TriedByStats

1.7K posts

TriedByStats banner
TriedByStats

TriedByStats

@triedbystats

Katılım Haziran 2024
421 Takip Edilen1.8K Takipçiler
Sabitlenmiş Tweet
TriedByStats
TriedByStats@triedbystats·
NEW: Over the past several months, I have obtained a number of court transcripts and have now identified several serious issues in the case against Lucy Letby concerning the murder charge of Baby C. 1. Lucy Letby wasn’t on shift on the day prosecution experts identified harm occurring to Baby C. 2. None of the experts identified harm until 2019, Letby was arrested in 2018. They had no murder accusation until 2022, after she was already charged. 3. All medical evidence related to the charge is based on a day when Letby isn’t there; even the pathologist testimony. I shared my findings with BBC file on 4 who have done their own investigation and will cover it in their radio documentary tomorrow. @triedbystats/lucy-letby-was-convicted-of-murdering-baby-c-based-on-evidence-from-a-day-when-she-wasnt-on-shift-8fb2bb93e0ef" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">medium.com/@triedbystats/…
English
34
164
500
178.1K
TriedByStats
TriedByStats@triedbystats·
In the transcript of her interview this quote from Dr Bohin is her hasty reply to the question “have you seen their reports?”. She of course hasn’t
The Trials of Lucy Letby@LucyLetbyTrials

A remarkable thing about Dr Bohin's claims this week: she's had to convince herself of something mindblowingly preposterous, which is that the world-leading experts instructed by Lucy Letby's new defence team did not have access to the babies' full medical records, in order to feel like her opinions about them hold weight.

English
3
12
33
5.5K
TriedByStats retweetledi
Neil Wilby
Neil Wilby@Neil_Wilby·
I've been closely involved in a number of miscarriage of justice campaigns over the past 15 years. Two with eventual CCRC referrals back to Court of Appeal (R v Calvert and others; and R v Danny Major) after previous failed attempts. From bitter experience, I can report that there is no accountability in any part of the full State machinery against which appellants are pitted. Particularly, the police and CPS.
English
5
8
28
1K
TriedByStats
TriedByStats@triedbystats·
@sergeantdixie @DavidDavisMP @EstherMcVey1 x.com/triedbystats/s…
TriedByStats@triedbystats

NEW: Over the past several months, I have obtained a number of court transcripts and have now identified several serious issues in the case against Lucy Letby concerning the murder charge of Baby C. 1. Lucy Letby wasn’t on shift on the day prosecution experts identified harm occurring to Baby C. 2. None of the experts identified harm until 2019, Letby was arrested in 2018. They had no murder accusation until 2022, after she was already charged. 3. All medical evidence related to the charge is based on a day when Letby isn’t there; even the pathologist testimony. I shared my findings with BBC file on 4 who have done their own investigation and will cover it in their radio documentary tomorrow. @triedbystats/lucy-letby-was-convicted-of-murdering-baby-c-based-on-evidence-from-a-day-when-she-wasnt-on-shift-8fb2bb93e0ef" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">medium.com/@triedbystats/…

QME
0
0
2
71
Joe Whelan
Joe Whelan@sergeantdixie·
@triedbystats @DavidDavisMP @EstherMcVey1 Tell me what evidence there is any allegation was dropped because Letby wasn’t present. Because there isn’t a shred of evidence for your lie. Btw, you clearly don’t know how experts work, not least because the defence panel have operated in the same way.
English
3
0
1
104
TriedByStats
TriedByStats@triedbystats·
The answer I wish @DavidDavisMP gave to @EstherMcVey1’s question about prosecution experts. *All* prosecution experts were first shown Dr Evans’s opinion before providing their own. Not one reviewed the case blind. One telling consequence of this is that, as Dr Evans misidentified cases as suspicious when Letby was not present, his “peer reviewers” failed to catch this. In fact, generally, they ended up concluding that these events were the result of foul play as well. It shows how worthless this peer review process was. Individually and collectively, this process demonstrated a complete inability to distinguish between events that had a natural cause and those in which natural causes could be “ruled out”. Even bleaker, once it was realised Letby was not present and these allegations would be dropped, some of these experts changed their minds and introduced entirely new allegations, in some cases mid-trial, in order to keep the prosecution going. In no world are these “independent” experts.
English
13
42
103
3.1K
TriedByStats
TriedByStats@triedbystats·
In response to this statement
English
4
0
3
470
TriedByStats retweetledi
Mervyn
Mervyn@mervynpervyn·
That akward moment in a thirlwall opening statement when the results of the hospital's own blind study showed Lucy Letby on shift for just 50% of unusual collapses over Hummingbird's 100% and the results were NEVER SPOKEN OF AGAIN Did the Jury get to learn of this?
Mervyn tweet media
English
7
23
89
6.5K
The Trials of Lucy Letby
The Trials of Lucy Letby@LucyLetbyTrials·
"LETBY SHOCK | Lead investigator of body reviewing Lucy Letby case AXED from role after "praising cop who jailed nurse" at award show" The Sun's latest non-exclusive which they claim is an exclusive: thesun.co.uk/news/38622381/…
English
8
23
79
3.2K
TriedByStats
TriedByStats@triedbystats·
@davidjamessmit5 @Adrian_992233 The court of appeals also rejected this in the first appeal of Sally Clark and the Dutch appeal court in the case of Lucia De Berk. Both of course overturned in the end
English
0
0
3
67
David James Smith
David James Smith@davidjamessmit5·
@Adrian_992233 I would encourage you to read the 2009 Ben Geen judgment which is available online and comprehensively rejects the submission that a similar statistical misrepresentation crept into that case. Indeed the court declined to hear the evidence of Jane Dutton on the point.
English
10
0
3
303
Luke Gittos
Luke Gittos@LukeSGittos1986·
@amandaknox The insulin evidence showed that someone on that ward was trying to kill babies. That evidence is not 'highly disputed'. It's disputed by one person who has no expertise in neonatal medicine. There wouldn't be a puncture wound if she put it in a feeding bag.
English
20
0
13
2.2K
Luke Gittos
Luke Gittos@LukeSGittos1986·
The smoking gun was insulin.
Amanda Knox@amandaknox

