tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5046172520958527381.post498917026168115601..comments2024-03-25T07:15:16.752+00:00Comments on white rabbit: Ian Tomlinson and an idiot pathologist...white rabbithttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15693920049571164318noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5046172520958527381.post-34081329627083405072010-09-02T23:17:13.168+01:002010-09-02T23:17:13.168+01:00All I can say is: That's just crap. You guys...All I can say is: That's just crap. You guys need a longer SOL on stuff like this. 6 months? That's ridiculous!JoJohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18165375435543044068noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5046172520958527381.post-40764199191153351352010-09-02T12:15:02.402+01:002010-09-02T12:15:02.402+01:00Catchy - It gets technical and convoluted but goes...Catchy - It gets technical and convoluted but goes something like this: Patel stated in his initial report that he found but did not retain or sample 3 litres of 'intraabdominal fluid blood'. Nobody found an internal rupture that would explain this degree of blood loss. He later changed this to 'intraabdominal fluid with blood' saying the fluid was mostly ascites (a substance formed in a damaged liver - Tomlinson had cirrhosis of the liver). This is important as the second post mortem found the cause of death to be internal bleeding from blunt force trauma to the abdomen. As to the rest,the CPS concluded that Patel's evidence would significantly undermine the second and third post mortems but see below. <br /><br /><br />Sybil - I expect the family will be quietly paid off without admission of liability in due course.<br /><br />Bentham - Welcome to my humble blog. You seem much livelier than when I last saw you in University College. I've read on and have the point about Patel not retaining fluid samples(one may ask why not but that's by the by) and that this fact underpinned the decision not to prosecute but Cary (with whom Shorrock of course agreed as to cause of death) disagrees with the decision not to prosecute. He must believe that his findings are sustainable even in the absence of the three litres of fluid in respect of which Patel has contradicted himself in any event (the insertion of 'with'). Thanks for your contribution anyway and interesting blog you have there...white rabbithttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15693920049571164318noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5046172520958527381.post-82359269176747780782010-09-02T10:09:58.913+01:002010-09-02T10:09:58.913+01:00"A modest proposal to the DPP: why not prosec..."<i>A modest proposal to the DPP: why not prosecute for manslaughter on the basis of the second post mortem, give away Patel's report as unused material</i>"<br /><br />Patel's report is the basis of the second post mortem, as only he examined the complete body, and he didn't retain fluids. So, dropping Patel's report would undermine Carey's (or even Shorrock's) evidence.benthamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17356503601343388721noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5046172520958527381.post-64144983883021367232010-09-01T20:31:40.727+01:002010-09-01T20:31:40.727+01:00Wow.
What a frakking mess!
Patel gives me the cree...Wow.<br />What a frakking mess!<br />Patel gives me the creeps.<br />I hope the family can at least sue for some damages?!sybil lawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13629349319977383547noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5046172520958527381.post-67638382933046645752010-09-01T20:07:57.969+01:002010-09-01T20:07:57.969+01:00It seems to me that manslaughter would be a more a...It seems to me that manslaughter would be a more appropriate charge than assult, even armed with the first autopsy information since the act resulted in a death, either directly or indirectly. But I know nothing of English law and I doubt I'll be running into Keir Starmer any time soon. <br /><br />It seems the British police are as much power maniacs as American law enforcers.Catch Her in the Wryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13052541966405145087noreply@blogger.com