Notice
Thread ordered by most liked posts - View normal thread.

sebanna

VIP Member
They didn't dispose of the body by burning or burying but they did leave it to decompose, so the post mortem gave little information. That affected the police investigation. The police asked repeatedly where was Victoria? but neither of them told. If no one had looked in the shed would she still be there today? If they had co operated with police it would be easier to find them not guilty.
 
  • Like
  • Heart
Reactions: 23

GalaxyGirl70

VIP Member
I don't think that they don't see the children as separate beings, they see them as their belongings... their "right" to have. And for me that's how they've ended up in this mess in the 1st place, because they can't put the baby's needs before their own. Both are very flawed individuals, and my worry is that if they are able to have another child that's exactly what they will do. For that reason alone (and because Judge's can't enforce sterilisation of both or either) I hope one or both gets a long enough custodial sentence to stop this from happening.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 23

F1Grid

VIP Member
“The name Constance is rooted in Latin. Constania, it means steadfastness, resolute, faithful, loyal, dedicated and perseverance no matter the obstacle.”
And 'Lucy' means 'light bringer', but Letby wasn't bringing light to anyone, was she? :rolleyes:
 
  • Like
  • Haha
  • Angry
Reactions: 23

HotesTilaire

VIP Member
I believe it’s because they’re co-defendants so they’re allowed to communicate with each other / discuss the case. Would love to know what the notes actually say.
I wore my claw clip again 4 u daddy bear xxxxxxxxxx c
---
I know I never will but I'd like to know more about why this all happened
We’re all hoping for an avalanche of info being released after the verdict.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 23

JCMSadie

VIP Member
That nursery case is fucking horrific. I wonder what else that bitch had been doing before she went so far as to get caught.
 
  • Like
  • Sad
Reactions: 23

duckdinner

VIP Member
I was called in for jury service a few months ago and I'm hoping this jury doesn't have a person like we had who was the sole reason for us being in the deliberation room for as long as we were.

She would only say "I don't know" when we were deliberating and when the judge told us he would accept a majority verdict of 10 with 2 disagreeing, she still was only saying "I don't know" (we had 2 who were strongly one way and 9 who were strongly the other way) we asked her if she was happy for us to tell the judge that we couldn't come to an agreement and she said no and that she could still be convinced one way or the other... It was the single most infuriating part of my jury service! We ended up telling the judge that we couldn't come to an agreed verdict probably 6 hours after we could have
 
  • Like
  • Angry
  • Sad
Reactions: 23
It was adjourned until 9am tomorrow at 3.56pm today.
Stuff like this really makes you understand why the jurors will be unwilling to shift pre-booked things now. Imagine if you’d come back from holiday a day early to accommodate the trial and you ended up being in for what was probably all of 5 mins once the faff etc had been sorted before it’s adjourned until tomorrow. You’d be livid.
 
  • Like
  • Sad
Reactions: 23

Be our guest

Active member
I'm so cross with the defence trying to argue that running away with Victoria was defensible because she had her older children removed. Whatever people think about the courts removing children it's not only lawful to do so but children's services are legally obligated to act where there is evidence of risk of significant harm. Preventing authorities from being involved with Victoria was preventing them from carrying out their legal duties. And the result was that Victoria died - so there is no 'benefit of hindsight they did the right thing' defence - they did exactly what they should have been prevented from doing - neglected their baby to death.
 
  • Like
  • Heart
Reactions: 23

sebanna

VIP Member
Regarding Victoria being in the soiled nappy, might that be purely down to the natural process which occurs after death?
I'm in no way making allowances for them, but it is a fact that the body releases the bowel & bladder after death.
Perhaps once she'd died, or they'd realised she had it likely didn't occur to them to address any hygiene care, if they ever did at all, poor soul 😔
They lost nearly all of Victoria's baby stuff in the car fire. The police tracked what they bought from this point. The only items purchased for Victoria were a dummy and the soon to be abandoned pram. There was no mention of baby wipes, to clean her in the tent with no water. They were never seen to carry a bulky pack of nappies but had two unused when she died. This is what makes me think she was neglected, they didn't have what they needed to make her comfortable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 23

Bleekemolen

Active member
Why are they actually being allowed to pass notes? They’ve been told to stop so why hasn’t something been done about it? Maybe like a Perspex screen between them? Sorry if it’s a daft question. Also do these notes get read by someone else or are they just between the two of them?
So nothing between them and not even security officer. They pass notes back and forth. Today was the MOST I have seen them do. I’m just walking dog, but back soon with write up for you lovely lot ❤
 
  • Like
  • Heart
Reactions: 23

Emsie

VIP Member
I just want a second with the jury to say:
1. That's no cosleeping
2. That wouldn't have been a cremation
3. This was not protection

I was sympathetic to their case a bit until she got on the stand and started rambling about forced adoption. Your babies are in care because of you, you absolute moron.
 
  • Like
  • Heart
Reactions: 23

Mums84

VIP Member
She maybe had such bad nappy rash when alive that by leaving her in a soiled nappy it would enable some element of plausable deniability. They could argue the damage occured after death.
I take care of my kids (Chris Rock?) but they got bad nappy rash at various points. I think Asda nappies were bad for it particularly. I used metanium a lot. This pair probably didn't use anything and God knows what the baby suffered in those short weeks. A life of pain and cold. I also don't think they named her Victoria and they used another name that they are hiding, it's all about power and control.
 
  • Like
  • Sad
Reactions: 23

lola_90

Member
New podcast up from The Trial. They are now down to ten jurors and they lost one this week. Only update so far really.
 
  • Wow
  • Like
  • Sad
Reactions: 22

Shinythings

VIP Member
This jury seem like idiots.
It only needs one person though. You could have 10 or 11 jurors who get it and have reached a verdict but you have that one or two people who keep flip flopping or refusing to budge when by the law their individual verdict is wrong and then the jury gets nowhere. You'd be surprised at how people struggle to grasp the 'so you can be SURE' part.
 
  • Like
  • Heart
Reactions: 22

Aberscot

Chatty Member
Going to be hard for defence to defend these two useless pricks.
lets hope the jury sees through them and they get the longest sentence possible ( nothing will be long enough in my option)

The idea that in 2022 and 2023 there was some Mission Impossible style private investigators coming out of the sky from nowhere to detonate vehicles. It’s fantastical. It’s mythical. It didn’t happen,” he told the court.
I am liking Tom Little more each day!
 
  • Like
  • Heart
Reactions: 22

Haveyouanywool

VIP Member
Have Fresh From The Old Bailey given up? No new podcasts since the 16th of March.

Hanging on by a claw clip here.
There’s a new FRTOB episodes today.
---
One person’s Lioness is another’s arrogant upperclass twat.
Obviously I’ll completely changed my mind because I now know the meaning of her name, Ffs 🙄
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: 22