UK - Nurse Lucy Letby Faces 22 Charges - 7 Murder/15 Attempted Murder of Babies #14

[esther43]

I agree, she must have said something about the note in interview and likely to the same effect as what Myers is saying.

 

[Dotta]

2016 (July) CoC Hospital notice

Chief Executive Tony Chambers said: “We have not taken the decision lightly and we are truly sorry for the inevitable inconvenience that this action will cause. However, it is important for us to fully understand the changes we are seeing in these neonatal mortality rates.

“At this time we are not in a position to share information about the number of cases. We want to be transparent, but this is sensitive information that forms part of the review and will be published when complete.”

Information about neonatal services at The Countess | Countess of Chester Hospital

This is the web site of the Countess of Chester Hospital.

web.archive.org

 

[esther43]

Has anybody listened to the DM podcast, episode 21 'The defendent'
I found that episode so interesting. It came off to me like Dr choc was way more into LL than visa versa. It looked as though she were just rinsing him for info.
Also the second part of the podcast blew my mind, a special speaker on 'the family court'
Why??! The family court is a different court to the crown and the speaker was talking about accessing information under this new 'pilot scheme' that suddenly allows us to be privi to information that has previously been protected.
They also hinted that none of this information has been allowed to be publicised before due it involving children.
Yes, yes, all very interesting but why are we hearing about this on a podcast named 'the defendent?'
I think we are in for a shock, it's going to come out that there is something either disturbing or sinister in the background of the defendent.
JMO

 

[esther43]

2016 (July) CoC Hospital notice

Chief Executive Tony Chambers said: “We have not taken the decision lightly and we are truly sorry for the inevitable inconvenience that this action will cause. However, it is important for us to fully understand the changes we are seeing in these neonatal mortality rates.

“At this time we are not in a position to share information about the number of cases. We want to be transparent, but this is sensitive information that forms part of the review and will be published when complete.”

Information about neonatal services at The Countess | Countess of Chester Hospital

This is the web site of the Countess of Chester Hospital.

web.archive.org

Yes, very weird how they decided to downgrade on the same week they reassigned LL. Explains the alleged look on LL's face after Dr B's convo with KE.
'she looked me in the eyes confidently'

 

[katydid23]

Has anybody listened to the DM podcast, episode 21 'The defendent'
I found that episode so interesting. It came off to me like Dr choc was way more into LL than visa versa. It looked as though she were just rinsing him for info.
Also the second part of the podcast blew my mind, a special speaker on 'the family court'
Why??! The family court is a different court to the crown and the speaker was talking about accessing information under this new 'pilot scheme' that suddenly allows us to be privi to information that has previously been protected.
They also hinted that none of this information has been allowed to be publicised before due it involving children.
Yes, yes, all very interesting but why are we hearing about this on a podcast named 'the defendent?'
I think we are in for a shock, it's going to come out that there is something either disturbing or sinister in the background of the defendent.
JMO

Oh, I'm glad you mentioned the 2nd half. I turned it off when the guest came on because I didn't understand how a family court interview was relevant to this case. Interesting to hear your take on it.

 

[esther43]

Oh, I'm glad you mentioned the 2nd half. I turned it off when the guest came on because I didn't understand how a family court interview was relevant to this case. Interesting to hear your take on it.

I had to listen to it twice - first time I lost concentration because as you say, it seemed irrelevant, listen again and you will hear hints the size of Great Britain!!

 

[marynnu]

I had to listen to it twice - first time I lost concentration because as you say, it seemed irrelevant, listen again and you will hear hints the size of Great Britain!!

Really? Well done for sticking it out, I switched off like Katydid. Need to go back & listen now!

 

[gerbil]

Haven't heard the podcast but are they discussing this pilot scheme?

Why I'm seizing the chance to scrutinise the family courts

After decades of calls for greater scrutiny, journalists are to be allowed to report on proceedings.

www.bbc.co.uk

Can someone please explain to an uncaffeinated me how this links with the Letby case?

