Nope. If she had paid for her own defence it would be very unusual for her to even have had that paid for unless the prosecution was shown to be particularly unjust/ corrupt. In this case legal aid would have been used.
TBF, a lot of people aren't familiar with the intricacies of the criminal justice system - and why should they be? For most of us, I imagine that an ideal situation is one in which we never have to find out how it all works. And our popular press, which is where lots of people will get what knowledge they do have, aren't exactly stellar at offering nuanced, thoughtful analysis.Jesus fucking christ.
Err - there's 3 unanimous verdicts there. So every single juror saw her as having murdered. Clearly at least one had a higher burden of proof in their head.
There are quite a few things that anyone who does have some understanding of how the justice system works will take almost as read. But we can forget that other people may not be so clear about it, and from an uninformed point of view, the fact that convictions weren't obtained on some charges might lead someone to, er, "average that out" and come to the conclusion that such convictions as were achieved were not conclusive. You and I might know that this is an incorrect assumption, but not everyone will. Perhaps, if there is any good to come of such a horrible situation, it is that the opportunity exists to make such things a bit clearer.
I don't think LDC was referring to a juror.
“Lessons haven’t been learnt until practice has been improved “.
Oh yeah, I know who moomoo is on the boards. I just wondered what Moomoo had to do with the misunderstanding as they weren't one of the posters in the convo about juries. I assumed tim was making some joke I didn't get. Never mind! I'm not sleeping too well so I'm probably being a bit thick.
Off to the cat thread which won't overtax my brain...Gonna be hard to find a jury that is uninfluenced by the current media coverage
A link that works in the UK (and isn't Fox!):
As in female?
Sounds like the Trust bosses, who bullied the doctors and allowed her to carry on killing, won't even have to attend the inquiry. Can already imagine the excuses they'll give: 'I've been advised by my lawyers...', 'I've beeb suffering from anxiety and given medical advice...'. Some of their statements yesterday were nauseating. One of the bosses came out with the line that the issues in the case were ' complicated '. Fuck me.
I agree: the clinical people are in thrall to bureaucrats and have been for a long timeI think that part of this is a hostile management culture towards clinical staff, which, alongside the massive pressure they are kept under, is creating a kind of siege mentality, which would make different clinicians be very reluctant to dob their coalface colleagues in to the people in suits upstairs. Which, coupled with the likely reaction, or complete inaction, of said suits upstairs, leaves them only the option of "failing to notice" what's going on.
It is amazing what we can ignore when we don't know what to do about it, or if the consequences of doing something about it are too unpalatable to contemplate.
ETA:: tldr; snap, LDC
Depends on what you mean by "in thrall to"...
