Three members of Lucy Letby hospital senior leadership team arrested.

[MissJoGrant]

Story here:

How can they press on with more charges knowing serious and credible doubts have been raised about the current convictions and the ccrc are investigating them?

The police and the cps don't care about the truth. They care about winning. Managers, parents, future babies who might be poorly cared for and Lucy herself are simply collateral damage.

It does seem backwards to announce to the press before the CPS have made any decisions whether there is anything credible there.

Can’t be bothered to reply to all of letbys supporters. Got better things to do than read her fans posts.
Clearly a few of you have a sick curiosity that need’s satisfying!
This post wasn’t about letby anyway it was about senior management who did nothing to intervene and stop her killing!
Can’t believe there’s people on MN slavering over a serial baby killer.

Just keeping her name in the press to detract from all the failings from the hospital managers, doctors, police, prosecution, so called witnesses. The truth will eventually come out whichever way this goes.

I'd say it seems to be the opposite. Many on here do not care about evidence, or having a thorough legal process as they have their glamorous serial killer to salivate over. Bollocks to other babies that could end up with the same fate as we've learned nothing from this.

And today the head of the CCRC has resigned, complete farce.

Not quite sure how she managed to hang around this long.

Also if the CPS charge then they can have reporting restrictions again to stop people discussing how the original convictions make no sense.

Then maybe they can get more convictions based on her already having convictions and the jury knowing that.

We have babies up and down the country dying due to poor care and inadequate staffing. But in and around Chester (despite plentiful evidence of dreadful care) babies die due to the actions of a serial killer instead.

I think Dewi Evans was more concerned about winning than anything else. He's said on several occasions that he's won all his cases bar one, and that it still rankled with him that he lost.

I was a bit shocked to learn that expert witnesses can pocket up to £500,000 during a case!!!

This is from Private Eye Part 14 of their Special Report:
multiple “suspicious events” were identified by Evans, but ten that didn’t involve Letby were disregarded. So the claim that “Letby was always on duty” when something suspicious happened was only true because the prosecution made it so.

https://www.private-eye.co.uk/special-reports/lucy-letby

Evans identified far more events than the ones Letby was prosecuted for, but because she wasn't there the prosecution left them out. Is no one else going to be investigated for them then since they were suspicious? Or are they now viewed as normal deaths since she wasn't in attendance?

I don’t get this. Even if you believe that her convictions are unsafe and/or that LL is innocent of the crimes she has been convicted of (and for the record I do not believe either of these things to be true), why does that mean that the police should not charge her with any other offences if they believe she committed them? The CCRC application is irrelevant - whatever the outcome it doesn’t mean she couldn’t still be guilty of these crimes.

A PP was keen to stress upthread that these new suggested offences are ‘alleged’ and that even a convicted serial killer maintains the right to be considered innocent until proven guilty of any additional crimes post-conviction as these are entirely separate. So surely a similar principle applies the other way and even if she did not commit the crimes she was convicted of (again, I believe she did) why does this mean that the police should not investigate any other suspicions and subsequently charge her if they believe they have sufficient evidence? Some of these charges relate to a completely different hospital, so it’s not even as though the same witnesses will be involved.

It seems an amazing coincidence that the news breaks again about possibly looking into further allegations just happens a few days after senior clinicians are arrested and the ccrc head resign. These further allegations have been going on for months but now it's front page news again.

You would have a point if any of these alleged murders or incidents had been considered to be suspicious at the time.

This entire current investigation is predicated on the idea Lucy is a serial killer. So they have gone through every previous child she has cared for searching for anything they can try to pin on her.

You could repeat this exercise with any neonatal nurse and achieve similar results.

I’m glad they’re looking into the other cases and her time in other hospitals. They definitely need investigating.

Because she chose vulnerable victims she got away with it. Same as Shipman did for so long. His victims are meant to be in the hundreds. Not all of them were discovered to be suspicious at the time. Dangerous people

Just reading this Thirwell Enquiry testimony from the parents of triplets shows what an absolute shitshow the unit was. From Private Eye Special Report Part 6. I'm surprised any baby survived.

But the parents realised their babies were at risk as soon as they arrived. The father attended the caesarean section in June 2016 and told the inquiry: “The state of the theatres looked like something out of a horror film. It was very cold
and unhygienic.” His wife complained about the pain, to which the anaesthetist responded: “It’s not hurting.”

The mother said that when one of the babies later collapsed, “We were confronted by a scene of complete chaos.” When a second triplet collapsed, “I was confronted with the same chaos as the day before.” Her husband observed it was “absolute pandemonium”. “I saw a nurse Googling a procedure, a lung drain. There was an image of a person with an arrow where the incision should
be… I remember other staff coming over to the computer to have a look at it… It looked like they were following a tutorial rather than they actually knew what they were doing.”

Your posts, the language that you use and your unwillingness to consider that people who are concerned about whether justice has been served are acting in good faith suggest that you are unable to approach this discussion with any level of rationality so yes, best that you find a better use of your time.

Agree

I think the police are running scared after Jeremy Hunt, who is not known for his rashness, came out as thinking there are problems with the conviction, and perhaps more alarmingly still Nigel Farage agreed with him. They needed to try to take back control of the narrative and ideally shut down discussion in the public sphere altogether before any other big names stick their necks out about how much this stinks. Saying they have evidence of more might plant some seeds of doubt in those who have not yet got their own heads around how astonishingly weak the evidence against her is.

@rubbishatballet my concern is that they are going to make them murders because the assumption is that Letby is a serial killer.

I’ve put that badly but let’s say someone has been tried and convicted, beyond reasonable doubt (DNA etc) of multiple murders of young women. Two more young women’s bodies are found; there is no direct evidence but the police can prove a known serial killer was in the immediate vicinity when they were killed, it’s safe to deduce in all probability he was responsible.

So if LL was guilty and other babies are showing the same sort of ‘signs’ then it’s reasonable to assume a jury would find her guilty. But the question mark here isn’t ‘did Lucy Letby murder babies’ it is ‘have babies been murdered at all.’

I wonder who the police have going through all the deaths deciding which ones are suspicious?

Dewi Evans has apparently retired.

She has been used as a scapegoat!

Because just maybe they are a bit more knowledgeable than a bunch of armchair detectives who didn’t sit through the trial. They will be meticulously checking everything so I know who I think is the most credible.

On the contrary why the hell do you and your fellow letby cheerleaders have the brass neck to think you know better than the most senior and experienced legal minds in the country. If there were LEGITIMATE grounds for appeal then she would have been granted one. YOU are the one ignoring the ACTUAL evidence not spurious crap that is barely worth responding too.

Of course the NHS is brilliant and full of brilliant, hard working and decent people. Nobody goes into the organisation intending to be inefficient, negligent or a bully. But the whole system is broken and therefore dangerous and we are all conspiring to turn a blind eye to it. That includes those inside it who are put under enormous pressure to achieve the impossible under huge pressure as well as everyone else with our sentimental knee jerk wish to keep saying how wonderful the NHS is.

The NHS is of course a wonderful idea and we should of course be proud of the principle behind it and fight to keep it. But for now it is broken and dangerous. We all know this and we are all complicit in not speaking the truth about what has happened to it.

What evidence?