I don't know about any legal limitations on sharing info, but I can't imagine they would apply after the conviction? Once one clinician discovers something, I've rarely found it takes long for others to catch up in the time I've been watching on tbh.https://twitter.com/c7rky/status/1023677770130440195?s=21 …
I agree it’s unlikely GMC would’ve appealed for a less serious charge. It’s the gravity of the charge which brought public confidence into play & although you say GMC undermined the autonomy of MTPS, the High Court ruling did strongly suggest GMC had a point. given they won. 1/
-
-
Re level of proof, it’s obv crim standard for conviction (pretty high) but what else must be proved? Resultant harm to public confidence? How? If we remove Nick ‘poke my nose in where it doesn’t belong’ Ross from the equation, I see little public support for reversing erasure. 2/
-
Re timing of reaction, I don’t think I’m ever going to find it anything other than strange tbh. I know I’m not alone in feeling the sudden interest over erasure (vs minimal reaction following conviction/failed appeals) appears odd at best. Self serving at worst. Hasn't helped 3/3
-
Due process has to take place. Or be seen to. I suspect many thought it would conclude very differently
-
I suspect you're right about that. :)
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.