The police shouldn’t have taken retired Dr Evans word as gospel, they should have got second or even third expert medical opinions before launching into proving by design that Lucy was a murderer.
As a nurse of 40 years, now retired, I could write a book on the Front Office ethics! It is the strangest trial and I believe she is innocent and more so after watching this.
@@Kazbing11 I have watched that and you never hear that man mention any of the material Scott mclahan has mentioned on here. That man has not done a fair and balanced view he just paints Lucy as the devil. Thankfully more evidence is coming to light. Hopefully common sense will return to the uk and replace this madness we are living through. Remember what our own government did to us all during covid
Only just found this excellent interview. Very informative. I’m amazed that no forensic testing took place in the environment. I believe the unit with plumbing issues has since been demolished and replaced., so we can’t even test retrospectively.
Smacks of cheaper to stich up 1 nurse than others higher up be held responsible. You know the old dodgy handshakes that go on all the time in this world of lies and corruption.. Why was the defence not bringing up these clear issues of cherry picking, by the police about a very subjective few words. How and why was the defence having hands tied? Compromised? Why were the other deaths not involving Lucy not bought into scrutiny for context. Why was the so called expert witness bought in who wasn't working in neo natal for 15 years? Why were these knows pathogens and their effects never discussed?
As well as the complete list of 30+ baby deaths with doctors on duty, I would also be interested to see ALL the babies, premature or not, who Lucy Letby cared for in her nursing career. The BBC court transcript cites Letby as saying that she has cared for "hundreds" of babies at the Countess Of Chester hospital, and it is probable that 90% of those babies did not die or collapse. Neither the judge, Richard Goss, the prosecutor Nick Johnson or the defense KC Ben Myers have BScs, although they are of course trained and experienced in law. I'm just surprised how they accepted Dr. Dewi Evans' theories without question, suggesting to me that they simply didn't understand the Scientific Method, with its criteria of controls, blinds and sometimes double-blinds. The trial, with its lack of direct evidence, irrelevant (IMO) psychological theories and cherry picking of facts is very worrying and I really hope it is challenged.
Lucy was the only person on duty for all the deaths. Many didn’t make it to trial. Doesn’t mean they were all natural causes. Along side this, any doctors that were also on duty weren’t actually based on the ward so they may have been on duty but not even been on the ward that day. It’s just all misinformation from the innocent side and they haven’t actually looked at the facts.
@@TheAikenHeadthe total number of deaths during the same period of the "murders". The hospital, police and CPS just cherry picked the ones they could make fit a narrative
Pembury hospital in Kent had a 'statistically impossible' number of deaths following hip/knee surgery. An investigation revealed air filters in the operating theatre had not been changed since the hospital opened 5+ years previously. The hospital was built on a PFI contract and changing the air filters had not been included...
I have only been able to follow the case via the reporting of two online British newspapers as I do not own a TV. What struck me was the emotive language used for me this is always a red flag as a trained hypnotist I do understand propaganda and mind control and when we cast people into the role of the villain we demonise them. When you look into the backgrounds of psychopaths people report that there was always something odd about them, they are unable to empathise. No family or friends of Lucy have said anything about the lack of empathy or reported any odd or peculiar behaviour from her. I have a gut feeling she is innocent, I have seen the press report that, the police, criminologist and even psychologist all opine about her guilt. I have not seen any psychiatrist linked to the case state any information for public consumption about her personality or state of mind. Did psychiatrists evaluate her before the trial and where are the psychiatric reports?
Yes totally agree, as far as I have seen there has been no concrete proof whatsoever that she is guilty. Coincidentally I was also a hypnotherapist for 10 years and like you have been concerned about the huge amount of demonisation that has gone on, the internet is awash with all these professionals diagnosing her mental state. There is something that doesn't quite make sense with the whole thing and there should definitely be a re trial. To me most of the evidence presented on many fronts is like a form of confirmation bias, looking for reasons she is guilty but ignoring all the other evidence. Lots of evidence about her character should have been gathered as you say. There is also the problem that the public have been trained to believe that doctors are always right, which simply isn't true, so she was always on the "back foot" trying to prove her innocence, when a number of supposed experts were presenting evidence against her. I also wonder about possible motives of the NHS or other parties in this case.
My background in psychotherapy and psychology crosses over with yours. What you explain is exactly what made me initially dubious. I then followed up with reading the Rex v Lucy letby 2023, and SOT which obviously confirmed my initial doubts had been correct.
@@samanthaphillips2547 Thank you for your reply. SOT stands for Science on Trial. If you google Science on Trial you should find it. Also “Health law and tech substack” is good. There are some very articulate and highly watchable David Kurten videos on the subject too. I just google “ David Kurten Lucy Letby” to find them. His two recent ones are good. The problem with this case is that if you haven’t got a degree in psychology, mathematics or a science such as physics or chemistry, it’s hard o see the flaws in Dewi Evans arguments, but the above sites try to explain everything. I didn’t leave links because my post gets cancelled if I try to do that.
I thought at the beginning that she was innocent and being made a scape goat by the hospital to cover up their own incompetence - now after seeing this I'm certain she has been.
If bolus of air is injected into a vein it ends up in the right side of the heart. It kills by preventing blood exiting the RV to get oxygenated in the pulmonary circulation. Intra abdominal ‘ free air ‘ is caused by infection or perforation of a hollow viscus. Retroperitoneal free air is caused by infection , inflammation ( eg necrotic pancreatitis) or severe trauma causing perforation of a hollow viscus. It is simply not plausible that the ‘free air’ cited by the PMs was caused by injection AND was the sole cause of death.
I'm not a lawyer yes I take a keen interest in law, there is something not right about this case however I don't know what it is but I do believe it's going to come out sooner or later. I do believe she is innocent.
This case concerns me a lot. I researched it quite hard, and did Lucy Letby do this?...I don't know....and that's the point. There's no hard evidence, no confession, a correlation, and an awful lot extrapolation. I cannot see how, in good conscience, a jury could convict in this case. She may have done it, but you can't convict on a belief that she did....you have to know. I truly think this has been a miscarriage of justice.
Wow, indepth analysis of a number of issues that could give alternative explanation of the deaths of these babies. Evidense presented seems to have been cherry picked and expert witnesses have question marks regarding their level of expertise. In my view this case is far from conclusive. The Court has a duty of care to ensure Lucy Letby has been given access to justice. I think her conviction should be set aside and a new trial scheduled.
