UK - Nurse Lucy Letby, Faces 22 Charges - 7 Murder/15 Attempted Murder of Babies #18

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jazmania said:
You don't think the defence will offer any evidence or call any witnesses? That would be insane! I'm sure they will call some experts. They could call the original pathologists who did the autopsies, or perhaps experts on conditions that the defence argues the baby's had like NEC etc. There might be character witnesses they could call.
Click to expand...
I am imagining the defence to be quite short. Suspect it may involve recalling some witnesses to clarify certain things. Think it will be scattered with the defence collating and covering many different babies in each day and then on to the closing speeches.
 
Sweeper2000 said:
Slightly worrying imo. I might take a stab in the dark and say the prosecution offered those notes as evidence of a disturbance of mind. Bolstering those occasions of odd behaviour. It really isn’t much to go on imo. Think that angle is a suggestion of problems preceding the events. Very scant evidence on that front. I do worry how the jury will see that evidence though.

it reads to me that the process after suspension from clinical duties has exacerbated things for her. She seemed happy enough before then after we get the notes of which suicide is a prominent feature.

it really is messed up.
Click to expand...
I tend to agree here. Not knowing anything really about her prior to this we can only speculate, but it would seem reasonable that there was some psychological or personality type issue within her which has been exacerbated by things prior to her arrest.

I'd still really love to know when these notes were written, exactly. I'm thinking we may never find out, though.

All MOO
 
Jazmania said:
You don't think the defence will offer any evidence or call any witnesses? That would be insane! I'm sure they will call some experts. They could call the original pathologists who did the autopsies, or perhaps experts on conditions that the defence argues the baby's had like NEC etc. There might be character witnesses they could call.
Click to expand...
They can only call witnesses, though, if they actually have witnesses to counter the prosecution's arguments. I can't see what calling the original coroners and suchlike will achieve as they are just going to say exactly what they said in their original reports which is what the prosecution has already provided.

I'm tending to agree that they won't be calling many witnesses of their own, if any at all. Surely their opportunity to counter the prosecution's witnesses was when they were on the stand; they can say something along the lines of "....well, Dr Bloggs, we have a witness who will say that your opinion/conclusion on X, Y or Z is incorrect because of such and such reasons.....". They haven't ever done that, though, as far as I'm aware.

Also, I can't really see what character witnesses would achieve, either. The character of the defendant is largely irrelevant either way. The jury is supposed to decide on the evidence not on whether defendant is a "thoroughly decent and solid chap" towards their mates, if you see what I mean?
 
Marantz4250b said:
I tend to agree here. Not knowing anything really about her prior to this we can only speculate, but it would seem reasonable that there was some psychological or personality type issue within her which has been exacerbated by things prior to her arrest.

I'd still really love to know when these notes were written, exactly. I'm thinking we may never find out, though.

All MOO
Click to expand...
The notes do need explaining. The 'confession' note especially. It's in her handwriting!!
If LL doesn't take the stand and explain what she meant by 'i am evil' 'i did this' and the defence just say 'her head was a mess' as a juror I would draw inferences from that. The prosecution don't need to spell out a motive. If you found a knife with blood on it, it wouldn't be 'lesser evidence' because we can't say what the intentions were of the person who put it there? We would take it on face value that it is a sinister item.
 
esther43 said:
The notes do need explaining. The 'confession' note especially. It's in her handwriting!!
If LL doesn't take the stand and explain what she meant by 'i am evil' 'i did this' and the defence just say 'her head was a mess' as a juror I would draw inferences from that. The prosecution don't need to spell out a motive. If you found a knife with blood on it, it wouldn't be 'lesser evidence' because we can't say what the intentions were of the person who put it there? We would take it on face value that it is a sinister item.
Click to expand...
I tend to agree but I don't think we'll see her giving evidence. The reasons for the notes may have been addressed in the police interviews which we're in the process of hearing about in detail. It may be that her KC simply gives her reasons for writing them on her behalf.
 
Last edited:
You’d also have to be stupid to keep a note that you’d written ‘I killed them on purpose..’ on as well though. Even if innocent, if she knew what she was being accused of it’s bizarre she kept all this stuff. JMO.
 
WaxLyrical said:
So the diary was definitely not a journal.. the baby’s initials are basically the only things noted.

Can these really be a note of murders? You’d have to be exceedingly stupid to record it in this way. JMO, if guilty, etc.
Click to expand...

DianaWW said:
You’d also have to be stupid to keep a note that you’d written ‘I killed them on purpose..’ on as well though. Even if innocent, if she knew what she was being accused of it’s bizarre she kept all this stuff. JMO.
Click to expand...
Or, just arrogant enough to think you'd never be caught, and then confident/naive enough to think that you'd be given prior notice of any police searches.

if guilty, jmo
 
esther43 said:
Yeah, that's what I meant, you phrased it more clearly!
Click to expand...
I think I meant the oppsite to you lol. I meant that she recorded the initials in her diary at the time. Then later when she needed to make the timeline she looked back at her diary.

Not sure we've heard of her writing any other references to other babies in the diary. Just initials of the two triplets on the dates they died, and "twins, followed the next day by twin resus", for L and M. Though it's a 2016 diary so woudl only include the 2016 babies anyway, so baby K onwards.
 
DianaWW said:
New pictures on twitter. Smudge is definitely a cat.
Click to expand...
Phew!
1 thing we can be sure of concerning the notes is better than nothing :D

It still might be that T&S are the doc and her - like the pair of cats.

JMO
 
Last edited:
esther43 said:
Yeah, that's what I meant, you phrased it more clearly!
Click to expand...
ColourPurple said:
I think I meant the oppsite to you lol. I meant that she recorded the initials in her diary at the time. Then later when she needed to make the timeline she looked back at her diary.

Not sure we've heard of her writing any other references to other babies in the diary. Just initials of the two triplets on the dates they died, and "twins, followed the next day by twin resus", for L and M. Though it's a 2016 diary so woudl only include the 2016 babies anyway, so baby K onwards.
Click to expand...
Oh ha ha, sorry I missunderstood. well I guess it could be either!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 184 more.
Total: 1,814 (members: 185, guests: 1,629)

Online statistics

Members online
185
Guests online
1,629
Total visitors
1,814
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
605,580
Messages
18,189,242
Members
233,448
Latest member
Lukasmalachi
Back
Top