Lucy Letby - new thread (part 2)

[anonymousamy]

A thread for anyone who was on the last one and wanted to continue the discussion.

What I cannot wrap my head around is Letby’s seemingly completely normal upbringing. Usually serial killers have displayed some kind of markers by the time they start killing, but AFAIK she literally had none. 100% believe she is guilty BTW - just cannot begin to understand it.

Jury members were expressly forbidden to read any news coverage throughout the trial. And the podcasts go into a granular level of detail that wasn’t provided by the news coverage, that’s made explicit in every episode.

I’m sorry, to clarify, the question was to the poster I quoted. That’s how quotes work.

@Seashellies hellies I am suggesting that the narrative of a killer nurse is far more preferable to a narrative of hospital failings, at a time when the NHS is on the brink of collapse.

Yes, it is worse now than it was in 2015/16, however babies (and mothers) dying unnecessarily in hospitals has been going on for some time. East Kent Trust faced a criminal case for failings in 2016-18 and paid out £0.75m while Nottingham Trust has paid 91m in compensation for failings between 2010 and 2020 and Shrewsbury £50m.

On the insulin readings, I think the readings are flawed - Child F was reported to have an insulin level of 4657, yet there are no reports of him entering a coma but moreover how did Letby know which feed bag would be used for that baby when the first was discarded as potentially contaminated.

@itsgettingweird
how you thought the insulin was high but not c peptide? Why you think it wasn't deliberately introduced via feeds and the dextrose didn't work? Why you think LL would say it could only have been introduced synthetically if it couldn't be true?
As above, I think the test was flawed, and I think LL has taken that reading at face value.

How these babies had the rashes? What were they? Why did they appear on a number of the babies that were murdered or attempted to be murdered?
Mottling and skin discolouration is often a sign of infection.

What caused the bleeding in the throats?
Probably a misplaced feeding tube, there are several instances where excessive attempts were made to insert the tubes.

Why did LL take home numerous notes and store some in special boxes? Why did she take some to her parents house?
I'd speculate it was because there were high deaths, fingers were pointing at her and she wanted to cover her back.

Why did LL send cards to some parents and not all?
I'd speculate that it was parents that she had particular interactions with or was particularly affected by the deaths of their babies.

How did LL know a baby in the dark under a canopy looked pale?
I'd suggest it wasnt in the dark, the lights were dimmed but enough for her to identify concerning skin tone.

Why did LL say she was somewhere she wasn't when swiped and notes show she was where witnesses said she was?
She does not have a perfect memory of events that happened several years prior.

@Janieforever There are writeups of each day of the courtcase on Reddit.

Why did LL take home numerous notes and store some in special boxes? Why did she take some to her parents house?
I'd speculate it was because there were high deaths, fingers were pointing at her and she wanted to cover her back.

She'd been taking them home way before the suspicions were announced. She took home her handover notes form her first ever shift.

Ah, that oracle of accuracy, Reddit.

Why did LL send cards to some parents and not all?
I'd speculate that it was parents that she had particular interactions with or was particularly affected by the deaths of their babies.

It was a Mother's Day card. The baby neither does or was part of the case. She did take numerous photos of the baby having removed it's breathing tubes though and told the parents they were removed for cleaning.

And every nurse ever employed in the NHS knows that taking home patient documentation is a cardinal sin. What an odd way to “cover your back”.

How did LL know a baby in the dark under a canopy looked pale?
I'd suggest it wasnt in the dark, the lights were dimmed but enough for her to identify concerning skin tone.

The baby was under a canopy. LL was at the door to the room. You couldn't see the babies face.

Why did LL say she was somewhere she wasn't when swiped and notes show she was where witnesses said she was?
She does not have a perfect memory of events that happened several years prior.

But witnesses did state what happened. Swipe data and notes showed what happened. She accused them all of lying. That's not misremembering or not remembering. She said she didn't recall or they were lying. Everyone. Even her nurse friend that she claimed was her best friend who she then tried to accuse of being the one to do it.

Every single point you raise as your "speculation" is just that speculation.

But you are speculating and there was actual evidence. Evidence that tells a different story to your speculations.

Some of which LL actually have herself.

I find it interesting that you speculate the evidence she have was false!

Does anyone know the answer to this? In court the prosecution can use her phone records to accuse her of certain things. Does she have a copy of her phone records for her defence?

Isn't that something for Cailleachian to reply to Hawkins0090?

The defence have access to everything the prosecution would be using.

On the subject of the tests being flawed, I had also considered this, after reading how difficult it would have been to predict which bags she would have had to poison to get the desired effect, and I wondered why this wasn’t used as a defence argument in court, surely this was a better argument (even if untrue) than just accepting that it was poisoning, if ur the defendant / defence team?

how you thought the insulin was high but not c peptide? Why you think it wasn't deliberately introduced via feeds and the dextrose didn't work? Why you think LL would say it could only have been introduced synthetically if it couldn't be true?As above, I think the test was flawed, and I think LL has taken that reading at face value.

yeah, you have not read the medical evidence, this is why I asked how you were following it. It’s clear you lack knowledge, what you’re writing is factually impossible

Completely agree with every point.
I've thought she was innocent all along. None of it adds up.

Because there was only one baby having those particular bags at the time.

hellies I am suggesting that the narrative of a killer nurse is far more preferable to a narrative of hospital failings, at a time when the NHS is on the brink of collapse.

Are you suggesting a well respected, highly competent and experienced defence team would purposefully be a part of this misdirection? And an independent jury of whom have given months and months of their lives to this case? Or are you suggesting the police forged evidence to steer towards the desired verdict? All of those are very big claims but that's what you are suggesting surely if you are implying the 'more palatable' option (I disagree with that anyway) was engineered. Or if you're implying that individuals aren't questioning it, I certainly believe the NHS is fucked but also trust that justice has been served; they're not mutually exclusive so not sure of your point really. The insulin cases are covered in the trial including your points.

Again interested to hear other perspectives and I'm certainly open to the fact she could be innocent if new evidence came to light, but not sure why stuff that was literally brought up and discussed at the trial is being given as a reason to believe the trial wasn't a fair one?

And NO babies on insulin. Not one in the entire unit.

What points don't you feel add up?

@Mustardseed86 But the other bags were not discarded, they were used for other babies without incident.

@Blossomtoes which makes it harder rather than easier to contaminate the bag undetected.

The smoking gun is her indifference not the insulin. If you hadn’t done it you’d be SCREAMING at the police and in court. She just rolled with it.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/lucy-letby-nostradamus-countess-of-chester-hospital-manchester-crown-court-earth-b2365862.html

so the way this is written made me think she must have known which bag they were gonna hang next and poisoned it, but seems to imply that they chose at random? That’s why I remember thinking about it at the time I read it x

Maybe she wasn’t picky about which baby had the bag she just had to kill one. There weren’t an infinite number of babies so she could probably have taken a guess.