Only one.. there's only one

Only one way to ensure that these murdering buggers (word used in its colloquial sense, as 'not very nice people'), only one way to ensure these murdering buggers get their just deserts.

And what are they?

Well Deserts come towards the end of the meal. It begins with an aperatif. (Regard this as a Wedding - or a night on the tiles.)

The first thing, in the main meal, is soup.

The soup in which my father's affairs swam, was pretty murky. It was the sort of soup which you might expect to find in a sewer. Full of penningtons and claytons .. and a bit cheesmanny, but prior to that certainly a bit odd. Not something about which to write home.

The main course is a bit more substantial. It's the sort of hearty fare one would expect on a winter's night. Full of the 'meat' of human intermedling, the like of which would be expected to get the intermeddlers into jail. Vegetables round it were related to the intermeddler.. a bit soggy with the soaking of cash-gravy. So soggy that they gently congeal in guilt .. and having congealed they find they can't run.. though they need to. Each time they lift a gravy-soaked foot, they leave a tell-tale footmark.

Of course there are condiments to this main course. Salt and pepper, which stand .. alone... Though they do appear to be slightly sticky around the gills

Then there is the 'pudding'. Always a favourite dish, the 'pudding'. Today's pudding is called 'milk' pudding. But that is a misnomer.It consists of the very best grains of related rice. Little tiny incestuous grains, which flocculate.

They congeal and divide and wonder at the stickiness of the situation. Milk pudding with no careful settling digestion. but only the bin.. in the yard. Then the tip. Deserts indeed!

Ah! The petit fours. A welcome interlocution. Something a bit too much but.. very welcome. The petit fours .. are little snippets. the sort of thing one would not quite expect.. but still they come. Arriving on some late, late night, just when the time has arrived, for the Bill.
return to: http://ralphwinstanleyofwath.blogspot.com
or go to : http://ralphwinstanley.blogspot.com
or go to: http://winstanleyr.blogspot.com
or go to: http://rwinstanley.blogspot.com
or go to: http://ralphwinstanley83.blogspot.com
or my own site:


Reply to letter "Coroner Stands Down"

Charlotte Peters Rock,Holly House,Middlewich Road,
Allostock,Knutsford,Cheshire.WA16 9JX
4th April 2005
Personal Attention of: Mr ES Hooper, HM Coroner, South Yorkshire (East District),
Coroner’s Court and Office, 5 Union Street,
Off St Sepulchre Gate West, Doncaster. DN1 3AE
(by fax and email)

Dear Mr Hooper,

To reply to your highly inaccurate letter, point by point:
1 You state in page 1, para 1:
“Partly for record purposes,..”
Perhaps, in that case, I could point out that 'for record purposes your comment should be accurate .. and I find very little of your letter of the 29th March 2005, to be accurate.

2 In page 1, para 1, line 3, page 1, you state:
“..without going into unnecessary detail, I record that I opened an inquest..”
The detail which needs to be gone into, in this case, is that you opened an inquest having tried to ensure that neither I nor my sister, Linda, had any details about the date and time of the inquest. We found out, inadvertently, from someone else, about the time and date; and wrote, if you remember, objecting to fact that we hadn’t been informed, in spite of your having had, with our affidavit and statement, our full contact details, (26th April 2004).

3 You state: page 1, para 1, line 4:
“Before the inquest I wrote to you and told you that the opening of the inquest would be formal..”
When you finally wrote to me about the inquest, it was only because I had written to you objecting, to not being told when it was to be held.
What was I supposed to make of the word, ‘formal’? I had had no experience of inquests, so it was a relatively meaningless word in that context, since it arrived with no other explanation.
4 You state, page 1, para1, line 5:
“.. notwithstanding that, you made plain that you wanted to give evidence, did so, and told me that you were on that day questioning your father’s testamentary capacity when he made his last will, shortly before he died..”
At the inquest, (6th May 2004), I 'made plain', as you put it, that I 'wished to give evidence', because it was obvious that otherwise the whole affair would have been over, with no investigation having taken place. This was made particularly obvious because of the presence in the court of Richard/ Raymond Walker, who I understand was expecting to collect my father's body and put it through either his undertaker service or his undertaker and cremation service.

5 You state, page 1, para 1, line 8:
“..but, on 6 May 2004, were questioning no more than that.”
The reason why I queried my father's will, was because I was aware that that was a way to stop the inquest from being an 'open and shut' affair, because such things as objections to a will, were taken more seriously than a murder, (which is what I am certain, had taken place.) Also, because I was the only one, in my immediate family who had never had any expectation of featuring in any will of my father’s, I decided to object to my father's rather laughable will; it being obvious to me, if not to you, that I was in an unassailable position as someone who had nothing to gain by objecting to his will - but who still objected to it, because it was a laughable affair.

6 To repeat: you state, para 1, line 8:
“..but, on 6th May 2004, were questioning no more than that.”
This, as you must be aware, is an absolute lie. I had already questioned my father's entire treatment, and had suggested to you , by 26th April 2004, in my Affidavit, that my father's death was involuntary euthanasia, which amounted to murder. Your cherry-picking choice of words, as you must be aware, does neither you nor the coronal service any credit.

7 You state, page 1, para 1, line 13:
“..it is my general understanding that if your father's will should be declared invalid you may well inherit a share of your late father's estate.”
Though not being aware of where your ‘general understanding’ came from, ( I suspect from Nina Clayton, though I may be wrong in this), nevertheless I object to such an ‘understanding’. Having never particularly 'got on' with my late father, I have never had any expectation of receiving anything from any of his wills. He was a particularly unpleasant man, who liked to buy people. I was never for sale. I saw him from time to time - for short periods - and hadn’t fallen out with him.
I still, no matter what I may have though of my father, object to his murder. After all, if every unpleasant person was murdered, there would be many people in this country who would no longer exist. (and a fair few of them would be public servants.)

8 You state, page 1, para 2, line 1:
“Since 6 May 2004 you have questioned a very great deal more than your late father's testamentary capacity in his last will.”
Whilst that is true, I still object to the fact that it is thus stated. I objected to my father's treatment, before he was finally killed. I further objected to his treatment when I called in the police, who were on the premises when he finally succumbed to the appalling treatment meted out to him under the auspices of Doncaster East and Doncaster Central Primary Care Trusts, and their agents. I also objected to you, to Doncaster East Primary Care Trust and to South Yorkshire Police by Affidavit, which you all had in your hands by 26th April 2004.

9 You state page 1, para 2, line 2:
“You have repeatedly made plain that it is your belief that your late father was the subject of involuntary euthanasia, was the subject of a conspiracy by more than 40 healthcare professionals, was put down, and was murdered.”
My response to this statement is that I certainly stated part of this. The only difficulty which I have with your statement is that where you quote 40 healthcare professionals, you are being inaccurate. I stated that, during the 6 days when my father was being killed, there were at least 42 visits by health professionals. That is not quite the same as your statement, as some of these people (particularly, District Nursing SisterJulie Marshall, RGN Susan Grimshaw and Dr Rachel S Sykes, came on several occasions, which added to the 42 visits.

10 You state, page 1, para 2, line 4:
“You have repeated these allegations on numerous occasions, and have copied your allegations to a large number of people, including the Home Secretary, the Lord Chancellor, various high ranking police officers and others.”
About this I would note: I have repeated facts.


11 You state, page 1, para 1, line 6:
“I am reliably informed by a Yorkshire newspaper that you have telephone them and said that your father was "put down" by a particular group of people, although I understand that that newspaper chose not to report that allegation by you.”
Perhaps ‘that newspaper chose not to report that allegation' by me, because its editor is suitably cognisant of the threat of the libel laws?
Editors have informed me that when this evidence is repeated, which it will be, in open inquest, they will be at liberty to report the lot. What I stated, probably by email, because mostly, I can afford no other, was accurately put, and has also been put to you. Further, it is in the general public domain, because I have also emailed the national press and broadcasters, who stood me in such good stead during and after the opened - and adjourned - inquest, by reporting facts reasonably - though not entirely - accurately.
I point out to you that in a free democratic society, information is made public. In this case, to keep the freedom and democracy, I have every intention of keeping it public

12 You state, page 1, para 2, line 9:
“You have repeatedly made complaints about the way that have dealt with the preparations for the inquest, notwithstandng that I have explained to you on a number of occasions that inquests are for limited purposes, that I am not concerned with intra-Winstanley family litigation but, rather, with very limited matters, and that I have been unable to proceed with things as early as I might have hoped because I have not yet received all the medical reports which you seek.”
I would comment here, that I do understand that an inquest is not a criminal court. What I do not understand is why, considering the documentary evidence which you hold, you still haven't asked the police to do a thorough investigation of my father's murder? I also do not understand why the Chief Constable has not set about an investigation on his own account.
‘intra-Winstanley family litigation’, is something which, has a great bearing on his death. This has already been explained to you and to South Yorkshire Police and both Primary Care Trusts.
I would ask you why, exactly, you have not yet received all the medical reports? This seems to be very remiss, after 11months. I repeat that I expect that I will be able to receive copies of all the medical and pharmaceutical reports on my father. As Coroner, I expect that you will, at least in some respects, do your job properly - even if retrospectively. So I expect that those reports which I have already asked you for, will, at least, be forthcoming. But when? Perhaps you will let me know?


13 You state, page 1, para 2, line 14:
“You have quite improperly accused me of obstructing your participation in, and the continuation of, the inquest touching your late father's death.”
As you are aware, you did not inform me or my sister of the inquest date and time. I consider that this was improper, and obstructive.

14 You state, page 1, para 2, line 15:
“You have said that I have ‘attempted, four times … to release [your] father's body, without asking for adequate tests to be done’. That is untrue,…”
I have indeed stated that. As you are more than aware, you have still not asked that any testing is done for HIV/Aids. I asked for this test to be done, on the 26th April 2004.. And it has still not been done. My sister is left, to remain at risk because of your cavalier attitude to her health. That is an utter disgrace on the coronal system,,, and you are the cause of it.

15 You state, page 2, para 1, line 7:
“.. that you may have a second post-mortem examination of Ralph Winstanley at your own expense.”
Well, this beggars belief! There should never be any need for this, assuming that the coroner has done his job adequately.

16 You state, page 2, para 2, line 1:
“I have had made a post mortem examination of Ralph Winstanley by a pathologist on the Home Office list, and extensive tests carried out by and under the direction of a distinguised forensic toxicologist and you have copies of their reports.”
It seems to me the the tests carried out, have been meagre in the extreme, and have only been carried out at all because of our insistence. The tests for the presence of Diamorphine, Haloperidol and Midazolam, were taken, in the main, outside the time when such tests could be of any value, (according to information which I have researched).
The tests for Sildenafil and Norsildenafil done on our father's blood, showed nothing, but would they have been expected to, so long after the event.
The tests for metals, assuming there had been some form of metal(s) to account for our father's extreme - and sudden - weight loss, would have needed to be done, as far as I am aware, on the place where such metals were stored. I am told that that would not be in the blood but in the bone.


17 You state, page 2, para 2, line 3:
“You have it that I have already reached a conclusion, being that your father died from natural causes. That is also untrue: what I have told you is that ‘on the evidence presently available to me’ it appears that your father's death was due to natural causes, ‘but I have not closed my mind, to the possibility that he died from an unnatural cause.’"
a You have been furnished with more than enough documentary evidence over the past 11 months, from various sources, which my brother, my sister and I have gleaned, and which shows that his death was not imminent, was lied about and was deliberately carried out.
b When I and my sister were in your office, paying for the still deficient, medical records, you stated that you thought that our father had died from natural causes. What are we to make of such a statement?
c You have a copy of Dr Brown's letter, of 28th May 2004, written to Mr Jonathan Goodwin of Bridge Sanderson Munro, solicitors, over a month after our father was killed. This states:
i ”As you are aware Mr Winstanley had been seeing me as his General Practitioner regularly since November 2003, for problems relating to chest and epigastric pain, which was found to be due to cancer growing around his lower oesophagus and stomach.”

ii He also made rather dubious statements in respect of my father’s mental health; claiming
“..with my special experience in mental health examinations, during the time when Mr Winstanley was preparing his will, no doubts arose concerning his mental state, although I did not undertake a formal examination of his mental health as such.”

This ‘doctor’ was fully aware that, his training, (if training he had) in Section 12 of The Mental Health Act 1993, specifically precluded him from making such statements, without setting up, with the patient, a proper consultation on the state of his mental health, and a quite separate consultation, for the patient, with a completely independent doctor, who also knew the patient.


18 You state, page 2, para 2, line 8:
“You have come close to suggesting that I am dealing with fees that are due to me (Coroners Rules 1984, Rule 57) in an improper and dishonest way.”
That statement is wide of the truth. I am accusing you of insisting, in writing, that a cheque for the purchase of my father’s still deficient medical records, was made out to your personal name, and not to your office as HM Coroner, as the Home Office wrote to me, it should have been.

The paragraph to which I refer, is contained on the first page of the letter which you wrote to me, and others of my family, on 7 February 2005. It states:

“I have now received a post-mortem report from Professor Helen Whitwell.”
It continues:
“I will make available copies of Professor Whitwells’ post-mortem report to all those to whom this letter is sent on payment of the statutory fee of £8.80; Coroners Records (Fees for Copies) Rules 2002. Please make the cheque payable to E S Hooper.”

In an addendum to that letter, written on 8 February 2005, you state:

“I can make available photocopies of the medical records that are in my possession, but the charge per Coroners Records (Fees for Copies) Rules 2002 would be of the order of £1.10 per sheet and I estimate there are in the region of 400+ pages.”
I confirm that when my sister and I came to your office to collect a copy of those medical records, you re-stated verbally, in the hearing of four people, that the cheque had to be made out to ES Hooper. My original cheque was made out - for the total of £390.50 - to ES Hooper. However, following contact with the Home Office, I cancelled that cheque and issued another, for the same amount, to HM Coroner, Doncaster.

I would be interested to know what the Home Office makes of this. I understand that you have been HM Coroner for around 15 years? Has it always been the case that cheques have had to be made out to your personal name and not that of your office?

19 You then continue with a long paragraph - page 2 para 3 - which is startling in its accuracy.

20 Following this, page 2, para 4 - you revert to type by stating that:
"My attention has been drawn to a libellous web site posted by you, in which you express the belief that I - together with South Yorkshire Police - have some sort of vested interest in not having your father’s murder investigated."
That statement is close to the truth. However, I have had much time to consider the matter, over the last 11 months and am still making my mind up as to the proportion of ‘vested interest’ to ‘sheer incompetence’, which has combined to create this fiasco of ‘justice’, in which no ‘justice’, however healthy, could possibly survive.

