Lucy Letby

dogsmother

Nacky….some experts, but not all. Others experts say not so.

Yes, agree but the doctors I have seen quoted as saying that the deaths could be natural tend to be much more experienced and up to date than those heard by the jury. One in particular, a world expert in his field, and I think mentioned in the New York Times article (worth a read and no longer banned in UK) gives a very good alternative explanation for there being insulin present. Like everyone here I don't know whether Lucy Letby is guilty but she deserves a fair trial and I don't think she has had one.

Retroladywriting

flappergirl

Lucy Letty is the archetypal girl next door in almost every sense. She was chosen as a "poster girl" for the maternity unit at one stage. Nobody wants to believe that someone so pleasantly ordinary, with a seemingly idyllic childhood and loving parents, could enact such evil.

On the other hand, nobody had any doubt that Beverly Allitt was guilty from the outset. She was a nurse who worked on a maternity unit in the 90's and was accused of murdering babies in a similar fashion. She was, by conventional standards, unattractive with a somewhat odd demeanour. How much does sub conscious bias and perception count when faced with criminality? Probably a lot more than we are prepared to acknowledge.

That's a very interesting point.

Having read about the Allitt case, it seems to me that many more red flags were found regarding Allitt's background and state of mind. I think the situation was rather more clear cut and this had nothing to do with her relative unattractiveness and her "odd demeanour".

All the same, I still don't feel as though I am a position to know if LL is innocent or guilty

Nacky….some experts, but not all. Others experts say not so.

Sarnia

I remember BBC News showing a work rota graph which had been drawn up when it became likely that a member of staff was responsible for the deaths. Letby was on shift for all 25 incidents while the next staff member was there for 7. Seems pretty conclusive to me.

Isn't there now some doubt about those graphs? Something to do with inaccuracies when they scanned themselves onto a shift?

Like others, I simply don't know. I am thinking though that, given the doubts expressed by those with more medical knowledge than most of us, that the case should at the very least be examined again.

flappergirl

Lucy Letty is the archetypal girl next door in almost every sense. She was chosen as a "poster girl" for the maternity unit at one stage. Nobody wants to believe that someone so pleasantly ordinary, with a seemingly idyllic childhood and loving parents, could enact such evil.

On the other hand, nobody had any doubt that Beverly Allitt was guilty from the outset. She was a nurse who worked on a maternity unit in the 90's and was accused of murdering babies in a similar fashion. She was, by conventional standards, unattractive with a somewhat odd demeanour. How much does sub conscious bias and perception count when faced with criminality? Probably a lot more than we are prepared to acknowledge.

That's a very interesting point.

I think that loopylou has a point. LL knew that she was under scrutiny, so surely she would have sought the back up of colleagues to cover herself.
This would have been effective in refuting allegations and encourage managers to look at other reasons for the problem.
The data is just part of the story. If it proven to be flawed, that does not necessarily mean that this woman is innocent of the charges.

In response to dogsmother some experts have come forward to suggest that the all deaths (and near deaths) could have been natural. That includes those involving insulin as there are other possible explanations for this in the bodies of these babies. As I understand it some of the early deaths were put down to natural causes.
The stats given to the jury were flawed, very like the case of Sally Clarke who was convicted of murdering her two babies. It was later shown that they died of natural causes.
I agree that Lucy Letby's notes are strange and suggest guilt but as said above there could be other explanations such as guilt at being on duty and helplessness at her inability to change the poor conditions and staffing levels on the ward (seemingly she had raised concerns). Guilty or not, an unsafe conviction.
Thank goodness we no longer have the death penalty!

dogsmother

Also we must remember that these deaths couldn’t have all been natural causes.

This is exactly the fallacy that statisticians are pointing out. Sometimes unlikely multiple events do occur like tossing a coin and it coming up heads several times in a row.

I really can’t say with hand on heart that Letby is guilty, I certainly hope she is for all involved, especially the families who lost precious babies, they more than anyone want someone to be punished for their heinous crimes. But as has already been said there have been terrible miscarriages of justice in the past.
Let’s just hope and pray that this isn’t another.

Also we must remember that these deaths couldn’t have all been natural causes.

If Letby had been innocent surely she would have taken steps to cover herself by insisting other members of staff watched her and checked what she was doing. And if the unit was unsafe she should have looked for another job.

People have been found 'guilty beyond reasonable doubt' many times in the past and been imprisoned, or even executed, only for it to turn out that they were innocent.
There are numerous, well documented cases of this so I am afraid I don't share the faith that some of you have in British justice.

I am not saying LL is innocent or guilty as I have an open mind about this and I simply don't know.

