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.

Then why didn't the defence call someone to put this forward? They certainly had some experts they consulted during the pre trial phase but they didn't call them during the trial, why is that?

The stats thing is something of a red herring. Lucy was at all the sudden deaths and the sudden collapses. Let’s be clear there were almost no other deaths on the ward for the relevant time period - from memory there was one other death and one the consultants felt was explicable. What really brought the police in was that all the deaths at which Lucy letby attended the baby were medically inexplicable.

there were various reports on the ward completed over the time period - the consultants wanted to know what was going wrong on the ward. There were examples provided of where medical practice could have been better - though I don’t recall any report being critical of the consultants.

At the trial the prosecuting barrister raised the point again and again - if Lucy letby didn’t kill baby A to baby P then what example of poor medical practice killed them? Lucy letby was unable to provide any examples - though she could raise issues around staffing levels and experience of staff. But that wouldn’t result in deaths - that would result in sub-optimal care!

About the only witness the defence called was one in relation to sewage coming through the natal ward taps - which did happen once - not however at the time of any baby dying - and the Natal ward subsequently took action to prevent this issue affecting baby care.

yes there have been various attempts to undermine the expert witness. The problem there is that there were 2 expert witnesses who both took the view that air was being deliberately injected into many of the babies (some got insulin - some got too much milk) and that this resulted in the weird moving rashes which many staff noted.

the defence clearly couldn’t find an expert witness to say that these deaths were at least possibly random bad luck - which is mainly what Letby was attempting to say (along with staffing levels / inexperienced staff and the odd actual mistake). An expert wouldn’t say that the deaths were random bad luck as one death might be random bad luck and medically inexplicable - but not seven on the same ward with Lucy letby always in attendance! Never mind the inexplicable collapses of the other babies and their near death experiences.

something was going on on that ward - and Lucy letby was the person always there when that thing was happening - and the expert witnesses merely provided the medical “gloss” on what Letby was doing to achieve the deaths…

“I did this. I am evil.”

Good question. The defence case was patchy albeit with some individually good cross examination from Myers himself.

It also seemed to be LL herself raising the issues with experience of staff. I've seen nothing (but happy to have links) to indicate the hospital had concerns this was related to deaths or collapses.

It always came across from what she herself presented that she didn't think a band 4 nurse should be doing the care instead of her a band 5. So I always figured (although again it's never been expressly said) that if the hospital needed a band 5 and had one they'd have used them? So using a band 4 was fine.

But that could be Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy again. It's not for her defence to show how those babies died, it's for the prosecution to prove she did it.

Anybody can be made to look guilty of anything if you exclude any possible factor that undermines the case you are trying to make against them.

As before, I'm not saying she is innocent, just that I'm nervous about any case made almost entirely on circumstantial evidence with defendant behaviour being retrospectively cherry picked to 'prove' that she was guilty.

There is a great book by Darrell Huff called 'How to lie with Statistics' that can shed some light on this.

Yep. At first blush, the 'statistical' case seems overwhelming (I did some back-of-an-envelope sums and came up with 500,000 to 1 or something like that). But even this thread mentions two deaths when Letby wasn't there that were excluded from the analysis, one because neo-natal not perinatal, and one because the death was considered medically explicable. I'm not saying that was right or wrong but, had Letby been there, you can easily imagine these being cast as part of the case against her. Perhaps the second death would've become medically less explicable to fit the preferred analysis.

I don't know enough about the facts to say much more than this. I will say that, once it's clear the stats can be 'picked' at in this way, the 500,000 to 1 (or whatever) 'bottom line' becomes less compelling. If you change some of the parameters then the number plummets and you find yourself in the realms of 'unlikely' as opposed to 'almost impossible'. Then, all the other stuff becomes more important. Yes, the post-it notes etc, but what about the lack of 'direct' evidence linking her to the deaths? Also, what about the complete lack of a possible motive (her supposed behaviour is just extraordinary - a huge outlier which fits no particular psychological condition)? And this is where reasonable doubt creeps in.

Last, you've got to wonder what help she got constructing her case. Yes, she got a QC for the trial, and they will have advanced what Letby told them to their best ability. But how much help will Letby really have had refuting a case built on statistics - something that is beyond many lay people? I don't know the answer to these questions, I'd be interested if someone does.

Dr Dewi is quite the lad, there are other cases...., citizenscybercourt.wordpress.com/nameless-stories/child-snatching/the-estranged-daughter/

In What circles is dr evans not seen as a reliable or competent witness? He’s been involved in some 30 cases as an expert witness and in ONE case the judge was highly critical of his report. That leaves 29 cases where his evidence has been found to be convincing.

moreover Dr Evans evidence was entirely backed by Sandie Bohin another medical expert!

sure Dr Evans was keen to get into this case as his medical background working with Neo-natal babies made him a good fit. And sure like any expert witness he gets paid for his time. But let’s be clear he gets paid irrespective of what he finds - he’s there to assist the court not to help the prosecution or the defence. As it happens his evidence and Sandie’s evidence was very helpful to the prosecution but no one knew - including Dr Evans - that that was what was going to happen at the outset of their involvement - as the expert witnesses had to investigate the various cases and come to their conclusions.

so thanks for the innuendos - but really it’s all nonsense!

Let’s be clear - in this case we know that baby A and baby E had air injected into them as X-rays taken shortly before their respective deaths showed air bubbles to be in their major arteries.

Other babies unfortunately weren’t x-rayed immediately before death - but they had the tell tale moving rash - which is what happens when air is injected into their circulation and temporarily oxygenates their red blood cells as it came into contact with them inside the blood vessels themselves.

