To think the Lucy Letby case needs a judicial review?

[Edenspirits73]

2 more detailed articles in main stream papers today questioning the Lucy Letby verdict - mirroring the well known New York Times article that wasn’t allowed here during her trial- surely with this much questioning, there should at least be a judicial review?

aibu?

If she is guilty after review then fair enough, but yet again convictions are being viewed as unsafe.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/article/2024/jul/09/lucy-letby-evidence-experts-question

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/07/09/lucy-letby-serial-killer-or-miscarriage-justice-victim/

This!!

And lol the last comment. So true.

If you think there are massive holes in the evidence that could exonerate her, why didn’t her legal team present this at trial? They had months - years, in fact - to prepare. They had their own expert produce evidence which they decided not to rely on. They could have called any expert or witness they wanted.

If the evidence to exonerate her existed, it would have been put to the jury in her trial.

It's not being 'dragged up'. These threads are in the direct aftermath of the retrial which led to the lifting of reporting restrictions. Of course it's going to be discussed now.

Do not think for one second that evil does not exist. Most sadists are never stopped or caught, but fortunately Letby was. She is guilty as sin.

Op....who will pay for this 'review'??

I take your point, 'dragged up' was not an accurate reflection. However, when people start these discussions they lose all sight of the fact that we are discussing real babies, with real families. Yes, Lucy Letby and her parents are also real people. But I highly doubt that most people are coming from a place of concern for Lucy Letby, they are doing it for the entertainment value, they seem to forget this is real life and not an episode of law and order.

We don't know why they didn't present them. That's the thing.

One option is that she had her defence team made very bad decisions or they were inadequate.

Another is that it was difficult to get experts because they were nervous about the consequences for their reputation. If that's the case then there are serious issues with the fairness of the trial.

Then of course there are those who say that they didn't bring any experts because there was none who could help her or they wouldn't have stood up to scrutiny. but we don't know if that's the case.

The defence didn't try to bring any evidence from Dr Shoo Lee during the trial, why? We don't know

For the appeal they tried to get some evidence from him brought in, but it doesn't sound like it was nearly as in-depth as it should have been. Why? We don't know. Did the defence just not ask him to review the babies medical files? Or did he say he wouldn't? We don't know.

@Edenspirits73 The answer is a comprehensive retrial not a review.

I am relieved to read the Guardian and Telegraph articles, specifically the volume of the number of medics now coming forward to express concern about the lack of evidence and bad science displayed at the trial.

The manipulation of statistics and science at the trial should be of concern to everyone.

The expert witnesses for the defence don’t seem to be concerned for their reputations. And they very much should have been given the quality. Evans and Bohin in particular.

That's the same on both sides though.

Some of the people who are convinced she is guilty were turning up at court treating it like it was a fun day out, and there's people all over the internet (haven't seen it on MN thankfully) salivating at the thought of maybe getting to see Letbys police interviews because they're fascinated by her! Many of them don't seem to know anything at all about the babies. It very much is entertainment for a lot of people.

I do think that a lot of people who feel that this was a miscarriage of justice (or potentially a miscarriage of justice have their hearts in the right place, no justice has been done if this was a miscarriage of justice.

She had a chance to change her solicitor and the rest of her defence team between all her trials, yet she choose not to.

Not really the point though is it?

IF a miscarriage of justice has happened, it needs to be righted.

It couldnt just be ‘oh fuck it, let her rot, innocent or not’ - a wrong would need to be righted. As it has been with other cases.

Yes it is the point

There's no money for this

She's been found guilty....move on

Benjamin Myers is an incredibly experienced KC. You can be confident that there isn’t a skill issue there.

Letby could have instructed alternative representation if she had had concerns about her legal team.

It’s important to bear in mind that if this has been a miscarriage of justice the parents are central victims of this as well as Lucy Letby.

She's not innocent she's been found guilty I dont know why you find this so hard to understand.

This has been done over on other threads. Respected KC, local criminal solicitor.

Yes she did but it was so soon afterwards and perhaps sticking was a desperate attempt to try to get out without delays or she might not have been in the right frame of mind and I also wonder how much contact she has with anyone else outside her legal team, in the New Yorker the journalist said she tried to contact her/get messages passed on multiple times but she didn't know if the messages got through.

I’m really not personally invested in this. It’s not that I find anything hard to understand.

We are discussing 2 fairly significant pieces of investigative journalism that suggest the conviction is unsafe.

3 if you count the New Yorker.

Of course. As I said above - it’s important that the parents get justice.

The main thing that I recall from an interview with a Dr from the hospital was a comparison between the number of deaths related to this type of presentation of critical illness and circumstance during and after LL was working there. Zero cases after she was no longer there. Multiple during.

Agreed. I wasn’t really directing that at you.

I'm concerned about all those healthcare professionals that have been mentioned in the Guardian article that do not feel able to speak openly about this because they fear it may harm their career.

'Freedom to speak up' is a total fantasy in the NHS. It's much more 'Freedom to have your card marked as a problem'

You're making up the options though and then doubly, making up reasons for those options!!!

Its pure fantasy!