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.

Googling 'Lucy Letby trial' and reading the first 5 or so hits their names aren't mentioned in any of them. Merely 'senior managers'.

You're correct though, there are quite a few articles where they're mentioned after that and if I search 'senior manager names' Maybe what comes up in the top results are 'old' articles while their names have only just been revealed/

I'm coming in very late to the thread and haven't read the whole thing, but could anyone explain something that I'm finding it difficult to get my head round.

I've read criticism of management not listening to staff concerns. But surely if you thought a colleague was murdering babies and management wouldn't act- you'd go to the police? Surely? They continued working with her?

I thought this too, stupid thing to do and so disrespectful to the victims families.

They may have been worried about their jobs, particularly if they're relatively junior. I don't think they can be hung out to dry.

@JuvenileEmu yes but as someone said earlier, these senior managers would likely have said they have investigated, consultants had a grudge against a staff member and have been forced to apologize, the medical director of the trust investigated and no evidence etc etc etc. You think the over stretched cid of the local police would have done more? You'd like to think yes but......

I don't think this was purely done for the attention on herself like a typical MBP. BA the "angel of death" prolonged that attention and special position as long as possible by becoming an important person in the grieving parents lives. There seems to be less of that here. Bathing and dressing a baby that has recently died might have been something LL was simply expected to do in her role, rather than signifying much. She also sometimes tried to time the emergencies/deaths for after her shift. If her sole motivation was to enjoy the adrenaline and attention of being involved in the resuscitation then these murders / assaults don't make sense.

Rather, there seems to be an element of her enjoying and relishing the despair and grief of the parents. And her power in making that happen. This is why she made an effort to kill groups of siblings so that there would be no survivors and why she grief stalked the parents afterward.

I have to presume she always "enjoyed" drama and high stakes situations, and being in a position of importance - that's common to a lot of people who work on intensive care settings. Maybe she also enjoyed death and grief, it sort of makes sense for someone who does to pursue work in healthcare, especially intensive high stakes healthcare.

Other NICU staff probably also get a rush and a sense of reward out of navigating high stakes situations, the probably wouldn't seek work there otherwise - the difference is that they are desperately trying to avoid a bad outcome because the parents' despair and grief makes them feel awful, it's an awful thing to witness. And they feel elated and rewarded when their good work keeps babies alive and well. It seems that LL found it more enjoyable when babies died. And she was selfish enough to make that happen.

I don't see this is a mental illness with diminished responsibility at all. She knew what she was doing was wrong and caused suffering - she wanted to observe the suffering and privately revelled in it. She conducted her life outside from these murders / assaults in a normal and relatively functional way. And she wrote notes indicating he understanding that her actions were evil. Quite apart from the poor babies and their devastated families she also inflicted this on her colleagues. People she pretended to be friends with. They would have suffered immeasurably also. From the pattern of her behaviour she probably enjoyed their distress. I have no sympathy for her. Whatever caused her to develop as she did, it seems that this is who she is at her core. An appallingly cruel, sly and selfish person.

@TooOldForThisNonsense I already said I feel there's more that will come out. But equally, how do you know there was more evidence?

Just because the jury sided with your view, doesn't make it right. As I said, they could be right, I truly hope they are. And yes, they'll be better placed to make a decision than me, obviously. But there's many cases in history to show they do sometimes get it wrong.

Anyway, moving on. One thing I find strange is, why didn't Lucy use insulin more often? And why didn't she use enough insulin to be successful each time? I guess I don't understand why some of the attempts weren't successful. If she had the means, she wanted to kill and there were staff shortages to the extent she had time to plan and carry out harmful activities, why wasn't she more successful? It's a genuine question, not a goady one.

I feel like I have to state - I'm not saying she's not guilty in the slightest. My gut still just doesn't have a solid view and I guess that ok given the limited evidence we've been exposed to.

Allitt will unlikely never be released into society. Huge relief for everyone

Apparently she's been eligible for parole since 2021 ... AFAIK she's actually still in jail, but don't be surprised if that changes

Does nobody else find it strange that multiple credible and professional consultants suspected her of being responsible yet the one mystery consultant she was clearing having an affair with (proof of them sneaking around, going on weekends away, sending love hearts to one another) thought absolutely nothing of it?

He wasn't a consultant.

What needs to happen soon is for people to get beyond the blood letting and politics, and start asking genuine questions about how this happened.

Her arrogance must be outstanding to defy 7 consultants. Most people, if accused of harming babies, even accidentally, would be devastated and probably not want to work there again. She launched a grievance against them and said to one of them 'will you work with me when I return' after killing several babies already.

