We need to talk about Lucy Letby

[HardwickHall]

As the “Lucy Letby denied leave to appeal” thread has filled up, I thought I’d start another thread to discuss the case, hopefully for discussion of the trial, evidence, prosecution and defence etc rather than fact free frothing.

I’ve just listened to episode 15 of “We Need To Talk About Lucy Letby” where they discuss the New Yorker article by Rachel Aviv and specifically the problems with the roster data table which was shown (several times as I understand it) by the prosecution during the trial. It’s quite shocking actually. Recommended listening.

https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/we-need-to-talk-about-lucy-letby/id1736761161?i=1000658160398

When this thread was first posted I wrote

"The enormity of such a potential miscarriage of justice takes one's breath away". Then I continued on to say that I had faith in the criminal justice process.

I have to say that my faith is faltering. If Lucy was 'framed' it really doesn't bear thinking about. The Dutch case of Lucia de Berk is eerily similar and her conviction was eventually quashed.

WTF. He has changed his mind!?!

that’s terrible!!!!

I have never thought that she was guilty but had accepted that I was in a minority to think that.

there has to be a retrial surely!?

Ages and ages ago I read an article that had some
comments by Ravi Jayaram and for some reason his words made my blood run cold and I just thought oh my god you are framing her to cover up the failings of your unit.

the poor parents. And if Lucy is innocent then omg

I just watched the whole press conference from her new barrister. It’s astounding. He’s got teams of experts looking into each case. One of the babies had a needle inserted into its liver by a doctor just before death. This was missed. And the insulin results were obviously a sampling error as not only was the insulin levels unusually high the blood glucose was off scale high - should be 40mmol/L and it was 999mmol/L which is the reading it gives when it’s off scale high. The barrister said the number of experts from round the world that have contacted him to help and not one wants payment he said was unprecedented.

It is of no relevance that a random journalist voiced an opinion (not a peer-reviwed article, an opinion) about a topic about which they know little, in a foreign weekly magazine.

Absolutely, whether this has been a conscious framing or a subconscious framing I don't know. But care at that unit was not robust at all.

Lawyer for Lucy Letby as per yesterday says new evidence is grounds for a new appeal after expert changed their minds on murders. Opinions? Apologies but wasn’t sure if it’d been raised here but see it has.