Motorina and Fannycam, there are all sorts of things happening, often unintended results from well meaning equality initiatives.
First selection is increasingly by UCAT score. If you want to get into medical school you are probably better off sitting in your bedroom practicing timed tests (One of DDs peers did this daily for six months and got 98% and four offers) than, say, volunteering with the St John's ambulance.
Second, students have a lot of power. Some have become serial complainants, and will launch formal complaints to counter any attempt at picking them up. No Clinical Training Fellow or consultant wants the bother of a complaint so they will stay well clear even if behaviour, often attendance, falls short of what should be required. More unusual, inappropriate behaviour, presumably is even harder to pick up and evidence, though in a larger year group there are bound to be one or two students who are odd and who may well have problems gaining patient confidence. A deep ingrained misogyny for example, and that can happen, for example with students from more patriarchal cultures.
Third, so much teaching now happens on placement that students are hard to track. A student may be late consistently through the year, but different staff members are hearing reasonable sounding excuses for the first time so don't escalate.
Fourth, I agree that with the emphasis on grades, UCAT and the respectability of the profession, many students really don't know that medicine involves a lot of bodily fluids and a very diverse patient population. Hence some very high drop out rates from the more academic universities to banking, law etc.
I hope that the ultimate objective of this hearing is to determine whether AH is able to generate patient trust and is therefore competent to be in his profession. I, personally, would not sign on his list because of behavioural and data concerns.