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: louise@londonnet.co.uk
Not Guilty
These people have a reasonable doubt and they want
to tell you about it!
From: "Williamson, Kirsty" <Kirsty.Williamson@uk.origin-it.com
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" <ra@lds.co.uk>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 <dorsey@ici.net>
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 <mgascoigne@gn.apc.org
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 <Rosema6737@aol.com>
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
And there's more....
Guilty as charged? These people reckon so...
Latest news
| Guilty or Not Guilty?
| Links
Register with LondonNet now!
Start receiving your free newsletter packed full of the latest
info on London direct from the LondonNet team
|