Lucy Letby

If anyone cares to listen to this File on 4 episode it might make people think.

www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m0023vnp.

The latest news indicates that there is more evidence of babies
being endangered under Lucy Letby's care.
If a robust case can be made for these findings, it may be that the outcome of her trial was right. I can't help feeling that, if this is the case, the correct verdict was reached despite the poor quality of the evidence.

The other thing is, if you were a nurse and questions were being raised about your practice
, most would insist on having everything checked and being supervised most of the time.
No she was clever and found she was getting away with it. Using methods that could seem accidental.

Allira

There seems to be an attempt by some who are campaigning to point the finger at whole departments and suggest they were failing.

It seems to have been forgotten that others, including paediatricians, tried to warn management about their concerns re Lucy Letby but were threatened that their jobs would be at risk if they persisted.

It’s worth remembering it’s often difficult to accept a work colleague, friend or relative can be guilty of heinous offences.

Indeed!

Allira Yes. And it seems to be overlooked that it would be a strange strategy of the hospital management to distract attention from their own failings by conspiring to convince the world that they had let a serial killer murder their patients for over 12 months.

Hardly seems an improvement compared to running a hospital badly.

I gather that several of LL's co-workers would have been willing to speak in her defence but were advised not to get involved as it might jeopardise their jobs.

Indigo8 I understood that staff were threatened when they tried to report their concerns about Letby to management.

I am convinced of her guilt.

There seems to be an attempt by some who are campaigning to point the finger at whole departments and suggest they were failing.

It seems to have been forgotten that others, including paediatricians, tried to warn management about their concerns re Lucy Letby but were threatened that their jobs would be at risk if they persisted.

I also agree with Iam64.

I was concerned about the safety of the conviction so I started reading up. Now I think the police investigation was well and thoroughly done, the trial was fine, the evidence is convincing and she's guilty. The questions I came across (about the insulin evidence, for example) have answers.

If anyone is interested, I can recommend:

- Crime Scene 2 Courtroom's videos on YouTube. He reads out transcripts of the trial.
youtube.com/playlist?list=PL2byzt3tQjyZUFDoOMgoo55U9lJkz7BMY&si=-j9bzEv8lhexJhCv

- The Appeal Court ruling. Convincing, but not an easy read.
www.reddit.com/r/lucyletby/wiki/index/coa-intro/

- The subReddit r/Lucy Letby. Full of interesting information and links.
www.reddit.com/r/lucyletby/

- A podcast episode on the case by two barristers.
podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/double-jeopardy-the-law-and-politics-podcast/id1633485236?i=1000665608331

Agree with Iam64.
I am an old NICU paediatric nurse/midwife and worked with very sick babies for many years. Can only recall an endotracheal tube being dislodged on 2 occasions. In my humble opinion I think she is as guilty as hell. My heart is broken for those poor families.

Thanks foxie48 and Oreo, good posts. Vintage jazz challenged my comment about women from apparently stable backrounds abusing chikdren. Vintagejazz rightly pointed out none of the usual background concerns about previous worrying behaviour patterns were found with LL. I’m not criticising Vintage and accept we have different views.
I accept there have been mis trials in other cases. In this one, the trials were lengthy. LL was well represented, the witnesses subjected to thorough cross examination. Oreo’s point about the contrast with tubes being dislodged on average 1% of the time where wuth L/l it was 40% of the time has to be significant and isn’t the only signufucant issue

Oreo

I feel the opposite, that she was guilty as charged.Especially after reading more recently, they are looking into other hospitals where she worked and many babies tubes were pulled out or partially dislodged which may happen 1% of the time but with Letby on duty happened 40% of the time.

I've just heard this on the news. I think the trial was flawed in some ways but I do think she's guilty and really feel for the parents of the children who died, this questioning of her guilt must be dreadful for them.

I feel the opposite, that she was guilty as charged.Especially after reading more recently, they are looking into other hospitals where she worked and many babies tubes were pulled out or partially dislodged which may happen 1% of the time but with Letby on duty happened 40% of the time.

I have just read Dr Hammond's latest piece about LL in Private Eye.

Along with a great deal of information about the post mortems and the tests that were done, there were details about the experts who appeared at the trials. Dr Hammond had communicated with them and he shared some of their responses.

I gather that several of LL's co-workers would have been willing to speak in her defence but were advised not to get involved as it might jeopardise their jobs.

The validity of her confessions has already been mentioned on another post.

I still don't know if she is guilty or not but the more I read about the way the trials were conducted the less confidence I have in the guilty verdict being safe.

Iam64

I don’t know enough to know whether this is a miscarriage of justice. One comment stood out from many above - that LL came from a loving stable home. I know of a number of women from homes described in that way who committed violent crimes against children

It is the fact that she came from a loving stable home combined with the fact that she has demonstrated no signs of a personality or mental disorder and was a well liked adult with a normal functioning life that has raised question marks. Not simply the fact that she came from a good home.

