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 😞

This.

Look, Lucy Letby didn't have just one trial.

In the first, she was found guilty of murdering 7 babies and attempting to murder six others.

In the second, she was found guilty of an attempted murder.

That's two different high court judges and two different juries.

Do people think that they were all wrong and she should maybe have a Best of Three result?

In addition, she has TWO attempts at appeal. Both were rejected.

In the light of all this-and no-one can deny that she has had a fair crack of the legal whip-it is bizarre that some people still insist it is a stitch up.

Lucy Letby was found guilty in two different court situations TWICE. She has had appeals rejected TWICE.

This is because, she is guilty.

There is no uncertainty about it but doubtless there will be programmes made and articles written as long as there is money to be made and gulls to believe them.

@Playingvideogames I was a police officer for 8 years. I understand very well how the CPS works. And I have seen first hand how political and frankly questionable they can be.

Out of interest, if there is a retrial (which I think is inevitable) and she is cleared of all charges, will those with blind faith in our justice system accept that?

A retrial isn’t possible now as she exhausted her two appeals when no new evidence was seen or anything likely to change the outcome

is that right? That’s what understand

just court of criminal cases review team now?

@MissAustenMadeAQuilt If you'd bothered to read more about the case, you'd know that the expert panel's findings were published after the trials and appeals.

For now, but if CCRC sends her case to the court of appeal they could send to a retrial, which would then go ahead if the CPS wanted to present a case for the prosecution.

So ccrc would only send it if they thought miscarriage of justice?

She has the same legal rights to have her case reviewed as anybody else, you see.

You are absolutely right @Oftenaddled and I think she has unless you are suggesting that the appeal judges are either thick, have an irrational hatred towards her, don't know the legal system or are deliberately stopping her from gaining justice.

In my opinion, she has asked twice-she has been refused twice. She has had mor chances than most other prisoners. Two Trials. Two Appeal Attempts.

There's a reason she is still behind bars-she has been judged TWICE and found to be guilty Twice.

Maybe she should go for 5 trials and take the best of three. If that doesn't work, maybe go for seven trials and take the best of four-what do you think?

Well, that's me and the appeal judges (not to mention two juries) that are wrong then and Mumsnet and documentary makers are right!

Can you see how silly that sounds.

It isn’t silly to suggest both judge and jury could have been wrong, especially as evidence that has later been widely shared wasn’t at the time.

So, when you apply for an appeal immediately after your conviction, you do so on narrow criteria based on how the trial was run.

The CCRC exists because new evidence and arguments can emerge over time, as has certainly happened in Lucy Letby's case. But it's not just for her. They have referred almost 900 cases back to the court of appeal. And you have to have applied for an appeal and had your application turned down to get that far.

Over two out of three of these cases - over 600 - is successful at the Court of Appeal after the CCRC makes this decision. All of these cases failed first at their application to appeal.

So, absolutely, I believe that Lucy Letby should have the right to an appeal like these other people who have used the same legal process. It's there to protect us all.

Worth adding that the two juries at Lucy Letby's two trials weren't really acting independently of each other, since the judge at the second trial told the jury there that they could take her previous crimes into account when they were deciding the case.

They would send it if they think there is a strong possibility the case would succeed at the Court of Appeal

Watching it has made me convinced that she is 100% guilty, as convicted, twice over.

Her notes apparently were not part of "therapy". They were written at home, after one of the arrests. The only thing mentioned to write down was the HR officer who was in touch with her that mentioned she might want to write down her thoughts - nothing to do with therapy or necessarily anything to do with her notes, which were found after at least one of her first arrests.

Why did she say "no comment" when interviewed? To me, that's what a guilty person says.

The AI figures were creepy, didn't like that at all.

Exactly this, so she hasn’t had TWO independent trial as PP put it 🙄 as the second trial was heavily reliant on the first. But hey, let’s not let facts and logic get in the way of a good old witch hunt.

Agree with this. The interview showed he was biased and you can tell he didn't understand that if the trust was going through huge changes upstream at the same time the effects on the neonatal ward could be huge. It seems they were suddenly taking in a larger influx of very ill babies and obviously didn't have the staff to cope, which he didn't take into account. They need to have a specialised medical judiciary for these, who understand the systemic issues, as I suspect there are cases up and down the country where the NHS has failed patients and tried to blame individuals for systemic failings.

Re the “why would she say no comment if not guilty” I suggest people read some resources or the book Prima Facie. It’s actually pretty easy to inadvertently implicate yourself even if you’re not guilty by talking too much in interview, especially in a case as complex as this.

I watched it and also found it interesting. The one thing that made me think was when she asked the officers “are you going to search the house?” Which I thought… I wonder what her reason was for asking that (I.e worried about them finding the case notes etc). Then when she said she didn’t have a shredder to discard the notes, and a photo showed a shredder in the home. Finally, the fact that she’d written “keep”’on the box instead of confidential/private. Just made me think really.

I'd be keeping every note I had if I spent a year knowing consultants were talking about me being a murderer, and another year knowing they'd spoken to the police.

Not saying that's what she did, but I really don't see how you get from, kept paperwork at home inappropriately to murdered those children. They're such different misdeeds.

Very interesting programme. Probably a bit overhyped though. Just reassured me how guilty she is.

I can see that point. Would she not have said that to the police when they asked her though? When they asked why she’d kept them she said she didn’t know what to do with them/ how to discard.

The AI was weird wasn’t it?

I think if her solicitor advised her to say ‘no comment’ that changes things. Most people would follow their legal team’s advice.

It seems like she had a pretty poor legal team.

That evidence was not shared at the trial because it didn’t stand up to scrutiny - that’s why it’s been shared after!!!!!!

the defence put forward a big fat zero witnesses

and it was two juries and two judges on separate occasions - and court of appeal twice

I think if innocent I’d be shouting from roof tops