Відео

But for council tax they threaten prison for non-compliance (and have imprisoned people)….which, under the single judgement procedure that they appear to be using, would be unlawful! Councils using a single judgment procedure cannot issue magistrate court summons or summary judgements or raise imprisonment committals surely? All tax requires consent (ie completing the PAYE form in a new job etc) because it’s classed as a contribution…it requires a contractual obligation signed by the man or woman agreeing to contribute, and then it’s that agreement itself that forms the basis of any prosecution (for not complying or avoiding it etc). With council tax, which technically never applied to people’s homes anyway (because they are not non-domestic or commercial premises), there is no signed agreement/contract, then there can be no enforced demand? Why is it so difficult to get a straight answer from them? Bottom line….there are some serious laws protecting the sanctity and privacy of the family home from public trespass and government intrusion…it’s time we all started learning about them.

When a member of the public gets the facts wrong, they go to jail. When the BBC does it (i.e. when found out), they simply submit an aplology.

3:30 What a bore! I hadn't realised that they occurred in that part of the world. We hear of the one in the Severn, but not this. Where is it?

If Ms Letby got a "very good defense team" I would hate to see a mediocre or poor defense team!

Lucy is Innocent!

I found it disturbing that someone can be given 15 whole life terms without one single shred of physical evidence , all circumstantial , and they couldnt find one single person , past or present , that had a bad word to say about her

Free Lucy Letby

When push comes to shove the law societies of the western world become neutered when an "emergency" is declared (see lockdowns). I mean, totalitarian regimes such as China have bills of rights and the like that are not enforced. So it's all tyranny dressed up as something else as the evidence clearly shows.

This bloke needs urgent lessons in precis and delivery. Cut out the ramblings, get to the point and make the case. I lost interest and focus after the first 2 minutes frankly.

Wonderful scenery where are you ?

I no longer have any faith or trust in the legal system ..if Lucy Letby is innocent the media have blood on their hands this was trial by media.

The judge at the second trial kept telling the jury that because she was a convicted murderer it was highly likely that she was guilty. Shouldn’t the jury, in a case of this complexity, been made up of medical professionals ?

Look up judges losing Judicial Immunity for inferior courts in Australia. High Court Case Judge Vasta.

Don't forget, folks, you can represent yourself AND take a unqualified person along with you to offer quiet words of advice, help with documents and so forth. This counts for all courts I have encountered - civil, criminal, administrative. But it doesn't end there, as County Court judges usually will allow your 'Mackenzie Friend' (as it's known) to speak on your behalf, especially if they have been heavily involved with the claim. Also, anyone can be put forward to the judge as your actual representative (not sure this is a right - I believe the judge has discretion). Don't do this is my advice - one CC judge suggested I act as Mackenzie Friend rather than representative, which was agreed. It took me a long time to realise that there is one very good reason why acting as a representative may not be a good idea (and to 'get' where that judge was coming from), and that was when another judge told me (as rep) to present our side of the argument, which I didn't actually have a presentation for. As a Mackenzie Friend I had never had that responsibility, as the judge had always led things. I can do a good submission, and that's usually good enough, and had I realised that I needed to make the whole case there on the spot I would have prepared better. The judge hadn't even read the paperwork, she said, so we lost badly on that one. Quick word on County Court judges: generally very good, sometimes excellent, seldom biased in my experience. I like 'em.

CPS mis-labeled evidence put into the court at trial. Whaaaaaat? But, but, but... that's not possible. Right? Actually no news to me. My brother was accused of beating his wife. He said it was her assaulting him, but guess who the police and CPS believed? So he was charged, thrown out of his house with the clothes he stood up in and not allowed to see his kids for a year. Then came trial with a lurid story from the wife of the assault. The CPS presented their killer evidence, pictures of her injuries inflicted by him. Except as my brother pointed out, they were pictures of his injuries inflicted by her. They had somehow been "mis-labeled". 🙄. The pictures of the injuries and their location proved that his story of being the victim of assault by her was true and her story of being beaten almost senseless was a load of tosh. Strangely enough he got found not guilty so fast we didn't get time to buy a coffee. An arrest, handcuffs, charges, jail, a year on bail, thrown out of his house, forbidden from seeing his children and a trial. All because the police had "believed the victim" (i.e. the woman), despite the only injury being on him, and the CPS has mislabeled the evidence. She still thinks he got found not guilty due to a "loophole in the law".

This man is talking out of his arse ? If people plead guilty and it’s on video that’s why it’s takes two days ? So wot about child molesters that film it and plead guilty? Yeh yeh yeh please remember the new p.m. is a lawyer and was head of the ship for 12 years letting Jimmy Savile run rampant while there were hundreds of police statements against him by children ? So you can clearly see who he wants to protect and who he doesn’t.

How shall we deal with these Nazi`s?

Lovely walk. I wish I had somewhere like that to walk at. Not so lucky. Here in Malta, we're limited in our choice of walks and mostly would have to go through some traffic along the way.

When consultants and nurses are saying they don’t trust a colleague around babies, idiots like you should f*****g listen.

How many mistakes and omission on the part of prosecutors are acceptible in a case where the consequences of a miscarriage are so significance? Whoever made the mistake is clearly unreliable. Does anyone double-check or corroborate evidence based solely on one specific piece of technology? (Think "Horizon"!) This may not make any difference to the convicted but makes an enormous difference to public confident in the application of the law ....... again!

Is it the case that the law is more onerous than 40 yrs ago 🤔 regarding evidence

You could tell from the media hysteria, that something was wrong. The ‘evidence’ was a joke.

The missing point is that at the retrial the Jury already knew that she had been convicted of multiple murders. To pretend that this was not a factor would be to totally ignore human nature.

There are over 12500 people who know about it now! Expect the pub car park to be a bit busier for a while😮

As a retired hospital Dr, i believed LL was innocent from the get go. I have seen so much covering up of malpractice by Drs who were in the pocket of managers or who had friends who were. If you stand up and question they turn on you. Even the GMC operate a quota system: the overwhelming number of upheld complaints they receive involve non white Drs, the majority of whom obtained their ‘degree’ overseas. The GMC’s DEI contribution is to go after white Drs to address the imbalance for their stats.They never go back and review their system of checking their method of validating academic and professional qualification as a root cause of ‘professional misconduct’.

You say she had very good legal representation, but how experienced would they be with such a specialised case - within a hospital setting with complex scientific evidence where there is not a starting point of a confirmed crime unlike most "murders". I am guessing the police would not have been experienced in this either...i sense incompetence and misunderstandings-not necessarily deliberate but a snowball of errors leading to this outcome.

The fundamental problem is the legal system in the UK which let us be fair is stuffed full of liberal arts graduates most of whom have not studied mathematics beyond GCSE level allows people without a proper grounding in statistics and probability to be "expert" witnesses involving statistics and probability. Statistics and probability are *really* hard to get right, is often counterintuitive and we as humans are far too likely to assign meaning to something that is in fact just random chance. We have seen it before with the scum that is Roy Meadows and the Sally Clarke case among others where someone with no grounding in statistics and probability was allowed by the court to present as an expert and see multiple people wrongly jailed. Until the court system only allows people approved by the Royal Statistical Society to present statistical evidence as an expert witness in court then we are going to have unsafe and wrongful convictions. The problem is getting the judges to admit that they know absolutely jack about statistics and probability and defer to the actual experts.

I don't know if this will make a difference but what should make a difference is that many doctors, including neonatologists are questioning the medical evidence in Lucy's trial. Dr Silvena Dimitrova, an NHS consultant neonatologist said the theories proposed in court were not plausible and the prosecution was full of medical inaccuracies.

Who does "cab rank" rule really benefit? It's great for the defendant if the next barrister is line happens to be really good, but what happens if they are allotted someone that is mediocre, low energy, or just plain crap? God help anyone who is the subject of a trial. It's a lottery - the barrister, the jury, the judge.

She's been framed.

Scapegoat?

Erroneous evidence?? That’s an immediate retrial. At the minimum.

I couldn't really watch. You to near the edge for my comfort 😮

Do Hope not Hate get the exemption? They appear to have admitted the online publication that the 100 targets for extremists was fake news? Does harm have to ensue? Many businesses boarded up shops in anticipation of disorder and could make no profit that day. Is financial harm covered? Or just physical and psychological?

Did anyone see the Ch5 documentary ?

I have been saying this since the very beginning. This whole thing stinks.

What absolute nonsense ....she's guilty she's probably got Munchausen by Proxy like Beverly Allitt very similar case .All these people are wanting attention over this case Disgraceful think of the parents not this murderer The evidence was overwhelming The end

The prosecution have deliberately conflicted correlation with causation to obtain a conviction. Our judicial system does not decide innocence or guilt based on evidence but on which of the opposing sides presents the winning case using any methods allowed by the judge. As we see in recent times, judges and the CPS are not above perverting the justice system for political ends.

There are far too many questions about this, there should be another trail and it should be conducted properly. Can’t we do anything properly and correctly these days ??? You can’t even trust the courts

Door swipe evidence was termed "the smoking gun" by the prosecution in opening and closing statements.As it showed Letby had time alone to get away with crimes.If others were present at time a major part of case fails

why were none of the blm rioters cases televised?

You have to wonder what else the CPS got wrong in that case, if anything.

What's annoying me with all this is the celebrity barrack room lawyers like Peter Hitchins who are now making a living out of undermining this conviction.

So, when someone was in they were out, when out they were in. It is not only this, the rest of the supposed 'evidence' is falling apart. Are you on damage control knowing what is coming? You think she had a good defence team? Says it all.

So you defended drug dealers? I suppose someone's got to do it and you seem like a nice guy. Don't you worry about being on the bad guy's side though?

I'm always shocked when I find out that judges can basically make up the law as they go along and can basically come to any conclusion they like in any context based on their own prejudice.

Hey guys, are you aware of the freemen on the land drafting and selling trusts in violation of the Legal Services Act 2007? I thought it was a reserved activity, yet the likes of Craig Gumshoe, Peter Wilson, Darren Norman, are drafting their own trusts, and are making a fortune doing so. The problem appears to be that the trusts are complete rubbish.

will you be asking Dan to challenge the unfair parking fine from Witherspoons?

Is it not the purpose of any law to direct behaviour in society ? and none are carved in stone, it follows there are no existing laws of any type that cannot be swept away by Parliament, the northern Ireland (legacy and reconciliation) act 2023 is a good example of this. The individual views of Judges beyond strict interpretation of the Acts are arrogance and should play no part in formulating the Law this approach should have stayed in the middle ages along with the wigs and the lottery of a jury ( you know the twelve locals from the village who knew the accused that has now morphed into twelve strangers press ganged into the Courts circus who don't know their a**e from their elbow when it comes to the Law ) . As for the cab rank argument from Barristers this is an excuse for defending the indefensible usually by playing the Court system or worse abusing the victims and getting away with it ! and taking the money of course.

Several people in the comments refer to the volume of expert witnesses’ testimony. Since the tragic case of Birmingham solicitor Sally Clark and the court’s acceptance of the statistics from expert witness Dr. Roy Meadows, it seems apparent that expert witness opinion can also be flawed in some cases.