VERDICT WATCH UK - Nurse Lucy Letby, Faces 22 Charges - 7 Murder/15 Attempted Murder of Babies #28

[notsure]

The jury have a difficult job because of the large number of cases they have to consider. They have to look at each case both individually and in the context of the whole scenario of events over a period of time. This is problematic, because one case on its own might be explained by some kind of unusual issue that occurred, and therefore you could say there's reasonable doubt. If you look at all the cases together, you may come to a different decision.

For that reason, I think they're likely to find her guilty on all the charges or not guilty on all the charges. I can't see that they can come up with anything in between.

Is this post subjudice? If so, I will delete.

 

[Tortoise]

So... are we going with Tortoises maths or Dan's (for the competition)??

Our predictions were excluding lunch and breaks, which Dan hasn't excluded.

 

[bbsaz]

I womder if the jurors who are adamant of guilt will persuade the uncertain members to go with guilt across the board, as they will keep emphasising the Judges direction that they could use the pattern approach

 

[WaxLyrical]

I womder if the jurors who are adamant of guilt will persuade the uncertain members to go with guilt across the board, as they will keep emphasising the Judges direction that they could use the pattern approach

I think this completely depends on the individuals themselves and how easily influenced by others they are. If a juror or two is entirely unconvinced by the case, I can’t imagine the level of discomfort to then agree to convict someone. I think it’s really unlikely we’ll get unanimous decisions now.

 

[gc105]

I womder if the jurors who are adamant of guilt will persuade the uncertain members to go with guilt across the board, as they will keep emphasising the Judges direction that they could use the pattern approach

I really hope so.

Maybe it’s just because I feel strongly one way (following the presentation of all the evidence may I add!), <modsnip - sub judice - discussion of guilt or innocence>

I guess the problem is, whilst there will be people like myself on the jury who feel very strongly one way and probably won’t have their mind changed, there could be others on the jury who feel strongly the other way and won’t have their mind changed.

I do NOT envy the foreperson on this case.

IMO of course.

 

[Tortoise]

The jury have a difficult job because of the large number of cases they have to consider. They have to look at each case both individually and in the context of the whole scenario of events over a period of time. This is problematic, because one case on its own might be explained by some kind of unusual issue that occurred, and therefore you could say there's reasonable doubt. If you look at all the cases together, you may come to a different decision.

For that reason, I think they're likely to find her guilty on all the charges or not guilty on all the charges. I can't see that they can come up with anything in between.

Is this post subjudice? If so, I will delete.

The judge's directions on this - (snipped for the relevant parts)

“It would, you may think, be a remarkable and exceptional case in which a jury could say we know everything about what happened in any case and why.

“You are not detectives.

“If you are sure that someone on the unit was deliberately harming a baby or babies, you do not have to be sure of the precise harmful act or acts. In some instances there may have been more than one.

“To find the defendant guilty, however, you must be sure that she deliberately did some harmful act to the baby the subject of the count on the indictment and the act or acts was accompanied by the intent and, in the case of murder, was causative of death.”

[...]

“If you are satisfied so that you are sure in the case of any baby that they were deliberately harmed by the defendant then you are entitled to consider how likely it is that other babies in the case who suffered unexpected collapses did so as a result of some unexplained or natural cause rather than as a consequence of some deliberate harmful act by someone.

“If you conclude that this is unlikely then you could, if you think it right, treat the evidence of that event and any others, if any, which you find were a consequence of a deliberate harmful act, as supporting evidence in the cases of other babies and that the defendant was the person responsible.

“When deciding how far, if at all, the evidence in relation to any of the cases supports the case against the defendant on any other or others, you should take into account how similar or dissimilar, in your opinion, the allegations and the circumstances of and surrounding their collapses are."

Letby jurors told to set aside emotion as baby murders trial winds up

The nurse is accused of murdering seven babies and trying to murder 10 others while working on the neonatal unit at the Countess of Chester Hospital.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[Dotta]

Why did the trial start and now the Deliberations at 10.30 instead of 9.00?
They start really late.
Is there a reason for this?

