drugs.
20:13He's just saying he's in the place at the right time.
20:15I just don't think it's...
20:17I've given another reason for having taken that home or used it for any other...
20:20He's not saying why he's used it.
20:22He took that home, he came into work with it and dispelled it.
20:25That's all we know.
20:27If it was a case of maybe using it on himself...
20:29You've got to follow certain practices as a nurse,
20:32and that in itself, just going home with...
20:34He's guilty of malpractice, but is he guilty of murder or purposefully doing...
20:38But you have to have a reason for taking that particular drug.
20:41You've got to have a reason.
20:43I'm having this drug to give to this person,
20:45so where was that person he was going to give that drug to?
20:47If you were trying to do something bad to patients,
20:52it would be so much easier just to get rid of the evidence at work.
20:55But to take a syringe full home and then bring it back into work,
21:00that seems like a really stupid thing to do.
21:02But at the same time, where's the exclamation for the use of the needle?
21:06It's not for him to...
21:09Has he took a used needle, or where's the explanation for that?
21:12It's not for him to, like the defence barrister said,
21:16it's not for him to prove what theory could have been.
21:20There's multiple people that have been affected,
21:23not necessarily by the same drug he was carrying at the time,
21:25but have been affected, and this needle's been used multiple times.
21:28And that's not a practice at all.
21:30We don't know how many people out of those 18 people
21:34were actually injected with this stuff.
21:37But we do know on the fleece that he was wearing,
21:40the fluids, there were several fluids in the pocket.
21:43Some of the people, but is there enough...
21:45One had been discharged, and in the other pocket,
21:47some other fluids that had also been used.
21:49Is there enough people, though, to say,
21:51this is a pattern, this guy is doing this for...
21:54So I'm going to stop you, that's getting hot in the jury room.
21:57I think we've got the defence case, and we'll be debating that
22:01as we go on throughout the programme,
22:03and then our jury reaches its verdict.
22:06But we now know the defence case,
22:08and it was a case which was dismissed by the original jury,
22:11because they found him guilty of the murder of two patients,
22:14and guilty of grievous bodily harm against 15 other patients.
22:18The final, the 18th patient, he was found not guilty on.
22:21But Ben Gein supporters campaigned.
22:24They sought an appeal. Did he get one?
22:26We'll find out after the break.
22:44Welcome back to the jury room.
22:45Ben Gein was convicted by a jury
22:47they'd heard both sides of the case, weighed up the evidence,
22:50found him guilty.
22:51Ben Gein was granted an appeal in 2009.
22:55That appeal was dismissed.
22:57Judges did not accept the new expert evidence.
23:00However, the campaign continues on behalf of Ben Gein,
23:03and yet more new evidence, yet to be considered at appeal,
23:07but revealed here in the jury room, has emerged.
23:11According to the defence, the prosecution's case at trial
23:14relied heavily on statistics
23:16about the number of incidents at Houghton Hospital.
23:19A Cambridge University academic came forward to say
23:22that he felt the conclusions drawn from the statistical analysis
23:25were not sound.
23:27The cluster of cases may not have been so unusual.
23:30Whilst another statistical expert went further,
23:33he said he would actually expect to see such a cluster of cases
23:37from time to time.
23:39There's a number of eminent statisticians
23:41who have been asked to give opinions on this case,
23:44and the suggestion at trial was that this was a significant
23:48or unusual number of occurrences of respiratory attack.
23:52But the suggestion from the experts, the statisticians,
23:55the medical experts now, is that it wasn't unusual,
23:59and that, in fact, one would expect
24:02perhaps even as frequently as once a year
24:05for there to be this type of spate of attacks within a hospital.
24:09In other words, to have a number of people at any one time
24:13who have come in for other ailments, a broken leg,
24:16whatever it might be, but for those people
24:19to contract a respiratory illness whilst in the hospital.
24:23The statistic quoted by the prosecution
24:26suggests it is all but impossible.
24:29The statistic quoted by the prosecution
24:32suggests it is all but impossible
24:34that patients could be attacked and be injured or die
24:37without there being a deliberate attacker in the equation.
24:40But these sort of statistics
24:42have been proved unreliable in other cases.
