Lucy Letby.....she might actually be innocent?!

[Dramatic]

I have just watched the full press conference and I'm blown away. There seems to be no actual evidence AT ALL that she killed or injured those babies. This could be one of the biggest miscarriages of justice there has ever been in this country.

Stillbirth rates also rose in that hospital during that period, something Letby could have had absolutely no effect on.

Absolutely spot on.

Whatever side of the fence you are on, you should want to be sure the outcome is the right one.

For me it isn't about Letby, it's about the justice system, and the NHS. If there is any chance either of these have failed, it is in everyone's interest to have that brought to light and for changes to be made.

Isn't it interesting how they called her therapist to the trial and the therapist said 'Oh yeah I totally told her to write down random thoughts about being guilty even though she isn't.

OH WAIT that never happened. No therapist witness, no medical experts... just the plumber (who said yeah there was a problem with the plumbing once but it was fixed quickly and I wasn't even there tbh... )

But she didn’t write that. She wrote a lot of scrawl “it’s my fault” etc but that doesn’t prove anything

If she herself wrote it down, if stats say so many babies couldn't have died one in a million chance, if there were consistent signs across all the babies like the bruises, if babies were all doing fine before, if all those deaths are linked to her being alone in the room with them, if all died in the same way from the same conditions. If it quacks, walks like a duck and so on...

He probably explained to her - look, we can't ask this expert x or the prosecution will ask him y and weirdly the answers will make you look like a murderer

I cannot believe you could have any knowledge of the medical evidence / expert opinion (that is now widely known in this case) and continue to insist that if these perspectives were heard at trial - she would obviously look guilty.

I can only conclude that you have not bothered to inform yourself in the most basic of respects regarding the expert opinion that is now out there.

I suggest you start by watching the press conference. It’s not too long and very informative/ interesting.

Not sure why you're repeatedly claiming that. Yes I understand that these people have, without all the evidence, and with some clear mistakes in their conclusions, given their opinions. That doesn't change anything.

You'll see. In a few months this will go to the CCRC and be thrown out again and everyone will be feeling either a bit silly, or oddly convinced it's some huge scandal.

She's not unattractive but she's not anything special. We're allowed to have different opinions, just in case you didn't realise.

Being odd is not a valid reason to be convicted of murder.

Amanda Knox was convicted of murder based on flimsy evidence and media speculation. Her own stepfather had thought she was too naive to go to Italy on her own.

Her behaviour around the murder was indeed odd. But she wasn't guilty of murder.

in two cases there was a difference of opinion, when that happened they brought in a third expert and then tried torch a consensus. Which they they then did. No evidence of murder.

I'm very well informed on all the available information and she's guilty as hell. Sorry that doesn't fit with your agenda. Doesn't really matter as she's where she belongs and will stay there.

Of course repetition doesn't make it true

I know it's true because I work with hospital fuck ups and I have seen for myself, thank you very much. No repetition required.

And please don't assume that, just because the babies didn't die of hygiene linked infection, that this wasn't a fuck up

I watched most of the press conference. From recollection out of all babies there were 2 that needed a third expert. For the rest they came to the same conclusion independently of each other. In the 2 cases, once the third expert looked they found still no evidence for what Letby had been accused of in those instances - and other more probable causes of death of the babies.

they have the only evidence which is relevant - the medical evidence which proves there were no murders. Her behaviour, weird or otherwise, is totally irrelevant once that has been established.

@Worldinyourhands
Are you claiming to have watched the press conference?

What do you suppose my “agenda” is?

Ok, there are clearly some on here who have their own agenda, and that's fine

But if there is a chance, even a small one, that she's not guilty and the danger is still there, don't we owe it to everyone involved to try to get to the very bottom and prevent anything happening again?

This is potentially much, much bigger than the actions of 1 individual

Did you watch the press conference? There was no evidence that she silenced the alarm, in fact there was witnesses that said the alarms were in fact going off.

Yes - a very tiny baby who could not self correct or dislodge their own tube.

My very tiny baby who could not self correct, dislodged her NG tube twice a week. All it takes is a tiny arm to get caught up in it.

You are why these cases should have a panel of three judges to decide on guilt.
Jutors are not fit to judge such complex cases.

What are the clear mistakes?

I can't imagine how the parents of that baby must feel knowing all of that. Also the parents of babies who died after other doctors/nurses had raised suspicion and she was allowed to carry on working. Imagine if your baby died and you found out afterwards that people were already suspicious and calling her the angel of death, I'd be so angry. It's like Sarah Everard's killer being known as "the rapist."

You looked up the parents in the Letby case on Facebook or have looked up parents/families of children you've treated who have died?
Either way, it might not make you a murderer but it's odd behaviour and, in a professional context, would not be acceptable.
In Letby's case I think there was a very intense fascination in exploring the families' grief and their lives, and it contributes to a psychological profile that is relevant to her actions. Likewise, the written notes she made...they may not be a confession but they are remarkably intense and troubling. I think she is a narcissist and I think that, had she not been investigated and subsequently convicted, the patterns and nature of deaths where she was working would have continued.

I think her guilt was predetermined before the trial and I think there was a concerted effort by the authorities to ensure that she was found guilty. Hospital authorities because it's easier to blame a string of deaths on one "rogue" nurse than admit to systematic failings over many years. One nurse sacrificed versus the potential of prison sentences for senior management if failings are proved.

That doesn't necessarily prove her innocence, but in one way or another failings by the hospital authorities led to those deaths.

I find it's usually quite easy to tell someone's guilt or innocence just by looking at them. A jury is so easily swayed by "expert" evidence that the layperson doesn't know about. I always thought Oscar Pistorius was guilty, even before his conviction was upgraded to murder. I always thought Tony Martin was innocent of murder, even before his conviction was overturned. Above all, James Hanratty was clearly guilty and deserved his execution despite a decades-long campaign to overturn his conviction that almost worked, until advances in DNA technology found that his semen was present on the underwear of one of his victims, which kind of sunk the main argument that it was a case of mistaken identity and he'd never met the victim.

And yet experienced judges let the cases go to trial, experienced counsel did not make any submission of no case to answer after the prosecution case had been presented, and two separate juries found her guilty. Is it just possible they know more about it than you do?

Because the alarm pauses rather than is 'silenced'. So yes, it was later going off as the tiny baby struggled to breathe while she watched.

Do tell us what the clear mistakes are in the conclusions of all these professors of pediatrics, heads of national colleges of neonatology etc, and how you’re qualified to assess them.