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 #36

[Tortoise]

Actually I don't think anything additional was learned in the post-trial coverage that didn't come out during her trial and verdicts.

In effect what he is saying is that there should be no trial reporting during trial, in case of future trials.

The jury in her second trial was instructed much the same as her first jury, that (in the first trial) they could use her first guilty verdict to inform them on the remaining charges, but that it doesn't prove she attempted to murder baby K.

 

[Tortoise]

The Crown Prosecution Service is opposing the appeal bid, with Nick Johnson KC stating in written submissions that it was “misguided” and that the jury found Letby to be a “multiple killer and habitual liar”.

He said: “The application appears to rely on the huge volume of publicity as being of itself sufficient grounds on which to base an application to stay the indictment.

“It also leans heavily on the proposition that it is wrong for a witness to speak to the news media and that fact in itself taints the prosecution to the extent that it should be stayed.

“This is a misguided approach.”

Letby retrial ‘should not have gone ahead due to overwhelming prejudice’

Letby, 34, was sentenced to 15 whole life orders for her crimes.

www.shropshirestar.com

 

[Parker Knoll]

Unsurprisingly REFUSED.

 

[Tortoise]

In a ruling briefly interrupted by a fire alarm inside the Royal Courts of Justice, he said the Court of Appeal had to take into account the “unrivalled” experience of the judge in charge of both trials and the steps he took to ensure the second prosecution was fair.

Lord Justice Davis said: “We conclude that the judge was right to find that Letby would be able to have a fair trial.”

He added the suggestion police should not have spoken about the case was "fanciful".

Letby, who watched the hearing via a video link from HMP Bronzefield, showed no reaction as the judges gave their ruling.

Lucy Letby loses bid to appeal against conviction

 

[cottonweaver]

DBM
because....

 

[Sweeper2000]

No reaction again ahhhh but she's used to it by now.

The Crown Prosecution Service is opposing the appeal bid, with Nick Johnson KC stating in written submissions that it was “misguided” and that the jury found Letby to be a “multiple killer and habitual liar”.

He said: “The application appears to rely on the huge volume of publicity as being of itself sufficient grounds on which to base an application to stay the indictment.

“It also leans heavily on the proposition that it is wrong for a witness to speak to the news media and that fact in itself taints the prosecution to the extent that it should be stayed.

“This is a misguided approach.”

Letby retrial ‘should not have gone ahead due to overwhelming prejudice’

Letby, 34, was sentenced to 15 whole life orders for her crimes.

www.shropshirestar.com

Can anyone inform of why the judge has said "the jury has found letby"? That sounds to me like he was informed that was what they thought and to me that's an insight I won't forget. I'm absolutely loving the strength in the convictions. I think it's great. Been slightly worried about the "innocent camp".

 

[Tortoise]

Can anyone inform of why the judge has said "the jury has found letby"?

That's what Nick Johnson KC said.

 

[Tortoise]

R -v- Letby - Courts and Tribunals Judiciary

Neutral Citation Number: [2024] EWCA Crim 1278Case No: 202402750 B4 In the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)On appeal from the Crown Court at Manchester 24 October 2024 Before: Lord Justice William Davis Lord Justice Jeremy Baker andMrs Justice McGowan Between: R -v- Lucy Letby

www.judiciary.uk

 

[Sweeper2000]

That's what Nick Johnson KC said.

How does he know that though? Or is it inferred by the jury siding with the prosecutions narrative? Seems quite specific to me. Forgive my misreading.

 

[Tortoise]

How does he know that though? Or is it inferred by the jury siding with the prosecutions narrative? Seems quite specific to me. Forgive my misreading.

How does he know the jury found she was a multiple murderer and liar? By her convictions she was proven to have murdered multiple times and that means she lied all through her testimony. I'm not sure if I may be misunderstanding your question though.

 

[Anxala]

How does he know that though? Or is it inferred by the jury siding with the prosecutions narrative? Seems quite specific to me. Forgive my misreading.

