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…

Her friends would have had to be put up for cross examination too, which was very aggressive. And I'm sure it would have boiled down to, well how do you know she didn't fool you? Angel of Death, pretending to care about those babies ...

I doubt it would have been much use. It's significant maybe, some might say, that nobody who knew her has come forward to dish any real "dirt" about her since the trial. But you couldn't prove that by having a handful of her friends testify. I just don't think it would have been very useful

In extremis, other people read me as calm and composed. On the occasions they’ve referred to, I was simply in shock. Shock in me doesn’t present as running around like a headless chicken or crying or screaming my head off. It’s more a withdrawal into myself. She may be similar (guilty or innocent).

I’m obviously lucky not to have been suspected of any crimes, lest the armchair psychologists would be out in droves speculating about my supposed guilt based on the fact I wasn’t acting the way they thought I should under tremendous strain. 🙄

Nightie. Which she appears to be wearing under the tracksuit.

It's not a particularly important issue, but I'm satisfied that we have no proof she was lying. I think I've given all the relevant information I've used to reach that conclusion now so obviously you are free to believe otherwise.

I am satisfied the prosecution wasn't lying.

We can't say for sure if it was a nightie or T shirt.

It is absolutely an irrelevant debate though.

That's my point really - if people are giving this incident much weight, they're doing so without knowing the full story. We saw a fragment on screen. We heard a fragment in court. I'm not accusing anyone of lying based on any of that.

I would definitely call it carted away in my pyjamas.

I think using it to call her a ‘calculating woman’ would be laughable it if wasn’t so horribly serious.

It's not a case of "It was only mentioned on here as it was mentioned in a link" - you obviously haven't read all the threads, it's a bit like the shredder, it's not of material importance to whether any babies were actually murdered, and if so then who did it but it appears from time to time.

This thread, or rather some of the people on it, demonstrates what a lottery the jury system is and I 100% support it staying despite Mr Lammy trying to get rid. The idea that some posters could be judging me or anyone really on guilt or innocence is genuinely frightening but it does explain some of the ridiculous jury decisions of late.

Black Belt Barrister has released a video today, warning about how you answer police questions

I love the patronising tone ' you obviously' haven't read the threads. As it happens I have and on many more forums. Followed the whole trial, Thirwall and all press conferences. Have you?
NJ was using it to show dishonesty as many barristers do in court cases. Whether morally right or wrong. It's a technique.

I have said many times it is irrelevant. So is her arrest behaviour. I hadn't seen that until recently.

I hope the jury did give it all thought. They appear to have. As they didn't blanket her guilty every charge.

Perhaps her team thought that having none of her friends testify would have drawn attention to the fact of no expert witnesses testifying, thus further damaging her credibility. Will be interesting to see if any of her friends who’ve publicly supported her since she was convicted will testify if there’s a retrial.

This is MN, not many more forums - there have been multiple threads on here and the same nonsense keeps getting regurgitated by one woman and her dog.

I have read all of the ones on here.
I don't think what any if us say will have any influence on ccrc at all.

No-one has claimed it will - doesn't mean people should be allowed to spout garbage without it being challenged though

Yes, but that’s tge adversarial system. It’s horrible. But we aren’t many years away from sexual assault victims being questioned about clothing choices or sexual history. It’s the job of the barrister to tear you apart if they can.

Not carrying on a carry on with Dr Love despite the 1300+ text message evidence and the shopping trips etc. Married men with kids don’t go on mini breaks to London with female colleagues when there is nothing going on.

That whole thing alone reeks of lies. We know there was a note found in which she wrote 'I loved you and I think you knew that … I wanted you to stand by me but you didn’t.” She denied during cross examination there was anything between her and this doctor she called "sweetie", who visited her house. But as soon as she saw him appear as a prosecution witness, she broke down in tears and attempted to leave the dock. When asked about this by Nick Johnson she came up with the crap "I was unwell".

This doctor went onto say at the Thirlwall enquiry that "I think I have become aware that I was not aware of the full clinical picture and I provided support by being misled and maybe manipulated'.

Oh the irony. Like the youtube link you posted.

Also that's isn't what I said so not sure where you got that from.

We will never know the true nature of their relationship. What we do know is Dr. AU told LL more than he should have.

The doctor clearly lied when he applied for anonymity at the pre-trial, he said he was the subject of unrequited affection which is clearly had true, he also said LL had targeted his wife on social media, if that was true they would have used it in the trial.

