- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 27,527
- Reaction score
- 6,653
- Country
Lucy Letby case - Evidence discussion thread
- Thread starter IT Minion
- Start date
The plot thickens...
But the state will cling on until the bitter end because it can't be seen to have f*cked up...
And that's why the state has legislated that even if someone is proved to be innocent they get a paltry payout...
Minus 'board and lodging' of course!
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 27,527
- Reaction score
- 6,653
- Country
At the end of the day, it's the tax payer who picks up the bill and if she is found to have her conviction unsafe, the book deal will make her very wealthy.
Wonder who will player her in the movie?
No amount of money could compensate for her being at the time one of the most vilified people in the country, and sentenced to a whole life tariff...
And the reason why the system doesn't care if they've got it wrong, is because as you say the taxpayer coughs up and no-one will be held accountable!
But it will help as whats the other option as she's in the position now?
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 27,527
- Reaction score
- 6,653
- Country
Which makes the argument for caps on compensation.
But we are jumping ahead, first her case needs to be reviewed.
Chair’s statement on Lucy Letby application review - Criminal Cases Review Commission
Lucy Letby – application timeline There has been much discussion in the press and on social media about Lucy Letby’s
ccrc.gov.uk
Imo it says the opposite...
How much would you value your innocent incarceration to be worth?
And the state then takes money back for 'board and lodging' if someone actually manages to get compensation after many years fighting for it...
Plus books don't tend to get written because gagging clauses are often put in place!
Interesting that at the end of that report, it says...But we are jumping ahead, first her case needs to be reviewed.
Chair’s statement on Lucy Letby application review - Criminal Cases Review Commission
Lucy Letby – application timeline There has been much discussion in the press and on social media about Lucy Letby’s
"We do not make decisions on the basis of external pressure from anyone"
Therefore there must be pressure from somewhere...
One can only speculate from which quarters
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 27,527
- Reaction score
- 6,653
- Country
You could argue the same for people tried and not found guilty having to pick up their legal bills or the compensation an airline pays when you are killed.
You cannot put a price on it, but there must be a mechanism for pricing it. It would not be fair, to value someone's wrongful incarceration based on lost earnings etc.
Which at the very least is anti-competitive since the victim can hardly shop around and has certainly not entered into a contract for the "service".
Are you suggesting the payments come with restrictions?
Strawman argument
The mechanism is already there if it were allowed...
The courts should not be bound by a cap!
And the courts already base judgements on loss of past/future earnings!
Actually on the "Bed and Board" issue, I note that this has now recently been scrapped but not retrospectively...
The Victims and Prisoners Act 2024 has put in measures that would "aim to prevent the misuse of non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) or "gagging orders"...
Why would there need to be an 'aim' such as that mentioned if there were not such restrictions in place?
