Page 16 | Lucy Letby: Have you changed your mind?

Kittybythelighthouse · 2025-08-12T11:54:43+00:00

The other thread has had a lot of really interesting discussion but we are running out of pages so here’s a new one for those who are interested in continuing the conversation. Whether you’re sure she’s guilty, sure she isn’t, or are somewhere in between, I’m interested in hearing how your opinion has evolved (or hasn’t!) since you first heard about the case, Please try to be respectful - this is a heated topic. Its a matter of huge public interest with a lot of strong opinions, but we are all adults and can disagree with each other in a respectful manner. Old thread is here (the poll still has a few days left): [[https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/_chat/5388914-lucy-letby-have-you-changed-your-mind?page=38&reply=146359313 https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/_chat/5388914-lucy-letby-have-you-changed-your-mind?page=38&reply=146359313]]

Firefly1987 · 13/08/2025 21:50

PinkTonic · 13/08/2025 21:18

It doesn’t matter if they think they know she is 100% guilty. They don’t know any more than anyone else at this point. They have suffered the trauma of losing a child and then on top of that, years later they’re suddenly told their babies were murdered. Naturally they’re going to want closure and the perpetrator to face justice. I think it’s understandable that they would be resistant to the idea that she might be innocent after all that.

Sadly that has no bearing on whether the case is reviewed. “People really need to listen to what they’ve said…”, no actually they don’t. It isn’t relevant.

Show quote history

Of course they know more than everyone else not involved in the case. Most of them were at the court everyday. You don't think they heard more evidence than any of us? It happened to their babies.

@Kittybythelighthouse I'm talking about the protests that were shown on the Panorama doc. I think discussion is fine, as long as people are respectful towards the parents. I think you know a lot about the case, and a couple other posters. But it's clear most don't since they keep having to ask about something LL did that anyone who followed the trial would be familiar with.

Original poster

Kittybythelighthouse · 13/08/2025 21:50

SellingBananas · 13/08/2025 20:23

This might be straying from the current conversation a bit, so apologies, but I thought it was worth saying.

One thing that is mentioned a lot by those who think she is guilty is, if course, the so-called confession note.

I, too, remember reading a headline along the lines of ‘I DID IT: accused killer nurse’s confession’ and thinking that was it - case closed, but then I read what she actually wrote and was shocked because I too, had written something very very similar after my daughter was stillborn a number of years ago.

My notes were: I did it, I killed her, I’m a murderer, I’m worse than a murderer, I deserve to be executed, I don’t deserve to live, there is no prison sentence long enough for me. I killed her with my arrogance/stupidity’ and I could go on.

To be clear, there was no cause found for my daughter’s death but I found a million reasons to blame myself, because I am conscientious and pride myself on keeping my children safe. And I couldn’t keep her safe.

At times, I was completely convinced I’d killed her because I was disappointed to find out she was a girl / because I had trouble gaining weight and didn’t try hard enough to force food down / because I didn’t intuit there was a problem until too late (a good mother would)/ because I felt smug when a midwife told me I was having the perfect pregnancy / because I forgot my vitamins more than once / because I once ate some meat that looked pink / because I had a sip of wine / because I exercised in my third trimester / because I got pregnant too quickly after my first / because I wasn’t at my pre pregnancy weight when I fell pregnant again / because I carried DD1’s pram to the car boot the day I found out my baby died and that certainly caused it.

It’s years later, and I’m happy and have moved forward, but if I dwell too long on it, I can’t absolutely say that I don’t - on some level - still believe i am guilty. It was on my watch, after all.

I share this because, reading Lucy’s note, I see echoes of the same mindset: someone conscientious, emotionally attached to those in her care, and overwhelmed by guilt — whether rational or not. I can’t know if that’s the case for her, but it’s another possible interpretation of what has been described as a “confession.”

I’m so sorry to hear this. Thank you for sharing. It’s obviously not an easy thing to share, but I think it is important. Kathleen Folbigg wrote similar thoughts after her babies died and that was used against her in court. People’s actual emotional responses seldom fit society’s expectations of behaviour. Thanks for your thoughtful and important perspective ❤

OP posts:

SquishedMallow · 13/08/2025 21:53

Kittybythelighthouse · 13/08/2025 21:50

I’m so sorry to hear this. Thank you for sharing. It’s obviously not an easy thing to share, but I think it is important. Kathleen Folbigg wrote similar thoughts after her babies died and that was used against her in court. People’s actual emotional responses seldom fit society’s expectations of behaviour. Thanks for your thoughtful and important perspective ❤

Show quote history

I second this.

