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

I guess I’d just like to know what else could have caused it. The suggestion that the tests are not completely accurate was one, but it seemed like they were accurate the majority of the time and so I would still feel the test evidence was strong. But I’m not medically trained so unless they show there’s alternative explainations to the test results then I’d be pretty convinced by that evidence

I don’t know whether LL is guilty or not guilty. I don’t believe the conviction is safe

there are questions I do have aside from that

what was the motive?
where did she get the insulin from? Non was ever missing
how did she kill a baby whilst not on shift and hadn’t been on shift since before the baby was born? The jury were told she could have slipped in unnoticed- yet they have to swip in?and no one saw her
nithing on her electronic devices of relevance to insulin

I know how it works thanks. My question carried (I thought obvious) subtext that you seem to have missed while still understanding it. The defence don’t have to but could have called them. We don’t know what all was disallowed via judges directions.

I think accurate the majority of the time is the problem, though.

If I'm alone with a baby and they fall ill, I don't want to be locked up for hurting them just because the test is right the other 98 times out of 100. Because some people will end up blamed, that way.

What the expert panel have said is that the children had infections with sepsis and this affected their blood sugar. Meanwhile, the insulin level in their blood was at a measure we see only in premature babies, because they are not adjusted to life outside the womb yet.

High insulin levels cause hypoglycaemia. It’s hypoglycaemia that causes the harm directly, because cells are starved of glucose essential for respiration.

Hypoglycaemia can occur spontaneously in neonates (and the elderly) without administration of exogenous (synthetic) insulin. Otherwise, spontaneous hyperinsulinaemia is found in certain rare medical conditions irrelevant to this case.

Quick immunoassay tests can be performed to check insulin levels in the case of hypoglycaemia. This is part of normal clinical management.

The test gives a ratio for insulin and c-peptide, which are produced by the pancreas at the same time and are generally found in a set ratio. If the ratio is not normal this may indicate that insulin has been administered - synthetic insulin does not contain any c-peptides. However, if this is suspected a separate test needs to be performed. The quick immunoassay is not sufficiently specific to rule it in or out. This is already known. The extent of “weird” insulin/c-peptide results is under some study at the moment as explained in the ITV documentary last week.

These immunoassay results are the only “evidence” that insulin was administered, and that evidence is flawed.

@EyeLevelStick @Oftenaddled Thanks.

There was also another baby with crazy insulin results who was never in the frame. That baby was diagnosed with hyperinsulinism and never mentioned as he disproved the assertion from the prosecution that there was no other explanation for the results in the indictment babies than exogenous insulin.

Also no one has come up with a plausible explanation for how LL could have done the insulin poisoning and I think it’s settled that it would have required doses which would have been noticeably missing.

The lab used to conduct the tests directs users to understand that their test is not to be used for forensic purposes.

This. With Bells on.

It's absolutely shocking how a conviction was ever reached, given the lack of actual proper evidence. The entire conviction is unstable and I hope those responsible for ruining LL's life are brought to justice.

Not if that ‘evidence is inaccurate or purposefully misleading.

I read that Mike Hall would pose problems on cross examination. He was convinced on some things but not on others. Might make things worse ( in retrospect couldn’t have been worse) so think they felt better not to put him on the stand.

& you think this was different in other hospitals? NNU have a higher death rate just because they were severely poorly these babies. The problem with Chester they weren’t equipped either with staff, skill mix & experience both in nurses & doctors, they were not set up to deal with level of illness. But money talks they get paid more if babies have a certain level of care.

Even on the Panorama programme he said he didn't know if she was guilty of not. Perhaps he secretly thinks she is guilty. And the only person who knows for sure is Lucy Letby. It surely would be hard to defend somebody under those circumstances.

This is why the mention that the test is right 98% of the time is an issue. Again it’s a sign of having zero understanding of statistics.How many babies went through that hospital while Letby was on shift, given she worked there for a few years before the 2015 death spike? Again they haven’t looked at all of the data.

These are good questions.

I always felt she was innocent. No motive. Far too clean cut with absolutely ZERO "fuck ups" in her past. Most of us have done at least something we're not proud of or got drunk and made an absolute tit of ourselves, something, anything. She was squeaky clean. And not in the manipulative "for appearances" way. There's never been an ex boyfriend, a scorned old friend, a teacher, a work colleague, literally nobody from her old life to come forward and say "there was something about her ". No cold blooded mass killer has ever had a conscience as far as I'm aware and labelled themselves horrible things in an emotional note. The evidence was poor and engineered rather sloppily to make it fit. The "expert" called up was of a terrible standard.

Yes, I believe she's innocent. And this will be the worst case of a miscarriage of justice when this (if it ever is allowed ) to be proved.

Thoughts with all victims and families.

I think the note that people pin against her was the writings of a woman who was being failed by the system she worked in, and blamed for things she never did

I completely agree. It was a turmoil filled self beating up session.

Completely agree

How she is surviving, I just dont know but I pray she has hope of justice prevailing

If I remember rightly her 'normalness' was criticised back when the trial was happening. The beige/basic killer. Her cuddly toys and closeness to her parents was used to give colour to the idea that she was in some way 'not right'. It was all very strange.

Some people are just like that. Squeaky clean, fairly uncomplicated, nice, very middle-of-the-road tastes etc.

I've always been very uncomfortable with the verdict. It feels as though a scapegoat was needed and evidence was made to fit.

Fwiw, my niece was born severely premature and had her hands bound together in the end because she did keep pulling out her endotracheal tube to the extent that she needed a tracheotomy because her throat became dangerously swollen with reinsertion after reinsertion. That particular bit of evidence against LL, in that this scenario almost never happens, is flawed. My niece did it time and time again. She weighed less than 2lbs when born. Perhaps she was one of the 1% of times that the prosecuting KC made reference to, but I don't think so.

The awful thing is : her life is irretrievably destroyed by this. IF the upper echelons EVER dare to let the truth emerge (because let's face it , to do so would be catastrophic for the NHS, her hospital she worked at , the government, the CJS, and she'd be entitled to a multi million pound pay out and a new identity and probably permanent security ) then she'd be past the age where she could ever have children. Something she wanted. The emotional and psychological damage she'd have endured she'd likely never recover from. She was her parents only child too. 😞

100%, and tbh, as much as the NHS has been managed into decline for finance companies to gain a foothold - this is justifiably to its detriment

Truly nasty

How heartbreaking for the Letby family

Yes, they’ve robbed her of her life, her ability to have a career and her chance to have a family. Awful.

Well, that’s only true if she’s not guilty. If she is then she hasn’t been robbed, she has been punished for extinguishing the lives of multiple vulnerable babies.

If that’s the case, it’s the parents of those babies that have been truly robbed. And you might argue they’ve been robbed even further by having to go through the events over and over again as the result of an unsafe conviction, whatever the truth may be.

LL has been denied the right to appeal her sentence more than once, hasn’t she?