Lucy Letby Case #79

[Tofino]

It’s what I expected although you never know if there is an unknown legal technicality and it’s nice to hear it confirmed.

Now hope they all fuck off. (But they won’t. And I expect McDick to have another publicity stunt lined up already)

 

[Tomi2015]

I thought exactly the same

View attachment 3468849

95% dirty old men

 

[Tofino]

makes me want to cry seeing Dr J and Dr B finally getting the support they needed from the start. Bet Crapton doesn’t report on this!

 

[Tofino]

https://archive.is/8FLJO

Panic stations at Maltin PR HQ, the media pushback against Mark McDoodah and his expert panel is starting

There’s a Mirror article too https://archive.is/XNRxq

It’s actually great that it’s their own strategy that’s backfiring on them. Their desperation for public support means they exposed themselves and given the other legal teams a head start in debunking it before McD has even submitted his full application.

Makes me start to wonder if he’s doing this purposely to test the evidence and experts before he takes it to CCRC look how quickly Dimitrova and Aiton were replaced.

 

[Tofino]

Thanks, Tofino! Sounds like at least someone in Parliament is seeing through the bullshine.

I like how he called out his ‘colleague’.

Letby has a legal route to take just like any other convicted criminal. I am not opposed to that at all because we need a way for actual miscarriages of justices to be uncovered and dealt with eg Andrew Malkinson. And of course CCRC has its faults which need addressing but the route is there.

The publicity stunts are harmful and upsetting to the families because they are not required. They don’t change the legal routes that are open to Letby. It’s performative and political but what does it achieve? The Double Jeopardy podcast said they would expect the CCRC to take this new panel evidence very seriously - well, I would actually expect them to take any application by anyone very seriously. Same for the CoA. Not just Letby.

If there are any fundamental issues with the justice system - eg I know expert witnesses is a current hot topic - that’s an entirely different campaign and debate and no amount of Letby press conferences is going to change any legal processes for that.

 

[tay65]

The Letbyists will be foaming at the mouth with this news

This is great news, it highlights what a good KC she had defending her (one of the best) something McDonald will never be.

 

[Tofino]

The argument that she also wrote ‘I did nothing wrong’ is so ridiculous to me. Can people really not see the difference?

If someone pleads not guilty then changes their plea to guilty do you think “oh but he also said he was not guilty so I just don’t know what to think.”

 

[Apostate]

re. the Jayaram email

The latest crazy theory from the Letby supporters is that Ben Myers KC deliberately chose not use this at Baby K's Court of Appeal so it could be kept back for the CCRC application so that it could then go back to....... the Court of Appeal.

Okaaaaaaaay...

 

[Tofino]

What is he actually on about? Her guilt wasn't the conclusion of the inquiry but the starting point and the whole reason the inquiry happened! Why can't these morons understand the difference between an inquiry and a trial?

Yep that is fact, whether he agrees with it or not. No wonder he thinks she’s innocent if he can’t even understand the basic facts of an inquiry. We are dealing with a bunch of thickos here.

 

[MmmB777]

Imagine just trying to have a peaceful meal in the Cheshire Oaks Las Iguanas when in walks Worzel Gummidge’s long lost brother. As he gets closer, you are hit with the overwhelming stench of Edam, stale knitwear and rotten eggs. He sits down next to you and rapidly pulls out some paper and a pencil, manically plotting a line graph and muttering continuously “I will get her out. I will get her out”.
The waitress approaches and asks the smelly weirdo “what would you like” but strangely the man replies “Lucy free! Lucy free!”. The waitress politely says “I’m sorry Sir, if you’re not going to order, I’ll have to ask you to leave”. With that, the man jumps up screeching “Don’t you know who I am?! I’m Richard Gill. I’ve produced the worlds finest line graph for the PhD holding mega scientist Professor Sarrita Adams! I’m the most eminent statistician in the universe! I don’t want quesadillas, I want Letby free!”
As the waitress grappled the stinky oddball out of the turquoise doors he screams “Ben Geen not tacos! Lucia De Berk not tortillas! Free Beverly Allitt!”

 

[Tofino]

Hi guys, I followed Letby's trial on here with the excellent work of @Tofino and others, and I posted intermittently during her trial. I am 100% convinced of her guilt - her own testimony completely condemned her. I haven't really been following the details of the calls for a retrial because I find it all completely distasteful. However, I just wanted to ask something that I picked up on here a couple of days ago: is it true that Letby isn't working with MacDonald on the appeal? I seem to have picked up on here that she has refused him access to her defence papers and other material not in the public domain already?

If this is the case, how does MacDonald justify this in terms of why she isn't fully behind them and wanting to co-operate with people who will supposedly prove her innocence?

I think what you’ve picked up on is her right to legal privilege.

So her trials and permissions to appeal were all done with Ben Myers KC. Myers and her defence team are not allowed to discuss her defence (what expert reports they received, what the reports said. why they didn’t call anyone to give evidence etc) unless she waives legal privileges.

