I feel fairly sure you can’t sue a witness for something they said in court. And even if she tried, the fact that she didn’t remove Letby shows that on the balance of probabilities (legal test for defamation) is that she did have that conversation even if not directly those words. She’s already confirmed he did call her and ask her to remove Letby.
She’s absolutely off her rocker!That NG one called Barbara Lyon. duck me she is so painfully dense. She still think that the bleeping vermin is going to be exonerated one day
She must share a single brain cell with that other idiot, Christopher 
I really hope you're right and I hope there are charges from her time at LWH as this will help to shut up the likes of Jeremy Vine, David Davis et al. Two hospitals will disprove all the BS about COCH failings.
The book states they spoke to a source about her earlier placement at LWH in 2012, who said there was a number of concerning incidents and the number of events was ridiculously high. This period at LWH appears to be an active line of inquiry for operation Hummingbird so little has been said.
he knew a bit about the case but not all the details.I'm a bit behind, sorry, but I've been working NNU adjacent for hospitals in our local area for ten years now and I can count on one hand the number of babies we've lost all those years. These people that assume premature babies just die all the time are so wrong.
I've found the last couple of chapters particularly interesting as the authors have interviewed a lot of experts. The insulin evidence is very well explained. The first chapter is about Letby’s background and it then tells the story of what happened to the babies. I've not had chance to read the middle chapters yet.
I don’t think she’s got the guts to do herself in. Maybe once her parents pass on she’ll say that she wishes to die and try and starve herself for attention like Ian Brady did. Hopefully then she gets force fed like he did so she can continue her miserable existence until she naturally expires.
They are so thick. The appeal was only for baby K, the judges were not there to judge the other verdicts.
My mum is the same. I’ve been on at her to engage with the case as I have really wavered over guilty/not guilty in the early days and I’ve wanted to know her opinion as she is pretty much always on the money. It was the same with her - the triplets left her in absolutely no doubt she’s guilty as hell.Mr Beacon is reading Judith Moritz's book and the soundtrack is basically "holy tit! What the duck?" He's just got to the Triplets
On Mumsnet they are saying the judges were discrediting Dr Jayram as he kept changing his story.
I had wondered if this was a tick box exercise - do they need to exhaust the appeals process before going to CCRC? but clearly Myers didn’t have much to go on. And CCRC is notoriously harder to overcome so Myers wouldn’t have deliberately held back if he had any actual valid appeal arguments.
My understanding is this: they do need to go to appeal to be able to then go to the CCRC. But this was their chance to appeal what happened during the Baby K trial. They can't now appeal against the judge's directions or anything that was dismissed or refused by the judge since they have now had opportunities to do so. There was nothing to be gained by not presenting other grounds if there were any. Same goes for all the other convictions. So the CCRC will only consider new evidence that was not available to the courts in the trials. I can only see this being compelling new medical evidence or serious misconduct by the prosecution.
So Mark Mcdonald can't use the insulin evidence or the air embolism rash to order a retrial. Its going to hard going, a "Superbug" that no baby had and a chart which looks more damning for Lucy when you add the non indictment deaths on.
