UK - Healthcare worker arrested on suspicion of murder/attempted murder of a number of babies, 2018

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
I have no opinion either way on her guilt or innocence, but having to wait another year in prison seems ridiculous to me. Unless it's own defence team delaying the trial, it seems unfair. I've been gone from the UK for a long time, is this typical?
 
vertbean said:
I have no opinion either way on her guilt or innocence, but having to wait another year in prison seems ridiculous to me. Unless it's own defence team delaying the trial, it seems unfair. I've been gone from the UK for a long time, is this typical?
Click to expand...

The usual turn around for trials is six months or so from date of charge. However, thanks to Covid, there is a large backlog so a year is not so unusual at the moment.

On a slightly related note, there are plans to convert several conference centres in major UK cities into courtrooms, in an effort to reduce the wait list. They will be known as the Nightingale courts.
 
vertbean said:
I have no opinion either way on her guilt or innocence, but having to wait another year in prison seems ridiculous to me. Unless it's own defence team delaying the trial, it seems unfair. I've been gone from the UK for a long time, is this typical?
Click to expand...

As the previous poster, it's longer than is usual due to the pandemic but I'm sure that even under normal circumstances this was likely to go well beyond the normal sort of timings. It will be highly complex and convoluted due to the sheer number of charges and the serious nature of them. This is one of of the factors that I think may lean towards her being granted bail because, as you say, this is a very long time to remain on remand. That in itself may be concerning because of the already mentioned fears for her safety.

On a bit of an off-topic note; even this length of time to trial is quite speedy when you look at some other European countries. Look at how long Amanda Knox was locked up and even when the trial was underway it was often a couple of days of hearings then off for a week. I think they even broke for six weeks summer hols at one point. I recall that the captain of the ship that overturned years ago spent years in prison awaiting trial. It always baffled me as to how this was compatible with your rights to a speedy trial under ECHR requirements.
 
Today’s hearing was not such a surprise to me personally. The sheer amount of documents which will be being submitted both sides will be ENORMOUS. It troubles me that LL will have spent a very long time on remand if this does go to a full trial in 2022 and she is acquitted but that’s an unknown at this stage. What does also trouble me is the various Facebook groups (one in particular) which seems to comprise a bunch of ill informed keyboard warriors who simply do not understand the law or the trial process who are clearly baying for blood. At this stage literally nobody except the legal teams and police know what evidence has been gathered.
 
Marantz4250b said:
In all honesty, if there is any case which has a higher than normal chance of failing to prove guilt it's this one. Going from previous cases of a similar nature (as mentioned by Whitehall1212 above) there is a provable track record of such things failing, often after the accused has spent considerable time in jail or has even been convicted. They very often seem to rely heavily, and often entirely, on circumstantial evidence and usually evidence which is of a highly technical nature. Moreover, this evidence is often "opinion" based where two experts may not agree on it's meaning.

The fact that this trial has been slated for some considerable time in the future (it will be fourteen months to the day after she was charged by my reckoning), ostensibly for the prosecution and defence to examine the evidence in detail, strongly suggests that it is highly unlikely that there is any "direct" evidence and that it is all circumstantial in nature. It's probably inevitable that a lot of this will be expert witness based which generally means that it's an opinion rather than absolute "fact".
Click to expand...

I'm not about to start second guessing evidence..it could as easily have been the number of charges taking up so much time than quality of evidence.
Of course the nature of the crime is more likely is not likely to have a smoking gun.

I would imagine the CPS are as aware of those previous cases and as aware of how complex Healthcare cases are just as we are
 
Parker Knoll said:
Today’s hearing was not such a surprise to me personally. The sheer amount of documents which will be being submitted both sides will be ENORMOUS. It troubles me that LL will have spent a very long time on remand if this does go to a full trial in 2022 and she is acquitted but that’s an unknown at this stage.What does also trouble me is the various Facebook groups (one in particular) which seems to comprise a bunch of ill informed keyboard warriors who simply do not understand the law or the trial process who are clearly baying for blood. At this stage literally nobody except the legal teams and police know what evidence has been gathered.
Click to expand...

That's very concerning. I have to say that other than the odd comment I've found online I haven't really seen any collective hate. To be fair I haven't really looked on FB but I rarely use that these days anyway as it's just full of pointless crap for the most part.

She may be guilty, she may not be (and I've made no secret of which way I lean). I think it's highly unlikely that anyone would attempt to harm her though (keyboard warriors are essentially cowards like the pub gobsh!te, all mouth and no trousers) but it certainly can't be discounted. I hope that if she's granted bail then proper security measures are put in place to ensure her safety. I'm sure that that will be the case and that orders will be made to prevent the publication of her whereabouts.
 
