Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Chat

Join the discussion and chat with other Mumsnetters about everyday life, relationships and parenting.

Lucy Letby: have you changed your mind?

1000 replies

Kittybythelighthouse · 09/08/2025 20:42

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.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
18
Kittybythelighthouse · 10/08/2025 14:35

nomas · 10/08/2025 14:34

The ‘she is innocent just because I say so’ lot are out again.

Who had said this? Can you quote them?

OP posts:
kkloo · 10/08/2025 14:38

CoralCrow · 10/08/2025 05:09

Paul Doyle the former royal marine who mowed down the crowd in Liverpool doesn't seem to have got much press attention though...

They're completely different crimes. She was accused of being a serial killer a serial killer of babies.

There is often an obsession with serial killers, I remember after the trial the amount of people convinced she was guilty who were desperate for more of her police interview footage to be revealed because they wanted to see more of this serial killer and her demeanour. The amount of threads I saw on reddit even begging for an updated mug shot of her after she was convicted because they were fascinated by her and wanted to see more about how haggard she had gotten.

Then to add to that obsession that many true crime fans and other people naturally have with serial killers, the evidence in this case just was not that convincing for a lot of people, and then some experts started to agree with that opinion publicly.

So of course this case was going to get a ton of attention, it can't in any way be compared to a case where a man just mowed down a crowd in Liverpool.

nomas · 10/08/2025 14:38

Kittybythelighthouse · 10/08/2025 14:35

Who had said this? Can you quote them?

The person I replied to said this thread is an explanation as to why she is innocent.

Leafy3 · 10/08/2025 14:44

nomas · 10/08/2025 14:34

The ‘she is innocent just because I say so’ lot are out again.

I have said that. But nice job attempting to be condescending.

Typicalwave · 10/08/2025 14:49

nomas · 10/08/2025 14:34

The ‘she is innocent just because I say so’ lot are out again.

I think you’re confusing the concept of innocence with the concept of ‘guilty beyond a reasonable doubt’

The two are not the same thing.

It is in everybody’s interest that our judiciary and the decisions made are held up to scrutiny and that the bar is set to ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’

kkloo · 10/08/2025 14:49

Chipotlego · 10/08/2025 14:27

He has also said he doesnt have access, I know quite challenging to keep up with someone doing the media rounds and off the cuff comments really, which is why its not usually done. I dont think hes stupid, hes definitely been clawing for attention for a while and this is a great platform for him. Someone who seriously has her interests at heart would be professional from start to finish. All entitled to our own opinions, mine isnt any more wrong or right than yours.

Where did he say this?

The only mention of this I have seen came from the dailymail podcast and they didn't have a clue what they were talking about, and the idea that he didn't have access to her previous defence etc came from that and it was incorrect and then got spread around.

I am happy to be corrected if you can tell me where he said he doesn't have access.

Kittybythelighthouse · 10/08/2025 14:51

Chipotlego · 10/08/2025 14:27

He has also said he doesnt have access, I know quite challenging to keep up with someone doing the media rounds and off the cuff comments really, which is why its not usually done. I dont think hes stupid, hes definitely been clawing for attention for a while and this is a great platform for him. Someone who seriously has her interests at heart would be professional from start to finish. All entitled to our own opinions, mine isnt any more wrong or right than yours.

I didn’t say you weren’t entitled to your opinion. You’re perfectly welcome to continue darkly pointing to “why won’t she waive privilege” while being totally wrong,

As regards publicity, do you think he just wants to get on Love Island or something? He’s using publicity and the media to maintain pressure on and awareness of the case. Victims of Miscarriages of Justice rely on media and public pressure or else they’d never have their cases reviewed. Paddy Hill from The Birmingham Six said many times that the judiciary never would have overturned their case, despite glaring evidence of their innocence, had it not been for public pressure.

I keep very well up on this case btw. I know exactly what Mark MacDonald said.

OP posts:
Leafy3 · 10/08/2025 14:51

*haven't

Kittybythelighthouse · 10/08/2025 14:53

nomas · 10/08/2025 14:38

The person I replied to said this thread is an explanation as to why she is innocent.

The person you replied to didn’t say “she’s innocent because I said so” and neither has anyone else.

OP posts:
Toddlerteaplease · 10/08/2025 15:12

@Kittybythelighthouseit is specialised as in it’s a critical care environment. But it’s still pretty much the same as paediatric nursing. We have neonates on normal wards as well. A neonate is a baby less than 28 days old. Regardless of what gestation they are born at. I’ve been a paeds nurse for 21 years.

