To be surprised this potential miscarriage of justice isn’t given more prominence

Tell the BBC!

I presume the Lucy Letby appreciation society would like for her to be released and again be in charge of tiny vulnerable babies again?

Would you be happy for her to be looking after your premature baby?

Do people genuinely believe that she wouldn’t ever harm a fly and would you genuinely have no doubts about leaving a baby in her care?

Where? Can you quote it?

It's not in the press statement. Honestly. I wouldn't bother making the point if he had denied it. It's only in the headline.

I wouldn't believe him anyway, but anyone who would should read what he actually said.

I find that a stretch but I don't think this is a point worth arguing about - it's not possible to judge people on whether they cry. It's interesting that the myth that she didn't cry about the babies took hold. Obviously when people cry it's in response to their own emotions about a situation - that's universal.

Except he hasn’t. He’s flatly denied having changed his opinion. Do keep up.

McDonald addressed dozens of points in the press conference? Which is Evans complaining about?

He could deny changing his mind very easily. He hasn't. People are just reading the headline.

If he did deny it, the statements he has made to the Sun, the BBC, C5 would find him out very quickly. If you read his statement, there's no denial.

it is in the public interest for a retrial .

No, it’s in Lucy Letby’s interest, nobody else’s.

The expert witness may have changed his mind about changing his mind

He hasn't though. He said of the lawyer: "Mark McDonald's observations regarding my evidence is unsubstantiated, unfounded, inaccurate."

It's all about her though - she says “I found [Child E’s] death very traumatic"

Not about the babies.

Plenty of new evidence has emerged since the conviction. It's also grounds for review of there are doubts about expert witnesses.

The expert witness may have changed his mind about changing his mind but since he's done so on the record to the media, it's going to be very hard to argue that his testimony was reliable.

There is no basis for an appeal.

Appeals are granted on the basis that new evidence has emerged, which isn’t the case.

The headline says that!

The expert didn't!

Here you are

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/may/05/lucy-letby-stunned-by-death-of-baby-she-is-accused-of-murdering

The quote about only crying for herself was just an assertion from the prosecution lawyer.

From the BBC website - their headline has that exact phrase, " expert denies he changed his mind"

www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cz6l0dynz7zo

A solicitor representing the families of six victims of Lucy Letby said online speculation about the safety of the nurse's conviction was "upsetting" for all of her clients.

So not sure why you think you know what would help them.

I didn't make any judgements, I simply clarified that she only cried for herself, not the children.

I've not seen any reports of her crying for the babies as evidence was given about the babies. Do you have a link?

And no, there is no evidence she cried at the time of killing the babies.

Likewise, and how does it help the families not to check LL's conviction? One child was due to have a coroner's inquest after a solicitor had advised that her care before death would be viewed as negligent. That was cancelled when the police enquiry started. The parents' lawyer is still asking questions about her care now, at the Thirlwall Enquiry.

I feel so sorry for the families but I believe LL is victim of a miscarriage of justice and a scapegoat for failings in the neonatal ward. The fact that so many experts are willing to speak up for her means that at least there should be an appeal.

My heart breaks for the families of those babies. They will never have peace and justice. They can never be sure of what happened.

She cried about the children as well. At the time, and at the trial.

Let's not make judgements based on how and when women show emotion and cry. It doesn't tell us anything.

I'm not saying tears mean that, you brought up Paula Vennells and said Lucy didn't cry. I'm clarifying she did cry, but only for herself.

Which I find concerning in itself. An appeal should be allowed . What are they worried about if the evidence is so strong ?

Was it evidence though or was it opinion and theory backed up by so called evidence from door swipe date which was then apparently incorrect ?

It’s got to the point that there are too many questions over these convictions and it is in the public interest for a retrial

Empty vessels make the most noise. Doesn't mean the noise is worth listening to.

Her leave to appeal has been denied.