Archie Battersebee case-thread 2

[whynotwhatknot]

ongoing from previous thread

www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/4573803-archie-battersbee-case?page=40

Can anyone clarify whether their legal team are working pro bono? I seem to recall this was stated by the judge in court, but there’s now a post on AA claiming to show bank transfers for legal fees.

Deveureux was pro bono

The others not. They did get a heavily discounted rate going by comments section

Yes the lawyers are acting pro bono.

That's not to say the family have not incurred other legal expenses - but I have no idea what those would be, nor am I aware of them being declared. However it's possible - for example if Hollie wanted cease and desist letters sent if she felt she was being misrepresented and I sure there are other possible legal matters that might require funding.

They did set up a legal GoFund me (and I think another crowdfunding site) before CLC took on the case so theoretically they do have access to that money which I believe is reasonably substantial (£50k mark I believe but I'm not 100% sure given I haven't looked recently).

Ah I stand corrected.

I was not aware that all the legal team were not acting pro bono.

That makes sense then.

I'm uncomfortable the fundraiser (for medical costs, rehab etc) is being promoted again by the family on facebook.

Hollie said in court they understand Archie is very unstable and has no prospect of recovery - and that sadly his death will likely happen "in weeks not months."

But yet there are loads of comments from people saying they know he'll wake up and they are donating to the page based on this, with no correction from family members.

Same with that baby born while his parents were on holiday in the US though. Massive fundraiser for ‘medical fees’ which were in fact waived very early on. But still the fundraiser continued.

For the legal fees that are not pro-bono are they being covered by the Christian Legal Centre instead?

One video she said "within three weeks" which I don't know if she means the natural chain of events , or within three weeks they will withdraw the medical intervention.

I did see the "eyes" video and another poster explained he'd have eyedrops to stop his cornea drying out which was why his eyes were slightly open , but by no stretch of the imagination could you say those poor eyes are focused .

😪💔

I thought the CLC was funding the other law firms though?

IIRC one of the recent appeal hearings a few weeks ago it was made clear that the family wasn’t out of pocket.

Tax receipts would be generated either way.

Yes I wondered this.

Two invoices have been posted on the FB group, but this just means someone had to pay them, not that the family did. I thought it was strange that if they were going to share that they wouldn't post the receipts instead.

the woman who encouraged her DD to have a crush on a child in a coma.

He's not in a coma, he's dead and his body is being desecrated.
I don't go on the Army page but if true this is one of the worst things I've seen on the internet. And I've seen a lot. It's my job.

I know memory is fallible but I’m sure that Justice Hayden commented that it was a positive that the family weren’t having to pay legal bills.

Two invoices have been posted on the FB group, but this just means someone had to pay them, not that the family did. I thought it was strange that if they were going to share that they wouldn't post the receipts instead

Indeed

Am I right in understanding the family have until midday/mid afternoon to appeal something, otherwise everything is switched off? I’ve not been following completely.

They have until 2pm today, to (as I understand it) ascertain whether the ECHR will consider the case. This seems unlikely, for reasons outlined on Monday.

Ah ok thanks.

Hopefully the ECHR will say no and the 3 ring circus will finally stop.

for now. I’m sure they’ll all be at their usual antics when the inquest starts.

When will the decision from the ECHR be known?

I wouldn’t be so sure. Wouldn’t surprise me if this lot turn on Holly once Archie’s life support is withdrawn. Once she sits with Archie while his life support is removed I can well imagine them to be the types who will accuse her of letting him down, of giving up, of abandoning her faith in God yada yada.

I wonder what determines the mentality of these armies.
I'm genuinely interested. Must fulfill a psychological need, does anyone know?? A sense of power maybe?

Loads of factors, imo.

Having an outlet to believe that they're doing something helpful without actually lifting a finger at all (it's easy enough to share a post and rant!)

Lack of education, so lacking that they're not even intelligent enough to be aware of their own lack of education. Most people with a modicum of intelligence would be aware that as a layperson without medical training their own opinion isn't very valuable. Even doctors who aren't involved in the case are aware that they're not present to assess and don't have access to medical records.

Sheer emotion. It's emotive to imagine a heartbroken mum fighting for her child. Putting yourself in her shoes and the distress of imagining that being your child.

Liking the drama. Being part of something. A common cause. Grief vultures.

A way to stick it to authority. If you're mistrustful of authority or medics you might glom onto something like this as a way to share your outrage against these powers.

Think it's also a sense of belonging and also if something was to change then they can feel they've played apart of it. It does seem a bit surreal some of the posts and about wanting to hug and having his photo as their profile. I get the support but it's not really supporting.

@MayThe4th I don't think anyone would be crass enough to do that - well maybe some would but there's enough sensible people on the group to tell them to shut up. But Hollie absolutely must feel the pressure from all the 'don't you dare give up' comments she gets.

I do think the army members mean well but possibly some just don't have brilliant critical thinking skills.

I dunnow. These overly religious types are a breed unto themselves.

I had a friend whose husband developed cancer. He was an evangelical Christian, and as soon as he announced that he had cancer he had people from the church telling him that God meant for him to survive. He just had to pray and God was going to heal him. Even when the cancer was confirmed to be terminal they kept going on about how this was a test of his faith, God was there, waiting to heal him, and he would soon be back to health.

Then he was taken into hospital and developed double pneumonia and ended up on life support, and the decision was taken to withdraw his treatment. And those same people absolutely turned on him and my friend. Saying that he had died because his faith wasn’t strong enough, he hadn’t prayed enough, and that my friend should repent of the fact that she hadn’t prayed hard enough for him either.

And these were actual friends of theirs from the same church they went to. It was hideous.

While there might be some who are just being supportive, there will absolutely be those who will turn as soon as they can and then move on.

Remember this is the same organisation who funded the cost of legal action to enable a baker to refuse to make a cake for a gay couple.