Lucy Letby denied leave to appeal

[Viviennemary]

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.

Some prosecution witnesses presented different information in the stand vs their medical notes at the time. Apparently their recall years later was fresher than at the time.

Hadn’t come across that one, will listen. Thanks for the heads up.

Who writes those substack articles does anyone know?

@kkloo
Pseudoscientists

@sewerbee
I haven't seen anyone disputing the things that were said and pointing out any pseudoscience in the articles.

Well, they can hardly go in all guns blazing - not the way they work and besides, they don't have the statistical data (yet) to interpret.

The URL link may give you a better idea to the way they approach things. - here's a screenshot just of the contents page for ease of reference

@ShiftySandDune - barring ITV Drama doing a four part series 'Ms Letby and The Hospital' along the lines of Mr Bates and the Post Office, there's hardly going to be public support for a retrial.

So far, its erudite statisticians and a diligent journalist team with close to unique access to,trial records questioning the safety of the conviction

if Letby's conviction is quashed, I think the horror of systemic failings in an NHS hospital coupled with understaffing and insufficient expertise (and bad luck) will outweigh a random serial killer nurse who perhaps ought to have been identified earlier but wasn't.

Quite. Given that they published the below report in 2022 ‘Healthcare serial killer or coincidence?’ Having since 2017 seen the Letby trial on the horizon (according to its co-author and RSS fellow Dr Gill) I think it’s pretty obvious what the RSS position is on statistics in this case. https://rss.org.uk/RSS/media/File-library/News/2022/Report_Healthcare_serial_killer_or_coincidence_statistical_issues_in_investigation_of_suspected_medical_misconduct_Sept_2022_FINAL.pdf

This is purely anecdotal for now, but I think a lot of people feel differently about the case now vs a few months ago/a year ago. I know I do. However, the wheels move extremely slowly, looking at previous miscarriages of justice, so it would most likely be many years before anything significant happened (if ever). I do, however, think we’ll see a difference in reporting on the case once the ban is lifted. The New Yorker article is already having an effect. I believe we will see a difference in tone from serious journalists in the UK. The daily mail will always cling to a salacious story, of course, but we won’t see as much confidence in the conviction from more serious publications IMO.

Well, they can hardly go in all guns blazing - not the way they work and besides, they don't have the statistical data (yet) to interpret.

@MyrtlethePurpleTurtle Well they clearly felt able to express concerns about statistics used in the Sally Clark case in far more definitive terms www.inference.org.uk/sallyclark/RSS.html

It will be interesting to see if authors like this man, apparently a retired doctor from Ireland writing under a pen name feel more open to talk under their own names when the appeal is over.

https://jameganx.notepin.co/

You’re comparing a response after conviction with a report written before a conviction (not to mention different authors, two decades apart etc). The RSS sent its 2022 report ‘Healthcare Serial Killer Or Coincidence?’ to both the defence and prosecution at the start of Letby’s trial. This was after having taken several years to research and write the report having seen the trial on the horizon from 2017. It’s extremely clear from the report what their position is on the stats presented in this case. I advise reading the full report, but there is also a summary report available on the RSS site - linked above.

I am positive that there will be a lot more open, intelligent, discussion (particularly from medics, journalists, lawyers) once the reporting ban is lifted. I am already hearing ripples of this anecdotally in my professional and personal life (not wanting to give too much away, but I’m a university based academic with media links). It’s such an extraordinary case once you dig into it. I don’t think it’ll blow over quietly.

Sorry I meant retrial and not appeal!

It does seem like more people are starting to speak out. This was published on the Irish medical times, it was just an opinion piece based on the New Yorker really but she still put her name to it even though that puts her in the firing line for criticism. It says you need to register but I was able to read it just scrolling down. And the 'LOL' is her initials, it's not in any way making light of the subject matter.
https://www.imt.ie/opinion/comment/lol-may-21-2024-21-05-2024/

I'm just delving into 'James Egan's' stuff properly now and he seems very knowledgeable.

It really is an extraordinary case, It's hard to believe she was convicted on that little evidence with no proper defence in 2023. It's almost like reading about a historic miscarriage of justice or unfair trial and looking at how flimsy the evidence was and how bad the defence was, it's crazy to think it happened in 2023.

I’d love to write about it, but it’s in such a tenacious spot right now. I’m in the medical humanities domain and the case brings up so many far-reaching points about the society we are in.

I think public opinion could turn round incredibly fast, because of stereotypical things like her being young and blonde, and public sympathy for nurses. And most people are capable of grasping the Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy which appears to have been key to how the whole thing was investigated. If a tabloid chose to run a front page suggesting she might well be innocent, which they could well do at some point because it certainly shift copies, it would stick in people’s minds.

