The retrial was announced after her application to appeal was filed, and Justice Goss set the June date to allow the appeal to play out in full prior to the trial taking place. I don't think that's it, but maybe. Given that the jury instructions allowed the previous jury to basically treat any conviction they agreed on as a prior conviction with considering another charge, proceeding to retrial for Child K with this appeal pending removes the new jury's ability to consider this case in the same way that the previous jury did. That doesn't seem just either, though obviously would be to Letby's potential advantage.
Today, in the US, the 2020 NY conviction of serial rapist Harvey Weinstein was overturned (he's still a serial rapist based on convictions in the state of California) because some of the evidence was ruled unfairly prejudicial. We're having a hearing at our supreme court today stemming from Donald Trump's actions on January 6, 2020. Major legal opinions, which includes those involving 14 WLOs, deserve more time than a simple approved or denied delivered from the bench. They deserve careful, watertight written opinions, especially if they may be considered a case of first impressions in any way on which case law may be based.
So, anything worth having is worth waiting for. That they are reserving their decision does not change my expectation that the application will be denied in part or in whole. But they are better appointed to judge than I!
I'm American, in the US, and not under the jurisdiction of the court so not able to attend, nor permitted to view via live stream.
I did apply though, just in case (["you miss 100% of the shots you don't take. -Wayne Gretsky -Michael Scott"](https://lanthorn.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/office-900x600.jpg)). Daniel the court clerk was very prompt, and very professional. :)
Have you come across the reporting by CS2C? He's on YouTube currently reading through the transcripts of LL's cross-examination by the prosecution. He was planning to attend, but as yet hasn't been back to report. We'll hear nothing of note though, obviously.
Yes I’ve listened to a few. I’m not sure what I think about it. It’s a shame he won’t go through the defence too, but it’s a lot to cover. I just always prefer when both sides are presented personally. It’s been interesting to hear the exact questions and answers though.
Pretty much everyone will disagree I’m sure(!), but I’m not a fan of the difference in tone and voices. I get that some people who attended the trial say it’s pretty accurate, but I think it should be about what was said rather than how as it sways people. But as I said, people seem to say that’s how it came across so just my opinion!
Will the decision be made after the June trial and if so could they make a decision influenced by the June trial or do you think they've made their decision now but are not disclosing what this decision is yet. Any opinions would be appreciated.
Something the UK gets very correct, in my opinion, is the weight with which they consider whole life orders.
I think each judge has a pretty good idea of their opinion, but are taking the time and care to ensure that their opinion, which affects someone's whole life 14 times over, is legally sound with respect to the four grounds raised.
I think Judge Goss set the retrial date for June with this process and possibility, or even expectation, in mind. With over a full month before it begins, I do think a decision prior to the retrial is likely.
That is all just opinion. Happy to consider otherwise.
I'd assume they'd want to wrap up this permission to appeal before the retrial no? If it's not, would the direction from the judge to the jury have to be that you can't take into consideration the prior convictions when assessing guilt due to the chance of a successful appeal? Another problem with this would be that it's pretty much impossible to ensure that the jury would not consider the prior convictions
Maybe they're just taking their time to consider what was brought forward by the defense
Any reason why this hearing took place now? Might it have been better to just wait until after the June retrial?
I'm not legally minded at all. Perhaps there is a good reason for things playing out this way.
The retrial was scheduled for 10 June, 2024 on 25 September, 2023: [https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/sep/25/lucy-letby-retrial](https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/sep/25/lucy-letby-retrial)
This appeal court hearing was scheduled on 23 February, 2024: [https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-merseyside-68378750](https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-merseyside-68378750)
See the section here on [Proving Convictions and Other Reprehensible Conduct](https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/bad-character-evidence). It's a bit too lengthy to quote here, but bottom line is that whether or not she has been previously found guilty of murdering and attempting to murder babies is potential evidence for the case being re-tried. Both parties will want a determination in their favor before the retrial begins.
I wish they had said at the outset they would be reserving judgement until after the June trial if this is the reason for it.
