Doctor faces grilling at disciplinary hearing after terrorising neighbour

Dr John McCallum, 50, did succeed in having a 2,500 fine slashed to 750. A matching fine imposed on his wife, Michele, 50, was cut to 400. The Justiciary Appeal Court in Edinburgh ruled that a sheriff who heard the trial of the McCallums had been "overly severe" in describing it as the worst breach of the peace he had experienced in his career. The incident with their neighbour, Rosaline Kinder, 49, in the capital's Merchiston area, occurred on 25 September 2008. On the day of the offence, it was alleged that Mrs Kinder had narrowly missed hitting three of the McCallum children while driving out of her driveway. Mrs Kinder said the claim was a lie and when she arrived home in her 4x4 vehicle with her son, five, Dr McCallum stood in the entrance and prevented her reversing into the driveway. "He was staring at me fiercely. He did not move … I was very scared. He looked very drunk," she told the trial at Edinburgh Sheriff Court. Mrs McCallum appeared on the scene. Mrs Kinder added: "She tried to pull the door open … I managed to get it locked. I thought she was going to hit me." Sheriff Graeme Warner convicted Dr and Mrs McCallum of putting Mrs Kinder in a state of fear and alarm and committing a breach of the peace - the doctor by wilfully obstructing and intimidating Mrs Kinder, and his wife by shouting and intimidating Mrs Kinder, and banging on the rear of her vehicle. At the appeal court, only Dr McCallum challenged his conviction. He and his wife both argued a 2,500 fine was too severe. Margaret Scott, QC, for Dr McCallum, said he and his wife had faced separate charges, yet the sheriff appeared to have treated them as though they had been acting together. Lord Malcolm, who heard the appeal with Lord Eassie and Lady Dorrian, said: "We agree that it was inappropriate for the sheriff to refer to concert (acting together]. The question is whether (Dr McCallum's] conduct meets the requirements for the crime of breach of the peace. We consider that it does." Lord Malcolm said the judges had concluded the appeal against conviction should be refused. "A meeting of the General Medical Council (GMC] awaits the outcome of this appeal. He has now moved, so there will be no repetition," added Lord Malcolm."While in no sense minimising the alarm caused to the complainer and others, in the whole circumstances we are satisfied that the sheriff took an overly severe attitude towards (Dr McCallum's] conduct and that the fine imposed was excessive. We shall quash it and substitute a fine of 750." The judges held that the sheriff had erred by assessing Mrs McCallum's fine by reference to her husband's income and that, again, the sheriff had taken too severe a view. Her fine would be set at 400. The GMC investigates doctors' fitness to practise. If it is found to be impaired they could either be allowed to continue practising with conditions related to the offence - or be struck off.