This nurse Letby case

COYBL25 said:
There was a Barrister who specialises in appeals on the news this morning, who said in his opinion, he’d read nothing that could warrant a mistrial and that the only way there could be a fresh appeal, would be if new evidence was presented before the court.

He also said internet conspiracy nutters, are driving the crackpot theories, that it was one of the biggest stitch ups in British legal history.
Click to expand...
I try to avoid them tbf.
The insulin thing, appropriate associated testing (not done), and the babies falling ill when letby wasn't there being excluded from evidence does suggest there's more than just the moon landings in play.
Also, https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c39k44n8j1mo

"There were at least six other deaths and numerous collapses."
 
Rita_Poon said:
I try to avoid them tbf.
The insulin thing, appropriate associated testing (not done), and the babies falling ill when letby wasn't there being excluded from evidence does suggest there's more than just the moon landings in play.
Also, https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c39k44n8j1mo

"There were at least six other deaths and numerous collapses."
Click to expand...

Yet, her defence team don`t seem to be making a noise about any of this and they`re the legal experts ?
 
COYBL25 said:
Yet, her defence team don`t seem to be making a noise about any of this and they`re the legal experts ?
Click to expand...
Maybe they were the court appointed dullards there for appearance.

Or

Maybe they weren't informed of the surrounding evidences like Malkinson's team weren't. As in, purposefully withheld.

Mentioned already, but Kiszko got fit up because someone, anyone had to swing for it. When thirst for a result is greater than the requirements for the facts, instances of colossal wrong doing end up being done.
 
Rita_Poon said:
Maybe they were the court appointed dullards there for appearance.

Or

Maybe they weren't informed of the surrounding evidences like Malkinson's team weren't. As in, purposefully withheld.

Mentioned already, but Kiszko got fit up because someone, anyone had to swing for it. When thirst for a result is greater than the requirements for the facts, instances of colossal wrong doing end up being done.
Click to expand...
Her KC sounds like he’d be completely clueless

Ben has been shortlisted as the Criminal and Extradition Silk of the Year in the Legal 500 Awards 2024.
 
I'm sure he's first to get a round of drinks in.

Anyway, this'll go a bit longer yet and if there's been any failed procedure first time round there'll be more pain and suffering for the families.
 

Rita_Poon said:
I'm sure he's first to get a round of drinks in.

Anyway, this'll go a bit longer yet and if there's been any failed procedure first time round there'll be more pain and suffering for the families.
Click to expand...
I don’t think you’re getting shortlisted in recognition for your performance if you’re crap. I’m also pretty confident a job of this profile the KC’s would be falling over themselves for the gig , she’ll have had competent representation in my opinion.

People might not like the result and argue with the verdict , based on various articles and internet theories , but I’d be surprised if she’d be badly let down by a KC and two juniors in a matter of this magnitude
 
Harryflashman said:
I don’t think you’re getting shortlisted in recognition for your performance if you’re crap. I’m also pretty confident a job of this profile the KC’s would be falling over themselves for the gig , she’ll have had competent representation in my opinion.

People might not like the result and argue with the verdict , based on various articles and internet theories , but I’d be surprised if she’d be badly let down by a KC and two juniors in a matter of this magnitude
Click to expand...
Who have they been let down by?
 
Harryflashman said:
I’m not an expert on the case I just think the idea that she’s had some crappy representation feels a bit fanciful .

All about opinions
Click to expand...
There's quite a few high profile occasions of the fix being 'in'. british justice aint whiter than white. I can remember no previous occasion where "overwhelming circumstantial evidence" was good enough previous. It is cheaper to blame one rogue individual than painstakingly trawl through an entire system and find every flaw and consider cumulative effect. A case of this magnitude required the highest possible measure of surety, and yet here we are.
 
Rita_Poon said:
Maybe they were the court appointed dullards there for appearance.

Or

Maybe they weren't informed of the surrounding evidences like Malkinson's team weren't. As in, purposefully withheld.

Mentioned already, but Kiszko got fit up because someone, anyone had to swing for it. When thirst for a result is greater than the requirements for the facts, instances of colossal wrong doing end up being done.
Click to expand...

The solicitors are her family solicitors and the same KC has been with her all the way through - has a very good rep and cv.

Not a chance anything was deliberately withheld.

It’d be the end of peoples careers, jail for some and a massive payout.
 

Rita_Poon said:
Maybe they were the court appointed dullards there for appearance.

Or

Maybe they weren't informed of the surrounding evidences like Malkinson's team weren't. As in, purposefully withheld.

Mentioned already, but Kiszko got fit up because someone, anyone had to swing for it. When thirst for a result is greater than the requirements for the facts, instances of colossal wrong doing end up being done.
Click to expand...
I have had dealings with her defence barrister (Ben Myers KC) on a case my work were involved in and he is far from an appointed dullard, he has a brain the size of a planet, a very impressive advocate (we won). A really nice bloke too as it happens.

