“We will do everything to find out why our father died. And we will really go to the end ». Cécile and Luc Jacquier are determined. Three years after the death of Noël Jacquier, 73, who had been operated on by doctor V., Grenoble surgeon specialist in the back, the two children of the septuagenarian have just filed a complaint for "aggravated scam" against the doctor, recently indicted for "homicide and involuntary injury". Seventy-four patients and families of patients (for the two who died) have filed complaints to date for allegedly failed operations. So here is a new front opening up.
The lawyer for the Jacquier family, Me Hervé Gerbi, who specializes in personal injury and victim assistance, explains the motivations for this new and unprecedented complaint. "By filing a complaint for aggravated scam, we want justice to examine the economic aspect of this file. In order to know why we got there, ”explains the lawyer before recalling the existence of an initial investigation by the Primary Health Insurance Fund (CPAM) of Isère.
"She concluded that this surgeon had performed unjustified operations and billed for surgical procedures that would not have been performed," said Gerbi. Given the gravity of these alleged facts, the CPAM had alerted the public prosecutor. "I regret today that the public prosecutor's office did not draw the legal consequences from its preliminary investigation by not entering the examining magistrates on this aspect of the case," continues the lawyer for the Jacquier family, citing example of the father of his clients.
“You should know that this surgeon had asked Mr. Noël Jacquier the sum of 912 euros for excess of fees . All this for an operation that would not be justified and whose consequences were dramatic, since it led to the death of Mr. Jacquier, "states Me Gerbi, considering that the qualification of scam therefore deserves to be studied. "A scam even aggravated, because of the vulnerability of patients who come to ask for these financial supplements," he adds.
In January 2019, the council of the National Order of Physicians asked Doctor V. to pay the CPAM the sum of 35,302 euros for having performed "interventions that were not necessary". What the surgeon did not do according to his lawyer, Me Bernard Boulloud, who develops the practitioner's position.
“My client did not pay this sum because he disputes the CPAM investigation. As of April 25, 2019, we filed a complaint denouncing pressure from a CPAM medical consultant on certain patients, encouraging them to testify against them. We also suspect expert bribery, ”claims the lawyer, who announces that, having no information from the prosecution on the outcome of this complaint, he will now seize the dean of the examining magistrates.
"Four times more interventions than its colleagues"
In January 2019, the National Council of the College of Physicians had suspended Doctor V. for 18 months, following "breaches of extreme gravity and gravely offensive behavior". In particular, the surgeon is accused of “a lack of information for his patients before the operation”, “unjustified operations”, “operating techniques that are not in accordance with good practice”, “a lack of postoperative follow-up which has led to complications” . Of the 54 patients concerned, 30 have sequelae or disability following their operation, according to the CPAM.
Newsletter - The essentials of the news
Every morning, the news seen by Le ParisienI'm registering
Your email address is collected by Le Parisien to allow you to receive our news and commercial offers. Find out more
“The CPAM launched its first checks because it noticed that this surgeon performed on average four times more procedures than his colleagues practicing in the same specialty, that of spine operations. Why so many interventions? Wasn't the Cedars clinic where the surgeon practiced something to be appreciated? Asks Me Hervé Gerbi. He also wants justice to verify "if the surgeon, who had developed surgical implants, pedicle screws marketed by a specialized company, could take advantage, directly or indirectly, in the exercise of his activity".
For his part, the lawyer for Doctor V., is formal: “A surgeon cannot place his own equipment on his patients. These suspicions are therefore completely unfounded. I now hear that the presumption of innocence of my client is respected ”insists Me Boulloud.
The two judges in charge of the case decided to appoint a panel of experts to examine all of the suspicious operations alleged against Doctor V.
