GUILTY 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 #38

[Parker Knoll]

For every pan there is a lid as they say !

 

[Sweeper2000]

And for every cup a saucer

 

[Baileyboo]

McDonald NEVER fails to act exactly how I would expect him to for someone who’s main objective is pushing himself and I love that for her.

It's almost like MM wants to delay the CCRC from making a decision, by keeping adding more and more reports. Then there's Letby not wavering privilege so they can't speak to Myers to find out why he didn't call any medical experts.

 

[Anxala]

McDonald NEVER fails to act exactly how I would expect him to for someone who’s main objective is pushing himself and I love that for her.

What's his end goal, though? Does he even have one? Or is it just enough for him that he knows he's living in a time when blatant lying and distraction are now the tragic order of the average news day so he doesn't have to concern himself with inconvenient things like eg. truth and accountability?

How come we can see him and his so obvious grift so clearly but others can't?

 

[Sweeper2000]

Maybe even for every ton a cocking. We should ask doc choc.

 

[Parker Knoll]

He’s got a practice that seems made up exclusively of no hoper serial killers both sides of the pond, an axe to grind with the NHS and a chronic thirst for publicity good or bad.
I find his actions professionally shocking as a member of the bar and I’m pretty sure his grift is seen loud and clear by most.
His M.O seems to be all bluster and half baked truths that whilst they grab a temporary headline certainly won’t hold water when properly questioned.
No doubt this will go back to the CCRC and I really hope it does but it won’t result in these convictions being overturned but he will get his five minutes of fame.
She will die in prison.

 

[Sweeper2000]

Does anyone know what the recently announced inquests are designed to achieve? A quick scan says it's designed to see what caused the babies deaths but one would think that's already been achieved and apparently to a higher standard via the courts. Is it purely to kind of stamp the cases as verified?

 

[Marantz4250b]

Does anyone know what the recently announced inquests are designed to achieve? A quick scan says it's designed to see what caused the babies deaths but one would think that's already been achieved and apparently to a higher standard via the courts. Is it purely to kind of stamp the cases as verified?

A Coroner's inquest is a requirement in cases of potential unlawful or unexplained death, etc.

The inquests will have been put on hold until any criminal legal procedures against her were exhausted.

They are now, so the inquests will be held.

 

[Sweeper2000]

Pp

A Coroner's inquest is a requirement in cases of potential unlawful or unexplained death, etc.

The inquests will have been put on hold until any criminal legal procedures against her were exhausted.

They are now, so the inquests will be held.

That makes allot of sense. Many thanks.

 

[Sweeper2000]

For any who might have missed it. MM reckons the CCRC have a decision soon to be released.

"The matter is currently under active consideration by the CCRC and a decision is imminent. It is therefore very likely that the convictions will soon be referred back to the Court of Appeal.”

https://archive.is/qLGgM

 

[katydid23]

Parents coming forward in support of Letby means absolutely nothing. She was not accused of harming every baby she came into contact with. Your comment does not detract from the accusations of multiple other parents whatsoever. These are parents who didn't know anything about Letby at the time and felt she had harmed their babies. That's alarming

AND, some of the parents whose babies were murdered by Lucy, were initially very supportive of her. They didn't believe she could have been responsible for the violence because they had thought she was so thoughtful and caring when their child was dying. Lucy was so nurturing and bathed and dressed the deceased babies and made the memory books for the families.

Some were literally shocked when they learned the truth.

 

[katydid23]

They don't leave you to get dressed alone. I wasn't being arrested but I was present when police showed up at 7am to do a search at a property. I was lucky there was a female officer present and was not left alone for anything!!!

I understand that they don't leave you alone. But my point is that if you are arresting someone for multiple murders, a possible life sentence---you have to assume they might feel desperate or erratic. You don't know what they might have in their room, in a drawer or a closet. They could suddenly pull a gun or a knife to use on themselves or on you.

So the cops are going to greatly limit the time allowed to get clothes on. They'd prefer she throw on a track suit over pjs as opposed to taking a longer time and looking through drawers or closets for a full outfit. IMO

 

[Anxala]

For any who might have missed it. MM reckons the CCRC have a decision soon to be released.

