WARNING This comment contains about four million words more than I intended. Also my thumbs have seized up and I think my phone might be on fire...
This is something I've taken a bit of interest in, or rather my DW's taken an interest in and I'm following along with. Here's what I've read from various sources thus far:
The is no physical evidence whatsoever linking her to the deaths of those poor, poor babies. Not one single shred of it, no forensics, no DNA, nothing found in her possession, no "smoking gun", absolutely nothing at all.
There are zero eyeball witnesses linking her to the deaths, not one. Not even a biased or unreliable one. Of all the staff and parents who'd have been buzzing around the neonatal unit, not a single person saw her do the slightest thing wrong, suspicious, or even unusual. No one even thinks they might have seen her doing anything untoward, not a single soul that can stand up and say "It was her, she did it, I saw her do it with my own eyes!".
Another thing there's a complete absence of is CCTV doing anything in the slightest bit out of the ordinary, no photos, no phone clips, not one single frame of proof, despite the fact that we've all got Hollywood-quality video cameras in our back pockets, and with security being such a high priority in neonatal they've got cameras than Jessop's.
What there are, however, is more than a dozen cases from across the globe of nurses in uncannily similar or in some cases near identical situations to Lucy Letby. Found guilty, left languishing in prison for moths, years, even decades, only to have all charges dropped and be instantly freed. Sometimes it's a previously undiagnosed medical condition that made them act in a suspicious way when they'd done nothing wrong. Sometimes it's incompetence in the legal system. Sometimes it's because a tragedy happens, and the one nurse who seems a little bit 'different' to the rest - the 'loner', the 'quiet one', the 'odd one out' just get's blamed and everyone runs with it.
The Jury were shown fabricated, manipulated evidence and believed it to be kosher, when it was actually a document created by the prosecution in an attempt to make reality fit their theory rather than the other way round. The Jurors were shown what they were told was a list off all suspicious/unexplained deaths on that ward between x date and y date, which clearly showed LL was on duty for every single one. What they were actually shown was a cherry picked list showing only the suspicious/unexplained deaths that happened when LL was on duty, and none of the equally suspicious/unexplained deaths (of which there are many) that happened when she was nowhere near the place. If the prosecution have strong case, why jeopardise their credibility by telling demonstrable lies?
Her notes and writing (now this one is a bit of a stretch I think) they're writing off (wait a minute..) as either some sort of delusional/fantasying disorder and/or plain old "impostor syndrome". While she has written down in black and white in her own handwriting things like "I killed them I did this" and so on, there is absolutely no specific detail whatsoever, nothing that so much as hints at her having inside or intimate knowledge of the cause of these tragic events. Consider for example the difference between "Frogpole has died, and I think it might be my fault because I didn't click the 'thanks' button on enough of his posts!" and "Frogpole has died because at 0235hrs on 30/08/04 I got the 10 inch kitchen knife with the grey handle from the second drawer on the left and I stabbed the bastard right in his ego!"
Good grief, this came out way, waaaay longer than intended, sorry! There was other stuff too but I don't want to type it any more than you want to read it lol