About the libellous nature of your written sentence on the ‘libellous’ (as you claim), nature of the web site, I will for the moment, reserve comment. However, I would remind you that being HM Coroner does not allow you to issue libel.


21 Your statement, page 2, para 4, line 4, is very interesting:
“..and I am doing everything that I can to make sure that your father’s death will be properly investigated.”
I would ask that you give me full information as to exactly what you claim to have done to expedite this.

i What duties have you given to your Coroner’s Officers in this respect?
ii What exactly have you asked South Yorkshire Police to do?
iii What have you done, (having had pointed out to you the deficiencies in the medical records), to gain accurate medical records
iv What moves have you made to gain Pharmaceutical records?
v What did you ask Professor Whitwell and Professor Forrest to do?
vi What else have you done?

If you cannot answer this, whatever makes you think that my father’s death could possibly be ‘properly investigated’?


22 In page 3, para 1, you seem to be saying that emails which I send, late at night (and on Easter Sunday), when it suits me, might be disturbing you? This is hardly likely, since I understand that they are picked up via your office computer, which is completely unattended at night and on Sundays and Bank Holidays. I am sure that I do understand that you were trying by your phrase:
"..in an email sent to me two days ago, on Easter Sunday, 27th March 2005 at 22.30 hours.."

to indicate that I was unnecessarily harassing you late at night on a holiday. That, as you are fully aware, is complete eyewash.


23 You also state, page 3, para 1, line 4:
“You have it that I, knowing that your father’s cause of death was severely disputed, and that Health Professionals were involved in it, have over a period of more then ten months refused to ask the South Yorkshire Police to investigate what happened.”

That is precisely what I think. And I would need proof that you had asked them to do anything.

Detective Superintendent Robert Haworth, assures me that South Yorkshire Police has not been asked to do anything by you. If you object to that, or find it inaccurate, then I suggest that you take it up with them and produce proof of your actions to me.

24 You also state, page 3, para 1, line 7:

"..that if there should be any proper medical evidence to demonstrate that your father’s death was other than unnatural (sic) I shall ask the South Yorkshire Police to deal with, and investigate the death, very thoroughly.”

So, why, having been presented with,
I a sworn affidavit from me,
ii a statement from my sister,
iii great swathe of documentary evidence
and finally
iv a Pathology Report, which makes no mention of oesophageal/stomach cancer and states that my father’s chronic lymphocytic leukaemia was still in a relatively benign state,
have you not asked South Yorkshire Police to act?

Is it that you can’t read? Or that you do not understand medical evidence? Or is it for some other reason? If the latter is the case, perhaps you would explain?

25 You state, page 3, para 1, line 9:
“You have it that I am aware that the present Chief Constable of the South Yorkshire Police, Mr Meredydd Hughes, and his respected predecessor, Mr Michael Hedges QPM, were and are refusing to do their duty.”
You are right in assuming that I believe that both Mike Hedges and Meredydd Hughes have refused - and Meredydd Hughes is still refusing - to perform the duty of a Chief Constable and investigate an obvious murder.


26 You state, page 3, para 1, line 11:
“You have sent to me a list of witnesses Whom in your view should be called at the resumed inquest, totalling no less than seventy-seven people. They include the man whom I understand your late father’s executors(if, as you will no doubt point out, executors they be) have instructed to be the funeral undertaker, a number of officers of two Primary care Trusts, Mr Hedges, Mr Hughes, a number of solicitors ‘all of whom were involved [you aver] at the time of [your late father’s] death’, and, at number 76 out of the 77 witnesses whom you think should be called to give evidence, me. I fail to see how I may be a witness in my own court.”

The long list of witnesses which I have already sent to you -and which includes you - has needed to grow exponentially because of the obstructive attitude of you, and the various people/levels of police of South Yorkshire, and senior executives at Doncaster East and Doncaster Central Primary Care Trust.

You seem to cavil at being called as a witness? You will still be called.. And possibly in other courts than that of HM Coroner.


27 You state, page 3, para 2, line 4:
“.. you will not be satisfied with any finding by me other than that your father was murdered by a conspiracy - and possibly an international conspiracy - of health care professionals, lawyers, and others. Further, from what you have written and emailed to me, sometimes in the middle of the night, I apprehend that in the absence of such a finding you will conclude that I am part of a general conspiracy to suppress proper investigation of your late father’s death.”

The conspiracy of which you speak, is something which has become patently obvious over the last 11 months. What else could explain the overall stonewalling destructiveness with which my sister, brothers and I have had to deal? Sheer incompetence, although I am sure that it has played its part, from the various quarters where we have found it to exist, would not be enough to explain, adequately, the terrible shambles which we have had to live through.

I have thus far, not deemed it to be an international conspiracy, but perhaps you know that it was? In that case I would be interested to hear it.

I do feel that you are yet again intimating that you have been disturbed by the fact that I send emails in the middle of the night. Does that mean that when I send an email a bell sounds in your home and you dress and rush down to your office to read it, rather than waiting for morning? That would be a very strange thing to do.

Also you seem to assume that I think that you can make a coroner’s finding of “murder”. I have always been fully cognisant of the fact that a coroner’s inquest is a very limited affair. “Murder” is not a finding that a coroner can make. Unless, it is a finding which you, as coroner, have made in the past? In which case, you would not have been working to Coroners Rules.


28 You state, page 3, para 2, line 9:
“I am acceding to your formal request that the whole matter should be shifted out of the Doncaster and South Yorkshire area and looked at elsewhere, made on 19 May 2004. I very much regret that I am constrained so to do. In what is now nearly fifteen years of coronal service, after six years service in a Commonwealth country when I discharged duties broadly equivalent to those of an English Circuit Judge, I am recusing myself for the first time in my judicial career. I shall tomorrow, put in hand finding another coroner, who sits without the county of South Yorkshire, to take over this inquest.”

I am grateful that the inquest will finally be shifted out of the South Yorkshire area, as I have been requesting since 19th May 2004. What a pity it took so long.

What a shame my family and I have had to waste so much time, when, in theory at least, you are supposed to have been someone to whom we could have turned for help in a pretty dire situation.

This situation is still one which we will have to face. I take no comfort from the fact that you have “recused” yourself the inquest. It now gives me just one job more to do, in trying to get you “recused” more generally. However, I will pursue it with due diligence.


29 I am aware that the entire letter, to which I am replying was written with only end in mind; and that was to ‘turn’ the coroner who finally has the unenviable job of completing my father’s inquest.

That is the only reason why I have written this letter, to put on record that your comments, expressed in your letter to me, (and therefore to the new coroner, since it will obviously go ‘on file’), of 29th March 2005, contained inaccuracies which no hard -working legally-minded coroner should ever make.


30 I would now like to have the whole of the documentary evidence, which I and my family have supplied to you, returned to us. You can take copies to pass on to the new coroner. I would also like to have an inventory of those copies, so that it can be checked against the information which we expect the new coroner will need - and which you will have sent to him.

For the record, I swear that the point by point objections made in this letter, are absolutely as accurate as I can make them.

Yours sincerely,

Charlotte Peters Rock

return to: http://ralphwinstanleyofwath.blogspot.com
or go to : http://ralphwinstanley.blogspot.com
or go to: http://winstanleyr.blogspot.com
or go to: http://rwinstanley.blogspot.com
or go to: http://ralphwinstanley83.blogspot.com
or my own site:


The killing spree in Britain

GENERAL RELEASE - 11th March 2005 - this is of National public interest

What will the political parties do about this?

