Lucy Letby

[kkloo]

New thread as the last one has filled up.

So Evans messed up with this, and has no clear explanation for how he thinks she killed the bevy, yet still insists that she did.

She didn’t kill baby O because that was the doctor that catastrophically damaged his liver with the cannula (but gas made no comment on his role in the death) and his collapse is still unexplained which means it is unexplained, not ‘he was murdered by Lucy Letby’.

Theres no verified evidence of the insulin injections she’s accused of giving and no verifiable evidence of the air injections - only the judgement of a single doctor who is clearly biased against her, gas changed his ‘expert opinion’ several times as facts proved him wrong, has no idea of what happened to the babies at birth just 48 hours beforehand (in some cases), and was determined to deliver the explanation that satisfies the people who pay his wages.

Remind of which charges are actually still standing?

The fact that she was there in the end does not mean murder - being there is a real stretch as circumstantial evidence given it was her job to be there on shift.

Can you really not see how claiming a nonsensical method of attack at a time when she wasn't there undermines the credibility of that whole case? Evans hypothesised an attack by air down the NG tube, then changed his mind when it was proven the x-ray allegedly supporting the theory was taken before she even came into contact with the baby. It undermines the credibility of the case and his alleged expertise. If he was adamant that his theory was correct, surely he should have been asking which other murderer was on the ward at the time. You can't go around saying an unexplained medical event is an attack or murder, but only if your suspect is present. It either is, or isn't.

This "mess up" is the basis for her conviction, not the circumstantial evidence. All of the medical evidence shown at court was from the 12th. Lucy hadn't been on shift since the 10th and was not on again until the 13th, the day after the x-rays were taken.

Evans himself admits that baby C was "at great risk of unexpected collapse". He also stated that it was "probable the infection was a significant factor in [Baby C]’s collapse during the late hours on 13 June."

It's more than a mess-up. It is Evans, Bohin and Marnerides consistently changing their theories based only on whether Letby was on shift or not.

https://medium.com/@triedbystats/lucy-letby-was-convicted-of-murdering-baby-c-based-on-evidence-from-a-day-when-she-wasnt-on-shift-8fb2bb93e0ef

Really? A baby born at 30 weeks with IUGR, who developed respiratory distress, received suboptimal resus attempts before consultant finally turned up - did you read the PM details? LL is irrelevant.

And the Thirlwall records and statements alone make it clear the nurses couldn't manage resuscitation - couldn't get a chest rise. They left it too late to escalate. When they did, the registrar wasn't able to intubate. So they were relying on bag ventilation for a child with a difficult airway for over 20 minutes until the consultant got there (night shift) And when the child finally started to attempt to breathe after he stopped resuscitation, he agreed with the family to let him go and gave morphine to ease his death.

There is really no need to imagine that he was killed by a nurse who was probably not in the room when he desaturated and stopped breathing. I am fairly sure the police just fixated on this one because Lucy Letby had sent text messages about wanting to work in his room shortly before he desaturated.

Ah I didn’t catch that, thank you for correcting it.

See? This is the importance of having all the details, presented in a complete way.

She was quite vocal. E.g. her Head of Nursing said: : "In weekly meetings to check on Letby’s wellbeing after she was removed from the ward, Rees described how she “cried in my arms”.
“She was crying … very distressed every time we met her, saying: ‘Why is this happening to me?’,” she said. “She kept saying to me: ‘I am not going to let them drive me out of the job that I love. I worked hard. I’ve done nothing wrong.’ That’s what she kept repeating to me. It was harrowing.”
Rees added: “People say she’s not emotional. Trust me, she is emotional. I know that they say psychopaths are clever. But if she was acting she deserves an Oscar because she was so convincing.”

@Dolphin37 Karen Rees is so dim. When people say she showed no emotion they're talking about for the babies not her crying over losing her job. We know she was devastated about being removed from the unit and any future victims. That's not in question. She cares about herself and plays the victim constantly, this isn't some huge revelation. None of it proves she has a shred of empathy and isn't a psychopath.

Don't you ever wonder why she loved her job so much when ten babies died on her watch? TEN!

I don’t know, maybe it’s my imagination, but there seems to be an almost desperate doubling down from the no dissent cohort in the last week. Maybe it’s something to do with the release of the new book which very clearly lays out all the concerns for a lay audience, then the File on 4 piece which was also picked up on the main BBC news, and a couple of newspaper articles today. Fascinating. The quality of the input hasn’t improved however.

Seriously don't be so ridiculous.

It's nothing to do with him being black, and everything to do with his inappropriate relationships with little boys and the fact he had them in his bed all the time and the fact he's had multiple accusers. Dear God 🙄

There's more evidence against MJ than there is against the majority of pedophiles, on the other hand there's less evidence against LL than the majority of murder cases, there's no real evidence that any babies were even murdered for a start.

Birth injury not possible in a CS??? I knew a baby who got a fractured skull from a CS delivery.

Indeed. The foot stomping, sneering and disparaging has ramped up considerably, from both the usual suspects and a few new reinforcements.

I was replying to the point that Letby "[did] not seem to be overly vocal in protesting her innocence". She did protest it to Karen Rees, and her whole pursuit of her workplace grievance to a favorable resolution was a clear protestation of innocence.

