Lucy letby - New threads (Part 3)

[WhiteFire]

The last thread has closed. I have kept the thread title in line with the previous one for continuity.

I have just started listening to the Daily Mail podcasts which gives a good overview.

https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/the-trial-of-lucy-letby/id1653090985

I've downloaded an app called Radio net so I can download them and then listen off line.

The evidence against her is compelling, the defence is pretty much "it wasn't me"

I suspect they may consider the Baby K case to be strongest because it is the one where the consultant said he found LL standing by the cot doing nothing with a baby who was desaturating. But that's pure guesswork.

But surely it won't make any difference to her sentence?

I don't really see the point either @MadAndGlad but it sounds as if the parents were pushing for it.
I've just relistened to the relevant podcast and the case does seem convincing to me although I can see how it could have been difficult as Baby K was a very poorly baby and might have desaturated anyway. She was born at 25 weeks and they had tried to transfer the mother to a more advanced unit but the only availability was in Bristol and it wasn't safe to undertake the journey. The baby was on the unit less than 24 hours before being transferred, to Arrow Park I think and sadly died around three days old, they don't accuse LL of causing her death.
But it's the case where Dr Ravi J remembered seeing LL standing by the cot doing nothing when the breathing tube was dislodged. How does a tiny poorly baby on a ventilator dislodge their breathing tube? Those things are fixed very securely and the babies aren't moving around.
Then there was the evidence of her searching the parents on Facebook two years later despite telling the court that she could not remember the baby and events around her.
Quite a feat of memory as the prosecutor said. On a busy unit with multiple babies passing through why would you remember one that had been there for less than one full shift? And if you didn't remember then why would a person be searching the name on Facebook? 🤷‍♀️

Though how she can possibly have a fair trial with unbiased jurors is a mystery to me.

The point is that the parents see justice done for their children. They deserve that.

Yes I see that. But I don't see how she can possibly have a fair trial.

Think it can also allow parents to claim compensation which is obviously more important where babies survived with terrible disabilities

Agree it will be tricky as even 12 months on most people will still remember that she was found guilty on 14 other charges even if they didn't follow the trial in any detail
But how else can it be done?

Possibly Baby K was also chosen as there was a local enquiry/report by Arrowe Park Hospital where they died that was very critical of the care provided by COCH - Baby K's parents have certainly had a long and painful journey

They can sue the NHS in those cases regardless of criminal guilt.

Only if proven neglect by the NHS

Hopefully the Letby Enquiry will provide that

Sorry that should say proven negligence not neglect

Chester Hospital could face corporate manslaughter charges in relation to the babies that died there.

Police have launched an investigation.

I personally hope that anyone that has proven to have allowed this to happen should also see the inside of a prison cell.

Yes, let’s see Tony Chambers trying to hide away in Tuscany now.

(I may have got the person and the location wrong but the sentiment is right.)

I think Chambers is in the UK. It’s the former medical director who’s hiding away in France. Unsurprisingly. I would be if I was him.

Questions certainly need to be answered about why they ignored concerns raised.

It'll be an interesting investigation, inquiry and consequences.

So an ongoing police investigation which could lead to a prosecution and a retrial in one particular case.

Surely this will impact the enquiry? Is it possible to run the enquiry alongside on going investigations which may result in criminal prosecution? As well as the retrial.

I can’t see why not. The enquiry will go on for years. It hasn’t even decided its scope yet.

Well surely if the enquiry is going to demand certain people attend and answer questions this will be problematic for those people who will also be relevant to any police investigation for corporate manslaughter and who could end up being prosecuted ?

Honest answers to the enquiry could be incriminating - I imagine their lawyers will want to object to them cooperating with the enquiry and protect them surely?

I suspect the investigation will be over long before those people are required to give evidence to the enquiry. In any case, given their previous form, they’re highly unlikely to tell the truth.