A lot of miscarriages of justice are caused by a lazy or incompetent defence team. It seems she was convicted solely on circumstantial evidence. She should of had the Barrister Mark McDonald as her council, she probably would be free now. Letby could be a victim of a hospital cover up, and as the police spent two years investigating this case, i suppose they were under pressure to justify the cost by getting a conviction.
You see clearly naive and ignorant f all the evidence and facts . Richard Baker KC said those questioning Lucy Letby’s guilt should be ashamed …those individuals who offer superficial opinions based upon second and third hand accounts then expressing conclusions . Those supporting Lucy Letby , as repeatedly pointed out , have not seen the evidence of the trial, the babies medical notes or have spoken to any of the consultants who have raised concerns or seen any of the evidence that will go before the inquiry over the coming months but that there is some relevance in this background noise as it highlights how society is sometimes too quick to make judgements and assumptions on first impressions . “
You have lots of good information Sir especially regarding the plumber I hope you can point out these things out for a retrial. Its terrible when a innocent person is in prison she could get killed. Their seems they looked for someone to blame and she was chosen!! SHE had Legal aid defense which is a waste of time as they mainly work with the police! if she had proper experience barrister she world more then likely been found innocent! You have
What well respected Barrister wouldn't look into the obvious points of the other baby deaths? Have "Hands tied seemingly" Maybe his masonic buddies did a deal behind the scenes. There is a lot of focus to distract public attention away from criminal activity by the very people who made public policy during the CV19 pandemic@@janlittle2148
@@janlittle2148 Ben Myers did not call any expert witnesses for the defence so Dewi Evans' half-baked theories went unchallenged. There is no branch of medicine anywhere, in which a retired paediatrician, who has not practiced medicine for 15 years, can make a clinical diagnosis on a deceased individual. In order to make a diagnosis one must minimally examine the patient and conduct additional tests. It's no wonder this charlatan was severely admonished by a senior judge in a different case for writing a biased and worthless report.
@@jackiesmith2710why don’t you want anyone replying to you? Are you scared they might put things to you that point to her guilt, that you have no explanation for? Just asking….
The nhs looks for scapegoats, they choose the weakest and lay the blame on them, it’s the way in which the nhs allows the public to think, got them, disciplined them, sorted, now all will be well, but it’s not sorted is it! How do I know 🤔I worked as an RGN in the nhs for 32years. If any of my colleagues tell me they are going to work for the nhs I warn them and tell them to reconsider, particularly if they are from overseas as they are prime candidates for scapegoating!! This unit was short staffed, this is when things go wrong, and go wrong big time!! Lucy Letby worked full time, that means statistically she had a 25% chance of being on duty when an incident occurred, but Lucy worked overtime, increasing her odds. Norman Fenton is the King of statistics 👍 Thinking about the waste water pipes leaking, do any of you remember a case where water from dead flowers was emptied down the neonatal unit sink causing pseudomonas infections which killed many neonates, can’t remember the nhs trust where this happened but it was a recent case.
Oh please, if they wanted to just blame it on someone, I’m sure they could’ve found a more liable candidate than Perfect Lucy, Lucy who raised over $3 million for a new baby Ward, let me let you in a little secret. No one is perfect as a sociopath psychopath pretends to be
Agreed. We don't need to look any farther than when the nurse who looked after Kate Middleton when Kate gave birth to George (a nurse named Jacintha Saldanha) allegedly committed suicide merely hours after the birth, despite having no history of Major Depressive Disorder or any other mental health issues, much less suicidal thoughts or intent. In my opinion, Jacinta learned something about HRH that she shouldn't have known, and I stand by that position because we all know that, since time immemorial, the British Royal Family has killed for far lesser reasons.
@@EmilyLawrence-c2b This is nonsense. Jacintha Saldana took her own life several days after putting through a call from a person purporting to be Queen Elizabeth. It was a hoax call and Saldana obviously blamed herself for the mistake. The DJs who made the hoax call apologised for the prank. At that time, Kate Middleton was being treated for morning sickness and had not given birth to George. You really should get your facts right before making nasty accusations.
The uncomfortable truth here is that…..1) The Unit had historical problems and wasn’t functioning properly or staffed well 2) The Hospital and the NHS knew this 3) Ultimately this happened because the NHS is crumbling before our eyes 4) The reason the NHS is in crisis is because the Government is underfunding it 5) The reason it’s underfunded is because politicians are terrified of telling the public the truth about needing more money and having to raise taxes 6) The British public have some kind of pathological hatred of higher taxes and think they can get something for nothing. ……so there is huge social and political denial about the cause of the babies deaths……….simple solution ? Lucy Letby is a baby killer ! Hey presto …the real issues disappear behind a big puff of smoke.
This is a fascinating break down of the medical facts. Points of interest for me are: [1] the umbilical vein and attempts by junior doctors to insert a catheter so many times.[2] the pathogens causing air to be trapped. What ones would they be? I ask because I trained as a doc at a London med school and have a degree in Microbiology. Also, I do not trust the British judicial system one bit. There are so many wrong things going on here. Justice for Lucy Letby.
The most interesting prospect is the public inquiry. It would be extremely interesting if new evidence begins to emerge that undermines the prosecution case.
Much has been made of the fact that there were no cameras on the ward so LL was not caught red handed. Had there been cameras it might have worked in her favour. There s a chance that they would have filmed nothing incriminating. That would leave people with a lot of explaining to do as to why they lost so many babies. I am still amazed that babies born at 25 weeks or less can be saved at all. In many places a termination can be carried out up to 24 weeks. That s a little of subject but it s made me think.
This is the question. There s a petition and a fundraiser but someone with a lot of clout and medical know how needs to step on board. There are also "for"LL sites who have some very in the know members. As soon as the case was over, thousands of people joined "l think it s called LUCY letby discussions and they are pro a t active.There are also sites geared to people who feel she is guilty. Everybody thought that at one time but public opinion is changing. Even the "guilty" brigade cannot deny all the evidence is circumstantial.
I followed the case and believe that Lucy is probably innocent. Congratulations Dr. Scott you have given and excellent interview to Norman, with tremendous insight into the legal aspects of the case. I have a clearer understanding now of why I believe this is a miscarriage of justice. Keep up the great work.
@@KBB-nf1dr not saying it means LL is innocent (or guilty) but it should at least warrant consideration (and perhaps an investigation) into whether the trial was biased.
