|
Post by lawrieleslie on Jul 2, 2024 16:21:49 GMT
Ben Myers, her defence lawyer, argued this at the beginning of the retrial and urged the judge to dismiss the charges quote….…"It can also be revealed, as the Press Association have reported, a bid to throw out the attempted murder charge against Lucy Letby was refused by the judge ahead of her retrial. Ben Myers KC, defending, argued there had been “overwhelming and irremediable prejudice” to Letby because of the extent and detail of coverage and comment across all forms of media in the aftermath of the verdicts from her first trial, including from witnesses set to give evidence at the retrial." The judge refused to throw it out. It will be interesting to see if Lucy Letby refuses to attend her sentencing hearing on Friday as she did at the first trial. The judge has ordered her to attend and she will be in contempt of court if she doesn't. But I imagine she won’t care about that if she is genuinely innocent.
|
|
|
Post by redstriper on Jul 4, 2024 7:33:22 GMT
A new BBC article, nothing conclusive of course but an interesting read. linkThe case still disturbs and engages, possibly because my own daughter was born at the Countess of Chester in 2008, less than four years before Letby started work there.
|
|
|
Post by gawa on Aug 12, 2024 11:35:09 GMT
I still believe that with time this will come out as a miscarriage of justice.
|
|
|
Post by phileetin on Aug 17, 2024 14:32:31 GMT
I still believe that with time this will come out as a miscarriage of justice. nostradamus ?
|
|
|
Post by spitthedog on Aug 17, 2024 21:36:41 GMT
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Aug 29, 2024 5:43:22 GMT
|
|
|
Post by gawa on Aug 29, 2024 15:12:03 GMT
The saddest thing is that if she isn't guilty, which I don't think she is, it just further highlights the demise of the NHS. Makes the cynic in me wonder if there was pressure on getting a Lucy Letby conviction too.
|
|
|
Post by gawa on Aug 29, 2024 15:18:15 GMT
Seems this is now blocked in uk. Url for anyone who wants to view - archive.is/al9i8
|
|
|
Post by gawa on Aug 29, 2024 15:32:59 GMT
Completely incomprehensible. Her evil actions took the lives of desperately ill children and have ruined the lives of their parents/loved ones. Spare a thought for the other medical professionals in her department as well. I genuinely felt sorry for that senior consultant they were interviewing, at the end there you could see he was a broken man, as if everything he worked for and stood for had been singlehandedly ruined. That same consultant had been embroiled in a bullying case against Lucy Letby which ruled in favour of her. Convenient for some senior consultants to have a fall girl to blame for premature deaths of babies too. If/When it comes out she is innocent. People like Stephen Brearey (lead consultant for the unit) and Ravi Jayaram should be the first in the dock for negligence. In some ways you could say there is a motive there to find someone else guilty too. Isn't he the same consultant who also kept finding evidence about high insulin months later... convenient. Edit - Not directed at you personally mate. I just don't trust anyone involved in this case.
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Aug 29, 2024 15:54:16 GMT
I expect this will run and run but the verdict is unlikely to be reversed - not many people are going to campaign on behalf of an alleged child serial killer
Circumstancial evidence is precisely that and "experts" in this particular case, differ on the weight and interpretation of that circumstantial evidence. 12 lay people are then expected to make a judgement
As the expert on the BBC segment said today there is probably only one person that knows for sure if she is guilty or not and that's Letby herself
As I said originally it seems to me from the outside, not hearing all the evidence and probably not understanding all of it even if I did, it appears Letby was convicted "on the balance of probability" which shouldn't be acceptable in an English Court for a Criminal Trial.
It also raises two other questions which I'm sure the authorities would rather not address. Firstly was a crime even committed or did the Police Investigation lead to that conclusion meaning someone had to be prosecuted. Secondly was a different crime commited that of Corporate Manslaughter because adequate qualified Staff and Equipment may not have been available.
