OUCH!!!!

Nothing new here except it's a man's penis. Women used to have this sort of thing happen all the time when they went in "only" for a breast biopsy. Fortunately that has changed.

Yes, the patient and his wife should have been consulted before this radical surgery. And a proper assessment of the extent of the cancer would likely have negated the need for a second surgery.

And a proper assessment of the extent of the cancer would likely have negated the need for a second surgery

Because they would have cut the whole thing off right away?

So many things about this don't make sense. If the penis was truly unidentifiable as what it was, how could the patient have been unaware of it. I don't know who is at fault here but it seems unlikely that both stories are true. As for expert witnesses, you can usually find someone to say most anything you are looking for. It's our legal system. It sucks. Last comment unrelated to the content of the article....

The first doctor only removed an inch, the rest was removed by another doctor in a second surgery.

This is a no-brainer. The doctor should have just ended the operation and consulted with the patient. Unfortunately the doctor was a no-brainer.