Jump to content

Lucy Letby


sadoldgit
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Baird of the land said:

I don't really see why feeding and clothing someone for the rest of their life is superior to a swift end, or why a swift end is barbaric. If you are arguing the potential for miscarriage of justice... well that seems improbable but guess she's never actually verbally confessed to it.

I think the issue is that it's improbable but not impossible. I certainly wouldn't want to go around allowing the state to kill based on that. Law of averages says they'll get one wrong eventually. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems it isn't long before many posts descend into a slanging match.

Anyway regarding the no-shows for the sentencing hearings, a couple of suggestions :

1) Sentences either increased or discounts on guilty pleas waived (obviously not in Letby's whole life term case)

2) Any right to appeal waived / prisoners to serve the whole tariff without parole.

3) Certain privileges denied (phone/internet/tv access, food treats etc)

That's of course if you believe that the law should not be changed and that a defendant can't be physically forced to the dock. There will be many more less serious cases where this would be an issue, perhaps the victim(s) should be consulted before sentencing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
1 hour ago, whelk said:

What is the point of having another trial?

Seems like an enormous waste of resources.

No verdict is going to change her whole life sentence. I get the parents will want "justice" - can't the judge just rule that on the balance of probabilities there is no evidence to say she didn't do it, that should make them happy?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, egg said:

None. I can't see how it's in the interests of justice to prosecute. 

I would imagine it is to try and give justice to the parents and family of the child. If I was one of the parents of the babies that there was no verdict given, I would feel let down by the process. They wouldn’t bring another prosecution if they didn’t think that there was a reasonable chance of a verdict.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

I would imagine it is to try and give justice to the parents and family of the child. If I was one of the parents of the babies that there was no verdict given, I would feel let down by the process. They wouldn’t bring another prosecution if they didn’t think that there was a reasonable chance of a verdict.

I get that, but the test is whether it's in the interests of justice to prosecute. The chances of a conviction are just one consideration. She'll never see the light of day again, so more guilty verdicts, all while giving that odious woman airtime, seems unnecessary to me. 

Edited by egg
Shit typing
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CB Fry said:

Tough old job for that jury once appointed.

Do you believe that this baby killer killed these babies as well.

I know juries get told to forget everything except the evidence but that's not one I'd want to sit on.

It's a retrial for attempted murder, so the question will be even tougher!

Do you believe this convicted baby killer tried to kill this baby as well....

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...