UK - Nurse Lucy Letby, Faces 22 Charges - 7 Murder/15 Attempted Murder of Babies #19

[JamesMcGillEsquire]

That is a good point. 17 life sentences were given in the Ben Geen case, but I was wondering if the recent 'success' of the prosecution in gaining a whole life tariff for Wayne Couzens may make them push upwards now for people in positions of authority.

But yes, we still have a defence to present and a jury to decide so every possible verdict is still on the table

Not wishing to diminish the alledged murders and attempted murders involved in this case, but a position of authority would not include neonatal nurses, imo.
They are not using the powers of arrest to abduct and murder, and it is these types of crimes that are under closer scrutiny currently.

Most occupations involve some level of authority, in some form or another.

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

Taking those sheets home might have been a symptom of some kind of impulse-control disorder, not unlike kleptomania, in which the person steals things just for the gratification of having stolen something, rather than for any kind of personal gain.

Or a form of non-compliant private rebellion that leaves the person feeling stronger than the controlling system because they've 'beaten it'

 

[Kemug]

What we need to bear in mind regards sentencing, and the justice system in general, is that sentencing is first and foremost a tool for rehabilitation - punishment is purely a secondary aspect.

RSBM
Plus keeping the public safe from them is also very important.

 

[katydid23]

RSBM
Plus keeping the public safe from them is also very important.

Very important. Rehabilitation, if successful, would ensure that public safety. But is full rehabilitation always possible with perps who have killed multiple victims? I have my doubts.

If someone has been found guilty of maliciously attacking 17 babies, what does the rehabilitation process look like? How would it be accomplished?

 

[JamesMcGillEsquire]

Very important. Rehabilitation, if successful, would ensure that public safety. But is full rehabilitation always possible with perps who have killed multiple victims? I have my doubts.

If someone has been found guilty of maliciously attacking 17 babies, what does the rehabilitation process look like? How would it be accomplished?

Life sentences are coupled with a minimum term of imprisonment, not a guaranteed term of release.



One would expect a convicted child killer to undergo masses of psychological therapy and assessment.



After, for Instance, thirty years imprisoned, their impending release would be based upon having met an extremely high bar in terms of proving they are no longer a risk to the public.

 

[katydid23]

Life sentences are coupled with a minimum term of imprisonment, not a guaranteed term of release.



One would expect a convicted child killer to undergo masses of psychological therapy and assessment.



After, for Instance, thirty years imprisoned, their impending release would be based upon having met an extremely high bar in terms of proving they are no longer a risk to the public.

How can they really prove they are no longer a risk to the public though?

Does massive psychological therapy and assessment truly change a brutal killer?

We have had some pretty bad luck with many of our parolees and it is hard to really know if they are truly cured or not.

 

[Dotta]

How can they really prove they are no longer a risk to the public though?

Does massive psychological therapy and assessment truly change a brutal killer?

We have had some pretty bad luck with many of our parolees and it is hard to really know if they are truly cured or not.

Besides, sitting for 30 years in solitary can only deepen MH issues.
Because such killers are rarely kept in general population (for their own sake).

"Rehabilitation" looks good on paper, but prison reality is a completely different matter.

It is just my view.

 

[marynnu]

dbm

 

[Marantz4250b]

I could see why, if guilty, she may not want the handover docs on the hospital grounds because as mentioned, they retain them for a period, then they are sealed and taken away.

Before last week I was thinking she could have somehow recovered them to support her case after being put on admin but she did not suggest that in interview, she said it was more a case of collecting them as she went and not being able to dispose of them.

So then, if she collected them as she went along because she thought she might need to use them in her defence, was this happening alongside the death toll increasing? If so, this would mean that LL was worried she'd get accused of murder even as early as child A, way before transfer to admin or anything else...

I don't see that any of that applies. Firstly, I don't recall it ever being mentioned about them being "sealed" then got rid of; secondly, the not wanting them on hospital grounds (in anyone else's possesion) can't be a reason either as these documents, as as i undetstand them, are not one-off documents. Every nurse gets their own copy so she's not hiding vital evidence from anyone else.

 

[Marantz4250b]

I agree with you. In such a case barristers would say ‘ No Credit for a Plea’ and yes a whole life tariff , if guilty, looks likely. However, if she considered that conviction was inevitable it could be a last throw of the dice.

She is not charged with manslaughter as an alternative is she?

A jury can convict her of that though, I think.

 

[Kemug]

Life sentences are coupled with a minimum term of imprisonment, not a guaranteed term of release.
One would expect a convicted child killer to undergo masses of psychological therapy and assessment.
After, for Instance, thirty years imprisoned, their impending release would be based upon having met an extremely high bar in terms of proving they are no longer a risk to the public.

Well, maybe I'm just a born sceptic, but I would hesitate to take the word of a convicted child killer on anything at all. And they're probably no stupider than the next person, so of course they would be keen to show what a good person they have become, and so should be freed. JMO

 

[esther43]

I don't see that any of that applies. Firstly, I don't recall it ever being mentioned about them being "sealed" then got rid of; secondly, the not wanting them on hospital grounds (in anyone else's possesion) can't be a reason either as these documents, as as i undetstand them, are not one-off documents. Every nurse gets their own copy so she's not hiding vital evidence from anyone else.

