Football
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
07 Aug 24
19:14
Joined:
Date Joined:
17 Feb 01
Did anyone see the channel 5 documentary?
Show More
Watched it last night
One strange thing it claimed was that at her trial no medical experts were called on by either side
Had a lot of people explaining how things that happened weren't her fault and suggesting that it was only her writing, I am evil, in her diary that went against her
However, it's easy enough for documentary makers to get a conspiracy theory and make the evidence fit their case
One strange thing it claimed was that at her trial no medical experts were called on by either side
Had a lot of people explaining how things that happened weren't her fault and suggesting that it was only her writing, I am evil, in her diary that went against her
However, it's easy enough for documentary makers to get a conspiracy theory and make the evidence fit their case
Also watched this last night on the back of this thread. Looks questionable for sure.
We should not make the same mistake with flimsy evidence that they did with Lucia de Berk. She was sentenced to life and it was 7 years before she was exonerated.
One strange thing it claimed was that at her trial no medical experts were called on by either side
Not true.
Not true.
There is a history with these kind of crimes,we would like to think they didn’t happen because they go against our sensibilities.
She did it and thankfully she is out of society.For Good.
She did it and thankfully she is out of society.For Good.
Hi busvaldo, Tash on...
Ronald is forum troll, he's obsessed by Trump and daft conspiracies
Good season ahead...
Ronald is forum troll, he's obsessed by Trump and daft conspiracies
Good season ahead...
Professionals often disagree with each other. If they always agreed, Lucia de Berk would still be in jail. In fact, she was fully exonerated because the professionals got it wrong, and then some other professionals put it right.
What conspiracy are you claiming I am obsessed with?
Hello mate,Newcastle should go well if Isak stays fit,VILLA battling on 3 fronts,fingers crossed..
Yhtl, it did seem strange that no medical experts were called, perhaps I misheard that bit or its just not true as you say
The main "expert" who was doubting the conviction was that Phil bloke who often appears on the BBC
The main "expert" who was doubting the conviction was that Phil bloke who often appears on the BBC
The trial lasted months.
The defence called no medical experts, despite having
them on list to be called.
This also means that evidence in their fields cannot be
used as new evidence to gain an appeal.
They called a plumber who testified about plumbing
in the hospital, not just Letby's ward.
The defence called no medical experts, despite having
them on list to be called.
This also means that evidence in their fields cannot be
used as new evidence to gain an appeal.
They called a plumber who testified about plumbing
in the hospital, not just Letby's ward.
Lets hope that Phil bloke gets to the bottom of it. I didn't see it because I haven't got a telly, but I think you mean Dr Phil Hammond.
Ronald, that's him
Yhtl, OK, the defence didn't call any medical experts I should have said
Very strange
Yhtl, OK, the defence didn't call any medical experts I should have said
Very strange
Do me a favour,medical professionals know.
Do they really?
Private Eye : SIX of the seven babies who Letby was convicted of murdering had a post-mortem examination conducted at the regional centre of excellence – Alder Hey Children’s Hospital – by one of three experienced, paediatric / perinatal pathologists. In five, the pathologist certified one or more “natural” causes of death and in one the cause was certified as “unascertained” but was not categorised as “unnatural”.
Do they really?
Private Eye : SIX of the seven babies who Letby was convicted of murdering had a post-mortem examination conducted at the regional centre of excellence – Alder Hey Children’s Hospital – by one of three experienced, paediatric / perinatal pathologists. In five, the pathologist certified one or more “natural” causes of death and in one the cause was certified as “unascertained” but was not categorised as “unnatural”.
If defence called witnesses it would only strengthen prosecution case, as it's likely
certain evidence is excluded pre trial, and calling
witnesses in those fields brings the evidence into play.
I don't know that to be the case, it's mere speculation.
The other reason you don't call your experts is that they don't help you.
certain evidence is excluded pre trial, and calling
witnesses in those fields brings the evidence into play.
I don't know that to be the case, it's mere speculation.
The other reason you don't call your experts is that they don't help you.
Or if the defense team was rubbish. There's only so much you can do with legal aid. There's never been a go fund me to get her some decent lawyers but now there can be with all this publicity.
