"Unsafe conviction?
If it turns out this is an unsafe conviction, it'll definitely fuel evidence for never returning the death penalty. "
Been watching it from the start, some of the evidence don't add up and the reasoning... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Considering the nature of her crimes it is both extremely difficult to keep emotion out of any verdict, as well as finding hard evidence to convict. If, however, there is any element of her trial that is unsafe she is entitled to have it reviewed. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Given that some of the evidence is purely scientific in its nature it's not surprising that other scientists will have different opinions as they did during the trials..
But clearly if new evidence casts doubts upon the original findings then that should be looked at.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I've been thinking for a while that it was probably an inappropriate conviction and wrong for everyone involved as well as society in general.
It does seem a real mess of a conviction and it's shocking that it could have happened so very badly. It should be given rightful attention ASAP, so that we get closure, if possible. Worst case, there's still loss of life, which could be preventable |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I’m still all for bringing back capital punishment, but not if there is any kind of doubt over the conviction of the accused.
I doubt this one is totally innocent, but there is probably enough doubt in some of the cases to exclude her from the death penalty if we had the option. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
 |
By *9alMan 3 weeks ago
Bridgend |
"Unsafe convictions are very scary in this day and age. One would assume that someone convicted of multiple deaths, the evidence would be overwhelming."
the shear number of suspicious deaths connected to her care makes her look very guilty to me. If she manages to wriggle out of some of the convictions with a cleaver lawyer she should still be locked up for life for the other convictions . |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I listened to one of the experts questioning the conviction. He is a professor who specialises in statistics.
I wonder what he thinks the odds are on an innocent person writing in their diary that they had killed the babies and that they were evil. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *atEvolutionCouple 3 weeks ago
atlantisEVOLUTION Swingers Club Stoke |
"I listened to one of the experts questioning the conviction. He is a professor who specialises in statistics.
I wonder what he thinks the odds are on an innocent person writing in their diary that they had killed the babies and that they were evil."
Nailed.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Unsafe conviction?
If it turns out this is an unsafe conviction, it'll definitely fuel evidence for never returning the death penalty. "
You have to trust the system and accept that nothings perfect otherwise you'll never convict anyone for fear of making that one mistake in a million |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *abluesbabyMan 2 weeks ago
Gibraltar/Cheshire/London |
"Unsafe conviction?
If it turns out this is an unsafe conviction, it'll definitely fuel evidence for never returning the death penalty.
You have to trust the system and accept that nothings perfect otherwise you'll never convict anyone for fear of making that one mistake in a million "
Ok. For absolute clarity you are saying you will have to trust the system.
Especially if the death penalty is reinstated?
So if your closest loved one is arrested, convicted and executed for a crime which is later established they could not have committed and the conviction is quashed then you will still simply accept it and not want the law even changed because "Hey, nothing's perfect, right?"
That is what you are saying yes? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I listened to one of the experts questioning the conviction. He is a professor who specialises in statistics.
I wonder what he thinks the odds are on an innocent person writing in their diary that they had killed the babies and that they were evil."
I have personal knowledge of a man that wrote a diary saying that he had killed several people, and saying that the devil made him do it. He hadn't killed anyone, we proved that he wasn't in the area at the time the killings took place. But he was convinced that he had killed those people, and that demons had made him do it, and were covering up for him.
There are some very self-destructive people out there. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Unsafe conviction?
If it turns out this is an unsafe conviction, it'll definitely fuel evidence for never returning the death penalty.
You have to trust the system and accept that nothings perfect otherwise you'll never convict anyone for fear of making that one mistake in a million "
Like all the cases where innocent people have been convicted of murder and then later released..
That sort of trust? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I listened to one of the experts questioning the conviction. He is a professor who specialises in statistics.
I wonder what he thinks the odds are on an innocent person writing in their diary that they had killed the babies and that they were evil.
I have personal knowledge of a man that wrote a diary saying that he had killed several people, and saying that the devil made him do it. He hadn't killed anyone, we proved that he wasn't in the area at the time the killings took place. But he was convinced that he had killed those people, and that demons had made him do it, and were covering up for him.
There are some very self-destructive people out there."
Was he also a credible suspect ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I listened to one of the experts questioning the conviction. He is a professor who specialises in statistics.
I wonder what he thinks the odds are on an innocent person writing in their diary that they had killed the babies and that they were evil.
I have personal knowledge of a man that wrote a diary saying that he had killed several people, and saying that the devil made him do it. He hadn't killed anyone, we proved that he wasn't in the area at the time the killings took place. But he was convinced that he had killed those people, and that demons had made him do it, and were covering up for him.
There are some very self-destructive people out there."
But she was in the area. Sometimes it really is that simple. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I listened to one of the experts questioning the conviction. He is a professor who specialises in statistics.
I wonder what he thinks the odds are on an innocent person writing in their diary that they had killed the babies and that they were evil."
"I have personal knowledge of a man that wrote a diary saying that he had killed several people, and saying that the devil made him do it. He hadn't killed anyone, we proved that he wasn't in the area at the time the killings took place. But he was convinced that he had killed those people, and that demons had made him do it, and were covering up for him.
