Is it “crass” to question Lucy Letby’s guilt? | The Daily T Podcast
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 26 янв 2025
- David Davis has told The Daily T he thinks “the balance of probabilities” is that killer nurse Lucy Letby is innocent, as the health secretary has says the public campaign to free her is “crass and insensitive”.
With an inquiry into her crimes due to begin this week, veteran Tory MP Davis is in the studio again to reveal his own conclusions about Letby’s case. We also hear from a Cambridge statistician who has raised concerns about the evidence used to convict the nurse of murdering seven babies.
Plus, is Labour brave enough to reform the NHS? Ahead of the publication of a damning report on the health service, Camilla and Gordon ask why the new government is overlooking one its biggest crises: social care.
#letby #crime #politics
Read the latest headlines here: www.telegraph....
![Blox Fruits Dragon Rework Update [Full Stream]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EqDAp8udhm0/mqdefault.jpg)
It is never crass to re-examine a case which may or may not prevent a miscarriage of justice. A civilised society must be willing to at least look..
100% agree. it’s not crass at all. we need the truth. we are a society with the rule of law. we need to ensure that the law is being enforced correctly.
Feel like it would be very inconvenient for the powers that be to look at this case again.
New evidences have to be presented 👍🏼 Miscarriages of Justice must always be explored 100%
It would be crass if it were a few loony conspiracy theorists. But it's not. It's the past president of the Royal Statistical Society.
@AlanaSmith223It's not a matter of numbers of appeals. It's a matter of evidence.
"Speculation" about Lucy Letby's guilt "is causing families enormous stress", we are told. Well, sorry, but the idea that someone can be convicted of serial murder on the basis of inaccurate statistics, "confession" notes which turn out to be written at the suggestion of a therapist, and the discovery that the whole unit and hospital were "out of their depth" causes me and a lot of others "distress", too, as does the idea that Lucy Letby might simply have been made the scapegoat for others' failings. The feelings of the families are, alas, secondary to the needs of justice.
It is worse than that the Daily mail and guardian misquoted and made statements completely out of context ,and completely failed to mention she wrote " I am innocent " on one of the notes I think this is the worst miscarriage of justice so far this century
About the worst I've seen is how the media is writing about her parents as if they're some kind of psychos for not giving up on their daughter, and protesting her innocence. Well, she's THEIR baby, and they're sure she's innocent. Surely abandoning her would make them the monsters, not fighting for her?
@@rolandhawken6628 I assumed - as a person half-following the case - she was guilty and the case was excellent. That is shameful coverage of a case that is garbage on its face.
If the parents’ emotional state is to be taken into account then it should also be recognised that they NEED someone to blame. Letby is someone, so she gets the blame.
The families of the babies should be happy that people are looking for the truth, because if this is a systemic failure of hospital, then more lives will be saved if it is properly dealt with instead of the hospital scapegoating a nurse, and the hospital 'gets away with it'...
Since she has not been on that NICU ward baby deaths have dropped to nil
@@roseanncampbell3168'Since 'she has not been on the ward' the unit's admittance gestational age has been raised significantly AND known fetal problems are not accepted on the ward. Basically they are practically risk free. Some people should research before making ridiculous comments.
those parents probably don't give a crap about how the wife of the sub post office master feels after he killed himself or how andrew malkinson felt after serving 17 years in prison for a rape he did not commit but the jury decided he was guilty!!
a butcher, baker, candle stick maker & an undertaker, along with several housewives does not represent a good enough jury in a case as difficult as this medical one!
one gets the impression the parents minds were poisoned by a corrupt judge & PROSECUTOR, BOTH IN THE PAY OF THE HOSPITAL!!
@@roseanncampbell3168
Wrong, they went up again in 2017-18
@@roseanncampbell3168 Many hospitals had peaks before and after the Chester hospital did. Before the trial the clinical care commission inspectors found a low value of care at the Chester hospital, which was due to chronic under-staffing and a culture that told nurses not to contact doctors after hours. Since the trial it has emerged that there was an serious infection present in the hospital which particularly affected babies, especially premature ones. Since the case Chester Hospital has not accepted any more seriously ill or weak babies... And maybe, just maybe the hospital admin raised their game and improved conditions and staffing levels for the neo-natal areas. This has all the hallmarks of a cover-up and scapegoating a junior staff member to protect the hospital.