Letby had a top barrister defending her
We did this before.
Ben Myers
Ben Myers is a KC/Kings Counsel. He was called to the bar in 1994 and then became a KC (then Queen's Counsel or QC) in 2014. He's a master of the bench of the Inner Temple. The Inner Temple is one of the Inns of Court. The Inns of Court are four professional bodies that all barristers and prospective barristers must join. The Inns of Court call students to the bar, which is when they become barristers. Being assigned the title of master of the bench is a huge honour that indicates Myers' colleagues hold him in the highest esteem.
We did this before.
Ben Myers
Ben Myers is a KC/Kings Counsel. He was called to the bar in 1994 and then became a KC (then Queen's Counsel or QC) in 2014. He's a master of the bench of the Inner Temple. The Inner Temple is one of the Inns of Court. The Inns of Court are four professional bodies that all barristers and prospective barristers must join. The Inns of Court call students to the bar, which is when they become barristers. Being assigned the title of master of the bench is a huge honour that indicates Myers' colleagues hold him in the highest esteem.
Based on the reporting, he conducted all questioning in LL's trial. His bio on Exchange Chambers indicates he gets involved in cases at an earlier stage than your standard barrister. This is because he takes on complex cases, where his expertise at an earlier stage will help ensure a better outcome for his client. His bio, including a readout of some recent cases, can be found here:
https://www.exchangechambers.co.uk/people/benjamin-myers-kc/
..
https://www.exchangechambers.co.uk/people/benjamin-myers-kc/
..
I am afraid that doesn't jive. He can't simultaneously be a great lawyer and a crap lawyer who was so crap he didn't call any experts, so a go fund me will still be required.
If you read into it YHTL, there were plenty of good standing witness' to be called in the first trial for the defence who were of better standing that the prosecution witness' and disagreed with their opinion.
I'm not sure what you mean by Top barrister. The best barrister can make mistakes and there is no doubt in this case he made a massive c*ck up by not calling expert witness'.
One prosecution witness based his evidence on a report authored by Dr Shoo Lee. Shoo Lee stated the reading of his report by the prosecution witness was flawed. How you can say he is a stop barrister and not call Shoo Lee as witness when he was willing to appear is comical. The appeal judge refused to allow Shoo Lee to appear as they had the opportunity to call him in the initial trial and choose not too. Myers choose to call him for the appeal but not the initial trial???
I'm not sure what you mean by Top barrister. The best barrister can make mistakes and there is no doubt in this case he made a massive c*ck up by not calling expert witness'.
One prosecution witness based his evidence on a report authored by Dr Shoo Lee. Shoo Lee stated the reading of his report by the prosecution witness was flawed. How you can say he is a stop barrister and not call Shoo Lee as witness when he was willing to appear is comical. The appeal judge refused to allow Shoo Lee to appear as they had the opportunity to call him in the initial trial and choose not too. Myers choose to call him for the appeal but not the initial trial???
He got her off some charges...
Although at retrial she was found guilty of another murder.
Although at retrial she was found guilty of another murder.
Private Eye:
MD can make no judgement either way as to the guilt or innocence of Lucy Letby, but the way expert witnesses are used – or not used – in
criminal trials with complex and uncertain science is simply not fit for purpose and risks miscarriages of justice. It should be mandatory
for the jury to hear expert witnesses from both sides or – better still – it should be a duty of, say, the Royal Colleges and Royal Statistical Society
to provide a team of the best, current expert witnesses on behalf of the court, not paid or employed by one side or the other. This is vital
for justice to be done and to be seen being done.
This is a superb and valid point. You get witness' being paid to give an opinion. How the f**k is that not seen as a conflict of interest.
MD can make no judgement either way as to the guilt or innocence of Lucy Letby, but the way expert witnesses are used – or not used – in
criminal trials with complex and uncertain science is simply not fit for purpose and risks miscarriages of justice. It should be mandatory
for the jury to hear expert witnesses from both sides or – better still – it should be a duty of, say, the Royal Colleges and Royal Statistical Society
to provide a team of the best, current expert witnesses on behalf of the court, not paid or employed by one side or the other. This is vital
for justice to be done and to be seen being done.
