In general I’m not in favour of ‘an eye for an eye’, because very soon mostly blind people are left.
In this case I’d like to reintroduce https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhaphanidosis once for each case - provided the Paediatrician is found guilty, which I suppose they will be; how would you err 130 times?
In general I’m not in favour of ‘an eye for an eye’, because very soon mostly blind people are left.
In this case I’d like to reintroduce https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhaphanidosis once for each case - provided the Paediatrician is found guilty, which I suppose they will be; how would you err 130 times?