Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Chat

Join the discussion and chat with other Mumsnetters about everyday life, relationships and parenting.

Lucy Letby denied leave to appeal

1000 replies

Viviennemary · 24/05/2024 13:40

Just heard on the news Lucy Letby the convicted serial killer has been denied leave to appeal. Good decision I think. She should stay behind bars for the rest of her life.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
32
MsCheeryble · 25/05/2024 01:38

Pinkjarblujar · 25/05/2024 01:12

What evidence was falsified and what did she lie about?

I've pointed out above one instance where she was demonstrated to have lied about her knowledge of air embolism in babies.

Zyq · 25/05/2024 01:47

Richard Gill is a notorious conspiracy theorist linked with Sarrita Adams, who is even worse. Anyone doubting the reliability of the conviction and relying on what they say is seriously wasting their time.

bibop · 25/05/2024 01:53

Zyq · 25/05/2024 01:47

Richard Gill is a notorious conspiracy theorist linked with Sarrita Adams, who is even worse. Anyone doubting the reliability of the conviction and relying on what they say is seriously wasting their time.

Multiple conspiracy theories have later been proven to be true.

RafaistheKingofClay · 25/05/2024 01:58

MsCheeryble · 25/05/2024 01:38

I've pointed out above one instance where she was demonstrated to have lied about her knowledge of air embolism in babies.

The falsification that sticks in my mind is writing herself into another baby’s notes to provide herself with an alibi for the time of one of the deaths. But she was accused of falsifying other sets of notes to cover her tracks. Although there may be plausible reasons for those notes having been changed.

Not sure about specific incidents of lying but the judge felt it was necessary to point out she’d been shown to have lied during his sentencing remarks. Do have a vague memory of her tying herself in knots during her testimony.

echt · 25/05/2024 02:38

bibop · 25/05/2024 01:53

Multiple conspiracy theories have later been proven to be true.

Such as?

IAmThe1AndOnly · 25/05/2024 03:52

The way in which people are tying themselves in knots to defend this depraved bitch is despicable.

seriously some people are comparing her to sally Clark? Ffs.

I would advise any parent of any of her victims never to come on here for any kind of support, because I have 0 doubt that the Lucy Letby fan club would be telling them that they should want the truth to be out according to the New Yorker.

Incidentally, I discovered an article from an American psychologist with a fairly convincing argument for Rose West’s innocence. Maybe you’d all like to start a love-in for her next.

itsgettingweird · 25/05/2024 06:23

YaWeeFurryBastard · 24/05/2024 20:30

Again, I am not saying she is innocent but can you imagine being in a jury room with some of the posters on this thread and the moral pressure you must feel?

But they weren't.

They didn't convict in all counts.

They did find reasonable doubt on some cases.

It's the fact it wasn't a straight "guilty" across the board which makes me sway to the side it was a fair jury.

I think if emotions drove the verdict they'd have just said guilty to all once they were convinced of guilt for some.

RafaistheKingofClay · 25/05/2024 06:36

itsgettingweird · 25/05/2024 06:23

But they weren't.

They didn't convict in all counts.

They did find reasonable doubt on some cases.

It's the fact it wasn't a straight "guilty" across the board which makes me sway to the side it was a fair jury.

I think if emotions drove the verdict they'd have just said guilty to all once they were convinced of guilt for some.

And there is at least one death that didn’t make it to court because the baby’s condition at the time could be a more likely explanation for their death.

I think some people are forgetting that some of these babies will have been in excruciating pain due to the injuries caused to them.

Luio · 25/05/2024 06:40

You have to have grounds for appeal. It would be a rather expensive waste of time otherwise. All paid for by the taxpayer.

MyrtlethePurpleTurtle · 25/05/2024 06:56

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Thank you

MyrtlethePurpleTurtle · 25/05/2024 06:58

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

The link you provide takes me straight to the article - no need to copy and paste any URLs into it

MyrtlethePurpleTurtle · 25/05/2024 07:02

CountingCrones · 24/05/2024 17:01

It’s easier for the hospital and society for the answer to be one evil person than a completely bollocksed unit, negligently underfunded and understaffed, overstretched and under resourced.

I don’t know if she is guilty or not guilty, but there was a lot of cherry picking of data assessed to decide she’s the one to look at initially.

Yes, this occurred to me too

MyrtlethePurpleTurtle · 25/05/2024 07:08

IAmThe1AndOnly · 24/05/2024 17:25

The jury were there, the judge was there, the CPS saw everything.

If you’re going to put your faith in some tacky trash mag we might as well abolish the justice system and put all cases in the daily mail instead and let the public decide.

Or put the jistice system in the hands of ITV (vis a vis Post Office)!!

In any case, the media does have a not insignificant role with investigative journalism in uncovering miscarriages of justice. Not saying that it happened here - just that it would be naive to casually dismiss the New Yorker article

MyrtlethePurpleTurtle · 25/05/2024 07:14

x2boys · 24/05/2024 17:47

No neither would they be thinking it was a miscarriage of justice ,if it was a male nurse .

