From Newsgroup: uk.net.news.moderation
quote:
Maternity notes for the babies Lucy Letby has been convicted of
murdering were not made available to her defence ahead of her
trial, the BBC has learned.
[...]
File on 4 Investigates has discovered that maternity notes for
the babies in the case - which include details of the mother's
pregnancy, labour and birth - were seized by Cheshire Police.
But they were not reviewed by the prosecution's chief medical
expert or disclosed to Letby's defence.
One concern is that the maternity history of the babies in
the case was not adequately considered.
[ In the absence of these notes its difficult to see how it
was considered at all]
Experts told the BBC that it is critical to fully assess the
pregnancy,labour and delivery of a baby when determining why
they collapsed and died.
{ However and as might be expected }
Dr Dewi Evans, the chief medical witness for the prosecution,
said the full maternity notes were not relevant to the case.
"I never saw any obstetric notes and I have no idea what
happened to them," he said.
Thus leading to MORE FLAWED LOGIC FROM THE CPS
quote:
The CPS reasoned that because the prosecution did not use them
to form its case against Letby, they were not relevant.
:unquote
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cm2g93n0j2ko
IOW because the entire prosecution rested on Evans' concocted
explanations as to how Letby had killed the babies, and because
those notes didn't form any part of Evans' concocted explanations
( but in fact could potentially be used to offer an alternative
explanation ) they were not released to the defence !
That is how the CPS "reasoned". Read it again !
quote:
The CPS reasoned that because the prosecution did not use them
to form its case against Letby, they were not relevant.
:unquote
So what of the notes themselves ?
quote:
However, Phil Bennett, professor of obstetrics and gynaecology
at Imperial College London, disagreed.
"It's very surprising indeed to me that little or no attention
was paid to the maternity care in these cases," he says.
Bennett has reviewed one case, referred to in court as Baby O, in
detail on behalf of her new defence.
The jury unanimously convicted Letby of murdering the triplet after
the prosecution said she had injected air into his bloodstream, into
his feeding tube and inflicted liver damage.
Bennett relied on Baby O's neonatal notes as well as testimony from
a police interview with the baby's mother about the infant's birth.
The prosecution argued that Baby O was born in good condition and
was stable for 48 hours before he suddenly collapsed. They said
that indicated that Letby attacked him.
But Bennett's opinion is that the baby died from a liver condition
caused by an injury to his liver during, what he believed was,
a difficult Caesarean section to deliver him.
He says though this is quite rare, there was substantial medical
literature on it.
:unquote
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cm2g93n0j2ko *
So that not only is this potential "New Evidence", on the basis
of which the defence could launch yet another Leave to Appeal; but
it would appear the case the both the police and the CPS have laid
themselves open to prosecution on the grounds of not only withholding
evidence from the Defence at the time of the original trial; but of
afterwards continuing to conceal the fact, during the course of
the various Appeals
bb
WARNING half way down this link contains a photo the cocksure
hatchet faced incompetent *Expert Witness* Dewi Evans; who somehow
convinced the Police and the CPS to waste millions of pounds of
taxpayers money on a flawed prosecution based solely on his manifest incompetence(see part 2) allied with a seeming ability to
convincingly lie through his doubtless yellow stained teeth.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2