Judge orders jury in Jayant Patel manslaughter trial to 'pay attention' to evidence when deciding if he is guilty or not guilty A JUDGE has told a jury in the manslaughter trial of Jayant Patel they are duty-bound to pay attention to the evidence when deciding whether he is guilty or not guilty. In the Supreme Court in Brisbane, Justice George Fryberg began his closing address just before midday on Monday, using a PowerPoint slide presentation to help the jury of five men and eight women to consider their verdict. "It is your duty to pay attention to the evidence and to say whether he is guilty or not guilty," Justice Fryberg said. You must determine the facts and that includes determining what evidence to accept and what evidence you do not accept. He stressed the burden of proof lay with the Crown and asked the jury to "ignore" anything heard outside the case and to put aside "any feelings of sympathy or dislike." "The accused is presumed to be innocent and you can convict him only if the prosecution established he is guilty," Justice Fryberg said. The prosecution must prove guilty beyond reasonable doubt. Justice Fryberg will continue summing up both the Crown and defence cases this afternoon before the jury is expected to retire. They will consider their verdict with the aid of a 27-point "flow chart" designed by legal counsel and Justice Fryberg. The former Bundaberg Hospital surgeon, 62, has pleaded not guilty to unlawfully killing Mervyn John Morris, 75, who died three weeks after a sigmoid colostomy and colectomy removed part of his bowel on May 23, 2003. Crown prosecutor Peter Davis SC said Patel misdiagnosed the cause of Mr Morris' ongoing rectal bleeding, misjudged the risks, ignored his patient's other underlying health problems and provided inadequate post-operative care. He said Patel's behaviour was criminally negligent and caused his patient's death. "If it's an operation that has been done in haste with no good reason, and it has lead to the death of a citizen, our submission to you is that's certainly the sort of conduct that would attract the criminal law and criminal sanction," he said. Defence barrister Ken Fleming QC told the jury there was simply not enough evidence to prove Patel caused Mr Morris' death and said the accused held the "honest and reasonable belief" the operation to remove his bowel was necessary. He said Patel was a busy doctor who tried his best to save Mr Morris' life and urged the jury against accepting evidence from Crown witnesses who used "the luxury of hindsight" to criticise Patel's decision to do the surgery. "Dr Patel didn't have that luxury," Mr Fleming said in his closing address. The trial has sat for 22 days and heard from 25 witnesses.