To wonder what would happen if LL were ever released?

[Pleasehelp12345]

I'm not intending to state whether I think she is innocent or guilty but I am just curious as to how her life would look if she were released.
Even if her conviction was overturned, it's highly unlikely she'd be able to go back to a regular life, or would she? Would she walk away with no convictions?

She was scape goated by the consultants who fought to report her. The consultants were the ones responsible for the medical care and for botching procedures on the infants, not prescribing the correct medicines etc. They were the ones whose reputations stood to suffer as the unit was being investigated for its excess deaths.

If you listen to the worldwide experts at their press conference it sounds like they made a lot of mistakes.

I don’t think you’re premise is right. For me the system did partly work, they was evidence to suggest she may have been responsible however the main issue is her defence team didn’t challenge this evidence.
If I were on a jury and was given all that circumstantial evidence, along with an “expert” presenting it and the defence team produce nothing to challenge it, then I’d assume they couldn’t challenge it and most likely think she was guilty.

I don't think the other nurses (who worked with her closely) did suspect anything did they?

Also someone said that the consultants only did two ward rounds a week which seems absolutely mad with such fragile and sick infants (no wonder they kept being surprised that allegedly stable infants died). But can I ask for a source for this as I don't remember hearing it at the press conference or elsewhere?

Right ok, I thought the previous poster was saying it was the hospital management who were trying to scapegoat her.

It was talked about in the trial. The guardian mentions it here https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/oct/24/lucy-letby-inquiry-character-missed-opportunities-staff-shortages

It was also in the BBC radio documentary a few months back. A senior doctor from Addenbrokes said he was shocked by the two a week as in his hospital at that level of sickness it would be three a DAY.

I have wondered whether this might end up being another push towards privatisation for the NHS. We all know how flawed the NHS is and how badly it is functioning these days. If it turns out this is a miscarriage of justice then surely there needs to be a huge reckoning in underperforming hospitals.

You weren’t in the jury room and you don’t know what they thought about what was presented. Juries are known to frequently misunderstand stats and evidence.

I don't think it should ever have made it to trial TBH.

I think the jury didn't ask enough questions.

Most likely nobody in either the CPS or the Police wanted to take the flak for not prosecuting her, and people were desperate for someone to blame. I think "let the jury decide" was the most convenient way of "sorting it out".

Not just a lack of consultants - from the Guardian article about the Thirwall enquiry above there was sometimes less than 50% of junior doctors on duty [3 instead of 8] too

In addition to around 50% of nursing staff too [3 or 4 instead of 5 or6]

Really shocked -not seen the actual numbers before - just 'understaffing'

Amazing that the unit functioned at all - let alone safely

They don’t do it on our whim or for fun or to prove a point. It’s a lengthy and incredibly costly process 🤦🏻‍♀️ The CPS don’t bring about a trial just to shut people up. Not to mention the impact on the victims and their families and the time given up by the jury.

Absolutely, especially in neonatal care where babies are very fragile. I do recall watching the panorama episode where they stated colleagues in different hospitals were suspicious and wary of her and that ‘mistakes’ were made by her specifically.

Why? I have been a juror, twice. And they were both unanimous convictions - one for gang related crime and one for CSA. It’s a little different when you have physical evidence in front of you and can make a fully informed decision, along with the judge’s directions which are based on the law, as opposed to hearing things here and there and trying to piece it together like the rest of the entire country.

People on MN can be so bloody rude, nobody wants to have a healthy debate, just throw personal shots at anything they don’t like the look of.

You would need to know whether they genuinely thought this at the time or if it’s just in retrospect.

If she is realised, I think she will die by suicide within 5 years. She was clearly not a mentally well woman BEFORE, so imagine the wreck she is now

Released not realised

Amanda Knox is, arguably, in a different position from LL. She returned to the US where she had enjoyed huge public support and criticism of the Italian judicial system.
SM exchanges would suggest that many cannot accept that LL may not have caused the baby deaths. Life in the UK might prove difficult for her if she remained in the UK.

My son was a very poorly Nicu baby almost 20 years ago and the consultants and doctors has rounds twice a day every day! Twice a week cannot be seen as good enough by anyone’s standards.

Regarding Lucy. I hope that when this so found to have been a massive miscarriage of justice she gets enough compensation to allow her to move away and start afresh. Personally I’d change my name and move to south east Asia which could be a lovely life, albeit not the life she’d planned. There’s absolutely no way she’ll ever have any peace living in the UK, or likely Europe/the US/ Australia

If she is found to be not guilty and released, I would hope the UK is a mature enough society to accept that, and allow her to try and get on with her life in peace.

Some of the posts on threads about her suggest not, unfortunately.

There will always be some people who either don’t have the mental flexibility to change their view even in the face of evidence, or just enjoy hating too much.
I don’t think we can judge how many people that will be from posts on here though. It’s early days and it’s clear some people aren’t aware of the full facts (eg they think she was seen harming babies, when that couldn’t be further from the truth.)

Will never happen. Even if there’s unequivocal evidence that it wasn’t her and she gets released with a grovelling apology and a lot of compensations the frothers will continue to froth and she’ll be hounded.

you've got to be smart enough to know what you don't know, where the limits of your knowledge and understanding are. It really looks to me like that defence "expert" might have been running on hubris and arrogance when so many actual experts, with no skin in the game, disagree with him.

It was the statisticians speaking out that first got me interested - I worked in STEM, I have stats training up to MSc level, what they were saying about the misapplication of probability theory to small numbers really struck home. We were taught again and again that you can't work with small numbers in the same way you can with large data sets. Bad science cherry picks the data it wants to fit the theory - which looks like what happened here.

The report done by the neonatologists is the final piece in the puzzle. No murders, so she cannot be a murderer.

Everything about this case is back to front.

They are looking at why a serial killer was able to kill babies without being caught and suggesting this happened because the ward rounds were only twice a week.

Where as in reality it is just more evidence that the babies weren't given suitable medical care and that's why so many died.

The consultants said that it was suspicious that stable babies suddenly deteriorated and died when Lucy was on shift. But they might not have even seen the baby for several days given their infrequent ward rounds and the medical evidence from the team of world experts in neonatology was that these babies were very ill and not at all stable.

Genuine question: Do you mean 'prosecution "expert"' rather than 'defence "expert"' there? I sort of assume you're referring to Dewi Evans, but maybe LL also had a not very competent expert on her side. 🙏

Last night I fell down a bit of a rabbit hole with this.

First I really looked at this was the 2 hr press release of the experts earlier this week. It’s pretty damning these children weren’t given the correct treatments from the off; and a lot of these deaths could not be proven to be directly linked to murder.

However I then went on a rabbit hole. Her behaviour was so strange! She had special boxes under her bed with handover notes from the suspect cases.

She also had a paper towel which was used to write down the medications during an arrest which was then handed to a doctor to write up, then to a nurse who binned it. And yet it ended up also in her special little stashes. It’s super off.

She also had initials of the babies she attacked in her diary on the dates.

Apparently those in the trial also witnessed a number of slip ups and lies which resulted in audible gasps in the gallery.

And as for motive she seemed a deeply unhappy person. Apparently (according to internet chat so can’t confirm) she herself was a very premature and poorly baby. Perhaps she wishes she didnt survive.

I do think we need to trust the jury on this. Perhaps they need to recall the jury to ask what was the weighting of medical, statistical to circumstantial evidence in their reasoning and whether they think they should retry.