“It was directed towards people who were vulnerable and involved elements of premeditation, seeking financial gain from [his victim] through intimidation,” the tribunal said.
In the sentencing judgement, the tribunal said his course of conduct was both ‘coercive’, ‘controlling’, and ‘persistent over a lengthy period of time’.
“Due to his lack of insight and the risk of him repeating his actions, the Tribunal considered that there was a current and ongoing risk to public protection because of Dr Chandran’s conviction. The Tribunal considered that there was a real risk of him harming someone in the future. It is considered that public confidence in the profession would be harmed if Dr Chandran were allowed to practise unrestricted, and that fellow members of the profession would be shocked if a finding of impairment were not made,” it said.