Letby Case (part 2)

[OneFrenchEgg]

www.mumsnet.com/talk/_chat/4652340-lucy-letby-court-case?reply=121815754

follow up, remember rules around discussion of active cases

What does that mean?

His behaviour? I’m pretty certain he has behaved impeccably

But what’s Ben Myers got to do with it?

And Dr Jayram

The appeal court judgment indicates that the predicted flood of successful appeals in cases in which Professor Meadow gave evidence is unlikely to materialise. It shows that as far as the judges are concerned he has not been discredited generally as an expert witness but only where he ventured beyond his expertise.

^^

Roy Meadows made a disastrous error and he was punished for it. However his expertise was still highly regarded

Are you ok?

Is this Richard Gill?

I love how this thread goes in swings and roundabouts. I feel he is doing an excellent job too. If the lead "medical expert" has his integrity thrown into question it really puts the whole case on the line surely?

In terms of prosecution. If they deliberately mislead the jury is that allowed? For eg saying things that are completely incorrect, such as the insulin dose used to poison the first child is half that of the second, which has been proven to be incorrect today by Mr Myers? How can the prosecution say something that is completely wrong? Are these documents not in front of everyone to see?

Your posts are not clear.

Are you saying that the families are going to sue the NHS?

Or that Dr Jayram is going to be struck off?

Who knows the relevance to the case regarding the amounts... but the prosecution clearly stated that the 2nd baby received double the dose which was an "intent to kill". However this is completely untrue. It was half the dose for the second baby.

Insulin poisoning for both but the prosecution stated something which was completely incorrect and misled everyone in the court.

So how does the prosecution make such an error?

Ben Myers is doing his job, he's defending his client. Let's suppose he has introduced enough doubt about the medical experts, what does that leave us with? The insulin cases are what's left and is there enough proof it was her? Someone poisoned those babies but he doesn't need to prove who.

It's always a busy time for the gmc (if i could roll my eyes now I would)

As an experienced medical professional you will know like I do that nurses and midwives tend to take the flack for doctors errors....

I've thought this trial was questionable from the start but now I know the prosecution can mislead the court in such a magnitude?! It should be thrown out. How is this a fair trial.

Yes but the prosecution have stated something that is completely untrue in order to show there was an "intent to kill"

If you give insulin to a baby is it not an intent to kill?

Just because there was less insulin in one baby it does not mean there was no intention to cause significant harm.

It is accepted that someone maliciously administered insulin into those bags.