I have no idea if she's guilty or not, but if there are questionable aspects to the case, evidence or witness statement then there needs to be a review of some sort to clarify the state of affairs.
lucy is 100% INNOCENT!!
@@normankennith7919heck nah. 10000% guilty. Watch her leaving her house after being arrested. She looked defeated. Likes she’s been expecting it.
@@MMAproAtGOLF any one would look defeated in her shoes it was going on a while before she was arrested
I have an idea if she's guilty or not ....she isn't.
I lean toward her being guilty, but everyone deserves a fair trial, and any doubts or questions should ALWAYS be pursued.
crass?! No, this needs seriously looked at and needs publicity to get it looked at.
Mr Davis is a very courageous man, I applaud him for his quest for justice in what seems from the very start to be an unsafe conviction,
@@paulrichards6894 I hate that term. What on earth does it mean ! It's just a way of trying to ridicule anyone who asks questions.
@@paulrichards6894that in fairness is just their opinion, they aren’t medical experts and neither are we.
Yes. It's disgusting to say that isn't it
DD is determined to go down as the new Lord Longford.
@@paulrichards6894 Yes, tweedledum and Tweedledee. Two idiots or may know the law but without the necessary medical or statistical knowledge to understand what is in front of them.
I believe Lucy is an NHS scapegoat. Like many others, I felt something wasn't right from the start. Staff washed their hands in that infected tap water before handling the babies and their catheters etc. I assume the babies were bathed in that water too. Also, bacteria like that would have spread easily between the sets of twins and triplets. Seems the puzzle pieces are coming together.
So they murdered babies in order to frame LL ?
@@cupofteawithpoetry I completely agree that she was an NHS scapegoat. If they can’t blame failure on the patient, they’ll blame it on the member of staff with the least power in the situation.
@@DrAlexisM It's frightening.
She made the mistake of initiating industrial arbitration against a TV celebrity doctor. He countered by getting the police involved and it all spiralled out of control.
exactly and it was oh so easy and oh so toooo easy to blame her because they were able to make the statistics fit the best theory for them. Far easier to blame one person than the failure of a whole hospital.
No reasonable person has anything but heartfelt sympathy for the parents of the babies. However, no reasonable person would want a miscarriage of justice, which this does seem strongly to be. Anyone who says "crass" or "shame" regarding concerns that the truth should prevail needs to take a step back and consider their reasoning. That includes the Health Secretary and, I'm afraid, the bereaved families.
Fair.
David Davis is a rare breed. He is still an MP who i would trust whatever my political affiliation.
No, it isn't crass to question it.
Yes it is crass to question it, because if she was black or Asian no one would question it
@@roseanncampbell3168 She wouldn't have been accused, charge or found guilty.
What a retarded comment. Omg. @@roseanncampbell3168
What a retarded comment. Omg. @@roseanncampbell3168
How is it 'crass' to re-examine a case where there is no forensic evidence, no eyewitnesses to the crime and was based almost entirely on statistics? Given the number of miscarriages of justice there have been by juries who were 'sure' of the guilt of the accused it is only right and proper that such cases are re-examined. Multiple times if necessary.
Statistics that were misrepresented deliberately to deceive the jury. The sharpshooter fallacy used to demonstrate Letby's presence at each incident for example.
The insulin poisoning is unambiguous…
@@moffattF Not according to news articles I have read, where apparently some experts claim otherwise.
So far it appears there are possible alternative explanations for everything.
This stretches credulity too far.
@@moffattF Honestly, just the fact that experts are questioning the evidence and providing other explanations is cause for concern.
That would imply the available evidence is definitely not a smoking gun.
If the evidence was really that unambiguous then nobody would question it would they?
How can a dysfunctioning ward end up blaming a nurse for the extra deaths? We need to KNOW.
Because she used the fact the ward had problems to HIDE her murders so that the ward and other staff would be blamed.
