Bit disrespectful changing the original thread heading.

HB can you please sort this out, cheers.

??? no change has been made spitfire....

I’ve answered before : there was no need for the police to be involved on the facts stated.

 

The hospital or family could have involved the police if they chose.

As for : “the coroner got it wrong and as per norm you are always right”

Who is saying the coroner has got it wrong?

I’m not, and I can’t be sure (due to your inability to make clear statements) if you are saying the Coroner is wrong or right .....

 

As for “The above would not be in the slightest bit relevant, its completely different, the complete opposite when you consider that a number of individuals will be held accountable for that disaster, and rightly so, make your mind up mate, you advocate the importance of a coroner but when you are put right, you move the goalposts. make your mind up“ :

I’m sure you are trying to make a point or create a logical argument, but it comes across as a random rant.

Your second paragraph evidently shows what the OP is questioning and the title thread which reads Negligence/NHS...

The hospital were clearly negligent in not informing the police that a patient and in their care died from injuries unrelated to those that he was being treated for.

Forget where it happened, that is not an excuse, its what happened and HOW IT HAPPENED that should have and still could be investigated accordingly.

Investigation: coroner /inquest.

"The hospital were clearly negligent in not informing the police that a patient and in their care died from injuries unrelated to those that he was being treated for": Negligence=breach of a duty of care with harm resulting. Not informing the police : where has this been shown to be a breach of their duty of care?.

Yet, you seem to be wanting to return to discussion. As I've asked before (since HB was asking that we focus on advice) : do you have any actual advice for the OP?.

Well if you cannot see where the hospital acted negligently and breached their duty of care, giving two different accounts of how someone died and not reporting those quite significant facts and to the relevant people, the police, is not only negligent and a breach of duty, deliberately acting with negligence and deliberately breaching a duty of care, supersedes what you are claiming has not happened as a means of defending which is and for the question posed by the OP has been advised and answered by me.

As for actual advice for the OP, the family needs to report the hospital and its staff to the relevant authorities which would include those that I have previously stated should be involved and that would include the police, as the cause of death has not been established, add to that two different accounts as to how the injuries were ACTUALLY reason for death, do you want me to continue or do you want to start preaching laws and the duties of a coroner to deflect from the main issue and what the OP needs to hear.

It’s almost like someone has swallowed a legal textbook and is regurgitating the words.

I’ve tried to make sense of this, but it just comes across as a stream of verbiage.

“Deliberately acting with negligence” makes about as much sense as the rest of the ‘stream’.

If it is negligent it can’t be deliberate. If it is deliberate it can’t be negligent. Negligent can be from lack of care, but not deliberate intent to harm.

It’s almost like someone has swallowed a legal textbook and is regurgitating the words.

 

I’ve tried to make sense of this, but it just comes across as a stream of verbiage.

“Deliberately acting with negligence” makes about as much sense as the rest of the ‘stream’.

 

If it is negligent it can’t be deliberate. If it is deliberate it can’t be negligent. Negligent can be from lack of care, but not deliberate intent to harm.

I have giving my advice and what the OP should do.

Stop trying to deflect using words, get to the point.

You said the police should not be involved, you are wrong and for the reasons that I have given.

If you are going to argue, for argues sake, start dealing in facts, rather than trying to twist things around that will always suit your agenda, I am two steps ahead of you BazzaS, try and remember that.

What advice would you give OP???

I am two steps ahead of you BazzaS, try and remember that.

 

What advice would you give OP???

Right you are. Two steps ahead you are, & you want me to give advice....

Except I did, at 20:37 yesterday.

Sure, HB.

If the notes remain missing, they are paper notes.

There may be some electronic notes : especially a ‘Datix’ report, that may still be available, and the family can consider asking for it.

 

I also hope that those links I’ve provided are useful, and give the family a realistic view on what they can expect as an outcome (a verdict, perhaps a ‘narrative verdict’ but not a finding of blame).

Some on here at looking as a mean's of getting to the actual root, by deflecting and going round the long way to establish what has actually happened here, remembering there are two different accounts to how someone died, carry on.

Was it a fall or was it a TV that caused the death, obviously one or the other.

Meanwhile the OP has to make quite sure that they should, could or otherwise have a realistic but non blaming view before they take the obvious route of establishing who and not if is responsible.

If it was my dad, I would be fighting his corner, not relying on ifs, buts or maybe's, that right or should I say excuse was exhausted when two different accounts were laid as a reason why his head, but not his chest was the reason why the poor bloke died.

But remember this happened in a hospital, BazzaS defence, so it never really happened, you decide.

I’ve decided you ought to give it a rest rather than dragging out some protracted argument based on your misunderstanding of what’s been written.

I’ve decided you ought to give it a rest rather than dragging out some protracted argument based on your misunderstanding of what’s been written.

And you are aiming that who?

Or are you the judge and the jury, think about it?

As for any misunderstanding of what has been written, i'm all ears mate.

Continue or just ignore the thread, no-one has got your arm behind your back have they, freedom of speech, freedom to view, goodnight.

this thread is now closed until the OP marniemoo123456

responds to ask to reopen it.

all you have to do is click on the exclamation warning triangle in the grey toolbar below marniemoo123456 and ask

dx