Judgment Awaited in Trial Over Death of 8-Year-Old Boy from Petrer After Five Emergency Visits

The trial over the death of Aitor, the 8-year-old boy who died from peritonitis in October 2020 after five visits to Emergency, is now awaiting judgment this Friday. The judge of the Criminal Court 2 will have to decide whether the two doctors accused of the boy's death committed malpractice or if their actions do not warrant criminal punishment.

The lawyer for the boy's grandmother, Raquel Sánchez Navarro, has reduced the initial prison sentence request for the accused from a charge of homicide by omission to negligent homicide because the Court's jurisdiction only covers crimes with a maximum sentence of 6 years, as explained before entering the final oral hearing. Therefore, she has stated that she will request the maximum possible sentence for the crime of negligent homicide: four years of imprisonment and six years of disqualification from practising medicine for the two doctors.

Meanwhile, the Public Prosecutor's Office has maintained its initial request of two years and four months of imprisonment for the paediatrician from the General Hospital of Elda and another of one year and ten months for the family doctor from the health centre, in addition to disqualification from practising the profession for four years and six months, and three years and six months, respectively.

Additionally, the Prosecutor's Office demands compensation of over 143,000 euros for the boy's biological mother and his grandparents, who have been his legal guardians since birth. The insurance company will be directly liable for these amounts, and the Conselleria will be subsidiarily liable.

Meanwhile, the lawyer for the doctor from the Petrer health centre, Guillermo Llago, has maintained the request for his client's acquittal. The lawyer argues that Aitor's death was "unforeseeable," as there was no diagnosis that could have predicted the fatal outcome. He also emphasized the absence of "non-tests."

In his conclusions, he argued that the defence did not call the doctor who attended the boy at the continuous care point (PAC), the assistant doctor of his client who attended him on October 24, nor the other paediatrician who examined him on the 26th, two days before his death.

Furthermore, he stated that Aitor's grandmother has constructed a "parallel reality" to secure a sentence for the accused and has created a "media trial" through the press. Similarly, the defence of the emergency paediatrician declared that the version of events has been "magnified and distorted" and that a trial is being conducted based on the "regrettable outcome."

Before the conclusions, an expert proposed by the defence of the General Hospital of Elda's doctor, a paediatrician from the Majadahonda hospital, testified. The specialist indicated that there was "no malpractice" in the accused's actions and maintained that additional tests were unnecessary because there were no "alarm signs" in the boy's health condition.

In contrast, the expert proposed by the court and the family's defence confirmed during the second session of the trial - held on Thursday - that, in their view, there was malpractice in the actions of the two doctors.

Finally, the accused paediatrician used her turn to clarify that in October 2020 - during the COVID-19 pandemic - the Emergency Department of the General Hospital of Elda was located on the fourth floor due to ongoing renovations, so all patients had to be transported in wheelchairs to avoid accidents, as it was a "long journey," she noted. She also stated that she did examine the boy on the stretcher and included it in the medical report. "I had no reason not to do it," she concluded.