There are some very self-destructive people out there."
"Was he also a credible suspect ?"
At first, which is why the diary got found. He was ruled out fairly early in the investigation. Which was lucky for him, because if he had been in those places, or even just if he couldn't prove he wasn't, he would have become the prime suspect.
My point with the above post is that someone admitting a crime isn't a slam dunk that they definitely did it. Ask any policeman and they'll tell you about those who claim responsibility for things they haven't done. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Unsafe conviction?
If it turns out this is an unsafe conviction, it'll definitely fuel evidence for never returning the death penalty.
You have to trust the system and accept that nothings perfect otherwise you'll never convict anyone for fear of making that one mistake in a million
Ok. For absolute clarity you are saying you will have to trust the system.
Especially if the death penalty is reinstated?
So if your closest loved one is arrested, convicted and executed for a crime which is later established they could not have committed and the conviction is quashed then you will still simply accept it and not want the law even changed because "Hey, nothing's perfect, right?"
That is what you are saying yes? "
Who mentioned the death penalty? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Unsafe conviction?
If it turns out this is an unsafe conviction, it'll definitely fuel evidence for never returning the death penalty.
You have to trust the system and accept that nothings perfect otherwise you'll never convict anyone for fear of making that one mistake in a million
Like all the cases where innocent people have been convicted of murder and then later released..
That sort of trust?"
The ratio is, I suspect heavily in favour |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Unsafe conviction?
If it turns out this is an unsafe conviction, it'll definitely fuel evidence for never returning the death penalty.
You have to trust the system and accept that nothings perfect otherwise you'll never convict anyone for fear of making that one mistake in a million
Like all the cases where innocent people have been convicted of murder and then later released..
That sort of trust?
The ratio is, I suspect heavily in favour"
Heavily in favour is simply not good enough when we are talking about taking away innocent peoples liberty for years..
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"If she does turn out to be not guilty then she will have suffered one of the biggest miscarriages of justice in decades."
Yes, she will....IF she's found not guilty but that doesn't mean no-one can be sent down for fear of getting it wrong. The evidence is compelling |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"If she does turn out to be not guilty then she will have suffered one of the biggest miscarriages of justice in decades."
Thinking of Jeremy Bamber and Michael Stone still in prison. Andrew Malkinson recently released after 17 years imprisoned innocent. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The most compelling evidence to me is a doctor seeing her standing by an incubator with alarm deactivated, watching oxygen level falling and not reacting"
Did the trial see evidence that the alarm has been deactivated? Were the jury shown proof that the baby died of anoxia? Was Letby demonstrated to be in the room at that point?
Or is your compelling evidence just you reading a newspaper report of what someone else said? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Or is your compelling evidence just you reading a newspaper report of what someone else said?"
"It is evidence I would have heard if I was a juror."
Unless you were a juror, you don't know that. Those of us that weren't in the court room can only know what the papers report, and that's rarely the whole truth. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"If she does turn out to be not guilty then she will have suffered one of the biggest miscarriages of justice in decades.
Yes, she will....IF she's found not guilty but that doesn't mean no-one can be sent down for fear of getting it wrong. The evidence is compelling"
I don’t think anyone is saying no one should get sent down if the case can be proven beyond reasonable doubt, but in highly emotive cases like this we have to make certain people aren’t swayed by the fact it is dead babies and someone needs to pay.
The evidence needs to be more than compelling, it needs to be conclusive. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I listened to one of the experts questioning the conviction. He is a professor who specialises in statistics.
I wonder what he thinks the odds are on an innocent person writing in their diary that they had killed the babies and that they were evil."
But hasn't it come out now that the diary is something she was encouraged to write by a psychiatrist that she was having counselling from, some high up at the same hospital? (Honestly not too sure of the details here, I've just heard a few snippets on the radio)
So now we might have a situation where:
1. There is no direct physical evidence of Letby actually harming the babies.
2. Letby being overworked and under resourced (same as every other health professional over the last 15 years or so), suffering from depression, anxiety, low self esteem, and pressure from superiors who didn't like her.
3. Hospital systems where department is under funded, badly run, faulty equipment (same as every other hospital over the last 15 years, several of which have been actually found to be so bad that patients have been mistreated and harmed by the system and administration, not by individual low level staff).
4. Letby being encouraged by MH therapist, a senior person at same hospital, to write down bad thoughts and self worries as a way to process her extreme stress and overwork.
5. Prosecution not properly revealing all the circumstances around these "confession diaries".
6. It being very convenient for hospital administration if blame could be placed on a single junior staff member, rather than there being the type of high level investigation of hospital malpractice that has occurred at some other hospitals.
Be clear that I'm not saying that Letby is definitely innocent. But that there does seem to be a possibility that not all the evidence was presented, that the prosecution might have been selective in their disclosure, and that it could have been very convenient for some of the high ups at the hospital to have all blame placed on a single nurse rather than any wider investigation occurring. That there may be a possibility of this being an unsafe conviction and a massive miscarriage of justice.
