Reply To: A TV drama

[Siderite]

Like I said, I am not disputing that the drama raises issues of interest. The idea that it’s a dereliction of responsibility for a politician not to watch it is still absurd. The bigger issue is whether Kemi has any idea how to approach the issues raised, and evidence suggests she doesn’t, not whether she watched a TV show. She could have formulated some ideas without having to have seen the show. And, while it may raise themes and discussion, it is not gospel. There has to be a more thorough way of tackling the issues of disaffected young males.

As for Letby, the whole defence seems to bear the hallmarks of the fake news outlets undermining actual verdicts in favour of a contrarian message, regardless of evidence. Cherry picking aspects to make it seem more wafer thin than it is. Of course there is the possibility that it may be deserving of being overturned, as many cases are, but the Letby truthers don’t seem to be willing to tackle the case in a manner which would truly demonstrate it. As said, they cherry pick aspects and rely on others not knowing the complex case and the science to any level to make it sound dodgy. Letby was found guilty through a multifaceted case where the prosecution successfully linked many circumstantial pieces of evidence together to demonstrate this wasn’t the case of understaffing or other problems. The Letby truthers tend to focus in on one detail, take it out of context, and say this is flimsy. They neglect to do any kind of holistic analysis.

I am no expert, but have read accounts of the court notes and it is clear that for it to be overturned it needs to be shown how the many pieces of evidence for guilt are just coincidences. The aspects they cherry pick over are also disputed and were so in court. Some of the recent revelations of ‘injustice’ were discussed in court and were refuted. I am still sceptical of it being injustice. The understaffing explanation doesn’t seem to account for why there were no or few abnormal emergency counts when Letby wasn’t on shift. I think it’s a stretch to believe Letby happened to only work shifts when the hospital was understaffed.

Anyway, to reiterate, I could be wrong, but those who sat through the court felt the same and it’s up to Letby’s team to prove otherwsie, through proper means. However, the refused appeals show they are struggling and there is no evidence that they are being refused for incorrect reasons. For the other side, someone more knowledgable than me talks here: