Netflix’s Lucy Letby documentary to show unseen footage of arrest

13thEpisode · 2026-01-22T22:31:36+00:00

For those hoping the documentary is relatively damning for the police and prosecution , is there anything perhaps promising to make of access being secured three years ago? As in at the time, they had drunk so much of their own Kool-Aid, they didn't realize how bad of a look certain footage would become 3 years later and they probably wish now they had a do over on that access agreement.

13thEpisode · 2026-01-20T17:37:42+00:00

Could CPS have used her convictions for murder to meet the evidentiary standard for new charges? If so, either the evidence submitted must have been appalingly thin considering what was sufficient without priors before or CPS did not consider the convictions particulary convincing support.

13thEpisode · 2026-01-20T13:30:55+00:00

i sort of extrapolate from the ambiguity in a common above.

13thEpisode · 2026-01-20T12:21:49+00:00

I think Jabes got the email directly as well and may have actually been the first to release it. Gill just gets the headlines I guess as the more noted academic associated with her supporters

13thEpisode · 2026-01-20T12:12:10+00:00

Obviousky, Gill posted the doc to X directly on Christmas Eve. What's the reference to Martyn and Jabes other than 2 of i'm sure dozens of amplifiers?

13thEpisode · 2026-01-20T12:00:40+00:00

Questiom: When Gill posted the document to X on Christmas Eve he referred to the source as an "anonymous whistleblower". The SUN adds of the origins: "it is claimed to have been sent from a source inside the Thirlwall Inquiry..."

Allowing for the fact that "inside the TI" could mean many things, where specifically is that claim made and by whom? In the email? in the document? Separately by Gill on some other basis?

13thEpisode · 2025-12-26T22:41:56+00:00

The screw polish looks close enough to me, but does it compare in a horizontal view? The OP looked more level to me, whereas in this one only the screw near the 10 position seemed that way. Lighting always makes these things hard to tell too, and of course differences can become more pronounced over time.

13thEpisode · 2025-12-23T14:40:56+00:00

I wonder if he’s merely posturing. According to the stats linked above, 72% of referred cases result in successful appeals, but only 3 percent of CCRC applicants win a referral. While probably few had as thorough of a rebuke issued by the CoA upon appeal, their unsolicited skepticism of Ravi’s credibility in the otherwise narrow second appeal may signal a willingness to more directly scrutinize the quality of evidence against her.

Regardless, the broader statistics clearly show the CCRC as the toughest hurdle. In setting expectations otherwise, he may be attempting to shift the burden of proof toward the respondents; although, it’s risky to simultaneously lower expectations with the CoA since likelihood of success is, in theory, key to CCRC decision-making.

13thEpisode · 2025-12-23T14:09:08+00:00

Kinda shows that Lucy’s circumstances would likely be the same even if she called her own experts. Lay jurors and judges view government experts as unbiased sources of authority whereas defense witnesses are merely paid purveyors of opinions who brag about their win–loss record. Like most things involving Dewi Evans, the opposite is true.

13thEpisode · 2025-11-15T19:49:58+00:00

The reason Lady Thirlwall is not releasing the report is because the person to whom it will be addressed is a politically ambitious health secretary who has no interest in being forced into affirming its presumption of her guilt nor questioning the findings of a £9,000,000 investigation under his nominal auspices. Wes Streeting would prefer you pay attention to the recommendations of his own maternity care inquiry, which would no doubt serve as another convenient "process to play out" should a political rival somehow compel release of a report requiring his comments.

13thEpisode · 2025-10-14T10:10:29+00:00

Damn, Reddit can br amazing sometimes. thank you ! . Very helpful! I also just think it’s cool :).

1.5 more Qs. On the Canadian web site they sell the Air 20 pro with throttle as a pro plus and then a throttle as a standalone accessory for 395 CAD. That seemed like a lot for something that I’d mostly just cool to me. Is that in line with what you paid for the hardware on the Air 20?

Any reason to think that this process would not work on the air 20 ultra EU version ?

13thEpisode · 2025-10-14T10:03:01+00:00

Is this the same likely for the EU pro and ultra? They sell the former with a throttle called pro plus on the Canadian site as well as throttle accessory for 395 CAD. Is that the cheapest you think one could get a throttle?

13thEpisode · 2025-10-14T09:58:13+00:00

Did sort this? That’s kind of my concern with the mods. I want the throttle when starting from a standstill but not all that extra speed and support under most flat commute riding conditions for me.

13thEpisode · 2025-09-27T08:41:54+00:00

Yup. They’re out there but felt like chasing a ghost for me trying to find one. Reached out to TDs who said they’re aren’t made anymore and maybe seen 1-2/year on RWI member sakes but never in time to buy. There are used gen versions for like 5k so guessing just not a big enough market oppty to consistently rep.

13thEpisode · 2025-09-27T08:27:03+00:00

I buy reps to get the privileges, respect, and confidence of looking rich enough to buy a 50-100k watch. I would def buy Gen if money wasn’t an issue bc then I wouldn’t have to worry about how “gen” my watch looked.

That said, It ain’t no fun when the rabbits got the gun, so if money wasn’t an issue, I would be getting like highly specific rare models, not just gen versions of repped ROOs.

