Since 2020, the medical journal has pursued ongoing legal proceedings against researcher and surgeon Paolo Macchiarini. Between 2011 and 2012, Paolo Macchiarini performed three stem cell-covered artificial trachea implantations at the Karolinska University Hospital. According to the surgeon himself, the purpose of the operations was to try to save the lives of critically ill patients after considering all other treatment options. All patients died some time after the procedures, and the operations became increasingly questionable.
Last summer, Paolo Macchiarini was sentenced to a suspended prison term by the local court for grievous bodily harm in a case. This ruling was overturned by the Svea Court of Appeal, which considered, among other things, that there was an alleged intent to obtain information and that Paolo Macchiarini was indifferent to the potential risks of the operations. The Court of Appeal sentenced Al-Jarrah to two-and-a-half years in prison for aggravated assault, a ruling that Paolo Macchiarini’s lawyer, Bjorn Hurtig, appealed to the Supreme Court before the deadline expired.
The appeal stated that Paolo Macchiarini believed he had committed no crime and that he believed the ruling of the Court of Appeal was unlawful. Al-Jarrah and his lawyer also believe that the Court of Appeal did not evaluate all the evidence presented and also ruled “outside the prosecution”.
In the appendix to the appeal, Paolo Macchiarini and his defenders request additional time when they “intend to present new evidence in the case”, which the Supreme Court agreed to.
The medical journal sought out Bjorn Hurtig, who in an email to the journal provided a brief description of the new evidence they intended to present:
“We’ve got some new written evidence that targets the target partially In the matter of intent, partially On the photo of the damage to patient No. 3, i.e. the woman coming from Türkiye. These include notes, emails, and photographs.
Bjorn Hurtig states in his email that the new evidence is fundamentally important to the question of permission to appeal on strange grounds. “This will be explained in more detail in the appendix to be submitted to the Supreme Court,” he wrote.
With regard to the appeal in general, Bjorn Hurtig states that they have focused on some cases which they believe are of importance to the continued application of the law.
“Among other things, we believe that the issue of indifference intent for the surgical physician is very interesting and important for the medical profession in the future. The risks that working doctors face in the future of incurring fees or claims for compensation, if the judgment is a question of intent, we believe, cannot be underestimated,” Bjorn Hurtig wrote to the newspaper.
He also writes that he considers that the fact that the Court of Appeal “did not take into account large parts” of the evidence presented influenced the outcome of the case. It is, says Bjorn Hurtig, “in some parts about the evidence first presented in the Court of Appeal”.
“We believe that this constitutes extraordinary grounds for the Supreme Court to issue leave to appeal and either examine the strength of the evidence itself, or alternatively set aside the judgment and refer the case back to the Court of Appeal for a renewed examination,” Bjorn Hertig wrote in conclusion.
Paolo Macchiarini and his defense have until August 28 to present the new evidence.
Paolo Macchiarini was sentenced to two and a half years in prison
Paolo Macchiarini: “I regret having had the operation in Stockholm”
Surgeon Macchiarini is appealing the prison sentence to the Supreme Court
The public prosecutor is asking for a four-year prison sentence for Paolo Macchiarini
Paolo Macchiarini’s notorious operations are now being tested in the Court of Appeal in Svea
Macchiarini’s goal was to save lives.
Prosecutor: Paolo Macchiarini knew it didn’t work
“Extreme tv maven. Beer fanatic. Friendly bacon fan. Communicator. Wannabe travel expert.”