Lucy Letby lawyer: "Anger needs to be pointed in a different direction" if conviction is not "safe" 

The Daily Mail and Guardian found her guilty before she stepped in the court by misreporting they want her guilty sells papers

He needs a team of barristers to assist him like in America? Why don't some barristers from the English London bar assist him! He looks and sounds whacked?

@@dianamincher6479 Maybe it's dealing with these two, it seems as if he's wading through treacle.

Correct.

Even if there was direct evidence of a crime & harming babies. It is very odd that the prosecutors had 6 medical experts there to bamboozle the jury. But the defence had zero. That's absurd. If the defence feels that way, why didn't she confess? Because no jury is going to believe zero expert witnesses over 6 medical experts giving hours of testimony.

Correct.

Agree, annoying & bias.

The defence withheld evidence. For example, the “admission note”. Letby had been asked to write down her feelings following counselling. The defence chose to omit this. Why ?

She had an incompetent defence

Nothing must go back to the courts as it has been deemed. Lucy is the scapegoat we must never implicate the middle management or other management in any of our companies within the UK or abroad. It is the way of the world to always implicate the workers. thank you for your understanding.

@@stephenlaw9886 Exactly it's a concern, even if she is guilty.

@@jonjones6583 so speaks the voice of the proletariat. Long live Karl Marx 💙

Er… lawyers represent their clients. You think that Ian Huntley’s lawyer thought he was innocent?

Also quoted newspapers like they are something we can believe.

as if cops do not jail people rather than admit mistakes.

I beg your pardon? That's not how it works at all and I say this as a police officer in major crime. We don't get to pick and choose what evidence is introduced at court. We collate the evidence and present it to the prosecution in an evidence pack, it is then their responsibility to disclose it to the courts. In regards to said suspect, or DP as we call them, during the interview process, we put the evidence to said person and provide disclosure to them and their legal representative before we send for a charging decision. The very fact that these other infant deaths are being spoken about, suggests that the OIC's, the SIO and all other policing colleagues, did everything by the book. I am not going to insult your intellect by saying we never make mistakes as individuals and as a team, we absolutely do, but the evidence used by the CPS at court, is not the responsibility of the police. I personally take the view that the CPS prosecutor has withheld certain entries from Lucy's diary and that in itself, should be investigated by the law society.

@@Man_v_Cars They also didn't include all the babies that die in Africa every year or those that died at Hiroshima or during the great plague or Covid. Funny that huh 😏

@@aidanjohnkelly it's the way it has been presented as a "confession note" misrepresentation.

@@jono1457-qd9ft Exactly. "I blame myself' taken from the counselling notes as a confession but omitting the bit that came after it "for not being good enough". We may have an adversarial system but this is just wrong as far as I'm concerned. If winning is all that matters, and the misrepresenting of her counselling notes suggests that is the case, it is not a stretch to believe the prosecution would withhold evidence and still go after someone they didn't even believe was guilty. It isn't as if this hasn't happened countless times before.

The system should always allow for the possibility of re-examining the case.

They already have

Aren't the jury supposed to decide guilt or otherwise? A lot of people weighing in on this who weren't at the trial.

Isn't whether she's guilty or not the whole point?

@@superted6960with all the evidence CPs already admitting they cocked up with life in prison you must be sure with out reasonable doubt

There was overwhelming evidence of their innocence with Horizon. It’s the other way round here.

I totally agree with you.She appears to be repressing a great deal of rage. She is totally convinced of Letby^s guilt. They used to burn witches for similar accusations regarding premature child death. Google Anna Göldi, it only took 227 years to exonerate her and accept it was a miscarriage of Justice!

​@@stephenSFthe evidence seems less and less overwhelming by the day with all these experts coming out pointing out issues with the trial

​@@brianterry8775Did they remove the engine?

@@stephenSF That 'overwhelming evidence' of yours is deeply circumstantial and flawed.

@@mrnobodieswildcampingadventure Harold shipman

@@stephenlaw9886 Harold Shipman is a terrible example as he was a GP who alone visited patients in their homes. It would be almost impossible to pass the buck for his actions.

