The investigation of Lucy Letby on Netflix

[TheRozzers]

Anyone watched it yet? It’s a really excellent documentary with loads of footage of her police interviews.

You see the police asking her questions about those ‘confession’ notes.

I won’t put spoilers in the OP but I’d love to hear what others made of her responses.

Mid way through I thought she’s 💯 guilty but by the end I’m really not sure. A lot points to her being innocent.

I feel for the parents of those babies so much, the uncertainty must be horrendous 😞

You are assuming there were murders, and you are running on righteous anger as a result. No one has established that there were any, though.

Also since when were Mumsnet and the comments section in the Daily Mail compatriots?

It's really interesting to see the cross section of newspapers and magazines taking an editorial position on this case, isn't it?

Telegraph, Observer, Guardian, Mail on Sunday, and the Sun have all called for a retrial - not individual columnists but as an editorial line. Not to mention the Private Eye campaign. A very unusual cross-section of print media.

And the British Medical Journal has just commissioned and published an article from one of Mark McDonald's experts, arguing that statistics have been dreadfully misused in the case. https://www.bmj.com/content/392/bmj.s226
That's the British Medical Association's own journal, not just publishing but requesting an article to show the case went wrong. (Short and worth a read)

I don't think we need to spend much energy arguing that we haven't hallucinated the unprecedented media interest in this potential miscarriage of justice.

Were all 250 of these notes to do with the babies who died under her care? Or were they various cases?

It is not a good documentary at all. 1 hour long, most of which were interviews by the documentary team, to cover a case that took 10 months at trial to show all the evidence.

Don't believe everything you see on TV. The majority of the evidence in this case will remain sealed indefinitely due the age and vulnerabilities of the victims.

A court of law has. And the court of appeal. Several times. Not assuming anything - she's a murderer and that's an agreed fact. How bizarre to describe someone despising a convicted baby murderer as having 'righteous anger'.

Luckily - it doesn't matter what you or I think. The known, convicted multiple baby murderer is rotting in jail where she belongs.

No. Every note had the name of multiple babies on the ward. 21 of the 257 sheets mention at least one name of a child on the indictment.

She worked about 150 shifts a year so that's over a third of her sheets she brought home over four years.

Most of the children on the indictment were on the ward more than one night so she would usually end up bringing home sheets with their names on them, at that rate.

When people refer to someone "rotting in jail" it always makes me think they are more excited by revenge than concerned about justice.

Anyway, the CCRC has assigned the case an officer and is working on it. Let's hope we hear back soon, and that it becomes one of the nearly 900 cases that are referred back to the court of appeal.

Those 870 cases they've referred back since 1997 represents just 3% of all cases referred to them. Such a tiny percentage. Statistically Lucy Letby will remain in jail. Whether she 'rots' or thrives there is really no concern to anyone, except as an expression of how deeply evil she is. But either way she very much belongs there.

She's not rotting. She is by all accounts quiet, well-behaved, promoted to librarian, and spending her free time studying and consulting her legal team.

The evidence is all out there.

And every one of those 900 had a jury, and I am sure many others, who believed them guilty to start with.

Referral to the CoA is a genuine possibility in this case, bolstered by unprecedented interest from experts, and an outcome which previous sceptics in the legal world, like Joshua Rozenberg, have accepted as likely since the expert panel reported. Lots of reason for optimism that those children weren't killed and Lucy Letby will be released.

I suppose identities of victims and some witnesses are sealed, but I don't think that has much effect on the case.

Yes it's just the anonymity orders but that's not evidence that would have any bearing on anyones opinion of guilt.

They’ve been conclusively wrong about that on many occasions and they will be again. Whether this is one of those times none of us can know but there is sufficient doubt for me to avoid frothing at the mouth about ‘baby killers rotting in prison’ (even if that was something I’d be prone to do).

Yes this is what’s important.
Failure to disclose important evidence to the defence IS absolutely a reason for CCRC to refer for a new appeal.
Flawed medical expert evidence and test results that supported a natural cause and were not disclosed are what led to Sally Clark’s eventual acquittal (sadly far too late for her to recover her life). There is a considerable chance that this will also be the case for LL.
I am hugely suspicious of medical experts many of whom have been proven to be wrong in the family courts (eg cox/Carter baby removed permanently for abuse who was later found to have a medical cause) Our system is not well set up to challenge flawed medical evidence.

Having watched it I still think she's 100% guilty. I found it so odd how much affection she gave her cats. She treated them like children but couldn't care less about the babies she murdered. Stalking the parents on fb, the notes , the confidential info, the rota, the strange texts to colleagues. She looks like a very cold person with an odd personality. For all those saying she's innocent, would you trust her 100% to mind your newborn? I doubt it.
I wouldn't give much value to what the guy Mcdonald was saying, he just wanted his 5 minutes of fame. He's not bringing any new evidence to the table.

I agree. Taking the notes home, the diary entries, the text messages, the pattern (that when she was taken off shifts the deaths stopped). Some people love a conspiracy and don’t want to accept the obvious explanation about anything. If she is innocent she’s the most unlucky person in history.

The unit was downgraded and no longer allowed to take very sick babies, which is why the deaths stopped.

For me, the most obvious answer is the one that was reached the first three times the deaths were looked at, which is natural causes compounded by poor medical care and the unit being unfit for purpose.

If murder was so obvious, why did it take DE to look at the evidence to see it? Why not the original coroners? Or the RCPCH (twice)? Or Jane Hawden? Or even the consultants, as they didn't deem any individual death as suspicious?

For all those saying she's innocent, would you trust her 100% to mind your newborn? I doubt it

It’s a moot point because it’s not going to happen. Even if she’s released from prison (and I think she will be) she won’t be returning to nursing.

FWIW though, yes, I would.

If she was freed and you had a baby , would you hire her as a nanny? She probably wouldn't kill another baby as that would be too obvious but she would 100% hurt it in some way. Just goes to show that they should have cctv in every nicu as a rule.
Babies are too precious to risk them around people the parents don't know.

But it’s not a crime to be an odd person. Other people who have been wrongly convicted or suspected and pilloried in the press it’s often for ‘looking odd’ or not reacting how they are ‘supposed to’. None of this is evidence of a crime and none of it will matter if it is found that the babies actually died of natural causes and/ or poor care which they very easily could have done.

isn't it that the cluster pattern is what stopped when unit downgraded ? LL left and the cluster pattern went back to random staff at deaths…

systemic failure can exist at the same time as suspicious deaths - and it doesn’t explain the deliberate insulin in blood bags - air injected into blood streams - falsified notes - collapses after feeds - babies that were improving suddenly collapsing - odd behavioural evidence

patterns are invisible in real time - the whistle was blown and in retrospect they saw the patterns - original pathologists took the obvious answer - they weren’t looking for foul play and most of the deaths didn’t go to coroners as they were assumed natural

The idea that there was a serial killer, as opposed to this being hospital failures and substandard care is the conspiracy.

"A conspiracy theory is a belief or explanation that alleges a secret, influential, and often malevolent group is responsible for a significant event or situation, rather than official, well-documented, or more likely explanations."

Haha yeah because that would obviously be a lucrative career for her, wouldn’t it?

The question was, would I trust her with my baby. Answer is yes, it isn’t going to change by changing the scenario.

But as it happens a lot of people wouldn’t be looking after my baby, it doesn’t make them killers. I wouldn’t let my own brother look after my children, not because he’s evil or dangerous but because he has sporadic epileptic fits so that would be potentially very dangerous. I’m not planning on sending him to prison though.