Bogus Louth doctor who carried out seven botched circumcisions appeals sentence

A bogus doctor, who was on bail for a botched procedure on a child when he circumcised seven young boys, has launched an appeal against his jail sentence, arguing he was not given sufficient credit for “seeing the light” and recognising the wrongfulness of his actions.

Philip Ogbewe referred to himself as “Dr Philip” when he performed circumcisions on six infants and one five-year-old boy at various locations in Dublin, Kildare and Wexford in 2018 and 2019.

Ogbewe (61), of Greenlanes, Drogheda, Co Louth pleaded guilty to seven counts of endangerment and seven counts of assault causing harm in relation to each child he performed the procedure on dates between January 1, 2018 and October 23, 2019.

He had previously been arrested in November 2018 in relation to a 2015 circumcision of another child, who ended up being hospitalised with complications from the procedure.

READ NEXT: Dundalk Gardaí arrest driver for disqualified driving and cocaine use

He was on bail for this offence when he carried out these crimes.

Ogbewe was jailed in May 2020 for three years for the endangerment of this child, which was backdated to November 2019 when he was taken into custody.

Ogbewe’s 2024 sentencing hearing was told he was contacted by parents who wanted their sons circumcised and who had heard of him through friends.

Some of these parents had tried to get their child circumcised in hospital but could either not access the procedure, or had been quoted around €1,500 for the surgery.

Ogbewe charged the parents between €300 and €350 in most cases to carry out the procedure in their own homes, usually while the child was on their parent's lap or – in one case – on a kitchen table.

He used an anaesthetic spray in some cases, but not all, the court heard.

Imposing sentence in July 2024, Judge Elma Sheahan said the court was struck by the “absence of anaesthesia” in some of the cases, “with small babies held in their parents' arms”.

She said it was “owing to luck” that the children did not suffer more.

Sentencing Ogbewe in July 2024, Judge Sheahan imposed a four-and-a-half-year sentence on each of the seven counts of endangerment and said it was necessary that one of these sentences would run consecutively, with the remainder to run concurrently.
T

he judge said this gave a total sentence of nine years, which she reduced by 18 months to reflect the principles of totality and proportionality, giving an effective total sentence of seven and a half years, with the final 12 months suspended.

At the Court of Appeal yesterday (Tuesday, October 21st), Giollaosa Ó Lidheada SC, representing Ogbewe, argued the headline sentence of six years set by the judge on each count was too high.

He acknowledged that his client’s behaviour had been “arrogant” and “ignorant” but said it was based on years of experience performing these activities to what Ogbewe believed was a high standard.

“This is a man who was behaving abominably but who was functioning effectively as a cheap service,” he said.

Mr Ó Lidheada said the fact his client had “learned his lesson” before the sentence in Mullingar was imposed but after he was arrested for these offences was relevant to his overall remorse and rehabilitation.

He said Ogbewe “seeing the light” of his wrongdoing did not affect his culpability but did affect his remorse and reformation.

His client had a “fixed world view”, said Mr Ó Lidheada, and lived his life believing he was someone who “was competent to carry out these operations”.

However, he said Ogbewe then went through a “reformation”, changed his world view but didn’t receive sufficient reduction for that in the sentence.

“The plea deserved weight, and the remorse and reformation are significant factors,” he said.

Mr Ó Lidheada also contended that if the prosecution had acted swiftly and brought these charges to court before his 2020 sentence had expired then these matters could have been dealt with while that sentence was “still live”.

He said if that was the case then the totality principle would have to apply.

“It didn’t happen that way and for whatever reason he ended up being charged three days before he was released,” said Mr Ó Lidheada.

Counsel further contended the judge did not take into account the mitigating factors in the case and imposed a headline sentence that was “much too high”.

He said Ogbewe had played an active role in his children’s lives and suffered from health difficulties.

Mr Ó Lidheada said it was important to distinguish between intentional and reckless endangerment, saying Ogbewe didn’t carry out the acts for the purpose of endangering of the children involved.

“Theres no suggestion in any material before the court that there was an actual risk of harm in anything he did,” said counsel.

He said the seven cases demonstrated “a level of competence” that prevented those involved from being exposed to serious injury or death.

“He [Ogbewe] says he’s being doing it for decades,” said Mr Ó Lidheada. “The reality is the risk was actually quite low in this case because of his level of experience.”

Shane Costelloe SC, responding for the Director of Public Prosecutions, contended the sentence imposed was sound and the judge had made no error.

“The idea that Mr Ogbewe has a fixed world view and that it is only when he is arrested and prosecuted and the lawyers sit down with him and he sees the error of his way, that that could be a mitigating factor I don’t see it,” said Mr Costelloe.

“There is no error in principle and the court is entirely correct.”

He said there were “grave” aggravating features in this case, including the “multitudes of victims”.

He said Ogbewe had researched whether he could perform these procedures legally by getting a licence, found he couldn’t and then proceeded to carry them out for over two decades.

Ogbewe “put himself out there” as a capable professional to perform surgery when “he knows he is neither of those things and he knows what he is doing is illegal”, counsel said.

“If that’s not an aggravating factor I don’t know what is.”

Mr Justice John Edwards said the court would reserve judgement.