Lucy Letby: Have you changed your mind?

[Kittybythelighthouse]

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

Politically opposed to Dorries, and all articles she writes is ultimately about her, however reading between the self obsessed lines, you can clearly see that Letby was meticulous and also well liked socially and at work.

Also, I'm one of the few people on the centre left of the political spectrum that thinks Letby's trial and subsequent life sentences is just wrong.

I wanted a link from behind the paywall to show that yet again, there are friends and ex colleagues who back Lucy, who liked her, who thought well of her - to counter the claims of some on here who says no on who knew her has stood by her. It’s nonsense.

Yes agreed.

I wonder if that's related to the thread asking if anyone had met her. Maybe the journalist was hoping for some different views.

I did quite a long post last week illustrating with detailed Thirlwall links (statements and questionnaires from colleagues) that far from all of her colleagues being suspicious of her none of them were, expect for the doctors we know about (who were also barely present in the unit). The nurses ranged from having no strong opinion of her, but no suspicions of her, to liking her fine, and having no suspicions of her, to speaking strongly in her defence.

We also know that nurses were warned off from supporting her at trial by the trust and that at least one nurse attended every day of the trial in her support. It’s simply not true that none of her colleagues supported her.

I didn’t see that thread. Because of the picture at Dawn’s wedding I presumed that Dorries went via Dawn and found other friends etc that way.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/5393497-have-you-met-lucy-letby?page=10

Called doubling down….to prove they were right the first time, even though their ‘evidence’ has been questioned & called out by even better experts than their experts( who really weren’t experts in the first place & hadn’t practiced for over 14yrs)
my question to you is what are those of who are speaking out gaining by speaking out?

I don’t think you are one of the few! I think people who are questioning this case fall all over the political spectrum. It’s not a left v right ‘culture war’ issue, though opponents do try to argue that it is. The Guardian appears to be fully pro doubt at this stage, as is The Telegraph. It’s been covered in everything from The Times, to The Sun, to Private Eye. Even The Morning Star has published questions about this case and you can’t get further left than that. It’s just not a politically motivated issue.

I know you did.

It’s just another piece confirming that she was liked.

I mean it doesn’t really bear any relevance really on guilty or not guilty, and the person claiming that no one liked her anyway as some sort of harbinger of psychopathy/sociopathy etc also points out in a different post that Ted Bundy and Shipman were well liked.

I get fed up of blatant lies being bandied about

I also wanted an accessible link because ij the article a colleague indicates Lucy was whistle blowing and even reported herself on Datix.

Thanks for the link @Kittybythelighthouse , certainly doesn’t paint a picture of the typical serial killer. I knew of the bullying complaints by Lucy and always assumed this was the initial catalyst, didn’t know she also spoke out about concerns at the unit. Very interesting.

Oh I know. I’m just backing up your point.

The prosecution’s case was that at least some of the datixes were to give herself cover.

Interesting that she raises a concern about potential air embolism here, but later on denied knowing anything about air embolism.

That’s a ducking stool - damned if you do, damned if you don’t.

Are you saying LL said she has no clinical knowledge of what an aid embolism is and how to avoid one, or how they might occur? I find that incredible.

Sorry I’m unable to read your screen shot

That's reassuring and thank you. I do buy The Morning Star from my local co-op occasionally.

That is a myth about her denying knowing anything about air embolism.

Judith Moritz and Jonathan Coffey, who produced the recent, shambolic episode of Panorama, played a really dirty trick in their book when they described this police interview. They said, like you, that she denied knowing anything about air embolism. Obviously if you've read it there, it's not your fault.

Here is what Lucy Letby actually said at that police interview. They're asking her about training:

Q: And what about air embolisms, Lucy? Did you receive any training in relation to those?
LL: No.
Q: Okay. Were you aware of them or?
LL: Not really, no.
Q: Have you heard of them before?
LL: Yes.
Q: When was that?
LL: I've heard of them more from an adult perspective.
Q: And tell me what that was in relation to.
LL: I don't know specifics. Like sometimes we've had mums on the unit who've been unwell and it's been found they've had AAP, pulmonary embolism. So that's just how I've heard of it via that.
Q: Specifically whilst working on the neonatal unit, have you ever come across it before?
LL: No.
Q: Has the air embolism training ever popped up in respect of dangers with other training that you might have had?
LL: Not that I can think of specifically.
Q: No, or any sort of general nursing training before you qualified?
LL: It's been mentioned in terms of line care. You'd have to be mindful that you don't leave a line open and things like that. But it's not something that's discussed frequently in any detail.

...

And here's what Moritz and Coffey say:

When she was questioned by police, Letby said all nursing staff would be aware of the dangers of an air embolus [the air bubble itself], but she claimed she didn’t know much beyond this. She said ‘I don’t know exactly what [an air embolism] is. When we were taught about lines, we were taught about clearing lines because that’s what it would lead to.’ She also told police she was only aware of air embolisms in adults.
...
[The fact that Letby raised the danger of air embolism after Child O's port was left open(1)] also makes it harder to understand why Letby told police that she was only aware of air embolisms in adults when she clearly knew the risk to newborn babies. For the prosecution experts, these details will only give them further confidence in their interpretations. Neither Dewi Evans nor Sandie Bohin had seen Letby’s text messages or knew about the training course she had attended when they first presented their air embolism theory. If their theory was wrong, it was a remarkable coincidence.
...

I don't think you need to take a particular view on Lucy Letby's guilt or innocence to see that Moritz and Coffey distorted Lucy Letby's words here. As she said, she knew leaving a line open risked air embolism. So of course it's not sinister that she should report this risk.

Terrible standards from the two BBC journalists here. They've straight-out misrepresented her. They've certainly undermined my trust in the corporation drastically with their melodramatic antics on this case.

Accidental air embolism and purposeful administration of air embolism aren’t exactly the same thing for a start.

That said, the prosecution’s case is that she injected air into the venous catheter, but we now know that the only diagnostic criteria for this conjecture was “skin rashes” that actually don’t occur with venous air embolism, so it’s a bit much to spookily imply that this datix report is proof of anything except diligence. There is zero proof that LL administered any air embolisms.

If you actually want to understand this case you’d do well not to take prosecution allegations as statements of fact.

Well that clears that up then.

I was sat pondering just how atrocious a nursing degree and subsequent placement training and CPD training would need to be to produce nurses that know nothing about air embolisms and how that could possibly be allowed. Now I know - fairy tales due to shoddy journalism.

You can read the transcripts of Letby's three police interviews and other things at https://reddit.com/r/LucyLetbyTrials/w/transcripts @Kittybythelighthouse and @Typicalwave

(Unfortunately not full transcripts of the trials, though there are segments)

I find it very difficult to characterise that account by Moritz and Coffey as anything but a lie. One can get things wrong; one can exaggerate; but in this case they have a short transcript and readers who will have little choice but to trust their account of it, and they simply write down what makes the best spooky story. Like that ridiculous statistics segment on Panorama. I can't understand how the BBC thinks it's acceptable to have them constantly misinforming us on this case.

I can't understand how the Daily Mail received money from a podcast that was exclusively dropped into social media accounts that were avidly hoping for a guilty outcome. Hull and Cheetham.

😂😂😂

The Daily Mail have always had questionable ethics. What’s harder to understand is how Cheshire Police were able to pay Caroline Cheetham’s media/pr company thousands of pounds while the podcast was being made. How is that not a humungous conflict of interest?

It seems Cheshire police don’t care about conflicts of interest nor do they care about carrying out their duties to the fullest of their extent without interference from other organisations.