Lucy Letby (2)

That wasn't my point. I never asked whether the case presented at court convinced a non-qualified jury. I asked if the case presented at court was sound where are the medically qualified experts defending it?

There is nothing stopping experts who have confidence in the verdict from speaking out to defend Evans' case.

This really just shows thatyou have no idea what you are talking about when it comes to the reasons for allowing an appeal.

Maybe you should read up on it.

There is nothing stopping experts who have confidence in the verdict from speaking out to defend Evans' case.

Only abuse and death threats from the Letby camp.

Mark Mcdonald actually referred to the babies as "not fully formed" in an interview yesterday (it's about 7 mins in). All part of dehumanising her victims. I've always said he's a disgrace but this is a new low even for him. I'm sure her supporters will say this is fine, because they've lost all perspective and decency when it comes to defending her.

Death threats? That’s disgusting and definitely not OK. Who has been threatened?

What he said was factual. Neonates are not fully formed. There are nicer ways of putting it, I agree, but what he said was not dehumanising, it it is a fact. Their lungs, digestive system, and immune systems are not fully developed, hence the need for serious medical intervention.

I’m not going to defend his choice of words, which were crass and insensitive in this context.

However, they were accurate for all of the pre-term babies, by definition.

The words used also (to anyone with relevant medical knowledge) go to their vulnerability and deserving of top notch neonatal care, which they did not receive.

I think this is really excellent from Dr Ellen Storm:

Dr Ellen Storm: A Question of Statistics: Suspicion is Not Enough, 18th September 2026

"Witch Hunts begin with one person in authority standing up in public and saying 'Suspicion is Enough' "

If you think..
not a baby, not a fully formed baby is not dehumanising you have a real problem. Wow.

People grieved miscarriages as a baby. Do we say that to those women?

Always an excuse. 🤦‍♀️

I have had miscarriages and don’t object at all to the use of accurate medical language to describe the factual reality. And I feel strongly that factual/precise language is important at times and this case is an example of when it especially matters.

But I also accept that some people would find it extremely hard to hear, and I do have empathy for those people. The choice of phrasing could have been improved without compromising the integrity of the messaging in my opinion.

I agree with @EyeLevelStick that it speaks to the vulnerability of the babies in question and that they deserved/required a far higher standard of care in the unit than they received.

It is an absolutely horrific phase. Absolutely he could have phrased it better . Baby D was full term yes some were under the 28 day limit. Do all Mothers not say the 'baby' is born? Do they say they have a neonate?
He knew what he was saying and he didn't care.

Yes not sure of your point though. We don't call them not babies. We just don't. It's indefensible however much you all try. Especially when he bleats on about caring about the parents.

oh has he apologised to them?

I can only speak for myself but I do call them babies, and a baby born before term medically is a pre-term neonate. A pre-term neonate isn’t as developed as a full term neonate, but both are babies.

Personally speaking, I haven’t seen/read about anyone in this case who has said the infants weren’t babies.

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.

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

This thread 🤦‍♀️

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.

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.

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.