Thread by @michaelpforan

I'm going to try to do a contemporaneous log of cross-examination of Dr Upton but I am not skilled at this, expect innacuracies and delay - apologies.

NC on resus incident, you give broad date range
DU yes
NC When you say between Oct and 18 Dec how do you place it?
DU bc my last recorded incidents

NC puts phone notes to DU. Does this mean you think this incident happened between Oct 25 and 18 Dec
DU I suspect so
NC by 25th why not narrow it down in investigation to between Oct 25 to 18 Dec

*finding notes*
NC this incident described in formal complaint but no date given or date range?
DU No. But I put it between 25 Oct and 18 Dec so probably between those dates

NC turn to page - that is letter on July 19 2024 inviting SP to investigatory meeting. Resus incident is described as between Oct and 18 Dec. So when AG is investigating, she can't narrow date range from beginning of Oct and 18 Dec
*goes to notes*

NC takes DU to interview notes where says between October and Dec
DU yes
NC You know you're taking part in an investigation, must know that yo equip managers to investigate properly they need best information possible

DU I did give best info
NC but you didn't, your supposedly contemporaneous notes had a narrower date range, you had those notes all the time didn't you?
DU yes
NC so you had a narrower range and you didn't give it
DU that was error on my part

NC so, what we can see is that - and you say when talking about resus allegation - *unfortunately* you don't have a precise date - so you know its a problem?
DU its in my nature to be apologetic
NC but we know from phone notes that you could have given a narrower range
DU yes

NC explain why you didn't give best information you could?
DU I was doing my best, people make mistakes. I could have been more precise. I didn't give inaccurate info.

NC but SP gave precise date didn't she?
DU not familiar with SPs evidence
NC she recalled that it was halloween and reason patient was in resus was bc child had been given sweet with peanuts
DU that's a different patient to what I'm referring to. These are two diff patients.

NC on the same shift
DU it is possible for me to see two patients on the same shift, yes.
NC so we can date the incident?
DU I remember the snickers bad but I can't link all patients to dates

NC so you are recalling working with SP with two patients on same shift
DU don't recall working with her on snickers bar case
NC but you recall her working with you without incident on that patient
DU yes

DU child with peanut allergy was more serious - but all patients with breathing issues are serious
NC you are recalling now having worked with SP on two different patients on same shift
DU no I recall working with SP on one patient but don't recall working with SP on peanut patient

NC but rare for you to work with SP?
DU fairly rare but higher stress situation so awareness was altered
NC would not have been difficult for board to come up with complete list of shared shifts - could just be one?
DU yes but shift information is private information of claimant

NC you're making this up as you go along Dr Upton?
DU No
NC what really happened is you did work with SP on snickers bar patient. You have made up the allegation that she abandoned that patient in order to leave the room because she couldn't bear to work with you

NC you deliberately failed to give the Board best info about this date because you had your phone notes, even if you couldn't remember halloween. I'm suggesting you made this up and kept date range vague to stop it being checked
DU no not true at all

DU I'm not in the habit of making up lies about my colleagues. I record things that happen to me if they feel unusual so that I can feel safe. They are my interpretations of these events. thats all I can speak to

NC we will come back to resus but now Qs on order in which you told story. You spoke to EP immediately after incident, said in chief you wrote up notes on phone in care before leaving.
DU yes

NC you emailed KS on Xmas morning when you got home
NC yes
NC takes to new document produced only last week

NC this is your email on 26 Dec to BMA telling your story
DU correct
NC other doc produced very late we see you emailing Antony Wilson on 27th thanking for advice- is that advice given on phone
DU if not email then would be on phone

NC when have phonically with advisors at BMA there will be some record, either recording or notes from BMA
DU you'd have to ask BMA
NC they would give this if you asked
DU never had to ask for it so don't know

NC new page we see header lines of email from jan 3 - draft of formal complaint sent to BMA
DU yes
NC new page we see date on ED email to you she's saying to commence investigation would be good to have initial incident at Xmas

NC she knows something else you want to talk about but chasing you of account from Xmas eve
DU yes
NC clear at this point that she's conducting investigation
DU can't speak to that
NC clear to you she was investigation
DU clear yo me that she was asking for statement

NC but read the email
DU oh yes she does say she is investigating - I missed this, apologies
NC so when your counsel told the Tribunal last week that ED was NOT investigator that wasn't right was it? whoever gave her those instructions wasn't telling the truth

DU I can't speak to that but looks like it
NC so ED has been chasing you on Jan 15 for account of what happened on Xmas eve - [sorting documents]

NC new doc - this is KS to DU saying Ester has taken lead on investigating the incident. But on 15 Jan, we see ED chasing you for written account
DU that's correct

NC we see later same day RR sending version of Formal Complaint back to you with comments
DU yes
NC all material only produced last week?
DU that's when I was asked to disclose it

NC if we go back to covering email for that annotated copy of formal complaint, and in same email he asks you for 3 things - all emails and attachments, copy of relevant policy, anything else you feel relevant
DU sure
NC did you send him those?
DU I believe so

NC when did you send those?
DU I'd have to check
NC we have not received this
DU I was not asked to disclose this - may have misunderstood
NC you're saying there are more emails between you and BMA relating to these matters you have not produced?

JR No not answer - emails about wellbeing not been disclosed
J: let's look at the order. Must be any docs "relating to investigations"
JR: but emails about well-being don't fall into category of interactions with SP
J do you say that email to and from BMA fall within order?

NC yes quite clear that whole correspondence with BMA is relating to the investigation
JR That cannot be right - Order is relating to internal investigation - emails about wellbeing are not relating to internal investigation
J if there was an email from DU to RR sending policies etc thought to be relevant do you agree falls within Order

JR agrees that it could but not well-being
NC not following, why wellbeing is relevant. Q is whether DU provided docs to BMA
J answer was I believe so
NC but have not been produced
DU this was from personal account not work email. Possible I forgot to check

J I think claimant would like to see these emails. Will ask you to provide this if possible to do so over lunch.
NC since I'm asking about this now can we break earlier for lunch?
J yes - 1.20 restart