I have no idea if Letby is guilty or innocent but the whole episode seems wholely unsatisfactory
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Aug 30, 2024 7:55:41 GMT
I genuinely felt sorry for that senior consultant they were interviewing, at the end there you could see he was a broken man, as if everything he worked for and stood for had been singlehandedly ruined. That same consultant had been embroiled in a bullying case against Lucy Letby which ruled in favour of her. Convenient for some senior consultants to have a fall girl to blame for premature deaths of babies too. If/When it comes out she is innocent. People like Stephen Brearey (lead consultant for the unit) and Ravi Jayaram should be the first in the dock for negligence. In some ways you could say there is a motive there to find someone else guilty too. Isn't he the same consultant who also kept finding evidence about high insulin months later... convenient. Edit - Not directed at you personally mate. I just don't trust anyone involved in this case. Yes, apparently there were 6 other baby incidents that happened when she wasn't on shift at the hospital, that wasn't brought up in the trial.
|
|
|
Post by Ariel Manto on Aug 30, 2024 8:01:08 GMT
Lucy Letby is guilty.
Letby and her legal representatives did not defend what she did or did not do - Letby and her KC simply relied upon diminishing the case for the prosecution and it failed somewhat dramatically.
One of the key pieces of evidence prosecutors used against Letby was a chart showing that Letby was the only nurse present for the 25 suspicious cases prosecutors said were connected to Letby. As Northy has said above, there were other neonatal deaths which occurred during the time span, but Letby was not charged with these as she was not working at the time. But to be the only nurse present at the same time that 25 babies die is substantial circumstantial evidence in itself.
Now, Letby's friend Dawn Howe and Letby’s defence lawyer, Ben Myers KC, had argued that sub-optimal care at the hospital had been behind the deaths, and Dawn Howe claimed Letby had been the victim of a “conspiracy”. Dawn Howe named a ‘Gang of Four’ consultants who had apportioned the blame onto Letby. But there is no physical evidence of that and it certainly wasn't presented to the court at the trial by Myers KC.
The key witness at Letby's second trial was a doctor who claimed he saw Letby standing next to an infant whose oxygen levels were dropping and Letby was doing nothing about it. The doctor intervened but the baby died three days later at a different hospital. Evidence of this was presented to the court.
Of all those nurses who have said they have resigned - they are very few in number and only very few people on the neonatal unit of the Countess of Chester think she is innocent. The only reason some people still believe in Letby's innocence is precisely due to the same trick Donald Trump has used since 2016 - that if you throw enough shit hard and long enough at someone or something to discredit them or it, then some people will believe it irrespective of the absence of evidence. Some people have for so long been pedalling a narrative that Letby was being blamed by consultants who were making excuses for their own mistakes despite no evidence of it ever existing or being presented to the court.
Literally all of the evidence presented in court pointed to Letby. If there is any evidence which suggests she is innocent, I'd suggest Myers KC gets off his well-paid arse and puts it before the Criminal Cases Review Commission so that the commission can refer Letby's case back to an appeals court - but it can only do so if Myers KC puts forward the evidence and then if the CCRC finds that it represents new evidence that could have changed the verdict had the jury known about it.
|
|
|
Post by chuffedstokie on Aug 30, 2024 8:45:45 GMT
I genuinely felt sorry for that senior consultant they were interviewing, at the end there you could see he was a broken man, as if everything he worked for and stood for had been singlehandedly ruined. That same consultant had been embroiled in a bullying case against Lucy Letby which ruled in favour of her. Convenient for some senior consultants to have a fall girl to blame for premature deaths of babies too. If/When it comes out she is innocent. People like Stephen Brearey (lead consultant for the unit) and Ravi Jayaram should be the first in the dock for negligence. In some ways you could say there is a motive there to find someone else guilty too. Isn't he the same consultant who also kept finding evidence about high insulin months later... convenient. Edit - Not directed at you personally mate. I just don't trust anyone involved in this case. 👍 I'll re read some of the other stuff here.
