Lucy Letby looking to appeal her convictions

[Gymnopedie]

How on earth does she think that's going to go?

Lucy Letby to appeal

(MSN link from the Telegraph)

I can't see what grounds she would have after a 10 month trial with all the evidence against her. And who would take her on as a client?

Anyone can say anything on the internet. I could tell you I’m Ben Myers. Your posts indicate little understanding of the law and how it works.

The tests showed high insulin levels and low C-peptide. Could you explain the mechanism by which the body could naturally produce insulin without producing C-peptide?

Not quite. They said that the test result indicated exogenous insulin but gave the standard recommendation to refer to Guildford to be absolutely sure one way or the other. Apparently it's a standard recommendation that is routinely only followed if the patient concerned continues to be ill. That doesn't change the fact that the test they did do was strongly indicative of synthetic insulin having been given. That was substantially reinforced by the detailed evidence that was given about readings of sugar levels in the baby's blood which remained at a low level despite higher levels of dextrose being given in the feed.

The experts consulted by the defence clearly agreed that the evidence demonstrated this, hence the acceptance that synthetic insulin had been administered.

There simply isn't new evidence here that the defence could not have known before the trial. The defence would have to produce an incredibly convincing expert who could explain why all the experts advising both the prosecution and defence previously had been wrong, and could also explain the scientific process by which the C-peptide test results could have existed if the insulin was natural. Are you aware of a credible expert willing and able to do that?

If it's a hypothesis by Evans, how do you explain the fact that the lab itself flagged up on the possibility of exogenous administration? Or that the evidence on this was in fact given by three witnesses other than Evans?

Unfortunately you do not seem to be aware how science works, and to be honest you are exposing a degree of ignorance of the law, both in Scotland and England.

Wasn't there someone based in Scotland with very odd theories about this case on another thread? Coincidence?

The lab flagged up nothing of the sort, now stop embarrassing yourself.

If it's a hypothesis by Evans, how do you explain the fact that the lab itself flagged up on the possibility of exogenous administration? Or that the evidence on this was in fact given by three witnesses other than Evans?

The 'evidence' which I have seen presented in support of endogenous/naturally occurring insulin has been

raised insulin levels are common in neonates in NICU

there is limited knowledge/research about insulin metabolism in premature neonates in NICU

a mystery unknown illness/disorder

Prof Hindmarsh wasn't a suitably qualified expert witness as his patients were young children rather than neonates etc

All of which are pretty easily refuted

She’s got a whole life tariff hasn’t she? She has nothing to lose by maintaining her innocence and appealing.

And it is possible she believes she never did it. I have in real life known people, and known them well, who seriously seem not to believe they have done things that you have experienced them doing.

It’s also possible she never did it. Innocent people do get convicted.

From the newspaper report on the relevant day:

"Child F's blood sample, which was dated August 5, 2015, was taken at 5.56pm.
The court is shown a screenshot of Child F's blood sample results. Child F is referred to as 'twin 2' - Child E, the other twin boy, had died at the Countess of Chester Hospital on August 4.
Dr Milan says Child F's insulin c-peptide level reading of 'less than 169' means it was not accurately detectable by the system.
The insulin reading of '4,657' is recorded.
A call log information is made noting the logged telephone call made by the biochemist to the Countess of Chester Hospital, with a comment made - 'low C-Peptide to insulin'

The note adds '?Exogenous' - ie query whether it was insulin administered."

Stop embarrassing yourself, @lubylo

Doesn’t everyone have the ability to appeal? I’m not sure why people are surprised she’s appealing it, it’s just a right she and 100s of others in her position exercise every day. It doesn’t mean the appeal is valid or not. It’s a last resort and you’ll get people chancing it on any grounds

I am going to leave this with you, convert 4657 Ua/ml to pmol/L, let me save you the bother it is 27,400 pmol/L, 10,000 pmol/L will kill a full grown well built adult stone dead. The lab was the RLUH, the clinician was Dr Anna Milan. Synthetic insulin cannot be detected using the test performed.( which was obviously compromised).

They carried out a blood test and sent it off to a laboratory. When it came back a week later it revealed an abnormally high level of insulin in Baby F's blood – 4,657 Ua/mL.

Amazed the defence didn’t call you as an expert witness @lubylo.

That's not really how it works - massive doses of insulin don't kill people 'stone dead' it's the profound hypoglycaemia caused by un-opposed insulin which does This did not occur in Baby F's case because a team of medics had been 'pouring' 20% and 50% glucose into him for nearly 18 hours Despite all this his blood sugar remained low but not at lethal levels

You'll be aware that Baby F is now significantly disabled

Being a diabetic I know exactly how it works.

So you'll understand why this baby 'didn't drop stone dead' because of the huge amount of iv glucose he was given?

And you'll also be able to explain how the body could produce very high insulin levels but very low C-peptides.

Insulinoma in infancy, usually genetic, and mainly benign, can result in high insulin levels and low peptide.

Child F was born 8 months before the birth of Child L - these two babies were believed to have been poisoned by insulin and Letby found guilty unanimously in both cases. If suspicious exogenous insulin had been used on Child F, the police should have been notified and a serious review should have taken place. Nothing wishy washy about this. A poisoning incident within a NICU unit has to be considered criminal.

Even if they did that's 2 counts, bit pointless really as that doesn't affect the other life sentences

It's not pointless at all!

It is to her sentence

Utterly pointless, she’d still be in prison until she dies.

I've assumed that the junior doctor was postulating an insulinoma or other similar rare cause when he asked for an insulin level - not that he was thinking murderer on the unit. Once he took down the TPN ??maybe thinking some kind of contaminant Baby Fs blood sugar returned to normal within about an hour and the baby didn't experience further hypoglycaemia ruling out an insulinoma

I feel you're being a bit unfair on John Gibb here - his ward based investigation suggested something very wrong about such a large dose of insulin being found in a baby who wasn't prescribed it. He took it to the consultants group and they tried to take it [and other very worrying events] to management who refused to act, He clearly deeply regrets not picking up the phone and calling the police

Tests were sent to determine if Child F had Down's Syndrome and the tests came back negative. Child F did not display physical or external appearances of DS however a test, amongst other arrays, were sent for determination. This is good practice of elimination. The confusion lies in the suspicion of exogenous insulin. Both twins were given small amounts of insulin after their birth.

Again, if there was a suspicion of exogenous insulin, an immediate review should have taken place. That's good practice as well.

What the hospital should have done but didn't is a separate issue

I think I read somewhere Lucy Letby even accepted that someone must have killed the babies and their death wasn’t accidental. Her argument is of course that person was someone else.

But funny how she was the only individual on the rota for every single death, so I’m not sure how she can blame someone else. Surely the culprit would’ve had to be on shift for every death too?