Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

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 thread 4

990 replies

MistressoftheDarkSide · 28/08/2025 21:20

With thanks to the original poster @kittybythelighthouse and @Tidalwave for continuing the discussion.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
53
Insanityisnotastrategy · 02/09/2025 13:29

Hmm, that link doesn't seem to work. But if you put the New Yorker article into archive.ph you can get round the paywall to read the whole thing.

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2024/05/20/lucy-letby-was-found-guilty-of-killing-seven-babies-did-she-do-it

Typicalwave · 02/09/2025 13:51

New uploads on Thirlwall.

Kittybythelighthouse · 02/09/2025 14:00

Insanityisnotastrategy · 02/09/2025 13:29

Hmm, that link doesn't seem to work. But if you put the New Yorker article into archive.ph you can get round the paywall to read the whole thing.

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2024/05/20/lucy-letby-was-found-guilty-of-killing-seven-babies-did-she-do-it

@Firefly1987 you can read a few articles per month for free on the New Yorker site. The article on the site itself has a ‘listen to this article’ option if you’d prefer to listen while doing something else (I often do that when driving etc). Same link @Insanityisnotastrategy shared here.

Kittybythelighthouse · 02/09/2025 14:14

Typicalwave · 02/09/2025 13:51

New uploads on Thirlwall.

They’ve been drip feeding bits and pieces. This latest drop only seems to underline that the COCH neonatal unit was poorly managed understaffed and badly in need of updating. There is nothing more here pointing towards Lucy Letby other than the fact that she worked a lot and often took on extra shifts, so she was there more than any other nurse (Steven Cross underlines this).

Again, Dr Brearey was the unit lead clinician, responsible for many of the poor decisions that led to babies of too high an acuity being taken into a dirty, overstretched, understaffed unit that had a poor skill mix of staff and often didn’t have basic lifesaving drugs and equipment on hand.

At the time of the alleged offences, particularly relating to babies M, Q and N, there were four recorded "high risks" on the NNU Risk Register relating to Pseudomonas, availability of medical staff, and availability of transfers.

Amanda Kelly (talking about the triplets): "We should not have received the triplets. Stephen Brearey did this".

Eirian Powell stated that there were "a couple of doctors that were quite prevalent in the review", and that a number of babies had congenital abnormalities. There was no concern about Lucy Letby's competence; in fact, quite the opposite.

Numerous mentions of witchhunts, targeting, scapegoating, and “looking for a single cause without any concrete evidence".

If the Inquiry sought to find ways to stop something like this from happening again, and they are intent on that ‘something’ being a serial killer nurse, they still have identified absolutely nothing unless they want to create a rule where any doctor can have any nurse suspended based purely on vibes without offering any evidence whatsoever.

They have unearthed an avalanche of evidence of hospital failings, poor care, and consultant failure though, particularly from Brearey.

Typicalwave · 02/09/2025 14:16

Baby transferred 6 times. Wow.

Im really struggling to read Alison’s notes (I struggle horribly with accents too)

Kittybythelighthouse · 02/09/2025 14:23

Typicalwave · 02/09/2025 14:16

Baby transferred 6 times. Wow.

Im really struggling to read Alison’s notes (I struggle horribly with accents too)

Yes, some of the handwritten notes are hard to decipher. Here’s a bit of her notes: baby not given antibiotics for 24 hours?!

Lucy Letby - have you changed your mind thread 4
Kittybythelighthouse · 02/09/2025 14:29

One has to wonder why these documents were released now. I wonder if Kate Blackwell KC (the hospital’s KC) was pushing for that. They certainly throw Brearey into a worse light. It looks more and more like he was abdicating responsibility for his own poor decisions in the clinical running of the unit.