|
|
|
Post by flea79 on Aug 30, 2024 12:21:18 GMT
Lucy Letby is guilty. Letby and her legal representatives did not defend what she did or did not do - Letby and her KC simply relied upon diminishing the case for the prosecution and it failed somewhat dramatically. One of the key pieces of evidence prosecutors used against Letby was a chart showing that Letby was the only nurse present for the 25 suspicious cases prosecutors said were connected to Letby. As Northy has said above, there were other neonatal deaths which occurred during the time span, but Letby was not charged with these as she was not working at the time. But to be the only nurse present at the same time that 25 babies die is substantial circumstantial evidence in itself. Now, Letby's friend Dawn Howe and Letby’s defence lawyer, Ben Myers KC, had argued that sub-optimal care at the hospital had been behind the deaths, and Dawn Howe claimed Letby had been the victim of a “conspiracy”. Dawn Howe named a ‘Gang of Four’ consultants who had apportioned the blame onto Letby. But there is no physical evidence of that and it certainly wasn't presented to the court at the trial by Myers KC. The key witness at Letby's second trial was a doctor who claimed he saw Letby standing next to an infant whose oxygen levels were dropping and Letby was doing nothing about it. The doctor intervened but the baby died three days later at a different hospital. Evidence of this was presented to the court. Of all those nurses who have said they have resigned - they are very few in number and only very few people on the neonatal unit of the Countess of Chester think she is innocent. The only reason some people still believe in Letby's innocence is precisely due to the same trick Donald Trump has used since 2016 - that if you throw enough shit hard and long enough at someone or something to discredit them or it, then some people will believe it irrespective of the absence of evidence. Some people have for so long been pedalling a narrative that Letby was being blamed by consultants who were making excuses for their own mistakes despite no evidence of it ever existing or being presented to the court. Literally all of the evidence presented in court pointed to Letby. If there is any evidence which suggests she is innocent, I'd suggest Myers KC gets off his well-paid arse and puts it before the Criminal Cases Review Commission so that the commission can refer Letby's case back to an appeals court - but it can only do so if Myers KC puts forward the evidence and then if the CCRC finds that it represents new evidence that could have changed the verdict had the jury known about it. the issue being that she was convicted mainly on statistical evidence, there was no actual proof of any wrong doing there was also errors in the initial trial over data from doors, this was corrected in the retrial of one case but it leaves a lot of doors open as i said way back in this thread it has similarities of a past case where a mother served time for the murder of two of her own children based on statistics again, it was overturned on appeal and she walked maybe i just hope that nobody could be so evil as to do what she is serving time for whatever the result its scant consolation for the parents of those children
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Aug 30, 2024 15:47:05 GMT
Lucy Letby is guilty. Letby and her legal representatives did not defend what she did or did not do - Letby and her KC simply relied upon diminishing the case for the prosecution and it failed somewhat dramatically. One of the key pieces of evidence prosecutors used against Letby was a chart showing that Letby was the only nurse present for the 25 suspicious cases prosecutors said were connected to Letby. As Northy has said above, there were other neonatal deaths which occurred during the time span, but Letby was not charged with these as she was not working at the time. But to be the only nurse present at the same time that 25 babies die is substantial circumstantial evidence in itself. Now, Letby's friend Dawn Howe and Letby’s defence lawyer, Ben Myers KC, had argued that sub-optimal care at the hospital had been behind the deaths, and Dawn Howe claimed Letby had been the victim of a “conspiracy”. Dawn Howe named a ‘Gang of Four’ consultants who had apportioned the blame onto Letby. But there is no physical evidence of that and it certainly wasn't presented to the court at the trial by Myers KC. The key witness at Letby's second trial was a doctor who claimed he saw Letby standing next to an infant whose oxygen levels were dropping and Letby was doing nothing about it. The doctor intervened but the baby died three days later at a different hospital. Evidence of this was presented to the court. Of all those nurses who have said they have resigned - they are very few in number and