Anyone else doubting Lucy Letby's guilt?

[Nickersnackersnockers]

Don't know if I am allowed to share a link so please Google 'Science on Trial Lucy Letby'.

It's written by a scientist with no association to LL who is asking questions that were not addressed in court.

I am very disturbed by the article. Don't start slinging mud at me, make a large coffee, go read it, come back, and tell me what you think!

No, that's his brother Christopher. Christopher is sadly missed. Peter, on the other hand...

Just because you read something on the internet by 'a scientist' doesn't make it credible and definitely doesn't make it true, OP.

Ugh not this again.

I didn't follow the case at all, didn't even watch news reports. I've just started listening to the pod cast The Lucy Letby Trial and am only 7 episodes in and it's very obvious she is guilty. One of the parents interrupted her killing one of the babies. Good God.

There's a lot of doubt.

Which is the case for a lot of criminal convictions.

Which is why the jury is asked to come to a conclusion 'beyond reasonable doubt'

Not no doubt at all. Or a bit.

Even if you have someone killing someone on CCTV it might not be murder but manslaughter or some other lesser charge.

We have an imperfect system where no member of a jury, barrister, Judge or member of the public can state 100% that the charged offence is true.

So we use the system we have and that's the best we can do.

No, I had wondered whether a failing department could use a scapegoat to mask inadequacies at the outset but as the trial went on the evidence appeared overwhelming.

No.

What exactly is it you want from starting another thread on this subject OP?

We want it to not be true because she was so 'normal' had loving parents, a good group of friends, a social life, she doesn't fit our idea of wierd, loner, psychopath, to believe she did it means believing that anyone could do it, but the evidence is there, she did do it.

None of you have read it have you. What are you scared of? That you'll have to take your blinkers off?

Yes the Peter Hitchen's article lead me to it

Have you read or attended some of those meetings from Science on trial. Richard Gill comes across as unhinged.

Have you also read all of the Chester standard daily court updates for the whole trial.

Sewage problem don't cause insulin problems for one.

I mean come on... those poor parents having to hear all of this nonsense.

no,
still convinced she is guilty

There are certainly a lot of unanswered questions, particularly regarding all of the other deaths she wasn’t present for.
I wasn’t at the trial, listening to the evidence, so I couldn’t say one way or the other.
I am glad she has the right to appeal.
I hope the other families, of babies who died but not on Lucy’s shift, are able to get some answers.

Oh god it's a lesser spotted "you lot are sheeple" conspiracy theorist

I believe she is guilty. I didn't give much weight to the notes in forming that view because she'd written notes protesting her innocence as well.

If she gets an appeal or a retrial, and/or further evidence emerges that casts doubt on her guilt, that's a different matter. I would feel very sorry for her then, because her life is ruined, even if in the highly unlikely event the verdict was overturned and she was exonerated.

Speaking of appeals, it's approaching Christmas - must be time for the annual Jeremy Bamber attempt to get out of jail, surely?

i am in agreement with the paediatricians involved

I feel like I don't want to believe she's guilty because I see a lot of myself in her, in a way. But she is guilty.

I knew what I was looking for..... I mean at!!!!!!

Sorry the dates are confusing me.

No.

And that article won't change my mind because it's written by someone widely discredited before it was written.

Our lizard overlords can’t come soon enough.

Nope - she was a murderer hiding in plain sight .
Someone capable of of being that devious in order to carry out such horrifying crimes was clever enough to cover their tracks and appear perfectly innocent - who would suspect such a sweet young nurse ..
We all know appearances can be deceptive .
She used her position to assault and kill the most vulnerable human beings .

I thought the evidence was very clear and the fact that she didn't shed a single tear for those babies or families gives me complete confidence that she is guilty. She had a good old cry for herself though.

She has had a very lengthy trial with months of evidence. She will also get an appeal.

Meanwhile don't believe everything you read on the internet - just because someone claims to be a scientist doesn't mean they are, are any good or are sane.

No. These conspiracy theories are pathetic.

Credulous thickos on the internet.

YANBU at all, OP. The evidence she was convicted on was wholly inadequate, the whole affair has so many wrongful conviction red flags. I posted a thread about this, but got so much personal abuse for it that mumsnet deleted it before I even had a chance to read the responses 😅. Read the scienceredditlucyletby subreddit it’s also very illuminating
x