To be surprised this potential miscarriage of justice isn’t given more prominence

[Snowintheforest]

Expert 'changed mind' over deaths, say Letby lawyers https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cyv3jlzme90o

If it is the case that she could be innocent it doesn’t really bear thinking about.

Well the jury felt differently about the evidence. I don't think it's fair of you to be so dismissive.

I agree with this.

Many don’t want to believe that a woman, a nurse no less, could do this. It’s so abhorrent a crime.

But I was not privy to every detail as the jury were, so I am going with their decision.

I don’t actually think she’s all that pretty. I don’t think that has anything to do with this. There are enough people speaking out about the unsafe nature of this conviction to make me pause for thought. And I’m absolutely not desperate for her to be innocent; to be honest it would be preferable in the extreme if she wasn’t, as the alternative is that the parents have been put through additional trauma for no reason and that Letby, her friends, relatives and colleagues have been through hell and will continue to do so even if - if - she is proved NG and released.

After all, you can’t just cheerily carry on with your life after this.

Letby didn’t cry which tells us that a) she might be guilty and not give a shit b) she might be innocent and still not give a shit (the world isn’t divided into those who cry = not murderers and those who do = murderers) c) she might give more than a shit but it was a very long time ago and loss is part of working as a medic d) she is on very strong anti depressants which often suppress emotion e) all the above and more besides.

After all, didn’t Paula Vennells cry throughout the PO enquiry? Crying means nothing. I am not sure I’d cry about losses from six years ago either.

I am not being dismissive. You are reading one post out of three, which was a reply to someone else. I have UPHELD the principal of jury trial. So why don't you answer my question - do you or do you not wish to live in a society where courts verdicts are determined by dictat or by popular opinion? I do not, and so I also uphold the right to question judgements, no matter what my opinion, or the opinion of anybody else, is on the judgement. I do not live in Russia where guilt can be determined by a dictator and questioning that can result in a death sentence. Nor do I wish to.

I have been clear that I do not personally know whether Letby is guilty or not, so I must trust the judgement of her peers. But courts have been wrong, so the right to challenge those decisons must be upheld. And that is important in any case, but especially so when she has said she is not guilty and where there is no irrefutable evidence that she did what she is accused of. Even the prosecution accept that their most "telling evidence" consists of the fact that "she was there" and a doodle that might mean many things. So I may believe that the court came to the right judgement, I may find that so many coincidences attached to one person is telling - but I do not know for a fact that she is guilty and I therefore defend her right to argue that. It is one of the foundation stomnes of democracy. And what makes us different, even if not perfect, from the governments of Russia, Afghanistan, the UAE, and so on.

The expert witness is denying this.

Expert denies he 'changed his mind' in Letby case https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cz6l0dynz7zo

Yes. The NHS is a textbook example of people being promoted one grade higher than their competence, often drawn from the ranks of the 'yes-men', zero actual management training ('learn on the job' from the incompetents and sycophants who preceded you); then, once you hit 8a,(£53-60k), you move or get shuffled around the managerial musical chairs, 'procurement officer' this week, 'compliance officer' next, on repeat. No one knows what they actually do, including themselves. But they're unsackable.

Mate if this was me, no one would think twice and start to believe that I didn’t do it. I guess some Brits can’t fathom that someone so ‘normal looking’ can be so evil

Ya think?

I can think of Ian Huntley, Ian Watkins, even Rose West looks ‘normal’ in her non mugshot photos. I wouldn’t have looked twice at Couzens either. Or prince Andrew, if we’re going to insist that it’s only the Bellfields and the Roy Whitings we can believe committed heinous crimes (one looks like a bloated thug and one looks like a shady, creepy, pathetic man.)

It isn’t about looks. If there were as many questions about Bellfield’s convictions are there are Letby’s, I’d be wondering about that too.

Notice he doesn't actually deny changing his mind. That's the headline, which is disappointingly misleading from the BBC.

Here's his press statement, from which the BBC is quoting.

He doesn't deny changing his mind on the evidence he produced in court about these babies, does he?

https://x.com/johnsweeneyroar/status/1868968381178671484

I'm a bit shocked at the BBC.

You seem unaware of the letter written after the court case by the RSS

‘Unsubstantiated, unfounded and inaccurate’ are his words.

they are big words but that’s a denial

Denial of what, though?

The press conference was an hour long and covered insulin reports, the death of one child in detail, the dismissal of Evans's opinion of one point as "nonsense".

Where does Evans say he hasn't changed his mind?

He can't, because he's on the record as having done so, with the Sun, BBC, Channel 5, and allegedly Private Eye.

Those long words are just that, words.

Where does he deny changing his mind?

It’s quite the opposite I think - their feelings are the most important thing and if there has been a mistake they need to know. The pain of losing a child is so horrific to have the potential to be living your life thinking your child was deliberately harmed would make that pain even worse. It’s got to the point that there are too many questions over these convictions and it is in the public interest for a retrial .

Paula Vennells cried for herself.

Lucy Letby also on cried for herself (when she she heard her cats names and when her doctor friend was a witness).

It’s got to the point that there are too many questions over these convictions and it is in the public interest for a retrial

Empty vessels make the most noise. Doesn't mean the noise is worth listening to.

Her leave to appeal has been denied.

Was it evidence though or was it opinion and theory backed up by so called evidence from door swipe date which was then apparently incorrect ?

Maybe she did. I’d probably cry for myself as well. It doesn’t mean I murdered anyone.

Tears or lack of tears tell us nothing. What we need is evidence.

Which I find concerning in itself. An appeal should be allowed . What are they worried about if the evidence is so strong ?

I'm not saying tears mean that, you brought up Paula Vennells and said Lucy didn't cry. I'm clarifying she did cry, but only for herself.

She cried about the children as well. At the time, and at the trial.

Let's not make judgements based on how and when women show emotion and cry. It doesn't tell us anything.

My heart breaks for the families of those babies. They will never have peace and justice. They can never be sure of what happened.

I feel so sorry for the families but I believe LL is victim of a miscarriage of justice and a scapegoat for failings in the neonatal ward. The fact that so many experts are willing to speak up for her means that at least there should be an appeal.

Likewise, and how does it help the families not to check LL's conviction? One child was due to have a coroner's inquest after a solicitor had advised that her care before death would be viewed as negligent. That was cancelled when the police enquiry started. The parents' lawyer is still asking questions about her care now, at the Thirlwall Enquiry.

I didn't make any judgements, I simply clarified that she only cried for herself, not the children.

I've not seen any reports of her crying for the babies as evidence was given about the babies. Do you have a link?

And no, there is no evidence she cried at the time of killing the babies.

A solicitor representing the families of six victims of Lucy Letby said online speculation about the safety of the nurse's conviction was "upsetting" for all of her clients.

So not sure why you think you know what would help them.