only very few people on the neonatal unit of the Countess of Chester think she is innocent. The only reason some people still believe in Letby's innocence is precisely due to the same trick Donald Trump has used since 2016 - that if you throw enough shit hard and long enough at someone or something to discredit them or it, then some people will believe it irrespective of the absence of evidence. Some people have for so long been pedalling a narrative that Letby was being blamed by consultants who were making excuses for their own mistakes despite no evidence of it ever existing or being presented to the court. Literally all of the evidence presented in court pointed to Letby. If there is any evidence which suggests she is innocent, I'd suggest Myers KC gets off his well-paid arse and puts it before the Criminal Cases Review Commission so that the commission can refer Letby's case back to an appeals court - but it can only do so if Myers KC puts forward the evidence and then if the CCRC finds that it represents new evidence that could have changed the verdict had the jury known about it. As i have said i didn't follow the trial in detail but from follow up reading there are 3 things i find most troublesome in her conviction. There are others about staffing and culture and accountability which is more subjective. 1. None of the initial autopsy's on the babies Letby was found guilty of Murder reached the conclusion they were murdered Again this partly leads in to the Statistical evidence, if Letby wasn't convicted of all the babies deaths how would they explain the others as the theory on cause of death was not the same in all cases. 2. The method of how the prosecution allege Letby murdered 4 babies the prosecution used was based on a study by Shoo Lee and A. K. Tanswell to argue that discolorations observed on the skin of some of the infants were diagnostic of air embolism. After the trial Shoo Lee reviewed the evidence and disagreed that they are suggestive of air embolism. Lee also described any attempt to diagnose air embolism just by ruling out other possibilities as "a fundamental mistake of medicine ( A case of if you rule out everything else it must be what's left) The defence attempted to use Lee as a witness in an appeal, but the Court of Appeal ruled out an appeal based partly on Lee's testimony because the defence could have already called him in the trial. This may be a technically legally correct decision but it's not natural justice 3. The statistical charts produced by the prosecution only included the periods of time Letby was on duty and not the whole time period when other incidents occurred when off duty.This was heavily criticized by the Statistical Community as it only showed spikes in incidents only when Letby was on duty, this led Professor John O'Quigley from University College London to say "In my opinion there was nothing out of the ordinary statistically in the spike in deaths, and all the shift chart shows is that when Letby was on duty, Letby was on duty." Letby was convicted on circumstantial evidence, there is no smoking gun, no matter how vigorously Letbys KC rotates his arse at best he will find other circumstantial evidence to dispute that put forward by prosecution. I contend that it is the job of the CCRC to review and investigate the appeal package put together by Letbys KC as that was the reason it was established to decide if her case should go back to the Court of Appeal. I believe in such a prosecution case which relies on circumstantial and forensic review of expert, sometimes conflicting, evidence it would be better reviewed by Appeal Court Judges to assure her conviction is safe rather than by 12 random members of the public
|
|
|
Post by flea79 on Aug 30, 2024 18:05:56 GMT
Lucy Letby is guilty. Letby and her legal representatives did not defend what she did or did not do - Letby and her KC simply relied upon diminishing the case for the prosecution and it failed somewhat dramatically. One of the key pieces of evidence prosecutors used against Letby was a chart showing that Letby was the only nurse present for the 25 suspicious cases prosecutors said were connected to Letby. As Northy has said above, there were other neonatal deaths which occurred during the time span, but Letby was not charged with these as she was not working at the time. But to be the only nurse present at the same time that 25 babies die is substantial circumstantial evidence in itself. Now, Letby's friend Dawn Howe and Letby’s defence lawyer, Ben Myers KC, had argued that sub-optimal care at the hospital had been behind the deaths, and Dawn Howe claimed Letby had been the victim of a “conspiracy”. Dawn Howe named a ‘Gang of Four’ consultants who had apportioned the blame onto Letby. But there is no physical evidence of that and it certainly wasn't presented to the court