 

[ColourPurple]

Has anybody listened to the DM podcast, episode 21 'The defendent'
I found that episode so interesting. It came off to me like Dr choc was way more into LL than visa versa. It looked as though she were just rinsing him for info.
Also the second part of the podcast blew my mind, a special speaker on 'the family court'
Why??! The family court is a different court to the crown and the speaker was talking about accessing information under this new 'pilot scheme' that suddenly allows us to be privi to information that has previously been protected.
They also hinted that none of this information has been allowed to be publicised before due it involving children.
Yes, yes, all very interesting but why are we hearing about this on a podcast named 'the defendent?'
I think we are in for a shock, it's going to come out that there is something either disturbing or sinister in the background of the defendent.
JMO

Haven't heard the podcast but are they discussing this pilot scheme?

Why I'm seizing the chance to scrutinise the family courts

After decades of calls for greater scrutiny, journalists are to be allowed to report on proceedings.

www.bbc.co.uk

Can someone please explain to an uncaffeinated me how this links with the Letby case?

I don't think it is directly linked to the LL trial at all. I think it's just being discussed because its related to media law and the courts and the changes in what they can report, and they they assumed listeners would be interested. Wrongly in my case as I'd rather they used the time to tell us more detail from the trial. They did the same with the interview with a court artist.

 

[gerbil]

Thanks ColourPurple!

 

[esther43]

Haven't heard the podcast but are they discussing this pilot scheme?

Why I'm seizing the chance to scrutinise the family courts

After decades of calls for greater scrutiny, journalists are to be allowed to report on proceedings.

www.bbc.co.uk

Can someone please explain to an uncaffeinated me how this links with the Letby case?

For me it's 'just an association' If you will excuse the pun
So the podcast highlighted that not all offences impacting on children are heard through a criminal court. And that historically, criminal courts can not hear about family court matters due to legislation protecting children. My thinking from the way the interview was told was that now, under this new pilot scheme, information previously sitting in the background could now be disclosed under the new pilot, under certain terms, if it is thought to be in the public interest.
I think these 'add ons' along with the other episodes are intended to be ambiguous to allow to the listener to draw their own conclusions, as opposed to directly concluding what this may mean for LL. JMO

 

[Parker Knoll]

May have a listen to the second half later as I must admit I wasn’t giving it my full attention. It’s mothers day here in the UK.
How sad and poignant for all involved in this hideous case.

 

[esther43]

I don't think it is directly linked to the LL trial at all. I think it's just being discussed because its related to media law and the courts and the changes in what they can report, and they they assumed listeners would be interested. Wrongly in my case as I'd rather they used the time to tell us more detail from the trial. They did the same with the interview with a court artist.

May have a listen to the second half later as I must admit I wasn’t giving it my full attention. It’s mothers day here in the UK.
How sad and poignant for all involved in this hideous case.

Happy mother's day to all.

 

[Sweeper2000]

I'm thinking she was probably asked about the note during police interview. They asked her about the Facebook searches and the other items found in her house and the photo of the card on her phone.

do You think there was no reporting that day? I would be truly surprised if no articles about the famous note. Gutting if true.

 

[Tortoise]

do You think there was no reporting that day? I would be truly surprised if no articles about the famous note. Gutting if true.

It'll be after the prosecution finishes presenting the babies' evidence.

 

[Becci]

Will the defence show the other notes that weren't relevant to the prosecution?

 

[katydid23]

In the UK, are the jurors allowed to send questions to the judge?

In some states here, the jury is allowed to send questions they have for the attorneys to answer. It is very revealing when it happens.

I am hoping the jurors have a way to get questions answered if they get confused with all of this overwhelming info.

 

[Tortoise]

Will the defence show the other notes that weren't relevant to the prosecution?

The prosecution will show all the notes, since they do the evidence gathering.

 

[Tortoise]

In the UK, are the jurors allowed to send questions to the judge?

In some states here, the jury is allowed to send questions they have for the attorneys to answer. It is very revealing when it happens.

I am hoping the jurors have a way to get questions answered if they get confused with all of this overwhelming info.

Yes, jurors send notes to the judge asking questions and they are put to the witness if deemed appropriate, or the barristers agree how to answer the question.

 

[squish]

Hi all, I have been reading along here, and I'm not from the UK so I want to verify my understanding that this is similar to the US in which each individual charge will be evaluated separately, on its own merits so it's possible that she could be found guilty on some charges, and not for others, correct?

Yes, correct, each charge is separate and she can be found guilty/innocent of any amount of them.

Realistically and logically, if she’s guilty of one, she’s probably guilty of them all, but they’ve got to judge each charge individually.