This is a superb and valid point. You get witness' being paid to give an opinion. How the f**k is that not seen as a conflict of interest.
Quite simply we don't know why the experts were not called.
2 possible explanations above.
Likely they stand up on 1hr TV doc but not to rigorous
examination under oath.
They would have tested them in private before deciding.
2 possible explanations above.
Likely they stand up on 1hr TV doc but not to rigorous
examination under oath.
They would have tested them in private before deciding.
Expert witnesses are not there to lie.
They will end up locked up.
They will end up locked up.
Theres a total delusion that these expert witness' have morals and have no conflict of interest.
Loads of these experts will say whatever you want so long as they get paid.
My old GP had a sign up in his waiting room....."Signed Sick Certs available at Reception desk : £10". Receptionist would type your name in and bobs your uncle. No checks by the actual Doc nothing ffs
Loads of these experts will say whatever you want so long as they get paid.
My old GP had a sign up in his waiting room....."Signed Sick Certs available at Reception desk : £10". Receptionist would type your name in and bobs your uncle. No checks by the actual Doc nothing ffs
The expert for defence would help KC formulate questions of witness
for prosecution. If there was a problem then a defence
witness could challenge opinion offered.
Lots of the evidence wasn't opinion, it was fact.
for prosecution. If there was a problem then a defence
witness could challenge opinion offered.
Lots of the evidence wasn't opinion, it was fact.
List the facts, lol
List the ones you dispute.
We can soon cover them.
List the ones you dispute.
We can soon cover them.
Not when you write down your own guilt in a bedroom in your own home.
Case closed.
Case closed.
you are claiming there is factual evidence....list it YHTL
Busvaldo, link to this evidence/claim please.
Busvaldo, link to this evidence/claim please.
She exhausted babies from oxygen,those are the facts.
So she killed them by asphyxiation? any evidence? Not even the prosecution claimed this.
So she killed them by asphyxiation? any evidence? Not even the prosecution claimed this.
Which facts from the 6 months of evidence do you dispute?
Experts are not there to lie? Is it not possible in the reality you live in for experts to just be wrong sometimes? Like the experts in the Lucia de Berk case who were completely wrong. We should all contribute to the go fund me when it starts in the interests of justice. Lawyers aren't cheap, and neither are medical experts. There may have been financial constraints on paying experts, so there's another possible reason for why experts weren't called for the defense.
YHTL, I do not believe there is any factual evidence showing Letbys guilt in this case. You claimed there was ("Lots of the evidence wasn't opinion, it was fact.")
What is this factual evidence you speak of?
What is this factual evidence you speak of?
Experts are there to give evidence and stand up to
examination on the facts they present.
This is put to a jury and a decision is reached.
Which facts are you disputing.
Just because some troll claims his doctor was a fraud without
presenting evidence, doesn't mean an expert under oath
cross examined by 2 barristers is wrong.
examination on the facts they present.
This is put to a jury and a decision is reached.
Which facts are you disputing.
Just because some troll claims his doctor was a fraud without
presenting evidence, doesn't mean an expert under oath
cross examined by 2 barristers is wrong.
Beverley Allitt from the 80’s,not disputing,these are silent deaths you cannot see as ordinary people.
These are not ordinary people.
These are not ordinary people.
Experts were cross examined by barristers under oath in the Lucia de Berk case.
Experts were cross examined by barristers under oath in the Lucia de Berk case.
A doubt in one case does not raise a doubt in another.
You are arguing against your actual reasons but dont seem
to understand that.
That's why experts evidence is cross examined by both sides in each trial
in front of the jury.
You are arguing against your actual reasons but dont seem
to understand that.
That's why experts evidence is cross examined by both sides in each trial
in front of the jury.
You are arguing as if it's impossible for experts and juries to be wrong, which the Lucia de Berk case disproves.
No I am not.
You really look even more stupid by making stuff up.
You really look even more stupid by making stuff up.
Still not providing any factual evidence that you claim shows Letbys Guilt YHTL?