If she was black or Asian no one would be so sympathetic or question it. They would be calling her and all other black and brown women monsters. End of
@@roseanncampbell3168 That is a ridiculous comment, verging on Anti-White racism.
Maybe because she was a murderer?
Because it is possible to have a poor ward and a serial killer. Not saying that is the case but there are plenty of sub standard wards without extraordinary mortality rates. I don't think the conviction is secure, but I don't think we can ignore the possibility that the ward was sub standard and the nurse is guilty.
Here's the evidence most people have
"She looks like a baby murderer (insert emotions)"
Case needs to be totally reviewed now.
Absolutely! 👍
They have been. Literally one Google search away.
Justice is more important than your feelings!
What a headline? Is it crass to get real justice for those dead babies? The hospital needs to answer questions.
Lucy was scapegoated for the inadequacies and failures of Dr Jayoram & Co.
Nurse midwife, I feel she is completely innocent. I Feel she has been deliberately thrown under the bus, as David Davies said, it is probably all three, poor habitat, poor staff levels in numbers and competence, and bacteria.
Would they think it CRASS, if they were sitting in a cell?
A free society has the right to seek the truth, professionals often get it wrong too. So I believe it's not crass to re examine the case. Well done David Davies!
Yes. Imagine if she is innocent. The mental torture. Its suspicious that one doctor advised parents not to have an autopsy. Why would a medically trained dr. Do that.
I call that a red flag. Autopsies bring evidence that proves things...sometimes not until medicine moves forwards...but its like police forensics...its there for future use.
The most important part of this case is getting to the TRUTH , and we undoubtedly have not had that, this is why so many genuine experts are raising the issues that have only recently been released to the public, and which more will come.
The problem I think lies in the way the police operate they set out to convict an individual and stop at nothing to do so ,I t calls to mind the case against Collin Stag the police spent 16 years trying to convict him of murder using even honey traps with undercover police women , they got bored and eventually tried another who I think was acquitted
When I look at Lucy Letby I see a caring nurse - Not a murderer !
I see a liar jealous callous evil monster of a sad individual of a woman that got caught after years of investigation the thing guilty as fk
Yes I see a hard working nurse, who was quiet and sensitive but not afraid to speak out for what she thought was right. She also blamed herself too much, hence the notes she wrote under direction of the therapist. We can see on here who are the ones who would cry ‘burn the witch’ if ever we had been transported back in time.
Of COURSE we should be ensuring that someone should not be wrongly convicted.
There’s a saying amongst British Lawyers that goes something like:
“It’s better to let off 10 guilty people than wrongly convict one innocent person”.
Imagine if she were innocent and someone else is to blame? The right people must be convicted- there cannot be ANY reasonable doubt.
I personally always believed that she was being set up by people on her team, if that makes any difference.
The convictions are unsafe? There was no proof beyond doubt! Avenues of appeal are unjustly closed! Do something!
Beyond reasonable doubt. BIG difference.
If it goes to trial again she will be found guilty of another 10. 5 happening when she was in school lol
Not yet!
Lucy is innocent and should be freed from prison immediately, exonerated and compensated. Although no amount of money could possibly compensate her for what she's been through.
The Court of Appeal should quash the convictions on the basis of no credible evidence whatsoever.
What about the notes they found in her house? What about the doctor who reported her?
@@KingTheJim he should be jailed for sure
@@KingTheJim the same notes she said she didn't do anything wrong. She was mentally un well
@@Xanti97 mentally unwell or not, shes a twice convicted murderer and tbh i was just naming a few bits of evidence. Ill name some more. What about how her workers all had to sign apologies to her after they outed her behaviour? Were those doctors and nurses wrong? What about the shot of incilin they had found she used on a baby? Was that coincidence too? Is all this behaviour just a coincidence?
Letby’s innocence is uncomfortable for many, but the truth is not crass.
@@paulrichards6894 would want to know what exactly?
I do feel for the parents, but grief often comes with a necessity for blameworthiness. It’s very difficult to accept loss without blame.
It's only uncomfortable for the misinformed and uneducated. I wish people would do a little bit of research before believing absolute rubbish.
It's clear that there has been an injustice, so another trial is needed.
If she ain’t guilty, then, no it ain’t CRASS?!
