I hope they do report it just out of interest. There might be a podcast.
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
When Ben Myers tried to appeal Jordan Monaghan’s conviction, it was decided the same day however it was only a single day hearing and may have been simpler to determine. I guess it depends what Myers thinks the grounds are. If they don’t decide straight away I don’t think that is a bad sign but will just be frustrating to wait.
---
Day 2 of the hearing was yesterday and expected to continue tomorrow. If it’s a 3 day hearing just to hear the arguments then I’m not sure we will get a same day decision. But I’ll hope for it!
Baby killer Jordan Monaghan loses bid to overturn triple murder convictions
Monaghan made a bid to appeal against his convictions at the Court of Appeal in London on Tuesday (February 21)
www.lancs.live
Day 2 of the hearing was yesterday and expected to continue tomorrow. If it’s a 3 day hearing just to hear the arguments then I’m not sure we will get a same day decision. But I’ll hope for it!
Last edited:
Probably an unpopular opinion but I’m not sure why they are going ahead with the baby k retrial. It was quite a weak case (evidence wise) and the fact a new jury will have to learn all the medical terms and protocol etc .. and for what? Shes never getting out anyway. And how on earth can she really get a fair trial for it? I mean how can the jury pool not be tainted at this point?
I think it’s just a bit mental tbh
I think it’s just a bit mental tbh
Imagine if some of those losers from the Facebook groups end up on the jury! There must be good and valid reasons why they have gone for retrial though surely? Was it one of those where the jury couldn't reach a decision?
It's likely that the parents want it. If my baby had been murdered by this witch I'd want everybody to know that yes, she'd done it. Hung jury wouldn't cut it for me!
Yes. There was that many charges it was hard for the Jury to reach a verdict in them all.
Exactly this. Nothing can bring their baby back but they deserve the public acknowledgment that Letby was responsible for their death.
I thought baby K was one of the strongest cases tbh. You have a witness in Dr Jayaram for starters - he walked in on her and caught her red handed. She also didn’t deny it happened if I remember correctly. Also they had found her guilty of murder on multiple babies so it’s also looking at it in the context of knowing she was a killer. Which the jury were allowed to do.
Thanks for sharing. Was hoping it would be a straight up “NO!” But I suppose these things don’t work like that.
Would it be an option for them to wait until the retrial in June and then consider her appeal?
as I’m assuming if they uphold her appeal, there is no need for the trial in June as surely they’ll all need to be retried? I’m not familiar with the appeals process though and whether that’s possible…
as I’m assuming if they uphold her appeal, there is no need for the trial in June as surely they’ll all need to be retried? I’m not familiar with the appeals process though and whether that’s possible…
I think it will be the other way round, they will delay the retrial until the appeal process is concluded, whatever the outcome. I think Justice Goss said this at the time too.
there are a lot of unknowns at the moment because we don’t know what grounds the defence are arguing about. Is it evidence relate to individual babies or is it something affecting all of them.
I am not surprised or overly concerned they have reserved judgement given the length of the hearing. But I will be surprised if the retrial goes ahead in June now. It could be weeks before we here the outcome of this bid to appeal.
It's like waiting for the verdicts to come all over again 
It’s a bit of a worry when we don’t know what arguments are! And I’ve just seen some of Harvey Weinstein’s convictions have been overturned in New YorkIt's like waiting for the verdicts to come all over again
and might need to be a retrial.These people try to get off on technicalities rather than any new evidence of innocence (because there isn’t any)
If worst case scenario happened ie successful appeal resulting in a retrial could she decide not to give evidence as she will be aware this was her absolute downfall.It’s a bit of a worry when we don’t know what arguments are! And I’ve just seen some of Harvey Weinstein’s convictions have been overturned in New York
These people try to get off on technicalities rather than any new evidence of innocence (because there isn’t any)
I’m sure I read that if it’s a retrial they have to give evidence again. Or there has to be a really good reason not to. And the original evidence can still be used if she contradicted herself for example. I’ll see if I can find it again.
---
And same with witnesses too.
I just genuinely don’t know how they can do an entire retrial because how could it possibly be fair on her? The evidence from the first trial was all out in the public domain.
I wondering if she is only appealing certain convictions to overall appeal her WLO? As in, if she can get off the murders but not the attempts they’ll lower her sentence? But I would think this would be more on legal technicalities rather than new evidence? God I hope we find out soon, the not knowing is driving me crazy so can’t imagine how the parents of the babies feel
I wondering if she is only appealing certain convictions to overall appeal her WLO? As in, if she can get off the murders but not the attempts they’ll lower her sentence? But I would think this would be more on legal technicalities rather than new evidence? God I hope we find out soon, the not knowing is driving me crazy so can’t imagine how the parents of the babies feel
Here it is - oral evidence
www.cps.gov.uk