Lucy Letby - what's happening

[Viviennemary]

In the last few days I've heard conflicting news stories. One an ex coroner saying she is innocent. And another piece of news saying the Cheshire police want to charge her with more crimes believed to have been carried out at two other hospitals she worked at.

You don’t concentrate on gut feelings. They just arise. And continue despite active efforts to ignore them.

Have you seriously never had a gut feeling?! You don’t know I am talking about?

But people will have different gut feelings. The nurses in Letby's units had concerns (competence, not criminal) about a registrar in all this. Brearey had a gut feeling that Letby was responsible for the deaths. Her manager obviously didn't. Whose gut do you listen to? What's your response when you're fired on someone's gut feeling?

You do realise that expert witnesses can be instructed by either the defence or the prosecution? They don’t limit themselves to one or the other. IIRC Dewi Evans had previously worked for the defence more than he had the prosecution.

And we don’t know how much any of Letby’s numerous defence experts were paid so yes, complete conjecture on your part.

You need to look at the principle of equality of arms/article 6 of the ECHR.

No. Where did I say that?

I said the prosecution and defence could draw on different levels of resources.

Thankfully I don’t work in a hospital and I’m not anyone’s manager. I am just a random person on the internet who has a bad gut feeling when I looked at this again today.

As I said. It’s a feeling. And it’s giving bad vibes about Rees as much as it is Letby. Is it bad vibes about negligence, competence, malice, murder. Who knows. It’s just bad and eery feelings.

But a prosecution case off the back of a prior police investigation will be the situation pretty much 100% of the time. I don’t understand what your point is in relation to Letby. It is not unfair (and is in fact completely proper) that the police thoroughly investigated prior to charge.

And I am not aware that there has been any suggestion from her defence team that she was constrained in terms of the resources she was allowed to make her own case?

Sorry, I should have been more clear. People are saying they didn't do enough by not calling the police. They waited for senior management to intervene.

Rees is interesting - she didn't know Letby at all during the period when the crimes were alleged. Then she supported her vociferously over the next years. After the guilty verdict, with calls being made to prosecute her and others, she seemed to concede that Letby was guilty. Same at the Thirlwall Inquiry. Then after the first of McDonald's press conferences, she came out and stated in the press that she didn't believe Letby was guilty, unlike the other managers who waited until police announced they were considering charges to react.

Definitely not perfect behaviour, but very human and quite brave - she would have been better off continuing to keep her head down

Anyway, I do respect your right to have gut feelings. It's just that without further investigation, one person's gut feeling is no more relevant than another's. But I accept that you weren't saying it was.

I've just pointed out a difference - and one that's pretty marked when you have three years of a police investigation before an arrest. It's not something I'd have any solution to, but it does create a significant difference in resources.

Emails like this did it for me, multiple doctors raised their concerns but were told to stop emailing and making a fuss then "In May, nursing boss Karen Rees texts Letby: "hang on in there girl" and "Your nursing team are fully behind u. We will get through this. Lol K xxx" - what? Lucy had support in high places hence no investigation which is why she could continue doing this for longer.

So if something suspicious happened the next day, they weren't allowed to report it.

To avoid all this, all hospitals need CCTV everywhere and it should be monitored on a regular basis. Then, video evidence will show what is happening when and where.

No, I'm afraid you have that wrong.

Karen Rees was never in touch with Letby before she was suspended from the ward. Once the doctors demanded it, she was off the ward within a week. She was on office duties elsewhere in the hospital when Rees sent that text. She was off the ward for three years before she was charged, and there have been no accusations around harmful behaviours in that time, from anyone.

This has been published by the BBC, they have evidence - yet you seem to know so much more? Bizzare. Where's your article? My point was she had support from here.

You seem very adamant Lucy is innocent. Are you a relative of hers?

I'm not at odds with the BBC here. They say, rightly, that that text was sent in May 2017. Letby was off the ward from July 2016. And there is far more detail on the Thirlwall site, where all transcripts and documents referred to in them were uploaded, so I'm not relying on the BBC. Judith Moritz's reporting on the case has been pretty weak.

