I actually disagree, I’ve seen David Davis on more than one occasion stand up for what he thinks is the truth above his politics.
I know David Davis was a Brexit grifter, he coined the phrase “remainers Brexit”….but I’ve got time for him.
Lucy Letby case - Evidence discussion thread
- Thread starter IT Minion
- Start date
I know David Davis was a Brexit grifter, he coined the phrase “remainers Brexit”….but I’ve got time for him.
Sponsored Links
I feel that part, at least, was adequately explained away, in something I read. Due to the investigations, she had managed to convince herself, that she was the guilty party.
Thick as mince Cummins called him. Hmmm.
A doubt isn't enough, there has to be an error of law, or fresh evidence, and the CA has already said there the defence could have, but didn't, rely on the statistical interpretation point. Apparently it is very difficult to argue your legal team was incompetent, which seems unfair, especially given the horizon prosecutions where lawyers and judges seem to accept at face value that the IT couldn't be wrong. The CA doesn't step into the shoes of the jury, so it will be a long time, if ever, before they look at it again. The best bet is probably to look at the judges directions.
Sponsored Links
No one was interested, or the right experts weren't approached, but legal team negligence isn't a ground for appeal apparently.
The musings of a naive well meaning and frightened young women. She cooperated completely with the detectives, who seemed to take this as a sign of guilt rather than naivete. I am increasingly thinking the poor girl was a lamb to the slaughter.
Or environmental conditions, The stats show the death rate was higher for the period after she was charged.
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 16,209
- Reaction score
- 2,427
- Country
They follow a process where this is the last resort consideration. Not simply deciding if she is guilty or innocent.
Nothing is off the table.
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 16,209
- Reaction score
- 2,427
- Country
The fact is, she is very disturbed. But who wouldn’t be if your job was to save young babies and you were failing a lot.
Today I met a hospice nurse. I could not believe how she was able to do her job with such passion and compassion.
I know there was boll@x posted in the other thread about appeals.. so to correct the record…
Poor representation can indeed be grounds for appeal.
Last edited:
She definitely needs a new legal team to look at the whole thing afresh
With a 6 year police investigation she probably would be either way. I gained the impression that there was some finger pointing earlier on. I told you so style.
The shift pattern evidence is pretty strong but a number of different nurses always involved on the same days. Deaths could be looked at when she wasn't on shift As they all work rotations that may not be easy. Some nurses drop a shift and accept a reduced pay so nothing needs to be synchronised based on their standard shift pattern. Also are they working in an ICU all of the time?
The CPS choose evidence to achieve a guilty result. They chose to ignore a pathological report on 6 of 7 babies that showed nothing amiss. This relates to death due to air being the cause. There is arguments about ideas on how that was achieved. I can relate to air in stomach. Mild chest pains cured by a couple of forced burps. Mantioned to a doc who found that acceptable. Pains in the correct place. Me needing to force them another story.
Really it all depends on medical expectations on a particular baby and how accurate those are. In my granddaughters case there was no chance of her ever surviving out of an ICU. They did try what treatments they could use and they were not effective enough. Severe fits. I now have a grandson who may have finished up the same without direct medical intervention. Slight signs of the cause of problem were there.
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 16,209
- Reaction score
- 2,427
- Country
The biggest problem in many cases is the understanding of beyond reasonable doubt.
Even magistrates struggle with it.
Even magistrates struggle with it.
Piece of cake - once you've mastered how many members are on a jury.
In this case the whole thing depends on the medical view of the expectations for the baby. None go into an ICU unless there is something wrong.
Another factor as some might find the link too long to read
After further deaths in late June 2016, Letby was removed from neonatal duty. Around the same time, the hospital management downgraded the unit, so that it stopped taking the most premature babies with the highest risk of mortality. The number of deaths fell thereafter.
Earlier reports stated that the unit was overworked and had poor access to consultants. They know that premature births get more complicated the earlier they are also that this can effect the future development of the child when they do survive. This is likely to have figured in the medical figures presented to the jurors.
Another section
In autumn 2016, after the royal college report, Dr Jane Hawdon, the lead consultant neonatologist at the Royal Free hospital in London, looked at the cluster of deaths and collapses. Her review did not look at all the clinical notes, but leaked documents seen by the Guardian suggest that in 13 of the cases Hawdon reviewed she found the babies had received suboptimal care and the “death/collapse is explained but may have been prevented with different care”.
In four of the cases, the “death/collapse was unexplained” and she advised a deeper forensic review. The Guardian understands that another consultant neonatologist did then review the cases that were unexplained. Evans said her findings differed from his. She declined to comment.
CoC said it was unable to comment while other investigations and an inquiry were continuing.
Maybe the 2nd one did look at all of the clinical notes.
It was reading all of that which you pasted, which persuaded me that the conviction was perhaps unsafe..
Thank God the Blowhards on here will have no bearing on her guilt or not.
The initial study by Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health were bought in due to spike in baby deaths. 2013-2014 had 4 deaths. (each year according to the article), Then between June 2015 and 2016 reported 13 / 15 and more later. If the medical notes for these periods are compared and no difference found it's pretty damaging to her case.
LOL Blowhards - I'm more inclined to start on the basis that authorities are intelligent and do know what they are doing.
Also disgusted that an external superior person steps in and produces a report and doesn't appeared to have done it correctly. However we don't know what she considered. Same with what was presented to the jury.
LOL Blowhards - I'm more inclined to start on the basis that authorities are intelligent and do know what they are doing.
Also disgusted that an external superior person steps in and produces a report and doesn't appeared to have done it correctly. However we don't know what she considered. Same with what was presented to the jury.
Sponsored Links
