• #2,461
They had Hitchens, Crapton up front asking the questions. The point is, that they were able to present a bunch of half cocked theories without scrutiny. Some of the claims were outlandish. Accusing Breary of killing a baby, and everything that went with that.

It was crass, beyond belief.
Ronald McDonald still hasn't apologised for being responsible for inviting the crank who made that accusation.
 
  • #2,462
Ronald McDonald still hasn't apologised for being responsible for inviting the crank who made that accusation.
It literally stuns me that he hasn't been subject to action by his regulator - maybe he has?

The way he has conducted himself in the form of holding stupid "pressers" and trotting out all and sundry to make statements as to her innocence and, in doing so, bringing the whole UK justice system into disrepute is disgraceful, imo.
 
  • #2,463
I think anyone interested in that case should start with Mother I’s thirlwall statement. She describes a steady deterioration of her baby in the days leading up to that ‘attempted murder’, contrary to the prosecution describing her baby as well and stable. She was an experienced mother whose intuition was screaming, yet she was let down and not listened to. Again and again.

She also describes a sorry state at another hospital where she predicted her baby would deteriorate when repositioned, was ignored, and then when it did happen she had to instruct the doctor to ventilate her child. This was during a time we were told that the baby was perfectly fine away from Letby’s “orbit”.

Child I’s care was clearly suboptimal. The hospital immediately panicked about a potential claim given the number of transfers the baby had endured, as per their datix. How lucky for the hospital that they’ve ended up absolved, thanks to a pesky serial killer also being present.

I have no thoughts on Letby coming out of the shadows like the Joker to spookily tell Hudson that the baby looked unwell. It’s ridiculous, and the fact the trial focused so much on how dim the room was, instead of the actual facts of the case, is just another example of why this case has so many parallels to a witch trial.
Has it ever occurred to you, that Nurse Letby might possibly be guilty as charged?

Is it even a slight possibility in your mind? Or are you 100% absolutely shut down to that as a reality?
 
  • #2,464
Has it ever occurred to you, that Nurse Letby might possibly be guilty as charged?

Is it even a slight possibility in your mind? Or are you 100% absolutely shut down to that as a reality?
Good questions!

I have to say that it always strikes me that the vast majority of people who are convinced that she's innocent are simply not willing at all to consider any alternative. Their approach, as it usually is with other silly conspiracies, is one of starting out to prove their belief, rather than to follow the facts before them.

The main route of failure in this particular case is that of continually nit-picking discrete points and claiming that because a particular point can be taken in more than one light, then it cannot be used as evidence against her. As we've said many, many, many times, this was never a prosecution that succeeded on one specific point - or even two or three. It was a case that relied on the entire weight of the combined evidence taken and assessed as a whole. It was the completeness of the evidence which was the point here.

I find it somewhat worrying that people fail to see that, tbh.
 

Guardians Monthly Goal

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
360
Guests online
4,666
Total visitors
5,026

Forum statistics

Threads
642,300
Messages
18,782,862
Members
244,932
Latest member
MikeGj
Back
Top