https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...rt-panel-finds
has this been a horrible miscarriage of justice?
there have been questions brewing about this for a while.
Printable View
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...rt-panel-finds
has this been a horrible miscarriage of justice?
there have been questions brewing about this for a while.
Indeed, this is quite an astonishing turn of events. The question that I asked myself at the time, and still does, is, if innocent, why did she write those personal notes referring to herself as being evil and having killed the babies on purpose? These are my words BTW as I cannot recall the exact phrases she used but were definitely of that ilk. Seems a strange thing to do, unless she was mentally ill perhaps? I am definitely no expert in such matters, so cannot comment further.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rjk
The notes apparently were produced after counselling sessions as part of a therapeutic process. Article here:Quote:
Originally Posted by Gofer Blue
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crim...-b1179955.html
One expert has dismissed Letby’s notes as “meaningless” and had no value as evidence, particularly if they had been written as part of counselling.
I’ve always thought this conviction was unsafe. Will she ever get a retrial because the case is such a high profile one?
This type of case is another reason why we should never bring back the death penalty.
Thanks for the link. Interesting. I can't argue with expert forensic psychologists but as a layman it just seems rather bizarre to me.
I suppose she ought to get a retrial if the expert(s) who have spoken up today are credible in their field. Only their peers would be able to judge that I assume.
I have no idea whether her conviction was safe or not, but it does bother me that some of the recent expert opinions (the new review panel) that support Letby may not be considered because her lawyers had the chance to introduce them as evidence in the original trial but didn’t.
If the new evidence (new expert opinion that contradicts previous expert opinion) is relevant and might change the verdict, why should the incompetence of her lawyers prevent its consideration?
Because it seems these days convictions (or not) are determined by the competency of the lawyers in question.Quote:
Originally Posted by jon1959
And that has been true in US death penalty cases for over a century. Especially if the defendant is poor, black or mentally damaged. Justice rarely figures.Quote:
Originally Posted by stevo
Guilty or not, she is ugly as sin. Would rather not have hounds like her roaming the streets. Keep her inside.
this was misjudgedQuote:
Originally Posted by Alan Lung
I rarely make personal comments about the character of some of the posters on this MB but my God, what sort of person are you. Looking at some of your other posts too, it would appear that the word shameful is not in your vocabulary.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Lung
WTF.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Lung
Unbelievable, imagine if it is!Quote:
Originally Posted by Rjk
You need a two month ban.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Lung
I'm surprised he wasn't banned on the 8th Feb (#8). Sounds like a charming chap (not!).