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.

I’m not sure you really think that? Unless someone is seen commiting a murder then can’t be found guilty? So if you do your husband in and no one is watching, but you’re the only one in the house, you think you get away with it?

The scenarios are different because ahe wasn't the only person there.

Whereas in the scenario that you mentioned, I would be the only person there.

I think you're misunderstanding what's being said.

No one could prove you were the murderer because they didn't see you according to what you said.

It won't matter if no one else was there or not. No one could prove that you were there. That's the point. If you say no one witnessed it then all you would have to say was "I wasn't there" and then all the evidence (for example murder weapon with your prints on etc) is circumstantial. Circumstance. No one could prove you didn't hold that weapon to commit the murder. Fingerprints remain on most surfaces for up to 7 days.

So you get back to the evidence all being collected and pointing to the most likely circumstance. The legal threshold is that all the circumstantial evidence proves beyond reasonable doubt you were the perpetrator.

I'm not saying it's the wrong verdict. I'm just saying normally there is DNA evidence or something a bit more concrete.

If a killer wore gloves there would be no dna evidence to link them because the would be no fingerprints etc.

The conviction was based on far more than just her being present. I would implore you to listen to the podcast on it. It was a real eye opener for me.

you are suggesting that since 2016 when LL was removed - so in 7 years on this ward caring for sick babies - not so sick when ward status was changed - that one death occurred? that would be incredible

There was only one death on the ward after she was moved, because the hospital stopped accepting premature babies. I'm not sure of exact dates . I will have to check . But the hospital stopped taking in premature babies. That is why

Incorrect. They didn't stop taking prem babies. They stopped taking babies below 27 weeks (or similar).

Nearly all the babies murdered or attempted to be murdered were already over the age of the babies they currently accept onto the NICU.

I can't remember off the top of my head the exact weeks and ages and stats but it easily out there because I found it after I'd heard this narrative.

Presumably there's plenty of DNA evidence because she was so involved with looking after the children, but the obvious problem is that it carries an equally innocent explanation. But that is an issue which will come up in plenty of crimes, and it certainly isn't the case that DNA evidence is a prerequisite.

This trial went on for 6 months, with the vast majority of that time being taken up by the prosecution case. Self-evidently, if the sum total of evidence against Letby was "She was always present" they could have got through the trial within a month at most. There was an awful lot more evidence in relation to each case and the overall picture.

I have never once taken any notes home. In my hospital its gross misconduct and you can be sacked for it. Not to mention a data protection breach.

Taking notes home as they're scrunched in your pocket and you forget they're there is obviously bad and shouldn't happen, but it's leagues away from having hundreds of handover notes. Some stored in files saying 'keep' , have been moved between homes, a paper towel retrieved from confidential waste with the readings done during the collapse, a diary with initials in etc. That's not accidentally taking some home, the one from her time as a student in a keepsake box in pristine condition seems chilling now to be honest.

Presumably there's plenty of DNA evidence because she was so involved with looking after the children

no, there wasn't DNA taken, no toxicology reports, no post mortoms - it was all done retrospectively

And it wasn’t just like it was one or two notes. There were hundreds- one of which was from her first shift and that was kept in a special box on its own in pristine condition. This was clearly her habit. It helps to build a picture of someone incredibly careful and controlled who had a very different inner life to the face she showed to friends and family.

IMO the texts show her using many ‘faces’ to
manipulate others. There is ‘expert’ Lucy who is snide about other colleagues, ‘poor Lucy’ who needs constant reassurance and ‘snippy Lucy’ who throws tantrums when she doesn’t get what she wants. The note collection and her writing in her journal seem to show a very different person to the one she presented to everyone else.

I would not be massively surprised if the personality she shows is a very carefully
managed stage version of herself and very few people ever see behind the mask- although her parents must have at some point.

Yes this was the best conclusion a psychologist could come up with. Her attacks seemed to start after moving away from her parents who lavished a lot of attention on her to the point of her feeling ‘suffocated’ but when leaving home, they believe she missed being the centre of attention and got some sort of rush being in the centre of drama and being made to feel important or special. Also she appeared to carry out more attacks following a trip away or night out or hen night. They think she felt resentment seeing her friends getting married and starting families and had a lot of pent up anger.

However, most of the above would not result in a psychopath killing innocent babies so she must have had a lot of deep rooted psychological issues!

*ie hen night

This.

I also work in a role where confidentiality it key.

I often wrote myself post it's with initials on and a keyword and I know what they mean. I've accidentally brought the odd one home - and yes - usually in a pocket! When Ive done that I've then either put it inside my work diary in my work bag to take back following day. Sometimes it'll be something I've already actioned and I'll either tear up or shred. The odd time I'll put in my drawer in bedroom with medicine or something in a rush and find it a few weeks later and get rid then.

NEVER would you find them filed or stored. Or in pretty special little boxes in my wardrobe or under my bed. And you'd never find more than 1 at a time because I've probably done it about 4 times in my whole career in my current workplace. I've been there 16 years!