That’s is a definite I’d say. They needed to divert attention away from the doctors fuck ups. If there is any justice in this world this woman will be freed. Terrible lies have gone on it seems
I think you will find that they never ever interviewed anyone else at the time ‘ I will say again I truly think she was a scapegoat but that you for you reply
I don't think genuinely evil people ever write down they are evil: Did Peter Sutcliffe, Myra Hindley, Ted Bundy or Harold Shipman do this? I have known in my life several sociopaths. You can tell if someone after knowing them for several months.
They aren't available due to threat of reprisals by the establishment Dissenters will be reputationally ruined or bankrupted as in the case of Post Office in Horizon Scandal.
flicking through and inital impression si s that it seems like Professor Norman Fenton doesn't get much chance to speak!! The questions go on forever!!! BUT - that said - this is well researched and well worth watching.
Letby will receive legal aid for an appeal. Money should not be an issue. Ben Myers is a KC, a top barrister with many years experience. This is a fascinating argument, however, Lucy Letby did have expert witnesses - the judge told the jury that. The reason that they were not heard at the trial is that in England and Wales there is a conference prior to the trial where experts from both sides debate their findings, and if the experts then end up agreeing, then only one set will be heard at trial. This is to avoid duplication and cost. An expert witness owes their duty to the court and not to the prosecution or defence. Also what about the deliberate introduction of synthetic insulin to two of the babies? It was accepted by both sides that this was deliberate. Can a virus account for that? Also the blood seen round one baby’s mouth and traumatic injuries to the livers of two babies, the deliberate tampering with observation times in the notes, which was proven by the timings of a mother’s phone calls, standing over a baby while the baby was struggling to breath and so on and so on. Taken together, the circumstantial evidence shows a pattern of behaviour and is compelling.
By his own admission the Crown's chief prosecution witness, retired paediatrician Dewi Evans, was not an expert witness. In fact he had been thoroughly discredited in a former case by a senior judge. If the amount of insulin in those two babies had been correct they would have died and yet they survived. It was just another cock-up from the CoCH. Six of the babies Lucy was supposed to have murdered had post mortems and five were found to have died from natural causes, a sixth was undetermined. And yet the word of a discredited retired paediatrician, who looked at a few x-rays, was accepted over the pathologists and Coroner.
It was far easier for the hospital administration to find a scapegoat instead of risk having the many systemic failures of the hospital's unit leaked to the public. Since the dawn of time, attack has been used as a first and last line of defence. Humans in power are despicable.
It did for a time but that has been explained in this video. The hospital stopped taking very premature babies, less than about 32 weeks. It was a failing neonatal unit and certainly wasn't up to caring for these babies. However in 2017 & 2018 there was actually more deaths than when Lucy worked in the hospital. Stillbirths and neonate deaths only dramatically declined in the hospital when the senior consultant Dr Gibbs retired in 2019.
@@ruthbashford3176 it’s so obvious now that the official narrative was built on weak foundations. The real scandal is that the unit and senior doctors completely failed those kids. Not enough staff to look after really sick kids who should have of probably not sent to the unit
the CoCH was downgraded to a Level 2 right after she was taken off ward. That is the real reason for the spike. Amazing that this was not first and foremost in the jury's mind at the original trial.
How do you explain the insulin levels found in some of those infants who died? (Not to say that the insulin alone implies anyone in particular, but it implies malicious intent. In other words it had to be someone who done it on purpose if a mistake is excluded).
@@Johnnytightfit But from what I followed here on RUclips on other videos there is a difference between insulin which is produced by the body and insulin which is injected from outside. There is a difference not in the insulin itself for that is the same chemical wheather it is produced naturally or syntheticaly, but when it is produced inside the body an accompanying chemical is produced ( a by product of the body producing insulin I presume), while if it is injected no such accompanying chemical will be found in the body (obviously, because it was not produced inside the body therefore no byproduct). In the case of the infants who died of insulin, high levels of insulin were found without this accompanying chemical, which can only mean that the insulin was not produced by the body, and therefore had to be injected!
One explanation could be contamination of the fluid the babies were on , it is not the first time medical supplies have been contaminated . The thing that does not makes sense is , if she was killing by injecting air undetected , Why switch to insulin and double the risk of being caught ? The whole thing to me says she was stitched up , I hope I am wrong because if the system has locked her up for life and she is innocent , well it become a real horror story , Not to mention she was convicted on such little evidence
Also, a junior dr can have been practicing for 8/9 years. They’re not trainees. They’re fully qualified doctors that aren’t yet registrars, consultants etc. To dismiss their skills in the way he does is offensive.
I was very suspicious about Letbys innocence. When I heard that when she went on holiday, the deaths stopped. But she only went to Ibiza for one week. Then, I thought she must have been on duty when babies didnt die in that two years, otherwise there would be around a hundred deaths in that time period. So that blew my suspicions out of the water. Her defence lawyer was inadequate.
Yes, there were baby deaths when Lucy wasn’t present, but they were sick babies that had infections, or with suspected likely may not survive The reason suspicions arose is because the babies that Lucy has been convicted of murdering or attempting to murder. We’re healthy babies that shouldn’t have died. They were simply born a few weeks earlier & needed to be incubated.
Baby A was 10 weeks premature. Diagnosed with respiratory distress straight after birth. Had increasing lactate levels indicating under perfusion. Drs tried numerous times to insert a line into his umbilical vein unsuccessfully. Thus had no fluids for 4 to possibly 8 hrs. CRP increasing suggesting infection. Numerous desaturations. So NO not healthy or stable. Crib next to a huge window into the corridor and 2 drs and 2 other nurses in the relatively small room with 4 cribs. She was never seen doing anything except observing the baby as nurses are told to do. Baby A was not murdered.
@@mazdodd4145 maybe she chose a baby that wasn’t well for the first, then when she thought she could get away with it, decided to go for healthy babies
@@KBB-nf1dr None were healthy. Only 1 not premature and that one was born by caesarian after mother left 2 days after water broke so had an infection & needed antibiotics. Risk factors are prematurity, multiple birth & male. 1st 2 twin babies had all these.
And the jury was not fairly configured at 9 women jurors and three male jurors so massive bias coming from the female jurors particularly to do with the care of infants..
