There's an awful lot of politicing of the X-won't-talk-to-Y-any-more type going on behind the scenes which would massively complicate things - but it seems if he does return to practice it might just be for second opinions, GRC letters and that sort of thing. I've been told he was contemplating retiring even before the GMC thing although I don't know how true that was.
I believe patient A's case was barred as it was out of time. (20 years ago or similar) Some other cases also didn't make it as far as the gearing either.
Sorry, it was patient F who was the "work as a prostitute" thing. Patients C, D and E seemed to have vanished from the proceedings.
I wrote CX barrister because it's shorter to write and that's important in an SMS ;-)
There were no members of the press present to witness the more serious charges being thrown out. There was also a reduction of the charges relating to Patient B, where they changed "without physical and mental assessment" to just "without physical assessment", and the two counsels had to agree to this. Russell and his counsel left for a few minutes, came back and said that was fine. The prosecution counsel said something to the effect that he supposed it was OK, but none of his lot were there to check with. They let that stand, but one of the other girls who's witnessed more of the proceedings said that they'd already more-or-less all agreed that baseline checks were basically irrelevant below a certain age, so it sounds like that one's trivial
( ... )
You just go in and tell them you'd like to sit in on Dr Reid's hearing. They give you a visitor pass, and then you go upstairs and steal all their coffee and hot chocolate and look vaguely disreputable until they usher you in to the roped off bit at the back.
It's adjourned until Feb 27th now anyway, when they'll reexamine the bits that are left.
I'm definitely going back when it reconvenes. It's awkward for me to get to, but Russell seemed to appreciate us being there, and some of the girls who'd been there for more of the hearing said that it was quite ... interesting to see the cross examination process. The articles in the newspapers are very misleading - the journalists weren't present to see a lot of the stuff torn apart.
Comments 23
Reply
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
Reply
Reply
I wrote CX barrister because it's shorter to write and that's important in an SMS ;-)
There were no members of the press present to witness the more serious charges being thrown out. There was also a reduction of the charges relating to Patient B, where they changed "without physical and mental assessment" to just "without physical assessment", and the two counsels had to agree to this. Russell and his counsel left for a few minutes, came back and said that was fine. The prosecution counsel said something to the effect that he supposed it was OK, but none of his lot were there to check with. They let that stand, but one of the other girls who's witnessed more of the proceedings said that they'd already more-or-less all agreed that baseline checks were basically irrelevant below a certain age, so it sounds like that one's trivial ( ... )
Reply
Reply
It's adjourned until Feb 27th now anyway, when they'll reexamine the bits that are left.
I'm definitely going back when it reconvenes. It's awkward for me to get to, but Russell seemed to appreciate us being there, and some of the girls who'd been there for more of the hearing said that it was quite ... interesting to see the cross examination process. The articles in the newspapers are very misleading - the journalists weren't present to see a lot of the stuff torn apart.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment