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.

Have you ever stopped to think maybe it's your unconscious biases at play here?

Most thought she was guilty at the start and she was still white and English then, so how does that fit into your theory?

The reasons people started to doubt was because credible information started to come out that threw doubt on the convictions. Keep in mind it is very difficult for people generally to change their mind that someone is guilty when they previously believed that was the case, due to confirmation bias, anchoring bias etc, also this case was an extremely emotive one, she was convicted of killing babies, for people to go from thinking she's killed babies to thinking actually maybe she didn't and she needs a re-trial, potentially putting her back on the streets, well that would need a very strong credible case for her being innocent, not just having white skin (that she always had anyway).

I think you're wrong but any unconscious bias is irrelevant anyway. The criticisms are based on pure facts.

There wouldn't be enough attention for him to know/care. He didn't know the entire time the trial was going on apparently. Most people on here didn't know or care about this case until well after the trial. People from other countries jumping on the bandwagon have said this case wasn't big news until all the innocence stuff. The innocence stuff was written and continues to be written because she's young, female, white. If you don't believe race plays a part then go onto clips of interviews with Ravi Jayaram and read the comments.

There wouldn't be enough attention surrounding the conviction of a serial killer of babies?! I honestly didn't think anyone was going to show themselves up by claiming this, but clearly I underestimated you. So is it that he wouldn't have ever found out or that he would've found out but wouldn't have cared? Because those are two quite different things.

Remember that 'people from other countries' aren't the relevant sample here, because we're only talking about someone who had a very specific connection. It doesn't matter what some random unconnected person said about how they found out about it, unless Dewi misled the court about their scientific paper too.

The existence of racist comments doesn't prove your claim either, any more than the existence of misogynistic comments disproves it. There's no doubt racism, sexism, classism and a whole host of prejudices are relevant to this case, as they are to most things. For example, would a female doctor still be in Ravi Jayaram's exalted position if she'd lied as much as he had, and would you be so ready to accept the claims from the married, older male doctor Letby had the dalliance with if it weren't for the existence of misogyny? But none of this actually proves your massive claim.

@CommonlyKnownAs well I couldn't believe Shoo Lee didn't know/speak up at the time of the trial when it mattered, but there we go...

So why did he do so last February?

@CommonlyKnownAs and there's a lot of misandry here-oh it must be those evil old male doctors scapegoating a poor young woman. They couldn't possibly be telling the truth, it's just misogyny.

Of course men can tell the truth. But these men didn’t.

Because he didn't know at that time, as you've acknowledged yourself.

So, if Letby weren't a white woman would he not know or not care? Personally I think the latter could get rather misandrist given that Dr Lee's a man, so you'll want to tread carefully there.

Fwiw I didn't use the word scapegoat. I don't know why Dr Jayaram lied and wouldn't wish to restrict the possible explanations.

Male and female, not evil, but misguided (I presume)

So every nurse midwife who took home handover should be regarded with suspicion?

Not if it was believable that they took them home accidentally and only had a few. If they had over 250 and were also at a high number of suspicious medical events then yes.

not sure anyone would be in position of power at 82…

Well quite, so why bring it up when it's a completely different situation. Must really be grasping for straws.

how many are standing up to defend Dr Evan’s theories, where as many esteemed people more highly educated than Dr Evan’s are backing Dr lees & the panels findings.

Why would they put themselves out there when justice has already been done? If you asked nearly every expert in the world they'd probably agree with DE. They just don't want the hate and abuse from Letby nutters.

you even I with my limited knowledge question death by overfeeding, or air down a nasogastric tube. You know he made about £100k from this trial, Dr Lee & members of the panel paid for their own airfare & worked on this pro bono.

I don't think she killed any child by overfeeding alone? Baby G is the only one I remember and she survived. There might've been others but in combination with AE. 100k isn't that much in that profession, and he must've put a hell of a lot of work in. Honestly if you'd said 500k I would've just shrugged. I think he should've been paid more if anything. Did you think he should do it for free?! Dr Lee only had to hold a press conference he didn't have to sit in court being cross examined or put in half the work DE probably did.

lets use your argument what are you going to say when she is found innocent, & I am not saying she is but the evidence Dr Evan’s used is questionable since then he has retracted some of his theories. why would the police sack the statistician? Why was the coroner not informed these were suspicious deaths even though they were ruled a natural death at PM.

She will never be found innocent, the CCRC doesn't care what people on social media think and that's the only card MM has to play. The defence had a statistician, wonder why they didn't call him...managers probably didn't want it getting out that someone was harming babies so didn't tell coroner-now THAT'S the conspiracy theory you should be getting behind because everything was done to hide this and get Lucy back on the unit. That's the real scandal.

Just on one point - the defence was not allowed by the judge to raise issues around the construction of the case, in court. So it would not have been possible for them to use evidence from a statistician effectively.

The consultants (who accused Lucy Letby) were the people who filled in reports for the coroner on that unit. Nicholas Rheinberg, Cheshire coroner, remarked on this specifically at Thirlwall.

Yes there were 7 and some were women-this always seems to get glossed over though. All the hate is directed at Dr Jayaram and Dr Brearey.

Isn't it evil to keep it going and not fess up and say I think we got this wrong at some point?

Or is your theory they still don't realise they got it wrong? In which case begs the question if they're still so sure she's guilty then maybe she is...

The CCRC will probably be more interested in non disclosure of evidence by the prosecution (re insulin tests and consultants concealing information from pathologists) than in social media posts. That's only a tiny bit of what they have to look at, but from a legal standpoint it is very important.

Mmm, unlike some people I wouldn't care to second guess the CCRC, but the non-disclosure very clearly qualifies as a card to play.

I don't easily jump to calling people evil and I'm not going to try to read their minds.

I suppose the three women are less often mentioned because they never did any media appearances, unlike Drs Evans, Gibbs, Jayaram and Brearey. The other male consultant isn't much mentioned either, and likewise kept out of the spotlight.

Hmm every time you are asked how it's a scapegoating you get very vague all of a sudden...

Speaking of vague, you've not told us yet whether you really think Shoo Lee just wouldn't care about his paper being misunderstood in a baby serial killer trial if the convicted weren't a young white woman. Obviously you'll want to be precise, and not to say anything that might sound misandrist.

You didn't ask me that? You asked if I didn't think they were evil, and related questions.

I usually avoid the word scapegoat, because some people interpret it as deliberate plotting. I would say the consultants weren't willing and able to face up to their own mistakes. Perhaps they lacked the expertise to understand that they had got things so wrong. Led by a misuse of statistics, they latched on to a less painful explanation and, as a group, dug their heels in. This explanation absolved them of any guilt and I've no reason to think they didn't believe it.

Well I'm asking you then.

Answered in the edit

Right except none of that makes sense as why would they scapegoat her for baby C when no one would've questioned baby C's death as he was so premature. Secondly, he was being looked after by Sophie Ellis so if any scapegoating was going to happen they'd either pick her to pin the blame on or drop that baby altogether. 3rd-plenty of these other babies were also being looked after by others yet they managed to pin it on Lucy. If they were looking for someone to scapegoat they're not going to pick someone who wasn't designated nurse unless they could be sure she was at the scene of the crime. Which circles round to her being at the scene of the crime every time and points to her guilt not scapegoating.

4th do you not think it's weird she wouldn't leave baby C's family alone?

There's no reason to think every case the doctors sent to the police is one where they feared being blamed. In their emails, Dr Jayaram spoke about piquing police interest by focusing on events that could be said to involve Lucy Letby. They did this for collapses (Lucy Letby exclusively), but sent all thirteen deaths from June 2015 - June 2016 in any case