@@dianamincher6479 true and even then it was hung and had to go to majority vote I understand there was unanimous verdict in only 3 cases and none where the murder cases Although not 100% sure yet it was only the attempted harm that got unanimous it still levels more questions as to why it was hung I agree it was rigged against Lucy on so many levels both insidious and blatant
@@KBB-nf1dr Yes. The retrial will *not* be an attempt to get the 7 life terms overturned. That is most unlikely to happen. The retrial is to reach a verdict on a deceased child whom previously had no verdict declared.
The judge did not deliver a fact based judgement so we do not know how Lucy injected the O2 into the neonate and whether she did so inject the neonate!? No--one saw Lucy injecting the babies ever? Pure speculation?
The experts fall short. The specialist doctors fell short. The gead of the babyunit fell short. The KC fell short. But Lucy is the victim? That's your findings? Really?
She absolutely is guilty. The online conspiracy theory industry that has grown up around her case is causing considerable distress to the parents of the very vulnerable children that she murdered and attempted to murder. It's obvious she thought by attacking premature babies she would get away with it.
@@kennethsimmons2029 no theories, just the fact they were born with congenital defects and weren’t expected to survive, unlike the ones she murdered and attempted to murder.
Problem is, the most convincing aspect of the trial to her guilt became her behaviour on the stand. No amount of degrees and phds will help you if you lack good old fashioned discernment.
The fact that Lucy went on the witness stand is to her credit. Beverly Allitt refused to take the stand. If I had been treated the way Lucy Letby has been treated by the NHS, the police, the media etc I think I would be insane. Poor Lucy's state of mind must be very fragile And yes I believe Lucy is innocent, I see no evidence she is guilty
@@ruthbashford3176I wouldn’t say it was to her credit seeing as she was caught out in numerous lies, inconsistencies and comical amounts of selective memory. From denying to recognise her own handwriting to differing versions of accounts to literally everyone else and conveniently not remembering anything that could be potentially incriminating. This is not the behaviour of a innocent person.
@@dianamincher6479 If the standard is catching criminals in the act, red handed - there would be a lot of free murderers on the streets. Rarely does it ever happen, it’s the nature of the beast.
@MrUltrasound no, other people higher up were guilty of Medical Negligence and she made the mistake of complaining about them. That s a nono in the NHS
@@Marigold502 it has happened before to other nurse and they ended up being totally innocent.dont for get high up DR,s had to be brought down a peg and made to right a letter of apologize to her and she has always proclaimed her innocent's pluses not one of her work colla.. would believe her to be quality.
@@derry1423 it’s interesting to see how people’s initial doubts were raised. The doctors egos are very apparent from the beginning. Great initial insight. I think you may well be proved right.
@@Marigold502 The jury certainly didn't base their verdict on evidence. All I've seen in this trial is opinion after opinion masquerading as fact. It was more like a case of witch burning than a trial.
![Megan Thee Stallion - Roc Steady (feat. Flo Milli) [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/HozPPyqW0dY/mqdefault.jpg)
Thank you professor norman, l hope this lady gets a re trial or set free. Brilliant interview.
The police shouldn’t have taken retired Dr Evans word as gospel, they should have got second or even third expert medical opinions before launching into proving by design that Lucy was a murderer.
And now he's changing the cause of death after the verdic as the evidence is she wasn't there when baby c 'was attacked' this man is a schyster
As a nurse of 40 years, now retired, I could write a book on the Front Office ethics! It is the strangest trial and I believe she is innocent and more so after watching this.
Thank you. There is a rat in the barrel?
Have you watched Crimescene 2 Courtroom? Only right to get a balanced view.
She is not guilty
@@Kazbing11 I have watched that and you never hear that man mention any of the material Scott mclahan has mentioned on here. That man has not done a fair and balanced view he just paints Lucy as the devil. Thankfully more evidence is coming to light. Hopefully common sense will return to the uk and replace this madness we are living through. Remember what our own government did to us all during covid
@@missma7882
She is guilty.
Only just found this excellent interview. Very informative. I’m amazed that no forensic testing took place in the environment. I believe the unit with plumbing issues has since been demolished and replaced., so we can’t even test retrospectively.
Smacks of cheaper to stich up 1 nurse than others higher up be held responsible. You know the old dodgy handshakes that go on all the time in this world of lies and corruption..
Why was the defence not bringing up these clear issues of cherry picking, by the police about a very subjective few words.
How and why was the defence having hands tied? Compromised?
Why were the other deaths not involving Lucy not bought into scrutiny for context.
Why was the so called expert witness bought in who wasn't working in neo natal for 15 years?
Why were these knows pathogens and their effects never discussed?
As well as the complete list of 30+ baby deaths with doctors on duty, I would also be interested to see ALL the babies, premature or not, who Lucy Letby cared for in her nursing career. The BBC court transcript cites Letby as saying that she has cared for "hundreds" of babies at the Countess Of Chester hospital, and it is probable that 90% of those babies did not die or collapse. Neither the judge, Richard Goss, the prosecutor Nick Johnson or the defense KC Ben Myers have BScs, although they are of course trained and experienced in law. I'm just surprised how they accepted Dr. Dewi Evans' theories without question, suggesting to me that they simply didn't understand the Scientific Method, with its criteria of controls, blinds and sometimes double-blinds. The trial, with its lack of direct evidence, irrelevant (IMO) psychological theories and cherry picking of facts is very worrying and I really hope it is challenged.
What complete list of 30+ baby deaths are you talking about?
Lucy was the only person on duty for all the deaths. Many didn’t make it to trial. Doesn’t mean they were all natural causes. Along side this, any doctors that were also on duty weren’t actually based on the ward so they may have been on duty but not even been on the ward that day. It’s just all misinformation from the innocent side and they haven’t actually looked at the facts.
@@TheAikenHeadthe total number of deaths during the same period of the "murders". The hospital, police and CPS just cherry picked the ones they could make fit a narrative
Pembury hospital in Kent had a 'statistically impossible' number of deaths following hip/knee surgery.
An investigation revealed air filters in the operating theatre had not been changed since the hospital opened 5+ years previously.
The hospital was built on a PFI contract and changing the air filters had not been included...
Why don’t they have CCTV in neonatal wards? I thought they were going to do this following the Beverley Allitt case.
because then it would expose that the nhs are regularly killing and framing people like they did to me
Great interview, fingers crossed justice is done. Thank you
Inexperienced immature doctors with zero oversight?
I have only been able to follow the case via the reporting of two online British newspapers as I do not own a TV.
What struck me was the emotive language used for me this is always a red flag as a trained hypnotist I do understand propaganda and mind control and when we cast people into the role of the villain we demonise them.