So sorry for your turmoil and devastating loss.

I completely understand the "guilt" and turning inwards to blame yourself. (Even though rationally you know it isn't your fault )

A very important post. Thankyou for sharing. God bless.

Original poster

Kittybythelighthouse · 13/08/2025 21:58

Typicalwave · 13/08/2025 18:03

And if I remember correctly the swipe logs were shown to have issues on accurately and reliability

Show quote history

The swipe data was 🍑 over tit. A complete mess. How that alone didn’t trigger a mistrial I’ll never know. It’s beyond me why the CP didn’t just…check? In their Operation Hummingbird ‘documentary’ (it’s a hard watch btw) they speak breathlessly about how important data analysis was in “finding hidden patterns” in texts and diaries and I’m thinking…babe, you didn’t even establish how the door swipe worked. Ffs. 🤦‍♀️

OP posts:

Moonlightdust · 13/08/2025 21:59

Kittybythelighthouse · 13/08/2025 19:55

There were a lot of things that the police used in the case that were complete nonsense. The diary “secret code” is one of the most nonsensical ones. What you’ve posted there @Moonlightdust is not what Lucy Letby wrote in her diary, but what the dum dums in Cheshire police “data analysis” thought and alleged. Where did you get this from? It’s been debunked absolute ages ago. It didn’t even make it through the trial, because Sophie Ellis’s texts to Lucy Letby reflected the exact same shift pattern. It was never “the initials of babies” or anything else.

Remember Cheshire Police are the same geniuses who managed to muck up the door swipe data for the entire trial, not being clever enough to understand (or seemingly to check?!) that at COCH NICU you only swipe in, and not out. As a result they buggered up all the timings that the prosecution relied on to “prove” who was where and when. They realised eventually, but not until after Lucy Letby was convicted.

Anyway, the diary is - like many things in this case - completely unremarkable. Even boring. All it does it’s record her shifts in normal nursing shorthand. For example, LD means ‘long day’ - nurse speak for a double shift. Cheshire Police misread that as LO - one of the baby’s initials - but in court the shift pattern and date was backed up by Sophie Ellis’s texts to Lucy Letby at the time. LD - long day, nothing more.

Cheshire police, who I could not have more disdain for, thought it was “secret code” with the baby’s initials because they are clowns. It was not a secret code. They could have asked literally any nurse, but they seemingly didn’t even think of that either.

Standard nursing shift shorthand ‘codes’ are LD, ON, AM, PM, (I hear there’s a NOB shift too - “no other bastard” wants it - and I feel that)- I may be missing others but it doesn’t matter here. Anyway, if a nurse doesn’t keep track of their shifts, especially when working extras or doubles, it’s hard to know if their pay is correct at the end of the cycle. Or even what day to go in.

Many hospital rostering and timesheet systems are outdated, relying on accurate data entry and careful checking of payslips. Different shifts pay different penalty rates, so keeping your own diary is essential to avoid being underpaid.

Occasionally, a manager forgets to update the day sheet, meaning the database misses a shift and you don’t get paid. To jog their memory, it helps to note which patients or lists you handled.

There’s no “secret serial killer code” here. It’s just about making sure you get paid. That’s literally it.

Edited

Yes I know all the medical terms refer to shift patterns that’s not what I copied it for - was relating to the times she marked being in on those days.

Just posting what evidence was used in the case. I was not being bias as it doesn’t necessary have meaning but yet used as evidence.

suki1964 · 13/08/2025 21:59

@Firefly1987

Protest can not be silent, where is the justice in that

I for one am hating that any parent has had to go through this, seriously, I can not even come close to imagining how they feel after the loss of a child, hard enough to come to terms with , then to be told your child was murdered. And now doubt being thrown on top of all that grief.. Unimaginable for anyone

Yet, I know, if I was that parent, I would want the truth. Already Ive been told two truths? How would I be sitting with that? I would be forever with that doubt - what truth was right?

