spot_img
HomeBusinessPhysician's Letter to BMJ: Lucy's "conviction appears to be unsafe" Receive US

Physician’s Letter to BMJ: Lucy’s “conviction appears to be unsafe” Receive US

In case you get pleasure from studying this weblog, please go away a star ranking on WealthTender. Thanks!


On the 2 month anniversary of the announcement of Lucy’s responsible verdicts, a health care provider goes on the file. Others ought to comply with. The tide could also be turning.


If you want to put up feedback and replies about this put up, please achieve this on the Discussion board by clicking right here (opens in new window so this weblog put up web page stays open so that you can view). The Discussion board is seen solely to members which makes it preferable to the Weblog for members’ conversations.

Replace on reporting restrictions: I’ve not sought authorized recommendation about what the reimposition of reporting restrictions means for what I can write in relation to Lucy’s case however I’ve spoken to somebody who is aware of about this stuff. The take a look at is whether or not a broadcast report poses a “substantial threat of significant prejudice.” The trial to which the reporting restrictions pertain is a yr or so away (it hasn’t even began!) Additionally, this text is about Prof Sally Kinsey whose testimony had nothing to do with Baby Ok (the case being retried).

On 10 October, the BMJ printed a letter () from retired normal practitioner Glyn Phillips titled Letby case: why did no-one contact the police earlier?

In the present day, Dr Phillips despatched the beneath letter to the BMJ.

Letter to BMJ editor by Glyn Phillips, retired GP

Glasgow

Pricey Editor


Given the recurring sample of gross authorized injustices within the UK, we must always remind ourselves {that a} verdict of responsible in courtroom will not be an absolute. Sadly, as soon as the decision is introduced the widespread courtroom of public opinion kinds a hard and fast view of certainty that justice has been executed. Many may have already executed so earlier than and in the course of the trial. We kind opinion primarily based on the reporting of the matter on TV, radio and within the press. We don’t see or hear all of the proof. We should always remind ourselves of the likelihood that, in actual fact, an injustice might have occurred.


Convictions will be, and are, overturned though that normally follows a prolonged uphill battle. While interesting, the particular person is incarcerated and topic to all kinds of vilification and doable violence.


Accused individuals are typically wrongly discovered responsible by jurors as a result of, amongst many doable eventualities, they’re offered with flawed and inaccurate proof (1), some potential exculpatory proof could also be improperly withheld (2), defence legal professionals might underperform, and judges might give inappropriate misdirection to jurors. All such occasions may happen in circumstances the place the accused did truly commit the crime.


Since not too long ago making a remark within the BMJ relating to the consultants circuitously informing the police (3), I’ve been contacted by skilled statisticians who’re satisfied that Letby didn’t obtain a good trial (4). My speedy response, formulated right into a letter, was not supposed as a touch upon Letby’s guilt or innocence. I used to be commenting on the misuse of management over registered clinicians by administration.


I have no idea if she is responsible or harmless. The courtroom justice system discovered her responsible. Nonetheless, I’m more and more involved that she didn’t obtain a completely honest trial. In that case her conviction appears to be unsafe.


1
2
3
4 Elston P. The Travesty of the Lucy Letby Verdicts. Chimp Investor weblog 18 August 2023.

Competing pursuits: No competing pursuits

15 October 2023

Glyn Phillips

retired GP

If you want to put up feedback and replies about this put up, please achieve this on the Discussion board by clicking right here (opens in new window so this weblog put up web page stays open so that you can view). The Discussion board is seen solely to members which makes it preferable to the Weblog for members’ conversations.

The views expressed on this communication are these of Peter Elston on the time of writing and are topic to alter with out discover. They don’t represent funding recommendation and while all cheap efforts have been used to make sure the accuracy of the data contained on this communication, the reliability, completeness or accuracy of the content material can’t be assured. This communication gives data for skilled use solely and shouldn’t be relied upon by retail buyers as the only real foundation for funding.

© Chimp Investor Ltd

#Docs #Letter #BMJ #Lucys #conviction #unsafe

RELATED ARTICLES
Continue to the category

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

- Advertisment -spot_img

Most Popular

Recent Comments