Lucy Letby: have you changed your mind?

[Kittybythelighthouse]

I’ve been sensing a shift in opinions on the Lucy Letby case and I’m interested in hearing from people who have changed their mind either way.

Did you used to think she was guilty and now you don’t, or you aren’t sure? What changed your mind?

Also vice versa: did you used to think she was not guilty but then changed your mind to guilty? What convinced you?

The reason I’m using the term ‘not guilty’ rather than ‘innocent’ is because courts don’t prove innocence. Not guilty is a legal conclusion about whether or not the state met its burden of proof.

The options ahead if the CCRC refer the case back to the courts are: either an appeal, retrial, or the verdicts get quashed (as in the Sally Clark case).

If she gets released via any of those methods it’s anyone’s guess what she will do or where she will go, though I imagine it would be hard to continue living in England. I very much doubt she would want to return to nursing.

By the way, British courts don’t ever prove innocence, ‘not guilty’ just means that the prosecution hasn’t met the standard of proof so there is reasonable doubt.

Although apparently UK law doesnt automatically allow this without a waiver:

If a new legal team is appointed, they do not automatically inherit the privilege held by the previous team. The new team needs to obtain explicit consent (a waiver) from the client to access the previous defense's work product.

So perhaps someone who actually works in law in this country will know an actual answer.

Now it is but then normal practice.

I don't know whether she's guilty or not but I do think undue weight has been placed on things like notes and Facebook searches.

Yes

At first, I didn't have any reason to believe that she wasn't guilty. As time went on, and I followed the trial on the news, I remember thinking to myself, "is this all they've got?". The evidence seemed very flimsy and circumstantial to me. I think the prosecution did a better job than the defence, and it's as simple as that.

As to whether she has done anything wrong, I think she was a part of a unit where there were many incompetences. I think the whole unit was badly run, (with reports of effluence contamination around vulnerable premature babies being one of many issues) and she is being used as a scapegoat. All of the other specialists/doctors/nurses on this unit haven't been properly investigated so far.

The problem is, if LL isn't solely responsible, then that means that the unit has been/is being very poorly run, but nobody is looking into it.

😂

You don’t know what I work at/what I’m experienced in.

Once a client instructs a new team, those lawyers “stand in the shoes” of the client, so privilege continues, and sharing between the old and new teams isn’t a loss of privilege. It stays protected from outsiders like the prosecution. I linked an article that goes into this in some depth,

This is how it works in practice. It’s extraordinarily naive to think her new team do not have access to everything from the first trial and it’s based on absolutely nothing save a misunderstanding about something Letby’s barrister said to Liz Hull. As if he would advertise the fact that he hasn’t done even the most basic work on the case 🙄

I’m astounded by this and your judgement concerns me, especially if you have children.

No one in their right mind would let a convicted child killer look after their children. Whether you think she’s probably innocent or not, if there is the slightest indication that someone might be a child murderer, you shouldn’t let them look after your children.

Stop being so patronising. I have not said anything about her being blonde or mob rule. I didn’t like the previous comment about ‘much’ of the evidence being heard by the public and I challenged it. I am perfectly entitled to do so unless challenging things is only ok if it’s a cause you personally agree with.

I am happy to wait for the outcome from the CCRC. If a retrial is needed then that must happen. However, whilst the experts you keep citing have made a compelling case, the court of appeal stated that even if they accepted Dr Lees findings in full (which they didn’t), it still would not have undermined the convictions.

Be honest OP, what is your role in this? Are you a journalist? Connected to the defence team? You seem desperate to sway public opinion on this.

Have you ever dressed a dead baby? You want to treat them as if it was yours. You go out of your way to ease the pain for the parents spend time looking for a little flower to put in the basket before you take photos. Wonder if the parents said these things when the deaths were ruled as natural or only after the doctors & police accused her & fed them their version of events.

I don’t think anyone should let a stranger look after their child, and I think most of us wouldn’t.

Letby’s friend Dawn, who does know her and who named her godparent, most likely would let Letby look after her children though.

All of these stories about odd behavior came after the parents were told that their baby had been murdered, years after the deaths and years after the post mortems found natural causes. None of them complained about her at the time. I don’t blame them for casting back into their memories and finding fault with her, or looking for things they’d missed. Anyone would.

What if you don't think she's any more likely to be a child killer than anyone else, though?

People always ask this question as a gotcha. Go on, if you really believed she was innocent, you'd say yes, but you don't, do you?

If they aren't willing to hear the answer, yes, I really do think she's innocent, they shouldn't try to win cheap points asking the question.

Wow thankyou. Yes I am interested in the searches. Do you know where I can find information on this that I can look at?

2 years! It’s crazy you don’t tidy your room in two years.

Maybe she's like me and shoving things away under beds and out of sight is exactly how she tidies her room

This is what you said:

”Oh well there you go then, some of the public heard much of the evidence. Thats fine then. We should all be able to have a vote based on much of what we heard. Maybe they could develop a Love Island style app.”

So it’s a bit much to get sniffy about being patronised in return. My comment stands. It’s very foolish to sneer about love island voting apps (which would be “mob rule” btw) when no one is suggesting any such thing.

”Be honest OP, what is your role in this? Are you a journalist? Connected to the defence team? You seem desperate to sway public opinion on this.”

Lol. My ‘role’ is that of a citizen in a democracy who is gravely concerned about matters that call into question the dependability of the justice system and the NHS. I genuinely wonder why that doesn’t concern you?

No clue, which is unfair on us all.

Exasperating that the science - stats and medical - is so badly presented or dithery we have no way of telling.

So was I disagree with you. Your evidence? A list of who was on duty, why were the doctors not on that list? What about the deaths that ocurred when she wasn’t on duty. Methods of killing have now been changed even though she was convicted of them. Motive? Because she was found guilty of one the judge told the jury she should be found guilty of them all. Declined appeal twice refused to allow dr Lee sho to be a witness in her appeal.

You didn’t answer my question. Yes you’re obviously a citizen. Do you have a personal or professional connection of any sort to the case?

It’s in the trial transcripts and Thirlwall reports. I’m sorry I don’t have the specific references to hand. There is a really good subreddit (linked below) that has tons of useful fact-checked and referenced info on this case.

www.reddit.com/r/LucyLetbyTrials/s/5gnjG6WxT0

I agree completely.

Sorry, I didn’t know I was under interrogation. I fully answered you though.

No, I do not have any connection to the case either personally or professionally. I am merely a private citizen taking an interest in matters which call into question the dependability of the justice system and the NHS, two bodies that affect my life, and the lives of my loved ones greatly.

Paranoid much? Now you answer my question, why don’t you care about that?

Also, what makes you think I’m not concerned? I’ve said repeatedly I wouldn’t be against a retrial if it is deemed necessary by the people who are reviewing all of the information.

Just seen its none other than Mark Macdonald- explains a lot!