Health

Slapping therapist deported early after manslaughter conviction upheld

A court has heard that Hongchi Xiao, convicted of gross negligence manslaughter after a patient with type 1 diabetes died during his workshop, was removed from prison and sent back to the United States before serving even two years of a 10-year sentence.
Listen
AI-generated image: Slapping therapist deported early after manslaughter conviction upheld
AI-generated image for illustrative purposes.
Intelligent summary
  • Hongchi Xiao was deported to the US after serving about 18 months of a 10-year sentence for gross negligence manslaughter.
  • Danielle Carr-Gomm, 71, died in 2016 after stopping insulin during his Paida Lajin workshop in Wiltshire.
  • The Court of Appeal upheld the conviction and rejected arguments about a liability waiver and trial fairness.

A dangerous alternative healer has been deported from Britain after serving only a fraction of his sentence for causing the death of a vulnerable patient who abandoned proven medical treatment.

Hongchi Xiao, 63, was convicted in 2024 of gross negligence manslaughter in the case of Danielle Carr-Gomm, 71. She died on 20 October 2016 during the fourth day of one of his Paida Lajin workshops in Wiltshire. The therapy, also known as slap and stretch, involves participants repeatedly slapping themselves or being slapped in the belief that it releases poisonous waste from the body.

Carr-Gomm, who had type 1 diabetes diagnosed in 1999, stopped taking her insulin on Xiao's advice. She became seriously ill, yet no medical help was called. The case exposed the lethal consequences when patients with life-threatening conditions turn away from evidence-based medicine toward unproven practices.

Conviction upheld despite early removal

On 24 July 2026 the Court of Appeal heard that Xiao had already been deported to the United States under the Early Removal Scheme on or around 30 June or 2 July 2026. He had served roughly 18 months of his 10-year sentence. The court dismissed his appeal against conviction.

Lord Justice Dingemans, sitting with Mr Justice Murray and Judge Andrew Lees, ruled that the trial judge was entitled to set out the evidence as he understood it. Comments about a liability waiver signed by participants did not render the trial unfair or the verdict unsafe.

As it is, we do not consider that the judge's comments about the waiver rendered the trial unfair or the verdict unsafe.

The judge was simply pointing out that the waiver did not reflect the reality of the relationship between Ms Carr-Gomm and Mr Xiao, Lord Justice Dingemans added.