Lol, one expert being wrong doesn't invalidate all experts.
And that appeal more likely succeeded due to fresh evidence around the claimed method of poisoning.
Letby's team is not disputing all the kids Letby murdered having been murdered.
They say somebody else must have killed those ones.
And that appeal more likely succeeded due to fresh evidence around the claimed method of poisoning.
Letby's team is not disputing all the kids Letby murdered having been murdered.
They say somebody else must have killed those ones.
If someone else killed them she could help find the real killers.
Please provide a link where Letbys team state someone else murdered the kids.
Thats not consistent with calling the plumber as an expert witness.
Thats not consistent with calling the plumber as an expert witness.
The cost of compo may also be playing a role in this. They had to pay out more than £2 million in compo to Lucia de Berk back in 2010, so the mind boggles to how much it will cost now with inflation.
The babies that were murdered by Letby by insulin poisoning.
On day four of the Lucy Letby trial, the court was shown a piece of paper on which she had written: "I don't deserve to live. I killed them on purpose because I'm not good enough." A neonatal nurse accused of murdering seven babies left a handwritten note that read "I am evil. I did this"
Letby was found guilty of seven counts of murder of seven babies. She killed them by injecting them with air, overfeeding them, poisoning them with insulin and assaulting them with medical tools.
Studies show that for every 1,000 premature babies born in the UK each year, fewer than two die.
Of the hundreds of babies that passed through the Countess of Chester hospital’s neonatal unit in an average year, only between one and three would die. Until 2015.
In just 14 days in June that year, three infants died suddenly and a fourth deteriorated rapidly without warning. All had been otherwise stable, still only days old, but expected eventually to go home with their parents. Letby had other ideas.
Minutes after clocking on for her night shift on 8 June 2015, she injected air into an intravenous long line connected to a boy who was born the previous day, six weeks early, along with his twin sister. He collapsed immediately. Doctors rushed to resuscitate him as his mother, in a wheelchair recovering from the labour, sobbed: “Please don’t let my baby die, please don’t let my baby die.” Attempts to save the boy failed and he was pronounced dead at 8.58pm, within 90 minutes of Letby coming on duty.
That night, the boy’s father stood guard over his sleeping daughter’s cot metres from where her twin brother had died. Relatives took it in turns to watch over her for almost 24 hours, staying with her until 8pm the following day. But this was, cruelly, the time Letby came back on shift.
The little girl’s alarm sounded shortly after midnight. She suddenly looked desperately ill, the trial heard, despite having had no problems in her first 48 hours of life.
Of the hundreds of babies that passed through the Countess of Chester hospital’s neonatal unit in an average year, only between one and three would die. Until 2015.
In just 14 days in June that year, three infants died suddenly and a fourth deteriorated rapidly without warning. All had been otherwise stable, still only days old, but expected eventually to go home with their parents. Letby had other ideas.
Minutes after clocking on for her night shift on 8 June 2015, she injected air into an intravenous long line connected to a boy who was born the previous day, six weeks early, along with his twin sister. He collapsed immediately. Doctors rushed to resuscitate him as his mother, in a wheelchair recovering from the labour, sobbed: “Please don’t let my baby die, please don’t let my baby die.” Attempts to save the boy failed and he was pronounced dead at 8.58pm, within 90 minutes of Letby coming on duty.
That night, the boy’s father stood guard over his sleeping daughter’s cot metres from where her twin brother had died. Relatives took it in turns to watch over her for almost 24 hours, staying with her until 8pm the following day. But this was, cruelly, the time Letby came back on shift.
The little girl’s alarm sounded shortly after midnight. She suddenly looked desperately ill, the trial heard, despite having had no problems in her first 48 hours of life.
The evidence from the handwritten note was misrepresented. It was not written in a strict left to right top to bottom fashion, it was written more in the style of a series of unorganized post it notes. The note says "They went" before it says "I killed them on purpose". "They went" is another very common way of saying "They said". If you read the sentence as written, it is "They went I killed them on purpose". And this note was written after her interrogation by the police when they made exactly that accusation, or in other words, they (the police interrogators) went she killed them on purpose. The note is actually saying the opposite of what is being claimed by the prosecution. Read the note for yourself.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/lucy-letby-nurse-note-picture-b2202448.html
/
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/lucy-letby-nurse-note-picture-b2202448.html
/
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/aug/18/lucy-letby-how-did-a-nurse-c...
