Diki Pispirigou: The pediatrician who examined Georgina takes the stand

The pediatrician who received Georgina at the Karamandanios outpatient clinic in Patras on April 8, 2021, where the accused Roula Pispirigou took the child reporting an incident of convulsions, is testifying at the trial of the 34-year-old mother before the MOD.

From the witness stand, the pediatrician Menia Grapsa said that she examined Georgina and as she was showing a good picture, she was not convinced that convulsions had occurred as the mother told her and so she decided that tests should be done.

The testimony of the pediatrician is heard by both the accused Roula Pispirigou and Georgina's father Manos Daskalakis.

President: What time did you see the child?

Witness: 9:30 to 9:50 in the morning. Mother had informed me that she was having convulsions. Many parents come in with a self-diagnosis. He reported shaking his head and eyes and then the child started convulsing. He defined them as limb movements. He told me that his eyes were open and that he was watching his mom's eye movements. That didn't convince me that it's spasms. I thought it might be some pill poisoning. I asked the mother if there were any medicines in the house and she told me that there were anti-epileptics that the doctor had given her for some stroke she had suffered. When I asked when the episode occurred my child said it happened at about 5:30.

The doctor's reference to "anti-epileptic pills" shortly after caused a strong reaction from the side of the accused, who said that Pispirigou had told her in that poem with the doctor that there were anti-depressant pills at home. Mr. Kougias even asked the witness:

Kougias: Why do you do it? The defendant has never taken anticonvulsants. Do you realize that you created an impression that the accused lied to you?

Witness: Both antiepileptics and antidepressants could trigger an episode. And antidepressants are worse.

Kougias: (to the Chair) She is giving false testimony and we reserve the right to ensure the interests of the accused. She is a false witness and biased.

The witness, answering a question from the president, said that an intense nightmare that the child may have had could give a physical reaction as Pispirigou described to her at the time.

"I thought he might have experienced a shock but mom insisted on convulsions," he said. .

From the defense, the witness was asked if she understood that the child could be "taught" not to answer the doctors' questions, Mrs. Grafsa replied "that no doctor can think of such a thing". The following dialogue with Mr. Kouya followed:

Kougias: But this is what prosecutors and investigators thought...

Witness: They would have had a reason.

Kougias: In this part of the accusation that the accused chose your hospital to bring and kill the child there and that she convinced him not to answer you, what do you say? Can you answer this?

Witness: No, I'm not getting into that.

Kougias: How do you see this scenario thought up by the Justice?

Witness: Judge Justice?

During these questions, Roula Pispirigou stated that she was not feeling well and received permission from the president to leave the room.

Kougias: Why do you say that she brought the child after the lapse of several hours?

Witness: My answer is the same. My mother said she had the episode at 5:30

Chairman: The accused in her supplementary affidavit says that the episode started at 6:30. The lead counsel is asking you if this gap between 6:30 and the time you brought the child to the hospital is reasonable?

Witness: I had other evidence based on what the mother told me and with that I testified. However, she did not immediately come to the hospital in a panic.

Source: RES-EAP