@@scroggins100 she guilty as sin ...I hope she gets full life

Says scroggins100 from the internet who has no legal qualifications and is far from the isight of the case. It's all about his feelings though. We should listen and follow him.

There are thousands of negligent deaths in the NHS every year. What about them ? " According to NHS Resolution, NHS compensation payouts in 2023/24 amounted to £ 2.8 billion. " £ 2.8 BILLION. Something about this trial does not ring true much like the Louise Woodward trial. Remember, she was guilty without a reasonable doubt.

agree. far too many people, who had zero sight of the evidence, now having some 'gut feeling' that she is innocent.

@@amac6483 not by the same person!!!!!

so how many trials and failed appeals will it take for you to accept it? 3? 15? 50? how many medical experts would need to review the evidence before you'd be satisfied that what they are saying is sound? There was plenty of medical evidence and witness evidence to confirm she's guilty, and she is guilty now until proven otherwise. She had a good defense barrister and i know this because i was in court and saw him in action, he took no prisoners but the fact is, the Jury didn't believe her and neither did i. She had due process and a fair trial, which is why the parents are so bereft at the moment.

The jury should have been made up of medical and nursing professionals..ie a jury of her peers

Yes, and they kept saying 'but that's just one element'. Well you can only deal with one issue at a time and he wasn't ever going to be given the time to set out a comprehensive defence.

I’m so glad I’m seeing more and more comments like this. Because I thought I was going mad. I’ve also always felt like something just isn’t right. Can you imagine though if she is actually innocent? Scary job to have. I worked as a care assistant a few years ago and felt like at any moment something could happen and you could quite easily be caught up in the middle and blamed. Would never go back to that kind of job.

Yes it sets a presidence for how easily any individual can be abused by a flawed system.

Agreed, I've seen this a number of times in interviews who confuse the interruptions required when politicians tell lies, or make a disputable assertion, not LISTENING to experts.

Deliberate tactic to derail the guest & make them look incompetent.

Seeking the truth ?

Not very bright are you?

please explain .

@stephenSF read the new Yorker article and u realize the babies died from natural causes (as the autopsies found) shes in prison cause she was on duty for 'all 7 deaths Yeats there's 17 dead babies...

Another brainwashed twa t

@@stephenSF Did you have a point to make?

Yes, this was a dreadful interview. They kept interrupting him when he was making important points.

I understood that Times Radio was not MSM...

@@davidsherman1206 It shows up in the 'News' section of RU-vid (that can't be hidden permanently no matter how hard you try) - ergo, it is MSM.

Choosing to weaponise the views of the parents, disgusting.

I don't think it was a terrible interview. Mark had plenty of time to put his arguments forward he was speaking the majority of the time. They do have to ask challenging questions otherwise it's just a speech

This is true and a flaw of the justice system. However, you have to remember actual doctors reviewed it as well (before it even went to trial). So, it's just not true that no one with medical training scrutinized what went on.

Ironic that you allege Medical illiteracy, while showing your own ignorance - "... very unique". Hahaha!

Read a reply to a comment about one of the Dr's who's since retired due to having Dementia etc.

@@anthonyat2401 Thank you so much for that comment. You absolutely validate the EXACT point I am making with regard to the expertise issue. You are 100% correct. I am indeed very ignorant in the important nuances of this case., I don't know you personally of course - and I may be wrong in assuming this - but I suspect you are too. And that's NOT a criticism nor a failing. Its simply we haven't (well I haven't anyway) done degrees and endless courses and seminars and training modules to become adept in this field. My sister has. Lucy Letby has. The police have not. The CPS have not. The barristers have not The Judge has not. The jury certainly hasn't. The good old cliche saying "its not rocket science" haunts us here because this is the problem.... it IS rocket science. Care of premature babies so tiny they fit in the palm of your hand takes VERY special skill that takes dedication and time to learn. A LOT longer than even the quite lengthy trial itself. So is Lucy Letby innocent? I don't know as I am too ignorant to judge. As are you (I assume) too. Is she guilty? I don't know as I am too ignorant to to judge, again as I assume you are. Has she had a fair trial? I'm not sure she has. Simply because the ones tasked with judging her are too ignorant, again through no fault of their own, of the knowledge needed to fully understand what really happened in order to carry out their judicial duty. So how does Lucy Letby get a fair trial??? On that I have NO idea. And that is the impasse we have arrived. If there was concrete evidence of her committing crimes - ie the proverbial smoking gun or bloody dagger and someone witnessed her committing a crime then we would not be having this conversation. But there isn't. So all she has been convicted on is its "maybe" that it was her that did it. As much as I would find the murderer of babies to walk free if guilty utterly abhorrent (as I am sure you do too) I cannot rest easily knowing someone has been given full life tariff sentences because they "might" have done it. Thanks once again for making my point for me, its appreciated.

