I think they just have to introduce enough reasonable doubt that the jury can't convict. I I think the professional testimonies in this will have a big bearing and how well the defence witnesses can undermine the prosecution ones.I do wonder though if LL knew this would be the evidence put forward why has she pled not guilty? Unless she actually is not guilty? I know that I could not sit and listen to all the horrific things I had done to those poor infants played out in court when I knew I had done it and they had overwhelming evidence. I wonder what her defence will be.
Could it be if she pleaded guilty she would be sent to prison for life as no way would she get early release, so her only hope of freedom is pleading not guilty ( unless of course she actually is !)….I do wonder though if LL knew this would be the evidence put forward why has she pled not guilty? Unless she actually is not guilty? I know that I could not sit and listen to all the horrific things I had done to those poor infants played out in court when I knew I had done it and they had overwhelming evidence. I wonder what her defence will be.
I agree but I remember seeing a request for a case like this before and I don’t think the mods were too keen. Might have been Archee battersbea?Been following this thread since it was opened and its already approaching the end quickly, it might be worth having a wiki. Over on the nursemum thread we never did one and now it would take too long to go back and list all the important incidents, negligence and facts so it may be worth having a wiki on this thread from the start. If this is going to go on for 6 months, there is going to be a lot of fast moving threads and it will be difficult to keep up.
I guess there’s a few things to consider,I do wonder though if LL knew this would be the evidence put forward why has she pled not guilty? Unless she actually is not guilty? I know that I could not sit and listen to all the horrific things I had done to those poor infants played out in court when I knew I had done it and they had overwhelming evidence. I wonder what her defence will be.
Yeah you’re right: it’s just unthinkable to think any of that re wanting people to know and it be in the public domain what she has doneI guess there’s a few things to consider,
- what if she didn’t do it? Everyone has a right to a fair trial
- what if she did do it but due to some kind of mental health reason didn’t believe she was harming them?
- what if she wants everyone to know what she’s done? If she pleaded guilty this wouldn’t go to trial or would any of the information be public.
I guess there a lots of reasons!
Interestingly, back in 2020 the charge was murder of 5 boys and 3 girls, and attempted murder of 5 boys and 5 girls.I get what you mean! 5 boys and 2 girls for the murder charges and 5 boys and 5 girls for attempted murders.
Sometimes killers enjoy reliving it by having to listen to the evidence.I do wonder though if LL knew this would be the evidence put forward why has she pled not guilty? Unless she actually is not guilty? I know that I could not sit and listen to all the horrific things I had done to those poor infants played out in court when I knew I had done it and they had overwhelming evidence. I wonder what her defence will be.
My (red-haired) daughters tell me this all the time!I also have red hair and I have been told this before too. I am not sure if its an officially researched opinion but have been told both by doctors and dentists that I need more anaesthetic than is usually required and they've seen this a lot in people of my complexion!
Thanks so much this is much more detailed than the sky news live updates.They are on www.leaderlive.co.uk
That's an extremely creepy thing to do.This is a big red flag for me. What explanation can there be for searching the families on FB?
Oh wow."Police later questioned Letby about why she had tracked the families of her alleged victims on Facebook.
"Lucy Letby's interest in the families of the children who we say she attacked is another feature of the case which we will see as the evidence emerges," he says.
"We suggest it is an unusual interest and we will see that on occasions she searched in quick succession for several of the families of children's names who appear on this indictment."
That's pretty chilling.
https://news.sky.com/story/lucy-let...n-trial-12716378?postid=4632349#liveblog-body
Same before my now business I was a health care professional for over 10 years never would I Google a patient or the families. I find it very wierdI work in healthcare, and I can categorically say there's not one reason I could think of to look up the families of those in my care. My work is work, and once I leave the building it's out of my head. If there is evidence to suggest that she done that, then I am sorry, it's a weird thing to do.
Alot of families were probably initially told that their child had died of natural causes. I'm guessing (if guilty) she was intrigued by them not suspecting a thing and she was revelling in their pain (and probably wanted to see a gofundme that praised the staff who looked after their child).That's an extremely creepy thing to do.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?