Note that the documents are not arranged in a chronological order since many documents have become available to me quite later than when it actually happened. The college was compelled by court order years later to disclose those documents .Note that all the documents mentioned and displayed here are stated in the affidavit sworn in court by the Royal College of Physicians of Ireland
(see the appendix)
I) Document 1 is page 16 of the affidavit sworn by the college in court (the full text is in the appendix) and is a continuation of page 4 of this affidavit which is in effect entitled “documents admitted by the college to be available and in its possession”. Item 178 on document 1 confirms that June 1995 essay answer papers were found and available in the college, but January 1996 written answer papers were not mentioned as found (note that this court case was related to both 1995, 1996 exams).A subsequent clarification was requested from the college’s lawyer (see Document 2) querying whether my answer papers of January 1996 exam have been lost or mislaid again (the other occasion was in the previous exam see chapter 2), see below for the college response.
II) Document 3 shows the royal college response to the requested clarification of the above. It was confirmed in Document 3 that my January 1996 written answers papers were mislaid again by the college, the probable known mechanisms of the papers loss or the mislaying is either during transport within the venue of the exam(the college) as it happened before (see chapter 7), or never been returned by the exam markers (see chapter 2).This mislaying of my 1996 exam answer papers was secretly covered up by fabricating marks (see III and IV below) ,that is why Dr. Buckley (the director of the exam then) refused to abide by the exam committee’s decision to investigate the affair and needed the interference of another involved member of the exam board (Dr.T.J.McKenna) to cancel this investigation decision (see chapter 6) and to prevent any further suggestion of an investigation (see chapters 8,9) as this marks fabrication secret would have certainly been discovered by any independent and/or external investigation.
III) Document 4 (an external record document) which was sent to me shows that the written question answer marks were weak, borderline and borderline, considering the admitted loss of the answer papers in Document 1, 3 (see I,II above) then these marks on Document 4 must have been pure fabrication since there were no answer papers available to mark in first place. the Director of the exam Dr. Buckley has been known to fabricate( see chapter 5)
IV) Document 5 is an internal college document disclosed by a court order which shows that the marks of January 1996 exam (see acceptence date Nov 1995, teo months before January 1996 exam ) were 48, 49 and 49 for the written questions, since the answer papers were lost, it follows that these marks were made up. This internal document could be verified as belonging to my January 1996 exam by the identity of my exam number 86 the same as in document 3 , by the appearance of 1996/1 which is an abbreviation to January 1996 exam and the exam application acceptance date being 22nd of November 1995 two months before the exam.
V) It was alleged in Document 6 that the written marks have been checked and found to be correct; this check must have been bogus since there were no answer papers available to check. In fact the source of the alleged answer papers recheck mentioned in Document 6 was Dr. Buckley (the director of the exam then) as I’ve been informed by phone by Dr.Feely’s secretary. To know more about Dr. Buckley’s character and attitude please review chapters 5,6 and 7
VI) Document 7 states that all materials relating to my performance in January 1996 exam were viewed and the procedures were confirmed as correct i.e. written marking procedure of January 1996 exam was confirmed as correct; this is hilarious since no sane person can consider fabricating marks for non existent answer papers as correct procedure. In fact none of the college meetings has ever viewed my answer papers or my exam materials (according to the college meetings’ minutes, all of which are in my possession); this notion of exam materials viewing (see Document 6) was pure fabrication by Dr.T.J.McKenna as part of his desperate attempts to bury the whole affair (see chapters 4, 6, 8 and 9).
VII) The royal college admits in Document 8 that it was unable to identify the examiners’ names (markers) of my written exam in January 1996, The College was unable to identify the examiners’ names who were supposed to have marked my written answers since the marks were not assessed by examiners but fabricated (see II, III, and IV above) by fabricators, the Director of the exam then( Dr. Buckley ) has been known to fabricate (see chapter 5).
VIII) Note that this is the second exam occasion in a raw that my answer papers have been mislaid by the college. the events of the first known paper loss in 1995 could be attributed to incompetence and negligence (see chapter 2), while the events of the second paper mislaying in 1996 and the subsequent marks fabrication to cover it up is attributed to deception and dishonesty (see above).