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 😞

The judge did warn the jury in one case (baby C) but not more generally. So you wouldn't be able to go back and say we have to review based on what Evans said at the trial - that right.

But you would be able to review based on what he has said since. I think that is one of the reasons the Chester police keep trying to stop him from talking to the media. But he's a funny character, whatever you think of his science, and he never stops

Yes it does really feel like if your defence was poor you could get retrial but then maybe everyone would say that to get a retrial

omg he’s definitely funny character - very dismissive on the mistakes one

do you know how the CCRC are likely to treat the alternative explanations for death put forward as I’m not sure if they take that as new evidence or rather differing opinions???

I think this is what is so haunting about it all.

I fell down a bit of an internet wormhole last night and I was reading about Lindy Chamberlain, who not only went through the unbearable pain of losing what was by all accounts a longed-for and beloved child, then had to give birth in prison and have her second daughter taken from her.

Or Sally Clark, who had that situation not once but twice and then had her third child removed. No wonder she turned to alcohol.

Because how could you put faith in others? As this thread shows some will determinedly hold onto the first jury’s verdict no matter what anyone subsequently says, so she’ll live the rest of her life hated and reviled by some, unable to practice as a nurse but won’t be given any real sort of compensation, what the hell will she do?

The loss of those babies was just awful but let’s not pretend being a miscarriage of justice, especially one like this, is some minor issue akin to a parking ticket in comparison. Her life is in tatters and if the experts are to be believed she’s done nothing to deserve it at all.

I don’t think anyone is hanging on to first verdict with LL - it is the CURRENT verdict

there is so much involved with getting an appeal/review at this stage and we aren’t underestimating that and how it works whether we like it or not - also holding in mind the people who are most in the know are people that were at the trial - we don’t have the full story

i would be delighted if it wasn’t murder as would the parents of the babies im sure

I think they can reject some grounds for referral and accept others, but what they do with the new medical reports at this stage is a grey area.

I have seen more than one commentator say that basically they can refuse to admit them as new evidence if they want to, but they can find a reason to if they want to as well. Evidence doesn't have to be new - the court just has to explain why it is allowing it to be heard and "because it's new" is the most straightforward reason.

It's a pity it's not all a bit more transparent, and quicker, not just for Lucy Letby but for anyone involved really

And do the inquests for the babies requested tie into it ?

No apparently not. They have to match the existing court verdict. But the coroner said that if it came to an appeal and she needed to open new ones, she would do that then. So most of those babies could end up with three death certificates each, in theory.

the people who are most in the know are people that were at the trial

After seeing how various things had been twisted around to suit a narrative, I’m not convinced about this.

At least two downright lies have been told and accepted by the judge and jury so I don’t have confidence that the people at the trial know it all.

I mean they know more than us..

There is another thread been started just now

you need to get over there and put them in the picture - they are all very laypeople like me! 😂😂

Arguably the judge and jury knew less than we do.

How come?

Me, maybe, but some people on here sure know their stuff 😅

The evidence is this case is huge - in terms of volume and complexity, this is a case of hundreds of suggestive or circumstantial threads that ‘weave’ together and have to be interpreted correctly and in context. You would need a 6-8 hour documentary to even touch on most of it. It’s very hard to create the big picture because there are so many detail, and even harder to present it in a way that a jury of laypeople will understand it.

I don’t think Dewi Evans is the sinister figure he is made out to be on this thread. I think it’s his opinion that Lucy is guilty, and he can give reasons as to why. Equally Lucy’s new defence barrister feels she is innocent, and he can give reasons as to why.

Ultimately though to convict somebody you can’t just have a few reasons, you have to build a case where there is guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Personally I’m not sure that’s been achieved here.

I would however avoid reading conspiracy and shady motives into any expert witness that doesn’t support your theory. It’s partly this tendency to ascribe sinister motives to people based on hunches and guesses which is clouding the whole thing, but that goes both ways.

He’s not supposed to have an opinion on whether she is innocent or guilty though. That’s most of the issue with him. He was censured by the judge in a previous case for being biased. He is just supposed to answer the questions put to him from his expertise in as unbiased a way as possible. He should assist the court rather than trying to prove the case himself.

Dewi Evanschanged his mind mid trial, and when pushed his answer was something like 'something bad must have happened' (paraphrased)

I understood that he was saying it was intentional harm but he couldn’t always say the method or mechanism

gosh he changed his mind openly and the jury still unanimous…

I know oftenaddled is better than her lawyers!

I think most people are saying that Evans was incompetent, not that he was conspiring as such.

Incompetent and arrogant is a dangerous combination.

Well we know things that are actually pertinent about the hospital that the jury never heard because the judge ruled them inadmissible. We know that things said in court under oath have since been shown to be untrue. We know more about how the indictment cases were selected. We know that many impartial and more qualified professionals disagree with the prosecution expert witnesses regarding claims about ‘the only possible explanation’ for certain outcomes. Many people have now read a significant proportion of the court transcripts, rather than what was available to the general public during the trial. Etc.

I believe she is guilty. I listened to the BBC podcast at the time of the trial and there is so much that was left out of the Netflix show. She was wanting the attention from one of the doctors who she was obsessed with for a start.
So many reasons why though, why did Beverly Allitt murder? Why did Harold Shipman? There is far too much evidence with her stealing hospital notes, sending weird letters to the parents etc. People just want to think she’s innocent because it’s such an awful thing for anyone to do, let alone a young nurse.

How does a young nurse having some kind of crush on or possibly dalliance with a doctor have any bearing whatsoever? That's the most normal and natural thing, and were hypocritesif we pretend otherwise..

Jurors aren't tasked with finding a motive but still people like to ascribe them. "She was wanting the attention from one of the doctors who she was obsessed with for a start" as a reason for committing murders (so that he would console her afterwards?) Is one of the more far-fetched speculative leaps trotted out here. Isn't it really that people want to say "But they were cheating! She is a bad person!"

Have we moved on at all from when we hanged Edith Thompson for adultery?

Who are you replying to @Gobacktotheworld2 ?