UK - Nurse Lucy Letby Faces 22 Charges - 7 Murder/15 Attempted Murder of Babies #5

[sleuth777]

Sky News link:

Healthcare worker arrested on suspicion of murdering eight babies

Media, Maps & Timeline *NO DISCUSSION* thread

Thread #1
Thread #2
Thread #3
Thread #4

 

[Sillybilly]

ADMIN NOTE:

This is a trial thread to discuss the trial only. It is not a general discussion thread.

Although WS is based in the USA, we do try to manage the various discussions according to laws of other countries.

As this trial is in the UK, the case is under sub judice so please stick to discussing the trial content without posting anything that violates the following principles:

Basically anything that may prejudice the accused’s right to a fair trial
Any suggestion, opinion, or direct accusation that the accused is either guilty OR innocent
(i.e. the accused cannot be called "the killer"; use "the accused", "the alleged killer", or "the defendant")
A defendant’s previous history of any offences is off limits
Scandalizing the court (disparaging judges, lawyers, any officer of the Court) is off limits
Broadcasting anything about proceedings which happen in the jury's absence is off limits
Any non compliance with an Order of the court is off limits

Note in the event of an Appeal subsequent to verdict:

Appeals are usually heard by senior judges who are not likely to be influenced by the media, therefore responsible comment is usually considered acceptable once a trial has concluded, regardless of if there is going to be an appeal.


Reference: UK Contempt of Court Act 1981

 

[Sillybilly]

Please read the above Admin Note and continue discussion here.

If your post is considered in violation of sub judice, it will be removed.

 

[Sillybilly]

ADMIN NOTE:

Read the opening post about sub judice, which states in part:

Scandalizing the court (disparaging judges, lawyers, any officer of the Court) is off limits

Websleuths doesn't make this stuff up ... it's law.

 

[Sillybilly]

ADMIN NOTE:

Numerous posts have been removed.

There is no MSM or other source to support speculation about any specific mental health issue of the accused. This includes autism, which oddly seems to crop in so many discussions when there is nothing to warrant it.

Sub judice is not the topic of this discussion. It is applicable to all cases in the UK.

 

[Sillybilly]

ADMIN NOTE:

This thread is specifically dedicated to discussion of the trial for the accused Lucy Letby. Please discuss this trial without bringing other cases into the discussion. All that does is introduce support for speculation regarding guilt or innocence which is sub judice.

 

[Sillybilly]

Bumping previous Admin Note:

ADMIN NOTE:

Numerous posts have been removed.

There is no MSM or other source to support speculation about any specific mental health issue of the accused. This includes autism, which oddly seems to crop in so many discussions when there is nothing to warrant it.

Sub judice is not the topic of this discussion. It is applicable to all cases in the UK.

 

[Sillybilly]

ONE MORE TIME WITH FEELING !!

ADMIN NOTE:

This is a trial thread to discuss the trial only. It is not a general discussion thread.

Although WS is based in the USA, we do try to manage the various discussions according to laws of other countries.

As this trial is in the UK, the case is under sub judice so please stick to discussing the trial content without posting anything that violates the following principles:

Basically anything that may prejudice the accused’s right to a fair trial
Any suggestion, opinion, or direct accusation that the accused is either guilty OR innocent
(i.e. the accused cannot be called "the killer"; use "the accused", "the alleged killer", or "the defendant")
A defendant’s previous history of any offences is off limits
Scandalizing the court (disparaging judges, lawyers, any officer of the Court) is off limits
Broadcasting anything about proceedings which happen in the jury's absence is off limits
Any non compliance with an Order of the court is off limits

Note in the event of an Appeal subsequent to verdict:

Appeals are usually heard by senior judges who are not likely to be influenced by the media, therefore responsible comment is usually considered acceptable once a trial has concluded, regardless of if there is going to be an appeal.


Reference: UK Contempt of Court Act 1981

 

[YaYa_521]

Continue here.

 

[BuzzC]

With regards to those questioning the appropriateness/meaning of the phrase “I killed then on purpose”

I disagree - respectfully.

The literal definition of the phrase is ‘deliberately, intentionally’ - whether that’s used in the positive or negative doesn’t change that. I will be amazed if the defence argue about the meaning of the phrase.

That phrase, taken in isolation and not made under duress would be a textbook definition of a murder confession.