@@jp7963 You presume that the medical evidence is all that is significant. It is not.

I so agree with your Comment @monikel

Senior management throughout the government seem to be untouchable whenever something goes wrong. Until they start losing their privileged positions and pensions, and possibly even their liberty, nothing will change.

Another Tiktok detective lol

@@monikel yes and it probably goes all the way to the very top. The Prime Minister, Lord Chief Justice, Master of the Roles, maybe even the King himself. This case is an international conspiracy 🤔 personally I believe aliens are involved. What do you think?

I guess you're ignoring the shrine she made, with notes and medical records from the babies.

He was going to fund her defense. Lucy letby isn't having the best of fortunes.

@@stevepowell1651 yes, what a great loss for society in general he was. Of course if he'd bankrolled a new defence people would then claim she's still guilty and evil. This is how powerful convictions are.

@@marinka424 you would hope so but it's not the same as the man himself who was highly intelligent and driven. Hopefully the estate is able to support and that's probably still possible. Money does matter a lot

Where doesn't?

@@Scum555 thank god for those immigrants in the health service. So kind and hardworking.

@@Scum555 I am not in a position of agency on that issue, so you are misdirecting your remarks.

Is she tho?

Yeah it must of been really traumatic for her killing those babies and all poor thing...

You pay for her solicitord then NOT THE TAXPAYER!!!

@@jeeves_uk Please catch up, an equal number of babies died when Letby was NOT on shift, it is just that the prosecution failed to include them in its flawed data, and this was never questioned in court. Any way Sir David Davis MP has taken a deep interest in this case and raised it in Parliament several times, someone in his position would not get involved unless he was very sure there had been a miscarriage of justice. Watch this space.

​@@andymckenzie833You wouldn't be saying that if it was you in jail and you knew you were innocent.... 😡 Many learned people have doubts about this case.

She's a monster, and so are you for 'sticking by' her. Someone needs to have a look at your harddrive

​@@Scum555Obviously you haven't found it YET! 😂

@@rhysdwyer3950 - threatening a truthteller. Appalling.

Will you give her your baby, given how much faith you have in her.

I’ve felt this way from the start. And I still haven’t heard anything concrete.

Disgusting to weaponise the parents. Its really nothing to do with them as things stand at present.

I don't reckon that's true. The parents just want someone to blame. It doesn't matter who. They've decided it was her. They aren't going to change their tune if new evidence comes to light, they'll just point to the "evidence" she was convicted with and claim that wouldn't have happened unless she was guilty. Let's not forget at least one of these parents claimed to have witnessed her harming their child, but did not alert security or the police at any point.

@@mydogeatspuke but think of the legal consequences. That's what is behind all of this. Think about the post office scandal.

@@jono1457-qd9ft the legal consequences of what? For whom? Plenty of people spend their lives in prison despite not having done the crime they're convicted for. There are no legal consequences for the court that convicted them, the CPS who accepted bad evidence, or the judge who handed down the sentence. It's a simple "mistakes happen" for them. There are also no legal consequences for the families for their incessant witch hunt and refusal to even consider it may be a wrongful conviction, scowling angrily at anyone who dares suggest perhaps she might not be guilty. Or do you mean the consequences for the NHS, who may have knowingly scapegoated her? Because they "just provided the information [they] had," the jury did the rest. Wrongful deaths get covered up and blamed on all kinds of things allllll the time, genuinely every single day, and there are never any legal consequences for the NHS. Ever. Lawyers don't face legal consequences for lying, in fact it's pretty much in the job description. So, again.. legal consequences for what; for whom?

