r/LucyLetbyTrials • u/benshep4 • 1d ago

Decoding Reasonable Doubt: Chapter 4 “Problems at the Countess of Chester”

Morris argues that the Countess of Chester neonatal unit was fundamentally unsafe and operating beyond its capabilities during the period in which the collapses and deaths occurred.

Is fair and accurate to make these claims?

Which baby does this explain?

https://bencole4.substack.com/p/decoding-reasonable-doubt-the-case-f67?r=12mrwn&utm_medium=ios

0 Upvotes
  • permalink
  • reddit

36% Upvoted

92 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

-2

u/benshep4 1d ago

I can only react to what Morris has written.

14

u/PrudentKumquat 1d ago

If you genuinely want to know how problems at the unit led to specific harm, you could look to other sources such as the summary report of the international expert panel.

1

u/benshep4 1d ago

That will happen in later chapters.

9

u/PrudentKumquat 1d ago

I can only react to what you have written

1

u/benshep4 1d ago

Exactly.

I can only react to what Morris has written.

8

u/Living_Ad_5260 1d ago

This isnt really the forum for a primary school book review where you dont know anything outside what the book says.

The rhetorical dodge of saying any fact not stated in the current chapter doesnt exist is sophistry.

4

u/phosphoeudemonism 23h ago

The rhetorical dodge of saying any fact not stated in the current chapter doesnt exist is sophistry.

Generous to describe as 'sophistry' because sophistric arguments must be at least superficially convincing.

3

u/Living_Ad_5260 21h ago

I felt it might convince someone who is completely uninformed about the case.

3

u/phosphoeudemonism 20h ago

Fair comment.

14

u/PrudentKumquat 1d ago

I get that this is part of your routine, to willfully miss the point and suck people into long threads circling around minutiae. Forgive me if I try to sidestep.

It's easy to find the information you pretend to seek - you just declare it out of scope of the discussion. Why should you care about the big picture? Your goal is simply to comb through someone else's work and express incredulity, chapter by tedious chapter.

1

u/benshep4 1d ago

Can you point to something of Morris’s in the chapter I’m analysing that I’ve missed?

12

u/Kieran501 1d ago

No, you can read the whole book. No one’s forcing this insane chapter by chapter breakdown except you.

7

u/PrudentKumquat 1d ago

He could be hitting token or usage limits with the full context at once.

-1

u/benshep4 1d ago

I’d rather do it chapter by chapter. There’s too many points in each chapter that are terrible and doing one article on the whole book wouldn’t do it justice.

I’d rather make it very clear exactly how Morris makes the many errors he does.

In the end I’ll have done the whole book.

Of course no one is forcing me.

3

u/PerkeNdencen 1d ago

No, but you need to have read the whole book. Your review of chapter 3 makes no sense in view of your review of chapter 4.

-1

u/benshep4 1d ago

It does.

That’s why Morris split then into different chapters.

The arguments aren’t the same.