It seems to me likely, in view of the desperate attempts which my sister and I have had to make, and have had rebuffed, that a form of Medical Killing , on the same terms as the (Nazi) Medical Euthanasia Programme, is taking place in Britain, today.

Since our father, Ralph Winstanley, was killed, by those ‘close to him’ and health care professionals, and using other health care professionals to do the job, we have fought the authorities for more that ten months, to get a proper investigation of what happened to him.

In favour of the need for an investigation, we have full documentary evidence of what was done to him, which shows deliberate intent to kill.
http://ralphwinstanleyofwath.blogspot.co.uk This web site shows a great deal of information and contains the full Pathology Report. If more information is needed, please contact me: 0156 572 2738 - 07050 183 417 - charlottepetersrock@tiscali.co.uk
Holly House, Middlewich Road, Allostock, Knutsford, Cheshire. WA16 9JX

Ranged against us have been:

1 Two Primary Care Trusts - and a large number of doctors and other health professionals. (Doncaster East and Doncaster Central)
2 An entire Police Force (Two Chief Constables - one after the other)(South Yorkshire)
3 The Police Authority (South Yorkshire)
4 The Coroner (HM Coroner, Doncaster)
5 The General Medical Council
6 The Nursing and Midwifery Council
7 The Healthcare Commission
8 The Home Secretary
9 The Head of Constitutional Affairs
10 The Secretary of State for Health

All of these people/offices have so far refused to insist that a proper investigation is done into our father's killing. Where else can we turn, but to the public?

On the day when the first syringe driver was put into his leg, 6 days before he died, he was walking across a room, sitting on a low chair and getting up again, all completely unaided. He was able to eat and drink and swallow tablets. He was able to hold a sensible conversation, in spite of the morphine, and could recognise, by name, everybody who came into the room. He had indigestion, which he relieved by belching..

He was killed, at home, deliberately, when he was not close to death, nor was he dying, nor asking for help to die. His Pathology Report confirms this. (see web site above). He had indigestion, from trapped wind, because he was not eating properly, partly because of recent chemotherapy which was keeping his relatively benign Chronic Lymphocytic Leukaemia stable; and partly because of the morphine. Both of these predisposed him not to want to eat.
The method used to kill him was:

A morphine by mouth, (Oramorph), for 5 days - in theory to help him - with pain which he did not have - and stated that he did not have.
B whilst he was still in a befuddled state, with the morphine, he was also then injected, with Diamorphine and Haloperidol
C As these drugs began to work, he had the first syringe driver, with Diamorphine and Haloperidol, attached to his left thigh
D Within 24 hours he was also injected with Midazolam
E Also a second syringe driver, containing more Midazolam, was inserted into his right thigh.
F over a period of 6 days, through a heatwave, he was 'nursed' with no line in for either food or fluid.
G when my sister and I complained vociferously about this treatment, it was continued.
H following our absence to sleep, when we returned, we were refused admission to the room where he was still alive. A squad of nurses and two doctors, were doing something over a three hour period, and injecting him with Hyoscine Hydrobromide.
I After this, it seemed as if he was drowning from the inside. Where on earth can all this fluid have come from since he had no fluids during the April heatwave, from Sunday 18th April, until he died on Friday 23rd April 2004. He must surely have been extremely de-hydrated?
J It took him two hours to die, once the ‘Health Professionals' had left, by which time I had called out the Police.

My sister and I have now waded through lies, deception and obstruction, from the various agencies listed above, (and numerous others), over a ten month period, to get a proper investigation of our father's killing.

He died on 23rd April 2004.

This deliberate Medical Killing, and the complete refusal of all agencies to investigate what happened, shows that the (Nazi) Killing Programme has continued. Except it is now completed in front of the relatives. There is no longer any need to hide the evidence. It is known that no-one will investigate. They used starvation, dehydration, Morphine (Oramorph, Diamorphine) and Scopolomine (Hyoscine Hydrobromide - also called Scopolomine Hydrbromide). It was called, “wild euthanasia”. Is it still called that, I wonder? It was sanctioned by the authorities, under Hitler.

We are all growing older. We need to have trust in our own medical services.

We do also wonder about the potential Masonic - or other - links between these groups, who seem quite confident in refusing to act.

Charlotte Peters Rock - daughter of Ralph Winstanley
0156 572 2738 - 07050 183 417 - charlottepetersrock@tiscali.co.uk
Holly House, Middlewich Road, Allostock, Knutsford, Cheshire. WA16 9JX
return to: http://ralphwinstanleyofwath.blogspot.com
or go to : http://ralphwinstanley.blogspot.com
or go to: http://winstanleyr.blogspot.com
or go to: http://rwinstanley.blogspot.com
or go to: http://ralphwinstanley83.blogspot.com
or my own site:


Pathology Report - just facts and comments

It would seem that Nina Clayton has informed a lot of people that the Pathology Report showed that my father, Ralph Winstanley, did have oesophageal cancer.

Read this for yourself.. and then ask yourself why the Coroner has still not asked South Yorkshire Police to begin a criminal investigation. Ask yourself why the Senior Police Officer in South Yorkshire, who is also able to set in train a criminal investigation, has not yet chosen to do so.

This seems to smack of corruption .. unless there is another reason for their lack of action? Perhaps someone can suggest what that might be?

If necessary, please keep moving down the page. You'll find the Pathology Report just below the side bar.


return to: http://ralphwinstanleyofwath.blogspot.com
or go to : http://ralphwinstanley.blogspot.com
or go to: http://winstanleyr.blogspot.com
or go to: http://rwinstanley.blogspot.com
or go to: http://ralphwinstanley83.blogspot.com
or my own site:


Oesophageal/Stomach Cancer ? Hardly!

The Pathology Report is in. After all these months, we know a few more answers.

To summarise, my father, Ralph Winstanley, had neither oesophageal nor stomach cancer.

His Chronic Lymphacytic Leukaemia had not metastased to a more acute form.. nor to anything else.It was still the relatively mild problem which he had had for some years.

Isn't that interesting? Doesn't it make you want to weep?

The utter murdering, thieving, liars, Nina Clayton, Rosemary Cheesman and Frazer Cheesman, together with Dr David J Brown, Dr Rachel S Sykes and Dr Gill Harding, really have a lot for which to answer. As do Dr Jonathan C Bundy, Dr Kevin Lee, and District Nursing Sister Julie Marshall. They are totally responsible - in one way or another - for killing my father, Ralph Winstanley. I will state now, that he would not have been dead if it were not for their deliberate actions.

So now South Yorkshire Police will rush to investigate his murder? No. It seems not.

Detective Superintendent Robert Haworth, stated to me last Friday,

it is South Yorkshire Police policy not to investigate a death, unless the Coroner asks it to.

Yet Home Office rules state that there are two people who can have a death investigated. One is the Coroner. The other is the Senior Police Officer for the area in which it took place

South Yorkshire Police Force has consistently refused to investigate my father's murder, whilst telling concerned outsiders that it has been investigated and nothing has been found to be wrong. This is police corruption. As far as I know, there is not other word which could describe it. This coprruption in respect of my father's murder, has been going on for 10 months, so far.