@@jono1457-qd9ft so you think, what, that the NHS would somehow be held accountable for scapegoating her? Lol. At worst they'd get sued by the families for the harm caused to their children and settle, they can afford it. There would be no real consequences for anyone but Letby, whose trauma of this experience would no doubt follow her for the rest of her life.

I feel she was made scapegoat by people in senior positions.

@@monikel Would not be the first time, and not the last.

@@monikel It goes higher than that.

How many infants suffered from Pseudomonas aeruginosa-related illness exactly? It sounds like you're just creating hyperbole around a 'deadly bacteria'.

@@monikel Absolutely.Potential negligence claims were estimated to be in the region of £400 million.

you're

So who killed the babies then? Who else injected air into the blood stream of those babies? They trawled through the work schedules and she was the only one there each time.

@@davidzack8735playing mix and match with the staff rota isn’t great evidence, is it ?

@@davidzack8735 There was never a suggestion that air was injected into the babies. It was suggested by the prosecution expert witness (who was not a neonatal expert and had been retired for 10 years) that fluid had been injected. Many other neonatal experts and professionals have since called into question his evidence as too simplistic in what are very complex cases in a specialised field. It is far from certain the babies were even killed by anyone directly. Maybe the contaminated water on the unit causes some deaths, or a lack of care for an overstretched unit as previously report by a consultant to the CEO? It should be noted that she wasn't present for all the deaths on the unit. The police/prosecution decided that the deaths when she wasn't there were natural causes. Very sketchy indeed.

​@@davidzack8735there's high death rates on special care baby units generally. So not all deaths indicate it was done intentionally. But the unit was managed poorly and umderstaffed. They've made LL into a scapegoat in my opinion. I hope to see her freed once all the truth comes to light

@@aodh5966 My question stands. Babies were dying suddenly in agony with air having been put into their blood streams. So if it wasn't Letby, who did It?

You're definitely on the spectrum

No proof? She kept a shrine with the medical records of the babies in her bedroom. Why would an innocent nurse steal the medical records of dead babies and keep them in a box? It was a trophy, something we see a lot in serial killers.

​@@Egon_CholakianOr someone who try to cope with their deaths in her own way.

​@@Egon_CholakianThat's only your opinion.

@@Egon_Cholakian Man, what planet do you come from? She kept a 'shrine'? She 'stole' the medical records and kept them in a box? Many nurses have said that they take handover sheets (not medical records) at the end of their working day, shoving them into their pockets and forgetting about them until they're back home. And if my memory serves, they were found under her bed, lying on the floor. Keep your artistic licence for a movie...

The Times has come down on the side of guilty, and so they are serving their paymasters. There is no independence in journalism.

Because they're bought and paid for.

@@SarahAdams-gt6pv - Loon.

@@FrostekFerenczy bot

No it reflects what the evidence was. It includes this: At some time shortly after 3.30am, the nurse allocated to look after Baby K left the unit to go and speak to the baby’s parents. At the time she left, she was content that the baby’s condition was stable. Letby was left to look after Baby K in the allocated nurse’s absence. When the allocated nurse returned at about 3.47am, the baby was being treated by Consultant Dr Ravi Jayaram. Dr Jayaram told the court that he had become increasingly concerned about Letby, following a spike in the number of baby deaths in the unit. When he realised that Letby was on her own with Baby K, he went into the nursery to reassure himself that everything was okay. He found Letby next to the cot. The baby’s condition was rapidly deteriorating. Letby could see the baby was desaturating but was doing nothing to help her. Neither had she raised an alarm or called for assistance. It was established that the baby’s breathing tube had been dislodged meaning she was not getting the support that she needed from the ventilator. The baby’s condition deteriorated on two further occasions over the next few hours. On both occasions, the baby’s breathing tube had again been dislodged. Evidence was presented to show that Letby had again been present in Baby K’s nursery at both of these times, despite the fact she had other babies to look after in a different nursery.

@@Anglo-Saxonforever She's dying in prison & so is geen.

@@paulis8107 and the guilty get away with it again.

@@lobbyskids2 She was not convicted on stats.

@@janetmarybowen3157 she was because there is no psychical evidence that she murdered any child.

That wouldn't surprise me

Clearly. Whether she is guilty or not.

