Lucy Letby......More revelations.

I dont know if she was guilty or not, but a public inquiry where she has no right to defend herself is hardly a fair way to establish criminality. 40%?
 
Public inquiry should be about learning lessons. The fact is, she has been found guilty.

No doubt if that changes. There will be another to learn the lessons of finger pointing without evidence
 
Yes, but the brief’s opening comment that the convictions did not tell the whole story suggests LL was also guilty of other deaths. The terms of reference focus solely on her culpability in relation to the convictions, so if the inquiry strays into the other deaths, it should also look at all relevant information, including statistical techniques used.
 
This has already been covered in the other thread. The new stuff has the same statistical aspect problems as the rest.
 
I dont know if she was guilty or not, but a public inquiry where she has no right to defend herself is hardly a fair way to establish criminality. 40%?
The public enquiry is not a trial.
 
The public enquiry is not a trial.
Indeed but recent inquiries have concluded that criminal breaches of the law occurred whether by named individuals or organisations. The experts have questioned whether the assertion at the inquiry that harm was 40 times more likely when LL was on shift is statistically well founded. Alternatively if it is then why was nothing done for a decade?

 
He seems to be saying that she definitely did it whatever the current medical reason being given. The Police/cps must be fuming that their man is changing his mind. But good for him that he is professional enough to be prepared to review his own testimony. Can't see the appeal court entertaining this one though.
 
Her lawyer seems very competent and is choosing to drip out his attempts at appeal rather than lay everything in one go and risk failure in one go.
 
Back
Top