UK - Nurse Lucy Letby Faces 22 Charges - 7 Murder/15 Attempted Murder of Babies #2

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
A further case management hearing on Friday 29th. Don't think we'll learn much more. Details being kept very closely guarded.

I suspect a lot of it will be very technical evidence, but even so..it seems for once the media are actually having some respect for the victims.

I say victims as that appears to be the case regardless of whether it's LL or general hospital failings
 
ShireChe said:
A further case management hearing on Friday 29th. Don't think we'll learn much more. Details being kept very closely guarded.

I suspect a lot of it will be very technical evidence, but even so..it seems for once the media are actually having some respect for the victims.

I say victims as that appears to be the case regardless of whether it's LL or general hospital failings
Click to expand...
You are correct in what you say about the details not being released. Many people on here, myself included, agree that this is exactly the way it should be rather than having the prosecution and defence argue it in front of TV cameras pre-trial.

As you say it will undoubtedly be highly technical and circumstantial evidence involving complicated medical and mathematical opinion - "opinion" being the operative word, I think. In regards to the media; I wouldn't be too quick to praise the British press, especially the lower echelons. Because of the fact that nothing is being released, and there are serious consequences for publishing certain things pre-trial, there is very little that the press can actually say right now.
 
Marantz4250b said:
You are correct in what you say about the details not being released. Many people on here, myself included, agree that this is exactly the way it should be rather than having the prosecution and defence argue it in front of TV cameras pre-trial.

As you say it will undoubtedly be highly technical and circumstantial evidence involving complicated medical and mathematical opinion - "opinion" being the operative word, I think. In regards to the media; I wouldn't be too quick to praise the British press, especially the lower echelons. Because of the fact that nothing is being released, and there are serious consequences for publishing certain things pre-trial, there is very little that the press can actually say right now.
Click to expand...
You are probably right. It's more the type of case along with the legal restrictions that are keeping things quiet.

It's doesn't seem a case where they can dig up character witnesses and salacious details.

I think it's going to be incredibly tough for the jury. A conviction likely means LL never leaves jail. It's going to be so difficult for all of them who may not have a scientific/statistical background. It's possible the evidence is much more clear cut but the fact they are advising a trial of many months suggests lots of data and expert opinion to wade through.

I think it's a fascinating and dreadful case from all angles. I dont mean to use the word 'fascinating' with any disrespect to the babies and their families.
 
YaYa_521 said:
Continue the discussion here.
Click to expand...

Marantz4250b said:
You are correct in what you say about the details not being released. Many people on here, myself included, agree that this is exactly the way it should be rather than having the prosecution and defence argue it in front of TV cameras pre-trial.

As you say it will undoubtedly be highly technical and circumstantial evidence involving complicated medical and mathematical opinion - "opinion" being the operative word, I think. In regards to the media; I wouldn't be too quick to praise the British press, especially the lower echelons. Because of the fact that nothing is being released, and there are serious consequences for publishing certain things pre-trial, there is very little that the press can actually say right now.
Click to expand...
 
Bakers said:
It's shocking the papers give her address put
Click to expand...
It's SOP for the news media. There is actually good reason for it; they do it so that they don't get sued for implicating the wrong person in a story. Someone with the same name might claim that people thought it was them and bring a defamation suit. If they give an age, address and suchlike then no one else can claim that they could be mistaken for the person in the article.

If I recall correctly, it all originates from a case back in, in think, the 1950's. A newspaper published a court report of a guy from the east end of London who had been convicted of bigamy. There was another chap with exactly the same name who lived a few streets away and was of almost the same age who was married who successfully sued the paper for defamation because people thought the article related to him. If the paper had published the address of the guilty man they would have had a defence to the case but they only made reference to a general area, I think.
 
I remain intrigued by how this case will play out. I can't imagine how awful it is for the parents of the babies, having to wait so long for whatever version of 'justice' they are going to get. I sort of hope the evidence is clear, so that no one has wasted time here :(
 
Marantz4250b said:
It's SOP for the news media. There is actually good reason for it; they do it so that they don't get sued for implicating the wrong person in a story. Someone with the same name might claim that people thought it was them and bring a defamation suit. If they give an age, address and suchlike then no one else can claim that they could be mistaken for the person in the article.

If I recall correctly, it all originates from a case back in, in think, the 1950's. A newspaper published a court report of a guy from the east end of London who had been convicted of bigamy. There was another chap with exactly the same name who lived a few streets away and was of almost the same age who was married who successfully sued the paper for defamation because people thought the article related to him. If the paper had published the address of the guilty man they would have had a defence to the case but they only made reference to a general area, I thinkI can u
Click to expand...
If she had of been found guilty giving her address out would be more acceptable more now .her parents address at that
 
How are they ever going to compensate this woman if it turns out she is found not guilty? I hope it doesn't all get swept under the rug and they just go "oops sorry". Didn't that nurse a few years ago get a pitiful amount in compensation when she was found to be innocent?
 
If this was a neonatal unit I presume many of the babies there exhibited some health issues. Perhaps they were preemies or had some other type of congenital issues like heart problems, etc. If that is the case, it kind of reminds me of a bombshell case back in the early 80s in Toronto when several babies started dying. An investigation was launched and eventually a few nurses were targeted as being the culprits, essentially injected these babies with digoxin. One of them, Susan Nelles, was charged with murder of four children. Within a year, the charges were dropped because they couldn't place her at the hospital when other deaths occurred.

Many experts in the field, years later, had posited that the autopsies done on these children were done too late since after death, digoxin a drug regularly used for childen with heart conditions could migrate from tissue and be re-released back into the blood stream after death making it appear that higher concentrations of the drug had been delivered. None of the woman targeted were ever charged again but it ruined all their careers.

Based on that, I have a bit of a healthy skepticism when hearing about these types of charges. Here's an excerpt of a case, which I believe was in the NL, highlighting the issues of certain drugs found during autopsy and how they can give false positives when therapeutic doses appear as overdoses.

Lucia de B. - Digoxin

www.math.leidenuniv.nl www.math.leidenuniv.nl
 
helenff said:
I remain intrigued by how this case will play out. I can't imagine how awful it is for the parents of the babies, having to wait so long for whatever version of 'justice' they are going to get. I sort of hope the evidence is clear, so that no one has wasted time here :(
Click to expand...
It's also pretty awful for the parents of LL. It is a nightmare for them too.
 
www.bbc.co.uk

Criminal barristers in England and Wales vote to go on all-out strike

An indefinite, uninterrupted strike over pay will begin in England and Wales next month.
www.bbc.co.uk

Criminal defence Barristers to go on indefinite strike!

One would presume that this is likely to affect LL's case? Even if the strike is over by then it will surely have some knock-on effect by delaying prior cases.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 166 more.
Total: 2,164 (members: 167, guests: 1,997)

Online statistics

Members online
167
Guests online
1,998
Total visitors
2,165
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
600,285
Messages
18,106,282
Members
230,993
Latest member
Clue Keeper
Back
Top