Lucy Letby found guilty.

They do, Gundy. And looking at her, a young nurse with a pleasant face, who would ever suspect what she was really like?

It’s obvious that some on here didn’t listen to one of the prosecutors explaining how painstaking it was to build the case because of lack of scientific evidence.
She explained how one crucial piece of evidence ( a phone call by a mother) helped to get the conviction.

I agree Blondiescot.

I would not wish to see the law changed so as to compel prisoners to attend sentencing hearings. They may, before being dragged out again for contempt, say unspeakable things to the victims and their families, or laugh in their faces. They have little or nothing to lose. It would compound the suffering of the victims and their families.

17 pages of comments is a bit much to read but I think I know which case you’re talking about. It had scant coverage here in the US but I managed to hear the story.

At the time I immediately thought about her being a mentally ill serial killer of… BABIES?? Omg, I cannot even imagine how these parents suffered their loss. And what an evil person LL must be. Deranged.

Someone had to take the rap… I think they may have the right suspect, but I am astonished that some people think she’s innocent after all the testimony.

I did not, could not follow the trial (no access). These things keep me up at night. People like this walk among us.
USA Gundy

Thank you for the explanation Blondiescot.

Kate1949

I'm sure many of you who are far more intelligent than me will understand this better than I do. A criminologist said yesterday that pieces of circumstantial evidence piece together to build a picture which then leads to a perpetrator being found guilty.

That can indeed be the case. During the course of my career, I have sat through many criminal trials, and it is often the case that there are pieces of evidence which, if viewed alone, may not mean much, but when viewed as part of an overall picture with others, can indicate guilt. Sometimes it just takes one vital piece of evidence for all the other pieces to fall into place - just like a jigsaw.

I honestly believe some people are born evil. And she is one of them . I married for the second time to a man who had two sons aged 9 and 6
The nine year old was inexplicably evil . He pushed his hamster through the bars of a drain to certain death. He abused the family dog until it bit him. The final straw was one day I walked in the garage by chance to find him stringing up his younger brother in a hangman’s noose. I got there in the nick of time. It was horrifying living with the child and the headmaster of his junior school had witnessed his behaviour too . I still shudder when I remember……..

Emotive language, Iam64
I said:If the accused chooses to lie on the floor he/she can be hauled to their feet; hands can be handcuffed behind so they cannot cover their ears; they may shut their eyes but they are still listening to the victims' statements.'
Not dragged into court.
I wonder if anyone has so much as raised their voice to this appalling woman; the police interviews and cross examinations were conducted in gentle tones, (to avoid accusations of bullying, which she has already used satisfactorily once before) and she successfully evaded the Judge's condemnation by exercising her apparent right to stay away.
Pointless allowing victims the right to make a statement when the guilty can refuse to attend.

I agree Shazmo

The managers who made the 7 Paediatric Consultants apologise to her are as far as I'm concerned as culpable as her. If they actually listened to them and acted other babies may have been servrd.

Jaxjacky and Blue Belle I asked my husband to read chimp investor’s article and he said the argument is that there’s insufficient evidence to convict LL! I have not sat through 10 months of trial evidence and am surprised to find anything like this being posted! It is very depressing.

The most recent guidelines were introduced in 2019.

I had no idea when the current rules were in, but if as you say Whitewave (and I’ve no reason to disbelieve you) then it was this current government who brought them in and frankly I’m not impressed that for some reason, prisoners were given the right to stay away from sentencing. Now this very same government is saying it’s going to amend the law! What’s going on? Couldn’t they see that this very scenario was likely? And the public outrage that would follow?
No, obviously not

With a name like chimp investor ? What does that even mean ?

ronib I have read it, Peter Elson aka chimp investor is a fund manager, he’s presented a statistical analysis of the ‘evidence available to him’.
I wouldn’t give him much credibility in this instance.

It is the grid showing who was on duty and who wasnt, that does it for me.
She is on duty all 24 times. The rest are on no more than 7.

