Blunders killed my wife at same hospital where my fiancee died, says grieving father-of-two
A father-of two is suing a hospital after a series of blunders killed his young wife. Charles Kabagambe, 46, is seeking compensation after his wife Charity died in June 2006 following a catalogue of errors at the Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Woolwich.
Incredibly his previous partner, Anne Atwine-Bagamuhoora, died in August 2002 following treatment at the same hospital due to pregnancy complications. The couple had been engaged to be married at the time.
Mr Kabagambe came to the UK from Uganda and married Charity in April 2003. In May 2006 Mrs Kabagambe started to complain about splitting headaches. She attended the A&E Department of the Queen Elizabeth Hospital Woolwich on four occasions in the space of just 11 days between 24 May and 3 June. She was suffering from a life-threatening brain condition but on each visit doctors failed to examine her properly and sent her home with headache pills.
Charity returned to the A&E Department for the fifth and final time on 5th June 2006 where she was referred to the medical team for a CT scan. A scan was performed that same day and was incorrectly reported as normal.
She collapsed from a heart attack following a lumbar puncture test and died four days later from brain damage.
South London Healthcare NHS trust has admitted liability for Mrs Kabagambe’s death. But Mr Kabagambe said this will not bring her back and has instructed solicitors Devonshires to bring a compensation case.
Partner at Devonshires solicitors, London, Nick Grant, said, ‘This is an incredibly tragic case which has left two young children without their mother. ‘We are assisting Mr Kabagambe with his claim so that the family can be assured that nothing like this is likely to happen to anyone else and so that they can regain some financial security following these very difficult times.’
Mr Kabagambe, who lives near Greenwich and works for the Home Office, is now left to care for his two young children, Charity (9) and Hope (8). ‘Charity’s death has left me devastated and has changed my life forever’, says Mr Kabagambe. ‘I am struggling to look after my children with the shifts I am working and the kids miss their mum. It is made worse knowing that her death was avoidable.’
South London Healthcare NHS Trust sent Mr Kabagambe a letter of apology in July last year from Chief Executive, Chris Streather. ‘The apology from the hospital trust is helpful,’ explained Mr Kabagambe, ‘however, it is not going to bring my wife back.’
Why 47 dangerous criminals on the run in Britain can’t be named: Because of their human rights, of course!
Forty-seven dangerous fugitives cannot be named by officials – because of their ‘human rights’. They include criminals convicted of child sex offences, murder and rape. All have breached the terms of their licence and should have been returned to prison.
They are assessed by officials as being at ‘high or very high risk’ of committing further criminal offences. But the Ministry of Justice has refused to name them. Critics said the human rights of offenders were being put before those of ordinary members of the public.
Details of the scandal first emerged 18 months ago when officials revealed more than 1,000 criminals were at large despite having been recalled to custody. Among the total were some who have been on the loose for up to 25 years after police failed to track them down.
The most recent Ministry of Justice figures show 960 have not been found, including two rated as level four – the highest risk to the public – and 45 rated level three. The group of 47 includes two murderers, two paedophiles, a rapist and ten robbers.
Police should find 75 per cent of recalled prisoners classified as ‘emergency’ cases within 74 hours and three-quarters of standard recalls should be completed within six days.
Details of all offenders who had not been returned were compiled following the murder in London of two French students, Laurent Bonomo and Gabriel Ferez, in 2009 despite the killer being recalled to jail. Dano Sonnex, who had been serving eight years for a stabbing and a number of knifepoint robberies, had been mistakenly freed under low supervision when documents revealing his true danger to the public had not been shared by officials.
Opportunities to return the 23-year-old to prison were then squandered or missed. When an arrest warrant was finally issued, it took police a further 16 days to get round to knocking on his door. By that time, Mr Ferez and Mr Bonomo were dead, knifed to death by Sonnex earlier that day.
Tory MP Philip Davies said human rights should not be used as an excuse to hide the ‘hugely embarrassing’ revelations. ‘It’s absolute madness. Once again it appears to put the human rights of dangerous criminals ahead of the rights of law-abiding people to know who is at large. ‘It must be in the public interest to put the names of these offenders in the public domain.’