24:45There was a similar case involving a different type of illness,
24:49involving cot deaths in the Netherlands,
24:51where the prosecution had relied upon
24:54the number of incidents as being significant,
24:57and, in this case, the defence were able to bring forward
25:00expert evidence to say that, in fact,
25:02this wasn't statistically significant,
25:04and, in fact, her appeal was allowed
25:06and she was subsequently released.
25:08One point that's often made is that the criminal courts
25:11aren't well equipped to deal with statistical issues,
25:14and that's likely to be one of the criticisms that's made in this case.
25:18The Crown Court will often proceed on the basis that,
25:21well, it must be significant,
25:23but that actually statisticians would say
25:25that the courts are simply ill-equipped to deal with those types of issues.
25:29Alongside this new analysis of the statistics,
25:32the defence argue that the age of the patients affected is worth noting.
25:36That's almost inevitably the case,
25:38that more elderly patients are going to be more vulnerable to these things,
25:41going into a hospital environment where there are more infections,
25:44they're more susceptible to it.
25:46So that almost certainly would form part of Ben Gein's case
25:49for saying, look, this just wasn't significant.
25:52The fact that 18 people had respiratory illness at the same time
25:56was, in one sense, to be expected.
25:59So the defence case on appeal would be,
26:02this was all relied upon at trial.
26:04The case presented to the jury was that this was significant.
26:08That case was wrong.
26:09The jury should not have had the case presented in that way.
26:13Had the jury known that this wasn't significant,
26:17then the prosecution case became very much weaker.
26:22Ben Gein may not ever have come to the attention of the police
26:25but for the fact that management at Houghton Hospital itself
26:28felt they had detected an unusual pattern of cases.
26:31But sensitivities were heightened by another set of attacks
26:34by a medic a year earlier.
26:36The Ben Gein case very much came in the aftermath of the Harold Shipman case
26:40when, understandably, health authorities became very concerned
26:44and very alert to make sure that these sorts of things
26:48weren't going to happen again.
26:50The defence would say that the hysteria that arose
26:54out of that necessary cautiousness
26:57has led to something being read in in this case
27:00that simply wasn't there,
27:02that that understandable cautiousness became hysteria,
27:06that the police perhaps would not have been called in,
27:09should not have been called in,
27:11and that they've been looking for something,
27:13looking for a crime that in fact never happened.
27:20The prosecution response to the new interpretation
27:22of the statistical evidence was to dismiss it.
27:25According to the new analysis, the police should never have been called in
27:28because nothing unusual had happened.
27:30But that's only half of the case offered by the prosecution.
27:39According to the new analysis, the police should never have been called in
27:43because nothing unusual had happened.
27:45But that is only some of the evidence offered by the prosecution.
27:49What's happened here is that the statistics
27:52have caused somebody to flag up that there might be a problem
27:56and ask for an investigation.
27:58Whether or not those statistics are borne out as being correct
28:02or whether they're arguable
28:04doesn't affect the evidence that was found
28:07once that investigation was started.
28:09But the statistical experts insist
28:11that given the number of patients using hospitals in the UK,
28:14it is probable that there'd be one cluster a year
28:17of cases like that which appeared at Houghton.
28:19Put simply, 18 people might indeed suffer respiratory attacks
28:23over two months in a hospital in Britain,
28:25and it happened to be at Houghton General.
28:28While the statistics, out of context,
28:31may say that actually these respiratory arrests aren't that common,
28:35you'd expect one a year,
28:38that doesn't explain the statistical improbability
28:45of the same nurse happening to be on duty
28:48each time one of those happens.
28:50It becomes too much of a coincidence, in my view,
28:54that somebody would just happen to be present at all these events
28:59if he didn't have anything to do with it.
29:02The final defence point was about a Dutch nurse
29:04convicted after the discovery that she alone was on shift
29:07when seven children had died.
29:09She's since been released because, statistically,
29:12it has been proved that such a cluster of cases can happen naturally.
29:16Again, a point dismissed by the prosecution.
29:19Where the statistics were the main plank of the investigation,
29:23the main plank of the prosecution evidence upon which she was convicted,
29:26that may be understandable.
