THE Legal Services Ombudsman has agreed to carry out a second investigation into complaints made against the barrister who defended disgraced surgeon Richard Neale.

Angry victims objected to allegedly aggressive cross-examination by Malcolm Fortune, at the General Medical Council hearing two years ago.

They also objected to Mr Fortune's use - without permission - of a diary kept by one of the principal witnesses, Sheila Wright-Hogeland, of Kirkbymoorside.

Towards the end of last year, the Bar Council wrote to the group stating that while a technical breach of procedures was admitted, it was formally dismissing the complaints against Mr Fortune.

Furious at this response, the group wrote to the Legal Services Ombudsman, Ann Abraham, asking her to look into the matter.

Last March, the Ombudsman ruled that she was not satisfied the Bar Council had dealt adequately with the complaints and recommended that they reconsider them.

In her report, the Ombudsman asked why the council had discounted the evidence of the GMC committee chairman that Mr Fortune had caused unnecessary distress by aggressive questioning.

However, the council stood by its original finding and rejected the complaints.

Graham Maloney, the former businessman turned health campaigner, who advises the campaign group formed by Mr Neale's former patients, said the group had no alternative but to ask the Ombudsman to look into the matter again.

"What we are concerned about here is the ability of patients to feel that they can stand up before the General Medical Council and get a fair hearing, without being made to feel that they are criminals," he said.

He said it was vital to create an atmosphere where witnesses could feel confident they could give their side of the story.

"We want the GMC to make professional conduct hearings a level playing field for patients."

If the Bar Council was asked to re-examine the matter for a third time it would be unprecedented, said Mr Maloney.

A spokeswoman for the Legal Services Ombudsman said: "There is a second investigation at the moment.

"We are looking into this case again."

The council said it did not comment on matters which were under investigation.

A spokesman at Mr Fortune's chambers said that the barrister was abroad and was unlikely to want to comment.