Not nice for Ben Myers but I'm sure his peers know his worth.Christ, never thought I’d agree with Anne Widdecombe
I have never known a case like this. She’s been convicted several times over, appeal dismissed & even supposedly credible journalists like Vine are spouting complete tit & discrediting her barrister.
Myers should complain. And if he was that wide of the mark why didn’t Letby or her solicitors (who would have instructed him in the first place) replace him for the appeal/second trial.
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
The alternative was agreeing with Jeremy Vine so I’m not sure it was ever going to feel goodChrist, never thought I’d agree with Anne Widdecombe
I have never known a case like this. She’s been convicted several times over, appeal dismissed & even supposedly credible journalists like Vine are spouting complete tit & discrediting her barrister.
Myers should complain. And if he was that wide of the mark why didn’t Letby or her solicitors (who would have instructed him in the first place) replace him for the appeal/second trial.
I think the timing here has been unfortunate with the second trial verdict and lifting of reporting restrictions coming right at the start of the journalist "silly season" when there is not much to report on
---
---
I think it started with the statistics boys frothing at the mouth because the staff rota only showed the deaths for which she was charged so they decided to assume there were other deaths at which she was not present.
Phil Hammond (MD) stated it as fact in his Private Eye article but the article was only written based on what people are telling him. I’m wondering if New Yorker also stated it. Will see if I can find it. I expect it was someone like Gill or Sarrita that suggested it and as often is the case, retweets of someone’s uneducated opinion has become fact.
The staff rotas and baby's medical records would have only been seen by the police and anyone working on the case. Phil Hammond wouldn't have been given this information.
---
They don't know if she was on duty for the twenty five cases. The only thing of interest was the article says there was two similar cases when Letby was not on duty. This piece of information wasn't used by the defence though.
---
A third insulin case with high insulin to low C peptide strongly suggests foul play. What are the chances of three babies all experiencing the same medical mystery.
They don't know if she was on duty for the twenty five cases. The only thing of interest was the article says there was two similar cases when Letby was not on duty. This piece of information wasn't used by the defence though.
Last edited:
Doesn't seem credible that to create doubt the defence went to the trouble of calling the plumber but decided to leave out deaths when Letby was not on duty. And why would BBC Panorama say there were 13 deaths with Letby present for all of them?
I think it's more likely that Letby had a hand in all of them, but there were other medical issues which made proving it too hard.
Amongst other things, I'm hoping the inquiry will provide some answers for the families of Baby H, Baby J and Baby Q as to what happened to their children
Reading back over baby Q in the wiki. She definitely had some thing to do with that baby, he was only on tiny milk feeds but his stomach was full of clear fluid? No witnesses have a clue how it would have got there!
When is this going end 
duck off Rinder. Judge Judy wannabe
I wonder if they can go for some kind of charge against the management for baby Q’s harm. Baby Q survived but has brain damage I think. I remember how BM tried to really downplay the incident but baby Q almost had a totally unnecessary surgery because they thought it must be a bowel condition and being left with brain damage shows how serious it was. It’s unbelievable that Letby was allowed back to harm Baby Q after the triplets, even after the desperate plea from Breary to keep her away. They absolutely knew for certain those babies were not in any danger of dying and were well. Then they both die suddenly and in a truly horrific manner, under her watch one after the other. “Back with a bang lol” it was just fun and games for her.
Agree. My understanding of these horrific cases (as a lay person) is that they bring the most robust cases to court in order to secure a conviction. The fact that Operation Hummingbird was planned adds to this argument, as it seems almost certain that they believe there are more babies involved. And as this is an ongoing case information can't be released to the public.
It's the families of the children involved in the original court case that I feel for. The loss or harm of their child / children will never leave them, but knowing that justice has been served must help a little. Raking this up in the MSM (which is difficult to completely avoid) must be awful for them.
He's talking BS and you can see he knows nothing about the trial but is just sensationalizing what other people have said before. He said all the prosecution expert witnesses were retired which isn't accurate. He said BM was rubbish but tried to say Ann Widdicombe had said it which I'm glad to see she firmly put him right about everything.This is quite rage inducing (but that’s Jeremy Vine anyway
Jeremy thinking Myers not calling any witnesses in her defence means he’s rubbish. Is he really that thick to not consider why Myers didn’t call anyone?
To be honest I feel a bit bad for Myers because we saw how hard he worked to defend her, he’s crossed the line a few too many times IMO but you can’t argue he didn’t push the witnesses including the parents themselves. And you’ve got this snowball effect of idiots thinking he’s crap at his job.
They can't KNOW that Letby wasn't on duty for any other incidents unless they have access to her full rota for the whole.p3riod which they don't. Disappointed in Rob Rinder, I liked him and I liked his books. Thought he would have had more sense
I agree with you on that. I had previously found him likable and read his first crime novel which I enjoyed. Looking at his Wiki it looks like he's mainly specialized in fraud and other financial crime and I can't see that he's a KC so not on the level of BM or NJ in the legal profession. I've listened to the interesting LL podcast of the two other KC's (I cannot remember their names) and they discussed the trial in a very balanced way. So as you say Rinder has spoken quite recklessly about the case without knowing the full trial details which you wouldn't expect from a qualified barrister.
- Status