Pages

Sunday, 15 February 2015

Mandatorily Reporting the dead !

The Slater Gordon /Mandate Now propaganda machine has gone into overdrive as the publication of the Stoke Mandeville Hospital Report draws ever closer. They want Mandatory Reporting  introduced and they don't care who they hurt in the process.

 The writer claims that THIS report will be different to all the other NHS Savile reports. Indeed, it will be because, according to Liz Dux, her 'clients' have 'EVIDENCE' that management ... were informed about Savile's abuses'
The Observer/Guardian article is carefully worded. Salmon and another DEAD doctor are named. There is NO mention of a third.
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/feb/15/stoke-mandeville-children-at-risk-jimmy-savile?CMP=share_btn_tw
Bill Bailey ? Of course he was being posthumously accused in December 2013. He died in 2001, ten whole years BEFORE Jimmy and 12 years AFTER Salmon was suspended.
One claimant kills two already dead birds with the same stone !
 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2516405/Jimmy-Savile-hospital-surgeon-Bruce-Bailey-accused-sexually-abusing-girl-4.html
This woman claims a 'junior doctor' witnessed Bailey's attack on her. My word this report will certainly be worth a read ! I for one very much doubt that Ms Dux' friends will have been able to track down that 'junior doctor'.
The Mirror published an article about Bailey too in December 2013.
 http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/jimmy-savile-hospital-doctor-accused-2871204
The plot to get Mandatory Reporting into law thickens ... 

4 comments:

  1. Mandatory reporting will make no difference other than that $later & Gordon will be able to use the Criminal Law to do even more work for them, and so deliver more cash to them in the subsequent civil settlements.

    One big step froward could be to bring in a Statute of Limitations at the same time that Mandatory reporting is introduced, meaning we will move forward with the new rules but the past will be left to the civil courts to decide upon. The victims should support this since in civil law they only have to convince on the balance of probabilities whereas a criminal court has to be beyond all reasonable doubt; and I will take my tongue out of my cheek when they take their hand out of my pocket.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm afraid you're speech is going to be significantly impaired for a very long time Mr L. The party's only just beginning. The NHS/BBC have lots of public money to GIVE to these scamsters !

      Delete
  2. Have either of you ever considered contacting the Irish media? If the British media are too busy stoking the flames, perhaps the media in a country which has not always been a fan of the British justice system would be more willing to explore the other side. There must be a few investigative journalists over there, e.g.
    http://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2013/sep/17/irish-independent-ireland

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for the suggestion but I doubt any journalist excluding David Rose has any interest in this.

      Delete