McDonald is her new barrister (not a KC) working on her case going forwards. It’s no longer Ben Myers. But Letby hasn’t waived privileges (confirmed by McD) so he has none of that information on her previous defence strategy.

What this means, is when McDonald presents to the CCRC or Court of Appeal his ‘new evidence’, one of the first things he will be asked is why this wasn’t called at trial originally. Is it really new? Or did you already know this and chose not to call it?

And I think his only answer will be ‘I don’t know, Letby won’t tell me’ although he will try to fluff around it.

It sounds like it will make it very difficult for him to argue her case that this is new evidence. Expert shopping is also frowned upon. A new expert opinion on the same evidence called at trial is not new evidence . But it isn’t stopping him from trying.

We have discussed why, if you are innocent, would you not allow your new defence barrister to know absolutely everything that happened in the original trials. You would want them to look at every little thing to see if anything went wrong or something was missed that he could use.

 

[slingo16]

But, what about "I havent done anything wrong" ??

She might not see murdering babies as being wrong, right and wrong is different for everyone, none of us get to decide what Lucy Letby thinks is right or wrong. “I killed them on purpose” cannot be misinterpreted, what else could she mean by those words?

 

[Tofino]

They address some individuals. Surprisingly they are supportive of Bergerac. I understand the position that they still needed to provide occ health support to Letby during that time but I feel the extent it went to with personal messages crossed boundaries?

Not so supportive of the exec…

 

[Tofino]

She did confirm it but she also said it wasn't significant and that the baby dod not have APP syndrome, which Lee is claiming he did have. Antibodies passed via the placenta, does not mean the baby itself had the condition. There was no evidence of blood clots

Not sure who to believe when it comes to blood clots and disorders. A professor in paediatric haematology or a retired neonatologist who is butt hurt the appeal courts rejected his evidence.

Such a toughie in the game of Letby Top Trumps

 

[SpendTooMuchTimeOnHere]

So many bizarre people out there. Let’s all just do away with the court system and stick a guilty/not guilty poll on social media in the future…it’s all madness. She’s so guilty

 

[Hazara04]

Just out of curiosity, what are you all going to do if she is found to be innocent of all charges against her based on new evidence? The medical negligence going on in the NHS is irrefutable, it’s no secret that the NHS is underfunded and the workers are overworked and pushed to their limits. I’ve linked below an article that describes almost exactly the same negligence as was shown in the LL case from a hospital in Shropshire, just an hour away from Chester. I personally have heard no end of stories about medical negligence and tbh just straight up misconduct from my local hospital. Hospitals are rife with it.

So many of you log on here every day to protest her guilt and type paragraphs and paragraphs detailing how disgusting she is and how much you hate her. I just hope that if she is found innocent you will continue to do what you’re doing, but instead be a voice for all of the mothers who have lost their children, for all the babies that have lost their lives, and a voice for all of the overworked and underpaid staff in hospitals that are in desperate need of help.

These types of cases evoke a lot of emotion, I get that but with new evidence coming to light, I cannot understand why very little of you are open minded to the fact. I think that if you were in her position and were imprisoned based on false, fictitious evidence you would like somebody fighting your corner.

link to article - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-shropshire-60925959.amp

Just because medical negligence happens within the NHS, doesnt mean that we should automatically give Letby the benefit of the doubt and just give her a free pass to attack babies. Her defence robustly argued that sub optimal care could have caused their deaths but it didn't hold up to scrutiny in court.

There has been no new evidence to prove her innocence and the evidence that convicted her in its entirety was overwhelming. Unless anything major happens why would we be open to the fact that she didnt kill and attempt to kill multiple babies. Are you also open to the fact Beverly Allit is innocent? Their cases were very similar

If her application to the CCRC / court of appeals is rejected and she is charged with more attacks and murders will be accept her guilt?

 

[AllieBee]

What do you think their agenda is?

Their agenda is as per the remit they were given and which we have seen. They were to find a cause of death, anything at all, that would mean the death was not a deliberate act. Now if that's impartial I'm the Pope

 

[AllieBee]

Well people can read and make up their own minds about who is a thicko I guess. And honestly I don’t think the combative responses are justified, but you know guys, you do you.

Oh we will do us thank you. We understand the evidence and have watched it build day by day throughout the trial. We are used to people like you coming on, stirring the pot and then sodding off again. So bye....

 

[Tofino]

The COCH final submission is probably worthy of a full read tbh and worth pointing out to doubters.

It’s just full of stuff like this. “Subject matter experts [paediatriacians] were dismissed in favour of those of a non-expert in Ian Harvey”

The shade ok own up, which one of you on here is in COCH’s legal team! Definitely a tattler

 

[Ghostranch]

They're not doing her any favours with that massive poster with the mask. Looks like something out of a horror film.