Yeah I remember it good:
see this:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4114261.stm
This area is a minefield - I think e g there is a permanent injunction in force which forbids anyone saying they thought Sally Clark erm did it. This means discussion is limited.
I can't find any more names besides those above but I recollect that many cases were abandoned. The lawyers just sort of gave up and said we have no evidence to offer and went off to the pub. In one case that I can't now find, the judge says in exasperation But someone killed little baby X
and the lawyers say yeah but we have no idea who it is and troop out.
and it became the norm in child protection cases for the parents to refer the doctor to the GMC
to the extent that doctors stopped doing child protection.
as you can see there are two sides to every coin.
All this now has kinda been sorted out
and so there are v few lessons to be learnt now from these cases.
There are differences with your friend - none of the cases involved the grandparents. Did the child die with the parents there or the grandparents ? Is it a police investigation or a coroner's ? or did the doctor say, there are signs of trauma I have to refer the case to the coroner ? Or did the coroner's pathologist carry out a post mortem and say oh dear there are signs of trauma ?
Early days I think: The function of the grandparents should be to support the parents and the parents of course as ever need a good lawyer.
support the bereaved parents, I think is the most important thing.
PP