IOM DHSC & MANX CARE

[Two-lane]

23 minutes ago, cissolt said:

So two of the three documents had incorrect dates on and the date on the 'template' happens to be the same day that evidence was due to be presented to the PAC?

There were two documents, each of which had different but conveniently coincidental date confusions. One time may be a coincidence, but two times?

This is from the video transcript - if it was written I assume that Robertshaw would have been more concise:

4:10
to be incorrect here the first one was a
document created in July 21.
purporting to be March 20.
and that date very conveniently
coincides with such a document
needed uh when it came to the PAC
evidence that was responding to evidence
given at the PAC Now you can call that a
coincidence
by all means but then the other document
purporting to be uh early 2020 created
on the 7th of October 21. again
coincides with the need to produce a
document of that nature Now I think what
QC Siegel was inferring there was
he wasn't denying or or contradicting
the expo Expo evidence and findings but
what he was saying as I read it and as I
listened was that
how strange that these coincidences
should apply in the way that they did
and have two of them
um out of the three documents and it
it's it's left a shadow I think over the
the findings of the record whether it
goes any further I don't know

[Shake me up Judy]

I expect Dr Ranson's KC will go on to make mincemeat of the Expol report. Ex coppers on IOM Govt pensions, commissioned by the AGs office, are not independent investigators. Would Dr Ranson's counsel have agreed to that ? Did the tribunal ? No way. As if that didn't look bad enough, the AG's office then sends in an attack lawyer to discredit her in a remedy hearing, after she's already won the case.   

[forestboy]

7 minutes ago, TheTeapot said:

They're police, they don't have any integrity.

At least one of them didn’t when in police 👮‍♀️ service!

[Hoops]

I don't suppose it's in the public domain how much we paid for this compliant investigation?

And, of course, the results of this investigation aren't in the public domain either.

Using the governments 'in-house' investigators was always going to look dubious, but then, they really needed to find no evidence of misdemeanours by, well, by who?

It stinks, and leaves so many questions not answered satisfactorily.

[Gladys]

9 minutes ago, Two-lane said:

There were two documents, each of which had different but conveniently coincidental date confusions. One time may be a coincidence, but two times?

This is from the video transcript - if it was written I assume that Robertshaw would have been more concise:

4:10
to be incorrect here the first one was a
document created in July 21.
purporting to be March 20.
and that date very conveniently
coincides with such a document
needed uh when it came to the PAC
evidence that was responding to evidence
given at the PAC Now you can call that a
coincidence
by all means but then the other document
purporting to be uh early 2020 created
on the 7th of October 21. again
coincides with the need to produce a
document of that nature Now I think what
QC Siegel was inferring there was
he wasn't denying or or contradicting
the expo Expo evidence and findings but
what he was saying as I read it and as I
listened was that
how strange that these coincidences
should apply in the way that they did
and have two of them
um out of the three documents and it
it's it's left a shadow I think over the
the findings of the record whether it
goes any further I don't know

I am not defending either the Expol investigation or what DHSC may, or may not have done.

But going back to my post of yesterday, it is possible that the documents may well have been created long after the event they were  recording.  Possibly, someone thought, "oh I had better get that finished as we have to produce all these documents for the hearing ".

The important word is "purported".  If they were purporting to be a document created at the earlier date, rather than just stating it was a record of something that happened on that date, then there is something to be concerned about. 

If they are documents created whenever, that just refer to the date of the event they are recording, then it is not too concerning in a falsification way,  just in a lax process way. 

Without knowing exactly what these documents were, it is difficult to come down on either side of that particular fence. 

[buncha wankas]

2 hours ago, Banker said:

What evidence do you have to support that allegation?

https://www.manxradio.com/news/isle-of-man-news/police-called-in-to-abbotswood-investigation/

[Gladys]

Just now, buncha wankas said:

https://www.manxradio.com/news/isle-of-man-news/police-called-in-to-abbotswood-investigation/

That is evidence of the Expol investigation, not of the intent behind it. 

[buncha wankas]

2 minutes ago, Gladys said:

That is evidence of the Expol investigation, not of the intent behind it. 

Why else would anyone pay a private investigator if not to find blame, if a crime was committed police would be called, if it’s procedural or non compliance with residential home requirements, DHSC inspection officers are there for that. 

[Gladys]

1 minute ago, buncha wankas said:

Why else would anyone pay a private investigator if not to find blame, if a crime was committed police would be called, if it’s procedural or non compliance with residential home requirements, DHSC inspection officers are there for that. 

We don't know what their investigation was about.  It may have been to look at stuff that was outside a police or a DHSC investigation and if it turned up potentially criminal actions  then the police should be called.

Thing is, we just don't know, either to challenge or support.  That alone is a concern as so much just 'slips away'. 

 

[Apple]

There was an excellent programme "Panorama"  on what potentially lies ahead for the Isle of Man in a "Hospital in the Home" (my description) approach and progress to date at some pilots sites in the UK. It looks to the delivery of health services outside of the hospital and at the bedside in patients homes. Technology and big changes to clinical behaviours such as getting Consultants and nurses working outside of the hospital walls is a fundamental principle.

Here is the I player link which may help those interested who may have missed it. It was first broadcast on the 16 th I think.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m001h917/panorama-the-nhs-crisis-can-it-be-fixed

If this is the way forward then the resources and staffing changes I hope are being planned to be ready if and when it happens here. Surely they are.

[Ringy Rose]

Hospital in the home? You're not even allowed to give birth in your own home here (or if you do, there'll be no midwives to help).

A brief glance at Magson's LinkedIn is interesting, you'd never know she worked here. On to the next bullying case for her. The NHS across is full of bullies in senior management, she'll fit right in.

As for the documents, a delay in typing them into Word isn't necessarily evidence of them being concocted. The issue comes if you lie about the date they were created. "These are the minutes/notes from x" is not a lie, even if the minutes do get typed up several months later following a completely coincidental request to see them. Where you fall into issues is when you lie about the creation date, as we saw in another recent Tribunal case from the private sector.

Edited January 20, 2023 by Ringy Rose

[Two-lane]

40 minutes ago, Ringy Rose said:

A brief glance at Magson's LinkedIn is interesting, you'd never know she worked here. On to the next bullying case for her.

Is she working in the NHS again?

[John Wright]

1 hour ago, Two-lane said:

Is she working in the NHS again?

She never left, remember, she was seconded, allegedly.

[Anyone]

Wish someone would bully me - I could do with £6m plus. Surely that won’t be the cost? Let’s remember it’s us tax payers who will foot that bill.

[Steve_Christian]

3 hours ago, Anyone said:

Wish someone would bully me - I could do with £6m plus. Surely that won’t be the cost? Let’s remember it’s us tax payers who will foot that bill.

Did you spend 7 years at medical school and decades working to be top of your tree? In which case, if you’re bullied, you’re entitled to it.