The listener questions were interesting. They addressed the actors voices and clarified legally they were not allowed to infer emotion esp for Lucy’s voice. which is what we expected on here.
Anonymity of doctor/nurse witnesses in trial. The individual reasons are legally protected but usually only granted for two reasons 1. Quality of evidence is likely to be diminished for fear or distress.
2. (They say most likely in this case) Improve the quality of the evidence or level of co-operation of the witness
They say serveral media organisations bandied together to pay for a barrister to try and argue against the anonymity orders as they felt it wasn’t in the interest of open justice (she starts saying ‘we’ so presume this includes the daily Mail) but the judge disagreed. They say as journalists they feel this may be a slippery slope of open justice.
The baby anonymity orders actually relate to the mums and dads. So can’t name the babies as it would identify the parents. The order allowed the media to use the first names but the media collectively decided not to because some of the first names are unusual and journalists have to be careful of jigsaw ID where identity can be known
Waiving anonymity - they can’t just do this themselves, they have to go back to the judge and ask to lift the order but they would be surprised if the judge refused.
Somebody asked: if Lucy Letby requests to listen to the podcast will she be allowed to. They didn’t know the answer but now I want to know the answer
www.bbc.co.uk
I still lurk here waiting for baby K’s retrial and for when LLs appeal gets thrown out.)