at the trial by Myers KC. The key witness at Letby's second trial was a doctor who claimed he saw Letby standing next to an infant whose oxygen levels were dropping and Letby was doing nothing about it. The doctor intervened but the baby died three days later at a different hospital. Evidence of this was presented to the court. Of all those nurses who have said they have resigned - they are very few in number and only very few people on the neonatal unit of the Countess of Chester think she is innocent. The only reason some people still believe in Letby's innocence is precisely due to the same trick Donald Trump has used since 2016 - that if you throw enough shit hard and long enough at someone or something to discredit them or it, then some people will believe it irrespective of the absence of evidence. Some people have for so long been pedalling a narrative that Letby was being blamed by consultants who were making excuses for their own mistakes despite no evidence of it ever existing or being presented to the court. Literally all of the evidence presented in court pointed to Letby. If there is any evidence which suggests she is innocent, I'd suggest Myers KC gets off his well-paid arse and puts it before the Criminal Cases Review Commission so that the commission can refer Letby's case back to an appeals court - but it can only do so if Myers KC puts forward the evidence and then if the CCRC finds that it represents new evidence that could have changed the verdict had the jury known about it. As i have said i didn't follow the trial in detail but from follow up reading there are 3 things i find most troublesome in her conviction. There are others about staffing and culture and accountability which is more subjective. 1. None of the initial autopsy's on the babies Letby was found guilty of Murder reached the conclusion they were murdered Again this partly leads in to the Statistical evidence, if Letby wasn't convicted of all the babies deaths how would they explain the others as the theory on cause of death was not the same in all cases. 2. The method of how the prosecution allege Letby murdered 4 babies the prosecution used was based on a study by Shoo Lee and A. K. Tanswell to argue that discolorations observed on the skin of some of the infants were diagnostic of air embolism. After the trial Shoo Lee reviewed the evidence and disagreed that they are suggestive of air embolism. Lee also described any attempt to diagnose air embolism just by ruling out other possibilities as "a fundamental mistake of medicine ( A case of if you rule out everything else it must be what's left) The defence attempted to use Lee as a witness in an appeal, but the Court of Appeal ruled out an appeal based partly on Lee's testimony because the defence could have already called him in the trial. This may be a technically legally correct decision but it's not natural justice 3. The statistical charts produced by the prosecution only included the periods of time Letby was on duty and not the whole time period when other incidents occurred when off duty.This was heavily criticized by the Statistical Community as it only showed spikes in incidents only when Letby was on duty, this led Professor John O'Quigley from University College London to say "In my opinion there was nothing out of the ordinary statistically in the spike in deaths, and all the shift chart shows is that when Letby was on duty, Letby was on duty." Letby was convicted on circumstantial evidence, there is no smoking gun, no matter how vigorously Letbys KC rotates his arse at best he will find other circumstantial evidence to dispute that put forward by prosecution. I contend that it is the job of the CCRC to review and investigate the appeal package put together by Letbys KC as that was the reason it was established to decide if her case should go back to the Court of Appeal. I believe in such a prosecution case which relies on circumstantial and forensic review of expert, sometimes conflicting, evidence it would be better reviewed by Appeal Court Judges to assure her conviction is safe rather than by 12 random members of the public The case of sally clark is very important in all of this, she was convicted based on two children dying of cot death and the odds of it happening twice are tiny and that’s what they did her for. I’m deeply uneasy about this case
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Aug 31, 2024 2:22:44 GMT
In situations like this, I strongly advocate for the application of the death penalty. Let her bear the consequences of her evil actions and be condemned to hell.
Hmmmm ....
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Aug 31, 2024 6:55:44 GMT
In situations like this, I strongly advocate for the application of the death penalty. Let her bear the consequences of her evil actions and be condemned to hell.
