Lucy Letby. Why do some people only read headlines?

[skyfirechesnut]

I was at work today and someone says so Lucy letby is innocent now. They have just gone with the media headlines. Instead of researching.

Sorry for the fail link but this is quite a good article below on the current state of things. The author has attended all trials and listened to appeals and conferences.

I also don't understand people who say she was scapegoated. If people follow the Thirwall enquiry this is far from the case. She was totally protected, her parents calling up, being in meetings, dictating apologies. It beggars belief.

I can somewhat understand people saying she is innocent based on medical evidence after the press conference but even that is nothing new.

You can't say my expert is better than yours.

Also people seem to think it was all Dewi Evans for the prosecution it wasn't. There was Dr Bohin, Prof Arthurs , Prof Hindnarsh and Dr Mar etc.

That is without the Doctor colleagues if you want to dispute them.

Then they new defence have changed ideas from the conference they had in December.

They are also not totally impartial.
It isn't as simple as the headlines.

Here is the article.

archive.ph/NYg7U

You think/are reminded of something or someone.

You look it up on your phone, without even really noticing you’re doing it.

Hours or even minutes later you couldn’t tell someone any of the things you read about that person or thing. You might not even remember you looked it up. Now give it several years… are you really going to remember? I couldn’t even give you a complete list of the things I’ve casually googled today.

This is the essence of smartphone-driven behaviour. If you don’t do this I envy you because most of us are out here wishing we could stop!

What I’m saying is this is VERY normal and the only thing that makes it a bit unusual in LL’s case is the sheer volume of people she looked up. But that actually makes it clearer this behaviour was nothing to do with murder, because only a tiny percentage of her thousands of searches related to the alleged victims.

You really can't prove that it's right that someone should be in jail by pointing out what it's like for them to be in jail.

You are showing how much people can be influenced by seeing someone locked up, in handcuffs, in the dock etc. I think this has affected a lot of people's judgement of Letby.

Oh yes, I completely agree. But clearly there are many people, including some on this thread, who for whatever reason do not. So they wouldn’t consider the question of the trial’s fairness to be closed!

If nobody should be questioning or thinking about Lucy Letby, how come it's OK to read salacious smear stories about what life might be like for Lucy Letby in prison from sources that cannot be verified because they are surely a breach of confidentiality, and use them as "proof" of her guilt? The hypocrisy is breathtaking, to be frank.

It was before that, people don't seem to understand she was doing this long before she was suspected of any harm. And why would she need to look up a baby she wasn't even supposed to have been caring for? Unless she did actually harm them!

And posters like you who are so defensive of your favourite little victim will be having quite the meltdown when realisation finally dawns on you.

This is somewhat unhinged.

This is just a bit of a flounce really isn’t it?

Again, for the millionth time, people taking an interest in a matter of extreme importance to our own lives and the lives of our children and loved ones etc are not being “defensive of our favourite little victim”.

The repercussions of a justice system that accommodates the kafkaesque nightmare we see here are terrifying and very relevant to every British citizen.

The repercussions of an NHS that has crumbled to the extent exposed by this mess are terrifying and very relevant to every British citizen.

The repercussions of a media that will parrot literally anything told to them by the prosecution without engaging in any fact checking or questioning of their sources, are terrifying and very relevant to every British citizen.

If any of this is to be examined and put right, we need to hold it to the light and talk about it. The alternative is a slide into a reality where all of the above is just how it is. If you think no one but Lucy Letby would find themselves in the wrong side of such a degraded set of institutions you are even more naive than I thought you were.

This goes far beyond Lucy Letby, but you are so busy salivating over a grisly little true crime story that you can’t even see the dangers here for you and yours. Very foolish.

Present your data for this claim.

No-one “needs” to look up anyone. But haven’t you, for example, ever chatted about someone you vaguely remember with a friend, then given them a quick search out of curiosity? I am almost certain you have. If not, it’s you who’s unusual, not Letby.

If you say so. Personally I think treating this whole case as a game to "win" and gloating about a serial killer of babies getting off is unhinged but there ya go.

I recently looked up my boss’s wife simply because he mentioned her name and I had my phone next to me. I’ve never met her and have no particular personal interest in her or him. Does it surprise you to learn I never harmed her baby?

Exactly. Apparently the public are to be shamed out of scrutinising major institutions we all depend on for life and liberty because it is some kind of lapse in etiquette, but it’s totally fine for this kind of salacious (and unevidenced btw) grisly detail to be paraded about and pored over ad infinitum.

I believe it’s because, as I said earlier, some people just really like having a witch to burn.

We don’t think she is a serial killer of babies. That is the point.

Who is “gloating about a serial killer of babies getting off”? Show me exactly where that has happened.

Once you resort to lazy hysterical smears like this you show only that you have no arguments. It’s not convincing anyone.

I really don't understand how some people are taking the evidence used in the trial as gospel and try to discredit or completely disregard all other expert opinions as it fits their narrative

They think most of the posters on this thread are nuts, wonder why 😆why don't any of you have the courage of your convictions to go argue it on there?

She is though

Tattle, which calls itself a “gossip forum” is now the finest venue for grown up discussion about matters of justice, health, public security etc etc?

You sure?

Then appeal and bring forward the evidence, if they have all this stuff.

Well done if you’ve given it a go. I’ve been tempted but honestly the thread is abhorrent. There’s no arguing with that level of stupidity, some of them are barely literate.

Then appeal, that's what the process is for.

Calm down Jessica Fletcher. That’s still, clearly, very much in contention.

Because there’s literally no point (and you’d end up banned!)

Someone did make this point early on the tattle threads and I remember it quite vividly; it was spring 2023 so before the verdict. The poster said quite nicely - no hate here but it’s obvious any suggestion LL isn’t guilty is not tolerated.

And the petulant ‘she is though’ isn’t convincing anyone.

That’s what’s happening. But you were attacking the very idea of the public discussing any of this at all, weren’t you?

Why weigh in so aggressively when you are so behind on all this?

The CCRC opened a review of the case the same day as the press conference. They assembled a team specifically to do so last September, months before receiving an application. That is already happening, but it doesn’t mean the public should simply look the other way. The public have every right, and indeed some would say a responsibility, to scrutinise matters of justice, health, public security, the media, etc.