That's a very odd question about whether I'm related to Letby. I'm hardly alone in thinking her conviction isn't safe or in posting about it. I would post much less on this thread if people weren't posting quite a lot of inaccuracies. It's a pity to let them stand.

Yes that was the article I read. The BBC timeline one from March. 2025.

That text was a red flag for me. Who in their right mind does an ‘keep your chin up hun’ to someone being accused of murder.

Denied she knew what the concerns were. When others said everyone was gossiping.

Then I found the flip flopping oftenaddled mentioned.

And a spat about the court case where someone said she would back LL to the hilt and when asked if she would take personal responsibility if something happened. Then she said yes. Then denied she had that convo.

Its all super odd.

I wonder what thirwall will make of it.

All I said was she had support from senior management, which is true based on the text messages she has received from them?

I agree, so god damn weird! They haven't released senior management names of who have been arrested. I wouldn't be surprised if she is one of them. Also, wouldn't be surprised if @Oftenaddled starts jumping on MN saying they're innocent too.

She needed to be impartial and have no bias, as this would have affected their investigation.

Most people concerned in the hospital just didn't believe Letby had harmed the children - after all, they'd seen the doctors initially accept natural causes of death. They'd seen the external reviews saying the unit was unsafe and that poor medical care had contributed to the deaths. The doctors had told them they had only gut feelings and the shift patterns as evidence. It was a bizarre situation, and as far as Rees and others were concerned, they were supporting a colleague who was being bullied by senior doctors.

But she wasn't on the ward at that time, so even if you believe the doctors were right and Letby was a murderer, no children were harmed / killed during the period when Rees knew and supported Letby.

There's these emails too: Steve seems quite angry that his concerns aren't being taken seriously or investigated? I genuinely don't understand how she's been scapegoated, when multiple doctors raised concerns and sent emails. They also asked police to investigate everyone? Why would they want police involvement, this could damage their own careers? If this was about the money or fame. As stuff like this when it goes public, it can be damaging and being recognised like that in medical profession.

https://thirlwall.public-inquiry.uk/wp-content/uploads/thirlwall-evidence/INQ0005749.pdf

"Most people concerned in the hospital just didn't believe Letby had harmed the children - after all, they'd seen the doctors initially accept natural causes of death." this bit - who cares what people think?

In an investigation, people need to stay impartial and keep mouths shut. If there's biased opinions in a case, then this can affect the outcome.

I could think you're a serial killer, but does my opinion matter? No, it doesn't. Investigation matters with evidence, not opinion.

They have also seen doctors raise concerns about Lucy which is evident in emails.

Rees wasn't conducting investigations, and the hospital had a duty of care to Letby. I agree the text wasn't professionally worded, but apart from that, I'd approve of her support for Letby.

Where did I say she was conducting the investigation? I said, she needed to behave professional and impartial as this can tamper investigation. All members of staff need to be professional, especially when it comes to investigation.

Good to know she wasnt there. She’s a big herring I suppose then. A very weird one though. If she wasn’t there at the time I am not sure how’s she managed to get so wrapped up in this. Perhaps unlucky too.

Sorry if I misunderstood you about the investigation, and thank you for pointing that out.

So, to be clear, the hospital took legal and HR advice as soon as they suspended Letby from nursing duties. Since they had no evidence on which to suspend her, and she was distressed and in a position to raise a grievance herself, they needed to put support in place for her, and Rees was part of that. While I think the wording of the text is unprofessional, supporting Letby was part of her remit, running in parallel with any investigations. All in Thirlwall.

I just think she behaved unprofessional with that text message, which could have affected peoples opinion of her etc.

Can you confirm which of the external reviews explicitly said that poor medical care had contributed to the deaths, because I don’t remember seeing that in the RCPCH report? Yes it did include recommendations for improvement, but it also said that some of these issues were entirely consistent with peer units at that time (ie as a result of wider NHS staffing and capacity issues) and it actually praises the team culture and supervision/learning environment.