Ministers have now ordered a review of the policy of releasing criminals’ details. A Ministry of Justice spokesman said: ‘This Government is committed to transparency and there should be a presumption that such information is published unless the police object for specific operational reasons. Recapturing high-risk offenders will always be a priority.
‘Over the past 10 years, in more than 99 per cent of cases where an offender has been recalled, the individual has successfully been returned to custody.’
BBC sneers at popular novels
The BBC has been attacked for its “sneering coverage” of genre fiction during its World Book Night programmes. BBC Two’s programmes The Books We Really Read: A Culture Show Special and New Novelists: 12 Of The Best, which were shown on March 5, triggered the protest.
The 85 signatories to a letter to Mark Thompson, the director general of the BBC, include the Gold Dagger-nominated crime author SJ Bolton and children’s writer Debi Gliori. Many fantasy, science fiction and horror authors – including Iain Banks and Michael Moorcock – also signed the letter.
Fantasy author Stephen Hunt, who organised the petition, said: “The sneering tone that was levelled towards commercial fiction during The Books We Really Read was deeply counterproductive to the night’s aims of actually encouraging people to read novels. The weight that was given to the single sub-genre of literary fiction in the remaining programmes was unbalanced and unrepresentative of all but a small fraction of the country’s reading tastes.
“And closest to my own heart, the failure to feature a single work from the three genres of horror, fantasy, and science fiction was a disgrace. The official World Book Night list included Philip Pullman’s fantasy novel, Northern Lights. It is a shame the BBC could not.
“There have been weeks when one in three books sold in the UK were Harry Potter novels, or more recently, Twilight novels. The sweeping under the carpet of the very genres of the imagination which engage and fire readers’ minds shows a lot more about the BBC production team’s taste in fiction than it does about what the general public is actually reading. If the BBC really wishes to support reading in this country, then they should produce a literary version of The Film Programme, or commission a modern updating of the Bookworm show that had Griff Rhys Jones as its lead presenter in the ’90s. A series with a mainstream slot. Then perhaps the BBC can do what it said on the tin the first time around: cover the books we really read.”
The intolerant Left will never be happy
Celebrating a holiday in Britain is like trying to celebrate it in an unhappy family. The best-laid plans for reviving much-loved traditions quickly blow up in an almighty row. There’s no embarrassing uncle in his cups or stroppy in-laws; just schools that drop Nativity plays, shopping centres that phase out carols, and offices that shun Christmas trees. When Christians meekly complain that their Christmas is being ruined, the powers-that-be shout them down: “It’s in the name of diversity, stupid!”
Now there’s a new rumpus, and just in time for Easter. The Wakefield and District Housing Association in West Yorkshire has ordered one of its electricians to remove a palm cross from the dashboard of his company van. Colin Atkinson, a grandfather and former soldier, faces the sack for refusing to follow orders.
Clearly, in the eyes of this publicly funded body, Mr Atkinson’s palm cross is on a par with a swastika, or a racist slogan. The symbol of Christ’s ultimate sacrifice strikes Mr Atkinson’s bosses as offensive: any show of Christian allegiance could drive a divisive wedge into this multicultural society.
I wish these self-appointed defenders of multi-culturalism would consult a representative group of Jews and Muslims. They would discover that minority faiths have no issue with palm crosses or Christmas carols. Read the Chief Rabbi, Jonathan Sachs, on this subject; listen to Fareena Alam, editor of the Muslim magazine Q News, and Dr Taj Hargey, an Oxford-based imam. They all agree: a Britain that respects, and protects, its predominant faith is a Britain that respects, and protects, all faiths.
At stake is not just a happy holiday. Once banning Christian symbols becomes accepted practice, the rejection of Christian beliefs is next. Already, social services have stopped a Christian couple from fostering children lest they infect their charges with an anti-gay attitude.
Soon, the authorities will forbid conscientious objection: Christian doctors, for instance, will be forced to carry out elective abortions, which they regard as a sin.