Oh - well that's sorted that out. Thanks for clearing the matter up so succinctly, Rumpole...

then every hospital has a lucy letby? because they are all failing.

with the likes of paula vennels employed as top magagment in the nhs

The police once accused us of blocking a neighbour's driveway with our car. I told them it wasn't our car and we had no idea who it belonged to, but the police got very angry and demanded that we move the car or they would tow it away. I kept telling them it wasn't our car and we knew nothing about it. As they left they told me again that they were going to get the car towed away. I told them again that I had no idea who owned the car or where the owner was. Then they left. Don't know if they did tow it away, I just shut the door and left them to it!

@@FunkyMonkey-p9c - so you do not have a window ?

Please explain yourself.​@@autoclearanceuk7191

​@@autoclearanceuk7191Please explain what you mean.

There have been questions about her Barrister and his handling of the case by more experienced Barristers.

The statistics are bogus. The calculations of probabilities laughable wrong.

The jury acquitted her on some charges and were unable to reach a verdict on one. So whatever else, their deliberations were careful.

I almost got bullied in a jury I was it. It would of been a lot easier to just agree. I was 1 of 3 that held the line. I think the jury was 12 and one guy threatened to beat me up.

@@andrewwarmington On the evidence presented. What wasn't presented? BBL has examples of that. What evidence was wrongly presented? For example, the statistics and probabilities?

The judge will also give instruction to the jury.

You do know that most criminal convictions are based on circumstantial evidence? Not every case involves direct evidence (i.e. witnesses, CCTV) if they aren't present.

​​@@knoxy6884beverley alitt was circumstantial evidence. Because of her background they never doubted it The Yorkshire ripper was circumstantial evidence. .

Management were supporting her.

What are 'Medics'? Is that, like, anyone who works in hospital? Hospital managers? Or, is it only people who have a degree in, er, 'Medic'?

@@alastairbarkley6572 No it's not 'like anyone who works in a hospital'. Silly!

Actually it’s not as she was kept on vulnerable baby wards after the deaths related to her started and doctors even vouched for her after parents became suspicious because she was sleeping with them. It is actually not in the hospitals interest at all to find her guilty because now they look like careless morons, you know like the sort of people who would trust Lucy Letby.

The cops chose not to say anything about all the other deaths before, during and after she left the ward. Only very seriously ill babies were on there.

The story is from American Nightmare on Netflix.

So - who are you looking to blame...?

@@tedthesailor172 We're not looking for a murderer. There was no murderder. The story that has been spun is ridiculous beyond words.

@@tedthesailor172 the person, persons or systems that caused the deaths with a fair trial

@@Scum555 Who cares? Don't shoot the messenger.

And no motive.

Here is some direct evidence from the trial: At some time shortly after 3.30am, the nurse allocated to look after Baby K left the unit to go and speak to the baby’s parents. At the time she left, she was content that the baby’s condition was stable. Letby was left to look after Baby K in the allocated nurse’s absence. When the allocated nurse returned at about 3.47am, the baby was being treated by Consultant Dr Ravi Jayaram. Dr Jayaram told the court that he had become increasingly concerned about Letby, following a spike in the number of baby deaths in the unit. When he realised that Letby was on her own with Baby K, he went into the nursery to reassure himself that everything was okay. He found Letby next to the cot. The baby’s condition was rapidly deteriorating. Letby could see the baby was desaturating but was doing nothing to help her. Neither had she raised an alarm or called for assistance. It was established that the baby’s breathing tube had been dislodged meaning she was not getting the support that she needed from the ventilator. The baby’s condition deteriorated on two further occasions over the next few hours. On both occasions, the baby’s breathing tube had again been dislodged. Evidence was presented to show that Letby had again been present in Baby K’s nursery at both of these times, despite the fact she had other babies to look after in a different nursery.

@@MarlboroughBlenheim1 Is this the time he did not bother reporting it? I believe it is, I would not trust Jayaram with a box of frogs, he had previously wrote a letter of apology to Lucy Letby, how did that make him feel towards her?

@@Scum555 he was told not to report it by management

@@Scum555 who's talking about BAMEs though? Why do you make EVERYTHING about race?

