Letby – more information coming to light

[Stirlingsays]

Would.

I've always suspected that at least some of the interest is because she's a reasonably attractive young woman.

 

[kevlee]

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.

Unfortunately the British legal system isn't based on guilt or innocence, its based on what 12 members of the jury decide having sat and listened to the evidence, which in this case was the longest trial in history. Wrong place, wrong time? I get that, but when its wrong place, wrong time 15 times or whatever it was, then what would you expect a normal person to think. On the new evidence, if these new experts are prepared to go into the witness box and be tested - fine, but not one expert has been prepared to do that before now for her, and the guy on the TV the other night really didn't look that convincing.

 

[cryrst]

Unfortunately the British legal system isn't based on guilt or innocence, its based on what 12 members of the jury decide having sat and listened to the evidence, which in this case was the longest trial in history. Wrong place, wrong time? I get that, but when its wrong place, wrong time 15 times or whatever it was, then what would you expect a normal person to think. On the new evidence, if these new experts are prepared to go into the witness box and be tested - fine, but not one expert has been prepared to do that before now for her, and the guy on the TV the other night really didn't look that convincing.

There are nearly 20 and the guy on TV wrote a piece years ago which they referenced and he has said they basically cherry picked a few lines. Context as one poster constantly states!

 

[Spiderman]

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.

Bamber is a case I have followed and studied closely, due to my wife’s family knowing the Bamber family well. Lived in same village. Personally I do not think he was guilty and there has been a huge cover up ( police incompetence?). To never be allowed another trial, despite new evidence is bizarre. He has now served longer than most “lifers” and has been a model prisoner. My wife’s nan and other locals described him as a wrong un but never a murderer. Still apologies wrong thread

 

[Forest Hillbilly]

Spiderman, your point about community gossip/opinion relating to Bamber may have some relevance to this case.
Certainly there only seemed to be co-workers being vocal about concerns about Letby. None that were willing to go against the flow and praise her efforts at work. Whether that's an indication of guilt, or just an unfortunate trait of some working environments, hopefully further investigation will get to the truth.

 

[steeleye20]

I've always suspected that at least some of the interest is because she's a reasonably attractive young woman.

Not guilty.

She has such a nice face.

I know it's ridiculous, but none of the prosecution witnesses seem to have actually witnessed these events.

 

[Stirlingsays]

Not guilty.

She has such a nice face.

I know it's ridiculous, but none of the prosecution witnesses seem to have actually witnessed these events.

As long as there has been no financial inducement for him I think that if a chief plank of the physical evidence used by the prosecution has been criticised by the very guy who created the evidence method then I think the case needs looking at again.....for that reason.

It doesn't change the fact that I think the conviction is safe.

Then again I'm just some random on the Internet.

 

[georgenorman]

Bamber is a case I have followed and studied closely, due to my wife’s family knowing the Bamber family well. Lived in same village. Personally I do not think he was guilty and there has been a huge cover up ( police incompetence?). To never be allowed another trial, despite new evidence is bizarre. He has now served longer than most “lifers” and has been a model prisoner. My wife’s nan and other locals described him as a wrong un but never a murderer. Still apologies wrong thread

Didn't he confess to his girlfriend?

 

[Spiderman]

Didn't he confess to his girlfriend?

It was her who said he did. They had a big falling out over him having their dog put to sleep. Apparently he was a bit of a gobby arse.
My theory ( and only an opinion) is to look at the cousin. She was one of the main prosecution witnesses, whi inherited everything, the farmhouse, caravan park. Ta very much. There was even a suggestion she had been “seeing “ the lead detective, the one that had much of the potential evidence burnt within the first 24 hours. Oh and don’t forget the other detective who had grave doubts, mysteriously dying when he fell off a ladder

 

[Stirlingsays]

It was her who said he did. They had a big falling out over him having their dog put to sleep. Apparently he was a bit of a gobby arse.
My theory ( and only an opinion) is to look at the cousin. She was one of the main prosecution witnesses, whi inherited everything, the farmhouse, caravan park. Ta very much. There was even a suggestion she had been “seeing “ the lead detective, the one that had much of the potential evidence burnt within the first 24 hours. Oh and don’t forget the other detective who had grave doubts, mysteriously dying when he fell off a ladder

I tell you, it's that fecking Emu again.

 

[georgenorman]

It was her who said he did. They had a big falling out over him having their dog put to sleep. Apparently he was a bit of a gobby arse.
My theory ( and only an opinion) is to look at the cousin. She was one of the main prosecution witnesses, whi inherited everything, the farmhouse, caravan park. Ta very much. There was even a suggestion she had been “seeing “ the lead detective, the one that had much of the potential evidence burnt within the first 24 hours. Oh and don’t forget the other detective who had grave doubts, mysteriously dying when he fell off a ladder

So we have to accept that the girlfriend was prepared to commit perjury and get someone convicted of murder because a dog was put down?

