We Should Not Care

The ‘distraught mum‘ should be studiously ignored here.

A mother of a baby boy who Lucy Letby attempted to murder has condemned the “disrespectful” endeavour to free her.

The parent expressed her anger and upset following the former nurse’s lawyers and an independent panel of experts demanding a case review based on “new evidence”.

Yesterday (Tuesday, February 4), saw the panel present their findings at a London press conference concluding that the deaths of seven babies resulted from natural causes or “bad” medical care.

Dr Shoo Lee said during the two-hour press conference: “There was no medical evidence to support malfeasance causing death or injury in any of the 17 cases in the trial.”

He added: “We did not find murders. In all cases, death or injury were due to natural causes or just bad medical care.”

However, the mother of the baby boy who Letby, 35, is convicted of attempting to murder believes the conference was a “publicity stunt”.

If the evidence against Letby was insufficient proof of guilt, then at the very least, she should be afforded a retrial. If the panel has found significant flaws, they should be taken seriously. I don’t give a flying one what the mother of one of the children believes. We are looking at evidence here, and if there is new objective evidence, it needs to be scrutinised. Someone’s belief is not enough. If there is a miscarriage of justice here, it needs to be put right. So ‘distraught mum’ needs to suck it up. If her baby suffered from other causes, she needs to get used to that.

“We want to hit back,” the parent, who cannot be legally named, told MailOnline.

“Every aspect of what they are doing is so disrespectful, it is very upsetting.

“They said the parents want to know the truth, but we’ve had the truth.

“We believe in the British justice system, we believe the jury made the right decision.

“We already have the truth and this panel of so-called experts don’t speak for us.”

Our justice system has a sordid history of miscarriage of justice. If there is evidence of such, then it needs to be followed up. If it’s a dead end, so be it. This person’s opinion has no right to be respected. The truth is all that matters, not her feelz.

The mother also explained how Conservative MP David Davis, who led the press conference, had “ignored her” when she emailed about his involvement.

She had attempted to raise concerns over “‘abusing his parliamentary position” to bid for Letby to walk free. “It’s outrageous,” she said.

“I told him exactly who I was and he didn’t respond.”

He is under no obligation to respond. It most certainly was not an abuse of his position. If Letby is innocent, then, yes, she should walk free or does this ‘distraught mum’ want someone anyone, to pay for the deaths of these children, even if the deaths were actually natural causes? Is she happy for an innocent person to spend decades in jail to assuage her grief and anger? Such a position does not deserve respect.

The mother said that Mr Davis introduced Dr Lee as the “star of the show”, using numbers to identify the children which “screamed disrespect”.

Learn what respect means and appreciate that it is earned, not dished out free with breakfast cereal. You, madam, are behaving in a manner that does not deserve it.

“At one point, just as they had discussed an alarm being silenced on the unit, the panel fell about laughing when a phone alarm went off, it was like they were mocking what had gone on, which was extremely distasteful and inappropriate.”

Oh, fuck off and grow up.

Lucy Letby may be guilty. She may be innocent. Let the evidence speak for itself. If there is new evidence, then let it be thoroughly examined and, if necessary, have a retrial. Truth and justice are what matters here, not someone’s warped view of respect. Grieving relatives are absolutely the last people to have a say in such matters and we should ignore them when considering that evidence.

14 Comments

  1. If there is evidence of an elevated rate of infant death at Countess of Chester during Letby’s time there, we need the explanation. Preferably the right one.

  2. The way they were demonising her unlike Saville etc, told me she was likely innocent. Now there’s reasonable doubt. Perhaps this distraught mother could contact prime minister to intervene, after all, he has a track record of that with the judges and courts. Prime minister could just say Letby is right wing and her case would never be heard again.

  3. Hurty feelz is the justification for many restrictions these days. The problem is the pandering of politicians to these special interest groups. Like the people who are pushing the Online Safety Act because their children topped themselves.

    Bereaved parents are the worst people to take notice of because they lose all sense of perspective. They also need something to fill the loss and “protect” others from what happened to them. And you’re an evil kiddie murderer apologist if you disagree.

    • And they have a propensity to start fake charities designed to campaign for restrictions on other people’s liberty or to ‘raise awareness.’

  4. So this woman thinks a potentially innocent woman should spend the rest of her life behind bars just so she doesn’t have hurty feelz? That doesn’t indicate a nice person.

    I get that she’s probably upset. But if she’s convinced that Lucy Letby did in fact murder her baby, then a retrial shouldn’t matter.
    .
    Retrial at a minimum. With some good lawyers for Miss Letby.

    • And therein lies my problem and why I am so caustic about her. She is happy for a potential miscarriage of justice, providing her feelings are respected. Her feelings are more important than the truth. What a nasty piece of work.

      • This is an example of why I believe there should be no ‘hate’ crimes. There are enough laws around to deal with crimes, dragging ‘hate’ into it just injects ‘feelz’ which are corrosive to justice.

  5. Given the general dysfunction within the NHS and the tendency for managers to throw people under the bus to cover up their incompetence, I would have thought that there would be enough room for doubt based on that alone.

  6. ’Our justice system has a sordid history of miscarriage of justice…’

    Which this genius doesn’t appear to know about, such is her conviction that the ‘Great British justice system’ cannot be wrong. I’m wondering if she harbours the same misguided confidence in the NHS.

  7. If my baby had died at that hospital and it were possible that Lucy Letby is innocent – then I would want it investigated.
    One Doctor said, “this hospital would have been shut down in Canada,” -aren’t we lucky to have the NHS!

  8. I see the relatives of those in Grenfell Tower believe it should be left as a rotting eyesore in a city that is short of housing because of feelz.

    The fact they were not native British is reason enough to fuck them off but for some reason (like the fentany addicted Saint George of BLM) our traitorous elite class is pandering to them.

  9. I seem to remember some years ago (in similar circumstances) posting a link here to a Mitchell and Webb sketch in which, after a disaster, a bereaved relative is asked to make a statement calling for a draconian piece of knee-jerk legislation in response. To the evident disappointment and growing frustration of the interviewer, he repeatedly declines, pointing out that his emotional involvement should make him the last person to be asked for a rational decision on what, if anything, should be done.

    I wonder if the BBC would broadcast that sketch now.

Comments are closed.