So where to we go from here? HM Coroner has been difficult to deal with (to put it at its politest), ever since my father was killed. I believe he - together with South Yorkshire Police - has some sort of vested interest in not having my father's murder investigated.

I also believe that, with so many people involved in his killing, a fair few others have a vested interest in my father's death; particularly since he seems to have been stripped of all he possessed, before he was killed. (And for those who do not know, my father held at least £2 million in trust, for his own family.)

We looked for help, my sister and I, when our father was being killed. We thought we lived in a civilised democracy. We thought that people were safe in their beds, and where there was a threat to that safety, we thought that we could rely on the Police, and the Health Authorities, and the Coroner.

We thought that there were other agencies set up to ensure that where things were going wrong, these public authorities would be brought back into line.

We thought a lot of things which we have since found out were totally untrue.

Glad to be British? No I'm ashamed.

However, I am certain that I will not stop pursuing this murder, until there is some form of justice. To all those who thought I would, You're wrong!

Charlotte Peters Rock
(Ralph Winstanleys saddened elder daughter)

return to: http://ralphwinstanleyofwath.blogspot.com
or go to : http://ralphwinstanley.blogspot.com
or go to: http://winstanleyr.blogspot.com
or go to: http://rwinstanley.blogspot.com
or go to: http://ralphwinstanley83.blogspot.com
or my own site:


Into Infinity with the Crooked, the Corrupt - and the Corpse which will not be released - yet

1 Perhaps Ralph might have found this poem amusing? Perhaps - under other circumstances - he might have written it?
this is Ralph's other site. Do visit it. Read Ralph's own poem.Written in 1990 it shows that he had spent a lot of money on..
this is Ralph's new site. Do visit it.
this is Ralph's comment site. Do visit it
Jump to the poem If (not by Rudyard Kipling)
Interesting comments appended to Perhaps he was in the way?
Also at Dead Man Walking - Post number 1 - Abide with me

It seems as if we have quite a way to go, yet.

However, numerous bits of information are slotting into place.

I would like to thank the various people who have come forward to tell us just what was going on around my father, before his untimely death.

It makes unedifying reading but I am very grateful to you all for the information.

Such calculating killing is something which I never expected to come across. However, I expect no-one expects to be witness to a murder, do they?

For anyone who comes new to this information. I do understand that killing someone deliberately, when he was not close to death, ranks as murder.

Also, covering up a crime such as murder, is an offence under British Law.. and there seems to be quite a lot of that going on.

If you want more information, please ring me on 0156 572 2738. I will be pleased to talk to you. However, I only answer the phone when numbers are displayed on my phone display system, so please do not remove your number when dialing.

Now, about the 'lady' who lives four doors down. Who is she?

Sorry. Must go now. I'm busy with other things. Back soon.

Charlotte Peters Rock
Elder daughter of Ralph Winstanley
(Who will find a way to jail the people who killed him because, whether or not I got on with him, I do object to murder. Most strongly!)
return to: http://ralphwinstanleyofwath.blogspot.com
or go to : http://ralphwinstanley.blogspot.com
or go to: http://winstanleyr.blogspot.com
or go to: http://rwinstanley.blogspot.com
or go to: http://ralphwinstanley83.blogspot.com
or my own site:


Removed from The Patients' Association website

The two postings below, were made on the Patients Association web site, under Medical Records - in the Comments section.

They were on the site from the 4th January and the 8th January respectively.

On the 13th January they vanished. Wonder why?

Posted on Patients Association web site on 4th January 2005 - removed by them on 13th January 2005
Ralph Winstanley was not dying - nor asking to die More than eight months ago, my father, Ralph Winstanley, who was 83 years old, was lain down to die in his bed, mainlined, against his will, with Diamorphine, Haloperidol and Midazolam, using two syringe drivers. These had been prescribed over the telephone by a doctor who never saw him. This was done by National Health Service staff, through the April heatwave, with no line into him for either food nor fluid. The end result was that he died. It took 6 days. Yet he was initially no closer to death than anyone else of 83 years of age. This was not done accidentally. A steady stream of doctors and nurses were involved. The few medical records which we have managed to gain, had been extensively altered and were missing vital drugs forms. Doncaster East and Doncaster Central Primary Care Trusts have stonewalled ever since. They know that they can. They have our money to do it with. We are paying these human beings - who are walking all over us. What can we do to stop them? Charlotte Peters Rock (elder daughter) by - Charlotte Peters Rock- 04/01/2005

Posted on Patients Association web site on 8th January 2005 - removed by them on 13th January 2005
In respect of Ralph Winstanley's medical records:

I reproduce here the full content of a letter which I received this morning,

(8th January), from
Christine Boswell, Chief Executive, Doncaster East Primary Care Trust.
"Dear Mrs Peters Rock
Release of Medical Records relating to Ralph Winstanley.
I write with reference to your email dated 3rd January 2005 to myself and to colleagues at the Primary Care Trust, regarding access to Mr Winstanley's medical records. The coming into force of the Freedom of Information Act does not alter the position in respect of access to your fathers records. No further information will be disclosed. Freedom of Information relates to requests for information about public bodies and their services. It does not relate to requests for personal information. Personal information (eg medical or patient records) are exempt from FoI as this would contravene the Data Protection Act and the Access to Health Records Act. Access to a patient's medical records is therefore not allowed under FoI. Yours sincerely, Christine Boswell Chief Executive" (note above, the phrase, "no further information will be disclosed." So she agrees that information has been released.) This is in spite of the fact that it was agreed, by Jayne Brown, the previous Chief Executive, (since moved on to the Strategic Health Authority for North Yorkshire and North Lincolnshire, as DIRECTOR OF PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT. Please pardon the hollow laughter at this point.). In her letter of 10th June 2004, she stated, "Thank you for your application for the release of your late father's medical records. I note that the basis of your claim is that you are asserting that your father was unlawfully killed. I confirm this, being a claim arising from the death of your father, is a valid ground for an application for release of the records." Following this 'agreement' that I had a lawful 'claim', a mish-mash of inaccurate, altered, records with added forms and missing forms was released to me. I pointed out the deficiencies in the records, and asked that the missing forms should be copied to me, since they were a vital part of the records. This did not seem to suit either Simon Morritt, Chief Executive of Doncaster Central Primary Care Trust (since moved to West Yorkshire Health Authority, I hear), or Jayne Brown, Chief Executive of Doncaster East Primary Care Trust. To this day they have refused, in total contravention of the Access to Health Records Act 1990, to supply ACCURATE records. Either way, it seems to me that they are deliberately flouting the law; AND THEREBYE, PUTTING OTHER PEOPLE AT RISK Either I WAS entitled to copies of my father's medical records, in which case they should have been ACCURATE copies. Or I WAS NOT entitled to copies of my father's medical records, in which case they have acted outwith the Access to Health Records Act 1990, in that they DID supply copies (albeit inaccurate copies), to me. When such actions are taken, by those who are supposed to protect the interests of the patients whom they serve, should they be trusted? More to the point should they be paid at the rate of £90,000 to £100,000 per year, to work against the safety of patients? (by 'the safety of patients', I mean that what happened to my father COULD ALSO BE HAPPENING TO OTHER OLD, ILL AND OTHERWISE VULNERABLE PEOPLE. And these so-called public servants, have allowed more than eight months now, for this to happen. I certainly do not trust them.. and I feel I have good reason. More than that, they have eroded my trust in any other health professional and this I find unforgivable. Perhaps someone can inform me how I can get them brought to account for their actions?
Charlotte Peters Rock- 08/01/2005

I understand that The Patients Association is a small charity. Perhaps it is easily threatened then? In view of the difficulties which my sister and I have had, in connection with our father's death, how telling this is.
return to: http://ralphwinstanleyofwath.blogspot.com
or go to : http://ralphwinstanley.blogspot.com
or go to: http://winstanleyr.blogspot.com
or go to: http://rwinstanley.blogspot.com
or go to: http://ralphwinstanley83.blogspot.com
or my own site:


And pigs can fly!