Kittybythelighthouse · 02/09/2025 15:31

Oftenaddled · 02/09/2025 14:52

That would probably be the child who died on 13th December 2015, fifth page of this report. This is one draft of the review they discussed at that meeting

https://thirlwall.public-inquiry.uk/evidence/inq0003217-document-titled-thematic-review-of-neonatal-mortality-2015-jan-2016-dated-08-02-2016/

It is baby I who was transferred six times.

I was underlining the general chaotic standard of care as evident from the new document drop. I know they aren’t all referring to the same baby.

Imperativvv · 02/09/2025 15:32

Kittybythelighthouse · 02/09/2025 14:29

One has to wonder why these documents were released now. I wonder if Kate Blackwell KC (the hospital’s KC) was pushing for that. They certainly throw Brearey into a worse light. It looks more and more like he was abdicating responsibility for his own poor decisions in the clinical running of the unit.

Doesn't it just.

Oftenaddled · 02/09/2025 16:29

Kittybythelighthouse · 02/09/2025 15:31

I was underlining the general chaotic standard of care as evident from the new document drop. I know they aren’t all referring to the same baby.

Oh I know - sorry if that came across as a correction. I didn't mean that at all! Just meant people might like to see the report that was discussed at this meeting, and that you can find accounts of the two children in it.

Alison Kelly has that sort of handwriting that is lovely to look at but still hard to read!

Firefly1987 · 02/09/2025 19:51

Typicalwave · 01/09/2025 20:27

‘You’ll never guess what’ is beginning to tread a line so thin an electron microscope would have difficulties defining the stop point - except for the fact no one gives a shit about a person convicted…

Apl I can say is I’m grateful I didn’t end up going into medicine of any kind - health/social care is fraught enough

Edited

Apl I can say is I’m grateful I didn’t end up going into medicine of any kind - health/social care is fraught enough

It's a shame Lucy didn't have the same idea. She was a nurse for all of 5 mins in the grand scheme of things not someone who had been in the profession 30 years. You'd expect the latter to have had the odd bad day occasionally where someone thought they were rude etc. Even so it's not the same. Lucy showed consistently inappropriate behaviour and crossing of boundaries over and over. All this in just a year. Points to something being very wrong.

I think I'll listen to the opinion of someone who knows what is professional nurse behaviour and what is wildly outside of that. Of course, you guys won't believe it happened unless it came from Lucy herself or someone had video evidence.

MistressoftheDarkSide · 02/09/2025 19:55

Firefly1987 · 02/09/2025 19:51

Apl I can say is I’m grateful I didn’t end up going into medicine of any kind - health/social care is fraught enough

It's a shame Lucy didn't have the same idea. She was a nurse for all of 5 mins in the grand scheme of things not someone who had been in the profession 30 years. You'd expect the latter to have had the odd bad day occasionally where someone thought they were rude etc. Even so it's not the same. Lucy showed consistently inappropriate behaviour and crossing of boundaries over and over. All this in just a year. Points to something being very wrong.

I think I'll listen to the opinion of someone who knows what is professional nurse behaviour and what is wildly outside of that. Of course, you guys won't believe it happened unless it came from Lucy herself or someone had video evidence.

Really?

Where are all the formal complaints from colleagues / parents that would have been catnip to the prosecution had they existed?

Why did one parent consider asking her to be a godmother?

What's that noise I hear?

Could it be the bottom of a barrel being scraped i wonder?

OP posts:
Typicalwave · 02/09/2025 19:57

MistressoftheDarkSide · 02/09/2025 19:55

Really?

Where are all the formal complaints from colleagues / parents that would have been catnip to the prosecution had they existed?

Why did one parent consider asking her to be a godmother?

What's that noise I hear?

Could it be the bottom of a barrel being scraped i wonder?

Quite.