How many of these little babies died 17 in total,Were the Dr 's present.? Dr Jayaram and the evasive other one were on shift,As being senior Dr's they should be looked at more fully.And not just their word taken for granted,there are inconsistencies in Dr Jayaram's story.he had a grudge against her,accused her of murdering the babies in a public area,but failed to tell the police,he said he caught her "Virtually "red handed there was no evidence and he didn't bother mentioning that to the police,He also lied about the time which he was positive was 100% correct as he had looked at his watch,This conflicted when it was checked out by the door entry system record.why did he lie?
He's allowed as he's a celebrity.
One of those Dr's own baby died in that unit, two were on heavy antidepressants, and another has had mental health issues throughout their life.
jayaram & breary are a pair of shifty doctors!! note they didn't report the babies deaths for 3 months, in case they were implicated in the deaths!! it gave them 3 months to make a plan of action to find a way out & lucy became the sacrificial lamb!!
Dr Jayaram was saying 'air embolism' back in June 2016, using the same research paper that Dr Evans quoted two years later. Coincidence ?
@@normankennith7919 I thought it was 7 months?
NHS managers shouted murder so they didn’t have to answer too all their gross failings. And unlike Lucy they had all the Power and all the money to be able to do so.
We live in an age where questioning a civil servant is treated like a crime in itself.
This is a sign of how far we’ve fallen.
The statistics are important. If there were say 40 suspicious deaths and Letby was only tried on 20 and convicted of 10, then that implies that 75% of the deaths were not caused by her. In that instance, one seeks to find another common explanation for all 40 deaths with a better success rate than 25%. The hunt is on.
Correct. There were 31 deaths during that period, Lucy was on shift for some of those too.
No, it means they can't prove she caused all of them, just 10.
@@itsmeagain7825they never proved she killed any. They only proved her presence there. Totally different things
@@itsmeagain7825 Learn what a Venn diagram is. They can only prove 10 maybe coincidentally. In other words, she was only on the ward when 10 died from some other cause. The key phrase being "some other cause".
Stitched up by muslims
Evans, the Prosecution's lead medical witness has previously been described by a senior judge (Lord Jackson) as being guilty of a "breach of proper professional conduct" with his evidence described as "worthless".Is this the type of person a court should be principally relying upon to send a dedicated nurse of impeccable character to prison for the rest of her life?
Maybe, maybe not. Expert witnesses get dumped on by judges all the time.
THE JUDGE & prosecutor were as corrupt as could be! it is obvious they were in the pay of the hospital!
"impeccable" characters can be murderers too. Psycopaths for instance, are experts playing a role on how they want to be perceived. Now, I am not saying Letby is one, I cannot diagnos someone I've never met, just saying a perceived character of a person is just a glimpse, a tiny piece of the puzzle.
@@anniesimone Lucy's nursing colleagues saw her in all types of situations including highly stressful ones and they have no doubt as to her integrity.We are again hearing specious comparisons with nurse Beverley Allitt but it is known she had psychological issues and had been disowned by those around her.With regard to Dewi Evans I have watched several interviews with him and heard many of his statements and he reveals the type of person he is almost every time he speaks.Even his explanation of how he became involved in the investigation was dubious and he is not someone I would place any trust in.
Finding the truth is never crass
Well said.
Letby was not actually seen or observed, in any form, doing harm to the babies she is convicted of murdering or attempting to murder. The case is based on circumstantial evidence of a subset of the baby deaths, not by any means all the deaths. Of that subset Letby is shown to have been present during the period the babies got seriously ill. This was provided as evidence by a rota chart of staff attendance on the wards. The staff attendance on the wards does not capture all the staff on the wards at those times because multiple people could have entered due to the swipe system employed at the entrance to each ward. She was convicted largely on circumstantial evidence and statistical data, along with her notes, which are contradictory in themselves. The statistical evidence is now being substantially questioned by several eminent statisticians. Time for an appeal surely? Lawyers (of all types) are terrible at statistics and medicine and generally will not understand statistician "speak" or medical uncertainty.
How many serial killers were seen killing their victims.
