Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Telly addicts

Related: Film discussion forum.

Original poster

The Trial of Louise Woodward

99 replies

purpleme12 · 17/11/2021 20:31

Did anyone watch this?
I'm watching it now
It seems they suddenly changed the options for convicting for murder or manslaughter or not guilty to murder or not guilty?
I don't know how the American system works
Why did they do that?
Why can they decide to take away one option midway through?
It then says they've gone through all the trial with 16 people on the jury but then they take 4 people out so they can't vote?! I don't understand

OP posts:
GentlyGentlyOhDear · 17/11/2021 20:37

I watched this too and didn't quite understand the jury issue either.
I would have liked more scientific content about shaken baby syndrome etc.
I was quite young at the time it happened so there was lots I wanted to ask more questions about.
Poor little baby.

Anoisagusaris · 17/11/2021 20:38

Is this a new programme about the case??

Original poster
purpleme12 · 17/11/2021 20:41

@Anoisagusaris

Is this a new programme about the case??
Yes it was on on Thursday last week
OP posts:
Original poster
purpleme12 · 17/11/2021 20:42

Now it seems that the 4 jurors were taken off the jury on purpose to get her a guilty verdict?
Do they take 4 jurors out in every case in America? I'm really confused by this

OP posts:
Original poster
purpleme12 · 17/11/2021 20:51

Interesting the science behind shaken baby syndrome is hotly contested it said
. And one witness prosecuting has changed his mind since then

OP posts:
MrsFoxyplease · 17/11/2021 20:55

I found the images of her smirking in court chilling.
No idea on the American system.

MrsFoxyplease · 17/11/2021 20:57

Yes, I know it was said to be nerves. I've just never seen it with my own eyes before.

Original poster
purpleme12 · 17/11/2021 21:00

It didn't come across well did it
But I guess I can also see how some people do do that nervous smiling thing

OP posts:
imnotacelebritygetmeoutofhere · 17/11/2021 21:09

I watched this programme last week, and I also remember it very well from the time. I was confused then and still am after watching the programme about why she didn't appeal her conviction. I know that the judge changed the conviction from murder to manslaughter and released her from jail because of time already served, but that still left her convicted of killing the baby albeit accidentally. Why didn't she appeal to clear her name?

PermanentTemporary · 17/11/2021 21:10

What channel is it on?

NiellyNoFive · 17/11/2021 21:15

They have such a weird legal system over there it was probably the best way to get her out of prison and back to the UK which is ultimately all you'd want as an 18 year old going through all that.

NiellyNoFive · 17/11/2021 21:21

I remember this on the news and wasn't much older than her at the time.

I remember thinking it was very unclear as to what happened if anything and by whom, her, the DM the DF or the older sibling.

For some reason I thought at the time the older sibling may have accidentally caused the baby harm.

millievanillaice · 17/11/2021 21:22

Just watched too

The Americans focus too much on the demeanour of the defendant rather than evidence

They didn't like her nervous smile
Or lack of emotion. Neither of those things are evidence though.

I wonder what the trial would look like if this happened now? The evidence didn't really stack up.

Original poster
purpleme12 · 17/11/2021 21:24

Would she maybe not have appealed because she didn't have the money?
I don't know

OP posts:
GoodnightGrandma · 17/11/2021 21:25

I haven’t watched the programme, but I do remember the trial, and I remember thinking that she was guilty.

Floralnomad · 17/11/2021 21:30

I haven’t watched this particular programme but I watched a different one a while ago and apparently the brain injury was definitely caused whilst the baby was in her sole care as it was a new injury . There was also some issue with her care / response when she was talking to the 911 operator as apparently they were giving her instructions on what to do and she completely ignored them . From the evidence in that programme I can’t see who else could be held responsible .

Chenga · 17/11/2021 21:33

I remember this so well from the time, Sky News broadcasted it in it’s entirety daily.

IIRC, she accepted the manslaughter verdict so she could be released from prison and go back to the UK. I don’t think it was the cost as she had Barry Scheck, probably the most expensive trial lawyer of the time, who must have been doing it pro-bono as there is no way she or her family could have afforded it. There was a fundraising campaign in the US to cover her family’s costs of being with her in the States- hotel bills, flights etc and also the work they missed in the UK.

It is normal in the US for an extended jury to listen to the case and then for only 12 to come to the verdict.

millievanillaice · 17/11/2021 21:37

At the end of the documentary, they said the injury could have been caused a few weeks earlier than the day in question and so it could have been somebody else, not Louise. One medical expert who testified against her has since changed opinion

Very odd case

Munchkinpumpkin · 17/11/2021 21:39

I dont get it, it seems people just want to believe shes innocent cos she was a young scared female but there has to be some big reason the baby died.. i was expecting it to look at the facts and find out what could have really happened to him but it didn't.. waste of time

covilha · 17/11/2021 21:41

I thought expert evidence varied between historic injury, probably recently exacerbated and more recent injury. @NiellyNoFive I know some people wondered this at the time. As far as not staying to appeal I can imagine she just wanted to get home. Yes@GentlyGentlyOhDear, you are right. RIP little one 💐

runwithme · 17/11/2021 21:42

Not watched this yet but with regards to the jury question, the case that is getting all the attention in the US at the moment, Kyle Rittenhouse - he picked out six names from a box. I think that meant that there were 18 jurors, and those six won't be deliberating

Littleducks · 17/11/2021 21:44

Were the extra jurors back ups? So additions who would step in if the original juror got sick etc and had to drop out of service to stop trial collapsing?

What platform is programme on?

YeOldeTrout · 17/11/2021 21:48

Yes some jurors are there purely as reserves - if the appointed ones get ill, dismissed or another reason why they can't deliberate.

EnjoyingTheSilence · 17/11/2021 21:57

She was an au pair, not a nanny and should never have had sole charge of children that young.

Can’t stand the way she was on trial in the media and obviously still is.

NiellyNoFive · 17/11/2021 21:59

@EnjoyingTheSilence

She was an au pair, not a nanny and should never have had sole charge of children that young.

Can’t stand the way she was on trial in the media and obviously still is.

I'm in total agreement