And this note was written after her interrogation by the police
Ron is correct. I guarantee most redtop rag readers think she wrote that before she was arrested.
Ron is correct. I guarantee most redtop rag readers think she wrote that before she was arrested.
The babies that were murdered by Letby by insulin poisoning.
Typical clueless comment this. None of the children involved in the insulin cases died.
The insulin test is seriously questionable. Its an anti body test and not a direct test of insulin. Supposedly other tests should be conducted to confirm the anti body test. None of these tests were completed.
Was any other possibility investigated (Contamination of IV bag etc..) No they had their answer and worked backwards.
Even in the scenario the child was actually poisoned, what was the evidence linking it to Letby other than she was on duty.
They claim she added it to the IV bag. Absolutely zero evidence of this only a story made up in their minds to confirm the bias they already had.
Typical clueless comment this. None of the children involved in the insulin cases died.
The insulin test is seriously questionable. Its an anti body test and not a direct test of insulin. Supposedly other tests should be conducted to confirm the anti body test. None of these tests were completed.
Was any other possibility investigated (Contamination of IV bag etc..) No they had their answer and worked backwards.
Even in the scenario the child was actually poisoned, what was the evidence linking it to Letby other than she was on duty.
They claim she added it to the IV bag. Absolutely zero evidence of this only a story made up in their minds to confirm the bias they already had.
The little girl’s alarm sounded shortly after midnight. She suddenly looked desperately ill, the trial heard, despite having had no problems in her first 48 hours of life.
Absolutely the child had no problems in the first 48 hours of life. They were in the ICU for the laugh.
Absolutely the child had no problems in the first 48 hours of life. They were in the ICU for the laugh.
all premature babies are placed in ICU as a mtatter of precaution. Ask yourselves this. If you had a baby would you accept it if she was the nurse on duty ?
Letby poisoned the kids with insulin shortly after reading about another uk nurse who used insulin to poison.
That nurse also wrote a letter of confession.
Another coincidence I'm sure.
That nurse also wrote a letter of confession.
Another coincidence I'm sure.
Letby might watch on tv, but won't get to see it live.
The letter of confession coincidence would only be a coincidence if Letby had actually written one.
The letter of confession Ron....
The one where in one part she says I did it and in another she says I did nothing wrong LOL
The one where in one part she says I did it and in another she says I did nothing wrong LOL
Newsflash if someone says they did nothing wrong it's not a confession.
I don't know if she did it or not.
There is a lot of circumstantial evidence she murdered a lot of the babies, but nothing clear cut.
What is clear to me is that all the problems associated with the Unit have been blamed on Letby, so its been a useful deflection from all other staff and the hospital.
Some of the stats used against Letby has also been manipulated by the prosecution and not fully challenged.
There is a lot of circumstantial evidence she murdered a lot of the babies, but nothing clear cut.
What is clear to me is that all the problems associated with the Unit have been blamed on Letby, so its been a useful deflection from all other staff and the hospital.
Some of the stats used against Letby has also been manipulated by the prosecution and not fully challenged.
If she wasn't white, blonde with blue-eyes she wouldn't be getting a piece in the New Yorker or a Ch5 special defending her innocence. She certainly wouldn't get any sympathy on here.
Dr Ravi Jayaram stated in court
he "virtually caught" Letby red handed
and i virtually won euro millions too
he "virtually caught" Letby red handed
and i virtually won euro millions too
The best part was he never reported "Virtually catching" her despite the fact he claims the reason he went into the room was because Letby was alone with the child and there were already suspicions around her.
CPS admit mistakes made during 1st trial
The truth is starting to come out
The truth is starting to come out
Door swipe data (the CPS c*ck up) is not worth a hill of beans. You get people swapping cards, losing cards, letting people in, not bringing their card to work etc...