What p's me off about this is that the case is already SO PUBLIC. Sensationalised. And all of a sudden, there are calls for privacy and hush hush and have respect for the families? The media has gone full throttle on this. Now any sceptics must pipe down and be quiet?
Lovely point
Yes, to make huge, ugly headlines about the "killer nurse" who did this and that horrible thing to Baby X, that's fine, but pointing out inadequacies in the trial, that's going too far?
Lucy is going to be Exonerated and she is in any case BLAMELESS. Giod to hear Mr. David Davis coming forward to say that Lucy is very likely INNOCENT. Wonderful !!! Great News indeed. Lucy : ⭐️⭐️⭐️🐈⬛🐈⬛🦋🦋🌼🌞👍👩🎓💘💖💝.
Crass to examine a case of someone who if innocent, has had her life completely ruined? Her conviction is looking more and more unsafe as more experts in their fields keep coming forward and discounting evidence that was used to convict her.
The families are irrelevant in this issue. The families are obviously upset, but truth should win out. Not vengeance.
With the amount of independent qualified experts in law, statistics, and neonatal care coming forward pointing out serious errors in the evidence is it crass NOT to question this case.
Jailing an innocent person for life is no "closure" - quite the contrary.
If I was charged with a crime and was innocent/guilty. I would want them to discover facts and examine evidence as much as possible.
Why is nobody talking about the adjoining maternity ward where there was a spike in stillbirths that occured similtanously. There was more stillbirths here than in almost every other unit in the UK.
As a parent myself i would want to get to the bottom of it,Especially if there might be others involved who need to share the blame and are walking scot free.Or its down to something to do with the contamination with pathogens and Bacterial proplems.
Taps were infected with bacteria and had to be completelyreplaced,thats a serious problem,Anyone in that place must have been washing there hands may have actually been contaminating their hands everytime.
Absolutely!
the dead babies parents must have been not only placated by somebody in the hospital, maybe doctors jayaram or breary but been lied to, to not have some suspicions of there own! for instance, were they aware of the sewage leak in the neo natal unit & intensive care room? methinks not!!!
Me too. If I was a parent of one of those babies I would definitely want to know the ins and outs. I wouldn’t want any innocent person taking the blame to cover up others’ major mistakes.
@@missmuffet3874 l agree😢 l feel for the family but at the same time it's not right for someone to do a life sentence if they were innocent.
Why are the authorities so afraid of a review? Many highly respected professionals have questioned the safety of the trial, and their concerns are very real. This is not going to go away as the sense of injustice is growing with every new revelation.
They're not afraid of a review. They're afraid of the expense and they're afraid of setting precedents and opening floodgates. But I do think in this case the pressure will be too great to resist... eventually.
When looking at the Post Office Inquiry, Grenfell, Hillsborough, The Guildford 4, Birmingham 6 , Cardiff 3, Jill Dando, Charles De Mendez and many, many more....how does Wes Streeting come to the conclusion we have a fair judicial system...?
She didn’t do it and they know she didn’t will end up another massive payout by the NHS
Look, there are important questions to ask about this case. But to plunge into the swamp and start making allegations of conspiracies makes all of us look foolish. Don't do it, there's no evidence of any such thing.
But no one is going to look at her case until the enquiry is done and dusted. At least 2 years.
It’s cannot be crass to question convictions otherwise the following would have never been acquitted for unsafe convictions.
The Birmingham 6,
The Guilford 4,
Sally Clarke,
Barry George
Andrew Malkinson,
If the nurses were militant I wouldnt be surprised if they called a strike off all nurses nationally untill Lucy is out of prison.
If I was a nurse in a ward, or care home, where patients die - I would get a new job as quick as I could. There are thousands of other jobs in the NHS.
Surely the families want the truth. If lucy letby is innocent. And the people are still walking free .so they still havnt got the truth.
It is crass not to re-examine the case!
Any conviction based on probability but no facts is unsound.
Would be bloody awful if this was a scapegoating ? Easier to scapegoat than to ever get to the real reasons - it would be a total miscarriage of justice if all the FACTS weren’t made available to the jury , if it is a scapegoating whose behind it that’s more frightening - someone prepared to alllow this to happen repeatedly , that person is the terrifying one!
