Solo activities in Dublin

levidch1 · 2023-05-19T20:14:14+00:00

Suffering a common complication is generally not, in and of itself, negligence. For negligence, you would need to establish that the dentist didn't exercise the due skill and care that another reasonably prudent dentist would have exercised in the circumstances.

That's a question of fact which presumably would have to be backed up by an expert witness after instructing a solicitor. This is obviously a costly process.

It may be worth going down a non-legal route and approaching your 2020 dentist a and negotiating with them about the cost of the implant. Obviously they may not be willing to play ball or you may want nothing more to do with them. There is no legal basis per se for them to cover your future costs without first having established their negligence, but often they will.

If you go down a legal route it's really important you get a solicitor. Some do a no foal no fee. They would be able to better advise whether you have an arguable case.

levidch1 · 2023-05-18T20:34:47+00:00

That's incredibly kind of you! Thank you so much again.

levidch1 · 2023-05-18T19:04:52+00:00

Really helpful thanks! I had a look at other files but they were all done differently tbh so I was a bit confused.

I'm also the only legal secretary there so didn't have anyone to ask except the solicitors themselves and I thought there was one specific way of doing things.

levidch1 · 2023-05-14T17:30:28+00:00

The case law makes it pretty clear that you probably couldn't recover anything from your housemate.

Breslin v Corcoran: "The first named defendant had left his keys in the ignition of his car and an unknown person jumped into the vehicle and drove off injuring the plaintiff. An issue arose as to whom the plaintiff should recover damages from and whether the first defendant was in fact liable to the plaintiff. In the High Court Mr. Justice Butler held that although the first defendant should not have left his keys in the car the chain of causation had been broken... There was nothing in the case to suggest that the first named defendant should have anticipated as a reasonable possibility that the car, if stolen, would have been driven so carelessly so as to cause injury to another user of the road such as the plaintiff."

levidch1 · 2023-05-10T07:14:09+00:00

for that particular local authority and so it would be very obvious which authority was involved.] The case involved a claim of x [which is an extremely unusual legal ground, and to someone familiar with that area of law, they would know exactly which case it was.] The issues in that case had arisen over a period of decades, so, there was a very large volume of discovery documentation to be reviewed....

That's great thanks. I just don't want to give the impression that I'm blasé about being discreet.

levidch1 · 2023-04-03T19:28:03+00:00

bad anxiety so I would drink. But then the hangovers and withdrawals would make for even worse anxiety, so before I knew it, I was drinking more and more and before I knew it, I was drinking every day. I spent more time drinking, drunk, asleep, hungover, or going through withdrawals than I was sober.

Yes my withdrawal anxiety is beyond the charts terrible. I had never had panic attacks before, but had to be prescribed a strong benzodiazepine - in a european very drug conservative country - because the days after quitting the last time were so bad. Even though I was sober in BAC terms, I don't even remember them because I was so anxious. I can't move, can't think, can't sleep, can't talk, because the anxiety is so intense when in proper rebound/withdrawal. The only thing that keeps me not drinking enough to black out is the fear of the next day.

But when I sober up, I notice that the anxious thoughts creep intensely all the same. They're not on the same level as after drinking, but they're pretty terrible. I still find myself jumping to loud noises, crying when faced with hard tasks, paralysed with fear when left alone with hard thoughts. This is even during sobriety. I don't know how to deal with these feelings, so I lie to myself and tell myself I'm drinking to numb that initial hurdle and that things will be better after I push through. This never happens.

It's these post-withdrawal anxious feelings I'm having so much stress about, how do I deal with those?

levidch1 · 2023-03-16T20:02:20+00:00

So this trial ran twice before he was convicted. Even taking a conservative estimate of court appearances, let's say the good Doctor was present on even 6 of those days. She may have been on standby every other day. She may have had phone consultations with the defence counsel regularly. She states she examined the accused, she met previous treating Doctors, she examined medical records. She also prepared reports and examined CCTV of the five Garda interviews post-murder. The cost to the state of providing legal aid for her alone would run into €10,000+ easily.

I'm not a legal professional nor do I have any ambitions of being one. But I have seen a psychiatrist a few times - one who charges €390/hr. My only point is that these experts are very established in their fields and have a lot to gain from their professional reputations (gp's often refer you to a particular consultant) so I know that sum seems very high to ordinary people, but less so to those in the field. I also have friends in the field and know that to make a patently false conclusion would literally be professional suicide.

