Dudley doctor 'sexually assaulted five patients in 10 days'
A Dudley doctor sexually assaulted five female patients over a 10-day period, including a woman who was groped after complaining of a high temperature, a court has heard.
Dr Amirul Haque, aged 33, is alleged to have ignored chaperone guidelines while also targeting patients being assessed for ear pain, a sore throat, and an eye problem.
Haque, of Ladypool Road, Balsall Heath, Birmingham, denies five counts of assault while training in general practice at a surgery in the Dudley area.
Opening the case against Haque, prosecutor Philip Bradley QC alleged that all of the women felt the doctor pressing his groin against parts of their bodies.
One of the alleged victims, the court heard, claims Haque sexually assaulted her after asking her to move her bra aside as he checked her heartbeat.
Explaining the issue due to be considered by the jury at Wolverhampton Crown Court, Mr Bradley said: "It is a feature of this case that because he was new to general practice, he was allowed 30 minutes with his patients as opposed to the usual 10.
"It is common ground that if Dr Haque acted in the way these women allege, there could be no medical justification for doing so."
Claiming Haque had committed the offences for sexual gratification, Mr Bradley added: "The prosecution case is that Dr Haque breached guidelines on intimate examinations and chaperones and that those breaches were not inadvertent, rather they were necessary to commit these offences.
"The issue in this case is straightforward and best understood by Dr Haque's response to all of this.
"Police twice interviewed him under caution when these allegations came to light."
Haque, Mr Bradley said, had chosen not to answer the officers' questions but had submitted a prepared statement denying that he had sexually assaulted any of the women.
Mr Bradley told the jury panel: "It follows that the issue that you have to determine in each count is can you be satisfied so that you are sure that each of these women is telling the truth?
"If having heard the evidence your answer to that question is yes, your verdict would be guilty. If you are not sure, it would be not guilty."