The trial of #LucyLetby for the murders and attempted murders of infants in the neonatal ward of the Countess of Chester Hospital was one of the longest murder trials in British history. It's worth asking why. /thread

English
20
2
22
13.5K
TriedByStats
TriedByStats@triedbystats·
This requirement came up during the trial in relation to Dr Evans when he was confronted by the prosecution about the harsh criticism he received from Justice Jackson. Essentially accusing him of perjury. Evans was reminded he had a duty to disclose this. He very typically doubled down and flat out said he wouldn’t have disclosed it even if he had known about it.
TriedByStats tweet mediaTriedByStats tweet media
Matthew Scott@Barristerblog

Criminal Practice Direction 7.4.1 requires an expert to disclose: "any adverse finding, disciplinary proceedings or other criticism by a professional, regulatory or registration body or authority, ... whether or not that finding, proceeding or criticism since has been resolved."

English
4
8
25
2.8K
TriedByStats
TriedByStats@triedbystats·
Right better accept the prosecutions interpretation that’s much less biased! With respect surely you can see some of the problems with that based on just this exchange. * Baby dislodged tube while paralysed -> actually evidence is that morphine was administered after. * 3x dislodgements is suspicious -> actually appears to not be three dislodgements. We then have at least three hospital mistakes related to ETT. 1. Wrong sized tube 2. ETT inserted to far needing to be withdrawn 3. ETT noted to not be secured The prosecutions interpretation is just that, an interpretation. Dr Hall reviewed the notes and doesn’t share that interpretation. The international panel reviewed it and don’t share that interpretation. What makes you so sure that if you reviewed it you would reach the same conclusion as the prosecution?
English
0
4
29
834
Paul Clarke
Paul Clarke@drpaulclarke·
@elsakendrick1 @triedbystats Sorry Elsa but I simply can’t accept any supposed ‘facts’ at face value in such an overtly partial account and contrived document.
English
4
1
11
622
TriedByStats
TriedByStats@triedbystats·
@drpaulclarke @elsakendrick1 Both of those are defence closing speech. The morphine allegation stems from the fact that it was taken out of the fridge at 03.30 but the notes suggest it was administered after the ETT was dislodged the first time. Also from defence closing:
TriedByStats tweet media
English
3
2
13
368
TriedByStats
TriedByStats@triedbystats·
@drpaulclarke @elsakendrick1 Quickly reread the Defence closing and Judge summing up for Baby K. The defence suggest there was no dislodgment the second time. The third allegation stems from the note of Dr J who recorded “ETT slipped”. It was recorded the tube was improperly secured.
TriedByStats tweet mediaTriedByStats tweet media
English
2
2
17
565
TriedByStats retweetledi
The Jالی Contrarian
The Jالی Contrarian@ContrarianJolly·
@gill1109 @robert_vanes @1val1richy i still find it extraordinary that with Dr. Evans antics since the trial the CPS hasn’t referred the case to the CCRC itself. It is just intolerable that critical evidence from so plainly biased and inappropriate an expert witness could be allowed to stand. Just mad.
English
8
18
96
2.1K
Sara Lockwood
Sara Lockwood@SaraLockwood_x·
@benshep20 @triedbystats Do you know the actual details of the investigation, or are you just assuming he 'harmed' patients? The latter i think Dear God, if only you Letbyists had an IQ above 70.
English
2
0
3
75

Keşfet

@sergeantdixie @DavidDavisMP @EstherMcVey1 @gilham_stuart @LucyLetbyTrials @davidjamessmit5 @Adrian_992233 @LukeSGittos1986