Lucy Letby new evidence

[Gonnagetgoingreturnsagain]

https://www.thejusticegap.com/new-research-undermining-letbys-convictions-for-insulin-

https://www.healthcare-management.uk/police-arrest-lucy-letby-hospital

New evidence out re this case. Any views? Sorry but think first link won’t work so will reposts.

Other than compensation for prison sentence would she get compensation for a damaged reputation? The stress and shame of being accused and jailed for something she didn't do? (not saying she did or didn't do it btw I'm just thinking out loud) Even if she is found innocent she will never ever really shake off the murderer label

Gunning for the consultants is odd - they didn’t think she was a murderer they thought she was not caring for babies as she should be

Why did they want the police involved then, if it was a capability issue? We have seen their emails and can read their discussions for ourselves.

what do you think they should have genuinely done?

Blind review. Have outside experts with no knowledge of suspect review all cases and flag events they find suspicious. Then have a statistician analyze whether association between staff and incidents is less likely by chance than a killer nurse.

This is spelled out in more detail (and accessibly for non-experts) in the Royal Statistical Society report on how to investigate such cases. But it's not hard to see why blind review is key. Judging incidents as suspicious or not is inherently subjective. If an expert knows the suspect was there, the expert is more likely to declare harm. Take it from Jayaram: "in isolation in that if nothing else had
happened before or after, I would have probably thought nothing more of it". The only way to remove such bias is blind review.

Incidentally, the one time consultants attempted a blind review, Apparently, Lucy did not feature prominently in the staff correlation analysis of those collapses."

I don't think he was "out to get her", but his comments don't explain why what he said in court differs from what he wrote down in an email closer to the events. Or how is it possible that he saw clear clinical malpractice but did not scold Letby on the spot or tell her supervisor. If senior doctors were that indifferent to malpractice on their ward, that alone explains the extra deaths! More likely, he didn't scold or report her because he didn't think he saw clear malpractice. But if it wasn't even clear malpractice, how can it have been a clear murder attempt? Explain that to me.

@dolphin Dewi Evans was only asked to review the files and at that time he had no sight of who was on shifts etc he could see some names from case notes but he wasn’t looking for staff members he was looking to see if the collapses and deaths were unusual

Evans got the files from the police, who got them from Letby's accusers, which makes the whole thing non-blind. On top of that, a number of incidents got their initial designation reclassified after learning whether Letby was on shift.

Sigh.

Not that many, given the complexity of what was ultimately just Evans’ opinion of how the ‘murders’ had been committed.

And of the three medical experts, two of them based their findings on reviews of the third’s (Evans) reports, complete with his conclusions - highly unusual and NOT good practice - rather than forming their own opinions from the evidence to hand.

Yes he got the files to look over from the police - what is wrong with that? What do you propose should have happened? He’s hardly at fault there - additionally he was given a large volume of cases not only ones when Letby was on shift! The files that were reclassified I’m assuming were the ones he reviewed and said there was no suspicious circumstances in his opinion. Is that not ok with you? Like I said when he was reviewing the files he was not looking at who was on shift?! He was looking at the clinical events surrounding the babies

@PaterPower

clearly not true! Dr Samdie Bohin for example examined thousands of notes etc relating to the babies - I don’t know where you are getting this info from

Dr Bohin?! You’re going to use HER as your exemplar? Fuck me, that’s clutching at straws. She’s had a VERY successful, unblemished career, hasn’t she 🙄

None of the coroners (you know, the expert medical practitioners who examined the dead babies first hand, rather than relying on second or third hand material) flagged up any concerns at the times of the various autopsies.

Evans, the first ‘expert’ to decide murder was involved (again, on the basis of never having seen a single one of the babies first hand, basing his theories on the back of police notes, in a field he had no relevant recent experience in) has backtracked on a number of his own theories, some of which stretched credibility to the point of being ludicrous. None of the prosecution medical ‘experts’ continue to stand by their work on this case, other than Evans.

The stats were dodgy as hell, with deaths occurring when Letby wasn’t on shift being conveniently ignored. The Keycard data they based some of their evidence on was shown to be incomplete and didn’t cover at least one of the entrances to the unit. The judge told the jury that they could ignore any discrepancies on the basis that if she was convicted of one death they could effectively infer guilt for the others! I mean, what the hell makes you think this ISN’T a massive miscarriage of justice?

