To think Lucy Letby could’ve done more to help herself if she really wasn’t guilty?

[Seymorbutts]

Just watched the new Lucy Letby documentary on Netflix. I think there’s one of C4 too, don’t know if it’s the same one? I’m leaning slightly more towards that she did it, but only about 60% sure she did it. 40% sure she didn’t do it. On this doc there’s a lot of footage of all her arrests and police interviews. What strikes me as odd IF she’s innocent, is how little she protests her innocence, how calm & composed she is. It’s the same during her arrests. I understand she must’ve been in shock when she was arrested so that could explain it. But she was interviewed for hours. Not once did she say “I didn’t do this” (unless directly asked, which she just answered with “no”) “I’m innocent”, “I could never kill a baby”. Nothing like that. Very little crying too. I know she’s supposedly very quiet and reserved and I’m sure was very scared, but I don’t think personality can account for a total lack of defending herself (or maybe she was just following the advice given by her lawyer). But still, if it was me I’d be absolutely raging, and protesting my innocence at every opportunity and giving clear, detailed reasons why I couldn’t have done it when they put it to me that I did. Or maybe she did do it and she’s a psychopath and unable to show remorse, which could explain her lack of any kind of emotion at all 🤷‍♀️ I really don’t know. If she is innocent though, I feel like the way she behaved made her look guilty. Interested to hear if people think she did it or not and why/why not…

That said, I'm sure they were distressed, stressed, apprehensive over the case, and sad about the deaths. That just doesn't mean they assessed the situation accurately or remembered all the details correctly.

Should we be down on Dr Brearey for not crying like Dr Jayaram, I wonder? What does that tell us?

I think it's quite the double standard to assume that a Doctor with a blossoming TV career, and a consultant with some experience in presenting himself favourably wouldn't be "acting" to a degree. Also, if the interviews weren't "live", there could have been multiple re-takes to ensure the most favourable outcome for them.

The footage of Lucy Letby however, in police interviews, was pretty devoid of opportunity to do that. And she probably wasn't thinking about the possibility that sections would be cherry picked and presented as public entertainment.

Extrapolating meaningful information from either scenario in the context of deciding guilt or innocence is a fraught exercise, however, the doctors had a supreme advantage over Lucy Letby, as perceptions of her had been skewed and cemented by lurid media reporting, while the toxic two some had claimed the mantle of beleagured unsung heroes.

So much in the way of smoke and mirrors....

Yes, I think that’s entirely fair.
My intuition over Jayaram is worth no more than the intuitions of all the people who think Letby is obviously lying. It’s just I find it genuinely surprising that anyone would think his manner in that interview will be universally agreed to be extra evidence in his favour as it didn’t seem that way to me at all.

Why would he be shouting it from the rooftops? There’s no reason to think that MM hasn’t had access to LL’s previous counsel’s records for ages, is there? She didn’t have to waive privilege for that to have happened.

Anything you bring up that is outside the court case will only serve to make her look even more guilty.

What does this even mean?

They definitely both creeped me out - something very inauthentic about their responses

I don't think I've seen either of them actually cry tears-they both looked utterly broken though. Must be amazing actors...

Because he's always in the limelight screaming that she's not guilty? Suddenly a massive development in the case and he's silent?

Firefly I’m with you - there won’t be any appeal

but something about how they were on camera was very false and guarded

don’t know what that means but if it were just them two giving evidence I’d be sus

Yes - when asked about waiving privilege he did try to explain, politely, to Liz Hull that she didn't understand the concept, but she and Caroline Cheetham didn't believe him.

As far as I can see they are the only people who were going on about waiving privilege in the press, so why would he announce it to them and let himself in for more of that hassle? Most media outlets are rightly not terrible interested in that question, and the one that was got all muddled over what it meant.

He isn't always in the limelight though, is he, really? He seems to provide a response to every significant newspaper article and to speak in documentaries. And he appears on TV breakfast shows and in newspaper interviews once every week or two.

How was Beverley allit found out? It looks so sumilar - air embolism and insulin and being the consistent person around

do you know oftenaddled?

https://jollycontrarian.com/index.php/Lucy_Letby:_waiver_of_privilege%3F

This is an interesting analysis.

Ha no. Most likely Liz Hull has got the measure of him. I think she can get her head around the concept just fine. He's just a slippery fellow that won't give a straight answer and she wasn't gonna let him wriggle his way out of it.

Of course everyone is interested in why she hasn't waived privilege. Why she didn't call any expert witnesses is like the no 1 question both sides have.

She didn’t need to waive privilege for her new barrister to have access to everything from her previous team, so I don’t understand what the issue is or why some people keep going on about it. It’s just scurrilous reporting.

She has waived privilege:

https://ccrc.gov.uk/news/chairs-statement-on-lucy-letby-application-review/

I don't know a lot about it, but I know that the police had blood samples to test at the time for manufactured insulin and that they consulted various specialists on how to do that. So they actually had forensic evidence that people had been harmed.

I suspect that if the police had had blood samples for babies F and L we wouldn't all be here right now - either they'd have had a much stronger case against Lucy Letby than now (though far from perfect) or they would know the children weren't poisoned. That's an important difference.

Yeah sorry, I meant why she hadn't waived it before.

It means bringing up a 3rd insulin case or whatever else as "evidence" is only going to cement her guilt because she was there for that suspicious incident too. Same with demanding to know about other deaths on the unit. The only death you could say she absolutely wasn't involved in was one where the baby died soon after birth and didn't even make it onto that unit. You can link her to every other death.

Only she wasn't there for the third insulin baby. And if there was evidence connecting her with any other deaths or harms, the CPS would not have blocked further charges.

I don’t think crying and wailing has always been the reaction when women are wrongly accused. I don’t seem to recall the mums accused of murdering their babies when really died of cot death screaming in the doc either.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cevywl7jmm3o.amp

Medical records seen by Panorama show how quickly the boy became poorly after Letby came on duty. A blood test taken at 06:56 showed the infant had a normal blood sugar level of three millimoles per litre (mmol/L).
Letby started her shift at 08:00, and by 13:54 his blood sugar level had plummeted to one mmol/L – a dangerously low level, and a strong indication the baby had too much insulin.
The boy’s blood sugar level remained low throughout the nurse’s shift and he only recovered after she went off duty at 20:00.

I'm sure you'll tell me the article got it wrong, seems to be your MO.

Beverley Allitt also worked on a children's ward, not intensive care so cardiac arrests would be much less common.

These were children suddenly having cardiac arrests when they were admitted with chest infections, pneumonia, gastroenteritis etc.

When Thirlwall uploaded the baby's medical records, they showed that he was poorly, as Panorama put it, before and after Lucy Letby's shift, including overnight, after changes of IV bags, including special custom bags from the pharmacy. The documents also showed the blood sample for this child's insulin test was taken before Lucy Letby came on shift, when he was having seizures shortly after birth.

I think Panorama may have had one leaked document but they must not have had the treating doctor's notes and statement. This was never disclosed to the defence and is one of the items submitted to the CCRC by Mark McDonald.