Indigo8

Nacky I read part two of PH's report. Thanks for flagging up Rachel Aviv's New York Times article I will look it up.

I have great respect for Dr Hammond. His pieces as MD in Private Eye were the voice of sanity for me during Covid. He combines medical expertise and experience with his skill as a journalist.

Yes, I agree about Dr Hammond's writing in Private Eye - well researched and sensible which gives weight to his comments on this case. I also value the opinion of criminologist David Wilson so was interested to read his view of the notes that helped convict Lucy Letby as reported in the Guardian today. Seemingly the so called confessions were written on the advice of workplace counsellors and in Professor Wilson's view were meaningless and had no value as evidence.

I don’t know enough to know whether this is a miscarriage of justice. One comment stood out from many above - that LL came from a loving stable home. I know of a number of women from homes described in that way who committed violent crimes against children

Nacky I read part two of PH's report. Thanks for flagging up Rachel Aviv's New York Times article I will look it up.

I have great respect for Dr Hammond. His pieces as MD in Private Eye were the voice of sanity for me during Covid. He combines medical expertise and experience with his skill as a journalist.

Indigo8

Indigo8

IMO Lucy Letby should be granted leave to appeal.

According to MD (Private Eye 1629 2-15 August 2024)*
"There have been sufficient serious concerns raised by credible experts in numerous fields as to whether the science and statistics were presented fairly and completely."

"The prosecution used six expert witnesses; the defence used none. Such a mismatch, although perfectly legal, poses a high risk of bias and false accusations."

I am not saying she is innocent or guilty of all charges, just that her trials were seriously mis-handled. So much for British justice.

I believe Channel 5 is airing a programme on the subject.

*Quotations from longer article by Phil Hammond MD

This is what I posted on Page 1. The second part of the report by Phil Hammond appeared two weeks after I posted this.

Thank you. Appreciated that you gave quotes and hopefully that led some to read more. I thought people might also be interested in the follow up article - both are very detailed and cover the questions raised here such as 'could all the deaths be natural?'
Phil Hammond begins by stating his initial view that Lucy Letby must be guilty so it is all the more compelling that having looked at the facts he now believes her conviction should be reviewed.

"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".

But there are a great deal of similarities. Chiefly, that Beverley Allitt was present on every occasion a baby died or was injured.
She also went notably above and beyond to befriend the bereaved parents. Naturally there was no social media (which Letby used) but Allitt wrote letters and formed unusually close bonds with her victims' parents. One bereaved mother even made Allitt godmother to her surviving child.

Additionally Allitt had ripped pages from the duty book relating to infant deaths on her watch. These were found at her home. I believe the same applied to Letby.

I feel this must be reviewed again if by the smallest chance she is a scapegoat and innocent then it’s a dreadful miscarriage of justice
Its hopeful to see there’s others on here feel this too
I ve no more idea than anyone else if she is guilty or not if she is then she needs to be where she is, but if she isn’t ……..

dogsmother

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

They were all very fragile babies being cared for in a unit that wasn't fit for purpose and was subsequently deemed not suitable for taking in such weak and premature babies.

People aren't defending Lucy letby because she is pretty and middle class. They are unsure of her guilt because, unlike most other murderers, nothing has come to light about her background, character or previous behaviour that would explain her actions or hint at any kind of mental or personality disorder.

She seems to have come from a loving and secure home, have fitted in well at school without being exceptional, and as an adult had a good job, a normal social life and her own home. The fact that some people, determined to find something sinister, could only latch onto the fact that her parents were understandably sad that their only child lived some distance away and that she sometimes holidayed with them (in addition to holidays with her friends) as evidence that she was overly attached and had smothering parents demonstrates how desperate they were to find something 'wrong' and how normal her situation and upbringing actually was.

Indigo8

IMO Lucy Letby should be granted leave to appeal.

According to MD (Private Eye 1629 2-15 August 2024)*
"There have been sufficient serious concerns raised by credible experts in numerous fields as to whether the science and statistics were presented fairly and completely."

"The prosecution used six expert witnesses; the defence used none. Such a mismatch, although perfectly legal, poses a high risk of bias and false accusations."

I am not saying she is innocent or guilty of all charges, just that her trials were seriously mis-handled. So much for British justice.

I believe Channel 5 is airing a programme on the subject.

*Quotations from longer article by Phil Hammond MD

This is what I posted on Page 1. The second part of the report by Phil Hammond appeared two weeks after I posted this.

I would suggest that anyone interested in this case reads the ar Private Eye article 'The Lessons of the Lucy Letby Case Parts 1 and 2' by Dr Phil Hammond and also the New York Times article by Rachel Aviv. Both are easily found via search engines and make interesting reading and make a clear case that this was an unsafe conviction and should now be reviewed.

There seems to be many question marks over this case - deaths where Lucy Letby wasn't present not being included in evidence, the Crown Prosecution admitting it had presented swipe card data incorrectly etc etc etc. This could be a massive miscarriage of justice.