In the initial trial, the prosecution said Dr Ravi Jayaram, a consultant, had discovered Letby standing over Baby K at 3.50am on 17 February 2016. The baby was deteriorating and its breathing tube had been dislodged.
The prosecution said door-swipe data showed that the baby’s designated nurse had left the intensive care unit at 3.47am. But the data was amended in the retrial to show the nurse had returned at that time, meaning Letby was not alone.
During the retrial, the prosecution and the defence accepted that it was a genuine mistake, and the nurse was convicted of the attempted murder of Baby K.
Wow, simply wow. So Ravi Jayarams "Story" of "Virtually catching her" is beginning to look like a big steaming pile of excrement.
Her defence team seem utterly incompetent.
The prosecution said door-swipe data showed that the baby’s designated nurse had left the intensive care unit at 3.47am. But the data was amended in the retrial to show the nurse had returned at that time, meaning Letby was not alone.
During the retrial, the prosecution and the defence accepted that it was a genuine mistake, and the nurse was convicted of the attempted murder of Baby K.
Wow, simply wow. So Ravi Jayarams "Story" of "Virtually catching her" is beginning to look like a big steaming pile of excrement.
Her defence team seem utterly incompetent.
Evidence presented in the case of Lucy Letby showing which staff came in and out of the baby unit was wrong, the Crown Prosecution Service has admitted.
Last August, Letby was convicted of the murders of seven babies and the attempted murders of six others at the Countess of Chester Hospital.
UK:Why everyone is excited about this £59 New Blood Sugar Smartwatch
shirem
UK:Why everyone is excited about this £59 New Blood Sugar Smartwatch
Ad
A retrial earlier this year found her guilty of the attempted murder of another child, known as Baby K.
During the retrial, Nick Johnson KC, prosecuting, told the court that door swipe data, showing which nurses and doctors were entering and exiting the intensive care ward, had been “mislabelled”.
The Crown Prosecution Service told The Telegraph that the discrepancy discovered was related to one door in the neonatal intensive care unit, and that it had been corrected for the retrial.
Now Sir David Davis, the Tory MP, has written to Sarah Hammond, the chief crown prosecutor of Mersey-Cheshire CPS, asking her to “urgently make clear” what timing errors were made during the first trial and how they relate to the prosecution arguments.
In several cases in the first trial, the door swipe data was used to show that Letby was the only nurse present in the unit when babies suffered catastrophic collapses. But the CPS refused to confirm that all other door swipe data was correct during that first trial.
The trial of Letby has come under scrutiny in recent months, with several scientists and doctors questioning the statistical and medical evidence that was put before the jury.
There are concerns that not enough weight was given to levels of understaffing, poor practice and cramped conditions in the baby unit, as well as the severe prematurity of the babies.
The Royal Statistical Society is due to convene a meeting in the wake of the verdicts, stating that it was aware of “concerns” from its members and the wider community regarding the use of statistical evidence in the case.
Since the trial, it has also emerged that the ward struggled to contain infectious outbreaks that may have put the babies at risk.
Last August, Letby was convicted of the murders of seven babies and the attempted murders of six others at the Countess of Chester Hospital.
UK:Why everyone is excited about this £59 New Blood Sugar Smartwatch
shirem
UK:Why everyone is excited about this £59 New Blood Sugar Smartwatch
Ad
A retrial earlier this year found her guilty of the attempted murder of another child, known as Baby K.
During the retrial, Nick Johnson KC, prosecuting, told the court that door swipe data, showing which nurses and doctors were entering and exiting the intensive care ward, had been “mislabelled”.
The Crown Prosecution Service told The Telegraph that the discrepancy discovered was related to one door in the neonatal intensive care unit, and that it had been corrected for the retrial.
Now Sir David Davis, the Tory MP, has written to Sarah Hammond, the chief crown prosecutor of Mersey-Cheshire CPS, asking her to “urgently make clear” what timing errors were made during the first trial and how they relate to the prosecution arguments.
In several cases in the first trial, the door swipe data was used to show that Letby was the only nurse present in the unit when babies suffered catastrophic collapses. But the CPS refused to confirm that all other door swipe data was correct during that first trial.
