The Guardian today on the safety of the Lucy Letby convictions

[Kittybythelighthouse]

This article was apparently months in the making but it was delayed by the reporting restrictions https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/article/2024/jul/09/lucy-letby-evidence-experts-question

“A Guardian investigation has interviewed dozens of these experts and seen further evidence from emails and documents. Those raising concerns include several leading consultant neonatologists, some with current or recent leadership roles, and several senior neonatal nurses. Others are public health professionals, GPs, biochemists, a leading government microbiologist, and lawyers. Several of those still working in the NHS have asked to remain anonymous, fearing the impact if they are named.

These experts said they were acutely aware of the suffering of the families involved and did not want to reopen their trauma, but were so troubled they felt compelled to become involved”

It’s easily missed, and the media tell you what they want you to see.

It makes me laugh how many people think that it’s cut and dried because of the guilty verdict and can’t even contemplate that the jury have got it wrong, yet everyone is convinced MJ is as guilty as sin, despite the jury not finding him guilty.

I'm sure I read somewhere that there had been another cluster of deaths elsewhere in the hospital, but can't find any reference to it. Does anyone recall this?

Really, the criminal justice system could be farmed out to volunteers from Mumsnet. It would save the taxpayers a FORTUNE.

Given the Post Office Horizon scandal and the Andrew Malkinson exoneration all over the news this year you’d think people understand that the jury system is far from perfect. Mistakes happen. We do need to be careful and sure. The repercussions of a miscarriage of justice like this go far beyond Lucy Letby as an individual. It’s gravely serious. Scrutiny has to be tolerated.

Fortunately the article we are discussing here doesn’t involve volunteers from mumsnet, does it? Either engage honestly and seriously, like an adult, or go on about your business.

Apparently the maternity ward had a similar spike at the same time. In typical fashion it appears to have been overlooked that neonates are a direct result of a process of pregnancy and labour. The state of the maternity ward in the same hospital were they were just born is very relevant.

Happy to go on about my business! Enjoy your thread.

Have a lovely Tuesday.

Not sure if this link will work...

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2024/05/20/lucy-letby-was-found-guilty-of-killing-seven-babies-did-she-do-it

Actually the entire week is looking brilliant, thanks for your kind wishes.

Yes I’m concerned that there is insufficient evidence that she did it. I think she probably did but there’s a good possibility she didn’t and I just don’t think there is enough for a conviction

Yes. Look at the beginning of the sentence “I killed them” to the left of “I did this”.

Whilst I agree it is odd it still does not prove her guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and that is what gives me huge concerns in this case.

You are very welcome 💐

If you listen to the podcast The Trial of Lucy Letby it is very clear that the investigation was extremely careful to be thorough and not jump to draw conclusions.

The Guardian article admits that it interviewed experts who did not have access to the medical notes on any of the babies or the evidence seen by the jurors. In which case how can they draw any valid conclusion?

Not in the UK but this one will - The New Yorker archive.ph/AWpyz

I wondered if the silenced alarms were connected to a central monitor system that the staff could see and if the doctor went into the room because of seeing a central monitor

I find it extraordinary and very disturbing that people in the UK cannot access the article without using a 3rd party site...

She didn’t keep patient notes. She had 257 handover sheets, around 250 had absolutely nothing to do with any of the babies in question. Handover sheets are actually very dry documents, single sheets of a4 paper. Nurses fill these in to give to the nurse taking over after a shift. In reality they frequently end up coming home in pockets, piled up to be shredded later. This isn’t meaningful to me at all.

257 is hardly a few that might have been accidentally brought home, and she didn't shred them - despite having a shredder - she stored them, clearly over some length of time given she'd built up hundreds. Again, I don't think it makes her guilty - I think it's at most circumstantial evidence. I do think it's odd that neither the Guardian nor the New Yorker article talk about any of the things that were used to try and build a motive/psychological profile, even if to dismiss them. I think there is some real cherry-picking going on in both.

Or maybe she was tortured by what was happening on her shifts. It must get to you.

When under extreme stress and under the pressure of certain types of questioning / gaslighting you doubt yourself.

it was suggested it could also be self reflection after and her expressing confusion or self doubt about her skills?

The Trial of Lucy Letby podcast simply regurgitated what happened in the court. Despite popular belief trials are not where you will get all the evidence. Trials generally exclude all kinds of things for all kinds of reasons in the pre-trial conferences. In the adversarial system, with a jury, which is the system we have, the truth is not as important as who “wins” on the day and in the eyes of the jury. Further, the creators of that podcast became blatantly biased as it went along. They minimise what they feel like minimising and do put a spin on the events.

Not having access to the specific notes isn’t relevant in certain areas of concerns - the statistics are bunk regardless of notes. The fact that death by the way Evans describes it in many of his conclusions isn’t medically possible or valid. That aside, Dr Hall did have access to the notes and everything. As did the coroners who did the initial post mortems. They also had the benefit of examine the actual infants, which Evans never did as he only came to the case years later. There is plenty of reason to doubt Evans without the notes, which are only relevant up to a point.

It was because it was published while there was still a live trial. They presumably could now give UK access because it's over, which is also why the Guardian can now publish. Whether they'll do so on an article they published a while ago I don't know.

I have no firm opinion on the safety or otherwise of Lucy Letby's conviction, but I don't think that post-it says "they went". I think it's "they won't" (you can see the apostrophe) and I think it's her answering the question she's written above: "how will things ever be like they [word obscured]".

When my dc were in nicu and later paeds alarms were routinely silenced - nurses were still attentive but a lot of the time it was things like nasal prongs dislodged etc or they’d silence them then just be observing baby and sats for example It seemed normal to me ? I never felt that was wrong so when I read about it in this case I was surprised