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 😞

Neither do handover notes or social media searches have any bearing when they don’t indicate a specific interest in certain people.

257 handover sheets. 21 related to the indictment babies. Only 5 in the box discussed on the Netflix show and none of those were related to the indictment babies. The rest stuffed in carrier bags. How does any of that get close to being circumstantial evidence of murder? How can anyone infer ‘Trophies’ from that? And what are the police up to with the Netflix show bringing up notes stored in a box when it was 5 unrelated bits of paper, and was never mentioned in the trial?

The same way 31 facebook searches of the parents out of 2318 total searches are apparently proof that she was a typical serial killer relishing reliving her crimes by stalking the families.

It's not even in line with serial killer behaviour, it showed just a fleeting curiosity about the families from a person who seemingly had a fleeting curiosity about every random person she met.

Yep. I don’t know how they got away with it.

The same way the police are allowed to make out it's extremely suspicious that someone would be able to talk freely and in-depth about procedures etc but not remember anything about certain incidents, even though the 2 types of memory are not the same, procedural and episodic.

But yet a huge amount of people just lap it up unfortunately.

Because she is guilty (imho), hence her sentence. If these conspiracies are so compelling than where's her retrial?

At the risk of repeating myself... guilty of what?
I don't believe that there is sufficient proof of murder.
Nor does an internationally renowned panel of neonatal experts who came forward of their own accord - they have no vested interest in the case.
The pathologist's who investigated the babies' deaths in the first instance found no evidence of unlawful killing.
We can't as a society put people in prison for life because they are odd/ do odd things ( even then I think that the behaviours under scrutiny aren't that odd in themselves)

Can someone who is absolutely sure of her guilt explain to me what she is guilty of?

I agree with the opinion of criminal psychologist Dr David Holmes that Letby has no empathy for others, and psychopathic traits.

It is also worth remembering that LL cried her eyes out at the mention of her cats, yet remained expressionless and void of any emotion when the details of her alleged crimes were presented to the jury. If you are so devastated by babies under your care dying, that you go to the extent of researching their familes on Facebook, sending cards, and photos, keep records, write intense notes, and keep diary entries than how can you not remember them? God, anybody would feel sick hearing those details, yet she didn't.
why was she notshouting from the rooftops that she was innocent rather than a straight face monotone, "I couldn't have done it?" They showed you multiple interviews and she was this way in them all; she was also widy scrutinised for not showing emotion like a typical person would (apart from the cats). This was not normal imo.

But...that behaviour isn't a crime.....

Is doesn't exactly make her look innocent though does it? If she is innocent than she is the most unlucky woman in the world.

Not really. She’s certainly very unfortunate but no more so than some of the other people who have suffered appalling and life changing miscarriages of justice.

It’s a sobering thought to think that you could be hated and reviled and locked up for life because of a set of circumstances but it’s what’s happened before and I believe is what’s happened in this case.

She cried over the babies when they died, and over at least one of them in court.

I don't think you can expect her to cry every time they are mentioned.

Did any of the other doctors and nurses who treated them cry over them in court?

I bet the male consultants weren’t expected to cry over them in court.

They didn't obsess over the babies dying though did they , or show over familar behaviour with the families in combinations with all of her other strange behaviour. LL couldn't even remember them despite the babies being in her care, and her being present at every collapse. She was the one on trail who was supposedly innocent and being blamed for killing these tiny innocent babies, yet her reaction was as though a hamster had died.

And your opinion is valid, just as everybody's is on this thread. I found her demeanor chilling, in every one of the clips (apart from the cats); I certainly wouldn't want to be in the same room as her that's for sure. I believe she did it based on all of the factors presented, which I find more compelling than the argument that she did not.
I would say that only she knows, but I'm honestly not sure she does. Did they do a mental health/personality disorder assessment at the time?
I know acouple of retrials were denied; I think there is another possible last attempt coming up?

Sorry this was in response to @dampmuddyandcold

I don't think she obsessed over them. She obsessed over being accused of murdering them but I think that is normal behaviour. She cried when they died, she wrote at least one sympathy card, she tried to use strategies to work through their deaths at work.

Eight years after they died, I don't think it would have been necessary for her to cry she showed she cared about them. And she was on antidepressants which would affect the way she showed emotions anyway

Odd doesn't begin to cover it - it's a massive breach of basic patient confidentiality. Absolutely no excuse for that. Disciplinary offence on its own. Searching for patient families online is also totally inappropriate.

I agree with the opinion of criminal psychologist Dr David Holmes that Letby has no empathy for others, and psychopathic traits.

I just looked him and watched his three minute speech. Laughable, he really is. He’s never met her and has diagnosed her with Munchausan syndrome (which isn’t correct from what I’ve read). Who knows what really goes on in her mind, but from what her friends and family have said, she was indeed caring and empathetic towards them.

So... too much emotion or not enough emotion?

Was it one of the babies who died that she didn't remember or one of the insulin babies/ones who went home and has Dr David Holmes interviewed Lucy Letby?

She was also accused by the prosecution of trying to get sympathy from the jury by claiming to have been arrested in her pyjamas when it was actually a Lee Cooper tracksuit thing. Except for the recent Netflix documentary where they show her being arrested in bed.

Im with the trial outcome until it’s proved to be wrong if it can be- but even I am struck by people saying “in very clip” etc - cos that immediately points to a certain narrative being driven - that documentary was 90 mins trying to cover events of nigh on ten years - they couldn’t begin to cover everything and I wonder how they picked the clips to show

I think the point is that Letby’s character is not on trial. To the best of my knowledge, none of us know her and we have a previous nursing mentor claiming she was ‘cold’ and parents of babies who passed away stating their belief that she behaved ‘oddly’ after their passing on the one hand and her own parents and friends painting a picture of a kind, loyal and caring young woman on the other.

We just don’t know. She could be a mean girl; gossipy, spiteful, vindictive and unkind, or she could be cool, aloof and lofty in the face of other people’s pain. She could be endlessly compassionate, patient and caring or she could be numb, remote and indifferent.

That matters if you want to make friends with her or if you want to invite her to a party. In the same vein - I think Michael Stone is innocent of Lynn and Megan Russell’s murder; I also sure as hell don’t want to go out for a drink with him.

You don’t need to like her. The question in this case isn’t ’did she murder them?’ It’s more ‘were they murdered?’ It’s the medical evidence that’s crucial and nothing else.

This is interesting on the handover notes https://x.com/NeoDoc11/status/2020825991464005829?s=20

Most people don’t commit murders in full view of other people.

Why did her defence team not call any expert witnesses? We won’t know unless LL waives legal privilege. However it would seem eminently more likely it was because there were none that would help her case or could make it worse, than because His Majesty’s Counsel was somehow incompetent

I’m sure there was evidence that even accounting for how sick the babies were the death rate was v high

The notes - sure I agree that’s not safe to be taken on its own as an admission. But part of a bigger picture

Guilty as sin IMO and hope she rots

I can’t know but my suspicion is the defence were putting the onus on the prosecution to ‘prove it’ rather than to present a robust defence.

It backfired massively, of course.

The evidence is cumulative and much stronger when looked at together

It is if it’s unanimously agreed they were murdered. If we all agree it was murder, it was Letby; no issue with that. But we don’t.