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

You don’t find it in any way odd that the sickliest triplet was also the only one that suvived - because his parents begged him to be transferred to a different hospital and the doctor in charge agreed such was their suspicion about LL’s involvement in the deaths of the other two? So many alleged coincidences working against the woman in this case, it’s beyond belief.

And you don't find it in any way potentially relevant that they were transferred to another hospital, not just taken from LL's care?

Sure, but it’s not a case of “isn’t it strange this individual nurse is always on shift- she must be the problem somehow”.
Its- let’s review the clinical decisions about the treatment of this patient- what did we potentially miss? What should have been done differently? Etc

Sadly, no. The suboptimal unit didn’t have the resources to take triplets, they should have been in a Level 3. The mother was promised 121 care but couldn’t deliver, (afair LL had care of 2 triplets + 1 other baby) and they had no neonatal consultant available.

One of the mothers whose baby was transferred to LWH said the difference between the two hospitals was “like night and day”.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3d93kpkl83o

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3d93kpkl83o

Are you without any doubt whatsoever that LL is innocent and if so what is the clinching piece of evidence that convinces you of her innocence?

Thank you for including this BBC-
in summary,
-LL has new barrister, a barrister who led appeals for another killer-nurse, so has relevant experience.
-The letter from the group concerning the “inquiry” …. ‘our goal is not to relitigate the Letby case, but to ensure that the [inquiry] is positioned to conduct the most thorough and beneficial investigation possible for the future of neonatal care in the UK’.

So, they aren’t saying she is innocent …. They are asking for the inquiry into improvements in neonatal care to be better???

Nothing about her scribbles .

10+ posters of different professions midwives, sonographers, radiotherapists, you saw the thread you saw numerous posts saying this couldn’t happen but you seem to have selective amnesia.

I’ve no idea whether she’s innocent but I know there’s not one piece of hard evidence against her. No evidence of murder in any case. No evidence to link to LL in particular. And good evidence of death from other causes.

That's literally what they did-they looked for every other explanation for the deaths and collapses until they were left with the only conclusion they could come to. And why would they need to scapegoat her anyway, the managers were prepared to brush everything under the carpet and forget it ever happened. It simply makes no sense that the doctors would want to get the police involved unless they genuinely knew someone was likely harming babies.

Do you accept that there is a wealth of circumstantial evidence against her even if there is not one piece of hard evidence eg: a video of her injecting air into a baby or a fully and explicit confession?

There’s always doubt in everything, but - without having direct knowledge of what happened (eg being present) I’m as convinced as one could be that she is innocent. Theres no clinching piece of evidence that proves she’s innocent, it’s the total absence of any good/ convincing evidence that she did this. For me, the handover notes, the scribbled diary entries, the Facebook searches, are meaningless. The character evidence /
profiling by all accounts suggests that she was a nice, ordinary sort of person and the “scientific” evidence that was used to convict her was full wild hypothesising , overreach and irredeemable holes (like if LL spiked bags with insulin , how on earth did she know/ anticipate in advance which nutritional bags to spike, since these were randomly chosen by other nurses for administration when she wasn’t present? Oh and also these babies fully recovered, and their blood results weren’t even flagged at the time. It’s almost like someone went searching through the clinical record in retrospect for any unusual result related to any babies in the unit over that period - anything that they could potentially use as evidence that a serial killer was afoot.. )

We don’t know that’s how it happened maybe it was suggested to the parents. I haven’t read the transcripts. I have questions & concerns, this could be any one’s daughter at the beginning of their career, I worked loads of extras in the first couple of years as I bought a house I lived there & had a shit boyfriend who didn’t work.

Circumstantial evidence IS evidence!!! If it was “nothing”, it wouldn’t be allowed to be introduced as Evidence.

You beat me to it😂

Do you accept that there is a wealth of circumstantial evidence against her

no. The only circumstantial evidence was that she happened to be around for a lot of collapses / deaths. And we all know well by now the problems with that evidence… (how were “suspicious incidents” identified/ defined? Who was on shift for other collapses / deaths that happened on the unit ? Have we adjusted for the fact that Lucy worked a disproportionate number of shifts in general (particularly night shifts)? What are the statistical chances that any patterns that we see - LL presence and spikes in deaths- could be a result of random chance , etc, etc , etc).

There’s a large amount of data none of it evidence of murder.

that’s circumstantial. No one on here knows the medical notes of any of these babies.

“It is my opinion that the prosecution expert witnesses misrepresented the degree of ‘wellness’, prior to their final collapses, of most, if not all, of those who died – leading the jury to believe that the babies were well when they were not. Given this, there could be differing views as to whether the deaths were all ‘sudden, unexpected and unexplained’. The three pathologists who conducted the original post-mortem examinations do not seem to have been in accord with this analysis.”

Mike Hall, a retired neonatologist and visiting professor in neonatology at the University of Southampton, who had full access to all medical notes and studied all cases….

there’s multiple medical expert whitenesses stating the babies were actually sick. It’s akin to finding people in intensive care and being surprised that they died when the hospital was over run, busy with inadequate staffing and sewage blocked up in sinks and toilets….

Do we have any evidence that the unit was suboptimal? Why would this other hospital be better if they were both NHS?

But it’s not 10+ professions is it? You’ve just plucked that number out of the air.

And does this mean you also have selective amnesia because you said you don’t remember the poster who said in her experience it does happen?

Maybe I should have said there were 20+ posters who said it happens and accused you of having selective amnesia.

sewage blocked up in sinks and toilets…

Raw sewage is sinks etc is pretty far fetched. A ward would simply not be allowed to continue to run under those conditions. Trust me infection control is taken very seriously in hospitals for obvious reasons.

Yes!! The Royal college of pediatric reviewed the unit in 2016 and found multiple serious issues, a lot of which related to inadequate staffing, (most of the findings in this report btw were never presented to the jury)

Any CQC reviews?

If all three of these triplets were poorly wouldn’t one have expected the weakest, sickliest one to have died first? But it was the sickliest that survived, having been transferred away from the person who was convicted of murdering his brothers.