 

[Forest Hillbilly]

It would be interesting to go over the Bamber and Letby case in the light of new investigation techniques.
Bamber would be a cold case, but I gather all his Rights of Appeal have been exhausted.
Letby is more that experts have different views, which happens all the time. Why these new experts never made it to the first trial is slightly perplexing. And it takes a particular kind of expert to state absolutely there can be no dispute in the evidence and that someone is 100% guilty of murder.
Because , as a scientist/professional, you always know there's room for doubt. It's just whether that doubt is reasonable , or can be dismissed.

 

[Stirlingsays]

It would be interesting to go over the Bamber and Letby case in the light of new investigation techniques.
Bamber would be a cold case, but I gather all his Rights of Appeal have been exhausted.
Letby is more that experts have different views, which happens all the time. Why these new experts never made it to the first trial is slightly perplexing. And it takes a particular kind of expert to state absolutely there can be no dispute in the evidence and that someone is 100% guilty of murder.
Because , as a scientist/professional, you always know there's room for doubt. It's just whether that doubt is reasonable , or can be dismissed.

From what I remember from Bamber, it's a 'balance of probabilities' verdict. I remember looking at the evidence and understanding that, while it was possible that his sister could have done it....it just wasn't very likely from the evidence....I think there was a focus on the sister...was it the sister or cousin who lived with them? But I remember the focus was there because she was mentally ill.

In theory she could have done it, but it just wasn't likely....If I remember correctly how she died doesn't fit well with shooting herself.

Quite a long time ago now.

 

[eritheagle]

From what I remember from Bamber, it's a 'balance of probabilities' verdict. I remember looking at the evidence and understanding that, while it was possible that his sister could have done it....it just wasn't very likely from the evidence....I think there was a focus on the sister...was it the sister or cousin who lived with them? But I remember the focus was there because she was mentally ill.

In theory she could have done it, but it just wasn't likely....If I remember correctly how she died doesn't fit well with shooting herself.

Quite a long time ago now.

It was his sister that lived with them and was mentally ill. It was her children who were murdered too. Weren't both the daughter and Bamber himself adopted into the family?

Wasn't it proven that it was difficult for her to have shot herself cos the rifle was too long and she couldn't reach the trigger if the gun was touching her head/under her chin.

 

[Stirlingsays]

It was his sister that lived with them and was mentally ill. It was her children who were murdered too. Weren't both the daughter and Bamber himself adopted into the family?

Wasn't it proven that it was difficult for her to have shot herself cos the rifle was too long and she couldn't reach the trigger if the gun was touching her head/under her chin.

Yeah, I think that's right.

It's all information that you have to rely on to be accurate but of course, if it is accurate then Bamber is the very obvious cause and thus a safe conviction.

 

[steeleye20]

In the Bamber case the first thing the police did was take away blood stained carpeting and burnt it, thus destroying what would have been vital evidence.

They did not do in those days do what you would hope they do now, or have the technical imoprovements since then, the last time I looked there was considerable doubt that the police experiment that she could not have shot herself was 100% correct.

Her mental state was very serious her psychiatrist warned it was unsafe for her not to be admitted to hospital.

I guess he still rots in jail, it's nearly 40 years ago.

😎

 

[Stirlingsays]

In the Bamber case the first thing the police did was take away blood stained carpeting and burnt it, thus destroying what would have been vital evidence.

They did not do in those days do what you would hope they do now, or have the technical imoprovements since then, the last time I looked there was considerable doubt that the police experiment that she could not have shot herself was 100% correct.

Her mental state was very serious her psychiatrist warned it was unsafe for her not to be admitted to hospital.

I guess he still rots in jail, it's nearly 40 years ago.

😎

You would think that being able to tell if someone could have shot themselves or not would be reasonably easy to tell with that kind of gun.

But hey, surely all that evidence has been looked at and looked at again?

 

[Stirlingsays]

What a thing to do for money.....Some souls are lost....parents too....horrible.

 

[kevlee]

You would think that being able to tell if someone could have shot themselves or not would be reasonably easy to tell with that kind of gun.

But hey, surely all that evidence has been looked at and looked at again?

There was an excellent TV dramatisation of the murders and the enquiry- I remember some of the investigating officers were made to look pretty poor.
Then again it was a long time ago and the forensic tools available now are in a different league.

 

[Stirlingsays]

There was an excellent TV dramatisation of the murders and the enquiry- I remember some of the investigating officers were made to look pretty poor.
Then again it was a long time ago and the forensic tools available now are in a different league.

The issue with a dramatisation is that ultimately it's the opinion of people trying to sell a product.

So you are completely reliant upon those producers being more competent than the investigating officers in their read of the situation.

It's like everything else, you need people with their heads screwed on properly with high IQs and no agendas other than an objective drive for the truth.

Maybe that's the people behind that drama or maybe not so much.