Toddlerteaplease · 10/08/2025 15:14

Don’t forget that these babies were only in a district general hospital. Therefore not particularly unwell. And that many unexplained and unexpected collapses, just do not happen.

LivelyOpalOtter · 10/08/2025 15:14

nomas · 10/08/2025 14:31

You’re wrong.

A supposition is a belief held without proof or certain knowledge. The court was satisfied beyond all reasonable doubt that she is a serial killer.

So you think courts determine reality? Is it only British courts that have this power or as soon as an organisation known as a court is assembled anywhere, does it gain this power?

Also, the trial did not present certain knowledge nor proof.

The mere decision of the majority of the jury that the evidence was sufficient to convict does not mean that what they have determined has become "fact."

That should be obvious from precedent of juries making mistakes.

Your theory also clearly doesn't account for juries which are ignorant, incompetent, corrupt, presented with false or misleading evidence, or any other myriad circumstances.

Toddlerteaplease · 10/08/2025 15:16

@placematsthar is not true. We look after babies from day one. They do not all go to NICU.

Oftenaddled · 10/08/2025 15:18

Toddlerteaplease · 10/08/2025 15:14

Don’t forget that these babies were only in a district general hospital. Therefore not particularly unwell. And that many unexplained and unexpected collapses, just do not happen.

The expert panel's conclusion was that many of the children were in the wrong level of hospital. They should have been born elsewhere or transferred out for better care.

Imperativvv · 10/08/2025 15:36

I do remember being surprised some of the babies were at Chester rather than somewhere like Alder Hey or St Mary's.

Kittybythelighthouse · 10/08/2025 15:37

Toddlerteaplease · 10/08/2025 15:12

@Kittybythelighthouseit is specialised as in it’s a critical care environment. But it’s still pretty much the same as paediatric nursing. We have neonates on normal wards as well. A neonate is a baby less than 28 days old. Regardless of what gestation they are born at. I’ve been a paeds nurse for 21 years.

Well in this context we are talking about very premature babies, not full term babies under 28 days old. As I understand it the physiology is very often different and complex even between different premature babies (various underdeveloped organs etc) everything I’ve read supports that. Happy to defer to you though because I’m not a nurse.

OP posts:
BadDinner · 10/08/2025 15:37

RightOhThen · 10/08/2025 14:05

Accusing people who are questioning of only doing it because she's young, white and blond. And the only people who bring that up are the people who are against her.

I’m really disturbed by how often this is brought up by people who believe LL is guilty. Either you believe everyone is entitled to a fair trial or you don’t. I’m beginning to think that’s its projection and people who say this don’t believe she is entitled to a fair trial because she’s blonde and white.

Those people don't believe that she would be given the 'benefit of the doubt' so to speak, and all the rather unprecedented public fuss about the safety of her conviction if she were not white, blonde and pretty. They may think why haven't men or less visually pleasing people for whom there are valid concerns about their sentences whom are currently languishing in jail been given so much attention?

There have also historically been times when white women have been believed in a crime case over that of genuinely innocent people of colour that to a degree is where the scepticism stems from. Even recently in the US there was a prolific case of a white, blonde very attractive woman beating up and abusing her black lover and stabbing him to death in a hotel room and she delayed calling 911 instead calling her parents for advice first, and yet when the police finally came to the apartment after she prevaricated giving the address, they put hand cuffs on him while he was immobile bleeding out on the ground and lightly questioned his girlfriend before letting her go free. These cases often happen in the US but they take up subconscious space in the mind when one hears about them. .

To make it clear. I firmly believe Lucy is innocent, and have been extremely distressed by this case, I'm just explaining where I perceive some of this continuous focus on her looks comes from.

There's other reasons, concerning women and the pretty witch phenomenon, but I think this is the most pertinent one I think.

Frieda86 · 10/08/2025 15:38

After watching the recent documentary I'm more on the fence (I was convinced of her guilt previously). I absolutely think the trial was a sham but I think her defence team have a lot to answer for. Why did they not challenge the spreadsheet showing the shifts? Why did they not have experts testifying about the insulin and how breathing tubes can dislodge? More things have come out about the hospital and I think its more a catalogue of errors from a lot of people that have all been blamed on her.

Kittybythelighthouse · 10/08/2025 15:41

Toddlerteaplease · 10/08/2025 15:16

@placematsthar is not true. We look after babies from day one. They do not all go to NICU.