I remember BBC News showing a work rota graph which had been drawn up when it became likely that a member of staff was responsible for the deaths. Letby was on shift for all 25 incidents while the next staff member was there for 7. Seems pretty conclusive to me.

I agree Iam she was found guilty and for a jury to convict, they must agree that the prosecution's case showed guilt 'beyond reasonable doubt'; that there is no other reasonable explanation for what took place.

It isn’t surprising that babies died when Letby wasn’t on duty. There was a thorough investigation, lengthy trial at which every scrap of detail was considered. Letby was defended by excellent counsel. Where any doubt existed, there were not guilty findings. I trust that process more than Peter Hitchens

Toetoe according to the highly trained people in the documentary she wasn’t on duty when every child died.

I, like all of us outside watchers have really no idea whether she’s guilty or not BUT after watching the documentary Im just unsure
Yes oreo I do feel very very uncomfortable about the ramblings in her diary and bits of paper Taken as they are they are completely damming and prove her guilt but was she in a fit state to have been working at that time, were they words from someone who felt guilty she was on duty and looking after these babies when they died, was she doubting herself and questioning herself People can blame themself when in a panic.
A small child falls and a mother’s first reaction will be omg what have I done that was my fault .

In Letbys case add to this the concern of a past baby dying in her care did she immediately start blaming herself saying I killed them I was the one with them it must be me.
Did she blame herself in those scribbled notes through pure mental illness I don’t know They are certainly totally damming if taken as a normal minded person writing then how ever was she in a normal place she was in an unrequited love so how stable was she
I simply don’t know like everyone on here I m trying to think it through from all angles
If she’s guilty with no doubts then her sentence is the correct one but could it be a number of shortfallings with her as the scapegoat none of us know I m certainly not defending her just trying to see it from all sides and could others be equally to blame ie managers who disappeared into the ether

None of us know and may never know

She was found guilty. Why all the navel gazing, just think of the parents having to hear all this, it's kept dragging up again and again. No qualms about Allit was there. Is it because Letby is prettier. As for Hitchens and Lynch, well they should have attended the trial, and may be read the awful diaries.
As for the managers, unfortunately that's typical of the NHS, they're always moved sideways if they have been at the center of any scandal. Experience seen first hand. The Dr's were spot on with this, the fact they were ignored by the supermarket management of the NHS , who should have been sacked, was appalling.

I agree with easybee in that there appear to be other possible explanations for the death of these poor babies . Whether she is guilty or not it seems that full information was not given to the jury in Lucy Letby's trial. For example babies died when she was not on duty, the spreadsheet referred to by Toetoe was not complete and only showed some deaths. An unsafe conviction in my view.

For me it is the diaries and the dark thoughts written on those sheets of paper. One psychologist said they were written after she was suspected and had been interviewed the first time . Why write words like I killed them, I don't deserve to live . I am evil . The spread sheet showed us that every time a baby died she was on duty .

Do you feel uncomfortable after reading her diary entries I wonder?! Seriously, look this up , it all came out in the court case.

Did you also see another nurse or maybe a doctor I think from Netherlands had had a very similar case and been jailed for some years but was completely innocent and eventually came out
I feel so uncomfortable with this case after I saw that documentary

To me it all seems to lead back to the managers. Concerns were expressed about the raised death rate of babies, only a few but enough to merit attention, but their concerns were ignored. When certain doctors persisted they were 'disciplined' and sent on training courses but their concerns were still ignored. When the balloon finally burst the managers vanished speedily into other equally well-paid jobs and refused to accept any blame.
Now suggestions are made that the department was badly run, under extreme pressure, understaffed and combating an infection, all of which should have been down to management to identify and attempt to deal with.
Lucy Letby may have been a scapegoat; I do not think so but enough doubt is being cast to make her conviction unsound.

Mike Lynch and also Peter Hitchens have expressed some questions and possible doubt about her conviction. These are very clever people with analytical minds. They would not get emotional or sentimental about the crimes, they would look at the facts. So maybe there is room for doubt.

Lucy Letty is the archetypal girl next door in almost every sense. She was chosen as a "poster girl" for the maternity unit at one stage. Nobody wants to believe that someone so pleasantly ordinary, with a seemingly idyllic childhood and loving parents, could enact such evil.

On the other hand, nobody had any doubt that Beverly Allitt was guilty from the outset. She was a nurse who worked on a maternity unit in the 90's and was accused of murdering babies in a similar fashion. She was, by conventional standards, unattractive with a somewhat odd demeanour. How much does sub conscious bias and perception count when faced with criminality? Probably a lot more than we are prepared to acknowledge.

I take it you all did see the diaries that she kept, they were shown in the newspapers? To say they were dark is the understatement of the year.