When you look into the backgrounds of psychopaths people report that there was always something odd about them, they are unable to empathise. No family or friends of Lucy have said anything about the lack of empathy or reported any odd or peculiar behaviour from her. I have a gut feeling she is innocent, I have seen the press report that, the police, criminologist and even psychologist all opine about her guilt. I have not seen any psychiatrist linked to the case state any information for public consumption about her personality or state of mind. Did psychiatrists evaluate her before the trial and where are the psychiatric reports?
Yes totally agree, as far as I have seen there has been no concrete proof whatsoever that she is guilty. Coincidentally I was also a hypnotherapist for 10 years and like you have been concerned about the huge amount of demonisation that has gone on, the internet is awash with all these professionals diagnosing her mental state. There is something that doesn't quite make sense with the whole thing and there should definitely be a re trial. To me most of the evidence presented on many fronts is like a form of confirmation bias, looking for reasons she is guilty but ignoring all the other evidence. Lots of evidence about her character should have been gathered as you say. There is also the problem that the public have been trained to believe that doctors are always right, which simply isn't true, so she was always on the "back foot" trying to prove her innocence, when a number of supposed experts were presenting evidence against her. I also wonder about possible motives of the NHS or other parties in this case.
My background in psychotherapy and psychology crosses over with yours. What you explain is exactly what made me initially dubious. I then followed up with reading the Rex v Lucy letby 2023, and SOT which obviously confirmed my initial doubts had been correct.
@@DavidPritchard-i7xthere are no grounds for a retrial
@@marinka424I've heard SOT mentioned in another group. What does it mean please and where can I read about it
@@samanthaphillips2547 Thank you for your reply. SOT stands for Science on Trial. If you google Science on Trial you should find it. Also “Health law and tech substack” is good. There are some very articulate and highly watchable David Kurten videos on the subject too. I just google “ David Kurten Lucy Letby” to find them. His two recent ones are good. The problem with this case is that if you haven’t got a degree in psychology, mathematics or a science such as physics or chemistry, it’s hard o see the flaws in Dewi Evans arguments, but the above sites try to explain everything. I didn’t leave links because my post gets cancelled if I try to do that.
I thought at the beginning that she was innocent and being made a scape goat by the hospital to cover up their own incompetence - now after seeing this I'm certain she has been.
If bolus of air is injected into a vein it ends up in the right side of the heart. It kills by preventing blood exiting the RV to get oxygenated in the pulmonary circulation. Intra abdominal ‘ free air ‘ is caused by infection or perforation of a hollow viscus. Retroperitoneal free air is caused by infection , inflammation ( eg necrotic pancreatitis) or severe trauma causing perforation of a hollow viscus. It is simply not plausible that the ‘free air’ cited by the PMs was caused by injection AND was the sole cause of death.
I'm not a lawyer yes I take a keen interest in law, there is something not right about this case however I don't know what it is but I do believe it's going to come out sooner or later. I do believe she is innocent.
@hugolloyd940 You do know what it is and is too scary to put into words even now.
This case concerns me a lot. I researched it quite hard, and did Lucy Letby do this?...I don't know....and that's the point. There's no hard evidence, no confession, a correlation, and an awful lot extrapolation. I cannot see how, in good conscience, a jury could convict in this case. She may have done it, but you can't convict on a belief that she did....you have to know. I truly think this has been a miscarriage of justice.
Additional doubt on this verdict has also been sown for me by David Kurten's latest videos.
Wow, indepth analysis of a number of issues that could give alternative explanation of the deaths of these babies. Evidense presented seems to have been cherry picked and expert witnesses have question marks regarding their level of expertise. In my view this case is far from conclusive. The Court has a duty of care to ensure Lucy Letby has been given access to justice. I think her conviction should be set aside and a new trial scheduled.
This is a very unsafe conviction, the prosecution Barrister came over as a spiteful bully!
A lot of miscarriages of justice are caused by a lazy or incompetent defence team. It seems she was convicted solely on circumstantial evidence.
She should of had the Barrister Mark McDonald as her council, she probably would be free now.
Letby could be a victim of a hospital cover up, and as the police spent two years investigating this case, i suppose they were under pressure to justify the cost by getting a conviction.
You see clearly naive and ignorant f all the evidence and facts . Richard Baker KC said those questioning Lucy Letby’s guilt should be ashamed …those individuals who offer superficial opinions based upon second and third hand accounts then expressing conclusions . Those supporting Lucy Letby , as repeatedly pointed out , have not seen the evidence of the trial, the babies medical notes or have spoken to any of the consultants who have raised concerns or seen any of the evidence that will go before the inquiry over the coming months but that there is some relevance in this background noise as it highlights how society is sometimes too quick to make judgements and assumptions on first impressions . “
You have lots of good information Sir especially regarding the plumber I hope you can point out these things
out for a retrial. Its terrible when a innocent person is in prison she could get killed. Their seems they looked for
someone to blame and she was chosen!! SHE had Legal aid defense which is a waste of time as they mainly work
with the police! if she had proper experience barrister she world more then likely been found innocent! You have
She had a very well respected barrister who had nothing to work with. She jad no witnesses except the plumber.
Not according to this video id rather believe there views then yours ! No need to reply
What well respected Barrister wouldn't look into the obvious points of the other baby deaths? Have "Hands tied seemingly" Maybe his masonic buddies did a deal behind the scenes. There is a lot of focus to distract public attention away from criminal activity by the very people who made public policy during the CV19 pandemic@@janlittle2148
@@janlittle2148 Ben Myers did not call any expert witnesses for the defence so Dewi Evans' half-baked theories went unchallenged. There is no branch of medicine anywhere, in which a retired paediatrician, who has not practiced medicine for 15 years, can make a clinical diagnosis on a deceased individual. In order to make a diagnosis one must minimally examine the patient and conduct additional tests.
It's no wonder this charlatan was severely admonished by a senior judge in a different case for writing a biased and worthless report.
@@jackiesmith2710why don’t you want anyone replying to you? Are you scared they might put things to you that point to her guilt, that you have no explanation for? Just asking….
The nhs looks for scapegoats, they choose the weakest and lay the blame on them, it’s the way in which the nhs allows the public to think, got them, disciplined them, sorted, now all will be well, but it’s not sorted is it!
How do I know 🤔I worked as an RGN in the nhs for 32years.
