Lucy Letby guilty

[BarelyLiterate]

Lucy Letby has been convicted of the murder of seven babies and the attempted murder of six more.

My thoughts are with the families of the victims.

These posts should be deleted.

Anyone defending this woman should be ashamed of themselves.

And on the day when a woman has been found guilty of the murders of several babies, and the parents of those babies are only just reaching a point where justice is being seen to be done for the murder of their babies, is not the time or the place for sympathising with a child murderer.

She is not going to have a nice Time in prison. Wonder if they'll go the psychiatry route with her and try to get her in a secure facility.

Are you one of the jurors? If not, you're talking through your arse.

So, just to be clear, you’re against freedom of speech, or is this just when it’s at odds with your own opinion ? It’s a public forum - if you don’t like the fact that people are free to express their own opinions, perhaps you need to find something less upsetting for you.

How can she be a scapegoat when she was actively protected by senior management?

Maybe poster is Letby's mum 🤷🏻‍♀️

I don’t understand why none of the consultants called the police and to hell with the trust not doing anything? Concerns were first raised after the third killing.

She'll end up in Rampton with the other serial child murdering NHS worker Beverley Allitt. A cushy life.

Agreed

@benfoldsfivefan the consultants were repotedly threatened with being reported to the GMC and presumably with losing their jobs.

Freedom of speech. Freedom to express an opinion without persecution. As you have done vociferously yourself. There’s a reason we have it. People died to uphold it. Perhaps you should remember that.

So the inference is that anyone questioning the verdict is racist ?

I think the misunderstanding here comes from Lucy Letby’s own defence which is the classic defence of a self centred narcissist- nothing is my fault and everyone is picking on me. There is no evidence of a manufactured bullying campaign or poor management (except that she was allowed to keep working on the ward). All management mistakes seemed to go in her favour- a very strange kind of witch hunt.

There is clear data that correlates her to the murders and attempted murders. This is not circumstantial. She had both the means and opportunity in all cases.

Then there is the messages, her internet search history and the items found in her home. These go somewhat to explain motive but not entirely.

But it does make sense if you consider Lucy Letby to be an attention seeker- maybe munchausens by proxy- who was motivated by the attention she got when a child died.

What? That doesn't even make sense.

If you were a consultant in that horrific situation and had taken your concerns to management a few times and nothing was happening, why wouldn’t you report it to the police yourself rather than have babies in perpetual risk of harm and worse?

I wondered about this myself

Obviously I appreciate there's supposed to be an internal process for reporting concerns, but when they don't work ...? Or worse, when reporting results in intimidation?

I have a question.

You know where it says that a baby died after being injected by air.

How did they know that?

How can you tell if a baby had been injected by air?

Shes been found guilty on some of the charges and not guilty on many of the others, so the evidence isn't particularly strong although definitely plausible she did indeed do it. It is a very messed up case. Would hate to have been on the jury for this case.

They have already announced a non statutory enquiry, which unfortunately means that witnesses can’t be forced to appear or give evidence. I think it also has limited legal powers in making recommendations. The advantage apparently is that it is quick, but since we have all seen how very slow these things can actually be then I doubt if anyone will be held to account for a very long time. I think the DM has a “ where are they now “ article on the main players, which is an interesting read, I will try and find a link.

However, I am allowed by reason of it being a free country still, to say that (and bearing in mind there have been some high profile miscarriages of justice in other related cases) that I FELT THERE WAS A LOT OF CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE IN THIS CASE

Yes, you're correct. And that's why she was found guilty. Because there was A LOT OF CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE IN THIS CASE. There was a whole mountain of it. Circumstantial evidence is just as important as any other type of evidence. Prosecute Lucy Letby for any of these murders individually and she would have been found not guilty, but when you look at the evidence is its entirety there's enough to convict.

Circumstantial evidence is used to convict people of murder all the time. I mean take (just as a random example) all the cases of men who murder their wives when a body has never been recovered, like this man: https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2006/nov/14/ukcrime.uknews2

No crime scene, no body, no murder weapon. Just some 'very powerful circumstantial evidence'. It's OK for men to be convicted on the basis of circumstantial evidence, but when it's a young, attractive, middle class, white woman it's suddenly not good enough. It seems like the only evidence that would have convinced Lucy's supporters is she'd been caught on camera during one of the attacks.

the cause of death would be an air embolism.

This is what I’m interested in too.

The initial causes of death were bowel issues / cardiac etc. How did they then go on to realise that wasn’t the case? Surely then the original cause of death was incorrect and whoever ascertained that is negligent? What made them then look to the air hypothesis.

Do present us with the evidence the jury didn't see.

Jesus, why are idiots like you still in such denial!!?

People always trot out the “freedom of speech” line to defend their abhorrent views and actions.

yes, you have the freedom to express whatever opinion you want. But when that opinion paints you as a child murderer sympathiser, you can expect to be called out on that opinion.

Just remember that this is a parenting site. A site where it’s entirely possible that parents of the victims may be present. So while you may defend your freedom of speech line, just imagine how one of those parents coming on to this thread, potentially for support or to read supportive messages, will be feeling when people are taking the side of their child’s murderer.

There are plenty of places where people can join the fan clubs of notorious criminals. A parenting site isn’t one of them. There’s a time and a place, and this isn’t it.

Did you read the court transcripts/reporting as the trial took place. So much more detail than the summaries given now?

They were being threatened with referral to the GMC which is a huge deal. Had that happened, they could all have been suspended in which case the neonatal unit would have had to close.