Message #2174

[AndrewF]

I think I am right to say that the post she was appointed to, as a result of the Victoria Kilbier(?) case, held legal responsibility for sorting out the procedures and liability for failures of those procedures, so she was legally liable and therefore did deserve to loose her job. I agree it is a sod of a job, and one I would never in a lifetime even consider going into, and that she had no control over how well the cops and medics performed their part, but she did have responsibility for seeing that they had a chance to do their bit, and saying (as she did on the R4 interview that she could not do anything about the docs not having an apointment available for 4 weeks after being contacted is not acceptable. That sort of case should be seen as a priority and it was up to her to make sure that her staff got that priority.
I also agree that the *way* she was sacked was wrong.
That said, I'm sorry, but it was right that she *was* sacked.