Lucy letby

[bloomingbonkerz]

Do you think she did it ? Watched the documentary and I’m not sure she should have been convicted

CPS said there were no further charges from previous hospitals. This also means no one can challenge the ‘evidence’. The police say they have. they were very arrogant in their statement afterwards.

Yes, that was my point.

If she were called up for jury service and sat on a trial where the accused had made no comment in interview then the judge would advise ("direct") her and her fellow jurors what the significance of that is, and how it is not to be treated as equating with guilt

They also said she had a secret code in her diary on each day somthing happened. LD when actually most nurses in the country knows that stands for long day. It’s a shift pattern. Not sure about the asterisk might have been her period who knows.

Either way I really wouldn’t want her anywhere near any child of mine in hospital. If you all feel so sure she’s innocent I guess you wouldn’t mind. Nobody will ever know for sure.

She was not defended by her defense team. On that alone its a dangerous conviction.

The evidence for the prosecution is contested and was presented by a dodgy discredited expert witness willing to say whatever his paymasters needed.

The case against her was certainly not proven therefore she should not be in prison.

Sorry, have a hideous head cold and probably need to go to sleep as my nuance filter appears to be fritzed.... just re read a few things, and it all makes better sense.... these threads get a bit intense sometimes 😘

I saw several interviews with medical experts who were concerned by the innacuracy of the prosecution evidence and had contacted the defense team. They would have been willing to stand. They were never responded to by the defense and certainly never called to testify.

What is interesting how the Netflix and ITV programmes differ.

Netflix I thought she is bound to have done it and she acted quite odd (though I dont know what I woukd be like after all that)

Then I watched ITV and wondered if it was an unsafe conviction. Especially that Dewi and the other consultant refused to take part. Dewi had changed his mind and report AFTER the conviction and also that not ALL of the babies who had collapsed or become more poorly during that timeframe were included on the shift roster. Just the ones that LL was on shift for...

So I dont know what I think either way except more confused.

https://www.cps.gov.uk/prosecution-guidance/expert-evidence

Thought this might be of interest to some, although it is very long - however I found some of it extremely eblightening....

I listened to the whole court case as it happened and was horrified she was convicted on such shaky evidence. Maybe she did it, but the evidence didn’t prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. I remember thinking ‘am I the only person who thinks this is unsound?’ and when I looked at forums it seemed like I was. Everyone online seemed convinced. She was immature and certainly did some strange things but serial killer? Doubt it.

I don’t think her defense team was any good, there is a lot of doubt around the evidence presented by the prosecution. I don’t believe she got a fair trial and that alone should be cause for the case to be looked at again. I don’t believe what has happened here can in anyway be called justice.

I do think that she did it, based on the cumulative circumstantial evidence that has been presented. I do also agree that it’s difficult to say she has had a “fair” trial.

Perhaps because I don’t work in the NHS, but it feels like a stretch to me to imagine that several highly educated individuals would conspire to spin a story that their neonatal unit had a murderer, in order to explain high mortality rates. Particularly when the trust itself (from my understanding) were not highly willing to investigate initial suspicions around Letby. I think there would be a lot of avenues to explore before you jumped to portraying a colleague as a serial killer…? Maybe I am missing something?

Not sure if I've already said this on this thread because there's now 3 LL threads on the go so apologies if I have, but I watched a video the other day with a retired senior police officer who had previously investigated a case for the CCRC and they were discussing how Dr Shoo Lee was saying his evidence was misused and he 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.

I think they were in denial and then got the notion in their head that she might have been harming babies and then groupthink took over and it all escalated from there.

I think they suspected her and built their case around proving her guilt, rather than collecting ALL evidence

Yes. The Texas sharpshooter analogy. I think this is absolutely the case.

Of course, this; the appalling job her defence team did, and her guilt, can all coexist as truths.

I'm undecided.

Yes, I am aware of this, but seeing as many people cling to their biases and 'gut feelings' (as witnessed on this thread and others) l have little hope that there would be a light bulb moment.....

Considering you said there is no proof, on what do you think she did it. Leaving out notes, no crying, weirdness none of which are prerequisites to being a serial killer.

I think very very few can get rid of all biases and stick to the jury instructions to a tee because we are human after all, but there really should be a process where they can weed out the ones who are exceptionally biased and have extreme black and white thinking about how people should behave in a situation etc. I reckon they could easily catch these people out with a simple questionnaire. 😅

Don’t think it was initally scapegoating. Think was vindictiveness, if Dr Bearery thought she was killing children they just wanted her to leave the trust. Is that what a dr would do if he thought she was killing children? She had taken a grievance out against x2 Drs for bullying they upheld that grievance they had to apologise to her well that took the biscuit. As I understand it they took her off the ward to protect her from the Drs. Other drs on the ward saw nothing that made them think she was a killer, seen written testimony one one of the drs who is now a consultant. There was some talk of Bearery having a crush on Lucy but that is just talk.

Have you actually read the thread? Your points have been answered numerous times but I will answer them again.

would you know if your parents have paper shedder she wasn’t in her house she was in their house.

the notes were kept in plastic bags under her bed & in a black bag not sure how you think they would be in chronological order. The ones in the box all 5 of them did not relate to any of the babies she was accused of hurting. They were probably kept for statement writing.

I think you should do bit more research based on more of facts rather than made up info from the daily mail. There are numerous resources to help.

What based on your feelings? Or do you have another source. Love to see your data. Just hope you are never on a jury.

Sorry think I read this wrong

even with the fact its all circumstantial evidence and genuine concern raised by medical professionals and statistician's the world over? You still think she is guilt beyond all reasonable doubt? I find it hard to believe that anyone doesn’t have a small element of doubt as to whether a crime was actually committed here.

People can believe she is guilty of course, but I don’t see how it’s the same belief as a killer who has DNA all over the scene. Then again, look how many people still think Amanda Knox is guilty when the actual killers DNA was left all over the scene and funnily enough, none of Amanda’s.

edited - sorry saw your other comment to say you read previous comment wrong.

This is where I stand. I have been a allied health professional in hospital and none of the behaviour they reported was unusual to the point of targeted malice.

I find it interesting that there is- in general- a difference of understanding between people who have extensive experience working in hospital, especially in units of high risk patients and the expectations of the general public. Diary entries, keeping of handover sheets even the close observation of patients are within the range of normal behavoiur for a person working on a ward with very sick babies.

Behaviour that I have witnessed when members of staff have behaved suspicously in the past would be:

• Isolating target patients (this was Dr. Shipmans MO)
• Harrassment and bullying of members of staff that worked with her targeted patients
• Coming into work on days when not on shift to "socialise" on the ward
• Being on hospital premesis when not scheduled to visit the patients
• Taking home items that belonged to the patients (in fairness I think she did this)
• Hiding of notes .
• Harassement of family post death of the baby i.e. keeping in contact after the funeral.
• Refusal to attend training or upskilling

I have wondered if they had a jury of neo-natal nurses whether they would have found her guilty of murder, or manslaughter through negligence or incompetence.