The trial of Letby has come under scrutiny in recent months, with several scientists and doctors questioning the statistical and medical evidence that was put before the jury.
There are concerns that not enough weight was given to levels of understaffing, poor practice and cramped conditions in the baby unit, as well as the severe prematurity of the babies.
The Royal Statistical Society is due to convene a meeting in the wake of the verdicts, stating that it was aware of “concerns” from its members and the wider community regarding the use of statistical evidence in the case.
Since the trial, it has also emerged that the ward struggled to contain infectious outbreaks that may have put the babies at risk.
During the retrial...
... She was convicted, again, at the retrial....
Still in jail
... She was convicted, again, at the retrial....
Still in jail
I have dealt with this hospital trust who run the Countess of Chester and met people in amin at that hospital, while pursuing a case to get funding for my late farther who had wrongly been denied funding. They are just about the most incompetent, dishonest and lazy people who I have ever met. They tried to hide evidence from me which I easily obtained, despite them saying they couldn't post it to me due to Covid. The couldn't even write replies to me in understandable English, despite being white British. When the appeal finally got as far as NHS England, they had the book thrown at them, and the chairman of the panel asked the hospital trust's rep to stay behind so he could give her a bollocking.
I am astonished that that hospital trust could actually retrieve any relevant information to convict anyone. That hospital is a disaster in all departments. I am sick of them. And the car parking sucks too, and is pricey.
I am astonished that that hospital trust could actually retrieve any relevant information to convict anyone. That hospital is a disaster in all departments. I am sick of them. And the car parking sucks too, and is pricey.
Why are some people so desperate to believe she is guilty? It is a very flawed case and the CPS has admitted that at least some of the evidence used in her conviction was faulty. No reasonable person would want to ignore all the flaws in this case while she languishes in jail.
The Crown Prosecution Service told The Telegraph that the discrepancy discovered was related to one door in the neonatal intensive care unit, and that it had been corrected for the retrial.
Corrected by whom? The hospital trust? The prosecution lawyers? Perhaps "back-fitted" would be a more appropriate way of describing it.
Maybe that hospital trust managed to uncover a real murderer. I don't know. Every broken clock is right twice a day. But I believe that this Hospital Trust cannot be relied on to provide accurate records. The whole place is chaotic.
Corrected by whom? The hospital trust? The prosecution lawyers? Perhaps "back-fitted" would be a more appropriate way of describing it.
Maybe that hospital trust managed to uncover a real murderer. I don't know. Every broken clock is right twice a day. But I believe that this Hospital Trust cannot be relied on to provide accurate records. The whole place is chaotic.
who did she play for ? why is this stuff on a football forum ?
How else could we find out what the football forumites think about the case?
stop being an idiot and trying to waste the gambling forums, betfair know all you're user names, they will shut you down completely shortly unless they are clueless on corporate social responsibility.
The prosecution never produced any feasible motives neither.
There is in life some people who commit random kills - serial killers, killing for thrills - Yorkshire Ripper etc
Then there are people who like to play God - Dr Shipman etc although he seemingly was after money too in 1 or 2 cases.
There has been 1 or 2 cases of attention seekers - the nurse in Grantham etc
But I haven't heard of any motives linked to Lucy Letby with evidence linked.
If she hated babies why did she work so long and for long hours in the baby unit, and how did she think she would ever get away with so many deaths in a short period?
There is in life some people who commit random kills - serial killers, killing for thrills - Yorkshire Ripper etc
Then there are people who like to play God - Dr Shipman etc although he seemingly was after money too in 1 or 2 cases.
There has been 1 or 2 cases of attention seekers - the nurse in Grantham etc
But I haven't heard of any motives linked to Lucy Letby with evidence linked.
If she hated babies why did she work so long and for long hours in the baby unit, and how did she think she would ever get away with so many deaths in a short period?
There was a motive given.
She was having affair with one of the consultants (granted annonimity)
was on call, and babies took turn for worse allowing her
to call him in.
During her trial, she was quizzed about her relationship with a consultant who became her 'best friend' when she was murdering babies at work.