I can guarantee that if things that are now in the public domain weren't disclosed in the pre trial hearings, her defence team would be bang onto that and shouting loudly, as that is a nailed on for a mistrial and unsafe verdict. The fact they arent suggests that it isnt new stuff. Having spent quite a bit of time in various court rooms over the years, the newspapers are picking up a story, it's easy to create a narrative when only one side of the story is being told. Thats what newspapers do, tell a story, 'a version' of the truth. All of the 'new evidence' cant be challenged by the prosecuting authorities as that could prejudice any future hearings.
 
Rita_Poon said:
did say 'maybe'. and 'for appearance'.

As a legal operative, you know of the Malkinson evidence trail?
Click to expand...
I'm not a lawyer Reets but I work with my company's legal team so get roped into court prep work and do running for the legals at trials. I am aware of the Malkinson case. Very sad, and sadly there will be loads more that are in a similar boat but cant prove it.

I'm non committed on the LL case, I haven't heard all of the evidence. I do know though that you need to sit in a trial all the way through to be able to judge which side is the strongest.

That said the NHS generally get a free ride for some horrific behaviour and are well adept at covering their tracks...
 
Rita_Poon said:
Head of steam building towards a review here. Troubling.
Click to expand...
Extremely troubling.


I'll bet the hospital trust and senior consultants who propped each other up and who hung her out to dry are starting to feel very uncomfortable now.

The 'damning' shift charts - which is the basis for Letby's conviction - is being ripped to shreds almost on a daily basis now by statisticians. This video blog suggests that in the period 2015-2016 in which Letby is said to have committed her crimes - 17 she was convicted for - there were 31 babies in total who died at that time, but she wasn't charged with all them because her presence in the unit didn't tally for all of them. All dying of the same type of problems. Similar 'conclusively damning' shift charts for the other 36 nurses on the unit (or doctors who practiced there) could be constructed from the whole data set if there was a mind to do that. The public prosecutor basically distilled the baby deaths they investigated down to a list to incriminate Letby alone. And I think they did that because of the 'incriminating note' Letby wrote about being guilty...a note written under the extreme pressure of an investigation into the deaths of the babies.

www.normanfenton.com

The Lucy Letby trial and verdict: not everybody is convinced that justice was done

Interview with one such prominent sceptic: Dr Scott McLachlanLucy Letby is a nurse who has been found guilty of 7 counts of murder and 6 counts of attempted murder of babies at the Countess of Chester Hospital during 2015-16.Although the mainstream media is portraying her as britain’s most evil...
www.normanfenton.com www.normanfenton.com

People clinging onto stuff like "her defence team were top notch and she was still found guilty" are completely barking up the wrong tree and have painted themselves into a corner.

Chronic understaffing caused by a hospital trust vasty over reaching itself in terms of the resources they had to treat poorly infants is the key to these deaths.

Heads will roll in time.
 
davek said:
Extremely troubling.


I'll bet the hospital trust and senior consultants who propped each other up and who hung her out to dry are starting to feel very uncomfortable now.

The 'damning' shift charts - which is the basis for Letby's conviction - is being ripped to shreds almost on a daily basis now by statisticians. This video blog suggests that in the period 2015-2016 in which Letby is said to have committed her crimes - 17 she was convicted for - there were 31 babies in total who died at that time, but she wasn't charged with all them because her presence in the unit didn't tally. All dying of the same type of problems. Similar 'conclusively damning' shift charts for the other 36 nurses on the unit (or doctors who practiced there) could be constructed from the whole data set if there was a mind to do that. The public prosecutor basically distilled the baby deaths they investigated down to a list to incriminate Letby alone. And I think they did that because of the 'incriminating note' Letby wrote about being guilty...a not written under the extreme pressure of an investigation into the deaths of the babies.

www.normanfenton.com

The Lucy Letby trial and verdict: not everybody is convinced that justice was done

Interview with one such prominent sceptic: Dr Scott McLachlanLucy Letby is a nurse who has been found guilty of 7 counts of murder and 6 counts of attempted murder of babies at the Countess of Chester Hospital during 2015-16.Although the mainstream media is portraying her as britain’s most evil...
www.normanfenton.com www.normanfenton.com

People clinging onto stuff like "her defence team were top notch and she was still found guilty" are completely barking up the wrong tree and have painted themselves into a corner.

Chronic understaffing caused by a hospital trust vasty over reaching itself in terms of the resources they had to treat poorly infants is the key to these deaths.

Heads will roll in time.
Click to expand...
I can't go that hard. There are for me 'circumstantial' problems.

I say, a calculating, none feeling, maniac, murderer, doesn't leave a load of 'I'm guilty' notes under her bed.

The issues ruled out at the same hospital need explaining.

If she was so clearly guilty why not pull her or by special measures the hospital earlier?

Something isn't quite right here. I wish I was cleverer.
 

Welcome to GrandOldTeam

Get involved. Registration is simple and free.

Register
Back
Top