Nurse Kate Shemirani Puts Coroner Over Inquest In Suspicious Death Of Her Daughter On Notice That Her Actions Constitute "Contempt Of Court" & "Misconduct In Public Office"

Following the total embarrassment to the BBC, Marianna Spring and a host of UK propaganda outlets, last week’s inquest into the suspicious death of nurse and nutritionist Kate Shemirani’s daughter, Paloma, last year revealed that the propaganda put out by the media against Shemirani was a complete lie as demonstrated by the doctor’s own testimony. While the media claimed that Paloma was “coerced” by her mother to not receive chemotherapy, the doctor stated that was not the case. Will they retract? Probably not. However, what is going on behind the scenes is even more telling. Shemirani has been firing off emails and legal notices to the coroner overseeing the inquest. In one of her latest that was sent on Friday, she put Ms. Catherine Judith Wood, Area Coroner for Mid Kent and Medway, on notice and stated that her actions constituted “contempt of court” and ” misconduct of public office.”

Beginning in her usual fashion, Shemirani quoted Luke 8:17, “For nothing is secret, that shall not be made manifest; neither anything hid, that shall not be known and come abroad.”

The coroner was attempting to pervert the course of justice by not taking into account a witness who was at the scene when Shemirani’s daughter collapsed.  In that statement, she claimed to have witnessed the paramedics administer a shot into the leg, which is now something they are attempting to coverup despite the testimony, and their own records.

“Under the Coroners and Justice Act 2009, Schedule 5, a coroner has the discretion to
summon witnesses where the evidence is necessary to establish ‘how, when, and in
what circumstances’ the deceased came by their death,” wrote Shemirani.  “However, this discretion is not
absolute and must be exercised in accordance with principles of natural justice and the
state’s procedural obligations under Article 2 of the European Convention on Human
Rights (ECHR).”

She then laid out the law and the violations of it.

1. Article 2 ECHR Right to Life
Under Article 2, the state has a positive duty to investigate deaths where state agents (e.g. paramedics, NHS staff) may be implicated. This duty requires an investigation that is effective, independent, and capable of identifying culpability or systemic failure. Refusing to call Katrine Lionnet, a direct eyewitness to the moment of paramedic
intervention, would obstruct this duty and render the inquest incompatible with Article 2.

2. R (Amin) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2003] UKHL 51
This case established that inquests must establish the circumstances of the death and whether any state actors were responsible. As Katrine Lionnet directly witnessed the IO gun being used and Paloma’s subsequent deterioration, her testimony is fundamental to fulfilling this obligation.

3. R (Middleton) v West Somerset Coroner [2004] UKHL 10
Confirmed the requirement for narrative verdicts in Article 2 inquests where there is potential state involvement. Excluding key eyewitnesses undermines the integrity of this process.

4. Chief Coroner’s Guidance No. 17 Witnesses (2016)
Paragraph 2: ‘The coroner should call all witnesses necessary to enable the inquest to answer the statutory questions.’ Paragraph 8: ‘An interested person may propose a witness and the coroner must give
reasonable consideration as to whether that person is needed.’ Katrine Lionnet provides eyewitness evidence to the very time window in which Paloma’s catastrophic deterioration occurred. Her account is essential and materially
relevant.

Shemirani continued:

The Coroner has confirmed that Dr Bentley will give evidence regarding the actions of the HEMS/KSS team. However, it is a matter of record that Dr Bentley was not physically present when the first paramedics arrived at the scene and when the intraosseous injections IO were delivered. Katrine Lionnet was present and saw the IO gun being pressed into Paloma’s leg. Her account directly challenges the official narrative and provides first-hand, material evidence of the cause of iatrogenic injury and the rapid collapse that followed. This makes her evidence not only relevant but indispensable.

Tampering with Witness Testimony and Intimidation of a Carer

It is hereby placed on the record that the witness, Katrine Lionnet, cares full-time for her disabled adult child, has been subjected to direct intimidation and threat by the Area Coroner Catherine Judith Wood, including the threat of financial penalties.

“This constitutes a serious interference with a key witness who directly observed events on 19 July 2024, including the administration of intraosseous (IO) adrenaline, which forms the central medical and legal issue of the inquest,” Shemirani warned.

“Such actions may amount to witness intimidation, in breach of Section 51 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994, which makes it an offence to threaten, intimidate, or cause harm to any witness involved in criminal or coronial proceedings,” Shemirani continued.  “The conduct in this instance undermines the fair administration of justice and may give rise to a separate criminal complaint.”

Furthermore, the Coroner is reminded of her duty under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) to ensure a fair hearing, and under Section 5(2) of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009, to ensure that all relevant circumstances surrounding a death are fully and fearlessly investigated,” added the nurse of more than thrity years.  “Suppressing or threatening a witness in this manner directly violates these statutory obligations.”

Below is Kate’s email to the coroner followed by the witness statement.

Legal Grounds Katrine Lionnet Witness by Tim Brown on Scribd

Katrine Witness Statement Paloma by Tim Brown on Scribd

The next day for inquest is Monday, July 25, 2025.

Be sure and catch Kate each Saturday at 8 am EST on The Sons of Liberty radio.

Article posted with permission from Sons of Liberty Media