29:28Here it isn't.
29:29The statistics were the means to make the inquiry be sought.
29:34They were what got the authorities interested or worried about this.
29:40But the investigation then proved that Ben Gein had the motive,
29:45he had the equipment, he had the opportunity to commit these crimes,
29:49and I think it's a completely safe conclusion to come to,
29:52that he committed them.
29:58So, that's the new evidence which Ben Gein's campaigners
30:02have been presenting with and say that they say
30:05means he should have yet another appeal.
30:07Let's get our head around what they're saying, shall we,
30:10and also what Colin Sutton has said in response to that.
30:13First of all, this point about statistics,
30:16it could have happened anyway.
30:18Bel, any thoughts?
30:20I just find it inconceivable.
30:23I mean, I know that statistics are very important,
30:27but there being this cluster at this little hospital in the A&E,
30:30and, again, with the guy always being there,
30:33I just don't see it.
30:35It just doesn't stack up in my imagination as a likely possibility.
30:41If there was a cluster, it does happen.
30:44But if the cluster was there in that hospital,
30:48you would think there would be other clusters
30:51at the same time in different areas as well, usually.
30:56But also the fact that he was there.
30:58You can have the cluster and, you know, you could accept that,
31:02but the fact that he was on shift for the whole of the cluster
31:07then makes the cluster more suspicious, doesn't it?
31:09If it was just the cluster, then...
31:11There is a small possibility this may happen once a year.
31:14But then how much more do you need to stretch?
31:16There's a possibility this may happen,
31:18and the same nurse will be there each time.
31:20There's a possibility this nurse may be found
31:22with some drugs discarded in their pocket
31:24with a syringe that's been used multiple times.
31:27It's just how much more do they need to stretch it?
31:31On there, I noticed it was midazolam that was used.
31:35And midazolam is an anaesthetic,
31:38and I cannot see an anaesthetic being used anywhere else
31:42apart from the anaesthetic department.
31:46And it was used. That's the allegation, anyway.
31:49That was a trace in the pocket, was an anaesthetic, wasn't it?
31:53Yes.
31:54So what do we make of this alternative theory
31:56that everybody was hysterical because of what happened with Harold Shipman?
32:00But is means testing a bad thing?
32:02If we are means testing because there are cases of things, of anything,
32:06means testing surely is a good thing to do wherever you are.
32:10The fact that they were on high alert,
32:12maybe it was a good reason that they were on high alert
32:14cos maybe they wouldn't have caught it.
32:16I think they definitely was on high alert,
32:18but I think that's stretching it even more
32:21as a reason to protest his innocence.
32:24Just because of everything else that matches, that goes against him.
32:27There's not a lot that's going for him at the moment.
32:30I mean, he's disregarding the needle.
32:32Surely, if you knew about these things that was happening,
32:35you'd probably quite easily lose your job, barbing and be convicted.
32:39As we said, it's very unlikely that you would accidentally take a needle
32:43that had been used multiple times, full of drugs,
32:45and then take it and then put it in your pocket to bring it back.
32:48That is very unlikely, unless there was a reason for it,
32:51an untoward reason that you needed to maybe take the...
32:53You'd discard it at home, wouldn't you?
32:55You'd get it off of the hospital premises and come once someone checked a locker...
32:58Are we clear that we have the defence case and the rebuttal,
33:02and are we clear that we have the campaigner's evidence in front of you
33:05for you to debate in part four as you reach your verdict?
33:07That's all for them to discuss.
33:09What will they decide? Find out in a few minutes.
33:26Welcome back to the jury room.
33:28It's very nearly time for our verdict.
33:30Before we hear it, let's have a summary of the Ben Gein case
33:33from the perspectives of the prosecution and the defence.
33:3916 people very nearly died, and two did,
33:42after being admitted to an accident and emergency unit.
33:45They all suffered respiratory attacks, despite such a condition being unlikely.
33:49Hospital management called in the police.
33:51Nurse Ben Gein had been on shift throughout the period
33:54and had attended to the 18 patients.
33:56He was found walking into work
33:58with a substance found in the bloodstreams of some of those attacked.
