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.

Seems to be a groundswell building for a retrial, some saying that the appeal court can reject, order a retrial or set aside the verdicts, wonder what the outcome will be, also what will the Crown announce tomorrow if anything.

An announcement on the decision as to whether to retry the cases on which the jury couldn’t reach a verdict is expected tomorrow. Pragmatism says there’s no point as she already has 14 whole life tariffs, idealism says those parents deserve justice.

Let's hope there is a decision for retrial on those where there where no verdicts could be found. My heart bleeds for those poor parents, the reports that they were crying and had to leave the Court as they were so upset broke my heart. Let's hope they can finally find justice. Praying for them tomorrow.

Surely everyone deserves justice, whichever way it falls.

Indeed. Thinking of those parents and families of the babies tomorrow. Peace and justice for all the victims.

Blimey, that Cheshire police video was raw and showed how deeply everyone involved cared about the investigation. I’m surprised it hasn’t been picked up by mainstream but maybe they wanted control of the direction. I think this is a good thing.

it also answered questions for me - I wondered if there were other babies the CPS felt there wasn’t enough evidence to proceed with, but the fact the CPS decided to proceed with every allegation the police had is incredible, especially where evidence was pretty much tied into circumstance and coincidence.

I think I see it as a web of evidence, there are plenty of holes but all the strings join up to present a very compelling picture with lucy Letby sat at the middle. I can see why people think there is a chance she may not be guilty, but to me her guilt is well beyond any reasonable doubt and I’ve only seen a small
amount that the jury have been presented with.

Each case has been presented ‘on it own merits’ and this is why the jury are undecided on some cases. The ‘big’ picture is one of overall guilt and each case adds weight of conviction to each other. The fact she was found guilty on 14 counts - as individual cases - shows that the evidence for her guilt is overwhelming. The jury will have had to decide each case on a case by case basis and I think they were strong in doing so or all counts will have been proven. It much be very difficult for the parents where no verdict was returned, but the other convictions would indicate that there was a very strong probability she had a hand in their children’s deaths.

Are you hard of thinking? There was no reason for the dr to call a pm at the time because there was no suspicion that there was a serial killer involved.

Of course the dr now regrets that in the light of the fact that there is a convicted serial killer involved in the death.

This is kind of annoying. Ever met the guy - and it’s usually a guy - steaming into a conversation late - and all the background stuff and the narrative and so on has to be reexplained - often without much of value for anyone involved. You are very much that guy.

lucy letby was regarded with suspicion by the consultant group for quite some time - as she kept on popping up at the side of healthy babys who suddenly died or suddenly had near misses. However at this stage - before two of the triplets died in June 2016 - these were merely suspicions and the consultants in many ways were hoping to find the cause of these deaths and near misses elsewhere. (Even in June 2016 the consultants merely had suspicions but these suspicions were hardening).

The post mortems were of course conducted in a spirit of objectivity - and the usual investigations would have been conducted. However given that air embolisms and over feeding by food to kill babies are highly unusual and rare, the pathologist carrying out the post mortem would not have been looking for this. the post mortems would find general reasons for death - say cardiac arrest - without probing further.

It’s not so much that the post-mortem results have been set aside (as you suggested) - rather fresh evidence has come to light - that a number of sudden deaths and near misses have common characteristics including a weird moving rash, and a failure by many of the infants to respond to normal resuscitation techniques. The findings of the original post mortems along with x-rays and scans would be very helpful to the expert witnesses in carrying out their report for the court.

As has already been explained, one doctor apologised to the parents of a dead baby for not recommending a post mortem at the time.

Overall a careful court process has taken place with hundreds of witnesses being called, an experienced judge presiding, impressive and able prosecution and defence barristers making their case, experienced expert witnesses providing their reports, the jury carefully reviewing the various charges and deciding one by one which letby committed beyond reasonable doubt…

It’s touching that you - and others like you - who have recently read media reports of this trial, imagine that you can see weaknesses or imperfections in the case that the judge and jury wading through days and weeks of evidence could not see!

