Reply To: A TV drama

[Siderite]

You do realise that this video isn’t the only thing I have come across on this? Have you bothered to watch or read up on what might contradict the evidence claimed by the people on Letby’s side? For example, they make claims of skin discolouration by the defence are debunked by peer reviewed research which says the opposite. Evidence that had nothing to do with the case, even. Or does the fact that they are doctors make the qualified to have authority, even if others disagree? Just like the climate change ‘sceptics’ who wheel out the ‘expert scientist’ who can make them sound like they have authority.

I have previously made errors, but if my error in an unrelated thread precludes me from arguing from a position of consideration, I don’t see why I should not view your position as equally based on what you want to believe.After all, you believed those not so trusty Hamas casuality figures without consideration for the context or reliability of live updates of casuality figures from a warzone. If a dubious video origin can dismiss me, this can with you.

You’re right though in that it has created the ‘culture warriors’ and conspiracist craze. Peter Hitchens and the conspiracists have seized on this to show how the lying ‘experts’ and ‘MSM’ have damned poor Lucy. If I can be so glibly dismissed based on your own prejudice, the same can be applied to you.

Moreover, I have not said it is beyond the realms of possibility that this was a miscarriage. However, it would be a huge coincidence based on the many pieces of circumstantial evidence and there is no medical evidence arisen that has changed the mind of myself, or more importantly the judge. The thoughts otherwise, from people who are (like me) not experts, are just that and the fact that they are not being considered is not necessarily evidence of a refusal to consider new evidence, but maybe that they have not understood the evidence and there is no conspiracy to silence their ‘greater understanding’ than us mere fools who must think the evidence can’t be enough to overturn the verdict because of our own biases. Only the ‘free thinkers’ who may misunderstand some things can critically assess anything, not the jury, judges and more.

Of course, I may be wrong, but so might you be and the burden is on the doubters to overturn the evidence and not just dismiss videos that question their stances as some cover-up or because they’re ‘sheep’. The point is that I am not dismissing the possibility of new evidence. The point is that the Letby defenders have not yet produced anything that can fully withstand scrutiny. Hence why it has (likely) been dismissed for appeal. Mistrials happen, but the defenders have failed to produce anything convincing to the court. Previous mistrials don’t magically make this one.

Maybe consider that those who disagree aren’t doing so because they want to believe something, but because maybe they have interpreted the situation different to you and it doesn’t make them below your own rationality.