Why his role matters
The Thirlwall Inquiry’s evidence record was not produced in a vacuum. It is the product of sustained cross-examination by Counsel to the Inquiry, who work under the chair’s direction to test and develop the record. Mr Medland KC’s examination of executives, HR, external reviewers, and regulatory figures is where the specific features of the institutional failure — the scope limits of the RCPCH review, the apology-letter sequence, the eight-month delay before police involvement — came onto the public record with documentary detail.
Professional background
- Senior barrister, King’s Counsel.
- Practice includes criminal law, public inquiries and regulatory matters.
- Appointed Counsel to the Thirlwall Inquiry on its establishment in 2023.
What his examination has established
Across the 2024–2025 Inquiry hearings, Counsel to the Inquiry, including Mr Medland KC, established the following features of the institutional record:
- The sequence and substance of the 2015 consultants’ concerns.
- The RCPCH Invited Service Review’s scope and what its authors say about it.
- The 2016 HR grievance sequence against the consultants.
- The eight-month delay between the September 2016 consultants’ letter and the May 2017 police referral.
- The role of executives and of the Director of Corporate Affairs (a former police officer) in shaping that delay.
- The regulatory-oversight package (CQC, NHS Improvement) and its scope limits.