Typicalwave · 02/09/2025 20:09

Interesting thread by Martyn Pitman

https://x.com/martynpitman/status/1962921882560155859?s=46

Typicalwave · 02/09/2025 20:11

Firefly1987 · 02/09/2025 19:51

Apl I can say is I’m grateful I didn’t end up going into medicine of any kind - health/social care is fraught enough

It's a shame Lucy didn't have the same idea. She was a nurse for all of 5 mins in the grand scheme of things not someone who had been in the profession 30 years. You'd expect the latter to have had the odd bad day occasionally where someone thought they were rude etc. Even so it's not the same. Lucy showed consistently inappropriate behaviour and crossing of boundaries over and over. All this in just a year. Points to something being very wrong.

I think I'll listen to the opinion of someone who knows what is professional nurse behaviour and what is wildly outside of that. Of course, you guys won't believe it happened unless it came from Lucy herself or someone had video evidence.

Then please provide the source of the claim LL approached itger staff members eith ‘you’ll never guess what…?!’

itstartedinthepeaks · 02/09/2025 20:23

There are countless threads on here with MNetters claiming they ‘always felt something was off’ about a celebrity who was later convicted of sexual misconduct. LL is similar. Hindsight gives the most innocuous actions sinister overtures.

Firefly1987 · 02/09/2025 20:30

Kittybythelighthouse · 01/09/2025 22:09

“He paid for the court transcripts.”

According to him. But did he? If so, why are all the asides and interjections etc missing in a way that happens to mirror the Chester standard trial reporting? I’m not convinced, but that doesn’t really matter either way.

I said that I have not listened to all of CS2C, because I don’t consider him to be a serious or trustworthy source. He doesn’t have anything I can’t get elsewhere and I cannot stand his voice acting/framing. I’ll give you this one defence video (though I haven’t listened to this either yet btw) but it looks awfully thin. Is that all he covered? Myers direct examination of Letby took about 8 days of court time. Anyway, what would I get from CS2C in your estimation that I haven’t already got from reading all the available transcripts myself? I’m not keen on giving this rubbernecking grifter clicks.

“How you know what true crime audiences expect when you don't have the least bit of interest in it?!”

How do you know how serial killers think when you are (presumably) not one?

That said, I obviously have some interest as this current discussion is technically true crime. I draw the line at other people’s misery being turned into entertainment though, which is what CS2C profits from and you enjoy consuming.

“And I've said I thought she was most likely innocent before trial so I was hoping for the opposite actually.”

I’m not surprised you think she’s guilty, given that all you engage with are prosecution arguments and you appear to have trouble grasping the nature of the adversarial trial system. Pick anyone you personally think was wrongly convicted and read the prosecution arguments against them. They will sling everything they can at the defendant and make them look guilty as sin. Those are just allegations. It’s how adversarial trials work. It’s wild how incapable you apparently are of understanding this simple fact.

“Or it's because they didn't call any experts apart from a plumber.”

The plumber was indeed called while no experts were. However, we know for a fact that this isn’t because the prosecution evidence was solid, or the defence wouldn’t have been able to find anyone to disagree with it. Far from it. I don’t know why you keep simply highlighting that there was something gravely wrong with this trial and acting like it’s a boon for your side.

How do you know how serial killers think when you are (presumably) not one?

Because they've been profiled by professionals who have investigated serial killers and interviewed them. They know how they think and act. It's textbook.

That said, I obviously have some interest as this current discussion is technically true crime. I draw the line at other people’s misery being turned into entertainment though, which is what CS2C profits from and you enjoy consuming.

But presumably it's fine to compound people's misery by claiming a serial killer is innocent and the victim in all this?!

I’m not surprised you think she’s guilty, given that all you engage with are prosecution arguments and you appear to have trouble grasping the nature of the adversarial trial system. Pick anyone you personally think was wrongly convicted and read the prosecution arguments against them. They will sling everything they can at the defendant and make them look guilty as sin. Those are just allegations. It’s how adversarial trials work. It’s wild how incapable you apparently are of understanding this simple fact.

