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

DellaC

VIP Member
@LilyRose1234 I'm sorry for tagging you again but I need some FREE legal advice.

My husband was going to the shop so I asked him to get me some chocolate. He came back with Peanut M&Ms.

If I hurt him physically would I get away with it? Does it fall under some rule because its essentially his fault?

TIA
 
  • Haha
  • Like
  • Heart
Reactions: 41

Thegirlwhouk

Well-known member
Oh man I just wrote a really long reply and lost it. How fucking annoying.

The jurors don't need to be certain. They need to be convinced beyond reasonable doubt. It's a bit different, but you don't have to be absolutely 'seen it on CCTV' certain. I really suspect the judge will go into this a lot next week.

In isolation, yes you could possibly argue that it would be difficult to convict based on the evidence. But the strength here is that there were SO MANY incidents. Yes ok maybe x can be explained by y but happening 3/4/5 times? Very very unlikely. As unlikely, say as multiple babies dying naturally, only on Lucy's shifts, from air embolism.... Oh and of course then Stopping after she was removed ..

Also, say for example the issue was poo in the sink causing infections or just poor care in general, then how on earth was Lucy on shift for every single event. The chances of this happening are so vanishingly small. If you look back at the duty/shift/rota thing she was on duty every time (25) times. The closest anyone else came was 7 times. It just cannot be coincidental. In my opinion it simply cannot be anyone or anything else. There is no way she's a scapegoat. The numbers wouldn't fall like they do. There would at least be a few 'well she wasn't here for x and y'. She was involved every single time.

There are many many things pointing towards guilt. Each on their own, yes maybe you can question it. Maybe she did just collect paper, maybe she did just take random photos of cards, maybe she did just write post it notes admitting her guilt, maybe she did just happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.... But all of those things together, that's beyond reasonable doubt.

In the case I was on, we didn't know for absolute certain and the judge made it clear that was not the requirement.

The summing up next week will be very interesting. The strength here really is in how all the coincidences add up together. There is only one baby who I have a slight niggle about, but given that I'm convinced she did the others, I'd say even that was 'beyond reasonable doubt'.

The judge will lay it out very clearly and I think from his directions we will get an inkling of how it will go.
.
 
  • Like
  • Heart
Reactions: 40

nosycowmoo

Well-known member
It’s just occurred to me (my god he’s clever) he didn’t have an expert witness because they could be cross examined, instead he’s saying their info now, when they can’t argue it! Or am I thinking too outside the box?! If it’s true it’s because he must’ve known the cross exam would’ve blown his expert opinion apart, if he was confident in them he’d of had them up there for all to see. Not just the plumber… it’s been bugging me for ages and now it all makes sense!
 
  • Like
  • Heart
Reactions: 40

KatieMorag

Well-known member
I had to aswell...the defence case was inconsistent with the closing speech. They literally brought nothing to the table.

Notice there's a lot of new members...has Tattle opened up again. In time for the verdict and Facebook nutters?
Yes it opened up again. But hopefully alongside the nutters you'll get people like me who are on the exact same page as you all and have followed the threads for months, like some kind of sad child with their nose pressed against the window. :ROFLMAO: Joking apart, I'm so glad I can see this out with you all, and that I can thank you - you've been hilarious, compassionate and insightful. Sorry for lurking and I promise I didn't search any of you on Facebook.
 
  • Like
  • Heart
  • Haha
Reactions: 40

stardust1

VIP Member
Haven’t caught up yet but why does he keep saying things such as ‘no one else will say it’ that hardly makes her look innocent if the only person willing to say she is innocent is the one getting paid
 
  • Like
  • Haha
  • Heart
Reactions: 40
The jury have sat for over 243 days listening to real evidence and seen the reactions from Lucy, witnesses, both barristers and the parents, these last five days will be just a tiny tiny percentage of everything they have heard and the judge will bring it all back, I have faith in them 🩷🙌🏽
 
