You seem to like to turn opinion into fact and are unable to accept that others don't agree with you.
Some things aren't merely a "difference of opinion"-and on a convicted serial killer of BABIES case all the more reason to not just "accept" it. She had a PLUMBER defend her, that's all. No one else had any natural explanation for the deaths, even her own defence expert didn't for some of them. It'd be a different convo if there were multiple experts going up against the prosecution with plausible reasons for the deaths and collapses. There is no explanation that holds any weight that's the bottom line.
For example in LL case "Baby killers are abhorrent, she's been accused so she must be guilty" - I'm not saying that happened, I'm saying it could which by your reasoning means it did.
No because my thought process at the start was "she must be innocent it must be a mistake, why would anyone harm babies" plus it made no sense there were so many collapses and multiple attempts if she wanted to kill them (she was a nurse she'd know how to first time). So what was the motive? I've said I thought she was innocent before on previous threads. The evidence was more than convincing. Also I know it's been said a million times but no one writes "I killed them on purpose" unless it's true.
Stop claiming "she is" guilty, you don't know that for a fact - you may notice that those who are saying the conviction is unsafe are not claiming "she is" innocent, they say they believe she didn't have a good defence team and new evidence / testimony / etc. should be taken into account at a (fairer) retrial - not she is 100% innocent and should be released today.
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.