I don't know. But I worry that if it is a bad conviction, the true reason for the deaths of these babies is still unknown, an innocent person could be being punished, and the true guilty person(s) could cause further harm in the future. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 2 weeks ago
|
The whole thing felt wrong. The case was widely reported in media as it happened... Not in an informative way, more in a persuasive way. Meanwhile other cases often get blocked for media reporting.
The NHS has cocked up too many times to be trusted. Royal Stoke only last year had excess baby deaths. Is there a murderer there too or perhapa an indicator of something more systemic. Stressed staff and understaffed wards?
We can't say for sure if she's innocent but there's not enough to frame her as guilty. They cherry picked timetables for less than half the deaths and found Letby was working on all of them. What about the other deaths? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Unsafe conviction?
If it turns out this is an unsafe conviction, it'll definitely fuel evidence for never returning the death penalty.
You have to trust the system and accept that nothings perfect otherwise you'll never convict anyone for fear of making that one mistake in a million
Ok. For absolute clarity you are saying you will have to trust the system.
Especially if the death penalty is reinstated?
So if your closest loved one is arrested, convicted and executed for a crime which is later established they could not have committed and the conviction is quashed then you will still simply accept it and not want the law even changed because "Hey, nothing's perfect, right?"
That is what you are saying yes?
Who mentioned the death penalty?"
First post! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Unsafe conviction?
If it turns out this is an unsafe conviction, it'll definitely fuel evidence for never returning the death penalty.
You have to trust the system and accept that nothings perfect otherwise you'll never convict anyone for fear of making that one mistake in a million
Ok. For absolute clarity you are saying you will have to trust the system.
Especially if the death penalty is reinstated?
So if your closest loved one is arrested, convicted and executed for a crime which is later established they could not have committed and the conviction is quashed then you will still simply accept it and not want the law even changed because "Hey, nothing's perfect, right?"
That is what you are saying yes?
Who mentioned the death penalty?
First post!"
You referred to it,I didn't |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I listened to one of the experts questioning the conviction. He is a professor who specialises in statistics.
I wonder what he thinks the odds are on an innocent person writing in their diary that they had killed the babies and that they were evil.
But hasn't it come out now that the diary is something she was encouraged to write by a psychiatrist that she was having counselling from, some high up at the same hospital? (Honestly not too sure of the details here, I've just heard a few snippets on the radio)
So now we might have a situation where:
1. There is no direct physical evidence of Letby actually harming the babies.
2. Letby being overworked and under resourced (same as every other health professional over the last 15 years or so), suffering from depression, anxiety, low self esteem, and pressure from superiors who didn't like her.
3. Hospital systems where department is under funded, badly run, faulty equipment (same as every other hospital over the last 15 years, several of which have been actually found to be so bad that patients have been mistreated and harmed by the system and administration, not by individual low level staff).
4. Letby being encouraged by MH therapist, a senior person at same hospital, to write down bad thoughts and self worries as a way to process her extreme stress and overwork.
5. Prosecution not properly revealing all the circumstances around these "confession diaries".
6. It being very convenient for hospital administration if blame could be placed on a single junior staff member, rather than there being the type of high level investigation of hospital malpractice that has occurred at some other hospitals.
Be clear that I'm not saying that Letby is definitely innocent. But that there does seem to be a possibility that not all the evidence was presented, that the prosecution might have been selective in their disclosure, and that it could have been very convenient for some of the high ups at the hospital to have all blame placed on a single nurse rather than any wider investigation occurring. That there may be a possibility of this being an unsafe conviction and a massive miscarriage of justice.
I don't know. But I worry that if it is a bad conviction, the true reason for the deaths of these babies is still unknown, an innocent person could be being punished, and the true guilty person(s) could cause further harm in the future."
Good points. I hear that if you want a copy of the full court transcript it will cost £100,000. That is not going to make it easy for anyone to get familiar with her case. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *atEvolutionCouple 7 days ago
atlantisEVOLUTION Swingers Club Stoke |
https://news.sky.com/story/breathing-tubes-dislodged-during-trainee-shifts-worked-by-lucy-letby-at-liverpool-hospital-prior-to-killings-13213518
'Breathing tubes dislodged' during Lucy Letby shifts prior to killings, inquiry told
On the third day of an inquiry into how serial killer Lucy Letby was able to murder seven babies, Richard Baker KC said the convictions against her "did not tell the full story".
Breathing tubes became "dislodged" during 40% of trainee shifts worked by serial killer Lucy Letby in Liverpool, prior to the murder and attempted murder of babies at another hospital in Chester, an inquiry has heard.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Unsafe convictions are very scary in this day and age. One would assume that someone convicted of multiple deaths, the evidence would be overwhelming.
the shear number of suspicious deaths connected to her care makes her look very guilty to me. If she manages to wriggle out of some of the convictions with a cleaver lawyer she should still be locked up for life for the other convictions . "
Why do you not feel the same way about all the male doctors who worked in a failing hospital that was downgraded because of its low standards of care? You know, the same doctors who blamed Letby on the basis of purely circumstantial evidence? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