I know what happened to my ex who was just a juror who convicted on false/unsafe/made up evidence. It split us up. You cant imagine the trauma he suffered, the guilt he lived with. The truth he lived with all his life was taken away from him That truth was justice will prevail. That we had fair trial by jury

The Tottenham three didn't, nor did the Guildford Four or The Birmingham Six. nor any of the women mentioned on this thread ( with evidence presented that Dewi Evans had his finger in )

Would you, if one of those parents not want the truth, the unequivocal truth , even if that meant another day in court?

Hotflushesandchilblains · 13/08/2025 22:27

Of course they know more than everyone else not involved in the case. Most of them were at the court everyday. You don't think they heard more evidence than any of us? It happened to their babies.

This is a ridiculous statement. They knew more at the time than we did, for sure, because they were in the court. But they did not know the things that have subsequently come to light - how could they have? And if the information presented in court was flawed, the conclusion they drew from it would also necessarily be flawed. This is the heart of the matter. Whether it was right or wrong is not the point. The point is that, unless the process is as rigorous and safe as possible, the outcome is untrustworthy.

As has been repeatedly pointed out, the victims of a crime may be 100% of the accused's guilt. But that does not say anything about the safety of the conviction, or the actual guilt of the accused. And so, as distasteful as it may seem, their feeling about what they heard in court cannot be allowed to override legitimate concerns about the process.

As I have said previously, it is beyond tragic for these parents. But that cannot be allowed to close down concerns and questions. Which is what the point seems to be when their feelings are mentioned.

Original poster

Kittybythelighthouse · 13/08/2025 22:27

Mirabai · 13/08/2025 16:19

Where LL’s records conflicted with prosecution theory she was accused of doctoring them.

Eg Baby F (I mistakenly called Baby E in a previous post) she recorded a bg reading that was around normal. So she was accused of falsifying the number to cover up her “crime” as it didn’t fit with the prosecution narrative.

Show quote history

This is true even when other records and statements matched hers, like in the case of Baby E where Letby is supposed to have “lied”. Thing is, if she lied then so did the midwife whose timings that night didn’t match up with the mum’s either, but they did match Letby’s. It’s not that the mum lied, but there is definitely confusion somewhere.

There’s a well researched post on Reddit that goes into this time discrepancy with links to statements etc. I’ll dig it out if anyone wants it. Myers brought it up at trial, but didn’t press it. Possibly wary of alienating the jury by being seen to pressurise the mum.

People need to realise that prosecution barristers always accuse the defendant of lying etc and vice versa. Prosecution allegations are not evidence or fact. They’re just allegations. Often they are sheer fantasy, hurled out in the hope that the defendant will crack in some way.

I was a witness for the prosecution in an awful rape case when I was 19. My friend was raped and I was the one who found her and had seen the defendant with her earlier. Anyway, it was extremely traumatic for all of us, including her family etc. Awful. But, yes, I learned the hard way that the adversarial system means that barristers can and will do everything in their power to make absolute mince meat out of their opposition’s witnesses. That’s their job. We were accused of all sorts of nonsense. None of it true. My friend’s mum was weeping watching her poor daughter in the dock being cross examined. You’d want to punch the barrister at that stage. It was horrendous. They will do this whether or not you’re innocent or a genuine victim. It’s what they do.

He got off with it btw. Just about. Bastard.

OP posts:

Original poster

Kittybythelighthouse · 13/08/2025 22:34

Moonlightdust · 13/08/2025 21:59

Yes I know all the medical terms refer to shift patterns that’s not what I copied it for - was relating to the times she marked being in on those days.

Just posting what evidence was used in the case. I was not being bias as it doesn’t necessary have meaning but yet used as evidence.

Edited

Show quote history

I don’t think you’re being biased and I don’t blame you for it. You naturally expect that evidence brought to court will have some substance to it and it should. It’s not your fault Cheshire Police can’t do basic research. But yes the secret code in the diary just isn’t a thing. I can’t believe it even made it to trial tbh, but this case is full of stuff like that. Frustratingly so!

OP posts:

MrsSunshine2b · 13/08/2025 22:41

I don't know if she's guilty.

I do think that that hospital was/is completely incompetent and failed those babies regardless of if they were murdered or died of medical negligence.