34:01When approached, he tried to get rid of the incriminating evidence.
34:05His defence team originally argued that he was a good nurse
34:08who would instinctively want to help if a patient's condition worsened.
34:12That's why he was around so much.
34:14And they gave what they felt were good reasons for having a syringe on him
34:18and for trying to dispose of its contents.
34:21Found guilty and having lost an appeal,
34:23Ben Gein is now using the evidence of statistical experts
34:27which undermine the prosecution claim
34:29that what had happened at the hospital was unusual.
34:36Time, then, for our jury to reach their verdict.
34:39Foreperson, Janet, it's over to you.
34:43It's an unusual case that 18 people had taken ill.
34:48They can get clusters of respiratory attacks,
34:52especially if this was the winter.
34:56Old people.
34:57However, I think that they...
35:00He should never have been found with that drug in his pocket at all.
35:04OK. So, debate.
35:06If it had been drawn up properly.
35:08One of the defences was that he was a very keen nurse
35:11and always very keen to help,
35:13but the shift pattern would have been arranged in advance.
35:16I'm presuming you have a shift pattern
35:18that rolls on from month to month to month.
35:21So, you think he didn't volunteer?
35:23So, you could not volunteer to be there, right?
35:25No. You have to be on shift to be able to...
35:28Very often, like, I've spent a lot of time as a patient in the NHS,
35:32and very often, you know, you have your normal nurses
35:35and then they come back in and do bank nurse shifts
35:38because there is not enough people in the NHS.
35:40And I would defend the NHS until the day I die
35:42because I think it's brilliant.
35:44But, you know, people are people. They're fallible.
35:46They can make mistakes. They're not...
35:48You wouldn't be at home and then called in for a respiratory...
35:51Well, you might be. No.
35:53But I think the respiratory happened while he was there.
35:56It wasn't that it happened and then he got called in for it.
35:59Yeah, but he would have already been on that shift,
36:02so he could have...
36:04It's not like he's being called in voluntarily.
36:07He's already there, so that defence to me just doesn't stack up at all.
36:11It's a coincidence that he was there on the 18 occasions.
36:15But not all those 18 occasions, as we've said,
36:19those people had those drugs in their system.
36:22It's only some of them.
36:25Having a syringe which has been used, let's say, in your fleece,
36:29and then, did he see a police cover? He was going to be questioned.
36:33So he discharged it into his pocket, which is a really weird thing to do.
36:36I mean, would it not be more intelligent to throw it into a bush?
36:39Why would you do that? That's a massive question mark in my mind.
36:42If you had a syringe on you, why would you...?
36:46I mean, what we do know is he had a syringe
36:50that is nearly impossible to get hold of with the drugs in to take home,
36:53which is nearly impossible, according to the nurse here.
36:56He then came back into the hospital with it in the thing,
36:59and when he was approached, he then dispelled it, which is, again, a bit daft.
37:02I think that makes you look a bit suspicious.
37:05Why would he have it?
37:07What we're not sure of is how he got those drugs,
37:10whether it was somebody else that may have left it
37:13or whether he actually went to get the drugs to intentionally hurt these people.
37:17This is what my hang-up is.
37:19In my mind, I just think that he shouldn't have had those drugs anyway.
37:22I think that's one major point.
37:24So he shouldn't have had those drugs on him at all.
37:27He shouldn't have had access to them.
37:29Unless he was planning a malicious act.
37:31It's not necessary, but we can't assume that.
37:33But all we can go on is that he had those.
37:35And it's not just the one drug either.
37:37It's not just the one drug that was found.
37:39It seems very likely that the drugs that was found are traces in his pocket
37:42with a needle that's been used multiple times.
37:44That would be very helpful to any patient.
37:46Why would it only be some people?
37:48That's the fact there. It wouldn't be very useful.
37:50If he was an adrenaline seeker,
37:52it's not like he's going to save somebody with the drugs that was found
37:55with a needle that's been used multiple times.
37:57They're not resuscitating, but it's not adrenaline or something like that.
38:00What if we make it a girlfriend, because she's a nurse,
38:03and she's got this syringe in a pocket?
38:05She must have freaked out.
38:07If she knows nothing about what...