Well, my friends. Here we are in the Happy New Year. Still with no sign of a conclusion. Still with no sign of a Pathology Report. Still with no sign that South Yorkshire Police Force has got up off its backside and started to do what we pay it for. Still with no sign of a criminal trial. Yet!

Nothing new there then.

However, there is something new. Let me introduce
Mr Stephen Davies, Head of Medicines Management, Doncaster Central Primary Care Trust, who wrote:

Dear Mrs Peters Rock,
My apologies for the delay in getting back to you.
Firstly I would like to express my sympathy for, not only for the death of your father but also the distress you have experienced since. It cannot have been easy, particularly when you are wrestling with the doubts expressed in your paragraph on the internet.
I would be happy to look into this for you, however as this is the first I have heard of the incident I would be grateful if you could furnish me with some further information.
who was your father's GP
your father's medical condition which led him to require a syringe drive
the nurses involved in his care (not the name but the type. i.e. a community nurse, a MacMillan nurse etc). You mention both East and Central PCTs in your paragraph. Both Trusts employ nurses with different specialities and I would need to have some idea of who to contact.
who you have already approached in the PCTs
Additionally may I have your mailing address so that I can write to you more formally to answer the questions you have raised. I look forward to hearing from you and hopefully being of some assistance.
Yours sincerely
Stephen Davies Head of Medicines Management Doncaster Central PCT (tel: 01302 320111 ext 3421 fax: 01302 730362)
(Yes, it was in blue)

This was in response to my original approach to him 04th January 2004), which said:

Dear Steve Davies, My father's drugs were, so it is written in his notes, destroyed, as soon as the Nursing Sister knew he was dead. Some of these drugs had arrived with her on that visit. I am aware, as she must have been, that all drugs used on a patient, have to be kept for 7 days in case the coroner should need them. She knew that the Coroner was already involved. They were Diamorphine, Haloperidol and Midazolam.I wonder what, as Head of Prescribing, you think about it? Charlotte Peters Rock

So, I wrote back (8th January 2004) saying:

Dear Mr Davies,

Thank you for replying to my original email. Your interest is very much appreciated.

I have tried to ring you several times - and I am aware that you also tried to ring me, when I was away from the phone.

I would like to speak to you but perhaps, under the circumstances it would be better if I reply to some of the questions which you ask, or we shall be going round in circles forever.

My home address is
Charlotte Peters Rock, Holly House, Middlewich Road, Allostock, Knutsford, Cheshire. WA16 9JX
phone 0156 572 2738 - mobile 07050 183 417

1 My father's GP was Dr David J Brown of Field Road Surgery, Stainforth and Barnby Dun.

He is also still in place as Caldicott Guardian at Doncaster East Primary Care Trust, in spite of my protests that there is a severe conflict of interest, since we have been trying, for over 8 months now to gain full and accurate copies of my late father's medical records, and we are being consistently blocked. (Jayne Brown had written to me on 10th June 2004 stating that I had a valid ground for an application for release of the records. And it was following that letter that she and Simon Morritt and Liz Hedge, released the highly inaccurate records which I now hold. Presumably it was with the involvement of Dr David J Brown, as a GP, GP Representative and Caldicott Guardian on Doncaster East Primary Care Trust, that these illegally inaccurate records were released?).

It is claimed that Dr Brown was not in his surgery during the 6 days when my father was 'being helped to die'. He was certainly in his surgery on 22nd April, signing prescriptions. It says so in the medical notes.

The general overseeing of the appalling treatment of my father, at Grange Farm, was undertaken by Dr Rachel S Sykes, of the same surgery, though overall, he was Dr Brown's patient. And it was Doctor Brown who, even one month (letter 28th May 2004, attached), after my father died, wrote a letter to the solicitor who held his tragic and hilarious 'will', (on which there had been a caveat in place for over a month), claiming that he had seen him for problems relating to his chest and epigastric pain,

'which was found to be due to cancer growing around his lower oesophagus and stomach.'

To this date, it has still not been 'found to be due to' anything, since the Pathology Report is still not in, and the Endoscopy Results from Doncaster Royal Infirmary showed no evidence of any malignancy or growth.

2 Once I had managed to gain (much altered and inaccurate), copies of the last month of my father's treatment, I found out a great deal more about what had been happening to my father, before and during the last 6 days of his life, which backed up what my sister and I already thought..

The two syringe drivers were prescribed by Dr Kevin Lee of Danum Doctors, on the 18th April. Dr Lee, in a letter, of which I have a copy, states that he never saw the patient. (see Dr Lee's letter, 18th May 2004, attached as two jpgs)

The first syringe driver, containing Diamorphine, was put in place, in my fathers right thigh, against his wishes, on Sunday afternoon, 18th April. He had already been on morphine-by-mouth, (Oramorph), prescribed by Dr David J Brown, (in spite of insisting that he was not in pain), every 4 hours since the 14th April, so he could not protest too much because he was 'flying above us' on morphine.

We - my sister and I - had been told that he was dying - and that he didn't want to speak about it.So we assumed that that was true. This assumption has troubled both of us a great deal ever since he died. But you can't bring somebody back from the dead.

The second syringe driver, containing Haloperidol and Midazolam, was put into his left thigh on Monday afternoon 19th April, whilst neither my sister nor I was on the premises. We hadn't been told that this was to happen, though Nina Clayton had it booked the night before (at around 23.15)

3 Re: his medical condition: As we have found out since his death, my father's medical condition, has been interesting, to say the least. On 9th March 2004, his second 'wife', Nina Clayton rang my sister to say father was dying. This was the day before (as we have found out since), he went for a second investigation, on 10th March, 2004, at Doncaster Royal Infirmary. This was an endoscopy at which '9 pale tissue fragments' were taken from the junction of the oesophagus/stomach. The result of this investigation came back, certainly by 22nd April - the day before my father finally died. (see attachment 22Apr2004fromDRI etc.)

As you can see it states that there was no 'growth', no malignancy and that a fungal stain was negative.

My father had had recent chemotherapy for his longstanding Chronic Lymphocytic Leukaemia, prescribed by his specialist, Dr Majumdar, at Doncaster Royal Infirmary. This began on the 5th April and ran for 5 days (so until the 10th or the 11th April?)

He was put on Oramorph by Dr Brown by the 14th April.. for some reason

When my sister and I arrived at his home, having been told that he was dying, on the morning of the 18th April, He was unnaturally calm. This continued all that day, until well after the first syringe driver was put into his leg. He objected to that. Otherwise he seemed to be reflective. Of course neither my sister nor I knew at that time, about the morphine which he had already been on for 4 days.

He did have trapped wind. It was giving him pain. However, when he belched, his muscles relaxed immediately and he looked comfortable again.