  • Like
  • Heart
Reactions: 39
There's a few posters on mumsnet that think she's NG.
Apparently tattlers are too biased towards guilty.
I once read a thread on there about a woman wanting opinions on if peoples other half’s have a penis beaker next to their bed to clean their willies after having sex, so on that basis I’m going to politely decline talking them lot seriously
 
  • Haha
  • Like
  • Wow
Reactions: 39

AllieBee

VIP Member
If it helps people feel more comfortable - when I was on Jury Duty our case had only circumstantial evidence. The judge told us we can still find guilty beyond 'reasonable doubt' with circumstantial evidence and gave this scenario:

You go into your kitchen and notice the cookie jar is open, and a chocolate chip cookie is missing. You go into the living room and find your child with chocolate around his mouth and crumbs in his lap.

He said while its possible someone broke into your house, stole the cookie and rubbed chocolate onto your childs mouth, you can presume beyond reasonable doubt your kid nicked the cookie.

I imagine the judge in this case will give a similar explanation to the jury.
Exactly. When one of mine was about 4 he got hold of the scissors and lopped a chunk off his hair. I didn't see him do it, he pleaded not guilty, but it was the blonde hair down the front of his navy top and the scissors lying next to him that convinced me of his guilt.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
  • Heart
Reactions: 39

gimmethattea

Chatty Member
I am almost up to date with this new thread, but I, like others, am really struggling with Dr BM's closing defence.

As a Mom of a NICU baby last year, I find it incredibly insulting that he just states that all these babies were on deaths door or had very little survival rates because they required NICU care.

I know many other parents will feel very similar to this and I can imagine those parents in the trial feel it more than most having to sit and listen to him.

Babies in NICU are little fighters and survivors. The vast majority of the human race thrives to survive against the odds, so that's why we can fight infections, survive horrific events. Sometimes, that requires some extra support. Whether it be breathing support, antibiotics, feeding support, etc... But we survive because that's what our bodies do.

From what others have shared, survival rates are really high amongst NICU babies. Even babies born very early have very good rates of survival and if BM had actually been inside of a NICU, he, like others, would be astounded at the technology that is available to these babies.

At the end of it all though, parents know their baby best and much better than BM. Sure, medical staff will get to know them during their stay in NICU, but parents will still know their babies the best. They will know whether the baby was screaming or just crying, they will know what they see on their baby, they will know their babies symptoms... I would believe a parent over any one else because they are not only a parent, but they are advocating for that baby.

When your baby is in NICU, you learn everything about what is going on with them. In my case, with my son being term, but poorly with Group B Strep Sepsis, you can bet I researched every single fact, symptom, website, case studies I found, the lot.

When he was in a second time, I again spent a lot of time researching what it meant when he had it a second time, what that meant for his future. I even began to research if there would be any effects for a baby having strong antibiotics for 3+ weeks in their first month of life, because I was terrified of what would happen after.

I researched so much that I have the symptoms of Group B Strep and Sepsis are ingrained into my brain, in case Sepsis happens to him ever again, because our consultant has concerns about his immune system.

I can guarantee every one of those parents were doing the exact same things I was when they couldn't sleep at night, when they were worried about their baby after visiting.

So BM, I know this is your job and I know without people like you, a fair trial wouldn't happen. However, I despise you for how you are describing these amazing little babies, that would have survived and lived happy and amazing lives, surrounded by so much love, with their families if it wasn't for Lucy Letby. She has destroyed lives and I hope the jury can see past his smoke and mirrors..
 
  • Heart
  • Like
Reactions: 37

F1Grid

VIP Member
I once read a thread on there about a woman wanting opinions on if peoples other half’s have a penis beaker next to their bed to clean their willies after having sex, so on that basis I’m going to politely decline talking them lot seriously
Average mumsnetter:
Screenshot 2023-06-29 at 22.50.46.png
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: 37

Treesy19

VIP Member
The waiting for a verdict is going to be unbearable.

