Charlie Gard 7

[CaveMum]

Continuation of the discussion.

It looks highly unlikely that there will be a verdict today as GOSH have not yet been able to put their case across. The Gard family had their position heard this morning and currently an expert witness from the US is being questioned via video link.

[Sirzy]

So if on the off chance they do get approval here it would still need to go through the ethics stuff in America? Surely there is no way that his proposals would pass an ethics committee?

[muckypup73]

I do not think the Gards can win to be honest, because if they do, this could open floodgates to lots of people that are out there with dying children, I seriously think they cannot.

[jellypi3]

Are there any more appeal routes from here? Or is this it - the final decision regardless of the outcome?

[HouseOfMouse]

"Judge: would you be prepared to come to London and examine Charlie if I adjourned the case? Answer: Yes."

[Balfe]

Surely he can't adjourn it for any significant amount of time

Poor baby.

[Katinkka]

So it's going to be drawn out even longer if this witness comes over etc.

[Alittlepotofrosie]

That poor baby. How can they let him continue to suffer? I hope the judge doesnt adjourn.

[alpacasandwich]

They have had more than enough time and the funds to get the fucking witness over here by now. This is all stalling.

[muckypup73]

Really? but then again I guess, it will put a stop too it if he comes over and exams Charlie and then says no.

[Minkyfluffster]

the 90 day life expectancy for an emergency FDA is an interesting point. Is the expert saying that they deem Charlie to be terminal and less than 3 months? because that contradicts the treatment plan, where they are suggesting a 3 month treatment plan (90 days).

[muckypup73]

Seriously??? why did the Gard family not pay for him to come over? this is infuriating for poor charlie.

[HouseOfMouse]

"Judge asks if he suspended the case for a few days so that the witness could come and visit Charlie, would he? Yes, he says hesitantly"

Slightly different tweet from SkyFixer. I suggest the judge has put the witness on the spot. He has given all this "evidence" without seeing Charlie, after all.

[GabsAlot]

hi cav thanks

[GabsAlot]

Expert now being cross-examined by Victoria Butler-Cole counsel for Charlie’s guardian.

[rabbitnothare]

Please don't adjourn this, I don't understand why the judge raised the issue.
It's more fuel to giving hope.

[Edsheeranalbumparty]

Charlie is never going to get better. He will never be that boy riding a bike, starting school, opening presents at Christmas. That is what Connie and Chris must have been hoping for, no parent would want their child to be in Charlie's state indefinitely would they?

And as someone before said, what if the treatment works to a degree that he is still blind, deaf, paralysed and can't communicate but doesn't necessarily need a ventilator so even that ceases to be an option and he is stuck like that until he dies?

His body is fighting to die. This fucking nonsense needs to stop right now.

[Minkyfluffster]

They could adjourn until Monday or maybe even consider a weekend sitting?

[muckypup73]

HouseOfMouse, it would certainly put an end to the drama surrounding this, because then the barmy army will not be able to say Gosh are killers, maybe its a good move, for everyone.

[MyPatronusIsAUnicorn]

NY Dr 'evidence' sounds very woolly to me.
I have a feeling it will be adjourned, he will examine Charlie and say he can't see evidence unless GOSH can prove Charlie's head hasnt grown.

[GabsAlot]

im still shockd francis said would you com over thought this was about evidence not opinion

[flatbreads]

Agree Edsheeran

[cjt110]

Please don't adjourn this, I don't understand why the judge raised the issue.
It's more fuel to giving hope. I think he is exploring every avenue possible, in light of fairness and so that it cannot be brought under judicial review proceedings.

[muckypup73]

Poor poor poor charlie.........................

[GabsAlot]

Butler-Cole to NY expert: we think the judge did understand the evidence you gave at the earlier hearing. Expert does not disagree.

[FlyingElbows]

I suspect the judge raised the issue to get the expert to, as it were, "put his money where his mouth is". Expert comes here and actually sees the child and after that will be expected to give evidence in court. I should imagine the time frame for doing so will be short. The judge is covering all potential bases.