Spat between Chief Minister and Dr Glover

[Apple]

2 minutes ago, rachomics said:

The genomics alone suggests that if they had closed the borders a few days earlier (rather than keep hinting at it for a week) then Abbotswood wouldn't have happened. 

Word was that borders had to stay open for some ..ahem.. people and their relatives to be brought back before the restrictions were brought in as that could have caused problems.  

Maybe clarity will come out of any police investigations or complaints about the push to send out patients untested to care home. Or is that all bunkum ?

[Gladys]

Thanks for what you have done to help, at cost and basic rates, and for sticking to your guns.  

This a is a real blow and we will all reap the fallout from this, from the impact on border opening to the ability to track and trace and manage the inevitable community infection. 

There needs to be full disclosure and accountability for this clusterfuck of truly Manx proportions.

[John Wright]

OK. It’s not sub judice. No charges. But please remember views and comments on here may be read by potential jurors and if there are charges may make a fair trial, or a proper conviction or acquittal difficult.

5 people have been arrested. They are entitled to fair process and trial.

[Banker]

No doubt Howie will say on Thursday there’s no problem and Rachel was just part of a team so let’s all just move on !!!

[NoTailT]

I cant help but think the arresting of Abbotswood management is nothing more than a witch hunt to help shift blame off DHSC, but more so Ashford, Quayle and COMIN. Including the fact they sent COVID positive patients from Nobles to the home. It’s crazy and I hope Rachel makes her science available to the defence in that case.

[Gladys]

Just now, John Wright said:

OK. It’s not sub judice. No charges. But please remember views and comments on here may be read by potential jurors and if there are charges may make a fare trial, or a proper conviction or acquittal difficult.

5 people have been arrested. They are entitled to fair process and trial.

Thanks John, but to be clear my comments were about Rachel's involvement and what now seems to be the loss of our own testing facility, not Abbotswood. 

[NoTailT]

2 minutes ago, John Wright said:

OK. It’s not sub judice. No charges. But please remember views and comments on here may be read by potential jurors and if there are charges may make a fare trial, or a proper conviction or acquittal difficult.

5 people have been arrested. They are entitled to fair process and trial.

Honestly John it’s impossible for a fair trial ANYWAY now given how everything has happened, you must agree?

 

i imagine if a case it to be answered, it’ll have to heard by a UK jury.

[Apple]

8 minutes ago, John Wright said:

OK. It’s not sub judice. No charges. But please remember views and comments on here may be read by potential jurors and if there are charges may make a fair trial, or a proper conviction or acquittal difficult.

My apologies for making reference. I agree we should let it run it's course now. 

[The Voice of Reason]

5 minutes ago, Banker said:

No doubt Howie will say on Thursday there’s no problem and Rachel was just part of a team so let’s all just move on !!!

Probably what he will have to  say. He’s hardly likely to say it’s a shame her ego wouldn’t let her stay and keep contributing. But ultimately it’s her decision and we have to respect that.

[rachomics]

14 minutes ago, Gladys said:

Thanks for what you have done to help, at cost and basic rates, and for sticking to your guns.  

This a is a real blow and we will all reap the fallout from this, from the impact on border opening to the ability to track and trace and manage the inevitable community infection. 

There needs to be full disclosure and accountability for this clusterfuck of truly Manx proportions.

It was a very difficult decision to withdraw but it needed to be done.

My future was always going to be in running my company and protecting my current staff and creating more jobs, not saying "how high" every time the DHSC said "jump" when they didn't plan accordingly. 

[AcousticallyChallenged]

35 minutes ago, rachomics said:

It'll take a while for that to become apparent. Likely 4-6 weeks or so, would be my prediction. But, as usual, if it's not immediate then it can't be attributed to any single action. Hopefully at least a few people will remember this come election time. This is an issue entirely made from the Health Minister's actions and the ego's of senior management at Nobles, who absolutely can't bear that the private sector had to sort out on-Island testing for them to get it going. 

Weren't they using gear from you too that had been loaned for use in the lab?

I think the real danger is that it completely screws our ability for a quick response to an outbreak, much like the problem we had when we had no reagents the last time around.

[rachomics]

6 minutes ago, The Voice of Reason said:

Probably what he will have to  say. He’s hardly likely to say it’s a shame her ego wouldn’t let her stay and keep contributing. But ultimately it’s her decision and we have to respect that.

He almost certainly will. It's the party line. However, this was a company decision, not mine alone. My business partner would have had us withdraw completely back in September once we realised that the company was being taken for a ride. My social conscience kept us involved this long. 

Edited December 7, 2020 by rachomics

[rachomics]

1 minute ago, AcousticallyChallenged said:

Weren't they using gear from you too that had been loaned for use in the lab?

I think the real danger is that it completely screws our ability for a quick response to an outbreak, much like the problem we had when we had no reagents the last time around.

Indeed, hence the difficult decision. 

But the DHSC seem completely convinced they can do this alone, so we're letting them. 

[The Voice of Reason]

2 minutes ago, rachomics said:

He almost certainly will. It's the party line. However, this was a company decision, not mine alone. My business partner would have had us withdraw completely back in September once we realised that the company was being taken for a ride. My social conscious kept us involved this long. 

Of course he may not mention it all

[John Wright]

22 minutes ago, NoTailT said:

 it’ll have to heard by a UK jury.

Not possible.

I wasn’t criticising any post. I’m just conscious of the awkward position we’ve been put in by the police and judiciary in the past. Don’t want our metaphorical collar felt. 

It so quickly gets out of control. Like when someone commented on a conviction of a defendant who was undergoing a second trial. The comment was in relation to a judgement published on the Courts own web pages. No one had any knowledge of the second trial. Who got blamed, Courts for publishing, or MF for linking to the published judgment? only one guess needed.