Cheshire Police are an incompetent bunch of useless bastards

@PaterPower such a chaotic unit Lucy had time to be texting colleagues constantly 🙄most of the babies she attacked would've still been cared for on that unit after the downgrade.

Where are you getting there were all these suspicious deaths LL wasn't present for? In Panorama they said she was there for every single suspicious death in the time period they were looking into. Her being a scapegoat is just a conspiracy theory. But if she was they did a hell of a job pinning it on the nurse who just so happened to internet stalk parents and hoard hundreds of handover sheets-something they couldn't possibly have known beforehand.

With respect, you’ve clearly not bothered to read the numerous criticisms of how the prosecution case was put together, nor about how chaotic the unit she was in had become.

For a start, the unit was looking after critically ill babies - babies that had problems that fell well outside the unit’s accredited level of competency. They were downgraded to only providing care for fit and healthy babies just after Letby was put on trial, and severely criticised for the conditions on the unit.

Their staffing levels were well below what was mandated for safe working practice, the unit was filthy (including sewage contamination) and the Drs, consultants and many of the nursing staff didn’t have the experience needed to look after babies as sick as the ones in their care.

Letby wasn’t on duty at the times of many of the deaths on the unit, and the main expert witness (who had no recent appropriate experience) changed his determination of the method of ‘murder’ several times to account for gaps that came to light as the case was investigated.

The statistical analysis carried out by the CPS was nonsensical, not least (but not only) because it used incomplete shift pattern data for her. They also discovered that at least one of the key card pads on the unit wasn’t recording entries and exits so the underlying data wasn’t even verifiable.

The method of death that she was supposed to have used has been written off as not credible by many pathologists and experts since the trial. Babies that died and showed the same pathology (but who couldn’t have been murdered by Letby because she was off shift and proven to be elsewhere at the time) were ignored. More than one experienced pathologist examined the ‘murdered’ babies and found no evidence of foul play, yet the chief prosecution expert (the one with no recent clinical experience) found ‘obvious’ evidence of the babies being killed - purely by reading reports.

Recent scandals / cover ups within the NHS as a whole should make you at least a little sceptical - your faith in the NHS not allowing very sick babies to be treated in a district general hospital is touching but, I would suggest, very naive.

If you’re genuinely a paediatric nurse, I’d be making sure you keep your arse covered. Nurses and HCAs are very often the easiest targets when the shit hits the fan.

That can be true and also be other failings

I don't think the Guardian is the gutter press?

Possibly Cheshire Police have more information than you do? Plus, they are required to work to a higher standard of evidence than the gutter press.

Sounds like some of the consultants might have concern of negligence claims against them. Maybe why they turned on Letby

@GossIsAGityes I do. Im a paediatric nurse and every other person I know is also convinced of her guilt. These babies were in a district general hospital. Therefore they were unlikely to be critically ill. That many babies do not just collapse. And she was present for most of them. And didn’t respond appropriately in an emergency situation.

I think that it'll eventually be revealed that she's not guilty. There are too many questions that haven't been addressed.

Given the number of respected experts from all areas associated with this case that now have grave doubts about the safety of these convictions, and are expressing them publicly despite the risk to their reputations, I find it incredibly arrogant that anyone can assert that Lucy Letby is 100% guilty.

She is absolutely 100% guilty.

There's rather more to it than that.

The article says Stephanie Davies resigned before she was sacked after releasing details of a diffeent case to the press. It also says she is neither medically or legally trained. This probably undermines her position somewhat.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/jul/14/former-senior-coroners-officer-says-lucy-letby-has-suffered-miscarriage-of-justice

It sounds like the police wish to make a statement and I wonder if this is pressure to try and reinforce the conviction that the police have of Lucy's guilt as there is a bit of panic in the senior ranks given the amount of evidence coming out in support of Lucy.

To start to bring about a serious charge probe into figures that are no doubt engaging in the Thirlwall enquiry surely undermines the enquiry and any future evidence is going to be tainted by the fact there is a parallel police probe. It would make sense to suspend the enquiry until the end of the police enquiry as surely the results of the police enquiry impacts the Thirlwall enquiry. It's a shit show.

Given the amount of contradictory evidence shown in the Letby trial I would think it hard for the CPS to gain a. conviction with such serious charges as you could say the management were right to not immediately go to the police given the now evident ambiguity of evidence and instead rely on internal investigation.

It sounds like the police are doubling down on this as they want to pressure any criminal case review in light of new interpretations of medical evidence. The police don't want to be seen wrong in this in future.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/mar/13/police-start-manslaughter-inquiry-into-senior-individuals-at-letby-hospital

Also interesting. This is going to get extremely complicated .....

That's a very interesting video. I can see the logic in wanting Hall to rebut each case in order, as it would give the jury time and opportunity to get both opinions down fresh at the same time, in order to compare them, especially due to the number of cases and complexity of evidence. And I can understand the defence feeling kind of defeated and not calling Hall after the whole prosecution case, as chances are we'd have seen "jury fatigue" come into play. The video somewhat answers the question of "why no defence witness".

All very interesting stuff.

Thank you for posting it.

Given that the press conference this week highlighted gross failures of care which ultimately led to the deaths, I think that there is a huge amount of arse covering going on by the doctors rather than admitting to their own and systemic failures. These medics continue to practice and if they will not acknowledge their own failings, present a greater on going danger to patients than Letby ever did.

In my opinion the lack of an adequate defence is yet another reason why the conviction is unsafe. I also think that her defence team should come under scrutiny for their professional standards and competency. They either threw her under a bus or they were incompetent which was it? Either way there should be a retrial.

It has become very clear that many medical professionals were concerned by what they were hearing during the trial. It would not have been at all difficult for the defence to produce credible expert witnesses. They didnt. Something stinks here.

If she can be convicted on the "expert" testimony of an unregistered, unqualified ambulance chaser . She at least deserves a retrial presenting evidence from the panel of world renowned experts who have spoken out. Presumally they would be happy to testify. Lets hear what the charlatan Dewy Evans has to say when actually challenged