• Existing user of old message board?

    Your username will have transferred over to this new message board, but your password will need to be reset. Visit our convert your account page, to transfer your old password over.

Letby – more information coming to light

Stirlingsays said:
Did the therapist say in the trial that this amounted to expressing what she wrote? As I regarded that as rather more than expressing your emotions rather than bottle them up.....as I'd expect a therapist to say.
Click to expand...
Don't know and that's the point. A lot did not come out in the trial. Why a lot of sensible people are saying - hang on a minute...

I don't know nearly enough to make a judgement.
 
There have been some funny court decisions made when medical matters are involved. John Bodkin Adams was caught red handed and got off,an extraordinary case.Many of his patients left him enormously well off.A prosecution would have rocked the new (at that time) NHS.
 
I had doubts from the moment she was arrested. I followed the trial closely but , despite her written notes etc, there was always something that made me hesitate. This needs to be reviewed on the basis of expert medical evidence or yet again the Establishment wins.
 
If evidence used during the trial is being questioned by the very specialist cited then that's a valid reason to look again.

Personally I think it's a safe conviction but justice is a heavy weight and if there is doubt then look again.
 
Guilty as F*ck!!!

Read the case review, read the judges comments, read the appeal judges comments, read the comments of the Baby K attempted murder retrial from July 2024, read what the families all have to say.
 
I wasn’t saying she is innocent or guilty.
Is it an unsafe conviction. Can it be proved beyond reasonable doubt. How many babies had died this way prior and post her. Why would highly esteemed doctors risk the inevitable cancellation and reputation or more so why are they not cancelled for this.
There is no smoke without fire.
 
She called no medical experts in her defence in what was the longest criminal trial in history, yet now after the event these new experts come forward.
Let them go into the witness box and be cross examined and leave it to the jury.
I followed the case and the appeal and if I was on the jury I would have found 100% guilty. As did the first jury.
Jury’s decide guilt or innocence having heard the evidence presented to them.
I have a lot of nurses in my extended family and they all think she was guilty as well.
 
kevlee said:
She called no medical experts in her defence in what was the longest criminal trial in history, yet now after the event these new experts come forward.
Let them go into the witness box and be cross examined and leave it to the jury.
I followed the case and the appeal and if I was on the jury I would have found 100% guilty. As did the first jury.
Jury’s decide guilt or innocence having heard the evidence presented to them.
I have a lot of nurses in my extended family and they all think she was guilty as well.
Click to expand...
Her defence wasn’t around or wanted to put their heads above the parapet.
Cancel culture is not so rife now so they feel able to speak out.
Councillors have been sacked for speaking out about other stuff so this was a hot potato.
Would you not be interested in the new evidence as you seem to have had a great interest in the prosecution.
 
cryrst said:
I wasn’t saying she is innocent or guilty.
Is it an unsafe conviction. Can it be proved beyond reasonable doubt. How many babies had died this way prior and post her. Why would highly esteemed doctors risk the inevitable cancellation and reputation or more so why are they not cancelled for this.
There is no smoke without fire.
Click to expand...

Apologies cryst, my post wasn’t directed at anyone in particular, let alone you.

It is simply my position on this matter and I have had a professional interest in it throughout.

I couldn’t feel any stronger about the safety of her convictions. She was found Guilty on every count.

The Court of Appeal dismissed an earlier bid to challenge her conviction and the comments of the judges were very telling.

The public enquiry has also been very interesting and thus far re-affirms the findings of the jury on all matters. The oral evidence has concluded and closing submissions will commence in mid March.
 
Phil’s Barber said:
Apologies cryst, my post wasn’t directed at anyone in particular, let alone you.

It is simply my position on this matter and I have had a professional interest in it throughout.

I couldn’t feel any stronger about the safety of her convictions. She was found Guilty on every count.

The Court of Appeal dismissed an earlier bid to challenge her conviction and the comments of the judges were very telling.

The public enquiry has also been very interesting and thus far re-affirms the findings of the jury on all matters. The oral evidence has concluded and closing submissions will commence in mid March.
Click to expand...
Tbh I never took it like that but thanks.
I though don’t think it is beyond reasonable doubt. As I posted just now. Would you be interested in the new medical defence arguments.
Part of her guilt was circumstantial. Shift on or off etc. how many babies died the very same way since. If it’s only 1 then it shows that it can happen.
That’s all I’m saying .
 
HKOwen said:
Whatever happens going forward her life is ruined.
Click to expand...
You should get with the REAL world if she is innocent she will be on every ITV and SKY reality show,Love island (false t*ts) ,Bushtucker cuisine,Loose women and every other unwatchable show. A fortune awaits.
 
beak said:
You should get with the REAL world if she is innocent she will be on every ITV and SKY reality show,Love island (false t*ts) ,Bushtucker cuisine,Loose women and every other unwatchable show. A fortune awaits.
Click to expand...
I have no idea if she is innocent or guilty. I do take what her defence say with a pinch of salt. How many times has Jeremy Bamber's lawyers claimed they had concrete evidence of his innocence only for the courts to rule against him. It's the job of the lawyers to big up their side.

I hope that the new evidence is looked at thoroughly and the correct decision is reached.
 
i thought (from only what i read) that her convictions were based on probability that she was always in the wrong place at the wrong time, because there was no actual hard evidence (witness, CCTV, fingerptints etc) that she'd done anything.

It could all be a tragic case of workplace bullying, where a dysfunctional medical facility had underperforming workers, who spotted a vulnerable colleague and used her as a scapegoat.

There is no evidence for either scenario (that i saw or read about) and it just seemed to come down to a numbers game of influential staff saying "she did it".

What do i know ? Hopefully some degree of truth and certainty will emerge.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Holmesdale Online Shop

Back
Top