38:09Supposing he is guilty, supposing he is,
38:11she doesn't know anything about it,
38:13she says, oh, my God, you should take that back.
38:16Well, in that case, if he's made a genuine mistake...
38:20You'd go to the... He'd just take it back.
38:22He wouldn't discharge it into his closet.
38:24But then he's already...
38:26We can't forget that he's already been in trouble
38:29and he's already had disciplinary action, so...
38:32If it was a mistake... You don't think straight.
38:34You don't think straight when you're planning...
38:36If it was a mistake, as a nurse, would you not...
38:38I know maybe we're thinking along the lines of him covering his back.
38:41Would you not discard that... Would you discard that drug somewhere?
38:44If he was coming back to do the same thing to other people
38:49and then he saw these detectives,
38:51why would he dispel it in his pocket, keep it in his pocket?
38:55Why wouldn't he just lob it? Why wouldn't he just...?
38:57What's to say he didn't have the chance to do it?
38:59What's to say that somebody's approached him?
39:01The only thing he can do is just push it through his...
39:04I know that's only an assumption we can only assume,
39:07but that's one of the possible reasons.
39:09He panicked and just got rid of...
39:11If he wasn't involved in them two murders,
39:13I think I'm right to believe that the third murder makes you a serial killer.
39:17So maybe they all have their own traits.
39:20Maybe he didn't want to lose that needle.
39:22Maybe that's a big thing to him, to keep using the same needle.
39:25I don't think he actually wants to kill him.
39:27You think it's a trophy needle? Ben, is that your point?
39:31I don't know, originally...
39:33If he was guilty, maybe he didn't want to originally kill people,
39:36he wanted to be the hero.
39:38With regard to the statistics as well,
39:40I know they've said that it's statistically possible
39:43that you have this cluster, but 18 seems like a big cluster to me.
39:47Seven, maybe.
39:49An emergency department in itself, it's an emergency department,
39:52and when you've got some sort of bug going round or whatever it is,
39:56like you say, it is going to happen in clusters.
39:59The issue that I think most people are having
40:01is the fact that he was on every single one,
40:03but in this day and age where nurses are on practically 24 hours a day,
40:07aren't they? I mean, would it be likely that...
40:10Lots of nurses would have been on the same.
40:12Is there anyone else?
40:14I think it may be like this day and age,
40:16with the shortcomings in NHS staff-wise,
40:18that you could be involved in every single case.
40:20I think, yeah, that is likely, but it's just everything held together.
40:23It's still this syringe in his pocket that I'm having an issue with.
40:27If somebody wants to, you know, a professional,
40:29have something that's been used,
40:31why would they have them drugs in there?
40:33It's also the same hospital, not the next hospital or the next hospital,
40:36because ambulances, if it's busy, will go wherever they go to A&E,
40:39but it is just at that hospital.
40:41Are you interested in the Dutch case at all?
40:43I mean, you know, there was a cluster of cot deaths
40:49and a woman was convicted for them and then found innocent.
40:53Cot deaths, though, I mean, there's a lot of research done about cot deaths.
40:58That was based on statistics.
41:01That was based on statistics that they're trying to base this case on,
41:04but this case has so many other...
41:06It's got drugs in it.
41:08It's the fact that he actually had these different drugs
41:11found in his outdoor coat.
41:13And everything else that's happened after that.
41:15Not in his inside jacket, not in his work jacket,
41:17but it was in his outdoor coat, his personal coat.
41:19As it was snowballed into coincidence after coincidence after coincidence.
41:22I feel like it's just maybe one or two things.
41:25It's not like a huge number of different coincidences.
41:29It's a guy that had a needle, he brought it back to work,
41:32he got scared, he dispelled it.
41:35There's not a huge pattern.
41:37There's only some of the people that had this drug that he had.
41:41Can I help you there on that point?
41:43Some of the drugs, like insulin, for example,
41:46disappears from the bloodstream after 24 hours.
41:50And so the anomaly is the respiratory attacks.
41:54And then the 18 respiratory attacks,
41:56some of these patients had dislocated shoulders, broken ankle,
42:00but they get a respiratory attack.
42:02And then in a handful, drugs are found.
