From Newsgroup: uk.net.news.moderation


The follow up concerning the breathtaking incompetence of
squeaky voiced Dewi Evans, Dopey Judge Goss, and the rest of
them is taking longer than expected


In the meantime here are some excerpts from the Thirwell
Inquiry (to locate these particular passages do a word
search of the document )

Thus far the Thirwell Inquiry has lasted over two and a half
years and cost 18 million pounds

Its almost like being back home in the Soviet Union
or East Germany in the "good old days".

As at that stage at least "The Inquiry" was simply another stitch
up based on asking leading questions of participants in order
to get them to see the error of their ways; based on the fact
of Letby's undoubted guilt.

This is a nurse being questioned (presumably by Counsel for
the Inquiry)




At the time, I just dismissed the idea of someone
deliberately administering insulin because it just
seemed so impossible, but I deeply regret that that
is how I interpreted things both for Child E and F's
parents and for all the babies that happened
subsequently.

I wish I'd interpreted these in a very different
light, but at the time it just didn't seem possible
that someone could do that.

Q.Absolutely recognising that you have justaccepted
very candidly that you misinterpreted those results

A.Yes.

Q.-- and did not take steps that you should have taken

A.(Nods).

Q.-- just trying to understand a little bit more about why.
You've used that phrase "impossible" more than once --

A.Yes.

Q.what about the case of Beverley Allitt,didn't that
potentially come to your mind in any waythat that
is a --

A.It didn't --

Q.-- real life example?

A.I don't know why not. That's -- I've sort of grown
up with the knowledge of Beverley Allitt and what she
did in sort of common knowledge, and then later Harold
Shipman, but it just never -- never occurred to me that
that would be something that happened on my ward to
the patients I was looking after

{ The test results ]

And by far and away the most common result we got back was
that the sample was insufficientfor them to process,
so we were more used to not gettinga result because of
the technical difficulties.

Q.That was going to be my follow-up question because,
again, that isn't this scenario, is it --

A.No.

Q.-- because you did get some results --

A.Yes.

Q.-- with no suggestion from Liverpool that there was any reason to
doubt them

A No

https://thirlwall.public-inquiry.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Thirlwall-Inquiry-7-October-2024.pdf

...........................................................................

Thus the fact that this nurse clearly wasn't aware of any disclaimers
is a convenient smokescreen; masking the fact that the Lab in question
the Royal Liverpool and Broadgreen University Hospital Trust
did in fact issue such a disclaimer on their website

quote:

Please note that the insulin assay performed at RLUH is
not suitable for the investigation of factitious hypoglycaemia.

If exogenous insulin administration is suspected as the
cause of hypoglycaemia, please inform the laboratory so
that the sample can be referred externally for analysis.

:unquote

https://pathlabs.rlbuht.nhs.uk/insulin.pdf

And no that isn't a hoax. Here's the full site

https://pathlabs.rlbuht.nhs.uk/

Exogenous insulin is insulin administered externally.

Although its actually much worse then simply being "not suitable"



bb










--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2