Page 3 | Lucy Letby: have you changed your mind?

Kittybythelighthouse · 2025-08-09T19:42:15+00:00

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.

MalcolmMoo · 09/08/2025 22:05

I don’t know maybe slightly leaning to not guilty. I think she definitely had an unfair trial though.

Lougle · 09/08/2025 22:07

I couldn't see how the retrial could be fair, when everyone on the jury would know she was convicted of all the other charges.

Viviennemary · 09/08/2025 22:09

Do I believe she is guilty. Absolutely. But with all these so-called medical experts coming forward maybe it needs to be investigated further. The point is medicine is not an exact science and experts have different opinions.

Toddlerteaplease · 09/08/2025 22:12

Nope. Still guilty. Never doubted it from the moment I first heard about it.

autisticat · 09/08/2025 22:13

I was wavering a year ago when the Guardian was publishing a lot of articles on how she wasn’t really guilty. But then I read all the court transcripts and quotes I could get my hands on - which of course wasn’t everything the jury heard - and I realised: (1) a lot of what the media reported was inaccurate (factually and/or scientifically), and (2) there was more than enough there that I was convinced beyond reasonable doubt she’s guilty.

JustHereForthePIP · 09/08/2025 22:14

What makes people think the trial was unfair? It's been reviewed twice and she hasn't been given leave to appeal. Even her new legal team have admitted that they haven't submitted anything to the CRCC that wasn't available to her initial defence team.

Her apparently lack of defence witnesses was surprising to an outsider, but her team was very experienced and party to far more information that anyone outside it could be. They had an expert but didn't call them at trial. There will have been a reason for that.

I haven't read or heard anything to make me think it was a miscarriage of justice, so I would have faith in the legal system and her convictions.

Absentmindedsmile · 09/08/2025 22:14

I wouldn’t let her look after my baby that’s for sure. Would you??

ScruffMuffin · 09/08/2025 22:17

If I remember correctly, the Panorama programme revealed at the end that there were other deaths during that time frame, and Lucy HAD been present at all of them. I believe they are looking into other possibly suspicious cases from earlier in her career too.

There were parents who went on the record saying LL got overly involved and insisted on doing things/ holding/ dressing babies when she didn't need to (will look this up when less tired), and others saying her emotional responses were sometimes bizarre.

Is the conviction safe/ beyond reasonable doubt? No.

Is she guilty? I think so.

Ritasueandbobtoo9 · 09/08/2025 22:17

Honestly on the fence.

Anyahyacinth · 09/08/2025 22:17

The New Yorker article is an incredible read about the poor care the babies were receiving, sewage running down walls, expert shopping, discounting experts who say there were no murders just inadequate care, her diary / journal entries were infact what a psychologist asked her to write as an exercise about the bad things she felt others were saying about her...then used as confessional evidence. The supposed statistics of her being on duty during incidents being totally incorrect...seek out the article ...it's an incredible read about how poor care can be covered up.

Ecstaticmotion · 09/08/2025 22:19

Curious which Scottish case?

ninjahamster · 09/08/2025 22:19

On balance, I do think she is guilty. But it would not surprise me if her conviction was overturned sometime.,

junkmaail · 09/08/2025 22:21

mamabearlove · 09/08/2025 21:58

She took home handover notes from previous shifts,very easily done. You have handover,stuff it in your pocket and it’s there when you get home . Think any HCP can relate to that scenario.

Show quote history

I can’t.

Ecstaticmotion · 09/08/2025 22:21

ARichtGoodDram · 09/08/2025 21:23

I think she is guilty, but I don't think her conviction is safe. There's a high profile Scottish murder case that I have the exact same feelings on.

And that's a dilemma because you don't want dangerous people walking the streets, but equally a fit and proper justice system is essential.

Curious which Scottish case?

