Forums
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 199 comments are related to the topic:
Lucy Letby TV programme tonight

Post your reply

Text Format: Table: Smilies:
Forum does not support HTML
Insert Photo
Cancel
Page 2 of 5  •  Previous | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Next
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 199
By:
the bairn
When: 04 Aug 25 23:51
she was just unlucky to be in a room where 7 people died and another 6 were lucky to live, how unlucky is that. cheers.
By:
Regbutler
When: 05 Aug 25 00:12
Other children died when she wasn't on shift
The baby unit she worked in was a unit for "normal" baby just born problems, changed  into a severe problem unit, with a higher mortality rate, and not equipped to deal with it staff wise
By:
stewarty b
When: 05 Aug 25 07:23
The bottom line is she is a baby murderer. The apologists on here are a disgrace and I cannot figure out why. If she were to fall into quicksand it would spit her out.
By:
kkkatt
When: 05 Aug 25 11:52
You`d think posters on a betting forum would have at least some grasp of probability.
By:
swiftynifty
When: 05 Aug 25 12:27
You'd be surprised. She's just been the unluckiest healthcare worker since Harold Shipman, just wrong place, wrong time.
By:
Regbutler
When: 05 Aug 25 12:53
As I've already said, I think there's enough doubt regarding the evidence that has been highlighted by "experts", plus the possibility of her being fitted up, however unlikely that may seem... For a young girl to at least have the chance of a retrial, and a chance to not spend the rest of her life behind bars for something she may not have done
I can't see why people would object to a retrial

No doubt, 15 years ago people would be condemning the hundreds of post office submasters who had been convicted of stealing and, in many cases, imprisoned...And how the evidence used to convict them was foolproof... Look how that turned out
By:
----you-have-to-laugh---
When: 05 Aug 25 13:19
She had a retrial

She was found guilty for a second time by a different jury.



Of course you can string together a circumstatial
case to suggest she didn't do it like suggesting
jesus was son of God, aliens landed at roswell, Loch Ness monster exists
and Elvis rides down Vegas strip on shergar when
nobody bar big foot is looking.
By:
pulio
When: 05 Aug 25 14:11
If you have any experience working in a hospital you would have serious reservations about her conviction. Not saying she's innocent but she could easily have been stitched up to cover up incompetence, laziness or something more sinister on the part of others...
By:
Johnny The Guesser
When: 05 Aug 25 15:01
It's a delicate legal position.  Is there really new evidence here ?

Letby's defence team has had a chance to rebut the prosecution's experts - it would appear they didn't do a very good job , but crucially they have had that chance.  This is akin to calling new witnesses after the trial has ended - witnesses that don't have hard new evidence just opinions. If you search hard enough you will always find an 'expert' with the opinion you want - expert shopping is the term I believe. There may be a bunch of eminent experts out there who believe that she did it , but their voices don't get heard.

Now, I watched the program - to a layman the case for a retrial looks compelling , but does the new 'evidence' legally justify that outcome ?
By:
swiftynifty
When: 05 Aug 25 15:06
it's like all these programmes, if they tell all the facts, there's no programme to make.
By:
Big Cat
When: 05 Aug 25 18:00
The debate above equates to 'reasonable doubt'
By:
the old nanny ;-)
When: 05 Aug 25 18:24
You'd be surprised. She's just been the unluckiest healthcare worker since Harold Shipman, just wrong place, wrong time.

She was only charged with Incidents that took place on her Shift , Not incidents when she was not working , what we need to know

is the scale of these other Incidents ...

Consultant said she called NO one when a Baby was in Trouble , then changed that TO SHE HAD CONTACTED HIM ,thats why he was in the ward with her
By:
ponchoslament
When: 05 Aug 25 18:39
Crucifixion or freedom, out the door, turn left
One cross each? Where’s Albert Pierrepoint when
He’s needed
By:
swiftynifty
When: 05 Aug 25 19:10
the old nanny, I've no doubt there was negligence in that hospital,  but the bottom line she has said herself she's evil, so being locked up is the best place for her, you sure wouldn't want her looking after your child.
By:
FOYLESWAR
When: 05 Aug 25 19:47
there is some  of doubt that she has done it  however small .she may well have but  in the past  its not unheard of  the old bill leaving out  evidence that could influence or   sway a jury not saying that's the case here . not the same but  the police on the cases  of  Barry George and Colin stag were  convinced they were guilty  .
By:
GLASGOWCALLING
When: 05 Aug 25 22:04
Google.