Hmmmm .... Ah you resurrect he/she of the multiple schizophrenic personalities who had a particular penchant for processed pork and relentlessly spreading it all over the MB
|
|
|
Post by Ariel Manto on Sept 2, 2024 12:51:45 GMT
Lucy Letby is guilty. Letby and her legal representatives did not defend what she did or did not do - Letby and her KC simply relied upon diminishing the case for the prosecution and it failed somewhat dramatically. One of the key pieces of evidence prosecutors used against Letby was a chart showing that Letby was the only nurse present for the 25 suspicious cases prosecutors said were connected to Letby. As Northy has said above, there were other neonatal deaths which occurred during the time span, but Letby was not charged with these as she was not working at the time. But to be the only nurse present at the same time that 25 babies die is substantial circumstantial evidence in itself. Now, Letby's friend Dawn Howe and Letby’s defence lawyer, Ben Myers KC, had argued that sub-optimal care at the hospital had been behind the deaths, and Dawn Howe claimed Letby had been the victim of a “conspiracy”. Dawn Howe named a ‘Gang of Four’ consultants who had apportioned the blame onto Letby. But there is no physical evidence of that and it certainly wasn't presented to the court at the trial by Myers KC. The key witness at Letby's second trial was a doctor who claimed he saw Letby standing next to an infant whose oxygen levels were dropping and Letby was doing nothing about it. The doctor intervened but the baby died three days later at a different hospital. Evidence of this was presented to the court. Of all those nurses who have said they have resigned - they are very few in number and only very few people on the neonatal unit of the Countess of Chester think she is innocent. The only reason some people still believe in Letby's innocence is precisely due to the same trick Donald Trump has used since 2016 - that if you throw enough shit hard and long enough at someone or something to discredit them or it, then some people will believe it irrespective of the absence of evidence. Some people have for so long been pedalling a narrative that Letby was being blamed by consultants who were making excuses for their own mistakes despite no evidence of it ever existing or being presented to the court. Literally all of the evidence presented in court pointed to Letby. If there is any evidence which suggests she is innocent, I'd suggest Myers KC gets off his well-paid arse and puts it before the Criminal Cases Review Commission so that the commission can refer Letby's case back to an appeals court - but it can only do so if Myers KC puts forward the evidence and then if the CCRC finds that it represents new evidence that could have changed the verdict had the jury known about it. As i have said i didn't follow the trial in detail but from follow up reading there are 3 things i find most troublesome in her conviction. There are others about staffing and culture and accountability which is more subjective. 1. None of the initial autopsy's on the babies Letby was found guilty of Murder reached the conclusion they were murdered Again this partly leads in to the Statistical evidence, if Letby wasn't convicted of all the babies deaths how would they explain the others as the theory on cause of death was not the same in all cases. 2. The method of how the prosecution allege Letby murdered 4 babies the prosecution used was based on a study by Shoo Lee and A. K. Tanswell to argue that discolorations observed on the skin of some of the infants were diagnostic of air embolism. After the trial Shoo Lee reviewed the evidence and disagreed that they are suggestive of air embolism. Lee also described any attempt to diagnose air embolism just by ruling out other possibilities as "a fundamental mistake of medicine ( A case of if you rule out everything else it must be what's left) The defence attempted to use Lee as a witness in an appeal, but the Court of Appeal ruled out an appeal based partly on Lee's testimony because the defence could have already called him in the trial. This may be a technically legally correct decision but it's not natural justice 3. The statistical charts produced by the prosecution only included the periods of time Letby was on duty and not the whole time period when other incidents occurred when off duty.This was heavily criticized by the Statistical Community as it only showed spikes in incidents only when Letby was on duty, this led Professor John O'Quigley from University College London to say "In my opinion there was nothing out of the ordinary statistically in the spike in deaths, and all the shift chart shows is that when Letby was on duty, Letby was on duty." Letby was convicted on circumstantial evidence, there is no smoking gun, no matter how vigorously Letbys KC rotates his arse at best he will find other circumstantial evidence to dispute that put forward by prosecution. I contend that it is the job of the CCRC to review and investigate the appeal package put together by Letbys KC as that was the reason it was established to decide if her case should go back to the Court of Appeal. I believe in such a prosecution case which relies on circumstantial and forensic review of expert, sometimes conflicting, evidence it would be better reviewed by Appeal Court Judges to assure her conviction is safe rather than by 12 random members of the public A jury can only base a decision based on the evidence put before it. A jury cannot convict on circumstantial evidence nor statistical evidence alone. There were witnesses. Autopsy's on the babies Letby was found guilty of Murder reached the conclusion they were murdered The "no smoking gun" conspiracy theory has (thus far) absolutely no evidential base - or at least you've presented no factual evidence for it. The jury felt they had seen enough evidence to convict; it is what it is. The most confusing thing out of all of this is that Myers KC has not put any evidence forward to the Criminal Cases Review Commission. You're wrong in your assertion that "it is the job of the CCRC to review and investigate the appeal package put together by Letbys KC as that was the reason it was established to decide if her case should go back to the Court of Appeal". Firstly, that isn't how the process works as an individual/legal representative has to physically apply to the CCRC separately from any appeal. Secondly, the KC/someone has categorically NOT applied to the CCRC AT ALL. One can only presume the reason nobody has applied to the CCRC is the same reason nobody else has put any additional evidence forward which could change the decision of the court; primarily due to the fact they don't have any. It's also interesting that by saying "it would be better reviewed by Appeal Court Judges to assure her conviction is safe rather than by 12 random members of the public" you've rather ironically summarily dismissed the jury system in one fell swoop.