"Re-examining the case and saying the convicted might be innocent is crass, insensitive to the families of the victims, and quite frankly inhuman and disgusting" has probably been said about every innocently sentenced person ever.
Was it crass to question the Post Office sub-postmaster's convictions ?
We all believe NOW that it was right to question these convictions, and we accept that the British judicial system DO get things WRONG, so why shouldn't we question Letby's convictions ? which were based on circumstantial and insubstantial evidence.
Why wouldn't the 'families' want to get to the truth ?
It seems to me that the standard of care generally was poor, and we all know now that the plumbing was in a dire state.
If Lucy Letby is innocent is it right to keep her in Prison because her face fits the Crime?
Never mind the injustice of it, let’s keep the families happy?
Exactly. Of course she has to stay until its re.examined she wiuldnt be safe outside. But she cant stay forever if...if...shes innocent...just to stop a cry of shame...outrage...etc. logos must prevail. Not emotives.
If an experienced barrister, still less learned judge, cannot comprehend or even acknowledge the possibility of a miscarriage of justice then she should not be chairing any judicial proceedings! Letby, however, has nothing to loose from this inquiry and everything to gain. The Criminal Cases Review Commission can hardly disregard any emerging new evidence if it has been taken seriously by Lady T's inquiry. BUT I'll bet good money that the moment this inquiry starts hearing new evidence that puts the convictions in doubt it will find an excuse to hear evidence in private!
THE NEWSPAPERS HAVE GOT TO TAKE SOME BLAME FOR THEIR PART IN THIS VERDICT. LUCY LEDBY IS NOT GUILTY.LED BY
SHE NEEDS A RE-TRIAL. THIS IS A DISGRACE.
Seriously people, read or listen to the court transcripts on the case against her by the prosecution. There will be no doubt of her guilt , it’s not just based on stats or notes. Endless lies to her colleagues, falsified paperwork, predetermining the deteriorating baby before she attacked it. There is so much there is no way she is innocent
I've listened to all the DMs podcast relating to LL. I ve listened to that Crime scene chaps podcasts where he's reading the court approved transcripts ....I still don't know whether she's guilty or innocent.
@@meganwilliams2962ok that’s fair enough , to me it left me with no doubt. But only one person really knows I guess
When I listen to the court transcripts all I hear is Nicky Johnson clutching at daft straws.
How can it ever be crass and insensitive to get to the truth!!
As difficult as this must be for the families, and I really do feel for them, if there is reason to believe that they have been lied to then their feelings cannot get in the way of this being exposed.
If the Royal Statistical Society are worried, then so am I - they are an organisation that fight misinformation, they don't spread it.
The way we're being told not to question the conviction makes me doubt it's safety even more. I feel like something is being swept under the carpet.
No closure if the verdict is found to be at the very least unsafe; two wrongs (miscarriage of justice and the poor babies that died) do not make anything right.
The evidence was OBVIOUSLY misleading. The cherry picking was so crass that it has the strong stench of intentionality.
Of course its intentional. Its an adversarial process. Defense and prosecution always cherry pick the evidence. That's what they're supposed to do. The other side is then expected to demonstrate that the cherry picking creates a false impression and that their cherry picking is more believable.
the stench was as strong as the sewage in the neo natal unit, which ran for nearly a year!! there's your killer!!
@osric1730 I really hope that's not what anyone else believes! Cherry picking is a serious miscarriage and is a fundamental breach of duty owed to the court by both prosecution and defence!
@@osric1730it is NOT the role of the prosecution to distort the truth. They are organs of the state and representing the people. Or they should be.
@@MsColl90 It is the role of the prosecution to present and interpret the evidence in to the jury in whatever manner is most likely to secure a conviction. It is the job of the defense to to precisely the same thing in reverse.
I doubt anybody who has ever been cross-examined ever thought the barrister doing it wasn't "distorting the truth". That is how an adversarial justice system works.