Rather tellingly letby completed a course two weeks before she killed baby A - where the dangers of air embolism were explicitly pointed out.

The experts also pointed to a research paper on air embolism in babies, written by scientists from the University of Western Ontario, in Canada, in 1989, which described a 'migrating' discolouration of the skin, which would typically manifest itself as pale, with flitting bright pink patches.

and don’t forget that two other babies had insulin injected into them and another baby projectile vomited a significant quantity of milk revealing that the baby had been injected with dangerous quantities of milk. We know beyond reasonable doubt that weird things were going on in that ward - and that letby was present at all the weirdness and no other doctor or nurse was present in that way.

its telling that when letby was removed from the ward that the deaths and unexplained collapses just stopped..

This bohin, this evans ?

guernseypress.com/news/2022/04/28/familes-with-sick-children-let-down-by-health-care-system/

www.casemine.com/judgement/uk/5a8ff87360d03e7f57ec0ab6

This is beyond silly. Bohin appears to have been involved in some safe guarding issue with a child in Jersey. It’s impossible to tell the rights and wrongs of the case from the link - but in any event it has nothing to do with her pre-natal medical expertise - which is robust.

https://www.msg.gg/clinical-team/consultants/dr-sandie-bohin/

Evans as I pointed out had been involved in some 30 court cases - in one of which the court was somewhat critical - and you gave kindly provided that case as if it somehow makes Evans an idiot!

if you read the case link you sent me attentively - you will see that this was an incredibly difficult case - with arguments both for and against non-accidental injury to the child. Evans initially felt that the evidence pointed to accidental injury to the 3 year old boy - then as happens, he spoke to the other expert witness and she pointed out that the ear injury to the boy was somewhat suspicious and Evans reversed himself. A really really difficult case. If you think that one case makes Evans some kind of idiot then you may wish to review your own life. Never made a mistake especially on a really fine tuned issue of judgment? Never? Right! Be gone with you and these silly innuendos.

They all try to appeal. Myra Hindley, Rose West, Harold Shipman and those who plead Guilty still try to appeal their sentence.

Lucy Letby if her parents or work colleagues are working this, tell her she is a disgrace. A "n0nce" people will be calling her in Prison. She is worse than all of those above.

Most likely outcome is that the appeal will be denied. Fingers crossed.

evans was employed by the police , not the court, after he claimed the NCA contacted him, which they didn't, your claim of one judge taking him to task is patently nonsensical propaganda, which covers your over long windbag posts, have a joyful evening.

Sally Clark.

Sally Clark wasn't a serial killer.

So you know better than the court of appeal then? FFS.

Despite having some reservations about this conviction (chiefly for the statistical reasons outlined by other posters) I am with you on this. I think the attempts elsewhere on the web to character assassinate some of the expert witnesses and even paint it as a deliberate and cynical conspiracy to frame Letby are unscientific and frankly just as ridiculous as the cod psychology attempts to create a motive for her from innocent text messages and thin air.

It should not be allowed to put an application to Appeal in. It is nothing but a monster.

A nonce indeed. Worst than Hindley, Shipman etc etc.

she was innocent, maybe you missed that, or perhaps that doesn't matter in your world of certainty.

robertius obviously meant this case not the one I posted, begone indeed.

Dr Evans was criticised over his involvement in an application for permission to appeal against a care order involving two children – in a case unconnected to Letby. Dr Evans supported the parents’ desire to have increased access to the children who were being cared for by their grandparents, the court heard. Refusing permission last December, Court of Appeal judge Lord Justice Jackson said Dr Evans’ report was “worthless” and “makes no effort to provide a balanced opinion”. He went on: “He either knows what his professional colleagues have concluded and disregards it or he has not taken steps to inform himself of their views. Either approach amounts to a breach of proper professional conduct.___ No attempt has been made to engage with the full range of medical information or the powerful contradictory indicators. Instead the report has the hallmarks of an exercise in ‘working out an explanation’ that exculpates the applicants. It ends with tendentious and partisan expressions of opinion that are outside Dr Evans’ professional competence and have no place in a reputable expert report. For all those reasons, no court would have accepted a report of this quality_ even if it had been produced at the time of the trial.”

I wonder if it will bother to turn up to the Appeal application. Wouldn't turn up to the sentencing.

Hopefully will rot in prison like the other mass murderers.

Yep, the Prosecution will more than likely announce the cases that failed to reach a verdict will be retried on the same day.

Also, the Judge led review, so a lot is going on.

Either way, she'll never get out at they are looking at over 4000 babies who have been under her care and quoted "the cases brought to Court, only covered one year".

She must like being in the limelight though.

https://ccrc.gov.uk/how-it-all-began/#

Maybe just have a read around that website, and then remind yourself of the Guildford Four; The Birmingham Six; Sally Clarke (RIP); Angela Canning ; Andrew Malkinson and others.

People who are correctly convicted have the right of appeal so that those incorrectly convicted can have a chance of Justice.
Unbelievably- you not only think that’s a bad idea; you think you have more insight than others for holding that view. If I said prayers, I would pray no-one in your family has to learn that lesson the hard way.

… and of course I have just quoted the wrong person. My reply was to this

I agree. Monsters like Letby shouldn’t be allowed appeals.

I think they should’ve chucked away the key as soon as they found out she did it. This would have saved the cost of the first trial too.

the lawyers who defended her should be struck off. How could they?

Try reading the whole thread. I bet @thedancingbear is really regretting that bit of satire.