Lucy Letby - Specifically those who think she is guilty…

I think she’s guilty, I don’t know anyone who doesn’t.

One of the reasons she was able to continue for so long, and IMO that the trial was so publicised, is that she doesn’t “look” like a serial killer. I think this is one of the reasons subconsciously fuelling conspiracy theorists.

Why are there no excess baby deaths after she left?

There were unexplained deaths after she left. In the new documentary they interviewed a mum who lost her son in very strange circumstances and was not deemed to be critical, 6 months after LL left. Additionally, the unit had been dowgraded from a level two to a level one so they are unable to take more critical ill babies.

I think the trial was always going to be heavily publicised because of the alleged crime. Alleged murder of seven babies was always going to be big news.

Why did numbers drop when Lucy Letby left the ward? Well, about the same time, the unit downgraded. They stopped taking very premature babies, multiples and babies with complicated histories during pregnancy. These children were no longer born at the hospital outside emergencies.

Meanwhile, emergency transport out of the hospital was improved. So even with less fragile patients, babies have died since. But they almost all have done that after being transferred to intensive care units elsewhere, because Chester no longer runs an intensive care unit.

Yes that’s what I mean, sorry if I wasn’t clear.
He has pointed out those differences and said it is one of the reasons he thinks Letby is innocent (along with the police investigation built around confirmation bias rather than following proper procedure, and the complete lack of actual evidence).

Ah. Got it. 🙂

As I said, I don’t have a solid opinion on whether Letby is guilty, but I feel like if she is, there’s got to be something in her personal history that we aren’t aware of.

I do notice that those convinced of her guilt are fond of the simple statement.

’She was convicted of the crimes so she did them.’
’She said she did it, so I believe her.’
’She was convicted by two juries.’

It closes down further questions and some suggest further questions are disrespectful or a sign of a lack of intelligence.

I disagree and would even if I believed she was guilty. A robust case should withstand questioning and scrutiny.

Maybe because I watch true crime but I don’t think there’s anything remarkable that someone who looks like her is a serial killer of babies considering how so many mothers harm their own kids.

But I do wonder had she been a Filipino or Indian nurse would there be so many challenging the conviction? The answer is no. Many of the same people would indeed be using it as a justification for their anti-immigrant stance.

I haven’t looked into the evidence beyond what was initially presented so I may change my mind later but right now I still view her as guilty.

Agreed - and the assertion that "the only reason you're questioning this is because she's young/white/pretty".

I think the only people I've seen referencing her looks or personality are those convinced she's guilty.

I expect you're right that if she weren't white British, some of the dregs of society would be off setting fire to something over it. But ultimately, a lot of the doubt in her guilt stems from experts who aren't themselves white. You've probably heard about Dr Shoo Lee's views and the panel he convened?

Why would it be OK if this particular case happened to a Filipino nurse?

It maybe sounds like I’m being argumentative and I’m not but I genuinely don’t understand this argument at all. What is it trying to suggest?

There is possibly an argument that if this happened to one ordinary woman it could happen again but then it has, hasn’t it? Everyday people living everyday lives have horrendous events happen to them. That in itself isn’t news. So why do people keep triumphantly pulling this one out?

Fair enough. No, I haven’t but I will look Dr Lee up. Definitely interested in hearing other views.

I saw Owen Jones posted about her alleged innocence too so FWIW I do accept all kinds of people have questioned her conviction.

Link to the full press conference with Dr Shoo Lee the Canadian neonatologist whose paper on air embolism was (mis)used by Dr Evans - it's long but there's chapters. The panel analysed evidence for all the babies and found no murders.

I think there were many failures on the ward and i'm also inclined to think she is guilty , but these 2 factors together have got so intertwined that the waters are too muddied now and so i think the whole truth will never be known.
I feel that she is quietly 'waiting in the wings' of her own drama for all her supporters and conspiracy theorists to fight her corner until she gets another trial.
If she does get one then i believe she would be aquitted .
Her behaviour that we know about wasn't normal , if she didn't do it she certainly gave the impression that she was involved in something bizarre, but nothing has ever convinced me that she is completely innocent.

With a title like that I assume it was a fair and unbiased documentary....

It was certainly looking at the evidence in her defence, but that is only fair given that it wasn’t aired at her trial.

This is interesting as I listened to the first one when the trial was going on and actually decided it raised more questions than it answered. I have no idea if she’s guilty or not but it didn’t seem as clear cut as I thought it would be.

The unit was downgraded to a level 1 which meant babies that just needed precautionary additional monitoring for a few hours after birth rather than being unwell. You wouldn't expect any deaths - however other babies did die after being transferred from countess to a level 2 - they just obviously died in another hospital. one baby has contracted an infection that had been present in the contaminated sinks at the countess.

While LL was there they were taking sicker babies than they should have done due to the closure of another unit. There was a shortage of level 3 spaces & so they were often left with babies that were too sick to be there

"Not a huge element of coincidence"-only that deaths followed her from nights to days and started back up the minute she returned from holiday. 2 thriving triplets dead and another baby collapsed within 72 hours of her return from Ibiza and you think this isn't a "coincidence"? Well I guess we agree there!

That baby died at another hospital and the doctor's had told the mum the baby had potentially caught the virus from her-it's no surprise she's looking for someone else to blame as that must be very hard to hear.

You can't force a defendant to call witnesses if it's potentially going to harm her case...the fact she didn't should in itself, tell people something.

It's not a significant coincidence, because the unit had on average a death a month in the indictment period, so no deaths for a week while she was away means nothing one way or the other. It's the kind of thing that makes a headline to stick in people's heads, but it's meaningless.

@Oftenaddled I don't know what you think a significant coincidence is. But I think you may be kidding yourself. It's not just no deaths whilst she's away it's them starting up again literally the minute she's back? 3 collapses in 3 days?
And then in the meeting she's completely unfazed about it all?

Would I think that putting air down a NG tube was a feasible method of murder if Letby had been Indian? No.

Would I have not cared that spiking a tamper-evident PN bag sealed in its wrapper with insulin ahead of time is technically and pharmaceutically preposterous if the suspect had been Filipino? Also no.

Do you think that Professor Shoo Lee, a Canadian of Chinese heritage, would not have minded his paper on air embolism being misconstrued and misused if the suspect had not been white British? Surely not.

It’s a silly title, agreed, and I haven’t watched it yet. But the makers say that they had intended to make a documentary to put to bed the idea that this was a MoJ once and for all, but the material they collated pointed in the opposite direction.

@DistantEarlyWarning they must not have looked very hard then. They would say they set out to prove she's guilty wouldn't they. I mean tabloids never lie!