Forum
Please register! If you are registered, please log inagain !
[NB: your old dvd forums / digitalfix login will not work]
I have not being following this story in extreme detail, but one thing worries me deeply, and it goes far beyond this case.
Despite both sides (guilty/injustice) making excellent points, there are groups on either side who have extremely strong black and white opinions.
How can any reasonable, intelligent, person be cast iron certain when:
a) They haven't even seen most of the evidence.
b) The other side can make a very strong case that their view is correct.
It reminds me of the Louise Woodward case where, despite two well respected experts giving completely contradictory evidence about timing, a jury found her guilty beyond all reasonable doubt.
How can you have no reasonable doubt when experts cannot agree about critical evidence?
Louise Woodward - well remembered - I knew that the Letby case triggered an old recollection, but I couldn't put my finger on it.
I wonder if it depends on how good of a case the experts make on either side - might hinge on communication skills and overall personal presentation of the facts. We know just how much people like Trump and Farage can convince people that black is white (not suggesting there is any personal motives or gains to be had by the Letby experts).
15 Sept (Guardian): Thirlwall inquiry has left biggest questions around the Letby case unanswered
2025 BMJ - Lucy Letby: No medical evidence to suggest murder, experts conclude
An investigation by a panel of 14 international experts into the cause of injury and death of the babies Lucy Letby is convicted of murdering or attempting to murder has claimed that there is “no medical evidence to support malfeasance” and that they were the result of “either natural causes or bad medical care.”
2026 BMJ - John Launer: Why I’ve changed my mind about Lucy Letby
I’ve been persuaded by some of the trial transcripts and a series of articles by the medical writer Phil Hammond, which examined potential shortcomings in the defence and discussed further evidence and expert opinion on statistics and several clinical issues
Reading this medical thread for some outside expert opinions, sounds like she was made a scapegoat for systemic hospital failings. And maybe the jury found it easier to blame one 'crazy' woman than condemn the whole system.