If any of my colleagues tell me they are going to work for the nhs I warn them and tell them to reconsider, particularly if they are from overseas as they are prime candidates for scapegoating!!
This unit was short staffed, this is when things go wrong, and go wrong big time!!
Lucy Letby worked full time, that means statistically she had a 25% chance of being on duty when an incident occurred, but Lucy worked overtime, increasing her odds.
Norman Fenton is the King of statistics 👍
Thinking about the waste water pipes leaking, do any of you remember a case where water from dead flowers was emptied down the neonatal unit sink causing pseudomonas infections which killed many neonates, can’t remember the nhs trust where this happened but it was a recent case.
Evertime they good at doing that and lying
Oh please, if they wanted to just blame it on someone, I’m sure they could’ve found a more liable candidate than Perfect Lucy, Lucy who raised over $3 million for a new baby Ward, let me let you in a little secret. No one is perfect as a sociopath psychopath pretends to be
not just the NHS...postal workers too.
Agreed. We don't need to look any farther than when the nurse who looked after Kate Middleton when Kate gave birth to George (a nurse named
Jacintha Saldanha) allegedly committed suicide merely hours after the birth, despite having no history of Major Depressive Disorder or any other mental health issues, much less suicidal thoughts or intent. In my opinion, Jacinta learned something about HRH that she shouldn't have known, and I stand by that position because we all know that, since time immemorial, the British Royal Family has killed for far lesser reasons.
@@EmilyLawrence-c2b This is nonsense. Jacintha Saldana took her own life several days after putting through a call from a person purporting to be Queen Elizabeth. It was a hoax call and Saldana obviously blamed herself for the mistake. The DJs who made the hoax call apologised for the prank. At that time, Kate Middleton was being treated for morning sickness and had not given birth to George. You really should get your facts right before making nasty accusations.
The uncomfortable truth here is that…..1) The Unit had historical problems and wasn’t functioning properly or staffed well 2) The Hospital and the NHS knew this 3) Ultimately this happened because the NHS is crumbling before our eyes 4) The reason the NHS is in crisis is because the Government is underfunding it 5) The reason it’s underfunded is because politicians are terrified of telling the public the truth about needing more money and having to raise taxes 6) The British public have some kind of pathological hatred of higher taxes and think they can get something for nothing. ……so there is huge social and political denial about the cause of the babies deaths……….simple solution ? Lucy Letby is a baby killer ! Hey presto …the real issues disappear behind a big puff of smoke.
Bravo ....We Believe Lucy Is Innocent ....Lucy Has Every Right To An Appeal / This Area Of Trust Is Corrupt To Core / Period .
This is a fascinating break down of the medical facts. Points of interest for me are: [1] the umbilical vein and attempts by junior doctors to insert a catheter so many times.[2] the pathogens causing air to be trapped. What ones would they be? I ask because I trained as a doc at a London med school and have a degree in Microbiology. Also, I do not trust the British judicial system one bit. There are so many wrong things going on here. Justice for Lucy Letby.
FREE LUCY NOW FREE LUCY NOW FREE FREE LUCY
The most interesting prospect is the public inquiry. It would be extremely interesting if new evidence begins to emerge that undermines the prosecution case.
Much has been made of the fact that there were no cameras on the ward so LL was not caught red handed. Had there been cameras it might have worked in her favour. There s a chance that they would have filmed nothing incriminating. That would leave people with a lot of explaining to do as to why they lost so many babies. I am still amazed that babies born at 25 weeks or less can be saved at all. In many places a termination can be carried out up to 24 weeks. That s a little of subject but it s made me think.
If born before 24 weeks then usually medical staff will not intervene to save save a baby even if the baby is attempting to breathe.
Thank you Dr Scott.
They also removed all the most vulnerable babies and sent them to another hospital for approx 6months
@sunshinemagicalrainbowunic4004 yes and then said the deaths stopped when LL left! Yes as the
Very prem. Babies were moved away.
miscarriage of justice -- I have little doubt now. [30 years experience as a lawyer]
But what can we do?
This is the question. There s a petition and a fundraiser but someone with a lot of clout and medical know how needs to step on board. There are also "for"LL sites who have some very in the know members. As soon as the case was over, thousands of people joined "l think it s called LUCY letby discussions and they are pro a t
active.There are also sites geared to people who feel she is guilty. Everybody thought that at one time but public opinion is changing. Even the "guilty" brigade cannot deny all the evidence is circumstantial.
having watched the presentation on Lucy to me there is grounds for reinspection by a team to deturnim the true facts and right this grave mistake
Remember when Lucy worked on unit for one day, then for the same day 12hrs, she was at HOME until next shift.
So many questions not asked 🤔
Utter bs investigation, she needs a retrial immediately
I followed the case and believe that Lucy is probably innocent. Congratulations Dr. Scott you have given and excellent interview to Norman, with tremendous insight into the legal aspects of the case. I have a clearer understanding now of why I believe this is a miscarriage of justice. Keep up the great work.
I followed this case and believe she is guilty
I think shes innocent too dept cover up
I think she is Innocent !
@@jillwildsmith So would you now be happy to allow Letby to look after *your* infant?
@@lynnetetstall3616 The trail of dead infants suggests otherwise.....
Thank you for this interesting argument, it certainly punches some holes in the verdict.
What it doesn’t
@@KBB-nf1dr not saying it means LL is innocent (or guilty) but it should at least warrant consideration (and perhaps an investigation) into whether the trial was biased.
Looks like she was framed to deflect from what was really going on at that hospital.
That’s is a definite I’d say. They needed to divert attention away from the doctors fuck ups. If there is any justice in this world this woman will be freed. Terrible lies have gone on it seems
patsy..........
When you find out the income revenue hospitals receive per baby per week you’ll understand what’s at stake and how hard it is to get quality staff
Diminished pediatric skills not measuring up to be a expert witness and the judge asked no questions?l
Dr. Evans?
I think you will find that they never ever interviewed anyone else at the time ‘ I will say again I truly think she was a scapegoat but that you for you reply
Look what happened to the consultant anaesthetist who raised concerns over Bristol baby deaths : had to flee to Australia!
I don't think genuinely evil people ever write down they are evil: Did Peter Sutcliffe, Myra Hindley, Ted Bundy or Harold Shipman do this? I have known in my life several sociopaths. You can tell if someone after knowing them for several months.
It is right to investigate this case before locking her up forever.
