Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Lucy Letby’s scribbled notes

1000 replies

Figmentofmyimagination · 03/09/2024 22:16

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

OP posts:
Thread gallery
9
Mirabai · 04/09/2024 14:51

Starlingexpress · 04/09/2024 14:48

‘Sewage’ 😂This is gold.

Oh, you didn’t follow the trial then.

angeldelite · 04/09/2024 15:19

Mirabai · 04/09/2024 14:51

Oh, you didn’t follow the trial then.

I followed the trial and the plumber said there was only one time that foul water had come out of a sink tap, but that this was fixed so didn’t happen again.

So you and others trying to imply there was daily sewage coming out of taps are wildly exaggerating.

angeldelite · 04/09/2024 15:25

3tumsnot1 · 04/09/2024 14:39

no the stats were selected by the prosecution team and this has been widely condemned by statisticians as false representation.

The defence did argue that there were times when Letby wasn’t there during the trial.

They had the opportunity to present their own statistical data. For all we know their data showed LL in a bad light so they didn’t present it.

Tandora · 04/09/2024 15:37

angeldelite · 04/09/2024 15:19

I followed the trial and the plumber said there was only one time that foul water had come out of a sink tap, but that this was fixed so didn’t happen again.

So you and others trying to imply there was daily sewage coming out of taps are wildly exaggerating.

only one time?
We are talking about sewage coming out of a tap!!! It takes a lot less than that to spark a lethal pathogen outbreak in a hospital.

Mirabai · 04/09/2024 15:38

angeldelite · 04/09/2024 15:19

I followed the trial and the plumber said there was only one time that foul water had come out of a sink tap, but that this was fixed so didn’t happen again.

So you and others trying to imply there was daily sewage coming out of taps are wildly exaggerating.

Poster didn’t say “daily”. Nor have I seen anyone say daily.

The plumber testified that he attended the neonate unit weekly.

And a leaked report found Pseudomonas aeruginosa colonised taps there - an ongoing problem.

David Livermore, professor of Medical Microbiology, at UEA said:

”We are asked to believe that this comprised two superimposed clusters, one of seven murders by Lucy Letby, and one where, to quote the crown prosecution expert, they died for the usual problems why small babies die: haemorrhage, infection, congenital problems.”

“It is simpler to believe that we are looking at a single spike of fatal infections in a chaotic unit.”

The US CDC commented:

”In our experience mortality rates during Pseudomonas aeruginosa outbreaks can be high,”

“Neonatal intensive care unit patients often have defects in their immune system and are often subject to large amounts of very invasive care which make them very susceptible to infections with healthcare pathogens and also, when infected, at high risk for adverse outcomes including death and severe infection.”

“As neonates have little capacity to compensate for additional stresses, infection can cause other problems in these patients that are not directly related to the infection.”

ClearFruit · 04/09/2024 15:50

Figmentofmyimagination · 03/09/2024 22:16

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

If you're scribbling "hate hate hate, die die die" on scraps of paper, get help.

Lucy Letby is a convicted murderer. Threads like this must be hideous for the families of the dead children, should they come across them. I'm amazed MN lets them stand.

SensorySensai · 04/09/2024 16:00

Lucy Letby is 100% guilty.

And also found guilty in a court of law.

But just for the sake of the nutcases on this thread... if you had been completely randomly and unfairly convicted of the multiple murders of premature babies and sentenced to multiple whole-life orders, you'd think your lawyer had fucked up big time no?

You wouldn't - for example - use him for the next trial too?!

3tumsnot1 · 04/09/2024 16:06

angeldelite · 04/09/2024 15:25

The defence did argue that there were times when Letby wasn’t there during the trial.

They had the opportunity to present their own statistical data. For all we know their data showed LL in a bad light so they didn’t present it.

The prosecution omitted a further 10 baby deaths as she wasn’t on shift when they died. This is the statistical bias. They didn’t include them as it makes her look innocent and asks questions as to why a further 10 babies died in the same period when she wasn’t there.

I don’t care whether her legal team had the same opportunity to represent stats as they want. It’s irrelevant whether they were a competent team or not.

This will always be an unfair representation of fact. And the jury in this instance were given statistics which were deliberately and thoroughly misleading.

Mirabai · 04/09/2024 16:08

SensorySensai · 04/09/2024 16:00

Lucy Letby is 100% guilty.

And also found guilty in a court of law.

But just for the sake of the nutcases on this thread... if you had been completely randomly and unfairly convicted of the multiple murders of premature babies and sentenced to multiple whole-life orders, you'd think your lawyer had fucked up big time no?

You wouldn't - for example - use him for the next trial too?!

It’s not LL who has said they fucked up: it’s doctors, lawyers and statisticians.

southpawsofthenorth · 04/09/2024 16:14

Unexpectedlysinglemum · 04/09/2024 13:11

Whoever was doing it when they realized they were getting away with it due to Lucy being blamed?

Or maybe everyone was a bit slack and now they're all much more careful after what happened? (Including management staffing better etc)

Neither of those scenarios are likely.

I mean if there was a killer why assume it wasn’t her?
If the hospital were being slack then they did what? Claimed they had a serial killer in their midst and then immediately improved their performance?

Tandora · 04/09/2024 16:19

SensorySensai · 04/09/2024 16:00

Lucy Letby is 100% guilty.

And also found guilty in a court of law.

But just for the sake of the nutcases on this thread... if you had been completely randomly and unfairly convicted of the multiple murders of premature babies and sentenced to multiple whole-life orders, you'd think your lawyer had fucked up big time no?

You wouldn't - for example - use him for the next trial too?!

Eh? It would entirely depend on whether you blamed your lawyer for the conviction. Wrongfully convicted people have maintained the same counsel for appeals before. Nothing far fetched about it.

southpawsofthenorth · 04/09/2024 16:19

I mean if improving their performance could be done so dramatically and quickly could they not of just done that in the first place instead of drawing attention to themselves by making their ward the centre of a huge media story.

Tandora · 04/09/2024 16:21

southpawsofthenorth · 04/09/2024 16:19

I mean if improving their performance could be done so dramatically and quickly could they not of just done that in the first place instead of drawing attention to themselves by making their ward the centre of a huge media story.

The hospital unit was downgraded. They were no longer allowed to care for really sick babies.

Itllfalloff · 04/09/2024 16:23

I thought she was guilty as sin but now not so sure given all the stuff around the data…

Terridactyl · 04/09/2024 16:23

Cardamomandlemons · 04/09/2024 14:23

I'm not saying that she is innocent but that the conviction was potentially unsafe & the terms of the judicial review should be expanded. So I don't know if I'm your conspiracy theorist.

For what it's worth, statistically speaking me & my kids would potentially be at more risk from a cover up and scapegoat culture, with a bacteria ridden hospital with leaky plumbing, underfunding, lack of enough nurses and an arrogant consultant culture, so giving the judicial review a wider remit is in our interests.

I lost my great grandmother, my grandmother and nearly my mother to poor hospital care. My mother was during childbirth. I completely understand that there can be serious shortcomings within hospitals.

However, I have concerns about the drive for the ‘Free Lucy’ brigade. It’s one thing to have concerns over a free trial, but it’s another to not have the full picture and be campaigning, as some people are on social media, to set her free. If she is deemed innocent of all crimes then she would be potentially free to return to looking after little babies. And I’m not sure I would be comfortable with that. Maybe that’s because I think she did it, but I wonder how many people saying the evidence is wishy washy and she deserves to be free - as people on Twitter have been - would be comfortable with her caring for their or a relatives little baby.

Just to add, I’d be open to changing my mind, I’m wouldn’t stake my life that she did commit the murders as I haven’t seen all the evidence, but from what I have seen and read including all the rebuttals I still think she did it.

angeldelite · 04/09/2024 16:27

Tandora · 04/09/2024 15:37

only one time?
We are talking about sewage coming out of a tap!!! It takes a lot less than that to spark a lethal pathogen outbreak in a hospital.

The plumber said ‘foul water’, not sewage. If he meant sewage he would have said sewage.

BeyondSmoake · 04/09/2024 16:32

What is your interpretation of "foul water"?

Terridactyl · 04/09/2024 16:34

BeyondSmoake · 04/09/2024 16:32

What is your interpretation of "foul water"?

Isn’t ‘foul water’ just the term for sewage in the industry?

angeldelite · 04/09/2024 16:34

3tumsnot1 · 04/09/2024 16:06

The prosecution omitted a further 10 baby deaths as she wasn’t on shift when they died. This is the statistical bias. They didn’t include them as it makes her look innocent and asks questions as to why a further 10 babies died in the same period when she wasn’t there.

I don’t care whether her legal team had the same opportunity to represent stats as they want. It’s irrelevant whether they were a competent team or not.

This will always be an unfair representation of fact. And the jury in this instance were given statistics which were deliberately and thoroughly misleading.

Likely the other deaths had a natural cause which is why the defence didn’t question their exclusion from the table.

She had a multi million pound defence, this would have been examined in detail.

angeldelite · 04/09/2024 16:36

Terridactyl · 04/09/2024 16:34

Isn’t ‘foul water’ just the term for sewage in the industry?

Edited

Foul water can be any waste water (bathroom, kitchen, utility, washing machines etc)

BeyondSmoake · 04/09/2024 16:37

Yes, @Terridactyl

"Foul sewers carry wastewater from toilets, sinks, baths, showers, washing machines and dishwashers to our sewage works for treatment."
(United utilities)

angeldelite · 04/09/2024 16:39

BeyondSmoake · 04/09/2024 16:37

Yes, @Terridactyl

"Foul sewers carry wastewater from toilets, sinks, baths, showers, washing machines and dishwashers to our sewage works for treatment."
(United utilities)

That’s for ‘foul sewer’ not foul water.

BeyondSmoake · 04/09/2024 16:39

"This water is considered ‘foul’ because it is contaminated with pollutants, like human waste and harmful chemicals. Usually, this wastewater will be directed through the main sewer system along to a sewage treatment plant."

Tandora · 04/09/2024 16:42

angeldelite · 04/09/2024 16:27

The plumber said ‘foul water’, not sewage. If he meant sewage he would have said sewage.

He agreed with Mr Myers when questioned that the “foul water” included “human waste, sewage”.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.
Swipe left for the next trending thread