cartoon

















IMPORTANT NOTE:
You do NOT have to register to read, post, listen or contribute. If you simply wish to remain fully anonymous, you can still contribute.





Lost Password?
No account yet? Register
King of Hits
Home arrow Forums
Messageboards
Welcome, Guest
Please Login or Register.    Lost Password?
Your Views Messageboard
Post a new message in "Your Views Messageboard"
Name:
Subject:
Boardcode:
B I U S Sub Sup Size Color Spoiler Hide ul ol li left center right Quote Code Img URL  
Message:
(+) / (-)

Emoticons
B) :( :) :laugh:
:cheer: ;) :P :angry:
:unsure: :ohmy: :huh: :dry:
:lol: :silly: :blink: :blush:
:kiss: :woohoo: :side: :S
More Smilies
 Enter code here   

Topic History of: Lucy Letby
Max. showing the last 5 posts - (Last post first)
Author Message
Wyot No Name wrote:


Summary: the failed UK Police-Prosecution system for convictions before justice, can't face the failed UK N.H.S system for profits before people.



This isn't a summary of the article at all. I would urge people to read it. There is absolutely nothing about NHS "profiteering" "before people" in there.

I know what the poster is referring to; but he has misunderstood the point, completely.
Wyot No Name wrote:
JK's fine link to true journo Rachel Aviv in The New Yorker May 13, 2024.

Rachel Aviv joined The New Yorker as a staff writer in 2013. She has written for the magazine about a range of subjects, including medical ethics.

Summary: the failed UK Police-Prosecution system for convictions before justice, can't face the failed UK N.H.S system for profits before people.

Burkhard Schafer, a law professor at the University of Edinburgh who studies the intersection of law and science, said that it appeared as if the Letby prosecution had “learned the wrong lessons from previous miscarriages of justice.”

Schafer told me. “What is not in the police’s remit is finding a systemic problem in an organization like the National Health Service, after decades of underfunding, where you have overworked people cutting little corners with very vulnerable babies who are already in a risk category.

It is much more satisfying to say there was a bad person, there was a criminal, than to deal with the outcome of government policy.”


Yes I know I read it as can others but thanks for pasting that bit just in case our attention wavered....

Correction to my post above; I of course mean if her "defence team had presented the evidence" not prosecution.
No Name JK's fine link to true journo Rachel Aviv in The New Yorker May 13, 2024.

Rachel Aviv joined The New Yorker as a staff writer in 2013. She has written for the magazine about a range of subjects, including medical ethics.

Summary: the failed UK Police-Prosecution system for convictions before justice, can't face the failed UK N.H.S system for profits before people.

Burkhard Schafer, a law professor at the University of Edinburgh who studies the intersection of law and science, said that it appeared as if the Letby prosecution had “learned the wrong lessons from previous miscarriages of justice.”

Schafer told me. “What is not in the police’s remit is finding a systemic problem in an organization like the National Health Service, after decades of underfunding, where you have overworked people cutting little corners with very vulnerable babies who are already in a risk category.

It is much more satisfying to say there was a bad person, there was a criminal, than to deal with the outcome of government policy.”
Wyot I don't understand how a jury could have found her guilty "beyond reasonable doubt" based on this article, and certainly not if her prosecution team had presented the evidence the journalist uncovered.

I think so many assumed her guilt based on her diary entries; but there are other pychological explanations for them that make as much sense as "she killed them".

Who knows? But a troubling case for sure.
Wyot JK2006 wrote:
Hopefully this link to the article works...

archive.ph/AWpyz


It does thanks JK. I shall read with interest...