Lucy Letby Case #82

New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
Order Thread by Most Liked Posts
I

IGiveUp22

Tofino said:
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.
Click to expand...
Yeah it is very interesting, especially since it was BNE who was the defence - now we don’t know if he advised JV not to have their pathologist take the stand and it was JV who insisted but again, similar to Letby’s experts, they largely agreed with the prosecution. I also think if I remember correctly, it was only some babies they could offer an alternative for and not all of them which of course is extremely damning for Letby.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 12
A

Apostate

Tofino said:
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.
Click to expand...
Interestingly Professor Crane said some of the injuries could have come from resuscitation and other causes not deliberate. Seems the jury did not believe this. Sounds familiar.

Any appeal for the convictions regarding Preston, unless it's some kind of technicality such as judge direction, would need to be that they discovered Preston had some kind of medical condition, unknown to the trial, which explained the death and injuries. Same for Letby - except that there are 13 babies who need previously unknown conditions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 8
MavisBeacon

MavisBeacon

Apostate said:
Interestingly Professor Crane said some of the injuries could have come from resuscitation and other causes not deliberate. Seems the jury did not believe this. Sounds familiar.

Any appeal for the convictions regarding Preston, unless it's some kind of technicality such as judge direction, would need to be that they discovered Preston had some kind of medical condition, unknown to the trial, which explained the death and injuries. Same for Letby - except that there are 13 babies who need previously unknown conditions.
Click to expand...
But the sink overflowed!!! And that killed them all!!!




🙄
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2
C

Cosytidy

I listen to The Trial pod & noticed an influx of low reviews for it. Reading them there’s a theme of calling Caroline & Liz biased in their reporting. A few of these reference Letby & I suspect the rest are Letby supporters.

Obviously they’re oddballs but it’s ludicrous to suggest impartiality needs to remain after conviction!

I loathe the Daily Mail but that’s a really well done pod & I respect Caroline & Liz.
 
  • Like
  • Heart
Reactions: 13
MavisBeacon

MavisBeacon

Cosytidy said:
I listen to The Trial pod & noticed an influx of low reviews for it. Reading them there’s a theme of calling Caroline & Liz biased in their reporting. A few of these reference Letby & I suspect the rest are Letby supporters.

Obviously they’re oddballs but it’s ludicrous to suggest impartiality needs to remain after conviction!

I loathe the Daily Mail but that’s a really well done pod & I respect Caroline & Liz.
Click to expand...
Sidebar but I know quite a few journalists who have written for the Mail. Some of them are aligned with its politics and crappy ragebait stuff, others recognise the value of the huge platform it has to get good journalism out there. I'd put Caroline and Liz in that category.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5
P

Penguinfeet

I found out yesterday that my mum thinks LL is innocent. My ghast has never been so flabbered. Im not sure I’m even related to her anymore! I kept up with this case as it was ongoing, I deep dived, I went down a rabbit hole, I read court documents, transcripts, legal things - I’m autistic ffs, I don’t let things go. She read the newspapers and watched the daytime tv reports and is arguing that she knows *knows* she is innocent. I had to end the conversation and put the phone down 🥴
 
  • Sad
  • Like
  • Wow
Reactions: 14
T

Tofino

The Lucy Letby fan club continuing to show everyone how unhinged they are. When are we going to see some arrests for harrassment??

IMG_9960.jpeg
 
  • Haha
  • Wow
  • Angry
Reactions: 21
S

sebanna



This is a really interesting video discussing the statistics and how unlikely it was all just down to chance. It's upset Richard Gill.
 
  • Like
  • Heart
Reactions: 13
Danica Catrick

Danica Catrick

sebanna said:


This is a really interesting video discussing the statistics and how unlikely it was all just down to chance. It's upset Richard Gill.
Click to expand...
liked the accessible way he presented the statistics in this video, thanks for sharing.

The comments are full of Letby apologists telling him he's wrong, including Richard Gill 🙄
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1
Erling Haaland

Erling Haaland

Has anyone read the Ockenden report on Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust? I’m about a third of the way through and it’s quite shocking
 
Tomi2015

Tomi2015

What makes me laugh is these absolute rooster spiders and the groups they create on facebook. “Road to freedom”. “Road to exoneration”. The meltdown is going to be epic when the CCRC throw it out. I will be there for it 🤣
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: 11
MmmB777

MmmB777

  • Like
Reactions: 10
MmmB777

MmmB777

👍
Yes only in this context. A lot of the morons online are trying to use this inquiry to suggest that it means a failing hospital or failures in care were responsible for the deaths of the babies in the Letby case. They were failing at CoCH but only failing to stop Letby. Sure, it’s all failures, all failure to prevent harm. Then the similarities end because CoCH babies were deliberately murdered by Letby which is a very different thing.
IMG_2096.jpeg
 
  • Like
Reactions: 11
Fruitshop

Fruitshop

I
MmmB777 said:
👍
Yes only in this context. A lot of the morons online are trying to use this inquiry to suggest that it means a failing hospital or failures in care were responsible for the deaths of the babies in the Letby case. They were failing at CoCH but only failing to stop Letby. Sure, it’s all failures, all failure to prevent harm. Then the similarities end because CoCH babies were deliberately murdered by Letby which is a very different thing.
View attachment 4041200
Click to expand...
hardly ever come back on to this thread anymore but MmmB777, your avatar never fails to make me laugh 😆
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: 8
You must log in or register to reply here.