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 😞

Sure - and I don't want to go down a rabbit hole here because I think there's not much in it. We know that Myers wanted to put Hall, his main expert, on the stand if he could do that case by case. We know he asked the judge to consider Hall's reports as evidence when he was challenging Dewi Evans's status. We know where the gaps were - the insulin cases, at that stage - from the leaks in the expert conference. So McDonald can probably take a very educated guess at Myers's strategy, and it wouldn't have been an irrational one.

thats not in dispute - but I’m saying it’s a lot more likely that not calling them was a considered decision for good reason, rather than he… just forgot, or had had enough of things at that point?

Saying we don’t know why he called then doesn’t mean defaulting to ‘well he should have called them and that was a bad effort at defence’..

I’ve only just started watching this but have been following the case and have seen the other documentaries. Surely at the least it needs a retrial, the cherry picking of statistics to push the defences narrative is shocking. I can’t believe the police have released footage of Lucy being arrested in her pyjamas when they lied about this in court to attack her character and said she was saying it for sympathy and attention. And the fact that Dr Shoo felt so strongly about his papers being misinterpreted and wrongly quoted in court he conducted his own investigation and found no evidence of wrongdoing by Lucy has me leaning towards the possibility of her being innocent. I have also worked for the NHS in a different setting and the vile scapegoat culture is universal. I hope this goes to appeal and if they re try it and come to the same conclusion it’s completely on the police force and prosecution when the families are dragged through this again as the first trial was a farce. And if she’s innocent I have no words for what she’s been through

That's exactly how it happened. You could add that the hospital managers put the consultants in touch with the police before Evans contacted them, because they were insisting they wouldn't be satisfied until the police were involved.

Exactly - he didn’t call them as they would have supported a lot of prosecution evidence

I think we are talking at cross purposes. Here is a quote from the Guardian about Dr Evans

‘Very, very informal’
The way Cheshire police quickly selected Evans as their expert has itself become a focus of criticism by the expert group now supporting Letby. It was, he acknowledges, “very, very informal”.
Evans retired as a consultant paediatrician, with experience of neonatology, in 2009. After that, he worked prolifically as an expert witness. In May 2017, he read about the Chester investigation, and emailed a contact at the National Crime Agency (NCA).
“If the Chester police have no one in mind, I’d be interested to help,” he wrote. “Sounds like my kind of case.”
Evans told the Guardian: “They [the NCA] rang me back and said: ‘Are you interested in this?’ And I said: ‘Tell Cheshire police to ring me up.’ It was very, very informal, almost a chance encounter actually.” The police followed up with a phone call, and in July 2017, Evans drove to Chester and saw those first medical records.
In internal police emails disclosed to Letby’s defence and seen by the Guardian,* *one officer wrote to the NCA after that first meeting: “We were certainly impressed with Dr Evans and he’s clearly very interested in assisting us!”

I never thought she did it and she’s so obviously neurodivergent, which I think explains a lot of her perceived odd behaviour.

And why would they do that if this was all a scapegoating exercise - their bosses said there was nothing to defend - you only scapegoat to shift blame but no one was being blamed here

it doesn’t make sense

Right I’m off to bed 👋
night night all

I think you’re being naive. You’re right in that LL has been found legally guilty. However a lot of the circumstantial evidence has since been brought into question by a lot of eminent specialists and a lot of the data was misrepresented. If it’s later found that there has been a miscarriage of justice it won’t be the first time. At the very least I think a retrial is in order.

I don't think the consultants deliberately scapegoated Lucy Letby, but their bosses hadn't said nobody was at fault. They had said there were problems with the unit which they wanted to support the consultants to overcome.

The reviewers the hospital had hired had judged that hospital care was at fault in several recent baby deaths, and this information was to be delivered to the coroner for inquests on some of the children who had died. Some of the consultants could certainly have been found to be at fault.

For example, there was a case where they did not come to help with a resuscitation for 40 minutes when the rule was that they should be on call five minutes away. This child later died. A reviewer found that failings in care were likely to have contributed to his death. Lucy Letby was eventually convicted of his murder.