I’m half a century old and I have seen a lot of evil. What has been done to children which always makes me cry a little even though I’m a man because I have four children of our own with my ex.
That said I have always believed that the eyes are the window to the soul which on rare occasions over the last 50 years has at times made me a poor judge of character. Albeit a humble hope I still cling onto and would like to still continue to believe in.
I saw no evil in those eyes how wrong I was.
When I read the news that she had been found guilty, aside from the wealth of evidence, I was shocked and disgusted and dismayed as well as disappointed.
I’m so upset and heartbroken for those poor babies and their families I always have been but I am also sad that such evil could have been visited upon those children by someone who was supposed to take care of them.
I feel a little sorry for her parents too because being a parent who on earth would ever believe their child capable of such evil.
My first thought upon reading the news was those poor families. My second thought was I’m so glad she wasn’t around to look after any of my children. Those poor babies and their parents words fail me now.

@WhisperingHi

But equally, how do you know there was more evidence?

On balance, do you not think it is very likely there is more evidence than the public has been privy to, based on the fact multiple consultants raised red flags before there was even a criminal investigation and a jury listened to nine months of evidence which included literally tens of thousands of pieces of evidence.

Much of which was complex medical evidence, which the jurors were able to ask questions about to clarify.

Evidence that met the threshold of beyond reasonable doubt culminating in seven murder verdicts and six attempted murder verdicts, when some verdicts were not guilty so we know they took the reasonable doubt threshold extremely seriously.

That's "how we know there was more evidence."

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/hospital-bosses-failed-pull-lucy-193227857.html?soc_src=social-sh&soc_trk=ma

and Tony Chambers. But he’s said he will fully cooperate with the post trial inquiry. So that’s alright then.

As to why it takes so long to detect someone like this and act to stop them killing...

Regard the number of people on this thread with no relationship to LL who still question her guilt, despite the mountains of compelling evidence spanning dozens of babies.

Now imagine instead fellow staff with much less complete evidence / information and a personal relationship to her - they liked and trusted her. It must have been difficult to escalate the concerns. They would have viewed her as innocent like themselves. Review processes of unexpected deaths are designed to pick up concerning patterns but it's hard to design them for the detection of serial killers, who are exceptional and will also be familiar with these systems and how to bypass them. It's not a coincidence she was was well liked and respected, didn't one colleagues defend her only relatively recently - this would suggest she is able to manipulate others very effectively.

I can't get my head around this. How the hell does anyone harm innocent vulnerable little NICU babies. No just once but over and over again with not an ounce of remorse or guilt.

She knew 7 consultants were suspicious of her & still continued. It's so messed up.

The senior management had the information and ability to stop this sooner. How on earth can only justify how they acted - even a slight suspicion in one cases - should have been enough. They should be charged with negligence- they failed those babies and their families, they failed the consultants, they failed everyone.

It's heartbreaking. I don't know how the parents & relatives of those child must be dealing with it, colleagues, the jury, the investigators etc. so many impacted.

Well, the news reports today, of journalists who sat through it all, and were able to say more now restrictions were lifted, said there was more evidence :/

Seriously evidence was heard for several hours a day for months! It hasn’t all been publicised.

I don’t have a view on it. I respect that the jury who heard all evidence and deliberated carefully for weeks have reached a fair verdict.

Actually it's been shown that some of the babies were doing well, stable, etc and it was a Level 1 unit not a high Level 3 unit so many of them would be there for other reasons than "seriously ill". The collapses were described as "unexplained and unexpected" - some of these babies were not expected to have these "life or death" moments.

I didn't feel sorry for her, I just thought she was an idiot. She's set herself up for so much abuse too now - and her poor innocent kids. "Your Mum loves a baby murderer" in the playground etc, can just imagine what they'll hear.

Can her managers be charged for negligence? Other babies died whilst they protected Letby.
Other heads just roll surely ?

@monsteramunch @TooOldForThisNonsense I haven't read that. I've had a busy day so whilst I was awaiting the verdict eagerly, I havent read every report out there about the conviction. I have read most of Sky News and I haven't seen - or registered - anyone saying there's a lot more evidence than the public have heard about.

I'm not a legal body, I have very little knowledge about the courts or process around trial, that's probably why I've been on the fence a lot, as the evidence has been so circumstantial and that's literally all I've been going off to create my viewpoint.

Can I ask, if you know, why some evidence, if compelling, hasn't been published yet?

I did assume there must be lots more but equally 1) can't say there is without knowing it and 2) I don't understand why crucial bits of evidence would be kept from the public?

I can bet every single thing I own including my house on why that was your thought process.

I watched a criminal profiler talking about this. It's power and control. Some killers are men who commit sex crimes and some are health care professionals who hide their true selves behind a facade of wanting to care for sick people. Like Harold Shipman and Beverley Allitt.

They all have ASPD. They all see people as objects to be manipulated and this is how they do it.

He was a registrar not a consultant

Multiple bits of evidence still aren't making any sense from all of this, I think it's likely there will be an appeal and multiple defense lawyers intervening here