Hunt calls for urgent re-examination of Letby case

[meltingtoday]

I find this case deeply troubling and always have. Something about it felt off from the start, but I had to assume justice had been followed. Then around a year ago concerns - reputable ones - started to emerge, followed by an entire panel of experts in February.

Yet still nothing is happening, it was way down on the BBC homepage, it wasn’t discussed on here, and everyone is still tiptoeing around it, anxious to express the view that they are ‘not saying she’s innocent’ and the Thirlwell enquiry continues investigating crimes that probably didn’t take place.

Has madness completely taken hold?

I'm surprised he has taken it on. He's normally focused on rural broadband. It's not his usual bag or a safe topic to take on for one of the very rare Tory MPs to keep his seat at the last GE.

That speaks volumes in itself. He must be very confident.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cwyql1gv0zgo

What are you referring to not being discussed on here? As there was a lengthy discussion further to the expert panels findings.

it wasn’t discussed on here

There has been LOADS of discussion on here. A lot around the time when a number of experts voiced their concerns.

The more I hear about it, the more I think some doctors wanted their appalling practices with these poor babies to be forgotten about.

No matter if she is guilty or not guilty doctors, and the hospital itself, seem to have escaped scrutiny as everything has been laid at this one nurse's feet.

I meant today, specifically - sorry.

To me, a potential miscarriage of justice of this scale is huge and the BBC are quiet on it.

This case has never sat right with me. Obviously none of us know the ultimate truth except LL but I’m glad for everyone concerned that the doubts are being taken seriously.

I agree OP. But the BBC aren’t quiet on it, you’ve literally linked to a BBC article. The prominence of any news story very depends very much on what other news is out and about that day. And it’s not the BBC’s place to campaign. There are plenty of other people raising concerns and lobbying which is why it’s now being taken up by MPs - first David Davies and now Jeremy Hunt. Hopefully more will follow. This is not just a horrendous miscarriage of justice if she is innocent, but even if she isn’t, the case has highlighted some massive issues with our legal process and the way medical and statistical evidence is used and presented in court that urgently need addressing.

It’s a long way down though, and only came up in my home page because I get news from Liverpool (which Chester apparently comes under!)

It is the job of the BBC to appear neutral and I’m not sure that they are in this particular case.

The BBC are quiet on the question of doubts. The article regarding Hunt was released in their local news section when it’s actually a matter of great concern to all British citizens, given the issues highlighted with the justice system and policing etc that affect all of us. Aside from this local BBC news article they’ve said very little concerning the doubts, whereas Judith Moritz covered the trial and made 2 Panorama episodes about it before the doubts were raised.

I've always maintained that I don't think she was guilty but there were so many people frothing at the mouth about her and telling me I was stupid/racist/baby murderer supporter that I stopped talking about it. I'm so pleased that this will hopefully enable a full review.

But Judith Moritz is a BBC journalist and panorama a BBC programme?

Here’s all the bbc news articles on Lucy. A mix of local and national with a mix of perspectives. Lots on the people disputing the evidence:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/topics/cvp59396q42t

She’ll go through the proper processes to get her case dealt with. She doesn’t get to jump the queue just because the court of public opinion says so.

FWIW I still think LL is as guilty as sin and give not two fucks about her

The “scapegoating” argument makes no sense in particular. Up and down this land NHS trusts are criticised for fucking things up, with apparently zero accountability. Yet we are supposed to believe LL apologists that in this one there is a massive conspiracy and cover up, manufactured murders etc, and implicating the trust, police, CPS, courts? Come off it FFS

Well, somethings not right about it, and a leading panel of experts agree something is not right about it.

I really hope that this case is looked at I really truly believe she is innocent and was set up.

I am fully aware that Judith Moritz is a BBC reporter and that Panorama is a BBC show. That’s the point. JM is and always has been heavily on the side of the prosecution. The BBC have paid very little attention to anything on the opposite side of the argument in stark contrast to other mainstream media outlets. Jeremy Hunt coming out with this statement, as former MoH, when this all happened on his watch, is of national interest. It’s strange to put it out as a local interest piece. That’s my opinion anyway. You don’t have to agree with me.

Not a conspiracy, no. A dangerous mix of human bias, high emotions, social pressure, dysfunctional processes and incompetent biased investigation.

The same heady mix that led to women and men being executed for witchcraft by people who genuinely believed they were doing the right thing. Because their communities got swept up in panic, bias and dysfunction.

Who is arguing that? What I’ve seen is people saying this is yet another example of NHS systems failure, not an organised conspiracy.

If we are talking about conspiracy theories let’s discuss those who think that a panel of extremely highly regarded international experts, in leading positions at the world’s best neonatal institutions, all individually decided to tank their very lucrative careers and reputations to shill and lie for a baby murdering nurse in England. Now that is a conspiracy theory.

Wait her turn would be amusing if it wasn’t so serious. We aren’t talking about missing a bus and waiting in a queue.

We’re talking about someone who potentially has done nothing wrong being imprisoned for the rest of her life. That’s not having to wait a bit longer in the airport.

I do know this but the legal process takes time. She doesn’t get to jump the queue. There will be other people with cases at the CCRC waiting for cases to be reviewed.

So this one, out of all the myriad of failings, ends up in a murder case, and NONE OF THE REST OF THEM do? Why?

I still think she’s as guilty as fuck. Nothing publicised to date has persuaded me otherwise. She’s had multiple goes through the judicial process and the only people who have heard all the evidence have made the decisions. That’s not to say they can’t get it wrong, but they’re in much better position than the TikTok jury and “experts” cherry picking what parts of the body of evidence to comment on.

There has been lots of criticism by TikTok Rumpoles of the decision of her defence not to call expert defence witnesses. There are a couple of potential explanations for that. 1. His Majesty’s Counsel didn’t have a clue what they were doing or 2. The defence witnesses would not have helped her case. Letby could waive legal privilege and reveal the advice she has received. If it was 1, why would she not have done that?

The concerns raised by statisticians and neonate experts need addressing properly.

It seems to be circumstantial where we choose the circumstances that point to her and disregard those that don’t.

It was shocking.

But evidence does get deleted in trusts. Two here.

Is somebody going to records and deleting them (and then, despite the data trails allegedly being reliable enough to monitor unauthorised access for dismissals of junior staff, these are unknown people, apparently) an 'accident', or is it that there is a culture of wiping evidence to protect the most powerful?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cly6k9l722do

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/clygkdd5xyyo

I think the point is, the evidence itself was potentially, for want of a better term, cherry-picked. I think to comment on this sensibly you need to have read the recent report and statements by the Royal Statistical Society.

What do you mean by ‘multiple goes through the judicial system?’