Family & Relationships5 mins ago
Should Hospital Bosses Face Corporate Manslaughter Charges ?
A key witness thinks so…
// Hospital bosses who failed to act on concerns about the killer nurse Lucy Letby should be investigated by police for corporate manslaughter, says the prosecution’s key medical expert.
Speaking to the Observer, Dr Dewi Evans, whose evidence was central to the case against Letby, said executives were “grossly negligent” for not acting on fears about the nurse as she murdered seven babies and attempted to kill another six. //
https:/
Their negligence contributed to the death toll. They are probably still working at other hospitals, and they shouldn’t be.
// Hospital bosses who failed to act on concerns about the killer nurse Lucy Letby should be investigated by police for corporate manslaughter, says the prosecution’s key medical expert.
Speaking to the Observer, Dr Dewi Evans, whose evidence was central to the case against Letby, said executives were “grossly negligent” for not acting on fears about the nurse as she murdered seven babies and attempted to kill another six. //
https:/
Their negligence contributed to the death toll. They are probably still working at other hospitals, and they shouldn’t be.
Answers
1 to 11 of 11
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Gromit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Not having access to all the details so being at a disadvantage, I'd say, no. A manager in a position of hearing an accusation but given no real evidence to support it aside from the circumstantial evidrnce that one particular person was involved at each situation, one can understand a reluctance to assume the accused was guilty. I think the actions actually taken was appalling, but I'm unconvinced it should be considered manslaughter. But maybe ask NJ ?
Sharon- That won't fly.
In order to raise that charge, you have to have evidence of clear intent to harm the victims, and that is clearly not the case here.
A charge of corporate negligence in a civil court may be an option, I hope so for these poor parents, they should have some redress for the way their children's killer was facilitated by her employers.
In order to raise that charge, you have to have evidence of clear intent to harm the victims, and that is clearly not the case here.
A charge of corporate negligence in a civil court may be an option, I hope so for these poor parents, they should have some redress for the way their children's killer was facilitated by her employers.
I dont want to go on...
Dr Dewi is NOT a legal eagle, and is giving a non-medical opinion.
BUT
https:/
R v Farm (NI) seems to show it may be go-er
since it is corporate- - - all the hospital does on conviction is get fined. - in this case £200 k
Dr Dewi is NOT a legal eagle, and is giving a non-medical opinion.
BUT
https:/
R v Farm (NI) seems to show it may be go-er
since it is corporate- - - all the hospital does on conviction is get fined. - in this case £200 k
A charge of corporate negligence in a civil court may be an option,
nope - corporate manslaughter is criminal, they get fined.(doesnt go to the victims)
a Civil case is necessary for damages - for the deceased, very little ( possibly a few thou, I mean peanuts, under the usual principles ( loss of income: a child doesnt have one)
One child at least is tetraplegic - that would be many hundreds of thousands of pounds ( cost of care).
sozza to ramble...I kn now I should limit myself to 'foo' and little else. Heavens ! ultimate mod sin: two posts abutting!
double sozza
nope - corporate manslaughter is criminal, they get fined.(doesnt go to the victims)
a Civil case is necessary for damages - for the deceased, very little ( possibly a few thou, I mean peanuts, under the usual principles ( loss of income: a child doesnt have one)
One child at least is tetraplegic - that would be many hundreds of thousands of pounds ( cost of care).
sozza to ramble...I kn now I should limit myself to 'foo' and little else. Heavens ! ultimate mod sin: two posts abutting!
double sozza
Gromit, I cannot think of a more contentious question on AB and you are right to raise it. It could not be more obvious, imo, that the Managers' lack of action on investigating the situation failed to safeguard other babies in the neonatal unit. That is an absolute dereliction of their duties and my initial reaction to the news was "Heads must roll". Common sense and experience tells me that (as with most after-the-event reports) the public will probably be fobbed off. The CE will continue to make the right noises at the right time, no doubt.
https:/
Talk about pouring scorn over the debacle - pun intended.
https:/
Talk about pouring scorn over the debacle - pun intended.
Managers as a breed rely on workers to make them look good and having workers tell you that somebody may be killing babies is not a stepping stone to the good chocolate biscuits, therefore information will be ignored in the hope that a job offer lifts them out of the problematic theatre and it's somebody elses worry.
Politicians without the photo ops and hi-viz in other words.
Politicians without the photo ops and hi-viz in other words.
Hmmm, interesting CQC Report for July 2022:
https:/
One might have expected the Hospital to have pulled its finger out in light of the public interest.
https:/
One might have expected the Hospital to have pulled its finger out in light of the public interest.
ANDY, "Sharon- That won't fly.
In order to raise that charge [of manslaughter], you have to have evidence of clear intent to harm the victims, and that is clearly not the case here.
A charge of corporate negligence in a civil court may be an option"
I don't know if she meant corporate manslaughter when referring to, "manslaughter" but this is what the CPS have to say about the requirements,
"Elements of the Offence [of Corporate Manslaughter]
The following needs to be proved:
the defendant is a qualifying organisation;
the organisation owed a relevant duty of care to the deceased;
there was a gross breach of that duty by the organisation;
the way in which its activities were managed or organised by its senior management was a substantial element in the breach;
and the gross breach of the organisation’s duty caused or contributed to the death"
In order to raise that charge [of manslaughter], you have to have evidence of clear intent to harm the victims, and that is clearly not the case here.
A charge of corporate negligence in a civil court may be an option"
I don't know if she meant corporate manslaughter when referring to, "manslaughter" but this is what the CPS have to say about the requirements,
"Elements of the Offence [of Corporate Manslaughter]
The following needs to be proved:
the defendant is a qualifying organisation;
the organisation owed a relevant duty of care to the deceased;
there was a gross breach of that duty by the organisation;
the way in which its activities were managed or organised by its senior management was a substantial element in the breach;
and the gross breach of the organisation’s duty caused or contributed to the death"
1 to 11 of 11
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.