The establishment doesn’t care about the feelings of parents, they care about preserving their authority and they are using the feelings of the parents as an excuse to silence legitimate questions about the failure of the judiciary, the NHS, and the media in this case
galling though it maybe for the parents of the dead babies to hear the case being re-examined, i wonder how many of those parents gave a stuff about the husband who killed himself, after being found 'guilty' by the jury in the sub post office workers case, or if they had any sympathy for andrew malkinson who served 17 years for rape but was in fact, like the post office workers, innocent?
or maybe we can go back to the 1950's when timothy evans was judged by the jury to have murdered his wife but instead it was doctor john christie who drugged, raped & murdered evan's wife before hiding her behind a false wall!!
juries can often get it wrong, especially in a medical case which was too complex for the court officials, let alone the jury!!
this was a rigged kangaroo court trial, which was conducted by a corrupt judge overseeing the court, who were all in the pay of a desperate hospital management, who knew that if the real truth emerged & it was neglect by the hospital, the building would have been closed immediately! & some people would have been gaoled for manslaughter & or heavily sued!
@@bwebb3177 who? me?
Why would finding out the truth EVER be 'crass'?
I followed the case, (admittedly via media reports), and felt throughout that there was something 'not quite right' about it. I have no medical training, so all that evidence pretty much went over my head. The fact that her fellow nurses didn't suspect her is a very important fact. The ones who did 'suspect' her, all had vested interests in ignoring the other factors that David Davis mentions here. Had it been due to staff shortages, a missed illness or the sewage issue, THEIR heads would be on the block. It was much more convenient for them, for it to be her.
Best option. New trial.
Isn't all the talk against Lucy Letby crass?
How do they know she attempted to harm 8 babies? What did she do to try to harm them? What were the signs of harm?
IT WAS THE SEWAGE LEAK WHICH LASTED FOR 10 MONTHS IN THE NEO NATAL UNIT AT THE SAME TIME THAT LUCY WAs alleged to have 'killed' the babies!! lucy is 100% innocent!!!
None
If the Premature babies die (some of them) it could be for a variety of reasons. It certainly doesn't mean they were murdered
Was it "crass" to think that the Guildford Four or the Birmingham Six might not be guilty ?
It was! Jeremy Corbyn was being condemned by the tabloids for being right about the G4 years after he was…right about the G4. Sums it up.
To Streeting probably yes.
On my information. The defence never challenged the nurse rota by telling the jury that 6 babies collapsed/ died when Letby was not on shift. In all honesty, how could this happen. Open to correction!
Labour could have played this cleverly by siding with reason and justice against the 'bad Tories' who let this awful miscarriage of justice happen. But baby faced Wes decided to go with tabloid values. How pathetic. I bet he hasn't read anything about the case at all. Pathetic!
the court prosecutor is a homosexual, as is wes streeting, so there might be a connection there!
whatever, the corrupt court officials were obviously in the pay of the hospital, to find lucy guilty!!
@@turquoiseblue228 Starmer siding with his old pals in the CPS.I think there might be a lot within this Prosecution for investigative journalists to get their teeth into not just what went on after it got to court.
Streeting is a moron. Starmer was a prosecutor. They are also reliably morons, who cover for each other.
I believe she is 100% guilty without a shadow of a doubt 😊
Wes Streeting seems to be implying there have never been any miscarriages of justice. That is crass and insensitive to all those that have been the subject of all these numerous miscarriages. Wes Streeting needs to acknowledge the failings of the justice system in this case and set about correcting them as soon as possible.
He is such a moron.
I believe the term he’s looking for is beyond reasonable doubt. Not the balance of probabilities. Apart from that he’s absolutely spot on!
Read Dale Nance 2016 book Burdens of proof asap !
Wes Streeting says “people questioning this verdict are crass. We have a fair and successful judiciary in this country”. The truth is, 56 people convicted of murder by this “fair and successful judiciary” in the last 30 years alone have turned out to be miscarriages of justice cases who spent an average of 5 years behind bars.
If we all shared Streeting’s astonishingly arrogant mindset, every single one of those falsely convicted would have served life. Worse still, none of them would have been paroled unless they admitted to the crimes they did not, as a matter of fact, commit.
Remember the man charged with murder of prominent TV lady - released after years entirely innocent. Jill Dando
@ Yes I remember that well, indeed it was the case that first opened my eyes to the inadequacies of our justice system.