I might say: “I punched the wall on purpose”. This would be me saying that I did it deliberately (because one may query why I would punch a wall and I’d be clarifying that I meant to do it - rather than doing it by accident, say - trying to punch someone standing in front of the wall)

If I said: “I punched the wall with purpose”, as was suggested. It would be a completely different meaning. It would suggest I did it “with determination” and conjure up images of me punching the wall with force, aggression etc.

 

[Sweeper2000]

With regards to those questioning the appropriateness/meaning of the phrase “I killed then on purpose”

I disagree - respectfully.

The literal definition of the phrase is ‘deliberately, intentionally’ - whether that’s used in the positive or negative doesn’t change that. I will be amazed if the defence argue about the meaning of the phrase.

That phrase, taken in isolation and not made under duress would be a textbook definition of a murder confession.

I might say: “I punched the wall on purpose”. This would be me saying that I did it deliberately (because one may query why I would punch a wall and I’d be clarifying that I meant to do it - rather than doing it by accident, say - trying to punch someone standing in front of the wall)

If I said: “I punched the wall with purpose”, as was suggested. It would be a completely different meaning. It would suggest I did it “with determination” and conjure up images of me punching the wall with force, aggression etc.

Yes but it’s not what you would say were you actually confessing to a crime. You would say “I killed them” the phrase is used additionally, the presence of it in the sentence strongly implies emotions not related to any definite guilt. You would only use that phrase if you had an element of doubt. You don’t say “I shot the soldier on purpose” do you? With an admission of guilt you only say “yes” or “no” you wouldn’t add something implicative of doubt. I don’t think people would Register the phrase “on purpose” as being the opposite of “without purpose” which doesn’t fit, it would be much more used in the context of unintentional ie by mistake Am I right or wrong? Or neither

 

[JosieJo]

I've thought about this a lot ..Read lots of different thoughts and theories around it.
Everything else in the note I could put down to anguish or what she feels ..but not the addition of "on purpose" it makes no sense at all apart from its literal meaning.

If it was a list of what people were saying about her I might dismiss the words but it doesn't read like that to me

 

[Sweeper2000]

I've thought about this a lot ..Read lots of different thoughts and theories around it.
Everything else in the note I could put down to anguish or what she feels ..but not the addition of "on purpose" it makes no sense at all apart from its literally meaning.

If it was a list of what people were saying about her I might dismiss the words but it doesn't read like that to me

Yeh that’s the other bit implied by the language. Is she wrestling with the feelings bought on by the accusations in which case an individual might start blaming themselves?

In the back of her head she knows she didn’t do it but so many accusations make her think she must have done something and if not deliberately then “by mistake” kind of Lucy giving space to the idea she harmed them but not deliberately with malice aforethought. It fits with the title, theme and emotionality of the note. “I’m not good enough to deliver the right care to these babies” or more in line with the actual wording”I killed them by mistake because I’m not good enough to deliver the right care”. She’s questioning her aptitude as a nurse?

Genuinely I think if that was a straightforward admission of guilt you wouldn’t be left with any doubt. You would simply say “I murdered them” or something more concrete and would contain a word that strongly implies guilt.

 

[gill1109]

Yeh that’s the other bit implied by the language. Is she wrestling with the feelings bought on by the accusations in which case an individual might start blaming themselves?

In the back of her head she knows she didn’t do it but so many accusations make her think she must have done something and if not deliberately then “by mistake” kind of Lucy giving space to the idea she harmed them but not deliberately with malice aforethought. It fits with the title, theme and emotionality of the note. “I’m not good enough to deliver the right care to these babies” or more in line with the actual wording”I killed them by mistake because I’m not good enough to deliver the right care”. She’s questioning her aptitude as a nurse?

Genuinely I think if that was a straightforward admission of guilt you wouldn’t be left with any doubt. You would simply say “I murdered them” or something more concrete and would contain a word that strongly implies guilt.

If she were a murderer, she would be able to prove it, by revealing how she did it. She would have information that only the murderer could have.

 

[TraderJones]

Does anyone have access to an HD version of the note? I am convinced it says 'No cure for them' rather than 'to care for them'. The N/t looks strikingly similar to that in 'NO HOPE' (top right). Maybe a hint at motive?

