Read on Twitter
LEGAL CASE UPDATE: Reconvening at 2pm for Sir Philip Havers conclusion/ reply.
James Eadie QC. Well well now. The man has presented his case that the Govt's use of the 1984 Act, the amendments added in 2008 & the additional coronavirus act this year - are justified.
James Eadie QC. Well well now. The man has presented his case that the Govt's use of the 1984 Act, the amendments added in 2008 & the additional coronavirus act this year - are justified.
He asserts that the interference to your Human Rights is also justified.
He asserts that there is a balance between the lives the measures are attempting to save and those that are suffering and lost as a direct result of the same.
He asserts that there is a balance between the lives the measures are attempting to save and those that are suffering and lost as a direct result of the same.
He asserts that in the circumstances, ie in the grip of a deadly infectious disease capable of wiping out the population, the Govt response is appropriate.
He has shown that he is completely OUT OF TOUCH. He has no clue how normal people are living. He evidently knows nothing
He has shown that he is completely OUT OF TOUCH. He has no clue how normal people are living. He evidently knows nothing
of the Chronic Stress the population is experiencing.
He has ignored the fact the Govt (SAGE instruction), have funded a FEAR Campaign via media, to ensure the public remain petrified and therefore, obedient.
He ignored the fact the elderly have been imprisoned and remain so.
He has ignored the fact the Govt (SAGE instruction), have funded a FEAR Campaign via media, to ensure the public remain petrified and therefore, obedient.
He ignored the fact the elderly have been imprisoned and remain so.
He ignores their 'right to life' was dissolved when the guidance, instructions or whatever wordage Health Depts used, to ensure they were not permitted to return to hospital and must be placed on END OF LIFE, the moment they displayed symptoms of covid.
He ignores the fact the elderly, married all their lives, are being kept apart in their final months - to 'protect' them. This is not remotely proportionate.
A decision needs to at least make some sense, for it to be labelled such.
A decision needs to at least make some sense, for it to be labelled such.
He ignores the 44 known deaths of infants under 1, from abuse in Essex alone, which directly resulted from the removal of safeguarding measures - thanks to Vicky Ford MP.
He ignores the huge increase in suicides and attempted suicides that are taking the lives of the young and very young.
He ignores the huge increase in mental health problems in all ages, inc small children now traumatised by the media fear.
He ignores the huge increase in mental health problems in all ages, inc small children now traumatised by the media fear.
He ignores the devastating losses of life from lack of health care, beliefs built upon by use of influential language via media and Gov press briefings to stay away and protect the NHS.
He ignores the decades of financial harms our country and people will endure - which is entirely disproportionate to the need to protect the very elderly who don't work or need to work - yet all are equally imprisoned under house arrest.
I find his ignorance astonishing. Yet I know that in his profession - what matters is 'winning'. Not who dies, is injured, suffers harm as a result of HIS actions.