     They said they previously expected 2 or 3 deaths at most per year on that ward under that admission criteria but had 13 deaths in that one year alone plus all the sudden collapses. All stopped when she moved - they also changed their admission criteria but even so it was an instant elimination of deaths and those sudden collapses. No other baby had an insulin overdose and no other babies collapsed from air embolism or over feeding!
By:
Big Cat
When: 05 Aug 25 22:19
The statistics associated with the rota sheet were utterly flawed. That in itself presents significant doubt with respect to possibly the most significant single piece of evidence. The rota sheet presented to the jury was manufactured
By:
A_T
When: 06 Aug 25 13:05
It's a delicate legal position.  Is there really new evidence here ?

the court of appeal would likely say not as she should have called her expert witnesses at trial but didn't presumably because they did not disagree enough with the prosecution's. the court might still hear her evidence though as they did in her first appeal - dr lee was heard but they refused to admit his evidence because it should have been heard at the trial but in any case added that it wasn't grounds for allowing the appeal. however the court has wide discretion to do what it feels is in the interests of justice.

The statistics associated with the rota sheet were utterly flawed. That in itself presents significant doubt with respect to possibly the most significant single piece of evidence. The rota sheet presented to the jury was manufacture


No statistical case was presented. The prosecution needed to show letby was the only staff member on duty otherwsie the defence could have said someone else might have done it. The defence did not dispute the staff rota.

something the court did not hear and you won't hear on biased programmes like ITV's which was put together by letby supporters: the royal college of child health reviewed what was happening on the unit and recommended that an investigation needed to look who was on duty at the time of the baby deaths and 4 hours before - letby met this criteria for 12 of the 13 deaths

honestly her best shot at freedom is the prerogative of mercy from prime minister nige - not impossible given some of the things he's said about the case.
By:
DrGordons
When: 06 Aug 25 13:42
If the chief prosecution witness changes his mind and revises his opinion, isn't that new evidence? Dr Dewi Evans is unreliable, full stop.
By:
blunder
When: 06 Aug 25 16:00
The problem with these programmes is that they tend only to show the arguments that favour their side of the story. There was
a show about 20 years ago , that expressed doubt that man ever went to the moon.That was  very convincing , but another show debunked the theories, but some people still believe that we have never been to the moon.
By:
----you-have-to-laugh---
When: 06 Aug 25 16:47
There will be a high correlation between moon landing deniers,
Letby is innocent sayers, and those that thought
covid was fake, and vaccines are Satan's work.

Please give generously to little tommehs legal costs
By:
A_T
When: 06 Aug 25 17:26
indeed - some of her prominent online supporters were vocal vaccine sceptics. it's the usual story - we're in possession of special knowledge that boosts our self-esteem - letby is a scapegoat,vaccines are dangerous, experts have proved the twin-towers were brought down by a controlled demolition, etc, etc, nige knew his audience when he waded-in on letby
By:
FOYLESWAR
When: 06 Aug 25 18:04
is it impossible she was a patsy ?
By:
----you-have-to-laugh---
When: 06 Aug 25 18:06
As the simple minded got wise to moon landings being real
the scammers had to produce a new test of gullibility, to
lead them off to glorious rabbit holes on YouTube to
fleece them.
By:
1st time poster
When: 06 Aug 25 18:15
i,ll have 50pew on candice owens saying letby is innocent
By:
A_T
When: 06 Aug 25 20:47
If the chief prosecution witness changes his mind and revises his opinion, isn't that new evidence?

this was raised at the trial - the prosecution invited the jury to disregard dewi evans' evidence on this charge. she was still found guilty.
By:
Regbutler
When: 07 Aug 25 08:25
I find it strange that some are lumping those of us who think there is possibly enough doubt for her to have a retrial... With people who are moon landing and covid deniers!
I am certainly not either of those