 

[BuzzC]

Yes but it’s not what you would say were you actually confessing to a crime. You would say “I killed them” the phrase is used additionally, the presence of it in the sentence strongly implies emotions not related to any definite guilt. You would only use that phrase if you had an element of doubt. You don’t say “I shot the soldier on purpose” do you? With an admission of guilt you only say “yes” or “no” you wouldn’t add something implicative of doubt. I don’t think people would Register the phrase “on purpose” as being the opposite of “without purpose” which doesn’t fit, it would be much more used in the context of unintentional ie by mistake Am I right or wrong? Or neither

“I killed them”. You can kill someone accidentally.

“I killed then on purpose” literally means I killed them deliberately.

There’s actually less ambiguity about the phrase she’s used.

Now, whatever the reason she’s written that is open to debate. But what the phrase means isn’t in doubt IMO.

And I’m confident that will be reflected in how her defence approach that when it’s argued in court.

 

[Sweeper2000]

“I killed them”. You can kill someone accidentally.

“I killed then on purpose” literally means I killed them deliberately.

There’s actually less ambiguity about the phrase she’s used.

Now, whatever the reason she’s written that is open to debate. But what the phrase means isn’t in doubt IMO.

And I’m confident that will be reflected in how her defence approach that when it’s argued in court.

It’s my belief that the phrase “on purpose” wouldn’t be used if she had “killed them deliberately” she would just say that, “I did it”. To take the phrase literally you would be saying “I killed them for a purpose” ie it was done for a reason or had a reason as a root of the action. Colloquially I think the phrase is used in the context of a mistake ie “did you do this”, “yes” and “on purpose”? “Yes”. It only becomes part of a sentence if there is a mistake/wrong + guilt involved. Not what a guilty person would say, “did you murder them and on purpose”? You wouldn’t say “I murdered them on purpose” in response to a question of “did you murder them”. In fact you might, “did you kick my dog”? “Yes”, “On purpose” . What would you think in that context?

 

[Sweeper2000]

Does anyone have access to an HD version of the note? I am convinced it says 'No cure for them' rather than 'to care for them'. The N/t looks strikingly similar to that in 'NO HOPE' (top right). Maybe a hint at motive?

It does say “to care for them” you can see a half written and only half legible “A” there but it’s scribbled really. I magnified it. It also fits with the preceding words and is a part of the first phase of writing.

 

[BuzzC]

It’s my belief that the phrase “on purpose” wouldn’t be used if she had “killed them deliberately” she would just say that, “I did it”. To take the phrase literally you would be saying “I killed them for a purpose” ie it was done for a reason or had a reason as a root of the action. Colloquially I think the phrase is used in the context of a mistake ie “did you do this”, “yes” and “on purpose”? “Yes”. It only becomes part of a sentence if there is a mistake/wrong + guilt involved. Not what a guilty person would say, “did you murder them and on purpose”? You wouldn’t say “I murdered them on purpose” in response to a question of “did you murder them”.

She’s not answering a question in the note.

If she said “I killed them” in the note, I would suggest there is doubt over whether or not she did it deliberately. As she says “I killed them on purpose”, which every dictionary I’ve consulted defines as “deliberately”, I have no doubt she means: “I killed them deliberately”.

If she killed them accidentally, I would have expected her to say the complete opposite to what she has. <modsnip - personalizing>

No, I wouldn’t say “I murdered someone on purpose” because the “on purpose” becomes superfluous when you consider the definition of “murder”.

I would, however, say I did something “on purpose” if there was any doubt about whether or not I did it deliberately.

 

[Sweeper2000]

She’s not answering a question in the note.

If she said “I killed them” in the note, I would suggest there is doubt over whether or not she did it deliberately. As she says “I killed them on purpose”, which every dictionary I’ve consulted defines as “deliberately”, I have no doubt she means: “I killed them deliberately”.

If she killed them accidentally, I would have expected her to say the complete opposite to what she has. <modsnip - personalizing>

No, I wouldn’t say “I murdered someone on purpose” because the “on purpose” becomes superfluous when you consider the definition of “murder”.

I would, however, say I did something “on purpose” if there was any doubt about whether or not I did it deliberately.

Your last point is my point exactly, if she KNEW she had murdered them she wouldn’t add the “on purpose” or even presumably the word “killed”which isn’t implicative of guilt. It’s a neutral word because to kill is not necessarily to do wrong. Assuming denial isn’t at play which is way off. No sign of denial with the phrase “I haven’t done anything wrong” which is in that note which is the correct way a denial of guilt would be given. Considering that note is a projection of Lucy’s inner monologue it’s self evident that she is talking to herself. There is no other in that letter, no one asking her if she is guilty so why does she have doubt about whether or not she did it deliberately?