When people say she showed no emotion they're talking about for the babies

Her distress over baby deaths is clear in her texts and post-its. E.g.: "We tried our best and it wasn't enough."

Don't you ever wonder why she loved her job so much when ten babies died on her watch? TEN!

"On her watch" implies "while she had direct responsibility for their care", which I don't think is accurate for all ten (correct me @Oftenaddled if I'm wrong). The hospital leaders had thirteen babies die "on their watch", yet loved their work enough to continue. How people deal with failure at work is deeply personal and individual.

@PinkTonic We do seem to have attracted a few r/LucyLetby types. Assuming they can actually discuss the evidence without resorting to flinging insults and accusing everyone of being racist baby-killer lovers, it should be interesting.

I enjoy reading informed opinions from the other side and thoroughly questioning the science. It helps me solidify my own feelings on topics and pushes me to research both sides.

For all we know if they'd searched other peoples homes and devices they could have found plenty of stuff too, because most people have some odd things about them or weird searches etc, would that mean that they had harmed babies deliberately? No, it just means that if you looked into any person you could find some things you might think are suspicious.

When you say write weird things in her diary are you referring to the diary that people suggested she wrote some kind of code in or are you talking about the post it notes?

I don't think she was considered a loner, i'm sure most could have been considered arrogant at times, there was certainly references to other arrogant staff members in the Thirlwall enquiry and also most staff members had issues recalling everything, they remembered some but not others.

That's right - four were in her care (babies A, E, O and P), one was transferred to her care after deteriorating (baby I) and the others including the five non indictment babies we have that information for weren't in her care when they died.

Nick Johnson made a big deal of getting her to agree that "Baby O died on your watch" at some point in that cross-examination: I think when she was pointing out that two other nurses were with him and she was out of the room when he had the first of his collapses on her shift. That was agreed evidence, that she wasn't in the room.

By the rules they applied in other cases, those two nurses would have been blamed for his collapse, but in this case, it didn't matter who was in the room.

Yes I don’t disagree. It’s just that I’ve never actually seen any r/LucyLetby types who do discuss the evidence. In my experience they rely entirely on personal insults and straw men.

Oh no - that's awful.

Weirdly, Jonathan Coffey and Judith Moritz claimed to have been told by an anonymous pathologist that birth injury from Caesarean is just not possible, in their book on Lucy Letby.

I think a lot of people with strange ideas about this case do have significant failures in journalism to thank. (Though there has been excellent work too)

You consistently conflate having doubts about the safety of this conviction with belief in innocent. There are people on this thread in both of those positions. What is interesting are the people actually looking at facts and learning, instead of spouting the same opinions and calling anyone who does not agree with them names.

@hotmumshit is absolutely right. There is a long history of medical misogyny which blames women for childrens ill health - whether mothers or in this case nurses. There are scores of cases where what was "obvious" was found out to be wrong and fueled by what can best be described as nastiness.

which is evident when statements are made that anyone who does not agree with you lacks empathy. Listen to File on 4 and tell me where your empathy is for those parents.

I wonder who told them that? I’ve had 3 Caesarian deliveries and they definitely didn’t just “take the baby out”.

Yes, the informed posts from the ‘Lucy is DEFINITELY GUILTY side are thin on the ground and heavy on insults and derision. That’s always telling.

I haven’t looked into this too deeply before, hoping that our justice system couldn’t possibly have done what they appear to have done, but the more information that comes out, the more convinced I am of the worst.

David Davis MP always struck me as pretty sensible and he has taken up her case to try and get to the facts of the matter. If this is a miscarriage of justice, it must be the worst for several generations. I guess those in authority still have a vested interest in maintaining the lie as admitting what they’ve done will be seismic.

I hope you recovered well. It’s always come across to me like a pretty brutal procedure that is fairly tough on the baby as well. In an emergency situation even more so.

There are a number of miscarriages of justice and terrible verdicts that relied on the ‘evidence’ of a main expert witness who for whatever reason is not objective and in some cases, remotely professional.

He wished to remain nameless! He appears only in the second edition.

I sometimes think there must be a list of dodgy but obliging medical experts for hire circulating somewhere. Or more seriously, these journalists relied heavily on the Chester consultants for their story, and I suspect that they recommended others in their network who may have over egged the pudding a bit.

What on earth?
What a claim to make. No wonder they remained anonymous.

Birth injury from a caesarean section is uncommon, affecting about 1% of babies, with minor skin cuts being the most frequent type of trauma. Serious or permanent injuries are rare, though the risk increases during emergency deliveries or when a baby's head is wedged deep in the pelvis. 1, 2, 3]

Common and Rare Infant Injuries

• Skin lacerations: Occur in roughly 1 to 2 out of every 100 caesarean deliveries when the scalpel nicks the skin.
• Minor bruising or swelling: Conditions like cephalohematoma (blood under the scalp) happen occasionally.
• Severe complications: Serious problems like skull fractures, nerve damage, or brain bleeds are very rare, affecting fewer than 2 in 1,000 babies

I've lost count of the sheer number of rare and very rare incidents affecting this one unit over just 12 months.

a cut in the skin (common) – this may happen accidentally as your womb is opened, but it's usually minor and heals without any problems

www.nhs.uk/tests-and-treatments/caesarean-section/risks/