"The matter is currently under active consideration by the CCRC and a decision is imminent. It is therefore very likely that the convictions will soon be referred back to the Court of Appeal.”

https://archive.is/qLGgM

From link:

Her barrister, Mark McDonald, said: “It is utterly remarkable that at the height of a moment when we have evidence now to show that Lucy is innocent, that they are attempting to change the record.

He has evidence of nothing of the sort.

 

[Sweeper2000]

From link:



He has evidence of nothing of the sort.

You know what I hope the only thing he's correct about is a decision being imminent and then we can see if he does indeed in the eyes of the law have new evidence. It's not really for him to say imo. I'm almost certain he's just referring to Dr Lee and Co input. I genuinely dont believe he has anything else.

That's got me thinking tbh, how on earth does the CCRC review things like that considering its high level medical knowledge.

 

[Marantz4250b]

You know what I hope the only thing he's correct about is a decision being imminent and then we can see if he does indeed in the eyes of the law have new evidence. It's not really for him to say imo. I'm almost certain he's just referring to Dr Lee and Co input. I genuinely dont believe he has anything else.

That's got me thinking tbh, how on earth does the CCRC review things like that considering its high level medical knowledge.

If MM had firm, clear and indisputable evidence of her innocence he would be holding the biggest presser in UK legal history! He'd be hiring the O2 Arena and we'd have heard about it at great length, ad-infinitum, by this point.

He's got nothing of the sort.

 

[Anxala]

You know what I hope the only thing he's correct about is a decision being imminent and then we can see if he does indeed in the eyes of the law have new evidence. It's not really for him to say imo. I'm almost certain he's just referring to Dr Lee and Co input. I genuinely dont believe he has anything else.

That's got me thinking tbh, how on earth does the CCRC review things like that considering its high level medical knowledge.

I'll be astonished if the CCRC, a sober body, one not driven or influenced by sensational grift, doesn't send him and his 'evidence' packing.

 

[Baileyboo]

You know what I hope the only thing he's correct about is a decision being imminent and then we can see if he does indeed in the eyes of the law have new evidence. It's not really for him to say imo. I'm almost certain he's just referring to Dr Lee and Co input. I genuinely dont believe he has anything else.

That's got me thinking tbh, how on earth does the CCRC review things like that considering its high level medical knowledge.

I think the CCRC have doctors complying new reports into the babies.

 

[Marantz4250b]

I'm not really sure that it's within the purview of the CCRC to be getting doctors to compile reports, tbh. They are just there to weigh up what's presented to them and decide whether the CoA gets to see it.

May be wrong, though.

 

[Sweeper2000]

I think the CCRC have doctors complying new reports into the babies.

Those are the inquests? Separate from I believe and if I'm not mistaken.

Apparently the ccrc can hire med experts if necessary.

However their main job is to make sure that after the convictions that the evidence used still would hold up if a trial were to be held on the same matter. Apparently they will be holding that trial under close scrutiny as we speak and will make sure that there were no basic errors such as other options for the deaths not being explored, that statistical anomalies do not automatically lead to suspicions and on the flip side they will also be insuring that MM efforts also can be admitted as new evidence

I think the biggest thing they will be doing is what's called "The real possibility test". That basically means they will check that any changes or new findings, new evidence and lots of other things will have a real possibility of changing the outcome of the trial.

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201415/cmselect/cmjust/850/85005.htm

 

[Sweeper2000]

I'm not really sure that it's within the purview of the CCRC to be getting doctors to compile reports, tbh. They are just there to weigh up what's presented to them and decide whether the CoA gets to see it.

May be wrong, though.

That's more or less correct although they can hire med experts. They basically fact check everything and see if it would have an impact on the original trial.
They are the step below the coa if that doesn't sound diminishing.

Best example would be pre dna trials, example if a known criminals dna was found at a crime scene after the original conviction for which someone else was convicted the likelihood of that having an impact on the way the jury see the evidence would be huge = worthy of admission.