No Sleeep

From the article: There are some pretty big holes to pick in this case. The “air embolism” theory is just that, a theory, because the doctors at the hospital couldn’t come up with any other explanation and one found one paper on Google . Nevermind that the author of that paper themselves has came out and said it’s a “mistake” to consider that as a cause of death simply because they can’t think of any other. And these assumptions are what the prosecution’s entire case relied on: It really shouldn’t be about your emotions in this case it should be about whether there is undeniable evidence of this woman’s guilt. They have nothing more than hearsay from a bunch of doctors whom suspicion would have fallen upon if we weren’t all too busy crucifying Lucy

By all accounts she is the exact opposite psychological profile of a serial baby killer, can you provide any evidence to the contrary? It may be the “mother of all coincidences”, but did you know the prosecution misrespresented the facts by leaving out the instances where Lucy wasn’t present for a baby’s death in the ward? Or that the death rate only dropped afterwards because they stopped caring for babies who were already in such a dire condition? This is a woman’s life we’re talking about, so yes I think due diligence should have been done and more solid evidence should have been presented to warrant 14 life sentences. It wouldn’t be the first miscarriage of justice similar to this, even in this country. Sally Clark was convicted after an “expert” witness misrepresented facts by claiming there was a 1 in 73 million chance of her two babies both dying of SIDS. She won her appeal but died of alcoholism 4 years later. It seems that when a woman is deemed to be a “baby murderer”, emotions run very high and logic goes out the window.

I don’t know why you have the idea that this is some right-wing conspiracy plot trying to prove her innocent, it is in fact quite the opposite. Rachel Aviv is a respected, award-winning journalist, the New Yorker is about as high-quality and liberal outlet as you can get, and if you check the conversations on Twitter, the people questioning this conviction are far from “Alex Jones” as you can get - it’s people with PhDs, journalists who know how media manipulation works. I would argue the “she’s an evil baby killer” mob have more in common with Alex Jones personally, resorting to emotive language and shaming people rather than looking at the facts and evidence (or, lack thereof). Outlets like the Daily Mail have controlled the narrative of this and there has never been any balanced reporting on this case in the UK, it’s refreshing to see the New Yorker restore at least some sanity.

I don’t think qualifying it with “allegedly” makes it any better. The tone of the reporting throughout the trial was very much that Lucy was guilty and evil and any dissenting opinions were strongly discouraged. It’s a long one but I strongly encourage you to read the article if you’re convinced of her guilt. The British media is godawful - they would much rather have an “Angel of Death”, makes a much more interesting story than a number of mistakes made by an incompetent hospital. Also following news coverage of a trial doesn’t make you an expert, no offence. It really reminds me of the Amber Heard case, people felt justified in their hatred of her because they had “watched the trial” when in actuality that had been manipulated by a very effective PR campaign

Very good article in The New Yorker with some new information. The media-led witch hunt against Lucy never sat right with me. Also I think it’s ironic that this article is inaccessible in the UK because of “contempt of court” laws (in case it “undermines” trust in the British justice system :rolleyes:) but newspaper headlines were already branding her an “evil baby killer” before she was convicted of anything. Whether you think she is guilty or not (I personally don’t believe she is), with a jury that was overheard saying they were convinced of her guilt from the start, it is impossible to say she had a fair trial. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence and the prosecution failed to deliver that. Here’s the article if anyone wishes to read it: https://archive.ph/AWpyz

Think my prediction that Post Morgan would go the way of Homesick wasn’t far off. Going from 1.1 million to 500k in 2 days :o

Think it’ll do similar to Homesick, very impressive and hyped debut but don’t know if it’ll have staying power

Still an almost 50% decline is drastic no matter how you look at it

Their rules state: “The ESC is a non-political event. All Participating Broadcasters, including the Host Broadcaster, shall be responsible to ensure that all necessary measures are undertaken within in their respective Delegations and teams to safeguard the interests and the integrity of the ESC and to make sure that the ESC shall in no case be politicized and/or instrumentalized and/or otherwise brought into disrepute in any way.” It doesn’t matter whether you agree with the message of the song or not

Why was it ok for Ukraine to enter and win with an explicitly political song in 2016 but Israel is crucified for having a song that some interpret to be political? It just seems so hypocritical to me, the same people that celebrated Jamala are attacking Eden

The anti-semitism I’m seeing from Eurovision fans is disgusting and really needs to be addressed.

I’ve noticed that but I feel it’s getting a bit boring now! I don’t feel like something unexpected like Padam Padam going top 10 could happen this year. The streams at the top have just doubled all of a sudden since about December.

Those numbers are very depressing

MJ - Chicago getting certified seems extremely random? Happy the Sugababes finally got there with Stronger

Stans make it impossible to have a balanced discussion about an artist these days. Of course Taylor’s album is doing great but it’s clear she doesn’t have the immediate mega hit single out of the gate with this album that many of us were expecting.

Spotlight by a mile. But I’m not familiar with the vast majority of those songs! Very good idea though, I’m surprised there’s so many

Yes it all makes sense really, and she was very unlucky not to have a #1 until 2017, but it just highlights that peaks aren’t the most reliable indicator of success.

It is so odd that Taylor’s #1s here are definitely not her biggest or most impactful hits. Look What You Made Me Do Anti-Hero Is It Over Now Fortnight Anti-Hero is the only one that I would say is even in her top 10 biggest hits

I’ve never had to worry about it since I only ever play from my own library :lol:

WCBF grew after release, Fortnight debuted massively and hasn’t stabilised since

I’m a bit disappointed neither Beyoncé or Taylor have been able to have a “We Can’t Be Friends”-style smash along with their album releases

Aww thanks y’all :wub: Funnily enough when I decided to do it I was thinking about how I couldn’t afford it when I saw Britney, and now I’ll probably never get the chance. I think I will keep it, it’s absolutely a bucket list thing for me and I’d hate myself for giving it up if I were to sell it

I was going to say, Prism had two of Katy’s biggest hits!

There goes her chance at a #1 album. Also think this kinda proves those of us who pointed out that she was underperforming so far weren’t wrong to acknowledge it.

Thanks for this, just bought it! Under the new £11.99 price it’ll be £143.88 a year, I imagine they’ll raise the price of the gift cards soon