Psychiatrist Jan Cimický Gets Five Years in Prison for Sexually Abusing Patients

The Prague Municipal Court has reviewed the case of psychiatrist Jan Cimický for a second time and upheld his conviction — five years in prison and a ten-year ban on practising his profession. The case centres on the sexual abuse of his patients by the doctor.

Back in April of last year, the appeals panel had already overturned the original verdict and sent the case back for retrial. According to presiding judge Pavel Benda, that earlier ruling was found to be confused and insufficiently substantiated.

Court Finds No Grounds for Leniency

"There are no grounds whatsoever to overturn the contested verdict, send the case back for retrial, or otherwise interfere with the ruling on guilt or sentencing," Judge Benda said on Friday. He noted that the court of first instance had addressed all the shortcomings previously identified by the appeals panel, and that the facts of the case were confirmed by the evidence presented.

"The appellate court by no means considers the five-year sentence excessive. The punishment is very strict for the defendant, but it takes into account all the circumstances surrounding the case," the judge stressed. He also described the ten-year professional ban as proportionate.

"They Come for Help and Leave with Even More Problems"

The judge delivered a scathing assessment of the doctor's conduct: "A person in despair comes seeking help and leaves with an even greater set of psychological problems, because instead of helping, the psychiatrist attacks them — attacks the most intimate part of their personality, the intimate parts of their body."

According to the court, at least three witnesses confirmed that Cimický's behaviour "was known about." In particular, two female doctors admitted during the main hearing that they had known about his actions since as far back as the 1980s but had taken no action. One of them stated that addressing the issue would have been pointless, since it would not have changed anything anyway.

The appeals court also rejected attempts to justify this inaction by claiming that, at the time, Cimický's behaviour was not perceived as a violation of social norms. The court described such alibi-seeking excuses — along the lines of "it was judged differently back then" — as unacceptable.

Source: novinky.cz