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 think any of that sounds strange in the circumstances - as a very junior doctor I spent a lot of time worrying that I might have accidentally killed someone by making a mistake - and as you have to reflect on everything (2 reflections a week for the portfolio was standard), recording details of significant events is essential

I agree, howerver the trial relied on a lot of technical evidence that a lay person would not be able to understand or think critically about.

The new panel reviewed the cases in detail in duplicate, blind, which is more than Evans did. He gave his findings to his panel who just confirmed (mostly) what he had concluded. I know which approach I think is the most scientific.

And yet a panel of the world's leading neo-natal specialists came to the conclusion that no child was murdered.

It would be interesting if you gave one example of where you differ from the panel and why.

Which is entirely your prerogative

some of their findings already rejected at trial

Exactly-everything was already explored at trial. Apparently the new panel don't have a forensic pathologist. Probably because they know there's no explaining the liver injury! Absolutely ZERO evidence for there being a birth injury-but throw any theory out there and people will be desperate to lap it up and "prove" her innocence. It'd all be torn down in cross-examination.

Its standard advice from any solicitor to a client facing police questioning - it’s up to the police to prove their case - unfortunately it’s used in lots of dramas!

@Genevie82 yes but surely the issue is she only went "no comment" on questions that made her look guilty. If you have nothing to hide why not answer them or go "no comment" on everything? Does she have to think before she answers what would make her look guilty or not? Why would an innocent person have to do that...

She doesn’t need to!

and I’m sure if another panel got together they could find equally differing causes

Whilst it's irregular, unprofessional, and contrary to the data protection act to take any kind of confidential patient information off the ward, there's probably not a nurse in the world that hasn't accidentally found a handover sheet in their uniform pocket. The fact that she had structured filing system of multiple handover sheets, with her own codes and abbreviations on in her house is breathtaking. Also, that she said she didn't know what to do with them is ludicrous. This is very basic knowledge, in the field. She also said she didn't have a shredder. She did. @HattieJ2

I wouldn't say "no comment"

I'd say "my solicitor has advised me to give no comment, I don't agree with this but I'll assume he knows best being a solicitor"

To every question.

Some findings of a report written in 2025 were rejected at trials in 2023 and 2024? Seems unlikely.

Ah, yes, the "impact injury" with the "force of a car crash" inflicted with no external signs. A premature neonates liver is around 5cm in size, and in a location somewhat protected by the rib cage. Even if torsion or shearing forces were applied, ie from shaking for example, to have zero other related injuries would be nigh on impossible. Of all the accusations against Lucy Letby this ranks as the supreme WTF pice of "evidence".

I think you’ve made the bit about a structured filing system up. And the bit about her own codes.

As a midwife, what do you think about the causes of death? In particular, overfeeding with milk, air in NG tube and the liver injury?

Yes she’s only been in the house two years and there was one there

That’s not so at all

in fact the panorama programme showed it’s not really in dispute - only if you want to go lurking off to find other ways it could happen

No - some of the methods put forward in 2025 paper (which is not new evidence) already put in front of jury who rejected them in favour of what they believed really happened when they had all of the evidence in front of them - which led to her conviction

@SpringTimeIsRingTime What panel? It really hinged on one doctor. The MP literally called him 'the star of the show'. I fear they were cashing in, seeking fame. And whilst, the safety of the working environment where LL worked was clearly compromised, this is true of many / most nhs facilities across the country, at least some of the time, as one of the unit consultant's said. Most wards however don't have multiple unexpected deteriorations and deaths of patients, that only happen when one particular member of staff is on duty.

I'm all ears, as that is what was presented at trial by Marnerides.

Surely an investigation should look at all the possible ways a liver could have been injured? Why shouldn’t it?

It so will

I feel sorry for the parents - they are in nightmare of torture and say there is a complete misunderstanding of the complexity of the case by the panel and public - some even having to not have radio/tv on to escape it

they were there! And by god you would know the ins and outs of it was your baby

I guess they just look at the evidence and conclude within that

no need to go off on spurious examples that don’t stand up

What examples would those be? Apart from the improbable one advanced at trial.

That's not the same issue at all then - these claims only came out this past weekend