Lucy Letby guilty - part 2

[twoandcooplease]

Thread 1 Lucy Letby guilty www.mumsnet.com/Talk/_chat/4875009-lucy-letby-guilty

Just in case anyone wants to keep the conversation going

Not so. She’s been found guilty and journalists can’t prejudice a sentencing, so if there were friends/boyfriends/colleagues already lined up to talk about her they’d have been all over the papers today.

Interesting.

Based on what?

Not being able to believe she did it or the evidence you've heard?

I often think the jury must have found it really hard too and I'm glad they will get post trial support.

@itsgettingweird truly just because there is a lack of hard forensic evidence and experience in that sector of medicine. I would very easily change my mind if there was a single piece of forensics tying her to it. I truly wish in a weird way I could blame her for the deaths but I can't. It means for me- in my mind- we (I) have to look for and at a wider variety of reasons for the deaths and that to me- is more frightening.

@Boomboom22

I agree with you to the highest degree.

To be fair, I don’t think it’s me doing the foaming. The consultant was quite clear that the insulin was the smoking gun. It hadn’t been prescribed for any of the babies in the unit.

Allitt confessed several months after the trial in order to be able to stay at Rampton instead of going back to prison. It was Munchausen’s by proxy, by the way, not Munchausen’s - completely different. Now known as FII (Fictitious or Induced Illness).

She was unanimously guilty of the attempted murder of babies K and L (the insulin cases) and the murder of Baby O (the one with the liver injury).

The insulin cases are considered the ‘smoking’ gun. It shows there was a poisoner on the unit. Even LL and her defence agree with this. Her defence was that it wasn’t her who did it. But the prosecution said it couldn’t have been anyone else BUT her.

@BIossomtoes but that still constitute forensic evidence.

So what's your opinion of the insulin?

Or of her being with babies that crashed and standing by watching or looking like she's doing something but not?

I don't think anyone wants to believe someone could be so cold and evil.

But a 2 year investigation and trial proved otherwise.

And i think the 2 not guilty and 6 undecided verdicts show the jury weren't swayed.

@BIossomtoes although the insulin does show there was a poisoner on the ward it does not provide it was Lucy. I truly wish I could blame her and her alone.
I'd feel so much more reassured for everyone but I just can't.

@ArcticSkewer and they have weighed up the other evidence.

Well given they sat through 10 months of evidence and took over 5 weeks of deliberation to return their verdicts I would say yes, they have looked at more than one spreadsheet.

@itsgettingweird
my opinion of the evidence regarding the insulin is that it does not prove without doubt it was the accused. Please understand that I wish I could believe otherwise but I can't. I look at babies everyday that are essentially transparent and I can see their heartbeat but I have not and cannot see that without a doubt Lucy was guilty.

It’s not shocking because she’s white. It’s because she’s a young seemingly happy and social female with a normal upbringing. Parents still married, good jobs, doted on only child who did well and got a degree, became nurse, has good social life, supportive family etc. often you read of mass murderers and they often, especially younger ones, have a troubled background and are isolated and angry individuals. It’s unusual so be so social and happy with no obvious issues and become a mass baby killer. I’m not sure why people are obsessed with it being because she’s white.

Still doesn't constitute forensic evidence- I apologise. I am dyslexic and sometimes miswrite or leave out words.

The other murder cases were agreed as majority verdict 10-1.

10 sensible people and one deluded weirdo that's probably on this thread

It is so easy to put some insulin into an i/v bag. Or anything lethal, really.

I believe she is guilty.

When Allitt was charged it was because she was the one person who was THERE for every single critical incident - and she had a terrible attendance record and sickness record - she injured herself on purpose to get attention when she was s pupil nurse.

Also - there had been many incidents of her "getting even" with people who had incurred her displeasure - an old boyfriend, for example. And there had been very disturbing things going on in the nurses' home - faeces left in the fridge, e.g.

I am fully expecting things like this to come out about Letby now.

This is the definitive book about Allitt:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Murder-Ward-Four-Biggest-Criminal/dp/0701148136

Interesting that my posts saying I disagree with the verdict are being deleted. Are we not allowed our own opinions on MN? Are we being controlled to the extent we are not allowed an opinion? Is that what we truly want- even if we disagree with others?

There was only two people on shift when the insulin poisonings happen. LL and another nurse. The other nurse was never a suspect for obvious reasons.

The insulin couldn’t have been accidentally added into the bags in the pharmacy because there were two people checking what went in and they account for every vial or ampoule that’s gone into the mix after making it up.

It couldn’t have been accidentally administered after a mix up because no one else on the unit was prescribed insulin at that time.

It was a targeted attack as the poisoner knew who the bags were intended for.

Despite the fact that Allitt only just managed to pass her finals, she was astute enough to know exactly which drugs would cause death to her patients.

Things like insulin and potassium and many other things are freely available on wards. It would be so easy to get a syringe-full and tamper with intravenous fluids.

Certainly hope so.

Perhaps my issue is more with the media because honestly, from the summaries of evidence since the guilty verdict, it looks underwhelming. Maybe they just bigged up the spreadsheet because it looks good to the eye. It doesn't sound, from comments here rather than in the media, like it was actually a major part of the trial evidence, very unsurprisingly. Add in every media commentary and there's noone who sounds convincing or convinced about it.

In other words - sounds like every other eventually overturned verdict based on 'later discovered to be unsound medical interpretations'. We'll see.

@EmpressSisi I do understand your point but it doesn't constitute hard forensic evidence but circumstantial. Again, please try to understand I do wish I could find her guilty but just can't. I feel bad for that but it is.

@ArcticSkewer Because statistics can be manipulated to mean anything

Oh come on! That's such a ridiculous comment!! It's not a "statistic" it's a bloody FACT she was the ONLY one there. It's not manipulated, it's what happened.

Do they? Or is it difficult to accept that others are allowed their own opinions and you are not free to dictate to the mass?