If you were previously on the fence about Lucy Letby’s guilt, have the Thirlwall findings swayed you either way?

I don't see much point having the enquiry report when the case is still with the CCRC.

Right so you don't believe baby E's mum then. What happened to always believing the victims?

YANBU because she is guilty and was found guilty by 2 different jury’s in 2 separate trials and also her right to appeal denied. I hope the horrible piece of filth suffers daily forever until she’s carried out in a box!

Which part are you referring to?

Letby should have been removed from her job simply for her behaviour towards the babies parents - one of the babies was being held by the parents in their final hours, and Letby pushed in a cold cot, telling the parents to put the baby down in it before the baby had passed away.

Paragraphs 3.68 and 3.69 of the Report are terrible reading. She is a monster.

@Oftenaddled Read the report - The baby was still alive when she brought the cold cot in and plugged it in. Still alive. Your comment about autopsy is totally missing the point. If a nurse brought a cold cot in while I’m trying to spend the last hours of my baby’s life holding them close and saying goodbye, I can’t imagine the psychological damage that would do to a parent.

The father had to forcibly order Letby to get out of the family room as she was making a nuisance of herself trying to get to the baby. She wasn’t the nurse allocated to the baby at any time, and the allocated nurse was horrified at Letby’s behaviour. There is nothing that can excuse this behaviour, nothing.

Except that this isn’t what actually happened. Perhaps if you take the time to listen to the podcasts that play recordings via transcripts of the enquiry you will understand better what actually happened. For example, the reference to some babies could have been saved isn’t about medics not being able to save them, but to the fact that if the people concerned had acted sooner and investigated the concerns being brought to them, Letby would not have gone on to kill or injure some babies.

It was 2018 but if you read into it her boyfriend got her further work

I agree, immunoassays can give false positives due to error/interference but it’s extremely rare and the manufacturer would consider it a major problem especially in an insulin assay.
When you factor in the same result from two unrelated babies months apart it becomes even less likely that it was an issue with the assay. This also makes a clerical error or contamination unlikely.
The NHS categorically do not use shoddy error prone immunoassays, they will be using high quality ones from a reputable manufacturer.
They should have followed up on that result asap with repeat testing and forensic analysis for exogenous v endogenous insulin. It should always be a red flag when you get that kind of insulin/c-peptide result and it’s shocking that it wasn’t followed up.

It sounds like this is what the experts are saying too, there could be rare biological reasons causing high insulin in premature babies (and if I read something convincing enough I would accept that), an error with the tests I just cannot believe.

Again show where this can be verified.

Oh yes of course and I'm not saying this was a brilliantly ran hospital. A lot of people seem to assume a subpar unit means she can't also be a serial killer though. When you look at each individual baby and the circumstances around their death or collapse, a failing hospital just doesn't explain it. The only thing that explains it is Letby being guilty.

There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that is the truth. I'm continuously amazed when other people can't see it. But then I don't think they followed the trial and her PR team have put out positive stories about her constantly for 2 years so I guess I can see how some of the public have been fooled.

Oh, she’s guilty as sin. Aside from the evidence presented at the trial, I always thought her behaviour in the dock absolutely confirmed it. If I was being tried for a crime I didn’t commit (particularly one as heinous as this) I’d be shouting my innocence from the rooftops. Not acting cold, detached, cocky and trying to outsmart the lawyer.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-66104004

All of her testimony, that Lucy disagrees with.

It comes from the parents themselves, surprised you don't know.

Right so you don't believe baby E's mum then. What happened to always believing the victims?

Because you’ve been accused of killing babies before so you know how you would react. Course you don’t none of us do. This had been going on for 3 years & she was imprisoned plus she was on a load of anti depressive medication. Because you’ve decided based on how she looks she is guilty let’s hope you never serve on a jury.

If its true Lucy Letby was on antidepressants during the trial, which is not surprising, then one of the things they do, is to flatten affect (ie emotions). It’s no wonder, she looked cold!

If its true Lucy Letby was on antidepressants during the trial, which is not surprising, then one of the things they do, is to flatten affect (ie emotions). It’s no wonder, she looked cold!

Think it said on the form do not use in forensic cases another test must be done.

She was definitely on medication during the trial, initially it was delayed for a week or so because she had moved prisons and been without her medication for a few days and it had a very bad effect on her so the trial had to be delayed.

But even trauma by itself can flatten emotions.

Also the people who say if that was them they'd be screaming and shouting in the courtroom must watch too much eastenders, people don't tend to go on like that in the courtroom.
Even the families of victims who have been raped and murdered tend to sit there quietly in the courtroom like everyone else does, no matter how much they might like to scream and shout and get up and attack the victim.

Yes I accept that and this should have been followed up with repeat/forensic testing.
That’s not the same thing as the tests not being accurate though, the tests are highly accurate, they’re used every day in hospitals to make clinical decisions.

Yes I accept that and this should have been followed up with repeat/forensic testing.
That’s not the same thing as the tests not being accurate though, the tests are highly accurate, they’re used every day in hospitals to make clinical decisions.

The clinical decision made in response to these results was to disregard them as errors or lacking corroborative detail. That is what accurate enough for clinical use means

Think you will find a cold cot is taken to parents after a baby passes away this is normal practice, to stop or slow down detierortion of the body so parents can spend more time with them. I would like you to show me your proof she asked them to put a live baby in a cold cot?