Gosh I knew we'd have to wait a few months for a trial, but next January?! And no plea yet..wow it feels like there is never going to be a resolution to this case it is all taking so long, those poor parents of the babies as well as Lucy's parents (assuming they believe LL to be innocent). I just really hope the police have got it right as it's just unimaginable if not. Such a long time to wait for answers.

All I can say is I'm waiting for the trial to make up my mind, anyone is probably capable of anything given the right circumstances. I certainly hope I would have the same opinion if she had been less attractive or male etc. but hard to say as her name and photo have been out there so long now. I formed an opinion to start with that she was innocent and back then there was no charge just an arrest and then they let her go and my opinion hasn't really changed since then. Obviously if I was in the police and had strong evidence I'd have no problem believing she did it. We just have so little to go on and doesn't sound like we'll be hearing anything else for quite some time. Frustrating trying to follow a case with so little info-obviously I'm thankful not to have to actually be involved in this case in any way I just can't imagine the agony all the people involved are going through.
 
Bakers said:
i honestly dont think she will get bail, letting a potential serial killer out is just not heard off.
Click to expand...
Perhaps the application might be made for practical reasons, like her lawyer being able to go through all the evidence with her. I don't know what the facilities are like in prison for reviewing such volumes of evidence, expert reports and medical records. I imagine there are probably enough boxes to fill an office. Unless it's all been scanned onto a laptop.
 
Bakers said:
i honestly dont think she will get bail, letting a potential serial killer out is just not heard off.
Click to expand...

That isn't really a consideration though, or at least it's a minor one. If she isn't a flight risk, isn't likely to intimidate witnesses and isn't likely to commit crimes whilst on bail then it will be difficult to refuse. When she was initially remanded it was suggested (by the prosecution, in fact) that she should be remanded "for her own protection". People took that as her being at risk of vigilante action, however it is more suspected that it referred to her risk of self harm. If there is a reason to refuse I think it will be that more than anything else.
 
Today was certainly a bit of a non-event. Nothing new to ponder and chew over. What we're going to discuss in the next 11 months I can't think. And if Lucy, innocent or guilty, is in a bad way mentally, surely such a long delay is the worst thing possible for her? You would think some sort of secure bail could be arranged?
 
Kemug said:
Today was certainly a bit of a non-event. Nothing new to ponder and chew over. What we're going to discuss in the next 11 months I can't think. And if Lucy, innocent or guilty, is in a bad way mentally, surely such a long delay is the worst thing possible for her? You would think some sort of secure bail could be arranged?
Click to expand...

I agree, at least we have some sort of timetable for things and the hearing in May might result in bail being granted. I agree that some form of secure bail is probably possible but I think it will amount to not much more than prison without the other inmates. I'm not sure where that would be as after prisons and secure hospitals there really aren't too many places where she could be property guarded against harming herself. In the case of a secure hospital I wonder whether that would unfairly prejudice her defence (0r indeed the prosecution) as it may be claimed that it presents her as mentally ill from the outset. I suspect wherever she is granted bail to will involve a reorting restrictions and anti-harassment orders and suchlike.

Hate to say it but it may be the case that a prison hospital wing might actually be the best place for her to remain safe.
 
The trial date has been set for January 2022, so hearing the evidence given will definitely be interesting. Given the severity of allegations, I can see why bail may not be given. I doubt that they are worried she could go "on the run" as she has been arrested and released numerous times and hasn't given them anything to worry about.
 
The trial date has been set for January 2022, so hearing the evidence given will definitely be interesting. Given the severity of allegations, I can see why bail may not be given. I doubt that they are worried she could go "on the run" as she has been arrested and released numerous times and hasn't given them anything to worry about.
 
Marantz4250b said:
Read the discussion. There are several reasons as to why bail may be appropriate. Whether it's best for her welfare is an entirely different matter, though.
Click to expand...
Kemug said:
Today was certainly a bit of a non-event. Nothing new to ponder and chew over. What we're going to discuss in the next 11 months I can't think. And if Lucy, innocent or guilty, is in a bad way mentally, surely such a long delay is the worst thing possible for her? You would think some sort of secure bail could be arranged?
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 169 more.
Total: 3,208 (members: 170, guests: 3,038)

Online statistics

Members online
170
Guests online
3,038
Total visitors
3,208
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,502
Messages
17,970,018
Members
228,788
Latest member
Soccergirl500
Back
Top