(What we didn't know until later, when we read the notes of Dr Kevin Lee, was that, out of the hearing of my sister, who was with father at the time, Nina Clayton rang Dr Kevin Lee of Danum Doctors (the On-call doctor service) - at 6.15am on Sunday, 18th April 2004, telling him, amongst other things that my father had heart failure.
(See attached Dr Lee's ADASTRA 'Delivery Note' for his first Consultation - though I don't have a 'Delivery Note' for his second Consultation later the same day)
Below that it says: diagnosis entered:

To begin with he was mobile and had not stopped eating at this point. He certainly was not 'terminally agitated'. He was unnaturally calm.. and remained so during the whole day and the following night. I know this because I was there, from 9.30am on Sunday morning until 9.30am on Monday morning, when I had to leave to collect some clothes from home. The only agitation which he showed was in respect of the insertion of a needle into his right thigh, which he did not want, but it seems could not prevent. He certainly spent some time, ineffectually trying to pull it out. We did not know enough at the time to help him. About this, both my sister and I feel shocked.

During the whole of Sunday and part of Monday, my father was able to get out of bed and stand up on his own. He could walk across the room steadily, and refused offers of help. He could sit, steadily, onto quite a low, soft armchair and get up again, with no help. He did this several times, when I was with him. He was doing it to shift the trapped wind.. and it worked well. I asked nurses and the doctor, what he was being given to help him, so that the wind did not build up and so that it could be dispersed. Neither nurses nor doctor gave him any help. My sister and I rubbed his back and this helped. He was able to speak lucidly, if slowly (due to the morphine?) and could recognise everybody who came into the room.

He was able to eat, which he did with evident relish, when easy food was presented to him by my sister. He ate melon. With no teeth in, he had no difficulty in swallowing it. He was able to drink both through a straw and from a glass, with no difficulty. He swallowed tablets with no difficulty.

I should make the point here that my father, during all the time when he was not unconscious, and thereafter, was not at any time trying to be sick, nor was he sick.

Nina Clayton, who was rarely in the room where my father was dying, rushed in each time the nurses or doctor arrived. She then followed the nurses and Dr Sykes round the rooms, each time they came, saying that he was:
a in dreadful pain - which was not true
b being dreadfully sick - which was not true
c was sicking up blood - which was not true
Her daughter, Rosemary Cheesman, who lived next door, was repeating this.

This was still happening even after he was fully unconscious. Each time, I told them, quietly and then more strongly that it was not true, but none of them would listen. It was like being inside a nightmare.

Of course you will realise that someone who is recovering from chemotherapy - and I understand that Fludarabine takes at least 4 weeks to recover from - would not be expected to eat well. It affects the senses of taste and smell and generally works to put the patient off his food. Lack of food and exercise allows the build up of trapped wind. Its hardly rocket science.

4 The nurses involved in my father's 'care' were from
a The District Nursing Service,
b The Evening Nursing Service,
c The Twilight Nursing Service,
d The Hospice-at-Home Nursing Service.

5 You ask who have I approached in the PCTs?
Jayne Brown
Simon Morritt
Liz Hedge
Christine Boswell
All other Directors of Doncaster Central PCT
All other Directors of Doncaster East PCT
at various times

Liz Hedge, Jayne Brown and Simon Morritt decided, after much umming and aaing that I was entitled to a copy of my father's medical records. When I went, with my sister and brother, to collect the records, they were being looked at and shuffled hastily into an envelope, by Simon Morritt and Jayne Brown. I know this to be against the Access to Health Records Act 1990, since only those who need to know are entitled to look at a patients records, and only then in order to decide whether they will be released. As far as I am aware only Liz Hedge, as Complaints Manager, was allowed to do this.

They were presented in such a mixed up fashion that it took me an entire weekend to get them into any sort of order.. and then for weeks, I reshuffled them regularly. There was such a complexity of people involved that it was difficult for a lay person to understand.. particularly since they had been altered and some were missing.

Then I started to realise, rather better, what had happened to my father, and that my certainty that he had been 'helped to die' when he was not dying, was correct.

Also I realised, though this took several weeks, what was wrong with the files which I had been given. Remember, I am not medically trained, so this was difficult to work out, partly because of the complex number of 'services' involved, and partly because to this day, I have been refused information on those services - or any adequate explanation of the medical notes - which I know, under the Access to Health Records Act 1990, I am legally entitled to.

It was immediately apparent that the Clinical Notes File had been extensively altered, from the time when my sister and I, with little else to do,except sit, had read it and re-read it over 6 long days and nights, in an effort to find out why our father was being 'helped to die', since nobody had seemed either willing or able to tell us.

Also two drugs forms, for Haloperidol and Midazolam, were missing altogether from the file. It was obvious that these two forms should have been there because the form for Diamorphine was there.. and both Haloperidol and Midazolam are mentioned in the rest of the file.

Curiously enough when my sister, having been out of the room for a short time, had reached beneath the sheet to hold father's hand (to check how he was, after he had been rendered quite unconscious), one of the syringe-driver needles stuck into her hand. In spite of the fact that the syringe-driver needles were strapped to his legs very firmly, (with a material which looks like cling film), this needle is supposed to have 'inadvertently' come off his leg and 'leaked fluid into the sheets'. Anything less unlikely, it would be difficult to conceive.

Interestingly enough this needle, 'leaking fluid into the sheets' was the one used for Haloperidol and Midazolam - for which the two forms were missing, from the file I was given.

This was the second time that there had been ' an unfortunate leakage'. The first time was when he still had only one syringe-driver, delivering Diamorphine. That time it was 'a malfunction of the syringe-driver, with a leakage into the bedsheets'. Again this happened when we were both out of the room. No-one seemed very concerned about it.

On Thursday 22nd April, when my father was close to death, and my sister and I, having protested to Doncaster East Primary Care Trust, (to Dr Tony Baxter), and been sent straight back to the GP Surgery which we were complaining about, we were so exhausted that we went home to her house, to try to sleep properly, for the first time since Saturday.

I was loathe to go, but my sister was utterly exhausted; and I did not see that I could do any good in remaining, without another witness to what was happening. I felt that I had done all I could. I was also exhausted.

(My father was by this time getting obviously beyond help. I had asked to have him moved to hospital. This was refused. But it was becoming obvious, by then, that his body would have received severe damage from the dehydration and drugs, and I thought that he would be beyond recovery).

My father had been given no line for either food or fluid, so once he was incapable of taking it by mouth, because of the mainlining with drugs, he was left, through the April heatwave, to die of dehydration - amongst other things.

When I had pointed this out, both the hospice nurse, Lorna Clarke, and Dr Rachel Sykes agreed with me, that he was probably dying of dehydration and broncho-pneumonia, rather than what Dr Sykes then said he was initially dying of, which she said was oesophageal/stomach cancer.

Following this, when my sister and I arrived back at Grange Farm at 11am on Friday 23rd April, there was a squad of three or four nurses and two doctors in the room, they were there until 1pm. My sister was assaulted by Nina Clayton and pushed from the room. (My sister had nursed father for 5 days, with no help from Nina Clayton, who had been busy throwing away his things and getting the pony shod (on Tuesday), for the funeral of a man who did not die until Friday.

Dr Gill Harding, from St John's Hospice, whom I had never met, but who had - in theory at least - come in response to my concerns of the previous day, came towards me in a menacing manner, and insisted that I leave the room as well. I asked her who she was, introduced myself and left the room. There were two other people in the room, one of whom hardly knew my father, and the other was totally unrelated to him. Later we found out that most of the nurses and doctors had been there from at least 10am.