Also, I stated earlier that about 15 years ago there would have been people saying that the hundreds of post office submasters found guilty of stealing must all be guilty... Because the Horizon computer system says so, and the PO chiefs couldn't surely have been prosecuting people if they had any doubts in their system?
Big organisations do make mistakes and are loathe to admit it, even going to great lengths to cover it up
By:
FOYLESWAR
When: 07 Aug 25 08:59
same here reg seems if you don't follow or agree with the majority then you must be a loon conspiracy theorist . as I said before she may well be guilty as charged but it may not be as cut and dried as it seemed .
By:
Gin
When: 07 Aug 25 11:36
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/08/07/australia-proves-we-dont-have-to-suffer-under-the-nhs/

"If I had to summarise the NHS in two numbers, they would be 27 and 18. The first – £27.5bn – is the liability for botched maternity care since 2019, when our world-beating health system has left women and infants crippled or dead. The second, £18bn, is roughly the amount the NHS spent on maternity services over the same period."

Assuming the first paragraph of the above article is correct, that is an astounding fact!?
By:
A_T
When: 07 Aug 25 11:52
Big organisations do make mistakes and are loathe to admit it, even going to great lengths to cover it up

the cover-up here is the nhs trust failing to remove letby from the ward when she was killing babies. there's a gross negligence manslaughter investigation into this and arrests have been made.
By:
DrGordons
When: 07 Aug 25 12:19
Who has said what the manslaughter charges relate to? Is what you posted your opinion or do you have insider knowledge?
By:
A_T
When: 07 Aug 25 12:40
the arrests were of 3 senior managers so not directly involved in patient care. given that letby has been convicted of murdering seven babies what else do you think the manslaughter charges might relate to?
By:
A_T
When: 07 Aug 25 12:41
*manslaughter investigation
By:
DrGordons
When: 07 Aug 25 12:46
Failure to report misgivings to the police and other authorities, failure to provide adequate staffing levels, failure to maintain proper hygiene standards...the list could go on.
By:
A_T
When: 07 Aug 25 12:53
seems unlikely given that the cause of the deaths has been established in court and was nothing to do with staffing levels or poor hygiene. unless the deaths are entirely different ones to the letby murders.

it could be failing to report misgivings to the police early enough but most likely is failure to remove letby quicker than they did. the thirlwall inquiry showed that some murders were committed after letby's managers were made aware of concerns about her.
By:
LoyalHoncho
When: 07 Aug 25 15:44
Far too much generalisation.  Nothing ever convinced me that man didn’t go to the moon. Just as nothing has ever convinced me that Oswald assassinated Kennedy.
I make my own mind up about everything, and most certainly never even entertain reading let alone accepting any bowlucks published in social media.
And I am as right, and as wrong as anyone.
“Established in court” is one of the most unsafe phrases in the legal system.
Please note, I did not say justice system.
By:
Big Cat
When: 07 Aug 25 18:27
I thought the journalist's take on things was telling. He was stunned by events post-trial. He was somebody who was there for the entire trial and has been across everything post-trial
We'll never know whether she was guilty, even if she gets a reprieve, but I've always felt a sense of doubt by what I heard during the trial and the subsequent controversy is compelling. Maybe I'm naïve, most likely I'm subconsciously biased by her ethnicity, upbringing and background, but my instinct based on my perception of human nature is that she's not guilty. I know how absurd a statement that is... I'm like the inverse of one of those jurors off '12 angry men'
By:
1st time poster
When: 07 Aug 25 20:41
if your guilty how is it not cut and dried, she either killed 6+ babies or she didnt ,she,s not half pregnant
whats the logic behind ITS NOT CUT AND DRIED, judge says your gulity of murdering 6 babies but it was a close run thing you nearly got off with it
By:
A_T
When: 08 Aug 25 07:59
people see a documentary like this and are fooled into thinking that's all the prosecution had but there was loads of evidence the trial was the longest in english history
By:
FOYLESWAR
When: 08 Aug 25 10:35
1tp ask the birmingham 5 barrie george or colin stag their cases looked cut and dried .
Page 2 of 5  •  Previous | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Next
sort by:
Show
per page

Post your reply

Text Format: Table: Smilies:
Forum does not support HTML
Insert Photo
Cancel
‹ back to topics
www.betfair.com