@@Scum555 and this white woman replaced them, yeah? It isn't all about race at all. That's just the distorted lens you see life through, and you project that onto everyone else.

@@Scum555 yes, that's definitely what she did, and is totally relevant and real and true. Yep.

@@Scum555 - Your crackpot paranoia is irrelevant to this case.

@@Scum555 Go cry to the other q anon members.

You may find that RU-vid is deleting comments. It seems to happen almost at random. Of course channel admins can remove them too -- the site is utter mayhem. But I'm leaning towards the opinion that Letby just slipped through the cracks created by mismanagement and was enabled to do what she's accused of doing. I'm the first to admit when I'm wrong - even in my *own areas of speciality* and this isn't one of them. However, I'm leery of a couple of very loud voices like David Davies MP and that awful brother of the late, great Christopher Hitchens who seem to be thinking with the *little head* not the big one. Lord Longford (now long dead) was the same over Myra Hindley. And we know fine well she was guilty because she made audio recordings of her partner torturing and murdering Lesley Ann Downey. The jury had to sit through that audio and many were reduced to tears. I'd prefer to wait until calmer heads prevail and we can see what is really what. With a whole life tariff, Letby has nothing to lose by launching appeal after appeal if only to gum up the works. Neonates do die in hospital care. They are fragile by nature - and this is why extra care and speciality nurses are required but I can think of a couple of medical doctors and at least one nurse who famously murdered patients in their care. It happens. The problem here is did it? I'm of the mind that it did but I'll wait for some experts not this sort of armchair journalism.

@@marcdraco2189 You share very balanced points of view! I've said all along that I doubt her guilt. However, if it gets proven she is guilty then she is where she deserves to be. I'm keeping an open mind until all the evidence has finally been presented and hopefully goes to the CCRC. Thank you.

@@myrants5836 Thank you. I do admire your screen name. I wish I was that creative. Rant away! :)

@@marcdraco2189 Haha! Rant by name rant by nature!

CrimeScene2Courtroom is the RU-vid equivalent of 'The Sun' newspaper.

So don’t arrest child killers?

Maybe talk to the parents of babies who caught her mid act of deleting their baby. I forget the details!

@@Worldagenda24 that's because those details don't exist.

​@@stephenSFWhere did he say that, boy?

​@@jayboy918Explain the shrine in her bedroom, roses and confidential medical records of the victims kept in an ornate box. It's almost like a trophy, something we see a lot with serial killers.

AND VERY SEXY

NOT INTELLIGENT (you)

How is she not

If you have evidence, please share it.

@@joshuaparrott2458 Do a RU-vid search and you will find plenty of evidence of an usafe conviction.

Found the incel.

If she was a man he'd be walking free, you're right mate.

That’s because you are a racist Dave.

There often isn't smoking gun evidence in cases like this.circumstantial evidence in the allit case.

Then it's very hard to root out hidden biases and agendas. In an adversarial system, you know who's side each barrister is on. Their agenda is explicit and obvious.

You're advocating for the French legal system without realising it. It has many advantages.

@@Her.Serene.Feline.Cuteness. yes I know !

Instead of the most capable legal team winning, and justifying to themselves at least failing to disclose evidence that may help find the truth? @@MrOdsplut

That part of the hospital has now been demolished and rebuilt, which does suggest the hospital knew it was a serious problem.

Why because she’s white?

You seem to like this cut/paste tactic..seen this same post on courtroom2. What's your call on LL? Guilty/innocent?

@@StormyDaniels-i7m I’m trying to put some key evidence out there for people who don’t assimilate it all. Rather than take low hanging fruit, why not engage with the actual substance of the point ?

@@MarlboroughBlenheim1 Might I suggest 'you engage with the actual substance' of courtroom2's vids on the Nicola Bulley investigation and pay special attention to the author's published views and comments in relation to the so called mis handling of a 'live' police investigation. We all know the very sorry outcome for the Bulley family. Cast your mind back to when Lancashire Police formally requested, through the media outlets that 'arm chair' , social media detectives were seriously affecting their ability to investigate Nicola's disappearance. Who's initial theory turned out to be correct?'..and you talk about low hanging fruit.

@@StormyDaniels-i7m what on earth has that got to do with the substance of the Letby case?