UK - Nurse Lucy Letby, murder of babies, 7 Guilty of murder verdicts; 8 Guilty of attempted murder; 2 Not Guilty of attempted; 5 hung re attempted #35

[Parker Knoll]

I was only thinking about the appeal this afternoon and wondering where it was up to.
Manifesting at its finest !
JUST MY OPINION obvs.

 

[Marantz4250b]

Appeal REFUSED !

An outcome which was about as predictable as gravity!

I think she's challenging the sentencing as well - which will go the same way.

 

[Parker Knoll]

She will go to the next stage …. Sigh.

 

[Marantz4250b]

She will go to the next stage …. Sigh.

She will.

I'd love to know what her actual grounds for appeal are. Nothing seems to spring immediately to mind and I can't really think what her side's reasoning might be - I never done it, guv - doesn't cut it, legally!

 

[mrC]

still early days though Lucy Letby murder convictions appeal bid rejected

 

[mrC]

i think they might y challenging the qaulfications of some expert witneses theres also the deaths that happend ater she ledt the hospital

and the state the hospital was wich was not good

 

[Marantz4250b]

still early days though Lucy Letby murder convictions appeal bid rejected

She's just going through the motions, though. None of this will come to anything.

IMO, obviously.

 

[Marantz4250b]

i think they might y challenging the aulfications of some expert witneses

That is not grounds for appeal. If they are unqualified then that should have been raised beforehand. Also, her team had ample opportunity to question them - which they did - but the jury still convicted.

Grounds for appeal are limited and rightly so. There has to be significant legal error, such as biased summing up by the judge or new evidence.

 

[mrC]

well you can appeal on the grounds of incompetence of councel she could cliam her brief should of challenged or that the judge of allowed them

 

[Marantz4250b]

well you can appeal on the grounds of incompetence of councel she could cliam her brief should of challenged or that the judge of allowed them

Incompetent counsel is not really a thing here, as far as I'm aware.

It's not just any backstreet lawyer who gets audience in the Crown courts. She was represented by one of the top Barristers (a KC) in the country in this field. She also has her solicitor who originally instructed said Barrister.

Also, you can appeal on any grounds you like but they have to be true. I don't think for one minute that anyone seriously believes that her KC was remotely incompetent.

 

[mrC]

well even top barristers make mistakes an appeal is based lardgely on finding anythin the jury should of heard but dident or shouldent of heard but did imcompetence of councel has been accepted at appeal on ociasions not nearly as much as in the usa she also has a chance if there was anything the proscution witheld from the defence from the defence

 

[Marantz4250b]

well een top barristers make mistakes an appeal is based lardgely on finding anythin the jury should of heard but dident or shouldent of heard but did imcompetence of councel has been accepted at appeal on ociasions not nearly as much as in the usa she also has a chance if there was anything the proscution witheld from the defence from the defence

I'm not sure how many successful appeals there have been based on Barristers being incompetent but I'd suspect there have been very, very few indeed. Lets not forget that she said she was appealing only a few weeks after conviction so mistakes serious enough to result in conviction - on multiple charges - must have come to light very, very quickly. I mean, they surely must have been evident when they were made at trial?

As above, it's highly unlikely that the prosecution withheld evidence. If they did then, again, how has she suddenly come into possession of it so soon after being convicted?

Nope, she's simply going through the motions because she has nothing else to loose. She's been given a sentence that will see her never being released so she may as well try everything she can.

 

[Marantz4250b]

Appealing a Conviction Due to Poor Legal Representation. - Forrest Williams

Want to Appeal a Conviction Because of Poor Legal Representation? Criminal Appeal solicitors are frequently contacted by clients who want to appeal because they feel that they were badly represented. The Court of Appeal have made it clear that only in extreme circumstances will they allow an...

forrestwilliamssolicitors.com

In order to succeed you will have to show that the representation was so bad that no reasonable lawyer would have acted like that AND that this made the difference between you being found guilty rather than not guilty.

That's a very high bar to clear.

 

[Parker Knoll]

Yes it’s going to be so interesting to hear the word salad / Grounds of appeal in a couple of weeks.
See you all then !
JMO !

 

[mrC]

Fury as ‘cowardly’ docs and nurses who worked with Lucy Letby keep names secret

A leading barrister has criticised a 'cowardly' court order which prevents doctors and nurses who worked with baby killer Lucy Letby at Countess of Chester Hospital from being named

www.mirror.co.uk

 

[marynnu]

Fury as ‘cowardly’ docs and nurses who worked with Lucy Letby keep names secret

A leading barrister has criticised a 'cowardly' court order which prevents doctors and nurses who worked with baby killer Lucy Letby at Countess of Chester Hospital from being named

www.mirror.co.uk

That's just ridiculous.

 

[Marantz4250b]

That's just ridiculous.

I tend to agree although I can see the reasoning behind it.

These things have to be balanced with an open justice system on the one hand and peoples rights to privacy under the Human Rights Act and suchlike on the other. The world today is a very different place than it was even 20 years ago; once your name is on the internet and connected to very serious or emotive subjects it's there for ever and it's impossible to evade it for the rest of your life.

Not too long ago you had to go looking for stuff like this in newspaper offices, local libraries and court records and suchlike. These days everything is available just by entering a few words into an online search engine. Not only is it just the person's name and other details available, it could have knock-on effects for their family and friends. Also, the internet makes it far easier for morons to inflame things and intimidate or harass people.

I don't think this means that it's justified to start using court orders on a large scale to prevent witnesses being identified but it is probably a discussion which needs to be had.

On the matter of the specific article in question; I'm a bit torn, tbh, because my thoughts are - why should someone have to be named publicly just because they happened to work wither her? There's no suggestion that they did anything to contribute to her crimes - other than in a few cases which are being investigated, that is. It's not the case that these people were anonymous to the court, just that their names can't be reported. It's a difficult one.

 

[mrC]

it doesnt take much dluething to ind out who they are anyway

 

[Dotta]

it doesnt take much dluething to ind out who they are anyway

But why would anyone sleuth them???

They are not charged, are they?
They are innocent.

The staff members were unfortunate to work next to a monster.
I guess some still have nightmares about it.

Really,
what is wrong with some people?

I trust the Judge.
It was Judge's decision.
And very wise and JUST one.

JMO

 

[Parker Knoll]

I don’t know how I feel about this tbh.
Once one asks for it then the rest will follow.