It was reported speech listen to the video again and educate yourself
Who decides which experts to use why didn't they use Lucy Letby's experts instead of the Crown Prosecution experts
They aren't available due to threat of reprisals by the establishment Dissenters will be reputationally ruined or bankrupted as in the case of Post Office in Horizon Scandal.
So pathogens can cause air in infants and the faulty sewage pipe from ward ABOVE COULD PRODUCE THIS.
You did not listen to the video ........listen again and educate yourself
Maybe you need to sell this to someone like Netflix or a TV show so you can get the funding and they get the show and fund the investigation.
Oh god she’s in jail for life wrongly 🤦♀️why can’t we just have this type of thing in a court not trial by media
Thanks for this very well informed interview.
@megja1812
We did.
flicking through and inital impression si s that it seems like Professor Norman Fenton doesn't get much chance to speak!! The questions go on forever!!! BUT - that said - this is well researched and well worth watching.
That isn’t the case, far from it.
it got a bit better - and was very good anyway - but there is still something to my initial impression, I think@@BobK5
all seems to add up to me that lucy is innocent
Letby will receive legal aid for an appeal. Money should not be an issue. Ben Myers is a KC, a top barrister with many years experience.
This is a fascinating argument, however, Lucy Letby did have expert witnesses - the judge told the jury that. The reason that they were not heard at the trial is that in England and Wales there is a conference prior to the trial where experts from both sides debate their findings, and if the experts then end up agreeing, then only one set will be heard at trial. This is to avoid duplication and cost. An expert witness owes their duty to the court and not to the prosecution or defence.
Also what about the deliberate introduction of synthetic insulin to two of the babies? It was accepted by both sides that this was deliberate. Can a virus account for that?
Also the blood seen round one baby’s mouth and traumatic injuries to the livers of two babies, the deliberate tampering with observation times in the notes, which was proven by the timings of a mother’s phone calls, standing over a baby while the baby was struggling to breath and so on and so on. Taken together, the circumstantial evidence shows a pattern of behaviour and is compelling.
By his own admission the Crown's chief prosecution witness, retired paediatrician Dewi Evans, was not an expert witness. In fact he had been thoroughly discredited in a former case by a senior judge. If the amount of insulin in those two babies had been correct they would have died and yet they survived. It was just another cock-up from the CoCH.
Six of the babies Lucy was supposed to have murdered had post mortems and five were found to have died from natural causes, a sixth was undetermined. And yet the word of a discredited retired paediatrician, who looked at a few x-rays, was accepted over the pathologists and Coroner.
Gareth Jenkins an expert witness in Horizon enquiry.
It was far easier for the hospital administration to find a scapegoat instead of risk having the many systemic failures of the hospital's unit leaked to the public. Since the dawn of time, attack has been used as a first and last line of defence. Humans in power are despicable.
All well and good, but the fact remains the excessive death rate ceased upon LL's departure.
It did for a time but that has been explained in this video. The hospital stopped taking very premature babies, less than about 32 weeks. It was a failing neonatal unit and certainly wasn't up to caring for these babies. However in 2017 & 2018 there was actually more deaths than when Lucy worked in the hospital. Stillbirths and neonate deaths only dramatically declined in the hospital when the senior consultant Dr Gibbs retired in 2019.
@@ruthbashford3176 it’s so obvious now that the official narrative was built on weak foundations. The real scandal is that the unit and senior doctors completely failed those kids. Not enough staff to look after really sick kids who should have of probably not sent to the unit
the CoCH was downgraded to a Level 2 right after she was taken off ward. That is the real reason for the spike. Amazing that this was not first and foremost in the jury's mind at the original trial.
How do you explain the insulin levels found in some of those infants who died? (Not to say that the insulin alone implies anyone in particular, but it implies malicious intent. In other words it had to be someone who done it on purpose if a mistake is excluded).
Sepsis can affect blood sugar levels. This could raise the insulin levels in the body even in non diabetics. (Hyperinsulinemia)
@@Johnnytightfit But from what I followed here on RUclips on other videos there is a difference between insulin which is produced by the body and insulin which is injected from outside. There is a difference not in the insulin itself for that is the same chemical wheather it is produced naturally or syntheticaly, but when it is produced inside the body an accompanying chemical is produced ( a by product of the body producing insulin I presume), while if it is injected no such accompanying chemical will be found in the body (obviously, because it was not produced inside the body therefore no byproduct). In the case of the infants who died of insulin, high levels of insulin were found without this accompanying chemical, which can only mean that the insulin was not produced by the body, and therefore had to be injected!
One explanation could be contamination of the fluid the babies were on , it is not the first time medical supplies have been contaminated .
The thing that does not makes sense is , if she was killing by injecting air undetected , Why switch to insulin and double the risk of being caught ? The whole thing to me says she was stitched up , I hope I am wrong because if the system has locked her up for life and she is innocent , well it become a real horror story , Not to mention she was convicted on such little evidence
@@Johnnytightfit it was proven that it was synthetic insulin, sepsis doesn’t cause a synthetic man-made product to be injected into a baby
Or the infant who showed signs of a sharp object having been forced down it's throat, which caused blood loss. The child later died.
Gibs needs looking at fist and foremost
I fear Letby is innocent .It nags me that this is the case
She's guilty, she said in her notebook that she killed them.
Yes I agree with 8447 I have the same feeling right from the start.
@@hugolloyd940 You can try and come up with excuses for her notes, but it doesn't look good, especially with all the other evidence on top
@@colinjava8447 You mean the evidence that the babies died from natural causes.
@@colinjava8447 A psychologist has explained that note, it was NOT a confession.
Seems like a stitch up but the judge did not deal with the substantial facts in a proper judgement so who knows?
Also, a junior dr can have been practicing for 8/9 years. They’re not trainees. They’re fully qualified doctors that aren’t yet registrars, consultants etc. To dismiss their skills in the way he does is offensive.
I was very suspicious about Letbys innocence. When I heard that when she went on holiday, the deaths stopped. But she only went to Ibiza for one week. Then, I thought she must have been on duty when babies didnt die in that two years, otherwise there would be around a hundred deaths in that time period. So that blew my suspicions out of the water. Her defence lawyer was inadequate.
When an institution has an agenda it's a massive mismatch. Mr Bates Vs Post Office is a must watch on the "convicts"
Yes, there were baby deaths when Lucy wasn’t present, but they were sick babies that had infections, or with suspected likely may not survive
The reason suspicions arose is because the babies that Lucy has been convicted of murdering or attempting to murder. We’re healthy babies that shouldn’t have died. They were simply born a few weeks earlier & needed to be incubated.