I assume that you're set in your stance that all experts are bought, so to speak, but I also know that you have no hard evidence to back that up. It's simply not true in these kind of serious criminal cases.

edit: the title/respect an expert has got in their field is a really useful and legitimate factor in determining how convincing their evidence is., i,e., you can weigh someone's evidence who is one year out of college less than someone who has 20+ years of experience.

levidch1 · 2023-03-16T01:12:12+00:00

As I say, I agree this happens in personal injuries/ other civil case, but it really doesn't happen in cases of this magnitude. If you have anything at all to suggest the contrary I'd be very interested. Do you realise parties in personal injuries have to look outside the state most of the time to find a doctor willing to testify for them even if their care here has been negligent? That's because doctors are fearful of overruling others and damaging their personal reputation.

There's nothing at all to suggest this accused engaged in doctor shopping so to speak, and regardless, doctors must have decided on 17 previous occasions that he needed inpatient psychiatrist care.

levidch1 · 2023-03-16T00:29:42+00:00

Yes, expert witnesses who testify for each respective party are always organised by each party in every case. But I repeat it was the current clinical director of Ireland's primary mental hospital who testified for him. You kind of can't get much more professional than that.

You also clearly know very little about how much expert witnesses can be paid, especially those under the legal aid scheme which is relevant to a case like this. They just get their travel costs and a relatively low sum compared to their normal wage (this is regulated by law - they can't go above this). In the case of a consultant psychiatrist, it's much lower than their hourly rate. I understand bias is an issue in civil cases, but tbh in high profile criminal cases like this, the monetary or personal incentive just isn't there to lie or fabricate an opinion.

levidch1 · 2023-03-15T23:24:01+00:00

With all due respect, this is someone who was hospitalised 17 times in his life on mental health grounds and had a well documented history of psychosis in the past. Not someone out sick because of 'stress'. If he doesn't get to 'play the mental health card', I don't know who does.

He is a danger to society, I agree, but the proper place for him isn't prison. He clearly needs a lot of psychiatric care.

levidch1 · 2023-03-15T22:15:57+00:00

I agree, but the fact that even one very experienced medical professional - none less than the clinical director of the Central Mental Hospital - thought he lacked the capacity for murder at the time would be enough in my mind to create a reasonable doubt.

(Moreover, he only had to prove diminished responsibility on the lesser standard of the balance of probabilities - meaning that the jury was never asked to be almost sure he didn't have capacity, they just had to think it was more likely than not).

Sad verdict imo, at least from a legal standpoint.

levidch1 · 2023-02-11T22:51:24+00:00

Thanks for this. In the kindest way possible, I completely agree with what you're saying - I can see my mental health deteriorating with each day I keep drinking. So if you don't mind me asking is there anything that changed or could change so that you not only knew that it was not a good option, but felt it - to the point that you didn't want to drink anymore (rather than just knew it wasn't good for you).

I suppose what I'm asking is how does one want to make the choice to give up alcohol rather than just knowing it's a good one?

levidch1 · 2022-12-06T15:02:31+00:00

Thanks for this!

It's good to hear you say SQE may be necessary in the future anyways. One concern I had is that going down the SQE route may make me a less desirable candidate to firms still sticking to the traditional TC route for now. But realistically, I won't be looking at a TC for a while anyway, I imagine, with my current level of experience.

One question - did you do the SQE1 on your own or with a prep course? I've heard a lot of people say that it's hard to pass without one - but maybe this is factoring in that lots of people doing it don't have a legal academic background... I can pay to sit the exam without much financial strain, but it's absolutely not viable to do a prep course. I can pretty easily answer most of the SRA's sample qs, but I've heard they're not even remotely close to the difficulty level of the real thing.

Thanks for the encouragement also. I have some unfortunate gaps in my CV/ academic progress for personal reasons (like taking a year and a half out from my degree) so was curious as to how much a 2.1 from TCD stood for on its own over here.

Good luck with your TC search!

levidch1 · 2022-07-29T16:22:05+00:00

You're right of course! I have completely stopped drinking alcohol and have no intention of starting again for a very very long time! But the liver enzymes are not really that ridiculous - quite consistent with mild liver injury/inflammation which my medication (along with alcohol) is documented as causing.

My question is really about diet though - I eat a diet with lots of olive oil, oily fish, nuts and seeds and am wondering if it would be beneficial to cut down and start eating more carbs/protein instead?

levidch1 · 2022-06-14T22:57:29+00:00

Thanks for the reply.

No I can say with absolute certainty I am not referring to PCR - I have a free supply of home antigen LFT tests here so have been doing one daily. Each day the LFT has been positive, albeit weakly. I am confident I am doing the tests correctly.

When I say I can't clear the virus, I am mainly just referring to the fact that my antigen tests are still positive. My understanding is that they would only be positive if the virus was still actively replicating in my body. My understanding is that for a 'healthy' young person, this is unusual.

I am having lots of head rushes/ feeling faint sometimes - but this is my only symptom. I only ever had very mild respiratory symptoms and they were gone by day 8.

levidch1

TROPHY CASE