“There was nothing gradual, but something strange that led to the end of Georgina” testified at the trial of Roula Pispirigou cardiologisthead of the Hereditary Heart Diseases Unit at Onassios Aris Anastasakis.

The witness told the court that he had undergone extensive genetic testing control on the child as well as a heart check on the parents to detect if there was any problem, since the family had already lost two children. As he said, the findings they had did not show anything important: “This is a partial indication that there is no hereditary disease, but it does not mean that it does not exist and that it cannot manifest itself in a child. The chances are 25%,” he said.

The witness – after describing that the Georgina he was under constant observation while he was hospitalized in Onasio and that “there was a group that met every day for this child” he emphasized: “The way Georgina died is not consistent with what we know. We had completely fortified the child! When you have such a result in such an effort of ours… This disappointed us a lot… In other words, we lost. And when you lose a child it’s more difficult…”

The witness explained to the Joint Jury that the Unit of his group in Onasio controls families whose members may suffer from some hereditary disease. “This also happened in the case of the Daskalakis family. We were called to check the parents to rule out any illness that can lead to sudden death because we had two children dead and one aborted. This is a strong indication of something genetic,” he stressed, saying that since their findings did not lead them to hereditary diseases they watched the little girl as “what kills is the manifestation of the disease and not a simple knowledge that it exists. This means findings at the clinical level. For example, the defibrillator gave us the whole process of the girl until the final phase…” he said.

A little later he pointed out that “there was not something gradual but something strange that led to the end of the girl. The fact that we did not have a defibrillator function makes it appear that the mechanism of death was a consequence of worsening bradycardia and not tachycardia.”

President: Does it ever happen that the myocardium reaches absolute destruction?
Witness: A traffic accident, a toxic substance, a poison. Diseases are progressive, so medicine has the ability to catch them in a phase where they have not yet affected the body. Of course, there are also lightning-fast situations.

As Mr. Anastasakis pointed out, “while Georgina’s pacemaker worked by giving electric current to the heart, calling it to work, it does not react because the myocardium does not work. That’s how we had death.”

The doctor stated in his testimony that defibrillator implanted in the child allowed doctors to see if there was something that had not been detected in the genetic test. He also added that “in medicine there are often indications of something, but here there were neither indications nor evidence of any disease. There was an episode of resistance in the Hospital of Patras where the causes remained unexplained, although I cannot say that an illness had been established… Georgina’s course was a course that we do not see in illnesses. We tested 125 genes initially, which is the hard core of the knowledge we have. We then asked to image 800 genes that we do not know well. But what is crucial here is the part of the clinical manifestations and not the genetic part that partially contributes to the puzzle”.

Then the witness said:The way he died doesn’t match what we know” and mentioned that her death was a defeat for all the scientists who made a huge effort for Georgina.

With the start of today’s process there was intensity between the defendant’s advocate and the Chair as Mr. Kougias referring to the procedure said that the chair does not respect the defense. He also requested that the court immediately respond to the requests he has submitted, stressing that what he is requesting makes sense before the statements of the prosecution witnesses are completed. “If you grant my requests at the end of July when 57 witnesses will have passed and I will not be able to examine anyone, there will not have been a fair trial.”

The president replied that the fact that the court has not yet been appointed does not mean “tacit rejection” of his requests. At the same time, regarding some of the defense’s references to her, the president noted that her personal information does not concern anyone.