Lucy Letby press conference

[Viviennemary]

There is a press conference going on now trying to get Lucy Letby's conviction overturned. From what I read the guilty verdict was sound. All those ill babies dying when she was alone with them. Just a coincidence? Already been refused an appeal.

Agree

Considering she wasn’t on duty or had been since one of the babies had been born - before the X-ray was taken, then the diary said “ im innocent” written on it

it’s all circumstantial evidence & I’d be doubtful of a safe verdicct

the best barrister won, but I could say whether LL is guilty or not guilty

The evidence has only come out today, who is disputing it

Exactly!

I’ve been saying this for years (not specifically in relation to LL) - it’s a key tenet of our legal system that we face trial by a jury of “our peers” but everyone I know who works in almost any professional capacity is able to be excused from jury duty because they are needed at work. I was permanently excused because of my occupation (health care related) and my neighbour (lawyer) has dodged it every time by saying her work couldn’t cope without her. So who are “the peers” making up juries? The unemployed and the nosey retirees as who else can commit the time or lose the wages?

Especially in complex and ultra-important cases, surely people need a grasp of the law to understand the nuances of it - when I hear a judge say to the jury to “strike this from your mind” I think - how is that possible? The seed has been sown.

When you look at the research for example on rape myths, it is clear that jurors are not fair and not able to make decisions based purely on evidence. I don’t believe the average person in the street has the intelligence and critical thinking ability to properly examine evidence and understand legal arguments. There is also the role of the “foreman” of the jury and who shouts the loudest during deliberations. I honestly think that trial by jury is an outdated concept which was probably okay when the crime was cattle rustling or stealing thruppence ha’penny but is not fit for purpose in today’s society.

I will be watching this latest LL development with interest.

On a separate note, I wish there would be cameras everywhere, recording in hospitals. I don't care if anyone sees me naked, on the toilet, vomitting, picking my nose or anything of the sort - as long as every potential abuser knows they are filmed - that would deter so many nasty people from going to medicine or just bog-standard people going into medicine purely for money. If they know they are being watched, they will try to perform.

Sorry? The medical evidence used to convict her has clearly been “out” much before today and many other professionals/experts have disputed it.

The press conference was a good idea. LL’s defence have applied for 2 appeals that have been dismissed without the basis for the appeals being widely publicised. By publicising the evidence as they submit to the last chance saloon of the Criminal cases review commission, they are preventing the same thing happening- summary rejection based on flimsy rationales.

Yep, it was embarrassing inaccurate.

I find this all so confusing.

I have no idea whether or not she is guilty.However there was speculation in the Guardian Dec 24 of some babies at an earlier hospital dying while she was there Does anyone know the outcome?

@Cunningfungus I will get flamed for this, but my criticism of trial by jury is:

Think of a person of average intelligence. Now reflect on the fact that 50% of the population is less intelligent than that person. Now reflect on the fact that that 50% makes up 50% of the jury that has power of life imprisonment or freedom after hearing legal jargon and medical jargon for a period of 9 months. How can we say that is watertight?

I don't have a better solution, but don't tell me a jury's decision is beyond question.

Well one big point is that there was zero evidence to convict her apart from that she had been on duty when they all very sadly perished, and now it turns out (although how such a fact could have been hidden I really don't know) - that for a third of the incicents, she wasn't even at the fking hospital.

And the other massive point is that the bs notion that she had injected air into those poor mites was apparently arrived at by a process of elimination - they could find no other explanation for the deaths (apart from natural causes) so they used the final fall-back option of a method of murder which leaves pretty much no signs of what's been done.

And then the guy who is the world expert on that air-injection effect said none of the babies showed even the tiniest sign of that being done to them, and every case had been scrutinsed by worried global experts and.. hey presto, in each case they'd found signs of a plausible natural cause.

So yes that is grounds for a retrial at least. Of course it is.

Her diary entry: is it possible she had a mental health condition, and when the babies she was connected with died, and quite a few of them, this got to her and made her think it was connected with her, and somehow her fault? She effectively hallucinated her involvement out of fear that she'd done something wrong? Because the deaths were so shocking and she so cared for the babies and parents?

That is AS plausible an explanation as any, isn't it?

Do tell me if I'm wrong. I'm sure you will ...

She's already been struck off.

There is no new evidence accoding to what I heard today. So where are the grounds for appeal. And after her conviction there were investigations going on at other hospitals she worked at.

I always think this. It’s frightening when you consider whose hands your liberty is in. Some people won’t want to be there so will chose the path of least resistance, some people will be too thick, won’t understand the evidence anyway. How can a lay jury be expected to examine and draw conclusions on evidence that is so specialist?

That the evidence was unsound and misinterpreted, misrepresented? Is that not right?

The panel has provided tons of new evidence. By not understanding this, you are aptly proving @Everanewbie ’s points on juries.

If this is indeed true & there is even the slight possibility she is being hung out to dry as a scapegoat it is beyond horrific. I don't know what to believe but there is certainly more to this than meets the eye whether guilty or not guilty. My heart goes out to the families involved in this dreadful situation.

because they were obviously not that good and also because there was a massive media frenzy and witch hunt going on, which whatever we say, the jurors will not have been able to avoid.

Check out Arthur Miller's play, 'The Crucible'. Witch hunts are rolling stones that somehow gather a lot of moss very very quickly.

This is what the Thirwall Inquiry is about. Hopefully going forward there will be cameras, especially where vulnerable patients are. Some of the witnesses to the Inquiry talked about the pros and cons of cameras.

There was a story that the diary confession was actually an exercise suggested by a therapist to unload her stress - so those doodles could be a way of processing the accusations, or guilt she felt at them dying on her watch, even though she had not intentionally harmed them. The reporting of that evidence was quite misleading.

I am not saying she is definitely innocent but that evidence is not the proof it first appears to be.

@Viviennemary They are not directly asking for another appeal via the courts. They are asking the CCRC to look at these alternative opinions. This is only for people who have lost appeals. It’s right that the convicted can ask for evidence and opinions to be reviewed if alternative views are very strong. I don’t think anyone can pre judge what the Commission will decide. We know there’s a huge amount of evidence and varying opinions but none of us can know how this will play out. She does have the right to ask that these opinions are considered though.

I agree. A lawyer friend of mine was staggered by how badly the trial was conducted and said she was certain it was a miscarriage of justice. I've known her for decades and she has never said that before.

I know what I believe.
I believe the panel composed of the world’s leading neonatologists who did this pro bono and with the understanding their results would be made public whether or not they found in Letby’s favour, rather than the barely qualified professional expert witness who goes around touting for work from the police citing his high conviction rate and is said to have received a seven figure sum in fees for his work on the case.