42:04If that helps you.
42:06He lives on the site with his girlfriend, who's also a nurse.
42:09So they live on site, so it's...
42:11Oh, I forgot, I've got this syringe in my pocket.
42:15It takes two minutes or five minutes to find a sharps pin in a hospital,
42:20especially in...
42:22Probably the biggest two things is the drugs that have been found
42:25in different situations has been found in his pocket.
42:28And he has a syringe which has been used multiple times.
42:31I think that's massive.
42:33If you wanted to be the big better person and save this person,
42:38who has got respiratory depression through the midazolam,
42:42he would have to have the antidote, which would be Narcon,
42:47which is another drug, in order to...
42:50Bring him round.
42:52That's big, yeah.
42:54Bring that person back round.
42:56Burning points that you want to make, make them now,
42:58cos we're running out of time.
43:00He's been in bother from his senior department.
43:04He's now trying to make, look, I'm indispensable
43:08by saving all these respiratory problems and things like that.
43:12Two of them he didn't save.
43:15A mistake, recklessness to what he did
43:18by administering the drugs in the first place.
43:21OK, that's it, the time is up.
43:23It's time for you to come to your verdict.
43:25So I'm going to ask Janet, our foreperson,
43:27to collate all the guilty and not guilty verdicts as we go around
43:30to hear what our jury believe.
43:33Ryn, do you find Ben Geane guilty or not guilty?
43:37There's too many coincidences, and I find him guilty.
43:40He shouldn't have had those drugs in his pocket.
43:42He should never have taken them away, but guilty.
43:44Guilty. Let's move along the line.
43:47Griffith, what do you think? Guilty or not guilty in the case of Ben Geane?
43:51Yeah, I'll find him guilty.
43:53Let's swap to the other side of the jury
43:55and see if we're getting a different message.
43:57Kerry, to you, a carer,
43:59somebody whose profession it is to look after others,
44:02do you find nurse Ben Geane guilty or not guilty?
44:05Guilty.
44:07Tracy, also somebody who helps in the work that you do,
44:11do you find Ben Geane guilty or not guilty?
44:16I think he's guilty, yeah.
44:18Trevor, former fireman, used to attending emergency services
44:22and this all happened in and around an accident and emergency unit.
44:26Ben Geane, for you, guilty or not guilty?
44:29Guilty.
44:31Let's swap back over to Nicole.
44:33Nicole, do you find Ben Geane guilty or not guilty?
44:37Guilty.
44:39Ben, next to you, do you find Ben Geane guilty or not guilty?
44:44Guilty.
44:46Let's swap back now over to Adrian.
44:48Adrian, a make-up artist,
44:50do you find nurse Ben Geane guilty or not guilty?
44:53Guilty.
44:55And Jess, who tells us she spent a long time at the NHS
44:58and is experienced in that sort of care that we've been hearing about,
45:02do you find nurse Ben Geane guilty or not guilty?
45:07Guilty.
45:09Kim, next to Jess, again a former carer,
45:12do you find nurse Ben Geane guilty or not guilty?
45:17Guilty.
45:20Let's move along to our next side of the jury, to Belle Mooney, a columnist.
45:24Do you find nurse Ben Geane guilty or not guilty?
45:27Guilty.
45:28And our fourth person, a nurse herself, Janet,
45:30do you find Ben Geane guilty or not guilty?
45:33Guilty.
45:35Janet, I'm going to ask you to stand to return the verdict of our jury.
45:39Do you find nurse Ben Geane guilty or not guilty?
45:43Guilty.
45:48Thank you very much to our members of the jury.
45:51This has been a four-television trial
45:53based on the facts and the evidence
45:55established in the case against nurse Ben Geane.
45:57The jurors are members of the public.
45:59Ben Geane is currently serving life for the murder of two people
46:02but protests his innocence.
46:04What's your verdict?
46:05See you next time on The Jury Room.
46:23THE JURY ROOM
Recommended
52:04
|
Up next
25:01
25:31
40:00
5:36
25:01
52:56
5:27
25:07
38:46
44:06
56:06
44:53
41:16
44:33
44:12
46:58
46:58
47:21