@drcmday watched GMC v Bawa-Garba in High Court and has written a blog about the way the GMC chose to argue the case against a junior doctor convicted of manslaughter for a medical error in the context of multiple system failures & errors from other staff
http://54000doctors.org/blogs/whose-interests-are-the-gmc-really-trying-to-serve-in-the-bawa-garba-case.html …
-
-
Replying to @54kdoctors @drcmday
Quick point: No mention of mistakenly stopping CPR? Longer point: GMC have no influence over Dr
#BawaGarba's lawyers, so surely all this mitigation will have been raised in her defence during original trial? Were the jury just unmoved?5 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
The lawyers were forbidden from making any argument about system wide errors in the trust at trial.
1 reply 1 retweet 0 likes -
Forbidden by whom, may I ask?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Not sure. Whoever forbids things, the judge? I guess the prosecution will have out forward a motion that it not be admissible and the judge agreed. (We don't have the court documents and my only knowledge of law stuff is from American TV.)
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
I'm not sure on what basis seemingly valid mitigation would be ruled inadmissible tbh? Imagine only a judge has such power. I think we'd all benefit from seeing the original trial transcripts some time.
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.