|
|
Post by captainconfident on Sept 10, 2024 18:28:26 GMT
BBC R4 6o'clock news, about 13 minutes in, correspondent Judith Moritz said the following:-
"Letby's trial heard months worth of detail about how babies suddenly collapsed and died at the hospital in 2015 and 2016 and how the nurse was there every time".
It is precisely the fact that other babies died when the nurse was not there, and that this fact was excluded in visual and verbal presentations to the jury, and that by doing this any nurse working there could have been convicted, that is causing disquiet among statisticians about this verdict.
|
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Say No To T.D.S.
Posts: 5,677 
Likes: 2,974
|
Post by michaelc on Sept 10, 2024 18:40:38 GMT
Terrible, terrible state of affairs when we have this doubt (when we shouldn't as it should be beyond reasonable doubt and we ought to be reasonable). Months of very valuable court time and now we have this mess.
Whether guilty or not, there probably ought to be an investigation into whether the trial was fair and if it was and no rules broken, are there any rules that should be made or changed? I don't think the current process will look at that.
|
|
|
|
Post by captainconfident on Sept 10, 2024 19:43:36 GMT
There is a huge dissonance that this investigation starting today is going to to "learn lessons" from "murders", while appearances are that the area where lessons should be learned were in an understaffed and struggling department that had multiple baby deaths no matter who was present and where managerial failings were covered up by shifting the blame to an unpopular nurse.
|
|
|
|
Post by bernythedolt on Sept 10, 2024 20:14:05 GMT
Reports this week that she has appointed a new barrister. 'Lucy Letby’s case could be the “biggest miscarriage of justice in the history of the United Kingdom”, the lawyer behind a bid to overturn her convictions said.'
|
|
|
|
Post by captainconfident on Sept 10, 2024 20:29:29 GMT
|
|
travolta
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,506
Likes: 1,214
|
Post by travolta on Sept 11, 2024 15:17:35 GMT
Considering whats involved in attempting to preserve the life of many neonates , I feel she's been made to carry the can and certainly DID NOT deserve the charge of murder and certainly not that appalling sentence.
|
|
|
|
Post by captainconfident on Sept 11, 2024 19:14:32 GMT
Considering whats involved in attempting to preserve the life of many neonates , I feel she's been made to carry the can and certainly DID NOT deserve the charge of murder and certainly not that appalling sentence. None of us can say "she is innocent", and I'm sure you're not either, because we didn't sit in on the whole trial. But this case will keep popping back into the news because a weight of expert opinion from all parts of the legal, medical and mathematical professions are concerned about what they have seen and heard. It is also annoying that the media has been amplifying lawyers for the parents of the babies, saying that they are 'distressed' that anyone is discussing the guilt of the accused. As if it is better to have the result that someone has gone to prison than to examine the possibility that the deaths were actually caused by a failure of faceless NHS managers struggling with understaffing, constrained budgets and a building no longer fit for purpose. The exercise is complicated by the very bad decision of Wes Streeting to allow the official enquiry to get underway, which is seeking to learn lessons.... on how the NHS can better spot serial killers at work, where it can well be that it is systemic failure that needs to be addressed. Which means that there is probably no further action in examining the foundations of the Letby case until the enquiry reports, and that the report of the enquiry together with the previous reaffirmation of guilt by the appeal court will stand together as the verdict of The Establishment. Such that then to find that there was insufficient evidence in the first place would be seen as undermining the authority of the legal system with the consequence that senior figures too find it better for an innocent person to stay in prison. My guess is she will be in prison for a long time yet, until a later generation of justices replaces the current ones at the Appeal Court so the egg is only of the retired and deceased. That's usually how it works.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 9,978
Likes: 5,131
|
Post by adrianc on Sept 11, 2024 21:11:06 GMT
Terrible, terrible state of affairs when we have this doubt (when we shouldn't as it should be beyond reasonable doubt and we ought to be reasonable). Months of very valuable court time and now we have this mess. Whether guilty or not, there probably ought to be an investigation into whether the trial was fair and if it was and no rules broken, are there any rules that should be made or changed? I don't think the current process will look at that. Well, the original High Court verdict went before the Court of Appeal, who found no issue - and their judgement then got backed by the Supreme Court. Who's next, iyho?
|
|
|
|
Post by captainconfident on Sept 16, 2024 18:21:33 GMT
|
|