NHS legislation states that every hospital has to have a retention and disposal policy for confidential waste. This includes the sealing, collection and disposal of the waste off site.

Whilst every nurse has a handover sheet, it's not a handover for the whole unit, it's a handover sheet for one baby. (The specific one they are caring for) so yes, LL has information that others are not privi to, unless they were caring for that child and she took that info home and stored it.

 

[Marantz4250b]

A whole life order in this case is unlikely.

Mitigating factors being - age when crimes were committed, lack of any previous convictions, previous good character, possible mental instability (yes, I know) and, above all else, propensity to rehabilitate.

What we need to bear in mind regards sentencing, and the justice system in general, is that sentencing is first and foremost a tool for rehabilitation - punishment is purely a secondary aspect.

Multiple concurrent life sentences with a minimum of 30 years imprisonment seems most likely, given all the information we have and the precedents previously set.

Assuming, of course, that the veridct the jury reach is guilty.
IMO

I think that a whole life order is not at all out of the question. Things like the age of the offender, likelihood of rehabilitation and lack of previous are not atball mentioned in the statutory life sentence tarrif guide lines.

The aggravating factors are things like; a high degree of pre planning, being in a position of trust/responsibility over the victims and suchlike. Look at Wayne Couzens, the major influencing factor in his wlo was that he was a police officer who was in a unique position of power over other people. In my opinion there is a parallel here with a nurse who us in a position to literally dictate whether an incapacitated and helpless patient dies.

If she's convicted of more than one of these murders then, imo, the starting point will be much higher than thirty years. I think at least a decade on top of that.

 

[Dotta]

Not wishing to diminish the alledged murders and attempted murders involved in this case, but a position of authority would not include neonatal nurses, imo.
They are not using the powers of arrest to abduct and murder, and it is these types of crimes that are under closer scrutiny currently.

Most occupations involve some level of authority, in some form or another.

The problem is that a tiny baby is completely dependent on the goodwill of a nurse.

The baby cannot complain or run away when being harmed.

So I would never compare this situation to "most occupations".

If this isn't a "Position of Trust", then what is?

For me it is the most damning aggravating factor.

JMO

 

[Tortoise]

NHS legislation states that every hospital has to have a retention and disposal policy for confidential waste. This includes the sealing, collection and disposal of the waste off site.

Whilst every nurse has a handover sheet, it's not a handover for the whole unit, it's a handover sheet for one baby. (The specific one they are caring for) so yes, LL has information that others are not privi to, unless they were caring for that child and she took that info home and stored it.

It was clarified in the mail podcast that they contain details of all the babies on the unit and who their designated nurse is.

The Trial of Lucy Letby: Episode 29, Arrested

www.mailplus.co.uk

 

[JosieJo]

I think that a whole life order is not at all out of the question. Things like the age of the offender, likelihood of rehabilitation and lack of previous are not atball mentioned in the statutory life sentence tarrif guide lines.

The aggravating factors are things like; a high degree of pre planning, being in a position of trust/responsibility over the victims and suchlike. Look at Wayne Couzens, the major influencing factor in his wlo was that he was a police officer who was in a unique position of power over other people. In my opinion there is a parallel here with a nurse who us in a position to literally dictate whether an incapacitated and helpless patient dies.

If she's convicted of more than one of these murders then, imo, the starting point will be much higher than thirty years. I think at least a decade on top of that.

I agree ..imo if guilty I'd be very suprised if it NOT a whole life tariff

 

[Marantz4250b]

RSBM
Plus keeping the public safe from them is also very important.

This is true. However the law relating to life sentence tarrifs makes it very clear that the period of imprisonment is the *punishment* portion of the sentence. It's not primarily for rehabilitation purposes.

 

[Marantz4250b]

.

Whilst every nurse has a handover sheet, it's not a handover for the whole unit, it's a handover sheet for one baby. (The specific one they are caring for) so yes, LL has information that others are not privi to, unless they were caring for that child and she took that info home and stored it.

I'm not sure that that's correct. I'm sure it's been mentioned that the sheets relate to the whole ward/unit so that everyone knows who is doing what in relation to each patient.

 

[Marantz4250b]

The problem is that a tiny baby is completely dependent on the goodwill of a nurse.

The baby cannot complain or run away when being harmed.

So I would never compare this situation to "most occupations".

If this isn't a "Position of Trust", then what is?

For me it is the most damning aggravating factor.

JMO

Totally agreed. If she receives multiple convictions then I'd be amazed if the tarrif were as low as 30 years!

 

[Dotta]

Totally agreed. If she receives multiple convictions then I'd be amazed if the tarrif were as low as 30 years!

Another factor must be taken into consideration IMO:

- undermining the public's trust towards National Health Care.

As was in the case of Wayne C - undermining the trust towards Police.

And it is absolutely damning and dangerous in any society.

Because these are fundamental issues for people - health and safety.

JMO