JLou08 · 09/08/2025 22:22

I didn't think she was guilty to start with but I did consider it may just be bias because the thought of a woman who got into a caring profession murdering babies is really hard to get my head around. The letters seemed really odd to me, the talk of being a bad person ( can't remember the exact wording) felt more to me that she felt that she was a bad nurse as in incompetent rather than a murderer. There was a lot of guilt in them letters, I don't know if someone capable of murdering so many babies could have the capacity to feel such guilt. I'm even more inclined to believe her to be innocent as there were medical reviews saying there was no evidence of murder.

distinctpossibility · 09/08/2025 22:23

I think she maybe did do it, or some of it, but I also think the conviction is not "beyond reasonable doubt". Legally I think she is not guilty.

vincettenoir · 09/08/2025 22:23

I don’t agree that the first trial was unfair. But it does appear that the defence case could have been more robust and there was evidence that could have been sought and put forward that wasn’t.

daisychain01 · 09/08/2025 22:23

Sometimeswinning · 09/08/2025 20:51

So Lucy Letby is let out tomorrow and back to being a nurse and with vulnerable newborns. We’re all good with that? This isn’t realistic. More put your money where your mouth is.

No way would she be let out and go back into nursing.

AnneElliott · 09/08/2025 22:24

I’m not sure but I’m astonished at how bad her defence seems to have been! Why didn’t they find and present all of these experts at the trial?

LivelyOpalOtter · 09/08/2025 22:24

Absentmindedsmile · 09/08/2025 22:14

I wouldn’t let her look after my baby that’s for sure. Would you??

Edited

No, definitely not: why would I let anyone look after my baby if there was even the slightest doubt or unproven accusation? I still believe that the conviction is unsafe though.

I'd recommend watching the latest documentary on ITV. There are credible experts (some of whom whose work was, they say, incorrectly used to 'prove' her guilt) who are saying that the trial was deeply flawed.

LivelyOpalOtter · 09/08/2025 22:24

Absentmindedsmile · 09/08/2025 22:14

I wouldn’t let her look after my baby that’s for sure. Would you??

Edited

No, definitely not: why would I let anyone look after my baby if there was even the slightest doubt or unproven accusation? I still believe that the conviction is unsafe though.

I'd recommend watching the latest documentary on ITV. There are credible experts (some of whom whose work was, they say, incorrectly used to 'prove' her guilt) who are saying that the trial was deeply flawed.

LambriniBobInIsleworthISeesYa · 09/08/2025 22:25

I wasn’t sure at the time and I’m even less sure now. I don’t think that she did it anyway and I don’t think that the conviction is safe even if she did.

mylovedoesitgood · 09/08/2025 22:25

JustHereForthePIP · 09/08/2025 22:14

What makes people think the trial was unfair? It's been reviewed twice and she hasn't been given leave to appeal. Even her new legal team have admitted that they haven't submitted anything to the CRCC that wasn't available to her initial defence team.

Her apparently lack of defence witnesses was surprising to an outsider, but her team was very experienced and party to far more information that anyone outside it could be. They had an expert but didn't call them at trial. There will have been a reason for that.

I haven't read or heard anything to make me think it was a miscarriage of justice, so I would have faith in the legal system and her convictions.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/feb/04/lucy-letby-conviction-challenge-to-evidence

What is the new challenge to the evidence used to convict Lucy Letby?

Letby’s legal team has submitted a fresh case to the body that investigates potential miscarriages of justice

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/feb/04/lucy-letby-conviction-challenge-to-evidence

TheBroonOneAndTheWhiteOne · 09/08/2025 22:27

junkmaail · 09/08/2025 21:18

As another NHS worker, I completely agree with this. The NHS are great at making things
‘go away’ for the right people, ignoring toxic management, sexual misconduct etc. Not convinced they would be pinning multiple murders on NICU nurses. Did upper management fail to act on the suspicions reported? Yes. Is Lucy guilty? As far as I’m concerned she’s guilty as sin. And I’m horrified at the Facebook groups full of people, with zero medical knowledge and no ability for critical thinking, tripping over themselves to insist she’s absolutely completely 100% innocent.

Show quote history

I'm a midwife, I've worked in NNU and I fully agree with this.
Letby is guilty.

Lavenderflower · 09/08/2025 22:28

I did not follow the trial but I am inclined to think she was guilty. The NHS is notorious for cover up issues including serious misconduct. It is very difficult to raise concerns including health and safety concern. It near impossible for either patient or staff to have their complaint or concerns upheld. The NHS is a very dishonest and corrupt organisation, therefore, I wouldn't be surprised if they also pinned things on Lucy that she didn't do. My sense is that NHS has lied about certain things but Lucy is guilty of many of the crimes she has been convicted off.