“During the retrial, the prosecution and the defence accepted that it was a genuine mistake, and the nurse was convicted of the attempted murder of Baby K.”
“The CPS can confirm that accurate door-swipe data was presented in the retrial.”
Mindless_Pride8976 on
*In the initial trial, the prosecution said Dr Ravi Jayaram, a consultant, had discovered Letby standing over Baby K at 3.50am on 17 February 2016. The baby was deteriorating and its breathing tube had been dislodged.*
*The prosecution said door-swipe data showed that the baby’s designated nurse had left the intensive care unit at 3.47am. But the data was amended in the retrial to show the nurse had returned at that time, meaning Letby was not alone.*
*During the retrial, the prosecution and the defence accepted that it was a genuine mistake, and the nurse was convicted of the attempted murder of Baby K.*
*Letby faced a three-week retrial on the single count of attempted murder, which she denied, after the jury in her original trial last year was unable to reach a verdict.*
jrob1097 on
So she was found guilty in the retrial?
Might be my dyslexia but I’m found the last part of the article hard to understand
Whole-Ad-8348 on
Prosecution rejigged timings at the retrial to make it still fit. But it was never acknowledged if the same error was made at the original trial. Which it now appears is the case, which has implications back to the original trial.
Pretend-Jackfruit786 on
This has to be purposeful written in a confusing manner, nothing is making sense here
5 Comments
“During the retrial, the prosecution and the defence accepted that it was a genuine mistake, and the nurse was convicted of the attempted murder of Baby K.”
“The CPS can confirm that accurate door-swipe data was presented in the retrial.”
*In the initial trial, the prosecution said Dr Ravi Jayaram, a consultant, had discovered Letby standing over Baby K at 3.50am on 17 February 2016. The baby was deteriorating and its breathing tube had been dislodged.*
*The prosecution said door-swipe data showed that the baby’s designated nurse had left the intensive care unit at 3.47am. But the data was amended in the retrial to show the nurse had returned at that time, meaning Letby was not alone.*
*During the retrial, the prosecution and the defence accepted that it was a genuine mistake, and the nurse was convicted of the attempted murder of Baby K.*
*Letby faced a three-week retrial on the single count of attempted murder, which she denied, after the jury in her original trial last year was unable to reach a verdict.*
So she was found guilty in the retrial?
Might be my dyslexia but I’m found the last part of the article hard to understand
Prosecution rejigged timings at the retrial to make it still fit. But it was never acknowledged if the same error was made at the original trial. Which it now appears is the case, which has implications back to the original trial.
This has to be purposeful written in a confusing manner, nothing is making sense here