I understand how trials work FGS 😆it's like a PP said-you're just stating the obvious and then saying stuff like "it's wild how you don't understand this" when I actually do. It's wild you fail to understand that I just think the prosecution case was far more compelling. It's not my fault she made herself look even worse on the stand, never admitted to doing anything wrong EVER unless it was in a bullshit attempt to explain the post it notes. Yeah she was SO worried about her practice that's why she wrote down she killed them yet anytime she was asked if she thought she made a mistake ever it was always "no". Something doesn't quite add up there? But she'd soon claim other staff might've made mistakes-because she can't bear anyone to think she did a thing wrong, because she's a narc. It's wild you can't see this. She lied her way through her entire time on the stand so the defence isn't the "facts" either.

Most of what you are consuming is defence stuff because we've established you "can't stand" to listen to all the people who happen to think she's guilty.

medievalpenny · 02/09/2025 20:32

itstartedinthepeaks · 02/09/2025 20:23

There are countless threads on here with MNetters claiming they ‘always felt something was off’ about a celebrity who was later convicted of sexual misconduct. LL is similar. Hindsight gives the most innocuous actions sinister overtures.

Nevermind the outright false memories which then get recirculated as misinformation.

Like the poster claiming that a mean sonographer she had was actually evil neonatal nurse Letby and how lucky she was to have had such a close escape, which was then gormlessly repeated as fact by multitudes of other breathless posters.

medievalpenny · 02/09/2025 20:36

Firefly1987 · 02/09/2025 20:30

How do you know how serial killers think when you are (presumably) not one?

Because they've been profiled by professionals who have investigated serial killers and interviewed them. They know how they think and act. It's textbook.

That said, I obviously have some interest as this current discussion is technically true crime. I draw the line at other people’s misery being turned into entertainment though, which is what CS2C profits from and you enjoy consuming.

But presumably it's fine to compound people's misery by claiming a serial killer is innocent and the victim in all this?!

I’m not surprised you think she’s guilty, given that all you engage with are prosecution arguments and you appear to have trouble grasping the nature of the adversarial trial system. Pick anyone you personally think was wrongly convicted and read the prosecution arguments against them. They will sling everything they can at the defendant and make them look guilty as sin. Those are just allegations. It’s how adversarial trials work. It’s wild how incapable you apparently are of understanding this simple fact.

I understand how trials work FGS 😆it's like a PP said-you're just stating the obvious and then saying stuff like "it's wild how you don't understand this" when I actually do. It's wild you fail to understand that I just think the prosecution case was far more compelling. It's not my fault she made herself look even worse on the stand, never admitted to doing anything wrong EVER unless it was in a bullshit attempt to explain the post it notes. Yeah she was SO worried about her practice that's why she wrote down she killed them yet anytime she was asked if she thought she made a mistake ever it was always "no". Something doesn't quite add up there? But she'd soon claim other staff might've made mistakes-because she can't bear anyone to think she did a thing wrong, because she's a narc. It's wild you can't see this. She lied her way through her entire time on the stand so the defence isn't the "facts" either.

Most of what you are consuming is defence stuff because we've established you "can't stand" to listen to all the people who happen to think she's guilty.

You clearly don't understand how trials work from what you've written there, but do continue.

Typicalwave · 02/09/2025 20:42

Firefly1987 · 02/09/2025 20:30

How do you know how serial killers think when you are (presumably) not one?

Because they've been profiled by professionals who have investigated serial killers and interviewed them. They know how they think and act. It's textbook.

That said, I obviously have some interest as this current discussion is technically true crime. I draw the line at other people’s misery being turned into entertainment though, which is what CS2C profits from and you enjoy consuming.

But presumably it's fine to compound people's misery by claiming a serial killer is innocent and the victim in all this?!

I’m not surprised you think she’s guilty, given that all you engage with are prosecution arguments and you appear to have trouble grasping the nature of the adversarial trial system. Pick anyone you personally think was wrongly convicted and read the prosecution arguments against them. They will sling everything they can at the defendant and make them look guilty as sin. Those are just allegations. It’s how adversarial trials work. It’s wild how incapable you apparently are of understanding this simple fact.

