Lucy Letby (2)

I’m neither a legal nor a medical expert so I can’t comment on that.

The NHS is a shitshow, I agree with that.

I just don’t think people would be examining this in such minute detail if she was someone else.

I cannot even begin to imagine the pain the parents are going through. They are trapped in a living nightmare; however, I don't think this is a good enough reason not to challenge blatantly poor medical care, policing, and justice. Not least because the parents deserve the truth, and they don't have that yet.

Whether you believe Letby is guilty or not, I think we can all agree that none of the babies died from overfeeding or air in the stomach. There are also serious doubts about the air embolism and insulin diagnosis that need to be addressed.

There's also the fact that until we know what went so very, very wrong at COCH, Cheshire Police, and the expert witness system that allowed this mess to happen, we cannot take steps to ensure it never happens again. That it could happen again should be of concern to anyone who uses the NHS or relies upon British policing and the justice system to keep them safe.

At the risk of getting flamed, I wonder whether people would be so quick to doubt the conviction if it hadn’t been a young, white, vaguely attractive woman who was found guilty?

Also isn’t it rather disrespectful to the families whose babies died to keep rehashing the medical details?

Should be good.

I don't have TV channels so will have to wait until it gets uploaded somewhere else, hopefully by Tuesday!

'Not fully formed' does not mean that MM was suggesting they're not actually proper human beings.

You're choosing to get outraged over something that he never implied.

This child, this vulnerable neonate, not a baby, not a fully formed baby, but one that was still developing was seriously ill and that's why they died."
what a disgusting, patronising thing for those poor parents to read
if premature babies aren’t actually proper human beings let’s forget controlling late abortion hey.
he’s a self serving, glory seeking career barrister who wants to be a Michael Mansfield but isn’t. I used to be impressed by mark mcdonald but not now

He is a barrister, badly phrased and inarticulate is not acceptable. He said it and it is indefensible

I had all 3 of my DC at COCH
i know quite a few very experienced, exceptional, dedicated ITU nurses who work there
i also know one of the consultants giving evidence and I think he is arrogant, misogynistic and self-absorbed
still believe she is 💯 guilty

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/40438179/letby-victims-died-impossible-surgeons-verdict/

I see Dewi is sitting down with a vascular doctor in this new documentary out tomorrow.

You were belittling posters with your comments, you told one they had a real problem if they didn't think that word was dehumanising, and how it was indefensible 'no matter how we all try'.
I responded because you then asked why didn't he say that then, even though he did, which is what those posters have been explaining to you over all the posts.

Is it not enough to just think it was a bad term to use? but to instead try to make out he said something awful deliberately and that anyone clarifying it is doing something indefensible isn't in any way fair or accurate.

I don't think the term is dehumanising in the context in which he used it, instead it's just stating how vulnerable they were. Doesn't mean I'm saying something horrible. When my waters broke at 36 weeks, even at that point I was told that they didn't want to induce me yet because my baby wasn't fully formed.

I can understand how the term may be considered offensive in other contexts, but he did not use the term in a different context, and instead was using it to express their vulnerability, which is completely different.

I'm not sure why that is a shame? It just shows that we can agree with people on some topics but not on others, but for this particular part of the discussion you were the one belittling others and being rude repeatedly.

I have literally never heard any of my friends or family saying 'I was on the floor crying' metaphorically. But it could happen I guess.

You probably "literally never heard and of your friends or family" being serial baby killers, or even just turning out to be so starkly different from who they seem to be. But that's what the prosecution says happened. To the extent that our personal experience is a useful guide for what to believe, the prosecution's claims warrant great skepticism.

Rude! I had an opinion. It doesn't agree with yours. Tattle or Reddit. What? I have been on here for years.
That is the trouble with some of the people who think she is innocent. Everything is perfect nobody did anything wrong. Literally not even he should not have said that it must be hard for the parents but no its all excuse.
I do think she is guilty but I don't agree with everyone. I can see problems on the prosecution side too. As I said very rude! Enjoy your Sunday.

You’ve picked a couple of words out of the whole interview. Along with your little gang you’ve been banging on about minutiae for 2 days now and you still have the gall to accuse other people of having an agenda. Pop off back to your coven on Reddit or Tattle or whatever echo chamber you inhabit why don’t you, and stop boring us rigid.

I did and read it. No need to belittle. I have said why in several posts. If you don't agree says more about you than my comprehension. Shame as I agreed with your points on the Clancy thread.

He did say that.

Did you even listen to what he said or did you just decide that the other poster had a twisted agenda without bothering to Listen to what MM said?

Words have impact its literally his job!

You're being ridiculous. It's a medical fact.

Oh please! You are making excuses for your own twisted agenda. Why didn't he say that then? Intent and impact are two different things as he well knows. Ok he is no Einstein but he is intelligent enough to know what he says had impact.

It really did come across as “they weren’t proper babies anyway

Given that the point he was making was how vulnerable the babies were it didn’t come across that he was dismissing them as not proper babies at all. You are picking on a turn of phrase and deliberately attributing a negative meaning to support your own twisted agenda.

My grandson was born just 5 weeks early last year and he needed surfactant and breathing support; the reason he needed those things was because he wasn’t finished growing and developing in utero. The fact that he needed those extra weeks inside to be fully developed and capable of independent life on the outside didn’t make him not a proper baby, but it did make it harder for him to adapt and it’s not in any way inappropriate or dehumanising to describe him as not fully formed at the time he was born, he just wasn’t ready.

What he said was disgusting and insensitive. It really did come across as “they weren’t proper babies anyway”.
But the fact is most of them were 30 weeks plus gestation and expected to survive.
It was baby after baby dying unexpectedly, experienced nurses and consultants saying they’d never seen anything like it before.
It wasn’t normal, the hospital had problems but these were not normal deaths.

The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears.

This thread 🤦‍♀️

Oh yes I absolutely agree. Claims on this thread that they have been dismissed as “not babies” I don’t think are a fair representation of what has actually been said any why medical accuracy is important.