Lucy Letby appeal

[GonnaGetGoingReturns]

Sorry if not allowed to discuss here but just seem that this vile creature plans to appeal against her original sentence as per yesterday’s news. Her defence team is leading this potential appeal.

WTAF?!

They haven’t reached a verdict on is it 6 or 7 poor other little babies who died and she’s suspected, I thought?

So sad for the poor parents and babies still.

Yes, we know of that mental slur here, seems it is ok to describe autism as a mental problem in this thread 🤷‍♂️

Can you clarify what the mental slur is that you are referring to here please.

Interesting. www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-16703526

Lots of barrels being scraped now.

Sewage and sinks is more appropriate, however of course you will not accept the NI government report, categorically stating 3 babies, and likely more died from Pseudomonas bacteria.

Have a lovely day in blighty.

Of course I accept it. It’s irrelevant, that possibly was thoroughly examined and discounted in the trial. How does it explain all the causes of death - air embolisms, insulin overdoses and over feeding?

But why didn't the defence explore this then? We know that they knew about the shitty sinks as they called the plumber and it was mentioned. If there was anything at all that could explain the deaths through this then they absolutely would have explored it.

It was thoroughly explored in the trial about which this poster appears to know nothing. Like I said, barrels are being scraped now.

They didn't, the NI report confirming waste as causing the death of 3 babies, is not up for debate, LL's less than robust defence team is.

That report would be more than enough for a retrial here, blighty is another question.

It wasn't thoroughly examined, the NI report was never entered into evidence, you knowing so much about the trial would know that, there again probably not...you will need a big napkin to wipe the egg coming your way.

Did sewage come up through the sinks and sabotage babies with insulin and air? There's nothing to suggest her defence weren't robust or professional, he's a very highly regarded KC- do people think he's in on the conspiracy? If so, then why? The defence did consult with several medical experts but decided not to use them in the trial, what reason other than none supported their side? She will be entitled to an appeal should it be deemed that her application is valid which is an important part of the justice process, but having life orders for each of the charges she was found guilty of seems highly unlikely she'd ever get every single one overturned because of shitty sinks (especially when the defence were aware of this and had every chance to provide evidence at trial).

Interesting. Do you know a date from that. There is no date on the article that I can see.

Early Sept 2022.

What is the relevance? No-one has ever suggested that pseudomonas infections were found in the babies involved in the LL case.

Where is "here"? It's a weird legal system that would give a retrial based on the fact that someone could show that babies in a different hospital died of a totally different illness for which there is no evidence in the case in question.

The problem is the sink/sewage issue wasn't investigated at the time and the sinks are no longer there. I believe the whole unit was pulled down and rebuilt.

There was another case of a cluster of baby deaths in a hospital in Oklahoma. They checked the rota's to see who was on duty around those deaths most and found two nurses. But instead of accusing them of murder and calling the police, they got epidemiologists in to swab all the staff and the sinks for infection. And found pseudomonas was the cause (from the sinks) And particularly so on those two nurses, who had long fingernails so spread it more easily. So it was nobody's fault - it was sink contamination. But that was the sensible thing to do - get the unit tested for infection and the staff tested to see if they were carriers of infection - not say - oh that nurse was on duty so she must be a serial killer.

I think that is why some people feel the trial was wrong (whether or not she is guilty because I don't know). Because things hadn't been investigated at the
time properly so there was no evidence. No evidence to exclude murder particularly. If the sinks did have sewage there were bound to be many nasty pathogens that would kill a tiny preterm baby. And sometimes one person can be a carrier more than others, or have more contact. It's the same with hepatitis C I think - someone can be a carrier and not know it and if they are a cook they can accidentally poison a lot of people.

Someone commented that they would have done blood tests on the babies to check for infection. But did they do that on all of them? And did they do specific tests to determine what bug was causing sepsis in some of the babies? From what I read they only did bacteriological tests, not for viruses, and sometimes blood tests only screen for common pathogens.

But it will be based on events some years earlier. This type of claim is never finalised until the full prognosis is known, which will take several years, and the limitation period is the child's 21st birthday or, occasionally, later.

From what I read they only did bacteriological tests, not for viruses

Pseudomonas is a bacterium

There was no evidence of any of those. That was Dr Evans who decided it must be that because he was working on the basis it was a murder case. No evidence of insulin, no evidence of death by air embolism, no evidence of over feeding - just someone's imagination to explain how the babies might have died if they were actually murdered. 6 of the 7 babies had autopsies and nothing abnormal found. Yet years later, when it's too late to test, Dr Evans "diagnosed" these things based on not very much at all.

It's the lack of evidence that makes some people have doubts. I saw a funny post elsewhere on the internet with lists of babies who had died without explanation and "Lucy Letby wasn't there" next to them.

Good grief this thread is awful. Full of misinformation and conspiracy theorists.

If an appeal is allowed the defence will have to show why evidence was not available in the trial.

And autism is not a medical condition.

Yes but does general screening include that? I believe they just screen for common ones like ecoli and staph and strep. And only unless specifically asked to screen for a wider range of bacteria, would the lab do that.

Pseudomonas is not a virus.

There was plenty of evidence of the insulin overdose, and indeed LL accepted that that was the case.

There was also evidence of the other methods of killing. Evans was not the only doctor who raised things like air embolus; it was a concern raised by the doctors in the unit at the time, and it was backed up by Dr Bohin. It was also consistent with the evidence of parents in relation to the odd discolouration which no-one had seen in other babies. Most importantly, there was no evidence to counter those opinions.

You could produce an ever-so-"funny" post with a list of elderly people who died in the Hyde area in the 1990s with "Dr Shipman wasn't there" written beside them. Or children who died in North Yorkshire in the 1960s with "Ian Brady wasn't there" beside their names. It still wouldn't make either of them innocent.

Yes, that's what I said.

no, you said they didn't test for viruses, why i have no idea.

You do know and understand the convention of using bold font for quoted material, don't you?