Chapter 10) The College Censors approve corrupt exam practices as established and regular within the college


   
This document shows the response of a complaint I made to the censors of the college regarding the incompetence, negligence and dishonesty that engulfed the process of the two examinations 1995, 1996 and the flouting of the appeals procedures by Dr.T.J.McKenna. My complaint to the censors ran in two lengthy letters (both were referred to in the first paragraph of this document) which enclosed all the documents available to me at that time. Note that the censors had access to all the Royal College of Physicians of Ireland documents (displayed in other chapters of this website) that were disclosed later to me by a court order.
 
 In the third paragraph the censors seem to approve swapping the appellant documents before presenting those to the council as appropriate!! (See chapter 9)
 
 In the last paragraph the censors can’t see any ground for appeal i.e. they considered the following as normal practice:
1)     Marking the papers after announcing the results (see chapter 2)
2)     Fabrication of the written marks (see chapter 3)
3)     Fabrication of the clinical marks (see chapter 4)
4)     Conflict of interest of Dr.T.J.McKenna in being part of the exam board and dealing with my complaint against the exam board. (See chapter 6)
5)     Wasting Answer papers in transport between
 the college officers (see chapter 7)
 
The censors have also lied in claiming that they reported the case to the council on 6/2/1998 ,a claim proved to be not genuine (see chapter 8) and they also falsely claimed that Dr.T.J.McKenna was never an examiner in any of my exam attempts while he was (see chapter 4,6,8).
 
 The same censors of this document (Dr.Beringer, Dr.Gleeson) who approved the above mentioned improprieties, are currently (2011/2012) in full control of the exams and current members of the exam committee that supervise MRCP exams (see chapter 13) 

In the outside world laws prohibit any defendant from being a part in a ruling of his case. But the cosy and friendly arrangements in RCPI are quite different. As the RCPI meetings minutes shows( I have many copies of these), the defendant is the only speaker in the meetings ruling in his case, the defendant urges the approval of a decision to exonerate him and even writes to the complainant that the college refused his complaint!!!


  • Document 1