 

[gc105]

I think this completely depends on the individuals themselves and how easily influenced by others they are. If a juror or two is entirely unconvinced by the case, I can’t imagine the level of discomfort to then agree to convict someone. I think it’s really unlikely we’ll get unanimous decisions now.

See I initially felt this way, surely a unanimous decision would be quick.

BUT - I do think for the jury to do their job PROPERLY, they should go through each charge on an individual basis. If they took 30 mins to discuss the evidence per charge - that’s 11hrs of deliberations straightaway. Not including initial discussions, then them summing up and any other questions that may arise). 1hr per charge would be 22hrs.

 

[gc105]

Why did the trial start and now the Deliberations at 10.30 instead of 9.00?
They start really late.
Is there a reason for this?

I may be completely making this up, but was it not to do with the travel time to/from court for LL each day? I’ve probably made that up

 

[Tortoise]

Why did the trial start and now the Deliberations at 10.30 instead of 9.00?
They start really late.
Is there a reason for this?

I think it's based on the judge's hours, having to be available in the building while they are in deliberations.

 

[bbsaz]

See I initially felt this way, surely a unanimous decision would be quick.

BUT - I do think for the jury to do their job PROPERLY, they should go through each charge on an individual basis. If they took 30 mins to discuss the evidence per charge - that’s 11hrs of deliberations straightaway. Not including initial discussions, then them summing up and any other questions that may arise). 1hr per charge would be 22hrs.

I agree completely. The absolute minimum imo is to return a verdict about now. That's still only 30mins per charge. And surely they will take more time than that. Which is why I said Wed next week

 

[notsure]

If the jury do extrapolate from one case to all the others and find her guilty on all charges, doesn't that potentially raise a problem later, if one of the cases is disproved, due to new evidence? That could then potentially cast doubt on all the others.

 

[Parker Knoll]

Courts always sit 10.30 - 4.30.
From recollection the jury were out 6 days for Shipman, the jury were unanimous.
I’m not panicking … yet !

 

[Dotta]

I also predicted Wednesday next week (apart from hrs and mins)
It is somewhere in this threads.

 

[Becky53]

If the jury do extrapolate from one case to all the others and find her guilty on all charges, doesn't that potentially raise a problem later, if one of the cases is disproved, due to new evidence? That could then potentially cast doubt on all the others.

As far as I’m aware only the jury know how they reached their verdict.

 

[Dotta]

Courts always sit 10.30 - 4.30.

Thanks!
Mystery solved

 

[gc105]

I’ve tried looking but no luck…

Does anyone know how long the jury took to bring back a verdict on the Edwin & Lorraine McLaren case in 2017? Longest criminal trial in the U.K. to date, he had 29 charges, of which he was found guilty of them all. His wife was found guilty of 2 charges. Would be interesting to see how long it took the jury to come back with verdicts on this one.

Jury members required counselling following the trial! I imagine the members of the jury of this trial will be much the same tbh.

 

[JosieJo]

I think the jury may well already have unanimous verdicts on some of the cases ...but it's a case of being unanimous on all.
Can these be divided into unanimous and majority ? Should that arise ? ...or would we only know them as all being a majority verdict?
If that makes sense

 

[bbsaz]

Completely understand Josie, and have wondered the same

 

[gc105]

I think the jury may well already have unanimous verdicts on some of the cases ...but it's a case of being unanimous on all.
Can these be divided into unanimous and majority ? Should that arise ? ...or would we only know them as all being a majority verdict?
If that makes sense

This is something I’ve wondered too.
Surely they don’t have to meet a unanimous verdict on the charges as a collective.

I would have thought they have to reach a decision on each case separately. However, obviously at the moment that causes an issue as need a unanimous verdict on ALL. So if at the moment the jury have a unanimous verdict on 14 of the 22 charges, but can’t agree on the other 8 (even if they have a majority on those) - they can’t go back as only allowed a unanimous verdict at present.

That issue would only be solved by either a change to unanimous on all, or the judge bringing them back to say he’ll accept a majority on all/some of the charges.