Proceeding contribution from Evan Harris (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 21 June 2007. It occurred during Adjournment debate on Shipman Inquiry.
Shipman Inquiry
Is there not a problem? I have to say that I have not investigated the matter fully, so these are initial thoughts, but the hon. Gentleman is implying that the person who makes the decision about guilt has the sentence in mind when deciding the burden of proof that is to be required. That might be possible, but it might break down if an appeal is made only on the sentence, as can be done through the Council for Healthcare Regulatory Excellence. It might increase the sentence without a commensurate increase in the level of the burden of proof required.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 461 c538WH
- Session
- 2006-07
- Chamber / Committee
- Westminster Hall
- Subjects
- Complaints Coroners Inquiries Homicide Legislation General practitioners NHS Patients Protection Prescription drugs Regulation Registration of births, deaths, marriages and civil partnerships Harold Shipman Tribunal of Inquiry Shipman, Harold
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2026-04-22 09:40:52 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_405089
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_405089
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_405089