ChatterBank14 mins ago
Harold Shipman Documentary
69 Answers
Apart from being utterly gobsmacked at how many people he murdered, they’ve just said he was 56 when he was convicted. Am shocked - he looked at least 15 years older. And it still hasn’t said why he killed all those people.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Smowball. 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.^ I heard Archer used to write letters for other inmates who were illiterate .
If you are at all interested in the reality of prison,rather than what you hear on TV and in films, you can not do better than read Archer's 3 'Prison Diaries ' They really do 'tell it like it is'. From high security to open conditions he went through it all.
If you are at all interested in the reality of prison,rather than what you hear on TV and in films, you can not do better than read Archer's 3 'Prison Diaries ' They really do 'tell it like it is'. From high security to open conditions he went through it all.
// .bit too clever for sqaddy boy //
well it shouldnt be - it was the basis for the acquittal of Dr bodkin adams - 1957
and makes perfect sense
you are giving morphine to deal with pain
and the shortening of life is an unwanted second effect
' the law on this is very clear. It starts off with the famous direction to the jury by Devlin J in Bodkin Adams and it has been taken up in a number of subsequent authorities: that, if the primary purpose, as here, is to treat properly and to reduce pain, the incidental consequence of shortening of life is perfectly acceptable, medically, ethically and legally." '
Devlin 50 y later then said he thought Bodkin Adams had done it - but so what - a judge can be wrong and frrequently are !
well it shouldnt be - it was the basis for the acquittal of Dr bodkin adams - 1957
and makes perfect sense
you are giving morphine to deal with pain
and the shortening of life is an unwanted second effect
' the law on this is very clear. It starts off with the famous direction to the jury by Devlin J in Bodkin Adams and it has been taken up in a number of subsequent authorities: that, if the primary purpose, as here, is to treat properly and to reduce pain, the incidental consequence of shortening of life is perfectly acceptable, medically, ethically and legally." '
Devlin 50 y later then said he thought Bodkin Adams had done it - but so what - a judge can be wrong and frrequently are !
// Archer's downfall was committing perjury in denying that he had paid off a prostitute.//
yeah perjury because a perverse verdict had been brought in and had to be reversed etc - before it comes to court, you get done for perverting the course of justice
Penalty starts at 2 y in gaol ! oo-er mrs!
and in his case - the perjured document was an affidavit which was sworn but not used in court ( apparently )
today in the high court - s/o has been found guilty of contempt of court in making a false claim against an NHS hospital ( oo-er even more Mrs!)
yeah perjury because a perverse verdict had been brought in and had to be reversed etc - before it comes to court, you get done for perverting the course of justice
Penalty starts at 2 y in gaol ! oo-er mrs!
and in his case - the perjured document was an affidavit which was sworn but not used in court ( apparently )
today in the high court - s/o has been found guilty of contempt of court in making a false claim against an NHS hospital ( oo-er even more Mrs!)
eek !
https:/ /en.wik ipedia. org/wik i/Dorot hea_Wad dingham
as sqad said so eloquently - never 'eard of her - who's she then ?
DW does seem to have well you know er killed people....
https:/
as sqad said so eloquently - never 'eard of her - who's she then ?
DW does seem to have well you know er killed people....