Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Chat

Join the discussion and chat with other Mumsnetters about everyday life, relationships and parenting.

Thread gallery
33
Firefly1987 · 28/09/2025 23:21

NorfolkandBad · 28/09/2025 23:18

I won't be communicating with you further after this post - you continually demonstrate lack of rational thought. From what I read I'm not the only one who is frustrated by you.

Your post here demonstrates your arrogance again - it's almost like that's the sole reason for posting, to wind people up, you haven't wound me up, I just can't be arsed giving you any more of my time. I wish others would adopt the same approach, you seem to thrive on the attention.

Stop replying to me in the first place then and repeating stuff you've already said and I already ignored. Trying to wind me up more like.

Firefly1987 · 28/09/2025 23:24

I think some of you should put yourselves in others shoes for once and realise it's probably quite upsetting for people to constantly hear this woman needs a retrial when you believe the evidence is more than enough. Then after you've wound ME up you accuse me of being a troll. Ugh total clique of bullies.

Oftenaddled · 28/09/2025 23:38

Firefly1987 · 28/09/2025 23:24

I think some of you should put yourselves in others shoes for once and realise it's probably quite upsetting for people to constantly hear this woman needs a retrial when you believe the evidence is more than enough. Then after you've wound ME up you accuse me of being a troll. Ugh total clique of bullies.

Might you find it less upsetting if you could imagine that there are people of good faith on both sides of the debate? And that people not agreeing that the case against Lucy Letby has been proved still care about children, parents etc? Is there a risk that you see yourself as fighting a battle against enemies instead of having a conversation?

Typicalwave · 28/09/2025 23:43

Firefly1987 · 28/09/2025 23:24

I think some of you should put yourselves in others shoes for once and realise it's probably quite upsetting for people to constantly hear this woman needs a retrial when you believe the evidence is more than enough. Then after you've wound ME up you accuse me of being a troll. Ugh total clique of bullies.

Really? I suggest you stop accusing people of made up scenarios.

OP posts:
Firefly1987 · 28/09/2025 23:48

Oftenaddled · 28/09/2025 23:38

Might you find it less upsetting if you could imagine that there are people of good faith on both sides of the debate? And that people not agreeing that the case against Lucy Letby has been proved still care about children, parents etc? Is there a risk that you see yourself as fighting a battle against enemies instead of having a conversation?

Depends how people go about it. Not calling someone a troll. Talking about this case with people who think the opposite to me only winds me up I can assure you. I think you have to give people a bit of leeway on a subject with multiple threads that they might from time to time repeat themselves or forget what someone said about something.

Firefly1987 · 28/09/2025 23:48

Typicalwave · 28/09/2025 23:43

Really? I suggest you stop accusing people of made up scenarios.

What have I done now?

Typicalwave · 28/09/2025 23:58

Firefly1987 · 28/09/2025 23:17

The grieving oarents dudng belueve theif babies were murdered by a killer nurse until Cheshire police told them so.

What sort of logic is that? Neither did the families of people killed by Harold Shipman. Most of them defended him-and he killed hundreds before being caught! They don't even know the exact number. It means nothing. The circumstantial evidence is what proves it not that no one thought anything was off at the time (maybe because serial killers are quite rare?)

I'll just leave this here-

In a courtroom setting, a judge's instructions to "look at the whole picture" or "consider all the evidence" are a standard legal principle.
This direction serves to:

  • Prevent bias and prejudice. It instructs jurors to base their decision solely on the facts presented in court, rather than on personal emotions or outside information.
  • Encourage a comprehensive view. Jurors are tasked with weighing all testimony and exhibits collectively to arrive at a verdict.
  • Allow for circumstantial evidence. Juries are permitted to consider circumstantial evidence, which can be part of a larger pattern or "whole picture" of events, and to draw reasonable inferences from it.

Sorry but you've shown time and time again you're unable to do the above which is the issue.

So the only way to redeem myself is to prostrate myself on the alter of one woman who had to spend the rest of her life I prison even if I look at the evidence and am not convinced. If I Dobt d tgat I’m just a bad person whos cruel and dishonest? If that’s your yardstick I suggest you take a good long hard look in the mirror - except I know you’re not capable of that.

OP posts:
Typicalwave · 28/09/2025 23:59

Firefly1987 · 28/09/2025 23:48

What have I done now?

Spoken like a true manipulator. If I repost what you’ve said I’ll be told it’s not real.