Given the similarities between Ireland and the UK in terms of health and justice systems, and the historical fact that two of the biggest miscarriages of justice in UK history involved innocent Irish people wrongly convicted, Irish medics, journalists, etc, may see the problems here more clearly than a more distant observer. I’m not surprised to see a couple of Irish voices already piping up (I’m thinking of Dr Michael McConville also, from the We Need to Talk About Lucy Letby podcast). I think we’ll see more of that, but the really interesting conversations will happen in the UK once the ban is lifted.

I agree it will all be very slow. On her conviction I reckoned about 10 years. It’s a long and complex case, although in many ways very simple - no evidence. The Rachel Aviv article may expedite the process.

By way of example - Barry George (Jill Dando murder) it took a campaign and a Panorama documentary. From conviction to acquittal at retrial was around 7 years. But that’s was for a single charge. A retrial on this scale will cost millions.

I don’t think casual opinion (I.e based on looks or other superficial engagement with the case) will turn easily. Mostly because the halo effect (where being young and pretty leads to positive cognitive bias) has a reverse effect when the person in question is associated with crimes like these. Shaking off a smear like this requires people actually engaging with the facts, including new information not previously known. That can be uncomfortable, particularly if you previously had a strong opinion of her guilt. I do think an awful lot of people will rethink their opinions once it is established in the public eye how weak the case was and how completely absent the defence were in terms of challenging literally anything. There will always be people who are, for whatever reason, emotionally attached to the idea of her guilt, who will refuse to even entertain the idea of a miscarriage of justice, regardless of proof. I don’t think that will be the majority position though.

Yes, it will be a long and slow process.

I have used the thanks button extensively but I would like to thank @Kittybythelighthouse , @Mirabai and @kkloo (and others) for the incredibly detailed and intelligent posts. It’s really been such an eye opening thread.

My own uneasiness about this case was actually not based in anything deeper than the note. It surprised me how many people took it at absolute face value (she said she did it, so she did, she said she was evil, so she is.) The notes seemed too hysterically raw, filled with pain and despair. They were just too authentic in their emotion to go side by side with someone who has the coldness to kill babies.

There were other things too but that was the main one. In all honesty it is troubling me a bit and I hope something happens fast.

Yes, you have to not engage your empathy at all to see those notes (in their full context) and not think this is a woman on the edge, a young woman who has been accused of the most unimaginably horrific crimes, and is having a human reaction to that. Reading them as admission of guilt requires such a tabloid esque lack of understanding of human nature, such an absence of empathy, I just despair. Like, for a start, if she had written them as confessions cackled to herself in the black of night, why keep them when you know you’re in this position and they’ll likely be found? Same goes for the handover notes. No ‘serial killer’ leaves ‘trophies’ lying around in shopping bags for police to find when they know that the police are going to search their house.

You’re right, everything about this case is extremely troubling and as a PP said, it says so much about contemporary UK society.

So LL if her convictions are overturned this means basically she’ll be 44 by the time this is completed. So her chances of having children by then will be slim.

I know the legal mechanisms run slowly but if she’s innocent it’s vastly unfair to her.

@Kittybythelighthouse I thought exactly the same as you, you’d have to be incredibly thick with some of the evidence she left lying around and she doesn’t come across as stupid but a woman who’s become mentally unstable as she’s been victimised and yes, the target of a witch hunt.

I bet her colleagues who tried to defend her or raised comments when she was suspended were quickly shut up and shut down. Who knows who decided to have her tried for murder but as I’ve said before it’s very easy for someone to be a scapegoat and then justify it by saying “she was suspended” - maybe she was suspended and this is coming back to bite her as she knew too much about the failings of the hospital, maybe even was tempted to whistleblow herself.

”I think public opinion could turn round incredibly fast, because of stereotypical things like her being young and blonde”

Is there any evidence that people’s appearance affects the public’s attitude to accused or convicted people?

LL’s race, age, sex, looks and hair colour and the privilege these supposedly give her have come up a lot on this thread but from where I’m sitting I’m really not seeing that they have helped her.

I understand that she did actually raise a complaint before all this kicked off, so I’ve had the same thought myself re whistleblowing. The unit was atrociously managed, no matter which way you slice it. There were babies that died in that unit due to straight incompetence and mismanagement - this is true even if you accept Letby’s conviction. Consultants incorrectly inserting breathing tubes, picc lines in the wrong place, no fluids for 16 hours (for a neonate?!). It’s just atrocious. Brearey, as the unit’s lead consultant has to take some heat for that once he’s done congratulating himself as a hero.