Football
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?
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 102
|
By:
Nope but i understand there are now grave concerns about her prosecution and incarceration.
The Countess of Chester paediactric ward is now closed I believe and they never should have been put in charge of seriously ill babies. Still, as I understand the law, the success of an appeal will be dependent on the introduction of new evidence. Which in most cases is almost impossible. |
|
By:
That's what I heard. Lucia de Berk was convicted of similar crimes and had to be released years later because the evidence was similarly dodgy.
|
|
By:
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 |
|
By:
Also watched this last night on the back of this thread. Looks questionable for sure.
|
|
By:
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.
|
|
By:
One strange thing it claimed was that at her trial no medical experts were called on by either side
Not true. |
|
By:
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. |
|
By:
That's what they said about Lucia de Berk.
|
|
By:
Do me a favour,medical professionals know.
|
|
By:
Hi busvaldo, Tash on...
Ronald is forum troll, he's obsessed by Trump and daft conspiracies Good season ahead... |
|
By:
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.
|
|
By:
What conspiracy are you claiming I am obsessed with?
|
|
By:
Hello mate,Newcastle should go well if Isak stays fit,VILLA battling on 3 fronts,fingers crossed..
|
|
By:
 |
|
By:
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 |
|
By:
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. |
|
By:
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.
|
|
By:
Ronald, that's him
Yhtl, OK, the defence didn't call any medical experts I should have said Very strange |
|
By:
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”. |
|
By:
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. |
|
By:
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.
|
|
By:
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. |
|
By:
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/ .. |
|
By:
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.
|
|
By:
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??? |
|
By:
He got her off some charges...
Although at retrial she was found guilty of another murder. |
|
By:
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. |
|
By:
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. |
|
By:
Expert witnesses are not there to lie.
They will end up locked up. |
|
By:
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  |
|
By:
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. |
|
By:
List the facts ^
|
|
By:
She exhausted babies from oxygen,those are the facts.
|
|
By:
List the facts, lol
List the ones you dispute. We can soon cover them. |
|
By:
Not when you write down your own guilt in a bedroom in your own home.
Case closed. |
|
By:
you are claiming there is factual evidence....list it YHTL
Busvaldo, link to this evidence/claim please. |
|
By:
She exhausted babies from oxygen,those are the facts.
So she killed them by asphyxiation? any evidence? Not even the prosecution claimed this. |
|
By:
Which facts from the 6 months of evidence do you dispute?
|
|
By:
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.
|