Lucy Letby - innocent?

Game Larder - Your reliable choice for Game Larder solutions - www.gamelarder.com
Status
Not open for further replies.
What is of greatest concern is that there have now been multiple enquiries into failing maternity services. Shrewsbury and Telford was truely awful. I know a midwife who resigned from her post as she was so concerned about staffing levels and failing senior management. It was a disaster waiting to happen. She was an extremely competent diligent and dedicated midwife but her job came close to destroying her.
It now seems that alarm bells are ringing in the Letby case.
D
 
Our judicial system is in no way perfect. Over the years there's been wrong decisions in that people have indeed been wrongly convicted. A tragedy on many levels, even more so before the abolition of the death penalty when there's no coming back.

By the same token, there's been cases where in the past there's been an absolute clamour for people to be released who have been convicted, only to discover with the development of DNA evidence that they were indeed guilty as hell.

I'm not sure that there could be a better system of administering justice. By it's very nature there's always going to be borderline cases, even given the onus of proof being beyond reasonable doubt. As time goes on, often with hindsight laws and procedures do improve.

But one thing I can be fairly sure of is that the Court of Stalking Directory isn't really up to the task.
 
Detection technology is good, but it still doesn't address the human tendency to form an opinion early on, and hang on to it like grim death, despite indications to the contrary.
Until we can accurately read minds, there will always be miscarriages of justice.
In the case of this unfortunate young woman, she should be given the benefit of the slightest doubt, and there are many.


D.
 
Back to Ms Letby,
It would appear that the only thing courts hate more than getting it wrong, is having to concede that they got it wrong.
Not the first time they’ve got it wrong, definitely not the last time they may have…
A prompt admission that there were some dubious grounds for the conviction would help, but that won’t happen, the establishment will double down and hope it blows over, politicians will quote the separation of powers, the judiciary will concede nothing until they are forced to.
 
The defence gets everything the prosecution has by disclosure rules, any sniff by the defence that they do not have everything would be an immediate appeal by defence for an unsafe conviction, some evidence will have been sifted out as I suspect if it was all heard the trial would still be going on. It's all well and good after the fact trawling for other opinions, you will always find someone with another view, follow most of the threads on here and you will see it.

I was once told by a dog trainer that the only thing 2 trainers will agree on is that a third one is wrong!
 
303British said:
The defence gets everything the prosecution has by disclosure rules, any sniff by the defence that they do not have everything would be an immediate appeal by defence for an unsafe conviction, some evidence will have been sifted out as I suspect if it was all heard the trial would still be going on. It's all well and good after the fact trawling for other opinions, you will always find someone with another view, follow most of the threads on here and you will see it.
Click to expand...
The difference here is that there appears to be a considerable difference in the way the available evidence is now being interpreted versus how it was presented and interpreted during the trial.
Under the circumstances, with a young woman incarcerated on a whole of life sentence, the new interpretation of the evidence is at least worthy of investigation.
Nobody is denying that there is merit in how the evidence is now being interpreted, nobody is denying that if the new interpretation is correct the conviction is unsafe, the reluctance to look at the case again is purely procedural, the case is closed and unless the grounds for re-opening it meet some very strict conditions it will stay closed.
The only thing worse than an innocent person being locked up on dubious grounds in the first place, is leaving them to rot in jail after the possibility of a miscarriage of justice is raised, until some future monarch or prime minister’s conscience is sufficiently pricked, that they apologise for the error, decades after the sentence is served or the death of the accused.
Justice delayed is justice denied.
303British said:
I was once told by a dog trainer that the only thing 2 trainers will agree on is that a third one is wrong!
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Our passion is your passion... stalk with us!
Back
Top