I understand how trials work FGS 😆it's like a PP said-you're just stating the obvious and then saying stuff like "it's wild how you don't understand this" when I actually do. It's wild you fail to understand that I just think the prosecution case was far more compelling. It's not my fault she made herself look even worse on the stand, never admitted to doing anything wrong EVER unless it was in a bullshit attempt to explain the post it notes. Yeah she was SO worried about her practice that's why she wrote down she killed them yet anytime she was asked if she thought she made a mistake ever it was always "no". Something doesn't quite add up there? But she'd soon claim other staff might've made mistakes-because she can't bear anyone to think she did a thing wrong, because she's a narc. It's wild you can't see this. She lied her way through her entire time on the stand so the defence isn't the "facts" either.

Most of what you are consuming is defence stuff because we've established you "can't stand" to listen to all the people who happen to think she's guilty.

And where are these experts in mental health forensics saying Letby fits the profile of a serial killer?

Typicalwave · 02/09/2025 20:44

Firefly1987 · 02/09/2025 20:30

How do you know how serial killers think when you are (presumably) not one?

Because they've been profiled by professionals who have investigated serial killers and interviewed them. They know how they think and act. It's textbook.

That said, I obviously have some interest as this current discussion is technically true crime. I draw the line at other people’s misery being turned into entertainment though, which is what CS2C profits from and you enjoy consuming.

But presumably it's fine to compound people's misery by claiming a serial killer is innocent and the victim in all this?!

I’m not surprised you think she’s guilty, given that all you engage with are prosecution arguments and you appear to have trouble grasping the nature of the adversarial trial system. Pick anyone you personally think was wrongly convicted and read the prosecution arguments against them. They will sling everything they can at the defendant and make them look guilty as sin. Those are just allegations. It’s how adversarial trials work. It’s wild how incapable you apparently are of understanding this simple fact.

I understand how trials work FGS 😆it's like a PP said-you're just stating the obvious and then saying stuff like "it's wild how you don't understand this" when I actually do. It's wild you fail to understand that I just think the prosecution case was far more compelling. It's not my fault she made herself look even worse on the stand, never admitted to doing anything wrong EVER unless it was in a bullshit attempt to explain the post it notes. Yeah she was SO worried about her practice that's why she wrote down she killed them yet anytime she was asked if she thought she made a mistake ever it was always "no". Something doesn't quite add up there? But she'd soon claim other staff might've made mistakes-because she can't bear anyone to think she did a thing wrong, because she's a narc. It's wild you can't see this. She lied her way through her entire time on the stand so the defence isn't the "facts" either.

Most of what you are consuming is defence stuff because we've established you "can't stand" to listen to all the people who happen to think she's guilty.

If you understand how trials wirk why do you keep referring to the prosecutor as presenting the truth? Or questioning why anyone would question what was presented in court?

Firefly1987 · 02/09/2025 20:49

Typicalwave · 02/09/2025 20:11

Then please provide the source of the claim LL approached itger staff members eith ‘you’ll never guess what…?!’

I already did a page or two ago-did you miss it? Are you waiting for me to provide video evidence or something?

Firefly1987 · 02/09/2025 20:50

Typicalwave · 02/09/2025 20:44

If you understand how trials wirk why do you keep referring to the prosecutor as presenting the truth? Or questioning why anyone would question what was presented in court?

I didn't say it was the truth I said how can you get mad at someone reading out court transcripts.

Typicalwave · 02/09/2025 20:52

Firefly1987 · 02/09/2025 20:49

I already did a page or two ago-did you miss it? Are you waiting for me to provide video evidence or something?

No I saw it - except Lucy didn’t go around SAYINV ‘you’ll bever guess what?!’ did she? That’s YOUR interpretation