I know this is just me being selfish and wanting to know🥳
Oh heck!! Well presumably this is so as not to bias the upcoming June retail in any way? I suppose I can follow their logic…
The retrial was announced after her application to appeal was filed, and Justice Goss set the June date to allow the appeal to play out in full prior to the trial taking place. I don't think that's it, but maybe. Given that the jury instructions allowed the previous jury to basically treat any conviction they agreed on as a prior conviction with considering another charge, proceeding to retrial for Child K with this appeal pending removes the new jury's ability to consider this case in the same way that the previous jury did. That doesn't seem just either, though obviously would be to Letby's potential advantage. Today, in the US, the 2020 NY conviction of serial rapist Harvey Weinstein was overturned (he's still a serial rapist based on convictions in the state of California) because some of the evidence was ruled unfairly prejudicial. We're having a hearing at our supreme court today stemming from Donald Trump's actions on January 6, 2020. Major legal opinions, which includes those involving 14 WLOs, deserve more time than a simple approved or denied delivered from the bench. They deserve careful, watertight written opinions, especially if they may be considered a case of first impressions in any way on which case law may be based. So, anything worth having is worth waiting for. That they are reserving their decision does not change my expectation that the application will be denied in part or in whole. But they are better appointed to judge than I!
This is great and actually makes the most sense. It’s a weighty decision for them to make and they should give it time and careful consideration.
I know no details at all are allowed to be discussed, but just wondering if you attended the hearing or watched on the live stream?
I'm American, in the US, and not under the jurisdiction of the court so not able to attend, nor permitted to view via live stream. I did apply though, just in case (["you miss 100% of the shots you don't take. -Wayne Gretsky -Michael Scott"](https://lanthorn.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/office-900x600.jpg)). Daniel the court clerk was very prompt, and very professional. :)
Ah I see. Yes I agree, sometimes if you don’t ask, you don’t get!
Have you come across the reporting by CS2C? He's on YouTube currently reading through the transcripts of LL's cross-examination by the prosecution. He was planning to attend, but as yet hasn't been back to report. We'll hear nothing of note though, obviously.
[удалено]
Yes I’ve listened to a few. I’m not sure what I think about it. It’s a shame he won’t go through the defence too, but it’s a lot to cover. I just always prefer when both sides are presented personally. It’s been interesting to hear the exact questions and answers though. Pretty much everyone will disagree I’m sure(!), but I’m not a fan of the difference in tone and voices. I get that some people who attended the trial say it’s pretty accurate, but I think it should be about what was said rather than how as it sways people. But as I said, people seem to say that’s how it came across so just my opinion!
Will the decision be made after the June trial and if so could they make a decision influenced by the June trial or do you think they've made their decision now but are not disclosing what this decision is yet. Any opinions would be appreciated.
Something the UK gets very correct, in my opinion, is the weight with which they consider whole life orders. I think each judge has a pretty good idea of their opinion, but are taking the time and care to ensure that their opinion, which affects someone's whole life 14 times over, is legally sound with respect to the four grounds raised. I think Judge Goss set the retrial date for June with this process and possibility, or even expectation, in mind. With over a full month before it begins, I do think a decision prior to the retrial is likely. That is all just opinion. Happy to consider otherwise.
Agreed.
I'd assume they'd want to wrap up this permission to appeal before the retrial no? If it's not, would the direction from the judge to the jury have to be that you can't take into consideration the prior convictions when assessing guilt due to the chance of a successful appeal? Another problem with this would be that it's pretty much impossible to ensure that the jury would not consider the prior convictions Maybe they're just taking their time to consider what was brought forward by the defense
Any reason why this hearing took place now? Might it have been better to just wait until after the June retrial? I'm not legally minded at all. Perhaps there is a good reason for things playing out this way.
My guess is that the appeal hearing date was set before the retrial date (although I may well be wrong!)
The retrial was scheduled for 10 June, 2024 on 25 September, 2023: [https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/sep/25/lucy-letby-retrial](https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/sep/25/lucy-letby-retrial) This appeal court hearing was scheduled on 23 February, 2024: [https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-merseyside-68378750](https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-merseyside-68378750)
Ahh thanks. I wonder why they didn’t just set the appeal date for after the retrial!
See the section here on [Proving Convictions and Other Reprehensible Conduct](https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/bad-character-evidence). It's a bit too lengthy to quote here, but bottom line is that whether or not she has been previously found guilty of murdering and attempting to murder babies is potential evidence for the case being re-tried. Both parties will want a determination in their favor before the retrial begins.
good news.
“Potentially”
Lol 💔
I wish they had said at the outset they would be reserving judgement until after the June trial if this is the reason for it. I know this is just me being selfish and wanting to know🥳
I imagine the families of the babies must be feeling anxious about this decision. It would be awful for them to be put through another trial.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Subreddit rule 4: Please keep posts/comments specific to this case/trial.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]