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Sept 2, 2024 13:38:39 GMT
As i have said i didn't follow the trial in detail but from follow up reading there are 3 things i find most troublesome in her conviction. There are others about staffing and culture and accountability which is more subjective. 1. None of the initial autopsy's on the babies Letby was found guilty of Murder reached the conclusion they were murdered Again this partly leads in to the Statistical evidence, if Letby wasn't convicted of all the babies deaths how would they explain the others as the theory on cause of death was not the same in all cases. 2. The method of how the prosecution allege Letby murdered 4 babies the prosecution used was based on a study by Shoo Lee and A. K. Tanswell to argue that discolorations observed on the skin of some of the infants were diagnostic of air embolism. After the trial Shoo Lee reviewed the evidence and disagreed that they are suggestive of air embolism. Lee also described any attempt to diagnose air embolism just by ruling out other possibilities as "a fundamental mistake of medicine ( A case of if you rule out everything else it must be what's left) The defence attempted to use Lee as a witness in an appeal, but the Court of Appeal ruled out an appeal based partly on Lee's testimony because the defence could have already called him in the trial. This may be a technically legally correct decision but it's not natural justice 3. The statistical charts produced by the prosecution only included the periods of time Letby was on duty and not the whole time period when other incidents occurred when off duty.This was heavily criticized by the Statistical Community as it only showed spikes in incidents only when Letby was on duty, this led Professor John O'Quigley from University College London to say "In my opinion there was nothing out of the ordinary statistically in the spike in deaths, and all the shift chart shows is that when Letby was on duty, Letby was on duty." Letby was convicted on circumstantial evidence, there is no smoking gun, no matter how vigorously Letbys KC rotates his arse at best he will find other circumstantial evidence to dispute that put forward by prosecution. I contend that it is the job of the CCRC to review and investigate the appeal package put together by Letbys KC as that was the reason it was established to decide if her case should go back to the Court of Appeal. I believe in such a prosecution case which relies on circumstantial and forensic review of expert, sometimes conflicting, evidence it would be better reviewed by Appeal Court Judges to assure her conviction is safe rather than by 12 random members of the public A jury can only base a decision based on the evidence put before it. A jury cannot convict on circumstantial evidence nor statistical evidence alone. There were witnesses. Autopsy's on the babies Letby was found guilty of Murder reached the conclusion they were murdered The "no smoking gun" conspiracy theory has (thus far) absolutely no evidential base - or at least you've presented no factual evidence for it. The jury felt they had seen enough evidence to convict; it is what it is. The most confusing thing out of all of this is that Myers KC has not put any evidence forward to the Criminal Cases Review Commission. You're wrong in your assertion that "it is the job of the CCRC to review and investigate the appeal package put together by Letbys KC as that was the reason it was established to decide if her case should go back to the Court of Appeal". Firstly, that isn't how the process works as an individual/legal representative has to physically apply to the CCRC separately from any appeal. Secondly, the KC/someone has categorically NOT applied to the CCRC AT ALL. One can only presume the reason nobody has applied to the CCRC is the same reason nobody else has put any additional evidence forward which could change the decision of the court; primarily due to the fact they don't have any. It's also interesting that by saying "it would be better reviewed by Appeal Court Judges to assure her conviction is safe rather than by 12 random members of the public" you've rather ironically summarily dismissed the jury system in one fell swoop. prosecutors can also make the circumstantial evidence more convincing than the defence of same evidence is there any actual physical evidence apart from hearsay, confessions and statistics
|
|
|
Post by gawa on Sept 3, 2024 20:12:45 GMT
|
|
|
Post by mickeythemaestro on Sept 3, 2024 20:40:54 GMT
Getting dodgier by the day this conviction.
