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

This is my understanding as well.

I would not want her anywhere near my baby.

I’m not cross nor have I sworn at anyone.

I have seen zero evidence of murder. I have seen evidence of suboptimal care.
Dr Hawdon reviewed all the cases. In 13 cases she found suboptimal care and some of the babies may have survived with different medical treatment. 4 cases she sent for forensic review, no concerns raised there. Pathology reports - natural causes.

prove incontrovertibly that all of these babies died of natural causes and that there is no possibility whatsoever that they were murdered?

the burden of proof isn’t on the defence!!
I mean can you prove incontrovertibly that that you didn’t commit these murders and there is no possibility whatsoever that they were murdered by you?

Fair point.

So the most premature baby in this case survives and yet much stronger babies die very suddenly and inexplicably? Please explain how that would naturally happen?

Suboptimal care given by incompetent staff is surely as likely as murder.

If this isn’t murder it is corporate manslaughter and there are far too many powerful people with powerful litigators to stop that happening

Grossly suboptimal care given by Lucy then since she was the only one around all these collapses. All the rest of the staff managed to keep the babies stable perfectly fine. Then when they go on break or handover or she sneaks into a room she's not designated to be in the babies suddenly are at deaths door. Not suspicious at all...

Other staff members were present for six of the seven deaths (multiple staff members iirc, and it includes doctors which the initial list didn't). If that one death is proven to be natural under further investigation, I assume you'll think that any member of staff present for the other six warrants investigation for murder?

@BeyondSmoake what new list are you looking at? LL would cause the catastrophic collapse and then call for help so ofc other staff and doctors would be there at the point of death. How many staff members were present when the babies actually collapsed?

Of course I can, what a silly question!

At the end of the day it is immaterial what you think you have or haven’t seen. A jury saw evidence of murder, they spent 9 months being shown it, they concluded it proved Letby killed numerous babies. Dr Hawdon was not called by defence to give evidence but even if she had it would have still been up to the jury to weigh up her opinion versus the opinion of the prosecution experts, together with all the other circumstantial evidence against the defendant . If Hawdon had been asked by the prosecution to rule out murder as a cause of death in each case could she have done so categorically I wonder?

It’s immaterial to the truth what a lay jury made of the evidence. And that is why ultimately this case will be a catalyst to reform in the way cases that pivot on scientific evidence are tried. It will take a long time, miscarriages of justice always do. Folbigg for example served 20 years before she was finally released and exonerated.

Do you think Beverley Allitt should be cleared too?

I know nothing about that case. Shipman certainly shouldn’t.

Plenty of cases involve detailed and expert knowledge and analysis in a wide range of fields, not just medicine and science. It seems there is a desire amongst some here to get rid of juries made up of lay persons in all such cases and ensure that in future juries (if there are to be any at all) should be chosen based on their own expertise and insider knowledge of the relevant field under scrutiny. I’m not entirely convinced that wouldn’t open up a whole other kettle of fish, as in so many areas experts within the same field often disagree with each other, and/or have their own biases and agendas.

The medics are the ones primarily responsible for deaths caused by poor clinical care. Not nurses.

Letbys actions each time were shown to the jury and it was proved she was the only one with opportunity when each baby crashed- and the evidence that each baby was stable and expected to improve, and was improving with care from all other staff, was all shown to the jury.

This is the kind of due diligence thing that was comprehensively addressed and clearly shown in court, but isn't reported so much as it would take too long, and is not sensational and paper selling enough. The big picture of evidence was strong enough for the jury to be sure.

Surely responsibility also comes down to management decisions like getting rid of senior nurses to save money, and staffing shortages among the doctors too? (And ultimately the decisions that gave the hotel the budget it had, because the managers could only work with what they had got?)
If Letby was innocent I have no idea how good a nurse she was, but if she was not good enough to be the most senior nurse on a unit looking after seriously ill babies in her mid twenties and only 3 years from graduation that might not be entirely her fault.

The Beverley Alitt situation is completely different, I'm not sure why her and Shipman are relevant here.

I will repeat what I've said previously elsewhere, the evidence as presented at the trial showed overwhelming evidence of her guilt, however if that evidence is now being called into doubt then it is correct that, as part of a fair and robust justice system, it is fully explored.

The arrogance in this post is a thing of wonder.

You are talking as if it’s a done deal that she’s innocent.

I hope to see you back here if her next appeal fails.

I think the pro-Letby posters need to tone down their arrogance and understand that the jury doesn’t have the luxury of looking at just a couple of hobby horse point, they have to consider the evidence as a whole.

Actually I was hoping Mirabai would answer that question because of her hope that cases which hinge on detailed medical information will be dealt with in a different manner by the courts in future so as to avoid miscarriages of justice, (the implication being that anyone already found guilty in a case which pivots on such information by a jury of 12 lay people must necessarily be unsafe). Was Beverley Allitt not a nurse accused of killing multiple children by means such as injecting insulin and air into young bodies? So not COMPLETELY different, surely? I don’t believe she confessed to these crimes until well after the trial and then only apparently to avoid being transferred to a high security womens jail.

Yes she can, by dint of the fact that she never set foot in the hospital and no one in the hospital would know her from Adam for a start 😂

Also I have a customer facing job hundreds of miles from the hospital and potentially dozens of witnesses to put me elsewhere on any given day, as well as phone records, photos etc. I don’t think even the most rabid LL fan is going to be able to pin this one one me… 😂

It was fully explored, over several weeks and two trials. The fact that a few armchair lawyers are pursuing hobbyhorses does not automatically mean that we have to go over the whole process again.