At that stage the police weren't investigating her, they were investigating whether there was anything suspicious about the deaths and collapses of so many babies. Of course, she (and only she) knew that that meant in practice that they were investigating her, because she had been the cause of those deaths and collapses. So, if she identifies it that way that is really quite an admission on her part.

How do you know when she wrote the note? It was when she had just heard the police were investigating her. May have been after her first police interview, I'm not sure.

I find it hard to discuss these things when people have such fixed views. I'm keeping an open mind until there is no further chance of an appeal or an appeal is successful. It's easy to believe the prosecution case and the evidence from Dr Evans and not look at the bigger picture. It seemed very much like Dr Evans evidence was made to fit a crime rather than being completely reliable.

It seemed very much like Dr Evans evidence was made to fit a crime rather than being completely reliable.

He explains how he examined the incidents here. Great pains were taken to ensure that what you suggest didn’t happen.

https://open.spotify.com/episode/2IO3qPvwfa0yq6oYQYP0hy

The defence could have called medical experts if they had doubts over the statements provided to court, yet they didn't. Why not? They engaged with some prior to trial yet didn't use them, ocams razor suggests they couldn't find anyone that would support and help their case.

I don't know when she wrote the note, that's the whole point. You are the one who has a very fixed view about when she wrote it. Where do you get that information from?

Does anyone know why none of the PM examinations were doctor requested, wouldn't that mean the coroner's office had decided they were necessary.

If doctors suspected foul-play, surely they should have requested PM examinations directly.

If doctors suspected foul-play, surely they should have requested PM examinations directly.

They didn't suspect foul-play at first.

Hadn't they suspected letby for some time of harming the babies, makes no sense at all.

The Consultants had concerns about Letby for some time as she was always present at the medically unexplainable deaths and near misses. At the same time they hoped there suspicions were unfounded as no one wants to believe a nurse could be doing these things...

For most of the dead babies PMs were carried out. I believe there was one baby where this was not the case. Likely the doctor in question who suggested the family in question did not pursue a PM was not privy to the concerns of the Consultant group or did not share these concerns. Life can be complicated unfortunately.

The doctor who advised no post mortem is a consultant, she has been named in other places.

Curious what point you are trying to make?

One doctor suggested to the parents that a PM might not be a great idea - for which she has since apologised.

She is going to be retried on one count of attempted murder

The Quality Care report criticises that not all babies were sent for PM's as apparently it's a requirement with an unexpected death for neonates. All the babies should have had post mortems, Six of the seven did have coroner post mortems and found to have died of natural causes. With the later cases, when the Doctors did have suspicions, at no time did they pass these suspicions on to the Coroner or ask for certain things to be specifically looked at. The care report also recommended an Independent investigation. Dr Evans is hardly that Independent, based just over the border of Chester in Wales and belonging to some of the same organisations (who have meetings) as the Doctors who work in the hospitals - allegedly. Neither was he a neonatologist apparently. Plus he volunteered himself for the job after reading about it in the paper according to reports. He has a history of diagnosing women with Munchausens by Proxy, allegedly.

I think a lot of nurses feel very uncomfortable about this case and think "that could be me next"

This article is interesting about the Doctors in the case

https://freelucyletby.wordpress.com/2023/09/20/birds-of-a-feather-evans-jayaram-gibbs-newby-inspired-by-and-supportive-of-two-disgraced-doctors-meadows-and-southall/

That is the strange thing, "Six of the seven did have coroner post mortems".
Not one post mortem was doctor requested, all were coroner established.

There is also a FOI request for the info that hospitals involved are refusing to release, namely the report by Dr Jane Hawdon, which is said to point to an entirely different scenario.

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/foirequestttocountesssof_chest

According to reports from people who have seen Dr Hawdon's report, she said she had not had time to conduct the in-depth review that was needed. However, she suggested a broader forensic review into the deaths of four babies because they remained unexpected and unexplained.