I still say she didn’t give a toss about Dr noname/Deakin. It was more about getting one over on his wife and kids because she loved to wreck happy families.
I don’t understand why these weirdos think the inquiry should have been postponed until after any and every appeal process has been turned down. She was found guilty and it’s a fact. The families needed answers, why should they have to wait until the circus clowns have packed up and left town? Going on about “let’s just have a retrial and then we can be sure”. The jury was sure, 2 juries in fact. “Her defence was poor/the jury didn’t hear all the facts”- her defence had NOTHING to work with and seemingly couldn’t call any experts without incriminating her. What facts did the jury not hear that would’ve changed the verdict? As far as I have observed they weren’t told of several things that raised suspicion even more, and the “facts” they bleat on were missing are easily accounted for and not relevant. See, this is why I don’t post very often these days, I go on long rants about things we already know but when I recall them I get angry again!