Blame. Scapegoating. Because people need "closure."
In 1950 Timothy Evans was hanged for murder. He was backward and it was later found out his landlord who lived in the same house did it, after 5 or 6 bodies were found
His name was Christie
I always thought she could be a scapegoat because it appears she was convicted on a lot of circumstantial evidence, a poorly run NHS unit, infected water systems in the unit and tremendous pressure from families (understandably) and the media for justice. If there is any doubt in a conviction like this it has to be looked into, it's crass not to.
Get her out this trial bloody stinks of rotten lies
Lucy letby victim of fall guy for her superiors
If I was a juror for the original trial and now understood the statistical evidence was questionable how would I feel about that. The words not very impressed come to mind.
Level the playing fields with taxpayers money! Her defence team need more support to ensure a fair trial for starters! Her Human Rights need to be respected.....
And where is her Union in all this?
How is it crass, if for example, there has been a gross miscarriage of justice? Surely the families are owed the truth?
Just my thoughts.
I haven't heard anyone calling for her to be freed - merely that her conviction may be unsafe. Typical politician making it sound worse to score political points. Disgusting really. My complete sympathy belongs with the parents in the case but they are understandably not in the best place to be rational about the possibility of a miscarriage of justice. It's horrible that the story continues but the idea of someone dying in prison can only sit well if we are sure they belong there
They are now going to be spending millions on this public enquiry. I wonder if, had those millions been spent on upgrading the neonatal unit and paying for extra doctors and nurses, the whole thing might never have happened.
Of cause the NHS management would not try to hide the truth and blame others, nor would the Post Office for that matter but they did. The Post Office, knew that the system they required Post Masters and Mistresses to use was faulty but failed to admit it and continued to prosecute people who were shown to be totally innocent. It’s called self protection.
The corporation AND CPS knew they were likely innocent. The system just chugged along and ate them up anyway. Pensions were at stake.
I applaud David Davis MP.
During the last Parliament I tried to get my own MP interested. ZILCH
He was a Barrister (not active whilst MP. He stood down at last Election after 10 years
Maybe it's time for the media to start questioning the Care Quality Commission. They had Representatives at the Thirlwall Inquiry, but wasn't asked any real pertinent questions.
Why didn't the CQC invoke the "urgent enforcement powers" when they were told on June 29, 2016 what was going in at the CoCH, Neonatal Ward?
It wouldn’t be for politicians to influence a trial pre verdict, so how would it be for streeting to influence a case that has such grave concerns and where it is only natural for people and media to speak about it vehemently. It’s obviously because he doesn’t want any adverse PR on the NHS and is an apologist for it. Appalling really.
Babies deteriorate very quickly. Especially neonatal babies. I am sure there were lots on faults with that ward. Wasn't the water itself contaminated?
Medical staff making mistakes Poor.girl was doing her job to the best of her abilitu. Offered up on a platter like a scapegoat
The truth will out eventually
By the same argument would it have been crass to criticise Andrew Malkinson's 17 years in jail, or the B'ham six, or the Guildford four, or the Post Office's prosecution of submasters, and so it goes on?
Given the state of our legal system, question everything.
Lol, crass or not, who cares, if people want to question someone's guilt they have every right to do so regardless if it's considered 'crass', what a dumb question.
Poor girl took the rap for the Hospitals flaws
A longer trial can reach a bad verdict just as easily as a short trial.... It is so easy for some people to cry 'witch' when it is the system that is the witch and not the person. Streeting is an idiot just looking for an easy life....
If there is reasonable grounds to question any verdict then “crass” doesn’t come into it. I fear human emotions are creeping into the judicial process.
Creeping??...it's the very foundation of it...if people think that conviction by jury has ever been anything other completely bias and unjust, they're mad...I've been victim of the process myself...as a result I have zero faith in the "justice" system...
People’s little feefees about her got her convicted, nothing else. This case is SCARY. I wouldn’t work for the NHS after this.
There is none. So no appeal will be allowed.
Not if she's innocent which she seems to be.
So everyone in the Lucia de Berg case regarded her as a convicted killer. If they did she wouldnt have been found innocent after spending nine years in prison!