Do you still think the Birmingham Six ‘must have done it’ because the security services said they did and a jury convicted them in their original trial?

I hope Lucy Letby can one day soon walk free, fully exonerated and fully compensated for the massive crime against her.

The hospital management and consultants that used this poor woman as a scapegoat for their cluster fuck of poor hospital management, standard of care and appalling harm to an innocent staff member should be put behind bars.

A strong punishment to show that the NHS will not tolerate this shit going forward. A warning to all higher management that they are accountable.

Cunts the lot of them.

He wasn't asked he offered his expertise.
He went to the police.
It has also been said that no=one accused LL of murder, but now you say that she had accusures that did? Which is it?

Yes he got the files to look over from the police - what is wrong with that?

That the police got the files from Letby's accusers, who picked files with knowledge of suspect's name and rota. That knowledge could make them more likely to pick a case where she could be blamed, or to omit a case where she could not. Same for the police, who could choose which files to give to Evans.

What do you propose should have happened?

Outside experts unaware of suspect should have reviewed all records, not just ones pre-selected by people with knowledge of suspect. Classifications made while blinded should not have later been changed once unblinded.

The files that were reclassified I’m assuming were the ones he reviewed and said there was no suspicious circumstances in his opinion.

No. There were incidents that he first marked suspicious, and later (after learning Letby's schedule) reclassified as non-suspicious: e.g. Child C's X-ray from the 12th. There were also incidents he first marked as non-suspicious but then reclassified as suspicious after learning of Letby's presence.

@Dolphin37 you know absolutely zero on the file selections given by the police - you are almost suggesting they acted with ill intent when you know nothing

Outside experts did review the files! Even for the prosecution?! Has it crossed your mind that they agreed the deaths were suspicious so he couldn’t call them

God help if a mistake is made while reviewing multiple case studies and X-rays - I’m sure it was brought up in court about the x ray maybe by her barrister? Can u link to the evidence where he changed his mind?

Actually @Dolphin37 please disregard my response above I really can’t keep on with this

what I will say is there is two camps: those who followed the trial and there’s those who followed the media speculation after the trial (the stuff that isn’t tested or relevant after a trial)

Actually there is a third camp, of legal and medical experts who followed the trial with growing incredulity as the "murder methods" were proposed, without research or precedence, and you could probably throw in the judge who wrote to Goss during the trial warning him that Evans position as an expert witness was questionable at the very least. But hey ho, what do they know, huh? Nothing better to do than risk their professional reputations by going against the grain - cos science.... 🙄

The trial is over. They're onto the CCRC application now.

And there's a third camp, people are dissecting everything from the trial in much more detail than was reported during the trial, along with reading all the updates from the experts who have compiled reports for the CCRC etc.

In fact there’s 2 camps: those that followed the medical data during and after the trial (Professor Lee’s panel of global experts was not a “media speculation” as you bizarrely imply but a thorough medical review of each case); and those who couldn’t follow the medical data thus latched onto the prosecution argument and the poor quality media reporting it spawned.

Lucy Letby is going to rot in jail no matter how many threads you start on Mumsnet. It's really getting tedious now. She's a proven baby murderer so she's where she belongs and will stay there - thank goodness. Can't wait till the CCRC throw this out soon and people can stop being silly.

Have you got proof that there were murders please

Well read through a few of the threads here and you’ll see how many support her. At first I thought she was guilty as hell but I’ve changed my mind. Read through a lot of documents. Suppose she is innocent what then? Or will people like you hound her and insist she’s guilty even if it’s been proved she isn’t?

Her life is ruined. Even if she’s proven innocent. And I was one person on here who was 100% certain she was guilty until I read through docs and papers. I don’t know how the hospital and police and jury can live with themselves if she’s innocent.

Don’t think she can be proven innocent, only not guilty.

Yes would be not guilty, and there seems no indication that anyone else would be tried. I think it's safe to say there'll be people who hold fast to the idea of her guilt whatever happens now with the CCRC and any subsequent hearing.

LL could only be found “not guilty” if there was a retrial, but given that there is zero evidence of intentional harm in any of the cases, and strong evidence of sick babies + suboptimal care, this case is highly unlikely to be re-tried, it would likely just be quashed.

In that case, LL could potentially be fully and formally exonerated of all charges.