To agree with the Guardian about the Netflix coverage of the Lucy letby case?

[justwandered]

https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2026/feb/04/the-investigation-of-lucy-letby-review-netflix?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other]]

I honestly don’t think I’ve come across a show in such poor taste before and I am no stranger to stories about murder and the like.

It crosses a huge line in terms of stripping individuals of their dignity.

I don’t plan on watching it but when I turned Netflix on the other night to put a TV show on for my children there it was - horrid and completely unnecessary.

They're an odd thing to collect, especially as they're supposed to be destroyed at the hospital. I'd find putting them in order and keeping them an odd thing for a nurse to do. Some have speculated the others she had may have meant something to her.
Is there a source to say only 4/5 of them related to the babies?

Genuinely asking, not being snarky.

There was 257 handover sheets and 21 related to the babies in the case.

What about Dr Lee, whose papers on air embolism was used wrongly by the "only expert witness"? He has stated it was wrongly used and he doesn't believe any of those babies were murdered. Him and 25 world renowned paediatricians have stated they believe her to be innocent.

The trial transcript from that day is up, but it's long of course. This is from page 45 on

Philip Astbury is representing the prosecution, Ben Myers the defence and Colin Johnson the police.

Philip Astbury: Are you aware what was in the box?

Colin Johnson: I believe paperwork.

PA: Okay. Were they more handover sheets?

CJ: They were.

PA: Were there in fact a total of five handover sheets in the box?

CJ: That is correct.

PA: Not related to this indictment?

CJ: Correct.

PA: We see some handwriting on the box as well; do you
agree?

CJ: Yes, I can see that too.

PA: What do you suggest that says?

CJ: It appears to say the word "keep".

PA: Thank you.

Mr Justice Goss: Can I just be clear: did the box only contain those five handover sheets and nothing else?

PA: Is that right, officer?

CJ: As far as I'm aware.

...

BM: Mr Johnson, I just want to summarise some of the figures that we've just looked at if you could help me with this. Just picking up where we got to then, a total of 257 handover sheets were recovered in the
course of the police searches; is that correct?

CJ: That is correct.

BM: Of those 257, 21 of them relate to babies on this indictment; that's correct, isn't it?

CJ: They do.

BM: Of that 21, four of them come from the Ibiza bag that was PMB-4 from Ms Letby's home address at 41 Westbourne
Road?

CJ: Yes.

BM: And we've seen those. Seventeen of those 21 came from the Morrisons bag, which is PMB-9, again from Ms Letby's
home address?

CJ: They did.

BM: So that leaves 236 handover sheets that don't relate to
babies on the indictment?

CJ: Correct.

So it's all a bit odd - Netflix seems to have jumbled up what the police and prosecution said at the trial? Or is their editing just confusing?

I copied this excerpts from a reddit post, to give credit where it is due.
https://www.reddit.com/r/LucyLetbyTrials/s/kRkpo1XSqA

But I have also checked the transcript at https://lucyletbyinnocence.com/transcripts/searches+police-interviews-day1-baby-a-17-04-2023.pdf

So there were only 5 in that box. Netflix (and/or the police officer) absolutely made it sound like they had all been stored in order, kept together.

She also admitted she found doing feeds "boring". So it's completely believable that she was more interested in texting than feeding the baby correctly and safely. I'm sure this is just the type of nurse everyone defending her would love to be looking after their babies...not.

Yes, everyone watching it has got the same impression. It's a shame - there's enough detail for Netflix to make a story out of (about innocence or guilt if they like to be selective) without exaggerating.

A lot of people naturally take the documentary very seriously, with all the police input

I'm obviously not a believer in Lucy Letby's guilt, but I'd recommend ITV instead https://www.itv.com/watch/lucy-letby-beyond-reasonable-doubt/10a6860a0001B/10a6860a0001

I find a lot of my job boring to be fair, but I do it to regulation standards all the same!

@Oftenaddled so presumably you're not texting when you're meant to be working then? Or openly complaining that you don't want to do what you've been asked to because you'd rather be elsewhere?

