Nick

[Nick @Nick36642028]

@GuerrillaCarl Excellent piece, Carl, and commendably thorough. Will you be sending this to Mark McDonald?

[Nick @Nick36642028]

@mathwithsanni 4991

[Nick @Nick36642028]

@bagshaw2112 1968

[Nick @Nick36642028]

@GuerrillaCarl @DavidDavisMP @YvetteCooperMP @TalkTV Good interview, Carl. Very articulate.

[Nick @Nick36642028]

@Sammyjo1954 @James_Treadwell Evans took just 10 minutes to decide there was deliberate harm. He misunderstood the role of an independent expert, boasting that he had “never lost” a case. He was motivated by money. Contrast that with the new defence team. And by the way, podcasts earn very little money.

[Nick @Nick36642028]

@Sammyjo1954 @James_Treadwell In contrast, Dr Dewi Evans famously stated in an interview that his high earnings from medico-legal work—including his role as a key expert witness in the Lucy Letby trial—helped "keep my daughter in horses and my son in cars." 2/2

[Nick @Nick36642028]

@Sammyjo1954 @James_Treadwell By all means disagree with Lucy Letby’s supporters, but to suggest they are motivated by monetisation is a very strange argument given that Mark McDonald, Shoo Lee and his team of international experts have all been working on this pro bono. 1/2

[Nick @Nick36642028]

@Sammyjo1954 @James_Treadwell It’s factually incorrect to say that they all agreed. In the original trial only three of the verdicts were unanimous.

[Nick @Nick36642028]

@AlexKahn_ Or possibly they have a better understanding of statistics than Cheshire Police, who stood down Jane Hutton when she questioned their methodology.

[Nick @Nick36642028]

@PeterElston1 @MartynPitman Will you write to Lady Justice Thirlwall and tell her?

[Nick @Nick36642028]

@AsACyclist @JeremyVineOn5 @Jeremy_Hunt @nelufar @theJeremyVine Precisely. So it was incorrect of you to say that “appeals have found her guilty”.

[Nick @Nick36642028]

@AsACyclist @JeremyVineOn5 @Jeremy_Hunt @nelufar @theJeremyVine Andrew, I think you’ll find that there haven’t been any appeals.

[Nick @Nick36642028]

@wordsnfrases @MarkHeath45 Not to mention the parallels with the Lucia de Berk case.

[Nick @Nick36642028]

@farman4x Also looks simple after you try to solve it. 48 or -48.

[Nick @Nick36642028]

@UKPatriots2geva @gill1109 @lizhull @DailyMail Try to keep up. It was the Court of Appeal which lifted the anonymity order yesterday, thereby allowing @lizhull to publish. (It doesn’t mean she should have done of course.)

[Nick @Nick36642028]

@WydRomanX 6141

[Nick @Nick36642028]

@mike_r_edwards @Thirlwall_Inq The irony being of course that in conducting their inquiry Thirlwall uncovered further evidence which has assisted the defence.

[Nick @Nick36642028]

@Barry_19967 @rob_goudie But Barry, the prosecution *DID* continue to do precisely that. Then the CPS Special Crime Division said:

“Six offences of attempted murder were reconsidered in relation to six babies, but the review upheld the original decision not to bring any further criminal charges.”

[Nick @Nick36642028]

@CPMorris1234 In such a scenario what would be done to protect her? Do you think it is likely that she would be offered a new identity? (2/2)

[Nick @Nick36642028]

@CPMorris1234 If the Court of Appeal declares Lucy’s conviction unsafe then that would secure her release, but it would not be entirely satisfactory as she would not have been declared innocent and there will no doubt be those who still believe her to be guilty. (1/2)