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 always find lunatics give the best tips

who was that pp claiming Hazel wasn’t throwing around personal insults?

It’s not just me though is it. That’s your problem. If you want to take issue with the NYer, Telegraph, Guardian, Economist, C5, MP David Davis, Dr Phil Hammond, Prof Michael Hall, Dr Svilena Dimotrova, Dr Shoo Lee etc be my guest…

Sorry, I didn't realise you were psychic and knew she was going to write this. However, where are the personal insults you claimed she was "throwing around" before the one you obviously predicted?

But your "fix" is incorrect.

The poster dominating this thread, as she goes every single LL thread posted on MNnis not saying "whether".

She is stating categorically that LL was scape goated.
And that it was by the consultants.
(Later she added management).

That's the topic that emerged in this thread.

There was no question in her post on the subject.

It was stated as fact.

You could that’s not what you did though.

You quoted a poster, responded to her as “you”. Then said you were talking about someone else.

If I were you I’d just own the mistake.

At some point, I'll go through it and see if i accidentally quoted the wrong poster.

She would need to admit her "mistake" in saying that the debate - including your posts (which she has been consistently and enthusiastically agreeing with) is around "whether" LL has been wrongly convicted of murdering multiple infants.

Because there was not one "whether" re.her being wrongly convicted or not, in your post outlining what (you believe) happened.

You claimed blankly and factually that the consultants scape goated her.

Everyone would need to admit to their mistakes eh.

If I were you I’d just own the mistake

You have monumentally bigger mistakes to own.

Like ones the size of the sun.

This thread is about whether LL had a fair trial- Specifically considering the role of the notes in the prosecution case and the context in which those notes were written being unknown to the jury.

Some people on this thread have the opinion (which is now very mainstream) that LL is not guilty and that she was made a scapegoat for systemic problems within the hospital and suboptimal clinical care by doctors in the neonatal unit.

I have given my opinion that LL was scapegoated and it’s a view shared by many people now. You’re just going to have to accept that someone thinks differently to you.

Now I am bored of your tantrums and I have to go out, so why not revert the thread back to the actual topic.

Which docuseries was this please? (Thanks in advance).

Completely agree. I’ve never known a neonatal nurse train to do miscarriage scans as part of their role. Yes they could leave neonatal nursing and train to be a sonographer but nobody trains up to do it on the side afaik. It’s such a lengthy training course and you need to be scanning all the time to become competent. Yes she might shadow someone for a day possibly (more likely as a student) but she wouldn’t be doing the scan.

in reference to another point someone said a newly qualified nurse would not be working in a NICU, I know NQ nurses who have got jobs straight out of uni in a NICU. Obviously they’re going to carry on doing extended training on the job.

Give it time. Sure there will be a review.

Your opinion is of no relevance, she is where she deserves and needs to be, and will be until she dies. The only opinion that matters is that of the jury.

If you look at the Post Office Horizon scandal, in recent years, skill at handling of the public comms around the scandal was one of the metrics for board bonuses.
Like schools (where pupils are transient people passing through while senior management and administration staff may be in post for decades) the trade-off in hospitals between blaming a single person or team versus admitting to a wider culture of complacency and carelessness can seem an easy one for people with a steep career trajectory.

I have read it , it is superficial it hasn’t touched scientific evidence, still hasn’t questioned the medics they are just taking their word that what they are saying is true. Triplets by their origin are high risk. If they were healthy happy babies why were they in intensive care in the first place? Healthy good weight babies would be on transitional care ward.

There is a man called Clive Freeman, who would already be a free man if he confessed to the crime he has spent more than 30 years in prison for.
https://www.pressreader.com/uk/daily-mail/20240327/281655375076077
He was convicted on the theory of a pathologist only two years into his career, based on a murderer 150 years earlier. The pathologist has since made huge contributions to pathology but refuses to comment on the case. The outcome of the CCRC inquiry may undermine a stellar career, but creative theories should attract an appropriate level of scepticism - particularly when someone's entire life is at stake.

Or retired healthcare professionals who have worked in the nhs for decades.

No one has explained why there would be “scapegoating”. There have been numerous enquiries over the years about failures in the NHS. In none of the others has anyone been framed for murder.

So you remember one poster who said a neonatal nurse could scan pregnant women but disregarded the 10+ professions who said it couldn’t happen.

Why WOULD’T the consultants look at the rota to see who was working? The nurses are on shift in the unit, there, present attending to the babies.

The consultants are NOT there the whole time, not THERE when the events occurred.

It’s the natural question to ask, in any workplace/business …. If something goes wrong, you ask, who was working that shift? Who was present when the things went wrong.
If there seems to be pattern regarding certain employee(s), well, that’s one line of enquiry. Or, the rota might help determine if understaffed, someone working too many shifts & tired, too many jr staff, someone who is known performance etc

It’s a step in information gathering…. Why is it being seen as targeted witch-hunt ?

Ah people who disagree with you are "tantrumming".

They're silly little angry kids, while you're a wise, calm, superior, rational adult

And you're "bored" with interacting with them.

Haven't seen either of those techniques on here before ....... Oh wait, I've seen them a million times. They're older than the pyramids.

Anyway;

This is the actual topic.

Did LL murder multiple infants.

You say she didn't, the deaths were due to consultant negligence, and LL was scape goated by them (and somehow neither the management, police, cps, jury or judges saw through it).

(Well the management did at first, but for unknown reasons, completely changed their mind or pretended they did, and also scape goated her).

That's some scape goating!!!!
Those consultants must have jedi mind control.

And the poor scape goat also got the most incompetent defence team in legal history.

But kept them on for the entire trial and used them again for the second one 🤔

When a patient in hospital dies unexpectedly, surely the questions start with potential errors in clinical care (which could be a shared responsibility across multiple actors - primary responsibility being on the doctors). Not which individual nurse is always around who had the opportunity to murder them.

People have questions about this case because the evidence that was used to convict Lucy just doesn’t stand up to scrutiny. If she isn’t in fact guilty of these crimes, it follows that she was made a scapegoat.

Do you think if there are unexpected deaths, on the dialysis ward, intensive care, cardiology … the consultants don’t, as part of enquiry, ask for the rota? Don’t ask WHO was there on the unit who can provide more information?

If they did NOT ask who was working … would you think they did a thorough investigation?

Or, do you agree that asking who was THERE on the ward at the time of the incident/death a valid part of an investigation?

Which ‘10 professions’ am I disregarding?

How can you look at what errors occurred without knowing who was present?