Harrop MPTS Thread 3

[BoreOfWhabylon]

For when the last one fills up

It's so good to hear the prosecutions side on this - has felt completely unbalanced up to now. For the first time someone has set out the case against.

The defence is very hard reading.

Someone on twitter has just commented re Vice article whatever the outcome today, if AH shared witness statements with the press which included confidential & identifiable information without witness consent, the people affected should consider fresh complaints to the GMC + seek advice from the ICO.

@BoreOfWhabylon yes

@KittenKong I would be surprised if it's earlier than end of tomorrow, but last time the chair gave a timetable just before they went into camera, so I would expect he will do the same.

Im finding it hard to believe AH found a council who would go along with this defence.
'The GMC should be investigated' wtf!?

What does he mean re the Vice article?

Organised approach to complaints?

Where is the organisation that arranges these complaints? I want to join!

As far as I can tell, part of the defence is "Well, if he wasn't a Dr, it wouldn't matter."

Which is to a great extent true, right to the point it crosses into criminality.

But he is a doctor. There's robust case law that professionals are held to a higher standard of conduct and behaviour, and have clear professional standards to follow. So I'm not quite sure where they're going with this.

@BoreOfWhabylon

Someone on twitter has just commented re Vice article whatever the outcome today, if AH shared witness statements with the press which included confidential & identifiable information without witness consent, the people affected should consider fresh complaints to the GMC + seek advice from the ICO.

This is a key point.

The badge he was wearing in that recent Twitter image also = fresh complaint.

It's such a palpabale contempt of process.

Also how could there be an orchestrated approach by the complainants r.e. the Vice article? am I misunderstanding? is he saying other people made him instigate and contribute to the article?

@Redshoeblueshoe

Unbelievable - GP thinks the Vice article is irrelevant.

Nah it shows his arrogance

Oh he has to say that.

But it does show his complete lack of care or self awareness.

I was genuinely shocked at the artice but his terf badge at the weekend I feel was even more telling. Thought he was being clever and subtle and KNEW it was going on social media so it would be a silent alert to supporters and haters that nothing has changed even after the rough week at tribunal.

I could almost understand the ignorance re the VICE article as it was before the tribunal was undertaken. But even after all the discussions in such a severe setting, he wants to tell everyone he is invincible? No helping some people.

The Adrian Harrop Tribunal
@tribunaltweets
·
6m
Context in Law is everything, GP says. He’s talking about the ‘approach’. Absent of identification as AH as a doctor, none of the considerations are relevant. Chair and GP discussing hypothetical situations.
1
3

The Adrian Harrop Tribunal
@tribunaltweets
·
3m
GP submits that there’s a disparity in treatment between an anonymous doctor and a doctor who identifies himself as one.
3
3
2

The Adrian Harrop Tribunal
@tribunaltweets
·
2m
GP reminds the panel that the fact that something is offensive to someone, doesn’t mean it’s unlawful and that it isn’t protected by free speech.
1
3

The Adrian Harrop Tribunal
@tribunaltweets
Everything needs to be reviewed, GP invites the panel to consider, within the rights of free speech. GP says AH was expressing his views not as a doctor, but in a ‘private capacity’.

That's crap defence, given the 'medical' content of some of his tweets.

AH never does anything of his own free will, it seems to me.
He's ALWAYS made to do things by other people.

Over to Mr Powell (GP). GP says it’s remarkable and unfair that there hasn’t been an investigation into the GMC. GP saying this is supposed to be a fair investigation

By whom & for what? Following its statutory duty? Not sure that will wash with the panel.

This is the second week as I recall? It's expected to last 3.

GP reminds the panel that the fact that something is offensive to someone, doesn’t mean it’s unlawful and that it isn’t protected by free speech.

That argument, from their side, is hilarious.

"I'm not on trial!

The GMC should be on trial!"

Great defence babe. Almost as good as your witness this morning

Is this the big "I know something you don't know" from a social media commentator last week, I've been dying to see what the big reveal would be

If he wasn't a doctor it wouldn't matter? Of course it wouldn't. That's why it's the GMC who has brought this case !

It's all about his fitness to practice as a doctor. What on earth are they talking about??

Well that's an argument to win the panel around.

Thanks so much for the continuation and clear explanations. His defence is paper thin isn’t it?

@Motorina (and anyone else who knows) I realise I am asking this question very very late in the day, but why is a case like this heard by an independent panel rather than by the GMC itself? It seems really weird to me that the GMC as a regulatory body has to persuade another group of people that a member has behaved badly enough to require disciplinary action, rather than being able to make that decision itself.

I thought his counsel was meant to be a high flyer?

@EmpressaurusWitchDoesntBurn

GP reminds the panel that the fact that something is offensive to someone, doesn’t mean it’s unlawful and that it isn’t protected by free speech.

That argument, from their side, is hilarious.

Yeah.

I mean, this is all true. Except this isn't a criminal court. So what's lawful or unlawful is really academic.

This is a professional tribunal. And it's well accepted that what you did in your private life impacts on your reputation and thus the reputation of the profession. Which is why, a few years ago, when I went to a social event and realised there were people there taking drugs, I immediately made my apologies and left. Because even though I've never so much as smoked a cigarette, being seen partying in a group where there were people taking drugs could have impacted on the trust my patients had in me.

People literally put their lives in doctors hands. They trust them with intimate access, literally and into their emotional life, which they wouldn't consider in any other circumstance. Which is why how you conduct yourself - in work and out of it - matters.

The Adrian Harrop Tribunal
@tribunaltweets
·
7m
Replying to
@tribunaltweets
There’s one inappropriate tweet in 2020, by ‘whatever means necessary’, you accept [panel] wasn’t intended as such. [missed next part].
1
1
5

The Adrian Harrop Tribunal
@tribunaltweets
·
6m
GP asking panel to accept human error and makes reference to a tweet in which AH apologised for.
1
1
7

The Adrian Harrop Tribunal
@tribunaltweets
·
5m
Chair referring to a letter sent in 2018 about AH tweeting at work. GP says there’s was no evidence AH was tweeting at work.
2
7

The Adrian Harrop Tribunal
@tribunaltweets
·
1m
GP referring to something noted in a private session. [GP alluding to mental health of AH]. Because of AH’a mindset, he didn’t pay attention to the document sent to him in 2018, GP is saying.

His counsel is quite a big hitter, although never taken silk. The GMC's barrister is v junior, and gives the impression of having been somewhat outmanoeuvred.