Lucy Letby

I agree with you Sky17

How could she ever have a retrial in this country with 12 unbiased jurors.
Just look at this thread.
Guilty ,not guilty, guilty, not guilty.
Where on earth could 12 people be found who didn’t know all or at least some of the facts beforehand.

No idea if innocence or guilt, leave it to the experts, and people who can interpret the law.
I do think a retrial is nessasary.

I looked it up online!

Over 50 experts have protested her innocence. Most of these are senior and more experienced than those listed above.

kjmpde

I remember when those poor ladies were found guilty of killing their infants as "experts" thought that cot deaths could not occur more than once. The defence team were totally inadequate as they should have had the expert - who gave evidence which later overturned the conviction. If my memory is correct it was a genetic trait in the family which caused multiple deaths in the infants. So my thoughts are
a) was the defence team any good
b)did the experts actually known anything
c) were there any genetic causes of the deaths of the infants
d) what part did the other nurses play in the deaths

a) She had one of the best KCs in the country, a man with a very good track record.
b) Undoubtably.*
c) - She was found guilty of 7 murders and 8 attempted murders. It’s doubtful that all these babies would have suffered from genetic defects.
- One baby had liver injuries that an expert witness said he had only ever seen in children who had been in car crashes or had trampoline accidents. I doubt these were caused by his genes.
- The mother of one baby testified at trial that she heard horrific screaming-like crying as she walked towards the room where her son was. She saw him with tacky blood all around his mouth. Lucy Letby blamed this on his feeding tube rubbing the back of his throat. Again, not genes.
d) Lucy Letby is the only nurse who was on duty during or immediately before every death or unexplained collapse brought to trial. When she was moved from night shifts to day shifts, the deaths followed her. When she went on holiday the deaths stopped, and when she came back they started again.

*Expert witnesses for the prosecution included:

Dr Andreas Marnerides, Consultant Pathologist
Dr Owen Arthurs, Professor of Radiology
Dr Sally Kinsey, Professor of Haematology
Dr Peter Hindmarsh, Professor of Endocrinology
Dr Stavros Stivaros, Professor of Radiology
Dr Simon Kenney, Consultant Paediatrician
Dr Dewi Evans, Consultant Paediatrician
Dr Sandie Bohin, Consultant Paediatrician

You can look up them and their qualifications online.

Definitely think she's guilty.
If doubts are being raised about your practice, you should make sure you are supervised and do nothing to cause concern.

Those top experts' subsequent information exonerates her completely. Hospital management and various consultants look pretty shifty. A lot of covering up has gone on. A retrial is vital.

*could not have harmed

petra

So that makes her guilty despite the fact that nobody witnessed her murdering a baby, and the fact that there was not one forensic fact to link her.

There are forensic facts linking her to attempted murders: the timing of the hypoglycaemia (very low blood sugar) symptoms of two babies combined with the timing of their being given new IV parenteral nutrition bags. These babies also had blood test results which showed that exogenous insulin had been given to them (insulin from outside the body.) Insulin, which causes low blood sugar, had evidently been added to the bags.

More information in the book and Reddit forum I linked to.

In addition, Lucy Letby was found to have falsified patients’ notes to make it appear that she could not have done harmed babies at the relevant times. In one case she was proved wrong by the mother‘s phone records. The mother was a GP and suspected her.

There was plenty of other evidence too.

As for not being witnessed murdering a baby: how many murderers do let people witness them doing the killing?

I did initially wonder if there could have been a miscarriage of justice in her case. But having read the book by two BBC journalists, Unmasking Lucy Letby, and followed the discussion on Reddit started by someone who seems to know everything about the case (with people who went to the main trial taking part), I think the evidence shows that she’s guilty as sin and there is no case for a retrial. The insulin evidence is particularly convincing.

There’s a reason that almost everyone who attended the trials thinks she’s guilty. (Probably not her mum and dad.)

I can recommend these resources to anyone interested:

Unmasking Lucy Letby book. £5.49 on Kindle, and available from libraries.
amzn.eu/d/ixik2En

Reddit forum. With subreddit wiki (collection of information) and high standard of discussion.
www.reddit.com/r/lucyletby/

Good summary article on the alleged reasons for doubt about her conviction.
snowdon.substack.com/p/what-next-for-lucy-letby?triedRedirect=true

Innocent, from the outset. While on remand she was videoed having great fun at her friend's wedding and I can't imagine she would be doing that unless she was certain she would be acquitted. I agree the photo of her usually used in the media makes her look cruel and hard, but that is why it is always the one they use.

I think some of the witnesses at the trial were covering their own backs.

I have thought she was innocent for a long time and that this case is a huge miscarriage of justice. I think she has been made a scapegoat for the abysmal shortcomings of the hospital. In many ways, this case makes me think of the mothers who were jailed because they had suffered more than one cot death and the “expert” claimed that this was almost impossible and that they must have murdered their babies. This was later disproved and they were exonerated and released from jail. Sadly, the damage was done and they were broken women.

DeeDe

Guilty…. She was even following those poor parents on fb

So that makes her guilty despite the fact that nobody witnessed her murdering a baby, and the fact that there was not one forensic fact to link her.

Didn't see it but I've always had some doubts.

I remember when those poor ladies were found guilty of killing their infants as "experts" thought that cot deaths could not occur more than once. The defence team were totally inadequate as they should have had the expert - who gave evidence which later overturned the conviction. If my memory is correct it was a genetic trait in the family which caused multiple deaths in the infants. So my thoughts are
a) was the defence team any good
b)did the experts actually known anything
c) were there any genetic causes of the deaths of the infants
d) what part did the other nurses play in the deaths

No idea about her guilt or innocence. I watched the programme and felt there was enough doubt about the ‘witnesses’ at the trial to warrant a further investigation. Her defence council always struck me as pretty inadequate.

TheatreLover

I don't know whether Lucy is innocent or guilty, but with the post-trial analysis of each baby's death by respected experts that suggest doubts that Lucy was to blame, and the apparent concerns about the fairness of her trial, I do think that she should be accorded a retrial. Of note, Dr Dewi Evans, the main prosecution witness has changed his mind on how one of the babies that Lucy was convicted of killing died.

👏👏👏👏👏

My thoughts are that she is innocent. The shame being if she is ever released, sher would never go back to nursing

Guilty…. She was even following those poor parents on fb

Guilty.

Sparklefizz

Skydancer

I don’t know but I do know that if I was accused of something, especially this serious, I’d be shouting my innocence from the rooftops whereas she is very quiet.

Yes. I agree with you.

I read somewhere that she is telling everyone and anyone in the prison she is innocent; I have no idea whether she is or not but to be fair she is hardly in a position to be shouting from rooftops, is she…….

Nobody can know. But when I began reading information about this case I began to think that her conviction was insecure. I am now inclined to think she may well be innocent. If so, one of the most awful things that could ever happen to anybody has happened to her. These were immature and very sick new borns. It seems the hospital was struggling with low staffing levels, inexperienced junior doctors and that the deaths can be more convincingly explained by natural causes, botched procedures and so on. If this is the case, it is unlikely she will ever recover and there is also the impact on the parents of these babies.

no doubt the truth will come out at a later stage but I don't believe she is guilty.

Not sure. Originally thought she was as guilty as hell but have changed my mind after reading all the latest. I think a retrial should be called to avoid a miscarriage of justice.