• protist@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    2 months ago

    Under English law, British media are restricted in their reporting owing to Letby’s upcoming retrial.

    This seems to answer the question

  • Observer1199@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    After reading the article, it very much looks the NHS is completely to blame for the deaths and crown prosecution fucked up because the believed 2 people that had a bee in their bonnet but no actual proof. I’d say it was right for the 2 accusers to ask the question the first time but after the investigation that resulted proved no wrong doing on Lucy’s part, they should have dropped it. The whole argument is that she was present, but they were short staffed so she was always called in to cover. Also most of the staff didn’t have adequate neo-natal training but were working on a neo-natal ward, because they were so short staffed.

  • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Of course Davis would ask a stupid question he’s supposed to know the answer to. Why would he do any research when he can make himself look like an idiot instead?

    • PrettyFlyForAFatGuy@feddit.ukOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      i think it’s more about informing the public information is being kept from them.

      Him asking this caused me to seek out the article.

      Letbys conviction never really sat right with me with the information present in the british media. less so now i have read it

      edit: having read some of the discussion around this on reddit i have moved back from the “maybe she didn’t do it” to “she probably did” but even still it’s all very circumstantial

      • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        There’s no conspiracy here. She’s being accused of a crime and there’s going to be a trial. The prosecution have to present enough evidence to convict

        All that’s happening here is that the media are not allowed to report on a trail that’s currently ongoing which is standard practice. In the US they do it differently because there are different country, and that’s fine too.

        There was no reason for him to bring this up other than I don’t know some kind of weird political game that he thinks he’s playing it’s very unclear who this performance was for.

        • Devi@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          She’s been found guilty of a crime. They’re doing a retrial on one of the counts but she’s been convicted of seven murders.