Though I suspect the opprobrium heaped on Letby would be less were she male because of the visceral horror with which female crime against children is viewed . Compare the media's treatment of Myra Hindley with Ian Huntley - it's Hindley who moved into the iconic emblem of evil

MyrtlethePurpleTurtle · 25/05/2024 07:16

IAmThe1AndOnly · 24/05/2024 17:50

The details as to why she has been denied an appeal can’t be released until after the baby k trial.

But appeals are often based entirely on things like new evidence etc, it’s not just a case of saying “I was convicted the first time so you need to run through the whole thing again,” there has to be something compelling which will facilitate a retrial.

(though we know the grounds for an appeal relates to four applications her barristers made at trial being denied)

Fasterthanacarrot · 25/05/2024 07:25

MsCheeryble · 24/05/2024 23:07

I think that perception that all the babies were enormously fragile is one of the misconceptions that surround this case. In most cases they were not. The unit didn't take really sick babies, it was a level 2 unit. It is level 3 and 4 units which take "enormously fragile" babies: level 2 units are basically special care nurseries who need a bit of an eye kept on them but who are fully expected to survive and do well. That was one reason why concerns were raised - these were babies most of whom were expected to spend a few days in the unit before going home, and who were doing well - until they suddenly crashed and became seriously ill or died - and this was happening over and over again.

One of the babies was 27 weeks and less that 2 lb , others mentioned were twins and one needed a long line - these aren’t babies just needing temperature regulation and a feeding tube - they clearly were sick and / or fragile. Seems like the unit was taking babies it couldn’t care for at the level they had been given and that could be an issue

MyrtlethePurpleTurtle · 25/05/2024 07:27

Ohfuckrucksack · 24/05/2024 20:26

I'm not convinced of the safety of these convictions.

You can shout at me and cry 'shame' as long as you want.

The babies in these cases were enormously fragile - in a chaotic, understaffed unit lacking experience of very premature babies they were always at risk.

I think it is more convenient to be able to blame one individual than to prise apart complex factors that may have been involved.

I remember the Sally Clark case and how absolutely we were told that it was not possible that both her children could have died from cot death and that it was certain that she was in fact a murderer. They were wrong.

Yes, I had wondered about those slew of cot deaths and the 'statistical likelihood' evidence given by that now notorious expert subsequently shown to be fallacious (Professor Meadows, IIRC)

Fasterthanacarrot · 25/05/2024 07:28

I’ve also spent a lot of time in nicu and scbu. They are BUSY. I was never ever in a room with less than 3 members of staff at any time even nights - the fact she was never seen to harm a baby but also reported to have been alone sometimes I find really strange

EnterFunnyNameHere · 25/05/2024 07:35

I don't think the justice system is infallible, but I think broadly it is fit for purpose and I think if they were able to persuade a jury that this young, pretty nurse was a multiple-baby killer she probably is.

I also think if she was an equally young male nurse no-one would be questioning the verdict!!

Lilacbluebells · 25/05/2024 07:39

People questioning it or not is by the by though. Some cases will always receive more publicity and coverage than others but it’s not really an argument to say ‘she is young and blonde therefore anyone uneasy with the verdict is clearly just biased in her favour.’

MyrtlethePurpleTurtle · 25/05/2024 07:40

Sunnyandsilly · 24/05/2024 21:28

Exactly, it’s beyond reasonable doubt. Otherwise no one would be found guilty. Letby is guilty beyond all reasonable doubt.

deleted - replying to wrong post!

YaWeeFurryBastard · 25/05/2024 07:46

itsgettingweird · 25/05/2024 06:23

But they weren't.

They didn't convict in all counts.

They did find reasonable doubt on some cases.

It's the fact it wasn't a straight "guilty" across the board which makes me sway to the side it was a fair jury.

I think if emotions drove the verdict they'd have just said guilty to all once they were convinced of guilt for some.

It’s perfectly possible that some jurors were satisfied that she’d been found guilty of at least one count and therefore weren’t bothered about absolutely all of them being guilty as they knew she’d be getting an enormous sentence anyway.

Nobody knows if this is the case but I don’t think the fact she wasn’t found guilty on all charges is a slam dunk that it’s a fair jury.

MyrtlethePurpleTurtle · 25/05/2024 07:47

Delphiniumandlupins · 24/05/2024 22:14

Doesn't there need to be new evidence for an appeal?

No, there doesn't.

Grounds for an appeal against a criminal conviction include:

  • poor representation at the trial
  • mistakes or misconduct of the trial judge
  • jury irregularities
  • bias
  • inconsistent verdicts
  • disclosure issues.

Though, yes, the most common basis is fresh evidence.

emeraldtablet · 25/05/2024 08:49

I am still a bit stunned after reading that investigative journalism article. I had only read in a glancing fashion about her arrest and conviction, and assumed it was an open and shut case.

I am also stunned that anyone would call The New Yorker magazine "some tacky trash mag".

It has been, for as long as I can remember, a well-regarded literary bastion, and a quick look at Wiki (for those not familiar with it, or muddling it with the New York Post) describes it as "a preeminent forum for serious fiction, essays and journalism."

Boringmouse · 25/05/2024 09:03

I always thought it strange they made such a big deal about her searching for the parents on FB. It's the kind of thing I would do. Interesting in that article that it said she'd searched over 2000 other people, random people she'd met at her dance classes etc, don't remember that being said at the time.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.