We do not know what they were doing to my father, over that 3 hour period. But I certainly have my suspicions. It will be interesting to see what the post mortem result is.. and to see whether - after all this time - we need to call for another one. My father was certainly severely dehydrated. He was awash with drugs by then. Was he also 'washed out' by the nursing staff - and rehydrated?

By the time my father died, just after 3pm, I had called the police out because things had become so dreadful at Grange Farm. The harassment, by Nina Clayton was becoming beyond bearing. My sister needed to be with her father, to whom she was close, so that he would not die amongst strangers and ill-wishers.

The police were insisting that I leave the premises, when my father finally died. Before I left, I drew their attention to the Clinical Notes File, particularly the page of notes which I had written in the relatives page. I expressed my concern that the Clinical Notes File would either vanish or be altered, and asked them to take charge of it. This request was made in front of witnesses.

They later allowed Sister Julie Marshall, the District Nurse, who arrived just after my sister and I left, to take the file away.

The copy which I was finally given, by Simon Morritt, Jayne Brown and Liz Hedge, had been extensively altered. It had had forms added, and forms abstracted, and the nurses' written notes were very much altered from what I - and my sister - had previously read.

Because I have pointed this out, I have been vilified and have had my own web site taken off the internet, by Doncaster East and Doncaster Central Primary Care Trusts, who, it seems are prepared to use health care money to pay solicitors, (Beechcroft Wandsbroughs of Leeds), to threaten both me and the server which held my personal web site, by using half-truths at best.

They have stonewalled ever since, rather than face the fact that their system is unsafe for the patients which they, in theory, serve. I have pointed out time and time again that there is 'public interest' in this, in that other people could be killed as my father was. So far, no one seems to be listening. Are you?

And District Nurse, Sister Julie Marshall, who is fully aware that she should hold drugs for 7 days when an elderly (or any) person dies, in case the Coroner should need them, made notes that she destroyed my father's drugs, even before his body was cold; even destroying drugs which she had brought with her on that occasion.. or so she wrote. (See part of Clinical Notes File attached - you will notice that it is parts of two pages, held together with a paperclip).

I find this very hard to believe. Especially in view of the police comment that it is not the job of the police to oversee the destruction of drugs under such circumstances. What really happened to the drugs, I wonder?

I know that this woman currently works in a private Nursing Home for the elderly.

I later had confirmed in writing, by South Yorkshire Police, that Sister Julie Marshall had taken the Clinical Notes File back to her office. They also confirmed that when, 4 days later, they collected the file, they had issued 24 hours warning, of when they would pick it up.

There is much more than this, but I do not like to frighten people with complexity, so I will stop at this point.

You said, in your email, that you would be happy to look into this for me?

Do you still feel that you would be happy to do this?

Because my sister and I certainly need some help from somewhere. Our father was unlawfully killed in front of us. It took 6 days - that we saw. We had arrived at Grange Farm, having been told that he was dying. We did not expect that we would witness him being put down. But over the 6 days, it gradually became obvious that that was what was happening. Even without the large amount of background which my sister and I have managed to gather since his death, it was still finally, obvious, at that time. But no-one would listen. Dr Gill Harding of St John's Hospice even told me to be quiet until after my father was dead,

because I was upsetting the relatives.

And I was trying to save my father's life because, even if he is finally, found to have been dying of cancer, he still had the right to live, until it was his time to die. He was not asking to die. He was still looking forward.

Even South Yorkshire Police are sitting on the evidence which we have put in. And this evidence is documentary - and considerable.

My brother is of the opinion that you have been 'put up' to reply, to see what I would say; so that later I can be taken to Court by the Primary Care Trusts.

If that is the case, then you won't look into it. However, I look for the good in people, as I have all the way through this fiasco. Perhaps there is one person in the whole of the two Primary Care Trusts, who is willing to care for vulnerable patients and to be totally professional?

If you are willing to look into this, there is a lot more information which I would be more than happy to show you, should you need it. If you want a copy of the Clinical Notes File probably Liz Hedge would be the best person to point you in the direction of where it is? In spite of being Complaints Manager, she was 'cut out of the loop', by the two Chief Executives, some time ago. Until that time, she had been quite reasonable to deal with.

Otherwise, I can supply a copy of the inaccurate Documents which I was given, if that would be of help?

Yours sincerely,

Charlotte Peters Rock
6 attachments

His reply which came today (11th January, 2005), arrived this morning. It was no great surprise. It said:

Dear Mrs Peters Rock,
I have forwarded your email to the Chief Executive of Doncaster East PCT as I understand that the PCT has already been in correspondence with you about the matters you raise. It would therefore be inappropriate for me to respond.

Yours sincerely,

Stephen Davies
Head of Medicines Management

So, no professionals there then! Just, it seems, time servers. Still, he seems to be a good match for the rest of the people at Doncaster East and Doncaster Central Primary Care Trust (ah, how 'Care Trust' grates), we have spoken to.

Watch out, people of Doncaster. If someone offers you sweeties, try not to accept. There are some people who claim to be professionals.. and who plainly are not.

I wonder what you pay for a Head of Medicines Management? Does it come up to the £100,000 mark?.. or less? .. or more?

Whatever! It does not seem that anyone,... not even the Head of Medicines Management, wishes to ensure that drugs are not misapproapriated.. and possibly handed round as sweeties.

Of course, I could be wrong. Even as I write, Mr Stephen Davies, Head of Medicines Management could be Managing the Medicines to everyone's advantage..

Was that a pig I saw flying past?

My father, Ralph Winstanley's second 'wife', Nina Clayton, said he was 'sicking up blood' and in dreadful pain. She seems still to be on the loose, so far. Even her 'lovely' daughter, who was not my father's relation - in any way - is still selling nice new houses. Her husband, Frazer Cheesman, is still doing something or other, with my brother's grass machinery equipment, as is her grand-son, so I'm told. Of course, this information could also be wrong. Is it?

I am still not Ralph Winstanley.
He is still frozen at the Medico Legal Centre in Sheffield.

I am
Charlotte Peters Rock
(Ralph Winstanley's elder daughter)
return to: http://ralphwinstanleyofwath.blogspot.com
or go to : http://ralphwinstanley.blogspot.com
or go to: http://winstanleyr.blogspot.com
or go to: http://rwinstanley.blogspot.com
or go to: http://ralphwinstanley83.blogspot.com
or my own site:

Protest songs and poems - coming shortly

  • A Full Index
  • Abide With Me (mine)
  • Dead An Buried? Ardly!
  • Director of Public Health - Dr Tony Baxter
  • If - (not by Rudyard Kipling)
  • Jayne Brown - The Cover-Up Woman
  • Practice - Field Road Made
  • Quack Quack Dr Lee
  • St John's Hospice - My Father Was Not Dying
  • Thanksgivin? Thanksgivin? Ah'll be Waitin On
  • The NHS/PCT Thinks You Should Go
  • The Palliative Gillian
  • The Power behind the Patient Dr Brown

Who was Ralph Winstanley?

My photo
sister sites: 1.http://rwinstanley.blogspot.com 2.http://ralphwinstanley.blogspot.com 3.http://ralphwinstanley83.blogspot.com 4.http://winstanleyr.blogspot.com 5.http://ralphwinstanleyofwath.blogspot.com