New Lucy Letby details

[Mrsdoyler]

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

Reason: Lack of empathy

Dewi Evans and the police already knew about the 3rd insulin case before the trial yet she wasn't charged with it so it would be very interesting to know why that case was different.

Yes that's a major issue that I have with all of this.

There is no proof that any crimes have been committed.

If this was ruled to be a miscarriage of justice we know that they're not going to go out and look for the other 'murderer'.

@kkloo people get away with murder because there simply is no realistic prospect of a conviction

This is not infrequent CPS reject all sorts through lack of evidence even though things are obvious

We don't know what breathing tube part they are talking about, is it the oxygen tubing, the et tube. If humidifying oxygen is given the tubing runs with a connection to a bottle of sterile water.

Yes I know that but yet the main piece of evidence for the 2 other insulin cases was the test results, and the third baby also had those high test results.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cevywl7jmm3o

Panorama has also discovered that potentially life-threatening incidents involving infants occurred on almost a third of Letby’s 33 shifts while she was training at Liverpool Women's Hospital in 2012 and 2015.

Shocking but not surprising. It's getting increasingly difficult to defend her now isn't it? Can't blame it on the Countess this time. Those handover sheets probably trophies of every single harm she did to a baby, she was absolutely prolific.

We need to know what the precise definition of a life-threatening incident is here, how many normally occurred on a shift at that time and place, and about any other factors affecting ward performance at that time. Otherwise how is this meaningful information at all?

If that is the case then every person involved with her training and oversight should be fired and prosecuted.

Every time an "unexpected" collapse or death occurs in any hospital, murder should be the first consideration, and an investigation should immediately be carried out. Any nurse or doctor who was the last to interact should be arrested and charged.

No nurse or doctor should ever be allowed to work one on one with any patient.

No one is safe. Ever.

(Yes, deliberately hyperbolic because this whole case is becoming farcical in the extreme.)

Oh right so just doubling down then 🙄is it an inability for posters to just admit they were wrong or what?

Nothing has been proven. I'm not in a position to be right or wrong. Neither is anybody else.

Where did I say any of that "made her a murderer".

You somehow omitted to answer if you'd lbe comfortable for her to look after your newborn ... Funny that.

None of you would.

Nah it shows how many nutters there are, now linked up 24 hrs a day by the internet.

There has never been a time when CT's and amateur "sleuthing" was more virulent.

Yes I’d also like to ask you all if you’d put her in charge of looking after your newborn?!

@Mirabai would you?

Did you see anyone here say she is a good nurse?

Well her supporters haven’t actually said either way what they think her nursing skills were like!

That's because her supporters aren't here.

Of course I wouldn’t because she may be a murderer. She may also not be. And/or she may be massively incompetent.

That’s the whole point - we don’t know.

I envisage more findings about her conduct, sadly. Meaning that any fresh 'evidence' will serve only to hinder (rather than assist) her new legal team.
I agree with both juries and the three appeal judges - her convictions are safe.
My heart goes out to the families.

I don’t think that you can count the second jury as a way to prove a sound conviction. They were told that she had been convicted previously and could use that in their decision. That means this was not a completely separate unbiased judgement.

regarding what someone said that all the people commenting didn’t sit through the trial
and see all the evidence. Dr Michael Hall DID sit through the whole trial, and did see all the evidence. He is a neonatologist (unlike Dewi Evans who is just a paediatrician) and he also thinks that there is numerous issues with the medical evidence and they way it was presented. He’s written to the bmj about it. He was LL expert witness who the defence decided not to call for some reason. He was just as puzzled as to why he wasn’t called as everyone else.

He was just as puzzled as to why he wasn’t called as everyone else.

Who's everyone?

I think most people with a brain could infer why.

So one would presume a supposedly very intelligent & accomplished man could also infer why.

That’s the whole point - we don’t know.

Do we not?

Most people, off MN, don't agree with that opinion.

@Neodymium
It's also very puzzling why they didn't try to submit evidence from Dr Shoo Lee for the trial and only did so for the appeal.

@Neodymium

Dr Hall had an issue with child C

He sat religiously through the whole trial did he?

Where is your proof of that

If you look as to why Dewi wasn’t a Neonatologist you’ll see there’s a very good reason!