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Sept 3, 2024 21:00:13 GMT
Getting dodgier by the day this conviction. It’s too high profile to go down as a miscarriage of justice Or If she gets out because the conviction is unsafe the parents will still believe she did it.
|
|
|
Post by mickeythemaestro on Sept 3, 2024 21:30:06 GMT
Getting dodgier by the day this conviction. It’s too high profile to go down as a miscarriage of justice Or If she gets out because the conviction is unsafe the parents will still believe she did it. I got a horrible feeling this could be a protect the NHS situation. Obviously nobody knows except Ms Letby but something is starting to smell pretty rotten for sure.
|
|
|
Post by Rick Grimes on Sept 5, 2024 8:10:31 GMT
The only way Letby can be innocent is if there was no deliberate attempt to murder or harm the babies, which is the sticking point isn’t it.
The fact that there’s so much disagreement amongst medical experts is troubling.
It’s also pretty concerning if she is innocent though because then the focus should be on the NHS and any potential failings to ensure that mistakes aren’t repeated.
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Sept 5, 2024 8:12:31 GMT
The only way Letby can be innocent is if there was no deliberate attempt to murder or harm the babies, which is the sticking point isn’t it. The fact that there’s so much disagreement amongst medical experts is troubling. It’s also pretty concerning if she is innocent though because then the focus should be on the NHS and any potential failings to ensure that mistakes aren’t repeated. to much evidence to not let the authorities off the hook with grenfell, post office etc. the first instinct will be to protect so unless there is compelling evidence to suggest otherwise letby will rot regardless of her guilt or innocence
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Sept 5, 2024 18:22:55 GMT
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Sept 5, 2024 19:33:10 GMT
As the link you provided says the inquiry starts next week and the letter mentioned is from a collection of Neonatal and Pediatric Consultants as well as Statisticians. They are asking that the inquiry at least not begin with the presumption of guilty murder convictions but with an open mind. What I only recently discovered was: The intervention (The letter signed by the 24) comes as fresh questions have been raised about the accuracy of the evidence presented at Letby’s trials. The Crown Prosecution Service confirmed last week that door swipe data from the CoC hospital, relied on by the prosecution to show that Letby had been alone when babies collapsed, was incorrect. Police had wrongly thought that the swipe data showed nurses leaving the neonatal unit and going into the labour ward, when in fact they were returning to the neonatal unit.In Letby’s retrial for the attempted murder of Baby K the prosecution corrected the error, undermining their original assertion that Letby had been alone for one incident, when in fact another nurse on duty in the same room as Letby had returned.The CPS has declined to comment on the swipe data in the first trial - I bet they haveThis alone should be sufficient to introduce new evidence for an Appeal. This is a House of Cards, if one conviction is overturned then the others become unsafe.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Sept 5, 2024 23:38:23 GMT
Police had wrongly thought that the swipe data showed nurses leaving the neonatal unit and going into the labour ward, when in fact they were returning to the neonatal unit.
This is utterly staggering incompetence in a trial of such magnitude.
Virtually beyond comprehension ...
|
|
|
Post by flea79 on Sept 6, 2024 8:01:03 GMT
Police had wrongly thought that the swipe data showed nurses leaving the neonatal unit and going into the labour ward, when in fact they were returning to the neonatal unit. This is utterly staggering incompetence in a trial of such magnitude. Virtually beyond comprehension ...
it is unsafe and needs urgent review, the parents need answers, the NHS and the CPS need holding to task if this has been a bungled conviction and has maybe landed an innocent girl with the tag she now has
|
|