Lucy Letby’s scribbled notes

[Figmentofmyimagination]

At times when I’m feeling acutely distressed, it’s not at all unusual for me to scribble all sorts of dreadful thoughts down on paper eg die die die, hate hate hate, I hate you, I hate you, what’s the point of you, my fault, stupid me, etc etc etc, usually scribbling them all out so nobody can see what I’ve written. I’m pretty sure this is quite a common response to acute mental distress. I agree with this article that it feels very surprising that Letby’s scribblings were used as evidence of a ‘confession’.

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/article/2024/sep/03/i-am-evil-i-did-this-lucy-letbys-so-called-confessions-were-written-on-advice-of-counsellors

I'm not

As someone who is rather sceptical of the verdict, I've been unsure what to make of this part of the evidence up to now. There have been some miscarriages of justice based around confession written by suspects with a history of MH issues or LD, but Letby didn't seem to be such a person. So this was very much in the "on the other hand" side of the ledger for me.

But if this is true, and she was told to write down these feelings by counsellors, and that fact was withheld from the jury, that seems to me to be a whole leg knocked from under the prosecution's case.

I mean this in the kindest way, but if you're writing things like that down when feeling distressed, I would talk to a doctor about getting some support or looking into different support if you are. I don't think writing about dying or hating yourself is particularly healthy and if I knew someone was, I would be very concerned.

I don't understand why anything is withheld from a case. I'm thinking of some text between Johnny Depp pa and Amber heard about him kicking her.
Just why??

agree. This is not a common or usual response at all.

It does seem like a lot has been held back from the jury.
I used to think she was guilty. After watching a few documentary series on the case, I am now not sure.

If she didn't kill those babies then who did??

Funny how it's all stopped..

I'm conflicted about the notes, the writing contradicts itself with her writing "I've done nothing wrong" and also writing "I killed them because I'm not good enough" so do those two things cancel themselves out because both can't be true? Or are we just meant to believe the bad things she wrote and disregard the rest?

I have also done similar, and recognise the 'splurging' of feelings and thoughts and nasty things onto paper, as a therapeutic technique. This was not written as a confession, and should never have been presented in this way. It's more like putting yourself into every viewpoint and splurging it all out- that's why she says she didn't do it, and she did do it, that she's evil but also hates her life and hasn't done anything. It's just emotional junking.

This conviction is unsafe, and if she really is guilty, that will be a terrible thing for the parents and babies who died.

The evidence is poor though, statistically, the 'confession' that wasn't. I wrote this during the trial on here, that there wasn't one 'gotcha' moment which I was waiting for, and was rounded on at the time.

Circumstantial evidence can be compelling, but if you don't have evidence of any murders (as in suspicious deaths), no confession, dodgy stats and wrong tests conducted (that didn't prove insulin had been given)- what do you have? Very little as it turns out.

I followed the trial and I think she’s guilty AF but I will be following the inquiry with (hopefully) an open mind.

What's a common or usual response to being linked to lots of murders?

That’s a supposition. It would require someone to put the same level of effort into assessing whether that’s true, which I don’t think has been done.

@Boymum888 writing down the unthinkable, the horrid thoughts, the bad ideas is a form of therapeutic writing, the idea is not to censor yourself but to write out everything, so if you are feeling alone, or lost, or suicidal, or like you hate your kids that moment, then you write it all down. Ideally you can destroy or tear it up but I've kept stuff and don't know where it is now (in the loft probably!)

It's a well-known and quite used therapeutic technique, you do not need to censor your thinking in that emotional moment, that's the whole point of it, not to block out any thoughts even if they are 'crazy' or 'not rational' or would be distressing to others.

I have never done that tbh no. I don't think its usual or normal.

Medical negligence

It all stopped because at the same time she was removed from the ward the hospital stopped taking the sickest babies that it wasn’t equipped to look after.

What? Did you even read what I was replying to??

Journaling your feelings is encouraged by therapists, it helps people to get them out of their head.

I'm not saying she's innocent, I really don't know.

But the fact that the deaths stopped is definitely not a sign that she's guilty. After Letby, the hospital's status was downgraded so they weren't allowed to look after babies who were that sick anymore. Of course less sick babies is going to mean less deaths.

Clearly not adequately

Therapeutic writing has an ok evidence-base. The point is to get out all emotions, ideas, crazy thoughts at the time, a thought dump, and then you can rewrite the story in the future sessions. Most people wouldn't spontaneously do this, but prompted by a therapist, it's completely normal, see also journalling which is becoming very popular. I've written when I was stressed with the kids when I was younger and I'd hate for them to read what I wrote as I was writing at a time of extreme pressure and distress- the idea is to empty it all out of your mind, even the worst thoughts and ideas, intrusive thoughts, anything.

Confessions are notoriously unreliable anyway, there's a whole bunch of evidence on that too.

I wish CCTV had been installed, that would have been by far the most sensible thing to have done after so many unexpected deaths, and then there would have been more concrete evidence instead of time-sheets, ramblings, recollections of consultants and some dodgy stats that don't even reflect all of the people on duty.

The babies were so small they were unlikely to survive anyway. A doctor/professor said this in the documentary.
I'm in 2 minds about it really.

Possibly no one. They were very sick, premature babies.

What? No one said this. What they said was the babies were tiny but actually strong. There was no reason for them to have died.

My apologies. I'm sure the doctor said this but I accept I may have misunderstood

That doesn't explain the spike in deaths from when she qualified to work in the NNICU.

They took babies like that before she started there, and there were nowhere near the level of deaths that happened after she started there.

And don't forget that the investigation - hundreds of cases - from her previous work.- is ongoing.

The timing of many of the deaths was also incredibly unlikely to make them accidental/negligent. 100 day anniversaries, due date anniversaries, imminent discharges. She predicted collapses and deaths (in unlikely cases) and they happened within hours.

Also those consultants reported, and begged for investigations and action, hardly likely if you knew you were negligent.

She had patient notes in her home she knew shouldn't be there, marked as not to be thrown out, that she took with her through house moves .... Meanwhile she had a shredder and shredded her bank documents.

She noted the deaths in her diaries and stalked the families on anniversaries and significant occasions. Only when they would have been posting things about their bereavements.

The parents reported totally inappropriate and ghoulish behaviour from her on numerous occasions.

The babies who were murdered died consistently by wherever method she'd just been trained on (i.e. trained to avoid/deal with).

I could go on.