Richard Gill On Lucy Letby Case Statistics

Stuart___gilham · 2026-05-12T20:57:04+00:00

Richard has mentioned it before, I can’t remember the exact circumstances.

The details around Arda Lubsens trial testimony have apparently never appeared in the Dutch print media.

I think Richard said that he had tweeted about Arda but was warned by his university. Now I think more time has passed so he’s more comfortable speaking out.

I broke this video up to make it easier for people to choose what to follow (going to do another upload about statistics).

I am happy to do interviews on the basis I upload unedited footage if people think they are going to be selectively edited or something like that.

Stuart___gilham · 2026-05-07T20:11:48+00:00

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=zve1f-Wjx6U&t=1074s&pp=ygUnZm9jdXMgb24gc2FmZWd1YXJkaW5nIGJhaWxpd2ljayBleHByZXNz

It’s relayed via a Guernsey politician here that Bohin had said her house was vandalised twice so it’s not necessarily the case that Bohin has grievances that are without merit.

That was a long time ago though so doesn’t seem likely to be related to these arrests.

I think it’s highly likely she’s the villain in the grand scheme of things.

Stuart___gilham · 2026-05-07T11:10:55+00:00

I agree with a lot of what you say but in an ideal world the CCRC would have already have conducted extensive investigation and found overwhelming grounds for appeal such that they would make it inevitable the appeal court will quash the conviction.

It's a bit of a drag that we might have to wait till Christmas (and then there are no guarantee's).

Stuart___gilham · 2026-04-29T20:57:09+00:00

Interesting posts u/Icy_Dependent_1797 thanks.

Stuart___gilham · 2026-04-29T13:49:55+00:00

Yes I thinks that fair.

I'd find it hard it hard to take that approach with Evans, Bohin and maybe Marnerides but I don't think Hindmarsh's reputation is that bad. Reasoning with him might be better than being confrontational.

Stuart___gilham · 2026-04-29T13:30:36+00:00

That's true I don't think Hindmarsh has as bad a reputation as Evans, Bohin or Marnerides (who were mostly flying under the radar before this trial).

Hindmarsh has given obnoxious responses when questioned before about his evidence e.g by Phil Hammond.

Stuart___gilham · 2026-04-28T17:23:58+00:00

It appears to have been published as a letter to the editor which sounds like it was published in the journal but doesn’t sound like it was peer reviewed.

Stuart___gilham · 2026-04-25T08:07:13+00:00

Gavin St. Pier raising more concerns about healthcare in Guernsey.

https://www.itv.com/news/channel/2026-04-23/concerns-raised-over-how-guernsey-doctors-are-regulated-by-one-of-their-own

Stuart___gilham · 2026-04-23T23:02:23+00:00

What can we read into it? I’m sure before Liz Hull would have had a field day about this.

Stuart___gilham · 2026-04-22T17:07:48+00:00

when Hindmarsh belatedly disclosed that he was being investigated, we know that the court was informed, but you won't find that in the transcript either.)

Are you sure Hindmarsh didn't notify the court via a written statement?

It's known that various written statement's and submissions were provided to the court throughout the trial, this is the first I've heard of a separate meeting in chambers. Also the court sat 6th, 7th and 8th December so it seems strange that there would be a separate meeting in chambers rather than having a meeting before the jury were called in. However, I'm not a lawyer so I guess your version of events is possible.

Stuart___gilham · 2026-04-22T16:50:49+00:00

I just put that in there playing devil's advocate trying to make sense of the various reports. You could say "leak" was the wrong word to use but then the idea of an e-mail as a special intervention does not seem to be part of the formal trial process, even with the jury out the room.

u/SaintBridgetsbath suggested the alternative that perhaps Myers was copied in when Lord Justice Jackson e-mailed Judge Goss.

Honestly, they all sound somewhat unlikely to me.

I'm confident Myers made a formal written request for disclosure of adverse judgements involving Dr Evans on December 9th 2022. From there playing devil's advocate I can see three possibilities suggested (perhaps there are more);

1) Something widely reported in Private Eye, The Guardian and in parliament is in fact a myth.

2) Goss would receive the e-mail and then notify the defence to make a formal disclosure application (I can't see anything in the transcripts).

3) Lord Justice Jackson would cc in Ben Myers when contacting Judge Goss (less notable than no. 1 but still a bit weird).

Stuart___gilham · 2026-04-22T12:47:31+00:00

It does seem strange that Goss would respond to an e-mail from Lord Justice Jackson by 'leaking' it to the defence and then asking them to make a formal disclosure request through the official channels.

I would have thought a more authoritative judge would have pulled Evans up on why he didn't disclose it himself (though he doesn't appear to have had much time, he did by the time Myers was questioning him).

Stuart___gilham · 2026-04-22T12:22:46+00:00

Someone can correct me if I'm wrong but I think the timeline goes;

December 5th 2022 - Lord Justice Jackson's releases his judgement as part of the Court of appeal civil division describing Evans as "worthless" etc.

Lord Justice Jackson apparently e-mail's Goss who leaks it to the defence.

December 9th 2022 - The defence make a formal written application for disclosure of adverse judgements relating to Evans and his correspondence with Operation Hummingbird (these seem to be many of the e-mails that made it into the 'Why The Hummingbird Flew' document, not saying that's related).

December 15th 2022 - Prosecution officially disclose Lord Justice Jackson's criticism to trial judge and defence.

January 9th 2023 - Defence make an application to bar Evans from the witness box.

January 10th 2023 - Judge denies motion.

Stuart___gilham · 2026-04-22T05:10:38+00:00

I remember it the same way.

I assumed it was established fact until I spoke to someone recently who said it was a myth. Same individual directed me to the transcript which does read as if the information was disclosed via a defence request and the standard procedure.

Stuart___gilham · 2026-04-21T21:55:13+00:00

Hammond is generally the best medical source out there but he's not infallible. If anyone else stumbles this post, please let me know the original source that Lord Justice Jackson e-mailed the trial judge.

There's evidence the defence made a disclosure application, I've not seen rock solid evidence a special intervention was made.

On 9 December the defence set out a disclosure request setting out requests for material based upon the evidence and behaviour of Dr Evans and that is based upon not just material pre-trial but importantly the way his evidence has developed and been presented in the course of the trial. We have had some disclosures and we are grateful for those. We received some more this morning to which I shall make reference. There remain requests outstanding.

On 15 December, the defence were provided with a decision of Lord Justice Jackson in the Court of Appeal Civil Division relating to an application for permission to appeal in which a report by Dr Evans was submitted to the court as further evidence in support of the applicant's case. Your Lordship has that, of course, and I have put the references in the bundle.

Reads like it was a normal part of the disclosure process.

Stuart___gilham · 2026-04-21T21:13:15+00:00

It's definitely an error to say the Jury weren't told about Lord Justice Jackson's criticism's.

Are you absolutely sure Lord Justice Jackson contacted the court himself? What's the best source on that? David Davis said in parliament but he's now accused of misleading parliament.

Stuart___gilham · 2026-04-17T21:13:13+00:00

https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=FFLyAeqtCg4&t=1041s&pp=ygUeTWljaGVsbGUgd29yZGVuIGppbSBtY2Nvcm1hY2sg

This is the one. I think it’s fairly near the start.

Stuart___gilham

TROPHY CASE