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

Can anybody tell me the name of the podcast?

other families of children treated as neonates at Chester since she started must be questioning everything

I think it’s worth remembering that a not guilty verdict doesn’t necessarily mean innocent. It just means that the prosecution wasn’t able to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

It’s entirely possible, I would say likely even, that she murdered those babies as well, it just couldn’t be proven beyond reasonable doubt.

Look at how many rape prosecutions end in a not guilty verdict. Do you think that all those people are innocent?

@Echio It is uninformed shite though! One conviction has little to do with another. They are looked at SEPARATELY and evidence is considered for each one. Just because the jury decided there was not enough evidence for one does not mean there’s not enough for another. There is no ‘overall’ because you are not convicted of one count ‘overall’. So yes, what you’re saying is ridiculous and shows little knowledge of the legal system in the UK.

By your logic, any criminal who is found not guilty of one charge therefore cannot be guilty of any others.

@Makemineacosmo interestingly the baby where she was seen standing by doing nothing was one of the not guilty verdicts.
Her defence for that was that she was waiting to see if the baby corrected themselves.

As a nurse I can vouch for that. We don't actually know how low the sats were, only that the alarm should have sounded. But that could be 93% or it could be 70%. There's a huge difference. But it is pretty common to find a patient de saturating and seeing if they self correct for a short period of time. Also sats can be notoriously inaccurate with a poor tracing? So she may have fiddled with the probe to see how accurate the trace was, very common to do. Also this baby was born at 25 weeks gestation, very common for them to have variable saturation levels, the prognosis for this baby was very poor.

I do think she is guilty from all I heard on the podcast, but this one was very dubious, so I am glad she was found not guilty for this case.

That's what I mean ... it wasn't that she just had ones related to the deaths. She seemed to have absolutely loads of random bits of paper. How can that be evidence of anything other than a weird collection of random bits of paperwork?
Yet if you pull out some, then suddenly you have 'she had paperwork on all the babies who died' rather than 'she had loads of paperwork on lots of babies who got better and some who died'.

Someone asked me for my opinion on a person who collects random pieces of paper and doesn't destroy them or hide them off property when being investigated for murder. I'd imagine they just hoard crap. I know loads of people who do.

It may be that some other evidence is convincing (eg the nurse who commented upthread about the baby with the dislodged tube) and some of it was obviously convincing enough for the jury. But I wouldn't put the paperwork in that category, myself. And am highly sceptical of the shift pattern data.

I actually wasn't convinced either way and haven't followed it much, but you can tell from the newspaper articles since conviction that not many people writing them are convinced by this. And they are the ones who've been following it. Even the 'experts is why nurses do this' articles can't make it fit their patterns without a stretch. Friends standing by her. I expect it will be revisited and overthrown eventually.

I agree with this.

I remember the Beverley Allit case, and refreshed my memory of it. Allit was clearly utterly deranged. There doesn't seem to be any evidence of Letby showing any similar previous behaviour. Letby seems to have been slightly odd, and the childishness is strange. But otherwise, nothing similar.

It's a terrible case for the parents, children and staff involved. I just can't shake this faint doubt. I'm also a little disturbed by the vitriol directed at anyone who expresses the slightest concern. I'm not a 'Lucy fangirl'. I just really hope the right decision was made.

According to one of the papers (I can’t remember which as I only saw the headline on the bbc) the police are looking at the records of 4000 babies treated in that hospital at that time.

And they’re also looking at others.

Two babies died at the Liverpool women’s hospital while she was on placement there, they’re also being looked into.

IMO this is just the tip of the ice berg and she is going to go down in the same leagues as Harold shipman. The only reason why she may not is because she is so much younger. But if she’d practiced for as long as he did then I have absolutely no doubt that she would have murdered or attempted to murder hundreds maybe even thousands of babies.

Where will I find the podcasts?

Daily mail Lucy letby podcast. I listened via Spotify. It's very good. I think there were 47 episodes before the jury were sent to deliberate.

So for the people who think she’s innocent, who do you propose murdered the babies with insulin? Because those babies’ deaths were 100% proven to be murder.

I am very surprised that her managers allowed her to return to work because of lack of evidence.

I always thought when it comes to the safeguarding of children, it's not based on evidence as such, but the balance of probabilities.

Whilst she was found not guilty on two accounts, one of these was for the third attempted murder charge on Baby G. She was found Guilty with a majority of 10-1 on the first two attempted murder attempts against Baby G.

She was also found not guilty of the first attempted murder of Baby H. The second case of attempted murder was ‘no verdict’.
I always suspected this would be the case as Baby H’s care at the hospital was poor.

J, K & Q were ‘no verdict’ (all three were one attempt murder per victim).

She was found guilty (10-1) of the attempted murder of Child N but the second and third attempts was ‘no verdict’.

I was meant to add, this means she hasn’t been found ‘not guilty’ unanimously for any single victim.

@ArcticSkewer Ah yes the friends - friends who she begged not to attend the trial at all.

this please please please.

I could tell you things that non clinical senior managers say about clinicians that would make your hair curl.

they actively block safe patient care due to their god complexes and lack of knowledge and have he audacity to call clinicians arrogant. I find them terrifying.

I really don't know. I'm not overly invested in this case.

I do know that it costs a lot of money, apart from anything else, and she earned less than £30k a year. Her parents aren't well educated. Who would do this research? Who pays these expert witnesses? Who even thinks to call them?

It's a lot easier for people with substantial assets and an educated family background to access, I would say justice but I don't mean that, more to access a robust defence - innocent or guilty.

i thought i heard the Tube was out

I don’t believe this will be overturned at all. Quite the opposite in fact I think there will be retrials in the undecided cases, not least because there were guilty verdicts in some of those, I also think that there will be other cases which will come to the fore. And hopefully she will ultimately be denied permission to appeal.

Some of you may be interested in this https://www.chimpinvestor.com/post/do-statistics-prove-accused-nurse-lucy-letby-innocent

The rest will probably want the author burned at the stake 🙄

Theyre senior managers at that point. They’re not clinical and they’re guided by the toxic culture above.

@Orangebadger i thought the one where she was accused of not doing anything was baby K? Which if that is the case it was ‘no verdict’ not ‘not guilty’.

The ‘Not guilty’ verdict was for attempt three of murder of Baby G (the first two attempts she was found guilty with majority 10-1) and the first attempted murder of Baby H (with second attempt decided as ‘no verdict’.

Tony Chambers may have trained as a nurse, but he was in his 50s, how long had he been out of nursing?

Yes, this would make perfect sense ... it's just that I'm mindful of various other killers who've been released, but then AFAIK they weren't in a secure hospital

Of course neither is Lucy (yet), but time will tell