Louise Woodward Trial : Guilty or Not Guilty : Your views : London Net : News Features regularly updated news from the coolest city on the planet


London's Pulse

Keeping you in touch with Londoners, London and LondonNet



 

 

Copyright Adonis 1997. LondonNet is published by Adonis, London, UK.

Features

Latest news | Guilty or Not Guilty? | Links

Guilty or Not Guilty?

Do you think Louise Woodward did it? Has she had a fair trial?
Have your say...email us at: [email protected]


Not Guilty

These people have a reasonable doubt and they want to tell you about it!


From: "Williamson, Kirsty" <[email protected]
Subject: NOT GUILTY
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998

Louise Woodward is NOT GUILTY!
She has been a victim of a misscarriage of justice! The judge was right to let her do time served but as campaign manager for the Louise Woodward campaign here in Runcorn we will not give up the fight until her name is totally cleared of her convictions!
Why weren't Debroh or Sunnil Eappen questioned or given a lie detector test? Debroh Eappen is in my eyes more guilty than anyone!
JUSTICE FOR LOUISE!!!!!!
We love you Louise can't wait for you to be back in Cheshire where you belong!


From: "Roy Arnold" <[email protected]>Subject: Not guilty
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998

Dear Louise, God bless you and i belive that you are NOT guilty, And I hope
to god that the people in the USA can see this and let you come home.


Date: Sun, 09 Nov 1997 18:19:13 -0500

From: Tom & Jeanne <[email protected]>

Subject: Not Guilty

The trial should have been moved out of Boston. The poor girl never had a chance to walk out of that Cambridge court house. You have the Eappen family from the suburbs of Boston, you have the Boston lawyers, the Boston doctors and the Boston jury..... I watched 80% of the trial, there was loads of reasonable doubt....Louise Woodward is Not Guilty.
Jeanne from Boston


Date: Sun, 09 Nov 1997 10:29:51 +0000

From: Mike Gascoigne <[email protected]

Who Killed Matty? The Case Against Sunil and Deborah Eappen

When Louise was found guilty of 2nd degree murder, Judge Zobel asked Sunil Eappen if there was anything he wanted to say. Eappen said "I hope she seeks God's forgiveness for what she has done". In a television interview shortly after the trial, Deborah Eappen grinned all over her face and said "We feel so relieved". The question is, relieved of what? Their triumphalist attitude is not typical of parents who have lost a child and finally obtained justice. A more typical response would be something like "We got justice at last but it won't bring back Matty", and there should have been a deep sadness about it that continues to re-occur whenever the subject is mentioned.

Their response is more typical of people who had finally nailed the Nanny and they felt "relieved" because they had got themselves off the hook. Matty Eappen was taken to hospital, not just with a head wound, but also with a broken wrist. Earlier testimony and X-rays from the autopsy showed that the wrist injury was at least two weeks old and maybe as much as six weeks old. When Deborah Eappen was questioned about it in court, she said she never noticed Matty had a broken wrist.

This is astonishing, considering she is a doctor who is trained to notice these things. She breast-fed Matty, played with him and changed his nappies, and never noticed he had a broken wrist. Sunil Eappen, who is also a doctor, also never noticed, or if he did he never let anyone know about it.

These two doctors also never noticed the head injury which, according to Louise's defence lawyers, was at least three weeks old when Matty was admitted to hospital. When presented with a photograph at the appeal hearing, showing that the wound had already started to heal, the prosecution claimed that medical eye-witness accounts on the day were more reliable than photographs.

The question is - eye-witness accounts from whom? Doctors always support each other when they are in trouble, especially in America where medical litigation is a major issue. I would say the photograph is more reliable, because the camera does not lie.

The only evidence against Louise is that she happened to be there at the time when symptoms developed. All the rest of the evidence is against the Eappons, but they and their medical friends have successfully stitched up Louise.

Mike Gascoigne
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/mgascoigne/louise.htm


Date: Thu, 06 Nov 1997 20:01:36 -0500

From: Rosemarie Fiumara <[email protected]>

Subject: DEFINITELY NOT GUILTY

I am a lifelong resident of Boston and I strongly feel that this entire case has been a miscarriage of justice from day one. The DA never even looked further than Louise as a suspect if this can even be called a murder. The jury further miscarried in their completely unfair and wrong verdict. This WAS NOT MURDER in any way shape or form. Louise is NOT responsible for what happened to this baby. The parents should be ashamed of themselves for perpetuating what is decidedly their own

negligence and guilt in not properly caring for their own children. Two supposed physicians who don't even have a clue that their child had a fractured wrist should be put in jail themselves for child abuse and neglect.

My heart and prayers are with Louise and her family that she will be exonerated and set free from the terrible injustice that has been done to her. I have been saying the rosary and lighting candles for her since this terrible incident began. God bless you Louise and don't lose faith. We are all with you.

All the best, RF in Boston


More Not Guilty opinions

And there's more....


Guilty

Guilty as charged? These people reckon so...


Louise Woodward Menu

Latest news | Guilty or Not Guilty? | Links

Check our LondonNet News Headlines for the latest on the verdict.

Register with LondonNet now! Start receiving your free newsletter packed full of the latest info on London direct from the LondonNet team

index / homepage