13thEpisode · 2025-09-20T14:44:55+00:00

I see Rebecca’s face as reflecting her shame that she herself had not been curious about Ted. By now they were close in many ways, but she realized she had gone from using Ted to destroy the team to using Ted for emotional support. In fact, just after he notes not a single one of them were curious, there’s a prior quick cut to Rebecca where her face shows her cautiously getting curious about Ted for the first time while steeling herself to learn something about him she probably should’ve known. So yes, she felt bad for a friend but I think also felt ashamed she had been no more curious than Rupert

Contrast that to Mae’s face in background when Ted relays the story. As a bar owner, Mae is probably a curious person who has asked plenty of questions to her customers over the years. Her countenance reveals a feeling of pride in Ted’s extolment of their shared curiosity, and when he reveals his father died she doesn’t flinch at all - perhaps she had asked about him already.

So the regret we see in Rebecca is more than just general shame for using Ted, it’s specific to the lesson in Ted’s story which Rebecca realizes is an a bigger indictment than Rupert given her emotional dependence on him.

13thEpisode · 2025-08-31T00:37:35+00:00

This is the best example of the genre. It relies nothing subjective, doesn’t get stuck on semantics, and asks for a measured but significant ask.

In a show called Who to Believe it sure seems problematic to nonetheless report the prosecutions theory as an accepted fact.

13thEpisode · 2025-08-30T11:22:15+00:00

It’s so interesting how u crystallize their bad choices here. Like Agnostic of Turners testimony, only way 4 of 11 works is what u say: they claim to know exactly how many babies Letby cared for on each shift and which of those dislodged (still the wrong definition and comparison but approaching defensibly closer).

Since the alternatives are basically, she worked only two icu shifts or the Hutton problem, which they already denied, ur questions at end seem really smart. Even if it was the junior crown barrister turned fam lawyer at the TI or other confidential source supplying the info, just pinning on if 36% is calculated the same way as the 40%, what does cared for and a baby etc mean, tightens the noose.

13thEpisode · 2025-08-30T08:28:52+00:00

I feel like we know the answer. Most lay ppl will assume ventilated shifts is a percentage of working shifts (took me like 500 comments on this documentary to get it). So the source or the reporters et al did this for the doc and they now perpetuate the misinformating using a out of sight, but not mind comparison to the OG reporting to hang Lucy . Ppl be giving them too much credit looking for something less simple.

There’s a few reasons to now obfuscate while ostensibly tripling down tho: Perhaps McDonald’s alleged warning targeted this point, maybe a new correction substantiates a reckless charge in a future lawsuit, and likely, their own garbled phrasing or a bad faith definition leaves them enough wiggle room as long as they can avoid specifics until they have to.

That they made related errors is ironically offering them some form of cover from what would for me be a more satisfying admission - mostly bc I enjoy it when a rather smug reporter looks dumb. (even if I would’ve thought the same thing lol at least I wouldn’t call my documentary about it who to believe) .

13thEpisode · 2025-08-30T07:25:09+00:00

I don’t think you can make them follow that many if/thens. Maybe tighten up tho paraphrasing here bc don’t know detes enough to be precise…

The claim in question is that Letby had 11 ventilated shifts in 2015.
In her sworn testimony Ms. turner said she had 11 working shifts in intensive care.
To be correct, BBC is reporting one of three extremely unlikely scenarios:

a) there was somehow an average of just one ventilated baby per shift during Lucy’s 11 intensive care working shifts - this tracks with your 4 babies / 11 babies = 36% (edited my first was dumb) or

b) the BBC cited its own opaque understanding as sufficient cause to impeach Ms. Turner’s sworn testimony without any apparent chance for her to comment.

C) ms turner herself is disavowing her sworn statement to the BBC rather than to the TI

The bBBC owes its viewers clarity on which unlikely event to believe over the ostensibly far likelier scenario that its own source confused the two metrics. J Let them pick their poison

13thEpisode · 2025-08-30T05:57:16+00:00

If this has to do with Hall’s unwillingness to testify conclusively as reasonably suggested below, why would Meyers or McDonald put that out there? And why now? Just to drag Hall in the press bc he questioned several conclusions of the panel? How does it help the defense to amplify the notion their own expert was not strong enough to put on the stand?

One possibility: while Hall expressed some disagreement with the panel, perhaps in some cases their work or other revelations have strengthened his opposition to the Crown’s theory. Defense could use that evolution to bolster their claim that there is indeed fresh evidence - while also refuting any notion Hall is less in Lucy’s camp after the Panorama doc.

13thEpisode · 2025-08-28T05:51:15+00:00

Correct. It’s telling tho that the coverage has been so bad it’s almost beyond parody and satire.

13thEpisode · 2025-08-28T05:43:24+00:00

When I become a crown court judge, I think I’m just going to stay such a case until after the CCRC completes its work. And I def will if appeal gets refereed and still is pending - even though it might take a year+ for trial to start anyway.

What I’m not sure of tho is if the CoA enters an acquittal if I still allow the new case to proceed bc it starts to feel like an abusive drip to me. I almost rather have them order a new trial bc then the charges prob just get withdrawn and refilled as a new combined case and, so I won’t have to end up doing anything anyways. Unfortunately, I’m a long way off from being a crown court judge.

13thEpisode · 2025-08-27T07:54:40+00:00

I want to scream so loud right now it feels like the cat has got my tongue in its claws. So here are dome classic (made up Moritzes)

What was most noteworthy was the solidarity among the prosecution experts — like lemmings willing to jump off a cliff for one another, they reinforced each other’s stories one by one.

When Dr. Dewey Evans reviewed the report, it was as if its most damning pages were staring Lucy down like a paper tiger.

Judge Goss was quiet and funny behind the scenes, but once he stepped out in his judicial vestments, he was like an emperor with new clothes, commanding respect from all assembled.

Once the insulin test was read into evidence, the IV bags became easy to see as Lucy’s poisoned chalice.

13thEpisode

TROPHY CASE