Where will it end? I fear intolerant atheists will not be satisfied until they’ve driven faith underground: Christians, Jews and Muslims will be forced to resort to Masonic handshakes and hush-hush gatherings. Meet you in the catacombs.
Leading warmist admits he was bamboozled by fear-mongers – on nuclear power
The original moonbat, George Monbiot, columnist for the left wing UK Guardian, now admits that he was bamboozled by fearmongers whipping up anti-nuclear fears.
Over the last fortnight I’ve made a deeply troubling discovery. The anti-nuclear movement to which I once belonged has misled the world about the impacts of radiation on human health. The claims we have made areungrounded in science, unsupportable when challenged, and wildly wrong. We have done other people, and ourselves, a terrible disservice.
I began to see the extent of the problem after a debate last week with Helen Caldicott [nee Broinowski]. Dr Caldicott is the world’s foremost anti-nuclear campaigner. She has received 21 honorary degrees and scores of awards, and was nominated for a Nobel peace prize. Like other greens, I was in awe of her. In the debate she made some striking statements about the dangers of radiation. So I did what anyone faced with questionable scientific claims should do: I asked for the sources. Caldicott’s response has profoundly shaken me.
Well, it’s a start. Dr. Caldicott has been virtually sainted by the anti-nuclear movement, yet when Monbiot investigated her sources, he discovered that they were:
…nine documents: newspaper articles, press releases and an advertisement. None were scientific publications; none contained sources for the claims she had made. But one of the press releases referred to a report by theUS National Academy of Sciences, which she urged me to read. I have now done so – all 423 pages. It supports none of the statements I questioned; in fact it strongly contradicts her claims about the health effects of radiation.
Monbiot remains one of the most hysterical wamrists, calling for “drastic action needed now” to combat the alleged dangers posed to our survival. The very same concerns expressed by thinkers like Charles Manson.
Now that Monbiot’s eyes have been opened to the machinations fraudsters, perhaps he would examine the hysterical and false predictions of climate refugees and other nonexistent dangers advanced by the charlatans pushing warmist doctrine, as well as the efforts to “hide the decline.”
Why men’s success with women all depends on their hands
I rather like this study — seeing I exemplify what it says. My ring finger is about half an inch longer than my index finger and I have been married 4 times
Forget witty chat-up lines and splashing on the aftershave. It appears the secret of a man’s attractiveness to the opposite sex lies in his hands. Men whose ring fingers are longer than their index fingers are seen as better bets by women, a study found. By contrast those seen as wimpier sorts will have longer index fingers.
It is thought that exposure to high levels of testosterone in the womb has a long-lasting effect on finger-length – and on looks.
The study is the latest in a long line to link the shape of man’s hands with his path in life. British, French and Swiss researchers photographed 49 young men and measured the length of their ring and index fingers. They also recorded their voices and took swabs to capture general odour. They then showed a group of women the photos and asked them to rate the men’s looks.
Those whose ring fingers were longer than their index fingers were more likely to win the women’s approval. They were seen as good prospects for both a fling and a long-term relationship.
However, they scored no more highly than the other men in terms of having a sexy voice or ‘attractive’ body odour, the journal Proceedings of the Royal Society reports.
Stirling University researcher Craig Roberts said exposure to testosterone in the womb likely affects facial structure as well as finger length. Having a long ring finger confers a host of other benefits. For instance, scientists believe the longer a man’s ring finger is compared to his index finger, the richer he is likely to be.
They claim he is also likely to be a promiscuous, extroverted go-getter with strong muscles and has a greater likelihood of playing a musical instrument. Unfortunately such men also have a higher chance of ending up in prison, being murdered or going mad.
Previous research has shown women who have ‘masculine’ hands, with long ring fingers, are more likely to be lesbians than those who don’t and display higher levels of aggression – as well as enjoying greater professional success.
To calculate finger length accurately you must measure the distance from the midpoint of the lowest crease at the base of the finger on the palm side to the very end of the fleshy tip.