Lucy Letby - Baby Serial Killer

pca.st

UPDATE: Is Lucy Letby Innocent?

An independent panel of experts has concluded that NO murders took place at the Countess of Chester hospital. If true, it would mean that Lucy Letby, currently serving 15 life sentences and branded…
pca.st pca.st

This has moved my needle much more to the she's innocent camp. Certainly, I think there should be a retrial,
 
It’s the notes the police found in her house that I find hard to disregard.

"I killed them on purpose because I'm not good enough to care for them", "I am a horrible evil person" and, in capital letters, "I am evil I did this".
 
Rita said:
It’s the notes the police found in her house that I find hard to disregard.

"I killed them on purpose because I'm not good enough to care for them", "I am a horrible evil person" and, in capital letters, "I am evil I did this".
Click to expand...
They're the least relevant piece of evidence for me. That is evidence of mental illness, not murder.
 
ZenGiraffe said:
pca.st

UPDATE: Is Lucy Letby Innocent?

An independent panel of experts has concluded that NO murders took place at the Countess of Chester hospital. If true, it would mean that Lucy Letby, currently serving 15 life sentences and branded…
pca.st pca.st

This has moved my needle much more to the she's innocent camp. Certainly, I think there should be a retrial,
Click to expand...
Omg I was listening to this on the way home, I've not finished it yet, and I never thought I'd think she's innocent, but this is putting questions on my head too...
 
Kratz said:
She did it.
Click to expand...

Scientifically this expert (and they really are the best of the best) panel do prove medically there were possibly other things wrong with the babies. But statistically, how unlucky must she be if she just happens to have been involved in all these cases?? That's what I can't get over.
 
Star said:
Scientifically this expert (and they really are the best of the best) panel do prove medically there were possibly other things wrong with the babies. But statistically, how unlucky must she be if she just happens to have been involved in all these cases?? That's what I can't get over.
Click to expand...
One of the points you might yet still have to come is that the guy who decided which cases were suspicious just cherry picked the deaths that occured whilst she was there and ignored the ones that didn't, and that if you wanted to you could make anyone in the department look bad with the same sort of stats they used on Letby.

The whole department seems terrible and I'm inclined to believe that she isn't specifically much (if any) worse than the others that worked there, and shouldn't be specifically held guilty for murder.
 
I do agree the department should be getting more blame, some of the things that went on, not Lucy related, seem really incompetent.
 
ZenGiraffe said:
They're the least relevant piece of evidence for me. That is evidence of mental illness, not murder.
Click to expand...

They are evidence of mental illness if dozens of baby haven't died on her watch... they are evidence of murder in circumstances where lots of babies have died.

And obviously don't change the title to a question mark - she's convicted!

I haven't listened to the RedHanded podcast but they literally sell themselves as people that investigate hauntings and possessions - sorry if I'm not completely convinced...!
 
cwej said:
They are evidence of mental illness if dozens of baby haven't died on her watch... they are evidence of murder in circumstances where lots of babies have died.
Click to expand...
The contention from the medical experts that gave that press conference is that there were no murders at all, so a confession to murder is moot if there was no murder, hence why I say it's the least relevant evidence to me.
 
www.theguardian.com

The convictions of Lucy Letby: should they be overturned?

When the former nurse was found guilty of murdering seven babies and attempting to murder seven others, a 1980s research paper was key to the prosecution’s case. But the author of the paper himself believes there has been a miscarriage of justice – and so too do other doctors
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com

This covers most of the same ground as the podcast from a few months ago, but is a more reputable source than two middle aged women with occasionally questionable politics
 
ZjermGiraffe said:
www.theguardian.com

The convictions of Lucy Letby: should they be overturned?

When the former nurse was found guilty of murdering seven babies and attempting to murder seven others, a 1980s research paper was key to the prosecution’s case. But the author of the paper himself believes there has been a miscarriage of justice – and so too do other doctors
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com

This covers most of the same ground as the podcast from a few months ago, but is a more reputable source than two middle aged women with occasionally questionable politics
Click to expand...

I read that this morning, and it's incredible.
 
ZenGiraffe said:
If this led to court, would this mean all the questions being raised by that panel of bored retired doctors who think they are Jessica Fletcher be heard in court?
Click to expand...
Only if their questions are relevant to whatever the new charges turn out to be. Given that it sounds like the new charges might relate to things that happened at other hospitals, the opinions which they have stated to date may not be relevant, although they would possibly be able give their expert opinion on the new charges. They would certainly not be permitted to discuss their questions over the convictions, given that any trial on the new charges won’t be supposed to acknowledge that the previous convictions even exist.
 
dmlaw said:
Only if their questions are relevant to whatever the new charges turn out to be. Given that it sounds like the new charges might relate to things that happened at other hospitals, the opinions which they have stated to date may not be relevant, although they would possibly be able give their expert opinion on the new charges. They would certainly not be permitted to discuss their questions over the convictions, given that any trial on the new charges won’t be supposed to acknowledge that the previous convictions even exist.
Click to expand...
Sidebar, wasn't the main doctor working with the police also retired?

Is justice coming down to who has the better OAPs?
 
ZenGiraffe said:
Is justice coming down to who has the better OAPs?
Click to expand...
Well, they've turned everything else to shit by voting against Scottish Independence, for Brexit and for Boris Johnson so they might as well try the justice system now.
 
ZenGiraffe said:
Sidebar, wasn't the main doctor working with the police also retired?

Is justice coming down to who has the better OAPs?
Click to expand...
Fair point. I guess the non retired senior doctors are too busy doctoring, which is probably the way it should be.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top Bottom