Lucy letby

[bloomingbonkerz]

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

I don't find it very strange. Remember that she was removed from the ward abruptly and discouraged from talking to her colleagues. She didn't know what was going on - the consultants admitted they had nothing against her accept the timings of incidents. I think that most people, guilty or innocent, would be asking anybody in the know questions. I don't see it as circumstantial evidence of guilt because I don't think it has any bearing on guilt or innocence.

This doctor wasn't in the inner circle of consultants and they said they didn't discuss their suspicions with registrars, so while he shouldn't have shared confidential information, I don't think he had anything to tell her that made much difference to events.

I really do not understand why the discrepancies and irregularities in the medical evidence are so easily dismissed by the "hang em and flog em" brigade.

Justice based on supposition is no justice at all. This conviction is unsafe. The nonsense peddled by Evans is dangerous, for reasons I pointed out upthread. It needs to be re-examined. If there were no murders, a nurse is serving a whole life sentence for data protection breach, plus other spurious accusations - last time I looked personal relationships of dubious nature aren't illegal between consenting adults. That is not justice.

When it comes to details, facts and figures need to be accurate. The bloody handover sheets have been done to death. Throwing around incorrect numbers is unhelpful when the information is freely available.

Similarly the assertion that she confessed via post it note. Incorrect. Her plea was consistently not guilty.

These things get passed around, exagerrated, and become cemented in people's minds as fact when it is not so.

And for the record, I am very sorry the PP is going through such a terrible time, cancer is a bastard.

It in no way means that you are a mass murderer though does it?
I have no idea how common it is for a doctor or nurse to take home and keep medical records but I bet she's not the only one.

I had hundreds of them at home during my first year as a junior doctor, which wasn’t good practice but happens really frequently

you also do need to keep some records as part of reflections

Since Covid, many clinicians are doing part of their job and paperwork at home

No it doesn’t mean she is a murderer, but I do think it’s a strange thing to do. Not convinced she is innocent but I don’t think the evidence was good enough to convict her either. With everything that has come to light recently about the case she does deserve a retrial in my opinion.

None of these things in isolation mean you are a murderer. The point is that it’s all the behaviours taken together combined with the unusual number and nature of baby deaths combined with her being on shift at the relevant times that has resulted in her conviction.

None of which stands if none of the babies were actually murdered, and the medical evidence doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Scores of eminent specialists in relevant fields and experienced HCPs have very vocally questioned the plausibility of the mechanisms described. This why it needs re-examining.

In other words, statistics, despite all the denials that statistical evidence had anything to do with the conviction.
And an investigation run by police who not only did not have the most elementary understanding of the statistical fallacies they were committing, but stood down the expert who tried to explain to them the risks of what they were doing.

The number of things that are arguably “strange to do” is infinite, which means the chance of finding some such in any person’s life is not low. So finding something arguably strange is not that strange.

People are strange, though. And while you think it’s not something anyone would do (and I agree that it’s not something anyone should do), people do, in reality, go home with handover sheets, for various reasons.

The evidence against her is rubbish. I'm not convinced of her guilt.

I think most innocent people in those circumstances would put their heads down and not (unofficially) ask questions. Of course, this is different because the person she was manipulating was someone she trusted and - in my view - in love with. Remember her reaction at her trial when she realised he was going to testify against her?

If she was guilty, and obviously had suspected why she'd been moved to an admin role, then having certain information from the person she trusted would be, well, helpful to know?

Here's the content of one of the emails he forwarded to her, which had been sent to him by Dr Brearey, the lead neonatal consultant at the Countess of Chester hospital. He's referring to child O and Child P:

"I think it's quite likely both will go to an Inquest and you're likely to be asked to give a statement. Can I suggest you prepare it now when everything is fresh in your mind. It can include things we discussed yesterday that might not be in the notes, particularly around Child P's initial arrest and who put IOs in and where and what went through them."

He went onto say he was "misled and maybe manipulated" by her.

Innocent, didn't goud media etc like Shipman & Allitt.

Having been at the mercy pumping me full of antibiotics for a prolonged period whilst playing god with my life with a fight for answers months on, I totally get that cover up's go on in the nhs.

Sigh. Innocent people are often also quite keen to clear their name and to seek support with that. I should think especially those falsely accused of murdering babies.

I find it completely unsurprising that an innocent person on trial for murdering babies and facing the rest of their life in prison for crimes they didn't commit would be quite upset that someone they trusted and who they thought believed in their innocence was going to give evidence against them.

She is damned by people like you whatever she does. You just twist everything to suit the fantasy in your head.

I was at work today and now that most of my colleagues have had a chance to watch the Netflix documentary, the afternoon was spent discussing it. I found it interesting that three of them who previously felt that she might be innocent had changed their minds and felt that she might somehow be guilty. When I asked why, they felt that the footage of the police interrogation and arrest had changed their minds. One colleague said that Letby came across as someone quite calculated in her responses. She also felt the reaction to her arrest was one of 'someone resigned to their guilt.' She feels that an innocent person would have protested more, reacted more loudly, resisted with a sense of injustice, whereas Letby's demeanour was one of 'the gig is up' - to use her words.

Has anyone else done a 180?

I think I preferred the BBC documentary on Lucy Letby (Panorama?) which felt less contrived. The digitalised friend and Baby 'Zoe''s mother have left me wondering how much of that was scripted for dramatic effect - clearly to show the two sides.

You just twist everything to suit the fantasy in your head.

@dragonexecutive It's called having a different opinion. What do you think of what the doctor said about her? Do you think he's twisted everything, too?

Everyone on the unit knew Child O and Child P might need an inquest. And Brearey's email to this doctor suggesting he should get his notes in order was perfectly normal. He wasn't sharing information that should have been secret there.

I accept that you would keep your head down if you knew you were innocent. We are all different. But my experience dealing with work complaints is that many people become extremely anxious and want to know anything they can from any source they can get, when there is investigation

I wouldn't say that asking questions about the sudden, shocking deaths of babies O and P, or about what was going on when she was suspended, tells us anything about guilt or innocence either way

This isn't entirely correct.
Other deaths did go to DE but he discounted them because she wasn't on shift.
In the same way that there were deaths before and after she started and left.
And again it is worth pointing out that the unit was downgraded when she was taken off the ward and has never gone back to taking babies there were so at risk.

Sorry I agree about there not being a smoking gun.

It was downgraded a up to a months after

and all of the babies she killed would still be treated on the downgraded version

Yet the main point was that other deaths happened, were discounted and never looked into because DE had already decided that she was guilty.

They weren’t within the time frame they were investigating

its very significant to know they would have still been treated at the downgraded level - tells you they weren’t some of the most vulnerable and the down grade wasn’t significant for those babies

That is inaccurate information you have there, I'm afraid

Lucy Letby worked her last shift on 30th June. The unit was downgraded on 7th July. She returned from leave and was moved to administrative duty on the 14th July.

What has been said about the insulin?