Well firstly, you have things arse about face with regard to Baby C. She didn't come into contact with that infant until the day of its final collapse so no, she couldn't have "sabotaged" by pumping air into them down an NG tube previously, as suggested by an x-ray taken the day before and which formed the basis of this charge. Dewi Evans when realising this AFTER THE TRIAL revised the cause of death retrospectively to death by intravenous air embolism on the day of death. That raises huge questions about the validity of his evidence in this case and as a whole.
Secondly, it's interesting that the "burn the witch" contingent are criticising both professionals and amateurs for questioning the medical evidence, which should be the foundation of this case, yet will confidently play armchair psychologist analysing and casting judgement on Lucy Letbts character and behaviour and surmised "motivation".
As far as I am aware, and I have searched, no psychiatric or psychological evaluation formed part of the evidence presented at court. Which either means there weren't any, or any findings were helpful neither to the prosecution nor the defence.
It did come out after the trial, that the alleged "confession" notes were part of therapeutic writing exercises recommended by a therapist to help her work through her feelings about what was going on. Why this wasn't highlighted at trial to rebut the certainty of those ramblings being any sort of coherent confession I have no idea.
There is so much about the way this case was handled that appears to run in direct opposition to "due process" that without a proper review, the justice system as it stands in the case if complex medical evidence is not fit for purpose.