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.

I think it’s more that she’s just flat refusing to listen to the expert opinion . I can’t believe she’s watched the press conference -she’s predetermined its “mickey mouse” and “doesn’t change anything”.

Or based their actions on expert knowledge that 14 experts disagree with.

I trust the jury, who sat through all the evidence presented at the trial, saw Letby in court, actually heard her evidence along with all the rest.

We've always known that there was no one piece of conclusive evidence against her, that's why people have to look at everything together. This was done by both the trial jury and the appeal judges, and every individual case was investigated by a different team.

People say it's a cover up by the hospital, rubbish. There have been several maternity units which have come under serious criticism because so many things went wrong, it's way more complicated to frame an innocent person as a serial killer than to just investigate a scandal. It's hardly letting the hospital off the hook if they have to admit they allowed her to continue killing babies for so long.

I always thought Tony Martin was innocent of murder, even before his conviction was overturned

Except that it wasn't overturned, it was simply changed into a conviction for manslaughter due to diminished responsibility. That did not change the fact that he committed homicide.

This baby was sedated. Again - if you followed the trial - you'd know that. Experts for the prosecution confirmed that it was enormously unlikely. Experts for the defence said... oh wait, the plumber didn't have an opinion on that one.

In some posters' opinion this would be her thinking carefully about the right treatment because she was such a caring nurse with a genuine medical interest in helping the sickest babies.

I've listened to all the opinion including every scrap of evidence in a 10 month trial. As have all the people who are very confident she's guilty.

There was no evidence that she silenced the alarm, in fact there was witnesses that said the alarms were in fact going off.

Even if she did, that is done all the time. It has to be, otherwise the entire unit would be a cacophony of alarms all day. For those inexperienced in NNICU, alarms might seem to be something very important. In fact, most times they aren't very. An alarm can go off when oxygen de-sats are a problem. That can happen after a feed, leading up to a big burp. Nurses don't jump to attention for every alarm on every baby, and when they do get to the incubator, they turn the alarm off. After having been there a couple of weeks, we (as parents) got used to turning the alarm off when we could see it wasn't an issue. Even now, 15 years later, I can hear the noise in my head, of those alarms going off all the time.

The alarm is not a smoking gun issue, or even part of the circumstantial evidence.

Did you listen to the press conference ?

This baby was sedated.

As was mine. It happened.

I've listened to all the opinion including every scrap of evidence in a 10 month trial. As have all the people who are very confident she's guilty.

If that's the case, you have nothing to fear from a re-trial.

There is definitely an argument for very specialist cases like this needing jurors with the relevant professional expertise. That would require actually paying them properly for their time, however, so I expect we'll keep pootling on as we are.

Yes. I know the trial so well that I immediately spotted some of the flaws in their conclusions. I've no doubt they believe what they're saying based on the evidence available to them.

Lucy Letby is clearly very guilty but it doesn't matter either way - her odd little lawyer has an extremely low success rate with the CCRC (none overturned) so I don't think it actually matters what you or I think. She's guilty in the eyes of the law (as well as in clear evidence both medical and circumstantial) and she will die in jail.

I'm not in the least afraid of a re-trial - I just know it isn't going to happen because she was convicted based on a wealth of all types of evidence, over a large number of different cases (and will probably soon be tried on further counts too). Her lawyer doesn't have any luck getting these cases sent back to appeal tbh.

Did you listen to the press conference?

@Worldinyourhands please forgive me but I'm curious - how have you come to follow the case so closely? Do you have a professional interest? (I'm hoping you don't have a personal connection)

I'm sorry you had such a sick baby, but EVEN IF this tiny baby that the medical experts said was incapable of dislodging its tube did so (and the defence didn't refute this) - she (the nurse other staff had come to associate with a high number of deaths in her care, who had been inappropriately 'excited' by these deaths) was still found standing over him with the alarm silenced watching his oxygen levels drop when interrupted unexpectedly by a doctor following his nagging feeling of concern that she was alone with the baby.

Which mistakes in their conclusions? And what is your personal expertise to claim that these experts are mistaken?

Was just coming on to say this. We're all guilty of looking up people on social media who we may come into contact with our of nosiness and curiosity.

So, the medical evidence is clear cut is it? 14 international experts in the relevant fields just "believe" on the basis of "evidence available to them" - ie all the case notes? Goodness. Are you the judge? Or a prosecuter?

@BoredZelda i was just about to write a long post about my NICU baby while under sedation removing their ventilator tube. It happens. Like you, we got used to silencing the constant alarms.

What is your expertise?
Have you watched the conference or refusing to because you will not considerer further evidence which does not suit your bias?

You were in court for the entire trial? That must have been gruelling.

Amazing that everyone else who thinks she was guilty was there too, I didn’t know the courtroom was that big.

No offense but I've been on Jury service.
Anyone could be called to do this- even if you're thick as shit.

Not to deliberately pick on a post, but this sums up the WHOLE problem.

There is too much, ' Walks like a duck, quacks like a duck' about the trial. That is what the debate is about.

It's not how we do justice in this country. If Letby is guilty, then the legal process needs to have been secure and correct all down the line, not based on ' walks like a duck, quacks like a duck'.