If she’s found NG and walks then she’s pulled off the perfect murders really hasn’t she. Anyone with murderous thoughts please feel free to go into nursing. It’s an open door. Choose either neonates or geriatrics, or maybe go into a hospice. There’ll be no cameras, and even if someone spots you doing something non-nurse like (like ignoring a terrifying scream, or watching a desat and doing nowt) then say it didn’t happen that way. If you want to bump a good number off then swap about your methods to confuse the hell out of your poor colleagues who will be naturally counteracting your attacks as they won’t suspect you for ages, if at all. Make sure you appear as normal as possible to the outside world, hell, take up salsa dancing and have some fizz and have a bet on the gee gees. Suck up to the Karen in charge of rotas too, as she is only concerned about staffing. When they find your paper trophies say you collect paper, but not paper with billing information on, nah not that.
When stopped and on trial, call everyone liars. Say you can’t recall. It all of their words against yours. When your barrister says no medical professional will swing by to support anything then it ok, because they won’t believe doctors nurses and parents anyway over you. When they ask you about your post it note that you forgot about which says I am evil I did this, I killed them on purpose because I’m not good enough…tell them it’s nothing and written in anguish. If you say that then…they can’t believe you’re evil, and did this.
 
  • Like
  • Sad
  • Heart
Reactions: 37

Thegirlwhouk

Well-known member
I have been following all you guys for weeks and just thought I'd say thanks for all your insight and comments! Found my way here after listening to the podcast.

She's definitely guilty in my eyes. Like others have said, there is just too much evidence to ignore, circumstantial or not. Did any babies die of air embolism after she was removed? Any strange rashes? Any issues with insulin? No.... Thought not. Can't really be the hospitals fault then can it....

I have faith in the jury. Don't forget they have been there day to day, watching her too. They will absolutely be making judgements we can't.

I did jury service and it was such a great experience - though obviously this is a very very serious case. I was dealing with a gang murder case. We had some CCTV footage but not of the actual event and the defendant said everything was accidental and it was just a scuffle where the victim did basically fall on his knife....

As a jury, we all felt he was guilty from day 1 but we did spend some time revisiting parts of the evidence as a few people just weren't sure about that 'beyond reasonable doubt'. But we talked it through together and got there fairly quickly.

The jury will hopefully be fairly balanced and if you have a few persuasive people who really understand the case and know everything they will be able to educate and explain why they would disregard certain things BM has said or will point out the holes and flaws in his arguments. That's what happened to us. One lady said "well I don't understand how we know x even happened" and turned out she'd just misunderstood or forgotten something so we clarified it, revisited som evidence and we were good to go with the verdict.

I'm not very eloquent but hopefully that makes sense.
 
  • Like
  • Heart
Reactions: 37

A mega Pint

Chatty Member
Hello Lovelies, I’ve missed tons, having surgery tomorrow so when recuperating, I’ll have the present thread open and all I’ve missed. I can’t believe we are at the end point, I couldn’t even follow the defence closing as from the little I saw, I just thought hogwash with no substance, I don’t have the capacity for this nonsense at the moment, did it get any better? Love to you all. 💕💕💕💕
 
  • Heart
  • Like
Reactions: 37

nosycowmoo

Well-known member
There’s so much I want to say, but I can’t yet… all I will say is this isn’t over till it’s over…
---
There’s so much I want to say, but I can’t yet… all I will say is this isn’t over till it’s over…
Have faith tattlers 💪🏼
 
  • Like
  • Heart
  • Wow
Reactions: 37

Deeznutslol

VIP Member
Can we all just take a moment to appreciate that Richard Gill actually tweeted a parody virologist account this morning and asked them for help on the LL case 💀
B65D424F-1B9D-4147-BBF2-39611F6E5660.jpeg
 
  • Haha
  • Wow
  • Like
Reactions: 37

Ali88

Well-known member
Do we think some of these people were waiting with baited breath for the memberships to reopen, just so they could vote NG? lol
Yes 💀

Judge Goss has started, highlighting that the plumbing issues did not occur when the alleged incidents took place.
 
  • Like
  • Heart
  • Haha
Reactions: 37