Letby, 33, insisted they were 'nothing more' than 'trusted' friends and denied being 'in love' with the doctor, who applied for anonymity at the start of the trial.
On one occasion Letby went to London with the doctor, and was due to go a second time before the trip was cancelled.
The prosecution claimed her infatuation with the registrar was one of her motivations for harming babies, because she knew that when of them fell seriously ill he would rush over to help.
She was having affair with one of the consultants (granted annonimity)
was on call, and babies took turn for worse allowing her
to call him in.
During her trial, she was quizzed about her relationship with a consultant who became her 'best friend' when she was murdering babies at work.
Letby, 33, insisted they were 'nothing more' than 'trusted' friends and denied being 'in love' with the doctor, who applied for anonymity at the start of the trial.
On one occasion Letby went to London with the doctor, and was due to go a second time before the trip was cancelled.
The prosecution claimed her infatuation with the registrar was one of her motivations for harming babies, because she knew that when of them fell seriously ill he would rush over to help.
She was having affair with one of the consultants (granted annonimity)
was on call, and babies took turn for worse allowing her
to call him in.
LMFAO. Thats some jump to go from being accused of having an affair to murdering babies. Literally zero evidence to back it up.
This is nearly as bad as the Italian police claiming Amanda Knox murdered Meridith Kercher during a 4 person orgy but left no DNA
was on call, and babies took turn for worse allowing her
to call him in.
LMFAO. Thats some jump to go from being accused of having an affair to murdering babies. Literally zero evidence to back it up.
This is nearly as bad as the Italian police claiming Amanda Knox murdered Meridith Kercher during a 4 person orgy but left no DNA
No it's not, it's a potential cry for attention, and a motive.
He finished with her, he claims she wanted it to continue.
This was all tested in court by a jury.
He finished with her, he claims she wanted it to continue.
This was all tested in court by a jury.
----you-have-to-laugh---, let me guess, do you have the complete box set of Cracker (Robbie Coltrane) DVDs, by any chance?
No, why would I?
Far more likely the conspiracists would watch that.
Far more likely the conspiracists would watch that.
Is there a cracker box set without coltrane?
I mentioned Coltrane so that you wouldn't be confused and think I was asking whether you had a box of a certain type of biscuits.
Any how, one of the things I liked most about the Cracker DVD box set is the packaging which is styled like a police card index drawer, with a little handle on the front and with typed card slotted in the front with the words: "Case Files". When you pull out the drawer and look down at where the cards should be, you see the 10 DVD cases.
https://www.wob.com/en-gb/film/dvd/cracker-the-complete-collection/5037115332639?gad_source=1&gclid=EAIaIQobChMI3vnW3az_hwMVcQQGAB1VeS1EEAQYByABEgK0qvD_BwE#DVDB004AFC4PAVG
Any how, one of the things I liked most about the Cracker DVD box set is the packaging which is styled like a police card index drawer, with a little handle on the front and with typed card slotted in the front with the words: "Case Files". When you pull out the drawer and look down at where the cards should be, you see the 10 DVD cases.
https://www.wob.com/en-gb/film/dvd/cracker-the-complete-collection/5037115332639?gad_source=1&gclid=EAIaIQobChMI3vnW3az_hwMVcQQGAB1VeS1EEAQYByABEgK0qvD_BwE#DVDB004AFC4PAVG
Do Jacobs do box sets of dvds now, I'll watch out
for them.
for them.
The conspiracy theorists who believe there are evil killer nurses out there plotting to murder babies are the ones who sound crackers to me. Are the evil killer nurses in the room with you now?
Mike Lynch was about to meet with David Davis to investigate the Lucy Letby trial. He was an expert on probability theory and saw through the statistical weaknesses in the Letby prosecution.
https://metro.co.uk/2024/08/25/mike-lynch-was-planning-investigate-lucy-letby-trial-yacht-tragedy-21484834/
/
https://metro.co.uk/2024/08/25/mike-lynch-was-planning-investigate-lucy-letby-trial-yacht-tragedy-21484834/
/
She'll get another 20 years for that once shes found guilty of downing the yacht ^
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539