UK - Nurse Lucy Letby Faces 22 Charges - 7 Murder/15 Attempted Murder of Babies #13

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Yea he could be a liability depending how he appears in court.

I wonder if the Jury see Myers as clutching at straws and distracting ...or Evans as unreliable
Wish we got full reporting as we didn't really get to hear Evan's response to him fully. I have been SO tempted to go and try and watch at some point but it's like a 2+ hour journey
 
Where is the link between putting oneself forward to review cases, and having a preconceived idea?
If it’s “his kind of case” that suggests he has a preference, does that mean he likes cases involving possible criminal behaviour? Thus is actively looking for cases like those?
 
If it’s “his kind of case” that suggests he has a preference, does that mean he likes cases involving possible criminal behaviour? Thus is actively looking for cases like those?
He "provides expert medical advice regarding clinical issues where child abuse is suspected or where there are allegations of clinical negligence"
from his own LinkedIn. More his profession rather than his preference. It's like saying a ballistics expert prefers testifying on gun based homicide trials.
 
If it’s “his kind of case” that suggests he has a preference, does that mean he likes cases involving possible criminal behaviour? Thus is actively looking for cases like those?
How does it suggest he has a preference for cases involving criminal behaviour? His kind of case is reviewing deaths and medical records to establish cause, natural or unnatural, as far as I know.

Any other reading of it is, without facts in support, unfounded and speculative.

MOO
 
I wish Dr Evans had been asked about what, in his belief, caused the initial desaturations on the 15th. I also wish we knew his opinion on when the injury that allegedly caused the bleeding and swelling could have occurred.
I expect he was asked but not reported, in the long pauses between tweets.
 
I wish Dr Evans had been asked about what, in his belief, caused the initial desaturations on the 15th. I also wish we knew his opinion on when the injury that allegedly caused the bleeding and swelling could have occurred.

I'm guessing prosecution don't want to go down that route because it might show problems occurring at random when LL wasn't around. And I bet the defense bring this up with their own experts. JMO
 
Wish we got full reporting as we didn't really get to hear Evan's response to him fully. I have been SO tempted to go and try and watch at some point but it's like a 2+ hour journey
I have to say that I'm becoming less impressed with the reporting as we go along. In a totally personal opinion, in lots of places the defence response to prosecution witnesses has been a bit lacking. I don't know whether that is actually the case or their side of things haven't been adequately reported. I' sure there is lots we aren't getting though.

Similarly, I did consider going along but you never know what's going to occur on any particular day - or whether it'll get postponed for any reason - and it's also quite a hike for me.
 
Where is the link between putting oneself forward to review cases, and having a preconceived idea?
I said there might be a link. Scientists sometimes have a reputation for wanting to proving their points. That could go either way, of course, but being very keen to do something rather than waiting to be asked might suggest that want to make a point on something.

All my own opinion, obvs.
 
Wish we got full reporting as we didn't really get to hear Evan's response to him fully. I have been SO tempted to go and try and watch at some point but it's like a 2+ hour journey

I have to say that I'm becoming less impressed with the reporting as we go along. In a totally personal opinion, in lots of places the defence response to prosecution witnesses has been a bit lacking. I don't know whether that is actually the case or their side of things haven't been adequately reported. I' sure there is lots we aren't getting though.

Similarly, I did consider going along but you never know what's going to occur on any particular day - or whether it'll get postponed for any reason - and it's also quite a hike for me.
We should have a WS meet-up at court!

It's also a real hike for me, from London. But I really want to go.
 
Yea he could be a liability depending how he appears in court.

I wonder if the Jury see Myers as clutching at straws and distracting ...or Evans as unreliable
JMO, but dr Myers’ credibility for me was done for after the baby C cross examination/ revelations .

That’s not to say that I would then return not guilty verdicts on everything. Dr Bohin has in my opinion been a very good witness, and subject to anything the defence does to debunk her medical opinions, I would have no problem with deciding that a murder or AM had taken place based on the medical evidence provided by a single expert witness presented by the prosecution (dr Bohin in this case).

(Obviously the question of who you decide is the person who committed those murders or AMs is a separate , non medical question.)
 
Not quite sure how I would feel looking at someone who is a potential serial killer of neonate babies. Very difficult to anticipate how I would deal with that situation.
 
It's the comment about

It's the comment he made about how how he wrote the report, though.

" ....and said it was written with knowledge of previous babies in this case."

That tends to suggest that the previous babies he looked at throughout this case might be having some bearing, possibly one which brings him to the same conclusion, on this one. Clearly it is in his mind as he said it was.

Would he have arrived at the same conclusions had he not examined the other cases? That is a pertinent question to ask, surely?

Yes I totally get where you are coming from ..its a difficult one as Air Embolus isn't something that would initially spring to mind

I think he said previously..and appeared to say this again today ...his Job is like being a normal Dr where further down you can change an initial diagnosis on new information

As an example in normal practice in hospital...a Dr who has seen an AE before will diagnose an AE earlier than one who hasn't.. if that makes sense
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
108
Guests online
2,429
Total visitors
2,537

Forum statistics

Threads
602,436
Messages
18,140,387
Members
231,388
Latest member
pennypiper
Back
Top