OP posts:
Typicalwave · 29/09/2025 00:00

Firefly1987 · 28/09/2025 23:17

The grieving oarents dudng belueve theif babies were murdered by a killer nurse until Cheshire police told them so.

What sort of logic is that? Neither did the families of people killed by Harold Shipman. Most of them defended him-and he killed hundreds before being caught! They don't even know the exact number. It means nothing. The circumstantial evidence is what proves it not that no one thought anything was off at the time (maybe because serial killers are quite rare?)

I'll just leave this here-

In a courtroom setting, a judge's instructions to "look at the whole picture" or "consider all the evidence" are a standard legal principle.
This direction serves to:

  • Prevent bias and prejudice. It instructs jurors to base their decision solely on the facts presented in court, rather than on personal emotions or outside information.
  • Encourage a comprehensive view. Jurors are tasked with weighing all testimony and exhibits collectively to arrive at a verdict.
  • Allow for circumstantial evidence. Juries are permitted to consider circumstantial evidence, which can be part of a larger pattern or "whole picture" of events, and to draw reasonable inferences from it.

Sorry but you've shown time and time again you're unable to do the above which is the issue.

The WHOLE picture looks compketely unconvincing to me.

Understand?

OP posts:
kkloo · 29/09/2025 00:11

Typicalwave · 29/09/2025 00:00

The WHOLE picture looks compketely unconvincing to me.

Understand?

Also it's not a courtroom setting 😅

And we also know that jurors often don't follow judges instructions anyway, some make their minds up on certain things and fixate on that and other instructions are just very hard to actually stick to with a human brain etc.

kkloo · 29/09/2025 00:19

@Typicalwave
But I agree completely. Even when the whole case is put together it just doesn't convince me.

NorfolkandBad · 29/09/2025 10:53

Firefly1987 · 28/09/2025 23:21

Stop replying to me in the first place then and repeating stuff you've already said and I already ignored. Trying to wind me up more like.

A free one.

YOU replied to ME - you are so unaware of yourself it hurts.

PinkTonic · 29/09/2025 11:58

Firefly1987 · 28/09/2025 23:48

Depends how people go about it. Not calling someone a troll. Talking about this case with people who think the opposite to me only winds me up I can assure you. I think you have to give people a bit of leeway on a subject with multiple threads that they might from time to time repeat themselves or forget what someone said about something.

Why does speaking to people who don’t agree with you wind you up? Do you generally have difficulty understanding that people have different views and are free to express them? Do you have skin in the game regarding this case and her guilt? I don’t really understand why anyone not personally impacted would be so invested in her guilt, whereas if it’s a miscarriage of justice it affects all of us so it’s entirely understandable why people are interested and want the full truth to come out.

Typicalwave · 29/09/2025 12:25

PinkTonic · 29/09/2025 11:58

Why does speaking to people who don’t agree with you wind you up? Do you generally have difficulty understanding that people have different views and are free to express them? Do you have skin in the game regarding this case and her guilt? I don’t really understand why anyone not personally impacted would be so invested in her guilt, whereas if it’s a miscarriage of justice it affects all of us so it’s entirely understandable why people are interested and want the full truth to come out.

Some great points

OP posts:
Typicalwave · 29/09/2025 13:12

Still waiting for commentary on how Jay Slater features here, @Firefly1987

OP posts:
Londonmummy66 · 29/09/2025 16:33

The problem is you have to find experts that will go into court and defend her and she had her chance for that. This new panel might be saying all the right things to sway public opinion but I really doubt they'd be putting their careers on the line in court defending her. If they actually did all their theories would soon fall apart under cross examination. Logic says there's a reason she could find no one to defend her at the trial.

Actually I imagine that any member of the expert panel would be prepared to go to court and defend her as I imagine would be a numkber of distinguished statisticians. I imagine that if they actually do all of Dewi's theories will fall apart pretty quickly. In fact I suspect it will be very difficult to find any one else prepared to speak for the CPS on this.

Typicalwave · 29/09/2025 16:40

Londonmummy66 · 29/09/2025 16:33

The problem is you have to find experts that will go into court and defend her and she had her chance for that. This new panel might be saying all the right things to sway public opinion but I really doubt they'd be putting their careers on the line in court defending her. If they actually did all their theories would soon fall apart under cross examination. Logic says there's a reason she could find no one to defend her at the trial.

