Lucy Letby - new thread

[anonymousamy]

No idea why the last one was taken down, but for anyone who wants to continue the discussion on Letby, I’m starting a new thread here.

I’m 100% sure she’s guilty, but I’m still massively struggling to comprehend why on earth she did it.

Can you quote which of my posts shows that I’m angry or offended? Because I’m definitely not either. Justice has been served, there will be no retrial and Lucy Letby will die in jail.

If they did put their name to it, then would everyone be law following and would everyone peacefully respect their free speech, their perspective etc.

why don’t you Google Lucia de Berk’s case and look at the similarities with LL? Miscarriages of Justice happen, and these cases are so disturbingly similar.

Why don’t you summarise the similarities? I’ve never heard of her case.

Going off track a bit - has there been any discussion about the jury. Not specifics of course, but it amazes me that a group of 12 people spent 10 months of their lives on this case. Were they specially chosen due to being able to spend that much time away from
work? I assume it was the same 12 people for the whole trial? I can’t even contemplate the impact it would have had on their well-being, having to listen to all of that upsetting information, but the impact of their day to day life must have been immense.

Surely that's how people are led to believe x, by just trusting the experts ?

@Hawkins009

If they did put their name to it, then would everyone be law following and would everyone peacefully respect their free speech, their perspective etc.

If they don't put their name to it, they're essentially saying they're entitled to critique the actions of numerous named parties (witnesses, defence team, prosecution team, consultants, hospital management) publicly without anyone being able to know who they themselves are.

They may actually have no legal or medical background in reality, which would mean their assertions are less credible than someone who has one or both of those backgrounds.

Claiming to shine a light on a perceived injustice while only being willing to do so from the dark completely undermines their credibility.

If they believe in 'the science' they keep mentioning, that they report as indisputable fact, they should be willing to have it stand up to scrutiny under their name.

This is exactly how I feel, and given the evidence that was found in her bedroom I really doubt it was anyone else.

In an ideal and completely law following world then yes i can understand your perspectives.

I wondered about the same thing.

I think it would be helpful to have a cursory summary of why Lucia denBerj is relevant, before I google her.

Agree totally, whomever created that fan site and tried to hide in the dark , and those taking to posting anonymously to protect her, are not folks to engage with. Friends, family, super fans of a child serial killer, I don’t know, and don’t wish to know. I just don’t want to engage with it.

why don’t you Google Lucia de Berk’s case and look at the similarities with LL?. Why don’t you google the Beverley Allitt case and look at the similarities with LL?

It’s a slippery slope to go down to say that “x was guilty/innocent therefore y must be as well. Where does that end?

Somewhat ironic, given you’ve clearly name changed for this thread.

Are you saying Covid didn’t happen?

Remaining nameless shows them to be complete charlatans. I mean anyone could make a load of stuff up, and let’s be honest here an awful lot of what is on that website is pure fabrication, and claim that they couldn’t possibly say who they are for fear of retribution.

More likely they haven’t disclosed who they are for fear of the authorities catching up with them.

Lucia De B.

https://murderpedia.org/female.B/b/berk-lucia-de.htm

I haven't read it fully, it isn't mobile compatible so difficult to read.

She was a Dutch nurse who was convicted of murdering a number of babies that happened on her shifts. Initial statistics given was that the chance of this being a random occurrence was one in 300+ million. It was actually one in twenty five.

I googled today when her name was mentioned, I know little of the full details, but I simply had my interest piqued and googled. It was not difficult.

Let's not pretend it's not super weird to pay money to create a fansite for a convicted child serial killer you claim to have no connection to, and then pay more money to keep your identity a secret.

They clearly know Richard Gill and his actions in promoting the site leave them open to far more online abuse.

As for "but other people might behave badly" - all this person has to do is block incoming mail and not allow comments, which they've already done.

No one is asking them to post their home address.

Worst case scenario, if they really do work in a hospital, the hospital might get complaints. Would a hospital fire someone for putting up a website, given how much we've all seen and read about someone keeping their job after being creditably linked to so many infant deaths? Seems like it's almost impossible to get fired from the NHS!

Lucy Letby's parents haven't had vigilantes turning up at their home, the hospital that permitted these horrible crimes hasn't been besieged with vigilantes, the consultants who forced others to apologies to her haven't been attacked or had people turn up at their house; the idea that this person absolutely has to have complete anonymity because putting up a website would put them in more danger than all the people involved in the case whose names are public knowledge, is simply not logical or credible.

It isn't shocking, it's predictable.
It's the equivalent of flat earthers.
Theres an identity to be made out of positioning yourself opposite widely held (and proven) beliefs.

Whether or not there’s an appeal, a retrial, a gross miscarriage of justice…

…it will be years or decades before any of that happens.

All we have now are the verdicts from the jury who heard every bit of evidence over 10 months. The fact that they spent a month deliberating, and found her not guilty of some charges and undecided on others shows that they believed “beyond reasonable doubt” that Letby was guilty of 13 of the charges against her, and two of them were unanimous guilty verdicts.

Letby fans and defenders would have to overturn every single one of the 13 guilty verdicts to get her released from her whole life imprisonment.

And in the meantime, there are ongoing investigations into other babies that Letby cared for over her career.

Hope her supporters have the stamina required for a years/decades-long campaign.

It is really misleading to call it a fan site, as there is nothing personal about LL, her character, or any assertions that she is innocent, just a very in depth, well researched and referenced analysis of why the evidence presented is flawed and misleading.

Gill is calling for the site to be peer-reviewed. I will be interested to look out for this happening.

I don’t think it’s any surprise the jury took a month to reach their conclusion as there were so many counts to consider! Most jury selection members might have 1 maybe 2 counts to consider, but they had 14/15?
It would have had to have been the same jury team all the way through and yes it would have been quite an ordeal for them. I expect many will stay in contact as they have shared a unique experience together and will need someone who they can trust to debrief. I can’t see a huge amount of support being given sadly.

I'm really shocked at the amount of people who seem determined that LL is not guilty. I agree actually that things like the Facebook searches and paperwork found doesn't necessarily mean murder but look at the falsifying documents, baby e's mums eyewitness account that LL lied about, the massive overfeeding, the gaslighting of colleagues and inappropriate comments. There's a slim chance she was incompetent and tried to cover it up but she's had her chance to explain and so many times in that witness box she claimed to know or remember nothing unless it benefited her. She had one if the top defence barristers in the country. If there's grounds to appeal I'm sure it will come out.

It's literally an entire website devoted solely to Lucy Letby, with her name in the URL, put up by a single anonymous person with dodgy links, who makes wild claims about their background and expertise that they can't back up, and who has spent money keeping their ownership of the website secret.

The idea of peer review is nonsensical. It's just some little fansite a random Lucy-obsessed person with a bee in their bonnet has put up.

Richard Gill (whose own links to the site are shrouded in mystery) can "call for" whatever he likes, doesn't make it real.

Na, they’ll have moved on to the next murderer by then.

They don’t actually believe that LL is innnocent, they’ve made it their life’s work to contradict rationality. They’re probably responsible for websites claiming that Sandy Hook is a hoax, Or that The victims of child disappearances were somehow to blame.

Doesn’t matter that it’s all bollocks, there will always be someone out there who’s prepared to spread the word so to speak.