Lucy Letby

[PenlanJack]

Hell of a lot of bullying going on here.

Not my fault he's making stuff up in his own head about me, then starts rambling on like I'm a pseudo fantasist about a trial I couldn't give two f*cks about

 

[Darran]

Not my fault he's making stuff up in his own head about me, then starts rambling on like I'm a pseudo fantasist about a trial I couldn't give two f*cks about

Who the fuck are you?

 

[PenlanJack]

Who the fuck are you?

Lucy Letby, can I claim my 5 pounds

 

[Pacemaker]

There is a bit of confusion on here in relation to expert witnesses, anyone who is an expert on a subject can place themselves on a list held by the National Crime Agency as long as they are indeed an expert on that subject.

The prosecution and defence teams then search that database for experts that they both pay to provide their expert opinion on the evidence before them. They re paid both by the prosecution and teh defence teams, their evidence must be unbiased and based on the evidence before them. The judge in a case will quite often ask all expert witnesses on both sides to talk to each other if there is a discrepancy in their opinions, it has been accepted for years that the basis of an expert is one of independence.

Indeed the UK no longer has a Forensic Science Service run by the Home Office it is now completely independent and available to anyone who pays the fee. In my experience experts are very independent and don’t care if their evidence doesn’t fit the narrative put forward by the defence or prosecution.

The argument that the prosecution has paid witnesses is incorrect, all witnesses to the offences ie people who were there and saw heard or felt something get no payment but can claim out of pocket expenses for attending court as can anyone called as a juror.

Like all witnesses experts can be wrong and there is an old judicial saying that there is no more certain witness than a mistaken one.

 

[Darran]

There is a bit of confusion on here in relation to expert witnesses, anyone who is an expert on a subject can place themselves on a list held by the National Crime Agency as long as they are indeed an expert on that subject.

The prosecution and defence teams then search that database for experts that they both pay to provide their expert opinion on the evidence before them. They re paid both by the prosecution and teh defence teams, their evidence must be unbiased and based on the evidence before them. The judge in a case will quite often ask all expert witnesses on both sides to talk to each other if there is a discrepancy in their opinions, it has been accepted for years that the basis of an expert is one of independence.

Indeed the UK no longer has a Forensic Science Service run by the Home Office it is now completely independent and available to anyone who pays the fee. In my experience experts are very independent and don’t care if their evidence doesn’t fit the narrative put forward by the defence or prosecution.

The argument that the prosecution has paid witnesses is incorrect, all witnesses to the offences ie people who were there and saw heard or felt something get no payment but can claim out of pocket expenses for attending court as can anyone called as a juror.

Like all witnesses experts can be wrong and there is an old judicial saying that there is no more certain witness than a mistaken one.

Great post L,more of this we need and not Gilbert and George trying to ridicule everyone they don’t agree with.

 

[Wing_Stand_Wood]

The gist is, proceed with caution, with a degree of healthy scepticism and never place full trust in sensationalist reporting!

 

[Wing_Stand_Wood]

There is a bit of confusion on here in relation to expert witnesses, anyone who is an expert on a subject can place themselves on a list held by the National Crime Agency as long as they are indeed an expert on that subject.

The prosecution and defence teams then search that database for experts that they both pay to provide their expert opinion on the evidence before them. They re paid both by the prosecution and teh defence teams, their evidence must be unbiased and based on the evidence before them. The judge in a case will quite often ask all expert witnesses on both sides to talk to each other if there is a discrepancy in their opinions, it has been accepted for years that the basis of an expert is one of independence.

Indeed the UK no longer has a Forensic Science Service run by the Home Office it is now completely independent and available to anyone who pays the fee. In my experience experts are very independent and don’t care if their evidence doesn’t fit the narrative put forward by the defence or prosecution.

The argument that the prosecution has paid witnesses is incorrect, all witnesses to the offences ie people who were there and saw heard or felt something get no payment but can claim out of pocket expenses for attending court as can anyone called as a juror.

Like all witnesses experts can be wrong and there is an old judicial saying that there is no more certain witness than a mistaken one.

What a superbly written and informative read that is! Bravo!

 

[Wing_Stand_Wood]

Chair’s statement on Lucy Letby application review - Criminal Cases Review Commission

Lucy Letby – application timeline There has been much discussion in the press and on social media about Lucy Letby’s

ccrc.gov.uk

CCRC now going through a rather complex and arduous judgement process, and will be privy to information, that will end up with an INFORMED decision based upon facts/evidence/documentation.

 

[Wing_Stand_Wood]

*Additional information*

Lucy Letby ("applicant" CCRC term) and her ("Applicants representative" CCRC term) solicitor will be notified via letter.

If unsuccessful? The decision will become obvious upon opening i.e. the header hits home with immediate effect. Exact wording bellow in bold lettering.......

Criminal Appeal Act 1995
Statement Of Reasons For A Decision Not To Make A Reference To The Court Of Appeal

The CCRC will have gone through everything with a fine toothcomb. Interesting to note that 'rejection letters' never tend to be published directly for mass viewing/circulation, along with the information enclosed within.

The press and the media are as much outsiders as the general public. Police officers, former police officers and a miniscule minority of others tend to know more, because they know exactly what is in the crown court transcripts, along with police interview notes etc.

Who is to say what the outcome of this will be, BUT it should be supported based on the fact that the CCRC is extremely professional and is privy to a mountain of private information outside of public gaze.​

 

[Wing_Stand_Wood]

Expert witness: 'This is what defenders of Lucy Letby get so wrong'

In an exclusive episode of the Trial podcast, Liz Hull and Caroline Cheetham interview Dr Sandie Bohin, a neonatologist who acted as an expert witness during Letby's murder trial.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[Smurph]

Imagine is she was actually innocent. This would go down as one of the biggest miscarriage of justice and possible cover ups of all time

Senior Lucy Letby hospital boss arrested

The arrest was made as part of a wider investigation into leadership at the Countess of Chester Hospital.

www.bbc.co.uk

God I'm going to miss this place

 

[Wing_Stand_Wood]

The problem for Lucy Letby is the evidence against her, stuff like the doctor who walked in on her in the early hours of 17 February 2016, whom witnessed her trying to kill another newborn by dislodging the babies breathing tube two hours after birth.

Add to fact that Lucy Letby had resorted to stereotypical serial killer behaviour by keeping and hiding souvenirs of murders.

To make things even worse was the fact that she confessed! It does rather appear that her legal team has some mountain to climb to get her cleared.

Lucy Letby found guilty of attempting to murder baby following retrial | The Crown Prosecution Service

www.cps.gov.uk

 

[monmouth]

Imagine is she was actually innocent. This would go down as one of the biggest miscarriage of justice and possible cover ups of all time

Senior Lucy Letby hospital boss arrested

The arrest was made as part of a wider investigation into leadership at the Countess of Chester Hospital.

www.bbc.co.uk

God I'm going to miss this place

The only living person that will ever really know, is her. It won't stop others 'knowing', obviously.

 

[Smurph]

The only living person that will ever really know, is her. It won't stop others 'knowing', obviously.

Not necessarily.

If she is innocent other people will be aware and are more than likely happy that she’s carrying the can.

 

[monmouth]

Not necessarily.

If she is innocent other people will be aware and are more than likely happy that she’s carrying the can.

That's fair, if they do know for sure.