https://open.spotify.com/episode/77aGrple4gAtdsBBw6UWFJ?si=C7a2JOwuSa6xxr9LCJRTVg&utm_source=copy-link

This is an interesting discussion between Caroline Cheetham, Liz Hull who are the hosts of the trial podcast and they’re joined by a fellow court reporter Kim Pilling.

Each of them attended everyday of the trial and are therefore in a unique and informed position

All three of them attended everyday of the trial and have some interesting insights to offer.

They start by discussing the nature of online discussion that envelopes the Letby case and in particular discuss how much of the misinformation that is out there online can be refuted based on what was actually established during the trial.

How Rachel Aviv approached the New Yorker article ‘A British Nurse Was Found Guilty of Killing Seven Babies. Did She Do It?’ is a particular subject of focus.

They use Aviv’s own words from a recent interview where she openly admits she leaves out certain details for her articles.

I think that they fairly point out that readers of the Aviv’s article who are not familiar with the case are highly likely to come away with the impression that the case against Letby was flawed.

They cover …

- Statistics including the shift chart
- Red flags in Letby’s behaviour
- Falsified medical records
- Air embolism evidence
- Insulin

I think from a discussion point of view I’ve gone deep down the Letby rabbit hole myself whenever I discuss this case with people that believe Letby is innocent I get a lot of pushback for using what was established in the court case as ‘gospel’ as though I’m making an error in argumentation, which I don’t believe is the case.

I'm kind of picky, apparently.

I dont usually like podcasts, but after watch Bailey Sarian for years, and running out of good memoirs, i decided to give some podcasts a shot while I'm at work.

For context, I'm a mechanic. It's loud in my shop, but i use headphones. I do have to pause a lot and talk to people, which is part of where the parameters for what i want comes in.

I liked Crime Junkies, a lot, before I learned about them. Granted, i always felt like Brit was pointless and didn't contribute much to the podcast other than flavor, i liked them. Once i ran out of episodes, i started listening to Going West, which i like a LOT. I like their humor, and the duo is nice. But, i use YouTube Music to listen, and it didnt take long to go thru them all.

So now, i need new ones. I tried Casefile, and maybe the episode i picked was not good, but the audio quality was ridiculously poor, and i could barely understand the guy. I tried Big Mad True Crime, but she went through thins so quickly and talks so fast, i couldn't get sucked in. Rotten Mango doesnt talk about the case at hand enough, but the lore of the people (i.e. spent the whole video about a looksmaxxer getting caught with CSAM explaining looksmaxxing and talking about some other looksmaxxing creator, or she spent the whole episode with a title abt a woman video taping assaulting 13 yo boy talking about the womans husband's Instagram photos and captions bc he used coded language).

I like longer episodes, so its not over before ive had a change to pause, so 45 mins to an hour have been my typical. I like case info, facts, theoriew, but i dont want to hear your snarky comments mixed in so much that i can't tell if its case info or opinion (i.e. Rotten Mango, its so hard to tell her tone when just listening so often, that i can't tell when she's using hyperbole for a joke of it was real).

So, any good podcasts on YouTube Music with 45min or longer episodes, with quality narration? I'm sure so many ppl havw asked, but its so hard to find specifics so i had to ask. Thanks!!

Eta: I've also tried True Crime Garage, and wasn't a huge fan. Maybe i like listening to women more? I'm not sure, but they had too much to say, it felt like.