I also think that the matter is not proven beyond reasonable doubt, and that it will never be because that ward was such a mess.

suki1964 · 13/08/2025 22:42

Oh and whilst Im saying more then I wanted to here, I worked for a long time for the NHS. I was admin not clinical, but my role as a PP officer, as a medical records manager, as a bed manager ( not all at once ) I could waltz around with impunity No one questioned my right to be on a ward . I was part of the furniture. Consultants knew me by first name, ward clerks knew me, The CEO knew me

And I was a nobody, yet I had access everywhere , and not just me, porters, post room, clerical staff. Could all access wards without being signed/checked in ( this was when keypads were more the norm tbh ) Indeed it was only junior doctors who would be struggling to gain access to wards

And whilst security has supposedly been stepped up - swipe cards - it means nothing. If you are known you get in and allowed all access

Firefly1987 · 13/08/2025 22:47

Hotflushesandchilblains · 13/08/2025 22:27

Of course they know more than everyone else not involved in the case. Most of them were at the court everyday. You don't think they heard more evidence than any of us? It happened to their babies.

This is a ridiculous statement. They knew more at the time than we did, for sure, because they were in the court. But they did not know the things that have subsequently come to light - how could they have? And if the information presented in court was flawed, the conclusion they drew from it would also necessarily be flawed. This is the heart of the matter. Whether it was right or wrong is not the point. The point is that, unless the process is as rigorous and safe as possible, the outcome is untrustworthy.

As has been repeatedly pointed out, the victims of a crime may be 100% of the accused's guilt. But that does not say anything about the safety of the conviction, or the actual guilt of the accused. And so, as distasteful as it may seem, their feeling about what they heard in court cannot be allowed to override legitimate concerns about the process.

As I have said previously, it is beyond tragic for these parents. But that cannot be allowed to close down concerns and questions. Which is what the point seems to be when their feelings are mentioned.

But the only reason you believe the new experts is because you weren't at the trial so you think it was flawed. Those that believe her guilty don't think it was flawed. I could understand it if they wrapped the trial up in a month but it was 10 months! And the jury were out for weeks. I genuinely believe it was held to the best standard possible considering how complex it was.

She had a chance to call an expert for her defence-it's not the system's fault she didn't.

Typicalwave · 13/08/2025 22:48

Kittybythelighthouse · 13/08/2025 22:34

I don’t think you’re being biased and I don’t blame you for it. You naturally expect that evidence brought to court will have some substance to it and it should. It’s not your fault Cheshire Police can’t do basic research. But yes the secret code in the diary just isn’t a thing. I can’t believe it even made it to trial tbh, but this case is full of stuff like that. Frustratingly so!

Show quote history

I didn’t know about the ‘secret code’ - again, flabbergasted.

yet more zebra hooves. You’d think instead of just wildly assuming the oddest things that ‘fit’ with the udea of a killer trying to cover tracks like they were somd part of a Nancy Drew mystery, they’d have done somd borring old fashioned fact checking.

Frequency · 13/08/2025 22:56

But the only reason you believe the new experts is because you weren't at the trial so you think it was flawed

As someone who believes the evidence at the original trial was flawed, I wholly disagree with this statement.

One of the main reasons I think the evidence is flawed is that the expert witness for the prosecution believes the evidence he gave was flawed, hence his writing another report and changing his mind on the cause of death of multiple babies.

There are other reasons, such as some of the medical evidence literally being plucked out of Dewi's arse, with no basis in science, but honestly, the fact that even Dewi himself lacks confidence in his evidence tells me everything I need to know.

placemats · 13/08/2025 22:59

Firefly1987 · 13/08/2025 22:47

But the only reason you believe the new experts is because you weren't at the trial so you think it was flawed. Those that believe her guilty don't think it was flawed. I could understand it if they wrapped the trial up in a month but it was 10 months! And the jury were out for weeks. I genuinely believe it was held to the best standard possible considering how complex it was.

She had a chance to call an expert for her defence-it's not the system's fault she didn't.

Show quote history

Were you at the trial every day?

Typicalwave · 13/08/2025 23:02

Kittybythelighthouse · 13/08/2025 21:27

“As for protesting, they should get on with it quietly if they think it's a miscarriage of justice, so there's less chance the parents will come across it.”

What do you mean by “protesting”? Is this thread a form of protest? Or do you mean literally out on the street with banners etc?

Either way, no miscarriage of justice on this scale gets re examined without public and media pressure. That’s just a fact. It’s too much of a hot potato otherwise. The postmasters, Birmingham six, Guildford Four, etc etc all had massive media exposure and public pressure that was crucial to their eventual release/quashed verdicts.