LOL, this is just like all those armchair virologists who popped up during the lockdowns. Turns out that they are all forensic scientists, criminologists and lawyers too…

And yet 14 out of the 17 babies Letby was charged with murdering or attempting to murder, would still have been cared for at the unit after it was downgraded.

Her mother had a very traumatic birth with her apparently and this influenced her wanting to be a Nurse to help babies. Perhaps LL was repeatedly told how difficult her birth was and how lucky her parents were to have her survive. Maybe they couldn’t have more children. Her parents were certainly very proud of her going to university - they even published her graduation in the newspaper & said how she was the first one in the family to go to university.

This vision of being a nurse being responsible for saving babies like she was saved at birth certainly was a contributing factor in her warped mind. She must have enjoyed the sense of being in control over whose life she heroically saved or tried to and if they tragically didn’t survive, she revelled feeling ‘connected’ to the family somehow. That explains her obsessive stalking of the families afterwards.

@Boudicasbeard

"The starting point for the police investigation was not that there was foul play."

The investigation started in April 2017 when consultants at the hospital had a meeting with the police where they suggested that Letby was responsible for the high number of deaths.

"Dewi Evans is a registered expert for police work nationally."

There are 13 registered experts for neonatal deaths, 2 for perinatal deaths, 1 for sudden infant death,8 for unexpected infant deaths, 3 for unnatural deaths,13 for death of babies, 8 for unexpected death of babies, 1 for cot death, 14 for paediatric deaths, and 7 for unexpected child deaths. Dewi Evans is not registered under any of these categories.

"Chester police contacted him to review the medical evidence."
After he contacted the National Crime Agency to offer his services to Chester Police, suggesting that the police rather than RCPCH were better placed to investigate.

Either Chester police, the consultants, other nurses and all right experts have lied on purpose to frame her (why the fuck would they).
I can find far more motivation for the consultants framing her than I can for Letby causing the deaths. As Dr Gibbs said, once the RCPCH report came out "we were in direct confrontation with managers and we had no choice but to fight and to make sure the police got involved. By that stage, it was us or her", particularly given the clinical errors of he and another doctor nearly led to the death of Baby G, after they left her alone and unmonitored on a treatment trolley, and failed to contact the designated nurse.

I'm not sure what you're trying to get at with 'that would be incredible' but yes, it is a reported fact. Maybe you like alternative facts.

Have you watched the Panorama on Lucy Letby?

But you're just making all this up to suit your own narrative. There has been no evidence that Lucy was raised to think she was special or that there was a constant narrative about her difficult birth. This is just something you've invented.

I am not 'making it up'. This is all information out there in the public domain lol.

An alternative version. Myers, Letby’s defence, tried to discredit Evans too. The prosecution made a better case. Of course Myers had every chance to produce a better expert witness but the only one he could come up with was a plumber.

https://nation.cymru/news/the-welsh-doctor-whose-evidence-convicted-baby-killer-lucy-letby/

particularly given the clinical errors of he and another doctor nearly led to the death of Baby G, after they left her alone and unmonitored on a treatment trolley, and failed to contact the designated nurse.

This theory is wild. So they tried to blame Lucy to cover their own arses, even though by escalating this it was clear notes and results etc would be gone over with a fine tooth comb which would be much more likely to find them in the wrong if they indeed were? Makes no sense. It also seems unfortunate for them that this uncovered all of these other incidents, what a coincidence.

People want to know how someone can become like Letby. Unless you believe that some babies are born evil, at least some of those answers will be found in their childhood. And most likely their parents if they were the main thread.

I think that Casey Anthony was guilty of killing her daughter. The evidence in that case was circumstantial. And in that case we also had a daughter who had grown up with parents rushing in to make excuses for her and get away with lying her entire life.

I should imagine that Lucy Letby's parents saw more of the real her than anyone else did. I also think that some of the things we know about them are telling.

I find it wild that people are genuinely buying the story that she was framed.

Do these people even understand what a murder investigation of this scale requires? Anyone attempting to frame someone else to get rid of one or two of their own indiscretions is a moron. Because the investigation put everyone in that unit under a microscope. If you are hoping to finger point to get away with some unprofessional behaviour then it would completely backfire in your face.

Yet somehow the consultants were still keen to call the police. Just like they were actually worried about patient care and not covering up for anyone else.

Plus the leaving the baby on the trolley was another event where there were various versions.

Everyone gave versions. Some were the same and matched. IIRC this was another area where LL response was that she couldn't recall and couldn't remember.

So many times she had a chance to discredit the "evidence". But she never did/could. She just said she couldn't recall.

With regards the notes discussed above she repeatedly maintained having loads of bits of paper filed and stored away was "normal behaviour for me".

It felt (but is obviously my opinion) that if she said something was normal behaviour for her people would think it was normal behaviour - even when it wasn't

And injected with air

And the fact that the people who are being accused of framing her are the very people who went to the police and have pushed for a public enquiry.

They'd have to be even more narcissistic than LL appears to be to put themselves through that if they were guilty!