Harvard Medical “Expert” Disqualified in Federal Court Case Due to “Overwhelming” and “Misleading” Plagiarism
This is allowed by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and the disclosure of the expert’s qualifications and the basis for his or her expert opinions is tightly controlled: a list of all other cases in which, during the previous 4 years, the witness testified as an expert at trial or by deposition; and, in which several dozen plaintiffs sued Lockheed Martin, alleging that toxic chemicals from Lockheed’s Orlando weapons plant caused them various diseases, many cancer-related.
Panigrahy’s testimony alleged TCE, PCE, HCHO, arsenic, hexavalent chromium, trichloroethylene and styrene could cause these cancers: kidney, breast, thyroid, pancreatic, liver and bile duct, testicular, anal, Hodgkin’s lymphoma, non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and leukemia. “And his deposition made the plagiarism appear deliberate, as he repeatedly outright refused to acknowledge the long swaths of his report that quote other work verbatim without any quotation marks at all – instead stubbornly insisting that he cited over 1,100 references, as if that resolves the attribution issue .”“Indeed, the plagiarism is so ubiquitous throughout the report that it is frankly overwhelming to try to make heads or tails of just what is Dr.