Because they found her guilty! Nothing to do with anyone siding with anyone or being informed after the fact, just NK stating the obvious, based on the outcome of her trial!

 

[Sweeper2000]

@Tortoise @Anxala I did get all of that but to me that reads more like a specific quote from the jury themselves but that might just be me reading too much into it. Presumably one wouldn't know that the jury thought she was a "habitual liar" without direct communication. Might just be me.

 

[Parker Knoll]

I think the jury had worked that out by themselves sweep !

 

[Sweeper2000]

Is it me? She's obviously a multiple murderer in the juries eyes but "habitual liar"? That's not what she was convicted of, as far as the jury knows and is concerned she may have had the genuine belief that she was innocent. How is it that captain NJ knows the jury thought she was a liar? I thought they had to take the reasons why they thought that to the grave or something? It's just very specific to me.

ETA.

As far as I know the only confirmation of the prosecutions story received from the jury was that they thought she was guilty of those crimes not that she was also lieing.

 

[Tortoise]

Is it me? She's obviously a multiple murderer in the juries eyes but "habitual liar"? That's not what she was convicted of, as far as the jury knows and is concerned she may have had the genuine belief that she was innocent. How is it that captain NJ knows the jury thought she was a liar? I thought they had to take the reasons why they thought that to the grave or something? It's just very specific to me.

ETA.

As far as I know the only confirmation of the prosecutions story received from the jury was that they thought she was guilty of those crimes not that she was also lieing.

Her defence wasn't a medical condition such as amnesia or psychosis which stood in the way of her knowing what she had done.

The only deduction from the jury rejecting her testimony and finding her guilty is that she was point-blank lying to them, for weeks, and that she habitually lies because she lied about doing nothing harmful to the babies throughout her murdering spree, during her grievance, in her police interviews, in her defence statement, and in the witness box. There is no other explanation for a person with full mental capacity doing something and denying it.

 

[Parker Knoll]

Amen to that @Tortoise !

 

[Sweeper2000]

Her defence wasn't a medical condition such as amnesia or psychosis which stood in the way of her knowing what she had done.

The only deduction from the jury rejecting her testimony and finding her guilty is that she was point-blank lying to them, for weeks, and that she habitually lies because she lied about doing nothing harmful to the babies throughout her murdering spree, during her grievance, in her police interviews, in her defence statement, and in the witness box. There is no other explanation for a person with full mental capacity doing something and denying it.

Cheers. To me that quote could read as outside the scope of what nj is allowed to say but I get it.

 

[Tortoise]

Cheers. To me that quote could read as outside the scope of what nj is allowed to say but I get it.

Not really, unless you can come up with another explanation for them disregarding her denials, in effect concluding that she had deceptively altered medical records, employed subterfuge to inject harmful substances into the babies tubes and feeds when other carers had left the cot space, knew what she was doing (had intention), and with there being no recommendation for a psychiatric evaluation or hospitalisation.

 

[Sweeper2000]

Here's an interesting take on herself. Not psychopath, not narccy but borderline. Interesting.

"But Dr Crawford believes that doesn’t ring true here: “She doesn’t seem psychopathic to me. She appears more like an inadequate woman who’s living a very empty life that has this real need for fulfilment.”

I really agree with that last statement. It has application to some of the behaviours we have seen. Could also explain the motive, she was doing it for the thrill. Was this the only way "she felt alive".

"Professor Mark Freestone agrees that Letby doesn’t display symptoms of psychopathy. An expert on forensic mental health, he’s worked in prisons and the NHS with some of the UK’s most notorious and high-risk criminals. He points out that psychopathy is not as well understood in women as it is in men but says the associated antisocial behaviours “are things that just don’t occur in women with anything like the same kind of frequency”."

Google News

Comprehensive, up-to-date news coverage, aggregated from sources all over the world by Google News.

news.google.com

 

[Anxala]

If Dr Crawford is correct, then that makes her even more despicable (if that's possible) than she already is.