There would be complete silence if there was no media/public pressure. The case simply has to be reviewed and either shown to be a safe conviction or vacated. It’s unfortunate for the parents, but it’s not just about them. This is of massive public importance. It matters to each and every one of us - even if we don’t know it. We didn’t ask for all of this. The bottom line is that there will be many more grieving parents and many more dead babies if the actual source issues are not addressed.

“And you could take LL out of it completely if you want to take on the NHS, police etc. if LL is guilty then there aren't actually any issues with those institutions re this case!”

It’s not about “wanting to take on” anybody. I’m a busy woman. I have a LOT to do. I’m sure most of us do. I don’t give lots of time to this for no reason. I’d rather not have to do it!

However, it’s already been shown that there are serious, serious issues here that will only be addressed and dealt with following a full and proper transparent review. If a review (whatever form it takes) shows some aha piece of evidence that shows she’s guilty - something real, not a Dewi Evans fantasy - then all well and good. But it needs to be shown.

If it is shown to be a MoJ then multiple institutions will have to answer a lot of questions. We’ll cross that bridge when we come to it, but simply doing nothing and waiting politely for the judiciary to check its homework won’t work. That isn’t going to happen now anyway. It’s just too big now and there’s far too much at stake.

Show quote history

I agree it must he awful for the oarents to come across publuc discussion and publuc protests, but it is a very sad fact (and I have first havd experience ig it) that statutory organisations have a habit of closing ranks, irnofring, Blake shifting wtc when they know they’ve fucked up. It’s one HELL if a fight if one has been wronged by social services, NHS, Police, courts, councils wtc - they don’t just roll ovef and put their hands up and admit neglect/misconduct/mistakes. They have to be badgered and man-handled into it.

Sad, disappointing, frustrating - but true.

Frequency · 13/08/2025 23:03

suki1964 · 13/08/2025 22:42

Oh and whilst Im saying more then I wanted to here, I worked for a long time for the NHS. I was admin not clinical, but my role as a PP officer, as a medical records manager, as a bed manager ( not all at once ) I could waltz around with impunity No one questioned my right to be on a ward . I was part of the furniture. Consultants knew me by first name, ward clerks knew me, The CEO knew me

And I was a nobody, yet I had access everywhere , and not just me, porters, post room, clerical staff. Could all access wards without being signed/checked in ( this was when keypads were more the norm tbh ) Indeed it was only junior doctors who would be struggling to gain access to wards

And whilst security has supposedly been stepped up - swipe cards - it means nothing. If you are known you get in and allowed all access

Same, and this was only a year ago with swipe cards in place (and key codes in the most secure areas, but we only had 2 key codes; if it wasn't one, it was the other).

I was in IT, but if I said I needed access to even the most secure area, no one questioned it. My badge worked on most wards, including the children's ward and maternity ward.

The medical notes room was massive; it was just a maze of shelves. I was found wandering aimlessly while looking confused with a hard drive clutched in my hand, among all those confidential notes, on more than one occasion. Not a single person challenged me, even on the many days I left my badge on my desk and asked strangers to buzz me into private areas.

suki1964 · 13/08/2025 23:08

Firefly1987 · 13/08/2025 22:47

But the only reason you believe the new experts is because you weren't at the trial so you think it was flawed. Those that believe her guilty don't think it was flawed. I could understand it if they wrapped the trial up in a month but it was 10 months! And the jury were out for weeks. I genuinely believe it was held to the best standard possible considering how complex it was.

She had a chance to call an expert for her defence-it's not the system's fault she didn't.

Show quote history

Winston Silcotts trial was 13 months

That was my ex and 11 peers reviewing the evidence put before them - declaring him guilty

Yet freed as an unsafe conviction and it was later found that the police falsified evidence

3 other trials since and still no one has been bought to justice

Typicalwave · 13/08/2025 23:09

Firefly1987 · 13/08/2025 22:47

But the only reason you believe the new experts is because you weren't at the trial so you think it was flawed. Those that believe her guilty don't think it was flawed. I could understand it if they wrapped the trial up in a month but it was 10 months! And the jury were out for weeks. I genuinely believe it was held to the best standard possible considering how complex it was.

She had a chance to call an expert for her defence-it's not the system's fault she didn't.

Show quote history

‘She had a chance…..’

Your take away is that it would be ok for a MoJ to go unchecked bevause it was the defendants own fault for not fighting hard enough, or making an error in defence tactics?

Typicalwave · 13/08/2025 23:11