New Lucy Letby details

[Mrsdoyler]

Did you see today in the news that LucyLetby originally failed her nursing training.

Reason: Lack of empathy

Because they talked about it.

They interviewed but didn’t investigate the doctor and the other nurse who were on shift for a high number of deaths.

And what of the locum the RCPCH report mentioned the nurses reported concerns about but he kept being retuned to the unit nonetheless. Was he investigated - we don’t even know who he is.

The consultants didn’t think she was a murderer necessarily- they just thought it very odd how she had been present for A, B & C!! And they then reviewed the deaths - later they persuaded management to move her to days - where collapses continued

I mean it’s strange to have twins and triplets dying/ collapsing with totally different presentations

The fact she went to Ibiza, nothing happened- then she returned to three healthy triplets and two of them died in her care was what finally and quite rightly resulted in the police being called

Still salty about being told no-one has to spoon feed you information because you can't be arsed researching it yourself, eh.

And just because the police didn’t use the expert of your preference it does not mean they were rubbish!!!

A lie or forgot a detail that happened 8 years previously? I can’t even remember what happened last week.

A nurse was present for 6 and a dr for even less than that so ofc they are going to quickly eliminate them

He’s not an expert is the problem. He’s a paediatrician who performed the role of expert neonatologist and pathologist for which he has no training.

It’s not a question of my preference it’s a question of who is a legitimate expert in the subject and what will therefore stand up in court under detailed scrutiny.

None of Evans’ will, as you will see.

LL was only charged with 7 out of 15 deaths. What other deaths were the other doctor and nurse present for?

@Mirabai just like she kept handover sheets from 8 years before too

And she had access to her WhatsApp messages too no doubt - well until her phone was removed

she has 15 life sentences so there was plenty attempts too!!

And sometimes there isn’t enough evidence to charge even though it is highly likely

It’s not strange to have 2/3 triplets, who should have been born in a Level 3 unit, die in a unit that was a Level 1 unit masquerading as a Level 2 unit with suboptimal care and problems with clinical management highlighted in the RCPCH and Jane Hawdon’s reports.

All 250 or so of them, most irrelevant to the case.

It’s more concern about them not using ANY qualified statisticians rather than that they didn’t use Prof Hutton in particular. There’s a whole Royal Society of Statisticians out there - she’s merely the one who they initially contacted.

Alright, I’ve had enough for now. Night folks.

WhatsApp convo - 2015.

Police interview 2018.

8 years 🤔

This is ridiculous. I’m interested in building as full a picture of the evidence as I can to help shape my understanding of the case. I have read a fair bit about it but with so much evidence of course there are details I (and all of us) have missed. Why so no aggressive about me asking?

I have never come across a list of these milestone dates and looking now I can’t find one either. If this was really significant evidence I’m sure more would be made of it.

Since no one on this thread seems able to link to a source about this I’ll assume it’s nonsense.

The only milestone date I recall was the 100 days of life. I can’t remember which baby it was though. I don’t remember anytime during the trial they mentioned any other deaths on milestones.

also, I don’t think the triplets were healthy. None of the babies were healthy. That’s the biggest lie they sold was that the babies were stable.

the first baby, the twin, was resuscitated at birth, and then spent 8 hours not receiving any fluids as nobody could get the long line into him. Anyone who has ever had a newborn, imagine going 8 hours without feeding them.

Yes, I have read about the 100 days before. I’ve never considered that a milestone date so I thought that poster must mean something else. If it really is just that it’s beyond ridiculous even to bring it up

It's not a milestone. It's just a nice round number.

Ah the police investigation that the consultants had been calling for, against the wishes and inclination of the management, for a considerable period of time - while being obstruced, delayed and dismissed.

Funny how people so keen to cover up all the deaths and collapses from their incompetence would keep pushing for it to be investigated, including suggesting police involvement. Over and over.

Wouldn't they have been better to leave it to the management and see what they did ..... Which to date had been not very much at all. Management who'd made it very clear they wanted to avoid police involvement.

They'd probably never have had to face anything,

What very strange behaviour indeed for people whose best option would have been to leave it to the laissez daure, avoidant, incompetent, police & scandal averse management.

And then there was the risk - that no matter what they attempted to feed to the police - that just maybe the police would not fall for their scape goating of one nurse; quite a risk indeed.

My jaw dropped and I almost laughed out loud when I read your neat, zealous little description of how all the consultants scape goated Letby. Then apparently the police went along with it (and everyone else in the legal system has done so too). And who was Letby's legal team in this scape goating scenario ? Well, of course, the most incompetent legal team ever.

What evil geniuses those consultants must be, eh.
Fooled the management, fooled the police, fooled the CPS, fooled the juries - they're almost wasted in medicine.

Which of course they're so incompetent in, that they were responsible for all those collapses and deaths.

So evil geniuses in criminality and law, but can't manage to be competent in the profession that they studied & worked in for decades.

Cannot imagine the planet someone would have to be on to consider that evidence of murder.

That is why you stated that scape goated Letby, isn't it

Covering up their own incompetence as the "net closed around them" or something to that effect.

(Except any net closing around them was moving at a glacial speed, and unlikely to actually close at all.
In fact the incoming manager found the paper work stating that several deaths needed further investigation, in boxes marked "Neonates" - which had never been referred for further investigation by management.)

That "net" sure was closing fast, those consultants really were in imminent danger of exposure and prosecution ...NOT.
But they inexplicably pushed for investigations and pushed for police involvement, repeatedly.

It is nonsensical, because it’s essentially a statistical claim (that the babies died disproportionately on milestones) but with no solid statistical underpinning to give the actual probability.
It’s another example of where the prosecution has behaved as if by avoiding technical language they have somehow magically removed the need for taking a rigorous scientific approach to claims about likelihood: it’s not statistics if we say it’s not.
Of course, it worked for them because many people, including the jury and some of the posters on this thread fell for it.
Actually, the moment the prosecution is saying things like ‘it can’t just be coincidence!’, that’s exactly where statisticians are needed to explore whether or not it realistically can.