Equally, the people who think she's guilty probably wouldn't want to face a jury who think 'believable' is the relevant standard of proof.

Surely it only undermines the narrative that the justice system were out to get her? The new charges didn't meet the threshold-the first ones did. No undermining there, they've stated the ruling has no effect on the first charges. I think it's pretty damning the police managed to find so many more charges, including a murder at Liverpool. But of course the police are still just out to get her aren't they...

I couldn't swear I've never texted at work, no. And I have complained about being stuck doing work I don't want to do. (Like the day I was in charge of 120 visiting fourteen year olds)

Do you want to shoot me now?

; )

@Oftenaddled so this is more about you seeing yourself in Letby then?

No I wouldn't say that!

I'm boring. Like a lot of people I just became concerned about the case after reading the famous New Yorker article, and I went from there.

Here it is in case anyone is interested. A lot has come out since but it has aged well
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2024/05/20/lucy-letby-was-found-guilty-of-killing-seven-babies-did-she-do-it

Given the ridiculously low bar for the first charges - basically "she was there" I imagine the CPS had little confudence in any "new" "evidence".

And as far as the police / justice system are concerned, given she's on a full life term, what possible benefit would come out of any new trial? They can't exactly punish her any further unless they bring back the death penalty.

BTW stories are coming out about babies who died or collapsed with similar presentations as her alleged victims in the year after she was removed. Apparently the police have declined to investigate those. Obviously there is another serial killer at large. Or you'll probably suggest she sneaked in to continue her reign of terror.... 🙄

@MistressoftheDarkSide BTW stories are coming out about babies who died or collapsed with similar presentations as her alleged victims in the year after she was removed. Apparently the police have declined to investigate those. Obviously there is another serial killer at large. Or you'll probably suggest she sneaked in to continue her reign of terror.... 🙄

It's been stated there has only been one death since 2016. So are you talking about one? Pretty good going in nearly 10 years, compared to over a dozen across less than two years whilst LL was on the unit...there is so much misinformation in this case I wouldn't be surprised if truthers are just making shit up at this point.

Right so you came to it having been already convinced of her innocence by an article designed to do just that. She was texting non-stop. She couldn't feed the baby at the same time-even she admitted that.

No - I read the article and became interested. We all start somewhere.

I think she did say she wouldn't be able to text while feeding, but she didn't say that she did text while feeding, so I wouldn't think that was significant

Because it's no longer a level 2 unit, children would be transfered out very quickly and those who died would usually die elsewhere.

You'd expect them to have fewer deaths, because mothers with risky pregnancies would now be booked to deliver elsewhere, and in general the unit takes fewer, less unwell children. But I posted an article above that shows the following years weren't trouble free - includes discussion of two deaths.

Eh? The times prove she was texting when meant to be feeding with two hands.

Yes, I watched something last night and Neil Basu, former senior police officer who previously worked as a senior investigating officer on a case for the CRCC said this was poor prosecution practice and that he was surprised a senior CPS lawyer wouldn't have turned around to a senior investigating officer and said that they needed to corroborate that evidence.

No they don't.

The times nurses wrote down for routine tasks like feeds were estimates rounded to the closest fifteen minutes. So if Lucy Letby noted a feed at 8.30, it could have started earlier.

Naturally, as with any task, she might take a break while doing it - get up to grab something, help another nurse etc., stop to calm the child and pause before restarting. You really can't prove she was feeding a child and texting at the same time from medical notes.

Well, the source was the Telegraph, so if you think they are "truthers" "making shit up" take it up with them.

Interestingly when I tried to get an archive link as it's behind a paywall, it's throwing up an error message.

Could be technical glitch, could be suppression, who knows.

There is a reddit thread though highlighting some of the content.

Yes - this site struggles with the archive.org link so maybe the easiest thing is to post to the reddit thread. This has a free link to the article in the top post.

www.reddit.com/r/LucyLetbyTrials/s/TzlgN5Dydb

@Oftenaddled Thank you 😊 was just trying to link the thread and massively phone fumbling!