You should check your facts before you write.
@@brianmacnamara9445 you should think twice before supporting a baby murderer
Baby A was 10 weeks premature. Diagnosed with respiratory distress straight after birth. Had increasing lactate levels indicating under perfusion. Drs tried numerous times to insert a line into his umbilical vein unsuccessfully. Thus had no fluids for 4 to possibly 8 hrs. CRP increasing suggesting infection. Numerous desaturations. So NO not healthy or stable. Crib next to a huge window into the corridor and 2 drs and 2 other nurses in the relatively small room with 4 cribs. She was never seen doing anything except observing the baby as nurses are told to do. Baby A was not murdered.
@@mazdodd4145 maybe she chose a baby that wasn’t well for the first, then when she thought she could get away with it, decided to go for healthy babies
@@KBB-nf1dr None were healthy. Only 1 not premature and that one was born by caesarian after mother left 2 days after water broke so had an infection & needed antibiotics. Risk factors are prematurity, multiple birth & male. 1st 2 twin babies had all these.
Not Grounds for appeal but for retrial?
I say yes
And the jury was not fairly configured at 9 women jurors and three male jurors so massive bias coming from the female jurors particularly to do with the care of infants..
@@dianamincher6479 true and even then it was hung and had to go to majority vote
I understand there was unanimous verdict in only 3 cases and none where the murder cases
Although not 100% sure yet it was only the attempted harm that got unanimous it still levels more questions as to why it was hung
I agree it was rigged against Lucy on so many levels both insidious and blatant
She has received a re-trial so she can be charged with attempted murder of more babies
@@KBB-nf1dr Yes. The retrial will *not* be an attempt to get the 7 life terms overturned. That is most unlikely to happen. The retrial is to reach a verdict on a deceased child whom previously had no verdict declared.
Just let her rot in prison. She's guilty.
Guilty or not the moj are not going to let her go without a fight
Perhaps you have a case, it would be bolstered if there was someone else who thought in this fashion. A lone
voice does not a case Mike..
It now seems there are many experts who agree with Dr Scott McLachan
The tide is now turning...
Why have they set her up? Was she about to expose something back then or something more recent?
compare deaths with other neo natal units in other hospitals.
The judge did not deliver a fact based judgement so we do not know how Lucy injected the O2 into the neonate and whether she did so inject the neonate!? No--one saw Lucy injecting the babies ever? Pure speculation?
So the Goverment and NHS have acted to protect the NHS name at all costs, much like in Maddie McCann's death?
people are so fickle... Lucy is still guilty...
No proof beyond reasonable doubt found in conjunction with Lucy. Insufficient cogent evidence presented to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt!
I have listened to the whole trial ,and to me it seems like something out of a witch trial in 14 century England
The experts fall short. The specialist doctors fell short. The gead of the babyunit fell short. The KC fell short. But Lucy is the victim? That's your findings? Really?
Yes. In the case of Post Office on 2700 occasions. Dissenting employees don't tend to be available and prefer employment where truth might end it.
The man sounds like an Aussi??? Good on the Aussi for standing up for Lucy!!!! We are listening from Oz.
Think he might be new Zealand??
Actually, listening more..maybe you're right
Super thanks!
But would he allow Letby to look after his infant?
More importantly A Would he let his infant be looked after by any of that lot from The Chester Hospital??? In particular those junior doctors?
She absolutely is guilty. The online conspiracy theory industry that has grown up around her case is causing considerable distress to the parents of the very vulnerable children that she murdered and attempted to murder. It's obvious she thought by attacking premature babies she would get away with it.
Any theories on the 49 babies she wasnt involved with ?
@@kennethsimmons2029 no theories, just the fact they were born with congenital defects and weren’t expected to survive, unlike the ones she murdered and attempted to murder.
You may not have a T.V but you obviously have access to the internet therefore you are not limited to just a couple of newspapers.
@@marvins42 then you must speak out.
She said she killed them ! Case closed
She didn’t
@@AJ-hi9fd she did
@@jacquiwilliams3198 No she didn't, the note has been explained it was reported speech. She actually said in the note she did nothing wrong.
She plead not guilty hence a trial. If she said she did it there wouldn't of been a trial.
When?
Problem is, the most convincing aspect of the trial to her guilt became her behaviour on the stand.
No amount of degrees and phds will help you if you lack good old fashioned discernment.
The fact that Lucy went on the witness stand is to her credit. Beverly Allitt refused to take the stand. If I had been treated the way Lucy Letby has been treated by the NHS, the police, the media etc I think I would be insane. Poor Lucy's state of mind must be very fragile
And yes I believe Lucy is innocent, I see no evidence she is guilty
@@ruthbashford3176I wouldn’t say it was to her credit seeing as she was caught out in numerous lies, inconsistencies and comical amounts of selective memory.
From denying to recognise her own handwriting to differing versions of accounts to literally everyone else and conveniently not remembering anything that could be potentially incriminating.
This is not the behaviour of a innocent person.
No-one actually saw any nurse injecting anything into the babies?
But the judge omitted to deliver a proper substantive judgement in which he deals with her demeanour but no such judgement was delivered!
@@dianamincher6479 If the standard is catching criminals in the act, red handed - there would be a lot of free murderers on the streets. Rarely does it ever happen, it’s the nature of the beast.
She is guilty of not owning up to clinical negligence: Not murder
@MrUltrasound no, other people higher up were guilty of Medical Negligence and she made the mistake of complaining about them. That s a nono in the NHS
ffs
Its the way that the defence handled the material.
I said it from day one this young woman is innocent i really hope that the British people waken up and she gets her life back
If you said it from day 1then you Didn't base it on evidence.
@@Marigold502 it has happened before to other nurse and they ended up being totally innocent.dont for get high up DR,s had to be brought down a peg and made to right a letter of apologize to her and she has always proclaimed her innocent's pluses not one of her work colla.. would believe her to be quality.
@@derry1423 it’s interesting to see how people’s initial doubts were raised. The doctors egos are very apparent from the beginning. Great initial insight. I think you may well be proved right.
Yes so have I ,this evidence needs to be put before a jury at a re-trial ,I wish her luck 🙏
@@Marigold502 The jury certainly didn't base their verdict on evidence. All I've seen in this trial is opinion after opinion masquerading as fact. It was more like a case of witch burning than a trial.