Actually I imagine that any member of the expert panel would be prepared to go to court and defend her as I imagine would be a numkber of distinguished statisticians. I imagine that if they actually do all of Dewi's theories will fall apart pretty quickly. In fact I suspect it will be very difficult to find any one else prepared to speak for the CPS on this.

Shop-Lee has been more than prepared to do that.

It seems quite odd for someone claiming they're so invested and know so much more than anyone else to not know that.

OP posts:
Londonmummy66 · 29/09/2025 16:44

Typicalwave · 29/09/2025 16:40

Shop-Lee has been more than prepared to do that.

It seems quite odd for someone claiming they're so invested and know so much more than anyone else to not know that.

I agree - their pick n mix of the facts is quite breathtaking sometimes

Typicalwave · 29/09/2025 17:02

Londonmummy66 · 29/09/2025 16:44

I agree - their pick n mix of the facts is quite breathtaking sometimes

Indeed.

OP posts:
H202too · 29/09/2025 19:23

I actually don't think firefly is trolling. She has a different opinion to the majority on here and it is looking a bit gang up. She believes ll is guilty and thats fine.Ll is a convicted killer so it isn't crazy what firefly is saying. A lot of it makes sense to me as does info from others. We don't need footballification.

It is nice to discuss even if we agree or disagree. Just some of it is coming across a bit mean.

Typicalwave · 29/09/2025 19:38

H202too · 29/09/2025 19:23

I actually don't think firefly is trolling. She has a different opinion to the majority on here and it is looking a bit gang up. She believes ll is guilty and thats fine.Ll is a convicted killer so it isn't crazy what firefly is saying. A lot of it makes sense to me as does info from others. We don't need footballification.

It is nice to discuss even if we agree or disagree. Just some of it is coming across a bit mean.

She accuses peopke who are questioning as disgusting and just wanting Letby freed because she’s ‘pretty’ etc etc.

No matter what one says, she insists she knows one’s motives and mind.

i Think peopld have been pretty reserved, all in all.

OP posts:
Firefly1987 · 29/09/2025 19:42

PinkTonic · 29/09/2025 11:58

Why does speaking to people who don’t agree with you wind you up? Do you generally have difficulty understanding that people have different views and are free to express them? Do you have skin in the game regarding this case and her guilt? I don’t really understand why anyone not personally impacted would be so invested in her guilt, whereas if it’s a miscarriage of justice it affects all of us so it’s entirely understandable why people are interested and want the full truth to come out.

I don't get wound up unless people are accusing me of twisting things or being a troll. That's not just disagreeing. Why would anyone have skin in the game for her guilt-she's already in prison. You feel strongly it's a miscarriage of justice, I feel strongly that the view she's some sort of victim in this needs countering.

Typicalwave · 29/09/2025 19:43

Firefly1987 · 29/09/2025 19:42

I don't get wound up unless people are accusing me of twisting things or being a troll. That's not just disagreeing. Why would anyone have skin in the game for her guilt-she's already in prison. You feel strongly it's a miscarriage of justice, I feel strongly that the view she's some sort of victim in this needs countering.

I suggest you stop twisting peoples words, telling peole what they think or feel, and accusing people of being unpleasant and cruel towards the oarents. bevause they dare to question the verdict

Its quite a simple formula.

OP posts:
Firefly1987 · 29/09/2025 19:46

H202too · 29/09/2025 19:23

I actually don't think firefly is trolling. She has a different opinion to the majority on here and it is looking a bit gang up. She believes ll is guilty and thats fine.Ll is a convicted killer so it isn't crazy what firefly is saying. A lot of it makes sense to me as does info from others. We don't need footballification.

It is nice to discuss even if we agree or disagree. Just some of it is coming across a bit mean.

Thank you, appreciate this. I'm in good company being made into a villain along with all the consultants, police, Dewi Evans, Sandie Bohin and probably all the other experts just inexplicably ganging up on this poor angelic nurse. So I don't really mind! They don't have the best judgement clearly.

Typicalwave · 29/09/2025 19:53

Firefly1987 · 29/09/2025 19:46

Thank you, appreciate this. I'm in good company being made into a villain along with all the consultants, police, Dewi Evans, Sandie Bohin and probably all the other experts just inexplicably ganging up on this poor angelic nurse. So I don't really mind! They don't have the best judgement clearly.

Tgere you go again - putting words into people’s mouths.

OP posts:
Swipe left for the next trending thread