Lucy Letby Case On Ch5.....

[10ClarionSt]

.....next Monday, Aug 5th at 9pm. Did she do it? Was she guilty? In my opinion, no. She was the scapegoat for the hospitals' incompetence. Having followed the case, I couldn't believe it even got to court, never mind a guilty verdict. All circumstantial, supposition and emotion. She must have been guilty, eh? 

[douglas9401]

Anything billed as a documentary on Channel 5 should come with a health warning.

[Peter Pedant]

yeah yeah got it.

INtro: squidgy doll splats against a bare wall ( child sqauwks) as red stuff ( drama it  is not real blood) runs slowly down wall.

Camera rolls back to see another soft  toy pinned with a small dagger against  the wall

On the child's play table: Barbie has had an appendicectomy but by a very inexperienced surgeon, it seems. Barbie's forearm is on the floor

Title: Yellow sans-cerif, red edging:   25 years later.....

[Peter Pedant]

grippping stuff

[mushroom25]

yet, why did her defence team not call any of their own expert witnesses?

[Old_Geezer]

I have no idea. But we only have the system to come to a conclusion. No doubt it'll get considered.

[grumpy01]

I think this case has legs.

[davebro3]

if we had capital punishment this argument would be moot...

[bookbinder]

It's a bit strange, that, whenever anyone dies as a result of hospital staff's carelessness, nobody ever gets prosecuted.

[davebro3]

it has happened but it's rare

[Peter Pedant]

It's a bit strange, that,......... carelessness, nobody ever gets prosecuted.

no it is  called  manslaughter by gross negligence - just ordinary negligence wont  do. about ten a year ( in Hospital)

[Peter Pedant]

yet, why did her defence team not call any of their own expert witnesses?

the usual good reason is that the defence expert cannot support the case - reports in this case not disclosable

[Cloverjo]

I don't believe she is guilty. I will watch the programme, but I'm not sure Ch5 is the best broadcaster to deal with this. 

[drmorgans]

 

 

Have you had the benefit of hearing all the evidence as the jury did?

 

 

[10ClarionSt]

Thanks for the replies folks, Sorry it's late. I didn't hear all the evidence, as court proceedings are not published online and I wasn't in court. I read what was available in the media and I assume that the most relevant aspects of the case are the ones that are published. No witnesses. No physical evidence. No CCTV. No useable DNA or fingerprints. Just circumstantial evidence, mainly. Tis a mis-carriage of justice, if ever there was one.

[Peter Pedant]

No witnesses. No physical evidence. No CCTV. No useable DNA or fingerprints

No the hacks if they do not understand the way the case is going, concentrate on fripperies which punters can understand

there were witnesses - nurses and doctors - oh you mean where someone says " I heard her say " ha! I have killed another of the little blighters" "

No CCTV - no not in clinical areas ( pt consent etc)

no notes - the black hand has killed another wee bairn singed Lucy Letby ( Miss)

sort of slam dunk ...