Issues Of Evidence - Letby Micarriage Of Justice?

[DTCwordfan]

Read the attached article - pretty technical but it appears the Director of Public Pros and those in Blue may not have been as thorough as they could have done and Letby may have a strong case for a mistrial......

If this is the case not eactly good news for KS and Yvette Cooper and how much moolah would be resulting if she was found to be found not-guilty?

 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/07/09/lucy-letby-serial-killer-or-miscarriage-justice-victim/

[DTCwordfan]

excuse my spelling in the title - a sticky 's' key! Hoping we don't have another Christopher Jenkins case coming....that was seriously disgraceful - and particularly what with the Press had to say about him, though he did get part-compensation out of it but it's forced him to move to France.

[THECORBYLOON]

If you can't read the full article, use this link https://archive.ph/Sooys

[Gromit]

She has been judged by two seperate juries and found guilty.

Who Christopher Jenkins?

[Dukedelorca]

Another sly dig at Starmer by DTC.

[THECORBYLOON]

Even if she were to win an appeal, compensation is not automatic.

https://appeal.org.uk/compensation/

"Most people think that when a person has gone to prison when they shouldn’t have, that they will receive compensation when their conviction is finally overturned.

However a most brutal law introduced in 2014 has meant the vast majority don’t get a penny.

It is no longer enough for the wrongfully convicted person to have proved that they are not guilty. To receive compensation, they must show that the new or newly discovered fact that led to the conviction being quashed shows “beyond reasonable doubt” that the person did not commit the offence (Criminal Justice Act 2014 Section 133 (1ZA)).

This essentially means they must prove their innocence – therefore reversing the age old principle of ‘innocent until proven guilty’. From 2016 to 2024, of the 591 applications for compensation by miscarriage of justice victims, only 39 were granted – less than 7%."

 

 

[DTCwordfan]

delorca, well he was DPP in his time.

Jefferies - the Bristol music teacher who got accused of murder of a young lady, Joanna Yeats..when eventually it was found to be a Dutch guy.

[sandyRoe]

He seemed to have been an eccentric with dyed hair.

That was enough for some sections of the press to pillory him.

[Gromit]

Thanks for the link THECORBYLOON.

[DTCwordfan]

to be fair here, it looks like the statistical work has not been done and it should have been - but then the Press jumped on the case too.....

[THECORBYLOON]

Jefferies wasn't prosecuted was he?

[naomi24]

As much as I detest the pair of them? in fairness I can't see how this reflects upon Starmer and Cooper in any way at all.

[youngmafbog]

Only in that they will get the flak Naomi.

It seems to be questioning the statistical evidence but surely that wasnt the only evidence?

[DTCwordfan]

well, it comes down to the work-shift patterns and that's what appears to be very dodgy evidence indeed, not just that LL was on duty - as there were, apparently, deaths when she wasn't there. No doubt,should be, the defence team ought to be letting AI loose on the data as well.... 

[DTCwordfan]

and naomi, it comes with the turf of being in government if there has been a justice/police foul-up....

[naomi24]

Indeed - but they can't possibly be held responsible.  

[Khandro]

This is a shocking development:

There are other reasons to be cautious about the shift patterns. Dr Coward has shown it is possible to take an identical number of nurses and incident rate at a hospital with 170 shifts and place any nurse at the same number of events as Letby, simply through randomness. 

“You could make a chart like that for any nurse in any hospital,” he said.

“All you would have to do is only focus on the times when something went wrong when that nurse was on duty and ignore all the times that nurse was on duty and everything was fine.

“You don’t need a PhD in statistics or maths to know that this is dreadful. This illustrates what you can do with cherry-picked data.”

I've always thought it unthinkable that she did all these killings, my main basis for thinking so ?  - her face.

[Peter Pedant]

well, it comes down to the work-shift patterns and that's what appears to be very dodgy evidence indeed, not just that LL was on duty -

well done for raising this

no there are a lot more things besides work patterns which is why the first trial took six weeks. I have no idea why they ran  the second tr-trial - AND let in 'bad character' evidence to wit she had killed another six.

Various doctors had witnessed lack of action, at least one said she shouldnt be employed ( made officially to apologise)

and.... the deaths have stopped

Further the defence employed and expert and then didnt use him ( they are allowed to do this) AND his evidence is not disclosable. Obviously people are saying the expert cd not support the defence case.

Finally the Crown expert Dr Dewi Evans has been referred to the GMC - a fave ploy in the eighties and nineties if a doctor displeased you. GMC referral used as a SLAPP ( you complain as anyone can and it  screws up the doctor for two years at least. The GMC says " o yes yes it is very important we investigate these serious allegations so we kick off by suspending him for a few years whilst we look. The system  is meant to work like this"

The shift pattern analysis could have shown she COULDNT have done it - absent whilst an  event occurred - even THIS can be overcome ( Toronot 1976, someone persuaded a nurse to give an injections 'she had forgotten') - and west midland serious crimes squad 1980 - removal of evidence whilst the suspects were out  of the building ( = collusion with others).

But the shift pattern was not the only evidence

er - this is the first of a new breed of criminal case they say. Where the internet conspiracy theorists have a go and pile in, before during and after the case.

and please can the mods leave this post alone? even  tho there are some Very Long Words in  it

[DTCwordfan]

agree that they can't possibly personally be held responsible but they are for their departments and overall government.

[jno]

the New Yorker ran a lengthy piece on this a couple of months ago, which had to be legally blocked until the latest trial was over. You can now read it here

https://archive.ph/AWpyz

[Gromit]

Thank you jno, that too was a very interesting article.