But paediatric nurses don’t look after very premature babies? I think that’s the difference that is being underlined here.

OP posts:
Oftenaddled · 10/08/2025 15:43

Frieda86 · 10/08/2025 15:38

After watching the recent documentary I'm more on the fence (I was convinced of her guilt previously). I absolutely think the trial was a sham but I think her defence team have a lot to answer for. Why did they not challenge the spreadsheet showing the shifts? Why did they not have experts testifying about the insulin and how breathing tubes can dislodge? More things have come out about the hospital and I think its more a catalogue of errors from a lot of people that have all been blamed on her.

The defence was forbidden by the judge to challenge the prosecution's construction of the trial, or to refer to deaths or collapses of children who weren't on the indictment sheet. So they had their hands tied on some points.

Typicalwave · 10/08/2025 15:43

Toddlerteaplease · 10/08/2025 15:14

Don’t forget that these babies were only in a district general hospital. Therefore not particularly unwell. And that many unexplained and unexpected collapses, just do not happen.

That’s not true, though.

They were dealing with level three babies despite being a level 2 unit - and they weren’t properly equipped to do so - not equipment wise, not staffing wise, and not structurally. Shortly after Lucy was taken off the unit they downgraded to a level 1

Article below

https://www.nursingtimes.net/midwifery-and-neonatal/former-nurse-speaks-out-about-failings-on-lucy-letbys-unit-12-06-2025/#:~:text=In%20the%20early%202000s%2C%20the,be%20very%20unwell%20after%20birth.

Former nurse speaks out about failings on Lucy Letby's unit

Read an interview with a former nurse about failings at the Countess of Chester's neonatal unit, some of which predated Lucy Letby's crimes.

https://www.nursingtimes.net/midwifery-and-neonatal/former-nurse-speaks-out-about-failings-on-lucy-letbys-unit-12-06-2025/#:~:text=In%20the%20early%202000s%2C%20the,be%20very%20unwell%20after%20birth.

TheBroonOneAndTheWhiteOne · 10/08/2025 15:44

I very much doubt she would want to return to nursing

Eh? The NMC struck her off the register, so she wouldn't be able to anyway.

Oftenaddled · 10/08/2025 15:45

Typicalwave · 10/08/2025 15:43

That’s not true, though.

They were dealing with level three babies despite being a level 2 unit - and they weren’t properly equipped to do so - not equipment wise, not staffing wise, and not structurally. Shortly after Lucy was taken off the unit they downgraded to a level 1

Article below

https://www.nursingtimes.net/midwifery-and-neonatal/former-nurse-speaks-out-about-failings-on-lucy-letbys-unit-12-06-2025/#:~:text=In%20the%20early%202000s%2C%20the,be%20very%20unwell%20after%20birth.

That was Michelle Worden, who did a brilliant interview on the conditions at Chester Hospital a couple of days ago. She speaks very well

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music that you love, upload original content and share it all with friends, family and the world on YouTube.

https://youtu.be/7eoxAOuhsrw?si=FtmDPMHunR8eEJoM

placemats · 10/08/2025 15:46

Toddlerteaplease · 10/08/2025 15:16

@placematsthar is not true. We look after babies from day one. They do not all go to NICU.

But the neo nates that go to NICU have neonatal nurses, especially when the NICU is on an enhanced level of care as was the case when Letby was at the CoCH. It was later down graded.

Kittybythelighthouse · 10/08/2025 15:47

Typicalwave · 10/08/2025 15:43

That’s not true, though.

They were dealing with level three babies despite being a level 2 unit - and they weren’t properly equipped to do so - not equipment wise, not staffing wise, and not structurally. Shortly after Lucy was taken off the unit they downgraded to a level 1

Article below

https://www.nursingtimes.net/midwifery-and-neonatal/former-nurse-speaks-out-about-failings-on-lucy-letbys-unit-12-06-2025/#:~:text=In%20the%20early%202000s%2C%20the,be%20very%20unwell%20after%20birth.

Yes. The hospital wasn’t equipped to deal with the acuity of those babies. Which is why it was downgraded just after Letby was taken off the ward.

As regards the “unexpected collapses” the expert panel view is that the collapses were “unexpected” only because the doctors were not monitoring properly for signs of decline. The consultants only did 2 ward rounds a week. The rest of the staff were over burdened and under staffed in a not fit for purpose NICU taking in babies of too high an acuity. Thirlwall shows that again and again crucial signs of decline were simply missed.

OP posts:
Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.