Yes I did closely follow the trial and read widely about it.
Im not a barrister, just wanted to show how easy it is to put that on the internet. It’s important to remember anyone can write anything.

What is disgusting behaviour is David Davis and the panel of "international experts" making a mockery of the British justice system at the request of her new performative barrister. It's pure PR and the fact so many people got caught believing them is worrying.

There is a verdict, thorough and considered, after years of investigation. Lack of CCTV or a direct witness does not exonerate an individual drowning in the sea of circumstantial evidence that would not have coincidentally 'happened' to her and not to anybody else at the entire CoC Neonatal Unit before her time.

I truly hope the CCRC will put an end to this deeply inappropriate media circus. There are bereaved families at the heart of it and babies who were killed, and suffered. This is not a story to be debated by TikTok idiots who can't string a sentence together and their next short will be about their nails, make up or workout. Honestly, I'm sick of this circus, of the online 'defenders' of her who have suddenly sprung up and who are incapable of critical analysis. All PR and people are falling for it.

Some of the comments on this thread and on MN about this case are shocking and should've never been posted.

I don't know why people who are determined that Lucy Letby must be guilty imply that it's a TikTok craze. I've never seen anyone cite anything to do with TikTok on the matter. There are plenty of other platforms out there: book, documentary, newspaper, magazine.

I would say that the most influential interventions have come from the New Yorker, known for erudite long-form articles, Private Eye, and of course the medical panel you mentioned which published its findings in a traditional conference summary style.

One of the remarkable things about Lucy Letby's case is that it has not been a grassroots campaign - whether traditional or on social media. This is extremely rare for miscarriages of justice. The impetus has come from subject experts recognizing that the prosecution case was nonsensical - medics and statisticians have been horrified and started to contact journalists as soon as the trial ended. Like everything else, their interventions have been amplified and dissected and discussed online, on whatever fora different demographics use. But this does not make concerns a TikTok craze or creation.

Maybe watch the documentary before commenting, then.

Of course it's not a traditional campaign, it's a full blown PR.

Observe any nursing team leaving a ward at shift finish and see how many actually put handover sheets in the confidential waste bin - the majority merrily wander out with them still in their pockets ...

I disagree. The defence barrister did not do their job and they should have called expert witnesses. Too many people are being found guilty in British justice who are actually innocent.

I found listening to her Mum crying hysterically really awful to listen to.

What and then file them at home and keep them.

@Flowerytwits no one else was being blamed so no one was scapegoated? Are you for real? In the case of baby Zoe, It was reported yesterday (not in the documentary) that it had been accepted that the hospital had been negligent re failures around antibiotics and parents had already instructed solicitors who were due to meet with the Triust on the day Letby was arrested to proceed against them. What a coincidence

I feel terribly for the families of those babies and it must be horrendous to have it dragged up repeatedly but there are systemic issues here that absolutely must be addressed to project others in future. The state of our justice system is terrifying and I suspect there are far more innocent people in jail in this country than we could ever anticipate

So your default position when someone makes a reasoned argument, but one with which you disagree, is to suggest they’re lying? I change my user name regularly as I’m very conscious of remaining anonymous but a search of my current user name would show I had commented on my job just earlier this week. You haven’t raised any argument you just say she is guilty and because I disagree I must be “one of those people that can say anything on the internet”. 🙄

Absolutely - don’t forget Andrew Malkinson, the Post Office Scandal etc

It was her parents who asked her current lawyer mark , a barrister , to help . He took a look and realised all of Dewie Evans findings were from a written paper by someone else so he said the best thing to do was go directly to that someone else . That’s when the whole thing started unravelling . The someone else Dr Shoo the author said his theories had been applied inappropriately.

That maybe so but to then arrange them in date order put them in a box marked “keep” say to the police… It was an accident and lie about having a paper shredder is a bit different.

There needs to be a retrial and the full truthful
facts presented