And surely, 2 deaths in a year or whatever it was, and then happens to be 4 in a month, and 24 in a year or whatever it was, pointed to things seriously amiss.
That all should have been investigated far far sooner.

I know many dont like coincidences. But I do think some people need to go by them in normal life, far more than they do currently.

I wouldnt think a grid alone would convict.
Juries would go more by medical fact.

But they do all have to still go by, "beyond reasonable doubt" I think.
So not all facts have to be known. How can they be in a Uk court situation anyway.

What does your husband base his feelings on exdancer ?

I'm sure many of you who are far more intelligent than me will understand this better than I do. A criminologist said yesterday that pieces of circumstantial evidence piece together to build a picture which then leads to a perpetrator being found guilty.

Iam64

Expressing the issues involved in physically dragging a convicted offender into Court is not showing misplaced sympathy for the offender as eazybee suggested to Franbern earlier.
It’s simply acknowledging it’s not as straightforward as we might wish.

I do appreciate that. As I think I said earlier in this thread, it definitely used to happen - I saw it several times during his career. On one notable occasion, a prisoner had carried out a 'dirty protest' in the cells below and was literally dragged into the court naked, but wrapped in a blanket and absolutely stinking! That of course was a good number of years ago now and certainly wouldn't happen today.

Whitewavemark2

Primrose53

CatsCatsCats

So glad she has received a whole life sentence for each and every child she killed or harmed.

It was interesting, though, to hear of reasons why it's not that straightforward to force a prisoner to attend court. One is that there is only a limited amount of force that can be used. The other is that the convicted person might make the appearance all about themselves by "causing havoc" as did the people who murdered Lee Rigby. It should be about the families of the victims to put across their point of view.

We have Keir Starmer to thank for allowing prisoners that choice. Until he put his oar in, prisoners were always made to appear in the dock.

I have just seen a very senior member of the Police on TV who said in his career he never heard of such a thing as criminals being allowed to stay in their cell.

Wrong

“We have Keir Starmer to thank for allowing prisoners that choice. Until he put his oar in, prisoners were always made to appear in the dock.”

The most recent guidelines were introduced in 2019.

As far as you must be aware Starmer was a member of parliament in 2019.

However I’d be happy to be corrected.

You shouldn't be happy to be corrected because you are right.

It was mentioned in the Criminal Procedure Rule (published in 2020) Clause 25.2 (1) (c).

ExDancer

My husband says he has serious doubts about her guilt.

So did her friend, and she explained her reasons based on her acquaintance with the accused. Has your DH explained why he feels that way?

Re guilt - I found the website the chimp investor online writing about the lack of scientific evidence in the Letby case. I tried to read it but found it too upsetting.
Perhaps someone else feels up to the task?

Dickens

GoldenAge

A view from a psychotherapist - LL is not insane, the insane are not capable of holding down a responsible (even a non-responsible in some cases) job. LL turned up for her shifts, cared for herself/appearance, planned her actions, and showed a caring attitude to the parents of the babies she murdered. She's a sociopath/psychopath (same thing) like other serial killers and should be kept behind bars - the greatest happiness for the greatest number. However, in my opinion, every single manager who was approached by anyone expressing concerns about these baby deaths, whether they have left the organisation or not should be prosecuted.

However, in my opinion, every single manager who was approached by anyone expressing concerns about these baby deaths, whether they have left the organisation or not should be prosecuted.

Considering that it is not the first time that this has happened within the NHS - with all the resultant hand-wringing and "we must ensure there are checks and balances in place so that this never happens again" rhetoric (those lessons never do get learned do they?)... yes, they should.

Will we know how many babies could've been saved if they'd listened?

I hope these individuals have it on their conscience for the remainder of their lives.

That’s what I think.
Bringing their jobs and the Trust into disrepute by going to the police was more important to them than by finding out the truth and protecting more babies from harm.I hope they will face justice for their actions.

Do you doubt her guilt ex-dancer

Has he said why ExDancer?

My husband says he has serious doubts about her guilt.