Clearly she had a defence, but there have been some question re quality and effectiveness- again conjecture/hearsay
-
-
Far too many are lobbing evidence out of the window to cram anecdotes into a 'not guilty' narrative. So grim for Jack's family.
-
It's only evidence based when it suits, apparently? Miscarriage of justice is the other phrase that's been setting my teeth grinding recently. Poor Nicky Adcock must feel battered by it all.
-
We're also dealing here with incomplete evidence. There is a genuine problem if the Coroner found a diagnosis, e.g. endocarditis on the heart values, if the Doctor at no stage suspected, examined for, investigated or managed, even though Jack was at risk of it +++
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
John, harking back to the original posting where
@dr_shibley retweeted a comment about whether a jury of peers judging a professional (medical) case should be made up of other Drs. The discussions re: GMC and High Court appeal came later in thread, just as@sarasiobhan joined -
Thank you for listening and taking the time to go over this. I'm bowing out I'm afraid - not because of anyone on this thread! Just having a bit of a tough time at this end and trying to be sensible...
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.