My problem with the Lucy Letby situation is knowing, from personal experience, how the judicial system works and can be manipulated by experts.
Those experts being police and lawyers.
If I was a juror - or if you were a juror - on hearing about the previous convictions I would certainly have convicted this time - wouldn't you?
Unless you'd learned from personal experience how the system works.
There is - understandably - an agenda.
It demands too much effort, intelligence, ability and a certain mind set to examine in two directions - or even more.
Suppose Letby DID hasten the demise of a few babies who were on the verge of death, were clearly suffering, were not only unlikely to survive (as, I gather, this baby was - she did subsequently die and nobody seems to have blamed the death on Letby) but almost certainly in pain?
I've always suspected that Harold Shipman started from the admirable position of assisting those who wanted to die, were in pain and close to death and couldn't afford to fly to Switzerland or persuade a relative to commit a crime.
Then, at one point, realised he could forge the odd will and make money.
So his downfall came - but was he "the worst serial killer of all time"?
I doubt it and even wrote a song about it.
The likely true story of Harold Shipman.
Once the media gets hold of a story - it exaggerates it (better story; bigger sales).
Once police have an agenda - they inflate it - stronger case.
Once Judges hear it they increase sentences; use stronger language; fall over each other to be quoted.
Once prosecution gets it (except in rare cases like Liam Allen) they colour up the story.
I have no idea of Letby's guilt, innocence or in between-ness.
But something smells.

JK2006 wrote:
My problem with the Lucy Letby situation is knowing, from personal experience, how the judicial system works and can be manipulated by experts.
Those experts being police and lawyers.
If I was a juror - or if you were a juror - on hearing about the previous convictions I would certainly have convicted this time - wouldn't you?
Unless you'd learned from personal experience how the system works.
There is - understandably - an agenda.
It demands too much effort, intelligence, ability and a certain mind set to examine in two directions - or even more.
Suppose Letby DID hasten the demise of a few babies who were on the verge of death, were clearly suffering, were not only unlikely to survive (as, I gather, this baby was - she did subsequently die and nobody seems to have blamed the death on Letby) but almost certainly in pain?
I've always suspected that Harold Shipman started from the admirable position of assisting those who wanted to die, were in pain and close to death and couldn't afford to fly to Switzerland or persuade a relative to commit a crime.
Then, at one point, realised he could forge the odd will and make money.
So his downfall came - but was he "the worst serial killer of all time"?
I doubt it and even wrote a song about it.
The likely true story of Harold Shipman.
Once the media gets hold of a story - it exaggerates it (better story; bigger sales).
Once police have an agenda - they inflate it - stronger case.
Once Judges hear it they increase sentences; use stronger language; fall over each other to be quoted.
Once prosecution gets it (except in rare cases like Liam Allen) they colour up the story.
I have no idea of Letby's guilt, innocence or in between-ness.
But something smells.

So what do the jury know now that they didn't know last year?. Nothing is the answer. They have just been subject to the media demonisation of Letcy, rightly or wrongly. The evidence is still only circumstantial. She was present on the shift (She worked a lot of extra shifts). I hope there is a more rigorous re-trial, bringing up the facts reported in the New York Times.

robbiex wrote:
[quote]JK2006 wrote:


So what do the jury know now that they didn't know last year?. Nothing is the answer. They have just been subject to the media demonisation of Letcy, rightly or wrongly. The evidence is still only circumstantial. She was present on the shift (She worked a lot of extra shifts). I hope there is a more rigorous re-trial, bringing up the facts reported in the New York Times.

While agreeing with the spirit of this what can a re-trial achieve and how can we know what defence was put up this last time? It may well have mentioned issues raised in the NYT.

The trouble with any re-trial (or further charges) is that most jurors will now factor in the fact that Letby has been found guilty of murdering multiple children.

From what I have read, I can't understand how anyone got to "beyond reasonable doubt" in this case. And there are other psychological explanations for that diary.

It is a troubling case. I would have had to find her "not guilty" on the "evidence", while being deeply troubled that she may have killed many children.

But I don't think these days many people can think like this. Everything is binary and they are at the centre of things. Jury trial should perhaps be reviewed now.

It was demonstrated during the Covid panic of 2020 that the majority can no longer think for themselves or weigh evidence; they should no longer be entrusted with the execution of criminal justice.

Yes it's like everything else - Democracy; the NHS; the music industry; online... a great idea and brilliant social structure starts to fall apart when it gets bigger and when circumstances around it change.
I always thought what happened to me in 2001 was impossible. But the manipulation by Max Clifford and Surrey Police of the judicial structure enabled them to convict me of something I simply did not do - and prevented my taking over EMI and changing the direction of the music industry. I might well have not succeeded, by the way.
As I said, I too would have convicted Letby on past media coverage and judicial decisions. Any fresh "evidence" would have been simply icing on the cake.
I'll never forget the case of Sally Clark - killed by British justice - long before the recent Malkinson appalling miscarriage of justice. And David Bryant/Danny Day (whatever has happened to that cunt?) and David's wife, killed by British justice. Dear Carl Beech. Dear Jemma Beale.
But the vast majority of humanity does not give a fuck. Just as they don't care about the thousands of innocents being killed in Gaza. Human beings have swallowed the stupid pill.
I often said humanity would disappear before I did. I still consider it possible.