If LL had said that they had a flirtation or relationship then that would have been used against her and she would have been made out to be a fantasist for telling the truth because the doc was committed to lying about it.

I am claiming specifically that that poster and the judges don’t understand the evidence. The evidence of this is clear from what the poster says, and the judges’ fixation on irrelevant rashes in their refusal to give leave to appeal. It’s blindingly obvious that that poster has no relevant qualifications or experience, and I don’t believe she has made any such claims. The judges are judges, not scientists or medics.

I am presuming Susan Oliver PhD does understand the evidence and has chosen to misrepresent what Shoo Lee has said for her own reasons.

I disagree with other posters on these threads but I don’t believe they are all “thick” as you put it. I’m happy to debate a point civilly, and agree to disagree, but that poster appears to be incapable of doing the same.

PJ-gate is irrelevant and not worth discussing. Even if she did lie, it’s not important. Taking home handover sheets is not appropriate, obviously, and may be a disciplinary matter , but it is not uncommon, so is irrelevant.

I’m not even particularly interested in Lucy Letby, but I am interested in science, and facts, and a fair justice system.

RavenPie · Today 09:43

Just adding to bits

The nightdress/pjs/tracksuit thing is just to build up a picture of her as fundamentally dishonest. When you are given time and permission to dress and either chose not to, or you do dress but half arsedly and then put a dressing gown on then it’s disingenuous to complain that you were taken out in a nightie. Even if you didn’t get dressed because of the shock or because the police are stomping up and down your stairs in their terrible policeman’s boots

I have some clothes that I bought as "lounge wear", they are essentially a tracksuit, but they wear sold in the night wear section of the website.
.
Not owning a shredder

Most people have lots of electrical equipment around that they have forgotten about. Or maybe its because its in relation to the handover sheets and she didn't have the correct type of shredder? who knows?
.
Having all those handover sheets by mistake - but storing them in a box marked “keep” in chronological order and taking them with you when you move house.

These would be the five pieces of paper that didn't relate to any of the babies?
In a box that had come from a previous house with keep on it. Lots of people write keep on boxes when they move house.

Not knowing what “go commando” means despite it being obvious from context that you do know

Not eveyone does know. Why assume that she does?

Putting little dots in your personal diary on the days the babies collapsed and died in order to do reflections later - no written reflections and incredibly shaky memories of the incidents she is supposed to have reflected on.

Weren't these markers to do with shifts that she was on?

Having no memory of “Zoe” despite being fairly involved, sending text messages about her and Facebook stalking her mum.

Not everybody remembers every person that they have every been involved with, and stalking is a charged term, no bias form you there (sarcasm)

Not carrying on a carry on with Dr Love despite the 1300+ text message evidence and the shopping trips etc. Married men with kids don’t go on mini breaks to London with female colleagues when there is nothing going on.

She may or may not have been invloved with him but he is also not a saint, but then he seems to have got away scot free whilst being able to say anything about LL to make himself look good.

It doesn't look good when you post half truths when you are trying to point out that someone else is lying.

I think it's more disingenuous for anyone to make out that anything about the pjs questions means anything, she was arrested 3 times so there was confusion and things get hazy, it's like a primary school tattle tales version of a lie where a child says something wrong or to the best of their understanding and the tattle tale says 'Miss, Lucy is lying'.

I have no issue with them bringing up that she had a shredder.

There was only 5 sheets in that 'keep' box, and none related to the babies in the case, the others were found in bags, at least 2 bags I believe so we really don't know anything about the order of the sheets, was it just the 5 in the box that were in chronological order?

In regards to 'no commando' and the relationship with the doc, she was screwed in that situation if she said there was a flirtation/relationship seeing as the doctor was committed to lying and saying there hadn't been, if she had admitted she was they would have said she was a fantasist.

Reflecting on things doesn't mean you commit them to memory, and not remembering things doesn't mean you didn't reflect.

It's a stretch to call it facebook stalking when she looked her up probably twice max out of over 2000 searches.

This thread is a wild ride.

And casts huge doubt on many people’s suitability to serve on a jury.

Ahh, yes - the 257 notes were found at her home, 21 related to the babies on the indictment. According to Letby, she liked to collect paper. She also said she took them by accident.

Why is she looking up the mum literal hours after her baby died?

The one you haven't debunked ? as per a lot of the arguments on this thread, no substance just opinions.