Lucy Letby Court Case

[Pebble21uk]

Today has been the first day of the trial, which is expected to last for six months. One thread has already been pulled on the subject. Upon deletion MNHQ said that a thread about the case is fine but please read the rules around contempt of court before posting... these are copied and pasted here:
Publicly commenting on a court case:

You might be in contempt of court if you speak publicly or post on social media.
For example, you should not:
say whether you think a person is guilty or innocent
refer to someone’s previous convictions
name someone the judge has allowed to be anonymous, even if you did not know this
name victims, witnesses and offenders under 18
name sex crime victims
share any evidence or facts about a case that the judge has said cannot be made public

If any of the above take place then new threads will also be pulled. Let's please try and keep it going!

Also, the fact that she chose to undertake a tough 3 years of uni doing her nursing degree, followed by additional training for NICU.

IF she is guilty, did she plan it all from 17/18 and it was all a very long game, or did something happen that made someone who chose to care for tiny babies suddenly wanted to kill them.

This is the bit about killer nurses that I struggle to understand, it's hardly an easy career choice.

Yes. I agree. These are extremely muddy waters.

The poor hospital care of Child H before the LL allegations is really going to muddy the waters and cause doubt. That’s going to be the really messy one to decide if guilty/not guilty.

It is hard to comprehend but there are many cases of doctors and nurses who kill. Plenty of theories on what they get out of it. They all have complex and severe personality disorders.

Thank you - that's the bit I didn't have

Just caught up on the live feed from the morning and the thread. So many questions... many of which will hopefully be answered when we start hearing from witnesses.

From what has been said in court this morning LL strikes me as a very intense person regarding her work. Her emotional involvement is above what would be considered professional. That doesn't mean she is either guilty or not guilty of anything - just very, very invested.

Someone upthread mentioned LL taking photos of children in her car - can anyone point me to where that comes from please?

Saying that you don't feel the prosecution's evidence supports a "beyond reasonable doubt" verdict (so far, and no doubt the defence will challenge much of what's presented) is not the same as saying that you believe LL to be innocent. You could also legitimately believe that LL probably committed the crimes and still think the appropriate verdict is "not guilty", because the prosecution have not proved their case beyond reasonable doubt.

Also, I don't think that anyone's suggesting that the hospital deliberately framed LL, are they? That is indeed deeply implausible. Just that the clearly very poor care elsewhere significantly complicates the evidence about LL, and that it is always easier to have a single scapegoat than address systematic failings.

Sky reported LL taking photos of two of the deceased triplets in their cots (O and P). Is that what you are referring to?

I can’t remember if I picked up this link here or websleuths but it’s an article written in 2014 and adds a new perspective I think.

apologies if it’s a repeat, I’ve only skimmed this thread.

www.thejusticegap.com/become-convicted-serial-killer-without-killing-anyone/

I agree with you. I wasn’t making that point. I was observing that some posters are reaching for explanations.

No, I don’t think anyone is suggesting she was framed (far fetched in the extreme!) but it is still a reach to suggest they’d let her be the scapegoat when the conditions of being scapegoat are that you stand accused of being a multiple child murderer.

I agree with you. I wasn’t making that point. I was observing that some posters are reaching for explanations

I'd imagine anyone on the stand accused of a crime would expect their defence attorney to do as much reaching ss they could.

Looking for possible alternative explanations is exactly how you put doubt into the prosecutions claims. It's exactly what is required.

Yes, thank you. That was of course supposed to say 'care'

Yes. Agreed. Guess the whole point is weighing the probability of those explanations based on the evidence. There’s a line somewhere between possible explanations, and wild speculations.

It has happened before, though; Lucia de Berk being an obvious example, a nurse convicted of murder on the basis of a random cluster of deaths and the fact she sounded a bit weird and Goth in her diary. If anything, I'd see it as more likely to happen when the background level of care and continuity is poor, and thus the chances of clusters of bad outcomes is significantly raised.

I think this is why it will be so important to know how many critical instances and deaths happened either side of the period LL is involved with. Was there only this cluster or other sudden deteriorations and deaths in a wider time period.

Someone on another site has mentioned that in Cognitive Behaviour Therapy you are encouraged to write down your worst thoughts or fears about yourself and then challenge the truth of them. This is sometimes done on post-it notes and the statements often begin ‘I’. Just a thought.

For Child E the defence say the absence of a post-mortem meant the prosecution could "float suggestions of deliberate harm".

If there had been any suspicion of foul play at this stage then a post mortem would have been insisted upon. As I said yesterday, I suspect they were going along with the wishes of the parents who didn't want any further procedures impacting their child.

Lack of PMs in unclear cases I think can make it harder for parents rather than easier in the long run. Totally different scenario, but I was always surprised that the parents of Otto Warmbier (who died after being 'handed back' by North Korea in a vegetative state - having been sentenced to over 30 years hard labour there) declined a post mortem. Religious views and mores may also have something to do with it.

I had twins in December 19. To my knowledge there were twins born the same month, in the Nov, two sets in the Jan. Didn't all go to nicu but they have a higher rate. Expand that out I've a few more months and it's not unlikely

What would happen if she was found not guilty and wanted to go back to her job?

Note the prosecution did not say on which device she photographed the babies, nor whether this was done on request from the parents (eg on their device)

So their not clarifying the details behind this when they are clearly trying to pin as much as possible on LL could be them letting the Jury fill that bit of unknown in for themselves in a way which benefits the prosecution.

I had a friend who died in circumstances that required a post mortem. I struggled to cope with the idea of her being kept in a fridge / cut into. It felt like her body was being violated and I can definitely understand why a parent would decline that for their child.

I think there's elements that are very clear gross misconduct so perfectly feasible she will be entirely struck off regardless

I would imagine she would be paid off (if still employed)