- Notice
Shinythings
VIP Member
I'm sick of arguing with idiots about this. Every post out come the morons with the same sound bite arguments having the audacity to tell me to 'do my research' when if they had followed the trial for even a day they would realise how stupid they sound. Babe, I've been following this trial since day 1, have some respect.
LittleMy
VIP Member
Is it definitely our Big Nick? Not this guy?Anyone brave enough to follow the trial for poor baby Preston currently going on? To my absolute horror our BNE is KC for the defence.
I found it really strange how the general public were pleased about Huntley being beaten to death but concerned about Letby being woken up too early on the morning of her arrest and the neighbours possibly seeing her dressing gown ( even though she could have worn her coat instead).
They are both child murderers they are as a bad as each other.
They are both child murderers they are as a bad as each other.
Tomi2015
VIP Member
Once this is all over and done with and it’s made official that the creature isn’t going anywhere. The parents should sue every one of these so called experts and journalists that have too much to say, for emotional distress. Especially Gill and that Dorres cunt or whatever her name is
DianaBanana
VIP Member
The response from Cheshire police is wonderful.
A statement issued by the force in response to the allegations said: “Cheshire Constabulary strongly refutes all the points made during the adjournment debate. It implied impropriety on the part of Cheshire Constabulary where none whatsoever has been established.
“We remain confident in the integrity of the investigation, the conduct of the prosecution, and the decisions reached by the courts.
“Over the past two years the force has come under constant criticism and has been intensely scrutinised and subject to unpleasant opinion from a core group of individuals who appear to pride themselves on spreading misinformation, making baseless claims and attempting to destroy reputations.
“While scrutiny of policing is legitimate and welcome, it is essential that such scrutiny is grounded in fact and does not inadvertently cut across due process, ongoing legal considerations, or the independence of the judiciary.
“The constant noise surrounding this case, inaccurate or partial information being presented as fact and attempts to hi-jack the perceived narrative risk undermining public confidence not only in this case – but in the wider criminal justice system.
Public confidence is best served by evidence-based discussion and responsible commentary – not ill-informed personal opinions and inaccurate details. We are committed to victim-focused justice, public confidence, and the rule of law. Our thoughts remain with the families of the babies – who have always been at the heart of this case.”
A statement issued by the force in response to the allegations said: “Cheshire Constabulary strongly refutes all the points made during the adjournment debate. It implied impropriety on the part of Cheshire Constabulary where none whatsoever has been established.
“We remain confident in the integrity of the investigation, the conduct of the prosecution, and the decisions reached by the courts.
“Over the past two years the force has come under constant criticism and has been intensely scrutinised and subject to unpleasant opinion from a core group of individuals who appear to pride themselves on spreading misinformation, making baseless claims and attempting to destroy reputations.
“While scrutiny of policing is legitimate and welcome, it is essential that such scrutiny is grounded in fact and does not inadvertently cut across due process, ongoing legal considerations, or the independence of the judiciary.
“The constant noise surrounding this case, inaccurate or partial information being presented as fact and attempts to hi-jack the perceived narrative risk undermining public confidence not only in this case – but in the wider criminal justice system.
Public confidence is best served by evidence-based discussion and responsible commentary – not ill-informed personal opinions and inaccurate details. We are committed to victim-focused justice, public confidence, and the rule of law. Our thoughts remain with the families of the babies – who have always been at the heart of this case.”
Chief Constable of Cheshire writes to the Speaker of the Commons accusing Sir David Davis of misleading the house
archive.is
Top cop hits back and accuses senior Tory who criticised Lucy Letby i…
archived 13 Apr 2026 03:00:59 UTC
AllieBee
VIP Member
I have no sympathy for her whatsoever. In fact I hope she lives in fear every day of the rest of her life.
Tomi2015
VIP Member
I don’t rise to it anymore. It used to wind me up and I’d go on a mad rant to them, now I just delete any articles I see about Lucifer. They’re fucking morons. All they can do is scream “scapegoat”. Or in some cases “escape goat”
Attachments
dustyrhodes
VIP Member
Looks like the Thirwall Inquiry has been exemplary.
Looking forward to the publication.
Looking forward to the publication.
Tomi2015
VIP Member
About time something was done about that odious cretin
I know many here are also on the Preston Davey thread. From a legal / justice perspective I’ve found it fascinating seeing what happens when the defence do present a medical expert on the stand.
And the 29 unanimous guilty verdicts in that case shows that it doesn’t mean that even when there is an expert for the defence (who was actually a highly regarded forensic pathologist of 40 years) doesn’t mean their evidence is enough for the jury to think there is reasonable doubt. Clearly with the Preston case, the jury found all the other evidence alongside the medical evidence, far too compelling to think there’s any doubt.
Something the Letbyists don’t see to understand that an alternative medical opinion is not enough to be considered reasonable doubt. It has to be tested in court and weighed up against all evidence as a whole. Letby could present everthing Shoo Lee et al are saying and still be found guilty.
And their evidence isn’t even new anyway.
And the 29 unanimous guilty verdicts in that case shows that it doesn’t mean that even when there is an expert for the defence (who was actually a highly regarded forensic pathologist of 40 years) doesn’t mean their evidence is enough for the jury to think there is reasonable doubt. Clearly with the Preston case, the jury found all the other evidence alongside the medical evidence, far too compelling to think there’s any doubt.
Something the Letbyists don’t see to understand that an alternative medical opinion is not enough to be considered reasonable doubt. It has to be tested in court and weighed up against all evidence as a whole. Letby could present everthing Shoo Lee et al are saying and still be found guilty.
And their evidence isn’t even new anyway.
scantysandwich
VIP Member
As kind as Bin Laden’s though?I don’t know guys.. I’ve been reading a lot of Reddit, listening to John Sweeney, reading through Gill’s rants and I am starting to wonder if there is some truth in their stuff after all
She does have kind eyes.
MmmB777
VIP Member
I also find it utterly disgusting he is pontificating about the fact she won't have children when she has murdered premature babies.