elsakendrick

[elsakendrick @elsakendrick1]

@ContrarianJolly @TomEvans80 It's still only incremental, the doctrine is not gone. It just won't be bound by previous decisions in the same case, when an 'exceptional circumstances' CCRC referral is made.

But yes Hayes was cited a lot in this judgment. Maybe finality will get a lot weaker.

[elsakendrick @elsakendrick1]

@ContrarianJolly @TomEvans80 Does it change that much? This is the first case to even use the 'exceptional circumstances' provision.

Are you expecting it will encourage the CCRC to use it more?

[elsakendrick @elsakendrick1]

@DebbieKennett @guyrowlanduk @TomEvans80 @VeraBaird @ccrcupdate It's the only analysis that makes sense, otherwise the "exceptional circumstances" clause becomes a dead letter.

[elsakendrick @elsakendrick1]

@drpaulclarke @LeeShoo @TheSun I'm not sure, but I suspect Lee has clocked on she is a bad faith actor now, so won't engage further.

Clearly unless already invested in the idea Dr Shoo Lee is wrong, the statements can be reconciled easily, it doesn't need his input.

[elsakendrick @elsakendrick1]

@GistWillie42455 @cjsnowdon @DavidDavisMP Snowdon's job is to lobby for various elite interest groups. I don't think he cares what the public think.

[elsakendrick @elsakendrick1]

@GarrickKingston @mervynpervyn Ah, much better to pick a biased sample then to 'pique the police's interest'!

[elsakendrick @elsakendrick1]

@triedbystats Who were these "senior academics"? Did she just make that up?

[elsakendrick @elsakendrick1]

@ContrarianJolly The best argument might be the reason she got convicted in the first place. Multiple qualified medical professionals were willing to testify under oath to support the case with their opinions/memories.

Of course many are willing to testify to the opposite as is clear now.

[elsakendrick @elsakendrick1]

@ContrarianJolly @Andrew_Cannon1 @james1071 Hume could hardly object to weighing evidence.

However the examples you give seem a stretch to call evidence.

Similar to how rolling the dice and getting 2 sixes isn't evidence of a loaded dice. It's just statistical inevitability it will happen sometimes.

[elsakendrick @elsakendrick1]

@ContrarianJolly @Andrew_Cannon1 @james1071 You seem to have an implicit philosophical commitment to a sort of Bayesianism.

I don't think this is the only way to reason about this.

[elsakendrick @elsakendrick1]

@Emilyjbronte @LucyLetbyTrials @Neil_Wilby Yes, they see themselves as the victims, read how they respond to FOI requests!
https://t.co/NmsBbiQIMx

[elsakendrick @elsakendrick1]

@Emilyjbronte @LucyLetbyTrials From someone, @Neil_Wilby who the Information Commissioner and Cheshire Police consider 'vexatious', so has no right to freedom of information! What a farce!

https://t.co/oCIvM9sW2D

[elsakendrick @elsakendrick1]

@triedbystats There are millions of people in the UK, the CCRC managed to pick the only one who had given Operation Hummingbird an award!

[elsakendrick @elsakendrick1]

@ContrarianJolly @Neil_Wilby @ACLMoss @ccrcupdate @DebbieK66580 It seems unusual for the CCRC to make this appointment while the Letby case is still under active review, as this individual’s impartiality may reasonably be questioned.

[elsakendrick @elsakendrick1]

@Neil_Wilby @WMPolice It looks like he is speaking on behalf as he was the host of the event.

[elsakendrick @elsakendrick1]

@littmath My view is coherence, after too long working autonomously, they tend to drift off from the main goal.

[elsakendrick @elsakendrick1]

@drpaulclarke @caltat @northerness @oh_biscuits_ @cleuci @LucyLetbyTrials @LCasley31782 @AnneSmi91430126 @FleurPoynter @AlekseyPotemkin @BarryCopeland1 @JayneArkle22617 @Oversig58651516 @hairyairey @NineteenNu45407 @cheshirepolice Disappointing, as I thought you were going to be a serious commenter on this case @drpaulclarke. Clearly you have chosen a different path into X conspiracy land and trolling.

[elsakendrick @elsakendrick1]

@davidjamessmit5 @Neil_Wilby But these are lies related to propositions the prosecution needs to prove, like false alibis.

Any alleged lies about handover sheets aren't that.

[elsakendrick @elsakendrick1]

@davidjamessmit5 @Neil_Wilby I'm not sure that is established.

But even if it is, it only goes to (in a very limited way) the weight of her testimony, surely it doesn't actually establish the facts needed to prove the case?

[elsakendrick @elsakendrick1]

@ContrarianJolly @kynohy @DebbieKennett @davidjamessmit5 Also, it seems a change of case by Johnson and so should have been disregarded by the Court of Appeal.