Lucy Letby - have you changed your mind pt. 5

[Typicalwave]

New thread

Part 4 here - https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/_chat/5400564-lucy-letby-have-you-changed-your-mind-thread-4?utm_campaign=thread&utm_medium=app_share

Originally started by @kittybythelighthouse

Who are these people? Staff on the unit who have corroborated this? Why do parents need a treasure box after a mere 2-3 hours? Surely all they want is to know how their child is. Lucy knew exactly what she was doing. I thought we were supposed to believe victims and their intuition when something is off?

Please read the link I posted already

https://nitter.net/RexvsLucyLetby/status/1972319232005161394

I have, I'm saying I don't know who those people are. Did they work at COCH?

Yes, Jennifer Williams was a band 6 nurse who gave evidence at both the trial and Thirlwall.

Dewi's looking nervous 👀

This case, I shouldn't think so.

But miscarriages of justice are horrifyingly common in the UK, and we do a shit job at remedying them. There are thousands of people who've been affected by them. The falsely convicted themselves and their loved ones. In cases where there were victims of the initial crime, them and/or their families who were told the perpetrators had been caught then had to go through the ordeal of learning this was wrong. The professionals who were involved in such cases, and live with that knowledge.

That's a pretty substantial group of people even before considering the ripple effect, and this is a very popular website. Naturally, such people might not feel like identifying themselves as such. It's quite interesting that you don't even consider the prospect that you might have come up against some of them in your lengthy and extensive posting history on this matter.

Why do you belueve peopld are sheep and cannot think for themselves? Of course somd people are, but reading a thread doesnt change or create that.

I watched last night’s documentary.
I still don’t know if LL is guilty.
However, imo Dewi Evans refusal to accept any other opinions is very worrying.

He's opprobrious

Watching now - so, Dewi is now claiming that he instructed the police on the window of time to decide which cases should be looked at.

Dies anyone ekse find this as yet another odd factor on how Cheshire police seem to have conducted the investigation?

I would be more concerned if he accepted the new panel’s opinions based only on their summary reports (which I think is all he has seen). His own opinions were founded on years studying all the babies’ medical records and then sitting through a 10 month trial - I cannot see how it is in any way unreasonable that he is sticking with them.

How do you address this?
Also this man hadn’t worked for 10 years. It’s 8 years since I retired, I absolutely couldn’t do my job to the standard required.

I also wouldn’t think that a person sound in their methodology and conclusions would feel the need for as hominem attacks and claims of ‘they have their facts wrong’ without backing that up.

But perhaps my standards on how professionals should behave are too high

How do you know he hasn’t backed that up?

And I have seen far more ad hominem attacks directed at him than I have seen him direct towards anyone else. I can certainly understand why he might have a bit of a chip on his shoulder by this point.

I’d be interested to see where other professionals from the Shoo-Lee panel made ad hominem attacks on Dewi…

He hasnt backed them up - feel free to watch the various documentaries and show me where he backs up his claims that ‘people have their facts wrong’

‘Botched birth’ - Liz Hill is an incredibly lazy journalist.

Nina Modi bever ever said snything aboyg a ‘botched birth’ what she DID say was that in premature babies in particular theres higher risk of shearing injuries during birth.

Liz Hull doesn't understand that there is the development of the subcapsular hematoma, and then there's the rupture of the subcapsular hematoma and they are two different events, often with different triggers. She was seeing a contradiction where there is none.

Lazy journalism - if you’re going to bd reporting on something technical you should at least make an effort to understand what you’re reporting on.

Also, no one who believes that the original expert findings are infallible, seems to find it odd that baby P also had a subcapsular hematoma

As far as I know I don’t think he has any say in how the documentaries are edited?

Just finished watching the Murder or Mistake documentary. I thought it was a very interesting presentation and reasonably balanced for the most part. They talked about the differences from the original prosecution and the alternative explanations for individual babies in a very clear way.

Dewi Evans is very much portrayed "on his own" with now nobody backing him up. I think he looks quite unreasonable and dogmatic.

Phil Hammond comes across very well and his is the question asked of Dr Shoo Lee in the press conference that was shown.

The part I felt was a bit misleading was the "parents". I know they did say that they weren't the parents of one of the babies that LL was accused of harming, but that passed quite quickly and they were interspersed throughout the 2 episodes without further introduction. I thought the "box" given centre stage in those segments was strange. They didn't mention that there are literally charities set up to provide memory/treasure boxes and that it's standard procedure in lots of hospitals and almost made it sound like LL had come up with the idea on her own in some kind of macabre way. They were stating that LL could have harmed their baby but that's not backed up by anything afaik.

True.

I cant seem to find anything online, either. Odd.

Yep I found the parents being prominent figures strange. I also found it odd that they have obviously told their child that Letby did try and hurt them. I understand that when you have a child who is disabled you look for someone to blame but there is no evidence to say she hurt their child other than her not being able to understand their emotions and react accordingly.

Why do you think it’s odd that you can’t find anything online? Are you expecting him to be posting here or on other forums about exactly why he thinks the expert panel have got their facts wrong? And it’s not up to him what the press chooses to print so he’s clearly got no control over that.

I agree.

Also If the child was born healthy and full term and then something went wrong and they had to be rushed to the neonatal unit, that can't possibly have been Lucy Letby's fault. She wouldn't have been at the delivery suite so whatever happened happened before she could have been involved. She wasn't a midwife or a maternity nurse.